# [Official] OCN Camera Thread



## shajbot

Canon Powershot A620. Recorded some songs and put them on youtube. Don't ask me for links though, them suck.









Blitz6804: "Removed site-glitching hotlink."


----------



## mugan23

don't worry i am a beginner too i like scenic shots most tho


----------



## mugan23

well got my new cam the other day so i thought i would like to have a place to get advice about photography, cuz i always liked it and did a little with my old cybershot but i don't really know what am doing. well today was 25c so i could not take any thing good but i tried to snap some good ones through the windshield hehe so i could test the new cam here is one of them

does anyone know hoow to change the ress on this camera


----------



## shajbot

I thought this was funny. So I was like oh yeah I have a camera too, let's take a picture of it and put it on the thread, but then you know, it can't take a picture of itself (unless in a mirror but that's something else), it's like us human, it can see everything but not itself.

/rant


----------



## mugan23

a haha well what if you have two hehe


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

hey, nice to see you got it up.
you may want to resize pics before you post them like that, http://www.shrinkpictures.com/
i have a nikon d70s with an 18-200mm with VR
















im excited to see a thread like this


----------



## mugan23

nice cam


----------



## mugan23

you look like ur pretty good with cams so al go a head and ask you, i know its not your cam but do you know how i can set my ress on this cam lower so i don't have to resize it all the time


----------



## shajbot

In Options no?


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

not sure exactly where it will be, but under your menu there should be a setting called image size or something like this, and you have
• 4000 x 3000
• 3968 x 2232 (16:9)
• 3264 x 2448
• 2592 x 1944
• 2048 x 1536
• 1024 x 768
• 640 x 480
to pick from with your camera (its the nikon coolpix s700 right?)


----------



## mugan23

fujifilm


----------



## mugan23

oh and i ment to say NICE CAM man what u do for a living ?


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

so you have a finepix s700 not cool pix








and the settings should be under the menu still and under something called resolution or picture size, and these are your options.
7M
3072 x 2304
3:2
3072 x 2048
4M
2304 x 1728
2M
1600 x 1200
0.3M
640 x 480


----------



## mugan23

hehe ya


----------



## orbiter

I use a Nikon compact camera and am saving up at present for a new D300, however this is my general purpose camera.....


----------



## mugan23

welcome! i am also saving for a Nikon d40


----------



## Death

*Nikon D80 in experimental stages







*


----------



## McStuff




----------



## shajbot

HOly mow Mcstuff, how much u pay for those?


----------



## vix

I'm the proud owner of one of these bad boys....


----------



## McStuff

Quote:


Originally Posted by *shajbot* 
HOly mow Mcstuff, how much u pay for those?









Actually I didn't pay for them, I'm a photographer in a company my dad owns. The d2h was like 3k, and I'm not sure about the lens tho.


----------



## mugan23

wow so u can buy a civic with your cam


----------



## McStuff

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mugan23* 
wow so u can buy a civic with your cam

A used civic, yes. But you need a good cam and some good glass if you want pics that you want to sell.


----------



## shajbot

That one Nikon I looked up before has like 20MP and it was priced like 8K...the lens are probably another 2K at least.


----------



## mugan23

i am going to lower my res on my camera and am going to try to take some more pics tomorrow and al post them to ask for help with my photography (be nice i am a beginner hehe)


----------



## mugan23

Quote:


Originally Posted by *McStuff* 
A used civic, yes. But you need a good cam and some good glass if you want pics that you want to sell.

true that ? what kind of pics do u guys sell or take?


----------



## shajbot

Prolly sports or celebrities pictures with that kind of power and lens.


----------



## mugan23

20mp + what res?


----------



## McStuff

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mugan23* 
true that ? what kind of pics do u guys sell or take?

Aerially photography, mainly of the blue angels.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mugan23* 
20mp + what res?

It's actually only 4mp, but it's the 8 frames per second that really matters for us.


----------



## bentrinh

My "camera"








Sony Ericsson W810i

Don't underestimate camera phones, you just gotta use it right





















































This last one was taken from a normal camera though


----------



## shajbot

Very nice trinh.


----------



## mugan23

nice cam what ir the ress on it?


----------



## DeX

Samsung D900i


----------



## CravinR1

Kodak Z710 (nothing special)


----------



## mugan23

no worries its about as powerful or more powerful than my fine pix s700


----------



## mugan23

i took some pics of my friends project car and i thought it looked alright (imagewise)

















and his dog


----------



## CravinR1

Here is a shrunk version of my truck in the snow (not that its impressive as I said)


----------



## bentrinh

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mugan23* 
nice cam what ir the ress on it?

The camera phone shoots at 1632X1224, or 2 megapixels. The one last pic was shot with a 5 megapixel camera. One again, you just gotta know how to use it.


----------



## mugan23

i want to go out again today and take some pics but its freezing in ohio


----------



## mugan23

The whinnier mobile was at the hotel that i was working and i just could not resist


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

i hope the weather here stops being stupid so i get a chance to go out, my favourite time is just as the sun goes down, and a few hours afterwards, the differant types of street lights and traffic lights can give you some pretty neat colours.


----------



## christian_piper

You can see quite a bit of my amature photography here:
http://christianpiper.deviantart.com/gallery/

I have a canon powershot G9: Great for a compact camera... (I also use my dads Nikon B80)
For video, just a simple Canon Elura 100- These are just google image search results.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

nice work piper, i think 'tower' was my favourite, and i forgot to post my stuff








http://picasaweb.google.ca/a.schub/Desktop


----------



## mugan23

Quote:


Originally Posted by *christian_piper* 
You can see quite a bit of my amature photography here:
http://christianpiper.deviantart.com/gallery/

I have a canon powershot G9: Great for a compact camera... (I also use my dads Nikon B80)
For video, just a simple Canon Elura 100- These are just google image search results.


















hey do you edit with photoshop and if so how and what did u use to make the pics so clear? or is your camera just out of my cameras league hehe


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

none of those pictures appear edited to me, the hardest part is to learn how to use your camera and its features to your advantage.
the best way, is to get out and and take ALOT of pictures, all of the ones i have posted were taken at least 5 months after i had the camera, and i would go out taking pics about 3 times a week for a few hours each time, it took me a long time to start taking pictures i was actually proud of because i had learned how to get the image i was looking for.

results like mine and pipens should be easily attainable with your camera once you have spent enough time with it.

happy shooting









EDIT: just thought i would mention that none of mine are edited, they are all right out of my camera.

also, im working on a guide (have been for a little bit of time now) on how to get the shot you want, basically walking through what camera settings are essential and how to use them, hope you guys will take a look once im done


----------



## mugan23

its fun tho i take mine everywhere


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

agreed, i take mine almost everywhere to


----------



## mugan23

I need a lot of help. I took this pick today at work, I think the pird looks ok and the quality is also good but as you can see i managed to get the car in the frame. This happened cuz i was trying too hard to take it because the bird kept flying about and made it hard to take it so if any one knows how i can cut out that part of the pic and not have to cover it up with something? the programs i have are s ccs and elements 6.0









sorry link didn't work first time


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

the easiest way would be to crop it, it sounds like that is what you are wanting to do, i could help you there even tho my skills are limited to paint









here you go


----------



## mugan23

how did you do that on paint?


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

i just used the default tool, selected what i wanted, copy what i wanted, made a new file, pasted and saved


----------



## mugan23

check this squirrel out he comes up to us at work when we got food, plus the pic quality is awsome for this cam (none of those guys are me hehe)


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

what are you feeding that thing
that is a HUGE squirrel


----------



## mugan23

he is fat from all the food we give him/her we don't know yet it don't let us touch


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

ahah, nice, did you take the picture?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Canon EOS 400D (Rebel XTi), with a Canon EF 28-135mm USM IS, Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 and Canon EF 18-55mm (kit lens):










First shot I took with the 400D (28-135 mm lens):










My digicam history:
Olympus Stylus Zoom
Nikon Coolpix 5700
Nikon Coolpix S5
Nikon Coolpix S6
Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ50
Canon SD1000
Canon Digital Rebel XTi


----------



## mugan23

Quote:


Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie* 
ahah, nice, did you take the picture?

ya


----------



## mugan23

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Canon EOS 400D (Rebel XTi), with a Canon EF 28-135mm USM IS, Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 and Canon EF 18-55mm (kit lens):










First shot I took with the 400D (28-135 mm lens):










My digicam history:
Olympus Stylus Zoom
Nikon Coolpix 5700
Nikon Coolpix S5
Nikon Coolpix S6
Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ50
Canon SD1000
Canon Digital Rebel XTi

very nice pic its soo clear ( i want a good cam







)


----------



## mugan23

here is a close up of his fat bum


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mugan23* 
very nice pic its soo clear ( i want a good cam







)

Well, be warned. As if my PC weren't already tapping my finances enough, delving into DSLR cameras has really left a mark!


----------



## mugan23

are u living on roman to save up for lenses kits hehe


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

ya, an SLR can empty your pockets VERY fast, i want to get a new lens before i head out west, but thats going to eat a good chunk of my funds


----------



## mugan23

wow and am photograghing with a finepix i feel like am racing a civic si against a gtr


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mugan23* 
are u living on roman to save up for lenses kits hehe

Not quite that bad, but definitely eliminating the phrase "savings account" from my vocabulary!

Quote:


Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie* 
ya, an SLR can empty your pockets VERY fast, i want to get a new lens before i head out west, but thats going to eat a good chunk of my funds









Yep, nice camera btw. I was considering the D70 (always been a Nikon fan), but it was a little pricey and I got the XTi for 50% off from my local CompUSA during its going out of business sale. Can't beat that!

Well, you have a very nice zoom lens, but you should definitely get a 50mm prime lens, a must for every photographer! They can be had for relatively inexpensive price and are the best for lowlight shots.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

i have been looking at one, but they are much better for people photography then landscapes and long exposures (i dont do people photography, really bad at it)
im eying up the 12-24mm for my next lens, and just got my new camera bag








http://products.lowepro.com/product/...AW,1924,16.htm


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mugan23* 
wow and am photograghing with a finepix i feel like am racing a civic si against a gtr

No, to a certain extent point-and-shoot cameras like yours can take shots nearly or as good as an SLR with plenty of bright daylight (I've seen some shots taken with Canon S5 and S6 (non-SLR) that were incredible on camera forums). SLRs shine in low light performance because they have the best quality sensors with little or no digital noise (barely any noise even at 1600 ISO on my XTi), plus they're very fast (3 shots per second burst mode!)

You're taking great shots with your Finepix. Composition and subject matter are half the battle. I learned the ropes with point and shoot cameras and am still learning with SLR.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

yep, as he said, composition and subject matter, and also learn the in and outs of your camera, like i almost always shoot with saturation all the way up, makes the color that much nicer


----------



## mugan23

can any one tell me what would be the fastest smallest cam out there? because i think its what i want.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie* 
i have been looking at one, but they are much better for people photography then landscapes and long exposures (i dont do people photography, really bad at it)
im eying up the 12-24mm for my next lens, and just got my new camera bag








http://products.lowepro.com/product/...AW,1924,16.htm

Damn, that's a mother of bag (I mean "pack"). Are you going to fill it with lenses one day? I have LowePro toploader myself, holds the body plus three lenses. If you do alot of outdoor photography, esp. boating or around water, you should also consider a good had shell like a Pelican case, water proof, they float, crush proof to several hundred pounds:

http://www.pelican.com/cases_detail.php?Case=1450

Quote:


Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie* 
yep, as he said, composition and subject matter, and also learn the in and outs of your camera, like i almost always shoot with saturation all the way up, makes the color that much nicer









Yeah, that and shoot with the RAW format. Another benefit of DSLR, although some high-end P&S cameras can do RAW


----------



## mugan23

how fast u need a cam anyway like for example this pic (i know its very good there is grass on my lens and all) my shutter can't do 3pics a sec but it can do 1.2 hehe and that was enough to catch the drops falling of the duck


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mugan23* 
how fast u need a cam anyway like for example this pic (i know its very good there is grass on my lens and all) my shutter can't do 3pics a sec but it can do 1.2 hehe and that was enough to catch the drops falling of the duck









A nice shot, up close and personal. The big advantage of a high burst rate is for fast moving subjects (birds flying, etc.), but patience can land a good shot like that one!


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

ya, i use my pack for skiing, biking and all that, and i do plan on getting it filled eventually








and i always shoot jpeg normal, saves ALOT of space, 99% the same picture quality, saves my image buffer for fast shooting


----------



## mugan23

how much memory u guys got in your cams( i d even know if u use memory sticks with dslr/slr cams)


----------



## mugan23

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
A nice shot, up close and personal. The big advantage of a high burst rate is for fast moving subjects (birds flying, etc.), but patience can land a good shot like that one!

i was pretty close but i was far enough for that to be all x10 of my zoom hehe


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie* 
ya, i use my pack for skiing, biking and all that, and i do plan on getting it filled eventually








and i always shoot jpeg normal, saves ALOT of space, 99% the same picture quality, saves my image buffer for fast shooting









Yeah, but you don't get the range post shooting adjustment features in JPEG as RAW. You should try it, you can make a really bad shot into a great one! But that's my amateurish approach. I'm only so-so when it comes to choosing the right aperture/shutter speed, so I rely on the flexibility that RAW offers to make up for the shortcoming.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mugan23* 
how much memory u guys got in your cams( i d even know if u use memory sticks with dslr/slr cams)

Yes, SLR cameras use flash memory, usually CF or SD format. I shoot 10 megapixel images in RAW + JPEG (one RAW image and on JPEG recorded for every shot!), so I use an 8GB CF card and I have a 2 GB back up.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

i shoot with a 2 gig CF card in on jpeg normal, get about 1k shots per card, and i have another 2 gig backup, and i love 10X zoom


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mugan23* 
can any one tell me what would be the fastest smallest cam out there? because i think its what i want.

In terms of what? Powered off to first shot? That one might go to the Canon SD1000, which from the off position takes right about 1 second to turn on and take a shot. However that's an ultra compact camera, the size of pack of cigarettes. I have one that I carry around in my jacket pocket at all times.

In terms of burst shooting speed, none of the point and shoots are going to perform that well. They just don't put very large or fast buffers in them. Some P&S cameras write images to storage cards faster than other though.

IMO the best point and shoot camera you can get without getting an actual DSLR is a Canon Powershot G9 or S5. I've seen user submitted shots from the S5 that were unbelievable.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

ya, the s5 is a great camera, and as compacts i would have to agree with the sd1000, or sd850(same thing, but with image stabalization). both run on a Lithium ion battery, and 3 times zoom.


----------



## mugan23

well the sd 1000 looks great and its not going to cost me a limb but i like pics of animals and u can never get to close to them so i think i will stick with mine for now, but the shape of the s700 is not very portable maybe i should go slr for my kind of pics


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

the one thing you will find with SLRs is they can be very cumbersome at times, thats why i got my bag so i can take it skiing and biking with me, while when i had the shoulder bag, it was not fun to bring along.

and for taking pictures of animals, a camera with a good zoom is your best friend, so you may want to look around at some alternatives to an SLR, as a cheap SLR zoom lens can run a few hundred bucks.


----------



## mugan23

well i saw this lense adapter for my s700 i was wondering if it was worth it? and if so what kind of lense do i buy? http://portal.fezfest.com/pn/207651_...nepix-S700.htm


----------



## Polo224

Glad that I saw this thread and hope my question doesn't make you laugh. Well, it's fine if it does.









Any recommendation for a camera ~$200 that takes decent pics, but doesn't require 5 seconds in between each to charge the flash. (ie - flash is incorporated, not external)

Thanks


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

i believe it is just a lens adapter to help it focus closer turning it into a macro lens, or at least thats what i gathered from that page.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

sure thing polo, what kind of camera are you looking for a compact, one with a large zoom, what kind of battery type will help narrow it down


----------



## Polo224

Quote:


Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie* 
sure thing polo, what kind of camera are you looking for a compact, one with a large zoom, what kind of battery type will help narrow it down









Really, I have no preference. It'd be for taking family pics, taking on trips, an all around use type. Right now we're using some HP pos, 5 mega pixels I believe and uses 2 AA's.

I've used a buddy's Rebel XT, while it's awesome, I'd never use all of it's features and I can't justify the price on it as I'd get no where near that level of use.

So, as my price range shows, no dslr, slr cameras. Really something point and shoot I guess.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

in that price range your options would be limited for a long zoom camera and i would opt for what mugan has, its an over all good little performer the fuji s700 with 10 times zoom
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16830122110

for a semi compact i would grab the canon a590 IS, the beauty of this will be that it has image stabilization and its nice for low light shots. 4 times zoom is not to bad either.

both of these run on AA batteries

these are some of your options for an ultra compact that all use Li-ion batteries

the Olympus has the best zoom sitting at a 5 time and probably comparable to the canon in size, the downside is it only takes xD and it is trickier to find then the standard SD cards
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16830111190

the canon is probably my fav pick because of the viewfinder (the others only have a live LCD and its hard to see with light to your back), it takes SD and the standard 3 times zoom
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16830120147

although i have not used the samsung, i have heard people that have one love it, it appears to be an all around good little camera, but my money is on the canon for an ultra compact.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16830144092

any questions feel free to ask
hope that helps


----------



## Polo224

I have spent a couple grand at newegg and have never even considered looking at cameras there! Thanks!


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

no problemo, if you have another place that you would prefer to buy a camera from (sorry, not familiar with any US places) i would gladly take a look.


----------



## Polo224

Ahh, no, it's because I didn't know that the egg sold them.







I'm always fixated on hardware when I'm looking at the site.

Anyways, thanks for letting me hijack for a bit!


----------



## mugan23

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Polo224* 
I have spent a couple grand at newegg and have never even considered looking at cameras there! Thanks!

i have the fuji s 700 and the pics are pretty nice all the pics i have posted on this thread are s700 pics


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

no problemo


----------



## mugan23

Quote:


Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie* 
i believe it is just a lens adapter to help it focus closer turning it into a macro lens, or at least thats what i gathered from that page.

so i can't attach any lens tho this cam







ohh well 10x is enough for me


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

i would hope so


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Polo224*


Glad that I saw this thread and hope my question doesn't make you laugh. Well, it's fine if it does.









Any recommendation for a camera ~$200 that takes decent pics, but doesn't require 5 seconds in between each to charge the flash. (ie - flash is incorporated, not external)

Thanks


Hey, www.bhphoto.com is a very well respected camera site. I usually buy my camera related gear there. However, the Egg can have some good deals as well.

As for recommendations is your price range, I suggest either a Canon SD1000 if you want something ultra compact and very fast, or a Canon SX100 (a little steep $260) if you want a better optical zoom and basic manual functions. And although I have no experience with Fuji cameras (most other brands though), the Fuji Finepix S700 is very well priced and has favorable reviews across the board.


----------



## mugan23

Quote:



Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie*


i would hope so










10 is enogh or there is no lenses


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

i would hope 10 is enough


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mugan23*


10 is enogh or there is no lenses


I wouldn't waste money on adapters, they usually cause bad clipping, vignetting and not much of a performance boost. 10x optical zoom should be plenty, although the latest ultra zoom p&s cameras are offering up to 12x. Once you get into zooms that high, it's very hard to get a steady shot, even with some sort of optical stabilization. Plus the aperture can't open very wide at the far end of the zoom, making it even more difficult for shots in less than bright light.

It sounds to me mugan like you need to venture into DSLR territory. You can get a good entry level body for $500-600 and a decent zoom lens for $200-300.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


I wouldn't waste money on adapters, they usually cause bad clipping, vignetting and not much of a performance boost. 10x optical zoom should be plenty, although the latest ultra zoom p&s cameras are offering up to 12x. Once you get into zooms that high, it's very hard to get a steady shot, even with some sort of optical stabilization. Plus the aperture can't open very wide at the far end of the zoom, making it even more difficult for shots in less than bright light.

It sounds to me mugan like you need to venture into DSLR territory. You can get a good entry level body for $500-600 and a decent zoom lens for $200-300.


correction, i think 20 is the longest, the Olympus sp-570








but agreed, among most cameras 12 is the most, and 10 is usually more then enough, and as gonetomorrow says, the only camera that would really be worth upgrading from yours would be an entry level SLR, if not i would stick with what you have until its not suiting your needs anymore


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie*


correction, i think 20 is the longest, the Olympus sp-570








but agreed, among most cameras 12 is the most, and 10 is usually more then enough, and as gonetomorrow says, the only camera that would really be worth upgrading from yours would be an entry level SLR, if not i would stick with what you have until its not suiting your needs anymore


Holy..they're coming out with higher zooms than I can keep up with. I see that Sony is offering up to 15x optical as well. That's what the point and shoots do; more megapixels and more zoom but the same sensors.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Here's another of my girlfriend's cat, one of the first I took with my 50mm f/1.4 lens:


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

ya, i dont get it, the more pixels you ram into the same size sensor the more noise at the same ISO or lower the ISO and sacrifice shutter speed








what are they thinking, just stick around 8-10 as a max, heck, my SLR is only 6, and can print large prints no problem, the only reason to go higher is if you plan on cropping alot


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

heh, you could so make a lolcat picture from that


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie*


heh, you could so make a lolcat picture from that










haha, yeah, but I can't come up with a good one. "I iz in ur lenzes, gettin dust on ur sensor!"


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

ahah, it would make me lol








i guess only for camera junkies tho


----------



## mugan23

nice i fell a lot better now besides i like the quality so far ,(and i don't have $1200 for any camera right now hehe


----------



## mugan23

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Here's another of my girlfriend's cat, one of the first I took with my 50mm f/1.4 lens:











wow thats a lot of cuteness how old?


----------



## mugan23

i took this at work one of our guests has a cat that luvs the window


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mugan23* 
wow thats a lot of cuteness how old?

Seven month old Ocicat from the humane society.


----------



## mugan23

it looks younger (hehe compliment)


----------



## mugan23

guys check this camera out would it be worth buying or is recertified bad http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16830113068


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mugan23*


guys check this camera out would it be worth buying or is recertified bad http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16830113068


Not a bad deal it seems. If it weren't for the two positive reviews I would be wary. The D40 is about as entry level as a DSLR can possibly get. They've really stripped off a few options to keep it inexpensive (relatively).

Here's a good review of it:
http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/nikon/d40-review/

What I don't like about the D40 is that it doesn't have an autofocus motor in the camera body and you need to buy AF lenses to have autofocus, otherwise it's manual focus only. That's a problem because only a few Nikon lenses are AF lenses.

I would hold off just because of the lack of an autofocus motor in the body. Look for a D50 or above instead.

EDIT: Hey, check out B & H's stock of used DSLRs - some are really cheap. They have ninety day warranties on their used gear:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...=&cltp=&clsgr=


----------



## mugan23

wow that eos is $60 more than my s700


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mugan23*


wow that eos is $60 more than my s700


Yeah, some of those cameras on that list are old. That EOS 10D is circa 2003.


----------



## mugan23

so that means mine is better or worse


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

depends, yours is probably what i would stick with, i would either grab a fairly new SLR or stick with what you have, digital cameras have come a LONG way in almost all aspects and an SLR more then 2 years old probably isnt worth your time as you can get a new rebel xti or something on sale for relatively cheap

hey, off topic i know, but does anyone know of some cool themes for xp?


----------



## mugan23

i want to go to cleaveland city to take pics tomorrow so bad but i think its gonna rain


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

ya, i was going to go the other day on my 3 hour break between classes, but it was raining and overcast


----------



## christian_piper

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mugan23*


hey do you edit with photoshop and if so how and what did u use to make the pics so clear? or is your camera just out of my cameras league hehe


Hey! I edit with photoshop elements, and the gimp, but most photos of mine are unedited. I DID tweak "6 feet under" a bit, Made the lights on the top of the tunnel stand out a bit more... Just a bit though. I believe in no to minimal editing.

As for clarity, I tell the camera to stay at as low of an ISO as possible- In my case I can simply set the dial to 80. Also, high shutter speeds help to a point. Experimentation is the key here!

Btw, I have 1 4Gb card, 3 2Gb cars, and 1 each of 32, 128, and 256, for a total of about 10.3 Gb. (Trips and such- really helps)

I updated my page with these 3: Ill try and have em show up on the forums, don't know if DA works like that. Anyway, these are 100% unedited (Except for removing the license plate a bit more in the one shot) and only the night one was on a tripod. All my G9, and all in Rolla Missouri


















I don't know if I like this one or not... Oh well its online now.









I LOVE this shot


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

yay, i dont really agree with people editing pictures in photoshop and calling them selves photographers (not that i have anything wrong with people editing in photoshop (takes mad skillz) but its more graphic design then photography)
all of my shots are stright from the camera








and im hoping to get a nikon f100 soon


----------



## christian_piper

Quote:



Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie*


ya, i dont get it, the more pixels you ram into the same size sensor the more noise at the same ISO or lower the ISO and sacrifice shutter speed








what are they thinking, just stick around 8-10 as a max, heck, my SLR is only 6, and can print large prints no problem, the only reason to go higher is if you plan on cropping alot


Ack double post... oh well. Anyway, TOTALLY agree with you! I shoot at 5Mp most of the time on my G9- Out of 12.1..... SO useless. Except for photographing a page out of a book or something.. or signs... Id say 8 would be good.. yea.

As for the post you JUST did- Well, at times, editing like the one time I did it, it can be an art... bringing the feel out more. But the photos should be great just from the camera... (Vacations and such you might want to tweak the photos a bit- especially when they were very rushed...) So um.... Yea? If the photographer uses photoshop all the time, but still has a great eye, Id say they'd be photographers.

Stuff like THIS is graphic design AND photography. I LOVE this guys work- I think I am going to try to do a couple of those...
http://www.flickr.com/photos/gadl/se...7594279945875/


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *christian_piper*


Ack double post... oh well. Anyway, TOTALLY agree with you! I shoot at 5Mp most of the time on my G9- Out of 12.1..... SO useless. Except for photographing a page out of a book or something.. or signs... Id say 8 would be good.. yea.

As for the post you JUST did- Well, at times, like the one time I did it, it can be an art... bringing the feel out more. But the photos should be great just from the camera... (Vacations and such you might want to tweak the photos a bit- especially when they were very rushed...) So um.... Yea?


i agree, if you have vacation photos or sometime you want to liven up, thats cool (you had the exposure wrong or something) but if you really say (i took this photo and am submitting it in a PHOTOGRAPHY contest) i strongly disagree with editing the photo, if you cant get the results you are looking for without photoshop you arnt trying hard enough (there are examples ie. panoramics, you cant take a 180 degree photo that only covers 50 degrees vertical or doing some noise reduction in a long exposure)
but agian, for the most part, i disagree with people photoshoping a decent picture, making it look good, then calling themselves a photographer.

they have awesome skills with photoshop, but that has little to nothing to do with taking the picture itself (in my opinion).


----------



## mugan23

Quote:


Originally Posted by *christian_piper* 
Hey! I edit with photoshop elements, and the gimp, but most photos of mine are unedited. I DID tweak "6 feet under" a bit, Made the lights on the top of the tunnel stand out a bit more... Just a bit though. I believe in no to minimal editing.

As for clarity, I tell the camera to stay at as low of an ISO as possible- In my case I can simply set the dial to 80. Also, high shutter speeds help to a point. Experimentation is the key here!

Btw, I have 1 4Gb card, 3 2Gb cars, and 1 each of 32, 128, and 256, for a total of about 10.3 Gb. (Trips and such- really helps)

I updated my page with these 3: Ill try and have em show up on the forums, don't know if DA works like that. Anyway, these are 100% unedited (Except for removing the license plate a bit more in the one shot) and only the night one was on a tripod. All my G9, and all in Rolla Missouri


















I don't know if I like this one or not... Oh well its online now.









I LOVE this shot

hey those are nice, by the way do you live anywhere near cleaveland?


----------



## mugan23

i didn't get to go to Cleveland but i went and took some today anyway so am gonna share :hehe:


----------



## christian_piper

Wow- I REALLY like the sunset / (Sunrise?) shot- The clouds are perfect! It looks so soft... but the trees are clear... And nice dog ^^

No I don't live near Cleaveland... I am close to Chicago.

And thanks!


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

wow, mugan, that first one is awesome!


----------



## mugan23

ya i shot it sideways but i used viewer to rotate it, the clouds i thought were not that clear but the trees were hehe. here it is upright but i think it got messed up (BY THE WAY THANK YOU THOSE ARE THE FIRST COMPLIMENTS I HAVE GOTTEN IN PHOTOGRAPHY)


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *christian_piper* 
As for clarity, I tell the camera to stay at as low of an ISO as possible- In my case I can simply set the dial to 80. Also, high shutter speeds help to a point. Experimentation is the key here!

That's the problem with point and shoot cameras: they can't take pictures over ISO 100-200 without significant noise. I also as a general rule shoot with the ISO sensitivity set as low as I can manage, but my SLR (Canon EOS 400D) can shoot at ISO 400 with absolutley no noise, and at 800 and 1600 ISO the noise is so low that Neat Image can easily remove it. Check out this review for the 400D and look at the ISO 100% crop tests below:

http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/ca...ew/index.shtml

or even Schubie's D70:

http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/nikon/d70-review/

When I saw reviews like these, that's what convinced me to get into DSLR. And the 400D is only so-so when it comes to ISO performance. The Mark I or 5D is noise free through ISO 1600.

Now check out the G9's crops:

http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/ca...hot_g9-review/

Not that the G9 is a bad camera (among the best of the point and shoots), but after ISO 80 it's unusable. When I used P & S cameras I did what you did; always set the ISO to the lowest that the camera could go.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie* 
i agree, if you have vacation photos or sometime you want to liven up, thats cool (you had the exposure wrong or something) but if you really say (i took this photo and am submitting it in a PHOTOGRAPHY contest) i strongly disagree with editing the photo, if you cant get the results you are looking for without photoshop you arnt trying hard enough (there are examples ie. panoramics, you cant take a 180 degree photo that only covers 50 degrees vertical or doing some noise reduction in a long exposure)
but agian, for the most part, i disagree with people photoshoping a decent picture, making it look good, then calling themselves a photographer.

they have awesome skills with photoshop, but that has little to nothing to do with taking the picture itself (in my opinion).

You're right to a certain extent, there's still something to be said about judiciousness when selecting aperture, shutter speed, composition and so forth. But even the best photographers do post shot editing, especially RAW adjustments, or combining exposures from bracketed shots (which can make images so incredible, that even film can't reprodcue it).

Digital photography isn't just about being able to avoid having film developed, it's about using technology to take it even further - reviewing shots on the camera's LCD, exposure bracketing, exposure compensation, noise reduction etc.

But again, skill when shooting is paramount. And besides, even the most talented user of Photoshop can only do so much to improve a photo; you can't polish a turd. A bad photo is a bad photo.


----------



## christian_piper

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Not that the G9 is a bad camera (among the best of the point and shoots), but after ISO 80 it's unusable. When I used P & S cameras I did what you did; always set the ISO to the lowest that the camera could go.


Yea... Noise i evil, but I needed a compact..

HOWEVER- That photo of the car at night I posted- ISO 200. So I would say "above 80 is unuseable" well.... not as a rule. 400+ is HORRID usually though


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


You're right to a certain extent, there's still something to be said about judiciousness when selecting aperture, shutter speed, composition and so forth. But even the best photographers do post shot editing, especially RAW adjustments, or combining exposures from bracketed shots (which can make images so incredible, that even film can't reprodcue it).

Digital photography isn't just about being able to avoid having film developed, it's about using technology to take it even further - reviewing shots on the camera's LCD, exposure bracketing, exposure compensation, noise reduction etc.

But again, skill when shooting is paramount. And besides, even the most talented user of Photoshop can only do so much to improve a photo; you can't polish a turd. A bad photo is a bad photo.


agreed, as i said there are exeptions, such as panoramics, HDR photos and some stuff is cool, and it is taking full advantage of technology, but when people do








they really didnt take the second picture as so many people claim, they took the first one and made the second one.
and i am not trying to say it doesnt take the same amount of effort to do that, it is VERY impressive, but the fact remains, you took the first, and made the second.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie* 
agreed, as i said there are exeptions, such as panoramics, HDR photos and some stuff is cool, and it is taking full advantage of technology, but when people do








they really didnt take the second picture as so many people claim, they took the first one and made the second one.
and i am not trying to say it doesnt take the same amount of effort to do that, it is VERY impressive, but the fact remains, you took the first, and made the second.

A lot of photographers use exposure blending for landscape shots, so that the lighter sky can be properly exposed. Exposure blending is so HARD to do. You have to have at least two identical images (with diff. exposures) and patience in P.shop/paint shop pro. I still haven't turned out a decent one! Those photos you posted show how blending can overcome that, but I have resolved to try an older method by using one of these:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...u=57841&is=REG

Filters are so damn expensive...

Right now I have UV/Haze filters for both my lenses, a circular polarizer, and a 4X ND filter (not dark enough).


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

i have a circular polarizer and a 10 stop ND filter
im looking to get a graduated ND filter as well
and i am familiar with HDR photos it didnt hit me that those were some, i have played around with them abit,
i like simple software like auto stitch for panoramics and photomatix basic for HDR


----------



## mugan23

wow i feel like a noob







hehe i thought filters only went on vid cameras


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

filters go on everything









ill show you an example of my polarizer
http://picasaweb.google.ca/a.schub/Polarizer


----------



## mugan23

wow its like cheating :hehe:


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mugan23* 
wow its like cheating :hehe:

I use my polarizer to get those nice deep blue skies. It's just handy in general though if you want to change the color tone without fiddling with the camera settings or post shot editing.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie* 
filters go on everything








ill show you an example of my polarizer
http://picasaweb.google.ca/a.schub/Polarizer

Nice example. Here's an example using an ND filter. This shot was taken with a Panasonic FZ50, a camera which I had for all of about two months:


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

nice, i havent seen anything with enough moving water to take advantage of my ND


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie* 








nice, i havent seen anything with enough moving water to take advantage of my ND

Yeah, just go find a nice swift moving brook or waterfall. The waterfall in that pic is only about 4 feet tall.

My Rebel with the lenses I have is so good at taking in plenty of light that my 4X ND filter can't darken enough! I tried that very same shot with the ND on and it froze the water in motion. I need a seriously darker ND filter, but they are just so pricey! Argh, between cameras and PCs I'm going to have a rob a bank or something...


----------



## mugan23

where do you attach the filter (lense?)


----------



## mugan23

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Nice example. Here's an example using an ND filter. This shot was taken with a Panasonic FZ50, a camera which I had for all of about two months:










wow that is so drool worthy man A++


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mugan23*


where do you attach the filter (lense?)


The end of the lens is threaded and the filter screws on. It works that way for any camera that can take a filter. You Finepix should accept filters. Get yourself a polarizer and an ND filter, they're fun!

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mugan23*


wow that is so drool worthy man A++


Thanks, as crappy as that camera was (Panasonic FZ50), it took some great pictures!


----------



## mugan23

hey that camera is better than mine

Quote:



The end of the lens is threaded and the filter screws on. It works that way for any camera that can take a filter. You Finepix should accept filters. Get yourself a polarizer and an ND filter, they're fun!


 linky?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mugan23*









hey that camera is better than mine

linky?


S700, correct? If you look on the front of your lens, it says "46mm" - that's the size filter that it can accept.

Here's a list of just the 46mm polarizing filters at B&H:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...t=Submit+Query

46mm ND filters:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...t=Submit+Query

46mm UV/Haze filters:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...t=Submit+Query

All filter types at B&H
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/catego...s_Filters.html


----------



## mugan23

well i was silly to think they would be cheap hehe, well what would this one do? and does b+w mean black and white http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...l_Density.html


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mugan23*









hey that camera is better than mine


Not really, the FZ50 sucked worse than worse with any ISO sensitivity, even 100. It was notorious for that. However it took great shots in daylight. But I was so disappointed with it's poor ISO performance and even worse noise reduction that I eBay'd almost as soon as I got it!

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mugan23*


well i was silly to think they would be cheap hehe, well what would this one do? and does b+w mean black and white http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...l_Density.html


B+W is a brand name. I wouldn't buy an ND filter that expensive. This Tiffen should do nicely:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...nsity_ND_.html

Also, you can find the more common filters at places like Best Buy and Circuit City, but they don't carry all sizes.

EDIT: One caveat about that Tiffen ND filter: it's only a .6 so it doesn't darken too much, it might not darken enough if your looking to take silky flowing water shots (but it certainly could, it depnds on your camera). If you want that, go for at least 1.8 ND filters. They get a little pricier the darker though.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Oh yeah, they also make filter kits, which have various kinds of filters:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...t=Submit+Query


----------



## mugan23

nice i like the kits


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

wow, i forgot how much cheaper smaller filters were, my 72mm filters are h3lla expensive


----------



## christian_piper

I really wish my G9 could take filters... Meh. Ill use my older Sony F717 for that ^^ But the photos on the G9 are slightly better....


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie* 
wow, i forgot how much cheaper smaller filters were, my 72mm filters are h3lla expensive

No joke, I use the same size for my 28 -135mm lens. I'm going to have to drop at least $70 on a graduated ND filter. Some filters are $500!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *christian_piper* 
I really wish my G9 could take filters... Meh. Ill use my older Sony F717 for that ^^ But the photos on the G9 are slightly better....

Oh but it can! http://dcresource.pricegrabber.com/s...erid=51613850/

With this adapter you can use 58mm filters for your G9 (it says for the G7 but it works for the G9 as well).


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

i dropped over 100 on my nd and my polarizer


----------



## christian_piper

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Oh but it can! http://dcresource.pricegrabber.com/s...erid=51613850/

With this adapter you can use 58mm filters for your G9 (it says for the G7 but it works for the G9 as well).

AH! I even HAVE 58mm filters lying around! !!!!!! Wow... Im gonna have to buy that. Looks quite small too....

Or maybe Ill buy a D40... Or get my dad a D40 and trade for his D80... (He wishes he got a D40 cause its got everything he needs and ins smaller....

Anyways, THANKS! +rep


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

if you try and get him on the D40 make sure his lenses are supported, the D40 only works with newer AF lenses otherwise it doesn't have autofocus


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *christian_piper* 
AH! I even HAVE 58mm filters lying around! !!!!!! Wow... Im gonna have to buy that. Looks quite small too....

Or maybe Ill buy a D40... Or get my dad a D40 and trade for his D80... (He wishes he got a D40 cause its got everything he needs and ins smaller....

Anyways, THANKS! +rep

You're welcome!

Although your dad would be crazy to give up his D80, it would work out swell for you! The D80 is a great SLR, I had my sights set on it, but it was out of my price range. And Schubie is right, the D40 doesn't have an autofocus motor in the camera body, so if your dad's lenses aren't Nikon AF lenses, then he will have manual focus only. That's what keeps the D40 from being a good SLR imo.


----------



## christian_piper

That's the thing- They ARE the proper lenses ^^

Naa... I'm still too cheap


----------



## mugan23

i know my camera is not good enough to take darker pics but i was wondering how i can maybe make it better? maybe a certain setting or a way to take it. this is the best it could do in the sunset setting


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mugan23*


i know my camera is not good enough to take darker pics but i was wondering how i can maybe make it better? maybe a certain setting or a way to take it. this is the best it could do in the sunset setting


Most decent non-SLR cameras do just fine in lowlight shots, such as Christian's G9 and your S700 - but they really can only take noise free low light shots at the lowest ISO settings, which means a tripod or stationary/supported position is necessary. When non-SLRs try to use higher ISOs (above 200 for most), that's when they become noise machines.

I guess I should clarify that SLRs do better in lowlight _handheld_ shots. Say for example if I were at a really dark art gallery which didn't allow flash photography or tripods. Well that means the flash is off and wide open aperture and bumping up the ISO to get steady shots. Most SLRs do this no problem with a decent prime lens, so I could take handheld shots up to 800 ISO (or more with a really expensive SLR) with little or no noise. If I had a point and shoot and had to shoot handheld and no flash, and were forced to use high ISO for stability, then the shots would be very noisy.

But your sunset shot (top one) is just fine, very nice, good composition. If I had to pick, I would say take the shot again from a vantage point where the light poles aren't in the way. Also, try saturating the colors a bit more to bring out those pinks, yellows and oranges in the sky. There's probably some setting for "vivid color" or some such on your camera.

On the next two shots, the skies are overexposed, because your camera is exposing the dark areas in and around the gazebo and overpass which causes the sky to wash out (particularly evident in the overpass shot). There's no way to expose both sky and ground properly at the same time without using a graduated ND filter or exposure blending (HDR compositing). But what you can do next time is is set your camera's metering to spot metering, and then putting the meter on the sky so it will expose properly. This of course will underexpose the dark areas, but often that it what you're after in sunset shots.

EDIT: Check out these sunset shots from all kinds of different cameras:
http://www.dcresource.com/forums/showthread.php?t=7499
Some people are shooting with expensive equipment but not taking any better shots than yours!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

I took this one recently, but it didn't come out as sharp as I had hoped:


----------



## mugan23

by the way thats a nice pic i like how it looks like there is a worm hole in the sky hehe, well thx for all the help but there is one thing i didn,t understand. what do you mean set my metering?


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

metering is how the camera adjusts itself to expose the picture properly, and spot metering exposes for a certain point instead of matrix metering that tends to overexpose sky's when the sky is bright and the foreground is very dark

and good tips gonetomorow, almost exactly what i would have said


----------



## mrnemo

I have a Canon D10 with a Canon 50mm lens and Tamron 19-35mm - great camera, great lenses, but I'm going to trade for computer parts. This is such an underrated camera - I've had it since new. Took this photo at Haeyundae beach in S. Korea- BEAUTIFUL PLACE.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mugan23*


by the way thats a nice pic i like how it looks like there is a worm hole in the sky hehe, well thx for all the help but there is one thing i didn,t understand. what do you mean set my metering?


What Schubie said. It's a pretty useful function when used correctly. If you go toyour Shooting menu, there is a category labeled "photometry (fancy word for light metering)", there you have the option of "multi" (default, measures the light throughout the image), "spot" and "average (averages the light measured into one one value as a whole). If you select spot metering, a little square reticle should appear on the live LCD, within that small reticle is where the camera measure the light to set the exposure. Try pointing at the TV screen and you will notice that the LCD view darkens quite a bit to compensate, much like it would a bright sky. Point it away and it will lighten. Spot metering is useful like I said if you want your sky to not wash out. It's also very useful when shooting the moon.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie*


metering is how the camera adjusts itself to expose the picture properly, and spot metering exposes for a certain point instead of matrix metering that tends to overexpose sky's when the sky is bright and the foreground is very dark

and good tips gonetomorow, almost exactly what i would have said











Thanks, I know the theory and technology, but rarely do my photos prove that! I'm a true amateur in that I use the "take a ton of pictures, find the best few and delete the rest" approach. I would be a lousy film photographer and would waste a lot of film!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mrnemo*


I have a Canon D10 with a Canon 50mm lens and Tamron 19-35mm - great camera, great lenses, but I'm going to trade for computer parts. This is such an underrated camera - I've had it since new. Took this photo at Haeyundae beach in S. Korea- BEAUTIFUL PLACE.










Ah, don't do that! Computer parts are obsolete in a year (or less) but your camera (espcially the lenses!) stays with you! I could see selling your older 10D body, but you at least ought to hang on to the lenses, which can use for your nest SLR!


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Thanks, I know the theory and technology, but rarely do my photos prove that! I'm a true amateur in that I use the "take a ton of pictures, find the best few and delete the rest" approach. I would be a lousy film photographer and would waste a lot of film!


amen the that philosophy, it takes a LONG time to learn how to use everything properly, when im out i always shoot full manual to try and force myself pick everything up as much as i can.
i just started using the bracketing feature more often.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie*


amen the that philosophy, it takes a LONG time to learn how to use everything properly, when im out i always shoot full manual to try and force myself pick everything up as much as i can.
i just started using the bracketing feature more often.


Yeah bracketing will definitely eat up your memory card. I shoot RAW + high quality JPEG, so if I bracket that's three RAW and three JPEGS for every shot! I think that I'll just shoot RAW only from now on since the JPEGs just take up space and I never use them except to have a thumbnail in Explorer to look at (grr..Windows won't do thumbnails for RAW images).


----------



## mrnemo

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Ah, don't do that! Computer parts are obsolete in a year (or less) but your camera (espcially the lenses!) stays with you! I could see selling your older 10D body, but you at least ought to hang on to the lenses, which can use for your nest SLR!


Yeah you're right - I can part with the 10D and keep the lenses.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Yeah bracketing will definitely eat up your memory card. I shoot RAW + high quality JPEG, so if I bracket that's three RAW and three JPEGS for every shot! I think that I'll just shoot RAW only from now on since the JPEGs just take up space and I never use them except to have a thumbnail in Explorer to look at (grr..Windows won't do thumbnails for RAW images).


ya, i shoot jpeg normal so i dont really have to worry about it to much


----------



## Gollie

Nikon D40x w/ SB600 Flash 
Stock lens and 50-200VR

Great camera but I have my eye set on the D300. To bad it goes for $1700+


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

ya, im looking to upgrade eventually, after i get my 12-24mm tho








and im looking at just grabbing a nice little sb400


----------



## mugan23

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Gollie* 
Nikon D40x w/ SB600 Flash
Stock lens and 50-200VR

Great camera but I have my eye set on the D300. To bad it goes for $1700+









welcome


----------



## mugan23

i used the d40 with a stock lens today, wow can you say sexy its so much faster than my s700 i think am saving up for one


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mugan23*


i used the d40 with a stock lens today, wow can you say sexy its so much faster than my s700 i think am saving up for one


Go for it. I would buy a body only and get a nice VR zoom lens instead of the kit lens:

Lowest price for the body I found:
http://www.fotoconnection.com/p57234...mera-body.html

Two decent Nikon VR lenses to choose from:
http://www.abesofmaine.com/item.do?i...R&l=PRICEGRABB

or

http://www.abesofmaine.com/item.do?i...R&l=PRICEGRABB


----------



## mugan23

i don't know if am considering it yet or not but how much would it be for a lens with 6x xoom


----------



## mugan23

wow what about this i d k much about the lense but everything else looks sweet http://www.fotoconnection.com/p56949...-55mm-1gb.html


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

wow, that price is sketchy low....i might be weary of them, and thats the same lens that gonetomorow linked but without VR, i would recomend VR highly


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mugan23* 
i don't know if am considering it yet or not but how much would it be for a lens with 6x xoom

Are we still talking about lenses for a D40? If so, that means you can only select from Nikon AF lenses (unless you can live with out auto focus). The most reasonably priced Nikon AF lens I can find is this:

http://www.abesofmaine.com/item.do?i...G&l=PRICEGRABB

That's a zoom factor of 7.5x. It's a good lens, although it doesn't have VR (vibration reduction, what Nikon calls their optical stablization)

The thing with SLR lenses is that typically you don't find zoom factors that high (most are just 3, 4 or 5x). Now that doesn't mean that they don't get close in. For example, the lens I posted above has a focal range of 18mm to 135mm. However, look at this lens:

http://www.abesofmaine.com/item.do?i...R&l=PRICEGRABB

That one has a focal range of 70mm to *300mm*, which is zoom factor of about 4.3x, but 300mm is seriously zoomed in. The zoom factor of a lens simply refers to it's minimum and maximum focal length, not necessarily how close it can zoom to a subject. For example, a point and shoot camera might have a range of 18mm to 180mm, a 10x zoom factor, but the max focal length is 180mm - not as close as 300mm. So when you shop for a zoom lens, look at the max focal length. Most zoom lens are telephoto lenses, which means that they are "zoomed in" to begin with so to speak, like the lens above which has a minimum length of 70mm. Not a very wide angle, but telephoto lenses are designed for one thing - to cover distance!


----------



## mugan23

well that blows my mind a little, so the kit i linked you what you think?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mugan23* 
well that blows my mind a little, so the kit i linked you what you think?

Well, it's just Nikon's regular kit offering (body + 18-55 lens) plus some generic accessories. They don't specify what kind of SD card it is or how fast it is (kind of important for SLR burst mode shooting, it could be some ancient slow SD card). The don't really specify the brands of the accessories either. These "accessory kit" deals usually get you a new camera and lens, but the rest of the accessories are generic crap.

I would look past the "accessory package" deals. I would get the body only plus a decent VR lens (which could be done for $600), or go for the ordinary Nikon D40 kit (body plus 18 -55mm lens), which you can get in $450 range. If you're on a tight budget, then you should do that so at least you can have the camera and start shooting and learning its ins and outs, and then save for a nice VR zoom lens and a prime lens.

That same site has a D40 + 18-55 lens for just $419:
http://www.fotoconnection.com/p56941...55mm-lens.html

But I have honestly never used that site before, so I can't comment on their service. But man that is a hell of a good price, and it's brand new - not refurbished or reconditioned.

I do trust this site though:
http://www.abesofmaine.com/item.do?item=NKD401855K

Although it's $479 (after you add it to your cart you get the sale price), you get a free two-year extended warranty.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

I forgot about Newegg, they have the same kit, and we all know we can trust them









http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16830113037


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Ok, caveat emptor for fotoconnection, sheesh:

http://www.google.com/products/revie...3bb3962&sort=1

They're one of these bait 'n' switch companies, sorry for not looking into this company first!


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

wow, they seem reliable


----------



## mugan23

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16830113068
wow check that out the reviews are good and everything


----------



## sugarton

I guess I'm in the club.

I shoot with a Canon 350D w/18-55mm kit lens and a Canon 35-135mm EF.

I put all of my photography here:

http://sugarton.deviantart.com


----------



## mugan23

welcome nice camera by the way


----------



## mugan23

kk can you guys tll me if this is a good pic i have been woundering if i should or shouldn't upload it it looks fine to me but it could be just too plain


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mugan23*


kk can you guys tll me if this is a good pic i have been woundering if i should or shouldn't upload it it looks fine to me but it could be just too plain


A bit plain, I think it's the light and the angle. Maybe try it again on a sunnier day and lower angle? BTW That water would look awesome with a nice dark ND filter on it (like my waterfall I posted earlier). You should get and ND filter and shoot it again.


----------



## mugan23

am ordering it today still not sure which to go with


----------



## mugan23

which angle do u recomend cuz that fall is a lil tricky to get too i almost lost my bike hehe


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mugan23*


am ordering it today still not sure which to go with


Well, you can just grab a cheap Sunpak ND filter from Best Buy, they get the job done and only like $15. If not, go for a cheap Tiffen as dark as you can get.


----------



## mugan23

thx rep + hey man i got 2 more to show and ur my best critic (i think am getting addicted i might actually need to upgrade







) so do u mind?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mugan23*


thx rep + hey man i got 2 more to show and ur my best critic (i think am getting addicted i might actually need to upgrade







) so do u mind?


Alrighty


----------



## mugan23

these are not so good, the camera was craping out on me cuz it was getting darker


----------



## GoneTomorrow

The composition looks nice, it's just the sky - too cloudy! It needs either a nice blue sky with scattered clouds or a nice sunset as a back drop.


----------



## mugan23

ok will do, i think i can try for a blue sky i d k if the sun sets goot at that park. bythe way is that filter good for this too?


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

not really
it is good for slowing stuff down, so it would make it trickier, if you want to bring out the color of the sky or something, you are looking for a graduated ND filter


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mugan23* 
ok will do, i think i can try for a blue sky i d k if the sun sets goot at that park. bythe way is that filter good for this too?

No, an ND filter is only if you want to achieve a really slow shutter speed in daylight. For a landscape shot such as those, I would use a circular polarizing filter. I use a cheapy Sunpak and it really brings out the blue skies.

Here's a recent one from January:


----------



## mugan23

ok guys i was serching on bestbuy.com and there are no 46 mm filters any linky?


----------



## mugan23

well still haven't got my filter since conviniently enough best buy did not have 46mm filters, but i still had to take pics so i thought this one looked pretty nice


----------



## mugan23

ok guys i finally found out i can't go slr i just don't have enough money but i was wondering if there is a camera out there that will take a dark light pic or completely blacked out, i found out my cams biggest weakness


----------



## mugan23

need some help picking cameras. I am sure this time am getting one of these just need to know what is more bang for buck here the fuji s9000 or the e410 slr


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mugan23*


need some help picking cameras. I am sure this time am getting one of these just need to know what is more bang for buck here the fuji s9000 or the e410 slr


Definitely the Olympus. If you are going to drop a few hundred on a new digicam, you should shoot for a DSLR. That way you have the ability to get different lenses and learn how to use SLR cameras. The S9000, however, is an impressive point and shoot. Here are two reviews from a site I frequent, they always have very in depth reviews:

http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/olympus/e410-review/

http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/fu..._s9000-review/

The Olympus is the better low light performer, obviously, as SLR's generally have better and larger sensors than even full bodied point and shoots.

Oh, and I wouldn't buy from Best Prices Camera, read their Reseller Rating reviews and you'll understand why:

http://www.resellerratings.com/store...rice_Cameras_6

There are so many "bait and switch" resellers out there. Always check their Reseller Ratings from the above website before you buy. They lure you in with ridiculously low prices, and when you buy from them, they call you and try to make you buy ridiculous things like a battery, claiming that the camera doesn't come with it (which any camera always does), or they'll say that you need to pay extra to get the "US version" because the one you bought is the Japanese version.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

SLR all the way!








sorry i havent been on to much latley, been really busy, the next while i should be alot more active


----------



## nitteo

Here are some pics of THE CITADEL (Mohamed Ali Mosque) on our Egypt Trip (Feb/08)

Nikon D3 with a Nikon 20mm f/2.8 lens, Enjoy!


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

you have a D3








im so jealous.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nitteo*


Here are some pics of THE CITADEL (Mohamed Ali Mosque) on our Egypt Trip (Feb/08)

Nikon D3 with a Nikon 20mm f/2.8 lens, Enjoy!





























Awesome shots - did you use exposure blending to get the skies to come out so nicely?


----------



## mugan23

that d3 can buy you a civic


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

if you are looking for an SLR, you may want to consider ebay, i have been hooked the last few days.
http://cgi.ebay.ca/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?....cWAT.m240.lVI


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie* 
if you are looking for an SLR, you may want to consider ebay, i have been hooked the last few days.
http://cgi.ebay.ca/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?....cWAT.m240.lVI

Yeah, and I would only buy from people at least a 99% rating and not from anyone overseas.

Also mugan, since the Canon Rebel XSi just came out, the Ebay listings are flooded with XTis:

http://search.ebay.ca/search/search....ital+Rebel+XTi

You could probably get one with a decent lens for $400 or a little more


----------



## mugan23

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Definitely the Olympus. If you are going to drop a few hundred on a new digicam, you should shoot for a DSLR. That way you have the ability to get different lenses and learn how to use SLR cameras. The S9000, however, is an impressive point and shoot. Here are two reviews from a site I frequent, they always have very in depth reviews:

http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/olympus/e410-review/

http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/fu..._s9000-review/

The Olympus is the better low light performer, obviously, as SLR's generally have better and larger sensors than even full bodied point and shoots.

Oh, and I wouldn't buy from Best Prices Camera, read their Reseller Rating reviews and you'll understand why:

http://www.resellerratings.com/store...rice_Cameras_6

There are so many "bait and switch" resellers out there. Always check their Reseller Ratings from the above website before you buy. They lure you in with ridiculously low prices, and when you buy from them, they call you and try to make you buy ridiculous things like a battery, claiming that the camera doesn't come with it (which any camera always does), or they'll say that you need to pay extra to get the "US version" because the one you bought is the Japanese version.

well i guess its decided i have to get the s9000 cuz everywhere else the e 410 is 460+


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mugan23* 
well i guess its decided i have to get the s9000 cuz everywhere else the e 410 is 460+

Forgive me for twisting your arm, but if you have the $350 or so set aside for an s9000, why not save $150 more and get an entry level DSLR? You would be glad you did.


----------



## nitteo

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Forgive me for twisting your arm, but if you have the $350 or so set aside for an s9000, why not save $150 more and get an entry level DSLR? You would be glad you did.


I concur. Even a D70 or a D50 with a 18-70mm lens, will improve your photography x10!


----------



## mugan23

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Forgive me for twisting your arm, but if you have the $350 or so set aside for an s9000, why not save $150 more and get an entry level DSLR? You would be glad you did.


this certain s9000 am getting for $270 i already have a compact card and most of the accessories i can use from my s700( an not a pro photographer am an 18 year old tring to save up for collage and getting $700 a pay check hehe am eating ramen to get this camera)


----------



## mugan23

ok i bid on the d70 hehe if it hits 350 i will stop hehe at least i tried


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mugan23*


ok i bid on the d70 hehe if it hits 350 i will stop hehe at least i tried


Good luck, hope you nab it.


----------



## mugan23

i saw ur camera at a party at work ( that thing is huge )


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

you will love a d70, i have the d70s and i love it, i just bid on some nice old film SLRs im hoping to nab.
and i know all about that saving for college thing, i just finished first year and i try to save up for so long and not go out at all to get money for computer/camera gear.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mugan23*


i saw ur camera at a party at work ( that thing is huge )


Mine? The XTi is sometimes criticized for having small body actually (it's ok for me, but my zoom lens does actually weigh as much as the body). You should see a Canon EOS-1Ds Mark III, it weighs 3 lbs.! I played with one at my local camera pro shop and it feels like your holding a lunch box up to your face. It's a steal at only $8k.


----------



## nitteo

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mugan23*


ok i bid on the d70 hehe if it hits 350 i will stop hehe at least i tried


Just want to let you know, I dont know the seller. I was just showing you that auction as an example. I would probably not buy from this seller (5 feedbacks) but then again, others wont bid either because of that. YOU might be able to steal this auction if not too many people bid.

GOOD LUCK!

PS. things to ask when buying a dSLR,

>How many shutter actuations?
>Any warranty left?
>How are the batteries? Do they keep charge close to original?
>Have you dropped it?

For lenses:

>Are the glass (front and back) pristine? no scratches?
>AF Motor runs good?
>Is the Zoom gear smooth?

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Mine? The XTi is sometimes criticized for having small body actually (it's ok for me, but my zoom lens does actually weigh as much as the body). You should see a Canon EOS-1Ds Mark III, it weighs 3 lbs.! I played with one at my local camera pro shop and it feels like your holding a lunch box up to your face. It's a steal at only $8k.


Dont talk to me about BIG.









The D3 gets heavy around the neck.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

ahaha, ya, the D3 is a beast, what lenses do you currently have for it?
do you do photography as a hobby, or a profession?


----------



## nitteo

Quote:



Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie*


ahaha, ya, the D3 is a beast, what lenses do you currently have for it?
do you do photography as a hobby, or a profession?


Its a hobby.









Nikon 17-35mm f/2.8
Nikon 35-70mm f/2.8
Nikon 70-300mm VR
NIkon 50mm f/1.8


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

nice, im taking a year off school, im hopping to build my camera/lens collection over the year, bidding on some Film SLRs on ebay at the moment








hopping to get a d300 at some point


----------



## mugan23

sorry it was a 40d


----------



## mugan23

well on the subject of things i can afford, i got my nd filter today so i went stream hunting and took lots of pics all very ok but only one stood out and showed of the filter but the pic its self sux


----------



## mugan23

pic showoff time 
the park where the stream was 








he would not fly away so i just had to








took this a while a go just thought it looked kewllll


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mugan23* 
pic showoff time
the park where the stream was








he would not fly away so i just had to








took this a while a go just thought it looked kewllll









Those are some really great shots. And I would call the first ND shot a success - the water looks so wispy, like fog almost. How dark of an ND filter did you get? It takes a fairly dark one to really dampen a sunny day.


----------



## mugan23

i bought a 4x .6


----------



## mugan23

the first shot of the park is filtered all the others are not


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mugan23*


i bought a 4x .6


I see from the EXIF data that you used a f/6.3 aperture. You should use as tiny of an aperture as possible so you can get a nice long shutter speed (at least 2" or more). I think my zoom lens will get as small as f/36 zoomed all the way in.


----------



## mugan23

which pic cuz i was changing aperture settings left and right i am still a noob so am tring to get used to the differences


----------



## mugan23

wait how did u get that info ?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mugan23* 
which pic cuz i was changing aperture settings left and right i am still a noob so am tring to get used to the differences

I'm referring to the stream picture where you used the ND filter to get that "silky" water look. To get that effect, you need the ND filter on (obviously), a tripod (or you set the camera on a rock or something) and you need a very small aperture. This is easiest to do by setting your camera to aperture priority, which is the "A" on the mode dial. Once you have that set, rotate the dial until the f-stop is at the highest it will go, which is f/13.6 for your camera. With the aperture set to that and the filter on, the camera should set a really long shutter speed. If you still can't get more than 1-2 seconds, than you need a darker filter, or you can try it during the late afternoon when it isn't so bright out.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mugan23* 
wait how did u get that info ?

All digicams record EXIF (Exchangeable Image Format) data which tells all the settings of the shot - ISO, aperture, camera model, etc. You access this buy right clicking the image (in Windows, not a web browser) and selecting properties, then "Summary" tab, then the "Advanced" button. It's a handy tool that lets you see what settings someone used to get their shot.

You can't view it from a web browser, unless you use the EXIF viewer add-on for Firefox (other browsers probably have ways as well).


----------



## mugan23

cool i never knew that wow that is a handy tool


----------



## mugan23

i just used the s9000 at my local dodds, wow this camera is sexy as hell. wow am in love but the whole non interchangeable lenses is a real buzz kill. the guy there has seen very many of my pics and told me that for my kind of photography its more than adequate.(but then again he is a sales man and that camera is 499 over there)


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

w00t, i have an N2000 and an N80 being shipped, im excited for when they get here


----------



## mugan23

how much did that set you back in the account


----------



## mugan23

is a sensor size 1/1.6 bad ?


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

N2000 $1 +15 for shipping, N80 $63.50 + 20 for shipping


----------



## mugan23

how did you gt a $300 phone for 70 bucks ?


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

both are fiilm SLR's








and ebay


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mugan23* 
is a sensor size 1/1.6 bad ?

No, that's typical. 1:1 sensor cameras are thousands of dollars. Even mid and high end DSLR cameras are 1:1.3 or 1:1.6

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mugan23* 
how did you gt a $300 phone for 70 bucks ?

Hmm, I think those are Nikon SLR film cameras. I'd like to get my hands on my father's 1983 Nikon FE2, which is still as good as any modern SLR film camera.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

im trying to nab an F100 as well, and ya, the FE2 is a really nice camera.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie* 
im trying to nab an F100 as well, and ya, the FE2 is a really nice camera.

Yeah, it's my dad's baby, he's probably taken at least 50k pictures with it. I'm amazed that there are still acuations on the shutter left. He paid $500 for the _body only_ in _1983_! The only lens he has ever used for it is a 50mm prime.


----------



## mugan23

wow u guys do film too how do u afford this stuff


----------



## mugan23

by the way i mean the sensor size in these terms

• 1/1.6" Type CCD


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mugan23* 
by the way i mean the sensor size in these terms

• 1/1.6" Type CCD

Oh, I was thinking of lens clipping. That's a newer sensor size, just a bit bigger than the more typical 1/1.8" sensor. Pretty typical for point and shoot cameras, it will have average noise. A 2/3" sensor is a better choice, but it isn't much larger, I definitely wouldn't get a smaller sensor than that though.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mugan23* 
wow u guys do film too how do u afford this stuff

I do only digital, but you can get fairly cheap film SLRs these days.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mugan23* 
wow u guys do film too how do u afford this stuff

i used to do film, these are going to be my first film SLRs, and as for affording it, i work two jobs and have for almost 5 years now.


----------



## mugan23

kewl u wouldn't mind buying me a d80 then would you hehe


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

ahaha, i cant afford one for myself


----------



## mugan23

hey am at 306 on this d70 currently leading if i can get it for $350 i would luv it 2 days left
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...ayphotohosting


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mugan23* 
hey am at 306 on this d70 currently leading if i can get it for $350 i would luv it 2 days left
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...ayphotohosting

Good luck, two days is an eternity when you're bidding!


----------



## mugan23

thats true its driving me crazy


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

good luck, i cant see it happening tho, i had a lens for 3 days at 10 bucks, last 16 seconds it went to 50


----------



## mugan23

well if it doesn't i will give up on buying an slr and i will use my slow s700 for now


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Is it too late to join the the club?









I have a Panasonic FZ50 (mine is silver with some black). I also use a Hoya +10 Macro lens filter for macro shots.










Some samples of pics I've taken with the FZ50:


















































































It's a 10MP "super zoom" camera. Not quite a DSLR, but pretty much as close as you can get to it without actually getting to it, hehe







.

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Highly-Annoyed*


Is it too late to join the the club?









I have a Panasonic FZ50 (mine is silver with some black). I also use a Hoya +10 Macro lens filter for macro shots.










Some samples:

It's a 10MP "super zoom" camera. Not quite a DSLR, but pretty much as close as you can get to it without actually getting to it, hehe







.

Highly-Annoyed


Welcome, I had that same camera for a couple of months. Great camera when there's plenty of light, but it's a noise machine in the dark. Worst noise reduction system ever, hands down. Great optics though and optical stabilization. Sorry, not to slam your gear, but I was kind of disappointed with the camera in lowlight. Some really nice shots you have there though.

Here's one I took with that camera and a 4x ND filter:


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Welcome, I had that same camera for a couple of months. Great camera when there's plenty of light, but it's a noise machine in the dark. Worst noise reduction system ever, hands down. Great optics though and optical stabilization. Sorry, not to slam your gear, but I was kind of disappointed with the camera in lowlight. Some really nice shots you have there though.

Here's one I took with that camera and a 4x ND filter:











Nice shot! ND filters really transform the look of the water! I haven't used them yet. I've only made use of a circular polarising filter. It's a shame about those green, orange and white patches of colour on the top and right portions of your image. What are those? Some kind of light refraction or chromatic aberration?

Yeah, noise is a bit of an issue with the FZ50, it's a fair comment.

ISO 100 is fine, 200 is also fine, 400 starts to be a bit less usable and to be honest, unless you want to work your arse off, you might as well forget ISOs 800 and 1600, let alone 3200.

The in-camera noise reduction is a waste of time. I just bought 2GB and 4GB memory cards (will need another 4GB soon) and I shoot everything in RAW. Forget JPEG if you want good quality shots, RAW is the way to go with the FZ50.

Once I have the RAW files, I just use the software that came with the camera (Silkypix) to "develop" the pictures to TIFF files, then, if required, run them through some noise reduction software. The only other thing I might do is use GIMP to touch up the images, or remove elements I don't want in them. After all this, it's just a matter of converting the processed TIFFs to high quality, 300DPI JPEGs and it's all done.

Yeah, it would be a lot easier if I could just shoot in JPEG







.

The pro's of RAW are that I can fix any exposure issues etc, clean up any noise and tweak my images to get any look I like. It gives me massive creative control over the final outcome and allows me to save so many images that otherwise I would have to delete due to getting the exposure wrong etc.

The main con is that it takes quite a bit of time working with RAW files and I probably spend 25 times longer at a PC doing "developing" and post-processing than I do actually taking photos! I don't mind too much though as I quite enjoy it and love the creative element. Having said that, sometimes it _can_ be a lot of work...

I can't afford to upgrade right now, but I do plan on getting better equipment in a year or so.

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Highly-Annoyed*


Nice shot! ND filters really transform the look of the water! I haven't used them yet. I've only made use of a circular polarising filter. *It's a shame about those green, orange and white patches of colour on the top and right portions of your image. What are those? Some kind of light refraction or chromatic aberration?*

Highly-Annoyed


lens flare


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:



Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie*


lens flare


Ah yes, that's it! I forgot what it was called, lol







.

You can reduce lens flare by using a lens hood can't you? I think that's right, lol, I'm really tired atm







.

*EDIT:* Btw, if anybody is interested in seeing some other FZ50 photos, have a look here, on the flickr website. There are a lot of really great photos!

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## mugan23

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Highly-Annoyed*


Is it too late to join the the club?









I have a Panasonic FZ50 (mine is silver with some black). I also use a Hoya +10 Macro lens filter for macro shots.










Some samples of pics I've taken with the FZ50:


















































































It's a 10MP "super zoom" camera. Not quite a DSLR, but pretty much as close as you can get to it without actually getting to it, hehe







.

Highly-Annoyed


wellcome, nice pics and nice camera


----------



## Syrillian

Quote:



Originally Posted by *shajbot*


I thought this was funny. So I was like oh yeah I have a camera too, let's take a picture of it and put it on the thread, but then you know, it can't take a picture of itself (unless in a mirror but that's something else), it's like us human, it can see everything but not itself.

/rant


heh!... that is quite the conundrum you have there...









Me: Canon Powershot A640:


----------



## mugan23

welcome man that camera is really popular am seeing it everywhere


----------



## mugan23

this d70 might actually end up being mine


----------



## mugan23

just took this off my balcony thought it looked cool


----------



## Syrillian

mugan, you have quite the eye, as does Highly-Annoyed.


----------



## mugan23

thx man i got to upgrade my camera tho and highly annoyed u really do take great pics and ur also slr less hehe


----------



## Litlratt

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mugan23*


fujifilm


I recently got one of these. Still haven't learned how to use it properly.


----------



## mugan23

its amassing how much i have learned from this camera, its faster than i expected and good in the dark if u have a tripod hehe. I suggest using the manual dial it gives you lots of options and if set right the pic comes out great


----------



## mugan23

i took this pic and i thought it was ok until i looked on the pc, there was water on my lens due to the rain. Does any one know how to fix this or is the pic screwed


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

it acctually looks more like lens flare, if you look the top purple blob, middle pink blob and bottom blue blob are all in a straight line, pretty common occurrence with lens flare and i dont think there is a way that you could fix the picture


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Syrillian* 
mugan, you have quite the eye, as does Highly-Annoyed.


Quote:


Originally Posted by *mugan23* 
...highly annoyed u really do take great pics and ur also slr less hehe

Thanks for the compliments guys







.

I took a few shots yesterday and have just finished "developing" and post-processing them after 10.5 hours, lol.

Here's three I was quite pleased with







:




























I cropped them where I thought they looked best to show here, but their actual size is a bit bigger. You can see a bit more detail in the full sized shots at 100%.

I just wandered around the garden for and hour or so, snapped 117 pics (some of them repeats of the same shot to ensure at least one good image) and eventually whittled the lot down to 21 pictures that I thought looked good. It's a new record for me, I usually end up ditching around 90% of my shots (including repeat shots of course), but this time I managed to only bin 82%







.

My goal is to have a collection of 2000 by the end of the year, but I've got a very long way to go yet! Got to take some technology shots soon and then perhaps some industry. Got to diversify!









Highly-Annoyed


----------



## mugan23

nice shots man u really make that camera shine


----------



## mugan23

Quote:



Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie*


it acctually looks more like lens flare, if you look the top purple blob, middle pink blob and bottom blue blob are all in a straight line, pretty common occurrence with lens flare and i dont think there is a way that you could fix the picture










too bad i really like this pic. but as you can see from my recent pics its summer here so every thing looks sweet i will just go shooting again maybe tomorrow to see if i can get that shot again


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mugan23*


nice shots man u really make that camera shine


Thanks dude!

I had a crack at removing the lens flare from your pic using GIMP, but I mucked it up a bit in the attempt.

Here it is anyway though:










It'd probably take me an hour or more with GIMP to correct the full size version to any reasonable standard, so I'm not volunteering myself here, but I think, if you have PhotoShop, or are good with GIMP you might stand a chance at fixing the lens flare properly; unlike my bodged attempt







.

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## ecoyd1

asd


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ecoyd1*


add me to the list with my d300.

i need to update my signature.


Nice hardware


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

hey, highly annoyed, thats actually a really good attempt, much better then i could do

and ecoyd1, thats a pretty awesome list you got there, im jealous.


----------



## ecoyd1

i have a fisheye on the way too! cant wait


----------



## Syrillian

Wow!

Highly-Annoyed... that is friggin' scwheet, sick and badarse photography there.

...hmmm.... are you sure you did not crop those from National Geographic?

Lol - just kidding... just kidding.

Seriously Man, nice work.


----------



## mugan23

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Highly-Annoyed*


Thanks dude!

I had a crack at removing the lens flare from your pic using GIMP, but I mucked it up a bit in the attempt.

Here it is anyway though:

It'd probably take me an hour or more with GIMP to correct the full size version to any reasonable standard, so I'm not volunteering myself here, but I think, if you have PhotoShop, or are good with GIMP you might stand a chance at fixing the lens flare properly; unlike my bodged attempt







.

Highly-Annoyed


wow very nice A++,but the thing is i am useless with editing programs i don't even know how you did that.I have photo shop cs3 and have no idea how to even use it other than color editing and such


----------



## mugan23

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ecoyd1*


add me to the list with my d300.

i need to update my signature.


welcome (







nice camera can't wait to see some of ur pics)


----------



## ecoyd1

i am uploading a few to flickr as we speak


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ecoyd1*


i have a fisheye on the way too! cant wait










you have the 10.5mm fisheye coming? i played with it at the digital imaging show, its so much fun, i was undecided between that and the 12-24mm, i decided on the 12-24, now i just have to get around to grabbing it


----------



## ecoyd1

as


----------



## mugan23

Omg







its so beautiful o man that camera kiks ##


----------



## ecoyd1

Its not about the camera, its about the user.

Ive seen amazing shots come from disposable cameras. A good camera just makes it easier to take pictures.


----------



## Syrillian

ecoyd1, amazing shots.

Those are some of my favorite spots in the entire world. I have spent so many days along the California Coast from Tiajuana to Oregon...

Beautiful.

I have some Sonoma Coast pics from last weekend that I will put up later, but they pale in comparrison to your guys' work.


----------



## Transonic

Add me to the club.

Canon 1D Mark II N
Canon SD630

Here's a couple pics I shot with the big camera


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Syrillian*


Wow!

Highly-Annoyed... that is friggin' scwheet, sick and badarse photography there.

...hmmm.... are you sure you did not crop those from National Geographic?

Lol - just kidding... just kidding.

Seriously Man, nice work.










Thanks man. I'm only just starting off in photography, but I'm trying to put the effort in to get good results. It's really encouraging to hear that you like some of my stuff







. It would help if my camera was a bit better, but I can live with it's shortcomings for the mean time







. I'd love a DSLR, but cash flow is preventing a purchase atm.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mugan23*


wow very nice A++,but the thing is i am useless with editing programs i don't even know how you did that.I have photo shop cs3 and have no idea how to even use it other than color editing and such


Yeah, it took me a while to get to grips with GIMP and I'm still learning. The key to it is patience. If you need to zoom in to 400% and move groups of 100 pixels around, or 1200% and work with groups of 5 or 10 pixels, do it. All you really need to do is "clone" the area surrounding the lens flare and paste it judiciously over the flare marks. It's true that you'll be altering what's actually in your photo, but I don't see any alternative really. I tried changing the colour hues and saturation around first, but cloning seems to be the only thing that can rectify the flare issue. I did manage to alter hue, saturation and brightness on some areas to help negate the flaring and also on some cloned areas, but mostly it wasn't very effective.

As I said though, it'd take me the best part of an hour (if not two) to fully cleanse your image of lens flare at it's native resolution, to an acceptable standard and I'm not really up for the challenge to be honest. I've been sat in front of a PC working for hours on end of late and I'm getting a bit fatigued.

Give yourself a few hours (and save at different stages) and play around with GIMP, or PhotoShop and see what you can achieve. I'm sure you're a smart person and will pick up the basics quickly enough. It's always satisfying to learn new skills and once learned, you wont forget them, but can build on them. If you're into photography, image editing is probably something you'll need to familiarise yourself with anyway, as it's sometimes essential to clean up noise and colour and other image aberrations.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ecoyd1*




















I will upload more later.

I love just driving along a coast line and stopping at every scenic point and taking pics, as I did along Highway 1.


Wow! Some seriously beautiful shots there. Nice work! I especially like the two I've quoted above.

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## ecoyd1

come on lets see some more pics!


----------



## mugan23

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Transonic* 
Add me to the club.

Canon 1D Mark II N
Canon SD630

Here's a couple pics I shot with the big camera






welcome great pics


----------



## mugan23

ok check this out (i know the pic is nothing amazing actually i think it sux but pay attention to the cloud, it was blue for miles a head and dark for miles behind i could park in the center of the sun and the dark side it was pretty cool. I don't think my s700 do it justice tho but it was really epic hehe









i shot it with a slower shutter to brighten them it here are some better pics


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mugan23* 
ok check this out (i know the pic is nothing amazing actually i think it sux but pay attention to the cloud, it was blue for miles a head and dark for miles behind i could park in the center of the sun and the dark side it was pretty cool. I don't think my s700 do it justice tho but it was really epic hehe









I have to say, I really do love the angles you shoot at. You turn what could otherwise be a fairly everyday street scene into a really interesting image. It's a really good idea I think I may have to adopt







.

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## mugan23

hehe u have to cheat when u don't have heavy duty hardware thx tho


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mugan23*


hehe u have to cheat when u don't have heavy duty hardware thx tho


I guess it forces you to be more creative, which ends up with a better result. I tend to be too formal and uncomplicated with the photos I take. I only really get creative when "developing" RAWs and undertaking post-processing work and most of that is just tweaking and polishing. Hmmm, I think I'll try and be a bit more creative in future. Try out a few wacky angles and unusual perspectives.

Last couple of shots I'll be adding for a while.

This is the first out-side shot I ever took with the FZ50. It was taken using JPEG, back before I discovered that RAW PC development yielded better results from the camera. Hence, the image isn't as clear as some of the previous ones, due to it being taken in fairly low light, at ISO 100, with JPEG and the useless in-camera noise reduction algorithms.










For a bit of comparison, below is a shot I took fairly recently, taken in RAW and "developed" on the PC. Also in ISO 100, in the late afternoon, just as the light was starting to die.










Highly-Annoyed


----------



## mugan23

looks like you slowed the shutter way down. that camera actually shines if you know what ur doing with it, I say this because i was looking to upgrade to a fz50 and the reviews were not favoring it but this is some very good quality work from a non slr, as for me its easier to be creative because my camera is not much bigger than my fist so its light and i can stick it in odd angles easier and in small spaces and all that. worst thing is that i can't shoot raw.


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mugan23*


looks like you slowed the shutter way down. that camera actually shines if you know what ur doing with it, I say this because i was looking to upgrade to a fz50 and the reviews were not favoring it but this is some very good quality work from a non slr, as for me its easier to be creative because my camera is not much bigger than my fist so its light and i can stick it in odd angles easier and in small spaces and all that. worst thing is that i can't shoot raw.


I looked into getting a camera for quite a while before I purchased. The other contender for my money was the Fujifilm FinePix S9600.

The S9600 can be had cheaper than the FZ50 and I have now come to believe that it is probably the better all-rounder, in that it is cheaper, it's only about 1 mega-pixel less, as far as I can tell it has a superior CCD, it's zoom range is only 1.3x less than the FZ50, all in all, it seems to take much crisper, less noisy pictures, right out of the camera, with little to no post production required.

The S9600 shoots in RAW as well as JPEG and if I had my chance again, I'd probably opt for it instead of the FZ50. The FZ50's glass is great, probably better than the than the S9600, but the sensor is far less noisy on the S9600 and it helps a lot.

When I got the FZ50 I bought it based on the specification. At the time of purchase, it had the best spec available for a non-slr, in terms of quality of lens, mega-pixel count, zoom and functionality. It allows you full manual, or full auto modes and pretty much any combination of the both you like. Without going into too much detail, it's a pretty well spec'ed piece of non-slr kit. I was seduced by this and paid little attention to those who claimed it's sensor was too noisy, or too small for the 10.1 mega-pixel job.

It's true, that when you get to know the FZ50 well enough (I'm still not quite _there_ as you can see) you can compensate for it's one real shortcoming (noise) and, with the right software and plenty of patience and some hard work, produce images that are of a pretty high standard for non-slr. But to be fair, I'd rather be out in the field, taking pictures, than stuck in front of a PC editing them.

If I were you, I'd seriously consider the Fujifilm-FinePix-S9600 as an upgrade, over the FZ50. It's cheaper than the FZ50 and a heck of a lot cheaper than DSLR, but it's a great all rounder, that produces crisp, clear photos. Just check out this review for it. It's really a great little camera.

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Highly-Annoyed*


I looked into getting a camera for quite a while before I purchased. The other contender for my money was the Fujifilm FinePix S9600.

The S9600 can be had cheaper than the FZ50 and I have now come to believe that it is probably the better all-rounder, in that it is cheaper, it's only about 1 mega-pixel less, as far as I can tell it has a superior CCD, it's zoom range is only 1.3x less than the FZ50, all in all, it seems to take much crisper, less noisy pictures, right out of the camera, with little to no post production required.

The S9600 shoots in RAW as well as JPEG and if I had my chance again, I'd probably opt for it instead of the FZ50. The FZ50's glass is great, probably better than the than the S9600, but the sensor is far less noisy on the S9600 and it helps a lot.

When I got the FZ50 I bought it based on the specification. At the time of purchase, it had the best spec available for a non-slr, in terms of quality of lens, mega-pixel count, zoom and functionality. It allows you full manual, or full auto modes and pretty much any combination of the both you like. Without going into too much detail, it's a pretty well spec'ed piece of non-slr kit. I was seduced by this and paid little attention to those who claimed it's sensor was too noisy, or too small for the 10.1 mega-pixel job.

It's true, that when you get to know the FZ50 well enough (I'm still not quite _there_ as you can see) you can compensate for it's one real shortcoming (noise) and, with the right software and plenty of patience and some hard work, produce images that are of a pretty high standard for non-slr. But to be fair, I'd rather be out in the field, taking pictures, than stuck in front of a PC editing them.

If I were you, I'd seriously consider the Fujifilm-FinePix-S9600 as an upgrade, over the FZ50. It's cheaper than the FZ50 and a heck of a lot cheaper than DSLR, but it's a great all rounder, that produces crisp, clear photos. Just check out this review for it. It's really a great little camera.

Highly-Annoyed


HA, with your eye you would really benefit from a DSLR. I don't mean that condescendingly either, it's just that a DSLR will limit the amount of post editing you do. And with a DSLR sensor, you won't have to worry about compensating for noise as much.


----------



## mugan23

i think i will hold off on buying a camera for a while this camera i have right now i am kind of attached, and it seems to produce good quality pic and every thing u guys have seen on here from my cam believe or not has only beed resized in photo shop nothing else. so I am gonna save up for some pretty slr glass (evolt it looks awful sexy at a good price). but the thing is i can't even use my s700 to potential yet i keep finding new ways to make my pics goodlooking every day


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
HA, with your eye you would really benefit from a DSLR. I don't mean that condescendingly either, it's just that a DSLR will limit the amount of post editing you do. And with a DSLR sensor, you won't have to worry about compensating for noise as much.

Yeah, in terms of all the effort I put in to RAW development and post production, I too have come to the conclusion that DSLR would be of great benefit. I've seen shots from DSLRs at ISO1600 that have less noise in the them than the FZ50 does at ISO200 in some conditions... The sensors in DSLRs are just much better quality than those in non-slrs in general, so you can use high ISOs without having to deal with noise issues to anywhere near the extent of non-slrs.

To be fair, I can shoot everything at ISO100 or 200 and still get good and occasional fairly great shots, if I'm prepared to use low shutter speeds. Fortunately the FZ50 has really great image stabilisation and in mode2, it's tough to get blur from camera-shake, so even with a 1/2 second shutter speed, wide-angle handheld shots are not out of the question. In fact, I can even get pretty reliable blur free handheld shots at full zoom as low as 1/4 of a second. If I want to make sure I wont get blur I can just take a tripod along and use that. Of course, all this only helps so much and ideally, higher ISOs are the only solution to low light, but as long as I'm prepared to work on it, I can make use of ISO400 if I have to, although to be fair it's not great and above ISO400 isn't really usable for everything.

Incidentally, I have recently undertaken a little test to determine which ISO levels I can actually use. I determined that, at fairly low light levels (one 60W "energy saver" light bulb three metres (about 9.8ft) away), I can get away with up to ISO400 with moderate noise reduction, without loosing too many details. I did take pictures with JPEG at the various ISO levels and in-camera noise reduction settings as well, but they were under-exposed, so I haven't shown them.

Have a look (all images shot in RAW, processed, then run through noise reduction software at moderate levels):

Oh, also, don't expect the fridge-magnet hippo's face to be in focus, I wasn't focusing the camera on it, but on the writing, which is why the words are much sharper than the face







.

This is the full image (scaled down to about 20%) showing the context of the crops.










.

ISO100 (100% CROP) [Moderate (PC Software) Noise Filtering]










.

ISO200 (100% CROP) [Moderate (PC Software) Noise Filtering]










.

ISO400 (100% CROP) [Moderate (PC Software) Noise Filtering]










.

ISO800 (100% CROP) [Moderate (PC Software) Noise Filtering]










.

ISO1600 (100% CROP) [Moderate (PC Software) Noise Filtering]










As you can see, at 100% the noise starts to show it's ugly face at ISO400 (even _after_ moderate, default filtering) and from there on it's extremely evident. I used the default settings on my noise reduction software (with a little sharpening) and with no doubt I could have done a better job of the filtration manually, than the default settings did. However, using default image profiling and default filtration settings is quick, taking around 60 seconds an image for an experienced user. If I had wanted a better result and filtered manually, I could of spent anything up to 15 minutes an image, but certainly around 4 or 5 minutes on average.

With the FZ50, it's a trade off between time and battling the noise, whilst saving as much detail as possible. If you have the time and don't mind being limited to ISO400 as a realistic maximum, you can get the results, but otherwise it's going to be tough to get anything looking that great, even at ISO100 or 200. I've taken about 500 shots with the FZ50 so far and in all that time, I've only come across about 25 images that would not have benefited from post-production noise reduction.

Having said all that, if you put the effort in, you can get some very nice results.

I would love a DSLR, but I just don't have the funds available atm. I'm going to have to wait it out with the FZ50 for at least another six months before I'll be in the position to think about spending the kind of cash involved in moving up to DSLR. In the mean time though, I'll keep on practising and trying to get better at photography and when I finally do get a DSLR, I'll really appreciate the absence of the necessity of hours of post production work







.

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## ecoyd1

oj;ijo;io;yi


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

ya, thats one of the main reasons i want a d200/d300 for noise, shutter speed and white balance control, i shoot fully manual about 90% of the time and the white balance control with the higher end SLRs is so much nicer then my d70s


----------



## ecoyd1

Here is another shot from a few weeks ago:










The bird has nested and the eggs have hatched. The babies are a few days old, so when I get some time this week I will try to take some careful shots of them.


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ecoyd1*


With my d300, there is literally no noise at ISO 3200(!) when shooting in good light. Even in low light, it is barley noticeable.

Have any of you tried lightroom?


My goodness, I just had a look at prices and the D300 body alone cost almost 4x as much as the FZ50 does now _online_ in the UK. Just the body...

I have no doubt from reading some of the spec that the D300 is a really great camera that, with regards to still image capture, blows the FZ50 cleanly out of the water; it's not even in the same league. But x4 as much for just the body? Then, I suppose you'll need a few lenses? Macro, telephoto, wide-angle? How much do they cost each? In the UK, I could be looking at spending in total, perhaps 10x as much as the FZ50 now costs, to get the D300 and some half decent lenses... I just don't have that kind of spare cash, lol.

I don't suppose (for future reference) you could recommend a DSLR that isn't quite as brilliant as the D300, but doesn't cost quite as much either? Something that perhaps comes with a few lenses? You'd be looking at spending around Â£1000 in the UK for the D300 body alone; I'd be looking to spend, maybe Â£750 for a body and lenses if possible. Perhaps that's unrealistic? I'd at least want a macro lens and a telephoto lens and maybe something that would produce nice wide-angle shots as well, with a body.

Any suggestions would be welcome







.

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

unfortunately macro lenses are EXPENSIVE, sorry, i will only be using nikon for examples because i am much more familiar with them then other brands.
but a nikon macro lens is around 900 bucks
http://www.ritzcamera.com/product/541535902.htm
you would be better with something like a medium wide angle moderate zoom
http://www.henrys.com/webapp/wcs/sto...&itemID=177765
and get a macro adapter for the end of the lens (yes i realize it degrades quality, but i would rather it then 900 bucks)
and then snag a d40 on top of that.

even an entry level DSLR is going to give you much more control and better results then a high end fixed lens camera, keep your eye out at local camera shops for a used SLR is there is a significant price drop as well.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Highly-Annoyed*


My goodness, I just had a look at prices and the D300 body alone cost almost 4x as much as the FZ50 does now _online_ in the UK. Just the body...

I have no doubt from reading some of the spec that the D300 is a really great camera that, with regards to still image capture, blows the FZ50 cleanly out of the water; it's not even in the same league. But x4 as much for just the body? Then, I suppose you'll need a few lenses? Macro, telephoto, wide-angle? How much do they cost each? In the UK, I could be looking at spending in total, perhaps 10x as much as the FZ50 now costs, to get the D300 and some half decent lenses... I just don't have that kind of spare cash, lol.

I don't suppose (for future reference) you could recommend a DSLR that isn't quite as brilliant as the D300, but doesn't cost quite as much either? Something that perhaps comes with a few lenses? You'd be looking at spending around Â£1000 in the UK for the D300 body alone; I'd be looking to spend, maybe Â£750 for a body and lenses if possible. Perhaps that's unrealistic? I'd at least want a macro lens and a telephoto lens and maybe something that would produce nice wide-angle shots as well, with a body.

Any suggestions would be welcome







.

Highly-Annoyed


Â£750 will get you a great DSLR with a lens! You could start with a Nikon D80 or Canon 450D body, either of which would set you back Â£400 or so. For a lens, you could easily have enough left over for a 50mm prime (or macro, depending on which is more important) and a good "walk around" zoom lens both for approximately Â£300 or so. That would leave enough left over for an extra battery, case and a UV filter, polarizer.

www.dpreview.com and www.dcresource.com are great sights for reviews and pricing.

Go for SLR, you won't regret it!


----------



## ecoyd1

asd


----------



## ecoyd1

Quote:



Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie*


unfortunately macro lenses are EXPENSIVE, sorry, i will only be using nikon for examples because i am much more familiar with them then other brands.
but a nikon macro lens is around 900 bucks
http://www.ritzcamera.com/product/541535902.htm
you would be better with something like a medium wide angle moderate zoom
http://www.henrys.com/webapp/wcs/sto...&itemID=177765
and get a macro adapter for the end of the lens (yes i realize it degrades quality, but i would rather it then 900 bucks)
and then snag a d40 on top of that.

even an entry level DSLR is going to give you much more control and better results then a high end fixed lens camera, keep your eye out at local camera shops for a used SLR is there is a significant price drop as well.


Sorry gonna have to disagree with you there, MACRO LENSES ARE CHEAP!!!

I purchased a Nikkor 1972 55mm 3.5 AiS Lense from KEH Cameras that was rated at "bargain" quality for only $70. In the bargain description, it said there could be dings or scratches in the lens. When I recieved it, it was pristine except for one minor dent that I could barley see.

But really, this is a great camera broker. http://www.keh.com/onlinestore/home.aspx

They have great deals on used gear that is just great!


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

ya, the problem, ship to canada, i have scrounged for an old macro lens and have yet to find anything around here, and most online places i find with a decent priced one dont ship to canada.


----------



## ecoyd1

I can help in shipping to canada..


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

i love you








could i PM you with details? i probably wouldnt be able to order it for a month or so, but would you mind helping me out when i have the funds agian?


----------



## ecoyd1

PM Sent.


----------



## ecoyd1

Come on post some more pictures guys!


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Â£750 will get you a great DSLR with a lens! You could start with a Nikon D80 or Canon 450D body, either of which would set you back Â£400 or so. For a lens, you could easily have enough left over for a 50mm prime (or macro, depending on which is more important) and a good "walk around" zoom lens both for approximately Â£300 or so. That would leave enough left over for an extra battery, case and a UV filter, polarizer.

www.dpreview.com and www.dcresource.com are great sights for reviews and pricing.

Go for SLR, you won't regret it!


OK. Well I've done a little reading and I've found this Pentax K20D, which seems pretty good from what I've read. Anybody have an opinion on it? For Â£1000 (the cost of a D300 body alone) I can get it with two lenses (although not a macro one sadly) here. Any thoughts on this camera?

Thanks!

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## ecoyd1

IMO:

I would stay away from non-mainstream SLR systems. Professionals only use either Nikon or Canon. You will never see a pro using a Sony. These non-mainstream SLR compainies have only been in the market since about 2000. However, Nikon and Canon have been alive since the 60's and even 50's. There quality in literally every aspect tops that of sony, pentax, olympus, and other compaines.

I think it would be best to go with a main stream brand.


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ecoyd1*


IMO:

I would stay away from non-mainstream SLR systems. Professionals only use either Nikon or Canon. You will never see a pro using a Sony. These non-mainstream SLR compainies have only been in the market since about 2000. However, Nikon and Canon have been alive since the 60's and even 50's. There quality in literally every aspect tops that of sony, pentax, olympus, and other compaines.

I think it would be best to go with a main stream brand.


The following is from the trustedreviews.com website.

Quote:



*Pentax is one of the original "Big Five" Japanese camera companies*, alongside Nikon, Canon, Minolta (RIP) and Olympus, and *has a history dating back to 1919*. Traditionally Pentax's core market has been the amateur enthusiast photographer, *with a long series of affordable but high-qualitySLRs* such as the Spotmatic, ME Super and P30, *although it has also produced some outstanding professional models over the years*, including the current 645NII and 67II medium-format film cameras. Pentax has always played second fiddle to market leaders Nikon and Canon, and even now has a much smaller share of the digital SLR market than any of the other major players. *However the brand's rich history of quality and innovation is still apparent in the current models.*


I don't know a great deal about DSLRs, it's true, but it would appear this particular brand has a good history of making some decent cameras?

I appreciate your input







.

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## ecoyd1

Well, its your money, but I'm going to recommend Nikon. I've used them for years (had my d70 for 3+ years now) and never had a problem. When i dropped a lense, they sent me a new one with in a week. And I was OVER the warranty. That alone will keep me with them.

And I can use old lenses from the 60s and 70s, which is a huge plus I think.


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:


Originally Posted by *ecoyd1* 
Well, its your money, but I'm going to recommend Nikon. I've used them for years (had my d70 for 3+ years now) and never had a problem. When i dropped a lense, they sent me a new one with in a week. And I was OVER the warranty. That alone will keep me with them.

And I can use old lenses from the 60s and 70s, which is a huge plus I think.

Hmmm, OK, thanks for sharing your opinion, I appreciate your insight







.

I've looked briefly at the D40 you recommended and it's actually pretty cheap as DSLRs go it would seem. It is only around 6 mega-pixel though. Now, I know that the mega-pixel race isn't necessarily all that important in reality, compared to other factors like sensor and glass quality, but if I do upgrade, I'd sell my FZ50 to raise some cash.

With this in mind, I don't think I'd be happy going from 10 mega-pixels to 6, even if the image quality would be better. I'd want at least as many mega-pixels as I have now, preferably more if possible, but also with the added benefits of DSLR, like superior image quality at higher ISOs. It's these factors that attracted me to the Pentax K20D. It has more of all the qualities the FZ50 could do with more of, but it's also got a 14.6 mega-pixel sensor, which would be more than a 40% increase on what I have now, _with_ all the benefits I don't have.

Could you suggest another Nikon (other than the D40) that has the following:

10+ mega-pixel sensor.
Live view LCD screen.
Self cleaning dust protection sensor mechanism.
Built in Image stabilisation technology.
Uses a Li-ion battery pack.
Can shoot in RAW and has software to process RAW.
Uses SD/SDHC memory cards.
Expanded dynamic range functionality.
Full auto and manual modes, with mixes of both available.
Dust-proof and water-resistant.
Tough, robust construction.
Built in filler flash.
Multiple-sensor auto focusing array.
Must cost no more than Â£1100 including at leat two lenses.
I think that's all the main things I've learned that I'd like so far. Being light is also desirable, although not imperative.

Any suggestions, I be happy to hear







.

Thanks!

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## Syrillian

Oh man.... so much beauty abounds. Highly annoyed, the crispness and vivid capture of color that you attain is astounding.

Here are a few from Bodega Bay:




























I'm sucha camera-dunce, it ain't even funny.

I have a Lady-friend that is into Cepia (sp?). She pulls off some really cool stuff... but it is all beyond me.

I just don't have the eye.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Highly-Annoyed* 
Hmmm, OK, thanks for sharing your opinion, I appreciate your insight







.

I've looked briefly at the D40 you recommended and it's actually pretty cheap as DSLRs go it would seem. It is only around 6 mega-pixel though. Now, I know that the mega-pixel race isn't necessarily all that important in reality, compared to other factors like sensor and glass quality, but if I do upgrade, I'd sell my FZ50 to raise some cash.

With this in mind, I don't think I'd be happy going from 10 mega-pixels to 6, even if the image quality would be better. I'd want at least as many mega-pixels as I have now, preferably more if possible, but also with the added benefits of DSLR, like superior image quality at higher ISOs. It's these factors that attracted me to the Pentax K20D. It has more of all the qualities the FZ50 could do with more of, but it's also got a 14.6 mega-pixel sensor, which would be more than a 40% increase on what I have now, _with_ all the benefits I don't have.

Could you suggest another Nikon (other than the D40) that has the following:

10+ mega-pixel sensor.
Live view LCD screen.
Self cleaning dust protection sensor mechanism.
Built in Image stabilisation technology.
Uses a Li-ion battery pack.
Can shoot in RAW and has software to process RAW.
Uses SD/SDHC memory cards.
Expanded dynamic range functionality.
Full auto and manual modes, with mixes of both available.
Dust-proof and water-resistant.
Tough, robust construction.
Built in filler flash.
Multiple-sensor auto focusing array.
Must cost no more than Â£1100 including at leat two lenses.
I think that's all the main things I've learned that I'd like so far. Being light is also desirable, although not imperative.

Any suggestions, I be happy to hear







.

Thanks!

Highly-Annoyed

Highly, a Nikon D80 would fit your needs perfectly, only $659 USD for the body. That leaves plenty of wherewithal for lenses. And about lenses, keep in mind that there are decent third party lens manufacturers like Tamron and Sigma, but they often lack Nikon specific features like Vibration Reduction and other features like ultra sonic motors.

The camera I use, a Canon 400D (aka Rebel XTi) also fit the bill. Body only for that is around $500 USD. Canon makes the best lenses in my opinion.


----------



## mugan23

what do u guys think of the e410 evolt by the way the reviews are great but i would like to know what u guys think


----------



## mugan23

what do u think of this pic (i have been trying out macro shots lately but as you can imagine its next thing to impossible to get one with no manual focus


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mugan23*


what do u guys think of the e410 evolt by the way the reviews are great but i would like to know what u guys think


For the price, which seems to be between $350 - 400 or so for the body only, the E-410 is a decent camera. That camera seems to depend on its proprietary noise filtering system to produce clean high ISO shots rather than relying on a decent sensor. It uses a 4/3" sensor which is on the small side for a DSLR. It apparently has a tiny viewfinder as well, which is can be a huge pain. But if you can get one on the cheap - definitely go for it. This camera is very flexible its lens compatiblity - it can use any FourThirds lens, which there are a lot of.

For that price range, I would alsoconsider at a Canon 350D or a Nikon D40


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Syrillian*


Oh man.... so much beauty abounds. Highly annoyed, the crispness and vivid capture of color that you attain is astounding.

Here are a few from Bodega Bay:




























I'm sucha camera-dunce, it ain't even funny.

I have a Lady-friend that is into Cepia (sp?). She pulls off some really cool stuff... but it is all beyond me.

I just don't have the eye.


"Sepia"







Those are some great landscape shots Syrillian. You _do_ have an eye and don't know it! You followed the "Rule of thirds" for landscapes without even realizing it (or maybe you did and I'm being presumptuous)!


----------



## mugan23

i do agree that the d40 is better than the than the evolt, but my reason for looking somewhere else other than Nikon d40 as primitive and stupid as this may sound is the fact that every one here(in mayfield) has one. when my friends get together for example last week when we went to the metro park they actually mixed up bodies (CAN U BELIEVE THAT) there was 4 d40s in the trunk that day i guess that means its the best entry level but i was wishing for something else for the same price. that eos 350 d might be too pricey tho am still looking


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mugan23* 
i do agree that the d40 is better than the than the evolt, but my reason for looking somewhere else other than Nikon d40 as primitive and stupid as this may sound is the fact that every one here(in mayfield) has one. when my friends get together for example last week when we went to the metro park they actually mixed up bodies (CAN U BELIEVE THAT) there was 4 d40s in the trunk that day i guess that means its the best entry level but i was wishing for something else for the same price. that eos 350 d might be too pricey tho am still looking

I think you're right to pass on the D40 for one huge screaming reason: it has no auto focus motor in the body. That means Nikon only lenses or no auto focus.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

w00t, my n2000 arrived, now i just need my lens to get here


----------



## mugan23

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


I think you're right to pass on the D40 for one huge screaming reason: it has no auto focus motor in the body. That means Nikon only lenses or no auto focus.


well that 350d looks aright 400 with lens but i want in black hehe u got any experience with it?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mugan23*


well that 350d looks aright 400 with lens but i want in black hehe u got any experience with it?


Yeah, no self respecting SLR owner would have anything but black!









The 350D is a really good camera. The only difference between it and the 400D is that it doesn't have the dust removal feature, it's 8 megapixels (vs. 10) and has a 7 point autofocus (vs. 9). It has the same sized sensor and both use the DIGIC II processor.

If you scour ebay and the web, you could find one for cheap. I would get a body only and a nice zoom lens, but if you can't the kit lens will do.


----------



## mugan23

can i use my sd card ? and or my batts?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mugan23*


can i use my sd card ? and or my batts?


No unfortunately, it uses CF cards and a proprietary battery. But you can sell your Fuji on Ebay (or on OCN!) and get the memory cards you need.


----------



## mugan23

ohh hey guys can i officialize this thread and how


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mugan23*


ohh hey guys can i officialize this thread and how


PM a mod


----------



## mugan23

will do i think its a good thread any way, as for that camera i have 300 from the d70 i was bidding on so al save it until next check then al see what happens


----------



## christian_piper

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mugan23*


can i use my sd card ? and or my batts?


Pretty much ALL cameras use their own batteries.. NO seperate makers batteries are compatible.

And Nikon SLR's use SD cards- not CF cards.

NEVER but a camera (at least right now) that is not either CF or SD. Those are the standard media today.

And you might be able to use SD cards with a CF camera-
http://the-gadgeteer.com/review/eagl...adapter_review

Just not the other way around.


----------



## mugan23

i pmed Transonic since he is a member hehe


----------



## mugan23

uuuuuuuuuuuu we are official people! thank you Transonic


----------



## christian_piper

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Syrillian*












I love this shot!! You DO have an eye. Practice!

OFFICIAL! WEWT! Everyone celebrate!

Sorting my photos at the moment.. Ill post up a couple soon.

I really need to shoot RAW...


----------



## ecoyd1

Yay for officialness!

I do a lot of sports photography for my school.

This was shot at a high school game 2 years ago (i think) with a d70 and 70-300 at 5.6 with flash. The lights were turned down. High School football is very hard to shoot but it can be done:


----------



## mugan23

ohhh A++ nice shooting


----------



## ecoyd1

Thanks! I shoot lacrosse tomorrow.


----------



## mugan23

u got to post those


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:


Originally Posted by *ecoyd1* 
With my d300, there is literally no noise at ISO 3200(!) when shooting in good light. Even in low light, it is barley noticeable.

Sorry to go back to this earlier post of yours, but in the process of looking for a future DSLR for myself, I've been looking into the D300 and I've found that it's not quite as noise-free you suggested, at least when viewed at 100%.

I've done a comparison with "mouse-overs" here to show the noise going from ISO100 to 400, 800, 1600, 3200 and 6400. Believe it or not, there's noise even at ISO400 and it is noticeable at 100%, especially so at ISO1600 and above. The noise seems to be predominantly white though, with little or no colour in it until it reaches ISO1600.

Have a look at the globe on each comparison, the details (like the black lines around the countries) even start to get a little bit smudged. It's quite interesting. Not to suggest that the D300 isn't a great camera, I'm sure it is and it's probably less noisy than the majority of cameras, but it doesn't appear to be noise free, even at ISO400. What do you think?

I've also been working on a similar comparison for the Pentax K20D that's I'm still interested in and so far, the D300 has quite a bit less noise at 100% than that camera, but considering the price difference, I'm not totally convinced the D300 is worth the extra, as far as noise goes anyway, although it is quite a bit better.

Anyway, have a look and pay attention to the globe and to the dark area to the bottom right







.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Highly, a Nikon D80 would fit your needs perfectly, only $659 USD for the body. That leaves plenty of wherewithal for lenses. And about lenses, keep in mind that there are decent third party lens manufacturers like Tamron and Sigma, but they often lack Nikon specific features like Vibration Reduction and other features like ultra sonic motors.

The camera I use, a Canon 400D (aka Rebel XTi) also fit the bill. Body only for that is around $500 USD. Canon makes the best lenses in my opinion.

I've had a look into those and also a few others, but I still like what I'm seeing in the Pantex K20D. It's features seem really good and it takes printable shots up to ISO1600, as well as receiving good reviews from various different sources and being 14.6 mega-pixel. It is quite expensive though, at around Â£600 to Â£700, but it was only just released this year, so presumably prices will fall by the time (hopefully) I'm ready to buy in six months or so.

I'm keeping your suggestions in mind and have bookmarked relevant pages and online stores, but I was hoping somebody might be able to give me some reasons _not_ to get the K20D. Some criticisms of it, the technology it uses, in what way it is inferior to camera's in the same price range? Pentax have been making camera's for ages as far as my research shows, so I'd be interested in what anybody has to say about them and the K20D in particular.

Thanks again for everybody's input! It'll probably take me months to decide what to get!









Highly-Annoyed


----------



## ecoyd1

Honestly, I have never used the K20D. Haven't used any from the lineup either.

On terms of noise, you have to remember that I went from a d70 where anything above iso 800 was so noisy it just wasn't even worth it to take pictures in that low of light. For example, high school volleyball. Even at f1.4, I would get shutter speeds of 1/200 at 1600. It would be blurred (slow shutter and fast action) and not to mention a TON of noise. Now, with the d300 I can safely use 3200, or even 6400 at 1/~500 and get MUCH better shots.

That was just an example.

I think you should start with a lower end SLR, and see what works better for you. I know people who ventured into the world of SLR photography and it was so complex they quit. (I really hope that doesnt happen to any of you..).

Another thing:
Go to your local camera store, even if its along drive or whatever. Try EVERY camera they have, and bring your own card(s). You may be there for hours, but then you can compare results yourself and see how each camera and each lens feels.

Give it a shot. (<< pun intended.)


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ecoyd1*


I think you should start with a lower end SLR, and see what works better for you. I know people who ventured into the world of SLR photography and it was so complex they quit.


Yeah, I'm not really too sure what the difference actually is between what I have now (FZ50) & a standard DSLR.

As far as I can tell, the main differences going from what I have to DSLR are:

01. Interchangeable lenses.
02. Better sensor quality (less noise, sharper images, etc).
03. Reflex mirror.
04. Faster focusing.
05. More rapid shooting (image buffering before write to card)
06. Lower shutter lag.
07. Greater Depth of Field control.
08. Greater versatility (more options, features)
09. Quite probably better optics.
10. Better low light shooting.
11. Faster shutter speeds.
12. Greater Cost.

Other than these, I understand there are a whole slew of features (a few I mentioned in my previous post about getting a Nikon Camera, like expanded dynamic range), but other than that and having to clean a sensor as well as lenses, I'm not sure what the major differences are?

Still, I love to learn new things! I've been awake late into the night over the last few days researching into DSLRs and I've found it quite interesting! I love to learn by experience though, as I enjoy testing things out, so the idea of having extra complexity to contend with is more exciting than daunting to me!









Quote:



Originally Posted by *ecoyd1*


Another thing:
Go to your local camera store, even if its along drive or whatever. Try EVERY camera they have, and bring your own card(s). You may be there for hours, but then you can compare results yourself and see how each camera and each lens feels.


Now that is a really good idea that just hadn't occurred to me. I think I will take you're advice and actually try some cameras out before buying. It just hadn't occurred to me that a shop would let me take my own cards so I could test their stock and take the pics home and compare.

Good idea! +REP









Highly-Annoyed


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Highly-Annoyed*


Yeah, I'm not really too sure what the difference actually is between what I have now (FZ50) & a standard DSLR.

As far as I can tell, the main differences going from what I have to DSLR are:

01. Interchangeable lenses.
02. Better sensor quality (less noise, sharper images, etc).
03. Reflex mirror.
04. Faster focusing.
05. More rapid shooting (image buffering before write to card)
06. Lower shutter lag.
07. Greater Depth of Field control.
08. Greater versatility (more options, features)
09. Quite probably better optics.
10. Better low light shooting.
11. Faster shutter speeds.
12. Greater Cost.

Other than these, I understand there are a whole slew of features (a few I mentioned in my previous post about getting a Nikon Camera, like expanded dynamic range), but other than that and having to clean a sensor as well as lenses, I'm not sure what the major differences are?

Still, I love to learn new things! I've been awake late into the night over the last few days researching into DSLRs and I've found it quite interesting! I love to learn by experience though, as I enjoy testing things out, so the idea of having extra complexity to contend with is more exiting than daunting to me!









Now that is a really good idea that just hadn't occurred to me. I think I will take you're advice and actually try some cameras out before buying. It just hadn't occurred to me that a shop would let me take my own cards so I could test their stock and take the pics home and compare.

Good idea! +REP









Highly-Annoyed


Yep, you know the advantages of DLSR, so you should look into one for sure. And definitely get out there and try a few. Most DSLR's will let you shoot without a memory card installed, so if you only have an SD card but want to try a camera which takes CF, you can at least operate it and get a feel for the controls.

The thing about Pentax, Olympus, Sony and Panasonic DSLRs is that they aren't generally considered "professional" DSLRs. Many of them are quite capable and rival the big two brands (Nikon and Canon) in quality, but if you look at any professional photographer's webpage or ask one, they only use Canon or Nikon.

But as I said, that doesn't mean that non Nikons and non Canons aren't good DSLRs, but they usually have more criticisms. For example, the Sony Alpha DSLR is acclaimed for it's speed, performance, etc. but it lambasted for it's ISO performance, which is _really_ bad.

So, always check out reviews. The two best and most in depth review sites are www.dcresource.com and www.dpreview.com they examine cameras inside and out - literally. They always have 100% crops for all ISO levels, redeye tests, barrel distortion tests, etc.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
But as I said, that doesn't mean that non Nikons and non Canons aren't good DSLRs, but they usually have more criticisms. *For example, the Sony Alpha DSLR is acclaimed for it's speed, performance, etc. but it lambasted for it's ISO performance, which is really bad.*

hmmm, not saying that isnt true, but then nikons would be as well, nikon uses sonys sensors, thats why the d300 was delayed because sony couldn't get enough of them to nikon fast enough.
so the only thing that would make a nikon better then a sony for noise would be the way it is processed, but i would think that the two would have very similar performance.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie* 
hmmm, not saying that isnt true, but then nikons would be as well, nikon uses sonys sensors, thats why the d300 was delayed because sony couldn't get enough of them to nikon fast enough.
so the only thing that would make a nikon better then a sony for noise would be the way it is processed, but i would think that the two would have very similar performance.

That's right, they may have the same manufacturer for the sensor, but Nikon has it's own in house image processor - Nikon EXPEED, Canon uses the Digic III, and so on. It's just like computer memory: some brands use Micron chips, some use Samsung, but the way it's implemented is the difference.

Lenses are also what separates companies. Canon has a reputation for having some of the best lenses, and so does Nikon.


----------



## ecoyd1

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
They always have 100% crops for all ISO levels, *redeye tests*, barrel distortion tests, etc.

Just to clear things up, red eye is not camera related, but flash rather.

I can explain if anyone is interested.


----------



## mugan23

go a head u forget there are noobs here (me)


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *ecoyd1* 
Just to clear things up, red eye is not camera related, but flash rather.

I can explain if anyone is interested.

Semantics, yes, I know that. Many SLRs have pop-up speed lights so they are _part_ of the camera. A lot features beside those that have to directly with the optics are tested: the menu system/GUI, button layout, weight, battery life.

I rarely use flash anyhow, so not much of an issue for me.


----------



## ecoyd1

Red eye happens when the flash is too close to the lens, as with many popup flashes and on camera flashes.

The light somehow reflects off the iris and comes up red on the sensor/film.

Tips for avoiding red eye:
Mount the flash higher above the lens. This is why you see many wedding photographers use flash brackets; they extend the flash way above the lens in order not to get the bad reflections.
Make flash a non-primary light source. If you do get red eye, it can be simply from the fact that the flash is where all the light is coming from. Flash is better used when it helps balance the light and is not the main source. For example, outside, you would use flash to fill in shadows on a face while the sun provides the primary light.
Fix it in Photoshop/GIMP.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ecoyd1*


Red eye happens when the flash is too close to the lens, as with many popup flashes and on camera flashes.

The light somehow reflects off the iris and comes up red on the sensor/film.

Tips for avoiding red eye:
Mount the flash higher above the lens. This is why you see many wedding photographers use flash brackets; they extend the flash way above the lens in order not to get the bad reflections.
Make flash a non-primary light source. If you do get red eye, it can be simply from the fact that the flash is where all the light is coming from. Flash is better used when it helps balance the light and is not the main source. For example, outside, you would use flash to fill in shadows on a face while the sun provides the primary light.
Fix it in Photoshop/GIMP.


The reason the eyes are red is because a flash is used in a dark environment, which cause the human pupil to dilate, so when the flash fires it actually reflects off of the _retina_, all the way in the back of the eye, giving its red color.

My integrated speedlight automatically pulses rapidly - thereby constricting the pupil - before firing so I've never had a red eye problem. But as you say, a flash mounted higher doesn't flash directly into the eye so there is less red eye as a result.


----------



## whitefro

D40 18-135 nikor and less than average skillz


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
The thing about Pentax, Olympus, Sony and Panasonic DSLRs is that they aren't generally considered "professional" DSLRs. Many of them are quite capable and rival the big two brands (Nikon and Canon) in quality, but if you look at any professional photographer's webpage or ask one, they only use Canon or Nikon.

Yeah I agree, I think it's got a lot more to do with what's actually "under the hood" and how it performs than what the badge on the front says. I think that's true with everything though. A brand _can_ indicate different qualities about a product, but that's not always the case. A lot of the time, marketing and consumer perception play a big role in making a brand popular.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
So, always check out reviews. The two best and most in depth review sites are www.dcresource.com and www.dpreview.com they examine cameras inside and out - literally. They always have 100% crops for all ISO levels, redeye tests, barrel distortion tests, etc.

Yeah, I've been doing a bit of review reading. They're a great resource for making an informed choice. I also like trustedreviews.com who do a lot of reviews for different products, including cameras, which I think are pretty well done.

I've got a few months yet before (hopefully) I'll be in the financial position to make a DSLR purchase, but I think I'll probably want to spend no more than around Â£1200 (hopefully) when the time comes, including lenses. I like to take macro shots, so I guess I would prioritise a macro lens, followed by a lens which encompasses good wide angle capability, with moderate zoom. I don't really make use of zoom much to be honest. Even though my FZ50 has the 12x zoom I hardly ever use more than 6x or so. Occasionally I might shoot an animal at a distance, without wanting to disturb it, but that happens very rarely as I'm more inclined to shoot insects and plants (and occasionally people) if I'm going to shoot something that's alive







.

Could anybody suggest some reasonable lenses for me? Keep in mind I may well go for a camera from either Canon, Nikon, Pentax or Olympus, so lenses that would fit any of those would be good. I've had a brief look at the Sigma 105mm for a macro lens. Any thoughts? Also, I saw this Sigma 18mm-200mm lens, which sounds good for me, because it gives some good wide-angle capability, with a reasonable amount of zoom as well, in the one lens.

If I did get the K20D body (Â£650 now), plus the 105mm Macro (Â£220 now), plus the 18mm-200mm (Â£250 now) I'd be spending Â£1120, which would fall right into the top end of my price range and give me what I think I want. Presumably I could keep the 18mm-200mm on the camera most of the time and only swap over when I want to do macro shots?

Anyway as I said, I don't know a great deal about lenses, so any input would be appreciated! Thanks!

Quote:


Originally Posted by *whitefro* 
D40 18-135 nikor and less than average skillz

I think those two shots are really nice. I love the scale and the clouds in the mountain shot and the colours and the crispness of the man and dog shot. It's really nice! The only suggestion I'd make, is that you straighten the horizon on the man and dog shot (unless it was at an angle on purpose!!)







.

What do you think?










Highly-Annoyed


----------



## GA_SLI

Wow, I just found this thread so here are a few pictures I've taken recently. Hmm some of these look darker for some reason, but regardless .... oops they might be a bit large


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

hmm, it may be because im at work, but i cant see any of your images GA, i can see all the other ones...


----------



## GA_SLI

strange, they are just links from picasaweb.google.com

what software do you guys use to crop your images?


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

ah, i have found hosting on picasa the images dont show up on OCN and a few other forums.
so i now host on imageshack for posting here


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

I've just got about half way through processing some pictures taken yesterday, so I thought I'd post a few I've finished to help keep the thread fresh







.

I went to walk the dog on the beach with my fiancÃ©e, so I took the FZ50 with me.




























I managed to take 269 pictures that day (not all on the beach) which filled both my memory cards (4GB & 2GB). As usual I took several of the same shot each time I found something that looked like it might make a good photo. I must have taken around 80 unique shots, of which I've currently discarded about 64%.

I took about 100 or so shots today (not all unique) and a few look promising. I'll post one or two when I've got round to processing them.

Any DSLR lens advice (see my earlier post) would still be appreciated







.

Thanks!

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## mugan23

what u guys think of this pic


----------



## mugan23

my first edit ( the pic came out bad so i tried to make it interesting)


----------



## ecoyd1

Looks good...but I would edit out the top left.


----------



## mugan23

like so?


----------



## ecoyd1

there you go


----------



## christian_piper

Took these the other day before school:










And again smaller for the lower rez crowd:


----------



## mugan23

nice i know its the photographers eye that counts, but u can't say your beast camera had nothing to do with that awesome reflection.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *christian_piper*


Took these the other day before school:










And again smaller for the lower rez crowd:











Decent composition!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Took these today at the park, using only my zoom lens! Not bad for a non-macro lens. Criticisms?


----------



## ecoyd1

I like the lighting on the second.

Will post baby humming bird pics tomorrow.


----------



## christian_piper

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mugan23*


nice i know its the photographers eye that counts, but u can't say your beast camera had nothing to do with that awesome reflection.


It's not even an SLR... That is what it was to the EYE almost 0.0

But thanks! Both of you!

And I REALLY like your second one GoneTommorow


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Highly-Annoyed*


I've just got about half way through processing some pictures taken yesterday, so I thought I'd post a few I've finished to help keep the thread fresh







.

I went to walk the dog on the beach with my fiancÃ©e, so I took the FZ50 with me.

I managed to take 269 pictures that day (not all on the beach) which filled both my memory cards (4GB & 2GB). As usual I took several of the same shot each time I found something that looked like it might make a good photo. I must have taken around 80 unique shots, of which I've currently discarded about 64%.

I took about 100 or so shots today (not all unique) and a few look promising. I'll post one or two when I've got round to processing them.

Any DSLR lens advice (see my earlier post) would still be appreciated







.

Thanks!

Highly-Annoyed


I've seen a lot of people with Sigma and Tamron lenses. I've never used them, but from what I hear, they're decent. But, you get what you pay for. For example, many of Canon's lenses use ultra sonic motors and optical image stabilization (as do Nikon's), and from what I've seen, the third party lenses don't. You can get a Tamron or Sigma macro or prime lens for under $100, but a Canon might be $200 and up. I personally really like the ultra sonic motors that Canon and Nikon use, because they auto focus extremely fast, _never_ any focus hunting even in low light. You seem to have enough budget to get decent lenses, so I wouldn't opt for third party lenses unless your budget won't allow it. Also, I haven't really looked much at Pentax or Olympus' lens offerings, so I can't comment on their quality.

I'm buying this lens next, and then I will have enough lenses to suit my needs. But that's what they all say I guess!


----------



## ecoyd1

sdsd


----------



## ecoyd1

Here is another shot from last week when the mother was sitting on 2, raisin sized eggs.










Again, remote flash used from bottom right (This time not ducktaped to anything.)


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
I've seen a lot of people with Sigma and Tamron lenses. I've never used them, but from what I hear, they're decent. But, you get what you pay for. For example, many of Canon's lenses use ultra sonic motors and optical image stabilization (as do Nikon's), and from what I've seen, the third party lenses don't. You can get a Tamron or Sigma macro or prime lens for under $100, but a Canon might be $200 and up. I personally really like the ultra sonic motors that Canon and Nikon use, because they auto focus extremely fast, _never_ any focus hunting even in low light. You seem to have enough budget to get decent lenses, so I wouldn't opt for third party lenses unless your budget won't allow it. Also, I haven't really looked much at Pentax or Olympus' lens offerings, so I can't comment on their quality.

I'm buying this lens next, and then I will have enough lenses to suit my needs. But that's what they all say I guess!

Thanks for the advice. If you don't mind, I'd appreciate it if you'd answer a few (more) questions for me







.

If a camera has image stabilisation in the body (like the K20D) does that negate the necessity for it to use lens based image stabilisation, or do you need both?

Do all DSLR lenses have motors (for focusing presumably) or do some not? If some don't how do they focus? Does the camera focus them (using auto-focus), or is it done manually?

Why is ultrasonic a good motor type for lenses? Is it because it reduces vibration, or is it because it focuses faster than non-ultrasonic, or both?

Isn't it best to get in-camera image stabilisation because:

*1.* You can use any lenses that fit, even if they don't have I.S. and still get stable shots?
*2.* Lenses without image stabilisation are generally cheaper than ones without, so the extra cost up-front to get I.S. in-camera (if there is any) is reaped back buy spending less on lenses?

Thanks for your help! I appreciate it!









Quote:


Originally Posted by *ecoyd1* 
Here is another shot from last week when the mother was sitting on 2, raisin sized eggs.










Wow, that's a beautiful shot! Shame about the lens flare (if that's what it is) but you can probably just edit that out, no? Otherwise it's really nice. Love the colour, clarity and composition!

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## ecoyd1

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Highly-Annoyed* 
Thanks for the advice. If you don't mind, I'd appreciate it if you'd answer a few (more) questions for me







.

If a camera has image stabilisation in the body (like the K20D) does that negate the necessity for it to use lens based image stabilisation, or do you need both?

Do all DSLR lenses have motors (for focusing presumably) or do some not? If some don't how do they focus? Does the camera focus them (using auto-focus), or is it done manually?

Why is ultrasonic a good motor type for lenses? Is it because it reduces vibration, or is it because it focuses faster than non-ultrasonic, or both?

Isn't it best to get in-camera image stabilisation because:

*1.* You can use any lenses that fit, even if they don't have I.S. and still get stable shots?
*2.* Lenses without image stabilisation are generally cheaper than ones without, so the extra cost up-front to get I.S. in-camera (if there is any) is reaped back buy spending less on lenses?

Thanks for your help! I appreciate it!









Highly-Annoyed

1. If the camera has stabilization, the lenses for that brand wont have stabilization. You only need it one: the body or the lens.

2. Most Lenses have motors, some dont. You have to check with the specifications on the specific lens to see if it does. Nikon is called AFS while Im not sure what Canon is called. Most modern lenses have them now, however.

3. Ultrasonic just means the motor is in the lens. Vibration reduction is completely separate.

4. Both of your points on stabilization are correct. However stabilization in camera vs lens is the same thing. Neither is better. Remember that neither Canon nor Nikon have in body stabilizers.

Edit: In that pic its not a lens flare, but overlapped bokeh. Its what happens when light sources are out of focus, they bleed into other parts of the image. I really don't feel like editing it but if anyone is up for it I can send you the full size pic.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Highly-Annoyed* 
Thanks for the advice. If you don't mind, I'd appreciate it if you'd answer a few (more) questions for me







.

If a camera has image stabilisation in the body (like the K20D) does that negate the necessity for it to use lens based image stabilisation, or do you need both?

Do all DSLR lenses have motors (for focusing presumably) or do some not? If some don't how do they focus? Does the camera focus them (using auto-focus), or is it done manually?

Why is ultrasonic a good motor type for lenses? Is it because it reduces vibration, or is it because it focuses faster than non-ultrasonic, or both?

Isn't it best to get in-camera image stabilisation because:

*1.* You can use any lenses that fit, even if they don't have I.S. and still get stable shots?
*2.* Lenses without image stabilisation are generally cheaper than ones without, so the extra cost up-front to get I.S. in-camera (if there is any) is reaped back buy spending less on lenses?

Thanks for your help! I appreciate it!









Highly-Annoyed

Most new DSLR lenses have AF motors in the lens and the in the body itself. The body AF motor is used when the lens doesn't have one (ii.e. if you're using an old film SLR lens). Since most new lenses do have AF, companies like Nikon leave the AF motor out of the body to cut costs, so older lenses would be manual focus only.

Yes, you know what you're talking about. Some DSLRs have image stabilization in the body itself, negating the need for a lens with the same feature. However, I'm not aware of any Nikon or Canon lenses that have this feature, so there must be some reason why they choose not to do that. Perhaps so they can ensure that their customers use their lenses if they want IS! Realistically, IS is only useful for lenses which have relatively small apertures. My 28-135mm has a aperture only at f/3.5 max (not that bad), so in lowlight or especially at high zoom, IS is very helpful. But my 50mm prime lens opens way up - f/1.4 which takes in so much light that IS isn't crucial, which is why Canon doesn't put IS on their primes. Many reviewers criticize Nikon and Canon for putting IS (VR as Nikon calls it) in their lenses thereby gouging their customers.

The USM is one feature that has universal acclaim. It focuses much, much faster. I could tell the difference easily from my non-USM kit lens. This is useful if you take action/sports shots and you need the speed that USM offers. The other advantage of USM is that it is quieter, but that's not much of an "advantage" really to me.


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:


Originally Posted by *ecoyd1* 
1. If the camera has stabilization, the lenses for that brand wont have stabilization. You only need it one: the body or the lens.

2. Most Lenses have motors, some dont. You have to check with the specifications on the specific lens to see if it does. Nikon is called AFS while Im not sure what Canon is called. Most modern lenses have them now, however.

3. Ultrasonic just means the motor is in the lens. Vibration reduction is completely separate.

4. Both of your points on stabilization are correct. However stabilization in camera vs lens is the same thing. Neither is better. Remember that neither Canon nor Nikon have in body stabilizers.

Edit: In that pic its not a lens flare, but overlapped bokeh. Its what happens when light sources are out of focus, they bleed into other parts of the image. I really don't feel like editing it but if anyone is up for it I can send you the full size pic.

Thanks for your help and advice!









I've never heard of bokeh before, lol







. Those white-ish circles should be behind the bird? Or they shouldn't be there at all, or should be, but not so prominent? I had a quick attempt at taking them out of the small scale image, but it was pretty hard because the smooth gradation of colour around the affected areas means that cloning is almost prohibitively difficult, whilst attempts to alter hue, saturation, etc are ineffective, at least with my skills in GIMP







.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Most new DSLR lenses have AF motors in the lens and the in the body itself. The body AF motor is used when the lens doesn't have one (ii.e. if you're using an old film SLR lens). Since most new lenses do have AF, companies like Nikon leave the AF motor out of the body to cut costs, so older lenses would be manual focus only.

Yes, you know what you're talking about. Some DSLRs have image stabilization in the body itself, negating the need for a lens with the same feature. However, I'm not aware of any Nikon or Canon lenses that have this feature, so there must be some reason why they choose not to do that. Perhaps so they can ensure that their customers use their lenses if they want IS! Realistically, IS is only useful for lenses which have relatively small apertures. My 28-135mm has a aperture only at f/3.5 max (not that bad), so in lowlight or especially at high zoom, IS is very helpful. But my 50mm prime lens opens way up - f/1.4 which takes in so much light that IS isn't crucial, which is why Canon doesn't put IS on their primes. Many reviewers criticize Nikon and Canon for putting IS (VR as Nikon calls it) in their lenses thereby gouging their customers.

The USM is one feature that has universal acclaim. It focuses much, much faster. I could tell the difference easily from my non-USM kit lens. This is useful if you take action/sports shots and you need the speed that USM offers. The other advantage of USM is that it is quieter, but that's not much of an "advantage" really to me.

Thanks again for your help and advice!

So, if all else was equal, it would be better to get a camera with in-body stabilisation, so that way your choice of lenses is greater and the costs are generally lower. The disadvantages are that Nikon and Canon don't do in-body I.S. so getting a camera with it means ruling out the big two producers.

Hmmm, I'll have to give this some more thought







.

Thanks again!

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Highly-Annoyed*


Thanks for your help and advice!









I've never heard of bokeh before, lol







. Those white-ish circles should be behind the bird? Or they shouldn't be there at all, or should be, but not so prominent?


Yeah, it's funny how esoteric the world of photography can be. I had no idea what bokeh was until I started researching lenses. Bokeh is a Japanese word meaning "blur" (fitting since the Japanese are the biggest DSLR makers) and it refers to the out of focus background portion of a picture, like in ecoyd's hummingbird nest photos. Most people don't even think about that, but to enthusiasts it is very important! Some lenses get bad reviews because their bokeh is "geometric", meaning that the light circles take on octagonal shapes instead of being round. It's the most evident in the circles of the bokeh, but you can tell from any curved surface in it.


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Yeah, it's funny how esoteric the world of photography can be. I had no idea what bokeh was until I started researching lenses. Bokeh is a Japanese word meaning "blur" (fitting since the Japanese are the biggest DSLR makers) and it refers to the out of focus background portion of a picture, like in ecoyd's hummingbird nest photos. Most people don't even think about that, but to enthusiasts it is very important! Some lenses get bad reviews because their bokeh is "geometric", meaning that the light circles take on octagonal shapes instead of being round. It's the most evident in the circles of the bokeh, but you can tell from any curved surface in it.

Hmmm, interesting. I see I have lot to learn! Excellent! I genuinely enjoy learning new things







. Thanks again for taking the time to help me learn







.

I just got around to finishing processing photos from two days ago. Here are a few more that I though looked OK.




























I've got to crack on with processing yesterday's photos now. There are fewer of them, so hopefully I'll get them done tonight and then I can go out tomorrow and get some more taken







.

Also, I was wondering if anybody had any tips regarding photographing a spider's web in some detail. I've tried, but not been very successful so far







.

I was thinking, maybe going out at night, and either shoot up at a web at 45Â° with the filler flash on, or perhaps taking some other lighting with me and shining it at the web at 45Â° and shooting straight-on, but I'm just guessing really.

Anybody got any tips?

Also, *GoneTomorrow*, seeing your flower shots above (I especially like the two white flowers nestled in the grass, very nice) reminded me I had this macro shot of a flower I took about a week or so ago. It's tough to tell scale this close up, but to give some idea, the middle section of the flower (yellow, surrounded by purple) is about the size of the hole in the middle of a CD/DVD. The image here is scaled down to about 20%, so the actual picture is 5x bigger.










Highly-Annoyed


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Highly-Annoyed* 
Hmmm, interesting. I see I have lot to learn! Excellent! I genuinely enjoy learning new things







. Thanks again for taking the time to help me learn







.

I just got around to finishing processing photos from two days ago. Here are a few more that I though looked OK.

I've got to crack on with processing yesterday's photos now. There are fewer of them, so hopefully I'll get them done tonight and then I can go out tomorrow and get some more taken







.

Also, I was wondering if anybody had any tips regarding photographing a spider's web in some detail. I've tried, but not been very successful so far







.

I was thinking, maybe going out at night, and either shoot up at a web at 45Â° with the filler flash on, or perhaps taking some other lighting with me and shining it at the web at 45Â° and shooting straight-on, but I'm just guessing really.

Anybody got any tips?

Also, *GoneTomorrow*, seeing your flower shots above (I especially like the two white flowers nestled in the grass, very nice) reminded me I had this macro shot of a flower I took about a week or so ago. It's tough to tell scale this close up, but to give some idea, the middle section of the flower (yellow, surrounded by purple) is about the size of the hole in the middle of a CD/DVD. The image here is scaled down to about 20%, so the actual picture is 5x bigger.

Highly-Annoyed

HA, you are going to be scary when you get a DSLR. You produce some nice macro shots with your FZ50. It must have taken some persistence to get those flies while they were still.

Thanks about the flowers, the white flowers in the grass are a half inch in diameter and the purple flowers are about a quarter inch. The three lenses I have now are non-macro and have a minimum focus distance of 18" - 20", so I can't get very close. I can't wait to get my 60mm macro lens, then I will get seriously close.

And about photographing a spider's web: open the aperture up as far as it will go (lowest f-stop number), this will narrow the depth of field and blur the background and thereby accentuate the web. It's tough to get a really thin spider web in a shot, usually the ones that have dew on them are easy to shoot (and hard to find). Try also to get a dark background (i.e. thick trees and not the sky). It's tough, I haven't found a web good enough to show up in a shot yet.


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


And about photographing a spider's web: open the aperture up as far as it will go (lowest f-stop number), this will narrow the depth of field and blur the background and thereby accentuate the web. It's tough to get a really thin spider web in a shot, usually the ones that have dew on them are easy to shoot (and hard to find). Try also to get a dark background (i.e. thick trees and not the sky). It's tough, I haven't found a web good enough to show up in a shot yet.


Thanks for the advice, I'll give it shot







.

Now I just need to find a nice web







.

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## .Style

hey guys this thread is awesome i must say..You guys have some serious talent in pictures...My dad has a Canon SLR thingy..not sure..ill tell yall when he gets back from Australia in a few weeks..but atm im shooting on my Sony Ericcson W580i which has 2MP camera....




























btw these were all taken this morning on a moving bus on the way to school..Twas a gorgeous day..Well for the UK it was so i took those..Ill take my dog out in the morning tommorow and get some better ones


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

my N80 came today


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie*


my N80 came today










Nice, that camera uses the same template for D100 DSLR body. I take it can use your current lenses?

Some new toys that I have on the way:

Canon EF-S 60mm f/2.8 Macro USM Lens
8x ND filter
Graduated ND filter (6x)


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

i can use any nikon lens, but the downside is mine are dx format so the have a smaller focal area, so im more likely to encounter vignetting.


----------



## .Style

Just took the dog out and its a horrible foggy day...Here are some snaps from my W580i























































SOrry some of em are blurry but this cameraphone doesnt take good dark shots ;P..

Btw keep on shooting guys, got some great phtographers here!!!


----------



## Syrillian

erm...

What is the "Rule of Thirds?"









GoneTomorrow made this comment, but I clearly don't know what it means.

Also, thanks for the spelling correction on "Sepia".


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Syrillian*


erm...

What is the "Rule of Thirds?"









GoneTomorrow made this comment, but I clearly don't know what it means.

Also, thanks for the spelling correction on "Sepia".



















Here are two more shots I took yesterday







.



















The rule of thirds is a compositional rule, which suggests that most images look better when major elements of their content are on thirds in the full shot. Just imagine a 3x3 grid on top of every image.

For example, if you took a picture of a tree standing alone in a field, you wouldn't want it in the centre of your shot, you'd want it off to the left a bit (or possibly right) and you'd want the horizon on the bottom (possibly top) third. Like this:










The second image uses the rule of thirds in it's composition and also makes use of my uber-leet MS Paint skillz, lol.

I think this is right. I think you can play around with it a bit anyway. It's more of a guideline, than a rule I think, although I'm fairly new to photography







.

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Syrillian*


erm...

What is the "Rule of Thirds?"










GoneTomorrow made this comment, but I clearly don't know what it means.

Also, thanks for the spelling correction on "Sepia".



















Believe it or not, the Wiki explains it best. Basicallt it's when elements of a landscape shot divide a picture into thirds horizontally, vertically or both.

So Syrillian, when will _you_ go SLR?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Highly-Annoyed*


The rule of thirds is a compositional rule, which suggests that most images look better when major elements of their content are on thirds in the full shot. Just imagine a 3x3 grid on top of every image.

For example, if you took a picture of a tree standing alone in a field, you wouldn't want it in the centre of your shot, you'd want it off to the left a bit (or possibly right) and you'd want the horizon on the bottom (possibly top) third. Like this:

I think this is right anyway. I think you can play around with it a bit anyway. It's more of a guideline, than a rule I think, although I'm fairly new to photography







.

Highly-Annoyed



Q...F..T! That's exactly it. The thing is, I always forget to apply it when I shoot.









Do you use a UV filter HA? It will take away some of that distant atmospheric haze in the first pic, but it might just be the light.

I like the dusk shot very much. Those are some of my favorites to shoot. I posted this one at the beginning of this thread, but here it is again:


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Believe it or not, the Wiki explains it best. Basicallt it's when elements of a landscape shot divide a picture into thirds horizontally, vertically or both.

So Syrillian, when will _you_ go SLR?










...or you could ignore my attempt to explain it and go to the wiki Syrillian, lol







.

It's likely got a much better explanation







.

*EDIT:*

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Q...F..T! That's exactly it. The thing is, I always forget to apply it when I shoot.









Do you use a UV filter HA? It will take away some of that distant atmospheric haze in the first pic, but it might just be the light.

I like the dusk shot very much. Those are some of my favourites to shoot. I posted this one at the beginning of this thread, but here it is again


Yeah I remember that shot, it's very nice. I like the bands of light rays filtering through the hole in the clouds.

I didn't use any filters for the two shots I posted just above. The haze has been a bit of an issue, it doesn't seem to be very clear of late. I've had to dump 96% of some landscape shots I did today becuase it was just too hazy to see any details. I need some clear skies!

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *.Style* 
Just took the dog out and its a horrible foggy day...Here are some snaps from my W580i

SOrry some of em are blurry but this cameraphone doesnt take good dark shots ;P..

Btw keep on shooting guys, got some great phtographers here!!!

Welcome! Yeah, not bad for a camera phone. Get yourself a better camera.


----------



## .Style

Yah my dad has a Canon with him but hes abroad so i cant take full use of it atm...My bro also has a digital camera but even if you shake about a millimeter it will blur the whole pic..even when taking on a tripod its hard to get a nice pic..so i think my cameraphone is better than that









Heres some garden shots..lol couldnt get the camera to focus on the water droplets


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*
Do you use a UV filter HA? It will take away some of that distant atmospheric haze in the first pic, but it might just be the light.

Actually, it just occurred to me that I do use an MC Protector on my FZ50. I think it has UV protection, but I don't know if that's the same as a UV filter...

The MC Protector was the first accessory I bought, as I wanted to protect the front element of my camera from physical damage. Better to scratch a Â£25 MC Protector than the fixed front element on a Â£400 (how much I paid for it) camera







.

I'd totally forgotten about it as I leave it on all the time







.

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Highly-Annoyed* 
Actually, it just occurred to me that I do use an MC Protector on my FZ50. I think it has UV protection, but I don't know if that's the same as a UV filter...

The MC Protector was the first accessory I bought, as I wanted to protect the front element of my camera from physical damage. Better to scratch a Â£25 MC Protector than the fixed front element on a Â£400 (how much I paid for it) camera







.

I'd totally forgotten about it as I leave it on all the time







.

Highly-Annoyed

Yes, a multi coated filter is the same thing. They have such a slight effect that they're often recommended to be left on at all times, so they double as a lens protector.


----------



## Syrillian

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Believe it or not, the Wiki explains it best. Basicallt it's when elements of a landscape shot divide a picture into thirds horizontally, vertically or both.

So Syrillian, when will _you_ go SLR?



















Ya know... I'm not your typical "Manly-man"... lol... I LOVE art. I dunno why, and I am not educated in Art at all:

_"A Hun gaping at the Gates of Rome"_

Some images calm me...

Imagery is of vital importance to me. When words fail me I resort to images in the hope that the same cerebral-sensation that I have will be shared with the person that I am attempting to commune with.

So.. "SLR"...









What would you guys recommend to a noob like me?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Syrillian* 









Ya know... I'm not your typical "Manly-man"... lol... I LOVE art. I dunno why, and I am not educated in Art at all:

_"A Hun gaping at the Gates of Rome"_

Some images calm me...

Imagery is of vital importance to me. When words fail me I resort to images in the hope that the same cerebral-sensation that I have will be shared with the person that I am attempting to commune with.

So.. "SLR"...









What would you guys recommend to a noob like me?

Ars gratia artis - I love art as well. I have a degree in Art History, but that doesn't make me any more of an art lover than anyone else! Real men love art! Besides, we were in Marines, you and I, so no one can question our uber pwnage head shot manliness!























But for an entry DSLR, there are lot of good choices these days. A Canon Rebel XT, XTi or XSi is a good choice, or Nikon D40, D40x or D80 are also good choices.

I am familiar with Nikon and Canon SLRs and lenses, so I only recommend those, but Olympus, Pentax and Sony also have competent DSLRs. But since you already have a Canon point and shoot, you may be partial to Canon already. The XSi just debuted and it's a great camera.


----------



## Dostoyevsky77

Hi, all! I found this thread in GoneTomorrow's signature. I am totally a beginner in DSLR, although I had a 35mm Rebel back in the day, when took pictures of airplanes landing at VHHH (I know, it sounds kind of lame, but it was FUN!).

I have a D40X, but I hated the kit lenses, and I bought a Nikkor 18-70mm, which I absolutely LOVE and also a Nikkor 70-300mm VR, which I absolutely HATE (anything over 200mm develops chromatic abberation).

Here are some shots:

Seagull in the SFO Bay (18-70mm and an 81A filter; the rest of the shots from this day were tragically overexposed; I'm such a n00b)









Thunderstorm in TPA (70-300, all the way in with a polarizer; I used a custom white balance by shooting a blue part of sky, which gave the clouds a very orangy tinge. Although this was taken in the evening, the clouds were not nearly this well-defined or colourful)









RAF Spitfire (18-70, with an 81A filter; it took me at least fifty shots to get this just right where the paint looks metallic; in the end, it was flash on the lowest level (rear flash) with a long exposure that turned out best)









Oh, and Kiki in front of my true money pit: the sigged rig! (18-70 with patience and sleeping dog)









More photos of my system are sigged! Sorry the photos are crap; I'm still learning; any comments or critiques would REALLY be appreciated. You guys rock!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dostoyevsky77*


Hi, all! I found this thread in GoneTomorrow's signature. I am totally a beginner in DSLR, although I had a 35mm Rebel back in the day, when took pictures of airplanes landing at VHHH (I know, it sounds kind of lame, but it was FUN!).

I have a D40X, but I hated the kit lenses, and I bought a Nikkor 18-70mm, which I absolutely LOVE and also a Nikkor 70-300mm VR, which I absolutely HATE (anything over 200mm develops chromatic abberation).

Here are some shots:

More photos of my system are sigged! Sorry the photos are crap; I'm still learning! You guys rock!


Dostoyevsky, from the P5N32-E SLI thread! Good to have you here. I wish I could see your shots, but at work our server filters out almost every non-work site (i.e Photobucket) so I'll look forward to seeing them later.

And yes chromatic aberration is a pita, but if you shoot in RAW format it shouldn't be a problem to take care of later.


----------



## mugan23

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Dostoyevsky77* 
Hi, all! I found this thread in GoneTomorrow's signature. I am totally a beginner in DSLR, although I had a 35mm Rebel back in the day, when took pictures of airplanes landing at VHHH (I know, it sounds kind of lame, but it was FUN!).

I have a D40X, but I hated the kit lenses, and I bought a Nikkor 18-70mm, which I absolutely LOVE and also a Nikkor 70-300mm VR, which I absolutely HATE (anything over 200mm develops chromatic abberation).

Here are some shots:

Seagull in the SFO Bay (18-70mm and an 81A filter; the rest of the shots from this day were tragically overexposed; I'm such a n00b)









Thunderstorm in TPA (70-300, all the way in with a polarizer; I used a custom white balance by shooting a blue part of sky, which gave the clouds a very orangy tinge. Although this was taken in the evening, the clouds were not nearly this well-defined or colourful)









RAF Spitfire (18-70, with an 81A filter; it took me at least fifty shots to get this just right where the paint looks metallic; in the end, it was flash on the lowest level (rear flash) with a long exposure that turned out best)









Oh, and Kiki in front of my true money pit: the sigged rig! (18-70 with patience and sleeping dog)









More photos of my system are sigged! Sorry the photos are crap; I'm still learning; any comments or critiques would REALLY be appreciated. You guys rock!

nice shot, and welcome


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

OK, last pic for the day.

This is one of the least bad pictures I shot earlier on this morning. It was a bit overcast and very misty, so sadly this is the best of a bad bunch, the vast majority of which I deleted after viewing the JPEGs that accompany the RAWs.










As you can see, a great deal of detail is lost to the mist. Hopefully I'll be able to get back up on the downs again soon on a clear day with good light







.

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## Syrillian

Thanks for the tips on possible future camera upgrades, GoneTomorrow.

This is quite the pleasant surprise for me: a notable number of Members that have quite the eye for still-life.

Highly-Annoyed: I like the soothing nature of that pic of the Downs. It is somewhat "myopic" (like Van Gogh's _Starry Night_). The blurred contours of the objects in the picture make me feel as though I am in that serene state between sleep and waking: Lucid Dreaming.


----------



## marcus000

@ Highly-Annoyed - Where abouts in the UK was that pic taken?


----------



## ecoyd1

sdsd


----------



## Syrillian

The Tiger pic is awesome!


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Syrillian* 
Highly-Annoyed: I like the soothing nature of that pic of the Downs. It is somewhat "myopic" (like Van Gogh's _Starry Night_). The blurred contours of the objects in the picture make me feel as though I am in that serene state between sleep and waking: Lucid Dreaming.

Wow, detailed and eloquent response! I wasn't all that happy with the image, but it's nice to know you liked it







. Thanks!

Quote:


Originally Posted by *marcus000* 
@ Highly-Annoyed - Where abouts in the UK was that pic taken?

It was taken on Culver down near where I live. Here, see the location on Google maps. That's pretty much where I was standing, shooting with my back to the road.

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## GoneTomorrow

It was a beautiful day for shooting in Lexington, I have macro fever at the moment - just wait until my macro lens gets here!


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

awesome pics, im not much of a macro person but those are great.
good job.


----------



## mugan23

Quote:



It was a beautiful day for shooting in Lexington, I have macro fever at the moment - just wait until my macro lens gets here!


been having that my self but right now i have a real ich for that stream, i can never make it look as good as it does when your there and its getting to me, I was gonna go but it rained 2 days(my days off







) in a row in Ohio


----------



## mugan23

haha my best macro so far


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mugan23* 
haha my best macro so far









Coolness, I take macros of the weirdest things myself. I need dig some of them up.

Guys, if you like macros, then you must take a look at this guy's stuff:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/lordv/

He does mostly insects, but he gets so damned close! He actually rigged a 50mm lens to attach to his macro lens, which increases the magnification so much that you can count the hairs on the bugs!


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mugan23* 
been having that my self but right now i have a real ich for that stream, i can never make it look as good as it does when your there and its getting to me, I was gonna go but it rained 2 days(my days off







) in a row in Ohio

Nice pic. The only problem I can see is that the whites seem a bit blown out. You know, the details in the white sections have disappeared into the white. Perhaps the shot is a bit over-exposed? I have the same problem myself fairly often. Sometimes I'm lucky and can fix it with some hard work, but most of the time I have to delete, as when the details go into the white, it's almost always impossible to retrieve them







. Otherwise, a nice shot!









Quote:


Originally Posted by *mugan23* 
haha my best macro so far









I like the Oreo photo. Really fun and playful. I love the angle again! You've really got a talent for picking interesting angles







.

Here are a couple I took a while ago:










I tried to get some close ups of circuitry, but ultimately was disappointed with what I got. I think the light, or the colours were wrong somehow. A bit too saturated with green and yellow for my liking.










My step-daughter's eye







. I printed this one at standard 6"x4" and was pretty pleased with the result








.

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## mugan23

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Highly-Annoyed*


Nice pic. The only problem I can see is that the whites seem a bit blown out. You know, the details in the white sections have disappeared into the white. Perhaps the shot is a bit over-exposed? I have the same problem myself fairly often. Sometimes I'm lucky and can fix it with some hard work, but most of the time I have to delete, as when the details go into the white, it's almost always impossible to retrieve them







. Otherwise, a nice shot!









I like the Oreo photo. Really fun and playful. I love the angle again! You've really got a talent for picking interesting angles







.

Here are a couple I took a while ago:










I tried to get some close ups of circuitry, but ultimately was disappointed with what I got. I think the light, or the colours were wrong somehow. A bit too saturated with green and yellow for my liking.










My step-daughter's eye







. I printed this one at standard 6"x4" and was pretty pleased with the result







.

Highly-Annoyed


nice pick, u don't know how hard i have to work to get my camera to take a pic of an eye that clear, and as for my macro the flower was over exposed thats why i didn't post it earlier







.


----------



## mugan23

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Coolness, I take macros of the weirdest things myself. I need dig some of them up.

Guys, if you like macros, then you must take a look at this guy's stuff:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/lordv/

He does mostly insects, but he gets so damned close! He actually rigged a 50mm lens to attach to his macro lens, which increases the magnification so much that you can count the hairs on the bugs!


wow that guy is good


----------



## mugan23

check this macro out (had to take my rig apart but i had to)


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Nice shot - you can really see the barrel distortion in RAM stick. Even the best lenses have it though.

Here's a really old one of my tarantula with my old Nikon Coolpix 5700:


----------



## mugan23

nice shot i want that spider! barrel distortion is that why the stick is curved?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mugan23*


nice shot i want that spider! barrel distortion is that why the stick is curved?


The spider is a Chilean Rosehair, female, now seven years old (can live to 30).

Yeah, BD is most evident when photographing long straight edges, like skyscrapers or framed art. I believe PS has a tool to correct it.


----------



## ecoyd1

I think if you crop the spider and b/w it, you should blow it up and print it.


----------



## sugarton

Barrel distortion sucks the big one


















(my most distorted shot)


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *ecoyd1* 
I think if you crop the spider and b/w it, you should blow it up and print it.

Yeah I will make a 4 by 5 foot print, and then I'll put directly opposite my front door with a light right above it. That will make for some interesting reactions from guests.









I need to spend some time on it though in PS, as it's straight from the camera, and a really old one at that.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sugarton* 
Barrel distortion sucks the big one









(my most distorted shot)

Perfect example, thanks for posting it. What's your cam? There's little anyone can do to overcome BD at close distance, even $2000 Canon L lenses have some BD.


----------



## mugan23

how do u fix it?


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sugarton*


Barrel distortion sucks the big one









(my most distorted shot)



Quote:



Originally Posted by *mugan23*


how do u fix it?


I've had some very pronounced barrel distortion in some of my shots, but shooting in RAW, I just correct it in the "digital darkroom".

The distortion in sugarton's shot (and your one of the RAM module) is next to nothing, compared to some of the shots I've fix with RAW processing.

It seems to me that shooting in RAW with a decent RAW processor can make all the difference between a shot you bin and one you can use. I honestly think I'll never shoot JPEG again.

If I get the time tomorrow, I'll give you an example of a shot I've fixed







.

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## ecoyd1

adasda


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Highly-Annoyed* 
I've had some very pronounced barrel distortion in some of my shots, but shooting in RAW, I just correct it in the "digital darkroom".

The distortion in sugarton's shot (and your one of the RAM module) is next to nothing, compared to some of the shots I've fix with RAW processing.

It seems to me that shooting in RAW with a decent RAW processor can make all the difference between a shot you bin and one you can use. I honestly think I'll never shoot JPEG again.

Yeah, I just use Canon's Digital Photo Professional (RAW editor) which has a feature to correct typical lens problems (barrel distortion, chromatic aberration, etc.).

Highly Annoyed, you hit it on the head - RAW is the only way to go. I don't shoot in JPEG at all anymore, and I only convert to JPEG for uploading to Flickr/Photobucket or if I want to make a print.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mugan23* 
how do u fix it?

By shooting in RAW and using appropriate RAW editing software. However Photoshop/PaintShop Pro, and even GIMP has a feature to correct distortion. I believe is PSP it's in the Photo Fix menu under Geometries.


----------



## sugarton

I shot my photo on a Canon 350D (Rebel XT) with the 18-55mm kit lens, at 18mm. Apparently BD is most prevalent on this lens at 18mm, so thats why it's so dramatic there. It is certainly possible to fix it in Adobe RAW, but I don't mind it enough to be bothered.

And yah, I've even gotten BD on my friend's 17-40 f/4L.

Another example here. Same camera, 18mm again. BD is incredibly obvious along the top and bottom frames.










I could have evened it out by moving right a bit and altering the angle but it can be impossible to even notice until you get home and load into PS.


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Highly-Annoyed* 
If I get the time tomorrow, I'll give you an example of a shot I've fixed







.

Well, I couldn't find the shot I wanted to show as an example. I guess it mustn't have made it past QC.

Anyway, here's another example. The first shot has the barrel distortion, the second has the problem corrected. Also, this shot was 1.07Â° off from the horizontal (according to Silkypix) to that's been corrected too in the second image.



















I understand a lot of pro's do image editing after a shoot, so I don't feel too bad editing errors out of my shots







.

As *GoneTomorrow* quite rightly says, RAW really is the way to go







.

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## Syrillian

Here are some shots that I took when I was in San Francisco this past weekend.

Canon PowerShot A640




























Japanese Tea Gardens in Golden Gate Park.


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Syrillian*


Here are some shots that I took when I was in San Francisco this past weekend.

Canon PowerShot A640

Japanese Tea Gardens in Golden Gate Park.


Wow, love the pond! It's such a beatiful scene







.

Here are a few I took yesterday







.










I knelt in the middle of the road for this. I'm not sure it was worth the risk really.










I managed to get back to the downs when it was a little clearer.










I saw this field of Rapeseed that I thought looked quiet nice.










Really tried to apply the "rule of thirds" here. The horizon is on a horizontal third and the hill is on a vertical third.

Keep up the good work guys! It's nice to see your work! It inspires me to go out, take more shots & try to improve!

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Highly-Annoyed* 
Wow, love the pond! It's such a beatiful scene







.

Here are a few I took yesterday







.

I knelt in the middle of the road for this. I'm not sure it was worth the risk really.

I managed to get back to the downs when it was a little clearer.

I saw this field of Rapeseed that I thought looked quiet nice.

Really tried to apply the "rule of thirds" here. The horizon is on a horizontal third and the hill is on a vertical third.

Keep up the good work guys! It's nice to see your work! It inspires me to go out, take more shots & try to improve!

Highly-Annoyed

Nice shots, especially the beach shot from above. I like landscapes the have significant foreground elements - helps in framing the landscape. For the rapeseed (that name always kills me) shot, you should get some of the flowers closer to the front of the shot, only a suggestion. I think it adds depth to an otherwise empty shot. Do you use a polarizer Highly Annoyed?

Landscape shots are what interest me the most, but they are the hardest to do well for me. There is a lot of farmland here in KY, but they often don't turn out the most interesting shots, and often look empty. This weekend I'm going ot venture out and shoot old barns. I love dilapidated old barns in the middle of an empty field.

I've been reading up on landscape shots and I see recommendations for hyperfocusing mentioned a lot:
http://www.great-landscape-photograp...yperfocal.html

It's a bit confusing right now, but I'm going to read up on it more and see if I can apply this technique. Does anyone have a link to good hyperfocus distance chart? Or for that matter, does anyone fully _understand_ this technique?


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


For the rapeseed (that name always kills me) shot, you should get some of the flowers closer to the front of the shot, only a suggestion. I think it adds depth to an otherwise empty shot. Do you use a polarizer Highly Annoyed?

I've been reading up on landscape shots and I see recommendations for hyperfocusing mentioned a lot:
http://www.great-landscape-photograp...yperfocal.html

It's a bit confusing right now, but I'm going to read up on it more and see if I can apply this technique. Does anyone have a link to good hyperfocus distance chart? Or for that matter, does anyone fully _understand_ this technique?


Thanks for your comments.

Yeah, you're right. The ideal is that you lead the viewer into the image, by creating depth, using objects closer to the foreground, as you suggested. These foreground objects can also help to frame a shot. The full size rapeseed shot shows quite a bit of detail in the rapeseed in the foreground, which gradually tapers away towards the distance, creating some depth. It doesn't show very well in the scaled down version (which is about 5x smaller) I posted however.

I do understand a few of these compositional ideas, but like yourself (with the rule of thirds) I don't tend to think too much about them when I'm out taking shots and often forget to consciously apply them. I keep trying though!

I did use a circular polarizer for all the shots I posted. I was trying to bring out the blue in the sky's as much as possible.

As for "hyperfocusing"... Yeah, I read a little about that a while ago and although I'm not too sure about the mechanics involved, the shots that result from it's use are nice. It's an SLR/DSLR only trick though I think, so not much I can do to employ it







.

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Got my macro lens yesterday! The weather has been crap lately however, but tomorrow if it's nice I'm going bug hunting!


----------



## ecoyd1

Here are some more hummingbird pictures from yesterday:


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ecoyd1*


Here are some more hummingbird pictures from yesterday:











Fantastic shot! That one is wall worthy!

To all other camera people, I am selling my LowePro DSLR camera bag, click the link in my sig for description and price.


----------



## ecoyd1

Thanks!

I would buy it but I have about 5 camera bags already...


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ecoyd1*


Thanks!

I would buy it but I have about 5 camera bags already...


LOL, I have three myself! Two LowePro's and a Pelican hard case.


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ecoyd1*


Here are some more hummingbird pictures from yesterday:











Wow. Really nice shots. Love this one especially. Really nice.

I was just thinking, how often do you guys with DSLRs use ISOs above 800. That is to say, how often do you use ISO1600, 3200 and 6400? I would guess that, in the majority of shots taken, the most common range to use would be ISO80 to ISO800?

Just to give me a rough idea, if you wouldn't mind, what proportion of your shorts would you say you use ISOs above 800 on?

Hey, GoneTomorrow, I'm looking forward to those macro shots man







. Good luck with the bug hunting







.

Thanks guys!

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## ecoyd1

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Highly-Annoyed*


I was just thinking, how often do you guys with DSLRs use ISOs above 800. That is to say, how often do you use ISO1600, 3200 and 6400? I would guess that, in the majority of shots taken, the most common range to use would be ISO80 to ISO800?

Just to give me a rough idea, if you wouldn't mind, what proportion of your shorts would you say you use ISOs above 800 on?

Hey, GoneTomorrow, I'm looking forward to those macro shots man







. Good luck with the bug hunting







.

Thanks guys!

Highly-Annoyed


Well to answer honestly, this is going to be completley different for each person. Since I do most of my photography for my school which includes mostly sports, I would say 50% im either at 800 or above. This includes evening/night football or other games (where they dont like to turn the lights on...) and other sports our crappy light gym. But, since most of our prints are not going to be bigger than an 8x10, I rarely worry about the noise.

Hopes this helps.


----------



## Burn

I'm a total newb to cameras- I have a Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ30. Any opinions on it?

Also, I want to try to take better shots overall, anyone have suggestions for websites I can go to in order to learn how to take better pictures? Specifically, I want to take better macro shots (The Lumix doesn't have interchangeable lenses :\\) and open-air (scenery) shots.

As far as processing goes, what applications do you guys use?


----------



## ecoyd1

Website to learn: this thread (lol) or photo.net. I have been reading photo.net for about 4 years now and have learned everything from there. I would say its the OCN equivalent to photography.

Post processing: Lightroom for processing hundreds/thousands of images from a shoot. It organizes everything very well. Its also $$. For more perticular things, I use photoshop CS3, which is also $$, but very worth it when you learn to use it. For the beginning photographer, I would say just start with an older version of photoshop which can be had for cheap these days.

To learn the basics of photography, I think its best to just pick up a book and read it. Then just practice and practice.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Highly-Annoyed*


Wow. Really nice shots. Love this one especially. Really nice.

I was just thinking, how often do you guys with DSLRs use ISOs above 800. That is to say, how often do you use ISO1600, 3200 and 6400? I would guess that, in the majority of shots taken, the most common range to use would be ISO80 to ISO800?

Just to give me a rough idea, if you wouldn't mind, what proportion of your shorts would you say you use ISOs above 800 on?

Hey, GoneTomorrow, I'm looking forward to those macro shots man







. Good luck with the bug hunting







.

Thanks guys!

Highly-Annoyed


I have a gnawing habit of using as low of an ISO as possible, which is a habit carried over from when I used point and shoots. I will use 800 ISO when necessary but tend to avoid 1600 ISO as it tends to lose detail at that point. However with NeatImage and Digital Photo Professional I can turn out a noise free 800 ISO shot.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Burn*


I'm a total newb to cameras- I have a Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ30. Any opinions on it?

Also, I want to try to take better shots overall, anyone have suggestions for websites I can go to in order to learn how to take better pictures? Specifically, I want to take better macro shots (The Lumix doesn't have interchangeable lenses







and open-air (scenery) shots.

As far as processing goes, what applications do you guys use?



The Lumix FZ ultra zooms are very decent cameras, Highly-Annoyed here uses an FZ50 and you can see how well he does with it. However the big complaint with the Panasonics are it's lowlight performance and overly aggressive noise reduction. But I had an FZ50 once myself so I know what great shots it can produce!

I learn a lot from this site:
http://digital-photography-school.com/blog/

For editing I use Canon's Digital Photo Professional, but that's just for RAW editing. For JPEG editing I use NeatImage, Noise Ninja for noise reduction, and Paint Shop Pro 9 for everything else.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Highly-Annoyed* 
Hey, GoneTomorrow, I'm looking forward to those macro shots man







. Good luck with the bug hunting







.

Thanks guys!

Highly-Annoyed

Well, I only have a few macros from today. Nothing to write home about. Using a macro lens is rather difficult. Even with a monopod and bright sunlight, it's hard to keep a steady shot at high magnification:

























I went waterfall hunting today in the woods as well to try to get some ND silky water shots, but the stream was a bit low so there wasn't much water to work with:


----------



## ecoyd1

If you shot the last two in RAW try an HDR or 2.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

my answer to highly annoyeds question, i try to shoot as low of an ISO as possible, but i prefer to do landscapes, and slong exposures, and when doing a long exposure if im using a tripod anyway, might as well shoot in as low as an ISO as i can.
my friend wants me to start doing some of biking when we go out, so that may change once we get some nice weather around here tho.


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ecoyd1*


Well to answer honestly, this is going to be completley different for each person. Since I do most of my photography for my school which includes mostly sports, I would say 50% im either at 800 or above. This includes evening/night football or other games (where they dont like to turn the lights on...) and other sports our crappy light gym. But, since most of our prints are not going to be bigger than an 8x10, I rarely worry about the noise.

Hopes this helps.


Yeah, I see what you mean. I guess, if you're going to shoot indoor sports, or sports in general where you want to freeze the action, you need fast shutter speeds which high ISOs facilitate in low light. But even for you, who shoots a fair bit of sport, it's still only ISO800+ around 50% of the time.

Thanks for helping







.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


I have a gnawing habit of using as low of an ISO as possible, which is a habit carried over from when I used point and shoots. I will use 800 ISO when necessary but tend to avoid 1600 ISO as it tends to lose detail at that point. However with NeatImage and Digital Photo Professional I can turn out a noise free 800 ISO shot.

The Lumix FZ ultra zooms are very decent cameras, Highly-Annoyed here uses an FZ50 and you can see how well he does with it. However the big complaint with the Panasonics are it's lowlight performance and overly aggressive noise reduction. But I had an FZ50 once myself so I know what great shots it can produce!

I learn a lot from this site:
http://digital-photography-school.com/blog/

For editing I use Canon's Digital Photo Professional, but that's just for RAW editing. For JPEG editing I use NeatImage, Noise Ninja for noise reduction, and Paint Shop Pro 9 for everything else.


Yeah, I tend to use as low as ISO as possible but it's more from necessity than habit with me atm














.

I'm looking at some DSLRs and while I still love the Pentax K20D in terms of spec, low ISO noise, features etc, I'm looking at others too, including the Cannon EOS 450D (Rebel XSi? in the US?) which has almost perfectly clean ISO1600 capability, but no ability to go to 3200.

I too can recommend Neat Image and I've heard Noise Ninja is good too for noise control, post-processing, but shooting RAW is also important I've found.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Well, I only have a few macros from today. Nothing to write home about. Using a macro lens is rather difficult. Even with a monopod and bright sunlight, it's hard to keep a steady shot at high magnification:










My goodness. That Macro in particular is gorgeous! What crisp detail and colour! Great Stuff!

Quote:



Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie*


my answer to highly annoyeds question, i try to shoot as low of an ISO as possible, but i prefer to do landscapes, and slong exposures, and when doing a long exposure if im using a tripod anyway, might as well shoot in as low as an ISO as i can.
my friend wants me to start doing some of biking when we go out, so that may change once we get some nice weather around here tho.


Right, I guess it is the subject matter and lighting that really determines the ISO useage. I'm just trying to get a feeling for how necessary ISOs above 800 would be and I'd imagine based on what you guys have said, for me, up to 800 would be enough, with the very occasional 1600 and 3200 if the light conditions demanded.

I'm still quite keen on the Pentax K20D to be honest. I can't find anything else that has the same kind of spec, with the same features for around the same price. It's got such good reviews as well!

Thanks for the help and advice!

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## GoneTomorrow

The 450D is the XSi. If you have the money, do pick it up. However it's really not drastically different from the 400D (XTi). The big differences are CCD resolution (10 vs 12 MP), spot metering (the XTi only has partial metering) and the image processor (DIGIC II vs. DIGIC III).

I did a lot of research on the XSi, because I considered upgrading my XTi, but almost every review I read said that it wasn't worth it if you already had and XTi. The 100% crops at various ISOs, even 1600, look nearly identical. The XSI barely edges out the XTi at 1600 ISO.

If you have the budget to get the Pentax K20D, also consider the Canon EOS 40D. That's the camera I wish I could have gotten, but it was out of my price range. I haven't found any in depth reviews on the Pentax yet, so I would definitely wait for one from dpreview.com or dcresource.com before buying. I know that previous Pentax DSLRs had rather a few criticisms.


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


The 450D is the XSi. If you have the money, do pick it up. However it's really not drastically different from the 400D (XTi). The big differences are CCD resolution (10 vs 12 MP), spot metering (the XTi only has partial metering) and the image processor (DIGIC II vs. DIGIC III).

I did a lot of research on the XSi, because I considered upgrading my XTi, but almost every review I read said that it wasn't worth it if you already had and XTi. The 100% crops at various ISOs, even 1600, look nearly identical. The XSI barely edges out the XTi at 1600 ISO.

If you have the budget to get the Pentax K20D, also consider the Canon EOS 40D. That's the camera I wish I could have gotten, but it was out of my price range. I haven't found any in depth reviews on the Pentax yet, so I would definitely wait for one from dpreview.com or dcresource.com before buying. I know that previous Pentax DSLRs had rather a few criticisms.


I'll have a look at the 40D then. Thanks for your advice. I'm still trying to keep an open mind, although I'm slowly falling for the K20D







.

Here's some in-depth K20D reviews from a few fairly trustworthy sites: digitalcamerareview.com, trustedreviews.com, popphoto.com, photoreview.com.au, neocamera.com. I could go on! Seriously, I'm really excited about this camera. Every review I read gives it high marks and there are few, if any cons, most of which are fairly inconsequential.

The main pro I see of this camera (instead of a Canon or Nikon) is the in-body IS, which means I can save cash on lenses. It's so packed full of features and is 14.6 Mega-pixels as well, with good low noise at the higher ISOs. If somebody had stamped Canon or Nikon on it, it'd be selling more than it is!

Seriously, I am yet to find a good reason not to get this camera. I'd really like a good argument against getting it, as the more I read about it, the better it seems. So far, all I've really heard is: "Its not a Canon or Nikon", which, as I'm not much of a one for brands, doesn't really convince me much.

It seems able to match any equivalently priced Canon or Nikon, in terms of features, ISO capability and noise, image quality and versatility and in some areas it actually exceeds the competition. Plus, it doesn't require expensive lenses with IS, as the IS is built in and it's 14.6 mega-pixels, which is around 20% to 40% more than similarly spec'ed cameras in it's price range. I can only imagine that Pentax are after some more of Canon and Nikon's market share by putting together such a camera.

Also, the K20D's predecessor, the K10D also got good reviews and, naturally, the K20D is better than that.

Please guys, give me a good reason _not_ to get this camera! I really need one as so far, I can't find anything other the name on the badge as a negative to getting the K20D. In terms of what it does and what's "under the hood" I can't really find any serious faults with it and neither can any review I've read!

Thanks for all your help!

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## christian_piper

So: I have wanted to get a DSLR for a while now... I just sold my old Sony, so I have some additional cash for a new camera. A major reason for wanting a DSLR is low light.. Anyway:

I need start on the inexpensive side- But I want to stick with either Canon or Nikon. Not sure which way to go... Ill need a couple good lenses- A normal lens, then a wide and zoom, and a macro? I am totally lost.... I have noticed most kit lenses seem to have really high apertures.. Which I'd like to avoid.

Can anyone recommend me a good system? I am used to Nikon, but Canon works too..
I can always upgrade the body eventually also. The lenses are more important..

------------------------------------------
What I am looking at at the moment:

Nikon D40 - $480 with the kit lens
-Kit lens 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G ED II AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor Lens

 Amazon.com: Nikon D40 6.1MP Digital SLR Camera Kit with 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G ED II AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor Lens: Electronics

Or maybe add a 55-200 on top of that- Only $120 more (in kit form) But aperture is only f/4-5.6G.......... Useful?
 Amazon.com: Nikon D40 6.1 Megapixel Digital SLR Camera Two Lens Kit, with 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G ED II AF-S DX & 55mm - 200mm f/4-5.6G ED-IF AF-S DX VR (Vibration Reduction) - USA Warranty: Electronics
That would be $600 total..

~~~
Then I was looking for a 35mm lens for indoor shots.. Couldn't find one under $400... Is a 50mm useful for that? (It goes to 1.8..)
 Amazon.com: Nikon 50mm f/1.8D AF Nikkor Lens for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras: Camera & Photo

Then I found a nice looking 28mm- Goes to 2.8 only, but it IS much wider $240- $130 more than the 50mm... Which one? It might not be much nicer to use than the first kit lens I listed.....
 Amazon.com: Nikon 28mm f/2.8D AF Nikkor Lens for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras: Camera & Photo

Macro? *No idea*

So yea: I am LOST here.. I wish I could use all our old Minolta lenses... ah well. Thanks for any help!
Could I save money going with a manual focus lens?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Highly-Annoyed* 
I'll have a look at the 40D then. Thanks for your advice. I'm still trying to keep an open mind, although I'm slowly falling for the K20D







.

Here's some in-depth K20D reviews from a few fairly trustworthy sites: digitalcamerareview.com, trustedreviews.com, popphoto.com, photoreview.com.au, neocamera.com. I could go on! Seriously, I'm really excited about this camera. Every review I read gives it high marks and there are few, if any cons, most of which are fairly inconsequential.

The main pro I see of this camera (instead of a Canon or Nikon) is the in-body IS, which means I can save cash on lenses. It's so packed full of features and is 14.6 Mega-pixels as well, with good low noise at the higher ISOs. If somebody had stamped Canon or Nikon on it, it'd be selling more than it is!

Seriously, I am yet to find a good reason not to get this camera. I'd really like a good argument against getting it, as the more I read about it, the better it seems. So far, all I've really heard is: "Its not a Canon or Nikon", which, as I'm not much of a one for brands, doesn't really convince me much.

It seems able to match any equivalently priced Canon or Nikon, in terms of features, ISO capability and noise, image quality and versatility and in some areas it actually exceeds the competition. Plus, it doesn't require expensive lenses with IS, as the IS is built in and it's 14.6 mega-pixels, which is around 20% to 40% more than similarly spec'ed cameras in it's price range. I can only imagine that Pentax are after some more of Canon and Nikon's market share by putting together such a camera.

Also, the K20D's predecessor, the K10D also got good reviews and, naturally, the K20D is better than that.

Please guys, give me a good reason _not_ to get this camera! I really need one as so far, I can't find anything other the name on the badge as a negative to getting the K20D. In terms of what it does and what's "under the hood" I can't really find any serious faults with it and neither can any review I've read!

Thanks for all your help!

Highly-Annoyed

The Pentax K20D seems to be an excellent DSLR. Still though, the Canon 40D has a faster burst mode and performs better noise wise at 1600 and 3200 ISO. Plus Canon makes the best lenses in my opinion, it's L class lenses are unbelievable. Plus the 40D is about $200 cheaper.

However the K20D is no slouch so if you went for it you wouldn't be disappointed. It does have the in body stabilization, but I did read a review where it claimed that Canon's in-lens stabilization is more effective, but I'm not sure if there's any truth to that. Considering that Olympus, Pentax, Samsung, etc. are making in body stabilization and Canon and Nikon still aren't, there must be some reason why they put it in the lens. I have my doubts that they do it simple for profiteering; my sense is that there is some advantage to having optical stabilization in the lens.

One other thing I would look into is how many and what kind of lense Pentax offers. And read reviews on their lenses! Lens reviews are as picky or more in my experience.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *christian_piper* 
So: I have wanted to get a DSLR for a while now... I just sold my old Sony, so I have some additional cash for a new camera. A major reason for wanting a DSLR is low light.. Anyway:

I need start on the inexpensive side- But I want to stick with either Canon or Nikon. Not sure which way to go... Ill need a couple good lenses- A normal lens, then a wide and zoom, and a macro? I am totally lost.... I have noticed most kit lenses seem to have really high apertures.. Which I'd like to avoid.

Can anyone recommend me a good system? I am used to Nikon, but Canon works too..
I can always upgrade the body eventually also. The lenses are more important..

------------------------------------------
What I am looking at at the moment:

Nikon D40 - $480 with the kit lens
-Kit lens 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G ED II AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor Lens
Amazon.com: Nikon D40 6.1MP Digital SLR Camera Kit with 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G ED II AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor Lens: Electronics

Or maybe add a 55-200 on top of that- Only $120 more (in kit form) But aperture is only f/4-5.6G.......... Useful?
Amazon.com: Nikon D40 6.1 Megapixel Digital SLR Camera Two Lens Kit, with 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G ED II AF-S DX & 55mm - 200mm f/4-5.6G ED-IF AF-S DX VR (Vibration Reduction) - USA Warranty: Electronics
That would be $600 total..

~~~
Then I was looking for a 35mm lens for indoor shots.. Couldn't find one under $400... Is a 50mm useful for that? (It goes to 1.8..)
Amazon.com: Nikon 50mm f/1.8D AF Nikkor Lens for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras: Camera & Photo

Then I found a nice looking 28mm- Goes to 2.8 only, but it IS much wider $240- $130 more than the 50mm... Which one? It might not be much nicer to use than the first kit lens I listed.....
Amazon.com: Nikon 28mm f/2.8D AF Nikkor Lens for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras: Camera & Photo

Macro? *No idea*

So yea: I am LOST here.. I wish I could use all our old Minolta lenses... ah well. Thanks for any help!
Could I save money going with a manual focus lens?

Piper, what is your total budget for body and lenses?

The Nikon D40 does not have an auto focus motor in the body, requiring the use of Nikon AF lenses, that is it's biggest criticism. I believe that it also only has a 5 point auto focus instead of the usual 9 and up. The thing about the Nikon DSLRs is that in their entry level category they seems to have a gap in between the D40 and D80 pricewise. I think that Canon fills that void well with the XTi and XSi.

And about lenses; zoom lenses typically don't have very wide apertures. The 3-4 f-stop range is about as good as they get. For indoor/lowlight, you definitely want to get a good prime lens. They're fix focal length, typically 50mm (the "nifty fifty"). My Canon 50mm EFS lens opens up to a whopping f/1.4 and can practically see in the dark! 85mm is another common prime size.

Definitely don't skimp on lenses. If you can only afford to start with a zoom, then so be it. Save up for better lenses. One way you can save a bit starting off and cover your bases is to get a body ONLY because the kit lenses aren't so great, then get a nice zoom lens. If you can afford, it go for Nikon's VR or Canon's IS. Also try to get lenses with USM (ultra sonic motor, super fast focusing).

For indoor shooting, you can get a prime as I suggested, or you could just get a macro lens. They don't open as wide as primes, but they aren't bad (my 60mm macro lens is f/2.8) and they are good as portrait and general use lenses.


----------



## christian_piper

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Piper, what is your total budget for body and lenses?

The Nikon D40 does not have an auto focus motor in the body, requiring the use of Nikon AF lenses, that is it's biggest criticism. I believe that it also only has a 5 point auto focus instead of the usual 9 and up. The thing about the Nikon DSLRs is that in their entry level category they seems to have a gap in between the D40 and D80 pricewise. I think that Canon fills that void well with the XTi and XSi.

And about lenses; zoom lenses typically don't have very wide apertures. The 3-4 f-stop range is about as good as they get. For indoor/lowlight, you definitely want to get a good prime lens. They're fix focal length, typically 50mm (the "nifty fifty"). My Canon 50mm EFS lens opens up to a whopping f/1.4 and can practically see in the dark! 85mm is another common prime size.

Definitely don't skimp on lenses. If you can only afford to start with a zoom, then so be it. Save up for better lenses. One way you can save a bit starting off and cover your bases is to get a body ONLY because the kit lenses aren't so great, then get a nice zoom lens. If you can afford, it go for Nikon's VR or Canon's IS. Also try to get lenses with USM (ultra sonic motor, super fast focusing).

For indoor shooting, you can get a prime as I suggested, or you could just get a macro lens. They don't open as wide as primes, but they aren't bad (my 60mm macro lens is f/2.8) and they are good as portrait and general use lenses.

Total Budget: $700, $900 for now?

The thing is, how flimsy are the newer canons? The older ones I have used seemed quite.. cheap.. when compared to my fathers D80. Am I expecting too much? I need to get to the camera store soon...

And wow... Canon lenses ARE cheaper... And I never thought about using a macro lens as a normal lens.... Didn't exactly know that was possible actually.. And I do enjoy macro photography. What would you recommend for a fairly inexpensive canon zoom? I'd also want to get a prime at the same time... (Or of course a macro)

So: Canon XTI, or XSi (Looks them up now) and 2/3 lenses.... Hrm.

And the canons are CF! Cmon now! How well do SD > CF adapters work? At least they take the same batteries as my G9...

Thanks!!

EDIT: I like the look of the XSi.. Uses SD cards, is nicer, and has a better battery.... Just a BIT expensive...
 Amazon.com: Canon Digital Rebel XSi 12MP Digital SLR Camera with EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS Lens (Black): Electronics
Kit lens has IS... 18-55mm 3.5-5.6... I wonder how good it is tho. But at $50 more than just the body on Amazon....


----------



## ecoyd1

Really its up to you.

Go to the store and take your own memory card(s) and just try out all the cameras and lenses. When you get home you can look and see what settings/camera/lens you used.

Try a ton of different settings, and see what would best fit you.

Also try their flashes.

Remember, there really aren't any BAD SLRs out there unless your looking at something made from pre-2002 or something.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *christian_piper* 
Total Budget: $700, $900 for now?

The thing is, how flimsy are the newer canons? The older ones I have used seemed quite.. cheap.. when compared to my fathers D80. Am I expecting too much? I need to get to the camera store soon...

And wow... Canon lenses ARE cheaper... And I never thought about using a macro lens as a normal lens.... Didn't exactly know that was possible actually.. And I do enjoy macro photography. What would you recommend for a fairly inexpensive canon zoom? I'd also want to get a prime at the same time... (Or of course a macro)

So: Canon XTI, or XSi (Looks them up now) and 2/3 lenses.... Hrm.

And the canons are CF! Cmon now! How well do SD > CF adapters work? At least they take the same batteries as my G9...

Thanks!!

EDIT: I like the look of the XSi.. Uses SD cards, is nicer, and has a better battery.... Just a BIT expensive...
Amazon.com: Canon Digital Rebel XSi 12MP Digital SLR Camera with EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS Lens (Black): Electronics
Kit lens has IS... 18-55mm 3.5-5.6... I wonder how good it is tho. But at $50 more than just the body on Amazon....

I don't find my XTi flimsy. They have them at Best Buy, go and try it for yourself.

A good Canon zoom would be the Canon EF 28mm-135mm IS USM. It's their most popular zoom. I have one and use it a lot.

And for a prime lens, you're in luck. They're rather cheap if you don't mind not having USM: Canon EF 50mm f/1.8, however without USM the auto focus may be a bit slow and "hunt" more. I have the USM version which has a slightly larger aperture - and price tag: Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM

Yes, the XSi has a few improvements, but it's pricey because it just came out. Even if you got the XTi and CF cards it would be cheaper than an XSi by itself. CF cards aren't expensive. You can get an 8GB 133X Transcend CF card for $40. but if you can spring for it, get the XSi. I don't know how well the SD to CF converters work.

I wouldn't bother with the kit lens, trust me. It's not all that great. Save the $50 and put it towards a zoom lens.


----------



## christian_piper

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
I don't find my XTi flimsy. They have them at Best Buy, go and try it for yourself.

A good Canon zoom would be the Canon EF 28mm-135mm IS USM. It's their most popular zoom. I have one and use it a lot.

And for a prime lens, you're in luck. They're rather cheap if you don't mind not having USM: Canon EF 50mm f/1.8, however without USM the auto focus may be a bit slow and "hunt" more. I have the USM version which has a slightly larger aperture - and price tag: Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM

Yes, the XSi has a few improvements, but it's pricey because it just came out. Even if you got the XTi and CF cards it would be cheaper than an XSi by itself. CF cards aren't expensive. You can get an 8GB 133X Transcend CF card for $40. but if you can spring for it, get the XSi. I don't know how well the SD to CF converters work.

I wouldn't bother with the kit lens, trust me. It's not all that great. Save the $50 and put it towards a zoom lens.

XTI for me... Thanks for the lens links!! I didn't see that zoom before... I like it. Thanks!

And Ill go without USM on a prime... My first camera was a manual Minolta and I wasn't too bad with it.. If it focuses too slowly I can just do it manually..

What is the difference between a prime 50mm and a macro 50mm exactly? (Being the same focal length just confuses me...)

And I found a $20 SD to CF adapter... its worth a try.

Thanks! Rep+

EDIT: Spect aint the whole story- going with Nikon./


----------



## ecoyd1

Macro/Micro = It focuses closer so you can get very close to your subject, like 2 inches.

With a non macro, you can only get about 10" - 1 foot close.


----------



## christian_piper

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ecoyd1*


Macro/Micro = It focuses closer so you can get very close to your subject, like 2 inches.

With a non macro, you can only get about 10" - 1 foot close.


Ah yes. That WOULD make sense.... Thank you (Rep again!)

I think I knew that...... *Needs sleep* Thanks everyone! I'm going to be going to the camera store VERY soon and looking at all these things..


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ecoyd1*


If you shot the last two in RAW try an HDR or 2.


Thanks for the tip, I sat down and learned how to do HDR with GIMP using only RAW images. Rep+ for the tip.

Everyone's probably tired of the waterfall shots from me already, but here are some more anyway.







These are all HDR shots, by the way, to the best of my ability.


----------



## christian_piper

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Thanks for the tip, I sat down and learned how to do HDR with GIMP using only RAW images. Rep+ for the tip.

Everyone's probably tired of the waterfall shots from me already, but here are some more anyway.







These are all HDR shots, by the way, to the best of my ability.












WOW! Those looked GREAT!! I especially like this one! NICE job!!!

I need to try that wish some of my photos.. I dont have any nearly so good looking though....

Aside from more $ and a worse aperture is there any more disadvantages to using a macro lens as a prime lens? (Can they focus to infinity?)


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *christian_piper*


WOW! Those looked GREAT!! I especially like this one! NICE job!!!

I need to try that wish some of my photos.. I dont have any nearly so good looking though....

Aside from more $ and a worse aperture is there any more disadvantages to using a macro lens as a prime lens? (Can they focus to infinity?)


Thanks, they took a lot of work! I was ankle deep in the stream at times praying not to fall and plunge my camera.

All it took was an ND filter, but I guess the G9 can't accept filters - or did you get that adapter?

If you use a macro as a prime, the only drawback is that you will have to step back a bit further to get your subject in the shot, more than you would with a prime because of the magnification. But nothing other than that.


----------



## ecoyd1

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Thanks, they took a lot of work! I was ankle deep in the stream at times praying not to fall and plunge my camera.


Were you using a tripod? In water? Or how did u get such a stable image?


----------



## christian_piper

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Thanks, they took a lot of work! I was ankle deep in the stream at times praying not to fall and plunge my camera.

All it took was an ND filter, but I guess the G9 can't accept filters - or did you get that adapter?

If you use a macro as a prime, the only drawback is that you will have to step back a bit further to get your subject in the shot, more than you would with a prime because of the magnification. But nothing other than that.


I actually meant trying to turn some of my existing raw images into HDR's in gimp... But no I did not get that adapter. I will when I get an SLR (Meaning to go back to SLR ever since I abandoned my Film minolta...So yea.) However- the G9 has an INTERNAL PHYSICAL ND filter you can activate in the menus. No, I do now know how well it works, I haven't had the occasion to use it and have a tripod handy lately..

---------

I need to put up some new photos. I think I will soon..... I cant compete with you guys tho >.>


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ecoyd1*


Were you using a tripod? In water? Or how did u get such a stable image?


Oh yeah, I used a tripod big time. All those images have EXIF data, and most are at least 2" shutter speed. Some are 5" or more. For one of those shots the tripod was in 2 feet of water. I basically hit the jackpot for waterfalls today. I went to a nature reserve, where I usually go to shoot, but this time I went deep into the woods and found a stream that had successive waterfalls further upstream. I didn't even see them all, so I'll be back there next weekend!


----------



## ecoyd1

I...um...dont think I would like my Manfrotto in water haha!


----------



## christian_piper

Nice! *Cant wait for the next set*

In fact, I cant wait until school is out and I have TIME to do stuff like that myself again


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *christian_piper*


I actually meant trying to turn some of my existing raw images into HDR's in gimp... But no I did not get that adapter. However- the G9 has an INTERNAL PHYSICAL ND filter you can activate in the menus. No, I do now know how well it works, I haven't had the occasion to use it and have a tripod handy lately..


I used this tutorial for HDR, though I need to tweak it a bit. I don't think the tutorial is dead on:
http://www.instructables.com/id/HDR-...with-the-GIMP/

That's really nifty, an internal ND. Well, go find a waterfall! I actually had to stack filters to get it dark enough. I had a UV filter, then an ND filter on that, then a polarizer on that.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ecoyd1*


I...um...dont think I would like my Manfrotto in water haha!


I wouldn't either if I paid that much for a tripod. I have a cheap Vanguard from Meijer. It's made for abuse.


----------



## ecoyd1

There you go.


----------



## christian_piper

Thanks for the HDR link! And well.. I'll look for one, but around here they are rather scarce.. (Illinois is a pancake)

Oo! I have an abuse tripod too! Used it in the rain, snow, all over.. Its a Slick U6600 and it serves me well ^.^ Could just stand to be a bit taller...

  Amazon.com: Slik Compact Video Tripod with 3-Way Panhead and Gear Drive: Electronics


----------



## Marin

Guess I will join,

Digital- Canon SD870 IS

Film- Konica Minolta Maxxum 50 w/28-90mm lens


----------



## ecoyd1

Where has mugan been?


----------



## Marin

I have had the Maxxum 50 since the end of 6th grade. Right now I am finishing 10th. So I am upgrading to a DSLR next school year.


----------



## ecoyd1

Yay! I am finishing up 11th grade right now.

Have my finals tomorrow...must...study....


----------



## sugarton

HDR looks pretty cool in video games... but it looks better in photography


----------



## Marin

Messing around with my Canon SD870 IS. I love being able to use the stitching feature again, my Canon SD600 also had it. Picture was quickly stitched together in PS CS3.

Also I am glad I got a quad instead of a wolfdale, if I only had two cores this wouldn't have been as fast.

Anyways, I will make a cleaner image later.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

if you like doing panos, give autostich a try
http://www.cs.ubc.ca/~mbrown/autostitch/autostitch.html

and i cant wait for some nice weather here, its been rain/cold for the last while and havent had a chance to get out.

and sugarton nice hdr, what program did you use for it?


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie*


if you like doing panos, give autostich a try
http://www.cs.ubc.ca/~mbrown/autostitch/autostitch.html

and i cant wait for some nice weather here, its been rain/cold for the last while and havent had a chance to get out.

and sugarton nice hdr, what program did you use for it?


Tried autostitch and the photos quality was way lower after using it and the image was stitched the same as the one in CS3.


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


The Pentax K20D seems to be an excellent DSLR. Still though, the Canon 40D has a faster burst mode and performs better noise wise at 1600 and 3200 ISO. Plus Canon makes the best lenses in my opinion, it's L class lenses are unbelievable. Plus the 40D is about $200 cheaper.

However the K20D is no slouch so if you went for it you wouldn't be disappointed. It does have the in body stabilization, but I did read a review where it claimed that Canon's in-lens stabilization is more effective, but I'm not sure if there's any truth to that. Considering that Olympus, Pentax, Samsung, etc. are making in body stabilization and Canon and Nikon still aren't, there must be some reason why they put it in the lens. I have my doubts that they do it simple for profiteering; my sense is that there is some advantage to having optical stabilization in the lens.

One other thing I would look into is how many and what kind of lense Pentax offers. And read reviews on their lenses! Lens reviews are as picky or more in my experience.


Well, I've had a look into the In-Body VS In-Lens IS question and it appears there are two major benefits to In-Lens IS over In-Body. They are:

1. You can see the effect of the IS in the viewfinder.

2. Telephoto lenses are (allegedly) better stabilised with in-Lens stabilisation.

The benefits are kinda' negated a bit for me though:

1. The FZ50 I currently use has two modes of IS. Mode 1 stabilises the image on screen (and in the viewfinder) but doesn't stabilise the shot well. Mode 2 doesn't stabilise the image through the screen or viewfinder at all, but stabilises the shot very well indeed. Guess which I use? Yeah, you guessed, mode 2. So, I'm used to not seeing the effect of IS on screen, or in the viewfinder anyway, so I don't really loose out by not having the first major benefit of in-lens IS.

2. Again, for me, the telephoto stabilisation benefit isn't really an issue as I very rarely shoot at anything much over 200mm (about 6x zoom) anyway. Very occasionally, I will shoot at up to the full 12x (420mm) but again, I use the FZ50's mode 2 IS, so I never see the effects of IS in the viewfinder or screen anyway and I've never had a problem yet.

The benefits of the in-body IS are:

1. Any lens you choose to use will be stabilised. The is especially true for the K20D which apparently can be manually, or automatically adjusted to work with just about any lens that'll fit on the body. Also, so I've read, the K20D's IS can be fine tuned to work with whatever zoom you're using, so it can be adjusted for 17mm, 200mm or 600mm, apparently; this somewhat negates the benefit of in-lens IS for telephoto lenses.

2. The cost of non-IS lenses is less than IS lenses, so a little greater investment up-front in the camera, will pay for it's self and then save money, later on. I might want to end up getting four or five lenses, which could save hundreds. For example an 18-50mm F2.8 Sigma lens _with_ IS cost's around Â£300 in the UK online, while the same lens _without_ IS cost's around Â£200 in the UK online. That's 33% more, for the in-lens IS and a saving of Â£100 ($195 USD) right away, if I get a camera with IS in the body. ...and that's just one lens; multiply that over five lenses and the camera has almost paid for it's self







.

With regards to Pantex lenses, I will indeed look into the quality. However, A few of the reviews I've read for the K20D speak quite highly of Pentax as a lens manufacturer. Indeed, even I'd heard of them in a good light in terms of their glass, although I didn't know they made camera's before I started researching DSLRs







. With this in mind, the hope is that the Pentax lenses will be good, as they seem to have a reputation for being. I will look into it though, as, as you know, the glass is as important as the sensor (if not more so) with DSLRs.

I'll keep reading up on the EOS 40D though, as I haven't done so yet and don't really want to rule it out until I've done the research. My only reservations with regards to it so far though (with the little I currently know) is that it's only a 10.1 mega-pixel camera (VS the K20Ds 14.6 mega-pixels) and, as it's a Canon, it'll undoubtedly require the more expensive IS lenses (unless I go without _any_ IS (if that's possible), which I'd prefer not to, to be honest).

Also, although I'm sure the 40D has got great low noise high ISO capability (I've come to learn now that Canon's supposedly have the edge, when it comes to really low noise high ISO) it seems unlikely that I'll need to go higher than ISO800 very often anyway, as the kind of subject matter I enjoy shooting, doesn't really require it. If I do need ISO1600 or 3200, the K20D can produce pretty damn clean images (although not as good as many Canons no doubt) that only really need a gentle cleaning in NeatImage to bring up to par with other camera's such as the one you mentioned. I know this, because I've downloaded sample images and tested the theory with Neatimage and the results were very good and took little time to implement.

Still, as much as the arguments for the K20D seem to mount in my mind, the cost's involved in going DSLR are going to end up being around Â£1200 ($2350 USD), to possibly even Â£1500 ($2930 USD) so I'm keen not to make a rash decision and I want to make a sound judgement, based on facts. So although I'm personally putting the K20D on the top of my list, I'm not adverse to having it knocked off if a better alternative presents it's self.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


I used this tutorial for HDR, though I need to tweak it a bit. I don't think the tutorial is dead on:
http://www.instructables.com/id/HDR-...with-the-GIMP/


Just thought I'd mention that the Pentax K20D has built in HDR capability, so you just turn a setting on and it automatically turns every shot into an HDR shot if you want














.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ecoyd1*


Where has mugan been?


Yeah, I was thinking that. Where is he? Hey, mugan! Where are you?

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Messing around with my Canon SD870 IS. I love being able to use the stitching feature again, my Canon SD600 also had it. Picture was quickly stitched together in PS CS3.

Also I am glad I got a quad instead of a wolfdale, if I only had two cores this wouldn't have been as fast.


Yep, Quads rule. Batch processing RAW images on my sig rig is literally twice as fast as my laptop's T7200 C2D.

I love panoramas! I haven't had a chance to shoot any with my DSLR yet, so that will be my next project. Canon provides a program that does it automatically, so we will see how well it does it.

I need to delve into my pictures folder, I havesome panoramas that I made with Nikon Coolpix 5700 several years ago.

Oh, to everyone who might be interested, particulary to Highly-Annoyed, I went out shooting with my graduated neutral density filter (if anyone is unfamiliar with that, it's essentially a dark tinted filter with one half left untinted, so that the sky and ground in a landscape shot canbe evenly exposed) and it works very well. No need for exposure blending/HDR shots.


----------



## max302

Ok... so I just bought my Nikon D40 with the kit glass, wondering what accessories I should buy first. I looked at IR filters, they seem to be relatively cheap, and give off pretty cool pics.

Did anybody try IR yet? How do people get IR + color pictures? Overlay on photoshop?


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

i have looked at IR photography, and when i get a new body im going to covert my d70s.
http://lifepixel.com/
they do conversions, or you can buy the filter and do it yourself.


----------



## ecoyd1

Dont bother with IR yet.

Just learn the basics then expirament, imo.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *max302*


Ok... so I just bought my Nikon D40 with the kit glass, wondering what accessories I should buy first. I looked at IR filters, they seem to be relatively cheap, and give off pretty cool pics.

Did anybody try IR yet? How do people get IR + color pictures? Overlay on photoshop?


Essential accessories for a DSLR kit:
extra battery - or even a battery grip if you have the money
extra memory card (or a large capacity single card)
case (Lowepro and Promaster make good cases)
microfiber lens cloth
something to clean the sensor with (Giotto rocketbulb, etc. there are many methods)
remote shutter release
tripod and/or monopod
filters (UV/MCP, polarizer, ND filter)

Lenses - a decent zoom and a prime are good to start with.


----------



## sugarton

Get a remote if you plan on shooting long exposures from a tripod. Get a good case or backpack as well. I don't think a battery/battery grip is that important unless you shoot LOTS of pictures, especially with flash. I've never ran the battery down on my 350D because I typically don't shoot more than 100 shots on a single outing.

Get a protective filter for the lens when you can as well.


----------



## Marin

I need to upload a huge panorama shot, what site will allow me to do that?


----------



## ecoyd1

any i think, just resize it.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
I need to upload a huge panorama shot, what site will allow me to do that?


What's the total file size? I think Deviant art will allow fairly large images. Alternatively, you could just host the image on a free webpage site, like Yahoo, Google Pages, etc.

Otherwise, to host full sized images, you need pro account with Flickr or similar site.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
What's the total file size? I think Deviant art will allow fairly large images. Alternatively, you could just host the image on a free webpage site, like Yahoo, Google Pages, etc.

Otherwise, to host full sized images, you need pro account with Flickr or similar site.

9.12mb's

8134x2046


----------



## ecoyd1

Resize the height in photoshop/gimp to 600px.

Then the file size should be much lower.


----------



## Marin

Here's my first attempt at HDR, top right didn't come out so good...


----------



## ecoyd1

Not to say that isnt an HDR, but it really doesnt show what and HDR really does.

Here is one (I didnt take this):









This turned what would be a VERY contrasty photo into something with little contrast.

Without HDR, it would have a blown out sky if exposed for the street. So two exposures were shot, and thus combined.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *ecoyd1* 
Not to say that isnt an HDR, but it really doesnt show what and HDR really does.

Here is one (I didnt take this):









This turned what would be a VERY contrasty photo into something with little contrast.

Without HDR, it would have a blown out sky if exposed for the street. So two exposures were shot, and thus combined.

Guess I will try it outside later today.


----------



## nitteo

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Got my macro lens yesterday! The weather has been crap lately however, but tomorrow if it's nice I'm going bug hunting!

The Macro bug never bit me. I had the "OLD" Nikon 105mm f/2.8 and I used it mostly for portrait shots. I bought the 60mm f/2.8 and rarely used it for macro as well. I sold both to get a 105mm VR and STILL the macro bug didnt bite, pluse I felt more comfortable with the old 105mm, so I sold the VR for a 70-300mm VR. Currently looking for an "old" 105mm 2.8 or an 85mm 1.4.

BTW, HDR or IR is great for landscapes (NOT MINE):


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Oh, to everyone who might be interested, particulary to Highly-Annoyed, I went out shooting with my graduated neutral density filter (if anyone is unfamiliar with that, it's essentially a dark tinted filter with one half left untinted, so that the sky and ground in a landscape shot canbe evenly exposed) and it works very well. No need for exposure blending/HDR shots.


Have a look at the pic below (not mine) of the difference between a shot without HDR and one with HDR on the K20D. On this camera, it's a built-in feature, no need for filters, multiple exposures (to combine in software later) or any of that, just turn it on and each shot is an HDR shot. Apparently there are three different HDR modes as well on the K20D, although I don't know what they might be?

The one on the left is "normal" while the one on the right is an HDR shot, straight out of the K20D, with no filters, software use or anything else.










I've scaled it down, so the details aren't super, but you can clearly see the difference it makes. Here is the page it's from, so you can see the bigger version. Personally, I think it makes all the difference, in this shot anyway.

I've tried creating HDR images using my RAW processor to over-expose and under-expose an image, then blending them both together in GIMP and the results do look good and give great detail in both dark and light areas, but it can be a bit time consuming, especially if you create more than just two differently exposed shots and merge them. The K20D takes all the hassle out of it and the results look good to me







.

What do you think?

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## christian_piper

I think it looks alright- But aside from the shy in my opinion the first shot looks better. Shadows just fir the scene.... PERSONAL PREF alert!!! It IS cool though....

So: On cameras: I went to Wolf Camera today- Decided on Nikon. D40/60/80.... I MIGHT be able to trade a D60 for my dads D80....


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Highly-Annoyed*


Have a look at the pic below (not mine) of the difference between a shot without HDR and one with HDR on the K20D. On this camera, it's a built-in feature, no need for filters, multiple exposures (to combine in software later) or any of that, just turn it on and each shot is an HDR shot. Apparently there are three different HDR modes as well on the K20D, although I don't know what they might be?

The one on the left is "normal" while the one on the right is an HDR shot, straight out of the K20D, with no filters, software use or anything else.










I've scaled it down, so the details aren't super, but you can clearly see the difference it makes. Here is the page it's from, so you can see the bigger version. Personally, I think it makes all the difference, in this shot anyway.

I've tried creating HDR images using my RAW processor to over-expose and under-expose an image, then blending them both together in GIMP and the results do look good and give great detail in both dark and light areas, but it can be a bit time consuming, especially if you create more than just two differently exposed shots and merge them. The K20D takes all the hassle out of it and the results look good to me







.

What do you think?

Highly-Annoyed


Very promising indeed, but I'd like to see more examples. The one above doesn't have to much of a difference between the sky and foreground, I'd like to see if the K20D could produce an HDR a shot more like what ecoyd posted.


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:



Originally Posted by *christian_piper*


I think it looks alright- But aside from the shy in my opinion the first shot looks better. Shadows just fir the scene.... PERSONAL PREF alert!!! It IS cool though....


You can actually see, that in the non-HDR shot, a lot of the colours are so dark, they look black. See the bottom left section, which is the colour it's supposed to be the HDR shot, but essentially black in the non-HDR shot. See the cranes also.

There's a lot more contrast in the first (non-HDR) shot, which perhaps is more pleasing to your eye than mine? Personally, I find the second image more pleasing, as it seems more balanced and there is more image detail and colour detail.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Very promising indeed, but I'd like to see more examples. The one above doesn't have to much of a difference between the sky and foreground, I'd like to see if the K20D could produce an HDR a shot more like what ecoyd posted.


There's not a huge contrast between sky and foreground, I agree, but there are loads of areas in the non-HDR shot where lots of detail gets lost in the darkness. In the HDR shot, you see so much more detail, as well as colour.

I'll have a hunt around the web and see if I can find any more examples







.

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Sorry for the double post







.

I found this pic, from a review of the K20D, taken on a damp day in the UK.

The first (left) image is "normal" the second (right) is with one of the HDR modes switched on, called "EDR".

















Here's the page it's from.

There's a bit more of a contrast here between sky and foreground in the first shot, which is balanced out quite well in the second. I think the HDR shot looks much better. Again, image details are more prominent and colour is more vibrant in the HDR shot. Just look at the lady's pink top in the left foreground and slightly further away, the hair of the two blonde ladies. The colour is much better in the HDR shot. This is all achieved in-camera, automatically, when the setting in turned on.

Apparently you can use this setting with RAW shooting, so if you prefer a bit more contrast, you could always dial it up a fraction or so in the "digital darkroom", if you wanted.

There's a whole bunch of seagull shots here, from a guy using a K20D with the "EDR" function that gives you the HDR effect. Apparently the white of the seagulls was very bright and the shadowing dark, or at least so he says here. Although you don't get to see a comparison, the shot's do look good, to me at least.

I'm yet to find anything that looks much like what ecoyd posted, but the camera is pretty new, so it's hard to find many comparison shots. It was only released the first quarter of this year apparently. If I ever get the camera (which, as you know, I'm seriously considering) I'll have a play around and see what I can do in-camera, HDR wise.

If you like HDR shots though, there are some really nice ones (achieved manually I believe) here on flickr, tagged HDR and K20D. This one and this one are really nice (imo) but I doubt they were achieved with the in-camera HDR function.

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## ecoyd1

500th post!

had to.

OT: Those look more like just shadow balanced or something, and their not really "true" HDR. Now that I think about it, Nikon has a similar feature called D-Lighting where you can manually lift the shadows or brighten the image. You can also add filter effects, crop, ect in camera.


----------



## max302

Highly-annoyed, I suspect that the flickr pics you posted above are miss-tagged. It appears to me that both are WAYYY too vibrant to not be HDR.

On another note, does the 20D sport a full HDR on a chip sensor, or is it just the Expanded Dynamic range DPreview is talking about? What is full HDR again, something like 32 bit color right?


----------



## ecoyd1

Quote:


Originally Posted by *max302* 
On another note, does the 20D sport a full HDR on a chip sensor, or is it just the Expanded Dynamic range DPreview is talking about? What is full HDR again, something like 32 bit color right?

I think your correct.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *ecoyd1* 
500th post!

had to.

OT: Those look more like just shadow balanced or something, and their not really "true" HDR. Now that I think about it, Nikon has a similar feature called D-Lighting where you can manually lift the shadows or brighten the image. You can also add filter effects, crop, ect in camera.

Agreed, it's a nifty feature, but not what I would call HDR. Nikon's D-Lighting feature is right on the money for a comparison and probably a competing feature.

Here's an awesome HDR shot I found (too big to display):

http://www.rnrh.net/images/blog/hdr-..._forgotten.jpg


----------



## Marin

I might be doing this wrong, but I made another attempt at this. I haven't done this outside yet but anyways. I took two shots, one under-exposed and one over-exposed. I then used "Merge to HDR" in CS3 to merge both photos into one. This is the result.


----------



## sugarton

For a good HDR shot you can't just shoot in different exposures and hope for the best. You kind of need a situation in which theres a lot of difference in light. Backlit scenes are awesome for this because you can capture the lit up parts in the underexposed shot and the dark parts in the overexposed. HDR combines these together to show them both without the shot being over or underexposed. Excellent example is shooting towards a sunny window in a dark room. If you do standard exposure (metering half for the room, half for the window) you'll see a dark room with a slightly overexposed window. If you try to expose for the window you'll get a very dark room with no detail. Shoot 3 exposures of the room and combine them for an HDR shot which will show detail in the room, detail outside the window and an overall increase in color saturation, depending on what you prefer.

I use Photomatix Pro for my HDR shots and my 350D's exposure bracketing function at +/- 2 stops. If you've got a newish Canon DSLR you should be able to do this too. It's in the second page of the menu under "AEB" on mine, probably named the same but in a different location on others. Bring the 3 points so that one is in the middle and the other two are at +2 and -2. First shot you shoot will be normal exposure, then overexposure, then underexposure. If you shoot with a remote it will take all 3 automatically. Obviously you want to use a tripod for this because the 3 images need to lineup perfectly.

Anyway this picture here illustrates what I was trying to get across.










In the original the room was detailed somewhat but the windows were overexposed and you couldn't see the buildings outside of them. I shot 3 exposures at +/- 2, merged them using Photomatix and actually toned down the saturation a bit (it was really whacky at default). The result is VERY close to what the real life scene looks like.


----------



## nitteo

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sugarton*


For a good HDR shot you can't just shoot in different exposures and hope for the best. You kind of need a situation in which theres a lot of difference in light. Backlit scenes are awesome for this because you can capture the lit up parts in the underexposed shot and the dark parts in the overexposed. HDR combines these together to show them both without the shot being over or underexposed. Excellent example is shooting towards a sunny window in a dark room. If you do standard exposure (metering half for the room, half for the window) you'll see a dark room with a slightly overexposed window. If you try to expose for the window you'll get a very dark room with no detail. Shoot 3 exposures of the room and combine them for an HDR shot which will show detail in the room, detail outside the window and an overall increase in color saturation, depending on what you prefer.

I use Photomatix Pro for my HDR shots and my 350D's exposure bracketing function at +/- 2 stops. If you've got a newish Canon DSLR you should be able to do this too. It's in the second page of the menu under "AEB" on mine, probably named the same but in a different location on others. Bring the 3 points so that one is in the middle and the other two are at +2 and -2. First shot you shoot will be normal exposure, then overexposure, then underexposure. If you shoot with a remote it will take all 3 automatically. Obviously you want to use a tripod for this because the 3 images need to lineup perfectly.

Anyway this picture here illustrates what I was trying to get across.










In the original the room was detailed somewhat but the windows were overexposed and you couldn't see the buildings outside of them. I shot 3 exposures at +/- 2, merged them using Photomatix and actually toned down the saturation a bit (it was really whacky at default). The result is VERY close to what the real life scene looks like.


Most DSLRs have a "bracketing" tab that will take under/over exposed for you.

Nice shot. So you metered the inside of the room or the windows?


----------



## sugarton

I metered for the room since it was rather bright and detailed already. There was a couple of windows beside and a bright hallway behind me that was lighting it up nicely.


----------



## stanrc

i just picked up a canon powershot SD750 and i'm hoping to learn a few things


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sugarton*


For a good HDR shot you can't just shoot in different exposures and hope for the best. You kind of need a situation in which theres a lot of difference in light. Backlit scenes are awesome for this because you can capture the lit up parts in the underexposed shot and the dark parts in the overexposed. HDR combines these together to show them both without the shot being over or underexposed. Excellent example is shooting towards a sunny window in a dark room. If you do standard exposure (metering half for the room, half for the window) you'll see a dark room with a slightly overexposed window. If you try to expose for the window you'll get a very dark room with no detail. Shoot 3 exposures of the room and combine them for an HDR shot which will show detail in the room, detail outside the window and an overall increase in color saturation, depending on what you prefer.

I use Photomatix Pro for my HDR shots and my 350D's exposure bracketing function at +/- 2 stops. If you've got a newish Canon DSLR you should be able to do this too. It's in the second page of the menu under "AEB" on mine, probably named the same but in a different location on others. Bring the 3 points so that one is in the middle and the other two are at +2 and -2. First shot you shoot will be normal exposure, then overexposure, then underexposure. If you shoot with a remote it will take all 3 automatically. Obviously you want to use a tripod for this because the 3 images need to lineup perfectly.

Anyway this picture here illustrates what I was trying to get across.

In the original the room was detailed somewhat but the windows were overexposed and you couldn't see the buildings outside of them. I shot 3 exposures at +/- 2, merged them using Photomatix and actually toned down the saturation a bit (it was really whacky at default). The result is VERY close to what the real life scene looks like.



Nice HDR shot. So far I have been doing my HDRs with only a single RAW image and the results are so-so, it depends on the shot. The next time I'm out shooting I'm going to try bracketing shots instead.


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:


Originally Posted by *ecoyd1* 
500th post!

had to.

OT: Those look more like just shadow balanced or something, and their not really "true" HDR. Now that I think about it, Nikon has a similar feature called D-Lighting where you can manually lift the shadows or brighten the image. You can also add filter effects, crop, ect in camera.


Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Agreed, it's a nifty feature, but not what I would call HDR. Nikon's D-Lighting feature is right on the money for a comparison and probably a competing feature.

Here's an awesome HDR shot I found (too big to display):

http://www.rnrh.net/images/blog/hdr-..._forgotten.jpg

Apparently, what the camera does, is to look at the dark and light areas in a shot, determine the best degree of exposure for both individually, effectively expose two shots and then merge them into one to create higher dynamic range. Is that not, essentially, the HDR process? Expose for the highlights, expose for the shadows and then judiciously merge?

I know that, for really vivid HDR shots, photographers often create, up to seven different versions of the same shots and then manually merge them, controlling every aspect, like what elements of a shot to merge, in what direction, to what degree, etc. Like the shot linked to, these can create really surreal, artistic images.

If I've got the wrong idea here, don't hesitate to correct me! I'd rather be corrected and learn, than persist with a misconception!

Also, I've been looking into the 40D and I can honestly say I like it. The implementation of live view is much better than the K20D, it has much faster continuous shooting, the 40D's remote control via a PC is pretty cool and it just seems a very well constructed camera.

However, on the down side, it's image quality doesn't quite meet the K20Ds (in reviews I've seen) it's RGB noise is a little greater then the K20Ds and it's not quite as sharp and doesn't resolve quite as much detail. In addition, the dust management system isn't quite as good as the K20Ds either. Plus, it's 4.5 mega-pixels less than the K20D meaning that the K20D captures 44.5% more information, which really makes a difference; especially so if you want big prints (I do) and occasionally crop images to improve composition (which I also do). I could crop to improve composition and still end up with a 10 or 12 MP image. The less interpolation for big prints, the better.

The only camera I can see getting at the moment, other than the K20D, is the D300. It's probably the best camera I've researched and I'd be happy to loose 2.3 mega-pixels over the K20D, simply due to how excellently implemented every feature of the D300 seems to be.

The options are:

D300: ~ Â£1000 online in the UK
105mm Nikkor Macro VR lens ~ Â£450 online in the UK
18-200mm Nikkor VR lens ~ Â£400 online in the UK.

Total: ~ Â£1850 ($3640 USD)

The alternative is:

K20D: ~ Â£700 online in the UK.
105mm Sigma Macro ~ Â£300 online in the UK.
18-200mm Sigma ~ Â£250 online in the UK.

Total: ~ Â£1250 ($2460 USD)

Both the 105mm Sigma Macro and the 18-200mm Sigma lenses get good reviews (especially the macro lens), produce good results and are good value. For example, I've seen a comparison between the 18-200mm Sigma and Nikkor lenses and although the Nikkor is better, it's not hugely better. They're perfect for my needs. I could leave the 18-200mm on all the time and use it for everything other than macro and then swap over to the macro lens when I wanted to take macro shots.

With the money I'd save going with the K20D option, I could buy a bunch of assessories, including extra batteries, extra memory cards, a high quality MC Protector for both lenses, filters, another camera case (and sell the one I've got with my FZ50) and get a flashgun as well and still be under the cost of the D300 option. I could also use my existing SD and SDHC cards with the K20D. I could even get a third lens for really wide-angle if I wanted.

With the D300 option, I'd be on an extremely tight budget. In fact, I'm not even sure I'll have the funds available to go with that option and I may have to save up some extra cash before a purchase. I'd have to make do with much more limited assessors to start and I'd probably have to end up buying them over time. Those accessories would have to include memory cards as well, as the D300 uses compact flash, which I don't have and which is about 2x the cost of SDHC. Also, with flashguns coming in at around Â£300 online in the UK, I could forget getting one of those up front. However, the D300 is a better camera.

I'd appreciate some constructive criticism on the options.

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Highly-Annoyed*


Apparently, what the camera does, is to look at the dark and light areas in a shot, determine the best degree of exposure for both individually, effectively expose two shots and then merge them into one to create higher dynamic range. Is that not, essentially, the HDR process? Expose for the highlights, expose for the shadows and then judiciously merge?

I know that, for really vivid HDR shots, photographers often create, up to seven different versions of the same shots and then manually merge them, controlling every aspect, like what elements of a shot to merge, in what direction, to what degree, etc. Like the shot linked to, these can create really surreal, artistic images.

If I've got the wrong idea here, don't hesitate to correct me! I'd rather be corrected and learn, than persist with a misconception!

Also, I've been looking into the 40D and I can honestly say I like it. The implementation of live view is much better than the K20D, it has much faster continuous shooting, the 40D's remote control via a PC is pretty cool and it just seems a very well constructed camera.

However, on the down side, it's image quality doesn't quite meet the K20Ds (in reviews I've seen) it's RGB noise is a little greater then the K20Ds and it's not quite as sharp and doesn't resolve quite as much detail. In addition, the dust management system isn't quite as good as the K20Ds either. Plus, it's 4.5 mega-pixels less than the K20D meaning that the K20D captures 44.5% more information, which really makes a difference; especially so if you want big prints (I do) and occasionally crop images to improve composition (which I also do). I could crop to improve composition and still end up with a 10 or 12 MP image. The less interpolation for big prints, the better.

The only camera I can see getting at the moment, other than the K20D, is the D300. It's probably the best camera I've researched and I'd be happy to loose 2.3 mega-pixels over the K20D, simply due to how excellently implemented every feature of the D300 seems to be.

The options are:

D300: ~ Â£1000 online in the UK
105mm Nikkor Macro VR lens ~ Â£450 online in the UK
18-200mm Nikkor VR lens ~ Â£400 online in the UK.

Total: ~ Â£1850 ($3640 USD)

The alternative is:

K20D: ~ Â£700 online in the UK.
105mm Sigma Macro ~ Â£300 online in the UK.
18-200mm Sigma ~ Â£250 online in the UK.

Total: ~ Â£1250 ($2460 USD)

Both the 105mm Sigma Macro and the 18-200mm Sigma lenses get good reviews (especially the macro lens), produce good results and are good value. For example, I've seen a comparison between the 18-200mm Sigma and Nikkor lenses and although the Nikkor is better, it's not hugely better. They're perfect for my needs. I could leave the 18-200mm on all the time and use it for everything other than macro and then swap over to the macro lens when I wanted to take macro shots.

With the money I'd save going with the K20D option, I could buy a bunch of assessors, including extra batteries, extra memory cards, a high quality MC Protector for both lenses, filters, another camera case (and sell the one I've got with my FZ50) and get a flashgun as well and still be under the cost of the D300 option. I could also use my existing SD and SDHC cards with the K20D. I could even get a third lens for really wide-angle if I wanted.

With the D300 option, I'd be on an extremely tight budget. In fact, I'm not even sure I'll have the funds available to go with that option and I may have to save up some extra cash before a purchase. I'd have to make do with much more limited assessors to start and I'd probably have to end up buying them over time. Those accessories would have to include memory cards as well, as the D300 uses compact flash, which I don't have and which is about 2x the cost of SDHC. Also, with flashguns coming in at around Â£300 online in the UK, I could forget getting one of those up front. However, the D300 is a better camera.

Iâ€™d appreciate some constructive criticism on the options.

Highly-Annoyed


Well if we're going to get into semantics, then yes, what the K20D does amounts to HDR. However, I don't think that it can match what manual exposure blending with software can produce. If it actually can, please do post some shots when and if you get the camera.

And regarding CCD resolution, 15 megapixels is rather superfluous. If you are looking to make a print at enormous proportions, on the order of 10 feet on side or more, then it would benefit. 10 megapixels will produce very large prints. In fact I had a 30" x 40" canvas print made from a 3 MP image from and it looks fine.

Inflated CCD resolutions on cameras are mostly for market appeal. However, a large resolution does allow you have more detail in 100% crop, so that is a benefit.

I think your plan to get the K20D is better. Although it's a very good camera, over a $1000 more for a D300 setup is a lot. If you can justify it financially and think that you will have the wherewithal for future upgrades, then go for the D300. I knew going into DSLR that I couldn't justify buying a really expensive body, so the XTi was as much as I cold afford, though in hindsight I wish I had held out for the XSi.


----------



## .Style

Hey guys sorry to jack this thread but i though it would be better here than a whole new thread...I want to get a digital camera...I have approximately ~Â£100 to spend..could you guys point me in a good direction?

Here are some sites you could look at for me









www.scan.co.uk
www.ebuyer.com
www.argos.co.uk

dont really know any others...thanks for your help


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *.Style*


Hey guys sorry to jack this thread but i though it would be better here than a whole new thread...I want to get a digital camera...I have approximately ~Â£100 to spend..could you guys point me in a good direction?

Here are some sites you could look at for me









www.scan.co.uk
www.ebuyer.com
www.argos.co.uk

dont really know any others...thanks for your help










If you can find it at a UK reseller, the Fuji Finepix S700 is a good camera for the money and your budget. Also, a Canon Powershot S3 is a good choice although it is slightly more than your budget. Otherwise your budget will limit you to a compact/ultra compact camera.


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Well if we're going to get into semantics, then yes, what the K20D does amounts to HDR. However, I don't think that it can match what manual exposure blending with software can produce. If it actually can, please do post some shots when and if you get the camera.

And regarding CCD resolution, 15 megapixels is rather superfluous. If you are looking to make a print at enormous proportions, on the order of 10 feet on side or more, then it would benefit. 10 megapixels will produce very large prints. In fact I had a 30" x 40" canvas print made from a 3 MP image from and it looks fine.

Inflated CCD resolutions on cameras are mostly for market appeal. However, a large resolution does allow you have more detail in 100% crop, so that is a benefit.

I think your plan to get the K20D is better. Although it's a very good camera, over a $1000 more for a D300 setup is a lot. If you can justify it financially and think that you will have the wherewithal for future upgrades, then go for the D300. I knew going into DSLR that I couldn't justify buying a really expensive body, so the XTi was as much as I cold afford, though in hindsight I wish I had held out for the XSi.


Thanks for your reply.

Yeah, I'm keen on logic; linguistic, formal, informal, I just like it







.

I totally agree with respect to HDR. There's no way the in-camera HDR can compete with what photographers can achieve with exposure bracketing and/or RAW processing and software. For one, a lot of photographers use many more than just two exposures to create the HDR effect and some may use different colour saturations to combine also. All this adds up to a much more impressive and artistic result that the camera alone certainly can't compete with.

Having said that though, HDR, straight out of the camera, regardless of how un-artistic it might be, is a pretty handy feature that I'm sure will save a lot of detail from being lost in over and under-exposed areas, in high contrast shots.

I had a 10MP shot printed on canvas at 24 inch x 36 inch and it looked pretty good when you stood 5 or 6 feet away. But even at this size, with 10MP, interpolation (up-scaling) is required, which (as you probably know) essentially "makes up" new pixels based on information regarding the surrounding pixels and can lead to soft edges and poorly defined details. Even 14.6MP would require interpolation for 24x36 inch, but a fair bit less than 10MP, which would result in a crisper image. That's assuming you use the lowest PPI most photographers seem to recommend of 240PPI. If you drop the PPI down to 145 or so, you can print 14.6MP at 24"x36" with no interpolation, but I don't know how coarse that would look from three or four feet away...

What really interests me about the 14.6MP, is the ability to crop where I like and still end up with a good size image for large prints. I'm not great at photography, so I often need to "fix" shots in post production, which can entail cropping to produce a more pleasing composition. If I lop off 25% of a 14.6MP image, I'm still left with a little over 10MP to print. If I do the same with 10MP, I'm down to 7.5MP, which requires more interpolation resulting in a softening of the image, or significant lowering of the DPI and the resultant coarseness of an image, in a large print.

I may like to print 30"x40", 40"x60", or even bigger if possible, so, although that can be done with interpolation and lowering of the DPI, the more mega-pixels you have, the less of those up-scaling techniques are required and the more crisp and faithful the final print can be.

I'm definitely swayed towards the K20D for many reasons, not least that it'll probably be more realistic for me to afford it. Having looked into several alternatives though, I have to say the D300 looks very nice indeed. Even with 18.7% fewer pixels than the K20D, it's just seems a much better executed tool, put together well, with the end user in mind. The K20D is a good camera and good value, but the live view seems a bit rubbish in the reviews I've seen and I would probably use that for Macro shooting more than the viewfinder. The D300's live view is really well implemented and thought through, as the whole camera seems to be.

I guess I'll have to see how my finances go. I'm expecting a lump sum of cash within the next couple of months or so, but I don't know how much yet. If it's better than I expect, I could opt for the D300, if it's what I expect, or not as good, the K20D. I have to say, I'm just blown away by how professional the D300 looks and how well executed the camera is. I'd even be willing to give up in-camera IS (and take on the extra expense of lenses) to get one if I could, so impressed have I been.

Anyway, thanks to you and other's who've helped me. I appreciate your advice and guidance. I think I will pop down to one of the local camera shops and have a look at some of the stock first hand, to get a feel for the cameras.

Thanks all!









Highly-Annoyed


----------



## .Style

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


If you can find it at a UK reseller, the Fuji Finepix S700 is a good camera for the money and your budget. Also, a Canon Powershot S3 is a good choice although it is slightly more than your budget. Otherwise your budget will limit you to a compact/ultra compact camera.


Ok i know my budget isnt great, im not loking for a SLR or w/e they are..just a digital camera with decent features...

edit: just checked out the fuji finepix s700 and it looks good...although i was more looking for a small digital camera..compact...jus wanted to know what was good and what was not..although thanks for the suggestions....anyway is that fuji s700 really good for that price? the specs look good....anyone else had expereiences with it before?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *.Style*


Ok i know my budget isnt great, im not loking for a SLR or w/e they are..just a digital camera with decent features...

edit: just checked out the fuji finepix s700 and it looks good...although i was more looking for a small digital camera..compact...jus wanted to know what was good and what was not..although thanks for the suggestions....anyway is that fuji s700 really good for that price? the specs look good....anyone else had expereiences with it before?


mugan, the guy who started this thread has an S700 I believe, go back and look at his shots. Here's a review on it:
http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/fu...x_s700-review/
Basically, for the price, it's superb, but definitely not the best ultra zoom you can get.

If you want a good ultra compact, I would recommend anything from Canon's SD lineup, particularly the SD1000 or SD1100IS which are the fastest power on to shot in their class.

For compacts, anything from Canon's A lineup is decent the Canon A590 IS is a good choice as is the SD870 IS.

I'm not just being partial to Canon either. It's just that Canon is currently making the most quality for value ultra compacts and compacts these days. Sony, Panasonic and Fuji make very decent compacts but they get pricey, as the compact size category is becoming increasingly more expensive and the low end cheaper cameras are being relegated to the ultra compact range.

I think that if you confined your search to Canon, Fuji, Panasonic or Sony you can't go wrong, just read reviews. I would avoid Nikon, Kodak, Minolta, Olympus, HP and Casio. Not that they're all bad, but I consistent read positive reviews for compact and ultra compact cameras from the first four brands I mentioned.

A couple of good review sites:
www.dpreview.com
www.dcresource.com

Hope this helps.


----------



## ecoyd1

Canon is superior in the point and shoot market.


----------



## BrinNutz

I guess I'll join.

Canon 400D ($319 brand new)
Canon BG-E3 Battery Grip w/ 2 NLB-2H Batteries (CL steal for grip, battery, and Canon remote for $95)
Canon 18-55 IS
Canon 70-200mm f/4L w/ hood, filters
Canon 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS w/ hood, filters
Multiple Filters
Canon Wireless Remote
Canon Wired Remote
Tripod (awaiting a nice one)
Manfrotto 679B Monopod w. 3232 head
SanDisk Extreme III 4gb CF card
Lowepro Fastpack 250

P&S - Fujifilm S700 (paid $80 brand new!)










Now for some examples:
18-55 IS:










70-200 f/4L:










100-400 L IS (Came out a little overexposed, and I didn't shoot in RAW, so I can't adjust it too much):


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *BrinNutz*


I guess I'll join.

Canon 400D ($319 brand new)
Canon BG-E3 Battery Grip w/ 2 NLB-2H Batteries (CL steal for grip, battery, and Canon remote for $95)
Canon 18-55 IS
Canon 70-200mm f/4L w/ hood, filters
Canon 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS w/ hood, filters
Multiple Filters
Canon Wireless Remote
Canon Wired Remote
Tripod (awaiting a nice one)
Manfrotto 679B Monopod w. 3232 head
SanDisk Extreme III 4gb CF card
Lowepro Fastpack 250

P&S - Fujifilm S700 (paid $80 brand new!)

Now for some examples:
18-55 IS:

70-200 f/4L:

100-400 L IS (Came out a little overexposed, and I didn't shoot in RAW, so I can't adjust it too much):


Welcome and nice hardware! Although the 400D is an excellent camera (I love mine), I would think that someone with two L class lenses would have a better camera body, like a 40D or 5D. The lenses costs more individually than your camera body (except for the kit lensof course)!


----------



## BrinNutz

I'm still new to the whole thing. only a month and a half in. I found that for my photos I needed a 400mm lens, and this was the best option.

While about 2 weeks after getting it, I was already in M mode. =)

I want a 5D or a Mark III, but that won't be for awhile. Full Frame is the next step, after I pick up the Canon 10-22 and 580EX II flash.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *BrinNutz* 
I'm still new to the whole thing. only a month and a half in. I found that for my photos I needed a 400mm lens, and this was the best option.

While about 2 weeks after getting it, I was already in M mode. =)

I want a 5D or a Mark III, but that won't be for awhile. Full Frame is the next step, after I pick up the Canon 10-22 and 580EX II flash.

Quite a price difference between the two, and size for that matter. The Mark III body alone weighs 3 lbs! The 5D is a bit long in the tooth having been released in '05.

The Mark III is the God of DSLRs. I hope you get it so I cna be very envious!


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Just to help keep things rolling along, here's a snail







.










Hehe







.

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## .Style

take its shell off then pour salt on it...then take a pic


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

thats just cruel.


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Yeah, poor ol' snail. Having said that, the little so-and-so wouldn't stay still for me. Kept "running" away from the lighting! It was tough to get any good shots at all and the one I posted was one the best, of a bad bunch...









Still, shell wrenching and salt seem a bit harsh







.

Does anybody know of a half decent 14-140mm lens? I'm still looking at 18-200mm as a sort of "all-rounder" that I can keep on a DSLR most of the time, but if I had a choice, I'd rather have a little less zoom and more wide-angle. 14-140mm would be kinda' perfect for me.

Anybody know of a good 14-140mm lens? Do they even exist?

Thanks!









Highly-Annoyed


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

not that i know of, most would have a 12-24 or 10-24 or something similar, but going from a wide to that much of a zoom i don't think exist and i think would be tricky to make without a lot of distortion at either end seeing as how spherical the front element is for most wide angle lenses.
i could be wrong, would like to hear some other opinions.


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:


Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie* 
not that i know of, most would have a 12-24 or 10-24 or something similar, but going from a wide to that much of a zoom i don't think exist and i think would be tricky to make without a lot of distortion at either end seeing as how spherical the front element is for most wide angle lenses.
i could be wrong, would like to hear some other opinions.

Yeah, you could well be correct. I'm still in the process of researching lenses and photography in general, so my knowledge of these things is currently a little lacking. 18-200 is apparently pretty good, although lenses that specialise in telephoto, or wide-angle will probably always be better than ones that try to do both.

If 14-140mm were possible though, I'd find it more usable as a general "all-rounder" than 18-200mm. Still, if it doesn't exist, I cant have one!









Highly-Annoyed


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

ya, i have an 18-200, i love it, my next will be a 12-24 once i get the funds, with the two i really dont have a need for many more lenses, besides a fisheye or a super zoom.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Highly-Annoyed* 
Yeah, poor ol' snail. Having said that, the little so-and-so wouldn't stay still for me. Kept "running" away from the lighting! It was tough to get any good shots at all and the one I posted was one the best, of a bad bunch...









Still, shell wrenching and salt seem a bit harsh







.

Does anybody know of a half decent 14-140mm lens? I'm still looking at 18-200mm as a sort of "all-rounder" that I can keep on a DSLR most of the time, but if I had a choice, I'd rather have a little less zoom and more wide-angle. 14-140mm would be kinda' perfect for me.

Anybody know of a good 14-140mm lens? Do they even exist?

Thanks!









Highly-Annoyed

Nice snail! I hope the weather is nice this weekend so I can get back out to the nature reserve.

Most zooms with focal lengths that wide have very small ranges, like 10-20mm or 14-24. I think that Nikon and Sigma's 18-200mm lens has the widest angle with the greatest zoom that I'm aware of.

I would just get a dedicated wide angle lens if I were you. Start with the 18-200m and see how it fits. Sigma makes a reasonably priced 10 -20mm lens. You're likely to get better performance out of a dedicated wide angle lens, particularly in the f-stop. Personally, I've rarely been in a situation where I needed a super wide angle. More zoom, of course.

Trying to find an "all around" SLR lens is impossible, but that's half the fun of SLR!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Ok, critique my HDR please. The first is the original image converted from RAW. Only the sharpness and saturation have been adjusted. There wasn't much difference between the sky and ground in the original image, so the effect of the HDR is less pronounced. I did this with 5 different images all from a single RAW image.


----------



## ecoyd1

sdsd


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Nice snail! I hope the weather is nice this weekend so I can get back out to the nature reserve.

Most zooms with focal lengths that wide have very small ranges, like 10-20mm or 14-24. I think that Nikon and Sigma's 18-200mm lens has the widest angle with the greatest zoom that I'm aware of.

I would just get a dedicated wide angle lens if I were you. Start with the 18-200m and see how it fits. Sigma makes a reasonably priced 10 -20mm lens. You're likely to get better performance out of a dedicated wide angle lens, particularly in the f-stop. Personally, I've rarely been in a situation where I needed a super wide angle. More zoom, of course.

Trying to find an "all around" SLR lens is impossible, but that's half the fun of SLR!


I was thinking about getting three main lenses, all Sigma, all with good reviews from multiple sources:

1. Wide-angle. 10-20mm. ~ Â£290 ($570 USD)
2. General Purpose. 18-200mm. ~ Â£290 ($570 USD)
3. Macro. 105mm. ~ Â£270 ($530 USD)

...add to that, either:

a D300 ~ Â£1000 ($1970 USD)
or a K20D ~ Â£700 ($1380 USD)

...for a total of either ~ Â£1850 ($3650 USD) for the D300 set-up (plus the cost of in-lens VR/IS), 
...or ~ Â£1550 ($3050 USD) for the K20D set-up.

This way, I could cover everything I'm likely to need for shooting in the foreseeable future, without having to swap lenses too often, or have any major purchases to make after the initial buying spree. The 18-200mm isn't _super_ (supposedly) at 18mm, or 200mm, but it's not bad either (in fact, it's relatively good for the range it offers) and in-between the extremes, where I'm going to be using it most, it's supposed to be very good.

Of course, all these plans depend on cash and if things don't go as well I might like, I could see myself just getting a D300 with one lens (possibly the Nikkor 18-200mm as it's a tiny bit better than it's Sigma counterpart), or the K20D with two lenses, the 18-200mm and the 105mm Macro.

What do you think? Do these options seem like good set-ups to start with? Or are there better alternatives?

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## BrinNutz

Well, I can now add the Canon 10-22mm to my list, and a Canon 580EX II Flash.

Totaling $920 shipped, new.

New from B&H, even after the rebate on the flash, would have cost me $200 more for the exact same parts (not imports, btw).


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Highly-Annoyed* 
I was thinking about getting three main lenses, all Sigma, all with good reviews from multiple sources:

1. Wide-angle. 10-20mm. ~ Â£290 ($570 USD)
2. General Purpose. 18-200mm. ~ Â£290 ($570 USD)
3. Macro. 105mm. ~ Â£270 ($530 USD)

...add to that, either:

a D300 ~ Â£1000 ($1970 USD)
or a K20D ~ Â£700 ($1380 USD)

...for a total of either ~ Â£1850 ($3650 USD) for the D300 set-up (plus the cost of in-lens VR/IS),
...or ~ Â£1550 ($3050 USD) for the K20D set-up.

This way, I could cover everything I'm likely to need for shooting in the foreseeable future, without having to swap lenses too often, or have any major purchases to make after the initial buying spree. The 18-200mm isn't _super_ (supposedly) at 18mm, or 200mm, but it's not bad either (in fact, it's relatively good for the range it offers) and in-between the extremes, where I'm going to be using it most, it's supposed to be very good.

Of course, all these plans depend on cash and if things don't go as well I might like, I could see myself just getting a D300 with one lens (possibly the Nikkor 18-200mm as it's a tiny bit better than it's Sigma counterpart), or the K20D with two lenses, the 18-200mm and the 105mm Macro.

What do you think? Do these options seem like good set-ups to start with? Or are there better alternatives?

Highly-Annoyed

Well if you go for the D300 you will get a better performing camera, but will need to spend the extra money on Nikon VR lenses. I say try the Pentax with the Sigma lenses, I bet it will be a nice setup for a lot less money.

And the 105mm macro is a popular focal length because of how close it gets, but you should know that it is *very* shaky and hard to keep still hand held or even with a monopod. I tried out 60mm, 85mm and 105mm in my camera shop and went for a 60mm because I could keep it the steadiest and it still gets plenty close up. Just a thought.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *ecoyd1* 
I think you should have shot WAY overexposed for one of the images to get the shadows in the trees brighter.

But overall, the sky looks pretty good.

I tried that, but I couldn't keep the sky from getting blown out. However I didn't tweak the image much, just added the layers and the mask and hit Ctrl + S. But you're right about the shadows, they need to be brighter, I will give it another shot.

I'm suprised though how well and HDR can be done with a single RAW image. I've tried bracketing and RAW method with equal results.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *BrinNutz* 
Well, I can now add the Canon 10-22mm to my list, and a Canon 580EX II Flash.

Totaling $920 shipped, new.

New from B&H, even after the rebate on the flash, would have cost me $200 more for the exact same parts (not imports, btw).

Dropping some serious dough on the camera setup! Post some shots from the WA lens when you can.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Highy-Annoyed, I came across a Swedish site with a good review of the K20D. They have some good ISO shots, click on "Testbilder":

http://www.cyberphoto.se/?http://www...icle=K20D18200


----------



## BrinNutz

Don't worry, I will!! I don't know when it will get here though. So, we'll have to see!!!


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Well if you go for the D300 you will get a better performing camera, but will need to spend the extra money on Nikon VR lenses. I say try the Pentax with the Sigma lenses, I bet it will be a nice setup for a lot less money.

And the 105mm macro is a popular focal length because of how close it gets, but you should know that it is *very* shaky and hard to keep still hand held or even with a monopod. I tried out 60mm, 85mm and 105mm in my camera shop and went for a 60mm because I could keep it the steadiest and it still gets plenty close up. Just a thought.


Yeah, I've revised my list again and for the D300, will go with the Nikkor 105mm Micro, VR. The Sigma version doesn't have OS afaik, so it's only good on a camera with in-body IS, like the K20D.

Nikon D300 body - Â£1,000 / $1,978
General Purpose - Sigma 18-200mm f3.5/6.3 OS HSM [Nikon Fit] - Â£340 / $673
Macro & Portrait - Nikkor AF-S 105mm f/2.8G ED-IF VR Micro - Â£420 / $831
Landscape & Big Group - Sigma 10-20mm f4-5.6 EX DC HSM [Nikon fit] - Â£340 / $673
Total: Â£2,100 / $4,154

Pentax K20D body - Â£700 / $1,385
General Purpose-Sigma 18-200mm f3.5/6.3 [Pentax Fit] -Â£270 / $534
Macro & Portrait-Sigma 105mm Macro f2.8 [Penax Fit]-Â£320 / $633
Landscape & Big Group -Sigma 10-20mm f4-5.6 HSM [Pentax Fit] -Â£290 / $574
Total: Â£1,580 / $3,125

These lists are still not definitive though. I'm still open to suggestions as the more I learn the more possibilities I see. As always, cash will be the ultimate decider though. I'm hoping to have somewhere around 2K to spend, but it could be a lot less. Obviously, I'd rather get the best I can afford, but I need to consider all the extras that increase costs, like filters, memory cards, batteries, high quality MC Protectors, etc, etc... I need to cost it all out thoroughly really. Handy I have about eight weeks until I'm able to actually make the purchase, if all goes well.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Highy-Annoyed, I came across a Swedish site with a good review of the K20D. They have some good ISO shots, click on "Testbilder":

http://www.cyberphoto.se/?http://www...icle=K20D18200


Yeah, I've read about 10 or so reviews on the K20D and seen lots of ISO shots with full size and 100% crops. Thanks for the "heads-up" though







. I'm fairly satisfied that the K20D is a good camera for the money. The only thing I don't like really, is the live view implementation. It's not very good and I'd probably use that to compose macro shots more than the viewfinder.

It's not just the composition, its the manual focusing, or refinement of the auto-focus when taking macros that the live view is also useful for. You just can't do it with the K20Ds implementation (at least in the reviews I've seen), so you're stuck with the viewfinder. No matter how good the viewfinder may be (and it is a good) I'm not sure I'd find using it for macro very practical. Still, I guess I should give it a try with my FZ50 and see if I could get used to macro shooting through the viewfinder.

The K20D has some advantages over the D300, not least, I was surprised to learn, it's continuous shooting speed... The D300 is a lot faster when shooting JPEG, but when you shoot RAW, it's FPS drops below that of the K20D's 3FPS when shooting RAW. As I always shoot RAW+JPEG, I'd actually get faster continuous shooting with the K20D, over the (43% more expensive) D300.

If I can get past the macro shooting with the viewfinder, I still think the K20D is a good choice and would be a massive step up from the super zoom I have now. Still, despite the K20Ds faster continuous RAW shooting and higher mega-pixels, the D300 is still the better camera, with a very well implemented live view system and I'd like to make a sound investment for the future.

I don't know. It's a tough decision, but I have a feeling that finances will make it for me







.

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## hi-zaki

My Cameras,

Nikon D70
Nikon D200
Nikon D300

Nikon NIKKOR VR 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED
Nikon NIKKOR 28mm f/2.8D
Nikon NIKKOR 135mm f/2D
Nikon NIKKOR 300mm f/2.8G IF-ED
Nikon NIKKOR 17-35mm f/2.8D IF-ED
Nikon NIKKOR VR 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G IF-ED

I spent a small fortune on lenses...


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *hi-zaki* 
My Cameras,

Nikon D70
Nikon D200
Nikon D300

Nikon NIKKOR VR 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED
Nikon NIKKOR 28mm f/2.8D
Nikon NIKKOR 135mm f/2D
Nikon NIKKOR 300mm f/2.8G IF-ED
Nikon NIKKOR 17-35mm f/2.8D IF-ED
Nikon NIKKOR VR 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G IF-ED

I spent a small fortune on lenses...

Christ, I bet you did, and on the *three* DSLR bodies as well. Welcome! Feel free to post some shots!


----------



## hi-zaki

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Christ, I bet you did, and on the *three* DSLR bodies as well. Welcome! Feel free to post some shots!

Thanks









I'll post shots sometimes lol.

Most of my shots can be viewed at http://thephotographerof08.deviantart.com/gallery/ , at least some of the better ones lol.


----------



## ecoyd1

Heres a quick rose from today:


----------



## christian_piper

Nice Rose!!! Great detail!!!

Shots from this morning:



















And not in nature, but oh well. Blurry.... But again oh well. Cool looking little guy.


----------



## catmmm

i have a canon sd870 is
best camera i've ever owned


----------



## christian_piper

Quote:



Originally Posted by *catmmm*


i have a canon sd870 is
best camera i've ever owned











Welcome! Canon is great!

Wait.. I just bought a Nikon.... 0.0

As to what my new gear will be:

Nikon D60 (Features DO make the slight price increase from the D40X worth it) with VR Kit 18-55. 
Old Pre AI 50mm manual lens
Cheap manual Ebay Macro Extension tubes
52mm Hoya Polarizer.

Getting shipped!


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

OK guys. I've been looking into some easy HDR imaging, using the GIMP and I've had a go at creating some additional dynamic range in a shot I took on the beach a while ago.

Here's the original image...










...and here's the HDR version.










Now I know it's not super-easy to see all the differences between them (although some are obvious), so I put a page up on my web site with a mouse-over to compare the two images.

Here's the link! The mouse-over is quite revealing. Which do you guys think looks better? The original, or the HDR? Personally, I prefer the HDR, but again I think it's a matter of individual taste. What do you guys think?

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

i prefer the HDR by a long shot, nice job








what technique did you use?









just saw it on the page, ill have to give it a try.


----------



## hi-zaki

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Highly-Annoyed*


OK guys. I've been looking into some easy HDR imaging, using the GIMP and I've had a go at creating some additional dynamic range in a shot I took on the beach a while ago.

Here's the original image...










...and here's the HDR version.










Now I know it's not super-easy to see all the differences between them (although some are obvious), so I put a page up on my web site with a mouse-over to compare the two images.

Here's the link! The mouse-over is quite revealing. Which do you guys think looks better? The original, or the HDR? Personally, I prefer the HDR, but again I think it's a matter of individual taste. What do you guys think?

Highly-Annoyed


Interesting image, nice lighting once it was 'shopped some. I have CS3 so it's a bit harder to get it to look good.


----------



## DigitalSonata

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Highly-Annoyed* 
OK guys. I've been looking into some easy HDR imaging, using the GIMP and I've had a go at creating some additional dynamic range in a shot I took on the beach a while ago.

Here's the original image...










...and here's the HDR version.










Now I know it's not super-easy to see all the differences between them (although some are obvious), so I put a page up on my web site with a mouse-over to compare the two images.

Here's the link! The mouse-over is quite revealing. Which do you guys think looks better? The original, or the HDR? Personally, I prefer the HDR, but again I think it's a matter of individual taste. What do you guys think?

Highly-Annoyed

I like the sharpness of the HDR one, and the color above the sea-line is nice the blues on the rock are also nice, and overall the shot is lighter than the original (I'd say it has a bit too much magenta though). The original is clearer by the ocean line (I like the contrast), the greens on the moss are richer, and the blues are a bit better on the rocks, the sand is also clearer, but the shot is a _tad_ too dark. I'd say I like the original better.


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:


Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie* 
i prefer the HDR by a long shot, nice job








what technique did you use?









just saw it on the page, ill have to give it a try.

Yeah, It's actually a pretty simple process. You just run the exposure blend plugin from GIMP, select three different exposures and blend them for some extra dynamic range. It seemed to work pretty well.

The only problem I found was that the selective/med and selective/high blur type/edge protection crashed the plugin, but it is free and open-source after all, so it's hard to grumble too much







. You can either use no edge protection, or low edge protection without problems though and I didn't notice any decrease in sharpness from the original using the low setting, so I don't think it has too much of an impact anyway.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *hi-zaki* 
Interesting image, nice lighting once it was 'shopped some. I have CS3 so it's a bit harder to get it to look good.

Yeah, I think it's worth getting acquainted with GIMP if you can make the time. It's not too hard to get used to and it's pretty powerful, as well as completely free. The HDR plugin might not be the best tool, or create the best result, but it's pretty quick, easy to use and free. I just under and over exposed an image by 2/3rds of an EV each way (using a RAW processor) and used the resultant images (including the "normally" exposed shot) to have the plugin create some extra dynamic range. I might try 2EV each way and see what I get.

Give yourself 20 minutes to play around with GIMP each day and you'll soon pick up enough to start unlocking it's powerful myriad of functionality.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *DigitalSonata* 
I like the sharpness of the HDR one, and the color above the sea-line is nice the blues on the rock are also nice, and overall the shot is lighter than the original (I'd say it has a bit too much magenta though). The original is clearer by the ocean line (I like the contrast), the greens on the moss are richer, and the blues are a bit better on the rocks, the sand is also clearer, but the shot is a _tad_ too dark. I'd say I like the original better.

Yeah, some people prefer more contrast it would seem. I agree with your assessment though. I guess I need to play about a bit more to perfect the process.

I think everybody would benefit from giving GIMP and the exposure blend plugin a try. If you shoot in RAW, you can (most likely) under and over expose the in RAW processing, but otherwise you might want to give exposure bracketing a try.

I wonder if this same process would work with colour saturation, either on it's own or in conjunction with different exposures? I'll have to play around a bit and see what i can do







.

Thanks for your input guys!









Highly-Annoyed


----------



## ecoyd1

asdasd


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ecoyd1*


Guys I am redesigning my website.

Here is a basic mock-up with random pictures:

Milophoto


Hey, looks good. I've got a few basic web sites kicking around and have built one fully functional commercial web site for a business I tried a couple of years ago.

I think the key is to come up with a simple design theme and then be consistent with it. Simplicity is always good for web design imo. Complicated graphics and/or site navigation often leads to people navigating away.

What you've got now looks good though!

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## ecoyd1

Cool thank you!


----------



## Whyifide

Add me. I have a NikonD50


































Some of my photos, all taken with my D50 ;o


----------



## christian_piper

Welcome Whyifide! I especially love your second shot! Nice!


----------



## mugan23

welcome to all the new guys i missed and sorry it took so long to add you, at&t has been updating there net or something so my connection has been on and off,


----------



## Marin

How I wish I could get my hands on a DSLR. Going from an SLR to a point and shoot sucks. Hopefully I can get one at the end of this summer.


----------



## ecoyd1

sdsd


----------



## Whyifide

Thanks guys. For some reason people prefer that shot in black and white than in color.


----------



## hi-zaki

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Whyifide*


Thanks guys. For some reason people prefer that shot in black and white than in color.


It has a better effect in black and white, and the long exposure means a black and white image has more detail and less noise than a similar one in color.


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

To help keep things bumping along, here's a shot I took today, of what I believe to be a Dragonfly.










The above image was cropped down to 2.4MP, from 10MP, then scaled down for the forum.

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## christian_piper

Sweet! !I doubt it's a dragonfly..... Something like it... But anyway, GREAT macro! So sharp! And the colors also.... Beautiful.

So: How do you guys clean your lenses? My G9 could use a cleaning... and I want to know how to mantain my SLR lenses scratch free.. Thanks!


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *hi-zaki*


It has a better effect in black and white, and the long exposure means a black and white image has more detail and less noise than a similar one in color.


how do you figure? maybe if he was using a low ISO b&w film, but on a dslr you are taking the picture in color and simply converting to b&w, you cant get more detail then the original, although some times details stand out more in b&w


----------



## christian_piper

My first HDR attempt- Unimpressive, but the HDR part of it came out quite nicely I think... Well not HDA- It's in GIMP- Just exposure blending using the script linked a few pages back:









And here is the lighting context.


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:


Originally Posted by *christian_piper* 
Sweet! !I doubt it's a dragonfly..... Something like it... But anyway, GREAT macro! So sharp! And the colors also.... Beautiful.

So: How do you guys clean your lenses? My G9 could use a cleaning... and I want to know how to mantain my SLR lenses scratch free.. Thanks!

I'm pleased you liked the shot. I was quite pleased to snap the little chap.

I'm pretty sure it is a Dragonfly in the picture. After having a quick look online, it looks like there are quite a few types of dragonfly and a few of the pics I saw look just like the little chap in the picture I posted. He was about two and a half inches long and had the four wings common to most (if not all) dragonflies as well as having a leg configuration and head and eyes that look uncannily like those that many dragonfly's have. Still, I'm not exactly an entomologist, so I could well be mistaken! I'm just pleased to have been able to capture his image







.

With regards to lens cleaning, I use (for my superzoom) a very soft, lens cleaning cloth, mostly. I bought a lens cleaning kit a while ago, which was pretty cheap and came with cleaning fluid and wipes etc. I also got a little, soft brush and a little device to rapidly blow small puffs of air onto a lens to move dust etc. You can pick these kinds of kits up pretty cheaply. Mostly I use the soft brush and cloth, which seems to clear most things up







. I'm pretty sure these things would be adequate for DSLR lenses. Although I'll no doubt be corrected if I'm in error with that assumption







!

Quote:


Originally Posted by *christian_piper* 
My first HDR attempt- Unimpressive, but the HDR part of it came out quite nicely I think... Well not HDA- It's in GIMP- Just exposure blending using the script linked a few pages back:

Hey, I'm pleased to see you gave the GIMP script a try! I was quite pleased with the results I got. You can also manually adjust the HDR effect, by viewing layers in GIMP (before saving and merging) and adjusting transparencies etc. I also found that giving images a tiny bit more contrast (around +5 to +15) after merging, actually helped to define the image better, without loosing a great deal (if any) detail in the dark and light areas.

I don't suppose you could post some before and after shots, so I could get an idea of how much of an impact you got from your use of the script? Also did you use exposure bracketing, or RAW processing to produce the three required images?

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## christian_piper

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Highly-Annoyed*


I'm pleased you liked the shot. I was quite pleased to snap the little chap.

I'm pretty sure it is a Dragonfly in the picture. After having a quick look online, it looks like there are quite a few types of dragonfly and a few of the pics I saw look just like the little chap in the picture I posted. He was about two and a half inches long and had the four wings common to most (if not all) dragonflies as well as having a leg configuration and head and eyes that look uncannily like those that many dragonfly's have. Still, I'm not exactly an entomologist, so I could well be mistaken! I'm just pleased to have been able to capture his image







.

With regards to lens cleaning, I use (for my superzoom) a very soft, lens cleaning cloth, mostly. I bought a lens cleaning kit a while ago, which was pretty cheap and came with cleaning fluid and wipes etc. I also got a little, soft brush and a little device to rapidly blow small puffs of air onto a lens to move dust etc. You can pick these kinds of kits up pretty cheaply. Mostly I use the soft brush and cloth, which seems to clear most things up







. I'm pretty sure these things would be adequate for DSLR lenses. Although I'll no doubt be corrected if I'm in error with that assumption







!

Hey, I'm pleased to see you gave the GIMP script a try! I was quite pleased with the results I got. You can also manually adjust the HDR effect, by viewing layers in GIMP (before saving and merging) and adjusting transparencies etc. I also found that giving images a tiny bit more contrast (around +5 to +15) after merging, actually helped to define the image better, without loosing a great deal (if any) detail in the dark and light areas.

I don't suppose you could post some before and after shots, so I could get an idea of how much of an impact you got from your use of the script? Also did you use exposure bracketing, or RAW processing to produce the three required images?

Highly-Annoyed



Ohh- At the dragonfly- It reminded me of these 1" long little things we have around here... which everyone calls something other than dragonflys./.. But I cant remember what.... Cool









Lens cleaning- I guess I'll pick up a kit then! Thanks!

And thanks for sharing the script! It is rather fun! That was done with manual bracketing and a tripod- Here is the normal exposure shot:
(COMING SHORTLY)

Also, after the merge, I found 100% worked best for all the layers- But I DID tweak the curves slightly to give it a bit yellower look instead of pure white- It gave it more depth. Its hard to tell at these small sizes- but the HDR you can see much more detail in the window, as well as into the doorknob-holes.... Here Ill put the 2 next to each other

















I am going to have to try some RAW HDR's too...


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:



Originally Posted by *christian_piper*


Here Ill put the 2 next to each other

I am going to have to try some RAW HDR's too...


Thanks for the comparison! Looks like it made a fairly big difference. I definitely prefer the HDR shot, lots more detail and more balanced overall exposure. Nice work







.

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## mugan23

my friends cat<i think am gonna gray scale it>








i was just testing my manual settings for the light and i actually got one good one of my new 8800gt


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Highly-Annoyed* 
Thanks for the comparison! Looks like it made a fairly big difference. I definitely prefer the HDR shot, lots more detail and more balanced overall exposure. Nice work







.

Highly-Annoyed

Thanks for the link the GIMP script. I love GIMP, so much that I uninstalled Paint Shop Pro







I've been doing HDRs manually with GIMP for a while now, but it's nice just to click a button and wait.

I'll be posting some HDRs soon..


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mugan23* 
my friends cat<i think am gonna gray scale it>
i was just testing my manual settings for the light and i actually got one good one of my new 8800gt









Just a tad bit of blur in that shot, but nice!

Now that you have a decent graphics card, post some benchies to replace those old 7 series benchies in your sig!


----------



## mugan23

u guys know how i can gray scale that cat but leave the eyes colored


----------



## mugan23

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Just a tad bit of blur in that shot, but nice!

Now that you have a decent graphics card, post some benchies to replace those old 7 series benchies in your sig!

hehe working on it am at 10900, i still need to get my vga cooler then after i will post my max hehe


----------



## max302

You guys, my D40 just arrived today! I'm getting it in my hands tomorrow, pics will be up fo sho.


----------



## catmmm

i went to this really cool place yesterday. and took a bunch of pics. here are a few of them


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *catmmm*


i went to this really cool place yesterday. and took a bunch of pics. here are a few of them


I like the contrast in the first shot.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *max302*


You guys, my D40 just arrived today! I'm getting it in my hands tomorrow, pics will be up fo sho.


Kit lens? Or did you get a better one?


----------



## mugan23

wow can some one explain hdr to me y is it so good looking


----------



## hi-zaki

Quote:


Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie* 
how do you figure? maybe if he was using a low ISO b&w film, but on a dslr you are taking the picture in color and simply converting to b&w, you cant get more detail then the original, although some times details stand out more in b&w

See, I say it like that because I moved from film to DSLR's. But yes, I meant that details tend to stand out better in black and white, hence the phrase (although I believe that is a reference to printing, but I may be wrong







).


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

gotcha, sorry if i came off rather harsh.
i went biking today, my first attempt at some action shots, i will upload in a few.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mugan23*


wow can some one explain hdr to me y is it so good looking


High Dynamic Range photography. It's a technique using software to approximate how the human eye sees. I just got done with these, although there are some that I think look better before HDR adjustments!

*Before:*








*After:*









*Before:*








*After:*









*Before:*








*After:*









*Before:*








*After:*









*Before:*








*After:*









*Before:*








*After:*


----------



## BrinNutz

Well, I was out walking along a tree line and stopped (I was looking for some owls). Something moved ever so slightly and and noticed it. Brought up the camera and snapped a few before he retreated back into his hole.










No PP on this one. Straight from the camera, how I like 'em.

Cropped:


----------



## hi-zaki

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
High Dynamic Range photography. It's a technique using software to approximate how the human eye sees. I just got done with these, although there are some that I think look better before HDR adjustments!


For some of them, you seem to have overcompensated for contrast maybe? I don't know, it seems to me that some are "washed out"? I think the originals were sharper, if darker.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *hi-zaki* 
For some of them, you seem to have overcompensated for contrast maybe? I don't know, it seems to me that some are "washed out"? I think the originals were sharper, if darker.

These are all done with GIMP's HDR script's default settings: three images at different exposures, the dark and the light added as layers with inverted layer masks.

Hmm, the term "washed out" means "over exposed" to me. I don't see what you think is over exposed? The originals are darker? - that's the point! HDR seeks to balance light and dark areas, just like the human eye would. Camera sensors can't evenly expose light and dark areas at the same time - thus the point of HDR.

And as I said, many of these I prefer out of the camera, particularly the sunset shots. I'm just showing what the GIMP script can do. There are a couple of stand alone HDR programs (Dynamic Photo HDR and Photomatix) that do auto tone mapping that I'm going to try with the same images and see if it yields better results


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

okay, so here is my picasa album, i uploaded 3 images from biking the yesterday,
http://picasaweb.google.ca/a.schub/Bikin
i have some im going to work on making an HDR of, i would resize and use image shack, but heading out biking all day agian, maybe some more to upload tonight!


----------



## BrinNutz

Where?


----------



## Burn

Went to the Sox game a couple days ago, I'll have some pictures in a few.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie*


okay, so here is my picasa album, i uploaded 3 images from biking the yesterday,
http://picasaweb.google.ca/a.schub/Bikin
i have some im going to work on making an HDR of, i would resize and use image shack, but heading out biking all day agian, maybe some more to upload tonight!


The second picture is a good candidate for HDR


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

w00t, just got home from about a 90k round bike trip, about 80k on road and 10 on trails.
7 hours, and got some awesome pics, once i am able to move i will head for my camera and upload a few


----------



## max302

Got my D40!

I'm still messing around with the settings, but this is one quick shot I took.



Seriously, I've never taken pictures so sharp. Can't wait to take this to the skate park.

Taken at like F4, how do I make it do F2.8? Even on Aperture Priority, it won't go that low.

Edit: Nvm, the lenses only does 3.5.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *max302* 
Got my D40!

I'm still messing around with the settings, but this is one quick shot I took.



Seriously, I've never taken pictures so sharp. Can't wait to take this to the skate park.

Taken at like F4, how do I make it do F2.8? Even on Aperture Priority, it won't go that low.

Edit: Nvm, the lenses only does 3.5.

What lens do you have? Most zooms don't go wider than f/3.5-3.6 or so, though a few go up to f/2.8 like Canon L lenses. If you want really wide apertures, you need a prime lens. My 50mm goes to f/1.4


----------



## christian_piper

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
What lens do you have? Most zooms don't go wider than f/3.5-3.6 or so, though a few go up to f/2.8 like Canon L lenses. If you want really wide apertures, you need a prime lens. My 50mm goes to f/1.4

I am guessing the 18-55 kit lens- which IS quite nice.

And ditto on the prime- I bought a manual Nikkor 50mm that goes to 1.8- $30 on ebay. Full manual, but meh. Its a great looking lens... (I get my D60 on Friday..)


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *christian_piper* 
I am guessing the 18-55 kit lens- which IS quite nice.

And ditto on the prime- I bought a manual Nikkor 50mm that goes to 1.8- $30 on ebay. Full manual, but meh. Its a great looking lens... (I get my D60 on Friday..)

That's why primes are great, they can be had for cheap. I could have gotten the Canon EF II 50mm f/1.8 ($50 brand new), but it didn't have a USM so I opted for the EF 50mm f/1.4 USM because of the USM and the extra f-stop, but I had to pay $280 for it! Worth it though, it focuses in an instant even in low light.


----------



## BrinNutz

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
That's why primes are great, they can be had for cheap. I could have gotten the Canon EF II 50mm f/1.8 ($50 brand new), but it didn't have a USM so I opted for the EF 50mm f/1.4 USM because of the USM and the extra f-stop, but I had to pay $280 for it! Worth it though, it focuses in an instant even in low light.

Not all primes are cheap!

Canon 200 f/2.8, 300 f/2.8 etc. Those lenses ain't cheap!


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

i think he was referring to just a standard run of the mill 50mm prime or so, i don't think he was taking all primes into account because as you said there is defiantly exceptions.


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
High Dynamic Range photography. It's a technique using software to approximate how the human eye sees. I just got done with these, although there are some that I think look better before HDR adjustments!










My goodness, some really beautiful shots there GT!

I especially like the one I've quoted above. I'd consider printing this one. The HDR version brings out so much more detail, it makes an already aesthetically pleasing image even more so. Good Job!









Man, I can't wait to get a DSLR camera. I'm really looking forward to the learning curve! That first good shot, with a new camera, I find so satisfying







. Only seven or so weeks to go. I actually went to a local camera shop, to see the D300 and K20D first hand, only to find they'd sold out! They're obviously popular cameras. I might get one early (using credit) if I can, or put a deposit down to secure one if demand is high. I'm still leaning towards the D300







.

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## BrinNutz

Go Canon! muwhahaah

My first Selective Coloring:

I took this at the Naval Academy Graduation watching all my former classmates graduate


----------



## ecoyd1

sdsd


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:


Originally Posted by *ecoyd1* 
Here is one from yesterday afternoon:










Straight out of the camera (no joke).

D300 + 10.5mm Fisheye + SB800

Here is a link to the large size:
http://milophoto.com/photography/Baseball/_DSC2724.JPG

That's really cool ecoyd1. Love it!

With each new piece of information I discover about the D300, I become more sure it's the DSLR camera I'd like to get (finances permitting). I read such good things about it in reviews and feedback from owners seems to be very good too.

I have to ask though, are there actually any negatives with the D300? Are there any shortcomings that you would of liked Nikon to have addressed before shipping it? I'm just really interested to hear something objectively negative about this camera. Surely it's not flawless, is it?

The only negatives I can see, are that it's fairly expensive (although arguably worth it) and you need to buy the VR/OS lenses for it, making the cost even higher. Other than that though and a few minor imperfections that can easily be fixed by changing settings etc, I'm yet to read any _real_ criticism of the D300. Is it really that good?

Also, I read that noise reduction is applied to the JPEG, TIFF and RAW images in camera. Do you know if this is true, or is it just for JPEG and TIFF? Also, what are the unprocessed RAWs like, compared to the JPEGs, in terms of noise? I read they've got a considerable amount of noise in them at ISO800+? Of course, you'd expect more noise in a RAW file, VS an in-camera processed JPEG etc, but I read it was considerably more? Is this true do you know?

Thanks.

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## ecoyd1

sd


----------



## max302

Quick little skate park shot edited with the GIMP. Next time, I'm using a tripod to do those kinds of overlays.


----------



## ecoyd1

sdsd


----------



## bgbop15

i am very into my new d60 with awesome kit lens and a 50mm f/1.8 Nikkor lens

Just got back on flickr

http://www.flickr.com/photos/theb/

This is my favorite pic I've taken so far with the d60








http://www.flickr.com/photos/theb/2527688491/


----------



## ecoyd1

sds


----------



## max302

I store ALL my photos on flickr with my pro subscription. I've got a bit under 1.5 k images archived in original quality, it cost me something like 50$US for 2 years.

Flickr rocks.

http://flickr.com/photos/maximerousseau


----------



## ecoyd1

I added both of you.


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:


Originally Posted by *ecoyd1* 
On a serious note though, if you buy just the d300 and not the battery grip, its a little small. With the grip, even though its about $250, enables an extra battery and another shutter release button. And, if you get the special batteris (like another $200...), the continuous high setting goes from 6fps to 8fps, which is huge for sport.

Thanks for your reply.

According to what I've read, the standard 6FPS only applies to 12-bit RAW (and JPEG etc). If you want 14-bit RAW, you have to settle for 2.5FPS. Could you confirm this is correct and also, could you see if the grip extends the 2.5FPS 14-bit RAW cont. shooting to anything above that rate? Thanks







.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *ecoyd1* 
Noise reduction can be enabled or disabled via the shooting menu.

Yeah, I know, I've done a bit of research on the D300














.

What I'm really interested in is a comparison between JPEG (with default in-camera NR settings), at say, 1600ISO (or higher) for example and unprocessed 14-bit RAW at the same ISO level. I've read there's quite a bit of difference (more than you'd expect) but I'm yet to see any side-by-side comparisons.

Thanks for your help







.

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## mugan23

do any of you know how to setup my camera to completely blur out every thing in this pic but the car?


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

the way to do that (best if you are still and the car is going fast, move the camera at the speed to keep the car in frame, take the picture and the result is a blurred background.
it does take practice to get good at it.


----------



## mugan23

how do i get a good angle like that?


----------



## The Pook

Kodak Easyshare Z760 ... it's junk









I can manage AVERAGE pictures at best. Saving up for either a Canon SD870 IS or a Canon SD1100 IS ..

Sample of a picture from the Z760 ...


----------



## mugan23

Quote:



The Pook;3955548]Kodak Easyshare Z760 ... it's junk









I can manage AVERAGE pictures at best. Saving up for either a Canon SD870 IS or a Canon SD1100


ADDED!
welcome


----------



## wire

I took this picture yesterday with my sister's Nikon S600.


----------



## BrinNutz

Quote:


Originally Posted by *ecoyd1* 
I added both of you.

Update my gear list with the Canon 10-22mm UWA and the Canon 580EX II Flash

Thanks


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *BrinNutz*


Update my gear list with the Canon 10-22mm UWA and the Canon 580EX II Flash

Thanks


What the hell do you do for a living Brin? Everytime I check this thread you've bought a new Canon L lens or something costing hundreds.







Between my camera and my computer, I'm tapped!


----------



## NrGx

Looking to buy a very compact camera to take some pics of stuff (consumer type) but I want them to be fairly high quality.

How is the Kodak V1253?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *NrGx*


Looking to buy a very compact camera to take some pics of stuff (consumer type) but I want them to be fairly high quality.

How is the Kodak V1253?


Canon and Sony make the best compact and ultra compact cameras. The Kodak would probably do just fine for you, but I would consider a Canon, anything from the SD line up is good and not expensive: SD1000, SD1100 IS are two good examples. Sony is also good but pricier.


----------



## BrinNutz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


What the hell do you do for a living Brin? Everytime I check this thread you've bought a new Canon L lens or something costing hundreds.







Between my camera and my computer, I'm tapped!


Well, I am a student. And work part time. So...I just have fun!

Oh, and I do the Navy thing once a month. I just find awesome deals on the lenses, and can't help but not buy them. I have a problem though, I spend all my money when I get it. Doh!

I advise all of you not to follow in my footsteps.


----------



## The Pook

Quote:



Originally Posted by *NrGx*


Looking to buy a very compact camera to take some pics of stuff (consumer type) but I want them to be fairly high quality.

How is the Kodak V1253?


Should look into the Canon SD870 IS or the Canon SD1100 IS ... I'm saving up for the same ones


----------



## christian_piper

Oh yea! Update to my gear list:

Nikkon D60 + 18-55mm F/3.5-5.6 kit lens + 50mm Nikkor non-ai prime F/2 lens

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
On another note, I am loving the D60! However, I am having some issues with using it. (User error I am sure)

Basically, I have a tedency to overexpose things, and to have soft focus. Overexposure- I am getting better. Soft focus? I dont know- I was using autofocus.. And the kit lens. I DO have a 52mm Tiffen UV filter on it.. Any tips for fixing this? And what is "hyperfocal" distance?

Also lastly, I need a polarizer as cheap as possible for good optics.... and a ND filter and such. And another UV filter / clear protective filter for my other lens... And a camera bag. I would like to convert my backpack into a good stealth camera bag- any suggestions? I also need a small standalone camera bag... (That fits the kit lens)

A shot from the first day I had it- testing it out. Kit lens- Holy barrel distortion! Any suggestions? Can aperture help this? (And I do think the shot is kind of cool..)


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

hmm, for soft focus, what aperture are you using?
if its small like f3-6 that could very well be the reason, small depth of field, focus to infinite, close objects will be very soft and vice versa.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *christian_piper*


Oh yea! Update to my gear list:

Nikkon D60 + 18-55mm F/3.5-5.6 kit lens + 50mm Nikkor non-ai prime F/2 lens

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
On another note, I am loving the D60! However, I am having some issues with using it. (User error I am sure)

Basically, I have a tedency to overexpose things, and to have soft focus. Overexposure- I am getting better. Soft focus? I dont know- I was using autofocus.. And the kit lens. I DO have a 52mm Tiffen UV filter on it.. Any tips for fixing this? And what is "hyperfocal" distance?

Also lastly, I need a polarizer as cheap as possible for good optics.... and a ND filter and such. And another UV filter / clear protective filter for my other lens... And a camera bag. I would like to convert my backpack into a good stealth camera bag- any suggestions? I also need a small standalone camera bag... (That fits the kit lens)

A shot from the first day I had it- testing it out. Kit lens- Holy barrel distortion! Any suggestions? Can aperture help this? (And I do think the shot is kind of cool..)


The overexposing might be the fault of the camera actually. Auto mode isn't the most accurate, which is why I don't use it. Shoot in Manual mode and pay attention to the meter, which will tell you how under or overexposed the shot will be. Also, if even in Manual mode you're still overexposing, shoot in RAW format, which is easily adjusted in post process. Barring that, try exposure bracketing.

You're probably shooting at a wide aperture and causing the soft focus. Lower end lenses, like your lit lens, will do that. However most lenses to a certain point are soft wide open, even if just a little bit. Close the aperture a bit (might require bumping the ISO up) and find out what works best and doesn't take too much away from sharpness.

For filters, I use cheaper Tiffen and Sunpak brands, but brands like B & W are the best. So far I don't notice any detriment using cheaper filters, but most serious photographers will say it's crazy to put cheap glass in front of expensive glass. Kind of makes sense to me, so I'm going to slowly start replacing my filters with high end B&Ws et al.

If you're looking for a good small camera bag, I'm selling a very good one, check out my FS thread (sig)! It's a LowePro, very nice bag. And about the backpack, I would honestly just buy a good LowePro or Promaster backpack, they're designed very well.

Hyperfocal distance is a technique for landscape shooting where you can get foreground and background objects into focus, which is normally impossible. It requires precisely measuring your foreground obects' distance to your lens and also requires and exact focal length. Old film SLR lenses had a little guide on them that told you at what focal length you needed to be at a particular f stop in order to achieve hyperfocus. I've been researching it a bit lately, but there's not much info for how to do it with newer digital SLR lenses that I've found yet.

EDIT: Just downloaded this: http://www.tucows.com/preview/238351 hopefully it will help me determine hyperfocal settings for my lenses.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

on the topic of filters, hoyas are my favourite, usually cheaper then the b&ws by alot, and they are all coated, even their entry levels ones. i usually get the super multi coated, or the multicoated.
http://www.kenrockwell.com/hoya/filters.htm
has a great explanation of the coatings about 2/3 the way down the page, and the whole page i found pretty helpful as well.


----------



## BrinNutz

Ken Rockwell? For serious? That dude is an asshat.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

meh, knows his stuff better then I.
i dont read much, but some of his pointers are pretty good.


----------



## BrinNutz

well, if you were to dig around his site and some of his reviews...You'd see why. Almost everyone on the photography forums feels the same way as I. Just wanted to let ya know.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *BrinNutz*


Ken Rockwell? For serious? That dude is an asshat.


Never heard of him, but I ROFL'd when I saw the front page! 
http://www.kenrockwell.com/index.htm


----------



## bgbop15

just got my ml-l3 in the mail from amazon.com, for my d60, and it doesn't work!! Anything I have to do to get it to work?

Battery could be dead i guess, but i pulled that plastic piece out which suggests it was brandy new


----------



## christian_piper

Hrm.... no idea....


----------



## ecoyd1

Here are some shots from today around my school:


----------



## ecoyd1

What do you think of the lightroom web gallery feature?

Here is a sample gallery with some sports shots:

link.


----------



## equetefue

This is what I have

*Powered By Canon*

Canon 1D Mark II
Canon 50mm f1.8
Canon 100mm f2.8 Macro
Canon 17-40mm f4 L
Canon 400mm f5.6 L
Canon 580EX II with Sto-Fen
Feisol CT-3401 Carbon Fiber tripod
Manfrotto Monopod
Better Beamer
Cokin P and HiTech .9 Soft GND filter
Crumpler 7 Million Dollar Home
Lowepro Backpak

Lots of other goodies

http://www.photo-galleria.com


----------



## equetefue




----------



## BrinNutz

All I can say is. Dayum. Nice pics, and nice gear.


----------



## dr4gon

Just got me a Sony a300 and a Tamron 70-300 Di Lens

(from my flickr, more to come soon)


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Wow, the shots making their way into this thread keep getting better and better! I am so jealous!

Anyway, here's a shot with my FZ50, taken at about 4:30am the other day.










1 minute exposure on a tripod, F11, ISO100.

Love to see some more work from you guys! So inspiring!

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *bgbop15*


just got my ml-l3 in the mail from amazon.com, for my d60, and it doesn't work!! Anything I have to do to get it to work?

Battery could be dead i guess, but i pulled that plastic piece out which suggests it was brandy new


The infrared remotes are problematic in my experience, which is why I use the wired remotes. Could be a battery issue though, where ever you got it from may have had it in stock for a long while and the battery drained.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dr4gon*


Just got me a Sony a300 and a Tamron 70-300 Di Lens

(from my flickr, more to come soon)











Did you shoot this in RAW? It would be a good HDR candidate since the sky is washed out.


----------



## TripleC

is it okay to list crappy cameras?
- Argus 5150 with 2GB SDCard
- Fujifilm 1.3MP Camera with 64mb memory card


----------



## equetefue

it's not the camera but the eye behind it.

equetefue

www.photo-galleria.com


----------



## dr4gon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Did you shoot this in RAW? It would be a good HDR candidate since the sky is washed out.


When I first got my camera, I did RAW+JPEG, but have since switched to just RAWs since I really have no need for 2 copies and the RAWs just looked that much better.

For HDR don't you need several different exposures of the same scene? I remember marin's attempts and some other pictures a little while back.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

well if you shoot raw, you can use a raw editor to slightly over and underexpose the picture and merge them.
although i dont think it looks as good as one taken with 2 or 3 differant exposures, i still looks pretty awesome.


----------



## equetefue

well for true HDR you need at least 3 exposures, one will work but is called Tone Mapping, not HDR, even though it looks pretty similar


----------



## equetefue

www.DslrGeeks.com

Excellent group of people


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie*


well if you shoot raw, you can use a raw editor to slightly over and underexpose the picture and merge them.
although i dont think it looks as good as one taken with 2 or 3 differant exposures, i still looks pretty awesome.


I went out one day and tried both methods. I took multiple bracketed exposure and single RAW files, and when I ran them through GIMP they honestly came out exactly the same. RAW is just that good!


----------



## BrinNutz

Got my Canon 10-22mm and Canon 580EX II in today!

Unfortunately, the Military Exchange didn't specify whether or not it would be USA or Japan model. I got the Japan models. No worries, I still paid less than what it would have cost me from B&H...I love getting about 30% off every once in awhile.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *BrinNutz* 
Got my Canon 10-22mm and Canon 580EX II in today!

Unfortunately, the Military Exchange didn't specify whether or not it would be USA or Japan model. I got the Japan models. No worries, I still paid less than what it would have cost me from B&H...I love getting about 30% off every once in awhile.

I loved the PX at Camp Lejeune when I was in the Marines. They always had such awesome deals. The PX actually lost money every year because they sold at such low prices.


----------



## Boris4ka

I don't even have a camera, I use my parents' Canon PowerShot SD450. It's perfect for regular photos but of course it sucks compared to every camera in this thread.

Here's the only pic I took with it worthy of this thread:










Only editing on it was resizing it so it'd be small enough to upload on OCN. Was taken when I was visiting Utah.


----------



## dr4gon

From the desert to an oasis


----------



## GoneTomorrow

It's the 17 year cicadas here in Kentucky, there were so many that the noise was deafening! This is the empty shell of cicada that has underwent its metamorphosis:










And what it looks like after:


----------



## dr4gon

That's really gross .... I'm not even going to quote it


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dr4gon*


That's really gross .... I'm not even going to quote it










It's really cool, that's what it is.


----------



## ecoyd1

sdsd


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *ecoyd1* 
I know its a great picture but the subject is so....ewww....I hate bugs and refuse to take pictures of them.

LOL, bugs are awesome, esp. close up. Meet my 7 year old tarantula:


----------



## dr4gon

omg, can I step on it?









was it really tiny when you got it? lol, I guess people breed these things?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dr4gon*


omg, can I step on it?









was it really tiny when you got it? lol, I guess people breed these things?


No, she was a young adult, but she has molted twice. Female tarantulas can live for 30 years (males 1-2 - the irony).

She's about 3 inches in diameter and my other is about 3.5"


----------



## ecoyd1

sdsd


----------



## ecoyd1

You guys are boring...


----------



## mugan23

the bugs pawn, there is just none here that are very interesting(unless you guys like Miskitos


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ecoyd1*


Critique Encouraged:



























All with from tonight with a D70 with my 55mm Ai

Thanks!


That's a damned sharp lens, nice flowers - what are they?


----------



## ecoyd1

sdsd


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Nice pics guys.

*GoneTomorrow:* I'm with you! Bugs are great







. I don't like spiders very much though! I'd probably stay a good 20 feet away from your eight-legged pets if I met them in person







. I like the shot you took of the empty shell of a cicada, very nice.

*ecoyd1:* I personally find the first of the three roses shots to be the most pleasing, in terms of composition. They're all really sharp and crisp, with really nice colours, but I'd say the first is probably my favourite, followed by the third and then the second, in terms of how pleasing I personally find the composition







.

I went to a local shop to have a look at the D300. I wasn't able to take any shots with it, but I held it in my hands and got a feel for it. It's really solid and feels pretty tough and well built. It's really heavy compared to my superzoom though! It must be three times the weight, without a lens! It felt really comfortable in the hand though. I'll try a different shop sometime next week if possible and see if I can actually take a few shots, as well as try the K20D out.

Here's a shot I took of a swan the other day.










Handheld ISO100, F8.

Keep up the good work guys!

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## ecoyd1

sdsdsd


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Highly-Annoyed* 
Nice pics guys.

*GoneTomorrow:* I'm with you! Bugs are great







. I don't like spiders very much though! I'd probably stay a good 20 feet away from your eight-legged pets if I met them in person







. I like the shot you took of the empty shell of a cicada, very nice.

*ecoyd1:* I personally find the first of the three roses shots to be the most pleasing, in terms of composition. They're all really sharp and crisp, with really nice colours, but I'd say the first is probably my favourite, followed by the third and then the second, in terms of how pleasing I personally find the composition







.

I went to a local shop to have a look at the D300. I wasn't able to take any shots with it, but I held it in my hands and got a feel for it. It's really solid and feels pretty tough and well built. It's really heavy compared to my superzoom though! It must be three times the weight, without a lens! It felt really comfortable in the hand though. I'll try a different shop sometime next week if possible and see if I can actually take a few shots, as well as try the K20D out.

Here's a shot I took of a swan the other day.










Handheld ISO100, F8.

Keep up the good work guys!

Highly-Annoyed

Good lord Highly, will you hurry up and buy the D300? I've never seen someone so meticulous about a purchase! You're making _me_ impatient.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *ecoyd1* 
Thanks for the critique!

I really love the swan there are none around here. However, there are snowy white egrets and blue herons. I will have to go do some shooting this week down at the perk ponds.

Here are some senic views from this past year:

Saturation and Contrast increased in Lightroom for this one; too fake looking? I like the artistic look the colors give it.



















These Three are all of the same road in case you didn't notice. Which is best?




























The Mission in Carmel, CA, USA:










The last road shot is fantastic, a textbook rule of thirds landscape. Phenomenal!


----------



## ecoyd1

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
The last road shot is fantastic, a textbook rule of thirds landscape. Phenomenal!

Hmm, ok. I was leaning towards the first two. I think the first one with the painted lines detracts from what is actually going on but then again it may emphasize the significance of the road.

The rule of thirds is just a guide. Many times photographs look better without the rule of thirds. You never have to abide by it; its just good to keep it in mind.


----------



## Ryan747

Ryan747: Camera - Kodak Crap and shoot, for the time being until i get a better one. pictures ive taken recently:


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ecoyd1*


Thanks for the critique!

I really love the swan there are none around here. However, there are snowy white egrets and blue herons. I will have to go do some shooting this week down at the perk ponds.

Here are some senic views from this past year:











I have to say that this is my favourite. I like the colours and the perspective is really cool. I tried to get something like this a while ago, but I think you really nailed it







.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Good lord Highly, will you hurry up and buy the D300? I've never seen someone so meticulous about a purchase! You're making _me_ impatient.










Hah! I'd buy one tomorrow if I could afford to! I still like the K20D and think it's very good value, but the D300 is simply better. I have to wait for for a cash injection though, which I wont be getting for at least another 6 whole weeks and even then I might have to save a bit. It'll probably end up being a Â£2000 (around $4000 USD) purchase with at least one lens and some extras and unfortunately I can't get that much cash together very quickly














. I wish I could







!

I'll post up one or two more pics I've taken recently, later. I've got to go the local animal shelter now for a "meet 'n greet" between my elkhound and a cat we're trying to home







.

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## ecoyd1

Just take out a second mortgage!


----------



## equetefue




----------



## mugan23

well i hope u guys are here cuz i need some quick help, i am trying to take a pic of these clouds that are outside right no but i can't seem to get the metering right or the shutter speed, here it is with spot metering,








and here it is on average








its getting kinda dark so i need some help quick cuz i cant hold a camera straight for long and am already having to use a 2 sec shutter speed


----------



## mugan23

oh and i haven't decided on the angle yet so don't judge the pics


----------



## christian_piper

Well- Tripod? Can you find a way to support it? I suggest a constant aperature OR shutterspeed, take like 6 photos from the same angle and averything, keep on changing the shutterspeed from fast to slow, combine them in GIMP using the exposure blending plugin a few pages back.


----------



## christian_piper

Double post... oh well. Here are some shots I just took- all with my "new" 50mm F/2 manual lens, and my new Nikon D60. Getting used to manual everything it.. interesting. But here are 3 shots I like. Critique welcomed.

Another thing- I need a watermark for my photos.... can anyone give me suggestions / point me in the right direction for that? I am lazy.. So I dont want to do it manually to every photo...
Also, is Nikons Capture NX, or Adobe's Lightroom a good investment?



















And my favorite:


----------



## BrinNutz

Pretty crazy afternoon. Sunny, beautiful morning, then I spend most of it inside, next I heard the sirens going off, went outside with my camera because I knew something was going on:



















This one is after the above photos, and I drove trying to get ahead of the storm to catch the front end of it. But after 20-30 min, I just stopped at a little road :


----------



## mugan23

well i finalized this pic of the tower in cleaveland , u guys like or should i change something


----------



## mugan23

the big mugan23 is cuz its currently my desktop


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mugan23*


well i finalized this pic of the tower in cleaveland , u guys like or should i change something










I think it looks very good as it is. I can't think of anything you could do to improve it. Again, I love the angle! You've really got a talent for finding really interesting/pleasing angles







.

I'm still developing all the RAWs I've been taking of late and will post a pic or two in this thread when I'm done







.

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## mugan23

thx again man, can't wait to see those pics. by thee way how do you get frames in photoshop cs3 or elements 6 (better yet how much is gimp)


----------



## BrinNutz

Tone mapped image I took yesterday (Sunday).


----------



## mugan23

very nice i like how the clouds look so close, how do you tone map?


----------



## BrinNutz

Here, OP, please replace the original post with what I've posted below then keep the updates the same, it's too hard to read the way you have it.

Ok, I thought the code button was to allow you to write with tags and it wouldn't show. What the hell?

Ok, go into the reply or whatever and try hitting the "Switch Editor" button (the A/A) button top right of the reply box, above smiley's if you didn't know and see if that changes anything.

Anywho...I organized it into D-SLR Cameras and Point & Shoots and then I alphabetized them and bolded names, with space in between each so it's actually readable.

Code:



Code:







Code:


[B]Point & Shoot[/B]

*bentrinh*-Sony Ericsson W810i

*Burn*-Lumix DMC-FZ30

*catmmm*-canon sd870

*christian_piper*-canon powershot G9

*CravinR1*-Kodak Z710

*DEX*-Samsung D900i

*Highly-Annoyed*-Panasonic FZ50

*Marin*-Canon SD870 IS
Film Camera - Konica Minolta Maxxum 50 w/28-90mm lens

*mugan23*- fuji s700/ cybershot dsc

*nitto*-d3

*orbiter*-Nikon coolpix 8700

*shajbot*-Canon Powershot A620

*stanrc*-canon powershot SD750

*Syrillian*-Canon Powershot A640

*The Pook*-Kodak Easyshare Z760

*vix*-casio exilim



Code:


[B]DSLR Cameras[/B]

*[PWN]Schubie*-nikon d70s
Nikkor 18-200mm VR

*BrinNutz*-
Canon 400D ($319 brand new)
Canon BG-E3 Battery Grip w/ 2 NLB-2H Batteries
Canon 18-55 IS
Canon 70-200mm f/4L w/ hood, filters
Canon 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS w/ hood, filters
Multiple Filters
Canon Wireless Remote
Canon Wired Remote
Manfrotto 679B Monopod w/ 3232 head
SanDisk Extreme III 4gb CF card
Lowepro Fastpack 250
Fujifilm S700

*Death*-Nikon D80

*Dostoyevsky77*-D40X
Nikkor 18-70mm
Nikkor 70-300mm VR

*ecoyd1*-nikon d300
50 1.4
70-200
12-24
24-70
85 1.8
300 2.8

*equetefue*-Canon 1D Mark II
Canon 50mm f1.8
Canon 100mm f2.8 Macro
Canon 17-40mm f4 L
Canon 400mm f5.6 L
Canon 580EX II with Sto-Fen
Feisol CT-3401 Carbon Fiber tripod
Manfrotto Monopod
Better Beamer
Cokin P
HiTech .9 Soft GND filter
Lowepro Backpak

*gollie*-Nikon D40x w/ SB600 Flash
Stock lens
50-200mm VR

*GoneTomorrow*-Canon EOS 400D
Canon EF 28-135mm USM IS
Canon EF 50mm f/1.4
Canon EF 18-55mm

*hi-zaki*-Nikon D70
Nikon D200
Nikon D300
NIKKOR VR 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED
NIKKOR 28mm f/2.8D
NIKKOR 135mm f/2D
NIKKOR 300mm f/2.8G IF-ED
NIKKOR 17-35mm f/2.8D IF-ED
NIKKOR VR 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G IF-ED

*McStuff*-nikon d2h

*sugarton *-Canon 350D
18-55mm kit lens
Canon 35-135mm EF

*Transonic*-Canon 1D Mark IIN
Canon SD630

*whitefro*-Nikon D40
Nikkor 18-135mm

*Whyifide*-NikonD50



Code:


It should look like this when it's done:




Code:


Quote:



Originally Posted by *BrinNutz*

*Point & Shoot*

*bentrinh*-Sony Ericsson W810i

*Burn*-Lumix DMC-FZ30

*catmmm*-canon sd870

*christian_piper*-canon powershot G9

*CravinR1*-Kodak Z710

*DEX*-Samsung D900i

*Highly-Annoyed*-Panasonic FZ50

*Marin*-Canon SD870 IS
Film Camera - Konica Minolta Maxxum 50 w/28-90mm lens

*mugan23*- fuji s700/ cybershot dsc

*nitto*-d3

*orbiter*-Nikon coolpix 8700

*shajbot*-Canon Powershot A620

*stanrc*-canon powershot SD750

*Syrillian*-Canon Powershot A640

*The Pook*-Kodak Easyshare Z760

*vix*-casio exilim

*DSLR Cameras*

*[PWN]Schubie*-nikon d70s
Nikkor 18-200mm VR

*BrinNutz*-
Canon 400D ($319 brand new)
Canon BG-E3 Battery Grip w/ 2 NLB-2H Batteries
Canon 18-55 IS
Canon 70-200mm f/4L w/ hood, filters
Canon 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS w/ hood, filters
Multiple Filters
Canon Wireless Remote
Canon Wired Remote
Manfrotto 679B Monopod w/ 3232 head
SanDisk Extreme III 4gb CF card
Lowepro Fastpack 250
Fujifilm S700

*Death*-Nikon D80

*Dostoyevsky77*-D40X
Nikkor 18-70mm
Nikkor 70-300mm VR

*ecoyd1*-nikon d300
50 1.4
70-200
12-24
24-70
85 1.8
300 2.8

*equetefue*-Canon 1D Mark II
Canon 50mm f1.8
Canon 100mm f2.8 Macro
Canon 17-40mm f4 L
Canon 400mm f5.6 L
Canon 580EX II with Sto-Fen
Feisol CT-3401 Carbon Fiber tripod
Manfrotto Monopod
Better Beamer
Cokin P
HiTech .9 Soft GND filter
Lowepro Backpak

*gollie*-Nikon D40x w/ SB600 Flash
Stock lens
50-200mm VR

*GoneTomorrow*-Canon EOS 400D
Canon EF 28-135mm USM IS
Canon EF 50mm f/1.4
Canon EF 18-55mm

*hi-zaki*-Nikon D70
Nikon D200
Nikon D300
NIKKOR VR 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED
NIKKOR 28mm f/2.8D
NIKKOR 135mm f/2D
NIKKOR 300mm f/2.8G IF-ED
NIKKOR 17-35mm f/2.8D IF-ED
NIKKOR VR 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G IF-ED

*McStuff*-nikon d2h

*sugarton* -Canon 350D
18-55mm kit lens
Canon 35-135mm EF

*Transonic*-Canon 1D Mark IIN
Canon SD630

*whitefro*-Nikon D40
Nikkor 18-135mm

*Whyifide*-NikonD50


----------



## BrinNutz

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mugan23* 
very nice i like how the clouds look so close, how do you tone map?

I used Photomatix Pro....


----------



## christian_piper

Equipment Update:

Nikon D60 SLR and 18-55mm VR kit lens
Nikkor 50mm non-ai F/2 prime manual lens
Nice but heavy promaster systempro tripod


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *BrinNutz*











Tone mapped image I took yesterday (Sunday).


Great shot, Photomatix is a good program, but it isn't worth $90.


----------



## BrinNutz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Great shot, Photomatix is a good program, but it isn't worth $90.


I agree...I wouldn't pay $90 for it either..hehehehehe


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *BrinNutz*


I agree...I wouldn't pay $90 for it either..hehehehehe


Yeah well. The only thing it does that I can't do (very well anyway) with GIMP is tone mapping.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *BrinNutz*


I agree...I wouldn't pay $90 for it either..hehehehehe


ahaha, neither would i








now i just need some time to play around with it


----------



## J.Harris

I'm kinda late for this thread. But if you would add me to the list.

I'm the proud owner of a Canon 5D and a rebel xt. I have a 24-105 f/4L IS, 50mm f/1.8, and the crappy kit 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

nice, not a huge canon fan, but 5d = awesomeness


----------



## TheFlyingWallaby

I'd like to get my name in here as well.
My gear is as follows:
Digital stuff:
Canon 300D
Sigma 28-200mm 1:3.5-5.6
Canon 28-90mm 1:4-5.6
Canon 55-250mm 1:4-5.6
Film stuff:
Canon T2 (compatible w/ all lenses above)
Pentax SF1 (my second favourite of my SLR's )
Sigma 28-70mm 1:3.5-4.5
Nikon Nikormat (circa between 1960 and 1978. My favourite SLR; it has been to nearly every continent, and it's strap has been to every continent except Antarctica. I got it from the man who first really got me into nature/wildlife photography)
Star-D 80-205mm 1:3.8
Nikon 55mm 1:2.8
Lots of other 35mm gear, but thats probably not too interesting for this crowd. I've also got some medium-format film gear, and a B&W darkroom in my house.


----------



## dr4gon

I've been here a bit and haven't even "joined"









Sony α300
Sony DT 18-70mm f3.5-5.6 (kit)
Tamron 70-300mm f4-5.6

And one of my latest


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

wow, that looks pimp, use a tripod? what exposure settings?


----------



## TnB= Gir

Can anyone help me out please? I'm on a severely limited budget and I'm wanting to upgrade from my crappy cell phone camera. What is the best camera in the 50 shipped range on the web? (site must take paypal)


----------



## TheFlyingWallaby

You really ain't going to get much for $50 shipped. Heck, most of my lenses cost at least four times that. I'd say look around on eBay for generic Chinese point 'n' shoot cameras. You could probably get 3MP (active) which is not too bad for 5x7 prints.


----------



## TnB= Gir

I'm pretty sure ANYTHING will be an upgrade from my cell camera.


----------



## TheFlyingWallaby

You could probably find one of these on ebay for $50.


----------



## TnB= Gir

They are actually pretty expensive on the fleabay.

Why does no one bid on this? http://cgi.ebay.com/10MP-Slim-Digita...6.c0.m14.l1308

Crap brand is what I'm guessing, but then again I know jack squat about cameras.


----------



## dr4gon

Quote:


Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie* 
wow, that looks pimp, use a tripod? what exposure settings?

Using a tripod I believe
1/4 sec at f/4.0
85mm
iso400
no flash


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *TnB= Gir* 
They are actually pretty expensive on the fleabay.

Why does no one bid on this? http://cgi.ebay.com/10MP-Slim-Digita...6.c0.m14.l1308

Crap brand is what I'm guessing, but then again I know jack squat about cameras.

For the love of God, do not buy that camera. It will work for a month and break.
You will get what you pay for for $50. In all seriousness, and I say this with the most economical tone possible, please consider $100 an absolute minimum for any kind of digital camera that can in any way be associated with the words "quality" or "reliability."

If $50 is your budget, the stretch it to $112 and buy one of the lower end Canon models:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...70012+50001213

You won't be sorry.

@ everyone: Can we establish a rule for posting photographs? Could everyone as a courtesy please ensure that your images have EXIF data? It's kind of annoying to have to ask for shot settings when everyone could just look at the EXIF.


----------



## BrinNutz

I don't know why mine don't have the exif intact. Weird.


----------



## ecoyd1

sdsd


----------



## mugan23

well its not the best but i can see what you were going for but its a little dull


----------



## mugan23

by the way i updated the member list and if i forgot you or have ur equipment down wrong please pm me so i can correct it


----------



## BrinNutz

mugan, the list was correct form the list I painstakingly made. you just needed to copy/paste. did you not read the PM? LOL

meh...Oh well, I guess I can't be picky, I don't really like that layout either. Oh well.


----------



## mugan23

i didn't have all the names i had to search all the names again and i could not copy and paste the words because u need the ocn code things hehe if you want me to change something i will gladly< actually let me go to sleep cuz i got work in like 4 hrs all re make it like urs tomorrow but with all the names in it <SO EVERY ONE WHO ISN"T IN THE CURRENT LIST OR NEEDS ANY LINKS ADDED TO THE LIST PLZ PM ME TOMORROW >


----------



## BrinNutz

Code:



Code:







Code:


[B]Point & Shoot[/B]

*bentrinh*-Sony Ericsson W810i

*Burn*-Lumix DMC-FZ30

*catmmm*-canon sd870

*christian_piper*-canon powershot G9

*CravinR1*-Kodak Z710

*DEX*-Samsung D900i

*Highly-Annoyed*-Panasonic FZ50

*Marin*-Canon SD870 IS
Film Camera - Konica Minolta Maxxum 50 w/28-90mm lens

*mugan23*- fuji s700/ cybershot dsc

*nitto*-d3

*orbiter*-Nikon coolpix 8700

*shajbot*-Canon Powershot A620

*stanrc*-canon powershot SD750

*Syrillian*-Canon Powershot A640

*The Pook*-Kodak Easyshare Z760

*vix*-casio exilim



Code:


[B]DSLR Cameras[/B]

*[PWN]Schubie*-nikon d70s
Nikkor 18-200mm VR

*BrinNutz*-
Canon 400D ($319 brand new)
Canon BG-E3 Battery Grip w/ 2 NLB-2H Batteries
Canon 18-55 IS
Canon 70-200mm f/4L w/ hood, filters
Canon 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS w/ hood, filters
Multiple Filters
Canon Wireless Remote
Canon Wired Remote
Manfrotto 679B Monopod w/ 3232 head
SanDisk Extreme III 4gb CF card
Lowepro Fastpack 250
Fujifilm S700

*Death*-Nikon D80

*Dostoyevsky77*-D40X
Nikkor 18-70mm
Nikkor 70-300mm VR

*ecoyd1*-nikon d300
50 1.4
70-200
12-24
24-70
85 1.8
300 2.8

*equetefue*-Canon 1D Mark II
Canon 50mm f1.8
Canon 100mm f2.8 Macro
Canon 17-40mm f4 L
Canon 400mm f5.6 L
Canon 580EX II with Sto-Fen
Feisol CT-3401 Carbon Fiber tripod
Manfrotto Monopod
Better Beamer
Cokin P
HiTech .9 Soft GND filter
Lowepro Backpak

*gollie*-Nikon D40x w/ SB600 Flash
Stock lens
50-200mm VR

*GoneTomorrow*-Canon EOS 400D
Canon EF 28-135mm USM IS
Canon EF 50mm f/1.4
Canon EF 18-55mm

*hi-zaki*-Nikon D70
Nikon D200
Nikon D300
NIKKOR VR 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED
NIKKOR 28mm f/2.8D
NIKKOR 135mm f/2D
NIKKOR 300mm f/2.8G IF-ED
NIKKOR 17-35mm f/2.8D IF-ED
NIKKOR VR 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G IF-ED

*McStuff*-nikon d2h

*sugarton *-Canon 350D
18-55mm kit lens
Canon 35-135mm EF

*Transonic*-Canon 1D Mark IIN
Canon SD630

*whitefro*-Nikon D40
Nikkor 18-135mm

*Whyifide*-NikonD50



Code:


Quote:



Originally Posted by *mugan23* 
i didn't have all the names i had to search all the names again and i could not copy and paste the words because u need the ocn code things hehe if you want me to change something i will gladly< actually let me go to sleep cuz i got work in like 4 hrs all re make it like urs tomorrow but with all the names in it <SO EVERY ONE WHO ISN"T IN THE CURRENT LIST OR NEEDS ANY LINKS ADDED TO THE LIST PLZ PM ME TOMORROW >




Code:


Ok, I didn't do anything different. All you had to do was click on the Quote button, and copy all of the stuff in between the CODE tags. That's what it's for. Then you paste them in the first thread, that's all. But just click the Quote button for this reply, and copy everything between the CODE tags.

I'm guessing you haven't checked your PM's either...sent you one almost 2 days ago now, LOL.


----------



## christian_piper

I took the liberty of fixing my entry...........

Code:



Code:







Code:


[B]Point & Shoot[/B]

*bentrinh*-Sony Ericsson W810i

*Burn*-Lumix DMC-FZ30

*catmmm*-canon sd870

*CravinR1*-Kodak Z710

*DEX*-Samsung D900i

*Highly-Annoyed*-Panasonic FZ50

*Marin*-Canon SD870 IS
Film Camera - Konica Minolta Maxxum 50 w/28-90mm lens

*mugan23*- fuji s700/ cybershot dsc

*nitto*-d3

*orbiter*-Nikon coolpix 8700

*shajbot*-Canon Powershot A620

*stanrc*-canon powershot SD750

*Syrillian*-Canon Powershot A640

*The Pook*-Kodak Easyshare Z760

*vix*-casio exilim



Code:


[B]DSLR Cameras[/B]

*[PWN]Schubie*-nikon d70s
Nikkor 18-200mm VR

*BrinNutz*-
Canon 400D ($319 brand new)
Canon BG-E3 Battery Grip w/ 2 NLB-2H Batteries
Canon 18-55 IS
Canon 70-200mm f/4L w/ hood, filters
Canon 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS w/ hood, filters
Multiple Filters
Canon Wireless Remote
Canon Wired Remote
Manfrotto 679B Monopod w/ 3232 head
SanDisk Extreme III 4gb CF card
Lowepro Fastpack 250
Fujifilm S700

*christian_piper*-Nikon D60
Nikkor 18-55 VR Kit lens
Nikkor 50mm f/2 Non-AI

*Death*-Nikon D80

*Dostoyevsky77*-D40X
Nikkor 18-70mm
Nikkor 70-300mm VR

*ecoyd1*-nikon d300
50 1.4
70-200
12-24
24-70
85 1.8
300 2.8

*equetefue*-Canon 1D Mark II
Canon 50mm f1.8
Canon 100mm f2.8 Macro
Canon 17-40mm f4 L
Canon 400mm f5.6 L
Canon 580EX II with Sto-Fen
Feisol CT-3401 Carbon Fiber tripod
Manfrotto Monopod
Better Beamer
Cokin P
HiTech .9 Soft GND filter
Lowepro Backpak

*gollie*-Nikon D40x w/ SB600 Flash
Stock lens
50-200mm VR

*GoneTomorrow*-Canon EOS 400D
Canon EF 28-135mm USM IS
Canon EF 50mm f/1.4
Canon EF 18-55mm

*hi-zaki*-Nikon D70
Nikon D200
Nikon D300
NIKKOR VR 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED
NIKKOR 28mm f/2.8D
NIKKOR 135mm f/2D
NIKKOR 300mm f/2.8G IF-ED
NIKKOR 17-35mm f/2.8D IF-ED
NIKKOR VR 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G IF-ED

*McStuff*-nikon d2h

*sugarton *-Canon 350D
18-55mm kit lens
Canon 35-135mm EF

*Transonic*-Canon 1D Mark IIN
Canon SD630

*whitefro*-Nikon D40
Nikkor 18-135mm

*Whyifide*-NikonD50


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
@ everyone: Can we establish a rule for posting photographs? Could everyone as a courtesy please ensure that your images have EXIF data? It's kind of annoying to have to ask for shot settings when everyone could just look at the EXIF.

Ah, yes, well, in order to use GIMP with the TIFF files my RAW editor produces, I have to first open them in IrfanView and then save them again. This wipes out all the EXIF data. If I don't do it though, I get a load of error messages from GIMP and either a total crash of GIMP, or a crash of whatever plugin I happen to be using (like the exposure blend one). Sorry about that.

I could use an EXIF editor to manually put data back into the image files, but that would make my work flow even more laborious than it already is. Hopefully the GIMP crashing/EXIF stripping effect wont happen any longer when I finally upgrade to DSLR, but in the mean-time, I'm going to have to list the shot settings under any images I post. Hope this is OK with everybody!

Talking of images... I got through processing the first batch about 40 minutes ago. I've selected four that I thought were OK to post here







.









Handheld. ISO100. F5.6. 1/250 Sec. +0.3EV.









Handheld. ISO100. F11. 1/200 Sec. +0.0EV.









Handheld. ISO200. F10. 1/1000 Sec. +0.3EV.









Handheld. ISO200. F5.6. 1/100 Sec. +0.0EV.

I don't know the focal length, as the length recorded in the EXIF information from the RAW files shows numbers like 7.4mm, which I'm pretty sure can't be correct, so I'm leaving it out







.

I've got another, smaller batch of shots to process now, so I'll post up a couple more in a day or so







.

Keep up all the good work guys! It's always inspiring!









Highly-Annoyed


----------



## this n00b again

ahh... didn't know this thread existed.

Canon Rebe XTi with the basic lens for now.
New lens coming, but the camera it self already set me back.

also,
Canon Powershot SD1000
Canon Powershot A70


----------



## BrinNutz

I'm going to be selling my Canon 100-400mm L IS here in the next couple of days. Anyone here interested?

I need to get my bike running before my trip in three weeks. And that's gonna give me the most money out of anything I could sell.


----------



## mugan23

Quote:


Originally Posted by *BrinNutz* 

Code:



Code:







Code:


[B]Point & Shoot[/B]

*bentrinh*-Sony Ericsson W810i

*Burn*-Lumix DMC-FZ30

*catmmm*-canon sd870

*christian_piper*-canon powershot G9

*CravinR1*-Kodak Z710

*DEX*-Samsung D900i

*Highly-Annoyed*-Panasonic FZ50

*Marin*-Canon SD870 IS
Film Camera - Konica Minolta Maxxum 50 w/28-90mm lens

*mugan23*- fuji s700/ cybershot dsc

*nitto*-d3

*orbiter*-Nikon coolpix 8700

*shajbot*-Canon Powershot A620

*stanrc*-canon powershot SD750

*Syrillian*-Canon Powershot A640

*The Pook*-Kodak Easyshare Z760

*vix*-casio exilim



Code:


[B]DSLR Cameras[/B]

*[PWN]Schubie*-nikon d70s
Nikkor 18-200mm VR

*BrinNutz*-
Canon 400D ($319 brand new)
Canon BG-E3 Battery Grip w/ 2 NLB-2H Batteries
Canon 18-55 IS
Canon 70-200mm f/4L w/ hood, filters
Canon 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS w/ hood, filters
Multiple Filters
Canon Wireless Remote
Canon Wired Remote
Manfrotto 679B Monopod w/ 3232 head
SanDisk Extreme III 4gb CF card
Lowepro Fastpack 250
Fujifilm S700

*Death*-Nikon D80

*Dostoyevsky77*-D40X
Nikkor 18-70mm
Nikkor 70-300mm VR

*ecoyd1*-nikon d300
50 1.4
70-200
12-24
24-70
85 1.8
300 2.8

*equetefue*-Canon 1D Mark II
Canon 50mm f1.8
Canon 100mm f2.8 Macro
Canon 17-40mm f4 L
Canon 400mm f5.6 L
Canon 580EX II with Sto-Fen
Feisol CT-3401 Carbon Fiber tripod
Manfrotto Monopod
Better Beamer
Cokin P
HiTech .9 Soft GND filter
Lowepro Backpak

*gollie*-Nikon D40x w/ SB600 Flash
Stock lens
50-200mm VR

*GoneTomorrow*-Canon EOS 400D
Canon EF 28-135mm USM IS
Canon EF 50mm f/1.4
Canon EF 18-55mm

*hi-zaki*-Nikon D70
Nikon D200
Nikon D300
NIKKOR VR 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED
NIKKOR 28mm f/2.8D
NIKKOR 135mm f/2D
NIKKOR 300mm f/2.8G IF-ED
NIKKOR 17-35mm f/2.8D IF-ED
NIKKOR VR 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G IF-ED

*McStuff*-nikon d2h

*sugarton *-Canon 350D
18-55mm kit lens
Canon 35-135mm EF

*Transonic*-Canon 1D Mark IIN
Canon SD630

*whitefro*-Nikon D40
Nikkor 18-135mm

*Whyifide*-NikonD50



Code:


Ok, I didn't do anything different. All you had to do was click on the Quote button, and copy all of the stuff in between the CODE tags. That's what it's for. Then you paste them in the first thread, that's all. But just click the Quote button for this reply, and copy everything between the CODE tags.

I'm guessing you haven't checked your PM's either...sent you one almost 2 days ago now, LOL.


ok i looked at you code, it is exactly like mine but i indented the lenses and accessories for the people who have a lot of them so i will take the indent off cuz i don't have a lot of time to add all the missing people, if its good its good if not when i get some time i will edit yours and add the missing people


----------



## mugan23

how does it look now?, plz guys don't forget to pm me if you join because this thread moves quickly some times and i might miss your post


----------



## christian_piper

Looks good to me!

OH.. I might have done it, but in my entry it it should be christianpiper- Missing the H.. no big deal, Ill pm you if you miss this...


----------



## mugan23

i got it, sorry i was coping n pasting all night i think i made a few mistakes hehe


----------



## max302

I messed around with the flash settings on my camera, got some interesting shots at a party last week. Note that all those were taken with the built in flash. I would loved to have taken those with a two slave flash config, but.... sadly I don't even have a single working flash yet.




























BTW, add me to the roster. Nikon D40 with kit Nikkor 18-55. For now


----------



## ecoyd1

sdsdsdsds


----------



## christian_piper

I got a couple I'll share soon..... Untill then, a question. How do y'all process your Nikon raw photos??

Also, I had a post a few pages back... Can I have some critique please? Here is the link... (Begging I know... sorry. I'd like to know what people think....)
http://www.overclock.net/3993312-post675.html


----------



## mugan23

first one is confusing to me, but the second two are superb i like how high the detail is in that river or stream,just the blurred trees are bugging me tho


----------



## christian_piper

Thanks! That's actually a lake.... heh. But in a lagoon. It was SUPER windy- All the power was out because of it.... and also dark. 10 second exposure.. As for the blurred, I stopped down slightly (as far as I could sue to the light) and used hyperfocal... but the close trees would be blurred no matter what- they were moving a lot..... Also, there were TONS of waves, and only a small moon. Yay fo long exposures! I also bought a brand new tripod because my light one just wasn't cutting up to my expectations anymore.

As to the confusing first one- It's a box! Heh. Mostly for amusement / I think it looks strangley cool. But that's just me.


----------



## mugan23

10 secs wow didn't the wind blow it our of focus hehe


----------



## christian_piper

First human photo I really like........
(D60 + kit lens)


----------



## mugan23

wow nice shot was that planed or was it just lucky?


----------



## mugan23

wow i just got photomatrix so i didn't get a chance to shoot out side but i tried getting my pc (i never knew that hdr could do this can't wait to go out side and shoot landscapes)


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

i dont think its supposed to come out like that


----------



## rx7speed

from my recent trip to the lake.
http://flickr.com/photos/rx7speed/se...7605624897558/

any advice would be nice as I'm still a new guy.


----------



## mugan23

Quote:


Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie* 








i dont think its supposed to come out like that









i kno i was just messing with it so i sett some settings way off, i just think it looks cool(like an 80s poster or something)


----------



## christian_piper

80's all right.....

Here:


----------



## ecoyd1

sdsd


----------



## s1rrah

Here's some seagull shots I got while surfing a couple days ago:

...










...










...










...

Those were all shot with a humble little Canon Powershot S2 IS.

(While throwing hand fulls of corn chips into the air, mind you)









...


----------



## mugan23

nice work, i can't get over how pure white the segals are, here in cleaveland there dirty brown, whitish kind of color and there angry, i would never try that


----------



## s1rrah

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mugan23* 
nice work, i can't get over how pure white the segals are, here in cleaveland there dirty brown, whitish kind of color and there angry, i would never try that

That's Johnathon on the right.


----------



## Pap3r

Quote:


Originally Posted by *s1rrah* 
That's Johnathon on the right.










I think I love you. That's my favorite book. I've done countless essays on it


----------



## s1rrah

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Pap3r*


I think I love you. That's my favorite book. I've done countless essays on it










I have a girlfriend.

Thanks.










Anyway ...

That same book was _and is_ very important to me as welll.

Richard Bach, ... his own human shortcomings not withstanding (wanna be rich and famous and all) ... is still a long standing and important guide of mine.

I mean ... c'mon .. Donald Shimoda didnt' die in his airplane for nothing, y0!!

...

And yes.

I have long since mastered the art of swimming in earth.

...


----------



## ecoyd1

sdsd


----------



## xHassassin

That looks fake doesn't it?


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:


Originally Posted by *ecoyd1* 
Now, I want you all to guess what camera I used for this. My new d300 or my four year old d70 that no one likes. No going to my flickr to cheat..

Nice images ecoyd1







.

I'd guess you used the D70, mainly because of how close it looks like you got to the waves to shoot them. I'd guess you'd be a bit more protective of your D300, no? Having said that though, I fully intend to take mine to the beach when I get it, so maybe my reasoning is flawed?

I love the DOF in the first pic of the unknown thing and the colours as well, although mainly greys, yellows and creams look really nice. As for the seaweed, I think you could have used a little greater DOF as although the seaweed that is in focus is sharp and crisp, I personally think it would have looked a bit better with more of it in focus. I love the footprints on the beach in B&W. Really nice, classic shot







. The waves are OK, but I'd of straightened the horizon ( I like a straight horizon







) and perhaps used a little greater DOF, but again, this is just my opinion. The "nice view" is indeed very nice. A good shot. I've taken quite a few like that, but you've really created a nice feeling to the shot (far better than I have done so far) by shooting through the grass like that.

Again, just my opinions. Overall some really nice stuff, as usual







.

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:


Originally Posted by *ecoyd1* 
Here are some shots from this evening:

Now, I want you all to guess what camera I used for this. My new d300 or my four year old d70 that no one likes. No going to my flickr to cheat..[/CENTER]

what do you mean 4 year old camera that no one likes?
thats my camera, and you can get great results with it, the camera makes little difference compared to the person behind it.


----------



## christian_piper

Nice pics everyone!!

xHassassin- Well, yea it does to me.....

Anyway


----------



## Pap3r

Disregard this...


----------



## ecoyd1

sdsd


----------



## christian_piper

Nice composition! Loving your shots.

That is my weak point... Composition....

On another note, my cheap ebay macro tubes came in today! So I took a test shot of a faucet. (With my 50mm F/2 Nikkor + the tubes)


----------



## max302

First attempt at HDR, I think I still need to mess around with the colors a bit. Photomatix KICKS ASS!


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Hey All. I need some advice please!!

I'm in the process of costing-out everything I would like to purchase with the D300 I am currently planning to buy sometime in mid August when I get a cash injection.

I'm currently looking at MC Protectors for the lens/es I'm planning to get and I wondered what everybody thought about MC Protectors in general and if they had any recommendations for any?

I'll be looking at getting a 62mm, 72mm and a 77mm one to start (probably fewer, possibly just the one) and I was thinking; do I actually need them at all?

I plan to get some insurance for lenses and my home contents insurance should also be able to cover them against accidental damage, even out of the home. So is it really worth me spending around Â£150.00 ($293 USD / $299 CAD) on MC Protectors, when I'll have insurance and lens hoods? Insurance for each lens cost less than a good quality MC Protector would do for each lens...

What do you guys think?

Thanks!

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## rx7speed

wher can one go to get the insurance?


----------



## BrinNutz

Call your insurance company.


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:


Originally Posted by *rx7speed* 
wher can one go to get the insurance?

I went into a shop in the UK called Jessops a week or so ago to try out the D300 and they told me there is an insurance company that insures camera equipment, such as lenses and cameras against fault or accidental damage. You can insure a single lens if you want. It was around 8% of the cost of the lens each year I think; something like that anyway. Still, you can add these things to your home insurance as separate items for a little extra cost anyway.

The point is that, one of the strongest arguments for getting an MC Protector, is that it is better to damage it, than the front element of your lens. But if you've already got your lens covered on home insurance for accidental damage, or take out a specific policy for each lens, you don't really need to protect the front element, as you'll get a replacement if you damage it. Also, the lens hood provides some protection.

Anyway, anybody have any thoughts? Can anybody recommend a decent MC Protector, or do people think they're not worth having if you're insured? Just wondered what people thought about MC Protectors generally, if they use them, and/or if they could recommend a particular brand/type?

Thanks.

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## christian_piper

Well, when using a protector, your zimage quality WILL go down- either with increased flare, CA, or less sharpness..... So if you have insurance, and hoods, I dont see a reason to use them.


----------



## BrinNutz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *christian_piper*


Well, when using a protector, your zimage quality WILL go down- either with increased flare, CA, or less sharpness..... So if you have insurance, and hoods, I dont see a reason to use them.


Not always. If you get a good filter, it won't.


----------



## christian_piper

Quote:


Originally Posted by *BrinNutz* 
Not always. If you get a good filter, it won't.

How do you figure? You are adding glass to the lens... At least SOME situations it will hurt it a bit...

However, a good UV filter can be nice.. I advise you get a protector or UV filter IF you remember you can take it off if you notice flare..... My kit lens gets no effects I can tell with my UV filter but my 50mm prime gets a bit of flare.. Might be because it is a recessed front element, I don't know....


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:


Originally Posted by *christian_piper* 
How do you figure? You are adding glass to the lens... At least SOME situations it will hurt it a bit...

However, a good UV filter can be nice.. I advise you get a protector or UV filter IF you remember you can take it off if you notice flare..... My kit lens gets no effects I can tell with my UV filter but my 50mm prime gets a bit of flare.. Might be because it is a recessed front element, I don't know....

Yeah, I think I'll get a UV filter for at least one lens. It's probably a good idea.

I always thought lens flare could be cured by using a hood, no? I leave an MC Protector on my FZ50's lens all the time (except for macro, when I have a macro filter to attach) and I find I don't get any flare with the hood on. I used to get some, before I started to use the hood all the time.

Anyway, I have another question for everybody who's got a DSLR







.

If you could only use one lens (that actually exists now) for your DSLR for the rest of your life, what lens would you pick and why?

I can't really answer atm, but I'd probably go for something like a 17-55mm f2.8, if I could actually afford one







. What about you DSLR owners?

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## ecoyd1

sd


----------



## ecoyd1

a


----------



## bgbop15

I dunno if i can sell a flash on here cause it's not exactly computer stuff, but If i can, would anybody be interested? It's Nikon SB-400 I was using on my D60...


----------



## max302

Quote:


Originally Posted by *ecoyd1* 
ok...ive pretty much finished redesigning my website.

all that i need to do is implement the actual wedding-business part of it into it.

http://milophoto.com

thoughts?

Nice stuff, clean, professional. Somewhat minimal, but it's a good think IMO, makes you're photos the main event.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *bgbop15* 
I dunno if i can sell a flash on here cause it's not exactly computer stuff, but If i can, would anybody be interested? It's Nikon SB-400 I was using on my D60...

If I weren't unemployed, I'd jump.... Once you get the rep, I'd try posting it here, you might just sell it.

Here are some more skatepark shots I took the other day.





I can't decide if it's too blurry because of the slower shutter. What do you think?



Needs to be cropped...



OOOOOouuuuh, angled shots. Frainbuck, eh?



I attempted to edit this one, used the GIMP and Photomatix. Cropped and straightened in the GIMP, then super-saturated, then blended with the orignals to get the clouds right. It has this kind of bi-polar look to it, once side blue and one side orangy. I might be applying masks to make it more apparent.


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:


Originally Posted by *ecoyd1* 
ok...ive pretty much finished redesigning my website.

all that i need to do is implement the actual wedding-business part of it into it.

http://milophoto.com

thoughts?

Looks good. I like the colour scheme. The greys are nice and focus attention on the photographs, which is what the site should be doing.

The only criticism I would levy at it is that your logo is far too difficult to read imo. If you want to spread your brand, you'll need something clear and easy to comprehend that will stick in people's minds.

You really need something that's instantly legible and I found your logo design (although pleasantly artistic) difficult to understand. Perhaps it's just me, but if you look around the business world, you'll find relatively simple shapes and easily comprehended lettering used for logos. It's not done like this for lack of creativity, but to create an easily recognisable brand image.

Think of all the big well known brands, from fast food, to cars, to computer equipment. The majority have relatively simplistic logo formations, with lucid text, if text is present.

Just my thoughts! As an artistic form, the logo is great, but as a logo, I think there might be better choices that fulfil the function of a logo more effectively







.

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## ecoyd1

sdasd


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ecoyd1*


Thank you for your comments...I will think of a new logo.


Well, obviously it's totally up to you, but you know that







.

I like the barcode idea, that's pretty cool, it's just the font/style/word placement used for your name, followed by "photography" that I found quite hard to decipher when I first saw it.

Otherwise, good site!









Highly-Annoyed


----------



## GoneTomorrow

The Sierras from 35,000 feet; you can actually see the curvature of the earth:


----------



## Ryan747

Im thinking of getting a D40 i found them for $350 and i figure if i get one that cheap i can get a good lens also. Are D40s good cams for Amature photographers?


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

gone - or barrel distortion


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie*


gone - or barrel distortion










A good point to make, but I actually observed it, which is why I decided to shoot it. Not bad for shooting through two panes of filthy and scratched window glass/plexiglass.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Ryan747* 
Im thinking of getting a D40 i found them for $350 and i figure if i get one that cheap i can get a good lens also. Are D40s good cams for Amature photographers?

Sure, they're quality entry level DSLRs. What site are you seeing this camera at that price? There are *a lot* of bait 'n' switch companies out there, so be sure to check the site on www.resellerratings.com


----------



## max302

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Ryan747* 
Im thinking of getting a D40 i found them for $350 and i figure if i get one that cheap i can get a good lens also. Are D40s good cams for Amature photographers?

I have the D40, and quite honestly, it gets the job done. IMO you're better off buying an entry level SLR body, then build your lense collection if you like it, then buy another better body if you feel the need to. All the pics I posted in this thread were taken with my D40, and my Flickr has tons more pics.


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

OK guys; I've been reading a heck of a lot of reviews for lenses lately and within my budget, I've found two that seem very good. Neither are Nikkor lenses, but the reviews and user feedback I've read (and pictures I've seen taken with them on the D300) show them to be excellent lenses, both for the money and in absolute terms.

With the D300, I've decided to go for the:

*Tamron SP AF 17-50mm F/2.8 XR Di II LD Aspheric IF.*

This is f2.8 (with "good" boke) throughout the zoom range (like the Nikkor 17-55mm) and the lens resolves more detail (is sharper) than the Nikkor throughout as well, according to reviews I've seen. The other major benefit is that this lens is less than half the price of the 17-55mm Nikkor. In the USA, Tamron offer a 6 year warranty for this lens as standard and although I'm not sure I'll get the same in the UK, it does suggest that Tamron are confident about the build quality.

The downside is that this Tamron has a little more distortion at the wide end and shows a little more chromatic aberration than the Nikkor. These minor problems can be easily corrected with RAW processing and indeed, the CAs can be fixed in-camera on the D300 if I actually wanted to shoot JPEG, which I don't. I plan to get Capture NX2 with the D300 (cost around Â£130 in the UK), so fixing these issues will be no problem.

I intend to get a 62mm Hoya SHMC PRO1-D UV Filter for this lens too. This is a low profile filter and will function as an MC protector (seven coats) to help protect the lens front element, as well as dealing with UV.

The second lens I plan to buy is the:

*Tokina AT-X PRO DX AF 11-16mm f/2.8.*

Again, this has f2.8 throughout the limited zoom range. The closest equivalent in the Nikkor line-up is the 12-24mm F4. The extra aperture of the Tokina will be good for low light in conjunction with the fairly clean higher ISOs of the D300. Again, this lens resolves more detail (is sharper) than the Nikkor, especially at the smaller apertures f8-f11 etc where it will be used for daylight landscape etc, but also at the large apertures including f2.8. It's also wider (although only by 8.3%) than the Nikkor and is also about 50% less expensive.

The downside is a little more distortion at the wide end compared to the Nikkor and somewhat greater amount of CA as well. Again, these minor issues can be resolved easily using a good RAW processor (Capture NX2) which I will use for all shooting anyway. The Tokina also has a more limited zoom range of 1.45x VS the Nikkor's 2x. This can be remedied (most of the time) by walking forward a few feet if necessary.

I intend to get a 77mm Hoya SHMC PRO-1 Digital Circular Polariser for this lens, which is low profile (to avoid added vignetting) and "super" multi-coated to avoid negatively interfering with the lens. It's also pretty damn expensive at Â£155 in the UK.

Both these lenses together will take me from 11-50mm (16.5-75mm @ 35mm equiv.) which will cover around 65% of what I shoot currently, both with f2.8 throughout and both very sharp. Both lenses are third-party, but both are in the "pro" range of the third party's line-up. Both lenses have some minor (easilly fixed in Capture NX2) problems that their equivalent Nikkors have less of, but both are sharper than the equivalent and the wide-angle has a wider aperture throughout.

To be honest, after spending around Â£1000 on a camera (the D300) and around Â£300 on necessary extras, I'm going to be pretty strapped for cash for lenses, so I don't have much of an option (if I want both a standard zoom and wide-angle lens right away) but to opt for third party. These third party lenses have good user feedback, look really good on paper, and shots I've seen with them on the D300 look equally as good as the paper specifications, so these are currently my choices.

*What do you guys think?*

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Highly-Annoyed*


OK guys; I've been reading a heck of a lot of reviews for lenses lately and within my budget, I've found two that seem very good. Neither are Nikkor lenses, but the reviews and user feedback I've read (and pictures I've seen taken with them on the D300) show them to be excellent lenses, both for the money and in absolute terms.

With the D300, I've decided to go for the:

*Tamron SP AF 17-50mm F/2.8 XR Di II LD Aspheric IF.*

This is f2.8 (with "good" boke) throughout the zoom range (like the Nikkor 17-55mm) and the lens resolves more detail (is sharper) than the Nikkor throughout as well, according to reviews I've seen. The other major benefit is that this lens is less than half the price of the 17-55mm Nikkor. In the USA, Tamron offer a 6 year warranty for this lens as standard and although I'm not sure I'll get the same in the UK, it does suggest that Tamron are confident about the build quality.

The downside is that this Tamron has a little more distortion at the wide end and shows a little more chromatic aberration than the Nikkor. These minor problems can be easily corrected with RAW processing and indeed, the CAs can be fixed in-camera on the D300 if I actually wanted to shoot JPEG, which I don't. I plan to get Capture NX2 with the D300 (cost around Â£130 in the UK), so fixing these issues will be no problem.

I intend to get a 62mm Hoya SHMC PRO1-D UV Filter for this lens too. This is a low profile filter and will function as an MC protector (seven coats) to help protect the lens front element, as well as dealing with UV.

The second lens I plan to buy is the:

*Tokina AT-X PRO DX AF 11-16mm f/2.8.*

Again, this has f2.8 throughout the limited zoom range. The closest equivalent in the Nikkor line-up is the 12-24mm F4. The extra aperture of the Tokina will be good for low light in conjunction with the fairly clean higher ISOs of the D300. Again, this lens resolves more detail (is sharper) than the Nikkor, especially at the smaller apertures f8-f11 etc where it will be used for daylight landscape etc, but also at the large apertures including f2.8. It's also wider (although only by 8.3%) than the Nikkor and is also about 50% less expensive.

The downside is a little more distortion at the wide end compared to the Nikkor and somewhat greater amount of CA as well. Again, these minor issues can be resolved easily using a good RAW processor (Capture NX2) which I will use for all shooting anyway. The Tokina also has a more limited zoom range of 1.45x VS the Nikkor's 2x. This can be remedied (most of the time) by walking forward a few feet if necessary.

I intend to get a 77mm Hoya SHMC PRO-1 Digital Circular Polariser for this lens, which is low profile (to avoid added vignetting) and "super" multi-coated to avoid negatively interfering with the lens. It's also pretty damn expensive at Â£155 in the UK.

Both these lenses together will take me from 11-50mm (16.5-75mm @ 35mm equiv.) which will cover around 65% of what I shoot currently, both with f2.8 throughout and both very sharp. Both lenses are third-party, but both are in the "pro" range of the third party's line-up. Both lenses have some minor (easilly fixed in Capture NX2) problems that their equivalent Nikkors have less of, but both are sharper than the equivalent and the wide-angle has a wider aperture throughout.

To be honest, after spending around Â£1000 on a camera (the D300) and around Â£300 on necessary extras, I'm going to be pretty strapped for cash for lenses, so I don't have much of an option (if I want both a standard zoom and wide-angle lens right away) but to opt for third party. These third party lenses have good user feedback, look really good on paper, and shots Iâ€™ve seem with them on the D300 look equally as good as the paper specifications, so these are currently my choices.

*What do you guys think?*

Highly-Annoyed


I've seen/known people who use Tamron lenses, but I've never heard of Tokina (and that by no means indicates that it's not a significant brand name).

I understand the need for wide angle (my next purchase for sure), but you seem to be lacking in the telephoto department. There are great telephoto lenses out there that go pretty wide and still have a decent telephoto (the range on my zoom is perfect IMO - 28mm - 135mm). You might say that you do landscapes primarily and have no need for telephoto, but I definitely appreciate having a decent zoom even for those kinds of shots.

Lenses are things you buy for the long run - something to consider if buying third party. They may be perfectly ok for all I know, but if you have qualms, why not buy one good Nikkor lens and save for others?


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


I've seen/known people who use Tamron lenses, but I've never heard of Tokina (and that by no means indicates that it's not a significant brand name).

I understand the need for wide angle (my next purchase for sure), but you seem to be lacking in the telephoto department. There are great telephoto lenses out there that go pretty wide and still have a decent telephoto (the range on my zoom is perfect IMO - 28mm - 135mm). You might say that you do landscapes primarily and have no need for telephoto, but I definitely appreciate having a decent zoom even for those kinds of shots.

Lenses are things you buy for the long run - something to consider if buying third party. They may be perfectly ok for all I know, but if you have qualms, why not buy one good Nikkor lens and save for others?


Yeah, I thought of just getting one really good Nikkor. I was going to get the *Nikkor 16-85mm*, but although it's wicked-sharp, it's f3.5-5.6 and it's boke is supposed to be undesirable.

I also looked at the popular *Nikkor 18-200mm*, but again, it's f3.5-5.6 and it's distortions (although well controlled for such a large zoom range) are quite prominent, especially so at the short end, where I'd use it most.

In addition, I thought of foregoing almost all of the extras (like Capture NX2, and every filter) and just getting a single lens in the *Nikkor 17-55mm f2.8*, but the truth is, that based on what I've read, the slightly shorter 17-50mm f2.8 Tamron is sharper throughout the zoom range and with RAW editing (that I'd be doing anyway) the little extra distortions and CAs compared to the Nikkor can be fixed easily. One thing you can't fix with software though, is increasing the detail captured in an image, that needs to be done with the hardware and the Tamron is better at it than the Nikkor based on everything I've read. Also as I said, Tamron are offering (at least in the USA) a 6 year standard warranty, which says to me that they're confident their lens will last.

I've spent about two weeks reading (into the small hours) reviews, user feedback and looking at photos taken with various lenses on the D300 and I've tried various permutations of lens purchase within my budget and the two lenses I've listed fit best for what I shoot most (currently) and the money I've got to spend initially.

I figure that in six months to a year's time, I'll be able to get more and potentially better lenses, but if I'm going to get the D300 (which I am) for the mean-time I'm going to have to make some compromises in terms of how many lenses I can get, for what price.

Later on, I intend to get the Nikkor 70-300mm VR, which, although it's only got apertures of f4.5-5.6, is supposed to be very good for the money and on a crop frame sensor gives a 35mm equiv. of 105-450mm, which will be more than adequate for me as I'm not into wildlife photography much and rarely need to zoom past 135mm (around 200mm @ 35mm equiv.). The Nikkor 70-200mm f2.8 VR is also a contender







.

The only other lenses I plan to get would be a prime lens (perhaps the Nikkor 50mm f1.4) and a macro lens, which currently I plan to be the Nikkor 105mm f2.8 VRII Micro, unless a better, equivalently priced alternative shows up in the lens market. This will leave a gap between 50mm and 70mm, but I'll probably fill it as time progresses.

Thanks for taking the time to read my posts! They're fairly long and I was a bit concerned nobody would read them and comment!























*Further comments are welcome!*









Highly-Annoyed


----------



## ecoyd1

sdsds


----------



## mugan23

i had to macro my quad, so i thought might as well do it now before i lap it


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Highly-Annoyed*


Yeah, I thought of just getting one really good Nikkor. I was going to get the *Nikkor 16-85mm*, but although it's wicked-sharp, it's f3.5-5.6 and it's boke is supposed to be undesirable.

I also looked at the popular *Nikkor 18-200mm*, but again, it's f3.5-5.6 and it's distortions (although well controlled for such a large zoom range) are quite prominent, especially so at the short end, where I'd use it most.

In addition, I thought of foregoing almost all of the extras (like Capture NX2, and every filter) and just getting a single lens in the *Nikkor 17-55mm f2.8*, but the truth is, that based on what I've read, the slightly shorter 17-50mm f2.8 Tamron is sharper throughout the zoom range and with RAW editing (that I'd be doing anyway) the little extra distortions and CAs compared to the Nikkor can be fixed easily. One thing you can't fix with software though, is increasing the detail captured in an image, that needs to be done with the hardware and the Tamron is better at it than the Nikkor based on everything I've read. Also as I said, Tamron are offering (at least in the USA) a 6 year standard warranty, which says to me that they're confident their lens will last.

I've spent about two weeks reading (into the small hours) reviews, user feedback and looking at photos taken with various lenses on the D300 and I've tried various permutations of lens purchase within my budget and the two lenses I've listed fit best for what I shoot most currently and the money I've got to spend initially.

I figure that in six months to a year's time, I'll be able to get more and potentially better lenses, but if I'm going to get the D300 (which I am) for the mean-time I'm going to have to make some compromises in terms of how many lenses I can get, for what price.

Later on, I intend to get the Nikkor 70-300mm VR, which, although it's only got apertures of f4.5-5.6, is supposed to be very good for the money and on a crop frame sensor gives a 35mm equiv. of 105-450mm, which will be more than adequate for me as I'm not into wildlife photography much and rarely need to zoom past 135mm (around 200mm @ 35mm equiv.). The Nikkor 70-200mm f2.8 VR is also a contender







.

The only other lenses I plan to get would be a prime lens (perhaps the Nikkor 50mm f1.4) and a macro lens, which currently I plan to be the Nikkor 105mm f2.8 VRII Micro, unless a better, equivalently priced alternative shows up in the lens market. This will leave a gap between 50mm and 70mm, but I'll probably fill it as time progresses.

Thanks for taking the time to read my posts! They're fairly long and I was a bit concerned nobody would read them and comment!























*Further comments are welcome!*









Highly-Annoyed


I understand the want for great bokeh, but if you doing mostly landscapes, then that would be among the least of your concerns, since bokeh is seen in macros, portraits, etc. where you use wide apertures.

And I wouldn't be so concerned that all your lenses have constant apertures throughout the focal range. Afterall, landscapes are best shot in narrow apertures anyway.


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:


Originally Posted by *ecoyd1* 
Check out these shots I have from the 18-200 I used. I see only a little distortion on the wide end; its really nothing to worry about. It is an amazing lens.




















They do look very nice ecoyd1. I know the Nikkor 18-200mm is a good lens. For the zoom range it provides it handles distortions extremely well.

The truth is that I thought to myself, why get DSLR if you're going to get one lens and leave it on all the time? The beauty of DSLR over super-zoom bridge cameras like the FZ50 is (apart from superior sensors etc) the ability to pick lenses that specialise for a certain range, with certain apertures. As good as the 18-200mm is, I'm sure you'd agree that it's not as good as getting several individual lenses which cover the same focal range, but specialise at certain sections of it. The Nikkor 17-55mm f2.8 is better at 18-55mm than the 18-200mm is at 18-55mm, no? Surely the 70-200mm f2.8 is better at 70-200mm than the 18-200mm is at 70-200mm, right?

Also, to be honest, I don't really go much beyond 135mm more than, perhaps 5-10% of the time currently and very few of those shots make it to my collection. I'm just not that bothered about telephoto zoom. When I have the spare cash, I'll probably invest in the Nikkor 70-300mm F/4.5-5.6, which can be had for about 60% of the cost of the 18-200mm in the UK and is likely better at 70-200mm than the 18-200mm is at 70-200mm.

Thanks for your comments and for taking the time to show me examples!









Highly-Annoyed

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
I understand the want for great bokeh, but if you doing mostly landscapes, then that would be among the least of your concerns, since bokeh is seen in macros, portraits, etc. where you use wide apertures.

And I wouldn't be so concerned that all your lenses have constant apertures throughout the focal range. Afterall, landscapes are best shot in narrow apertures anyway.

Agreed, landscapes are best shot at small apertures, but I'd like the flexibility of having a large aperture if possible, to tackle low light situations, or shoot wide-angle indoors in available light. Also, I'd like to expand what I shoot to a certain extent to encompass other subject matter as well, so flexibility is useful.

The two major problems I've had with my FZ50 are noise and poor low light performance and I'd really like to cure those issues with the D300's good high ISO performance and some fast glass. To be honest, I don't care too much about the f2.8 aperture on the 11-16mm, as it will be used mostly for daylight landscape/seascape etc, but it just so happens to be sharper and cheaper than the Nikkor equivalent, so I look upon the wide aperture as a bonus for that lens, rather than something I actually need. It's also a bit wider than the Nikkor, which is also nice.

As for the 17-50mm f2.8, again, it's sharper than the Nikkor 17-55mm f2.8 equivalent and will be used as a kind of general purpose lens, so it's always a good idea to have the wide aperture at hand if needed.

Later on, I can add the 105mm Micro (macro), 70-200mm f2.8 tele, or 70-300mm f4.5-5.6 tele and _perhaps_ a decent prime and that'll be OK for my needs for a while.

I've read that Pros tend to gravitate towards lenses with wide apertures throughout (perhaps with the exception of landscape pros?) so I figure there must be a good reason for it. The pros of course can afford the absolute best, I have to just go with what I can afford, but again, other than some minor niggles (which can be fixed in Capture NX2) the lenses I plan to get are the better choice over the equivalent Nikkors, perhaps with the exception of a certain amount of build quality.

Still, I believe both lenses have a one year "local" warranty, so as I'd be using them a lot, I'd soon find out if there were any troubles and if so, be able to get them replaced. If they go wrong outside of the warranty limit, I may _accidentally_ drop them ( who knows







) and put in an insurance claim for a replacement














.

That's partly why I'd like to get two lenses to start. If one is defective (or becomes so) hopefully the other will be OK and I wont be left lensless whilst I wait for a replacement







.

I know I'm leaving myself a little short, range-wise with the two lenses I've chosen, but as I said, they'll cover, perhaps 65% of what I currently shoot. If I got a tele, instead of a wide-angle, they'd only cover perhaps 35% and if I got a tele and wide-angle I'd have a fairly big 17-70mm gap in the middle that would leave my options more limited than the combination I plan to go for. Also, to be fair, I don't make use of tele zoom often enough to really justify it at the moment







.

I really wanted to get the Sigma 17-70mm f2.8-4.5 DC macro lens, which would be a good range for me, but I've read some bad user feedback about their hit-and-miss QA and pretty poor UK customer services, so that make's me reluctant to purchase. The lens it's self has some good reviews though, but is quite a bit less sharp than the Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 at f2.8 and isn't f2.8 throughout the zoom range. Annoyingly Canon make a 16-70mm f2.8 L series lens which looks nice, but obviously isn't for a Nikon mount







.

Anyway thanks for your responses GoneTomorrow, it's always good to hear from you







.

If you guys hear of anything bad, specifically about the lenses I've listed, I'd appreciate it if you'd let me know. I've only seen good things in the couple of weeks I've been on the hunt for lenses, but obviously there are millions of relevant web pages and I can't read them all







.

I should be making the purchases sometime in August, probably around the 20th to the 30th, when I should have all the funds I need, so I've got time to make changes to the current list if it turns out there are problems I'm not aware of with my current choices







.

Thanks guys!









Highly-Annoyed


----------



## Dronac

Hey everyone, I just purchased my first camera from the egg, and should be in this Wednesday or Thursday. Its the Casio Exilim EX-Z80. I know people reccomend the Cannon SD1000 for Ultra Compacts, but the Casio had a few features that I really liked and the Cannon didn't fit in the budget.

Anyways, I'm looking forward to learning how to take good pictures. I'm not really going to be doing any displayed photography, most of it will be for archiving, or 4x6 prints if anything. Ill also be doing a good bit of video.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Highly-Annoyed*


They do look very nice ecoyd1. I know the Nikkor 18-200mm is a good lens. For the zoom range it provides it handles distortions extremely well.

The truth is that I thought to myself, why get DSLR if you're going to get one lens and leave it on all the time? The beauty of DSLR over super-zoom bridge cameras like the FZ50 is (apart from superior sensors etc) the ability to pick lenses that specialise for a certain range, with certain apertures. As good as the 18-200mm is, I'm sure you'd agree that it's not as good as getting several individual lenses which cover the same focal range, but specialise at certain sections of it. The Nikkor 17-55mm f2.8 is better at 18-55mm than the 18-200mm is at 18-55mm, no? Surely the 70-200mm f2.8 is better at 70-200mm than the 18-200mm is at 70-200mm, right?

Also, to be honest, I don't really go much beyond 135mm more than, perhaps 5-10% of the time currently and very few of those shots make it to my collection. I'm just not that bothered about telephoto zoom. When I have the spare cash, I'll probably invest in the Nikkor 70-300mm F/4.5-5.6, which can be had for about 60% of the cost of the 18-200mm in the UK and is likely better at 70-200mm than the 18-200mm is at 70-200mm.

Thanks for your comments and for taking the time to show me examples!









Highly-Annoyed

Agreed, landscapes are best shot at small apertures, but I'd like the flexibility of having a large aperture if possible, to tackle low light situations, or shoot wide-angle indoors in available light. Also, I'd like to expand what I shoot to a certain extent to encompass other subject matter as well, so flexibility is useful.

The two major problems I've had with my FZ50 are noise and poor low light performance and I'd really like to cure those issues with the D300's good high ISO performance and some fast glass. To be honest, I don't care too much about the f2.8 aperture on the 11-16mm, as it will be used mostly for daylight landscape/seascape etc, but it just so happens to be sharper and cheaper than the Nikkor equivalent, so I look upon the wide aperture as a bonus for that lens, rather than something I actually need. It's also a bit wider than the Nikkor, which is also nice.

As for the 17-50mm f2.8, again, it's sharper than the Nikkor 17-55mm f2.8 equivalent and will be used as a kind of general purpose lens, so it's always a good idea to have the wide aperture at hand if needed.

Later on, I can add the 105mm Micro (macro), 70-200mm f2.8 tele, or 70-300mm f4.5-5.6 tele and _perhaps_ a decent prime and that'll be OK for my needs for a while.

I've read that Pros tend to gravitate towards lenses with wide apertures throughout (perhaps with the exception of landscape pros?) so I figure there must be a good reason for it. The pros of course can afford the absolute best, I have to just go with what I can afford, but again, other than some minor niggles (which can be fixed in Capture NX2) the lenses I plan to get are the better choice over the equivalent Nikkors, perhaps with the exception of a certain amount of build quality.

Still, I believe both lenses have a one year "local" warranty, so as I'd be using them a lot, I'd soon find out if there were any troubles and if so, be able to get them replaced. If they go wrong outside of the warranty limit, I may _accidentally_ drop them ( who knows







) and put in an insurance claim for a replacement














.

That's partly why I'd like to get two lenses to start. If one is defective (or becomes so) hopefully the other will be OK and I wont be left lensless whilst I wait for a replacement







.

I know I'm leaving myself a little short, range-wise with the two lenses I've chosen, but as I said, they'll cover, perhaps 65% of what I currently shoot. If I got a tele, instead of a wide-angle, they'd only cover perhaps 35% and if I got a tele and wide-angle I'd have a fairly big 17-70mm gap in the middle that would leave my options more limited than the combination I plan to go for. Also, to be fair, I don't make use of tele zoom often enough to really justify it at the moment







.

I really wanted to get the Sigma 17-70mm f2.8-4.5 DC macro lens, which would be a good range for me, but I've read some bad user feedback about their hit-and-miss QA and pretty poor UK customer services, so that make's me reluctant to purchase. The lens it's self has some good reviews though, but is quite a bit less sharp than the Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 at f2.8 and isn't f2.8 throughout the zoom range. Annoyingly Canon make a 16-70mm f2.8 L series lens which looks nice, but obviously isn't for a Nikon mount







.

Anyway thanks for your responses GoneTomorrow, it's always good to hear from you







.

If you guys hear of anything bad, specifically about the lenses I've listed, I'd appreciate it if you'd let me know. I've only seen good things in the couple of weeks I've been on the hunt for lenses, but obviously there are millions of relevant web pages and I can't read them all







.

I should be making the purchases sometime in August, probably around the 20th to the 30th, when I should have all the funds I need, so I've got time to make changes to the current list if it turns out there are problems I'm not aware of with my current choices







.

Thanks guys!









Highly-Annoyed


No problem, the questions you ask make me consider my future lenses. I really wish I could have all Canon *L* lenses!

I learned a lot about lenses from this guide (you may know much of this info):
http://www.dcresource.com/forums/showthread.php?t=8089

I love the picture at the beginning, must be $50,000 worth of lenses:


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dronac*


Hey everyone, I just purchased my first camera from the egg, and should be in this Wednesday or Thursday. Its the Casio Exilim EX-Z80. I know people reccomend the Cannon SD1000 for Ultra Compacts, but the Casio had a few features that I really liked and the Cannon didn't fit in the budget.

Anyways, I'm looking forward to learning how to take good pictures. I'm not really going to be doing any displayed photography, most of it will be for archiving, or 4x6 prints if anything. Ill also be doing a good bit of video.


Budget? The SD1000 retails for $150, same as the Casio you bought. Maybe you're thinking of the slightly more expensive SD1100 IS.

Nevertheless I think you will like the Casio, they're decent enough. Since you have an ultra compact, you should carry it with you where ever you go. I have an SD1000 that I used to carry in pocket almost at all times, good for those candid shots or sudden inspirations.


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
No problem, the questions you ask make me consider my future lenses. I really wish I could have all Canon *L* lenses!

I learned a lot about lenses from this guide (you may know much of this info):
http://www.dcresource.com/forums/showthread.php?t=8089

I love the picture at the beginning, must be $50,000 worth of lenses:










Thanks for the link, I've book-marked it and will read through later.

It's been a crash course for me learning about lenses over the last couple of weeks. I've been agonising over what to get on such a limited lens budget.

I've got about Â£935 out of a Â£2200 maximum photographic budget to spend on lenses. Now, Â£935 sounds like quite a lot of money, but when you add in high quality UV filters (or the ridiculously expensive high quality Circular PL filter I'm going to get) that shaves about 16% off the budget and then you end up with around Â£750 for lenses alone...

Sadly, Â£750 doesn't go far on Nikkor lenses, it'll only buy you 88% of the Nikkor 17-55mm f2.8 standard zoom for example...

I've been up to the very small hours night after night researching lenses and reading obscure camera forums for feedback from users... I've been trawling through Flickr for pictures from the lenses I've been looking at coupled with the D300 to see what the results are like. My goodness, I've read and looked at so much for each lens I've considered I'll start dreaming about MTF charts soon







.

I love to learn new things though! Its been so much fun (although fairly hard work) to come to an independent conclusion about what lens choice to make based on all of my research over the last two weeks. It's been a matter of teaching myself about lenses, more or less from scratch, so I can make an informed decision. Fortunately I've only _just_ learnt enough to make an informed decision, so there is no doubt lots left to learn!

I've also been researching into compositional technique in advance of my upgrade to DSLR and it's also been quite fun. I'm really looking forward to putting the theory into practice with the D300 when I get it, but again, like lenses there's still lots to learn! The D300 it's self has a 421 page manual, so I'm going to have a lot to teach myself in the coming few months







!

Any links to web sites that explain composition in depth would be most welcome! Also, any links to user "how to" pages about the D300 would be good as well, to get some studying in before the camera arrives.

I can tell you, honestly, I'm actually getting quite excited about all this. I had no idea photography was so complex, interesting and enjoyable!

Thanks again for your help and advice!

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## BrinNutz

If you had a Canon I could help you...


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:



Originally Posted by *BrinNutz*


If you had a Canon I could help you...


I had a look at the Canon 5D as an alternative to the Nikon D300, but I figured that the newer, cheaper D300 would be a better choice. Still, I think it's hard to fairly compare the full frame 5D to the crop frame D300. What do you think, do they compare, is the 5D a better choice? Perhaps I'm missing an opportunity not going with Canon?

Any Canon advice is welcome as although I'm fairly set on the D300, my mind is not beyond being swayed by a good argument and I've still got about 6 weeks to make a final decision. Bear in mind though, that my maximum budget is Â£2200, which translates to about $4340 USD. Also bear in mind that US prices are generally lower (even when adjusted for the exchange rate) than British prices, so what can be bought in the US for $4340, when converted to GBP, doesn't buy as much in the UK.

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Highly-Annoyed* 
I had a look at the Canon 5D as an alternative to the Nikon D300, but I figured that the newer, cheaper D300 would be a better choice. Still, I think it's hard to fairly compare the full frame 5D to the crop frame D300. What do you think, do they compare, is the 5D a better choice? Perhaps I'm missing an opportunity not going with Canon?

Any Canon advice is welcome as although I'm fairly set on the D300, my mind is not beyond being swayed by a good argument and I've still got about 6 weeks to make a final decision. Bear in mind though, that my maximum budget is Â£2200, which translates to about $4340 USD. Also bear in mind that US prices are generally lower (even when adjusted for the exchange rate) than British prices, so what can be bought in the US for $4340, when converted to GBP, doesn't buy as much in the UK.

Highly-Annoyed

The 5D is a godly camera. It came out in 2005, but it was years ahead of its time. It was one of the first to use Canon's DIGIC III processor, which they are still putting in the new Canon XSi. It's easily as good as the D300 imo, but you can't go wrong with either.

Check out some 100% crops for the 5D, they are virtually noiseless up to 1600 ISO.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


The 5D is a godly camera. It came out in 2005, but it was years ahead of its time. It was one of the first to use Canon's DIGIC III processor, which they are still putting in the new Canon XSi. It's easily as good as the D300 imo, but you can't go wrong with either.

Check out some 100% crops for the 5D, they are virtually noiseless up to 1600 ISO.


QFT
not a huge canon fan (not saying they arnt good, just never enjoyed using them as much as nikon or pentax)
but the 5D is a beast, and one of the best you can get if you do landscapes and have the time to play around with shots.


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


The 5D is a godly camera. It came out in 2005, but it was years ahead of its time. It was one of the first to use Canon's DIGIC III processor, which they are still putting in the new Canon XSi. It's easily as good as the D300 imo, but you can't go wrong with either.

Check out some 100% crops for the 5D, they are virtually noiseless up to 1600 ISO.


Yeah, I saw some noise comparisons between the D300 and the 5D and they we're pretty good. To be honest, I thought I saw more noise in the crops of the 5D than in the D300 crops of the same scene, but it wasn't a great deal more and the image quality looked so much better on the 5D shots! More contrast and detail, it was really nice. Having said that, both cameras weren't using the same lenses, one was a Canon, one Nikkor, so perhaps the glass had some effect on the contrast and sharpness?

I might be convinced towards the 5D as it is only about Â£100 or so more expesive than the D300. I have to think though, can a three year old camera, even a godly one, ahead of its time, not be lacking in some areas VS the barely one year old D300? I'm always inclined towards the newest technology if I can afford it.

What does the D300 have that the 5D lacks? Other than the full frame sensor, what does the 5D have that the D300 lacks? I guess I'll have to do a bit more research







.

Also, GoneTomorrow, I'm seeing DIGIC II (not III) on the Canon product page here??

Quote:



Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie*


QFT
not a huge canon fan (not saying they arnt good, just never enjoyed using them as much as nikon or pentax)
but the 5D is a beast, and one of the best you can get if you do landscapes and have the time to play around with shots.


Hmmm, what makes it more beastly than the D300, other than the full frame sensor?

Also, guys, what about lenses for the Canon? If I can get it for Â£1100 that leaves Â£1100 more for software, memory cards, a sensor cleaning kit, filter/s and lenses.

I see the 5D comes with a free RAW processor (any good?) that would save around Â£130 on the software. It also takes the Sandisk "Ultra" compact flash cards instead of the faster Extreme III/IV cards, so that'll save me about Â£50.00.

So, all in all, if I could get the Camera for Â£1100, I'd have Â£965 left for lenses and filters. If necessary, I could forego the filters in the short term. What does Â£965 buy in Canon lenses?

Again guys, any advice is welcome! I'll do a bit of my own research in the mean-time







.

Thanks!

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

the biggest thing from what i have seen is sharpness, and noise.
it is SHARP, even at the edge of the frame, noise is also very good on it, but when shooting in an auto mode i have also read that the metering is not up to par, so its more of a camera for taking your time and setting up a shot just right, but it excels at it.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Highly-Annoyed* 
Yeah, I saw some noise comparisons between the D300 and the 5D and they we're pretty good. To be honest, I thought I saw more noise in the crops of the 5D than in the D300 crops of the same scene, but it wasn't a great deal more and the image quality looked so much better on the 5D shots! More contrast and detail, it was really nice. Having said that, both cameras weren't using the same lenses, one was a Canon, one Nikkor, so perhaps the glass had some effect on the contrast and sharpness?

I might be convinced towards the 5D as it is only about Â£100 or so more expesive than the D300. I have to think though, can a three year old camera, even a godly one, ahead of its time, not be lacking in some areas VS the barely one year old D300? I'm always inclined towards the newest technology if I can afford it.

What does the D300 have that the 5D lacks? Other than the full frame sensor, what does the 5D have that the D300 lacks? I guess I'll have to do a bit more research







.

Also, GoneTomorrow, I'm seeing DIGIC II (not III) on the Canon product page here??

Hmmm, what makes it more beastly than the D300, other than the full frame sensor?

Also, guys, what about lenses for the Canon? If I can get it for Â£1100 that leaves Â£1100 more for software, memory cards, a sensor cleaning kit, filter/s and lenses.

I see the 5D comes with a free RAW processor (any good?) that would save around Â£130 on the software. It also takes the Sandisk "Ultra" compact flash cards instead of the faster Extreme III/IV cards, so that'll save me about Â£50.00.

So, all in all, if I could get the Camera for Â£1100, I'd have Â£965 left for lenses and filters. If necessary, I could forego the filters in the short term. What does Â£965 buy in Canon lenses?

Again guys, any advice is welcome! I'll do a bit of my own research in the mean-time







.

Thanks!

Highly-Annoyed

Whoops, I must've had the 40D in mind when I read that. It does use DIGIC II which is something to consider. For that matter, the 40D is also a great camera, but not perhaps on the same level as the D300.

Canon uses Digital Photo Professional for adjusting RAW images and it's really good, I use it solely for making RAW adjustments.

For 1100 quid you could get a nice Canon L lens or even non-L lenses. Canon has a good line up of lenses and some of there non Ls stack up to the L lenses (especially their 50mm f/1.4 prime, every bit as good as the L counterpart from what I've read).

However if you're looking for the latest bodies, Canon hasn't released any new midrange or high end bodies this year (most recent was the 40D last October). They have been focusing on their entry levels (XSi and the XS). Nikon has released the D3 and the D300 this year.

And the XSi that Canon released is being held as nearly the equal of the 40D, so Canon it seems is really blurring the boundaries of entry and midrange bodies, but afterall, it's tantamount to their prerogative since they pioneered entry level DSLRs.

It's a tough call with the D300. There's nothing comparable from Canon that's new, except possibly for the 40D. I expect that Canon will release an update version of the 5D soon with the DIGICIII processor.

You should take a look at the 40D, it's also a good camera which does use the DIGIC III (I'm sure of it, that's the one that I had in mind that first used the DIGIC III). It's much cheaper and would allow you put more money towards your lenses.

40D: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos40d/


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Whoops, I must've had the 40D in mind when I read that. It does use DIGIC II which is something to consider. For that matter, the 40D is also a great camera, but not perhaps on the same level as the D300.

Canon uses Digital Photo Professional for adjusting RAW images and it's really good, I use it solely for making RAW adjustments.

For 1100 quid you could get a nice Canon L lens or even non-L lenses. Canon has a good line up of lenses and some of there non Ls stack up to the L lenses (especially their 50mm f/1.4 prime, every bit as good as the L counterpart from what I've read).

However if you're looking for the latest bodies, Canon hasn't released any new midrange or high end bodies this year (most recent was the 40D last October). They have been focusing on their entry levels (XSi and the XS). Nikon has released the D3 and the D300 this year.

And the XSi that Canon released is being held as nearly the equal of the 40D, so Canon it seems is really blurring the boundaries of entry and midrange bodies, but afterall, it's tantamount to their prerogative since they pioneered entry level DSLRs.

It's a tough call with the D300. There's nothing comparable from Canon that's new, except possibly for the 40D. I expect that Canon will release an update version of the 5D soon with the DIGICIII processor.

You should take a look at the 40D, it's also a good camera which does use the DIGIC III (I'm sure of it, that's the one that I had in mind that first used the DIGIC III). It's much cheaper and would allow you put more money towards your lenses.

40D: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos40d/


OK. I've read through the information you linked to and read a couple of D300 VS 40D comparisons and though doing so does put the 40D in a more favourable light than I had previously considered it VS the D300, I just can't get past how good the D300 really is. It's 50% more expensive than the 40D and I'm not sure that 50% is wholly justified, but the feature set alone justifies a good portion of that price jump.

One of the great features the D300 has, that I didn't see on the 40D, is the ability to have user custom focus for each lens you use, to correct for front/back focusing of lenses. Instead of having to send your lens to be recalibrated, or just getting a replacement when it isn't quite perfect, you can calibrate the camera instead, to achieve perfect focus with each lens. Apparently the camera "remembers" the perfect settings for up to 12 (I think) different lenses. This is great if you're using third party lenses and need to tweak their focus performance and equally great for tweaking Nikkor lenses.

The D300 has active D-lighting, which is (apparently) superior to the Canon 40D's equivalent. It has contrast (as well as phase) focusing in live-view mode; the contrast focusing being good for getting pin-sharp focus in static macro shots. It's live-view is excellent in general and when I tried it out in our local camera shop I found the live view composition super-fast, with the camera showing the scene, flipping the mirror, acquiring focus, flipping the mirror again and showing the scene again almost faster than my FZ50 focuses in the best possible conditions. I was extremely impressed by the live-view performance, which for macro shooting can be invaluable. I simply could not have taken some macro shots I have done without the FZ50's "live-view" and although the D300's doesn't swivel (like the FZ50's) it's angle of view is good and its large, bright and very sharp.

I just find it so hard to pass up the D300. It's just such a good camera. It seems to do everything so well. Ideally I'd like to afford to get more lenses with it to start and ironically, if I were to get a 40D I could actually get all but one of my desired lenses, however I'm prepared to wait for a few months and get more lenses then, if it means I can have the seeming all-round excellence embodied in the D300.

If I was shorter on budget, the 40D would be an excellent choice, it is an excellent choice anyway, it's just that the D300 is better still. In six to nine months I can add a macro and telephoto to the standard zoom and wide-angle I want to get initially with the D300 and other than a fast prime, that'll be all my requirements met. Although I could get more lenses with the 40D initially, I'd still have to rely heavily on third-party to do so. The extra Â£300 that buying the 40D instead of the D300 saves me, would not go far on Canon lenses, let alone L series lenses.

The 5D seems to be the only real competitor to the D300 as far as I can see. It seems to produce nicer images. I could just get a single lens like the EF 16-35mm f/2.8L USM (costs about Â£900) (plus a UV filter) to go with the 5D and being a full-frame camera, I could actually use the 16mm as 16mm on the EF lens and make that do as my wide-angle and short general purpose lens (in one) until funds become available to expand. Both the Tokina 11-16mm (on 1.5x Nikon crop frame) and Canon 10-22mm (on Canon 1.6x crop frame) would give me around 16mm on the wide end anyway, so I'd be loosing nothing to go with this configuration to start, other than a little extra reach at the longer end.

Having said that, godly though the 5D might be, it's getting on a bit now and will soon be replaced by a MkII version which (as you speculated) will undoubtedly use the DIGIC III processor and will probably have other upgrades too. If I had double the budget and 10x the time to wait around, I could hold out for the 5D MkII, but I want to get shooting DSLR now damn it!







LOL! All this talk is making me impatient and over-excited







. Even if I was more patient though, I'm unlikely to be able to afford the 5D MkII when it's finally released, although I have a sneaking suspicion it'll end up being a much better choice than the D300 when it's available, although by then the D300 will cost less no doubt.

Anyway... I'm starting to ramble on a bit







. 'What's new' you might think







.

Sufficed to say, I still think the D300 is the better choice so far, although I do appreciate your suggestions







.

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## christian_piper

Hrm.... Remember this: If you go Nikon you can also use a canon body- but if you go with canon glass you CANNOT use a nikon body.

There are various- and cheap- adapters for that.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *christian_piper*


Hrm.... Remember this: If you go Nikon you can also use a canon body- but if you go with canon glass you CANNOT use a nikon body.

There are various- and cheap- adapters for that.


The adapters really increase the crop to the point of utter uselessness though.


----------



## christian_piper

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


The adapters really increase the crop to the point of utter uselessness though.


Really? I was under the impression that they worked great..... Especially with film (full frame) lenses...

How do they increase the crop? I thought they just "shrunk" the mount some..


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *christian_piper* 
Really? I was under the impression that they worked great..... Especially with film (full frame) lenses...

How do they increase the crop? I thought they just "shrunk" the mount some..

I've never heard good things about adapters in general and that is the general complaint that I hear about them. There are other complaints as well, such as not allowing infinity focus because the length of the lens is changed slightly. But these are all just claims I read on fourms, I've never used them or seen reviews on them.


----------



## christian_piper

http://www.16-9.net/nikon_g/
Our adaptor contains an AF-confirmation chip that enables your Canon digital camera to focus-confirm just like a Canon lens. Please note that VR, auto-focus and auto-aperture functions are disabled. Infinity focus is guaranteed.-

(My note) It also lets you electronically control the aperature- so you have full control...

Found with Ken Rockwell. (Yea I know, but he was the best result I found in 4 seconds of google.... And he knows his equipment somewhat at least)
http://kenrockwell.com/tech/nikcan.htm
'

So it looks like you can meter and everything... Just not AF. Seems quite useful, to me at least..


----------



## mugan23

well i went to the park again to take the pic of that stream again using the nd filter but the watter had gone down and was al most gone, al post them in a while but for now i got this really cool macro of a moth


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mugan23*


well i went to the park again to take the pic of that stream again using the nd filter but the watter had gone down and was al most gone, al post them in a while but for now i got this really cool macro of a moth 










Looks like that chap is supping some nectar.

Nice shot mugan!

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## mugan23

well here are the nd pix 

















i kno they suck, but still working on it, but my macros were ok today 









this thing looked so cool but it would not let me get close enogh for a macro


----------



## mugan23

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Highly-Annoyed* 
Looks like that chap is supping some nectar.

Nice shot mugan!

Highly-Annoyed

thank you man, ur stuff has been looking good too. sorry not been on much i have been on a quest to oc my quad


----------



## BLKKROW

I took this picture, in Tijuana. At an orphanage, this girl loved me and just wanted to play with me all day, and the whole time i was there. I thought this picture describes a lot about; her life, she is surrounded by dust and filth, and damage. But she is still smiling ad happy inside, she only knows what life in Mexico looks like.

Please Comment

I hope this picture works, it isn't for me right now.


----------



## [email protected]

Yeah, doesn't work for me either.


----------



## mugan23

same, and u got me wanting to see it real bad hehe


----------



## BLKKROW

well its up and working now

thanks for the patience

http://www.overclock.net/art-graphic...ml#post4088996


----------



## mugan23

nice shot and cute kid (travel a lot?)


----------



## BLKKROW

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mugan23* 
nice shot and cute kid (travel a lot?)

nope i dont travel much at all lol

she was amazing, i dont know why i love that picture so much. but i think it is amazing


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:


Originally Posted by *BLKKROW* 
she was amazing, i dont know why i love that picture so much. but i think it is amazing

She's beautiful. I'd of been tempted to adopt. What a sweet little girl!

It always makes me feel sad when I think about all the kids without loving parents in the World. Orphanages can be dangerous places too, sadly.

Maybe its the juxtaposition of something new, fresh and beautiful, in an old, decaying and ugly environment that lends your shot that certain artistic something?

Nice work







.

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## ecoyd1

J


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ecoyd1*


Just got home from a week/weekend of canoeing. Took the D70..


Sounds fun!









Quote:



Originally Posted by *ecoyd1*


Critique Appreciated!


I'll try







. As always, its only my opinion though!

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ecoyd1*












The tree branch in the forefront helps lend the picture some additional depth. It's also placed approximately on the left vertical third, so conforms to the Rule of Thirds (RoTs) principle. The canoe falls approximately on the other, right, vertical third.

This is my least favourite of the four. I might of preferred to see the branch/leaves in focus. Also the light reflected on the water kinda' kills the water surface detail (at least scaled down) where it fades to an off-white. Perhaps some HDR work might cure that in post processing, or perhaps a Circular PL next time?

It's a nice enough shot, but it doesn't appeal to me much and in my opinion I've seen better from you.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ecoyd1*












Now this is simply beautiful and I'm sure it would get more so at a larger scale! It approximates to the RoTs principle sufficiently (although there's no harm in breaking from the rule at all, of course) and I find the water reflection far less harsh than in the first picture.

I love the sharp detail in the rocks in the foreground and the tiny green plant, next to the larger rock in the centre foreground is a really nice touch. Overall a very nice shot indeed. I think it could only have been improved (perhaps), on a clearer day (so there was less mist/haze in the distance) with blue skys, although arguably the mist and sky add to the atmosphere here.

Overall, really nice! My favourite of the four







.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ecoyd1*












Again, another very nice shot. Pleasing perspective and geometry with regards to the placing of the canoe relative to the camera and the water line. I'm increasingly becoming a fan of more neutral/more realistic/less vivid colours in photos and this shot has that I think.

This probably my second favourite shot of the four







.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ecoyd1*












This is probably my joint-second favourite, edging towards third favourite. I've tried shots like this in the past and what I see with my eye, never seems to be faithfully reproduced with the camera. Although I like this kind of shot, I would be willing to wager the scene in reality, to the human eye, looked a lot nicer than the photo of it. Lens flare aside, I personally find that these shots never seem to look as good as the human eye saw them, when converted to pixels.

Having said that though, this shot is one of the better ones I've seen. There are some really nice shadow details and highlights on the grass (looks like dried grass) and what looks like fallen tree branches in the foreground and the trees in front of the sun start becoming some pleasant silhouettes at points. Also, I like the light on the ground on the other side (towards the horizon) as it gives a nice contrast to the light behind the trees (closer to the camera) and gives me the pleasing impression of being on the outskirts of a wood, looking out onto plains, or perhaps being in a wood, looking into a clearing.

Overall some very nice shots ecoyd1, as usual.









Highly-Annoyed


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ecoyd1*


Just got home from a week/weekend of canoeing. Took the D70..

Critique Appreciated!


I like the composition very much, but it's too bad you had a crappy sky that day.


----------



## ecoyd1

sdsd


----------



## jul3z

Hello everyone! I've been into photography for a while, but i mainly use a 35mm SLR Canon Rebel. I did just buy a Olympus 850 SW digital point and shoot, mainly because its water proof, and I'm plaining on going to Puerto Vallarta next year.

Here is the first pic from my Olympus. Its not well composed or anything, as i was driving away from work, and looked at the mountains and had to pull over cause it looked awesome. Critiques appreciated.










Here's a few more photos from my Grand Canyon trip:














































some of my composition is really crappy, cause I'm terrified of heights, and the lighting was a bit funky too, as it was sunny then transferred to overcast then rainy quickly.


----------



## christian_piper

Great photos guys! jul3z- Whats with the porthole effect? I love the photos- just odd it all...

two I took today:


----------



## Biohazed

Konica Minolta DiMAGE Z5

Also have a Sony handycam but i'll post that later


----------



## ecoyd1

a


----------



## jul3z

The porthole effect is a wide angle attachment i have for my lens. It causes some distortion, more visible in the closer areas of the photos.


----------



## KamuiRSX

Well this is going to be a list.

Kodak i830 (It was free)
Canon Rebel EOS Digital SLR XT 8mp (don't know model number off the top of my head will have to get the box. I've got 2 lenses for it as well)
I'll list the rest in the morning. I just realized that I'm going to have to get them all to list them. I've got something like 20 cameras. I got them for either really cheap or free.


----------



## mugan23

added welcome to the ocn camera cub


----------



## jul3z

Oh, i forgot. Can you add me as well?


----------



## christian_piper

Hey! I just had an idea- why dont you have an option for members of the club to have a link to their online gallery (whatever it may be) in the first post after their name? How's that sound?

Example: I would have a link to my Flick account.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/christianpiper/


----------



## ecoyd1

a


----------



## mugan23

done pm me with ur links pz


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

For those who are interested and didn't already know; the Nikon D700 is out around the end of this month!

Full frame compared to the crop frame D300, but projected cost (in the UK at least) is going to be around Â£2000, slightly more than twice the cost of the D300 currently. Still, good for full frame.

There's a brief comparison here, with the D300 and D3. DPReview has a more in-depth hands-on preview here, which I'm just about to read through







.

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## mugan23

well took a trip to the city, most of the pics taken there were either badbecause i had no uv filter or am not allowed to show because there not only of me hehe, well these two came out well. the one with me in it is not my photographing skills hehe


----------



## christian_piper

Hrm... you seem to have a tendency to overexpose... Nice flowers- Cool sign! Uhh EERE? What is it?

Bad because of no UV filter? What? UV filters do NOT improve or change an image except adding (Hopefully imperceptible) softness and chromatic abbaration..


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mugan23* 
well took a trip to the city, most of the pics taken there were either badbecause i had no uv filter or am not allowed to show because there not only of me hehe, well these two came out well. the one with me in it is not my photographing skills hehe

























Nice angles again mugan23. You always manage to introduce an interesting angle into your shots. I don't know how you do it by it makes a big difference. If you'd taken those shots straight-on, they'd wouldn't be half as good in my opinion.

Good stuff!









Quote:


Originally Posted by *christian_piper* 
Hrm... you seem to have a tendency to overexpose... Nice flowers- Cool sign! Uhh EERE? What is it?

It's F R E E, lol







.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *christian_piper* 
Bad because of no UV filter? What? UV filters do NOT improve or change an image except adding (Hopefully imperceptible) softness and chromatic abbaration..

No, no, UV filters remove UV light from the light captured in the image. This has the effect of reducing haze. See here, for example.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *christian_piper* 









Nice Road! Love the mountains in the distance and the clouds.

Good work!









Highly-Annoyed


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *christian_piper*


Great photos guys! jul3z- Whats with the porthole effect? I love the photos- just odd it all...

two I took today:




















Very nice, I love dilapidated machinery/cars abandoned in nature, one of my favorite subject matters.


----------



## BrinNutz

Taken at Road America during the Buell 25th Anniversary


----------



## jul3z

beautiful photo! beautiful track as well.


----------



## christian_piper

Taken on my dads D80, untouched cause I am lazy and they are more cool than artistic.










PANNING!


----------



## mugan23

u like the pic at the top i don't know if u had it on burst mode or what but that's perfect timing


----------



## christian_piper

Burst mode... But that was a BIG Puddle- water shooting up a good 3 seconds.... heh That shot wasnt hitting it- it was of it plowing through and sending up a wall of water...


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:


Originally Posted by *BrinNutz* 
Taken at Road America during the Buell 25th Anniversary










Wow, nice shot.

Did you crop at all to get this composition, or is this straight from the camera?

Either way, great shot!









Highly-Annoyed


----------



## christian_piper

^ Agreed!


----------



## ecoyd1

^^

I. Want. To. Do. That.

Now.

Its been a while since ive been on an ATV....so fun....

As for the pictures, great job guys. We need everyone to start posting more work of theirs. If you dont have any to post, go out and shoot something!


----------



## christian_piper

Haha... First time I've ever been on an ATV. Its used here to pull a trailer for garbage... I decided to have a bit of fun with it.... and then decided that the camera + water + ATV = even more fun... and an exuse to go through a 7-9" deep puddle as fast as possible... a bunch of times......

Need to go through the rest of my photos and post some up.


----------



## BrinNutz

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Highly-Annoyed* 
Wow, nice shot.

Did you crop at all to get this composition, or is this straight from the camera?

Either way, great shot!









Highly-Annoyed

That one is straight from the camera!

This one is cropped:


----------



## rx7speed

since you guys seem to know your cams fairly well what would you get and why.
xsi vs the 40d. I want my own cam now since I keep stealing the cam my wife owns new (thanks for the help on that one guys you made a very happy wifey







) and that doesn't make her happy.
XTI is the easy grab but figured might as well get the XSI as it can be done fairly easily but the 40d is a stretch but if it really is worth I can buy it. I'm just trying to figure out if it really is worth it and why or just stick with the XSI.


----------



## christian_piper

Hrm... I was looking at the XSI before I decided to go Nikon....

Go try the XSI and 40D- One of the MOST importanty aspects of a good camera is its ergonomics- they ALL take great photos, so see if you would like using it also....

And it would be to your benefit to try a Nikon D40 and maybe a D80. I was going canon until I tried using both side by side....


----------



## BrinNutz

40D < XSi < XTi.

But, you must remember, the camera has a learning curve. The 40D's learning curve is up there man. You'll have to read the manual, ask tons of questions.

Also, if you are looking to buy the camera, don't forget you need to get lenses as well!! That goes with either of the three.

If it was me, buy the body only, and get better lenses.


----------



## equetefue

The 40D is a great camera. Feels extremely good in the hands specially with the grip. Learning is not too bad. The GUI is a lot easier than my 1DMarkII


----------



## SDawg

What are some lenses to get after buying a body only camera? I am looking to get an XSi soon, and would like to buy some lenses that are good but don't break the bank. I am a noob when it comes to cameras but i am very interested in learning all that I can.


----------



## donnybrook

ive tried to look thru this best i could, to try and find the question i have, but either my ADD or my impaitence made me just go ahead and ask.

my girlfriend, she LOVES pictures, loves taking them. but she's only had point and shoots and you can see her frustration with how the pictures come out. on top of it, someone (ahem im sorry lauren) left her camera on the ground after taking some pictures for the site here, and the camera kind of got busted >.< no bueno.

it is now my mission to find her a D-SLR that has the ability to be upgraded well, ie not a crappy body thats never going to be much better, no matter the lens. but im also looking for something thats cheaper. i want to spend around 400 for the lens and body. used is absolutly fine, but i dont really know what to look for, as all i know about cameras is that they steal your soul! (im a native american, lulz) any brands, sites, ideas, or if anyone has something they might want to get rid of, help a red brother out! and hurry shes so mad at me lol


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *donnybrook*


ive tried to look thru this best i could, to try and find the question i have, but either my ADD or my impaitence made me just go ahead and ask.

my girlfriend, she LOVES pictures, loves taking them. but she's only had point and shoots and you can see her frustration with how the pictures come out. on top of it, someone (ahem im sorry lauren) left her camera on the ground after taking some pictures for the site here, and the camera kind of got busted >.< no bueno.

it is now my mission to find her a D-SLR that has the ability to be upgraded well, ie not a crappy body thats never going to be much better, no matter the lens. but im also looking for something thats cheaper. i want to spend around 400 for the lens and body. used is absolutly fine, but i dont really know what to look for, as all i know about cameras is that they steal your soul! (im a native american, lulz) any brands, sites, ideas, or if anyone has something they might want to get rid of, help a red brother out! and hurry shes so mad at me lol


That's a tight budget, I would save more and stretch it a it. Now that the XSi is out, the XTi's are a bit cheaper. You can get a body with kit lens for about $600:
http://www.us1photo.com/catalog/prod...oducts_id=4409

However, there is a cheaper alternative, the Nikon D40 for $430:
http://www.us1photo.com/catalog/prod...oducts_id=4409

Those are basic setups with a kit lens, battery, strap and software. Memory cards, cases, tripods and filters are more.

Also, check this guide out, it's organized by price range and has recommendations for decent SLRs (but not all):
http://www.dcresource.com/buyersguide/


----------



## christian_piper

Quote:



Originally Posted by *donnybrook*


ive tried to look thru this best i could, to try and find the question i have, but either my ADD or my impaitence made me just go ahead and ask.

my girlfriend, she LOVES pictures, loves taking them. but she's only had point and shoots and you can see her frustration with how the pictures come out. on top of it, someone (ahem im sorry lauren) left her camera on the ground after taking some pictures for the site here, and the camera kind of got busted >.< no bueno.

it is now my mission to find her a D-SLR that has the ability to be upgraded well, ie not a crappy body thats never going to be much better, no matter the lens. but im also looking for something thats cheaper. i want to spend around 400 for the lens and body. used is absolutly fine, but i dont really know what to look for, as all i know about cameras is that they steal your soul! (im a native american, lulz) any brands, sites, ideas, or if anyone has something they might want to get rid of, help a red brother out! and hurry shes so mad at me lol



Nikon D40! UNDER Budget, and great optical quality and a nice body.

D40X if you want more MP

D60 if you want VR in the kit lens + improved body... (Its like D40x v-2)

Nikon Vs Canon- Nikon is better designed, and has greeeaaaatttttt cheap optics- Better than canon in the cheap end by a long shot IMO.... Their menus are better, the smaller (cheap) ones just feel better in the hand than Canon, Yes, the AF lens choice on the D40/60 is limited- BUT you can get manual lenses for them for reaallyy cheap. And the newer lenses will meter, just no autofocus. AND Since she is new to the SLR world, she can choose to only buy compatible lenses so she gets autofocus too..

IMO Nikon > Canon in the cheap end, especially for a girl. (They have a tendency to care more about look/feel etc ergonomics of things... So do I so dont call me sexist....)

MAKE SURE she knows that a SLR doesnt mean good pictures- it means the quality and ability to control everything possible so she can create great shots. It doesnt do the work for you- If you keep it on the 100% automatic "point and shoot" mode, they can be WORSE than a point and shoot..... Yes SLR's OWN, but not if you arent willing to do some work and thinking.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *SDawg*


What are some lenses to get after buying a body only camera? I am looking to get an XSi soon, and would like to buy some lenses that are good but don't break the bank. I am a noob when it comes to cameras but i am very interested in learning all that I can.


SDawg, this guide says it all as far as I'm concerned:
http://www.dcresource.com/forums/sho...s+buyers+guide

In my (non-professional-purely-amateur) opinion, you should have two kinds at the very least, but there are for basic kinds of lenses:
1. a good "walkabout" lens; i.e. a small zoom lens
2. a prime lens (fixed focal length and good for low light/protraits, 50mm is the most common focal length)
3. macro lens (also fixed FL, various sizes - 60mm, 80mm, 100mm, etc.)
4. wide angle (fixed, small focal lengths, e.g. 10mm - 20mm)


----------



## rx7speed

I've seen some xt bodies that are going for around that much and from what I have seen compared to the S5 I currently have they are MUCH better. From what I have seen though and heard just about any dslr cam made recently is going to be loads better then just about any point and shoot cam. but other then that I'm not much help as I don't know much about cams either other then what little I've picked up in the last month.

sdawg I wish I could you as well but so far what I'm going with right now going to be just the standard kit lens as I'm broke and worried more about the body for the moment. one of the lenses I have heard great things about though is the 50mm f1.8 at least as far as price to performance. you can get one for under 100 many times but also depending on what you are taking pictures of it might not work so hot either just being it can't zoom in or go any wider but is just a straight 50mm lens.

just to add this dislaimer again though I'm a noob myself and this is just little I picked up so it could be right could be wrong. do your own research first before you take my word as gospel









Brin right now I don't have a load of money and it seems to get a kit lens is cheaper then to just buy body only and then buy better lens. right now I'm worried more about getting the right body as I plan on using that same body for quite some time and then just upgrade the lenses as I go, or am I really going about this wrong? I know lenses make a HUGE impact on performance and they will get upgraded don't get me wrong but it is easier to swap a lens then swap a camera right?

between the XSI and the 40D what are the biggest real world differences between them other then the obvious size thing. I've tried doing my research on them but I just can't quite grasp it yet as to real world difference as many review sites seem to be just focused more on paper differences rather then how this feature can make the job easier/different/better and so forth.


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:


Originally Posted by *ecoyd1* 
As for the pictures, great job guys. We need everyone to start posting more work of theirs. If you dont have any to post, go out and shoot something!

Have now sold my FZ50 on eBay for Â£280 (around $560 USD) so no more pictures from me until I get my shiny new D300 sometime around the third week in August.

Having chosen the lenses I want to get, I'm now looking into lighting options for getting into portraiture. Obviously, I need at least two off-camera lights, but being on a fairly limited budget, I'm not sure what to get. Compared to lenses, flashes like the SB-600/800s seem relatively inexpensive (although still somewhat costly in absolute terms, relative to my initial budget) and two SB-600s might be what I'm looking for, but unlike lenses, I have spent very little time learning about flashes and lighting, so I'm busy trying to learn all I can about lighting now.

So far, I've done some research into portraiture composition, lenses, light and lighting configurations, but much of the details are still to be learned and I'm not sure about the actual hardware set-up for the D300 and what flashes might be best, or exactly how they work remotely. For example, where do they get their electrical power from? Do they plug into the mains, have an independent battery pack, connect somehow to the camera? Also, how do they stand, do they have attachable "feet", do they clamp onto stands? In addition, what kind of diffusion is best, should light be reflected, or diffused through soft-box material? So much to learn







.

My initial thoughts are for getting two off-camera flashes (perhaps SB-600s?) and controlling them via the D300, using the pop-up flash as the "commander" for the other two, perhaps using umbrellas, but I'm a little fuzzy on the details atm, so any advice or links to good information sources, would be very much appreciated







.

Anyway, counting down the days until I get the D300. 42 days to go







.

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## christian_piper

Sorry for the large size: It needs it or else it looks bad:


----------



## ecoyd1

a


----------



## ecoyd1

a


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ecoyd1*


Good for you.

I would just start out with the sb600s, 2 of them. There are negligible differences between them and the sb800, none of which will ever be seen in a photograph. They are powered by 4 AA batteries each, and both come with a built in flap-like diffuser thing. As for diffusion, bouncing off the ceiling works 90% of the time. You can also use note cards, and other household objects to diffuse the flash. There really is no need to buy a diffuser unless you want to. Umbrellas might as well be substituted for note cards, as they give the same effect. I would only get them if you are doing professional portrait work. AND they are cumbersome to carry around, and I guarantee your not gonna want to whip them out when you see a bug in the yard everyday..

Also, the d300's popup flash will fire any where from 1 to 30 remote flash if they are all in range. I wouldn't worry about figuring this out until you actually have the camera.

The nikon flash section of photo net is a great place to read up from everything to troubleshooting to different techniques about nikon flashes.

http://photo.net/nikon-camera-forum/...nd+Speedlights

Here is their portrait section too:
http://photo.net/portraits-and-fashi...ography-forum/

What I like to do, especially on a rainy day, is just browse the photo net gallery once in a while. There is some AMAZING work that you cannot find anywhere else and is organized much neater than anything flickr could do. There are about 30 sections for the gallery with each having thousands of images. I've gotten a lot of ideas from there:

http://photo.net/gallery/photocritique/filter

My image for the week:









D300, 18-200mm


Thanks for the links!

You know, that scene looks exactly like the English countryside. Was it a bit overcast when you took it? It's a nice, well composed shot, as we have come to expect from you now














.

So you think a couple of SB-600s will be enough to start. The 600s are about 40% cheaper than the 800s in the UK, so that'd help the finances a little bit.

I've had some interest, from friends of my partner, regarding me taking some portraits for them (after I developed an interest in trying portraiture), for which I would receive payment. They know I have very limited experience, but even so, I'd like to try to do a good job for them if possible. With this in mind, I was hoping to get some diffusing equipment, along with backgrounds and perhaps a few extra lights to go along with the two flashes. I would either be taking these portraits at their home, or better still, at mine (where I can set everything up at my leisure a few days previous), but either way, it would be indoors, which makes it a bit easier.

With regards to the SB-600s. Would I be correct is assuming they'd need stands to attach to, to be able to position them correctly? Like tripods for flashes, or something like that? It seems like that kind of thing would be a good idea anyway, otherwise finding something appropriate to place them on at the correct angles could be a bit tricky?

Also, what do think about softboxes, "brollyboxes" (the softbox/umbrella hybrid), scrims and shoot-through umbrellas? Any good? Apparently many of these light modifiers can be relatively light and portable?

As always, advice is welcome!

Thanks!

Highly-Annoyed

*EDIT:*

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ecoyd1*


Also, I added a finished the new logo to my site, so far it has good 'reviews.'

I also split up the nature and animals into two sections.

Let me know what you think....link in signature.


Ah, yes. Now in my opinion the new logo is much better than the previous one. It still has the artistic flair of the previous one, but the text is much easier to comprehend.

Good choice!

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## mugan23

nice horse ecoyd, haven't shot anything lately but i was tring to make me a profile pic and i came up with this (not that good but its awfully shinny)


----------



## ecoyd1

ae


----------



## equetefue

Shooting Tele most of the time Canon is winner

If shooting on lower end Nikon is winner unless you have a 1DmkIII's

Been on both camp and make substancial amount off income from photography.


----------



## ecoyd1

\


----------



## dangerousHobo

Nikon D40
I love it. Right now just have the stock lens, but looking at upgrading it.

EDIT
I'll have to post some shots later, tried attaching some but the quality was too low.


----------



## tkl.hui

Well I've been looking through this thread a lot and I've been thinking of stepping up to a DSLR. My current camera ( well my mom's anyways...) is a canon SD750 which isn't that great. I was thinking of getting something like this and I'm wondering if the lens it comes with is any good.

http://www.henrys.com/webapp/wcs/sto...&itemID=184661

I'm not looking to spend a whole lot since I'm just starting out.


----------



## ItsBobtista

I'd like to join. I have a Sony DSC-H3.


----------



## mugan23

welcome to the ocn camera club 
(please remember to pm me if you are tring to join or if you would like to get a link attached to your name)


----------



## mugan23

hey whats so bad about the evolt e500 that makes it so cheap, 
http://www.tvsdepot.com/product.php?...48&ref=froogle


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mugan23*


hey whats so bad about the evolt e500 that makes it so cheap, 
http://www.tvsdepot.com/product.php?...48&ref=froogle


As far as I can gather from a few reviews, not much.

It only goes to ISO1600.
ISO800 is fairly noisy, although "usable", whatever that means.
Relatively slow start-up (although it's mainly due to the dust removal system)
Images can have some "jaggies".
No USB 2.0 support.
It was released in 2005
It's an Olympus
As far as I can see though:

ISO1600 limit is fine if you don't really need higher ISO. Based on what I've learnt from people in this thread, ISO800 is probably as high as most people need to go on average.
The four-thirds system is going to mean a bit extra noise, so it's to be expected and not really all that bad at ISO800 from the reviews I've seen. Also, ISOs 100-400 are just fine if that's all you really need and I understand there are intermediate ISO levels on this camera, which should help.
"Relatively slow" translates to less than 2 seconds, which with the dust removal system, seems OK to me and should be fine for most people, unless you really need blazingly fast start-up speeds.
Presumably you can turn down in-camera sharpening and use some unsharp mask in PhotoShop, or GIMP and get better results, so "jaggies" are not really an issue as far as I can see; unless they're caused by something other than in-camera sharpening?
Just get a card reader and the lack of USB 2.0 support disappears as an issue. Also, a card reader is going to be much faster anyway.
2005 release makes it a bit old now. Perhaps have a look at the 2008 E-520 model? Apparently it's got less noise, more mega-pixels and better built-in image stabilisation.
Being an Olympus isn't really a negative factor as far as I'm concerned. Imo products should be judged based on how well they do what they were designed for, for their price point, not on what badge they have stamped on them.
I don't know what the price is for an E-520, but for $379 USD, the E-500 seems like a good price and would be a decent step-up from point & shoot no doubt.

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## mugan23

what printers do you guys use to print your photos on, am looking for one under $130+ tax scanner not really important


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

i head to zhers, print on photo reactive paper like getting film developed (for 4*6 any larger is inkjet) and yields better results IMO and is less prone to fade or running if it gets wet.
that being said, i work at staples and selling printers is pretty big there, i would grab a canon ip4500
most of the HP's in this price range that take the 02 (like the 7260) cartridge print photos pretty well, but don't fair to well with boarder pictures as the rollers that feed the paper in usually make it skew to one side making the boarder not even and leaving the picture not looking right.
hope you found that helpful


----------



## mugan23

thank you for the info but the links are asking me for a canadin zipcode


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

ah, well in that case, just go by the model numbers, or use a random zipcode (like n2t1v3) to look at the product.


----------



## rx7speed

Quote:


Originally Posted by *christian_piper* 
Hrm... I was looking at the XSI before I decided to go Nikon....

Go try the XSI and 40D- One of the MOST importanty aspects of a good camera is its ergonomics- they ALL take great photos, so see if you would like using it also....

And it would be to your benefit to try a Nikon D40 and maybe a D80. I was going canon until I tried using both side by side....

I thank you for the help but your a rotten bastard also you know that








thought I was just about set and then you bring up the d80 and now I'm really more confused.

all in all though I agree it's just time to head to the cammy store and hold them and go through their menus and just play with them for a moment. if nothing else 14 day return policy I believe.

if you don't mind me asking though why did you choose the nikon?


----------



## dr4gon

seems like it was more comfortable and fit in his hand better.

I tried both of those and the sony a300 and just fell in love with the sony and got the a300.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

yep, the ergonomics is all personal preference, i tried a d70s, XTI, a300, k10d, and an olympus model (forget what one).
after trying them all i knew i was getting the d70s or the pentax k10d as i really couldn't stand any of the other ones.


----------



## christian_piper

Quote:



Originally Posted by *rx7speed*


I thank you for the help but your a rotten bastard also you know that








thought I was just about set and then you bring up the d80 and now I'm really more confused.

all in all though I agree it's just time to head to the cammy store and hold them and go through their menus and just play with them for a moment. if nothing else 14 day return policy I believe.

if you don't mind me asking though why did you choose the nikon?


HA! Well the D80 is old... They are coming with a replacment soon... XD

Why Nikon?

1- Ergonomics

2- Menus were better / faster

3- LENSES! With my D60 I can use ANY Nikon F-Mount lens! (Well some fisheyes dont work etc.. ) But I have an old pre-ai (Pre 1977) 50mm lens that I LOVE and has amazing image quality- which I got for $40....

4- Lenses- Nikon has better quality cheap lenses than canon (Kit lens is decent, Canon kit is crap from what I can tell. Friend with canon agrees...)

5- Bit cheaper for me. And Image Stabilized lens in the KIT!

Plus the image quality- canon is great too though


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

*ecoyd1* (and anybody else if you know), perhaps you can help me again!

I may have a chance to get the D700, instead of the D300. There's an offer on at one of the UK online stores which is a buy now, pay in a year's time offer.

This would give me the time to save enough to pay for the D700, which I couldn't really do if I wanted to pay up-front now.

I have to ask though, if I opted for the D700, what would be in the impact for lenses? The D700 is a full frame sensor camera, so I'd need lenses for full-frame. Do they cost more, is there less choice, are there any noteworthy lenses you are aware of for full-frame?

As far as I can see, the D700 is essentially a D300, with a few extras from the D3 and a full frame sensor, which I think is also from the D3. So excluding the full-frame advantage it's at least just as good as the D300 and most probably a bit better.

What do you think? D300, or D700 and what about the impact for lenses?

Thanks!

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## equetefue

there is some know issues with the majority of the Nikon lens lineup with the new full frame.

The lenses were designed for DX sensor, so Nikon is now starting to re-design their lenses the way that Canon did with the "L" lineup

I have handled the D3 and the files out of the camera are great.

If you shoot wildlife stick with the D300, if you shoot anything else, you would love the D700.

Right now I use a 1DMarkII for wildlife and looking to get a 5D for everything else.

Hope it helps


----------



## rx7speed

what makes the d700 different then the d300 for wildlife vs other types of shooting?


----------



## equetefue

Having a full frame sensor you loose the 1.5x multiplier, and the full frame is just better suited for regular type photography.


----------



## ecoyd1




----------



## equetefue

not here to confused people but Nikon HAS confirmed that some of their lenses do have a compatability issue with their new FX sensor.

The most noticeable issue right now is with the 7-2vr. I handle and work with most bodies in the field today, and from working with the D3 I can tell you that it produces great files but nothing stellar with that lens. Very very soft at corners.

Nikon will go full force on the lenses to promote their new FX sensor, so I would suggest you go for the D700.

Now if you had the money or were making money of it you would know that 2 bodies is the way to go; one crop and one full frame


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Thanks for your responses guys







.

I have slept on it and to be honest I'm still somewhat ambivalent about the choice.

There are a couple of things that worry me about the D700 and that do put me off, plus the new issue brought up by *equetefue* regarding lens compatibility issues.

1. The D700 offers 95% coverage through the Viewfinder, while the D300 offers 100%. I'm not sure how much of an impact the 5% difference would make to be honest, but I know 100% is better.

2. The D700's auto-focus points are pretty tightly bunched in the centre of the sensor, where the D300's are more spread out. This is more of a concern to me as I have read some user feed back that says that this makes some types of photography more difficult. As I want to get into as many different types as possible (starting with landscape & portrait) I think this may be a hindrance.



















I know you can focus-lock and recompose, but I'm worried about the practicalities of doing this with only a few seconds to take a shot. For example, if I'm taking a macro of an insect, by the time I've focused, locked focus, recomposed and pressed the shutter release, the damn thing will have flown or crawled away... With wider spread AF points, I can select one at the point I want (on a thirds intersection for example) before I take any shots, then just place this over the insect, AF and shoot. This would save me a few seconds in which the bugs may have left and believe me, they don't often like to hang around for you to snap them.

Also, I've read that fashion photography is also an area where having wider spread AF points is a big help and although I don't see myself doing that any time soon (hehe) I also don't rule it out as I want to try everything if possible.

There are a couple of things that really draw me to the D700 though and they all relate to the sensor.

1. The sensor is still 12 Megapixel, the same as the D300, but these 12MPs are spread over the area of a full frame sensor. This means that the "photosites" (I believe that's the correct term) are larger (as they have to cover a larger physical area) which means even lower noise than the D300. Apparently the smaller and more densely packed the photosites on a sensor, the greater the noise. This means not only that the D700 offers up to ISO25,600, but that lower ISO levels are more noise free. Apparently, ISO1600 is essentially noise-free on the D700, which uses the D3's sensor, where there is noise on the D300 at that level, albeit pretty low compared to other DSLRs at that price point.

2. Having full-frame means (as has already been mentioned) being able to use ultra wide-angle lenses, at their intended focal length. This means that a 12-24mm lens, really is 12-24mm, while on a crop-frame sensor, this same lens actually produces a field of view equivalent to 18-36mm. Having this extra width is an advantage for landscape photography, which I do a fair bit of when I've got a camera.

Finance wise, the _initial_ investment looks like this:

D300: Â£1000 (approx $2000 USD)
Lenses to start: Â£830 (approx $1660 USD)
Speedlights: Â£360 (approx $720 USD)
Necessary Extras: Â£320 (approx $640 USD)
Total: Â£2510 (approx $5020 USD)

D700: Â£0 (pay Â£2000 (approx $4000 USD) later)
Lenses to start: Â£1830 (appox $3660 USD) (not sure which lenses for this camera)
Speedlights: Â£360 (approx $720 USD)
Necessary Extras: Â£320 (approx $640 USD)
Total: Â£2510 (approx $5020 USD) (pay Â£2000 later, so real total Â£4510 (approx $9010 USD))

I just don't know which to opt for. Coming from the FZ50 super-zoom, either camera will be a massive step-up for me. ISO400 wasn't really usable on the FZ50, but both Nikons are fine up to ISO800. The D700 takes it even further without a hint of noise and the D300's noise (being more than D700) is easily manageable without loosing too much detail and it's noise is mostly of the more desirable "film grain" verity.

I'm still not decided. The D700 is even more expensive than the D300 (these prices are a lot to me) and although I know that the cost of manufacturing a full frame sensor considerably exceeds that of crop frame, I'm not sure I'm ready to spend, in total, Â£4500 ($9000 USD) on camera equipment. The D300 was at the very limits of my budget anyway...

I'll have to give it more thought guys. I'm tempted towards the D700, but I'm not sure how much I'm actually going to take advantage of what it offers, over and above what the D300 offers. I'm most definitely not a pro, so do I really need full frame? To be honest, it's only really this buy now, pay in a year's time offer that has sparked my interest in actually buying the D700. I had written it off as out of my price range previously... Hmmm.

Thanks for your input guys. Any additional advice is welcome!









Highly-Annoyed


----------



## christian_piper

One thing- Macro photography is done using manual focus mainly- It is actually easier. (Many people will move the camera itself a few inches to focus) It is faster/m,ore reliable than autofocus in that situation......... plus you can buy old nikon macro lenses with reeaallyy high quality and just mf them!

Dont worry about autofocus when thinking about macros... MF is easier than you think. And you would still be fine with either in terms of autofocus- Locking recomposing takes almost no time- Focus, keep shutter half down recompose and shoot- Takes under a second... And I am using slow autofocus (D60 with a single AF point in the center....)


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:


Originally Posted by *christian_piper* 
One thing- Macro photography is done using manual focus mainly- It is actually easier. (Many people will move the camera itself a few inches to focus) It is faster/m,ore reliable than autofocus in that situation......... plus you can buy old nikon macro lenses with reeaallyy high quality and just mf them!

Dont worry about autofocus when thinking about macros... MF is easier than you think. And you would still be fine with either in terms of autofocus- Locking recomposing takes almost no time- Focus, keep shutter half down recompose and shoot- Takes under a second... And I am using slow autofocus (D60 with a single AF point in the center....)

Yes, I guess you're right with regards to macro. I could just lock focus at a set amount of inches away from the front element and then move the camera until the subject was within the focus plane. I guess that would work.

Having said that though, I think I'm going to have to pass up the D700, sadly. I've had a look at the lenses available and they're just hugely expensive. Both lenses I would need to start, cost more than a D300 individually.

With the D300, to start, I'd be going with good optical quality third-party lenses, which are very reasonably priced. I'd be looking at the Tokina 11-16mm f2.8 for landscape and other ultra-wide-angle shooting and the Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 as a standard zoom and also for some portrait work until I get hold of the Nikon 50mm f1.4 prime.

With the D700, to replicate these focal lengths and max apertures as closely as possible, I'd need to get the Nikon AF-S 14-24mm f/2.8G ED (the 12-24mm is for DX, not FX) coming in at Â£1100 (around $2200 USD) and the Nikon AF-S 24-70mm f2.8G ED, which costs another Â£1100 ($2200 USD). These would be the only AF lenses (with the focal lengths I need) available to me for full frame (FX). There are no third-party (that I know of) lenses for the FX format, only for DX.

That's Â£2200 (around $4400 USD) on two lenses alone, ignoring filters/protectors. Even with not having to pay for the D700 for a whole year, that's still outside of my budget; a budget, I may say, that has been stretched already out of all recognition since I first thought about the move to DSLR. Having only looked at DX lenses (and decided upon third-party, with excellent optical performance for the D300) I had no idea how enormously expensive FX lenses were.

So, sadly, I think I'll have to stop any thoughts of getting the D700. Even with the buy-now-pay-next-year offer, it's just too expensive once you factor in the cost of FX lenses. If I had the cash of course, I'd get both the D300 and D700, or even look towards a D3 or even a Canon 1Ds Mark III, but if I had the cash, I wouldn't have to base my decisions on financial cost at all and would just get the best of everything...

Anyway, thanks for your help guys! I appreciate the input on the issue!









Highly-Annoyed


----------



## BrinNutz

Here's some Race photos from Buell's 25th Anniversary:
http://wbphotography.smugmug.com/gal...28009593_WQzUQ

I can't link from this computer I'm on...But have a gander through this gallery:

There's some good race photos and even a panning race photo I took with my 10-22 (That's hard to do!)


----------



## equetefue

the 10-22 is a Very good lens. Sharp from corner to corner. Too bad I can use Ef-s lenses cause I would pick it over my 17-40L


----------



## rx7speed

well I just bought the XSI with the kit 18-55mm lens. couldn't afford better but it will do for now.

please forgive my pictures though as I'm still learning the camera and I was just more trying to have fun and learn the thing then get the good shot.

picture of the wife as she was trying to get a picture of me with my new toy








as you can see though she is happy with her toy and wants me to tell you guys thank you for helping us out on picking that camera up.

then the reason she cries a lot over broken cameras 









now I just need to learn how to take a picture


----------



## equetefue

www.DslrGeeks.com

Small but nice Dslr forum.


----------



## equetefue

This one looks diferent but is because it was raining and eagle was soaking wet


----------



## SoBe8503

Hey all, Just got this










Not the best, but definately better than what I had. If you want, i'll put some of my pix up later.


----------



## woodpigeon4

Hi,
Well I've just got the Canon Eos 450D to replace my olympus E410. It's really good. I like taking shots of car racing - rally, tourning cars e.t.c


----------



## mugan23

nice shots equetefue, (monkey has bigger muscles than me hehe) haven't shot much lately but i got this pic i took of some friends








(there not gay )


----------



## christian_piper

These were taken with a Nikkor 50mm F/2 Prime lens- 100% manual. (No choice..) and my D60. I LOVE this lens! (Both taken in Alaska on the 14th)


















(Sheep Mountain Lodge, Alaska)


----------



## equetefue

nice shots people !! keep them coming.


----------



## BrinNutz

2008 Naval Academy Graduation:


----------



## SoBe8503

Just a few of my faves


----------



## BrinNutz

Hopefully everyone's out shooting....wondering why this thread has been dead the last couple days.


----------



## dr4gon

Let's get it started then again, shall we?


----------



## BrinNutz

THIS....IS...SPARTAcus...

My new kitten...


----------



## rx7speed

shot I took at the local museum









and one of my rabbits (curly q) trying to have some fun with a box


----------



## tkl.hui

Hey everyone. I just got myself a DSLR 2 days ago and I'm loving it. Its the Sony Alpha A200 with a 18-70mm f3.5-5.6 lens. Here's a couple of my first pics that I took in area where I live. I actually found a deer but it was on the other side of a fence so i had some difficulty getting a good picture of it. Anyways, please comment and give me ways to improve. I don't care if u own me, i need advice to get better







Enjoy.


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:


Originally Posted by *BrinNutz* 
Hopefully everyone's out shooting....wondering why this thread has been dead the last couple days.

I have nothing to shoot with atm. I'm still waiting on getting my D300. Another 24 days or so and I should have it. Then I shall be practising a lot, so expect some more shots from me, from the end of August onwards







.

Haven't seen much form GoneTomorrow or ecoyd1 for a while. I'm sure they're still shooting, so hopefully they'll share some more of their stuff soon







.

Keep up the good work guys!









Highly-Annoyed


----------



## Squeeker The Cat

ok just stumbled across this thread.... YAY

anyway i have a CANON S5-IS

its a good camera so far, got it cause we needed a new camera before the baby was born.

i also have a SONY DCR-PC105. had it for a few years, takes sucky a$$ still pics, but is primarily a mini dv camcorder. it works great!

i also have a SONY CYBERSHOT DSC-S50 which ive had since 2001. good little camera, mostly as a back up camera now


----------



## rx7speed

welcome to the buying a camera before the baby is born club. http://www.overclock.net/art-graphic...light=canon+s5
I ended up doing the same (ended up with the same camera even). well that and I also had the pacify the crazy lady







. just watch it though. so far we started in the same boat. then next thing you know we dumped a few bucks for filters, then a few more bucks for a cheap tripod and some other little misc stuff, and then somehow I get hooked and end up with a dslr.

it's all down/up hill from here


----------



## bgbop15

hey guys, need some advice.

I have a Nikon D60 and a Nikon 50mm f/1.8 AF (doesnt autofocus with the d60) and i love the combo! I recently strapped on an sb-600 for indoor shots at night, and i cant figure out what settings to use. I get nothing but out of focus shots!

Any tips for settings?


----------



## christian_piper

Not the very widest aperature- Wider aperture smaller depth of field- harder to focus. At 1.8 you have to be SPOT on...

I dont really see what settings have to do with focus? Look up hyperfocal focusing (That an older or newer lens? Older lenses have hyperfocal markings..)


----------



## Aden Florian

I won my Canon PowerShot S3 IS at my school's prograd 2 months ago.

This is my dog.










My video camera is my family's JVC miniDV camcorder










Here is a video I made with it for my last French II project (guess which one I am).

*(click title to watch in high quality)*


YouTube - Fifty-Sixty by AlizÃ©e - French II Music Video Project


----------



## Squeeker The Cat

here is a quick shots with my camera.....


----------



## BrinNutz

Well, my buddy got his car back from some motor work and wanted to drag it.

So, I decided to take the camera out and have a go at some tire wrinkle shots. Well, the first one I took, came out!










Then I would slow shutter speed for some panning:









And a time shot:









And finally, the return trip:










It was about 90+ degrees on the track, so he wasn't getting his better times...

Fastest time of the day for him was about 12.25


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

OK guys. Just to keep those of you who might be interested up to speed. I was able to get hold of some cash earlier than expected, so I've placed some orders, which should be with me by the end of this week, to perhaps early next week.

Nikon D300 Body (Â£980/$1915 USD)
Universal Card Reader (Â£15/$30 USD)
Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 (Â£300/$585 USD)
Hoya 67mm UV Protector (Â£40/$80 USD)
SB-600 Speedlight (Â£150/$295 USD)
another SB-600 Speedlight (Â£150/$295 USD)
8GB Sandisk Extreme IV Memory Card (Â£115/$225 USD)
Sensor/Camera Cleaning Kit (Â£70/$140 USD)

Total so far: Â£1820/$3550 USD

Sadly, it looks like I'm going to have to wait for a while to get the Tokina 11-16mm f2.8 lens I wanted to use for landscape, but I should be able to get it in a month or two, perhaps sooner.

In the mean time, I'm looking forward to getting all of this stuff and having a play! The manuals should make for good bedtime reading as well














.

Anyway, I'll borrow my partner's compact point and shoot and take some pics of the stuff when it arrives. I always love receiving parcels in the post, so I'll try and share a small amount of that goodness with you guys soon














.

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## rx7speed

might want to try dealextreme.com for the card reader. they are cheap but at 2-5 bucks with free shipping it can't be that bad. worst part is shipping takes some time they quote 6-8 weeks I usually get it though within 2-4weeks but that is US from china. not sure how UK would be. they are at least honest and upfront and it is free though so...
so far though I have had fairly good luck with their products so I can't complain to much about them. I jus


----------



## tkl.hui

oooo, i wanna know how that tamron lens performs. I was thinking of either getting the following to replace my kit lens.

Tamron 17-50 f2.8
Sigma 18-50 f2.8
Carl Zeiss 16-80 f3.5-4.5 (most exepensive one)

Post lots of pics when you can









EDIT: btw, can someone add me to the list? Here's what I'm using at the moment.

Sony Alpha A200 w/ 18-70 f3.5-5.6 kit lens
B+W UV Haze Filter

Thats about it for now until I get my hands on an old Minolta 70-210 f4 "beercan" lens.

EDIT 2: Thought I'd post a pic I took a few days ago. Its a picture of my lil puppy (not really a puppy anymore but i still think of him as one







) Its a 100% center crop. I love the expression he has on his face.


----------



## christian_piper




----------



## SoBe8503

Hey everyone... I'm in a night-time phase right now. Anyone have any tips (filters, shutter speeds, aperature, ISO speeds, etc.) to get some fancy schmancy shots???


----------



## Squeeker The Cat

Quote:



Originally Posted by *tkl.hui*


oooo, i wanna know how that tamron lens performs. I was thinking of either getting the following to replace my kit lens.

Tamron 17-50 f2.8
Sigma 18-50 f2.8
Carl Zeiss 16-80 f3.5-4.5 (most exepensive one)

Post lots of pics when you can










EDIT: btw, can someone add me to the list? Here's what I'm using at the moment.

Sony Alpha A200 w/ 18-70 f3.5-5.6 kit lens
B+W UV Haze Filter

Thats about it for now until I get my hands on an old Minolta 70-210 f4 "beercan" lens.

EDIT 2: Thought I'd post a pic I took a few days ago. Its a picture of my lil puppy (not really a puppy anymore but i still think of him as one







) Its a 100% center crop. I love the expression he has on his face.












man is he cute as hell!!! not as cute as my kitty i posted a few lines lol but for a dog he is damm cute!!


----------



## christian_piper

Quote:



Originally Posted by *SoBe8503*


Hey everyone... I'm in a night-time phase right now. Anyone have any tips (filters, shutter speeds, aperature, ISO speeds, etc.) to get some fancy schmancy shots???


Here is one night shot.... EXTREMELY dark- looked nothing like this in real life.










TRIPOD TRIPOD TRIPOD.....

Exposure: 30 sec (30)
ISO Speed: 1600
Aperature was f/2- as fast as my lens goes. It was really dark... (VERY small moon- yes it looks full- thanks to ISO 1600 and 30 seconds...)
LENS: 50mm f/2 nikkor manual lens.

So what do you need? Long exposures wide aperatures and a still subject- or something that looks good still (That shot the waves were choppy, turned calm looking)

OH- That had a UV filter on it- if I was smart enough to remove it all that green CA would go away..... oh well

-------------------------------------------------------------

Here is another low light long exposure shot, but wasn't a pitch black shot like before.









Exposure: 2 sec (2)
Aperture: f/8
Focal Length: 18 mm
ISO Speed: 100
Exposure Bias: 1 EV

That one had a LOT more light- so I upped the aperature for a sharper shot, and put the ISO at lowest for a clean shot- and used 2 seconds to capture.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This one was taken with my canon G9 Compact:








Exposure: 1 sec (1)
Aperture: f/2.8
Focal Length: 7.4 mm
ISO Speed: 200
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

I hope these different examples + settings helped at least a bit.... Get a tripod and enjoy!


----------



## SoBe8503

Quote:


Originally Posted by *christian_piper* 
Here is one night shot.... EXTREMELY dark- looked nothing like this in real life.










This looks incredible thank you for your help.

You mentioned removing the UV filter. What does that do exactly? I just use it to protect my lens, but I always thought it really didn't affect the pic that much.


----------



## tkl.hui

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Squeeker The Cat* 
man is he cute as hell!!! not as cute as my kitty i posted a few lines lol but for a dog he is damm cute!!

Pshhh







Your kitty is cute, but I've always found dogs to be cuter


----------



## christian_piper

Quote:



Originally Posted by *SoBe8503*


This looks incredible thank you for your help.

You mentioned removing the UV filter. What does that do exactly? I just use it to protect my lens, but I always thought it really didn't affect the pic that much.


It improves image quality overall slightly, and makes chromatic aberrations less likely- that green around the moon WAS caused by my UV filter (I replicated it in another shot, fixed it by removing it..) ANY filter will cause potential IQ isses, and CA is a common issue. (Remove it if you notice an issue)


----------



## tkl.hui

What do you guys think of this pic I took? I did some minor adjustments of contrast.


----------



## dr4gon

Quote:


Originally Posted by *christian_piper* 









Nice bokeh and great tips! You really HH that last one for an entire second?









Quote:


Originally Posted by *tkl.hui* 
What do you guys think of this pic I took? I did some minor adjustments of contrast.










Looks nice, reminds me of running around the forest in crysis.


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:



Originally Posted by *rx7speed*


might want to try dealextreme.com for the card reader. they are cheap but at 2-5 bucks with free shipping it can't be that bad. worst part is shipping takes some time they quote 6-8 weeks I usually get it though within 2-4weeks but that is US from china. not sure how UK would be. they are at least honest and upfront and it is free though so...
so far though I have had fairly good luck with their products so I can't complain to much about them. I jus


Thanks for the advice, but I've already ordered all the stuff in the list and (except the sensor cleaning kit) it's all already been dispatched now.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *tkl.hui*


oooo, i wanna know how that tamron lens performs. I was thinking of either getting the following to replace my kit lens.

Tamron 17-50 f2.8
Sigma 18-50 f2.8
Carl Zeiss 16-80 f3.5-4.5 (most exepensive one)

Post lots of pics when you can










The Tamron lens has equal to better MTF numbers across the focal range than the stupendously expensive Nikon equivalent, so I'm guessing it's better than the Sigma. In addition, Tamron have a somewhat better reputation than Sigma (from what I've read) in terms of customer service and build quality.

Also, although Carl Zeiss lenses are usually very good, you get f2.8 throughout with the Tamron vs the Zeiss' f3.5-4.5, which makes the Tamron more flexible in terms of giving you greater control over DOF and better "available light" shooting capability, as well as making it "faster glass" in general than the Zeiss.

For the money, the Tamron really is an excellent lens and it even comes with an AF motor now as well (find the right model), which makes it AF a bit quicker than the non-motor model. I've done quite a bit of research into the Tamron and optically, it's really very good. There is a bit of distortion and some CAs, but nothing major and nothing that can't be remedied if you shoot in RAW and even if you shoot in JPG and have the right software. The most important factor for me is image quality and the Tamron has that in spades.

Check out this analysis.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *christian_piper*












Wow, that is really good. Very nice image indeed. Love the composition, the lighting, the colours, everything. Very nice.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *SoBe8503*


Hey everyone... I'm in a night-time phase right now. Anyone have any tips (filters, shutter speeds, aperature, ISO speeds, etc.) to get some fancy schmancy shots???


I've only shot at night a few times, but I used a tripod and shutter speeds of 1 to 4 seconds on a fairly light night, with ISO200/400 and as wide an aperture as I could go. That was with my old FZ50 superzoom, so I'll probably do things a little differently with my D300.

It depends on the circumstances you find yourself and what outcome you want as to what settings you use, but I'd recommend a tripod, if you don't already plan to use one. That gives you some flexibility with regards to longer shutter speeds. Of course, with longer shutter speeds, motion blur will be more evident, which can be undesirable. Shorter shutter speeds will mean wider apertures, which can make edges look softer, which could also be undesirable, or higher ISOs, which can introduce the almost universally undesirable noise.

It's really about finding a combination that works best in the circumstances you find yourself in, for getting the results you want. There's not really an exact formula for any kind of photography as far as I know. I guess that's what makes it more of an art-form, than a science. Still, for night time, what I'd do, is set an ISO as high as I was comfortable wouldn't introduce more noise that could be dealt with. Then set an aperture that gave me a good balance between the sharpness of the subject and as much light as possible getting to the sensor. Then, using a tripod, I'd set a shutter speed that would give a good exposure. I'd also shoot in RAW, so I could more easily correct any mistakes. However, that's just how I'd do it, which is by no means _the_ way to do it







.

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## BrinNutz

Ok, I'm not posting anymore pics here...I'll keep those to the camera forums for critiques.

Unless, someone starts a picture thread. Otherwise I think this thread would best be suited for talking about cameras, and keeping it that way..eh?


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Well, everything arrived today. Much faster than I had thought. Unfortunately, my partner has managed to loose her point and shoot, so I cant put any pictures up to show you my new toy, but when she gets home, I'll try to get her to find her camera.

I'm just charging the battery now, so I'm pretty excited to start messing around with this beast. It's such a serious bit of kit. Feels great in the hands and looks really nice. Come on battery charger!









Highly-Annoyed


----------



## SoBe8503

Here's a few i've done so far... I've never really messed with the ISO speed before. I've always kept it at 100. I'll change that up a bit and see what happens.








Shutter Speed: 1293/10 second
F Number: F/3.5
Focal Length: 18 mm
ISO Speed: 100








Shutter Speed: 150/10 second
F Number: F/7.1
Focal Length: 55 mm
ISO Speed: 100








Shutter Speed: 130/10 second
F Number: F/22.0
Focal Length: 18 mm
ISO Speed: 100








Shutter Speed: 300/10 second
F Number: F/6.3
Focal Length: 18 mm
ISO Speed: 100


----------



## christian_piper

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dr4gon*


Nice bokeh and great tips! You really HH that last one for an entire second?










Thank you! And NOOO... I used a tripod. lol


----------



## Marin

I took a lot of Panorama shots in Israel. Here's one for now.


----------



## Syrillian

Marin.... did you jump?


----------



## christian_piper

Marin: COOL SHot! However, the overexposed rocks on tiop KILL it for me. You should photoshop them! Try and make a texture similat to real life maybe, and use that> At least make em black instead of white...


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Syrillian*


Marin.... did you jump?


Yes.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *christian_piper*


Marin: COOL SHot! However, the overexposed rocks on tiop KILL it for me. You should photoshop them! Try and make a texture similat to real life maybe, and use that> At least make em black instead of white...


I'll try that.


----------



## Syrillian

Jump =









and, "Welcome back".


----------



## rx7speed

marin? isn't that the menstral sheep guy? or am I thinking of someone else.

btw if anyone wants I found this killer deal on a canon XT with the kit lens. only has 59 exposures on it. plus it has an extra battery. he is asking 700 bucks if you guys are interested.


----------



## Marin

My new camera: Canon Rebel XSi


----------



## tkl.hui

Sweet camera.


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

OK, I finally got my partner to dig out her P&S.

Here are a couple of pics of my new stuff, so far.



















I had a little back-focusing with the Tamron lens, but it was easily corrected with the D300's AF fine tune function.

I'm still getting used to the camera, but I have to say it's really comfortable and intuitive to use. My only issue with it so far, is that I would like the â€œassignableâ€ button to be more versatile, but other than that, I have to say this camera does everything I want.

I set up the SB600's as remote flashes last night and gave them a whirl and I was really impressed with how easy everything was to configure how I wanted. This camera has obviously been very well thought through.

One problem I'm getting so far though, is that, using the Camera's built-in flash (as commander for the remote flashes) leaves a big shadow at the bottom centre of every image, due to the length of the Tamron lens. Even when I take the lens hood off I get the shadow. I understand you can buy a UV filter for the D300's flash though, which only lets UV light through, so that the remote flashes will fire, but the built-in flash will produce no visible light in a shot, so I'm going to look into getting one of those, unless anybody else can make any suggestions as to how I can configure the built-in flash to act as "commander" for the remotes, but not add any light to a shot?

Overall I'm impressed with the camera. It feels really natural to use, to the point that I stop thinking about it completely, which is, I think, a good thing. It's just so easy and comfortable to use, it's simply a joy. It just does the job.

Anyway, all that's left now is for me to improve and to try to develop some skills that come close to being worthy of the tool I'm using







.

I'll post some pictures later







.

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## tkl.hui

Are you sure the shadow with the flash isn't caused by the lens hood? That seems to happen for me when I use the built in flash and the Lens hood that came with my camera.(though the included lens hood SUCKS and is practically useless) I generally leave it off since my Lens hood is so short it hardly helps at all.


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:


Originally Posted by *tkl.hui* 
Are you sure the shadow with the flash isn't caused by the lens hood? That seems to happen for me when I use the built in flash and the Lens hood that came with my camera.(though the included lens hood SUCKS and is practically useless) I generally leave it off since my Lens hood is so short it hardly helps at all.

Thanks for your response







.

Depending on how close the subject is and/or at what angle the camera is to the subject, sometimes I don't get the shadow, but as I intend to undertake some "proper" portraiture, I want to try and eliminate the shadow in all circumstances. It happens even when the hood is off in some shots when the built-in flash contributes light to a shot.

I'll have to do some more research and see if there's a setting I can use to solve the problem. Perhaps the built-in can fire a pre-flash or something like that, so the camera can meter and the remotes can fire, but the built-in doesn't contribute any light to a shot?? I just don't know enough about the camera yet. I'll need to do some more research and experimentation.

I almost always leave my lens hood on though. I've had shots ruined by lens flare, which a good lens hood could of prevented.

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## rx7speed

mind posting a few pictures or at least providing links that show the issue?


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:


Originally Posted by *rx7speed* 
mind posting a few pictures or at least providing links that show the issue?

Thanks for your response. I think I've solved it now.

For Â£8.00 (about $16 USD) I can buy what's called an IR Panel that sits on the hot shoe of the camera and hangs over the face of the built-in flash, blocking all but infrared light. The IR light wont show up in photos, but it will allow the remote flashes to fire, which solves my problem!

To be honest, the shadowing was only mainly with close up subjects anyway and only slight when using the off-camera flashes. It's a lot worse when using the built-in flash only, but I can get around that by fitting one of the SB600s and using that instead of the built-in flash; which is probably better anyway.

Here's one of my first shots with the new gear







. More to come as I take them







.










f3.5, ISO1600, 50mm, 1/40th Sec, handheld.

This was cropped, bordered and marked in GIMP, after having a light run through NeatImage. To be honest, the original didn't really need any NeatImage treatment, but I've got so used to removing all traces of noise I did it anyway. You can download the original here, if you want. It's only a 7MB file.

I'm shooting in JPG only atm as I haven't bought Capture NX2 yet, so no RAW shooting. At least this leaves the EXIF data intact.

I totally love this camera







. So pleased I got it







. Worth every penny







.

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## equetefue

Congrats Highly !!


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

a good trick is to hold the camera upside down, then the shadow is usually on the ceiling or sky where it isn't noticeable, or as noticeable.
i get the same problem with my 18-200mm when i am shooting at 18-24mm


----------



## rx7speed

how does that neat image program works and how much? just doesn't look like it removes detail that much but yet does quite a good job at removing noise.


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:


Originally Posted by *rx7speed* 
how does that neat image program works and how much? just doesn't look like it removes detail that much but yet does quite a good job at removing noise.

The NeatImage people make several versions of the same program. Depending on what you want/need it runs from around $30US to around $75US. I've got an older version, but I intend to buy the latest, best version soon.

Here's their web site; you buy direct.

It's a good program, but the version I have is sometimes a bit hit-and-miss when it decides upon a portion of a photo to build a noise profile from. Quite often, the program will come up with a "profile quality" of 82% (for example) automatically, which I can raise with a little effort to over 90%, sometimes past 95%. The higher the percentage "quality" the better job the program will do at removing noise, while protecting detail. By selecting a different area of a photo and resizing the selection area, I can almost always get the program to build a better quality noise profile than it can do by it's self.

Apparently the latest version has a more sophisticated and accurate profile building algorithm however, so it'll probably do a better job at automatically building noise profiles than the older version I've got, which is one of the main reasons I intend to upgrade.

Using everything on auto and default, you do get good results. Even a profile quality of 80%, with default settings will deal with noise well, while protecting most of the finer detail. If you take a little time to get to know the program though, you can get some excellent, to superb results from it. It's actually very powerful when you take control of all it's settings.

I haven't used other noise reduction programs, but I'd say NeatImage must rank highly among them. Almost any PC based noise control is better than in-camera noise control though







.

I think you can download a free trial of NeatImage, so maybe it's worth giving it a try?

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## tkl.hui

You should give Adobe Lightroom 2.0 a try. Great for organizing photos and fixing up either one picture at a time or it can also be great for fixing multiple pictures fairly quickly.


----------



## rx7speed

the only one I used was noise ninja. works I guess but not sure how much I really care for it. doesn't remove the noise well enough (could be user error though) and by the time it does the image starts either turning soft or over sharp


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:


Originally Posted by *rx7speed* 
the only one I used was noise ninja. works I guess but not sure how much I really care for it. doesn't remove the noise well enough (could be user error though) and by the time it does the image starts either turning soft or over sharp

Well, I tell you what, why don't you upload a photo you want to remove some noise from. I'll run it through NeatImage at default settings and then again with manual tweaking and you do what you usually do with Noise Ninja and then I'll upload my two cleaned versions of your image and you can compare them to what you get from Noise Ninja? This might give you a clearer idea of how the two programs compare?

It doesn't take that long, so I don't mind doing it if you want







.

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *rx7speed*


how does that neat image program works and how much? just doesn't look like it removes detail that much but yet does quite a good job at removing noise.



Quote:



Originally Posted by *rx7speed*


the only one I used was noise ninja. works I guess but not sure how much I really care for it. doesn't remove the noise well enough (could be user error though) and by the time it does the image starts either turning soft or over sharp


I've used NoiseNinja, NeatImage as well as Canon's DPP and sometimes an image is too beyond noisy to begin with to be rendered entirely noiseless. Best to compromise and not shoot in ISO's which are really noisy for your camera. ISO 800 is the max I can shoot in and still completely remove noise, and even then there's a tad of detail smearing if you view 100%. 1600 ISO is hopeless except for small prints for my 400D, but some cameras (like Highly's D300) can produce near noiseless post-processed 1600 ISO shots even in larger prints.


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

OK, just to update any of you who might take an interest. I just bought Nikon's Capture NX2, plus an IR panel for the built-in flash, 2 "softbrellas" (a sort of softbox/umbrella hybrid), 2 flash tripods and the 2 mounts that connect flash, to tripod, to softbrella.

Should have most of it with me by early next week. Still got to get backgrounds, at least one hair light, at least one accent light and a stand for backgrounds and possibly a boom and another light stand as well, unless I can figure out some other way to rig a hair light in the right place...

I'm really looking forward to getting my hands on Capture NX2. It looks like some powerful RAW processing and image editing software. Apparently you can selectively apply "D-Lighting", which sounds good, among other useful things. Despite how good the D300 is with JPG (and it is good), I've missed having the flexibility of shooting in RAW. It really opens up the possibilities.

Anyway, I'll probably upload some shots of the new stuff when it arrives and I've got it set up. I've really got to drag myself out of the house and get some walkabout shooting in soon. I'm getting eager to put this new camera through it paces







.

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

sounds like you will have a nice decked out studio once you get it all set up, cant wait to see it and happy shooting


----------



## tkl.hui

I wonder how the Nikon Capture NX2 compares to say Adobe Camera Raw or Adobe Lightroom 2.0


----------



## max302

I was able to OBTAIN Lightroom. I'm installing it right now, I'll be checking it out. Theres a podcast on youtube with howtos too, if you guys want to check that out.


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote: 
   Originally Posted by *tkl.hui*   I wonder how the Nikon Capture NX2 compares to say Adobe Camera Raw or Adobe Lightroom 2.0  
You can have a look at a quick guide on YouTube for NX2.

Part One.   
 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TlIqtkSwUWc&feature=related  



 
 It gives you some idea of the kind of things the software can do and how easy it can be to use.

As max302 noted there are other similar guides on YouTube that can give you an idea of what the other programs are capable of and how easy they are to use.

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## Marin




----------



## tkl.hui

neat. Is that cropped?


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *tkl.hui*


neat. Is that cropped?


It is cropped.

In the original picture you can see the ocean and the sun.


----------



## tkl.hui

I'd like to see the original







Where'd you take this picture?


----------



## Marin

I took the picture while I was in Israel at the Mediterranean in Tel Aviv. It was such an amazing sunset.


----------



## Marin

Don't know what to do with this one. Any ideas?

I took 3 shots of the ark, going from the bottom up and stitched them together in photoshop using photoshop. I then cropped the image.


----------



## equetefue

Some from 2 days ago


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

wow, simply amazing shots


----------



## Namrac

My dad just picked up a sony alpha350 to replace is broken alpha 100. It's a brilliant camera, blows my dinky Canon S3 IS out of the water. D:


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Perhaps somebody can help me out here, as I'm a bit confused...

I've read that the lens I have (the Tamron 17-50mm) has a minimum focusing distance of 0.27 meters, or 27cm. It even says this on the lens barrel it's self.

What does this mean exactly, as I am able to obtain (what I'd consider) sharp focus at around 9cm from the front element. I get the double-beep confirmation from AF that the lens is focused and the images look sharp to me. Have I got something wrong?

Here's a link to a shot I took. The focus point is the starfish. If you zoom in it looks pretty sharp. Considering this _isn't_ (afaik) a macro lens, this looks pretty good to me. It was taken with the lens at 50mm. The starfish is approximately 9cm away from the front element of the lens. That's a third of the distance it should be able to focus at, right?









Highly-Annoyed


----------



## christian_piper

I believe that is from the plane of focus- AKA the sensor. There should be a mark on the top of the nikon camera body as to the exact position inside the camera....


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

as christian said, it is usually measured from the sensor on an SLR and not the front lens element.


----------



## christian_piper

Which means it is possible with extension tubes to accidentally focus so close that you are focusing BEHIND the front element......


----------



## TnB= Gir

Girface is finally getting a camera.

I picked up a Nikon Coolpix S9 for 40 bucks.


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:



Originally Posted by *christian_piper*


I believe that is from the plane of focus- AKA the sensor. There should be a mark on the top of the nikon camera body as to the exact position inside the camera....



Quote:



Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie*


as christian said, it is usually measured from the sensor on an SLR and not the front lens element.



Quote:



Originally Posted by *christian_piper*


Which means it is possible with extension tubes to accidentally focus so close that you are focusing BEHIND the front element......


Ah, I see, that makes more sense. I thought I might of had something wrong







.

There's a little mark, that looks like a circle with a line intersecting it, I guess that must be the mark you mean. Measuring from the mark, to the subject, the total length is approximately 27cm.

Thanks for clearing that up for me guys!!







I appreciate it







.

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

any time








hope to see a lot of stellar shots soon


----------



## ecoyd1

a


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:



Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie*


hope to see a lot of stellar shots soon










Not sure about soon, but I'll keep trying







.

I've really only been experimenting with the camera so far; trying different settings in different conditions to experience how it all works. I've really only been trying to get familiar and comfortable with the D300, rather than trying to produce anything of merit. I've been trying to test the camera's limitations in real-world (-ish) conditions







. No amount of reading seems to be an adequate substitute for actual hands-on testing in my experience.

One of the first things I've been doing is building a custom menu of all the settings I've been using most. There are a lot of settings that are easily accessible from the exterior of the camera, but some are buried in menus and sub-menus and it's handy to have the ones I use most in one place. Of course, I don't know what they are until I try the camera out in different circumstances, so it's a useful exercise to just play around with it for a while.

I have to say though, based on my few days of experience so far, I think the D300 really is an excellent camera. I've been really pleased with how few limitations it has presented since I've owned it. The more I use it, the more I come to appreciate just how good a tool it is. I've also been pretty pleased with my choice of lens. Once I had the back-focusing issue identified and corrected (thanks to the D300's AF fine tune) I've found it to be really very good. So far it's all been an extremely pleasant step-up from my previous camera.

Anyway, I could go on all day about how great this camera is. I'd better stop now before I start to write an essay







.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ecoyd1*


Highly Annoyed: Lets see some shots with that D300!


Yes, I know







. Give me chance will you?!
















I'm still getting used to the camera, just playing around with it so far, getting a feel for it and finding it's limitations. I'll be doing even more of that once I get Capture NX2 (which is en-route) and start to play around with RAW files. I like to experiment, I find it a good way to learn.

Anyway, I wanted to thank you for your advice and help again. If it weren't for you (and GoneTomorrow) I probably wouldn't have considered the move to DSLR for a long time. So far I think it's really been worth it and I'm extremely pleased with the camera and the other photographic hardware. It all works exactly how I had hoped and has actually exceeded my expectations in some ways, which is not something I can say about much else.

Thanks!









Highly-Annoyed


----------



## ecoyd1

Good for you!

Glad your happy!


----------



## tkl.hui

Here's 2 shots from the baseball game I went to. Its at the Roger's Centre. Toronto Blue Jays vs. Cleaveland Indians. I tried my best to get the exposure right. Was taking pictures of the Indians started Cliff Lee but I was having trouble getting exposure and shutter speed right because i wanted to capture the ball leaving his hand.


----------



## dr4gon

Quote:


Originally Posted by *tkl.hui* 
Here's 2 shots from the baseball game I went to. Its at the Roger's Centre. Toronto Blue Jays vs. Cleaveland Indians. I tried my best to get the exposure right. Was taking pictures of the Indians started Cliff Lee but I was having trouble getting exposure and shutter speed right because i wanted to capture the ball leaving his hand.



























I'm so excited, a fellow sony shooter! alright!

kit lens eh? junk it!!! :swearing:

The first is nice though. 2nd needs a bit of work (stablizing)

I think you would really like this lens. It's great for sports and outdoors photography. Great deal too! (~$160ish) It goes well with the kit lens (and it's better).


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *tkl.hui* 
Here's 2 shots from the baseball game I went to. Its at the Roger's Centre. Toronto Blue Jays vs. Cleaveland Indians. I tried my best to get the exposure right. Was taking pictures of the Indians started Cliff Lee but I was having trouble getting exposure and shutter speed right because i wanted to capture the ball leaving his hand.










Yep, to really freeze that action you would have needed to set the shutter to at least 1/600. However that can be difficult in that situation since it looks a bit dark.

Nice shots otheriwse, though you may want to run the second image though NeatImage as I can see the chroma noise in the grass.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *equetefue* 
Some from 2 days ago























































Dammit equetefue, you make we want to throw in the towel altogether with shooting. Nice shots!


----------



## Marin

Wheres a good place online to get cameras and stuff.


----------



## tkl.hui

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dr4gon* 







I'm so excited, a fellow sony shooter! alright!

kit lens eh? junk it!!! :swearing:

The first is nice though. 2nd needs a bit of work (stablizing)

I think you would really like this lens. It's great for sports and outdoors photography. Great deal too! (~$160ish) It goes well with the kit lens (and it's better).

Ya the second one I had to shoot at ISO 800 and it was at 1/400. It was so dark I had to adjust exposure alot in Lightroom. Wish i had a faster lens. I've been trying to get my hands on the lengendary Minolta 70-210 f4 "beercan".

http://www.dyxum.com/lenses/detail.asp?IDLens=48

EDIT: Could someone tell me the difference between an APO lens and a non APO lens? Thanks


----------



## christian_piper

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Wheres a good place online to get cameras and stuff.

Newegg, Amazon, etc.

I avoid places like butterfly.....


----------



## catmmm

Thank god I had my camera with me yesterday when I saw this.










there was lightning where the rainbows were and I was hoping to get a picture with a lightning bolt in it but I am not that lucky I guess haha










and this is a picture of the sky opposite of the rainbows


----------



## dr4gon

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Dammit equetefue, you make we want to throw in the towel altogether with shooting. Nice shots!

Canon EOS-1D Mark II, duh!! LOL

marin, b&h photo video, amazon, Adorama, ebay (be careful, buy from us sellers/stores like cameta camera), and wolfcamera.

There's a bunch out there!


----------



## max302

Here are some of my latest shots.



Bokeh on the kit lense ain't worth crap.... I want a prime











Generic... but I like the colors.



A bit dark I know. This was supposed to be an HDR shot, but my tripod didn't feel like cooperating, so I just adjusted the RAW so the entire scene is visible.





That's it for now...

BTW, I tried out Adobe Lightroom... amazing software, I don't know how I managed to live without it. Processing NEFs is like 8000 times faster and easier, the controls are really detailed too.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dr4gon*


Canon EOS-1D Mark II, duh!! LOL

marin, b&h photo video, amazon, Adorama, ebay (be careful, buy from us sellers/stores like cameta camera), and wolfcamera.

There's a bunch out there!


Hah, it's more the glass than the camera body IMO and the skill of the shooter during shooting and post-shot editing.

All good suggestions for resellers, but I would add Abe's of Maine and Beach Photo to the list as well. However B&H and Adorama are my favs.


----------



## Marin

nvm


----------



## tkl.hui

Hey anyone know if the price difference is worth getting a lens thats APO vs. one thats non-APO?


----------



## ecoyd1

a


----------



## tkl.hui

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ecoyd1*


For Nikon, the cheapest full size sensor is 3 grand. D700.

For Canon, its the 5D, not sure on the price. There are also used 1Ds that are relatively cheap.


Umm.... that doesn't really answer my question lol.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *max302*




A bit dark I know. This was supposed to be an HDR shot, but my tripod didn't feel like cooperating, so I just adjusted the RAW so the entire scene is visible.


Well, since you shot in RAW, try making it into an HDR with just a single image, or just do an exposure blend (easier).

Minneapolis City Hall


----------



## ecoyd1

gonetomorrow it looks like disneyland!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *ecoyd1* 
gonetomorrow it looks like disneyland!

Huh. It does, doesn't it?


----------



## Marin




----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ecoyd1*


For Nikon, the cheapest full size sensor is 3 grand. D700.

For Canon, its the 5D, not sure on the price. There are also used 1Ds that are relatively cheap.


Hey, ecoyd1, I wonder if you could give me a little advice?

I recently took the D300 out and did some more testing with it. I took a few seascape/landscape shots, to see what kind of DOF I could get with F14/F16 compared to F11 that i used to use with my old FZ50.

When I got home and looked at the files, I was less than impressed by the sharpness of the images. Now, my first thought was that it was the lens, and then that it may of been my technique, but after some research I found that DSLR sensors actually suffer from diffraction when used with lenses stopped down to higher F numbers. What was more surprising was that from research I've done, it looks like images produced by the D300's sensor start to be affected by this sensor diffraction at around F8, which isn't much DOF for landscape...

Now, I've done a little testing at home and it seems like I can push the aperture to F13 without too much loss of IQ compared to wider apertures, and with a little increase in contrast and a sprinkling of unsharp mask in post processing, I can artificially raise the perceived IQ to around that of F6.3 at the centre of the image and around that of F11 at the edges, but with the extra DOF of F13.

With all that in mind and knowing that you don't do a huge amount of landscape shooting, I wanted to ask what your take on the sensor diffraction of the D300 was and what kind of apertures you use for landscapes, or shots where you want to maximise DOF?

Thanks.

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## equetefue

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Dammit equetefue, you make we want to throw in the towel altogether with shooting. Nice shots!

Thanks for that !


----------



## rx7speed

so I have a challange for you guys. I notice many of you seem to take a picture with great colors and nice and vivid and such. with that though how much of it is done post work? any chance I can get you all to post just plain pictures. no touch up at all on the computer. no sharpening, or color adjustments just as is how the camera saw it. also all settings no the camera itself just leave as neutral. I'm just curious here how much people play and tweak with their pictures.

so post one like that just more or less as was shot picture and then that same picture after your touch ups and tweaks.


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:



Originally Posted by *rx7speed*


so I have a challange for you guys. I notice many of you seem to take a picture with great colors and nice and vivid and such. with that though how much of it is done post work? any chance I can get you all to post just plain pictures. no touch up at all on the computer. no sharpening, or color adjustments just as is how the camera saw it. also all settings no the camera itself just leave as neutral. I'm just curious here how much people play and tweak with their pictures.

so post one like that just more or less as was shot picture and then that same picture after your touch ups and tweaks.


That's a really good idea.

I've been working on sharpening and contrast tweaks a lot recently (RE: my above post about diffraction when stopped down) so I do actually have several "before and after" shots.

I too would like to see what other people do in post-processing, as it could be very instructive.

I might add also (to your idea) that people could also state exactly what they did (like program used, unsharp mask quantities, saturation levels etc) to enhance their shot, so perhaps we can all learn from each other's techniques?

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## rx7speed

hey not a bad idea yourself there with adding what you did about how you came with the results.

I was just thinking along the lines of we never really see the picture as the camera see's it and instead only what we have done with it. sure the post proccess is still work of the artist work but it all starts with the photographer and the picture they took right.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

i haven't updated it in a long while, but all the pictures i have uploaded here have no editing done on them if you want to take a look
http://picasaweb.google.ca/a.schub/Desktop

all of these were shot as .jpeg


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:



Originally Posted by *rx7speed*


hey not a bad idea yourself there with adding what you did about how you came with the results.

I was just thinking along the lines of we never really see the picture as the camera see's it and instead only what we have done with it. sure the post proccess is still work of the artist work but it all starts with the photographer and the picture they took right.


I suppose the only real way to see exactly what the camera "sees" is to show a JPG, direct from RAW. You could, (using a RAW editor) turn off all sharpening, noise reduction, contrast and saturation settings and just show what the sensor saw, when the photons came through the lens and struck the photosites. That would come closer to showing the true image I guess.

You make a good point though; I too wonder how much of an effect on people's final image, either in-camera settings, or post-processing has. I guess you very rarely see what the camera does when somebody presents you with an image. It must make it harder to evaluate camera performance as well, without knowing how much of any particular shot is the camera and how much is processing by configurable camera settings, or post-processing.

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *rx7speed* 
so I have a challange for you guys. I notice many of you seem to take a picture with great colors and nice and vivid and such. with that though how much of it is done post work? any chance I can get you all to post just plain pictures. no touch up at all on the computer. no sharpening, or color adjustments just as is how the camera saw it. also all settings no the camera itself just leave as neutral. I'm just curious here how much people play and tweak with their pictures.

so post one like that just more or less as was shot picture and then that same picture after your touch ups and tweaks.

Ok, here's a before and after of one of mine. The before picture is unaltered by my PC, although I have the sharpening set to max on the camera and the camera's saturation upped a bit:










And here's the after, which includes some sharpening, a bit more color saturation, and an exposure blend (from one RAW image):










Not a huge difference, but I don't do much to my pictures. If I don't do an HDR or Exposure Blend, then the most I do is adjust the sharpness, noise reduction, saturation, contrast.


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

One of the test shots I took the other day with the D300.

*The Original.*










*The edited version.*










I cropped the shot to a composition I found more pleasing and which showed more detail in the flower and bee. I then added some (radius around 1.2, quantity about 0.24) USM in GIMP. Then I selected the bee, increased the yellow saturation by about +15 or so, then increased all colour saturation on it by about +5 or so. Then I inverted the selection and de-saturated (by about -15) and slightly darkened (by about -9) the yellow in the background. This helped to separate the bee from the background, as the background yellow was competing with the bee for attention in the original. I then ran the image through NeatImage to remove what little noise there was and gave the image a tiny bit more sharpening. The in camera settings were set to "standard" with +1 sharpening.

Obviously this was only a test shot, so I didn't bother with composition much in the original, or care too much about the end result when I was taking the shot. I would usually put a bit more effort in, so would usually not have to crop so much. I have found images can be a bit soft straight out of the D300 (and I'm not the only one) so sharpening is probably something I'll use most in future.

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## tkl.hui

Here's one I did about a week ago.

Before









After


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Just to let you guys know I probably wont be posting much for a while...

My PC just died







. I'm writing this post from my partner's laptop. My PC had been working perfectly, with no problems until today. I turned it off to go out, but then realised that I wanted to check my e-mail before leaving the house, so I hit the power button and after a few seconds got a "no signal" message from the monitor...

After trying several times to get it to boot up, it appears that it's not reading the HDDs, or sending a signal to the monitor. From past experience with this kind of thing I assume that my motherboard has died...

As this is the second motherboard that's died on me in less than a year, I'm starting to suspect my PSU is killing them, so I'm going to replace both my motherboard and PSU, just to be sure. It could be a HDD problem, but I doubt it and will rule that out definitively before replacing other hardware.

Sufficed to say, with a new PSU running at around Â£100, and a new motherboard coming in at around the same, if not a little more, it's going to be a little while until I can afford to replace them, especially so soon after spending over 2K on photographic equipment...

Anyway, keep up the good work guys. I'll probably check back in sporadically, but it'll be a little while before I can start to upload images/etc again, as it'll take time to get my PC back up







.

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## equetefue

hope to see it running soon my friend...


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:



Originally Posted by *equetefue*


hope to see it running soon my friend...


Thanks man, me too







.

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## nuclearjock

Brand spankin new D300
nikkor 18-200 vr
nikkor 80-400 vr
nikkor 18-55 vr
nikkor 55-200 vr


----------



## Kamikaze127

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*












Wow do you have a Higher res of that?


----------



## ecoyd1

a


----------



## Kamikaze127

Hey I'm pretty noob at cameras,and photography, but I took these today.

A magenta flower with a bumble bee:









Some rocks in the flower bed:









More of the bee:









And moving inside here is a shot from my desk:









My shoe lol.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

the bumblebee shot is pretty nice kamikaze









Quote:



Originally Posted by *ecoyd1*


Why the hell would you buy an 18-200 AND an 18-55? What a waste of a couple hundred dollars!?!?! And the 55-200??


thats what i was thinking


----------



## rx7speed

well just ended up picking up some new gear myself here today. finally bought myself the 50mm f1.8 prime and a flash. that flash makes a HUGE difference in pictures I'm starting to notice. but on to the pictures.



















btw does anyone know what the big deal is with taking a picture of a duck is or is that just something on photography on the net forums?


----------



## ecoyd1

Quote:



Originally Posted by *rx7speed*


btw does anyone know what the big deal is with taking a picture of a duck is or is that just something on photography on the net forums?


meh.









rx7 that pic is great.. love the color and the dof. is that with the new 50?


----------



## rx7speed

that's the 50 I bought. think I used the built in flash for it though as this manual flash I'm still getting used to. only adjustments made where in camera which was contrast at even but had the saturation and sharpness all the way, and the white balance set to cloudy I believe. don't know what it is but if I'm not using custom WB I try to use cloudy a lot. is that normal? still need to learn how to use photoshop









I say your duck is a little cooler though.


----------



## ecoyd1

1000th post ftw.


----------



## dr4gon

1,000th REPLY!









*Flickr Gallery - 26 photos*

*If you would like to see something bigger, let me know and I can post it or add you to my contacts list on flickr!*


----------



## tkl.hui

what camera and lens are those shot with?


----------



## dr4gon

Sony a300, tamron 70-300/4-5.6 Di









And also I thought it would be cool to start a flickr group where everyone could organize and post their photos instead of having a long mega thread here.

http://www.flickr.com/groups/[email protected]/

Everyone please join!!


----------



## tkl.hui

mm nice. can you put up some big pictures? i wanna see how that lens performs at the corners. Also, what do you normally put the aperture to?


----------



## dr4gon

I think most of these were f/7.1 or f/8 or maybe at most f/11. It was board daylight and I wanted to step it down to make sure these were spot on (aperture wise).

The best way is if you had a flickr account (instead of photobucket







), then I could add you and we could share photos.









Racked out though, the lens does tend to be a bit soft at 300mm (450mm on our camera's aps-c sensor).


----------



## tkl.hui

Just made a flikr account







I went to he Museum today to take some pictures. Had a lot of trouble using the kit lens and getting exposure right. I didn't want to go past ISO 400 and i don't have a tripod. All my shots were hand held and i was forced to use a shutter speed of usually 1/3 or slower.

I find the kit lens isn't very good wide open. Either that or I'm still not very good at taking pictures yet







Only started 2 weeks ago.


----------



## dr4gon

No you're right, it's not very good lol. I have to say I wasn't all that impressed with my early pictures. Perhaps "AUTO" mode had something to do with that? Then I got my Tamron 17-50/2.8 and it's all changed. Better glass is definitely worth the money!

Thanks for joining!


----------



## tkl.hui

I'd love to get that lens. But its 500 bux here. Either that one or the 24-70 f2.8.
But first things first, I need a telephoto lens. something up to at least 200. Been trying to get my hands on the so called "legendary" beercan









EDIT: heres some of my fave pics so far. Let me know wat you think








http://www.flickr.com/photos/2962426...7606773381129/


----------



## dr4gon

24-70 is the sigma? I've really become a fan of Tamron. Their 6 year warranty is just great. Not sure what sigma has, but I doubt it's as much as 6. Also, from what I've seen Sigma quality is just not up to most of the Tamron lenses. If you do get a tamron, make sure it's the newer "Di" series for digital cameras.









Taking a look at all your new photos now!

nice pictures, on the purple flower one, IMO, you should either crop or zoom in next time for a more macro look.


----------



## Marin




----------



## equetefue

love it Marin !!


----------



## equetefue




----------



## equetefue




----------



## dr4gon

nice ships! these are from 2006?









do you have a facebook account? you should join our group to share your pictures where everyone can see! (link in my sig)


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

friends cottage for my birthday.
it was about 4 am.
me and my friend couldn't sleep, decided to have a 4 am Canoe ride.


----------



## equetefue

Love your 30sec exposure on that good ol' D70s


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

oh ya, it gets the job done, looking to get some more lenses before i make the jump to a bigger body.
but i dont know when that will be as my next few purchases will be on headphone gear.


----------



## Marin




----------



## Burn

Looking good









Can anyone give me some pointers on ISO speeds? What, for example, would be a good one to take pictures of PC hardware with? Also, can anyone give pointers on lighting?


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Burn*


Looking good









Can anyone give me some pointers on ISO speeds? What, for example, would be a good one to take pictures of PC hardware with? Also, can anyone give pointers on lighting?


Whenever I take pictures of my hardware I use the lowest possible ISO (which on my camera is 100) so I can have the least amount of noise. I also use a tripod so I can avoid using flash and not have blurry pics (which can happen on slower shutter speeds).

And by doing this you can end up with pictures like this.


----------



## dr4gon

I always try and shoot on ISO 100. You want to reduce noise as much as possible. Sometimes you need the faster speed and need to adjust accordingly.

And as marin said, avoid using the flash, especially if you are using the pop-up camera flash, it sucks...

I find natural light works well for some nice daytime shots.


----------



## ecoyd1

^^ Added you on flickr!


----------



## dr4gon

thank you


----------



## stn0092

http://img516.imageshack.us/img516/8141/dsc00979hu4.jpg

Could someone tell me what kind of USB connection that is and, if possible, provide a Newegg link to the appropriate cable? My sister found that camera in the women's bathroom and took it home. It measures 0.5 centimeters across.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *stn0092* 
http://img516.imageshack.us/img516/8141/dsc00979hu4.jpg

Could someone tell me what kind of USB connection that is and, if possible, provide a Newegg link to the appropriate cable? My sister found that camera in the women's bathroom and took it home. It measures 0.5 centimeters across.

What camera is it?


----------



## stn0092

A Polaroid i533. It's not listed on Polaroid's site though and Google isn't helping much.


----------



## rx7speed

I'm running blind here as I can't see your plug. I'm at work and they block many sites so I can only get rough ideas sometimes or have to use the cache feature in google if I'm lucky. pictures still dont' work though

but take a look is this the same
http://www.pccables.com/cgi-bin/orde...09&rsite=71609
mini-b d6s plug


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

OK, well I've got my PC back up and running now. Hopefully I won't get any more problems for a while.

I went out the other night and tried to take some night shots, without a tripod. The only real light was from street lamps and artificial lighting, but I managed to get one or two shots handheld without too much blur. In retrospect I really should of taken my tripod with me, so I could of increased the shutter speed some, but meh, I knew that; I just didn't do it... Again, I'm still only really testing the camera's real world limitations atm though







.

Anyway, this was the best I could get @ ISO1600, balancing the camera on a wall ( with a rounded top no less







), at 1/2 a second.










I'm definitely going to try this shot again, with a tripod. I might go earlier in the day as well, so there'll a bit more available light and I can try an aperture smaller than F2.8 (ie higher f number). Might be better if I had bit longer lens as well, so I could get a closer shot.

I'd really like to get the 70-200 VR 2.8, but it's Â£1200 (around $2400 USD) in the UK online. It's got some great MTF numbers, but it'll be a while before I can afford it. There's a Sigma equivalent for less than half the price, but it's not quite as sharp (especially at 200mm) and it doesn't have VR. Does anybody know if Sigma make a lens with VR or their own VR equivalent?

Oh and Capture NX2 is supposed to be with me tomorrow, so I just got the PC back up in time it would seem. I'm totally looking forward to trying it out, it looks great







.

Oh, and here's another test shot, this time of a small teddy bear







.










...and a crop of his head







.










This little guy is only about three inches tall (about 7cm) and his eye measures about 5mm accross. Focus point is on the eye with the live view (contrast based), manual focus. The bear was only about 10cm from the front element. ISO200, F5.6.

I'll update when I have more. Keep up the good work guys!

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## dr4gon

Looks nice. That's a lot of bokeh even at 5.6 since the lettering on the stomach isn't crisp, but the head is just spot on.

Is that using the 17-50/2.8 lens? I have that lens and it's awesome!


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dr4gon*


Looks nice. That's a lot of bokeh even at 5.6 since the lettering on the stomach isn't crisp, but the head is just spot on.

Is that using the 17-50/2.8 lens? I have that lens and it's awesome!


The Tammy's sweet spot ( or should I say sweet_est_ spot, as it's all pretty sweet







) is 35mm (52.5mm full frame equiv. on a 1.5 crop frame) @ F5.6. There you get the most detail the lens can resolve in both the centre and the corners. After F5.6 you're really only getting more DOF in a shot, rather than any more detail, at least on my D300 sensor anyway







. 50mm is only fractionally less sharp than 35mm at 5.6.

This lens is really sharp throughout the entire focal range though. Even at 50mm at F2.8 the resolving power is extremely good. This lens actually equals and even beats the Nikkor F2.8 17-55, especially at 35mm and 50mm and even the Nikkor F1.4 50mm prime is only a tiny bit better at the same apertures the Tammy can do. It's almost as good as one of the best Nikkor primes and equals and beats one of the best Nikkor standard zoom lenses available. For the price, it's an outstanding little lens.

I just wish Tamron made an equivalent to the Nikkor 70-200 f2.8 VR, that was a fraction of the price and either on a par, or better than it. I guess I can dream on though








.

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## dr4gon

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Highly-Annoyed* 
The Tammy's sweet spot ( or should I say sweet_est_ spot, as it's all pretty sweet







) is 35mm (52.5mm full frame equiv. on a 1.5 crop frame) @ F5.6. There you get the most detail the lens can resolve in both the centre and the corners. After F5.6 you're really only getting more DOF in a shot, rather than any more detail, at least on my D300 sensor anyway







. 50mm is only fractionally less sharp than 35mm at 5.6.

This lens is really sharp throughout the entire focal range though. Even at 50mm at F2.8 the resolving power is extremely good. This lens actually equals and even beats the Nikkor F2.8 17-55, especially at 35mm and 50mm and even the Nikkor F1.4 50mm prime is only a tiny bit better at the same apertures the Tammy can do. It's almost as good as one of the best Nikkor primes and equals and beats one of the best Nikkor standard zoom lenses available. For the price, it's an outstanding little lens.

I just wish Tamron made an equivalent to the Nikkor 70-200 f2.8 VR, that was a fraction of the price and either on a par, or better than it. I guess I can dream on though







.

Highly-Annoyed

At least for Sonys, I think they are working on a 70-200mm. I keep hearing everyone talk about wanting it and they are expecting it this fall (sept-oct timeframe). Thanks for the tips regarding the lens. I had no idea that was the sweet spot. I will try to take more at 35mm/5.6!


----------



## Marin

I have been messing around with Lightroom and really like the program. Anyways, another photo. I took this picture at Point Reyes (in Marin). The fog was coming over the hill from the Ocean and the sun was breaking through it.


----------



## stn0092

Quote:



Originally Posted by *rx7speed*


I'm running blind here as I can't see your plug. I'm at work and they block many sites so I can only get rough ideas sometimes or have to use the cache feature in google if I'm lucky. pictures still dont' work though

but take a look is this the same
http://www.pccables.com/cgi-bin/orde...09&rsite=71609
mini-b d6s plug


It definately looks like it. Is there anywhere else I can get it? Staples, Radioshack and OfficeMax don't have it and the nearest Fry's is too out of the way to go to just for a cable.


----------



## max302

Posted something to my blog yesterday, I thought you guys might be interested.

http://maximerousseau.com/?p=124

If you use Nikon stuff, YOU MUST READ! For Canon, Sony, Minolta, whatever photographers, it can be very interesting too.


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Here's my first attempt at dropping a slice of lemon, into a glass of water







.










The EXIF data doesn't seem to be in any of the NEF files I'm using with CNX2, but maybe I'll find a solution to that? Perhaps there's a camera setting I'm not turning on, or a setting in CNX2 that I haven't enabled?

Anyway... According to the JPG that accompanied the NEF, this was f5.6, 50mm, ISO200, 1/1000th sec. It was on a tripod, with 1700 Watts of continuous lighting.

I think I mucked up a bit, having two spotlights facing the front of the glass, so I may change that when I try this again.

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## dr4gon

wow that's just impressive!


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dr4gon*


wow that's just impressive!


Thanks man







.

I keep trying to work the kinks out of how to set it up, but with a bit of practice I'm sure I'll get it down







.

I took another, without the spotlights and it did look better. I've given this one a different crop, to give it a slightly different look.










Same settings as before, just 1/800th of a second this time, as I was down to 1500w of lighting. I guess I should increase the ISO a bit, perhaps, to get a faster shutter speed at this light? Probably 1/800th of a second is fast enough to freeze action though. I might need to bump up the active D lighting as well, as I'm loosing some highlight detail to my harsh lighting. Maybe I can find a way to sofen the lighting also?

I'm going to keep playing around with this until I get it right







.

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## dr4gon

Maybe crop it a bit lowr so more of the lemon shows, the detail on the lemon is nice too


----------



## equetefue

Here you go guys... Nifty little website.

It will search the whole net for a picture you upload or link to. It will show all the places it shows up.

http://tineye.com/

Ed


----------



## equetefue

Here's a must read article for all Nikon users and very interesting read for all others.

http://maximerousseau.com/?p=124

Ed


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

that site is pretty neat, i will play around with it later, and i will give that article a read after friends are gone.


----------



## ecoyd1

Some shots from yesterday around my school:


----------



## ecoyd1

And highly annoyed: I really like the first shot of the lemon. Better than the second. The lighting is better in the second, however the first is composed better I think.

You sould make a flickr... or some way to put your photos online..


----------



## tkl.hui

does anyone know how to put my name on pictures with PP? I would really like to put my name on pictures i post online.


----------



## ecoyd1

whats pp?


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ecoyd1*


And highly annoyed: I really like the first shot of the lemon. Better than the second. The lighting is better in the second, however the first is composed better I think.

You sould make a flickr... or some way to put your photos online..


Thanks man, I keep trying







.

I'll give flickr some consideration, but I'm quite keen on building websites, so I might have a go at putting one together for photography.

Here's a couple more I've taken recently. I'm slowly getting to grips with this camera now, so hopefully I can start to pump out a few more half-decent shots as time progresses.



















I don't know if you saw my earlier post about diffraction and small apertures on the D300? It would seem that, due to the Airy Disk size and the size of the photosites on the crop frame D300 (VS the D700 or D3 etc), diffraction starts to set in at around F8 and if you go past F11 to get greater DOF, the fine details start to get so mushy that the extra DOF you're getting, just isn't worth it in terms of overall image quality.

This diffraction issue is the biggest limitation I've found with the otherwise excellent D300. I understand it's not _just_ limited to the D300, but all small photosite sensor cameras, but especially for landscape I'm starting to wonder if it might be a problem?

With this in mind I was wondering what F stop/s you usually use for landscape ( I know you don't do a huge amount of landscape







) or for shots where you're trying to maximise DOF? Where is the best trade-off between diffraction and DOF in your opinion? Is F8 good enough, or would you go smaller, to F9, 10, 11 or more?

Oh, btw, I'm lovin' Capture NX2







.

Thanks!

Quote:



Originally Posted by *tkl.hui*


does anyone know how to put my name on pictures with PP? I would really like to put my name on pictures i post online.


I'm not sure what PP is to be honest? PowerPoint, lol? Umm, I use GIMP for quite a bit of image editing and it has a neat plugin that will allow you to add text to images quickly and easily. GIMP and said plugin are both legally free and available to download.

Let me know what you mean exactly and I'll try and help if I can







.

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## ecoyd1

a


----------



## Marin

I was doing a pencil mod and decided to take a picture of it. The exposure is 2" and I had it at F5.6


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ecoyd1*


In all honesty, F8 is the smallest I EVER go, unless I'm trying something special or messing around. When I had shot above F8, it always seemed that the quality would take a dive. It looked as if it was out of focus, but now I know why! haha.

With the 12-24 nikkor, F8 also gives plenty of DOF for the landscape shots I do.

This was shot at F8:









At full size, its sharp all the way through. There was really no need to use a smaller apeture.

Hope this helps!?!











LOL, yeah, essentially what you've said, is exactly what I'd already discovered. I think I'll do more testing between F7.1 and F11 to determine the absolute optimum DOF VS Diffraction. In real terms, diffraction starts at F8 on the D300 sensor, but the perceptible effects don't really start to show until a little smaller it would seem.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


I was doing a pencil mod and decided to take a picture of it. The exposure is 2" and I had it at F5.6


Wow, love the colours!

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## tkl.hui

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Highly-Annoyed*


Thanks man, I keep trying







.

I'll give flickr some consideration, but I'm quite keen on building websites, so I might have a go at putting one together for photography.

Here's a couple more I've taken recently. I'm slowly getting to grips with this camera now, so hopefully I can start to pump out a few more half-decent shots as time progresses.



















I don't know if you saw my earlier post about diffraction and small apertures on the D300? It would seem that, due to the Airy Disk size and the size of the photosites on the crop frame D300 (VS the D700 or D3 etc), diffraction starts to set in at around F8 and if you go past F11 to get greater DOF, the fine details start to get so mushy that the extra DOF youâ€™re getting, just isn't worth it in terms of overall image quality.

This diffraction issue is the biggest limitation I've found with the otherwise excellent D300. I understand it's not _just_ limited to the D300, but all small photosite sensor cameras, but especially for landscape I'm starting to wonder if it might be a problem?

With this in mind I was wondering what F stop/s you usually use for landscape ( I know you don't do a huge amount of landscape







) or for shots where you're trying to maximise DOF? Where is the best trade-off between diffraction and DOF in your opinion? Is F8 good enough, or would you go smaller, to F9, 10, 11 or more?

Oh, btw, I'm lovin' Capture NX2







.

Thanks!

I'm not sure what PP is to be honest? PowerPoint, lol? Umm, I use GIMP for quite a bit of image editing and it has a neat plugin that will allow you to add text to images quickly and easily. GIMP and said plugin are both legally free and available to download.

Let me know what you mean exactly and I'll try and help if I can







.

Highly-Annoyed


lol woops, i meant to say PS. I got CS3 and Lightroom to use. Do i just get an image of my name and add it as a layer onto pictures?


----------



## dr4gon

I thought you meant PP as in the commonly used term among photographers.... *post processing!!!* I make my text and save it as an image and then use a batch recorded action to place it on and reisze everything.







GIMP sounds like it might be easier lol!

The leaf is nice highly-annoyed, although I think it has too much water on it to be natural







(maybe I'm wrong lol if it is a real shot)


----------



## christian_piper

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Highly-Annoyed*


I'm not sure what PP is to be honest? PowerPoint, lol? Umm, I use GIMP for quite a bit of image editing and it has a neat plugin that will allow you to add text to images quickly and easily. GIMP and said plugin are both legally free and available to download.

Highly-Annoyed


Which said plugin are you using? It sounds like you are talking about exactly what I want... thanks!

(My apologies if you already said it and I missed it...)


----------



## jbrown

In on this

Canon 350D [Rebel XT]
Canon 420ex Flash
Canon 50mm 1.8
Canon 28-105mm
Lowepro 100 Fastpack
3x 2Gb CF cards

I mostly do modeling/fashion, & mess with cars. I am pretty new at photography, so go easy on me









My website is currently under construction, so go easy on that also









Some of my work:


































www.photosbyjlb.com/portfolio


----------



## dr4gon

Welcome, I see you've already joined our flickr group and posted to the pool, great! and nice photos!


----------



## Marin

Pretty upset right now. I am in Colorado right now to see some relatives and while on the flight I saw the most amazing sunset ever. There was a huge break between the lower and upper clouds and it looked so epic. And guess where my camera was... on my desk at home! Brilliant! I forgot to bring it with me to school as I was going directly from school to the airport. *sigh*

Oh well, I am going to Hawaii in December so I have another chance to take amazing pictures.

Anyways, this pic was taken under the Kotel in Israel. This is to the side of the tunnel where they are still excavating,


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:



Originally Posted by *christian_piper*


Which said plugin are you using? It sounds like you are talking about exactly what I want... thanks!

(My apologies if you already said it and I missed it...)


It's part of the FX-Foundry script pack you'll need to install to GIMP. You can download it from here. The pack gives you loads of different photo (and other) enhancement etc tools and under the "Toolbox" dropdown (which it's self is under the "FX-Foundry" dropdown), the text placer is called "EG Copyright Placer" unless they renamed it in the latest version? You also get a handy "rule of thirds" grid drawer as well, which can help with cropping composition







.

Have a look and see if any of it helps you at all







.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *tkl.hui*


lol woops, i meant to say PS. I got CS3 and Lightroom to use. Do i just get an image of my name and add it as a layer onto pictures?


It did cross my mind you may of meant PS and it was just a typo. I can't really help you with that, sorry. I have no experience with any of the PS software














.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dr4gon*


The leaf is nice highly-annoyed, although I think it has too much water on it to be natural







(maybe I'm wrong lol if it is a real shot)


Thanks







. No, it's real alright. It's a crop of the original that I edited with Capture NX2, NeatImage and GIMP. I deliberately over-saturated the colours a bit, with extra saturation to the greens. It was raining quite hard a day or two ago ( I'm in the UK after all







) and I went outside, took a cutting from one of the soaked plants (I think it was a rose, although I not sure), brought the cutting inside and took a series of shots while it was still really wet. I've thought about deliberately showering plants to make it look like they've been rained on for a shot, but I'm not sure if it would realistically simulate the "rained on" look or not







. I might give it a try though







.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *jbrown*


Some of my work:









www.photosbyjlb.com/portfolio


This girl has really pretty eyes.

Where do you get your models from? Do you advertise? How much do they cost?

Oh and welcome!









Highly-Annoyed


----------



## jbrown

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Highly-Annoyed*


It's part of the FX-Foundry script pack you'll need to install to GIMP. You can download it from here. The pack gives you loads of different photo (and other) enhancement etc tools and under the "Toolbox" dropdown (which it's self is under the "FX-Foundry" dropdown), the text placer is called "EG Copyright Placer" unless they renamed it in the latest version? You also get a handy "rule of thirds" grid drawer as well, which can help with cropping composition







.

Have a look and see if any of it helps you at all







.

It did cross my mind you may of meant PS and it was just a typo. I can't really help you with that, sorry. I have no experience with any of the PS software














.

Thanks







. No, it's real alright. It's a crop of the original that I edited with Capture NX2, NeatImage and GIMP. I deliberately over-saturated the colours a bit, with extra saturation to the greens. It was raining quite hard a day or two ago ( I'm in the UK after all







) and I went outside, took a cutting from one of the soaked plants (I think it was a rose, although I not sure), brought the cutting inside and took a series of shots while it was still really wet. I've thought about deliberately showering plants to make it look like they've been rained on for a shot, but I'm not sure if it would realistically simulate the "rained on" look or not







. I might give it a try though







.

This girl has really pretty eyes.

Where do you get your models from? Do you advertise? How much do they cost?

Oh and welcome!









Highly-Annoyed


NO I do not advertise except giving out my card. I can find models on modelmayhem.com... Some of those shots are from a runway show I was invited to. So yes I know lighting is BAD, but I still like them. I actually did pay to shoot Leslie[white bikini] b/c that was a pretty big organized shoot with 11 or so models, great location, and 5-6 photogs. My first shoot ever. I try and do most my work TFCD [time for cd].

Thanks for welcomes.

I can't believe I never looked for a photog group in OCN before, I am a 2005 member afterall
















Edit:

Oh and Leslie's eyes are ok, but my girlfriends eyes are much better.

















She models also. She's the blonde runway shot in my port...


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:


Originally Posted by *jbrown* 
NO I do not advertise except giving out my card. I can find models on modelmayhem.com... Some of those shots are from a runway show I was invited to. So yes I know lighting is BAD, but I still like them. I actually did pay to shoot Leslie[white bikini] b/c that was a pretty big organized shoot with 11 or so models, great location, and 5-6 photogs. My first shoot ever. I try and do most my work TFCD [time for cd].

Thanks for welcomes.

I can't believe I never looked for a photog group in OCN before, I am a 2005 member afterall
















Edit:

Oh and Leslie's eyes are ok, but my girlfriends eyes are much better.

















She models also. She's the blonde runway shot in my port...

Is this girl with the butterfly your girlfriend? If so, you're right, she does have very pretty eyes indeed.

You de-saturated some of that shot somewhat, right? The butterfly and the eyes stand out most, in terms of colour, but the skin and to a slightly lesser extent the hair look colour de-saturated to me. It's a neat effect; looks good







. Unless I'm wrong, in which case, how did you do it? Lighting trick? Pretty effective







.

Do you mind telling me how much you paid on the occasion you hired a model? Undoubtedly their services vary in price, but I was just interested to know.

I just quickly looked up TFCD and by that do you mean you shoot models for their own portfolios, so they either pay you, or you do it for free to gain experience? If so, that's sounds like a great way to get experience and both parties benefit. Have I got that right?

The shot with the guy wearing the grey-ish shirt in your first post here looks good. I like the lighting. How did you do it? It looks like you back-lit him and used a low key, or filler off to his left? I'm just starting to get equipment together to try portraiture and lighting is one of the things I've been reading about, so I'd be interested to hear how you set things up







.

Looks like you got some really good results for your first shoot also. I look forward to trying something similar myself once I've got all the gear together







.

2005. A good vintage for OCN members







.

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## christian_piper

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Highly-Annoyed* 
It's part of the FX-Foundry script pack you'll need to install to GIMP. You can download it from here. The pack gives you loads of different photo (and other) enhancement etc tools and under the "Toolbox" dropdown (which it's self is under the "FX-Foundry" dropdown), the text placer is called "EG Copyright Placer" unless they renamed it in the latest version? You also get a handy "rule of thirds" grid drawer as well, which can help with cropping composition







.

Thank you very much! Checking it all out now


----------



## jbrown

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Highly-Annoyed* 
Is this girl with the butterfly your girlfriend? If so, you're right, she does have very pretty eyes indeed.

You de-saturated some of that shot somewhat, right? The butterfly and the eyes stand out most, in terms of colour, but the skin and to a slightly lesser extent the hair look colour de-saturated to me. It's a neat effect; looks good







. Unless I'm wrong, in which case, how did you do it? Lighting trick? Pretty effective







.

Do you mind telling me how much you paid on the occasion you hired a model? Undoubtedly their services vary in price, but I was just interested to know.

I just quickly looked up TFCD and by that do you mean you shoot models for their own portfolios, so they either pay you, or you do it for free to gain experience? If so, that's sounds like a great way to get experience and both parties benefit. Have I got that right?

The shot with the guy wearing the grey-ish shirt in your first post here looks good. I like the lighting. How did you do it? It looks like you back-lit him and used a low key, or filler off to his left? I'm just starting to get equipment together to try portraiture and lighting is one of the things I've been reading about, so I'd be interested to hear how you set things up







.

Looks like you got some really good results for your first shoot also. I look forward to trying something similar myself once I've got all the gear together







.

2005. A good vintage for OCN members







.

Highly-Annoyed

Ok I'm gonna try and answer everything in order, lol.

Yes that is my girlfriend, and unfortunately I didn't take that shot. A very, very skilled photog from here did.

I've never just paid a model, it's always been TFCD [time for cd, prints, w/e, no money involved. Just for portfolios. [as you guessed]

I did pay for that big shoot, $80 went to organizer who was the MUA[make up artist]

She then payed the models I think, and the locations owner. [ a private house]

I did that shoot to start my portfolio, so I could start finding and shooting models. I had barely any equipment, was borrowing a flash, and had a good lens. 50mm 1.4

NOW, about gray shirt shot. That was impromptu at my runway shoot, I had him pose in a window seal, all natural lighting coming through white window behind him. Came out great. NO PP at all, just crop.

I really am a complete noob.


----------



## max302

Ewwww.... blood!


----------



## bgbop15

hey guys... i have not been here since i first got my D60.. been trying to tech myself photography, play around with lenses, etc...

I just joined the flickr group, so see you on there!

If you would like to update my gear list, here you go...

Nikon D60
Nikon 18-55mm AF-S VR 
Nikon 55-200mm AF-S VR
Nikon 50mm f/1.8 D AF 
Nikon 105mm f/2.5 AI
Nikon 55mm Micro with M2 for 1:1 macro
Vivitar 200mm f/3.5 with 2x-3 teleconverter
Nikon SB-600

also a Nikon Coolpix P5100 for P&S

This is beginning to be a sickness!


----------



## SoBe8503

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Pretty upset right now. I am in Colorado right now to see some relatives and while on the flight I saw the most amazing sunset ever. There was a huge break between the lower and upper clouds and it looked so epic. And guess where my camera was... on my desk at home! Brilliant! I forgot to bring it with me to school as I was going directly from school to the airport. *sigh*

Oh well, I am going to Hawaii in December so I have another chance to take amazing pictures.

Anyways, this pic was taken under the Kotel in Israel. This is to the side of the tunnel where they are still excavating,










Colorado Native right here, and I feel your pain. The sunsets here completely pwn any others that i have seen. Even in Kuaii. Only thing is, they go a way so fast, so you need to have your camera with you ALL the time. If you're lucky, there may be some mist above the mountains during a sunset. It's happened a few times this summer. Truely one of the sweetest views I have ever seen in my life. You get some nice reds and oranges, and you can see a several layers of mountains, instead of the usual one or two. Have your camera around your neck 24/7 while you're here lol.


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:


Originally Posted by *christian_piper* 
Thank you very much! Checking it all out now









Sure man, np







Hope it does what you want







.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *jbrown* 
Ok I'm gonna try and answer everything in order, lol.

Yes that is my girlfriend, and unfortunately I didn't take that shot. A very, very skilled photog from here did.

I've never just paid a model, it's always been TFCD [time for cd, prints, w/e, no money involved. Just for portfolios. [as you guessed]

I did pay for that big shoot, $80 went to organizer who was the MUA[make up artist]

She then payed the models I think, and the locations owner. [ a private house]

I did that shoot to start my portfolio, so I could start finding and shooting models. I had barely any equipment, was borrowing a flash, and had a good lens. 50mm 1.4

NOW, about gray shirt shot. That was impromptu at my runway shoot, I had him pose in a window seal, all natural lighting coming through white window behind him. Came out great. NO PP at all, just crop.

I really am a complete noob.

Thanks for replying, I appreicate it







.

I have to say, for a "noob" you've certainly got some nice shots there







.

I'm thinking of getting myself a 50mm f1.4 at some point, as they're relatively cheap compared to most other lenses and seem to be one of the best types for portraiture. How often do you use lower than f2.8 for DOF? What's the most common aperture/s you use for portraiture?

Thanks again for the info.









Highly-Annoyed


----------



## Burn

Hi Guys,

Now that I'm off at college, I am looking into a nice P&S camera to use around campus. Any suggestions? Budget is in the $200-250 range.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

SD1100 IS
great camera for the price.


----------



## bgbop15

i just got a nikon coolpix P5100 takes great 12MP shots, and has a hotshoe on top if you want to get a decent flash later for indoor shots... party shots are about a million times better with an SB-400 flipped up for bounce flash


----------



## rx7speed

and don't forget the hotshoe should also allow remote flash shots so you can do off center lighting also.


----------



## bgbop15

Quote:


Originally Posted by *rx7speed* 
and don't forget the hotshoe should also allow remote flash shots so you can do off center lighting also.

awww crap.. something ELSE for me to spend money on now


----------



## rx7speed

you should be able to get a cheap wireless remote trigger for about 20-30 bucks


----------



## bgbop15

for a d60/ sb-600 combo?


----------



## rx7speed

not sure about specific combo's to be honest I believe they are universal.

the only problem is from my understanding is you lose any TTL metering/options that the flash might of had and instead it runs fully manual unless it has some on flash metering setup like the older thyrister setups had. for that one I will let other people try to answer though.

when I get home though from work I will see if I can provide you a link at least of the product that allows the wireless flash adaptors. they also sell fairly cheap umbrella's, flash stands, reflectors, diffusers and such as well.


----------



## tkl.hui

Hey guys, heres a pic of my first portrait. Its of my sister taken with my Sony A200 and the 18-70 kit lens. C&C appreciated.


----------



## bgbop15

very nice! Shots like this are what sent me to the photo store to get my 50mm f/1.8 lens.... a lower f-stop would have narrowed the depth of field, making the "clutter" on the piano a little less noticeable

I mocked up what a narrower depth of field would have done for the pic below...


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

hmm, so im thinking of grabbing an SB-600 as im starting to get more hours at work, i can justify the cost now.
but i just checked some us sites and they are nearly 100 bucks less in the states, ~180 on amazon, ~260 at henrys.


----------



## tkl.hui

ya im looking at getting an old minolta 50mm f1.7 that would probably be alot better.


----------



## bgbop15

well, its a matter of personal preference, but yeah, i really love narrow DOF shots! the first time i saw them done, i went out and bought my first slr!


----------



## tkl.hui

I agree, narrow DOF looks really good for portraits. Hows the lighting on that pic? u think it mite be a bit dark?


----------



## bgbop15

if I thought that her hair was any other color but JET BLACK, I may have said so... but I think the fact that there is no detail in her hair adds to the image...

does that sound racially insensitive? I don't mean to be... i have jet black hair too!

here is a bit more of an extreme example of what i am talking about










it's like, you know its a black cat so the detail on the left is not as important as the lighting and expression on her face.


----------



## tkl.hui

I see what you mean.


----------



## equetefue

Canon 50D and Canon 18-200 IS announced !

http://www.dpreview.com/previews/canoneos50d/

http://www.dpreview.com/previews/can...00_3p5-5p6_is/

Edwin


----------



## equetefue

Nikon's answer to the 50D

http://www.dailytech.com/Update+Niko...ticle12768.htm

GPS Geo-Tagging


----------



## dr4gon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *tkl.hui*


ya im looking at getting an old minolta 50mm f1.7 that would probably be alot better.


Just got my minolta 50/1.7




























This guy must have danced around the tree 15+ times while I took pictures.









Haven't the slightest idea what these are called, but they were sure colorful!

I think I found my new "walk-around" lens, the minolta 50/1.7







. It's kind of nice not having to zoom and I can concentrate on focusing and composition by moving my own two feet and putting more thought into a picture. The bokeh is awesome too!


----------



## tkl.hui

great shots! I just got the minolta 70-210 f4 also known as the "beercan". I'll try to find time to post some pics up soon.

O, and how much was your copy of that lense? I've seen it to be around 100-150 USD.

EDIT: Omg, i just realized i have a dead pixel on my cameras LCD. Its just one pixel that always stays red. I'm wondering if I can get a replacement because of one dead pixel.

EDIT 2: Well heres of a pic of the actual lens. This thing is built like a tank. And i weighs a ton lol. Its also pretty damn big, about the size of a tall can. Wish I had a tall can to compare it to. Maybe my dad will get me one if I say I need to use it to compare


















The second picture is of some spider i found in my house. Taken with the beercan. I had to use the built in flash so it doesn't look that great.


----------



## dr4gon

nice beercan, that spider looks creepy







.

I got it for ~125, how much was the can? $220ish?


----------



## tkl.hui

185 USD. but with shipping and tax and exchange rate, came out to 231 CAD. Wish I had more time to play with it this week, but gotta work until labour day


----------



## Burn

Anyone have any more sub-$250 suggestions?


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Burn* 
Anyone have any more sub-$250 suggestions?

Fujifilm FinePix S5800 seems OK. Casio Exilim EX-Z1080 looks alright too. Might be worth looking at the Samsung NV30 as well. That's all I can see for the price really, although there may be others







. Out of those I've suggested, I'd probably go with the Casio, as ISO noise is very well controlled for a compact and the lens offers f2.8-5.1, which isn't bad at all.

Here are a few more shots from me







.





































Highly-Annoyed


----------



## tkl.hui

Was that moth dead o.o neways, i really like the water drop one. What Shutter speed did you have to shoot that at?


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:



Originally Posted by *tkl.hui*


Was that moth dead o.o neways, i really like the water drop one. What Shutter speed did you have to shoot that at?


No, the moth had just hit himself repeatedly into my lights, so he was a bit stunned







. He does look a bit dead though, I agree







.

Water droplet was shot at 1/800th of second, ISO200, F4, manual focus (essentially focus-locked) on a tripod, with 1000W of continuous lighting. I really like these kinds of high shutter speed water shots. I think I'll do some more







.

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## tkl.hui

Well i went out this morning trying to find birds, and only seemed to find a red one. I think its a cardinal, but I'm not sure. I then stumbled upon this flower which I think is some sort of rose. What do you think?




























Wish I could have stopped down for the bird shot, isn't as sharp as I'd like.


----------



## bgbop15

anybody know what a nikon D60 with 18-55mm AFS AND 55-200mm AFS lens will go for used? A buddy want to unload some gear....


----------



## Votkrath

Going to buy a camcorder, don't have any experience with 'em so I wonder if anyone could help me out a bit? 

I don't got the money to buy a ULTRA CAMCORDER with 80x zoom, HD 1080p quality etc so I'm after something in a reasonable price class but gives descent videos/pictures?

I seem to be choosing between the JVZ GZ-MS100, GZ-MG330 and the Canon FS100 so I got a couple of questions:

1. Which one is best in the dark?
2. Which one handles colored lights best? _(i.e. spotlights etc in purple/green/yellow/random colors.)_
3. Can both take normal pictures as well and how good is the outcome on each one?
4. Which one has best quality when the zoom is maxed?
5. Which one has best quality overall?
6. Which one is best?









If anyone have any other suggestions, feel free to post the name of 'em.


----------



## dr4gon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Highly-Annoyed*


No, the moth had just hit himself repeatedly into my lights, so he was a bit stunned







. He does look a bit dead though, I agree







.

Water droplet was shot at 1/800th of second, ISO200, F4, manual focus (essentially focus-locked) on a tripod, with 1000W of continuous lighting. I really like these kinds of high shutter speed water shots. I think I'll do some more








.

Highly-Annoyed


what about that fly? let me guess you blew a poisonous dart at it so it wasn't smashed into a billion pieces so you could take pictures of it all day?


----------



## tkl.hui

no he probably froze it and then tied a string around it and then let it thaw and have it flying around on a string


----------



## bgbop15

you know what works for bees? (maybe flies too, but i know it works for bees)

Trap it in a glass, blow cigarette smoke in there, and wait like 2 minutes.... they pass out for about 4 minutes, then just fly away unharmed! I seen it done!


----------



## tkl.hui

too bad i don't smoke, nor anyone in my family otherwise i'd give that a try.


----------



## bgbop15

i might start now that i have a macro lens!

J/K!!!


----------



## tkl.hui

lol which lens did you get? I'm considering getting a 100mm f2.8 for macro.


----------



## bgbop15

i got the Nikkor 55mm Micro lens with an M2 Adapter for 1:1...

crazy close pictures with that thing!

of course, its non-metering and manual focus on my D60, but i like it that way...


----------



## tkl.hui

well mostly for macro shots, you probably going to be manual focusing anyways. Is that 55mm 1:1 enough? I was thinking of either getting a 100mm f2.8 1:1 or a 50mm f2.8 1:1


----------



## bgbop15

what do you mean 1:1 enough? I am new to all of this, and i have not gottena grasp of what 1:1 even means... i read about it, but just dont "get" it....


----------



## tkl.hui

Its the ratio of the object on the sensor i believe. 1:1 would be the object you taking a picture of is a 1:1 scale in the image. At least this is what i think it means. I could be wrong


----------



## bgbop15

see, i barely understand that... how big is the sensor in my D60?

If you have some kind of test for me to do with it to see if it is 1:1, let me know....


----------



## tkl.hui

Heres an exerpt from wikipedia. This is where i read about it. Hope this helps you understand it a bit better.

"Macro photography is close-up photography; the classical definition is that the image projected on the "film plane" (i.e., film or a digital sensor) is close to the same size as the subject. On 35 mm film (for example), the lens is typically optimized to focus sharply on a small area approaching the size of the film frame. Most 35mm format macro lenses achieve at least 1:2, that is to say, the image on the film is 1/2 the size of the object being photographed. Many 35mm macro lenses are 1:1, meaning the image on the film is the same size as the object being photographed. Another important distinction is that lenses designed for macro are usually at their sharpest at macro focus distances and are not quite as sharp at other focus distances."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macro_photography


----------



## bgbop15

ah, so if my d60's sensor size is 16mm x 24mm, then the fact that my wedding ring (about 16mm x 24mm) fills the picture says that the lens is full 1:1, right?


----------



## tkl.hui

I believe so. What length extension tube are you using?


----------



## bgbop15

27.5mm (nikon M2)


----------



## dr4gon

1:1 is indeed the actual size of the image will be that size on film (or in this case the sensor's size). I'm almost positive it has to do with the level of detail you can achieve.

tkl, have you considered the Tamron 90/2.8? I'm not sure about the 100/2,8, but the 90 can focus like an inch or two away without any tubes or mods. Tamron's also running a rebate till the end of the month as well for $90! (not sure about canada though)


----------



## tkl.hui

thanks, i'll take a look into that.


----------



## dr4gon

It's kind of sold out everywhere right now though lol.

The cheapest I found is Amazon:
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg...X0DER&v=glance


----------



## dr4gon

What else is next on your 'to-buy' list? You should get a Tamron 17-50/2.8 to replace that kit


----------



## Marin

Here is a cropped panorama shot of my case. I zoomed in and took three shots across the computer, I then merged them together in CS3 and cropped it. I haven't messed with anything else yet.

But this did exactly what I wanted it to do, since the lights from the ballistix are changing each shot has different lighting, causing the shots lighting to show different colors.

Any comments?


----------



## tkl.hui

That looks neat. I like how the lighting is different colors. If you didn't tell us it was a panorama, i wouldn't have known.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dr4gon*


What else is next on your 'to-buy' list? You should get a Tamron 17-50/2.8 to replace that kit










Yep that definitely one of the first things i need to get. Either that or I was thinking of maybe the minolta 50mm f2.8 macro or the sony version to use a kit lens replacement and macro







that would save me some money. I'm gonna go broke soon


----------



## Votkrath

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Votkrath* 
Going to buy a camcorder, don't have any experience with 'em so I wonder if anyone could help me out a bit? 

I don't got the money to buy a ULTRA CAMCORDER with 80x zoom, HD 1080p quality etc so I'm after something in a reasonable price class but gives descent videos/pictures?

I seem to be choosing between the JVZ GZ-MS100, GZ-MG330 and the Canon FS100 so I got a couple of questions:

1. Which one is best in the night?
2. Which one handles colored lights best? _(i.e. spotlights etc in purple/green/yellow/random colors.)_
3. Can both take normal pictures as well and how good is the outcome on each one?
4. Which one has best quality when the zoom is maxed?
5. Which one has best quality overall?
6. Which one is best?









If anyone have any other suggestions, feel free to post the name of 'em.

Bump


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dr4gon*


what about that fly? let me guess you blew a poisonous dart at it so it wasn't smashed into a billion pieces so you could take pictures of it all day?










LOL







. No, the fly was just co-operative. Sometimes insects can be quite helpful. I try to make it a rule not to kill anything for photography, although I've been tempted







.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *tkl.hui*


no he probably froze it and then tied a string around it and then let it thaw and have it flying around on a string










LOL







. Nothing so elaborate







.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *bgbop15*


you know what works for bees? (maybe flies too, but i know it works for bees)

Trap it in a glass, blow cigarette smoke in there, and wait like 2 minutes.... they pass out for about 4 minutes, then just fly away unharmed! I seen it done!


Yeah, now that's a really good idea. I recently took smoking back up again after giving up for three years, so I think I'll give that a try! Know of any other insects you can incapacitate without harm like that?

I've really got to get myself a macro lens! I really miss macro photography!









Highly-Annoyed


----------



## tkl.hui

But then they might die of cancer from second hand smoke :0 j/k


----------



## dr4gon

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Highly-Annoyed* 
LOL







. No, the fly was just co-operative. Sometimes insects can be quite helpful. I try to make it a rule not to kill anything for photography, although I've been tempted







.

LOL







. Nothing so elaborate







.

Yeah, now that's a really good idea. I recently took smoking back up again after giving up for three years, so I think I'll give that a try! Know of any other insects you can incapacitate without harm like that?

I've really got to get myself a macro lens! I really miss macro photography!









Highly-Annoyed

I'm not sure how you would trap a bee in the first place, but have fun with the pics if you do!







. Most insects (mosquitos) don't like smoke. It interferes with their senses so that's probably partially what happens.


----------



## tkl.hui

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dr4gon*


I'm not sure how you would trap a bee in the first place, but have fun with the pics if you do!







. Most insects (mosquitos) don't like smoke. It interferes with their senses so that's probably partially what happens.


Use some honey in a jar? You'd probably get more than just bees though which might be a bonus


----------



## equetefue

here's one from yesterday.


----------



## rx7speed

to the one that was looking for remote triggers for the flash. here is the link. sorry I was a little late in posting this as I have been a little busy and kept forgetting.

http://www.gadgetinfinity.com/home.php?cat=274


----------



## dr4gon

It's been quiet in here soo here! The first is from this weekend.

I would love to make something like this here (eventually....).









*Raining stars*

This first one was from the other night (early yesterday morning







).









*Big Dipper with a Delta Aquarid Meteor*









*Jupiter and the Milky Way*









*Jupiter, the teapot (Sagittarius), and scorpius*


----------



## Marin

I love the first two shots.


----------



## equetefue

Excellent shots !

I'll play..

Some from yesterday


----------



## dr4gon

Thanks marin, wow equietefue, those are dead on! What lens is that? I noticed both are at 400mm, a prime maybe?


----------



## tkl.hui

wow, great shots


----------



## equetefue

I used the 400 f5.6 L


----------



## Votkrath

Anyone here that got a JVC GZ-MG330 camcorder?


----------



## ecoyd1

asd


----------



## bgbop15

got a decent shot with my 55mm Micro-Nikkor


----------



## dr4gon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *bgbop15*


got a decent shot with my 55mm Micro-Nikkor











wow that's cool. do you mean macro?









how big is the fish in reality. I can't get my neon tetra to stay still!


----------



## bgbop15

nah... for some reason the old nikkor "macro" lenses are called "micro"










The fish is about the 4 inches long...


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

so my next purchase is going to be.


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:



Originally Posted by *bgbop15*


got a decent shot with my 55mm Micro-Nikkor











That's really good! Do you find 55mm sufficient for macro, as I'm considering either a 90mm, or 105mm macro lens? I wonder if it would be worth it though, as that shot of yours looks really good. Did you crop any, or is that the full shot?

Quote:



Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie*


so my next purchase is going to be.










Yeah, I'm going to get one of those! It's got some good MTF figures. I can't really afford it atm though and I miss macro photography too much, so I'm going to get a macro lens first, but that lens is really good based on what I've read, so I'm sure you wont be disappointed. The large aperture will be good for night-time landscape, or in-door wide angle as well.

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## bgbop15

well, if you pop an [email protected] tube on the 55mm, it is 1:1 macro on the d40/x, d60

that picture has NO cropping


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Highly-Annoyed*


Yeah, I'm going to get one of those! It's got some good MTF figures. I can't really afford it atm though and I miss macro photography too much, so I'm going to get a macro lens first, but that lens is really good based on what I've read, so I'm sure you wont be disappointed. The large aperture will be good for night-time landscape, or in-door wide angle as well.

Highly-Annoyed


yea, i am really looking forward to it, as night time, and landscape photography is what i really enjoy, and im going skiing for a week again this winter, and that means 2000+ images from a week again









except this time i know what im doing, last time i just got my camera and didn't really know what i was doing so i got some nice pictures, but this year is going to be awesome.


----------



## dr4gon

Oh my..... lots to show today!

flickr





































First tries at HDR


















Not HDR obviously from here to the end

















Yes.... these are surprisingly not HDR. Reminds me of crysis!


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

wow, great shots dragon


----------



## rx7speed

dragon how are you getting the colors on some of those pictures. that is one of my weak points is the PP work and it is just killing me right now. kind of like on shots 2, 5, and 6 there


----------



## Marin

What are some good lenses to get for my Canon Rebel XSi? Not looking at anything specific, just want to see what's good for each kind of lens.


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dr4gon*


Oh my..... lots to show today!


Wow, really nice dr4gon!

I love the light in the first two, really nice and the moon shot is great also!

The HDR shots (mostly the first) look a bit, well to be honest, odd. Sorry, not trying to be mean







.

What process did you use to get the HDR? Was it in-camera, GIMP, or other software? Also, how many exposures did you use and what EVs were they? Did you take multiple exposures with the camera it's self, or did you over and under expose a RAW image in a RAW processor and then combine the resultant images with other software?

I really like the first HDR shot, as a shot in it's self, but the HDR kinda' makes it look a bit strange, to me anyway







.

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## dr4gon

It was 3-4 exposures, merged in photoshop, then used photomatrix.... I have no idea how to do HDR lol...

Thanks for the other compliments. I'll post the original on the first shot in a bit.


----------



## bgbop15

anyone here ever use the Canon HV20 HD Camcorder>? THinking about getting one...


----------



## dr4gon

Here's the original. It's actually a pretty boring picture. The blue/white transition in the sky was because it was just so washed out by the sun :\\.

Attachment 82143
clicky.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *bgbop15*


anyone here ever use the Canon HV20 HD Camcorder>? THinking about getting one...


I have one, it's awesome. I'll post a video soon of it filming in HD.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


What are some good lenses to get for my Canon Rebel XSi? Not looking at anything specific, just want to see what's good for each kind of lens.



Anyone care to answer?


----------



## bgbop15

Marin said:


> I have one, it's awesome. I'll post a video soon of it filming in HD.
> 
> Awesome, thanks... any tips for mastering the video in HD? What prog you use?


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *bgbop15*


Awesome, thanks... any tips for mastering the video in HD? What prog you use?


I used iMovie, Final Cut and Premiere with it.

Only thing you really need to know is HD takes up a ton of space.


----------



## bgbop15

went to the safari today,










saw a pretty nice sunset..










then i found a very cooperative praying mantis at home...


----------



## dr4gon

Look at those eyes! Have you joined the flickr group yet?









Sunset is great, maybe even better without the fill flash and just silhouettes

As for the first, I'm not sure that I see a clear subject to it. What do you think?

Marin, what type of a lens are you looking for? A zoom perhaps to go with that kit lens? or a kit replacement? Or maybe a prime? 50mm F1.8?


----------



## bgbop15

yeah, i added all these and more to the group!

I have a few with silhouettes, but they seem very over done right now.

I think the baboon's bent hand is the main thing my eyes goes to







, then it's like, "wait why the the on a roller coaster section? And the roller coaster int he bakcground kind of sets that scene even more..


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dr4gon*


Look at those eyes! Have you joined the flickr group yet?









Sunset is great, maybe even better without the fill flash and just silhouettes

As for the first, I'm not sure that I see a clear subject to it. What do you think?

Marin, what type of a lens are you looking for? A zoom perhaps to go with that kit lens? or a kit replacement? Or maybe a prime? 50mm F1.8?


The kit lens is fine for now, really have no clue what I am looking for, lol.

Maybe a 50mm.


----------



## equetefue

bgBop15 that last one is awesome... very good macro !

here's 3 from yesterday !


----------



## bgbop15

thanks edwin... check the flickr group for a few more


----------



## Polo224

Hey you shutterbugs, I need a hand if you will.

I'm picking up a point and shoot today and am torn between a couple so I'm soliciting your thoughts. Here they are:

SD870
SX110

I'm leaning towards the 110 because of the zoom, it's not tiny, and takes AA's. The 870 is nice also though and does that cool time lapse video stuff







.

Your thoughts please?


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Polo224* 
Hey you shutterbugs, I need a hand if you will.

I'm picking up a point and shoot today and am torn between a couple so I'm soliciting your thoughts. Here they are:

SD870
SX110

I'm leaning towards the 110 because of the zoom, it's not tiny, and takes AA's. The 870 is nice also though and does that cool time lapse video stuff







.

Your thoughts please?

Or you can get this camera:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16830120207

And about the SD870, here's two pictures mine took.


----------



## Polo224

Great pics, Marin. Thanks for your input.


----------



## Polo224

I picked up the SX110IS (black = sexy) at CC for $280 and a 4gb SDHC card for $18 on my lunch hour.










This is my first "real" camera purchase. We've been using a 4MP HP camera for about 2 years lol. I'll post some pics when I get time to use it.


----------



## rx7speed

for that price you could almost of come up with the S5 which i believe is a better camera then the sx100.

the other thing to is you might want to take a look around as there are a few dslr camers out there (granted used) that can be had for around 300 bucks


----------



## Polo224

I had thought about that, but in the end I wanted a point and shoot. I don't have the time, nor the inclination to dive into DSLR at the moment. I just needed something cheap and better than what I had. There's always something better, but this will likely fit what my purposes are and was a new release.


----------



## rx7speed

you might at least want to take a look at the S5 while as it is at right around the same price as the camera you just bought. if it is better for the same price why not?

also DLSR isn't that hard to get into







. most any of them have an auto mode that makes them work just like a point and shoot. main difference is unless you get a new model with live view you have to look through the eye piece instead of looking at a LCD. but I can understand on not wanting to go that route. even more so if you start to enjoy taking pictures. though guess it can be a good diet as for some reason the wallet starts to feel a lot lighter.


----------



## christian_piper

Quote:


Originally Posted by *rx7speed* 
you might at least want to take a look at the S5 while as it is at right around the same price as the camera you just bought. if it is better for the same price why not?

also DLSR isn't that hard to get into







. most any of them have an auto mode that makes them work just like a point and shoot. main difference is unless you get a new model with live view you have to look through the eye piece instead of looking at a LCD. but I can understand on not wanting to go that route. even more so if you start to enjoy taking pictures. though guess it can be a good diet as for some reason the wallet starts to feel a lot lighter.

+ Portability... I still use my Canon G9 All the time even though I have a Nikon D60.. So if he needs a portable compact.....

But um, the S5 is a point and shoot..... Or am I missing something?


----------



## rx7speed

s5 is a point and shoot. granted a tad larger then the sx series but not by much.

and I can see what you mean though with the dlsr and portability. with the 50mm on it's not so bad but with the 18-55 with the hood attached it's a bit much. even without the hood it is and they are quite a bit heavier.


----------



## Polo224

Here's a couple:


----------



## dr4gon

Nice pictures. You should join our OCN flickr group and add them to the pool.

http://www.flickr.com/groups/ocn


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

any advice?
i have not really done wildlife photography before so it was a rocky start, and i havent got time to use my camera in MONTHS









i got done work early today so i walked to the park before picking my mom up from work.
here are some shots i took.

























and one of where i work, i work on the end of the building closest to the camera, the other end is for all the smart people. (this is the back of the building)


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Here's a shot of my cat, Lucy, taken with my new Tokina 100mm Macro lens.










F11, 100mm (duh), ISO400, tripod, MF. Desat with GIMP.

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

nice shot highly annoyed.

any thoughts from anyone on how to improve my shots for next time out?


----------



## dr4gon

In the first three, the flash is too harsh, especially in the first. It's broad daylight, flash shouldn't be necessary. And in the last picture, it's a nice shot, but the sidewalk is definitely too bright. Some PP will tone it down a bit.


----------



## tkl.hui

Hey guys, haven't posted in a while. Here's a few pics of the full moon and one of my dog. I don't think I did a very good job with taking the pic of the moon. Anyone got tips for that kind of stuff?


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

not to bad, what kind of camera do you have again?
if its an SLR i would say play with the white balance a bit, and it looks a little soft.
It will be close to a full moon tonight, i will go out and see what i can get so i can give some advice.


----------



## tkl.hui

im using a sony alpha A200. Those are already 100% crops =/ wish it came out sharper. Would using a tripod help?


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

probably not, shooting at the moon (really bright) you should be able to shoot with a nice quick shutter speed unless you are shooting with a really small aperture.


----------



## tkl.hui

I tried various shots at F8-14, shutter speeds at 1/100-1/250. And ISO 100-200.

EDIT: here's one where i played around with the white balance. This is at f10 1/200 iso 200. I think this one looks decent, what do you guys think?


----------



## dr4gon

Tripod would definitely help, turn off SSS.

Those are nice shots. Is this a 100% crop?

Here's mine from the other night: 

Not a 100% crop lol.


----------



## tkl.hui

thats looks good







Ya, mine are 100% crops. I'd like to get them sharper=/ Don't own a tripod though, perhaps its time to invest in one


----------



## dr4gon

From tonight, tkl.hui inspired me not to rack out







The lens is sharper at ~200mm, this was at 180mm and hand held!

Probably don't need a tripod for this actually, but it's good to invest in one! I guess I didn't show this here but here's what I got!

It's time for the weekly (probably the last for a while, lol) *What's in the boxes!?!?*









*Tamron SP AF90mm F/2.8 Di 1:1 Macro*






























































First day macro shots.... not that great lol.

Brand new tripod+head!
*Bogen Manfrotto 190XPROB and Bogen 488RC2 Pan and Ball Head*














































Love the horizontal feature!


















Helps you get way low to the ground which helped in that moth shot!

It's a fantastic sturdy tripod. You don't want to know what I was using before do you? Ok yeah ..... It was a $10 tripod. I have no idea how much it was rated at. 1/2 a pound maybe?

Here's the link to it: http://www.sears.com/shc/s/p_10153_12605_00948248000P

The good news is the bag fits the new tripod but the head sticks out







.

mmmm what else? Guess that's about it, enjoy!









Macro helped with stuff like this:




No PP done, just resized. I must say it is a nice lens. A bit slow to focus though, but overall nice. I say slow maybe it's not too bad but it's hard when you get up close and you try to get bugging or take macros of flowers when the wind is whipping things around. Bees are especially hard to get a good "headshot"

.......


----------



## tkl.hui

wow neat tripod







and thats a really nice lens. What settings did you shoot the moon at? It looks really good.


----------



## dr4gon

Thanks. Here's the exif for the moon:

Quote:

Camera Make: SONY
*Camera Model: DSLR-A300*
Image Date: 2008:09:18 23:15:20
Flash Used: No
Focal Length: 180.0mm (35mm equivalent: 270mm)
*Exposure Time: 0.0063 s (1/160)*
*Aperture: f/7.1*
*ISO equiv: 100*


----------



## ecoyd1

I FREAKING LOVE PANDA SPRESS!!!!

haha

and those are some nice shots


----------



## equetefue

Some from last couple of days..Enjoy !


----------



## dr4gon

Awesome bird shots!! The eagle is just great! I hear those are very difficult to do because they can see you miles away!

*okay, new page, new stuff, from today







*

okay instead of making a new thread, I'll just add it here since these were all taken with the 90/2.8







. Used it as a walkaround lens today


















Anyone know what type of flower this is? I need to start learning names!









EXIF is in flickr!


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

great shots equetefue, where do you go for your shooting?

and great work as well dr4gon!


----------



## equetefue

Thanks guys.... I go shooting all over Florida and trips abroad.


----------



## rx7speed

this thread kinda died here.

little gift from the stork









my little girls. sarapod and the little pea









dad is using his land for pasture so figured I would see if I could get a horse to come up. he did and then I scared him away but managed to at least take a few pics before I did.









just wish I had photochop handy as these are untouched pictures







. well that and that I maybe used a little flash in the hospital but I didn't want to scare the poop out of our little girl. so far though now that she is kinda home she is being a little trooper with the pictures.


----------



## dr4gon

The horse shot is nice.







The first baby picture with the socks on her feat look funny because it looks like she's got her legs above her head in a really awkward position.


----------



## rx7speed

lol I never noticed that till you brought that up. she just has some flailing hands though and so mama didn't want an eyeball being poked out or anything.


----------



## Marin

This was done with a kit lens, so nothing amazing.

I'll crop the picture a little later today or tomorrow, I'm just way to tired at the moment to do it.


----------



## dr4gon

lens upgrade marin! lol... I remember when I was taking moon shots with my kit lens, it was very frustrating because it was just so small! From what I can tell, looks ok though!


----------



## Marin

Cropped it.


----------



## dr4gon

lol, it's like double the size!


----------



## tkl.hui

lol. The kit lens definitely doesn't offer enough reach


----------



## mustkill

en-route to taiwan









at taiwan... dont remeber exactly where!

tell me if its any good?


----------



## dr4gon

Good use of the rule of thirds for sure!









Went to the zoo yesterday and it was quite an experience! I don't think I've ever had so much fun at a zoo in a long time!

Felt like a kid again.

There's way too many to post, so please check my *flickr* set *here*.



















This eagle was also really cool!



Most taken with the Tamron 70-300/4-5.6, a couple were from the 90/2.8 Prime.


----------



## mustkill

have no idea what you are talking about...

Quote:



Most taken with the Tamron 70-300/4-5.6, a couple were from the 90/2.8 Prime.


i guess those are your cameras?

i will upload some more photos later 2nite


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mustkill*


have no idea what you are talking about...

i guess those are your cameras?

i will upload some more photos later 2nite


Those are lenses and f-stops.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

yep, thats his lens Tamron 70-300/4-5.6 and the 4-5.6 is the apature size.
so at 70mm wide open the apature is f4 and at 300mm wide open its f5.6

and nice shots dr4gon!
makes me wanna head to the zoo.


----------



## tkl.hui

Hey guys, haven't posted in a while since i haven't had time to go out lately. Anyways, here's some from this morning.

All of them taken with my sony A200 and the "beercan" ( 70-210 f4)

All were either cropped or white balanced, and that's bout it. Quite happy with the bug shots. I've finally have some half decent bee shots now









ENJOY


----------



## dr4gon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mustkill*


have no idea what you are talking about...

i guess those are your cameras?

i will upload some more photos later 2nite


Yup, those are the lenses, sorry about that







. At least you learned something new!









It's a budget zoom but a decent one at that.

tkl, nice job on the snail, love the DOF.


----------



## tkl.hui

Thanks, the snail is my fav one. Really love that bokeh. And the little buy looked pretty cool.


----------



## mustkill

you guys accept digital photographers... with cheapo stock lenses etc. like me in your group?

xD


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

of coarse


----------



## mustkill

hehe

more photos from me!



















this following one aint that great....but my first shots of a butterfly


----------



## Farin

Posted this in off topic but I figured I could get some extra attention in here, if that's cool. If not I apologize and someone delete this >.>.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Farin*


I wanna get my gf a digital camera for her bday but I'm clueless here. I could just go to the store and get anything but I'd rather get some suggestions. Price doesn't really matter, but please note that the camera will be used for really basic stuff, shots with friends/me etc, nothing professional, all simple.

So basically, what camera should I get her? Sony Cybershots look decent but again, I know nothing about them. I just want something good that will last, will do the basic stuff and looks nice, if that's not too much to ask









Anyway, thanks in advance. Cheers!


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

hmm, i would go with the canon sd1100 if its in your price range, great camera, uses sd and not MSPD (i hate sony proprietary stuff)

that's assuming you want something slim, and not something with a long zoom or that uses AA batteries. (sd 1100 uses a li-ion pack)


----------



## dr4gon

Got more goodies, this time from last weekend. It was quite a show! Too many again to highlight so check them out on my *flickr*.

The fireworks and Beatles tribute were my favorite!











Some photographers:







TONS OF PEOPLE:


----------



## mustkill

dragon.. those are such good photos!!!

could someone comment on mine?


----------



## dr4gon

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mustkill* 
dragon.. those are such good photos!!!

could someone comment on mine?

What camera do you have? The EXIF is missing. The subjects are nice, but a bit out of focus or they have motion blur. You could probably increase the ISO or use a lower shutter speed and more lighting.


----------



## mustkill

sighhh

i knew you would say its out of focus

its a olympus of some sort, 7.1megapixles...
i will try to find the model number

its the olympus u780

5x optical zoom, 7.1megapixles

http://www.gadgetspeak.com/gadget/ar...t_Digital.html

tell me if its any good... im new to all this


----------



## AMOCO

well i have a Canon PowerShot A570 IS Digital Camera


----------



## dr4gon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mustkill*


sighhh

i knew you would say its out of focus

its a olympus of some sort, 7.1megapixles...
i will try to find the model number

its the olympus u780

5x optical zoom, 7.1megapixles

http://www.gadgetspeak.com/gadget/ar...t_Digital.html

tell me if its any good... im new to all this


Practice makes perfect! I'm really new to this too! It looks like a decent camera. But it's not the camera that makes the shot, it's the photographer! Just take your time and practice with different things.


----------



## mustkill

alright~!


----------



## phospholipid

guys help me out with my thread please?

http://www.overclock.net/computer-pe...dslr-help.html


----------



## Polo224

I know this could be taken better, but I've never tried doing any landscape or scenery before buy my camera. White River Park in Indy btw.


----------



## tkl.hui

Thats pretty good picture. You should experiment taking the same picture with a slower shutter speed. It will come out looking like the water all flows together and is silky smooth. Try it out.


----------



## Marin

Taken in my backyard.


----------



## tkl.hui

Those clouds look neat


----------



## otterpopjunkie

Nikon D60 with mid and long telephoto VR lenses. ALso Canon SD400 with modded Chdk firmware.

I'll tell you what, VR lenses are the best stuff ever. I've never used another lens that can handle a 1/2 second exposure in a cave (Jewel Cave National Monument) and come out sharp. And I've taken over 600 photos in half an hour without killing the stock battery before (getting lightning shots).


----------



## dr4gon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *otterpopjunkie*


Nikon D60 with mid and long telephoto VR lenses. ALso Canon SD400 with modded Chdk firmware.

I'll tell you what, VR lenses are the best stuff ever. I've never used another lens that can handle a 1/2 second exposure in a cave (Jewel Cave National Monument) and come out sharp. And I've taken over 600 photos in half an hour without killing the stock battery before (getting lightning shots).


1/2 a sec?







I'd like to see that. What length were you using?

Marin, nice silhouettes and cloud pattern!


----------



## otterpopjunkie

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dr4gon* 
1/2 a sec?







I'd like to see that. What length were you using?

Coming right up!
I can't convert the raw nef to jpeg without losing exif info (looking for a suggestion, irfanview let me down). so here's a screenshot next to a 1/2 size original (no editing whatsoever).

Of course, this was one of many many burry shots, but with the VR lenses I can almost always get a crisp shot in tough situations with 3 or 4 frames.

Make - NIKON CORPORATION
Model - NIKON D60
DateTime - 2008:05:30 12:43:55
DateTimeOriginal - 2008:05:30 12:43:55
ExposureTime - 1/2 seconds
FNumber - 3.50
ExposureProgram - Normal program
ISOSpeedRatings - 800
ExposureBiasValue - 0.00
MaxApertureValue - F 3.48
MeteringMode - Center weighted average
LightSource - Auto
Flash - Not fired
FocalLength - 18.00 mm
SensingMethod - One-chip color area sensor
ExposureMode - Auto
White Balance - Auto
DigitalZoomRatio - 1 x
FocalLengthIn35mmFilm - 27 mm
ISO Setting - 800
Color Mode - COLOR
Image Quality - RAW
Flash Used - Not fired
AF Focus Position - Top
Color Mode - MODE3a
Light Type - NATURAL
Hue Adjustment - 0
Noise Reduction - OFF
Total pictures - 851
Optimization - NORMAL


----------



## dr4gon

I'm sorry for doubting you lol.. Last night I tried it with a bookshelf on 17mm and I was able to get .8 and a couple times with 1.3".







I was quite surprised what a wide angle lens can do!


----------



## Polo224

Quote:



Originally Posted by *tkl.hui*


Thats pretty good picture. You should experiment taking the same picture with a slower shutter speed. It will come out looking like the water all flows together and is silky smooth. Try it out.


Thanks for the tip, I'll give a try.


----------



## SoBe8503

Hey everyone I need some advice. My geeky bro actually got a date for homecoming next weekend and he wants me to do some portraits of them for proof







. I'm more into the quirky, and nature shots. Don't do much of people. Any tips?? i.e exposure times, apertures, ISO speeds especially. Maybe even composition; I know that's a little hard, but if there are some best practices, that'll help out a lot. Thanx!


----------



## SoBe8503

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dr4gon*


Got more goodies, this time from last weekend. It was quite a show! Too many again to highlight so check them out on my *flickr*.

The fireworks and Beatles tribute were my favorite!






​
​
​
Dude, how the hell did you get these shots? I've tried getting some of fireworks, but they look like crap. Please teach us!!







lol​


----------



## dr4gon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *SoBe8503*


Dude, how the hell did you get these shots? I've tried getting some of fireworks, but they look like crap. Please teach us!!







lol


Well, this was my third attempt at fireworks after going to two shows around Independence Day (One on the 3rd and the other on the 4th). A good location helps. A tripod is a MUST. A shutter release is also very handy so that you can enjoy the show and click the shutter open in anticipation of a firework(s) burst. Since a show is ~20min or more, you should be able to experiment a bit and work your way to the finale. Try something like F4 and a couple seconds and adjust from there. If it's too bright, use a slower aperture or a longer exposure. You'll get the hang of it!


----------



## otterpopjunkie

Depending on wind conditions and how close together fireworks are you really get some nasty smoke with garbles up pictures. Some of the best fireworks shots I've done were of non-professional shows, near a park where lots of people shoot them off in different places. Then you don't have the smoke problems from them all going off at once. Sometimes that can help. Framing can also be important (as always), get something interesting in the background and around the edges if you can, buildings would look cool.

Dr4gon, those shots are awesome btw.


----------



## mustkill

my camera produces so much noise.. im tired of it!


----------



## christian_piper

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mustkill* 
my camera produces so much noise.. im tired of it!

Are you shooting at the lowest possible ISO?


----------



## mustkill

no im not.. when shooting at night i mean.. so much noise in the picture!

and no i cant get a tripod anytime soon!


----------



## hxcnero

Nikon D40 with DX NIKKOR 18-55mm lense.

some stuff ive done.

old lead singer of the band "XliferuinerX"









The GYM when i still lived in the Bs









a little creek by a trail i used to run every other day









black and white.









some flowers









support beams under a bridge









a winch on a truck


----------



## sgtdisturbed47

Nikon D80 with 18-70mm and 70-300mm VR. I plan on very soon getting the D90 (when it comes out), the D300 or D700.


----------



## ecoyd1

adasdqweqwedsadasd

asdasd


----------



## ecoyd1

adasdadasd


----------



## dr4gon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ecoyd1*


Oh, here is the link: http://milophoto.com/sports


Love that second shot with the player tossing the ball in his hand!

The other football action shots, were those using the 70-200/2.8 or were those from the 300? Those are both especially nice lenses!


----------



## mustkill

hey... can i be on the OCN camera club?


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

hmm, mugan has not posted in 3 weeks or updated the OP in over a month.
i wonder if we can get a mod to transfer ownership of the OP if he isn't back in say a week or two?
i would be more then happy to baby sit the thread if it comes to that


----------



## equetefue

can I be in it.... I made part of my living out of photography


----------



## mustkill

how do you like this

taken from my balcony:








[/IMG]


----------



## dr4gon

Cool, good use of the rule of thirds (altered a bit, since there's obvioulsy nothing interesting in the trees).

Looks like you got some spots on either your sensor/lens







(right side).

What camera do you have mustkill? (Gotta say it to join the club, officially







)


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:


Originally Posted by *equetefue* 
can I be in it.... I made part of my living out of photography

your already in


----------



## christian_piper

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mustkill* 
no im not.. when shooting at night i mean.. so much noise in the picture!

and no i cant get a tripod anytime soon!

Well you gotta improvise! Lower the ISO as low as possible... and use like.... fences and such. I LOVE fences for camera supports... I have a tripod but only use it half the time I need it... other half I improvise....


----------



## rx7speed

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ecoyd1*


Hey guys havent been here in a while.

The D90 is out. We have one at school. The video is pretty cool...but get a real video camera if you want video.

We also just got the D3 battery for the D300 the other day which increases the frame rate from 6 to 8. Gonna see how that works out this weekend for football.

Also, Ive updated my sports section in flash if you'd like to see.

Let me know what you think.



what is bad about the video on the d90? I admit I haven't seen it but is the video quality really that bad?


----------



## dr4gon

Quote:


Originally Posted by *rx7speed* 
what is bad about the video on the d90? I admit I haven't seen it but is the video quality really that bad?

This is what's wrong.

http://s477.photobucket.com/player.s...fs=1&os=1&ap=1


----------



## rx7speed

lol reminds me of the live view almost on my xsi kind of just without the rest of the live view "features" that canon gave me.
I'm assuming this must be a CMOS sensor also in the d90?

this isn't that good though but it could at least be livable depending on what you where taking a video of.


----------



## mustkill

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dr4gon* 
Cool, good use of the rule of thirds (altered a bit, since there's obvioulsy nothing interesting in the trees).

Looks like you got some spots on either your sensor/lens







(right side).

What camera do you have mustkill? (Gotta say it to join the club, officially







)

idk about the spots...

i posted my camera model a few pages back..


----------



## dr4gon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *rx7speed*


lol reminds me of the live view almost on my xsi kind of just without the rest of the live view "features" that canon gave me.
I'm assuming this must be a CMOS sensor also in the d90?

this isn't that good though but it could at least be livable depending on what you where taking a video of.


yeah the video in the nikon just doesn't seem up to par yet. I think that's why sony didn't include it in their latest A900 flagship. (since nikon uses sony sensors).

The live view though on my sony is smooth as butter. The Canon's LV is notoriously slow. But when it comes down to it, it's hard to judge focus and clarity in LV..... afterall that's why it's an SLR and has a viewfinder!


----------



## rx7speed

hopefully they get this video thing worked out as it would be a handy little feature as long as it doesn't degrade image quality.

about the only time I use the live view is more for macro sometimes since you have the 10x I think it is on the screeen. usually even then I don't though as I'm still new and still suck and manual focus.

it is sad though when my canon point and shoot has better live view then my dslr that cost 3 times as much.


----------



## tkl.hui

A beautiful weekend this thanksgiving and I went for a hike with my dad. Here are some fall colors for you to enjoy. C & C welcome


----------



## dr4gon

Beautiful fall colors! Everything is still green here!


----------



## Polo224

Excellent pics! I love fall.


----------



## Marin

Check this out.

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...d.php?t=281524

I'm making one, it will be perfect for taking pictures of hardware.

Found the worklight:

  Amazon.com: Designers Edge L-18 Home Light One-Light 500-Watt Halogen Portable Work Light: Home Improvement
Now looking at the pics in the thread, he has a flash unit but I don't know if he is using it. If he is, will my XSi's flash be fine?

EDIT: Check this one out: http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...3&postcount=41


----------



## Marin

tkl.hui, I was looking at the first pic and just had to do this.

Quote:


And here is a picture I took. I'm messing around with the flash, it really changes up how pictures are taken.

I love practicing taking photos on my computer, its perfect for different shots for me.


----------



## tkl.hui

heh, thx for flippin it







I don't think that picture came out that well. It seems a bit cluttered to me with all the other leaves floating around.


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

OK, I had to swap out my Tokina 100mm macro lens as when I tested it, I found it had some pretty bad back-focusing and some odd distortions. The second copy I got didn't have the distortions, but the back-focusing was off the scale; so bad in fact, that I couldn't correct for it with the D300's AF Fine tune function.

In the end I swapped the Tokina for the Tamron 90mm macro lens (essentially the same in terms of MTF figures as the Tokina) and this one is quite a bit better. I'm still getting back-focus, but I'm able to correct for it (just) and bring the lens into perfect AF.

Anyway, here are three of the first shot's I've taken with the new Tamron 90mm macro lens.




























All three we're taken with flash (in overcast daylight) @ ISO200, F8, 1/200th of a second, handheld.

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## Emperor

Hi everyone!

I am getting my girlfriend a camera for Christmas, I know, it is a little early. But I rather get it over with then dealing with the Christmas shopping. I don't know if I will get it online or at a retail store. Guess it just depends on the deal. But was just wondering if you had any recommendations for a camera for around $200 to $300. Prolly could stretch $350 but that would be max. I have a Canon Rebel XTi and was going to buy her something like the D40. But she says those are way above her head. I do not know a lot about the lower end cameras. Thanks in advance!


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Emperor*


Hi everyone!

I am getting my girlfriend a camera for Christmas, I know, it is a little early. But I rather get it over with then dealing with the Christmas shopping. I don't know if I will get it online or at a retail store. Guess it just depends on the deal. But was just wondering if you had any recommendations for a camera for around $200 to $300. Prolly could stretch $350 but that would be max. I have a Canon Rebel XTi and was going to buy her something like the D40. But she says those are way above her head. I do not know a lot about the lower end cameras. Thanks in advance!


When I went to a camera shop in my local area, I was interested in getting a DSLR, but the store guy, who at the time seemed very knowledgeable, told me how difficult they were to use and how complicated they were for a beginner to get to grips with.

It turns out that what the store guy said was a lot of rubbish. It hasn't taken me long to get to grips with DSLR at all and I'm certain that the majority of people wouldn't have too much difficulty. Yes, there is a steeper learning curve than with a point and shoot, but most DSLRs have a "green mode" that makes them very much like a point a shoot, so there's no reason not to get one if you can afford it imo.

Very few p&s cameras (if any) can compete with the sensor quality of almost all DSLRs, so it's most definitely worth getting one over a p&s. Just make sure whatever one you get has a "green" or "auto" mode and your girlfriend will have no problems at all to start and will have a camera she can grow into as well.

As for make and model. It's probably best to look into what she would most likely be using it for first and go from there. If she wants something general, you can look into a lightweight camera, with an 18-200/250mm lens so she can cover the majority of focal lengths. If Canon don't make an 18-200mm (for example) you could look towards some of the good third party lenses for Canon that cover that focal length. Pretty much anything from the big two camera brands will be fine and there are other good options from the other brands, but as I said, it's best to try to work out what would suit her most and try to match a camera to that, rather than the other way around.

If she wants a compact, then obviously DSLR is out of the question. For a compact, I'd go with either the Ricoh Caplio R7, or the Casio Exilim EX-Z1080.

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Highly-Annoyed* 
When I went to a camera shop in my local area, I was interested in getting a DSLR, but the store guy, who at the time seemed very knowledgeable, told me how difficult they were to use and how complicated they were for a beginner to get to grips with.

It terns out that what the store guy said was a lot of rubbish. It hasn't taken me long to get to grips with DSLR at all and I'm certain that the majority of people wouldn't have too much difficulty. Yes, there is a steeper learning curve than with a point and shoot, but most DSLRs have a "green mode" that makes them very much like a point a shoot, so there's no reason not to get one if you can afford it imo.

Very few p&s cameras (if any) can compete with the sensor quality of almost all DSLRs, so it's most definitely worth getting one over a p&s. Just make sure whatever one you get has a "green" or "auto" mode and your girlfriend will have no problems at all to start and will have a camera she can grow into as well.

As for make and model. It's probably best to look into what she would most likely been using it for first and go from there. If she wants something general, you can look into a lightweight camera, with an 18-200/250mm lens so she can cover the majority of focal lengths. If Canon don't make an 18-200mm (for example) you could look towards some of the good third party lenses for Canon that cover that focal length. Pretty much anything from the big two camera brands will be fine and there are other good options from the other brands, but as I said, it's best to try to work out what would suit her most and try to match a camera to that, rather than the other way around.

If she wants a compact, then obviously DSLR is out of the question. For a compact, I'd go with either the Ricoh Caplio R7, or the Casio Exilim EX-Z1080.

Highly-Annoyed

A Casio









From my personal experience they are terrible, the image quality is horrible and they aren't reliable at all. If the light is slightly to low the noise shoots through the roof, even if the ISO is changed and different settings are used (thats all you can really do for a point and shoot). The camera died on me several months after I got it.

I would get a Canon, Nikon, Sony, or something else that has been proven good.


----------



## AN HERO

Are Leica R lenses worth it?

They're all manual focus and cost like hell (even on keh.com) but it seems that they are literally without par in terms of resolution and quite void of optical artifacts.

Am kinda interested in getting some Elmarits and Summicrons for my future Sigma SD15 (modified mount), but I might get the Canon EF mount mod (comes along with the camera, probably a $300-$500 job) instead.


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
A Casio









From my personal experience they are terrible, the image quality is horrible and they aren't reliable at all. If the light is slightly to low the noise shoots through the roof, even if the ISO is changed and different settings are used (thats all you can really do for a point and shoot). The camera died on me several months after I got it.

I would get a Canon, Nikon, Sony, or something else that has been proven good.

I've never owned one, but this review gives the camera good marks. Have a look at the ISO noise testing section as well. Printable results @ ISO800 from a compact p&s? That's not all that common imo. Run the ISO800, or even 1600 images through Neat Image with a little sharpening and most people would be happy with the results, especially at 6x4.

It's not like you're going to need ISO800 or above very often anyway, unless you're a bit more serious about photography and if you're a bit more serious, you're not likely to buy a compact point and shoot, are you? The Casio's f2.8-5.1 lens seems pretty good too, for a compact p&s. It's at a good price point for a 10.1 MP camera as well imo.

Still, it's only a suggestion, nobody has to take it. I think it looks like a good compact. I think it offers a good balance of features and pretty decent ISO noise performance. Sure, it's no where near as good as even an entry level DSLR, but if you have to go for a compact, I think it's a contender.

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## Marin

Here are some pics my casio took. The noise gets quite bad when its dark out, but there is no noise when its light out. But who knows, maybe Casio got their act together and released a good camera. I haven't used that particular camera so I'm not going to doubt the review.

The compression exaggerates it, click on the image to see the original.


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Here are some pics my casio took. The noise gets quite bad when its dark out, but there is no noise when its light out. But who knows, maybe Casio got their act together and released a good camera. I haven't used that particular camera so I'm not going to doubt the review.

The compression exaggerates it, click on the image to see the original.










To be honest, that doesn't look too bad to me (for a compact) if it's ISO800, but I can't see the full image as I'm not a member of the site that hosts it; or at least I couldn't find a way to see the full image







. My old Panasonic FZ50 had trouble with noise from ISO400 upwards. In fact, ISO200 was a little bit noisy. Your shots, if ISO800, are way better than my old FZ50.

If I ran the above image through Neat Image, it'd look much better. In fact, I could probably clear all the noise up, without loosing a great deal of image detail at all. Link me to a copy of the original I can download without having to sign up to anything and I'll give it a whirl through Neat Image to show you if you want?

Which Casio model is it that you took those shots with btw?

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Highly-Annoyed* 
To be honest, that doesn't look too bad to me (for a compact) if it's ISO800, but I can't see the full image as I'm not a member of the site that hosts it; or at least I couldn't find a way to see the full image







. My old Panasonic FZ50 had trouble with noise from ISO400 upwards. In fact, ISO200 was a little bit noisy. Your shots, if ISO800, are way better than my old FZ50.

If I ran the above image through Neat Image, it'd look much better. In fact, I could probably clear all the noise up, without loosing a great deal of image detail at all. Link me to a copy of the original I can download without having to sign up to anything and I'll give it a whirl through Neat Image to show you if you want?

Which Casio model is it that you took those shots with btw?

Highly-Annoyed

The ISO is actually at 100, not 800.

And here's the original: http://img509.imageshack.us/my.php?i...300nhcnls7.jpg

The pictures were taken on a Casio EX-Z75.


----------



## dr4gon

HA, those are some beautiful macro shots with that new lens! Good call on the Tamron 90/2.8!


----------



## Emperor

Still looking at my camera options for a Christmas present...just wondering how you guys felt about the new coolpix line.

I.E. the S60 and the S610c? I like the idea of the Wifi in the s610c....


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


The ISO is actually at 100, not 800.

And here's the original: http://img509.imageshack.us/my.php?i...300nhcnls7.jpg

The pictures were taken on a Casio EX-Z75.


Wow, I can understand why you have the opinion you do about Casio cameras. That's really very bad for ISO100. Man, even my old FZ50 could do better than that and that was a noise demon.

Well, I gave your shot a quick run-through with Neat Image and it seems to help quite a bit, although obviously it's still not perfect.

Have a look at this mouseover page.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dr4gon*


HA, those are some beautiful macro shots with that new lens! Good call on the Tamron 90/2.8!


Ha ha! You too! It's a good lens. I actually prefer it mechanically to the Tokina too. With the Tokina the manual focus ring moved when the lens was in AF mode, so if you held the camera by the lens at all (which seems to be quite natural, for me anyway) you have to be careful of the focus ring whizzing round when the lens was acquiring AF. With the Tamron (as you know) the manual focus ring is loose when the lens is in AF mode, which means you can hold it more easily and not worry about the ring trying to spin under your grip. I much prefer the Tamron







.

My family and I went to our local cat shelter yesterday and have agreed to adopt three kittens, so I took my camera and the Tamron 90mm Macro lens with me to capture some cuteness, as we wont be able to get them until they're six weeks older.

The first three are the kittens, the last one is of their mother.





































All taken with flash, F11, ISO200, 1/200th of a second, handheld.

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## equetefue

nice shots Highly.... beautiful kitties... I'm a sucker for cats...

I went ahead and added + deleted photos from my website, and re-arrange some of them into new folders.

Let me know what you think of the pictures in website.

Do they look ok ?

Thanks guys

www.Photo-Galleria.com

.


----------



## dr4gon

HA, sure did capture the cuteness!









Equetefue, nice site. The simplicity is good!


----------



## equetefue

Thanks dr4gon !


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

hey guys, i made a thread to congraulate one of our resident camera buffs on his second flame








http://www.overclock.net/member-mile...ond-flame.html


----------



## Emperor

Ok guys, really need some serious input. I am looking at the following 3 cameras. And can not decide witch one to get. I like the quality of the Ricoh. I like the idea of the wifi in the Nikon. And I like the low price of the Fuji, and it has good reviews. Thanks in advance!

1. Ricoh R10 or R8
2. Nikon Coolpix S60 or S610c
3. Fujifilm FinePix Z100fd


----------



## bgbop15

I shoot nikon SLR and point and shoots, but I would have to recommend you through a Canon into your options there... they are just too good with point and shoot to overlook!


----------



## equetefue

The new Canon P&S are nice and you should check them out. Also keep in mind that normally Fuji P&S have the lowest noise at high ISO compare to the rest.

Do some research here. www.dpreview.com


----------



## Squeeker The Cat

Quote:



Originally Posted by *bgbop15*


I shoot nikon SLR and point and shoots, but I would have to recommend you through a Canon into your options there... they are just too good with point and shoot to overlook!


i agree, i have a canon S5-IS. its a wonderful point and shoot....almost too good for an amateur like me (dont know how to do half of the stuff) but it takes wonderful pic..........this is just one i took as i was walking down the stairs lol no real posing or prepping lol


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

only turkey of the day









cousins heading into the blinds, two on the right are in the blind in the picture, the one on the left is in the blind with me and our blind was further up to the left









shot from out of the blind, decoys are about 6 yards out.









shot looking out to the side where the turkeys would come in from.


----------



## EricM9104

Myself, I have a Nikon Coolpix L10 (which I hate).

I usually use my mom's Sony DSC-W55 when I want good pics...
Here are some taken with the Sony.


----------



## Squeeker The Cat

^^^ whats the thing circled?


----------



## EricM9104

my mountain bike... lol.


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Some more shots with the D300 and Tamron 90mm Macro lens.










F11, 1/200th Sec, ISO200, Flash, Handheld.










F16, 1/200th Sec, ISO200, Flash, Handheld.










F16, 1/200th Sec, ISO200, Flash, Handheld.

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

nice work highly annoyed









anyone have comments on the pics i posted?


----------



## TaiDinh

I own a Sony DSC-N1 Cyber-Shot, but the following pictures were taken with my Nokia N95 (cell phone), which I would like to share.


----------



## dr4gon

Cool fountain!


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

hmm, so still no mugan.
should we try contacting a mod to get the OP changed to someone else?
if so should we pick a new OP?

EDIT: oh ya, sorry, nice shots Tai!
i like the giant game pieces.


----------



## TaiDinh

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dr4gon* 
Cool fountain!

It is! It was my first time seeing it. It changes color too. Pinkish Red, blue, and I heard green and yellow.

EDIT: Thanks Schubie!


----------



## ecoyd1

Hey guys, got some pics from fleet week:

The black and white really makes it look like its from the 50's.


----------



## Marin

Where do you live?

I can see Alcatraz in one of your pics.


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:



Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie*


hmm, so still no mugan.
should we try contacting a mod to get the OP changed to someone else?
if so should we pick a new OP?


I recently PM'ed mugan and got a response back from him.

I think that it appears that a problem has arisen in his life and he's not able to be at his PC much atm.

It might be a good idea to look for a replacement to take over temporary "ownership" of the thread for a while, at least until mugan gets things sorted out?

Perhaps somebody could start a new thread, with an anonymous poll, and give everybody a chance to vote for a temporary "successor" to mugan, to maintain the first page? Either that, or maybe a mod could take over for a while?

Either way, it looks like it's a bit difficult for mugan currently, to keep the first page updated much, so somebody else is required to do so, at least temporarily.

Any suggestions?

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

thanks for that highly annoyed, i was just going to PM him when i got home from work.
i like the idea of the anonymous poll for temp. ownership.


----------



## ecoyd1

asdasdadasd


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Hello all! I haven't posted in a while, been working for the man a lot lately. I've been shooting a lot lately though, and a huge tragedy has befallen me - I just lost approximately 10,000 pictures when my external hard drive fell to the ground. It's definitely dead - the read/write heads don't move and the spindles don't spin. The only hope of recovery is a rebuild which is $1000 and up. Every picture I have taken from 2002 to August this year are gone.









However, I do have about 1000 pictures which I had miraculously left on my laptop. Here are few recent ones:


----------



## dr4gon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Hello all! I haven't posted in a while, been working for the man a lot lately. I've been shooting a lot lately though, and a huge tragedy has befallen me - I just lost approximately 10,000 pictures when my external hard drive fell to the ground. It's definitely dead - the read/write heads don't move and the spindles don't spin. The only hope of recovery is a rebuild which is $1000 and up. Every picture I have taken from 2002 to August this year are gone.









However, I do have about 1000 pictures which I had miraculously left on my laptop. Here are few recent ones:





























THAT IS A TRAGEDY!







I'm sorry. You need a 1TB internal and an external and mirror both of them for extra protection while still having a usable external drive! or just get 2 1TBs and RAID1 them. At least you have a few (1000 lol) duplicates!


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Hello all! I haven't posted in a while, been working for the man a lot lately. I've been shooting a lot lately though, and a huge tragedy has befallen me - I just lost approximately 10,000 pictures when my external hard drive fell to the ground. It's definitely dead - the read/write heads don't move and the spindles don't spin. The only hope of recovery is a rebuild which is $1000 and up. Every picture I have taken from 2002 to August this year are gone.










Wow, sorry to hear that GT







. I guess you'll just have to save up to get the images back. Even if it takes a year @ $20 a week to get the money together, it's got to be worth it. Perhaps the credit card can take the hit for you, or maybe an insurance claim is possible?

I guess it's just a harsh lesson in backing-up we can all learn something from. I've got a 500GB Seagate internal HDD I use for photo storage and although I've got no where near 10K images, I think it might be worth me getting another HDD for backup. After all, another HDD is a lot less cash than data recovery.

Seriously sorry to hear the news man







. Hope you get the images back.

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## getllamasfast

Do vintage cameras count? I inherited my grandfather's leica IIIf (or atleast that's what I think it is...)


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dr4gon*


THAT IS A TRAGEDY!







I'm sorry. You need a 1TB internal and an external and mirror both of them for extra protection while still having a usable external drive! or just get 2 1TBs and RAID1 them. At least you have a few (1000 lol) duplicates!


Thanks, what I need is not to be so clumsy. And yes I need some more storage disparately. In fact the only reason that the 1000 images were spared was because I had run out of room on my external!

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Highly-Annoyed*


Wow, sorry to hear that GT







. I guess you'll just have to save up to get the images back. Even if it takes a year @ $20 a week to get the money together, it's got to be worth it. Perhaps the credit card can take the hit for you, or maybe an insurance claim is possible?

I guess it's just a harsh lesson in backing-up we can all learn something from. I've got a 500GB Seagate internal HDD I use for photo storage and although I've got no where near 10K images, I think it might be worth me getting another HDD for backup. After all, another HDD is a lot less cash than data recovery.

Seriously sorry to hear the news man







. Hope you get the images back.

Highly-Annoyed


Thanks, that what I've been planning, set the broken drive aside and who knows, maybe one day I'll pay for the rebuild. I just wonder if it is a time critical situation - that is, if I wait too long, I might not be able to recover my data.

But right now I'm saving feverishly for the 50D - I must have it!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *getllamasfast*


Do vintage cameras count? I inherited my grandfather's leica IIIf (or atleast that's what I think it is...)


Cool! Those are pretty old. And worth some money still. Post some shots from it!


----------



## getllamasfast

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Cool! Those are pretty old. And worth some money still. Post some shots from it!


lol, I'll do that once I figure out how to use it







Just got it and I don't even know how to load it with film. >__>


----------



## mugan23

hey guys been in and out of state like crazy the last few months, i am sorry if you needed any thing changed that i missed plz pm me again. I am back and will continue to be in the club but i no longer have my camera i will be needing someone else to be the new op so if interested again plz pm me


----------



## Polo224

Here's a picture of my old man that I really love. It's old and tattered, but well earned as it's from the late 60's (VietNam). This is a scan obviously.








]


----------



## bgbop15

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Highly-Annoyed*


Wow, sorry to hear that GT







. I guess you'll just have to save up to get the images back. Even if it takes a year @ $20 a week to get the money together, it's got to be worth it. Perhaps the credit card can take the hit for you, or maybe an insurance claim is possible?

I guess it's just a harsh lesson in backing-up we can all learn something from. I've got a 500GB Seagate internal HDD I use for photo storage and although I've got no where near 10K images, I think it might be worth me getting another HDD for backup. After all, another HDD is a lot less cash than data recovery.

Seriously sorry to hear the news man







. Hope you get the images back.

Highly-Annoyed


Ugh, tell me about it! I keep my 10,000+ images on my 4x250gb Raid-0 array! probably not the best idea


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *bgbop15* 
Ugh, tell me about it! I keep my 10,000+ images on my 4x250gb Raid-0 array! probably not the best idea









Lest your fate be mine, back those bad boys up!


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

i only have one copy on HDD, but before i delete them off of my card i make sure they are backed up on DVD as well.


----------



## dr4gon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *bgbop15*


Ugh, tell me about it! I keep my 10,000+ images on my 4x250gb Raid-0 array! probably not the best idea


The least you could do is at least convert it to a RAID5!


----------



## Polo224

Could be. I wouldn't know though. My pop was the kind of veteran that you always hear about: they never talk about it and it's too late now as he's passed. I've got another one of him getting pinned by who I am pretty sure is Westmoreland. I figure that it was for his bronze medal.


----------



## NrGx

I popped my photography cherry haha. What do you guys think of the exposure and stuff?










Sorry about the large image. Taken with a Kodak Z710. Location is Southern Australia depicted a path through the gum trees.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *NrGx*


I popped my photography cherry haha. What do you guys think of the exposure and stuff?

Sorry about the large image. Taken with a Kodak Z710. Location is Southern Australia depicted a path through the gum trees.


I would say that the exposure is spot on, the sky isn't washed out at all. The composition is what stands out the most to me, nicely done!


----------



## dr4gon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *NrGx*


I popped my photography cherry haha. What do you guys think of the exposure and stuff?

Sorry about the large image. Taken with a Kodak Z710. Location is Southern Australia depicted a path through the gum trees.


Exposure isn't bad. Seems like it's a bit over saturated and too yellow (which is probably a white balance issue).


----------



## ENTERPRISE

By request of Mugan, control has been given to GoneTommorow.


----------



## tkl.hui

Hey guys,
I was thinking of starting a photography club at my high school but I need some ideas on what we could do at each meeting. It would probably be once a week. Some ideas I had were themes/challenge for each week ex. wildlife one week, insects the next, architecture, people, school etc....even a colour could be a theme.

I also had the idea of a challenge where each week, I take a close up of something and people guess what it is. If they guess right, they then get a turn to do a closeup of something etc.

Any other ideas would be appreciated.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

OK everybody, mugan offered me the OP, so I hope that's ok with everyone. I will stay current with it so PM me if any of your information on the front page is incorrect, suggestions, etc.!

And thanks to mugan for entrusting it to me.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

congrats, great person for the job








ill have some updates to send you in a little while


----------



## tkl.hui

anyone got some ideas for a photography club for school?


----------



## dr4gon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


OK everybody, mugan offered me the OP, so I hope that's ok with everyone. I will stay current with it so PM me if any of your information on the front page is incorrect, suggestions, etc.!

And thanks to mugan for entrusting it to me.


*NO WAY ABSOLUTELY NOT!* kidding, we love you. Thanks for keeping it current. We really need a photography forum, to organize and share better (flickr group hasn't really been utilized).

Quote:



Originally Posted by *tkl.hui*


anyone got some ideas for a photography club for school?


What you named was good. Check out other photography forums for ideas on competition and just general discussion. Maybe invite people to learn about their cameras be it a P&S or an SLR. I think it's great what you're doing! You can have discussions and presentations and have "field trips" where people bring their cameras and go outside or wherever you know?

Let us know how it goes! Good luck!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Double post


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *tkl.hui*


Hey guys,
I was thinking of starting a photography club at my high school but I need some ideas on what we could do at each meeting. It would probably be once a week. Some ideas I had were themes/challenge for each week ex. wildlife one week, insects the next, architecture, people, school etc....even a colour could be a theme.

I also had the idea of a challenge where each week, I take a close up of something and people guess what it is. If they guess right, they then get a turn to do a closeup of something etc.

Any other ideas would be appreciated.


Sounds like you have some good ideas. In addition to a weekly theme, you could have brief how-to's which pertain to that weeks shooting, i.e. small class on how to shoot landscapes properly, etc.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie*


congrats, great person for the job








ill have some updates to send you in a little while










Thanks! Definitely PM updates to me, as it makes it easier to keep track of them as opposed to posting them.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dr4gon*


*NO WAY ABSOLUTELY NOT!* kidding, we love you. Thanks for keeping it current. We really need a photography forum, to organize and share better (flickr group hasn't really been utilized).


Thanks!

Well, I was considering adding a section to the original post with links to members' individual flickr, picasa, websites, or wherever their photos reside online.


----------



## dr4gon

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Sounds like you have some good ideas. In addition to a weekly theme, you could have brief how-to's which pertain to that weeks shooting, i.e. small class on how to shoot landscapes properly, etc.

Thanks! Definitely PM updates to me, as it makes it easier to keep track of them as opposed to posting them.

Thanks!

Well, I was considering adding a section to the original post with links to members' individual flickr, picasa, websites, or wherever their photos reside online.

That sounds like a great start!


----------



## tkl.hui

thx guys, now I gotta discuss with my friend, then some administrative stuff and I should be able to get it going


----------



## FilluX

Here are my best shots







Some of them are taken with a Canon powershot s3 IS, and some with a Canon EOS digital rebel.

Please, tell me what you think









Taken from our living-room window, what a storm


















Taken from our living-room window










Firenze, Italy










Firenze, Italy










Firenze, Italy










Firenze, Italy










Rome, Italy










Rome, Italy










Thanx

-FilluX


----------



## dr4gon

BEAUTIFUL! What a view from your house (Italy, LOL)

That one shot is very interesting. I think Tamron uses that same exact shot for their lens demonstration.

http://www.tamron.com/lenses/learnin...comparison.php


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *FilluX* 
Here are my best shots







Some of them are taken with a Canon powershot s3 IS, and some with a Canon EOS digital rebel.

Please, tell me what you think









Taken from our living-room window, what a storm









Thanx

-FilluX

Very decent shots, I have been to Florence and Rome - great places to take pictures!


----------



## FilluX

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dr4gon*


BEAUTIFUL! What a view from your house (Italy, LOL)

That one shot is very interesting. I think Tamron uses that same exact shot for their lens demonstration.

http://www.tamron.com/lenses/learnin...comparison.php


Thanx mate







(Just to make it clear, the 2 first are taken in Finland)

Darn im @ work (workin hard as you see







) and i don't have flash player so i can't watch the link, will check it out when i get home!

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Very decent shots, I have been to Florence and Rome - great places to take pictures!


Thanx! yeah i love Italy









-FilluX


----------



## Marin

I've been looking through my photos again. Here's one I took while in Israel. Its a Sunrise over the Dead Sea, it was taken from the top of Masada.


----------



## FilluX

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


I've been looking through my photos again. Here's one I took while in Israel. Its a Sunrise over the Dead Sea, it was taken from the top of Masada.











Sweet







At what time was this taken?









Did you like my pics?

-FilluX


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
OK everybody, mugan offered me the OP, so I hope that's ok with everyone. I will stay current with it so PM me if any of your information on the front page is incorrect, suggestions, etc.!

And thanks to mugan for entrusting it to me.

Like what you've done with the first page!









Thanks for taking over for us!









Highly-Annoyed


----------



## JeremyFr

Well sign my ass up.

Bodies - Canon Rebel Digital (upgraded to 10D firmware), and Canon 20D.
Lense's - Canon ef 18-55, Canon EF IS 70-300, Canon EF 60mm Macro, Tamron EF 70-300.
Flashe's - Sigma EF 500 DG Super, Quantaray (don't remember the model right now)
Other Accessories - COKIN filters, Several Tripods, 2 Stroboframes, Various Softbox's etc.

I mainly do portrait and wedding photography, though I like doing scenic, sports & action, etc.

I don't have a flickr account (never really checked it out) Though I have some of my work up at....

http://home.comcast.net/~rjphotography/


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Highly-Annoyed* 
Like what you've done with the first page!









Thanks for taking over for us!









Highly-Annoyed

No problem, and I have some tarantula pictures on the way which you might appreciate.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *JeremyFr* 
Well sign my ass up.

Bodies - Canon Rebel Digital (upgraded to 10D firmware), and Canon 20D.
Lense's - Canon ef 18-55, Canon EF IS 70-300, Canon EF 60mm Macro, Tamron EF 70-300.
Flashe's - Sigma EF 500 DG Super, Quantaray (don't remember the model right now)
Other Accessories - COKIN filters, Several Tripods, 2 Stroboframes, Various Softbox's etc.

I mainly do portrait and wedding photography, though I like doing scenic, sports & action, etc.

I don't have a flickr account (never really checked it out) Though I have some of my work up at....

http://home.comcast.net/~rjphotography/


Welcome and added!

Nice shots, I've some some weddings myself, they're fun. If you shoot random people out in public, it's weird, but at weddings you can get in everyone's face!

Which Rebel? They've been around for years and have several iterations. I have a 400D (XTi, soon to be a 50D hopefully).


----------



## dr4gon

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Welcome and added!

Nice shots, I've some some weddings myself, they're fun. If you shoot random people out in public, it's weird, but at weddings you can get in everyone's face!

Which Rebel? They've been around for years and have several iterations. I have a 400D (XTi, soon to be a 50D hopefully).

I'm guessing the 300D (Rebel original)


----------



## JeremyFr

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Welcome and added!

Nice shots, I've some some weddings myself, they're fun. If you shoot random people out in public, it's weird, but at weddings you can get in everyone's face!

Which Rebel? They've been around for years and have several iterations. I have a 400D (XTi, soon to be a 50D hopefully).



As the other poster pointed it out I have the 300d, and as I posted its flashed to a 10D firmware now so its not really a Rebel per say anymore lol.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

As promised, some tarantula shots:

The setup:










Desert Blond (Aphonopelma chalcodes) 5" female:










Chaco Golden Knee (Grammastola aureostriata) 3" female:









Chilean Rose Hair (Grammastola rosea) 5" female, close-up of the chelicerae and fangs:









Night time:









They look really cool with the blacklight bulb:


----------



## TaiDinh

@GoneTomorrow

What do you feed them? First time I've seen someone owning tarantulas as pets.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *TaiDinh* 
@GoneTomorrow

What do you feed them? First time I've seen someone owning tarantulas as pets.

He feeds them fat babies.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


He feeds them fat babies.











LOL, they're not quite big enough for that yet, but one day...

Quote:



Originally Posted by *TaiDinh*


@GoneTomorrow

What do you feed them? First time I've seen someone owning tarantulas as pets.


I feed them crickets, but some species can reach over 8" leg span (e.g. the Burgundy Goliath Tarantula gets up to 11") at which point they prefer pinky mice.


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

I could do with a little advice please guys







.

Can anybody recommend a remote (corded) shutter release for my D300?

Something like the Nikon MC-30/36 perhaps, but without the excessive price tag that comes with the Nikon badge.

Would like one with 2 stage release, where pressing 1/2 way activates auto focus, then fully pressing takes the shot.

Any suggestions?

Thanks!

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## rx7speed

how does this work?
http://www.dealextreme.com/details.dx/sku.8189

I have more or less the same one on my 450d and it works fine. allows have press to auto focus and full press to snap picture. also has a switch that holds the button down if you want to do a bulb exposure.

plus at 5 bucks with free shipping you can't complain too much.

also if you want a wireless trigger 
http://www.dealextreme.com/details.dx/sku.5483
at least the canon specific one there will do auto focus before you take the picture and allows you to set a 2 second delay or take the picture the moment after it gets focused.


----------



## dr4gon

I've went through one of those

make it two..... just broke tonight as I was trying to do some lunar/jupiter photography tonight









So cheap...... ugh.


----------



## xguntherc

Hey guys. I'm about to get another camera. I was wondering what you'd all suggest I get.

The Nikon D40, used for 5 months. amazing condition. with 15-55mm lens, bag, and 2, 2GB SD cards. and a case. for $375.00 Looks amazingly new. guy is a professional.

Nikon D50 with a 180mm lens, and the average 15-55 that came with it also. with 4 2GB sticks, a Battery addon pack that sits on bottom and makes for more to hold onto, shaped like the camera, with a 250 page intro book to help learn, and a case, and tripod. all for $450. he just upgraded. shoots nightclubs and such in Vegas. (Worried from all the nightclub use it might not be in as good of condition than the D40)

or a Nikon D60...?

Or a SLR-Like Camera such as the Canon SX10 or a Sony DSC-H10. or even better the H50

those are my choices right now. what does everyone suggest for a beginner.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *xguntherc*


Hey guys. I'm about to get another camera. I was wondering what you'd all suggest I get.

The Nikon D40, used for 5 months. amazing condition. with 15-55mm lens, bag, and 2, 2GB SD cards. and a case. for $375.00 Looks amazingly new. guy is a professional.

Nikon D50 with a 180mm lens, and the average 15-55 that came with it also. with 4 2GB sticks, a Battery addon pack that sits on bottom and makes for more to hold onto, shaped like the camera, with a 250 page intro book to help learn, and a case, and tripod. all for $450. he just upgraded. shoots nightclubs and such in Vegas. (Worried from all the nightclub use it might not be in as good of condition than the D40)

or a Nikon D60...?

Or a SLR-Like Camera such as the Canon SX10 or a Sony DSC-H10. or even better the H50

those are my choices right now. what does everyone suggest for a beginner.


I would definitely not recommend an "SLR-like" camera. Many of them are great cameras, especially Canon's line up, but if you're deciding between them and SLR, definitely SLR. They're worlds faster, allow for different lenses, have much, much better sensors, etc.

As for the Nikon SLRs you listed, I would say the D40 or D60 if you can spring for it. The D50 is about a year older than the D40 as far as its release is concerned. The two are very similar, but the D40 has a better feature set. And your sense that it has seen some significant usage is prudent, as the D50, being older, probably has fewer shutter actuations left in its life.


----------



## xguntherc

Thanks for the info gonetomorrow. I see you started this 134 page thread... Nice work. I'm sure you know what your talking about.

Ya I'm hearing that the D40 is in Perfect condition. and some people have told me $375 for one thats 5 months old is a GREAT deal.

also the D50 guy got it used. so I'd be the 3rd.. or worse owner.. I'd rather have the D40 then.

Thanks for the info..

So no SLR-Like Camera's then..

and how long of a life do these camera's have?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *xguntherc* 
Thanks for the info gonetomorrow. I see you started this 134 page thread... Nice work. I'm sure you know what your talking about.

Ya I'm hearing that the D40 is in Perfect condition. and some people have told me $375 for one thats 5 months old is a GREAT deal.

also the D50 guy got it used. so I'd be the 3rd.. or worse owner.. I'd rather have the D40 then.

Thanks for the info..

So no SLR-Like Camera's then..

and how long of a life do these camera's have?

I didn't start it, I just took it over actually. And there are other very knowledgeable people here, especially when it comes to Nikon cameras. I'm more of a Canon guy.

As far as DSLR camera life, the actual number of actuations a camera can take before quitting is hard to say. A general range is 50 -100k actuations, so if a used camera has over 20k, that can give you an idea about how long it will last based on how old it already is. There's no conventional way to check how many actuations a camera has, but it can be done via Photoshop and other methods.


----------



## xguntherc

Cool.. Thanks for the info. So you can check that though. right?

what about a D60.. is it worth it to scrounge the cash for it over the D40.. or do you not know since ur a Canon man?

Thanks guys. I'll probably get the D40 for $375 from this guy.

Thanks!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *xguntherc*


Cool.. Thanks for the info. So you can check that though. right?

what about a D60.. is it worth it to scrounge the cash for it over the D40.. or do you not know since ur a Canon man?

Thanks guys. I'll probably get the D40 for $375 from this guy.

Thanks!


I say go for the D40. The D60 isn't much better than the D40 - both are entry-level DSLRs. The D60 has a higher resolution (10 MP versus 6, the most significant difference IMO), faster burst mode, better ergonomics, those are the main differences. So I would go for the good deal you're being offered for the D40 and put the money saved towards more lenses.

But do wait for some more opinions form the Nikon people here.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

hmm, i was wondering if you guys thought maybe it would be a good idea to get this thread moved to the new Photography section?
maybe some new people will find it if it is relocated








http://www.overclock.net/photography/


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:


Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie* 
hmm, i was wondering if you guys thought maybe it would be a good idea to get this thread moved to the new Photography section?
maybe some new people will find it if it is relocated








http://www.overclock.net/photography/

Sounds like a good idea to me.

Make it a sticky perhaps?

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie*


hmm, i was wondering if you guys thought maybe it would be a good idea to get this thread moved to the new Photography section?
maybe some new people will find it if it is relocated








http://www.overclock.net/photography/



Quote:



Originally Posted by *Highly-Annoyed*


Sounds like a good idea to me.

Make it a sticky perhaps?

Highly-Annoyed



I'll PM a mod and get this done.


----------



## dr4gon

Yay a photo section!


----------



## bgbop15

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


I say go for the D40. The D60 isn't much better than the D40 - both are entry-level DSLRs. The D60 has a higher resolution (10 MP versus 6, the most significant difference IMO), faster burst mode, better ergonomics, those are the main differences. So I would go for the good deal you're being offered for the D40 and put the money saved towards more lenses.

But do wait for some more opinions form the Nikon people here.


As a d60 owner getting into some creative flash situations, I have a bit of remorse for choosing the d60, as it's fasted sync with the sb-600 is 1/200 and the d40 can do 1/500, so there is one more reason you should get that d40!


----------



## rx7speed

wopohoo this way we don't have to be tainted by the art section


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

my thoughts exactly


----------



## GoneTomorrow

We're in!


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

yay


----------



## xguntherc

I just got my D40 today.

Staring at it now. More intimidated than exited. (Not Really) but seriously. It's very exiting and cool.

I don't know how to do 80% of what it does yet. But I'm still exited to start learning and taking some good shots.









The guy was this rich, nice guy that takes Marine Macro shots. He said it had never left his Tank room. 6 months old. with about 2-3k actualations. and in near perfect condition. a little dust I cleaned off with Q-tips, and thats it.


----------



## EyedClock

EyedClock:

Canon Rebel XSi
18-55mm, 55-250mm


----------



## xguntherc

I need another lens. I only have the 15-55mm one. Now time to find a 220VR


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *xguntherc*


I just got my D40 today.

Staring at it now. More intimidated than exited. (Not Really) but seriously. It's very exiting and cool.

I don't know how to do 80% of what it does yet. But I'm still exited to start learning and taking some good shots.









The guy was this rich, nice guy that takes Marine Macro shots. He said it had never left his Tank room. 6 months old. with about 2-3k actualations. and in near perfect condition. a little dust I cleaned off with Q-tips, and thats it.































the best way to learn is to get out there and play around with the features and find out for yourself what exactly they do to an image, believe, it will take a lot of toying around to learn it inside out (i know i still have stuff to learn with my D70s)


----------



## dr4gon

I see this got moved









Any chance at this thread also getting moved?

http://www.overclock.net/art-graphic...ckr-group.html

(the flickr group just makes a good way to have a collective gallery of nice pictures)


----------



## xguntherc

It should be.. has some Great shots by dragon, and a few others.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dr4gon*


I see this got moved









Any chance at this thread also getting moved?

http://www.overclock.net/art-graphic...ckr-group.html

(the flickr group just makes a good way to have a collective gallery of nice pictures)


dr4gon, PM admin and ask him to move it.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *xguntherc*


I just got my D40 today.

Staring at it now. More intimidated than exited. (Not Really) but seriously. It's very exiting and cool.

I don't know how to do 80% of what it does yet. But I'm still exited to start learning and taking some good shots.









The guy was this rich, nice guy that takes Marine Macro shots. He said it had never left his Tank room. 6 months old. with about 2-3k actualations. and in near perfect condition. a little dust I cleaned off with Q-tips, and thats it.































Enjoy it! It didn't take me long to learn how to use mine. In a few months I new enough to use Manual mode effectively.

And shall add you to the club?


----------



## dr4gon

done, thanks


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *EyedClock*


EyedClock:

Canon Rebel XSi
18-55mm, 55-250mm


Added!

Nice gear!


----------



## Marin

Marin:

Canon Rebel XSi

18-55mm


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Marin:

Canon Rebel XSi

18-55mm


Added!


----------



## pow3rtr1p

I'm pretty old school. I shoot with a Minolta X700, and a Holga. That's right, I shoot film...


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *pow3rtr1p*


I'm pretty old school. I shoot with a Minolta X700, and a Holga. That's right, I shoot film...


As do others here. Afterall, it's the OCN _Camera_ Club, not _Digital_ Camera Club!

Got any scans of some of your shots?


----------



## xguntherc

Ya I'm thinkin I'll just learn as I go, as well as reading a few things online. I've taken about 50 photo's so far tonight. and I'm starting to get some decent ones. I need a new 15-200VR lens soon though.

Also I was told to get a UV Cover, or a filter, as it will protect the lens. you leave it on while actually using the camera and all. Better to break a 34 dollar filter then the entire lens. ya know. So where could I get one of those.?

Ya So I got the D40 w15-55mm lens, battery, 2 2GB SD Cards, charger, ont he fly charger, cables, body & lens cover, and a nice carry case, and neck strap, all for $370. and I'm very happy with it so far. I'll post a picture i took in his marine tank before I bought it. just to show you guys something cool.

edit* Yea add me to the "CLUBBERS" sounds good to me


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *xguntherc* 
Ya I'm thinkin I'll just learn as I go, as well as reading a few things online. I've taken about 50 photo's so far tonight. and I'm starting to get some decent ones. I need a new 15-200VR lens soon though.

Also I was told to get a UV Cover, or a filter, as it will protect the lens. you leave it on while actually using the camera and all. Better to break a 34 dollar filter then the entire lens. ya know. So where could I get one of those.?

Ya So I got the D40 w15-55mm lens, battery, 2 2GB SD Cards, charger, ont he fly charger, cables, body & lens cover, and a nice carry case, and neck strap, all for $370. and I'm very happy with it so far. I'll post a picture i took in his marine tank before I bought it. just to show you guys something cool.

edit* Yea add me to the "CLUBBERS" sounds good to me

UV filter or MCP as it's sometimes called. You can find good ones at B&H Photo, Adorama, Abe's of Maine, all good sites for camera gear.

I don't use UV filters. I do have one for certain situations, like if I want to take the reflection off the surface of water, but ordinarily it's off. If I used one at all, it would have to be a really good Hoya or Tiffen filter (which are pricey). No point in putting a cheap $20 Best Buy UV filter in front of good glass.


----------



## xguntherc

Really.. so should I just not use one. and be careful with my camera. I usually am very careful with all my Gear. So I'm not to worried. but I do wanna take necessary precautions. but if it's not needed. and will be better without. then I wont get one. also is there some western stores.. instead of Maine.?

thanks. and check the thread above this one. I just threw in some pics of the coral where I got my camera. it's pretty cool looking.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *xguntherc* 
Really.. so should I just not use one. and be careful with my camera. I usually am very careful with all my Gear. So I'm not to worried. but I do wanna take necessary precautions. but if it's not needed. and will be better without. then I wont get one. also is there some western stores.. instead of Maine.?

thanks. and check the thread above this one. I just threw in some pics of the coral where I got my camera. it's pretty cool looking.

Opinions vary wildly about whether using UV filters is beneficial. If you want to use one, get a decent brand. I'm pretty careful when shooting, especially outdoors. If I'm not actively shooting something, the lens cap is always on.

The three stores I mentioned are the only ones I've used. Wait, there is Newegg as well, but they don't have the best filter selection.


----------



## xguntherc

cool. thanks for all the info. I really appreciate it man.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *xguntherc*


cool. thanks for all the info. I really appreciate it man.


No problem, and I like the Yorkie pics!


----------



## CRZYSTNG

Panasonic DMC-FZ8 
I took this the other day just outside my front door overlooking the valley.










Playing around with some night shots and blue led lighting.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *CRZYSTNG*


Panasonic DMC-FZ8 
I took this the other day just outside my front door overlooking the valley.

Playing around with some night shots and blue led lighting.


I like the blue LED shot. The landscape is a little over exposed, especially the sky. Did you shoot it in RAW format? If so you could easily fix it and even do a single-RAW HDR shot.


----------



## xguntherc

So what should I usually be shooting in?

right now it's jpeg Normal. it was on fine.

or should I be on RAW+jpeg+basic??

also I know you don't have a Nikon. but if I buy this will it work with no other additional purchases? I see these have IR.. thats nice.

  Amazon.com: Nikon ML-L3 Wireless Remote Control for Nikon D40, D40x, D60 & D80 Digital SLR Cameras: Camera & Photo
oh and ya, the Yorkie is a blast.. I love it, and taking pictures of him.


----------



## CRZYSTNG

No RAW format taken. I think a bit of the look is due to the fog that was rolling in that afternoon which is giving it that hazy look. Neither of the pictures have been touched by any kind of editing software. I just grabbed the camera and started snapping some pics.

I would like some help in trying to hone some of my photography skills though. I honestly don't think they are anything special however, I posted that same picture on a local voting site and it placed an astonishing 33 of almost 2000. So that tells me there is something there that others seem to like, I jsut need to figure out the camera I guess to try and enhance those "small slices of heaven".

I know this camera isn't anything close to professional equipment (ie. no changeable lenses, remote triggers, super high quality resolution) but think it is a good introduction to the world of photography and if I could possibly improve on a few minor details (inexperience?) that something else might come of this hobby.


----------



## xguntherc

What camera did you use for those shots?


----------



## Dragoon

Add me up to the list









*Sony DSC-P100*

I love this camera, about 4 years old, but it takes fantastic photos.


----------



## CRZYSTNG

Quote:



Originally Posted by *xguntherc*


What camera did you use for those shots?


Not sure if that was directed towards me, if so then I used a Panasonic DMC-FZ8.


----------



## Dragoon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *CRZYSTNG*


Not sure if that was directed towards me, if so then I used a Panasonic DMC-FZ8.


That blue led shot is great, 30 sec exposure to it?


----------



## CRZYSTNG

THX, nah, it was a 15 sec shot as the light was actually pretty bright. 30 sec was way overexposed.


----------



## Dragoon

I'll post a nice shot later when I get home. I gota love taking shot against the sun with 1/1000 at F5.6


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *xguntherc* 
So what should I usually be shooting in?

right now it's jpeg Normal. it was on fine.

or should I be on RAW+jpeg+basic??

also I know you don't have a Nikon. but if I buy this will it work with no other additional purchases? I see these have IR.. thats nice.

Amazon.com: Nikon ML-L3 Wireless Remote Control for Nikon D40, D40x, D60 & D80 Digital SLR Cameras: Camera & Photo

oh and ya, the Yorkie is a blast.. I love it, and taking pictures of him.

It depends on how much flexibility you want to have in post-processing. RAW images record a wider range of light, color, white balance, contrast and sharpness, allowing you to fix things like improper exposures or dull colors. JPEGs are very limited in how much and more importantly how well they can be adjusted post-process. The pain with RAW images is that it's not a universal format, every brand has it's own (Nikon uses NEF, Canon uses CR2), so you have to convert images into JPEGs/TIFFs if you want to post them online or send them people.

I shoot RAW only, no extra JPEGs. It allows to fix my mistakes, and admittedly makes me a bit lazy when shooting since I realize that (but digital cameras do that by their very nature).

I don't see why you would want to shoot three images - RAW, JPEG and basic - every shot. I could see RAW + JPEG alone, since that lets you have a JPEG image for every shot ready to go. But when shooting in multiple formats, it obviously takes up more space on your CF card, and it makes shooting in burst mode ridiculously slow as the buffer fills up very quickly.

And for the remote shutter release, the one you posted is basic and will work, but I would get a two-stage remote, i.e. one that allows not only partial push for focus and then release, but also allows the button to be locked in for very long exposures in bulb mode (5-10 minutes, such as for night sky shots).

I looked on Amazon, but I can tell if any of the wireless Nikon remotes are two stage, and many of the wired ones are:
 Amazon.com: Nikon MC-DC1 Remote Cord for Nikon D70S & D80 Digital SLR Cameras: Camera & Photo

I use a two-stage wired one myself.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Dragoon* 
Add me up to the list









*Sony DSC-P100*

I love this camera, about 4 years old, but it takes fantastic photos.










Welcome and added!


----------



## Dragoon

I think I know where to go when I'm doubt of what camera to buy next.







Which will possibly be an SLR


----------



## Dragoon

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Welcome and added!

Just checked the first post, the DSC-P100 is a Point n shoot camera









Here you go:


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dragoon*


Just checked the first post, the DSC-P100 is a Point n shoot camera









Here you go:



















Whoops, I wasn't paying attention. I knew it was PAS, honest! Thanks for the correction.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

the mc-dc1 is the remote i have.


----------



## Dragoon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Whoops, I wasn't paying attention. I knew it was PAS, honest! Thanks for the correction.


lol







No worries.


----------



## dr4gon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dragoon*


I think I know where to go when I'm doubt of what camera to buy next.







Which will possibly be an SLR










Get a sony dslr next!







. I have the P100 too and still carry it with me but the Sony A300 has really blown me away!


----------



## Dragoon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dr4gon*


Get a sony dslr next!







. I have the P100 too and still carry it with me but the Sony A300 has really blown me away!


I've seen those A300 around, they're not too expensive compared to most of the SLR cameras that I looked. I love to photograph (imo better than video shooting), and sometimes I feel the P100 doesn't "fill what I'm aiming for", despite being one heck of a PAS camera.

Thanks for the recommendation on the camera dr4gon


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dr4gon*


Get a sony dslr next!








. I have the P100 too and still carry it with me but the Sony A300 has really blown me away!


The Sony DSLRs are very noisy above ISO 400, even the $3000 Sony A900.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sonydslra350/
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sonydslra700/
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sonydslra900/

They are otherwise good in terms of speed, features, reliability, but the poor noise performance is what holds Sony back. Just compare the 800 and 1600 ISO samples with 800 and 1600 ISO samples from a Canon or Nikon DSLR, it's like night and day.

Canon 40D
ISO 400:








ISO 800:









Sony A350
ISO 400:








ISO 800:


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

hmm, i would have thought the Sonys to be on par with the nikons as nikon uses Sony sensors.
must be the processing of the image?


----------



## Dragoon

Nikons at ISO6400 are unbelivably good









And wow... the DSLRs really are noisy over ISO400. And few weeks ago I was taking a look at some A100s and the Canon EOS 400 and 1000 since they're all within the same price range, which is under €500 (~650 USD). I can't afford anything higher than that


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie* 
hmm, i would have thought the Sonys to be on par with the nikons as nikon uses Sony sensors.
must be the processing of the image?


Quote:


Originally Posted by *Dragoon* 
Nikons at ISO6400 are unbelivably good









And wow... the DSLRs really are noisy over ISO400. And few weeks ago I was taking a look at some A100s and the Canon EOS 400 and 1000 since they're all within the same price range, which is under â‚¬500 (~650 USD). I can't afford anything higher than that









Well, Nikon and Canon are kings of DSLR. Professional almost exclusively use Canon or Nikon, because the other brands like Sony, Pentak, Olympus, etc. are playing "catch-up" sort of when it comes to DSLR.

Nikon uses Sony chips for their processors, but as you said its how the image is processed, which is probably a closely guarded secret by Nikon.


----------



## Dragoon

Then my best bet would be a Canon EOS, right?

My cousin has an EOS, I don't know its model but it has a couple of years, and it takes awesome photos.

What I like about the SLR cameras is that you can control everything, even with my P100 90% of my photos are taken on manual, setting exposure and aperture size for best quality.


----------



## CRZYSTNG

You can throw me in the mix, Panasonic DMC-FZ8
not sure what classification it is really, body of an SLR, wants to be one when it grows up haha.


----------



## xguntherc

Well I just got my D40, but I'm needing to keep learning the shutter, exposure, and aperture settings first before I can "Truly" take some good pics. as Auto is ok, but I'd rather use manual


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

I went out to a public fireworks display at our local beach the other night. Nothing too fancy, just a few minutes of fireworks, but I thought I'd take the camera along.

Here are a few shots.









*F11, 50mm, 1 Sec, ISO200, Manual Focus, Tripod*









*F11, 36mm, 1 Sec, ISO200, Manual Focus, Tripod*









*F11, 36mm, 1 Sec, ISO200, Manual Focus, Tripod*









*F11, 36mm, 1 Sec, ISO200, Manual Focus, Tripod*









*F11, 36mm, 1 Sec, ISO200, Manual Focus, Tripod*









*F11, 36mm, 1 Sec, ISO200, Manual Focus, Tripod*









*F11, 36mm, 1 Sec, ISO200, Manual Focus, Tripod*









*F2.8, 50mm, 1/13th Sec, ISO640, Auto Focus, Handheld*









*F2.8, 50mm, 1/250th Sec, ISO640, Auto Focus, Handheld*









*F2.8, 50mm, 1/13th Sec, ISO640, Auto Focus, Handheld*

They didn't turn out quite as well as I had hoped, but this was my first time shooting fireworks and it was a good learning experience for next time.

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## Dragoon

Whoa, amazing photos.







ISO640 and no noise visible









I so want an SLR lol Probably near mah birthday


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dragoon*


Then my best bet would be a Canon EOS, right?

My cousin has an EOS, I don't know its model but it has a couple of years, and it takes awesome photos.

What I like about the SLR cameras is that you can control everything, even with my P100 90% of my photos are taken on manual, setting exposure and aperture size for best quality.


You can't go wrong with Canon or Nikon, they're just FTW for DSLR cameras.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Highly-Annoyed*


I went out to a public fireworks display at our local beach the other night. Nothing too fancy, just a few minutes of fireworks, but I thought I'd take the camera along.

Here are a few shots.

They didn't turn out quite as well as I had hoped, but this was my first time shooting fireworks and it was a good learning experience for next time.

Highly-Annoyed


Nice handhelds, don't you just love prime lenses?


----------



## TaiDinh

My room awhile back.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *TaiDinh*


My room awhile back.











Are those Bose Cubes?


----------



## TaiDinh

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Are those Bose Cubes?


Yes they are.


----------



## usapatriot

I shoot Pentax, probably the only one here.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *usapatriot*


I shoot Pentax, probably the only one here. Anyways I sort of always prefer the underdog in every industry.


Cool, post some of your Pentax shots! All we ever get are Nikon and Canon shots around here.


----------



## usapatriot

I got the Pentax in late May, a new model, I've barely used it, I feel so bad, I got rid of my old camera and I was totally engaged into photography, I spend $700 on a new system and boom, total discouragement. Quite a few months have passed now and it's just not getting the use I meant to give it, and I want to, but I just feel discouraged, I don't feel very creative.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

I know the feeling, I sometimes put my camera down for months. You just gotta get out there and shoot!


----------



## tkl.hui

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Cool, post some of your Pentax shots! All we ever get are Nikon and Canon shots around here.


You get some sony shots from me and dragon


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Nice handhelds, don't you just love prime lenses?


Thanks. I don't own a prime unfortunately, but my Tamron 17-50mm @ 50mm f2.8 is almost as sharp (like 99.5% as sharp) as the Nikon f1.4 50mm prime @ f2.8 anyway, so I can at least get a sense of how good some of the decent primes are.









Highly-Annoyed

Quote:



Originally Posted by *usapatriot*


I got the Pentax in late May, a new model, I've barely used it, I feel so bad, I got rid of my old camera and I was totally engaged into photography, I spend $700 on a new system and boom, total discouragement. Quite a few months have passed now and it's just not getting the use I meant to give it, and I want to, but I just feel discouraged, I don't feel very creative.


It's not the Pentax K20D by any chance is it? I was going to get one of those until I opted for the Nikon D300. If it is I'd love to see some shots. Even if it isn't though, still do post some!

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *tkl.hui*


You get some sony shots from me and dragon










More! Haven't seen any Pentax or Olympus that I recall though.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Highly-Annoyed*


Thanks. I don't own a prime unfortunately, but my Tamron 17-50mm @ 50mm f2.8 is almost as sharp (like 99.5% as sharp) as the Nikon f1.4 50mm prime @ f2.8 anyway, so I can at least get a sense of how good some of the decent primes are.









Highly-Annoyed


Ah, I just saw that they were all 50mm focal length and thought it was a prime. I love my 50mm f/1.4, it's so sharp! But at f/1.4, the focal area is so small that it's only good for close-up portraits and macros.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

where did you get your 50mm prime gone?


----------



## pow3rtr1p

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


As do others here. Afterall, it's the OCN _Camera_ Club, not _Digital_ Camera Club!

Got any scans of some of your shots?


I have been doing all black and white in my Intro Darkroom Techniques class. I can see about getting some scans soon.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie*


where did you get your 50mm prime gone?


I bought from Adorama for about $300, it was so worth it. My favorite lens, hands down. It's ten times sharper than my 28-135mm which is worthless below f/8.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

hmmmm, might have to be my next purchase after the Tokina 11-16 i plan to get this month


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie* 
hmmmm, might have to be my next purchase after the Tokina 11-16 i plan to get this month









Yeah, I really need a wide angle lens too, but they're so damned expensive, even the non L versions.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

yea, but it will so be worth it, i love my 18-200mm, so very versatile, but countless times it just has not been wide enough for what i wanted to do.
and i love the look of wide angle shots, i cant wait









might be motivation to get out shooting more often (i rarely get out anymore







)


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie* 
yea, but it will so be worth it, i love my 18-200mm, so very versatile, but countless times it just has not been wide enough for what i wanted to do.
and i love the look of wide angle shots, i cant wait









might be motivation to get out shooting more often (i rarely get out anymore







)

I'm going to splurge for my next lens and try to get the 17-40mm f/4L and make that my new "walkabout lens."

The 18-200mm is another one I would like to have to replace my 28-135mm.


----------



## xguntherc

I'd really really Love to get the 18-200VR for my D40, but they are ONLY like $650-750.. then I'd be able to use just that for most things. instead I'll probably have to get the 55-200 VR and switch between the 2. having just the one sure would make things easier. So I'm not switching my lens and miss a shot.

I might be getting a 4 month old, 2,100 shots taken 55-200VR from guy that I got my camera from. for only $145 they are new around over 200 everywhere. but that might have to wait til i get the cash


----------



## Dragoon

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
You can't go wrong with Canon or Nikon, they're just FTW for DSLR cameras.

I still need to know more about lens, I know that the 18mm-55mm is the focal length but to what does that translate to?

I was looking at these, what do you think?

*Canon EOS 350D* with 18-55 lens - Was â‚¬675, now on sale at â‚¬349 (less than half







)
*EOS 400D* with EF 18-55 lens - â‚¬449
*Nikon Reflex D60* with AFS DX15-55 lens - â‚¬499
*EOS 1000D* with 18-55 lens IS - â‚¬499

I'm not willing to drop more than â‚¬500 for a camera lol. Which one do you think it has the best price/quality ratio?


----------



## tkl.hui

Well here's some i already uploaded to the flickr page but not the thread. Enjoy.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dragoon*


I still need to know more about lens, I know that the 18mm-55mm is the focal length but to what does that translate to?

I was looking at these, what do you think?

*Canon EOS 350D* with 18-55 lens - Was €675, now on sale at €349 (less than half







)
*EOS 400D* with EF 18-55 lens - €449
*Nikon Reflex D60* with AFS DX15-55 lens - €499
*EOS 1000D* with 18-55 lens IS - €499

I'm not willing to drop more than €500 for a camera lol. Which one do you think it has the best price/quality ratio?











I would say go for the 400D. I wouldn't get the 350D because it lacks a few must have features in my opinion, like a dust reduction system (dust on the sensor is the bane of DSLR), 9 point AF sensor, higher resolution (10 MP), larger LCD screen. I have the 400D myself and it is an awesome camera body.

Now if you wanted to splurge and go for the 1000D, then go for it - because it is a very successful update of the 400D, better in every aspect. However, as I said you can't go wrong with the 400D.

The kit lens with the 350D and 400D is the old Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5 - f/5.6 zoom lens. 18 - 55m is the focal range: 18 at the widest angle, 55 at full zoom. That's a zoom factor of about 3x, but DSLR lenses don't have zoom factors of 20x like you see in ultra-zoom point-and-shoots. In fact the best you usually see is an 11x factor like in the Canon and Nikon 18-200mm lenses.

The f/3.5 - f/5.6 refers to the widest aperture that the lens can achieve at it's respective focal ranges (i.e. f/3.5 at 18mm, f/5.6 at full zoom, varying gradients in between). Really expensive Canon *L* lenses have features such as constant aperture throughout the range (i.e. f/4).

Professionals and enthusiasts will call that kit lens crap, but it really isn't that bad. You certainly would want to upgrade to a better lens eventually though, a zoom with IS and USM, and then a prime lens and a macro lens, all basic lenses to have in your kit.

The 1000D lens is almost the same except that it has IS (Image Stabilization), which is very nice to have.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *tkl.hui*


Well here's some i already uploaded to the flickr page but not the thread. Enjoy.


Solid shots. I have some shots of bees on those same purple flowers too!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *xguntherc*


.. then I'd be able to use just that for most things.


LOL, that's what I thought when I first got my camera, now here I am four lenses later. One lens cannot truly do it all for a DSLR. If you want good macro shots, you need a macro lens. If you want take good portrait and low-light hand held shots, you need a prime lens.


----------



## Dragoon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


I would say go for the 400D. I wouldn't get the 350D because it has it has a few must have features in my opinion, like a dust reduction system (dust on the sensor is the bane of DSLR), 9 point AF sensor, higher resolution (10 MP), larger LCD screen. I have the 400D myself and it is an awesome camera body.

Now if you wanted to splurge and go for the 1000D, then go for it - because it is a very successful update of the 400D, better in every aspect. However, as I said you can't go wrong with the 400D.

The kit lens with the 350D and 400D is the old Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5 - f/5.6 zoom lens. 18 - 55m is the focal range: 18 at the widest angle, 55 at full zoom. That's a zoom factor of about 3x, but DSLR lenses don't have zoom factors of 20x like you see in ultra-zoom point-and-shoots. In fact the best you usually see is an 11x factor like in the Canon and Nikon 18-200mm lenses.

The f/3.5 - f/5.6 refers to the widest aperture that the lens can achieve at it's respective focal ranges (i.e. f/3.5 at 18mm, f/5.6 at full zoom, varying gradients in between). Really expensive Canon *L* lenses have features such as constant aperture throughout the range (i.e. f/4).

Professionals and enthusiasts will call that kit lens crap, but it really isn't that bad. You certainly would want to upgrade to a better lens eventually though, a zoom with IS and USM, and then a prime lens and a macro lens, all basic lenses to have in your kit.

The 1000D lens is almost the same except that it has IS (Image Stabilization), which is very nice to have.


That explanation was ftw







Thanks









+







for the great explanation and putting it so nicely and detailed


----------



## xguntherc

Ya I'll probably eventually need more lens. but for now. just the 2 would be enough for a while.

and ya get the 400D would be good. or even the Nikon D60. I just got the D40 and so far it's a great camera.. It's amazing me more every time I use it.


----------



## Dragoon

Alright, thanks for the input









I'll try to get it for my birthday (a present to myself lol







) because right now I'm quite broke because I got myself a car two weeks ago


----------



## SDawg

Well after much delay I finally went out and got me a Canon EOS Rebel XSi with the kit lens (Canon EFS 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS). I am still a noob with it but I am excited about it and can't wait to take awesome pics like I see you guy posting. I could not afford a really good lens for starters but I will be getting more lenses as I can afford them. I already see the need for a good macro lens because I can't really get good close-up shots with the current one. I will be going camping this weekend and I hope to get some shots to post soon.


----------



## Dragoon

Here are a few of my favorite shots I took on my trip to england 2 weeks ago, I know the timestamp shouldn't be there









All taken with my trusty DSC-P100








Hope you like them.

















*f/2.8 1/200sec ISO-100 8mm Focal length* Chalice Well, Glastonbury @ 9:48 AM

This is a shot against the sun, I like to take these kind of photos, but the camera wont let me set the shutter speed faster than 1/1000 on manual...








*f/5.6 1/1000sec ISO-100 8mm* Glastonbury Abbey @ 2:19PM

I don't know how I didn't notice I shot this one with ISO-400... Another against the sun, I really love the overbright effect on the tree and its leaves.








*f/5.6 1/80sec ISO-400 8mm* Chalice Well, Glastonbury @ 4:21PM

Here's a night shot for a change, I love to take these as well (NO flash of course!!). Had to use ISO 400 since I didn't have a tripod
















*f/2.8 1/30sec ISO-400 8mm* The Gauntlet, Glastonbury @ 5:29 PM

And last, another night shot but this time I had where to place the camera
















*f/2.8 1sec ISO-100 8mm* Salisbury Chapel cloister @ 5:17 (already DST)

What you you guys think?


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dragoon*


I still need to know more about lens, I know that the 18mm-55mm is the focal length but to what does that translate to?

I was looking at these, what do you think?

*Canon EOS 350D* with 18-55 lens - Was €675, now on sale at €349 (less than half







)
*EOS 400D* with EF 18-55 lens - €449
*Nikon Reflex D60* with AFS DX15-55 lens - €499
*EOS 1000D* with 18-55 lens IS - €499

I'm not willing to drop more than €500 for a camera lol. Which one do you think it has the best price/quality ratio?











Whatever camera you get, don't rule out the possibility of getting at least one third party lens for it.

Most Canon/Nikon users will tell you that lenses are an investment, so it's worth getting branded lenses and paying the extra. While this is true enough for professionals, it's less true for amateurs and hobbyists. You could, for example, get one really good branded lens, which is no bad thing, but for the same money, you could of got two good third party lenses and have twice as much to be able to shoot well. In addition, in most cases, the results (i.e. the actual photographs) you get from third party, are indistinguishable from the results you get with branded lenses from Canon or Nikon.

For example, the two lenses I have for my Nikon are both third party and cost me about Â£685 including tax and shipping for both. If you compare their MTF figures with their Nikon branded equivalents, you'll find the third party lenses are either better, on a par with, or slightly below (like ~5% below) the Nikon's MTF figures depending on focal length and/or aperture. If I had bought the Nikon branded lenses, I would have had to pay about Â£1385 including tax and shipping. By going with third party, I saved my self Â£700 and the results I can get in terms of resolution and sharpness are utterly indistinguishable from the results I would have got if I had gone with Nikon branded lenses. Essentially, purely in terms of results (the photographs) the branded lenses are rarely, if ever, worth the extra money for an amateur or hobbyist photographer, imo.

In my case, the money I saved on lenses, meant I could go with a better body, that does everything I want, rather than having to sacrifice some features/performance in a lesser body, but with more expensive lenses.

The beauty of the DSLR system is the interchangeable lenses. It means that you can get a body separately. You don't have to have the kit lens. You can get pro level performance from a third party lens, for a fraction of the cost of the branded pro lenses.

It's up to you of course. Certainly there is nothing wrong with choosing branded lenses and most, if not all, will produce good results. To get the best proverbial "bang for buck" though, pro third party lenses are the best bet imo.

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## aznofazns

This thread is pretty ballin', sign me up: Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ20. The first shot is of few among thousands of lotus flowers in a certain lake in China, my country of birth. I didn't note the shutter speed or sensitivity, but I did the best I could in Manual mode. The second is a shot of a single lotus in the same location, but my camera was set to Macro mode with ISO 100.


----------



## mugan23

been out for a while i also sold my s700 and for the next few weeks until i get my cam i will be using my friends Sony a100, got to test it out this week and it was actually very nice here are some of the pics (bare in mind i haven,t been shooting and this is a new camera hehe 

























































here is the camera (i shook it a lil so u can't see my bad hair)


----------



## xguntherc

So 3rd party lens huh.. I might look into that.

What about 3rd party Batteries anyone. I've just got my D40, and it only came with 1 lens.. I was able to take about 400 picks over the first 2 days I had it and the battery still had 1 bar out of 3.. and then I charged it.

I only have 1 battery. they are $34.99 on amazon, or other places online. An actual Nikon branded N-L3 or whatever it is. I can't remember exactly. but the 3rd party ones are like $10-18.00 online, and on ebay. I was wondering if anyone uses them. the Nikon is 1000mv, I've found 3rd party ones at 1200mv. but not sure if they are "Really" better or not.

Please let me know if you've used any 3rd party ones. and where I can get Nikon ones.

Thanks!

p.s. those are great shots of your trip. I like the first one, but they are huge man. try to keep them a little smaller in the thread.. like 17" LCD size or so.. thats what I choose im imageshack


----------



## dr4gon

congrats mugan! welcome to the sony family!


----------



## By-Tor

I've been using a Fuji film s5000 for the past 4 years and it does a great job. Would like to grab a nice Digital SLR one day.


----------



## Dragoon

Quote:


Originally Posted by *xguntherc* 
p.s. those are great shots of your trip. I like the first one, but they are huge man. try to keep them a little smaller in the thread.. like 17" LCD size or so.. thats what I choose im imageshack

Eh lol







I forgot to do that when I uploaded. I'll make sure I do it next time I upload some photos


----------



## mugan23

i have been using a ponit and shoot for a while, only shooting with dslrs from friends so i don't have much expirience shooting macros with dslr lenses(which i just found out is rather hard without a macro lens). Does any one know what i can try to do to shoot lettering with this lens or would i need a new one.


----------



## tkl.hui

Indeed! welcome to the sony family







You're among friends.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *aznofazns* 

This thread is pretty ballin', sign me up: Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ20. The first shot is of few among thousands of lotus flowers in a certain lake in China, my country of birth. I didn't note the shutter speed or sensitivity, but I did the best I could in Manual mode. The second is a shot of a single lotus in the same location, but my camera was set to Macro mode with ISO 100.

Added and welcome! The lotus shots look great, got to love the Leica optics on Panasonic ps cameras. Please reduce the size of the images you post, it makes navigating the thread difficult when they're so large. Maximum of 600 x 800 please.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *xguntherc* 
So 3rd party lens huh.. I might look into that.

What about 3rd party Batteries anyone. I've just got my D40, and it only came with 1 lens.. I was able to take about 400 picks over the first 2 days I had it and the battery still had 1 bar out of 3.. and then I charged it.

I only have 1 battery. they are $34.99 on amazon, or other places online. An actual Nikon branded N-L3 or whatever it is. I can't remember exactly. but the 3rd party ones are like $10-18.00 online, and on ebay. I was wondering if anyone uses them. the Nikon is 1000mv, I've found 3rd party ones at 1200mv. but not sure if they are "Really" better or not.

Please let me know if you've used any 3rd party ones. and where I can get Nikon ones.

Thanks!

p.s. those are great shots of your trip. I like the first one, but they are huge man. try to keep them a little smaller in the thread.. like 17" LCD size or so.. thats what I choose im imageshack

Third-party lenses are worth looking into, although I prefer using Canon lenses myself. Here's a review of some third-party lenses for Nikon DSLRs:

http://www.dcresource.com/forums/sho...67&postcount=3

The brands to look for third-party are Tamron and Sigma. There are some really cheapy brands out there, like the ones you see at Radio Shack, so beware.

And I use third party batteries. I have one for my camera that gets as many shots as the factory battery.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Dragoon* 
Here are a few of my favorite shots I took on my trip to england 2 weeks ago, I know the timestamp shouldn't be there









All taken with my trusty DSC-P100








Hope you like them.








What you you guys think?



















Quote:


Originally Posted by *xguntherc* 

p.s. those are great shots of your trip. I like the first one, but they are huge man. try to keep them a little smaller in the thread.. like 17" LCD size or so.. thats what I choose im imageshack


Yes, please do keep your posted shots to a maximum of 600 x 800, makes them difficult to see and adds scroll bars to the page.

And you have a good eye for shots, you just need a better camera! The ISO 400 night shot shows, major noise. You should run it through Neat Image to remove some of the noise.

And about the "tree in front of the sun" shot, a fast shutter speed isn't the only thing to consider. I see from the EXIF that you had the aperture at f/5.6, which is fairly large. Reduce the aperture (increase the f number) as far as the camera will go next time and that will avoid over-exposures. You can also try an ND filter to dampen the light even more.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *By-Tor* 
I've been using a Fuji film s5000 for the past 4 years and it does a great job. Would like to grab a nice Digital SLR one day.

Go for it, you won't regret it. I had to put some PC upgrades on hold to get my current kit, but it was worth it.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mugan23* 
i have been using a ponit and shoot for a while, only shooting with dslrs from friends so i don't have much expirience shooting macros with dslr lenses(which i just found out is rather hard without a macro lens). Does any one know what i can try to do to shoot lettering with this lens or would i need a new one.

How small is the lettering? You can get decent macro shots out of a non-macro lens (just not as close as with a macro lens), just set the lens to manual focus and turn the focus ring all the way to the "macro" range (usually indicated on the lens), and then just try to find the distance where the image is focused. Zoom lenses typically have a minimum focus distance of about 18-20" or so, so zoom all the way in to get max magnification.


----------



## PioNYC

I guess I have to join the club!

*Advanced Compacts*:
Canon G6
2 x Canon G3

*Bodies*
2 x Canon 20D
Canon 1DMk2

*EF Lenses*
50 mm 1.4
50 mm 1.8
85 mm 1.8
17-40 mm L
24-70 mm L
70-200 mm L f/4
70-200 mm L f/2.8

*Manual Lenses * for use with Canon dSLR's with M42 Adapter
16 mm Zenitar
50 mm Industar 
50 mm Volna
50 mm macro-Takumar
50 mm Takumar
50 mm Rikenon
85 mm Jupiter 9
105 mm Soligor
135 mm Carl Zeiss Jena
200 mm Vivitar Series 1
and some other lenses that I have not used in a while

*Film Bodies*
Leica IIIG
Leica M3
Nikon F2 Photomic
Canon F1


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *PioNYC*


I guess I have to join the club!

*Advanced Compacts*:
Canon G6
2 x Canon G3

*Bodies*
2 x Canon 20D
Canon 1DMk2

*EF Lenses*
50 mm 1.4
50 mm 1.8
85 mm 1.8
17-40 mm L
24-70 mm L
70-200 mm L f/4
70-200 mm L f/2.8

*Manual Lenses * for use with Canon dSLR's with M42 Adapter
16 mm Zenitar
50 mm Industar 
50 mm Volna
50 mm macro-Takumar
50 mm Takumar
50 mm Rikenon
85 mm Jupiter 9
105 mm Soligor
135 mm Carl Zeiss Jena
200 mm Vivitar Series 1
and some other lenses that I have not used in a while

*Film Bodies*
Leica IIIG
Leica M3
Nikon F2 Photomic
Canon F1


Ok, added! Quite a collection you have there. Out of curiosity, why do you have two G3s and two 20Ds? How well do those non-Canon mount lenses work? Is there any additional cropping?


----------



## mugan23

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


How small is the lettering? You can get decent macro shots out of a non-macro lens (just not as close as with a macro lens), just set the lens to manual focus and turn the focus ring all the way to the "macro" range (usually indicated on the lens), and then just try to find the distance where the image is focused. Zoom lenses typically have a minimum focus distance of about 18-20" or so, so zoom all the way in to get max magnification.


i am tiring to take a pic of a p4 so i can sell it and i want the specs to show on the proc. but i cant seem to even focus on it up close


----------



## PioNYC

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Ok, added! Quite a collection you have there. Out of curiosity, why do you have two G3s and two 20Ds? How well do those non-Canon mount lenses work? Is there any additional cropping?

Photography is a serious hobby of mine, and I earn some money from it sometimes







I love the G cameras, they are excellent for stealthy street photography. Having several on hand takes care of the slow writing problem inherent in compact cameras - I can shoot with one, and use the other to shoot another photo while the first one records the RAW file. Besides, I plan to convert one of the G3's for dedicated IR photography, a project that I have been putting off for quite some time now.

About the multiple dSLR bodies, I like having them so that I don't have to switch lenses all the time. Having 3 bodies at one time gets tiring though









About the MF (Manual Focus) lenses, there are no additional cropping with the Canon bodies apart from the inherent one (1.6 for the 20D, and 1.3 for the 1D series). I primarily use them with one of 20D's which is fitted with a Haoda split focus screen. These lenses are purely mechanical with no electronic innards, and as such one has to focus them manually and the split screen helps a lot. These days there is an MF lens adapter with focus confirm electronics but I haven't tried that out yet. Exposure with these lenses is determined through Av mode and stopped down metering. These lenses are relatively inexpensive, yet most of them have excellent optics. There are a lot of great lenses made for the popular Pentax M42 screw mount and they can be had for cheap. All you need is an M42 to EF mount adapter (around $15 for a good one), a split focusing screen ($75 to $150) and the M42 mount lens of your choice. A good starter lens would be the Takumar 50mm 1.4, which can be had for around $30. It has a heavy quality tank-like build and superb optics, and did I mention that the max aperture is 1.4?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *PioNYC* 
Photography is a serious hobby of mine, and I earn some money from it sometimes







I love the G cameras, they are excellent for stealthy street photography. Having several on hand takes care of the slow writing problem inherent in compact cameras - I can shoot with one, and use the other to shoot another photo while the first one records the RAW file. Besides, I plan to convert one of the G3's for dedicated IR photography, a project that I have been putting off for quite some time now.

About the multiple dSLR bodies, I like having them so that I don't have to switch lenses all the time. Having 3 bodies at one time gets tiring though









About the MF (Manual Focus) lenses, there are no additional cropping with the Canon bodies apart from the inherent one (1.6 for the 20D, and 1.3 for the 1D series). I primarily use them with one of 20D's which is fitted with a Haoda split focus screen. These lenses are purely mechanical with no electronic innards, and as such one has to focus them manually and the split screen helps a lot. These days there is an MF lens adapter with focus confirm electronics but I haven't tried that out yet. Exposure with these lenses is determined through Av mode and stopped down metering. These lenses are relatively inexpensive, yet most of them have excellent optics. There are a lot of great lenses made for the popular Pentax M42 screw mount and they can be had for cheap. All you need is an M42 to EF mount adapter (around $15 for a good one), a split focusing screen ($75 to $150) and the M42 mount lens of your choice. A good starter lens would be the Takumar 50mm 1.4, which can be had for around $30. It has a heavy quality tank-like build and superb optics, and did I mention that the max aperture is 1.4?









Are there split focusing screens for modern AF lenses? I have a Nikon F3 that my father used, and its lenses have split focus screens, something that I could use even with my AF lenses.

And LOL about having multiple DSLR bodies, reminds me of a Paparazzo. I used to carry around a Canon SD1000 around for the same reason that you do, for those spur of the moment candids. And I know how slow point-and-shoot cameras record RAW files; I had a Nikon CoolPix 5700 that would take nearly a minute to record RAW shots.


----------



## Dragoon

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Yes, please do keep your posted shots to a maximum of 600 x 800, makes them difficult to see and adds scroll bars to the page.

And you have a good eye for shots, you just need a better camera! The ISO 400 night shot shows, major noise. You should run it through Neat Image to remove some of the noise.

And about the "tree in front of the sun" shot, a fast shutter speed isn't the only thing to consider. I see from the EXIF that you had the aperture at f/5.6, which is fairly large. Reduce the aperture (increase the f number) as far as the camera will go next time and that will avoid over-exposures. You can also try an ND filter to dampen the light even more.

Okay, I resized the photos.

The first night photo I shot, I had to use ISO-400, I had to take the shot with the camera supported by the entrace gate to the Gauntlet.

The "tree infront of the sun" shot, I meant it to have over exposure. I woud've used a smaller aperture, but the camera wouldn't let me anything higher than f/5.6, it would if I had zoomed in.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dragoon*


Okay, I resized the photos.

The first night photo I shot, I had to use ISO-400, I had to take the shot with the camera supported by the entrace gate to the Gauntlet.

The "tree infront of the sun" shot, I meant it to have over exposure. I woud've used a smaller aperture, but the camera wouldn't let me anything higher than f/5.6, it would if I had zoomed in.


Yeah, I've done some odd things to find good support for my camera as well. My girlfriend is the perfect height for me to support the camera on her shoulder.


----------



## coffeejunky

How come nobody on here noticed my thread







-
http://www.overclock.net/suggestions...ub-forums.html
You can add me in a few weeks







- No camera worth mentioning really yet, lol. (Benq DC-C25 - cheap POC)


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *coffeejunky*


How come nobody on here noticed my thread







-
http://www.overclock.net/suggestions...ub-forums.html
You can add me in a few weeks







- No camera worth mentioning really yet, lol. (Benq DC-C25 - cheap POC)


Well coffee, admin did just recently make this new Photgraphy section in the forum, so that part of your suggestion was followed. But having an MP3/portable audio section may be warranted as well.

So what camera are you getting?


----------



## pow3rtr1p

Can I be added, plz? I use the following

Film Cameras

Minolta X-700 w/ 50mm and 135mm Vivitar Lenses
Holga 120 Standard (for Black and White)
Lomography Color Flash Holga

I also have a non-functioning XG-M. It feels super-sturdy, and looks better, IMHO, than the X-700, but it doesn't ave some of the niftier features, so whatever.


----------



## coffeejunky

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Well coffee, admin did just recently make this new Photgraphy section in the forum, so that part of your suggestion was followed. But having an MP3/portable audio section may be warranted as well.

So what camera are you getting?


I didn't know there was a photography section in 'off topic'







- I always posted in pheripherals.
Well, only a cheap pocketable P&S. It will be a Sony W120 - I got a good deal on it. I can always use my dads DSLR (Canon EOS-350D) as thats available whenever I need it. 
I'll try and find some of my 35mm snaps later.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *pow3rtr1p* 
Can I be added, plz? I use the following

Film Cameras

Minolta X-700 w/ 50mm and 135mm Vivitar Lenses
Holga 120 Standard (for Black and White)
Lomography Color Flash Holga

I also have a non-functioning XG-M. It feels super-sturdy, and looks better, IMHO, than the X-700, but it doesn't ave some of the niftier features, so whatever.

Added and welcome! Nice to see that we're getting more 35mm film shooters. If have some scans from that Minolta camera, do post them!


----------



## tkl.hui

O my im not even on the lists yet







Anyways, here's what I got.

Sony Alpha A200 w/ 18-70 kit lens
Minolta 70-210 F4 "beercan" lens


----------



## pow3rtr1p

Here are a couple scans from prints I made with negatives from my Minolta.

ISO 400 Tri-X Film Push-Processed to ISO 1600
1/125 Shutter
f4 Aperature
Printed on Ilford Multigrade IV RC Glossy Paper
Ilford #3.5 Contrast Filter









ISO 400 Tri-X Film
1/60 Shutter (w/ Flash)
f8 Aperature
Ilford Multigrade IV RC Glossy Paper
Ilford #2 Conrast Filter









These are the 2 best prints I have to work with right now. I'll post more as I make them.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *pow3rtr1p* 
Here are a couple scans from prints I made with negatives from my Minolta.

ISO 400 Tri-X Film Push-Processed to ISO 1600
1/125 Shutter
f4 Aperature
Printed on Ilford Multigrade IV RC Glossy Paper
Ilford #3.5 Contrast Filter

ISO 400 Tri-X Film
1/60 Shutter (w/ Flash)
f8 Aperature
Ilford Multigrade IV RC Glossy Paper
Ilford #2 Conrast Filter

These are the 2 best prints I have to work with right now. I'll post more as I make them.









Nice, very urban and dark, creates the mood. You make me want to get my film SLR out now! I respect the ability to take good film shots, it requires profound knowledge of apertures and shutter speeds, kind of like shooting in the dark when compared to digital.


----------



## xguntherc

Ya, those are great shots.

Hey everyone. what do you all think about Sigma lenses. I've heard they and Tamron are the main 3rd party ones worth getting. I heard that from people here also. So I figured I'd post something I came across the other night. I've heard from a few places some bad things about the Sigma Lens these days. I'm sure they have some decent lenses but I've heard there ones that go to 300mm and beyond are having major issues. Anyone care to read what I did.. read this. It changed my mind and I'm now getting a nikkor lens for my D40, instead of a Sigma.

http://www.lensrentals.com/news/2008...the-sigma-saga


----------



## christian_piper

Here is my first shot edited in Lightroom! I think it came out nicely.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *xguntherc*


Ya, those are great shots.

Hey everyone. what do you all think about Sigma lenses. I've heard they and Tamron are the main 3rd party ones worth getting. I heard that from people here also. So I figured I'd post something I came across the other night. I've heard from a few places some bad things about the Sigma Lens these days. I'm sure they have some decent lenses but I've heard there ones that go to 300mm and beyond are having major issues. Anyone care to read what I did.. read this. It changed my mind and I'm now getting a nikkor lens for my D40, instead of a Sigma.

http://www.lensrentals.com/news/2008...the-sigma-saga


I only have brand lenses, never tried a third-party. Highly Annoyed has Tamron lenses only for his D300 and they produce nice shots.


----------



## xguntherc

Ya I think I'll stick to Nikon/Nikkor, and maybe get a Tamron.

and piper.. Nice colors in that. looks great. looks like I need to learn lightroom more.


----------



## CRZYSTNG

Just picked up a Nikon coolpix S51. Needed something a bit more compact and easy to travel with. Looks halfway decent so far for such a compact little thing.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *CRZYSTNG*


Just picked up a Nikon coolpix S51. Needed something a bit more compact and easy to travel with. Looks halfway decent so far for such a compact little thing.


I've had a few of the Nikon Coolpix Sxx series (S5, S7, S7c) they're a capable line. The wireless transfer feature that some of them have was pretty useful when it felt like working.

Compact and easy to travel with - yes! I had a Coolpix S5 a couple of years ago that I left on a train in Wales.







That's why I like having a large camera now - much easier to notice if it's gone.


----------



## CRZYSTNG

haha, at least I don't feel so bad now about leaving behind a few older Canons. Mom decided to take it with her for the week so i'll have to play with it later on and see if I am going to actually keep that or go with something a little higher priced and little better quality like the SD870.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

well today i pulled the trigger and ordered me a new lens.










just have to wait for it to come in now.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie*


well today i pulled the trigger and ordered me a new lens.










just have to wait for it to come in now.


Nice, I'm in need of a wide angle zoom myself, but Canon's 10-22mm is so pricey.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

same as what i paid for mine in canada








looking at a speed light next, then possibly a body upgrade down the road.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie* 
same as what i paid for mine in canada








looking at a speed light next, then possibly a body upgrade down the road.

Which body? You have a D70 right now, correct?

I was drooling over the 50D for a bit, but lately have decided that a 40D is much better for me.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

D70s for the time being, cant see upgrading for some time, when i do probably go all out for a d300.


----------



## christian_piper

It snowed yesterday- so I HAD to pop outside and take a couple shots.....


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *christian_piper*


It snowed yesterday- so I HAD to pop outside and take a couple shots.....


No EXIF?









Nice shot though, I can't wait for a good snow, but it takes bloody ages for it to snow down here, usually not till January.


----------



## christian_piper

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


No EXIF?









Nice shot though, I can't wait for a good snow, but it takes bloody ages for it to snow down here, usually not till January.


Thanks!

And whoops... that'd be due to flickr. Here ya go:
Camera: Nikon D60
Exposure: 5 sec (5)
Aperture: f/5.6
Focal Length: 200 mm
ISO Speed: 100
Exposure Bias: 0/6 EV

(Was taken with the Nikon 55-200vr)


----------



## BULLATTACK

Sign me up
Canon 40D
Canon EF 28-300 f:/3.5-5.6 IS USM 
Canon 580EX II


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *BULLATTACK*


Sign me up
Canon 40D
Canon EF 28-300 f:/3.5-5.6 IS USM 
Canon 580EX II


Added and welcome!


----------



## xguntherc

wow Piper. thats a great shot. I really like it.

Were you and the Camera covered at least?


----------



## Mr. Mojo

Bleh, this thread makes me feel like a noob again. I have a Canon Powershot A610, and I thought I was doing good by figuring out how to work the macro setting and flash.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mr. Mojo* 
Bleh, this thread makes me feel like a noob again. I have a Canon Powershot A610, and I thought I was doing good by figuring out how to work the macro setting and flash.

LOL, well photography isn't sort of this innate "language" like computer literacy is for the younger generations, everyone has a learning curve


----------



## SDawg

Can you add me to the member list? I posted a while back but was missed somehow. I have a Canon EOS Rebel XSi with the Canon EFS 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS.

http://www.overclock.net/photography...ml#post4861288


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *SDawg*


Can you add me to the member list? I posted a while back but was missed somehow. I have a Canon EOS Rebel XSi with the Canon EFS 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS.

http://www.overclock.net/photography...ml#post4861288


No problem, added!


----------



## SoBe8503

Hey all, I'm starting to shop around for a new lens for my Nikon D60. I want something that has a pretty decent zoom. I like taking sunset and moon pix, but i'm pretty limited with the stock lens. Any suggestions? Where to buy would be helpful too. Thanx!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *SoBe8503* 
Hey all, I'm starting to shop around for a new lens for my Nikon D60. I want something that has a pretty decent zoom. I like taking sunset and moon pix, but i'm pretty limited with the stock lens. Any suggestions? Where to buy would be helpful too. Thanx!

What's your budget? The Nikon 55-200mm is fairly popular, inexpensive and has a versatile focal range. But if you can swing it, the 18-200mm VR is even better, highly rated.

As for where to buy, look at this site's shopping section:

http://www.dcresource.com/shopping/

They only list the best online camera gear resellers like B&H, Abe's of Maine, etc.

Newegg has a decent selection too.


----------



## christian_piper

Quote:


Originally Posted by *xguntherc* 
wow Piper. thats a great shot. I really like it.

Were you and the Camera covered at least?

Thanks!!!

And.. um.. neither







But it wasn't snowing TOO hard... hardly and water ended up on the camera. And what did, I wiped off


----------



## xguntherc

lol oh ok. I c.

cool cool to bad we don't get snow in vegas. or I'd take something cool like that. Maybe the next time it rains.

I live in the middle of the big city of las Vegas. There's nothing to exiting around my area to take pics of. but one of these days I'll drive down to the strip and take some good pics at night or something now I know how to use the shutter speeds.


----------



## SoBe8503

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


What's your budget? The Nikon 55-200mm is fairly popular, inexpensive and has a versatile focal range. But if you can swing it, the 18-200mm VR is even better, highly rated.

As for where to buy, look at this site's shopping section:

http://www.dcresource.com/shopping/

They only list the best online camera gear resellers like B&H, Abe's of Maine, etc.

Newegg has a decent selection too.


Sweetness. There's a couple different one's; I assume the Nikkor is the best choice?

http://dcresource.pricegrabber.com/s...oduct/sv=title

The the 18-200mm VR looks sexy, but I'd rather save for that than miss a car payment







.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *SoBe8503*


Sweetness. There's a couple different one's; I assume the Nikkor is the best choice?

http://dcresource.pricegrabber.com/s...oduct/sv=title

The the 18-200mm VR looks sexy, but I'd rather save for that than miss a car payment







.


It's almost the only choice, the Nikkor group constitutes most of their newer lenses.


----------



## Marin

I might build a lightbox soon for hardware pics. But until then, my desktop is fine for smaller items.

First pic goes off the desk a little, but that can be fixed with a little cropping:


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
I might build a lightbox soon for hardware pics. But until then, my desktop is fine for smaller items.

First pic goes off the desk a little, but that can be fixed with a little cropping:


The pictures are nicely composed, but you might want to close the aperture more so that all of the modules are in the focus area (or if you're bold enough you can try focus stacking). What aperture did you shoot these with?


----------



## tkl.hui

Hey guys, haven't posted in a while so I thought I'd share some from this morning. Its a couple of the first snow here in Toronto. All taken just on my street. Hoping to have time this weekend to go out and get some more if its snows more


----------



## Mootsfox

I just bought a D60!

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...m=360101185520

$749.99 - $187.50 Live Search Cashback - $74.99 ebay coupon = $487.50


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

nice moots, you will be happy with that for sure


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


I just bought a D60!

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...m=360101185520

$749.99 - $187.50 Live Search Cashback - $74.99 ebay coupon = $487.50










Wowo, nice deal! If only I could find a similar deal for a 40D..


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


The pictures are nicely composed, but you might want to close the aperture more so that all of the modules are in the focus area (or if you're bold enough you can try focus stacking). What aperture did you shoot these with?


Here the settings: http://flickr.com/photos/[email protected]

And I meant to have only focus on one part. It looks better than having the whole stick in focus.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Wowo, nice deal! If only I could find a similar deal for a 40D..


Oh, I checked my price sheet. It's $825 for the body. Hardly a deal, sorry









I'm glad I didn't buy the Nikon through work though, it would have been $170 more expensive. Thanks Microsoft


----------



## coffeejunky

Quote:



Originally Posted by *xguntherc*


lol oh ok. I c.

cool cool to bad we don't get snow in vegas. or I'd take something cool like that. Maybe the next time it rains.

I live in the middle of the big city of las Vegas. There's nothing to exiting around my area to take pics of. but one of these days I'll drive down to the strip and take some good pics at night or something now I know how to use the shutter speeds.


Theres loads of cool stuff to take pics of in Vegas.
Heres some pics of mine (both taken with a 350D) -


----------



## SoBe8503

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


I just bought a D60!

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...m=360101185520

$749.99 - $187.50 Live Search Cashback - $74.99 ebay coupon = $487.50










I got one a few months ago. I'm loving it. Now I'm just shopping for a new lens. I think I found a 55-200 mm I like.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *xguntherc*


lol oh ok. I c.

cool cool to bad we don't get snow in vegas. or I'd take something cool like that. Maybe the next time it rains.

I live in the middle of the big city of las Vegas. There's nothing to exiting around my area to take pics of. but one of these days I'll drive down to the strip and take some good pics at night or something now I know how to use the shutter speeds.


Oh, but you're in the desert - get out there and take some desert shots! I wish I were close enough to a desert, because if you get out far away enough from city lights, deserts off the best view of the night sky, good for doing really long bulb exposures.


----------



## xguntherc

yes.. your very right about the desert. I'm actually about 15 mins from the strip. and the desert is a little farther than that. cuz I'm in the middle of the city. and then I can drive for about 40 mins and be in some pine tree's and such up at a higher altitude. and I know there's good stuff to take pics of here. but I work every morning. and I get off right as it's already gone dark. so my only chance would be taking a night photo.. and thats ok also. but I want some nice ones. I need to find a ledge and get the strip with a 20 second exposure or something of that sort.

and coffeejunky. whats that first picture. Also when you live in Vegas, it's not as exiting as you'd think. and next time I go to the old strip, freemont street. I'll get some good photo's like that one you have there.

Also Sobe. I'd recommend you get that 55-200mm lens. but make sure you spend to 30-50 extra and get the VR model. the Vibration reduction really helps. it's a great lens. it was my first purchase after my camera. and I use it daily!


----------



## coffeejunky

Quote:



Originally Posted by *xguntherc*


yes.. your very right about the desert. I'm actually about 15 mins from the strip. and the desert is a little farther than that. cuz I'm in the middle of the city. and then I can drive for about 40 mins and be in some pine tree's and such up at a higher altitude. and I know there's good stuff to take pics of here. but I work every morning. and I get off right as it's already gone dark. so my only chance would be taking a night photo.. and thats ok also. but I want some nice ones. I need to find a ledge and get the strip with a 20 second exposure or something of that sort.

and coffeejunky. whats that first picture. Also when you live in Vegas, it's not as exiting as you'd think. and next time I go to the old strip, freemont street. I'll get some good photo's like that one you have there.

Also Sobe. I'd recommend you get that 55-200mm lens. but make sure you spend to 30-50 extra and get the VR model. the Vibration reduction really helps. it's a great lens. it was my first purchase after my camera. and I use it daily!


The first pic was the glass flower ceiling in the Bellagio hotel. I was only there 2 days so I didn't manage to take as many pics as I may have wanted. Also, glad I've inspired you to take some local pics


----------



## christian_piper

Quote:


Originally Posted by *xguntherc* 

Also Sobe. I'd recommend you get that 55-200mm lens. but make sure you spend to 30-50 extra and get the VR model. the Vibration reduction really helps. it's a great lens. it was my first purchase after my camera. and I use it daily!

Agreed! I also read the VR version is optically better.... And this thing in low light, since it is fairly slow speed, you WILL need to use VR in low light handheld... and it works quite well.

And its cheap!


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *xguntherc*


yes.. your very right about the desert. I'm actually about 15 mins from the strip. and the desert is a little farther than that. cuz I'm in the middle of the city. and then I can drive for about 40 mins and be in some pine tree's and such up at a higher altitude. and I know there's good stuff to take pics of here. but I work every morning. and I get off right as it's already gone dark. so my only chance would be taking a night photo.. and thats ok also. but I want some nice ones. I need to find a ledge and get the strip with a 20 second exposure or something of that sort.

and coffeejunky. whats that first picture. Also when you live in Vegas, it's not as exiting as you'd think. and next time I go to the old strip, freemont street. I'll get some good photo's like that one you have there.

Also Sobe. I'd recommend you get that 55-200mm lens. but make sure you spend to 30-50 extra and get the VR model. the Vibration reduction really helps. it's a great lens. it was my first purchase after my camera. and I use it daily!


Night photos are a lot of fun and you can do a ton of neat stuff with long exposures. Try it out


----------



## xguntherc

yea moots. I'll be trying those soon.

Also I'm going to Utah for Turkey day, leaving tomorrow after work. so will be offline for a few days. (I NEEEEED a laptop, thats next on the list. nothing extreme. just something decent for an enthusiast like me. and that means a good one. lol. but I'm going to take some good shots of the desert, and Zions if we go, and a lake I'll be heading out to. So hopefully I'll get some good stuff to post.

Also question to anyone that's used them before. I was on ebay and I saw and purchased a actual Multilayer, scratch resistant Screen protector for my D40, it was just some no name brand. but it's a nice LCD screen protector, thats removable without leaving residue, and it's laser cut for my actual camera. I was wondering if anyone has actually used anything like that on there DSLR camera? is it even needed. or am I just being to worried with my new item? I like the idea of protecting it, and removing the cover if ever needed. but it's sort of thick and I'm not sure I'll like the lip it leaves or the look of it. So I was wondering what others thoughts are about this, and if anyone else has one.

thanks!


----------



## Clinic

I'm sorry, but my god that dog looks evil. =P

Well, I've been curious about photography ever since the beginning of high school (7 years ago now?) and looking through all 38 pages of this thread has pushed me over the edge.

I think I'm going to be seeing a Nikon D40 in my future. What with my current asperations (Army Helicopter Pilot) I'm thinking I'll have plenty to shoot. =P

Oh, a quick thing: It was interesting watching Mugan23 advance in his level of ability photowise in such a short time. Definately come a long way! Good work!


----------



## coffeejunky

Quote:


Originally Posted by *xguntherc* 
yea moots. I'll be trying those soon.

Also I'm going to Utah for Turkey day, leaving tomorrow after work. so will be offline for a few days. (I NEEEEED a laptop, thats next on the list. nothing extreme. just something decent for an enthusiast like me. and that means a good one. lol. but I'm going to take some good shots of the desert, and Zions if we go, and a lake I'll be heading out to. So hopefully I'll get some good stuff to post.

Also question to anyone that's used them before. I was on ebay and I saw and purchased a actual Multilayer, scratch resistant Screen protector for my D40, it was just some no name brand. but it's a nice LCD screen protector, thats removable without leaving residue, and it's laser cut for my actual camera. I was wondering if anyone has actually used anything like that on there DSLR camera? is it even needed. or am I just being to worried with my new item? I like the idea of protecting it, and removing the cover if ever needed. but it's sort of thick and I'm not sure I'll like the lip it leaves or the look of it. So I was wondering what others thoughts are about this, and if anyone else has one.

thanks!

I just invested in a rather pricy eXim screen protector for my phone -
http://www.pda-now.com/
I'm fairly impressed with it...It seems tough and durable nad can be washed and replaced. Colour reproduction is good, but it is somewhat more glossy than the screen itself so you may have issues with glare. They are a PITA to install, any teeny scratch or bit of lint will show through or create a bubble...but a bit of patience can help.
I'm a bit anal about having scratches on anything...so its a worthy investment for me.


----------



## tkl.hui

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Clinic*











I'm sorry, but my god that dog looks evil. =P

Well, I've been curious about photography ever since the beginning of high school (7 years ago now?) and looking through all 38 pages of this thread has pushed me over the edge.

I think I'm going to be seeing a Nikon D40 in my future. What with my current asperations (Army Helicopter Pilot) I'm thinking I'll have plenty to shoot. =P

Oh, a quick thing: It was interesting watching Mugan23 advance in his level of ability photowise in such a short time. Definately come a long way! Good work!


Hes not evil







Hes the cutest thing I've ever had


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *xguntherc*


yea moots. I'll be trying those soon.

Also I'm going to Utah for Turkey day, leaving tomorrow after work. so will be offline for a few days. (I NEEEEED a laptop, thats next on the list. nothing extreme. just something decent for an enthusiast like me. and that means a good one. lol. but I'm going to take some good shots of the desert, and Zions if we go, and a lake I'll be heading out to. So hopefully I'll get some good stuff to post.

Also question to anyone that's used them before. I was on ebay and I saw and purchased a actual Multilayer, scratch resistant Screen protector for my D40, it was just some no name brand. but it's a nice LCD screen protector, thats removable without leaving residue, and it's laser cut for my actual camera. I was wondering if anyone has actually used anything like that on there DSLR camera? is it even needed. or am I just being to worried with my new item? I like the idea of protecting it, and removing the cover if ever needed. but it's sort of thick and I'm not sure I'll like the lip it leaves or the look of it. So I was wondering what others thoughts are about this, and if anyone else has one.

thanks!


I've used them, and in my experience they always come off and show air bubbles. I don't bother with them anymore, and I don't have any scratches. If you think about how a DSLR is handled, the LCD screen shouldn't touch any hard surfaces; it's either in your hand or in a camera bag. However the pre-cut sheets you are describing are a good idea, because having to cut a precisely sized little square of material for a screen is a pita.


----------



## Marin

Surprised this thread hasn't been jumped upon yet: http://www.overclock.net/photography...hoto-book.html


----------



## SoBe8503

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Surprised this thread hasn't been jumped upon yet: http://www.overclock.net/photography...hoto-book.html

Holy crap thanx for posting that lol. I have some work to do


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Surprised this thread hasn't been jumped upon yet: http://www.overclock.net/photography...hoto-book.html

Yeah, I definitely saw it, but my rig is moth-balled at the moment, so I will have to dig it out first. Plus I need to think of a good macro subject.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

hmm, im not good at macro shots, but ill see what i can whip up


----------



## xguntherc

Well it's not a ghetto sticker, or plastic. It's like an actual hard piece of Acrylic or something of that sort. and has already been cut. So there shouldn't be bubbles and weird things like that. Maybe I'll try it out, and see what I think.

Thanks for the input!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *xguntherc* 
Well it's not a ghetto sticker, or plastic. It's like an actual hard piece of Acrylic or something of that sort. and has already been cut. So there shouldn't be bubbles and weird things like that. Maybe I'll try it out, and see what I think.

Thanks for the input!

Ok, I didn't know it was that kind. Never tried one of the acrylic ones. What brand is the one you're bidding on?


----------



## coffeejunky

I think he means this sort -
http://www.dealextreme.com/details.dx/sku.13091
They are very thin glass...never used them.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

the d40 and canon models dont come with screen protectors?
my d70s came with
http://www.sourcingmap.com/lcd-monit...70-p-3726.html
and they have them available for most nikon models, or so i thought.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie*


the d40 and canon models dont come with screen protectors?
my d70s came with 
http://www.sourcingmap.com/lcd-monit...70-p-3726.html
and they have them available for most nikon models, or so i thought.


Mine didn't come with one.


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

I looked out of my home's front door this morning at around 06:30 and saw this sky, so I walked down to the beach and took a few shots.










17mm, F8, ISO200, 3 Sec, Tripod.

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## Mootsfox

I got my Nikon D60 yesterday and have been playing around with it. I tried to take some night photos, but it was freezing and worse, windy, so none of my long exposure shots came out looking ok.


----------



## SoBe8503

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


I got my Nikon D60 yesterday and have been playing around with it. I tried to take some night photos, but it was freezing and worse, windy, so none of my long exposure shots came out looking ok.


Did you get the wireless remote?


----------



## Mootsfox

I'm looking for the ML-L3 right now! The local camera shoppes have it for $30, Walmart has it online (maybe in store too?) for $20 and Amazon has it for $15, but shipping would take weeks.


----------



## SoBe8503

I got mine at wolf camera (Not sure if they are just local or not). It was like $20. Seems like a lot, but I use that more than the actual shutter button. Worth the price in my opinion.


----------



## christian_piper

Quote:


Originally Posted by *SoBe8503* 
I got mine at wolf camera (Not sure if they are just local or not). It was like $20. Seems like a lot, but I use that more than the actual shutter button. Worth the price in my opinion.

http://cgi.ebay.com/Remote-Control-f...3A1|240%3A1318

^$4 off of ebay. Free shipping... I bought a $6 one a while back... and LOVE it. For $4- worth a try.

Oh Moots- set it to the self timer, for just 3 seconds or so.... annoying, but removes the shake your hand gives it. Should work till you get a remote.


----------



## endo

Kodak Z710. woot!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Hey all, I'm selling my XTi, check out my for sale link below. I'd like to sell it before Christmas so PM me if interested!

Sorry for the shameless promotion, just took a leap an got 40D, so I need to recoop


----------



## Unstableiser

Hiya








I finally stepped into the realms of 'proper photography' and got myself an actual camera. It's only a noobish thing I guess but It fits me well in that case








I hope it will help me to gain some actual talent!

Here it is:










Yay, no more camera-phones!
Any advice on how best to use it will be appreciated


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Unstableiser*


Hiya








I finally stepped into the realms of 'proper photography' and got myself an actual camera. It's only a noobish thing I guess but It fits me well in that case








I hope it will help me to gain some actual talent!

Here it is:










Yay, no more camera-phones! 
Any advice on how best to use it will be appreciated










Nice buy. Biggest advice I can give is to keep the ISO low and start learning how to shoot manually.


----------



## Unstableiser

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Nice buy. Biggest advice I can give is to keep the ISO low and start learning how to shoot manually.


Yeah that's what I got it for







I've always tried for low ISO too and I've heard this camera can suffer from noise anything above 400. I hope it is a good buy, cost me $400


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Unstableiser*


Yeah that's what I got it for







I've always tried for low ISO too and I've heard this camera can suffer from noise anything above 400. I hope it is a good buy, cost me $400










Well, any point & shoot camera (i.e., non-DSLR) suffers from high ISO noise, that's what happens with a small sensor with a high pixel density. But I think you'll really like that cam., Canon is tops for the p&s market.


----------



## Unstableiser

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Well, any point & shoot camera (i.e., non-DSLR) suffers from high ISO noise, that's what happens with a small sensor with a high pixel density. But I think you'll really like that cam., Canon is tops for the p&s market.


I do love it









it drains the batteries fast though









Couple of random pics I made, playing with the settings, as I should


















I went and got a cheap(ish) stand


----------



## mugan23

hey guys need some help picking a new lens for the sony, i need a lens thats is just as good as my current one (zoom 70mm and pretty nice wide angle) but i need it to macro. I know that macro n wide angle might not go together but i just needed to macro my proc so i can sell and this lens can't even get to the lettering, i have tried every thing


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mugan23* 
hey guys need some help picking a new lens for the sony, i need a lens thats is just as good as my current one (zoom 70mm and pretty nice wide angle) but i need it to macro. I know that macro n wide angle might not go together but i just needed to macro my proc so i can sell and this lens can't even get to the lettering, i have tried every thing























You should check out some Tamron lenses mugan. They make lenses with impressive focal ranges that also have macro capabilities. I can think of a few off hand, like the 18-200mm, 28-70mm, etc. but most of the ones I've seen are for Canon and Nikon systems, though they do make Sony mounts.

But you should be able to get the lettering on a CPU heat spreader to come out with a regular zoom. First off, don't get closer than about 18"; next set the focal length to full telephoto. Use a tripod if necessary, esp. at high zoom where it becomes difficult to take clear hand held shots. Once you have your shot, crop it in close, do some sharpening if necessary, and it should be legible. I've gotten lettering to come out at 135mm and less


----------



## mugan23

that actually worked but i never had to do that much work to macro with my s700 but i guess its gonna take time to figure out this sony but i think am gonna go got a macro lens because i don't see any insects or animals waiting that long for me to shoot hehe


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mugan23*


that actually worked but i never had to do that much work to macro with my s700 but i guess its gonna take time to figure out this sony but i think am gonna go got a macro lens because i don't see any insects or animals waiting that long for me to shoot hehe


That's the drawback of DSLR: there really isn't an all purpose lens. For specific types of shooting - portraits, macros, wildlife, etc. - you need a specific kind of lens. Many DSLR lenses can multitask when it comes to wildlife, portraits, etc., but the biggest limiting factor for them is macro shooting. Yes, with just about any point and shoot camera, you can take very close macros mere centimeters away. But if you want to get that close with a DSLR, you need an actual macro lens. However, macro lenses aren't just for macros - they make great portrait and lowlight/interior lenses as well owing to their wide apertures.


----------



## Marin

Posted this in the other thread, took this over thanksgiving weekend after it snowed.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Decent macro, marin!


----------



## Marin

Thanks, did this with my kit lens. Just cropped it a little and it worked out.

Another picture but I think I overdid the sunset at the bottom.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Thanks, did this with my kit lens. Just cropped it a little and it worked out.

Another picture but I think I overdid the sunset at the bottom.
[/IMG]


Yeah it's fuzzy at the bottom, but that's where all lenses lose sharpness and where you start to see chromatic aberration - in the corners. That's why Canon L lenses are so awesome; they're sharp almost from corner to corner!


----------



## tkl.hui

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Yeah it's fuzzy at the bottom, but that's where all lenses lose sharpness and where you start to see chromatic aberration - in the corners. That's why Canon L lenses are so awesome; they're sharp almost from corner to corner!

And they cost an arm and a leg


----------



## stanrc

So I'm thinking of getting a nice DSLR, it will be my first and I've been looking at the Canon Rebel XS. Is this a good one to start with or should I consider something else?


----------



## Marin

I got the Rebel XSi to start with and it's great.


----------



## stanrc

Yeah I was looking at that one too but I think its a little more than I want to spend. And the XS is on sale right now.


----------



## Unstableiser

Took this on the train, i took a couple without the flash which looked better overall but were blurry


















Like this one:










Plus I took these two pics because I liked the scene but of course they look aweful cos I took them at 5pm. I was wondering if anyone could do anything cool with one though, whichever is best to use.



















I wish I was actually any good at this







Also whever I have time to take pictures it's either dark or I'm in a moving vehicle or both...


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *stanrc*


Yeah I was looking at that one too but I think its a little more than I want to spend. And the XS is on sale right now.


Get the Nikon D60 it's wonderful









You can use the cashback/ebay thing to get 40% TODAY only.

http://cgi.ebay.com/NIKON-D60-Digita...QQcmdZViewItem

http://www.overclock.net/online-deal...nday-only.html


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *stanrc*


Yeah I was looking at that one too but I think its a little more than I want to spend. And the XS is on sale right now.


The XS is a very good DSLR. If you can get it for a good price go for it, but also don't rule out the XTi. Although it's older, it's nearly the same camera and can be had for relatively cheap.

Here's a very detailed comparison between the XSi, XS and XTi:

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos1000d/page2.asp

The biggest advantage I see in an XS is the kits - they come with the newer and much better 18-55mm IS lens, whereas the XTi has the older, less sharp, non IS version.


----------



## stanrc

I just picked up the XS, with the 18-55 kit lens, the 75-300 lens, UV filter, extra battery, bag and 4gb card for under 700.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *stanrc*


I just picked up the XS, with the 18-55 kit lens, the 75-300 lens, UV filter, extra battery, bag and 4gb card for under 700.


That's a fair deal. Enjoy it! You can shoot at 800 or 1600 ISO on that camera with confidence.


----------



## stanrc

Now I just need to learn how to use everything


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

believe me, you not learn how to use everything








way back when i was a complete and utter n00b i used to think i new everything, im always learning new facets and abilities that my camera has and new ways to use certain features.

you will have a blast, they are a ton of fun to play with when you get your first SLR.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *stanrc*


Now I just need to learn how to use everything










Well, the first thing I would do is set a user defined picture style, which can be found in the menu. The default picture styles all have the sharpness set really, really low (like at 2 out of 7). I like to max the sharpness on mine.


----------



## CRZYSTNG

Gonna have to add the Nikon CoolPix S51 with the FZ8. Looks like it is going to stick around for a little while. Not too bad of a point and shoot, I just wish it had a little better auto focus/display.


----------



## Unstableiser

Me again... sorry


----------



## stanrc

Great picture, I was hoping to get a nice one of the moon last night (or the night before) but couldn't see it.


----------



## Polo224

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Unstableiser*


I do love it









it drains the batteries fast though










I have that same camera and use Energizer Lithium batteries. They last quite a while for me. Did you turn off the start up image and other power sucking features?

I've only had it a few months and because of all the photogs here, am thinking about buying a "real" camera now.


----------



## Unstableiser

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Polo224* 
I have that same camera and use Energizer Lithium batteries. They last quite a while for me. Did you turn off the start up image and other power sucking features?

I've only had it a few months and because of all the photogs here, am thinking about buying a "real" camera now.










It was the batteries that came with it that ran out. Now I'm using my favorite batteries (GP ReCyko), they're the best on the market and enironmentaly friendly too. They last a good day or two


----------



## Marin

Been messing with more Lightroom settings.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

mmmmm, san ace


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mugan23*


hey guys need some help picking a new lens for the sony, i need a lens thats is just as good as my current one (zoom 70mm and pretty nice wide angle) but i need it to macro. I know that macro n wide angle might not go together but i just needed to macro my proc so i can sell and this lens can't even get to the lettering, i have tried every thing
























This 18-250mm Tamron lens has macro capability for Sony mount. This would give you 18mm (times the crop factor) for relatively wide-angle macros. I think Tamron are the best third party lenses, but it'd be advisable to read some reviews about this specific lens (or hire and try it if possible) before making a purchase







. It'd be a good lens for studio-esque shots where you can control the light, or outdoor in good light.

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## GoneTomorrow

This sucks! I sold my XTi a couple of days ago, and now I have to wait at least 5 more days without a camera until my 40D gets here.









Maybe a good excuse to break out the venerable Nikon EM


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Highly-Annoyed*


This 18-250mm Tamron lens has macro capability for Sony mount. This would give you 18mm (times the crop factor) for relatively wide-angle macros. I think Tamron are the best third party lenses, but it'd be advisable to read some reviews about this specific lens (or hire and try it if possible) before making a purchase







. It'd be a good lens for studio-esque shots where you can control the light, or outdoor in good light.

Highly-Annoyed


Yeah, I think my next lens will be a Tamron. I was checking out some MTF charts for the 70-200mm for the Canon EF mount, and it's actually sharper at f/8 across the focal range than a Canon 70-200mm L (and less than half the price)!

How are you liking the D300, Highly?


----------



## ecoyd1

sdasdasdasdasdasd


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ecoyd1*


Hey guys,

havent been active for a while.

got some umbrellas and those wireless triggers (amazing!) from gadget infinity.

i think this picture will be a good chirstmas card for the season:








http://flickr.com/photos/milophoto/3081814716/

D300 with 50mm; Shot-through umbrella on right, reflective umbrella on left.


Welcome back ecoyd, and nice shot! Perfect white balance.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


This sucks! I sold my XTi a couple of days ago, and now I have to wait at least 5 more days without a camera until my 40D gets here.









Maybe a good excuse to break out the venerable Nikon EM










Do it


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Do it









I will this weekend, but this my dad's camera, which he used for years, and he only had two lenses for it. One is a decent lens, a Nikkor 50mm prime, but the other one is a Sears brand (I kid you not) 25-70mm zoom lens! And it doesn't have a zoom ring, but you physically slide the element forwards and back. But I haven't tried it, so who knows.


----------



## SoBe8503

Here's one I took last night (About 10:00, I'm still trying to warm up). All the lighting is from the reflection of the city lights off of the clouds.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *SoBe8503* 
Here's one I took last night (About 10:00, I'm still trying to warm up). All the lighting is from the reflection of the city lights off of the clouds.

I really like the light, and wow, a 230 sec. exposure! If I may give one pointer, the picture is a little soft. I noticed that you had the aperture at f/22, which is super small. Why such a small aperture? At such small apertures, most lenses produce really soft pictures, unless it's multi-thousand dollar glass. Better to use a stronger aperture, f/5.6 - f/8 is where most lenses are sharpest. I really do like the picture though, and I don't know, maybe the softness adds to its mood. I'm just a junkie for ultra-sharp shots.


----------



## SoBe8503

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
I really like the light, and wow, a 230 sec. exposure! If I may give one pointer, the picture is a little soft. I noticed that you had the aperture at f/22, which is super small. Why such a small aperture? At such small apertures, most lenses produce really soft pictures, unless it's multi-thousand dollar glass. Better to use a stronger aperture, f/5.6 - f/8 is where most lenses are sharpest. I really do like the picture though, and I don't know, maybe the softness adds to its mood. I'm just a junkie for ultra-sharp shots.

Honestly... I'm still learning how all of that works. I've always had it in my head that if you can pull off a high aperture setting, then do it. It snowed a crap load more today, so I'll try again tonight with a lower F-Stop. The softness may also be due to the slight vibrations from my hand. I forgot my remote and had to hold down the button. I figured it wouldn't be too bad cause of the long exposure time. Thanx for your input!


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
I will this weekend, but this my dad's camera, which he used for years, and he only had two lenses for it. One is a decent lens, a Nikkor 50mm prime, but the other one is a Sears brand (I kid you not) 25-70mm zoom lens! And it doesn't have a zoom ring, but you physically slide the element forwards and back. But I haven't tried it, so who knows.


















Quote:


Originally Posted by *SoBe8503* 
Honestly... I'm still learning how all of that works. I've always had it in my head that if you can pull off a high aperture setting, then do it. It snowed a crap load more today, so I'll try again tonight with a lower F-Stop. The softness may also be due to the slight vibrations from my hand. I forgot my remote and had to hold down the button. I figured it wouldn't be too bad cause of the long exposure time. Thanx for your input!

It's kind of a pain, but you can always use the self timer if you don't have your remote with you.


----------



## SoBe8503

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
It's kind of a pain, but you can always use the self timer if you don't have your remote with you.

I have the D60, and the longest it will go is 30 seconds. The shots I take are in the 4-5 min range. My finger was getting tired lol.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *SoBe8503* 
I have the D60, and the longest it will go is 30 seconds. The shots I take are in the 4-5 min range. My finger was getting tired lol.

The remote allows for longer than 30 seconds then, eh? I haven't bought it yet, though I need too :/


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *SoBe8503*


Honestly... I'm still learning how all of that works. I've always had it in my head that if you can pull off a high aperture setting, then do it. It snowed a crap load more today, so I'll try again tonight with a lower F-Stop. The softness may also be due to the slight vibrations from my hand. I forgot my remote and had to hold down the button. I figured it wouldn't be too bad cause of the long exposure time. Thanx for your input!


You're welcome. One good thing to do for your lens is to check the MTF charts, which are graphs that tell you how sharp a lens is at a given aperture and focal length. Manufacturer web sites usually have them and some camera review sites. This is also a good thing to do when shopping for new lenses.

Here's the MTF for the Nikkor 18-55mm VR:
http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/..._n15/page3.asp

If you slide the aperture at the bottom of the widget from f/22 back to f/8, note how the sharpess increases quite a bit.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


The remote allows for longer than 30 seconds then, eh? I haven't bought it yet, though I need too :/


A remote has nothing to do with it; the longest preset shutter you can set on most DSLRs is 30 seconds. Beyond that, you have to use bulb mode, which will keep the shutter open for as long as the shutter release is pressed, either via the button on the camera or a remote. This is where a two-stage remote release is handy, because they have a locking switch so you don't have to hold a button forever.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


A remote has nothing to do with it; the longest preset shutter you can set on most DSLRs is 30 seconds. Beyond that, you have to use bulb mode, which will keep the shutter open for as long as the shutter release is pressed, either via the button on the camera or a remote. This is where a two-stage remote release is handy, because they have a locking switch so you don't have to hold a button forever.


Any reason behind that?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Any reason behind that?


I don't know, mostly tradition if anything. Old film cameras worked the same way, the shutter maxed at 30-60 seconds, but beyond that you used bulb mode.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


I don't know, mostly tradition if anything. Old film cameras worked the same way, the shutter maxed at 30-60 seconds, but beyond that you used bulb mode.


Ah. Well, I just bought the remote in between posts at the Ritz down the street and it's awesome. It should be included with the camera, it seems so necessary now.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Ah. Well, I just bought the remote in between posts at the Ritz down the street and it's awesome. It should be included with the camera, it seems so necessary now.


LOL at the emergency remote run. Agreed, a remote is a must have!


----------



## stanrc

So in my feeble attempt to learn how to use this camera, what are some good sites that can point me in the right direction?


----------



## Mootsfox

This one has been quite helpful to me: Here

I grabbed the one for my camera and it's been very helpful:
http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_ss_b?...uide&x=12&y=21


----------



## stanrc

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
This one has been quite helpful to me: Here

I grabbed the one for my camera and it's been very helpful:
http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_ss_b?...uide&x=12&y=21

Looks familiar







I think I've been there a few times.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *stanrc* 
So in my feeble attempt to learn how to use this camera, what are some good sites that can point me in the right direction?

I learned a lot from this site:

http://digital-photography-school.com/blog/

On the right side, the "Digital Photography Tips" section is quite useful. Otherwise, I just look at other people's shots, always examine the EXIF, and Google what I don't know or post on photography specific forums.

One of my favorite forums is www.dcresouce.com and also check out equetefue's site: www.dslrgeeks.com

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
This one has been quite helpful to me: Here

I grabbed the one for my camera and it's been very helpful:
http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_ss_b?...uide&x=12&y=21

LOL, right on! I'm glad we have a photog section here!


----------



## Marin

Sometimes I hate RAW, like right now. Every brand has to have their proprietary format and .CR2 on the G10 works on nothing. Guess I have to wait until 10.5.6 comes out for Apple to get the support out for it since Adobe has no support at the moment.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Sometimes I hate RAW, like right now. Every brand has to have their proprietary format and .CR2 on the G10 works on nothing. Guess I have to wait until 10.5.6 comes out for Apple to get the support out for it since Adobe has no support at the moment.


Adobe's Canon RAW plugin doesn't read CR2 files? And yes, I hate proprietary RAW as well. Have you tried just using Digital Photo Professional? It's actually pretty thorough.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Adobe's Canon RAW plugin doesn't read CR2 files? And yes, I hate proprietary RAW as well. Have you tried just using Digital Photo Professional? It's actually pretty thorough.


It does but Canon tweaked the .CR2 for the G10. I just gave in and used the software Canon included.


----------



## stanrc

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


I learned a lot from this site:

http://digital-photography-school.com/blog/

On the right side, the "Digital Photography Tips" section is quite useful. Otherwise, I just look at other people's shots, always examine the EXIF, and Google what I don't know or post on photography specific forums.

One of my favorite forums is www.dcresouce.com and also check out equetefue's site: www.dslrgeeks.com

LOL, right on! I'm glad we have a photog section here!


Thanks! I'll be sure to check all those out.


----------



## SoBe8503

Alright here's a new attempt at the same composition, but aperture set at 5.6.

I also attached another one I took right after work. I love it lol

As far as the time settings on the D60. The longest preset IS 30 seconds. Then you use bulb. Without the remote you have to hold down the shutter button. With the remote you just push it once, wait your time, then push it again to close the shutter. There is a maximum time of 30 min (I think). The manual tells the exact time. It automatically shuts off to save battery life and to prevent anything bad happening to the sensor.


----------



## Marin

What would be a good macro lens for my Canon XSi? (not looking for an expensive one)

Also looking for a fixed lens, just can't decide between a 50mm lens or to go for more of a wide angle lens.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

what do you consider 'expensive'?
for some that might mean they are looking for a ~150 dollar lens, others a ~400 dollar lens


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie*


what do you consider 'expensive'?
for some that might mean they are looking for a ~150 dollar lens, others a ~400 dollar lens


More in the $150 range.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
What would be a good macro lens for my Canon XSi? (not looking for an expensive one)

Also looking for a fixed lens, just can't decide between a 50mm lens or to go for more of a wide angle lens.

Canon makes 50mm, 60mm and 100mm macro lenses (I think there are others, but those are the common ones), and they're all in increasing order of price $250, $350 and $450 (approx. retail), so you can count on spending about that much. I have the 60mm, and it's one of my sharpest lenses. It gives you 1:1 macros and it makes pretty good all-purpose lens too.

And macros are fixed lenses. Tamron makes some zoom lenses that have macro capability, but I've never used them.

And for a prime, there are sub 50mm lenses, like the 20mm & 28mm f/1.8 (and f/2.8 models), but they aren't as sharp as the 50mm. They call the 50mm prime the "nifty fifty" for a reason - they are very sharp and have the widest apertures. And the good thing is that Canon sells the 50mm EF Mk II f/1.8 for only $80, so it's a good value. I opted for the 50mm USM f/1.4, although it cost me $300 (but USM is so sweet).

But as far as lenses go, it's worth going all out (or as much as you can!), because lenses are for keeps. Bodies will come and go like PC components.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *SoBe8503* 
Alright here's a new attempt at the same composition, but aperture set at 5.6.

I also attached another one I took right after work. I love it lol

As far as the time settings on the D60. The longest preset IS 30 seconds. Then you use bulb. Without the remote you have to hold down the shutter button. With the remote you just push it once, wait your time, then push it again to close the shutter. There is a maximum time of 30 min (I think). The manual tells the exact time. It automatically shuts off to save battery life and to prevent anything bad happening to the sensor.

Whoa, a lot more snow in that second shot! I hate to say it, but it looks a tad out of focus (The previous shot was focused). Either that or holding your finger on the shutter release on the camera is causing too much movement. And as for apertures, f/5.6 is a little wide for landscapes and might leave the corners out of the DOF. For landscapes, I usually go f/8 - f/10 or so.

The pine needle shot is quite good though, nice work!


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Canon makes 50mm, 60mm and 100mm macro lenses (I think there are others, but those are the common ones), and they're all in increasing order of price $250, $350 and $450 (approx. retail), so you can count on spending about that much. I have the 60mm, and it's one of my sharpest lenses. It gives you 1:1 macros and it makes pretty good all-purpose lens too.

And macros are fixed lenses. Tamron makes some zoom lenses that have macro capability, but I've never used them.

And for a prime, there are sub 50mm lenses, like the 20mm & 28mm f/1.8 (and f/2.8 models), but they aren't as sharp as the 50mm. They call the 50mm prime the "nifty fifty" for a reason - they are very sharp and have the widest apertures. And the good thing is that Canon sells the 50mm EF Mk II f/1.8 for only $80, so it's a good value. I opted for the 50mm USM f/1.4, although it cost me $300 (but USM is so sweet).

But as far as lenses go, it's worth going all out (or as much as you can!), because lenses are for keeps. Bodies will come and go like PC components.


Great to know. I'll look into 50mm lenses then.


----------



## stanrc

Here's a few pictures I took today, let me know what you think.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *stanrc*


Here's a few pictures I took today, let me know what you think.


IMG_0*231* - looks like you've been busy since you got that XS! You should leave the EXIF embedded in your shots, so we can see your settings.

Not bad, decent composition, but I think some HDR treatment could spiffy some of these up nicely. In the bridge shot, the sky is completely blown out, through no fault of your own, because the area below the treeline and bridge was metered. Did you shoot these in RAW? If so you could do a single RAW HDR or exposure blend on that shot.

And shooting when overcast usually needs some post-processing. Upping the saturation makes for a nice contrast against all the greyness.

Landscape shots also do well to have a foreground element, such as a road, rocks, branches, etc., to "lead" to viewer into the shot, otherwise it can look like bland.

Landscapes are the hardest kind of shot IMO. So many rules to go by, and usually the most amount of post processing.


----------



## stanrc

I'm not sure how to leave the EXIF data on the pictures. Is that a setting on the camera or the photo software used? They were all shot in JPEG mode, not RAW.

I took quite a few of that bridge with various settings just to try things out. I tried setting a long shutter time so it would make a nice effect on the water but they all came out overexposed, even after adjusting the aperture. I'm not sure what I was doing wrong.

I know the last shot is pretty bland, I only posted it because it actually came out better looking in a picture than actually being there. Plus I liked the silhouette of the tree line.

Here is a link to the full album, there is another picture of the bridge that came out nicely I though. I might be uploading more as I look through them.

http://picasaweb.google.com/stanrc/LeesylvaniaStatePark


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *stanrc*


I'm not sure how to leave the EXIF data on the pictures. Is that a setting on the camera or the photo software used? They were all shot in JPEG mode, not RAW.

I took quite a few of that bridge with various settings just to try things out. I tried setting a long shutter time so it would make a nice effect on the water but they all came out overexposed, even after adjusting the aperture. I'm not sure what I was doing wrong.

I know the last shot is pretty bland, I only posted it because it actually came out better looking in a picture than actually being there. Plus I liked the silhouette of the tree line.

Here is a link to the full album, there is another picture of the bridge that came out nicely I though. I might be uploading more as I look through them.

http://picasaweb.google.com/stanrc/LeesylvaniaStatePark


I like the other two bridge shots much better!

To do long shutter exposures during daylight hours, you can do two things: narrow the aperture a great deal, but often it is still too bright, as you noted. And with really high apertures on the order of f/22, the sharpness tends to drop off for most lenses. Secondly, you can use a neutral density filter, which is nothing more than a dark tinted filter, which dampens the light coming in and effectively makes it dark outside to the camera. This will let you do long exposures for water and such.

And you should try shooting in RAW. Canon's Digital Photo Professional, which comes with their DSLRs, is very capable and allows you to make adjustments post shot that cannot be done effectively with JPEGs.


----------



## stanrc

Thanks for the tips, I'll try out RAW. I do have a UV filter that I used but it is not tinted or darkened at all.

Next weekend I'm going to a different park and hopefully getting some sunset shots if weather permits.


----------



## Unstableiser

I re-took the Moon again with my 'camera'.


----------



## ILOVEPOTtery

I've always wanted a decent camera to take with me on trips and whatnot. Never thought I'd get around to buying a nice one, but my friend gifted me a decent film camera. I'd like to join up with my Canon E0S Rebel G.









I haven't taken any pictures with it, but I'm hoping we'll have some nice powder days this winter.

Here are a few I took last summer and winter out in ID. Don't remember which were on disposable or Digi SLR...


----------



## Marin

What ski resort?


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *ILOVEPOTtery* 
I've always wanted a decent camera to take with me on trips and whatnot. Never thought I'd get around to buying a nice one, but my friend gifted me a decent film camera. I'd like to join up with my Canon E0S Rebel G.









I haven't taken any pictures with it, but I'm hoping we'll have some nice powder days this winter.

Here are a few I took last summer and winter out in ID. *Don't remember which were on disposable or Digi SLR...*

Proof that it's the photographer, not the gear that makes the shot.

Nice pics


----------



## ILOVEPOTtery

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
What ski resort?

Pomerelle. That was New Years Day, got a foot of powder the previous night.









Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Proof that it's the photographer, not the gear that makes the shot.

Nice pics









Thanks much!


----------



## Unstableiser

I took this random photo as I was waiting for church to open. It's quite strangely angled but I messed about with it in Lightroom as it was aweful before (I didn't want to crouch down in the cold lol







). I know it's not very good but for some reason I liked it exactly the way it came out. Especially with the dude in the car







I tried to make it look as cold as possible but tbh I didn't really need to, the ice on the thingy is awesome


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *ILOVEPOTtery* 
I've always wanted a decent camera to take with me on trips and whatnot. Never thought I'd get around to buying a nice one, but my friend gifted me a decent film camera. I'd like to join up with my Canon E0S Rebel G.









I haven't taken any pictures with it, but I'm hoping we'll have some nice powder days this winter.

Here are a few I took last summer and winter out in ID. Don't remember which were on disposable or Digi SLR...

Added...some very nice film shots, and even better scans!


----------



## Cpt.Hawkins

Hey I want to join the official OCN camera club! I've taken the liberty of already adding the club to my signature so my gear is listed there, photos to follow soon...


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Cpt.Hawkins*


Hey I want to join the official OCN camera club! I've taken the liberty of already adding the club to my signature so my gear is listed there, photos to follow soon...


Added! Nice gear, I'm always envious of a full-frame sensor camera, even if it's a Nikon!









Oh, and why not link to the Camera Club in signature?


----------



## mugan23

what do you guys think of this pic


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mugan23* 
what do you guys think of this pic

I like it a lot mugan, the title really makes it a good shot.


----------



## mugan23

ya but lots of photo shop hehe i hate that i got my sony in winter i can't go out shooting because i am not as good with portraits


----------



## Cpt.Hawkins

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Added! Nice gear, I'm always envious of a full-frame sensor camera, even if it's a Nikon!









Oh, and why not link to the Camera Club in signature?

Haha thanks, I had to choose whether to go down the canon or nikon road and it was a very hard choice! the 5D MKll costs Â£500 more than a D700 and in a lot of reviews the D700 ends up being regarded as the superior camera







but im happy with my choice!

P.S I am NOT trying to start a Canon vs Nikon flame war!


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Cpt.Hawkins* 
Haha thanks, I had to choose whether to go down the canon or nikon road and it was a very hard choice! the 5D MKll costs Â£500 more than a D700 and in a lot of reviews the D700 ends up being regarded as the superior camera







but im happy with my choice!

P.S I am NOT trying to start a Canon vs Nikon flame war!

Flame war? I thought we were all in agreement that Nikkor = win?









Just joking around, Canon and Nikon both make great stuff and you really can't go wrong with either.


----------



## Undispu7ed

It's all personal preference. Personally, I can't stand holding Nikon cameras lol. But they are nice cameras none the less.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Cpt.Hawkins*


Haha thanks, I had to choose whether to go down the canon or nikon road and it was a very hard choice! the 5D MKll costs Â£500 more than a D700 and in a lot of reviews the D700 ends up being regarded as the superior camera







but im happy with my choice!

P.S I am NOT trying to start a Canon vs Nikon flame war!


I know, but personally I think the verdict is still out on the 5D mkII, being so new there aren't as many reviews. Heck, the camera is back ordered or out of stock on most sites.

Nikon is currently just edging out Canon as far as popularity and acclaim for camera bodies are concerned, but Canon still has the best glass out there, by far. Nikon could do with a few new lens offerings just as Canon could use a few better DSLR body offerings in the entry and mid level range.

But there are rarely flame wars between Canon and Nikon shooters; they both concede that Canon and Nikon are the best out there for DSLR, they're both sort of the Mercedes and BMW of DSLRs (don't ask me who is which).


----------



## Cpt.Hawkins

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
I know, but personally I think the verdict is still out on the 5D mkII, being so new there aren't as many reviews. Heck, the camera is back ordered or out of stock on most sites.

Nikon is currently just edging out Canon as far as popularity and acclaim for camera bodies are concerned, but Canon still has the best glass out there, by far. Nikon could do with a few new lens offerings just as Canon could use a few better DSLR body offerings in the entry and mid level range.

But there are rarely flame wars between Canon and Nikon shooters; they both concede that Canon and Nikon are the best out there for DSLR, they're both sort of the Mercedes and BMW of DSLRs (don't ask me who is which).

Very well put, although i'd have to point out that the Nikkor 14-24mm is probably the most impressive lens available in the world today as far as setting new standards in quality and sharpness are concerned, Canon has nothing to match nikon as far as wideangle is concerned and also the Nikkor 24-70mm is also regarded as being superior to the canon Lseries equivelent, but apart from those two canon definatley has better glass on offer.

P.S Nikon is defiantley the AMG Mercedes of the DSLR world!


----------



## Unstableiser

Sorry to be such a bother







But could you add me to the group please







Thank you for your time and sorry again.


----------



## Undispu7ed

I've played with a Nikkor 14-24mm and I think the Sigma 10-20mm would like to have a word with that Nikkor


----------



## tkl.hui

Why does no one ever consider sony?







The new A900 is pretty nice FF :O


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *tkl.hui* 
Why does no one ever consider sony?







The new A900 is pretty nice FF :O

Canon and Nikon have decades of knowledge and equipment behind them. I like the fact that I can pick up pretty much any F-mount lens and put it on my camera. Sony doesn't have that huge amount of options that the big two do. From what I hear they make pretty good stuff though, and in the dSLR area, offer competitive prices.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

just got my 11-16mm tonight








want wait to get out and start using it!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Unstableiser*


Sorry to be such a bother







But could you add me to the group please







Thank you for your time and sorry again.


Oh, sorry Unstableiser. A reminder to anyone viewing this thread to actually say that you want to be added. I know it seems silly, but so many just drop in say things like "I have such and camera and blah blah" but don't ask to be added. Canon SX100 right?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Cpt.Hawkins*


Very well put, although i'd have to point out that the Nikkor 14-24mm is probably the most impressive lens available in the world today as far as setting new standards in quality and sharpness are concerned, Canon has nothing to match nikon as far as wideangle is concerned and also the Nikkor 24-70mm is also regarded as being superior to the canon Lseries equivelent, but apart from those two canon definatley has better glass on offer.

P.S Nikon is defiantley the AMG Mercedes of the DSLR world!











Quote:



Originally Posted by *Undispu7ed*


I've played with a Nikkor 14-24mm and I think the Sigma 10-20mm would like to have a word with that Nikkor










LOL, a lot of lens quality has to do with personal opinion, but as well as using the old eye, I'm also data-minded, so I base a lot of opinion on MTF charts, and Canon really delivers in this area, but of course Nikon has impressive glass as well.

And Canon is the BMW 7-series


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

gonetomorrow, could you add my new 11-16mm to the list?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *tkl.hui*


Why does no one ever consider sony?







The new A900 is pretty nice FF :O


Because quite frankly, and the reviews have a consensus on this, Sony has yet to deliver. I say "yet" because they are relatively new to DSLR. They have offerings like their full-frame sensor A900, which is as expensive as comparable Canon and Nikon models, but can't match the noise capabilities of a Nikon D300 or Canon 40D, which are crop sensor bodies.

I think Sony will be a contender though. They have some decent glass as well, as does some of the Tamron lenses for Sony.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie*


just got my 11-16mm tonight








want wait to get out and start using it!


Nice, I'll have my 10-22mm one of these days...then I will actually have what I would call a wide angle lens. Damn crop sensors!

Quote:



Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie*


gonetomorrow, could you add my new 11-16mm to the list?










No problem! That looks to be a very capable lens, I just check the specs and MTF on it. Never heard much from Tokina, but they make a Canon mount of the same lens, so let me know how you like it. I have only Canon glass, but am not too proud to try out a third-party, esp. one that looks as promising as that Tokina.


----------



## stanrc

Thanks for adding my info


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *stanrc* 
Thanks for adding my info

Welcome!


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Nice, I'll have my 10-22mm one of these days...then I will actually have what I would call a wide angle lens. Damn crop sensors!

No problem! That looks to be a very capable lens, I just check the specs and MTF on it. Never heard much from Tokina, but they make a Canon mount of the same lens, so let me know how you like it. I have only Canon glass, but am not too proud to try out a third-party, esp. one that looks as promising as that Tokina.



havent actually taken anything (dont want to until i do my usual shooting stuff, hopefully tomorrow) but i played with it a bit, and so far i can say:
-focuses fast
-not as silent as my nikon lenses, but its fast!
-i love wide angle lenses thus far
-wish it had a m/a focus mode where its auto focus with a manual override (although i do think i like this as well, just not as much and not used to it)
- going to have to get new filters, thinking ill just stock up on 77mm from now on and get step up rings.
-pretty compact, and internal zoom and focus, so nothing moves externally (slightly shorter then my 18-200mm all the way in)

i really think im going to like my new toy


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Oh, sorry Unstableiser. A reminder to anyone viewing this thread to actually say that you want to be added. I know it seems silly, but so many just drop in say things like "I have such and camera and blah blah" but don't ask to be added. Canon SX100 right?


Add me too please! I wrote it out so all you have to do is copy and paste it.

P&S

Code:


Code:


[URL="http://www.flickr.com/photos/mootsfox/"]Mootsfox[/url] - Canon SD750

DSLR

Code:


Code:


[URL="http://www.flickr.com/photos/mootsfox/"]Mootsfox[/URL] - Nikon D60
Nikkor AF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G VR
Nikkor AF-S 55-200mm f/4-5.6G VR


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

ooh, how are you liking the 55-200mm moots?
and is that 18-55mm the original or II?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Add me too please! I wrote it out so all you have to do is copy and paste it.

P&S

Code:


Code:


[URL="http://www.flickr.com/photos/mootsfox/"]Mootsfox[/url] - Canon SD750

DSLR

Code:


Code:


[URL="http://www.flickr.com/photos/mootsfox/"]Mootsfox[/URL] - Nikon D60
Nikkor AF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G VR
Nikkor AF-S 55-200mm f/4-5.6G VR


Done!


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie*


ooh, how are you liking the 55-200mm moots?
and is that 18-55mm the original or II?


Loving it so far. I use the 55-200mm for all my macro shots. I bought the dual lens kit off of ebay with cashback as it was cheaper than my vendor price for just the D60!


----------



## Marin

I was going to get some new audio stuff for the holidays but found this:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16830998366


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


I was going to get some new audio stuff for the holidays but found this:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16830998366


I LOVE that lens. You won't regret it! It's very much worth the extra cost over the 50mm f/1.8 mkII.
Check Abe's of Maine, I got mine there for less than $300


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


I LOVE that lens. You won't regret it! It's very much worth the extra cost over the 50mm f/1.8 mkII.
Check Abe's of Maine, I got mine there for less than $300


Great to here. Other people have been saying it's worth it over the 1.8.

EDIT: http://www.abesofmaine.com/item=CN5014USM~item.htm

$2 less and free shipping. So this is a good site?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Great to here. Other people have been saying it's worth it over the 1.8.

EDIT: http://www.abesofmaine.com/item=CN5014USM~item.htm

$2 less and free shipping. So this is a good site?


Abe's is pretty good, I've ordered a couple of lenses from them without issue. Strange, I checked all the camera sites I trust, and they all have about the same price for that lens. Abe's had it for $280 about a year ago, but I guess times are tougher.

I looked around and I found the same lens for $279 plus free shipping:
http://www.etronics.com/p-4661-canon...ame=GoogleBase

I've never used etronics, but they seem have a decent enough rating (though not as good as Abe's):
http://www.resellerratings.com/store/etronics
http://www.google.com/products/revie...&cat=merchants


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

abesofmaine is a very reputable site if that's what you're asking


----------



## Unstableiser

Quote:



Originally Posted by *gonetomorrow*


oh, sorry unstableiser. A reminder to anyone viewing this thread to actually say that you want to be added. I know it seems silly, but so many just drop in say things like "i have such and camera and blah blah" but don't ask to be added. Canon sx100 right?


sx110 is


----------



## Marin

Thanks for the links GoneTomorrow. Now I can't decide between getting the 50mm 1.4 USM or getting a lens meant more for macros.

EDIT: Leaning more towards the 50mm as I won't be taking too many macros and would rather get a lens that I will use a lot.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Thanks for the links GoneTomorrow. Now I can't decide between getting the 50mm 1.4 USM or getting a lens meant more for macros.

EDIT: Leaning more towards the 50mm as I won't be taking too many macros and would rather get a lens that I will use a lot.


Yeah, it's worth considering what you want to do more of. The 50mm is great for portraits and low light shooting, but won't do macros and certainly isn't a wide angle lens.

A macro lens is just for that, macros, but it can also serve as a prime covering the same functions as the 50mm, but where macros fall short are max apertures. The EF-S 60mm macro lens is f/2.8 (still pretty good) at it widest compared to f/1.4 for the 50mm.


----------



## Marin

Hmmm... seems like the 60mm might be better as I can use it as a macro lens and as a prime. I won't be taking portraits but will be taking photos sometimes in low light.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...%20Macro%20USM

  Amazon.com: Canon EF-S 60mm f/2.8 Macro USM Digital SLR Lens for EOS Digital SLR Cameras: Camera & Photo


----------



## christian_piper

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Hmmm... seems like the 60mm might be better as I can use it as a macro lens and as a prime. I won't be taking portraits but will be taking photos sometimes in low light.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...%20Macro%20USM

Amazon.com: Canon EF-S 60mm f/2.8 Macro USM Digital SLR Lens for EOS Digital SLR Cameras: Camera & Photo

If you want low light... the relatively slow aperature on that 60mm macro would be a bit of a hindrance...


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *christian_piper* 
If you want low light... the relatively slow aperature on that 60mm macro would be a bit of a hindrance...

Its not like low light to the point it's dark out. But more like sunsets, which my current kit lens has been doing fine with.


----------



## SoBe8503

Got some of a sunrise recently. I'm not a big fan of the town I live in, but I must admit, there are some incredible sunrise/sets.

Yeah some are a little dark, but I like the color


----------



## stanrc

Beautiful shots


----------



## Unstableiser

Awwwwww


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Unstableiser* 
Awwwwww

Nice macro, your snake? I can see some red lights reflecting off its shiny nose.


----------



## SDawg

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
.... I can see some red lights reflecting off its shiny nose.

Its a Christmas snake named Rudolph.









Sorry, I could not resist.


----------



## Unstableiser

Lol, yes I think I did that one with autofocus in the centre as I couldnt see it too well on the screen, I took quite a few in variations but I liked that one. A shame about the bit of bark stuff on the left bottom.


----------



## Chris627

Quote:


Originally Posted by *SoBe8503* 
Got some of a sunrise recently. I'm not a big fan of the town I live in, but I must admit, there are some incredible sunrise/sets.

Yeah some are a little dark, but I like the color









Beautiful shots. I've been through Fort Collins before, on my way to Boulder a couple years back.


----------



## stanrc

Here are a few more I took this weekend, a little more color this time haha.




























Full album below

http://picasaweb.google.com/stanrc/CorinnesHouse#


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

well, finally almost here, this thursday is winter camping trip, i cant wait









ill make sure to get a LOT of pictures while im out.


----------



## bgbop15

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Done!


I think i posted my additions a while back, but they never got added... here we go!

Nikon D60
Nikon 18-55mm AFS VR
Nikon 55-200mm AFS VR
50mm f/1.8 AF
55mm Micro-Nikkor f/3.5 + M2 Tube for 1:1 Macro
Nikkor 105mm f/2.5 (Great, Old Portrait Lens)
SB-600 with SC-17 cable
SB-400
Also have the Nikon P5100 for point and shoot and my Canon HF100 is on the way for video!

this is my flickr, and i am already in the OCN group.... http://www.flickr.com/photos/theb/


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *bgbop15*


I think i posted my additions a while back, but they never got added... here we go!

Nikon D60
Nikon 18-55mm AFS VR
Nikon 55-200mm AFS VR
50mm f/1.8 AF
55mm Micro-Nikkor f/3.5 + M2 Tube for 1:1 Macro
Nikkor 105mm f/2.5 (Great, Old Portrait Lens)
SB-600 with SC-17 cable
SB-400
Also have the Nikon P5100 for point and shoot and my Canon HF100 is on the way for video!

this is my flickr, and i am already in the OCN group.... http://www.flickr.com/photos/theb/


Updated


----------



## Marin

I really like this pic. In lightroom I upped the brightness and contrast then lowered the exposure. I also lowered the saturation of the green primary and upped the saturation in the red primary so the fruit would keep its vibrant color (while the green trees in the background were made duller so they wouldn't distract from the crab apples).


----------



## Marin

One more:


----------



## bgbop15

Alright advanced P&S'ers

Please help me out with a conundrum I am having...

I consider myself a D-SLR shooter for the most part, but sometimes wou just need something you can stick in your wife's purse, know what I mean?

I have a Nikon Coolpix P5100, but as with all P&S cameras, the flash is just atrocious for shooting people. I specifically bought this camera so i could stick my SB-400 on top and have decent, small camera to get nice indoor/night shots when I can't bring my D60 out.

Problem: the P5100 is SLOW AS ALL HELL! Anybody have another solution to my situation? I considered the G9/10 with a small speedlight, but I think it's a bit too big/expensive to ditch the P5100 for...


----------



## YOSHIBA

i like what highly-annoyed does alot! (lists the settings of the camera) i know its hard to remember and to do for everyone but its awesome
keep it up!


----------



## YOSHIBA

how do you guys take cool pictures like this?


----------



## SoBe8503

Honestly, That's how the sky looked outside. Hence why I swerved off the side of the road like a drunken idiot. I took about 15 pictures at a bunch of different settings in hopes that I would get some decent ones out of it. I had to hurry cause I only had a few minutes before the sun would be too high to keep the color.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *YOSHIBA*


i like what highly-annoyed does alot! (lists the settings of the camera) i know its hard to remember and to do for everyone but its awesome
keep it up!


It isn't necessary to list the settings, that's what the embedded EXIF is for. If you use Firefox, then viewing an image's EXIF is just a right click away:

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/3905


----------



## nuclearjock

With the D3X just announced, if you find the right sales person and look pathetic enough, deals are sometimes possible. I've been dreaming about this camera for sooooooo long, I can't believe it's actually happened...









My other artillery:
bodies:
Nikon D300
Nikon F6

lenses (all nikor):
full frame:
80-400mm f/4.5-5.6D ED VR AF
70-200mm f/2.8G ED-IF AF-S VR
70-300mm f4.5-5.6G ED-IF AF-S VR
24-85mm f/3.5-4.5G ED-IF AF-S
50mm f/1.4D AF
DX:
18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 ED-IF AF-S VR DX
55-200mm f4-5.6G ED AF-S VR DX
18-55mm f3.5-5.6G AF-S VR DX

flash:
SB-400

scanner:
Epson Perfection V750-M PRO Scanner

For ultimate sharpness and digital resolution, I shoot 35mm velvia 50, and then scan the transparencies @~12-16mb resolution.
Film is still far superior when it comes to resolution, sharpness, and dynamic range, (strictly in my opinion).


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


With the D3X just announced, if you find the right sales person and look pathetic enough, deals are sometimes possible. I've been dreaming about this camera for sooooooo long, I can't believe it's actually happened...

My other artillery:
bodies:
Nikon D300
Nikon F6

lenses (all nikor):
full frame:
80-400mm f/4.5-5.6D ED VR AF 
70-200mm f/2.8G ED-IF AF-S VR 
70-300mm f4.5-5.6G ED-IF AF-S VR 
24-85mm f/3.5-4.5G ED-IF AF-S 
50mm f/1.4D AF 
DX:
18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 ED-IF AF-S VR DX 
55-200mm f4-5.6G ED AF-S VR DX 
18-55mm f3.5-5.6G AF-S VR DX

flash:
SB-400

scanner:
Epson Perfection V750-M PRO Scanner

For ultimate sharpness and digital resolution, I shoot 35mm velvia 50, and then scan the transparencies @~12-16mb resolution.
Film is still far superior when it comes to resolution, sharpness, and dynamic range, (strictly in my opinion).


Deal or no deal, you definitely dropped a chunk of change on that beast!


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
For ultimate sharpness and digital resolution, I shoot 35mm velvia 50, and then scan the transparencies @~12-16mb resolution.
Film is still far superior when it comes to resolution, sharpness, and dynamic range, (strictly in my opinion).


i dont think anyone is going to argue with you on that one, at least i sure am not


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


With the D3X just announced, if you find the right sales person and look pathetic enough, deals are sometimes possible. I've been dreaming about this camera for sooooooo long, I can't believe it's actually happened...









My other artillery:
bodies:
Nikon D300
Nikon F6

lenses (all nikor):
full frame:
80-400mm f/4.5-5.6D ED VR AF 
70-200mm f/2.8G ED-IF AF-S VR 
70-300mm f4.5-5.6G ED-IF AF-S VR 
24-85mm f/3.5-4.5G ED-IF AF-S 
50mm f/1.4D AF 
DX:
18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 ED-IF AF-S VR DX 
55-200mm f4-5.6G ED AF-S VR DX 
18-55mm f3.5-5.6G AF-S VR DX

flash:
SB-400

scanner:
Epson Perfection V750-M PRO Scanner

For ultimate sharpness and digital resolution, I shoot 35mm velvia 50, and then scan the transparencies @~12-16mb resolution.
Film is still far superior when it comes to resolution, sharpness, and dynamic range, (strictly in my opinion).


Nice setup. I think you can find a way to get a D3 if you own a F6


----------



## Bigevil89

Hey all. I just got a Canon A590 IS as an early x-m,as gift. i love it, Especialy with the chdk firmware addon. Here is a few pictures from my sunday visit to the everglades.

Panorama from the viewing platform.









My attempt to do an HDR rendering.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Nice setup. I think you can find a way to get a D3 if you own a F6










Hey Foxie, no I actually bought it. That's it sitting on my desk.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


Hey Foxie, no I actually bought it. That's it sitting on my desk.


Oh, nice!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...ck_Tripod.html

Just picked up this Manfrotto 725b tripod. For all you DSLR shooters who have always used cheap tripods (like me), I definitely recommend a better tripod. The one I got was one of the cheapest (if not the cheapest) tripods that Manfrotto has, but it's so much better than the Vanguard I used to have.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*











http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...ck_Tripod.html

Just picked up this Manfrotto 725b tripod. For all you DSLR shooters who have always used cheap tripods (like me), I definitely recommend a better tripod. The one I got was one of the cheapest (if not the cheapest) tripods that Manfrotto has, but it's so much better than the Vanguard I used to have.












I use a Vanguard VT-126. I get most of the tripods we sell for 50%, but didn't feel like spending $120 on a nice tripod.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Actually, the Vanguard I had (I think I had the same one as you) wasn't all that bad, it was fairly sturdy, but the quick release plate was awful (scratched the bottom of the camera and wouldn't stay tightened) and adjustments were jerky and required twisting a few different knobs and a huge obtrusive handle. The ball head on the Manfrotto has one small locking lever that controls all movements. The only other lever is for the column height.

It's one of those things that most don't spend a lot of money on; filters also fall into this category.


----------



## YOSHIBA

does this look like a good Camera ?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *YOSHIBA* 
does this look like a good Camera ?

Well,the Lumix FZxxx series are great cameras for their Leica optics, optical image stabilzation and features, but they all suffer from poor high ISO noise performance (even by point and shoot standards) and very over zealous noise reduction. I would consider a Canon Powershot SX series instead.


----------



## YOSHIBA

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Well,the Lumix FZxxx series are great cameras for their Leica optics, optical image stabilzation and features, but they all suffer from poor high ISO noise performance (even by point and shoot standards) and very over zealous noise reduction. I would consider a Canon Powershot SX series instead.


thanks, i was looking at the Canon PowerShot SX10 for a split second... its way to far out of my price range..... any suggestions on something between 200 and 275?
ill keep it in mind tho thanks!


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

the sx110 should fit your budget








http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...S_Digital.html


----------



## christian_piper

Thought I'd drop by with a shot... took it last night. What do yall think?

4 Seconds, ISO 100, F/5.6, 50mm Prime f/2 nikkor lens non-ai, Nikon D60


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *christian_piper*


Thought I'd drop by with a shot... took it last night. What do yall think?

4 Seconds, ISO 100, F/5.6, 50mm Prime f/2 nikkor lens non-ai, Nikon D60












Very nice Christian. The air must have been very still. Hardly a flicker during the 4 second exposure.

Is your 50mm f/2 on older lens??


----------



## christian_piper

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


Very nice Christian. The air must have been very still. Hardly a flicker during the 4 second exposure.

Is your 50mm f/2 on older lens??


Yea it is. I bought it on ebay for $30! Non-ai, so it is the oldest type of all nikon f-mount (I think) lenses. It doesn't even meter on my DSLR. I find full manual to be fun









And thanks! Yea it was in the corner of my basement..... and I think I need to pull the wick out more. Tiny flame. Meh.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *christian_piper*


Yea it is. I bought it on ebay for $30! Non-ai, so it is the oldest type of all nikon f-mount (I think) lenses. It doesn't even meter on my DSLR. I find full manual to be fun









And thanks! Yea it was in the corner of my basement..... and I think I need to pull the wick out more. Tiny flame. Meh.










I want $30 lenses.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *christian_piper* 
Yea it is. I bought it on ebay for $30! Non-ai, so it is the oldest type of all nikon f-mount (I think) lenses. It doesn't even meter on my DSLR. I find full manual to be fun









And thanks! Yea it was in the corner of my basement..... and I think I need to pull the wick out more. Tiny flame. Meh.

Nice work with the old lens!


----------



## ncsa

A small running kit:

Mamiya 645
3x Backs
2x 120 & 220 Inserts
1x Instant Film Back
35mm 3.5
55mm 2.8
70mm 2.8 leaf
150mm 3.5
180mm 4

Gossen meter / Wein Slaves
3x Hensel 1000 flash units with snoots, doors
various Manfrotto poles & pods
drops


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *ncsa* 
A small running kit:

Mamiya 645
3x Backs
2x 120 & 220 Inserts
1x Instant Film Back
35mm 3.5
55mm 2.8
70mm 2.8 leaf
150mm 3.5
180mm 4

Gossen meter / Wein Slaves
3x Hensel 1000 flash units with snoots, doors
various Manfrotto poles & pods
drops

A Mamiya - don't see too many people with those these days! Which 645 do you have? One of the autofocus bodies? Do you have any digital backs?

Very cool though, post some scans if you have any, or if you have a digital back, definitely post those!


----------



## dangerousHobo

Hey can I be added to the list please.

SLR:
Canon AE-1
Canon 50mm f/1.8
Osawa Mark II 80-205mm f/4.5

DSLR:
Pentax K20D
Pentax DA 40mm f/2.8 limited
Pentax DA 14mm f/2.8


----------



## ncsa

lol ... yes it is on old kit but still very reliable and a workhorse in the ten years of wedding / portraiture - hence the studio setup - it had to deliver! ... no auto anything







and no digital backs for this version all 120 roll film.

There is something very noticiable when looking through a medium format lens compared to 35mm... and when you use 6x17 format - that opens another perspective, a format I also used for weddings









Previously had an extensive Canon F1 and T90 kits.... now the Canon G3 is the digital compact that does the happy snaps









Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
A Mamiya - don't see too many people with those these days! Which 645 do you have? One of the autofocus bodies? Do you have any digital backs?

Very cool though, post some scans if you have any, or if you have a digital back, definitely post those!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *ncsa* 
lol ... yes it is on old kit but still very reliable and a workhorse in the ten years of wedding / portraiture - hence the studio setup - it had to deliver! ... no auto anything







and no digital backs for this version all 120 roll film.

There is something very noticiable when looking through a medium format lens compared to 35mm... and when you use 6x17 format - that opens another perspective, a format I also used for weddings









Previously had an extensive Canon F1 and T90 kits.... now the Canon G3 is the digital compact that does the happy snaps









I hear ya, if I had money to burn, I would grab an old Hasselbad large format off Ebay.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Sorry, didn't feel like cloning out the eye booger.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Sorry, didn't feel like cloning out the eye booger.










Now THESE are eye boogers.
D3 1/60 F2.8 @iso6400


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dangerousHobo*


Hey can I be added to the list please.

SLR:
Canon AE-1
Canon 50mm f/1.8
Osawa Mark II 80-205mm f/4.5

DSLR:
Pentax K20D
Pentax DA 40mm f/2.8 limited
Pentax DA 14mm f/2.8


Added!









Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


Now THESE are eye boogers.
D3 1/60 F2.8 @iso6400


Yuck (about the boogers that is)! Why ISO 6400? Testing out the high ISO noise?


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

sorry for the following post.

main lookout point at lions head, fantastic view







(from left to right: Alex, Me(also named alex) and Troy)









view from campsite to the lake (only time sky was clear)









shot of little water pool as i was approaching the lake









shot of lake









starting the fire and building our 'oven'









the fire moved into the oven and starting to melt some snow and cook some hot dogs over the 'chimney'


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

I saw something like this a while ago and wanted to try it, so here's my first attempt at this kind of shot.










F2.8, ISO200, 38mm, 1/250th, Single Remote Flash from Below, Tripod.

Having looked at it a bit, I think I could probably have composed it a bit better and I should have used some filler flash to kill some of the shadows, but overall, I'm fairly pleased with this first attempt.

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## equetefue

Here are a few from past weekend.

As always C&C always welcomed. Enjoy !


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

as i just posted in DSLR geeks

Quote:



you make me want to trow in my towel sometime and call it quits








fantastic work as always!


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Added!









Yuck (about the boogers that is)! Why ISO 6400? Testing out the high ISO noise?


It was dark in our study this morning, AND I am exploring high iso and the associated in camera noise reduction.


----------



## equetefue

Schubie great location on ur pics..


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *equetefue*


Here are a few from past weekend.

As always C&C always welcomed. Enjoy !


Lovely...


----------



## NFF

canon powershot A580


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie* 
sorry for the following post.

main lookout point at lions head, fantastic view







(from left to right: Alex, Me(also named alex) and Troy)









Is this a recent trip? Looks like a lot of fun


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

it was a blast, just got back yesterday


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie* 
it was a blast, just got back yesterday









Nice looking area, Schubie, I'm a big backpacker myself. First big snow we get here and I'm going to disappear for a few days.









A few recent ones:


----------



## Marin

So I was thinking about getting this for my XSi:

 Amazon.com: Canon EF-S 60mm f/2.8 Macro USM Digital SLR Lens for EOS Digital SLR Cameras: Electronics

But my Dad recommended that I instead get a good zoom lens as I won't be getting a ton of new lenses any time soon. So... any good zoom lenses for the XSi?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


So I was thinking about getting this for my XSi: Amazon.com: Canon EF-S 60mm f/2.8 Macro USM Digital SLR Lens for EOS Digital SLR Cameras: Electronics

But my Dad recommended that I instead get a good zoom lens as I won't be getting a ton of new lenses any time soon. So... any good zoom lenses for the XSi?


Not a bad idea, but let me tell you: that 60mm macro lens is awesome. I love it! But a tele zoom is probably a good thing to get first. How much are you willing to spend? The Canon EF 28-135mm IS USM is a decent one, very versatile and similarly priced to the 60mm macro. I have it myself and it's the lens I use the most. It makes a good all-around lens.

http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/co...9&modelid=7337

If you want a greater zoom, there's this, very versatile lens:

http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/co...&modelid=17518

It depends on how much zoom you want and how much you're willing to pay. here's Canon's full lineup:

http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/co...categoryid=111

P.S. - when shopping for lenses, it's a good idea to learn how to interpret MTF charts, which Canon puts for all their lenses on their site.


----------



## christian_piper




----------



## [PWN]Schubie

that looks AWESOME!
playing in a chem lab?


----------



## lanky

Could I join the club please ? First ever dSLR Camera, old camera was a rubbish Sony P&S.

Body : Canon 40D ,

Lens 1 : 28-135mm Ultrasonic and IS
and
Lens 2 : 70-300mm Ultrasonic and IS

Got it about 3 months ago, and I am trying to figure out what in the world each setting does haha. Read the manual for the first time yesterday.. I just realised how much this camera can do...

Went through this thread from page 50ish to 168 yesterday ... fascinating.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *lanky* 
Could I join the club please ? First ever dSLR Camera, old camera was a rubbish Sony P&S.

Body : Canon 40D ,

Lens 1 : 28-135mm Ultrasonic and IS
and
Lens 2 : 70-300mm Ultrasonic and IS

Got it about 3 months ago, and I am trying to figure out what in the world each setting does haha. Read the manual for the first time yesterday.. I just realised how much this camera can do...

Went through this thread from page 50ish to 168 yesterday ... fascinating.

Welcome and NICE camera! I love mine and know how to use it fairly well, so let me know if you need help. You can shoot ISO 1600 with confidence on the 40D, it's such a great camera even at over a year from its debut.


----------



## christian_piper

Quote:



Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie*


that looks AWESOME!
playing in a chem lab?


Haha  Thanks! Yup! Gotta love the chem lab.....

Todays fire photo- boring compared to before, but it is a shot of making charcloth in my fireplace......


----------



## lanky

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Welcome and NICE camera! I love mine and know how to use it fairly well, so let me know if you need help. You can shoot ISO 1600 with confidence on the 40D, it's such a great camera even at over a year from its debut.


Thanks, First of most likely what is to be a barrage of questions eventually... lol

Are all the images in post #1692 directly from the camera or have they been enhanced using Photoshop or GIMP or some such other similar programs ?

Thanks


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *lanky*


Thanks, First of most likely what is to be a barrage of questions eventually... lol

Are all the images in post #1692 directly from the camera or have they been enhanced using Photoshop or GIMP or some such other similar programs ?

Thanks


The first three were shot in RAW and then had only minor adjustments to sharpness, contrast and saturation in Digital Photo Professional before being converted to JPEG (the minimum I do for any shot).

The last two had the same treatment, but I also did a single-RAW HDR with a GIMP plug-in on both.

They all have EXIF embedded. I use Elements, GIMP, Photomatix PRO and DPP for post processing.


----------



## lanky

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


The first three were shot in RAW and then had only minor adjustments to sharpness, contrast and saturation in Digital Photo Professional before being converted to JPEG (the minimum I do for any shot).

The last two had the same treatment, but I also did a single-RAW HDR with a GIMP plug-in on both.

They all have EXIF embedded. I use Elements, GIMP, Photomatix PRO and DPP for post processing.


Thank you for the information.


----------



## xguntherc

So when you shoot in RAW. do you have to convert all the images before doing things with them.. Like one at a time. I just can't shoot in RAW. and load them on my computer right?

I've not moved to RAW yet on my D40, and I have some cool pics coming soon. Not great or anything, but I like them.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *xguntherc* 
So when you shoot in RAW. do you have to convert all the images before doing things with them.. Like one at a time. I just can't shoot in RAW. and load them on my computer right?

I've not moved to RAW yet on my D40, and I have some cool pics coming soon. Not great or anything, but I like them.

They work just like other image formats, but they're not universal like JPEGs or GIFs. Every camera company has their own RAW format - Canon has CR2, Nikon has NEF, etc. You need the bundled software from the camera to view them or a codec to view them with Windows Photo Gallery or as thumbnails in Explorer.

You can edit and print RAW files just like JPEGs, either with the included software or third party programs like Photoshop, Lightroom, etc. (with Adobe Camera RAW). You edit them first as a RAW file, then convert it to whatever standard image format.

And as far as converting goes, you can do them one at a time or batch process them. It's no problem with a fast system, I can process RAWs really quickly with my sig rig. I leave the vast majority of my shots in RAW unless I need to upload one, send one, do an HDR, make a print, etc., and only then do I convert it to JPEG or PNG.

Shooting RAW is the best way to go imo. There is very little flexibility in post-process with JPEGs as compared to RAWs. You can change the exposure, white balance, saturation, contrast, all without touching the RGB channels. RAW is awesome and it's all I shoot with.


----------



## EricM9104

Ooo!
Put me down! I now have a Canon PowerShot A590IS. I <3 it, hehe.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *EricM9104* 
Ooo!
Put me down! I now have a Canon PowerShot A590IS. I <3 it, hehe.

Added, have fun with it!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Macro shot of a hoya leaf (1/3" wide), taken with EF-S 60mm lens:


----------



## Marin

Waiting to get my EF-S 60mm. I was going to order it from Amazon but found out that the store can't ship it until after Christmas, which just so happens I won't be at home that week.
So I'm ordering the lens at the end of next week so I can get it when I'm home.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Waiting to get my EF-S 60mm. I was going to order it from Amazon but found out that the store can't ship it until after Christmas, which just so happens I won't be at home that week.
So I'm ordering the lens at the end of next week so I can get it when I'm home.

Cool, you went with the 60 after all. Even if you don't use it constantly or as much as your other lenses, you'll be glad you have it. Out of my four lenses, I probably use it the least, but it's my favorite lens, so sharp!


----------



## stanrc

A few new shots...




























Full album here


----------



## Marin




----------



## Marin

What's a good store to order a lens from besides Amazon?


----------



## xguntherc

adorama.com


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


What's a good store to order a lens from besides Amazon?


Anyone on this list.

http://www.pictureline.com/specials/...Promo%20LR.pdf

I've personally bought online from Beach Camera.

Ritz, Cord and Midwest Photo Exchange are around Columbus and all are good.


----------



## xguntherc

everything I got from adorama was Perfect.. but slow shipping. Amazon beats them in the time of leaving warehouse, and shipping.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


What's a good store to order a lens from besides Amazon?


The other suggestions are fine, but www.bandhphoto.com is the most widely regarded in terms of selection and quality of service.


----------



## Mootsfox

Looking to buy a new (used) lens.

These three are available locally. Any thoughts or suggestions?

24mm f2.8 AIS Nikkor - $90
28mm f2.8 AIS Nikkor - $70
50mm f1.8 AIS Nikkor - $40


----------



## xguntherc

I'll take that 50mm for $40...

amazon.
http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00005LEN4/...7500_pe_vfe_d3


----------



## Mootsfox

That's the newer AF 50mm, all three of these are manual focus only.


----------



## Marin

I'm probably ordering my lens tomorrow so there's no way it can get to my house before I get home next week.


----------



## Marin

Ordered my lens. It dropped in price again too.

Also, are there any low price fish-eye or wide angle lenses that I can get for my XSi? I don't mind it being manual only.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Ordered my lens. It dropped in price again too.

Also, are there any low price fish-eye or wide angle lenses that I can get for my XSi? I don't mind it being manual only.

Ebay


----------



## Marin

Anyways to get my photos more recognized?


----------



## xguntherc

put them on flikr, enter weekly picture contests.. stuff like that. is that what your asking. oh and I posted an edited picture in the other thread sir!


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *xguntherc*


put them on flikr, enter weekly picture contests.. stuff like that. is that what your asking. oh and I posted an edited picture in the other thread sir!


So far all my pics are on Flickr. Guess I'll start entering them into contests, nothing to lose.


----------



## Marin

http://www.amazon.com/Canon-BG-E5-Ba...0807644&sr=8-3

I just got that for half price. (half the listed amazon "mark down")


----------



## xguntherc

Nice.. Well I linked that ebay listed moots gave me. and I'm getting a brand new 18-105mm VR lens for $220 is the deal. thats not bad at all. and I'm selling my 18-55mm for $115 today. haha


----------



## dangerousHobo

Finally updated my gallery online.
Open to comments and critiques.


----------



## dr4gon

From my recent trip to Toronto, Canada.


----------



## Marin

Nice. I really like the lighting.

There are some churches in Maui that are really amazing looking, I may need to take some photos of them.

Anyways. This Gecko was inside a lamp so I snapped a pic of it.


----------



## xguntherc

wow dangerous.. that middle picture sure is a great shot.

There' no EXIF data with it. I wanted to look at it.
Was there any PP done to that picture? very well done, I really like that one.

what camera/lens you on?


----------



## tkl.hui

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dr4gon* 
From my recent trip to Toronto, Canada.




Is that St. Michaels Cathedral? I've only been there once (and i live in toronto :O) and that one time I was there, I didn't have my camera


----------



## dangerousHobo

Quote:



Originally Posted by *xguntherc*


wow dangerous.. that middle picture sure is a great shot.

There' no EXIF data with it. I wanted to look at it.
Was there any PP done to that picture? very well done, I really like that one.

what camera/lens you on?


Thank you
Nikon D40 w/ AF-S Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6
Aperture: f/8
Shutter: 1/250
Exposure Bias: -1.7ev
ISO: 200

There was a little bit of PP done in Aperture to adjust the highlights and shadows. Basically increased the dynamic range a bit.


----------



## xguntherc

yea thats what I thought you had done. it looks really good.

Nice work. and thats great you shot that on your kit lens. the kit lens is actually a pretty good lens on the D40. but I wish it was VR.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dangerousHobo*


Finally updated my gallery online.
Open to comments and critiques.




wow, great shot hobo, do you have exif info for this one?
also, was there any PP done to this one?


----------



## dangerousHobo

Quote:



Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie*


wow, great shot hobo, do you have exif info for this one?
also, was there any PP done to this one?


Thank you
Nikon D40 w/ AF-S Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6
Aperture: f/4
Shutter: 1/400
Exposure Bias: +1.3ev
ISO: 200

It under went about the same PP as the second one, some work done to the highlights and shadows to increase the dynamic range. Also some sharpening applied. It able the same process I apply to most of my images. I love the look of HDR shots.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *xguntherc*


yea thats what I thought you had done. it looks really good.

Nice work. and thats great you shot that on your kit lens. the kit lens is actually a pretty good lens on the D40. but I wish it was VR.


Thanks. I've been impressed with the kit lens too. Not too bad for a kit lens. Its the only lens I have for my D40 though. All my lens money is now going towards my new Pentax K20D.


----------



## tkl.hui

Here's two of my dog on Christmas day looking for his present.









Enjoy.


----------



## xguntherc

those are HDR's then?? so you took 3 shots of each.. or no?

Yea I like the D40. It's fun.

I also have a picture of my dog OPENING his x-mas present. want me to load that?


----------



## Marin

My camera died while I was snapping a ton of pics of this (hopefully to get one in focus). Guess that's what happens when I forget my charger and none of the Ritz Cameras have anything in stock except kits.


----------



## tkl.hui

What do you guys think of these two? Took them as the sun was setting at my uncle's place.


----------



## xguntherc

Nice shot Marin, Well done yet again by you.

and tkl. I really like the first one. I like the misty, almost like smokey look it has, Like a fantasy or something. well caught. Nice eye!


----------



## xguntherc

Nice pictures of your dog on Christmas, Here are the x-mas pics of my dog I said I would post for you guys.

He usually never shreds anything. He's a good dog, we probably shouldn't teach him this. but I think it was ok. He didn't do it again.



There was treats inside the package. and OH could he smell them.


----------



## tkl.hui

Thx. I wish I was able to capture the second one better. I just couldn't seem to capture what my eyes actually saw. It looked so much better =/ I still need practice shooting with low light.

Cute dog







I see that he is shaved







Isn't it cold where you live?


----------



## xguntherc

ya, it's hard getting exactly what you see. I still need LOTS of practice.

and well yes and no, I live in a desert. so It's not all that cold actually. but recently it's been a little chilly. We just recently shaved him, usually he's a puff ball o hair.


----------



## Mootsfox

Not happy with how it turned out. This is at ~8.3x. A picture of the safari icon on my iphone.


----------



## lhowatt

is there like a noobs guide to this? after seeing all these great pics i really am wanting to get into this!


----------



## Marin

My XSi's battery died and I forgot the charger, so I used my dads G10 for this pic. It's a good camera and I'm glad it shoots in RAW, but it's still no DSLR.


----------



## equetefue

been meaning to get another body and don't know what to get

I want a 5d but also want something portable. Last week I left the 1D2 home just because of it's size.

I was looking at the G10 but it's not that small. Maybe a Sony H10 or something like that


----------



## Marin

How small do you need it? I find the G10 to be pretty compact, not to the point where you can put it in your pocket. But small enough where you can slip it into your bag or a jacket pocket.


----------



## equetefue

Marin be honest... You know what I shoot. Will I like a G10 ?

I really want a Lumix DMC-LX3 but the lack of tele is a no-go


----------



## Marin

Well the G10 has very nice ergonomics with all the adjustable settings being right at your finger tips, but it's not like the cameras that have the super-zoom lenses that cover basically everything. That's really the only thing that irks me sometimes, and seeing the photos you take, this may be a huge con for you.

I guess your best option is to try them out at a local camera store, and the H10 looks like the better choice.


----------



## Cpt.Hawkins

I've just started experimenting with some night photography, they're very much first attempts but I quite like the one of the house especially with the sunstars from the windows and also the way the stars are very clear, I took the house shot handheld on 25600 ISO hence the noise and grain, the other one is a pretty rubbish photo but I just like the way my mate looks as though he has some crazy electricity based special powers!
(I threw in a third photo of my new camera, lens and flash just to show off







!)


----------



## equetefue

I really like the styling of the G10 but it's a lot of money for a P&S.

Dunno what to do. Maybe complement the Mark II with a 5D for business purposes. Get a 40D for going around. Dunno yet


----------



## lanky

Quote:


Originally Posted by *equetefue* 
I really like the styling of the G10 but it's a lot of money for a P&S.

Dunno what to do. Maybe complement the Mark II with a 5D for business purposes. Get a 40D for going around. Dunno yet

40D for going around seems like a good plan. The 1D seems huge from its pictures compared to the 40D, I mean 5D or 40D seem to be good for travelling as they are both considerably smaller than the 1D.

Just my







as I dont really know much about all these different cameras.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:


Originally Posted by *equetefue* 
Marin be honest... You know what I shoot. Will I like a G10 ?

I really want a Lumix DMC-LX3 but the lack of tele is a no-go

i have used the G10 and i liked it much more then any other P&S i have used, its still doesn't compare to an entry level DSLR but it is a heck of a lot easy to pack in a small bag or back pack.

if you get it from somewhere like staples they have a 30 day return policy, full money back, i say try it out, if you don't like it return it


----------



## Marin

So on flickr, how do you guys go about with groups. Do you just join the ones that your photos fit into or do you wait to get invited into groups?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *equetefue*


Marin be honest... You know what I shoot. Will I like a G10 ?

I really want a Lumix DMC-LX3 but the lack of tele is a no-go


equetefue, as you know, any point-and-shoot is very, very limites when shooting low light and handheld, and even the fastest ones have sluggish shot-to-shot times, so knowing full well what kind of gear use and results you expect, I can't imagine that you will like any p&s camera.

I guess it depends on what you will be shooting with this new portable camera - candid urban shots? landscapes? You should see about maybe borrowing one and trying it out. Maybe you can lend someone one of your DSLR bodies in trade







Would have to be a very trustworthy person though!

What about one of the new Micro Four Thirds cameras? Actually, the only one there is so far is the Panasonic DMC-G1, but it is a very promising camera and smaller than an Olympus E-series DSLR.


----------



## phospholipid

*I'll play, add me to the list- I just got my first DSLR about 3 weeks ago :]*

Canon XSi - picked up for 500$ on photography-on-the.net

8GB SDHC card [extreme iii]
Canon EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6
Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II
Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 [stock fun times]
Canon EF 70-200 f4.0L

*35mm fun-*
Canon AE-1P with FD 75-300mm
Canon Elan 7E with 28-30mm EF lens.

Here's some pics - i'm still getting use to everything so be gentle!































































































































Next Purchases:
Sigmas 10-20mm lens
Tamaron 18-55mm f/2.8 lens [i get them 1/2 off







]

I don't really need a battery back. i went to the snow and took over 250+ RAW pics and my battery still had juice in it when i got home. i don't think i'll ever take that many photos again. also, I'm in none of the photos. I hope to get better now that i have the 28-135mm.

i want the tamaron bad though, cause i hate the how a 50mm prime becomes a 80mm cause of the crop on the XSi, and the tamaron has the f/2.8 stop







mmmm bokkeh shots.

i convert RAW to JPG via lightroom, no editing though cause i consider that cheating :O


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *phospholipid*


i convert RAW to JPG via lightroom, no editing though cause i consider that cheating :O


ah, this is kind of my mentality as well, i like to try and get the shot i want out of camera.
the only editing i do is stitching for a pano, and im going to try some HDRs soon, but other then that i like to keep them un-touched.

nice shots btw


----------



## laboitenoire

Hey guys, I'm thinking of picking up a "new" camera to replace my old Fuji 2650. I was hoping to spend no more than $150-$175 total for camera, memory, and any other accessories. I'm really tempted by the deal Newegg has on a recertified Fuji S700 for under $100. I read through parts of the thread and really liked the pictures Mugen was getting out of his S700, so I think it would be perfect for me. I posted another thread, but nobody's biting... I was hoping to get mega zoom and at least 7 megapixels for my price, and this seems like the ticket. I figured if I pair it with one (or two) fast 2 gig SD cards, a lens cap and strap (they're missing from the camera), and a cheap 46mm polarizing filter I'd have a nice setup that kicks the snot out of my current camera--all for under my price limit!


----------



## Marin

I get my 60mm lens today, it was delivered already but I'm still in school.


----------



## lanky

Quote:



Originally Posted by *phospholipid*


*I'll play, add me to the list- I just got my first DSLR about 3 weeks ago :]*

Canon XSi - picked up for 500$ on photography-on-the.net

8GB SDHC card [extreme iii]
Canon EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6
Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II
Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 [stock fun times]
Canon EF 70-200 f4.0L

*35mm fun-*
Canon AE-1P with FD 75-300mm
Canon Elan 7E with 28-30mm EF lens.

Here's some pics - i'm still getting use to everything so be gentle!

Next Purchases: 
Sigmas 10-20mm lens
Tamaron 18-55mm f/2.8 lens [i get them 1/2 off







]

I don't really need a battery back. i went to the snow and took over 250+ RAW pics and my battery still had juice in it when i got home. i don't think i'll ever take that many photos again. also, I'm in none of the photos. I hope to get better now that i have the 28-135mm.

i want the tamaron bad though, cause i hate the how a 50mm prime becomes a 80mm cause of the crop on the XSi, and the tamaron has the f/2.8 stop







mmmm bokkeh shots.

i convert RAW to JPG via lightroom, no editing though cause i consider that cheating :O


Lovely pictures









I have two questions and would really appreciate some help please .

First : Would a hotshoe flash / flashgun be useful in taking pictures at a dinner ?

Second : 50mm lens , what is this lens useful for ? again, would it be useful in a dinner situation type thing?

Thanks


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *phospholipid*


*I'll play, add me to the list- I just got my first DSLR about 3 weeks ago :]*

Canon XSi - picked up for 500$ on photography-on-the.net

8GB SDHC card [extreme iii]
Canon EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6
Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II
Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 [stock fun times]
Canon EF 70-200 f4.0L

*35mm fun-*
Canon AE-1P with FD 75-300mm
Canon Elan 7E with 28-30mm EF lens.

Here's some pics - i'm still getting use to everything so be gentle!

Next Purchases: 
Sigmas 10-20mm lens
Tamaron 18-55mm f/2.8 lens [i get them 1/2 off







]

I don't really need a battery back. i went to the snow and took over 250+ RAW pics and my battery still had juice in it when i got home. i don't think i'll ever take that many photos again. also, I'm in none of the photos. I hope to get better now that i have the 28-135mm.

i want the tamaron bad though, cause i hate the how a 50mm prime becomes a 80mm cause of the crop on the XSi, and the tamaron has the f/2.8 stop







mmmm bokkeh shots.

i convert RAW to JPG via lightroom, no editing though cause i consider that cheating :O


Added. Nice shots, looks like you already have a good eye from film shooting. 
And I think the ability to post-process and edit is one of the strengths of digital photography, not an underhanded trick. I try to get as much of the shot done right out of the camera too, but I don't think the process of digital photography stops there. For me, half the fun is editing. I mean why shoot in RAW and spend the money on Lightroom if you aren't going to edit? Might as well shoot JPEGs and use Digital Photo Professional to convert.


----------



## Mootsfox

I need to learn more post processing stuff. Right now all I do is resize an image.


----------



## phospholipid

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Added. Nice shots, looks like you already have a good eye from film shooting.
And I think the ability to post-process and edit is one of the strengths of digital photography, not an underhanded trick. I try to get as much of the shot done right out of the camera too, but I don't think the process of digital photography stops there. For me, half the fun is editing. I mean why shoot in RAW and spend the money on Lightroom if you aren't going to edit? Might as well shoot JPEGs and use Digital Photo Professional to convert.

Well, I got lightroom for free :]. When I mean I don't edit the pictures, I mean don't do heavy changes like temp/blackness/clarity/etc. etc. If I see a pic that could use a -1 or +1 exposure, lightroom does that for me. It also catalogs and converts and catalogs those conversions in a super easy manner. I shoot RAW so when I want to print, I get the fullest color.

I never shot much 35mm, I just use to develop film, a lot. Always wanted to get into it, so my mom gave me her AE-P1 and her Rebel 2000, and I said "i have to get myself into it". I got the Elan 7E for 50$ shipped damn near new [thanks ebay!]. I have tons of way to go, I want to primarly do macros and night shots. So I'm learning. _*I took pictures of the san diego auto show*_ and I'll post those when I get home :]!

Quote:


Originally Posted by *lanky* 
Lovely pictures









Second : 50mm lens , what is this lens useful for ? again, would it be useful in a dinner situation type thing?

Thanks

50mm is usefull for portraits, its the best bang for your buck lens out there for beginners/portraits. its 85$ with a f/1.8 and it's amazing. it's useful for [obv] portraits, macros, and bokkeh shots/DOF shots. i wouldn't say its good for "dinner" situations if you mean pictures of your family having family dinner, because if you use it with an XSi\\XS\\XTi, the crop factor turns it into a 80mm, so you have to be about 10 feet back to get anyone in the shots. it's a pain in the ass when it's not being used with a 35mm. the shots of the ice up close, and the food i shot with the 50mm, same with the picture of my hand. it's got great detail.



















for example, this pic, notice the dept of field? for 85$ if you're into that kind of bokkeh shot [something important in focus, others kind of hazey] its the lens for you :]


----------



## Marin

Got my 60mm lens. *faints*

Going to take some pictures, sucks that my sig rig isn't working at the moment as I can't edit in Lightroom 2.


----------



## phospholipid

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Got my 60mm lens. *faints*

Going to take some pictures, sucks that my sig rig isn't working at the moment as I can't edit in Lightroom 2.









why the 60mm? macroing? imo you shoulda saved up for the EF 100mm,
its rated WAAAAYYY higher than the 60, but the 60mm will take you places no doubt.

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...lts&pollid=636


----------



## Marin

I got the 60mm as it can double as a prime lens that works for the photos I take, if I got the 100mm I would basically be limited to macros. (I could use it normally, but it would be a pain due to it being... well... 100mm's)


----------



## lanky

Quote:


Originally Posted by *phospholipid* 

50mm is usefull for portraits, its the best bang for your buck lens out there for beginners/portraits. its 85$ with a f/1.8 and it's amazing. it's useful for [obv] portraits, macros, and bokkeh shots/DOF shots. i wouldn't say its good for "dinner" situations if you mean pictures of your family having family dinner, because if you use it with an XSiXSXTi, the crop factor turns it into a 80mm, so you have to be about 10 feet back to get anyone in the shots. it's a pain in the ass when it's not being used with a 35mm. the shots of the ice up close, and the food i shot with the 50mm, same with the picture of my hand. it's got great detail.










for example, this pic, notice the dept of field? for 85$ if you're into that kind of bokkeh shot [something important in focus, others kind of hazey] its the lens for you :]

Ah okay, thanks dude. I have a 40D. The picture looks great. But I get your point. Thanks again. Hmm.. I mean, what sorta focal length would be good for that ? I have no idea hence I ask







.

I have 28-135mm lens and 70-300mm lens and I tbh I dont understand what the numbers actually mean. Should I even bother getting another lens or is the 28-135 okay ?









Also, any recommendations about flash guns ? Yes or No ?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *phospholipid* 
Well, I got lightroom for free :]. When I mean I don't edit the pictures, I mean don't do heavy changes like temp/blackness/clarity/etc. etc. If I see a pic that could use a -1 or +1 exposure, lightroom does that for me. It also catalogs and converts and catalogs those conversions in a super easy manner. I shoot RAW so when I want to print, I get the fullest color.

I never shot much 35mm, I just use to develop film, a lot. Always wanted to get into it, so my mom gave me her AE-P1 and her Rebel 2000, and I said "i have to get myself into it". I got the Elan 7E for 50$ shipped damn near new [thanks ebay!]. I have tons of way to go, I want to primarly do macros and night shots. So I'm learning. _*I took pictures of the san diego auto show*_ and I'll post those when I get home :]!

50mm is usefull for portraits, its the best bang for your buck lens out there for beginners/portraits. its 85$ with a f/1.8 and it's amazing. it's useful for [obv] portraits, macros, and bokkeh shots/DOF shots. i wouldn't say its good for "dinner" situations if you mean pictures of your family having family dinner, because if you use it with an XSiXSXTi, the crop factor turns it into a 80mm, so you have to be about 10 feet back to get anyone in the shots. it's a pain in the ass when it's not being used with a 35mm. the shots of the ice up close, and the food i shot with the 50mm, same with the picture of my hand. it's got great detail.

for example, this pic, notice the dept of field? for 85$ if you're into that kind of bokkeh shot [something important in focus, others kind of hazey] its the lens for you :]

The 50mm f/1.8 for macros? It can't focus closer than about 18 inches or so. But you're right, that old lens is still a great buy and a must have. I paid a premium for the 50mm f/1.4 USM, but the USM and the extra stop are well worth it imo.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *phospholipid* 
why the 60mm? macroing? imo you shoulda saved up for the EF 100mm,
its rated WAAAAYYY higher than the 60, but the 60mm will take you places no doubt.

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...lts&pollid=636

Yes but the EF-S 60mm is designed for crop sensors, so you're actually shooting at 60mm, allowing the lens to double as a decent prime. The EF 100mm, with the crop, makes it less useful other than for macros. Personally, I don't think there's much difference in IQ between, in fact, the 60mm is actually sharper - check out the MTF charts. It's definitely my sharpest lens by a wide margin.


----------



## phospholipid

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
I got the 60mm as it can double as a prime lens that works for the photos I take, if I got the 100mm I would basically be limited to macros. (I could use it normally, but it would be a pain due to it being... well... 100mm's)

Ok ok, gotcha gotcha, that's a good point. the 60mm is still majorly bad arse.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *lanky* 
Ah okay, thanks dude. I have a 40D. The picture looks great. But I get your point. Thanks again. Hmm.. I mean, what sorta focal length would be good for that ? I have no idea hence I ask







.

I have 28-135mm lens and 70-300mm lens and I tbh I dont understand what the numbers actually mean. Should I even bother getting another lens or is the 28-135 okay ?









Also, any recommendations about flash guns ? Yes or No ?

28-135mm basically means the focal length it telescopes to. if its 50mm, it means it's prime, meaning it doesn't zoom essentially. as for the focal lenghts, the lower the number, the wider the shot. 10-20mm is usually wide angle, so 17-50mm would be your best focal lenght for sitting down and dinners/ at parties/ out with friends to take shots.

here's a focal lenght tool
http://www.tamron.com/lenses/learnin...comparison.php

you select a picture, and below the picture, slide the arrow around. it will show you how much imagine is gained/loss from different focal lenghts. 10mm gets the most of the shot in, 300mm gets far away shots in. 28-135 is great IMO for a walk around esque lens. if you want, i'd suggest a 17-55 like the tamaron which stops down to f/2.8. that way you don't have to back up to get tons in the shot. most lens below 17mm are wide angels/fisheyes

as for flash guns, i can give you some links :]
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...d.php?t=138907

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
The 50mm f/1.8 for macros? I*t can't focus closer than about 18 inches or so.* But you're right, that old lens is still a great buy and a must have. I paid a premium for the 50mm f/1.4 USM, but the USM and the extra stop are well worth it imo.
Yes but the EF-S 60mm is designed for crop sensors, so you're actually shooting at 60mm, allowing the lens to double as a decent prime. The EF 100mm, with the crop, makes it less useful other than for macros. Personally, I don't think there's much difference in IQ between, in fact, *the 60mm is actually sharper* - check out the MTF charts. It's definitely my sharpest lens by a wide margin.

*Oh, i don't use the 50mm for macros*, i use it for portraits :].
but i want a good lens for macros- really, you think the 100mm isn't as sharp as the 60mm? what about WD?
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...256#post779256
hrmm MTF charts. i'd have to see a shoot off to agree on that. links to a shoot off :]?

as i'm just starting into DSLR territory, i though a f/1.8 II would be a better investment over the F/1.4 just because I wasn't sure if I'd really do that many portraits shots, and I do. The extra stop is debatable, but I don't think I'm that crazy, yet ;]]]]


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *phospholipid*


*Oh, i don't use the 50mm for macros*, i use it for portraits :].
but i want a good lens for macros- really, you think the 100mm isn't as sharp as the 60mm? what about WD? 
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...256#post779256
hrmm MTF charts. i'd have to see a shoot off to agree on that. links to a shoot off :]?

as i'm just starting into DSLR territory, i though a f/1.8 II would be a better investment over the F/1.4 just because I wasn't sure if I'd really do that many portraits shots, and I do. The extra stop is debatable, but I don't think I'm that crazy, yet ;]]]]


Well you said that the 50mm was good for macros, so that's why I pointed it out. No biggie. And besides portraits, primes are excellent for low light shooting without a flash, owing to their wide apertures. I like the 50mm USM because it focuses incredibly fast, unlike my 18-55mm which tends to hunt sometimes.

Hmm, interesting comparison about WD, I never really thought about it that much. One thing that your link points out that I forgot about is the amount of shake when you're at 100mm vs. 60mm; the 60mm has a lot less allowing for better hand held macros. And when I say sharper, I'm seriously splitting hairs. They're both razor sharp, but the 60mm has better sharpness in the corners:

100mm: http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/co...5&modelid=7400

60mm: http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/co...&modelid=11156

(scroll down for the MTF charts)

And another rationale for getting the 100mm is that it will fit a full-frame camera if you ever decide to upgrade your body.


----------



## Marin

Now I need to get used to not using an IS lens.


----------



## equetefue




----------



## Marin

Just got Aperture 2, time to test it out.


----------



## TnB= Gir

*hopes not to not get flamed for not having a $1+ camera*

Hoping you guys could help me out. I got my Woot.com bag of crap in today, and it came with a camera. The camera works and comes with all accessories, I just want to know if it's better than my current camera.

My current camera is a Nikon Coolpix S9, and the one that came in the bag of crap is a Samsung S85.

Thanks.


----------



## phospholipid

Quote:



Originally Posted by *TnB= Gir*


*hopes not to not get flamed for not having a $1+ camera*

Hoping you guys could help me out. I got my Woot.com bag of crap in today, and it came with a camera. The camera works and comes with all accessories, I just want to know if it's better than my current camera.

My current camera is a Nikon Coolpix S9, and the one that came in the bag of crap is a Samsung S85.

Thanks.










i'd say the samsung :], little more pixles, better iso, decent/better zoom, Face Recognition, f/2.8. it's a nice camera :] for 5$.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


(scroll down for the MTF charts)

And another rationale for getting the 100mm is that it will fit a full-frame camera if you ever decide to upgrade your body.


Oh I wish I could afford a full-frame. My next step is first the tamaron f/2.8, than a 50D. mmmmmm that would be a stellar purchase. I figure in 2-3 months i can sell my XSi body+Memory for 475-500$ used, so i'd only be spending 500$ on a 50D. Digic IV? 6400+ISO? Faster cont shots? Yes please :]!

nice community you got going here my friend. i'll be sure to stick around.
*by the way, any recommendations for places to by minimalist camera bags?* +reps :]


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *phospholipid*


i'd say the samsung :], little more pixles, better iso, decent/better zoom, Face Recognition, f/2.8. it's a nice camera :] for 5$.

Oh I wish I could afford a full-frame. My next step is first the tamaron f/2.8, than a 50D. mmmmmm that would be a stellar purchase. I figure in 2-3 months i can sell my XSi body+Memory for 475-500$ used, so i'd only be spending 500$ on a 50D. Digic IV? 6400+ISO? Faster cont shots? Yes please :]!

nice community you got going here my friend. i'll be sure to stick around.
*by the way, any recommendations for places to by minimalist camera bags?* +reps :]


Wow, you just got the XSi and you're already looking to upgrade? And I thought I was bad







The 50D is a worthy successor to the 40D, but all the reviews I have read about them say that it needs good glass (i.e. *L*) to get the full potential from it. And yes, it has the DIGIC IV, but it's no better noise wise (even a tad worse according to dpreview) than the 40D because of its pixel density. The 40D is still a top notch body, and you could get one for a couple hundred after the sale of your XSi. The only thing I don't like about the 40D is the resolution of the LCD screen (the 50D has almost 3 times the pixels on its screen).

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos50d/page31.asp

And for bags, check B&H Photo www.bandhphoto.com. Any bag by Lowepro is very good. I have a Nova 3 AW.


----------



## laboitenoire

Well, I'll be joining up with you guys shortly. Pulled the trigger on a factory refurb Fuji S700 off of eBay yesterday for $105. Judging from the reviews, it'll beat my Fuji 2650 pretty handily. Hopefully it fits in my camera bag.

On another note, anybody got recommendations for 2 gig SD cards that are fast and not too expensive?

Once I get the camera, I think I might look into picking up a filter or two (the lens supports 46mm filters), most likely a polarizer and UV, although people say the UV isn't worth it with digital? If that's not terribly useful, maybe I'll get a decent ND.


----------



## phospholipid

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Wow, you just got the XSi and you're already looking to upgrade? And I thought I was bad







The 50D is a worthy successor to the 40D, but all the reviews I have read about them say that it needs good glass (i.e. *L*) to get the full potential from it. And yes, it has the DIGIC IV, but it's no better noise wise (even a tad worse according to dpreview) than the 40D because of its pixel density. The 40D is still a top notch body, and you could get one for a couple hundred after the sale of your XSi. The only thing I don't like about the 40D is the resolution of the LCD screen (the 50D has almost 3 times the pixels on its screen).

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos50d/page31.asp

And for bags, check B&H Photo www.bandhphoto.com. Any bag by Lowepro is very good. I have a Nova 3 AW.


Yeah














Even though I never shot 35mm much, I use to have a digi cam I took everywhere with me, an old sony. Man that was a tank. You should see the walls of my old room, since I use to develop photos [both 35 and digi] i got stills for uber cheap, and I had my walls covered from top to bottom of pictures of everything :]. So I want to upgrade now I realize the power of the XSi- a 40D would be so much nicer?

Wow-50D worse than the 40D in terms of ISO noise? Hrmmm I do mostly night shots [parties with friends, stuff like that, besides the portraits], Maybe I should just invest in a nice flash first? Hahaha. I was eyeballing the 40D for so long- I'm just hoping now that the ISO noise is a simple firmware fix for the 50D, you know? Cursed L glass :: shakes fist ::

Oh, and here's a shot from the auto show.










I thought I knew a bit about photography, but you know your stuff sir! I'm glad I joined this thread, now I have someone to share thoughts/ideas/opinions with. All my friends see my camera and go OMGZZZZ, I need someone who knows what they're talking about!


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Well, I'll be joining up with you guys shortly. Pulled the trigger on a factory refurb Fuji S700 off of eBay yesterday for $105. Judging from the reviews, it'll beat my Fuji 2650 pretty handily. Hopefully it fits in my camera bag.

On another note, anybody got recommendations for 2 gig SD cards that are fast and not too expensive?

Once I get the camera, I think I might look into picking up a filter or two (the lens supports 46mm filters), most likely a polarizer and UV, although people say the UV isn't worth it with digital? If that's not terribly useful, maybe I'll get a decent ND.


I find UV are completely worth it. People may say they don't work as intended on digitals but that doesn't keep them from being good lens protectors. There's no need to worry about damage, if the filter gets scratched up just take it off and put a new one on.

It's way cheaper to replace a simple UV filter compared to buying a whole new lens (or a whole new camera body if the lens is built in).


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Well, I'll be joining up with you guys shortly. Pulled the trigger on a factory refurb Fuji S700 off of eBay yesterday for $105. Judging from the reviews, it'll beat my Fuji 2650 pretty handily. Hopefully it fits in my camera bag.

On another note, anybody got recommendations for 2 gig SD cards that are fast and not too expensive?

Once I get the camera, I think I might look into picking up a filter or two (the lens supports 46mm filters), most likely a polarizer and UV, although people say the UV isn't worth it with digital? If that's not terribly useful, maybe I'll get a decent ND.



free shipping, $6 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16820134806


----------



## xlastshotx

I want to join the club!

*xLastShotx* - Sony








200
Minolta 50mm f1.7
Minolta AF 35-70mm f4
Minolta AF 70-210mm f4 "Beercan"
Sony 18-70mm 3.5-5.6f
Sony 75-300mm 4.5-5.6f

Code:


Code:


[CODE]
[b][url="http://www.flickr.com/photos/allthesepictures"]xLastShotx[/url][/b] - Sony [IMG]http://i215.photobucket.com/albums/cc182/truthnotknown/13x9.jpg[/IMG]200
Minolta 50mm f1.7
Minolta AF 35-70mm f4
Minolta AF 70-210mm f4  "Beercan"
Sony 18-70mm 3.5-5.6f
Sony 75-300mm 4.5-5.6f

[/CODE]


----------



## TnB= Gir

Quote:



Originally Posted by *phospholipid*


i'd say the samsung :], little more pixles, better iso, decent/better zoom, Face Recognition, f/2.8. it's a nice camera :] for 5$.


Thanks for the response.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

hmmm, i from just a quick glance at the specs i would have to agree that the Samsung is probably a better camera.

nothing wrong with the S9, just a bit dated and the samsung has a few new features that were not available then.

i would say take a few shots with both of them, see what shots come out better, what camera is easier to use and what camera is quicker (especially important for low light shots). Then make the choice for yourself


----------



## TnB= Gir

Quote:



Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie*


hmmm, i from just a quick glance at the specs i would have to agree that the Samsung is probably a better camera.

nothing wrong with the S9, just a bit dated and the samsung has a few new features that were not available then.

i would say take a few shots with both of them, see what shots come out better, what camera is easier to use and what camera is quicker (especially important for low light shots). Then make the choice for yourself










Yea, I've been using the Samsung and taking random pics, and the pictures are definitely clearer than the Nikon.

Danke shoobs.


----------



## Marin

If I want to take some fisheye photos what should I get for my XSi? The lenses cost way too much for me so right now I'm keeping an eye on eBay in hopes a cheap one is put up.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


If I want to take some fisheye photos what should I get for my XSi? The lenses cost way too much for me so right now I'm keeping an eye on eBay in hopes a cheap one is put up.


good luck, i checked every day for a while with no luck


----------



## xlastshotx

Oh and here are some of my favorite pictures I have taken over the past couple days (I am still learning how to use a dslr).


































This weekend me and my friend (who has been shooting with his dslr for quite awhile now) are going to take a little photography trip around my town and the surrounding ones. So hopefully I will be able to get some cool pictures other than macro.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


free shipping, $6 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16820134806


Well, that certainly fits the cheap bill, but how fast is it?


----------



## phospholipid

Quote:



Originally Posted by *xlastshotx*












I love this picture.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


If I want to take some fisheye photos what should I get for my XSi? The lenses cost way too much for me so right now I'm keeping an eye on eBay in hopes a cheap one is put up.


Budget? Or just looking for a good lens that you hope to pick up on ebay?
Check this link out my friend :

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...d.php?t=621567


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Well, that certainly fits the cheap bill, but how fast is it?


If you want fast get either a Sandisk Ultra II or Ultra III. Since you won't be shooting in RAW I doubt you need an Ultra card though.


----------



## coffeejunky

As far as reliability I have never had any issues with kinston products (And I've bought quite alot of them)


----------



## phospholipid

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


If you want fast get either a Sandisk Ultra II or Ultra III. Since you won't be shooting in RAW I doubt you need an Ultra card though.


Agreed. All you really need for shooting .jpg is 5 MBPS, max, as most jpg shots don't go over that size. Even if you are shooting raw, unless you doing 1 FPS [continous shots] you still won't need an ultra till you do many cont shots.

megapixles =/= to size of file being written :]

*for anyone else looking for SDHC cards for their XSi *- 2 x[4gb] Ultra san disk SDHC cards, 35$ at your local costco :]
http://www.costco.com/Browse/Product...lang=en-US&s=1


----------



## xlastshotx

Quote:



Originally Posted by *phospholipid*


I love this picture.


Thanks


----------



## SoBe8503

I never thought about _type_ of SD card. Does it really make a difference? I have a Nikon D60 and will start shooting RAW format here soon. Should I get a higher end card?


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


If you want fast get either a Sandisk Ultra II or Ultra III. Since you won't be shooting in RAW I doubt you need an Ultra card though.


I suppose you have a point there. Once the camera arrives I'll test it with a 128 meg SD card I have to make sure it works, and then probably just get that kingston card. Ironically, the 128 meg is a Kingston itself...


----------



## phospholipid

Quote:


Originally Posted by *SoBe8503* 
I never thought about _type_ of SD card. Does it really make a difference? I have a Nikon D60 and will start shooting RAW format here soon. Should I get a higher end card?

I'd say yes, just because it has room for ever doing continuous shots :]
SD vs SDHC is just the size/speed of the card. HC = High capcity

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Gizmodo*
*Secure Digital High Capacity* pretty much spells it out in the nameâ€"an extension of the SD format that allows for more storage (up to 32GB) and much faster write speeds (SanDisk's latest hit 30MB/s). Classesâ€"2, 4 or 6â€"let you know what the card's minimum transfer speed is. The major catch is that while they look the same as a regular SD card, SDHCs won't work in older card readers. Most electronics are quietly swapping in readers that can support SDHC, and of course regular SD cards work wherever they physically fit.

Won't make your pictures look better, but will record them faster. If you're shooting in raw, I'd saw definetly get at least Class 4, because I know I take pictures of my friends who are always wiggling around, and sometimes, shots come out blurry and I want to take another picture quick when not in continuous mode :]

Here's a quick and easy comparison, using a D80

http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/notag/-278351.php


----------



## SoBe8503

Quote:


Originally Posted by *phospholipid* 
I'd say yes, just because it has room for ever doing continuous shots :]
SD vs SDHC is just the size/speed of the card. HC = High capcity

Won't make your pictures look better, but will record them faster. If you're shooting in raw, I'd saw definetly get at least Class 4, because I know I take pictures of my friends who are always wiggling around, and sometimes, shots come out blurry and I want to take another picture quick when not in continuous mode :]

Here's a quick and easy comparison, using a D80

http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/notag/-278351.php

Great info. Thanx!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *phospholipid*


Yeah














Even though I never shot 35mm much, I use to have a digi cam I took everywhere with me, an old sony. Man that was a tank. You should see the walls of my old room, since I use to develop photos [both 35 and digi] i got stills for uber cheap, and I had my walls covered from top to bottom of pictures of everything :]. So I want to upgrade now I realize the power of the XSi- a 40D would be so much nicer?

Wow-50D worse than the 40D in terms of ISO noise? Hrmmm I do mostly night shots [parties with friends, stuff like that, besides the portraits], Maybe I should just invest in a nice flash first? Hahaha. I was eyeballing the 40D for so long- I'm just hoping now that the ISO noise is a simple firmware fix for the 50D, you know? Cursed L glass :: shakes fist ::

Oh, and here's a shot from the auto show.

I thought I knew a bit about photography, but you know your stuff sir! I'm glad I joined this thread, now I have someone to share thoughts/ideas/opinions with. All my friends see my camera and go OMGZZZZ, I need someone who knows what they're talking about!


Thanks! Well the fact that the 50D packs 15 MP into an APS-C sensor and matches the performance of the 40D (10 MP) is an amazing accomplishment for Canon, thanks to the DIGIC IV and gapless microlenses. It's just that a successor to the the 40D, one of the best mid-range DSLRs ever, should be vastly superior in all aspects. Some reviews that I read had hoped that the 50D would have fewer megapixels (10-12 MP) in order to take advantage of the newer technology and make the noise performance truly incredible.

But when comparing the XSi to the 40D, they're actually quite similar performance wise, but the 40D has a faster burst rate and slightly better noise performance. But where the 40D outshines the XSi is in it's ergonomics and button layout. It's substantially heavy enough that it can accommodate heavy zoom lenses without feeling "front heavy."

So it isn't a quantum leap over you XSi necessarily. I had an XTi before, which was a great camera (still is), and the move to the 40D was well worth it.

If you like the 50D, definitely consider it, because it has some very worthy improvements (mostly the new LCD screen), but you might wait until the novelty of the 50D wears off and the price comes down. And I suggested the 40D because with the release of the 50D, it has come down in price quite a bit.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *xlastshotx*


I want to join the club!

*xLastShotx* - Sony







200
Minolta 50mm f1.7
Minolta AF 35-70mm f4
Minolta AF 70-210mm f4 "Beercan"
Sony 18-70mm 3.5-5.6f
Sony 75-300mm 4.5-5.6f

Code:


Code:


[CODE]
[b][url="http://www.flickr.com/photos/allthesepictures"]xLastShotx[/url][/b] - Sony [IMG]http://i215.photobucket.com/albums/cc182/truthnotknown/13x9.jpg[/IMG]200
Minolta 50mm f1.7
Minolta AF 35-70mm f4
Minolta AF 70-210mm f4  "Beercan"
Sony 18-70mm 3.5-5.6f
Sony 75-300mm 4.5-5.6f

[/CODE]



Quote:



Originally Posted by *SoBe8503*


Great info. Thanx!


Added, thanks for giving me the markup!


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *laboitenoire* 
Well, that certainly fits the cheap bill, but how fast is it?

No idea, probably a class 4 though.

For your camera, you probably aren't going to need a faster card. The S700 won't take SDHC though, so you're a bit limited in choices if you want to stay on the cheap route.


----------



## xguntherc

I have a 8GB Transcend class 6 card... and a friend had a 2GB Sandisk Ultra III for sale for $10 dollars.. would it really make any difference, I'd get less space. but a faster reader. or is the class 6 8GB card good enough. I didn't think I needed the Sandisk Ultra.

Also I have a question. I figured I'd ask in this general Camera thread instead of making a post for it. So my D40 has some dust and what not on the inside of the camera, on the sensor or whatever. I've cleaned everything. and the lens. and it's still in the pictures. only a small mark, but it's there. Whats the BEST solution to clean that. I do have the Nikon cleaning pen with the brush on one side, and the lens swab on the other. that works on. but all it did was make it worse.. I finally got it back to about where it was. but there's still one big spot on the top right. How can I clean the sensor in my camera while being careful. Any idea's.

Please let me know.
Thanks!

edit* oh and one more thing. I'm thinking of possibly selling my D40 with it's kit lens, the 18-55mm and keeping my 18-105 and 55-200mm lens. and when I sell the D40, spending the money I get for it, and a little more and snagging a D80 body. What does everyone think about that idea? It would sure help with the lens options. overall better camera. and it has a lens cleaner built in right.. It wouldn't be much harder to learn it, than my D40 would it? as I'm slowly getting better with it atm. Just a thought. what ya think


----------



## phospholipid

Quote:


Originally Posted by *xguntherc* 
I have a 8GB Transcend class 6 card... and a friend had a 2GB Sandisk Ultra III for sale for $10 dollars.. would it really make any difference, I'd get less space. but a faster reader. or is the class 6 8GB card good enough. I didn't think I needed the Sandisk Ultra.

your class 6 is more than enough, ultra III's are pretty intense, i think which you only see benefits if you're using it for HD video. but for 10$, you can't really go wrong :] that's a nice card for continuous shots









as for cleaning the nikon :[ no idea sir sorry. i say i do agree with your upgrade plan :] take a class on basics of digi photog if so you can get the best bang out of your D80 though! :]!

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 

But when comparing the XSi to the 40D, they're actually quite similar performance wise, but the 40D has a faster burst rate and slightly better noise performance. But where the 40D outshines the XSi is in it's ergonomics and button layout. It's substantially heavy enough that it can accommodate heavy zoom lenses without feeling "front heavy."

If you like the 50D, definitely consider it, because it has some very worthy improvements (mostly the new LCD screen), but you might wait until the novelty of the 50D wears off and the price comes down. And I suggested the 40D because with the release of the 50D, it has come down in price quite a bit.

I think you're right, I might wait more than 2 months. The only real improvement I want is the noise ratio, and if the 40D is just as good, I'm happy. I mean, I don't need HDMI, and the 40D can output to a computer if I ever get series about portraits, right? [you know, auto display picture]. TBH I the LCD screen isn't a big woop for me. Hrmm 40D seems like a solid choice. I'll look more into it.

BTW, I figured out what bag I want :]
http://www.amazon.com/Lowepro-Nova-2.../dp/B0016J1EIQ

For my two SLR's + lens. Thanks for the suggestion. I cruised B&H and man they have some ugly aass bags.


----------



## xguntherc

Thanks for the info there.

So, I was wondering what everyone thought about this. The Nikon D300 is a very expensive Camera.. they are around $1300-1500 for the Camera Body ALONE..

there is a guy locally here in Las Vegas. He is offering the Nikon D300, with a Nikon 18-200mm VR lens. (retail for over $600) a kit with both the Camera, and the lens. Both BRAND NEW NIB.. for a total of only $1,300

thats way to good of a deal. he says they are brand new. I'm wondering if thats iffy. He emailed me back and confirmed the price, and that they are the 18-200 and that it's the VR lens. I'm almost thinking about getting one and re-selling them separate and making some dough. haha.

Does that seem to good to be true!


----------



## laboitenoire

So, another thread on the forum (the one by the guy who just got an S2000HD), led me to upload some of my older photos taken with my Fuji 2650. These are all photos that just happened to turn out beautifully, but only because I had great daylight.

The ones of the day lilies are actually some of the first photos I ever took with my camera, and I was just learning what everything did.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3310/...3556a99e_o.jpg
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3460/...37bc9dda_b.jpg
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3386/...90058100_b.jpg


----------



## max302

Quote:



Originally Posted by *xguntherc*


Thanks for the info there.

So, I was wondering what everyone thought about this. The Nikon D300 is a very expensive Camera.. they are around $1300-1500 for the Camera Body ALONE..

there is a guy locally here in Las Vegas. He is offering the Nikon D300, with a Nikon 18-200mm VR lens. (retail for over $600) a kit with both the Camera, and the lens. Both BRAND NEW NIB.. for a total of only $1,300

thats way to good of a deal. he says they are brand new. I'm wondering if thats iffy. He emailed me back and confirmed the price, and that they are the 18-200 and that it's the VR lens. I'm almost thinking about getting one and re-selling them separate and making some dough. haha.

Does that seem to good to be true!


It is pretty cheap, but you have to consider that the 18-200 is not a very high performance lens, so it could very well be true. I say see the stuff for yourself, and if it looks ligit, snatch it!


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *xguntherc*


I have a 8GB Transcend class 6 card... and a friend had a 2GB Sandisk Ultra III for sale for $10 dollars.. would it really make any difference, I'd get less space. but a faster reader. or is the class 6 8GB card good enough. I didn't think I needed the Sandisk Ultra.

Also I have a question. I figured I'd ask in this general Camera thread instead of making a post for it. So my D40 has some dust and what not on the inside of the camera, on the sensor or whatever. I've cleaned everything. and the lens. and it's still in the pictures. only a small mark, but it's there. Whats the BEST solution to clean that. I do have the Nikon cleaning pen with the brush on one side, and the lens swab on the other. that works on. but all it did was make it worse.. I finally got it back to about where it was. but there's still one big spot on the top right. How can I clean the sensor in my camera while being careful. Any idea's.

Please let me know.
Thanks!

edit* oh and one more thing. I'm thinking of possibly selling my D40 with it's kit lens, the 18-55mm and keeping my 18-105 and 55-200mm lens. and when I sell the D40, spending the money I get for it, and a little more and snagging a D80 body. What does everyone think about that idea? It would sure help with the lens options. overall better camera. and it has a lens cleaner built in right.. It wouldn't be much harder to learn it, than my D40 would it? as I'm slowly getting better with it atm. Just a thought. what ya think


I've got a 8GB A-Data (class 6) and just got three 8GB Sandisk Ultra III's.

I tried a burst test on my D60 and couldn't tell a difference between the cards. I have a feeling it could matter more on a camera that shoots higher than 2.4fps, but on our range, I don't think it matters much.

I've also been thinking about getting a new body, the D90. I'm getting kinda pissed off that I can't AF with anything with AF-S lenses. I want the screw motor.


----------



## Marin

Don't worry about the dust, it's on the UV filter. And the exposure makes my hands look... young I guess...










And some pics.


----------



## xguntherc

Ya max, I see what your saying about those lenses.. but even though they are not high performance. they are $600 dollar glass.. so for one and a D300, that deal is screaming. To bad I don't have $1300 or I would go get one tonight. I guess I could sell ALL my camera stuff. my extra 22" LCD. and my old PC parts and get it. but I'll pass. haha.

Mootsfox, your probably right there, if we had a D300, or a D90 where they have a higher burst. then it would matter. but even with the D80 it's only 3 fps.. and yea as soon as I get my taxes back. or have an extra $200. I'm selling my D40 and it's 18-55mm lens, and getting the D80 body. Then I'll use that with my new lenses I have. I really don't need the D90. ya it's newer, but the D80 is good enough for me I think. unless the D90 body drops in price by then. oh and you just got 3 of the 8GB Ultra III's huh. why 3. thats more than you'll ever need. did you get a good deal or something. I want one please!

and nice hand picture marin. you have some cool area's around you. or do you travel a lot.

oh and does anyone have idea's on how I should clean my camera?? the sensor?


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *xguntherc*


Ya max, I see what your saying about those lenses.. but even though they are not high performance. they are $600 dollar glass.. so for one and a D300, that deal is screaming. To bad I don't have $1300 or I would go get one tonight. I guess I could sell ALL my camera stuff. my extra 22" LCD. and my old PC parts and get it. but I'll pass. haha.

Mootsfox, your probably right there, if we had a D300, or a D90 where they have a higher burst. then it would matter. but even with the D80 it's only 3 fps.. and yea as soon as I get my taxes back. or have an extra $200. I'm selling my D40 and it's 18-55mm lens, and getting the D80 body. Then I'll use that with my new lenses I have. I really don't need the D90. ya it's newer, but the D80 is good enough for me I think. unless the D90 body drops in price by then. oh and you just got 3 of the 8GB Ultra III's huh. why 3. thats more than you'll ever need. did you get a good deal or something. I want one please!

and nice hand picture marin. you have some cool area's around you. or do you travel a lot.

oh and does anyone have idea's on how I should clean my camera?? the sensor?


The D90 has something that is rare on dSLRs... HD video. I'm seeing some good deals on D80's on ebay though, so maybe it's not a bad idea.

I got the cards for $75 - $60(if it comes back) rebate.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *xguntherc*


Thanks for the info there.

So, I was wondering what everyone thought about this. The Nikon D300 is a very expensive Camera.. they are around $1300-1500 for the Camera Body ALONE..

there is a guy locally here in Las Vegas. He is offering the Nikon D300, with a Nikon 18-200mm VR lens. (retail for over $600) a kit with both the Camera, and the lens. Both BRAND NEW NIB.. for a total of only $1,300

thats way to good of a deal. he says they are brand new. I'm wondering if thats iffy. He emailed me back and confirmed the price, and that they are the 18-200 and that it's the VR lens. I'm almost thinking about getting one and re-selling them separate and making some dough. haha.

Does that seem to good to be true!


The D300 is an outstanding camera, best in it's class. If you got that camera, you wouldn't want another one. The price the guy is offering is really cheap for the kit with the 18-200 VR lens, so make sure you check it out before you buy, that it's a US retail with warranty and sealed. But I don't see how you could pass that up!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *phospholipid*


I think you're right, I might wait more than 2 months. The only real improvement I want is the noise ratio, and if the 40D is just as good, I'm happy. I mean, I don't need HDMI, and the 40D can output to a computer if I ever get series about portraits, right? [you know, auto display picture]. TBH I the LCD screen isn't a big woop for me. Hrmm 40D seems like a solid choice. I'll look more into it.

BTW, I figured out what bag I want :]
http://www.amazon.com/Lowepro-Nova-2.../dp/B0016J1EIQ

For my two SLR's + lens. Thanks for the suggestion. I cruised B&H and man they have some ugly aass bags.


Nice bag, it's similar to mine. AW stands for "All Weather," and it took me forever to realize that there is a zipper pouch on the bottom of the bag which hides a rain cover for the bag, pretty nifty!

And about the 40D and 50D, go check them out in person if you can. I've played with the 50D, and man, that screen is gorgeous. It may not seem like a big deal, but when you're reviewing a shot and you want to make sure the focus is razor sharp, it's much easier with a high res LCD. Otherwise the two cameras are very similar.

Auto display? Are you talking about remote capture? Yes, it comes with the software for that.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *max302*


It is pretty cheap, but you have to consider that the 18-200 is not a very high performance lens, so it could very well be true. I say see the stuff for yourself, and if it looks ligit, snatch it!


Actually, the 18-200mm VR is a great lens for the money, way better than Canon's 18-200mm, which is garbage.


----------



## xguntherc

I have a nice bag very similar to that you listed.. and I got it for free with my D40.

So the D90 can record video huh.. and the D80 and others cannot. Thats actually a pretty cool feature. That was one thing I was sad about with my nice camera.. it takes amazing photo's. but my ghetto Kodak camera took really good video. in 720p.

Maybe I'll spend the extra for the D90.. lol but in all honestly i don't NEED the video recording. but it sure would be nice. So if I had the D90 I could zoom in with my 55-200 to 200mm and record in HD video.. hell ya.

I want one!


----------



## phospholipid

Mmmm good news GoneTomorrow,

my co-worker is going to let me borrow his 300mm L lens to go to the zoo with this weekend. gorgeous shots coming up soon? i think so. haha i read about the AW, that's pretty dope, but seeing as I'm in sunny san diego all the time, i doubt i'll ever use the rain gear, but you never know!

@marin - such crisp shots, what was your WD for the shots?

@ gunther: *D80 body -530$, D90 body $870, prices listed on amazon.*









Quote:



*ikon D90 Advantages*

*Resolution:* The slightly higher 12.3 MP resolution on the D90 gives slightly more detail than what you'd get from the 10 MP sensor on the D80. You get a bit more headroom for cropping too.
*Shoot movies with sound in D-Movie mode:* This is the most notable step-up in functionality over the D80. If shooting 720p video clips with a large-sensor camera and SLR lenses is your thing, get the D90.
*Live View:* Live View offers the most accurate method of manual focusing if required. It also allows for easier shooting at awkward angles.
*Rear LCD:* The rear LCD on the D90 measures 3 inches, which is larger than the 2.5 inch LCD on the D80. The D90's LCD also has VGA resolution, which makes menus clearer and preview images sharper.
*Better high ISO performance:* Image noise on the D90 is very much lower due to the use of a CMOS sensor, compared to the D80 which uses a CCD sensor.
*No purple blooming:* If you shoot lots of night skies with long exposures, you'd be pleased to know that the CMOS sensor used on the D90 won't result in purple blooms near the edges and corners of the photo. You get this artifact if you shoot under the same conditions with the D80 due to its use of a CCD sensor.
*Info button and readout:* One press on the D90's Info button and the camera settings appear on the rear LCD. This is extremely useful if your camera is high up on a tripod and you can't read what's displayed on the top LCD.
*Dust-cleaning sensor:* The sensor on the D90 can be set to vibrate at startup and / or shutdown (or switched off altogether) to shake off loose dust.


one more article for you for the d90
http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Ni.../verdict.shtml
scroll down for the comparison against d80!


----------



## Marin

WD is?









Having a huge brain fart from being tired and typing part of a paper right now.


----------



## phospholipid

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


WD is?









Having a huge brain fart from being tired and typing part of a paper right now.


working distance, how far away were you from your birds :]


----------



## Marin

Ahh.

Pretty close to them since I was using my 60mm lens. I would say... 10+ ft or something, give or take a few feet.


----------



## xguntherc

does the D80 have a sensor cleaner?


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

nope.


----------



## phospholipid

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Ahh.

Pretty close to them since I was using my 60mm lens. I would say... 10+ ft or something, give or take a few feet.



wooo those shots came out sooo clean. i love prime lens, that 60mm is a doozy. it's WD is around 10cm so get up close my friend!

food shots are always sexy with macros, you gotta take some food shots!


----------



## laboitenoire

Well, the S700 just arrived, and everything seems to work! Now because it's a factory refurb it didn't come with the lens cap or strap, so I'll guess I'll need to pick those up as well...


----------



## Mootsfox

Newegg is now selling Nikkor lenses!!!!!!!!!

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...e=&srchInDesc=

Just the 18-105mm in VR or not, but still, this is awesome









Took this on the drive home from Great Steak with my iphone. Just posting because I'm surprised how well it came out for a cellphone cam.


----------



## xguntherc

Thats totally awesome that newegg is finally selling Nikon lens. I've been waiting for that. As I'd rather buy EVERYTHING I get from newegg.com. lol.

I found the Nikon 18-105mm VR on ebay NIB for $243.99 and thats the best deal. Other than that, online stores like amazon, newegg, Adorama, and B&H. So far Newegg has the best deal on it other than the ebay guy.

Nice find!


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *xguntherc* 
Thats totally awesome that newegg is finally selling Nikon lens. I've been waiting for that. As I'd rather buy EVERYTHING I get from newegg.com. lol.

I found the Nikon 18-105mm VR on ebay NIB for $243.99 and thats the best deal. Other than that, online stores like amazon, newegg, Adorama, and B&H. So far Newegg has the best deal on it other than the ebay guy.

Nice find!

Oh, hey, I found this site and thought you might like it.

http://www.momentcorp.com/review/index.html

Check out the "Cleaning" section


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *phospholipid*


wooo those shots came out sooo clean. i love prime lens, that 60mm is a doozy. it's WD is around 10cm so get up close my friend!

food shots are always sexy with macros, you gotta take some food shots!


----------



## Dragoon

I'm thinking in getting a DSLR very soon, but I have a few questions I would like to ask before dumping â‚¬600 on a new camera









Right now I was looking at the Canon EOS 1000D for â‚¬599, the kit includes a 18-55 lens and a 75-300 (Which seperately costs over â‚¬300, getting it included in the camera makes it only around â‚¬150 so I think it's a great deal).

So, the questions are:

1. What do you guys think of that camera?
2. The 450D + 18-55 is the same price than the 1000D with the two lens, is the 450D that much better?
3. I have realized the 18-55mm, 75-300mm, etc, is the zooming capability, around 3x for the first and 4x for the second one. But what does the *18*-*55*mm mean? Those sizes... I mean, a 200-55 has nearly the same zoom as the 18-55, and some of them are fixed 40mm,100mm, etc.


----------



## Marin

Took pics of my dog Mac.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Newegg is now selling Nikkor lenses!!!!!!!!!

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...e=&srchInDesc=

Just the 18-105mm in VR or not, but still, this is awesome









Took this on the drive home from Great Steak with my iphone. Just posting because I'm surprised how well it came out for a cellphone cam.


LOL, I never I noticed that the Egg didn't sell Nikon lenses. That's funny that they haven't until now though, seeing as how they've always sold Nikon DSLRs. They have a great Canon lens selection, but they _always_ have the highest prices for lenses, like 100% retail price. I've always found better deals on lenses at B&H, Abe's and elsewhere. Newegg needs to price their DSLR inventory better if they really want to compete.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dragoon*


I'm thinking in getting a DSLR very soon, but I have a few questions I would like to ask before dumping €600 on a new camera









Right now I was looking at the Canon EOS 1000D for €599, the kit includes a 18-55 lens and a 75-300 (Which seperately costs over €300, getting it included in the camera makes it only around €150 so I think it's a great deal).

So, the questions are:

1. What do you guys think of that camera?
2. The 450D + 18-55 is the same price than the 1000D with the two lens, is the 450D that much better?
3. I have realized the 18-55mm, 75-300mm, etc, is the zooming capability, around 3x for the first and 4x for the second one. But what does the *18*-*55*mm mean? Those sizes... I mean, a 200-55 has nearly the same zoom as the 18-55, and some of them are fixed 40mm,100mm, etc.











1. The 1000D is a great camera, so you wouldn't do wrong to buy it. Comparison of the two cameras (with 400D as well): http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos1000d/page2.asp
2. The 450D isn't a quantum leap over the 1000D. I say go for the 1000D and spend more money on building up your lenses. Bodies come and go, but lenses are for keeps (usually







).
3. The measurements refer to focal length (i.e., 18mm) and the the two numbers refer to the focal range of the lens. So the 18-55mm is 18mm at it's widest and 55mm at full zoom. DSLR lenses are never referred to with "4x" and so forth like point-and-shoot cameras are; they are always assigned a focal range if they are a zoom (like your two potential lenses), or if they are a fixed focal length lens (like a prime or macro), then just one focal length. So don't think in terms of 4x and such for DSLR lenses. The two lenses you are considering may have the same zoom factor, but they aren't the same zoom level. 18mm is a wide angle, which will allow you to get more of a shot in the frame, which is useful in small indoor spaces and for landscapes. High telephoto zoom like 300mm is useful whenever you need to get close up of course, for subjects like wildlife or sports. Fixed focal length lenses are called primes, because they are they "primary" lens that a photographer uses. They are fixed because lenses can be optimized in terms of aperture range and image quality at one focal length. 50mm (the "nifty fifty") is he most common fixed focal length lens, and is a must have for any DSLR photographer.

One important thing to know about Canon cameras and lenses: The 1000D and 450D are crop sensor cameras, meaning that they don't have a full-frame 35mm sensor (most DSLRs don't, and the ones that do are thousands of dollars). Until recently, most lenses were designed specifically for a 35mm sensor, which Canon designated "EF." But with the advent of crop sensor DSLRs, there is a crop factor when using such lenses, so that Canon EF 75-300mm lens will actually be 120mm-480mm. However, Canon (and other companies) have started to design lenses with a shorter back focus designed specifically for crop sensor cameras, which don't have a crop. So, the Canon EF-*S* 18-55mm is actually 18-55mm on the 450D or 1000D. Crop sensor cameras can still use both EF and EF-S lenses, but there will always be a 1.6x crop factor on all Canon EF lenses.

Sorry for the long reply, I'm in a lull at work today.


----------



## Dragoon

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
1. The 1000D is a great camera, so you wouldn't do wrong to buy it. Comparison of the two cameras (with 400D as well): http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos1000d/page2.asp
2. The 450D isn't a quantum leap over the 1000D. I say go for the 1000D and spend more money on building up your lenses. Bodies come and go, but lenses are for keeps (usually







).
3. The measurements refer to focal length (i.e., 18mm) and the the two numbers refer to the focal range of the lens. So the 18-55mm is 18mm at it's widest and 55mm at full zoom. DSLR lenses are never referred to with "4x" and so forth like point-and-shoot cameras are; they are always assigned a focal range if they are a zoom (like your two potential lenses), or if they are a fixed focal length lens (like a prime or macro), then just one focal length. So don't think in terms of 4x and such for DSLR lenses. The two lenses you are considering may have the same zoom factor, but they aren't the same zoom level. 18mm is a wide angle, which will allow you to get more of a shot in the frame, which is useful in small indoor spaces and for landscapes. High telephoto zoom like 300mm is useful whenever you need to get close up of course, for subjects like wildlife or sports. Fixed focal length lenses are called primes, because they are they "primary" lens that a photographer uses. They are fixed because lenses can be optimized in terms of aperture range and image quality at one focal length. 50mm (the "nifty fifty") is he most common fixed focal length lens, and is a must have for any DSLR photographer.

One important thing to know about Canon cameras and lenses: The 1000D and 450D are crop sensor cameras, meaning that they don't have a full-frame 35mm sensor (most DSLRs don't, and the ones that do are thousands of dollars). Until recently, most lenses were designed specifically for a 35mm sensor, which Canon designated "EF." But with the advent of crop sensor DSLRs, there is a crop factor when using such lenses, so that Canon EF 75-300mm lens will actually be 120mm-480mm. However, Canon (and other companies) have started to design lenses with a shorter back focus designed specifically for crop sensor cameras, which don't have a crop. So, the Canon EF-*S* 18-55mm is actually 18-55mm on the 450D or 1000D. Crop sensor cameras can still use both EF and EF-S lenses, but there will always be a 1.6x crop factor on all Canon EF lenses.

Sorry for the long reply, I'm in a lull at work today.









Whoa, thanks for the detailed reply. It's long, but very helpful. That link's great, I suppose the 1000D is the best bang for buck. I won't even be able to use its full capabilities in the beginning lol









Once again thank you, that cleared out my doubts. I'm going to check for dem moneyz







to see if I can buy it. Else I'll have to wait a bit longer









+







for the great assistance.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Took pics of my dog Mac.


Nice shots, is that with the 60mm? Is he a Standard Poodle?


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Nice shots, is that with the 60mm? Is he a Standard Poodle?


Airedale and it's with my 60mm lens. He needs a haircut.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Airedale and it's with my 60mm lens. He needs a haircut.


Of course, I don't know my breeds that well. I thought he might have been a Labradoodle at first









Liking the 60mm I take it? Have you explored its macro capabilities yet?


----------



## phospholipid

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Of course, I don't know my breeds that well. I thought he might have been a Labradoodle at first









Liking the 60mm I take it? Have you explored its macro capabilities yet?



I think i like his 60mm more than he does! hahaha
i told him to take food shots <3333 but noooooo. gone, you buy from abes of maine? they're prices are so low that i never thought they were legit :O!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *phospholipid* 
I think i like his 60mm more than he does! hahaha
i told him to take food shots <3333 but noooooo. gone, you buy from abes of maine? they're prices are so low that i never thought they were legit :O!

Well, I've bought two lenses from Abe's: the EF-S 60mm macro and the EF 50mm f/1.4 USM. I got both US boxed retail with warranty, brand new, for well under retail. No problems whatsoever, for which reason I often recommend them. However, I've seen some vitriolic reviews for them lately at Reseller Ratings, very surprising, so I guess I can't fully recommend them anymore. Yet I can say that they are *not* a "bait 'n' switch" reseller. They don't make you call you to "confirm your order" or anything and you get what you order, but judging from the reviews, it looks they're having processing and shipping problems. So in light of that, I think that it's worth the possibility of a long shipping and processing time for a really good price on a lens.

And I repped you for the POTN suggestion for buying used lenses. I've had my eye on an EF-S 10-22mm lens for sometime now, and there must be at least 30 for sale there!

Everyone looking for Canon gear (suck it Nikon people







) should look at their FS section, they have tons of stuff for sale:

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...splay.php?f=14

Looks like the only requirements to buy are 30 posts and 30 days since registration. A lot easier them getting 35 rep!


----------



## phospholipid

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 

Everyone looking for Canon gear (suck it Nikon people







) should look at their FS section, they have tons of stuff for sale:

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...splay.php?f=14

Looks like the only requirements to buy are 30 posts and 30 days since registration. A lot easier them getting 35 rep!


Ignore those requirements, just PM someone who's selling! I PM'd a guy and I only have 11 posts [had about 8 posts at the time] and had been registered for less than a month. That's how i got the my XSI body/ less than 2 months use [ less than 1,000 actuations ] with warranty card and reciept from US authorized dealer for 500$ shipped. I saved about 60$ on taxes+shipping alone :]!!! It's a great place for sure!


----------



## coffeejunky

Just found this picture on my old PC (aplogies for the grainyness, it was taken with 35mm and my scanner is crap). I wish I could go back in time and take it with dSLR







.


----------



## Mootsfox

New lens

















Test shot at f/2


----------



## tkl.hui

My Sister's Birthday cake. She didn't like any of the picture with her in it because I got a lot are of her stuffing her face with cake.


----------



## Marin

Eggnog is still good after the holidays.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *coffeejunky*


Just found this picture on my old PC (aplogies for the grainyness, it was taken with 35mm and my scanner is crap). I wish I could go back in time and take it with dSLR







.











Nice, reminds of the XP default background.


----------



## Marin

Took these today.


----------



## Mootsfox

I don't care for the first two, the last one I like a lot though. Got a full res version?


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
I don't care for the first two, the last one I like a lot though. Got a full res version?

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3427/...3af6fc8e_o.jpg

And here's a food macro.


----------



## Dragoon

Since the 1000D with a 18-55 + 75-300 bundle is unavailable and only with the 18-55 is still on sale, I began looking at some lens, majorly macro capable lens since I love to take macro shots, and I found this lens: *Sigma 70-300mm F/4-5.6 DL Macro*, and it's quite cheap (179€).

Has anyone had any experience with Sigma lenses before? I'm willing to pay a little more for the 1000D + 18-55 and the Sigma 70-300 Macro (628€ total vs 600€ on the 18-55 + 75-300 bundle) if that lens gives me some good bang for buck


----------



## laboitenoire

My dad has a pair of Sigma lenses for his old Nikon 2020 film SLR. He's gotten a lot of good photos with them.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Sigma is a very decent 3rd party lens manufacturer, but the reviews I've read about these zoom/macro combo lenses were unfavorable for both their macro capabilities and ordinary image quality in general. Such lenses have macro capability and that's about it. If you really want to delve into macros, you should get a dedicated macro lens. Optically, they're among the sharpest lenses and can double as a prime lens.

Here's a review for the Sigma 70-200mm, not the same lens, but very similar:
http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/..._n15/page6.asp

And here's another for a similar Tamron lens:
http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/..._n15/page4.asp

You can liken these new zoom/macro combo lenses to onboard sound on a motherboard; it's just not as good as a dedicated sound card.

I'll find some more specific reviews about these kinds of lenses later, but I can tell you that they are generally not well received.


----------



## rx7speed

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dragoon*


Since the 1000D with a 18-55 + 75-300 bundle is unavailable and only with the 18-55 is still on sale, I began looking at some lens, majorly macro capable lens since I love to take macro shots, and I found this lens: *Sigma 70-300mm F/4-5.6 DL Macro*, and it's quite cheap (179€).

Has anyone had any experience with Sigma lenses before? I'm willing to pay a little more for the 1000D + 18-55 and the Sigma 70-300 Macro (628€ total vs 600€ on the 18-55 + 75-300 bundle) if that lens gives me some good bang for buck



















from my understanding the 75-300 canon is junk, slow, soft, and overall not so hot.
the sigma 70-300DL I understand to be a little better but.... not really

the best one to get would be the 70-300 sigma APO lens. not much more but a whole world of difference from my understanding with image quality. still isn't a good ol' white lens and it's by no means perfect but compared to the other two it is a huge difference.


----------



## SoBe8503

Ok,

Can someone tell me what the blue light source is in this pic?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *rx7speed*


from my understanding the 75-300 canon is junk, slow, soft, and overall not so hot.
the sigma 70-300DL I understand to be a little better but.... not really

the best one to get would be the 70-300 sigma APO lens. not much more but a whole world of difference from my understanding with image quality. still isn't a good ol' white lens and it's by no means perfect but compared to the other two it is a huge difference.


Yep, most of Canon's entry-level zoom lenses are terrible, the 75-300, the 55-250, 18-200 are all below par. The 28-135, 28-105, 18-55 IS (not the non-IS), 10-22mm are all decent lenses though (esp. the 10-22mm).


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *SoBe8503*


Ok,

Can someone tell me what the blue light source is in this pic?


Looks like lens flare maybe.


----------



## SoBe8503

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Looks like lens flare maybe.


What's Lens Flare? Never heard of that.

Edit: NM Google FTW


----------



## rx7speed

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Yep, most of Canon's entry-level zoom lenses are terrible, the 75-300, the 55-250, 18-200 are all below par. The 28-135, 28-105, 18-55 IS (not the non-IS), 10-22mm are all decent lenses though (esp. the 10-22mm).

the 55-250 I've heard different on but I can't say yet first hand. what I was told is it is almost like the 50 f1.8 in that for the price while not perfect is a steal and quality is though while not quite at the 70-300 lens is fairly close and close enough you are not going to notice the difference unless you are really looking for it. the biggest downsides with it is it isn't USM and it is plastic cheap build just like the 18-55 IS lens.

I can show some pictures tonight though as I'm getting it today from amazon. and guess we can see for sure though.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *SoBe8503* 
What's Lens Flare? Never heard of that.

it's commonly caused by light bouncing around causing little ghost patterns.
here is an example of lens flare in the upper left hand corner
http://www.newmexicophotos.com/blog/...lens-flare.jpg

or a little bit of an explanation on it
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lens_flare


----------



## phospholipid

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3427/...3af6fc8e_o.jpg

And here's a food macro.


Mmmmmmmm


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *SoBe8503*


What's Lens Flare? Never heard of that.


Lens flare is when ever you are shooting a bright light source, like the sun or a street light. The polygonal/circle shaped things that appear coming from the light source are called lens flare. It caused when light enter the lens at a really steep angle. Hard to explain, here's a picture:










Your example looks kind of weird, but it's the best explanation I can come up with. You can prevent lens flare by zooming in or using a hood.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *rx7speed*


the 55-250 I've heard different on but I can't say yet first hand. what I was told is it is almost like the 50 f1.8 in that for the price while not perfect is a steal and quality is though while not quite at the 70-300 lens is fairly close and close enough you are not going to notice the difference unless you are really looking for it. the biggest downsides with it is it isn't USM and it is plastic cheap build just like the 18-55 IS lens.

I can show some pictures tonight though as I'm getting it today from amazon. and guess we can see for sure though.

it's commonly caused by light bouncing around causing little ghost patterns.
here is an example of lens flare in the upper left hand corner

or a little bit of an explanation on it
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lens_flare



LOL! Holy crap, we picked the same image from Google! And about the lenses, they can produce nice shots, but only at f/5.6 to about f/11 or so. Anything wider or narrower than that and they produce soft images with fuzzy corners. Most camera lenses will have some softness in the corners at really wide or narrow apertures, but some have too much, which the lenses I mentioned do.


----------



## Dragoon

Well, the Sigma APO is a bit more expensive, nealy 240â‚¬. I also looked a bit more on more lens, I found these Tamron AF 70-300 mm F/4-5,6 Di LD MACRO 1:2. From a few reviews I've read, they speak nicely of their quality, but they all complain that the AF engine is quite noisy, but on the other hand... it's only 150â‚¬. But I guess from the review on the Tamron 18-270, it's pretty much the same with the 70-300.

Since you said a dedicated macro lens can double as a prime (fixed focus range right?), a Canon EF 50mm f/2.8 is tagged at 280â‚¬, you think I should save up for that "nifty fifty" macro lens?

I guess a 18-55mm and a 50mm macro should be enough for a DSLR rookie









Going to try to get that 1000D and the 18-55 at the end of this month







The EF 50mm.... that's another story lol

Thanks for all the help guys


----------



## Marin

Typing this on my phone so I really can't go into detail.

Anyways should I go with an EF or EF-S lens for my next lens?

I've been interested in wide angle and fisheye but can't decide what to get. I ruled out the wide angle EF since it wouldn't actually by wide angle on my XSi. This leaves me with either a wide angle EF-S or Fisheye EF.
I was leaning towards EF since that's the lens format Canon will probably stick with in the future.

Any thoughts?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Typing this on my phone so I really can't go into detail.

Anyways should I go with an EF or EF-S lens for my next lens?

I've been interested in wide angle and fisheye but can't decide what to get. I ruled out the wide angle EF since it wouldn't actually by wide angle on my XSi. This leaves me with either a wide angle EF-S or Fisheye EF.
I was leaning towards EF since that's the lens format Canon will probably stick with in the future.

Any thoughts?


Well, the next lens on my list definitely the EF-S 10-22mm USM, so I can truly have a wide angle lens. Trouble is the price, around $700. The only thing to keep in mind when buying EF lenses is that they can't be used on full-frame cameras (if you ever go that route).


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Well, the next lens on my list definitely the EF-S 10-22mm USM, so I can truly have a wide angle lens. Trouble is the price, around $700. The only thing to keep in mind when buying EF lenses is that they can't be used on full-frame cameras (if you ever go that route).



So EF also can't be used on full frame? That's one of the reasons I was going to get it.

So I guess the wide angle EF-S is the better choice.


----------



## rx7speed

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Typing this on my phone so I really can't go into detail.

Anyways should I go with an EF or EF-S lens for my next lens?

I've been interested in wide angle and fisheye but can't decide what to get. I ruled out the wide angle EF since it wouldn't actually by wide angle on my XSi. This leaves me with either a wide angle EF-S or Fisheye EF.
I was leaning towards EF since that's the lens format Canon will probably stick with in the future.

Any thoughts?


EF or EF-S wouldn't make any difference on your camera. they still use the same raiting system for focal range and everything the only difference is the mount. lets take for instance if they make a 10-22mm EF lens and lets say a 10-18mm EF-S lens
both of them are going to be the same on the wide end. equiv to a 16mm in a 35mm format. just being it is EF-S doesn't mean it is going to be equiv to a 10mm on a 35mm camera.

biggest thing with your camera I would say to worry about on the EF to EF-S question is are you going to get a full frame camera? if not no worries as crop cameras can take both (not counting the 10d) but if you plan on getting a 5D, 1D or 1Ds then you will need EF lenses.


----------



## Mootsfox

To nikonains, the DX lens class is meant for APS-C sensor cameras. Anything without a "DX" will work on full frame cameras.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


So EF also can't be used on full frame? That's one of the reasons I was going to get it.

So I guess the wide angle EF-S is the better choice.


No, EF can be used on full-frame, in fact that's the only mount it can use. EF-S is exclusively for APS-C crop sensor cameras, but they can use either mount, although there will be a crop for the EF lenses.

So yes if you want the widest possible angle, then the EF-S 10-22mm is a good choice, plus its IQ is amazing.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *rx7speed*


EF or EF-S wouldn't make any difference on your camera. they still use the same raiting system for focal range and everything the only difference is the mount. lets take for instance if they make a 10-22mm EF lens and lets say a 10-18mm EF-S lens
both of them are going to be the same on the wide end. equiv to a 16mm in a 35mm format. just being it is EF-S doesn't mean it is going to be equiv to a 10mm on a 35mm camera.

biggest thing with your camera I would say to worry about on the EF to EF-S question is are you going to get a full frame camera? if not no worries as crop cameras can take both (not counting the 10d) but if you plan on getting a 5D, 1D or 1Ds then you will need EF lenses.


Um, they wouldn't be the same. There is no crop factor for EF-S lenses, which are designed specifically for crop sensors, having a shorter back focus. Also, the 10-22mm is an EF-S mount (unless they made an EF version I'm not aware of) and there's an EF-S 10-18mm ?


----------



## laboitenoire

Well, I'm loving my S700. At the moment I'm still getting used to it, so some photos I took the other night didn't look too good, but in time I will become the master.









Finally got some memory cards. Staples had a 3-pack of 2 gig PNY 60x cards for $19.99, and dad has had tons of success with PNY cards, so I figured why not. So, I could take 1704 shots on max quality, 3381 on 2nd highest, 6000 on 4 megapixel, 9300 on 2 megapixel, or a whopping 46512 shots on .3 megapixel. With video, I can shoot almost 3 hours on low res, or about an hour and a half on high res. Not bad!

On a side-note... For a camera bag, I'm looking for one that has interior dimensions of 4.2 w/3.0 h/3.2 l, and also under $20. Lowepro Cirrus 100 any good? And also, how good is the $5.25 Tiffen UV filter that BH sells for just basic UV filtering/lens protection?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Well, I'm loving my S700. At the moment I'm still getting used to it, so some photos I took the other night didn't look too good, but in time I will become the master.










Finally got some memory cards. Staples had a 3-pack of 2 gig PNY 60x cards for $19.99, and dad has had tons of success with PNY cards, so I figured why not. So, I could take 1704 shots on max quality, 3381 on 2nd highest, 6000 on 4 megapixel, 9300 on 2 megapixel, or a whopping 46512 shots on .3 megapixel. With video, I can shoot almost 3 hours on low res, or about an hour and a half on high res. Not bad!

On a side-note... For a camera bag, I'm looking for one that has interior dimensions of 4.2 w/3.0 h/3.2 l, and also under $20. Lowepro Cirrus 100 any good? And also, how good is the $5.25 Tiffen UV filter that BH sells for just basic UV filtering/lens protection?


Well the S700 is a decent p&s with full manual controls, so it's a good camera to learn on. And you can't go wrong with Lowepro bags, just make sure that it will be big enough to suit your needs. I'm on my second Lowepro bag, but am quickly outgrowing it (but I have a DSLR, much more space consuming for sure).


----------



## rx7speed

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Um, they wouldn't be the same. There is no crop factor for EF-S lenses, which are designed specifically for crop sensors, having a shorter back focus. Also, the 10-22mm is an EF-S mount (unless they made an EF version I'm not aware of) and there's an EF-S 10-18mm ?



I don't know if there is a 10-18mm. just more or less making a focal distance for reference sake.

as far as the differerence there in focal length are you trying to say that an EF-S would be wider then a EF lens of the same focal length on a crop camera? take for instance the the EF 17-40mm on a crop camera because the EF lens is cropped acting as a 27.2-64mm lens while the 18-55mm EF-S acts just as though it is an 18-55mm lens rather then a 28.8-88mm lens because they aren't cropped? at least that is what it sounds like unless I'm misunderstanding you here is since EF-S lens's aren't cropped and I had to choose between a ef 17-40 or a ef-s 18-55 lens and I wanted the widest lens as the only factor I would be best to grab the 18-55


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Well the S700 is a decent p&s with full manual controls, so it's a good camera to learn on. And you can't go wrong with Lowepro bags, just make sure that it will be big enough to suit your needs. I'm on my second Lowepro bag, but am quickly outgrowing it (but I have a DSLR, much more space consuming for sure).


Yeah, I had a little Lowepro for my 2650, and it has lasted me quite well. The Cirrus 100 says it's big enough for an SLR with a smaller lens attached, which could be nice for when (or if, your pick) I move up to a DSLR (probably once I'm out of college and working, but you never know).


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *rx7speed* 
I don't know if there is a 10-18mm. just more or less making a focal distance for reference sake.

as far as the differerence there in focal length are you trying to say that an EF-S would be wider then a EF lens of the same focal length on a crop camera? take for instance the the EF 17-40mm on a crop camera because the EF lens is cropped acting as a 27.2-64mm lens while the 18-55mm EF-S acts just as though it is an 18-55mm lens rather then a 28.8-88mm lens because they aren't cropped? at least that is what it sounds like unless I'm misunderstanding you here is since EF-S lens's aren't cropped and I had to choose between a ef 17-40 or a ef-s 18-55 lens and I wanted the widest lens as the only factor I would be best to grab the 18-55

Yes, say for example there were two 10-22mm lenses - an EF-S and an EF. The EF-S, having no crop, would be a wider angle than the EF version. And if it came down to absolutely needing the widest angle, then the EF-S 18-55mm would be the way to go, but the 17-40mm lens you mention is an L lens, which I would choose just based on the quality of the lens! And 27mm with crop isn't too bad.

Personally, I don't know if I will ever really go full-frame. Crop sensor cameras are pretty sophisticated these days and I'm betting that Canon will start releasing more EF-S lenses (I know Nikon is releasing new DX lenses this year), so I'm banking on that.


----------



## rx7speed

I have to say you are mistaken on that. all lenses have their focal distance given as how they would be on a 35mm camera. this includes EF-S lenses.
so all lenses when put on a 1.6x crop camera you have to multiply their focal length by 1.6x to see what it would be equiv to on a 35mm camera.

try it yourself. I see you have a 50mm EF lens and a 18-55mm EF-S lens. following what you are saying there the 50mm will act as though its an 80mm lens while the EF-S lens will still act as though it is a 55mm lens.

here are my results of trying that
one is my 50mm lens the other is my 18-55mm lens at as close just under 55mm. which is which?

















yes I know the exposure is a bit of between them but the camera was at the same distance. when both shots where taken. just forgot to take the polerizer off and so one of them is darker. but other then that can you guess which is which without looking at the EXIF data?

if you don't believe me try it on your own.

if nothing else read this page
http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/co...&modelid=17518
and look in the overview and tell me if you notice anything regarding this 18-200mm EF-S lens that would be applicable to this conversation?


----------



## Marin

Some lens choices (for a future purchase):

Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM

Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6 EX DC HSM

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4L USM Ultra Wide Angle Zoom Lens

Canon EF 15mm f/2.8 Fisheye Lens

Sigma 10mm f/2.8 EX DC HSM Fisheye Lens


----------



## mentholmoose

Hey, hate to interrupt your discussion, but I got a new camera, a Canon PowerShot SD-1100IS, my first digital camera actually, and I've been taking a bunch of pictures, most recently of a new upgrade for my laptop. I took about ten good - well, good for me, at least - pictures of the drive and installation, and uploaded them here. Let me know what you think.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *rx7speed* 
I have to say you are mistaken on that. all lenses have their focal distance given as how they would be on a 35mm camera. this includes EF-S lenses.
so all lenses when put on a 1.6x crop camera you have to multiply their focal length by 1.6x to see what it would be equiv to on a 35mm camera.

try it yourself. I see you have a 50mm EF lens and a 18-55mm EF-S lens. following what you are saying there the 50mm will act as though its an 80mm lens while the EF-S lens will still act as though it is a 55mm lens.

here are my results of trying that
one is my 50mm lens the other is my 18-55mm lens at as close just under 55mm. which is which?

yes I know the exposure is a bit of between them but the camera was at the same distance. when both shots where taken. just forgot to take the polerizer off and so one of them is darker. but other then that can you guess which is which without looking at the EXIF data?

if you don't believe me try it on your own.

if nothing else read this page
http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/co...&modelid=17518
and look in the overview and tell me if you notice anything regarding this 18-200mm EF-S lens that would be applicable to this conversation?

What you say is convincing, so I suppose what you say is true. But then that makes me wonder what the point of EF-S is, other than to make the lens more compact and lighter. Supposedly it's to make them cheaper than EF lenses, but the EF-S 10-22mm and EF-S 60mm are both as expensive as EF lenses.

The reason I've always thought that EF-S lenses had no crop is because of reviews like this one:

Quote:

Lens Mount
The 50D has a standard Canon EF lens mount, which will work with both EF and the EF-S lenses that are used on the lower-end Canon SLRs. But if you use EF lenses on the 50D, you will get a smaller angle of view from what you are used to with a 35mm film camera because of the smaller sensor size (this is also often referred to as the crop factor). While this is great for telephoto lenses (as you get a free 1.6 x boost), it's not so great for wide angle lenses, as the field of view will be reduced. *Canon's EF-S series and L series professional lenses are built with this in mind, though.*
(Source)

So I guess that there's some confusion in the way that the description of EF-S lenses are worded. It's funny that Canon would pt the 35mm equivalent focal range on a lens that can't actually be used on a full-frame camera (why wouldn't they just put the crop range?). Thanks for clearing that up!


----------



## Marin

So with that cleared up which lens will be the best choice for me?


----------



## rx7speed

and sorry I just reread my post I came off a little not so happy sounding 

main point of EF-S lenses? honestly I don't know might be cheaper and easier to make as the glass might be able to be smaller as it dosn't need to project as big of an image circle but I don't know there. don't know the specifics on how they make them or the physics behing how it all works. lol and with my skill I wonder IF they even work sometimes









another way I guess would be easier to look at it as is this

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crop_factor

and then the picture here









with a cropped cam it would be like the blue box. so since it is viewing a smaller portion of the image it acts as though it has a longer focal length while the red box would be a full frame camera.
with an EF-S lens though your box size hasn't changed as your still the blue box but instead what you have done is cut image circle size down to where it touches the corners of the blue box instead. you still have the same information inside the blue box but you are not getting as much extra wasted info that never hits the sensor since you don't need to cover as much area as the red box. at least that is my best guess.

also to answer what I asked the first picture was the 18-55mm lens. no marker for 50mm and so guessed it and looks like I was at 53mm.

lol sorry marrin I don't know on that one as I have yet to do anything with a wide angle and don't know anything about them
here would be a good place to start though
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...d.php?t=141406


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mentholmoose* 
Hey, hate to interrupt your discussion, but I got a new camera, a Canon PowerShot SD-1100IS, my first digital camera actually, and I've been taking a bunch of pictures, most recently of a new upgrade for my laptop. I took about ten good - well, good for me, at least - pictures of the drive and installation, and uploaded them here. Let me know what you think.

On most of them, there is a bit of blur from shooting hand held with slower shutter speeds. I can see from the EXIF that the shutter speed was 1/8", did you have the IS on? Might try adding some more light to the shots.


----------



## xguntherc

Nice SSD drives.

I want one!


----------



## phospholipid

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Some lens choices (for a future purchase):

Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM

Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6 EX DC HSM


IMO, fisheye gets boring after a few shots, it looses it's appeal. but the 10-20/22mm are so versatile, and i love the 10-20mm. i've used my friends 10-20mm sigma so many times and the pictures are so crisp and fun and amazing. i'd put my vote to that, snappy little lens :]

today i'm gonna go pick up a rezo 190 bag for my SLR's







i can't walk around campus with 2 SLR's and a 1800$ laptop just out and about, i need protection!


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *phospholipid*


IMO, fisheye gets boring after a few shots, it looses it's appeal. but the 10-20/22mm are so versatile, and i love the 10-20mm. i've used my friends 10-20mm sigma so many times and the pictures are so crisp and fun and amazing. i'd put my vote to that, snappy little lens :]

today i'm gonna go pick up a rezo 190 bag for my SLR's







i can't walk around campus with 2 SLR's and a 1800$ laptop


I agree. It's a neat effect, but if you don't have an actual need for fisheye effects, it's going to get boring after a few shots. A super wide would be more useful, and I'm sure there's a software effect for fisheye somewhere.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Some lens choices (for a future purchase):

Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM

Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6 EX DC HSM

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4L USM Ultra Wide Angle Zoom Lens

Canon EF 15mm f/2.8 Fisheye Lens

Sigma 10mm f/2.8 EX DC HSM Fisheye Lens


All good choices Marin. The Sigma 10-20mm looks pretty good, but it's max aperture isn't as wide as its Canon counterpart (but it is cheaper, might be worth losing the extra stop). And I've always had my eye on that 17-40mm L, the cheapest L lens Canon makes. However, I've read posts on other forums saying that the IQ of the 10-22mm is as good at the L. But it is an L afterall, and it can be used on full-frame, so it's a tough call.

I feel the same way about the fisheye lenses as the others, might not be useful in the long run.


----------



## Marin

Guess I'm going to do some more research on these two:

Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4L USM


----------



## Marin

A little research, here's the difference. Because of the 1.6 crop this happens to the lenses.

10-22mm EF-S: 16-35.2mm

17-40mm EF: 27.2-64mm


----------



## Dragoon

I looked a bit into HDR shots, and they look simply great, that made me curious, so I decided to try for myself using my P100









There isn't a huge leap between this shot and one of the originals like in the HDR shots I saw... But I guess at night and indoors it's the best I can do.









*My bedroom*

I mixed 4 photos, all at f/5.6, ISO-100, but 2 sec, 2.5 sec 3 sec and 4 sec exposure times. Maybe the short exposure time steps are the cause, I'll have to play around a bit more. Let me know what you guys think.


----------



## Marin

My dads Leica M6. Takes amazingly clean pics.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Dragoon* 
I looked a bit into HDR shots, and they look simply great, that made me curious, so I decided to try for myself using my P100









There isn't a huge leap between this shot and one of the originals like I saw in the HDR shots I saw... But I guess at night and indoors it's the best I can do.

I mixed 4 photos, all at f/5.6, ISO-100, but 2 sec, 2.5 sec 3 sec and 4 sec exposure times. Maybe the short exposure time steps are the cause, I'll have to play around a bit more. Let me know what you guys think.










What method/software did you use? You might not have a bright enough image to really lighten the shadows.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
My dads Leica M6. Takes amazingly clean pics.



Great shots of a great camera. The Leica M8 digital is one of the most absurdly expensive cameras on the market, it's as if they make their cameras and lenses out of solid platinum.


----------



## Dragoon

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
What method/software did you use? You might not have a bright enough image to really lighten the shadows.

I used photomatix to process that photo.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Great shots of a great camera. The Leica M8 digital is one of the most absurdly expensive cameras on the market, it's as if they make their cameras and lenses out of solid platinum.

I've seen one of those around... the price is ludicrous


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Guess I'm going to do some more research on these two:

Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4L USM



Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


A little research, here's the difference. Because of the 1.6 crop this happens to the lenses.

10-22mm EF-S: 16-35.2mm

17-40mm EF: 27.2-64mm


Any thoughts on this?


----------



## mentholmoose

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
On most of them, there is a bit of blur from shooting hand held with slower shutter speeds. I can see from the EXIF that the shutter speed was 1/8", did you have the IS on? Might try adding some more light to the shots.

Hmm, I'm not sure if it was on, actually. I'll check that the next time I use it. Thanks.


----------



## default501x

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Any thoughts on this?

at CES i was actually discussing these exact 2 lenses with 4 of the canon employees, each of them agreed that for wide angle the 17-40 is a much better lens for the money, it also is a class L canon lens meaning it uses a special much higher quality glass for the lens. (thats what the red ring means)

final decision: go with the 17-40. after trying both, the 17-40 is clearly the superior lens, but for some reason it is a little bit less expensive.
you wont be disappointed.

my $.02


----------



## default501x

i have a question for you guys.
this 400d is the first camera i have owned that uses cf cards instead of SD, when i got it i ran to best buy and bought the only card they had in stock, a pny 2gb. i figured it would be fine becuase i know of PNY but the card is CRAP. it corrupted about 1/3 of my pictures from CES, including the ones i took with the EF II lens









what would you recommend for a good CF card that wont freaking corrupt my pictures?


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *default501x* 
at CES i was actually discussing these exact 2 lenses with 4 of the canon employees, each of them agreed that for wide angle the 17-40 is a much better lens for the money, it also is a class L canon lens meaning it uses a special much higher quality glass for the lens. (thats what the red ring means)

final decision: go with the 17-40. after trying both, the 17-40 is clearly the superior lens, but for some reason it is a little bit less expensive.
you wont be disappointed.

my $.02

That's actually the conclusion I came to after reading some reviews and comparing images. I should be getting it within the next few weeks.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *default501x* 
i have a question for you guys.
this 400d is the first camera i have owned that uses cf cards instead of SD, when i got it i ran to best buy and bought the only card they had in stock, a pny 2gb. i figured it would be fine becuase i know of PNY but the card is CRAP. it corrupted about 1/3 of my pictures from CES, including the ones i took with the EF II lens









what would you recommend for a good CF card that wont freaking corrupt my pictures?

Just get one from SanDisk.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...3&name=SanDisk

Any of these are good.

I prefer the Ultra cards due to the faster read/write speeds (as I only shoot in RAW).


----------



## tkl.hui

I have a Lexar professional x133 CF card and its been great. Nice and fast.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *default501x*


i have a question for you guys.
this 400d is the first camera i have owned that uses cf cards instead of SD, when i got it i ran to best buy and bought the only card they had in stock, a pny 2gb. i figured it would be fine becuase i know of PNY but the card is CRAP. it corrupted about 1/3 of my pictures from CES, including the ones i took with the EF II lens









what would you recommend for a good CF card that wont freaking corrupt my pictures?


The major well known brands, like SanDisk or Lexar, as others have said. I actually use a cheapy Transcend CF card, only $30, but it's 8 GB and 166x. The first one I had did the same to my images, but I RMA'd it and the current one is doing fine.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


That's actually the conclusion I came to after reading some reviews and comparing images. I should be getting it within the next few weeks.


I'm torn between the same two lenses. The 17-40mm is an L lens with superior materials and build (of course), but I've seen some amazing shots with the 10-22mm and some reviews I read about it actually rate it's IQ as slightly better than the 17-40mm (I'll find and post such reviews later, typing from my phone atm). I'm leaning towards the 10-22mm myself because when I travel every summer, I always end up wishing that I had a wide angle for tight interior spaces. The wider 10mm and wider aperture is what's selling me, but it's hard to resist that red stripe! It's such a mark of status to be seen with that tell-tale red stripe on your lens! The only thing greater is to have one of the larger off-white L lenses.


----------



## Polo224

What's the cycle/lag time on a low level dslr like the XTI? My point and shoot sx110is, depending on the setting, lags too much for my liking.


----------



## dieanotherday

http://www.buy.com/prod/canon-eos-1d...ml?dcaid=15889

good for lab work?


----------



## default501x

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dieanotherday*


http://www.buy.com/prod/canon-eos-1d...ml?dcaid=15889

good for lab work?


the 5d mark II is a better camera IMO


----------



## Mootsfox

http://www.buy.com/prod/canon-eos-5d...210399750.html

If you get the 5D markII, it's probably worth grabbing the grip as well.

http://www.buy.com/prod/canon-bg-e6-...210466822.html


----------



## billbartuska

Quote:



Originally Posted by *tkl.hui*












Pictures of dead things?


----------



## billbartuska

Quote:



Originally Posted by *phospholipid*


Oh, and here's a shot from the auto show.










I thought I knew a bit about photography


Hints..........


----------



## Marin

Noooo to far. I don't like that kind of editing.


----------



## Dragoon

Lens I'm looking forward to get once I have my EOS 1000D:

EF 50mm f/1.8 II - I think this kit is a nice investment, I'm looking forward for it since it has a very small f value, and I love taking night shots, and it is cheap.

EF 50mm f/2.5 Macro - Self explanatory, macro







And by your suggestion, doubles as a good prime lens

EF-S 10-22 f/3.5-4.5 USM - Ultra wide shooting, but its price is/will hold me back...

As for a zoom lens, I have none defined yet, most I see (75-300, 100-300) all say that at higher focus lengths the photo tends to get some CA and to get soft. But if I had to choose:

EF 100-300 f/4.5-5.6 USM - very high focal range, I take that a 100-300 would be better at 200mm than a -e.g- 55-200, since from what I learned lens tend to have detail issues at their extreme settings, but correct me if I am wrong.

And of course the bundled *EF-S 18-55 f/3.5-5.6 IS*

What are your thoughts on these? All of them lack IS, but I can manage to get some clean shots at 1/20 of a sec and even 1/8 after a few tries.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dragoon*


Lens I'm looking forward to get once I have my EOS 1000D:

EF 50mm f/1.8 II - I think this kit is a nice investment, I'm looking forward for it since it has a very small f value, and I love taking night shots, and it is cheap.

EF 50mm f/2.5 Macro - Self explanatory, macro







And by your suggestion, doubles as a good prime lens

EF-S 10-22 f/3.5-4.5 USM - Ultra wide shooting, but its price is/will hold me back...

As for a zoom lens, I have none defined yet, most I see (75-300, 100-300) all say that at higher focus lengths the photo tends to get some CA and to get soft. But if I had to choose:

EF 100-300 f/4.5-5.6 USM - very high focal range, I take that a 100-300 would be better at 200mm than a -e.g- 55-200, since from what I learned lens tend to have detail issues at their extreme settings, but correct me if I am wrong.

And of course the bundled *EF-S 18-55 f/3.5-5.6 IS*

What are your thoughts on these? All of them lack IS, but I can manage to get some clean shots at 1/20 of a sec and even 1/8 after a few tries.











The 10-22mm doesn't really need IS. Only zooms with a long telephoto focal length really benefit from IS, which is why you should get a zoom other than the 100-300mm. Canon has zoom lenses that have IS, like the 55-250mm IS, the 75-300mm USM IS and the DO version of that one ("Diffractive Optics", much more compact than the ordinary 75-300mm and supposedly little to no CA). Or if you don't mind having a relatively short max focal length, the 28-135mm USM IS is a decent lens, which I've been using for a couple of years now. And you're right, all of Canon's non-L zooms are soft at full zoom _and_ at the widest angle (and at really wide or narrow apertures too). It's just the nature of the beast, if you want a zoom that is corner-to-corner sharp at any focal length, you need to shell it out for an L.

To save some money, you can hold off on the 50mm f/1.8 mkII and just keep the 50mm macro for the time being. But I would definitely keep a true prime on your list of future lenses (esp. the 50mm f/1.4 USM). Macro lenses do make good primes, but they don't have as wide of an aperture and they're sharpest at macro distances.

And back to the zooms. When reviewer say a lens is "soft" at certain focal lengths/apertures, they're being extremely picky and are pixel peeping. I took this one with my 28-135mm USM IS at 28mm and f/11, and out-of-the-camera is wasn't bad, and with some PS unsharp mask, it came out fine:


----------



## Dragoon

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
The 10-22mm doesn't really need IS. Only zooms with a long telephoto focal length really benefit from IS, which is why you should get a zoom other than the 100-300mm. Canon has zoom lenses that have IS, like the 55-250mm IS, the 75-300mm USM IS and the DO version of that one ("Diffractive Optics", much more compact than the ordinary 75-300mm and supposedly little to no CA). Or if you don't mind having a relatively short max focal length, the 28-135mm USM IS is a decent lens, which I've been using for a couple of years now. And you're right, all of Canon's non-L zooms are soft at full zoom _and_ at the widest angle (and at really wide or narrow apertures too). It's just the nature of the beast, if you want a zoom that is corner-to-corner sharp at any focal length, you need to shell it out for an L.

To save some money, you can hold off on the 50mm f/1.8 mkII and just keep the 50mm macro for the time being. But I would definitely keep a true prime on your list of future lenses (esp. the 50mm f/1.4 USM). Macro lenses do make good primes, but they don't have as wide of an aperture and they're sharpest at macro distances.

And back to the zooms. When reviewer say a lens is "soft" at certain focal lengths/apertures, they're being extremely picky and are pixel peeping. I took this one with my 28-135mm USM IS at 28mm and f/11, and out-of-the-camera is wasn't bad, and with some PS unsharp mask, it came out fine:

That photo looks really nice







Even colors are vivid and detailed, you used a polarizer for that one?

Well about those lenses, when they say they're soft, they place a 100% crop of the corner of the photo, and it is indeed soft or shows signs of CA, but hell, its a 100% crop... I'm not even feeling the need to shoot 10MP photos, I don't even take 5.1MP ones on my DSC-P100, almost ALL photos taken with that camera were at 3MP, aside my modding project photos.

I have looked into a few zoom lenses, the 28-135 USM IS is kinda out of my league... 457€. The 55-200 USM is 355€ which is what I am willing to pay for a lens. That's why I'm kind of holding back on the 10-22... I would need to shell out min of 700 for that one... or a SIGMA 10-20mm F4-5.6 EX DC HSM for 500, or a Tamron AF 10-24 / 3,5-4,5 SP DI II LD for a little more.

I'm going to look for some reviews on the sigma and Tamron wide angle lenses, it is quite painful to pay for a lens that costs more than the body itself, but hey... who said decent photography is cheap?

Then, for now my selections are: *EF 50 f/1.8*, *EF 50 f/2.5 M*, *Sigma 10-20mm F4-5.6 EX DC HSM*, and *EF 55-200 USM* (Not that I want to take ultra zoomed in photos in low light conditions, as far as my experience goes, zoomed in lenses always have higher f values)

Thanks for your support so far









*EDIT:* After seeing some sample shots of both Wide angle lenses, Sigmas 10-20mm F4-5.6 EX DC HSM will be my selection. Here's a review on the sigma lens

And to compare here's a review made by a user with the amron AF 10-24 / 3,5-4,5 SP DI II LD.


----------



## rx7speed

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dragoon*


Lens I'm looking forward to get once I have my EOS 1000D:

EF 50mm f/1.8 II - I think this kit is a nice investment, I'm looking forward for it since it has a very small f value, and I love taking night shots, and it is cheap.

EF 50mm f/2.5 Macro - Self explanatory, macro







And by your suggestion, doubles as a good prime lens

EF-S 10-22 f/3.5-4.5 USM - Ultra wide shooting, but its price is/will hold me back...

As for a zoom lens, I have none defined yet, most I see (75-300, 100-300) all say that at higher focus lengths the photo tends to get some CA and to get soft. But if I had to choose:

EF 100-300 f/4.5-5.6 USM - very high focal range, I take that a 100-300 would be better at 200mm than a -e.g- 55-200, since from what I learned lens tend to have detail issues at their extreme settings, but correct me if I am wrong.

And of course the bundled *EF-S 18-55 f/3.5-5.6 IS*

What are your thoughts on these? All of them lack IS, but I can manage to get some clean shots at 1/20 of a sec and even 1/8 after a few tries.











the 75-300 lens by canon I would say avoid. from my understanding no matter what you do it's soft.

the 100-300 lens is ok. image quality still isn't that great even more so wide open but if you can get one with USM they are usually at least acceptable for performance on both focus speed and image quality.

as far as being able to do a shot at 1/8-1/20 of a second that might be one thing at shorter focal lengths. longer focal lengths though require a much more steady of a hand or shorter exposure times as the movements gets amplified by quite a bit.

also how much are you paying for taht XS? the XSI isn't a whole lot more and brings a bit more to the table there.


----------



## Mootsfox




----------



## Dragoon

Quote:


Originally Posted by *rx7speed* 
the 75-300 lens by canon I would say avoid. from my understanding no matter what you do it's soft.

the 100-300 lens is ok. image quality still isn't that great even more so wide open but if you can get one with USM they are usually at least acceptable for performance on both focus speed and image quality.

as far as being able to do a shot at 1/8-1/20 of a second that might be one thing at shorter focal lengths. longer focal lengths though require a much more steady of a hand or shorter exposure times as the movements gets amplified by quite a bit.

also how much are you paying for taht XS? the XSI isn't a whole lot more and brings a bit more to the table there.

Well, true about the longer focal lengths... Forgot about that detail, my P100 has a min focal length of 8mm, so taking photos at 1/8 might become impossible at, let's say... 18mm. I am most likely get the 55-200 USM... OR make a long stretch for the 28-135 IS... But like I said, taking zoomed photos at low light conditions has a disadvantage, the f value, zoomed in its always larger.

The xs is 445€ + 23€ for an 8GB SDHC, the xsi is tagged 645 including a 2GB SD, it's too expensive, and for a beginner in SLR cameras, I think the XS will fill in my needs for quality.

I've been photographing the past 4 years with the same Point n shoot camera, no doubt an excellent camera and my dad, since it's his camera (as christmas present) was worth every € I dropped on that stores counter (IIRC around 400€ and a few dozen more for a 256MB Memory Stick Pro). To be honest, I'm really a fan of that Sony camera, never fell on the ground, not a single scratch on it, never failed


















Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 









Hmmm... toast... om nom nom nom...

Excellent macro photo... I'm... hungry. lol


----------



## rx7speed

there are a few lenses that actually would not require longer exposure times being that you zoomed in more. it depends on the apreture setup. many lenses you see are lets say f/3.5-5.6 those will do as you said and lose light as you zoom in more. quite a few of the canon L lenses (though from the sounds of it out of your budget) are constant value. so with these lets say you zoom from 70mm to 200mm you can still keep the same wide open apreture value. though you can get some of these lenses that are not L lenses either though I don't believe non-L constant apreture lenses are common.

didn't know about the XS vs XSI pricing over there but figured it was worth a shot at least. here they seem to be overlaping on price depending on what store you to go.

one other question is what about the 55-250 IS lens? doesn't have USM but honestly I would rather have IS then USM for a slow telephoto lens. quality wise though I can't say as I don't know much about the 55-200 USM lens. another one of those things here in the states they seem to be about the same price though I don't know about there in portugal.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dragoon*


That photo looks really nice







Even colors are vivid and detailed, you used a polarizer for that one?

Well about those lenses, when they say they're soft, they place a 100% crop of the corner of the photo, and it is indeed soft or shows signs of CA, but hell, its a 100% crop... I'm not even feeling the need to shoot 10MP photos, I don't even take 5.1MP ones on my DSC-P100, almost ALL photos taken with that camera were at 3MP, aside my modding project photos.

I have looked into a few zoom lenses, the 28-135 USM IS is kinda out of my league... 457â‚¬. The 55-200 USM is 355â‚¬ which is what I am willing to pay for a lens. That's why I'm kind of holding back on the 10-22... I would need to shell out min of 700 for that one... or a SIGMA 10-20mm F4-5.6 EX DC HSM for 500, or a Tamron AF 10-24 / 3,5-4,5 SP DI II LD for a little more.

I'm going to look for some reviews on the sigma and Tamron wide angle lenses, it is quite painful to pay for a lens that costs more than the body itself, but hey... who said decent photography is cheap?

Then, for now my selections are: *EF 50 f/1.8*, *EF 50 f/2.5 M*, *Sigma 10-20mm F4-5.6 EX DC HSM*, and *EF 55-200 USM* (Not that I want to take ultra zoomed in photos in low light conditions, as far as my experience goes, zoomed in lenses always have higher f values)

Thanks for your support so far









*EDIT:* After seeing some sample shots of both Wide angle lenses, Sigmas 10-20mm F4-5.6 EX DC HSM will be my selection. Here's a review on the sigma lens

And to compare here's a review made by a user with the amron AF 10-24 / 3,5-4,5 SP DI II LD.


No polarizer, just some sharpening and minor adjustments to the levels. I find that when shooting RAW, I typically underexpose landscapes by about -.5 EV, which makes properly exposed skies, and foreground elements which are too dark I either do an exposure blend or use the dodge/burn tool in PS.

And I totally understand monetary limitations for lenses, but honestly Dragoon, why not just get maybe a really good zoom and macro for now, instead of getting several so-so lenses? That's what I've tried to do. Slowly accumulate good quality lenses, because you will always have those, whereas bodies will come and go.


----------



## laboitenoire

Finally am getting the hang of my S700, so here's a few test shots that were mostly taken it macro mode. I futzed with the white balance to make it a bit more towards the yellow end, as I've found that the fluorescent settings make stuff look even worse... Although on this setting colors are a bit more vivid (although that might be because I tested the so-called "Fuji Chrome" mode on a few shots.

Here's a sampling of them. Didn't realize that I was shooting ISO 400, so there's a bit of noise. However, there's almost no noise in black and white. And, there was no tripod use on any of these, which is surprising because I'm usually not steady enough to get blur-free pics in this kind of light. If you want to see the rest of the shots, just check out the Flickr.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *rx7speed*


the 75-300 lens by canon I would say avoid. from my understanding no matter what you do it's soft.

the 100-300 lens is ok. image quality still isn't that great even more so wide open but if you can get one with USM they are usually at least acceptable for performance on both focus speed and image quality.

as far as being able to do a shot at 1/8-1/20 of a second that might be one thing at shorter focal lengths. longer focal lengths though require a much more steady of a hand or shorter exposure times as the movements gets amplified by quite a bit.

also how much are you paying for taht XS? the XSI isn't a whole lot more and brings a bit more to the table there.


You're right, I actually meant to recommend the EF *70* - 300mm f/4-5.6 USM IS, which is substantially sharper and has better contrast, esp. at full tele. I get the two mixed up quite a bit.


----------



## Dragoon

Got it...



























One word... epic.









Well... I know what you mean, it's an expensive investment, but it gets cheaper in the long run.

What macro and telephoto lens would you recommend?

I think the Sigma 10-22 is really on par with the Canon counterpart, and the 50mm f/1.8 is so cheap that I think I can't just pass the chance of such cheap and relatively good wide aperture lens.

Once again, GoneTomorrow, thanks for the help. The 1000D is a fantastic camera!


----------



## Mootsfox

I can't keep track of Canon's number models. Is that the XS or XSi?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


I can't keep track of Canon's number models. Is that the XS or XSi?


1000D=XS, 450D=XSi, 400D=XTi, 350D=XT, 300D (Digital Rebel original). In Europe they don't say "Digital Rebel XS" on them but just have the model number. I guess we can't handle numbers here









They are confusing, seems like 1000D should be the XSi model number doesn't it?

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dragoon*


Got it...









One word... epic.









Well... I know what you mean, it's an expensive investment, but it gets cheaper in the long run.

What macro and telephoto lens would you recommend?

I think the Sigma 10-22 is really on par with the Canon counterpart, and the 50mm f/1.8 is so cheap that I think I can't just pass the chance of such cheap and relatively good wide aperture lens.

Once again, GoneTomorrow, thanks for the help. The 1000D is a fantastic camera!











For a macro lens I must recommend the EF-S 60mm f/2.8 USM, because I own it and it's amazing, my sharpest lens. The EF 50mm f/2.5 you listed is fair in terms of image quality, but lacks USM, although fast auto focusing isn't necessarily that important in macro photography since you end up using MF a lot. But the price difference for 60mm isn't much, and you get so much more.

For tele lenses, it's a jumble with Canon. As I said, the EF *70*-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM (not the 75-300mm like I stupidly said at first) is decent, but it's a bit pricey for sure. But the EF-S
55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS is much cheaper and a good value for what you get. It doesn't have USM, but does have IS, something you will definitely be glad to have on a lens like that.

There are many other lenses in the tele zoom and macro category, check out some reviews:

http://www.cameralabs.com/lenses/Can..._listing.shtml
http://www.popphoto.com/archive.asp?...0&article_id=0
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/R...s-Reviews.aspx
http://www.canonlensreview.com/


----------



## Mootsfox

Do the 40D and 50D have another name too?


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Do the 40D and 50D have another name too?


I don't think so.


----------



## Dragoon

You can add my 1000D to the first post


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Do the 40D and 50D have another name too?


Nope, they're hardcore enough to have numbers only.


----------



## Marin

Just noticed some people in the first post have links to their Flickr page. Can you hyperlink mine?

http://flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dragoon*


You can add my 1000D to the first post











Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Just notice some people in the first post have links to their Flickr page. Can you hyperlink mine?

http://flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/


Done...

And a minor house cleaning request: could everyone on the list who no longer has a particular camera on that list (i.e. sold it when you upgraded) let me know so I can remove it. Makes the list not quite so long.


----------



## Marin

Any tripod recommendations?

Mine from 6th grade (i'm in 11th now, lol) has a huge bent leg and looks like it's ready to finally be put to rest. So I need a new tripod. I'm looking for one that's pretty versatile and is also easy to travel with.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Any tripod recommendations?

Mine from 6th grade (i'm in 11th now, lol) has a huge bent leg and looks like it's ready to finally be put to rest. So I need a new tripod. I'm looking for one that's pretty versatile and is also easy to travel with.

I have a Manfrotto 725b, one of their cheapest tripods. It's still about $145 or so, but so worth it, the quality is much better than the cheapy ones you see at Best Buy. It's also relatively lightweight compared to some of the beastly high-end tripods they make. Also check out Slik tripods, I've read good things about them as well.


----------



## Mootsfox

Oh, could add
"Nikkor AI 50mm f/2.0"
for me please?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Oh, could add
"Nikkor AI 50mm f/2.0"
for me please?









You got it!


----------



## PianoFan

I would like to join the club if that's possible. I own the following equipment:

Nikon D40 body
Nikor AF-S DX 18-55 II f/3.5 lens
Nikor AF-S DX VR 55-200 f/4 lens

I've only purchased these products about two months ago. I'm pretty new to the DSLR world. I've got hooked because of my father who always owned good camera's from the old Analog Eos series from Canon up too the Canon 350D and recently the Sony A350.


----------



## laboitenoire

Here's the link to my Flickr.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *PianoFan* 
I would like to join the club if that's possible. I own the following equipment:

Nikon D40 body
Nikor AF-S DX 18-55 II f/3.5 lens
Nikor AF-S DX VR 55-200 f/4 lens

I've only purchased these products about two months ago. I'm pretty new to the DSLR world. I've got hooked because of my father who always owned good camera's from the old Analog Eos series from Canon up too the Canon 350D and recently the Sony A350.

Added. Welcome!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *laboitenoire* 
Finally am getting the hang of my S700, so here's a few test shots that were mostly taken it macro mode. I futzed with the white balance to make it a bit more towards the yellow end, as I've found that the fluorescent settings make stuff look even worse... Although on this setting colors are a bit more vivid (although that might be because I tested the so-called "Fuji Chrome" mode on a few shots.

Here's a sampling of them. Didn't realize that I was shooting ISO 400, so there's a bit of noise. However, there's almost no noise in black and white. And, there was no tripod use on any of these, which is surprising because I'm usually not steady enough to get blur-free pics in this kind of light. If you want to see the rest of the shots, just check out the Flickr.

Very decent, esp. the shoe shot. And the noise isn't so bad that it couldn't be taken care of with Neat Image.

P.S. - added your flickr.


----------



## rx7speed

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
1000D=XS, 450D=XSi, 400D=XTi, 350D=XT, 300D (Digital Rebel original). In Europe they don't say "Digital Rebel XS" on them but just have the model number. I guess we can't handle numbers here









They are confusing, seems like 1000D should be the XSi model number doesn't it?


don't forget the kiss and kiss x2


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *rx7speed* 
don't forget the kiss and kiss x2

LOL, yeah, I forgot the Japanese model names. I don't know if I could own a camera with "Kiss" stamped on it.


----------



## Marin

I'm loving this macro lens.


----------



## Dragoon

That photo was taken with the EF-S 60mm Macro? Awesome shot.

I have two questions though... Last night I tried to take some night shots through the window of my bedroom (Taken at f/3.5 and f/7.1) with high exposure times (5~10 sec). I noticed that the photo blurred quite a bit, is it normal with such high exposure times?

I removed the lens to check it properly for some defects (none), when I placed it back on the body I got a tiny particle of dust on the lower left corner of the sensor (what rotten luck), the self cleaning process isn't strong enough to shake it out, so I have to clean manually. My doubt is, I have a small micro fiber cloth, is it safe to use it to remove the dust particle off the sensor by passing on it *very* lightly, just enough for the weight of the tip of the cloth to grab it?

Cheers

EDIT: Gone, just read your edit on the previous page on the recommendations on the macro and telephoto lens. The macro lens is affordable, and if it's worth it, I'll save up. The 55-250 IS seems like an excellent deal.

Well then, (finally...I think) it's settled:

*EF 50mm f/1.8 II* - 108€
*Sigma 10-20mm F4-5.6 EX DC HSM* - 496€ I think Sigmas HSM is like Canons USM AF motors
*EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS* 289€
*EF-S 60mm f/2.8 Macro USM* 419€


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


I'm loving this macro lens.


Yeah, awesome isn't it?

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dragoon*


That photo was taken with the EF-S 60mm Macro? Awesome shot.

I have two questions though... Last night I tried to take some night shots through the window of my bedroom (Taken at f/3.5 and f/7.1) with high exposure times (5~10 sec). I noticed that the photo blurred quite a bit, is it normal with such high exposure times?

I removed the lens to check it properly for some defects (none), when I placed it back on the body I got a tiny particle of dust on the lower left corner of the sensor (what rotten luck), the self cleaning process isn't strong enough to shake it out, so I have to clean manually. My doubt is, I have a small micro fiber cloth, is it safe to use it to remove the dust particle off the sensor by passing on it *very* lightly, just enough for the weight of the tip of the cloth to grab it?

Cheers

EDIT: Gone, just read your edit on the previous page on the recommendations on the macro and telephoto lens. The macro lens is affordable, and if it's worth it, I'll save up. The 55-250 IS seems like an excellent deal.

Well then, (finally...I think) it's settled:

*EF 50mm f/1.8 II* - 108€
*Sigma 10-20mm F4-5.6 EX DC HSM* - 496€ I think Sigmas HSM is like Canons USM AF motors
*EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS* 289€
*EF-S 60mm f/2.8 Macro USM* 419€


Dragoon, when doing long exposures with the camera stationary, you need to turn the IS on the lens off. It plays havoc with the camera when doing long exposures for some reasons. Try again and see for yourself: watch the AF points during the exposure, you'll notice the picture "drifts" slowly. It's strange and took me forever to figure out that IS was the culprit. IS is only for shorter shutter speeds that are hand held.

And definitely DON'T touch your sensor with even a microfiber cloth. There are some options if you have a tenacious piece of dust on your sensor:
1. Use a bulb blower (I use a Giotto Rocket blower, in expensive, usually takes care of things)
2. Use a Copperhill cleaning kit (http://www.copperhillimages.com/index.php)
3. Send it off to Canon to be cleaned, or take to a local authorized service center (if there is one)
And I wouldn't use canned air either. Some do, but canned air puts out a lot of pressure and can actually dislodge components or force dust even further into the camera body. Plus, there's always the risk that an unexpected jet of liquid will come out.

And your lens lineup looks decent - although, you could do one of two things two things: either don't get the 50mm f/1.8 and put the cost of that towards the EF 70-300mm USM IS, OR dump the EF 55-250mm f/4-5.6 and put the money from that towards the EF 50mm f/1.4 USM. Just a thought, that way you can have better glass and then eventually get the other. The EF-S 60m, and Sigma 10-20mm are definitely very good choices. The Sigma is nearly the equal of the Canon 10-22mm, so I'm interested to see how it works for you.


----------



## SoBe8503

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Any tripod recommendations?

Mine from 6th grade (i'm in 11th now, lol) has a huge bent leg and looks like it's ready to finally be put to rest. So I need a new tripod. I'm looking for one that's pretty versatile and is also easy to travel with.


Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
I have a Manfrotto 725b, one of their cheapest tripods. It's still about $145 or so, but so worth it, the quality is much better than the cheapy ones you see at Best Buy. It's also relatively lightweight compared to some of the beastly high-end tripods they make. Also check out Slik tripods, I've read good things about them as well.

Does it really matter? As long as it holds the camera steady, who cares (Real question, not trying to be an ass







)?


----------



## laboitenoire

Well, I suppose the higher-end tripods might have heavier-duty clutch mechanisms for adjusting, so they probably don't wear out as easily. I've got a fairly old tripod (my dad got it with his first SLR I think back in the 80s...), and it works fine.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *SoBe8503* 
Does it really matter? As long as it holds the camera steady, who cares (Real question, not trying to be an ass







)?

I thought the same thing for a long time until I actually got a quality tripod. All I can say is try one if you can, there are several decent brands: Manfrotto, Gitzo, Slik, etc. Yes, the cheaper ones get the job done I suppose, but the build quality is terrible, making fine adjustments is a hassle, they can be wobbly, aren't as durable, etc. I had a Vanguard tripod that I got at Meijer for a couple of years, and it was ok I guess, but the quick release plate was crappy and wouldn't stay tightened, and it left circular scratches on the bottom of the camera body. Also, there was a knob for every single kind of movement, whereas on my Manfrotto, you simple twist one knob, which frees the ball joint and you can move the camera to any position quickly.


----------



## SoBe8503

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
I thought the same thing for a long time until I actually got a quality tripod. All I can say is try one if you can, there are several decent brands: Manfrotto, Gitzo, Slik, etc. Yes, the cheaper ones get the job done I suppose, but the build quality is terrible, making fine adjustments is a hassle, they can be wobbly, aren't as durable, etc. I had a Vanguard tripod that I got at Meijer for a couple of years, and it was ok I guess, but the quick release plate was crappy and wouldn't stay tightened, and it left circular scratches on the bottom of the camera body. Also, there was a knob for every single kind of movement, whereas on my Manfrotto, you simple twist one knob, which frees the ball joint and you can move the camera to any position quickly.

Well that makes sense. I've had the same tripod forever (Dad used to use it for his in the early 80s). He spent some decent moolah on it and I could never figure out why he would. Thanx for the info!


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Any tripod recommendations?

Mine from 6th grade (i'm in 11th now, lol) has a huge bent leg and looks like it's ready to finally be put to rest. So I need a new tripod. I'm looking for one that's pretty versatile and is also easy to travel with.


i got the Manfrotto 785B, advantage, its a 5 section so it folds REALLY small.
i stick it in my back pack for skiing and biking no problem.

the down side, with 5 sections its not as sturdy as the 725b, Gone recommended but still pretty good none the less.

i would recommend going to a camera shop and just playing around with a few of them to see what would fit your needs, but if you want something easy to travel with the 785 delivers.


----------



## Dragoon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Yeah, awesome isn't it?

Dragoon, when doing long exposures with the camera stationary, you need to turn the IS on the lens off. It plays havoc with the camera when doing long exposures for some reasons. Try again and see for yourself: watch the AF points during the exposure, you'll notice the picture "drifts" slowly. It's strange and took me forever to figure out that IS was the culprit. IS is only for shorter shutter speeds that are hand held.

And definitely DON'T touch your sensor with even a microfiber cloth. There are some options if you have a tenacious piece of dust on your sensor:
1. Use a bulb blower (I use a Giotto Rocket blower, in expensive, usually takes care of things)
2. Use a Copperhill cleaning kit (http://www.copperhillimages.com/index.php)
3. Send it off to Canon to be cleaned, or take to a local authorized service center (if there is one)
And I wouldn't use canned air either. Some do, but canned air puts out a lot of pressure and can actually dislodge components or force dust even further into the camera body. Plus, there's always the risk that an unexpected jet of liquid will come out.

And your lens lineup looks decent - although, you could do one of two things two things: either don't get the 50mm f/1.8 and put the cost of that towards the EF 70-300mm USM IS, OR dump the EF 55-250mm f/4-5.6 and put the money from that towards the EF 50mm f/1.4 USM. Just a thought, that way you can have better glass and then eventually get the other. The EF-S 60m, and Sigma 10-20mm are definitely very good choices. The Sigma is nearly the equal of the Canon 10-22mm, so I'm interested to see how it works for you.


Alright, then I definitely will not use the cloth. Well, this morning I was looking into some cleaning kits, those blowers aren't too expensive, but if they do the job, fine by me, imho it's better to use air to "touch" the sensor than something material.

I was expecting the 50mm f/1.4 USM to be expensive as hell lol
To buy that one, I'll put the 50mm f/1.8 down and hold the 55-250 for much later... I'll focus first on the Sigma 10-20 *(Love how the Canon compatible is cheaper than Nikon and Pentax







)*, then the 60mm macro, then the 55-250 (the 70-300 is out of reach... nearly 700€). That'll take me a year lol, all summed up goes 1.5k easily (I might even be lucky and prices drop in the meantime)

Oh, and is this you were talking about?








Does it always work out for you? That cleaning kit you linked looks very nice, but I can't find it around here. I'll go with that rocket blower.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dragoon*


Alright, then I definitely will not use the cloth. Well, this morning I was looking into some cleaning kits, those blowers aren't too expensive, but if they do the job, fine by me, imho it's better to use air to "touch" the sensor than something material.

I was expecting the 50mm f/1.4 USM to be expensive as hell lol
To buy that one, I'll put the 50mm f/1.8 down and hold the 55-250 for much later... I'll focus first on the Sigma 10-20 *(Love how the Canon compatible is cheaper than Nikon and Pentax







)*, then the 60mm macro, then the 55-250 (the 70-300 is out of reach... nearly 700â‚¬). That'll take me a year lol, all summed up goes 1.5k easily (I might even be lucky and prices drop in the meantime)

Oh, and is this you were talking about?








Does it always work out for you? That cleaning kit you linked looks very nice, but I can't find it around here. I'll go with that rocket blower.











Yeah, that's the Giotto. I have a medium blower I think, and it fits snugly into my camera case (the nozzle is removable). It's fairly effective. When I use it, I hold the camera body facing the ground, and use the blower from the bottom so dust will fall out. I do this religiously to prevent dust from sticking. If the Giotto doesn't get rid of it, then you will have to get it cleaned professionally (or find another wet cleaning kit, but I don't know of any others besides Copperhill).


----------



## Mootsfox

I bought this guy for $7:
http://www.delkin.com/products/senso...ter/index.html


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


I bought this guy for $7:
http://www.delkin.com/products/senso...ter/index.html


That whole kit was only $7? Does it work?


----------



## Dragoon

Those "sensor safe wands" I saw something like that on an online store here, you think that can do the trick? Or it is a bit risky? (If the rocket blower fails to succeed in removing the dust)

EDIT: Gone, I've uploaded 3 photos, the first two is a comparison between the 1000D and the DSC-P100, can you guess which took which photo? The exif was removed when I uploaded. Just to say I took both at nearly same settings aside focal length. Both taken from my bedroom, window open standing still on 2 "cakes" of CDs/DVDs

P100- ISO100 f/3.2 4" 9mm
1000D- ISO100 f/3.5 4" 18mm

The 3rd photo (The one with the logitech mouse and the P100) was taken on auto.

ISO100 f/4.5 1/60 29mm


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


That whole kit was only $7? Does it work?


I haven't needed to use it yet, but the vacuum is USB powered and does work.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Dragoon* 
Those "sensor safe wands" I saw something like that on an online store here, you think that can do the trick? Or it is a bit risky? (If the rocket blower fails to succeed in removing the dust)

EDIT: Gone, I've uploaded 3 photos, the first two is a comparison between the 1000D and the DSC-P100, can you guess which took which photo? The exif was removed when I uploaded. Just to say I took both at nearly same settings aside focal length. Both taken from my bedroom, window open standing still on 2 "cakes" of CDs/DVDs

P100- ISO100 f/3.2 4" 9mm
1000D- ISO100 f/3.5 4" 18mm

The 3rd photo (The one with the logitech mouse and the P100) was taken on auto.

ISO100 f/4.5 1/60 29mm

The one on the far left is the 1000D shot. Much sharper, plus it's a narrower angle, which kind of gives it away since you posted the focal lengths.


----------



## Dragoon

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
The one on the far left is the 1000D shot. Much sharper, plus it's a narrower angle, which kind of gives it away since you posted the focal lengths.

Hard to belive, I know, but you're mistaken...

The first shot was actually taken with the P100, which shoots at 4:3 aspect ratio, the EOS always takes on 3:2 ratio, which is the same resolution as the 3rd photo. I knew giving away the focal length would cause confusion, but even the P100 at 9mm can't capture as much as the 1000D at 18mm, I don't understand though...

That's what I mean by being blurred... But the photo with flash is dead sharp.

Here's me having fun.


Air writing is fun, but since that was my first time, it took me quite a bit to get that one straight


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dragoon*


Hard to belive, I know, but you're mistaken...

The first shot was actually taken with the P100, which shoots at 4:3 aspect ratio, the EOS always takes on 3:2 ratio, which is the same resolution as the 3rd photo. I knew giving away the focal length would cause confusion, but even the P100 at 9mm can't capture as much as the 1000D at 18mm, I don't understand though...

That's what I mean by being blurred... But the photo with flash is dead sharp.
[/URL]

Air writing is fun, but since that was my first time, it took me quite a bit to get that one straight










Then it's a mystery to me. I would almost say it looks soft, but really it looks out of focus. I thought for sure it was the older Sony in the right shot, so that's definitely not good. Hard to say, maybe try a few other things to rule out it just being the lens. Try shooting at a longer focal length and see if it sharpens up (zoom lenses are usually softest at the widest angle). Try shooting at the same focal length, but manually focus this time and see how it turns out. Barring that, I would say wait until your new lenses arrive and repeat the same shot with the different lenses. If they're all still blurry, it could be something wrong with the camera itself.

Sorry, it always suck when you get a new toy and something isn't right with it.


----------



## Dragoon

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Then it's a mystery to me. I would almost say it looks soft, but really it looks out of focus. I thought for sure it was the older Sony in the right shot, so that's definitely not good. Hard to say, maybe try a few other things to rule out it just being the lens. Try shooting at a longer focal length and see if it sharpens up (zoom lenses are usually softest at the widest angle). Try shooting at the same focal length, but manually focus this time and see how it turns out. Barring that, I would say wait until your new lenses arrive and repeat the same shot with the different lenses. If they're all still blurry, it could be something wrong with the camera itself.

Sorry, it always suck when you get a new toy and something isn't right with it.

Hmm... I'll give it a try, but the camera did shoot nicely when I took a picture of the P100 and the logitech mouse next to it was taken at 1/60 of a sec, f/4.5 and 29mm focal range.

And it does suck... badly. What luck...

I'll post a photo full zoomed in in a few.

Okay, I took the photos.

The first one is fully zoomed in, as you requested, I used manual focus on this one, only using the viewfinder.

The second one, is at shortest focus range, manually focused using live view because using the viewfinder was hard due to the position I was in, and the lack of place to focus on at so short "FR" (Now I know how a camera feels when it can't lock the focus lol







). It came out ALOT better than the original, but still a bit soft, maybe now is how you told before, zooming lens have a softer focus on larger angles.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Dragoon* 
Hmm... I'll give it a try, but the camera did shoot nicely when I took a picture of the P100 and the logitech mouse next to it was taken at 1/60 of a sec, f/4.5 and 29mm focal range.

And it does suck... badly. What luck...

I'll post a photo full zoomed in in a few.

Okay, I took the photos.

The first one is fully zoomed in, as you requested, I used manual focus on this one, only using the viewfinder.

The second one, is at shortest focus range, manually focused using live view because using the viewfinder was hard due to the position I was in, and the lack of place to focus on at so short "FR" (Now I know how a camera feels when it can't lock the focus lol







). It came out ALOT better than the original, but still a bit soft, maybe now is how you told before, zooming lens have a softer focus on larger angles.










Still odd. I have the same lens, but I haven't used it a whole lot lately. I'll use it this weekend and see how it turns out for me, but the 18-55 IS is really a decent lens in it's own right, not "for a kit lens," so I'm surprised to see that it would be so soft for you.

EDIT: One thing I just realized: The default sharpness for the camera when I had my XTi was really low (set to 2 out of 7), so I configured a custom picture style and bumped the sharpness up to max (7). Maybe try that and see how it comes out. One review I read for Canon DSLRs say that they have that "trademark Canon softness."


----------



## Dragoon

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Still odd. I have the same lens, but I haven't used it a whole lot lately. I'll use it this weekend and see how it turns out for me, but the 18-55 IS is really a decent lens in it's own right, not "for a kit lens," so I'm surprised to see that it would be so soft for you.

EDIT: One thing I just realized: The default sharpness for the camera when I had my XTi was really low (set to 2 out of 7), so I configured a custom picture style and bumped the sharpness up to max (7). Maybe try that and see how it comes out. One review I read for Canon DSLRs say that they have that "trademark Canon softness."

Whoa, wth? No wonder... I just went to picture style menu and I found something interesting, I've been using "faithful" setting and the sharpness is ZERO... I'll make a new style and try out







. I'll post a photo in a few.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Dragoon* 
Whoa, wth? No wonder... I just went to picture style menu and I found something interesting, I've been using "faithful" setting and the sharpness is ZERO... I'll make a new style and try out







. I'll post a photo in a few.










Great, I hope that turns out to be cause! With Canon DSLRs, the max sharpness in camera is level 7, but with the DPP software you crank it further to level 10 (only with RAW of course). I use Adobe Camera Raw with Elements 7, and then the sharpness can start to get ridiculous, which is nice because it makes lens softness less of a worry.


----------



## Dragoon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Great, I hope that turns out to be cause! With Canon DSLRs, the max sharpness in camera is level 7, but with the DPP software you crank it further to level 10 (only with RAW of course). I use Adobe Camera Raw with Elements 7, and then the sharpness can start to get ridiculous, which is nice because it makes lens softness less of a worry.


It worked out!

18mm, sharpness level 5- IMG_0253

55mm, sharpness level 5- IMG_0254

18mm, sharpness level 7- IMG_0255

55mm, sharpness level 7- IMG_0256

EDIT: Added a night photo, taken few minutes ago. 4", f/3.5, ISO-100, AF ON, sharpness 7. Indeed alot better.


----------



## Mootsfox

Went to the auto show today, I'll post some pictures soon.


----------



## stanrc

A few pics from Daytona Beach...


----------



## mega_option101

I went ahead and stickied this thread


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mega_option101*


I went ahead and stickied this thread










Kick ass


----------



## phospholipid

i got a flickr.
im trying to figure out batch image urls
to show you the pictures. my friends put on a little skate demo for the local kids, and i took pictures :]


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mega_option101*


I went ahead and stickied this thread










i still hate you.


----------



## mega_option101

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Kick ass




















Quote:



Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie*


i still hate you.


----------



## stanrc

A few from St. Augustine's in FL



















Full album: http://picasaweb.google.com/stanrc/StAugustine#


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *stanrc* 
A few from St. Augustine's in FL

Full album: http://picasaweb.google.com/stanrc/StAugustine#

Castillo de San Marcos, I've been there many times!










I think I went a little overboard with the saturation on this one:


----------



## Mootsfox

Just some rocks in my window.


----------



## HaXXoR

I would like to join the club if that's alright. I own the following equipment:

Fujifilm Finepix S2000HD
Sony DSC - S500


----------



## muffin

Some nice pictures in here







I just picked up my little D40x from a repair shop. Almost 1 year old and it broke, just squeaked into the warranty period so it was repaired for free. I don't have many photos online because I'm lazy as hell, plus I only really intend to show them to friends and family. But anyway my flickr is here. I don't do fancy software baloney beyond a little _light_ HDR tinkering. I think you should take a decent picture to start with, no dodge this and burn that or swapping the sky out totally! What's the point in taking a picture if you've got to go to extremes to alter it and make it look good? I use the GIMP with some RAW plugin to crop/resize and clone out dust specks and that's about it.

I have:

Nikon D40x
Nikon DX 18-55mm (kit lens)
Nikon DX-VR 70-200mm
Hoya 52mm polarizing filter
Nikon ML-L3 infra red remote
Joby Gorillapod SLR
Velbon MAXi 347GB


----------



## coffeejunky

Quote:


Originally Posted by *muffin* 
Some nice pictures in here







I just picked up my little D40x from a repair shop. Almost 1 year old and it broke, just squeaked into the warranty period so it was repaired for free. I don't have many photos online because I'm lazy as hell, plus I only really intend to show them to friends and family. But anyway my flickr is here. I don't do fancy software baloney beyond a little _light_ HDR tinkering. I think you should take a decent picture to start with, no dodge this and burn that or swapping the sky out totally! What's the point in taking a picture if you've got to go to extremes to alter it and make it look good? I use the GIMP with some RAW plugin to crop/resize and clone out dust specks and that's about it.

I have:

Nikon D40x
Nikon DX 18-55mm (kit lens)
Nikon DX-VR 70-200mm
Hoya 52mm polarizing filter
Nikon ML-L3 infra red remote
Joby Gorillapod SLR
Velbon MAXi 347GB

Nice pics. I really like this one -
http://www.flickr.com/photos/0386/3100247384/

This one is very nice too -
http://www.flickr.com/photos/0386/3100244366/

You should upload some more, I like browsing through others photos


----------



## importpunch

My subjects are usually something with an engine in it.. heres my friend's Evolution I took a picture of..










hi res http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3524/...a9477700_b.jpg


----------



## wierdo124

Dude, Mootsfox, you're an amazing photographer.

Can i haz entrance? I have a Nikon S202. Brand new, actually just launched. Seems decent.


----------



## phospholipid

@ moots:
making the simplest things, gorgeous. :thumbs:

i just picked up a swanky backpack for my laptop+camera. I needed a nice backpack for carrying my SLR and lens for my photo class in college [50mm and 17-50mm or w/e], and i picked up this from b&h










http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...ck_Black_.html

75$! cheaper by anyplace by 25$, man I love b&h.
then i'm going to buy a cheaper top loader case for my DSLR for when i got to NYC/Boston this spring.


----------



## wimcle

By wimcle at 2009-01-22


----------



## Marin




----------



## SoBe8503

Quote:


Originally Posted by *wimcle* 








By wimcle at 2009-01-22

Shawnee, KS maybe??


----------



## default501x

Quote:


Originally Posted by *muffin* 
Some nice pictures in here







I just picked up my little D40x from a repair shop. Almost 1 year old and it broke, just squeaked into the warranty period so it was repaired for free. I don't have many photos online because I'm lazy as hell, plus I only really intend to show them to friends and family. But anyway my flickr is here. I don't do fancy software baloney beyond a little _light_ HDR tinkering. I think you should take a decent picture to start with, no dodge this and burn that or swapping the sky out totally! What's the point in taking a picture if you've got to go to extremes to alter it and make it look good? I use the GIMP with some RAW plugin to crop/resize and clone out dust specks and that's about it.

I have:

Nikon D40x
Nikon DX 18-55mm (kit lens)
Nikon DX-VR 70-200mm
Hoya 52mm polarizing filter
Nikon ML-L3 infra red remote
Joby Gorillapod SLR
Velbon MAXi 347GB

you have some great shots in there!
my favorite:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3288/...12203e08_o.jpg

you take some great shots with that D40x


----------



## Marin

Five shots stitched together.


----------



## TaiDinh

My street at night.

Taken with my phone - Samsung Behold.


----------



## Marin

Just took this.


----------



## EricM9104

^woohoo quality^


----------



## Mootsfox

Why so dark Marin?


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Why so dark Marin?


I preferred this pic. I do have one that's brighter and can get it uploaded if you want.

EDIT: I spent some time on it in Lightroom.


----------



## phospholipid

photo editing is something i disagree with :[ [this stems from my time working developing photos]

oh, my photography class starts tomorrow. 120$ for the freaking book. 120$! shiiiii+ mang. oh well, wish me and my Elan 7e luck!


----------



## stanrc

Good luck! Don't forget to come back and show off what they taught you.


----------



## Marin

What's a good walk around lens for my XSi? For price... keeping under $500 if possible.


----------



## TaiDinh

Samsung Behold Panorama mode.

My room.

The part by the door messed up. LOL


----------



## laboitenoire

Just took this spur of the moment. It's a picture of Sirius (the "Dog" star) taken with my S700. No telescope used (don't have an adapter and my telescope is only okay), just the full telephoto range of the camera. f 3.5, 4 second exposure. Looks like there's a bit of lens flare. If only I had a good SLR, a good telescope, and an adapter. As it is, my dad just got himself a used Nikon D50 (he had an old 35mm Nikon 2020 along with some decent lenses, so he wanted to keep those), so if I just got the scope and adapter... However once there's a moon out (I guess it's new moon tonight...) I'll have to try taking some pictures.



EDIT: TaiDinh, we have almost the same monitor!


----------



## Kris88

Marin do you have a 50mm? 50's are epic


----------



## Bigevil89

Taken with my a590is earlier today and made into a pseudo HDR with Dynamic-Photo HDR.


----------



## stanrc

Beautiful shot, I need to learn how to turn some of my RAWs into HDRs.


----------



## Kris88

Could i be added to the list








I shoot with a Pentax K20D, a DA 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 AL II and a Tamron AF70-300mm F/4-5.6 Di LD Macro.


----------



## Squeeker The Cat

Quote:


Originally Posted by *importpunch* 
My subjects are usually something with an engine in it.. heres my friend's Evolution I took a picture of..










hi res http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3524/...a9477700_b.jpg

i love those type of photos.........all black with 1 thing colored? i gotta learn how to do it!!! lol


----------



## Kris88

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Squeeker The Cat* 
i love those type of photos.........all black with 1 thing colored? i gotta learn how to do it!!! lol

Open the image in photoshop, make it black and white and then select the restore tool *not sure if thats what its called* And go over the subject you want colored with it.


----------



## stanrc

Nice, I'll have to try that


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


What's a good walk around lens for my XSi? For price... keeping under $500 if possible.


What kind of focal range are you looking for? I have the 28-135mm USM IS and it's a decent lens, then there's the 70-300mm USM IS (might be just out of your price range), the 28-105mm USM is popular but doesn't have IS (a must have for a zoom lens IMO).

Definitely avoid Canon's 18-200mm and 75-300mm. And of course there are third party offerings as well.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


What kind of focal range are you looking for? I have the 28-135mm USM IS and it's a decent lens, then there's the 70-300mm USM IS (might be just out of your price range), the 28-105mm USM is popular but doesn't have IS (a must have for a zoom lens IMO).

Definitely avoid Canon's 18-200mm and 75-300mm. And of course there are third party offerings as well.


Guess I'm leaning more towards the lens you have: http://www.amazon.com/Canon-28-135mm...3084411&sr=8-1

At first, when I started taking photo's I thought I would need a longer focal length like the 70-300mm but really none of the photo's I take need that. I don't take nature photos where keeping a distance is ideal and I have a macro lens for macro's.

I'm really just looking for a good upgrade from my kit lens as I find it will get more use instead of, for example, a wide angle lens (which, thinking about it, has only been needed in a few situations.).

I was looking at the other lens you mentioned: http://www.amazon.com/Canon-28-105mm...3084767&sr=1-1

But IS is really a feature I want to have. I at first thought it wasn't important but after trying to take some handheld shots with my macro I came to realize that IS is an extremely good feature and worth paying the extra for in any lens.

I'm open to other brands like Sigma and Tamron, just I want to have some type of Image Stabilization incorperated into the lens.


----------



## Mootsfox

Some of you Canon users might like this









http://www.davidbergman.net/blog/200...gural-address/


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Guess I'm leaning more towards the lens you have: http://www.amazon.com/Canon-28-135mm...3084411&sr=8-1

At first, when I started taking photo's I thought I would need a longer focal length like the 70-300mm but really none of the photo's I take need that. I don't take nature photos where keeping a distance is ideal and I have a macro lens for macro's.

I'm really just looking for a good upgrade from my kit lens as I find it will get more use instead of, for example, a wide angle lens (which, thinking about it, has only been needed in a few situations.).

I was looking at the other lens you mentioned: http://www.amazon.com/Canon-28-105mm...3084767&sr=1-1

But IS is really a feature I want to have. I at first thought it wasn't important but after trying to take some handheld shots with my macro I came to realize that IS is an extremely good feature and worth paying the extra for in any lens.

I'm open to other brands like Sigma and Tamron, just I want to have some type of Image Stabilization incorperated into the lens.

That's a good price for the 28-135mm. It's the lens I use the most. I find it to be a perfect "walkabout" lens. It has IS and USM, and isn't large, but still has that quality feel to the weight. Its image quality is great with lots of light, but when I use apertures wider than about f/5.6 I find it to be a bit soft, esp at f/3.5. But still highly recommended. And I'm the same about zoom - I've never needed more than what this lens does.

Yes, IS is no gimmick, is really is a must when you're shooting at focal lengths over about 50mm or so. And I really wish they made an IS version of the 60mm macro too, but I suppose that would probably make the lens really expensive.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

We're in the midst of a major ice storm here in KY, so everything is encased in ice!


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

sooooo purty.


----------



## stanrc

Yeah, that ice storm is coming my way, we just got an good 2 inches of snow (thats a lot for VA)


----------



## Polo224

That ice is beautiful but definitely can wreak havoc. I've got ice dams in my gutters because of it.









Those 4x4's holding up the (porch) in that 1st pic don't look too healthy.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Polo224* 
That ice is beautiful but definitely can wreak havoc. I've got ice dams in my gutters because of it.









Those 4x4's holding up the (porch) in that 1st pic don't look too healthy.

Hey, that's my house you're talking about


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Kris88* 
Could i be added to the list








I shoot with a Pentax K20D, a DA 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 AL II and a Tamron AF70-300mm F/4-5.6 Di LD Macro.

Added


----------



## Mootsfox

We had an ice storm earlier and most of Columbus (half a million people) were without power for a week. Not fun


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
We had an ice storm earlier and most of Columbus (half a million people) were without power for a week. Not fun









Yeah, my city has 250,000 people and in 2003 80,000 lost power and heat. Tonight it's supposed to rain/snow even more, so tomorrow it will be interesting outside. The beauty of it is that I will have the whole day to take pictures (being a teacher has its perks, not many, but it has them).


----------



## Mootsfox

What do you teach?

I will without doubt have to work (had to work during the power outage, that was when I was working two jobs, both on the one damn street that had power.

Anyways, yeah it should be nice after the storm, so pictures it shall be


----------



## laboitenoire

Central MA is supposed to get up to a foot of snow tonight, so if I don't have school (probably), then I'll take a few pictures of how clean it all looks.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


What do you teach?

I will without doubt have to work (had to work during the power outage, that was when I was working two jobs, both on the one damn street that had power.

Anyways, yeah it should be nice after the storm, so pictures it shall be










I teach Latin, Computer Applications (mostly Office 2007) and Web Design (Dreamweaver CS3). Yeah, businesses will usually stay open no matter what, even at the risk of their employees.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Central MA is supposed to get up to a foot of snow tonight, so if I don't have school (probably), then I'll take a few pictures of how clean it all looks.


Yeah, up north you guys get snow, none of this ice crap that we have to deal with down here at the lower latitudes. It got so bad a few years ago that whole trees (I mean 50 foot oaks) were falling down from the weight of the ice. Earlier today I went to my car, after I bashed through the ice shield that had formed over it, and rolled down my windows and their was a stable ice window!


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


I teach Latin, Computer Applications (mostly Office 2007) and Web Design (Dreamweaver CS3). Yeah, businesses will usually stay open no matter what, even at the risk of their employees.



high school?

and might i say you would make an awesome teacher


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie*


high school?

and might i say you would make an awesome teacher










Haha thanks, and yes, I teach high school. It's funny because my students have been pining for a snow day (haven't had one this winter yet), but what they don't realize is that the teachers are even more desperate for one!


----------



## Bigevil89

Can i be added under the P&S category. Canon A590IS







. Oh i also have a flickr account


----------



## Gunfire

Just created a Flickr too: http://www.flickr.com/photos/jsallee/


----------



## laboitenoire

We do get freezing rain occasionally up here, as we did back in December... Half inch of snow with like two or three inches of freezing rain on top. They still haven't completely cleaned that stuff up yet.

EDIT: On a camera note, I'm kinda bothered by how hard it is to use manual focus on my S700. I have to set all my aperture, shutter speed, and zoom settings before I enable it, and then it takes forever for it to step through everything. I'm now in envy of my dad's D50 (which shoots some nice pictures), so the next camera is definitely going to be SLR, although not for a few years...


----------



## laboitenoire

Well, UPS brought me a box of toys. Nice bag, camera strap, lens cap, and a UV filter.


----------



## phospholipid

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16830998034

What do you think of this lens? I have a 28-135mm and when i got to NYC for a week, i can either take the 28-135 of my friends 17-85mm EF-S. i love ef-s lens SOOO much. i think i might sell my 28-135mm [in a few months when i have more cash] and buy the sigma 18-125, but it only stops to 3.8.

what do you guys thing? take the 17-85mm ef-s or the 28-135mm, or both? if i bring both, i'd have to bring my bigger canon bag :[


----------



## Marin

Well it comes down to what focal length you need.

17-85mm = 27.2-136mm

28-135mm = 44.8-216mm


----------



## Polo224

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Hey, that's my house you're talking about










Just a friendly observation.







I'd drill some holes and put some lag bolts through them to the porch. Either that, or not drink beer on the porch in summer! - in fear of knocking one out of place after one too many!

Nice pics!


----------



## phospholipid

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Well it comes down to what focal length you need.

17-85mm = 27.2-136mm

28-135mm = 44.8-216mm



i understand this... but wouldn't the EF-S make the 17-85 a 17-85 or does it actually translate the way you described it?


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *phospholipid*


i understand this... but wouldn't the EF-S make the 17-85 a 17-85 or does it actually translate the way you described it?


that was my understanding, i believe the 17-85 should act as a 17-85.


----------



## Mootsfox

Still has the crop although it's EF-S.


----------



## phospholipid

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Still has the crop although it's EF-S.



so should i take the EF-S to NYC instead? ill be taking pictures of everything, also I'll have my 50mm prime on me







!


----------



## Mootsfox

EF-S or EF doesn't matter on a APS-C, it's still x1.6 for Canon, (DX) x1.5 for Nikon.

So your 18mm is now a 29mm.

If you are going on a trip, I'd take more than one lens. Otherwise you need a zoom or need to think wisely about what kind of pictures you want.


----------



## phospholipid

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


EF-S or EF doesn't matter on a APS-C, it's still x1.6 for Canon, (DX) x1.5 for Nikon.

So your 18mm is now a 29mm.

If you are going on a trip, I'd take more than one lens. Otherwise you need a zoom or need to think wisely about what kind of pictures you want.



Thing is I'm a walker - love to walk everywhere. And I'll be in NYC by myself [yeah, that's right]. I want to see the sites and everything, but I don't want to be toting around 3 lens in a camera bag. that just shrieks MUG ME. so i bought a nice small bag that can fit 1 lens to walk around with. otherwise, i'd just take my incase bag ant not my Lowepro bag and not my lowerpro bag.

So if pressed to chose the between the two lens, which would you choose?


----------



## Mootsfox

Which two do you have?

EDIT: Sorry, didn't read.

I'd go with the 17-85mm over the longer zoom, as you'll want a wider angle for any building shots.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *phospholipid*


http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16830998034

What do you think of this lens? I have a 28-135mm and when i got to NYC for a week, i can either take the 28-135 of my friends 17-85mm EF-S. i love ef-s lens SOOO much. i think i might sell my 28-135mm [in a few months when i have more cash] and buy the sigma 18-125, but it only stops to 3.8.

what do you guys thing? take the 17-85mm ef-s or the 28-135mm, or both? if i bring both, i'd have to bring my bigger canon bag :[


It's a decent lens, but overpriced. For not much more, you can have a EF 17-40mm L, which is better by a wide margin.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Polo224*


Just a friendly observation.







I'd drill some holes and put some lag bolts through them to the porch. Either that, or not drink beer on the porch in summer! - in fear of knocking one out of place after one too many!

Nice pics!


Come now, I was joking. That's not really my house. Give me some credit here!


----------



## phospholipid

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


It's a decent lens, but overpriced. For not much more, you can have a EF 17-40mm L, which is better by a wide margin.



Oh, I know good sir. 
I have the the 28-135mm [my friend gave me his








!!!] but the 18-80mm isn't mine, my best friend said she'd lend it to me for the trip. So I was seeing if I should take her up on it

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


I'd go with the 17-85mm over the longer zoom, as you'll want a wider angle for any building shots.


So borrow the 17-85mm eh? I'll take your word on it :]


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *phospholipid* 
i understand this... but wouldn't the EF-S make the 17-85 a 17-85 or does it actually translate the way you described it?


Quote:


Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie* 
that was my understanding, i believe the 17-85 should act as a 17-85.

Even though it was already answered I'm just going to post this for other people to see.

http://kwc.org/blog/archives/2006/20...ersus_efs.html

Quote:

Important things you need to know about EF-S lenses:

-*You still use the 1.6x multiplier when evaluating the field of view for EF-S lenses. The 10-22mm EF-S lens gets zoomed up to a 16-35mm lens. You may think it's a bit confusing at first that a lens designed specifically for the crop factor still has to have the multiplier used, but it's consistent: always use the multipler.*
-You (currently) can only use EF-S lenses on Digital Rebels, EOS 20D, EOS 30D, and EOS 40D. You can't use them on Canon's top-of-the-line Digital SLRs, which have different sensor sizes.
-There is always the possibility that Canon could stop making cameras that support EF-S. However, EF-S lenses tend to be cheaper, as lenses go, and you would only really buy them for wide-angle uses, so it's unlikely that you would ever have many EF-S lenses.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Well, to add insult to injury, Mother Nature added a heap of snow to the freezing rain, resulting in fully half my city (125,000 people) without power (including myself). But it made for an interesting photo op.


----------



## laboitenoire

Yeah, it's switched to freezing rain up here. Tomorrow is supposed to be sunny so depending on whether or not it's still light when I get home...


----------



## EricM9104

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Bigevil89*











Can i be added under the P&S category. Canon A590IS







. Oh i also have a flickr account



w00t A590IS owner here too








They take great pictures.


----------



## Bigevil89

Quote:


Originally Posted by *EricM9104* 
w00t A590IS owner here too








They take great pictures.

aye for such a cheap camera, its awesome. I want to get the lens adapter for it and some filters.


----------



## AllDolledUp

Hello! I'm new to here but I LOVE photography. I love the ethereal feel in artworks, photos, music and in everyday life, so this was the look I was trying to go for! [Sorry if the IMGs are too big]
































Any tips with the editing? I have PSCS3 and I use Canon PowerShot SD550 and my baby, Nikon D70 DLSR <3 
Please have a look at my gallery and sorry if this is considered SPAM X.X


----------



## AllDolledUp

Quote:



Originally Posted by *BrinNutz*


THIS....IS...SPARTAcus...

My new kitten...











I know it's old but argh so..cute.. D:!!Great capture!


----------



## laboitenoire

Tried taking some pictures of the snow around sunset today. Got some good ones, although my camera was freaking out at times from the brightness. I was shooting ISO 64 and was stopped down to F 13.6 (my smallest aperture), and it still sometimes was overexposing (with 1/1000th second exposures...)


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Tried taking some pictures of the snow around sunset today. Got some good ones, although my camera was freaking out at times from the brightness. I was shooting ISO 64 and was stopped down to F 13.6 (my smallest aperture), and it still sometimes was overexposing (with 1/1000th second exposures...)


Shouldn't be doing that. Post a shot that you think is over exposed. It might just be a dynamic range issue (i.e., blown-out skies).


----------



## GoneTomorrow

More shots of all this madness. Any tips or suggestions are welcome.


----------



## Mootsfox

Icy icy icy.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *AllDolledUp*


Hello! I'm new to here but I LOVE photography. I love the ethereal feel in artworks, photos, music and in everyday life, so this was the look I was trying to go for! [Sorry if the IMGs are too big]

Any tips with the editing? I have PSCS3 and I use Canon PowerShot SD550 and my baby, Nikon D70 DLSR <3 
Please have a look at my gallery and sorry if this is considered SPAM X.X


These photos have that worn, decades old 35mm film look to them, very retro. Is that the look you're after? For "ethereal" looks, you might look at some of the filters in PS. I don't recall if CS3 has it (Elements 7 does), but if you adjust the Clarity slider all the way to the left (negative value), it really gives that "dreamy" look.

Another thing to consider is when shooting, use really wide apertures, like wider than f/2. This requires a prime, but the effects are really interesting with such shallow DOFs. Here's an exmaple, not mine, but this was shot by someone with a Canon 5D mkII with a 50mm prime at f/1.6:










Also, have you looked into HDRs? Certain HDR techniques have a very striking "painterly" look to them. Check out this guys work:

http://www.hdrsoft.com/gallery/gallery.php?id=41&gid=0


----------



## Mootsfox

Hey, I have that lens!


----------



## Marin

I should give HDR pics another try.


----------



## phospholipid

@ gonetomorrow: the first picture in your second set "IMG_5644.jpg", amazing.
i'm going to take my XSi out tomorrow, see if i can shoot anything decent.
beach? balboa park? hrmmm.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *phospholipid* 
@ gonetomorrow: the first picture in your second set "IMG_5644.jpg", amazing.
i'm going to take my XSi out tomorrow, see if i can shoot anything decent.
beach? balboa park? hrmmm.

Thanks! This Iceageddon is making for a fun photo op. I still don't have power though, so I can't play Fallout 3.







Guess I'll just keep shooting.


----------



## coffeejunky

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Thanks! This Iceageddon is making for a fun photo op. I still don't have power though, so I can't play Fallout 3.







Guess I'll just keep shooting.

Wow...Still no power. We had a power cut a month ago for 8 hours and that was too much...Froze our arses off.


----------



## teK0wnzU

Hello, Nice club.

I have a Nikon D80 with AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G EDII
I also have Zeikos 3pc Filter kit: UV, CPL, and FLD

I love my Nikon D80 so far, I'm glad I live in the North West now and have plenty of great things to take pictures of.


----------



## Kris88

Sunset


----------



## teK0wnzU

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Kris88* 
Sunset










Nice.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Nice shot Kris, but why such a small version?


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

i leave tomorrow for skiing for a week in new hampshire, ill make sure to take plenty of pics for you guys


----------



## Marin

I'm thinking about renting a fisheye lens.


----------



## teK0wnzU

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Nice shot Kris, but why such a small version?










Awesome snow scene...


----------



## laboitenoire

Uploaded a bunch of snow pics to the Flickr account. However, here are the highlights, along with a random macro. If you guys want full res (7 megapixel) of any of these, shoot me a PM and I can e-mail them to ya.

BTW, the colors got goofed by GIMP on the resizing/compression of the images, so like I said about full size...


----------



## Kris88

Here is a bigger one


----------



## GoneTomorrow

^^ Ahh..now I can see it. Looks great!


----------



## Bigevil89

Heres a panorama of downtown I took earlier.


----------



## Marin




----------



## equetefue

having fun with that 60 eh ?


----------



## Kris88

Is that fake DOF? not feelin it


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Kris88*


Is that fake DOF? not feelin it










Nope, when you're shooting macros, the DOF is a mere sliver.


----------



## Xero.

I'm no photographer for the whole reason of lacking a camera, but I like a lot of your shot's guys.

You should upload then in 1680x1050++ =P


----------



## equetefue

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Kris88* 
Is that fake DOF? not feelin it


----------



## Kris88

So is it fake or not lol. It just doesnt look right on the fan blade


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *equetefue*


having fun with that 60 eh ?


Definitely









Quote:



Originally Posted by *Kris88*


Is that fake DOF? not feelin it











Quote:



Originally Posted by *Kris88*


So is it fake or not lol. It just doesnt look right on the fan blade










It's real. It's shot with a 60mm Macro lens. In the pic I have four fans all lined up, focus is on one of the middle fan blades.

http://www.amazon.com/Canon-EF-S-Mac...3524020&sr=8-1

Here's another pic, taken this morning.



EXIF: http://flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/3245558214/meta/


----------



## phospholipid

sailing the other day:

@ marin: how does your macro work in the context of regular shooting? does it shoot like any other prime, such as a 50mm? i know your WD for the macro is super close, and i'd LOVE to have that, but I also want something i can shoot with as a portrait lens [not studio portrait, but it's the only thing i can describe of the kind of photos i take of my friends] here's the kind of pictures i take, _for fun_ and no other reason
























i know, my friends are gay and typical.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:



Originally Posted by *phospholipid*


i know, my friends are gay and typical.


Lol, you're friends with the deli case in the supermarket?


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *phospholipid*


http://i735.photobucket.com/albums/ww353/jdqphotos/chartersbday/IMG_4897.jpg

sailing the other day:

@ marin: how does your macro work in the context of regular shooting? does it shoot like any other prime, such as a 50mm? i know your WD for the macro is super close, and i'd LOVE to have that, but I also want something i can shoot with as a portrait lens [not studio portrait, but it's the only thing i can describe of the kind of photos i take of my friends] here's the kind of pictures i take, _for fun_ and no other reason

http://i735.photobucket.com/albums/w...y/IMG_4864.jpg
http://i735.photobucket.com/albums/w...y/IMG_4802.jpg 
http://i735.photobucket.com/albums/w...y/IMG_4895.jpg

i know, my friends are gay and typical.


It's great for portraits. Here's one I took of my dog.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Lol, you're friends with the deli case in the supermarket?


You aren't?


----------



## default501x

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Definitely









It's real. It's shot with a 60mm Macro lens. In the pic I have four fans all lined up, focus is on one of the middle fan blades.

Here's another pic, taken this morning.

EXIF: http://flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/3245558214/meta/


whoa, how did you get to the EXIF data on flickr?

i like the fan shot, i can see why people would think its a fake DoF, because the top fan blade that is out of focus is hard to tell apart from the blade that is in focus, it looks like it is just one fan with a really weird DoF


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *phospholipid* 

sailing the other day:

@ marin: how does your macro work in the context of regular shooting? does it shoot like any other prime, such as a 50mm? i know your WD for the macro is super close, and i'd LOVE to have that, but I also want something i can shoot with as a portrait lens [not studio portrait, but it's the only thing i can describe of the kind of photos i take of my friends] here's the kind of pictures i take, _for fun_ and no other reason

i know, my friends are gay and typical.

Nice shots, I need to get more people shots.

And the EF-S 60mm macro makes a superb portrait lens, no doubt about it. It has absolutely no limitations when it comes to functioning as a general prime, unless you count the somewhat narrow max aperture (but f/2.8 is still pretty good).

The only reason that a true prime would be better is for the wider max aperture, such a f/1.4 on the EF 50mm USM lens.


----------



## phospholipid

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Lol, you're friends with the deli case in the supermarket?


It was just a display of what kind of pictures I take haha.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Nice shots, I need to get more people shots.

And the EF-S 60mm macro makes a superb portrait lens, no doubt about it. It has absolutely no limitations when it comes to functioning as a general prime, unless you count the somewhat narrow max aperture (but f/2.8 is still pretty good).

The only reason that a true prime would be better is for the wider max aperture, such a f/1.4 on the EF 50mm USM lens.



Thats good news. I love my 50mm but i'm thinking of selling it for a EF-S lens, but i still want a decent portrait lens, and a portrait/macro lens is hard to refuse. but i want a decent low mm lens that i can use as a walkaround, as i often find myself wishing i had a 10-20mm but it's hard to find a good lens that's under 600$


----------



## XAslanX

Finally got a decent digital camera let me in









Panasonic Lumix DMC-LS75BLST


----------



## Marin

Not the type of editing I prefer to do but it worked for the pic.


----------



## Mootsfox

Sure, if you like Sentras ;p

jk marin, nice shot


----------



## Marin

Going to try using my dads Lomo LC-A, this should be fun.

EDIT:


----------



## nuclearjock

GT,

Just added some new hardware.

The 200mm macro is sort of strange to shoot with.

I'll try and post some bug pics soon.


----------



## Cpt.Hawkins

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
GT,

Just added some new hardware.

The 200mm macro is sort of strange to shoot with.

I'll try and post some bug pics soon.


















Ah you found a 200mm Macro! I tried for ages to find one of those, they're very rare- Nikon hardly made/make any. is it strange in a good way or a bad way? You liking that 24-70mm? I love mine, bit of a beast but the clarity and sharpness are second to none.


----------



## Bigevil89

Heres a few shots I took today
















Edited with Dynamic-Photo HDR


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Cpt.Hawkins*









Ah you found a 200mm Macro! I tried for ages to find one of those, they're very rare- Nikon hardly made/make any. is it strange in a good way or a bad way? You liking that 24-70mm? I love mine, bit of a beast but the clarity and sharpness are second to none.


Yea, I did have quite a bit of trouble finding the 200mm F/4, but it was worth it.

Extremely tack sharp.

The 24-70 is also an awesome lens..., right up there with my trusty 70-200 
f/2.8.

On film, both 2.8 lenses really shine. Yet to try the "micro" on film.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *XAslanX*


Finally got a decent digital camera let me in









Panasonic Lumix DMC-LS75BLST


Added...

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


GT,

Just added some new hardware.

The 200mm macro is sort of strange to shoot with.

I'll try and post some bug pics soon.











...and updated! Nice additions. I bet there's quite a bit of shake when trying to shoot hand held macros with that 200mm! But I bet it can get seriously close. What the mag. ratio?


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
What the mag. ratio?

Maximum Reproduction Ratio = 1:1.


----------



## Marin

Liking this pic.


----------



## default501x

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Liking this pic.




interesting lighting.
cool shot.


----------



## TaiDinh

Panorama mode on Samsung Behold


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *TaiDinh*


Panorama mode on Samsung Behold



[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
Obviously a much better camera than the one on my Samsung Instinct [IMG alt=""]https://www.overclock.net/images/smilies/wth.gif


----------



## XAslanX

Quick macro shot


----------



## noname

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Liking this pic.



Thats good stuff man.
Photoshop that power line out though.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *noname*


Thats good stuff man. 
Photoshop that power line out though.


No, it divides the image nicely.

Do this instead:


----------



## noname

True, that does look nicer.


----------



## Marin

I'm liking this. Looks a lot better than the original, the buildings had too much contrast.



EDIT:

Another two.


----------



## SoBe8503

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
I'm liking this. Looks a lot better than the original, the buildings had too much contrast.



Whoah Funky


----------



## TaiDinh

Marin said:


> Go to 2:25 in my video.
> 
> Any chance you can get a shot with similar environment?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> YouTube - F.E.A.R 2: Project Origin Demo Game play


----------



## noname

Hahahaha - that hall way was scary as hell!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Check out this lens Nikon DSLR owners:

Link

220Â° field of view, so wide it can actually see _behind_ itself.


----------



## Marin

Someone buy it, it's only 35k.









The pictures it takes are amazing though.

Quote:


----------



## Mootsfox

The first weekly OCN photo contest is now in the voting stage!

http://www.overclock.net/photography...test-26-a.html


----------



## tkl.hui

Oh man, how do i enter that contest


----------



## teK0wnzU

Yeah, I didn't even know there was one.


----------



## Mootsfox

Don't worry, there will be more!

Hopefully we'll get one running each week.


----------



## SlickMeister

Hello,

May I join the club?

I have a film SLR :
Canon EOS 500n

Lenses:
Sigma 100-300mm 1:4.5-6.7 DL
Sigma 24-70mm 1:3.5-5.6 UC

On the digital side of things I have a Point and Shoot : Fujifilm FinePix S602 Zoom; not good.

I am looking to buy a new camera but I think I'll have to stick to a better Point and Shoot camera, DSLR just costs way too much. If I were to invest in a DSLR body can I use the Sigma lenses I already own?


----------



## coffeejunky

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Don't worry, there will be more!

Hopefully we'll get one running each week.

If you win just don't choose foxes lol.


----------



## importpunch

Btw I did the Black and white and blue colour effect..by just making a new layer, desaturating it, then erasing what i want, which is the car. color level edit then im dont. lol.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *SlickMeister*


Hello,

May I join the club?

I have a film SLR : 
Canon EOS 500n

Lenses:
Sigma 100-300mm 1:4.5-6.7 DL
Sigma 24-70mm 1:3.5-5.6 UC

On the digital side of things I have a Point and Shoot : Fujifilm FinePix S602 Zoom; not good.

I am looking to buy a new camera but I think I'll have to stick to a better Point and Shoot camera, DSLR just costs way too much. If I were to invest in a DSLR body can I use the Sigma lenses I already own?


Actually, if you buy a Canon you can use those lenses. Canon is still using the EF mount, just they added the EF-S mount to all APS-C DSLRs (majority of cameras use this). APS-C cameras can also use EF lenses, just you need to multiply the length by 1.6 to figure out the true focal length when taking photo's.


----------



## default501x

you know, ive posted in this thread before, i just completely forgot to ask to be added to the camera club










here's my gear:

Canon EOS 400D (Rebel Xti)
Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 
Canon EF 90-300mm f/4.5-5.6
Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro


----------



## catmmm

got my canon xsi yesterday








today i was playing with it.

here are some shots i took.
of course, i am still learning how to use it and everything but so far, i'm really liking it and already planning what kinda lens i wanna get next


----------



## Mootsfox

I like the second one because of the jet trails.


----------



## Cr4zYH3aD

i have an XTi


----------



## Marin

...


----------



## Danylu

Danylu

Nikon D60 18-55mm STD.

I'm still learning


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *SlickMeister*


Hello,

May I join the club?

I have a film SLR : 
Canon EOS 500n

Lenses:
Sigma 100-300mm 1:4.5-6.7 DL
Sigma 24-70mm 1:3.5-5.6 UC

On the digital side of things I have a Point and Shoot : Fujifilm FinePix S602 Zoom; not good.

I am looking to buy a new camera but I think I'll have to stick to a better Point and Shoot camera, DSLR just costs way too much. If I were to invest in a DSLR body can I use the Sigma lenses I already own?


Added! And yes, you're all set to move to a digital SLR. Canon still uses the EF mount so your lenses are compatible. Canon has also added the EF-S mount to the crop sensor models, but full-frame sensors are EF only. Either way you're good.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *default501x*


you know, ive posted in this thread before, i just completely forgot to ask to be added to the camera club









here's my gear:

Canon EOS 400D (Rebel Xti)
Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 
Canon EF 90-300mm f/4.5-5.6
Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro


Done


----------



## evilspongebob72

Hello, I'd love to join. I only have p&s fuji s5500 but it's still a lot of fun : D


----------



## Cr4zYH3aD

i have an xti and im looking to buy a 10-20 or 10-22


----------



## default501x

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Cr4zYH3aD*


i have an xti and im looking to buy a 10-20 or 10-22


the canon 10-22 is a great lens.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *default501x* 
the canon 10-22 is a great lens.

It's my next lens, hopefully after taxes. The Sigma 10-20mm is also a great lens.


----------



## equetefue

Just purchased like 10 mins ago... kenko Pro 300 1.4x to mate to the 400L + 1d2 Combo

I'll post some pics as soon as I get it..


----------



## Marin

Is this a good deal?

Quote:

# Digital camera sensor cleaning @$40.00 for most cameras

It's at my local camera store.


----------



## Mootsfox

Depends if they know what they are doing or not


----------



## Marin

Well it's not some camera store like Ritz.







It's been around here for awhile and the people who work there are photographers.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

If they have good reptutaion, I would trust them. It's nice to have a local shop that can clean your sensor and not have to send it off to Canon. You might ask if they are an authorized Canon servicer


----------



## coffeejunky

Just in case people don't know the photo contest for this week is underway -
http://www.overclock.net/photography...-feb-20-a.html
The theme is *animals*, I'm sure alot of you have some nice animal pics


----------



## Kris88

This is my friends Great Dane








Only like 5 months old and he is massive


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *equetefue*


Just purchased like 10 mins ago... kenko Pro 300 1.4x to mate to the 400L + 1d2 Combo

I'll post some pics as soon as I get it..


That's a lot of extra reach!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Nikon people, there's a new Nikon DX AF-S prime coming out next month, 35mm f/1.8, only about $200 retail, looks like a decent lens:

http://www.dcresource.com/news/newsitem.php?id=3872


----------



## Marin

Looks like a decent "50mm" lens for cropped sensors.


----------



## Marin

nvm...


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Looks like a decent "50mm" lens for cropped sensors.


Yeah, and already full frame Nikon users are complaining that there isn't an FX version.


----------



## Mootsfox

Oh, do want. I was shooting in low light tonight and was having trouble with my MF, because it was too dark to see









I believe that this is the first AF-S prime that isn't a specialty lens (macro, etc).


----------



## Marin

I'm so frustrated trying to figure out what lens to get. I'm trying to keep it cheap (around $400) but can't find one that looks good. I'm mainly looking for a walk around lens that has IS. I don't use a lot of zoom as I rarely need it, my 18-55mm is actually perfect for the focal length as I rarely find myself wanting to zoom in more.
What I'm looking for is a good mix of a wide angle and zoom lens, not so focused on zoom though and most likely would rather take a wide angle lens over it if I had to decide between the two factors.

EDIT: I also find myself taking more low light/night shots.


----------



## Enjoi

took this picture with my crappy little Sony Cybershot while i was in Spain =P
just thought id share


----------



## Bigevil89

Just got this today for my a590










Cant wait to try this out at the everglades this weekend


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


I'm so frustrated trying to figure out what lens to get. I'm trying to keep it cheap (around $400) but can't find one that looks good. I'm mainly looking for a walk around lens that has IS. I don't use a lot of zoom as I rarely need it, my 18-55mm is actually perfect for the focal length as I rarely find myself wanting to zoom in more.
What I'm looking for is a good mix of a wide angle and zoom lens, not so focused on zoom though and most likely would rather take a wide angle lens over it if I had to decide between the two factors.

EDIT: I also find myself taking more low light/night shots.


Yeah, it's hard to get really wide without spending a lot.


----------



## Marin

Since the only lens that really suit my need are basically out of my price range I'm thinking about getting flash.

http://www.amazon.com/Canon-Speedlit...4318024&sr=8-1

http://www.amazon.com/Canon-Speedlit...4318024&sr=8-2


----------



## equetefue

i have the 580II and is a great flash, but unless you use it that much or make $ out of it, you are better off with the 430Ex. Excellent flash for the price.

What lens you looking to get Marin.


----------



## Mootsfox

I wish I had your budget Marin.

Give me a reason not to buy this.

http://www.dealextreme.com/details.d...813~r.99999999


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *equetefue*


i have the 580II and is a great flash, but unless you use it that much or make $ out of it, you are better off with the 430Ex. Excellent flash for the price.

What lens you looking to get Marin.


No clue on the lens. I was liking the 17-55mm IS but it's way out of my budget. There's a Tamron that ranks high but it doesn't have any image stabilization system, which I have found pretty crucial for the photo's I take.


----------



## equetefue

the 17-55 is a very good lens. Light but good.

I used to own a Tammy 28-75mm and it was very good. Heard that the 17-50 version is a tad sharper. Why don't u buy a prime, or are u looking for flexibility of zoom ?

the 28mm and sigma 30 are great. also the 50 and 85.(prefer 100) myself.

All within budget.


----------



## Marin

I like the flexibility of zoom although I have been thinking of a prime. If it were a prime I would want to be to around 35mm (that or less in focal length). And the lack of IS is what kind of bothers be as I've found it to be very beneficial for night shots, but then again, if there is a good tripod that's portable I wouldn't really need IS at all.


----------



## Mootsfox

On a fast prime, I've found that it's possible to hand hold at 1/8s or slower with higher ISOs.


----------



## equetefue

A good copy of the siggy 30 f1.4 is what you need. No need for IS


----------



## Oscuro

Hunh, I never even noticed this place!

Rockin' a Canon Powershot S5 IS for the moment, looking to pick up either a Pentax K200D, or an Olympus E-520...Used, either of them. Though I am leaning towards the Pentax. If i could, I'd love to get a Canon or Nikon, but everything around here used is still painfully expensive....and I'm not rich.

Still, even with a "Bridge" camera and an el-cheapo tripod:









I do almost all of my shooting in manual mode if I can help it, although I have this problem of using the LCD all the time.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *equetefue*


A good copy of the siggy 30 f1.4 is what you need. No need for IS


So this one?

http://www.amazon.com/Sigma-30mm-Can...4323617&sr=8-1

Also, would I need to hunt down a good copy on eBay. I would prefer to use Amazon (or any e-tailor) but will resort to using eBay if it is needed.

Also, how is this lens?:

http://www.amazon.com/Canon-28mm-Wid...4323617&sr=8-3


----------



## equetefue

go to fredmiranda and photography-on-the.net

Ask for a good copy and it will happen. Excellent lens with the right one. You won't regret it. I will be adding one of those and a 100f2 to the arsenal very soon.

Hope it helps brother


----------



## Marin

So get the Sigma over the Canon?


----------



## equetefue

depends on the copy but i've seen excellent results from both, but the siggy has a stop advantage


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *equetefue*


depends on the copy but i've seen excellent results from both, but the siggy has a stop advantage


Hmmm... so how would I go about getting a better copy?

Also, what's a good and portable tripod?


----------



## equetefue

Post on snapsonline..people will help a lot there and give feedback


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Hmmm... so how would I go about getting a better copy?

Also, what's a good and portable tripod?

i would recomend the manfrotto 758
its lasted me two and a bit years, been on two week long ski trips, backpacking, winter camping, and up mount washington twice.


----------



## Marin

I may just hold off on getting a new lens for now and save up for a better one. Seems like the best option.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *equetefue* 
A good copy of the siggy 30 f1.4 is what you need. No need for IS

When you say "good copy," do you mean a used lens in good condition (i.e. well taken care of), or is there a lot variation in the quality of new lenses?

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
I may just hold off on getting a new lens for now and save up for a better one. Seems like the best option.

Right on. As soon as my tax return shows up on my bank statement, that Canon 10-22mm is mine!


----------



## SoBe8503

I'm thinking of getting a 55-200 mm lens, would that be enough zoom for these kinds of shots? The moon in the CO mountains can be spectacular, and I'm hoping to take some more. (Plz ignore composition







)


----------



## Mootsfox

They are demoing two huge buildings on the OSU campus right now. I want to take pictures of them so badly but it's pouring out right now


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
They are demoing two huge buildings on the OSU campus right now. I want to take pictures of them so badly but it's pouring out right now









Yeah, you got what just came through KY, which was leftover from the OK tornadoes. I guess mother nature feels like taking a dump on this region.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Yeah, you got what just came through KY, which was leftover from the OK tornadoes. I guess mother nature feels like taking a dump on this region.

I just got light rain, heavy rain, hail, gale force winds, and now a light drizzle. Tomorrow it will snow.

Ohio <3


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *SoBe8503* 
I'm thinking of getting a 55-200 mm lens, would that be enough zoom for these kinds of shots? The moon in the CO mountains can be spectacular, and I'm hoping to take some more. (Plz ignore composition







)










200mm with the crop should be enough reach to get the moon that large.


----------



## Marin

So going along with my previous plan of saving up some money I'm hoping to get this by the summer. It has a high price but probably evens out with the number of lower price lenses I would acquire during that period of time. Also, on eBay this lens sells for a lot cheaper than the listed price.

http://www.amazon.com/Canon-24-105mm...4417730&sr=8-1


----------



## default501x

canons keep their price too well :/
the cheapest i could find that lens was in the $900 range

the regular version of that lens is supposadly a beast though, so i can only imagine how amazing the L version must be


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *default501x*


canons keep their price too well :/
the cheapest i could find that lens was in the $900 range

the regular version of that lens is supposadly a beast though, so i can only imagine how amazing the L version must be


Not so much Canons, but lenses in general. Bodies are worth about 10-20% of their MSRP after 5 years, while a lens can actually gain value


----------



## Marin

Well, my dads camera (both the body and lens) gained value. But that's probably an exception.


----------



## Mootsfox

Yeah, but only because it's a Leica film, right?

The F series from Nikon still sell for crazy amounts if they are good condition.

But the D1 for example, can be found for $100. D2H's (which are still better than D200's for action) can be had for about $500.


----------



## Enjoi

what would be a good camera on a $200-300 budget?


----------



## xguntherc

Hey everyone, I have a question. where's the BEST place to upload pics. like I always use imageshack and I hate it. This will be just for me loading everyday pics, pics for the contests, my work log I just started







and other things. Should I just use Flikr, after you load them there, can I always just go there and get a link??

Let me know.

Thanks!


----------



## Mootsfox

I've used photobucket for years and love it. Imageshack is crap, I agree.

I also have a flickr and a devantart account, though I don't post to them as much as the photobucket.


----------



## default501x

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Enjoi* 
what would be a good camera on a $200-300 budget?

http://www.google.com/products/catal...ton#ps-sellers

i love the canon EOS's

heres an even better one for 335 on POTN
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...d.php?t=645044

and an xt:
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...d.php?t=644728


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Enjoi* 
what would be a good camera on a $200-300 budget?

Check Circuit City if you have one around you. I saw a Nikon D40 for $270ish ($400 retail) and a few Canon's for 20-30% off.


----------



## xguntherc

Nikon D40 was $320 by my house, but it was the display only left, flash didn't shut and the lens was all dark when looking through.. it was torn up.

Thanks moots.. the only thing I have against photobucket, is there's always those links I find that say Photobucket on them but no image. why does that happen, I don't want mine to do that. lol.

and I guess I could pay for imageshack account.. or no.


----------



## xguntherc

oh, and question Moots. See in my Sig.. the CM 690 Club.. it used to be links just like my work log, and overclock.. wasn't all nice like that. it used to look like the others, and someone changed it for me..

How can I do that again. I want to make my work-log link just be the title of the work log or something, instead of ugly like it is..

Thanks!


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *xguntherc*


Hey everyone, I have a question. where's the BEST place to upload pics. like I always use imageshack and I hate it. This will be just for me loading everyday pics, pics for the contests, my work log I just started







and other things. Should I just use Flikr, after you load them there, can I always just go there and get a link??

Let me know.

Thanks!


I use Flickr. Purchased a Pro account and it was totally worth it. So many photographers use the site and the group feature allows other people to easily discover your photos.


----------



## Marin

I know I keep changing my choices and a few hours ago was content with waiting to get a L lens. But, maybe being my ADD, I'm leaning towards the 30mm Sigma again. I guess I"ll just not update you guys with my decision until I order whatever lens/accessory I decide on and take some pics.


----------



## Oscuro

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


I know I keep changing my choices and a few hours ago was content with waiting to get a L lens. But, maybe being my ADD, I'm leaning towards the 30mm Sigma again. I guess I"ll just not update you guys with my decision until I order whatever lens/accessory I decide on and take some pics.











What I don't like about Flickr...is...well, All I ever see are tiny pictures. I've never seen hi-res on that site. Nevermind...finally saw the _tiny_ little "all sizes" button up in the top corner. After years of seeing flickr, I never noticed that stupid little thing. SHould be more obvious.

Also, the navigation is to me, a pain. I just don't like flickr personally.


----------



## xguntherc

I got photobucket.. uploaded like 40 pictures.. awesome, that will work. Screw imageshack.

Thanks!


----------



## stanrc

Quote:



Originally Posted by *xguntherc*


Hey everyone, I have a question. where's the BEST place to upload pics. like I always use imageshack and I hate it. This will be just for me loading everyday pics, pics for the contests, my work log I just started







and other things. Should I just use Flikr, after you load them there, can I always just go there and get a link??

Let me know.

Thanks!


I suggest Flickr or Picasa.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *xguntherc*


Hey everyone, I have a question. where's the BEST place to upload pics. like I always use imageshack and I hate it. This will be just for me loading everyday pics, pics for the contests, my work log I just started







and other things. Should I just use Flikr, after you load them there, can I always just go there and get a link??

Let me know.

Thanks!



Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


I know I keep changing my choices and a few hours ago was content with waiting to get a L lens. But, maybe being my ADD, I'm leaning towards the 30mm Sigma again. I guess I"ll just not update you guys with my decision until I order whatever lens/accessory I decide on and take some pics.










Check out this new lens from Tamron, 10-24mm and will retail in the sub $500 range:

http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/...4_3p5-5p6_n15/

Judging from the MTF, it's definitely no Canon EF-S 10-22mm or even as good as the Sigma 10-20mm, but it's certainly a lot cheaper.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *xguntherc*


Nikon D40 was $320 by my house, but it was the display only left, flash didn't shut and the lens was all dark when looking through.. it was torn up.

*Thanks moots.. the only thing I have against photobucket, is there's always those links I find that say Photobucket on them but no image. why does that happen, I don't want mine to do that. lol.*

and I guess I could pay for imageshack account.. or no.


If you go over your 25GB a month. I've never had that happen to me, ever. I know a few people who use 1mb gif files as their sigs, and yeah, after about 10 days of posting they run out of bandwidth. You'll be fine with just photos.

Quote:



Username mootsfox
Account Type Free
Member Since 01/19/2007
Total Pictures and Videos 929
Monthly Hits 14460
Album Size 
184 MB (17%)
1 GB

Monthly Bandwidth 
2.7 GB (10%)
25 GB


----------



## HaXXoR

I thought i'd post a couple pics, what you guys think?


----------



## xguntherc

awesome info there Moots.. that will do just fine. I just signed up.


----------



## Enjoi

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Check Circuit City if you have one around you. I saw a Nikon D40 for $270ish ($400 retail) and a few Canon's for 20-30% off.


Checked, the one in my area isnt going below 375 0_o


----------



## Mootsfox

I went back in today and all the decent cameras were gone. The Sony's were the only thing left


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


I went back in today and all the decent cameras were gone. The Sony's were the only thing left










Sony's aren't bad though.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Sony's aren't bad though.


Yeah, but I don't want an a200 even if it is 30% off MSRP.

They still had displays from like 2005. There was the original DX 55-200mm which is at least four years old by now. It's kinda depressing really.

They had all their display mice in bags... There was a MX Revolution for $104.99! Minus 30% too I suppose, but it was the display model, without the charger or USB adapter.


----------



## Enjoi

Yeah the one in my area is pretty much cleaned out, i might go there tomorrow to see if theres anymore price drops on there cameras


----------



## catmmm

i went the other day and saw an xsi for $560
i was ultimately sad since i just got mine for $600
...i was going to wait til the prices at cc went down more, but i figured by the time that happened then the xsi would be gone.


----------



## phospholipid

Photo class is going well.
Man, I thought I knew what I was doing, I was WAYYYY wrong. Almost all the kids in my class either work in a studio, work with professionals [big time], or are just generally awesome. I'm learning though, that's what's important.


----------



## Marin

I'm down to two lenses.

http://www.amazon.com/Sigma-30mm-Nik...4548406&sr=8-1

http://www.amazon.com/Canon-28mm-Wid...4548415&sr=8-1

The Sigma is an all around better lens with the only downside to it being that it's an "EF-S" lens. But the real issue I'm having with this is that people seem to report getting more bad copies of the Sigma. Now I really would prefer to buy one of these lenses through an e-tailor and not buy from some person online.

You would think the better choice would be the 28mm but it also seems to have it's issue like minor chromatic aberrations and slighly worse image quality than the Sigma.

So right now I don't know what to do...


----------



## xlastshotx

I need an update to my SLR, I stepped up to a Canon 50D.. So now it should say:

*xLastShotx* - Canon EOS 50D
Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II
Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 AT-X 116 Pro DX










Thanks


----------



## phospholipid

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


I'm down to two lenses.

http://www.amazon.com/Sigma-30mm-Canon-Digital-Cameras/dp/B0007U0GZM/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1234549651&sr =1-2

You would think the better choice would be the 28mm but it also seems to have it's issue like minor chromatic aberrations and slighly worse image quality than the Sigma.

So right now I don't know what to do...



















Get the sigma. Hands down, get the sigma. in fact, that was the lens i was secretly eyeballing next to the 60mm, because it's "EF-s". i just haven't seen any info on its wide angle "proportions" you know what i mean? since it's not a regular like the 50mm, i want to see how shapes hold up.


----------



## catmmm

took this a few hours ago








i'm loving my new camera


----------



## Mootsfox

This page is going to be sunsets.


----------



## dr4gon

I agree.


Phos, that looks so yummy right now, I'm STARVING!


----------



## Marin

*cracks knuckles*

Here's yer sunset moots.


----------



## catmmm

mine looks lame


----------



## bentleya




----------



## [PWN]Schubie

wow, spectacular HDR


----------



## Marin




----------



## tkl.hui

Quote:



Originally Posted by *bentleya*












That looks amazing. Is it just me, or do people find that HDR photos often look very "fake". To me, it ends up looking like a painting. Not that its a bad thing.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


This page is going to be sunsets.



OK, here's a sunrise:


----------



## huntman21014

Huntman21014

Sony Alpha a300
18-70MM and 75-300 lenses


----------



## Marin

I love how this photo turned out for me.


----------



## Squeeker The Cat

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


I love how this photo turned out for me.




kinda lookslike a scene from HL2 or something.it dont look real kinda like pixar shot or something.its cool!!


----------



## Squeeker The Cat

Quote:



Originally Posted by *tkl.hui*


That looks amazing. Is it just me, or do people find that HDR photos often look very "fake". To me, it ends up looking like a painting. Not that its a bad thing.


how do you do hdr photos?


----------



## xlastshotx

Took this in my garage studio with my 50D and 50 f/1.8, I wanted a new desktop background but I couldn't find anything that fit what I was looking for. So I made my own


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *tkl.hui*


That looks amazing. Is it just me, or do people find that HDR photos often look very "fake". To me, it ends up looking like a painting. Not that its a bad thing.


It depends on the method. Tone mapped HDRs have that glowing "painterly" look, but there are also more natural looking HDRs (the trick is make it not seem like an HDR). In both cases the dynamic range is increased by lightening the shadows using multiple combined exposures.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Squeeker The Cat*


how do you do hdr photos?


It can be done manually using Photoshop/Gimp (there's a great tutorial for HDR's in GIMP - Google!), but most use software like Photomatix or Dynamic HDR. No matter what method you use to create them, at least three identical images shot at different exposure values (underexposed, normally exposed and over exposed) are required, but single RAW HDRs are possible as well.


----------



## tkl.hui

Haven't posted any pictures in a while so here's one of my mum's b-day cake.









It was a chocolate mouse cake and was delicious.


----------



## Marin

Here's my first HDR attempt.



And another pic (not an HDR).


----------



## dr4gon

If that first one had some nice bright red strips on the wall and some other red objects, I'd say I had runners vision and I was in Mirror's Edge!


----------



## Marin

That's the effect I was going for









It reminded me of Mirror's Edge, maybe if I spray paint a car red...


----------



## Mootsfox

They were demoing a building on campus last friday...





































And this is for you Marin:


----------



## Marin

Omg...


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 

And this is for you Marin:










care to share?


----------



## bentleya

Moots care to share them lens's, marin what great work on your first HDR looks amazing







really good


----------



## phospholipid

ohhh i can't wait to print my black and whites for you guys.

i've been using my Elan 7E in my photo class, and i developed my own negatives for the first time. i use to work in a photo depo, developing but never have i had developed. it was fantastic- the negatives are very promising. if i can find a place that can print black and whites in 1 day, i'll post some up for you guys to see :]

btw -nuclear, amazing sunsett picture


----------



## huntman21014

Out of these two prime lenses for a sony alpha, which one do you guys think is better?

http://cgi.ebay.com/Sigma-24mm-AF-Ma...3A1|240%3A1318

or

http://cgi.ebay.com/Minolta-50mm-f1-...3A1|240%3A1318


----------



## dr4gon

Minolta definitely, I'm not a fan of sigma at all..... Plus the Minolta 50mm prime is the one you want!


----------



## Mootsfox

Not sharing my lenses kthx.

They aren't mine, but I got to ship 150 of them


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Not sharing my lenses kthx.

They aren't mine, but I got to ship 150 of them









I'll just steal them.


----------



## Marin

Here's another HDR. I'm trying to stay away from the fake "processed" look.

EDIT: fixing color


----------



## spice003

no picture!


----------



## xlastshotx

Quote:



Originally Posted by *spice003*


no picture!


theirs a picture there... its just 4x4 pixels, so you have to really look hard


----------



## Marin

Aperture seems to be messing up the color profiles. So I'll just wait until I get back home so I can edit it in Lightroom.


----------



## Whyifide

Add a Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 and the Tokina 11-16 f/2.8 under my name


----------



## Marin

Here I am taking a pic. HDR I took will be posted soon











(Photo was cropped)


----------



## bentleya

Marin i would rekomend reading though this website >> stuck in customs Great TUT's On HDR's


----------



## EricM9104

Can you put me down as owning a Nikon D40X too?? (Not here yet... Coming in next week)















Going lens shopping soon so dunno on that yet.
I still own my Canon P&S for now too.


----------



## Dragoon

Hope you guys can help me along with this. Currently I'm building my lens wish list, and I'm a bit undecided on which telephoto zoom lens I should get. My options are:

-EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS
-EF 70-300mm 70-300 f/4-5.6 IS USM
-EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM

I've read on reviews the image sharpness on the 55-250 could be better and the lens body mount mechanism is plastic (holding me back there), so I figured I should find another options, a review site advised the 70-300mm which from some sample photos is clearly sharper than the 55-250, but the price is quite steep, and after searching a bit more I find the 28-135 which is fairly cheaper, and I will most likely not need the huge 300mm focus range, but I saw on few places good and bad things about them, like jerky zoom ring, wobbly, outdated IS (?)...

Anyway, I'd like to know what's your opinion, if it's *really* worth to shell out 500â‚¬ on the 70-300 or 375â‚¬ on the 28-135, I'm also not buying them soon since they're my least priority (Top is wide angle -> macro -> prime -> telephoto)

Mind you, most of the prices I get are off ebay, which in most cases can be over 100â‚¬ cheaper than in stores (your opinion of this?).

Thanks


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dragoon*


Hope you guys can help me along with this. Currently I'm building my lens wish list, and I'm a bit undecided on which telephoto zoom lens I should get. My options are:

-EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS
-EF 70-300mm 70-300 f/4-5.6 IS USM
-EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM

I've read on reviews the image sharpness on the 55-250 could be better and the lens body mount mechanism is plastic (holding me back there), so I figured I should find another options, a review site advised the 70-300mm which from some sample photos is clearly sharper than the 55-250, but the price is quite steep, and after searching a bit more I find the 28-135 which is fairly cheaper, and I will most likely not need the huge 300mm focus range, but I saw on few places good and bad things about them, like jerky zoom ring, wobbly, outdated IS (?)...

Anyway, I'd like to know what's your opinion, if it's *really* worth to shell out 500€ on the 70-300 or 375€ on the 28-135, I'm also not buying them soon since they're my least priority (Top is wide angle -> macro -> prime -> telephoto)

Mind you, most of the prices I get are off ebay, which in most cases can be over 100€ cheaper than in stores (your opinion of this?).

Thanks



















Hey Dragoon,

I would avoid the 55-250mm, it is soft (but not necessarily worse than the 28-135mm) unless you shoot in f/8 all the time.

The other two lenses however are decent. Of the two I would say go for the 70-300mm, definitely the sharper of the two (NOT the *75*-300mm), but the 28-135mm is a great lens, I have it myself and it's the lens on my camera the majority of the time. As far as sharpness, it really isn't sharper than the 55-250mm (check the MTF charts), but it is more compact and has USM motor. The reviews are correct, the construction is a tad "wobbly" but that it's all - just wobbly, has no effect on performance. I don't know about outdated IS, it still still gives you about a 2 stop advantage and I love it, but I think what the reviews mean by outdated is that it doesn't have the "Mode 1" and "Mode 2" IS like the 70-300mm has (one is for stationary subjects, the other moving subjects). And of course the USM is worth having as well. Plus the 28-135mm, as you have noticed, is cheaper (but could be sharper). And myself I find that the telephoto end of that lens is sufficient zoom, esp. with the crop.

So I would say the 70-300mm if you can afford it, but if not the 28-135mm is fine too. The 55-250mm would be the budget lens of course. If you have a decent camera shop locally, go try them.

And my priority for my next lens is definitely wide angle too - I will hopefully have that Canon 10-22mm if my tax return is decent.

MTF charts and info for the lenses:
55-250mm
28-135mm
70-300mm


----------



## stanrc

Everyone get your photo contest submissions in!! It ends at 4 PM EST today!


----------



## Dragoon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Hey Dragoon,

I would avoid the 55-250mm, it is very soft (particularly in the corners) unless you shoot in f/8 all the time.

The other two lenses however are decent. Of the two I would say go for the 70-300mm, definitely the sharper of the two (NOT the *75*-300mm), but the 28-135mm is a great lens, I have it myself and it's the lens on my camera the majority of the time. The reviews are correct, the construction is a tad "wobbly" but that it's all - just wobbly, has no effect on performance. I don't know about outdated IS, it still still gives you about a 2 stop advantage and I love it, but I think what the reviews mean by outdated is that it doesn't have the "Mode 1" and "Mode 2" IS like the 70-300mm has (one is for stationary subjects, the other moving subjects). And of course the USM is worth having as well. Plus the 28-135mm, as you have noticed, is cheaper. And myself I find that the telephoto end of that lens is sufficient zoom, esp. with the crop.

So I would say the 70-300mm if you can afford it, but if not the 28-135mm is fine too. If you have a decent camera shop locally, go try them.

And my priority for my next lens is definitely wide angle too - I will hopefully have that Canon 10-22mm if my tax return is decent.


Thanks alot for the prompt reply









I'll see if I can head down to a local camera shop and try them out, if not, I will have to rely on the reviews and on you, which honestly, is enough for me









And I wanna see some shots with that 10-22mm when you get it







I'll stick to my decision in getting the Sigma 10-20mm


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *stanrc*


Everyone get your photo contest submissions in!! It ends at 4 PM EST today!


Fun fun! I hope the next topic is people. Incidentally, our photo contests here are great - low key, anyone can enter, but for those of you who want some serious competion, DP Review has these new Photo Challenges:

http://www.dpreview.com/challenges/

The thing is, their contests get hundreds of submissions by some serious photographers, a bit daunting!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dragoon*


Thanks alot for the prompt reply









I'll see if I can head down to a local camera shop and try them out, if not, I will have to rely on the reviews and on you, which honestly, is enough for me









And I wanna see some shots with that 10-22mm when you get it







I'll stick to my decision in getting the Sigma 10-20mm



















You're welcome, I would get Equetfue's take on the lenses as well, he's the Canon maestro around here. And the 10-22mm is so sweet (Google some shots of it), they call it "an L in disguise," it really is superb. In fact, Camera Labs rates its quality higher than the 17-40mm L:

http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Ca...0D/index.shtml
http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Ca...FS/index.shtml

I can't WAIT to have it! I'm traveling to Europe and other places this summer, so it will see a lot of use.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Check out this new Zuiko wide angle zoom for Olympus DSLRs:

http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/...-18_4-5p6_o20/

Seriously wide angle! That would be my next lens if I had an Oly.


----------



## Dragoon

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
You're welcome, I would get Equetfue's take on the lenses as well, he's the Canon maestro around here. And the 10-22mm is so sweet (Google some shots of it), they call it "an L in disguise," it really is superb. In fact, Camera Labs rates its quality higher than the 17-40mm L:

http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Ca...0D/index.shtml
http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Ca...FS/index.shtml

I can't WAIT to have it! I'm traveling to Europe and other places this summer, so it will see a lot of use.

Heh, sweet









Yeah I have read about the 10-22, but not yet about the 17-40 L, but damn, no wonder they call the 10-22 an "L in disguise".

Btw, if I may know, which country(ies) will you be visiting?

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Check out this new Zuiko wide angle zoom for Olympus DSLRs:

http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/...-18_4-5p6_o20/

Seriously wide angle! That would be my next lens if I had an Oly.

That's ludicrous! Imagine that on a full frame body... And from their review, it's very sharp, with a slight CA on the edges. And its their standard design, I wonder the price though...


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Dragoon* 
Heh, sweet









Yeah I have read about the 10-22, but not yet about the 17-40 L, but damn, no wonder they call the 10-22 an "L in disguise".

Btw, if I may know, which country(ies) will you be visiting?

That's ludicrous! Imagine that on a full frame body... And from their review, it's very sharp, with a slight CA on the edges. And its their standard design, I wonder the price though...

I'm going to Italy and Greece in June for a field trip, taking some of my students. I've been to both countries before, but there are a few spots on our trip that I haven't visited, so it'll be fun. I'm just trying to plan on how much of my camera gear to take. I don't think I'll take all my lenses, maybe my 50mm prime, 28-135mm and the 10-22mm and that's it, but even that's a load to carry around and worry about. Later in the summer I'm going to California for a conference as well. Being a teacher is great (usually), so much free travel!

And about the Zuiko, it does have some CA issues but as the review says, most wide angle zooms do, unless it L glass of course.


----------



## Dragoon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


I'm going to Italy and Greece in June for a field trip, taking some of my students. I've been to both countries before, but there are a few spots on our trip that I haven't visited, so it'll be fun. I'm just trying to plan on how much of my camera gear to take. I don't think I'll take all my lenses, maybe my 50mm prime, 28-135mm and the 10-22mm and that's it, but even that's a load to carry around and worry about. Later in the summer I'm going to California for a conference as well. Being a teacher is great (usually), so much free travel!

And about the Zuiko, it does have some CA issues but as the review says, most wide angle zooms do, unless it L glass of course.


Ooh, that's very nice









3 lenses are too much to take? lol Well... let me get the rest of my lenses and I will understand why you say that


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dragoon*


Ooh, that's very nice









3 lenses are too much to take? lol Well... let me get the rest of my lenses and I will understand why you say that










Not that it's too much to carry, but it's a matter of space and portability. I have four lenses which all fit in my bag (five if you count my 18-55mm non-IS and six when I get the 10-22mm), but I'm not sure if I will use all of them. I don't think I will use my macro lens because it takes time to stop and setup macro shots usually, and to save space/weight I will probably leave my 18-55mm IS at home too, that way I can carry money, passport, maps, etc. in my bag.

I also won't take my tripod because of space issues, although I'm thinking about getting a Gorillapod to take instead, which I might be able to cram in my bag. It's getting tight in the old camera bag, I wish I had the money to get a Lowepro Slingshot, but they're really overpriced.


----------



## Dragoon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Not that it's too much to carry, but it's a matter of space and portability. I have four lenses which all fit in my bag (five if you count my 18-55mm non-IS and six when I get the 10-22mm), but I'm not sure if I will use all of them. I don't think I will use my macro lens because it takes time to stop and setup macro shots usually, and to save space/weight I will probably leave my 18-55mm IS at home too, that way I can carry money, passport, maps, etc. in my bag.

I also won't take my tripod because of space issues, although I'm thinking about getting a Gorillapod to take instead, which I might be able to cram in my bag. It's getting tight in the old camera bag, I wish I had the money to get a Lowepro Slingshot, but they're really overpriced.


I see... Why not take the macro instead the 50mm prime? The macro lens doubles as one right?

Those gorillapods are the ones ones that have small and flexible shafts where you can make it "grip" onto handrails and such right? If so, those are pretty sweet, especially for urban photography.

I still havent bought myself a camera bag, I'm using one not very appropriate for it, just to keep the camera safe.


----------



## porschedrifter

Taken on a Sony DSC-W150 yesterday.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Not that it's too much to carry, but it's a matter of space and portability. I have four lenses which all fit in my bag (five if you count my 18-55mm non-IS and six when I get the 10-22mm), but I'm not sure if I will use all of them. I don't think I will use my macro lens because it takes time to stop and setup macro shots usually, and to save space/weight I will probably leave my 18-55mm IS at home too, that way I can carry money, passport, maps, etc. in my bag.

I also won't take my tripod because of space issues, although I'm thinking about getting a Gorillapod to take instead, which I might be able to cram in my bag. It's getting tight in the old camera bag, I wish I had the money to get a Lowepro Slingshot, but they're really overpriced.

I bought a Lowepro Fastpack 250 because I wanted to be able to hold a laptop/notebook/book at the same time as a body with telephoto lens, flash unit, hoods and batteries, and 2-3 other lenses. I got it for $50, but I can see how these bags can be overpriced.

I was thinking about a Gorillapod as well, either the Zoom or the SLR.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Dragoon* 
I see... Why not take the macro instead the 50mm prime? The macro lens doubles as one right?

Those gorillapods are the ones ones that have small and flexible shafts where you can make it "grip" onto handrails and such right? If so, those are pretty sweet, especially for urban photography.

I still havent bought myself a camera bag, I'm using one not very appropriate for it, just to keep the camera safe.

Right, the 60mm can serve as a prime, but it's max aperture is f/2.8 whereas the the 50mm is f/1.4, which I will definitely need for poorly lit interiors. Plus it's my favorite lens, I can't not take it! I do love the 60mm though, I might take it anyway.









Yeah the Gorillapod is nifty. I have a small one which I use for my Canon SD1000, but I need the SLR version, which a bit larger and sturdier. But yeah, it will wrap around anything small enough - light pole, top of wall, etc.

I have the Lowepro Nova 3 AW, highly recommended. It's a top loading bag, squared-shaped with movable dividers inside. It holds the camera with lens attached, plus four other compact lenses or two other larger zoom lenses. I also am able to put the battery charger, CF card reader, manual and bulb blower in the main compartment. In the front pouch I have four filters and in the flap pouch I have the extra battery, remote and lens cloth. It's a perfect sized bag for walking around, especially since has an attached rain hood that folds into a zip pouch on the bottom. I love it, but I think I would like to try a Slingshot and see if that works better.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
I bought a Lowepro Fastpack 250 because I wanted to be able to hold a laptop/notebook/book at the same time as a body with telephoto lens, flash unit, hoods and batteries, and 2-3 other lenses. I got it for $50, but I can see how these bags can be overpriced.

I was thinking about a Gorillapod as well, either the Zoom or the SLR.

Yeah, and especially a full Fastpack is one expensive item to be toting around! But I can see how it would be necessary to have camera and laptop in one bag, esp. for a student.

I just like the Slingshot because it's a single strap backpack which loads from the side, so it can be swung around easily and accessed. But, it's like $100 for small one alone.


----------



## xguntherc

Those Lowepro Slighshot's look really nice, I want one now. I have just average digital solutions bag I got for free with my camera. It's actually pretty good, I'll post a pic of it. But I'd like the slingshot 200

Anyways, I got some news guys. I am going on a Cruise, the Mexican Riviera on middle of April, right when it's warming to 80-90 Degree's. so it's not to hot. I plan to take my Nikon D40 and take as many shots as I can, (Or I'd like to sell it before I got and nab a D80, but I need to save for the cruise also, so I doubt that will happen)

So, I'm now wondering what lens will be the best solution. I have the 18-105mm VR that comes with the D90 that I bought a while back. It's a nice lens, and I've had it on almost the entire time since I got it. I've only used the 55-200 VR a few times the last month or so, But I'm wondering what my next purchase is, what's the next lens I should get.

I was thinking of getting the nikon 50mm Prime f/1.8 from B&H, but I then will have to manually focus. but thats ok I guess.

*What would be a good lens to take for a cruise?* although I plan to take my bag and just leave it in my room in the safe when not in use.


----------



## Dragoon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Right, the 60mm can serve as a prime, but it's max aperture is f/2.8 whereas the the 50mm is f/1.4, which I will definitely need for poorly lit interiors. Plus it's my favorite lens, I can't not take it! I do love the 60mm though, I might take it anyway.









Yeah the Gorillapod is nifty. I have a small one which I use for my Canon SD1000, but I need the SLR version, which a bit larger and sturdier. But yeah, it will wrap around anything small enough - light pole, top of wall, etc.

I have the Lowepro Nova 3 AW, highly recommended. It's a top loading bag, squared-shaped with movable dividers inside. It holds the camera with lens attached, plus four other compact lenses or two other larger zoom lenses. I also am able to put the battery charger, CF card reader, manual and bulb blower in the main compartment. In the front pouch I have four filters and in the flap pouch I have the extra battery, remote and lens cloth. It's a perfect sized bag for walking around, especially since has an attached rain hood that folds into a zip pouch on the bottom. I love it, but I think I would like to try a Slingshot and see if that works better.


Can't stay away from the sweetness of the macro photography?










Going to take the opportunity to show a HDR "macro" (If this can be called macro







) taken with my 18-55mm IS at my Logitech V500.










For non macro lenses these sure can get pretty close, especially at 55mm.









And I'm REALLY thinking if I should first get the Sigma 10-20mm or the EF-S 60mm macro... I should be able to buy either one or the other by the end of this month.


----------



## SoBe8503

Alright, while I wait for a mod to delete my previous post, here's a better pic...


----------



## Marin

Did you use Photoshop to create the HDR?


----------



## SoBe8503

No Photomatix. Photoshop scares me lol


----------



## Marin

Did you use a P&S? Mine did the weird coloring when I tried to create HDR's.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *SoBe8503*


Alright, while I wait for a mod to delete my previous post, here's a better pic...











Wow, really cool shot! I hate Jack Daniels though.


----------



## Marin

R8, wooo!


----------



## SoBe8503

Aaaaaaand another one. This stuff is fun! LOL!


----------



## teK0wnzU

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
R8, wooo!




R8 with a bad driver... I think I could keep it between the lines. LoL


----------



## Kris88

R8 is possibly the best looking car ever.


----------



## Marin

I whole week of not using my macro lens









So I used it today.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/3297858851/


----------



## dr4gon

"Screwed" - how I feel right now...









Anyways,

I think y'all will probably be able to recognize the fan screws, a case screw, and a DVD drive/hdd screw.


----------



## Mootsfox

Nice!

What lens and settings did you have? Any PP?


----------



## porschedrifter

Quote:


Originally Posted by *teK0wnzU* 
R8 with a bad driver... I think I could keep it between the lines. LoL

Damn that's a hot color.

I would love to get that sideways

Lambo Gallardo chassis, more advanced transmission.... yum


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:



Originally Posted by *teK0wnzU*


R8 with a bad driver... I think I could keep it between the lines. LoL


Well, it has Florida plates... Old guy wearing a hat, maybe?

That candle shot someone posted is nice! The weather has been appalling here, and my overnight in Cleveland to visit a college was the kind of trip I didn't have the time or the space to take and use my camera (although Case Western has a beautiful campus). Once it warms up, I'm going to head up to a nearby park and do some shooting. It was sorta not obvious that it was a park for a few years, and it kinda became a hangout for the skaters and potheads in town. However, it was once the property for a huge Masonic mansion, and parts of the garden are still intact. Kinda cool to walk around.


----------



## default501x

Quote:



Originally Posted by *SoBe8503*


No Photomatix. Photoshop scares me lol


photomatix is GREAT for making HDR shots.


----------



## dr4gon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Nice!

What lens and settings did you have? Any PP?


moi? Just a regular macro shot (Sony 100mm F/2.8 Macro), not much PP, slight crop because I didn't like how I composed it. It's not quite 1:1, could be bigger







. I think if any I just added a bit of contrast, cropped and that was it.
Thanks!


----------



## equetefue

Some from today... what you guys think ?


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

i have said it before, you make me want to give up.

simply stunning work Eq


----------



## equetefue

Thanks bro... I was testing the new 1.4x tc


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

no problem, i always look forward to you sharing more pictures with us!


----------



## Squeeker The Cat

Quote:



Originally Posted by *equetefue*


Thanks bro... I was testing the new 1.4x tc


i wish i could take pics like that!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! you have an amazing eye


----------



## Marin

At a gas station and I saw this. I liked the look of it for some reason.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

http://tokyobling.wordpress.com/2008...3-cut-in-half/

Pretty interesting, check out all that glass in the lens!


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


http://tokyobling.wordpress.com/2008...3-cut-in-half/

Pretty interesting, check out all that glass in the lens!


That's really interesting. Now lets see an IS lens cut in half.


----------



## leptonsoup337

Wow. 11 elements in the 14-24 f/2.8.









(real shame to see a perfectly good lens sliced in half though. Kind of makes me die a little bit on the inside...)


----------



## teK0wnzU

A little something I did with my D80.


----------



## Oscuro

I got my D70 a present: Lowepro flipside 200.

Hopefully I get to go hiking this weekend!


----------



## Marin

Got some new IEM's.


----------



## teK0wnzU

*Marin - Sweet...
*


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Got some new IEM's.

Marin - I have the same earphones. They're great, but you really have to shove them in your ears to get the best sound quality and noise isolation. They kind of hurt my ears when I first got them, but I'm used them by now.


----------



## Marin

http://www.amazon.com/Giottos-Rocket...5786901&sr=8-3

Just received that today. It is so worth the purchase, honestly I think it is a must. I aimed it at my XSi's mirror and was able to clean it with a couple of well aimed blows.


----------



## laboitenoire

Nice buds, Marin. I have the ER-6 Isolators myself (not the ER-6i). I agree with GoneTomorrow that the standard rubber tips are uncomfortable, but I just use the foam tips. Better seal and I can wear them for hours.

On a photo editing note, I figured out something cool in GIMP the other day. I used to have this really crappy digital camera (one of those that were like $40 at OfficeMax and could take like 20 pictures at 640*480 and you had to download your pictures before turning it off...), but it actually came with decent editing software that was somewhere between Paint and GIMP/Photoshop. Well, it had a cool macro built in that would render the image in a crayon-esque sketch style. I've been trying to figure out how to do it for a while, and yesterday I found a tutorial that told you how to do a really thick-line, comic-style sketch from a photo. One of the steps said to do a Sobel Edge-Detect on the image, and the result looked sorta like what I wanted. Sure enough, doing the edge-detect and then running auto levels produced the exact effect. In really intricate photos, it looks pretty awesome.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


http://www.amazon.com/Giottos-Rocket...5786901&sr=8-3

Just received that today. It is so worth the purchase, honestly I think it is a must. I aimed it at my XSi's mirror and was able to clean it with a couple of well aimed blows.


There hasn't been a bit of dust that mine hasn't been able to remove as of yet.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


There hasn't been a bit of dust that mine hasn't been able to remove as of yet.


I just went on a cleaning spree with mine. 
http://www.overclock.net/computer-ca...-easy-way.html


----------



## wierdo124

I might as well join. Just a regular digital camera. Nikon Coolpix S202. Very nice camera for price, i recommend


----------



## bs6851

bs6851 - Canon EOS 450D (Rebel XSi)
Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS

That is coming monday then soon there will be some L Series Glass coming to join it.


----------



## Dragoon

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
http://www.amazon.com/Giottos-Rocket...5786901&sr=8-3

Just received that today. It is so worth the purchase, honestly I think it is a must. I aimed it at my XSi's mirror and was able to clean it with a couple of well aimed blows.

I am so going to get one of those for mine...

A month and half little "piece of trouble"







arrived home last night...









She won't let me take decent photos, she comes running at me as soon she sees me holding the camera!







I'm surprised on how she managed to stay put a couple of seconds to let me take that one


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Cute. Yeah, gotta use at least 1/100" or faster to capture that little bugger.


----------



## j0z3

My trusty film slr, Yashica FX-3 2000 and a Nikon F3.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

I just love the EF 50mm f/1.4, makes my other lenses look like garbage ('cept maybe the 60mm macro):


----------



## huntman21014

You can put me down for a Pentax Z-70 Film SLR and a 50MM f/2.0 Prime along with my Minolta 50MM f/1.7 prime


----------



## Marin

Never cheap out on a filter, EVER! I just replaced mine with a B & W (already have one on my 60mm Macro), it is awesome. Contrast is better and it actually does what it's supposed to it.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *huntman21014*


You can put me down for a Pentax Z-70 Film SLR and a 50MM f/2.0 Prime along with my Minolta 50MM f/1.7 prime


Ok, so is the 50mm f/2.0 for the Pentax or the Sony?


----------



## huntman21014

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Ok, so is the 50mm f/2.0 for the Pentax or the Sony?










Whoops, the f/2 is for the pentax and the minolta f/1.7 is for the sony, sorry!


----------



## bs6851

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Never cheap out on a filter, EVER! I just replaced mine with a B & W (already have one on my 60mm Macro), it is awesome. Contrast is better and it actually does what it's supposed to it.


Who is make the very best filters? Or is it no one manufacturer?


----------



## Mootsfox

B&W, Nikon. Hoya and Tiffen are ok. There's most esoteric companies as well, but if you're gonna blow 1/4 to 1/3 of the cost of the lens on a filter, you may want to rethink that purchase


----------



## bs6851

two additional questions: Are canons filters no good? Is there a certain series in the brands you listed?


----------



## Mootsfox

No.

What type of filter are you looking for?


----------



## bs6851

good uvs to protect lens to start I was going to order the canon one but if they are no good I dont want to put something on that will take away from the quality of the L series


----------



## xlastshotx

Quote:



Originally Posted by *bs6851*


good uvs to protect lens to start I was going to order the canon one but if they are no good I dont want to put something on that will take away from the quality of the L series


I cant really recommend putting any filter on a lens other than a polarizer when needed. The Lens hood and lens caps will prevent any damage that may happen. The only place a UV has any real use would be if you were shooting some dirt bikers close up, were there would be a risk of dirt flying (or some similar scenario). Other than that they will only degrade quality imo (and if you want more contrast like some of them may provide, just use the contrast adjuster in photoshop or whatever program you use). Your better off saving the money for something more useful.


----------



## Mootsfox

You don't need a UV filter to 'protect' a front element. This argument was fought a few pages back.


----------



## bs6851

Ok thanks guys sorry i didnt catch that on prev page I have to admit I didnt look through all 228 pages to see what had already been discussed but I will track it down now thanks again


----------



## Mootsfox

Actually I'm not so sure it was this thread.









Filters should really only be used when you need them for their intended purpose. Throwing a filter on any lens is going to degrade the quality because it's not designed for it. Hoods (As low as $6 shipped) provide a lot of protection from the elements and from lens flare. Keep a lens cap on the lens when you aren't using it and you should be fine.


----------



## equetefue

Canon 1D Mark III
Canon 5D with Grip
Canon 50D
Canon 50mm f1.8
Canon 17-40mm f4 L
Canon 135mm f2 L
Canon 70-200mm f2.8 IS L
Canon 400mm f5.6 L
Canon 580EX II Flash
Canon EF 1.4x II TC
Feisol Carbon Fiber tripod
Manfrotto monopod
Lowepro Trekker bag
Crumpler 7 Million Dollar Home Bag
Neutral density kits for landscapes
Hyperdrive
other goodies

www.Photo-Galleria.com


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *equetefue*


woot !! 
Just got a Canon 5D.


Very very nice box. I know alot of people scoff at Ken Rockwell, but according to his qualitative resolution tests, if you're in the ~20 megapixel range your resolution is approximately equivalent to film.

I'm totally into Nikon glass and I REFUSE to spend $8k for their D3X, so I'm waiting for their D700x or D770, whatever they're going to call it. Should be available sometime in September.

Hurry up and post some pics....

BTW, how do you like your Kenko TC?? The 300 1.4 is supposed to be the only TC that'll work with my 80-400 and retain af and VR.

Agian, from what I've read, you gonna be very very happy with your new body...


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *equetefue* 
woot !!

Just got a Canon 5D.

Now this is the new gear list

Canon 1D Mark II
Canon 5D with Grip
Canon 50mm f1.8
Canon 17-40mm f4 L
Canon 400mm f5.6 L
Kenko Pro 300 1.4x TC
Feisol Carbon Fiber tripod with Sidekick head
Manfrotto monopod
Lowepro Trekker bag
Crumpler 7 Million Dollar Home Bag
Neutral density kits for landscapes
Hyperdrive
other goodies

www.Photo-Galleria.com

Updated your gear. Why did you get a 5D - smaller size or just a backup?


----------



## Mootsfox

I bought a Gorilla pod today, the SLR instead of the zoom because it has a removable mount.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


I bought a Gorilla pod today, the SLR instead of the zoom because it has a removable mount.











Yes, I need to get one of these soon.


----------



## stanrc

A few pictures of the snow we just got...



















Its still slushy and wet outside so I haven't been brave enough to walk around and take any better pictures yet haha.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Updated your gear. Why did you get a 5D - smaller size or just a backup?

1D mkII = 1.3x crop factor, 8mp.
5D mkII = FX, 21mp.
Edit:
I myself broke down and bought an SB 900 flash and contrary to Ken Rockwell's comment of it being nothing more than a video game, it really is quite a nice strobe with an extended zoom range (200mm) and the ability to concentrate the flash itself. Using my SB 600 as a remote, I can achieve some really beautiful flash effects. Thinking of an additional SB-600 to even things out a bit.

So you can add an SB 900 to my "arsenal".

I'm also in the negotiating stage for a used 600mm f/4D ED VR AF-S. It's going to need some factory repair and I'm just not certain about laying out a large $$$ for a bit of an unknown. The repair itself is gonna be ~$1k so right now it's looking kinda bleak. I've only purchased one used lens in my time, and I returned it within 24 hours. Had some stuff floating around loose inside the lens which made me feel a bit uneasy.


----------



## Marin

Wish I could get a 5D, full frame must be so nice. Only really see cropped sensors being beneficial to wildlife photographs.


----------



## xlastshotx

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


1D mkII = 1.3x crop factor, 8mp.
5D mkII = FX, 21mp.


ohh I thought you got a 5D not a 5D MKII. Very nice, awesome camera


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


1D mkII = 1.3x crop factor, 8mp.
5D mkII = FX, 21mp.


He just said "Canon 5D," so I assumed it wasn't a mkII, but the original. Still an upgrade from the 1D mkII (I was thinking of the 1D*s* mkII).


----------



## TDN1979

You guys are just killing my new camera with your talk, lol. I just stepped up into the DSLR world from the Point And Shoot. I have the Kodak Z650 p&s and I just purchased a Canon Rebel XSi and just now got home with it







. I have been doing nothing but playing with it and I have to say that it kicks the crap out of my old Kodak. I will never look back at point and shoot again.


----------



## TaiDinh

Leaking fire hydrin.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


1D mkII = 1.3x crop factor, 8mp.
5D mkII = FX, 21mp.
Edit:
I myself broke down and bought an SB 900 flash and contrary to Ken Rockwell's comment of it being nothing more than a video game, it really is quite a nice strobe with an extended zoom range (200mm) and the ability to concentrate the flash itself. Using my SB 600 as a remote, I can achieve some really beautiful flash effects. Thinking of an additional SB-600 to even things out a bit.

So you can add an SB 900 to my "arsenal".

I'm also in the negotiating stage for a used 600mm f/4D ED VR AF-S. It's going to need some factory repair and I'm just not certain about laying out a large $$$ for a bit of an unknown. The repair itself is gonna be ~$1k so right now it's looking kinda bleak. I've only purchased one used lens in my time, and I returned it within 24 hours. Had some stuff floating around loose inside the lens which made me feel a bit uneasy.


Nikon SB-900 with a Canon body?


----------



## equetefue

I got the best of both worlds.... the best body for action/wildlife and full frame for everything else...

I'm set. yippee


----------



## Marin

I'm about to pull the trigger on this:

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg...9AVE6&v=glance


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Nikon SB-900 with a Canon body?

He has a Nikon D300, he was just explaining the difference between two Canon bodies.


----------



## equetefue

Marin i've used that lens, and recommend the Sigma 30 f1.4 over it. To be honest is recommended by most photogs. The only thing is that I would try to buy a used one rather than a new one as you want to make sure you get a sharp copy.


----------



## equetefue

Next month I'll be getting either a 100 f2 or a 135 f2 L to go with the 5D. The 1d2 will be glued to the 400L from now on.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *equetefue* 
Marin i've used that lens, and recommend the Sigma 30 f1.4 over it. To be honest is recommended by most photogs. The only thing is that I would try to buy a used one rather than a new one as you want to make sure you get a sharp copy.

That's the problem, I want to buy it new from an online store. And if I get the Sigma there's a huge risk of it being a lemon.


----------



## equetefue

u can send it in for calibration.... I'm telling you the Sigma is THAT much better my friend.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *equetefue* 
u can send it in for calibration.... I'm telling you the Sigma is THAT much better my friend.

Yeah, I've seen reviews and can see how much better it is. If I send it in for calibration how long will it take?


----------



## equetefue

Sigma is pretty good about that. When I used to send the 120-300 f2.8 it would take one to one/half week. Due to shipping


----------



## Marin

That's not too bad actually. Seems worth it for how much better the image quality is. And does the warranty cover the tuning, if it does I'll get the Sigma.


----------



## equetefue

it's all cover my friend. Also the lens is faster, sharper, and cheaper !


----------



## Marin

Then I'm down for getting it, ordering now.


----------



## equetefue

Glad I could help... Getting that siggy and the 100 or 135 myself. Then the 24-105 for walkaround.


----------



## HaXXoR

Hey guys, whats the best place to buy a used dslr online in canada?


----------



## equetefue

Henry's Camera


----------



## TDN1979

I thought I would post up a pic that I took of some Green Fuzzy Shrooms in my saltwater tank. Let me know what you think.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


He just said "Canon 5D," so I assumed it wasn't a mkII, but the original. Still an upgrade from the 1D mkII (I was thinking of the 1D*s* mkII).


It may be my bad. I thought it was a mk II but maybe not....


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Nikon SB-900 with a Canon body?


No, I thought I was clarifying E's body.

If U look at my hardware, all my stuff's Nikon.


----------



## Mootsfox

Gone, can I get "Nikkor AI-S 24mm f/2.8" added under my name please?









nuclearjock, I'm looking into getting a flash, since you all three that's I'm looking at... Do you think the SB-600 is worth getting over the 400?


----------



## Dragoon

Damn... I want to pull the trigger really soon but I can't decide on which to get for now...

Sigma 10-20mm f/4.5~5.6 EX DC HSM - $521

EF-S 60mm 60 f/2.8 MACRO USM $463

Something that is bothering me, is it me or the EF-S 18-55mm IS won't cut it for night shots? They all get too... soft even from f/5.6 through f/8 and using manual focus (Yeah, I changed the sharpness all the way to 7)

Yeah... vandalism occured in my street at around 2AM (On the night from Sunday to Monday, this was shot last night after getting home from work), it's a unique scene.







Someone wanted to burn down the recycling containers and took 4 cars along, one is not there as it was still moved by a fireman, it was sided with the silver Audi A4... I guess in between the unfortunate event, some luck, the Audi and the Peugeot 206 were diesel, else the damage would be really bad from the explosion, the red 106 IS petrol, few minutes later it would have been a disaster.

Here's the photo:









Don't know if the EXIF is still available after the reize from hosting, but it is as following. And I also used a tripod to assist.

ISO Speed: 400
Exposure time: 2.5 sec
F stop: f/6.3
Focal range: 55mm


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Gone, can I get "Nikkor AI-S 24mm f/2.8" added under my name please?









nuclearjock, I'm looking into getting a flash, since you all three that's I'm looking at... Do you think the SB-600 is worth getting over the 400?


I do and here's why. Higher guide number, you can buy a nice Stoffen diffuser for the 600 which really makes for some nice "soft" flash effects, and finally the 600 can be used as a slave should you acquire an 800 or 900 down the road. The 900 is definately not worth the $480 I paid for it, but it's fun to play with. I haven't tried the colored gels yet.

The 400 is very compact though and the price is right, although not that far from the 600. Take a look at both of them in a shop and see what U think.

Edit:

Moots,
I U decide U want the 400, I'll be happy to sell U mine for $50. I've shot < 50 pics with it and have the original box, paperwork, etc. Brand new for all purposes. But I think you'll like the 600 once you check it out, and the Stoffen diffuser (~$20) is a big deal in terms of picture quality.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dragoon*


Damn... I want to pull the trigger really soon but I can't decide on which to get for now...

Sigma 10-20mm f/4.5~5.6 EX DC HSM - $521

EF-S 60mm 60 f/2.8 MACRO USM $463

Something that is bothering me, is it me or the EF-S 18-55mm IS won't cut it for night shots? They all get too... soft even from f/5.6 through f/8 and using manual focus (Yeah, I changed the sharpness all the way to 7)

Yeah... vandalism occured in my street at around 2AM (On the night from Sunday to Monday, this was shot last night after getting home from work), it's a unique scene.







Someone wanted to burn down the recycling containers and took 4 cars along, one is not there as it was still moved by a fireman, it was sided with the silver Audi A4... I guess in between the unfortunate event, some luck, the Audi and the Peugeot 206 were diesel, else the damage would be really bad from the explosion, the red 106 IS petrol, few minutes later it would have been a disaster.

Here's the photo:

Don't know if the EXIF is still available after the reize from hosting, but it is as following. And I also used a tripod to assist.

ISO Speed: 400
Exposure time: 2.5 sec
F stop: f/6.3
Focal range: 55mm


It depends on what you want to do more of in the near future - macro shots or landscapes (and other uses for a wide angle zoom). You wouldn't do wrong to buy either, as both are great lenses.

And about the shot, it doesn't look too terribly soft. Lenses are generally softest at their widest and narrowest focal length. Check out DP Review's MTF widget for that lens; if you move the dial to 18 or 55mm, you will see the sharpness drop.

My biggest problem with the 18-55mm is that doesn't reproduce color that well (I seem to get a greenish cast, particularly at night).


----------



## Dragoon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


It depends on what you want to do more of in the near future - macro shots or landscapes (and other uses for a wide angle zoom). You wouldn't do wrong to buy either, as both are great lenses.

And about the shot, it doesn't look too terribly soft. Lenses are generally softest at their widest and narrowest focal length. Check out DP Review's MTF widget for that lens; if you move the dial to 18 or 55mm, you will see the sharpness drop.

My biggest problem with the 18-55mm is that doesn't reproduce color that well (I seem to get a greenish cast, particularly at night).


I'm leaning towards the Macro, I love taking macro shots too much to skip it, I guess the wide shots will have to wait a couple of months. And such small aperture will not help with night shots, as with the macro having f/2.8 will help.

Well, about the softness, according to the review site I guess it's just about right, I have to learn not to expect that much from a bundled kit







, although it takes quite sharper photos on daylight or using flash, or that's just me









Thanks alot for the help and for that link, I completely forgot about that site, next time I'll check to see if a determined lens is working accordingly through it.

I'm also looking forward to getting a gorillapod in the future. Is this the one I should look for?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Dragoon* 
I'm leaning towards the Macro, I love taking macro shots too much to skip it, I guess the wide shots will have to wait a couple of months. And such small aperture will not help with night shots, as with the macro having f/2.8 will help.

Well, about the softness, according to the review site I guess it's just about right, I have to learn not to expect that much from a bundled kit







, although it takes quite sharper photos on daylight or using flash, or that's just me









Thanks alot for the help and for that link, I completely forgot about that site, next time I'll check to see if a determined lens is working accordingly through it.

I'm also looking forward to getting a gorillapod in the future. Is this the one I should look for?










Well, be glad you don't have the previous version of that lens, the EF-S 18-55mm (non-IS), it is a royal piece of garbage. I had that lens when I had the XTi. There were a lot of gripes in reviews about how bad that lens was in comparison to Nikon's 18-55mm kit lens, so Canon revamped the design. So believe it or not, the new version, that you have, is worlds better than the previous lens. But it's still a low-end lens, so it performs as well as sub $200 zoom lens can.

Yes, that's the Gorilla Pod to get. There is another older version that doesn't have the quick release function.


----------



## tphotog96

OK, I'll jump in. My current kit is considerably cut down from what I used to have (I still REALLY, REALLY, REALLY miss my 1D3)..

Anyway, here is what's in the dry-cabi for now...

Canon 40D
EF 24-70 2.8
EF 70-200 2.8
EF 85 1.2 Mk2
EF 50 1.4
EF 16-35 2.8
EFS 18-55 (can't remember the apertures - it's the wife's lens)
Sigma 8mm CFE
Lots and lots of accessories...

For those interested, some of my photos --> www.pbase.com/cyber_m0nkey


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *tphotog96*


OK, I'll jump in. My current kit is considerably cut down from what I used to have (I still REALLY, REALLY, REALLY miss my 1D3)..

Anyway, here is what's in the dry-cabi for now...

Canon 40D
EF 24-70 2.8
EF 70-200 2.8
EF 85 1.2 Mk2
EF 50 1.4
EF 16-35 2.8
EFS 18-55 (can't remember the apertures - it's the wife's lens)
EF 1.4 Mk2
Sigma 8mm CFE
Lots and lots of accessories...

For those interested, some of my photos --> www.pbase.com/cyber_m0nkey


Nice lens collection. Question - what lens is "EF 1.4 Mk2" exactly?


----------



## Dragoon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Well, be glad you don't have the previous version of that lens, the EF-S 18-55mm (non-IS), it is a royal piece of garbage. I had that lens when I had the XTi. There were a lot of gripes in reviews about how bad that lens was in comparison to Nikon's 18-55mm kit lens, so Canon revamped the design. So believe it or not, the new version, that you have, is worlds better than the previous lens. But it's still a low-end lens, so it performs as well as sub $200 zoom lens can.

Yes, that's the Gorilla Pod to get. There is another older version that doesn't have the quick release function.


Wow... it was *that* bad









Alright, I'll get one of those, the quick release function is pretty handy, it avoids having to screw the camera to the pod everytime you want to use it.

I'm going to do some calculations to my budget, and if it allows me to, I'm pulling the trigger for that EF-S 60mm f/2.8 Macro.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dragoon*


Wow... it was *that* bad









Alright, I'll get one of those, the quick release function is pretty handy, it avoids having to screw the camera to the pod everytime you want to use it.

I'm going to do some calculations to my budget, and if it allows me to, I'm pulling the trigger for that EF-S 60mm f/2.8 Macro.










Yep, I remember having shots so soft with the old 18-55mm that I thought they were out of focus. The 60mm macro is a good choice, extremely sharp lens.


----------



## tphotog96

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Nice lens collection. Question - what lens is "EF 1.4 Mk2" exactly?


doh...

50mm


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


I do and here's why. Higher guide number, you can buy a nice Stoffen diffuser for the 600 which really makes for some nice "soft" flash effects, and finally the 600 can be used as a slave should you acquire an 800 or 900 down the road. The 900 is definately not worth the $480 I paid for it, but it's fun to play with. I haven't tried the colored gels yet.

The 400 is very compact though and the price is right, although not that far from the 600. Take a look at both of them in a shop and see what U think.

Edit:

Moots,
I U decide U want the 400, I'll be happy to sell U mine for $50. I've shot < 50 pics with it and have the original box, paperwork, etc. Brand new for all purposes. But I think you'll like the 600 once you check it out, and the Stoffen diffuser (~$20) is a big deal in terms of picture quality.


I can get the SB-600 new for $140ish, which is why it's tempting. I would really like a unit that can tilt straight up, and I keep reading that the SB-400 can do that, but I don't see how by looking at it.

I'll keep your offer in mind


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


I can get the SB-600 new for $140ish, which is why it's tempting. I would really like a unit that can tilt straight up, and I keep reading that the SB-400 can do that, but I don't see how by looking at it.

I'll keep your offer in mind










The lamp itself flips up on the 400. But if you can get the 600 for $140, by all means. And immediately get a stoffen diffuser.. It softens the flash output nicely and also makes it much less traumatic for your subjects as well.


----------



## Marin

Had to cancel my lens order and re-order it. Wasn't going to be shipped out until the end of March so I ordered from another store. But the overnight shipping for it is dirt cheap so I should get it tomorrow.


----------



## stanrc

Which lense did you decide on?


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *stanrc*


Which lense did you decide on?


http://www.amazon.com/Sigma-30mm-Can...6127165&sr=8-1


----------



## stanrc

Nice, I still don't know which lens I should get as an upgrade to the kit lens but I can't afford it so I shouldn't be looking anyways haha.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


I can get the SB-600 new for $140ish, which is why it's tempting. I would really like a unit that can tilt straight up, and I keep reading that the SB-400 can do that, but I don't see how by looking at it.

I'll keep your offer in mind










http://flickr.com/photos/enelle/1061554989/


----------



## Mootsfox

^ Thanks









I've my macro setup for awhile, anything anyone wants to see at a 2:1 ratio?


----------



## Marin

Oooo, cool setup. How are you liking that tripod? I was thinking about snatching one up to put in my backpack along with my monopod.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Oooo, cool setup. How are you liking that tripod? I was thinking about snatching one up to put in my backpack along with my monopod.


It's absolutly HORRID for this work. The joints are way too loose to be useful. It just collapses under the weight of the camera. It says it's good to three pounds, but it feels more like 1.5lb. I put some flux in a few of the joints, hopefully that will help.

For macro shooting, no, it's a horrible tripod. For outside crap where you want to attach it to a tree or similar, it's pretty nice. Sharp angles do not work on it though.


----------



## spice003

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mootsfox*


^ thanks









i've my macro setup for awhile, anything anyone wants to see at a 2:1 ratio?











can you post some macro samples?


----------



## Mootsfox

The DoF is so shallow when using lenses in this config, plus the angle of the camera, it makes it near impossible to get something in compete focus.

This is a Wynn $1 chip.


----------



## equetefue

Glad you bought it marin...

Anyways something you would like to know. A person in another forum purchased a used Siggy 100-300 f4 and the lens turned out bad, Person sent it to Sigma and sigma replaced the lens for a brand new one even though the lens was out of warranty.

Told you they were good


----------



## Marin

Sounds even better. I'm really hoping though that the lens is good out of the box so I can use it over the weekend.


----------



## equetefue

What body ?


----------



## Marin

XSi.


----------



## equetefue

the lens rocks... I hope u get a bad a$$ copy


----------



## Photographer

how does this look?








re sized from 3264 x 2448
i know i m not a professional but i like my work


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Photographer*


how does this look?

re sized from 3264 x 2448
i know i m not a professional but i like my work










It looks ok, a little busy. It would look better if you increased the saturation a bit and perhaps some more contrast.

And to everyone else, I may be about to get a Canon EF-S 10-22mm used from POTN for only $500!







Wish me luck.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Photographer*


how does this look?
re sized from 3264 x 2448
i know i m not a professional but i like my work










What are you focusing on? I dunno where I'm supposed to look. You're the photographer, you have to show your viewers where or what to focus on









I like the subject, but as Gone said, it's busy, maybe focus in on one or two apples, or a few leaves that catch your eye.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


What are you focusing on? I dunno where I'm supposed to look. You're the photographer, you have to show your viewers where or what to focus on









I like the subject, but as Gone said, it's busy, maybe focus in on one or two apples, or a few leaves that catch your eye.


I think that the background is competing with foreground. If it were sky or a contrasting light color, it would pop a bit more, but I agree, just a few peach clusters should be filling the frame.


----------



## Mootsfox

Oh, peaches. I dunno my fruit very well









As I was going to bed, I moved my camera bag, which wasn't zipped up and my 18-55mm VR flew out and slammed into the floor. I'm not really angry or sad, just disappointed in myself that I was that stupid.

I highlighted the non-noticeable crack.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Oh, peaches. I dunno my fruit very well









As I was going to bed, I moved my camera bag, which wasn't zipped up and my 18-55mm VR flew out and slammed into the floor. I'm not really angry or sad, just disappointed in myself that I was that stupid.

I highlighted the non-noticeable crack.









I would be angry! That's a nasty crack in the lens body there. Have you tried shooting with it and see how it functions? Who knows, maybe it won't affect its function (wishful thinking probably). I guess the up side is that it's not some uber $2000 lens,so shouldn't be too much to replace.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 







I would be angry! That's a nasty crack in the lens body there. Have you tried shooting with it and see how it functions? Who knows, maybe it won't affect its function (wishful thinking probably). I guess the up side is that it's not some uber $2000 lens,so shouldn't be too much to replace.

I checked before I went to bed, and just about everything seems to be ok. The AutoFocus still works, the switches work, VR I believe is functioning. None of the elements are cracked or loose(from what I can tell), the zoom ring feels stiffer though, and the manual focus is sort of... crunchy.

I suppose it's an excuse to buy a new wide zoom though









And yeah, it's only worth like $80-120, so it's not a huge loss, and not a complete one. Even broken 18-55mm VRs go for like $75. I'm glad it wasn't the 55-200mm VR or my 24mm MF (though that one would have more likely dented my hardwood floors).


----------



## wimcle

TWO MORE WEEKS TILL SPRING!!


----------



## Dragoon

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
It looks ok, a little busy. It would look better if you increased the saturation a bit and perhaps some more contrast.

And to everyone else, I may be about to get a Canon EF-S 10-22mm used from POTN for only $500!







Wish me luck.

Oh wow $500 for the 10-22... That's practically giving it away! Those lenses around there are usually what price (new)?

The EF-S 10-22mm should be labeled as an "L" lens, just too awesome to miss that red ring









Good luck


----------



## wimcle

cool pic, did nothing but turn the saturation down a bit


----------



## hometoast

Can you add me with a Canon SD1000?










I'm REALLY interested in moving up to a DSLR - so I'll be going back through this thread sometime this week.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Dragoon* 
Oh wow $500 for the 10-22... That's practically giving it away! Those lenses around there are usually what price (new)?

The EF-S 10-22mm should be labeled as an "L" lens, just too awesome to miss that red ring









Good luck


















If you search diligently, you can get it new from a reputable reseller for about $650 at the very lowest. What's weird about this lens is that since it's an EF-S lens, I find a lot of used ones being sold by people who are upgrading to full-frame cameras (which are incompatible with EF-S lenses).

And I don't think Canon would ever label an EF-S lens as an "L" lens. Only their EF lenses get that moniker. But yeah, there's definitely a sense of pride in having that red stripe. Maybe one day when I have the 70-200mm L (yeah right).


----------



## SilverPotato

Can you add me, I have a Canon EOS Digital Rebel


----------



## Dragoon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


If you search diligently, you can get it new from a reputable reseller for about $650 at the very lowest. What's weird about this lens is that since it's an EF-S lens, I find a lot of used ones being sold by people who are upgrading to full-frame cameras (which are incompatible with EF-S lenses).

And I don't think Canon would ever label an EF-S lens as an "L" lens. Only their EF lenses get that moniker. But yeah, there's definitely a sense of pride in having that red stripe. Maybe one day when I have the 70-200mm L (yeah right).


Ooh... wow, even $650 is an acceptable price, here they can go as high as around $1000 (€800) and also with a thorough search I can find those at about $820 (€650) (Why do they always make 1:1 currency







)

Honestly, I never noticed the L series were all EF only







, and yeah, having a lens with that red stripe is something to be proud of







. But jeez, the 70-200mm L is expensive to hell and back, and it's one of those nice white lenses...

I would so get lenses from the USA or so, they are much cheaper, even with transport fees, but the forsaken customs would make the lenses twice the price, so I'm limited to the European Union.

Oh ya, I almost forgot. Got myself registred on flickr, so if you can add it up, thanks.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *SilverPotato*


Can you add me, I have a Canon EOS Digital Rebel











Great camera, I used to have it. Do you have just the kit lens?

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dragoon*


Ooh... wow, even $650 is an acceptable price, here they can go as high as around $1000 (â‚¬800) and also with a thorough search I can find those at about $820 (â‚¬650) (Why do they always make 1:1 currency







)

Honestly, I never noticed the L series were all EF only







, and yeah, having a lens with that red stripe is something to be proud of







. But jeez, the 70-200mm L is expensive to hell and back, and it's one of those nice white lenses...

I would so get lenses from the USA or so, they are much cheaper, even with transport fees, but the forsaken customs would make the lenses twice the price, so I'm limited to the European Union.

Oh ya, I almost forgot. Got myself registred on flickr, so if you can add it up, thanks.


That sucks. Isn't there anyway you could fudge the customs BS, e.g. say it's just a bunch of rocks or lie about the value? I don't mean to encourage anything illegal, but that's so unfair.


----------



## spice003

people with rebel xsi, can you tell me what does the hand grip(NOT BATTERY GRIP) feel like on the camera? is it rubbery or like rebel xti? because it looks different.

i was thinking about getting xti but found xsi for $140 more, so probably just gonna go for xsi.


----------



## SilverPotato

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Great camera, I used to have it. Do you have just the kit lens?

Nope, I also have a 300mm sigma lens for close ups. I'm sure you know this but it's manual adjustment. It's really great for taking pictures of very small things. I'm using my iPod right now but I'll post a link to the lens later.


----------



## equetefue

Congrats on camera !


----------



## Dragoon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Great camera, I used to have it. Do you have just the kit lens?

That sucks. Isn't there anyway you could fudge the customs BS, e.g. say it's just a bunch of rocks or lie about the value? I don't mean to encourage anything illegal, but that's so unfair.


Too risky, I don't think it pays off taking that risk, governament likes to go chubby with things like this, I made the mistake once, I won't do it again...

Few years ago I ordered a PS2 game that was priced $28 including transport fee, it was cheap, considering I could not find it here anywhere since it was quite old and rare. When the UPS guy was to hand me out the package... "$60 for customs tax please." ...you can guess how I felt









But yeah, it's just unfair, especially when majority of OCN users are from the US, I've seen great deals around, but I have to pass them all









I'm pulling the trigger on the lens btw, I can easily afford to get it now


----------



## SoBe8503

All right everyone... I'm gonna need some support. I am camera-less for about a month. I gave it to my Dad to use for his trip to Ireland (Over St. Patrick's day too). I'm going through some withdrawals


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *spice003*


people with rebel xsi, can you tell me what does the hand grip(NOT BATTERY GRIP) feel like on the camera? is it rubbery or like rebel xti? because it looks different.

i was thinking about getting xti but found xsi for $140 more, so probably just gonna go for xsi.


I used to have the XTi, but not the XSi, although I have handled it quite a bit, and I remember that it felt exactly the same in my hands as the XTi (the two are nearly identical in dimension). I don't recalling the grip feeling spongy or anything, but it is more textured, although the XTi grip still felt just as comfortable.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *SoBe8503*


All right everyone... I'm gonna need some support. I am camera-less for about a month. I gave it to my Dad to use for his trip to Ireland (Over St. Patrick's day too). I'm going through some withdrawals


I wouldn't loan my camera to Jesus. He can get his own.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


I wouldn't loan my camera to Jesus. He can get his own.


I'm similar about my stuff. No one rides my bike, uses my camera. I've let a couple friends use my truck to learn stick, but that's it.

Other people mess up/break stuff, watch out!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


I'm similar about my stuff. No one rides my bike, uses my camera. I've let a couple friends use my truck to learn stick, but that's it.

Other people mess up/break stuff, watch out!


Actually, if it was someone I really trusted I might consider it, but it would make me nervous because It took me a while to save enough money to gradually accumulate all my gear, which I have something like $2200 invested in.


----------



## spice003

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


I used to have the XTi, but not the XSi, although I have handled it quite a bit, and I remember that it felt exactly the same in my hands as the XTi (the two are nearly identical in dimension). I don't recalling the grip feeling spongy or anything, but it is more textured, although the XTi grip still felt just as comfortable.


thanx, so its not like the pro body feel huh? well i guess one can hope!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *spice003*


thanx, so its not like the pro body feel huh? well i guess one can hope!










Not at all, it's very much a "compact" DSLR. It's much smaller than the 40D for example. If you've held an XTi before, then you've essentially held an XSi. The button layouts are nearly the same. The major difference is that the LCD is larger. That's often one of the gripes you hear about the Digital Rebel lineup, that they're too small, but I had an XTi for a couple of years and I found it perfectly comfortable, and to give you idea of how large my hands are, I can palm an NCAA regulation basketball. However, I do like the larger size of the 40D much, much more. It fills my hands and it's heavier weight balances larger zoom lenses better, and generally I can hold it more steadily when shooting hand-held.

If you're seriously considering an XSi, it's a great body, but the 40D is about the same price these days (if you search diligently you can nab in the $700 range new, less for a used one) and despite being over a year old, it still is one the best crop sensor cameras in terms of noise performance, speed and ergonomics.


----------



## spice003

i had a xti before, had to sell it to pay some bills, now i'm trying to get back in to dslr world, i found xsi body for $449 refurb, but d40 is like $699 for refurb body.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *spice003* 
i had a xti before, had to sell it to pay some bills, now i'm trying to get back in to dslr world, i found xsi body for $449 refurb, but d40 is like $699 for refurb body.

I hope you mean 40D, not the D40


----------



## spice003

yeah, my bad! i meant 40D


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *spice003*


i had a xti before, had to sell it to pay some bills, now i'm trying to get back in to dslr world, i found xsi body for $449 refurb, but d40 is like $699 for refurb body.


I was about to say, you could almost buy two D40s for that price. But that's a good price for a refurb XSi, but if I recall refurbs come with only 90-day warranties. But since you are already familiar with XTi, you won't have any problems adjusting to the XSi.


----------



## nuclearjock

Group shot.
No more Nikon stuff for awhile after the recent price increase.
Got lucky and snuck in the 200mm macro about a month B4 the increase.


----------



## Marin

I think I got a good copy of the Sigma 30mm.









Picture I took with it. It's at f/2.2, a lot sharper but doesn't have the bokeh the shot at f/1.4 did.


----------



## spice003

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
Group shot.
No more Nikon stuff for awhile after the recent price increase.
Got lucky and snuck in the 200mm macro about a month B4 the increase.










wow nice lens collection!


----------



## Marin




----------



## xlastshotx

I got to hold a Canon 1Ds MKIII with a 400mm f/2.8L IS on it at photography class on Tuesday. My teacher brought in some of his "collection". He also had a freekin thousand dollar tripod head combo, I cant recall what it was though.

*
















*

I have never held such a $14,000 camera lens combo before, to bad it inst mine


----------



## Marin

Wildlife photographer?


----------



## xlastshotx

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Wildlife photographer?

Yeah he primary does wildlife and portraits, He is building some new studio around here somewhere. I have pretty much figured out that when I am in his class and I don't feel like doing work, all I have to do is ask him about one of his photography expeditions. He can go on for hours about how he would camp out by his camera for a couple days just waiting for the perfect shot of some certain animal lol.


----------



## spice003

Quote:


Originally Posted by *xlastshotx* 
I got to hold a Canon 1Ds MKIII with a 400mm f/2.8L IS on it at photography class on Tuesday. My teacher brought in some of his "collection". He also had a freekin thousand dollar tripod head combo, I cant recall what it was though.

*
















*

I have never held such a $14,000 camera lens combo before, to bad it inst mine









that's sexy!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *xlastshotx* 
I got to hold a Canon 1Ds MKIII with a 400mm f/2.8L IS on it at photography class on Tuesday. My teacher brought in some of his "collection". He also had a freekin thousand dollar tripod head combo, I cant recall what it was though.

I have never held such a $14,000 camera lens combo before, to bad it inst mine









LOL, when it's a 1Ds mkIII, saying that you simply got to hold one is a big deal. I played with one in my local camera shop and it's one beastly camera! I don't think I would want a body quite so large, even if I could afford it. I'll take a 5D mkII please.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
LOL, when it's a 1Ds mkIII, saying that you simply got to hold one is a big deal. I played with one in my local camera shop and it's one beastly camera! I don't think I would want a body quite so large, even if I could afford it. I'll take a 5D mkII please.









I wouldn't want one due to the crop factor.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
I wouldn't want one due to the crop factor.

Crop factor? The 1Ds lineup doesn't have a FOV crop. The previous 1D did though.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/cano...kiii/page2.asp


----------



## teK0wnzU

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*





I NV U


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Crop factor? The 1Ds lineup doesn't have a FOV crop. The previous 1D did though.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/cano...kiii/page2.asp












Guess my only other issue is the same one you have, it's pretty large. I'm used to having my battery grip on my camera the majority of the time but there are times were I need to have it off.


----------



## xlastshotx

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


LOL, when it's a 1Ds mkIII, saying that you simply got to hold one is a big deal. I played with one in my local camera shop and it's one beastly camera! I don't think I would want a body quite so large, even if I could afford it. I'll take a 5D mkII please.










Yeah im with you on that one, as much as I love the 1D MKIII I would still rather have the 5D MKII, the price to performance ratio is awesome. But once the 1D MKIV comes out that could change.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *xlastshotx*


Yeah im with you on that one, as much as I love the 1D MKIII I would still rather have the 5D MKII, the price to performance ratio is awesome. But once the 1D MKIV comes out that could change.


Then check this mother out!










THIS IS AN OBVIOUS FAKE AD!!


----------



## dr4gon

I'm just not sure I'd be ready for the price


----------



## xlastshotx

lol iso 51,200


----------



## xguntherc

that camera is AMAZING..

Anyways. I recently had some friends in town down here to vegas. I was taking pictures with my D40 when we ran into some decently pretty, newly 21 year old girls at the Venetian Hotel and Casino. I took a few pics of then, and then my buddy with them. & then managed to hang out and enjoy our night... I figured I'd post a few pics just for fun...









These were the first 2 I met.

















then my buddy saw what I was doing, and jumped in.









then they started posing a little more. (This photo I had to brighten, and edit someone out. As a girl walked into the left of my shot & ruined the focus and where the light went)









I have more photo's of the night, but those are for me.









Just thought I'd share.


----------



## Dragoon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *xguntherc*


that camera is AMAZING..

Anyways. I recently had some friends in town down here to vegas. I was taking pictures with my D40 when we ran into some decently pretty, newly 21 year old girls at the Venetian Hotel and Casino. I took a few pics of then, and then my buddy with them. & then managed to hang out and enjoy our night... I figured I'd post a few pics just for fun...









These were the first 2 I met.









then my buddy saw what I was doing, and jumped in.

then they started posing a little more. (This photo I had to brighten, and edit someone out. As a girl walked into the left of my shot & ruined the focus and where the light went)

I have more photo's of the night, but those are for me.









Just thought I'd share.


Lucky little...







Wait for me, I'll be right there in a few hours... Let me just... catch a flight to Vegas...









Mmmmkay... *EF-S 60mm f/2.8 Macro is ordered!* Now I wonder how long it'll take. Can't wait to go on a macro shooting rampage with it.

By the way, I've been looking into some nice packs to store my equipment, since everyone talks so good about Lowepro bags I am taking those into top consideration, I have my sight on one of the following 3 bags: *Flipside 200 red*, *Slingshot 200AW* and *Fastpack 200 Black*. Any difference between the 3 that I should take into heavy consideration, like internal space, compartiments sturdyness and protection? I'm planning into having 5 lens kits, and the biggest one will most likely be the 28-135mm, also gorillapod and the rest of the camera equip like charger, cables, etc.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *xguntherc*


Anyways. I recently had some friends in town down here to vegas. I was taking pictures with my D40 when we ran into some decently pretty, newly 21 year old girls at the Venetian Hotel and Casino. I took a few pics of then, and then my buddy with them. & then managed to hang out and enjoy our night... I figured I'd post a few pics just for fun...










I thought cameras in casinos were no no's. Maybe that's changed.

Funny how hot women make any lens/body combo look good.


----------



## savagebunny

I'd hit the chick in the blue


----------



## riko99

Add me up just got my Nikon D60 Last week so i only have the standard Nikon 18-55mm AFS VR with it but soon enough there will be more... Cant wait till my next build as it should make me take my time and document EVERYTHING.


----------



## Lige

xguntherc, I would hit the chick in blue, but first I require more pic's.








And numbers please?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GH0*


xguntherc, I would hit the chick in blue, but first I require more pic's.








And numbers please?











Quote:



Originally Posted by *savagebunny*


I'd hit the chick in the blue










Why such violence against women? That's not nice









Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dragoon*


Lucky little...







Wait for me, I'll be right there in a few hours... Let me just... catch a flight to Vegas...









Mmmmkay... *EF-S 60mm f/2.8 Macro is ordered!* Now I wonder how long it'll take. Can't wait to go on a macro shooting rampage with it.

By the way, I've been looking into some nice packs to store my equipment, since everyone talks so good about Lowepro bags I am taking those into top consideration, I have my sight on one of the following 3 bags: *Flipside 200 red*, *Slingshot 200AW* and *Fastpack 200 Black*. Any difference between the 3 that I should take into heavy consideration, like internal space, compartiments sturdyness and protection? I'm planning into having 5 lens kits, and the biggest one will most likely be the 28-135mm, also gorillapod and the rest of the camera equip like charger, cables, etc.











Great, you'll love the 60mm. It produces such sharp images that it needs no post-process sharpening! And about the packs, the Fastpack and Flipside have two shoulder straps (obviously), so to access them might be a pain since you'll have to take the pack off. The Flipside appears to have some sort of strap to attach a tripod, which is nifty. The Slingshot is neat because it has one cross body strap (which is very secure, I've tried one), and it can easily be slung around to the front for access without taking it off. Something to consider, all are great packs, they're LowePros. If possible, you should try to go find them in a store to try them.


----------



## phospholipid

Photo class is going well, sorry I haven't scanned in any of my photos from photo class. If you guys wanna see em, let me know, but I doubt you wanna see my nub shots :[


----------



## Dragoon

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Why such violence against women? That's not nice









Great, you'll love the 60mm. It produces such sharp images that it needs no post-process sharpening! And about the packs, the Fastpack and Flipside have two shoulder straps (obviously), so to access them might be a pain since you'll have to take the pack off. The Flipside appears to have some sort of strap to attach a tripod, which is nifty. The Slingshot is neat because it has one cross body strap (which is very secure, I've tried one), and it can easily be slung around to the front for access without taking it off. Something to consider, all are great packs, they're LowePros. If possible, you should try to go find them in a store to try them.

Alright, thanks for the info, so, all 3 would be enough to carry the 1000D with a lens mounted plus the extra 4?

That slingshot 200AW looks damn nice, single strap is an advantage there, like you said I can sling it around me without taking it off for fast access (Maybe that's why it's called slingshot







)

I'll take a look at all 3, but tbh I find the Slingshot the best looking, but space is my main concern.


----------



## Mootsfox

No, no, with the fastpack you can still swing it around, in fact it's made to do that.

Check the video on the bottom of the page, right side.

http://www.lowepro.com/about-us/news...product-videos

To all you canon guys, what is a NIB Canon 5D worth?


----------



## Oscuro

I got the flipside 200
I wanted something extremely secure, and I generally don't like single strap bags for some reason.

Anyways, here's some extra pics so you can see what I've done with mine, (which isn't much since I have no spare lenses yet)








I recommend leaving the top pouch thing in, as it presses the body down, and holds it nice and secure.









The top pouch should be able to hold your charger and cord, an maybe a few other small items. But it does get a bit squished by the camera's body.









Without the pouch in there, your SLR will bounce up and down. My D70 had no resistance. so...personally, I say keep the pouch in there.









There's space at the bottom where they put the final two dividers, however this area is slightl difficult to reach because the zip-panel doesn't extend down that far, and the bag does try to close itself. Personally, I plan on shoving a cleaning kit into one of those whenever I can afford to buy one.









Finally, the side pocket which I've never seen any pictues of.
Against the body of the bag there's a pouch for a slim pad of paper, or a micro-fibre cloth or something, onto of that is space for 2 pens, and Well, something...
The other side has space for 2 CF cards, though you might be able to double stack them. "below" that, is a loose pocket, and a plastic carabiner on a loop.

The opposite side of the pack is a bottle holder, and yes, there is a tripod carrying flab that is neatly tucked into the bottom of the bag. It's a simple pocket for two of the tripod's legs, then use the buckled strap up tom to secure the tripod onto the pack.


----------



## lhowatt

How important is dust removal systems? im going to get the Nikon D40 but im wondering how big an issue will dust be?


----------



## xlastshotx

Quote:


Originally Posted by *lhowatt* 
How important is dust removal systems? im going to get the Nikon D40 but im wondering how big an issue will dust be?

Its not a big deal, Its nice to have but as long as you change the lenses correctly, and just be careful dust shouldn't be a problem. If you do get dust on it, its pretty easy to clean the sensor once you get the hang of it.

(most tests of the dust removal system that the cameras have, find that the system doesn't really work that great anyways)


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


No, no, with the fastpack you can still swing it around, in fact it's made to do that.

Check the video on the bottom of the page, right side.

http://www.lowepro.com/about-us/news...product-videos

To all you canon guys, what is a NIB Canon 5D worth?


It's not the same, you still have to remove your arm from one of the straps, making it easier to come completely off when you swing it. The Slingshot is one motion, and can't come off accidentally.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


No, no, with the fastpack you can still swing it around, in fact it's made to do that.

Check the video on the bottom of the page, right side.

http://www.lowepro.com/about-us/news...product-videos

To all you canon guys, what is a NIB Canon 5D worth?


Classic or mkII?


----------



## Marin

Monopod is assembled. I can see why people say to get the 488RC2 over the 486RC2, but for what I'm doing it's not a huge concern. Should make night shots easier for me, which I love to take.


----------



## Dragoon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


No, no, with the fastpack you can still swing it around, in fact it's made to do that.

Check the video on the bottom of the page, right side.

http://www.lowepro.com/about-us/news...product-videos

To all you canon guys, what is a NIB Canon 5D worth?


Wow, awesome, thanks a bunch moots, all 3 models I stated can easily be accessed without them being taken off, which is ludicrously handy







and apparently they have enough space for the camera with a lens attached and 4 additional lenses, if not using a big guy like the 1D or so









Quote:



Originally Posted by *Oscuro*


I got the flipside 200
I wanted something extremely secure, and I generally don't like single strap bags for some reason.

Anyways, here's some extra pics so you can see what I've done with mine, (which isn't much since I have no spare lenses yet)

<snip>

Finally, the side pocket which I've never seen any pictues of.
Against the body of the bag there's a pouch for a slim pad of paper, or a micro-fibre cloth or something, onto of that is space for 2 pens, and Well, something...
The other side has space for 2 CF cards, though you might be able to double stack them. "below" that, is a loose pocket, and a plastic carabiner on a loop.

The opposite side of the pack is a bottle holder, and yes, there is a tripod carrying flab that is neatly tucked into the bottom of the bag. It's a simple pocket for two of the tripod's legs, then use the buckled strap up tom to secure the tripod onto the pack.


Thanks alot for the photos! The bag is roomy and it looks sturdy









Now all I have to do is decide on which one I should get, it's not for now since I just burnt little over $400 on a lens









+







gents

EDIT: Erm, virtual one for moots lol


----------



## xlastshotx

Here is an iso test I did with my 50D earlier today, same aperture for all the pictures just different iso and shutter speed.

(click for other sizes)


To me it looks like anything after iso 1,250 is unusable (without noise reduction). 6,400 and 12,800 are pretty much there for advertising.

What do you guys think?


----------



## Squeeker The Cat

went to the zoo today..........got lots of super duper close ups!!!!! here is this one first...oh and no zoom at all!! keep in mind i already know im not the best photog in the world lol


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Classic or mkII?

Classic, or, ye olde. Vanilla 5D, no kit lens, but NIB.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Classic, or, ye olde. Vanilla 5D, no kit lens, but NIB.


Did you somehow get one?


----------



## Mootsfox

No, but I was thinking about it.


----------



## Marin

Have you looked on eBay and popular forums to see what the average price is?

Honestly, I have no clue what the older 5D goes for.


----------



## Mootsfox

I was seeing like $950-1250, but I really don't know as I'm not familiar with Canon gear.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


No, but I was thinking about it.










Moots, you're jumping ship and defecting to Canon?? Whoa... not that I'm complaining, we welcome Nikonian converts into the ranks of the Canonites.









Why not look into a D700 or something, if you want FF?

And after a quick perusal of most photo gear sites I frequent, I can get a NIB 5D classic, body only for about $2000 or so, and I found some refurbs for as low as $1400.

You might ask Equetefue, he just bought one.


----------



## Mootsfox

I might be able to get a deal on one. The question is, do I buy it and use it, or do I sell it and buy a real camera (D300/nikon/etc







)

Honestly, my D60 is pissing me off with the noise it generates even at ISO 400.


----------



## Marin

Buy it, sell off your Nikon stuff, and enjoy being able to use higher ISO's.


----------



## xguntherc

hah.. Nice gone Tomorrow.. why do we have such anger or violence to women.. we don't. When we say I'd hit the one in blue......... you get what we mean. lol I wont explain it..

haha, yes. Come to vegas. I have the one in Blue, and the hottie on the right's numbers. the other one wasn't down to party the rest the night.









Yup yup. I was giving my attention to the blonde on the right at first, as she was the one that initiated the pictures to begin with. and she was very flirty. (Must a been the booze). but slowly as the night went on I had to tell the girl in Blue she was just Gorgeous. The girl in blue was both Cute, and Hot. if you guys know what i mean. I could hit that, and take her home to the family. the other's would be more for one nighters for me. haha. personally.. so yea. Nicole, the one in the blue. Was how the night ended.







and she was a nice girl.

Yes, your right. chicks can definitely make any camera and lens look good. Or make the pics good. haha! (Hey the lighting was bad in the casino OK)

also, camera's in Casino's are allowed. there is thousands of tourists. of course camera's are allowed. but if your taking pictures of there tables or things of that sort, you'll get escorted to the door within about 2 minutes flat. I've seen it happen.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Buy it, sell off your Nikon stuff, and enjoy being able to use higher ISO's.


Well, outside of the L series, I really don't like the Canon lineup for lenses. They don't look or feel as nice as my nikkors.

If I could use Nikkor glass on a Canon body I would probably jump.


----------



## spice003

ha you wish


----------



## Marin

woops, wrong thread


----------



## Marin

So, should I send my lens to Sigma to get tuned? (shot at f/1.4)


----------



## Cpt.Hawkins

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


I might be able to get a deal on one. The question is, do I buy it and use it, or do I sell it and buy a real camera (D300/nikon/etc







)

Honestly, my D60 is pissing me off with the noise it generates even at ISO 400.


If you wait until Q3 when the D700x is released then prices on the D700 will be slashed making the price of the D700 more comparable to the D300









If lots of noise at high ISO is annoying you then a full frame D700 is the way to go! its awesome- I can't tell the difference between a shot at 400 and a shot at 1600


----------



## dr4gon

Marin, I think it's fine. It might be a hair off, but it's definitely in focus. Better light might help get it dead on.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


So, should I send my lens to Sigma to get tuned? (shot at f/1.4)


Looks fine to me. That's what happens when you shoot at f/1.4


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Buy it, sell off your Nikon stuff, and enjoy being able to use higher ISO's.


I'll match the results I get from my D3 at 3200, and 6400 with any camera. That can probably be extrapolated to the D700 as well.

My D300 is also very usable at 1600, 3200 can be noisy depending the amount of "dark" areas in the frame.

But I've done quite a bit of work with a friend's Canon gear, and been very impressed with the results. I've always preferred Nikon's build and ergonomics though.

Any, I'm too deep into Nikon glass to turn back now.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dr4gon* 
Marin, I think it's fine. It might be a hair off, but it's definitely in focus. Better light might help get it dead on.


Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Looks fine to me. That's what happens when you shoot at f/1.4









I'll try it with a smaller aperture outside.


----------



## Marin

Here's another one. Shot under natural light and at f/4.0.



http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3590/...95cbfb4f_o.jpg


----------



## equetefue

looks perfectly focused to me... how you like it ?


----------



## equetefue

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


But I've done quite a bit of work with a friend's Canon gear, and been very impressed with the results. I've always preferred Nikon's build and ergonomics though.

Any, I'm too deep into Nikon glass to turn back now.



don't jump... done it and it's expensive to do so. I'm really glad I did but if you have enough invested in one system is pointless. Both system have stuff to be desired... Your choice should be based on the lenses needed and not the bodies.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


I'll match the results I get from my D3 at 3200, and 6400 with any camera. That can probably be extrapolated to the D700 as well.

My D300 is also very usable at 1600, 3200 can be noisy depending the amount of "dark" areas in the frame.

But I've done quite a bit of work with a friend's Canon gear, and been very impressed with the results. I've always preferred Nikon's build and ergonomics though.

Any, I'm too deep into Nikon glass to turn back now.


I really love the feel of a NIkkor lens. Canon's glass just looks cheap and fakeish. I'm sure Canon makes good stuff, it just doesn't feel right to me. I'm also cheap, so being able to buy great old lenses for 1/5 of the new cost is great.

Maybe I'll wait for the D400 or D700x and pick up a D300, or possibly even a D3.


----------



## equetefue

I guess it depends... When I was a Nikonian I hated the feel, build, price and lack of telephotos in the Nikon Camp..

The only 2 lenses I like are the 105VR and the 200-400 f4 ..


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *equetefue*


looks perfectly focused to me... how you like it ?


I'm liking it, great walk around lens. But I'll keep using my 60mm Macro for computer pictures and stuff.


----------



## default501x

very nice shots
love the lighting on the 2nd and 3rd ones


----------



## equetefue

looks sharp....

Marin do u plan in upgrading the body eventually ?


----------



## Marin

I'll upgrade it sometime, don't really know when though.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Finally got a Canon EF-S 10-22mm, should get it next week sometime!


----------



## default501x

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Finally got a Canon EF-S 10-22mm, should get it next week sometime!

ooo that lens is on my wish list tell me how it performs once you get it


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *default501x* 
ooo that lens is on my wish list tell me how it performs once you get it

Yeah, bought from photography-on-the.net, check it out there, there are usually a few for sale there, and they go quick.


----------



## equetefue

congrats Gone... is an excellent lens


----------



## Marin

More shots with the Sigma 30mm F/1.4, I'm really liking it now.


----------



## Mootsfox

The 30mm f/1.4?


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


The 30mm f/1.4?


Just did a ninja edit in my post. So yeah, it's the 30mm.









I'm glad equetefue convinced me to get it.


----------



## Mootsfox

I think I'm gonna go after that lens too. Nice shots Marin


----------



## Marin

Thanks.


----------



## equetefue

Its a gem of a lens...

Be getting a few things in the coming weeks

Sigma 30 f1.4
Canon 100 f2
Canon 580 EXII
Canon 20D (3rd bodt backup)

Looking empty and need to fill it


----------



## dr4gon

lol. nice! I need a nice shelf for my geat (just sitting in an open space in a bookshelf atm)


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *equetefue*


Its a gem of a lens...

Be getting a few things in the coming weeks

Sigma 30 f1.4
Canon 100 f2
Canon 580 EXII
Canon 20D (3rd bodt backup)

Looking empty and need to fill it


LOL, a cell phone shot from Equetefue. Doesn't seem right somehow.







Where's the 5D??


----------



## equetefue

gets here on wednesday

cant wait


----------



## default501x

unless im mistaken, isnt that the siggy than normally takes like 3 RMAs before you get one that doesnt backfocus?
looks like you got lucky, i LOVE how sharp that lens is.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *default501x*


unless im mistaken, isnt that the siggy than normally takes like 3 RMAs before you get one that doesnt backfocus?
looks like you got lucky, i LOVE how sharp that lens is.


Yeah, it's the Sigma with the huge lemon rate.


----------



## default501x

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Yeah, it's the Sigma with the huge lemon rate.

and you got a good one on your first try? very nice!
yeah a buddy of mine has that lens, it has unbelievable clarity.


----------



## Dragoon

I wonder how that Sigma 30mm f/1.4 compares to the Canon's EF 50mm f/1.4.

That lens seem "quite" sharp even wide open aperture, I'm very temped to get it instead of the EF 50mm, but the huge "lemon rate" and slightly higher price...

Does it cost anything (aside shipping) to get those lenses calibrated?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dragoon*


I wonder how that Sigma 30mm f/1.4 compares to the Canon's EF 50mm f/1.4.

That lens seem "quite" sharp even wide open aperture, I'm very temped to get it instead of the EF 50mm, but the huge "lemon rate" and slightly higher price...

Does it cost anything (aside shipping) to get those lenses calibrated?


Not a lot of reviews out yet, but Photozone isn't duly impressed:
http://www.photozone.de/Reviews/45-c...report--review

They don't have the 50mm f/1.4 reviewed, but they have the 50mm f/1.8:
http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff..._18_ff?start=1

Here's the reviews for the Sigma 30mm and Canon 50mm f/1.4 from SLR Gear:
Canon 50mm f/1.4
Sigma 30mm f/1.4

Judging from SLR Gear's MTF, the two look very similar wide open (you don't get a lot of sharpness at f/1.4 to begin with). I don't why Photozone slammed the Sigma so bad, since it's fairly close (but not better) than the Canon in terms of corner sharpness as far as I can tell from other reviews. But for $100 more than the Canon, it should be a better performer.

I'm sure it's a great lens, but if deciding between it and the Canon, you should pick based on whether you prefer the wide angle of the Sigma over the Canon.

I remember reading somewhere about "Nifty Fifties" that they are usually the best performing prime focal length because for whatever reason, it's relatively easy to optimize a lens for that particular focal length than others, hence its prevalence and popularity (maybe someone can confirm this).

And I believe Equetefue says that the calibration is covered under warranty. I hope so anyway.


----------



## Dragoon

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Not a lot of reviews out yet, but Photozone isn't duly impressed:
http://www.photozone.de/Reviews/45-c...report--review

They don't have the 50mm f/1.4 reviewed, but they have the 50mm f/1.8:
http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff..._18_ff?start=1

Here's the reviews for the Sigma 30mm and Canon 50mm f/1.4 from SLR Gear:
Canon 50mm f/1.4
Sigma 30mm f/1.4

Judging from SLR Gear's MTF, the two look very similar wide open (you don't get a lot of sharpness at f/1.4 to begin with). I don't why Photozone slammed the Sigma so bad, since it's fairly close (but not better) than the Canon in terms of corner sharpness as far as I can tell from other reviews. But for $100 more than the Canon, it should be a better performer.

I'm sure it's a great lens, but if deciding between it and the Canon, you should pick based on whether you prefer the wide angle of the Sigma over the Canon.

I remember reading somewhere about "Nifty Fifties" that they are usually the best performing prime focal length because for whatever reason, it's relatively easy to optimize a lens for that particular focal length than others, hence its prevalence and popularity (maybe someone can confirm this).

And I believe Equetefue says that the calibration is covered under warranty. I hope so anyway.

Once again, thanks alot for the prompt response









Well, from the SLRgear review (and from what I understood of the graphics) the Sigma 30mm cans the EF 50mm wide open, but as you and most reviews said, the 50mm lacks sharpness -badly- at f/1.4, but it shines at f/2 up to f/11, peaking at around f/8.

To be honest until now I didn't know the existance of this lens







, and from some sample shots that I found, it seems to be an exellent lens, especially color and contrast wise.

But, as far as focus range matters, having the macro 60mm and the EF 50mm seem to be close and probably even the same (sharpness wise) if I set both with the same aperture. I am really more interested in the largest aperture I can get over focus range (Not counting L lenses lol) and of course image quality matters there.

And then again, $100 more there but surprisingly only Â£13 (14â‚¬ / $19) more on Europe (with the ridiculous exchange rates now) Â£299.99 vs Â£313.18.

I'll give a thorough think on this.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Dragoon* 
Once again, thanks alot for the prompt response









Well, from the SLRgear review (and from what I understood of the graphics) the Sigma 30mm cans the EF 50mm wide open, but as you and most reviews said, the 50mm lacks sharpness -badly- at f/1.4, but it shines at f/2 up to f/11, peaking at around f/8.

To be honest until now I didn't know the existance of this lens







, and from some sample shots that I found, it seems to be an exellent lens, especially color and contrast wise.

But, as far as focus range matters, having the macro 60mm and the EF 50mm seem to be close and probably even the same (sharpness wise) if I set both with the same aperture. I am really more interested in the largest aperture I can get over focus range (Not counting L lenses lol) and of course image quality matters there.

And then again, $100 more there but surprisingly only Â£13 (14€ / $19) more on Europe (with the ridiculous exchange rates now) Â£299.99 vs Â£313.18.

I'll give a thorough think on this.










Yeah, what you say is right: wide open, the Sigma definitely beats the Canon, the SLR Gear 3D MTF widget for the Canon is all over the place, esp. in the center. But if you slide the aperture in the f/5.6 - f/11 range, the Canon overtakes the Sigma in sharpness. Not by much, from what I can tell the Canon is right at the 1 mark on the scale and the Sigma is between 1 and 2 (lower being better).

So both have their advantages:
Sigma: sharper wide open and wider angle
Canon: sharper at narrower apertures and less expensive, and less likely to have focus issues

But if you can get for the price you claim, I would say look to the Sigma. I have the 60mm macro as well, so initially when I was prime shopping, I wanted the Canon 28mm f/1.8 but I couldn't find it for a decent price, so I went for the 50mm f/1.4, which I'm very happy with. But if I knew about the Sigma at the time, I might have thought twice, but the price might have kept me away as it did with the Canon 28mm


----------



## Dragoon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Yeah, what you say is right: wide open, the Sigma definitely beats the Canon, the SLR Gear 3D MTF widget for the Canon is all over the place, esp. in the center. But if you slide the aperture in the f/5.6 - f/11 range, the Canon overtakes the Sigma in sharpness. Not by much, from what I can tell the Canon is right at the 1 mark on the scale and the Sigma is between 1 and 2 (lower being better).

So both have their advantages:
Sigma: sharper wide open and wider angle
Canon: sharper at narrower apertures and less expensive, and less likely to have focus issues

But if you can get for the price you claim, I would say look to the Sigma. I have the 60mm macro as well, so initially when I was prime shopping, I wanted the Canon 28mm f/1.8 but I couldn't find it for a decent price, so I went for the 50mm f/1.4, which I'm very happy with. But if I knew about the Sigma at the time, I might have thought twice, but the price might have kept me away as it did with the Canon 28mm


Alright, thanks.

Yeah, the price is pretty close, heres for the Sigma and the Canon I usually place prices from any other countries from Europe because they are generally cheaper than buying locally even with shipping







(EDIT: I just confirmed that... it's €400 here, while ordering from the UK rounds me to a min of €365, and ebay is way over €400)

I'll look in other places of course, just need to really know if it costs to calibrate the lenses in case I get a fuzzy copy, if not or it is cheap, consider that on my wish list


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
So, should I send my lens to Sigma to get tuned? (shot at f/1.4)

Nopeseree, you've got a winner.

Go forth and pixelate...


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Dragoon* 
Alright, thanks.

Yeah, the price is pretty close, heres for the Sigma and the Canon I usually place prices from any other countries from Europe because they are generally cheaper than buying locally even with shipping







(EDIT: I just confirmed that... it's â‚¬400 here, while ordering from the UK rounds me to a min of â‚¬365, and ebay is way over â‚¬400)

I'll look in other places of course, just need to really know if it costs to calibrate the lenses in case I get a fuzzy copy, if not or it is cheap, consider that on my wish list









I didn't go with a 50mm as it's to hard to work with on a crop sensor (becomes 80mm) as a walk around lens.


----------



## Dragoon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


I didn't go with a 50mm as it's to hard to work with on a crop sensor (becomes 80mm) as a walk around lens.


My thoughts as well, and people say 50mm is the "normal" but thats for 35mm sensors or film SLRs, on a 1.6x crop normal would be 30mm making it 48mm, but I guess that's what Sigma had in mind when they created that lens.

And wow... seeking out user reviews it really is luck based... about 1 in 4 users tell it has focusing issues on Canon cameras and they have to send the lens to calibrate or even their cameras. That's my primary concern, but still... it takes some awesome shots.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Dragoon* 
My thoughts as well, and people say 50mm is the "normal" but thats for 35mm sensors or film SLRs, on a 1.6x crop normal would be 30mm making it 48mm, but I guess that's what Sigma had in mind when they created that lens.

And wow... seeking out user reviews it really is luck based... about 1 in 4 users tell it has focusing issues on Canon cameras and they have to send the lens to calibrate or even their cameras. That's my primary concern, but still... it takes some awesome shots.

Well, there are other options for Canon besides the 50mm. Consider the Canon EF 28mm f/1.8 USM, EF 20mm f/2.8 USM, the EF 24mm f/2.8, the EF 35mm f/2 - all Canon wide primes which are decent, although the Sigma is still the better performer of them all (but nevertheless more expensive than them all). There's also the EF 85mm f/1.8 USM which is a very popular prime, but that exacerbates the crop problem even more.

That's too bad about the Sigma having so many problems, hopefully they will resolve these copies that slip through their QC. And hopefully the warranty will cover any tuning that yours may need, because if you have to pay, that may get expensive depending on where you need to send it.

I suppose that I'll get a wide angle prime someday, but I'm going to wait for an EF-S version, which hopefully Canon will make. Considering that Nikon just released a 35mm DX crop lens, I don't see why they wouldn't.


----------



## Mootsfox

Anyone else notice the Nikon version doesn't have a MF/AF switch? I'm so confused.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Anyone else notice the Nikon version doesn't have a MF/AF switch? I'm so confused.


it has focus override.
just grab the focus ring at any point for manual adjustments.


----------



## Tommytom22

Nice pics Marin! gg.


----------



## Dragoon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Well, there are other options for Canon besides the 50mm. Consider the Canon EF 28mm f/1.8 USM, EF 20mm f/2.8 USM, the EF 24mm f/2.8, the EF 35mm f/2 - all Canon wide primes which are decent, although the Sigma is still the better performer of them all (but nevertheless more expensive than them all). There's also the EF 85mm f/1.8 USM which is a very popular prime, but that exacerbates the crop problem even more.

That's too bad about the Sigma having so many problems, hopefully they will resolve these copies that slip through their QC. And hopefully the warranty will cover any tuning that yours may need, because if you have to pay, that may get expensive depending on where you need to send it.

I suppose that I'll get a wide angle prime someday, but I'm going to wait for an EF-S version, which hopefully Canon will make. Considering that Nikon just released a 35mm DX crop lens, I don't see why they wouldn't.


I did look at some of those, but alas, aperture isn't wide enough, and sigma's still outperform those like you said. It'll be a while before I get it, 10-20mm is most likely before on my list.

I just like to get as much information I can from reviews, and if possible from other users actual experience to avoid committing mistakes that I cannot turn back and lose a chunk of money, because unfortunately, I don't have much









Hopefully I'll either get some luck and get a good copy, or their QC will be fixed by then


----------



## coffeejunky

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dragoon*


I did look at some of those, but alas, aperture isn't wide enough, and sigma's still outperform those like you said. It'll be a while before I get it, 10-20mm is most likely before on my list.

I just like to get as much information I can from reviews, and if possible from other users actual experience to avoid committing mistakes that I cannot turn back and lose a chunk of money, because unfortunately, I don't have much









Hopefully I'll either get some luck and get a good copy, or their QC will be fixed by then










You may want to check the European return terms, we usually get screwed when it comes to warranties. Also sometimes when you import a product you have no warranty in your country, just the country of purchase. TBH if you are dropping that amount of money on a piece of glass the returns should be no questions asked.


----------



## Dragoon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *coffeejunky*


You may want to check the European return terms, we usually get screwed when it comes to warranties. Also sometimes when you import a product you have no warranty in your country, just the country of purchase. TBH if you are dropping that amount of money on a piece of glass the returns should be no questions asked.


Well, I just checked sigmas UK website since if I order this lenses it will most likely be from the UK, they say if the lens is still under warranty which in case of a lens failing to focus it *should* be within one year, they will repair at no cost. I hope it's like so. (Just an example, when my 360 busted with RROD, I had to send it to Germany, didn't pay a cent though)


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Not a lot of reviews out yet, but Photozone isn't duly impressed:
http://www.photozone.de/Reviews/45-c...report--review

They don't have the 50mm f/1.4 reviewed, but they have the 50mm f/1.8:
http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff..._18_ff?start=1

Here's the reviews for the Sigma 30mm and Canon 50mm f/1.4 from SLR Gear:
Canon 50mm f/1.4
Sigma 30mm f/1.4

Judging from SLR Gear's MTF, the two look very similar wide open (you don't get a lot of sharpness at f/1.4 to begin with). I don't why Photozone slammed the Sigma so bad, since it's fairly close (but not better) than the Canon in terms of corner sharpness as far as I can tell from other reviews. But for $100 more than the Canon, it should be a better performer.

I'm sure it's a great lens, but if deciding between it and the Canon, you should pick based on whether you prefer the wide angle of the Sigma over the Canon.

I remember reading somewhere about "Nifty Fifties" that they are usually the best performing prime focal length because for whatever reason, it's relatively easy to optimize a lens for that particular focal length than others, hence its prevalence and popularity (maybe someone can confirm this).

And I believe Equetefue says that the calibration is covered under warranty. I hope so anyway.

50mm lenses are usually the cheapest of the primes. Less glass and engineering to design it I guess.

To compare the 50mm Canon and 30mm Sigma doesn't seem fair in my book. They are used for different things.


----------



## equetefue

Sigma is great when it comes to service of the EX line. I would never hesitate to buy a Sigma, and I've used plenty. The 30 f1.4 will be my next lens for sure, then the Canon 100 f2.

Congrats on the great lens Marin. I told you it was good !


----------



## Dragoon

Quote:


Originally Posted by *equetefue* 
Sigma is great when it comes to service of the EX line. I would never hesitate to buy a Sigma, and I've used plenty. The 30 f1.4 will be my next lens for sure, then the Canon 100 f2.

Congrats on the great lens Marin. I told you it was good !

So, I guess I'll hope for some luck and get the 30mm f/1.4... "probably" after the 10-20... (I would so buy them all at once. Damn money limits!!)

Thanks


----------



## GoneTomorrow

*666x*









(100 MB/s)

I guess this could be good for one of those CF-to-SATA adapters, but haven't CF cards long since surpassed the read/write speeds of even the most hig end DSLRs?


----------



## Mootsfox

Is the x 150Kb or KB?

666x is like 100MB/s if it's the second one


----------



## Oscuro

I personally wouldn't bother using it in a camera....
1: My D70 would take like 3008 RAW pictures with it.....kinda frivolous
2: Waaaay too many pics on one card. I'd rather just get 2 more 2Gb cards if I'm going on some crazy long vacation.

However, it would make a good hard drive for a small backup computer or something. m-itx or nano-itx....


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Is the x 150Kb or KB?

666x is like 100MB/s if it's the second one









Are you talking about bits vs. bytes? I think is has to be bytes - bits are for communication, right?

Nevertheless it is 100 MB/s believe it or not:
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0903/09...cfcard666x.asp

There's also the SDXC format (it's only capable of 50 MB/s currently):

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0903/09...pretecsdxc.asp


----------



## Dragoon

Jeez, 100MB/s... the only use that I can see for CFs are for digital cameras and storage for ultra low power computers, and for the earlier option, 64GB and 666x seems overkill, unless you plan to store a life in that card... JPG format


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Holy Lord, I just learned about Leica's upcoming digital SLR, the S2:

http://blog.wired.com/gadgets/2008/0...s2-reinve.html

This thing is going to be off the hook. A sensor 56% larger than a typical full-frame sensor, 37.5 mega pixels, and only $45000 (that's three zeroes). And I thought Hasselbads were expensive. Gives new meaning to "medium format" when it comes to digital.


----------



## Marin

So the rental price for that could probably get me a new camera body.


----------



## Mootsfox

In two years it will be $3,000 for a used body


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


In two years it will be $3,000 for a used body










Well, the M8 is almost two years old and still costs over $3000 for the body ($4700 debut).


----------



## Dragoon

Wow... $45.000... It's nothing short of unbelievable. And I thought $5000~$8000 cameras were expensive. I can't imagine the lenses.

I didn't know there were sensors bigger than 35mm, and it's called a "medium format" camera? Are there sensors bigger than that?


----------



## coffeejunky

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Dragoon* 
Wow... $45.000... It's nothing short of unbelievable. And I thought $5000~$8000 cameras were expensive. I can't imagine the lenses.

I didn't know there were sensors bigger than 35mm, and it's called a "medium format" camera? Are there sensors bigger than that?

Yeah plate cameras (the old bellow type). Some claim they give the best image quality. I dunno about that.
As for digital I think thats gotta be the largest frame I know of.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dragoon*


Wow... $45.000... It's nothing short of unbelievable. And I thought $5000~$8000 cameras were expensive. I can't imagine the lenses.

I didn't know there were sensors bigger than 35mm, and it's called a "medium format" camera? Are there sensors bigger than that?


Yes, Hasselbad cameras have medium format sensors. It's term used for film only really (medium and large format film), but is applied to digital sensors as well. Just like ISO is a film-only term, but is used for convenience in digital jargon.

I don't know what the biggest sensor is, but it's probably in a satellite or in a camera like the Gigapxl camera.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *coffeejunky*


Yeah plate cameras (the old bellow type). Some claim they give the best image quality. I dunno about that.
As for digital I think thats gotta be the largest frame I know of.


Yeah, just like larger resolution digital images produce better quality large prints.


----------



## Dragoon

Quote:


Originally Posted by *coffeejunky* 
Yeah plate cameras (the old bellow type). Some claim they give the best image quality. I dunno about that.
As for digital I think thats gotta be the largest frame I know of.


Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Yes, Hasselbad cameras have medium format sensors. It's term used for film only really (medium and large format film), but is applied to digital sensors as well. Just like ISO is a film-only term, but is used for convenience in digital jargon.

I don't know what the biggest sensor is, but it's probably in a satellite or in a camera like the Gigapxl camera.

Thanks for the info guys









A 1GP camera... Holy...









Well, I got curious (as usual) and snapped some test charts to see how my camera is. From what I know it seems to be doing a "slight" backfocus.









Strange... I can't see the original file, flickr doesn't show the option to select it.

Here are the charts, what do you think?







*55mm f/5.6*








*18mm f/3.5*


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Dragoon, based on what I know from these charts, it doesn't look like you have a back focus problem - what makes you think so?


----------



## Dragoon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Dragoon, based on what I know from these charts, it doesn't look like you have a back focus problem - what makes you think so?


Well, especially at 18mm, I can see all the way up to 80mm clearly, but downwards the 80mm is really out of focus, at 55mm is also noticeable, but not as much. I tried my best to place the camera at 45Âº on my tripod.

Just now I re-did those tests handheld and they yielded better results... Strange, but isn't when the back gets focused instead of the center called backfocused and the other way around frontfocused? Theorically it should have the same focus detail "upwards" and "downwards", kind of centered, right?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dragoon*


Well, especially at 18mm, I can see all the way up to 80mm clearly, but downwards the 80mm is really out of focus, at 55mm is also noticeable, but not as much. I tried my best to place the camera at 45Âº on my tripod.

Just now I re-did those tests handheld and they yielded better results... Strange, but isn't when the back gets focused instead of the center called backfocused and the other way around frontfocused? Theorically it should have the same focus detail "upwards" and "downwards", kind of centered, right?


I think charts like these only show glaringly obvious back focus problems. If you don't have the angle just right, it can be off. Another good more real-world test is to set bottles or soda cans in a diagonal row going backwards spaced a few inches apart, and trying to focus on a central bottle to see if to focus targets that bottle.


----------



## Dragoon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


I think charts like these only show glaringly obvious back focus problems. If you don't have the angle just right, it can be off. Another good more real-world test is to set bottles or soda cans in a diagonal row going backwards spaced a few inches apart, and trying to focus on a central bottle to see if to focus targets that bottle.


Hmm... Seems like great idea. I should have thought of that before







I'll try getting something to do that.

Thanks alot.

Oh btw, 60mm should arrive within the next 2~3 business days, as it was only shipped this morning.


----------



## equetefue

Woot !

got the 5D !!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *equetefue* 
Woot !

got the 5D !!

Very nice (Borat voice)! Looking forward to some shots.


----------



## Marin

At first I thought you took that pic with your 5D


----------



## Dragoon

Talk about a massive arsenal! Sweet!


----------



## equetefue

it was a lot bigger before... working on getting all the stuff back soon... Then again really want either a 600 f4 IS or a 400 f2.8 IS

Lets see what I do


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *equetefue*


it was a lot bigger before... working on getting all the stuff back soon... Then again really want either a 600 f4 IS or a 400 f2.8 IS

Lets see what I do


Holy crap, that's some serious cash for those two lenses.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Holy crap, that's some serious cash for those two lenses.










no doubt.


----------



## equetefue

yeah... have a lot of use for them. Selling quite a few pics lately.. with the 5d I should be able to tap into some new shooting environments.


----------



## Marin

5D = awesome for handheld night photo's.


----------



## equetefue

Yeah man.. the camera is awesome.. I will be testing it pretty good on saturday and sunday but so far with the nifty fifty and the 17-40L it seems to perform great. DOF is amazing on full frame.

Saturday i'll be shooting some portraits with the 5D and sunday some wildlife with the 1D Mark II.. I'm happy !


----------



## Marin

All I'm doing this weekend is using my Sigma 30mm more.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


All I'm doing this weekend is using my Sigma 30mm more.


All I'm doing this weekend is shooting with the Canon 10-22mm, should arrive Friday! The wait is killing me!


----------



## Mootsfox

I don't have $400 to blow every two weeks, so I'll be shooting with my glass from 1982 thank you very much.


----------



## Marin

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...9&postcount=32

Quote:



13. "I used DxO Optics Pro software to stretch my fisheye image back to a conventional, flat image. The image from the camera was the usual useless curvy image. "


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


I don't have $400 to blow every two weeks, so I'll be shooting with my glass from 1982 thank you very much.


LOL, you and me both. I haven't bought a lens in nearly a year, and I only bought the 10-22mm from my Paypal balance after selling a bunch of stuff here. I'm going to start buying some Canon FD mount lenses if I can find a decent adapter. FD lenses are going for $10-$20 on Ebay.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...9&postcount=32










LOL, these are my favorites:

The "spray and pray" method, all the pros do it:

Quote:



2. "The key is to be sufficiently observant to recognize that it's time to shoot"... "I don't need no stinking tripod, even though I always have one in the car. In cases like this I use the Continuous shutter mode and hold the shutter button down long enough to fire several shots. I later select the sharpest. "



Quote:



6. "I made this with my 5D camera resting on broken glass on the floor."


I love the poster's response to this one,"No argument here."

Quote:



8. "I forget how weird I looked."


Haunted lens, LOL:

Quote:



21. "My 14mm lens has ghosts, which I eliminated by standing so the sun went behind the pole."


----------



## coffeejunky

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
LOL, you and me both. I haven't bought a lens in nearly a year, and I only bought the 10-22mm from my Paypal balance after selling a bunch of stuff here. I'm going to start buying some Canon FD mount lenses if I can find a decent adapter. FD lenses are going for $10-$20 on Ebay.

LOL, these are my favorites:

The "spray and pray" method, all the pros do it:

I love the poster's response to this one,"No argument here."

Haunted lens, LOL:

lol. My faves are these -

Quote:

10. " I remember once in 1992 I was rolling around on the ground along the side of a wet street at night in Austria. I was wearing black."
*Appears that Ken may have been on LSD*.

Quote:

19. "Remember that my work is all about color. It's not about detail or form. I see in color; " *Yup, definitely too much LSD*.
And this guy really likes distortion -

Quote:


----------



## Marin

Was taking a picture when a crow flew into the frame. I had to crop it so it didn't look weird.



And another pic with my Sigma 30mm. Looks like my kit lens won't be getting anymore use.



And a shot at f/1.4. I should have brought my 60mm Macro with me.


----------



## nuclearjock

Love is in the air here in the midwest,

D300;nikon 80-400, ISO 200, 220mm 1/400 @F/8


----------



## Sanad

just bought a nikon d700 with a 24-70mm lens! Cant wait to try it out.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Sanad* 
just bought a nikon d700 with a 24-70mm lens! Cant wait to try it out.

Nice camera and _very_ nice lens. Post some shots with it. I'd like to see some shots of where you're at.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Got my 10-22mm yesterday, and this thing is seriously wide. I have to be careful when shooting with or my toes end up in the frame. And the perspective distortion on the wide end is crazy (I expected this from such a wide angle)!

I wanted to get out this weekend and get some shots, but of course there's an enormous storm system parked over my state right now, so it's going rain all damn weekend.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Got my 10-22mm yesterday, and this thing is seriously wide. I have to be careful when shooting with or my toes end up in the frame. *And the perspective distortion on the wide end is crazy (I expected this from such a wide angle)!*

I wanted to get out this weekend and get some shots, but of course there's an enormous storm system parked over my state right now, so it's going rain all damn weekend.









Now you can be just like Ken Rockwell!









Seriously though, get some pics up soon.









Also; Rain + Night = awesome light reflections.


----------



## lhowatt

i got my nikon D40 and what i need now is a 55-200mm so i can take wildlife pics


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Now you can be just like Ken Rockwell!









Seriously though, get some pics up soon.









Also; Rain + Night = awesome light reflections.

LOL, I'll try some burst mode shooting and pick the sharpest one of the bunch.

Good point about rain at night, but rain + camera = SOL.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
LOL, I'll try some burst mode shooting and pick the sharpest one of the bunch.

Good point about rain at night, but rain + camera = SOL.

Plastic bags!


----------



## spice003

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Got my 10-22mm yesterday, and this thing is seriously wide. I have to be careful when shooting with or my toes end up in the frame. And the perspective distortion on the wide end is crazy (I expected this from such a wide angle)!

I wanted to get out this weekend and get some shots, but of course there's an enormous storm system parked over my state right now, so it's going rain all damn weekend.









wow that is really wide, are you serious about seeing your toes in frame?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *spice003* 
wow that is really wide, are you serious about seeing your toes in frame?









Yes. Here's a quick example in my living room. These two images are from the 10-22mm and my 28-135mm (shot from the same spot). You can really see the perspective distortion on the wall clock and TV:

Canon EF 28-135mm @28mm, f/5.6, ISO 100, 4":









Canon 10-22mm @10mm, f/5.6, ISO 10, 2.5":


----------



## Marin

The eye cup broke on my XSi. Now I need to get another one... wish they used a better material.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
The eye cup broke on my XSi. Now I need to get another one... wish they used a better material.

Maybe you shouldn't use your eye so hard :/


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Maybe you shouldn't use your eye so hard :/


----------



## spice003

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Yes. Here's a quick example in my living room. These two images are from the 10-22mm and my 28-135mm (shot from the same spot). You can really see the perspective distortion on the wall clock and TV:

Canon EF 28-135mm @28mm, f/5.6, ISO 100, 4":









Canon 10-22mm @10mm, f/5.6, ISO 10, 2.5":









wow that is crazy wide! enjoy your new lens.


----------



## Marin

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonicdmcg1/

Interesting...

Quote:


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Went out shooting on this gloomy overcast day with the 10-22mm. This lens really takes some getting used to; the distortion can really screw up a shot. But I love this lens! I stood all of 10 feet away from the mill building below and capture the entire two-story building in the shot. Let me know what you think of these, especially if the distortion is too much:


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 

Interesting...

Yeah, that camera has a lot of promise. The small size of the lenses apparently allow for more corner sharpness than larger standard lens mounts. If it weren't so expensive and I had the extra cash just laying around, I would get a whole Micro Four-Thirds setup. There's still the problem of sensor size and pixel density though, making it a very so-so noise performer. But I think future advances in image processing will improve future models. I hope that Olympus starts releasing Micro Four Thirds cameras as well.


----------



## Marin

Looks like there's a lot of chromatic aberration.


----------



## TaiDinh

Canon PowerShot SD550


----------



## default501x

gawd i want that 10-22 sooo bad
im in the process of deciding whether i want the 10-22 or the 17-40L, its a tough decision.
anyways, enjoy your new lens!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Looks like there's a lot of chromatic aberration.


Yeah, it was impossible to avoid with the branches against the whitish-gray skies. I didn't really attempt to reduce in PP, maybe I'll give it another stab.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *default501x*


gawd i want that 10-22 sooo bad
im in the process of deciding whether i want the 10-22 or the 17-40L, its a tough decision.
anyways, enjoy your new lens!


Yeah, I was torn between the same two myself. I think I might rent the 17-40 one weekend and see if I like it any better than the 10-22. I got my copy from POTN. There's usually several for sale from people upgrading to FF bodies. Don't expect to pay less than $600 on average for a used one.


----------



## riko99

Just thought i would post a couple of shots with my D60

My Cat Pickles
(shot by me)









(Shot by my Fiance shes better lol)









My Soon to be Nephews feet (shot by my Fiance)









And a cropped image of my digital Piano (shot by me)









Also my flickr Account is Here


----------



## Marin

Shot of me, taken with my Sigma 30mm. I haven't skated in years.


----------



## dr4gon

Looks good though!









Good job with the focus! F/3.5 wow, someone pre focused or something? I'm guessing someone tripped the shutter


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dr4gon*


Looks good though!









Good job with the focus! F/3.5 wow, someone pre focused or something? I'm guessing someone tripped the shutter










My brother took the pictures







I had it on AI Servo and "burst". Only could get 6 frames off at a time due to shooting in RAW.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Shot of me, taken with my Sigma 30mm. I haven't skated in years.




Nice Marin! I can almost jump that high


----------



## MADMAX22

Thought I would throw in a few pics my GF took with the XSI and the kit lens. She is still learning but thought they were pretty good. I had these submitted for a motorcycle calender and two of them were accepted. Pretty cool, she was very stoaked.

Anyways this was at a little park up here in NW WA.


----------



## Dragoon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Went out shooting on this gloomy overcast day with the 10-22mm. This lens really takes some getting used to; the distortion can really screw up a shot. But I love this lens! I stood all of 10 feet away from the mill building below and capture the entire two-story building in the shot. Let me know what you think of these, especially if the distortion is too much:

<snip>


wow, those shots look great. And from the two previous you posted there's a huge difference from 28mm to 10mm, it's like twice the FoV.

Like Marin said, there is a bit of CA, but with a lens like that and wide open it's expected right? I suppose that is fixed with a sightly larger focal length, but aside that they look great.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Dragoon* 
wow, those shots look great. And from the two previous you posted there's a huge difference from 28mm to 10mm, it's like twice the FoV.

Like Marin said, there is a bit of CA, but with a lens like that and wide open it's expected right? I suppose that is fixed with a sightly larger focal length, but aside that they look great.

Thanks. Yeah, I think I made the CA worse in the post-process by increasing the contrast quite a bit. But I was surprised to see that much to begin with. You're right, at really wide angles it's expected (maybe not with L glass), and the reviews I read about the lens before I got it said there would be some CA wide open, but I didn't expect this much. I just have to be careful when I'm shooting that wide, because CA shows up the most where there's a lot of contrast, such as branches against a cloudy sky.

I wish that Adobe Camera Raw in Elements had lens correction options, because to fix CA I have to use DPP, but the correction doesn't register if I open the same RAW file with ACR. Irritating.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Shot of me, taken with my Sigma 30mm. I haven't skated in years.

Nice action freeze, looks good. When it gets warm, I'm going to a local skate park to try some action shots, something I haven't really gotten into.


----------



## Dragoon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Thanks. Yeah, I think I made the CA worse in the post-process by increasing the contrast quite a bit. But I was surprised to see that much to begin with. You're right, at really wide angles it's expected (maybe not with L glass), and the reviews I read about the lens before I got it said there would be some CA wide open, but I didn't expect this much. I just have to be careful when I'm shooting that wide, because CA shows up the most where there's a lot of contrast, such as branches against a cloudy sky.

I wish that Adobe Camera Raw in Elements had lens correction options, because to fix CA I have to use DPP, but the correction doesn't register if I open the same RAW file with ACR. Irritating.


I guess now I know what to expect on different environments. I didn't know CA amount would depend on what you're shooting, I had the idea it was more like a constant in any circumstances aside camera definitions.

Looked into some sample photos and in some cases the CA is barely visible and again in high contrast zones, it is... But damn, I can't wait to get my hands on a Sigma 10-20









Btw, any ideas on what lens you'll be getting next? 200mm f/2.8L?


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MADMAX22*


Thought I would throw in a few pics my GF took with the XSI and the kit lens. She is still learning but thought they were pretty good. I had these submitted for a motorcycle calender and two of them were accepted. Pretty cool, she was very stoaked.

Anyways this was at a little park up here in NW WA.


Those look pretty nice, but if she continues to do a lot of shooting in direct sunlight, you should probably get a circular polarizer filter.


----------



## Sanad

LOVING that skateboard shot Marin! Nice work!


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Nice action freeze, looks good. When it gets warm, I'm going to a local skate park to try some action shots, something I haven't really gotten into.



Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Nice Marin! I can almost jump that high











Quote:



Originally Posted by *Sanad*


LOVING that skateboard shot Marin! Nice work!


Thanks.









And today's another Macro Monday, wooo!!!


----------



## equetefue

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


The eye cup broke on my XSi. Now I need to get another one... wish they used a better material.


time to upgrade


----------



## equetefue

Nice shots the man !

Glad you like the Siggy 30mm. It's a great lens... I'll be buying the bigger brother soon. The 50 f1.4 for full frame.

Here's a product shot for today. Board and had nothing to do.

Don't mind the fuss/lint/ and crookedness.... just messign around


----------



## Marin

EF 16-35mm f/2.8L?


----------



## equetefue

EF 17-40 f4 L

Don't like the softness in the corners of the 16-35 plusI see no advantage of the stop diference when shooting landscapes. Maybe If I were shooting weddings, but not for now.


----------



## Ryan747

Ok finally i can say this, Update my Camera with a "Nikon d40" and get rid of that crappy kodak!
ohh and my flikr is http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/


----------



## equetefue

u got it yet ?


----------



## Ryan747

Quote:


Originally Posted by *equetefue* 
u got it yet ?

my d40? Yes i picked it up like 2 hours ago.


----------



## equetefue

How you like it so far ?

what lens you got to go with it. This is the beginning of a very expensive hobby.


----------



## default501x

Quote:


Originally Posted by *equetefue* 
nice shots the man !

Glad you like the siggy 30mm. It's a great lens... I'll be buying the bigger brother soon. The 50 f1.4 for full frame.

Here's a product shot for today. Board and had nothing to do.

Don't mind the fuss/lint/ and crookedness.... Just messign around










<3 17-40

i think pictures taken *of* that lens are almost as sexy as pictures taken *with* that lens


----------



## Ryan747

Quote:


Originally Posted by *equetefue* 
How you like it so far ?

what lens you got to go with it. This is the beginning of a very expensive hobby.

came with a 18-55 and a 55-200 mm imo that should hold me over for a good amount of time i see no need to upgrade lenses for atleast a year.

Also ive only taken like 5 pictures with it and i have semi-wood


----------



## default501x

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Ryan747* 
came with a 18-55 and a 55-200 mm imo that should hold me over for a good amount of time i see no need to upgrade lenses for atleast a year.

good luck. I lasted 1 month









Quote:


Originally Posted by *Ryan747* 
Also ive only taken like 5 pictures with it and i have semi-wood

hahaha


----------



## Ryan747

Quote:


Originally Posted by *default501x* 
good luck. I lasted 1 month









hahaha

what do you mean you lasted a month?


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Ryan747* 
what do you mean you lasted a month?

Until he got a new lens.


----------



## default501x

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Until he got a new lens.

yep.








next lens will hopefully be within the next month.
Oh, and Marin, i am going to pick up the 17-40L, so in the future if you are interested in a swap just let me know.


----------



## Ryan747

Quote:


Originally Posted by *default501x* 
yep.








next lens will hopefully be within the next month.
Oh, and Marin, i am going to pick up the 17-40L, so in the future if you are interested in a swap just let me know.

ohh, ya ill be able to stay with these 2 for a while cause i got no choice im broke now lol


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Ryan747*


Ok finally i can say this, Update my Camera with a "Nikon d40" and get rid of that crappy kodak!
ohh and my flikr is http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/


Moved you down to the DSLR section.









Quote:



Originally Posted by *Ryan747*


came with a 18-55 and a 55-200 mm imo that should hold me over for a good amount of time i see no need to upgrade lenses for atleast a year.

Also ive only taken like 5 pictures with it and i have semi-wood


That's what they all say. I've spent almost two grand on lenses in the last two years. That's a fraction of what you can spend on one high-end lens. Now you'll know the simultaneous elation and despair from having two expensive hobbies.


----------



## Ryan747

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Moved you down to the DSLR section.









That's what they all say. I've spent almost two grand on lenses in the last two years. That's a fraction of what you can spend on one high-end lens. Now you'll know the simultaneous elation and despair from having two expensive hobbies.


ohh lol i know the price of hobbies got into Rc cars, Rc planes, and paintball. Them are super expensive, im used to it by now.


----------



## default501x

haha i was just thinking to myself earlier today how i really should quit one of my hobbies, because i just cant afford them!


----------



## Marin

Just started Project 365, don't know why I waited so long.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Just started Project 365, don't know why I waited so long.


I've always wanted to do that, but I'm way too busy to keep up with it. And besides, at my age I don't need to review a year's worth of aging pictures of myself.


----------



## Mootsfox

Too many hobbies is too true.

Computers, bikes, photography, buying stuff from ebay


----------



## riko99

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Too many hobbies is too true.

Computers, bikes, photography, buying stuff from ebay










And Sadly that last hobby probably in the end costs you the most because it can feed the other one lol.

Yeah i need to pick up a new lens thinking a 55-200mm Nikkor AF-S DX VR as the fiance likes wildlife and close shots so that will probably come here soon if i can get a good price.


----------



## dr4gon

Some days 365 is easy, others it's quite hard. But it's fun to look back!


----------



## MADMAX22

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Those look pretty nice, but if she continues to do a lot of shooting in direct sunlight, you should probably get a circular polarizer filter.


Thanks Moots, I noticed she was looking at a few of the different filters. If you see any deals on some be sure to post them.

Another thing if any of you all are costco members they have a coupon for $30 off of adobe emelemnts 7 this week. Well march16 thru apr5. There normal price is close or the same as amazon so its a good deal.http://www.costco.com/Browse/Product...se=&lang=en-US


----------



## lonnie5000

I got a brand new Canon PowerShot A1000 IS today. Here's some pics I took trying it out. These aren't the original size. I had Imageshack resize them. I like this camera.









Here's a little yellow flower or weed growing in the backyard.


A closeup of the bark on this weird tree in the backyard.


A little creek.


Here's a little red flower from a bush in my yard. 


Some ivy on the side of my house.


And a cross-section of a sawed off tree limb from a tree in my front yard.


----------



## spice003

has any one bought lenses of ebay before, because i got a 10% coupon and i cans save up $100. What you guys think? I'm thinking of picking this up


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *spice003*


has any one bought lenses of ebay before, because i got a 10% coupon and i cans save up $100. What you guys think? I'm thinking of picking this up 


I bought my D60 kit with two lenses from ebay when I got that coupon and 25% cashback (yes they stack)









Very good experience, I love ebay.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *spice003*


has any one bought lenses of ebay before, because i got a 10% coupon and i cans save up $100. What you guys think? I'm thinking of picking this up 


That's a great lens (but overpriced by Canon) and if you get it for under $500, you will have done well. It's a zoom that I've had my eye on.


----------



## spice003

does the canon 2x extender work with this lens?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *spice003* 
does the canon 2x extender work with this lens?

Don't know, have to Google that one.


----------



## spice003

yeah i was just reading, it works with any EF lens,but AF is possible with any EOS body if the lens has an f/2.8 or faster maximum aperture. so does that mean i wont have auto focus?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *spice003* 
yeah i was just reading, it works with any EF lens,but AF is possible with any EOS body if the lens has an f/2.8 or faster maximum aperture. so does that mean i wont have auto focus?









Well, the 70-300mm can only do f/4, so if that's what it says I guess not. I think you'll find that 300mm on a crop sensor is a a lot of reach to begin with though, so you may not even need the TC converter.


----------



## spice003

yeah, i'm just gonna get that lens for now, maybe sell it in a couple of years, and get an L series with like f2.8 or something. Thanx for the help though.


----------



## Mootsfox

That aperture need has something to do with the AF system used by the camera. I don't fully understand, nor have I fully read up on it. To Auto Focus, the camera opens the aperture up all the way and then closes it down to what yo asked for before it opens the shutter. It may need faster stops to get more light, or it may be there because focuses slowly with slower lenses, etc.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


That aperture need has something to do with the AF system used by the camera. I don't fully understand, nor have I fully read up on it. To Auto Focus, the camera opens the aperture up all the way and then closes it down to what yo asked for before it opens the shutter. It may need faster stops to get more light, or it may be there because focuses slowly with slower lenses, etc.


Yeah, AF works by examining contrast, which requires extremes in light an dark, so it makes sense what you say.


----------



## spice003

take look at this, lol. man that thing is huge.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *spice003*


take look at this, lol. man that thing is huge.











LOL, that's probably the 600mm or 800mm L lens, practically a friggin' telescope.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


LOL, that's probably the 600mm or 800mm L lens, practically a friggin' telescope.


It's actually a 500mm f/4 L IS.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Ok, everyone start Googling for the biggest damn SLR lens you can find. Here's one:

Quote:



Sigma showed their 200mm-500mm F2.8, *35 pound* beast again, but this year, it had a 2x "attachment" on it to take it to *400mm to 1000mm at F5.6*. It has it's own *LCD display* to show focal length and focusing distance


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Ok, everyone start Googling for the biggest damn SLR lens you can find. Here's one:


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*












Well, it does "shoot" I guess.


----------



## spice003

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Ok, everyone start Googling for the biggest damn SLR lens you can find. Here's one:











that thing is freaking huge


----------



## spice003

oh yeah










This is Canon's 1200mm f/5.6L EF USM Autofocus Lens. Canon has been making them since 1993, on a special order only basis, and if you want one you'll have to wait around a year and half for Canon to build it for you. Unless you're quick, and head over to B&H, where you'll find a second hand one for just $99,000.

According to the B&H blog, "there are 'more than twelve, less than twenty' of them in existence". The lens weighs 36lbs. and measures just over a yard long. You won't be taking any handheld candids with this thing.

here is another one










anybody trying to pick this one up


----------



## Mootsfox

Extremes:

6mm f/2.8









1200-1700mm f/5.6









More money than sense:









The family:


----------



## equetefue

Quote:


Originally Posted by *spice003* 
does the canon 2x extender work with this lens?

Don't buy the 2x extender. You WILL be dissapointed. If you have a 4-7k $ lens it will take the 2x fine, but other than that you will be floor when you see results...

Also if you will loose 2 f-stops so your camera one autofocus. You will need a pro body and will only work on center focus.


----------



## Ryan747

holy crap them are big!
But mine is bigger! 520mm


----------



## Oscuro

I...can't figure out where you could really use a 1200-1700mm lens!

And Spice, is that a 65mm /1.2 L lens?


----------



## xlastshotx

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Oscuro*


I...can't figure out where you could really use a 1200-1700mm lens!

And Spice, is that a 65mm /1.2 L lens?



I asked my professor and he said that most likely it would be used for very skiddish birds, or animals that you really don't want to get near.

That looks like a Canon 85 f/1.2L.


----------



## Oscuro

Yeah, I just couldn't make out the first number, that's a fat lens though...and god, the DOF must be ridiculously small on it.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Oscuro* 
I...can't figure out where you could really use a 1200-1700mm lens!

And Spice, is that a 65mm /1.2 L lens?


Quote:


Originally Posted by *Oscuro* 
Yeah, I just couldn't make out the first number, that's a fat lens though...and god, the DOF must be ridiculously small on it.

Yep, the legendary 85mm f/1.2 *L*, heralded as the ultimate portrait lens.

I seriously need to win the lottery or sell a kidney to buy some L lenses.


----------



## Dragoon

Not the largest, but an aperture wide to hell and back.


----------



## Marin

http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/olympus_25_2p8_o20/

Canon should make one... but I doubt it's possible without the Four Thirds System.


----------



## default501x

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dragoon*


Not the largest, but an aperture wide to hell and back.











is that the f/.75 lens?

i got to play with the legendary f/1.2L at CES and i was floored. i put it on auto focus and gave it to my dad who knows nothing about photography and he was able to use it as a point and shoot and take better shots than i had taken all day with my other lenses.

the thing is godly.

oh and holy poo:









http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography...12001700mm.htm


----------



## Ryan747

^ Looks like a sniper scope


----------



## Oscuro

Hmmm...wonder if you can get a polarizer for that thing...?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/olympus_25_2p8_o20/

Canon should make one... but I doubt it's possible without the Four Thirds System.


Probably true, Four Thirds lenses have so much corner-to-corner sharpness that such a lens can afford to have fewer elements to make it smaller. This is an impressive lens, too bad it has such bad CA.


----------



## Marin

Oh why hello there sexy.



Rest of the pics can be seen here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/4250487...7614864745283/


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/olympus_25_2p8_o20/

Canon should make one... but I doubt it's possible without the Four Thirds System.


Looks interesting, I guess finding an adapter is the hard part:










http://cgi.ebay.com/45mm-F2.8-CARL-Z...QQcmdZViewItem


----------



## Dragoon

How nice, a new 10-20mm from Sigma with a fixed f/3.5 aperture. I wonder about the price and performance with these.

DP-Review also posted a review on the current 10-20mm f/4-5.6, finally! Very nice, and considering it's about $200 cheaper than the Canons counterpart.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dragoon*


How nice, a new 10-20mm from Sigma with a fixed f/3.5 aperture. I wonder about the price and performance with these.

DP-Review also posted a review on the current 10-20mm f/4-5.6, finally! Very nice, and considering it's about $200 cheaper than the Canons counterpart.


Nice, I wish the Canon 10-22mm had a constant aperture. It will be nice if Sigma can fix the sharpness issues in this new lens. I also wonder how much the addition of a constant aperture will raise the price. Even with Sigma, I bet it will be close to or equal to the price of the Canon.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Apparently the Canon 500D will be out soon:

http://www.1001noisycameras.com/2009...-march-25.html

More megapixels, HD video, high resolution LCD and the DIGIC 4 image processor. Should be pretty nice! I wonder if they'll keep the same ergonomics and size.


----------



## Dragoon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Nice, I wish the Canon 10-22mm had a constant aperture. It will be nice if Sigma can fix the sharpness issues in this new lens. I also wonder how much the addition of a constant aperture will raise the price. Even with Sigma, I bet it will be close to or equal to the price of the Canon.


Yeah, I was thinking about that, in my point of view, sigma is releasing that one to get head to head with the EF-S 10-20, but if the price tag is the same as the Canons AND if the corner softness is somewhat reduced, I'd say it's a big deal, from what I know only L series from Canon have fixed aperture right? I can see them releasing an *ultra* wide L after this.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Apparently the Canon 500D will be out soon:

http://www.1001noisycameras.com/2009...-march-25.html

More megapixels, HD video, high resolution LCD and the DIGIC 4 image processor. Should be pretty nice! I wonder if they'll keep the same ergonomics and size.


Wow... 15MP and full HD video. If that rumor is real, it'll be one hell of a camera, $1000 range?


----------



## MADMAX22

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Apparently the Canon 500D will be out soon:

http://www.1001noisycameras.com/2009...-march-25.html

More megapixels, HD video, high resolution LCD and the DIGIC 4 image processor. Should be pretty nice! I wonder if they'll keep the same ergonomics and size.


Whats the 500D gonna be name wise, its rebel series right so is this the new version of the xti/xsi cameras? I


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dragoon*


Yeah, I was thinking about that, in my point of view, sigma is releasing that one to get head to head with the EF-S 10-20, but if the price tag is the same as the Canons AND if the corner softness is somewhat reduced, I'd say it's a big deal, from what I know only L series from Canon have fixed aperture right? I can see them releasing an *ultra* wide L after this.


There are already ultra-wide L zooms and primes: the 17-40mm L, 16-35mm L, the 14mm fisheye, 20mm L and 35mm L. so I doubt they'll release anything else since those two lenses are tops in their class. But yeah, considering that Tokina already has an ultra-wide zoom with a constant aperture and the upcoming Sigma, it would make sense for Canon to release another UWA EF-S lens with a constant aperture. However, if they did that, then it would have to be over $700 considering that the current 10-22mm EF-S retails for nearly $700. And yes, only L zooms have constant apertures, which are very expensive to manufacture and design, hence the high price of L lenses.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dragoon*


Wow... 15MP and full HD video. If that rumor is real, it'll be one hell of a camera, $1000 range?


I don't think it will go that high. The Rebel series afterall is their entry-level DSLR so I imagine it will be under $800 for a kit.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MADMAX22*


Whats the 500D gonna be name wise, its rebel series right so is this the new version of the xti/xsi cameras? I


I don't know, the rumors are presumably coming from Canon corporate in Japan (there are already Japanese sites talking about the 500D), so at this point it's probably just a conjectured name, but who knows what it will be. In the past it was XT/XTi and then XS/XSi, so if they keep the same scheme there will need to be a new letter after the X. XE? XX?


----------



## Cpt.Hawkins

Hi, Just wandering if any Nikon shooters here have any experience with the nikkor 200mm f/2 VR? reviews on the internet are pretty sparse and im looking to pick one up, just interested to know if anybody had any first hand information about it?! Thanks


----------



## Dragoon

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
There are already ultra-wide L zooms and primes: the 17-40mm L, 16-35mm L, the 14mm fisheye, 20mm L and 35mm L. so I doubt they'll release anything else since those two lenses are tops in their class. But yeah, considering that Tokina already has an ultra-wide zoom with a constant aperture and the upcoming Sigma, it would make sense for Canon to release another UWA EF-S lens with a constant aperture. However, if they did that, then it would have to be over $700 considering that the current 10-22mm EF-S retails for nearly $700. And yes, only L zooms have constant apertures, which are very expensive to manufacture and design, hence the high price of L lenses.

Hmm, that makes sense, but I was wondering about something around 10mm focal length, or that is quite unachievable to fill out a full frame? The EF 17-40 L is basically the same as the EF-S 10-22 since in a crop it'll turn out to be 16-35.2mm so theorically they have roughly the same angle of view.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
I don't think it will go that high. The Rebel series afterall is their entry-level DSLR so I imagine it will be under $800 for a kit.

Then if they'll release that one under $800 I'd imagine the 450D and 1000D will get a price cut.. $600 for the 450D... and around $500 for 1000D (I'm assuming those prices using a 1:1 €/$ ratio)... 750~800 for the "500D", it seems quite superior than the 450D.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
I don't know, the rumors are presumably coming from Canon corporate in Japan (there are already Japanese sites talking about the 500D), so at this point it's probably just a conjectured name, but who knows what it will be. In the past it was XT/XTi and then XS/XSi, so if they keep the same scheme there will need to be a new letter after the X. XE? XX?









Maybe XR/XRi following their backwards alphabet trend. Who knows


----------



## catmmm

a dslr that records hd video?
that just seems kinda weird to me haha

but damn, makes me wish i would've waited on getting my xsi


----------



## Mootsfox

I bet you it's going to be XTR, XTX, or XTS.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *catmmm*


a dslr that records hd video?
that just seems kinda weird to me haha

but damn, makes me wish i would've waited on getting my xsi










The Nikon D90 shoots 720p and the Canon 5D Mark II shoots 1080p, the only two on the market I know of. There is almost $2000 in difference between those though.


----------



## catmmm

yeah but i just can't imagine using a dslr camera to record video lol
call me weird
but i'd rather use a camcorder for that.


----------



## xlastshotx

500D hmm, makes me wonder what the difference between the 500D and the 50D will be, magnesium body and weather seals? And wouldn't that make the 40D pointless, you can get a 40D for about $900, so if the 500D went for $800 or so with a lens then?


----------



## Squeeker The Cat

so i got a new watch today.YAY!! anyway im trying to take a closeup of it. and it WILL NOT FUCUS FOR THE LIFE OF ME!! i try getting up close. fuzzy.......i try stepping back and zooming....fuzzy. what the hell am i doing wrong? here is the best one i could get......oh and if it helps im using my canon S5 IS


----------



## Marin

Since that's a P&S there should be a macro feature on your camera. Look for the flower icon.


----------



## Squeeker The Cat

i did that was shot at 800 on the SCN setting under indoor..........800 was the lowest.and im not real sure how to play with the macro or what it ever does yet lol. anyway if i went up in macro....the image was white like. if i shot it in AUTO......the macro was like 360 or something? then the pic was worse focus!!


----------



## Marin

Macro is what you use for close up pics. And I don't get what settings you're changing. Do you mean 800 ISO?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Squeeker The Cat* 
i did that was shot at 800 on the SCN setting under indoor..........800 was the lowest.and im not real sure how to play with the macro or what it ever does yet lol. anyway if i went up in macro....the image was white like. if i shot it in AUTO......the macro was like 360 or something? then the pic was worse focus!!

After you have set the camera to macro mode, you will need to move rather close to the subject (obviously), then you need to zoom in a bit until the flower icon changes from white to blue (IIRC from how Canon macros work). Once you're in the "sweet spot," that is the right distance and focal length, the macros will focus correctly.


----------



## Squeeker The Cat

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Macro is what you use for close up pics. And I don't get what settings you're changing. Do you mean 800 ISO?

yes sorry 800 ISO........i cant figure out how to find the macro mode...i have the little flower button, but when i push it it dont do anything. is there a MODE i need to turn the dial to? ugh sorry. amateur here lol..

here is the setting area.. the flower button is below the MF button you can see on the left side of the lens area


----------



## Mootsfox

Read pg. 16 of this:
http://gdlp01.c-wss.com/gds/09000098...S_CUGba_EN.pdf


----------



## Marin

800 is way too high for a P&S, keep it as low as possible


----------



## xlastshotx

I dont see a flower icon on that camera


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *xlastshotx* 
I dont see a flower icon on that camera

It's on the lens barrel on the left side. Perfectly logical and obvious


----------



## xlastshotx

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
It's on the lens barrel on the left side. Perfectly logical and obvious









oh lol, that makes sense







..

Good luck with your watch picture Squeeker


----------



## Squeeker The Cat

Quote:


Originally Posted by *xlastshotx* 
I dont see a flower icon on that camera

as your looking at that photo of it...its on the left of the lens houseing below the MF button ....

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
800 is way too high for a P&S, keep it as low as possible









how do i make it lower. usually when in auto mode its always at that. i dont know how to lower it

also i figured out...that when in P mode........i hold the flower button then it goes into super macro mode. i took a shot and this is it










good god do i suck or what? lol


----------



## Mootsfox

Up the shutter speed, turn on IS if you can or get a tripod.


----------



## xlastshotx

^ thats a better quality picture, but it looks like you need to stabilize that camera. Or take the picture somewhere brighter so that the shutter speed wont be so long.


----------



## Squeeker The Cat

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Up the shutter speed, turn on IS if you can or get a tripod.

how do i up the shutter speed? whats is? ill try again with some sunlight

ok same distance, with blinds open, on yellow backdrop


----------



## Dragoon

Finally! It just arrived!



















What a difference in weight! The 18-55 is like half of the 60mm. But so is the quality...

It's lens cap.









And my latest purchase.









I'm impressed with the image quality, the sharpness is no short of outstanding, but can be a pain to shoot in low light due to the lack of IS though, but I can't ask for everything.









Now... onto thinking about my next one... thinking seriously if I should wait or not for the 10-20 f/3.5 to be released, Sigma bumped up prices like mad the past week. I've seen in some places that prices were increased around 30%


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dragoon*


Finally! It just arrived!



















What a difference in weight! The 18-55 is like half of the 60mm. But so is the quality...

It's lens cap.









And my latest purchase.









I'm impressed with the image quality, the sharpness is no short of outstanding, but can be a pain to shoot in low light due to the lack of IS though, but I can't ask for everything.









Now... onto thinking about my next one... thinking seriously if I should wait or not for the 10-20 f/3.5 to be released, Sigma bumped up prices like mad the past week. I've seen in some places that prices were increased around 30%



















Nice! You'll love that lens. It's so sharp that sometimes I have to actually _decrease_ the sharpness post-process, and I'm a sharpness nut.







And if they put IS in that lens, it would be much more expensive.

It's a tough call on the next lens. I would wait for the Sigma and see how it does, or at least wait until they reveal the retail price. It could end up being over $700. If it's too much and/or doesn't live up to expectations, then you can consider the Canon 10-22mm. Also don't overlook the Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 AT-X 116 PRO DX, it's often touted as the equal of the Canon 10-22mm and it has a constant f/2.8 aperture. I seriously considered it, but couldn't find a good deal on one (paid $575 for my 10-22mm







)


----------



## xlastshotx

I get to see Lewis Kemper today! He is a Professional Wildlife and Nature photographer. My college and Canon are sponsoring him to come and present his work and techniques. I'm so exited









LewisKemper.com


----------



## Dragoon

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Nice! You'll love that lens. It's so sharp that sometimes I have to actually _decrease_ the sharpness post-process, and I'm a sharpness nut.







And if they put IS in that lens, it would be much more expensive.

It's a tough call on the next lens. I would wait for the Sigma and see how it does, or at least wait until they reveal the retail price. It could end up being over $700. If it's too much and/or doesn't live up to expectations, then you can consider the Canon 10-22mm. Also don't overlook the Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 AT-X 116 PRO DX, it's often touted as the equal of the Canon 10-22mm and it has a constant f/2.8 aperture. I seriously considered it, but couldn't find a good deal on one (paid $575 for my 10-22mm







)

I'm already loving this lens. It's simply awesome!

Yeah... about the sigma, it's really odd about the ridiculous price boost. I've been searching around and there's still no release date announced nor price. But I'd really want to avoid dumping €600 on a lens, and when the f/3.5 is released I'm pretty sure the current model will drop the price, plus, if it's quality is significantly better than the f/4-5.6 and the price is around €500 I will make the effort and pull the *big* 'ol trigger on that one. If not, I'll be happy with the older model







, I know what it is capable of and that corner softness doesn't really bother me that much, which imho, it's not THAT soft.

The Tokina looks awesome!... and really out of my league, on ebay they go for over $680 and all from HK or USA, customs would jack up the prices to anything over $1000







On retail stores it goes around $750...

But I'll keep an eye out, in the meantime while wating for news, the 30mm f/1.4 is next on my list.

EDIT: Oh yeah, you can add the lens to my list on the first post.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

I was driving around countryside and saw a dilapidated old stone barn from the road. I had to get up close to it, which meant I had to trespass to get these shots, well worth it though:

1.









2.









3.









4.









5.









6.


----------



## Mootsfox

Nice. I like the one with the F150.

I just bought myself this thing:









http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16832347010

I don't think I'm using it right, or something. I get this blue hue to it once it's "done". I did learn that OCN does not have a white background though... so that's interesting.


----------



## Dragoon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


I was driving around countryside and saw a dilapidated old stone barn from the road. I had to get up close to it, which meant I had to trespass to get these shots, well worth it though:

1.









2.









3.









4.









5.









6.










Nice shots! Taken with the 10-22?

One thing though, is it me, or the 2nd one is missing some color detail? (HDR? I can't tell...)


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Dragoon* 
Nice shots! Taken with the 10-22?

One thing though, is it me, or the 2nd one is missing some color detail? (HDR? I can't tell...)

Maybe, I fiddled with that one a bit. The others are more or less out of the camera. For the second one I decreased the exposure then used the fill light tool to lighten the foreground elements, making for a half-assed HDR









Yes, these are with the 10-22mm. I got a ProMaster slim CPL today for it.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Nice. I like the one with the F150.

I just bought myself this thing:









http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16832347010

I don't think I'm using it right, or something. I get this blue hue to it once it's "done". I did learn that OCN does not have a white background though... so that's interesting.

LOL, you know your pickups. That truck kind of startled me at first because I thought people were there. It looked like it had been there for a while though, and it had Grateful Dead and Ron Jon stickers on it.

So what does that device do exactly? Calibrate your monitor for "true" colors?


----------



## spice003

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Squeeker The Cat* 
how do i up the shutter speed? whats is? ill try again with some sunlight

ok same distance, with blinds open, on yellow backdrop










i dont think you set it to macro.

these were take with powershot SD1000 with no IS


----------



## Squeeker The Cat

Quote:



Originally Posted by *spice003*


i dont think you set it to macro.


no it was on super macro. even the screen said macro on it as i shot


----------



## Oscuro

Yes, with the S5 IS, press the Macro button once for regular macro, which allows a bit of zoom if you need it. Press and hold for Super Macro which will let the camera focus I think from 0-2" or something.
If you have any other questions about the S5, I can probably help ya out. Still have mine, and I know most of it. I can guide you through ISO adjustment, etc.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


I was driving around countryside and saw a dilapidated old stone barn from the road. I had to get up close to it, which meant I had to trespass to get these shots, well worth it though:


Very nice pics. They Convey a very "isolated" feel. One that I have to drive quite a ways to enjoy living near a big city.

This is simply personal observation, but all of your pics seem just a tad under exposed. I've fount that adding 0.3 - 0.7 ev to my exposure (about 1/2 stop) corrects for this nicely when using a CP and I use CP's alot in sunny situations to remove not only specular components from water surfaces but diffuse reflectance components as well such as those off of plant leaves or blades of grass.

I do alot of nature photography, right now we're anticipating the spring warbler migration to come through Illinois soon.

Here's a picture of a meadow lark unhappy with my presence:










D300, Nikon 80-400 VR @400mm, 1/320 sec @F/8 +1.0 EV, camera chose iso 250, no CP used here.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


Very nice pics. They Convey a very "isolated" feel. One that I have to drive quite a ways to enjoy living near a big city.

This is simply personal observation, but all of your pics seem just a tad under exposed. I've fount that adding 0.3 - 0.7 ev to my exposure (about 1/2 stop) corrects for this nicely when using a CP and I use CP's alot in sunny situations to remove not only specular components from water surfaces but diffuse reflectance components as well such as those off of plant leaves or blades of grass.

I do alot of nature photography, right now we're anticipating the spring warbler migration to come through Illinois soon.

Here's a picture of a meadow lark unhappy with my presence:

D300, Nikon 80-400 VR @400mm, 1/320 sec @F/8 +1.0 EV, camera chose iso 250, no CP used here.


Thanks, I do actually tend to underexpose, with or without a CP, usually by as little as -.25 EV and ad much as -.5. It's just a habit that I have, because I hate overexposed shots, especially blown highlights, which are often irrecoverable.


----------



## xlastshotx

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Thanks, I do actually tend to underexpose, with or without a CP, usually by as little as -.25 EV and ad much as -.5. It's just a habit that I have, because I hate overexposed shots, especially blown highlights, which are often irrecoverable.


Why not enable Highlight Tone Priority then? It really reduces the chance of blown highlights, I actually find myself leaving it on 60% of the time (the only time it isn't as useful is when there are no highlights at all).

The setting is under

Menu > C.Fn II :Image > 3 Highlight tone priority (at least on the 50D).

Info Info2


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *xlastshotx*


Why not enable Highlight Tone Priority then? It really reduces the chance of blown highlights, I actually find myself leaving it on 60% of the time (the only time it isn't as useful is when there are no highlights at all).

The setting is under

Menu > C.Fn II :Image > 3 Highlight tone priority (at least on the 50D).

Info Info2


Thanks, I've been meaning to try it actually, I just forget to set it.


----------



## Dragoon

E8400 are simply great CPUs, and even better when they're free. This one was a gift








Of course I couldn't skip taking a nice photo







Taking slower shutter speed shots with this one is quite hard.










This one is most likely going to my possible folding/HTPC rig.

Please comment on the photo, tell me if something can be improved or changed.


----------



## Squeeker The Cat

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Oscuro*


Yes, with the S5 IS, press the Macro button once for regular macro, which allows a bit of zoom if you need it. Press and hold for Super Macro which will let the camera focus I think from 0-2" or something.
If you have any other questions about the S5, I can probably help ya out. Still have mine, and I know most of it. I can guide you through ISO adjustment, etc.


thank you!! i might need you!!


----------



## Marin

So this is what the peeling paint looks like on Sigma lenses... at least my lens is metal...

http://www.flickr.com/photos/sharpshutter/2217795024


----------



## bentleya

Did you buy it new marin? because i was looking in buying that lens for a walk around







and i don;t wait to if the paint is going to come off.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *bentleya*


Did you buy it new marin? because i was looking in buying that lens for a walk around







and i don;t wait to if the paint is going to come off.


The pic I linked isn't mine, but I did buy mine new.

This is mine:

http://www.overclock.net/5824823-post2600.html


----------



## xlastshotx

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


So this is what the peeling paint looks like on Sigma lenses... at least my lens is metal...

http://www.flickr.com/photos/sharpshutter/2217795024


Thats scary









I just put my Tokina 11-16 f/2.8 canon mount up for sale, for those of you looking for a ultra wide zoom lens. Link in my sig.

I am going to save up for the Canon 24-70mm f/2.8L USM (I wish it was f2 or lower though), the Tokia is really nice but I have found that I enjoy shooting in the 35-65 range the best.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
So this is what the peeling paint looks like on Sigma lenses... at least my lens is metal...

http://www.flickr.com/photos/sharpshutter/2217795024

That's lame that the paint comes off. The owner of that flickr says that he wants to get the new updated one, so maybe his is really old. Still, I would be pissed if the paint started peeling. I hope the warranty would cover that. How long does Sigma give for a warranty?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *xlastshotx*


Thats scary









I just put my Tokina 11-16 f/2.8 canon mount up for sale, for those of you looking for a ultra wide zoom lens. Link in my sig.

I am going to save up for the Canon 24-70mm f/2.8L USM (I wish it was f2 or lower though), the Tokia is really nice but I have found that I enjoy shooting in the 35-65 range the best.


Good luck with that, it's a very nice lens. That's the beauty of the L line, literally non of them are bad lenses. I see what you mean about a more useful range than the Tokina, but what about the 17-40mm L? It's a good compromise range wise between the two and it costs about the same as the Tokina.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dragoon*


E8400 are simply great CPUs, and even better when they're free. This one was a gift








Of course I couldn't skip taking a nice photo







Taking slower shutter speed shots with this one is quite hard.

This one is most likely going to my possible folding/HTPC rig.

Please comment on the photo, tell me if something can be improved or changed.











It looks fine. Yeah with the 60mm in anything but bright outdoor light you'll need a tripod when shooting macros. But it's much easier than the 100mm macro, which is even shakier. Since the DOF is so narrow with macro shots, I've always wanted to try focus stacking. Your shot looks like it would make a good candidate.


----------



## xlastshotx

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Good luck with that, it's a very nice lens. That's the beauty of the L line, literally non of them are bad lenses. I see what you mean about a more useful range than the Tokina, but what about the 17-40mm L? It's a good compromise range wise between the two and it costs about the same as the Tokina.


I like that 17-40 L f4, but I really want the extra full stop that the 24-70 L f2.8 gives me. I think if I did buy the 17-40L that I would end up selling it in the future and getting the 24-70L anyways







.

I would really prefer to have the 24mm f1.4L, 35mm f1.4L, 50mm f1.2L, and the 85 f1.2L, that would pretty much keep me set for awhile.... but sadly I don't have $4,500 bucks to spare


----------



## dr4gon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


That's lame that the paint comes off. The owner of that flickr says that he wants to get the new updated one, so maybe his is really old. Still, I would be pissed if the paint started peeling. I hope the warranty would cover that. How long does Sigma give for a warranty?


4 years I believe. But that's one reason (the quality control and build quality) I would put Sigma at the end of my list for any lens.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dr4gon* 
4 years I believe. But that's one reason (the quality control and build quality) I would put Sigma at the end of my list for any lens.

I'd be happy to pay a little extra for my lens if it meant better quality control and build quality (really is just the paint, at least they use metal).


----------



## Oscuro

Peeling paint?
Doesn't affect the function of the lens does it?

If not, then what does it matter? It adds "character" to the lens


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Oscuro*


Peeling paint?
Doesn't affect the function of the lens does it?

If not, then what does it matter? It adds "character" to the lens










Smart man


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Oscuro*


Peeling paint?
Doesn't affect the function of the lens does it?

If not, then what does it matter? It adds "character" to the lens










It affects the resale value of the lens.


----------



## Mootsfox

Just browsing through this thread:
http://www.overclock.net/computer-ca...ity-cases.html

I got bored and looked at the EXIF data for this picture:








http://www.lian-li.com/v2/en/microsite4/x2000.html

They are using a D80 and (my guess) the AF 50mm Nikkor.


----------



## Marin

*likes looking at EXIF data*

Well whoever took it, their name is Hank Chen.


----------



## equetefue

The 17-40L is a complete diferent lens to the 24-70L

I own the 17-40L and it's awesome. The 24-70L IMO is over rated, but don't get me wrong is a nice. The new Sigma 24-70 HSM... the new new version has been tested and is sharper and prone to lot less flare. The 28-70L is better in my opinion than the new 24-70L which I have played with quite a bit, but can't get myself to buy.

On a full frame camera the 17-40L would be glued to the body, and if portrait was the nature of the call, I would break out the Sigma 50mm f1.4 (which is a LOT better than the canon version), the canon 100 f2 or 135f2 depending on the needed FL.


----------



## Dragoon

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
It looks fine. Yeah with the 60mm in anything but bright outdoor light you'll need a tripod when shooting macros. But it's much easier than the 100mm macro, which is even shakier. Since the DOF is so narrow with macro shots, I've always wanted to try focus stacking. Your shot looks like it would make a good candidate.

I've just read on that focus stacking technique, it's very nice to have the whole photoed object in focus. I might try that sometime.

But yeah, I can barely take shots at anything longer than 1/30 of sec. I tried out during the day, and I am impressed with this lens, honestly I think I have to reduce the cameras sharpness level from 7 to 5 when shooting at bright areas as they seem to get too sharp lol


----------



## Marin

For you Nikon photographers:

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 35mm 1:1.8G DX review


----------



## Mootsfox

It's still not available for sale


----------



## Marin

But you can pre-order it









http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-35mm-AF-...7679745&sr=8-1


----------



## equetefue

sample of the Tamron 28-75 in a 30D with no PP besides web resize. Sold the lens some time ago, but for sure getting it again.

Wide Open f2.8









at f4


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Just bought one of these on a whim, the Gary Fong Puffer:










I must say, it actually works well for me.

Without Puffer:









With Puffer:


----------



## equetefue

yeah it does...it painted the couch too lol lol


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *equetefue* 
yeah it does...it painted the couch too lol lol

Yeah it's cool, it makes it look like the light that comes from my table lamp. A big improvement, no more blueish shots. This is about the best I'll be able to to do short of getting a real speed light and a Sto-Fen.


----------



## equetefue

adjust the WB so we can see the diference...

I see more balance lighting.. nice


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *equetefue* 
sample of the Tamron 28-75 in a 30D with no PP besides web resize. Sold the lens some time ago, but for sure getting it again.

Wow, it's not that expensive either.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *equetefue* 
adjust the WB so we can see the diference...

I see more balance lighting.. nice

Sorry, adjust the white balance how exactly?


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Sorry, adjust the white balance how exactly?

Use lightroom or some editing software.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Sorry, adjust the white balance how exactly?

Nevermind, I'm an idiot, I left the WB on auto. Here's both again @ 5200K:

Without Puffer:










With Puffer:










Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Use lightroom or some editing software.

Yeah, I know _how_ to adjust WB, just didn't realize what he was asking, delayed intelligence.


----------



## Oscuro

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


It affects the resale value of the lens.


That's something I've never really understood.
I don't buy things considering their resale value, I don't really get the point of it either. If I buy something, I don't have a plan to sell it later on. I don't even think of it like I will sell it later on.
Course, I suppose I'm weird in thinking like that, oh well.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Oscuro*


That's something I've never really understood.
I don't buy things considering their resale value, I don't really get the point of it either. If I buy something, I don't have a plan to sell it later on. I don't even think of it like I will sell it later on.
Course, I suppose I'm weird in thinking like that, oh well.


Yeah, definitely weird thinking. Lenses are actually good investments because many (esp. Canon L lenses) hold their value for years.


----------



## Marin

I love the buttery bokeh this macro lens produces.

1.


2. 


3.


4.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Wow, weird looking red plant. What is it?

And that moss looks kind of like some moss I shot some time ago (same lens):


----------



## Marin

It's a Japanese maple that's just starting to bloom (right next to be bedroom sliding door).


----------



## Mootsfox

Tis pretty.


----------



## spice003

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Wow, it's not that expensive either.

you guys talking about this one correct http://www.amazon.com/Tamron-28-75mm.../dp/B0000A1G05 even cheaper at b&h
wow, $399, maybe i should get this lens instead the f/1.4 50mm for now


----------



## riko99

Moots why is your fox updside down.... Or has it always been that way lol i was just reading all the new posts and it was kinda irritating me lol.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *riko99*


Moots why is your fox updside down.... Or has it always been that way lol i was just reading all the new posts and it was kinda irritating me lol.


Inside joke.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *riko99*


Moots why is your fox updside down.... Or has it always been that way lol i was just reading all the new posts and it was kinda irritating me lol.


Marin told me to barrel roll and I didn't make it all the way around.


----------



## riko99

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Marin told me to barrel roll and I didn't make it all the way around.


Ahhh i see lol +fake rep for the attempt though since you cant get any


----------



## Oscuro

Went out for a ride today, took some fun angles on the bike:



























Flare! Kinda like it in this one...










And generic:


----------



## Mootsfox

That is the most confused bike I've ever seen. Not that that is a bad thing...but whoa.

I like the muddy BB shot


----------



## Oscuro

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
That is the most confused bike I've ever seen. Not that that is a bad thing...but whoa.

I like the muddy BB shot


















The LHT is a touring bike, meant for long distance rides, etc.
The 52cm frame uses 26" wheels to keep frame geometry comfortable for short dudes like myself, and to keep heel/toe clearance alright with panniers.

Came stock with slicks, but slicks just don't work well on gravel, and useless mud. Since I'm such a nutter, I get bored of just roads, so I had those Kenda's ordered in.

Thanks for the comment on that shot, but it just bugs me that now, looking back at it...I should have gotten the whole BB in the shot. Experience and practise and I'll get it right sometime









Edit: Oh, and it'll be more confused when I get full fenders, and a front rack mounted some point this summer I hope


----------



## riko99

My bikes in pieces right now winter has yet to go away and i need to get some parts for my rear derailler sigh the bracket holding it has gotten quite weak lol.


----------



## nuclearjock

According to my wife, these are crocuses.

Nikon D3/200mm F/4 macro:


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


According to my wife, these are crocuses.

Nikon D3/200mm F/4 macro:


Hmm...only seeing placeholders Nuke.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Couple of macros I took today. The bud is about 5mm in diameter and the pine cone bud is about twice that:

1.









2.


----------



## dr4gon

Very nice GT!

I can't wait to see what the first looks like when it opens up!


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Hmm...only seeing placeholders Nuke.

Can you be more specific??

What do you mean by placeholders?


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
Can you be more specific??

What do you mean by placeholders?

The pics don't work.


----------



## coffeejunky

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
Can you be more specific??

What do you mean by placeholders?

photobucket says images moved or deleted for me too.


----------



## nuclearjock

Yep, totally dorked out.

Should be ok now....


----------



## Marin

I like the second one, hard to judge them though since Photobucket seems to compress them.

Anyways, I posted these on XS so I might as well post them here.


----------



## dr4gon

That last one is nice! Shows off the lens nicely!


----------



## stanrc

A few I took this weekend


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dr4gon*


Very nice GT!

I can't wait to see what the first looks like when it opens up!


Yeah I went out today to see if anything was in bloom, but there were only buds.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *stanrc*


A few I took this weekend


I like the first one, nice texture.


----------



## Marin

It took 70 pics to get this pic of my eye right.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Nice shot! I like the detail in the iris. Maybe try the remote capture software with a laptop next time, that way there's no guessing when framing self-portraits.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Nice shot! I like the detail in the iris. Maybe try the remote capture software with a laptop next time, that way there's no guessing when framing self-portraits.


I probably would have done that but my laptop isn't working at the moment.

EDIT: Also, what's some good lens cleaning fluid for cleaning smudges?


----------



## dr4gon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


I probably would have done that but my laptop isn't working at the moment.

EDIT: Also, what's some good lens cleaning fluid for cleaning smudges?


Are you sure it's on the lens not the sensor?

I really wouldn't put any liquids other than maybe distilled water on a microfiber cloth to gently (!) wipe the lens. It really takes a lot of junk on a lens to bring down IQ though.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


I probably would have done that but my laptop isn't working at the moment.

EDIT: Also, what's some good lens cleaning fluid for cleaning smudges?


I haven't tried fluids. I just a lens cleaning pen. Nikon makes a great one and so does Promaster.


----------



## dr4gon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


I haven't tried fluids. I just a lens cleaning pen. Nikon makes a great one and so does Promaster.


Yeah, I've got the Nikon lens pen. I'd be really hesitant about anything liquid.


----------



## Mootsfox

I use 99.953% Isopropyl Alcohol from MG Chemicals. I've heard ethyl alcohol (ethanol) is better, but I haven't gotten around to buying any of that. It is harmful to breathe in as well, so I'm less willing to have it in my room. If Everclear was legal in Ohio, I'd probably use that stuff and store it downstairs.

Breathing on the lens to fog it, then wiping it off with a microfiber cloth is a cheap and portable solution.


----------



## Dragoon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


I use 99.953% Isopropyl Alcohol from MG Chemicals. I've heard ethyl alcohol (ethanol) is better, but I haven't gotten around to buying any of that. It is harmful to breathe in as well, so I'm less willing to have it in my room. If Everclear was legal in Ohio, I'd probably use that stuff and store it downstairs.

*Breathing on the lens to fog it, then wiping it off with a microfiber cloth is a cheap and portable solution.*


Second that. Did that to one of my lens that I accidentially placed a fingerprint, "fogged" it and wiped with microfiber cloth, it got perfect.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


I use 99.953% Isopropyl Alcohol from MG Chemicals. I've heard ethyl alcohol (ethanol) is better, but I haven't gotten around to buying any of that. It is harmful to breathe in as well, so I'm less willing to have it in my room. If Everclear was legal in Ohio, I'd probably use that stuff and store it downstairs.

*Breathing on the lens to fog it, then wiping it off with a microfiber cloth is a cheap and portable solution.*


Same here, it takes care of most of the smudges. However I just bought a Promaster 77mm wide circular polarizer and I fogged it with my breath, and these streaks suddenly appeared on the glass, which look like water droplets running down a window. I can't get them off even with the lens pen and I'm starting to wonder if the coating ran when it was applied in the factory. It doesn't show up in my shots at all, so I guess it isn't a problem, but I may take it back anyway.


----------



## xlastshotx

Yeah I couldn't recommend any type of fluid for cleaning either. A microfiber cloth will get off just about everything.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *xlastshotx*


Yeah I couldn't recommend any type of fluid for cleaning either. A microfiber cloth will get off just about everything.


As long as you aren't cleaning them every single day with something harsh you should be fine. If you get 10-15 years out of a lens before the coating needs to be replaced, I'd say you're in good shape.


----------



## lhowatt

yeah count me in i have a nikon D40 with kit lens and a 55-200mm Nikkor DX VR AF-S lens


----------



## nuclearjock

The F6 is used mostly for landscapes and nature. Film still wins.










My "bug" lens and D300 for 1.5x or when I need two bodies.


----------



## Marin




----------



## GoneTomorrow

Saw this thread at POTN:
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...d.php?t=664289

A paper-free way to test for focus problems.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Saw this thread at POTN:
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...d.php?t=664289

A paper-free way to test for focus problems.


Mine focused on it perfectly!









And some pics I took today after taking a tour of a College. I couldn't really judge the school since there wasn't any student work up.

1.


2.


3.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Saw this thread at POTN:
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...d.php?t=664289

A paper-free way to test for focus problems.


Real handy...

I've been "eyeballing" this for some time.

+1 rep.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


The F6 is used mostly for landscapes and nature. Film still wins.










My "bug" lens and D300 for 1.5x or when I need two bodies.




















you own all 3 of those bodies??


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Which college did you visit Marin?


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie* 








you own all 3 of those bodies??

My wife's real pleased.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Which college did you visit Marin?


http://www.cca.edu/

No work was up and I didn't like the atmosphere at all.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
http://www.cca.edu/

No work was up and I didn't like the atmosphere at all.

Are you planning on going to art school?


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Are you planning on going to art school?

So far, yeah.


----------



## Arrowslinger

I just have a little cruddy Fujifilm A310


----------



## default501x

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


So far, yeah.


i have a few friends at Cornish and they love it.
you should check it out.
http://www.cornish.edu/

also, second pic is really cool. I like the sharpness of the texture of the pole.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *default501x*


i have a few friends at Cornish and they love it.
you should check it out.
http://www.cornish.edu/

also, second pic is really cool. I like the sharpness of the texture of the pole.


I'll check it out. I've already looked at this college where my dad went: http://www.artcenter.edu/

If I could get accepted I would be amazed.









I'm going to check out a few colleges over spring break, ones I can remember off the top of my head are:

http://www.sfai.edu/

http://www.brooks.edu/


----------



## default501x

SFAI is a GREAT school, i think its pretty hard to get into, but that may just be because im out of state.
all the colleges i applied to are in cali


----------



## Marin

Good thing for me at least, since most are are Cali.


----------



## default501x

just bought one of these guys to play around with, i have heard they are tons of fun if you like experimenting with fisheye, and for $40 it seems like a good option.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...m=250327953848

slap it on your 10-22 and you have a fisheye zoom marin


----------



## spice003

post some samples! good deal for $44


----------



## spice003

Canon EOS Digital Rebel T1i now official

http://www.overclock.net/hardware-ne...ml#post5870049


----------



## Mootsfox

Where is my D90s! ????


----------



## Marin

Maybe I can do a small body upgrade to this...

I really like the smaller size of the Rebel body's. But this also could push down the prices of the 40D and 50D... choices... choices...


----------



## laboitenoire

Hey Marin, don't forget about the East! Rhode Island School of Design (RISD) is always well regarded, but is freaking hard to get in to. I have a friend who did get accepted, but they didn't give her a very good offer :/


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *default501x*


just bought one of these guys to play around with, i have heard they are tons of fun if you like experimenting with fisheye, and for $40 it seems like a good option.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...m=250327953848

slap it on your 10-22 and you have a fisheye zoom marin










I have my doubts about this piece of gear's effectiveness (compared to an actual fisheye lens from a reputable manufacturer), but I guess it could be fun to play around with.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Maybe I can do a small body upgrade to this...

I really like the smaller size of the Rebel body's. But this also could push down the prices of the 40D and 50D... choices... choices...


Marin, if you got a 40D or 50D, you would say "What Rebel?" It's really an easier camera to use if you ask me. Larger yes, but feels better in the hands and has MUCH better controls and button layout. It also balances heavier lenses better, making for easier hand-held shots. I also love the little info LCD on the top of the body as opposed to using the battery-sucking main LCD to see shot settings, which on the Rebel line is always on (pain when shooting in the dark).

You ought to rent a 40D or 50D for a day and you'll see what I mean.

I bet the T1i will drive the 50D to right around $1000 body only and the 40D will be in the $700 range new.


----------



## Marin

Canon EOS 500D (Digital Rebel T1i / Kiss X3 Digital) Preview


----------



## Mootsfox

When is it coming out?


----------



## dr4gon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


When is it coming out?


Good question! It's certain to drive down prices.


----------



## xlastshotx

Wait a minute, so what is the difference between the 50D and the T1i? (edit, I found out below)

*50D*
Weather Resistant Magnesium body
slightly larger 
More White Balance options
Shutter 1/8,000 Max
6.3fps
Compact Flash Memory
Shoots In RAW, SRAW1, SRAW2, & JPG
Viewfinder 95% coverage, 0.95x magnification
Top LCD

*T1i*
Video Recording
Shutter 1/4,000 Max
3.5fps
Secure Digital Memory
Shoots in RAW & JPG
Viewfinder 95% coverage, 0.87x magnification

Thats all the difference between the two that I can find. The Shutter speed 1/8000 vs. 1/4000 would make the biggest difference to me, followed by White Balance options, and the shooting speed.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *xlastshotx*


Wait a minute, so what is the difference between the 50D and the T1i?

*50D*
Weather Resistant Magnesium body, 
slightly larger 
More White Balance options
Shutter 1/8,000 Max
6.3fps
Compact Flash Memory
Shoots In RAW, SRAW1, SRAW2, & JPG
Viewfinder 95% coverage, 0.95x magnification

*T1i*
Video Recording
Shutter 1/4,000 Max
3.5fps
Secure Digital Memory
Shoots in RAW & JPG
Viewfinder 95% coverage, 0.87x magnification


Good question, we'll have to wait for full reviews to be written when it comes out, but it looks like the 50D has a faster burst rate, different button layout, the info LCD on the top, different ergonomics, and I know that the 50D has the gapless microlenses, which the T1i may or may not have.


----------



## Marin

All that's really left is to see is how the T1i fairs at higher ISO's.


----------



## spice003

Canon EOS Rebel T1i EOS 500D Hands-on Preview


----------



## Kris88

Wow do they make a new rebel every week?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Kris88*


Wow do they make a new rebel every week?










Same reason they make new video cards, CPUs and motherboards every week: that new "wow" factor which appeals to spec hounds. Notice that the FF bodies don't release new models as quickly.


----------



## sti_boy

Not sure how I missed this group.

My gear (currently):
- Canon 5D MkII
- 50mm f1.4
- 100mm f2.8 macro
- 135mm f2L
- 70-200mm f2.8L IS

Yes, I'm missing the wide end. Used to have a 16-35 f2.8L and also 17-55 EF-S (when I had 20D), but planning to replace with 24mm f1.4L prime.

I'll be sure to post up a few photos on the site.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sti_boy*


Not sure how I missed this group.

My gear (currently):
- Canon 5D MkII
- 50mm f1.4
- 100mm f2.8 macro
- 135mm f2L
- 70-200mm f2.8L IS

Yes, I'm missing the wide end. Used to have a 16-35 f2.8L and also 17-55 EF-S (when I had 20D), but planning to replace with 24mm f1.4L prime.

I'll be sure to post up a few photos on the site.


Added, seriously nice gear. God I want the 70-200mm f/2.8L so bad.


----------



## xlastshotx

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Added, seriously nice gear. God I want the 70-200mm f/2.8L so bad.


Me to, If I had a 24-70mm f/2.8L and that, I would be pretty much set for anything. (and if I really wanted a complete collection throw in the 180 f/3.5L Macro and a Tokina 11-16 f2.8)


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *xlastshotx*


Me to, If I had a 24-70mm f/2.8L and that, I would be pretty much set for anything. (and if I really wanted a complete collection throw in the 180 f/3.5L Macro and a Tokina 11-16 f2.8)


Hey wait - you still have the Tokina! Don't sell it!!


----------



## xlastshotx

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Hey wait - you still have the Tokina! Don't sell it!!


haha I would love to keep it, but I really need a lens in the 24-70 range. I have to sell that to be able to afford a different lens. Maybe I will re-buy the Tokina later on. Rite now I am pretty much set on getting the 24-70 f/2.8 L


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *xlastshotx*


haha I would love to keep it, *but I really need a lens in the 24-70 range*. I have to sell that to be able to afford a different lens. Maybe I will re-buy the Tokina later on. Rite now I am pretty much set on getting the 24-70 f/2.8 L


My kit lens? =p


----------



## xlastshotx

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


My kit lens? =p


haha, wouldn't that be nice


----------



## dr4gon

While you're updating GT, here's my up to date camera gear:

Sony α300
Sony HVL-F58AM Bounce-Shift Flash
Tamron SP 17-50mm F/2.8 XR Di II LD Aspherical (IF)
Tamron SP 70-200mm F/2.8 Di
Sony 100mm F/2.8 Macro SAL-100M28
Sony 50mm F/1.4 SAL-50F14
Manfrotto 190XPROB + 488RC2
Kata DR-567 
LowePro Slingshot 200 AW

Thanks!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dr4gon*


While you're updating GT, here's my up to date camera gear:

Sony α300
Sony HVL-F58AM Bounce-Shift Flash
Tamron SP 17-50mm F/2.8 XR Di II LD Aspherical (IF)
Tamron SP 70-200mm F/2.8 Di
Sony 100mm F/2.8 Macro SAL-100M28
Sony 50mm F/1.4 SAL-50F14
Manfrotto 190XPROB + 488RC2
Kata DR-567 
LowePro Slingshot 200 AW

Thanks!


Done, nice setup.


----------



## dr4gon

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Done, nice setup.

Thank you for the update sir!


----------



## sti_boy

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Added, seriously nice gear. God I want the 70-200mm f/2.8L so bad.


The 70-200 f2.8 IS is a remarkable lens, especially for portraits and anything you want to crop in on, _but_ it is quite big and heavy and in some cases I have simply left the lens at home (especially on longer vacations). For some reason I wont get rid of it though


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sti_boy*


The 70-200 f2.8 IS is a remarkable lens, especially for portraits and anything you want to crop in on, _but_ it is quite big and heavy and in some cases I have simply left the lens at home (especially on longer vacations). For some reason I wont get rid of it though 


I would be honored to relieve you of your burden.


----------



## ace8uk

I don't know why I haven't joined this club yet, heres my gear:

Nikon D70
Nikon D300

Nikon 50mm f1.4
Nikon 85mm f1.8
Nikon 18-70mm f3.5-4.5
Nikon 70-200mm f2.8
Nikon 17-55mm f2.8
Nikon 70-300mm f4-f5.6

Manfrotto Tripod 055xproB and head 804 RC2 2way
Nikon Speedlight Flash SB800


----------



## Oscuro

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ace8uk*


I don't know why I haven't joined this club yet, heres my gear:

Nikon D70
Nikon D300

Nikon 50mm f1.4
Nikon 85mm f1.8
Nikon 18-70mm f3.5-4.5
Nikon 70-200mm f2.8
Nikon 17-55mm f2.8
Nikon 70-300mm f4-f5.6

Manfrotto Tripod 055xproB and head 804 RC2 2way
Nikon Speedlight Flash SB800


I officially envy you! And want to know; what sort of shooting do you primarily do? And have you used an 80-200/2.8 in the past?

I am looking at getting (in the future, at some point), either the 80-200/2.8D or even the older AF lens for my D70, due to the savings over the 70-200mm. But I am looking at primarily using it for Motorsports photography, where the VR would be a bloody nice addition.


----------



## ace8uk

I'm really not the person to give advice on this stuff really, I'm only a beginner photographer really but I was lucky enough to have a lot of this stuff handed down to me.


----------



## Oscuro

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ace8uk*


I'm really not the person to give advice on this stuff really, I'm only a beginner photographer really but I was lucky enough to have a lot of this stuff handed down to me.


You got that all handed down to you?








Cripes you're lucky as all hell!


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ace8uk*


I'm really not the person to give advice on this stuff really, I'm only a beginner photographer really but I was lucky enough to have a lot of this stuff handed down to me.


I also have the 70-200 f/2.8 and its a really an awesome lens. AF is fast and silent, and the optics are tack sharp.

The recent price increase has pushed it into the stratosphere though. I'm lucky I purchased mine a few months prior.

Nice collection you have, have fun.


----------



## bentleya

First shoot from my new toy







, Cannon 450D


----------



## Squeeker The Cat

ok i have just seen something wicked!!!!!!!!! has anyone else seen this beast?

Canon 5D Mark II

21mega pixel.
hd video shoot.
holy hell!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

i tried to link it but it wont sho up the link thingy on this site must be down lol check it out!!


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Squeeker The Cat* 
ok i have just seen something wicked!!!!!!!!! has anyone else seen this beast?

Canon 5D Mark II

21mega pixel.
hd video shoot.
holy hell!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

i tried to link it but it wont sho up the link thingy on this site must be down lol check it out!!

It's been out for awhile now.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Squeeker The Cat* 
ok i have just seen something wicked!!!!!!!!! has anyone else seen this beast?

Canon 5D Mark II

21mega pixel.
hd video shoot.
holy hell!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

i tried to link it but it wont sho up the link thingy on this site must be down lol check it out!!

Yeah, it's all that, but been out for a while, plus it has a slower burst rate than the competition. You should check out the 1Ds MkIII.


----------



## spice003

i know this is of topic, but i was wondering why canon switched from CF card to SD on the XSI, where the high end cameras still use CF cards?


----------



## dr4gon

Quote:


Originally Posted by *spice003* 
i know this is of topic, but i was wondering why canon switched from CF card to SD on the XSI, where the high end cameras still use CF cards?

Consumers tend to like the SD better (point and shooters anyway). I would much rather use CF because they are much faster, store more for less, and are only a tiny bit bigger.

I wish Canon had stuck with CF cards, but I don't even use Canon anyway. But similarly, I wouldn't want Sony to use memory sticks either.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dr4gon* 
Consumers tend to like the SD better (point and shooters anyway). I would much rather use CF because they are much faster, store more for less, and are only a tiny bit bigger.

I wish Canon had stuck with CF cards, but I don't even use Canon anyway. But similarly, I wouldn't want Sony to use memory sticks either.

For consumer and even prosumer DSLRs, CF cards aren't necessary. I got my Sandisk Extreme IV's (8GB) for $5 each, so I'm not about to dis SD


----------



## dr4gon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


For consumer and even prosumer DSLRs, CF cards aren't necessary. I got my Sandisk Extreme IV's (8GB) for $5 each, so I'm not about to dis SD










Those were extreme IIIs weren't they?

And actually some cameras do use the fast potential of the CF cards.


----------



## Mootsfox

Opps, yeah Extreme III. I get confused with Sandisk's Ultras and Extreme.

It's roughly equal to a 150x CF card, but a lot cheaper


----------



## Marin




----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *spice003* 
i know this is of topic, but i was wondering why canon switched from CF card to SD on the XSI, where the high end cameras still use CF cards?

How is that off topic?







They switched to SD cards for the entry level cameras in an attempt to bring over the point and shoot owners, the vast majority of whom use SD cards for their cameras. That way they wouldn't need to buy new memory cards.

There's no real effective difference in the two formats. CF cards on average have faster read/write speeds, but even high-end DSLRs can't use all that speed (one day maybe).

CF cards are used on all the professional and mid-range DSLRs because back in the late 90s when the first DSLRs were being produced, manufacturers had CF and SD to choose from, but chose CF cards because the cards actually had the read/write speeds they claimed, whereas SD cards were slower and inconsistent with their claimed speeds (at that time read/write speeds were much slower and actually mattered). So that's why CF has its niche and SD its own, but today both formats are equally capable.


----------



## bentleya

Just ben shopping on some bits for my stock EF-S 18-55mm And dam are lens hoods expensive







Â£20 for a little bit of plastic.


----------



## coffeejunky

Quote:


Originally Posted by *bentleya* 
Just ben shopping on some bits for my stock EF-S 18-55mm And dam are lens hoods expensive







Â£20 for a little bit of plastic.

Theres a few here for around $5 (Free worldwide shipping)-
http://www.dealextreme.com/search.dx/search.lens%20hood
They are cheap and will likely not be great quality, but hey, its only a bit of plastic as you say.


----------



## alexyov

i love to take pics of anything, i got a Nikon coolpix 3200, Nikon coolpix S10 VR, Samsung Instinct, Samsung SPH-A640 and a Samsun SPH-A740


----------



## coffeejunky

Gone, can you add me to the list, I thought I asked while ago, but maybe not.

Sony Scybershot DSC-W120

Only a P&S but it performs pretty well for macros and panoramas.


----------



## ace8uk

I ordered the Nikon 60mm f2.8 Micro lens earlier, I can't wait for it to arrive!


----------



## nuclearjock

Found this specimen building a web on my patio last summer.










D300,18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 G ED-IF AF-S VR DX Zoom-Nikkor 
Taken at full 200mm focal length. Onboard flash fill.


----------



## kaer

That spider's something else. Freaky.

Here's taken a bit earlier. Tuned the lighting a bit.


----------



## Marin

Bokeh time!

1.


2.


3.


4.


----------



## Mootsfox

Just saw this on Newegg, no idea how it performs but damn it sure is sexy.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...-352-_-Product


----------



## equetefue

Nice pics everyone


----------



## coffeejunky

Been out in the garden taking some snaps -


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Bokeh time!


Nice shots, I love the bokeh on the 60mm. I'm getting a set of Kenko extension tubes soon so I can try out some dewdrop refractions like this:

(This is definitely not my image, but the great Lord_V's!)


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *coffeejunky*


Been out in the garden taking some snaps -


They're not bad Coffee, but just a few pointers:

Number two has some motion blur, watch for slower shutter speeds shooting hand held.

Numbers one and three are decent, but could stand some more saturation and when shooting flower close-ups, you must shoot with a wider aperture or you'll have a distracting background.

Have a look at Wikipedia's article on aperture; scroll down at look at the two flower shots at f/5.6 and f/32:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aperture


----------



## coffeejunky

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


They're not bad Coffee, but just a few pointers:

Number two has some motion blur, watch for slower shutter speeds shooting hand held.

Numbers one and three are decent, but could stand some more saturation and when shooting flower close-ups, you must shoot with a wider aperture or you'll have a distracting background.

Have a look at Wikipedia's article on aperture; scroll down at look at the two flower shots at f/5.6 and f/32:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aperture


Yeah motion blur is an issue with me








As for the aperture, sadly as I am on a P&S that is the _only_ thing I have no control over. I did set it to only focus on the flower, so there is some blurring of the background, but not enough.

Thanks for the feedback. I certainly could do with some more learning.


----------



## kaer

I believe that Lord_V's using a 105mm Macro in combination of a 50mm inverted.

I have the Nikon equivalent of those lenses but just missing the tube joining them.

It's a real ***** to do it by hand.


----------



## bentleya

Everyone loves cars, taken today


----------



## muffin

I want a wide-angle lens :/


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *coffeejunky* 
Yeah motion blur is an issue with me








As for the aperture, sadly as I am on a P&S that is the _only_ thing I have no control over. I did set it to only focus on the flower, so there is some blurring of the background, but not enough.

Thanks for the feedback. I certainly could do with some more learning.

Too bad, I looked up your camera and there doesn't appear to even be a scene mode (portrait, macro, etc.) that might open the aperture up. Time for a better camera!









Quote:


Originally Posted by *kaer* 
I believe that Lord_V's using a 105mm Macro in combination of a 50mm inverted.

I have the Nikon equivalent of those lenses but just missing the tube joining them.

It's a real ***** to do it by hand.

I think he used to use that setup, but now he uses an Canon MP-E 65mm macro. I took some refractions today and actually had some decent ones turn out just with my 60mm macro alone, but some extension tubes would definitely help, and I need to learn how to do some focus stacks.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *kaer*


I believe that Lord_V's using a 105mm Macro in combination of a 50mm inverted.

I have the Nikon equivalent of those lenses but just missing the tube joining them.

It's a real ***** to do it by hand.


It's a $7 piece you can get on ebay, works great.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Here are my refraction attempts from today. I didn't have ideal equipment (really wish I had a 100mm macro with some tubes for this), but they look halfway decent - yes? No?

1.









2.









3.









4.


----------



## Mootsfox

How do you do them?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


How do you do them?


Well, macro lens, tripod and remote are useful. Then you setup your drop however you can manage it - eyedropper, sticks, etc. The key is that you have to get your drop as spherical as possible to get a clear image, otherwise it's distorted. I placed object behind it anywhere from a few centimeters to a few inches. I found that steeper angles looking downward were easiest. When you refract the images, they are flipped upside down. My working distance was about 2-5 inches, so some of these are heavily cropped, hence my desire for some tubes.

Here's Lord V's tutorial, but he uses a much higher magnification and does focus stacks, which is why his look awesome:
http://www.flickr.com/groups/macrovi...7594313729574/


----------



## Marin

My local camera store said that this was a good place to rent from:

http://www.lensprotogo.com/

Agree?


----------



## default501x

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
My local camera store said that this was a good place to rent from:

http://www.lensprotogo.com/

Agree?

looks to be legit, but i have always heard nothing but rave reviews about www.lensrentals.com


----------



## Marin

Probably going to rent this lens for use during Spring Break: http://www.lensrentals.com/rent/cano....5-l/for-canon

Seems like the best time to use it as I have no school worry about and I'll be visiting colleges, so tons of places to take photos.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Probably going to rent this lens for use during Spring Break: http://www.lensrentals.com/rent/cano....5-l/for-canon

Seems like the best time to use it as I have no school worry about and I'll be visiting colleges, so tons of places to take photos.


I've always wanted to try a T/S lens.


----------



## Danylu

Hi guys could someone suggest a cheapish upgrade for a D60 with a standard 18-55mm lense. I have seen the SB400 speedlight for $AUS 150, a monopod for $100, the cheapest lense is $300 for a 55mm-200mm and the last upgrade I can think of is a UV/Polariser filter. I am not exactly sure on how practical the filters (not to mention I am still trying to understand how they help) are although they are the cheapest option by far. I've just gotten an 8gb memory card and I'm unaware of any battery grips that can fit it.

I am open to criticism.


----------



## catmmm

went to the beach on saturday to play with my new lens for my xsi








it was cold, windy and drizzling the whole time but i like my new lens


----------



## bentleya

http://www.flickr.com/photos/bentleya/







.


----------



## laboitenoire

Just uploaded some new photos to the Flickr. Nothing too special.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *catmmm* 
went to the beach on saturday to play with my new lens for my xsi








it was cold, windy and drizzling the whole time but i like my new lens

Ah, the Canon EF 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 II USM? You didn't bother to say so I had go mining your EXIF to find out.


----------



## catmmm

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Ah, the Canon EF 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 II USM? You didn't bother to say so I had go mining your EXIF to find out.










lol
yup that's the one
picked it up on ebay for $185. came with 3 filters and a lens hood.
totally a nice investment.
i like it better than the kit lens.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
Hi guys could someone suggest a cheapish upgrade for a D60 with a standard 18-55mm lense. I have seen the SB400 speedlight for $AUS 150, a monopod for $100, the cheapest lense is $300 for a 55mm-200mm and the last upgrade I can think of is a UV/Polariser filter. I am not exactly sure on how practical the filters (not to mention I am still trying to understand how they help) are although they are the cheapest option by far. I've just gotten an 8gb memory card and I'm unaware of any battery grips that can fit it.

I am open to criticism.









It depends on what your immediate needs are. I would say that the 55-200mm VR is a good next purchase to fill out your zoom range. Barring that, a prime or macro would be good next lens purchases too (Nikon just released a new 35mm AF-S prime, pretty decent lens).

A speed light is something you really have to to want, otherwise it won't see much use. You have to ask what sort of photography you might get into and whether a speed light will benefit it. I'd like to have one myself, but I can't justify purchasing one, and the integrated flash has served me well enough.

A circular polarizing filter is an excellent filter to have. It's great for darkening bright skies and taking the reflection off water or glass. UV filters have their uses as well, but that's a big debate as to how effective and essential they are. I personally don't use them.

And battery grips are also something that you really have to have a need for. With two batteries I can go for an all day outing without running out. Grips are people who are doing some seriously extended outings and need as much battery power as possible. Plus it adds a vertical grip and extra shutter button and wheel.


----------



## Marin

So I was saying I would rent the tilt-shift lens but I can't stop looking at the Sigma 10mm f/2.8. It takes really sharp pics and the fisheye effect I've seen for it looks nice. Hmm...


----------



## Mootsfox

Marin I don't think you'd have much fun with a PC lens. The 10mm sounds better suited to what you shoot, and a lens that you might actually use after a rental.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Marin I don't think you'd have much fun with a PC lens. The 10mm sounds better suited to what you shoot, and a lens that you might actually use after a rental.

That's what I was thinking.

Hmmm...

Lens Rentals has these two lenses:

(shows some of the barrel) http://www.lensrentals.com/rent/sigm...heye/for-canon

(don't like the effect of this one) http://www.lensrentals.com/rent/sigm...heye/for-canon

But no 10mm.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
That's what I was thinking.

Hmmm...

Lens Rentals has these two lenses:

(shows some of the barrel) http://www.lensrentals.com/rent/sigm...heye/for-canon

(don't like the effect of this one) http://www.lensrentals.com/rent/sigm...heye/for-canon

But no 10mm.

No comment other than this:

Quote:

One point Iâ€™ll warn everyone about: the dark coating used on all of the 4.5 and 8mm Sigma fisheyes tends to flake off. It has absolutely no effect on image quality but its apparent cosmetically and has occurred on every copy we have.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


That's what I was thinking.

Hmmm...

Lens Rentals has these two lenses:

(shows some of the barrel) http://www.lensrentals.com/rent/sigm...heye/for-canon

(don't like the effect of this one) http://www.lensrentals.com/rent/sigm...heye/for-canon

But no 10mm.


Don't you have a local shop that rents out lenses? Might be easier than having one shipped and such.

My local place has an MP-E 65mm macro in their lens rental inventory, I might try it out this week.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


No comment other than this:


Yeah, that happens to all the Sigma EX lenses.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/sharpshutter/2217795024/

Probably will happen to my 30mm soon.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Don't you have a local shop that rents out lenses? Might be easier than having one shipped and such.

My local place has an MP-E 65mm macro in their lens rental inventory, I might try it out this week.


Sadly, they don't do lens rentals.

EDIT: They actually do









EDIT 2: Seems they have a large selection of lenses (I was under the impression they didn't since they recommended a rental site) and they also have fish eyes. So I'll probably go tomorrow to check them out.


----------



## nuclearjock

A Northern Flicker posted from Flikr (sorry).










D300, 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6D ED AF VR Zoom-Nikkor @400mm (600mm effective).


----------



## GoneTomorrow

LOL at the Flicker on flickr. Nice shot.


----------



## dr4gon

haha!


----------



## ace8uk

I don't think I'll be getting my 60mm Micro f2.8 lens any time soon now. I just got a phone call from the company I ordered it from saying that Nikon have put the price up Â£100 and that they could only offer it to me for Â£370 as oppose to the Â£250 that I actually bought it for.

It's annoying that only a week or so ago this lens was available for Â£200 from some places, but the cheapest I have found it now is about Â£310-340.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ace8uk*


I don't think I'll be getting my 60mm Micro f2.8 lens any time soon now. I just got a phone call from the company I ordered it from saying that Nikon have put the price up Â£100 and that *they could only offer it to me for Â£370 as oppose to the Â£250 that I actually bought it for.*

It's annoying that only a week or so ago this lens was available for Â£200 from some places, but the cheapest I have found it now is about Â£310-340.










Wait - you already paid and they're raising the price on you?


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ace8uk*


I don't think I'll be getting my 60mm Micro f2.8 lens any time soon now. I just got a phone call from the company I ordered it from saying that Nikon have put the price up Â£100 and that they could only offer it to me for Â£370 as oppose to the Â£250 that I actually bought it for.

It's annoying that only a week or so ago this lens was available for Â£200 from some places, but the cheapest I have found it now is about Â£310-340.










I'm a Nikon fanboy, and I've got a boatload of Nikon gear (all purchased before these insane price increases), but given the recent price hikes I won't be buying anything Nikon in the near future.

Further, if anyone were to inquire as to which way to go if they were getting started in photography, I would definately point them towards Canon. But who knows, Canon may have plans for something similar soon as well.

Regardless, the Nikon price increases come at a time when money's tight in the U.S. and in my opinion it sucks.


----------



## bgbop15

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


I'm a Nikon fanboy, and I've got a boatload of Nikon gear (all purchased before these insane price increases), but given the recent price hikes I won't be buying anything Nikon in the near future.

Further, if anyone were to inquire as to which way to go if they were getting started in photography, I would definately point them towards Canon. But who knows, Canon may have plans for something similar soon as well.

Regardless, the Nikon price increases come at a time when money's tight in the U.S. and in my opinion it sucks.


I haven't noticed any hikes in Nikon lens prices here in the US of A... to what specifically are you referring?

Also, MODS, I got a Nikon D90 to add to my list of gear!


----------



## ace8uk

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Wait - you already paid and they're raising the price on you?

Pretty much. It was ordered on Saturday afternoon for Â£250 and on Monday afternoon I received a phone call from the company saying that it went out of stock at the weekend and that they had reserved me one for their mid week shipment of lenses, which I was cool with. Then earlier I got another phone call and they said they got the shipment but Nikon had raised the price by Â£100 and asked if I still wanted the lens, but for Â£370 instead.

I made a failed attempt at making a deal and told them to cancel my order because I can get it for Â£250 elsewhere (which I can't, but still) and they said fine, sorry about the lens.

I guess I'm glad that they told me, but I wouldn't mind betting that they would have still charged me the Â£250 if Nikon had dropped the price by Â£100.


----------



## MADMAX22

Quote:


Originally Posted by *ace8uk* 
Pretty much. It was ordered on Saturday afternoon for Â£250 and on Monday afternoon I received a phone call from the company saying that it went out of stock at the weekend and that they had reserved me one for their mid week shipment of lenses, which I was cool with. Then earlier I got another phone call and they said they got the shipment but Nikon had raised the price by Â£100 and asked if I still wanted the lens, but for Â£370 instead.

I made a failed attempt at making a deal and told them to cancel my order because I can get it for Â£250 elsewhere (which I can't, but still) and they said fine, sorry about the lens.

I guess I'm glad that they told me, but I wouldn't mind betting that they would have still charged me the Â£250 if Nikon had dropped the price by Â£100.

That sucks dude. Sounds pretty shady as well but oh well. Its getting harder and harder to find business that actually try for there customers and are even close to honest. Atleast here in the US its getting harder. Ahh well


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *bgbop15* 
I haven't noticed any hikes in Nikon lens prices here in the US of A... to what specifically are you referring?

Also, MODS, I got a Nikon D90 to add to my list of gear!

Last month, 10 - 30% depending on the item.


----------



## Marin

The Canon 60mm Macro has gone up $70 since I bought it in January.


----------



## ace8uk

I was thinking of getting the new 35mm f1.8 lens, it's only Â£200 and it should be OK for macros. Has anyone tried this lens out or know of any good reviews?


----------



## spice003

was wondering







if canon extension tubes work only on canon lenses or can they be used with tamron(for canon) lenses. cause i received the 28-75mm xr di LD today , just gotta buy the xsi now


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Hi all,

Haven't been here for a while but...

I just got the Tokina 11-16mm f2.8 today and have been testing it for focus etc. I just _have_ to say how utterly amazed I am with this lens. It's wickedly sharp with beautiful colour reproduction, great contrast and going out to 11mm (16.5mm FOV) is just, well, awesome, quite literally.

I'm awe-struck by how good images look from this lens. Maybe it's just me, but this lens even makes my Tamron 17-50 (which is very sharp) seem a little less impressive.

Seriously, if anybody is in the market for a really wide-angle zoom lens, the Tokina 11-16mm is the one to get for crop frame. Don't worry about the limited focal range, once you see how nicely this lens performs and the quality it can give you, you'll fall in love. It's seriously good.

Sadly, I don't have any images I can show atm, as all the test ones I have are of my cluttered and messy home and garden, or of focus test charts, but I plan to get out within the next week or so and take some landscape/seascape shots, so once I have, I'll upload some. Got to work out what precisely "hyperfocal focusing" is soon and how, exactly, to apply it also







.

Seriously though people, this lens is good. Rent a copy if you can and if you get a half-decent copy, you'll be seriously impressed







.

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## Marin

Looks like the local camera store only has one lens for rental. So, I'm probably going to have to call a store in SF to see what lenses I can rent.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Highly-Annoyed*


Hi all,

Haven't been here for a while but...

I just got the Tokina 11-16mm f2.8 today and have been testing it for focus etc. I just _have_ to say how utterly amazed I am with this lens. It's wickedly sharp with beautiful colour reproduction, great contrast and going out to 11mm (16.5mm FOV) is just, well, awesome, quite literally.

I'm awe-struck by how good images look from this lens. Maybe it's just me, but this lens even makes my Tamron 17-50 (which is very sharp) seem a little less impressive.

Seriously, if anybody is in the market for a really wide-angle zoom lens, the Tokina 11-16mm is the one to get for crop frame. Don't worry about the limited focal range, once you see how nicely this lens performs and the quality it can give you, you'll fall in love. It's seriously good.

Sadly, I don't have any images I can show atm, as all the test ones I have are of my cluttered and messy home and garden, or of focus test charts, but I plan to get out within the next week or so and take some landscape/seascape shots, so once I have, I'll upload some. Got to work out what precisely "hyperfocal focusing" is soon and how, exactly, to apply it also







.

Seriously though people, this lens is good. Rent a copy if you can and if you get a half-decent copy, you'll be seriously impressed







.

Highly-Annoyed


Good to hear from you again Highly. Got a 10-22mm myself so I know the joy of an ultra-wide angle.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ace8uk*


I was thinking of getting the new 35mm f1.8 lens, it's only Â£200 and it should be OK for macros. Has anyone tried this lens out or know of any good reviews?


http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/nikon_35_1p8g_n15/

It's not a macro lens, it's a prime - or are you just referring to close-ups in general? It's a decent prime, but you already have two very nice primes; are you just looking for a wider angle?

Quote:



Originally Posted by *spice003*


was wondering







if canon extension tubes work only on canon lenses or can they be used with tamron(for canon) lenses. cause i received the 28-75mm xr di LD today , just gotta buy the xsi now










It's a Canon mount so yes it will work.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Looks like the local camera store only has one lens for rental. So, I'm probably going to have to call a store in SF to see what lenses I can rent.


My shop wants way too much to rent lenses.


----------



## Marin

I just stole your sig gonetomorrow


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


I just stole your sig gonetomorrow










Oh - but you don't have my cool little _*f*_'s


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


It depends on what your immediate needs are. I would say that the 55-200mm VR is a good next purchase to fill out your zoom range. Barring that, a prime or macro would be good next lens purchases too (Nikon just released a new 35mm AF-S prime, pretty decent lens).

A speed light is something you really have to to want, otherwise it won't see much use. You have to ask what sort of photography you might get into and whether a speed light will benefit it. I'd like to have one myself, but I can't justify purchasing one, and the integrated flash has served me well enough.

A circular polarizing filter is an excellent filter to have. It's great for darkening bright skies and taking the reflection off water or glass. UV filters have their uses as well, but that's a big debate as to how effective and essential they are. I personally don't use them.

And battery grips are also something that you really have to have a need for. With two batteries I can go for an all day outing without running out. Grips are people who are doing some seriously extended outings and need as much battery power as possible. Plus it adds a vertical grip and extra shutter button and wheel.


Thanks for that mate, apreciate it







.

I don't get what the mm on the polarizing filters mean... do they have to correspond with the lense they have to be put on.

ie, theres a 55mm polarizing lense and a 70-something-mm polarizing lense with varying prices.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Thanks for that mate, apreciate it







.

I don't get what the mm on the polarizing filters mean... do they have to correspond with the lense they have to be put on.

ie, theres a 55mm polarizing lense and a 70-something-mm polarizing lense with varying prices.










That's the filter size, different lenses have different filter sizes. For example, with my lenses it's like this:

Sigma 30mm - 62mm

Canon 18-55mm IS - 58mm

Canon 60mm Macro - 52mm


----------



## ace8uk

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/nikon_35_1p8g_n15/

It's not a macro lens, it's a prime - or are you just referring to close-ups in general? It's a decent prime, but you already have two very nice primes; are you just looking for a wider angle?


Oops, I meant close ups. I guess it would be stupid for me to buy another prime lens just for close up's. I'll keep an eye out on ebay for the 60mm micro or just save up for the rest.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Thanks for that mate, apreciate it







.

I don't get what the mm on the polarizing filters mean... do they have to correspond with the lense they have to be put on.

ie, theres a 55mm polarizing lense and a 70-something-mm polarizing lense with varying prices.










What Marin said. A lens' filter size is usually indicated on the rim on the front, e.g. Ã¸77mm (if not, it's also shown on the back of the lens' front cap). Filters can get really expensive when you have multiple sizes. Right I have 52mm, 58mm, 72mm and 77mm.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


What Marin said. A lens' filter size is usually indicated on the rim on the front, e.g. Ã¸77mm (if not, it's also shown on the back of the lens' front cap). Filters can get really expensive when you have multiple sizes. Right I have 52mm, 58mm, 72mm and 77mm.


i can attest to this, im thinking of just buying all 77mm filters from here in and just getting step-up rings as needed.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie*


i can attest to this, im thinking of just buying all 77mm filters from here in and just getting step-up rings as needed.


That's actually I good idea, I need to look into this myself.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Zeiss to make Carl Zeiss 18mm f/3.5 Distagon T* 3.5/18 for Canon mount










Now I would be all over this lens if it weren't already $1200 for Nikon and Pentax mounts. Oh to own a Zeiss lens!


----------



## dr4gon

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
That's actually I good idea, I need to look into this myself.

I have a 77mm to 49mm step down ring set with just about every major step in between. The only problem you have to worry about is getting an extra 77mm cap when you do use your CPL and maybe a hood. But at that point, with all that stacking and depending on the lens, you could have some severe vignetting. Maybe best to get two CPLs a 77mm and maybe a 58mm or I would probably get a 55mm for Sony.


----------



## nuclearjock

My first of only a few HDR images. Not too bad for hand held. far left building is blury.










Nikon D3, Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8G ED-IF AF-S VR + Kenko pro 300 1.4x DG


----------



## Mootsfox

So just got back from class.

I actually know how to meter now


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


So just got back from class.

I actually know how to meter now










Really, give us the skinny. I've never had an actual photography class.


----------



## Mootsfox

Well, I learned the official f/stops and shutter speeds. I sure you know all this.

But I've never used the meter on the camera before, now all my stuff comes out at perfect exposure


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Well, I learned the official f/stops and shutter speeds. I sure you know all this.

But I've never used the meter on the camera before, now all my stuff comes out at perfect exposure










Never used the meter? How did you shoot before, with aperture and shutter priority? I love using the meter, makes shots come out better especially since my 40D tends to overexpose even when the meter is centered. The different metering modes are also eye-opening. I replaced my XTi with the 40D so I could have spot metering (among other reasons).


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Never used the meter? How did you shoot before, with aperture and shutter priority? I love using the meter, makes shots come out better especially since my 40D tends to overexpose even when the meter is centered. The different metering modes are also eye-opening. I replaced my XTi with the 40D so I could have spot metering (among other reasons).


I just used my eyes and brain and ended up with about 2x the number of photos. I've been on M since I opened the box, though I've touched A and S to see how it works.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Holy crap, what a camera! 50 MP, 36 x 48mm sensor (five times the area of my 40D's sensor):

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...=REG&A=details


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Holy crap, what a camera! 50 MP, 36 x 48mm sensor (five times the area of my 40D's sensor):

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...=REG&A=details


Quote:

Lease for as low as $949/mo
Yeah... I'd rather get an RS4, or like a cheap house and car...


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Yeah... I'd rather get an RS4, or like a cheap house and car...

LOL, costs more than my Subaru Forester. The funny thing about the Hasselblads is that the processing time for each shot (shot-to-shot time) is 1 second or more. Granted it's 50 MP image, but not much use for sports or jittery wildlife.


----------



## Oscuro

Hasselblads are pretty much dedicated studio, landscape, achitecture, and macro cameras as far as I can think of using one. Same as medium format film.

Course, I am semi-tempted to pick up a medium format film camera for some landscape work....


----------



## Marin

Every photo of mine has been in explore, can that be right?

http://bighugelabs.com/flickr/scout....rt=date&year=0


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Good to hear from you again Highly. Got a 10-22mm myself so I know the joy of an ultra-wide angle.

Thanks GT, it's good to see the thread is still going!

10-22mm is a really useful range and the MTF charts suggest that lens is pretty sharp too. Tamron have a 10-24mm on the way which I was going to wait for, but early independent MTF testing suggests it's not as sharp as the faster Tokina 11-16mm, so I went for that instead. Less useful zoom range perhaps, but I can almost always "zoom with my feet" if needed







and f2.8 is always nice too.

Any chance you can help me out with hyperfocal focusing, as I want to try maximise the DOF in future landscapes with this new Tokina?

I went to this web site and found a calculator (bottom of the page) which looks good, but I'm still a little hazy on some of the details of exactly what I'm supposed to do with the numbers the calculator provides and what results I'm likely to get?

Here are the figures I got for my lens/camera for a 24" x 16" print:










I went with 24x16 inches as it's a realistic maximum print size for 12.3MP @ 300PPI. It pulls the PPI down to 180, which I can either up-sample to 240/300PPI or leave at 180PPI and let the printers deal with the interpolating for a decent looking print when viewed at 1m (about 3 feet).

What I'm not sure about though, is the figures output and the result they provide. If we stick to F11 (the max before diffusion becomes more obvious on the D300) is the chart saying that @ 11mm, I should set the focal point to 0.9m, in order to get maximum DOF out to infinity? I think that's what it means, but I'm not 100% sure







. Does it mean that DOF will extend in front of everything in front of 0.9m for 1/3 of the shot and all the way out to infinity, or does DOF start at 0.9m and go out to infinity from there? I was under the impression that DOF extends 1/3 in front of the focus point and 2/3 behind it; is this correct and if so, is it still correct with hyperfocal focusing? Does the 2/3 behind the focus just include everything to infinity in this case? A little confused







.

Any help you can give is appreciated







.

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Highly-Annoyed* 
Thanks GT, it's good to see the thread is still going!

10-22mm is a really useful range and the MTF charts suggest that lens is pretty sharp too. Tamron have a 10-24mm on the way which I was going to wait for, but early independent MTF testing suggests it's not as sharp as the faster Tokina 11-16mm, so I went for that instead. Less useful zoom range perhaps, but I can almost always "zoom with my feet" if needed







and f2.8 is always nice too.

Any chance you can help me out with hyperfocal focusing, as I want to try maximise the DOF in future landscapes with this new Tokina?

I went to this web site and found a calculator (bottom of the page) which looks good, but I'm still a little hazy on some of the details of exactly what I'm supposed to do with the numbers the calculator provides and what results I'm likely to get?

Here are the figures I got for my lens/camera for a 24" x 16" print:

I went with 24x16 inches as it's a realistic maximum print size for 12.3MP @ 300PPI. It pulls the PPI down to 180, which I can either up-sample to 240/300PPI or leave at 180PPI and let the printers deal with the interpolating for a decent looking print when viewed at 1m (about 3 feet).

What I'm not sure about though, is the figures output and the result they provide. If we stick to F11 (the max before diffusion becomes more obvious on the D300) is the chart saying that @ 11mm, I should set the focal point to 0.9m, in order to get maximum DOF out to infinity? I think that's what it means, but I'm not 100% sure







. Does it mean that DOF will extend in front of everything in front of 0.9m for 1/3 of the shot and all the way out to infinity, or does DOF start at 0.9m and go out to infinity from there? I was under the impression that DOF extends 1/3 in front of the focus point and 2/3 behind it; is this correct and if so, is it still correct with hyperfocal focusing? Does the 2/3 behind the focus just include everything to infinity in this case? A little confused







.

Any help you can give is appreciated







.

Highly-Annoyed

You know as much as I do about hyperfocus at this point Highly (maybe more). All I know is the theory, but have yet to put it into practice. I've been using DOF Master, which I think is a bit simpler than the on you posted (looks very complicated!):

http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html

The whole site is dedicated to hyperfocus and they even have software for your PC. I love on the online DOF calculator how it asks you to select "Camera, film format, or circle of confusion," hilarious!

And I was torn between the Canon 10-22mm and the Tokina 11-16mm. The Sigma and Tamron offerings weren't on the same level from the what I discerned in the specs and MTF. I eventually went for the Canon because of the more useful focal range, but I'll probably regret that! I specifically wanted a UWA for tight interior shots, where constant f/2.8 would be very useful.


----------



## ace8uk

My Dad came home from work today with a little surprise for me. He bought me the Nikon 60mm f2.8 from the Jessops near where he works







Only thing is, I wont have much time to test it out tonight as I have work that I need to do for tomorrow.


----------



## laboitenoire

Nice! If it weren't for the fact that my camera isn't too bad and film is getting expensive, I would pick up a cheap lens for my dad's old Nikon 2020 body and start shooting some stuff with that. He recently upgraded from that to a used D50, and he's loving it.


----------



## dr4gon

Got this shot this morning


----------



## default501x

got my $40 fisheye in the mail...
it made me actually use my kit lens for the first time in a WHILE
some sample shots from around the house

























im fairly impressed, seeing as how it is a no-name ebay product, worth the $40 imo


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
You know as much as I do about hyperfocus at this point Highly (maybe more). All I know is the theory, but have yet to put it into practice. I've been using DOF Master, which I think is a bit simpler than the on you posted (looks very complicated!):

http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html

The whole site is dedicated to hyperfocus and they even have software for your PC. I love on the online DOF calculator how it asks you to select "Camera, film format, or circle of confusion," hilarious!

And I was torn between the Canon 10-22mm and the Tokina 11-16mm. The Sigma and Tamron offerings weren't on the same level from the what I discerned in the specs and MTF. I eventually went for the Canon because of the more useful focal range, but I'll probably regret that! I specifically wanted a UWA for tight interior shots, where constant f/2.8 would be very useful.

Wow, that hyperfocal distance calculator is so much easier to use than the one I found! Thanks for that!









Highly-Annoyed


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dr4gon* 
Got this shot this morning




_Nice_ shot! Great reflection in eyes. What lens?


----------



## dr4gon

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
_Nice_ shot! Great reflection in eyes. What lens?

Tamron 70-200mm F/2.8. Excellent optically, probably one of the best in class but the AF is lacking a bit, but that's subjective. Maybe it's faster on Canon or Nikon (Sony is screw driven)

And I also had on a Hoya Pro-1D CPL. I think it's my first time like actually using it on the lens, think it came out quite nice.


----------



## muffin

Today I went to a camera store to buy the new 35mm DX lens for my D40x and came out with a D90 + 18-105mm DX VR kit. So uh, anyone want to buy a D40x?









Quote:


Originally Posted by *dr4gon*
Got this shot this morning




Nice picture, I hope you gave him a nut or two for posing


----------



## dr4gon

Quote:


Originally Posted by *muffin* 
Today I went to a camera store to buy the new 35mm DX lens for my D40x and came out with a D90 + 18-105mm DX VR kit. So uh, anyone want to buy a D40x?









Nice picture, I hope you gave him a nut or two for posing









thanks!









lol must've been a convincing salesman?


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *muffin* 
Today I went to a camera store to buy the new 35mm DX lens for my D40x and came out with a D90 + 18-105mm DX VR kit. So uh, anyone want to buy a D40x?









I'd keep it. It's really a great little DSLR with awesome image quality.

I don't know what types of shots that you take, but I do alot of wildlife and I always try to carry a second body with a macro lens for when I run across cool "little" stuff, but that's only my $0.02 worth.

The D40x is a sweet body, but I bet you're loving your new D90.

Have fun, pics!!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

DPP 3.6 - you won't find this through Canon's official software update on their USA site (yet), but it's available through Canon SX1 IS and T1i owners. However, it's already spreading through the net. It adds highlight and shadow sliders, but is otherwise the same check it out:

http://web.canon.jp/imaging/dcp/firm...1is/index.html

Serial: 7816002105

If this violates the TOS somehow, Moots or somebody remove it. It is all over various photography forums, it's just that Canon has their head up their you know what and have yet to release it to other Canon camera owners. Plus it still requires the DPP software to be installed as it's an update.


----------



## SlickMeister

Equipment update :

Digital SLR

Canon EOS 1000D
Sigma 100-300mm 1:4.5-6.7 DL
Sigma 24-70mm 1:3.5-5.6 UC


----------



## bentleya

Few Test Shots


----------



## tkl.hui

Hey guys, haven't posted anything in a while. Recently went to the Toronto Flower and Garden show and snapped up a few pics. All were taken with my Sony A200 and kite lens.

Enjoy. I'm also open to comments. Would love to improve myself.









Cheers guys.


----------



## spice003

i like the last one a lot


----------



## GoneTomorrow

tkl.hui, the flower shots are ok, they're in focus and the framing is quite nice, but a few flower shooting tips:

- Use a narrow aperture for flower close-ups (at least f/5.6 or lower). This will blur out the background and make it less distracting. A narrow aperture makes the background too "in focus" and draws attention away from the flower.

- Using a flash is a good idea, but it's just a bit too harsh imo. Decrease the flash exposure compensation or diffuse it somehow.


----------



## Marin

Snapped some pics after taking the ACT in SF. There were a ton of places I wanted to take pics at but didn't want to stop. Probably will go back and take some pics next week.


----------



## Danylu

I finally found some free wifi at some maccas-ish place. Hotel net ain't cheap. Thanks for the answers a few pages back... Now that I've got a vague idea of which lense to get, I'm now going to take a look at the many different lenses available. What I don't get is why the 3rd party lenses are cheaper than Nikor/Nikon branded ones. Are the 3rd party ones more dodgy or something?

I've made 2 observations so far in the US.

- More Canon than Nikons in a 2:1 ratio
- The high end models have the Model number on the strap whilst the others don't.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


I finally found some free wifi at some maccas-ish place. Hotel net ain't cheap. Thanks for the answers a few pages back... Now that I've got a vague idea of which lense to get, I'm now going to take a look at the many different lenses available. What I don't get is why the 3rd party lenses are cheaper than Nikor/Nikon branded ones. Are the 3rd party ones more dodgy or something?

I've made 2 observations so far in the US.

- More Canon than Nikons in a 2:1 ratio
- The high end models have the Model number on the strap whilst the others don't.


The popular kids all have Canon these days









3rd party glass will always be cheaper because it's not name brand. Doesn't mean it's bad, but it can be (there are some horrid 3rd lenses). Nikkor and Canon glass is always to be the best or close to it.


----------



## spice003

i found this site, where you basically pick the brand and the lens or camera model to see pictures that were taking with it, just to get an idea of the picture quality. you can tell right away who is a pro and who is not with the same lens







oh and lenses are all the way at the bottom.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


The popular kids all have Canon these days









3rd party glass will always be cheaper because it's not name brand. Doesn't mean it's bad, but it can be (there are some horrid 3rd lenses). Nikkor and Canon glass is always to be the best or close to it.


orly? Last I checked Nikon had the largest market share.


----------



## Marin

I saw two tourists with matching D90's and 18-200mm lenses. So you're not alone moots


----------



## tkl.hui

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


tkl.hui, the flower shots are ok, they're in focus and the framing is quite nice, but a few flower shooting tips:

- Use a narrow aperture for flower close-ups (at least f/5.6 or lower). This will blur out the background and make it less distracting. A narrow aperture makes the background too "in focus" and draws attention away from the flower.

- Using a flash is a good idea, but it's just a bit too harsh imo. Decrease the flash exposure compensation or diffuse it somehow.


I would love to use a narrow aperture, but I find with the kit lens, anything under f/6.3 becomes soft.

About diffusing the flash, would taping something like kleenex over it help diffuse it? If not, what other options would I have?

Thanks for the tips. I'll take all the comments I can get.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


orly? Last I checked Nikon had the largest market share.




















Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


I saw two tourists with matching D90's and 18-200mm lenses. So you're not alone moots










^_^







:

Everyone knows the 18-200mm VR is a nub lens


----------



## USlatin

joining!

I don't have great still cameras...









I have a P&S Canon Powershot A630 (hacked for RAW and a bunch of other neat features!) and a Film SLR Olympus OM-1


----------



## spice003

Quote:


Originally Posted by *USlatin* 
joining!

I don't have great still cameras...









I have a P&S Canon Powershot A630 (hacked for RAW and a bunch of other neat features!) and a Film SLR Olympus OM-1

how do you hack it for RAW? can it be done to other canon P&S?


----------



## USlatin

Very easy actually! http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/CHDK

I got a timelapse, bracketing and RAW, plus smaller shutter increments... loads of stuff... but the menus suck.


----------



## spice003

thanx







does it void the warranty?


----------



## USlatin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *spice003* 
thanx









No problem! Have fun with RAW!









Here, I started a thread for it: http://www.overclock.net/photography...shoot-raw.html


----------



## spice003

Quote:



Originally Posted by *USlatin*


No problem! Have fun with RAW!









Here, I started a thread for it: http://www.overclock.net/attachment....9&d=1238893700


----------



## USlatin

LOL! I guess I had a different link in the clipboard









Here you go: http://www.overclock.net/photography...shoot-raw.html


----------



## spice003

thanx


----------



## USlatin

At your service :bows:


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*












Owned with the truth. I don't know the amount of truth behind that though.

Quote:



Everyone knows the 18-200mm VR is a nub lens










I was thinking about getting one of those







.

I don't like the idea of having to take off a 18-55mm and putting on a 70-200mm lense... the idea of exposing the camera sensor to the elements is too much for me, sorry.

There is also the problem of the time it takes to swap out lenses compared to changing the focal length.

Just my 2c.

Niagara Falls is cold. /off-topic


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*











^_^







:

Everyone knows the 18-200mm VR is a nub lens










That chart (wherever it's form - source?) is for _all_ digital cameras - DSLR and P&S. I was talking about DSLRs, not every bloody P&S digital camera out there:

Quote:



Nikon is "number one for share by volume in the UK, Europe, USA and Japan."


Nikon tops Canon in DSLR sales

So Nikon isn't the Indie rock of DSLRs, they're just as trendy as Canon DSLRs these days, and slightly more so as it seems.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Owned with the truth. I don't know the amount of truth behind that though.

I was thinking about getting one of those







.

I don't like the idea of having to take off a 18-55mm and putting on a 70-200mm lense... the idea of exposing the camera sensor to the elements is too much for me, sorry.

There is also the problem of the time it takes to swap out lenses compared to changing the focal length.

Just my 2c.

Niagara Falls is cold. /off-topic


I own an 18-200 mm vr zoom nikkor and I assure you it is by no means a "noob" lens. IQ is outstanding.


----------



## USlatin

I totally missed this:

Quote:


Originally Posted by *spice003* 
does it void the warranty?

Well, since all you have to do to reload the original BIOS is to power down and back on I don't see how they could find out. And it couldn't do any damage... still, read carefully and I am not responsible for any damage or warranty being void or what not in the unlikely event.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
That chart (wherever it's form - source?) is for _all_ digital cameras - DSLR and P&S. I was talking about DSLRs, not every bloody P&S digital camera out there:

Nikon tops Canon in DSLR sales

So Nikon isn't the Indie rock of DSLRs, they're just as trendy as Canon DSLRs these days, and slightly more so as it seems.


Quote:

Canon won the camera war by just one per cent â€" taking a 41 per cent market share to Nikon's 40 per cent.
Canon is the winnar, so Nikon is still indie









*Before I get flamed off the board, keep in mind I'M JOKING, playing around and trying to bring some humor to the thread


----------



## Oscuro

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


I don't like the idea of having to take off a 18-55mm and putting on a 70-200mm lense... the idea of exposing the camera sensor to the elements is too much for me, sorry.

There is also the problem of the time it takes to swap out lenses compared to changing the focal length.

Niagara Falls is cold. /off-topic


Heh, I am aiming to get the 80-200mm F/2.8 lens at some point, and the though of switching back and forth between my 18-70mm doesn't really bother me that much. Just keep the body facing down the minimize the possibility. Besides, dust will get in there anyways. It's inevitable.

The time taken to swap lenses, replace lens caps, etc is understandably a pain. But since most of my work is easy to prepare for, I'll be alright. I mean, the 80-200mm will mostly see duty when I'm out doing motorsports photography (Auto-x and drifting primarily...I want a road course!). The 18-70 would be my everyday lens for its flexibility. Although, a lens with slightly longer reach might become a daily use when I can afford a better one.

Heh heh, poor Australian dude! You came to Canada at the wrong time man!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Canon is the winnar, so Nikon is still indie









*Before I get flamed off the board, keep in mind I'M JOKING, playing around and trying to bring some humor to the thread

Isn't that what they call editorial juxtaposition?







Here's the _full_ quote:

Quote:

The fight in the DSLR market between Canon and Nikon has always been a close one, *with last year's figures* suggesting that Canon won the camera war by just one per cent â€" taking a 41 per cent market share to Nikon's 40 per cent.
So Nikon is actually the winner currently! Yes, Canon loses!







The difference is seriously like one percent or less, as it has been for several years. Together Canon and Nikon have over 80%, but Sony and Olympus are slowly chipping away at that.

We need a Canon vs. Nikon clan war on CODWAW or something.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
Owned with the truth. I don't know the amount of truth behind that though.

I was thinking about getting one of those







.

I don't like the idea of having to take off a 18-55mm and putting on a 70-200mm lense... the idea of exposing the camera sensor to the elements is too much for me, sorry.

There is also the problem of the time it takes to swap out lenses compared to changing the focal length.

Just my 2c.

Niagara Falls is cold. /off-topic

I like switching lenses, kind of like playing golf.









Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
I own an 18-200 mm vr zoom nikkor and I assure you it is by no means a "noob" lens. IQ is outstanding.

And the Canon version is very decent too, but the problem with both is that they're way too expensive and not worth the money.


----------



## catmmm

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Canon is the winnar, so Nikon is still indie









*Before I get flamed off the board, keep in mind I'M JOKING, playing around and trying to bring some humor to the thread

indie kid !!!


----------



## madmike0408

I had no idea such a thread existed. I'll try to throw up a few of my shots a little later!

btw, I shoot with an olympus evolt e-500 w/ 14-45mm f3.5-5.6


----------



## bs6851

Got a very noob question for you guys that use photoshop I shoot in raw and when I first open them they have all kinds of red but even if I dont adjust at all just click the open button then the reds gone... So whats going on? What am I doing wrong?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *bs6851*


Got a very noob question for you guys that use photoshop I shoot in raw and when I first open them they have all kinds of red but even if I dont adjust at all just click the open button then the reds gone... So whats going on? What am I doing wrong? 




At the very top right of the screen where the histogram is, there is a small triangular button at the top right (which is labeled "Highlight clipping warning" when you mouse over it); click this and the red spots will disappear. This feature shows you where you have blown highlights. On the opposite side is the Shadow clipping feature as well which shows up blue.


----------



## bs6851

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


At the very top right of the screen where the histogram is, there is a small triangular button at the top right (which is labeled "Highlight clipping warning" when you mouse over it); click this and the red spots will disappear. This feature shows you where you have blown highlights. On the opposite side is the Shadow clipping feature as well which shows up blue.


Thank you I have alot to learn obviously.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *bs6851*


Thank you I have alot to learn obviously.


Well, while we're on that, if you have that feature on and see the red splotches in your shot, drag the "Recovery" slider to the right and you will notice them shrink. This is ACR's attempt the recover clipped highlights, pretty neat feature but only works for slightly blown highlights (some, like really overexposed cloudy skies, are beyond hope).


----------



## bs6851

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Well, while we're on that, if you have that feature on and see the red splotches in your shot, drag the "Recovery" slider to the right and you will notice them shrink. This is ACR's attempt the recover clipped highlights, pretty neat feature but only works for slightly blown highlights (some, like really overexposed cloudy skies, are beyond hope).

Yeah I have been playing around with the camera and ps for about a week or two now. I have done photography with film cameras before (in high school) but never digital so this is a new world for me. And I havent done photography in maybe 12 years or so. Is there a good online resource that would refresh my knowledge fairly quickly and maybe expand my digital and editing knowledge?


----------



## muffin

Went for a walk up Kinder Scout today, put 6 shots from mah D90 on flickr


----------



## default501x

LOVE the lighting on those shots muffin


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *muffin* 
Went for a walk up Kinder Scout today, put 6 shots from mah D90 on flickr













Very nice muffin. Very nice indeed.


----------



## spice003

nice looking pics muffin(man )









oh you guys can add me to the list finally

equipment: 
Canon XSI(comming this week), Tamron SP AF 28-75mm F/2.8 XR DI LD IF

man thats a lot of letters!


----------



## default501x

Quote:



Originally Posted by *spice003*


oh you guys can add me to the list finally

equipment: 
Canon XSI(comming this week), Tamron SP AF 2-75mm F/2.8 XR DI LD IF

man thats a lot of letters!


im assuming you meant 28-75 not 2-75


----------



## spice003

Quote:



im assuming you meant 28-75 not 2-75










i wish









edited


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *bs6851*


Yeah I have been playing around with the camera and ps for about a week or two now. I have done photography with film cameras before (in high school) but never digital so this is a new world for me. And I havent done photography in maybe 12 years or so. Is there a good online resource that would refresh my knowledge fairly quickly and maybe expand my digital and editing knowledge?


This is a nice site with concise information:
http://digital-photography-school.com/

Also, since you're a Canon shooter, there's a great Canon only forum with a lot of knowledgeable people. Also a great place to buy used gear:
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/index.php

Quote:



Originally Posted by *spice003*


nice looking pics miffin(man )









oh you guys can add me to the list finally

equipment: 
Canon XSI(comming this week), Tamron SP AF 28-75mm F/2.8 XR DI LD IF

man thats a lot of letters!


Added. Yeah, Tamron and Sony lenses get a bit verbose with all the features listed after their lenses. Did you get the kit lens with the XSi?

Quote:



Originally Posted by *madmike0408*


I had no idea such a thread existed. I'll try to throw up a few of my shots a little later!

btw, I shoot with an olympus evolt e-500 w/ 14-45mm f3.5-5.6


Welcome, gotta love Four-Thirds lenses, excellent quality!


----------



## spice003

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Added. Yeah, Tamron and Sony lenses get a bit verbose with all the features listed after their lenses. Did you get the kit lens with the XSi?


no just the body, i had it with my xti last year it sucks.


----------



## Marin

At f/20 dust on my sensor is noticeable. At least I got rid of it with Lightroom.


----------



## Mootsfox

I noticed some hairs on my mirror... I'd like to know how they got there.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *spice003*


no just the body, i had it with my xti last year it sucks.


Mistake! The 18-55mm *IS* (which comes with the XS, XSi and T1i) is a completely revamped version of the the old 18-55mm non-IS, and is a very good lens, nothing like the old one (which does suck admittedly). It's actually worth having.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


At f/20 dust on my sensor is noticeable. At least I got rid of it with Lightroom.


Yeah at apertures that narrow, every little mote becomes noticeable. Time to get in there with the Giotto.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Mistake! The 18-55mm *IS* (which comes with the XS, XSi and T1i) is a completely revamped version of the the old 18-55mm non-IS, and is a very good lens, nothing like the old one (which does suck admittedly). It's actually worth having.

Yeah at apertures that narrow, every little mote becomes noticeable. Time to get in there with the Giotto.


Anyway to get the mirror up on the XSi so I can do that?


----------



## spice003

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Mistake! The 18-55mm *IS* (which comes with the XS, XSi and T1i) is a completely revamped version of the the old 18-55mm non-IS, and is a very good lens, nothing like the old one (which does suck admittedly). It's actually worth having.


thats ok, i got a refurb body, so i can save money for better lenses. I've seen pics taken by the new 18-55mm , dont like the quality that much.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Anyway to get the mirror up on the XSi so I can do that?


Yes, in the setup menu is an option for manual sensor cleaning, select "Sensor cleaning" then "Clean manually":


----------



## Marin

It's noticeable in the top right.


----------



## HowHardCanItBe

soo...Marin is the D90 good? I get two lenses with it.

18-55 and a 55-200 mm is that good?

Compared to others...is there like a cheaper alternative?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


It's noticeable in the top right.


Sure enough, but wow - the entire lens is in the DOF. I guess I need to find a nice white surface and take some shots at f/29 and see how my dust situation is.


----------



## Marin

Was browsing through one of the groups I'm in and saw this pic. Pretty weird seeing a XSi with a huge L lens on it.

Quote:


Source


----------



## sti_boy

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Was browsing through one of the groups I'm in and saw this pic. Pretty weird seeing a XSi with a huge L lens on it.

Source


Why is that weird. I have that lens - its the 70-200 f2.8L IS. It makes _any_ body look tiny. It made my 20D look tiny and it makes my 5DMkII look tiny.

When I attach this lens, its more like a lens with a camera attached to it


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sti_boy*


Why is that weird. I have that lens - its the 70-200 f2.8L IS. It makes _any_ body look tiny. It made my 20D look tiny and it makes my 5DMkII look tiny.

When I attach this lens, its more like a lens with a camera attached to it










The XSi is small body to begin with. So having a lens that dwarfs bodies such as the 40D and 50D on a XSi is weird.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/brianapa/3050036998/


----------



## USlatin

Actually that is a 100-400mm


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *USlatin*


Actually that is a 100-400mm


That it is







i r makin no sense


----------



## USlatin

Yea


----------



## dr4gon

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
The XSi is small body to begin with. So having a lens that dwarfs bodies such as the 40D and 50D on a XSi is weird.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/brianapa/3050036998/

WOW, that's as huge difference in size!


----------



## .Style

Thought I would post some pics from a trip my bro and dad took a while ago to Italy.

Shot with Olympus E500 I think..


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dr4gon*


WOW, that's as huge difference in size!


Yeah, I was walking around with a bunch of friends late the other night in Walmart (don't ask...) and we were looking at the cameras and I remember how huge the 50D felt compared to my dad's D50.


----------



## spice003

they sell 50D a walmart now?


----------



## laboitenoire

I'm pretty sure it was the 50D. It certainly had the right price tag... They had one of the Rebel models right next to it for like $500 less...

All the SLRs they had on display (the two Canons and a Nikon D40) were beat up. Broken flashes, scratched viewfinders and displays, incredibly dirty lenses... It was sad


----------



## Marin

I'm going to see if my local camera store has these in stock, but which one do you think is better.

- Sigma has HSM but is slightly less sharp and is known for the bad copies like all their lenses

- Tamron is sharper but uses a normal motor so it's louder and isn't fast at focusing

At the moment I'm leaning towards the Sigma.

http://www.amazon.com/Sigma-70-200mm...9065999&sr=8-1

http://www.amazon.com/Tamron-70-200m...9066018&sr=1-1


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
I'm going to see if my local camera store has these in stock, but which one do you think is better.

- Sigma has HSM but is slightly less sharp and is known for the bad copies like all their lenses

- Tamron is sharper but uses a normal motor so it's louder and isn't fast at focusing

At the moment I'm leaning towards the Sigma.

http://www.amazon.com/Sigma-70-200mm...9065999&sr=8-1

http://www.amazon.com/Tamron-70-200m...9066018&sr=1-1

It's a tough one, I just read some reviews for both. The Sigma is the II version and has supposedly corrected the one thing it was criticized for in comparison to the Tamron - softness wide open. However it's hard to turn down the Tamron, it's MTF is awesome and nearly as good as the Canon 70-200mm f/2.8. If it were me, I would be inclined to go with the Sigma, because if this lens will be used for wildlife or other fast moving subjects, the HSM will be very handy and the difference in image quality to the Tamron is negligible. It's too bad that neither of these lenses has any sort of optical stabilization, but the f/2.8 should help somewhat with that. Personally, I'm just going wait for a good deal on the Canon version, even though it retails for twice as much. However if either Tamron or Sigma releases a version with optical stabilization soon, that may change.

Marin, this would be a good question to maybe post at POTN, but here's one thread where they talk about the two lenses:
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...Sigma+70-200mm

EDIT: Marin, also worth considering is the Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM. It doesn't quite match the IQ of the Tamron or Sigma, but it's still very good. It doesn't have a constant aperture either, but is optically stabilized, has USM, more reach, and is cheaper.


----------



## Marin

Hmmm...

My plan was to use one of the lens to really snipe pics of people like this: http://www.flickr.com/photos/hafrenz/3394923297/

And maybe use it for some wildlife and sports (rarely though).


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Hmmm...

My plan was to use one of the lens to really snipe pics of people like this: http://www.flickr.com/photos/hafrenz/3394923297/

And maybe use it for some wildlife and sports (rarely though).

In that case, needing the HSM might not be an issue. That would be a good use for either lens though, some urban candids of people. My longest reach is 135mm but I still have to get fairly close, so I get some WTH stares from the skaters at the park sometimes, so it would nice to have some extra reach.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
In that case, needing the HSM might not be an issue. That would be a good use for either lens though, some urban candids of people. My longest reach is 135mm but I still have to get fairly close, so I get some WTH stares from the skaters at the park sometimes, so it would nice to have some extra reach.

Yeah, that's what I'm aiming for.

I tried to take some pics with my 30mm... didn't go over so well.







At least people were nice about it.


----------



## nuclearjock

My 80-400 Nikkor that I use for wildlife is way noisy and slow, so I've just resolved myself to the fact that I have to use manual focus, just like the old days.

I'd pick Tamron for the optics and focus manually in sensitive situations.


----------



## spice003

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Hmmm...

My plan was to use one of the lens to really snipe pics of people like this: http://www.flickr.com/photos/hafrenz/3394923297/

.


the one on the left or the right?


----------



## Danylu

Nikon AFS18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED VR is expensive.









I've read about the lense creep and I'm not sure if its big enough of a problem, it's the only thing bugging my mind at the moment though.

Lenses are pretty expensive especially the f/2.8 and under ones.

The snow here in Canada is great right now, I like the snow but taking photos of the snow doesn't look so good cause it leaves white specks on the image


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Nikon AFS18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED VR is expensive.









I've read about the lense creep and I'm not sure if its big enough of a problem, it's the only thing bugging my mind at the moment though.

Lenses are pretty expensive especially the f/2.8 and under ones.

The snow here in Canada is great right now, I like the snow but taking photos of the snow doesn't look so good cause it leaves white specks on the image










My 18-200 mm VR Nikkor doesn't creep at all, zero.

On the other hand, I have a 28-300mm "VR" Tamron that creeps so bad, it has a hard lock switch to lock the lens at 28mm to prevent it from creeping while you're carrying it.

But the Nikkor doesn't creep at all. It's a really sweet lens but as you say, $$$.

Here's a picture taken at full focal length to illustrate the sharpness.


----------



## Oscuro

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Nikon AFS18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED VR is expensive.









I've read about the lense creep and I'm not sure if its big enough of a problem, it's the only thing bugging my mind at the moment though.

Lenses are pretty expensive especially the f/2.8 and under ones.

The snow here in Canada is great right now, I like the snow but taking photos of the snow doesn't look so good cause it leaves white specks on the image










Snow? Canada? Ohhh, you're on the wrong side of the country








West coast is clear and sunny for tomorrow!

But, if you're in the Toronto area and have a bit of spare cash on hand while travelling...
http://toronto.en.craigslist.ca/tor/pho/1105741611.html
55-200mm AF DX lens for $180 Canadian.


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Hey, as anybody here tried focus stacking yet?

I had a go earlier on today, using the free CombineZM program.

Here's my first stack.










This is the product of a stack of 7 images, all F11 and manual-focused using live-view, with a remote-shutter release, on a tripod.

At the distance I was shooting, there was no way I could of got this close to a match-head and got this level of DOF. Even with F32 this wouldn't have been possible and of course, F32 would have led to diffraction and loss of image sharpness anyway, even if it could come close.

If you have a macro lens and haven't tired focus-stacking yet, download the free program and give it a go. It takes time, but the virtual DOF you can get is worth it. Make sure to manual focus though and use small focus increments.

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Highly-Annoyed* 
Hey, as anybody here tried focus stacking yet?

I had a go earlier on today, using the free CombineZM program.

Here's my first stack.

This is the product of a stack of 7 images, all F11 and manual-focused using live-view, with a remote-shutter release, on a tripod.

At the distance I was shooting, there was no way I could of got this close to a match-head and got this level of DOF. Even with F32 this wouldn't have been possible and of course, F32 would have led to diffraction and loss of image sharpness anyway, even if it could come close.

If you have a macro lens and haven't tired focus-stacking yet, download the free program and give it a go. It takes time, but the virtual DOF you can get is worth it. Make sure to manual focus though and use small focus increments.

Highly-Annoyed

Nice stack! I love CombineZM, such a good _free_ program. I've had moderate success with it, and I'm currently trying to get some decent water drop refractions for a focus stack.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Highly-Annoyed* 
Hey, as anybody here tried focus stacking yet?

I had a go earlier on today, using the free CombineZM program.

Here's my first stack.










This is the product of a stack of 7 images, all F11 and manual-focused using live-view, with a remote-shutter release, on a tripod.

At the distance I was shooting, there was no way I could of got this close to a match-head and got this level of DOF. Even with F32 this wouldn't have been possible and of course, F32 would have led to diffraction and loss of image sharpness anyway, even if it could come close.

If you have a macro lens and haven't tired focus-stacking yet, download the free program and give it a go. It takes time, but the virtual DOF you can get is worth it. Make sure to manual focus though and use small focus increments.

Highly-Annoyed

Very nice HA. I've downloaded CombineZM but haven't had time to mess with it yet. I'll try and find some time tonight with some water drops. Anxious to see your results as well GT. That match is truly awesome though... Very nice work.


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Nice stack! I love CombineZM, such a good _free_ program. I've had moderate success with it, and I'm currently trying to get some decent water drop refractions for a focus stack.


Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
Very nice HA. I've downloaded CombineZM but haven't had time to mess with it yet. I'll try and find some time tonight with some water drops. Anxious to see your results as well GT. That match is truly awesome though... Very nice work.

Thanks guys







. Looking forward to seeing some of your stuff soon







.

The only problem I see with focus-stacking is using it on living creatures or other moving subjects, but for static subjects it seems really promising. I've seen some really good stacking on flickr of some insects, so I know it can be done; I guess you need insects dead though, or very co-operative







.

I think I try some more







.

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## jbrown

Just picked up a Canon 40D & 17-55 2.8IS


----------



## SoBe8503

First attempts with my new lens


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *SoBe8503*


First attempts with my new lens




















Wow, you got that lens fast! Did you go with the 50mm f/1.8D?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *jbrown*


Just picked up a Canon 40D & 17-55 2.8IS


Nice, do you still have the 350D?


----------



## SoBe8503

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Wow, you got that lens fast! Did you go with the 50mm f/1.8D?


Yup. Found a locally owned sporting goods store that had it.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Oscuro*


Snow? Canada? Ohhh, you're on the wrong side of the country








West coast is clear and sunny for tomorrow!

But, if you're in the Toronto area and have a bit of spare cash on hand while travelling...
http://toronto.en.craigslist.ca/tor/pho/1105741611.html
55-200mm AF DX lens for $180 Canadian.


Snow is cool







. We bought maple syrup









Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


My 18-200 mm VR Nikkor doesn't creep at all, zero.

On the other hand, I have a 28-300mm "VR" Tamron that creeps so bad, it has a hard lock switch to lock the lens at 28mm to prevent it from creeping while you're carrying it.

But the Nikkor doesn't creep at all. It's a really sweet lens but as you say, $$$.

Here's a picture taken at full focal length to illustrate the sharpness.


I'll assume VR was on when you took the picture, thats pretty sweet quality. No tripod was used?

What is the lense hood meant to do? Nikon website tells me that it is to reduce stray light... what? I think it'll have full function on a D60, I just figured out I have nearly enough money to buy one with some extra warranty







. Now let's convince the parents


----------



## sti_boy

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sti_boy*


Not sure how I missed this group.

My gear (currently):
- Canon 5D MkII
- 50mm f1.4
- 100mm f2.8 macro
- 135mm f2L
- 70-200mm f2.8L IS

Yes, I'm missing the wide end. Used to have a 16-35 f2.8L and also 17-55 EF-S (when I had 20D), but planning to replace with 24mm f1.4L prime.

I'll be sure to post up a few photos on the site.


Please update my gear-list. I just broke down and got the 16-35mm f2.8L II. Got tired of waiting for the 24 f1.4L II to come into stock and wanted to experience 16mm on full-frame.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
Snow is cool







. We bought maple syrup









I'll assume VR was on when you took the picture, thats pretty sweet quality. No tripod was used?

What is the lense hood meant to do? Nikon website tells me that it is to reduce stray light... what? I think it'll have full function on a D60, I just figured out I have nearly enough money to buy one with some extra warranty







. Now let's convince the parents









Lens hoods curtail lens flare by blocking light coming in at oblique angles. Wide angle lenses are most prone to lens flare. It's a pain sometimes on my 10-22 if I don't have the hood with me. Hoods are also good because they provide a modicum of protection to the front element.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sti_boy* 
Please update my gear-list. I just broke down and got the 16-35mm f2.8L II. Got tired of waiting for the 24 f1.4L II to come into stock and wanted to experience 16mm on full-frame.

Yeah, Canon's lens inventory is spotty at best, hard to get a 50mm f/1.4 or a 100mm f/2.8 macro anywhere.


----------



## spice003

Quote:


Originally Posted by *SoBe8503* 
First attempts with my new lens



















what was a ram stick doing buy the railroad


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
*Lens hoods curtail lens flare by blocking light coming in at oblique angles. Wide angle lenses are most prone to lens flare. It's a pain sometimes on my 10-22 if I don't have the hood with me. Hoods are also good because the provide a modicum of protection to the front element.*

Yeah, Canon's lens inventory is spotty at best, hard to get a 50mm f/1.4 or a 100mm f/2.8 macro anywhere.

Yeah. I basically use a lens hood all the time now. And the fact that petal lens hoods look cool


----------



## default501x

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Yeah. I basically use a lens hood all the time now. And the fact that petal lens hoods look cool









that they do








i use the lens hood as an added protection agent, seems to work well.

anyways,
just posted a WTB add for a 17-40L on POTN, hopefully i get some hits, i am excited to get this lens!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *default501x* 
that they do








i use the lens hood as an added protection agent, seems to work well.

anyways,
just posted a WTB add for a 17-40L on POTN, hopefully i get some hits, i am excited to get this lens!

Yeah, I saw your post over there. I think you'll have better luck if you contact sellers directly there, because lenses are selling like crazy at POTN right now since Canon isn't stocking very many lenses currently (some lenses have been out of stock for a while now).

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...archid=7723249


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Have any of you guys tried the Gary Fong Lightsphere II for speedlights, or the Puffer for pop-up flash?

You'd think Fong would have a patent for these things, right? He must have. Maybe he licences out his inventions for other people to sell? Idk. All I know is that I recently bought a Lightsphere II cloud, identical in every way to the Gary Fong Lightsphere II cloud, but sold as a "store's own" brand at about 1/4 of the price the Fong original sells for online in the UK... Same thing, same results, just minus the Fong brand name and minus 3/4 of the Fong price.

I also just picked up a flash diffuser for pop-up flash, apparently identical in every way to the Fong "puffer", but sold under a different brand name on eBay, for about 3/4 of the price of the Fong original. I haven't got the "puffer" (clone?) yet, so I don't know if it'll perform as well as the Fong version, but it looks identical in every way, so I don't see why it wouldn't.

Just thought I'd let you guys know, in case any shooters wanted a Fong product, but didn't fancy his prices. Atm I can confirm that the off-brand "Lightsphere II" is exactly the same as the Fong version and can be bought here. They ship world-wide and tax (currently @ 15% for the UK) is not charged for countries outside of the EU, making the product even cheaper. The puffer clone can currently be had here, under the brand name "Spirit".

These are where I got mine from and I'm in no other way affiliated with these sellers.

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Highly-Annoyed* 
Have any of you guys tried the Gary Fong Lightsphere II for speedlights, or the Puffer for pop-up flash?

You'd think Fong would have a patent for these things, right? He must have. Maybe he licences out his inventions for other people to sell? Idk. All I know is that I recently bought a Lightsphere II cloud, identical in every way to the Gary Fong Lightsphere II cloud, but sold as a "store's own" brand at about 1/4 of the price the Fong original sells for online in the UK... Same thing, same results, just minus the Fong brand name and minus 3/4 of the Fong price.

I also just picked up a flash diffuser for pop-up flash, apparently identical in every way to the Fong "puffer", but sold under a different brand name on eBay, for about 3/4 of the price of the Fong original. I haven't got the "puffer" (clone?) yet, so I don't know if it'll perform as well as the Fong version, but it looks identical in every way, so I don't see why it wouldn't.

Just thought I'd let you guys know, in case any shooters wanted a Fong product, but didn't fancy his prices. Atm I can confirm that the off-brand "Lightsphere II" is exactly the same as the Fong version and can be bought here. They ship world-wide and tax (currently @ 15% for the UK) is not charged for countries outside of the EU, making the product even cheaper. The puffer clone can currently be had here, under the brand name "Spirit".

These are where I got mine from and I'm in no other way affiliated with these sellers.

Highly-Annoyed

I have a Gary Fong Puffer (my fiance says it sounds like a porn star's name) and I love it, works much better than I expected. It wasn't something that I was in the market for or even knew about; I simply noticed it at my local camera shop. It was $20 there, which is a lot for a piece of plastic I suppose, but I buy small items from my store (filters, etc. but there lenses are way too expensive). I suppose if I knew about the Spirit I might have considered it instead, but it's only about $5-6 dollars cheaper anyway.


----------



## Marin

Planning on renting this: http://www.lensrentals.com/rent/tamr...f2.8/for-canon

But I still can't find a way to get my hands on a Sigma 10mm f/2.8 for a short time, so I'll probably rent this.: http://www.lensrentals.com/rent/toki...017f/for-canon


----------



## Mootsfox

I want to try this guy so badly, but at $110, I don't want to









http://www.lensrentals.com/rent/niko...pc-e/for-nikon


----------



## bs6851

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Planning on renting this: http://www.lensrentals.com/rent/tamr...f2.8/for-canon

But I still can't find a way to get my hands on a Sigma 10mm f/2.8 for a short time, so I'll probably rent this.: http://www.lensrentals.com/rent/toki...017f/for-canon

That tamron 70-200mm how does it stack up against the canon one?
https://www.lensrentals.com/rent/can...l-is/for-canon


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
I have a Gary Fong Puffer (my fiance says it sounds like a porn star's name) and I love it, works much better than I expected. It wasn't something that I was in the market for or even knew about; I simply noticed it at my local camera shop. It was $20 there, which is a lot for a piece of plastic I suppose, but I buy small items from my store (filters, etc. but there lenses are way too expensive). I suppose if I knew about the Spirit I might have considered it instead, but it's only about $5-6 dollars cheaper anyway.

I'm pleased to hear the puffer works, hopefully the clone version will too. The clone seems good enough in the few obscure reviews I managed to find anyway.

The Lightsphere II cloud is actually quite impressive. It really does a good job of reducing harsh shadows, or simply eliminating them altogether. Much better than direct flash and also better than bounced flash, (even using the built in flash diffuser flashes usually have).

I got the Lightsphere for macro photography mainly, as I use flash a lot with (the necessary) small apertures, even in daylight and I keep getting harsh reflections from shiny surfaces on bugs and plants. Hopefully the LSII will help.

Other than paying around Â£50 for a Fong version in the UK (the equiv. of approx. $75 USD) there doesn't seem to be any other way to get a LSII, other than this online store's own brand. They sell their LSII for about Â£12.50 (around $18 USD) and considering it's essentially identical, it seems like a good deal, for a pretty good bit of kit. I know you can get the Fong version for less than $75 USD in the US, but I haven't seem them sell as low as $18.

Anyway, just wanted to post it, in case somebody was in the market for one of these things and wanted to save some cash







. You never know, Google might pick this thread up and somebody outside of the OCN family might be helped out by this. It took me hours to find, so it might help save somebody some time, as well as money







.

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *bs6851*


That tamron 70-200mm how does it stack up against the canon one?
https://www.lensrentals.com/rent/can...l-is/for-canon


From reviews it it usually comes close or matches it (some say exceeds but who knows) in optical quality. Just it lacks IS (or VC as Tamron calls it) and doesn't use a Sonic motor.

I'm renting the Tamron since I'm thinking about buying one and want to see how I like using it. No need to rent the Canon since I can't afford to buy it anyways.


----------



## bs6851

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


From reviews it it usually comes close or matches it (some say exceeds but who knows) in optical quality. Just it lacks IS (or VC as Tamron calls it) and doesn't use a Sonic motor.

I'm renting the Tamron since I'm thinking about buying one and want to see how I like using it. No need to rent the Canon since I can't afford to buy it anyways.


I actually just rented the canon one because I was thinking of buying it. It comes next week I have a wedding I'm going to so going to try it out there. Please post your impressions of the tamron one once you try it out. Thanks


----------



## default501x

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Yeah, I saw your post over there. I think you'll have better luck if you contact sellers directly there, because lenses are selling like crazy at POTN right now since Canon isn't stocking very many lenses currently (some lenses have been out of stock for a while now).

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...archid=7723249

been doing both.
looks like i will be closing a deal on a 17-40 for 580 very soon here...


----------



## dr4gon

You're going to LOVE IT!

For the price, can't beat it, and optically it's one of the most superior 70-200mm F/2.8's.

See here:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/dr4gon/...n70200f28spdi/


----------



## BittenReaper

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dr4gon* 




WantWantWantWant


----------



## default501x

please add a 430EX II and a BG-E3 to my gear list!


----------



## xlastshotx

I need a new lens, I only have about $500. I need something in the 24/28-70+ range.

I am not really sure if I need a zoom lens though, I have a 50 f/1.8 which is nice but I always want it to be a bit wider on my 50D. So maybe a 28 or 35 prime?

I just don't know what to pick for my price range (if I had more money it would be simple 24-70 f2.8L).

Canon 28 f/2.8 $180
Canon 35 f/2 $240
Sigma 28-70 f/2.8 $325
Sigma 30mm f/1.4 $380
Canon 28 f/1.8 $420
Sigma 24-70 f/2.8 $430


----------



## Marin

Rented the Tamron 70-200mm, lets hope it gets here by monday.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *xlastshotx* 
I need a new lens, I only have about $500. I need something in the 24/28-70+ range.

I am not really sure if I need a zoom lens though, I have a 50 f/1.8 which is nice but I always want it to be a bit wider on my 50D. So maybe a 28 or 35 prime?

I just don't know what to pick for my price range (if I had more money it would be simple 24-70 f2.8L).

Sigma 28-70 f/2.8
Sigma 24-70 f/2.8
Canon 28 f/2.8
Canon 28 f/1.8
Canon 35 f/2

















http://www.amazon.com/Sigma-30mm-Can...9328749&sr=8-2


----------



## xlastshotx

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Rented the Tamron 70-200mm, lets hope it gets here by monday.

http://www.amazon.com/Sigma-30mm-Can...9328749&sr=8-2

That looks nice, the only review I could find on it was on Photozone.de, and there copy didn't perform to well there..?

Did they get a bad copy, I wasn't expecting a prime to perform that poorly.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *xlastshotx* 
That looks nice, the only review I could find on it was on Photozone.de, and there copy didn't perform to well there..?


Sigma is known for having poor QC, so that review site should have known that and attempted to get a good copy for the review.

Anyways, here's another review:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/R...ns-Review.aspx

Mines doing great so far, it is basically on my camera all the time. Here are some shots I took with mine:


----------



## xlastshotx

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Sigma is known for having poor QC, so that review site should have known that and attempted to get a good copy for the review.

Anyways, here's another review:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/R...ns-Review.aspx

Mines doing great so far, it is basically on my camera all the time. Here are some shots I took with mine:


Hmm, I think I mite get one of those. It looks like it can take high quality images, and I really like the way it looks









+mod rep









*edit

Found one used that may or may not be available still.


----------



## laboitenoire

Went for a walk today up in Prospect Park, and took a TON of photos. They are all up on the Flickr, but here's some of the better ones.







I'm really liking this camera. While the picture isn't the best, I like it a lot more than my last one...

BTW, if you're wondering what's up with all the broken trees in the set, it's because this park got hit pretty hard by the ice storm that landed in MA back in December.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Sigma is known for having poor QC, so that review site should have known that and attempted to get a good copy for the review.

Anyways, here's another review:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/R...ns-Review.aspx

IMHO, if they are testing a lens, they should pull one off the shelf and not get a cherry picked one. Kind of like how computer hardware _should_ be reviewed.

If they get a crap lens, then there is probably a good chance you would end up with one too. I want to know that before putting down $300-600 on a piece of glass.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
IMHO, if they are testing a lens, they should pull one off the shelf and not get a cherry picked one. Kind of like how computer hardware _should_ be reviewed.

If they get a crap lens, then there is probably a good chance you would end up with one too. I want to know that before putting down $300-600 on a piece of glass.

True. But at the same time I also want to know how well this lens does at its best. Some other review sites will get a few copies before drawing the line if it doesn't seem to be making a difference.


----------



## BittenReaper

I'd like to join up on the dSLR list, please.









Olympus E-510 10MP Body
Zuiko Digital 40-150mm Telephoto Lens
Sigma 18-50mm Wide-Angle Macro Lens
Tiffen 72mm Protective Glass UV Filter
Olympus Wireless Remote


----------



## USlatin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*







Lovely. They compliment each other so well.


----------



## SoBe8503

I just had to post this lol


----------



## xlastshotx

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
IMHO, if they are testing a lens, they should pull one off the shelf and not get a cherry picked one. Kind of like how computer hardware _should_ be reviewed.

If they get a crap lens, then there is probably a good chance you would end up with one too. I want to know that before putting down $300-600 on a piece of glass.


Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
True. But at the same time I also want to know how well this lens does at its best. Some other review sites will get a few copies before drawing the line if it doesn't seem to be making a difference.


What I understand about that website is that it is a couple guys who do simple tests on the lenses, they don't get them for free to test from the manufactures. Most of the times they just get them donated to test from random people.

I really like the sigma, but I think I am going to wait awhile till a good deal rolls around. I really want the Canon 24-70mm f/2.8L, but I have to wait for a couple paychecks to get that one.


----------



## max302

I am ADORING the bokeh you guys use. It's about time I get myself a 50mm f1.8.

Here are some shots of my new commuter bike.









[URL=http://www.flickr.com/photos/maximerousseau/3419452958/]


Can't wait for the 50mm. Bought an HV30 this winter too, and there's a 35mm adaptor out there that fits Nikon lens, so it'll serve double purpose.

I might re-condition my father's film Pentax to shoot too.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:



Originally Posted by *SoBe8503*





















Eww... Protools HD...







(I'm also into recording gear, and i HATE Protools)

A lens cap saved my day today! I was out hiking on Mt. Tom (just north of Springfield, MA), and had my camera slung over my shoulder. Was scrambling along a huge basalt outcrop and bumped the camera into the rock! Luckily, only the lens cap got scratched slightly. Got some good shots it looks like.


----------



## Dragoon

Well... I just pulled another trigger on the Sigma 30mm f/1.4.

Wish me luck on this one, I couldn't pass up the chance since got it new in box for 317Â£ shipping included whereas they're around 420Â£ RRP shipping included. I just hope I get a good copy.


----------



## xlastshotx

Can anyone send me a link to a comparison between the Canon 24-70 2.8L and the new Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 EX HSM.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dragoon*


Well... I just pulled another trigger on the Sigma 30mm f/1.4.

Wish me luck on this one, I couldn't pass up the chance since got it new in box for 317Â£ shipping included whereas they're around 420Â£ RRP shipping included. I just hope I get a good copy.



















Nice, I've been thinking about picking it up myself.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *xlastshotx*


Can anyone send me a link to a comparison between the Canon 24-70 2.8L and the new Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 EX HSM.


http://www.the-digital-picture.com/R...0&LensComp=372

There you go, you may have to reselect the lenses. It's for FF but should give you some idea.


----------



## xlastshotx

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


http://www.the-digital-picture.com/R...0&LensComp=372

There you go, you may have to reselect the lenses. It's for FF but should give you some idea.



hmm the canon is way sharper than the sigma up to f8 both at 70mm. Both at 24mm the Sigma is almost as sharp as the canon to f3.2.

Thanks for the link, I didn't even know that website had that feature.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *xlastshotx*


hmm the canon is way sharper than the sigma up to f8 both at 70mm. Both at 24mm the Sigma is almost as sharp as the canon to f3.2.

Thanks for the link, I didn't even know that website had that feature.


The Canon is the clear winner wide open, but stopped down both are about the same. I'd say save up for the Canon!


----------



## xlastshotx

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


The Canon is the clear winner wide open, but stopped down both are about the same. I'd say save up for the Canon!


Yeah thats what I think I will have to do if I chose to get a 24-70mm, although I am still trying to figure out if I really need a zoom. All I know is that I want something wider than the 50mm but not as wide as my old 11-16mm. Ideally I would have both the 24-70mm and the 70-200mm, but I don't have that kind of spare cash rite now.

If I got a cheaper 35mm prime or something, I could get some new flash triggers or a nicer tripod. So idk


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *xlastshotx*


Yeah thats what I think I will have to do if I chose to get a 24-70mm, although I am still trying to figure out if I really need a zoom. All I know is that I want something wider than the 50mm but not as wide as my old 11-16mm. Ideally I would have both the 24-70mm and the 70-200mm, but I don't have that kind of spare cash rite now.

If I got a cheaper 35mm prime or something, I could get some new flash triggers or a nicer tripod. So idk


Well, although it doesn't have USM, the Canon EF 35mm f/2 is a damn sharp lens.


----------



## USlatin

hey... has the chat diverged yet to discussion of the Fuji 617 and digital counterparts?



















Digital:

160MP from the Seitz 6x17 Digital Panoramic Camera
http://images.google.com/imgres?imgu...a%3DN%26um%3D1

Red is making a digital motion picture camera slated to produce some ~250MP pictures (and over 24 of those a second)
www.red.com


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *USlatin* 
hey... has the chat diverged yet to discussion of the Fuji 617 and digital counterparts?



















Digital:

160MP from the Seitz 6x17 Digital Panoramic Camera
http://images.google.com/imgres?imgu...a%3DN%26um%3D1

Red is making a digital motion picture camera slated to produce some ~250MP pictures (and over 24 of those a second)
www.red.com

Wow, 160MP - What about 4 _Giga_ Pixels from 9" x 18" exposure?










http://www.gigapxl.org/faqs.htm

And about the RED camera - Holy ****! $17500 video camera? And it uses CF cards??! What's up with the red eye? I CAN'T LET YOU DO THAT DAVE


----------



## USlatin

What about that picture of the guys with a camera the size of a room... wish I could find it now, this isn't about the size of your john, and more like 50k for a complete base package.

Personally I want the FF35 Red, which will shoot S35 or quad 1080p and give you 6k at 100fps... wanna talk about through put that will put 4billion pixels to shame









Though the best deal would be Scarlet which "limits" you to 30fps 6k or 72fps bursts... to use only the S35 (~1.6 crop) section for film... plus some big-boy still specs

Apples and rotten oranges imho







but fun to talk gadgets.

The 6x17 film negatives or sensors give you some serious panorama capabilities in one exposure... the Red would have a little over the number of photosensors as two human retinas put together.


----------



## xlastshotx

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Well, although it doesn't have USM, the Canon EF 35mm f/2 is a damn sharp lens.


I have just enough to get the Canon 35mm f/2 and the Canon 100mm f/2.8 Macro, I wonder if getting those two would be the way to go. I have always wanted to try out macro photography, and that 100mm lens is a good portrait lens as well.

Or I could save some money and get the Kenko Extension tube set for my 50mm. To my understanding if I put a 50mm extension tube on the 50mm lens, it would be a magnification ratio of 1:1?


----------



## USlatin

Does anyone use only MF lenses?

If so, have you guys considered Zeiss ZF manual primes? Expensive, but above average mechanical constriction and phenomenal optics.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *xlastshotx*


I have just enough to get the Canon 35mm f/2 and the Canon 100mm f/2.8 Macro, I wonder if getting those two would be the way to go. I have always wanted to try out macro photography, and that 100mm lens is a good portrait lens as well.

Or I could save some money and get the Kenko Extension tube set for my 50mm. To my understanding if I put a 50mm extension tube on the 50mm lens, it would be a magnification ratio of 1:1?


It would be 1.15x magnification (1.15:1 I think, I understand the number and x format better). You have to know what the native magnification for a lens is first and then add the magnification gained by the tube (tube length divded by focal length of lens = magnification gain). For the 50mm f/1.8, it's something small like .15x, so with a 50mm of tubes added you gain 1x magnification for a total of 1.15x, which is more than 1:2 and almost 2:1.

I'd like to have that same set of Kenko tubes myself. With all of them stacked on my 60mm macro, I could get just over 2:1.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *USlatin*


Does anyone use only MF lenses?

If so, have you guys considered Zeiss ZF manual primes? Expensive, but above average mechanical constriction and phenomenal optics.


Well, I'd love to have a lens like this one just for fun:

Contax Tessar 45mm F2.8 AEJ Lens 45/2.8


----------



## xlastshotx

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


It would be 1.65x magnification (1.65:1 I think, I understand the number and x format better). You have to know what the native magnification for a lens is first and then add the magnification gained by the tube (tube length divded by focal length of lens = magnification gain). For the 50mm f/1.8, it's something small like .15x, so with a 50mm of tubes added you gain 1x magnification for a total of 1.65x, which is more than 1:2 and almost 2:1.

I'd like to have that same set of Kenko tubes myself. With all of them stacked on my 60mm macro, I could get just over 2:1.



hmm so would I be better off getting the extension tubes with the 50mm for $160 or just getting the 100mm macro for $400?

I was also wondering about reverse mounting another 50mm f1.8 onto my current 50mm f/1.8?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *xlastshotx* 
hmm so would I be better off getting the extension tubes with the 50mm for $160 or just getting the 100mm macro for $400?

I was also wondering about reverse mounting another 50mm f1.8 onto my current 50mm f/1.8?

Did my math wrong back there, it would 1.15x not 1.65x. Magnification factors and ratios are so confusing.









Tubes would be cheaper, but the 100mm macro is one a hell of sharp lens. And don't rule out the EF-S 60mm either (just as sharp). The 100mm lets you get further away and still get 1:1, but shakes quite a bit needing a tripod/monopod more. The 60mm is easier to get hand held shots, but you have to get closer for 1:1. Plus the 60mm is $100 or so cheaper.

And I've never tried reverse mounting but I've seen some really amazing macros from such setups.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *USlatin* 
Does anyone use only MF lenses?

If so, have you guys considered Zeiss ZF manual primes? Expensive, but above average mechanical constriction and phenomenal optics.

I use my Nikkor 24mm f/2.8 and 50mm f/2.0 the majority of the time I shoot.

All metal construction, hefty but compact and excellent optics. I bet you could take someone down with one too.. without breaking the lens









Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Did my math wrong back there, it would 1.15x not 1.65x. Magnification factors and ratios are so confusing.









Tubes would be cheaper, but the 100mm macro is one a hell of sharp lens. And don't rule out the EF-S 60mm either (just as sharp). The 100mm lets you get further away and still get 1:1, but shakes quite a bit needing a tripod/monopod more. The 60mm is easier to get hand held shots, but you have to get closer for 1:1. Plus the 60mm is $100 or so cheaper.

And I've never tried reverse mounting but I've seen some really amazing macros from such setups.

You can reverse mount a single lens, or stack lenses. I've only stacked lenses so far. The level of detail can be amazing, but at the same time, it takes forever to get even one decent shot.



















An example shot:









This was all before I got my primes, and I want to go back with those since I will be able to actually set an aperture.


----------



## USlatin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Well, I'd love to have a lens like this one just for fun:

Contax Tessar 45mm F2.8 AEJ Lens 45/2.8

Why a 45mm 2.8f?


----------



## USlatin

Here is a teaser from the R&D department over at Red. Again, really expensive stuff, though not at all from cinema standards. It is an ungraded 5k .jpg from their next CMOS sensor, which is slated to handle up to 100fps at full 5k RAW. It was taken with their new Pro Prime cinema 100mm at f1.7. Click on it for full screen, then again for 1:1.

(from www.reduser.net)


----------



## dr4gon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


I use my Nikkor 24mm f/2.8 and 50mm f/2.0 the majority of the time I shoot.

All metal construction, hefty but compact and excellent optics. I bet you could take someone down with one too.. without breaking the lens









You can reverse mount a single lens, or stack lenses. I've only stacked lenses so far. The level of detail can be amazing, but at the same time, it takes forever to get even one decent shot.



















An example shot:









This was all before I got my primes, and I want to go back with those since I will be able to actually set an aperture.


Yeah the DOF is incredibly shallow and it's hard to achieve a good focus!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *USlatin*


Why a 45mm 2.8f?


For the novelty mostly, it's a pancake lens, something I've always wanted, and for reasons you stated: Zeiss optics!


----------



## Dragoon

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
For the novelty mostly, it's a pancake lens, something I've always wanted, and for reasons you stated: Zeiss optics!

Pancake lenses look quite strange, I can imagine on a big body like the 1D or so.

But it looks great for travelling. That's the only thing special about those lenses right? And having a Zeiss optics would be something to brag about, wouldn't it?









There's still nothing out on the Sigma 10-20 f/3.5... They could at least announce prices


----------



## Marin

Someone find me a site where I can order wristbands for cheap. I need a "lens condom"









http://www.flickr.com/photos/sharpshutter/3251132512/


----------



## muffin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *marin*


someone find me a site where i can order wristbands for cheap. I need a "lens condom"









http://www.flickr.com/photos/sharpshutter/3251132512/


That's cool!


----------



## dr4gon

LOL. Will that really protect it?


----------



## USlatin

Say no to PTDs (photography transmitted diseases)!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *USlatin*


Why a 45mm 2.8f?



Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Someone find me a site where I can order wristbands for cheap. I need a "lens condom"









http://www.flickr.com/photos/sharpshutter/3251132512/


We use this company for our school sports and clubs:

http://www.wristbandswithamessage.com/


----------



## dudemanppl

Just got a 17-35mm f/2.8 and a 70-200mm f/2.8 VR... Gonna try to sell them after a week.


----------



## Dragoon

Kinda confused here or missing something. What are the wristbands on the bottom of the lens for?

I understand from some of the photos seen that they can be used to avoid zoom lenses creeping out when pointed vertically.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Dragoon* 
Kinda confused here or missing something. What are the wristbands on the bottom of the lens for?

I understand from some of the photos seen that they can be used to avoid zoom lenses creeping out when pointed vertically.

*comparison time*

Dust is to sperm as wristband is to condoms.









Here's where it can be useful.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Example*
http://www.flickr.com/photos/carnivillain/2827287540/


----------



## Dragoon

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
*comparison time*

Dust is to sperm as wristband is to condoms.









Here's where it can be useful.

Holy....

I got it "clearly".

Thanks


----------



## nuclearjock

My wife has been into birding for several years now, and she asked me to try and photograph some of the migrating species as they come through our area. No problem said I. Guess what, big problem. These little suckers are fast, and very timid. I have an 80-400 VR Nikkor which is mechanical or "D" type autofocus and is much too slow to be helpful. Further, there's usually some sort of brush or twig between me and the bird which usually completely fools auto focus anyway, so it's manual focus that's worked the best.

Below is a cedar waxwing taken at 400mm with a D300 (1.5x) and a Kenko pro DG 1.4x teleconverter (which allows me to keep AF and VR) so the effective focal length is ~840mm. I also use a Manfroto monopod which alot of wildlife photographers say is a no no with VR and all. but I'd be lost without one. having to steady 800mm while standing is really a pain. I usually shoot a burst of 5-8 shots and a few will be in focus.










The blur you see covering the left side of the bird is underbrush which is out of focus. As soon as I moved to the right to get a clear shot, the bird was gone.

The warblers are just starting to come through, and theyre even smaller.

I'm thinking of renting a 600mm VR and a 2x TC from a local Calumet photo for the month of May. We'll see.


----------



## Oscuro

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Just got a 17-35mm f/2.8 and a 70-200mm f/2.8 VR... Gonna try to sell them after a week.


Why would you just get them, and then sell them after 1 week?


----------



## bentleya

Fans, i love them


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Oscuro* 
Why would you just get them, and then sell them after 1 week?

To try and make money?


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dudemanppl* 
To try and make money?

You're going to sell a used lens for more than the cost of a new one?


----------



## Kris88

What do you guys think of these? This was my first time actually trying to take pictures of birds and its not as easy as I thought


----------



## laboitenoire

Those look pretty good! I tried shooting pics of some birds (ducks, red-winged blackbirds, buzzards) the other day when I went hiking, but it was tricky. Camera was having a hard time focusing, and I had to spray and pray for the buzzards as they were flying.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Kris88*


What do you guys think of these? This was my first time actually trying to take pictures of birds and its not as easy as I thought










I've had the best results with spot metering and spot focusing (if you have a clear shot with no twigs in your way to confuse your af), otherwise spot metering and manual focus and I usually overexpose the critter 1-2 stops. This blows out the background, but unless you have the sun directly on your target it's what you have to put up with.

A monopod and image stabilization also help. They're fast little critters, and a real challenge to photograph, (usually from a distance).


----------



## Marin

http://www.lensrentals.com/rent/cano...k-ii/for-canon

*watch the video*

Never expected that kind of recording quality.


----------



## dr4gon

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Kris88* 
What do you guys think of these? This was my first time actually trying to take pictures of birds and its not as easy as I thought


















Very nice!

Regarding this past week's photo contest, congrats GT. I shall do better than third on our next subject!









Marin, nice video. They did a cool job panning (think that was done with the tripod or in the editing?) It's so smooth.

Isn't this camera MF after you begin recording? They seemed to adjust nicely while moving (elevator scenes).


----------



## MADMAX22

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


http://www.lensrentals.com/rent/cano...k-ii/for-canon

*watch the video*

Never expected that kind of recording quality.


That is really nice.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dr4gon*


Very nice!

Regarding this past week's photo contest, congrats GT. I shall do better than third on our next subject!









Marin, nice video. They did a cool job panning (think that was done with the tripod or in the editing?) It's so smooth.

Isn't this camera MF after you begin recording? They seemed to adjust nicely while moving (elevator scenes).


Thanks, I had despaired and thought I would never even place in one, stiff competition! I have some ideas for the next contest, but the thread was closed before I could tell everyone.


----------



## Sebkiller

I'd like to join. I have:
Canon EOS 400D (Rebel XTi) DSLR and a Canon EOS 500 film.
I also collect old film SLRs but I can't be buggah'd to list them.
Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6
Canon EF 90-300mm f/4.5-5.6
Sigma 100-300mm 1:4.5-6.7 DL
Sigma 24-70mm 1:3.5-5.6 UC

I love to take HDRs and mainly of derelict places.
Heres one of mine..


----------



## GoneTomorrow

The next contest theme is flowers, and I know how everyone loves them!







Good luck with the contest.


----------



## bentleya

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


The next contest theme is flowers, and I know how everyone loves them!







Good luck with the contest.


Do we?







I hate the things


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *bentleya*


Do we?







I hate the things










Well, it's springtime, so what better subject than flowers? Get out and shoot now before the perennials (tulips, etc.) are gone!


----------



## coffeejunky

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
The next contest theme is flowers, and I know how everyone loves them!







Good luck with the contest.

Very nice choice








Just a shame mine will have distracting backgrounds, lol.


----------



## Oscuro

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Well, it's springtime, *so what better subject than flowers?* Get out and shoot now before the perennials (tulips, etc.) are gone!

....Anything?









Means I need to pull my S5 out of retirement....
You're LUCKY I've been waiting to try and get a certain flower shot!


----------



## Marin

First shot on the rental Tamron 70-200mm. So far I'm liking it.



Shot at 200mm, aperture at f/2.8.


----------



## Sebkiller

Flowers you say?


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Well, it's springtime, so what better subject than flowers? Get out and shoot now before the perennials (tulips, etc.) are gone!



Kinda puts us upper midwesterners at somewhat of a disadvantage cause not much is happening here yet. I might have something from last year though.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


Kinda puts us upper midwesterners at somewhat of a disadvantage cause not much is happening here yet. I might have something from last year though.


Surely the prairies will have flowers before the end of this month? Don't forget good old house plants - orchids make for great shots. As for me, I'll be hunting for wild flowers deep in the woods. I have plenty of older shots, but it's time for something new.


----------



## Marin

And testing it out. Sorry about the pic being blurry.


----------



## bs6851

Marin cant wait to see some shots from it and hear your review.


----------



## Oscuro

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Surely the prairies will have flowers before the end of this month? Don't forget good old house plants - orchids make for great shots. As for me, I'll be hunting for wild flowers deep in the woods. I have plenty of older shots, but it's time for something new.









Wild flowers? I have....Ferns....
Uhhm...Skunk cabbage...
Heh


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Surely the prairies will have flowers before the end of this month? Don't forget good old house plants - orchids make for great shots. As for me, I'll be hunting for wild flowers deep in the woods. I have plenty of older shots, but it's time for something new.









My 200mm macro lens is new this year so I'm itch'n to find some new stuff coming up real soon. But where you're located, I'm pretty sure you're at least a month ahead of us.

BTW, my wife has 5 F%&@ing cats that all eat house plants, some of which can be harmful, no houseplants for us. So I may have to travel to the Garfield Park Conservatory in Chi town and see what's happening there.

I'm picking up a 600mm f/4G ED VR AF-S Nikkor that I rented for one week from Helix in Chicago, so I'll be in the city anyway. Also rented a 2x Nikkor teleconverter so should get some interesting small bird shots.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
My 200mm macro lens is new this year so I'm itch'n to find some new stuff coming up real soon. But where you're located, I'm pretty sure you're at least a month ahead of us.

*BTW, my wife has 5 F%&@ing cats that all eat house plants*, some of which can be harmful, no houseplants for us. So I may have to travel to the Garfield Park Conservatory in Chi town and see what's happening there.

I'm picking up a 600mm f/4G ED VR AF-S Nikkor that I rented for one week from Helix in Chicago, so I'll be in the city anyway. Also rented a 2x Nikkor teleconverter so should get some interesting small bird shots.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
My 200mm macro lens is new this year so I'm itch'n to find some new stuff coming up real soon. But where you're located, I'm pretty sure you're at least a month ahead of us.

*BTW, my wife has 5 F%&@ing cats that all eat house plants, some of which can be harmful, no houseplants for us.* So I may have to travel to the Garfield Park Conservatory in Chi town and see what's happening there.

I'm picking up a 600mm f/4G ED VR AF-S Nikkor that I rented for one week from Helix in Chicago, so I'll be in the city anyway. Also rented a 2x Nikkor teleconverter so should get some interesting small bird shots.

LOL, we have four plant-munchers ourselves. Strong words, a firm hand, and a spritz from the water bottle keep them at bay, but the siege continues and there are always sappers in the wire.

If you can't find some nice flowers in Chicago, something's wrong!









Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 









MUZZLE CAT IS NOT AMUSED


----------



## HowHardCanItBe

okay I don't have an SLR camera yet...But this is my attempts at taking a decent photo.
What do you think?


----------



## HowHardCanItBe

opps...made a little mistake...

Code:



Code:


[CODE]
http://img2.imageshack.us/img2/685/dscf4470.jpg

[/CODE]


----------



## Mootsfox

Found a neat video on packing gear.

http://blog.chasejarvis.com/blog/200...otography.html


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 









LOL

Thanks Marin...
Do you think I can get a quantity discount on 5 of these???

Edit:
P.S. Good luck with your Tammy. I've got a 28-300 VC that's useful in some circumstances, not quite up to snuff compared to some of the better Nikkor glass, but still quite good.

From what I've read about the 70-200, it's a whole different ballgame. I actually had a salesman at Calumet photo try to sell me one in place of my 70-200 f/2.8 Nikkor (he was out of stock on that lens btw), but I hefted the Tammy and took several shots in the store and was impressed.

In the end, I opted for the Nikkor glass which I'm extremely happy with, (but not the bloated price).

From what I've read, the reviewers like the Tammy. In the end, lets see what it can do in the hands of someone with your skill and creativity. Pics!!

BTW, we share the same monopod and head for what that's worth.


----------



## Marin

I'm definitely liking the bokeh the it produces, only downside is the dc motor. I'll be gone from OCN for the next few days as I won't have access to a computer due to my laptop not working, but I should come back with some pics.


----------



## default501x

please add a Canon EF 17-40 F/4L to my list








finally got it!
cant wait to go play with it!


----------



## riko99

Got my Nikkor AF-S DX 55-200mm VR lens today so add it on to my section... and the A-Typical gratuitous lens shot.










Will get some shots tomorrow as the Battery died when i took that shot apparently the Fiance was out taking shots earlier to test i lol.


----------



## Danylu

Can someone recommend a good NEF viewer and editor? Google Picassa is okay for viewing but I was wondering if anyone had any suggestions.

I'm also looking to get another lense. I am looking at a Nikon 18-200mm VR f/3.5-5.6. Can anyone offer me any suggestions please? Wanting a good lense that is kind of a one-size-fits-all type thing. Currently the 18-55mm Standard is doing it's job well but it fails hard occassionally. Zoom is one example.


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
Can someone recommend a good NEF viewer and editor? Google Picassa is okay for viewing but I was wondering if anyone had any suggestions.

NEF editor? I've only used Capture NX2 for NEF. It's best for NEF apparently. Supposedly it reads NEFs better than other editors that are merely "compatible" RAW editors and applies Picture Control settings unlike many other "compatible" editors too. It supposedly gives you the greatest degree of control over NEF and reads/applies camera settings better (for NEF) than any other RAW editor. Got to love colour and selection control points too







.

Of course, NX2 only supports the NEF raw format, so if you have other cameras that produce other types of RAW file, it can't do anything with them, which isn't much help. It's powerful for NEF though, although of course it _should_ be.

As for a viewer, I just tried opening a NEF in the free program infanview and although the file extension doesn't seem to be listed in the file-type drop-down, going to "all files" allows you to open a NEF file for viewing; looks like you can do a bit of editing too, although I imagine it's severely limited. You'll need the free plugin pack as well I think.

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## Mootsfox

I use Lightroom 2 and Photoshop CS3 (thank god for school discounts) and love them both. I might look into that Capture NX2 as it's from Nikon, and is probably pretty good, and cheaper than Lightroom + CS (About $150 vs $1500).


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
Can someone recommend a good NEF viewer and editor? Google Picassa is okay for viewing but I was wondering if anyone had any suggestions.

I'm also looking to get another lense. I am looking at a Nikon 18-200mm VR f/3.5-5.6. Can anyone offer me any suggestions please? Wanting a good lense that is kind of a one-size-fits-all type thing. Currently the 18-55mm Standard is doing it's job well but it fails hard occassionally. Zoom is one example.

Besides the other suggestions, if you have Photoshop or Elements, you can use Adobe Camera Raw, works very well.

Honestly if you want consistently good shots with a DSLR, a one-size-fits-all lens won't cut it. It's fine to have a "walkabout" lens which you use _most of the time_, but there won't be one lens that you will _only_ use, if you're serious that is. Tamron and Sigma have made headway into these kinds of lenses, with huge focal ranges and even limited macro capability, but nothing compares to dedicated lenses: wide angle zooms, telephoto zooms, primes, and macros.

And for a lens, the 18-200mm VR is very good in terms of image quality, but very expensive. I suppose if you can afford it no problem, then go for it, but a better and less expensive route would be to get the 55-200mm VR, a great lens which complement your 18-55mm lens and cover the same focal range as the 18-200mm.


----------



## Mootsfox

"Very good" is subjective. I'd put it on par with the 55-200mm VR, but it's easily _four times_ the cost. It's a good lens if you don't want to changes lenses except in a rare case, I don't think it's worth it if you can change lenses though. Others might feel differently.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


"Very good" is subjective. I'd put it on par with the 55-200mm VR, but it's easily _four times_ the cost. It's a good lens if you don't want to changes lenses except in a rare case, I don't think it's worth it if you can change lenses though. Others might feel differently.


Not totally subjective, the MTF charts provide some objectivity (I don't think it can be argued that the lens is awful).

Both the Canon and the Nikon 18-200mm have the same problem. Both are successes in achieving what they were intended: an ideal "vacation lens" which covers a large focal range from wide angle to telephoto, is optically stabilized, and has decent image quality. However both won't be successful in the long run because Canon and Nikon aren't thinking about those to whom these lenses are marketed, beginner and/or amateur DSLR users, who often aren't willing to pay $600 for a lens. It also won't appeal to professionals and advanced amateurs who have no need for such a lens, so it's a little lose-lose.


----------



## Mootsfox

Playing around with a couple thread ideas in my head, I thought I'd mention some of them and see what you guys thought.

Critique the picture above - Similar to the rate the picture above, but with no rating, instead positive feedback.

Topic of the Day/week - a thread to share techincal shooting types such as stop action, high ISO, selective DoF, PoV, etc. This would be less about shooting particular things, but rather how they are shot.

Nikon Guide - An in depth guide on Nikon systems, lenses, accessories and such. I'd write/start this one, but one would be needed for Canon, Sony, Olympus, Lecia, etc.

Thoughts?


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Besides the other suggestions, if you have Photoshop or Elements, you can use Adobe Camera Raw, works very well.

Honestly if you want consistently good shots with a DSLR, a one-size-fits-all lens won't cut it. It's fine to have a "walkabout" lens which you use _most of the time_, but there won't be one lens that you will _only_ use, if you're serious that is. Tamron and Sigma have made headway into these kinds of lenses, with huge focal ranges and even limited macro capability, but nothing compares to dedicated lenses: wide angle zooms, telephoto zooms, primes, and macros.

And for a lens, the 18-200mm VR is very good in terms of image quality, but very expensive. I suppose if you can afford it no problem, then go for it, but a better and less expensive route would be to get the 55-200mm VR, a great lens which complement your 18-55mm lens and cover the same focal range as the 18-200mm.


The current 18-55mm I own annoys me cause the aperture is







and no VR lol. I figured this out when the tour bus decided to have GODDAM tinted windows...









I'm still probing ideas and currently it seems some options are

55-200
&18-200.

I don't think I'll get a prime lense though cause they're kind of inflexible and I'm not into taking portraits but I've seen that they are very good. I still don't really know, maybe I'll have to wait till I get home to see what kind of photos I like to take. Currently on my holidays in America/Canada I always seem to keep hitting the focal length limits :/. If I do decide to get serious, yes I will have a look into telephoto, macro and the rest.

BTW can you please explain 'consistently good shots'? I don't know what sort of quality to expect from my photos, I still don't know how to read those colour chart things dpreview has and I think most of my shots are okay...

Quote:



NEF editor? I've only used Capture NX2 for NEF. It's best for NEF apparently. Supposedly it reads NEFs better than other editors that are merely *"compatible" RAW editors and applies Picture Control settings* unlike many other "compatible" editors too. It supposedly gives you the greatest degree of control over NEF and reads/applies camera settings better (for NEF) than any other RAW editor. Got to love colour and selection control points too










Google Picasa does that and it annoys me, what annoys me even more is that loading the NEFs lags on this netbook or I would have uploaded a photo or two for you guys to give feedback







.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Playing around with a couple thread ideas in my head, I thought I'd mention some of them and see what you guys thought.

Critique the picture above - Similar to the rate the picture above, but with no rating, instead positive feedback.

Topic of the Day/week - a thread to share techincal shooting types such as stop action, high ISO, selective DoF, PoV, etc. This would be less about shooting particular things, but rather how they are shot.

Nikon Guide - An in depth guide on Nikon systems, lenses, accessories and such. I'd write/start this one, but one would be needed for Canon, Sony, Olympus, Lecia, etc.

Thoughts?


All good ideas, I'll gladly help out with whatever I can. I can do the Canon info thread, but I will happily defer to someone more knowledgeable like equetefue.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


The current 18-55mm I own annoys me cause the aperture is







and no VR lol. I figured this out when the tour bus decided to have GODDAM tinted windows...









I'm still probing ideas and currently it seems some options are

55-200
&18-200.

I don't think I'll get a prime lense though cause they're kind of inflexible and I'm not into taking portraits but I've seen that they are very good. I still don't really know, maybe I'll have to wait till I get home to see what kind of photos I like to take. Currently on my holidays in America/Canada I always seem to keep hitting the focal length limits :/. If I do decide to get serious, yes I will have a look into telephoto, macro and the rest.

BTW can you please explain 'consistently good shots'? I don't know what sort of quality to expect from my photos, I still don't know how to read those colour chart things dpreview has and I think most of my shots are okay...


Meaning that you are using lenses made for certain kinds of shooting when shooting in those situations. For example, using a true macro prime lens instead of using a Sigma or Tamron zoom with limited macro capabilities, or using a lens which is known to be soft wide open instead of using a prime or sharper zoom. Or using a lens with a slow focusing mechanism for wildlife/sports instead of a lens with ultra-sonic rings. So what I mean by consistency is that using good lenses really makes it _easier_ to get good shots than using low-end lenses. And that does not mean that you can't take good shots with low end lenses either, especially with today's post-processing software, but sometimes there's nothing sharper than a good prime lens, so it makes sense to have one. So I'm not trying to be condescending about your lens choice, but rather trying to save you some cash that could be better spent on say a prime and/or a macro, or a less-expensive-but-just-as-good zoom lens (i.e. 55-200mm VR). It's all about how much you want to get into DSLR photography. I was looking for exactly same kind of lens as you when I started out (the 18-200mm wasn't out then), but I bought a prime instead and was very glad.

Please read this guide:
http://dcresource.com/forums/showthread.php?t=8089

It made a lot of sense to me when I first got a DSLR. From the guide itself about using "convenience lenses":

Quote:



Recommended for those who want one lens to handle it all. These are perfect lenses for traveling when portability is a concern. *These lenses compromise some quality because of the large range, but the upside is that you can figure out what focal lengths you use the most and work from there.*


----------



## nuclearjock

I own both DX lenses, ie. 55-200 VR and 18-200 VR.

Same shots/conditions/exposure in the 55-200mm range, I doubt even the most sensitive eyes could tell the difference between the two lenses. You're paying the x-tra $500 for the added 18-55 built in convenience. That's a lotta money!!!

Do I use the 18-200 frequently? Yes, at dog parks where we take our dog to run off leash with other dogs, and this type of focal range is actually useful. But $500 is an awful lot of dough to pay for convenience. I paid it, it's a done deal, and I'm happy with the 18-200.

If I were getting started with limited funds, no way.

My 70-200 f/2.8 Nikkor is a beautiful lens. Fast, insanely sharp, and the bokeh is probably the best I've seen. But $2k??

I'm afraid the camera manufacturers have us by the short ones....


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 

I'm afraid the camera manufacturers have us by the short ones....

That's the truth. You know it's bad when you fantasize about what awesome lens you could get if you sold your rig.


----------



## Oscuro

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Playing around with a couple thread ideas in my head, I thought I'd mention some of them and see what you guys thought.

Critique the picture above - Similar to the rate the picture above, but with no rating, instead positive feedback.

Topic of the Day/week - a thread to share techincal shooting types such as stop action, high ISO, selective DoF, PoV, etc. This would be less about shooting particular things, but rather how they are shot.

Nikon Guide - An in depth guide on Nikon systems, lenses, accessories and such. I'd write/start this one, but one would be needed for Canon, Sony, Olympus, Lecia, etc.

Thoughts?

I was actually sort of thinking of starting up a Critique thread, but I wasn't sure if well, people thought my varied critiques that I have post were good to consider it worthwhile.
That...and I'm going to be couch surfing for a bit for hopefully only 2 weeks.

But if you do start such a critique thread, I will happily offer my input, such as it is.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
My 70-200 f/2.8 Nikkor is a beautiful lens. Fast, insanely sharp, and the bokeh is probably the best I've seen. But $2k??

Thus....I plan on getting the 80-200/2.8. Half the price, on par sharpness. Slower AF, and no VR.
Bargain.


----------



## Mootsfox

Got my GTX260







Such a close fit, not more than 5mm of space.


----------



## dudemanppl

I just got my 17-35 f/2.8, OH GOD THIS IS AMAZING! This lens is SHARP! I was missing out on so much.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Got my GTX260







Such a close fit, not more than 5mm of space.

Do you find the GTX260 to be that much better than the 4850? And is that a _stock_ HSF I see in there??


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Do you find the GTX260 to be that much better than the 4850? And is that a _stock_ HSF I see in there??

GTX260 is for folding only







Yeah it's the stock heatsink, and it almost didnt fit in th case at all.


----------



## USlatin

lol.. can you post one showing how much your HDD and the card overlap, lol... those things are big


----------



## Dragoon

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Playing around with a couple thread ideas in my head, I thought I'd mention some of them and see what you guys thought.

Critique the picture above - Similar to the rate the picture above, but with no rating, instead positive feedback.

Topic of the Day/week - a thread to share techincal shooting types such as stop action, high ISO, selective DoF, PoV, etc. This would be less about shooting particular things, but rather how they are shot.

Nikon Guide - An in depth guide on Nikon systems, lenses, accessories and such. I'd write/start this one, but one would be needed for Canon, Sony, Olympus, Lecia, etc.

Thoughts?


Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
All good ideas, I'll gladly help out with whatever I can. I can do the Canon info thread, but I will happily defer to someone more knowledgeable like equetefue.


I second these great ideas, all of them can contribute to beginner SLR users to learn alot from specific topics and how to take full use of their camera.

Also, if it could fit in some specific place, an *accessory information thread/guide*, including filters, tripods, external flash units, etc... A place where people that own determined accessories could share information about it. Just my


----------



## norcrawler

canon 40D FTMFW!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *norcrawler* 
canon 40D FTMFW!!!!!!!!!!

Indeed


----------



## USlatin

Has anyone looked into the soon to be released Panasonic 4/3" GH1? It should blow the doors off the D90 and 5D in terms of video. It will do 24fps 1080p and let you manually control aperture and focus. They also enabled their face tracking AF for video. And it seems it will be a great 12MP still camera. Swivel screen!


----------



## murderbymodem

Hey guys, I'm thinking about jumping into the DSLR world. I've had many digital cameras, all ~$200 cameras, and I've never been happy with the quality of my pictures. it seems like I need to hold the camera completely steady for a good 2 seconds or else I'd get a blurry picture.

I'll have some money soon and was considering this. Opinions? Is the lense that it comes with okay, or would I be better off buying a body and lense seperately?

As for what I'll be taking pictures of, problably a little bit of everything. I used to play Paintball, and still have many friends that do, so I may start going and taking pictures at tournaments. I'd like to start taking some nature pictures too. and of course random shots of friends now and then...basically a bit of everything.

I have not read any guides or stickys yet, I'm going to search for them now, just figured I'd make a post first and introduce myself.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *USlatin* 
Has anyone looked into the soon to be released Panasonic 4/3" GH1? It should blow the doors off the D90 and 5D in terms of video. It will do 24fps 1080p and let you manually control aperture and focus. They also enabled their face tracking AF for video. And it seems it will be a great 12MP still camera. Swivel screen!

It's an exciting camera just for the size. It has no mirror box (only electronic viewfinder and LCD viewer) so it's really small, even smaller than Olympus cameras. The problem with it is that it's absurdly expensive and it uses a new mount, the Micro Four Thirds mount, which means that there are only a few lenses and to use regular 4/3 lenses, it requires an adapter.

But yeah, it supposedly has the best live view out there and the best LCD put on a DSLR. It's also even reasonably fast, but the only thing bad about the camera is it's sub par high ISO noise, which is something that Panasonic has struggled with on all their cameras, DSLR and point-and-shoot alike.

And I would be pissed if I had bought the G1, since Panasonic just released the GH1 (added HD video).

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Redmist* 
Hey guys, I'm thinking about jumping into the DSLR world. I've had many digital cameras, all ~$200 cameras, and I've never been happy with the quality of my pictures. it seems like I need to hold the camera completely steady for a good 2 seconds or else I'd get a blurry picture.

I'll have some money soon and was considering this. Opinions? Is the lense that it comes with okay, or would I be better off buying a body and lense seperately?

I have not read any guides or stickys yet, I'm going to search for them now, just figured I'd make a post first and introduce myself.









The D60 is a fine body and it's kit lens is one of the best out there. Others to consider in that price range are the Nikon D40, Canon XSi and Canon XS.


----------



## USlatin

Yea, but they have a few lenses that should cover you very well. I love the size thing though at the same time I have big hands so I'd have to feel it first. D90's are a tad too small for me but big enough.

Do you know anything about the D400?


----------



## murderbymodem

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
It's an exciting camera just for the size. It has no mirror box (only electronic viewfinder and LCD viewer) so it's really small, even smaller than Olympus cameras. The problem with it is that it's absurdly expensive and it uses a new mount, the Micro Four Thirds mount, which means that there are only a few lenses and to use regular 4/3 lenses, it requires an adapter.

But yeah, it supposedly has the best live view out there and the best LCD put on a DSLR. It's also even reasonably fast, but the only thing bad about the camera is it's sub par high ISO noise, which is something that Panasonic has struggled with on all their cameras, DSLR and point-and-shoot alike.

And I would be pissed if I had bought the G1, since Panasonic just released the GH1 (added HD video).

The D60 is a find body and it's kit lens is one of the best out there. Others to consider in that price range are the Nikon D40, Canon XSi and Canon XS.

I checked out the Canons on Newegg, the XSi is a bit too expensive for me. ($569 for the body only, while I could get a D60 with the lense for $550)

The XS is only $509 and comes with a lense, but reading the reviews on Newegg I'm leaning towards the D60.

Then again I may decide to cut my budget and go with the D40. Too bad I can't seem to find the D40x anywhere. What do you guys think would be better, splurging for the D60, or going with the D40 and saving the $100 difference to put towards a lens?

Anyway, you guys should check out my friend's Flickr:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/enmpaul...7614721892901/

He take paintball pictures, he's really good.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *USlatin*


Yea, but they have a few lenses that should cover you very well. I love the size thing though at the same time I have big hands so I'd have to feel it first. D90's are a tad too small for me but big enough.

Do you know anything about the D400?


The D90 is too small for you? I could see the D60 being that way, but the D90 is pretty big.

The D400 is still on the rumor stage.


----------



## Marin

Here are some shots with the Tamron 70-200mm, the sharpness of this lens easily makes up for it using a DC motors. I have missed a few shots because of it being slow to focus, but the ones that I have gotten are extremely sharp. These photos are just the ones I uploaded for Project 365, more to come later.

(these are all hand held)


----------



## dr4gon

Wow all awesome! I've missed shots due to the lack of a SSM (sony's ultra fast motor), but the sharpness and price make it a good value for sure.

That's an awesome flower macro!


----------



## bs6851

Ok guys here is the first couple I took today with a Canon EF70-200mm f2.8 L IS USM. Their not amazing I know I'm still very new so still have lots to learn. Both at f2.8:



















C+C welcome.


----------



## USlatin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Redmist* 
I checked out the Canons on Newegg, the XSi is a bit too expensive for me. ($569 for the body only, while I could get a D60 with the lense for $550)

The XS is only $509 and comes with a lense, but reading the reviews on Newegg I'm leaning towards the D60.

Then again I may decide to cut my budget and go with the D40. Too bad I can't seem to find the D40x anywhere. What do you guys think would be better, splurging for the D60, or going with the D40 and saving the $100 difference to put towards a lens?

Anyway, you guys should check out my friend's Flickr:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/enmpaul...7614721892901/

He take paintball pictures, he's really good.

If you are starting out I would HIGHLY recommend you get something with Live View if possible. You will learn much faster. It sounds like it may be off your range though I wonder if some of the new Rebels included that recently?

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
The D90 is too small for you? I could see the D60 being that way, but the D90 is pretty big.

The D400 is still on the rumor stage.

Well, not really, the D90 is big enough, but a 5D size feels better for long periods of time.

If they put out a D400 soon it will certainly have some sick video options. It would seem it would be an answer to the 5D and GH1... I smell full frame 24fps + 30fps @ 1080p and manual everything.... and crazy good still capabilities on top of that since you might as well keep that there too


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *USlatin* 
If they put out a D400 soon it will certainly have some sick video options. It would seem it would be an answer to the 5D and GH1... I smell full frame 24fps + 30fps @ 1080p and manual everything.... and crazy good still capabilities on top of that since you might as well keep that there too









If I had to guess, I would say 12-21 MP, 1080p @ 24fps, 720p at 30fps, live view + tilt/rotating lcd and a price tag around $1800.


----------



## USlatin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
+ tilt/rotating lcd and a price tag around $1800.

I would cream my pants... I am SO all about swivel screens! And at $1800 it would be an INSANE deal for something that would give you very strong Pro still capabilities and some very strong Prosumer video capabilities.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dr4gon* 
Wow all awesome! I've missed shots due to the lack of a SSM (sony's ultra fast motor), but the sharpness and price make it a good value for sure.

That's an awesome flower macro!

Thanks.
__________________________________________________ ____

And some more pics with the Tammy.


----------



## USlatin

I would love more dynamic across the board too.


----------



## dr4gon

Macro from Tuesday, Sony 100mm F/2.8


----------



## Marin

That's really smooth bokeh and a great capture.

Here's some more shots from my small "trip".


----------



## muffin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Can someone recommend a good NEF viewer and editor? Google Picassa is okay for viewing but I was wondering if anyone had any suggestions.

I'm also looking to get another lense. I am looking at a Nikon 18-200mm VR f/3.5-5.6. Can anyone offer me any suggestions please? Wanting a good lense that is kind of a one-size-fits-all type thing. Currently the 18-55mm Standard is doing it's job well but it fails hard occassionally. Zoom is one example.


I don't use Nikon software at all because Nikon refuse to support Vista x64. To get Windows Picture+Fax viewer to recognise .NEF you have to buy a codec from a third party just because Nikon are too damn lazy to make their own. I use the GIMP with UFRaw for editing.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *muffin*


I don't use Nikon software at all because Nikon refuse to support Vista x64. To get Windows Picture+Fax viewer to recognise .NEF you have to buy a codec from a third party just because Nikon are too damn lazy to make their own. I use the GIMP with UFRaw for editing.


Same goes for Canon sadly.


----------



## Mootsfox

Did I ever post this?


----------



## muffin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Same goes for Canon sadly.




















Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*

Did I ever post this?


Yes


----------



## Marin

I'm definitely getting this lens now. Sucks that I have to send it back in a few days.


----------



## muffin

Curse you people who live in permanent sunshine! Why does it have to be so grey and boring on this crappy little North-Atlantic island?


----------



## norcrawler

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
It's an exciting camera just for the size. It has no mirror box (only electronic viewfinder and LCD viewer) so it's really small, even smaller than Olympus cameras. The problem with it is that it's absurdly expensive and it uses a new mount, the Micro Four Thirds mount, which means that there are only a few lenses and to use regular 4/3 lenses, it requires an adapter.

But yeah, it supposedly has the best live view out there and the best LCD put on a DSLR. It's also even reasonably fast, but the only thing bad about the camera is it's sub par high ISO noise, which is something that Panasonic has struggled with on all their cameras, DSLR and point-and-shoot alike.

And I would be pissed if I had bought the G1, since Panasonic just released the GH1 (added HD video).

The D60 is a fine body and it's kit lens is one of the best out there. Others to consider in that price range are the Nikon D40, Canon XSi and Canon XS.

get a xsi over a d60 any day..its not even in the same league and for the price,its way worth it.
i just hate the feel of the rebels tho. thats why im about to buy a 40d. 40d goes dookie on a xsi.haha

no but really..


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dr4gon*


Macro from Tuesday, Sony 100mm F/2.8




How far away were you from the bee? It looks nice.









About the lend upgrade, I'm going to postpone it for a little bit, I'll also make up my mind for the lense at the shop so I can try both of them out first







.

But for more pressing matters;

1. Camera shots sometimes randomly get corrupt before they get to the
computer, After everytime I move files back to the computer I delete all files then format the card while it's in the camera - format it twice. Is it safe to assume the SD card is failing?

2. With the 18-55 I currently have, it intermittently fails to autofocus, I mean, the front of the lense doesn't move at all, even if the switch is in the auto position. I'm assuming something wrong with the lense cause the D60 doesn't have a motor thing?


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
How far away were you from the bee? It looks nice.









About the lend upgrade, I'm going to postpone it for a little bit, I'll also make up my mind for the lense at the shop so I can try both of them out first







.

But for more pressing matters;

1. Camera shots sometimes randomly get corrupt before they get to the
computer, After everytime I move files back to the computer I delete all files then format the card while it's in the camera - format it twice. Is it safe to assume the SD card is failing?

2. With the 18-55 I currently have, it intermittently fails to autofocus, I mean, the front of the lense doesn't move at all, even if the switch is in the auto position. I'm assuming something wrong with the lense cause the D60 doesn't have a motor thing?

1. Sounds like it.

2. Make sure it is correctly pointed at the object you want in focus. For example if you wanted something like a bench in focus, but were shooting it off center, first focus on the bench, then hold the AE-L/AF-L button to the right of the viewfinder, then shoot your picture. You can also adjust the focus point with the D-pad, but the D40/60 series only has 3 point focus.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
1. Sounds like it.

2. Make sure it is correctly pointed at the object you want in focus. For example if you wanted something like a bench in focus, but were shooting it off center, first focus on the bench, then hold the AE-L/AF-L button to the right of the viewfinder, then shoot your picture. You can also adjust the focus point with the D-pad, but the D40/60 series only has 3 point focus.


Hm, when I say it fails to autofocus, it will actually fail! Nothing will move and it'll do nothing. It happened a few times in broad daylight of subjects (people) 3 or so metres away. It will not attempt to focus at all.









No mechanical moving, nothing. The front of the lense, the focusing ring, will not move at all and the lense is not internal focus. Since the Nikon D60 does not have an internal motor I am assuming it's the lense.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
Hm, when I say it fails to autofocus, it will actually fail! Nothing will move and it'll do nothing. It happened a few times in broad daylight of subjects (people) 3 or so metres away. It will not attempt to focus at all.









No mechanical moving, nothing. The front of the lense, the focusing ring, will not move at all and the lense is not internal focus. Since the Nikon D60 does not have an internal motor I am assuming it's the lense.

If you point it at something else does it focus?


----------



## Oscuro

My question is...why do you reformat the SD card twice after you offload files every time? Doesn't make much sense to me from where I am sitting. I thing that might be putting excess read/write cycles into the memory, which might be causing it to fail "early". Perosnally, I just download from the card, and then erase what is on it. Leave it at that.


----------



## Squeeker The Cat

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Oscuro* 
My question is...why do you reformat the SD card twice after you offload files every time? Doesn't make much sense to me from where I am sitting. I thing that might be putting excess read/write cycles into the memory, which might be causing it to fail "early". Perosnally, I just download from the card, and then erase what is on it. Leave it at that.

i cant find where someone wanted to format it? why do you need to each time? or why does someone think they need to?


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Squeeker The Cat* 
i cant find where someone wanted to format it? why do you need to each time? or why does someone think they need to?

I've read that most professional photogs format their cards each and every time they insert it into the body after a file transfer just to be sure the card is properly formatted and there are no "residuals" left on the card.

I now do this out of habit and have never had a problem, but I also never had a problem for the ~1 year before when I used to just dump files from the card and use it without formatting.

I do use only high quality sandisk cards though. Fastest transfer rate available.


----------



## muffin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
I've read that most professional photogs format their cards each and every time they insert it into the body after a file transfer just to be sure the card is properly formatted and there are no "residuals" left on the card.

I now do this out of habit and have never had a problem, but I also never had a problem for the ~1 year before when I used to just dump files from the card and use it without formatting.

I do use only high quality sandisk cards though. Fastest transfer rate available.

I reformatted my 4GB Sandisk card the first time I put it into my D90 (normally I never reformat), and it still has the 100ND40x folder on it. Empty, but the folder itself is still there.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *muffin* 
I reformatted my 4GB Sandisk card the first time I put it into my D90 (normally I never reformat), and it still has the 100ND40x folder on it. Empty, but the folder itself is still there.

I took an 8gb sandisk cf from my D300 and placed it in my D3 and formated and all the D300 stuff was wiped clean. It shouldn't make any difference, but I use the two button method for formating my cards. Doing it from the menu should accomplish the same thing.

Sump'n sounds funny....


----------



## Danylu

It won't focus at anything. I'll point at 4 different things at differnt ranges and nothing will happen. I format because I was thinking it might be related to the corrupt files. I do it twice cause I can't think of anything else that can be the problem and seriously, life cycles? Come on if it dies in a year I'll pay another $10 for a replacement. If it was an SSD I'd be more careful. Oh and, I have owned the card for less than a month I think. Thanks for the help so far


----------



## Marin

Went to my local photography store to get some Tri-X for my dads Leica (as I need some photos shot with film for my portfolio). Anyways, while there I finally got to see some camera bags in person and loved how easy it was to remove the camera from the Slingshot. So... I finally picked one up.

Also nice since I won't have as much camera gear laying around in the back of my cars trunk.


----------



## Mootsfox

What do you drive?


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


What do you drive?


Audi A4.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Went to my local photography store to get some Tri-X for my dads Leica (as I need some photos shot with film for my portfolio). Anyways, while there I finally got to see some camera bags in person and loved how easy it was to remove the camera from the Slingshot. So... I finally picked one up.

Also nice since I won't have as much camera gear laying around in the back of my cars trunk.










I have the same bag, love it. A monopod (even a tripod) fits nicely into the loop on the side.


----------



## riko99

that bag keeps popping up when i look at it... maybe once i get more gear cause the bag i have right now supports 2 loose lenses and one on camera so i cant justify the price tag yet for that bag. It is nice though.


----------



## dr4gon

Did some cable cleaning last week.



More here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/dr4gon/...7616959780701/


----------



## Marin

You should flip your HDD's.

Shot of me holding the Tammy. (To give an idea of the size of the lens for some, I'm 5' 11")


----------



## dr4gon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


You should flip your HDD's.

Shot of me holding the Tammy. (To give an idea of the size of the lens for some, I'm 5' 11")




I tried, but the cables stick out too much when I slide them in the rails and lock it in. Am I doing something wrong? It would save me the trouble of getting longer cables and give a cleaner look overall. But with the window covering that bottom section, it's completely hidden. I would be using black hdd sata cables, but I needed right angle ones because this sapphire heatsink on the 4870 is just huge!

Yeah it's really long!

The box is huge


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


You should flip your HDD's.

Shot of me holding the Tammy. (To give an idea of the size of the lens for some, I'm 5' 11")


So what's the verdict, buy or not to buy??

My 80-400 nikkor is a "d" lens and focuses with a "screw" which makes it frustrating when you need quick resullts (like with wildlife). Alot of the stuff I shoot with it is in obscured brush which fools the af anyway so I've become used to manual focus which isn't really all that bad.

The Tammy optics seem sweet on that lens though, I've got a 28-300 VC that I fool around with from time to time and I like it.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


So what's the verdict, buy or not to buy??

My 80-400 nikkor is a "d" lens and focuses with a "screw" which makes it frustrating when you need quick resullts (like with wildlife). Alot of the stuff I shoot with it is in obscured brush which fools the af anyway so I've become used to manual focus which isn't really all that bad.

The Tammy optics seem sweet on that lens though, I've got a 28-300 VC that I fool around with from time to time and I like it.


I'm definitely getting it. I haven't found the DC motor to be an issue lately with the photos I've been taking and since I only use it outside the noise also isn't an issue. The lens is extremely sharp and I can confidently say it's on par optically with Canon and Nikon.


----------



## nuclearjock

D3, 24-70 f/2.8 nikkor

Edit:
The burgers (grease pool) were for our boxer.


----------



## Mootsfox

Replacing the HDD in my X61 with the one on the right. The one in the middle is the drive that was just in it, notice the shock mounts, and the drive on the left is going to be RAID 0'd with the middle one in a 3.5" bay when I pick it up tomorrow









It fits in this thread because I need the new drive to store photos and speed up my editting (7200rpm vs 5400rpm).


----------



## Marin

Seems like Art Center is interested in me because of my portfolio and the fact that I'm still a Junior (met with them over spring break). Admissions liked what I had and I got a personal tour of the photography department.

Also found out my dad is under their notable alumni (admissions didn't know until my dad found a section about himself in one of their books talking about alumni) so... that should help too...

Going to start an internship next week.


----------



## BittenReaper

Good luck, mate!


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Seems like Art Center is interested in me because of my portfolio and the fact that I'm still a Junior (met with them over spring break). Admissions liked what I had and I got a personal tour of the photography department.

Also found out my dad is under their notable alumni (admissions didn't know until my dad found a section about himself in one of their books talking about alumni) so... that should help too...

Going to start an internship next week.


Celebrate, buy the Tammy.


----------



## xlastshotx

They may not be mirror like, but they are almost perfectly flat, I dont think there is any way I could make them flatter. Sanded both of them to 1000 grit.

Went from 46c load to 37c load









(yeah I know those hairs on the bottom rite are annoying, I am going to remove them later. I am on Ubuntu rite now and I have no idea how to use GIMP to remove things. So I have to wait until I get on Photoshop)


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *xlastshotx*


They may not be mirror like, but they are almost perfectly flat, I dont think there is any way I could make them flatter. Sanded both of them to 1000 grit.

Went from 46c load to 37c load









(yeah I know those hairs on the bottom rite are annoying, I am going to remove them later. I am on Ubuntu rite now and I have no idea how to use GIMP to remove things. So I have to wait until I get on Photoshop)


Right on, that's all I went for with my lap. I gave up after a few hours of sanding trying to get a mirror (but I got very close, decent reflection). I tested but sitting the processor on top with the HS inverted to make sure the corners touched.


----------



## xlastshotx

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Right on, that's all I went for with my lap. I gave up after a few hours of sanding trying to get a mirror (but I got very close, decent reflection). I tested but sitting the processor on top with the HS inverted to make sure the corners touched.

Yeah, three of the 4 corners are even with the block, one of them has a tiny gap, but I just didn't think it would be worth sanding the whole thing over and risking making it uneaven to fix a tiny corner that wouldn't make any difference in tempurature (and it really is a tiny tiny gap.

They are semi reflective, but not like a mirror like I have seen others have.

I was almost considering sanding it down to the acutal chips, but I am pretty afraid... One day maybe.


----------



## Marin

Getting a mirror finish is pointless. It offers no benefit to temps and just adds a lot of extra work. Most people get the effect by using fine grits and polishing, the thing is though the polish fills in the gaps and can actually make temps worse.

All you should really be doing when lapping is trying to get it as flat as possible. It may not look pretty like a mirror finish but it works.


----------



## xlastshotx

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Getting a mirror finish is pointless. It offers no benefit to temps and just adds a lot of extra work. Most people get the effect by using fine grits and polishing, the thing is though the polish fills in the gaps and can actually make temps worse.

All you should really be doing when lapping is trying to get it as flat as possible. It may not look pretty like a mirror finish but it works.


Yeah that's what I have read over the years, I didn't want to waste high grit sandpaper for nothing more than making two pieces of parts you almost never see look shiny. I just wanted to drop my temps a bit.

37c Load @ 4.15Ghz with my radiator fans on there lowest setting is pretty good I think (26c ambient {no air conditioning + heat wave = 26c+ ambient







}).


----------



## Dragoon

It has arrived! Shippment was quite fast.









I know everyone here has seen quite a dosage of photos from this lens. I had to use the 18-55mm to shot these, and the room was already dark-ish so I had to use the flash


























Focused on the mouse on the back:









Focused on the remote control in the middle:









Focused on the forground remote control:









So, I think I got a good copy, but anyone that has this lens as well, let me know what you think.









One thing I have noticed, is it me, or the camera automatically adjusts the flash intensity depending on the distance to the focused object?

*@GoneTomorrow*: You can safely add the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 to the list (And the 60mm macro, you missed that one







)


----------



## Mootsfox

Both Canon and Nikon have a TTL (through the lens) metering system that will adjust flash based on the light available and your set shutter speed.


----------



## Dragoon

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Both Canon and Nikon have a TTL (through the lens) metering system that will adjust flash based on the light available and your set shutter speed.

Ah, I see. Thanks alot Moots. Cheers!


----------



## equetefue

Bad bad day !!! 

Bad weather... here's the best for the day

Caracara


















Ibis









Osprey looking for food









Osprey diving









Osprey wtih fish


----------



## GoneTomorrow

The-Digital-Picture has one of the only reviews of the Canon EF 1200mm f/5.6 USM posted:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/R...ns-Review.aspx

$120,000, a production rate of 2 per year, 36 lbs., and the fluorite crystals used to make some of the elements take a year to grow. It's even compatible with the Canon 2X teleconverter, for a total focal length of 2400mm (at f/11 though)!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Dragoon* 
It has arrived! Shippment was quite fast.









I know everyone here has seen quite a dosage of photos from this lens. I had to use the 18-55mm to shot these, and the room was already dark-ish so I had to use the flash









So, I think I got a good copy, but anyone that has this lens as well, let me know what you think.









One thing I have noticed, is it me, or the camera automatically adjusts the flash intensity depending on the distance to the focused object?

*@GoneTomorrow*: You can safely add the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 to the list (And the 60mm macro, you missed that one







)









Added both, you're getting a nice collection there!

Quote:


Originally Posted by *equetefue* 
Bad bad day !!! 

Bad weather... here's the best for the day

Caracara

Nice shots as always equetefue, I like the Ibis shot and that Caracara looks fierce, I thought it was a Stellar's Sea Eagle at first.


----------



## Dragoon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


The-Digital-Picture has one of the only reviews of the Canon EF 1200mm f/5.6 USM posted:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/R...ns-Review.aspx

$120,000, a production rate of 2 per year, 36 lbs., and the fluorite crystals used to make some of the elements take a year to grow. It's even compatible with the Canon 2X teleconverter, for a total focal length of 2400mm (at f/11 though)!











Wow... 1200mm at f/5.6... The lens is most likely to need its own mono/tripod, if not mandatory to even weild that stable!

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Added both, you're getting a nice collection there!

Nice shots as always equetefue, I like the Ibis shot and that Caracara looks fierce, I thought it was a Stellar's Sea Eagle at first.


It's growing steadily. Waiting for any news on the 10-20mm f/3.5.

And QFT on those shots. Simply outstanding.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



I know that after reading this review, you think you need one of these lenses. Being realistic, the Canon EF 800mm f/5.6 L IS USM Lens is going to be the better option for most people. While obviously not as long in the focal length spec, the 800 is a better lens in most other aspects. It is sharper wide open, focuses faster, is smaller and lighter - and the Canon EF 1200mm f/5.6 L USM Lens price *makes the 800 L look like a bargain.*


True, I lol'd.


----------



## Dragoon

This lens has a hard time focusing on low light conditions, especially to the infinite, it most of the times focuses back forcing me to override with "FTM"... I have to do few more tests on it during daylight, ah damn it... I hope it's not faulty.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 









I'd buy it, but I can't afford a 1D MKIII to go with it.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *equetefue* 
Bad bad day !!! 

Bad weather... here's the best for the day


Absolutely stunning Edwin..

What focal length(s) are these taken at??


----------



## Marin

Quote:

So when B&H Photo called to invite me to review this lens, I of course said "Yes!".
Then Ken Rockwell chimed in going "WUD ABOUT MEE?!".


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
I'd buy it, but I can't afford a 1D MKIII to go with it.









That's ok, with Canon's 1.6x crop and a 2x teleconverter you could have a ~3800mm f/11 lens.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Then Ken Rockwell chimed in going "WUD ABOUT MEE?!".

And then he would shoot it hand held on burst mode and keep the best one.


----------



## Marin

Should I lose the UV Filter. Yes or No?

I just did a comparison shot and it looks like the one with the filter is less sharp and has chromatic aberration (way more than I had thought it had, to the point of hurting the image). Seems like the only benefit of having it is keeping dust from getting behind the first element... but then again the rental Tammy has a ton of dust on the second and third elements and it hasn't hurt the images...
Think I may take it off and use the filters when I need to seal the front element from weather...

EDIT: I'm going to do some more test shots to see what happens...

EDIT 2: Doesn't seem to be as bad as I thought but I'm still on the wall about keeping the UV Filter. The Tammy seems to have done great without it except for the dust on the second and third elements, but that seems to be because of the AF/M switch on the lens. Wonder how much dust can get past the front element as it moves when focusing.


----------



## Mootsfox

Take the filter off unless you want the effect.

But you knew I would say that.


----------



## Marin

Decided to stop using UV Filters. I'll still keep them at hand for situations that require them (dust, rain, mud, etc...) but otherwise they aren't needed. Looking back at some night pics, the filters looked like they have done more harm than good with ghosting from lamps and stoplights (this is with the B+W MRC, any higher end I'll have to start breaking $70 which is ridiculous).

The lens that would be at the most risk of damage would be my Sigma since I use it the majority of the time (there is basically no way for me to damage the Canon 60mm unless I'm careless with macro shots) and Sigma has a 4 year warranty, so if I ever damage the front element I can have them replace it. And no matter what I'm going to end up sending it to them to fix up before I sell the lens (if I ever make the move to FF).


----------



## Mootsfox

Good choice Marin. I'm glad you saw the light so to speak.


----------



## muffin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Decided to stop using UV Filters. I'll still keep them at hand for situations that require them (dust, rain, mud, etc...) but otherwise they aren't needed. Looking back at some night pics, the filters looked like they have done more harm than good with ghosting from lamps and stoplights (this is with the B+W MRC, any higher end I'll have to start breaking $70 which is ridiculous).

The lens that would be at the most risk of damage would be my Sigma since I use it the majority of the time (there is basically no way for me to damage the Canon 60mm unless I'm careless with macro shots) and Sigma has a 4 year warranty, so if I ever damage the front element I can have them replace it. And no matter what I'm going to end up sending it to them to fix up before I sell the lens (if I ever make the move to FF).

Why does it have to be a UV filter? Just leave a skylight filter on it.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *muffin*


Why does it have to be a UV filter? Just leave a skylight filter on it.


Probably will have the same ghosting problems.


----------



## equetefue

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
Absolutely stunning Edwin..

What focal length(s) are these taken at??

Those were taken with the 1D MarkII and 400 f5.6L + 1.4x tc on a Wimberly Sidekick tripod set-up

Glad you guys like them.

Currently saving for a 400f2.8 L or a 600 f4L


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *equetefue*


Those were taken with the 1D MarkII and 400 f5.6L + 1.4x tc on a Wimberly Sidekick tripod set-up

Glad you guys like them.

Currently saving for a 400f2.8 L or a 600 f4L


That's exactly whe're I'm at now. 400 x 1.4TC x1.5 crop factor (vs your 1.6) with my D300, in less demanding situations, I'll use my D3 since af is much faster with my 400 "d" lens than with the D300.

I have a 600mm f/4 VR Nikkor and a 2x Nikkor TC set up for the weekend of May 8th to shoot some migrating warblers. Wife says if it looks good, I've got the go ahead to order one. Fingers and toes are crossed.


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

One of my first shots with my Tokina 11-16mm.








11mm, F8, 1/320th Sec, ISO200, Handheld, GIMP Exposure Blend.

Downscaling seems to have softened it a bit, it's actually very sharp at full size.

Also, I'm considering getting a ND filter or two; any suggestions?

Will upload some others later on







.

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## Squeeker The Cat

question guys................who has seen the movie yes man???

the camera that the chick uses in that movie what is it? it looks like an older Sony cybershot point and shoot, but it is like a Polaroid too. its like a digital Polaroid?? here is the best pic i could find lol


----------



## laboitenoire

Almost looks like an old Sony Mavica.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
EDIT 2: Doesn't seem to be as bad as I thought but I'm still on the wall about keeping the UV Filter. The Tammy seems to have done great without it except for the dust on the second and third elements, but that seems to be because of the AF/M switch on the lens. Wonder how much dust can get past the front element as it moves when focusing.

This is a little scary Marin. I have several nikkor lenses from the late '70's that have seen alot of use/abuse and none of them have dust on the inner elements. Again, you say that it doesn't manifest itself in your pics, but if the lens isn't sealed properly, then fogging/moisture may at some time become an issue. I suppose it's possible that during it's rental life, a bump may have disturbed a seal and dust is now able to find it's way in. Maybe it's just my paranoia, but dust on the inner elements doesn't seem like a good sign.

I remember checking out a used 80-200mm f/2.8D ED AF Zoom-Nikkor and it looked like it was in pretty decent shape so I bought it. When I got it home and looked at it more closely, I saw something that looked like a piece of snot rolling about deep inside the lens. Needless to say, I returned it and coughed up some more $$ for my 70-200 f/2.8 which I bought new and love to pieces.

I use Heliopan or B&W UV filters on all my lenses and have never seen any adverse effects. I also have a couple of Hoya filters which seem to perform well.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
*This is a little scary Marin. I have several nikkor lenses from the late '70's that have seen alot of use/abuse and none of them have dust on the inner elements. Again, you say that it doesn't manifest itself in your pics, but if the lens isn't sealed properly, then fogging/moisture may at some time become an issue. I suppose it's possible that during it's rental life, a bump may have disturbed a seal and dust is now able to find it's way in. Maybe it's just my paranoia, but dust on the inner elements doesn't seem like a good sign.*

I remember checking out a used 80-200mm f/2.8D ED AF Zoom-Nikkor and it looked like it was in pretty decent shape so I bought it. When I got it home and looked at it more closely, I saw something that looked like a piece of snot rolling about deep inside the lens. Needless to say, I returned it and coughed up some more $$ for my 70-200 f/2.8 which I bought new and love to pieces.

I use Heliopan or B&W UV filters on all my lenses and have never seen any adverse effects. I also have a couple of Hoya filters which seem to perform well.

I've been trying to figure out how the dust made it's way in there. The front element doesn't move and is completely sealed, so I'm leaning towards the usage of the clutch switch causing dust to get in.

What I did notice though were the screws holding the cap around the front element (which has the screws under it to remove the element) seemed to have been tampered with as they were loose.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Highly-Annoyed* 
One of my first shots with my Tokina 11-16mm.








11mm, F8, 1/320th Sec, ISO200, Handheld, GIMP Exposure Blend.

Downscaling seems to have softened it a bit, it's actually very sharp at full size.

Also, I'm considering getting a ND filter or two; any suggestions?

Will upload some others later on







.

Highly-Annoyed

It looks very good, nice framing and composition. You should try resizing your shots to 1024 x 768, I find it a nice balance between visibility and maintaining detail.

For ND filter, what will you use it for? I use a .9 (8X) for slow water shots, but I find that it isn't dark enough in full sunlight, so I'm looking at getting at least a 1.5 or 1.8.


----------



## Dragoon

Damn you Sigma for your lemon rates!









I might have to send this lens off to Sigma UK or return it and ask for a replacement, roughly 90% of the shots I took at daylight (The camera had to set itself for 1/1600sec at ISO 100 and F/2.8, so you have an idea how bright it was), and it simply fails to focus to the infinite, and I can safely say that I took exactly *69* photos in over one hour of testing and tweaking.

The camera focuses really well at closer range, stacked few items and it focused on each single one perfectly with and without flash (Low light condition).

I bought the lens on Ebay BNIB, and the seller offers 1 year of warranty from himself, but personally, I think sending off to Sigma to re-calibrate would be best. Less time consuming and probably yield better results than getting a new one.

What do you guys think?

What rotten luck...


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dragoon*


Damn you Sigma for your lemon rates!









I might have to send this lens off to Sigma UK or return it and ask for a replacement, roughly 90% of the shots I took at daylight (The camera had to set itself for 1/1600sec at ISO 100 and F/2.8, so you have an idea how bright it was), and it simply fails to focus to the infinite, and I can safely say that I took exactly *69* photos in over one hour of testing and tweaking.

The camera focuses really well at closer range, stacked few items and it focused on each single one perfectly with and without flash (Low light condition).

I bought the lens on Ebay BNIB, and the seller offers 1 year of warranty from himself, but personally, I think sending off to Sigma to re-calibrate would be best. Less time consuming and probably yield better results than getting a new one.

What do you guys think?

What rotten luck...



















That really sucks. This is what keeps me from buying third party lenses, horror stories like these. I would just send it off to Sigma, but I don't know how the warranty would work since it wasn't bought from an authorized reseller. You may be forced to deal with the eBay seller. However, do contact Sigma and see what they say, they may calibrate it for free with no questions asked.


----------



## Dragoon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


That really sucks. This is what keeps me from buying third party lenses, horror stories like these. I would just send it off to Sigma, but I don't know how the warranty would work since it wasn't bought from an authorized reseller. You may be forced to deal with the eBay seller. However, do contact Sigma and see what they say, they may calibrate it for free with no questions asked.


Yeah









On their FAQ they do say they need the proof of purchase for the lens to be elegible for warranty repair. 53Â£ for a focus repair!? (On their tariff document) I guess I'll talk to the ebay seller first...

Thanks alot for the advice.


----------



## dr4gon

Damn this took forever, but I like how it turned out!



Click to go to flickr to make it bigger


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dr4gon*


Damn this took forever, but I like how it turned out!


Click to go to flickr to make it bigger











My question now is how?


----------



## spice003

http://www.flickr.com/groups/transpa...iscuss/114733/


----------



## Danylu

Hi guys I just have a question about the picture quality of one of the 8000 pictures I took. I'm just gonna link it cause I really can't think of a resizing program that works well after the last 5 I tried.

Nikon 18-55mm NON VR, 18mm, ISO 200, 1/200s, f/6.3, D60, RAW (Attached one is JPEG)

http://www.overclock.net/gallery/data/500/DSC_8297.JPG

I'm asking in regards to picture quality, is that expected from my lense? What lense would improve that? Is it a decent picture by me?

Thanks


----------



## Marin

That image quality looks normal for a kit lens. And what lens will improve it... well the majority of lenses out since the kit lens is the lowest end.

So, what lens do you think you need?


----------



## Dragoon

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dr4gon* 
Damn this took forever, but I like how it turned out!



Click to go to flickr to make it bigger









lol awesome! I wonder if adding some effects on the laptops "wallpaper" to look like some sort of portal would look nice


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


That image quality looks normal for a kit lens. And what lens will improve it... *well the majority of lenses *out since the kit lens is the lowest end.

So, what lens do you think you need?


I lol'd at that bit. Well at the moment I'm flicking through the photos I have taken, I seem interested in taking pictures of landscape such as like the White House and that pic I attached.

I seem to like to take pictures of natural things, I look at the pictures of people I have taken and I don't seem to like them. Scenery and distant photos are what I seem to be going towards, I usually have set the focal length to 18mm for these but at the same time I like taking pictures of animals which needs max zoom (55mm at the moment) so I don't know what lense I should get. I don't even know what lense is good for scenery type scenes lol.









Like this one of a tree trunk, I just took it cause the real tree looked interesting. It was about 2 steps away from me.
http://www.overclock.net/gallery/data/500/DSC_5197.JPG.

EDIT: Instead of the 18-200mm I was looking at before, I think I don't need a 10x zoom so I was looking into;

the 18-105mm for $405 (http://nikonusa.com/Find-Your-Nikon/....6G-ED-VR.html) and
the 16-85mm for $840 (http://nikonusa.com/Find-Your-Nikon/....6G-ED-VR.html).

Why such the big price difference lol...


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


I lol'd at that bit. Well at the moment I'm flicking through the photos I have taken, I seem interested in taking pictures of landscape such as like the White House and that pic I attached.

I seem to like to take pictures of natural things, I look at the pictures of people I have taken and I don't seem to like them. Scenery and distant photos are what I seem to be going towards, I usually have set the focal length to 18mm for these but at the same time I like taking pictures of animals which needs max zoom (55mm at the moment) so I don't know what lense I should get. I don't even know what lense is good for scenery type scenes lol.









Like this one of a tree trunk, I just took it cause the real tree looked interesting. It was about 2 steps away from me.
http://www.overclock.net/gallery/data/500/DSC_5197.JPG.

EDIT: Instead of the 18-200mm I was looking at before, I think I don't need a 10x zoom so I was looking into the 18-105mm (http://nikonusa.com/Find-Your-Nikon/....6G-ED-VR.html) and maybe another lense


I guess it really depends on whether or not you're happy with your current focal length range and want to improve picture quality, or if you want to increase your focal length particularly for wildlife shots. Either way you're most likely looking for a new lens, correct?


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


I guess it really depends on whether or not you're happy with your current focal length range and want to improve picture quality, or if you want to increase your focal length particularly for wildlife shots. Either way you're most likely looking for a new lens, correct?


True. Need a new lense, I'm thinking either the 16-85 or 18-105 should be sufficient and I don't need it to go all the way to 200mm I don't think. Would the quality of the above 2 lenses be better than my current one? I also don't get why the 16-85 is double the price.


----------



## dr4gon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dragoon*


lol awesome! I wonder if adding some effects on the laptops "wallpaper" to look like some sort of portal would look nice



















Thanks, that would be interesting lol!

Maybe something like this?










http://www.flickr.com/photos/woof69/2883910037/ (not mine)


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


True. Need a new lense, I'm thinking either the 16-85 or 18-105 should be sufficient and I don't need it to go all the way to 200mm I don't think. Would the quality of the above 2 lenses be better than my current one? I also don't get why the 16-85 is double the price.

















It's the quality of the optics, quality of the build and number of elements that make it expensive. Such lenses are optimized to have less chromatic aberration, better corner sharpness, etc. The 18-105mm is technically a Nikon kit lens, so measures were taken in it's design to make it inexpensive, such as cheaper materials in the construction (mostly plastic), fewer optical elements, quality of the glass, less sophisticated lens coating, etc.

And about your shot, the main problem with it is the completely overexposed sky. It's washed out and dominates the shot, way too bright. It's really unavoidable though, since your camera metered the side of the building (which is darker) and camera sensors can't (yet) evenly expose differently lit areas. So to improve a shot like this, the best thing to do would be to shoot at a time of day other than noon or whenever the sun is overhead and bright. If the sun were behind you (early morning or early evening depending on the direction of the shot), the shot would dramatically improve and the sky wouldn't overexpose.

There are a few things that you can do even in super bright conditions like that. You can do a bracketed shot and fashion an HDR, or use a graduated neutral density filter, or meter off the sky (so it exposes properly) and then use Photoshop tools (fill light) to lighten the foreground (kind of a ghetto HDR, but it does work sometimes).

And about lenses, having good quality lenses will of course improve things that are faults of lesser quality optics, such as softness, chromatic aberration, etc., but it's mostly about your skill as a photographer. Whatever lens you use, you have to keep in mind it's strengths and weaknesses. For example, many lenses are very soft at very wide and very narrow apertures, so it's often a good rule of thumb to shoot between f/5.6 - f/8 unless an aperture outside that range is specifically needed.


----------



## Danylu

Thanks for the help. I think the washed out sky eliminated the details that weren't important in this picture though. Brings the attention to the building and the view. Don't get that much where I live, you bring up a good point, I need to start learning photoshop


----------



## Dragoon

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dr4gon* 
Thanks, that would be interesting lol!

Maybe something like this?










http://www.flickr.com/photos/woof69/2883910037/ (not mine)

lol









That would be sweet!


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


I lol'd at that bit. Well at the moment I'm flicking through the photos I have taken, I seem interested in taking pictures of landscape such as like the White House and that pic I attached.

I seem to like to take pictures of natural things, I look at the pictures of people I have taken and I don't seem to like them. Scenery and distant photos are what I seem to be going towards, I usually have set the focal length to 18mm for these but at the same time I like taking pictures of animals which needs max zoom (55mm at the moment) so I don't know what lense I should get. I don't even know what lense is good for scenery type scenes lol.









Like this one of a tree trunk, I just took it cause the real tree looked interesting. It was about 2 steps away from me.
http://www.overclock.net/gallery/data/500/DSC_5197.JPG.

EDIT: Instead of the 18-200mm I was looking at before, I think I don't need a 10x zoom so I was looking into;

the 18-105mm for $405 (http://nikonusa.com/Find-Your-Nikon/....6G-ED-VR.html) and
the 16-85mm for $840 (http://nikonusa.com/Find-Your-Nikon/....6G-ED-VR.html).

Why such the big price difference lol...


I'm going to make a few points, most of which have been answered by others.

The 18-105mm is a kit lens as well, it came/comes with the D90. It is a better lens, and more useful than the 18-55mm, and it's fairly cheap ($250 used). It bit be a bit overpowering on the D60 though, the 18-105mm is a big lens.

You need to shoot at 100 ISO. I keep it set to that for probably 95% of my shots, and only going to 200/400 if there is no light what so ever. With the VR lenses you can shoot 2-3 stops slower, handheld. This means that where you could hold reliably to 1/60, now you can shoot at 1/15 or even 1/8" without blur. Take advantage of that so you don't have to use a higher ISO, which adds a lot of noise on the D60.

As for metering, Gone is right that it will try to expose for the sun light. The D60 does support spot metering though. It works like the AF, select your meter point, set the shutter speed for it, and then use the AE-L/AF-L button to the right of the viewfinder to lock the focus and exposure reading. When using the meter only and not locking AF, you may not to use this button, but sometimes the camera with moan and groan about the picture not being exposed correct and will not take the picture.

If you really want a new lenses, there are a lot of choices and you need to decide first what you want to shoot most of the time, or which lens is going to be the most useful to you. As for right now, try shooting at f/5.6 or f/8.0 I noticed the 18-55mm shines at these apertures and fades off at the ends.


----------



## Highly-Annoyed

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
For ND filter, what will you use it for? I use a .9 (8X) for slow water shots, but I find that it isn't dark enough in full sunlight, so I'm looking at getting at least a 1.5 or 1.8.

I'd like it for that motion blur water effect. I've not tried anything like that yet. I also fancy one of these too.

Here's another shot from the other day. Still processing these.








15mm, IS0200, F8, 1/400th Sec, Handheld.

Highly-Annoyed


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Highly-Annoyed*


I'd like it for that motion blur water effect. I've not tried anything like that yet. I also fancy one of these too.

Here's another shot from the other day. Still processing these.

15mm, IS0200, F8, 1/400th Sec, Handheld.

Highly-Annoyed


Nice use of the sunlight there, the way it shines through the petals!

And yes, I love my CPL. CPL and ND filters are the only filters I use. I don't use UV filters. I do have a graduated ND filter (half dark, half clear) which works fairly well sometimes.


----------



## Marin

Hopefully going to take the Leica M6 out this weekend and take some pics.


----------



## Dragoon

Trying to take flower macro photos under low light.

Here I used a -2 Flash exp comp.









Here I placed my hand on the front end of the lens in front of the flash slightly angled so the light was reflected from my hand to the wall on my right. Odd, I know, but I think it gave out a pretty nice effect.







Also the exp comp was set to 0.









Tell me what you think.


----------



## HaXXoR

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Dragoon* 
Trying to take flower macro photos under low light.

Here I used a -2 Flash exp comp.









Here I placed my hand on the front end of the lens in front of the flash slightly angled so the light was reflected from my hand to the wall on my right. Odd, I know, but I think it gave out a pretty nice effect.







Also the exp comp was set to 0.









Tell me what you think.


















They're both really nice Dragoon, second is my favorite of the 2


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


I'm going to make a few points, most of which have been answered by others.

The 18-105mm is a kit lens as well, it came/comes with the D90. It is a better lens, and more useful than the 18-55mm, and it's fairly cheap ($250 used). It bit be a bit overpowering on the D60 though, the 18-105mm is a big lens.

You need to shoot at 100 ISO. I keep it set to that for probably 95% of my shots, and only going to 200/400 if there is no light what so ever. With the VR lenses you can shoot 2-3 stops slower, handheld. This means that where you could hold reliably to 1/60, now you can shoot at 1/15 or even 1/8" without blur. Take advantage of that so you don't have to use a higher ISO, which adds a lot of noise on the D60.

As for metering, Gone is right that it will try to expose for the sun light. The D60 does support spot metering though. It works like the AF, select your meter point, set the shutter speed for it, and then use the AE-L/AF-L button to the right of the viewfinder to lock the focus and exposure reading. When using the meter only and not locking AF, you may not to use this button, but sometimes the camera with moan and groan about the picture not being exposed correct and will not take the picture.

If you really want a new lenses, there are a lot of choices and you need to decide first what you want to shoot most of the time, or which lens is going to be the most useful to you. As for right now, try shooting at f/5.6 or f/8.0 I noticed the 18-55mm shines at these apertures and fades off at the ends.


When you say it'll overpower the D60, do you mean it's too good? I need to try using the lock button now







.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


When you say it'll overpower the D60, do you mean it's too good? I need to try using the lock button now







.


He means that the 18-105mm is a large and heavy lens and may be a bit unsettling with the D60's small body. Shouldn't be too big of a deal though, I used large lenses when I had an XTi. And yes, the AF/AE lock is a very useful feature.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


When you say it'll overpower the D60, do you mean it's too good? I need to try using the lock button now







.


No









No lens is "too good". Though the D60 is certainly the limiting factor...

I meant as Gone said, the 18-105mm is a lot heavier, longer and wider than the 18-55mm. I may feel slightly unbalanced on a D60 sized body. It will have excellent results though.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
I may feel slightly unbalanced on a D60 sized body. It will have excellent results though.

According to Tom Hogan's review, one of the positives is that it balances nicely on DX bodies. I borrowed one for a couple of days and found it a little "soft" for my liking. My 18-200 seems sharper with more range, but unfortunately more $$.

Contrary to my experience, Hogan describes the lens as sharp on DX bodies, maybe I had a bad sample.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
According to Tom Hogan's review, one of the positives is that it balances nicely on DX bodies. I borrowed one for a couple of days and found it a little "soft" for my liking. My 18-200 seems sharper with more range, but unfortunately more $$.

Contrary to my experience, Hogan describes the lens as sharp on DX bodies, maybe I had a bad sample.

DX is anything from a D40 to a D2Hs to a D300. The D40/D40x/D60 are _small_ cameras. I think they weigh like 450g. In that review he's got it on a D90 which is about 30% larger (by guess) than a D60. It's also the kit lens for the D90, so it should fit it fairly well


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
No









No lens is "too good". Though the D60 is certainly the limiting factor...

I meant as Gone said, the 18-105mm is a lot heavier, longer and wider than the 18-55mm. I may feel slightly unbalanced on a D60 sized body. It will have excellent results though.

Oh woops







.

I'm thinking the 16-85, 18-200 or the 18-105. I don't think I need it all the way to 200mm but why is it only $50 more than 16-85, this website I read said that the lense on the 16-85 has less distortion but for $50 more you get a greater focal range in one lense. But then again I don't think I need 200mm. What would you guys suggest? I was thinking about renting them and having a go. But I am waiting for a reply to see whether or not I am eligible for the 50% student discount lol


----------



## Mootsfox

I think you should look into the 18-105mm because it's like $250 used.


----------



## Marin

Need some ideas of what I should go shoot when I start using the Leica M6 this weekend...

Maybe I should go into SF and take pics...


----------



## muffin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
I think you should look into the 18-105mm because it's like $250 used.

I second this motion. The 18-105mm came with my D90 and it seems pretty decent to me. As Mootsfox mentioned earlier it also has VR, which is handy.


----------



## laboitenoire

Meant to post this the other day. Went to prom on the weekend, and the photographer they hired (a school alum, at every event) was shooting on an A900 it looked like. It's weird, because all the portrait takers were using either Canon 1D or 5D models, but he was walking around with the A900 and a big honking lens. When I went for my senior portrait he used Canon...


----------



## xguntherc

I just got home from my Mexican Riviera Cruise. and I took WAY to many photo's. Not really to many, but we took alot.

I have some good photo's. (Or what I think are good) coming soon. I'll post them as soon as I sort through them, and edit a few.

Every photographer on the boat had a Nikon D300, with Ext Battery Grips, and those off Camera Flashes that attach to the camera body, they were amazing and I wanted one! The sad thing. Is some of the photo's were Terrible, and most of them shot in Auto Mode. Some didn't though. The cruise had a wall of photo's. and I wasn't very impressed.

Also, I have the Nikon D40, and I got the 18-105mm VR. No it's not to overpowering with it's weight. Yes it's heavy. and takes a little getting used to over the light kit lens. but it's a great all purpose lens. and It's been mostly what I've used since I got it. I also have a 55-200mm VR that I use when it's needed.

If you need a new lens. the 18-105 VR is a decent choice. I got mine used. but it was basically new.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *xguntherc*


I just got home from my Mexican Riviera Cruise. and I took WAY to many photo's. Not really to many, but we took alot.

I have some good photo's. (Or what I think are good) coming soon. I'll post them as soon as I sort through them, and edit a few.
*
Every photographer on the boat had a Nikon D300, with Ext Battery Grips, and those off Camera Flashes that attach to the camera body, they were amazing and I wanted one! The sad thing. Is some of the photo's were Terrible, and most of them shot in Auto Mode. Some didn't though. The cruise had a wall of photo's. and I wasn't very impressed.*

Also, I have the Nikon D40, and I got the 18-105mm VR. No it's not to overpowering with it's weight. Yes it's heavy. and takes a little getting used to over the light kit lens. but it's a great all purpose lens. and It's been mostly what I've used since I got it. I also have a 55-200mm VR that I use when it's needed.

If you need a new lens. the 18-105 VR is a decent choice. I got mine used. but it was basically new.


Typical tourists.


----------



## xguntherc

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Typical tourists.










Ya, ya Jerk. lol jk.

No that wasn't the Tourists.. There was Photographers on the boat. Employed by Carnival Cruise Lines.. there was over 20 of them or more. A few on every level on the boat. and when we'd embark, and disembark from islands. They all had D300's. yet they weren't that great at there job. Some were ok though.

I also met people with great camera's. I used some dudes D1 I think it was. with a HUGE $4,000 lens on it. Some people had great camera's. but most just had there P&S Digital Camera's!


----------



## Marin

Don't know why I didn't go under the bridge sooner. Anyways, some pics with my Sigma 30mm f/1.4 without the UV filter.


----------



## Danylu

Hi again guys, my first attempt at photoshop.
http://www.overclock.net/gallery/dat...SC_1111_PS.jpg
Now this picture, the entire picture is messed up by the sun, what is the correct terminology for something like this and how can I solve it?
http://www.overclock.net/gallery/data/500/DSC_8291.JPG
Thanks guys


----------



## skeptic

i have a old web cam i like to use to take pics of my Oc's and case mods.......will that do? lol


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
Hi again guys, my first attempt at photoshop.
http://www.overclock.net/gallery/dat...SC_1111_PS.jpg
Now this picture, the entire picture is messed up by the sun, what is the correct terminology for something like this and how can I solve it?
http://www.overclock.net/gallery/data/500/DSC_8291.JPG
Thanks guys










The sky is completely overexposed (blown highlights) and there's some lens flare. You could clone out the flare I suppose, but the highlights are lost, you'll never get all the detail back, even with a RAW file.

I'm telling you, shooting when the sun is right over head on a cloudless day (I imagine there's a lot of those in Australia) is the worst time to shoot. It's just too bright. Unless you're in a well shaded area, your skies will always be over-exposed when shooting darker foreground areas.

And it's not that you _can't_ shoot when it's really bright and sunny, but you have to be smart about it: don't shoot directly into the sun or avoid having it in your shots altogether; use a polarizer or ND filter; bracket a few shots so that you could possibly do an HDR; shoot at angles which are advantageous. In your shot the sun looks like it's slightly at an angle (early afternoon maybe?), so you might have been able to avoid the lens flare if you were shooting the other side of the tree.

The morning, late afternoon and evening are the best times to shoot when it's sunny. The sun is lower in the sky and not as strong, and the light rays are coming in at angles which make for interesting shadows.

and I like the first shot BTW, just wish there weren't so many smudges on the globe.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


The sky is completely overexposed (blown highlights) and there's some lens flare. You could clone out the flare I suppose, but the highlights are lost, you'll never get all the detail back, even with a RAW file.

I'm telling you, shooting when the sun is right over head on a cloudless day (I imagine there's a lot of those in Australia) is the worst time to shoot. It's just too bright. Unless you're in a well shaded area, your skies will always be over-exposed when shooting darker foreground areas.

And it's not that you _can't_ shoot when it's really bright and sunny, but you have to be smart about it: don't shoot directly into the sun or avoid having it in your shots altogether; use a polarizer or ND filter; bracket a few shots so that you could possibly do an HDR; shoot at angles which are advantageous. In your shot the sun looks like it's slightly at an angle (early afternoon maybe?), so you might have been able to avoid the lens flare if you were shooting the other side of the tree.

The morning, late afternoon and evening are the best times to shoot when it's sunny. The sun is lower in the sky and not as strong, and the light rays are coming in at angles which make for interesting shadows.

and I like the first shot BTW, just wish there weren't so many smudges on the globe.











lol that was in LA Disneyland....

It was a bright day and the queues were long so I looked at random things through the lense and I wanted to take a picture with that crap so you guys could tell me what it is









Man I only just discovered how good and fun photoshop is.








http://www.overclock.net/gallery/data/500/DSC_3902.jpg

Cheers


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


lol that was in LA Disneyland....

It was a bright day and the queues were long so I looked at random things through the lense and I wanted to take a picture with that crap so you guys could tell me what it is









Man I only just discovered how good and fun photoshop is.








http://www.overclock.net/gallery/data/500/DSC_3902.jpg

Cheers










Australia, Disneyland, same difference







. Actually, sometimes lens flare can add to a shot's appeal.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Don't know why I didn't go under the bridge sooner. Anyways, some pics with my Sigma 30mm f/1.4 without the UV filter.


What would we do without gang graffiti??

Some of it shows amazing talent. Nice as always Marin.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


What would we do without gang graffiti??

Some of it shows amazing talent. Nice as always Marin.


Thanks


----------



## Dragoon

Well, I've spoken to the ebay seller that I've bought the lens from, I will return this "lemon" for a full refund.

I guess when it's Sigma we're talking about, it's better that I buy from a certified retail store, either local or international, so I can use the warranty from Sigma without any issues.

*@GoneTomorrow* I guess for now you can remove the Siggy from my list, it'll be some time until I can shell out $620 for one, probably next month or so.


----------



## kerbitroy

I use a Canon 300D Digital 
http://www.canon.co.uk/for_home/prod...300d/index.asp

Lenses I use are:-
Canon EFS 18-55mm
Canon EF 75-300mm

Selection of my photos are on http://www.flickr.com/photos/kerbitroy/
I'm still in the experimenting stages, but I hope I'm getting better


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Check out this alien looking flower , anyone know what it is (first two)?

1.









2.









3.









4.









5.









6.









7.









8.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *kerbitroy* 
I use a Canon 300D Digital
http://www.canon.co.uk/for_home/prod...300d/index.asp

Lenses I use are:-
Canon EFS 18-55mm
Canon EF 75-300mm

Selection of my photos are on http://www.flickr.com/photos/kerbitroy/
I'm still in the experimenting stages, but I hope I'm getting better


















Lightsaber dual with a squeeze light?







Nice shot.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Dragoon* 
Well, I've spoken to the ebay seller that I've bought the lens from, I will return this "lemon" for a full refund.

I guess when it's Sigma we're talking about, it's better that I buy from a certified retail store, either local or international, so I can use the warranty from Sigma without any issues.

*@GoneTomorrow* I guess for now you can remove the Siggy from my list, it'll be some time until I can shell out $620 for one, probably next month or so.

Lame, I'll take it off, _temporarily_!


----------



## USlatin

Well... if you want a camera that takes great pictures and still want to make movies:

http://www.vimeo.com/4320861

http://vimeo.com/4321752

Pretty sick considering Vimeo ant 17Mbps!


----------



## Mootsfox




----------



## Marin




----------



## laboitenoire

Wow, when you put it next to the wooden dude, that bulb blower looks huge! By the way, cool shot.

Also, quick question. Is there any filter that can cut through the haze I'm seeing in the shot below? It definitely didn't seem that hazy when I was out hiking, and I had my UV filter on.


----------



## xonix

Hey guys.. Just came across this thread.. thought it was interesting =)

I current have a Canon EOS 10D with Canon EF 17-40mm USM 'Ultrasonic' lens

Takes some GREAT photos.. will share in due time =)


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *xonix*


Hey guys.. Just came across this thread.. thought it was interesting =)

I current have a Canon EOS 10D with Canon EF 17-40mm USM 'Ultrasonic' lens

Takes some GREAT photos.. will share in due time =)


That's the 17-40mm *L*, correct? Nice lens!

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Wow, when you put it next to the wooden dude, that bulb blower looks huge! By the way, cool shot.

Also, quick question. Is there any filter that can cut through the haze I'm seeing in the shot below? It definitely didn't seem that hazy when I was out hiking, and I had my UV filter on.


High end UV filters might help, but at such far distances the haze can't be helped really. Adding some contrast will help some.


----------



## Marin

First Macro Mondays shot done.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Wheel bearings?


----------



## muffin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Check out this alien looking flower , anyone know what it is (first two)?

According to my resident plant expert (my mum







), it's some kind of Peony. I like it


----------



## xonix

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
That's the 17-40mm *L*, correct? Nice lens!

Yes, it's the L model.

I also have Canon Zoom EF 75-300mm 1:4-5.6 III.. it's quite the voyuer lens =P


----------



## Danylu

Hey I'm just wondering... if any of you have any spare bullets lieing around... could you take a picture for me?









Kinda need the camera angle to be like the picture below and at 800 pixels tall minimum, thanks







. I'd prefer it if the bullet was sharp and pointy and have a plain background so photoshop can get rid of it easy


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Hey I'm just wondering... if any of you have any spare bullets lieing around... could you take a picture for me?









Kinda need the camera angle to be like the picture below and at 800 pixels tall minimum, thanks







. I'd prefer it if the bullet was sharp and pointy and have a plain background so photoshop can get rid of it easy










I have some .223 and .50 caliber ammo leftover from when I was in the Marines, I'll dig them out. The .223 will look funny, being dwarfed by the massive .50 cal round.


----------



## nuclearjock

My second (and best by far) wife made me get rid of all my firearms.

The only shooting I do now is with film and digital sensors.....

One of these days I may sneek back on a trap range though.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Everyone knows the 18-200mm VR is a nub lens









hey now, love my 18-200mm
couldn't imagine not having it, it plus my 11-16mm give me all the focal range i need without carrying a tone of lenses.
i don't wanna go camping with 3 lenses to fit the bill of something i can get in one lens, that's a lot of weight and a too much of a hassle if you have to keep some of the lenses in your pack.


----------



## xonix

Quote:


Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie* 

i don't wanna go camping with 3 lenses to fit the bill of something i can get in one lens, that's a lot of weight and a too much of a hassle if you have to keep some of the lenses in your pack.

Thats why you attach a camera to each separate lens =)


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:


Originally Posted by *xonix* 
Thats why you attach a camera to each separate lens =)

that's even more weight


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie*


hey now, love my 18-200mm
couldn't imagine not having it, it plus my 11-16mm give me all the focal range i need without carrying a tone of lenses.
i don't wanna go camping with 3 lenses to fit the bill of something i can get in one lens, that's a lot of weight and a too much of a hassle if you have to keep some of the lenses in your pack.


I know what you mean but I always pack out all the lenses in my sig. I don't mind the weight, thanks to the 250 lbs. of gear we had to hike with in Marines.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *xonix*


Thats why you attach a camera to each separate lens =)


You laugh, but I've seen gear displays at POTN where one camera bag has three bodies each with a lens attached. And if you look in the background of those red carpet Hollywood shots, you'll see Paparazzi with two camera bodies around their neck.


----------



## laboitenoire

Yeah, I've seen some photographers with crazy setups out in the field. There's a local photographer who often has a pair of 5D bodies with him at my school's events. One prime, one zoom.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *laboitenoire* 
Yeah, I've seen some photographers with crazy setups out in the field. There's a local photographer who often has a pair of 5D bodies with him at my school's events. One prime, one zoom.

Often sports photographers will have an FF body like 5D or 1D, and a crop body like a 30D/40D/50D because of the faster burst rate.


----------



## SoBe8503

Ok, so a lot of people like this one, but I'm not sure how I feel about it. What do you guys think?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

I think it's nice, the rose is a nice touch and the selective desaturation works. However, I think the dreamy/hazy effect could be scaled back or even removed, just an opinion.


----------



## SoBe8503

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
I think it's nice, the rose is a nice touch and the selective desaturation works. However, I think the dreamy/hazy effect could be scaled back or even removed, just an opinion.

I agree. However, without the hazy look, you can easily see the all of the wrinkles in the black sheet we used lol. I'll see if I can scale it back a bit.


----------



## evilspongebob72

Just got some new gear : D

Sony A200 and kit lens


----------



## equetefue

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Often sports photographers will have an FF body like 5D or 1D, and a crop body like a 30D/40D/50D because of the faster burst rate.


That's me


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *evilspongebob72*


Just got some new gear : D

Sony A200 and kit lens


Added. You should look into getting a new lens soon, as the Sony 18-70mm has a bad reputation for not being a very high quality lens.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *equetefue*


That's me


Good, confirmation that I actually know what I'm talking about.


----------



## equetefue

I keep 5D for short stuff. The 1D for extremely fast stuff and long lenses, and my friends 30/40D for a smaller telephoto.

Looking to buy 3rd body. Maybe the 40D or another 1DMarkII or so


----------



## evilspongebob72

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Added. You should look into getting a new lens soon, as the Sony 18-70mm has a bad reputation for not being a very high quality lens.

Good, confirmation that I actually know what I'm talking about.










Yeah I am looking for a zoom lens for my dad but have no idea on what to look for. I am generally looking for something around the Â£100 budget but I doubt I will get anything around that =(


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *evilspongebob72*


Yeah I am looking for a zoom lens for my dad but have no idea on what to look for. I am generally looking for something around the Â£100 budget but I doubt I will get anything around that =(


I'm sure Dr4gon or some other Sony shooter can help you, but I know of a few that are inexpensive but decent:

Sony SAL-55200 55-200mm f/4-5.6 DT Autofocus Lens

Sony 75-300mm f/4.5-5.6 SAL-75300


----------



## equetefue

save up and get what you really want. We all been there at one point, got something to get us by and didn't work. Save the money and before you know you'll get the lens you want.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *equetefue*


save up and get what you really want. We all been there at one point, got something to get us by and didn't work. Save the money and before you know you'll get the lens you want.


Good advice, that's how I've proceeded. I was thankfully warned early on not to buy cheap "vacation lenses" (not that there aren't good ones), so I've scrimped for the lenses I currently have. One day, I'll have the 70-200mm f/2.8 IS USM L, one day...

Evilsponge, check out this concise list of common Sony lenses:

http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showcat.php/cat/83

And at the same site, be sure to peruse the third-party companies like Tamron and Sigma.


----------



## evilspongebob72

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


I'm sure Dr4gon or some other Sony shooter can help you, but I know of a few that are inexpensive but decent:

Sony SAL-55200 55-200mm f/4-5.6 DT Autofocus Lens

Sony 75-300mm f/4.5-5.6 SAL-75300



thanks, I think I might look into getting a used 55-200mm. I read somewhere that I will really get 82-300 out of it using my A200 body, is this right?


----------



## nuclearjock

D300, 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6D ED AF VR Zoom-Nikkor, circular polarizer.


----------



## HaXXoR

New case + overclock.net applique + macro


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *evilspongebob72*


thanks, I think I might look into getting a used 55-200mm. I read somewhere that I will really get 82-300 out of it using my A200 body, is this right?


It's a 1.5x field of view _crop_, so you're really still seeing 55-200mm, but it's a good rule of thumb to think in those terms.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


D300, 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6D ED AF VR Zoom-Nikkor, circular polarizer.


I like the effect, very clear water, maybe a shallower angle without the grass obstructing?

Quote:



Originally Posted by *HaXXoR*


New case + overclock.net applique + macro


Thanks for posting, but please resize your images to something smaller, it's a real pain to look at images bigger than my entire monitor's max res. 1024 x 1024 (or thereabouts) is the max for this thread.


----------



## HaXXoR

Thanks for posting, but please resize your images to something smaller, it's a real pain to look at images bigger than my entire monitor's max res. 1024 x 1024 (or thereabouts) is the max for this thread.[/QUOTE]

Theyve been resized to 1024 x 1024


----------



## Oscuro

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Thanks for posting, but please resize your images to something smaller, it's a real pain to look at images bigger than my entire monitor's max res. 1024 x 1024 (or thereabouts) is the max for this thread.


Time for a new monitor maybe?









20" wide screens are cheap and useful!


----------



## xlastshotx

*New 50D Firmware just released* 1.0.6

*Fixes/Improvements*

Supports the AF assist beam feature of the new flash, Speedlite 270 EX, which is scheduled to be released in April 2009.
Changes the error indications that are displayed on the camera.
Addresses the vertical banding noise phenomenon.

Instructions and Download Here


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *HaXXoR* 
Theyve been resized to 1024 x 1024

Thanks, and nice shots!

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Oscuro* 
Time for a new monitor maybe?









20" wide screens are cheap and useful!

I have a 22" actually, but am on my 12.1" laptop.


----------



## Marin

I really need a wide angle lens









There were some shots that would have looked amazing if I had one.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
I really need a wide angle lens









There were some shots that would have looked amazing if I had one.



Nice shot, not much graffiti here unfortunately, but obviously a ton in the Bay Area.







What about your 18-55mm? Don't forget about it, it's actually a very sharp lens. Otherwise, you can get one of Tokina, Sigma or Canon UWA zooms on POTN, I got the Canon 10-22mm for $575 shipped. You know you want one.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Nice shot, not much graffiti here unfortunately, but obviously a ton in the Bay Area.







What about your 18-55mm? Don't forget about it, it's actually a very sharp lens. Otherwise, you can get one of Tokina, Sigma or Canon UWA zooms on POTN, I got the Canon 10-22mm for $575 shipped. You know you want one.









The 18-55mm wasn't wide enough for the shot. Liking this lens though: http://www.amazon.com/Tokina-11-16MM...0969277&sr=8-2

May get two lenses instead of a body and lens.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


The 18-55mm wasn't wide enough for the shot. Liking this lens though: http://www.amazon.com/Tokina-11-16MM...0969277&sr=8-2

May get two lenses instead of a body and lens.


It's a nice lens for sure, kind of wish I had it instead of the Canon 10-22mm (not that I don't like, I love it, but the constant f/2.8 would be nice). You just missed Lastshot's sale of that lens, it was a steal!

And if it comes down to more glass or a body, more glass! Besides, your body is still very good and will be for a while. What new body are you thinking about?


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


It's a nice lens for sure, kind of wish I had it instead of the Canon 10-22mm (not that I don't like, I love it, but the constant f/2.8 would be nice). You just missed Lastshot's sale of that lens, it was a steal!

And if it comes down to more glass or a body, more glass! Besides, your body is still very good and will be for a while. What new body are you thinking about?


I was thinking about getting a 50D, but having second thoughts since everyone's saying there should be a new body out by the holiday season.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


I was thinking about getting a 50D, but having second thoughts since everyone's saying there should be a new body out by the holiday season.


Probably so. That way you can have a choice between the new body (60D?) or the 50D which will have dropped in price.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Thanks, and nice shots!

I have a 22" actually, but am on my 12.1" laptop.










m1210 <3 Mine has a busted motherboard, so I'm using a Thinkpad X61. but otherwise I'd be on one as well


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


m1210 <3 Mine has a busted motherboard, so I'm using a Thinkpad X61. but otherwise I'd be on one as well










Knock on wood, mine is still going after two years, I love it to death, best laptop I've ever owned. I was thinking about dropping a new CPU in it just for hahas.


----------



## dr4gon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Knock on wood, mine is still going after two years, I love it to death, best laptop I've ever owned. I was thinking about dropping a new CPU in it just for hahas.


just for hahas? lol







 haven't heard that one before

New page, who is hungry?


----------



## Danylu

^^ Aw now I want mango too







.


----------



## muffin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *evilspongebob72*


Yeah I am looking for a zoom lens for my dad but have no idea on what to look for. I am generally looking for something around the Â£100 budget but I doubt I will get anything around that =(



Quote:



Originally Posted by *evilspongebob72*


thanks, I think I might look into getting a used 55-200mm. I read somewhere that I will really get 82-300 out of it using my A200 body, is this right?


Used Sony 75-300mm F/4.5-5.6 for Â£120: http://www.lcegroup.co.uk/SHdetails.asp?Item=8059#

New on Amazon is Â£172.22

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*

D300, 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6D ED AF VR Zoom-Nikkor, circular polarizer.


The water is really nice, but the leaves in front need hacking down with a machete


----------



## nuclearjock

Me + machete = not a pretty site. Lots of red hues though.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dr4gon*


just for hahas? lol







haven't heard that one before

New page, who is hungry?


Yeah you know, for shi*s and giggles


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Funny shot, he's holding the camera completely wrong. It looks like a 5D with a Canon L prime (35mm?):


----------



## Mootsfox

Obama uses Canon







At least like you said, he's holding it wrong


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Obama uses Canon







At least like you said, he's holding it wrong










isn't that how all canon users hold their cameras?


----------



## Marin

I got into Honors Photography


----------



## huntman21014

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Funny shot, he's holding the camera completely wrong. It looks like a 5D with a Canon L prime (35mm?):


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
I got into Honors Photography









Congrats Marin









Oh, and Gone, lookie what I found


















http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/45.htm


----------



## bentleya




----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie* 
isn't that how all canon users hold their cameras?









Hey watch it!







Don't forget that the God of Nikon is Ken Rockwell, 'nuff said.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Congrats Marin









Oh, and Gone, lookie what I found



















http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/45.htm

Nice! By "found" do you mean you now own it? Nice though, I wish Canon had some EF/EF-S pancake lenses. We have settle for using adapters for old Contax/Yashica lenses or even Nikon pancakes:

http://cgi.ebay.com/Contax-Yashica-m...3%3A1|294%3A50

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
I got into Honors Photography









Cool, I bet you'll learn some great techniques. I want to take a class myself just for the fun of doing the assignments and re-learning everything I know in a strict academic sense.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Hey watch it!







Don't forget that the God of Nikon is Ken Rockwell, 'nuff said.

OUCH, that was a cheap shot.


----------



## dr4gon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Funny shot, he's holding the camera completely wrong. It looks like a 5D with a Canon L prime (35mm?):











ROFL that's hilarious! got a link to the flickr page?

nvm it's here http://www.flickr.com/photos/whitehouse/3484011749/


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Hey watch it!







Don't forget that the God of Nikon is Ken Rockwell, 'nuff said.

Nice! By "found" do you mean you now own it? Nice though, I wish Canon had some EF/EF-S pancake lenses. We have settle for using adapters for old Contax/Yashica lenses or even Nikon pancakes:

http://cgi.ebay.com/Contax-Yashica-m...3%3A1|294%3A50

Cool, I bet you'll learn some great techniques. I want to take a class myself just for the fun of doing the assignments and re-learning everything I know in a strict academic sense.

I just never knew Nikon had pancake lenses, and I know how much you liked them


----------



## Marin

I love using the Leica. Rangefinders majority of the time are way easier to use for manual focus since once the two images are lined up it's in focus, unlike SLR's where in manual focus you have to judge it yourself (or metering depending on the camera).

Anyways, have to wait to see how the pics turned out as I have to finish the roll, then get it developed. Did switch to my camera halfway through.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


I love using the Leica. Rangefinders majority of the time are way easier to use for manual focus since once the two images are lined up it's in focus, unlike SLR's where in manual focus you have to judge it yourself (or metering depending on the camera).

Anyways, have to wait to see how the pics turned out as I have to finish the roll, then get it developed. Did switch to my camera halfway through.


The shot looks great. And you're right about rangefinders' focusing, but actually DSLRs can focus similarly with a split-focusing screen installed. My old Nikon EM film SLR has one and it's awesome, but only a small circle in the middle of the screen actually splits, although you can get screens with larger or smaller circles. There's actually a company that sells DIY kits or they will do it for you, I've been considering it now for awhile:

http://www.katzeyeoptics.com/


----------



## Squeeker The Cat

ok friends........looking for a new SDHC card. the one i have now is this one. i like it it works well. i would like to get another card, for various use through out other devices AND for the camera if needed. so im wanting a card i guess that will A. be perfect for the camera and B. be good for lets say the DSi on long road trips with music on it?

so im thinking another of the 4gb lexar
or a 4gb sandisk

im sticking with 4gb cause that's all that my canon S5-IS will take supposedly?

what do you think?


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Squeeker The Cat* 
ok friends........looking for a new SDHC card. the one i have now is this one. i like it it works well. i would like to get another card, for various use through out other devices AND for the camera if needed. so im wanting a card i guess that will A. be perfect for the camera and B. be good for lets say the DSi on long road trips with music on it?

so im thinking another of the 4gb lexar
or a 4gb sandisk

im sticking with 4gb cause that's all that my canon S5-IS will take supposedly?

what do you think?

I hope you aren't about to spend $50 on a 4GB card.

Here's a two pack of class 4's:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16820134941

And a class 6:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16820134475

And an Ultra II (very good):
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16820171347


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Funny shot, he's holding the camera completely wrong. It looks like a 5D with a Canon L prime (35mm?):











It almost looks like he's trying to find the eyepiece....

Must have been taken by a Nikon person.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


I got into Honors Photography











Your school's faculty obviously has an eye for talent.

Congrats Marin, but this is more importantly well deserved.


----------



## Squeeker The Cat

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
I hope you aren't about to spend $50 on a 4GB card.

Here's a two pack of class 4's:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16820134941

And a class 6:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16820134475

And an Ultra II (very good):
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16820171347


thanks!! i just used the 2 examples i used cause thats what i have already and those i used before. how is the kingston? never tried at all.......that dual pack is nice!


----------



## Zeva

OOO! i wanna join! haha
40D, 20D, 28-135, 17-55 f/2.8 IS, 70-200 f/2.8 IS, 10-22 f/3.5-4.5, 580exII, 430ex, 100-400 f/4.5-5.6, and the best lens ever! 18-55


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Zeva*


OOO! i wanna join! haha
40D, 20D, 28-135, 17-55 f/2.8 IS, 70-200 f/2.8 IS, 10-22 f/3.5-4.5, 580exII, 430ex, 100-400 f/4.5-5.6, and the best lens ever! 18-55










Nice glass collection, but no primes?







And is your 18-55mm the IS or non-IS version?


----------



## Zeva

Non IS







told you it was the best lens ever hahaha and yup no primes... the 2.8 with IS are fast enough for me


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Zeva* 
Non IS







told you it was the best lens ever hahaha and yup no primes... the 2.8 with IS are fast enough for me

LOL, so what do you use your 18-55mm for? Paperweight? Skeet shooting? Oh, one important thing I almost forgot: as the maintainer and OP of this thread, there is a small fee payable in the form of a gear contribution to me so that I may stay on top of the game and properly guide this thread, so I'll relieve you of your 70-200mm. I'll PM you the address.


----------



## Zeva

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
LOL, so what do you use your 18-55mm for? Paperweight? Skeet shooting? Oh, one important thing I almost forgot: as the maintainer and OP of this thread, there is a small fee payable in the form of a gear contribution to me so that I may stay on top of the game and properly guide this thread, so I'll relieve you of your 70-200mm. I'll PM you the address.

Hmmm skeet shooting never thought of that! lol and for part 2 OK! but ummm you







=O


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


LOL, so what do you use your 18-55mm for? Paperweight? Skeet shooting? Oh, one important thing I almost forgot: as the maintainer and OP of this thread, there is a small fee payable in the form of a gear contribution to me so that I may stay on top of the game and properly guide this thread, so I'll relieve you of your 70-200mm. I'll PM you the address.


You haven't been making your protection payments to the staff that allows to keep a thread running.... We'll be in touch


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


You haven't been making your protection payments to the staff that allows to keep a thread running.... We'll be in touch


----------



## Zeva

haahahaha


----------



## xlastshotx

Hey I just noticed that my thread "Best Blog/Info/Photo/Review/Retail Websites" is on the first post of this thread, under forum stickies







! That is really cool







thanks!

To bad it isn't really a sticky, but either way as long as people see it and it helps them im happy







.


----------



## SlickMeister

Equipment Update! Got myself the Nifty Fifty :

Canon EF 50mm ƒ1.8 II


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *xlastshotx*


Hey I just noticed that my thread "Best Blog/Info/Photo/Review/Retail Websites" is on the first post of this thread, under forum stickies







! That is really cool







thanks!

To bad it isn't really a sticky, but either way as long as people see it and it helps them im happy







.


It's an obvious addendum. It will be eventually.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *SlickMeister*


Equipment Update! Got myself the Nifty Fifty :

Canon EF 50mm ƒ1.8 II


Excellent, open that mother up!

EDIT: Wow, did you do some boozin' to celebrate?


----------



## Zeva

Gratz on the nifty!


----------



## SlickMeister

Haha! No, that would essentially be illegal. My father is a fan of spirits. I must add, I myself am becoming one also.







Plus, it is an elegant bottle.


----------



## Danylu

Hi guys I just want to know if I got this right;

<30mm is landscape
30-50mm is portraiture/macro
50mm-80mm is everyday
80-200mm is moderate telephoto
200mm< supertelephoto

So... assuming I've gotten that right, what do you guys think of the;

Nikon 18-105mm VR for $405 Aussie 
Nikon 35mm f/1.8 $337 & 
Nikon 50mm f/1.8 $175

What are the two primes meant to be used for? Just to make sure









The 50mm is a lot cheaper, longer length, no autofocus and the front moves to focus. Is it worth being $150 cheaper, are there other differences I have missed that make it a lot cheaper?


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
Hi guys I just want to know if I got this right;

<30mm is landscape

Depends. 30mm and under is fine on a FF but on a crop sensor you have to go even wider than that. Usually 20mm and under.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
30-50mm is portraiture/macro

For macro's you'd want 60-100mm on average, but if you're serious about them nothing is holding you back from getting an even longer one.

For portraits 85mm seems to be the sweet spot.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
50mm-80mm is everyday

For crop sensors, around 30mm's depending on the cameras crop (want to get as close to 50mm as possible).

On an FF you'd use a nifty fifty.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
80-200mm is moderate telephoto

Yeah, you can see that with the popularity of 70-200mm lenses.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
200mm< supertelephoto

So... assuming I've gotten that right, what do you guys think of the;

Nikon 18-105mm VR for $405 Aussie
Nikon 35mm f/1.8 $337 &
Nikon 50mm f/1.8 $175

What are the two primes meant to be used for? Just to make sure









The 50mm is a lot cheaper, longer length, no autofocus and the front moves to focus. Is it worth being $150 cheaper, are there other differences I have missed that make it a lot cheaper?

Since you use a camera with a crop sensor get the Nikon 35mm f/1.8. 35mm* 1.5 = 52.5mm

The Nikon 50mm will be 75mm.


----------



## Danylu

Unfortunately it seems I keep forgetting to click the ok button when I edit my posts.

I forgot to add, is the 35mm alright for macros? I heard someone mutter something about a true 1:1 zoom a while back about macros, does that mean anything?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Unfortunately it seems I keep forgetting to click the ok button when I edit my posts.

I forgot to add, is the 35mm alright for macros? I heard someone mutter something about a true 1:1 zoom a while back about macros, does that mean anything?


I don't think you will get 1:1 with 35mm, more like 1:7 or 1:8. And I don't believe that Nikon makes a 35mm anyway for that reason. To get 1:1, most macro lenses (there are macro primes and non-macro primes by the way) are 60mm, which is an ideal focal length and ratio for most macro purposes. 1:1 means that the object shot will be the same size in the shot as it is in reality (at a certain working distance).

For greater ratios, like 2:1 (object will be twice the size on the shot), you'll need a 100mm macro lens, but the draw back is that at that focal length and mag. ratio, it's very, very hard to hand hold shots, requiring a tripod in most cases.

Now for any lens, zoom, macro or non-macro, you can get extension tubes and increase the mag ratio. For example, if I get 60mm worth of tubes for my 60mm macro, I will get 2:1, because it's 1:1 to begin with. But for a non-macro lens, say a 50mm normal lens, if you add 50mm of extension you will get 1:1 (extension tube length divided by lens focal length).

I use the 60mm macro and it's a good balance between mag. ratio and hand holdability, here's a sample 1:1 shot that has been cropped, note the dime for scale:


----------



## Danylu

I think I'll save up for the 60mm.


----------



## Mootsfox

If you flip that 35mm I think you get like a 8:1 ratio.

I want to say my 24mm gives a 10:1, not 100% sure though.


----------



## Marin

Since I'm used to using an SLR, when using the Leica I was framing the image using the whole viewfinder









Anyways...


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


If you flip that 35mm I think you get like a 8:1 ratio.

I want to say my 24mm gives a 10:1, not 100% sure though.


Certainly true, but at such high mag. ratio the DOF is impossible to deal with. 1:1 to 5:1 is a reasonable macro ratio range to be effective. Which is why I really wish I had the Canon MPE 65mm, adjustable mag. ratio from 1:1 to 5:1!


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


If you flip that 35mm I think you get like a 8:1 ratio.

I want to say my 24mm gives a 10:1, not 100% sure though.


what is this lens flipping you speak of?


----------



## Mootsfox

F mount to 52mm (or whatever size your filter thread is) adapter ring.

http://cgi.ebay.com/52mm-Macro-Rever...3A1%7C294%3A50

When you flip a lens around it turns it into a high powered microscope basically. But as Gone said, you lose your DoF down to about oh... 0.1 to 1mm. Meaning the surface of a dollar bill could be part in focus and part out







The wider the lens is the higher the magnification ratio is in general. Not always though.


----------



## xonix

Playing around with macro:

New PSU! =)









Master of Cool (needs a dust off though)









Razer Sharp (or is that Blur?)


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
F mount to 52mm (or whatever size your filter thread is) adapter ring.

http://cgi.ebay.com/52mm-Macro-Rever...3A1%7C294%3A50

When you flip a lens around it turns it into a high powered microscope basically. But as Gone said, you lose your DoF down to about oh... 0.1 to 1mm. Meaning the surface of a dollar bill could be part in focus and part out







The wider the lens is the higher the magnification ratio is in general. Not always though.










sounds like fun.


----------



## evilspongebob72

How's this lens?

http://www.cliftoncameras.co.uk/Tamr...i_LD_Macro_1:2

Looking to get it for my A200


----------



## SlickMeister

I think it is quite a decent lens, check out these reviews : http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showp...ct/455/cat/all

Quite commonly works best when stopped down and may not be amazing at the top of the focal range but a very good budget buy methinks.


----------



## Oscuro

I am tempted to go hungry for this:

http://vancouver.en.craigslist.ca/pho/1147181391.html

Nikon 18mm/2.8 for $450 Canadian...


----------



## dr4gon

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Oscuro* 
I am tempted to go hungry for this:

http://vancouver.en.craigslist.ca/pho/1147181391.html

Nikon 18mm/2.8 for $450 Canadian...

Seems like a good deal!


----------



## Oscuro

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dr4gon* 
Seems like a good deal!

Yeah, but I have an empty fridge, and barren cupboards (just moved). My new job isn't full time...augh, and I might OWE money for Taxes.

*sigh*


----------



## Marin

Jackpot!

Found a bunch of rolls of film in my room. Some of them already used and undeveloped. And five unused rolls of film (Tri-X 400, awesome!). I probably have some more hiding around.


----------



## Danylu

I have a nagging question, assuming I take a photo at 50mm, if I enlarge the photo 3:1 ratio on my computer, would that picture have the same zoom as if I take a picture at 150mm?


----------



## Marin

I'm embracing the integration between Lightroom and CS3 more. I like editing B&W pics more in CS3 than Lightroom since I can apply different types of filters. Still like editing color pics in Lightroom since CS3 doesn't offer me anything else I need and I can fix chromatic aberration in Lightroom.

Anyways, B&W done in CS3.


----------



## The_Rocker

Add me to the list:

Canon EOS 450D with 18-55mm Kit lens.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
I have a nagging question, assuming I take a photo at 50mm, if I enlarge the photo 3:1 ratio on my computer, would that picture have the same zoom as if I take a picture at 150mm?

Technically no, because you're just enlarging the image size, not changing the field of view somehow post process. Now you could _simulate_ the FOV of 150mm by cropping and enlarging the center of the image, much the same way that I can crop a 1:1 macro shot to a simulated 2:1 shot.

The thing is, when you crop heavily, you lose detail, which is where having a high resolution (more megapixels) is really helpful. You can imagine how tightly you could crop a 40 megapixel image from a Hasselblad DSLR.


----------



## Danylu

I have decided that I want to get a macro lens







mainly cause wide angle lenses are too expensive.

I have found the Nikon 60mm for $760 and the Sigma 150mm for $870. The Sigma is heavy with 150mm and the Nikon is lighter with 60mm, is the $100 premium for the Sigma worth it? I have read reviews and both look awesome! I am more inclined to the 60mm as it is more usable in average circumstances however the focal length the Sigma has might be useful... sometimes.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
I have decided that I want to get a macro lens







mainly cause wide angle lenses are too expensive.

I have found the Nikon 60mm for $760 and the Sigma 150mm for $870. The Sigma is heavy with 150mm and the Nikon is lighter with 60mm, is the $100 premium for the Sigma worth it? I have read reviews and both look awesome! I am more inclined to the 60mm as it is more usable in average circumstances however the focal length the Sigma has might be useful... sometimes.

What you will get from the Sigma is a 1:1 ratio as well, but increased working distance, which for some is easily worth the extra $110. The 60mm has a 1:1 ratio too, which is fairly close up (and cropping can enhance the mag. more), plus the 60mm will be much, much easier to hand hold shots. The 150mm will have quite a bit of shake at that focal length and mag. ratio, requiring a tripod for most shots. Personally, I think it's wise to just get the 60mm, for a few reasons:

1. It can double as a very nice prime lens for portraits, etc.
2. Cheaper obviously
3. Easier to hand hold shots
4. Less tube length to get 2:1 (60mm of tubes)


----------



## Danylu

The 60mm is full frame, it will still work on a D60 right?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
The 60mm is full frame, it will still work on a D60 right?

Checking...as far I can tell the Nikon 60mm f/2.8D AF Micro Nikkor and the Nikon 60mm f/2.8G ED AF-S Micro both work on DX sensors. The second one is nice because it is an AF-S lens, which means you will have auto focus, although for macros most people manual focus anyway.

Also there's the Nikon 105mm f/2.8D AF Micro Nikkor which a nice compromise between the 60mm and 150mm.

EDIT: I looked more closely at the Sigma 150mm an apparently can only do 1:1 like the 60mm. The advantage, though is that it has a much longer working distance than the 60mm (meaning you can be further away to get 1:1, useful for jittery insects).


----------



## dr4gon

FF lenses will definitely work on an APS-C, just with the 1.5x crop factor for Sony/Nikon (1.6 for Canon).

I would definitely suggest AF for a macro lens. Not absolutely needed, but makes life simpler sometimes and you can use it as a portrait lens too (easier).


----------



## Oscuro

Anyone know of any reviews on a Sigma 70-300mm lens?
Have a friend offering my his for $100, thinking it might be worth it.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Oscuro*


Anyone know of any reviews on a Sigma 70-300mm lens?
Have a friend offering my his for $100, thinking it might be worth it.


Which one? There are two:

Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 DG Macro
Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 DG Macro APO

Neither is a particularly spectacular lens, but I would buy the APO version if that's what he has. A Sigma APO (apochromatic) lens has an extra low-dispersion element which reduces chromatic aberration. Otherwise, neither lens has a hypersonic motor, so focusing on quick moving wildlife might pose a problem. Also, both are very soft at 300mm (common with many zoom lenses).

Neither lens is bad; you could easily get great shots out of it, provided that you're stopped down to f/5.6-f/11.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Oscuro* 
Anyone know of any reviews on a Sigma 70-300mm lens?
Have a friend offering my his for $100, thinking it might be worth it.

How old and what F? My dad has a fairly old (like late 80s) 70-300mm F/4 Sigma that turns out pretty decent photos.


----------



## dr4gon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


How old and what F? My dad has a fairly old (like late 80s) 70-300mm F/4 Sigma that turns out pretty decent photos.


Constant F/4? Sounds like quite a lens, haven't heard of anything like this before?


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dr4gon* 
Constant F/4? Sounds like quite a lens, haven't heard of anything like this before?









Yup, constant F/4 75-300mm for the Nikon F-mount with auto-focus. It's one of the sliding zoom barrel (compared to his 28-70mm Sigma with the twist zoom). His next most-used lens after his 50mm F/1.8 Nikon. He wishes the Sigma was a tad faster at times, but it can turn out some great shots.

EDIT: Just double-checked, and it's actually an F/3.8 lens. His 28-70 is F/3.5-4.5. I think the reason why I though F/4 is that his D50 doesn't always register the lens properly and sometimes the aperture isn't correct.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Look at what I got









Canon 430EX II









I love this speedlite! You more experienced photographers are probably saying "Big deal, it's a flash," but this is my first speedlite, wish I had gotten this long ago. I'm still playing with it and RTFM, but here's an example of what it can do:

Direct flash (pointed straight at the subject):









Bounce-flash off the ceiling at 75Â°:


----------



## SlickMeister

Congrats on the purchase GoneTomorrow! Looks like some great pictures are to come. I can see it coming in handy for you for the next photo contest.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *SlickMeister*


Congrats on the purchase GoneTomorrow! Looks like some great pictures are to come. I can see it coming in handy for you for the next photo contest.


Indeed, if I can find the time, May is a damn busy month for teachers.


----------



## laboitenoire

Wow, I never knew that there was that much of a benefit from bouncing the flash. It almost looks like it was taken in natural light.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Indeed, if I can find the time, May is a damn busy month for teachers.


What do you teach?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Wow, I never knew that there was that much of a benefit from bouncing the flash. It almost looks like it was taken in natural light.


Yeah, when it bounces off the ceiling, the light is scattered and partially absorbed, giving a nice diffusing effect. And the ceiling bounce obviously can't work in a space with very high ceiling (e.g. stadium), but you can get creative and bounce the flash off the walls.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


What do you teach?


Latin and Computer Applications (mostly Office '07, but I do teach some web design too).


----------



## Mootsfox

That's cool. I'm guessing highschool level?

Nice flash too, it's something I've been wanting and you're about to push me over that edge


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


That's cool. I'm guessing highschool level?

Nice flash too, it's something I've been wanting and you're about to push me over that edge










Yep, high school, specifically a Catholic private school (not Catholic myself). And driving you to getting a speedlite is something I'm happy to do.









A couple more with the new flash. Again, the flash is bounced off the ceiling and the images here are straight from the camera (no PP):


----------



## Marin

Looks awesome. Bouncing does help a lot.


----------



## dr4gon

Bouncing does wonders, makes things look very natural when there may not be any light at all


----------



## Marin

Cinco de Mayo macro's. All I can really take since I'm home sick.


----------



## Oscuro

My sister's wedding present....is a gift to myself?!


----------



## laboitenoire

It's funny--my dad has the 1988 model of that lens and it hasn't changed all that much since then.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Oscuro* 
My sister's wedding present....is a gift to myself?!

LOL, reminds me of one Simpsons episode where Homer buys marge a bowling ball as a gift, only to keep it.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Look at what I got









Canon 430EX II


GT,

My SB900 came with a diffuser, but you can buy one for your flash from Stofen.

Instead of bouncing off the ceiling, you get a more direct diffuse effect.

They're ~ $20 and many big camera stores have a good selection, but you can order directly from Stofen. I love the one I bought for my SB-600. I'll post some pics tomorrow.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
GT,

My SB900 came with a diffuser, but you can buy one for your flash from Stofen.

Instead of bouncing off the ceiling, you get a more direct diffuse effect.

They're ~ $20 and many big camera stores have a good selection, but you can order directly from Stofen. I love the one I bought for my SB-600. I'll post some pics tomorrow.

Oh yes, of course I have a Sto-Fen. The 430EX II didn't come with one







Nor did come with a two-way unit that retracts from the flash bulb, but instead it has a wide angle refractor, which I'm glad to have for my 10-22mm. .The Omni-Bounce works very well for direct flash, in situations where the ceiling is too high or colored, but otherwise the bounce is superior because of the reduces "blueness" and lack of harsh shadows.


----------



## dr4gon

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Oscuro* 
My sister's wedding present....is a gift to myself?!




























But it's really a present for her with all the sweet pictures you'll take with it!

What is with all the new stuff, is it Christmas already?


----------



## Oscuro

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dr4gon*


But it's really a present for her with all the sweet pictures you'll take with it!

What is with all the new stuff, is it Christmas already?










That's exactly how I view it!

New stuff? Some people got their tax returns back with a huge slab of cash back. Me? I'm going to be hungry for the rest of this month since I also OWE money on my taxes....I think. Son of a expletive.

Oh, and I STILL need to pick up a tripod. Something under $100 canadian. I'm so screwed this month.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Cinco de Mayo macro's. All I can really take since I'm home sick.


Uh-oh, swine flu?


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Uh-oh, swine flu?


Maybe. If I do I don't really care since so far it is way less harmful than the other strains of flu in the US.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Oscuro*


That's exactly how I view it!

New stuff? Some people got their tax returns back with a huge slab of cash back. Me? I'm going to be hungry for the rest of this month since I also OWE money on my taxes....I think. Son of a expletive.

Oh, and I STILL need to pick up a tripod. Something under $100 canadian. I'm so screwed this month.


I feel ya, I had to pay in this year myself.

How bout a Slik? There are a few Manfrotto tripods under $100 as well. If worse comes to worst, you could just buy a dirt cheap $20 tripod, they get the job done, but annoyingly so.


----------



## Oscuro

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


I feel ya, I had to pay in this year myself.

How bout a Slik? There are a few Manfrotto tripods under $100 as well. If worse comes to worst, you could just buy a dirt cheap $20 tripod, they get the job done, but annoyingly so.


Under $100...Canadian.
And I already have a $20 tripod, but it's base doesn't flip for portrait shooting. Otherwise, I wouldn't have an issue.

Yes, I was stupid with an impulse buy...several of them last year. The $500+ something I blew on the S5 could have gone to a nice used DSLR and lens. Should have picked up a better tripod...*sigh* Damned hindsight.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Oscuro*


Under $100...Canadian.
And I already have a $20 tripod, but it's base doesn't flip for portrait shooting. Otherwise, I wouldn't have an issue.

Yes, I was stupid with an impulse buy...several of them last year. The $500+ something I blew on the S5 could have gone to a nice used DSLR and lens. Should have picked up a better tripod...*sigh* Damned hindsight.


Well, sell your S5 here, I'm sure it will sell. And the tripod is $106 Canadian, but fair enough. I can't really find any decent tripods for less than that. Just hold out with the cheap one until you can get a decent Manfrotto or Slik. You can get several decent models from both for less than $150 CAD.


----------



## Mootsfox

If someone were in the market for a Manfrotto, Gone, perhaps because their cheap tripod was chucked into the street when the quick release broke, which Manfrotto model would you recommend?


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


If someone were in the market for a Manfrotto, Gone, perhaps because their cheap tripod was chucked into the street when the quick release broke, which Manfrotto model would you recommend?


Off topic, any pics?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


If someone were in the market for a Manfrotto, Gone, perhaps because their cheap tripod was chucked into the street when the quick release broke, which Manfrotto model would you recommend?


Any of the 190 series:

http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_ss_p?...to+190&x=0&y=0

Carbon fiber legs, lightweight, sufficient weight capacity. They're sold as legs only mostly, so a head would be needed like a 486RC2 or 488RC2.

I would recommend the Manfrotto 7xx series, like my 725b, but they are very scarce online for some reason, perhaps being discontinued or economic reasons, much like the absence of many Canon lenses these days. eBay has some.


----------



## dr4gon

190X series is not carbon fiber

the CX series legs are CF


190xprob here!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dr4gon*


190X series is not carbon fiber

the CX series legs are CF


190xprob here!


Right you are, I had the 190CX in mind. Nice tripod, that's a 488RC2 ball head, no? I originally was set on a 190 series tripod, but couldn't swing it with the legs and head together. Settled for the 725b because I found a great deal on it. The head is not removable though, so no more heads for me. Unless I can get the replacement aftermarket column from someone at mflenses.com.


----------



## Mootsfox

The xprob with that extendable and movable middle piece looks great!

What do you guys think about this? 









http://www.amazon.com/Manfrotto-322R...d_bxgy_p_img_b


----------



## Oscuro

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Well, sell your S5 here, I'm sure it will sell. And the tripod is $106 Canadian, but fair enough. I can't really find any decent tripods for less than that. Just hold out with the cheap one until you can get a decent Manfrotto or Slik. You can get several decent models from both for less than $150 CAD.


Selling the S5 has crossed my mind a few times, but it is sort of hard to break with at the moment since it gives me one thing that I can't do with the D70 (yet), which is "macro-ish" mode. Sure it's not ideal to have the camera 0-4 inches away from the object, but it is nice, and useful.

But I may just have to sell it off.

The other issue though, is the urgency due to my sister's wedding being on the 14th. This month. Hmmm...perhaps I will ask around to see if I can borrow a tripod from someone I know first.

Otherwise, I've narrowed my "entry-level tripod list" to these:

http://www.blackphoto.com/blacks/product.jsp?prdId=2018 'Frotto 728B $119
http://www.blackphoto.com/blacks/product.jsp?prdId=5787 Velbon Sherpa 200R $109
http://www.lensandshutter.com/produc...status=current Slik Sprint Pro $99 But with a 4.4 lb (2kg) weight limit, I don't think it will be a great long term option.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


I feel ya, I had to pay in this year myself.

How bout a Slik? There are a few Manfrotto tripods under $100 as well. If worse comes to worst,* you could just buy a dirt cheap $20 tripod, they get the job done, but annoyingly *so.


I have one of those... $15 to be exact.









That bounced flash looks awesome Gone... but I imagine bringing a flash that big could be a little big intimidating to the people around you. You got me interested and looking at the SB-400, I was thinking, surely someone must have made a shoe-box accessory that lets you swivel the speedlight side to side. I'm going to investigate


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


I have one of those... $15 to be exact.









That bounced flash looks awesome Gone... but I imagine bringing a flash that big could be a little big intimidating to the people around you. You got me interested and looking at the SB-400, I was thinking, surely someone must have made a shoe-box accessory that lets you swivel the speedlight side to side. I'm going to investigate










I don't much about the Nikon speedlites, but surely they swivel to begin with? My 430EXII does (took me a few hours to realize it). And my flash isn't as intimidating as the 580EXII, which is enormous, and mine already dwarfs the camera.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


I don't much about the Nikon speedlites, but surely they swivel to begin with? My 430EXII does (took me a few hours to realize it). And my flash isn't as intimidating as the 580EXII, which is enormous, and mine already dwarfs the camera.


SB-400 looks like this;










$170 AUSTRALIAN. You can't put too many features in or else the SB-600 wouldn't sell lol.


----------



## moward

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Oscuro*


That's exactly how I view it!

New stuff? Some people got their tax returns back with a huge slab of cash back. Me? I'm going to be hungry for the rest of this month since I also OWE money on my taxes....I think. Son of a expletive.

Oh, and I STILL need to pick up a tripod. Something under $100 canadian. I'm so screwed this month.


When looking for tripods its useful to remeber that you can pick two of the three features listed below:

Cheap
Lightweight
Stable

i.e. a lightweight & stable tripod will cost $$$$
whereas a heavy but stable tripod can be picked up for a lot less.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


The xprob with that extendable and movable middle piece looks great!

What do you guys think about this? 









http://www.amazon.com/Manfrotto-322R...d_bxgy_p_img_b


That's a very nice head obviously, one handle to move the ball head to any position. However, I've seen this head in my local camera shop, and it's pretty large. The handle sticks out a good 6" from the head, so it won't be ideally portable. But with an 11 lb. capacity, it certainly will hold you camera. But that kind of weight capacity is aimed at shooters with enormous FF cameras and arm-length zoom lenses (I'm so not jealous







), so it may be overkill for your needs. A much, much more compact head which still holds a good deal of weight (17 lbs.) is the 488RC2. I wish I had it myself.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Oscuro*


Selling the S5 has crossed my mind a few times, but it is sort of hard to break with at the moment since it gives me one thing that I can't do with the D70 (yet), which is "macro-ish" mode. Sure it's not ideal to have the camera 0-4 inches away from the object, but it is nice, and useful.

But I may just have to sell it off.

The other issue though, is the urgency due to my sister's wedding being on the 14th. This month. Hmmm...perhaps I will ask around to see if I can borrow a tripod from someone I know first.

Otherwise, I've narrowed my "entry-level tripod list" to these:

http://www.blackphoto.com/blacks/product.jsp?prdId=2018 'Frotto 728B $119
http://www.blackphoto.com/blacks/product.jsp?prdId=5787 Velbon Sherpa 200R $109
http://www.lensandshutter.com/produc...status=current Slik Sprint Pro $99 But with a 4.4 lb (2kg) weight limit, I don't think it will be a great long term option.


Nice, you located a 728b, they're hard to find these days. I would say go for that one. The Slik has dubious weight capacity and I don't know much about Velbon tripods. One thing about the 728b you have to realize is that it's head is permanently attached, so you won't be able to upgrade it.


----------



## dr4gon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Right you are, I had the 190CX in mind. Nice tripod, that's a 488RC2 ball head, no? I originally was set on a 190 series tripod, but couldn't swing it with the legs and head together. Settled for the 725b because I found a great deal on it. The head is not removable though, so no more heads for me. Unless I can get the replacement aftermarket column from someone at mflenses.com.


You could add a head on top I think lol....

It is the 488RC2, found a nice combo at JR when manfrotto was doing rebates last year. The setup is quite beastly, very sturdy. I wish the top column swung underneath to get down on the ground, but I can always flatten out the legs, switch the vertical to horizontal column and get right down on the ground that way.

I was considering getting the 725B but heard some stores about the head breaking. I just wanted 1 tripod that would last me a while and I wouldn't have to worry. Then again, it did almost cost double.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dr4gon*


You could add a head on top I think lol....

It is the 488RC2, found a nice combo at JR when manfrotto was doing rebates last year. The setup is quite beastly, very sturdy. I wish the top column swung underneath to get down on the ground, but I can always flatten out the legs, switch the vertical to horizontal column and get right down on the ground that way.

I was considering getting the 725B but heard some stores about the head breaking. I just wanted 1 tripod that would last me a while and I wouldn't have to worry. Then again, it did almost cost double.


Actually, at mflenses.com there's a guy who sells aftermarket replacement columns with a head mount (no integrated head) for the 725b. The weird thing is that they come from China, but many at that site have gotten them and are happy.

Yeah, one thing I didn't think to consider when I got the 725b was the fact that legs weren't hinged at the top, so know expanding of the legs. I haven't heard much about the 725b's integrated head breaking. Maybe that happened to people who were mounting Canon 1Ds mkIII with 400 L lenses.







But I've put mine through some torture and it has never creeped or unloosened. The head on it is exactly the same as the 484RC2 I believe. I don't weigh it down much though. My heaviest lens is the 28-135mm.


----------



## Oscuro

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Nice, you located a 728b, they're hard to find these days. I would say go for that one. The Slik has dubious weight capacity and I don't know much about Velbon tripods. One thing about the 728b you have to realize is that it's head is permanently attached, so you won't be able to upgrade it.


There's also a store listing the 718B, but since the 728B seems like a evolution of the design.
And I know you mean well by reminding me about the fixed head thing....But to be honest, at this point: I couldn't care less about being able to upgrade the head. Since Legs seem to start at $200, and then throwing in a head is another $50-100. I'm working this on a budget that more closely resembles a pre-teen's allowance than a working man's pay









Quote:



Originally Posted by *moward*


When looking for tripods its useful to remeber that you can pick two of the three features listed below:

Cheap
Lightweight
Stable

i.e. a lightweight & stable tripod will cost $$$$
whereas a heavy but stable tripod can be picked up for a lot less.


You forgot the fourth aspect: Features









I'm going for Cheap and stable, which for some reason...is always more expensive than cheap and light...


----------



## laboitenoire

Kinda interesting... Got the most recent B&H catalog the other day, and saw an interesting camera from Sigma. It was either the DP1 or DP2, which have the 14 megapixel Foveon sensor packed into a P&S body. Hot-shoe for flash, but only a fixed focal length (41mm equivalent for DP2, 28mm for the DP1).


----------



## equetefue

I have Feisol CF Ct-3401 legs and Wimberly Sidekick setup...

Also have a Bogen Monopod with a 486RC2 head


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *laboitenoire* 
Kinda interesting... Got the most recent B&H catalog the other day, and saw an interesting camera from Sigma. It was either the DP1 or DP2, which have the 14 megapixel Foveon sensor packed into a P&S body. Hot-shoe for flash, but only a fixed focal length (41mm equivalent for DP2, 28mm for the DP1).

The DP1 had less than stellar reviews (but not totally bad):

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sigmadp1/

The Sigma DP2 is supposed to resolve a lot of the issues, but I haven't seen any reviews yet.


----------



## Marin

Sometimes I hate when something "clicks" a little late. I was wondering why I could get away with extremely high ISO's back when I used film. Then it finally hit me, grain looks good with B&W when you can work with it.

On that note (about film), I just ordered some more film. Seems like my local drug store, that is now owned by CVS, only sells Kodak film. So I had to order some of my favorite color film off of Amazon.

http://www.amazon.com/Fujifilm-10142...1672331&sr=8-5


----------



## xlastshotx

What do you guys think of my bicycle/paintjob, I just finished putting it back together after I painted it.

I wanted something different, brighter than the standard black bicycle/single color bicycle.










*edit

Here is a before picture


----------



## Mootsfox

You forgot the chain.


----------



## xlastshotx

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


You forgot the chain.


 Wait you need a chain?!?







I am picking up a singlespeed Shimano cassette converter tomorrow to finish the job. I don't need all those fancy gears. I just need to get it done quick, I have 80 miles to ride, on Saturday and Sunday.


----------



## Oscuro

My personal view: garish.
I like things subtle and simple personally. Though I have seen a few custom jobs that I did like/not mind that were bright, mainly through the use of complementary colours, or a simplified scheme.

To be blunt: I don't like the choice of colors, I don't think they are complementary at all. And while I can see your attention to detail in even painting the bolts, it just does not appeal to me.

Edit: Nice shot though, I do like the lighting a lot. Feels almost studio shot.


----------



## Mootsfox

Oscuro, I think it's a California type thing with the colors. I'm not sure though.

Paint the chain yellow.


----------



## Marin

IMO, the bike looks awesome. Why have the colors go with each other, it wouldn't be able to stick out.


----------



## Mootsfox

Exactly my point


----------



## xlastshotx

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Oscuro* 
My personal view: garish.
I like things subtle and simple personally. Though I have seen a few custom jobs that I did like/not mind that were bright, mainly through the use of complementary colours, or a simplified scheme.

To be blunt: I don't like the choice of colors, I don't think they are complementary at all. And while I can see your attention to detail in even painting the bolts, it just does not appeal to me.

Edit: Nice shot though, I do like the lighting a lot. Feels almost studio shot.

Hmm, I chose the colors (lime green, orange, and blue), primary because they are on opposite ends of the color wheel, which would make the colors pop when next to eachother. I think this is either a like it or hate it bike







. My three other bikes a are all simple color schemes, (green/white, blue/black, white/black). I wanted somthing different, something nowone else has.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Oscuro, I think it's a California type thing with the colors. I'm not sure though.

Paint the chain yellow.

lol, hmm Im not even sure if its a California thing. I think I have only seen one other bike that was as bright as mine, everybody else has regular colors/paint jobs.

No yellow for me (the one color I don't really like), and I dont think painting the chain is a good idea.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 










IMO, the bike looks awesome. Why have the colors go with each other, it wouldn't be able to stick out.

lol thanks.

All the people I ride with call it the Lego Bike haha


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *xlastshotx* 
Wait you need a chain?!?







I am picking up a singlespeed Shimano cassette converter tomorrow to finish the job. I don't need all those fancy gears. I just need to get it done quick, I have 80 miles to ride, on Saturday and Sunday.

Single speed? Must be a relatively flat route. I use my gears constantly, esp. on trails.


----------



## Oscuro

Quote:


Originally Posted by *xlastshotx* 
Hmm, I chose the colors (lime green, orange, and blue), primary because they are on opposite ends of the color wheel, which would make the colors pop when next to eachother. I think this is either a like it or hate it bike







. My three other bikes a are all simple color schemes, (green/white, blue/black, white/black). I wanted somthing different, something nowone else has.

Orange? Cripes, on my monitor it looks very red...Maybe I need to adjust my monitor or something?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Oscuro* 
Orange? Cripes, on my monitor it looks very red...Maybe I need to adjust my monitor or something?

Me too, looks fire engine red to me.


----------



## xlastshotx

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Single speed? Must be a relatively flat route. I use my gears constantly, esp. on trails.

The route I am taking is kinda flat I guess, I usually average about 18 mph in the 52/18 gear ratio, on flat ground or going up most hills. And this ride is going to be more leisurely, so everybody can make it, so we probably will go about 10MPH. Should be pretty easy in any gear, Almost all the other riders are using fixed gears.









This probably isnt the final route were gunna take, but it should be close to what we do, were going to go from Temecula to Oceanside then Camp over there in sleeping bags, then ride back on Sunday. Should be a fun ride, and I am definitely bringing my camera.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Oscuro* 
Orange? Cripes, on my monitor it looks very red...Maybe I need to adjust my monitor or something?


Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Me too, looks fire engine red to me.

I think it was my camera, also it is a very red orange.


----------



## dr4gon

Getting back on topic....

Been working on my RAID so I don't have lightroom right now so this is straight JPEG out of the camera.


----------



## Marin

Looks good, but Lightroom would definitely benefit it a lot. Besides that I love the bokeh, and is that a blurred out clover I see in the background?

Anyways, took this pic. Came out just the way I wanted.


----------



## dr4gon

It is clover (the nasty weed). There's a bunch of these yellow flowers around it, think it's the flowers of the clover.

It could use a bit of contrast and sharpening. I could've posted the smaller size from flickr and you wouldn't be able to tell as much. Oh well, I was in a hurry.

What is yours a picture of? Some sort of water as bokeh I think?


----------



## Marin

It's a pot that I kept spraying water on until I got this bokeh effect.


----------



## EntropyTTU

Can you add a newbie to your photo club?









Fujifilm sd1500









ISO 64
f/2.4?
shutter: 1000
Cant remember the rest.
Temp 100! Plenty of sun.

Edit: Believe it or not, this is a lot of color (natural grown) for West Texas; I am doing good to find grass that isn't dead. The rest is just cactus, cactus, and mesquite...


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dr4gon* 
It is clover (the nasty weed). There's a bunch of these yellow flowers around it, think it's the flowers of the clover.

Blasphemy! My family loves clover. It doesn't die out in the summer, is soft on the feet, attracts lots of bees for you people who have gardens, and actually fertilizes your lawn for you! Clover flowers are usually white and sort of resemble lavender flowers in a way. Those flowers look more like honeysuckle.


----------



## Mootsfox

My yard is mostly clover. Beats dandelions.


----------



## dr4gon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Blasphemy! My family loves clover. It doesn't die out in the summer, is soft on the feet, attracts lots of bees for you people who have gardens, and actually fertilizes your lawn for you! Clover flowers are usually white and sort of resemble lavender flowers in a way. Those flowers look more like honeysuckle.


lol the stuff really does get everywhere! I can see it being soft. Not dying out in the summer is kind of a problem lol.

hmmm ok I'll have to go back and take a second look.









Thanks for the ID!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *EntropyTTU* 

Can you add a newbie to your photo club?









Fujifilm sd1500

ISO 64
f/2.4?
shutter: 1000
Cant remember the rest.
Temp 100! Plenty of sun.

Edit: Believe it or not, this is a lot of color (natural grown) for West Texas; I am doing good to find grass that isn't dead. The rest is just cactus, cactus, and mesquite...


Added and nice shot.









More shots with the new flash. It's raining a lot and I'm really busy at work, so all I have time to shoot are the cats, LOL. So add your LOLCats decription if you want.

Our new Turkish Angora:









And the Ocicat:


----------



## Oscuro

Finally, good weather! Went out for a quick hike with the 50mm

Found out 2 things: DOF at f/1.8 = TINY









But does nice, smooth Bokeh:









And it can be very, very sharp:









Also learned that I really need to stop down the aperture for landscape and forest shots with it. I need to pay more attention to that. 5.6 = fuzzy landscapes and trees.


----------



## Squeeker The Cat

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Added and nice shot.









More shots with the new flash. It's raining a lot and I'm really busy at work, so all I have time to shoot are the cats, LOL. So add your LOLCats decription if you want.

Our new Turkish Angora:









And the Ocicat:










damn is that white guy cute!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! whats his name?


----------



## riko99

Hmm looks like the T1i is now available from Canon..... wonder how its going to do.


----------



## Danylu

Just wondering, how credible is this site in terms of its reviews?
http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/index.php

It has graphical blur chart things which is good if you need to find optimal settings for a lens, I finally figured out that f/8-f/11 is best for me on my lens









Why is Ken Rockwell disliked on this website? I don't get it.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Squeeker The Cat*


damn is that white guy cute!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! whats his name?


Her name is Coco (not my choice, my fiancee is really into fashion). We just got her last week.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Just wondering, how credible is this site in terms of its reviews?
http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/index.php

It has graphical blur chart things which is good if you need to find optimal settings for a lens, I finally figured out that f/8-f/11 is best for me on my lens









Why is Ken Rockwell disliked on this website? I don't get it.


Slrgear.com is very well respected, their lens tests are simple but thorough, I check that site at least once a day to compare lenses. But their reviews are all user reviews, so take those with a grain of salt.

And as for Ken Rockwell, well, just read this thread:

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...t=Ken+Rockwell


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Her name is Coco (not my choice, my fiancee is really into fashion). We just got her last week.

Slrgear.com is very well respected, their lens tests are simple but thorough, I check that site at least once a day to compare lenses. But their reviews are *all user reviews,* so take those with a grain of salt.

And as for Ken Rockwell, well, just read this thread:

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...t=Ken+Rockwell


They do test the lens themselves though, they even state which ones they have and haven't unless I'm missing something :S

7. "These indoor and night shots are hand-held. Tripods are for the weak.* I stack the odds in my favor by firing bursts of several shots in the Continuous shutter mode and sorting out the sharpest later*..."
Nothing like a little spray and pray heh?

I do that occasionally... but in broad daylight. HE DOES IT AT NIGHT! I am never going to his website again. I've stopped spraying recently cause I've learnt that it fails, 1 great picture is better than 3 blurry ones - unless you miss the great one.

7. "The Canon 70-300 IS works great for panning, *and I haven't even read the instructions on how to use it.* I used it in IS MODE I, and I suspect that I should have used IS MODE II for panning. I don't know, "

Dear god I have just started learning photography, maybe I should start my own website too and make minimal profit.
You have shown me the truth, I thank you


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


They do test the lens themselves though, they even state which ones they have and haven't unless I'm missing something :S

7. "These indoor and night shots are hand-held. Tripods are for the weak.* I stack the odds in my favor by firing bursts of several shots in the Continuous shutter mode and sorting out the sharpest later*..."
Nothing like a little spray and pray heh?

I do that occasionally... but in broad daylight. HE DOES IT AT NIGHT! I am never going to his website again. I've stopped spraying recently cause I've learnt that it fails, 1 great picture is better than 3 blurry ones - unless you miss the great one.

7. "The Canon 70-300 IS works great for panning, *and I haven't even read the instructions on how to use it.* I used it in IS MODE I, and I suspect that I should have used IS MODE II for panning. I don't know, "

Dear god I have just started learning photography, maybe I should start my own website too and make minimal profit.
You have shown me the truth, I thank you










Now you see. For beginners, he actually has useful tips, which gives the impression that he's some kind of expert. But when he describes his techniques and protocol, he shows his ass.


----------



## dr4gon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


And as for Ken Rockwell, well, just read this thread:

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...t=Ken+Rockwell


LOL









That is too funny!

I thought I was the only one who felt that way!


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dr4gon*


LOL









That is too funny!

*I thought I was the only one who felt that way!*


Most definitely not, lol.

Ken isn't all bad, but his ego ruins any credibility his site could hold.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Most definitely not, lol.

Ken isn't all bad, but his ego ruins any credibility his site could hold.

That and his questionable shooting techniques. I still can't believe that he actually admits to using the "spray and pray" technique. But, I must begrudgingly admit that he has some nice shots on his website.


----------



## Marin

Maybe it's just me, but I don't like his shots. Tons of wide angle shots with no composition.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Maybe it's just me, but I don't like his shots. Tons of wide angle shots with no composition.

Well, I said just _some._ There are definitely lots of bad ones, just as you describe, and he gets ridiculous with saturation.

I got my B+W 1.8 ND filter today. This mother is seriously dark! I can barely see through the viewfinder. Must find some waterfalls soon, because it's rained for two straight weeks.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Well, I said just _some._ There are definitely lots of bad ones, just as you describe, and he gets ridiculous with saturation.

I got my B+W 1.8 ND filter today. This mother is seriously dark! I can barely see through the viewfinder. Must find some waterfalls soon, because it's rained for two straight weeks.


I've been thinking about getting a ND filter. Maybe grab one once I get a wide angle lens so I can take some nice, long water shots without having to use insanely tight apertures.


----------



## Dragoon

Looked out the window by chance and looked up to find this:









The halo effect the moon does on the clouds is nice. If only I had looked out earlier, as time went by the moon hid more behind the building









*Got myself doing some reversed lens shooting:*
REALLY hard to shoot these handheld due to the lack of light that goes through the lens, both were taken with the EF-S 18-55mm.

This one was shot at around 25mm (Didn't look at the scale)









After a few tries at 18mm (HUGE magnification), I took this interesting shot with flash. DoF is ludicrously shallow, to have an idea, the numlock logo is around 3mm by 3mm, not even 1mm in focus!
















I had no idea the numlock led on my keyboard was so dusty lol, looking at it doesn't seem like so


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


I've been thinking about getting a ND filter. Maybe grab one once I get a wide angle lens so I can take some nice, long water shots without having to use insanely tight apertures.


They're great, but if I were you, I would get a 1.8 to start. I found the .9 ND filters not dark enough, forcing me to go as narrow as f/32, which got me the desired speed, but resulted in extreme softness. That extra 3 stops over the .9 should work perfectly at my next outing.

EDIT: maxsaver.net has B+W ND filters for about $20 less than retail. Takes them a while to ship (up to 10 days), but worth it for the price.


----------



## xonix

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dragoon*


*Got myself doing some reversed lens shooting:*
REALLY hard to shoot these handheld due to the lack of light that goes through the lens, both were taken with the EF-S 18-55mm.

This one was shot at around 25mm (Didn't look at the scale)
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3365/...a37c77bc_b.jpg

After a few tries at 18mm (HUGE magnification), I took this interesting shot with flash. DoF is ludicrously shallow, to have an idea, the numlock logo is around 3mm by 3mm, not even 1mm in focus!








http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3331/...95eba268_b.jpg
I had no idea the numlock led on my keyboard was so dusty lol, looking at it doesn't seem like so










That.. looks.. AWESOME!
I must get myself a reverse lens frame.. quite cheap and for results like that.. just Awesome!


----------



## Dragoon

Quote:


Originally Posted by *xonix* 
That.. looks.. AWESOME!
I must get myself a reverse lens frame.. quite cheap and for results like that.. just Awesome!

Thanks









Well, those were shot handheld lol, no reverse lens frame.









The 18-55mm made it easy for me, since the focus ring moves, making it as extended as possible it has a small gap where I could "clamp" my fingers to hold the lens against the camera.

But yeah, I also gotta get one of those frames.

I wonder about taking shots with the Canon EF-S 10-22mm or the Sigma 10-20mm


----------



## Marin

Finally, a HDR that I like.


----------



## evilspongebob72

nice, my HDRs never seem to turn out right


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *evilspongebob72*


nice, my HDRs never seem to turn out right


The problem with most HDR's is the tone mapped "painterly" shots. It was popular when people started doing them, but now they are trite and look entirely artificial. Simple exposure blends look much better IMO. In fact, if they're done correctly, no one would guess that they were multiple exposures combined.

On another note, I went shooting waterfalls with my new B+W 1.8 ND filter. If any one is looking to do slow shutter water shots, a 1.8 ND is _the_ filter to have. It's ideal; even in bright daylight, the filter was dark enough that I could shoot at f/8 and still get the 1"-2" shutter speeds.

Here's two of many that I shot today, give me some feedback please.


----------



## xonix

Wow.

Thats really all I can say atm, quite speechless.

Wow.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *xonix*


Wow.

Thats really all I can say atm, quite speechless.

Wow.


Thanks, not a feel a bit better about framing these as a Mother's Day present. And my camera shop closed today before I could get to it and make some awesome 8-color process prints, so I had to settle for Target, but I must say they looked decent.


----------



## TaiDinh

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


The problem with most HDR's is the tone mapped "painterly" shots. It was popular when people started doing them, but now they are trite and look entirely artificial. Simple exposure blends look much better IMO. In fact, if they're done correctly, no one would guess that they were multiple exposures combined.

On another note, I went shooting waterfalls with my new B+W 1.8 ND filter. If any one is looking to do slow shutter water shots, a 1.8 ND is _the_ filter to have. It's ideal; even in bright daylight, the filter was dark enough that I could shoot at f/8 and still get the 1"-2" shutter speeds.

Here's two of many that I shot today, give me some feedback please.









http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y11.../IMG_7738_.jpg











In your second waterfall picture, the blurred leaves at the bottom right is a little distracting. Other than that, great shots!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *TaiDinh*


In your second waterfall picture, the blurred leaves at the bottom right is a little distracting. Other than that, great shots!










Impossible to avoid with long shutter speeds unfortunately. The wind blows, the leaves move.


----------



## Danylu

They look awesome.


----------



## riko99

Great pics Gone


----------



## TaiDinh

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Impossible to avoid with long shutter speeds unfortunately. The wind blows, the leaves move.


True.


----------



## evilspongebob72

The do look fantastic. I need to read up on exposure blend now.


----------



## Danylu

Help please.









http://www.overclock.net/photography...g-options.html


----------



## Marin

He flew into the kitchen and knocked himself out. Once he came to I snapped some pics of him, here's one of them.


----------



## dr4gon

Wow, nice DOF and glad you could help the little guy up!


----------



## Lelin

Just saying hi. I bought a Canon XSi with a bit of advice from Marin. Currently have a 18-55mm IS, 50mm 1.8 and should be receiving my 55-250mm IS this week. I'm going to Peru at the end of june so I think I will have to buy a nice wide angle $$$ for some landscapes... too many lenses are interesting to get. If not the sigma 30mm 1.4 is my next choice.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Lelin*


Just saying hi. I bought a Canon XSi with a bit of advice from Marin. Currently have a 18-55mm IS, 50mm 1.8 and should be receiving my 55-250mm IS this week. I'm going to Peru at the end of june so I think I will have to buy a nice wide angle $$$ for some landscapes... too many lenses are interesting to get. If not the sigma 30mm 1.4 is my next choice.


The Sigma is an excellent lens, but won't be wide on your camera; the FOV will be equivalent to 48mm. How much can you spend? There are a lot of choices, like the Canon 10-22mm, The Tokina 11-16mm, the Sigma 12-24mm and 10-20mm.


----------



## Mootsfox

Playing with the zoom ring.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Playing with the zoom ring.

So did you zoom in or out? Gotta try that someday.

I was standing knee-deep in water when I took this, the current almost knocked over the tripod.


----------



## Mootsfox

Zoomed in, like 18-40mm while driving, 1 second exposure.

Nice shot Gone, I think it was worth getting wet.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Zoomed in, like 18-40mm while driving, 1 second exposure.

Nice shot Gone, I think it was worth getting wet.

Thanks, it's been raining on and off for two weeks straight, so this creek was off the hook.


----------



## xonix

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Thanks, it's been raining on and off for two weeks straight, *so this creek was off the hook.*

I dont know why, but that was hilarious.. XD


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *xonix* 
I dont know why, but that was hilarious.. XD

LOL, it was!


----------



## Lelin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
The Sigma is an excellent lens, but won't be wide on your camera; the FOV will be equivalent to 48mm. How much can you spend? There are a lot of choices, like the Canon 10-22mm, The Tokina 11-16mm, the Sigma 12-24mm and 10-20mm.

I don't know yet how much I'm willing to spend, trying to determine this as soon as possible. The problem is that I need to buy a tripod and maybe a flash. Also my father went away so we have to recalculate a few things. I'm working 7/7 12hours a day to be able to buy all the lenses I need.

I've been traveling mostly in Europe in tight streets where I was having alot of trouble taking complete pictures of a building. In Peru I'm gonna be doing more hiking and etc. Not sure how it's gonna be.

I can get the Sigma 10-20mm for less than 600CAD (520US) or wait for the 10-22mm. Never heard of the 11-16mm. I saw the Sigma 12-24. Is the difference from 18 to 12 really big?

Overall I'm thinking 1500$ budget for tripod, flash, 55-250mm (already bought) and another lens.


----------



## Lelin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
So did you zoom in or out? Gotta try that someday.

I was standing knee-deep in water when I took this, the current almost knocked over the tripod.


















Not sure if I have the courage to bring my camera in a place like that yet.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Lelin* 
I don't know yet how much I'm willing to spend, trying to determine this as soon as possible. The problem is that I need to buy a tripod and maybe a flash. Also my father went away so we have to recalculate a few things. I'm working 7/7 12hours a day to be able to buy all the lenses I need.

I've been traveling mostly in Europe in tight streets where I was having alot of trouble taking complete pictures of a building. In Peru I'm gonna be doing more hiking and etc. Not sure how it's gonna be.

I can get the Sigma 10-20mm for less than 600CAD (520US) or wait for the 10-22mm. Never heard of the 11-16mm. I saw the Sigma 12-24. Is the difference from 18 to 12 really big?

Overall I'm thinking 1500$ budget for tripod, flash, 55-250mm (already bought) and another lens.

I think so. 18mm on APS-C has the FOV of 29mm due to crop, and 12mm becomes 19mm. The differences on APS-C are increased because of the crop factor.

And 10mm becomes 16mm, which is seriously wide. I can get whole buildings in the frame only standing a few feet away.

And the Tokina 11-16mm is one of the most highly rated crop sensor wide angle zooms. And it has an advantage over the Canon 10-22mm in that it has a constant f/2.8 aperture vs. the f/3.5-5.6 of the Canon. But the Tokina has one weakness in it's amount of chromatic aberration.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Lelin* 
Not sure if I have the courage to bring my camera in a place like that yet.

LOL, not for the timid! Actually, if you're careful it's easy. The water in the creek is very shallow, never more than 3 feet and usually just inches. I just walk up the creek with the camera on the tripod, legs folded when moving, and the camera strap around my neck.


----------



## xonix

Personally, I like the mobility of a monopod as I have a pretty steady hand.

But for longer exposures, definitely tripod. Preferrably a heavy one, so it doesnt fall over (for shots like Gone's)


----------



## Lelin

When I'm walking through a river I'm always thinking "I'm gonna fall and lose alot of money".
Mmm now you made me even more undecided with the Tokina! I low balled the sigma 10-20 to 435$ but there's a Tokina 11-16 for 600$ too. The Canon one is kinda out of my price range.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *xonix* 
Personally, I like the mobility of a monopod as I have a pretty steady hand.

But for longer exposures, definitely tripod. Preferrably a heavy one, so it doesnt fall over (for shots like Gone's)

I'd like a monopod because I travel very lightly, but I love doing really long exposures sometimes.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Lelin* 
When I'm walking through a river I'm always thinking "I'm gonna fall and lose alot of money".
Mmm now you made me even more undecided with the Tokina! I low balled the sigma 10-20 to 435$ but there's a Tokina 11-16 for 600$ too. The Canon one is kinda out of my price range.

I'd like a monopod because I travel very lightly, but I love doing really long exposures sometimes.


The two Sigma lenses are ok, but nothing in comparison with the Tokina or Canon.


----------



## Lelin

I'd rather wait and buy quality then. Let's see if I can get the Tokina cheaper.

Edit: Reading the reviews it seems like the Tokina has the best quality but less range. More and more interesting.


----------



## Marin

I'd take the Tokina. Rather give up some range for a constant aperture at f/2.8 and extremely good image quality.

Check out this thread for sample images:
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...d.php?t=502308

Also, to anyone who's a POTN member. I'm Depth.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
I'd take the Tokina. Rather give up some range for a constant aperture at f/2.8 and extremely good image quality.

Check out this thread for sample images:
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...d.php?t=502308

Also, to anyone who's a POTN member. I'm Depth.









I'm a clone of myself at POTN.







There are some incredibly knowledgeable people there, they'll pick some aspect of your photo that you didn't notice. It's a little intimidating because so many people have a huge list of L lenses in their sig. Great place though, I learn a ton there.


----------



## Oscuro

POTN? I don't think they'd appreciate me


----------



## Marin




----------



## xlastshotx

^ I like that picture alot. The lines and contrast are really nice, what are those? Almost like metal grass blades.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Oscuro* 
POTN? I don't think they'd appreciate me









Believe or not, there are a handful of Nikon shooters over there, who are not ostracized.

@Marin: Wolverine claws?! Sorry, I just watched X-Men last night. Nice shot.


----------



## Marin

Thanks. It's a picture of a sculpture.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

The Sigma DP2 isn't out yet, but DPReview has posted some samples from it already. They look extremely good, even ISO 800 is very low noise. I seriously would love to have this camera as an ultra-portable/pocket camera.


----------



## laboitenoire

That does look like quite the camera. Too bad it's fixed focal length, but then I guess it would risk stealing customers from Sigma's SLR models!









On another note, my dad just picked up a refurbished Nikon 18-55 VR (Nikon's kit lens) to replace his 28-70 Sigma. The Sigma hasn't been getting along too well with his D50, especially at its widest zoom. Seems like a seriously nice lens for the money, as I tried snapping off a few pics and was getting good results even at F5 and 1/8 of a second. Didn't seem that blurry at all (just based off of the tiny little LCD on the body). He's contemplating selling the Sigma along with his old 2020 body.


----------



## dr4gon

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
The Sigma DP2 isn't out yet, but DPReview has posted some samples from it already. They look extremely good, even ISO 800 is very low noise. I seriously would love to have this camera as an ultra-portable/pocket camera.

I can't wait till the LX4 hits! I plan to get one as a SLR substitute when I can't have the SLR with me (daily use and on the bike trails).


----------



## Lelin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
I'd take the Tokina. Rather give up some range for a constant aperture at f/2.8 and extremely good image quality.

Check out this thread for sample images:
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...d.php?t=502308

Also, to anyone who's a POTN member. I'm Depth.









Nice, I'm pretty sure it's my next self-given gift.

Nice picture, also thought of Wolverine


----------



## Marin

I finally got it, yay.


----------



## laboitenoire

What's so great about B+W filters? I'm not terribly in the know about them.


----------



## Mootsfox

They are expensive, so they are good.


----------



## Lelin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mootsfox* 
they are expensive, so they are good.

:d


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *laboitenoire* 
What's so great about B+W filters? I'm not terribly in the know about them.

You won't ever get a bad B+W filter, _ever._ Consistent high quality, that's what you pay for. There are other very high quality (and less expensive) brands though, like Hoya, Cokin, Tiffen, even Promaster makes some highly-rated filters.


----------



## Marin

Other brand I like is Heliopan. Don't like Hoya though, filters tend to smear when wiped and quality seems pretty inconsistent (for example, seeing one filter not having the coating reach one of the sides).


----------



## laboitenoire

Okay, makes sense. My dad's used Hoya UV filters on his lenses for years, and he's always liked them. Just for kicks, he picked up a 52mm CPL from the Ritz that's going out of business near us. $10, so he figured it was worth it.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Other brand I like is Heliopan. Don't like Hoya though, filters tend to smear when wiped and quality seems pretty inconsistent (for example, seeing one filter not having the coating reach one of the sides).

Yeah, that's the compromise I made when I got a Promaster 77mm Wide CPL, paid $70 for it. It's weird though because when I cleaned it one day, holding up to the light, I noticed streaks, like water drops had ran slowly across the glass. Turns out that these streaks are permanent, perhaps the coating was allowed the run before drying. Fortunately it doesn't seem the affect the image quality at all.

I wanted the B+W wide CPL 77mm, but it's $192.00.


----------



## nuclearjock

I just bought a 77mm Hoya "HD" circular polarizer (~$210 US) because it was supposedly the newest and latest and greatest. Checked it out and it seemed to perform fine, multi coating, less light loss all seemed good until I started looking at some 1:1 scale aspects of some shots and saw tons of diffusion or random noise. I thought something was wrong with my camera/lens.

Nope, it was the latest and greatest Hoya CP!!! Visual inspection showed absolutely nothing wrong, but it funked up my results big time. It's on its way back to the shop in NY I purchased it from and they're sending me the new Nikon "low profile" 77mm CP. Light loss is supposedly 1.5 stops as opposed to the usual 2.

It may just have been a bad filter, but I trust Nikon and B+W to always provide pro quality filters.

Live and learn.


----------



## Oscuro

Any thoughts Kenko filter's then?

Local options only seem to be Hoya and Kenko.
Aden Camera carries Nikon Filters, but I can't afford that for the life of me.


----------



## Danylu

@Gone: How much stuff can you fit into the bottom camera part of your slingshot 200?


----------



## Mootsfox

A comparison of the Slingshot 200 and the Fastpack 250.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


@Gone: How much stuff can you fit into the bottom camera part of your slingshot 200?


I'll just show this picture of my setup (crappy cell phone picture, sorry). To the setup below, I've since added my 430EXII, which fits snugly in the upper compartment, and I also attach my tripod by sticking one of the legs through the loop on the side:



















The single cross-body strap is really nice, easy to get off your back in a pinch. I find that stays on absolutely securely if the strap is sufficiently tightened. You should try, if possible, to try the different LowePro bags, including the Fastpack which has two shoulder straps. Besides LowePro, Crumpler makes awesome bags,


----------



## SlickMeister

Nice bag setup GoneTomorrow! You know, I'm really interested in the 28-135mm for walkaround. What are your thoughts on it?

I tried doing a product shot with the lightbox tutorial you linked to once on POTN.










Not quite up the standard of Marin's shots.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *SlickMeister* 
Nice bag setup GoneTomorrow! You know, I'm really interested in the 28-135mm for walkaround. What are your thoughts on it?

I tried doing a product shot with the lightbox tutorial you linked to once on POTN.

Not quite up the standard of Marin's shots.

Nice shot, you just need to dust that sucker off next time!









And the 28-135mm is worth having. Wide open it is somewhat soft, and at 135mm it is also soft. But if the aperture is stopped down to f/5.6-f/8 it is tack sharp. The IS is of course very useful as are the ultra sonic rings. No barrel creep that I've noticed. However, it doesn't have a whole lot of reach, so shooting wildlife can be difficult.

Some other walk around lenses to consider are the Canon EF-S 18-200mm.


----------



## Danylu

Hm... I'm thinking of getting the Slingshot 200 as well as the 18-105mm + Flash.

I basically need something that holds:
-D60 + 18-105mm with Lens Cap On
-SB-600 Flash
-2 lenses

Your picture has basically shown me that is possible









Cheers.

Oh btw what does the G. Fong Puffer do?


----------



## SlickMeister

And I present to you...my lightbox! I need to replace the backing paper...the current one has a story to tell though.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Hm... I'm thinking of getting the Slingshot 200 as well as the 18-105mm + Flash.

I basically need something that holds:
-D60 + 18-105mm with Lens Cap On
-SB-600 Flash
-2 lenses

Your picture has basically shown me that is possible









Cheers.

Oh btw what does the G. Fong Puffer do?


The 200 will easily hold your gear. In fact, even the 100 will, but the 200 is a good bag to start with to keep up with your future gear acquisitions.

The GF Puffer is a flash diffuser for on board pop-up flashes. I don't use it anymore since I got my speedlight. I was thinking about giving it away as a freebie here. It actually works very well.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *SlickMeister*


And I present to you...my lightbox! I need to replace the backing paper...the current one has a story to tell though.


Looks dead on the tutorial. Did you ever use the two side lights?


----------



## SlickMeister

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Looks dead on the tutorial. Did you ever use the two side lights?


Nope, don't have any.


----------



## laboitenoire

I've been playing around with my dad's D50 and his new 18-55 VR, and I must say I'm quite impressed with the lens. It has a good zoom range (not the amount of reach as his 75-200 (which I accidentally posted as being a 75-300), but still good for just basic stuff), it seems quite sharp to me, and I *love* VR. Whereas normally I'm good for about 1/30 or 1/25 of a second handheld, it seems like I'm getting 1/8 of a second and the shots don't seem blurry. It's got me seriously wanting to spend too much money and buy a DSLR. If it weren't for the fact that film is getting expensive I'd ask him if I could have his old 2020 with his 28-70 Sigma, as that could be a good foray into the SLR world (he also has an older flash for it that only points straight on).


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *laboitenoire* 
I've been playing around with my dad's D50 and his new 18-55 VR, and I must say I'm quite impressed with the lens. It has a good zoom range (not the amount of reach as his 75-200 (which I accidentally posted as being a 75-300), but still good for just basic stuff), it seems quite sharp to me, and I *love* VR. Whereas normally I'm good for about 1/30 or 1/25 of a second handheld, it seems like I'm getting 1/8 of a second and the shots don't seem blurry. It's got me seriously wanting to spend too much money and buy a DSLR. If it weren't for the fact that film is getting expensive I'd ask him if I could have his old 2020 with his 28-70 Sigma, as that could be a good foray into the SLR world (he also has an older flash for it that only points straight on).

Here's an idea: convince your father that is D50 is obsolete and that he should upgrade. Then convince him to bequeath the D50 to you.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Here's an idea: convince your father that is D50 is obsolete and that he should upgrade. Then convince him to bequeath the D50 to you.










Well, the only reason he doesn't use the 28-70 Sigma is that it doesn't always work too well on his D50







Plus, he just bought the D50 a few months ago as his first DSLR. He's probably all set for another 20+ years


----------



## Danylu

*"In Mint Condition. probably used for 20 shots at most. Comes with original box and accessories"* - 2nd hand SB-800

I have 24 hours to decide between that and a new SB-600. Both are the same price, the SB-800 2nd hand could actually cost a little bit less.

I don't know which one I should get as most "SB-800 vs SB-600" are both First hand comparisons.

Please help. The SB-800 I can't seem to find at many shops and it is about $700~ new from some shops. Which one would you guys recommend?


----------



## max302

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


*"In Mint Condition. probably used for 20 shots at most. Comes with original box and accessories"* - 2nd hand SB-800

I have 24 hours to decide between that and a new SB-600. Both are the same price, the SB-800 2nd hand could actually cost a little bit less.

I don't know which one I should get as most "SB-800 vs SB-600" are both First hand comparisons.

Please help. The SB-800 I can't seem to find at many shops and it is about $700~ new from some shops. Which one would you guys recommend?


If I'm not mistaken, the SB-800 can be used as a commander flash to trigger secondary strobes as a part of Nikon's CLS (Creative Lighting System). SB-800s are hard to find these days, since then the new flagship is the SB-900, which costs over 500$ a pop.

If you can afford it, go with the SB-800.


----------



## nuclearjock

SB800 hands down.


----------



## Mootsfox

Sb-800.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *max302* 
If I'm not mistaken, the SB-800 can be used as a commander flash to trigger secondary strobes as a part of Nikon's CLS (Creative Lighting System). SB-800s are hard to find these days, since then the new flagship is the SB-900, which costs over 500$ a pop.

If you can afford it, go with the SB-800.

They are both the same price albeit the SB-800 being used for 20 shots or so, so basically new.

EDIT: Hm the SB-800 is imported stock with no warranty and no receipt... Think I'd feel safer buying a brand new SB-600 with warranty.


----------



## Marin

I've been debating getting a 50D for awhile but I really think I'm going to get it at the end of school. I love how it feels when shooting with it and since I'm going to be taking a ton of photos over the summer I feel that's quite important. So far, the only obvious features of the 60D are it being able to record video and probably some more AF points. Having more AF points will be nice but rumors are saying it will be only increased to 13, which isn't a crazy amount. And video... even though I can get some cool shots for videos I do I'd rather just use my schools HD cameras.


----------



## dr4gon

I saw there was some filter discussion on the last couple pages. Here's a 20 filter roundup review of light transmission.

http://www.lenstip.com/113.1-article...roduction.html

Guess who won?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
I've been debating getting a 50D for awhile but I really think I'm going to get it at the end of school. I love how it feels when shooting with it and since I'm going to be taking a ton of photos over the summer I feel that's quite important. So far, the only obvious features of the 60D are it being able to record video and probably some more AF points. Having more AF points will be nice but rumors are saying it will be only increased to 13, which isn't a crazy amount. And video... even though I can get some cool shots for videos I do I'd rather just use my schools HD cameras.

It's certainly a good body. But don't rule out its predecessor, the 40D. What you get with the 50D is more resolution, video, higher resolution LCD (it has twice the pixel count of the 40D) and micro focus adjustment (the one worthwhile feature IMO). The 40D actually edges out the 50D in terms of high ISO noise, because of its lower pixel density. And it has a faster burst rate as well. I almost bought the 50D at first until I looked more closely at the 40D.

I probably won't upgrade until an xxD model comes out that dramatically improves noise performance.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dr4gon* 
I saw there was some filter discussion on the last couple pages. Here's a 20 filter roundup review of light transmission.

http://www.lenstip.com/113.1-article...roduction.html

Guess who won?









Interesting, looks like Hoya spanked even the great B+W.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 vs Canon 17-40mm f/1.4 L USM

http://camerablognetwork.com/

Interesting, this guy is suggesting that the 18-55mm rivals the 17-40mm in some aspects. Canon really did a bang up job in revamping the 18-55mm kit lens!


----------



## laboitenoire

Huh, according to that page my Tiffen filter is doing almost nothing good for my image...


----------



## Mootsfox

At least no more than what a piece of clean glass does


----------



## equetefue

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
It's certainly a good body. But don't rule out its predecessor, the 40D. What you get with the 50D is more resolution, video, higher resolution LCD (it has twice the pixel count of the 40D) and micro focus adjustment (the one worthwhile feature IMO). The 40D actually edges out the 50D in terms of high ISO noise, because of its lower pixel density. And it has a faster burst rate as well. I almost bought the 50D at first until I looked more closely at the 40D.

I probably won't upgrade until an xxD model comes out that dramatically improves noise performance.

I used to own a 40D and played with the 50D. I would go back to the 40D if I needed a XXD body. Though I would miss the beautiful screen and ability of commanding the version II of the new Canon flashes


----------



## equetefue

BTW...forgot to add that I bought a 580EX II today, to replace the one I sold 2 months ago


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *equetefue* 
I used to own a 40D and played with the 50D. I would go back to the 40D if I needed a XXD body. Though I would miss the beautiful screen and ability of commanding the version II of the new Canon flashes

Wait - the 40D can't be a commander for version II flashes? I had thought that the firmware of the flashes would make them backwards compatible.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *equetefue* 
BTW...forgot to add that I bought a 580EX II today, to replace the one I sold 2 months ago

Nice, I actually just got my first speedlight, the 430EXII and I love it.

On an unrelated not, I've been asked to possibly shoot a wedding this weekend! Their booked photographer had bugged out apparently. I think that I have what I need to take decent shots, but I don't know much about directing (although I could wing it I think).

And in case I fubar everything, I told them to pay me whatever. Anyone with wedding photography experience, weigh in and make me slightly less noobish.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
On an unrelated not, I've been asked to possibly shoot a wedding this weekend! Their booked photographer had bugged out apparently. I think that I have what I need to take decent shots, but I don't know much about directing (although I could wing it I think).

And in case I fubar everything, I told them to pay me whatever. Anyone with wedding photography experience, weigh in and make me slightly less noobish.










i have been asked a few times to do some weddings, i opted not to as i don't feel comfortable screwing up someones wedding









good luck Gone im sure you will do a great job.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie* 

i have been asked a few times to do some weddings, i opted not to as i don't feel comfortable screwing up someones wedding









good luck Gone im sure you will do a great job.

Oh boy that makes me feel better!







Thanks.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Oh boy that makes me feel better!







Thanks.

i thought it might


----------



## equetefue

the most important thing is to be honest about your abilities with the couple. I'm shooting a wedding this saturday and to me the contract and terms are the most important things you can do.

Here are some items to help you


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *gonetomorrow*


oh boy that makes me feel better!







Thanks.


lol!


----------



## evilspongebob72

Got my tamron 70-300. Still need to take some shots though.

Only got this one trying out the macro, a bit soft.


----------



## Danylu

Hey guys the only full frame cameras I can name are the Nikon D3/D3x and the Canon one, how long do you guys think it'll take for full frame cameras to find their way down to the $1000~ USD range?


----------



## equetefue

Correction..

Nikon has the D700 and D3's

Canon has 5D/5DII/1DS/1DSII/1DSIII

You can get used Canon's for around 1200 or so. (5D)


----------



## Danylu

nvm I get it now


----------



## dr4gon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *equetefue*


Correction..

Nikon has the D700 and D3's

Canon has 5D/5DII/1DS/1DSII/1DSIII

You can get used Canon's for around 1200 or so. (5D)


And Sony's 24.6 MP A900


----------



## Mootsfox

I got an ad on the front page for the D5000 that took me to Nikon's site


----------



## laboitenoire

I got a Tiffen CPL yesterday as an 18th birthday present. Should be fun to shoot with once the weather improves. I didn't realize that CPL filters block so much light from coming through!


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


I got a Tiffen CPL yesterday as an 18th birthday present. Should be fun to shoot with once the weather improves. I didn't realize that CPL filters block so much light from coming through!



In a photograph without a cpl, you're collecting both the specular (direct) component of light which is what you want, as well as a diffuse of reflected component. The sum total of these two components is your total measured light that is accounted for by your camera.

With your cpl, you reject the reflected or diffuse compnent thus reducing a large portion of the total light reaching the sensor and hence your're seeing less total light. But this is exactly what you're asking your cpl to do. throw away reflected and/or diffuse light which does not contribute spectral detail of your image.

Newer (and more expensive) cpl's use fancier coatings and polarizing media to reduce overall light loss while still achieving the polarizing effect, but you wind up paying alot more $$$ for a relatively small difference in exposure.

Take some shots with your new cpl in place and make sure your images look good at 1:1. I recently shelled out $210 for the newest latest and greatest 77mm Hoya HD cpl only to have it be defective, ( images at 1:1 looked terriblely noisy). Sent it back and bought a Nikon cpl which works beatifully. I also Have a 77mm Promaster cpl that works very well also.

Clouds, water surfaces, and leaves in the sun look so much better with a cpl.

Have fun, pics.....


----------



## nuclearjock

Nikon D3/70-200 f2.8 VR HDR 5 images


----------



## evilspongebob72

You can update my equipment with a Tamron 70-300mm Æ’4-5.6 and a Sony Camera Bag LCS-SC5.


----------



## Lelin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*











Nikon D3/70-200 f2.8 VR HDR 5 images


Sorry but the result and pictures look... I think you went a bit too strong with the sky, look at the edges of the planes.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Lelin* 
Sorry but the result and pictures look... I think you went a bit too strong with the sky, look at the edges of the planes.

Thanks, but there's alot of subjective nature to HDR. It has alot to do with the mood you're in when you're cmbining the images.


----------



## Danylu

Just wondering about these two pictures;

















Apparently a polarizer filter made that big of a difference? Seriously????


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Just wondering about these two pictures;
Apparently a polarizer filter made that big of a difference? Seriously????


Yep, you can dial out the reflected component.


----------



## equetefue

Update my list again..

580EXII yesterday and 220EX today

Woot !


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *evilspongebob72*


You can update my equipment with a Tamron 70-300mm Æ'4-5.6 and a Sony Camera Bag LCS-SC5.


Done!

Quote:



Originally Posted by *equetefue*


Update my list again..

580EXII yesterday and 220EX today

Woot !


Nice, what are you going to use the 220EX for?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Christ, the Sigma DP2 is $650.00!

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...l_Camera_.html


----------



## dr4gon

Exif on flickr (click the picture)

This was shot yesterday.


----------



## DaCrusader

Bodies: Canon 350D; 5D (Original)
Lenses:
18-55mm EF-S f/3.5-5.6
50mm EF f/1.8
55-200mm EF f/4-5.6

more goodies on the way.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dr4gon* 
Exif on flickr (click the picture)

This was shot yesterday.

Nice shot.

The CPL is definitely an interesting object. I do like the effect, especially on skies and trees.


----------



## muffin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dr4gon*


Exif on flickr (click the picture)

This was shot yesterday.


Very nice, I really want to get a macro lens. I also need a better internet connection. Uploading 24MB to flickr and it's taking foreeeeeeeever









EDIT: I bought a new bag yesterday, its a Muffin Top full photo backpack. Appropriate name







. 30% off all Crumpler bags at London Camera Exchange


----------



## dr4gon

Quote:


Originally Posted by *muffin* 
Very nice, I really want to get a macro lens. I also need a better internet connection. Uploading 24MB to flickr and it's taking foreeeeeeeever









The picture, full size is only 1.3MB or so, hardly any cropping to 10.2MP. When you convert RAW to JPEG, there's no way it's 24MB.

I think everyone should have a macro lens!


----------



## muffin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dr4gon* 
The picture, full size is only 1.3MB or so, hardly any cropping to 10.2MP. When you convert RAW to JPEG, there's no way it's 24MB.

I think everyone should have a macro lens!









Not you







I was uploading 24MB of images to flickr and it took a long time to finish.


----------



## bentleya

*@GoneTomorrow* - Could you please add me to the list please.

Canon 450D (Rebel XSi)
Canon EF-S 18-55mm IS with EW-60C Lens Hood & Jessops UV Filter
BG-E5 Battery Grip
Joby Gorillapod SLR
Camlink TP1700 Compact Tripod
Roots (RZ30) Sling Back Pack


----------



## dr4gon

Quote:


Originally Posted by *muffin* 
Not you







I was uploading 24MB of images to flickr and it took a long time to finish.

Oh ok.

Your new bag looks very nice, quite expensive. I've heard crumpler makes good stuff. It looks a bit empty though


----------



## Oscuro

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dr4gon* 
I think everyone should have a macro lens!









I will....after I get the telezoom


----------



## Lelin

Add me to the list please:
PnS: Canon SD890IS

dSLR: 
-Canon XSi
-Canon 18-55mm IS
-Canon 50mm 1.8


----------



## Cr4zYH3aD

Canon Rebel XTi


----------



## Danylu

Takes a weekend to learn DSLRs, takes a lifetime to master photography!

Sooo many things to understand.

On that topic can someone please explain to me what hyperfocal distance is? I was studying this depth of field table and this is on it - no clue what it means and I've looked at diagrams and explanations.


----------



## Marin

Camera bag pic time.

My Lowepro 200 AW


----------



## bentleya

WOW, marin, seeing that picture now makes that 30mm sigma look so good on your camera


----------



## laboitenoire

Now what camera did you use to take the bag pic? Seems likes pretty decent quality, especially if it's from a cell phone.


----------



## Marin

Click the images to view the Exif









And no camera phone can have this quality.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

It's an awesome bag, mine is packed to capacity now. The 300 AW is looking good all of sudden...









Oh, and I got the Canon Pixma Pro9000 mkII today! Prints *amazing* pictures on Ilford Pearl photo paper. I know prints are cheap to order these days, but for me it's like having the entire creative process in my hands. Plus I'm already selling prints to friends and relatives.









Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Takes a weekend to learn DSLRs, takes a lifetime to master photography!

Sooo many things to understand.

On that topic can someone please explain to me what hyperfocal distance is? I was studying this depth of field table and this is on it - no clue what it means and I've looked at diagrams and explanations.


HF distance a point from your camera to a particular forground element, past which _everything_ all the way to the horizon is in focus. If the correct focal length is determined as well as the proper distance from you to the beginning of your HF shot, this distance could be as short as 8 feet or so. Sometimes when shooting landscapes you can do this by accident. It looks great because the foreground elements all the way to the background are in focus. It's something I've been meaning to get into for a while but haven't had time. Currently I've been looking into this website, which is great for learning HF:

http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Click the images to view the Exif









And no camera phone can have this quality.









Canon G10. Nice camera


----------



## Marin

It's official.

Sony unveils four new lenses

Sony launches Alpha 230, Alpha 330 and Alpha 380


----------



## SlickMeister

Interesting Sony releases, I like what they have done to the body design and I like the revolutionised GUI, and a 50mm ƒ1.8! I'm quite impressed, the menu interface definitely looks a lot better, a needed revamp in my opinion compared the current A200 interface.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Camera bag pic time.

My Lowepro 200 AW















Is that the Slingshot 200 mate?


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
Is that the Slingshot 200 mate?


Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
*My Lowepro 200 AW*

See quote.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


See quote.


I saw that but theres a 200AW in a few ranges, Micro Trekker etc..

On 2nd inspection at home it looks like the Lowepro Slingshot series. Low brightness laptop screen not as good as 22"


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


I saw that *but theres a 200AW in a few ranges, Micro Trekker etc..*

On 2nd inspection at home it looks like the Lowepro Slingshot series. Low brightness laptop screen not as good as 22"










aye there is, but i do believe it is the slingshot series as well.


----------



## muffin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dr4gon* 
Oh ok.

Your new bag looks very nice, quite expensive. I've heard crumpler makes good stuff. It looks a bit empty though









Room for expansion


----------



## Dominant

Add me please!

Canon 400D (Rebel Xti)
Tamron 28-105mm


----------



## laboitenoire

Went up to Harvard, MA today to visit the Fruitlands Museum. They only allow cameras outside, so I used it as an opportunity to test my CPL. I really like the effect it produces.


----------



## Mootsfox

: | Interesting art









I'm trying to take a picture where my arm is reaching out from the monitor for my mouse. I've got some pictures so far, but I can't figure out how to make it look 3D. Any ideas?


----------



## Marin

Why hello there...


It's a rental lens


----------



## GoTMaXPoWeR

It looks more like a gun than a camera.

I can't wait for Photography in college.


----------



## DaCrusader

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Why hello there...

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2358/...83070665_b.jpg
It's a rental lens


What... you can rent lenses?... *Has some ideas*


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *DaCrusader*


What... you can rent lenses?... *Has some ideas*


http://lensrentals.com/


----------



## nitteo

Quote:



nitto - nikon D3
20mm f/2.8


its nitteo!









I also have lenses:

70-300mm VR
17-35mm f/2.8
35-70mm f/2.8
50mm f/1.8

For point and shoot:

I just purchased the Canon Powershot D10, for our trip to Hawaii. Its a Shockproof/Waterproof camera!


----------



## riko99

Bah Humbug woke up to having a slight amount of snow on the ground and vehicles today... will have pics later tonight.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nitteo* 
its nitteo!









I also have lenses:

70-300mm VR
17-35mm f/2.8
35-70mm f/2.8
50mm f/1.8

For point and shoot:

I just purchased the Canon Powershot D10, for our trip to Hawaii. Its a Shockproof/Waterproof camera!

What,no 70-200 f/2.8VR???

How's your D3 holding up??

I just finished learning how to do a sensor cleaning on mine, a bit of a pain in the butt, however it did get rid of a couple of dust bunnies and what I think might have been an oil spot from the mirror mechanism which is supposed to be common with new D3's.

Otherwise, I love it.


----------



## nitteo

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


What,no 70-200 f/2.8VR???

How's your D3 holding up??

I just finished learning how to do a sensor cleaning on mine, a bit of a pain in the butt, however it did get rid of a couple of dust bunnies and what I think might have been an oil spot from the mirror mechanism which is supposed to be common with new D3's.

Otherwise, I love it.


lol.

I rarely go over 70mm. So I didnt want to "overspend" on a 70-200 f/2.8 VR that would just be sitting around.

I actually have my 17-35mm on the D3, 95% of the time.

The D3 is the BEST camera I have ever owned. I probably will keep it until it breaks.


----------



## Marin

I just got the photos back I took with the Leica M6 using Kodak Tri-X 400TX. This is the one thing digital can never duplicate, the look (unless you edit the hell out of a photo) and usage of film.

Here's one shot for now.


----------



## laboitenoire

Looks like you have some noise from whatever scanner you used. But nice shot.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *laboitenoire* 
Looks like you have some noise from whatever scanner you used. But nice shot.

Grain is caused by the film.


----------



## laboitenoire

I thought high-ISO black and white film didn't have much of a grain?


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


I thought high-ISO black and white film didn't have much of a grain?


Definitely the look of Tri-X, grain looks the same as the other photos people have taken with this film.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


I just got the photos back I took with the Leica M6 using Kodak Tri-X 400TX. This is the one thing digital can never duplicate, the look (unless you edit the hell out of a photo) and usage of film.


I see, so you agree with Ken Rockwell on something??









No, for down right purtiness, film still rules. Specially the low ISO (~50-100)
Fuji Velvia stuff. (I'd better be careful lest I be accused of agreeing with Mr. Rockwell myself...).

I wouldn't be without my trusty F6 no way no how.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


*I see, so you agree with Ken Rockwell on something??








*
No, for down right purtiness, film still rules. Specially the low ISO (~50-100)
Fuji Velvia stuff. (I'd better be careful lest I be accused of agreeing with Mr. Rockwell myself...).

I wouldn't be without my trusty F6 no way no how.


His logic is that only JPEG should be used so you can't cheat...


----------



## Mootsfox

Yeah go F series


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Yeah go F series


----------



## Mootsfox

Ken is my idol and god. You should not disrespect him


----------



## Marin

Okay, _hang loose_










If that guy shaved his beard and left a mustache he would look like a bald borat...


----------



## Mootsfox

It's a squirrel.










This is another squirrel.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


His logic is that only JPEG should be used so you can't cheat...










I just bought Lightroom and I think it's really cool so far. Works better on raw (.nef) than jpegs tough. Does that make me a cheater??

I do like Ken's Hawian shirts though. Really makes him look like Leica man


----------



## evilspongebob72

Messing around with my lightbox I made today...how did it turn out?


----------



## nuclearjock

Looks more like the pin side of a cpu than a light box.


----------



## DaCrusader

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
Looks more like the pin side of a cpu than a light box.

*swooooshh* that's the sound of that flying over your head!









Lightbox looks great!


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *DaCrusader*


*swooooshh* that's the sound of that flying over your head!









Lightbox looks great!


Sorry, should have added the obligatory "lol" after my post.


----------



## DaCrusader

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


Sorry, should have added the obligatory "lol" after my post.


Nah I was being sarcastic myself haha!


----------



## Lelin

Just bought a Tokina 11-16mm brand new. Can't wait to try it out


----------



## Marin

A few pics taken with the 70-200mm. Going to edit and upload a bunch on saturday.


----------



## Bigevil89

Some pics I took yesterday and today.
































































Enjoy


----------



## Marin

Better stage light this time so I was able to lower the ISO to 400. More pics to come...


----------



## laboitenoire

School event?


----------



## nuclearjock

Nikon D3/70-300 f/4-5.6G ED-IF AF-S VR / 81A filter.
1/500th @f/9 iso 200


----------



## dr4gon

Those legs are like toothpicks!


----------



## Marin

http://www.amazon.com/Kenko-Auto-Ext...3215011&sr=8-1

Seems like they're compatible with EF-S lenses now... so... think I'm taking the plunge...


----------



## Lelin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
http://www.amazon.com/Kenko-Auto-Ext...3215011&sr=8-1

Seems like they're compatible with EF-S lenses now... so... think I'm taking the plunge...

Clueless, what is it supposed to do?


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Lelin* 
Clueless, what is it supposed to do?

Allows the lens to focus closer. Want to use them with both my 60mm f/2.8 (for even closer macros) and with my 30mm f/1.4 since it has poor magnification.


----------



## nuclearjock

I have both the 1.4x and 2x tele's (nikon mount) and they both preserve VR on all lenses, the 1.4x af's on all lenses, (d as well as afs), the 2x is manual focus on lenses > f/4 but preserves VR and af on my f/2.8's.

Optical quality is excellent. I'd like to try the tubes, might order them next week as well.

Marin, did you wind up buying the 70-200 Tammy??


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


I have both the 1.4x and 2x tele's (nikon mount) and they both preserve VR on all lenses, the 1.4x af's on all lenses, (d as well as afs), the 2x is manual focus on lenses > f/4 but preserves VR and af on my f/2.8's.

Optical quality is excellent. I'd like to try the tubes, might order them next week as well.

Marin, did you wind up buying the 70-200 Tammy??


I ended up renting the Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L and now don't want the Tammy









The Tammy is definitely on par optically but the fact that the Canon has USM is a major plus. Just like other sonic motors, it's basically silent and focuses extremely fast.


----------



## nuclearjock

Shot today.

D3/80-400 nikkor @400mm, 2x kenko tele, (800mm).
f/8 @1/400, iso 1250 cleaned up in neat image.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


I ended up renting the Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L and now don't want the Tammy









The Tammy is definitely on par optically but the fact that the Canon has USM is a major plus. Just like other sonic motors, it's basically silent and focuses extremely fast.



The 2.8 usm??? Definately a sweet lens. The AFS on my 70-200 2.8 vr is very fast and accurate, a big plus. If you can, swing the IS model, it really works.


----------



## dr4gon

Can anyone ID this? I shot this yesterday with the Tamron 70-200mm at 1:3. It's very tiny.


While the AF is not overly fast it's bearable. I suspect the screw drive helps greatly since the micro motors they put for Nikon and Canon are all notoriously slow.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dr4gon*


While the AF is not overly fast it's bearable. I suspect the screw drive helps greatly since the micro motors they put for Nikon and Canon are all notoriously slow.


Nope, the screw drives are the slowest.
My 80-400 and 200mm micro nikkors take forever to focus while all of my AF-S lenses focus at the speed of light.


----------



## dr4gon

Quote: 
   Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*   Nope, the screw drives are the slowest.
My 80-400 and 200mm micro nikkors take forever to focus while all of my AF-S lenses focus at the speed of light.  
The Sony screw drives (Tamron works closely with Sony) are quite fast, but also put out a fair amount of noise (varies from lens to lens). I have no experience with other systems but can say that the screw drives are good, on the average.

Here's my 50/1.4, I show the focusing speed at the end.

  
 YouTube - Sony SAL-50F14 50mm F/1.4 Unboxing


----------



## laboitenoire

That does look pretty fast for a screw drive.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dr4gon* 
The Sony screw drives (Tamron works closely with Sony) are quite fast, but also put out a fair amount of noise (varies from lens to lens). I have no experience with other systems but can say that the screw drives are good, on the average.

Here's my 50/1.4, I show the focusing speed at the end.

YouTube - Sony SAL-50F14 50mm F/1.4 Unboxing

Nice looking lens. Is that how loud it really is when focusing? I could hear it even with the music.


----------



## laboitenoire

My dad's screw-drive lenses are probably that loud.


----------



## max302

I'd like my profile to to be updates please









Just add the new lens, Nikkor AF-S 35mm f1.8G.

Thanks!


----------



## Mootsfox

Lol, dragon, are you saying that's slow?

Max, how is it?


----------



## max302

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Lol, dragon, are you saying that's slow?

Max, how is it?


It is WONDERFUL. Super sharp, even wide open, as crisp as can be at f2.8. I do some BMX shoots, so having higher shutter times is cool too. Basically, it's a shorter 50mm f1.8 with AF-S autofocus. Bokeh is superb too, smooth and creamy.

Took a couple of shots, but I'll upload in a few.


----------



## Mootsfox

Awesome, I'd love to see them.

As much as I love my MF glass, that 35mm AF-S is so damn tempting.


----------



## dr4gon

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Lol, dragon, are you saying that's slow?

Max, how is it?

No, I'm suggesting screw drive can be fast, especially in use, when you're not making it try to hunt from end to end.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*
Nice looking lens. Is that how loud it really is when focusing? I could hear it even with the music.

The mic was close to the camera so I'm not sure how well in perspective the sound is. It's not silent but I wouldn't say it's overly loud, large swings in AF are much louder than minor adjustments within a couple feet or less.


----------



## nuclearjock

The fastest I've ever seen a screw drive lens hunt/focus was on a Nikon F5. That camera has some serious horsepower, enough so that momentary lens "confusions" were downright scary.

I traded the F5 for an F6 which seems a bit more docile.

GT,

I've been playing around with a Tamron AF28-300mm F/3.5-6.3 XR Di VC that I forgot I had, (it's the only non nikkor lens I own). If you get a chance, add it to my "list".

Performance is on the good side of so-so with my D3.


----------



## dudemanppl

Just got my 300mm f/2.8 AI-S (manual focus is pretty easy) , wow this is sharp! At closest focus and wide open there is about 1 cm in focus (probably less). I haven't really gone out with it yet cause I'm sick, buy so far it's amazing!


----------



## Danylu

Are screw drives generally slower than non screw ones such as the Nikon AF-S system?

Cause I tried a school Pentax with Sigma screw lenses. It was very slow and I could not capture a moving subject quick enough, my D60 + Kit lens owns it. There would be a half secound delay before it would focus... is this the same for most screw drives or did the school buy a crappy one?


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
Are screw drives generally slower than non screw ones such as the Nikon AF-S system?

Cause I tried a school Pentax with Sigma screw lenses. It was very slow and I could not capture a moving subject quick enough, my D60 + Kit lens owns it. There would be a half secound delay before it would focus... is this the same for most screw drives or did the school buy a crappy one?

The degree of focus speed of a screw driven lens depends on it's design, but generally screw driven lenses are much slower to focus and overshoot (hence hunt) more than in lens motor driven focus lenses.

Lenses containing their own focusing motors hit their target much faster and more accurately than screw driven lenses. If you have a large change in subject distance, patience is required for a screw lens. If the change in subject distance is minimal, then screw lenses usually perform very well.

It's sort of old technology versus new technology. Screw drive lenses also have apeture rings which are designed to work with older camera bodies.


----------



## laboitenoire

Yes, usually screw drive is much slower than the various in-lens motor systems (AF-S, HSM, etc...). My dad's 70-200 Sigma takes forever to focus, as does his 50mm Nikkor. However, his new 18-55mm AF-S lens is lightning fast.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
The degree of focus speed of a screw driven lens depends on it's design, but generally screw driven lenses are much slower to focus and overshoot (hence hunt) more than in lens motor driven focus lenses.

Lenses containing their own focusing motors hit their target much faster and more accurately than screw driven lenses. If you have a large change in subject distance, patience is required for a screw lens. If the change in subject distance is minimal, then screw lenses usually perform very well.

It's sort of old technology versus new technology. Screw drive lenses also have apeture rings which are designed to work with older camera bodies.


Hm ok










School has Sigma kit 18-55 & 55-200mm... The hood on the 18-55 looks lol. ahah. I also tested the 200mm range and I think 18-105mm should be enough


----------



## Lelin

Weee, just came back from my friend's prom. He paid me the cocktail ticket so I could take a few pictures. I ended up being the only person with a DSLR there . The photograph bailed out. I made 225$CAD in a few hours. My friend is great for marketing haha. At first I kinda felt bad since I am not a pro at all but everyone prefered paying 10$ than having PnS quality pics







. 
Used my 50mm 1.8. I will sell it and get me a 1.4 with the cash I made tonight








Also the school guy asked me to take pictures of the event and some sub ministers from here. I really felt alot of pressure on my shoulders but overall it was a really nice experience!


----------



## nuclearjock

According to Ken Rockwell, these are signs of being an amateur.

Except for the camera brand logo strap, LCD magnifier, and polarizer over a UV filter, I'm guilty of all the infractions outlined in his description.

I'm not a pro!!! I don't get paid to shoot pictures freelance nor do I work for an organization that pays me to take pictures so yes I admit taking care of stuff I paid alot of money for.

Now if I was given equipment and told to come back with shots at all costs, my gear might eventually look like Karl's gear.

But for now, in Ken's eyes I'm an amateur....


----------



## Marin

Awesome, now there's another article I can link when showing how dumb he can sometimes mostly always be.

__________________________________________________ ___________

Quote:



*Backpack*

Photographers don't carry their gear in backpacks because they can't shoot out of them.

Backpacks are for carrying stuff that you don't need until you reach your campsite, like cooking gear and tent pegs.

Backpacks are not for carrying anything you need as you're walking around, like cameras or lenses.

Bag makers sell a lot of expensive packs to a lot of people new to the hobby. Don't fall into this trap.


I guess National Geographic photographers are mediocre, thanks for pointing that out Ken.

Quote:



*Carrying too much stuff*

Pros know exactly what they need and only bring it.

It's OK to buy and own everything ever made, just never try to bring more than a camera and lens or two anyplace at once.

People with less experience, just like inexperienced or infrequent travelers, bring everything out of fear that they "might need it."

"Might" isn't a strong enough need to justify carrying something with you. Carry only what you actually do use.

Never carry more than two or three lenses (preferable bring just one), and never carry any lens with any focal lengths duplicated by any other lens you're carrying.

See Carry Less for more.


Correct you are!

Photographers never EVER have a body fail on them or a lens get damaged on the go. And we all know that two to three lenses can cover every situation, right!?

Quote:



*Polarizer over UV filter, or polarizer used all the time
*
Doing either of these is silly.

It's inelegant to put a polarizer over a UV filter. You might get vignetting with a wide lens, and you're inviting extra ghosts and flare from the unneeded UV filter that should have been removed before you placed any other filter over the lens. The UV is just a mechanical prophylactic, it doesn't do anything optically today.

Only use a polarizer if you need it, which is rarely. If you don't need it, it costs you about two stops of light, meaning you'll have to shoot at larger apertures, slower shutter speeds or higher ISOs to get the same result as you would if you took off your polarizer and replaced it with your UV filter.

I'm the laziest guy around, and I only put on a polarizer when I need it, and then it comes right off and I put the UV filter back on.

This is why I'm so adamant about picking your lenses to have the same filter size as each other: you only need to carry one set of filters.


I've never seen a person use a polarizer all the time. But people who are new do put CPL's on UV's... you might have won this time Ken...

Quote:



*Midrange zoom*

I don't know of any fulltime pro who uses, or even owns, a midrange zoom.

Pros use a wide zoom, a tele zoom, and maybe a small, fast fixed-focal-length normal lens for low light.

In the pro's bag, the fixed normal lens, if carried at all, replaces the midrange zoom because it's much faster for low light.

Pros know that you don't need any lenses between where the wide zoom leaves off and the tele zoom picks up, so why carry a big midrage zoom? If you get stuck, pull out your normal, or just take a few steps forward or back.

Newcomers to the hobby freak out, and think they'll die if they don't have every millimeter covered, while guys like me will shoot for weeks on end with just a few fixed lenses of wildly different focal length.

When I shoot in any format, I usually only bring three fixed lenses equivalent to 20mm, 40mm and 85mm.


OH MY GOSH KEN, YOU'RE ON AN EPIC WIN ROLL TODAY.









We all know those midrange zooms are garbage. There's a huge reason why Canons 24-70 f/2.8L, Nikons 24-70mm f/2.8 and Sonys 24-70mm f/2.8 are so unpopular. You'll never run into a situation where you need a very high quality zoom which can cover the needed focal lengths when walking around. Yes, we all like to carry around multiple lenses and change them at the speed of light when needed.

Quote:



*Clean gear*

Pros use their gear so much that it gets thrashed.

Here's what my friend Karl Grobl's gear looks like. He earns his living with this gear every day, and by now it looks even worse than when he took those photos.

The surest way to spot a hobbyist is that all his gear and tripods look brand new, and they probably are.


You hear that, stop taking care of your expensive equipment! Go cake your camera in mud and bang it against a rail, that's the only way to be a pro. No way will your photos prove otherwise.

Quote:



*New DSLR*

Everyone reads the Internet and thinks they need the newest DSLR.

Every amateur buys a brand-new DSLR, and that's fine.

Pros use beat-up old gear, and love to shoot film on their off hours for personal work.

There are plenty of pros earning their livings today with Canon 10Ds and Nikon D70s. A pro is a pro because he's in this to make a profit, not to buy more gear.


Yep, like you proved before, those National Geographic photographers are amateurs. I can't imagine why one would need a 1Ds Mark III with a 24-70mm, ultimate house-wife setup.

Quote:



*Lens caps and cap keepers
*
Pros work too fast for lens caps.

They use protective filters, and then usually just throw their filtered lenses in their bag.

It takes too long to fiddle with lens caps, which lead to lost photos.

The most foolish thing is cap keepers. This give you all the disadvantages of caps, and also leaves it dangling below your lens to annoy the heck out of you.


Yay, UV filters are the new lens caps.









Quote:



*Using a tripod in daylight
*
For photography's first hundred years or so (1850 - 1950), ISO 32 film was a reasonably fast normal film. Color film was slower, usually ISO 10.

Even in broad daylight, you were making long exposures at large apertures.

You needed to use a tripod to allow slower speeds for smaller apertures for depth-of-field, otherwise nothing was in focus.

A typical color exposure in broad daylight was f/4 at 1/125. If you wanted more depth-of-field, wanted to use a telephoto lens or if it got cloudy, you needed a tripod.

When decent film reached ISO 100, which was a speed almost unheard of up through the 1950s, the tripod went away for daylight use, and with digital, they aren't needed, even at night.

See Digital Killed My Tripod.

Someone shooting with a DSLR on a tripod in daylight probably has a few screws loose. VR further eliminates the need for tripods. If I shoot a 15-pound 400mm lens, I use a monopod; not to steady it, but just to hold the weight.


You here that GoneTomorrow, you're crazy for purchasing a ND filter and using a tripod for long exposures on water falls. You should have been able to do it without a tripod!

Quote:



*Hood on backwards*

If you use a hood, leave it on the lens in the shooting position.

If you can't carry it (or leave it in your bag) that way, leave it home.

Do not store the hood in the reversed position. It takes too long to right it when you need to shoot.

I don't know how many times I see people out shooting with hoods attached in reverse! All this does is get in the way of you controlling the lens, and does nothing to reduce flare.

If you can't store the lens with the hood in the shooting position, ditch the hood.

I use caps that fit over the front of any hoods that I use. No one promotes this, but often a larger cap size will fit in the front of a hood. This is a lot better than having to unscrew a hood each time, and the round cap inside the front of the hood helps keep the hood from getting bangs in a bag.


You heard the man. Now go find some bags that can fit all your lenses with the hoods on in the regular position. And they can't be backpacks either, he said they suck.

__________________________________________________ __________


----------



## Lelin

I read the article too. I found funny the part about wearing a branded strap was for amateur when he links to a friend's website where the guy shows all his Canon straps really used.
Also the tripod for long exposure....
And the hood thing is just there to provoke or something. It's the first time I read from this guy and I don't like him.
His UV filters "caps" dont get scratched in his used and dirty gear?
And about dirty gear. Maybe he doesn't care about it because he's full of $ but I might want to resell my gear... if not I'll have to carry 2 bodies when I upg!

Edit: Yes, I'm an amateur. I will be for alot of time. Do I still have the right to take pictures I like?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Awesome, now there's another article I can link when showing how dumb he can sometimes mostly always be.

__________________________________________________ ___________

I guess National Geographic photographers are mediocre, thanks for pointing that out Ken.

Correct you are!

Photographers never EVER have a body fail on them or a lens get damaged on the go. And we all know that two to three lenses can cover every situation, right!?

I've never seen a person use a polarizer all the time. But people who are new do put CPL's on UV's... you might have won this time Ken...

OH MY GOSH KEN, YOU'RE ON AN EPIC WIN ROLL TODAY.









We all know those midrange zooms are garbage. There's a huge reason why Canons 24-70 f/2.8L, Nikons 24-70mm f/2.8 and Sonys 24-70mm f/2.8 are so unpopular. You'll never run into a situation where you need a very high quality zoom which can cover the needed focal lengths when walking around. Yes, we all like to carry around multiple lenses and change them at the speed of light when needed.

You hear that, stop taking care of your expensive equipment! Go cake your camera in mud and bang it against a rail, that's the only way to be a pro. No way will your photos prove otherwise.

Yep, like you proved before, those National Geographic photographers are amateurs. I can't imagine why one would need a 1Ds Mark III with a 24-70mm, ultimate house-wife setup.

Yay, UV filters are the new lens caps.









You here that GoneTomorrow, you're crazy for purchasing a ND filter and using a tripod for long exposures on water falls. You should have been able to do it without a tripod!

You heard the man. Now go find some bags that can fit all your lenses with the hoods on in the regular position. And they can't be backpacks either, he said they suck.

__________________________________________________ __________

LOL, all valid points, I hate this guy more more I hear about him.
I thought the backpack comment was ludicrous, but that's the problem with this guy. He's so matter-of-fact about anything with blanket statements like "Pros always use beat up gear" and so on, which leads new DSLR owners to be mislead into thinking that he knows what he's talking about. It's irritating because all his ruminations are usually his from own imagination and have no basis in actual real-world practice.

And what's worse and truly ironic is that *he* does things that are not only characteristic of an amateur, but are outright stupid. I offer his "spray and pray" technique as evidence of this as well as taking pictures with a baseball cap on backwards. Can someone kill this guy already?


----------



## Marin

Yeah, it's sad. Ignorance at its best.

I also just realized Art Center College of Design's photography department goes against so many things he believes "pros" go by. While I was there being given a personal tour, I saw that they embrace both "old" and "new" photography. While having film in almost any format, a huge darkroom and lots of old film equipment, they also embraced digital and have basically any professional Epson printer you could imagine, a dedicated editing room and a rental section which basically could dwarf an average brick and motor store (I'm completely serious, they have basically any lens you could imagine. Saw one student renting a 5DMKII and a 16-35mm)


----------



## Danylu

What do you guys think about this?
http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/05/sp...d_style-2.html

I think that it looks a bit dodgy, like if I were to jump around a little bit the camera would fall out :/ but the concept is great!


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


What do you guys think about this?
http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/05/sp...d_style-2.html

I think that it looks a bit dodgy, like if I were to jump around a little bit the camera would fall out :/ but the concept is great!


Makes it so much easier for someone to steal your gear.


----------



## Lelin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Makes it so much easier for someone to steal your gear.


They don't have to decapitate you anymore, just slide it off!

I think it would put too much weight on the belt making the pants really uncomfortable.


----------



## dr4gon

New fan, unfortunately one of the LEDs is out .... ugh Newegg is getting a call Monday!

Lighting: HVL-F58AM fired wirelessly off camera, sony style, bounced off of a wall. Messed with the shutter speed and lighting in M Manual mode to freeze the blades partially while still conveying rotational motion. Hope you like it!


----------



## Lelin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dr4gon*



New fan, unfortunately one of the LEDs is out .... ugh Newegg is getting a call Monday!

Lighting: HVL-F58AM fired wirelessly off camera, sony style, bounced off of a wall. Messed with the shutter speed and lighting in M Manual mode to freeze the blades partially while still conveying rotational motion. Hope you like it!


Really nice!


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Ken Rockwell*

AutoFocus assist Illuminator (icon: AF-ILL): Default is ON. Turn this OFF if you don't want the red illuminators to come on when they need to. When set to OFF the icon plainly reads NO AF-ILL. *The only reason for this is if you don't want to be seen before the flash goes off, for instance, if you're a Marine sniper.*


I fail to see why a Sniper would be taking a photo of something within the effective range of a flash.

@Dr4gon: How far away were you from the fan?


----------



## dr4gon

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
I fail to see why a Sniper would be taking a photo of something within the effective range of a flash.

@Dr4gon: How far away were you from the fan?

Not that far. It was taken with a 100mm macro lens (150mm equivalent). I would say about 2 feet away.


----------



## Oscuro

Hmmm, I kind of like the spider holster idea. I mean, if you're doing some kind of event, or just out on your own (places where theft is unlikely...weddings, trail walking/hiking), I can see it being extremely handy.

Personally, I hate the strap on my D70. Maybe because the ends that attach to my camera are stiff as all hell, or that the strap is too short (neck and shoulder carrying, the camera's at my ribs. Can't bring it to my eye, gotta take it off).


----------



## nuclearjock

Hanging on by a thread in the breeze. ~1cm long.









Nikon D3/200mm F/4 micro Nikkor
iso 200 1/[email protected]/4.8 -0.7 EV


----------



## laboitenoire

Pretty cool shot. I'm happy as my new laptop has a built-in SD reader, so I don't have to waste battery anymore when I'm transferring photos from the camera!


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Pretty cool shot. I'm happy as my new laptop has a built-in SD reader, so I don't have to waste battery anymore when I'm transferring photos from the camera!


Should be faster as well.

Edit: I'm dating myself, but I saw Hendrix live at the Aragon Ballroom in Chicago about a year before he died. The warm up band was the Bob Seeger System. Dissolved alot of brain cells that night..


----------



## laboitenoire

Yeah, that would date you a little bit...







Of course my mom remembers King Crimson opening for somebody (for some reason Gregg Allman sticks in my mind, but I'm pretty sure it was somebody else with a similar last name that played almost exclusively on acoustic) in the concrete field house of Marquette University... She said King Crimson was so loud that nobody could hear the main act afterward









Nah, but I have no idea why I picked that picture for my icon...


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Oscuro*


Hmmm, I kind of like the spider holster idea. I mean, if you're doing some kind of event, or just out on your own (places where theft is unlikely...weddings, trail walking/hiking), I can see it being extremely handy.

Personally, I hate the strap on my D70. Maybe because the ends that attach to my camera are stiff as all hell, or that the strap is too short (neck and shoulder carrying, the camera's at my ribs. Can't bring it to my eye, gotta take it off).


Time for a new strap! I have the Canon red strap that comes with the xxD and above cameras, which is decent, but it has quick-release clips. They're handy at times, esp. when tripod mounting, but I'm off to Europe in a few weeks and the clips make the strap seem less secure (I imagined a thief unbuckling one of the clips and grabbing the camera). Accordingly, I just ordered this strap, a lot of glowing reviews and looks very comfortable:

Crumpler Industry Disgrace


----------



## Marin

Post some pics up when you get it, I've been looking at that Crumpler strap.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Post some pics up when you get it, I've been looking at that Crumpler strap.


Will do, I also like it because it's designed to double as a shoulder strap.


----------



## dr4gon

hmmm I just became interested in looking for a new non-stock strap. Something that offers a bit more flexibility but still simple. Was looking at the Black Rapid R straps but boy are they pricey!


----------



## max302

Took a couple of shots with the new lens... it's absolutely awesome. All of the shots below are mostly unedited, none are sharpened.



Bokeh is almost TOO thick when it's wide open. Superb for portrait stuff, gotta do more of those.



Reviews say that sharpness peaks out at anything over f2.8. This one was taken at f2.5, and honestly, it's pretty much the sharpest photo I've taken to date.



Very little bokeh past f4. Sharp as a blade.

Best purchase ever for any DX camera owner.


----------



## Marin

New lens is what?


----------



## Lelin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
New lens is what?









Nikkor 35mm 1.8 I think.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dr4gon* 
hmmm I just became interested in looking for a new non-stock strap. Something that offers a bit more flexibility but still simple. Was looking at the Black Rapid R straps but boy are they pricey!

LOL, I saw that strap too. The double is a little ridiculous, looks like a race car harness! I'm sure it's very useful, but it would look extremely geeky wearing one. Best suited for more extreme situations I imagine.










Quote:


Originally Posted by *max302* 
Took a couple of shots with the new lens... it's absolutely awesome. All of the shots below are mostly unedited, none are sharpened.

Bokeh is almost TOO thick when it's wide open. Superb for portrait stuff, gotta do more of those.

Reviews say that sharpness peaks out at anything over f2.8. This one was taken at f2.5, and honestly, it's pretty much the sharpest photo I've taken to date.

Very little bokeh past f4. Sharp as a blade.

Best purchase ever for any DX camera owner.

Nice shots and a worthwhile purchase. Everyone should have a prime, they're tops in terms of sharpness at wide apertures, which most zoom lenses suck at in comparision.


----------



## Lelin

Don't know why but my picture lose their color when I upload or print them :S


----------



## laboitenoire

File compression is what causes the change in color depth/accuracy. If I save a picture that was like 100 quality JPEG down to like 85 quality, it looks much worse instantly.


----------



## xonix

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Lelin*


Weee, just came back from my friend's prom. He paid me the cocktail ticket so I could take a few pictures. I ended up being the only person with a DSLR there . The photograph bailed out. I made 225$CAD in a few hours. My friend is great for marketing haha. At first I kinda felt bad since I am not a pro at all but everyone prefered paying 10$ than having PnS quality pics







. 
Used my 50mm 1.8. I will sell it and get me a 1.4 with the cash I made tonight








Also the school guy asked me to take pictures of the event and some sub ministers from here. I really felt alot of pressure on my shoulders but overall it was a really nice experience!


Oh man, Canada sounds so much better for the Back-On-Same-Night photography service! At least they appreciate the effort for your service..

Australia is quite s*** for those kind of services. Everyone is just Point-n-Shoot, even event organisers =(


----------



## dr4gon

Starting a new project to uni-sleeve my 24-pin ATX. I was just practicing. Don't have my heat shrink yet!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Always be prepared!


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Always be prepared!



















Aint see'n the pic GT.


----------



## laboitenoire

I think he was referring to Dragon not having the heat shrink for his sleeving project.


----------



## dr4gon

lol, maybe he was, but that's a funny picture. He's probably got too much overlap between the at least 5 cameras he has on him. Heat shrink should be here Thursday when I can start slowly sleeving. I have a feeling it's going to be quite painful (tedious). More so than lapping!


----------



## laboitenoire

Oh, there is supposed to be a picture? Then I can't see it either...


----------



## dr4gon

Ah, I know why I can see it. I'm registered at POTN. Looks like I'm the prepared one!


----------



## Ryan747

ok question, what is better to have on Jpeg *Highest* Or RAW format, I dont really understand the difference in it. So can someone explain?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dr4gon* 
Ah, I know why I can see it. I'm registered at POTN. Looks like I'm the prepared one!









Whoops, I wasn't paying attention. Anyone who wants to see it, register at POTN









Here it is:


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dr4gon* 
Ah, I know why I can see it. I'm registered at POTN. Looks like I'm the prepared one!









Sorry, what is POTN?


----------



## evilspongebob72

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Ryan747* 
ok question, what is better to have on Jpeg *Highest* Or RAW format, I dont really understand the difference in it. So can someone explain?

http://digital-photography-school.com/raw-vs-jpeg


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Ryan747* 
ok question, what is better to have on Jpeg *Highest* Or RAW format, I dont really understand the difference in it. So can someone explain?

It's best to shoot in RAW because of the greater flexibility you have post-process. With RAW you can adjust exposure and white balance to a degree not possible with JPEG.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


Sorry, what is POTN?


Photography on the Net, it's a forum that Gone and a few others post on. It's pretty much Canon-only as far as I know.

And going to that picture you posted Gone, the poor sucker probably brought all the cameras so he can get a little more excitement during the golf match.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Photography on the Net, it's a forum that Gone and a few others post on. It's pretty much Canon-only as far as I know.











Yep, I sorta figured that out. Being Nikon based, I never really ran across POTN, but I went ahead and registered. After all I do own a Canon SD880, GT you can update me if you're so inclined.


----------



## dr4gon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


Yep, I sorta figured that out. Being Nikon based, I never really ran across POTN, but I went ahead and registered. After all I do own a Canon SD880, GT you can update me if you're so inclined.


Sony - Dyxum
Nikon - Nikon Cafe
Canon - Photography-on-the.net


----------



## Gunfire

Taken from my buddy's backyard, tell me how I did.


----------



## dr4gon

Pretty nice view. Nicely stitched. Where did you focus? The things in the distance look quite soft.


----------



## Mootsfox

Mmm Washington. I'm flying there in eight days


----------



## Gunfire

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dr4gon* 
Pretty nice view. Nicely stitched. Where did you focus? The things in the distance look quite soft.

I was just testing out my phones camera as i've only used it a couple times









Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Mmm Washington. I'm flying there in eight days









If you hurry you'll catch this great weather we're having. Running high 80's low 90's all week.


----------



## dr4gon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Gunfire*


I was just testing out my phones camera as i've only used it a couple times









If you hurry you'll catch this great weather we're having. Running high 80's low 90's all week.










Camera phone, ah. That explains it!


----------



## Marin

I just figured out how to properly pronounce Nikon and... I... think it sounds lame...









Probably why there's multiple ways of saying it (Ni-kon and Nee-kon)


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


I just figured out how to properly pronounce Nikon and... I... think it sounds lame...









Probably why there's multiple ways of saying it (Ni-kon and Nee-kon)


I say with the long 'i' myself (honestly never heard anyone say NEE kon before). But it seems that I've been saying "bokeh" wrong as well. I had always said it like the word "bouquet" but apparently it's with a short 'e' and equal emphasis on both syllables (bo ke like the 'e' in "bet"). Both it doesn't matter, they're both Japanese words pronounced with our own English rules of pronunciation.


----------



## SlickMeister

Hmmm, I just say Ni-kon ("i" pronounced like it would be in "pick"). This seems quite a British way to go about it.


----------



## Danylu

I say it like Nike (hike). Nikon. I still don't know how to say bokeh.


----------



## dr4gon

"bo" as in bowl, and keh as in "ketchup" lol is how I think you are supposed to say it.

And I'm pretty sure Nikon is nI-kon with the long I. Marin, you used to say "nee-kon?" lol


----------



## laboitenoire

Lol, I've known it was Nikon since I was able to speak.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dr4gon* 
"bo" as in bowl, and keh as in "ketchup" lol is how I think you are supposed to say it.

And I'm pretty sure Nikon is nI-kon with the long I. Marin, you used to say "nee-kon?" lol

I've always said nI-kon. I was talking about it actually being nee-kon (even though in the states and probably in a ton of other places Nikon pronounces it "nI-kon")


----------



## nuclearjock

Someone needs to email Ken Rockwell regarding the correct pronunciations, and it will all be settled.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


I've always said nI-kon. I was talking about it actually being nee-kon (even though in the states and probably in a ton of other places Nikon pronounces it "nI-kon")


Wait, so where did you hear that it's supposed to be nee-kon? All the commercials, all the pros who use it... everybody I've ever heard/known has said nI-kon.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Wait, so where did you hear that it's supposed to be nee-kon? All the commercials, all the pros who use it... everybody I've ever heard/known has said nI-kon.


Thus why I said it's pronounced differently here. But the Japanese name isn't pronounced the same.


----------



## dr4gon

oh wow lol, where did you hear it officially?

But in the commercial I do remember the lenses called "nik-or" as in "Nick" (the name).


----------



## Lelin

250$ budget: Flash or Tripod?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Lelin* 
250$ budget: Flash or Tripod?

That's a tough call, but I would go for a tripod probably, unless you know you have some pressing need for a flash (e.g., you're being asked to shoot weddings already).

For $250 you can get a nice Manfrotto or Slik tripod. I have a Manfrotto 725b myself.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dr4gon*


oh wow lol, where did you hear it officially?

But in the commercial I do remember the lenses called "nik-or" as in "Nick" (the name).


But I've heard it in commercials say knee-core. Nai-kon is confusing us.


----------



## dr4gon

YouTube - ASHTON KUTCHER APPEARS AS THE MAN WITH THE MAN WITH ...  



 
Watch again, "N(eye)-Kon"


----------



## Marin

Yep, all you need is a kit lens, flash unit and... a $1,800 $1,900 (Nikon bumped the price) 70-200mm lens... when going on a vacation...

And I said in Japan, dr4gon :|


----------



## GoneTomorrow

I really like the Industry Disgrace. It's much lighter than it looks and very comfortable. The strap contours to the neck and especially to the shoulder and is easy to carry that way. I also like how the strap is able to adjust from the ends where they attach to the camera and at the top, making it easier and quick to adjust the length.


----------



## nuclearjock

Looks tempting GT, could you post some close ups of how the straps attach to the body? I'm real picky about that after I had a Neekon "kit" strap fail on me while at the beach. Nothing like dropping your camera in the sand. Fortunately I caught it in time, but I prefer the loop through rather than "buckle" config.

TIA.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


Looks tempting GT, could you post some close ups of how the straps attach to the body? I'm real picky about that after I had a Neekon "kit" strap fail on me while at the beach. Nothing like dropping your camera in the sand. Fortunately I caught it in time, but I prefer the loop through rather than "buckle" config.

TIA.


Ask and you shall receive!


----------



## Marin

I'll take one.

I'm so ordering that after finals.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


I'll take one.

I'm so ordering that after finals.


Nice, finished grading my finals last week and am now seriously relaxing


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Ask and you shall receive!










Thanks GT, These types of buckles are what scare me and what failed on my kit strap along time ago on an old D50 that I owned.










BTW, I've since stopped using manufacturer's straps since reading Ken Rockstar's article about things that bug him...

Anyway I'm gonna pick one up and give it a try, (our local Calumet has them).
Looks way comfy.

Thanks.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
Thanks GT, These types of buckles are what scare me and what failed on my kit strap along time ago on an old D50 that I owned.

BTW, I've since stopped using manufacturer's straps since reading Ken Rockstar's article about things that bug him...

Anyway I'm gonna pick one up and give it a try, (our local Calumet has them).
Looks way comfy.

Thanks.

If you're really worried about the buckles failing, you could probably just use a bead or two of hot glue on the strap once it's perfectly adjusted to your liking. It's strong enough so that it won't fail too easily, but weak enough so that if you need to remove or adjust the strap for whatever reason you can scrape it off without needing to cut the strap. Just an idea...


----------



## dr4gon

I know marin, just assuring myself that we (I) am/are calling it by its acceptable name lol.

Nice strap!


----------



## Marin

Lemon.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/3601313357/


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


Thanks GT, These types of buckles are what scare me and what failed on my kit strap along time ago on an old D50 that I owned.










BTW, I've since stopped using manufacturer's straps since reading Ken Rockstar's article about things that bug him...

Anyway I'm gonna pick one up and give it a try, (our local Calumet has them).
Looks way comfy.

Thanks.


Did your old strap just come loose through the buckle or did the buckle actually break? The Crumpler looks like quality materials.

My previous strap the Canon Professional Strap, had similar buckles, but I made sure that there was plenty of slack fed through the buckle, but I've never had heavy lenses like you have. One trick that I did in the military was to melt the strap ends then flatten them while hot, which made them larger than the buckle.

If you want something that will definitely hold the weight of a body with a heavy lens, you might look into a Black Rapid strap.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


If you're really worried about the buckles failing, you could probably just use a bead or two of hot glue on the strap once it's perfectly adjusted to your liking. It's strong enough so that it won't fail too easily, but weak enough so that if you need to remove or adjust the strap for whatever reason you can scrape it off without needing to cut the strap. Just an idea...


Not a bad idea!


----------



## nuclearjock

The camera was an old D50 with a kit lens on it, and the strap just came undone, it didn't break. It was really wierd. And I was at the Lake Michigan beach stand knee deep in water taking pictures of my dog when it came undone. caught it just in time B4 it took a swim.

Taken several years ago with an old D50 and the 18-55 kit lens camera set to dummy mode.


----------



## riko99

So its sad how i just found out what the classes on SD and SDHC cards mean lol... anyone here don't know?


----------



## SlickMeister

I bought my SanDisk 4GB Class 2 fully aware of what it meant. It was Â£4.50, just over a Â£1 per GB. I'm not a burst shooter at all really. I haven't found the use for the FPS yet as I haven't done crazy shooting yet.


----------



## Marin

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...postcount=3726

Check out that fail.


----------



## laboitenoire

Had some fun out in the backyard with macro mode today. It is just gorgeous outside--one of those days that makes us New Englanders forget about the nasty winters.


----------



## riko99

Quote:



Originally Posted by *SlickMeister*


I bought my SanDisk 4GB Class 2 fully aware of what it meant. It was Â£4.50, just over a Â£1 per GB. I'm not a burst shooter at all really. I haven't found the use for the FPS yet as I haven't done crazy shooting yet.


See right there is what i used to think it was as well but i got an explanation from sandisk directly saying that the class means nothing to photography what it is is the bandwidth for video so even with burst shooting its a problem


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...postcount=3726

Check out that fail.










LOL, I wonder if he's checking for dust or something.


----------



## Marin

More fail.


YouTube - Dropping a camera


----------



## laboitenoire

He's lucky he didn't do some real damage to it :/


----------



## Mootsfox

Just got back from an anime con, some pics incoming.


----------



## Unknownm

jeez I wish I had a awesome camera







. I just got this Nikon CoolPix S210. Thing I hate the most of these cameras are you can't do the manual focus







. Close up sucks


----------



## Mootsfox

I'm thinking about the 190XPROB and the 488RC2.

Head:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...=272779&is=REG

Legs:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...=479927&is=REG

Any suggestions?

EDIT: I noticed my local camera shop has that package for $15 less than B&H and there is a $25 MIR for legs+head.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Unknownm*


jeez I wish I had a awesome camera







. I just got this Nikon CoolPix S210. Thing I hate the most of these cameras are you can't do the manual focus







. Close up sucks










Well, the quality of the pictures doesn't seem too bad for a point and shoot, as I'm not noticing much in the way of high-ISO noise. You'll find that your camera will be able to auto-focus much better in brightly-lit situations. Also, the reason that the camera is having trouble focusing for "close-ups" (usually referred to as macros when the object is something relatively small or you're trying to get immense detail in the shot), is you probably need to enable macro mode on your camera. It's the little option that is represented by a flower on your camera. All the pictures I recently posted from flowers were taken with a relatively mid-grade P&S that just had macro mode enabled.

EDIT: Here's a little bit of a pictorial to point out how you can improve those shots.

This is assuming you know how to enable macro mode on your camera (when in doubt, RTFM).

First, we have an example of what happens when you leave the camera on full auto and try to take the macro. Often, the automatic flash fires, destroying the detail you were trying to achieve.










If you defeat the flash and leave it in some sort of auto mode, then the image comes out blurry as shutter speed has to decrease (on my camera, it goes from ~1/40 of a second to 4 full seconds). While some detail is visible, it's not terribly good looking.










If you don't have anything except auto or program modes (i.e. you have no manual mode), then this can get tricky to get detail. You can try to deflect/diffuse the built-in flash of your camera. First, I tried my hand, but that gave the image a reddish cast. Then, I just placed a white envelope in front of the flash, and the result was quite good.



















The end result is not bad, but if I just wanted to get the LEDs on the laptop, I would need to change my methodology... This is when I flipped over to a full manual mode (often designated "M"). I set the aperture to f/3.5 (the fastest on my camera's lens), and then set shutter speed to 1/30 of a second (about the slowest I can still hand-hold the camera without blur). I disabled flash, and enabled macro mode (actually, I went to "super-macro" mode on my camera, which basically sets the focusing distance even closer, but isn't on every camera). Focused and... Voila!










So, basically you just need to play around with it, and eventually you should be able to get some decent shots. You certainly don't need a DSLR to get decent macro shots, although they do have their advantages in these situations...


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


I'm thinking about the 190XPROB and the 488RC2.

Head:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...=272779&is=REG

Legs:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...=479927&is=REG

Any suggestions?

EDIT: I noticed my local camera shop has that package for $15 less than B&H and there is a $25 MIR for legs+head.


*BUY IT*

Exact Tripod/Head setup that I've been wanting. And there's a reason it's an extremely popular combination.


----------



## Mootsfox

Just did.

190XPROB legs, 488RC2 head, 055CCS 1/2 height center column (for table use). All for $20 less than Amazon, and I don't have to deal with shipping.

EDIT: Just realized I bought the wrong center column







Back to the store tomorrow


----------



## Unknownm

Quote:


Originally Posted by *laboitenoire* 
Well, the quality of the pictures doesn't seem too bad for a point and shoot, as I'm not noticing much in the way of high-ISO noise. You'll find that your camera will be able to auto-focus much better in brightly-lit situations. Also, the reason that the camera is having trouble focusing for "close-ups" (usually referred to as macros when the object is something relatively small or you're trying to get immense detail in the shot), is you probably need to enable macro mode on your camera. It's the little option that is represented by a flower on your camera. All the pictures I recently posted from flowers were taken with a relatively mid-grade P&S that just had macro mode enabled.

EDIT: Here's a little bit of a pictorial to point out how you can improve those shots.

This is assuming you know how to enable macro mode on your camera (when in doubt, RTFM).

First, we have an example of what happens when you leave the camera on full auto and try to take the macro. Often, the automatic flash fires, destroying the detail you were trying to achieve.










If you defeat the flash and leave it in some sort of auto mode, then the image comes out blurry as shutter speed has to decrease (on my camera, it goes from ~1/40 of a second to 4 full seconds). While some detail is visible, it's not terribly good looking.










If you don't have anything except auto or program modes (i.e. you have no manual mode), then this can get tricky to get detail. You can try to deflect/diffuse the built-in flash of your camera. First, I tried my hand, but that gave the image a reddish cast. Then, I just placed a white envelope in front of the flash, and the result was quite good.



















The end result is not bad, but if I just wanted to get the LEDs on the laptop, I would need to change my methodology... This is when I flipped over to a full manual mode (often designated "M"). I set the aperture to f/3.5 (the fastest on my camera's lens), and then set shutter speed to 1/30 of a second (about the slowest I can still hand-hold the camera without blur). I disabled flash, and enabled macro mode (actually, I went to "super-macro" mode on my camera, which basically sets the focusing distance even closer, but isn't on every camera). Focused and... Voila!










So, basically you just need to play around with it, and eventually you should be able to get some decent shots. You certainly don't need a DSLR to get decent macro shots, although they do have their advantages in these situations...

Yeah macro mode is with the flower, it's always enabled for close up shots







.

Here is one with flash off (Sorry it's dark, I turned down the Exposure down by mistake)










Here is one with flash covered. Shutter speed faster, ISO @ 64. 400 you start to see artifacts










Flash with ISO @ 200. Turned out much better with the flash covered


----------



## nuclearjock

It's big and heavy but it sure makes perty pics.
Bokeh is awfully nice too.



JPEG out of camera, cropped in LR. Click for EXIF.
Nikon D3/24-70 F/2.8 G ED AF Nikkor.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Unknownm* 
Yeah macro mode is with the flower, it's always enabled for close up shots







.

Here is one with flash off (Sorry it's dark, I turned down the Exposure down by mistake)

Here is one with flash covered. Shutter speed faster, ISO @ 64. 400 you start to see artifacts

Flash with ISO @ 200. Turned out much better with the flash covered

Those look quite good.


----------



## dr4gon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


*BUY IT*

Exact Tripod/Head setup that I've been wanting. And there's a reason it's an extremely popular combination.










That's my setup and it rocks!


----------



## Unknownm

delete


----------



## nitteo

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dr4gon*


Sony - Dyxum
Nikon - Nikon Cafe
Canon - Photography-on-the.net


nikonians.com is by far the "best" forum for nikon users.

Nikon really is pronounced "Knee-kon" but it is universally accepted to say "nayh-kon"


----------



## max302

Marin wants some fail?


YouTube - Props Issue 70 - Metal Bikes - Broken Camera


----------



## dr4gon

LOL "it's not scratched" ..... "it's broken...." love how he picks up the two pieces and sees how to put it back together!

Well, I finished uni-sleeving it in all black!

http://www.overclock.net/case-mods-g...4-pin-atx.html


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *max302* 
Marin wants some fail?

YouTube - Props Issue 70 - Metal Bikes - Broken Camera

The wireless flash goes off when it hits the ground. xD

I'd be pissed too.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *max302*


Marin wants some fail?

YouTube - Props Issue 70 - Metal Bikes - Broken Camera


"It's not scratched...."


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *max302*


Marin wants some fail?

YouTube - Props Issue 70 - Metal Bikes - Broken Camera


I saw this on another forum and some poster claimed that the camera was a Hasselblad with a fisheye prime.


----------



## Marin

Probably didn't have insurance.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


I saw this on another forum and some poster claimed that the camera was a Hasselblad with a fisheye prime.


Based on his pants I'd say it was a Canon.


----------



## Ryan747

can you update mine please, my new flickr is www.flickr.com/ryanbradford


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Based on his pants I'd say it was a Canon.


Yeah, definitely not a Nikon user.


----------



## Mootsfox

Further proof that Nikon is the camera of the gods.


----------



## Danylu

lol flame on!


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Yeah, definitely not a Nikon user.











hey, the guy on the right has the same shirt as i do!
yes, im kidding


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Yeah, definitely not a Nikon user.











Looks like Ken got leid.


----------



## Danylu

I have a question about VR and image stabilizing techs in general. They claim 3 or so stops which ends up being around 2 stops in actual use. If I took a photo at 1/50 @50mm, VR allows me to handhold to around 1/15 (2 stops? Correct me if I failed the maths), but if I took the photo at 1/50 with VR, would the picture sharpness be the same as 1/200 without VR? This is assuming a perfectly still subject.

I think I read that VR is most noticable around the 1/3-1/30 range but in theory am I right?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


I have a question about VR and image stabilizing techs in general. They claim 3 or so stops which ends up being around 2 stops in actual use. If I took a photo at 1/50 @50mm, VR allows me to handhold to around 1/15 (2 stops? Correct me if I failed the maths), but if I took the photo at 1/50 with VR, would the picture sharpness be the same as 1/200 without VR? This is assuming a perfectly still subject.

I think I read that VR is most noticable around the 1/3-1/30 range but in theory am I right?


You may have the equivalent _steadiness_ shooting hand-held, but keep in mind that 1/3" is still a rather slow shutter speed and won't freeze action better than a faster speed, even with VR. It just allows for less hand shake at slower speeds, but if the speed is too slow for a moving subject, the motion blur will remain.


----------



## dr4gon

Also 50mm on a cropped sensor is about 75-80mm on a 35mm full frame where that 1/focal length rule was developed. Just something to keep in mind







.


----------



## nuclearjock

Good news:
Just ordered a 600mm f/4G ED VR AF-S Nikkor and a TC-17E II.









Bad news:
4-6 weeks delivery on the lens. The dealer is allowing three free weekend rentals of one of their rental 600's. Still gonna be a long wait









Wildlife pics soon.

Edit:

GT,

You can add the TC to my list, but wait on the 600. Also, traded my 50mm 1.4 d for a 50mm f/1.4G AF-S Nikkor, and also added a Voigtlander Nokton 58mm f/1.4 SL-II.


----------



## equetefue

Nice !!! congrats


----------



## dr4gon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


Good news:
Just ordered a 600mm f/4G ED VR AF-S Nikkor and a TC-17E II.









Bad news:
4-6 weeks delivery on the lens. The dealer is allowing three free weekend rentals of one of their rental 600's. Still gonna be a long wait









Wildlife pics soon.

Edit:

GT,

You can add the TC to my list, but wait on the 600. Also, traded my 50mm 1.4 d for a 50mm f/1.4G AF-S Nikkor, and also added a Voigtlander Nokton 58mm f/1.4 SL-II.










WOW, $10,000 lens. You could poke someone's eye out with all those zeroes and the lens. Amazon has 1 in stock btw.

Free shipping too!

http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-600mm-Te...4935529&sr=8-2


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dr4gon*









WOW, $10,000 lens. You could poke someone's eye out with all those zeroes and the lens. Amazon has 1 in stock btw.
*
Free shipping too! *

http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-600mm-Te...4935529&sr=8-2











for 10k i would hope they would get it too you for free


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dr4gon*









WOW, $10,000 lens. You could poke someone's eye out with all those zeroes and the lens. Amazon has 1 in stock btw.

Free shipping too!

http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-600mm-Te...4935529&sr=8-2


I paid ~$450 less for mine, hence the wait. Also, Calumet's local here in case I don't like the lens and want to return it







.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


I paid ~$450 less for mine, hence the wait. Also, Calumet's local here in case I don't like the lens and want to return it







.











450!?!?
can you get deals like that on another/any other lenses?


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie* 








450!?!?
can you get deals like that on another/any other lenses?

It depends, but I had a situation with another large camera store here in Chicago several years ago, and the Calumet Chicago store helped me out big time. From then on, I've always given them first crack at my business as well as the company I work for. In return, they are willing to explore various pricing situations with me. This was a particularly pleasant one. I seriously don't think they made much money on this sale..

FYI, I paid retail for the TC.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
It depends, but I had a situation with another large camera store here in Chicago several years ago, and the Calumet Chicago store helped me out big time. From then on, I've always given them first crack at my business as well as the company I work for. In return, they are willing to explore various pricing situations with me. This was a particularly pleasant one. I seriously don't think they made much money on this sale..

FYI, I paid retail for the TC.

ahaha, i see, i was going to ask you if you could hook me up









lookin forward to seeing some pics once you get it in


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


Good news:
Just ordered a 600mm f/4G ED VR AF-S Nikkor and a TC-17E II.









Bad news:
4-6 weeks delivery on the lens. The dealer is allowing three free weekend rentals of one of their rental 600's. Still gonna be a long wait









Wildlife pics soon.

Edit:

GT,

You can add the TC to my list, but wait on the 600. Also, traded my 50mm 1.4 d for a 50mm f/1.4G AF-S Nikkor, and also added a Voigtlander Nokton 58mm f/1.4 SL-II.


Nuke, did you rob a bank or something?


----------



## Mootsfox

Just got an SB-600.

Bounce flash = insta-win.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Nuke, did you rob a bank or something?









Maybe that's why they gave me a funny look when I peeled off 10g in red stained bills...

Actually, our incentive program at work came through very nicely this quarter, and what can I say. I made the wife an offer she couldn't refuse.

Gonna be fun devising something to carry this thing in the field. I did rent the 400 2.8, 500 4.0, and the 600 4.0 and believe me, they're a load to carry, but the IQ I feel has to be seen to be believed.


----------



## nitteo

I use this strap for my gigantic D3. Best accessory I have ever bought:

http://www.optechusa.com/product/det...&CATEGORY_ID=4


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nitteo*


I use this strap for my gigantic D3. Best accessory I have ever bought:

http://www.optechusa.com/product/det...&CATEGORY_ID=4


Yep, that's what I use on all my bodies. The loop through makes me feel more secure, but when you get right down to it, I'd be happier if the loop itself were twice the thread thickness....

Anyway, it eliminates the buckle failure that I've experienced with other straps.

It's also nice to be able to un-snap the neck strap if you don't need it like if you're on a monopod.


----------



## SlickMeister

I cannot believe a mere strap has boggled my brain. How do you use it? The red bit looks like it is 10cm thick!


----------



## laboitenoire

The wide red and green (?) bits are the actual part that rests on your neck. They are made probably out of a padded neoprene-like material. Adds a bit of bounce to the strap, which is quite comfortable. I have a neoprene strap for my tenor sax. Makes the 25 pounds feel like less. It then buckles onto the straps that attach to the hooks or loops on your body, so you can easily remove the strap (like when you're using a tripod, as mentioned).

The reason the one piece is so wide is so that it rests more evenly on your neck and shoulders. Guitarists have known for years that the wider the strap is, the more comfortable it is to have it on for long periods of time.


----------



## Marin

Taking pics:

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...postcount=3773

p.s. If you can't figure it out based on the avatar... I'm depth...


----------



## laboitenoire

Those jeans look like they belong to your mom, Marin...









Actually, I have a pair that's not much looser and probably just as low-cut...


----------



## nuclearjock

Got the last one in Nikon mount from B&HP, just arrived this morning,










Bokeh's to follow as soon as it stops raining. Looks minature my D3.


----------



## Marin

Pffffffffff... rain... I'd shoot in it.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Pffffffffff... rain... I'd shoot in it.


Dude, you Norcalers are used to it...







.


----------



## dominique120

can i join 
i have a nikon coolpix l1


----------



## gtsteviiee

Canon T1i
Canon XSi
May i join?


----------



## TaiDinh

May I be added to the list?

I now have a Nikon Coolpix P80.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dominique120*


can i join 
i have a nikon coolpix l1



Quote:



Originally Posted by *TaiDinh*


May I be added to the list?

I now have a Nikon Coolpix P80.


Added!

Quote:



Originally Posted by *gtsteviiee*


Canon T1i
Canon XSi
May i join?


Any lenses?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

I may have to splurge for this camera when it comes out, a true pocket sized DSLR!










http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/olympus/e_p1-review


----------



## Marin

I have mixed feelings about the new Micro Four Thirds cameras. The size of them is great and the lack of a mirror allows tons of lenses to be adapted (tons of adapters are already out). But the crop factor kind of ruins it.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
I have mixed feelings about the new Micro Four Thirds cameras. The size of them is great and the lack of a mirror allows tons of lenses to be adapted (tons of adapters are already out). But the crop factor kind of ruins it.

Yeah, but I just want something that I can carry in my pocket that isn't useless over 400 ISO, and this camera may cut the muster. The 2x crop is a lot, but not impossible to work with, as there is now a Micro 4/3 17mm prime.

And it's a fair trade off for 4/3 quality. Their small size makes for amazing sharpness even wide open and very low CA.

Here's DP Review's preview with samples, the high ISO shots look promising:

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0906/09...olympusep1.asp


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Yeah, but I just want something that I can carry in my pocket that isn't useless over 400 ISO, and this camera may cut the muster. The 2x crop is a lot, but not impossible to work with, as there is now a Micro 4/3 17mm prime.

And it's a fair trade off for 4/3 quality. Their small size makes for amazing sharpness even wide open and very low CA.

Here's DP Review's preview with samples, the high ISO shots look promising:

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0906/09...olympusep1.asp

True.

If I were to get it I would put this lens on it:

http://www.amazon.com/Zeiss-Distagon...5213611&sr=8-1

Expensive but it would be awesome. Or one of the wider Zeiss's.


----------



## Mootsfox

So my cousin jumped ship from Nikon recently and picked up a 5D and a few L lenses, so I got to shoot a few shots with it today









This was with the kit zoom from a Canon EOS, 28-70mm I think.










Oh, and FF is so amazingly awesome.


----------



## Marin

The kit lens for the 5D is the 24-105 f/4L IS

Other popular lens is the 24-70mm f/2.8L


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


The kit lens for the 5D is the 24-105 f/4L IS

Other popular lens is the 24-70mm f/2.8L


It was the kit lens from an older film Canon SLR.

We had a laugh about that on the beach... that he brought only one lens, and the only non-L lens he has.


----------



## Marin

Why hello there bee.



Lets get some bokeh too.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


True.

If I were to get it I would put this lens on it:

http://www.amazon.com/Zeiss-Distagon...5213611&sr=8-1

Expensive but it would be awesome. Or one of the wider Zeiss's.


GT, evidence that our friend Marin gives new meaning to the word "splurge"

My wife carries a Canon SD880 around with her and other than the fact that Ken Rockstar waxes poetically about it, (that's not why I bought it, it was given to me as a gift), it provides some pretty decent pictures in a pinch.

But I'm curious about the Olympus as well.

Post some shots when you get it, (even if you don't get the Zeiss).


----------



## dr4gon

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
GT, evidence that our friend Marin gives new meaning to the word "splurge"

My wife carries a Canon SD880 around with her and other than the fact that Ken Rockstar waxes poetically about it, (that's not why I bought it, it was given to me as a gift), it provides some pretty decent pictures in a pinch.

But I'm curious about the Olympus as well.

Post some shots when you get it, (even if you don't get the Zeiss).

I'm kinda curious about the Oly E-P1 (what a pain to type). I saw the ISO examples and anything above 400 ISO, TBH looks pretty poor. There's a significant loss of DR from the one set of images I saw, although that could be due to the change in lighting, doubt it though. We'll see!


----------



## Marin

Had a brain fart, definitely would get this before the Zeiss due to the pricing:

http://www.amazon.com/Da-15MM-F4-Ed-...5245375&sr=8-1


----------



## gtsteviiee

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Added!

Any lenses?

yes Sigma 18-200mm 1:3.5-6.3
canon 52mm macro lense 1:1.8
canon 18-55mm
and other lense i cannot remember


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
GT, evidence that our friend Marin gives new meaning to the word "splurge"

My wife carries a Canon SD880 around with her and other than the fact that Ken Rockstar waxes poetically about it, (that's not why I bought it, it was given to me as a gift), it provides some pretty decent pictures in a pinch.

But I'm curious about the Olympus as well.

Post some shots when you get it, (even if you don't get the Zeiss).

I'd put a Zeiss on anything, esp. my 40D, and I don't need a new camera to do it (just a lot of money)! And I'm far from getting the Pen (how about that for a short name), even if I do ($900 retail with the 17mm lens and viewfinder). If I get it would probably be early next year after taxes.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dr4gon* 
I'm kinda curious about the Oly E-P1 (what a pain to type). I saw the ISO examples and anything above 400 ISO, TBH looks pretty poor. There's a significant loss of DR from the one set of images I saw, although that could be due to the change in lighting, doubt it though. We'll see!

Poor in comparison in to larger sensor cameras like Canons or Nikons, yes, but it looks very useful at least and better than a p&s camera. I'm reserving judgment for full reviews as well.


----------



## dr4gon

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
I'd put a Zeiss on anything, esp. my 40D, and I don't need a new camera to do it (just a lot of money)! And I'm far from getting the Pen (how about that for a short name), even if I do ($900 retail with the 17mm lens and viewfinder). If I get it would probably be early next year after taxes.

Poor in comparison in to larger sensor cameras like Canons or Nikons, yes, but it looks very useful at least and better than a p&s camera. I'm reserving judgment for full reviews as well.

Good point, but at more than double the price of an LX3, it's kinda hard to justify. But yes, we shall wait and see. I'm wanting an LX3 as a new p&s, but am wondering about a possible new model or an alternative like this. With one of these though, you have to buy lenses (plus and minus) which means more cost and more bulk. The LX3 though is nice and compact, has an F/2.0-2.8 wide angle lens which will give you a 1 stop of light advantage over most of the 4/3 lenses. Ultimately, I want something small, shoots RAW, and can supplement my SLR when it's not handy.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

I'm also hoping that now that there are (will be rather) two Micro 4/3 cameras, the other being the Panasonic G1, that prices will become more reasonable. I also wonder if anyone besides Panasonic and Olympus will make M 4/3 cameras?


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
I'm also hoping that now that there are (will be rather) two Micro 4/3 cameras, the other being the Panasonic G1, that prices will become more reasonable. I also wonder if anyone besides Panasonic and Olympus will make M 4/3 cameras?

I would think that Fuji could be a good candidate, as they already use some smallish sensors in one or two of their SLR models.


----------



## max302

Cool little bokeh demo, brought to you by my Nikon 35mm F1.8









DPReview was right though, there is a significant amount of purple fringing wide open. How would I go about correcting that in Photoshop or Lightroom?


----------



## noahmateen1234

I'm contemplating buying an XSi, gonna hopefully pull the trigger within a week or so. Just gotta sell this damn wc'ing crap. Anyone interested in funding this camera PM me


----------



## dr4gon

Quote:


Originally Posted by *max302* 


Cool little bokeh demo, brought to you by my Nikon 35mm F1.8









DPReview was right though, there is a significant amount of purple fringing wide open. How would I go about correcting that in Photoshop or Lightroom?

Edit the saturation and take out purple (well it's more likely going to be magenta







)


----------



## Sebkiller

Hey guys.
My EOS 400D has gone wrong, the cmos has gone corrupt








I was just wondering, if any of you fellow camera enthusiasts had an old digital EOS I could buy off them.
My budget it about Â£115 I don't have much :/ Economic jazz.
Thanks guys.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Sebkiller* 
Hey guys.
My EOS 400D has gone wrong, the cmos has gone corrupt








I was just wondering, if any of you fellow camera enthusiasts had an old digital EOS I could buy off them.
My budget it about Â£115 I don't have much :/ Economic jazz.
Thanks guys.

What do you mean by "corrupt?" Will it record images at all? Before you go buying a new one, you should at least get a repair quote from Canon, which will probably be more expensive than it's worth, but still worth checking out.

As for a new body, you should peruse the Marketplace section of Photography on the Net Forums. You can easily get a replacement body, but probably not for Â£115, even the 400D still goes for more than that.


----------



## Sebkiller

Well, it switches on but goes blank, and my warrenty is out. so canon wont do it for free. But I'm going paris in a few weeks and need a camera to take.
I'm off work at the moment (personal reasons) so I can't really get any more money.








Nevermind.
I guess I'm gonna have to go with film.
Now I have to get some more silver nitrate. Buggah.
Thanks anywhos.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *max302* 
http://www.flickr.com/photos/maximerousseau/3631115596

Cool little bokeh demo, brought to you by my Nikon 35mm F1.8









DPReview was right though, there is a significant amount of purple fringing wide open. How would I go about correcting that in Photoshop or Lightroom?

In Lightroom you're going to want to adjust the Chromatic Aberration levels. There's Red/Cyan and Blue/Yellow. Most of the time with the primes wide open you'll run into green in the chromatic aberration the most, so start by adjusting the Red/Cyan.

Getting rid of purple fringing though is a lot harder. In Lightroom in the Chromatic Aberration toolbar there's a menu called "Defringe" and it gives two options (Highlight Edges and All Edges). This does more though than get rid of fringing and usually has a tendency to get rid of small areas of color (reason why I don't use it).


----------



## TaiDinh

What do you guys think? I took this today. It was a cloudy day and rainy day.

-Nikon Coolpix P80
-Shutter speed: 1/30
-Aperture: f/3
-ISO: 64
-300 dpi
-No flash
-VR on
-Original size: 3684 x 2736
4.7-84.2mm 1:2.8-4.5 - What does that mean? It's written on my lens.

I'm not sure how to list the settings I used. Can someone give me a format?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *TaiDinh*


What do you guys think? I took this today. It was a cloudy day and rainy day.

-Nikon Coolpix P80
-Shutter speed: 1/30
-Aperture: f/3
-ISO: 64
-300 dpi
-No flash
-VR on
-Original size: 3684 x 2736
4.7-84.2mm 1:2.8-4.5 - What does that mean? It's written on my lens.

I'm not sure how to list the settings I used. Can someone give me a format?


It's pretty good; I would crop and enlarge the flower and reduce the scale of the background a bit.


----------



## TaiDinh

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


It's pretty good; I would crop and enlarge the flower and reduce the scale of the background a bit.


May you please explain, "... reduce the scale of the background..."


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *TaiDinh*


May you please explain, "... reduce the scale of the background..."


Crop around the flower so the background doesn't become another point of focus


----------



## TaiDinh

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Crop around the flower so the background doesn't become another point of focus










Ah, okay. I should keep in mind of cropping images when I take pictures too then. I never thought of it.

Thanks.


----------



## Marin

http://www.adorama.com/SG102035EOS.h...fo=sigma+10-20

I think it's out in the US









I am so getting this lens.


----------



## SlickMeister

My god. That lens can be had here for cheaper!


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *TaiDinh*


What do you guys think? I took this today. It was a cloudy day and rainy day.

-Nikon Coolpix P80
-Shutter speed: 1/30
-Aperture: f/3
-ISO: 64
-300 dpi
-No flash
-VR on
-Original size: 3684 x 2736
*4.7-84.2mm 1:2.8-4.5 - What does that mean? It's written on my lens*.

*I'm not sure how to list the settings I used. Can someone give me a format?*











The lens zooms from 4.7-84.7mm which is about a 17x zoom? the aperture maximum is f/2.8 to f.4.5.

Your format is pretty good.









More info than what others give...


----------



## TaiDinh

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


The lens zooms from 4.7-84.7mm which is about a 17x zoom? the aperture maximum is f/2.8 to f.4.5.

Your format is pretty good.









More info than what others give...


Close. x18 zoom.









Thanks for the input!


----------



## Marin

Anyone who's a POTN member mind bumping/responding to this?

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...d.php?t=712085


----------



## nuclearjock

Kinda dinky on my D3. Makes nice pics though. Manual focus is very "German" like. Reminds me of old times. Pics tomorrow (supposed to be nice out). We're up in northern Wisconsin for the weekend.


----------



## Marin

Does it have AF Confirmation like Zeiss?

EDIT: And I think I'm going to order the Tokina 11-16mm.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Does it have AF Confirmation like Zeiss?


If you mean does the manual focus guide (> • <) work, the answer is yes.

Edit: Going into ticksville tomorrow to find some bokeh.


----------



## Mootsfox

Thinking about buying a D90 when the Bing (through ebay) cashback goes higher than 8%.

Anyone have first hand experience with or comments they want to share about it?


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Thinking about buying a D90 when the Bing (through ebay) cashback goes higher than 8%.

Anyone have first hand experience with or comments they want to share about it?

Even though it's plastic it feels solid like all the other Nikon bodies that use plastic.

One thing I didn't like was recording video on it. The CMOS sensor has a serious issue of causing the "gelatin" effect when there's too much shake, like when handheld. Basically rolling shutter to the extreme.


YouTube - Nikon D90 wobble test


----------



## Mootsfox

Doesn't look too bad until you shake it.

Maybe I should wait for the D90 replacement... I'm just feeling limited with this D60 right now


----------



## Zeva

Hrmmm... my 40D and 17-55 got sent in to canon







i m sad now!


----------



## Marin

GoneTomorrow, add the Canon 10-22mm for me.

I should be getting it next week.


----------



## Zeva

Ooo nice that lens is fun to play with!


----------



## Marin

Yeah, definitely looking forward to getting it. Also getting a 7 Million Dollar Home, got a deal I couldn't resist on it.

And if all goes well I might be able to get a 70-200mm f/4 IS or 70-200mm f/2.8


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Doesn't look too bad until you shake it.

Maybe I should wait for the D90 replacement... I'm just feeling limited with this D60 right now









Buy a lens for the time being to make yourself feel better









To be honest though the D60 is a little bit limitting but I'd rather buy more lenses! All of the DLSRs have features I wished I had


----------



## Lelin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Does it have AF Confirmation like Zeiss?

EDIT: And I think I'm going to order the Tokina 11-16mm.


Good choice







I have read alot of user reviews who used both the Canon and Tokina and say the Tokina gives better results.

Edit: Ups just saw you ordered the Canon.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Zeva*


Hrmmm... my 40D and 17-55 got sent in to canon







i m sad now!


What's wrong with them? It seems like everyone is sending in their 40D lately at POTN.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


GoneTomorrow, add the Canon 10-22mm for me.

I should be getting it next week.










Nice, you went with a winner! The Tokina is nice, but it has what I would call profound amounts of CA (typical for Tokina according to some reviews), so it's what steered mt towards the Canon.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Yeah, definitely looking forward to getting it. Also getting a 7 Million Dollar Home, got a deal I couldn't resist on it.

And if all goes well I might be able to get a 70-200mm f/4 IS or 70-200mm f/2.8


You should consider the 8MDH too, I got look at that and the 7MDH the other day and the 8MDH is very nice, same length and width, but the compartment is deeper.

I want a Crumpler too, but I have four camera bags already!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

I'm in Europe for two weeks everybody, so member list changes will have to wait till I return. I have my camera so I'll post some when I get back!


----------



## SlickMeister

Oh my! Where are you going GoneTomorrow?


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
I'm in Europe for two weeks everybody, so member list changes will have to wait till I return. I have my camera so I'll post some when I get back!

You better post pictures!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Taking some students to Italy and Greece. I get to go for free.







I brought only my 40D, 10-22mm, 50mm and flash, will post some pics when I return!


----------



## dr4gon

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Taking some students to Italy and Greece. I get to go for free.







I brought only my 40D, 10-22mm, 50mm and flash, will post some pics when I return!

Have a good trip, be safe! We'll look forward to all those pics!


----------



## Mootsfox

D90 + 18-105mm VR is now <$900 with ebay and cashback! I want it so badly!


----------



## SlickMeister

Get at least a D300 or do you want video?


----------



## Marin

D300 is probably out of his budget.


----------



## Mootsfox

I don't have the $1,700 needed for a D300. Plus I don't have the money for lenses to match a D300.

If I did, I'd probably just switch to canon because I could go to FF and a L prime for that price.

Oh, and I would like to shoot video


----------



## Marin

http://www.vimeo.com/4685373


----------



## nuclearjock

Lightroom 2.4


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


Lightroom 2.4


What's different about it? I'm using 2.3 right now.


----------



## Squeeker The Cat

so my brother in law just got back from sandiego and went to look at all his pics he took, and there all gone! he says he took like 200 and now that he is home says the sd card is blank.

what could have happened to them? heat? who knows.

any ideas to see if they are still there or not?


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Squeeker The Cat* 
so my brother in law just got back from sandiego and went to look at all his pics he took, and there all gone! he says he took like 200 and now that he is home says the sd card is blank.

what could have happened to them? heat? who knows.

any ideas to see if they are still there or not?

They probably are. Don't write over it, don't format it. You'll need to nab some recovery software, but there is a good chance his pictures are still there.


----------



## Squeeker The Cat

are there any good free ones out there?


----------



## Mootsfox

Shot and uploaded while on the Amtrak. iPhone tether :wub-smiley










http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3404/...f4d79ecd_o.jpg


----------



## Danylu

Gone if you are there buddy add a Nikon AF-S 35mm 1.8 and the Nikon SB-600 flash for me please.









Will get them Monday or Tuesday Australian time. Pulled out of the 18-105mm VR at the last minute and went with the 35mm because I shot at my sister's concert and it was a small hall with only about 10m from the last seat to the stage and I had to shoot at 3200 ISO 18mm f/3.5 1/30 and the shots look bad, too noisy. The 2nd reason for doing so is that I don't have to buy another bag yet and I can keep using my 18-55mm for longer.

Speaking of bags, I had a look at the Lowepro Slingshot 200 and WOW that thing is thick with padding! I have a Lowepro Top Loader and it seems very thin compared to the slingshot.


----------



## Marin

You may notice something new in my sig. I couldn't resist any longer









As you can also tell, only new part for my rig recently was a new gpu cooler. So you can probably guess where the money is going now.


----------



## Danylu

I feel the same way now haha.


----------



## laboitenoire

You got a 50D? Nice!

My dad just got a Nikkor 55-200 VR. He wanted a faster-focusing telephoto zoom than his Sigma, although I think he'll miss the constant f/3.8 aperture.

Although this means I might be able to ask if I can have his old body with both of the Sigma lenses







. If I decide to shoot film now and then...


----------



## SlickMeister

50D! My god. How is it? What are you doing with the 450D?


----------



## Marin

I should be getting the 50D tomorrow if all goes well with Adorama. Today I get the 10-22mm and 7MDH.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


I should be getting the 50D tomorrow if all goes well with Adorama. Today I get the 10-22mm and 7MDH.


Can't sig 'till it's in your hands.....

Penalty:

Pics today and tomorrow


----------



## TaiDinh

Do you guys use any programs to add borders to your pictures?


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *TaiDinh*


Do you guys use any programs to add borders to your pictures?


No, but only because I'm too lazy.

If you have Photoshop, it's easy, just go to Image -> Canvas Size, select how much you want to add to each side, and pick the color you want, and hit ok.


----------



## Marin

This lens is awesome. No editing done to this pic.


----------



## dr4gon

congrats on all the new stuff!


----------



## SlickMeister

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


Can't sig 'till it's in your hands.....

Penalty:

Pics today and tomorrow










I agree; although the penalty and whatnot is a bit excessive.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dr4gon*


congrats on all the new stuff!


Thanks.

50D is still pending on Adorama... ugg...

If it's still pending tomorrow I'm going to have to make a phone call.


----------



## Danylu

http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=251

That link is the best. Read it. It is work safe if you feel suspicious.


----------



## rx7speed

well if you wouldn't mind I would like to update my entries here as far as gear that I have

for film cameras I ended up picking up a
Canon A1 with 50mm 1.4 and 70-210 f/4. also have a broke 135mm 2.8 jc penny
Canon EOS Rebel XS (film) 28-80
minolta maxxum 7000 with 35-70 f4

for my XSI already listed picked up some new gear there as well.
lenses
135mm 2.8 vivitar
135mm 2.8 cimko
135mm 2.8 carenar
90-230 4.5 lentar
55-230 4.0-5.6 canon IS

flashes
sunpack 383
Sigma DG super 530
cheapo el cheapo sl-300 china made studio flash that I can't complain about too much


----------



## Danylu

Is there CA on the petals or are my eyes playing up or is it blur?

This is a pretty bad photo in terms of how I took it







.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *SlickMeister* 
I agree; although the penalty and whatnot is a bit excessive.

Got a 600 VR comin today..... But alas I have no photo gear sig here.

You betcha there will be pics though..


----------



## dr4gon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Thanks.

50D is still pending on Adorama... ugg...

If it's still pending tomorrow I'm going to have to make a phone call.


Bait and switch!









http://www.photographybay.com/2009/0...rs-get-busted/

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=251

That link is the best. Read it. It is work safe if you feel suspicious.


LOL those are too funny!







I'd love to photoshop a Sony A900 into the mix!

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*











Is there CA on the petals or are my eyes playing up or is it blur?

This is a pretty bad photo in terms of how I took it







.


I don't see any CA, although with a small sample, it's hard to tell, but this isn't a high contrast scene. The bokeh is pretty bad though. What lens was this with?


----------



## nuclearjock

Kinda cute, don't you think.....

This lens is HEAVIER than I thought. 
Some birding this weekend if the weather holds.


















I'm gonna need a bigger mono and tripod!!!!

Sorry for the ugly pics but I'm in a hurry to shoot this beast.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

holy :turd: that is one sexy setup


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie* 
holy :turd: that is one sexy setup









I just took it out for a "spin" came back to drop the wfie off and going back out to shoot more birds. I had no idea how friggn heavy this beast is. It is not something you would carry a long ways without careful preparation, (preferably in the form of a pack mule).

There is NO, I repeat, NO way you could hand hold this thing.

But AF is lightning fast, and the optics like all the Nikkor primes 200 f/2 and up is absolutely stellar.

I'll try and post some pics later. just got a smugmug acct. so more there.

This will definately build some muscles.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dr4gon*


Bait and switch!









http://www.photographybay.com/2009/0...rs-get-busted/


Except for the fact that it's Adorama.










I've ordered all my lenses through them so... yeah...

Anyways, I've been trying to contact them and they've been trying to contact me. I got two phone calls from them this morning, both times I couldn't answer and when I returned the call I couldn't reach them.

I left a message with the order number. I'm going to guess it has something to do with the CC.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dr4gon*


I don't see any CA, although with a small sample, it's hard to tell, but this isn't a high contrast scene. The bokeh is pretty bad though. What lens was this with?


The Nikon 18-55mm Kit Non-VR. Can you define bad bokeh?

A crop of the petals at 38%, if I zoom at 100% the edges of the petals look sort of blue.



100%


----------



## nuclearjock

A couple of first day quickies with the 600 VR. AF is a bit more complicated on this lens with some settings I don't quite understand yet, so I'm gonna read the dreaded manual..

A po'd female bobolink, I think I was close to her nest:










A greater blue heron balancing on one leg.










I think I sweated off a couple of pounds hauling this beast around today. It's already chewed up my 486RC2 (load limit = 13.3 lbs).

Pics shot with a D300.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


486RC2 (load limit = 13.3 lbs).


isnt that pretty much the weight of the lens without the camera?


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie*


isnt that pretty much the weight of the lens without the camera?











Lens is 11.2 lbs
D300 = 1.8 lbs (+ lens = 13.0 lbs)
D3 = 2.7 lbs (+ lens = 13.9 lbs)

I'm gonna have to revamp my entire tripod/monopod/ball head/gimbal or wimberly, easily another $1500-$2k...









This is starting to get expensive


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

gonna have to get rid of your old stuff?


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie*










gonna have to get rid of your old stuff?










My daughter already has plans for it. Unfortunately she'll get the family 100% discount.


----------



## Marin

Lets see... what I did in the last hour...

- Found a new spot to take landscape pics
- Realized I really need a CPL for my 10-22mm
- Liking my 7MDH even more, so easy to switch lens


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
My daughter already has plans for it. Unfortunately she'll get the family 100% discount.

haha, fair enough, but just know you would make a bit more selling it to someone else









anyways, probably going to grab a new tripod for my camping trip, after three years of a lot of use, a few skiing trips and a ton of hiking and biking its starting to show its age, not bad for a 50 dollar tripod


----------



## Marin

Saved this pic after spending some time in Lightroom.


----------



## Mootsfox

Found this today...

Still looking for the rumored AE-1.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Saved this pic after spending some time in Lightroom.

Marin,

Do you have a graduated neutral density filter for this lens???

Looks like a textbook situation where one might work well..


----------



## dr4gon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Except for the fact that it's Adorama.









I've ordered all my lenses through them so... yeah...

Anyways, I've been trying to contact them and they've been trying to contact me. I got two phone calls from them this morning, both times I couldn't answer and when I returned the call I couldn't reach them.

I left a message with the order number. I'm going to guess it has something to do with the CC.


Oh lol, I was kidding. Hope you get it sorted out. I order from Adorama all the time.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


The Nikon 18-55mm Kit Non-VR. Can you define bad bokeh?

A crop of the petals at 38%, if I zoom at 100% the edges of the petals look sort of blue.



100%




It's a kit lens, can't expect too much from it. And yes, those are CAs.

Check this link out to read more about bokeh, good and bad.

http://www.dyxum.com/dforum/tp-bokeh...opic28088.html


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
Marin,

Do you have a graduated neutral density filter for this lens???

Looks like a textbook situation where one might work well..

Probably what I need.


----------



## equetefue

ND filters work great... I have a +.9 kit and does the job well


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *equetefue*


ND filters work great... I have a +.9 kit and does the job well


He's talking about a GND, like this.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
He's talking about a GND, like this.

Foxie has everything!!!

Edit:

I saw your earlier post, I'd say definately for your $$ range, D90 all the way.
It's low light ISO kicks bootie, and it's a dang nice body. I've seen lots of purty stuff posted on the cafe' from 90's.

D300's a big $$ hike, and you really have to sit and ponder the cost/benefit thing. I like my D300 and D3 cause they'er built like tanks and I'm dragging two bodies many times in the rain clanking against one another, what I'm saying is they'er durable.

I was shooting girl's softball today and had the D3/600 on a monopod, with my D300/70-200VR on a strap over my shoulder and it was a real calamity. But if you don't need durability, D90 all the way.


----------



## Marin

Anyways, what GND would be the best for a situation like the pic I previously posted (sticking with B+W)?


----------



## TDN1979

Edited: After reading some of the posts in this thread, I don't think I want to be apart of this group...


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dr4gon* 
It's a kit lens, can't expect too much from it. And yes, those are CAs.

Check this link out to read more about bokeh, good and bad.

http://www.dyxum.com/dforum/tp-bokeh...opic28088.html

Actually, I think it was an issue with *this* particular kit lens. My dad recently picked up an 18-55 VR to replace the 20-70 Sigma he had (it didn't always agree with the D50), and he's had no issues so far with it. Most reviewers (including the notorious Ken Rockwell) say it's not a bad lens. However, I remember hearing that the non-VR 18-55 had many CA issues.

Oh, and @TDN, the reason you're not on the list yet is because GoneTomorrow is out of the country at the moment, so he can't really update the thread


----------



## Marin

I love this lens.


----------



## laboitenoire

Wow, sharp as a tack.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dr4gon* 
It's a kit lens, can't expect too much from it. *And yes, those are CAs.*

Check this link out to read more about bokeh, good and bad.

http://www.dyxum.com/dforum/tp-bokeh...opic28088.html

Thats a bit disappointing if they are CAs because I could see them on the LCD on the back of the D60







.

Thanks for the link.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Anyways, what GND would be the best for a situation like the pic I previously posted (sticking with B+W)?



They're kinda hard to find, but Adorama has them here.


----------



## Marin

Good news, 50D is being shipped now.









Excellent customer service from Adorama too. Called them today and the rep didn't pick up, a few minutes later the rep called me back and told me the body was being shipped. Yay.

EDIT: They probably held the order since I was changing my account information after I ordered it.


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
I love this lens.


What lens is it?


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*


What lens is it?


Canon 10-22mm.


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Canon 10-22mm.


Jeeze that's pricey xD

I'm _thinking_ about getting into photography.. I don't think I'll have the money.


----------



## dr4gon

Orange anyone?


----------



## muffin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


They're kinda hard to find, but Adorama has them here.


http://www.adorama.com/SearchSite/De...&category=2360


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dr4gon*


Orange anyone?




Stop making me wish I had a macro lens.

Jokes, please continue


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *muffin*


http://www.adorama.com/SearchSite/De...&category=2360











The bad thing about the square filters is that you need a holder. The good thing is I think you can adjust the position vertically, whereas the screw in filters rotate like a cp, but don't give vertical adjustment which may comprimise composition.


----------



## dr4gon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Stop making me wish I had a macro lens.

Jokes, please continue










Everyone needs one!


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
The bad thing about the square filters is that you need a holder. The good thing is I think you can adjust the position vertically, whereas the screw in filters rotate like a cp, but don't give vertical adjustment which may comprimise composition.

Not all lenses spin the front element. Out of the four I have, only the 18-55mm VR (kit lens...) does that.

But yeah square filters allow for greater control, and you can use gels which are in a TON of different varieties, and are cheap.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
*Not all lenses spin the front element. Out of the four I have, only the 18-55mm VR (kit lens...) does that.*

But yeah square filters allow for greater control, and you can use gels which are in a TON of different varieties, and are cheap.

i dont think thats what he was getting at, i think he means in a graduated ND filter the graduated part rotates like a polarizer allowing you to adjust it.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie* 
i dont think thats what he was getting at, i think he means in a graduated ND filter the graduated part rotates like a polarizer allowing you to adjust it.

Ah, that would make sense


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie*


i dont think thats what he was getting at, i think he means in a graduated ND filter the graduated part rotates like a polarizer allowing you to adjust it.


Thanks....


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dr4gon* 
Everyone needs one!









The Kit lens will have to do until the store gets some 35mm in stock which really isn't a macro at all. :/


----------



## muffin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


The bad thing about the square filters is that you need a holder. The good thing is I think you can adjust the position vertically, whereas the screw in filters rotate like a cp, but don't give vertical adjustment which may comprimise composition.


The circular type apply the effect over the whole lens, the square drop in type allow you to selectively darken a portion of the image and leave the rest to natural light. The circular type would be fine for a shot where the subject is filling the frame. The drop in filters would work best for a shot like Marin's landscape, where just the sky could be darkened. A set of Lee filters and the mounting gear is on my list of 'to buy', which is longer than my bank balance unfortunately :/


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *muffin* 
The circular type apply the effect over the whole lens, the square drop in type allow you to selectively darken a portion of the image and leave the rest to natural light. The circular type would be fine for a shot where the subject is filling the frame. The drop in filters would work best for a shot like Marin's landscape, where just the sky could be darkened. A set of Lee filters and the mounting gear is on my list of 'to buy', which is longer than my bank balance unfortunately :/


No, there are circular graduated neutral density filters that rotate in the case of an uneven horizon/foreground. Check out Nikon cafe' or FredMiranda for some descriptions.


----------



## Marin

I got the 50D and my XSi feels like a toy compared to it. What I've noticed so far:

- The pentaprism makes a huge difference. The viewfinder is a lot larger and brighter compared to the XSi. 
- Body feels extremely solid and like I said before, makes the XSi feel like a toy in comparison. 
- The size of it is perfect, feels extremely nice to hold and the ergonomics are fantastic 
- AF is better
- A lot larger ISO selection
XSi (100, 200, 400, 800, 1600)
50D (100, 125, 160, 200, 250, 320, 400, 500, 640, 800, 1000, 1250, 1600, 2500, 3200)
- The screen is amazing

Now I need to go pick up a CF card, I forgot to order one


----------



## dr4gon

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
I got the 50D and my XSi feels like a toy compared to it. What I've noticed so far:

- The pentaprism makes a huge difference. The viewfinder is a lot larger and brighter compared to the XSi.
- Body feels extremely solid and like I said before, makes the XSi feel like a toy in comparison.
- The size of it is perfect, feels extremely nice to hold and the ergonomics are fantastic
- AF is better
- A lot larger ISO selection
XSi (100, 200, 400, 800, 1600)
50D (100, 125, 160, 200, 250, 320, 400, 500, 640, 800, 1000, 1250, 1600, 2500, 3200)
- The screen is amazing

Now I need to go pick up a CF card, I forgot to order one











Pretty sure the 50D goes up to 6400 ISO as well, congrats


----------



## equetefue

Congrats my friend !!!! if you think that the xsi feels like a toy you should try a 1D body, it makes my old xxD's feel like toys... lol

Miss the old XXd bodies though. Have fun


----------



## Danylu

So guys I just bought 4 rechargable 2450mAh NiMH AA batteries for the SB-600 I'm getting tomorrow (if all goes well... For the 5th time). Was it a good choice?

I'm not overally sure what the battery specifications are meant to mean either though. Bloody technical crap!


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


So guys I just bought 4 rechargable 2450mAh NiMH AA batteries for the SB-600 I'm getting tomorrow (if all goes well... For the 5th time). Was it a good choice?

I'm not overally sure what the battery specifications are meant to mean either though. Bloody technical crap!


The Eneloops I got can do a full 1/1 flash every 3 seconds. The Duracells I have (2650mAh) can do it every 3.5-4 seconds.

I can continue test flashes with the eneloops at 1/8 power for about 10-15 flashes. At 1/16th I can flash nonstop (and as fast as I can press the button) till the batteries run out.

So yeah, get a set of rechargers, Eneloops if possible.


----------



## equetefue

Eneloops are the best batteries. Also invest on this charger as it will charge the batteries properly and will extend the life of them.

http://www.amazon.com/Crosse-Technol.../dp/B00077AA5Q

That's my setup for my flashes


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


The Eneloops I got can do a full 1/1 flash every 3 seconds. The Duracells I have (2650mAh) can do it every 3.5-4 seconds.

I can continue test flashes with the eneloops at 1/8 power for about 10-15 flashes. At 1/16th I can flash nonstop (and as fast as I can press the button) till the batteries run out.

So yeah, get a set of rechargers, Eneloops if possible.


I got Energizers - are they any good?

The eneloops are rare here, and very expensive at twice the price of my already expensive Energizers.


----------



## riko99

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
I got Energizers - are they any good?

The eneloops are rare here, and very expensive at twice the price of my already expensive Energizers.

You always pay for the best lol... Whats sad is Sanyo did a little speil for us at a tech demonstration about the Eneloop battery and at the time it was impossible to believe them but look at it now they are by far the best rechargables out there.


----------



## equetefue

I had both the energizers and Duracells, and they both died. I guess the battery is important but the charger is critical, specially in your case that you already have energizers.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

I'm back - and it looks like thousands of dollars have been spent on photo gear while I was gone! Congrats to all on the purchases, the only thing I've bought lately is an Extreme IV 4GB CF... Update gear for all who requested, let me know if I overlooked anyone.

I took about 800 pictures in Europe and will post some soon!


----------



## dr4gon

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
I'm back - and it looks like thousands of dollars have been spent on photo gear while I was gone! Congrats to all on the purchases, the only thing I've bought lately is an Extreme IV 4GB CF... Update gear for all who requested, let me know if I overlooked anyone.

I took about 800 pictures in Europe and will post some soon!

Hey! Welcome back! Don't think I bought anything while you were gone!


----------



## SlickMeister

Post some up GoneTomorrow!

I got my camera back from repair today. It was Error 99ing and it was only a firmware issue, which I think they reinstalled somehow? I got back it back today after going to France over the weekend and went to some really amazing looking places, all of which I missed on camera.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *riko99*


You always pay for the best lol... Whats sad is Sanyo did a little speil for us at a tech demonstration about the Eneloop battery and at the time it was impossible to believe them but look at it now they are by far the best rechargables out there.


I would have also had my doubts about the Eneloop seeing that Sanyo makes electronics ranging from microwaves to... everything.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *equetefue*


I had both the energizers and Duracells, and they both died. I guess the battery is important but the charger is critical, specially in your case that you already have energizers.


The charger says its best used with Energizer blah blah blah and happens to be the ones that came with the charger so I think I'm fine here









Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


I'm back - and it looks like thousands of dollars have been spent on photo gear while I was gone! Congrats to all on the purchases, the only thing I've bought lately is an Extreme IV 4GB CF... Update gear for all who requested, let me know if I overlooked anyone.

I took about 800 pictures in Europe and will post some soon!


Nice! I haven't been to Europe


----------



## nuclearjock

Just hit the "checkout" button on a 400 mm F2/8 VR and a TC-17E-II.

Arrives Friday (7/03), pics to follow.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
Just hit the "checkout" button on a 400 mm F2/8 VR and a TC-17E-II.

Arrives Friday (7/03), pics to follow.

Do you still have the 600mm f/4?


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Do you still have the 600mm f/4?

Yes. I'm using that lens basically for wildlife and motorsports.

I'm shooting alot of field sports in which I want blurred backgrounds, and also reasonable performance in night events. Hence the 400 f/2.8.

The 400 will also used for BIF (birds in flight). It's easier to pan than the 400, and will allow faster shutter speeds.

I've used both of these lenses extensively on a rental basis and have researched them to the best of my ability.

The 500 f/4 is planned for Q2 of next year.


----------



## Danylu

Just wondering for those with a FX camera, if you put a FX lens on the camera can you force it to run in DX mode with the 1.5x multiplier?


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


Yes. I'm using that lens basically for wildlife and motorsports.

I'm shooting alot of field sports in which I want blurred backgrounds, and also reasonable performance in night events. Hence the 400 f/2.8.

The 400 will also used for BIF (birds in flight). It's easier to pan than the 400, and will allow faster shutter speeds.

I've used both of these lenses extensively on a rental basis and have researched them to the best of my ability.

The 500 f/4 is planned for Q2 of next year.


just wondering why a 500 f4 if you already have a 600 just as fast?
is the 500 notably smaller?


----------



## Danylu

Ok I got home with my two new items and I'm going to test the 35mm to see if it has focusing issues or if its the program of the photographer, a few test shots out and about today doesn't have anything in sharp focus


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Just wondering for those with a FX camera, if you put a FX lens on the camera can you force it to run in DX mode with the 1.5x multiplier?


The D3 can be shot in a ~5.1MP mode, and a 5:4 ~10MP crop mode. FX is 12.1MP.

The D3X can be shot in a ~10MP mode, and a 5:4 ~20MP crop mode. FX is 24.5MP.

The D700 can be in a ~5.1MP mode, FX is 12.1MP.

Can't tell you much about Canon. Their FX line is the 5D, 5DMkII and the 1Ds, 1DsMkII, 1DsMkIII. The MkIII can be shot in a ~5MP crop mode. Dunno about the others.

So yes is the answer to your question, and speeds usually increase. The D3 in crop mode can do 11FPS (9FPS in FX).


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie*


just wondering why a 500 f4 if you already have a 600 just as fast?
is the 500 notably smaller?


Smaller front element, 500 balances much better and is actually hand holdable for BIF.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
Just wondering for those with a FX camera, if you put a FX lens on the camera can you force it to run in DX mode with the 1.5x multiplier?

Here is your answer from P.61 of the D3 manual. If you set DX Auto to off, then you can choose mode with "choose image area":










With DX Auto = on, it automatically goes into the DX mode when you attach a DX lens.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
Smaller front element, 500 balances much better and is actually hand holdable for *BIF*.

I've never heard anyone use BIF for Built in Focus before and today I see it like 50 times!!!

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
Here is your answer from P.61 of the D3 manual. If you set DX Auto to off, then you can choose mode with "choose image area":










With DX Auto = on, it automatically goes into the DX mode when you attach a DX lens.

Oh cheers - not that I'd be getting a FX anytime soon.


----------



## muffin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *danylu*


i've never heard anyone use bif for built in focus before and today i see it like 50 times!!!


vv









Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*

the 400 will also used for *bif (birds in flight)*. It's easier to pan than the 400, and will allow faster shutter speeds.


----------



## Danylu

^^ Looks like I epic failed that one.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


I've never heard anyone use BIF for Built in Focus before and today I see it like 50 times!!!

Oh cheers - not that I'd be getting a FX anytime soon.


For me BIF represents Birds in Flight.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Everyone, I made a Flickr set for some of my Europe photos, have a look if you want:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/5068864...7620840908484/


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

nice shots Gone


----------



## equetefue

Beautiful !! thanks for sharing


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie*


nice shots Gone











Quote:



Originally Posted by *equetefue*


Beautiful !! thanks for sharing


Thanks!


----------



## Danylu

Nikon 35mm 1.8 @ 1.8









Same lens @ 6.3









Both pictures are at 50%, the focus point is the lemon but it appears the leaf to the bottom left is the sharpest! Am I doing something wrong here? I was about 
half a metre away from the lemon.


----------



## dr4gon

Looks like you have some really really severe front focus if you did set the AF point correctly and didn't move the camera.

*New 9600GSO*

Random shot for today, not too much going on. Can't wait till tomorrow, Kaboom Town in Addison, one of the top 10 places in the nation for fireworks! I actually saw it listed first on MSN .

Today, I also wrote and published my first article (review) at Bright Hub. It's a review of my Logitech MX Revolution. Check it out here, especially if you're looking for a new mouse.

Logitech MX Revolution at Amazon - A steal at $55 for this wireless mouse!


----------



## Danylu

Can you guys tell me how you imbed the flickr picture into the forum whilst allowing it to still link back to the original flickr page?


----------



## muffin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Can you guys tell me how you imbed the flickr picture into the forum whilst allowing it to still link back to the original flickr page?


Put the tags inside [url] tags, like this -

[*url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/0386/3663920570/][*img]http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3379/3663920570_3d87e6e6cd_o.jpg][/img*][/url*]

Remove the stars [IMG alt=""]https://www.overclock.net/images/smilies/smile.gif


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Can you guys tell me how you imbed the flickr picture into the forum whilst allowing it to still link back to the original flickr page?












Hit the quote button and check out their tags 
Bonus points if you caught the hidden tags in this post!


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Nikon 35mm 1.8 @ 1.8









Same lens @ 6.3









Both pictures are at 50%, the focus point is the lemon but it appears the leaf to the bottom left is the sharpest! Am I doing something wrong here? I was about 
half a metre away from the lemon.











Make sure you're focusing in the spot mode, and unlock the spot and move it so that it covers the lemon. If that doesn't focus your lemon, you got probs.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *muffin* 
Put the tags inside [url] tags, like this -

[*url=[URL=http://www.flickr.com/photos/0386/3663920570/%5D%5B*img%5Dhttp://farm4.static.flickr.com/3379/3663920570_3d87e6e6cd_o.jpg%5D%5B/img*%5D%5B/url*]http://www.flickr.com/photos/0386/3663920570/][*img]http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3379/3663920570_3d87e6e6cd_o.jpg][/img*][/url*[/URL]]

Remove the stars [IMG alt=""]https://www.overclock.net/images/smilies/smile.gif






Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 









Hit the quote button and check out their tags 
Bonus points if you caught the hidden tags in this post!


noparse and white. What does noparse mean?

I GET IT I GET IT









Aw can't rep any of you.

I'm about to try this focus tester. I got home, printed it out and was ready to try it and when I turned on the camera I realised that I had left it On for 6 hours which killed the battery and now I'm waiting for it to charge.

I'm not too sure to make out of this chart now that I have done the test. I have a $17 Tripod, I could have stuffed up one of the instructions etc etc. It looks like there is a diagonal band of focus. Imagine a line from -6 on the left to 0 on the right and then another line from 0 on the left to +6 on the right.


Really small focus.


----------



## Mootsfox

Noparse allows you to show tags.









Couldn't tell if you got it or not









That focus is really weird, it shouldn't be like that. You might want to try again, making sure everything is lined up perfectly.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Noparse allows you to show tags.









Couldn't tell if you got it or not









That focus is really weird, it shouldn't be like that. You might want to try again, making sure everything is lined up perfectly.










Argh I keep trying and it really is hard. I've also broken the tripod too now







. I still have no idea if the lens is stuffed or not. Although I have had a look at dofmaster.com and it seems the depth of field at f/1.8 under 2m is about 5cm each side! Maybe it was human error.











Do you guys think they sell this piece of the tripod? Its the one that goes onto the camera base so that it can attach to the tripod quickly - the tripod is a $17 Targus if that helps. Next time I might get a more reliable tripod. I'd prefer to buy a few more lenses first though







.



On a brighter topic can someone go through the photos I've taken in my cheap lightbox and see how I can improve them?


----------



## Mootsfox

Buy a Bogen tripod and head. You can get them for about as much as the 35mm f1.8, and it's worth putting off another new lens


----------



## dudemanppl

So guys, I have a dilemma. I just bought a 70-200mm f/2.8L non-IS and I don't have a Canon body(I'm on my way to selling my D300). But do I get the 40D with the BG-E2N or simply a 1D Mark II, they're both around the same price.

Edit: I don't have a normal zoom right now but I'll get a fifty later.


----------



## Danylu

The best pasta I've ever made











Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Buy a Bogen tripod and head. You can get them for about as much as the 35mm f1.8, and it's worth putting off another new lens










Only problem is that I have to convince my dad that everything purchased is worth it and not a waste of money - I doubt buying a $300 tripod will help me to do that, I even had trouble convincing him that the SB-600 was worth it until the end where I manually set the flash to max power.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


The best pasta I've ever made












Me. Want. Mac and cheese. Now. But I'm way too lazy to make it.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
The best pasta I've ever made











Only problem is that I have to convince my dad that everything purchased is worth it and not a waste of money - I doubt buying a $300 tripod will help me to do that, I even had trouble convincing him that the SB-600 was worth it until the end where I manually set the flash to max power.

Well, flash him again and grab his checkbook. You'll have a few minutes until he'll be able to see again


----------



## dr4gon

Well here's my mac and cheese from a while back.


And this was from last night:


----------



## dr4gon

Great deal on a T1i and a nice photo printer here:

http://www.overclock.net/online-deal...ml#post6605304

Quote for the lazy:

Quote:

$450 printer with this camera makes it a pretty sweet deal.

*Canon EOS Rebel T1i 15.1 MP CMOS Digital SLR Camera with 3-Inch LCD and EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS Lens*

Canon EOS Rebel T1i 15.1 MP CMOS Digital SLR Camera with 3-Inch LCD (Body Only)

*Canon Pixma PRO9000MkII Inkjet Photo Printer*

Make sure all items are purchased on the SAME receipt from AMAZON.COM!!!!


----------



## nuclearjock

GT,

You can sig my 400 f/2.8 VR. It arrived late yesterday.


----------



## Marin

Pics of the lens?


----------



## dr4gon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dr4gon*


Great deal on a T1i and a nice photo printer here:

http://www.overclock.net/online-deal...ml#post6605304

Quote for the lazy:

Quote:



$450 printer with this camera makes it a pretty sweet deal.

*Canon EOS Rebel T1i 15.1 MP CMOS Digital SLR Camera with 3-Inch LCD and EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS Lens*

Canon EOS Rebel T1i 15.1 MP CMOS Digital SLR Camera with 3-Inch LCD (Body Only)

*Canon Pixma PRO9000MkII Inkjet Photo Printer*

Make sure all items are purchased on the SAME receipt from AMAZON.COM!!!!




bumping to next page so if someone is looking for a t1i,....

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


GT,

You can sig my 400 f/2.8 VR. It arrived late yesterday.



Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Pics of the lens?


Yeah, pics or it didn't happen!

So marin, didn't you say you were going somewhere cool yesterday?


----------



## Marin

I'm in Calistoga right now. Took a pretty cool landscape shot.


----------



## riko99

Alright here are 2 shots that i got during our Canada day fireworks that i thought worked well. What do you guys think? I know the trees in the foreground throw it off and they both have some flaring going on but right now they are unedited



















And one of a Dragonfly i got since he was sitting so nice and still on my friends fence again unedited.


----------



## Mootsfox

Took about a thousand shots of fireworks and family over the last two days.

Multiple batteries + 16GB SD card <3

And yeah, pics of that 400mm nuclear


----------



## dr4gon




----------



## xlastshotx

This may be the biggest .jpg file that I have ever had.
26,619 x 2,973 Pixels
Panoramic of my city and the one next to it, during the 4th of July celebrations.

(link to my Flickr picture if you wanna see it bigger) 79.1MP


Heres my favorite non panoramic picture, I was a bit far so I couldn't get any close ups.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Pics of the lens?


Sorry, I was so excited to go out and shoot this puppy that I haven't had time. This is without a doubt the ideal nikkor sports lens, (which is how I pay for these toys). F/2.8 gets you lightning fast shutter speeds to freeze action, helps with low light (i.e. night games), and it blurs those nasty backgrounds. Sharpness edge to edge at f/2.8 is mindboggling.

This lens takes a T17E-II (1.7x tc) beautifully, no loss in sharpness that I can see.

I've got pics from delivery and step by step box opening, I'll post them next week when I get more time. Delivery of one of these lenses is almost like a religious experience....

Sorry 'bout the lousy flash pics, but I'm off to shoot birds this morning.







Just ordered a new foot and Wimberly attachment from Really Right Stuff.

dr4gon, it DID happen...







And I've got the 500 VR planned for December if soccer season is as lucrative as last year.

Off to snap the birdies.


----------



## nuclearjock

Sorry, I don't know what inspired me to look at this guy's website just now, but he's speculating on the release of the 24mp D700x. In his literary work he states:

Quote:

I want a D700X, but for the wrong reasons. The reason I want one is because I'm not spending $8,000 on a D3X, and because I use the extra resolution so I can see lens defects and performance better in the course of reviewing lenses for you.

For my own photos, my 6MP D40 has exactly the resolution I need for anything. High resolution is for nerds.
I've seen lots of pics of this guy's kids on his website and for that 6mp is just dandy. But I wonder if he's ever tried to capture objects far off in the distance and as a result, do some serious cropping to get an acceptable image???

Did he mean to say high resolution is for nerds and wildlife photographers??

I guess this confirms the fact that I'm a nerd...

I'd actually like to see a 24mp DX format, but that's just me...

OK, I'll shut up now.


----------



## Mootsfox

High MP, small sensor is Canon's thing









Ken is right though, all _he_ needs (or is able to use) is a D40.


----------



## nuclearjock

Here's another KR gem:

Quote:



Put the shiny Nikon CT-402 coffin trunk case away until you sell this and get a good bag.


Carry my new $8500 fine optics in a bag?? Don't think so Ken.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


High MP, small sensor is Canon's thing










Currently this is true. I'm simply saying that if Sony or whoever Nikon buys their sensors from could engineer a sensor in such a way as to cram 24mp onto a DX sensor with reasonable signal to noise, I'd have to pony up. Probably will for the D700X if and when. I hope it doesn't have video!!


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


I'm in Calistoga right now. Took a pretty cool landscape shot.


Biked up and down the Silverado trail from Calistoga into Rutherford many times. Stunning part of the country. I envy you Mr. Marin


----------



## dr4gon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


Currently this is true. I'm simply saying that if Sony or whoever Nikon buys their sensors from could engineer a sensor in such a way as to cram 24mp onto a DX sensor with reasonable signal to noise, I'd have to pony up. Probably will for the D700X if and when. I hope it doesn't have video!!


What's wrong with video? I want my video!









Btw, do you have a photography website? I'd love to see what you do with your nice toys!


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


High MP, small sensor is Canon's thing









Ken is right though, all _he_ needs (or is able to use) is a D40.


Canons sensor is barely smaller for crop and the FF (or FX, whatever) are the same size.

Anywho, what Ken is referring to is with the higher MP count you can supposedly see more flaws in the lens and lens shake is more obvious. So far, with my 50D I haven't noticed either. Probably something pixel peepers brought up over time.

Also what Ken isn't taking into account is sensor size, obviously with a large sensor they can cram more pixels onto it. And when compared to a crop sensor, the density can actually be less or on par due to the sensor being large. But whatever, he's spewing the same crap he always does.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


Currently this is true. I'm simply saying that if Sony or whoever Nikon buys their sensors from could engineer a sensor in such a way as to cram 24mp onto a DX sensor with reasonable signal to noise, I'd have to pony up. Probably will for the D700X if and when. I hope it doesn't have video!!


Well the D700 is FF, I'm guessing the D700X will be as well.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


ve got pics from delivery and step by step box opening, I'll post them next week when I get more time. Delivery of one of these lenses is almost like a religious experience....

Sorry 'bout the lousy flash pics, but I'm off to shoot birds this morning.




What do the last 2 switches do?

Oh guys this is too funny to pass up.
http://230grain.com/showthread.php?t=51051


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


What do the last 2 switches do?


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Well the D700 is FF, I'm guessing the D700X will be as well.


I'm sure it will be foxie. Again, hopefully no video nonsense.

Buy a frigg'n video camera for $300 if you need one.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


I'm sure it will be foxie. Again, hopefully no video nonsense.

Buy a frigg'n video camera for $300 if you need one.


I'm going to disagree.









The DoF that can be obtained with prime lenses is amazing. And is a lot cheaper than buying something like a Red One.

This was posted over on POTN since some people find video to be some marketing gimmick: http://www.vimeo.com/4685373


----------



## Danylu

I'm going to the snow tomorrow and only have room to fit one lens with my D60, 18-55 Kit or 35mm 1.8. Please answer quickly









I've already asked Marin and he thinks the 35mm 1.8 cause he loves bokeh.

EDIT: Should I bring the SB-600?

EDIT2: What quick and dirty settings do you guys recommend, just approximate ISO settings etc..? I think I'll be shooting in aperture priority.


----------



## Mootsfox

I'd say the kit.

It does about f/4 at 35mm, and 3.5 at 18mm, so you can get a bit blurred with it.

ISO 100-400 depending on the light. For portraits, 1/60" is fine, for any movement you want a faster shutter speed.

Also, for white balance, you might want to play with it a bit, as snow is not 18% gray


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


I'm going to disagree.









The DoF that can be obtained with prime lenses is amazing. And is a lot cheaper than buying something like a Red One.

This was posted over on POTN since some people find video to be some marketing gimmick: http://www.vimeo.com/4685373


IQ seems very good. but video stutters. I probably should see it from a dvd, but I still don't think it's up to video standards.

Nice DOF though, the stutter is anoying.

Hey, maybe Nikon will improve the quality...


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
I'd say the kit.

It does about f/4 at 35mm, and 3.5 at 18mm, so you can get a bit blurred with it.

ISO 100-400 depending on the light. For portraits, 1/60" is fine, for any movement you want a faster shutter speed.

Also, for white balance, you might want to play with it a bit, as snow is not 18% gray









Hm I'm starting to think I'll bring the 18-55 its cheaper to replace than the 35mm 1.8







. What speeds do you guys think is good for action? 1/200? Starting to see the benefits of a fast zoom now.

EDIT: I use Flickr Uploadr to upload my stuff to flickr and the speed is 40kb/s. I need a program that is faster - any suggestions?


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
IQ seems very good. but video stutters. I probably should see it from a dvd, but I still don't think it's up to video standards.

Nice DOF though, the stutter is anoying.

Hey, maybe Nikon will improve the quality...

The stuttering is probably an issue with Vimeo for you, not the camera. Since I'm getting absolutely no stutter.

Also, Canon recently released new firmware for the 5D MKII that allows complete shutter control.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
I'm going to the snow tomorrow and only have room to fit one lens with my D60, 18-55 Kit or 35mm 1.8. Please answer quickly









I've already asked Marin and he thinks the 35mm 1.8 cause he loves bokeh.

EDIT: Should I bring the SB-600?

EDIT2: What quick and dirty settings do you guys recommend, just approximate ISO settings etc..? I think I'll be shooting in aperture priority.


Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
Hm I'm starting to think I'll bring the 18-55 its cheaper to replace than the 35mm 1.8







. What speeds do you guys think is good for action? 1/200? Starting to see the benefits of a fast zoom now.

EDIT: I use Flickr Uploadr to upload my stuff to flickr and the speed is 40kb/s. I need a program that is faster - any suggestions?

I would bring the prime, but that's me. My 50mm and my 10-22mm is all I ever carry these days and depending on the situation I'll use just the 50 all day. Can't beat the sharpness and speed of a prime.

And I don't think it's the fault of the Flickr Uploadr, since I'm uploading at 2-300 kb/s. How fast is it when you use the web uploader?


----------



## Rayce185

Repping with a Fujifilm S100fs Semi here


----------



## Zeva

Yay! I got my camera back! lol
Camera
We have examined the product according to your request and it was found that the adjustment of the AF assembly was incorrect the auto focus did not operate properly. Electrical adjustments were carried out on the AF assembly. Repair battery door that caused power issue. Other electrical adjustment and inspection and cleaning were carried out
Lens
We have examined the product according to your request and it was found that the adjustment of the lens assembly was incorrect the focus did not operate properly the lens assembly was reprogrammed other electrical adjustments inspection and cleaning and mechanical adjustments were carried out

Woah thats quite a bit of stuff! good thing i got in the day before my warrenty ends! lol


----------



## Danylu

What do you guys think?

Copied Description from Flickr:
-------------------------------------------------------------
Beautiful Full Moon Tonight. Took a total of 10 shots with the 18-55 Non VR Kit and the 35mm 1.8 and kept this one because it kept most detail of the moon and had the least CAs. Spot Metering.

Note 1: Get a telephoto
Note 2: Fix Tripod/Get New One.
-------------------------------------------------------------


----------



## Rayce185

Nice!

I made a similar picture a month ago:










Full 400mm zoom, but I cut the moon out of the 100% size picture with PS CS4









Also made this one on the same evening:


----------



## FaLLeNAn9eL

Can I join? Here's my modest list.

FaLLeNAn9eL - Canon 400D (Rebel XTi)
Canon BG-E3 Battery Grip w/ 2 NLB-2H Batteries
Canon EP-EX15 Eyepiece Extender
Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6
Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II
Canon Wired Remote
Hoya UV Filter
Hoya Multicoat Polarizer


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
What do you guys think?

Copied Description from Flickr:
-------------------------------------------------------------
Beautiful Full Moon Tonight. Took a total of 10 shots with the 18-55 Non VR Kit and the 35mm 1.8 and kept this one because it kept most detail of the moon and had the least CAs. Spot Metering.

Note 1: Get a telephoto
Note 2: Fix Tripod/Get New One.
-------------------------------------------------------------


You could definitely use some more reach, but you've already stated that









Does anybody here actually do astro photography? I've been meaning to get into it, but I don't have the budget to get both a good camera body and a good scope to go with it (along with the T-ring, the equatorial mount...)


----------



## Danylu

Thanks to Gone posting his holiday photos on Flickr, I decided to do the same except I picked 300 of the 8000 I took. These photos are ones that I thought were unique in one way or another.









http://www.flickr.com/photos/3985050...7620751011171/

I think my favourite photo in terms of technique might have been this one which isn't exactly saying a lot


----------



## Unknownm

Here are some shots from camping using my Nikon Coolpix S210. flash was off So the shutter speed sucked. I'm not a camera person, my parents bought me this camera for X-mas. Anyways I Resized the pictures to 1280x960 from 3264x2448


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Thanks to Gone posting his holiday photos on Flickr, I decided to do the same except I picked 300 of the 8000 I took. These photos are ones that I thought were unique in one way or another.









http://www.flickr.com/photos/3985050...7620751011171/

I think my favourite photo in terms of technique might have been this one which isn't exactly saying a lot










Great shot! Up the saturation though, straight exports from RAW always lose the rich original color.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Great shot! Up the saturation though, straight exports from RAW always lose the rich original color.


Hm I never knew that - thanks







.

Straight output to RAW via Nikon ViewNX has the same contrast as PhotoShop CS4 at +60 Contrast.


----------



## dr4gon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Thanks to Gone posting his holiday photos on Flickr, I decided to do the same except I picked 300 of the 8000 I took. These photos are ones that I thought were unique in one way or another.









http://www.flickr.com/photos/3985050...7620751011171/

I think my favourite photo in terms of technique might have been this one which isn't exactly saying a lot











I think the saturation is fine. It needs a bit more contrast. Nice USA set, that would take me FOREVVVVERERR to go through so many pictures. I actually hate doing that!


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dr4gon*


I think the saturation is fine. It needs a bit more contrast. Nice USA set, that would take me FOREVVVVERERR to go through so many pictures. I actually hate doing that!


I started to cut corners at the end, it was pretty tedious but I think it was worth it. I get to have the luxury of smart people tell me how to make the photos better


----------



## Cpt.Hawkins

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Thanks to Gone posting his holiday photos on Flickr, I decided to do the same except I picked 300 of the 8000 I took. These photos are ones that I thought were unique in one way or another.









http://www.flickr.com/photos/3985050...7620751011171/

I think my favourite photo in terms of technique might have been this one which isn't exactly saying a lot











I think that would be a good candidate for HDR, especially with those clouds which are burnt in the original shot. Only if you're not one of those anti-HDR people though!


----------



## Mootsfox

How can anyone be against a quality HDR, one that is used for it's real purpose and not to turn the photo into a paint?

Also, playing with my new cord and softbox




















Spoiler: Huge image held within!















Done with my project!

Materials









Setting to keystone









Finished boxes (smaller one is for the camera hot shoe)









All together modded









Now I have an adjustable length flash cord. If I need 50ft, all I need is a longer patch cable.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Cpt.Hawkins*


I think that would be a good candidate for *HDR*, especially with those clouds which are burnt in the original shot. Only if you're not one of those anti-HDR people though!










Should learn to do one of those one day.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


How can anyone be against a quality HDR, one that is used for it's real purpose and not to turn the photo into a paint?

Also, playing with my new cord and softbox



























Done with my project!

Materials









Setting to keystone









Finished boxes (smaller one is for the camera hot shoe)









All together modded









Now I have an adjustable length flash cord. If I need 50ft, all I need is a longer patch cable.


What is the tent thing on the flash?

I was looking to buy a cable for my SB-600 too because my lightbox isn't tall enough to let me bounce the light well when I'm working with larger objects but I'm not sure, wireless looks tempting right now (The cheap $30 ones from Hong Kong, not the SU-800).


----------



## Rayce185

I'd guess the paper on the flash softens it. I always hold a piece of paper infront of my flash when I don't want it to be too intensive, like when taking pictures of PCB's or chips when you need to read the etching or something.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dr4gon* 
I think the saturation is fine. It needs a bit more contrast. Nice USA set, that would take me FOREVVVVERERR to go through so many pictures. I actually hate doing that!

Agreed, more contrast will do the trick. Composition is very good, although personally I would crop out the building at the bottom.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
How can anyone be against a quality HDR, one that is used for it's real purpose and not to turn the photo into a paint?

Also, playing with my new cord and softbox









Done with my project!

Now I have an adjustable length flash cord. If I need 50ft, all I need is a longer patch cable.

This looks great! Did you use a tutorial? How well does it work?

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
Should learn to do one of those one day.

What is the tent thing on the flash?

I was looking to buy a cable for my SB-600 too because my lightbox isn't tall enough to let me bounce the light well when I'm working with larger objects but I'm not sure, wireless looks tempting right now (The cheap $30 ones from Hong Kong, not the SU-800).

That's a soft box, it diffuses the flash.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
This looks great! Did you use a tutorial? How well does it work?

I've seen the tutorials for them, but didn't use one during. It's very simple. Cut cord, set into keystone, pop together, use. So far, so good, can't tell a difference of lag or anything of the sort. Everything still works!

I just made a 20ft patch cable, here's a quick photo shoot of a fox that lives on my desk:



















The ability to add light wherever you want is something I'm not used to, and it's going to take me awhile to figure it out. Lots of fun though


----------



## Danylu

^ Very smart with the network cable


----------



## Inuzukakiba2

I have to wait to get home to find the model of my camera, I'm in Rapid City on a medical internship atm. I believe it was 8 mp and probably about $100-$150.

This was taken at my cousin's graduation from the Airforce Academy. The shadows of the jets are from the Thunderbirds, the Airforce equivalent of the Navy's Blue Angels. The small objects in the air are the caps of the graduating cadets.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Inuzukakiba2*


I have to wait to get home to find the model of my camera, I'm in Rapid City on a medical internship atm. I believe it was 8 mp and probably about $100-$150.

This was taken at my cousin's graduation from the Airforce Academy. The shadows of the jets are from the Thunderbirds, the Airforce equivalent of the Navy's Blue Angels. The small objects in the air are the caps of the graduating cadets.


Checked the EXIF of your image - you used a Canon PowerShot SD850 IS.


----------



## Gunfire

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Inuzukakiba2*


I have to wait to get home to find the model of my camera, I'm in Rapid City on a medical internship atm. I believe it was 8 mp and probably about $100-$150.

This was taken at my cousin's graduation from the Airforce Academy. The shadows of the jets are from the Thunderbirds, the Airforce equivalent of the Navy's Blue Angels. The small objects in the air are the caps of the graduating cadets.

-Image-


Wow that's an amazing shot, but I'm more of a Navy guy


----------



## Marin

Live View on the 50D is amazing. It's so easy getting accurate manual focus with it.


----------



## Mootsfox

Went out to shoot and smoke with some friends


















Gear included a 50D, XSi, XTi, D60, more Canon lenses than I can name (a few Ls and kits), my glass, multiple flashes, packs, a Manfrotto monopod, 055XPROB, 190XPROB two 488RC2 heads, half a dozen plates, and etc.


----------



## Danylu

Someone tell me where they got the idea for this please?


----------



## Oscuro

Carshow on the 1st, it is HARD to get anything good going when you're surrounded by 300 idiots who can't figure out that the dude with the camera is more important than them!









All joking asside, tiny show, too many people. More cars this year however.


----------



## equetefue

Nice.... you need a Circular Polarizer though to get rid of reflections


----------



## nuclearjock

I'm inclined to think that the reflections are deliberatly artistique'...


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
Someone tell me where they got the idea for this please?

Probably the same place that Taco Bell came up with the idea of a hard shelled taco wrapped in a layer of cheese and a soft taco.

I've never seen that in Mexico!! When I ask the locals about it they just laugh.


----------



## Oscuro

Quote:



Originally Posted by *equetefue*


Nice.... you need a Circular Polarizer though to get rid of reflections


Do, but it knocks out a lot of light I find. It's a Kenko Pro-1 Digital Wideband CPL. Can't find out exactly how much light it knocks out.


----------



## tkl.hui

Hey guys, haven't posted in a while. Here's one from my backyard. I was relaxing in my backyard when I saw this little guy hiding in the shadow. He slowly popped his head out thought so I was able to get half his body.


----------



## riko99

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Oscuro*


Carshow on the 1st, it is HARD to get anything good going when you're surrounded by 300 idiots who can't figure out that the dude with the camera is more important than them!









All joking asside, tiny show, too many people. More cars this year however.










Nice Corvette ... is it a 60? if so where was this car show? I cant wait until the 60 that my grandpa owns get's handed down to me...


----------



## Danylu

Found this which appears to be user input information about the shutter life of the D60 shutter. Many people are saying that the shutter dies on them at about 16,000 - is that to be believed? I do have warranty left becuase the D60 is 6 months old.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Found this which appears to be user input information about the shutter life of the D60 shutter. Many people are saying that the shutter dies on them at about 16,000 - is that to be believed? I do have warranty left becuase the D60 is 6 months old.


Seems hard to believe that it's that low. There aren't enough submissions for that figure to be accurate I think.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Found this which appears to be user input information about the shutter life of the D60 shutter. Many people are saying that the shutter dies on them at about 16,000 - is that to be believed? I do have warranty left becuase the D60 is 6 months old.


That seems REAL hard to believe...


----------



## dr4gon

Guys, be sure to vote in our latest contest!

http://www.overclock.net/photography...-jun-29-a.html


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Found this which appears to be user input information about the shutter life of the D60 shutter. Many people are saying that the shutter dies on them at about 16,000 - is that to be believed? I do have warranty left becuase the D60 is 6 months old.


I'm already at 7k. We'll find out I guess.


----------



## Oscuro

Quote:



Originally Posted by *riko99*


Nice Corvette ... is it a 60? if so where was this car show? I cant wait until the 60 that my grandpa owns get's handed down to me...


No idea of the year really, but it was In Victoria.


----------



## Danylu

Just wanted to make sure about the shutter though, I think the MTBF for the shutter is 100,000 according to Nikon or thereabouts.


----------



## Mootsfox

I had a visitor earlier today.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

LOL, my sister had to remove all her cat doors because raccoons would raid the house.


----------



## Danylu

Does anyone know how to change the time zone for Flickr? I've gone through google and all the options and I still can't seem to find it, all my pictures are date stamped in GMT which is wrong







.


----------



## SlickMeister

It's in your profile. http://www.flickr.com/profile_edit.gne?from=personal


----------



## Danylu

^ That worked, + rep.

My photo for today.


----------



## nuclearjock

Almost completely submerged in a glass smooth pond at sunset.
D300/400mm f/2.8 VR + nikon 1.7x tc


----------



## Marin

I love my Sigma 30mm f/1.4. Still my most used lens since I got it.



And no, there isn't a hidden meaning to this picture. So that means I'm not looking to attend Princeton...


----------



## bentleya

First new lens for my 450D (Apart from Kit Lens) Tamron 90mm Macro SP DI F2.8



















First real test image, really pleased. now got to try my luck on proper Macro Stuff.

Next lens is either wide or replacement from kit then goes abit higher.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *bentleya* 
First new lens for my 450D (Apart from Kit Lens) Tamron 90mm Macro SP DI F2.8

First real test image, really pleased. now got to try my luck on proper Macro Stuff.

Next lens is either wide or replacement from kit then goes abit higher.

That's a pretty damn good macro lens actually, nice going! Manual focus and tripods are a must for macro shooting IMO, esp. when you're at 90mm, very hard to hand hold in anything except bright light.


----------



## nuclearjock

D3/400mm f/2.8 + nikon 1.7 tc wide open (f/4.8).
Edge to edge sharpness wide open is mind boggling.

From .nef:


----------



## nuclearjock

Same setup:

I bet this hurts....


----------



## riko99

ouch maybe it should learn to stay off the road !


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *bentleya* 
First new lens for my 450D (Apart from Kit Lens) Tamron 90mm Macro SP DI F2.8



















First real test image, really pleased. now got to try my luck on proper Macro Stuff.

Next lens is either wide or replacement from kit then goes abit higher.


What do you think of the autofocus compared to your kit lens?


----------



## bentleya

@*Danylu* - Slight bit nosier, but very good, i will be using auto to get me there then push/pull the manuel focus ring to fine tune, so it's great for that. But TBH never had much of a problem with the kit lens and auto focussing.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...d.php?t=723685

So tempted to buy this, but I don't need to spend the money! Someone buy it before I do, it's a nice lens.


----------



## dr4gon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...d.php?t=723685

So tempted to buy this, but I don't need to spend the money! Someone buy it before I do, it's a nice lens.


very nice price! (I'm sorry, I'm not helping).


----------



## nuclearjock

GT, sold my 600 VR, you can scratch it from my list.

Edit: please add Nikkor TC-14E II, TC-17E II, Wimberley WH-200 gimbal.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
GT, sold my 600 VR, you can scratch it from my list.

How the hell did that happen?


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dudemanppl* 
How the hell did that happen?

I use my 400 f/2.8 VR for ALL of my sports work which is my revenue engine for photographic equipment.

I was in a unique position to grab the 600 when someone who ordered it couldn't come up with the money so it was offered to me and I took it.

In the meantime, I bought the 400 f2/8 specifically for sports and immediately fell in love with it. It's lighter, f/2.8 blurs backgrounds, ups shutter speeds, and makes night sports a breeze. What I didn't know is how well it takes nikon 1.4 and 1.7 tc's. I have to say honestly that there is no loss of IQ with either the 1.4 or 1.7. I begin to see softness with the 2.0. And BTW, Nikkor tc's are critical with these super tele's. Kenko tc's look like crap.

So now I've got 680mm f/4.8 with the 1.7 tc and with my D300, that's 1020mm @f/4.8. That's all I need for anything I'm currently doing including small birds.

F/2.8 really is a big deal at 400mm, especially when edge to edge shrpness is as mind boggling as it is. I should have purchased this lens first.

I sold the 600 for $10k, (which is alot of money to have tied up in something that isn't optimized for what I do), so I found it a new home.

I will get a 500mm f/4 when the rebates roll around. The 500 is lighter and is less front heavy than the 400 therefore it pans better for birds in flight. I'll pick it up when the rebates come around again.

Right now though the 400 is all I need for my sports work. It's the most awesome lens I've used to date.


----------



## dr4gon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


I use my 400 f/2.8 VR for ALL of my sports work which is my revenue engine for photographic equipment.

I was in a unique position to grab the 600 when someone who ordered it couldn't come up with the money so it was offered to me and I took it.

In the meantime, I bought the 400 f2/8 specifically for sports and immediately fell in love with it. It's lighter, f/2.8 blurs backgrounds, ups shutter speeds, and makes night sports a breeze. What I didn't know is how well it takes nikon 1.4 and 1.7 tc's. I have to say honestly that there is no loss of IQ with either the 1.4 or 1.7. I begin to see softness with the 2.0. And BTW, Nikkor tc's are critical with these super tele's. Kenko tc's look like crap.

So now I've got 680mm f/4.8 with the 1.7 tc and with my D300, that's 1020mm @f/4.8. That's all I need for anything I'm currently doing including small birds.

F/2.8 really is a big deal at 400mm, especially when edge to edge shrpness is as mind boggling as it is. I should have purchased this lens first.

I sold the 600 for $10k, (which is alot of money to have tied up in something that isn't optimized for what I do), so I found it a new home.

I will get a 500mm f/4 when the rebates roll around. The 500 is lighter and is less front heavy than the 400 therefore it pans better for birds in flight. I'll pick it up when the rebates come around again.

Right now though the 400 is all I need for my sports work. It's the most awesome lens I've used to date.



I can only imagine..... lol

I've asked this once before, but I guess you didn't see it. Do you have a photgraphy website where we can see your professional work?


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dr4gon*


I can only imagine..... lol

I've asked this once before, but I guess you didn't see it. Do you have a photgraphy website where we can see your professional work?










I do, there's material there for parents of the kids participating in the events that I've shot. For now, it's limited to their access since these are young kids and their parents have expressed their wishes to keep them private. I've agreed to this concept since they're the only ones buying pictures.

I'll be shooting private soccer and US college football this fall, those pics will be in a public section of my website along with some nature and landscapes.

Here's one shot that a parent who's a friend of mine ok'd:










This shot was taken with the D3 and the 600 VR. Note the busy background due to f/4. The 400 f/2.8 would have really shined here.

As soon as I make some progress on the public side of the website, I'll post a link in my sig. For now I'm concentrating on kid's sports 'cause that's what's paying for all this fancy equipment.


----------



## Danylu

Wow i am a bit surprised that you found a buyer so quickly.


----------



## honk_honk

pentax k10d
18-55 mm Pentax DA
55-300 mm Pentax DA


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Wow i am a bit surprised that you found a buyer so quickly.


I knew several people who were on waiting lists for the 600.

It actually only took one phone call.


----------



## Mootsfox

Nuclear, if you don't mind me asking, how much do you sell each shot for?


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Nuclear, if you don't mind me asking, how much do you sell each shot for?

Not at all Foxie, I'm not greedy. That's why I sell so many








It's a smugmug pro account.

4x6's 4.99
5x7's 5.99
8x10's 7.99

I don't offer anything larger than 8x10 through SM cause it's more cost effective for me to get them printed through Costco. I have the customer contact me directly, I send them a test crop (for anything largar than 8x10) and if it's ok, I have Costco print it and send it to them.

I sell the original digital image for 15.00.

Edit:

Wallets (4x4) 5.99


----------



## riko99

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
Not at all Foxie, I'm not greedy. That's why I sell so many








It's a smugmug pro account.

4x6's 4.99
5x7's 5.99
8x10's 7.99

I don't offer anything larger than 8x10 through SM cause it's more cost effective for me to get them printed through Costco. I have the customer contact me directly, I send them a test crop (for anything largar than 8x10) and if it's ok, I have Costco print it and send it to them.

I sell the original digital image for 15.00.

Edit:

Wallets (4x4) 5.99

lol i love Costco... And not because i work in the Electronics department but because of the great prices... oh and the fact that i learn stuff about photo printing cause the manager loves me


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


I knew several people who were on waiting lists for the 600.

It actually only took one phone call.


So I guess the long telephotos are in high demand then.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


So I guess the long telephotos are in high demand then.


I think it's a case of low supply when it comes to the 600 in particular.

The 400 and 500's are around if you look for them but waiting lists are still in the 8 month range. Production of these lenses is slow and small in quantity.


----------



## bentleya

Is everyone cool with 1024 x 683? or you want me to drop to 500 x 333?


----------



## muffin

Following Dr4gon's wisdom that everyone should own a macro lens I would like to get one, and I think I have it down to three choices:

Sigma 70mm f2.8 EX DG Macro for Â£349.95

OR

Sigma 105mm f2.8 EX DG Macro for Â£352.95

OR stretching the money ceiling a little further, is it worth to shell out for a proper Nikon lens...

Nikon 60mm F2.8G ED AF-S for Â£387 @ Park Cameras or Â£385 @ Mifsuds

I would imagine the Nikon to be better quality, but is it worth losing the focal length of the Sigma's? In a current DSLR magazine they say for macro you should look for 100mm+ for insects so as not to get too close to them. People with experience, speak up









Quote:



Originally Posted by *bentleya*

Is everyone cool with 1024 x 683? or you want me to drop to 500 x 333?










The bigger the better as far as I'm concerned. 1000 pixels on the long edge should be the minimum, anything lower and the poster should be taken out and shot. Your shot is another example of why I want need a macro lens


----------



## Mootsfox

If you don't have a normal lens already, the Nikkor will double as a portrait lens.


----------



## nuclearjock

First gadget from RRS. Exceptionally well made, 75 lb. capacity!!
This is really an awesome head. Also mounts on my Wimberly to provide lateral movement (which I'll never use).
On the monopod tilts front to back only, no side to side motion which is exactly what I prefer for sports. Can be adjusted to allow desired amount of force required to tilt lens, and it STAYS.. No creeping or loosening.

Very high quality product.



















Just enough capacity to hold my 50mm f/1.4..


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *bentleya*











Is everyone cool with 1024 x 683? or you want me to drop to 500 x 333?










Yeah, read the OP, it's cool so long as no side is more than 1024 pixels (plus or minus a few).

Quote:



Originally Posted by *muffin*


Following Dr4gon's wisdom that everyone should own a macro lens I would like to get one, and I think I have it down to three choices:

Sigma 70mm f2.8 EX DG Macro for Â£349.95

OR

Sigma 105mm f2.8 EX DG Macro for Â£352.95

OR stretching the money ceiling a little further, is it worth to shell out for a proper Nikon lens...

Nikon 60mm F2.8G ED AF-S for Â£387 @ Park Cameras or Â£385 @ Mifsuds

I would imagine the Nikon to be better quality, but is it worth losing the focal length of the Sigma's? In a current DSLR magazine they say for macro you should look for 100mm+ for insects so as not to get too close to them. People with experience, speak up









The bigger the better as far as I'm concerned. 1000 pixels on the long edge should be the minimum, anything lower and the poster should be taken out and shot. Your shot is another example of why I want need a macro lens










All these lenses will give you 1:1 magnification, so it's a question of how much working distance you want. The longer the focal length, the further you can be from your subject at 1:1. Personally I use a 60mm and don't find the working distance a problem. Also, the longer the focal length of a macro lens, the more hand shake there will be.

Nevertheless, go for the Nikon, you won't have to think twice about outstanding image quality and most importantly, reliability (Sigma has some QC issues).

One other lens you might consider is the Tamron 90mm f/2.8 Di Macro 1:1 SP AF, very good IQ. However the Nikon still trumps all and auto focuses much faster than the Tamron or Sigma lenses.

And lastly, as Moots says it makes for a good prime/portrait lens. For which reason having a shorter focal length like 60mm would make it more versatile.

In short, the Nikon hands down


----------



## dr4gon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


Not at all Foxie, I'm not greedy. That's why I sell so many








It's a smugmug pro account.

4x6's 4.99
5x7's 5.99
8x10's 7.99

I don't offer anything larger than 8x10 through SM cause it's more cost effective for me to get them printed through Costco. I have the customer contact me directly, I send them a test crop (for anything largar than 8x10) and if it's ok, I have Costco print it and send it to them.

I sell the original digital image for 15.00.

Edit:

Wallets (4x4) 5.99


Thanks, looking forward to the site!

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Yeah, read the OP, it's cool so long as no side is more than 1024 pixels (plus or minus a few).

All these lenses will give you 1:1 magnification, so it's a question of how much working distance you want. The longer the focal length, the further you can be from your subject at 1:1. Personally I use a 60mm and don't find the working distance a problem. Also, the longer the focal length of a macro lens, the more hand shake there will be.

Nevertheless, go for the Nikon, you won't have to think twice about outstanding image quality and most importantly, reliability (Sigma has some QC issues).

One other lens you might consider is the Tamron 90mm f/2.8 Di Macro 1:1 SP AF, very good IQ. However the Nikon still trumps all and auto focuses much faster than the Tamron or Sigma lenses.

And lastly, as Moots says it makes for a good prime/portrait lens. For which reason having a shorter focal length like 60mm would make it more versatile.

In short, the Nikon hands down










I would choose the Nikon, but as GT said, it depends no your subject and the working distance you want.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
I think it's a case of low supply when it comes to the 600 in particular.

The 400 and 500's are around if you look for them *but waiting lists are still in the 8 month range.* Production of these lenses is slow and small in quantity.

Ouch no wonder they were quick to snap up your offer.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *bentleya* 












Is everyone cool with 1024 x 683? or you want me to drop to 500 x 333?









I think 1000 is a controllable size









Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
First gadget from RRS. Exceptionally well made, 75 lb. capacity!!
This is really an awesome head. Also mounts on my Wimberly to provide lateral movement (which I'll never use).
On the monopod tilts front to back only, no side to side motion which is exactly what I prefer for sports. Can be adjusted to allow desired amount of force required to tilt lens, and it STAYS.. No creeping or loosening.

Very high quality product.



















Just enough capacity to hold my 50mm f/1.4..









50 1.4 - Nice.

Hey Muffin did you have a look at the Tamron 60mm f/2? I think it seems unique for what it is. It also depresses me that most of the 3rd party macros in Australia are at the same price as the genuine ones (Nikon 60mm, Tamron 90mm, Sigma 105mm)


----------



## muffin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


If you don't have a normal lens already, the Nikkor will double as a portrait lens.



Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


All these lenses will give you 1:1 magnification, so it's a question of how much working distance you want. The longer the focal length, the further you can be from your subject at 1:1. Personally I use a 60mm and don't find the working distance a problem. Also, the longer the focal length of a macro lens, the more hand shake there will be.

Nevertheless, go for the Nikon, you won't have to think twice about outstanding image quality and most importantly, reliability (Sigma has some QC issues).

One other lens you might consider is the Tamron 90mm f/2.8 Di Macro 1:1 SP AF, very good IQ. However the Nikon still trumps all and auto focuses much faster than the Tamron or Sigma lenses.

And lastly, as Moots says it makes for a good prime/portrait lens. For which reason having a shorter focal length like 60mm would make it more versatile.

In short, the Nikon hands down











Quote:



Originally Posted by *dr4gon*


I would choose the Nikon, but as GT said, it depends no your subject and the working distance you want.










Thanks guys







I'd rather have the Nikon for image/build quality reasons. Not too concerned about portraiture, I already have a 50mm f1.8 and I'm not bothered with taking pictures of people anyway so I don't do it very often.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Hey Muffin did you have a look at the Tamron 60mm f/2? I think it seems unique for what it is. It also depresses me that most of the 3rd party macros in Australia are at the same price as the genuine ones (Nikon 60mm, Tamron 90mm, Sigma 105mm)


The Tamron seems to be more expensive than the Nikon 60mm over here :/


----------



## bentleya




----------



## bentleya




----------



## ace8uk

Quote:



Originally Posted by *muffin*


Following Dr4gon's wisdom that everyone should own a macro lens I would like to get one, and I think I have it down to three choices:

Sigma 70mm f2.8 EX DG Macro for Â£349.95

OR

Sigma 105mm f2.8 EX DG Macro for Â£352.95

OR stretching the money ceiling a little further, is it worth to shell out for a proper Nikon lens...

Nikon 60mm F2.8G ED AF-S for Â£387 @ Park Cameras or Â£385 @ Mifsuds

I would imagine the Nikon to be better quality, but is it worth losing the focal length of the Sigma's? In a current DSLR magazine they say for macro you should look for 100mm+ for insects so as not to get too close to them. People with experience, speak up









The bigger the better as far as I'm concerned. 1000 pixels on the long edge should be the minimum, anything lower and the poster should be taken out and shot. Your shot is another example of why I want need a macro lens











To my surprise, I found that Jessops was the cheapest place to buy the Nikon 60mm f2.8 at Â£349.99 I bought it a few months ago and have been very pleased with the results.

As an example, I used this lens to take this water droplet photo on my Nikon D3:


----------



## muffin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ace8uk*


To my surprise, I found that Jessops was the cheapest place to buy the Nikon 60mm f2.8 at Â£349.99 I bought it a few months ago and have been very pleased with the results.

As an example, I used this lens to take this water droplet photo on my Nikon D3:


That's a different lens to the one I linked - it's the older model. The one I'm looking at is the new version







. Nice shot though, looks like there's a fire under the surface


----------



## ace8uk

Quote:



Originally Posted by *muffin*


That's a different lens to the one I linked - it's the older model. The one I'm looking at is the new version







. Nice shot though, looks like there's a fire under the surface










I know it's the older model, but my uncle is into photography a lot and said that he preffered the older 60mm to the new one. And yeah, it was a candle in the reflection of the water


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *ace8uk* 
I know it's the older model, but my uncle is into photography a lot and said that he preffered the older 60mm to the new one. And yeah, it was a candle in the reflection of the water









I have to disagree on that one. I don't doubt that the older 60mm Micro is still a high quality lens, but it doesn't compare to the newer one. It's worlds sharper wide open, has the faster ultra sonic focus rings and the ED elements (less CA). It's a no brainer.

Check out the SLR Gear reviews:

http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showp...duct/98/cat/12 (old 60mm)

http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showp...ct/1175/cat/12 (newer 60mm)


----------



## dr4gon

Yeah, if at all possible, always get the newer lens variations. They have updated multi-coatings, improved AF speeds, better optics (newer design, potentially), and for Nikon they come updated with VR!


----------



## grishkathefool

*Digital*
Pentax istDS
Pentax 18mm - 55mm, Auto Focus
Pentax 35mm Manual
Pentax 35mm - 105mm Manual
Pentax 50mm Manual
Sunpak auto 422 Flashpak (from about 1984)
-----------------------------------
Canon Poweshot A20

--------------------------------
*FILM*
Pentax P3
this body uses the same lenses as my Digital SLR.


----------



## ace8uk

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


I have to disagree on that one. I don't doubt that the older 60mm Micro is still a high quality lens, but it doesn't compare to the newer one. It's worlds sharper wide open, has the faster ultra sonic focus rings and the ED elements (less CA). It's a no brainer.

Check out the SLR Gear reviews:

http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showp...duct/98/cat/12 (old 60mm)

http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showp...ct/1175/cat/12 (newer 60mm)


I'm sure the newer lens is better, but for me it wasn't worth the premium.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *grishkathefool*


*Digital*
Pentax istDS
Pentax 18mm - 55mm, Auto Focus
Pentax 35mm Manual
Pentax 35mm - 105mm Manual
Pentax 50mm Manual
Sunpak auto 422 Flashpak (from about 1984)
-----------------------------------
Canon Poweshot A20

--------------------------------
*FILM*
Pentax P3
this body uses the same lenses as my Digital SLR.


Ah, an *ist user, cool! I think you're the only other Kentuckian in the club too.


----------



## grishkathefool

you and me, baby, you and me...

btw, I have had my P3 since about 1985.


----------



## nuclearjock

D300 400 f/2.8 TC-17E II
Pwns most sports venues naked, and does a nice job with the small birdies with the 1.7 tc:

1.









2.









3.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

fantastic shots nuclear!


----------



## Danylu

Nice ones Nuke!

I tried about 5 minutes of panning and wow I was astonished by the result, I now want to experiment further


----------



## SlickMeister

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Nice ones Nuke!

I tried about 5 minutes of panning and wow I was astonished by the result, I now want to experiment further










I tried panning once and I couldn't do it. Should really try it again as some of the results look phenomenal. I'm hoping to get a Sigma 17-70mm soon with trading in an old lens with Sigma to get it brand new at a used price direct from them. I need something wider as I would like to do landscape and architecture HDR and I've been whoring the 50mm which is just not wide enough although this lens has provided some amazing shots for me. I really wanted the Tamron 17-50mm 2.8 but it's going to be too costly I think.

Want to get a battery grip as well after trying a 400D w/ BG-E3 the other day.


----------



## Danylu

Does anyone know a good way to colour calibrate a monitor for free? There are a few suggestions on the internet but I was just wondering if you guys had any recommendations. Thanks


----------



## bentleya

Click On Image For More Info, As Well As Bigger Sizes


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *SlickMeister*


I tried panning once and I couldn't do it. Should really try it again as some of the results look phenomenal. I'm hoping to get a Sigma 17-70mm soon with trading in an old lens with Sigma to get it brand new at a used price direct from them. I need something wider as I would like to do landscape and architecture HDR and I've been whoring the 50mm which is just not wide enough although this lens has provided some amazing shots for me. I really wanted the Tamron 17-50mm 2.8 but it's going to be too costly I think.

Want to get a battery grip as well after trying a 400D w/ BG-E3 the other day.


17mm still isn't that wide for a 1.6 crop sensor, I would look for something wider like the Sigma 10-20mm or the Tokina 12-24mm. Trust me, it's worth saving a little more for an ultra wide. 10mm will give you a 16mm FOV equivalent whereas 17mm will give you 27mm.


----------



## SlickMeister

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
17mm still isn't that wide for a 1.6 crop sensor, I would look for something wider like the Sigma 10-20mm or the Tokina 12-24mm. Trust me, it's worth saving a little more for an ultra wide. 10mm will give you a 16mm FOV equivalent whereas 17mm will give you 27mm.

I hear you and feel that 10mm may be divine. I went to the store and tried the Tamron 17-50 and was completely satisfied by the 17mm. More importantly in my situation to be my walkabout lens I need the 50mm length covered and 70mm is a great bonus. Slight issue with the Sigma is the variable aperture but I'll live. I'll be selling my nifty fifty to help fund the purchase as I don't want to trouble the parents with business being down at the moment. So a UWA isn't for me at the right now I don't think.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *SlickMeister* 
I hear you and feel that 10mm may be divine. I went to the store and tried the Tamron 17-50 and was completely satisfied by the 17mm. More importantly in my situation to be my walkabout lens I need the 50mm length covered and 70mm is a great bonus. Slight issue with the Sigma is the variable aperture but I'll live. I'll be selling my nifty fifty to help fund the purchase as I don't want to trouble the parents with business being down at the moment. So a UWA isn't for me at the right now I don't think.

In that case, the Sigma 17-70 is a good choice, though I don't it would be worth selling your 50mm personally.


----------



## SlickMeister

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
In that case, the Sigma 17-70 is a good choice, though I don't it would be worth selling your 50mm personally.

I hate the mistakes I make when posting on an iPhone.

However, I don't want to really sell especially after taking some great shots last night at Æ'2.5 yesterday. However, I really want that wide angle so I will sell it now and buy it again later on when I can.


----------



## grishkathefool

Gone Tomorrow, here is my Flickr link. I only have one Public set and it's all flowers.... and I am not the photographer I was when I was young, either.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
Does anyone know a good way to colour calibrate a monitor for free? There are a few suggestions on the internet but I was just wondering if you guys had any recommendations. Thanks









Print out a nice picture and try to match it while holding it to the monitor.

I don't like to spend much time doing it manually, but using OCN, the post background should be a very faint gray/blue color. If it's white (check with this white text) then your monitor is probably off.


----------



## nuclearjock

Boy's baseball tournament.
D300 400mm f/2.8 @ f/2.8 from over the right field fence, VR off.



Runner was safe.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Print out a nice picture and try to match it while holding it to the monitor.

I don't like to spend much time doing it manually, but using OCN, the post background should be a very faint gray/blue color. If it's white (check with this white text) then your monitor is probably off.

Cheers







. It's only because my 2nd monitor is a bit blue when compred to the main one and I thought it might be important to get both monitors looking the same at the least.


----------



## bentleya




----------



## dudemanppl

1DII is a tank! I got it today from Tallyn's, there was a price sticker for 990 on it, but I got it for 840!


----------



## bentleya




----------



## By-Tor

Sign me up please.....

Canon 40d w/canon grip
Canon 10-22mm
Canon 24-105mm L
Canon 70-200mm 2.8 IS L
Canon 430ex II flash
Kenko 1.4 TC
Black Rapid R-strap (R4)


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dudemanppl* 
1DII is a tank! I got it today from Tallyn's, there was a price sticker for 990 on it, but I got it for 840!

Nice, older but still an excellent FF camera.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *By-Tor* 
Sign me up please.....

Canon 40d w/canon grip
Canon 10-22mm
Canon 24-105mm L
Canon 70-200mm 2.8 IS L
Canon 430ex II flash
Kenko 1.4 TC
Black Rapid R-strap (R4)

Awesome gear! I'm scrambling for some wherewithal to get the 70-200 f/2.8 IS before the Canon rebate ends ($200 rebate, ends 8/08).


----------



## equetefue

1DII is not full frame . 1.3x rather.

1Ds is full frame


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *equetefue*


1DII is not full frame . 1.3x rather.

1Ds is full frame


LOL, right. I know that but still can't bring myself to call it a crop camera.


----------



## By-Tor

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Awesome gear! I'm scrambling for some wherewithal to get the 70-200 f/2.8 IS before the Canon rebate ends ($200 rebate, ends 8/08).

I was saving to buy that lens from B&H or Adorama and then someone posted one for sale on my local craigslist and I grabbed it up for $950 in new shape with UV filter.


----------



## Danylu

Kent Rockwell's DX Dream Team:

18-55mm 3.5-5.6 NON-VR
10-24mm 3.5-4.5
35mm 1.8
55-200 VR

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/dx-dream-team.htm

I agree with Kent as the lenses cover 80% of what MOST people photograph. I do not know why he chose the 18-55 NON-VR over the VR one though. Sports and Macros are a few examples not covered by his dream team.

What do you guys think?


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Kent Rockwell's DX Dream Team:

18-55mm 3.5-5.6 NON-VR
10-24mm 3.5-4.5
35mm 1.8
55-200 VR

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/dx-dream-team.htm

I agree with Kent as the lenses cover 80% of what MOST people photograph. I do not know why he chose the 18-55 NON-VR over the VR one though. Sports and Macros are a few examples not covered by his dream team.

What do you guys think?


Ken freely admits that you need a good BS filter when you read his page. Read his musical praise on the 18-200 then ask yourself why not just purchase one lens, carry it on your dx camera and be done with it. The 35mm f/1.8 is the only exception where you pick up speed and some IQ.

I have both the Nikkor 18-200 and the Tamron 28-300 (both IS) and to be quite honest, I like the Tammy alittle more for its reach. Optically they're about the same.

After shooting fixed apeture primes though, you really begin to see the optical short commings of these variable apeture lenses. If you really want to treat yourself to some awesome IQ, get yourself a prime fixed focal length lens.

My 400 f/2.8 is incredible. Yes it's way expensive but no I didn't pay a dime for it. It all came from shooting kids sports. The lens is almost 3D in nature. Once you produce images with glass like this, you're ruined.

You really don't have to spend alot to get a prime lens to get started. The Voigtlander 58mm f/1.4 is a good example. It's manual focus, but the focus ring is dampened like fine German optics and it's a pleasure to use. The images it produces are spectacular, and the lens retails for ~ $369.

The Nikkor 35mm f/1.8 is another example, but right now they're hard to find.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


Ken freely admits that you need a good BS filter when you read his page. Read his musical praise on the 18-200 then ask yourself why not just purchase one lens, carry it on your dx camera and be done with it. The 35mm f/1.8 is the only exception where you pick up speed and some IQ.

I have both the Nikkor 18-200 and the Tamron 28-300 (both IS) and to be quite honest, I like the Tammy alittle more for its reach. Optically they're about the same.

After shooting fixed apeture primes though, you really begin to see the optical short commings of these variable apeture lenses. If you really want to treat yourself to some awesome IQ, get yourself a prime fixed focal length lens.

My 400 f/2.8 is incredible. Yes it's way expensive but no I didn't pay a dime for it. It all came from shooting kids sports. The lens is almost 3D in nature. Once you produce images with glass like this, you're ruined.

You really don't have to spend alot to get a prime lens to get started. The Voigtlander 58mm f/1.4 is a good example. It's manual focus, but the focus ring is dampened like fine German optics and it's a pleasure to use. The images it produces are spectacular, and the lens retails for ~ $369.

The Nikkor 35mm f/1.8 is another example, but right now they're hard to find.


That sums up the other 20% I was refering to lol.


----------



## tkl.hui

Hey guys,
Thought I'd share some pictures of my Denon D1001's recabled. It was the first time I soldered so I made sure to practice before working on the real thing. I used a Switchcraft 3.5mm plug. The cable is made from Mogami W2534. I decided to just braid it and leave it at that as I really like how it looks. Anyways it was a blast doing this and it honestly does sound better. The bass seems to be tightened up, the separation seems to have improved. Anyways, enjoy.



















I know the Y split isn't that great but it works.


----------



## bentleya




----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
Ken freely admits that you need a good BS filter when you read his page. Read his musical praise on the 18-200 then ask yourself why not just purchase one lens, carry it on your dx camera and be done with it. The 35mm f/1.8 is the only exception where you pick up speed and some IQ.

I have both the Nikkor 18-200 and the Tamron 28-300 (both IS) and to be quite honest, I like the Tammy alittle more for its reach. Optically they're about the same.

After shooting fixed apeture primes though, you really begin to see the optical short commings of these variable apeture lenses. If you really want to treat yourself to some awesome IQ, get yourself a prime fixed focal length lens.

My 400 f/2.8 is incredible. Yes it's way expensive but no I didn't pay a dime for it. It all came from shooting kids sports. The lens is almost 3D in nature. Once you produce images with glass like this, you're ruined.

You really don't have to spend alot to get a prime lens to get started. The Voigtlander 58mm f/1.4 is a good example. It's manual focus, but the focus ring is dampened like fine German optics and it's a pleasure to use. The images it produces are spectacular, and the lens retails for ~ $369.

The Nikkor 35mm f/1.8 is another example, but right now they're hard to find.

My favorite two lenses I own are the 50mm f/2 and the 24mm f/2.8 manual focus, Nikkor glass with all metal bodies and weigh about as much as my D60.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
My favorite two lenses I own are the 50mm f/2 and the 24mm f/2.8 manual focus, Nikkor glass with all metal bodies and weigh about as much as my D60.

Yep, pro quality stuff - you'll have it forever.


----------



## By-Tor

Flash triggers came in today. New toys to play with....


----------



## TaT3rs

I had no idea this thread existed. Here are my specs, could I be added?

Canon Rebel Xti
Stock 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6

Thanks.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *By-Tor*


Flash triggers came in today. New toys to play with....











What does L and W mean?


----------



## By-Tor

This is what I getting out of the instructions.

W is when you use the wireless remote transmitter to fire the flash.

L is when you use the pop up flash or other speedlite to fire it.

http://www.hkyongnuo.com/e-detail.php?ID=195


----------



## equetefue

Guys I havent shot in a while so be kind...


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *equetefue*


Guys I havent shot in a while so be kind...


Very nice as usual Edwin. When you shoot birds in flight (BIF), do you use your wimberly, or do you freehand your camera/lens?


----------



## equetefue

I do both, but lately been using the wimb. Makes it easy as hell.

Trying to buy a 500mm.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

as i have said in the past, you make me want to give up sometimes Eq








stunning work


----------



## Marin

Holding off on buying computer parts has been such a good decision. *plans next purchase*

And I'm liking my Canon 10-22mm. Doesn't get as much use as my other lenses, but when used I seem to always get the shot I want.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *equetefue*


I do both, but lately been using the wimb. Makes it easy as hell.

Trying to buy a 500mm.


Yep, I've got a 500 f/4 planned for late/'09 early/'10 depending on how much money I make this fall shooting soccer. I'm just about 2/3 of the way there already. My 400 f/2.8 is just too front heavy to swing comfortably and even with a full wimberly it's not like panning with the naked lens. The 500 is no where near as front heavy and much easier to hand hold. I had a 600 for a short while and it was strictly tripod city. Not even managable on a monopod so I unloaded it. The 500 (Nikkor) is really a sweet lens. I know a couple people who have them and are very happy with their performance for BIF like osprey's and blue heron. 
I'm going up to Door County Wis. in a few days and amongst all the seagulls over lake Michigan there are a few terns which I hope to somehow capture with my 400 and possibly a 1.7 tc. we'll see.

Edit: Check out this guy's post from NikonCafe'. He's into osprey's in flight and does some beautiful work with a D3/500 f/4 combination.


----------



## equetefue

Ohh that's randy. I've known these folks for years now, from when I was a Nikonian period. Great peeps to shoot with


----------



## equetefue

Update time for me. Just bought a lens I used to owned and love for sharpness and weight. I bought and returned a 70-200 IS simply because the sharpness is not up to par with the f4 counterpart.

So with that said add me in there with another white; Canon 70-200f4


----------



## bentleya

Click for Bigger


----------



## nuclearjock

I'll call this goosebumps... Plane is a private 737 owned by Well's Fargo Bank taking off from Waukegan, Il airport (KUGN). Not really what I'd like to see if I were a passenger..


----------



## Marin

One of the things I'm planning to get is a new tripod. Already looking at Really Right Stuff for the head, just don't know which one.

So what's a versatile head/tripod setup (used for shots ranging from landscapes to macro's).

(about to post this on POTN too).


----------



## Mootsfox

055XPROB or 190XPROB legs.


----------



## equetefue

whatever you do consider weight

I hiked 2 miles carrying my wimberly set-up and I almost died; that was with CF legs... imagine regular ones..

ohh almost forgot. Something you guys might consider. Saw this on POTn and definetely getting one http://www.cottoncarrier.com/

Excellent specially when you carry 2 bodies like me


----------



## By-Tor

Quote:



Originally Posted by *equetefue*


whatever you do consider weight

I hiked 2 miles carrying my wimberly set-up and I almost died; that was with CF legs... imagine regular ones..

ohh almost forgot. Something you guys might consider. Saw this on POTn and definetely getting one http://www.cottoncarrier.com/

Excellent specially when you carry 2 bodies like me



Nice looking rig...

I love my Black Rapid R-Strap (R4) when used with my 40d w/grip and 70-200mm 2.8 IS lens. I hiked for back to back 5 mile trails and never got tired of carrying it...

http://www.blackrapid.com/rs4.php

videos here
http://www.blackrapid.com/video/


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


One of the things I'm planning to get is a new tripod. Already looking at Really Right Stuff for the head, just don't know which one.

So what's a versatile head/tripod setup (used for shots ranging from landscapes to macro's).

(about to post this on POTN too).


Buy one based on what you think your max load will be and add some room for expansion.

I am very pleased with RRS and Gitzo, I imagine Arca Swiss is quality as well.


----------



## bentleya

Click For Bigger


----------



## nuclearjock

400 f/2.8


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


400 f/2.8











may i ask what those two things over the front part of the lens are?


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie* 
may i ask what those two things over the front part of the lens are?










They're actually a pain in the butt.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
They're actually a pain in the butt.

Aw Snap!

It has a VR ring instead of a switch - never seen that before.

How would you guys go about cleaning the rear glass of a lens?


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie* 
may i ask what those two things over the front part of the lens are?









Hoods, to block light that causes lens flare.

Never seen TWO on one lens before, damn


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Hoods, to block light that causes lens flare.

Never seen TWO on one lens before, damn









Yep, the 600 f/4 also has two, the 500 f/4, only one.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
Yep, the 600 f/4 also has two, the 500 f/4, only one.

Sorta off topic, but do you notice a faster battery draw using the 400 over smaller lenses? I've wondered if these huge lenses pull any more power than their smaller cousins.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Sorta off topic, but do you notice a faster battery draw using the 400 over smaller lenses? I've wondered if these huge lenses pull any more power than their smaller cousins.


Yes, but it's ever so slight. When I'm shooting sports, VR is off cause I'm wide open to blur backgrounds, and this usually results in 1/1250 - 1/2000 @iso 200 on a sunny day. when it's cloudy, I'll bump iso to 320-400.

No need for VR at these ss's.

VR with these large optics is probably responsible for the most draw, but don't quote me on that.

Good question Foxie. I'll have to pay more attention to that. It's certainly not at the point where I'm carrying spare batteries.


----------



## Bigevil89

Got to borrow my friends S5 IS, gonna have fun tomorrow


----------



## Squeeker The Cat

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Bigevil89*


Got to borrow my friends S5 IS, gonna have fun tomorrow










i have one its a good little camera!!


----------



## Squeeker The Cat

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


400 f/2.8











just curious..............i googled that sweet lens.........i found a price tag.pleas tell me you didnt pay what google says its worth!!


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Squeeker The Cat* 
just curious..............i googled that sweet lens.........i found a price tag.pleas tell me you didnt pay what google says its worth!!
















Quality *cough* and the Nikon tax *cough* comes at a price.


----------



## Danylu

On the topic of telephotos, I decided to have a look at some telephotos and teleconverters and I have a question, what are the negatives to owning a teleconverter?

I'm thinking maybe a Sigma 150mm 2.8 and Sigma 2x TC next year as it offers a cheap super tele option with macro capabilities.... maybe.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Quality *cough* and the Nikon tax *cough* comes at a price.


Pays to be the best









Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


On the topic of telephotos, I decided to have a look at some telephotos and teleconverters and I have a question, what are the negatives to owning a teleconverter?

I'm thinking maybe a Sigma 150mm 2.8 and Sigma 2x TC next year as it offers a cheap super tele option with macro capabilities.... maybe.



They reduce the amount of light that hits the sensor. 1.4x -1 stop, 1.7x - 1.5 stop, 2.0x -2 stops. Maybe not a huge problem if you had a lens like Nuke's 400 f/2.8, but on a f/5.6, you would go to f/11 with a 2x converter.

They also reduce the quality of the lens in front of it. So unless you have multiple of thousands of dollars of glass in front of it, a 2x doesn't seem like a good idea.

If you're up for a read, check here: http://www.lensrentals.com/news/2009...converters-101

If you're looking for something with some reach on the (relative) cheap, the Sigma 50-500mm f/4 to f/6.3 is fairly well known as a good lens for the price (~$1,000). Nicknamed the "bigma": http://www.amazon.com/Sigma-50-500mm.../dp/B0009F3MPQ

Then of course, there's always this cannon:


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Pays to be the best









They reduce the amount of light that hits the sensor. 1.4x -1 stop, 1.7x - 1.5 stop, 2.0x -2 stops. Maybe not a huge problem if you had a lens like Nuke's 400 f/2.8, but on a f/5.6, you would go to f/11 with a 2x converter.

They also reduce the quality of the lens in front of it. So unless you have multiple of thousands of dollars of glass in front of it, a 2x doesn't seem like a good idea.

If you're up for a read, check here: http://www.lensrentals.com/news/2009...converters-101

If you're looking for something with some reach on the (relative) cheap, the Sigma 50-500mm f/4 to f/6.3 is fairly well known as a good lens for the price (~$1,000). Nicknamed the "bigma": http://www.amazon.com/Sigma-50-500mm.../dp/B0009F3MPQ

Then of course, there's always this cannon:










Get the heli pilots looking a bit nervous with that one









But I kinda want to buy something that will do macro next and I thought because the TC would let me get 2:1 reproduction and let me have a 300mm, albeit with dodgy AF, it would also be a good deal seeing as TC + 150mm is cheaper than the BIGMA and still give me some change D:.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Squeeker The Cat*


just curious..............i googled that sweet lens.........i found a price tag.pleas tell me you didnt pay what google says its worth!!

















I paid $8350, overnight shipping included from J&R Electronics in NY.
BTW, I give them a 10/10 customer rating. It was the first time doing business with them, and I would do it again in a heartbeat. Good people.

opened an Amazon credit card and I get 6% back for the first 90 days so I'm getting a check for $501 as well so after all's said and done, I paid ~$7849 for the lens.

But you're right Marin, the dark side is ~25% higher at the super-tele end.

I'm seriously thinking of picking up a used 50D and a new Canon 800mm f/5.6 for small birds next year.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Get the heli pilots looking a bit nervous with that one









But I kinda want to buy something that will do macro next and I thought because the TC would let me get 2:1 reproduction and let me have a 300mm, albeit with dodgy AF, it would also be a good deal seeing as TC + 150mm is cheaper than the BIGMA and still give me some change D:.



I bought the Bigma awhile back, shot ~20 pics with it and brought it back. It's a piece of garbage. I've seen some decent stuff with their long primes, but their quality control is terrible. You get a good copy or not?? Come on !!!

I'll consider a Sigma lens if a retailer will line up four or five and let me pick one.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


I bought the Bigma awhile back, shot ~20 pics with it and brought it back. It's a piece of garbage. I've seen some decent stuff with their long primes, but their quality control is terrible. You get a good copy or not?? Come on !!!

I'll consider a Sigma lens if a retailer will line up four or five and let me pick one.



Hm no company can be that bad can they? I'm seriously contemplating Sigma lens for a few reasons, there is like a 30% discount off sigma stuff right now as well as the fact that Nikkor Pro stuff is priced high, as Marin mildly put it a few posts back. For me, (thanks to the random pricing in Australia) it will either be Nikon kit or 3rd party pro with the exception of macro where for some reason the 3rd party are just as expensive as the Nikkors.

EDIT: Just had this thought, take the Nikkor 60 2.8 which gets to 1x repoduction ratio, the D60 has a 1.5x crop which makes the 60mm a 90mm so does that mean that the 60 2.8 will give a max reproduction ratio of 1.5x?


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Hm no company can be that bad can they? I'm seriously contemplating Sigma lens for a few reasons, there is like a 30% discount off sigma stuff right now as well as the fact that Nikkor Pro stuff is priced high, as Marin mildly put it a few posts back. For me, (thanks to the random pricing in Australia) it will either be Nikon kit or 3rd party pro with the exception of macro where for some reason the 3rd party are just as expensive as the Nikkors.

EDIT: Just had this thought, take the Nikkor 60 2.8 which gets to 1x repoduction ratio, the D60 has a 1.5x crop which makes the 60mm a 90mm so does that mean that the 60 2.8 will give a max reproduction ratio of 1.5x?



Check out some of the other forums, Nikoncafe', fredmiranda, POTN, people all complain about sigma getting it right on a regular basis. There even issues with the 50mm f/1.4. That's a newly introduced lens that should have all the wrinkles ironed out. If you get a good copy, you're good to go. If not, it's rma time. I'm just not willing to put up with that crap.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Quality *cough* and the Nikon tax *cough* comes at a price.


Hope your cough gets better.


----------



## equetefue

ok... add me for a Canon OC-E3 Off camera Hot shoe adapter and a flash bracket to go with Sidekick.


----------



## bentleya

Click For Bigger


----------



## GoneTomorrow

I just got engaged, and here's the ring! It's a Tiffany platinum ring with a princess cut .34 ct. diamond:


----------



## laboitenoire

Congrats man! And Tiffany







that's some serious stuff right there.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
I just got engaged, and here's the ring! It's a Tiffany platinum ring with a princess cut .34 ct. diamond:


Congrats man, welcome to the "club".
Misery loves company


----------



## Mootsfox

So I got a new bag today!

















So what's inside?










Awh don't be shy little guy... Yes, that is how much Goodwill let me have it for.










Wait a second, what's that?










Sneaking a peek










It's hugggeeee










Revealed, Nikon D1H.










Bag was $14
SD1000 and cards, $10
D1H with compete box, charger, battery, all caps, a cool $100.

Oh, and congrats Gone on the engagement


----------



## Marin

2 megapixels of awesome.

I should really get a pic of my bag up.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *laboitenoire* 
Congrats man! And Tiffany







that's some serious stuff right there.

Thanks, they're not as expensive as you might think, though they do have rings in the 1 million plus range.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
Congrats man, welcome to the "club".
Misery loves company









Thanks guys.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 

So what's inside?

Awh don't be shy little guy... Yes, that is how much Goodwill let me have it for.

Bag was $14
SD1000 and cards, $10
D1H with compete box, charger, battery, all caps, a cool $100.

Oh, and congrats Gone on the engagement









Damn, that's a really awesome deal for the SD1000, still a great camera! The D1H is kind of an antique now though, but still cool. What lens did it come with? I can't believe you found this stuff at a Goodwill. I look at the Goodwills around here and all I find are old crappy point-and-shoot _film_ cameras.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


I just got engaged, and here's the ring! It's a Tiffany platinum ring with a princess cut .34 ct. diamond:


Congrats!!! Beautiful ring - the photos do it justice.

What do you guys think about this tripod?
http://www.digitalcamerawarehouse.com.au/prod4894.htm


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Damn, that's a really awesome deal for the SD1000, still a great camera! The D1H is kind of an antique now though, but still cool. What lens did it come with? I can't believe you found this stuff at a Goodwill. I look at the Goodwills around here and all I find are old crappy point-and-shoot _film_ cameras.

I bought everything in a different place. The bag was from the surplus store, but it's new stock. The P&S was Goodwill in Columbus and the D1H I had to drive about 3 hours to get, saw it on Craigslist, without a price, the guy was just asking for an offer on it.

He also had a D2H, which I thought about, but don't have the money for right now.


----------



## bentleya

Click For Bigger and More Info


----------



## Mootsfox

Cool effect bentleya.

Almost looks like "AGP!" on the right side of the bench









Anyone know where one could buy the foam that comes in camera bags. Like this stuff, but hopefully much, much cheaper. Plain foam is fine, I was going to sew felt bags for them anyways.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...Partition.html


----------



## max302

I thought I'd share some of my pics from my trip to Europe. I spent way too much time listening to my music, not enough looking for great snaps.







Anyways, here are some of the good ones:


----------



## Gunfire

Where was that last picture taken Max?


----------



## max302

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Gunfire*


Where was that last picture taken Max?


The Great St. Bernard Pass. It's a pass in the alps between Italy and Switzerland.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_St_Bernard_Pass


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Gunfire*


Where was that last picture taken Max?


ahaha, exactly what i was going to ask









Quote:



Originally Posted by *max302*


The Great St. Bernard Pass. It's a pass in the alps between Italy and Switzerland.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_St_Bernard_Pass


very nice shots, i love mountains, me and my friend just confirmed our plans for the end of august, we are going to be doing a mountaineering trip in BC, our first one, very excited


----------



## Marin

I just ordered something from Adorama. It weighs over a pound.

What could it be?

Also past posts will not give hints about my purchase =p


----------



## MADMAX22

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Cool effect bentleya.

Almost looks like "AGP!" on the right side of the bench









Anyone know where one could buy the foam that comes in camera bags. Like this stuff, but hopefully much, much cheaper. Plain foam is fine, I was going to sew felt bags for them anyways.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...Partition.html










Depends on what you want out of it. If you want the best protection and what not plus water proof you want closed cell foam like neoprene. If not then regular high density foam would be best with the other low density foam after that.

You can get the regular foam like low density and sometimes high density (allthough this definition seems to vary) at like joanns or a fabric knitting type store. they will have the best prices locally.

Online this place is where I get my foam for my variouse projects. They have great products but shipping may be a little slow. However usually your ordering in skins or half skins. A half skin should be enough to do several projects link


----------



## laboitenoire

Yeah, something like an AC Moore or Michael's should carry the correct foam. I think that's where we got foam for my model rocket payloads...


----------



## equetefue

hit me again GoneTomorrow...

Canon 70-200 f4 L
Canon 100 f2


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MADMAX22*


Depends on what you want out of it. If you want the best protection and what not plus water proof you want closed cell foam like neoprene. If not then regular high density foam would be best with the other low density foam after that.

You can get the regular foam like low density and sometimes high density (allthough this definition seems to vary) at like joanns or a fabric knitting type store. they will have the best prices locally.

Online this place is where I get my foam for my variouse projects. They have great products but shipping may be a little slow. However usually your ordering in skins or half skins. A half skin should be enough to do several projects link


Awesome, I found that site too and sent them an email asking what to use. Prices are pretty damn good compared to what other people are selling the same stuff for.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Yeah, something like an AC Moore or Michael's should carry the correct foam. I think that's where we got foam for my model rocket payloads...


I have a Jo'anns here so I guess I'll stop by there tomorrow and check prices, and I'll need to get the fabric there anyways.

Thanks guys


----------



## Danylu

Yes I finally did a decent job of calibrating my monitors and I learnt how to set White Balance on the D60







- I'm still very new to this hahaha. Can anyone think of anything else that might be useful to learn?

Results:

Auto WB

Manual "Measure" WB


----------



## Bigevil89

is that a targus tripod?


----------



## dr4gon

That looks like it could be any number of tripods (slick or even a crappy free after rebate tripod like the one I have that looks just like that lol)


----------



## Bigevil89

lol true just wondering cause i have a cheap targus and it looks the same, its such a piece of crap but for what i use it its fine.


----------



## nuclearjock

I saw on that looked like that. It was called "Promaster"


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Bigevil89* 
is that a targus tripod?

Yes it is although I am sure most of the cheapy ones are the same things renamed.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dr4gon* 
That looks like it could be any number of tripods (slick or even a crappy free after rebate tripod like the one I have that looks just like that lol)

Yeah

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
I saw on that looked like that. It was called "Promaster"

Proves my point.









I'd still be using it but placing an SB-600, D60 and 35mm 1.8 snapped the quick release plate so I can't place a camera on it anymore







It lived for 3 months - not bad for USD$17. I think this tripod is a likely candidate for a replacement, it will be able to handle anything I might buy.


----------



## TestECull

I have a dying Olympus D535 P&S. :\\

Hopefully I'll replace it real soon, tho.


----------



## dr4gon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Yes it is although I am sure most of the cheapy ones are the same things renamed.

Yeah

Proves my point.









I'd still be using it but placing an SB-600, D60 and 35mm 1.8 snapped the quick release plate so I can't place a camera on it anymore







It lived for 3 months - not bad for USD$17. I think this tripod is a likely candidate for a replacement, it will be able to handle anything I might buy.


That's a pretty cool design on that velbon. Not sure how useful the table clamp would be. Mine does have a horizontal rail on my 190XPROB which I hardly ever use to get over a table. It's mainly useful forgetting down low.

Don't forget to vote in the July 27 photo contest on the main photography forum.


----------



## Bigevil89

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
I'd still be using it but placing an SB-600, D60 and 35mm 1.8 snapped the quick release plate so I can't place a camera on it anymore







It lived for 3 months - not bad for USD$17. I think this tripod is a likely candidate for a replacement, it will be able to handle anything I might buy.

lol yea i bought mine at radio shack for 12 and the leg broke the same day!. it still works as the crack was at the hinge thing. it gets the job done but poorly lol.


----------



## bentleya

Couple for Today and Yesterday.





Click For Big


----------



## nuclearjock

Shot about an hour ago.
D3, 400mm f/2.8 VR, Nikon 1.7 TC
You cant tell this lens has a TC attached. AF is lightning fast, no difference in IQ.


----------



## tkl.hui

I've been looking at some lenses to replace the kitlens for my Sony A200.

These are the ones I've been considering:
TAMRON 17-50MM XR DI-II F2.8 SONY 
http://www.henrys.com/webapp/wcs/sto...&itemID=189904

SONY ALPHA 16-80 F3.5-4.5 VARIO-SONNAR 
http://www.henrys.com/webapp/wcs/sto...&itemID=181025

SIGMA 18-50MM F2.8 MACRO EX DC SONY 
http://www.henrys.com/webapp/wcs/sto...&itemID=186455

SIGMA 17-70MM DC 2.8-4.5 AS SONY ALPHA 
http://www.henrys.com/webapp/wcs/sto...&itemID=166612

Money isn't really an issue though I would like to limit myself and not spend too much. Which one do you guys think would be best at replacing my current kit lens which is 18-70 f3.5-f5.6


----------



## Marin

Get the Tammy, having a constant f/2.8 aperture is nice for better bokeh, easier to use in full manual, and better for low light. And it's a sharp lens.

And to point out now, the 16-80mm isn't actually Zeiss optics (Zeiss doesn't manufacture it).


----------



## tkl.hui

Really? If its not Zeiss manufacturing it then why do they brand it as such =/ And who actually manufactures it then?

Think it would be a good idea to buy the tammy off ebay? Prices in Canada are ridiculously high.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *tkl.hui*


Really? If its not Zeiss manufacturing it then why do they brand it as such =/ And who actually manufactures it then?

Think it would be a good idea to buy the tammy off ebay? Prices in Canada are ridiculously high.


Pretty sure Sony manufactures them. They brand them as Zeiss because they use the Zeiss coating. Just like how all those Leica lenses Panasonic has aren't actually manufactured by Leica. All Panasonic has to do is meet the "Leitz standards", whatever that is.

EDIT: Just to add, what differentiates the Zeiss lenses for the Sony DSLR's from the P&S's is that they're designed by Zeiss, so they're still good lenses.


----------



## Marin

How large are your picture folders? I've noticed mine is 163gb's.


----------



## laboitenoire

Jesus... Mine's only 2.3 gigs, but that's what low-res JPEG shooting for years will do for ya


----------



## By-Tor

I have only owned a DSLR since X-mas and my file is 52 gigs..


----------



## Bigevil89

My folder is at 14.2 Gigs at the moment.

Here are some pics taken today in Miami/ Coral Gables, I used my friends Canon S5is. I love that camera
































































Check out the rest of the pics on my Flickr


----------



## laboitenoire

You know, I just realized I should take my camera to work one day and shoot stuff once I'm done for the day. I work at a botanic garden at the moment, so definitely plenty of subjects...


----------



## equetefue

Guys, Can't seem to be able to connect to http://photography-on-the.net/forum/

or http://www.fredmiranda.com

My G/f about 15 mins away from me can't get in it either... Could you guys check if you can ?


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *equetefue*


Guys, Can't seem to be able to connect to http://photography-on-the.net/forum/

or http://www.fredmiranda.com

My G/f about 15 mins away from me can't get in it either... Could you guys check if you can ?


I can, both of them.


----------



## equetefue

what the hell then? DNS issue or loca area problem ?


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *equetefue*


Guys, Can't seem to be able to connect to http://photography-on-the.net/forum/

or http://www.fredmiranda.com

My G/f about 15 mins away from me can't get in it either... Could you guys check if you can ?


i can get to both, a good tool to check is
http://downforeveryoneorjustme.com/


----------



## equetefue

Thx Schubie, Moot.

I tried that link earlier and they both work, works from cell, but not from any computer in the house nor my g/f house some miles away


----------



## equetefue

I keep getting " The DNS Server is not responding" when I run the troubleshooter


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Eq, there might be a network link down in your area, a local ISP problem. You should do a trace route to see if that's the problem, happens here every now and then


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

hmm, try changing to opendns
http://www.opendns.com/


----------



## equetefue

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Eq, there might be a network link down in your area, a local ISP problem. You should do a trace route to see if that's the problem, happens here every now and then


How you do that... see if it was only me I would think the problem is here but the g/f has the same issue with those two sites and she lives like 15mins away from me


----------



## Danylu

Since January... 80Gb.


----------



## Marin

Just went ahead and removed my XSi and kit lens from my sig. *I still have them though*, but since I got my 50D neither have seen any action.

And you can see a new addition in my sig, I'll be getting it tomorrow.


----------



## Danylu

Table Tennis + P&S + IS + Automatic - Choice of Scene Mode = Blurry Action Photos

Which light bulb do you guys think I photoshopped in and why?


----------



## Aaron_Henderson

Bottom right, colour looks a hair off? Can't really tell, looks good to me.


----------



## evilspongebob72

Bottom right or bottom left

Left is too crisp and right is just a little bit small


----------



## bentleya

Click For Bigger And More Info


----------



## Marin




----------



## equetefue

Nice Marin.... you will love it !


----------



## laboitenoire

So Marin, how do you pay for all your camera gear along with the PC stuff? My point being that as a fellow student finding time to earn that kind of dough always seems scare...


----------



## By-Tor

Grats on the nice purchase... You'll love it... I went with a after market tripod ring off of ebay for $14 shipped and worked great.. Sold my F/4 and bought a f/2.8 IS about a month ago...


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *laboitenoire* 
So Marin, how do you pay for all your camera gear along with the PC stuff?

I've actually stopped getting PC stuff so I could get camera stuff, lol.


----------



## By-Tor

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
I've actually stopped getting PC stuff so I could get camera stuff, lol.

I sold my 5 ghz Intel tech station to buy my 70-200mm f/4 lens in feb. this year...


----------



## Danylu

Ah if only sigma had OS on their 70-200mm then it would be perfect.

I photoshoppd the bottom left light btw.


----------



## nuclearjock

Meh!!!!

New Nikon stuff here.

No midrange 24mp as of yet.


----------



## Marin

*looks at the list*

- 18-200mm: LOL

- 70-200mm f/2.8: Wonder if it's now optimized for FX

- D3000: Um... meh....

- D300S: Maybe it's just me, but video on crop sensors isn't impressive at all.


----------



## nuclearjock

80-400 AFS update???? Hello????


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


Meh!!!!

New Nikon stuff here.

No midrange 24mp as of yet.


Maybe this is why I couldn't get the Vendor price lists after June 30th.

Hoping for a drop in price of the D90 or D300(*S*)


----------



## Cpt.Hawkins

New 70-200mm! finally! since I found out how bad the old one was with fullframe sensors i've been waiting for this little beauty, mind you I doubt there'll be any available for atleast 3 months


----------



## Danylu

The new D3000 makes me jealous of it's 11 AF points.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 

































































Welcome to living long Marin. Now a can of black spray paint and you're all set


----------



## dr4gon

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
I've actually stopped getting PC stuff so I could get camera stuff, lol.

Out with water cooling, in with camera gear! lol ....









nuclearjock, the new Sony A850 will be a mini-fullframe A900 with the same 24.6MP stabilized sensor but not quite up the the A900's build quality. It will also only have a 98% VF coverage and will be significantly cheaper (I'm thinking sub $2,000).


----------



## Bigevil89

Here's my attempt at taking pictures of the moon. Using my friends S5is




























Man I love this camera, cant wait to buy a dslr though.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dr4gon* 
nuclearjock, the new Sony A850 will be a mini-fullframe A900 with the same 24.6MP stabilized sensor but not quite up the the A900's build quality. It will also only have a 98% VF coverage and will be significantly cheaper (I'm thinking sub $2,000).

Does it accept the Nikkor lens mount?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*




































































Nice, just in time for the rebate! I really want either the f/4 or f/2.8 before the rebate ends (8/8 for anyone interested).

How do you like the Industry Disgrace? I thought the tag it came with was funny.


----------



## equetefue

Guys really needing two lenses.... the 24-105mm L or the 24-70 L and the 500mm L..


----------



## nuclearjock

From today with the D3/400VR f2.8/1.7 NikkorTC

1.









2.


----------



## equetefue

Oh damn.... I got competition in the wildlife scene.... lol

Great shots as usual!


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *equetefue*


Oh damn.... I got competition in the wildlife scene.... lol

Great shots as usual!


Yep, and you're gonna have competition in the biceps department as well as a result of hand holding this beast. Definately can't do it or long periods of time, and the wimberly is ok but for BIF it's hard to move your head/eye in relation to vertical movements of the lens. Hand holding is still the way to go.


----------



## equetefue

Yeah ...really torn between the 600/4 500/4 and 400/2.8 but the weight of the 4 and 6 is to much for birding.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Nice, just in time for the rebate! I really want either the f/4 or f/2.8 before the rebate ends (8/8 for anyone interested).

How do you like the Industry Disgrace? I thought the tag it came with was funny.


I like it a lot better than the Canon strap. It's longer and comfier. Best thing is that it doesn't say *Canon* in huge letters on it.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *equetefue*


Yeah ...really torn between the 600/4 500/4 and 400/2.8 but the weight of the 4 and 6 is to much for birding.


Uh huh.. But the 400 2.8 pwns the athletic events. 400 f/2.8 with the D3 for smaller fields, 600 f/2.8 (effective) with the D300 for larger fields and the backgrounds all blur beautifully, ss's in the 1/2000 range so no VR to muck up dynamic AF.. Great for night games as well. Gotta have the 400 f/2.8 for sports.

Also the 400 takes 1.4 and 1.7 TC's like they were'nt there.


----------



## equetefue

dammit man why you make it so hard lol


----------



## Danylu

Hm when I shake my D60 battery charger it rattles, what could that be an indication of?


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Hm when I shake my D60 battery charger it rattles, what could that be an indication of?


Mine doesn't. Something broke off I would guess.


----------



## Danylu

Hm that isn't a great feeling







. I should clean my desk more often so I don't drop it sigh. At least it still works.

On another note I understand manual flash exposure now


----------



## dr4gon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


Does it accept the Nikkor lens mount?










No, but you can pick up some Zeiss ZA Auto focus, stabilized primes to go with it! 85mm F/1.4 Plannar, 135 F/1.8 Sonnar, and the 16-35mm and 24-70mm F/2.8 vario-sonnars.







Nikon doesn't have the first two! There's also the Sony 35mm F/1.4 G, but it's not a stellar lens wide open.


----------



## Bigevil89

HDR attempt


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Bigevil89*


HDR attempt


Nice. I don't what method you're using to combine your images, but you may want to try and lighten the shadow in the vertical window crevace and see how that looks.


----------



## Bigevil89

thanks for the tip ill try that, im using photoshop cs3 to even out the temperature and tint to each of the files and save them as tiffs, then dynamic photo hdr for the hdr process


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Bigevil89*


thanks for the tip ill try that, im using photoshop cs3 to even out the temperature and tint to each of the files and save them as tiffs, then dynamic photo hdr for the hdr process


It's all totally subjective, but I think it's cool when shadows are evened out. It gives the pic a surreal effect. I prefer this to the more pronounced adjustments where the picture begins to look unreal. Eraly n I produced of unreal stuff which I've gotten tired of. 
Marin did an underground parking garage I saw posted somewhere and I thought that looked really neat. Maybe He'll post it if we ask him nicely.


----------



## tkl.hui

Just wondering, do any of you like to keep UV filters on your lenses just as protection?


----------



## spice003

Hey guys i'm selling my XSI and the Tmaron 28-75mm f2.8 lens if any one is interested, here is the link.
http://www.overclock.net/sale/550342...ml#post6827367


----------



## Bigevil89

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


It's all totally subjective, but I think it's cool when shadows are evened out. It gives the pic a surreal effect. I prefer this to the more pronounced adjustments where the picture begins to look unreal. Eraly n I produced of unreal stuff which I've gotten tired of. 
Marin did an underground parking garage I saw posted somewhere and I thought that looked really neat. Maybe He'll post it if we ask him nicely.


I understand, This is one of my few HDR trys that have actually come out fine. most of the time they just seem odd and grainy at times.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *tkl.hui*


Just wondering, do any of you like to keep UV filters on your lenses just as protection?


i do, always have a UV filter, polarizer or some filter on the front, if i fall, slip or drop it i would rather replace a 50 dollar filter then paying a TON because i shattered a front element.

but thats just me, some people rant about how it degrades image quality, i for one dont notice large enough a difference for me to justify not having one on.


----------



## By-Tor

Hood FTW


----------



## xlastshotx

Quote:


Originally Posted by *tkl.hui* 
Just wondering, do any of you like to keep UV filters on your lenses just as protection?


UV filters are useless most of the time, all of the inexpensive ones can degrade your image quality. They may also make your lens more susceptible to lens flare since the filter will be at the very end of your lens, which will cause it to catch light sooner than the farther set back lens.

The only times I can see them as useful is if it is raining and you have a sealed body and lens (a filter completes the seal usually), then you need one. Or if you a shooting somewhere very dirty (like a dirtbike track or somewhere were debris could get on the lens).

A lens hood is the best thing to have for protecting your lens from a drop (other than just not dropping it {i.e. neck strap/bottom weighted tripod})


----------



## nuclearjock

Out on the beach again tonight shooting gulls and terns, when my wife threw a ball for our boxer to fetch. People over in the Nikon forum alude to a seemingly 3D nature to the appearance of captures from the 400VR. I think I know what they're referring to when looking at the splash in these pictures of our pup. Again, everything with the D3 400 f/2.8 VR 1.7tc:

1.









2.









I've been trying to catch one of these guys doing this and tonight I was successful. They do this shake rattle and roll a few seconds after plunging into the water to catch a fish.. Note this bird has been banded.

3.


----------



## Bigevil89

Beautiful shots mate







. Especially the last one


----------



## bentleya

Click For Big/More Info


----------



## By-Tor

A couple from yesterday...

10-22mm









70-200mm


----------



## equetefue

GoneTomorrow hit me up again.

Sold 100 f2 and upgraded to Canon 135mm f2 L


----------



## Marin

Some shots with my 70-200mm F4L IS.


----------



## equetefue

How you like it so far marin... great lens aint it ??

Anxiously waiting for 135 L

Is supposed to be sharpest lens from Canon


----------



## nuclearjock

I really lust for 2 canon lenses.
800 f/5.6 and 200 f/1.8.

I have absulutely no use for the 200 f/1.8, but I think it's just way cool.
Maybe I'll start shooting volleyball..
Probably be a winner for basketball on a FF body.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Some shots with my 70-200mm F4L IS.


Honestly - do you wish you had the f/2.8 version instead? I've been set on it for a while but I think I may cave and get the f/4 version.


----------



## equetefue

Gone personally I had every single version of them both Canon and Nikon and I find every single copy of the f2.8 overrated and soft compare to the f4 variants... The only advantage is the one stop over the f4, but with cameras now and days low noise is easier to bump the ISO a bit and rather walk around with a sharper and lighter lens.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *equetefue* 
Gone personally I had every single version of them both Canon and Nikon and I find every single copy of the f2.8 overrated and soft compare to the f4 variants... The only advantage is the one stop over the f4, but with cameras now and days low noise is easier to bump the ISO a bit and rather walk around with a sharper and lighter lens.

Makes sense, I was almost about to hit "Submit Payment" but wondered whether $600 for an extra stop was worth it.

So the f/4 IS is significantly lighter than the f/2.8 version?


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *equetefue* 
Gone personally I had every single version of them both Canon and Nikon and I find every single copy of the f2.8 overrated and soft compare to the f4 variants... The only advantage is the one stop over the f4, but with cameras now and days low noise is easier to bump the ISO a bit and rather walk around with a sharper and lighter lens.

My nikon 70-200 f/2.8 is soft in the corners wide open, but absolutely tack sharp in the center, and the edge softness which is minor is completely gone by f/4. Not sure you specifically were talking about the Nikon 70-200 f/2.8 but it's known for its great IQ. I've blasted quite a few frames through that lens all with stellar results. Also takes Nikkor 1.4 and 1.7 TC's beautifully. Also, the edge softness I'm referring to is only at FF. No softness in DX.


----------



## equetefue

yeah... now keep in mind that once you play with 8-12 lbs lenses you really can't care less about the weight of the f2.8 IS. For me is more about the sharpness of the lens.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/R...ns-Review.aspx

Here's a shot of the f4 variant.... sharp as hell

This is back with a 30D and 70-200f4 no sharpening at all...straight out of camera JPEG


----------



## equetefue

See out of my old nikon set-up the shapest lens was an old 80-200 AF. I did not like the corner output at all. Now that 8-2 AF was a beauty


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *equetefue*


yeah... now keep in mind that once you play with 8-12 lbs lenses you really can't care less about the weight of the f2.8 IS. For me is more about the sharpness of the lens.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/R...ns-Review.aspx

Here's a shot of the f4 variant.... sharp as hell

This is back with a 30D and 70-200f4 no sharpening at all...straight out of camera JPEG


I'm sold - I just bought the f/4! Joy and pain at the same time! Oh well, at least now I can stop obsessing about that damn lens. Ever comparison shop an item as a daily routine?


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *equetefue*


See out of my old nikon set-up the shapest lens was an old 80-200 AF. I did not like the corner output at all. Now that 8-2 AF was a beauty


Well the new 20-200 f/2.8 with two x-tra ED elements and the magic nano foo foo dust supposedly takes care of the corner "issue" at an additional $500 per copy. For me, I need f/2.8 for sports (blurred backgrounds) so the edge sahrpness is not an issue. I need f/2.8 for low light, sharp focus on subjects and faces, and smooth blurred backgrounds. The AFS is also critical for fast focus. The 80-200 screw focus is simply too slow. Also too slow for wildlife.


----------



## equetefue

You will not be disappointed !


----------



## equetefue

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


Well the new 20-200 f/2.8 with two x-tra ED elements and the magic nano foo foo dust supposedly takes care of the corner "issue" at an additional $500 per copy. For me, I need f/2.8 for sports (blurred backgrounds) so the edge sahrpness is not an issue. I need f/2.8 for low light, sharp focus on subjects and faces, and smooth blurred backgrounds. The AFS is also critical for fast focus. The 80-200 screw focus is simply too slow. Also too slow for wildlife.



Agree. The only way for me personally to justify the lens would be for sports which I don't shoot.

Now I have 3 lenses to go.

The 200 f1.8L the 24-105L and the 500L


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *equetefue*


Agree. The only way for me personally to justify the lens would be for sports which I don't shoot.

Now I have 3 lenses to go.

The 200 f1.8L the 24-105L and the 500L



Wildlife too..

If I can find a 200 f/1.8, I'll break down and buy a body for it as well. I think that lens is way cool. They're kinda hard to find though.


----------



## equetefue

I would go for the newer f2 as I would be scare that the old one would need repair and the parts are scarce... That lens is just sick. Never seen one but the pics out of it are insane on full frame


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Honestly - do you wish you had the f/2.8 version instead? I've been set on it for a while but I think I may cave and get the f/4 version.

The f/2.8 is way larger than the f/4 and there would be no possible way to keep it in my bag with my other lenses.

I used it tonight in the Cow Palace and it worked great. It was only lit by stage lights and the lens worked fantastically.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


The f/2.8 is way larger than the f/4 and there would be no possible way to keep it in my bag with my other lenses.

I used it tonight in the Cow Palace and it worked great. It was only lit by stage lights and the lens worked fantastically.


Nice, I should get mine in time to shoot a wedding next Friday.


----------



## equetefue

what you getting next? I'm going for a 24-105L now


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *equetefue*


what you getting next? I'm going for a 24-105L now


Well, I need something to replace my 28-135, the 24-105 would perfect, maybe when the tax return comes in next year.


----------



## Marin

Or you can get the 17-55mm.


----------



## Marin

Here's a wide angle of the lighting.



And the Canon 70-200mm f/4L IS in action, this was shot handheld.








EXIF


----------



## Danylu

I went to buy a tripod I wanted today and the guy who walked out when i walked in left with the last one. ***

When I got home I tried to take a picture of the moon in a blue sky but couldn't get a steady one due to the lack of a tripod. *Sigh*


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Or you can get the 17-55mm.

Also an excellent lens, would love to have it but I think the 24-105 or even the 24-70 L would be a more useful range for me.

And your 70-200 shots look great, can't wait to get mine!


----------



## tkl.hui

Here's some from today. Civic holiday up here.







All were taken with my Sony A200 and Minolta 70-210 f4 "beercan".










My dog getting ready for a shake.









He looks like a little monster here.

















He gets hungry and tired really quickly on walks.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

The last shot is great tk.


----------



## dr4gon

tkl! long time no see!

The last one has some very lively color!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Hey marin, did youre 70-200 come with a tripod mount ring? Damn they're expensive.


----------



## equetefue

here you go Gone... works like a charm

http://cgi.ebay.com/Tripod-Mount-Rin...d=p3286.c0.m14


----------



## By-Tor

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Hey marin, did youre 70-200 come with a tripod mount ring? Damn they're expensive.


I went with this one when I had my 70-200mm f/4 lens.. Worked great...

http://cgi.ebay.com/Tripod-Mount-Rin...d=p3286.c0.m14


----------



## tkl.hui

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dr4gon*


tkl! long time no see!

The last one has some very lively color!


Haha thanks, 
And ya, I've been real busy lately worrying about my first year of university preparing etc. But now I have time to relax and I got some new goodies coming in. Mainly something to replace the kit lens and a new bag for hikes.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *equetefue*


here you go Gone... works like a charm

http://cgi.ebay.com/Tripod-Mount-Rin...d=p3286.c0.m14



Quote:



Originally Posted by *By-Tor*


I went with this one when I had my 70-200mm f/4 lens.. Worked great...

http://cgi.ebay.com/Tripod-Mount-Rin...d=p3286.c0.m14


Thanks, I saw those, and I'm sure I'll regret it but I went ahead with the Canon A2 collar. I want the best possibility quality collar, because I take my camera in some precarious places, like knee deep in a running stream tripod mounted.

Shameless promotion: selling my Canon 28-135 at POTN, PM if interested:
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...d.php?t=732834


----------



## dr4gon

Quote:


Originally Posted by *tkl.hui* 
Haha thanks,
And ya, I've been real busy lately worrying about my first year of university preparing etc. But now I have time to relax and I got some new goodies coming in. Mainly something to replace the kit lens and a new bag for hikes.

Sounds good!



My macro monday submission today for 90Â°.


----------



## tkl.hui

Love the DOF. Is that from the Tamron 90mm macro lens?


----------



## dr4gon

Nope, Sony 100mm SAL-100M28. I didn't have the Tamron 90mm for very long, the Sony is superior in every way, except the price, but I think it's well worth it.


----------



## nuclearjock

Gone,

Hit me up for nikkor 2x TC and a Canon 5d MKII. body only.
Gonna see what all the white city hoopla is about.

gotta think carefully about what I want to use that will show me all the pretty megapixels this thing is supposed have.


----------



## equetefue

5dmkii ....WOOT !!! WELCOME TO THE FAMILY !

You've seen the light. I'll ship you the 135 f2L


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *equetefue*


5dmkii ....WOOT !!! WELCOME TO THE FAMILY !

You've seen the light. I'll ship you the 135 f2L


Don't go getting all sloppy on me now. I haven't had a chance to shoot with it yet. If I don't like it, I've got 30 days!!!!


----------



## equetefue

hahaha... i see it now...

85 f1.2 135 f2 and 200 f2


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *equetefue*


hahaha... i see it now...

85 f1.2 135 f2 and 200 f2



Actually there's a big camera shop in Chicago (Calumet Photo) that has the 200 f/2 for rental, I just reserved it for this weekend.

Edit:
Hope it's a good copy!! I hear there's alot of variation in this glass.


----------



## equetefue

hahaha I knew it.

I used to buy from Calumet. Excellent people to work with


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


Gone,

Hit me up for nikkor 2x TC and a Canon 5d MKII. body only.
Gonna see what all the white city hoopla is about.

gotta think carefully about what I want to use that will show me all the pretty megapixels this thing is supposed have.


Nuke, I'm going find out where you live and rob you.









Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


Actually there's a big camera shop in Chicago (Calumet Photo) that has the 200 f/2 for rental, I just reserved it for this weekend.

Edit:
Hope it's a good copy!! I hear there's alot of variation in this glass.


Next step: sell all your Nikon gear and get the Holy Trinity of L primes and a 1Ds mkIII!


----------



## equetefue

Gone with have Nuke right where we want him.....


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:


Originally Posted by *equetefue* 
Gone with have Nuke right where we want him.....

ready to off load his nikon gear for cheap?!?!


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie* 
ready to off load his nikon gear for cheap?!?!









Only place my Nikon gear's going is my daughter's place. Her photographic eye far surpasses mine.
Anyway, my 400 f/2.8 is by far the finest piece of glass I've owned. I much prefer it to the 600 VR for many logistical reasons.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Nuke, I'm going find out where you live and rob you.









But GT, my stuff's all black!!!

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Next step: sell all your Nikon gear and get the Holy Trinity of L primes and a 1Ds mkIII!

See above...


----------



## nuclearjock

Pretty simple. HH, ambient outdoor sunlight, D3, Nikon 200mm f/4 micro.

1.


----------



## xlastshotx




----------



## Inuzukakiba2

Quote:


Originally Posted by *xlastshotx* 









Haha, Curse You Peanut Butter! :swearing:


----------



## nuclearjock

New lenscoat for my big gun. Protects the lens from dings, and eliminates reflections that can scare critters. The "protect from dings" thing is more important than I thought. You realize how heavy this beast is when you go to get into the car, and you try and one hand it into the passenger's seat. Not only is it long, but trying to handle it carefully inspite of its weight is surprisingly difficult. It's a whole different animal. Shown with the 1.7 tc and my D300. The foot is from RRS.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie




----------



## equetefue

SHOW OFF !!!! lol


----------



## Ramzinho

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


New lenscoat for my big gun. Protects the lens from dings, and eliminates reflections that can scare critters. The "protect from dings" thing is more important than I thought. You realize how heavy this beast is when you go to get into the car, and you try and one hand it into the passenger's seat. Not only is it long, but trying to be handle it carefully inspite of its weight is surprisingly difficult. It's a whole different animal. Shown with the 1.7 tc and my D300. The foot is from RRS.











my fiancee would kill you for that Camera


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Ramzinho*


my fiancee would kill you for that Camera










Just for that, I'm cancelling my trip to Egypt!!!


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *equetefue*


SHOW OFF !!!! lol


Yea, and it's black. Deal with it!!!









I coulda got camo, but it just needs to be black.


----------



## Marin

It would look better in white.


----------



## equetefue

^^^ agree ! /thread ... joking


----------



## nuclearjock

You guys are gang banging up on me....

Edit:

BTW, that blue thing under the foot is a charger for a Canon P&S, so there.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
Yea, and it's black. Deal with it!!!









I coulda got camo, but it just needs to be black.

Black and baking in the sun, accelerating mold growth.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
New lenscoat for my big gun. Protects the lens from dings, and eliminates reflections that can scare critters. The "protect from dings" thing is more important than I thought. You realize how heavy this beast is when you go to get into the car, and you try and one hand it into the passenger's seat. Not only is it long, but trying to handle it carefully inspite of its weight is surprisingly difficult. It's a whole different animal. Shown with the 1.7 tc and my D300. The foot is from RRS.










That's a great touch.

You know, resting it on a Canon charger.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


New lenscoat for my big gun. Protects the lens from dings, and eliminates reflections that can scare critters. The "protect from dings" thing is more important than I thought. You realize how heavy this beast is when you go to get into the car, and you try and one hand it into the passenger's seat. Not only is it long, but trying to handle it carefully inspite of its weight is surprisingly difficult. It's a whole different animal. Shown with the 1.7 tc and my D300. The foot is from RRS.


That thing is equivalent to the GDP of a small third world country.









Got my 70-200 f/4 IS today, *very* pleased with it! The reviews weren't kidding about the effectiveness of the IS on this lens, seems leaps and bounds better than the IS on my 28-135! Here's the first shot that I snapped, 1/15 hand held:


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


That's a great touch.

You know, resting it on a Canon charger.










There's my dark friend Foxie, I knew I could count on you.

BTW, to answer your question as to whether these big lenses drain your battery faster, after shooting every day last week while on vacation I would have to say no. Mind you all of my shooting is done without VR which I feel screws up dynamic af which is critical to BIF's. SS=1/2xfocal length works best with no VR. I was shooting 1/1600 and 1/2000 @ f/7.1 -8 and letting auto ISO set exposure. Typically iso ranged from 400 - 600 which is no prob for the D300 and not even noticed by the D3.


----------



## equetefue

congrats Gone !!!

I knew you like it. Now shoot something outside and drool at the sharpness from that lens


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *equetefue*


congrats Gone !!!

I knew you like it. Now shoot something outside and drool at the sharpness from that lens


I certainly will, flood or no.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


I certainly will, flood or no.


Got a polarizer for the water shots???


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
Got a polarizer for the water shots???









Polarizer's don't protect camera's from flash floods.


----------



## Danylu

^ They do now!









Shooting indoor table tennis when half the lights aren't working is beyond the D60 and 35mm 1.8. Autofocus in sports fails too with 3 AF points. I think I got 2 keepers out of about 100 shots


----------



## muffin

I'm forced to reinstall Windows tomorrow, how would I go about setting Lightroom up on the new install with my pictures and settings intact? I can save a backup of the catalogue but I'll be putting the pictures on a different hard drive though so the file paths will change...


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *muffin*


I'm forced to reinstall Windows tomorrow, how would I go about setting Lightroom up on the new install with my pictures and settings intact? I can save a backup of the catalogue but I'll be putting the pictures on a different hard drive though so the file paths will change...


Save the catalog and pictures, you may have to remap their locations, but that's as easy as Import from disk -> that folder.


----------



## laboitenoire

There is quite the story behind getting this Frisbee. My friend and I were going to see Trivium back in February, but the guy who bought the tickets misplaced one of them, and so we couldn't go. We finally got tickets to see them on this year's Mayhem circuit. We were about ~15 feet from the stage, and my friend almost passed out during their set because he was dehydrated. We then stood in line to meet them, and we were told they wouldn't be giving out free posters to sign. So, we went and bought the cheapest merchandise we could, which turned out to be Frisbees. $5 for the Frisbee, and I met all of the guys. My friend and I got a picture with Matt Heafy. We were excited.


----------



## equetefue

Holy freakin Batman.... I just recieved my Canon 135mm f2 L and this thing should have warning stickers on it. It's amazingly sharp. I will post pics later. still in disbelief


----------



## laboitenoire

Well, maybe you should dispose of it in one of those yellow sharps boxes they have around... I know a few near my house if you need suggestions


----------



## GoneTomorrow

My first outing with the 70-200, the hummingbirds were very difficult to shoot, they move so fast!


----------



## laboitenoire

When I first looked at that second horse pic I thought it was horribly deformed







Looks like a nice lens.

I was reading the review of the Olympus EP-1 today. Looks like a very interesting camera


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


When I first looked at that second horse pic I thought it was horribly deformed







Looks like a nice lens.

I was reading the review of the Olympus EP-1 today. Looks like a very interesting camera










Yeah, I'd love to have one actually, but it's rather overpriced.


----------



## equetefue

you are loving the lens eh ?


----------



## MADMAX22

LOL allmost got the hummingbird wings to look stopped on that second shot.

Looks really nice.


----------



## nuclearjock

Hijacked from Nikon Cafe. Several of these nikon lenses are no longer in production. there's an 800mm f/5.6 and a 300mm f/2 in there.

Here's an article on the 300mm f/2 for those who are so inclined.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *equetefue* 
you are loving the lens eh ?

Yes sir, it's about time I got this lens! I was just looking at some MTF charts for that 135mm, it's obscenely sharp, can't wait to your shots from it!


----------



## equetefue

I tell you I had a lot of lenses from both camps. Sharpest lenses I ever had was the a Nikon 80-200 AF (cherry pick copy bought from a shooter for National geographic) and my Canon 70-200f4, but dude this 135 L is no joke. Now I understand all the talk about it. Its as sharp as a macro lens. Coming home early from work and shooting random crap around the house.


----------



## Marin

I'd love to get a 135mm F/2L but the focal length is pretty awkward on a crop body.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

hmm, with the new nikon 70-200mm on the horizon do you guys expect some decent price drops in the current model?
have been thinking about picking one up for a while but no way i could justify the price


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie*


hmm, with the new nikon 70-200mm on the horizon do you guys expect some decent price drops in the current model?
have been thinking about picking one up for a while but no way i could justify the price











For now it's kinda wait and see what 2 xtra ED elements and the magic nano foo foo dust is going to do performance wise. One feature that's been eliminated on the new lens is (are) the focus lock buttons which I find myself using quite frequently. They're not obvious in the pictures that have been published, they may have been moved elsewhere. 
The current model is really a fantastic lens though. There's a thread at Nikon Cafe regarding this issue and most of the shooters there refuse to pay the xtra tarrif and unload their current models. As far as new copies left in stock, I really doubt there will be a price break. The lens is in short supply and people wanting to save the ~$500 will probably gobble up what's left of the current model.
If it turns out to be an overwhelming success, then I may sell mine which is in out of the box condition, box, warranty card, everything.

We'll see in the next couple of months.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


I'd love to get a 135mm F/2L but the focal length is pretty awkward on a crop body.


Canon has a mid range FF body.


----------



## Danylu

Hey guys I'm just wondering, I can either afford new 3rd party or 2nd hand Nikkor stuff. Like on ebay right now there is a 2 year old 70-200mm VR going at $900, for that price I can get the Sigma equivalent (minus OS/VR) for the same price. Unfortunately I don't have funds right now but if a similar opportunity rises when I have the money - which option would you guys choose?


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 









Canon has a mid range FF body.









$2,700 isn't cheap.

And the original 5D is a little too old for me.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
Hey guys I'm just wondering, I can either afford new 3rd party or 2nd hand Nikkor stuff. Like on ebay right now there is a 2 year old 70-200mm VR going at $900, for that price I can get the Sigma equivalent (minus OS/VR) for the same price. Unfortunately I don't have funds right now but if a similar opportunity rises when I have the money - which option would you guys choose?

No way it will sell for that cheap, that lens retails for $1800 USD and up. Is this the auction? It still has 4 days left, the bids will go up well over $1000.


----------



## Marin

Feels good to use Canon. Nice to have four 70-200mm lenses in the line-up.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Feels good to use Canon. Nice to have four 70-200mm lenses in the line-up.


Nikon doesn't need four lenses to do one job....


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Nikon doesn't need four lenses to do one job....


Then you can cough up $1,800 for the old 70-200mm or $2,400 for the new one.









For portability Canon has the 70-200m f/4L (IS) and for sports and a thinner DoF they have the 70-200mm f/2.8L (IS).

Satisfies everyones needs


----------



## equetefue

and that's the reason I drop Nikon. Not enough lens selection and the steep pricing. Also I feel; and this is personal intuition; that Canon Teles are faster in the AF regardless of the body.

Few months back I played for good time with a friends D300 and D3 and was not impressed at all. The Canon 1d; again my opinion; jumps into focus.

There are only two things that I miss from Nikon. The viewfinders and the excellent flash system.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *equetefue*


and that's the reason I drop Nikon. Not enough lens selection and the steep pricing. Also I feel; and this is personal intuition; that Canon Teles are faster in the AF regardless of the body.

Few months back I played for good time with a friends D300 and D3 and was not impressed at all. The Canon 1d; again my opinion; jumps into focus.

There are only two things that I miss from Nikon. The viewfinders and the excellent flash system.


It's all a matter of personal preference. All of my AFS lenses focus instaneously with decent light. My 400 VR is absoultely the quickest focusing lens I've ever used bar none on both my D300 and D3. The dynamic AF when placed in continuous mode outpaces Canon for quickness hands down.

So far I am unimpressed with the placement and feel of the controls on the 5DMKII. The camera feels much less than substantial in my hands. Based on this I reserved a 1Ds MKIII body as well for this weekend to see if it handles alittle better. The verdict will be in after evaluating them with the 200 f/2 this weekend.

But this really boils down to a matter of personal preference. Both camera systems have so much to offer, both have produced some of the finest photographs on the planet, and in Nikon's case, off the planet.

The D3 is a tough act for any camera to follow, and I honestly believe that Nikon's primes are superior to Canon's.

As far as pricing, the difference won't last forever. Canon will also raise prices eventually.


----------



## Marin

I don't see how Nikon's primes can be superior when a lot of them can't match Canon, unless you're only referring to the telephoto primes.


----------



## Mootsfox

I keep hearing about this huge pricing gap, but I only hear it from the Canon guys... Ya'll act like your white glass is a bargain. Just quickly browsing, the 70-200mm f/2.8's are roughly the same cost between makers.


----------



## equetefue

Moot I used to shoot Nikon...

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...mm_f_4_0L.html

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...kor_600mm.html

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...mm_f_2_8G.html

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...mm_f_2_8L.html

So on and so on...

Now let me clarify, it's not only the pricing that gets me, but the lack of availability and the lack of lens options in the line-up.

Both system deliver impressive images though with the right person behind the lens


----------



## tkl.hui

I am very happy. My new lens arrived yesterday. Finally i have something to replace the kit lens and boy what a difference. I'm loving the bokeh on this thing and it makes taking shots indoors alot easier. Even wide open its 10x sharper than the kit lens.

And here it is. A brand new Tamron 17-50mm F/2.8 XR.




























Just something with some nice colour I really enjoyed.









And one with some awesome bokeh. Loving it so much.


----------



## equetefue

that lens is a little gem for the $$

Enjoy it. Pics not working though


----------



## equetefue

Need 3 more lenses and i'll be happy

100mm f2.8 Macro
24-105mm f4 IS L
500mm f4 IS L

Filling up...


----------



## Mootsfox

To equetefue;

So Nikon Teles are about 20% higher than Canons? Are they 20% better? Complaining about price is one thing, complaining about price when it's on lenses that far exceed the value of my car(s), I don't see the argument holding much weight to me. The ability for me to grab any damn Nikkor lens and use it, is great. I'm a very cheap person honestly, and that's why I went with Nikon.

With Canon I feel like you _have_ to buy new lenses. The mount changes every decade anyways. With Nikon I feel like I can buy what I need, new or used and get a good value. Maybe it's just me. I like Nikon though, quite a bit, and I don't see those arguments of Canon rocking lower prices, because it's not what I've seen in practice. Though of course, I'm not buying into the $5,000-$15,000 market, at least not with lenses









Enjoy your Canon. I'm going to go shoot with my 5FPS Pro-level DSLR that has held it's value well for so long (payed $100).


----------



## equetefue

There is one lens in the Nikon lineup that I drool about. Shot with it a few times and fell in love with it for it's versatility.

The 200-400. What a dream for wildlife shooting


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
I don't see how Nikon's primes can be superior when a lot of them can't match Canon, unless you're only referring to the telephoto primes.

In addition to the long primes, there's the 85mm f/1.4 known as the "cream machine", the 180mm F/2.8, the 200mm f/2 just to name a couple.

Canon has nothing that comes close IQ wise when it comes to the 24-70 f/2.8 as well as the 14-24 f/2.8. You can blow all you want but those lenses are totally unmatched by Canon.

I'll keep going, the 200-400 f/4 is in a class by itself and carried by numerous Nat'l Geo. photogs. Also, Canon does not in any way match the sharpness and performance of the 200mm F/4 in the macro department.

Need more??


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
In addition to the long primes, there's the 85mm f/1.4 known as the "cream machine", the 180mm F/2.8, the 200mm f/2 just to name a couple.

Canon has nothing that comes close IQ wise when it comes to the 24-70 f/2.8 as well as the 14-24 f/2.8. You can blow all you want but those lenses are totally unmatched by Canon.

I'll keep going, the 200-400 f/4 is in a class by itself and carried by numerous Nat'l Geo. photogs. Also, Canon does not in any way match the sharpness and performance of the 200mm F/4 in the macro department.

Need more??

Under the prime L lenses that are in production, Canon has:

- 14mm f/2.8L II
- 24mm f/1.4L II
- 35mm f/1.4L
- 50mm f/1.2L
- 85mm f/1.2L II
- 135mm f/2L
- 180mm f/3.5L Macro
- 200mm f/2L IS

This is before getting into super-telephoto.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *equetefue* 
Now let me clarify, it's not only the pricing that gets me, but the lack of availability and the lack of lens options in the line-up.

For Nikon users, we do have a wide selection of glass in the form of Sigma, Tamron, and Tokina which for the most part give the same IQ as Canon glass. So the palette of glass available to a Nikon user with Canon IQ is really rather large.

BTW have you shot the Nikkor 135mm f/2?? If not, it's also in a class by itself.

I have to say for the most part, I don't like their DX format lenses.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Under the prime L lenses that are in production, Canon has:

- 14mm f/2.8L II
- 24mm f/1.4L II
- 35mm f/1.4L
- 50mm f/1.2L
- 85mm f/1.2L II
- 135mm f/2L
- 180mm f/3.5L Macro
- 200mm f/2L IS

This is before getting into super-telephoto.

Yea, what's your point? We're discussing performance. The fact that they're available simply means just that.

Again, there's alot of additional glass out ther that matches Canon's IQ and price in Nikon mount, it's just third party optics.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
For Nikon users, we do have a wide selection of glass in the form of Sigma, Tamron, and Tokina which for the most part give the same IQ as Canon glass. So the palette of glass available to a Nikon user with Canon IQ is really rather large.

BTW have you shot the Nikkor 135mm f/2?? If not, it's also in a class by itself.

I have to say for the most part, I don't like their DX format lenses.

Under that logic, then Canon has the exact same glass since those three brands have their lenses in both F and EF mounts.

Also, Tokina only makes lenses currently for crop sensors.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
Yea, what's your point? We're discussing performance. The fact that they're available simply means just that.

Again, there's alot of additional glass out ther that matches Canon's IQ and price in Nikon mount, it's just third party optics.

And same can be said for Nikon. I don't get your point, third party lenses can match both Canon and Nikon.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
And same can be said for Nikon. I don't get your point, third party lenses can match both Canon and Nikon.

You don't get my point???
Let me simplify for you. Edwin is saying that He's happier with Canon glass because there's a wider selection than Nikon, (ignoring price).

I'm saying all we Nikon shooters have to do is turn to third party glass which gives the same IQ as Canon glass and we have the same selection available to us, if not even a wider variety at a lower price and inferior build quality. That's not so hard is it?

BTW, here's a shot taken about 15 minutes ago on a cropped sensor (D300) with the 400 f/2.8 from about 75 feet. This pic saw auto WB in LR and individual RGB channels optimized using the Ron Reznick method:










Also, a 1.7 Nikon tc was attached. Wide open @ f/4.8 with the tc.


----------



## Marin

Yeah, that make sense. But still doesn't answer what I originally said, unless you took what I said out of context. Which it seems from the sound of it.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


I don't see how Nikon's primes can be superior when a lot of them can't match Canon, unless you're only referring to the telephoto primes.


----------



## Danylu

@Gone: Yeah there are 4 days left on the auction but a $900 price with a few bids looks more promising than a $1800 auction with 0 bids, if it sells for under $1200 it'll be a nice price.

Wow this flamefight is almost as pointless as Intel vs AMD flame threads. All I know is that Nikkor lenses look better than Canon







.

Hm it might be smart to put my camera stuff in a cabinet instead of on my desk amongst my mess.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Yeah, that make sense. But still doesn't answer what I originally said, unless you took what I said out of context. Which it seems from the sound of it.


Please by all means, recontextualize it.


----------



## Marin

Excluding telephoto lenses, more of Canon's *prime* lenses currently in production can be considered superior.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *equetefue*


Need 3 more lenses and i'll be happy

100mm f2.8 Macro
24-105mm f4 IS L
500mm f4 IS L

Filling up... 










C'mon Edwin, you took that picture in a camera store right??

Tell me that's not your Canon "shrine".


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Wow this flamefight is almost as pointless as Intel vs AMD flame threads. All I know is that Nikkor lenses look better than Canon







.


It's not a flame fight, but more correctly a discussion of photographic equipment.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Wow this flamefight is almost as pointless as Intel vs AMD flame threads. All I know is that Nikkor lenses look better than Canon







.


If it was a flamewar I'd be quoting Ken Rockwell right now and posting pictures of him.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Excluding telephoto lenses, more of Canon's *prime* lenses currently in production can be considered superior.


Superior to what?


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


Superior to what?


To the prime lenses Nikon has in the same focal lengths.


----------



## equetefue

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


C'mon Edwin, you took that picture in a camera store right??

Tell me that's not your Canon "shrine".


You see that bottom shelf... Hopefully a 500 in there soon.

Hard when tryign to buy a house at the same time.

As far as the rivalry.... is all good. But deep down inside nikonians love white







as much as Canon shooters like black bodies


----------



## equetefue

any of you coming down to florida any time soon ??? I want to go shoot with you guys


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


To the prime lenses Nikon has in the same focal lengths.


Sorry Marin, I've yet to see evidence of this in the 40 years I've been enjoying photography. I categorically disagree.

When I started shooting digital several years ago, both options were available and it really was a no brainer.

Mind you, I dropped close to 3K a few days ago to investigate this IQ issue further. For me, it's a combinination of body functionality and image quality.

This weekend I'll have my 5DMKII, a 1DSMKIII, and a 200mm f/2 at my disposal. If this shows promise, I'll start renting mid focal length primes. But I've spent alot of time looking at shots from both mid range prime camps. Canon lenses do not have the "pop" or sharpness or for that matter color rendition the Nikon glass exhibits. Mind you these are other peoples photographs. What matters to me is how this equipment performs in my hands. I'd like nothing more than to be able to settle on a vendor that has better IQ, better handling and a cheaper price. From my experience to this point, I have my doubts.

I assume you've evaluated both brands personally since you seem to speak with such authority about the quality of Canon's products vs. Nikon's products. Am I correct in that assumption?


----------



## equetefue

u know what's odd... When I moved from Nikon to Canon I felt the buttom layout was better on Nikon. When I shot my friends D300/D3 I got used to the Canon and now the Canon felt odd....

Weird how you get used to the layout. I would be able to do what you are doing right now and have 2 diferent systems. I would get lost


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *equetefue*


any of you coming down to florida any time soon ??? I want to go shoot with you guys


I'll be in the Jacksonville area for four days on business in October. If that would work, I'd love to hook up with you Edwin, I might bring some white stuff with me.

Randy and myself and a few others are talking about shooting bald eagles off the mississippi in December near where I live. It's cold, but you may get some good shots. PM me if you want details.


----------



## equetefue

Hey Nuke... you sell your pics man or is it just hobby ?


----------



## equetefue

Hey man i'll take some days off. I have like 30 days available and perks of being the boss.

I would love to meet up and shoot. If you serious about it we can start planning and select some shooting locations


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


If it was a flamewar I'd be quoting Ken Rockwell right now and posting pictures of him.




















wait a second, i shoot nikon, scratch that!

Quote:



Originally Posted by *equetefue*


You see that bottom shelf... Hopefully a 500 in there soon.

Hard when tryign to buy a house at the same time.

As far as the rivalry.... is all good. But deep down inside nikonians love white







as much as Canon shooters like black bodies


no trips planned currently, but if i am down that way im not so sure you would wanna spend a day showing me how to 'properly' do stuff


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *equetefue*


Hey Nuke... you sell your pics man or is it just hobby ?


How do you think I pay for all this kaka???

I shoot kids sports, soccer, baseball, LaCrosse, football, basketball, you name it.

The 400 VR was paid for with "soccer" dollars, and the season is just starting up now. I'm hoping to fund either a black 500 f/4 or a white 800 f/5.6 with this year's proceeds.

No way the 5DMKII will do for sports, burst rate is way too slow. Maybe be ok for perched small birds which is what I have planned for the 800.


----------



## equetefue

yeah for sports definetely the 5D is too slow. I would go with the D700 or if $ no object the 1Ds.

I need to get into sports man, but don't know how to start around here. Birds don't complain if you know what I mean


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie*












Thanks for that Schub, just about tossed dinner.. He's trying to look like a "pro" there.

I know a couple pros. Their equipment is beat to crap, and they make 30-40k/year and eat in cheesie restaurants.

No thanks.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *equetefue*


yeah for sports definetely the 5D is too slow. I would go with the D700 or if $ no object the 1Ds.

I need to get into sports man, but don't know how to start around here. Birds don't complain if you know what I mean


You're not gonna like this, but postpone the 500. Get a 400 f/2.8 for night venues and blurred backgrounds. Go to sportsshooter.com and read up.

Then find out where the soccer games are located in your area, get a company name, have some cards printed along with some t-shirts that say see today's action at... your website, and sign up for something like a smugmug pro account.

You want to go to events where the parents are, i.e. the kids aren't old enough to drive. The parents are the ones who'll buy the pics.

Finally, stay away from girl's events. I only shoot them if specifically asked.
Parents are funny about this sometimes.

If you want more info, pm me but it's an easy way to make alot of money and have some fun.


----------



## equetefue

I already sell prints and stuff, but nothing sports.

www.photo-galleria.com i'm thru ExposureManager for couple years now.

I thought I had to get permission from school and coach


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *equetefue*


I already sell prints and stuff, but nothing sports.

www.photo-galleria.com i'm thru ExposureManager for couple years now.



ok, so you're all set. But you want the 400 f/2.8 for sports.
If the white one is like my black one, it'll take tc's beautifully and you'll have the length for birds, only it'll be a bit heavy. Within a year, you should have enough for the 500 if you really want it.

Edit:
I don't shoot school events..
You want to shoot private league games. It's here that the parents have invested money in their kids recreation, and have the resources to buy "professional" quality pics of their kids for their friends and families. You'll be amazed, not many people are doing this. The response I get when I show up at games with my big gun and my t-shirts is really positive and at times overwhelming.

I'm sure there are some affluent markets down in Florida...


----------



## equetefue

My buddy does the baseball trading card style for sale in another country and does very well... you do the same ? what's your smug smug or zen link ?


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *equetefue* 
My buddy does the baseball trading card style for sale in another country and does very well... you do the same ? what's your smug smug or zen link ?


I just cleaned all the soccer stuff, but there's some kids baseball there. Still in the process of transferring galleries but you can have a look at:

midwestsportspictures.com.


----------



## equetefue

most games take place on Sunday right ?

Also how did you start? You called all the locals schools? Seriously thinking about it

What focal lenghs optimum with both my FF and 1.3x


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

i have also been thinking about getting started in this as a way to make a bit of change while at school.

thinking of getting a D2h nice a cheap and using my 18-200 for the time being, then want to get the 70-200 maybe a bit after christmas.


----------



## equetefue

Schub the D2H is a banging camera. The LBCast rules...

Anyways, try to go for a D2Hs if you can. lot better noise control. The viewfinder in the body is awesome and the shutter sound is great


----------



## Mootsfox

I was hoping to have stirred up more flaming then that









I'll try again in a few weeks









Anyways, Schubie, the D2H is a beast. The pro level DSLRs are so wonderful to hold and shoot with. Plus at 8FPS you should be able to catch anything.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:


Originally Posted by *equetefue* 
Schub the D2H is a banging camera. The LBCast rules...

Anyways, try to go for a D2Hs if you can. lot better noise control. The viewfinder in the body is awesome and the shutter sound is great

thanks for the heads up, ill keep my eyes out, looks like one just went up on ebay but its not functioning, any ideas of other places to keep an eye out?


----------



## Mootsfox

I found my D1H on Craigslist, OBO. The guy also had a D2H for $500 OBO.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *equetefue* 
most games take place on Sunday right ?

Also how did you start? You called all the locals schools? Seriously thinking about it

What focal lenghs optimum with both my FF and 1.3x

Saturday and Sunday. And again, I prefer to shoot private league games. That's where the time/$$$ ratio is the best. Do some googling for private soccer leagues in your area. There has to be a ton in Fla...

And remember, parents want faces. They want personalized action shots of their kids. Make sure you have cards, and a t-shirt Identifying where they can find your website. Then get home and post your pics while the iron is hot, the same day if possible.

For soccer, ff @400 f/2.8 rules the field. With 1.3x you may be able to get by with 300mm but you really need a wide apeture to blur the backgrounds and emphasize your subject. Wide apetures will also get you night venues of which there are many, and fast daytime shutter speeds so you don't have to use VR (IS) which screws dynamic on the fly autofocus.

First step, go to sportsshooter.com and spend some time reading their reccomendations. I can't emphasize this enough. Ultimately if you can get accepted into sportsshooters, you then have a very impressive credential to add to your website and business cards. I'm in the process of applying for this season.

It sounds like alot of stuff, but in the end it's fun, and you can buy lots of neat glass.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


I was hoping to have stirred up more flaming then that










You start it and then you make me finish it. How 'bout alittle help with these "white city" guys next time Foxie???


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


You start it and then you make me finish it. How 'bout alittle help with these "white city" guys next time Foxie???


I went and had a delicious dinner. I figured you can handle them. And of course, with the true lens craftier behind us, I didn't think you'd need much help


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


You start it and then you make me finish it. How 'bout alittle help with these "white city" guys next time Foxie???



Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


I went and had a delicious dinner. I figured you can handle them. And of course, with the true lens craftier behind us, I didn't think you'd need much help










i was around, but didnt want to get involved in something that i would get









EDIT: so i am now (or will soon) have the funds set aside for a used d2h or preferably d2hs
but the later are rarely on ebay and cant find them on kijiji or craigslist, any ideas on places to check, fine with registering on forums with a decent for sale section


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


I went and had a delicious dinner. I figured you can handle them. And of course, with the true lens craftier behind us, I didn't think you'd need much help











You're schmoozing me Foxie....


----------



## equetefue

Hey guys.... can any of you help me. I suck at PS and need to design a basic logo.

www.Photo-Galleria.com is the name

I'm begging for help designing one I can use. I currently have business cards and they work, but no logo, just the name.


----------



## ace8uk

Too much Nikon hatred in here! Anyway... Anyone else entering the photographer of the year competition? Not sure if it's open to the states, but top prize is Â£10,000, and first prize per category is Â£500. www.poty2009.com


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *equetefue*


Hey guys.... can any of you help me. I suck at PS and need to design a basic logo.

www.Photo-Galleria.com is the name

I'm begging for help designing one I can use. I currently have business cards and they work, but no logo, just the name.


hey eq, im no good with photoshop, but you many wanna post a thread
http://www.overclock.net/art-graphics/
asking for help








good luck!


----------



## muffin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Save the catalog and pictures, you may have to remap their locations, but that's as easy as Import from disk -> that folder.


When I reformatted, I completely forgot about the catalogue and my pictures







. I hadn't slept for a long time... So I've lost all my adjustments and what not but thank christ I had Lightroom set to create a backup on another hard drive so I do at least have a copy of all my original .NEF files


----------



## equetefue

Ok guys... I suck at Photoshop an after one hour of work this is the best I can come up with...

Help


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *equetefue* 
Ok guys... I suck at Photoshop an after one hour of work this is the best I can come up with...

Help










Did you find any soccer events in your area this weekend??

There's a huge seeding tournament here this weekend, (8/9&10).

$$$$$$


----------



## equetefue

Going to sit down and look for them.

How did you do it? I mean what should I look for and expect?


----------



## equetefue

hey guys. I was going to post this on the for sale board, but is only for photogs.

Is a Sekonic L-358 and a Canon 220EX. Pm me


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *equetefue* 
hey guys. I was going to post this on the for sale board, but is only for photogs.

Is a Sekonic L-358 and a Canon 220EX. Pm me

Gotta keep this stuff in the For Sale section. I've seen a couple people post in this thread in the past, just letting you and everyone else know, you have to keep it in FS.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Gotta keep this stuff in the For Sale section. I've seen a couple people post in this thread in the past, just letting you and everyone else know, you have to keep it in FS.


Foxie,

The photo people on oc.net are sorta few and far between. Chances are if we post something in 4 sale, they won't even know about. Isn't there a way or can there be a way to notify the photographic people about photographic 4-sales without breaking the rules??? Can we modify the rules so that we can at least notify people about something in the 4-sale section??

I know I very seldom look at the oc posts any more and go straight to this thread. In my case (and I think others) we never see the new posts page at all.

Can we have a separate 4 sale section for the photographic thread???


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


Foxie,

The photo people on Overclock.net are sorta few and far between. Chances are if we post something in 4 sale, they won't even know about. Isn't there a way or can there be a way to notify the photographic people about photographic 4-sales without breaking the rules??? Can we modify the rules so that we can at least notify people about something in the 4-sale section??

I know I very seldom look at the oc posts any more and go straight to this thread. In my case (and I think others) we never see the new posts page at all.

Can we have a separate 4 sale section for the photographic thread???


hey nuclear, i agree, ill bring it up with the rest of the staff and see what they think and what can be done


----------



## equetefue

yeah. That's why I did not posted over there. I would disappear in minutes


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
Foxie,

The photo people on Overclock.net are sorta few and far between. Chances are if we post something in 4 sale, they won't even know about. Isn't there a way or can there be a way to notify the photographic people about photographic 4-sales without breaking the rules??? Can we modify the rules so that we can at least notify people about something in the 4-sale section??

I know I very seldom look at the oc posts any more and go straight to this thread. In my case (and I think others) we never see the new posts page at all.

Can we have a separate 4 sale section for the photographic thread???

Ah I only visit the Aussie OCN Club, the Home Page just in case something rando interests me and the photography section.


----------



## tkl.hui

Well I was kinda bored at work so I brought my camera in for some fun. Here's one that I thought looked better in black and white. What do you think?

For some reason the words seem out of focus on flickr but on my computer they seem fine. Kind of weird.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
Foxie,

The photo people on Overclock.net are sorta few and far between. Chances are if we post something in 4 sale, they won't even know about. Isn't there a way or can there be a way to notify the photographic people about photographic 4-sales without breaking the rules??? Can we modify the rules so that we can at least notify people about something in the 4-sale section??

I know I very seldom look at the oc posts any more and go straight to this thread. In my case (and I think others) we never see the new posts page at all.

Can we have a separate 4 sale section for the photographic thread???

I'd like to do that if possible, I think it would be a good idea. However, I don't make the rules









I'll talk with some of the for sale guys and Chipp and see if we can't have that.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


Foxie,

The photo people on Overclock.net are sorta few and far between. Chances are if we post something in 4 sale, they won't even know about. Isn't there a way or can there be a way to notify the photographic people about photographic 4-sales without breaking the rules??? Can we modify the rules so that we can at least notify people about something in the 4-sale section??

I know I very seldom look at the oc posts any more and go straight to this thread. In my case (and I think others) we never see the new posts page at all.

Can we have a separate 4 sale section for the photographic thread???


I totally, agree, but putting a link in your sig to your FS thread is a temporary solution without breaking the TOS.


----------



## Marin

Think I'm going to drop by the local camera store and pick up some older lenses.


----------



## Mootsfox

Alright, so feel free to post links to your for sale threads. If you have something to sell, you still need to make the thread in the FS section. All other rules apply, 35 reps to sell and such.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Alright, so feel free to post links to your for sale threads. If you have something to sell, you still need to make the thread in the FS section. All other rules apply, 35 reps to sell and such.


Thanks Foxie. +1 symbolic rep


----------



## equetefue

excellent...


----------



## GoneTomorrow

More 70-200 goodness:


----------



## tK FuRY

Gone - that 70-200 is definitely an amazing piece of glass


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *tK FuRY*


Gone - that 70-200 is definitely an amazing piece of glass










Indeed, but I've been bitten by the L bug now...not a financially sound condition.


----------



## Marin

Took the 70-200mm out for some shots. I liked this one.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Nice bokeh, Marin. This lens hasn't come off my 40D since I got it.


----------



## tK FuRY

now I really want to reconsider the 50D + 70-200mm ... I wonder what the Nikon D90 Equivalent to that would be









Nevermind







Found some great 70-200 f/2.8 VR shots


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *tK FuRY*


now I really want to reconsider the 50D + 70-200mm ... I wonder what the Nikon D90 Equivalent to that would be









Nevermind







Found some great 70-200 f/2.8 VR shots


Here's another 70-200 f/2.8 @200mm.
Click pic for the good stuff.


----------



## equetefue

going shooting tomorrow.

bringing the 2 bodies and Wimberly setup. Also new Off shoe adapter and flash bracket. Hopefully some nice pics tomorrow


----------



## nuclearjock

Spent all day with the 5DMKII, and 1DsMKIII rental today. Now I'm a Canon rank amateur, but the 5DMKII's feel and ergonomics totally suck compared to the D3, D300, and 1DsMKIII. The 200mm f/2 rental lens had a bad AF system, so spent all day "MF"ing... Looks like it's gonna be the 1DsMKIII in the end.

I'll try again tomorrow with the 85mm f/1.2.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


Spent all day with the 5DMKII, and 1DsMKIII rental today. Now I'm a Canon rank amateur, but the 5DMKII's feel and ergonomics totally suck compared to the D3, D300, and 1DsMKIII. The 200mm f/2 rental lens had a bad AF system, so spent all day "MF"ing... Looks like it's gonna be the 1DsMKIII in the end.

I'll try again tomorrow with the 85mm f/1.2.


What's the reason for the 1D?

And a $6,500 camera better feel good, no matter the maker.

Why no D3X?


----------



## equetefue

those 1Ds are bad ass cameras...

Looking for a used 1Ds2 to replace my 5D


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


Spent all day with the 5DMKII, and 1DsMKIII rental today. Now I'm a Canon rank amateur, but the 5DMKII's feel and ergonomics totally suck compared to the D3, D300, and 1DsMKIII. The 200mm f/2 rental lens had a bad AF system, so spent all day "MF"ing... *Looks like it's gonna be the 1DsMKIII in the end. *

I'll try again tomorrow with the 85mm f/1.2.


thinking of making the switch to canon?

i was un-decided when looking at the two brands, the biggest thing that switched me was i liked the ergonomics of the lower end nikons more so thats the way i went


----------



## equetefue

to be honest the ideal thing is to have both systems, but it would be very expensive and hard to get used to both ergonomics.

That 1Ds is amazing camera though


----------



## equetefue

heard the 85 f1.2 af is slow but the bokeh and optics are amazing


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *equetefue* 
heard the 85 f1.2 af is slow but the bokeh and optics are amazing

They improved the speed of the MKII. But it was never meant to be fast since it's more of a studio lens.


----------



## equetefue

true...


----------



## Danylu

So many expensive lenses being used







.

Guys quick question, if I got a normal lens @ f/2.8 and a telephoto @ 2.8 and took a photo of an object so that the object was the same size in both photos, which one would have more depth of field?


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


So many expensive lenses being used







.

Guys quick question, if I got a normal lens @ f/2.8 and a telephoto @ 2.8 and took a photo of an object so that the object was the same size in both photos, which one would have more depth of field?


The wider one will have greater depth of field.

You can see how with this link. The guy says otherwise, but just look at the differences in the photos (mainly the tower)
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/dof2.shtml


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


The wider one will have greater depth of field.

You can see how with this link. The guy says otherwise, but just look at the differences in the photos (mainly the tower)
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/dof2.shtml


His 28mm picture is OOF I think D:

By looking at the pic it seems that you get more perceived depth of field with a wide angle at the same photo size. I'll try to buy the 55-200mm VR off eBay for $50 and do some testing myself







. If its higher than that I'll ignore it and keep saving for something fast.


----------



## Mootsfox

The 55-200 is slow, but faster at 55mm than the 18-55mm. That lens is worth $150-200 new, so be careful with any auctions you see it having it for $50.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


The 55-200 is slow, but faster at 55mm than the 18-55mm. That lens is worth $150-200 new, so be careful with any auctions you see it having it for $50.


Hm... I'll restart my internal debate about quality vs convenience then.


----------



## Mootsfox

It's a lens you should get if you can. Feels great on both of my bodies, and is very sharp at f/8.

It's nothing special, but it will do it's job just fine and can save you some money until you jump on a better lens.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
It's a lens you should get if you can. Feels great on both of my bodies, and is very sharp at f/8.

It's nothing special, but it will do it's job just fine and can save you some money until you jump on a better lens.

I agree with you







. With the current plan I won't have a VR lens for a very long time so it might be nice to test out VR.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
What's the reason for the 1D?

And a $6,500 camera better feel good, no matter the maker.

Why no D3X?









I'm gonna try and go super long next spring for migrating birds (small).
I'm thinking seriously about the Canon 800mm f/5.6 for that.
I'm also boycotting the Nikon D3X for adding a 24mp sensor in a D3 body and doubling the price.
I also plan to look at the 1DMKIII to see if all the mp make a difference for what I'm doing. If I can fill the frame with the 800, then mp's won't be as important.

5DMKII is going back this week.
Sorry GT. I'll make sure I'm keeping my next purchase before you go to the trouble of sigging me.

BTW, I bought am ML-3 infrared release and I'll be keeping that.


----------



## equetefue

Talk to Mao at Pixel-shooter.com He has an 800.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *equetefue*


Talk to Mao at Pixel-shooter.com He has an 800.


I actually have an acquaintance here in the Chicago metro area that has an 800 as well. I've already taken several shots with it and I like what I see. Optically, it just doesn't have the "pop" or 3D character that the long Nikon primes have. I find my self cranking up saturation in PP which I never have to do with Nikon glass. I don't know what the reason for this is, maybe the magic nano foo foo particles really do something other than raise the price.

Maybe I'll get lucky and find a used Nikkor 800mm f/5.6 by the time I'm ready.


----------



## FilluX

Took this one a few days ago from our window









20sec shutter speed


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


I actually have an acquaintance here in the Chicago metro area that has an 800 as well. I've already taken several shots with it and I like what I see. Optically, it just doesn't have the "pop" or 3D character that the long Nikon primes have. I find my self cranking up saturation in PP which I never have to do with Nikon glass. I don't know what the reason for this is, maybe the magic nano foo foo particles really do something other than raise the price.

Maybe I'll get lucky and find a used Nikkor 800mm f/5.6 by the time I'm ready.



I've never seen this pop you're talking about, so I'm a little confused where you see it.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 

BTW, I bought am ML-3 infrared release and I'll be keeping that.

Best $20 you can spend


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

should I?

http://cgi.ebay.com/Nikon-D2Hs-camer...d=p3286.c0.m14

its the first function D2Hs i have seen go up yet, the D2H is a lot more common and quite a bit cheaper, but i dont know if its worth the extra.

help?


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie*


should I?

http://cgi.ebay.com/Nikon-D2Hs-camer...d=p3286.c0.m14

its the first function D2Hs i have seen go up yet, the D2H is a lot more common and quite a bit cheaper, but i dont know if its worth the extra.

help?










From what I've heard, the extra "s" is a big difference.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie* 
should I?

http://cgi.ebay.com/Nikon-D2Hs-camer...d=p3286.c0.m14

its the first function D2Hs i have seen go up yet, the D2H is a lot more common and quite a bit cheaper, but i dont know if its worth the extra.

help?









I think that would be money better spent on a D90 or maybe even towards a D300.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
I think that would be money better spent on a D90 or maybe even towards a D300.

hmm, that actually makes some sense to put it towards a d300, with the grip it shoots at the same speed as the d2h and that was one of the main reasons i was thinking of picking one up.


----------



## equetefue

Some pics from today. Schubie not trying to make you quit














































[IMGhttp://s152588970.onlinehome.us/PiCs/Birding/Viera%208%2010%2009/0017.jpg[/IMG]










More here http://s152588970.onlinehome.us/PiCs...208%2010%2009/

Pic of my main set-up today + had 5D + 70-200 L on my side


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie*


should I?

http://cgi.ebay.com/Nikon-D2Hs-camer...d=p3286.c0.m14

its the first function D2Hs i have seen go up yet, the D2H is a lot more common and quite a bit cheaper, but i dont know if its worth the extra.

help?










No.

You can pick up a D2H for about $350 on ebay. The s adds significant improvements, but it's not worth 2x the price.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Awesome shots and nice Wimberley setup, eq. Is that flash extender? How well does it work?


----------



## equetefue

well I used to have one and sold it. decided to get it again and give it a try.

I like it but I get a little confused with it. Still playing with it and trying to figure out what metering should I use and such. I got home and pics were a underexposed. Thank god for RAW.


----------



## equetefue

Update me...

Out is the 220EX in is a 380EX


----------



## By-Tor

equetefue, those are some great shots... Love the setup also...

I picked up a used 20d today in pristine condition as my back up/2nd body and can't wait to put it to use.


----------



## equetefue

looks like new... u got a good price for it ? Thinking of getting one also as I don't like the 5D for wildlife as is full frame.


----------



## By-Tor

Paid $300 with everything in the box unopened but the body. It has about 15k shots on it...

I was getting it for my wife which I already have a 28-135mm lens up in my closet for her, but once I held it in my hands it was mine... Oh well

She used my 40d once and said it was just to big and heavy for her, so maybe a rebel body would be a better choice.. hehe


----------



## equetefue

That's a great price... Congrats on a great camera.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Best $20 you can spend










The ML-3 is the D3 flavor remote. It's wireless infrared and costs $220, not $20 (I wish).

What's nice is that you can set it up so that if something interrupts the beam, (like a critter), it'll trip the shutter release. So if you trust leaving your camera unattended, you might get some great captures. I also functions as a convential wireless remote to trip the shutter.

Edit:
I'll be using it mainly for hummers.


----------



## By-Tor

Quote:


Originally Posted by *equetefue* 
That's a great price... Congrats on a great camera.

Oh yeah couldn't pass it up...

Just got a email from a local shooter buddy of mine that will sell me his 300d and a G5 P&S for $100 for the pair... That will take care of the wifes camera... lolz..


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


The ML-3 is the D3 flavor remote. It's wireless infrared and costs $220, not $20 (I wish).

What's nice is that you can set it up so that if something interrupts the beam, (like a critter), it'll trip the shutter release. So if you trust leaving your camera unattended, you might get some great captures. I also functions as a convential wireless remote to trip the shutter.


Oh damn. I thought you typo'd ML-L3.

So the ML-3 works with the 10 pin? Think it would work on a D1?


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *equetefue*


Some pics from today. Schubie not trying to make you quit



Nice Pictures! Were you in Aperture Priority Mode?


----------



## Marin

I'm drooling right now.

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...postcount=2386


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Great shots as always Eq









Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
No.

You can pick up a D2H for about $350 on ebay. The s adds significant improvements, but it's not worth 2x the price.

aye, i think that will be the route i will go as i think the d300 will be a bit out of my price range for some time.


----------



## equetefue

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
Nice Pictures! Were you in Aperture Priority Mode?

Oh yes. For birding AP is the best way as sunlight changes too quick and the action is too quick for dialing.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


I'm drooling right now.

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...postcount=2386


100mm is the longest lens in the bunch. I'm an optical purist with the best of them, nice yuppie collection but from me it gets an unmitigated meh!!!

Edit: Here's another angle if you're so inclined. Same author.


----------



## Oscuro

It's a nice collection....but just not for me. Not much in the way of diversity for having spent....hmm...what? 4-5 grand? Probably more since I don't know the pricing on the Zeiss glass.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Oscuro*


It's a nice collection....but just not for me. Not much in the way of diversity for having spent....hmm...what? 4-5 grand? Probably more since I don't know the pricing on the Zeiss glass.


The pure optical quality of Zeiss glass probably wouldn't manifest itself in the digital format anyway, (maybe >20mp). They really shine when shooting slow, fine grain film.

Anyway, Nikon and Canon have these focal lengths covered with some pretty awesome glass themselves.


----------



## dr4gon

Wow I'm drooling over that zeiss collection, wow. Apart from the lenses, I like the photo, very well composed and cool lens reflection colors!









That's actually a really cool thread.


----------



## Danylu

Hey Gone I guess you were right, that Nikkor 70-200 ended up at $2000 - some guy had to bump the price $600 in one bid... there goes my chances of owning one.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Hey Gone I guess you were right, that Nikkor 70-200 ended up at $2000 - some guy had to bump the price $600 in one bid... there goes my chances of owning one.


Yeah, I should know having looked for several months for a Canon 70-200 f/2.8 IS for a steal, just can't happen!


----------



## By-Tor

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Yeah, I should know having looked for several months for a Canon 70-200 f/2.8 IS for a steal, just can't happen!


I picked one up a couple of months ago off my local craigslist for $950, so they are out there...


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *By-Tor*


I picked one up a couple of months ago off my local craigslist for $950, so they are out there...


What was its condition?


----------



## By-Tor

Not a mark on it. I just took this shot playing with my flash triggers... Still learning flash photog..


----------



## Marin

Looks nice.

I finally got around to taking a pic of all my stuff.


----------



## By-Tor

I like how you have them sitting on the rocks...Nice gear..

How do you like your 10-22mm lens? I love mine....


----------



## Marin

I like the 10-22mm, glad I got it over the Tokina 11-16mm since the MFD on the Canon is a lot better.

Wouldn't be able to take shots like this with the Tokina.


----------



## Danylu

$950 is a pretty good price, it appears that I am not alone in stalking prices of the fast teles









Alright guys I saw this epic photo:
Does anyone know how to explain how he got that unnatural effect and colours of the photo? Did he require post-processing to do this? To me, the photo looks like a 3D computer render because of the somewhat random lighting - I think this may be attributed to the long shutter speed but I want to know how he made such a picture. Could you guys please take a guess as to how please?


----------



## ace8uk

Looks like he set up a long exposure shot just as a train was going past, hence the lights running with the track. Looks like the photo has been made into an HDR photo too. I've got a similar shot of Tower Bridge, I waited ages in the freezing cold for a Ferry to come so I could get the lines of light through the bridge.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *By-Tor*


I picked one up a couple of months ago off my local craigslist for $950, so they are out there...


That's incredible, a rare opportunity. I never see used ones go for less than about $1200 at the most (unless damaged). Your seller must not have known what he had!

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


$950 is a pretty good price, it appears that I am not alone in stalking prices of the fast teles









Alright guys I saw this epic photo:
Does anyone know how to explain how he got that unnatural effect and colours of the photo? Did he require post-processing to do this? To me, the photo looks like a 3D computer render because of the somewhat random lighting - I think this may be attributed to the long shutter speed but I want to know how he made such a picture. Could you guys please take a guess as to how please?










It's tone mapped I bet, probably with Photomatix or similar software.


----------



## dr4gon

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
It's tone mapped I bet, probably with Photomatix or similar software.

I agree, looks like it's been tone mapped. It's got that ugly characteristic to a bad HDR. It really kicked up the noise in the rocks on the bottom. They look like colorful gems now. Talk about bling!


----------



## bentleya




----------



## Mootsfox

Two new pieces of glass today.

A Nikkor 35mm f/2.8:









And a classic Nikkor-S 50mm f/1.4:









What's cool about the Nikkor-S is that it's only metal and glass. No plastic, rubber or other materials.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


I've never seen this pop you're talking about, so I'm a little confused where you see it.


No, if you're shooting Canon glass, you won't see it,

Go to the Nikon Cafe and look at some of Randy's osprey posts. Or better yet, some of his macro work. Search the key word pop as it applies to lenses, there will be plenty of examples.


----------



## dr4gon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


No, if you're shooting Canon glass, you won't see it,

Go to the Nikon Cafe and look at some of Randy's osprey posts. Or better yet, some of his macro work. Search the key word pop as it applies to lenses, there will be plenty of examples.


Wow they're stunning

http://www.carolina-sportsphotograph...My%20Favorites


----------



## laboitenoire

Yeah, those pics almost do look like they're 3D...

Moots, I'm guessing those are both AI-S lenses? Which body were you mainly planning to use them with?


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


No, if you're shooting Canon glass, you won't see it,

Go to the Nikon Cafe and look at some of Randy's osprey posts. Or better yet, some of his macro work. Search the key word pop as it applies to lenses, there will be plenty of examples.


I don't see the pop.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


I don't see the pop.


Very well then, you don't see the pop. Those of us who do think it's a stunning aspect unique to well designed and executed lenses.

I think pop refers to inherent sharpness, contrast and color rendition which are all hallmarks of Nikon optics. Partially oof captures to elucidate "bokeh" rarely exemplify this.

If you've taken the time to examine some of the work that Randy has posted on his site, what I'm referring to should be apparent.


----------



## Marin

I have taken the time to go through almost all of his photos and I don't see the pop.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


I have taken the time to go through almost all of his photos and I don't see the pop.


As I mentioned above, pop refers to inherent sharpness, contrast and color rendition. Do you see evidence of that in his images?? Have you maybe learned a new photographic term?? Do you have links to images with pop that we could see?


----------



## Danylu

Why does this pop only come with good Nikkors?


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Why does this pop only come with good Nikkors?


I didn't say it did, did I?? Leica, Zeiss, and Voigtlander to name a few also have excellent optical properties.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


Very well then, you don't see the pop. Those of us who do think it's a stunning aspect unique to well designed and executed lenses.

I think pop refers to inherent sharpness, contrast and color rendition which are *all hallmarks of Nikon optics*. Partially oof captures to elucidate "bokeh" rarely exemplify this.

If you've taken the time to examine some of the work that Randy has posted on his site, what I'm referring to should be apparent.


Maybe I'm misinterpreting it, but you seem to be making it out to be a unique feature to Nikkors here.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
As I mentioned above, pop refers to inherent sharpness, contrast and color rendition. Do you see evidence of that in his images?? Have you maybe learned a new photographic term?? Do you have links to images with pop that we could see?

All I see are images which can be reproduced by Canon lenses.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
All I see are images which can be reproduced by Canon lenses.

You're entitled to your opinion. I didn't think you'd post any images.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
Maybe I'm misinterpreting it, but you seem to be making it out to be a unique feature to Nikkors here.

Nowhere in that statement does it say that those properties are unique to nikkor lenses does it?? I'm simply stating that most nikkor lenses are known for outstanding sharpness, color rendition, and contrast. Images from the longer prime nikkors are also known to exhibit an almost 3D effect. This is just plain efficient optical design and fabrication.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
Nowhere in that statement does it say that those properties are unique to nikkor lenses does it?? I'm simply stating that most nikkor lenses are known for outstanding sharpness, color rendition, and contrast. Images from the longer prime nikkors are also known to exhibit an almost 3D effect. This is just plain efficient optical design and fabrication.

I don't see this 3D effect at all in the images.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
You're entitled to your opinion. I didn't think you'd post any images.

I never knew you were expecting me to post pics. If you really want me to I can go round up a bunch of sample pics on POTN.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
I don't see this 3D effect at all in the images.

I never knew you were expecting me to post pics. If you really want me to I can go round up a bunch of sample pics on POTN.

Don't bother Marin, I've dignified this Pi%%ing contest enough.

Smug away.


----------



## equetefue

uhmmm i really dont want this to end as a nikon vs canon thing as this goes back for years, but like I said before each system is great, but no lens offers more "pop" than the other. This is very subjective and purely dependant of the shooter and multiple variables.

I do know that for a fact most of my professional friends (10+ of them with 100% income out of photography) stick to canon or are swapping to Canon due to the lens selection,IQ, and availability. At the same time we agree that at the current moment Nikon has a better sensor technology and offer excellent bang for the $.

I do feel that the assumption of "pop" is personal and not correct, and point can be validate it as whenever I go out with these guys or by myself. I see Whites dominating the field. Also most of the stunning works captured by NG and SI have been by Canon.

Competition is a beauty and we are the ones that win here as it drive for better equipment and pricing.

Sorry Rick, but I can't agree with you on this one as I shoot both camps on weekly basis and definetely do not see the "pop" being referred here. Stunning images come out of both systems or lenses for that matter.

Law of economics explains that prices goes up when supply is low and demand is high. Nikon has always struggled with lens and body production, thus price is high. Not because of fufu coatings or more "pop".

Canon uses Fluorite on their lenses and prices are good 20-30% lower not because lens offers less pop, but because supply is much higher.

Not argueying though as we are all friends here.

BTW off topic here. Got offered by a friend to do a shoot with him in NY for a baseball game. Still deciding if I should take the week off, but excited as hell.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *equetefue*


uhmmm i really dont want this to end as a nikon vs canon thing as this goes back for years, but like I said before each system is great, but no lens offers more "pop" than the other. This is very subjective and purely dependant of the shooter and multiple variables.

I do know that for a fact most of my professional friends (10+ of them with 100% income out of photography) stick to canon or are swapping to Canon due to the lens selection,IQ, and availability. At the same time we agree that at the current moment Nikon has a better sensor technology and offer excellent bang for the $.

I do feel that the assumption of "pop" is personal and not correct, and point can be validate it as whenever I go out with these guys or by myself. I see Whites dominating the field. Also most of the stunning works captured by NG and SI have been by Canon.

Competition is a beauty and we are the ones that win here as it drive for better equipment and pricing.

Sorry Rick, but I can't agree with you on this one as I shoot both camps on weekly basis and definetely do not see the "pop" being referred here. Stunning images come out of both systems or lenses for that matter.

Law of economics explains that prices goes up when supply is low and demand is high. Nikon has always struggled with lens and body production, thus price is high. Not because of fufu coatings or more "pop".

Canon uses Fluorite on their lenses and prices are good 20-30% lower not because lens offers less pop, but because supply is much higher.

Not argueying though as we are all friends here.

BTW off topic here. Got offered by a friend to do a shoot with him in NY for a baseball game. Still deciding if I should take the week off, but excited as hell.


Well I can see your "pro" friends switching for availability and pricing, But IQ.. uh uh.

Most of the stunning works in NG, Last time I looked Frans Lanting shoots Nikon, I'll check the others.

SI?? Have you been to a pro football (US) game lately?? I have season Bears tickets and routinely see more black than white on any given Sunday and especially at night games when high iso is a factor. You say you see whites dominating the field. Does that mean they provide better images?? Do you see any Leica optics in the field. Is this simply a question of economics? cause if it is, then white it will be. I make my purchasing decisions based on IQ and what I can afford. I can't afford Leica. Taking the money I spent on my Nikon gear and converting it to Canon, I'm rollin in all kinds of prime equipment. But to me IQ is more important. And I honestly realize better IQ with Nikon optics, case closed.

For me, Canon is a better economic decision, Nikon is a better decision with regard to image quality and the oh so important ergonomics and burst speed shen it comes to sports and wildlife.

But as you know, I'm trying my best to find something I can live with on the white side in the 600 - 800 mm range. I refuse to pay nikon's tarif at that point. I guess I'll just have to spend more time in PP.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Yeah, those pics almost do look like they're 3D...

Moots, I'm guessing those are both AI-S lenses? Which body were you mainly planning to use them with?


The 35mm is AI or AI-S, the only way I know of telling would be to check the serial against a database.

The 50mm f/1.4 pre-dates AI, it's known as Non-AI. This one is pre-modified, otherwise it wouldn't fit the newer bodies (somewhere around 1973 to present).

I'm guessing the 50mm was made from 1966 to 1973, although it's very possible it's not, as the zoom range and front ring markings as well as serial number do not match a single (but rather 3 different) line(s) of the 50mm Nikkor-S.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


I don't see the pop.


http://www.carolina-sportsphotograph...91957971_2YiLk

Notice the sharp edge of the baseball player vs the blurred background?

I think that is what nuke is talking about.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Maybe I'm misinterpreting it, but you seem to be making it out to be a unique feature to Nikkors here.


He's saying Nikon glass has that, not excluding other glass, but that Nikon does have that.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


http://www.carolina-sportsphotograph...91957971_2YiLk

Notice the sharp edge of the baseball player vs the blurred background?

I think that is what nuke is talking about.


If that's so then it's *definitely* not something special that Nikkor lenses can do.


----------



## equetefue

Keep in mind that the Nikon applies LOTS more of in Camera PP in comparison to Canon. In Canon you have to PP those RAWs. This might give the ilusion of having better pics when in fact it all comes down to the shooter.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


http://www.carolina-sportsphotograph...91957971_2YiLk

Notice the sharp edge of the baseball player vs the blurred background?

I think that is what nuke is talking about.


That's one of them.
There's an element of experience that one acquires over time. I've been shooting various brands of equipment for 40 years now. You finally reach a saturation point, but some aspects remain very clear.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *equetefue*


Keep in mind that the Nikon applies LOTS more of in Camera PP in comparison to Canon. In Canon you have to PP those RAWs. This might give the ilusion of having better pics when in fact it all comes down to the shooter.



I shoot raw Edwin.


----------



## equetefue

I don't want to bring samples here from my bodies as they are copyright, but I can assure you that the APS-H is much prefer in the sports arena. Nikon has better ISO control so people switching for just that.

I can tell you my friends have swapped or remain with Canon not because of pricing or availability as most of them are sport shooters and had all the "big" guns in Nikkor versions.

Now at the same time I have to admit that a few of them have bought Nikon bodies for when shooting concerts and such. Again because of the need of better ISO control.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


http://www.carolina-sportsphotograph...91957971_2YiLk

Notice the sharp edge of the baseball player vs the blurred background?

I think that is what nuke is talking about.

He's saying Nikon glass has that, not excluding other glass, but that Nikon does have that.


My poor English misinterpreted Nuke's previous post my bad









If that is the pop you guys are talking about, then I think I might know what you guys are on about.

Something like this? Or do I have no clue. (Pic courtesy of Nuke's Flickr)


----------



## equetefue

yes you shoot raw like me, but the images from nikon are a lot more PP than Canon. We both know that. Even straight out images from my old D2X had better straight out of camera look. Same as the image town on both systems.

Like I said we can go about it for 441 more pages, thus the neverending arguement of Nikon or Canon.

I can bet you something though. When and If Canon finally catches up to Nikon (Sony's) sensor technology, people will come right back to Canon. Not everyone of course.


----------



## equetefue




----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *equetefue*


I don't want to bring samples here from my bodies as they are copyright, but I can assure you that the APS-H is much prefer in the sports arena. Nikon has better ISO control so people switching for just that.

I can tell you my friends have swapped or remain with Canon not because of pricing or availability as most of them are sport shooters and had all the "big" guns in Nikkor versions.

Now at the same time I have to admit that a few of them have bought Nikon bodies for when shooting concerts and such. Again because of the need of better ISO control.


Well I don't know who your friends are or what their rational is but what I see on the field and what I've assimilated from talking to SI and Pro Football Weekly photographers on the sidelines does not at all jive with your statement. In fact it's quite the contrary. As a matter of fact, at the pre season camp in Bourbanis Ill, the vast majority of bodies I'm seeing on the sidelines are D3x's and the lenses are 300, 400, and 200-400 prime nikkors. There were a few Canons that looked like 1D's, not sure about the glass.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *equetefue*












Beautiful Edwin. Are you using a visual echoes frensel on your flash? If so, does it seem to help. How do you get it to sync at 1/800th as was posted in your earlier set?


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *equetefue*


yes you shoot raw like me, but the images from nikon are a lot more PP than Canon. We both know that. Even straight out images from my old D2X had better straight out of camera look. Same as the image town on both systems.

Like I said we can go about it for 441 more pages, thus the neverending arguement of Nikon or Canon.

I can bet you something though. When and If Canon finally catches up to Nikon (Sony's) sensor technology, people will come right back to Canon. Not everyone of course.


What happens when Canon raises their prices?? D4 Sensor??

Also, Coming back to Canon is easier said than done especially if there's alot of glass involved. I'll take that bet!!


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


My poor English misinterpreted Nuke's previous post my bad









If that is the pop you guys are talking about, then I think I might know what you guys are on about.

Something like this? Or do I have no clue. (Pic courtesy of Nuke's Flickr)



I think that was to illustrate a tc effect. not the elusive "pop".


----------



## equetefue

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
Beautiful Edwin. Are you using a visual echoes frensel on your flash? If so, does it seem to help. How do you get it to sync at 1/800th as was posted in your earlier set?

I use the High SPeed sync feature. (Auto FP in Nikon)

Like it but confused as my pics from the last set came underexposed. I going to ask some friends on how to properly set it as to I don't overexposed the surroundings but have enough fill flash. Very easy concept, but not so easy to use in combo with the flash head.

I'm still trying to figure out what metering mode to use and such.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Hate be Devil's Advocate, but equetefue's bird shots have as much of this mysterious "pop" as any of Randy's shots. I think it's a bit ridiculous to argue about this; it's like arguing who's the better between BMW and Mercedes, pointless. If it's a matter of preference, fine, state it and leave at that, but to speak in absolutes as though it's objective is stupid (and especially to be insulting and condescending about it). We could post random bird shots from both Canon and Nikon's best glass, bodies and _photographers_, and I wager that no one could name all the Nikon shots just from looking at the images.


----------



## laboitenoire

Seeing as I'm the guy with a Fuji P&S, I'll take a fairly neutral position. Like Gone says, I'd certainly be hard-pressed to tell the difference between a photo taken on a Nikon system and then the same photo taken at the exact same settings on a Canon system. But hey, I'd be happy with either one of them









And Gone, a bit off topic, but I must say that BMW is hands down the better of the two. But in that area, seeing as my family has owned over ten Bimmers and only six non-Bimmers, I might be a bit biased







I've already decided that I'll buy one the minute I have the money, as long as it's in good enough shape.


----------



## Marin

I heard Ken Rockwell drives a Mercedes...
I kid, I kid, lol. =p

Anyways, to change topics. I really love Live View on my 50D. It was pretty meh on my XSi, but with the way higher res screen on the 50D it's so much easier to accurately focus.


----------



## laboitenoire

How much does live view run down the battery life on that? Certainly I remember that it killed battery life on my last P&S. The new one is EVF, though, so can't figure that out.


----------



## Marin

Never really checked how much more power live view used.

Anyways, shot this in live view. Nice and accurate.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Hate be Devil's Advocate, but equetefue's bird shots have as much of this mysterious "pop" as any of Randy's shots. I think it's a bit ridiculous to argue about this; it's like arguing who's the better between BMW and Mercedes, pointless. If it's a matter of preference, fine, state it and leave at that, but to speak in absolutes as though it's objective is stupid (and especially to be insulting and condescending about it). We could post random bird shots from both Canon and Nikon's best glass, bodies and _photographers_, and I wager that no one could name all the Nikon shots just from looking at the images.


Umm, no. It's very clear that BMW is better, though they are somewhat of different leagues of cars. I've owned and driven both from 325i's to 750Li's and S classes. BMW is better. Mercedes feels nicer though.


----------



## laboitenoire

Actually, speaking of BMW... I've never shown my pics from my trip to Munich when I got to visit the BMW museum. Unfortunately, this was back when I was still using my Fuji 2650. I was shooting at 1 megapixel in order to conserve shots on my 32 meg xD card


----------



## Mootsfox

Nice pictures! And proof that it's not about the MP.

I want a 2002, e30 or e31.

So pretty.


----------



## MADMAX22

That black one is sweet looking. Im a audi fanboy myself but BMW is a close second.


----------



## Mootsfox

Audi is ok. As long as you stick to the S series, RS series or the A8.


----------



## Danylu

I like the Audi TT









BMWs are quite nice too.


----------



## Danylu

One question, what does Lightroom do and does it do anything that Photoshop doesn't do that is relevant to photos?


----------



## Marin

I forgot about how awesome my 60mm macro is. I missed the creamy bokeh


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


One question, what does Lightroom do and does it do anything that Photoshop doesn't do that is relevant to photos?


You can actually manage your photos.

This is while in the develop tab (top right) where you can make adjustments. In the library tab it lists all your folders on the left panel. The thumbnails are there on the bottom where you can browse. Most of it is adjustable as well to suit your needs.


----------



## Danylu

Lightroom is quite nice, thanks!









Does Lightroom offer Auto CA correction? I know Nikon ViewNX does and Photoshop has an option for manual CA correction.

EDIT: Wish I had a 30 inch monitor as well!


----------



## Mootsfox

Auto correction... I don't think so.

There is CA correction though, it's under the Details tab on the right panel.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


I forgot about how awesome my 60mm macro is. I missed the creamy bokeh














I don't see the cream.


----------



## daanielin

I'd like to join. I've got Canon 5D Mark 1, 50mm f/1.4, 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM, 35-300 "L" f/4.5-6.3, aimit to buy flash soon since the 5D doesnt have any..









My flicker - http://www.flickr.com/photos/daanielin














































And my car..










My style is mainly B/W, urban, retro and abandoned..


----------



## nuclearjock

No pop. No cream. Just a bird and some sky.

D3/400 VR/nikon 1.7 tc


----------



## By-Tor

70-200mm @ 2.8 mmmm


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Nice pictures! And proof that it's not about the MP.

I want a 2002, e30 or e31.

So pretty.

Yeah, I got a lot of mileage from that camera. It's been in probably ten states, and three foreign countries!

My dad's first car out of graduate school was a beige/gold (hard to tell from pictures) 2002 (just the vanilla version--couldn't afford the ti or turbo version). He bought it with about 40,000 miles on the odometer, and drove it until there were holes where the rocker panels used to be. He rebuilt the engine in that time, replaced the drive shaft twice, and did a few other big repairs.

Interesting that you posted that 840. There's somebody around my area who has a white one.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Canon EF 1200 f/5.6L w/5D mkII

What a leviathan of a lens, 36 lb., but the video with the lens looks awesome. He's also using a 2x TC for an effective 2400mm.


----------



## laboitenoire

That's like the .50 cal of lenses right there


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *laboitenoire* 
That's like the .50 cal of lenses right there









So then what is the Sigma 200-500mm *f/2.8*?










Or the Nikon 1200-1700mm?


----------



## equetefue

url]

Wonder if it has more "POP" at 1200 or 1700mm? lol lol









Sorry Rick, I had to


----------



## Marin

Anyone notice how a Canon 1 series body is mounted to it.


----------



## equetefue

yes... is so it can give it the "POP"


----------



## Danylu

Just for those of you who have macro lenses, do you find yourselves going to 1:1 often, if you do, what do your subjects tend to be?

And for those of you who shoot small animals and large insects, how far away do you often find yourselves from the insect/animal? Do animals run away if you get within a metre?


----------



## equetefue

the distance between the shooter and subject depends on the lens you have. When I used to have the 100mm it was pretty tricky to get close to the subjects. It takes time and patience.

Some of my friends shoot with the Sigma 150 for the added distance when working with skiddish bugs, while other use the MP-E65 lens with is crazy close.


----------



## Squeeker The Cat

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
So then what is the Sigma 200-500mm *f/2.8*?










Or the Nikon 1200-1700mm?










what in gods name do you use those for?? someone please explain what kind of pictures you take with those lenses?? pictures martian poop on the moon? what?? WOW i have never seen those before?


----------



## Marin

Sporting events that you're farther away from.


----------



## nuclearjock

With my 400 VR, 2x tc, and d300 (1.5 crop) I have in effect 1200mm focal length. It's potent, but not as much as you would think. It's when you take these huge lenses (800, 1200, etc) and couple them with a crop sensor and a tc then you really get into far away photography. My limiting factor is photographing small migrating birds. That's why I was very happy to discover that my 400 VR would take a 2x tc nicely.

I shot my first private soccer tournament today. first day of a 2 day event.
The 400 VR on my FF D3 was awesome for the further half of the field, but I wound up juggling my 70-200 f/2.8/D300 for the in my face shots. it was kind of hairy until I developed a method for dangling the 400 off my left shoulder while shooting the 70-200.

Worked out real well. Agreed to a flat fee of $480 per day for the 2 day event, and all the shots go directly to the league. don't have to post them up on my site. I'll take that all season long if I can get it.

Sure better than shooting berries with blurred backgrounds....


----------



## Marin

nvm... misunderstanding...


----------



## Mootsfox

Play nice guys.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
So then what is the Sigma 200-500mm *f/2.8*?










Or the Nikon 1200-1700mm?










Anti-tank rounds?


----------



## nuclearjock

Berries with a blurred background for which I got paid nothing.


----------



## Marin

I'll apologize since I thought you were making reference to one of my previous posts and were still holding a grudge from the previous discussion/argument.

Guess I misunderstood the comment from the lack of sleep I've had over the past few days due to editing a video.


----------



## tK FuRY

now I want to go buy some cherries









Too bad they won't taste as good as they look in that photograph


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


I'll apologize since I thought you were making reference to one of my previous posts and were still holding a grudge from the previous discussion/argument.

Guess I misunderstood the comment from the lack of sleep I've had over the past few days due to editing a video.










At least we are both Intel fanboys, right??

1.









2.









3.









4.









5.









6.









7.


----------



## tK FuRY

wow at number 3! Theres that 3D effect.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


At least we are both Intel fanboys, right??

1.
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2648/...050af248_o.jpg

2.
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2501/...6cd557b4_o.jpg

3.
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2591/...5f097dd1_o.jpg

4.
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2623/...3d438333_o.jpg
5.
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2478/...a57a40b4_o.jpg

6.
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2539/...eea906c9_o.jpg

7.
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2493/...29cd6bb3_o.jpg


Yeah, this Q6600 has served me well and the i5 certainly looks promising...

Anyways, what lens did you shoot those with? Too lazy to check the EXIF, lol.


----------



## equetefue

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


I know professional photographers. They make 30-40k a year, eat in McDonalds, drive crappy cars, and beat the crap out of their equipment.


40K dang... I'll stay doing my own thing then. I make 3x times that and do it for fun..


----------



## equetefue

Quote:



Originally Posted by *tK FuRY*


wow at number 3! Theres that 3D effect.


Nope.... that's that nice f2.8 effect of a 400 Nikkor... beautiful pics


----------



## Marin

http://64.13.226.237/2009/08/sigma-85-f1-4-hsm-cr1/

I hope this rumor is true. Not a fan of the Canon 85mm f/1.8 and the f/1.2L is too expensive for me.

Quote:



Sweet
It doesn't have to be all Canon!

I received an email today saying Sigma would be introducing an 85mm f/1.4 this fall season. The 50 f/1.4 has been a smashing success for Sigma and this such lens would do extremely well.


*crosses fingers*


----------



## nuclearjock

Yea, I just bought the 950 (which will soon be surpassed by the 960) to replace my 940 cause of the D0 stepping which makes a real big difference VID wise:
3.8ghz 1.13v
4.0 1.18
4.2 1.23

So I overpaid, A D0 920 would have probably have been just fine, but that's just the way i am. The 950 has a notch higher multi, but my RIIE likes big bclk's (210-230) so I run 18,19, 20ish multis anyway. Gobs of memory bandwidth, I've got 6 (3x2) gigs of ram that make editing in vista and windows 7 really fast.

Anyway, all the shots posted were with the 400 VR naked on the D3 wide open @ f/2.8.
While walking from one soccer field to another, a little girl (~4 years old) shot the front of my big lens with her squirt gun and then asked me if I would take her picture. After my heart stopped palpitating, I wiped of my front element with my handy dandy microfiber cloth, and took her picture. Live and learn. I will now ALWAYS place the front protector cap over my lens when walking from field to field.

Here are some caps from the D300/70-200 VR naked @f/2.8:

1.









2.









3.









4.









5.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


Yea, I just bought the 950 (which will soon be surpassed by the 960) to replace my 940 cause of the D0 stepping which makes a real big difference VID wise:
3.8ghz 1.13v
4.0 1.18
4.2 1.23

So I overpaid, A D0 920 would have probably have been just fine, but that's just the way i am. The 950 has a notch higher multi, but my RIIE likes big bclk's (210-230) so I run 18,19, 20ish multis anyway. Gobs of memory bandwidth, I've got 6 (3x2) gigs of ram that make editing in vista and windows 7 really fast.


Got to love having a lot of RAM. Lightroom and CS3 would use up all my RAM when I used to have 4gb's.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


Anyway, all the shots posted were with the 400 VR naked on the D3 wide open @ f/2.8.
While walking from one soccer field to another, a little girl (~4 years old) shot the front of my big lens with her squirt gun and then asked me if I would take her picture. After my heart stopped palpitating, I wiped of my front element with my handy dandy microfiber cloth, and took her picture. Live and learn. I will now ALWAYS place the front protector cap over my lens when walking from field to field.


Could have been worse. You could have been at the beach and the squirt gun could have been filled with salt water.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *equetefue*


Nope.... that's that nice f2.8 effect of a 400 Nikkor... beautiful pics


See, you're not the expert you think you are. That's "pop".









Now Marin's gonna say he doesn't see the pop and I'm gonna have to catch a plane to Norcal.

I could stop and see my son and daughter in northern AZ at least.


----------



## Marin

Does this count as pop?









http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...postcount=1839

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...postcount=1840


----------



## tK FuRY

Marin, it might just be me. I don't see a "pop" in any of those pics, except maybe last picture last link.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Does this count as pop?









http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...postcount=1839

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...postcount=1840


Dude, I know you're setting me up...

I'm so sorry I ever mentioned that word, I'll probably never live it down.


----------



## Marin

Like this?

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...1&postcount=92

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...7&postcount=93

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...8&postcount=95

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...9&postcount=76

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


Dude, I know you're setting me up...

I'm so sorry I ever mentioned that word, I'll probably never live it down.












Okay... I'm done lol.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


So I'm guessing the pop nuclearjock is talking about is the DoF created by longer FL's with wide apertures.

Like this:

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...1&postcount=92

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...7&postcount=93

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...8&postcount=95

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...9&postcount=76











From what I gather, it's an intangable combination of sharpness, contrast, color rendition and brightness that all seem to come together in harmony and balance.

That's the best way I can describe it.

It's like a politician once said about pron, I can't describe it, but I know it when I see it.

BTW,

I've ordered Nikon's "cream machine" (85mm f/1.4). Old screw focus, just due for an afs update. I wanna get a copy before they update it and possibly change what appears to be a magical optical formula. If by some miracle they keep the optics intact, I'm sure they'll ding the price.

Should be here mid-week.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 

BTW,

I've ordered Nikon's "cream machine" (85mm f/1.4). Old screw focus, just due for an afs update. I wanna get a copy before they update it and possibly change what appears to be a magical optical formula. If by some miracle they keep the optics intact, I'm sure they'll ding the price.

Should be here mid-week.

Before they cover it in Nano Crystals?









Seriously though, that's one of the lenses I wish Canon had. Don't want to pay more for the f/1.2L.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Before they cover it in Nano Crystals?









Seriously though, that's one of the lenses I wish Canon had. Don't want to pay more for the f/1.2L.

Hey, don't make fun of nano crystals. We NIKONIANS pay alot of money for those.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Really great soccer shots Nuke.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Really great soccer shots Nuke.


Thx GT.

I really have to pay tribute to my gear though. It makes taking these shots alot easier.


----------



## nuclearjock

Hey GT,

You might have missed this pic of the 1200 with your new honored much revered Canon Authority. Us Nikonians have had to listen to his "guidance" for a long time, now it's your turn. Congrats on your new Canon grand pubah...
I'm sure you'll all learn alot from this digital/celluloid wizard.
Somehow I think he looks right at home with Canon gear, don't you??
He'll have to stand pretty far away from his kids to shoot them with this beast. He looks like he has bad breath.


----------



## equetefue

hey guys re-did website... swap from Exposure manager to Zenfolio

Tell me what you guys think

www.Photo-Galleria.com


----------



## Marin

He dresses like it's the 90's, xD. I'll switch to Pentax, I'll be safe there.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


Hey GT,

You might have missed this pic of the 1200 with your new honored much revered Canon Authority. Us Nikonians have had to listen to his "guidance" for a long time, now it's your turn. Congrats on your new Canon grand pubah...
I'm sure you'll all learn alot from this digital/celluloid wizard.
Somehow I think he looks right at home with Canon gear, don't you??
He'll have to stand pretty far away from his kids to shoot them with this beast. He looks like he has bad breath.


Sorry Nuke, you can't get rid of him that easy. We don't want him. Nikon is stuck with the Rockwell taint.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *equetefue*


hey guys re-did website... swap from Exposure manager to Zenfolio

Tell me what you guys think

www.Photo-Galleria.com


Some great shots on there eq, I've always liked Zenfolio


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
*Sorry Nuke, you can't get rid of him that easy. We don't want him. Nikon is stuck with the Rockwell taint.
*

Some great shots on there eq, I've always liked Zenfolio


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
Hey GT,

You might have missed this pic of the 1200 with your new honored much revered Canon Authority. Us Nikonians have had to listen to his "guidance" for a long time, now it's your turn. Congrats on your new Canon grand pubah...
I'm sure you'll all learn alot from this digital/celluloid wizard.
Somehow I think he looks right at home with Canon gear, don't you??
He'll have to stand pretty far away from his kids to shoot them with this beast. He looks like he has bad breath.










I wish I had a camera store like that close me where I live.









Minus Ken


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Sorry Nuke, you can't get rid of him that easy. We don't want him. Nikon is stuck with the Rockwell taint.


I don't know, Nikon might have stopped giving him pens and t-shirts. He looks pretty happy and at "home" with that big Canon. I think you've got a new advocate/guru. Now you guys can learn valuable new things like shooting raw is a waste of time, and dial up your color settings to the max so your caps look like an over-inked cartoon. We'll know for sure if we see a pic of him in a Canon t-shirt. Yep the times are a changing.

He's making the New York tour and goes on (on his website) about the "celebrity" reception he received at both Adorama and B&H (where the 1200 was taken). Hopefully He'll return to the west coast soon. I know Marin misses him.


----------



## Marin

Quote:

There's still room on the new Point Reyes trip, which runs Sunday evening, 30 August through Wednesday morning, 02 September, 2009. The Point Reyes trip is an opportunity to create some uniquely fantastic images that you won't see show up everywhere photos are displayed.
*NOOOOOOO!!!
*










It's in the same county as me.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
*NOOOOOOO!!!
*










It's in the same county as me.

That's way too funny Marin. Pssst, he's coming.....

Edit: is it me or is he showing us some navel in that shot??


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
That's way too funny Marin. Pssst, he's coming.....

Edit: is it me or is he showing us some navel in that shot??

Haha, I noticed that too! It looks like he just finished picking some out navel lint.


----------



## equetefue

god he's so weird looking


----------



## equetefue

added lots more pics

www.Photo-Galleria.com


----------



## nuclearjock

Just trying to see how far I can push my 400. This is with a Nikon 2.0 tc on a semi cloudy day with my D300. The 400 f/2.8 VR is truly "magic glass" IMO.


----------



## equetefue

yes... I hear that from both versions. That's why i'm torn between that and the 500.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *equetefue* 
yes... I hear that from both versions. That's why i'm torn between that and the 500.

Edwin, if you're shooting sports, it's a no brainer. 400 2.8 hands down.
The ONLY reason to get the 500 f/4 is it's relatively light weight and "swingability" for BIF, and in Nikon's case it's cheaper than the 400 2.8.

You can't really slap a 2.0 tc on an f/4 lens with any sucess AF wise, a 1.7 will also take you above f/5.6 so you're kinda limited to the 1.4 unless you don't mind spotty AF or MF.

Since Canon is at a lower price point, I would say 400 2.8 if you're gonna do sports, or the 600 f/4. The 500 seems to be kind of in a no man's land.


----------



## equetefue

aboslutely agree with you, but If I get the 400/600 then i'm bound by a tripod


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *equetefue*


aboslutely agree with you, but If I get the 400/600 then i'm bound by a tripod


The 600 is tripod city, I shoot my 400 on a monopod, no probs. The malard was actually HH. Saw it and jumped out of my car to get a couple of shots B4 it took off. Didn't try BIF @ 1200mm, no way.


----------



## huntman21014

WooHoo, just got back from a pawn shop and picked up a mint Minolta AF 28mm F2.8 Prime for $20, the guy had no idea what kind of lens it was, he also had a 50mm F1.7 Prime for $25 but alas, I already have one.

I thought about buying it just to resell it but all I had was a $20 on me


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *huntman21014* 
WooHoo, just got back from a pawn shop and picked up a mint Minolta AF 28mm F2.8 Prime for $20, the guy had no idea what kind of lens it was, he also had a 50mm F1.7 Prime for $25 but alas, I already have one.

I thought about buying it just to resell it but all I had was a $20 on me

Just checked out that lens at Dyxum, sounds like a great deal and a sharp lens! How's the condition?


----------



## huntman21014

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Just checked out that lens at Dyxum, sounds like a great deal and a sharp lens! How's the condition?


Excellent, it came with a filter and a rubber type lens hood as well. There are absolutely no scratches on it, no mold or fungi either. If I get any more lenses I am going to have to get a new bag.

Right after I got my A300 I was torn between getting the 28mm or the 50mm prime. The 50mm was cheaper on ebay but I always had a wanting for a sharp short focal length lens. Once I got the 50mm I noticed I had to step back further than I liked to get the type of photos I wanted

The Sony version is like 200 new and is nothing but a rehash of the Minolta glass, I cannot wait to take some pics with it, I will be sure to post up a few


----------



## Marin

I just picked up a Soligor 200mm f/3.5 F-mount. Now to adapt it









They also had a Minolta Rokkor 50mm f/1.4, but the only way to adapt it is to shave both the metal around the element (for FF) and the aperture pin. So I'll probably come back for it later.


----------



## equetefue

there good? the soligor ?


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *equetefue*


there good? the soligor ?


No clue. It was only $30, so not much to lose.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


No clue. It was only $30, so not much to lose.


Hmm, I saw a 500mm reflex from them at my local shoppe for $70. T mount though...

Let us know how it is.


----------



## murderbymodem

Tripod question...

Tripods are standard across all cameras / camcorders, correct? There aren't different sizes or anything? I have a JVC Everio (GZ-MG330AU) video camera I'd like to get a tripod for, any recommendations? Preferably on the cheap side.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Redmist*


Tripod question...

Tripods are standard across all cameras / camcorders, correct? There aren't different sizes or anything? I have a JVC Everio video camera I'd like to get a tripod for, any recommendations? Preferably on the cheap side.


1/4" (20TPI) is the standard for cameras and 3/8"(16TPI) for heads.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Hmm, I saw a 500mm reflex from them at my local shoppe for $70. T mount though...

Let us know how it is.

Will do.


----------



## hackm0d

Amateur photographer, Olympus FE-190.
Amateur videographer, JVC GZ-MG330.


----------



## ImmortalKenny

ImmortalKenny - Sony DSC-H20


----------



## Mootsfox

Gone, I need the Nikkor 35mm f/2.8 AI and the Nikkor-S 50mm f/1.4 added.

I've also got this on the way:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...=STRK:MEWAX:IT

Though I got it for less than that.


----------



## Marin

Get the Nikkor 50mm f/1.2









http://cgi.ebay.com/NIKON-AI-S-NIKKO...d=p3286.c0.m14

http://cgi.ebay.com/NIKON-Nikkor-50m...4#ht_513wt_998

And I should be getting my F-mount adapter soon.


----------



## Mootsfox

I can't spend $600 on a MF prime...

Although I'm bidding on a 58mm f/1.2 Noct Nikkor, I'm in the lead with $315, and it will probably end between $1800-3,000.


----------



## Marin

http://www.lensrentals.com/rent/lensalign

Think I'm going to rent that...


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Gone, I need the Nikkor 35mm f/2.8 AI and the Nikkor-S 50mm f/1.4 added.

I've also got this on the way:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...=STRK:MEWAX:IT

Though I got it for less than that.

Quite the prime collection you're amassing!


----------



## nuclearjock

GT,

Hit me up with the "cream machine" (nikon 85mm f/1.4).

Pics soon.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


I can't spend $600 on a MF prime...

Although I'm bidding on a 58mm f/1.2 Noct Nikkor, I'm in the lead with $315, and it will probably end between $1800-3,000.


Does the 50mm AiS 1.4 AF on the D60?


----------



## Mootsfox

No, only AFS lenses do.

AF and AFS are the only Nikon lenses that Auto Focus, and the AF lenses only Auto focus on bodies with a drive motor, i.e the D70 and above (plus the D50).


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
No, only AFS lenses do.

AF and AFS are the only Nikon lenses that Auto Focus, and the AF lenses only Auto focus on bodies with a drive motor, i.e the D70 and above (plus the D50).

Thanks for clearing that up, I read in a book that the Ai-S lenses did but I guess they must have gotten that wrong.


----------



## Mootsfox

There is the AF-I spec, but those are rare and predate AF-S slightly, as AF-S replaced AF-I around '95-96.


----------



## FatalityxZ

Fujifilm Finepix S1000FP
Don't know if it's a point and shoot or a DSLR...
maybe extended zoom point and shoot?


----------



## laboitenoire

Correct. It is a megazoom P&S.


----------



## nuclearjock

Now if the sun will only come out, I'll post some shots.
Supposed to be a real creamery. We'll see.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *FatalityxZ* 
Fujifilm Finepix S1000FP
Don't know if it's a point and shoot or a DSLR...
maybe extended zoom point and shoot?

No, modern DSLR cameras are interchangeable lens cameras, with the same basic design as older 35mm film SLRs. Your camera has a number of monikers: ultra zoom, prosumer, megazoom, SLR-like, bridge camera, etc.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
Now if the sun will only come out, I'll post some shots.
Supposed to be a real creamery. We'll see.


Nice looking piece of glass!


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
No, modern DSLR cameras are interchangeable lens cameras, with the same basic design as older 35mm film SLRs. Your camera has a number of monikers: ultra zoom, prosumer, megazoom, SLR-like, bridge camera, etc.

Define "modern".

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympuse10/

Or is that not a SLR because it doesn't have a mirror?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Define "modern".

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympuse10/

Or is that not a SLR because it doesn't have a mirror?

That camera is from 2001 and hardly typical, back when DSLRs were still in the "bleeding edge of technology" era (would you call a Pentium IV "modern"? This is technology, not art). From my understanding, an SLR is a camera that uses a _reflex mirror_ and pentaprism for through-the-lens composing and uses a single lens, hence the term Single-Lens Reflex (cf. Twin-Lens Reflex cameras). That camera does have a pentaprism of sorts ("beam splitter?") and a mirror (at the top), so who knows on that one.

So yes, I think if we're being pedantic, then a SLR properly should have a reflex mirror and pentaprism.

So how about _most_ modern DSLRs have interchangeable lenses? In the film SLRs, there were plenty of fixed lens SLRs, but not with DSLRs, save for oddity that you posted.

But that leaves the question of what to call cameras like the Micro Four-Thirds cameras that are out, the Panasonic G1/GH1 and the Olympus Pen EP-1.

DPReview doesn't call them SLRs, but they don't say whether they technically _not_ DSLRs:

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonicdmcg1/
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonicdmcgh1/
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympusep1/

But they're definitely Interchangeable Lens cameras, but not DSLRs according to the definition.


----------



## Mootsfox

Four thirds still has a mirror changing the direction of light into a prism for viewing.

Micro four thirds look like fancy P&S cameras. I think without a mirror or prism, it's no longer a SLR. Whether or not the camera has interchangeable lenses is irrelevant.

(I'm bored and looking for a discussion







)


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Four thirds still has a mirror changing the direction of light into a prism for viewing.

Micro four thirds look like fancy P&S cameras. I think without a mirror or prism, it's no longer a SLR. Whether or not the camera has interchangeable lenses is irrelevant.

(I'm bored and looking for a discussion







)


Micro Four-Thirds is completely mirrorless, only electronic viewing, so I agree that it's not an SLR. The whole point of an SLR is that your seeing the same light that comes through the lens, not an electronic rendering!

I still like the Olympus PEN simply for the novelty of it, though I'd never pay what they're asking for it.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


(I'm bored and looking for a discussion







)


OK, does micro 4/3 have that pop??


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


OK, does micro 4/3 have that pop??


Maybe the one you get from the expression on your face after you get one and realize that you actually paid $700 for it.









On an unrelated note, Canon has (among many) two new P&S cameras coming out, the G11 and the S90:

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0908/09081908canong11.asp
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0908/09...s90handson.asp

What's interesting is that they actually decreased the sensor resolution to 10MP to allow for better high ISO performance. Hard to believe, it will be interesting to see if it delivers.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Finding all kinds of interesting camera related things today. Check out this Nikon "lens," the last word in close-up macro photography:



The Nikon Fabre Photo EX, with magnifications of 20x-66x, mounts on any Nikon DSLR. It's $1300, actually not as expensive as I thought it would be.


----------



## Mootsfox

Kudos to Canon for not playing the MP game further with their G series.

Although what would be next? Their 21MP sensor? They'd probably have to upgrade their optics as well.

If I have the money and need for it, I'd be all over the G9/10/11.


----------



## tK FuRY

isn't the Fabre made for like petri dish macros?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *tK FuRY* 
isn't the Fabre made for like petri dish macros?

Presumably


----------



## Oscuro

Kind of surprised in reading the specs of the G11, that they didn't add a HD recording capability, or even a 640 @ 60 fps.

Still....I want.


----------



## Mootsfox

Looking over the S90... I want one.


----------



## Marin

Lets see if the Canon 7D is for real.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Lets see if the Canon 7D is for real.


I hope the specs are wrong.

12MP, no movie mode, and $1900? A 5DMKII is only like what, $2200?


----------



## Danylu

Hey guys do Kenko TCs work with 3rd party lenses??


----------



## Mootsfox

It won't work with any of the lenses you have now, or the 55-200mm if that's what you are asking


----------



## Marin

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...d.php?t=740825

Quote:


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
It won't work with any of the lenses you have now, or the 55-200mm if that's what you are asking









Understandable, I don't have anything that fits in the telephoto range as of now haha. I was thinking more AF-S 60mm/sigma 70-200 2.8/sigma 150mm 2.8. Currently saving up for one of the above - the Nikon 70-200 goes for almost new on ebay


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...d.php?t=740825


Better ON/OFF switch placement for sure.


----------



## tK FuRY

hmmm basically a 5DMKII with 45AF points. Sounds very nice









or are those specs wrong? and it has 13AF points ?


----------



## Sparhawk

Awesome thread, I've got a D80 and a couple lenses. Don't really have many of my pics hosted online yet... but I'll work on getting some up.


----------



## Mootsfox

It came today


















I found out that this was one of the last AI 50mm f/1.4 lenses from Nikon, out of almost a million (by serial number) it's within the last 300 made


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


It came today









I found out that this was one of the last AI 50mm f/1.4 lenses from Nikon, out of almost a million (by serial number) it's within the last 300 made










Nice! You should post some comparison shots at different apertures from all your primes since a lot of them aren't reviewed.

On another note, this guy on flickr had a less than pleasant lens reception since Fedex broke his $1800 Nikon 70-200 f/2.8 VR lens during delivery:


----------



## Marin

They probably forgot to put on the Nano Crystal Coating.


----------



## tK FuRY

one of the reasons I rarely order anything "valuable" online.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


It came today


















I found out that this was one of the last AI 50mm f/1.4 lenses from Nikon, out of almost a million (by serial number) it's within the last 300 made










Hm I'm going to try and get bokeh like that in one of my photos









Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Nice! You should post some comparison shots at different apertures from all your primes since a lot of them aren't reviewed.

On another note, this guy on flickr had a less than pleasant lens reception since Fedex broke his $1800 Nikon 70-200 f/2.8 VR lens during delivery:











I feel very sorry for that guy.


----------



## equetefue

sucks big time, but the worst part is not only the loss of the lens but how hard is to find one


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *tK FuRY* 
one of the reasons I rarely order anything "valuable" online.

Kinda limits your options doesn't it??

I've purchased over 50% of my gear online including my Nikon 400 VR and never had a problem. That's what insurance is for anyway.

I just purchased this lens online for $1239.95, no tax, no shipping. Didn't even have to drive one block to get it. AND if I wanted it the next day, I coulda had it for $26 more.

I went to my local calumet store where the lens was in stock for $1289 + 8% sales tax = $1392.12. My online purchase saved me $152.17. Kind hard to beat.

Don't forget, that guy's 70-200 will be replaced if it was new, or he'll get his money back. Ya it's a hassle but he probably a. couldn't find it locally, b. saved a pretty $$, or both.

BTW the vast majority or probs I've heard of are related to FedEx. Never had a problem with UPS. But this also could have been the seller's fault in the form of sub standard packaging as well.

The only advantage to local retailers ia that you can hold it, feel it, smell it.
I do that then I go online and buy it after I give the local guy the option to match the online deal which they usually don't.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *equetefue* 
sucks big time, but the worst part is not only the loss of the lens but how hard is to find one

I didn't realize Fla was that isolated. They're all over the place in Chi town...


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
It came today









Purty Foxie. Brings back memories of the old days. Looks like it's in great shape.


----------



## nuclearjock

New to this bokeh stuff.
The subject flower group (oof) is only about 10" off the ground.
Shot wide open.



JPEG right out of camera with in camera sharpening set to 5, (duh).

Next time, raw and pp properly. but it's a start.


----------



## hackm0d

Add Nokia E90 as well, please.








I think 3.2MP AF is nice for amateur shots.


----------



## Danylu

I'm so depressed I lost the rear cap to my 35mm 1.8.

But in slightly better news I bought something today but I'll see if I can find that cap first.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


I'm so depressed I lost the rear cap to my 35mm 1.8.

But in slightly better news I bought something today but I'll see if I can find that cap first.


No biggie, just keep that lens on your camera by default when stored. They're cheap to replace. What did you buy?


----------



## Danylu

I bought a tripod


Found it pretty strong


In all orientations


And took a photo of the whole set-up:


Velbon 803R Tripod - much better than my old broken tripod which you can see supporting the iPhone







. This tripod will be in use for as long as it lasts as I do not think there is a chance in hell I can somehow go over the 4kg limit or the 180cm viewfinder height. I'm set









I also taught my 6 year old sister how to frame shots with a prime and taught her what depth of field achieves.


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


I also taught my 6 year old sister how to frame shots with a prime and taught her what depth of field achieves.










Awesome! and nice tripod.


----------



## equetefue

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
I didn't realize Fla was that isolated. They're all over the place in Chi town...

Nah FL is bigger than those states, is just that even the 5 year olds do photography down here.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


I'm so depressed I lost the rear cap to my 35mm 1.8.

But in slightly better news I bought something today but I'll see if I can find that cap first.


I lost a LC-52 on my flight out to Washington, it fell between my seat and the wall, but I found it under the seat in front of me after we landed.

I was thinking about doing one of those orders for like 50 LC-52's or LF-1's, for the genuine Nikon ones, as it's like $2/cap instead of buying each one for $15.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


I also taught my 6 year old sister how to frame shots with a prime and taught her what depth of field achieves.










Awesome!









Can she overclock your camera yet?


----------



## tK FuRY

out of no where, I have a sudden urge to purchase the "Dream Cream Machine"


















Too sexy


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *tK FuRY*


out of no where, I have a sudden urge to purchase the "Dream Cream Machine"


















Too sexy










I'm just at the beginning of the learning curve with mine, but so far I LOVE it.
Gonna try and shoot some more and better quality cream shots. We have a few (Marin) expert creamologists here so I want to at least give it a good go.


----------



## Marin

I love creamy DoF. Also I got the Nikon F-mount adapter, time to test it out.


----------



## Marin

Yay, test shot in harsh lighting







. There was an umbrella over the japanese maple leaves and the tree behind it (thus resulting in the right portion of the image having softer bokeh).

Soligor 200mm f/3.5 @ f/5.6


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Sparhawk*


Awesome! and nice tripod.










Thanks

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


I was thinking about doing one of those orders for like 50 LC-52's or LF-1's, for the genuine Nikon ones, as it's like $2/cap instead of buying each one for $15.

Awesome!









Can she overclock your camera yet?


Hm I might buy one of those caps. Nah she can't overclock the D60 but shes already taken my old tripod


----------



## Marin

I had a housewife come up to me with her Sony A900 + 24-70mm f/2.8 and actually say "My camera has 24mp's!"

I couldn't tell if she was joking at first until I noticed she didn't know how to compose shots at all.


----------



## equetefue

should I ask her if she prints anything bigger than A4s


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *equetefue*


should I ask her if she prints anything bigger than A4s


She'd probably be like...

"Oh yeah! I drive an Audi A8 and have printed pictures of it!"


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
She'd probably be like...

"Oh yeah! I drive an Audi A8 and have printed pictures of it!"

I parked next to an A8 today. When I came back out to my car, the A8 had been replaced by a Ferrari F40...
It's a kit


----------



## Marin

How hard is it to park right?


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
How hard is it to park right?









just as hard as it is to get your fancy italian car keyed.


----------



## Marin

Lol.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


I had a housewife come up to me with her Sony A900 + 24-70mm f/2.8 and actually say "My camera has 24mp's!"

I couldn't tell if she was joking at first until I noticed she didn't know how to compose shots at all.


Somehow that reminds me of the time my cousin took a portrait of me and swung the D60 dial to macro because I was 2 metres away and she thought it would focus closer...


----------



## Oscuro

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


just as hard as it is to get your fancy italian car keyed.


Or your badly body kitted fiero....


----------



## Danylu

I think this offers a unique perspective - and I now know why a remote shutter is useful as I took 2 shots, the first one was blurred from depressing the button and this 2nd one is tack sharp with the 2 second shutter delay option.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Somehow that reminds me of the time my cousin took a portrait of me and swung the D60 dial to macro because I was 2 metres away and she thought it would focus closer...


isnt that how it works?








kidding!


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


I think this offers a unique perspective - and I now know why a remote shutter is useful as I took 2 shots, the first one was blurred from depressing the button and this 2nd one is tack sharp with the 2 second shutter delay option.




You still have the mirror slap to worry about with the D60 since you can't lock it up. It makes macros hard to shoot in the shutter range of about 1/125 to 2", anything in there will be blurred slightly.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


You still have the mirror slap to worry about with the D60 since you can't lock it up. It makes macros hard to shoot in the shutter range of about 1/125 to 2", anything in there will be blurred slightly.


Ahhh, you mean mirror POP.


----------



## Marin




----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Nice! You should post some comparison shots at different apertures from all your primes since a lot of them aren't reviewed.


Well, Ken has "reviewed" a lot of this glass, I don't want to try to outdo his mastery of all things photographic or journalistic...

Seriously though, I wouldn't know where to start. I'm guessing tripod with a remote release and a lab-based shot for each lens/aperture?


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Well, Ken has "reviewed" a lot of this glass, I don't want to try to outdo his mastery of all things photographic or journalistic...

Seriously though, I wouldn't know where to start. I'm guessing tripod with a remote release and a lab-based shot for each lens/aperture?


That may be wnadering into digital "geeksville" a bit Foxie.

Brick walls are nice for sharpness while the mortar joints can sometimes infer lens abbberations. A tripod and timed release should be more than enough to provide uniformity. Pick a shot with good lighting that will allow you to venture into small apeture land and lots of features and you should be able to tell if you like your lens. Bird feathers are always a good test if you can get close enough. Maybe a cat or dog..


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


You still have the mirror slap to worry about with the D60 since you can't lock it up. It makes macros hard to shoot in the shutter range of about 1/125 to 2", anything in there will be blurred slightly.


So if I stay out of that range, I should be alright?


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


That may be wnadering into digital "geeksville" a bit Foxie.

Brick walls are nice for sharpness while the mortar joints can sometimes infer lens abbberations. A tripod and timed release should be more than enough to provide uniformity. Pick a shot with good lighting that will allow you to venture into small apeture land and lots of features and you should be able to tell if you like your lens. Bird feathers are always a good test if you can get close enough. Maybe a cat or dog..


I could shoot the wall of my garage then, it's brick and gets lot of sun all day.

I would use my dog, but he'd probably move around too much.


----------



## riko99

Just got back from a 2 week vacation to LA and Las Vegas only took about 1000 pics because we just didn't have enough time to shoot lots oh well i'll post the Vegas sign pic that our photographer buddy requested we do... Only problem was it was in a windstorm and i was not on level ground since i have a POS tripod...


----------



## riko99

And here it is... I know its not exactly great but limited time plus sandstorm didnt make me want to stay out to long to play around with the settings to much.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
I could shoot the wall of my garage then, it's brick and gets lot of sun all day.

I would use my dog, but he'd probably move around too much.

I wouldn't be surprised if you didn't run across anything out of the ordinary Foxie. That particular lens is known for it's reliability.


----------



## Marin

Nikkor 55mm f/1.2 "Black Nose" on it's way.


----------



## Mootsfox

Why are you using Nikon glass?


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Why are you using Nikon glass?


Because the 50mm f/1.2L is over a grand.


----------



## Mootsfox

But it has USM and a red ring. That's worth at least $1,400.

I wonder if the adapter effects image quality at all?


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


But it has USM and a red ring. That's worth at least $1,400.


Lol.

Seriously though, the Canon lens is worth the extra money. It's superior in image quality, weather sealing, has autofocus, etc...

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


I wonder if the adapter effects image quality at all?


Not at all. Since the EF Mount has a shorter flange focal distance, Nikon lenses only have to be extended a little to obtain infinity focus. So image quality is unaffected.


----------



## Mootsfox

Ok, I took a picture of my garage brick wall at the fastest aperture and each full stop up to the highest (f/16, f/22 or f/32 depending on the lens/length). I did it with all 7 lenses.

18-55mm
18 @ f/3.5, 4, 5.6, 8, 11, 16, 22
24 @ f/4.2, 5.6, 8, 11, 16, 22
35 @ f/5.3, 5.6, 8, 11, 16, 22, 32
45 @ f/5.3, 5.6, 8, 11, 16, 22, 32
55 @ f/5.6, 8, 11, 16, 22, 32

55-200mm
55 @ f/4, 5.6, 8, 11, 16, 22
68 @ f/4.2, 5.6, 8, 11, 16, 22
85 @ f/4.5, 5.6, 8, 11, 16, 22
102 @ f/4.8, 5.6, 8, 11, 16, 22
135 @ f/5, 5.6, 8, 11, 16, 22
200 @ f/5.6, 8, 11, 16, 22, 32

Note: The maximum apertures at 102 and 135mm are 26 and 29 respectively, but not listed because they are not full stops.

50mm f/2.0
f/2, 2.8, 4, 5.6, 8, 11, 16

50mm f/1.4 Nikkor-S
f/1.4, 2, 2.8, 4, 5.6, 8, 11, 16

50mm f/1.4 AI
f/1.4, 2, 2.8, 4, 5.6, 8, 11, 16

35mm f/2.8
f/2.8, 4, 5.6, 8, 11, 16, 22

24mm f/2.8
f/2.8, 4, 5.6, 8, 11, 16, 22

I'm listing them now, in this order, because the MF's are chipless and don't report anything for EXIF data. I also shot with them in this order.

How should I compare them?


----------



## Quantum Man

Hi all, I just joined OCN and saw this thread here. I'm a full-time wedding photographer based in NY. I was with Nikon last year but I switched to Canon this past winter and I'm content with my Canon L primes. Without further ado here is my gear list:









1D Mark III
5D Mark II x2
24L II
35L
50 1.4
85L II
100 Macro
135L
16-35L II
24-70L (going to sell this)
70-200L 2.8 IS
580EX x2
580EX II
Nikon SB-800 x2 (I use these for off-camera lighting)
Nikon SB-600
Quantum T5D-R


----------



## riko99

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Quantum Man*


Hi all, I just joined OCN and saw this thread here. I'm a full-time wedding photographer based in NY. I was with Nikon last year but I switched to Canon this past winter and I'm content with my Canon L primes. Without further ado here is my gear list:









1D Mark III
5D Mark II x2
24L II
35L
50 1.4
85L II
100 Macro
135L
16-35L II
24-70L (going to sell this)
70-200L 2.8 IS
580EX x2
580EX II
Nikon SB-800 x2 (I use these for off-camera lighting)
Nikon SB-600
Quantum T5D-R


Quite the Gear setup there...


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

holy crud, thats a lot of L's!


----------



## Quantum Man

Here's an almost up to date pic of my camera bag. Missing the 135L and a 5DII + 24L II which I used to take the picture.


----------



## equetefue

Woot more L's

Anyways. Took some pics of kids/gf today to test the 135L


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


I wonder if the adapter effects image quality at all?


Can't make it any worse. Probably will improve IQ immensly









Edit:
It's fun to experiment with conglomerations, unfortunately they seldom bear fruit.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *equetefue*


Woot more L's

Anyways. Took some pics of kids/gf today to test the 135L


Very nice Edwin, I particularily like the bokeh on the last 2.


----------



## tK FuRY

Very nice, im a little dizzy right now, so for some reason. They look like you just photoshopped them in lol


----------



## equetefue

they do look a little 3d. Same comments about the 3d'ish look at other forums. Full frame with that lens + great results.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *equetefue*


they do look a little 3d. Same comments about the 3d'ish look at other forums. Full frame with that lens + great results.


Wait, upon further scrutiny, I believe I see the elusive "pop" in these pictures.


----------



## Marin

Took this off-campus during school. Due to it being foggy the light was really soft and nice. Surprised at how sharp my Sigma 30mm f/1.4 got this.


----------



## equetefue

That is pretty nice Marin


----------



## deleter

Add me on the list..
I got a 
Nikon D90
Nikkor 18-200mm 3.5-5.6
Tokina 11-16mm 2.8
SB-600


----------



## tK FuRY

It looks like there is finally a D90 shooter


----------



## Marin

Behold!!!


----------



## Mootsfox

*vomit*

Sorry, it's just... So wrong Marin









At least you'll finally be able to shoot with real glass I guess.

*puts on flame suit*


----------



## tK FuRY

I see you haven't added that lens to your sig yet


----------



## Marin

Test shot time!



I didn't notice this pine needle until I uploaded it.



Self Portrait


----------



## GoneTomorrow

What interesting, nice looking bokeh! They look good Marin, how 'bout a shot at f/5.6 and f/8 so we can see the maximum sharpness of this lens?

And which adapter did you get (brand)? I have a Nikon 50mm f/1.8 Series E that I'd like try out.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


What interesting, nice looking bokeh! They look good Marin, how 'bout a shot at f/5.6 and f/8 so we can see the maximum sharpness of this lens?

And which adapter did you get (brand)? I have a Nikon 50mm f/1.8 Series E that I'd like try out.


You can get adapters on eBay for dirt cheap. Adorama sells the low end Fotodiox adapters, which I coughed up the extra money for since I'm not a fan of eBay (didn't realize it was Fotodiox until I received it, so I could have saved some money by directly ordering from them).

http://www.adorama.com/CZNKEOSA.html

https://www.fotodiox.com/catalog/index.php?cPath=21


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Test shot time!

are these wide open?


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
are these wide open?

Yeah.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *equetefue* 
Woot more L's

Anyways. Took some pics of kids/gf today to test the 135L

Do any standard lenses give this pop?


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Yeah.


You like the bokeh??


----------



## nuclearjock

A couple more from the "cream machine".

1. wide open


2. f/2.8


----------



## Quantum Man

Wow I am liking the bokeh of that 55mm 1.2! Very funky looking but smooth.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
A couple more from the "cream machine".

Very nice.

Guys what category of lenses would allow the subject to be in focus from edge to edge but then have everything else blurred like this photo?


----------



## CRZYSTNG

Update, now have a Canon T1i with the stock 18-55mm IS along with the Coolpix S-51 and Lumix DMC-FZ8


----------



## tK FuRY

holy crap HUGE picture! At least we now have auto resize









DC lenses?

Actually, that picture looks like any standard macro lens with a shallow DOF. (Someone more knowledgeable correct me)

Another example of what might be what you're talking about?


----------



## Mootsfox

Shot from Matsuricon 2009 going on this weekend.

This is from the Will It Blend? Panel. And yes, that is a Blendtec.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *tK FuRY*


holy crap HUGE picture! At least we now have auto resize









DC lenses?

Actually, that picture looks like any standard macro lens with a shallow DOF. (Someone more knowledgeable correct me)

Another example of what might be what you're talking about?



















Yes like that, but every photo I see seems to have the DoF perfect so that the subject is 100% in focus, I'm wondering as to whether telephoto (or a different type of lens) makes this attribute easier to obtain or something else because I find that I have to stop down and give it a few gos before I can get the same effect with my 35mm 1.8. About the macro answer, I doubt that because what I'm describing is kind of like the pop in the soccer shots a few pages back.

Speaking of DoF, for those of you with fast standard primes, do you ever find yourself needing to use AF Continuous to get the subject in focus or is my technique epic fail?


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Yes like that, but every photo I see seems to have the DoF perfect so that the subject is 100% in focus, I'm wondering as to whether telephoto (or a different type of lens) makes this attribute easier to obtain or something else because I find that I have to stop down and give it a few gos before I can get the same effect with my 35mm 1.8. About the macro answer, I doubt that because what I'm describing is kind of like the pop in the soccer shots a few pages back.

Speaking of DoF, for those of you with fast standard primes, do you ever find yourself needing to use AF Continuous to get the subject in focus or is my technique epic fail?


AF-C is a better idea anyways, unless you want to re-half-press the release every time something moves.


----------



## Quantum Man

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Yes like that, but every photo I see seems to have the DoF perfect so that the subject is 100% in focus, I'm wondering as to whether telephoto (or a different type of lens) makes this attribute easier to obtain or something else because I find that I have to stop down and give it a few gos before I can get the same effect with my 35mm 1.8. About the macro answer, I doubt that because what I'm describing is kind of like the pop in the soccer shots a few pages back.

Speaking of DoF, for those of you with fast standard primes, do you ever find yourself needing to use AF Continuous to get the subject in focus or is my technique epic fail?


A good number of lenses are not very sharp when shot wide open. Usually you have to pay top dollar for lenses that are sharp wide open. Also as you get closer to the subject your DoF decreases dramatically. If you are within a couple of feet of your subject and shooting at a large aperture like f/2 or larger, your DoF could be an inch or less. Therefore it can be rather difficult to get tack sharp shots with your intended target in focus perfectly.

If the subject is stationary then AF Single or One-Shot modes are fine. If the subject is moving then your continuous focusing modes are probably better. A lot depends on your camera too, the type of AF module it has.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
Yes like that, but every photo I see seems to have the DoF perfect so that the subject is 100% in focus, I'm wondering as to whether telephoto (or a different type of lens) makes this attribute easier to obtain or something else because I find that I have to stop down and give it a few gos before I can get the same effect with my 35mm 1.8. About the macro answer, I doubt that because what I'm describing is kind of like the pop in the soccer shots a few pages back.

Speaking of DoF, for those of you with fast standard primes, do you ever find yourself needing to use AF Continuous to get the subject in focus or is my technique epic fail?

When trying to precisely place you DOF, I find manual focus to be of great use.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Quantum Man* 
A good number of lenses are not very sharp when shot wide open. Usually you have to pay top dollar for lenses that are sharp wide open. Also as you get closer to the subject your DoF decreases dramatically. If you are within a couple of feet of your subject and shooting at a large aperture like f/2 or larger, your DoF could be an inch or less. Therefore it can be rather difficult to get tack sharp shots with your intended target in focus perfectly.

If the subject is stationary then AF Single or One-Shot modes are fine. If the subject is moving then your continuous focusing modes are probably better. A lot depends on your camera too, the type of AF module it has.

Right, which is why having a longer prime can be useful.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *tK FuRY* 
holy crap HUGE picture! At least we now have auto resize









DC lenses?

Actually, that picture looks like any standard macro lens with a shallow DOF. (Someone more knowledgeable correct me)

Another example of what might be what you're talking about?

It doesn't have to be a macro lens, just a prime with a large max aperture. In fact, macro lenses don't usually have larger max apertures than f/2.8 or so because the DOF at close working distances would be too small. The photo he posted is an 85mm f/1.8 @ f/1.8.


----------



## tK FuRY

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


When trying to precisely place you DOF, I find manual focus to be of great use.

Right, which is why having a longer prime can be useful.

It doesn't have to be a macro lens, just a prime with a large max aperture. In fact, macro lenses don't usually have larger max apertures than f/2.8 or so because the DOF at close working distances would be too small. The photo he posted is an 85mm f/1.8 @ f/1.8.



Forgot about EXIF


----------



## rx7racer

Well I think I'm ready to be asked if I can be placed on the list









Got my Cannon EOS Rebel T1i with the 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS kit lens. Finally got in a Cannon EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS lens in today.

A new flash is the next on my list along with a good tri-pod. Slowly by surely I'm getting items I need. Then comes the better lens after that.

Finally using all manual mode and manual focus, and wow I am blown away by the control you have. I'm not sure I even like auto mode anymore









But yet full auto does have it's moments of awesomeness


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *rx7racer*


Finally using all manual mode and manual focus, and wow I am blown away by the control you have. I'm not sure I even like auto mode anymore









But yet full auto does have it's moments of awesomeness










I've had my D300 for a little over a year now, My D3 for about 8 months and I've never used either in full auto. Manual, and Apeture priority seem to work best for me.

As for autofocus, I live by it unless I'm using an MF lens, or shooting very close macro. Both Nikon and Canon have quite good autofocus systems, some lenses require fine tuning but the camera will remember these adjustments for each lens, (I think up to 20). Given sufficient light and contrast, the camera usually focuses better than me and certainly much quicker.

I guess I might use full auto if I handed someone who had no experience with DSLR's my camera and said "here, go take some pictures".


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *rx7racer*


Finally using all manual mode and *manual focus*, and wow I am blown away by the control you have.


I don't see the point in that.







And why not just use Av? You should try it, it'll speed up the shot.


----------



## rx7racer

About manual focus, well I ran into more than a few situations where it focused the fore most part perfect but when I wanted a full frame focus dof it was impossible with AF.

For the most part like when I'm at the drag strip and what not for sure. But it seems I can get more in focus manually than with auto in certain key situations.

I guess I should have worded that differently.

I guess the way to say it is so I can control where and what I want focused. Example coming in a min. (and I might add, I am still learning and grasping much)

This is with AF, and keep in mind this is just me playing around though.









And MF, was able to get the foreground more in focus. I know not the best example. I know what I'm trying to say in my head just don't know how to say it.

















Also, these were taken with the kit 18-55mm lens, just getting started with my 55-250mm lens.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *rx7racer*


About manual focus, well I ran into more than a few situations where it focused the fore most part perfect but when I wanted a full frame focus dof it was impossible with AF.

For the most part like when I'm at the drag strip and what not for sure. But it seems I can get more in focus manually than with auto in certain key situations.

I guess I should have worded that differently.

I guess the way to say it is so I can control where and what I want focused. Example coming in a min. (and I might add, I am still learning and grasping much)

This is with AF, and keep in mind this is just me playing around though.
And MF, was able to get the foreground more in focus. I know not the best example. I know what I'm trying to say in my head just don't know how to say it.









Also, these were taken with the kit 18-55mm lens, just getting started with my 55-250mm lens.


You need to read your manual, but with Nikon cameras, you can move the focus and/or metering point around the frame to where you want it. It doesn't have to be in the center. This will allow you to choose what part of the frame you want to focus and meter on.

All modern DSLR's should AF just as good as a person can MF if not better or there's somethimg amiss with the body or the lens.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *rx7racer* 
About manual focus, well I ran into more than a few situations where it focused the fore most part perfect but when I wanted a full frame focus dof it was impossible with AF.

For the most part like when I'm at the drag strip and what not for sure. But it seems I can get more in focus manually than with auto in certain key situations.

I guess I should have worded that differently.

I guess the way to say it is so I can control where and what I want focused. Example coming in a min. (and I might add, I am still learning and grasping much)

Also, these were taken with the kit 18-55mm lens, just getting started with my 55-250mm lens.

Remember that you can select your AF points. For those shots you would've just had to select the bottom AF point and it would've focused on the front beam.

The only times I MF is when I'm wide open or shooting macros. But MF is a great way to visually observe how the DOF moves. And wean yourself from full auto mode altogether and explore the other modes. Aperture priority is pretty useful when you know you're only going to shoot in one aperture (like f/8, the sharpest aperture for most lenses), Shutter priority is great when you really need to freeze action (like when I shoot skaters), and Manual I use for more mixed situations when I need control over the shutter and aperture.


----------



## rx7racer

Ok, I didn't honestly know about that ability to specify which AF point to use. I know which ever ones it uses it will highlight with red so you know where it's focusing. Which I might say is very nice and handy.

+rep to both. Like I said I'm still learning. Will have to give that a try next time I go out shooting.

One thing I have noticed is it seems it AF's towards whichever point is either farthest or closest to me. It's like it can read the distance and then assumes which AF point, it doesn't go with the center point all the time. I have went in and played with some settings though. Will have to dive in some more. I won't lie, I've been learning as I play and referring to manual only when I get stumped on a solution.

I figure learning from experience is a decent way.


----------



## sdla4ever

wow never saw this! totally add me!

Nikon D40x
18-55mm Nikon DX Nikkor AF-S
18-135mm Nikon DX Nikkor AF-S


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Remember that you can select your AF points. For those shots you would've just had to select the bottom AF point and it would've focused on the front beam.

The only times I MF is when I'm wide open or shooting macros. But MF is a great way to visually observe how the DOF moves. And wean yourself from full auto mode altogether and explore the other modes. Aperture priority is pretty useful when you know you're only going to shoot in one aperture (like f/8, the sharpest aperture for most lenses), Shutter priority is great when you really need to freeze action (like when I shoot skaters), and Manual I use for more mixed situations when I need control over the shutter and aperture.



Quote:



Originally Posted by *rx7racer*


Ok, I didn't honestly know about that ability to specify which AF point to use. I know which ever ones it uses it will highlight with red so you know where it's focusing. Which I might say is very nice and handy.

+rep to both. Like I said I'm still learning. Will have to give that a try next time I go out shooting.

One thing I have noticed is it seems it AF's towards whichever point is either farthest or closest to me. It's like it can read the distance and then assumes which AF point, it doesn't go with the center point all the time. I have went in and played with some settings though. Will have to dive in some more. I won't lie, I've been learning as I play and referring to manual only when I get stumped on a solution.

I figure learning from experience is a decent way.



Thats the auto picker, it basically has a look at which thing is closest and covers most of the viewfinder and focuses on it.

Looking at my lenses, it seems that I have nothing that could be described as a telephoto so that perfect DoF will be hard to achieve for me.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *rx7racer*


Ok, I didn't honestly know about that ability to specify which AF point to use. I know which ever ones it uses it will highlight with red so you know where it's focusing. Which I might say is very nice and handy.

+rep to both. Like I said I'm still learning. Will have to give that a try next time I go out shooting.

One thing I have noticed is it seems it AF's towards whichever point is either farthest or closest to me. It's like it can read the distance and then assumes which AF point, it doesn't go with the center point all the time. I have went in and played with some settings though. Will have to dive in some more. I won't lie, I've been learning as I play and referring to manual only when I get stumped on a solution.

I figure learning from experience is a decent way.


On the higher end Nikon DSLR's, you can select spot metering, compose your shot, then manually move the spot to where you want to focus and if you want also meter. You've taken the decision making away from the camera and made it yourself. I'm assuming Canon has something similar. I have a 5DMKII but have done very little with it. I find AF too slow for sports, It's probably going back.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
On the higher end Nikon DSLR's, you can select spot metering, compose your shot, then manually move the spot to where you want to focus and if you want also meter. You've taken the decision making away from the camera and made it yourself. I'm assuming Canon has something similar. I have a 5DMKII but have done very little with it. I find AF too slow for sports, It's probably going back.

I think all the Nikon DSLRs have spot metering and AE/AL lock. My D60 has both, and my D1H, so I'm guessing all the others do as I've got the lowest models.


----------



## Marin

Two more shots with the Nikkor 55mm f/1.2. Third shot, which I think is a lot better, I'm going to upload later.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Took a snapshot of the moon this evening with the 70-200, had to crop heavily but it didn't come out too bad. I really need a 2x TC.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Took a snapshot of the moon this evening with the 70-200, had to crop heavily but it didn't come out too bad. I really need a 2x TC.











Very nice detail, 100% crop or...?

Marin the depth of field is wow.

Is it just Australia or are Canon equivalents to Nikon lenses much cheaper in the states too?

$1900 - Canon 24-70 2.8
$2500 - Nikon 24-70 2.8

$700 - Canon 60 2.8 Macro
$850 - Nikon 2.8 Macro


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Very nice detail, 100% crop or...?

Marin the depth of field is wow.

Is it just Australia or are Canon equivalents to Nikon lenses much cheaper in the states too?

$1900 - Canon 24-70 2.8
$2500 - Nikon 24-70 2.8

$700 - Canon 60 2.8 Macro
$850 - Nikon 2.8 Macro










Thanks, it's a 100% crop. And yes, Nikon is generally more expensive than Canon.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Thanks, it's a 100% crop. And yes, Nikon is generally more expensive than Canon.



Naw, I saved $300 when I bought my D60 + 18-55 and I'm starting to pay that back now with every purchase.


----------



## riko99

Quote:


Originally Posted by *rx7racer* 
Ok, I didn't honestly know about that ability to specify which AF point to use. I know which ever ones it uses it will highlight with red so you know where it's focusing. Which I might say is very nice and handy.

+rep to both. Like I said I'm still learning. Will have to give that a try next time I go out shooting.

One thing I have noticed is it seems it AF's towards whichever point is either farthest or closest to me. It's like it can read the distance and then assumes which AF point, it doesn't go with the center point all the time. I have went in and played with some settings though. Will have to dive in some more. I won't lie, I've been learning as I play and referring to manual only when I get stumped on a solution.

I figure learning from experience is a decent way.

NOt being a Canon User myself so not knowing where to look but you should be able to select which focus point you want i believe you have to go in and change your AF Area Mode (nikon cameras term) to dynamic area or Single point focusing.


----------



## Marin

Here's the third pic with the Nikkor 55mm f/1.2


----------



## Danylu

The DoF is very awesome on it. How far away was the backgrond from that twig?

This made me lol:
A photographer goes to his friends house for a party, and decides to bring along his camera. He takes a bunch of photos, and then a few days later he prints them out. His friend's wife, who hosted the party, calls him up and thanks him for his photos saying, "The photos are so great you must have an amazing camera."
The photographer's annoyed, but he doesn't say anything to her about it.
That next weekend he's over at his friends house again for dinner. As his friend's wife is clearing the table he looks at her and says, "Dinner was excellent, you must have some amazing pots and pans!"


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Here's the third pic with the Nikkor 55mm f/1.2


That's the best of what you've posted with that lens. Bokeh is more in line with what I'd expect.

Now you've gotta get the 85 f/1.2 and compare the two.









Maybe throw in the 58mm f/1.2 Nikkor noct just for yucks.

Edit: Sorry Marin, I didn't look at the pics on the previous page, they're great too.


----------



## Marin

Canon EOS 7D:

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0909/09...canoneos7d.asp

http://www.dpreview.com/previews/canoneos7d/


----------



## Lelin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Canon EOS 7D:

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0909/09...canoneos7d.asp

http://www.dpreview.com/previews/canoneos7d/


Out of budget, need 60D. Nice little camera though


----------



## Gunfire

Found him sittin in my Bamboo tree


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Canon EOS 7D:

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0909/09...canoneos7d.asp

http://www.dpreview.com/previews/canoneos7d/


Looks nice, but I don't like the name. It should be the 3D or similar as it's not FF and is ranked under the 5DMKII.

Any idea what the button on the right hand grip is for?


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Looks nice, but I don't like the name. It should be the 3D or similar as it's not FF and is ranked under the 5DMKII.

Any idea what the button on the right hand grip is for?


You've got it wrong.

If it was called 3D then it would be placed between the 1 series and 5 series. That doesn't make sense since it's a crop sensor.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


You've got it wrong.

If it was called 3D then it would be placed between the 1 series and 5 series. That doesn't make sense since it's a crop sensor.


So the 1 and 5 are in the same series?

And the xxxD are in another?

I'm used to higher numbers being better, like with the 400D, 450D, 500D, D70, D80, D90, 30D, 40D, 50D, D200, D300, etc. 5D and 7D sound like they are in the same class and that the 7D is higher.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


So the 1 and 5 are in the same series?

And the xxxD are in another?

I'm used to higher numbers being better, like with the 400D, 450D, 500D, D70, D80, D90, 30D, 40D, 50D, D200, D300, etc. 5D and 7D sound like they are in the same class and that the 7D is higher.


- 1Ds (FF)
- 1D (1.3x Crop)
(Considered the same line, the 1Ds is the FF version while the 1D has the 1.3x crop. The 1D will probably soon be dropped leaving just the 1Ds)

- 5D (FF)
- 7D (Crop)
- xxD? (Not known yet if the 7D is the next body or if the 60D will still come out)
- xxxD
- xxxxD


----------



## Danylu

I thought this was cool that my tripod can do this


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
So the 1 and 5 are in the same series?

And the xxxD are in another?

I'm used to higher numbers being better, like with the 400D, 450D, 500D, D70, D80, D90, 30D, 40D, 50D, D200, D300, etc. 5D and 7D sound like they are in the same class and that the 7D is higher.

With Canon, the lower the single digit, the more uber it is. 1D - 7D. Add a digit and it drops to the mid-range class, though now increasing numbers indicate new iterations of the same camera (the xxD line and the xxxD line). Yet the single-digit line doesn't numerically increase, it adds "Mark II" and such.

The 7D is an odd camera to develop in the "professional" line. Canon has released APS-H (1.3x) pro bodies like the earlier 1D cameras, but to release an APS-C camera is odd. I think Canon is trying solve the problem of the full frame bodies not being able to burst very fast. Sports photographers are using 40Ds for sports, so I suppose Canon is trying to draw them away from using xxD cameras. I bet they tried to develop a full frame camera that had a high burst rate, but found that would have been a 1Ds mkIII priced camera, so they relented and went with a crop sensor. I guess it kind of makes sense because other than the sensor, it has FF features like 19 cross-type AF points, 65 area metering, etc.

What's funny is that at POTN and Canon Rumors, there are already rumors that there are problems with the 7D having back focus issues and inaccurate AF in burst mode.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
With Canon, the lower the single digit, the more uber it is. 1D - 7D. Add a digit and it drops to the mid-range class, though now increasing numbers indicate new iterations of the same camera (the xxD line and the xxxD line). Yet the single-digit line doesn't numerically increase, it adds "Mark II" and such.

The 7D is an odd camera to develop in the "professional" line. Canon has released APS-H (1.3x) pro bodies like the earlier 1D cameras, but to release an APS-C camera is odd. I think Canon is trying solve the problem of the full frame bodies not being able to burst very fast. Sports photographers are using 40Ds for sports, so I suppose Canon is trying to draw them away from using xxD cameras. I bet they tried to develop a full frame camera that had a high burst rate, but found that would have been a 1Ds mkIII priced camera, so they relented and went with a crop sensor. I guess it kind of makes sense because other than the sensor, it has FF features like 19 cross-type AF points, 65 area metering, etc.

What's funny is that at POTN and Canon Rumors, there are already rumors that there are problems with the 7D having back focus issues and inaccurate AF in burst mode.

Before the 7D, I don't think that pattern was there. I see what you guys are getting at, but I still don't like it.

Doesn't one of the FF 1d's do 10FPS?


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Canon EOS 7D:

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0909/09...canoneos7d.asp

http://www.dpreview.com/previews/canoneos7d/


That would really be nice for my small birdies.

Nikon had better get off their a$$ and come up with something alittle more innovative than the D300s..


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


That would really be nice for my small birdies.

Nikon had better get off their a$$ and come up with something alittle more innovative than the D300s..


You aren't head over heels excited about 720p video and a SD slot?


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


That would really be nice for my small birdies.

Nikon had better get off their a$$ and come up with something alittle more innovative than the D300s..


"Canon isn't messing around anymore, look at the 7D. We need something more than the D300s..."

*Everyone thinks*

"Well" the intern says, "we can cover it in a nano crystal coating?"

Everyone stairs down at the intern with him now fearing for his life and seeing his future job at Nikon disappearing.

"That is brilliant!" The CEO yells as he throws money at the intern,"you're definitely getting a job here!"

But being serious again, Nikon does need to add some more stuff. And maybe make video usable, I get this feeling the video on the D300s will be like the D90 and D5000.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Before the 7D, I don't think that pattern was there. I see what you guys are getting at, but I still don't like it.

Doesn't one of the FF 1d's do 10FPS?


No, the 1D Mark III will do 10 FPS, but it's technically a crop sensor (APS-H) with 1.3x crop factor and a 10 MP sensor. All the older 1D cameras could do 8 FPS or more, but they were all APS-H.

The 1Ds cameras are the FF 1D cameras (the 1Ds, 1Ds markII and 1Ds Mark III). The 1Ds Mark III is the fastest at 5 FPS, even with dual D!GIC III processors.


----------



## bentleya

New Toy which means some more photos, Guess's on the lens Used?







Then a HDR of above.


----------



## nuclearjock

Sigma 10-20


----------



## bentleya

dam your good


----------



## nuclearjock

Your EXIF kinda tipped me off, but thanks anyway.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *bentleya* 
dam your good









If you check the EXIF page on your flickr link, it says "10-20mm" next to "Lens:", which leaves only one possible choice. Next time don't link to the flickr page


----------



## equetefue

Still upgrading to a 1DMarkIII in a few weeks. Need the faster AF. Very nice back-up. Very very nice camera indeed.


----------



## equetefue

some from yesterday. Tough shooting conditions... hazy and bright

Some of my favorites and link to rest http://equetefue.zenfolio.com/p798025160


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Nice captures as always eq. That gator shot is great! And the 1DMarkIII does look like a nice body indeed, bettering metering, faster burst, live view, lighter weight. I wish that Canon would have put an APS-H 1.3x crop sensor into the 7D instead of usual APS-C, don't know if EF-S lenses would still vignette though.


----------



## nuclearjock




----------



## GoneTomorrow

Great Caesar's ghost!


----------



## laboitenoire

You can barely see the camera... Sort of reminds me of the auto pilot from Walle...


----------



## tK FuRY

umm, I'm speechless....


----------



## Danylu

!

Yeah looks a lot like the autopilot from walle.


----------



## Mootsfox

Should have told me you were going that route, I put two SB-200's up on ebay and would have happily sold them to you for the same price. (~$100)

Otherwise looks like two SB-800, eight SB-R200's, a ring, a SB-900 and a SU-800?


----------



## tK FuRY

I thought we were supposed to capture the presence and leave the scene alone, not cause permanent damage to the creatures eyes


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *tK FuRY*


I thought we were supposed to capture the presence and leave the scene alone, not cause permanent damage to the creatures eyes










Actually that setup is very popular on the west coast. While having a portrait taken, one also gets a suntan.


----------



## Bigevil89

That's an insane lighting setup!

Here's a macro Lego shots I took today with my A590










And after experimenting with filters in photoshop, I ended up with this


----------



## grishkathefool

Hey guys I have a MEAD DS90 telescope and was wondering what adapter I should search for to use it to snap pics with my Pentax ist DS? I tried searching, but honestly, I don't know what the part I am looking for is called.


----------



## laboitenoire

You need to find a T-ring and corresponding adapter for the Pentax mount. Do you know what diameter of eyepiece the focuser on your telescope uses?

You'll need this:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...a_Adapter.html

and this:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc..._Digital_.html

You can do a lot of reading on the subject.


----------



## Marin

Finally found someone using Pentax!



Pentax K100D w/ 18-55mm


----------



## laboitenoire

Sniped.


----------



## grishkathefool

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


You need to find a T-ring and corresponding adapter for the Pentax mount. Do you know what diameter of eyepiece the focuser on your telescope uses?

You'll need this:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...a_Adapter.html

and this:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc..._Digital_.html

You can do a lot of reading on the subject.


Thanks, now I can take pictures of the ISS.


----------



## Danylu

Guys I'm not sure how its done but is there a way to calculate distance between subject-photographer of certain length lenses given the reproduction ratio? In other words, if I use a 85mm lens and want a reproduction ratio of 0.2, is it possible to work out the distance from those 2 numbers? Thanks if someone knows how to do this!


----------



## laboitenoire

Well, presumably it would have to do with (relatively) basic physics of lenses and mirrors. Too bad it's been a while since I've done that.


----------



## nuclearjock

Some wide open, some at f/16 to show sharpness.

1.









2.









3.









4.









5.









6.









7.


----------



## Marin

Mmmm bokeh.

Anyways, using Aperture is so frustrating after using Lightroom for awhile. The major problem I have with it is the lack of a Tone Curve, which I heavily use in Lightroom.

I have a ton of pics I'm going to upload, but I'm waiting until I get back and can use Lightroom again.


----------



## grishkathefool

Nice depth of field on Picture #6 the Wooden Boards.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Wow, Nuke, that goes to show just how small the DOF can get on an FF sensor. Even at f/16 the shots are dead sharp, diffraction or not. Nice work!

So I will reward your efforts with a perplexed and cautious squirrel, enjoy.


----------



## grishkathefool

Hey, I know that squirrel. That's Edward, he hangs out near the pool at Woodland!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *grishkathefool*


Hey, I know that squirrel. That's Edward, he hangs out near the pool at Woodland!


LOL, that's him! Good guess on the location. He didn't like the newest addition to our family:


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Wow, Nuke, that goes to show just how small the DOF can get on an FF sensor. Even at f/16 the shots are dead sharp, diffraction or not. Nice work!

So I will reward your efforts with a perplexed and cautious squirrel, enjoy.


Thanks GT. That squirrel looks just one that taunts my boxer every morning.


----------



## Marin

Back to using Lightroom.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Nice shots marin, I've been waiting for some more 10-22 shots from you.







And I like the skies, most people won't even go out shooting when it's overcast, but it makes for interesting skies.

Here's my latest 10-22, a mill building. Uses a B+W 1.8 ND with this one:


----------



## Mootsfox

Gone, overcast days are my favorite. No direct sun, cooler and sometimes interesting stuff to look at. Luckily I live in Columbus and vacation in Seattle









Nice shot there. I love wide angles so much


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Gone, overcast days are my favorite. No direct sun, cooler and sometimes interesting stuff to look at. Luckily I live in Columbus and vacation in Seattle









Nice shot there. I love wide angles so much










Thanks, but they're so hard to get level shots with sometimes, the distortion makes it very hard. That's one feature I think might come in handy on the 7D, the electronic level. And often if there's lots of edges in the shot, the distortion is more noticeable requiring correction in PS and cropping.


----------



## mrwesth

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
- 1Ds (FF)
- 1D (1.3x Crop)
(Considered the same line, the 1Ds is the FF version while the 1D has the 1.3x crop. The 1D will probably soon be dropped leaving just the 1Ds)

- 5D (FF)
- 7D (Crop)
- xxD? (Not known yet if the 7D is the next body or if the 60D will still come out)
- xxxD
- xxxxD

What have you heard that the 1D will be dropped?
... Sports shooters would throw a hissy fit or switch to Nikon.

Granted the 1D III was a bit of a flop because of focusing issues, but good copies are excellent cameras. I've been waiting on the 1D IV... heard it will be released 1st Quarter 2010.

I just don't see them phasing out the 1D line. Hopefully you got misinfo!


----------



## Marin

Thin DoF.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Here's my latest 10-22, a mill building. Uses a B+W 1.8 ND with this one:


Very nice GT. I'm thinking of experimenting with split ND's but I'd have to have something that would hold square filters in front of the lens.

Anyway, I'm finding less and less time to experiment with new techniques with soccer season here.

Again, your use of ND's is quite masterful. Well done.


----------



## nuclearjock

From a tourney last weekend:

D3/400mm VR f/2.8 @ f/2.8









D300/20-200 VR f/2.8 @f/2.8


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


Very nice GT. I'm thinking of experimenting with split ND's but I'd have to have something that would hold square filters in front of the lens.

Anyway, I'm finding less and less time to experiment with new techniques with soccer season here.

Again, your use of ND's is quite masterful. Well done.


Thanks, appreciate it. Your soccer shots are great, wish I could afford that caliber of glass.









I'd love to have a rectangular filter setup with graduated NDs, but they get rather pricey. I'd ideally like the have a Lee holder and filters, but they're really expensive (but the best supposedly). I hear Cokin and Hitech square filters are decent, so I'm seeing if I can afford those.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

The Leica M9 has been announced, full-frame sensor, small rangefinder body, yours for $6995.00 (body only):












I just glanced at DPReview's pre-release beta samples, and the ISO 1600 low light shots look pretty sub-par (in comparison to what I've seen from Nikon and Canon FF sensors) and some of the shots have some major purple fringing! What's the draw other than the Leica name (and getting to use the only digital rangefinder I guess)?


----------



## nuclearjock

I don't likea leica.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
I don't likea leica.

No likey Leica? Never used one, film or otherwise, so maybe there's some magic that happens when you shoot with one.


----------



## Marin

I like shooting with them. They'll be even better once Ken Rockwell and his site go away.


----------



## nuclearjock

I worked for a local newspaper during the summer of 1971. The paper owned a Leica slr with a couple of Leica lenses that we could check out for "special" assignments. All I remember was that the shutter was extremely quiet, the same sound a canon or nikon would make with the mirror locked up.
We shot BW film and processed it ourselves so I never ran any color film through it.
I perceived it to be an expensive camera with no real tangible benefit(s).
I'm sure they're made ridicously well, the optics are good but probably just as good as some of the finer japanese optics.

They're not getting my money.

Edit: What's Ken Rockwell got to do with Leica or anything else for that matter? I'm glad he lives far away in California. I'm sure he fits in well there. Marin, have you signed up for any of his shoots yet??


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
I worked for a local newspaper during the summer of 1971. The paper owned a Leica slr with a couple of Leica lenses that we could check out for "special" assignments. All I remember was that the shutter was extremely quiet, the same sound a canon or nikon would make with the mirror locked up.
We shot BW film and processed it ourselves so I never ran any color film through it.
I perceived it to be an expensive camera with no real tangible benefit(s).
I'm sure they're made ridicously well, the optics are good but probably just as good as some of the finer japanese optics.

They're not getting my money.

Edit: *What's Ken Rockwell got to do with Leica or anything else for that matter?* I'm glad he lives far away in California. I'm sure he fits in well there. Marin, have you signed up for any of his shoots yet??









Along with being a huge Nikon fanboy, he's a Leica fanboy.

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...02&postcount=9

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Pekka* 
It seems when you buy Leica you buy a stairway to heaven and unparalleled skills. Guess who wrote these (answer below):

_"Thank goodness, the M9 has no mode to put moving images up on the rear LCD as you shoot. This would be inconceivably stupid for the LEICA photographer, even if popular with lesser men. The LEICA photographer's attention never leaves his subject, and certainly would never be fixed on an LCD while out shooting."_

_"When you shoot the LEICA, you know your photos are perfect. The Leica man never wastes his shooting time looking back at what he just shot; his eyes are always looking for his next great photo. The Leica man is part of the action, not a huddled drone off in the corner."_

_"Lesser men don't understand the simple brilliance of the LEICA, just as a dog doesn't understand calculus or the brilliant designs of Ive or Rams. There have always been those who appreciate elegance and purpose, and those who never will."_

_"Simplicity is brilliance. This simplicity allows the Leica photographer to bag 10 award-winning photos in less time than others take to find a hidden menu item, or try to rescue their mistakes later on a computer from a lesser camera."_

_"Men who can't comprehend genius will always be able to find ways in which the LEICA is different from lesser cameras, and turn these differences into criticism. Anyone can always find something negative to say about anything. That is not important. "_

Yep, guessed right: http://kenrockwell.com/leica/m9.htm


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Along with being a huge Nikon fanboy, he's a Leica fanboy.

You're right, I forgot about "Leica man".


----------



## Mootsfox

What if Ken Rockwell is all a joke. Like the single largest trolling effort in history?


----------



## mrwesth

Early morning boredom.... took this over a year ago, just processed it about 5mins ago.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


What if Ken Rockwell is all a joke. Like the single largest trolling effort in history?


Jeez, then the joke would be on Nikon I guess. Maybe he secretly works for Canon.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mrwesth*


Early morning boredom.... took this over a year ago, just processed it about 5mins ago.


Cool idea for a shot. I love rediscovering old shots that I had at the time thought weren't keepers and trying new PP on them. What gear do you use?


----------



## Mootsfox

I had a dream last night. I was off shooting in southern Ohio and was going to use my D60, but the mount had warped and a lens wouldn't properly fit. I was trying everything I could, but couldn't fix it and had to use a P&S for the whole day


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
I had a dream last night. I was off shooting in southern Ohio and was going to use my D60, but the mount had warped and a lens wouldn't properly fit. I was trying everything I could, but couldn't fix it and had to use a P&S for the whole day









Sounds like a nightmare, not a dream


----------



## mrwesth

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Jeez, then the joke would be on Nikon I guess. Maybe he secretly works for Canon.

Cool idea for a shot. I love rediscovering old shots that I had at the time thought weren't keepers and trying new PP on them. What gear do you use?

Did a long shoot that day and decided to play around at the end and got that photo. Never used it for anything but still liked it.

I had a 30d or 40d and shot that with either a 50mm f1.4 or 85mm f1.8... too bad I didn't have a macro lens at the time. Sold off most of my gear though, just have a 40d and 70-200mm 2.8... and work gear.


----------



## Dragoon

Wow... long time sice I wandered around here.

Gone, equipment update, please add a *LowePro Fastpack 250* to the list









I decided to dump the idea of getting an EF 28-135mm and to get a 70-300mm IS USM instead. I also "drooled" over a 70-200mm f/4 USM which only costs a bit more, but the lack of IS on a telephoto lens was a wake up slap.

Before I pull the trigger, is there anything I should consider? If there are any better lens than those (around the same price range) with approximately the same focal range.


----------



## mrwesth

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Dragoon* 
Wow... long time sice I wandered around here.

Gone, equipment update, please add a *LowePro Fastpack 250* to the list









I decided to dump the idea of getting an EF 28-135mm and to get a 70-300mm IS USM instead. I also "drooled" over a 70-200mm f/4 USM which only costs a bit more, but the lack of IS on a telephoto lens was a wake up slap.

Before I pull the trigger, is there anything I should consider? If there are any better lens than those (around the same price range) with approximately the same focal range.










Unless you need the added reach of the 70-300, then I would say screw IS and go for the 70-200mm f4. Stabilization is nice but not necessary. Its more or less a convenience. Pull out a monopod/tripod or use the camera strap to stabilize...
Of course this is all my opinion.








(Could also look at the Sigma 70-200mm 2.8 for a little bit more)


----------



## Marin

omg...

http://kenrockwell.com/trips/2009-08-nyc/bnh.htm


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


What if Ken Rockwell is all a joke. Like the single largest *trolling *effort in history?


DEAL: Adorama has refurbished D2Hs for $1,200 each. For sports, these are pro-level cameras probably better than today's amateur D300s.
TROLLTROLLTROLLTROLLTROLLTROLLTROLLTROLLTROLLTROLL


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Ken*

If Apple put a camera in the iPhone Touch.


That's creepy.

Also wow, he never shuts up.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dragoon*


Wow... long time sice I wandered around here.

Gone, equipment update, please add a *LowePro Fastpack 250* to the list









I decided to dump the idea of getting an EF 28-135mm and to get a 70-300mm IS USM instead. I also "drooled" over a 70-200mm f/4 USM which only costs a bit more, but the lack of IS on a telephoto lens was a wake up slap.

Before I pull the trigger, is there anything I should consider? If there are any better lens than those (around the same price range) with approximately the same focal range.












Quote:



Originally Posted by *mrwesth*


Unless you need the added reach of the 70-300, then I would say screw IS and go for the 70-200mm f4. Stabilization is nice but not necessary. Its more or less a convenience. Pull out a monopod/tripod or use the camera strap to stabilize...
Of course this is all my opinion.








(Could also look at the Sigma 70-200mm 2.8 for a little bit more)


Welcome back Dragoon, enjoying the 1000D? I agree with mrwesth says, the 70-200 f/4 is better for a number of reasons:

1. Sharper (though not by much, the 70-300 is decent)

2. Past 200mm, the 70-300mm is fairly soft, so you might find yourself not going past 200mm with it because of that.

3. the L lens has a constant f/4 aperture, so when shooting at 200mm at f/4, you may not see a huge difference in hand held shooting at 200mm at f/5 with IS. Plus it's nice to have f/4 at all times for blurring backgrounds and narrow DOFs.

4. The L has MUCH better build quality, it's weather sealed, focuses and zooms internally, and has smoother zoom and focus rings. Conversely, the 70-300 extends quite a bit when zooming (exposing itself somewhat to dust and moisture), the front element rotates (annoying for using CPLs), probably prone to lens creep, and is mostly plastic (less likely to survive an impact). This is probably the biggest difference between the two lenses.

5. The L lens has ring-type USM, which is faster than the micro-motor USM on the 70-300 (though it isn't slow by any means).

I partially agree about IS being just a convenience. If you will be shooting wildlife, panning shots, or other fast moving subjects, or low-light hand held, it's vital in my opinion since you aren't able to open the aperture very wide on the 70-300. The IS on the 70-300 is basic but effective (no mode 1 & 2).

On another note Dragoon, and despite the higher price you have to pay for lenses, I strongly encourage you to try and save for the 70-200mm f/4 L USM IS. It's a work of art it's so damn good. The IS on it is very advanced (4th gen.) and gives a 4-stop advantage, plus it has two modes (one for panning); it's worth every penny extra over the non-IS version. It also has few extra lens elements and is sharper, you can pick any aperture or focal length at random and it's dead sharp.

Hope that helps.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


omg...

http://kenrockwell.com/trips/2009-08-nyc/bnh.htm


Christ, thanks a lot, now I have to hear his voice, as if looking at him and reading what he writes wasn't bad enough.


----------



## Danylu

Wow there are physical camera stores that big in the US.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Wow there is a physical camera store that big in the US.










Yes, fixed.


----------



## Dragoon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mrwesth*


Unless you need the added reach of the 70-300, then I would say screw IS and go for the 70-200mm f4. Stabilization is nice but not necessary. Its more or less a convenience. Pull out a monopod/tripod or use the camera strap to stabilize...
Of course this is all my opinion.








(Could also look at the Sigma 70-200mm 2.8 for a little bit more)


Thanks a bunch for the opinion mrwesth. That one really made me lean into getting the 70-200, especially after reading a few reviews on it!









The sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 is out of my league for now lol, it's too expensive, I think with that price I would get the 70-200mm f/4L IS USM









Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Welcome back Dragoon, enjoying the 1000D? I agree with mrwesth says, the 70-200 f/4 is better for a number of reasons:

1. Sharper (though not by much, the 70-300 is decent)

2. Past 200mm, the 70-300mm is fairly soft, so you might find yourself not going past 200mm with it because of that.

3. the L lens has a constant f/4 aperture, so when shooting at 200mm at f/4, you may not see a huge difference in hand held shooting at 200mm at f/5 with IS. Plus it's nice to have f/4 at all times for blurring backgrounds and narrow DOFs.

4. The L has MUCH better build quality, it's weather sealed, focuses and zooms internally, and has smoother zoom and focus rings. Conversely, the 70-300 extends quite a bit when zooming (exposing itself somewhat to dust and moisture), the front element rotates (annoying for using CPLs), probably prone to lens creep, and is mostly plastic (less likely to survive an impact). This is probably the biggest difference between the two lenses.

5. The L lens has ring-type USM, which is faster than the micro-motor USM on the 70-300 (though it isn't slow by any means).

I partially agree about IS being just a convenience. If you will be shooting wildlife, panning shots, or other fast moving subjects, or low-light hand held, it's vital in my opinion since you aren't able to open the aperture very wide on the 70-300. The IS on the 70-300 is basic but effective (no mode 1 & 2).

On another note Dragoon, and despite the higher price you have to pay for lenses, I strongly encourage you to try and save for the 70-200mm f/4 L USM IS. It's a work of art it's so damn good. The IS on it is very advanced (4th gen.) and gives a 4-stop advantage, plus it has two modes (one for panning); it's worth every penny extra over the non-IS version. It also has few extra lens elements and is sharper, you can pick any aperture or focal length at random and it's dead sharp.

Hope that helps.

Christ, thanks a lot, now I have to hear his voice, as if looking at him and reading what he writes wasn't bad enough.


Oh yeah, it's a great camera







, it may not be much for you guys but on a 5 day trip to spain, I shot well over 650 times, the nice ol' 18-55mm IS was on my camera 99% of the times lol. I need to post a few pics on flickr when I have the time









I'm leaning even more into getting the 70-200mm now lol

About the IS version... it "IS" very tempting... almost double the price too lol...

I'll thoroughly think about it.

Thanks alot for your opinions


----------



## Marin

Save up for the IS version, you will not regret it. Even at times when you have a fast enough shutter speed, IS helps so much when composing shots at the long end.


----------



## Dragoon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Save up for the IS version, you will not regret it. Even at times when you have a fast enough shutter speed, IS helps so much when composing shots at the long end.


Thanks Marin. *adds another vote for the IS version*

I also remembered; the cheapest I found was 915€ *new* on ebay but my credit card is capped at 900€...









I also tried to look for used but no luck. I only looked from European Union as I don't want to risk getting hammered by the customs.

This can become a big problem...


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Dragoon* 
Thanks a bunch for the opinion mrwesth. That one really made me lean into getting the 70-200, especially after reading a few reviews on it!









The sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 is out of my league for now lol, it's too expensive, I think with that price I would get the 70-200mm f/4L IS USM









Oh yeah, it's a great camera







, it may not be much for you guys but on a 5 day trip to spain, I shot well over 650 times, the nice ol' 18-55mm IS was on my camera 99% of the times lol. I need to post a few pics on flickr when I have the time









I'm leaning even more into getting the 70-200mm now lol

About the IS version... it "IS" very tempting... almost double the price too lol...

I'll thoroughly think about it.

Thanks alot for your opinions











Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Save up for the IS version, you will not regret it. Even at times when you have a fast enough shutter speed, IS helps so much when composing shots at the long end.


Quote:


Originally Posted by *Dragoon* 
Thanks Marin. *adds another vote for the IS version*

I also remembered; the cheapest I found was 915€ *new* on ebay but my credit card is capped at 900€...









I also tried to look for used but no luck. I only looked from European Union as I don't want to risk getting hammered by the customs.

This can become a big problem...

Obviously Marin and I can both attest to the quality of the lens, 20 elements of awesome! Can't say enough about it, I have the L bug. I hope you can manage to get one. What about eBay in your area? Maybe you can find a used one for a good price? I don't know how much customs are from the US, buy you might even check on POTN for a good used copy, I've seen them go for under a grand before (some people practically give away lenses there sometimes), so it might be justifiable. There are also lots of UK sellers there too, so you might find one nearby.


----------



## mrwesth

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Save up for the IS version, you will not regret it. Even at times when you have a fast enough shutter speed, IS helps so much when composing shots at the long end.

I partially agree. IS helps a ton on longer heavy lenses with composing the shot in the viewfinder as much as with image quality.

In this case though, I think the 70-200mm f4 is light enough and short enough that you don't notice very much shake hand holding. And again, bracing the camera with the camera strap (around your neck and wrapped around your hand if necessary, etc) can save you 2 stops or more handheld--not as convenient as IS but saves 2-400$ depending on the lens...









***EDIT and I want to second the EBAY suggestion. You can find great deals from people with too much money and too little time to learn photography...


----------



## Squeeker The Cat

ok guys, my little girl was just born last friday, YAY ME, anyway im looking back and in all of the pics and movies i too, there are 2 purpleish dots. they show up on lcd so i thought cool it wont show in pics, WRONG. they are on pics and movies too. what do you suppose this is? i cleaned the lens and they are still there too. BTW i have a canon S5-IS


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Squeeker The Cat* 
ok guys, my little girl was just born last friday, YAY ME, anyway im looking back and in all of the pics and movies i too, there are 2 purpleish dots. they show up on lcd so i thought cool it wont show in pics, WRONG. they are on pics and movies too. what do you suppose this is? i cleaned the lens and they are still there too. BTW i have a canon S5-IS

Can you post a shot? Ordinarily I would say hot pixels, which typically happen only during long exposures (although modern cameras seldom have hot pixel problems), but it could be stuck pixels, which may or may not go away. There are methods to deal with them on monitors, but with CCD's it usually means warranty repair.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Squeeker The Cat* 
ok guys, my little girl was just born last friday, YAY ME, anyway im looking back and in all of the pics and movies i too, there are 2 purpleish dots. they show up on lcd so i thought cool it wont show in pics, WRONG. they are on pics and movies too. what do you suppose this is? i cleaned the lens and they are still there too. BTW i have a canon S5-IS

Sounds like dead/stuck pixels mate









They are on the camera sensor which means warranty.


----------



## Danylu

lol I have one of them dead bang in the lower middle and it is purple D:


----------



## tK FuRY

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
lol I have one of them dead bang in the lower middle and it is purple D:


Lol, at least you won't have trouble shooting purple subjects


----------



## Dragoon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Obviously Marin and I can both attest to the quality of the lens, 20 elements of awesome! Can't say enough about it, I have the L bug. I hope you can manage to get one. What about eBay in your area? Maybe you can find a used one for a good price? I don't know how much customs are from the US, buy you might even check on POTN for a good used copy, I've seen them go for under a grand before (some people practically give away lenses there sometimes), so it might be justifiable. There are also lots of UK sellers there too, so you might find one nearby.


Well, I did look through the local ebay, portugal lacks an ebay site so I looked through the UK and italy ebay sites (both showed the same stuff) but I cannot find a used 70-200mm f/4 IS, only new.

Yeah... on POTN it has really great deals, but as I said before my main concern is the customs, the lens is expensive as it is, even if I can manage to get a used one for $500 or $600 I will probably be unable to afford paying the import tax, especially when it's something so expensive it tends to get exponentially higher.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mrwesth*


I partially agree. IS helps a ton on longer heavy lenses with composing the shot in the viewfinder as much as with image quality.

In this case though, I think the 70-200mm f4 is light enough and short enough that you don't notice very much shake hand holding. And again, bracing the camera with the camera strap (around your neck and wrapped around your hand if necessary, etc) can save you 2 stops or more handheld--not as convenient as IS but saves 2-400$ depending on the lens...









***EDIT and I want to second the EBAY suggestion. You can find great deals from people with too much money and too little time to learn photography...


Same answer as above, as much odd it may seem, I can't find anyone selling the IS version used.

I have 3 options, I either buy one locally and 200€ more expensive (debit card has no limit), hope my bank accepts my request to increase my credit card limit and get it off ebay, or, take the shot and import one.

I thought to myself I wouldn't spend more than 600€ on a lens... but I don't have an L lens and I already feel the "L bug" symptoms.









Thanks for the input guys.


----------



## Marin

Taking PP more seriously now.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Taking PP more seriously now.




The stalks (wheat? :S) look great here. Do you mind giving me a quick run through of what you did in PP?


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Taking PP more seriously now.




The stalks in the background (wheat? :S) look great here. Do you mind giving me a quick run through of what you did in PP?


----------



## Dragoon

I've tried looking a bit for a review, but there's still none for the Sigma 10-20mm f/3.5, anyone here had the opportunity to do some trial shots with one of those and compare to the older version?

EDIT: Nevermind... one was posted few hours ago.

Here you go. SLRGear review on Sigma 10-20mm f/3.5

Wondering if the constant f/3.5 and the ELD glass is worth the extra $160. All this because I'm also wondering if the EF-S 10-22 is worth the extra $300 over the old sigma. (Outrageous exchange rates)


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dragoon*


I've tried looking a bit for a review, but there's still none for the Sigma 10-20mm f/3.5, anyone here had the opportunity to do some trial shots with one of those and compare to the older version?

EDIT: Nevermind... one was posted few hours ago.

Here you go. SLRGear review on Sigma 10-20mm f/3.5

Wondering if the constant f/3.5 and the ELD glass is worth the extra $160. All this because I'm also wondering if the EF-S 10-22 is worth the extra $300 over the old sigma. (Outrageous exchange rates)











I just read that review myself, and from what I gather, it's on par with the Canon 10-22. With the Canon you have more range (a whopping 2mm, I know!), the Canon is a *little* sharper overall, particularly corner sharpness, and the CA control on the Canon is a bit better. The Sigma has the constant aperture obviously and for less cost that the Canon's variable aperture. They both have ultra-sonic focusing. I'd say the Sigma is the better bang-for-buck by far, fairly impressive offering.

I think the extra low dispersion element is worth it, because if you look at the older Sigma 10-20, it's CA is almost off the chart. CA is fixable PP however, but IMO it's nice having good control over it in the optics.

And also IMO I think variable aperture isn't a big loss for a UWA lens. Sure, it would be useful, but with such a wide angle lens, hand holding is much easier (I've hand held shots @10mm for 1" before with no blur) and if you're shooting landscapes, you might not use a wide aperture that much anyhow. It's a mixed bag.


----------



## Dragoon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


I just read that review myself, and from what I gather, it's on par with the Canon 10-22. With the Canon you have more range (a whopping 2mm, I know!), the Canon is a *little* sharper overall, particularly corner sharpness, and the CA control on the Canon is a bit better. The Sigma has the constant aperture obviously and for less cost that the Canon's variable aperture. They both have ultra-sonic focusing. I'd say the Sigma is the better bang-for-buck by far, fairly impressive offering.

I think the extra low dispersion element is worth it, because if you look at the older Sigma 10-20, it's CA is almost off the chart. CA is fixable PP however, but IMO it's nice having good control over it in the optics.

And also IMO I think variable aperture isn't a big loss for a UWA lens. Sure, it would be useful, but with such a wide angle lens, hand holding is much easier (I've hand held shots @10mm for 1" before with no blur) and if you're shooting landscapes, you might not use a wide aperture that much anyhow. It's a mixed bag.


Ahh, once again, great help.









Well, it IS a mixed bag, I want to have the UWA for landscapes, creative shots and limited space photos, in which the later option might take the best advantage of a wider aperture if indoors. I'm really in between the Sigma f/3.5 and the canon, but the UWA lens will be after I get the 70-200, so I have a little more time to think on it and probably more reviews will pop up.

Also... if all goes well, I will get the 70-200mm f/4 L IS USM by the beginning of october, my bank accepted my request to increase my credit card limit.







I can barely wait.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dragoon*


Ahh, once again, great help.









Well, it IS a mixed bag, I want to have the UWA for landscapes, creative shots and limited space photos, in which the later option might take the best advantage of a wider aperture if indoors. I'm really in between the Sigma f/3.5 and the canon, but the UWA lens will be after I get the 70-200, so I have a little more time to think on it and probably more reviews will pop up.

Also... if all goes well, I will get the 70-200mm f/4 L IS USM by the beginning of october, my bank accepted my request to increase my credit card limit.







I can barely wait.


Nice! You'll love it!


----------



## muffin

Is there an award for roughest panorama ever?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eden_Project


----------



## GoneTomorrow

LOL, looks like a five minute job!


----------



## Dragoon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *muffin*


Is there an award for roughest panorama ever?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eden_Project

/snip


LOL, I second Gones statement!

By the way, what can you guys say about this photo?









In my trip to spain, we had to stop to refuel the bus when suddenly there was a power outtage. I took the photo through the bus window.

It was really hard to take that one, even with IS it got a bit blurry, there's not much to see but I enjoy the effect it got due to the window being slightly fogged.

ISO 800
25mm
2sec exposure
ƒ/4

I have to upload more... but there are so many lol


----------



## laboitenoire

Actually, with those settings you might want to have turned IS off.


----------



## Marin

Tried out a Canon 1D Mark III today. Put my Sigma 30mm f/1.4 on it and it only vignetted a little.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Was there a noticeable difference in the 30mm going from 1.6 to 1.3 crop?


----------



## Marin

Yeah, there's a pretty huge difference actually. Even though there's only a 9mm difference in FoV between the two crop sizes, the 30mm feels way more like a wide angle on the 1D.


----------



## dudemanppl

Whos 1D was it?


----------



## Danylu

Hm Lightroom lags a bit when rendering NEF (Nikon's RAW) and lags when I decide to load a folder of 100 photos in grid. I can attribute them to CPU and Hard Drive respectively I think but when I Import from Device>D60 it lags for about 10 secounds (Not Responding) and then loads the dialog, I'm not too sure what the problem is, anyone have any suggestions?









Oh and spot healing lags about a second when I have 100s of those bubble things up :/


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
Hm Lightroom lags a bit when rendering NEF (Nikon's RAW) and lags when I decide to load a folder of 100 photos in grid. I can attribute them to CPU and Hard Drive respectively I think but when I Import from Device>D60 it lags for about 10 secounds (Not Responding) and then loads the dialog, I'm not too sure what the problem is, anyone have any suggestions?









Lightroom is a laggy piece of crap. It has serious lag issues on my laptop if it's not fullsized.

As for the import, I have it set with my card reader so it autoloads through windows and brings up the import box as soon as Lightroom loads. I find it reall nice as I don't even have to open lightroom, it loads when I stick the SD card into the reader.

I had the same problems with the lag when reading through the camera. After leaving the camera on overnight a few too many times, I just said screw it and bought a card reader.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
Hm Lightroom lags a bit when rendering NEF (Nikon's RAW) and lags when I decide to load a folder of 100 photos in grid. I can attribute them to CPU and Hard Drive respectively I think but when I Import from Device>D60 it lags for about 10 secounds (Not Responding) and then loads the dialog, I'm not too sure what the problem is, anyone have any suggestions?









Oh and spot healing lags about a second when I have 100s of those bubble things up :/


Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Lightroom is a laggy piece of crap. It has serious lag issues on my laptop if it's not fullsized.

As for the import, I have it set with my card reader so it autoloads through windows and brings up the import box as soon as Lightroom loads. I find it reall nice as I don't even have to open lightroom, it loads when I stick the SD card into the reader.

I had the same problems with the lag when reading through the camera. After leaving the camera on overnight a few too many times, I just said screw it and bought a card reader.

I had no problems with the trial version on my Laptop, but I never used it much obviously. That's odd about LR lagging, what about the new 2.5 update? Still lags?

And I also just use a card reader, much easier. I have a very small 23-in-1 USB 2.0 reader, the size of a saltine cracker. It has a USB mini cable that also can be used with my 40D (when I do firmware updates or check the shutter count.)

LR is a nice piece of software, but I do all I need with PS CS3 and Elements 7.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Lightroom is a laggy piece of crap. It has serious lag issues on my laptop if it's not fullsized.

As for the import, I have it set with my card reader so it autoloads through windows and brings up the import box as soon as Lightroom loads. I find it reall nice as I don't even have to open lightroom, it loads when I stick the SD card into the reader.

I had the same problems with the lag when reading through the camera. After leaving the camera on overnight a few too many times, I just said screw it and bought a card reader.


My Lightroom issues aren't as serious as yours, importing 7gb of RAWs via Lightroom only lags before the dialog pops up, I hope future patches may fix this but that is rather disappointing to hear. Only problem is, I can't find any other program as specialized as Lightroom.









EDIT: Should get 2.5 on the weekend to see if it changes anything.


----------



## Marin

I've never had issues with Lightroom lagging.


----------



## tK FuRY

Camera-less now







, I guess by the end of this year or early next year I will be upgrading to an FX D700







.

On the LR topic, I've also never had issues with it lagging, maybe a slight sluggish-ness while I was importing a 16GB card. No major issues though.


----------



## FSF-Foxhound

Oh boi i love my D40, and its 18-105mm VR lens! got both for ~250. cam refurbished on newegg, and lens used as a demo in the store.. Oh its amazing!


----------



## Mootsfox

Where did you get the 18-105?


----------



## Danylu

About the rattly noises my D60 charger had a while ago, the thing decided to go pop/boom today when I slid the battery in and now smells like burnt plastic







If I buy a 3rd party charger are there any consequences I may have to be aware of?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Looks like the a fire hydrant!


----------



## Squeeker The Cat

cool red camera never seen one before!!


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Looks like the a fire hydrant!











I have this urge to lift my leg on it.


----------



## laboitenoire

Actually looks like a pretty good camera on paper. Plus with the insane number of Pentax-mount lenses available...


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Actually looks like a pretty good camera on paper. Plus with the insane number of Pentax-mount lenses available...


It does it look good - but not in red. I guess it's a natural evolution for DSLRs with so many entry-levels to choose from, but I prefer good old black or maybe brushed metal on some cameras. Pentax seems to be going haywire with colors though:



















And then Sony is apprently color coordinating to the point that not only is there a copper-brown body (A330), but the hand strap is brown _and_ menu background:


----------



## huntman21014

I must have that Pentax!


----------



## laboitenoire

Panasonic also has tons of colors. Actually, Nikon, Olympus, and Sigma are the only DSLR brands that only offer the bodies in one color, it would seem.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0909/09...amyung14mm.asp

A 14mm f/2.8 prime lens with 14 elements (including 2 ED and 2 aspherical) for under $400, looks appealing! Coming out in November for Canon, Sony and Nikon mounts. It will be interesting to see how it stacks up to the Canon 14mm f/2.8L ($1900.00 for the mkII).

Don't know much about Samyang other than they're a Korean company who made some lenses for Vivitar.


----------



## ace8uk

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0909/09...amyung14mm.asp

A 14mm f/2.8 prime lens with 14 elements (including 2 ED and 2 aspherical) for under $400, looks appealing! Coming out in November for Canon, Sony and Nikon mounts. It will be interesting to see how it stacks up to the Canon 14mm f/2.8L ($1900.00 for the mkII).

Don't know much about Samyang other than they're a Korean company who made some lenses for Vivitar.

I think I'll keep an eye on that one, cheers.


----------



## tK FuRY

Do want... reviews/test images!


----------



## nuclearjock

GT, Sold my 5D MK II last night so I'm Canonless for a short time.

Been doing some extensive druling regarding shots taken with the 800 f/5.6. It is really a spectacular piece of glass. Some of the small bird pics I've seen posted on fredmiranda are just as sharp as the Nikon primes. Absoluteltly stunning. As a matter of fact, both companies make awesome superteles.

So I'm currently dickering with a guy (store) in NYC. I found out the exact dealer cost on the lens, (my wife's cousin works for Canon), and I told the NYC e-tailer I'd pay him 9% above his cost, take it or leave it.

I'm sure he's running it by the powers that be to get the green light. But if he doesn't want a quick ~$850, I'm sure I can find someone who will take me up on the offer. I've got until next spring's migration anyway. Although I'd love to have it here to fondle and stare at now .

Still up in the air 'bout the body, but I'm thinking if I had to make a decision today, it would prolly be a 50D.

Anyway zap the Canon from my list for now. I'll be adding to it soon (I hope).


----------



## laboitenoire

Just got back from my college's football game. Some of the photographers were definitely shooting Nikon, but the guy with the best setup was the Contra-bassoon player from my concert band. He was shooting one of the BIG Canon primes on what looked like a 5D and then he had a smaller lens on a smaller body (couldn't tell what type).


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
GT, Sold my 5D MK II last night so I'm Canonless for a short time.

Been doing some extensive druling regarding shots taken with the 800 f/5.6. It is really a spectacular piece of glass. Some of the small bird pics I've seen posted on fredmiranda are just as sharp as the Nikon primes. Absoluteltly stunning. As a matter of fact, both companies make awesome superteles.

So I'm currently dickering with a guy (store) in NYC. I found out the exact dealer cost on the lens, (my wife's cousin works for Canon), and I told the NYC e-tailer I'd pay him 9% above his cost, take it or leave it.

I'm sure he's running it by the powers that be to get the green light. But if he doesn't want a quick ~$850, I'm sure I can find someone who will take me up on the offer. I've got until next spring's migration anyway. Although I'd love to have it here to fondle and stare at now .

Still up in the air 'bout the body, but I'm thinking if I had to make a decision today, it would prolly be a 50D.

Anyway zap the Canon from my list for now. I'll be adding to it soon (I hope).

Nice, you'll have a little boost from the crop factor as well, making for a seriously long lens. Why again didn't you like the 5d mkII? If you're thinking about the 50D, you might consider the 7D as well, quite the beefed up AF and metering system on it.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Nice, you'll have a little boost from the crop factor as well, making for a seriously long lens. Why again didn't you like the 5d mkII? If you're thinking about the 50D, you might consider the 7D as well, quite the beefed up AF and metering system on it.


Didn't like control placement, and AF was WAY too SLOW for sports and little birds. Fine for scenery though. I can't say enough how pleasantly surprised I was at the IQ of the 800 f5/6 pics. Stunning. As for the 7D, I'm still reading...

Anyway, I WANT the 200 f/1.8!! I just think it's soooo cool. Finding one will be the challenge. 
Do you know if they're still in production??

Thanks GT.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


Didn't like control placement, and AF was WAY too SLOW for sports and little birds. Fine for scenery though. I can't say enough how pleasantly surprised I was at the IQ of the 800 f5/6 pics. Stunning. As for the 7D, I'm still reading...

Anyway, I WANT the 200 f/1.8!! I just think it's soooo cool. Finding one will be the challenge. 
Do you know if they're still in production??

Thanks GT.


It's discontinued (lord knows why). It's a legendary lens from what I've read:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/R...ns-Review.aspx

Of course Canon still makes the f/2 IS, which replaced the f/1.8:

http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showp...ct/1174/cat/10

Good luck finding one! fredmiranda calls it "the worlds fastest 200mm lens."


----------



## Marin

Even though the 50D has better AF, I still think you'll be disappointed by it. 7D is probably more what you're looking for, the tricky thing is getting your hands on one at launch.


----------



## Bigevil89

some old photos i found while diggin around my picture folder


----------



## grishkathefool

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Bigevil89* 
some old photos i found while diggin around my picture folder









That is gorgeous... except for the ghost. Otherwise I love this composition.


----------



## Bigevil89

Quote:



Originally Posted by *grishkathefool*


That is gorgeous... except for the ghost. Otherwise I love this composition.


lol thanks that ghost would be me, that's what i get for forgetting to roll down the window


----------



## Marin

Nailed it!

Another shot I'm pleased with for Macro Mondays.


----------



## Danylu

Just a curious question, how many of you have filters permanently on the front of your lenses?


----------



## huntman21014

I got myself a new baby! Just picked up an Olympus OM-1 with a flash, 50MM lens, original case and paperwork for $20! Got it at GoodWill, have loaded a roll of film and have taken off! I forgot how much fun shooting with film can be, cannot wait to get some pictures up for you guys


----------



## Dragoon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Bigevil89*


some old photos i found while diggin around my picture folder











That one looks awesome. How did you do that? It looks like you used a TS-E lens.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Just a curious question, how many of you have filters permanently on the front of your lenses?


Not I!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Nailed it!

Another shot I'm pleased with for Macro Mondays.


Nice use of available lighting on this one. Looks like it's hanging from dental floss.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
Just a curious question, how many of you have filters permanently on the front of your lenses?

I used to use UV filters, but good ones were too expensive, and after reading a lot of heated arguments about whether or not they're worthwhile, I'm convinced that their efficacy is overrated. Not they aren't beneficial in some way but an impact strong enough to break a front element won't even be lessened by a UV filter (filters are mere millimeters thick, elements can be a half inch or more). They may help prevent scratches, but the coating on lenses makes them pretty tough to scratch. I use lens hoods as a prophylactic and am pretty anal about keeping the lens cap on when not shooting.

I need to dig through my massive bookmarks folder, but I found a really good round-up test of different UV filters and all the best ones lessened image quality by at least a small amount (Hoya had the highest rated ones).

If money were no object, I would use the best Hoya UV filters money could buy, but I don't consider them essential enough to justify the cost.


----------



## Mootsfox

They lessen image quality, no way around that.

You can put on safety goggles to see the same effect. Image quality is decreased. Your eyes/lenses are now protected to a greater degree, but it's not practical.


----------



## Bigevil89

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dragoon*


That one looks awesome. How did you do that? It looks like you used a TS-E lens.











actually I gave that effect on photoshop, I forgot to mention that in my original post. i used alienskin bokeh to give that effect, im sure i cant that great of an effect with my a590 alone.


----------



## Dragoon

Well, few of my favorite shots from my trip to Spain in July.




























I wish I had a UWA lens by then... a 10-20 or a 10-22 would be golden...




































I know I commited a newb mistake of leaving the camera on Shutter speed priority when I shot the landscapes... let me know what you guys think, and I appreciate a few pointers


----------



## GoneTomorrow

They look nice Dragoon, I like the first two. Where in Spain did you go? I've been there a few times myself. A few pointers though: have a prominent foreground object for you landscapes to draw the eye in, also consider leading lines (roads, streams leading in). Not having to foreground represented can make landscape shots seem distant and empty, but a good foreground makes the viewer feel like they're "there."

The foreground looks underexposed in the third shot and there's a large blown area of the sky. I also would increase the contrast in those first three shots to bring out the definition in those clouds.

Looks like a great place though, I've been only to the coast lines and never up north.


----------



## Dragoon

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
They look nice Dragoon, I like the first two. Where in Spain did you go? I've been there a few times myself. A few pointers though: have a prominent foreground object for you landscapes to draw the eye in, also consider leading lines (roads, streams leading in). Not having to foreground represented can make landscape shots seem distant and empty, but a good foreground makes the viewer feel like they're "there."

The foreground looks underexposed in the third shot and there's a large blown area of the sky. I also would increase the contrast in those first three shots to bring out the definition in those clouds.

Looks like a great place though, I've been only to the coast lines and never up north.

Thanks.

I went to the peaks of Europe and Cantabria, it's a beautiful place indeed.

Ah, so you suggest having something "up close" caught up in frame with the landscape, like floor or something? Thing is, I was on top of a hill when I took the first two shots, the 3rd, I was in the bus on my way to the top.

Thanks for the tips Gone.









Can't wait for my next trip... Prague









One thing, I admit... I caught the "disease"... I was looking for a substitute for the EF-S 18-55mm... so I looked into a few candidates, the 17-85mm, the 17-55 f/2.8 (expensive!) and the... 17-40 f/4L USM










Seeing ISO 12233 comparison photos(on "the digital picture") I was shocked when I saw that the 18-55mm IS was matching or really close to the 17-40 L at the same settings (sharpness wise, because in CA, the 18-55 was ran over)

I really considered adding the 17-40 to my want list, but the focal range gap between the 40mm and the 70mm might be more needed than I think lol.

The 17-85 loses to the 18-55 in alot of ways... especially in corner sharpness, that's why I barely considered it, unless I'm mistaken.


----------



## huntman21014

Hey guys, I should be getting my Canonet this Friday and I was wondering if anyone here had any tips or anything I should know about the camera. I have ordered a pair of Wein Cell batteries as they no longer make the mercury batteries.

Anyone have shooting tips for Rangefinders in general? Also, since I don't know much about film does anyone have tips for what kind of film to put through the camera?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dragoon*


Thanks.

I went to the peaks of Europe and Cantabria, it's a beautiful place indeed.

Ah, so you suggest having something "up close" caught up in frame with the landscape, like floor or something? Thing is, I was on top of a hill when I took the first two shots, the 3rd, I was in the bus on my way to the top.

Thanks for the tips Gone.









Can't wait for my next trip... Prague









One thing, I admit... I caught the "disease"... I was looking for a substitute for the EF-S 18-55mm... so I looked into a few candidates, the 17-85mm, the 17-55 f/2.8 (expensive!) and the... 17-40 f/4L USM









Seeing ISO 12233 comparison photos(on "the digital picture") I was shocked when I saw that the 18-55mm IS was matching or really close to the 17-40 L at the same settings (sharpness wise, because in CA, the 18-55 was ran over)

I really considered adding the 17-40 to my want list, but the focal range gap between the 40mm and the 70mm might be more needed than I think lol.

The 17-85 loses to the 18-55 in alot of ways... especially in corner sharpness, that's why I barely considered it, unless I'm mistaken.



















I'm in the market for a zoom between my 10-22 and 70-200 myself. Ideally, I'd like to have the 17-55 f/2.8, I hear nothing but good things about it, but it is very expensive indeed. If I ever find a decent deal on it, I may grab it, but most likely I will get a copy of the 17-40L, which I've seen used in the $500 range.

And the new 18-55 kit lens is remarkable, Canon really listened to gripes about the old one. It's dead sharp, I was really impressed when I had my copy. And it is funny that it rivals the 17-40 in sharpness, but the 17-40, like you say, has better CA control. Besides that, the 17-40 focuses faster and has much better color reproduction and contrast. When I used my 18-55 in low light, I always got this greenish cast to my shots.

The 17-85 isn't a great performer as you've discovered, I never considered after reading reviews. One lens that I'm keeping an eye out for is the Canon EF 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM that's coming out with the 7D. It's also rather expensive, but has impressive specs (except the variable aperture of course).


----------



## Dragoon

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
I'm in the market for a zoom between my 10-22 and 70-200 myself. Ideally, I'd like to have the 17-55 f/2.8, I hear nothing but good things about it, but it is very expensive indeed. If I ever find a decent deal on it, I may grab it, but most likely I will get a copy of the 17-40L, which I've seen used in the $500 range.

And the new 18-55 kit lens is remarkable, Canon really listened to gripes about the old one. It's dead sharp, I was really impressed when I had my copy. And it is funny that it rivals the 17-40 in sharpness, but the 17-40, like you say, has better CA control. Besides that, the 17-40 focuses faster and has much better color reproduction and contrast. When I used my 18-55 in low light, I always got this greenish cast to my shots.

The 17-85 isn't a great performer as you've discovered, I never considered after reading reviews. One lens that I'm keeping an eye out for is the Canon EF 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM that's coming out with the 7D. It's also rather expensive, but has impressive specs (except the variable aperture of course).

Ooh, I've heard about the 7D kit lens! It looks awesome, but yeah, as you said quite expensive, but imho, if it is an awesome performer, it's worth the price, IIRC it's not as expensive as the 17-55mm f/2.8, but I think the price tag on that one is because of the constant aperture.

Why don't you consider the 24-105mm f/4L IS USM? If I had Â£800 to spend I would be all over that lens (Well... I do have Â£800 to spend, but they are already destined niiiice 70-200







)


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Dragoon* 
Ooh, I've heard about the 7D kit lens! It looks awesome, but yeah, as you said quite expensive, but imho, if it is an awesome performer, it's worth the price, IIRC it's not as expensive as the 17-55mm f/2.8, but I think the price tag on that one is because of the constant aperture.

Why don't you consider the 24-105mm f/4L IS USM? If I had Â£800 to spend I would be all over that lens (Well... I do have Â£800 to spend, but they are already destined niiiice 70-200







)

I would like to have that one too! Really though I would love an f/2.8 wide angle zoom like the 17-55 f/2.8. But I'm also watching for the reviews on the new Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 VC lens.


----------



## ace8uk

my 17-55 f/2.8 lens is actually one of my least favourite of the lenses that I own. I don't know why, but for some reason I've never really liked it that much considering how much it cost, don't get me wrong though, the picture quality is very good.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

I took a night tour of the infamous Waverly Hills Sanatorium last night, and it was pitch black (only tourers had flashlights, no internal lighting). So I did all hand-held and improvised supported shots (knee, ledge, ground, whatever







) with 1,2 3 seconds or more shutter speed. I haven't looked at them yet, but we'll see how they look on the monitor!

Quote:


Originally Posted by *ace8uk* 
my 17-55 f/2.8 lens is actually one of my least favourite of the lenses that I own. I don't know why, but for some reason I've never really liked it that much considering how much it cost, don't get me wrong though, the picture quality is very good.

If you want, you can send me that lens so you don't have to deal with the frustration of it. I'll shoulder the burden with a nice F to EF adapter.









17-55mm and thereabouts is a focal range that I find myself wishing I had. I use my 10-22 for UWA type shots, like interior spaces, landscapes, etc., then I use my 70-200 for wildlife and distant people/objects. Yet I find myself wishing that I had something in between. I use my 50mm as my "in between" lens, but I wish I just had a nice wide angle zoom.


----------



## Dragoon

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
I took a night tour of the infamous Waverly Hills Sanatorium last night, and it was pitch black (only tourers had flashlights, no internal lighting). So I did all hand-held and improvised supported shots (knee, ledge, ground, whatever







) with 1,2 3 seconds or more shutter speed. I haven't looked at them yet, but we'll see how they look on the monitor!

If you want, you can send me that lens so you don't have to deal with the frustration of it. I'll shoulder the burden with a nice F to EF adapter.









17-55mm and thereabouts is a focal range that I find myself wishing I had. I use my 10-22 for UWA type shots, like interior spaces, landscapes, etc., then I use my 70-200 for wildlife and distant people/objects. Yet I find myself wishing that I had something in between. I use my 50mm as my "in between" lens, but I wish I just had a nice wide angle zoom.


Sweet! I wanna look at those shots









I've been fascinated by the recent ludicrous exchange rate drops! If you noticed, the day I placed the 70-200 in my want to have list, it was priced 915€, right now it's priced 874€. They cost over 1100~1200€ in a store...


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


I took a night tour of the infamous Waverly Hills Sanatorium last night, and it was pitch black (only tourers had flashlights, no internal lighting). So I did all hand-held and improvised supported shots (knee, ledge, ground, whatever







) with 1,2 3 seconds or more shutter speed. I haven't looked at them yet, but we'll see how they look on the monitor!


Very cool. Sounds like it was a good place before it closed now, though it looks so creepy now.

Wanna see some pictures Gone!


----------



## ace8uk

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


If you want, you can send me that lens so you don't have to deal with the frustration of it. I'll shoulder the burden with a nice F to EF adapter.









17-55mm and thereabouts is a focal range that I find myself wishing I had. I use my 10-22 for UWA type shots, like interior spaces, landscapes, etc., then I use my 70-200 for wildlife and distant people/objects. Yet I find myself wishing that I had something in between. I use my 50mm as my "in between" lens, but I wish I just had a nice wide angle zoom.


Haha, I think I'll cope







I usually take the 17-55 f/2.8 and the 70-200 f/2.8 out together, it does offer a nice range I'll admit, but I wouldn't mind something a little wider


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Dragoon* 
Sweet! I wanna look at those shots









I've been fascinated by the recent ludicrous exchange rate drops! If you noticed, the day I placed the 70-200 in my want to have list, it was priced 915â‚¬, right now it's priced 874â‚¬. They cost over 1100~1200â‚¬ in a store...









Nice, get it while it lasts! That price is actually around US retail. I guess the import tariff/customs or whatever are still high though, right?

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Very cool. Sounds like it was a good place before it closed now, though it looks so creepy now.

Wanna see some pictures Gone!

I'm skeptical when it comes to paranormal stuff, but I admit when I was standing in the dark outside "Room 502" where a nurse hung herself, the pucker factor was high.







The place is really touristy, but so awesome. I couldn't pause much to take shots and couldn't bring a tripod (or speed light) unfortunately. They sell 4 and 8 hour "paranormal investigation" sessions where you can stay there alone, but they're booked through this year. I wish the place was still abandoned and not owned so I could just explore it.

I'm check the shots soon, probably won't have many usable ones though, I was really pushing it with hand held shutter speeds.


----------



## tK FuRY

Just color calibrated my monitor, I've learned my lesson LOL. Never loan out a colorimeter to friends, because you probably won't get it back.

2.2/6500K, pictures look much more vivid and vibrant. Grays appear kind of blue, but thats due to the temperature.

Its going to take some time to get used to all my websites/forums being different shades of colors









Like OCN, I never realized the side bar was kind of purple-ish gray.


----------



## laboitenoire

How much did one of those things cost you? I've always tried doing the really basic color adjustment that nVidia had built-in to the drivers that you moved the sliders until the shades of the colors matched, but God knows how accurate that was...


----------



## tK FuRY

I bought the DataColor Spyder2Express for $69.99 from Microcenter, and just used a copy of the PRO upgrade that I previously had.

If you can afford a better quality version, I would recommend the EyeOne (some people swear by it and will NOT use anything other). The reason I bought the Spyder2Express other than I had an upgraded software, is because reviewers actually said it uses algorithms/calibration methods used only in higher end colorimeters.


----------



## ImmortalKenny

I really need to get my monitor calibrated someday.


----------



## Danylu

Me too


----------



## huntman21014

Any thoughts on redscale film? The price is pretty high for lomography 100 redscale but I like the look. Has anyone here used it before?


----------



## tK FuRY

I officially feel that I have skipped SEVERAL steps on my TO BE COMPLETED;

I calibrated my monitor, but don't have a camera anymore .... hmmmmm

Oh well, at least my pictures/webpages match whatever the author has


----------



## Danylu

I upload from my home to Flickr @ 35kb/s and now I'm at my cousin's place getting 100kb/s...


----------



## Mootsfox

Just got this today


----------



## Danylu

Nice you have 3 bodies now









Should I buy an eBay battery grip for my D60 if I'm gonna try to keep the D60 for 3 years?


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
Nice you have 3 bodies now









Yeah







This one is a film body, and I'll be using it for my B&W class this quarter, and hopefully after that as well, as it wasn't cheap :/

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
Should I buy an eBay battery grip for my D60 if I'm gonna try to keep the D60 for 3 years?

I thought it about it... Since Nikon doesn't officially support one, I'm wary of any third party ones. I think second battery would be a better idea, as it's cheaper and you can keep the small size of the D60.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Yeah







This one is a film body, and I'll be using it for my B&W class this quarter, and hopefully after that as well, as it wasn't cheap :/

I thought it about it... Since Nikon doesn't officially support one, I'm wary of any third party ones. I think second battery would be a better idea, as it's cheaper and you can keep the small size of the D60.

I can't imagine myself seeing anyone using a Film body with rolls of film if they have a Digital one with memory cards









I've had a look at a few reviews of the battery grips and they seem fine. You have a point about getting a 2nd battery, maybe I'm just paranoid about the ebay battery charger (that will get here next week) going boom again and was looking at being able to use AAs.









I mean I missed a pretty good opportunity to take some photos of birds in flight which makes me pretty sad beacuse the birds were close and I didn't need a telephoto.









This was my best shot with a P&S (I need to PP this so not showing a bigger size yet)


----------



## tK FuRY

I think the last 6 hours I spent tweaking and fine tuning my monitor's settings for calibration, was just a waste...... LOL


----------



## muffin

Star trails? Long exposure noise reduction takes foreeeeeeever







It's also bloody hard to compose an image when you can't see anything through the viewfinder









First try, looking straight up:



Try again a few nights later, with some foreground:



Same night, just pointing in the opposite direction with the city light pollution:


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Just got this today










Nice one Foxie... Looks like it's in great shape too.

When you get a nice sunny day with fall colors, blast a roll of velvia 50 or if you want prints, Kodak's Ektar 100 through it.

Film still rules....

Again, nice bod.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


Nice one Foxie... Looks like it's in great shape too.

When you get a nice sunny day with fall colors, blast a roll of velvia 50 or if you want prints, Kodak's Ektar 100 through it.

Film still rules....

Again, nice bod.


Nice film choices.









I'd love to shoot with color film but I can only develop B&W film at my schools darkroom. And because of digital getting film developed at a store costs a lot, no more one-hour-photo stores.


----------



## Marin

delete...


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Just got this today



















That's a fine looking body, post some of your B/W work if you get the time to scan it.


----------



## tK FuRY

Hmmmmm Film









I decided to set up a bias lighting setup for my monitors today, spent 3 hours driving around finding 6500K CFL and ended up buying a Full Spectrum 6500K desk lamp too lol.


----------



## Mootsfox

A scanner is on the list of what to buy next! For now, you'll have to live with a picture of a print.









Quote:



Originally Posted by *tK FuRY*


Hmmmmm Film









I decided to set up a bias lighting setup for my monitors today, spent 3 hours driving around finding 6500K CFL and ended up buying a Full Spectrum 6500K desk lamp too lol.


You're certainly taking it to heart... Any noticeable improvement? Personally tungsten lighting pisses me off, and generally puts me in a sour mood if I'm around it too long. Where did you find the lights? I might have to get some myself


----------



## Bigevil89

Heres some Macros i took today.





































Did some minor tweaking on them in photoshop, mainly brightness/contrast levels and USM


----------



## tK FuRY

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


A scanner is on the list of what to buy next! For now, you'll have to live with a picture of a print.









You're certainly taking it to heart... Any noticeable improvement? Personally tungsten lighting pisses me off, and generally puts me in a sour mood if I'm around it too long. Where did you find the lights? I might have to get some myself











I bought a 18" 6500K 75CRI (or around that) Fluorescent tube and threw that into a housing I had around the house. $8 - Walmart

Home Depot in my area only sold 5000K "Sunlight", I did however buy a Hampton Bay 27-Watt 6500K Desk lamp. - $23.

It makes one hell of a difference, compared to my last set up with OHF (Overhead Fluorescent) which was just bad. I also dropped my 2nd Acer monitor and will be purchasing a larger 26" or 30" monitor







(no more gaming for me lol).

The bias lighting really helps because I only run that as ambient lighting now, the monitor never is TOO bright when I look at it and there isn't a large contrast with lots of eye strain.

Its also kind of weird, without the monitor on my Bias lighting appears a perfect 6500K blue-ish tone on the walls, after the monitor is on and my eyes adjust to it, it appears a slight greenish tone ( but I understand that our eyes are very sensitive to green and lighting manufacturers add in green to make the lights appear brighter)

EDIT: The ambient lighting you see in these pictures are what I run 24/7 now







Since the only other lights in this room are the over head FL and some CFL 3000k)

And I had to crank my white luminance up from 110 cdm/2 to around 140-150 cdm/2 to match the surrounding ambient from bias. Even though Spyder2 says my ambient is VERY low, the low brightness of the monitor + high brightness bias lighting makes your eyes work in overtime adjusting. I will be checking some prints in this lighting (with use of the 6500K lamp probably) and seeing if my monitor is too bright to match prints or not.


----------



## Chaos Assasson

ok here is the camera that i am going to start taking pics with Konica Minolta Maxxum 5D 6.1MP DSLR with a 18-70mm lens


----------



## Bigevil89

Went out fishing yesterday with a buddy. Tagged along my camera and tripod and took a few pics. Beautiful evening, too bad the fish weren't biting.

I Decided to create an HDR of the landscape in front of where we were Fishing with 5 different exposures. Here's a comparison of 3 different HDR blending programs

DynamicPhoto HDR









Photomatix Pro









Photoshop CS3


----------



## huntman21014

I think I like number 2 the best, then 1, then 3. Three looks like the water is too bright


----------



## nuclearjock

Yep, I've been a fan of Photomatix for awhile. nice shots.


----------



## Bigevil89

Thanks for the feedback. The problem i used to have with photomatix was there ended up being alot of noise with the blended image. recently the results have been better.


----------



## Nubster

Shooting a Nikon D200. Glass includes a Sigma 30mm f/1.4, Nikon 50mm f/1.8, Tamron 90mm Macro, Sigma 17-50mm, and a Sigma 50-200mm. Tripod duties performed by a Manfrotto 055XPROB Tripod Legs w/484RC2 Mini Ballhead.


----------



## max302

The latest (good) shot. I really need to have my camera on my person more often.


Also, would it be possible to update my gear on my first page?

I'd like to add my video rig:

Canon HV30
Raynox 3032 Fisheye

And my film rig:

Pentax Super Program
Pentax A 35-105mm F/3.5
Pentax M 50mm f/2

That will be all.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Added everyone who requested it, let me know if I overlooked you. I added a separate video camera section to the front page, so let me know if you want gear added there. I'm only putting dedicated video cameras there, so your DSLR with video capability won't cut it.









Quote:



Originally Posted by *Bigevil89*


Thanks for the feedback. The problem i used to have with photomatix was there ended up being alot of noise with the blended image. recently the results have been better.


Biggest problem with Photomatix. It takes some finagling, but the noise can be minimized with the right settings. I find myself using the exposure blend tool more than the HDR tool because I want that more "natural" look, i.e. without tone mapping. But tone mapped images can still look nice as long as they aren't overdone.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Added everyone who requested it, let me know if I overlooked you. I added a separate video camera section to the front page, so let me know if you want gear added there. I'm only putting dedicated video cameras there, so your DSLR with video capability won't cut it.









I've also got the D1H and 24-120mm AF.


----------



## max302

Btw GT, the Pentax stuff is actually a 35mm still cam, not a video cam


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *max302* 
Btw GT, the Pentax stuff is actually a 35mm still cam, not a video cam









Right, I knew that


----------



## Chaos Assasson

here is my photo website there are no photos there yet though
http://www.wix.com/Chaos_Assasson/Chaos_Assasson


----------



## MasterShake

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Chaos Assasson*


here is my photo website there are no photos there yet though
http://www.wix.com/Chaos_Assasson/Chaos_Assasson


So its just a website then?
lol let us know when you start posting


----------



## Chaos Assasson

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MasterShake*


So its just a website then?
lol let us know when you start posting


i will 
i will get the camera back from my mom tomorrow and hopefully have some pics up tomorrow night


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Chaos Assasson* 
here is my photo website there are no photos there yet though
http://www.wix.com/Chaos_Assasson/Chaos_Assasson

I went to Asheville often when I lived in NC, nice place.


----------



## laboitenoire

I put my camera into action last night because somebody in my dorm turned 18. The flash is really weak on my camera, I'm finding, which is annoying because even when the camera flashes with f/5.6, the image is quite dim at 1/60 second.

I really want a DSLR...


----------



## Dragoon

Guys, I'm in need of some help...

I decided once I got home to get to try to make some HDRs and take some time to mess around with my camera to get to "know it better".... I shot this:










When I was rendering I noticed something, if you look at the bottom quarter of the photo you'll notice 5 "pixels" (Flickr JPEG compress...







I actually saved this HDR in 16bit TIFF and it got almost 19MB)

At first I thought it could be a rendering issue or something but after shooting a few high exposure photos I know it's not.

Here's a 75 second exposure photo of my living room...










If you look below the table (red pixel), onto the middle door on the counter to the right (a red and two gray pixels), the middle drawer (big blue pixel) and on the top border above the right drawer (gray pixel)...

Is it me... or my cameras sensor is dying?

All these shots were taken at ISO 100, so I can't consider high ISO noise, and these are only noticeable on long exposures.


----------



## Mootsfox

Does look like you have a few hot pixels there


----------



## Danylu

^ Quite a few too. I have one too so your not alone


----------



## huntman21014

Could it just be the sensor heating up? Doesn't a long exposure inherently make the sensor warmer?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *huntman21014* 
Could it just be the sensor heating up? Doesn't a long exposure inherently make the sensor warmer?

Yes, but it shouldn't be that bad. I don't get them on my 40D, unless I really crank up the ISO and use a really long shutter. At normal sensitivity, there shouldn't be any hot pixels, esp. on a DSLR sensor.

Dragoon, I would e-mail Canon and send them some samples and see what they think.


----------



## Dragoon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Does look like you have a few hot pixels there











Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


^ Quite a few too. I have one too so your not alone










Ah crud... As I suspected.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *huntman21014*


Could it just be the sensor heating up? Doesn't a long exposure inherently make the sensor warmer?



Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Yes, but it shouldn't be that bad. I don't get them on my 40D, unless I really crank up the ISO and use a really long shutter. At normal sensitivity, there shouldn't be any hot pixels, esp. on a DSLR sensor.

Dragoon, I would e-mail Canon and send them some samples and see what they think.


I've taken a few long exposure shots before, and some with over a minute and I never had those hot pixels on the sensor, I don't know for how long they have been there since it has been some time that I took long exposure photos.

I've also tried taking a pitch black photo using the EF-S 60mm (30sec @ f/32), and they're quite noticeable, always on the same place.

Alright, I will contact Canon ASAP, but I will probably go to the store where I bought it and RMA it.

Dang... just when I was going to get the 70-200...









Thanks for the help everyone


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Dragoon* 
Ah crud... As I suspected.

I've taken a few long exposure shots before, and some with over a minute and I never had those hot pixels on the sensor, I don't know for how long they have been there since it has been some time that I took long exposure photos.

I've also tried taking a pitch black photo using the EF-S 60mm (30sec @ f/32), and they're quite noticeable, always on the same place.

Alright, I will contact Canon ASAP, but I will probably go to the store where I bought it and RMA it.

Dang... just when I was going to get the 70-200...









Thanks for the help everyone









I have a good 2 years left on my warranty so I'm in really no rush to go RMA it yet =D


----------



## Chaos Assasson

here is my photobucket the first 3 are the ones taken with my dslr
http://s602.photobucket.com/albums/t...ha0s_Assass0n/


----------



## Marin

Wow. I just got the Nikkor 50mm f/1.2 (older one with a 7 blade aperture, doesn't matter for me though since I'll be shooting wide open) and it completely crushes the Nikkor 55mm f/1.2.

And it seems like Adorama exaggerated the condition yet again (not that it's a bad thing), I was expecting the bent filter ring to be completely flattened in. It's only slightly dented (took me awhile to find the dent).

So yet again, Adorama gets a


----------



## max302

Newest shots are in!

All film this time, brought to you by my Pentax Super Program and Pentax M 50mm f/2. It's noisy I know, used some Superia 1600 on those ones.

Sorry for the ****ty scans... I'll have to ask the photo place if they have a film scanner next time.


----------



## Marin

I'm liking Color Efex Pro.


----------



## tK FuRY

The joys of Nikkor lenses Marin







.


----------



## dr4gon

It's been a while since I've been in OCN photography. I jsut got my 7D today.


























More at my website.


----------



## Marin

You should buy all my crop lenses now.

EDIT: You also need to sign up on POTN. =p


----------



## dr4gon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


You should buy all my crop lenses now.

EDIT: You also need to sign up on POTN. =p


I've had an account for more than a year









bet you can't guess what it is!







(dr4gon, dur)


----------



## Marin

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/member.php?u=153758

=D

You should start a 7D unboxing and ISO test thread here. It's the cool thing to do now


----------



## tK FuRY

Marin, how are you enjoying the Nik software? I'm thinking of giving the whole collection a try. Would you recommend say Viveza or Dfine over say NoiseNinja and regular LR2 adjustments?


----------



## Marin

At the moment I only have Color Efex Pro.


----------



## tK FuRY

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
At the moment I only have Color Efex Pro.


In that case, have you tried PhotoTools Pro by OnOne?


----------



## dr4gon

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/member.php?u=153758

=D

You should start a 7D unboxing and ISO test thread here. It's the cool thing to do now









You think I should, there's a bajillion threads already....

They really need separate camera forums. At least one for the 5D and now the 7D.


----------



## Marin

MOAR BOKEH!



I managed to get it in the harshest of light. =D


----------



## savagebunny

Yo cool kids with near 2k cameras

I am getting into photography, and well I will want to buy a camera soon.

What will I be doing?

-close up's (I can't afford a 500$ lens for macro)
-Basic shots(kit lens will suffice)

I don't have the funds for super uber duber lens of fun and buttsecks, but I wanna get off a good starting point

I will haz $600 in funds, and money down the road for a decent macro


----------



## Bigevil89




----------



## bentleya

MDPC-X Sleeving meets Tamron 90mm Macro


----------



## laboitenoire

That's actually really cool.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *savagebunny*


Yo cool kids with near 2k cameras

I am getting into photography, and well I will want to buy a camera soon.

What will I be doing?

-close up's (I can't afford a 500$ lens for macro)
-Basic shots(kit lens will suffice)

I don't have the funds for super uber duber lens of fun and buttsecks, but I wanna get off a good starting point

I will haz $600 in funds, and money down the road for a decent macro


You could set yourself up with a Canon XSi with 18-55mm kit lens, extra battery and case easily for $600. One notch down would be the XS, and one notch above would be the T1i.

And you won't have to pay $500 for a good macro lens. The Canon EF-S 60mm macro lens can be had for about $300 new, even less used.


----------



## Mootsfox

Picture of my friend playing for the dance at Anime Detroit this past weekend.

Shot with D60 and 24-120mm AF in manual focus mode, SB-600 bounced.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dr4gon*


It's been a while since I've been in OCN photography. I jsut got my 7D today.










Nice dr4gon. I'm hoping to get my copy before the end of this year (trying to talk to other half into letting me get it).

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Picture of my friend playing for the dance at Anime Detroit this past weekend.

Shot with D60 and 24-120mm AF in manual focus mode, SB-600 bounced.


Nice shot Moots, bouncing rocks. I wonder though, what caused that yellowish posterization on his forearm?

I like the shot, but you might try slowing the shutter by a stop or two to let in more ambient light and bring out that background. Unless of course it was your intent to darken the bg.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Nice shot Moots, bouncing rocks. I wonder though, what caused that yellowish posterization on his forearm?

I like the shot, but you might try slowing the shutter by a stop or two to let in more ambient light and bring out that background. Unless of course it was your intent to darken the bg.


Not sure what you mean about his forearm.

I was trying to darken the background as it's not very interesting. The dance was to the left of this picture, which would have made a suitable background possibly.

I use TTL, f/8 and 1/60-1/100 of a second for flash stuff. I usually up the EV one to three stops for bounce work. Changing the shutter speed wouldn't help much because I'm not in manual mode on the flash, nor do I even know what it's firing at in terms of power


----------



## Tempest2k7

I've got a Nikon D200 with a SB-600 flash and a nikkor AF 85mm F/1.8 for glass right now. im debating whether or not i should sell it for my build.


----------



## laboitenoire

Damn, that actually seems like a pretty good setup (I know Nuclearjock has been trying out the 85mm if I remember). Do you use it on a regular basis? It would be sad to sell off that just in order to upgrade your machine.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Damn, that actually seems like a pretty good setup (I know Nuclearjock has been trying out the 85mm if I remember). Do you use it on a regular basis? It would be sad to sell off that just in order to upgrade your machine.


Nuclearjock has the Nikon 85mm f/1.4.


----------



## laboitenoire

Ahh... I knew it was 85mm something or other. Forgot that their was an f/1.4.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Not sure what you mean about his forearm.

I was trying to darken the background as it's not very interesting. The dance was to the left of this picture, which would have made a suitable background possibly.

I use TTL, f/8 and 1/60-1/100 of a second for flash stuff. I usually up the EV one to three stops for bounce work. Changing the shutter speed wouldn't help much because I'm not in manual mode on the flash, nor do I even know what it's firing at in terms of power










Hm, maybe it's my monitor, but there is some yellowish color on his left forearm.


----------



## tK FuRY

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Hm, maybe it's my monitor, but there is some yellowish color on his left forearm.











The olivish-yellowish going from his elbow down right? If that's what you're talking about then I see it too.

(Color Corrected Monitor)


----------



## Mootsfox

I'm only seeing it now because you said something. Probably a reflection off of something.


----------



## tK FuRY

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
I'm only seeing it now because you said something. Probably a reflection off of something.


LOL, same here.


----------



## nuclearjock

Wrong place at the wrong time looking in the wrong direction.
D3/400mm f/2.8 wide open.


----------



## laboitenoire

Owned.

I'm hoping the kid was alright afterwords?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Just pre-ordered the 7D! Ships on 10/9, can't wait! How do you like yours so far dr4gon?


----------



## Dragoon

The 7D looks sooo awesome. (Especially its kit lens) Congrats dr4gon and Gone









Just pulled the trigger on the 70-200! Managed to get it used in mint condition for little less than new (these lens have BIG resale value







)

I still haven't contacted Canon about my camera, going to see if I don't forget to give them a call tomorrow.

But I'm not in a hurry to send it to repair, I'll wait after the lens arrives, I have to test it out


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dragoon*


The 7D looks sooo awesome. (Especially its kit lens) Congrats dr4gon and Gone









Just pulled the trigger on the 70-200! Managed to get it used in mint condition for little less than new (these lens have BIG resale value







)

I still haven't contacted Canon about my camera, going to see if I don't forget to give them a call tomorrow.

But I'm not in a hurry to send it to repair, I'll wait after the lens arrives, I have to test it out



















f/4 or f/2.8?
either way, nice purchase


----------



## Dragoon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie*


f/4 or f/2.8?
either way, nice purchase










The f/4 IS









The f/2.8 is way too expensive lol, and imo the f/4 gives alot more bang for buck since from the reviews I saw the f/2.8 is slightly soft wide open.

Thanks Schubie


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Dragoon* 
The f/4 IS









The f/2.8 is way too expensive lol, and imo the f/4 gives alot more bang for buck since from the reviews I saw the f/2.8 is slightly soft wide open.

Thanks Schubie









Way to go! I love that lens. I think you'll be thrilled with the f/4 IS despite not having f/2.8.


----------



## Mootsfox

Where do you Canon guys get your money?









Nuclear, love the grass flying up in that shot


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Where do you Canon guys get your money?









Nuclear, love the grass flying up in that shot










From all the money we save. *tsk* *tsk* Nikon tax.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Where do you Canon guys get your money?









Nuclear, love the grass flying up in that shot










Selling old gear in my case (already have a buyer for my 40D), just had a Craig's List sale for a lot of crap in preparation for selling my house. Probably should have saved the money for when I move, but alas.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


From all the money we save. *tsk* *tsk* Nikon tax.










Nikon tax only applies to new purchases









The last thing I bought new was my D60 and kit glass


----------



## dudemanppl

Just sent 950 for a used 70-200 f/4 IS. I'm only planning to keep it for a month (coming from f/2.8 non-IS), because I need the 2.8. Tried my friends f/4 and it was light as my 28-70!


----------



## laboitenoire

Well, I just discovered one downside to going to school in Ohio. The fall here is nowhere near as colorful as back home in New England. Would have liked to get some shots of fall foliage...


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Well, I just discovered one downside to going to school in Ohio. The fall here is nowhere near as colorful as back home in New England. Would have liked to get some shots of fall foliage...


Where are you in Ohio? I can show you some nice fall spots, because Ohio does have them


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Well, I just discovered one downside to going to school in Ohio. The fall here is nowhere near as colorful as back home in New England. Would have liked to get some shots of fall foliage...


Drive east until you reach the Appalachians


----------



## Danylu

Nuke nice photo









Seems like everyone except Mootsfox and me have a fast tele lol

Does anyone know where Lightroom 2 saves all your work? Photo adjustments etc. Would really appreciating knowing this so I can back it up =D


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Nuke nice photo









Seems like everyone except Mootsfox and me have a fast tele lol

Does anyone know where Lightroom 2 saves all your work? Photo adjustments etc. Would really appreciating knowing this so I can back it up =D


Yeah, my longest stuff is a 24-120mm and a 55-200 (crop glass). Both are like f/5.6 or higher at the end though :/

Lightroom should save your originals wherever you asked it to.

You can make a backup of the catalog which saves changes as well.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dudemanppl* 
Just sent 950 for a used 70-200 f/4 IS. I'm only planning to keep it for a month (coming from f/2.8 non-IS), because I need the 2.8. Tried my friends f/4 and it was light as my 28-70!

So you're going to turn around and buy the f/2.8 again?







I have to ask, but why not just wait a month? Now you have to sell the f/4 again.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Yeah, my longest stuff is a 24-120mm and a 55-200 (crop glass). Both are like f/5.6 or higher at the end though :/

Lightroom should save your originals wherever you asked it to.

You can make a backup of the catalog which saves changes as well.

Would that be the 169mb 'Lightroom 2 Catalog.lrcat' I have in 'My Pictures'?

My longest lens currently is my 18-55 :/

But going past that I have decided not to buy a tele yet and venture into off-camera flash, looking back, you can only ever do so much with the flash on the hotshoe, mainly bouncing, so I think it'll get me more value out of my current equipment if move towards off-camera lighting, now that you've heard the life story I would like your opinion on what to buy









Costs listed are FULL costs for it to reach my hands

1. Cactus V4 'Poverty Wizards' ($70)
Will it work on my D60? I'm not too phased by manual flash settings because I get how it works.

2. eBay i-TTL Cable ($50)
With the help of a lil mod (courtesy of Mootfox's pics 20 pages back) this can be as long as needed.

I can think of situations where the wireless part of the Cactus would be useful and I can also think of situations where the TTL would be useful. I'm currently leaning towards the Cactus V4s because I won't be limited by a cable but would just like an opinion before I purchase something.

Thanks once again for all the help and knowledge this group of photographers is giving me =]


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Where are you in Ohio? I can show you some nice fall spots, because Ohio does have them










I'm in Cleveland, enjoying my first year at Case Western. So far the gray weather combined with relatively dull colors in the foliage has made fall sort of bleak here.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Would that be the 169mb 'Lightroom 2 Catalog.lrcat' I have in 'My Pictures'?

My longest lens currently is my 18-55 :/

But going past that I have decided not to buy a tele yet and venture into off-camera flash, looking back, you can only ever do so much with the flash on the hotshoe, mainly bouncing, so I think it'll get me more value out of my current equipment if move towards off-camera lighting, now that you've heard the life story I would like your opinion on what to buy









Costs listed are FULL costs for it to reach my hands

1. Cactus V4 'Poverty Wizards' ($70)
Will it work on my D60? I'm not too phased by manual flash settings because I get how it works.

2. eBay i-TTL Cable ($50)
With the help of a lil mod (courtesy of Mootfox's pics 20 pages back) this can be as long as needed.

I can think of situations where the wireless part of the Cactus would be useful and I can also think of situations where the TTL would be useful. I'm currently leaning towards the Cactus V4s because I won't be limited by a cable but would just like an opinion before I purchase something.

Thanks once again for all the help and knowledge this group of photographers is giving me =]



TTL metering especially for flash, as a newb (like myself) is wonderful. I would go with the cord and a mod to lengthen it.


----------



## laboitenoire

Well, had a chance to go to the Cleveland Botanical Garden today with my freshman seminar course, and I think I got some good pictures, which I will probably post to my Flickr today.


----------



## Dragoon

I need a few explanations guys. I've seen around here a few "statements" but I couldn't understand them.

Bouncing, hot shoe, poverty wizards, non poverty wizards(?)

Lol, yep, I only know the basics







but I'm always ready to learn.

Are there any others that I should know?









Thanks


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dragoon*


I need a few explanations guys. I've seen around here a few "statements" but I couldn't understand them.

Bouncing, hot shoe, poverty wizards, non poverty wizards(?)

Lol, yep, I only know the basics







but I'm always ready to learn.

Are there any others that I should know?









Thanks











bouncing is as it sounds, you aim the flash away from the direction you are shooting and bounce the light off a wall or ceiling to diffuse it and give a much cleaner look.
example.









hotshoe is the addapter for an external flash found on the top of an SLR body









the other two im not sure about, ill get back to you in a bit


----------



## tK FuRY

Well a poverty wizard gets it's name because of the price tag. They are relatively cheap and some are extremely unreliable.

The opposite is for non-poverty wizards.

What a wizard is; is a radio transmitter and receiver for the flash. Mainly used for off camera lighting and can be used to control many flashes' at once.


----------



## laboitenoire

Well, this is one of the better photos I got at the Botanical Garden today. Lots of fringing and CA, but that's the nature of my camera, sadly :|


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


So you're going to turn around and buy the f/2.8 again?







I have to ask, but why not just wait a month? Now you have to sell the f/4 again.


I want to try all the 70-200 versions.


----------



## Dragoon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie*


bouncing is as it sounds, you aim the flash away from the direction you are shooting and bounce the light off a wall or ceiling to diffuse it and give a much cleaner look.
example.









hotshoe is the addapter for an external flash found on the top of an SLR body









the other two im not sure about, ill get back to you in a bit










Ahh, thanks a bunch Schubie! So... now that I recall I accidentally used that "bounce" technique on this photo:









I used my hand to "bounce" the flash light to the wall my right then it "bounced" onto the rose. It did look alot better than direct light from the pop up flash.

+cookie for you (imaginary







)

Quote:



Originally Posted by *tK FuRY*


Well a poverty wizard gets it's name because of the price tag. They are relatively cheap and some are extremely unreliable.

The opposite is for non-poverty wizards.

What a wizard is; is a radio transmitter and receiver for the flash. Mainly used for off camera lighting and can be used to control many flashes' at once.


Thanks for the explanation









+


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Well, this is one of the better photos I got at the Botanical Garden today. Lots of fringing and CA, but that's the nature of my camera, sadly :|


Areas of high contrast, such as in your shot, are a torture test for any lens' resistance to CA. I've seen worse on DSLR lenses. For a shot like this, a little fill flash would do nicely to brighten up the foliage some.


----------



## Mootsfox

Here's another shot of my friend, finally finished developing my film:










I can't figure out why his arms and neck, part of his face, etc are all soft. My scanner also scanned the negative as red...


----------



## Marin

When you enlarge negatives, you use a filter to obtain the contrast you want. With scanners you don't have this so you need to open the photo in Photoshop and boost the contrast.

That should probably get rid of the softness. The other cause of the lack of sharpness is probably the scanner itself.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Areas of high contrast, such as in your shot, are a torture test for any lens' resistance to CA. I've seen worse on DSLR lenses. For a shot like this, a little fill flash would do nicely to brighten up the foliage some.


Actually, this little guy was probably at least 20 feet away, so I doubt my flash would have worked. Plus, the BG folks don't like flash inside the greenhouses.


----------



## laboitenoire

Just learned that Flickr limits your photostream to 200 photos unless you go pro


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


TTL metering especially for flash, as a newb (like myself) is wonderful. I would go with the cord and a mod to lengthen it.


Fair point. Would you still have some photos of that on-flash softbox you showed a while back? I can't seem to find it


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Fair point. Would you still have some photos of that on-flash softbox you showed a while back? I can't seem to find it










This is the one I've got:

http://www.microcenter.com/single_pr...uct_id=0311144

Works just as well as the $40 ones at camera shops as far as I can tell.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


This is the one I've got:

http://www.microcenter.com/single_pr...uct_id=0311144

Works just as well as the $40 ones at camera shops as far as I can tell.



When you use yours do you set your SB-600 to the widest you can or do you let it auto zoom to the lens you're using?

I think I'll DIY mine to look like this:


----------



## laboitenoire

You probably could make one using wax paper as the diffuser.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Just learned that Flickr limits your photostream to 200 photos unless you go pro










It's worth having a pro account and doesn't cost that much.


----------



## Mootsfox

Got offered a Nikon 18-55mm VR for $80. It's the D60/D5000 kit lens. Think I should buy another? It's going for $100+ on ebay, and I wouldn't mind having another toss about lens with VR...


----------



## laboitenoire

Why would you need the second one? I would think a single 18-55 VR would fulfill its role... Unless you just wanted a spare?


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Got offered a Nikon 18-55mm VR for $80. It's the D60/D5000 kit lens. Think I should buy another? It's going for $100+ on ebay, and I wouldn't mind having another toss about lens with VR...


Unless your current one is falling apart I don't think its useful to have two of the same thing.


----------



## tK FuRY

I would get it just to throw on a different body, and maybe resell later on.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Got offered a Nikon 18-55mm VR for $80. It's the D60/D5000 kit lens. Think I should buy another? It's going for $100+ on ebay, and I wouldn't mind having another toss about lens with VR...



Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Why would you need the second one? I would think a single 18-55 VR would fulfill its role... Unless you just wanted a spare?


Didn't you put a nice crack in your other one Moots?


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Didn't you put a nice crack in your other one Moots?


I did, it still works, although in manual focus, the ring/front element feels weird, like it's cracking internally.

I think it would be nice to have another one that I could keep on my D1 so I don't have to keep taking a lens off something else.

I figure at $80, I can still resell it and make money or at least break even.


----------



## laboitenoire

Ahh... A cracked housing would be a good excuse to get another, most likely.


----------



## Mootsfox

I'm gonna pick it up soon









I'm also looking at ND filters, going to shoot some water this weekend... What is the right one to use?

This is the one I had in mind:
http://www.mpex.com/browse.cfm/4,1929.html


----------



## Marin

I just got some stuff I rented and...

... why haven't I boughten a rf transmitter yet?!

I'm so buying one next week.


----------



## tK FuRY

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
I just got some stuff I rented and...

... why haven't I boughten a rf transmitter yet?!

I'm so buying one next week.


If you were a Nikon shooter, the answer would have been - Cause you're using Creative Lighting







.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


I'm gonna pick it up soon









I'm also looking at ND filters, going to shoot some water this weekend... What is the right one to use?

This is the one I had in mind:
http://www.mpex.com/browse.cfm/4,1929.html


That's the most popular kind of ND filter, the ND8/.9/3-stop. I used one for a while, but found that it isn't dark enough in many situations, and I found myself using ridiculously narrow apertures (f/22 and up) just to attenuate the light. If you want a good strength ND for water shots, I would get an ND64/1.8/6-stop, that gets the job done.







I use a B+W ND64 that I got from MaxSaver, a great site to get filters from. They have very cheap prices and are trusted, but the only drawback is that it will take 10 days or so to get it.

http://maxsaver.net/B-W-52mm-Neutral...ss-Filter.aspx


----------



## Marin

I've been thinking about splurging for square filters... hmmm...


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
I've been thinking about splurging for square filters... hmmm...

Do it. They're the most Vers-a-tile.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
I'm gonna pick it up soon









I'm also looking at ND filters, going to shoot some water this weekend... What is the right one to use?

This is the one I had in mind:
http://www.mpex.com/browse.cfm/4,1929.html


Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
I've been thinking about splurging for square filters... hmmm...

Me too, I'd like a nice set of Cokin GNDs and a holder


----------



## Dragoon

I have officially caught the L disease. The 70-200 arrived today, It's simply... outstanding









I find it quite hard to shoot with it handheld lol, max I could get (IS on) was round 1/6th and 1/15th of a second, but it really depends on my concentration lol.

It's.. dead sharp! I need to test it out decently on daylight, but it seems perfect.

It's slightly larger than I thought, going to be hard to fit 5 lenses on my Fastpack...

Now only the siggy 30mm and the siggy UWA or the EF-S 10-22 left to buy.










EDIT: One thing, am I supposed to "hear" the IS? I can hear on my 18-55 but I have to have the lens next to my ear or be in a very quiet environment.


----------



## Danylu

Dragoon congrats on the 70-200! Having never had a IS/VR lens myself I can't answer your question D:

After 3 weeks and $20 I finally got my charger from eBay =]


----------



## Dragoon

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
Dragoon congrats on the 70-200! Having never had a IS/VR lens myself I can't answer your question D:

After 3 weeks and $20 I finally got my charger from eBay =]











I can say you've been eagerly waiting for that! Congrats


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dragoon*


I have officially caught the L disease. The 70-200 arrived today, It's simply... outstanding









I find it quite hard to shoot with it handheld lol, max I could get (IS on) was round 1/6th and 1/15th of a second, but it really depends on my concentration lol.

It's.. dead sharp! I need to test it out decently on daylight, but it seems perfect.

It's slightly larger than I thought, going to be hard to fit 5 lenses on my Fastpack...

Now only the siggy 30mm and the siggy UWA or the EF-S 10-22 left to buy.










EDIT: One thing, am I supposed to "hear" the IS? I can hear on my 18-55 but I have to have the lens next to my ear or be in a very quiet environment.



Congrats, knew you would like it.







1/6 to 1/15 is pretty good considering focal length of that lens.

And you can hear the IS. Try it in a quiet room. When you press the shutter halfway, you will hear it engage and then disengage when you release the button. It sounds like a grinding/motorized sound.

And it is a bit large, but you should see how larger the 70-200 f/2.8 IS is. I can fit my 40D with 70-200 attached plus the other four lenses in my sig into my Slingshot 200, but it's annoying because the only place the 70-200 fits is attached to the 40D. I need a Crumpler xMDH.


----------



## Dragoon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Congrats, knew you would like it.







1/6 to 1/15 is pretty good considering focal length of that lens.

And you can hear the IS. Try it in a quiet room. When you press the shutter halfway, you will hear it engage and then disengage when you release the button. It sounds like a grinding/motorized sound.

And it is a bit large, but you should see how larger the 70-200 f/2.8 IS is. I can fit my 40D with 70-200 attached plus the other four lenses in my sig into my Slingshot 200, but it's annoying because the only place the 70-200 fits is attached to the 40D. I need a Crumpler xMDH.


I can't put my 70-200 on the camera, it will not fit on the current "setup" I have on the bag. But it's either one way or the other, if I change the bags setup, I will only be able to store the lens mounted onto the camera.

And yes, I can hear it engaging and disengaging. Quite more noisy than the 18-55.









I deleted the above photo, here's a better one taken few minutes ago (less fog)


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


That's the most popular kind of ND filter, the ND8/.9/3-stop. I used one for a while, but found that it isn't dark enough in many situations, and I found myself using ridiculously narrow apertures (f/22 and up) just to attenuate the light. If you want a good strength ND for water shots, I would get an ND64/1.8/6-stop, that gets the job done.







I use a B+W ND64 that I got from MaxSaver, a great site to get filters from. They have very cheap prices and are trusted, but the only drawback is that it will take 10 days or so to get it.

http://maxsaver.net/B-W-52mm-Neutral...ss-Filter.aspx


Damn, because I need it this week.

I'll probably just pick up that ND8 that I can get at my local shop as it's ~$18 and should help some.


----------



## FatalityxZ

Anyone have experience with the Fujifilm S1000FD? Whenever I go into full 12x optical zoom the image is always blurry and out of focus. Any ideas?


----------



## HaXXoR

Quote:



Originally Posted by *FatalityxZ*


Anyone have experience with the Fujifilm S1000FD? Whenever I go into full 12x optical zoom the image is always blurry and out of focus. Any ideas?


As an owner of the s2000hd (basicly the same thing only with hd video) you almost have to have a tripod for anything past 3/4 zoom


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *FatalityxZ*


Anyone have experience with the Fujifilm S1000FD? Whenever I go into full 12x optical zoom the image is always blurry and out of focus. Any ideas?


Up the shutter speed, something like 1/500th of a second or higher is probably necessary


----------



## dudemanppl

I just noticed that all of us Canon shooters have a 70-200 f/4 IS. Wow!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Damn, because I need it this week.

I'll probably just pick up that ND8 that I can get at my local shop as it's ~$18 and should help some.


Cool, give it a shot. If isn't too bright outside, you may get some good results out of it.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


I just noticed that all of us Canon shooters have a 70-200 f/4 IS. Wow!


Quick jump on!










Only joking of course. Must be pretty good glass


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Quick jump on!










Only joking of course. Must be pretty good glass









LOL, besides the 17-40L, it's one of the most popular L lenses.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Quick jump on!










Only joking of course. Must be pretty good glass









LMAO! Epic one there.

In all seriousness the one lens I would jump ship for would be the 70-200 f4 IS although the first thing I would do is paint it black.


----------



## Dragoon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


LMAO! Epic one there.

In all seriousness the one lens I would jump ship for would be the 70-200 f4 IS although the first thing I would do is paint it black.










lol, the white color is it's trademark, it's easier to "spot on" an L lens when it's white than the red stripe around it.

If I could only have one lens, it wouldn't be this one, focal range too high, I would settle for the niiice 24-105mm f/4L







(which I'd love to add to my collection btw)


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Quick jump on!










Only joking of course. Must be pretty good glass









But I just jumped.







Nikons too expensive for me.


----------



## nuclearjock

And some 400mm goodness


----------



## Marin

Threw some ND filters on my 10-22mm and took a ton of shots. Here's one for now.


----------



## Bigevil89

beautiful shot marin


----------



## tK FuRY

I think I'll bite the bullet on a Graphic Tablet today lol, told myself "why not, I already spent almost $1000 this weekend, what's another $200-500?"


----------



## Quantum Man

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


I just noticed that all of us Canon shooters have a 70-200 f/4 IS. Wow!


Almost all. See sig.


----------



## tK FuRY

OK, so I bit the bullet and this Intuos4 is very very very different lol. I'm forcing myself to use just the tablet and no mouse....


----------



## Quantum Man

Using the pen to manipulate the mouse takes some getting used to, the drawing part though should come more naturally.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Quantum Man* 
Almost all. See sig.









If you want to be cool like us, I'll take a trade!







(+300?)


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *tK FuRY* 
OK, so I bit the bullet and this Intuos4 is very very very different lol. I'm forcing myself to use just the tablet and no mouse....









I thought you would pick up a Bamboo or something, not the professional series


----------



## tK FuRY

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
I thought you would pick up a Bamboo or something, not the professional series










I like to get the best of the best







, it's a very bad habit lol. Amazingly Fry's had the Bamboo Fun for 79.99 and the Medium one for 149.99. I was actually thinking of picking the Cintiq 12WX but remembered, I still need to upgrade my camera soon lol.

EDIT: I can draw an awesome tree (minus the leaves) in Illustrator now lol


----------



## Danylu

Interesting read to me at least. http://www.flickr.com/photos/good_day/3608471108/


----------



## Quantum Man

Quote:



Originally Posted by *tK FuRY*


I like to get the best of the best







, it's a very bad habit lol. Amazingly Fry's had the Bamboo Fun for 79.99 and the Medium one for 149.99. I was actually thinking of picking the Cintiq 12WX but remembered, I still need to upgrade my camera soon lol.

EDIT: I can draw an awesome tree (minus the leaves) in Illustrator now lol


I own a Bamboo myself, works just fine for my needs. You still feel the same way about your tablet, that it's not for you?


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
Interesting read to me at least. http://www.flickr.com/photos/good_day/3608471108/

It's very true. Porn gets hits.


----------



## tK FuRY

I guess I just need to get used to it.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


It's very true. Porn gets hits.


I'm gonna test that in a future upload









Nikon D3s sample photos look nice even though I won't be able to justify its cost









The 12800 ISO shot looks like a 800 ISO shot from my D60 thats pretty good.


----------



## tK FuRY

I saw the article on DPR, and had to put away the wallet. D700 is enough for me


----------



## Danylu

Knowing your recent spending habits, you probably pulled out the credit card as you posted that


----------



## Quantum Man

Wow the D3s goes up to 102,400 ISO!


----------



## Marin

http://www.canonrumors.com/2009/10/o...-of-canon-slr/


----------



## Mootsfox

So, who's going to have a D3 to sell me for cheap?


----------



## Quantum Man

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


So, who's going to have a D3 to sell me for cheap?


heh, I sold my D3 a few months back. Great camera, super comfortable ergonomics. But I likes me Canon glass.


----------



## tK FuRY

In love with the new D3s ... (JK), but seriously though I'm in love with DxO Optics Pro! ... fantastic lens correction program.

Now I officially have;
CS4 Masters Collection
Lightroom 2.0
DxO Optics Pro
Capture NX2
Alienskin Bokeh
Topaz Labs Adjust, Denoise, and Simplify...
NIX Color Efexs Pro 3 and Sharpener 3
OnOne Genuine Fractals and Phototools Pro ...

Too much software


----------



## Mootsfox

Nikon _finally_ updated their vendor purchase form.

D300S body for $1,200.

I want it so badly.


----------



## laboitenoire

Then just get it already









Actually, now that the colors are starting to turn on campus here, I'm noticing some good places to shoot some stuff. Unfortunately, it's really freezing in Cleveland at the moment (mid 40s with high wind under very overcast skies). Just out curiosity, how do y'all gear up for cold-weather shooting?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Nikon _finally_ updated their vendor purchase form.

D300S body for $1,200.

I want it so badly.

Get it Moots, enough with the D60 already


----------



## Quantum Man

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Get it Moots, enough with the D60 already









lol you know you can't resist!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Then just get it already









Actually, now that the colors are starting to turn on campus here, I'm noticing some good places to shoot some stuff. Unfortunately, it's really freezing in Cleveland at the moment (mid 40s with high wind under very overcast skies). Just out curiosity, how do y'all gear up for cold-weather shooting?


Jacket, hat, and gloves?

Seriously though, when it gets seriously cold, it's important to have an extra battery since the cold saps it faster.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Then just get it already









Actually, now that the colors are starting to turn on campus here, I'm noticing some good places to shoot some stuff. Unfortunately, it's really freezing in Cleveland at the moment (mid 40s with high wind under very overcast skies). Just out curiosity, *how do y'all gear up for cold-weather shooting?*


Wear more clothes.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/4001483895/


----------



## tK FuRY

Grab a couple of those chemical hand warmers and throw it in your pocket, next to some extra batteries. I like wearing somewhat thin gloves on my right hand so I can control my dials and buttons.

Oh yeah, and DON'T breathe on the camera...


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Nikon _finally_ updated their vendor purchase form.

D300S body for $1,200.

I want it so badly.


wait, how do i get one for 1200?!?


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie*


wait, how do i get one for 1200?!?










Work for an authorized Nikon dealer


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Work for an authorized Nikon dealer









I wish I had fringe benefits like that too


----------



## nuclearjock

D3 70-200 f/2.8 wide open.


----------



## ace8uk

Currently watching this on ebay. I'm a little cautious about the whole "WINNING BIDDERS: Please DO NOT make immediate payment at auction-end. It is crucial that you wait for our contact first." thing. Seems like it could be a little dodgy.


----------



## Quantum Man

Nikon's new 70-200 2.8 VR II is looking pretty sweet so far. I've seen samples of hand holding at 1/13 f/2.8 at 200mm and they are SHARP. Pretty insane if you ask me.


----------



## Quantum Man

Quote:


Originally Posted by *ace8uk* 
Currently watching this on ebay. I'm a little cautious about the whole "WINNING BIDDERS: Please DO NOT make immediate payment at auction-end. It is crucial that you wait for our contact first." thing. Seems like it could be a little dodgy.

It's too good to be true.


----------



## ace8uk

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Quantum Man* 
It's too good to be true.

Yeah, that's also exactly what I was thinking. There's still a good 20 hours left to bid, but I would have expected it to have more bids than it does. I wouldn't mind the D700 though


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Nikon _finally_ updated their vendor purchase form.

D300S body for $1,200.

I want it so badly.


I don't know if you're into the video option, if you can bypass that then I would say to look for a used D300 in good shape and snarf it up. There really is a BIG difference between the D60 and the D300 (or D300S for that matter).

I went from a D50 to my D300 and couldn't believe the difference. But I really began to apreciate my D300 on a different level after I got my D3.

I'd sell you my D3 for cheap, but the changes made to yield the D3S aren't enough to make me want to upgrade.

The extra ram would be nice, but that's only useful if you're bursting .nef's. I shoot jpeg large, fine when shooting sports so the 256m is totally fine for me.

But I would really think about the D300 or D300S seriously Foxie. you won't be sorry.


----------



## Marin

I got a blood blister when trying to open the container today, awesome...

And only six shots on the roll came out (roll has been sitting in my room for over four years), so not really worth it... ugg...


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Work for an authorized Nikon dealer


















how much can you get a D300 for then?


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


I don't know if you're into the video option, if you can bypass that then I would say to look for a used D300 in good shape and snarf it up. There really is a BIG difference between the D60 and the D300 (or D300S for that matter).

I went from a D50 to my D300 and couldn't believe the difference. But I really began to apreciate my D300 on a different level after I got my D3.

I'd sell you my D3 for cheap, but the changes made to yield the D3S aren't enough to make me want to upgrade.

The extra ram would be nice, but that's only useful if you're bursting .nef's. I shoot jpeg large, fine when shooting sports so the 256m is totally fine for me.

But I would really think about the D300 or D300S seriously Foxie. you won't be sorry.


It looks like it would feel like my F100 and D1, both of which I love.

I think I'm going to go into my local shoppe tomorrow (Only damn store in Columbus that has the D300S) and try it out.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie*










how much can you get a D300 for then?


The D300 was $1,100 before they discontinued it/replaced with D300S.

The D700 is $2,000 and the D90 body is ~$640.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
It looks like it would feel like my F100 and D1, both of which I love.

I think I'm going to go into my local shoppe tomorrow (Only damn store in Columbus that has the D300S) and try it out.

It's gonna feel entirely more solid and substantial than your D60.
I love my D3. I love my D300 as well. Regardless where I go in FX land, I will always have a crop sensor body for FL scale-ups.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Quantum Man*


Nikon's new 70-200 2.8 VR II is looking pretty sweet so far. I've seen samples of hand holding at 1/13 f/2.8 at 200mm and they are SHARP. Pretty insane if you ask me.


I think I saw the same article you're referring to here.

The pictures from the new 70-200 looked really nice, but the second shot taken with a 70-200 VRI 1/13th, f/2.8 @200mm kinda threw me for a loop. In fact the camera shake appeared way exaggerated. I don't like VR period for sports and wildlife cause I think it has a problem with dynamic AF which I use alot. With VR, you have to acquire your subject, engage VR and then wait for it to "settle". Not a good situation for sports or fast moving twichy animals.
My 400mm f/2.8 has VRII and quite frankly, I dont see alot of difference from VRI.

Anyway, I mounted my 70-200 VRI on my D3 and took some shots of a pillow, (by no means flat) under incandescant lighting, same conditions. VR on, 1/13th, f/2.8 @ 200mm hand held. These are jpegs out of the camera with in camera sharpenig set to 5, no pp except for cropping, exif intact.

Full frame:


100% crop at center focus point:









Now when viewing the 100% crop, don't forget this is not a flat object, it's 6 feet away from me, hence the dof is very small. But you can see the individual threads hand held at 1/13th ss.

I myself was pondering selling my 70-200 VI and geting the new lens, but I just can't convince my self to take the hit cash wise.

In my opinion, Cliff Mautner's comparison of VRI vs. VRII smells fishy. I guess if Nikon sent me a new lens to try, I'd try and make it look good too.

It looks like they've fixed the edge sharpness issue at full apeture on FX, but I shoot my 70-200 90% of the time as a second soccer lens on my D300 (DX) with my backgrounds out of focus so it's really not an issue for me.

Two extra ED elements is always a good thing, but the five in my lens seem to provide awesome color reproduction anyway.

I guess if I didn't own the VRI version and were in the market, I would wait for the new lens to hit the streets next month. For the people that do decide to upgrade, they'll be some good deals on some used VRI's which will be an awfully good thing for folks who couldn't afford or didn't want to pay the asking price for a new 70-200.

But I'm definately keeping my VRI...


----------



## Quantum Man

Very interesting post nuclearjock. I belong to an online forum where he shared his blog post and there's been an ongoing discussion about it. Your sample definitely is sharp even at 1/13. He said that his tests were non-scientific and just done as fairly as he could manage given the circumstances. He had the lens for 3 days only and used it for a wedding.

I agree that the current 70-200 is still a superb lens, and Cliff even says that as well.

Edit: I wanted to mention also that I've met Cliff, took his workshop even, he's a straight up guy. He wouldn't BS around.


----------



## Danylu

I know why people pay a lot for flashes that can take 8 AAs, 2 FX bodies with fast UWA and fast standard zoom. D60 with 18-55 and SB-600 cannot take good photos of kids running around inside, the SB-600 doesn't recharge fast enough to beat the D60's 3fps and the focus is really slow - never used it in such a difficult condition before. It might have something to do with trying to focus on dark hair indoors though, can someone with a lens that has fast AF test if their lens can focus on dark hair indoors please? I would like to know some results because my lens would start hunting if the AF point was set on dark hair.

Thank god it was a family thing so they won't have such high expectations


----------



## Quantum Man

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


I know why people pay a lot for flashes that can take 8 AAs, 2 FX bodies with fast UWA and fast standard zoom. D60 with 18-55 and SB-600 cannot take good photos of kids running around inside, the SB-600 doesn't recharge fast enough to beat the D60's 3fps and the focus is really slow - never used it in such a difficult condition before. It might have something to do with trying to focus on dark hair indoors though, can someone with a lens that has fast AF test if their lens can focus on dark hair indoors please? I would like to know some results because my lens would start hunting if the AF point was set on dark hair.

Thank god it was a family thing so they won't have such high expectations










What AF mode were you shooting in? AF-S or AF-C? The AF assist beam coming from your SB-600 can focus on anything even in complete darkness. But you have to be in AF-S mode in order to have it work. And it has to be enabled on your flash as well, a setting in the menu. Also certain focus points in your viewfinder might not trigger the AF assist beam so to be safe just use the center point.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Quantum Man*


What AF mode were you shooting in? AF-S or AF-C? The AF assist beam coming from your SB-600 can focus on anything even in complete darkness. But you have to be in AF-S mode in order to have it work. And it has to be enabled on your flash as well, a setting in the menu. Also certain focus points in your viewfinder might not trigger the AF assist beam so to be safe just use the center point.


Hm that might explain why it doesn't work... AF-C it was, kids don't seem to like running parallel to the guy holding a camera.

I didn't know that, rep muffins to you sir.


----------



## Quantum Man

Even though I shoot Canon now I used to shoot Nikon so I'm glad that I've swung both ways so to speak.







In my line of work I will often work with other photographers who shoot Nikon, so it definitely helps to know the gear.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Hm that might explain why it doesn't work... AF-C it was, kids don't seem to like running parallel to the guy holding a camera.

I didn't know that, rep muffins to you sir.


The AF-C on the D60 is quite slow. It's faster on my D1H with the same lens.

You can refocus with the half shutter press faster than the D60 can in AF-C.

I went into the store to try out the D300S. I'm in love







I'm filling out the paperwork right now







My wallet is going to hate me.


----------



## Quantum Man

w00t! But your new camera will love you!


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Quantum Man* 
w00t! But your new camera will love you!

I hope so









I took some pictures and video while there. The video looks hella nice. The lack of Auto focus while in video and the lack of being able to use the viewfinder make it kind of hard to use for anything that would move in and out of focus. I have a clip if anyone wants to see it, it's about 70MB in size though.

This is of the ISO test, 6400/3200/1600, at 100% crop. The black and gray are pretty meh, but the color noise is very low even at 6400. Usable prints at 6400 and 1/3 or 1/4 crop look fine!










Here is a 1280(H) crop of the 12.3MP original at 6400ISO.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

that 6400 looks cleaner then my D70s at 800


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


The AF-C on the D60 is quite slow. It's faster on my D1H with the same lens.

You can refocus with the half shutter press faster than the D60 can in AF-C.

I went into the store to try out the D300S. I'm in love







I'm filling out the paperwork right now







My wallet is going to hate me.


So did you like it???

Good for you Foxie...


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
The AF-C on the D60 is quite slow. It's faster on my D1H with the same lens.

You can refocus with the half shutter press faster than the D60 can in AF-C.

I went into the store to try out the D300S. I'm in love







I'm filling out the paperwork right now







My wallet is going to hate me.

Congrats on the purchase! Ah well I can't do much about the D60's slow AF. Could get faster lenses to try and compensate but ah well.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
I hope so









I took some pictures and video while there. The video looks hella nice. The lack of Auto focus while in video and the lack of being able to use the viewfinder make it kind of hard to use for anything that would move in and out of focus. I have a clip if anyone wants to see it, it's about 70MB in size though.

This is of the ISO test, 6400/3200/1600, at 100% crop. The black and gray are pretty meh, but the color noise is very low even at 6400. Usable prints at 6400 and 1/3 or 1/4 crop look fine!

6400 looks like my 800 more or less. 2 stops not a bad improvement.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


The video looks hella nice.


The video sucks on the D5000, D90 and D300S, end of story.

They are the definition of rolling shutter.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


The video sucks on the D5000, D90 and D300S, end of story.

They are the definition of rolling shutter.


It's not a video camera, and I understand that. If you don't go swinging the camera around the video is great.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


It's not a video camera, and I understand that. If you don't go swinging the camera around the video is great.


Even when not doing quick pans the rolling shutter is still noticeable.

I'm not saying the bodies are bad, as a DSLR they are excellent. Just the video feature is mediocre in comparison to Canon.


----------



## CatfishSoup

i use a Canon 40D







17mm-5mm and a 75-300 mm lense


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
The video sucks on the D5000, D90 and D300S, end of story.

They are the definition of rolling shutter.

Woops I left out the /quote at the end of Mootsy's quote.









Its better than nothing and thats just my take on it, don't slam me with 'buy a camcorder' stuff because I know the reasoning behind one.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
Woops I left out the /quote at the end of Mootsy's quote.



















Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
Its better than nothing and thats just my take on it, don't slam me with 'buy a camcorder' stuff because I know the reasoning behind one.

I'm also in the group that thinks comparing some camcorder, which in comparison to photography is like a P&S, to a DSLR is really dumb.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Dammit all, I'm starting to think I won't get my 7D even before the end of the year. Newegg keeps pushing back its availability date.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Dammit all, I'm starting to think I won't get my 7D even before the end of the year. Newegg keeps pushing back its availability date.










Newegg is probably going to take the longest on it.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Newegg is probably going to take the longest on it.


We'll see. No one has it currenty. I bought from newegg because I had some gift card funds to use


----------



## Bigevil89

just won a bid for a petri ft 100 film SLR


----------



## Mootsfox

Hey, our lil thread has grow to over 5,000 posts









Congrats Gone for being the 1st and 5,000th post


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Hey, our lil thread has grow to over 5,000 posts









Congrats Gone for being the 1st and 5,000th post









i call hax, mugan did have the OP for a while


----------



## Marin

Finding good low-priced m-mount lenses is really hard. *continues searching*


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Hey, our lil thread has grow to over 5,000 posts









Congrats Gone for being the 1st and 5,000th post










Quote:


Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie* 
i call hax, mugan did have the OP for a while









Yeah, props go to mugan for being the original OP







But I would have never noticed that I had the 5000th if you hadn't pointed it out!


----------



## dudemanppl

Anyone wanna buy my 70-200 f/4 IS? I'm going back to my D300. I like Canon, but LOVE Nikon!


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dudemanppl* 
Anyone wanna buy my 70-200 f/4 IS? I'm going back to my D300. I like Canon, but LOVE Nikon!

i just took a quick glance at it and saw "buy my 70-200, d300 and nikon"
i was disapointed to find out you were selling canon gear


----------



## nuclearjock

A couple from the cream machine.
D3 85mm f/1.4

1. @f/1.8









2. @f/2.8


----------



## Bigevil89

Just won another bid off goodwill, Nikon N2000 with a E Series 50mm 1.8 lense and sunpak flash


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
A couple from the cream machine.
D3 85mm f/1.4

1. @f/1.8









2. @f/2.8









O_O That's some crazy bokeh going on there.


----------



## Marin

Bokeh time?


----------



## nuclearjock

D3 85mm f/1.4

1. @f/1.4


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Bokeh time?




It may be just me, but nothing looks in focus in the picture... What were you focusing on?


----------



## tK FuRY

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


D3 85mm f/1.4

1. @f/1.4



this is what I was waiting for


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


*It may be just me, but nothing looks in focus in the picture*... What were you focusing on?


who cares, look at that Bokeh!


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


It may be just me, but nothing looks in focus in the picture... What were you focusing on?


The bolts in focus (the moss around it in the same area is also in focus). The lens is soft at MFD wide open. Something being in focus doesn't mean it's sharp.


----------



## Quantum Man

I'm curious, are there any other full-time photographers in here? And if so what kind of photography?


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
The bolts in focus (the moss around it in the same area is also in focus). The lens is soft at MFD wide open. Something being in focus doesn't mean it's sharp.









Generally focus means clarity...


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Generally focus means clarity...

And it does such, it's just soft.


----------



## Mootsfox

Posted some gear for sale. Nikon stuffs (SB-600) and some B&W filters.

http://www.overclock.net/sale/559854...ml#post6967224


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


The bolts in focus (the moss around it in the same area is also in focus). The lens is soft at MFD wide open. Something being in focus doesn't mean it's sharp.










I'm sorry, but it's not in focus if it makes me think I need glasses again









I'm guessing this was one of your Nikkor f/1.2 lenses?


----------



## Marin

I went outside to take some macro shots and there are so many mushrooms! (it's been raining on and off for the last few days).


----------



## laboitenoire

That second one you posted is strange--never seen anything like it out east, I must say.

I should have gone out shooting today, as the campus is a veritable ghost town, what with people home for fall break. However, I'm getting over a cold still. Maybe tomorrow, although I'm sure by late in the day people will have filtered back.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Cool mushroom shots Marin


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

looks like someone is getting an SB-600








thanks moots.


----------



## Mootsfox

Congrats on your purchase Schubie









I would recommend picking up a nice set of rechargeable AA's. A fully charged set of Eneloops did around 200 shots I want to say. I only replaced them once since I've had it.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

indeed i will, i have a giant wad of energizer industrials that i got from work but im going to be getting a nice pair of recharables in the near future.


----------



## Marin

Canon 1D MKIV!!!

http://www.usa.canon.com/dlc/control...icleTypeID=125


----------



## Quantum Man

I was just going to post that lol. Too bad it's not full frame. Otherwise it looks pretty sweet. Let's hope it focuses like it's supposed to.


----------



## Quantum Man

You HAVE to check out the video that Vincent Laforet made, same timeframe as with the 5D2.

http://blog.vincentlaforet.com/2009/...camera-action/

It was entirely shot at ISO 6400, it looks soooo clean it's unreal.


----------



## tK FuRY

I guess it's true that ISO/ASA 6400 is the new 1600.


----------



## Marin

I just watched it. So impressive and the effects of rolling shutter were barely noticeable (I had to look for them).


----------



## Quantum Man

I am looking forward to seeing some still shots at 6400. If they look as good as that video with low to moderate NR, say goodbye $5k heh.


----------



## Unknownm

figured why not post a picture with slower shutter speed


----------



## tK FuRY

Since we're posting DSLR Videos







, D3s ISO/ASA 6400-12800 - http://www.studioimpressionsphotogra...tion-portrait/


----------



## Marin

Darn, not what I expected. Only videos so far for the D3 that show tons of action and panning are from Nikon. But, they slowed the shutter speed down to make the horizontal shift less noticeable (bad Nikon =P), so can't judge the videos.

Guess I'll have to wait longer.


----------



## tK FuRY

Or maybe this one? lol,


YouTube - Vincent Munier - Summer Variations - Nikon D3s


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *tK FuRY* 
Or maybe this one? lol, YouTube - Vincent Munier - Summer Variations - Nikon D3s

Exact video I was talking about.









And just to point out now, my knowledge of slower shutter speeds being used in the video only reaches as far as forum posts. So what I had read could have easily have been fanboyish comments.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Canon 1D MKIV!!!

http://www.usa.canon.com/dlc/control...icleTypeID=125


That's pushing me more towards the 800 5.6 for next spring.
Guess I better make a decision . 
AF on the two Canon's I've shot (5DMKII and 1DsMKIII) just didn't even touch Nikon's D300 or D3 with respect to acquisition, speed, and dynamic af tracking which I use constantly for soccer. While it's not critical for small critters, it's nice to have.

I may have to become bi-photographical again, not that there's anything wrong with that


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Quantum Man*


I was just going to post that lol. Too bad it's not full frame. Otherwise it looks pretty sweet. Let's hope it focuses like it's supposed to.


Well, this is the venerable 1D Mark x line, which has always had a 1.3 crop CMOS sensor for a balance in speed and pixel quality. The 1D*s* mkIV will be full frame whenever it debuts.


----------



## Quantum Man

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Well, this is the venerable 1D Mark x line, which has always had a 1.3 crop CMOS sensor for a balance in speed and pixel quality. The 1D*s* mkIV will be full frame whenever it debuts.

All of us wedding togs were hoping it would be full frame with a selectable 1.3 crop mode maybe. Sort of like how Nikon has a D3X and a D3. Both full frame, and the big difference is the megapixel count. I know the 1Ds line is full frame but it carries an $8k price tag along with it...


----------



## Marin

Judging by the ISO performance seen in the video shot with the 1DMKIV, the 1DsMKIV is going to be absolutely insane.

Also...

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...d.php?t=769493

http://www.bjp-online.com/public/sho...ml?page=870180


----------



## Quantum Man

Haha yes I just read about that. I am going to LOVE shooting at 24fps. I can't wait.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Quantum Man* 
All of us wedding togs were hoping it would be full frame with a selectable 1.3 crop mode maybe. Sort of like how Nikon has a D3X and a D3. Both full frame, and the big difference is the megapixel count. I know the 1Ds line is full frame but it carries an $8k price tag along with it...

Well, knowing Canon, they aren't likely to go the low-megapixel, low pixel density route like Nikon. Except for the G11 of course, which they are actually reducing the MP count.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Judging by the ISO performance seen in the video shot with the 1DMKIV, the 1DsMKIV is going to be absolutely insane.

Also...

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...d.php?t=769493

http://www.bjp-online.com/public/sho...ml?page=870180

What was the FPS before? The 5D mkII has been kind of a mess since its debut, hopefully this will wrap up the last of the major complaints for it (I recall the black dot and banding issue early on).


----------



## Quantum Man

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Well, knowing Canon, they aren't likely to go the low-megapixel, low pixel density route like Nikon. Except for the G11 of course, which they are actually reducing the MP count.

What was the FPS before? The 5D mkII has been kind of a mess since its debut, hopefully this will wrap up the last of the major complaints for it (I recall the black dot and banding issue early on).


The FPS currently is 30.


----------



## mrwesth

This 1d MarkIV looks promising... but it seems like $5k for the camera that should have been the MarkIII. Meaning the autofocus system. The ISO and megapixel look like a nice improvement.

Wish we could have seen a FPS increase... or at least a buffer increase. Kind of a let down on that end.

Don't know if I can justify 5k, when the 7d looks like an improvement over the 1d2 and only slightly worse then the 1d4.


----------



## tK FuRY

Lol just had a rather interesting conversation with a Canon fanboy; after I mentioned 7D + Noise, he flipped out and started flaming me and calling me a Nikon Fanboy (who apparently also makes up reasons to dog on Canon ...)


----------



## mrwesth

Quote:



Originally Posted by *tK FuRY*


Lol just had a rather interesting conversation with a Canon fanboy; after I mentioned 7D + Noise, he flipped out and started flaming me and calling me a Nikon Fanboy (who apparently also makes up reasons to dog on Canon ...)


I heard the 7D has good ISO performance.
I haven't got my hands on one... so I don't know.

I know the D3 looks even more impressive with this lackluster release.
Hell canon is even trying to say the 1.3x crop is an advantage... seriously, where is the full frame sports shooter Canon? Where is it.
If I want cropping I can photoshop (or get the D3).


----------



## Marin

Developed a roll of 400TX today. Shots are insanely sharp and having a large dynamic range again is awesome. Leica M6 w/ Summicron-M 50mm f/2 + 400TX = awesome.

I'm getting a roll of Superia 400 film developed tomorrow at a lab since my school only has a B&W darkroom, hopefully the shots come out nicely.

Think I'm going to order a few rolls of Ektar 100 if I can't get it locally.


----------



## max302

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Developed a roll of 400TX today. Shots are insanely sharp and having a large dynamic range again is awesome. Leica M6 w/ Summicron-M 50mm f/2 + 400TX = awesome.

I'm getting a roll of Superia 400 film developed tomorrow at a lab since my school only has a B&W darkroom, hopefully the shots come out nicely.

Think I'm going to order a few rolls of Ektar 100 if I can't get it locally.









Damned Marin, you're really starting to look like a pretty wealthy kid. The complete Canon rig, now a Leica? What's next, a Hasselblad?









I reconditionned my father's old Pentax this summer, took a couple of shots with it, nothing ground-breaking, but it's a really fun experience shooting all out manual all the time.

I really like taking a peak at your Flickr stream regularly, keep pumping out the good stuff.


----------



## Marin

Leica M6 is my dads.


----------



## Quantum Man

When the reviews come in for the 1D4 and if they are stellar, my 1D3 may be for sale...







Going from the LCD on my 5D2's and then looking at my 1D3 LCD is just sad.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Congrats on your purchase Schubie









I would recommend picking up a nice set of rechargeable AA's. A fully charged set of Eneloops did around 200 shots I want to say. I only replaced them once since I've had it.


I'll take it that you didn't use it that often?


----------



## tK FuRY

Just saw more D3s 102K ISO and went nuts.

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/D3S/D3SA7.HTM

/awaits 1DMKIV

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PROD...rig_102400.HTM


----------



## Quantum Man

Here are some REAL 1D4 high ISO pictures in low light. These are straight out of camera by the way. I think 12,800 is very very good. I feel like a giddy school boy.









http://dpinterface.com/review-galler...eview-gallery/

Regarding the D3s 102,400 pics, those 2 guys are standing in spotlights or something like that, not really low light which is the real test IMO. But still good for how high the ISO is.


----------



## max302

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Quantum Man* 
Here are some REAL 1D4 high ISO pictures in low light. These are straight out of camera by the way. I think 12,800 is very very good. I feel like a giddy school boy.









http://dpinterface.com/review-galler...eview-gallery/

Regarding the D3s 102,400 pics, those 2 guys are standing in spotlights or something like that, not really low light which is the real test IMO. But still good for how high the ISO is.

All the pics were taken at pretty open apertures, and correctly exposed... that's what I would call high ISO. Kinda looks like 3200 ISO film if you ask me, I could almost be OK for shooting B&W.


----------



## Quantum Man

Quote:



Originally Posted by *max302*


All the pics were taken at pretty open apertures, and correctly exposed... that's what I would call high ISO. Kinda looks like 3200 ISO film if you ask me, I could almost be OK for shooting B&W.


What I meant was that taking a picture using let's say ISO 12,800 with good quality light on your subject is different than on a subject in a dark environment all around.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Quantum Man*


Here are some REAL 1D4 high ISO pictures in low light. These are straight out of camera by the way. I think 12,800 is very very good. I feel like a giddy school boy.









http://dpinterface.com/review-galler...eview-gallery/

Regarding the D3s 102,400 pics, those 2 guys are standing in spotlights or something like that, not really low light which is the real test IMO. But still good for how high the ISO is.


The 100k ISO looks HORRIBLE. Almost like Canon put it in there just to say they have it.

25,600 and 51k look very similar at 100%. 12,800 looks pretty good cropped. 3200 looks really nice at 100%.


----------



## Quantum Man

I just saw this for the 1st time a few minutes ago. This may make it into CS5.

http://www.facebook.com/video/video.php?v=540977923979

What a time saver, it's just mindblowing!


----------



## tK FuRY

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Quantum Man* 
I just saw this for the 1st time a few minutes ago. *This may make it into CS5.*

http://www.facebook.com/video/video.php?v=540977923979

What a time saver, it's just mindblowing!










EDIT: Nevermind Lol, I saw content-aware and thought it was stretching...


----------



## Marin

Score, local lab only takes a day to develop color film. Way faster than the local photo store which takes a week to develop B&W (think they send it to a lab in the city).


----------



## GoneTomorrow

If you ask me, the 100k ISO looks bad on both cameras. Personally, I don't use a really high ISO unless it will look decent, meaning that after some PP noise reduction and sharpening it will look good enough for a large print. I think the important thing to note for these two bodies is that ISO 1600 and 3200 in low light (and 6400 and 12500 in well-lit shots) are now what I would call usable. 1600 ISO in lowlight for my 40D isn't usable in my opinion, 800 ISO is the highest I will go in low light, there just too much detail loss otherwise.

It's difficult to tell which is really better between the 1D mk4 and the D3s without comparing samples in a studio setup of the same shot. Nevertheless, the D3s will of course have the better high ISO quality, because it has a much larger sensor than the the 1D4 and a lower pixel density, so the light-sensing quality of individual pixels is better. So it's apples and oranges really. It is fair however, to criticize why Canon isn't putting a full frame CMOS sensor into the 1D4, which I'm assuming is the competition for the D3s.

What's interesting to me is how Canon is trying this browbeating approach of relying more on image processing with a high pixel density instead of the low pixel density approach that Nikon is doing (and always has been).


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


If you ask me, the 100k ISO looks bad on both cameras. Personally, I don't use a really high ISO unless it will look decent, meaning that after some PP noise reduction and sharpening it will look good enough for a large print. I think the important thing to note for these two bodies is that ISO 1600 and 3200 in low light (and 6400 and 12500 in well-lit shots) are now what I would call usable. 1600 ISO in lowlight for my 40D isn't usable in my opinion, 800 ISO is the highest I will go in low light, there just too much detail loss otherwise.

It's difficult to tell which is really better between the 1D mk4 and the D3s without comparing samples in a studio setup of the same shot. Nevertheless, the D3s will of course have the better high ISO quality, because it has a much larger sensor than the the 1D4 and a lower pixel density, so the light-sensing quality of individual pixels is better. So it's apples and oranges really. It is fair however, to criticize why Canon isn't putting a full frame CMOS sensor into the 1D4, which I'm assuming is the competition for the D3s.

What's interesting to me is how Canon is trying this browbeating approach of relying more on image processing with a high pixel density instead of the low pixel density approach that Nikon is doing (and always has been).


I don't think it's really Apples to oranges as the cameras are competing on the same price level and market ($5k, sports).

Where did you find 102k shots with the D3S? Nikon isn't letting anyone release them yet









I wish Nikon would improve their PP in regards to NR in body to the level that Canon has :/

It's awesome how far these cameras have gone, with _10 stops_ of ISO range... that's the difference from f/1.4 to f/32 or 1/2000" to 1/4"


----------



## tK FuRY

OMG, I didn't realize there were sample videos too! ... LOL


----------



## Quantum Man

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


I don't think it's really Apples to oranges as the cameras are competing on the same price level and market ($5k, sports).

Where did you find 102k shots with the D3S? Nikon isn't letting anyone release them yet









I wish Nikon would improve their PP in regards to NR in body to the level that Canon has :/

It's awesome how far these cameras have gone, with _10 stops_ of ISO range... that's the difference from f/1.4 to f/32 or 1/2000" to 1/4"










D3s high ISO samples here.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Quantum Man*


I just saw this for the 1st time a few minutes ago. This may make it into CS5.

http://www.facebook.com/video/video.php?v=540977923979

What a time saver, it's just mindblowing!










my mind has just been blown, do want.


----------



## Danylu

Sigh I would have a look at those samples but this new wifi router makes my net seem like 64kbps.


----------



## Marin

I just got the color photos back and my jaw dropped. The photos are razor sharp and at f/2 the DoF is thin (since I've been using a crop body for awhile, I'm used to f/2 not being so thin). Also, the contrast is perfect and really gives a punch to the shots.

Looks like I'm going to be using the Leica M6 + Summicron-M 50mm f/2 combo a lot more.

Once I finish developing my B&W film, I'm going to sort through the shots and pick the ones to be scanned. I'm hoping to get all the B&W film developed by tomorrow...


----------



## Mootsfox

Just got store approval and submitted my order to Nikon for their approval. Hopefully they do so soon


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


I don't think it's really Apples to oranges as the cameras are competing on the same price level and market ($5k, sports).

Where did you find 102k shots with the D3S? Nikon isn't letting anyone release them yet









I wish Nikon would improve their PP in regards to NR in body to the level that Canon has :/

It's awesome how far these cameras have gone, with _10 stops_ of ISO range... that's the difference from f/1.4 to f/32 or 1/2000" to 1/4"










Tk posted earlier about the 102k D3S samples:

Quote:



Originally Posted by *tK FuRY*


Just saw more D3s 102K ISO and went nuts.

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/D3S/D3SA7.HTM

/awaits 1DMKIV

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PROD...rig_102400.HTM


And about the apples and oranges, it is, as I said, when you look at the different sensor sizes. But as I also said, it's worth asking why Canon isn't putting a full frame sensor in the 1D4. Clearly they feel the 1.3x sensor is good enough (as they fell it has been in the the 1D mkI - mkIII), but Nikon has challenged that with their very reasonably priced (amazingly) full-frame pro body.


----------



## Quantum Man

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
And about the apples and oranges, it is, as I said, when you look at the different sensor sizes. But as I also said, it's worth asking why Canon isn't putting a full frame sensor in the 1D4. Clearly they feel the 1.3x sensor is good enough, but Nikon has challenged that with their very reasonably priced (amazingly) full-frame pro body.

Canon is about product differentiation. If you want full frame in a 1D body you need to shell out 8k for the newest one. You have full frame in the 5D2 at a good price but the body and AF is not pro. Canon is a much larger company than Nikon so they probably have different marketing and business strategies in place. And who is the target customer of the 1D4? Sports right? I'm sure sports photographers LOVE the 1.3x crop.

Would I love a full frame 1D4? Absolutely. Instead I use a combo of 5D2's and 1D3 currently, I like the little extra "reach" the 1D3 gives me for certain situations. The IQ of the 1D3 is outstanding even though it's not full frame, and hopefully the 1D4 will follow suit.


----------



## tK FuRY

Wonders about LR3 Beta...

EDIT: Actually I think I won't even use the new features lol, most of the new features I already have a better plug-in for it


----------



## Marin




----------



## Bigevil89

Got this in the mail today














































only bad part about it is the shutter speed dial is missing, so i used my pocket knife and set it to (P)rogram ( i think its P lol)


----------



## laboitenoire

N2000 was manual, right? My dad has an N2020 lying around, and that is definitely an auto-focus.


----------



## Bigevil89

yea the N2000 is all manual, its just a shame the shutter dial is gone so i cant control it unless i carry my pocket knife and flash it around everywhere lol. Anyone recommend some good Color and B&W film?


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*















































I've shot two rolls of the Ektar and liked it. I'll be intrested to see what you think.


----------



## computeruler

Im using a rebel t1i
Also, why does Marin use a fild camera? What makes it so much better then a digital?


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:


Originally Posted by *computeruler* 
Im using a rebel t1i
Also, why does Marin use a fild camera? What makes it so much better then a digital?

i have two film SLR's as well.
film can be fun to shoot and has a much better dynamic range then digital does, especially when shooting B&W


----------



## computeruler

Whats dynamic range? Does that make it look better then a digital? Honestly though it would never work for me because I take about 200 pictures at one time lol. You should see me pressing that button


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

here is some reading for you








http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tut...amic-range.htm
http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tut...amic-range.htm


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


I've shot two rolls of the Ektar and liked it. I'll be intrested to see what you think.


Good to hear.









I'm hoping to use it for some landscapes soon.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *computeruler*


Im using a rebel t1i
Also, why does Marin use a fild camera? What makes it so much better then a digital?


- Larger dynamic range
- Challenging (chimping with digital has grown tedious for me) 
- Colleges prefer it due to it showing ones photographic abilities better (can't modify negatives like a RAW photo)
- Rangefinders are awesome to use (digital rangefinders are quite pricey thus I don't plan on getting one)

Probably a ton of things I'm skipping over.


----------



## computeruler

Thanks for the links/explanation
But the film price must be really expensive! And how much does it cost to get it developed? I found a canon rebel s in a closet in a old pleather camera bag. In it was this weird thing that said universial exposer meter. Ill google that one. But anyways, good camera?


----------



## Marin

I develop the B&W film myself and the color film costs $12 to get developed, so I use it less than B&W.


----------



## computeruler

is the canon rebel s a good film camera?


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *computeruler* 
Thanks for the links/explanation
But the film price must be really expensive! And how much does it cost to get it developed? I found a canon rebel s in a closet in a old pleather camera bag. In it was this weird thing that said universial exposer meter. Ill google that one. But anyways, good camera?

Film is about $4-5 a roll, and if you're in school, developing can be fairly cheap + paper costs.

To make a single print from a roll of good film, it costs me about $6. Ten prints would be around $14-15, basically just adding in the cost of paper.

When using film the body matters far less. Any manual operation camera with a meter and a good prime (35-50mm) is enough to start with.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *computeruler* 
Whats dynamic range? Does that make it look better then a digital? Honestly though it would never work for me because I take about 200 pictures at one time lol. You should see me pressing that button

The spray-n-pray method is the worst way to take pictures. Slow down, apply some technique and know-how, and see what you've been missing. You'll get much better shots in the end that way.









And actually, I partially retract that statement, as spraying in burst mode is good for fast subjects (sports, birds, cars, etc.), but it shouldn't be an approach to all shots. Quality over quantity.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
The spray-n-pray method is the worst way to take pictures. Slow down, apply some technique and know-how, and see what you've been missing. You'll get much better shots in the end that way.









And actually, I partially retract that statement, as spraying in burst mode is good for fast subjects (sports, birds, cars, etc.), but it shouldn't be an approach to all shots. Quality over quantity.

Yeah, don't take the Rockwell approach and use your camera like a machine gun 24/7.









Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Film is about $4-5 a roll, and if you're in school, developing can be fairly cheap + paper costs.

To make a single print from a roll of good film, it costs me about $6. Ten prints would be around $14-15, basically just adding in the cost of paper.

*When using film the body matters far less. Any manual operation camera with a meter and a good prime (35-50mm) is enough to start with.*

I agree.


----------



## computeruler

Ive been trying to take better quality ones now. I still take tons though. I probably took around 200 today.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *computeruler*


Ive been trying to take better quality ones now. I still take tons though. I probably took around 200 today.


It's ok to take lots, but try to compose each shot if you can, and since you've got a digital camera, review your shot, change settings and see the difference. Pray n' spray like Gone and Marin have said isn't going to help you. And you'll look like Ken Rockwell, which would just be embarrassing.

Film is fun and can be rewarding, but you don't get to see your techniques instantly which can make learning slow.

If you want to get into it, check your local craigslist. A 35mm SLR with one or two lenses can be found for about $20 if you shop a bit.


----------



## computeruler

I have a film slr so no problem there. I could never have the patients for it though. I usually do look at each one then change settings till I get it just right.


----------



## Bigevil89

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


If you want to get into it, check your local craigslist. A 35mm SLR with one or two lenses can be found for about $20 if you shop a bit.










I bought my film SLR from craiglist( not local, online but still good deal), only $48 with shipping for a nikon N2000 with a pretty decent flash, and it came with a new roll of film in it too









Edit: im thinking of getting some Kodak Tri-X 400 film, ive never shot with B&W film.
*
*


----------



## Mootsfox

I think Ilford film is better, cheaper too and be pushed and pulled quite far. HP5 (400) and FP4 (125) are what I shoot with. Both are $4 at my local shop, and the FP4 can be pushed 6 stops (ISO 8000).

HOWEVER, if you don't have a lab to process it yourself, you should probably stick with C-41 (color process) B&W film, so the lab you go to doesn't ruin your film.

This is FP4 at 6400 ISO, taken from this thread (you'll need logins to see the pictures)


----------



## Marin

I really like the grain 400TX produces. Really a preference thing.

I only have two shots uploaded (that were taken awhile ago) that I used 400TX.



I'm developing a bunch of rolls currently and have a few already done.


----------



## Bigevil89

ah as you can see im a complete noobie with film, i didnt know there were different ways of processing fo different kinds of films. I was planning on going to my local CVS or Costco to develope film.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Bigevil89*


ah as you can see im a complete noobie with film, i didnt know there were different ways of processing fo different kinds of films. I was planning on going to my local CVS or Costco to develope film.


Stick with films that are to be processed in C-41. It will say on the box either "Process in color development" or "Use C-41 process".

I honestly don't know much about Kodak films other than I don't like their grain patterns, or their company, so I tend to avoid it.

Google and Marin should be able to help you with those films.

If you can find a lab that will let you process your self (most schools have labs, universities often have open lab time) you have a much greater control over the creative process of the print.


----------



## Bigevil89

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Stick with films that are to be processed in C-41. It will say on the box either "Process in color development" or "Use C-41 process".

I honestly don't know much about Kodak films other than I don't like their grain patterns, or their company, so I tend to avoid it.

Google and Marin should be able to help you with those films.

If you can find a lab that will let you process your self (most schools have labs, universities often have open lab time) you have a much greater control over the creative process of the print.



thanks for your help Moots, Im not partial to Kodak films, there just more readily available in my area.


----------



## tK FuRY

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Yeah, don't take the Rockwell approach and use your camera like a machine gun 24/7.










But I actually like the sound of 4.5FPS







.

Seriously though, compose your shots and try to get the perfect shot first time.

I do take several shots (2-5) per composition though, just because one may be tack sharp compared to others.


----------



## Quantum Man

I like showing people how the 1D3 sounds at 10 FPS.


----------



## riko99

Have You guys heard that Casio Exilim P&S that does 40 FPS lol now there's a machine gun.... such a waste of money though might as well go SLR for that price range.


----------



## tK FuRY

EX-F1?

Even though technically, it's 60FPS for ONE Second and 5 FPS for 12 seconds...


----------



## riko99

yep that's the one, lol even though it doesn't have a real shutter or anything if you put your ear up to it its beastly...


----------



## Bigevil89

Random shot from today.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Off-topic, but since I post here most often, I might as well ask: could someone spare an invite for Google Wave for me?


----------



## mortimersnerd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Off-topic, but since I post here most often, I might as well ask: could someone spare an invite for Google Wave for me?


I would be very interested in an invite as well.....


----------



## Danylu

I finally got my Cactus V4s. First Impression is that it is cheap as hell (was expecting this) and that it works 100% to about 40/50m. I also now know that I need a lot of practise to get my strobist skills up to my nub 'normal' photography skills


----------



## porschedrifter

Count me in, Nikon D80 with a couple lenses


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *porschedrifter*


Count me in, Nikon D80 with a couple lenses


OK, what lenses? This a gearhead thread, saying "a couple of lenses" doesn't cut it.


----------



## nuclearjock

GT, when you get a chance switch my Wemberly to an Induro GHB2 gimbal. The Wemberly developed "issues", and their customer service stinks.
The Induro is silky smooth and built like a tank.

Edit: On second thought, you can leave the Wemberly there and just add the Induro. I'm gonna keep the Wemberly and shoot two rigs for Eagles and Raptors. Just need a second rig now...


----------



## Quantum Man

Which lens is that? 600mm?


----------



## laboitenoire

Nuke dropped the 600 a while back IIRC. That's probably his 400 2.8 VR.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

oh my, Nuke, that thing looks like it could support a car!

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Nuke dropped the 600 a while back IIRC. That's probably his 400 2.8 VR.


i believe you are correct on that one


----------



## mortimersnerd

Just got my new camera. This is what I have for now:

Nikon D5000
Nikon AF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G VR
Tamron SP AF24-135mm F/3.5-5.6


----------



## DaCrusader

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mortimersnerd*


Just got my new camera. This is what I have for now:

Nikon D5000
Nikon AF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G VR
Tamron SP AF24-135mm F/3.5-5.6


wait for it, in a few years you will be a happy (poor) photographer


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Quantum Man*


Which lens is that? 600mm?


Yep, 400 f/2.8. My absolute favorite.


----------



## laboitenoire

Well, seeing as it is Halloween...









The shots are a bit grainy from shooting at ISO 200, but overall they turned out pretty well I think. The first three are my pumpkin, and the Joker pumpkin was carved by my friend.


----------



## Quantum Man

Wow those are pretty intricate carvings. Grainy from ISO 200? Maybe you meant 2000?


----------



## laboitenoire

Nope, on my camera things get grainy starting around 200 (which is still usable). 400 is okay, 800 is unusable. Gotta love 1/2.3" sensors


----------



## mortimersnerd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *DaCrusader*


wait for it, in a few years you will be a happy (poor) photographer











Yeah. Lots of wants right now but can't afford.... The D5000 will be a good start.


----------



## DaCrusader

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mortimersnerd* 
Yeah. Lots of wants right now but can't afford.... The D5000 will be a good start.

Yeah I had a 5D Mark II, 24-105F/4L IS USM and a 580EXII in my hands the other day, shot with it for about an hour at ice hockey presentations.. I'm tossing up between 7D and 5D Mark II... I love the full frame for events with low light.. but I love the 7D for sport and its blazing fast AF and FPS. its also $1000+ cheaper... (thats almost an L lens in australia)


----------



## tK FuRY

Lol, Apparently the D300 I borrowed has a dead battery. Or that specific camera drains very quickly when temps are 48F ...

Only got 2 shots tonight before it went "dead".


----------



## NameUnknown

Id like to join, I have a Nikon D40 with the stock lens that comes in the kit, no special lenses or filters yet, one of these days Ill get some good stuff to go with it, but for now I dont have the time to as much as much as I like it.


----------



## tK FuRY

Ohh yeah; I think I have turned Strobist







.


----------



## laboitenoire

Hmm... I discovered today that my shutter is only two planes, and the hole isn't even perfectly circular as it closes...


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *DaCrusader* 
Yeah I had a 5D Mark II, 24-105F/4L IS USM and a 580EXII in my hands the other day, shot with it for about an hour at ice hockey presentations.. I'm tossing up between 7D and 5D Mark II... I love the full frame for events with low light.. but I love the 7D for sport and its blazing fast AF and FPS. its also $1000+ cheaper... (thats almost an L lens in australia)

Stuff in Aus is overpriced.


----------



## DaCrusader

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Stuff in Aus is overpriced.










So much it isn't funny. In a lot of cases its cheaper to buy from BH Photo Video than Digidirect (the cheapest non grey-importer in sydney) That includes shipping and 10% GST, you don't have an australian warranty then, but all L lenses have an international warranty so its not much of an issue.

To give the Americans an Idea, the retail price of a 5D Mark II with 24-105F/4 is about $5100, thats about $4672 USD when 1 USD = 1.09158 AUD.

compare that to BH's price, $3500 USD.

Fk off Canon Australia, you ain't getting my cash anytime soon.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *DaCrusader*


So much it isn't funny. In a lot of cases its cheaper to buy from BH Photo Video than Digidirect (the cheapest non grey-importer in sydney) That includes shipping and 10% GST, you don't have an australian warranty then, but all L lenses have an international warranty so its not much of an issue.

To give the Americans an Idea, the retail price of a 5D Mark II with 24-105F/4 is about $5100, thats about $4672 USD when 1 USD = 1.09158 AUD.

compare that to BH's price, $3500 USD.

Fk off Canon Australia, you ain't getting my cash anytime soon.


I'd do the same but Nikon's International warranty specifically states that you must have a valid reason for buying something from America... Looks like it's greys with 3rd party warranty!

Speaking of which, given that the 70-300 4.5-5.6 VR is $700 and the Sigma 70-200 2.8 is $850, which one would you prefer? The things going for the Nikon are VR and lightness, I really won't lug the Sigma along to a holiday. I do shoot concerts informally and I like birdies. If I do get the Sigma I'll get the 2x & 1.4x TC as all. Hm maybe I should start a thread lol


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *DaCrusader*


So much it isn't funny. In a lot of cases its cheaper to buy from BH Photo Video than Digidirect (the cheapest non grey-importer in sydney) That includes shipping and 10% GST, you don't have an australian warranty then, but all L lenses have an international warranty so its not much of an issue.

To give the Americans an Idea, the retail price of a 5D Mark II with 24-105F/4 is about $5100, thats about $4672 USD when 1 USD = 1.09158 AUD.

compare that to BH's price, $3500 USD.

Fk off Canon Australia, you ain't getting my cash anytime soon.


Yeah, yeah, cry me a river.







Believe me, we know, we hear about it all the time from the other Aussies here, then I hear about it over at POTN and elsewhere (UK, Portugal, etc.). It's unfair.


----------



## tK FuRY

lol? I hope no one buys this.

http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-SB-800-S...7100731&sr=1-1

For just half you could get a SB-900 >.>

EDIT: Woah, all the Amazon retailers are set at $500+++ .. what's with the prices?


----------



## nuclearjock

Check here, PM me if you're interested.

Mint, pristene, like new, never used condition. Need to go heavier duty.

Sold to the Fox.


----------



## laboitenoire

Ugh... My eyes are killing me at the moment from doing tons of research. I'm currently writing a paper for my seminar on the impact of materials about how semiconductors impacted developments in photography. Tons of search results, almost as many dead ends. But I think I'm off to a good start.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


Check here, PM me if you're interested.

Mint, pristene, like new, never used condition. Need to go heavier duty.


Both of those = mine. YGPM.


----------



## Marin

Voigtlander Ultron 40mm f/2 (EF Mount)

Translation

Review

After seeing the older review for the F mount, this looks like an awesome walk-around lens. Extremely good optically and very compact, and it comes out for the EF mount one day after my birthday... do want...


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Voigtlander Ultron 40mm f/2 (EF Mount)

Translation

Review

After seeing the older review for the F mount, this looks like an awesome walk-around lens. Extremely good optically and very compact, and it comes out for the EF mount one day after my birthday... do want...

Marin,

Nikon thread with pics here.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
Marin,

Nikon thread with pics here.

I have to log-in.


----------



## Mootsfox

Shot from this weekend:


----------



## Mootsfox

Just got this from UPS:



















Shots are a bit noisy, those are straight out of camera at ISO 2000 with no NR.

Also, here's an example of the movie mode from the D300s. (watch it in HD)


YouTube - Youmacon09 Dance Clip-001





Taken by my friend Lycwolf this weekend at Youmacon 2009. He's switching to Nikon after using my D300s for the dance









I'm in the orange kitty suit at the end, otherwise I would have taken more video.


----------



## Danylu

lol at kitty suit.

Just a quick question, do you think the MB-D10 was worth it when a 3rd party battery grip costs a 3rd as much, looks the same and is even recognized by the camera as a MB-D10?

Edit: lol I got the PM as soon as I sent this


----------



## Mootsfox

It's heavy, like heavy heavy. The grip with battery and camera probably weigh a bit more than my D1H which is like 2.1lbs. With a flash and a small lens it's probably over 4lbs.

It's nice so far though. I jumped on it because it was 50% MSRP and I like to only use Nikon stuff when possible.


----------



## dudemanppl

I just got a MB-D10 too, with and without grip is a totally different camera. The weight difference when its filled with Eneloops is pretty big, which makes it balance better with my 70-200 VR.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dudemanppl* 
I just got a MB-D10 too, with and without grip is a totally different camera. The weight difference when its filled with Eneloops is pretty big, which makes it balance better with my 70-200 VR.

Totally agree. It fits my hand better with the grip as well. Same as the F100, which I have gripped.

I am a bit worried about the weight of the thing, but oh well.

How well do the Eneloops work? I bought two extra EN-EL3e batteries anyways, but if the Eneloops provide better life, I might have to pick up more of those.


----------



## Quantum Man

I can't use a camera without a grip lol and I don't have large hands by any stretch. The benefits for me far outweigh the added weight and I carry 2 bodies on me for 10-12 hours at a time.


----------



## Quantum Man

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Totally agree. It fits my hand better with the grip as well. Same as the F100, which I have gripped.

I am a bit worried about the weight of the thing, but oh well.

How well do the Eneloops work? I bought two extra EN-EL3e batteries anyways, but if the Eneloops provide better life, I might have to pick up more of those.

Eneloops are the best low discharge rechargeables. I have about 32 of them I think.







Their power cells dissipate extremely slowly if left on a shelf for a long time, and when in use they output very consistent power. I use them in my flashes only. For battery grips I use the brand specific camera batteries like your EN-EL3e. Those will give you the best bang for the weight I think unless you go for the more expensive D3 battery.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Quantum Man* 
Eneloops are the best low discharge rechargeables. I have about 32 of them I think.







Their power cells dissipate extremely slowly if left on a shelf for a long time, and when in use they output very consistent power. I use them in my flashes only. For battery grips I use the brand specific camera batteries like your EN-EL3e. Those will give you the best bang for the weight I think unless you go for the more expensive D3 battery.

Yeah, I have 8 Eneloops which I use in my flashes, and they do very well. Wouldn't hurt to buy more anyways







Really good batteries.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

I finally got my 7D today - I must say, I'm fairly impressed. Haven't shot much with it, but here are some high ISO shots I tried out. They are all RAW converted to JPEG with a small amount of NR in DPP:

EDIT: Had the 6400 and 3200 switched







Also forgot to mention that Standard NR was turned on for these shots.

ISO 1600:









ISO 3200:









ISO 6400:









They certainly outdo my 40D at the same ISOs. So far so good!


----------



## laboitenoire

You can see a bit of noise, but it doesn't look all that noticeable.


----------



## Mootsfox

Why does 6400 look better than 3200?


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Why does 6400 look better than 3200?


Just checked the EXIF on Flickr. His 3200 is actually 6400, while the 6400 is actually 3200.


----------



## Quantum Man

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Why does 6400 look better than 3200?


lol I was gonna say.









Still though 6400 looks very good here.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Why does 6400 look better than 3200?


Because I'm an idiot and had them switched around







Fixed! They're fairly close though, which is why I mixed them up I guess. The big difference is that 6400 has more shade noise the 3200, either way, I'm happy. What I read was true about the high resolution (18 MP) making the noise grain smaller and therefore better.


----------



## Quantum Man

*chants to self* Learn to be content with your 1D3. You don't need the 1D4. Learn to be content with your 1D3.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Quantum Man* 
*chants to self* Learn to be content with your 1D3. You don't need the 1D4. Learn to be content with your 1D3.









You do need it actually. Don't fight it. Imagine that 1D4 goodness in your hands.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Totally agree. It fits my hand better with the grip as well. Same as the F100, which I have gripped.

I am a bit worried about the weight of the thing, but oh well.

How well do the Eneloops work? I bought two extra EN-EL3e batteries anyways, but if the Eneloops provide better life, I might have to pick up more of those.

I've heard they're around the battery life of the ENEL4a, so around 3-4k shots. I got them instead of ENEL3es because I shoot sports so I need the 8 FPS (don't want to spend 200 for the ENEL4/a batteries).


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


I've heard they're around the battery life of the ENEL4a, so around 3-4k shots. I got them instead of ENEL3es because I shoot sports so I need the 8 FPS (don't want to spend 200 for the ENEL4/a batteries).


You know there's a trick to shooting at 8FPS without the grip?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

A few more 7D shots. I've found that the noise grain is so tiny that it cleans up very well:


----------



## Quantum Man

Very nice 3rd shot. Is that AI Servo? How many shots did you fire in that sequence, and were they all in focus?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Quantum Man*


Very nice 3rd shot. Is that AI Servo? How many shots did you fire in that sequence, and were they all in focus?


Thanks, it was AI Servo in the last shot. I fired 10 shots in that sequence with so running towards me. All were in focus! AI Servo on the 7D is WAY better than the 40D. It was too slow on the 40D to use on really fast subjects and just missed a lot. Since the dog was coming straight at me, it was very easy to get all the shots in focus (no panning), so it wasn't the best test really. When I did panning sequences of the dog from the side, I only ended up with about half the shots in focus, but I think it's just because I suck at panning


----------



## laboitenoire

Just looked at the sample gallery of the Leica X1 on dpreview. Not too bad, although the ISO 3200 is definitely noisy.


----------



## nuclearjock

GT, if the spirit moves you you can add a set of Gitzo GT5541LS tripod legs to my sig. Normally I wouldn't think of including tripods/monopods in my sig but these things were $$$$.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *laboitenoire* 
Just looked at the sample gallery of the Leica X1 on dpreview. Not too bad, although the ISO 3200 is definitely noisy.

Yeah, but for a compact it's pretty darn good (owing to its APS-C sensor). ISO 1600 looks clean. Too bad the camera is $2000, which I could almost buy a 5d mkII for. I wish that Canon or Nikon would make a compact with an APS-C sensor in it, then it would actually be affordable.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
GT, if the spirit moves you you can add a set of Gitzo GT5541LS tripod legs to my sig. Normally I wouldn't think of including tripods/monopods in my sig but these things were $$$$.

No problem!


----------



## Volvo

hi add me to the list please.

Canon EOS 1000D

18-55mm IS
75-300mm USM III
25-200mm IS
no flashlights as of yet.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Volvo*


hi add me to the list please.

Canon EOS 1000D

18-55mm IS
75-300mm USM III
25-200mm IS
no flashlights as of yet.


Added! 25-200 IS? Never heard of such a lens.


----------



## computeruler

the googles told me tampron makes one


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


You know there's a trick to shooting at 8FPS without the grip?


Yeah, doesn't everyone? I shoot vertical 85% of the time, so I bought it. The trick also limits the burst to 9 shots and I need more than that.


----------



## Marin

Tomorrow I should get my rental...

Voigtlander Nokton 50mm f/1.1


----------



## Danylu

Nice.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Tomorrow I should get my rental...

Voigtlander Nokton 50mm f/1.1











Take it to the limit one more time (old Eagle's song).


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Tomorrow I should get my rental...



Spoiler: Hidden Text Below!



Voigtlander Nokton 50mm f/1.1












Quest for The Ultimate Small DOF


----------



## Quantum Man

If you want small small DOF just shoot a macro lens wide open as close as possible to the subject.









f/1.1 is pretty ridiculous though. Still not as good as the Canon 50 f/1.0


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Quantum Man*


If you want small small DOF just shoot a macro lens wide open as close as possible to the subject.









f/1.1 is pretty ridiculous though. Still not as good as the Canon 50 f/1.0










...or the Canon 50mm f/.95 lens (maybe you were referring to this one):










ORRRR a Zeiss 50mm f/0.7 (that's point seven) lens!


----------



## tK FuRY

Ahh the Zeiss, allowing astronauts to photograph the dark side of the moon


----------



## laboitenoire

I love how that Canon blocks the bright lines viewfinder...


----------



## Marin

Say hello to my little friend...






Wish I owned this lens.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

A thing of beauty!


----------



## Quantum Man

Looking forward to seeing some shots with it.


----------



## max302

Sorry to respost, but I'd really need my shizzle appraised: preparing for the migration from my D40 to a D90!!!

http://www.overclock.net/appraisals/...cessories.html

Thanks for replying!


----------



## laboitenoire

$350 sounds pretty fair for all that's included.


----------



## nuclearjock

Ok, I'm ready for eagle season. should be in a month or so in the midwest.
Amazing difference the right tripod and gimbal make with a heavy lens. Like it's floating in air, literally.


----------



## Mootsfox

How much was that setup?


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
How much was that setup?

Gimbal.

Gitzo legs.

I got a 10% discount on the legs cause I knew it was "Gitzo day" at my local Calumet Photo store, and they were doing promos on some of their high end stuff for suckers like me.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
Gimbal.

Gitzo legs.

I got a 10% discount on the legs cause I knew it was "Gitzo day" at my local Calumet Photo store, and they were doing promos on some of their high end stuff for suckers like me.

Christ, what I wouldn't give for some Gitzo legs, esp. the Mountaineer









On another note, I've been trying out the wireless flash capability of the 7D, and it works flawlessly! Just an initial test, off camera flash:


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
On another note, I've been trying out the wireless flash capability of the 7D, and it works flawlessly! Just an initial test, off camera flash:

I'm starting to like this camera for lots of reasons.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
I'm starting to like this camera for lots of reasons.

For wireless flash? The D70 and up do that.


----------



## computeruler

1.5k for a tripod!?!?


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *computeruler* 
1.5k for a tripod!?!?

It supports 14k (also 14lbs) of gear.

Edit:
I could have purchased a set of legs that cost less, but I'm going to be adding either a 600 or 800mm lens next year, and the way I figured this would probably be the last tripod I buy, (unless I want to set up two rigs at the same time which can sometimes be very helpful).


----------



## laboitenoire

Your collection of gear never ceases to amaze me, nuke. I have so many hobbies that it would be a long time before I had the cash for that caliber of setup...


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *laboitenoire* 
Your collection of gear never ceases to amaze me, nuke. I have so many hobbies that it would be a long time before I had the cash for that caliber of setup...

I've been in the chemical industry for 28 years after 9 years of college. That's a long time. Plus, I supplement my equipment funds with soccer shoots which I keep telling you guys is very lucrative.


----------



## laboitenoire

Yeah, I'm assuming that once I get my degree I'll have a bit more cash for personal spending. I've been told by my professors that materials science is going to be huge in a few years.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


For wireless flash? The D70 and up do that.


Sigh not the D60


----------



## Marin

Voigtlander Nokton 50mm f/1.1 update:

Used it for portrait shots today. So far I've finished off four rolls of film and I'm getting them developed/scanned tomorrow. I could develop the B&W film myself but I don't have the time right now to do it in class.

Film to be developed:

- Kodak Ektar 100
- Kodak Portra 160VC (two rolls)
- Ilford Delta 100


----------



## Marin

Just finished this for class. The flattened TIFF is 363mb's and the one retaining its layers is 1.46gb's. Both are 16-bit.

Here's the JPEG of it.


----------



## nuclearjock

Now that's what I'm talkin about(?)


----------



## Danylu

Posted a bit of a first impression review. In this summer heat, more often than not my common sense will fail me (as proven by the comments) so any comments would be appreciated









http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/4093863551/


----------



## Mootsfox

Some new stuff from nuclearjock


----------



## Marin

Maybe someone will recognize who this is...

Leica M6 + Voigtlander Nokton 50mm f/1.1

Kodak Portra 160VC



Ilford Delta 100


----------



## tK FuRY

Hmm I see Breezer, so Joe Breeze the mountain bike designer*?


----------



## laboitenoire

I don't know who the guy is, but I must say that the bokeh from that lens is just luscious.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *tK FuRY*


Hmm I see Breezer, so Joe Breeze the mountain bike designer*?


You are correct.

I have a whole series finished of most of the original mountain bikers. I'm going to upload more later on.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


I don't know who the guy is, but I must say that the bokeh from that lens is just luscious.


Yeah, it's pretty nice bokeh. While it's not as nice as the Noctilux, it definitely pops the subject out more.


----------



## olli3

You guys have some really cool photos









I've added a couple of mine to the flickr, and I've got some fireworks pictures to put on flickr soon too









Count me in for the group, here's my gear:

Nikon D60
Nikon 18-55mm
Nikon 55-200mm VR
Lowepro slingshot 200 AW

Only had camera a few months so hopefully ill have some more lenses soon







Macro is next on the list!


----------



## laboitenoire

Was that wide open?


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Was that wide open?


Yeah, both were shot wide open.


----------



## Quantum Man

Nice shots Marin! That's pretty sharp for wide open at 1.1.


----------



## Boris4ka

Hey, can you update my profile, I just got a Sony Alpha DSLR A100


----------



## Mootsfox

Nice


----------



## Unknownm

I have no idea what everyone is talking about with lens and stuff (newb)

All I got is this lame Digital camera with 6.3-18.9 mm on the left and 1 : 3.1 - 5.9 on the right. It's annoying taking shots without the flash because the shutter speed is super slow unless the camera LCD looks like it has a frame rate of 60 (compared to 30). If it looks like it's 60 frames and when I click and shoot the shutter speed is so fast but if it's 30 it takes about a few seconds.. Also I hate the auto focus.... Sometimes it focuses on the wrong object and try to move the camera around to get it to focus to that object

So do I have a dumb camera or what?


----------



## Mootsfox

It's just a point and shoot.

6.3 to 18.9mm is the focal length, roughly equal to about 24-72mm on a film camera.

3.1-5.9 is the aperture range.

Without manual controls, you don't need to worry about either of those.


----------



## Unknownm

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


It's just a point and shoot.

6.3 to 18.9mm is the focal length, roughly equal to about 24-72mm on a film camera.

3.1-5.9 is the aperture range.

Without manual controls, you don't need to worry about either of those.


Yeah I'm starting to hate it!. I wanna do my own focus and take awesome shots. Hell even sometimes this camera takes pictures and the colors are different. When I took a shot of my AGP slot with my 6200 in it it turned out somewhat blue... But it's green IRL


----------



## Unknownm

Good thing about slow shutter speed is this:


----------



## laboitenoire

Did some "sports" shooting tonight while my friends were playing football. Had to flip to black and white because shots at ISO 800 are otherwise unusable from my camera. Had some good ones though.


----------



## olli3

Cool pictures laboitenoire, I really like the first one.

Heres a couple of pictures I took on the 7th







I think they came out alright for a first go at fireworks!


----------



## Danylu

The swirls are surreal! (Similar comment on Flickr)

I am hoping to take similar firework photos in the near future.


----------



## Mootsfox

Fedex just delivered this


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Fedex just delivered this











Nice, I'll add it to your gear list. I really want a prime in that range myself. If I get enough from my tax return next year, I'm getting the 35L for sure.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Nice, I'll add it to your gear list. I really want a prime in that range myself. If I get enough from my tax return next year, I'm getting the 35L for sure.

Nah, by then you'll go FX...


----------



## Mootsfox

I tried it on the film body and I see no vignetting. Probably has soft edges, but that's not a huge issue for most pictures.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


I tried it on the film body and I see no vignetting. Probably has soft edges, but that's not a huge issue for most pictures.


With the 30mm? It definitely vignettes on 35mm. There have been pics taken with the 30mm on full-frame cameras, such as the 5D.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/-spam-/2677950531/


----------



## Bigevil89

Just got my first roll of film taken with the N2000 developed. came out alright














































Hey GoneTomorrow, can you add my film gear , Im using a Nikon N2000 with a nikkor 50mm f/1.8


----------



## olli3

Nikon N2000 :O Awesome!







Nice pictures


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


With the 30mm? It definitely vignettes on 35mm. There have been pics taken with the 30mm on full-frame cameras, such as the 5D.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/-spam-/2677950531/


Want me to take some pics with my F100? No vignetting in the viewfinder, and it's supposed to be 96% coverage.

It's possible that the Nikon and Canon versions are slightly different.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


Nah, by then you'll go FX...


Haha, I don't think so! I'm firmly entrenched in crop sensor territory I'm afraid, having bought a 7D and owning 2 EF-S lenses.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Want me to take some pics with my F100? No vignetting in the viewfinder, and it's supposed to be 96% coverage.

It's possible that the Nikon and Canon versions are slightly different.

No, the versions are the same optically. They just have different mounts.

Trust me on this Moots, it will vignette. If you want you can go ahead and take pics with it on your F100.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/sharpshutter/3251132512/

Quote:

and in 8x10 / 4:5 crop mode the results on the D3 are nice.
*hint* *hint*

EDIT:

I'm actually going to quote the person I absolutely despise.

http://kenrockwell.com/sigma/30mm-f14.htm

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Moronic "Photographer"*
The Sigma 30mm f/1.4 is not a wide-angle and it doesn't work on film, FX or full-frame cameras. I tried it, and the corners go black on full-frame.

EDIT 2:

More proof:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/youngrobv/2917526613/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/calanan/3128748517/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/calanan/3129578224/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/calanan/3207008308/


----------



## Mootsfox

Well technically it's for crops only, and that's why Ken says that. He reviews lenses he doesn't even have in person, so anything past general specs from him I can't trust.

I'll shoot some tomorrow and find out monday when I process the film. That D700 is crazy, I didn't see that when I tried it out earlier today.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Well technically it's for crops only, and that's why Ken says that. *He reviews lenses he doesn't even have in person*, so anything past general specs from him I can't trust.

I'll shoot some tomorrow and find out monday when I process the film. That D700 is crazy, I didn't see that when I tried it out earlier today.


Thats the thing that killed him as a source. I don't mind his opinions but the fact that he gives opinions on products and calls them reviews is just not cool.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Finally got myself a Crumpler bag, a 7MDH to be exact. Always wanted one to go with my Lowepro Slingshot, but have been too cheap to get one. Pricey, but well worth the money. They only had red and purple at my shop, so I went with red:


----------



## nuclearjock

D3 85mm f/1.4 @ f/1.4
1.









2.


----------



## equetefue

Congrats on the bag...it's great. I've had it for like 2years to complement my Lowepro Trekker. Mine is olive color.

Guys, sorry I've been gone for a long time. Work really keeping me away, but more promotions coming so is all good.


----------



## laboitenoire

Nuke, I'm surprised you still have leaves on the trees. Almost everything dropped in Cleveland a few weeks ago


----------



## Marin

Can't figure out how to letterbox my photos... ugg...


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Nuke, I'm surprised you still have leaves on the trees. Almost everything dropped in Cleveland a few weeks ago










Almost everything here too. Don't know what kind of trees/bushes these are, but they're the last.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *equetefue*


Congrats on the bag...it's great. I've had it for like 2years to complement my Lowepro Trekker. Mine is olive color.

Guys, sorry I've been gone for a long time. Work really keeping me away, but more promotions coming so is all good.


I understand totally, esp. in my line of work! Post some shots eq!


----------



## Marin

Some test shows with the Voigtlander Nokton 50mm f/1.1. Lens gets sent back tomorrow


----------



## equetefue

that's some shallow DOF for sure... nice Marin.


----------



## laboitenoire

I was about to discuss camera sightings in today's game, but now I'm just too sad to even think about it...


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


I was about to discuss camera sightings in today's game, but now I'm just too sad to even think about it...


Do share. I shot an awards ceremony with 18-55 and SB-600... would like that 70-200 soon xD


----------



## Marin

I think Flickr Explore hates me, even photos that rack up tons of comments and favorites don't get noticed. Even though Explore is a terrible way to judge how good a photo is since it's just an algorithm; it would be nice to get explored.


----------



## Mootsfox

Marin, do you have a pro account?


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Marin, do you have a pro account?


Yeah. Had it for a year so far.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

50mm f/1.4 wide open:


----------



## Mootsfox

That's quite shadow sir.

I was bored, and was picking up lighting equipment at Wal-mart anyways... so I built my very own Gary Fong.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


That's quite shadow sir.

I was bored, and was picking up lighting equipment at Wal-mart anyways... so I built my very own Gary Fong.


After using Sto-Fen and G.Fong products, I'm convinced that a Ziploc container works just as well!


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


After using Sto-Fen and G.Fong products, I'm convinced that a Ziploc container works just as well!


Yeah, it _does_ work. It's just not worth $160

~$1 seems like a good price to me


----------



## Marin

http://www.facebook.com/video/video.php?v=205582939847

http://www.facebook.com/video/video.php?v=205581469847

http://www.facebook.com/video/video.php?v=205589104847


----------



## Quantum Man

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
http://www.facebook.com/video/video.php?v=205582939847

http://www.facebook.com/video/video.php?v=205581469847

http://www.facebook.com/video/video.php?v=205589104847

Go go go 5DII!









The 7D wasn't as crisp and the D300s was way too cold on the white balance.


----------



## laboitenoire

While the 5D definitely looked the best of the bunch, I think I preferred the D300S over the 7D. Sure, the white balance was off, but the video seemed much smoother than the 7D, and you can always correct white balance during post production.

EDIT: And they should have thrown the D3S into the comparison. It'd be interesting to see how one full-frame compares to another.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *laboitenoire* 
While the 5D definitely looked the best of the bunch, I think I preferred the D300S over the 7D. Sure, the white balance was off, but the video seemed much smoother than the 7D, and you can always correct white balance during post production.

EDIT: And they should have thrown the D3S into the comparison. It'd be interesting to see how one full-frame compares to another.

The D3s can only be pre-ordered right now. And the D300s looks the worst to me. It has extremely noticeable rolling shutter even though it's on a tripod, which is unacceptable for shooting video with.


----------



## Mootsfox

Where do you the rolling shutter problem in those movies?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Where do you the rolling shutter problem in those movies?


I can see it too, though it's barely noticeable. In the Asian Male video when he operates that clapper, the two halves bend as they move.

The 5DII looked best to my eyes, then the 7D, then the D300s. All are pretty damn good looking though, makes me want to explore the 7D's video capability more, if I weren't a crappy videographer.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


I can see it too, though it's barely noticeable. In the Asian Male video when he operates that clapper, the two halves bend as they move.


If you mean what I think you mean, I'm seeing the same phenomenon with the 7D.

EDIT: Maybe it has something to do with the fact that the 5D is shooting at 30 fps vs 24 for the D300S?


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Quantum Man*


Go go go 5DII!









The 7D wasn't as crisp and the D300s was way too cold on the white balance.


Kinda hard to know if the white balance was off without actually being in the room when they shot it... and that is one thing you can easily fix.

But the 5DII looks so much clearer than the D300, especially in the last video.


----------



## Quantum Man

I'm thinking that the lighting conditions between videos was exactly the same, they only changed cameras in between shots to compare them. Regardless it's one extra fix you would have to do in post production, I think Canon does a better job with Auto WB than Nikon anyhow. And yes I've used both brands.


----------



## Marin

Why hello there...


----------



## Ryan747

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Why hello there...




beautiful camera and shot. I need to start collecting old cameras, right now i only have 2.


----------



## Mootsfox

It's not old, and that lens is like $1,000+.


----------



## computeruler

what is it?


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:


Originally Posted by *computeruler* 
what is it?

camera looks to be a Hasselblad 201f and lens a Zeiss Planar 80mm f2.8

cant wait to see some pics marin


----------



## Marin

Developed a roll yesterday.

Anyways, think I'm going to sell off my 70-200mm F/4L IS. So far it has just sat in the bag most of the time.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Developed a roll yesterday.

Anyways, think I'm going to sell off my 70-200mm F/4L IS. So far it has just sat in the bag most of the time.


Not mine! I use it quite a bit. Should be an easy sell though.


----------



## Boris4ka

Here are two recent pics I took with my a100, which I'm still learning to use. Both are at full manual settings. The first photo is untouched, the second I shot in RAW and enhanced color and contrast just a dash. The horizon isn't level because of the location I had to use my 4 inch tripod. Thoughts, tips?


----------



## Danylu

Hey guys quick question, I was reading up about scuba diving cases for DSLRs yesterday and the posters in that forum said something about salt water killing your DSLR if it comes into contact, I have camera armor (courtesy of Moots) on the camera but was just curious as to whether or not salt water is that deadly to a camera. I'm simply going fishing tomorrow but would like to know nevertheless.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Hey guys quick question, I was reading up about scuba diving cases for DSLRs yesterday and the posters in that forum said something about salt water killing your DSLR if it comes into contact, I have camera armor (courtesy of Moots) on the camera but was just curious as to whether or not salt water is that deadly to a camera. I'm simply going fishing tomorrow but would like to know nevertheless.


Salt water is conductive (moreso than tap or fresh water) and can deposit salt and other crap when it dries. Initial contact is probably going to be about as bad as water, but salt water might be worst over time.

That would be my best guess.


----------



## olli3

yeah salt can corrode metals I think, and is conductive, so if any got inside the camera that would be bad news. If some got splashed onto it though, id imagine it would be fine, as long as it doesn't get into anywhere. With camera armour the risk is pretty low.


----------



## Marin

Also, water in general is bad news for lenses unless it's weathersealed (This is good for rain and such. Pointless if you drop your camera into water). Now add salt to the mix and it's absolute hell for it.


----------



## tK FuRY

Those words and camera combined makes me just cringe.


----------



## Marin

=D


----------



## BubblesMuhaha

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


=D


*Doesn't know what I'm looking at*

I wanna join this club! Just got a Kodak EasyShare C875 for $30 on ebay. I'm noob to photography, so don't laugh too hard









Equipment List: Kodak P&S, mini-tripod thingy, quickly diminishing 6-pack of Rayovac Alkalines.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *BubblesMuhaha*


*Doesn't know what I'm looking at*

I wanna join this club! Just got a Kodak EasyShare C875 for $30 on ebay. I'm noob to photography, so don't laugh too hard









Equipment List: Kodak P&S, mini-tripod thingy, quickly diminishing 6-pack of Rayovac Alkalines.


That's a film back for Hasselblad film SLR. Welcome to the club!

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


=D


I have to ask: do you somehow own this camera? I bet there's a digital back for this model!


----------



## Marin

Yeah, I got it a few days ago. Hasselblads are cheap on the used market.


----------



## nuclearjock

Sold to[PWN]Schubie.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Yeah, I got it a few days ago. Hasselblads are cheap on the used market.

But surely the lens wasn't cheap?


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
But surely the lens wasn't cheap?

Lens was cheap too. Check out the used prices on Keh, Adorama and B&H. You'll be surprised.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


It's here. PM me if you want it. It's a beautiful lens.


Gah, I have been wracking my brain around this for the last hour!


----------



## BubblesMuhaha

Quote:


Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie* 
Gah, I have been wracking my brain around this for the last hour!

You just had to have it, eh?









*lurks moar*


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:


Originally Posted by *BubblesMuhaha* 
You just had to have it, eh?









*lurks moar*

we shall see how it plays out









I really do want it and have wanted that lens for a long time and its such a great deal. But its still very epensive for a college student to justify









on that note, if I do get it, what would your suggestions be to fill the gap?
ill have my 11-16mm, the 18-200mm will likely go to my sister (maybe to help fund the 70-200) and then the 70-200mm.
Was thinking just a nice prime like the nikon 35mm f/1.8 would be a nice lens to bridge the gap.


----------



## BubblesMuhaha

Quote:


Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie* 
we shall see how it plays out









I really do want it and have wanted that lens for a long time and its such a great deal. But its still very epensive for a college student to justify









on that note, if I do get it, what would your suggestions be to fill the gap?
ill have my 11-16mm, the 18-200mm will likely go to my sister (maybe to help fund the 70-200) and then the 70-200mm.
Was thinking just a nice prime like the nikon 35mm f/1.8 would be a nice lens to bridge the gap.

Oh, I don't know anything at all about optics. Just felt like striking something up.


----------



## Boris4ka

Please critique my shots. It was dusk and I only have the stock flash. I know if I go earlier in the day I can use a faster shutter speed, but I rarely have time. Taken with a Sony a100. And here's the flickr set if you want more shot details: http://www.flickr.com/photos/boris4k...7622741104499/
































































And here's a pic of me that my friend took with my camera:


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie*


we shall see how it plays out









I really do want it and have wanted that lens for a long time and its such a great deal. But its still very epensive for a college student to justify









on that note, if I do get it, what would your suggestions be to fill the gap?
ill have my 11-16mm, the 18-200mm will likely go to my sister (maybe to help fund the 70-200) and then the 70-200mm.
Was thinking just a nice prime like the nikon 35mm f/1.8 would be a nice lens to bridge the gap.


The 50mm f/1.8 AF-D is cheap ($130 BNIB) and excellent.

1:1 of the 50mm f/1.8 at 1.8 on the D1H and D300s, both at 800 ISO, no lighting changed.

D1H









D300s (cropped at 1:1 and resized to match FoV of D1H)


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie*


we shall see how it plays out









I really do want it and have wanted that lens for a long time and its such a great deal. But its still very epensive for a college student to justify









on that note, if I do get it, what would your suggestions be to fill the gap?
ill have my 11-16mm, the 18-200mm will likely go to my sister (maybe to help fund the 70-200) and then the 70-200mm.
Was thinking just a nice prime like the nikon 35mm f/1.8 would be a nice lens to bridge the gap.


Congrats on the purchase. When you get glass that good for the first time, you'll never get lesser glass again! I think a prime is an excellent idea for an in-between lens. That's my setup actually: 10-22, 50mm f/1.4, 60mm f/2.8, and a 70-200. Works quite well for me, although I think I'm going to add the 17-55 f/2.8 (or possible the 24-70 f/2.8) to the lineup. I would suggest something similar for you, but good quality mid-range zoom lenses with constant apertures are expensive for any brand. I imagine a prime fits your budget better after dropping so much on the 70-200, so it would be a good choice. I love the 50mm focal length, but often I wish I had a wider prime (such as 35mm), so it's something to consider.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Boris4ka*


Please critique my shots. It was dusk and I only have the stock flash. I know if I go earlier in the day I can use a faster shutter speed, but I rarely have time. Taken with a Sony a100. And here's the flickr set if you want more shot details: http://www.flickr.com/photos/boris4k...7622741104499/


The shots look good. And for panning, a fast shutter speed isn't always necessary. If you use slower shutter speeds in the 1/30 - 1/100 range when panning, it gives that sense of swiftness by blurring the background and partially the subject, a different effect altogether than freezing the action.


----------



## Boris4ka

That is true, but it's hard to accomplish with the rider going 20+ mph. As you can see in some of the shots, both rider and background get blurred. Practice, I guess?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Boris4ka*


That is true, but it's hard to accomplish with the rider going 20+ mph. As you can see in some of the shots, both rider and background get blurred. Practice, I guess?










Practice yes, but a quick AF system in the camera helps, as well as a fast-focusing lens. The A100 should manage, but may still pose some difficulty. Another way to get a good pan is pre-focus the shot manually based on distance to the subject (look at the focus distances on the lens barrel).


----------



## Mootsfox

Panning is tricky, and pray and spray can come in handy while trying to get that shot.

You did pretty well with the flash pictures though, I think the third picture is a good shot. And anyone who has a Fox 40 is probably pretty cool


----------



## Marin

Attempted a scan at home, as you can see it looks like absolute crap. (I enlarged the negative at school today. The print completely blows this scan out of the water.)

The prices on the Canon 8800F are quite nice... hmm...



Anyways, I should have my color photos back tomorrow with properly done scans.


----------



## Mootsfox

"Quite nice" It's still like $170.

But yeah, it looks like a good choice except that it can only scan one strip of negatives, and the top light is not big enough for anything above 35mm.

I had the G4050, and it's horrid. No drivers for Vista or 7 and it's slow, like 5 hours to scan 20 negatives slow.


----------



## Marin

The results I've seen so far look nice.

http://www.flickr.com/search/?ss=1&w...n+8800f&m=text

http://www.flickr.com/photos/zgodzin...57610038562397


----------



## laboitenoire

Went to the Cleveland Art Museum today with my seminar class, and we got a chance to just walk around the galleries for an hour or so. It was cool, because in their new wing they have a gallery just dedicated to old daguerreotypes. I was reading how they basically just washed plain or waxed paper in common table salt solutions and silver nitrate and exposed that for the negative, and then washed another sheet and then shone light on it through the negative to get the final positive image. Considering how crude of a process it seemed to be, many of the prints they had on display were amazing. Not too much in the way of depth of field evident, but they were pretty damn sharp. I was impressed.


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Went to the Cleveland Art Museum today with my seminar class, and we got a chance to just walk around the galleries for an hour or so. It was cool, because in their new wing they have a gallery just dedicated to old daguerreotypes. I was reading how they basically just washed plain or waxed paper in common table salt solutions and silver nitrate and exposed that for the negative, and then washed another sheet and then shone light on it through the negative to get the final positive image. Considering how crude of a process it seemed to be, many of the prints they had on display were amazing. Not too much in the way of depth of field evident, but they were pretty damn sharp. I was impressed.


Yeah, we're definitely spoiled with film and especially with digital.


----------



## Boris4ka

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Practice yes, but a quick AF system in the camera helps, as well as a fast-focusing lens. The A100 should manage, but may still pose some difficulty. Another way to get a good pan is pre-focus the shot manually based on distance to the subject (look at the focus distances on the lens barrel).

All of those shots were pre-focused. I used AF to focus on the take-off ramp or landing, then turned AF off, then made tiny manual adjustments.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Panning is tricky, and pray and spray can come in handy while trying to get that shot.

You did pretty well with the flash pictures though, I think the third picture is a good shot. And anyone who has a Fox 40 is probably pretty cool









Pray and spray was much easier than flash, yes (can't spray with flash - can you with better cameras or flashes?).


----------



## computeruler

Whats metering?


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:


Originally Posted by *computeruler* 
Whats metering?

its what determines the exposure,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metering_mode


----------



## computeruler

ahh thanks that explains it


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

My bank account will never be the same









on the upside, thanks nuke, cant wait to get it, I'll be coming home from class each day and running to see if I got a package


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Boris4ka*


All of those shots were pre-focused. I used AF to focus on the take-off ramp or landing, then turned AF off, then made tiny manual adjustments.

Pray and spray was much easier than flash, yes (can't spray with flash - can you with better cameras or flashes?).


I avoid using my flash. I feel it changes the scene in a negative way, I really like working with ambient/available light since it usually captures the mood better. For portrait stuff I'll use a flash because the point is to make the person/thing look good.

I can take good shots in low light with a little added noise. Better cameras than mine do an even better job.


----------



## Marin

I just got the film back. The Portra totally owns in medium format, it looks like the issues I had with it before were because of the Voigtlander Nokton 50mm f/1.1. The Velvia also looks awesome.


----------



## computeruler

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Sparhawk* 
I avoid using my flash. I feel it changes the scene in a negative way, I really like working with ambient/available light since it usually captures the mood better. For portrait stuff I'll use a flash because the point is to make the person/thing look good.

I can take good shots in low light with a little added noise. Better cameras than mine do an even better job.

So im not the only one who doesnt like to use the flash all that much?


----------



## tK FuRY

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Sparhawk* 
I avoid using my flash. I feel it changes the scene in a negative way, I really like working with ambient/available light since it usually captures the mood better. For portrait stuff I'll use a flash because the point is to make the person/thing look good.

I can take good shots in low light with a little added noise. Better cameras than mine do an even better job.


Quote:


Originally Posted by *computeruler* 
So im not the only one who doesnt like to use the flash all that much?


I rarely use ON CAMERA flash, it doesn't add depth to the image at all. It makes the image flat and doesn't really appeal to me. But if it's the only way I can get the shot, I use ON Camera flash.

The money is on OFF Camera flash, even with a simple hotshoe cable and holding the flash in your hand is better than on camera


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Bouncing with a speedlight is the way to go. Direct flash is useless unless used at its weakest FEC or heavily diffused.


----------



## FilluX

What do you guys think of my first panorama?


















Don't know why the quality got so bad :/


----------



## Bigevil89

what program did you use? i know the canon panorama sticher degrades the quality


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

I use autostitch for any panorama I do, it probably doesnt compare to photoshop but its fast and its free


----------



## FilluX

I used photoshop - the quality was perfect before i upped it to tinypic :/


----------



## Danylu

Is there anything I can do whilst shooting concerts in lighting that requires _1/30 @ f/3.5, ISO 3200_ without resorting to a flash? Any tricks of the trade that I might be able to put to use here? If I used my 35mm 1.8 I could get 1/60 but I'm hoping one of you geniuses will have an idea


----------



## Quantum Man

What's the goal, a higher shutter speed?


----------



## Marin

I just got the EF-S focusing screen, it is amazing! I'm basically manual focusing my Sigma 30mm f/1.4 now and finding all my shots to be hitting focus.


----------



## grishkathefool

I inherited my dad's K10







. Now I need to find a User's Manual online, lol.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Quantum Man*


What's the goal, a higher shutter speed?


As high a shutter speed and as low a ISO as is possible.

Looking over some of my maths it seems I stuffed it up.

1/30 @ f/3.5 should be 1/120 @ f/1.8


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Is there anything I can do whilst shooting concerts in lighting that requires _1/30 @ f/3.5, ISO 3200_ without resorting to a flash? Any tricks of the trade that I might be able to put to use here? If I used my 35mm 1.8 I could get 1/60 but I'm hoping one of you geniuses will have an idea










I think that that's the best you'll be able to do with your equipment. Low light without flash will always require wide apertures and high ISO sensitivity, it's the nature of the beast. The best you can do is try to find as much support as possible, be it with a tripod, monopod (not always possible at concerts) or improvised support. Even then, to capture the band in action will require a somewhat fast shutter speed (probably no slower than 1/60), so wide aperture and high ISO is the only way you'll get it.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


I just got the EF-S focusing screen, it was amazing! I'm basically manual focusing my Sigma 30mm f/1.4 now and finding all my shots to be hitting focus.


For a while I had planned to get a nice Katz Eye focus screen (either a split-focus screen or high precision matte) for my 40D, but now on the 7D the focus screen isn't interchangeable.


----------



## Marin

Shot using the EF-S screen (MF of course).

Sigma 30mm f/1.4 @ f/1.4.



Haven't taken any serious shots yet since I've been using the Hasselblad 201F.


----------



## iandroo888

*DSLR*
Nikon D5000

Nikkor AF-S DX 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G VR
Nikkor AF 50mm f/1.8D

*Point & Shoot*
Canon Powershot SD550 Digital Elph
Canon PowerShot SD780IS Digital Elph


----------



## laboitenoire

I made the mistake of looking at used bodies on KEH. D100 in excellent condition for $200... so tempting.


----------



## Marin

Enjoy a scanned contact sheet filled with test shots.









Getting the rest of the film developed and scanned this week (no test shots







).


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *laboitenoire* 
I made the mistake of looking at used bodies on KEH. D100 in excellent condition for $200... so tempting.

The Fuji S2 Pro is the same price, it's a D200.

The D1/D1H is also the same price and a better camera imo.


----------



## laboitenoire

Yeah, they also had a D1X for around the same amount. Probably not going to buy, but like I said, it's very tempting.


----------



## nuclearjock

Only time I'll have both in one place at the same time. I like the way the VRII handles. We'll see about its IQ this weekend. The VRI is flying north to [PWN]Schubie.


----------



## Mootsfox

What's the extra ring for?


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


What's the extra ring for?


It's a rubber grip. Pretty fancy, huh? The focus buttons are gone.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

cant wait!


----------



## Quantum Man

Rotate those lens hoods 180 degrees please!


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Quantum Man*


Rotate those lens hoods 180 degrees please!










You want me to paint 'em white while I'm at it??


----------



## [PWN]Schubie




----------



## Quantum Man

If a lens hood is "upside down" on a lens I'm using it just feels wrong lol.


----------



## tK FuRY

Lol


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Quantum Man*


If a lens hood is "upside down" on a lens I'm using it just feels wrong lol.


even though physically there is no difference?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Sparhawk*


even though physically there is no difference?











There is a difference. Lens hoods can be reversed, making them easier to store.


----------



## Quantum Man

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


There is a difference. Lens hoods can be reversed, making them easier to store.


I meant rotated 180 degrees as per nuclearjock's picture.


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Quantum Man*


I meant rotated 180 degrees as per nuclearjock's picture.










You never specified which axis?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Sparhawk* 
You never specified which axis?

LOL, I was thinking the Y-axis I guess.


----------



## mortimersnerd

Lol guys.

I have a computer again so I can browse the photo section. It was a little difficult on my phone.


----------



## laboitenoire

Just updated the firmware on my S700. I wasn't having any of the issues it supposedly fixed (as far as I know), but I did it just to be safe and also so that if I really wanted to I could use SDHC cards on it (haven't tested it yet).

Also, just discovered the sharpness setting in the menu. Didn't even know I had one, so I bumped it up a notch to the highest setting and I must say the improvement is quite nice.


----------



## Mootsfox

Toying with the idea of selling my D60 again.

http://www.overclock.net/appraisals/...60-extras.html


----------



## Boris4ka

Lately I've been thinking about a new lens for my a100. I think my stock lens' f/3.5 max is limiting me. I was thinking about a prime, because the way I use the stock lens now, I never zoom in anyways because then I have to use an even higher f-stop. Plus won't it be cheaper? I need something less than $100, so probably used, preferably around $50 if that's not too crazy. I have no idea what to get.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Boris4ka* 
Lately I've been thinking about a new lens for my a100. I think my stock lens' f/3.5 max is limiting me. I was thinking about a prime, because the way I use the stock lens now, I never zoom in anyways because then I have to use an even higher f-stop. Plus won't it be cheaper? I need something less than $100, so probably used, preferably around $50 if that's not too crazy. I have no idea what to get.

http://www.ebay.com/









This one should fit: http://cgi.ebay.com/Minolta-50-mm-f1...item45ef9741a4

Oh, and check out this database:
http://www.dyxum.com/lenses/index.asp


----------



## Boris4ka

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
http://www.ebay.com/









This one should fit: http://cgi.ebay.com/Minolta-50-mm-f1...item45ef9741a4

Oh, and check out this database:
http://www.dyxum.com/lenses/index.asp

I've been looking at that lens while waiting for a reply here actually. The reviews seem good, but how do you think it will do for action shots (mountain biking)?

And what's the depth of field like on this lens?


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Boris4ka* 
I've been looking at that lens while waiting for a reply here actually. The reviews seem good, but how do you think it will do for action shots (mountain biking)?

And what's the depth of field like on this lens?

Fairly shallow. You shouldn't have any trouble with it doing action shots. AF speed is based more on the body than the lens.


----------



## Boris4ka

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Fairly shallow. You shouldn't have any trouble with it doing action shots. AF speed is based more on the body than the lens.

It's just that all sample pics I see taken with this lens are portraits. Not really worried with AF speed, I don't mind manually focusing. But isn't shallow depth of field bad for action/sports? And to clarify, with that lens I can focus from about a foot away to infinity? And since it's a 50mm, that means it'll be the same in terms of what it sees as my kit lens when set to 50mm? Sorry, I'm still learning


----------



## Marin

It depends on the situation. Usually having a shallow DoF is beneficial for sports since it isolates the subject more (check out nuclearjocks' photos).

And you are correct, the 50mm lens will have about the same FoV as the kit lens at 50mm.


----------



## Mootsfox

What Marin said.

Nuke mostly shoots with a 400mm f/2.8 for sports, and they are amazing pictures really, great portraits in their own right.


----------



## Marin

Oh boy, I get my prints and scans tomorrow. So excited!









Especially looking forward to seeing how the Velvia turns out. (the transparencies looked great when I first saw them, so hoping for the best *crosses fingers*)


----------



## Boris4ka

I guess I'll start looking for a great deal on ebay, thanks for the advice.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
What Marin said.

Nuke mostly shoots with a 400mm f/2.8 for sports, and they are amazing pictures really, great portraits in their own right.

Thanks guys, not only does the main subject "pop" out with a shallow dof, but sometimes the backgrounds are just butt ugly i.e. parking lots, fences, etc. I always try to situate myself with the sun (or lighting) over my shoulder
and looking towards a nice background like trees or the field itself if I can elevate myself. f/2.8 (f/4 max) is definately the way to go for sports. You also get the side benefit of fast ss.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
Thanks guys, not only does the main subject "pop" out with a shallow dof, but sometimes the backgrounds are just butt ugly i.e. parking lots, fences, etc. I always try to situate myself with the sun (or lighting) over my shoulder
and looking towards a nice background like trees or the field itself if I can elevate myself. f/2.8 (f/4 max) is definately the way to go for sports. You also get the side benefit of fast ss.

And unfortunately for us crop sensor owners, f/2.8 is really more like f/4 on your camera.


----------



## Marin

For me f/2.8 is really f/1.6.


----------



## Boris4ka

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
Thanks guys, not only does the main subject "pop" out with a shallow dof, but sometimes the backgrounds are just butt ugly i.e. parking lots, fences, etc. I always try to situate myself with the sun (or lighting) over my shoulder
and looking towards a nice background like trees or the field itself if I can elevate myself. f/2.8 (f/4 max) is definately the way to go for sports. You also get the side benefit of fast ss.

The situation with me though is that I have to take most my sports photos from about 5-10 feet away, because all trails are narrow. Also since it's in the forest, there are shadows everywhere. I took a look through your flickr and those are some great shots. But they're in a different environment. For me, most of the background is pleasant to look at and might actually add to the shot.

But I'm still set on getting that 50mm lens.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


For me f/2.8 is really f/1.6.











Doesn't count till you get a digital back


----------



## Marin

I just got the scans back and heres how I feel about them.










I'm about ready to get an 8800F.

Anyways, here are some shots.

Fujifilm Velvia 100



Fujifilm Velvia 100



Kodak Portra 160VC


----------



## tK FuRY

I am really liking those scans, you should definitely get the 8800F









I miss having film now, I loved the surprise when you finally get the prints/scans and your mind just gets blown.


----------



## laboitenoire

I just had a thought/question:

Why exactly did JPEG become the dominant image format? I mean, it's around the same size as an equivalent PNG file, and I've always thought PNG looked better...


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


I just had a thought/question:

Why exactly did JPEG become the dominant image format? I mean, it's around the same size as an equivalent PNG file, and I've always thought PNG looked better...


.jpg is smaller for anything complex. .png is (much) smaller for a few colors, but larger for complex images with thousands or more colors.

PNG does look better though.


----------



## default501x

png is waaaay bigger for a large image than jpeg, but yeah i totally agree, i hate jpeg and i wish png would just become the dominant image format.


----------



## default501x

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
And unfortunately for us crop sensor owners, f/2.8 is really more like f/4 on your camera.









yeah and sometimes f/4 on a crop just doesn't cut it








oh how i long for a FF body! haha


----------



## sti_boy

Quote:


Originally Posted by *default501x* 
yeah and sometimes f/4 on a crop just doesn't cut it








oh how i long for a FF body! haha

Nothing is without its tradeoffs however. I went from a crop (20D) to a FF (5DII) about a year ago. My fav lens by far is the 50mm f1.4 (just perfect FOV on a FF), *BUT* the extra DOF make shooting at f2 and lower quite a challenge. You really have to nail the focus otherwise the whole thing ends up blurry. Although having said that, this particular lens is actually best at f2 and up so maybe its not so bad. So what was my point again?


----------



## default501x

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sti_boy* 
Nothing is without its tradeoffs however. I went from a crop (20D) to a FF (5DII) about a year ago. My fav lens by far is the 50mm f1.4 (just perfect FOV on a FF), *BUT* the extra DOF make shooting at f2 and lower quite a challenge. You really have to nail the focus otherwise the whole thing ends up blurry. Although having said that, this particular lens is actually best at f2 and up so maybe its not so bad. So what was my point again?

your point was making me jealous of your 5DII haha
I really just want a FF because every time i shoot with my 17-40 it makes me sad that the lowest real focal length i can get is 27mm. its like im not able to use my lens to its full potential..


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sti_boy* 
So what was my point again?

You were switching to Nikon.


----------



## sti_boy

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
You were switching to Nikon.

Hmm, that' funny, I looked outside and I don't see pigs flying about. I guess no Nikon for me then


----------



## doat

Here are some pics i took with my brother's Canon digital rebel XTI black
































My cat Turkish
















































My cat Tyrone

































And of course my rig


----------



## laboitenoire

Those look pretty nice, especially those butterfly pics. What lenses were you using?


----------



## olli3

Butterfly pics are really nice, and some good ones of the cat too! =D Really love the 4th cat one


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sti_boy*


Nothing is without its tradeoffs however. I went from a crop (20D) to a FF (5DII) about a year ago. My fav lens by far is the 50mm f1.4 (just perfect FOV on a FF), *BUT* the extra DOF make shooting at f2 and lower quite a challenge. You really have to nail the focus otherwise the whole thing ends up blurry. Although having said that, this particular lens is actually best at f2 and up so maybe its not so bad. So what was my point again?



Good point, because with crop sensors, despite the small DOF, you at least still get the same light-gathering benefits of wider apertures as with FF sensors. I have the 50mm f/1.4 also, I just wish it sharper at f/1.4! I love it from f/2 and up as well. I think f/2.8 is the sweet spot, sharp across the plane.


----------



## doat

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Those look pretty nice, especially those butterfly pics. What lenses were you using?


I used the lens the camera came with, not much of a photographer but i can take some decent pictures.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *olli3*


Butterfly pics are really nice, and some good ones of the cat too! =D Really love the 4th cat one


Thanks


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sti_boy*


Hmm, that' funny, I looked outside and I don't see pigs flying about. I guess no Nikon for me then










They were there, maybe you were looking through Canon glass


----------



## laboitenoire

Woot! I got my paper back the other day that I wrote about how semiconductors impacted the development of the digital camera. First (and only) person in my class to get a perfect score on a paper for the semester.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Woot! I got my paper back the other day that I wrote about how semiconductors impacted the development of the digital camera. First (and only) person in my class to get a perfect score on a paper for the semester.

































Nice going Lab. Celebrate.
Maybe post the paper!


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 



























































Nice going Lab. Celebrate.
*Maybe post the paper*!

This, as long as you're in a sharing mood.


----------



## laboitenoire

Haha, yeah I don't mind posting it. Just don't go using it


----------



## Mootsfox

Scam y/n?

http://columbus.craigslist.org/pho/1497939818.html


----------



## default501x

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Scam y/n?

http://columbus.craigslist.org/pho/1497939818.html

damn thats a hell of a deal
its hard to scam something like that on craigslist, provided you can actually drive out to take a look at the camera to make sure its legit.
if its legit i would hop on that as fast as possible. even as a lifelong canon user i would still snag that deal if it was near me haha


----------



## laboitenoire

Hard to say. However, looking at the (crappy) picture, it almost looks like the number says D2X?


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Hard to say. However, looking at the (crappy) picture, it almost looks like the number says D2X?


It's a D3X.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Scam y/n?

[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
Damn, I don'...overclock.net/images/smilies/wink.gif[/IMG]).


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Hard to say. However, looking at the (crappy) picture, it almost looks like the number says D2X?


The D2X has removeble caps for the sync and 10-pin on the right side there. The D3, D3x, D3s, D300/s, D700 all have that cap piece that is attached to the camera.

Hmmm, so where do I get $2,500 in cash...


----------



## laboitenoire

Ah, I see.

You never know: it could be a break-up sale.


----------



## Boris4ka

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Woot! *I got my paper back the other day* that I wrote about how semiconductors impacted the development of the digital camera. First (and only) person in my class to get a perfect score on a paper for the semester.



Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Haha, yeah I don't mind posting it. Just don't go using it











Quote:



Originally Posted by *your paper*

*December 11, 2009*

Digitizing the Shutterbug


Lolwut.

Very interesting paper though, I'll read the whole thing when I have time.


----------



## laboitenoire

Oh, I should have explained that I posted a revised version. As part of Case's general requirements, we have to maintain a writing portfolio from our various seminar classes, and in order to graduate everything needs to be revised based off of comments. We also date everything by the due date, and I have until this coming Friday to submit two revised papers from this semester along with a reflection about my writing and revising process for the semester. The only comment on this one was that I put a period before my citation instead of after it. Easy fix.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


The D2X has removeble caps for the sync and 10-pin on the right side there. The D3, D3x, D3s, D300/s, D700 all have that cap piece that is attached to the camera.

Hmmm, so where do I get $2,500 in cash...


Dibs on your D300s and MB-10


----------



## Marin

http://canonfieldreviews.com/7d-1-weather-sealing/

http://www.zeiss.de/C1256A770030BCE0...257681001E93E7


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
http://canonfieldreviews.com/7d-1-weather-sealing/

http://www.zeiss.de/C1256A770030BCE0...257681001E93E7

One of the main reasons I was drawn to the 7D. I go spelunking, boating, and wading with my camera a lot, so I'm glad to see that its weather sealing is as good as the 5DII. Interesting that the author dropped his 1Ds mkIII _twice_ in the ocean and it still worked! I wish he would have gone ahead and submerged his 7D as well so I could know if it could handle it, because I've been wading up to my chest before with the 40D.


----------



## default501x

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
One of the main reasons I was drawn to the 7D. I go spelunking, boating, and wading with my camera a lot, so I'm glad to see that its weather sealing is as good as the 5DII. Interesting that the author dropped his 1Ds mkIII _twice_ in the ocean and it still worked! I wish he would have gone ahead and submerged his 7D as well so I could know if it could handle it, because I've been wading up to my chest before with the 40D.

ive been looking for a new body to replace my xti, as i dont really feel comfortable taking it on the mountain in the snow with me. now my question is, should i spring for the 7d? or should i wait and keep saving up and try to get a 5dii?

This article has really pushed the 7d for me, because i didnt know it had such good weather sealing, i thought that was reserved for the FF bodies.

But i would really like a FF body. however the 7d does outshine the 5dii in a few categories, such as the better AF, and the fact that its $1000 less.

i have a 17-40L and a 70-200L, both are weather sealed and my camera isnt and its driving me nuts, not to mention i really cant get the full performance out of my UWA on a 1.6x crop sensor.

help me! 7d? or save for a 5dii?


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *default501x*


ive been looking for a new body to replace my xti, as i dont really feel comfortable taking it on the mountain in the snow with me. now my question is, should i spring for the 7d? or should i wait and keep saving up and try to get a 5dii?

This article has really pushed the 7d for me, because i didnt know it had such good weather sealing, i thought that was reserved for the FF bodies.

But i would really like a FF body. however the 7d does outshine the 5dii in a few categories, such as the better AF, and the fact that its $1000 less.

i have a 17-40L and a 70-200L, both are weather sealed and my camera isnt and its driving me nuts, not to mention i really cant get the full performance out of my UWA on a 1.6x crop sensor.

help me! 7d? or save for a 5dii?


Im not much of a Canon expert, but I would save the thousand bucks and get the 7D myself, that can go towards new glass or a trip to take pictures.

Also, what mountain are you refering to?
Im trying to get into mountaineering myself, a buddy and I are going to climb south gully on Mt. Washington mid Feb. and then head out to BC for a week or two in the spring.


----------



## default501x

Quote:


Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie* 
Im not much of a Canon expert, but I would save the thousand bucks and get the 7D myself, that can go towards new glass or a trip to take pictures.

Also, what mountain are you refering to?
Im trying to get into mountaineering myself, a buddy and I are going to climb south gully on Mt. Washington mid Feb. and then head out to BC for a week or two in the spring.

i was actually referring to shooting for a friend of mine who is a sponsored snowboarder, so we will be all over at quite a few ski resorts like mt. baker, stevens pass, northstar, and maybe a few others.

But if you are looking to get into mountaineering and want some breathtaking pictures, i always recommend mt. rainier. the view on a clear day is truly unbeatable.

Yeah i am leaning towards the 7d, as i could spend the extra $1000 on some new glass like the new 100mm macro L, but having a FF would completely change my 17-40L, it would be like getting a whole new lens.

hard decision.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *default501x* 
i was actually referring to shooting for a friend of mine who is a sponsored snowboarder, so we will be all over at quite a few ski resorts like mt. baker, stevens pass, northstar, and maybe a few others.

But if you are looking to get into mountaineering and want some breathtaking pictures, i always recommend mt. rainier. the view on a clear day is truly unbeatable.

Yeah i am leaning towards the 7d, as i could spend the extra $1000 on some new glass like the new 100mm macro L, but having a FF would completely change my 17-40L, it would be like getting a whole new lens.

hard decision.

No Whistler?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *default501x* 
ive been looking for a new body to replace my xti, as i dont really feel comfortable taking it on the mountain in the snow with me. now my question is, should i spring for the 7d? or should i wait and keep saving up and try to get a 5dii?

This article has really pushed the 7d for me, because i didnt know it had such good weather sealing, i thought that was reserved for the FF bodies.

But i would really like a FF body. however the 7d does outshine the 5dii in a few categories, such as the better AF, and the fact that its $1000 less.

i have a 17-40L and a 70-200L, both are weather sealed and my camera isnt and its driving me nuts, not to mention i really cant get the full performance out of my UWA on a 1.6x crop sensor.

help me! 7d? or save for a 5dii?

It's a tough call. For me, if money were no object, I would have both a 5D mkII and a 7d. And when I was in the market for an upgrade to my 40D, I could have managed the wherewithal (barely) for a 5DmkII (instead of 7D), but my lens situation dictated otherwise. I have two EF-S lenses which I love (10-22 and 60 macro) and I've had my eye on the EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 for a while. I really didn't feel like selling my EF-S lenses to go FF, because I really see a bright future for the EF-S mount.

Canon is releasing very high quality lenses for that mount and for a lot less than L lenses. With a 5D, you won't ever be able to buy EF-S lenses, and with a FF sensor, the demands of the glass are much higher than on a crop sensor (esp. in corner sharpness). This means that the 5D really needs L quality glass to get the most out it. And with no crop factor, your 70-200 all of a sudden becomes a true 70-200 - no crop factor and hence less reach.

The 5DII is also much slower in terms of burst speed and clearing the buffer, so it will be challenging to shoot sports like the snowboarding you mentioned (the 7D will excel at this). It's AF system is one of its weak points, it's truly a "still" camera in a literal sense, and not much of a sports/birding/etc camera.

The other thing is that the DOF that you have expected with your XTi at various apertures all of sudden will be much narrower on a full frame. This is both a benefit and a drawback.

And yet there is still more, like the fact that the 5DII has no built-in flash, which isn't a biggie in itself, but the 7D not only has one but can wirelessly trigger external speed lights (the 5D will require a separate transmitter).

So basically, you buy the 7D for its plethora of awesome features, and you buy the 5DmkII for the awesomeness of full-frame image quality. But a full frame camera really is meant for someone who can afford to buy expensive glass and accessories.


----------



## default501x

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 

And yet there is still more, like the fact that the 5DII has no built-in flash, which isn't a biggie in itself, *but the 7D not only has one but can wirelessly trigger external speed lights* (the 5D will require a separate transmitter).

Did not know that, and being a huge fan of OCF, that pretty much sold me.

Thank you, this was exactly what i needed to help make up my mind. You are completely right about the lens situation, i dont want to be having to spend close to 1k every time im picking up a new lens.

I think the 7D it is, thanks for the advice

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
No Whistler?









to be completely honest, ive gotten pretty tired of Whistler. I actually go to Sun Peaks now as a replacement for Whistler, but i didnt think to name it as it isnt very well known.
Whistler is just getting too crowded for my taste.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *default501x*


Did not know that, and being a huge fan of OCF, that pretty much sold me.

Thank you, this was exactly what i needed to help make up my mind. You are completely right about the lens situation, i dont want to be having to spend close to 1k every time im picking up a new lens.

I think the 7D it is, thanks for the advice

to be completely honest, ive gotten pretty tired of Whistler. I actually go to Sun Peaks now as a replacement for Whistler, but i didnt think to name it as it isnt very well known.
Whistler is just getting too crowded for my taste.


No problem, I'm loving the hell out of mine. And the wireless flash feature actually works flawlessly, which surprised me. However, I've only done it with one speed light (can do up to three).


----------



## GoneTomorrow

I've seen all sorts of DIY devices to bounce with pop-up flashes, such as business cards, index cards, etc. taped rubber-banded on, then I came across this doodad:

http://www.lightscoop.com/index.html

Anyone heard of it or maybe even tried it? It's limited in how wide it can spread the light cone, but would work for longer focal lengths. If it were half the price, I'd buy one right now so I could turn my pop-up into a second flash for off-camera flash setups.


----------



## laboitenoire

I dunno, the way that mirror is placed looks like it would blind you every time you used the flash...


----------



## default501x

Quote:


Originally Posted by *laboitenoire* 
I dunno, the way that mirror is placed looks like it would blind you every time you used the flash...

haha that is what it looks like, but im sure it just bounces it up.
seems like it would work, but i never EVER use my built in flash so i could never justify spending money on this thing.

although i suppose if it really made a big difference, it could be a nice tool for when you dont feel like pulling your big ol flash out of your bag


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *default501x*


to be completely honest, ive gotten pretty tired of Whistler. I actually go to Sun Peaks now as a replacement for Whistler, but i didnt think to name it as it isnt very well known.
Whistler is just getting too crowded for my taste.


Yeah, it seems very touristy... Figured it should be on the list though, since you're so close to it. I've only been there once, and that was 5-6 years ago for biking, it wasn't too bad then, but ski season is probably worse.

Also, remember that D3X?

I got an email back:

Quote:



I have purchased the camera in Oct 2009, it is new, it is in perfect condition and comes with the original packing and accessories : quick start guide, hi-capacity battery, TV connection cable, USB, neck strap, warranty docs and software CD. Price: $2500 *plus shipping $50*. Other features: Audio recording, DPOF support, LCD live view mode, PictBridge support, USB 2.0 compatibility, color control, cropping an image, depth-of-field preview button, direct print, display brightness control, highlight point display, histogram display, in-camera red-eye fix, mirror lock. With the D3X, the world is your studio.

Regards


I think we can tell it's a scam now


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Yeah, it seems very touristy... Figured it should be on the list though, since you're so close to it. I've only been there once, and that was 5-6 years ago for biking, it wasn't too bad then, but ski season is probably worse.

Also, remember that D3X?

I got an email back:

I think we can tell it's a scam now










I'm missing something I think







Or is it because the price is too low.


----------



## computeruler

Why cant you ask if you can just pick it up in person?


----------



## Mootsfox

I did, waiting on a reply...

Someone buy my D60 so I can buy a 17-55mm f/2.8








http://www.overclock.net/other-techn...60-extras.html


----------



## laboitenoire

Damn, if it weren't for the fact that I pay for my textbooks, I'd consider jumping on your offer Moots.


----------



## Mootsfox

Screw school, think of all the fun you could have with a new DSLR


----------



## Danylu

Nah I don't need a 2nd one


----------



## Mootsfox

You could SLI them.


----------



## NeverGive7

Canon HV30 w/ Rode VideoMic
Sony DSC-W290


----------



## tK FuRY

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
You could SLI them.


I think Tri-SLI would pwn










YouTube- 30fps con Canon EOS-1D Mark III


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *tK FuRY* 
I think Tri-SLI would pwn









YouTube- 30fps con Canon EOS-1D Mark III

Jesus, it sounds like a battery of Gatling guns! And that looks to be about $15k worth of glass. Not to mention the 15k worth of camera. Interesting setup, but is there really that much action to capture?


----------



## laboitenoire

This made me lol:


----------



## Marin

http://vimeo.com/3156959


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


You could SLI them.


That never dawned on me. I'm SLI'ing my D3 and D300 when I'm shooting Soccer!! Apparently different bodies and different lenses don't cause a conflict!

FYI, the new 70-200 VRII is appearing to be more incredible every time I shoot it. Sharpness is insane and if I'm caffeine free, 1/15th is no prob.
There's gonna be alot of used 70-200 VRI's out there at decent prices and if you are in that $ range, I would definately pick one up provided it's in good condition.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


That never dawned on me. I'm SLI'ing my D3 and D300 when I'm shooting Soccer!! *Apparently different bodies and different lenses don't cause a conflict! *

FYI, the new 70-200 VRII is appearing to be more incredible every time I shoot it. Sharpness is insane and if I'm caffeine free, 1/15th is no prob.
There's gonna be alot of used 70-200 VRI's out there at decent prices and if you are in that $ range, I would definately pick one up provided it's in good condition.


That would be Crossfire.


----------



## mortimersnerd

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
I did, waiting on a reply...

Someone buy my D60 so I can buy a 17-55mm f/2.8








http://www.overclock.net/other-techn...60-extras.html

I'm trying to get my father back into photography so he can buy some lenses that we can share.









I will try to be convincing....


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


That never dawned on me. I'm SLI'ing my D3 and D300 when I'm shooting Soccer!! Apparently different bodies and different lenses don't cause a conflict!

FYI, the new 70-200 VRII is appearing to be more incredible every time I shoot it. Sharpness is insane and if I'm caffeine free, 1/15th is no prob.
There's gonna be alot of used 70-200 VRI's out there at decent prices and if you are in that $ range, *I would definately pick one up provided it's in good condition.*


Already did that, even though it wasnt in my price range


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie*


Already did that, even though it wasnt in my price range










Start saving Schub, I'm working on a body for you.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


Start saving Schub, I'm working on a body for you.











don't say that!


----------



## Mootsfox

If it's a D3, give it to foxie.


----------



## Bigevil89

just got a new lense for my N2000 , a quantaray 28-90mmD, yes i know its not the best brand but how could i resist for 15 bucks


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


If it's a D3, give it to foxie.


Did you say give?


----------



## Mootsfox

Yes plz.

Or maybe trade for a bit of cash.

What do you think about the 17-55mm f/2.8?


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Yes plz.

Or maybe trade for a bit of cash.

What do you think about the 17-55mm f/2.8?


Meh....
17mm isn't really that wide on DX. Also, that's an awful lot of cash to spend on a crop lens. It's a pro lens no doubt, but why not just shoot the 18-55 kit lens and crank on the iso a bit.

I'm really not the one to ask about this lens since I have FX and can accomplish the same thing with wa primes for alot less.

It's your dough, if you've dug up a sweet deal then like I said, meh.

As for my D3, my daughter's got dibs when the D4's come out. I'm passing on the D3s.

I clean my sensor manually and I don't give a rat's patuty about video. The iso performance is tasty, but not for $15 - 18k difference.

Edit:
Here's the cafe's thread on this lens if you already haven't seen it.


----------



## Mootsfox

Hmm...

I like the 18-55mm, but it's a bit slow, and messy if you open up past 5.6. Being able to shoot at 2.8 without worrying about my edges or CA creeping in would be nice. Plus the 18-55mm while a good lens in it's own right, feels dinky on my D300 and D1H. I've seen the 17-55 for $800, and if I sell my D60 kit, then I'm looking at $400 out of pocket which I can do right now.

I've got my head around it now. I feel like I'm ready for a good zoom now with my prime collection built up


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Hmm...

I like the 18-55mm, but it's a bit slow, and messy if you open up past 5.6. Being able to shoot at 2.8 without worrying about my edges or CA creeping in would be nice. Plus the 18-55mm while a good lens in it's own right, feels dinky on my D300 and D1H. I've seen the 17-55 for $800, and if I sell my D60 kit, then I'm looking at $400 out of pocket which I can do right now.

I've got my head around it now. I feel like I'm ready for a good zoom now with my prime collection built up










Alot of people complain about carrying around "substantial" lenses. I love it, hence the 400 f/2.8, 24-70 2.8, you get the idea. But go for it Foxie. I'm in the process of getting ready to ditch all my DX lenses. Some are going to my daughter, others will come up for sale soon. I don't own a 17-55 though. $800 is a pretty decent price if the lens is good. If you can, check it out first or get some return agreement just in case.

I know the feeling well. Once it's in your head....
The pics on the cafe' look pretty awesome.
But for that kind of money, it would nice to have something you could use on FX once you get there, something like the 17-35 2.8.
If it's in good shape go for it.


----------



## Mootsfox

I hadn't thought about the 17-35... That might work better since I'm taking another film course next quarter and could use something faster than my 24-120mm which is very meh across the board.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


I hadn't thought about the 17-35... That might work better since I'm taking another film course next quarter and could use something faster than my 24-120mm which is very meh across the board.


Yeh, I'd loose the 24-120. But I had a brain fart and forgot you had a new D300s. I'd say go for the 17-55. If you're in a rough neighborhood, you can use it as self defense. But the 17-55/D300s would be sa_weet.

Edit:
Why do you have an AMD moniker with a 920 in your box?


----------



## Marin

Pfff... zoom lens...

You know you want this:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc..._f_1_4_EX.html


----------



## laboitenoire

Yeah, you can't seem to get enough of the nifty fifty, can you Moots?









My take on it: If you like the focal range and just need the few extra stops, I'd say that's good enough reason to buy it.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Pfff... zoom lens...

You know you want this:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc..._f_1_4_EX.html


1. This is a fine Nikkor zoom lens. Pffft is thusly negated.
2. Yea he could buy 2 or 3 of the siggy's and maybe eventually come up with a decent copy. Front/back focus is a plague with this lens. Nikkor 50mm f/1.4 afs G will do it the first time. Bokeh is almost as good as the siggy.


----------



## Mootsfox

I already feel dirty for owning the 30mm f/1.4 siggy. I don't think I could get another one. What if it rebels against my Nikkors?


----------



## Marin

Then throw the Nikkor lenses out.


----------



## Mootsfox

*gasp*


----------



## Boris4ka

I finally won an ebay auction for a good Maxxum 50mm f1.7. $70. Can't wait to get it. Wish I could afford the types of lenses you guys have.


----------



## Mootsfox

Watching "Body of Lies" and at 1:11:11 they pull out a D2X with a 70-200mm VR (I)


----------



## tK FuRY

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Watching "Body of Lies" and at 1:11:11 they pull out a D2X with a 70-200mm VR (I)











During "The Brothers Bloom" Bang Bang was using a Nikon (Don't recall) and what looked to be a 50mm f/1.4 or 85mm f/1.4. It's been a while since I saw the movie lol.

EDIT: It might have been a 24-70 f/2.8


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *laboitenoire* 
This made me lol:










Does that work lol? If it does I have a good mind to do that with my 18-55mm


----------



## ace8uk

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Yes plz.

Or maybe trade for a bit of cash.

What do you think about the 17-55mm f/2.8?










Moots, I have the 17-55mm f2.8. There's no doubting that it's a nice lens, the image quality is stunning. I kind of wish I had gone for something a bit wider though, and the fact that it only works on cropped sensors is annoying, as I'm planning to get a D700 or D3 next.

You obviously have quite a few 50mm primes, so perhaps going for a wider angle lens would be better for you.

Anyway, to give you an idea, here are a couple of shots I have taken with the 17-55mm:

Taken with the D70









Taken with the D300


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Watching "Body of Lies" and at 1:11:11 they pull out a D2X with a 70-200mm VR (I)











Quote:



Originally Posted by *tK FuRY*


During "The Brothers Bloom" Bang Bang was using a Nikon (Don't recall) and what looked to be a 50mm f/1.4 or 85mm f/1.4. It's been a while since I saw the movie lol.

EDIT: It might have been a 24-70 f/2.8


Yeah, we DSLR owners can ID a DSLR on a movie or TV show in a split second. I notice that CSI Miami prefers Nikon for shooting crime scenes, and on Dexter, he was using a Nikon D700 with a macro twin speed light. The next week he had a Canon! Sometimes he even uses a Pentax with a ring flash of all things. I guess Canon must not try very hard to place their products in movies and TV, because I almost never see them (then again, I don't watch much TV). I guess Nikon whores their product out just like the ubiquitous Apple laptops that are in EVERY movie!


----------



## tK FuRY

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Yeah, we DSLR owners can ID a DSLR on a movie or TV show in a split second. I notice that CSI Miami prefers Nikon for shooting crime scenes, and on Dexter, he was using a Nikon D700 with a macro twin speed light. The next week he had a Canon! Sometimes he even uses a Pentax with a ring flash of all things. I guess Canon must not try very hard to place their products in movies and TV, because I almost never see them (then again, I don't watch much TV). I guess Nikon whores their product out just like the ubiquitous Apple laptops that are in EVERY movie!











Im going to actually watch "The Brothers Bloom" again today and narrow my eye-spy down. I am pretty sure it was a D3/D3x, or maybe a D700/D300 with a grip (nah), and either a 24-70mm or something else in that size and wide looking.

Speaking of Apple laptops in every movie, I was watching one the other day and they were all _typing_ on their Macbooks, but guess what... None of them were on. Out of the 3-4 during that one scene, NONE were on...

Common sense people, there's a glowing Apple on the other side that lights up when it's on


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *tK FuRY*


Im going to actually watch "The Brothers Bloom" again today and narrow my eye-spy down. I am pretty sure it was a D3/D3x, or maybe a D700/D300 with a grip (nah), and either a 24-70mm or something else in that size and wide looking.

Speaking of Apple laptops in every movie, I was watching one the other day and they were all _typing_ on their Macbooks, but guess what... None of them were on. Out of the 3-4 during that one scene, NONE were on...

Common sense people, there's a glowing Apple on the other side that lights up when it's on










Haha, I notice that too! It's funny how you rarely see the screen with OSX visible.

Just found this thread discussing the DSLRs used in Dexter. Apparently in one episode, a child molester is using a Canon







And to make things worse, it's a crappy old 10D (but with a 300L). The producers must be Nikonians.


----------



## tK FuRY

AT least it wasn't a 1D or 5D lol, cause if it was you'd know he was serious about _his_ kids.

http://i280.photobucket.com/albums/k...ter/nikon4.jpg

Lol, I hope he knows there's a lens cap on.

Lol found this quote;

Quote:



On a couple of recent episodes of CSI Miami there has been an evil paparazzi (paparazzo?) in the employ of the Russian mob, who takes pictures from far away to subsequently intimidate victims. *On a recent episode they showed him shooting with a DSLR, logo masked out, and a Big Mother White Lens.* I thought it was curious to mask the logo since the cast on the show use Nikon for their field and forensic photography, and the show never passes up a chance to show the Nikon logo on cameras, macro flashes, etc. But any Canon user (and I would guess most Nikon users) know that a Big Mother White Lens is a Canon. Granted, the shade of white was a little different, and I did not notice a red stripe. But still.


So I guess bad guys use Canon and good guys use Nikon?????


----------



## nuclearjock




----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*















































Rockwell is weird looking enough without a metal mullet.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Gone, do you think you could get a 70-200mm VR added to my gear in the OP?


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie*


Gone, do you think you could get a 70-200mm VR added to my gear in the OP?










As long as you're at GT, make mine a 70-200 VRII if you have the time..


----------



## nuclearjock

Please be a sharp axe...


----------



## laboitenoire

He kinda looks a little bit like Ozzy Osbourne in those pictures...


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
Please be a sharp axe...

...and please make contact with his face. What the hell is this from anyway?


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


...and please make contact with his face. What the hell is this from anyway?


I confess. I looked at his site today. I guess it was kinda worth it.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


I confess. I looked at his site today. I guess it was kinda worth it.


Canon really needs its own Ken. Any volunteers?


----------



## Mootsfox

Watching "We Were Soldiers"

Spotted a Nikon F1 with a 50mm f/1.4 Nikkor-S.

It gets shot, destroyed, and is in perfect condition in the next scene...


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Canon really needs its own Ken. Any volunteers?


I'll do it if I get enough donations *cough* 7D *cough*









Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Watching "We Were Soldiers"

Spotted a Nikon F1 with a 50mm f/1.4 Nikkor-S.

It gets shot, destroyed, and is in perfect condition in the next scene...


lol. I love it when they stuff it up.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Watching "We Were Soldiers"

Spotted a Nikon F1 with a 50mm f/1.4 Nikkor-S.

It gets shot, destroyed, and is in perfect condition in the next scene...



Saw that too. He has at least two bodies around his neck in the beginning and ends up with just the F1 at the end. I think it was one of the earlier bodies that bites the dust.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


I'll do it if I get enough donations *cough* 7D *cough* ;


So you'd defect and go to Canon just to be the Canon Ken Rockwell? Treacherous!


----------



## laboitenoire

Well in that case it wouldn't be so much a defection as a propaganda campaign.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Saw that too. He has at least two bodies around his neck in the beginning and ends up with just the F1 at the end. I think it was one of the earlier bodies that bites the dust.


I counted three, but could only make out the F1 and a silver (I think) rangefinder.

Possible that he had two F1's, but I'm not sure if the director really cared about that sort of continuity.


----------



## laboitenoire

What's the movie where the lead actress is eating french toast one second and the next is eating a waffle?

EDIT: And I think I'll definitely have to wait on buying an SLR with my own money this year. I've already spent nearly $200 on just two of the texts I need for next semester, and the prices were already at least 50% what the college bookstore charges (IE half.com). Although from what I've heard, most of the texts I'll need once I get into my materials science courses are even beyond the $200+ that some of my current books fetch brand new.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Saw that too. He has at least two bodies around his neck in the beginning and ends up with just the F1 at the end. I think it was one of the earlier bodies that bites the dust.

So you'd defect and go to Canon just to be the Canon Ken Rockwell? Treacherous!

Hey it's for the greater good.... Right? Yes some sacrifices will have to be made.







Ken reviews Canon as well IIRC so why can't we all share the one god?


----------



## tK FuRY

I can't remember the movie's name, but it started off with someone shooting Nikon D40 and then at the next scene where they pull it out again, it becomes a Canon. My mind was blown at that point.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Hey it's for the greater good.... Right? Yes some sacrifices will have to be made.







 Ken reviews Canon as well IIRC so why can't we all share the one god?










Only problem then is who's representing Pentax, Sony, Olympus...


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Hey it's for the greater good.... Right? Yes some sacrifices will have to be made.







Ken reviews Canon as well IIRC so why can't we all share the one god?










I don't think so! Nikon alone forever has the taint of Rockwell.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
I don't think so! Nikon alone forever has the taint of Rockwell.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie




----------



## nuclearjock

Ken's a big time Canon guy. I particularly like the navel shot. A rockwell gem. Camo lenscoat the lens, but the wildlife won't see the lens hood. He needs to be stabilized with drugs.


----------



## Captain Skyhawk

Whats up fellas. First time poster here on the photography forum. Just recently bought my first DSLR, a Canon 500D. I have the basic EF-s 18-55mm kit lens and I just had a few questions. I'm having a lot of trouble shooting anything that is moving, it always seems to come out blurry even when using the sports auto mode.

Before I bought this camera I did a lot of reading and research on DSLRs so I'm not a complete noob here. I understand that I probably need some better lenses as well. I have my eye on 2 lenses that I will probably pick up: the EF 50mm f/1.8 and the EF-S 55-250mm f/4.0-5.6 IS. I guess my question would be what techniques or settings (aperture, shutter speed, iso) would you recommend for different shooting settings such as Sports, Macro, landscape.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 










Blasphemer!

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Captain Skyhawk* 
Whats up fellas. First time poster here on the photography forum. Just recently bought my first DSLR, a Canon 500D. I have the basic EF-s 18-55mm kit lens and I just had a few questions. I'm having a lot of trouble shooting anything that is moving, it always seems to come out blurry even when using the sports auto mode.

Before I bought this camera I did a lot of reading and research on DSLRs so I'm not a complete noob here. I understand that I probably need some better lenses as well. I have my eye on 2 lenses that I will probably pick up: the EF 50mm f/1.8 and the EF-S 55-250mm f/4.0-5.6 IS. I guess my question would be what techniques or settings (aperture, shutter speed, iso) would you recommend for different shooting settings such as Sports, Macro, landscape.

Forget the scene modes. For moving subjects, you want to set the AF mode to AI servo, which will continuously focus and refocus as the subject moves. You will also want to set the dial to Tv (shutter priority) and dial the shutter speed to something very fast, like 1/500 (or faster depending on the speed of the subject). This mode will automatically control the aperture to achieve the desired shutter speed. If there isn't much available light, you may need to increase the ISO sensitivity as well.

For landscapes, a narrower aperture is best, f/8 - f/11 or so. This is best done in Av (aperture priority mode).

For macro, you'll need a macro lens first. Non-macro lenses have a minimum focusing distance, usually something like 18 inches (depending on the lens and focal length).

Both the lenses you mention are great "bang-for-buck" lenses and worth having.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Blasphemer!


He quite enjoys the Canon side of life it seems









But on another topic. I got myself one of the rocket air blowers - should I get the carbon brush pen as well?

EDIT: Dammit scams








http://cgi.ebay.com.au/Nikon-D700-12...ht_1504wt_1165


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


EDIT: Dammit scams








http://cgi.ebay.com.au/Nikon-D700-12...ht_1504wt_1165


Annoying, but if there's a market for it...

Yeah, people should never buy anything online that doesn't use paypal or credit(that has been verified legit).


----------



## Mootsfox




----------



## laboitenoire

Sweet.


----------



## nuclearjock

atta boy Foxie.


----------



## Mootsfox

It's heavier than I thought. Tends to be sightly front heavy with my camera and grip. Gonna use it a bit tonight, I'll post some shots later.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
It's heavier than I thought. Tends to be sightly front heavy with my camera and grip. Gonna use it a bit tonight, I'll post some shots later.

Use that monopod I sent you


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Nice moots, I still have to get out shooting with my new lens, stuck in exams


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie* 
Nice moots, I still have to get out shooting with my new lens, stuck in exams









Take some pics of your exams..


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


Take some pics of your exams..


lol....


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
Take some pics of your exams..










I would have to stand a good 5 feet back to get a shot of it, and I dont think me getting up with a camera and walking around the room would go over to well


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


It's heavier than I thought. Tends to be sightly front heavy with my camera and grip. Gonna use it a bit tonight, I'll post some shots later.


Would you say its as heavy as the D300s body only? Or + grip? I've had a 17-35 and might get a 17-55 in the future, so I'm pretty curious.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Would you say its as heavy as the D300s body only? Or + grip? I've had a 17-35 and might get a 17-55 in the future, so I'm pretty curious.


It's 5lbs 10 oz with the grip and a sb-600. Not sure of the other weights, I'll check when I get home.


----------



## Danylu

Was there any reason in particular you wanted the 17-55? Just curious


----------



## Marin




----------



## Mootsfox

Could. Not. Resist.










Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Was there any reason in particular you wanted the 17-55? Just curious










It's considered to be the best standard zoom for DX format camera.

It's weather sealed (which helped in the icy rain tonight).

It replaces the 18-55mm for me, since I sold mine, and this piece is a constant f/2.8.

It's just a really good lens that fits the D300/s very well, and keeps me from needing another zoom until I find a need for a 70-200, or pony up the cash for a nice UWA.


----------



## DaCrusader

Mootsfox is quite the shop artist....

Ken Lolwell.


----------



## HowHardCanItBe

Nikon D90 here Just bought one.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Canon Rebel XTi with Sigma DG 28-70mm f/2.8-4 and Sigma DG 70-300mm f/1.4-5.6

Just got it recently and I love it!

I'm also looking for a good value lens (up to 80mm, with a min of 55mm) to replace my 70mm. Does anyone have any suggestions?


----------



## Marin

What's your budget?


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
What's your budget?

Up to ~$120, I'd prefer less than that but I can live with $120.


----------



## tK FuRY

Lol, just watched the Nikon Girl video again.

So who shoots with Pentax on OCN?


----------



## laboitenoire

According to the first post, it looks like there's a few Pentax and about as many Olympus users.


----------



## computeruler

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/150-...lar-camera.htm
lolz


----------



## tK FuRY

My mind is BLOWN, Apparently KEH.Com is based here in GA! They are currently looking for full time technicians too







, wish me luck in my search for a job lol.

If I do get the job, it means cheap lenses/bodies for muah!


----------



## laboitenoire

Go for it.


----------



## Marin

Hanukkah present on the way.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc..._Aluminum.html

I'm also trying to hunt down a Lee 77mm WA filter adapter ring; no luck so far.


----------



## max302

Thought I'd share some of my latest snaps, fresh out of my new film scanner, a Plustek Opticfilm 7200.

Everything is taken with this gear:









I also did a little writeup on my return to 35mm. Have a read:
http://maximerousseau.com/2009/12/13...pticfilm-7200/

Really liking film. Although I wish I'd quit being a ***** and create occasions get to shoot something other than Velvia 400 and 800...


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Canon Rebel XTi with Sigma DG 28-70mm f/2.8-4 and Sigma DG 70-300mm f/1.4-5.6

Just got it recently and I love it!

I'm also looking for a good value lens (up to 80mm, with a min of 55mm) to replace my 70mm. Does anyone have any suggestions?










For $120, I would say the Canon EF-S 18-55 IS. Sure, it's a kit lens, but leaps and bounds better in terms of image quality than your Sigma and the best you'll get for $120. Otherwise, you could have a Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 mkII for that price, but that's a prime...

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Hanukkah present on the way.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc..._Aluminum.html

I'm also trying to hunt down a Lee 77mm WA filter adapter ring; no luck so far.


Interesting, let us know what you think of it. I'm always looking for a good travel tripod.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *tK FuRY* 
My mind is BLOWN, Apparently KEH.Com is based here in GA! They are currently looking for full time technicians too







, wish me luck in my search for a job lol.

If I do get the job, it means cheap lenses/bodies for moots!

Fixed!

max302, I really like the last shot there, looks good with film.


----------



## Gollie

I'd like to join the club!

Gear:

2x Nikon D700 DSLR

SB 900 Flash

SB 800 Flash

SB 600 Flash

Nikkor 85mm f/1.4D

Nikkor 60mm f/2.8 Micro

Nikkor 50mm f/1.4G

Nikkor 35mm f/2.0

Nikkor 70-200 f/2.8 VRII

Manfroto Monopod

Bogen Tripod

Quantum Turbo SC battery

12x Enelop Batteries

33″ Umbrella

2Ã-2 Easybox

40″ Reflector w/ stand

2 flash/umbrella stands


----------



## max302

Holy mother of Nikon pro gear...


----------



## Boris4ka

I just got my Minolta f1.7 50mm lens in the mail. The aperture doesn't work. f1.7 and f22 produces the exact same image, with all other settings being the same. Am I missing something here? Is there a way to leave the blades at f22 when I take the lens off the camera so I can inspect them?


----------



## laboitenoire

I thought most of the time the lens defaulted to the smallest aperture when it was off-camera. There's also a little lever.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Gollie*


I'd like to join the club!


Nice outfit! Gollie, I can't add you because you're already a member:

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Gollie*


Nikon D40x w/ SB600 Flash 
Stock lens and 50-200VR

Great camera but I have my eye set on the D300. To bad it goes for $1700+










Wow, you got some better gear in a hurry! Updated


----------



## Boris4ka

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


I thought most of the time the lens defaulted to the smallest aperture when it was off-camera. There's also a little lever.


Yes, I found the lever, and there is lots of oil on the blades.







The ebay auction didn't state that there were any problems. I paid $70 for it. Should I return it or fix it myself, and if so, how much $$ should I get back?


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Boris4ka*


Yes, I found the lever, and there is lots of oil on the blades.







The ebay auction didn't state that there were any problems. I paid $70 for it. Should I return it or fix it myself, and if so, how much $$ should I get back?


Return that sucker!


----------



## Boris4ka

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Return that sucker!


I'd rather fix it myself if it's easy, and I've been reading that it is. I'd have to take the iris assembly out, take off the blades, and soak in alcohol and that's it? Wouldn't this be worth it if I get $20-30 back? People who've never done it before say it's a 3-hour-max job.


----------



## Gollie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *gonetomorrow*


nice outfit! Gollie, i can't add you because you're already a member:

Wow, you got some better gear in a hurry! Updated


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Boris4ka*


and soak in alcohol and that's it?


If it's oil, acetone would work better. your hardware store should have some.


----------



## Boris4ka

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


If it's oil, acetone would work better. your hardware store should have some.


Alright, well how much money back should I ask for? What's reasonable for a lens like this considering I paid $70?


----------



## Mootsfox

How much is your time worth?


----------



## Boris4ka

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


How much is your time worth?


To me, too much. But I don't have a job right now or anything, so I have plenty of time. It'd probably be worth the experience if everything goes right. :/ But should I ask for $20 back, or more like $40, or ? I'm guessing a camera store would charge $50-100 for this kind of repair?


----------



## Mootsfox

I'd try $30-35, or offer to send it back for a full refund, including shipping costs.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Had a chortle at this:


----------



## Oscuro

Augh....Nikon FM2 + two lenses...$130...

Soo damned tempted!


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Had a chortle at this:











Hehehe very nice


----------



## bgbop15

uh-oh, are we updating gear again?

Here I go:

Nikon D60
Nikon D90
Olympus E-P1 w/ 17mm f/2.8
Nikon AF-S 17-55mm f/2.8
Nikon AF-S 55-200mm f/4.5-5.6
Nikon AF 85mm f/1.8
Nikon AF 50mm f/1.8
Nikon AF-S 35mm f/1.8
Nikon 55mm f/3.5 AIS Micro + M2 Tube for 1:1

and I just got a DOF adapter with Nikon lens mount for my Canon HF100... pretty psyched about that!


----------



## Mootsfox

^

Gone, I need my D60 taken away, and the following glass added.

Nikkor 50mm f/1.8 AF-D
Nikkor 17-55mm f/2.8 AF-S


----------



## Mootsfox

Double post!

Trying to take a picture with my D1H on the drive home from work.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *bgbop15* 
uh-oh, are we updating gear again?

Here I go:

Nikon D60
Nikon D90
Olympus E-P1 w/ 17mm f/2.8
Nikon AF-S 17-55mm f/2.8
Nikon AF-S 55-200mm f/4.5-5.6
Nikon AF 85mm f/1.8
Nikon AF 50mm f/1.8
Nikon AF-S 35mm f/1.8
Nikon 55mm f/3.5 AIS Micro + M2 Tube for 1:1

and I just got a DOF adapter with Nikon lens mount for my Canon HF100... pretty psyched about that!

How you do like the Pen? I'd really like to have one of these new compact SLRs with a nice pancake lens.


----------



## max302

Guys, I have a dilemma going on here.

D90 or D300s?

I currently take my snaps with my film rig, and to be honest I don't take all that much pictures in the winter, as I mainly shoot when I'm out biking, or for events that generally take place in the summer, festivals, concerts, weddings, whatever.

The D90 was my original choice because I was stepping up from a D40, and I didn't want to go all out. But now I see on the D300s all the features that I really really want, like:
-External mic jack (Cam + Rode Shotgun = !!!!CONCERTGASM!!!!)
-Better noise performance
-Better weather sealing
-MOAR BUTTONS for more things, faster reaction time
-MOAR FRAMES
-Contrast AF on video
-alot of other good stuff

All those features are great, because I get all the features that I want to shoot BMX and action sports and whatnot: make sequences with 8 fps or use it as a secondary video rig for stationary shots to complement my HV30.

HOWEVER, I sold my kit lens from the D40 along with the body, and the only lens I have now is my 35mm F1.8 DX.

Do you think I'm better off buying, in January, a D90 + a lens like the much loved 18-70mm and maybe start a strobist setup, or wait longer and use film in the meanwhile and shoot for the D300s to have a body I'll keep longer?


----------



## Danylu

Generally, buying lenses is more important than buying a new body, but in this case I would go with the D300s and stick with the prime


----------



## Mootsfox

D300s & 17-55mm f/2.8 you'll be good ^_^

And if you're really good you'll be able to do it for $2,000.

I can show you samples that will sway you from the D90 straight to the D300s


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *max302* 
Guys, I have a dilemma going on here.

D90 or D300s?

I currently take my snaps with my film rig, and to be honest I don't take all that much pictures in the winter, as I mainly shoot when I'm out biking, or for events that generally take place in the summer, festivals, concerts, weddings, whatever.

The D90 was my original choice because I was stepping up from a D40, and I didn't want to go all out. But now I see on the D300s all the features that I really really want, like:
-External mic jack (Cam + Rode Shotgun = !!!!CONCERTGASM!!!!)
-Better noise performance
-Better weather sealing
-MOAR BUTTONS for more things, faster reaction time
-MOAR FRAMES
-Contrast AF on video
-alot of other good stuff

All those features are great, because I get all the features that I want to shoot BMX and action sports and whatnot: make sequences with 8 fps or use it as a secondary video rig for stationary shots to complement my HV30.

HOWEVER, I sold my kit lens from the D40 along with the body, and the only lens I have now is my 35mm F1.8 DX.

Do you think I'm better off buying, in January, a D90 + a lens like the much loved 18-70mm and maybe start a strobist setup, or wait longer and use film in the meanwhile and shoot for the D300s to have a body I'll keep longer?

Get the D300s, for all the reasons you mentioned. Lenses will come later, but if you went the other route, a D300s might _not_ necessarily come later. With what I paid for my 7D, I could have gotten a 35L and 17-55 f/2.8 and kept my 40D, but I went for the 7D and am very glad I did. Much like your situation, it was a choice based on the many features and performance of the 7D over my 40D.


----------



## max302

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
D300s & 17-55mm f/2.8 you'll be good ^_^

And if you're really good you'll be able to do it for $2,000.

I can show you samples that will sway you from the D90 straight to the D300s









Please do so kind sir.


----------



## Mootsfox

In the film days the body didn't matter much. The difference between an F5 and N4004 isn't much outside of extra buttons and build quality.

In the digital age, the body plays a much more significant role. Just get the D300s, you'll love it.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote: 
   Originally Posted by *max302*   Please do so kind sir.







  
Thread I made awhile back, most of the images are actually with an XSi. They should all have Exif data with them.

http://www.overclock.net/photography...ow-movies.html

I sent someone a full clip, I thought via PM, I'm trying to find it now.

Here's a short piece from last week's LAN party.

This is without the mic, and it's picking up the people who are downstairs: (Click and go to Youtube to watch in HD)
  
 YouTube- DSC_7912.AVI


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Double post!

Trying to take a picture with my D1H on the drive home from work.











Please say you were paying attention to the road while you took that shot









On a happy note, I'm home! Which means I can borrow my dad's D50 from time to time for the next month or so


----------



## Mootsfox

Yeah, sure. I switched it to cont @ 5FPS and took about 35 shots. That was the best framed one.


----------



## Danylu

Mootsfox enough 50s there for you yet?









Guys, I keep hearing the term 'Arca Swiss' every now and then but I still don't get what's so good about them, someone please care to enlighten me?


----------



## Gollie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *max302*


Guys, I have a dilemma going on here.

D90 or D300s?

I currently take my snaps with my film rig, and to be honest I don't take all that much pictures in the winter, as I mainly shoot when I'm out biking, or for events that generally take place in the summer, festivals, concerts, weddings, whatever.

The D90 was my original choice because I was stepping up from a D40, and I didn't want to go all out. But now I see on the D300s all the features that I really really want, like:
-External mic jack (Cam + Rode Shotgun = !!!!CONCERTGASM!!!!)
-Better noise performance
-Better weather sealing
-MOAR BUTTONS for more things, faster reaction time
-MOAR FRAMES
-Contrast AF on video
-alot of other good stuff

All those features are great, because I get all the features that I want to shoot BMX and action sports and whatnot: make sequences with 8 fps or use it as a secondary video rig for stationary shots to complement my HV30.

HOWEVER, I sold my kit lens from the D40 along with the body, and the only lens I have now is my 35mm F1.8 DX.

Do you think I'm better off buying, in January, a D90 + a lens like the much loved 18-70mm and maybe start a strobist setup, or wait longer and use film in the meanwhile and shoot for the D300s to have a body I'll keep longer?


Get the D300s. After getting into the Pro level bodies, the prosumer bodies feel like toys. The D300s is definitely a body that you can keep for several years. You'll also find huge value in the 51 focus points. I never thought I'd use all of them but I'm constantly framing and moving the focus points to get the shot.

D300s gets my vote!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Mootsfox enough 50s there for you yet?









Guys, I keep hearing the term 'Arca Swiss' every now and then but I still don't get what's so good about them, someone please care to enlighten me?










They make large format film cameras and tripod heads.


----------



## max302

Alright, you guys convinced me. D300s it is!


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Mootsfox enough 50s there for you yet?









Guys, I keep hearing the term 'Arca Swiss' every now and then but I still don't get what's so good about them, someone please care to enlighten me?










No.

I want the 50mm f/1.4 AF-D. If I get that I'll lose the 50 f/2 and 50 f/14 NIKKOR-S.


----------



## Marin

Or get the 50mm f/1.4G and gain weather-sealing.

EDIT: Or the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 (which is superior optically).


----------



## nitteo

Please add a Panasonic Lumix LX3 to me!

Loving it so far, the LX3 is nice to have when lugging a dSLR is not an option.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Or get the 50mm f/1.4G and gain weather-sealing.

EDIT: Or the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 (which is superior optically).

I don't like the manual focus feel of the new primes though.

Show me a review that puts the Sigma ahead of the Nikkor. I can't believe you without proof after using my 30mm siggy.


----------



## Boris4ka

So that lens I bought, I got a $35 refund. Which means it only cost me $35. And it works great (well apart from the blades being stuck), I like it better than my kit lens already. When I have time I'll fix the oily blades, but I very rarely use anything other than max aperture. So please add Minolta Maxxum AF 50mm f/1.7 to my profile


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Boris4ka* 
So that lens I bought, I got a $35 refund. Which means it only cost me $35. And it works great (well apart from the blades being stuck), I like it better than my kit lens already. When I have time I'll fix the oily blades, but I very rarely use anything other than max aperture. So please add Minolta Maxxum AF 50mm f/1.7 to my profile


----------



## FaLLeNAn9eL

Quote:



Originally Posted by *FaLLeNAn9eL*


Can I join? Here's my modest list.

FaLLeNAn9eL - Canon 400D (Rebel XTi)
Canon BG-E3 Battery Grip w/ 2 NLB-2H Batteries
Canon EP-EX15 Eyepiece Extender
Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6
Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II
Canon Wired Remote
Hoya UV Filter
Hoya Multicoat Polarizer


You guys forgot about me.








That makes me sad face.

Anyway, I just added a 24-105mm f/4L to my collection yesterday.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *FaLLeNAn9eL*


You guys forgot about me.








That makes me sad face.

Anyway, I just added a 24-105mm f/4L to my collection yesterday.










Fixed


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


No.

I want the 50mm f/1.4 AF-D. If I get that I'll lose the 50 f/2 and 50 f/14 NIKKOR-S.



Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Or get the 50mm f/1.4G and gain weather-sealing.

EDIT: Or the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 (which is superior optically).


Moots will buy ALL of them


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


I don't like the manual focus feel of the new primes though.

Show me a review that puts the Sigma ahead of the Nikkor. I can't believe you without proof after using my 30mm siggy.


Just checked both out at SLR Gear and Photozone, and they're actually pretty close. Comparable resistance to CA and vignetting. The Sigma has better overall center sharpness, but the Nikon has sharper corners. Couldn't call either one superior really, though I'd put the Sigma 50 over the Sigma 30. I'd have the Sigma 50 instead of my Canon 50 f/1.4 in a minute if it weren't so expensive and I didn't fear the Sigma back/front focus issues.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
No.

I want the 50mm f/1.4 AF-D. If I get that I'll lose the 50 f/2 and 50 f/14 NIKKOR-S.

I love my 50 1.4 AF-D on my D300, just set the micro adjust and at f/1.4 its fricken godly! Who gives a crap about weathersealing, the ass-gasketed lenses arent very good at keeping water out anyways. If you get the micro adjust right (mines at +13) , you will probably sell all of your 50s except that one.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dudemanppl* 
I love my 50 1.4 AF-D on my D300, just set the micro adjust and at f/1.4 its fricken godly! Who gives a crap about weathersealing, the ass-gasketed lenses arent very good at keeping water out anyways. If you get the micro adjust right (mines at +13) , you will probably sell all of your 50s except that one.

I don't think I can live without my AI glass though







It just feels sooooo good.

The 50 f/1.8 I'm not going to trash cause I use it for work in a harsh place where I'd rather not have my D300 and other glass.

I'm not going to buy anymore glass this year though, I've bought like one a month and it's getting a bit crazy


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
I don't think I can live without my AI glass though







It just feels sooooo good.

The 50 f/1.8 I'm not going to trash cause I use it for work in a harsh place where I'd rather not have my D300 and other glass.

I'm not going to buy anymore glass this year though, I've bought like one a month and it's getting a bit *crazy*









Never.

I don't see the 2.8 trinity in your signature yet buddy...


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
Never.

I don't see the 2.8 trinity in your signature yet buddy...









Fixed.

Also removed my D60 and kit lens *sniff*


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Never.

I don't see the 2.8 trinity in your signature yet buddy...










Is that what you guys call it? I call it the 14-400mm f/2.8-4 sometimes VR and sometimes Nano Crystal coated lens.


----------



## Mootsfox

???


----------



## max302

Hahahaha that made no sense at all.


----------



## dudemanppl

I don't like making sense!


----------



## Danylu

???????????????????

I'll link a photo when I get on my comp that demonstrates how serious this is


----------



## Marin

I hope this adapter ring fits...


----------



## max302

More hot film action:





I'm really in love with my film scanner. Great buy, strongly recommended to anyone who still shoots 35mm.


----------



## Dragoon

It has been a while since I posted here. Got some new shots (taken quite some time ago but I only had the opportunity to upload them today)

Visiting Saint George's Castle in Lisbon, it's an awesome place to visit.

It's impressive that the oldest parts of that castle are known to be there since the 6th century, fortified by the Romans, Visigoths and Moors. An interesting piece of arquitecture that "tells many tales" of Lisbon's and Portugal's history.

Please do comment










The castle can be seen on the left.




I think this pidgeon was posing for me....
















What beats a nice cold beer after a whole afternoon walking around in the castle?











Tell me what you guys think.









Oh yeah, I decided to go for an EF-S 10-22mm, the few reviews I managed to find regarding the Siggy 10-20mm f/3.5 doesn't make it look that good.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Dragoon, GREAT set, I checked it all out on your flickr. I'd love to see this place someday. I had a ton of shots from when I visited Caernarfon Castle in Wales (13th c.), but they were lost when my external hard drive bit the dust.







Congrats on the 10-22, it's a fine lens.


----------



## olli3

really nice pics there dragoon


----------



## Dragoon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Dragoon, GREAT set, I checked it all out on your flickr. I'd love to see this place someday. I had a ton of shots from when I visited Caernarfon Castle in Wales (13th c.), but they were lost when my external hard drive bit the dust.







Congrats on the 10-22, it's a fine lens.


Thanks! I'm glad you liked it.







Well... I did shoot like over 500 photos, but I just uploaded a small part.

Oh, I may have made myself unclear, but I still don't have the 10-22, but I will, I should be able to get it around January, just in time for my trip to Prague









Quote:



Originally Posted by *olli3*


really nice pics there dragoon










Thanks olli3


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dragoon*


Thanks! I'm glad you liked it.







Well... I did shoot like over 500 photos, but I just uploaded a small part.

Oh, I may have made myself unclear, but I still don't have the 10-22, but I will, I should be able to get it around January, just in time for my trip to Prague









Thanks olli3



















Nice, I've had my 10-22 for a about a year and I use it constantly. It takes a lot of practice to get decent shots, both while shooting and during post-process though. There's quite a bit of distortion to deal with, being a wide-angle lens.


----------



## Dragoon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Nice, I've had my 10-22 for a about a year and I use it constantly. It takes a lot of practice to get decent shots, both while shooting and during post-process though. There's quite a bit of distortion to deal with, being a wide-angle lens.


Hmmm... How true! Being that wide it tends to cause a barrel distortion.

I don't have the habit to "PP" my photos though, all photos (Except HDR) I upload are straigt JPG from the camera. I know I am not using the camera to it's full extent... But shooting in RAW to decently post process and then publish is a lengthy work.

I think I should make that a habit, at least for some, but each time I go visit a place, I really tend to easily take over 300~400 photos, hence I don't post process...









After I get the two "must have" lenses that I still miss, I will replace the 18-55mm with the 10-22mm and a 24-105mm f/4L. It's amazing on how lovely deals I can find. They sell for around Â£800 BNIB and I can get them at around Â£650 used. So far... buying them used sounds like a great deal, especialy L lenses in which I'm more than happy with my 70-200.


----------



## Marin

I like mine a lot.


----------



## Dragoon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


I like mine a lot.

_/snip_


Those shots look awesome Marin, how expensive are the ND filters anyway? (Mostly because of the brands to use) I'm really thinking in getting those.

Btw, now that I remembered, are there any other kind of filters I should consider? Polarizing, UV.. etc...

*EDIT:* Gone, I just noticed you still didn't add my 70-200 to the list.


----------



## Marin

I rented the screw-in ND filters, but usually the good ones (B+W, Hoya, etc...) are kind of expensive. Recently I bought a Lee 4x4 filter holder and some Hitech resin filters, so I'm going to start using that.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Dragoon* 
Those shots look awesome Marin, how expensive are the ND filters anyway? (Mostly because of the brands to use) I'm really thinking in getting those.

Btw, now that I remembered, are there any other kind of filters I should consider? Polarizing, UV.. etc...

*EDIT:* Gone, I just noticed you still didn't add my 70-200 to the list.









Added the lens. For an ND filter, I use a B+W 77mm #106 1.8 ND filter. It retails for about $100 USD and is worth every penny. I highly recommend a 1.8 ND over a .9 or lower, especially if you want to shoot running water. I used a .9 for a while and it just wasn't dark enough.

I got mine here:
http://maxsaver.net/B-W-77mm-Neutral...ss-Filter.aspx

They ship internationally (based in Hong Kong) and they take a while to get it to you, but they have the best prices on filters.

I shot this with my 10-22 and the B+W 1.8 ND:


----------



## Danylu

Sigh only yesterday I discovered how much more substantial the 18-55 VR is compared to the 18-55 II. The MF ring on the VR version is still meh but its a step up from the II version. I'm annoyed that the MF ring moved during a shoot and I got blurry photos whilst shooting at f8/f11 @ 18mm.

Epic Fail









@Gone nice waterfall shot


----------



## Dragoon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Added the lens. For an ND filter, I use a B+W 77mm #106 1.8 ND filter. It retails for about $100 USD and is worth every penny. I highly recommend a 1.8 ND over a .9 or lower, especially if you want to shoot running water. I used a .9 for a while and it just wasn't dark enough.

I got mine here:
http://maxsaver.net/B-W-77mm-Neutral...ss-Filter.aspx

They ship internationally (based in Hong Kong) and they take a while to get it to you, but they have the best prices on filters.

I shot this with my 10-22 and the B+W 1.8 ND:

/snip


$100!?









Is there a least expensive solution? I understand what you mean... That shot is fantastic.

I know generally going cheap on photography equipment leads in having to buy something else later...

What about .9? It's basically only half as dark right? I understand you still found yourself using narrow apertures using that one..


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dragoon*


$100!?









Is there a least expensive solution? I understand what you mean... That shot is fantastic.

I know generally going cheap on photography equipment leads in having to buy something else later...

What about .9? It's basically only half as dark right? I understand you still found yourself using narrow apertures using that one..


Yes, a .9 will give you three stops darker and a 1.8 six stops. And in that shot, I shot at f/13 to get the needed shutter speed, but if I had used my .9 it would have been more like f/22 and a lot diffraction would come into play making the image softer. That shot was taken in very bright day light.

And I got mine for $77 at MaxSaver (there out of stock it seems).

I think you should start with a cheap .9 and see how you like it. You might find that .9 is enough for your purposes, plus .9 is the most common ND and there are a lot of inexpensive ones. It's something to think about. The good thing about using a 77mm filter is that it's large, which means you can use step-down rings for your other lenses.


----------



## mortimersnerd

Nice photo GT. Did you get your feet wet for that one?

I wish I had the money like I did about a year ago (that I put into computers) and could really invest in photography. Hoping to pick up a 35mm f/1.8 as a Christmas present to myself lol.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mortimersnerd*


Nice photo GT. Did you get your feet wet for that one?

I wish I had the money like I did about a year ago (that I put into computers) and could really invest in photography. Hoping to pick up a 35mm f/1.8 as a Christmas present to myself lol.


Thanks, I sure did. I was up to my waste and the camera was tripod mounted sticking just two feet above the water.

Yeah, I haven't invested in my computer in almost two years. The last thing I ever bought was a new monitor a few months back. All my money has gone to my photo gear lately.


----------



## mortimersnerd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Thanks, I sure did. I was up to my waste and the camera was tripod mounted sticking just two feet above the water.

Yeah, I haven't invested in my computer in almost two years. The last thing I ever bought was a new monitor a few months back. All my money has gone to my photo gear lately.


I haven't added a part to my computer for about 9 months now. It was college and then unexpected medical bills that kinda killed my savings, and will continue to. With how much surgery costs (even with insurance coverage), I could have all I would every want for photography, which really isn't that much lol.


----------



## laboitenoire

Speaking of castles, I need to find the pictures my dad took with my old 2650 when he visited Ireland with his sisters a few years ago. We've got a funny one of him kissing the Blarney Stone at Blarney Castle







Must say your set is quite nice. I intend to have a DSLR before the next time I visit Europe. Looking at slides my dad took while we were living in the south of France, it makes me wish I had had at least my S700 instead of my 2650 last December...

Had some fun with my dad's D50 while we were decorating the tree and the living room today. If I can find where he stored them I might post some of the ones I took.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Dragoon* 
$100!?









Is there a least expensive solution? I understand what you mean... That shot is fantastic.

I know generally going cheap on photography equipment leads in having to buy something else later...

What about .9? It's basically only half as dark right? I understand you still found yourself using narrow apertures using that one..

I bought a 52mm Hoya awhile back (only 52mm ND8 they had :/) for like $18 at my local shop. The B&W's are the top of the line ones, and GT is talking about the 77mm size which tends to make the price jump.

Cokin has a great system that will fit multiple thread sizes and can be scaled to medium format as well. Some also allow the use of multiple filters if you need that effect. The prices are pretty good on them as well, I think the size to fit a 77mm thread was like $40 for the holder and about $20 for a ND8.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
Sigh only yesterday I discovered how much more substantial the 18-55 VR is compared to the 18-55 II. The MF ring on the VR version is still meh but its a step up from the II version. I'm annoyed that the MF ring moved during a shoot and I got blurry photos whilst shooting at f8/f11 @ 18mm.

Epic Fail









@Gone nice waterfall shot









Try out the 17-55mm


----------



## Marin

Cokin filter resins aren't neutral, so not a great choice.


----------



## Mootsfox

What?


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
I bought a 52mm Hoya awhile back (only 52mm ND8 they had :/) for like $18 at my local shop. The B&W's are the top of the line ones, and GT is talking about the 77mm size which tends to make the price jump.

Cokin has a great system that will fit multiple thread sizes and can be scaled to medium format as well. Some also allow the use of multiple filters if you need that effect. The prices are pretty good on them as well, I think the size to fit a 77mm thread was like $40 for the holder and about $20 for a ND8.

Try out the 17-55mm









I don't really want to put that much in a DX lens because I'm hoping in 2 years a Nikon FX cam can cost the same (or less) than a D300 today.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
I don't really want to put that much in a DX lens because I'm hoping in 2 years a Nikon FX cam can cost the same (or less) than a D300 today.









It's usable as a 24-55mm on FX, I tried with my F100.

Either way, you can still sell it for roughly the same cost as you can buy a used copy for, it's not going to devalue in two years


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
It's usable as a 24-55mm on FX, I tried with my F100.

Either way, you can still sell it for roughly the same cost as you can buy a used copy for, it's not going to devalue in two years









Well that is true


----------



## Dragoon

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Yes, a .9 will give you three stops darker and a 1.8 six stops. And in that shot, I shot at f/13 to get the needed shutter speed, but if I had used my .9 it would have been more like f/22 and a lot diffraction would come into play making the image softer. That shot was taken in very bright day light.

And I got mine for $77 at MaxSaver (there out of stock it seems).

I think you should start with a cheap .9 and see how you like it. You might find that .9 is enough for your purposes, plus .9 is the most common ND and there are a lot of inexpensive ones. It's something to think about. The good thing about using a 77mm filter is that it's large, which means you can use step-down rings for your other lenses.









Alright, I'll try using a .9 to see how well it goes. And how true! Having a larger filter will allow me to use it on smaller lenses, either way, I kind of win


















Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
I bought a 52mm Hoya awhile back (only 52mm ND8 they had :/) for like $18 at my local shop. The B&W's are the top of the line ones, and GT is talking about the 77mm size which tends to make the price jump.

I did notice even with Polarizing filters that the even a small difference in the filter size makes the price go up exponentially. Quite ridiculous in some situations really...









Hmmm... I need to find some info on polarizing filters. From some shots I have seen with those used, they get really good! Specially landscape shots. I wonder if those can also be used on a stepdown ring...


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Dragoon* 
Hmmm... I need to find some info on polarizing filters. From some shots I have seen with those used, they get really good! Specially landscape shots. I wonder if those can also be used on a stepdown ring...










I love my polarizer, deepens how blue the sky is and really makes the clouds stand out a lot more, couldnt image not having it.

A show from a ski trip last year


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Dragoon* 
Alright, I'll try using a .9 to see how well it goes. And how true! Having a larger filter will allow me to use it on smaller lenses, either way, I kind of win


















I did notice even with Polarizing filters that the even a small difference in the filter size makes the price go up exponentially. Quite ridiculous in some situations really...









Hmmm... I need to find some info on polarizing filters. From some shots I have seen with those used, they get really good! Specially landscape shots. I wonder if those can also be used on a stepdown ring...


















They can, I use mine with step down rings no problem. If you get a 77mm CPL for your incoming 10-22, it's important that you get a Wide Circular Polarizer, aka Thin CPL, aka Wide Angle CPL, since a regular CPL will vignette. They're fairly expensive (wide or regular), more so than ND filters. I got a ProMaster 77mm Wide CPL for $70, cheapest I could find that was halfway decent.

@schubie: Really nice shot! Is someone who wiped out ahead in the background?


----------



## laboitenoire

God I love being able to use 46mm filters on my Fuji









Love that shot Schubie, although I must agree it looks like that one guy was probably hurtin' the next day (I've taken similar falls when skiing).


----------



## Marin

Using my new Benro Travel Angel.



TTV.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
@schubie: Really nice shot! Is someone who wiped out ahead in the background?

Thanks Gone, and it is indeed









Quote:


Originally Posted by *laboitenoire* 
Love that shot Schubie, although I must agree it looks like that one guy was probably hurtin' the next day (I've taken similar falls when skiing).

Thanks, and I know the hurting feeling, I have taken some nasty wipe outs before, the worst being a really hard landing off a jump and a torn ligament in the bottom of my foot


----------



## Dragoon

Quote:


Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie* 

I love my polarizer, deepens how blue the sky is and really makes the clouds stand out a lot more, couldnt image not having it.

A show from a ski trip last year

/snip

That shot looks great Schubie









I can tell the polarizer does wonders!

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
They can, I use mine with step down rings no problem. If you get a 77mm CPL for your incoming 10-22, it's important that you get a Wide Circular Polarizer, aka Thin CPL, aka Wide Angle CPL, since a regular CPL will vignette. They're fairly expensive (wide or regular), more so than ND filters. I got a ProMaster 77mm Wide CPL for $70, cheapest I could find that was halfway decent.

@schubie: Really nice shot! Is someone who wiped out ahead in the background?


Alright, I will take that into consideration. I can see most of the filters are in the same price range either ND or Polarizer.

Looks I have some saving to do..







Photography IS an expensive hobby, but truly enjoyable

Thanks guys


----------



## Danylu

But I think most of us have stopped upgrading our PCs so I think it's safe to say we like photography more


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
But I think most of us have stopped upgrading our PCs so I think it's safe to say we like photography more









Lol, true.


----------



## Marin

70-200mm f/4L IS, proving zooms can be on par with primes in IQ.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


70-200mm f/4L IS, proving zooms can be on par with primes in IQ.


Right on Marin.

I'll compare my 24-70 f/2.8 and my 70-200 f/2.8 against corresponding primes any day. Good call.

I really want to complete the "trinity" and get the 14-24, but I'm ~ $2k shy of a MK IV and an 800 f/5.6 for small bird season so I'm sticking with the plan.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
Right on Marin.

I'll compare my 24-70 f/2.8 and my 70-200 f/2.8 against corresponding primes any day. Good call.

I really want to complete the "trinity" and get the 14-24, but I'm ~ $2k shy of a MK IV and an 800 f/5.6 for small bird season so I'm sticking with the plan.

Agreed. I feel comfortable shooting with a zoom now that I have a real one.

The 17-55mm is as sharp as my 24mm f/2.8 and sharper than my 50mm f/1.8.


----------



## Marin

Got my filter adapter ring. I had to go with a regular 77mm ring since I'm leaving on Friday but I'm going to order the wide angle version when I get back. Anyways, this focus ring vignettes to 12mm without the filters on and it might vignette to 14mm's with them on. I can't tell though until I take some photos.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Agreed. I feel comfortable shooting with a zoom now that I have a real one.

The 17-55mm is as sharp as my 24mm f/2.8 and sharper than my 50mm f/1.8.


Yeah, the Canon version will be my next lens. I finally got a decent sized CF card for my 7D. I was only getting 150 18MP shots in my 4GB, but I now that I have a 16GB Sandisk Extreme 60mb/s, I can hold 600.


----------



## Mootsfox

HAHA _only_ 60mb/s?

http://www.amazon.com/SanDisk-64GB-E...1604301&sr=1-2

(I'm joking of course, that's a ridiculous speed there GT







)


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
HAHA _only_ 60mb/s?

http://www.amazon.com/SanDisk-64GB-E...1604301&sr=1-2

(I'm joking of course, that's a ridiculous speed there GT







)

So two of those for my D3 would be ~$1300?? What a great deal.


----------



## lokster

Add me up.

LokSTAR

Nikon D3000 10.2MP DSLR
18-55mm AF-S DX VR
55-200mm AF-S DX VR


----------



## Marin




----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
I don't really want to put that much in a DX lens because I'm hoping in 2 years a Nikon FX cam can cost the same (or less) than a D300 today.










Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
HAHA _only_ 60mb/s?

http://www.amazon.com/SanDisk-64GB-E...1604301&sr=1-2

(I'm joking of course, that's a ridiculous speed there GT







)

Who are they kidding with that CF card? Unless it's for a Hasselblad MF DSLR, it's overkill.

I know, a CF card is superfluous for any DSLR past about 30-40 MB/s, but it's nice offloading 16GB to my PC at 60MB/s


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*






Very nice Marin.


----------



## Danylu

What's the square thing on Marin's lens?









@Nuke: You might have mentioned it, but why did you want the Canon 800mm instead of the Nikon equiv?


----------



## Marin

Those are resin filters. I have a GND so I can expose the sky correctly and a ND for longer exposures. I'm going to use it to take pics of the ocean.


----------



## DaCrusader

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


HAHA _only_ 60mb/s?

http://www.amazon.com/SanDisk-64GB-E...1604301&sr=1-2

(I'm joking of course, that's a ridiculous speed there GT







)


I can get those for $427 AUD, legit.

http://www.techbuy.com.au/p/127584/M...P-064G-P91.asp


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
What's the square thing on Marin's lens?









@Nuke: You might have mentioned it, but why did you want the Canon 800mm instead of the Nikon equiv?

Nikon no got an 800. Longest FL is 600mm. Seen some pics taken with the Canon 800 and they're awesome.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


Nikon no got an 800. Longest FL is 600mm. Seen some pics taken with the Canon 800 and they're awesome.


So you're getting the mkIV with that lens? Just reading up on it, and it can apparently take both the Canon 1.4x and 2x extenders, making for some serious reach (2560mm with a 2x extender on an APS-C sensor and 2000 for APS-H , though with a max aperture of f/11).


----------



## Bigevil89

Hey gone can you update my film setup, Im now using a Nikon N6006 with the nikkor 50mm F/1.8 and a Quantaray 28-90mm D F/3.5-5.6


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
Nikon no got an 800. Longest FL is 600mm. Seen some pics taken with the Canon 800 and they're awesome.

Oh for some reason I just assumed they had one... woops.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Oh for some reason I just assumed they had one... woops.


They do have longer glass, just nothing with AF-S or VR.


----------



## Marin

Went out and took a test shot.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


So you're getting the mkIV with that lens? Just reading up on it, and it can apparently take both the Canon 1.4x and 2x extenders, making for some serious reach (2560mm with a 2x extender on an APS-C sensor and 2000 for APS-H , though with a max aperture of f/11).


If order the stuff B4 the end of '09, Calumet will throw in a 1.4 x tc. problem is I'll have to pay Ill sales tax. Don't think that's gonna happen. B&H has been real good to me.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


If order the stuff B4 the end of '09, Calumet will throw in a 1.4 x tc. problem is I'll have to pay Ill sales tax. Don't think that's gonna happen. B&H has been real good to me.


The 1.4x TC would be nice, but I see what you mean, 6% sales tax (or whatever it is in IL) on $18k is something like another $1k! That always has confused me: how can some online retailers not charge sales tax while others do?

On an unrelated note, look what Santa brought me! Didn't have a duck By-Tor, so I hope this digital duck is sufficient:


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


The 1.4x TC would be nice, but I see what you mean, 6% sales tax (or whatever it is in IL) on $18k is something like another $1k! That always has confused me: how can some online retailers not charge sales tax while others do?

On an unrelated note, look what Santa brought me! Didn't have a duck By-Tor, so I hope this digital duck is sufficient:


They only have to collect sales tax on orders done within state.

For example, we don't have to pay California sales tax on any orders we buy from SVC. However, we are supposed to document and report any sales done outside of the state so we can pay taxes on it


----------



## nuclearjock

D3/70-200 VRII/crappy weather
Jpegs out of camera.



















Merry X-mas everyone.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 

On an unrelated note, look what Santa brought me!

Someone's been a very good boy!!! Congrats GT.


----------



## Danylu

You all seem to buy stuff like dominos... I want in!









Today I found out how to set flash compensation on the body, I wonder how many more little discoveries I might make before I find them all xD


----------



## dudemanppl

Uh, Marin, someone stole your picture. He lives in So Cal so I don't the he knows you. Link


----------



## Marin

Link doesn't work.


----------



## dudemanppl

Works for me...


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Works for me...



Quote:



This content is currently unavailable

The page you requested cannot be displayed right now. It may be temporarily unavailable, the link you clicked on may have expired, or you may not have permission to view this page.


Nope.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Not working for me either...


----------



## dudemanppl

There.


----------



## Marin

What a tool.

PM me his profile page.


----------



## dudemanppl

Hmm, I think he goes on here because hes also into computers. His name is in that screenshot. EDIT: Hes not on the first page, but neither am I.

Gear:

Nikon D300 + MB-D10 and Eneloops
Nikon D40
70-200mm f/2.8G AF-S VR
50mm f/1.4 AF-D
18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G AF-S VR
SB-800


----------



## Danylu

What a tool...

Dudemanppl: How do you like the 70-200?


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


What a tool...

Dudemanppl: How do you like the 70-200?


I really can't describe how good it is. It beat my 70-200 f/4 IS at f/3.5 (no its not fair, but f/3.5 is faster than f/4 so I call it a win).

I looked through Mr. Tools pictures and I also saw Marin's Leica M6 picture and something else that I forgot about.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


There.


Wait â€" Nicholas _Poon_? No wonder he's insecure enough to take credit for other people's work.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Hmm, I think he goes on here because hes also into computers. His name is in that screenshot. EDIT: Hes not on the first page, but neither am I.

Gear:

Nikon D300 + MB-D10 and Eneloops
Nikon D40
70-200mm f/2.8G AF-S VR
50mm f/1.4 AF-D
18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G AF-S VR
SB-800


Added


----------



## laboitenoire

That's quite lame of the guy to claim the picture as his own, and then get the specs of the camera wrong by saying it's digital.


----------



## Marin

He's got a day to respond before I get Facebook to remove his photos.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Hmm, I think he goes on here because hes also into computers. His name is in that screenshot. EDIT: Hes not on the first page, but neither am I.

Gear:

Nikon D300 + MB-D10 and Eneloops
Nikon D40
70-200mm f/2.8G AF-S VR
50mm f/1.4 AF-D
18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G AF-S VR
SB-800



What's his username? I've got a surprise for him.


----------



## Marin

Whatever, he'll get what's coming to him.

Anyways, shot from Maui. I'm going to upload the final version once I get back and can use Lightroom.

Enjoy.


----------



## Sparhawk

Never understood why people do this kind of thing.







But I love it when they are caught.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


What's his username? I've got a surprise for him.


Give him the username Marin







!

Nice photo though Marin


----------



## Marin

I only have his Facebook profile.


----------



## laboitenoire

If he has an email, Moots can probably look him up in the user list.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
What's his username? I've got a surprise for him.

I'm not actually sure he goes on here, maybe hes seen Marin's flickr. He wouldn't be on POTN because he shoots Sony.


----------



## Marin

He could be on XS.


----------



## dudemanppl

Wuzzat? I know he has a Lian Li case and a Thermalright GPU cooler.


----------



## Marin

Threads now up on XS.

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...d.php?t=241979


----------



## Danylu

Let the manhunt begin


----------



## dudemanppl

I'll hit him with my battery grip!


----------



## riko99

Jeez Marin I hope you get this solved quick that's just not cool.


----------



## riko99

Got a Quick question for all of you out there... If i sell my D60 i would be looking at 2 options
A: Buy a D90 and be happy with all the extras over the D60 and really not spend that much more in the long run

Or
B:Buy 2 D5000's so both me and my Fiance can shoot together. I know this would be more expensive for lesser Quality cameras.

Either option is a good possibility for me in the next couple months as i would like to do this before i start saving all my pennies for the wedding.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *riko99* 
got a quick question for all of you out there... If i sell my d60 i would be looking at 2 options
a: Buy a d90 and be happy with all the extras over the d60 and really not spend that much more in the long run

or
b:buy 2 d5000's so both me and my fiance can shoot together. I know this would be more expensive for lesser quality cameras.

Either option is a good possibility for me in the next couple months as i would like to do this before i start saving all my pennies for the wedding.

d90.


----------



## riko99

that's the way i've been swaying thanks moots for just giving me that extra reassurance... wont be doing it until April anyways and hey we might just keep the d60 for a kicker body lol.


----------



## FieryCoD

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Hmm, I think he goes on here because hes also into computers. His name is in that screenshot. EDIT: Hes not on the first page, but neither am I.

Gear:

Nikon D300 + MB-D10 and Eneloops
Nikon D40
70-200mm f/2.8G AF-S VR
50mm f/1.4 AF-D
18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G AF-S VR
SB-800



Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


He's got a day to respond before I get Facebook to remove his photos.


I'll go ahead and say it.

What a tool.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *riko99*


B:Buy 2 D5000's so both me and my Fiance can shoot together. I know this would be more expensive for lesser Quality cameras.


You've got to ask yourself how often is this gonna happen. You're sacrificing an awful lot d5000 vs d90. I agree with Foxie, get the d90. Get your sweetie another for a wedding present.
Just my $0.02.


----------



## riko99

Thanks Nuke and this here is why i come to the photography section so much, thinking now with the money i can save i might as well get a speed light as well.


----------



## Danylu

Clever ad.


----------



## max302

Hahahaha that's some great stuff!


----------



## Dragoon

LOL That ad is simply rich!










It made my day.

*EDIT:* I just remembered, I did some research on ND filters, I managed to find something quite intriguing. How come ND3 filters are cheaper than 1.8 at the same size? Hell, these reduce light to the sensor by 10 stops!

I've seen some photos taken with those filters and I can say I was blown away. Some with over 4 minutes of exposure! Here's what I found.


----------



## Marin

I've already shot 6 rolls in Hawaii.


----------



## Danylu

That bokeh looks wierd. Like the semi circle bokeh on the left =|


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dragoon*


LOL That ad is simply rich!










It made my day.

*EDIT:* I just remembered, I did some research on ND filters, I managed to find something quite intriguing. How come ND3 filters are cheaper than 1.8 at the same size? Hell, these reduce light to the sensor by 10 stops!

I've seen some photos taken with those filters and I can say I was blown away. Some with over 4 minutes of exposure! Here's what I found.











I just did a quick search, and from what I can tell, ND 3.0 filters aren't cheaper. Compare ND 3.0 and 1.8 filters from the same manufacturer and the same thread size and you'll see they're about the same. For B+W they're the same price ($91.50). You might be looking at different grades of filters. For example, a Tiffen HT (High Transmission) or B+W F-Pro Gold are much more expensive than their regular filters.


----------



## Marin

Woke up at 5:45 am and walked down to the beach while the sun was just starting to rise. Was able to get in a 30" and 20" exposure (different subjects) so the clouds are blurred and there are no blown-out highlights.

But I had to remove the filter holder every time I focused since barely any light was coming in. I'll have the pics up next week.


----------



## max302

With all this ND filter talk, I'm beginning to consider the purchase of one myself.

What are the advantages of the resin filters versus standard circular screw-in filters? I did a quick research, and all I can see is that they are light, however to me they seem bulkier when you consider the cases, holder, and all the associated gear. They also sound much easier to scratch and aren't at all less expensive than standard filters.

What gives?

I was thinking about just getting a 72mm .9 front whatever brand my local photo store sells, and a stepup ring for each of my lenses. Sounds good?


----------



## Marin

On UWA lenses (and using a UWA ring adapter) you can stack resin filters
and avoid vignetting. When using GND's they can be rotated and moved, where with screw-in filters the horizon has to be on the middle.


----------



## Marin

WOOOOOOOO!!!

Quote:



Hi Sam,

Thank you for bringing this matter to our attention. We have removed or disabled access to the offending third-party or user-generated content you have reported. The second picture in question, however, could not be found. In almost all instances, the best way to help us locate the content you are reporting is to provide us with active web addresses (URLs) leading directly to that material. We look forward to your response.

Note that it is possible that this content has already been removed from the site. If this is the case, you do not need to respond.

Thanks for contacting Facebook,

Kieran
User Operations
Facebook


And dudemanppl, since you have access to his account can you go through it and make sure he doesn't have any other of my photos.


----------



## laboitenoire

Glad to see that they're working to resolve the problem.

Finally had a chance to see the pictures I took with my dad's D50 and his 50mm f/1.8. I'll try to put them up later.


----------



## xlastshotx

This is killin me, I have the money to buy an 85 f1.8 for my Canon 50D, but I cant find any for sale on craigslist


----------



## mortimersnerd

Ordered a Nikon 35mm f/1.8 today to add to my very small collection. And now I wait...


----------



## xlastshotx

I just ordered the Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM, can you please add it to the list


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


WOOOOOOOO!!!

And dudemanppl, since you have access to his account can you go through it and make sure he doesn't have any other of my photos.


Actually I don't have him added, a friend showed me that picture of your Hassy (or whatever it was). Also, am I crazy to consider selling the 70-200 VR for a 35 1.8, 85 1.8, 180 2.8 and a 70-300 VR?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dragoon*


LOL That ad is simply rich!










It made my day.

*EDIT:* I just remembered, I did some research on ND filters, I managed to find something quite intriguing. How come ND3 filters are cheaper than 1.8 at the same size? Hell, these reduce light to the sensor by 10 stops!

I've seen some photos taken with those filters and I can say I was blown away. Some with over 4 minutes of exposure! Here's what I found.












Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Actually I don't have him added, a friend showed me that picture of your Hassy (or whatever it was). Also, am I crazy to consider selling the 70-200 VR for a 35 1.8, 85 1.8, 180 2.8 and a 70-300 VR?


Well, if you find that you just don't have much use for the 70-200, then why not, but to downgrade to the 70-300 just to get a few primes seems unnecessary. I say keep your glass and save for new glass.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Well, if you find that you just don't have much use for the 70-200, then why not, but to downgrade to the 70-300 just to get a few primes seems unnecessary. I say keep your glass and save for new glass.

Well, at first I was going to get just the 180 2.8 and a 85 1.4, but then realized I would never use it at f/1.4 and f/1.8 would do so that was a 600 dollar difference which is enough for a 70-300 VR and a 35 1.8. Right now I only have a 50 and the 70-200 so I need more glass.


----------



## Marin

I have my eye on the 135mm f/2L. Just need to sell my 70-200mm.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


I have my eye on the 135mm f/2L. Just need to sell my 70-200mm.


Not finding a lot of use for the 70-200mm?


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
Not finding a lot of use for the 70-200mm?

Nope.


----------



## Dragoon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


I just did a quick search, and from what I can tell, ND 3.0 filters aren't cheaper. Compare ND 3.0 and 1.8 filters from the same manufacturer and the same thread size and you'll see they're about the same. For B+W they're the same price ($91.50). You might be looking at different grades of filters. For example, a Tiffen HT (High Transmission) or B+W F-Pro Gold are much more expensive than their regular filters.


I must've misread something, I just confirmed thoroughly, and you're right, although not by much but ND 3.0 filters are more expensive than ND 1.8. From what I've seen, only by 5~10€

I'm thinking seriously in getting a ND 3.0 instead of a .9 or 1.8. Those shots were simply stunning.

But before I even think of getting the filter, I need to send my camera to repair, I still need to find the recipt to head on to the store so they send it for RMA. Can't take long exposure shots or I'll get stuck pixels showing on the photos.

I use my 70-200 quite a bit, specially for portrait shots, imho the f/4 and the long range make it quite adequate. Best to take photos when people are not expecting you to, the photos get much more natural







(I prefer to be photographed when I don't know, I hate posing for it







)

Currently "fighting" for a 10-22 used. I'm ahead of the pack and only 6 days to go.


----------



## Danylu

Quick question before the NYE fireworks tonight in a few hours. Will there be enough light from the fireworks for my 18-55mm to AF off?


----------



## Marin

You shouldn't have to auto-focus, you can just set the lens to infinity and shoot away.


----------



## Danylu

Well back from the family fireworks and AF worked. Although I'm finding 4" @ f16 ISO 100 is a bit too bright









@Marin: I tried that a week ago and somehow most of the shots were OOF. Maybe its the dodgy MF ring on my 18-55 xD


----------



## Dragoon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Well back from the family fireworks and AF worked. Although I'm finding 4" @ f16 ISO 100 is a bit too bright









@Marin: I tried that a week ago and somehow most of the shots were OOF. Maybe its the dodgy MF ring on my 18-55 xD


Keep in mind that some lenses (At least one I'm sure is the Siggy 30mm f/1.4) will go past the infinite mark.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
Well back from the family fireworks and AF worked. Although I'm finding 4" @ f16 ISO 100 is a bit too bright









@Marin: I tried that a week ago and somehow most of the shots were OOF. Maybe its the dodgy MF ring on my 18-55 xD

Pull it just before infinity. Like the least amount that you can with it still being noticeable in the ring.


----------



## Mr_Nibbles

Please add me to the list.

Body: Olympus E-510

Lens: Zuiko Digital 40-150mm 1:4-5.6 Lens

Filters: Tiffen 58mm UV and Tiffen 58mm circular polarizer.


----------



## Marin

Shoot, a hot pixel appeared while doing long exposures. At least it's not permanent and it should be really easy to edit out.


----------



## Nhb93

Well after a lot of help in an older thread on here, my dad surprised me with a D5000 for Christmas. I've only got the AF-S 18-55mm 1:3.5-5.6 G lens on it. Add me up.









Just curious on one thing, are there blinders, so to speak, for the eye piece? I'm a competitive shooter, and have been shooting with one all season, so I'm difficult for me to look through the eye piece with the other eye closed.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Shoot, a hot pixel appeared while doing long exposures. At least it's not permanent and it should be really easy to edit out.

You shoulda seen my 1DII.... Like I threw sand on the sensor.


----------



## Deano12345

Got my first SLR yesterday









Sony Alpha (A) 230 with 18-55 SAM lens

Loving it









Added my IFX-14 photo to the group,its probably the best shot I've taken so far


----------



## riko99

Might soon be able to add quite a bit of old Nikkor stuff to my list of in the bag's, Grandpa has an old 35mm Nikon and he said he might be willing to sell it to me so now i just want to find out how much. Good thing is its got a nice range of items with it like filters, wide angle lenses, telephoto's, and i believe he said a flash.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


Originally Posted by *riko99* 
Might soon be able to add quite a bit of old Nikkor stuff to my list of in the bag's, Grandpa has an old 35mm Nikon and he said he might be willing to sell it to me so now i just want to find out how much. Good thing is its got a nice range of items with it like filters, wide angle lenses, telephoto's, and i believe he said a flash.

Tell him its worth nothing now and get it all for free!


----------



## Marin

Add:

- Olympus OM-4 + Olympus Zuiko 50mm f/1.4
- Nikon FA (to be paired with my Nikkor 50mm f/1.2)
(I may get a Nikon F3, still trying to decide between the two)

Two camera bodies released around the same time; they were meant to compete against one another and each offer different advantages in both the body and the entire system.

The Nikon FA introduced matrix metering, which is seen in todays SLR's. The FA meters five portions of the scene and computes an exposure (and it's quite good at it). Another reason why I'm getting it is so I can pair it with my Nikkor 50mm f/1.2.

The Olympus OM-4 instead went with multi-spot metering, which requires the photographer to control the metering more (not a bad thing, some prefer this). The good thing about this metering is the OM-4 allows the photographer to easily correct for shadows or highlights; with a press of a button the camera can correct it +2 EV or -2 1/3 EV (two buttons, Hi Light and Shadow). 
The OM-4 also has an insanely large viewfinder, a trait of all the OM bodies. Most notice this right away when handling these bodies.

(Left is the OM-1's viewfinder, to the right is the typical 35mm camera)









Final reason why I'm getting the OM-4 is because of the OM Zuiko lenses. They're very good, quite compact and inexpensive in comparison to other brands. I love film bodies but prefer to invest the most in my DSLR, so the OM system is the best for getting quality glass without throwing down a ton of dough.


----------



## Dragoon

A new goal for me to complete.

Here's my first out of 365. I decided to begin this project today. I hope I can manage to go through the whole 2010 without missing a single photo.

After all, I will take the most out of this project, I want to improve and to take better photos each day that goes by. I hope I can count the OCN camera club's help too.









Let me know what you think of this one

Last but not least, I want to wish everyone here on the OCN Camera club a *Happy 2010*


----------



## mortimersnerd

I miss my quad core. Processing images with lightroom on my old dual core laptop isn't very speedy.

Took some pictures of some fireworks last night (home made) but the explosions were shaking the camera so most of them didn't turn out. I did get a few good ones though - I'll have post them later.

@Dragoon -
Thats a cool idea, I might try that but it will probably be closer to one every other day. I don't think I could find something interesting to post every day lol.


----------



## Marin

Added more to my post.









Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dragoon*




A new goal for me to complete.

Here's my first out of 365. I decided to begin this project today. I hope I can manage to go through the whole 2010 without missing a single photo.

After all, I will take the most out of this project, I want to improve and to take better photos each day that goes by. I hope I can count the OCN camera club's help too.









Let me know what you think of this one

Last but not least, I want to wish everyone here on the OCN Camera club a *Happy 2010*











Project 365 is fun and helps develop one as a photographer if one pushes them-self as one. (taking a bunch of snapshots won't make you better







)

I tried project 365 but ended up not finishing it since I barely took photos during the week when school started.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Shoot, a hot pixel appeared while doing long exposures. At least it's not permanent and it should be really easy to edit out.


I thought mine did too, but it was lightroom putting a bright green pixel in the image that vanished when zoomed in 1:1









I tried the 365 thing to, and only got to about 25 I think. It is a lot of fun though


----------



## Marin

Lets see if KEH can get back to me before they ship out the body. I'm liking the F3HP more than the FA.


----------



## Mootsfox

F3 series is better.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


F3 series is better.


Definitely. Only advantages the FA has is a higher shutter speed, matrix metering (not that important when something is properly metered in the first place) and a smaller size.

I'm liking the F3HP since it's meant for glasses, so I can wear mine when taking photos.


----------



## Dragoon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Added more to my post.









Project 365 is fun and helps develop one as a photographer if one pushes them-self as one. (taking a bunch of snapshots won't make you better







)

I tried project 365 but ended up not finishing it since I barely took photos during the week when school started.


That is true, and I am willing to push myself to get better. Especially when I'm so hard with myself on the things I do.

Even if I cannot carry my DSLR with myself everytime (which I will not) I will try to get a small camera that will allow myself to be with it at all times. Although with work, I take that most of my photos will be taken very early in the morning or in the evening.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


I thought mine did too, but it was lightroom putting a bright green pixel in the image that vanished when zoomed in 1:1









I tried the 365 thing to, and only got to about 25 I think. It is a lot of fun though










My camera is showing hot pixels on long exposures, a whole flock of them to be honest









The project 365 seems really fun to do, and also quite a challenge. I hope I'm up for it.


----------



## otterpopjunkie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dragoon*


My camera is showing hot pixels on long exposures, a whole flock of them to be honest










Yeah.. after 16k releases on my D60 I'm definitely noticing more noise at 120 400 and above.. hotspots as well.

ouu and I just ordered a 0.20x wide angle adapter


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Definitely. Only advantages the FA has is a higher shutter speed, matrix metering (not that important when something is properly metered in the first place) and a smaller size.

I'm liking the F3HP since it's meant for glasses, so I can wear mine when taking photos.


I figured that's why you were looking at the HP model.

I've been thinking about getting an older F series as well, because I want something is full manual control... something I can leave in my car under the seat


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


I figured that's why you were looking at the HP model.

*I've been thinking about getting an older F series as well, because I want something is full manual control... something I can leave in my car under the seat*










That's the exact reason I'm getting one.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
That's the exact reason I'm getting one.

I sold one ~4 years ago. Bought it new in the early 80's. Produced beautiful images.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


I sold one ~4 years ago. Bought it new in the early 80's. Produced beautiful images.


That's good to hear.


----------



## Marin

Just did some long exposures on the beach with the rocks lit by the moon. The photo I wanted came out great and I've definitely learned from this experience.

- Bring flashlights (or any other type of light source that's bright) for composing and focusing
- If there's no light on the subject, use flash
- Make sure you have the time to get the shot, the sensor constantly has to cool down
- Have a timer


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Just did some long exposures on the beach with the rocks lit by the moon. The photo I wanted came out great and I've definitely learned from this experience.

- Bring flashlights (or any other type of light source that's bright) for composing and focusing
- If there's no light on the subject, use flash
- Make sure you have the time to get the shot, the sensor constantly has to cool down
- Have a timer


I keep a green laser pointer and 100 lumen flashlight in my bag for night shots


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


I keep a green laser pointer and 100 lumen flashlight in my bag for night shots










What's the laser pointer help with?


----------



## Syrillian

For those interested Here are some pictures of the Guggenheim in Bilbao, Spain.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


What's the laser pointer help with?


Sighting and sometimes focusing.

Also it's fun to have a green laser at night









Syrillian, some nice shots there. The Guggenheim building reminds me of the EMP building in Seattle.


----------



## equetefue

here's one you guys...

Selling a like new Kenko Teleplus Pro 300 DG 1.4x TC. Is in mint condition and includes two caps, box, warranty info and leatherette pouch.

Very sharp. Upgrading only because I need weather sealing for rainy Florida birding season.

$135.00 including shipping and Paypal gift.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...s_Pro_300.html


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *equetefue*


here's one you guys...

Selling a like new Kenko Teleplus Pro 300 DG 1.4x TC. Is in mint condition and includes two caps, box, warranty info and leatherette pouch.

Very sharp. Upgrading only because I need weather sealing for rainy Florida birding season.

$135.00 including shipping and Paypal gift.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...s_Pro_300.html


Bump for my friend..

If you don't have a 1.4tc I'd buy his. Great deal....

I'm on the wait list at Adorama for the Nikon TC-20E III. First tc to use aspherical optics. Don't know if that will make a big difference, the Nikon TC-20E II turned out to be soft on my 400 f/2.8 which is sharp as a tack to begin with and takes my 1.4 and 1.7 beautifully. Went through three copies and all were the same.

Should ship next week. We'll see.


----------



## equetefue

Nuke... I had 2.0x tc and none was good. They were all soft and never venture that way anymore. I really hope they get it right on the new model. It seems that you want the 800mm with the convenience of the 400 

BTW getting the Big L next month and dunno which to get. 400mm, 500mm or 600mm.

This is my thinking so far

400mm: can't justify the 400mm as is the same reach as what I have and need more
500mm: too close to 400mm but lighter than 600mm so handholding for longer periods possible
600mm: best reach, but heavy as hell and I trek quite a bit.

Really freaking torn and don't know what to get


----------



## Marin

You should get this lovely lens.


----------



## equetefue

too heavy.... lol


----------



## Marin

I went through half a roll of film before I realized it was on the wrong aperture.

*bangs head against desk*


----------



## equetefue

Things happen man...

What you shooting now and days Marin ?


----------



## Marin

In Maui right now shooting landscapes. I'm going to start uploading photos once I get back next week.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Whatever, he'll get what's coming to him.

Anyways, shot from Maui. I'm going to upload the final version once I get back and can use Lightroom.

Enjoy.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *equetefue*


Nuke... I had 2.0x tc and none was good. They were all soft and never venture that way anymore. I really hope they get it right on the new model. It seems that you want the 800mm with the convenience of the 400 

BTW getting the Big L next month and dunno which to get. 400mm, 500mm or 600mm.

This is my thinking so far

400mm: can't justify the 400mm as is the same reach as what I have and need more
500mm: too close to 400mm but lighter than 600mm so handholding for longer periods possible
600mm: best reach, but heavy as hell and I trek quite a bit.

Really freaking torn and don't know what to get


600 hands down.


----------



## xlastshotx

Its been awhile since Ive posted something



















Just a crop and a B&W conversion. Thats my friend getting the tattoo, I just got a camera themed tattoo yesterday Ill post a picture of it soon.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

I like the b/w treatment lastshot


----------



## xlastshotx

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
I like the b/w treatment lastshot

Thanks









Alright this is the best picture I can take of my tattoo rite now, its in an awkward spot to take a picture of yourself.

5 points to the first person that can tell me what it is (it is definitely photography related).


----------



## Marin

Looks kind of like the Planar design...

EDIT: Is it the Canon 85mm f/1.2L?


----------



## Danylu

LOL NICE! Which lens is it from?


----------



## xlastshotx

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Looks kind of like the Planar design...

EDIT: Is it the Canon 85mm f/1.2L?











Yep its the canon 85mm f1.2, you have just one 5 points







.










The tattoo looks a bit better than in the picture, I think im gunna have my friend take a better picture of it tomorrow.


----------



## Marin

Awesome!

If I were to get a tattoo it would be the Zeiss 21mm f/2.8.


----------



## Danylu

If Zeiss made AF versions of their lenses they would own.


----------



## xlastshotx

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Awesome!

If I were to get a tattoo it would be the Zeiss 21mm f/2.8.



oOoO that ones cool. Im debating on weather or not I should leave it as it is or add the other stuff around it in the diagram I posted.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
If Zeiss made AF versions of their lenses they would own.

They kind of do.

The Zeiss lenses Sony has for their DSLR's are actually designed by Zeiss (unlike the P&S's); Zeiss designs them and Sony constructs them.

Sony's Zeiss lenses

Quote:


Originally Posted by *xlastshotx* 
oOoO that ones cool. Im debating on weather or not I should leave it as it is or add the other stuff around it in the diagram I posted.

I like it with just the optics.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *xlastshotx*


Thanks









Alright this is the best picture I can take of my tattoo rite now, its in an awkward spot to take a picture of yourself.

5 points to the first person that can tell me what it is (it is definitely photography related).


Nice! Now you have to stick with Canon - for life!


----------



## Marin

Good:

Last day in Maui and I managed to get an excellent shot this morning. 20" long exposure of the ocean; I love this 1.2 ND resin filter.

Bad:

Forgot to change the aperture again with my Hasselblad.









Expected though since I was still half asleep. Shots weren't even that great to begin with.


----------



## Dragoon

I want nothing else but Canon









My first color selective shot. Pretty simple, it went better than I was expecting.

I think the photo speaks for itself...


Improvised a bit, popup flash shot through a paper tube. I really need a 430 or a 580EX II.

Once again I find myself using the 60mm, I guess I didn't know what I had been missing all this time for not using it.


----------



## xlastshotx

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Nice! Now you have to stick with Canon - for life!

I don't think that's a bad thing unless they go way downhill, worse comes to worse I could use an adapter plate


----------



## max302

Guys, quick question.

I shot a roll of Superia 400 with the Pentax, only when I loaded the spool I had already ingested a couple of longnecks... I shot the first 20 frames at ISO 800.

So I guess I accidentally 'sped up' my film? How will I get around getting my pics out of this underexposed film? Do I need to tell something to the lab who will develop the film?

I was planning on scanning those pics anyways throught my plustek scanner, which has a 48bit HDR color setting, do you think 48 bit HDR is deep enough to boost exposure in Lightroom afterwards and get some decent snaps?


----------



## Marin

The film needs to be pushed.

http://www.nelsontan.com/articles/pushpull.html


----------



## equetefue

Went out on horrible weather of cloudy and 40 degrees. Still got a few keepers.


----------



## Danylu

Nice shots, I love the 2nd one.


----------



## Marin

Samsung NX10

http://www.dpreview.com/previews/samsungnx10/


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *equetefue* 
Went out on horrible weather of cloudy and 40 degrees. Still got a few keepers.

Dang perty Edwin... Get the 600!

I'm $2k short of a MKIV/800 combo for small birds. Think I may pull the trigger on the glass since it's in stock now, and get the body next month. Gonna be hard having the lens sitting here and not be able to play with it.

I want the 2x tc I mentioned earlier for when I travel to soccer games. Many times I'll run across wildlife by accident that I'd like to shoot and having a reliable 2x in the bag would be nice on my 400.

I hate you guys down in the warm weather, it was -10F here yesterday


----------



## equetefue

I hear that 800 is a gem of a lens and by the latest reviews the Mark IV is amazing...


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Samsung NX10

http://www.dpreview.com/previews/samsungnx10/


Must say it's an interesting move on Samsung's part to do everything in-house, even so far as creating their own lens mount.

However, that AMOLED screen looks gorgeous.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *equetefue*


Went out on horrible weather of cloudy and 40 degrees. Still got a few keepers.

*SNIP*


Indeed, number two is great with the reflection. The only birds I can find own here are ducks and geese :| But we do have herons when it's warmer.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Must say it's an interesting move on Samsung's part to do everything in-house, even so far as creating their own lens mount.

However, that AMOLED screen looks gorgeous.


Well, now that there a few compact interchangeable lens cameras (they need an official name since "SLR" isn't applicable), I seriously hope competition will drive the price down, because I refuse to pay $1000 for a compact camera with worse performance than an entry-level DSLR.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Article*

For example, a rule of thumb for hand-holding the camera used to be that the shutter speed must be at least the reciprocal of the lens focal length. Thus a 50mm lens could only be hand-held reliably at 1/50 second. But if the image could be 3-5 times sharper than film, then *a three-times-faster shutter speed is needed.*


http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/a...al_limits.html

What do you guys think about this?


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/a...al_limits.html

What do you guys think about this?


That is a very interesting article.
















I'd say that to get ultimate quality pictures that would indeed be the case.

However, most of the time shooting conditions won't allow for camera settings like that. In some cases the idea is to create a specific artistic effect and not necessarily just pump out the most usable pixels.

Apparently I still haven't been added to the list:
Nikon D80
Nikon 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6
Nikon 50mm f/1.8


----------



## Marin

Went down to the beach (just got back 20 minutes ago) and the tide was higher than usual. So my tripod got covered in even more water and sand, so I'm going to have to disassemble it when I get home, clean out the sand, re-oil it and put it back together.

Went through a roll of Portra 160VC and Velvia 100 (I LOVE SLIDE FILM!), so hope they come out great (cross fingers, knock on wood).


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *equetefue*


I hear that 800 is a gem of a lens and by the latest reviews the Mark IV is amazing...


The images I've seen on FM are beautiful. Finger's getting itchy.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Sparhawk*


That is a very interesting article.
















I'd say that to get ultimate quality pictures that would indeed be the case.

However, most of the time shooting conditions won't allow for camera settings like that. In some cases the idea is to create a specific artistic effect and not necessarily just pump out the most usable pixels.

Apparently I still haven't been added to the list:
Nikon D80
Nikon 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6
Nikon 50mm f/1.8



Quote:



Originally Posted by *Sparhawk*


Awesome thread, I've got a D80 and a couple lenses. Don't really have many of my pics hosted online yet... but I'll work on getting some up.


Added. Again, if anyone wants to join, please say something to that effect and list your gear. A lot of people post just saying that have such and such camera. Thanks


----------



## MightyAA

New here...
For Xmas I picked up a Panasonic DMC-GF1 with the 20mm pancake lense.
Then I got the Panasonic 45-200mm f/4.0-5.6 Lumix G Vario MEGA OIS Zoom.

It's my first digital SLR but didn't want to lug around a big camera bag. I long ago buried in my closet my ancient Nikon FG-1 and various lenses and have been using point and shoots....

Charged it up and took it on a cruise. Brillant camera. With the 20mm lense, it was extremely easy to just tote around with me being just slightly larger than a point and shoot (smaller than some of the mega-zoom ones). It's a monster with the 200mm zoom though since the lense is bigger than the camera, but my little "man purse" held everything just fine. Fun as hell to shoot and goof around with. Ended up taking just under 2000 pictures and a couple dozen video's with it over the week. Shockingly, I didn't miss not having a view finder...

Since I'm a beginner, I pretty much left it on automatic the whole trip.

Any good recommended books about photography?


----------



## laboitenoire

Finally got around to uploading some pictures. It's depressing how slow my home internet connection is compared to my one at school (~1 Mbps up vs. 75+ Mbps on the average day).

All of these shots (except the one of Orion) were taken using my dad's D50. Most were shot using his 50mm f/1.8 AF except the bird pic, which was using his 55-200 VR.







And a shot of my sister Sami


----------



## Marin

Finished editing it.


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Finished editing it.


That's a great picture









Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Added.


Thanks!


----------



## Mootsfox

Whoa, I didn't know your name was Sam.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Whoa, I didn't know your name was Sam.


Now you know.


----------



## xlastshotx

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Finished editing it.




Damn. I hate you Marin, now I have to add a neutral density filter to my list of things I would like to get for my camera







.

What lens did you shoot that with?


----------



## Marin

Shot it with my Canon 10-22mm. It was at 12mm; f/8.

I'm going to be uploading more shots like this throughout the week. And after shooting these seascapes, I can never go back to screw-in filters.

EDIT:

I have absolutely no clue what KEH is sending me. I originally ordered a Nikon FA for a total of $191.45. A few days ago I sent them an e-mail asking them to change my order to a Nikon F3HP (costs $248). Now it says my total is $201.90, so I have no clue what is going on.

Looks like I'm calling them tomorrow.


----------



## ace8uk

I just missed out on some epic Nikon clearance deals







Almost bagged a D3 body for Â£1600 and another D300 body for Â£600! Here's the link to the clearance page if anyone's interested http://www.warehouseexpress.com/home...learance-Extra


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Finished editing it.


Beautiful Marin. I wanna go sooooo bad, sick of this -0F crap in Chi town.

Edit:
Sounds like KEH screwed up your order. Hope you can snag the F3HP. Better yet, I wish I still had mine to sell you. not a mark on it.


----------



## Danylu

Marin all of your shots are very nice! I also see that you are watermarking them because of what happened









On another note do you guys think bringing a 300mm f4 + 35mm 1.8 would be enough for a zoo trip?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Marin all of your shots are very nice! I also see that you are watermarking them because of what happened









On another note do you guys think bringing a 300mm f4 + 35mm 1.8 would be enough for a zoo trip?


Yes. I find that my 70-200 is all I need at the zoo. When did you get a 300 f/4?


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
Beautiful Marin. I wanna go sooooo bad, sick of this -0F crap in Chi town.

Edit:
Sounds like KEH screwed up your order. Hope you can snag the F3HP. Better yet, I wish I still had mine to sell you. not a mark on it.

Thanks.

And I just sent KEH an e-mail. I'm at school right now, so I'll call them once I get back home.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
Marin all of your shots are very nice! I also see that you are watermarking them because of what happened









On another note do you guys think bringing a 300mm f4 + 35mm 1.8 would be enough for a zoo trip?

Yeah, I'm watermarking them now.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

It's here, the Canon 70-200 f/2.8L IS USM *II*:

http://www.dpreview.com/news/1001/10...n70200isii.asp

With *five* UD elements...I wish it weren't so damned big, otherwise I'd like to have one (even a mkI). The f/4 version is such an ideal size.


----------



## Dragoon

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
It's here, the Canon 70-200 f/2.8L IS USM *II*:

http://www.dpreview.com/news/1001/10...n70200isii.asp

With *five* UD elements...I wish it weren't so damned big, otherwise I'd like to have one (even a mkI). The f/4 version is such an ideal size.

Five UD elements... Amazing.

We'll be going to see the Mk I dropping price... or not?

From what I recall, wasn't the biggest flaw on the f/2.8 the slight softness wide open? (Aside size and weight)

Walking everywhere now with a Canon Digital Ixus 95IS (Europe name) / PowerShot SD1200 (USA name) to help me with the Project 365. Nifty little camera, has a couple flaws, built in Noise Reduction and cannot turn off and still slightly noisy from ISO80 to ISO400 but quite usable, anything over 400 is overkill for a Point n Shoot... why do they keep making such small cameras with ridiculously high resolutions and ISO, photos get simply unusable at such settings...

Here's a shot taken with it.

*PP:* Black and white and vignette.

I'm close to winning an auction on an EF-S 10-22mm... just an hour and half more. I won it


----------



## Mootsfox

Sold my 50-200mm VR to Mort!


----------



## dudemanppl

Add a 35 1.8 to my gear list. The damn thing is sharper wide open than my 50 1.4 stopped down to f/2 and my 70-200 VR (wide open though).


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Yes. I find that my 70-200 is all I need at the zoo. When did you get a 300 f/4?

I was planning a rental for a week. I had planned to get the 70-200 for a week to see if I like it but renting that is almost twice as much as renting the 300 f/4!

Dudemanppl: Is the 35 really sharper than your 70-200 wide open? Maybe it's me but when I take photos, I can't seem to get the subject in perfect focus at 1.8 so I've pretty much resorted to shooting at 2.8 instead.


----------



## mortimersnerd

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Sold my 50-200mm VR to Mort!

Yeah I bought it. Probably shouldn't have but Moots offered a good price.

Just picked up a Nikon 35mm as well.

This is what I have so far (add me to the list please) :

Nikon D5000
Nikon 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 VR
Nikon 35mm f/1.8
Nikon 55-200mm f/4-5.6 VR
Ape Case Pro
Vivitar 283 Flash (Old - pulled it out of my dads old SLR kit)


----------



## Mootsfox

It's a good lens, I like it a lot... I just never use telephotos anymore. The only time I take my 17-55mm off is for videos in low light.


----------



## mortimersnerd

I like birds and other wildlife. Eventually I will be able to afford a larger telephoto but for now I the 55-200mm will have to do.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dudemanppl* 
Add a 35 1.8 to my gear list. The damn thing is sharper wide open than my 50 1.4 stopped down to f/2 and my 70-200 VR (wide open though).

This was taken with my old 70-200 VRI @f/2.8. My new 70-200 VRII is ~10-15% sharper wide open. Not dissing your 35mm, but you may need to do some af fine tuning on your 70-200 if it's not as sharp as your 35. The 70-200 is known for it's sharpness especially wide open.


----------



## Mootsfox

1/1000th of a second and those wings are blurred, wow. Nice shot nuke.


----------



## equetefue

Add me with a Canon CP-E4 Compact Battery Pack for Flash


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


1/1000th of a second and those wings are blurred, wow. Nice shot nuke.



thx Foxie. Caught him with an ML-3 remote trigger. He breaks an IR beam and zappo!!!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dragoon*


Five UD elements... Amazing.

We'll be going to see the Mk I dropping price... or not?

From what I recall, wasn't the biggest flaw on the f/2.8 the slight softness wide open? (Aside size and weight)

Walking everywhere now with a Canon Digital Ixus 95IS (Europe name) / PowerShot SD1200 (USA name) to help me with the Project 365. Nifty little camera, has a couple flaws, built in Noise Reduction and cannot turn off and still slightly noisy from ISO80 to ISO400 but quite usable, anything over 400 is overkill for a Point n Shoot... why do they keep making such small cameras with ridiculously high resolutions and ISO, photos get simply unusable at such settings...

Here's a shot taken with it.

*PP:* Black and white and vignette.

I'm close to winning an auction on an EF-S 10-22mm... just an hour and half more. I won it










Congrats on the 10-22, it's a great lens. I thought my 17-55 might usurp it, but I still find that 10mm is really that much wider on a crop sensor, so it's a keeper.

And the mkI 70-200 is considered only relatively soft wide open (compared with the Nikon version), but if you check some MTF charts, it's still pretty impressive (but my 50mm f/1.4 @ f/2.8 is way sharper). I imagine that the mkII aims to rectify that f/2.8 softness. Plus the mkII is actually heavier!


----------



## Danylu

From what I've seen from the Nikon 70-200s, there are too many enthusiasts trying to snag good deals on the older model and the pricing hasn't come down AT ALL. At least that's how it has been down in Australia


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


From what I've seen from the Nikon 70-200s, there are too many enthusiasts trying to snag good deals on the older model and the pricing hasn't come down AT ALL. At least that's how it has been down in Australia










I saw one go for $1400 on eBay a few days ago.


----------



## Marin

10-22mm wide open. This lens deserves to be labeled as a L lens and given a better build, it whoops the 16-35mm's butt in distortion control.


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
I saw one go for $1400 on eBay a few days ago.

If only I had anywhere close to that amount to spend on a lens...







Student budget ftl.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
10-22mm wide open. This lens deserves to be labeled as a L lens and given a better build, it whoops the 16-35mm's butt in distortion control.



Love the watermark


----------



## Dragoon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Congrats on the 10-22, it's a great lens. I thought my 17-55 might usurp it, but I still find that 10mm is really that much wider on a crop sensor, so it's a keeper.

And the mkI 70-200 is considered only relatively soft wide open (compared with the Nikon version), but if you check some MTF charts, it's still pretty impressive (but my 50mm f/1.4 @ f/2.8 is way sharper). I imagine that the mkII aims to rectify that f/2.8 softness. Plus the mkII is actually heavier!


Imo there's nothing that can replace the beauty of a 10mm lens







. Oh, and congrats on the 17-55 f/2.8! I'd love to have that one to replace the kit lens, but to cash out 800€ on that one, I prefer to save an extra 50 and buy a 24-105mm f/4L









I see everywhere on reviews saying the 70-200 f/2.8 is an oversized and overweight lens, I can imagine what reviewers will say about the Mk II... I agree with you that the f/4 is just perfect, it got a spot in my heart
















Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


10-22mm wide open. This lens deserves to be labeled as a L lens and given a better build, it whoops the 16-35mm's butt in distortion control.

[snip]


Marin, that's a stunning shot!

I agree with you, too bad Canon only makes L lenses for EF mount







that one would deserve the red stripe hands down...


----------



## Marin

Thanks.


----------



## nuclearjock

FYI

Firmware updates released for D3 and D700 owners.

D3: 2.01 -> 2.02

D3 2.01 -> 2.02

D700: 1.01 -> 1.02

D700 1.02 -> 1.02


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
10-22mm wide open. This lens deserves to be labeled as a L lens and given a better build, it whoops the 16-35mm's butt in distortion control.


I'm glad it isn't an L lens. If it were, it would gain admittedly nice improvements that L lenses have, such as weather sealing, internal focusing, more robust build quality, constant aperture, etc. (much like the 16-35), but all this would make it dramatically more expensive. I like the fact that there are so many high quality EF-S lenses.

Here are some shots with my recent addition (17-55), another abandoned hospital and some farmhouses:


----------



## equetefue

Update me again.... Sold the Kenko 1.4x TC so replace it with a Canon EF 1.4x II


----------



## Mootsfox

Gone, how do you find out about these places?


----------



## Danylu

Gone I like the last shot but I don't like abandoned places D:


----------



## laboitenoire

That last shot is very interesting, Gone. I couldn't figure out how to orient my head for it and wasn't sure what to focus on, and then I realized it was a staircase


----------



## Marin

My morning.

1. Check POTN
2. Go to the Rolleiflex thread to help a member find a medium format camera 
3. Stumble onto a discussion on digital backs
4. Find out about the Hasselblad CFV Back
5. Check Flickr for pics
6. Check dpreview for tech info

Fun... fun...

http://www.flickr.com/photos/avril_neuf/3388889143/

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0907/09...lbladcfv39.asp


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Gone, how do you find out about these places?


Sometimes just by driving around, but also at websites like abandonedonline.net, opacity.us, or even flickr.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Gone I like the last shot but I don't like abandoned places D:


To each his own!









Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


That last shot is very interesting, Gone. I couldn't figure out how to orient my head for it and wasn't sure what to focus on, and then I realized it was a staircase










Thanks


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
My morning.

1. Check POTN
2. Go to the Rolleiflex thread to help a member find a medium format camera
3. Stumble onto a discussion on digital backs
4. Find out about the Hasselblad CFV Back
5. Check Flickr for pics
6. Check dpreview for tech info

Fun... fun...

http://www.flickr.com/photos/avril_neuf/3388889143/

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0907/09...lbladcfv39.asp

7. Look up price of digital back and realize that the fun is over: $13,995.00


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
7. Llook up price of digital back: $13,995.00











I wish it were cheaper. If the back cost as much as a 5DMKII (or slightly more), I'd definitely get one. The dynamic range is huge (12 stops) and due to the sensor size/lens quality it resolves so much detail.

And not having to worry about 12 shots per roll has to be awesome.









Any who, my color film is being developed at-the-moment (six rolls of Velvia and a roll of Portra) and I'm going to develop my B&W film next week (can't use the schools darkroom for the first week of the semester).


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 









I wish it were cheaper. If the back cost as much as a 5DMKII (or slightly more), I'd definitely get one. The dynamic range is huge (12 stops) and due to the sensor size/lens quality it resolves so much detail.

And not having to worry about 12 shots per roll has to be awesome.









Any who, my color film is being developed at-the-moment (six rolls of Velvia and a roll of Portra) and I'm going to develop my B&W fil, next week (can't use the schools darkroom for the first week of the semester).

It would indeed be well worth the cost, a 12 stop dynamic range is amazing. Here's a thought: sell that car of yours to fund it! (and get a moped with the remainder).


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


This was taken with my old 70-200 VRI @f/2.8. My new 70-200 VRII is ~10-15% sharper wide open. Not dissing your 35mm, but you may need to do some af fine tuning on your 70-200 if it's not as sharp as your 35. The 70-200 is known for it's sharpness especially wide open.


Well thats for the new owner to do because I sold it for the 35, a 85 1.8D, a 180 2.8D and a 70-300 VR. Still sharp enough for me because when I shot sports with it I just stopped it down to f/3.5. I'll miss it, but once I get enough money, I'll buy another one (maybe a D700 before it though).

Danylu (all those pages back): Well I either got a good copy or my D300 is doing a better job focusing than your D60.


----------



## xlastshotx

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Here's a thought: sell that car of yours to fund it! (and get a moped with the remainder).










I have been thinking about this.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *xlastshotx* 
I have been thinking about this.

Yeah, I always fantasize about all the glass and gear I could buy if I sold my car. I figure it's worth $17K, which could get me a 1Ds mkIII and all the L primes. I could even save $1000 and buy a cheap old beater.


----------



## Mootsfox

I could sell my car and get a like a 20mm prime.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


I could sell my car and get a like a 20mm prime.











Don't worry Moots, if I sold my car I couldn't get anything.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

I suppose I would need a car in order to sell it, eh?


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dudemanppl* 
Well thats for the new owner to do because I sold it for the 35, a 85 1.8D, a 180 2.8D and a 70-300 VR. Still sharp enough for me because when I shot sports with it I just stopped it down to f/3.5.

For sports I LOVE f/2.8 on the 70-200 lens for the close half of the field. Nice blurred backgrounds and fast ss:









400 f/2.8 is for the long end/far away shots. I too have the 70-300 VR and it along with my 80-400 are my "zoo" lenses. Pics I've seen with the 180 f/2.8 are awesome as well.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
I could sell my car and get a like a 20mm prime.










Well, that would be a 20mm prime that you didn't have!


----------



## Marin

Changed the white balance.


----------



## MightyAA

Here's one with my panasonic gf1 with 20mm pancake lense.. unedited other than resized. Night shot downtown Miami.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dudemanppl* 
Well thats for the new owner to do because I sold it for the 35, a 85 1.8D, a 180 2.8D and a 70-300 VR. Still sharp enough for me because when I shot sports with it I just stopped it down to f/3.5. I'll miss it, but once I get enough money, I'll buy another one (maybe a D700 before it though).

Scrap the 180, I decided to get a beater 17-35. The 85 and 70-300 get here tommorrow and the 17-35 next week.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dudemanppl* 
Well thats for the new owner to do because I sold it for the 35, a 85 1.8D, a 180 2.8D and a 70-300 VR. Still sharp enough for me because when I shot sports with it I just stopped it down to f/3.5. I'll miss it, but once I get enough money, I'll buy another one (maybe a D700 before it though).

Danylu (all those pages back): Well I either got a good copy or my D300 is doing a better job focusing than your D60.









Out of curiosity how much did you get for it if you don't mind me asking


----------



## mortimersnerd

First shot with the Nikon 35mm f/1.8. I like it a lot already.

Sad article in the picture though.


----------



## equetefue

well guys, I had a knee injury resulting from last sundays 5 mile photo trek. I had knee surgury in the military back in 2002, and for some damn reason two nights ago my knee decided to "blow up". Completely unstable and running tests with the VA hospital to determine If I have to go under the knife again and if so a possible total knee replacement.

Very worried right now and sucks that i'm on crutches. I guess this made choosing my next lens a lot easier. I have decided agains the 600L due to the weight and go for the 500L.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *equetefue*


well guys, I had a knee injury resulting from last sundays 5 mile photo trek. I had knee surgury in the military back in 2002, and for some damn reason two nights ago my knee decided to "blow up". Completely unstable and running tests with the VA hospital to determine If I have to go under the knife again and if so a possible total knee replacement.

Very worried right now and sucks that i'm on crutches. I guess this made choosing my next lens a lot easier. I have decided agains the 600L due to the weight and go for the 500L.


Sorry to hear about that eq, the military messed up most of my joints. :|


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Don't worry Moots, if I sold my car I couldn't get anything.


Ha ha, me neither, maybe because it's antique(1982) I can get more money?









Quote:



Originally Posted by *equetefue*


well guys, I had a knee injury resulting from last sundays 5 mile photo trek. I had knee surgury in the military back in 2002, and for some damn reason two nights ago my knee decided to "blow up". Completely unstable and running tests with the VA hospital to determine If I have to go under the knife again and if so a possible total knee replacement.

Very worried right now and sucks that i'm on crutches. I guess this made choosing my next lens a lot easier. I have decided agains the 600L due to the weight and go for the 500L.


Knee injuries are so much fun!









The docs made me a new ACL last year. Fun times had by all...

Hope you get it sorted, without too much pain.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Out of curiosity how much did you get for it if you don't mind me asking










Impulse buy in Las Vegas







. 230 with tax. 
EDIT: If you meant my 70-200 VR, 1450 shipped. I traded it for a 70-300 VR and a 85 1.8 with 675 dollars too. We both decided to ship next day instead of him paying extra.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *equetefue*


well guys, I had a knee injury resulting from last sundays 5 mile photo trek. I had knee surgury in the military back in 2002, and for some damn reason two nights ago my knee decided to "blow up". Completely unstable and running tests with the VA hospital to determine If I have to go under the knife again and if so a possible total knee replacement.

Very worried right now and sucks that i'm on crutches. I guess this made choosing my next lens a lot easier. I have decided agains the 600L due to the weight and go for the 500L.


Sorry Edwin. For what its worth, I know someone who had a knee replacement and she's doing very well. Hopefully they'll be able to fix yours though. All the best.


----------



## laboitenoire

Yeah, knee replacements are quite practical these days... My 92 year-old Grammy is a perfect example! She has two fake knees and a fake hip, and up until a few years ago she could walk about two miles a day. The first knee is well past it's estimated useful life. It was supposed to last 15 and it's lasted for 25 if I remember correctly.


----------



## Mootsfox

I haven't posted any content recently, so here's a clip I made of me taking apart my Nikkor 50mm f/1.4.

  
 YouTube- Taking apart a Nikkor 50mm f/1.4


----------



## equetefue

thanks for all the encouragement. Right now I barely have pain as I got a shot of cortizon in between my knee bone. Still feel weird things when I bend my knees.


----------



## dudemanppl

Hey equetefue, I found a pretty good deal (1k off) on a UX datecode 500 f/4 IS. link Hope your knee does better, I can't walk for the next 3 months and I'm still shooting with crutches (my parents think I'm crazy).


----------



## equetefue

son of a b.... !!! sold it seems


----------



## dudemanppl

Woah, it moved! Equetefue, you seem to be having bad luck lately. If you have funds ready I can contact the seller and get you in line if he backs out.


----------



## xlastshotx

Whoa that was confusing, the photography section moved.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *xlastshotx* 
Whoa that was confusing, the photography section moved.

And the REP+ button is back!


----------



## tK FuRY

Lol so this is where the Photog forum went. I was confused when I click on the "sports" thread thinking it was Photography and read "Roll Tide".


----------



## Danylu

Woah woah good change


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Yet I see that posts still don't count here. I swear I must have 3000+ actual posts.


----------



## Marin

I got my film back and there's so many keepers. I'l be uploading them this weekend.

Also, Portra 160VC may be my new favorite film. I absolutely love the beach shots with it.


----------



## Danylu

I swear I had no where near 2278 posts before the move =|


----------



## Marin

Here's a scan.


----------



## Dragoon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Here's a scan.

[snip]


That's a beautiful shot. Too bad you're forced to watermark such photos after what happened.







Was it taken with the Hasselblad? (checked your flickr page and saw







)

It's amazing how hard it is to find ND1000 filters here in Europe... On the other hand ND64 and ND8 are easy as hell to find... I would buy a 64, but after seeing numerous photos taken with the 1000...







(And some of them even with exposure with over 2 minutes had really small apertures)

Just ordered a remote shutter. I had no idea they were dirt cheap...


----------



## Marin

Yeah, it was taken with my Hasselblad. I absolutely love this camera.

Also, I got the Olympus OM-4 today and have been messing around with it. It's very compact yet has an insanely large viewfinder. The shutter and mirror are very quiet, although it's louder than a rangefinder it's still very quiet for a SLR. And the metering system is simplistic yet seems to be very effective in Auto (Aperture Priority). 
Next to the shutter button there's a spot metering button; while looking through the viewfinder the center point is aimed at something and the metering button is pressed. That part is metered and is indicated in the meter bar in the viewfinder. Up to 8 spots can be metered in order to achieve a balanced exposure. There's a ring around the shutter button that allows the metering to either be saved for the next shot or be cleared for the current shot.


----------



## equetefue

beautifull shot Marin. I'm very impressed.


----------



## Danylu

Does anyone know if Adobe CameraRaw is required for Lightroom to operate? I was just checking space and it is using 10Gb of space







I'd prefer to delete it if it was useless. Thanks all!

The folder is here "C:\\Users\\[*Your User Name*]\\AppData\\Local\\Adobe\\CameraRaw\\Cache"


----------



## Volvo

Hi, I'm new here









Canon EOS 1000D, 18-55mm EF-S, 75-300mm EF Supersonic USM III, Sigma 28-300, 8GB SanDisk SDHC.
No external flash at the moment.


----------



## Volvo

Some of my shots:


----------



## Dragoon

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Volvo* 
Hi, I'm new here









Canon EOS 1000D, 18-55mm EF-S, 75-300mm EF Supersonic USM III, Sigma 28-300, 8GB SanDisk SDHC.
No external flash at the moment.









How nice, good to see another 1000D user







, I don't feel so alone now.









Nice shots there, especially the first two.

Christmas was not yet over for me











Took the opportunity to play around with flash bouncing. Popup flash @ +2, bounced off a paper on my right hand onto a paper sheet standing on my left.

*GT:* You can add this amazing piece of glass to the list. Thanks.

EDIT: Oh, I almost forgot, a Skyfilter came along with the lens, I was not expecting that lol. Correct me if I'm wrong, aren't skyfilters roughly the same as UV filters?


----------



## Bigevil89

Bought A canon 200eg gadget bag for my film camera


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Dragoon* 
How nice, good to see another 1000D user







, I don't feel so alone now.









Nice shots there, especially the first two.

Christmas was not yet over for me









Took the opportunity to play around with flash bouncing. Popup flash @ +2, bounced off a paper on my right hand onto a paper sheet standing on my left.

*GT:* You can add this amazing piece of glass to the list. Thanks.

EDIT: Oh, I almost forgot, a Skyfilter came along with the lens, I was not expecting that lol. Correct me if I'm wrong, aren't skyfilters roughly the same as UV filters?










Congrats on the lens. I see you got the hood for it as well. However, the 10-22 is incredibly resistant to flare, even when I try to produce flare I have a hard time doing so:










If I took that same shot with my 17-55, there would be flare streaming down (believe it or not it's rather prone to flare).

If by "skyfilter" you mean "skylight filter" (the term I've heard), then that's the same as a UV/Haze filter.


----------



## Eek

Wow, just realized i never posted in here









Can you add me to the list, gear is in sig









p.s- I'll wear the ocn camera tag first


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Eek* 
Wow, just realized i never posted in here









Can you add me to the list, gear is in sig









p.s- I'll wear the ocn camera tag first









Nice gear, added. I assume that you have a Tamron 2*8*-75mm (I don't think they make a 24-75)?


----------



## Eek

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Nice gear, added. I assume that you have a Tamron 2*8*-75mm (I don't think they make a 24-75)?

Yes. Typo


----------



## Marin

The scans were annoying me so I finally pulled out the contact sheets and found the problem. The scanner threw the colors off a ton. So here's some color corrected versions.

Portra 160VC



Velvia 100


----------



## sillymansam

oooowwwhh add me.

Canon 40D, Canon 17-40 f/4 L, Canon 70-200 f/4 L

Canon AE-1, 50mm, 70-200mm

Mamiya RZ, 2x 120 backs, 80mm, 110mm, 180mm

Equiped for school use: Sinar 4x5" monorail, 210mm, 180mm, 110mm, 90mm, with Toyo view camera slides(mine)


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


The scans were annoying me so I finally pulled out the contact sheets and found the problem. The scanner threw the colors off a ton. So here's some color corrected versions.
<snip>


A side by side comparison would have been nice but you've taken if off already







. No wonder your previous film scans seem to be a bit pink and orange.


----------



## Dragoon

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Congrats on the lens. I see you got the hood for it as well. However, the 10-22 is incredibly resistant to flare, even when I try to produce flare I have a hard time doing so:










If I took that same shot with my 17-55, there would be flare streaming down (believe it or not it's rather prone to flare).

If by "skyfilter" you mean "skylight filter" (the term I've heard), then that's the same as a UV/Haze filter.

Now after taking a few shots with it, comparing with the 18-55, I can really see the difference in viewing angle. 10mm makes a *huge* difference. Btw, great shot!

And yup, a skylight filter







I got to take a few shots to see if there's any noticeable difference, or loss in detail







. If the filter doesn't reduce detail, I won't mind using it if it.


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Does anyone know if Adobe CameraRaw is required for Lightroom to operate? I was just checking space and it is using 10Gb of space







I'd prefer to delete it if it was useless. Thanks all!

The folder is here "C:\\Users\\[*Your User Name*]\\AppData\\Local\\Adobe\\CameraRaw\\Cache"


Anything labeled Cache that is found in your user folder can usually be deleted without adverse effects. 
However, if there is data there then something is putting it there. 
Try deleting it(or renaming the folder) and try firing up your most commonly used adobe programs. 
The worst that could happen is that you have to revert the files back because some program doesn't work right. Most likely one of the programs will run very slowly for a while, until it builds up its cache again.

For reference: On my computer that folder is only 1GB.


----------



## Marin

This camera is small.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Sparhawk*


Anything labeled Cache that is found in your user folder can usually be deleted without adverse effects. 
However, if there is data there then something is putting it there. 
Try deleting it(or renaming the folder) and try firing up your most commonly used adobe programs. 
The worst that could happen is that you have to revert the files back because some program doesn't work right. Most likely one of the programs will run very slowly for a while, until it builds up its cache again.

For reference: On my computer that folder is only 1GB.


ok thanks! By any chance do you use Lightroom as well? I think CameraRaw was installed with Lightroom so Lightroom might need that folder.


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


ok thanks! By any chance do you use Lightroom as well? I think CameraRaw was installed with Lightroom so Lightroom might need that folder.


I use Photoshop CS4 for most of my editing. 
Like I said, it's just a cache folder so it should rebuild it if it is really needed. Most of the time the cache just stores small versions of files for quick access, thumbnails/etc; nothing integral for program operation. All the critical files are stored in your Program Files folders.


----------



## riko99

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
ok thanks! By any chance do you use Lightroom as well? I think CameraRaw was installed with Lightroom so Lightroom might need that folder.

I bet it is for Lightroom because it likes the quick load of everything... mine is only 55 mb though but then again i keep telling Lightroom not to allow anything in.


----------



## ace8uk

Had a rummage through my Dads old camera bag earlier, found a few goodies to play with. An old sunpak flash, which I was surprised even works after about 20 years or so, a cokin filter holder with a box of various filters and a Pentax MX SLR with a 50mm Pentax f1.7 lens. I think I might buy some film and see how it shoots after all these years!


----------



## Mezosurfer

Nikon D5000 owner here! I got it 3 months after release and LOVE the camera. I have always like Canon cameras, but the feel of Nikon is so much better (personal opinion).


----------



## Bigevil89

Gone Can you add my new lense to the list, i got a quantaray 70-210mm f/4-5.6.

Bought some Black &white kodak C-41 film and a new strap for my camera too.Went out and took some B&W shots with my 590is


----------



## MCBrown.CA

Sign me up!

Nikon D40, Nikkor 15-55mm kit lens, Blacks full-size tripod (can't remember model #)


----------



## max302

I want to kill the people at my local photo store. I bought a crapload of film just before the Christmas break, my usual couple of Superia 400, some 800, a T-max 3200, and a Velvia 100. I shot the Superia 800 right before Christmas over 4 days, then refrigerated the exposed film over the Christmas. I'm just back from developing the film, and none of the shots are good; the grain on that film ruined every single frame.

I don't know if it's a problem with the film itself, the age of the film, the developing process, or whatever else, but I've never seen that much grain on an un-pushed color film. I've shot expired color 1600 that had 4 times less slushy grain than that roll of 800.

An hour of prepping and scanning film, all to waste. I'm pissed.


----------



## edwardm

Whats the cheapest dslr camera i can get with full hd movie? is it the canon eos t1i?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *edwardm* 
Whats the cheapest dslr camera i can get with full hd movie? is it the canon eos t1i?

For 1080p video, yes, that's the least expensive. There are numerous options for 720p however.


----------



## xlastshotx

Ahhh my used Canon 85mm f/1.8 USM is arriving in the next hour







! I hope its in good condition, ordered it from KEH (bgn). Im so sick of waiting I want it now!


----------



## Mootsfox

Just got back from a first year anime con in Concord, NC. Got a lot of pictures, I'll start uploading tomorrow.

Great to see the forum finally got moved







And awesome to see like 5-6 new people join up in the last few days because of it.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Just got back from a first year anime con in Concord, NC. Got a lot of pictures, I'll start uploading tomorrow.

Great to see the forum finally got moved







And awesome to see like 5-6 new people join up in the last few days because of it.


And now only if posts would count here. One can only dream!


----------



## mortimersnerd

Posts don't count?

(checking)

Edit: nope.


----------



## laboitenoire

Oh wow, just noticed the move... Nice!!

Finally had time for some reading through the forum... mainly because of an awesome power outage in Cleveland that lengthened my return trip to school by seven hours.


----------



## xlastshotx

Yay! I got it, showed up at 8pm from UPS which I thought was a pretty late delivery.. But better late than tomorrow I guess.

I looked it over, the is a small scratch on the outside of the body. There are no scratches on the glass, although it looks like there is a little dust in the lens. The lens seems to focus very fast and accurately. Tomorrow im gunna take it out and see what it can do, its a bit to dark rite now for me to tell if the dust in the lens will be a problem.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *xlastshotx* 
Yay! I got it, showed up at 8pm from UPS which I thought was a pretty late delivery.. But better late than tomorrow I guess.

I looked it over, the is a small scratch on the outside of the body. There are no scratches on the glass, although it looks like there is a little dust in the lens. The lens seems to focus very fast and accurately. Tomorrow im gunna take it out and see what it can do, its a bit to dark rite now for me to tell if the dust in the lens will be a problem.










Congrats, the dust behind the front element shouldn't affect IQ, some lenses come that way brand new. Others inevitably get it (like the 17-55, aka "dust pump"). I hear that the focus of the 85 f/1.8 is faster and more reliable than on the 85 f/1.2L.


----------



## Danylu

Hey now this comes up on the front page yay!


----------



## riko99

Hey Moots quick question why did you upgrade to the D300s. Just curious because depending on my tax rebate i might want to get that over the D90. Also would the jump of 700 dollars be worth it for an average/hobby photographer.


----------



## dudemanppl

I've seen them used with like 1k clicks for 1350.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *riko99* 
Hey Moots quick question why did you upgrade to the D300s. Just curious because depending on my tax rebate i might want to get that over the D90. Also would the jump of 700 dollars be worth it for an average/hobby photographer.

I was going for the D90, but due to working at a "Nikon" retailer at the time I could get the D300s for _less_ than the D90 kit...

The D300s is worth the extra change, but I wouldn't have known that if I didn't buy it. You'll need new glass too, the 18-55mm isn't that great on it.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


I was going for the D90, but due to working at a "Nikon" retailer at the time I could get the D300s for _less_ than the D90 kit...

The D300s is worth the extra change, but I wouldn't have known that if I didn't buy it. You'll need new glass too, the 18-55mm isn't that great on it.


The difference between the D300 and up comared to the consumer Nikon DSLR's is huge in terms of functionality and feel. That's not to say the D90, D60 etc don't crank out awesome images though. 
Same with Canon and the 1D stuff.


----------



## dudemanppl

I found a 70-200 VR for 1150 if any Nikon shoots want it. Heres the description:
70-200 VR version 1. This is a well used lens that I bought at a good price when I sold my better condition 70-200. It has wear marks on the barrel but the glass is clean. the zoom ring is stiff at the long end. It's fine at 70mm and while zooming in. But from 200mm and zooming out it's stiff. It didn't really bother me, but may be bothersome to some. Includes the soft case, tripod foot,hood, rear cap, and front cap (Canon version). Because of the zoom, I'll sell it cheap. Asking $1150 plus shipping.


----------



## Mootsfox

Cl?


----------



## Marin

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc..._Pack_Kit.html

Costs less than my Hasselblad. If only it was 6x6 and used Zeiss glass.


----------



## max302

Scanned some Kodakchrome for my granny during Christmas time, I just finished giving them new life via Lightroom. Check it out:


----------



## mth91

I have a point and shoot Canon SX120 IS. Pretty nice camera. Using automatic settings doesn't do this camera service, so I took it upon myself to learn as much as I could about manual settings.


----------



## Mr_Nibbles

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mth91*


I have a point and shoot Canon SX120 IS. Pretty nice camera. Using automatic settings doesn't do this camera service, so I took it upon myself to learn as much as I could about manual settings.


Cool story bro.

But in all seriousness show us some pics, its always cool to see what people can do with P&S cameras.


----------



## nuclearjock

Tammy 28-300 for sale here. Don't shoot it anymore, great deal.


----------



## nuclearjock

I think He's finally balanced his photographic knowledge with his advice.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
I think He's finally balanced his photographic knowledge with his advice.

Sound advice. Sometimes people need someone to point out the obvious for them.


----------



## Dragoon

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mth91* 
I have a point and shoot Canon SX120 IS. Pretty nice camera. Using automatic settings doesn't do this camera service, so I took it upon myself to learn as much as I could about manual settings.

If you want to take even more out of Canon PnS cameras, these fellows here develop "custom firmwares" for some Canon PnS cameras, it allow some cameras to shoot RAW, be able to shoot at speeds over 1/30000 and even flash sync at those speeds! They have listed on the right side of the home page the cameras that are currently supported. They are constantly trying to broaden their list of supported cameras... just need to wait.









Too bad they lack for the Ixus 95IS... The camera really needs a manual or Aperture/Shutter priority mode...


----------



## dafour

Count me in,
check out my deviantart...

My 'gear'
Canon EOS 400D with Sigma 18-200 DC
My eyes
My soul









I love photography!


----------



## Marin

I have so many scans to upload.

Anyways, I love 6x6.


----------



## Danylu

Maybe get rid of the black line on the right of the two beach shots. I like the first one


----------



## riko99

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
I was going for the D90, but due to working at a "Nikon" retailer at the time I could get the D300s for _less_ than the D90 kit...

The D300s is worth the extra change, but I wouldn't have known that if I didn't buy it. You'll need new glass too, the 18-55mm isn't that great on it.

Well I'll have to see how the money situation is at the time because the Fiance doesn't mind me getting something better because she figures i'll want to upgrade down the road. The main thing for me is that for the spare 700 and change i could get both the 50mm 1. 8D and the 90mm Tamron macro lens and i mean i already have 2 people interested if we sell the D60 off which means the 18-55 would go bye-bye as well.

Oh well ill just have to save my pennies and wait and then discern which way to go still have to save for cancelling my cell contract and buy an iphone get her an Ipod touch so ill see.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *riko99*


Well I'll have to see how the money situation is at the time because the Fiance doesn't mind me getting something better because she figures i'll want to upgrade down the road. The main thing for me is that for the spare 700 and change i could get both the 50mm 1. 8D and the 90mm Tamron macro lens and i mean i already have 2 people interested if we sell the D60 off which means the 18-55 would go bye-bye as well.

Oh well ill just have to save my pennies and wait and then discern which way to go still have to save for cancelling my cell contract and buy an iphone get her an Ipod touch so ill see.


I can vouch for making the jump to a higher-end body. I upgraded from a Canon 40D, which is roughly between a Nikon D60 and a D80, to a Canon 7D, the equivalent of the D300s. I'm glad that I did, although I could have gotten a 50D and more more glass. They say glass is the most important, which is true, but having a decent camera body is also very nice if you can afford it.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Cl?

Fredmiranda.com
















Apparently thats alot of wear. If I could sell my 70-300 and 85 for it, I would.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


I can vouch for making the jump to a higher-end body. I upgraded from a Canon 40D, which is roughly between a Nikon D60 and a D80, to a Canon 7D, the equivalent of the D300s. I'm glad that I did, although I could have gotten a 50D and more more glass. They say glass is the most important, which is true, but having a decent camera body is also very nice if you can afford it.


Back in the film days that was so true. A frame from a Nikon 2002 with say a 50mm f/1.8 will look _exactly_ the same as a frame from a Nikon F6, assuming the same lens and film are used.

With digital, the body plays a much bigger role in IQ.

The D90 is a great body, but if you can afford it, there's no reason not to get the D300s.

The prices are going back up, but if you can find a 17-55mm f/2.8 for $900 or less, grab it. It's one of if not _teh_ best wide-standard zoom for the DX platform. It makes a great "walk-around" lens. Personally, it doesn't leave my D300s except when I'm doing very low light video (raves, dances) and a f/1.4 lens is needed.


----------



## dudemanppl

I got the 17-35 and the AF-S motor squeak is more like a whistle. Its pretty loud, but still not AF-D loud.


----------



## bk7794

possible to add me. Canon Powershot A550 2gb sd card. 7.1mp with a 4x optical zoom


----------



## riko99

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Back in the film days that was so true. A frame from a Nikon 2002 with say a 50mm f/1.8 will look _exactly_ the same as a frame from a Nikon F6, assuming the same lens and film are used.

With digital, the body plays a much bigger role in IQ.

The D90 is a great body, but if you can afford it, there's no reason not to get the D300s.

The prices are going back up, but if you can find a 17-55mm f/2.8 for $900 or less, grab it. It's one of if not _teh_ best wide-standard zoom for the DX platform. It makes a great "walk-around" lens. Personally, it doesn't leave my D300s except when I'm doing very low light video (raves, dances) and a f/1.4 lens is needed.


Yeah i would love to get the 17-55 but for now the wedding coming up in about 20 months is more important this will be the last bit of spending i do as come May its all just save save save.


----------



## Mootsfox

A few shots from last weekend.

Still going through the Cosplay photos... probably won't upload them here since there's so many.

Stage setup Thursday night. Under the two Cerwin-Vega's on each side is a 18" sub that's hard to make out. 









Cosplay intermission, first year con, really good turn out.









Crazy guy at the dance









Friend of mine, OJ mixing for the dance saturday night. He was the only DJ there since a lot of stuff was last minute. He did a great job though.









The con was at The Great Wolf Lodge in Concord, NC. It was really dry and cold the whole weeking, and the carpet they had in there made a HUGE amount of static build up. You would walk ten feet and touch something grounded and get shocked (badly). One of the Vega's fried and one of the 18's fried during the dance, as well as a DMX lighting panel, probably from the static discharge.


----------



## Marin




----------



## Danylu

Marin was that last shot just before sunrise or just after sunset?


----------



## Marin

Too many favorites.


----------



## Captain Skyhawk

I'm tryna to take a good picture of my desk setup with my EOS T1i, any tips?


----------



## Meta-Prometheus

Add me please!

Meta-Prometheus

Camera: Canon EOS Rebel G2 [35mm SLR]
http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/co...8&modelid=8771

Lenses: Tamron AF 28-80mm 
http://www.tamron.com/lenses/prod/2880mm.asp

Tamron AF 70-300mm Macro 1:2
http://www.tamron.com/lenses/prod/70300_di_a017.asp


----------



## Mootsfox

I got a Canon 2x Teleconverter in mint condition. Any idea what it's worth? It's the first 2x, not the II. Does support AF though.




























Images taken with a 35-70mm AF I picked up... it's meh.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


I got a Canon 2x Teleconverter in mint condition. Any idea what it's worth? It's the first 2x, not the II. Does support AF though.
Images taken with a 35-70mm AF I picked up... it's meh.


Just checked POTN's for sale forum and it looks like the mark I 2x TC is selling in the range of $150 to $200. A brand new Canon 2x TC II goes for $300 to give you a frame or reference. The only difference, as far as I know, between the mkI and mkII is weather sealing added in the mkII.


----------



## Marin

Wow, national portfolio day was crazy. Totally packed and a ton of art schools were there. Anyways, I presented my portfolio to some of the colleges I'm applying to and got recommended for a few scholarships. Score!

Also, next format I'm trying is 4x5. My teacher has one so I'm going to use it.


----------



## Sparhawk

I'm thinking of getting these:

http://maxsaver.net/b-w-52mm-mrc-uv-...ted-alloy.aspx

http://maxsaver.net/b-w-67mm-kaesema...er-filter.aspx

Thoughts?

I'm considering getting a pol filter for the 52mm lens instead of the UV, but I'm not sure which one to go with, they don't have the kaesemann filter for the 52mm size







.


----------



## equetefue

Re did the website. Went for the clean and professional look this time around. Now to add more pics to it and more variety.

what's you guys' opinion. www.Photo-Galleria.com


----------



## ace8uk

It looks pretty swish swosh to me, much easier to navigate around.


----------



## Deano12345

Just got a new SD card









8GB Extreme III 30 MB/s Edition

In the words of a little green man,

''Teh Awesome,it is''


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *equetefue*


Re did the website. Went for the clean and professional look this time around. Now to add more pics to it and more variety.

what's you guys' opinion. www.Photo-Galleria.com


Internal Server Error


----------



## Mootsfox

What do you guys think of this light?

http://www.amvona.com/shop?page=shop...category_id=61


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
What do you guys think of this light?

http://www.amvona.com/shop?page=shop...category_id=61

I have no idea what most of the specs mean but for $48 you can't go wrong


----------



## equetefue

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Internal Server Error











Weird...works fne for me and everyone else. What browser you using?


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *equetefue*


Weird...works fne for me and everyone else. What browser you using?


Hm problem is gone now, so I guess its ok


----------



## Dragoon

Quote:


Originally Posted by *equetefue* 
Re did the website. Went for the clean and professional look this time around. Now to add more pics to it and more variety.

what's you guys' opinion. www.Photo-Galleria.com

Looks very nice!

One thing though...

Error 404.

I can access and view the home page and navigate through the website, but when selecting any photo to view, it'll pop that error. Tried a few different galleries and they all do the same.

Tried with IE 8 and Chrome.


----------



## laboitenoire

It's working just fine for me...

Nice looking site, BTW. I don't really remember the old one all that much.


----------



## Unknownm

From my Sanyo Xacti Camcorder


----------



## Mootsfox

Got my package from B&H


----------



## tK FuRY

Kind of want to grab this ....







...

http://atlanta.craigslist.org/atl/pho/1537299757.html

For lazy folks (Canon 1D II N)


----------



## computeruler

Wow, that thing has tons of shots on it!


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *computeruler*


Wow, that thing has tons of shots on it!


55k IS A LOT?!?!


----------



## computeruler

well kinda
at least I always thought so


----------



## HaXXoR

Hi everyone, could use some help from the camera experts, picked this up for 2$ at a yard sale, from what i've been able to find out, this lens is suppost to have an m42 screw mount, but it appears to have some strange mount that ive never seen before, do any of you know what it is?, lens is a Carenar 135mm f:2.8


----------



## LIU_ZOMG

what do you guys think of this camera? I'm looking to buy a new camera coz my kodak 5.1mp is worse than my samsung camera phone 3.2mp & they're both getting old anyways... so you reckon this canon a-1 with a 55 mm f/1.2 is worth it? i am a camera noob and this will just be for family photos, videos and occasionally taking nice pics of nature

thanks in advance ;D


----------



## mortimersnerd

I'm pretty sure that's a 35mm camera.


----------



## LIU_ZOMG

can someone explain to me what the diff is







i dont know much abt cameras


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *HaXXoR* 
Hi everyone, could use some help from the camera experts, picked this up for 2$ at a yard sale, from what i've been able to find out, this lens is suppost to have an m42 screw mount, but it appears to have some strange mount that ive never seen before, do any of you know what it is?, lens is a Carenar 135mm f:2.8
[/TD]
[/TR][/TABLE]
Well, seeing that "Mamiya" is written on the mount, then it's probably one of the Mamiya mounts. This same lens might have been produced for different mounts. I would submit this query over at mflenses.com forums to find out for certain.

Quote:
[TABLE][TR][TD]
Originally Posted by [B]LIU_ZOMG[/B] [URL=showthread.php?s=5bd08cb0a2becf66ff9a516b8d226d15&p=8257767#post8257767][IMG alt="View Post"]http://static.overclock.net//img/forum/go_quote.gif[/URL]
can someone explain to me what the diff is







i dont know much abt cameras

That is a film camera and not a digital.


----------



## laboitenoire

That's a film camera, not a digital model, so you'll need to buy film for it and take it in to be developed. Now the problem is that film is getting even less convenient these days due to the loss of (good) local processors. Either you have to develop it yourself or send it out to be developed... AKA it's really only popular amongst hobbyists, artsy people, and those who are shooting medium format.

Now while that's a pretty good film body from back in the day, a modern DSLR (aka a digital model) starts at around $450 for the body with a basic kit lens, and will give you the step up in quality that you're looking for.

@ HaXXor, going off of the fact that the mount says Mamiya, I'm guessing the lens was released in both the M42 Pentax mount and a Mamiya mount for their line of 35mm bodies, which would date it to early 80s most likely. It looks far too small to be for medium format.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *LIU_ZOMG* 
what do you guys think of this camera? I'm looking to buy a new camera coz my kodak 5.1mp is worse than my samsung camera phone 3.2mp & they're both getting old anyways... so you reckon this canon a-1 with a 55 mm f/1.2 is worth it? i am a camera noob and this will just be for family photos, videos and occasionally taking nice pics of nature

thanks in advance ;D

Film, so you'll need to spend more time and money buying film, developing etc...

So much for not enough $$ to buy my comp


----------



## equetefue

Up for sale is a Canon 380EX and CP-E4.

I'm second owner of both items, but both items are like brand spanking new and guarantee to work and look as new.

Canon 380EX: Includes Canon pouch and flash itself. It's an older flash but it supports e-ttl, and has no compatibility issues with 5D or any other newer bodies. After magnifying glass inspection it has one tiny1/32" inch scratch on it and not visible at all. Great littlle flash that I simply don't use. $75 shipped and paypal gift please.

Canon CP-E4: I thought I would use it and bought about a month ago from a fellow FM'er. Shooting birds there is no use at all + it adds weight when trekking in the woods. Tested it when received and works great. When you turn it on it makes a barely audible humming noise, but after consulting here and other forum, is a normal thing. Just putting it out there because at first I thought it was busted. IT IS NOT !! It comes with box, pouch, battery tray and case itself. $120 shipped and paypal gift please.

I have great rating here, ebay and other forums. Items are like new and guarantee and are also available for pickup in the Central Florida area.

Thanks

Ed


----------



## xlastshotx

This is a pretty cool camera mod, diy fine focusing knob


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *xlastshotx* 
This is a pretty cool camera mod, diy fine focusing knob

They also sell those, if you're interested in a higher quality version. They're popular in cinematography.


----------



## equetefue

Here are some from a very cloudy day in Florida. The day served as practice for manual shooting.

Enjoy























































BTW forgot to mention that I just got a Canon 70-200 f2.8 IS for $122 shipped. Don't hate...


----------



## tK FuRY

Quote:



Originally Posted by *equetefue*


here are some from a very cloudy day in florida. The day served as practice for manual shooting.

Enjoy

*
btw forgot to mention that i just got a canon 70-200 f2.8 is for $122 shipped. Don't hate... *



wuh??????


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


Originally Posted by *equetefue* 
BTW forgot to mention that I just got a Canon 70-200 f2.8 IS for $122 shipped. Don't hate... 

Hax.

Just got back from a band concert (at Severance Hall here in Cleveland!) and there was a photographer who had this *massive* Canon lens. I would say it was at least 300mm or 400mm, possibly more.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


Originally Posted by *equetefue* 
Here are some from a very cloudy day in Florida. The day served as practice for manual shooting.

Enjoy

BTW forgot to mention that I just *got a Canon 70-200 f2.8 IS for $122 shipped*. Don't hate... 

What the ****1?


----------



## equetefue

Up for sale... all prices include shipping and paypal

1. Canon 1D Mark II: SOLD!!

2. Canon 70-200 f4 (non is): $525 or $510 if paypal gift 2nd Owner. I just moved and can't find the box. It is tack sharp and includes hood, body caps, UV Filter + knock-off tripod ring which works just as good. Some brealy visble brasing on the hood, lens is flawless.


----------



## tK FuRY

WHY do you Canon guys keep tempting me with 1D deals !!! ..... I SOOO want this one too lol, if it isn't gone by the time my scholarship monies gets to my bank account I will probably might buy it off of you Equetefue.


----------



## dudemanppl

The 1DII is so unbalanced with a 70-200 f/4.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


The 1DII is so unbalanced with a 70-200 f/4.


How so?


----------



## riko99

WooHoo getting the 50mm 1.8D today







just in time for the Motor show


----------



## Marin

I managed to snatch up a Olympus 50mm f/1.2 (kind of rare on the used market) and finally got it (got sent to the wrong house). The front element is the same size as the Nikkor 50mm f/1.2 yet the lens is more compact.

I'll get pics up later.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
How so?

Body is too heavy for the lens. 70-200 is also too skinny, it doesn't feel right.


----------



## Steggy

I have a Canon T1i(500D) with 18-55mm IS & 50mm f1.8. I hope to pick up a 430ex as my next photo purchase, figure i'd need a good flash to take pics in more places than an L lens at the moment 

Just took this pic a few hours ago. Used on board flash and a lil ingenuity to make it not terribad. but i failed and forgot to turn down my ISO so it's @ 3200 :/ oh well, i still think it came out ok.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Body is too heavy for the lens. 70-200 is also too skinny, it doesn't feel right.


I have the opposite situation with my 70-200 VR II/D300. But it sure takes perty pictures!!! 70-200 VR II/D3 = balanced, but just plain HEAVY.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


I have the opposite situation with my 70-200 VR II/D300. But it sure takes perty pictures!!! 70-200 VR II/D3 = balanced, but just plain HEAVY.


You need the MB-D10


----------



## Unknownm

YouTube- Sanyo Xacti CG-10: Super Maco





I love this camcorder/Camera, Although the manual focus could be more free range than preset


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


You need the MB-D10










No, I need the TC-20E III NOW.


----------



## dudemanppl

Hey NJ, wanna buy my D300? 1025 Shipped.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Hey NJ, wanna buy my D300? 1025 Shipped.


Nope one's enough. I'm sure someone will snag it though, pretty good price if it's in good shape.


----------



## max302

Just posted a HUUUUUGGGGE panorama on Flickr. The Uploadr has trouble handling it.

Its the Great St. Bernard Pass, a place I went on my trip to Europe last summer.



Go to the Flickr page for the full 10 471 x 1739 image.


----------



## riko99

Hey Gone add the Nikkor 50mm f/1.8 AF-D to my gear. Wow is this lens small lol but still very nice even if i have to manual focus everything at the moment.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:



Originally Posted by *riko99*


Hey Gone add the Nikkor 50mm f/1.8 AF-D to my gear. Wow is this lens small lol but still very nice even if i have to manual focus everything at the moment.


It is indeed a nice lens. My dad has the older AF version, and it's fun to shoot with.


----------



## Mr_Nibbles

Can you add my flickr next to my name please.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/andrewpoet/


----------



## Marin

Zuiko 50mm f/1.2


----------



## laboitenoire

Damn, that's a big front element.


----------



## equetefue

Nice Marin !!

Guys hit me up again. Got rid of the 380EX and CP-E4 and got a Canon 70-200mm f2.8 L IS and a Canon 1D Mark III


----------



## Unknownm

playing around with the shutter speeds on my camcorder. Not bad but eh who wants to record 1/1500 shutter speed with 720p @ 30 or 480p @ 60?


YouTube- Sanyo Xacti CG-10: 1/1500 to 1/15 Shutter Speed


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Unknownm* 
playing around with the shutter speeds on my camcorder. Not bad but eh who wants to record 1/1500 shutter speed with 720p @ 30 or 480p @ 60?

YouTube- Sanyo Xacti CG-10: 1/1500 to 1/15 Shutter Speed

Notice how you can see the text on the disc at 1/1500 and not at 1/15?


----------



## Unknownm

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Notice how you can see the text on the disc at 1/1500 and not at 1/15?

I know but you would need to fly into space than drag the sun all the way in your room to get decent light with 1/1500 speeds









Edit: I had my lamp on that CD when I was recording it. Still pretty dark but 1/1500 wouldn't be surprised


----------



## mugan23

K its been a while since ive been on this site let a lone shooting again, i might have shown this pics on this thread before but am actually looking for constructive crt. before i quit photography 3 months ago these photos where some of my last and i was getting complaints of them being plain, can someone tell me what that could mean and how i can work to fix it


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *equetefue*


Nice Marin !!

Guys hit me up again. Got rid of the 380EX and CP-E4 and *got a Canon 70-200mm f2.8 L IS and a Canon 1D Mark III*


How's that combo feel in your hands Edwin?? If it's like my D3/70-200 2.8 it's like carrying 2 bricks strapped together.. Beautiful images though. I've been playing with my 1.4 and 1.7 tc's with my new 70-200 VR II and I'm really impressed to say the least. The IQ on this new Nikkor is really astounding.

D3/70-200 VR II/1.7 tc wide open ambient tungsten light:

FF










100%


----------



## equetefue

Nuke that is sick sharp !!! hey how you like the 2x ?

Anyways... this is what I have for sale today.. email me at [email protected] for questions and comments

Every item is like new, mint condition. Every item was bought new. All come with everything that came with the item and some like the 150-500 come with a free UV filter. Prices are firm as they are comparable to the normal going price. Prices include shipping to lower 48 only + 3% paypal or nothing additional if you choose the Paypal gift method. All items also available for local pick up in the Central Florida area.

Please email me at [email protected] for questions as i'm anticipating a lot of responses and this is the fastest way. This is first come, first serve.

Bodies:
1. Nikon D70: SOLD !!

2. Nikon D80: Price is $375.00 Shutter count 13,938









3. Nikon D300: SOLD !!

Grip:
1. MB-D80: SOLD!!
2. MB-D10: SOLD !!

Flash:
1. SB-600: SOLD !
2. SB-800: SOLD !

Lenses:
1. Tokina 12-24 f4 ATX Pro: Price is $345.00









2. Tamron 17-50 f2.8: Price is SOLD !!

3. Nikon 50 f1.8: Price is $80.00









4. Nikon 18-135 f3.5-5.6: SOLD !!
5. Nikon 105 f2.8 VR: SOLD !!
6. Nikon 80-200 f2.8D AF: SOLD !!

7. Sigma 150-500 f5-6.3: Price is $800.00









8. Kenko 1.5 AF TC: SOLD !!

Others
1. Flashgun Cable: Price is SOLD !!
2. MC-30: Price is SOLD !!
3. MC-DC1: Price is SOLD !!
4. Nikon wireless transmitter: Price is SOLD !!

5. Better Beamer for SB-800 FX4: Price is $30.00


----------



## Mootsfox

What, how much was the 80-200?


----------



## laboitenoire

Urggh... So tempted to relieve you of that D70.


----------



## [Teh Root]

Canon Rebel XT, Sony Alpha 100

Normal lenses.


----------



## sweffymo

Please add me to the list! I have:

*Bodies*
Canon EOS 30D w/ Zeikos Battery Grip
Mamiya/Sekor 500DTL with timer
MagiMatic (out of film forever







)

*Lenses* (Yes they are all crappy except for the LensBaby!)

*-EOS*
-Canon 18-55 "Kit Lens"
-Tamron 28-80 f3.5-5.6 Asphyrical
-Canon 28-135 IS USM
-Tamron 75-300 f3.5-5.6
-LensBaby 2.0
-EOS to Screwmount adaptor

*-Pentax Screwmount*
-Mamiya/Sekor 28mm
-Some Japanese 50mm
-Some Japanese 100mm
-800-3200mm f5.6-12(ish) Telescope
-2x telephoto tube

I love taking pictures! I haven't had much time to do stuff lately though. A few of my pictures and part of my book can be found on my ePortfolio at http://www.sethmoyer.com if you're interested.

_Edit: It seems as though my server is down right now, so I'll have to diagnose that when I get home! My book can be found at http://www.blurb.com/bookstore/detail/651459!_

Thanks!

-Seth AKA sweffymo


----------



## equetefue

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Urggh... So tempted to relieve you of that D70.


Come' on....you know you want it. Is like brand spanking new with extremely low clicks...


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

D300








*checks bank account*


----------



## equetefue

Prices updated


----------



## Sparhawk

arg, so tempting... must... resist 12-24...


----------



## equetefue

you know you want it.....it's a freakin awesome price. I'll be surprise if it does not sell tonight at Fred Miranda.

BTW all the lenses and bodies are flawless...


----------



## xlastshotx

ahh, that was a gooood price on that d300. I wish I had found one that cheap when I bought my 50D.


----------



## laboitenoire

Hmm... Adorama has a used D100 with battery and charger for $170 in V condition... Do you think it'd be worth it?

EDIT: They also have a used Rebel XT in E- for $195...


----------



## equetefue

couple things left guys !!

Anyways Gone hit me up again.

Take out :
- 70-200 f4 L
- 380EX
- Sidekick

Add:
- Canon 40D


----------



## equetefue

1 item out of 27 left !!!

Sigma 150-500 purchase few months back and sent to Sigma for calibration. So sharp It cuts....... $800.00 shipped with UV filter










Pic taken with the lens


----------



## equetefue

Gone I'm prolly driving you crazy but here it goes...

Take the 40D out and add a 50D


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *equetefue* 
Gone I'm prolly driving you crazy but here it goes...

Take the 40D out and add a 50D

LOL, it's no trouble. Why did you opt for the 50D instead of the 40D? I'd think that you would want the speed of 40D.


----------



## equetefue

actually, I used to have a 40D before and is great, but the 50D has the same AF bu better screen, more pixels and noise a tad higher, but adds also micro adjustment.

The burts of the 40D is 6.5 vs 6.3 of the 50D, but if I want it burst I have the Mk3.

I figure that as a 2nd camera for wildlife is great match with the 1d3. Now I can leave the 5D at home.


----------



## Marin

I'm pretty sure the 40D was slightly overrated for FPS.


----------



## equetefue

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
I'm pretty sure the 40D was slightly overrated for FPS.

Actually it did hit the 6fps no problem when I had it


----------



## raisethe3

Add me to the club! I have a Nikon CoolPix L14 Camera.


----------



## equetefue

Gone how you like the 7D? depending on how it goes with the 50D in the field I might upgrade it to a 7D to complement the 1D3.

For this month Im done though. Got 1D Mark III, 50D, 70-200 f2.8 IS L

Next month upgrading the 5d to 5DII


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *equetefue*


Actually it did hit the 6fps no problem when I had it


Well, not that overrated.









But I remember seeing threads where it didn't actually hit 6.5, it instead reached around 6.3 (same as the 50D).


----------



## equetefue

Well all XXD bodies do not hit the rated burst if the shutter speed and aperture is not right.


----------



## Funcrazy1

Hey add the new comer to the Photography to OCN! Which is me







here is my gear

Nikon D3000 Lens AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G VR Lens

Will post pics when I get should be here Tuesday woot!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *equetefue* 
Gone how you like the 7D? depending on how it goes with the 50D in the field I might upgrade it to a 7D to complement the 1D3.

For this month Im done though. Got 1D Mark III, 50D, 70-200 f2.8 IS L

Next month upgrading the 5d to 5DII

Hm, for some reason I was thinking the 50D was a few frames slower









I'm really enjoying the 7D. Only complaint is that I've gotten the weird on-board flash issue a few times (overheats and says "busy" for a few seconds to a few minutes), but that's happened only twice.

AI Servo mode is outstanding, way better than the 40D. It wasn't really useful on the 40D, but on the 7D the AI focus is fast and the different tracking modes is nice. Not sure how it stacks up to a 1DmkIII in terms of AF.

The noise is well-controlled, but nowhere near 5DII quality, although some reviews tout it as rivaling the 5D in that area. I also like the fact that it's weather-sealed as well as the 5DII. I had the 40D in some moist places (streams and caves) and felt lucky that it didn't get ruined.


----------



## Marin

That's why I like good film cameras. They can go through hell and back and still work fine.









Anyways, for the list remove the Nikon FA and add an Olympus Zuiko 50mm f/1.2.


----------



## dudemanppl

Haven't done a gear update for a while.

Nikon D300 + MB-D10 and Eneloops
Nikon D40

35mm f/1.8G AF-S DX
50mm f/1.4 AF-D
85mm f/1.8 AF-D
17-35mm f/2.8 AF-S D
70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G AF-S VR
18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G AF-S DX VR
SB-800


----------



## Marin

I saw this lens and was like:









Then I saw the results on Flickr and was like:









Then I saw the price on eBay and was like:









But then I realized Canon has something slightly wider and cheaper and was like:


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dudemanppl* 
Haven't done a gear update for a while.

Nikon D300 + MB-D10 and Eneloops
Nikon D40

35mm f/1.8G AF-S DX
50mm f/1.4 AF-D
85mm f/1.8 AF-D
17-35mm f/2.8 AF-S D
70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G AF-S VR
18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G AF-S DX VR
SB-800

What do you think of the 17-35mm on the DX format?


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
What do you think of the 17-35mm on the DX format?

Its a good lens, just like the 17-55 but missing 20mm on the long end. When I'm shooting I either shoot long, wide or normal which the 50 does pretty damn well. I'm also going to upgrade to a D300s AND a D700 eventually.


----------



## equetefue

Marin the 24mm f1.4 is going to be my next lens probably. Is supposed to be great.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *equetefue* 
Marin the 24mm f1.4 is going to be my next lens probably. Is supposed to be great.

Yeah, I've been looking at it for when I go FF at the end of the school year. But I'm having a hard time deciding between it and the Zeiss 21mm f/2.8. Both have their pro's and con's... hmmm...

And...


----------



## equetefue

those are sexy


----------



## dudemanppl

Wow, Oly lenses are tiny!








Thats why the 17-35 (Nikkor) was only 700 (I mean the shape, not stuck to a canon).


----------



## Danylu

If it was stuck to the canon you should have gotten it for free. But dang that's a pretty roughed up lens, even the paint on the lens badge is coming off.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Wow, Oly lenses are tiny!








Thats why the 17-35 (Nikkor) was only 700 (I mean the shape, not stuck to a canon).


I'd pay $700 for it


----------



## dudemanppl

Well its not stuck to the Canon







. The AF-S motor squeaks (louder than you think), but I don't think its dying any time soon. It was 700 buy it now, so 8% off that and with the 8% I replaced the zoom ring and focus ring rubber, though not in that picture.


----------



## equetefue

Well got my $50 70-200mm f2.8 L IS back from Canon

Here's the story and tell me I didn't do good here.

I saw an ad in craiglist for a guy selling the broken lens for $50.00 !!! I was like, let me shoot an email and see what it is. Guy responds and tells me that the lens was new and on the first day of use he dropped it in church while shooting a wedding. The lens was cracked and would not autofocus. I asked the guy about repair and he shows me the copy of the repair estimate by Canon in Newport News VA showing a bill for $1,157.00. I told the guy I would buy it and give it a shot and the guys mails it to me along a very sarcastic note saying "good luck !!".

Now here's the kicker. I'm a member of CPS so I mail to diferent facility and get a 30% in repairs among other perks. I sent it off and got it back today. Total repair....... $392.14 !!!!

So I sold my 70-200 f4 L for $515 and upgraded to a brand new, 2 day old, very sharp wide open, 70-200 f2.8 L IS for -$72.86. Not bad, not bad....

As soon as the version two of this lens comes out, I will sell it for $1600 or so and upgrade.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

I hate you


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Nice deal you nabbed EQ!


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:



Originally Posted by *equetefue*


Well got my $50 70-200mm f2.8 L IS back from Canon

Here's the story and tell me I didn't do good here.

I saw an ad in craiglist for a guy selling the broken lens for $50.00 !!! I was like, let me shoot an email and see what it is. Guy responds and tells me that the lens was new and on the first day of use he dropped it in church while shooting a wedding. The lens was cracked and would not autofocus. I asked the guy about repair and he shows me the copy of the repair estimate by Canon in Newport News VA showing a bill for $1,157.00. I told the guy I would buy it and give it a shot and the guys mails it to me along a very sarcastic note saying "good luck !!".

Now here's the kicker. I'm a member of CPS so I mail to diferent facility and get a 30% in repairs among other perks. I sent it off and got it back today. Total repair....... $392.14 !!!!

So I sold my 70-200 f4 L for $515 and upgraded to a brand new, 2 day old, very sharp wide open, 70-200 f2.8 L IS for -$72.86. Not bad, not bad....

As soon as the version two of this lens comes out, I will sell it for $1600 or so and upgrade.


you lucky son of a ...

hate u T_T

played with 14-24mm & 24-70mm f/2.8's over the weekend at a wedding. oh my. paired with d5000 and d200. so nice. lol had the ultra wide on my d5000 and cousin's 24-70mm on a borrowed d200. im waiting for my cousin to upload the pictures from the d200. hope they are good. =] its amazing how wide the 14-24 is. sitting/standing next to the person, and u can get 1/2 body shots.. if you standing and they sitting, could/or almost could get full body shots.. and f/2.8 makes it bright ! omg =X xD


----------



## Lelin

Wow, incredible deal on the 70-200 2.8 IS!!

Just dealt a Sigma 30mm 1.4, perfect focusing. Will pick it up tomorrow afternoon







.
Also found a old paycheck of near 1k$ O_O. Waiting to see the 60D announcement and I'll see if I get a 7D right now or wait for it! Good week


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


Originally Posted by *equetefue* 
Well got my $50 70-200mm f2.8 L IS back from Canon

Here's the story and tell me I didn't do good here.

I saw an ad in craiglist for a guy selling the broken lens for $50.00 !!! I was like, let me shoot an email and see what it is. Guy responds and tells me that the lens was new and on the first day of use he dropped it in church while shooting a wedding. The lens was cracked and would not autofocus. I asked the guy about repair and he shows me the copy of the repair estimate by Canon in Newport News VA showing a bill for $1,157.00. I told the guy I would buy it and give it a shot and the guys mails it to me along a very sarcastic note saying "good luck !!".

Now here's the kicker. I'm a member of CPS so I mail to diferent facility and get a 30% in repairs among other perks. I sent it off and got it back today. Total repair....... $392.14 !!!!

So I sold my 70-200 f4 L for $515 and upgraded to a brand new, 2 day old, very sharp wide open, 70-200 f2.8 L IS for -$72.86. Not bad, not bad....

As soon as the version two of this lens comes out, I will sell it for $1600 or so and upgrade.


Quote:


Originally Posted by *Lelin* 
Wow, incredible deal on the 70-200 2.8 IS!!

Just dealt a Sigma 30mm 1.4, perfect focusing. Will pick it up tomorrow afternoon







.
Also found a old paycheck of near 1k$ O_O. Waiting to see the 60D announcement and I'll see if I get a 7D right now or wait for it! Good week

ive seen a guy use a sigma 30mm on his d40. great pictures.. takes in so much light. where did u get it? how is it compared to like the 35mm f/1.8?


----------



## Bigevil89

http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/02/canon-rebel-t2i/

interesting.


----------



## iandroo888

articulating screen. following the d5000 design? id go for the faster AF in LV over articulating screen. reason is ur not gonna use AF in LV when it takes so long for a shot.. sure it gives some conveniences but as someone who has a d5000... i dont use it much lol.. only pro i have for the articulating screen is that u can turn it around and protect the screen lol. if u were a photographer with a tripod and just doing portrait shots, it should be fine but if it were to be for normal use with movement or want to do a quick picture, its kind of a PITA lol


----------



## Lelin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


ive seen a guy use a sigma 30mm on his d40. great pictures.. takes in so much light. where did u get it? how is it compared to like the 35mm f/1.8?


I saw a guy's add on kijiji.ca. He lives near my university. I wish I'd live in the states though. Much cheaper and there's a lot for sale. Especially in Cal. Getting it for 425$CAD so about 400$ US, good price considering people on potn try to make me pay 50U$ shipping extra... And won't have to pay customs







I don't think Canon has a 35mm f1.8 but compared to the 2.0 and 28mm 1.8 it's supposedly sharper. Not as sharp as the 35L. I'll have to see by myself how sharp it is.


----------



## Lelin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Bigevil89*


http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/02/canon-rebel-t2i/

interesting.


 8 days till the announcement, can't wait! I want a 60D (if its good enough compared to the 7D







)


----------



## Marin

I'd rather see new lenses (Not EF-S) introduced over a new rebel or xxD body. Maybe the patented lens design that closely resembles a 14-24mm.


----------



## Lelin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


I'd rather see new lenses (Not EF-S) introduced over a new rebel or xxD body. Maybe the patented lens design that closely resembles a 14-24mm.


Which ones particularly?


----------



## iandroo888

mmm 14-24... such a fun lens.. xDD


----------



## Marin

Yes, yes it is. =D

http://www.flickr.com/photos/renderz/3501260675/


----------



## iandroo888

http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?pi...d4&id=23705195

my toys over the weekend hahaha


----------



## dudemanppl

Nikon 24 1.4 and 16-35 f/4 VR soon! Although the latter doesn't make sense for me and I don't care for the 24 (35 1.8 <3).


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?pi...d4&id=23705195

my toys over the weekend hahaha


Take the:

- D200
- 14-24mm f/2.8
- 24-70mm f/2.8

Leave the other two bodies behind as a distraction.


----------



## iandroo888

can someone explain to me what the diff is between 16-35 f/4 and a 18-55 f/3.5? the f-stop isnt n e better. focal distance is shorter... if it was the 17-55, id understand that the f-stop is better b/c its a f/2.8...

*edit*

LOL Marin XDDD during the wedding, used the d200 w/ 24-70 and the d5000 w/ 14-24. worked out pretty well. was primarily using the 24-70 from the seats in the church. then used 14-24 as the party walked down the aisle for full body or close up. =]


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


can someone explain to me what the diff is between 16-35 f/4 and a 18-55 f/3.5? the f-stop isnt n e better. focal distance is shorter... if it was the 17-55, id understand that the f-stop is better b/c its a f/2.8...


16-35mm is for FF, thus an UWA (on FF or FX for you Nikon users).


----------



## iandroo888

o i c i c.. *imaginary rep's marin* xDD


----------



## Marin

http://www.hasselblad.com/promotions/h4d-40.aspx

The prices really are coming down with medium format cameras. Yay.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...LR_Camera.html

Affordable MF cameras within the next few years, score!


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dudemanppl* 
Nikon 24 1.4 and 16-35 f/4 VR soon! Although the latter doesn't make sense for me and I don't care for the 24 (35 1.8 <3).

Nikon doesn't make a 24mm f/1.4. If you're talking about the 28mm, it's better than the 35mm by a lot, but it's a $5,000 lens. There's also no 16-35mm f/4 from Nikon. The only zoom with 16mm at the wide end is the 16-85mm VR. If you're talking about the Canon one, it's L glass, and f/2.8

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
can someone explain to me what the diff is between 16-35 f/4 and a 18-55 f/3.5? the f-stop isnt n e better. focal distance is shorter... if it was the 17-55, id understand that the f-stop is better b/c its a f/2.8...

*edit*

LOL Marin XDDD during the wedding, used the d200 w/ 24-70 and the d5000 w/ 14-24. worked out pretty well. was primarily using the 24-70 from the seats in the church. then used 14-24 as the party walked down the aisle for full body or close up. =]

Between those lenses (one doesn't exist) the difference would be that the 16-35 f/2.8 is constant. The 18-55mm is variable. At the tele end it's like 4.5 or 6.3.

Also, nice toys to play with there. I want to try out the 10-24, 12-24 or the 14-24 soon.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Nikon doesn't make a 24mm f/1.4. If you're talking about the 28mm, it's better than the 35mm by a lot, but it's a $5,000 lens. There's also no 16-35mm f/4 from Nikon. The only zoom with 16mm at the wide end is the 16-85mm VR. If you're talking about the Canon one, it's L glass, and f/2.8

And you call yourself a bit of a gearf...?

http://nikonrumors.com/


----------



## Mootsfox

Haha, ya...

Excited about Wednesday


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Haha, ya...

Excited about Wednesday










Look forward to Nikon updating another lens that nobody needs updated.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Look forward to Nikon updating another lens that nobody needs updated.










D:

Cue the entry of the 500g 20-200 f/1.2 VRIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII N zoom with a 52mm diameter!

Damn you physics


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Look forward to Nikon updating another lens that nobody needs updated.










Good point, because every lens they release is already perfect


----------



## laboitenoire

Anybody else check out the announcements of Fuji's new lineup? The F80 EXR looks pretty damn awesome, as do the updates to the S series. I must say that the most interesting of the bunch is the HS10: 10 megapixels, 10 FPS at full resolution, and a 30x zoom range


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Anybody else check out the announcements of Fuji's new lineup? The F80 EXR looks pretty damn awesome, as do the updates to the S series. I must say that the most interesting of the bunch is the HS10: 10 megapixels, 10 FPS at full resolution, and a 30x zoom range










It'll be a winner for sure, Fuji makes decent sensors for point-and-shoots. Granted that's their bread and butter, but I wish Fuji would get back into producing DSLRs in light of the success with their P&S cameras. Maybe a compact interchangeable like the Olympus and Panasonic offerings.


----------



## SpykeZ

Gots me a NikonD60 DSLR with an 18-55mm and a promaster 70-300

My peektures 

I'm still farely new and still learning


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


http://www.hasselblad.com/promotions/h4d-40.aspx

The prices really are coming down with medium format cameras. Yay.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...LR_Camera.html

Affordable MF cameras within the next few years, score!


If you can call $20k affordable (relative to their other models perhaps). It's those damned huge sensors; they're so pricey to produce. Hopefully there will be advances in sensor manufacturing one day so that we can all have medium or even large format digicams for less than the price of a new minivan.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


It'll be a winner for sure, Fuji makes decent sensors for point-and-shoots. Granted that's their bread and butter, but I wish Fuji would get back into producing DSLRs in light of the success with their P&S cameras. Maybe a compact interchangeable like the Olympus and Panasonic offerings.


I wonder how awesome an APS-C or FF sensor based on EXR technology would be


----------



## Lelin

Just got my 30mm 1.4. Focuses perfectly, super sharp, I have a small concert to shoot this weekend, will be fun.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


If you can call $20k affordable (relative to their other models perhaps). It's those damned huge sensors; they're so pricey to produce. Hopefully there will be advances in sensor manufacturing one day so that we can all have medium or even large format digicams for less than the price of a new minivan.










Run Life.exe, press tilde and type /INTERNETSARCSMMETER on , then you will understand why 20k could be cheap.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
If you can call $20k affordable (relative to their other models perhaps). It's those damned huge sensors; they're so pricey to produce. Hopefully there will be advances in sensor manufacturing one day so that we can all have medium or even large format digicams for less than the price of a new minivan.









If you follow the pricing trend of MF cameras, the prices have been dropping a ton with each release. So within the next few years I can see MF cameras becoming an option among amateurs.

Mamiya, as you can see in my link, has the price down to 10K which is insane.


----------



## Bigevil89

a snap from today and a panorama of the place i work( not with them i work on the 4th terminal, thats the 1st pictured)



















edit: ugh i need a pro flickr account :/ its cheap but right now saving for my Rebel XSI


----------



## Marin

Shoot...

My OM-4 has a failing shutter. Time to return it.


----------



## equetefue

sucks to hear that Marin... hipe it all gets sorted out soon

Here are some from today.


----------



## laboitenoire

That one bird with the bright yellow neck and head is gorgeous, another great set.


----------



## Marin

Nice series.

Anyways, B&H sent me a RMA number this morning. No questions asked. Think I'm going to order an OM-4T (OM-4Ti) to replace it. Hopefully KEH rates their cameras like their lenses.

But on a more positive note, the shots that were exposed look amazing. The spot metering system is awesome even though it's so simplistic compared to modern metering systems. Just meter the shadows, midtones and highlights. And meter the light and dark tones and the camera will average them. Pretty awesome.


----------



## dudemanppl

Gone, take out my D300, replace it with a D300s, add a 24mm f/2.8 AF-D and maybe soonish, take out the 17-35 and 70-300 and replace with an 80-200mm f/2.8 AF-S D.


----------



## equetefue

can you tell the diference with the 300s over the reg?


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *equetefue*


can you tell the diference with the 300s over the reg?


Yes.


----------



## equetefue

guys...just got a Extreme III 16gb card and want to test both read and write speed. Any clues on a software for that and free would be best. I keep finding ones that only do read but want to do write


----------



## Mr_Nibbles

Quote:


Originally Posted by *equetefue* 
guys...just got a Extreme III 16gb card and want to test both read and write speed. Any clues on a software for that and free would be best. I keep finding ones that only do read but want to do write

Have you tried HDtune? If you have a sata card reader HDtune should be able to show you everything you need.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mr_Nibbles* 
Have you tried HDtune? If you have a sata card reader HDtune should be able to show you everything you need.

Yup, just make sure the card is plugged in first.

The reader can make a difference too, so you might want to try any that you have. And of course, post results because I'm sure I'm not the only one interested in them


----------



## Mr_Nibbles

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


The reader can make a difference too, so you might want to try any that you have.


+1 to this, if you are using a USB reader you will have nowhere near the speed of a sata reader.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


Originally Posted by *equetefue* 
can you tell the diference with the 300s over the reg?

Well, I've only ordered it.


----------



## equetefue

whats a nice SATA reader ? currently i'm using a built in card reader in my computer. Works great for what I use it. I just really wanted to test the diference in speed so I can figure out if is worth getting the faster cards.


----------



## laboitenoire

Not posting any "interesting" photos (at least compositionally), but more just pictures of a metal under different kinds of light. I was given this sample by my advisor, who is also the professor I'm working with for a freshman research project. I was intrigued because this sample had been from consulting work he did in relation to the metal 10-15 years ago. It had been cut and milled small enough so that it could be analyzed via x-ray spectrometry, and the resulting level of shine is captivating. So, I decided to take a few pictures of it under a few different kinds of light (direct flash from my S700, cool white fluorescent, and warmer fluorescent). The way it reflected was interesting, I think.

If you can guess the metal, you'll just get cool points in my book









A few hints:
It is pretty much pure metal
It is not iron, aluminum, lead, or silver (although some prospectors and scientists though it might be one of the last two)
It is incredibly heavy for its size
It has one of the highest melting points of any metal
The US has one of the largest deposits of it in the whole world
You probably have two or three devices at least that contain sizable amounts of it
It's often used in alloys of other metals


----------



## Mootsfox

Could it be... Tungsten?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Tungsten?


----------



## laboitenoire

It's similar to tungsten.


----------



## U-Dubominator

Osmium if not then Iridium?


----------



## equetefue

rhenium


----------



## laboitenoire

Gone and Moots were the closest. It's a chunk of like 99.99% pure molybdenum. Same period as tungsten, which is one reason why it can be used as an electric heating element just like tungsten. At one point it was about $100,000 per ton, but now it's only around $30,000









My professor is thinking I can start doing literature review about what people are doing to recycle molybdenum, seeing as it's going to become a very strategic material in a few years.


----------



## xlastshotx

I was a bit board today so I decided to test the focus on my new lens, Im not sure if I did it rite or not though:

85mm @ f1.8 auto-focused in the center of the paper


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *xlastshotx*


I was a bit board today so I decided to test the focus on my new lens, Im not sure if I did it rite or not though:



45 degree angle??


----------



## nuclearjock

Outside parking lot light fixture.
D300 400mm f/2.8 VR TC-2.0 III @f/7.1 (1200mm effective fl)
~50 feet from fixture, 100% crop.










By far the sharpest tc I've ever used. First tc with aspheric elements.


----------



## Marin

Gah! That is so sharp! And it's a 100% crop!!!

*jaw hits the floor*

Canon better get off their butts and release a TC like this.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
Outside parking lot light fixture.
D300 400mm f/2.8 VR TC-2.0 III @f/7.1 (1200mm effective fl)
~50 feet from fixture, 100% crop.










By far the sharpest tc I've ever used. First tc with aspheric elements.

Another reason for me to save up for the 70-200 VR D:


----------



## xlastshotx

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


45 degree angle??


um, idk. does it have to be at a 45 degree angle?


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *xlastshotx* 
um, idk. does it have to be at a 45 degree angle?

Too shallow an angle, and its hard to see differences. From what you've posted, it looks like you may need some adjustment.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 









Gah! That is so sharp! And it's a 100% crop!!!

No ka ka Sam. I may have saved myself alot of $$$ for small birds..


----------



## dudemanppl

I just realized you basically have a 1200 f/5.6 VR now! And its sharp!


----------



## laboitenoire

So are you still thinking of picking up a large Canon setup for birding or does this TC allow you to skip that route?


----------



## nuclearjock

70-200 VR II/20E III

ff ~100 feet










100%










f/7.1 VR on hh. Not bad for a zoom.


----------



## iandroo888

dang O_O


----------



## Marin

Nikon F3 + Nikkor 50mm f/1.2 Ai-S on the way (replacing my Nikkor 50mm f/1.2 Ai).

I really liked the Zuiko glass but the OM bodies just didn't feel right in my hand. Just something about them...

So Gone, remove the OM-4 and add a Nikon F3 and Nikkor 50mm f/1.2 Ai-S.


----------



## laboitenoire

Damn, you're really hunting for that perfect 35mm, aren't you?


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Damn, you're really hunting for that perfect 35mm, aren't you?


Lol.









Well, the perfect 35mm camera for me would be the Leica M6 + Noctilux (f/.95 or f/1.0). But the cost...

Anyways, the Nikkor 50mm f/1.2 tones come close to looking like what the Leica and some of the Voigtlander lenses produce, so hopefully all goes well.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


So are you still thinking of picking up a large Canon setup for birding or does this TC allow you to skip that route?


Right now, I'm thinking skip. I know my wife certainly is...

Dudeman, 5.6 isn't that sharp, although I may be able to recover it in pp. But 6.3 on up totally rock. This really is an awesome tc.


----------



## equetefue

some from the last two days... rest here http://equetefue.zenfolio.com/p798025160


----------



## iandroo888

dang equ.. where do u live? such nice nature for u to capture.. all i got here is desert T_T


----------



## laboitenoire

According to the zip code, Kissimmee, FL.


----------



## iandroo888

very nice. i havent been to florida in years... last time i went... lots of raining =[


----------



## laboitenoire

Rebel T2i (550D) is official. From the features it looks as if this might make the 50D obsolete. Must say it looks like a hell of a camera.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *laboitenoire* 
Rebel T2i (550D) is official. From the features it looks as if this might make the 50D obsolete. Must say it looks like a hell of a camera.

I wouldn't go so far as to say that. The 50D is still faster in burst (almost twice as fast and the buffer holds more), has a better battery life, micro AF adjustment, and has a better AF system (the 50D has 9 cross-type points compared to the T2i's one). Plus, I'd be surprised if it beats the 50D in high ISO noise. The T2i is packing a seriously dense sensor. Lastly, The 50D has a magnesium and partially weather-sealed body, with superior ergonomics (IMO) and the scroll-wheel and joystick layout, not to mention the top info LCD. Apples and oranges.

The movie mode and metering system beat out the 50D, but I don't see what else does.


----------



## xlastshotx

Alright here we go, I took this test at a 45Â° angle.

Auto-focused at center f1.8









(for fun) Manual-focused at center f1.8









How is it?


----------



## Marin

Seems to be slightly front focusing. An easy fix though since you have a 50D (micro-adjust) and the front focusing is quite minimal.

EDIT: Try shooting from farther back and see if the focus is still off.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
I wouldn't go so far as to say that. The 50D is still faster in burst (almost twice as fast and the buffer holds more), has a better battery life, micro AF adjustment, and has a better AF system (the 50D has 9 cross-type points compared to the T2i's one). Plus, I'd be surprised if it beats the 50D in high ISO noise. The T2i is packing a seriously dense sensor. Lastly, The 50D has a magnesium and partially weather-sealed body, with superior ergonomics (IMO) and the scroll-wheel and joystick layout, not to mention the top info LCD. Apples and oranges.

The movie mode and metering system beat out the 50D, but I don't see what else does.

Well, it has the new Digic processor, so I'm guessing it should be relatively similar to the 7D as far as IQ is concerned.


----------



## xlastshotx

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Seems to be slightly front focusing. An easy fix though since you have a 50D (micro-adjust) and the front focusing is quite minimal.

EDIT: Try shooting from farther back and see if the focus is still off.

Here is a couple feet back (cropped)


----------



## Marin

Yeah, looks like you just need to micro-adjust it.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *laboitenoire* 
Well, it has the new Digic processor, so I'm guessing it should be relatively similar to the 7D as far as IQ is concerned.

Yes, except that the 7D has dual Digic 4's and although they share the same resolution and sensor size, they aren't the same sensor (according to DPReview, whatever that entails). The 50D has a single Digic 4 as well, so I think it will have a long life in production and desirability. Hell, 40Ds are still popular.

But with the T2i, it's definitely impressive, but makes you wonder if it's just too much for an entry-level camera. I'm reserving judgment for full reviews.


----------



## dudemanppl

WHOOO!
The versatile, wide angle AF-S NIKKOR 16-35mm f/4G ED VR is scheduled to be available in late February 2010 at Nikon Authorized Dealers with an estimated selling price of $1259.95*. The ultra-fast AF-S NIKKOR 24mm f/1.4 G ED lens will be available in late March 2010 for estimated selling price of $2199.95*.


----------



## iandroo888

dang.


----------



## Lelin

I want to upgrade to a 7D but I don't have that kind of money, especially since it costs alot more here -_-. I was really hoping for a 60D. A T2i with a nicer body, mixed features between the 50D(fps, cross type AF, basic sealing)-T2i would be perfect.







Guess I'll have to wait for a 7D price drop (yea right) or a cheap used deal...


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dudemanppl* 
WHOOO!
The versatile, wide angle AF-S NIKKOR 16-35mm f/4G ED VR is scheduled to be available in late February 2010 at Nikon Authorized Dealers with an estimated selling price of $1259.95*. The ultra-fast AF-S NIKKOR 24mm f/1.4 G ED lens will be available in late March 2010 for estimated selling price of $2199.95*.

Why does it have to be $2,200!?

I'm tired of using my Sigma in low light. It's not good or wide enough.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Lelin*


I want to upgrade to a 7D but I don't have that kind of money, especially since it costs alot more here -_-. I was really hoping for a 60D. A T2i with a nicer body, mixed features between the 50D(fps, cross type AF, basic sealing)-T2i would be perfect.







Guess I'll have to wait for a 7D price drop (yea right) or a cheap used deal...


Why not get 40D or 50D?


----------



## Lelin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Why not get 40D or 50D?

I'm thinking about a 50D but I'd be pissed if they announced a 60D in a few weeks.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Lelin*


I'm thinking about a 50D but I'd be pissed if they announced a 60D in a few weeks.


I wouldn't worry about it. Rumored specs are already out (canonrumors.com) and judging from them, the 60D won't be a quantum leap over the 50D (you can bet that Canon won't want it to be too close to the 7D). The only significant difference will be the video capability. That's assuming that there will be a 60D anytime soon. The consensus is that either the 60D or the 1Ds MkIV is due out next, no one knows for sure.

And besides, the 60D will likely cost what the 50D did at launch ($1300), whereas you can get a 50D now for $900 or so new.


----------



## Lelin

I'm thinking more and more about a 50D + 70-200mm f4, that'd be about 1400$ minus 500-575$ for my XSi kit sold.
I usually prefer lenses over camera bodies and I thought the XSi would be sufficient, but the ISO for what I shoot is often lacking and it feels quite small in my hands. I played a bit with a 40D and it felt so much better. Lens micro adjust would be fantastic too.
I'll keep my eye open on 50D's. Thanks for the advices


----------



## dudemanppl

Moots, this thing is amazing! I can see what you meant when you said the D300s was better.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dudemanppl* 
moots, this thing is amazing! I can see what you meant when you said the d300s was better.

Glad you like it


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Why does it have to be $2,200!?

I'm tired of using my Sigma in low light. It's not good or wide enough.

It'll probably drop $200 after a month. For $2200, save a bit more and get a D700 for much better ISO


----------



## iandroo888

hmm i borrowed my cousin's SB-600. there is a indoor formal event tomorrow night that i planned on using the flash for. better to do direct flash or bounce from ceiling?

i did some practice shots with a stuffed animal. what i got was direct puts a shadow. and if there is a background or backdrop [which may happen...] it would cover and not look that well.. so i was thinking should i point it like straight up or like 60 degrees forward? or something like that?


----------



## Marin

Nikon F3 + Nikkor 50mm f/1.2 Ai-S gets here later today. Hoping for the best. *crosses fingers*


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


hmm i borrowed my cousin's SB-600. there is a indoor formal event tomorrow night that i planned on using the flash for. better to do direct flash or bounce from ceiling?

i did some practice shots with a stuffed animal. what i got was direct puts a shadow. and if there is a background or backdrop [which may happen...] it would cover and not look that well.. so i was thinking should i point it like straight up or like 60 degrees forward? or something like that?


Bounce!

If the ceiling is too high for it to bounce properly, a notecard placed in the head of the flash works very well.

In a pinch, a white or glossy business card works well with the SB-600


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
hmm i borrowed my cousin's SB-600. there is a indoor formal event tomorrow night that i planned on using the flash for. better to do direct flash or bounce from ceiling?

i did some practice shots with a stuffed animal. what i got was direct puts a shadow. and if there is a background or backdrop [which may happen...] it would cover and not look that well.. so i was thinking should i point it like straight up or like 60 degrees forward? or something like that?

Bounce definitely, direct flash is inferior no matter what you do to diffuse it. One important thing you should do is scope out the location. Get an idea of the surfaces and distances, such as the height of the ceiling. If there are 15 foot ceilings, you will need to ratchet up the flash output. If the ceilings are higher than that, than bouncing won't be possible, in which case you'll either need to use a bounce card like Moots said, or try a softbox diffuser and use direct flash.

Other things to consider are the colors of the surfaces. Whatever color the ceiling is will influence the color of the shot. Also, don't forget the walls. You can bounce off those too!


----------



## Quantum Man

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
hmm i borrowed my cousin's SB-600. there is a indoor formal event tomorrow night that i planned on using the flash for. better to do direct flash or bounce from ceiling?

i did some practice shots with a stuffed animal. what i got was direct puts a shadow. and if there is a background or backdrop [which may happen...] it would cover and not look that well.. so i was thinking should i point it like straight up or like 60 degrees forward? or something like that?

Direct flash from the on-camera position is almost never a good idea. Bounce flash is your friend. Bounce over your shoulder or behind you. Pointing it straight up or slightly forward will create shadows in the eye sockets.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Quantum Man*


Direct flash from the on-camera position is almost never a good idea. Bounce flash is your friend. Bounce over your shoulder or behind you. Pointing it straight up or slightly forward will create shadows in the eye sockets.


Good tip, I do that myself, but it's often hard to find a close enough wall, esp. if you're in a ballroom type setting. I can't find it now of course, but I once saw a gadget which attached to a speed light, which allowed the flash to emit straight from the head (wherever it's pointed), but diverted a small amount perpendicularly (directly towards the subject). The idea was to allow light to bounce off the ceiling, but at the same time allow a little fill flash for those eye sockets and other crevasses.


----------



## Quantum Man

You'd be surprised at how far away you can bounce from, especially given today's high-ISO cameras. I have bounced off of gray-colored stone walls in a super dark church, 40-50 feet away.

The "device" you're describing is the "black foamy thing" or the black "a better bounce card" with white inset card inside. It's just black foamy material attached to your flashhead with a small portion of white material on the inside to throw some light forward.

Check out www.abetterbouncecard.com.


----------



## Marin

Well I got the F3HP, it's in great condition. No brassing or anything. Looks like it barely got any use.

And there's the Nikkor 50mm f/1.2 Ai-S. Well, when I took it out of the plastic wrap it was obviously not an Ai-S lens. It has seven blades and the labels are on the barrel, not the focus ring. The lens also has crap stuck in the focus ring (so it's hard to focus) and looks pretty beat up.

The lens is obviously not in BGN condition and it's not even the right version. Uggg...


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Well I got the F3HP, it's in great condition. No brassing or anything. Looks like it barely got any use.

And there's the Nikkor 50mm f/1.2 Ai-S. Well, when I took it out of the plastic wrap it was obviously not an Ai-S lens. It has seven blades and the labels are on the barrel, not the focus ring. The lens also has crap stuck in the focus ring (so it's hard to focus) and looks pretty beat up.

The lens is obviously not in BGN condition and it's not even the right version. Uggg...


Isn't BGN short for Bargain, meaning it's crap?

The AI and AI-S look like they have the same lens design as well.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Isn't BGN short for Bargain, meaning it's crap?

The AI and AI-S look like they have the same lens design as well.


Around 70% condition. For KEH that usually means a lens with a small ding or some scratches.

And you're right, the Ai and Ai-S have the same optical design. What's different is the number of aperture blades (seven vs. nine), so the Ai-S renders bokeh a lot better when stopped down. Wide open they're the same though.


----------



## Lelin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Around 70% condition. For KEH that usually means a lens with a small ding or some scratches.

And you're right, the Ai and Ai-S have the same optical design. What's different is the number of aperture blades (seven vs. nine), so the Ai-S renders bokeh a lot better when stopped down. Wide open they're the same though.

Don't really know anything about Nikon. How much does the F3 + that lens go for? I'm tempted to try film a bit. Anyway hope you have great results.


----------



## Marin

Body is around $250, lens ranges from $400-600+.


----------



## laboitenoire

You probably got an AI conversion. It seems like you're always getting something wrong with your 35mm stuff...


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Lelin* 
Don't really know anything about Nikon. How much does the F3 + that lens go for? I'm tempted to try film a bit. Anyway hope you have great results.

You can get a FM or FE body for a lot less though, and the 50mm f/1.*4*, 1/2 stop slower is about $100-120 online in good condition.


----------



## Lelin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
You can get a FM or FE body for a lot less though, and the 50mm f/1.*4*, 1/2 stop slower is about $100-120 online in good condition.

Good stuff. Seems reasonable to experiment.

Marin, do you develop your pics yourself? If so, did it take alot of time to learn it?

Just bought a Naneu Sahara 217F. Look at alot of bag before finally finding that one. Perfect for me. It is much bigger and deeper than I thought tho. I'll probably even use it as my next pack sack. I had a 45L last time I travelled and it was way too big. For all inclusive Ill bring all my gear carry on in that. For backpacking Ill bring my body, 2 lenses and maybe a flash. Rest of the dividers will be used for rolled tshirts, boxers, socks and laptop sleeve for a pair of pants, should be great.
Will post picks soon.


----------



## Marin

I develop my B&W film. A local lab develops my color film.

I learned how to develop B&W in a day. It's extremely straight forward and easy to do.


----------



## Lelin

Thanks for the quick answer


----------



## Marin

Paired with the Nikkor 50mm f/1.2 Ai that I already have, not the one from KEH.


----------



## Bigevil89

A few B&W and Color film snaps that i got developed yesterday. enjoy









taken with Kodak BW400CN


























































Taken with Kodak Ultramax 400


----------



## Mr_Nibbles

I no longer have the E-510, can you please replace it with a Digital Rebel XSi and the 18-55 3.5 IS kit lens


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Good tip, I do that myself, but it's often hard to find a close enough wall, esp. if you're in a ballroom type setting. I can't find it now of course, but I once saw a gadget which attached to a speed light, which allowed the flash to emit straight from the head (wherever it's pointed), but diverted a small amount perpendicularly (directly towards the subject). The idea was to allow light to bounce off the ceiling, but at the same time allow a little fill flash for those eye sockets and other crevasses.



Quote:



Originally Posted by *Quantum Man*


You'd be surprised at how far away you can bounce from, especially given today's high-ISO cameras. I have bounced off of gray-colored stone walls in a super dark church, 40-50 feet away.

The "device" you're describing is the "black foamy thing" or the black "a better bounce card" with white inset card inside. It's just black foamy material attached to your flashhead with a small portion of white material on the inside to throw some light forward.

Check out www.abetterbouncecard.com.


Yeah I was thinking of making myself one of those things


----------



## DK_mz

please add me, with a Canon 1000D and 18-55 default lens


----------



## The Pook

Take me off, please. My Kodak is long gone (not that it was any good in the first place), and I'm in the process of buying a new camera.


----------



## iandroo888

bounced up at like 80 degrees with power at like 50mm. worked well i think. i havent looked thru pictures yet but from what i saw on screen, looked good =]

thx for the tips ^_^


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
bounced up at like 80 degrees with power at like 50mm. worked well i think. i havent looked thru pictures yet but from what i saw on screen, looked good =]

thx for the tips ^_^

Everything looks good on the camera screen until you put it on a computer monitor


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
Everything looks good on the camera screen until you put it on a computer monitor









Yeah, because then it looks great!


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Sparhawk* 
Yeah, because then it looks great!
















indeed it did xDDD [thankfully..]


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
bounced up at like 80 degrees with power at like 50mm. worked well i think. i havent looked thru pictures yet but from what i saw on screen, looked good =]

thx for the tips ^_^

Power at 50mm? That's not a measure of the output of the flash. That's the setting for the focal length of whatever lens you're using. The flash cone will widen or narrow as needed depending on the focal length of the lens (my 430 EXII sets is automatically).

The output is measured in 1/3 stops and can be adjusted on the flash itself, but can also be adjusted on the camera (at least on my 7D).


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Power at 50mm? That's not a measure of the output of the flash. That's the setting for the focal length of whatever lens you're using. The flash cone will widen or narrow as needed depending on the focal length of the lens (my 430 EXII sets is automatically).

The output is measured in 1/3 stops and can be adjusted on the flash itself, but can also be adjusted on the camera (at least on my 7D).

The settings on the flash head are the same for the SB-600 and 430EXII in terms of zoom and manual/TTL modes.

You can't adjust the flash power from the body while the units are on the body. When they are off, you can adjust the outputs with the higher end bodies.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


The settings on the flash head are the same for the SB-600 and 430EXII in terms of zoom and manual/TTL modes.

You can't adjust the flash power from the body while the units are on the body. When they are off, you can adjust the outputs with the higher end bodies.


I can adjust it with my 7D. I could with my 40D as well. Maybe it's different for Nikon.


----------



## iandroo888

something for u guys to see.. a tripod.. probably older than most of us here.. according to my uncle [original owner of the tripod], it is over 40 yrs old. used to be top of the line. has some damage on the mount. not sure how since its almost twice my age [im 22..] been thru lots of moves. pretty good shape still imo. the extended legs look new ! which is surprising.. must be b/c when its not in use and its inside the outer tube, gets protected.

heres some pictures of it


















shortest length is about 24" and can extend to approx 56". can hold up d200 w/ 24-70mm f/2.8 lens. pretty good considering the age. its super light too. think it was made with aluminum.

since my uncle doesnt use it now.. and im into photography, hes letting me use it =] xD


----------



## laboitenoire

Aluminum would probably still have a bit of heft to it. It might actually be magnesium. I know that my grandfather had an 8 foot magnesium step ladder at one point that was light enough for him to carry with one hand.


----------



## iandroo888

oic


----------



## olli3

Nice tripod







Looks great considering its age lol.


----------



## laboitenoire

Of course the only way to find out for sure is to try and set it on fire. If you're blinded by the flash, it's magnesium


----------



## equetefue

New ones from today trek

Enjoy !


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Of course the only way to find out for sure is to try and set it on fire. If you're blinded by the flash, it's magnesium










Then post it on youtube


----------



## Boris4ka

So I was bored today and did this:


----------



## nuclearjock

D3 70-200 VRII f/4 @ 200mm iso 1100 1/160th VR on.










Shot through glass window, mf.


----------



## laboitenoire

Damn, he looks a bit groggy.


----------



## iandroo888

i have a question..

so i was using my sd780is at a concert yesterday... 1/2 - 3/4 way thru teh concert, i noticed a dark mark on screen.. so i used my shirt to wipe the lcd.. wasnt that.. i wiped the lens. wasnt that eitehr... any idea whats up? i reviewed the videos i took and the spot is there.. so =X


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
i have a question..

so i was using my sd780is at a concert yesterday... 1/2 - 3/4 way thru teh concert, i noticed a dark mark on screen.. so i used my shirt to wipe the lcd.. wasnt that.. i wiped the lens. wasnt that eitehr... any idea whats up? i reviewed the videos i took and the spot is there.. so =X

Never heard of something like that happening to a p&s. If it were a DSLR, I would say mote or something on the sensor or rear element. Can you upload a sample of the vid?


----------



## Marin

http://www.camera-pentax.jp/new/index.html

This is probably Pentax's MF camera. Price is supposed to undercut the competition by a lot. I'm so excited.


----------



## iandroo888

uhhh =X how do i cut video. LOL

actually imma just take some pictures or record a new video. upload later

*edit*

woo lucky, musta really been a dust mote or something. i took the chance and took a can of compressed air to it. since my sd780is lens cap is gone [sister accidentally hit camera out of hand when it was on and it dropped on ground..] i just blew air around.. in the holes n openings.. and after a few times.. it was gone! oOo

i need to buy one of those bulb thingies.. lol =X if in cases this happens to my SLR. heck no not taking a can of compressed air to it >=[


----------



## Mootsfox

$6500 for a 400mm f/2.8... Good deal?

http://atlanta.craigslist.org/nat/pho/1601835743.html


----------



## iandroo888

daaaaaaaaang ! thats huge [thats what she said...]


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
daaaaaaaaang ! thats huge [thats what she said...]

:swearing:


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


http://www.camera-pentax.jp/new/index.html

This is probably Pentax's MF camera. Price is supposed to undercut the competition by a lot. I'm so excited.


From Pentax, interesting. I wonder if Canon, Nikon, et al will follow suit.


----------



## mortimersnerd

Ordered some Sandisk 16GB Ultra SDs. The 4GB was very limiting...


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
$6500 for a 400mm f/2.8... Good deal?

http://atlanta.craigslist.org/nat/pho/1601835743.html

Only a bit under average price. But you sure as hell don't see many of them around.


----------



## myresolution_72

Ehh you all have very expensive cameras. Do you guys know of a good camera for ~$150? I was looking at a few Sony Cybershots. I don't want to go with Kodak because my family members have their cameras and the pictures seem very grainy.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Only a bit under average price. But you sure as hell don't see many of them around.


Nope, this isn't the VR II version which is ~9k. The version pcitured is not the newer version and was nowhere near 9k at purchase. all in all, not a good deal by any means.

I have the VR II version and the VR II is actually worth the money in this case. I'm very surprised at it's effectiveness on a lens of this weight and fl.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
Nope, this isn't the VR II version which is ~9k. The version pcitured is not the newer version and was nowhere near 9k at purchase. all in all, not a good deal by any means.

I have the VR II version and the VR II is actually worth the money in this case. I'm very surprised at it's effectiveness on a lens of this weight and fl.

Ah, good to know.

I wasn't planning on buying, I don't have $6,500, and if I did, I would be buying a Subaru first.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
Nope, this isn't the VR II version which is ~9k. The version pcitured is not the newer version and was nowhere near 9k at purchase. all in all, not a good deal by any means.

I have the VR II version and the VR II is actually worth the money in this case. I'm very surprised at it's effectiveness on a lens of this weight and fl.

I know it wasn't VR. Didn't know the non-VRs would be that cheap. I've seen Canon 400 2.8s go for 2500.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


I know it wasn't VR. Didn't know the non-VRs would be that cheap. I've seen Canon 400 2.8s go for 2500.


Canon glass is alot more reasonably and I should say realistically priced. Nikon in general is overpriced. This guy is trying to sell his apparently immaculate non-VR lens at a new VR-II lens price (used that is). 3.5 - 4k is more realistic for his non-VR lens.


----------



## dudemanppl

Got a 17-55 (traded 70-300 VR for it), and I'm planning to have it only for a few weeks because I still have my 17-35 and I want to sell both for a 300 f/2.8 AF-I. 17-55 is MUUUUUUCCHHH sharper in my opinion and is a little bit lighter (small but noticeable). Lack of aperture ring is horrible since I love shooting video.


----------



## iandroo888

gonna buy 18-105 from my uncle who got a 16-85mm for his d90. hes sellin for 265 w/ a hoya or b+w uv filter.

how much can i sell 18-55mm VR for? saw it was 180 on b&h photo. think i can sell for 150? no physical damage or blemishes. glass is clean.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


gonna buy 18-105 from my uncle who got a 16-85mm for his d90. hes sellin for 265 w/ a hoya or b+w uv filter.

how much can i sell 18-55mm VR for? saw it was 180 on b&h photo. think i can sell for 150? no physical damage or blemishes. glass is clean.


$100, if you're lucky.


----------



## iandroo888

really? dang. how about the 18-105 price?


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
really? dang. how about the 18-105 price?

More than the average price, but if it's in good condition, it's not a bad deal.

http://completed.shop.ebay.com/Lense...=p3286.c0.m282

The 18-55mm VR isn't worth much because it's a kit lens. Everyone has one, and no one wants a second one


----------



## Danylu

I may be purchasing a 70-300mm VR in an hour or so.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
More than the average price, but if it's in good condition, it's not a bad deal.

http://completed.shop.ebay.com/Lense...=p3286.c0.m282

The 18-55mm VR isn't worth much because it's a kit lens. Everyone has one, and no one wants a second one









it should be in good condition. family takes pretty good care of things. from what my cousin told me, my uncle has a filter on it and they only get B+W or Hoya filters.. so thats like 60 bux right there =X


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


The 18-55mm VR isn't worth much because it's a kit lens. Everyone has one, and no one wants a second one










C'mon Foxie, you know you want another for backup.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
C'mon Foxie, you know you want another for backup.

I actually don't have one. I sold it with my D60


----------



## laboitenoire

Moots, did you get my PM?


----------



## Mootsfox

Yes, I meant to PM you back but got side tracked.


----------



## iandroo888

that means moots should buy mine ;D


----------



## equetefue

Woot !!

Canon CPS will be sending me a 500L on March 5th for two week trial. After I return it I'll be testing the 600L and two weeks after the 800L

Woot.


----------



## laboitenoire

Lucky...


----------



## Mr_Nibbles

How did that happen? And where can we apply?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mr_Nibbles* 
How did that happen? And where can we apply?









Canon Professional Services


----------



## iandroo888

is tehre one for nikon?


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


is tehre one for nikon?


Nikon Professional Services


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Nikon Professional Services


Har, har, har...










I'm surprised photographers haven't really turned Ken Rockwell into their own version of a Rick-roll...


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Har, har, har...









I'm surprised photographers haven't really turned Ken Rockwell into their own version of a Rick-roll...


It's almost there. We've got the facts, now we just need someone to put his head over Rick Astleys head.

Quote:



* Ken Rockwell is the Chuck Norris of photography

* Ken Rockwell's camera has similar settings to ours, except his are: P[erfect] Av[Awesome Priority Tv[Totally Awesome Priority] M[ajestic]

* Ken Rockwell doesn't color correct. He adjusts your world to match his.

* Sure, Ken Rockwell deletes a bad photo or two. Other people call these Pulitzers.

* Ken Rockwell doesn't adjust his DOF, he changes space-time.

* Circle of confusion? You might be confused. Ken Rockwell never is.

* Ken Rockwell doesn't wait for the light when he shoots a landscape - the light waits for him.

* Ken Rockwell never flips his camera in portrait position, he flips the earth

* Ken Rockwell ordered an L-lens from Nikon, and got one.

* Ken Rockwell is the only person to have photographed Jesus; unfortunately he ran out of film and had to use a piece of cloth instead.

* When Ken Rockwell brackets a shot, the three versions of the photo win first place in three different categories

* Before Nikon or Canon releases a camera they go to Ken and they ask him to test them, the best cameras get a Nikon sticker and the less good get a Canon sticker

* Once Ken tested a camera, he said I cant even put Canon on this one,thats how Pentax was born

* Rockwellian policy isn't doublethink - Ken doesn't even need to think once

* Ken Rockwell doesn't use flash ever since the Nagasaki incident.

* Only Ken Rockwell can take pictures of Ken Rockwell; everyone else would just get their film overexposed by the light of his genius

* Ken Rockwell wanted something to distract the lesser photographers, and lo, there were ducks.

* Ken Rockwell is the only one who can take self-portraits of you

* Ken Rockwell's nudes were fully clothed at the time of exposure

* Ken Rockwell once designed a zoom lens. You know it as the Hubble SpaceTelescope.

* When Ken unpacks his CF card, it already has masterpieces on it.

* Rockwell portraits are so lifelike, they have to pay taxes

* On Ken Rockwell's desktop, the Trash Icon is really a link to National Geographic Magazine

* Ken Rockwell spells point-and-shoot "h-a-s-s-e-l-b-l-a-d"

* When Ken Rockwell went digital, National Geographic nearly went out of business because he was no longer phyically discarding photos

* For every 10 shots that Ken Rockwell takes, 11 are keepers.

* Ken Rockwell's digital files consist of 0's, 1's AND 2's.

* Ken Rockwell never focus, everything moves into his DoF

* Ken Rockwell's shots are so perfect, Adobe redesigned photoshop for him: all it consists of is a close button.

* The term tripod was coined after his silhouette

* Ken Rockwell never produces awful work, only work too advanced for the viewer

* A certain braind of hig-end cameras was named after people noticed the quality was a lot "like a" rockwell

* Ken Rockwell isn't the Chuck Norris of photography; Chuck Norris is the Ken Rockwell of martial arts.

* Ken Rockwell never starts, he continues


Oh yes, I posted them again.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
It's almost there. We've got the facts, now we just need someone to put his head over Rick Astleys head.

You would think that for a group of people so talented at creating images, somebody could modify one sufficiently.


----------



## iandroo888

n e one selling a Nikkor AF-S 18-105mm VR lens? [just curious b4 i buy my uncles... maybe i can find lower price LOL]


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


You would think that for a group of people so talented at creating images, somebody could modify one sufficiently.










I gotta say, I took a flick through the school cameras today (400D). I have to say that the interface on Nikon is simpler, but it is easier to get to options on the Canon. But the delete sequence of keys is downright stupid on the Canon. Delete Button>Right Key>Set, much simpler on my D60 (double tap delete)


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


is tehre one for nikon?


http://www.nikonpro.com/AboutNPS.aspx

Yes, but you have to submit a portfolio and some other stuff. There's no yearly fee.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


I gotta say, I took a flick through the school cameras today (400D). I have to say that the interface on Nikon is simpler, but it is easier to get to options on the Canon. But the delete sequence of keys is downright stupid on the Canon. Delete Button>Right Key>Set, much simpler on my D60 (double tap delete)










Think about how easy it is to accidentally delete when all you need to do is tap the same button twice. Sure, Canon's method is more laborious, but it's a safeguard (a la Windows) to prevent accidental deletion.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Think about how easy it is to accidentally delete when all you need to do is tap the same button twice. Sure, Canon's method is more laborious, but it's a safeguard (a la Windows) to prevent accidental deletion.


Exactly.


----------



## sweffymo

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


I gotta say, I took a flick through the school cameras today (400D). I have to say that the interface on Nikon is simpler, but it is easier to get to options on the Canon. But the delete sequence of keys is downright stupid on the Canon. Delete Button>Right Key>Set, much simpler on my D60 (double tap delete)










It's a little easier on my 30D. (Delete --> Turn wheel 1 click --> Set) However, I never delete anything until I get to a computer anyway, so I don't care about how easy it is.









However, the "Picture Styles" on Canons starting with the 30D are great! I have that mapped to the "Set" button, so all I have to do to change them is press Set, scroll to the one I want, and then press Set again.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Think about how easy it is to accidentally delete when all you need to do is tap the same button twice. Sure, Canon's method is more laborious, but it's a safeguard (a la Windows) to prevent accidental deletion.



Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Exactly.


Lol.

I've never accidentally deleted any file, and you can lock any file by hitting the lock button.


----------



## olli3

lol yeah its pretty hard to double tap a button by accident id say. I've never deleted something by accident and like moots said there is always the lock button if you wanted to make sure.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Lol.

I've never accidentally deleted any file, and you can lock any file by hitting the lock button.


This.

Btw is e-TTL meant to work? I mean the 430 EX II meters the scene properly but the 400D doesn't recognize that the 430 EX II is being used so I still get long shutter speeds.

Also, how do I use AF in Live View? Dam this is confusing, it took me 10 minutes to realise the 'Set' button activatedd LV









Slowly I must learn the ins and outs of this camera until my tele lens arrives


----------



## Lelin

Oh boy... since there won't be a 60D... I'm getting a 7D. Got a good deal mint 7D + 28-135mm IS for 1600$ shipped to Canada. That's a load of cash haha... really nervous at the moment. I'll sell the lens for 350$ locally so its basically a 1250$ 7D







. I need to sell my XSi!

Edit: Scratch that, her husband said it would be too long to ship to Canada. I then offered to pay a bit more for faster shipping but nop. No love for Canada they probably found a US buyer and thought it would be easier :'(


----------



## Mootsfox

Cool video from NASA with their expensive Nikon toys.

  
 YouTube- Space Station Reboost


----------



## dudemanppl

Its not an 800mm lens but a 400 f/2.8 AF-I with a 2x TC. They should upgrade to the new TC.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Its not an 800mm lens but a 400 f/2.8 AF-I with a 2x TC. They should upgrade to the new TC.


Note that they have a D2X...









I think shipping is a bit slow to the ISS.


----------



## Marin

Searching for deals has payed off.

Epson V700 on the way.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Searching for deals has payed off.

Epson V700 on the way.


I have a V750 and am very happy with it.


----------



## Dream Killer

Hey guys, new to the forums.

Looking around, I would love to join this club.

I use a Canon Rebel XTi (400d) with an EF-s 17-55 f/2.8 IS USM and EF 70-200 F/4L IS USM.


----------



## Danylu

Oh my, this 430 EX II is starting to scare me. So I tried to take a photo of my monitor and all of the sudden the flash turned on for 2 seconds and made this weird noise - what was that about :S


----------



## equetefue

charging noise ?


----------



## laboitenoire

Wait Danylu, when did you switch to Canon?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


This.

Btw is e-TTL meant to work? I mean the 430 EX II meters the scene properly but the 400D doesn't recognize that the 430 EX II is being used so I still get long shutter speeds.

Also, how do I use AF in Live View? Dam this is confusing, it took me 10 minutes to realise the 'Set' button activatedd LV









Slowly I must learn the ins and outs of this camera until my tele lens arrives










When I use my speed light (same one), I shoot in M mode or Av, and adjust EV by -1 or -2 (a little guesswork involved depending on the ambient lighting). Play around with the EV and flash output to find combinations that work. The goal is to balance ambient light and the light from the flash.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Oh my, this 430 EX II is starting to scare me. So I tried to take a photo of my monitor and all of the sudden the flash turned on for 2 seconds and made this weird noise - what was that about :S


When the flash auto adjusts the coverage (depending on what focal length your using), it makes a mechanical sound. Is this what you're hearing.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *equetefue*


charging noise ?


Wouldn't be, surprisingly enough, I can't hear this 430 EX II charge, it is literally silent. On Nikon systems, the SB-600 sounds like a laser, but with Canon, the shutter sounds like a laser









Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Wait Danylu, when did you switch to Canon?


It's a school camera that I gotta learn to use, unfortunately they bought into the dark side









Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


When the flash auto adjusts the coverage (depending on what focal length your using), it makes a mechanical sound. Is this what you're hearing.


Not sure, I barely know how to operate this thing so there is a small chance of me remaking that sound.

Gone, the 70-300 VR I ordered should be arriving next week so add that when you get a chance please









BTW: Any suggestions for protective filters? (67mm)


----------



## Marin

Nikon's the dark side. Lenses back this up.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Nikon's the dark side. Lenses back this up.










Aw Snap! lol

I just looked at a photo of the 16-35 VR, if someone had blurred out the gold branding I would have said it was a 17-55mm VR D:


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Nikon's the dark side. Lenses back this up.










Dark side has limitless power.

And cookies.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Dark side has limitless power.

And cookies.


And Ken Rockwell.


----------



## Mootsfox




----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
And Ken Rockwell.

We have Moots =]


----------



## Quantum Man

lol @ Ken Rockwell.

Canon has Chuck Westfall.


----------



## ericeod

I am new to the DSLR camera scene. I picked up the camera (Rebel XS) about a month ago and am taking a digital photography class at my university.

On a side note, I am looking to upgrade before may. What would be a good upgrade, and should I stick with Canon?


----------



## laboitenoire

Well, it depends on what you've got in the way of lenses, how much you're willing to spend, and how comfortable you've found your current Canon body. If you do stick with Canon, a used 40D or 50D would be a great upgrade. However, depending on what lenses you have, it might be more worthwhile to upgrade those instead. Plenty of guys on the forum who shoot with a low-end body like the XS or XSi and lenses from Canon's L-series.


----------



## ericeod

Quote:


Originally Posted by *laboitenoire* 
Well, it depends on what you've got in the way of lenses, how much you're willing to spend, and how comfortable you've found your current Canon body. If you do stick with Canon, a used 40D or 50D would be a great upgrade. However, depending on what lenses you have, it might be more worthwhile to upgrade those instead. Plenty of guys on the forum who shoot with a low-end body like the XS or XSi and lenses from Canon's L-series.

Very good point. I wouldn't mind getting an IS zoom lense for starters. But I had the idea of upgrading the entire kit because I wanted to give my current camera to my sister-in-law who has a real passion for photography, but honestly can't afford a nice camera, and won't for many years. So I am planning on giving her my Rebel XS and picking up an entire new kit.


----------



## Marin

Get a 7D.


----------



## equetefue

50D if not wanting to spend too much $$, but 7D would be great


----------



## Marin

Or a 40D.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


And Ken Rockwell.


Looks like I 've got to haul this thing out again.

You continue to insist he's Nikon, but a picture is worth 1000 words.

You know he's all your's and you know you want him







(killed with fire).










Edit:

BTW, I've been playing with my 2.0E III and I think Nikon's got it right this time. Apparently only useful for f/2.8 though. Some members on the cafe' are so-so with the IQ. My copie's awesome. I need some 1. sun, 2. birds to get some feather detail shots but fur shots from my dog and static object shots look awesome on my 400/D3 (800mm) and 400/D300 (1200mm). f/5.6 is soft but can be recovered in PP, 6.3 is good, 7.1-11 totally rock on the 400. the 70-200 f/2.8 also looks very good as well, but 90% use will be on the 400. This may wind up saving me alot of money in the long run.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *equetefue*


Woot !!

Canon CPS will be sending me a 500L on March 5th for two week trial. After I return it I'll be testing the 600L and two weeks after the 800L

Woot.


Awesome Edwin!!! I hope you find one you like









Do me a favor and do some experiments with the 800 wide open. I'll be interested to see how it stacks up to my 400/TC-20E III. Sounds like alot of fun. Randy mentioned to me that Nikon has decided only NPS members will be able to purchase 600 f/4's. That about does it for me. I may have to have a Nikon "garage sale" soon.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ericeod*


I am new to the DSLR camera scene. I picked up the camera (Rebel XS) about a month ago and am taking a digital photography class at my university.

On a side note, I am looking to upgrade before may. What would be a good upgrade, and should I stick with Canon?


How much do you have to spend? A 40D or 50D, as suggested, are good options and worthwhile upgrades.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


Looks like I 've got to haul this thing out again.

You continue to insist he's Nikon, but a picture is worth 1000 words.

You know he's all your's and you know you want him







(killed with fire).


Sorry Nuke, that picture doesn't change reality - Nikon is stuck with him!


----------



## Marin

It's obvious Ken is testing out the Manfrotto tripod.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
It's obvious Ken is testing out the Manfrotto tripod.

Maybe, but he's smiling at you Sam...


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


Awesome Edwin!!! I hope you find one you like









Do me a favor and do some experiments with the 800 wide open. I'll be interested to see how it stacks up to my 400/TC-20E III. Sounds like alot of fun. Randy mentioned to me that* Nikon has decided only NPS members will be able to purchase 600 f/4's.* That about does it for me. I may have to have a Nikon "garage sale" soon.


lol seriously? It seems that the only thing stopping me from buying the 600 is my wallet. This does seem like a bit of an odd policy though.


----------



## Marin

I'm thinking it's a Nikon F6.


----------



## Bigevil89

A few snaps from a few days ago.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 









I'm thinking it's a Nikon F6.

Looks like a F100. The F6 has the same sync and 10 pin caps that the D300/700/3 has.

F6 also has round buttons of different size for the EV+/- and mode, where the F100(and D1) has the oval buttons.


----------



## Marin

Yep, you're right.

Also, it seems like Sigma redid their website. And it looks great.


----------



## equetefue

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


Awesome Edwin!!! I hope you find one you like









Do me a favor and do some experiments with the 800 wide open. I'll be interested to see how it stacks up to my 400/TC-20E III. Sounds like alot of fun. Randy mentioned to me that Nikon has decided only NPS members will be able to purchase 600 f/4's. That about does it for me. I may have to have a Nikon "garage sale" soon.



Nuke are you freaking serious ?? That is a hell of a blow if you ask me. It doesn't make sense why that would be. If that's the case the 400 would be going the same route as they are the standard for sports.

hey man, will be happy to have you at Canon !


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *equetefue* 
Nuke are you freaking serious ?? That is a hell of a blow if you ask me. It doesn't make sense why that would be. If that's the case the 400 would be going the same route as they are the standard for sports.

hey man, will be happy to have you at Canon !

You know the Randy I'm referring to. His source was the head head sales guy at ephotocraft.com. I think his name is Eldar. Doesn't really bother me much. The 600 is way too heavy to be viable in the field. and my 400 with my 1.7 or for that matter 2.0 III look pretty awesome so if I don't jump ship, I'm good with the 400.

I feel cozy with Nikon gear, availability and price are bugging me to no end though.


----------



## equetefue

yeah. i feel you. That's the reason I jumped ship, availability, pricing and the variety.

How much the 400 weight in comparison to the 600? In Canon the 400 is a tad heavier.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *equetefue*


yeah. i feel you. That's the reason I jumped ship, availability, pricing and the variety.

How much the 400 weight in comparison to the 600? In Canon the 400 is a tad heavier.


600 f/4 = 11.12 lbs
400 f/2.8 = 10.2 lbs

But the 600 is alot bigger and cumbersome to carry in the field.

BTW, here's a dark day shot of a goose from my D300 set at iso 640. Uncontrolled NR kicks in at iso 800 and above. So D300/400/2.0_III TC 1/125th VR on. 1200mm effective fl. Cant wait to try it on small birds in GOOD light.


----------



## equetefue

plenty sharp for me.

What's your take on the 400 in the field? is it hanholdable for long periods or not.

Canons are heavier than Nikons though by about 2lbs.

Really torn between the 400/500/600

Really thinking the 500 will be the way to go for me.

BTW, what you think Wimberly or Mongoose. Lots of photogs swear by Wimberly, but lots of people trading for the mongoose. Arthur Morris loves his on the 800


----------



## nuclearjock

I bought an Induro GHB2 and love it/ prefer it to the Wemberly. Don't know anything about the mongoose.

The 400 was a no brainer for me 'cause I needed f/2.8 for shutter speed and blurred bg's for sports. Randy hh's his 500 f/4 all the time and does very well with it. The 400 2.8 has a very wide front element and is therefore front heavy and almost impossible to hh period.

You're gonna have the opportunity to "play" with these gems so ultimately you'll be able to decide for yourself. Just try your best not to get attached to all three $$$.


----------



## equetefue

Heard the same thing about the Canon's 400; front heavy and not easy to hh. The 600 is heavy but more balanced. The 500 seems to be the compermise. The 800 would be the ideal one but not for that price.

I'll check out the Unduro. Why u prefer it over the Wimberly ?


----------



## equetefue

I like the look of the Induro. It seems that it includes the QR plate already, but what about flash bracket. They dont sell one for it ? That would break the deal for me


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *equetefue*


I like the look of the Induro. It seems that it includes the QR plate already, but what about flash bracket. They dont sell one for it ? That would break the deal for me


Nah, you'd need one from RRS. I prefer their stuff anyway.


----------



## riko99

Quote:



Originally Posted by *equetefue*


Nuke are you freaking serious ?? That is a hell of a blow if you ask me. It doesn't make sense why that would be. If that's the case the 400 would be going the same route as they are the standard for sports.

hey man, will be happy to have you at Canon !


At least NPS doesnt cost a thing where as CPS does depending on how high in it you feel like being.


----------



## equetefue

believe me I don't mind the fee at all. Everything I sent to CPS has been received, fixed and shipped back in one day.

Also a 500/600 and 800 all in 6 weeks for trial. Try that with NPS


----------



## laboitenoire

Had the time today to go out shooting around campus. Gorgeous weather (just shy of 40 degrees and not a cloud in the sky) for walking around, although upon reviewing my shots I think I probably would have been better off without the polarizing filter. Some of my images seemed a little soft (even by P&S standards) and I got more flare than I had expected.

I'll post them to my Flickr in a few. Today made me realize I really need to buy a DSLR.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Had the time today to go out shooting around campus. Gorgeous weather (just shy of 40 degrees and not a cloud in the sky) for walking around, although upon reviewing my shots I think I probably would have been better off without the polarizing filter. Some of my images seemed a little soft (even by P&S standards) and I got more flare than I had expected.

I'll post them to my Flickr in a few. Today made me realize I really need to buy a DSLR.


LOL, get one already! You've been pining for one for as long as I've seen you frequenting these forums.


----------



## laboitenoire

I'm watching for deals. I'm planning to buy one for sure by May (birthday money), although I'm thinking of pulling the trigger on a D50 that Adorama currently has.


----------



## iandroo888

stop thinking and pull ! LOL

so question for you peepz. i know canon categorize their pro lenses with the "L". what does Nikon use to categorize? the only thing i know is they have a gold ring like canon's red but is there anything in the name that would tell its a pro lens?


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


stop thinking and pull ! LOL

so question for you peepz. i know canon categorize their pro lenses with the "L". what does Nikon use to categorize? the only thing i know is they have a gold ring like canon's red but is there anything in the name that would tell its a pro lens?


The price









There isn't a definitive marker, if 'N' is in the name then it's a pretty good indication.


----------



## iandroo888

yah i noticed the N in the badge as well as the gold ring. but o well.


----------



## Bigevil89

im really loving black and white film


----------



## mugan23

i always liked gray scale it makes a lot of shots more interesting


----------



## riko99

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
yah i noticed the N in the badge as well as the gold ring. but o well.

Yeah the N is for their "Nanocoating" and usually is available on their high end.


----------



## Sparhawk

I was thinking about getting a Nikon DX 55-200mm...
then I rented a Nikon AF 80-200mm f/2.8 this weekend(Went to the Norway vs. Switzerland hockey game







), really tempting to grab a used one now...
all I'd have to do is sell my paperweight of an xbox360, since I just sold my 18-135mm DX.


----------



## iandroo888

oh man im starting to like the black n white effect. was playing with it earlier today during a CNY festival here at chinatown. something different xD i like =]

haha yah that 80-200 is nice. played with a 70-200 f/2.8 [altho newer version of the 80-200 but should still be nice] the 55-200 is favored by a lot of people. esp since its pretty cheap for something that covers up to 200mm for like 200 - 250 bux for the VR version.


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
oh man im starting to like the black n white effect. was playing with it earlier today during a CNY festival here at chinatown. something different xD i like =]

haha yah that 80-200 is nice. played with a 70-200 f/2.8 [altho newer version of the 80-200 but should still be nice] the 55-200 is favored by a lot of people. esp since its pretty cheap for something that covers up to 200mm for like 200 - 250 bux for the VR version.

I always forget to test convert my images to B&W.








I still don't see the point in taking pictures in B&W mode when you are basically getting all the color data from the sensor and throwing it away.







I like B&W pictures but the effect can be added later using almost any photo editor







, and then you still have the color version if you want to use it for something else.









yeah, the 55-200 has some great value, but I can definitely see myself upgrading bodies at some point in the semi-near future, so I may as well get a lens that will work properly on an Full-frame sensor.

I have to say that the metal body really feels much better than the plastic lenses.







It makes my camera body feel cheap, and my camera is one of the better entry level ones (I've used my friends' canon XS(etc) series cameras and they feel cheaper than mine for sure)


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
stop thinking and pull ! LOL

so question for you peepz. i know canon categorize their pro lenses with the "L". what does Nikon use to categorize? the only thing i know is they have a gold ring like canon's red but is there anything in the name that would tell its a pro lens?

Mostly build quality and badges. The pro glass have all metal bodies, wide focus rings with thin ridges, M/A and M instead of just AF and MF, gold rings as you said and large badges. The pro line stuff usually has internal focusing and with some pieces like the 70-200mm, internal zoom as well. This is a major benefit for harsh conditions.


----------



## Marin

B&W is where it's at...

... at least for film.







And color has its uses.




Series I did a few weeks ago on Eichlers.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Mostly build quality and badges. The pro glass have all metal bodies, wide focus rings with thin ridges, M/A and M instead of just AF and MF, gold rings as you said and large badges. The pro line stuff usually has internal focusing and with some pieces like the 70-200mm, internal zoom as well. This is a major benefit for harsh conditions.

And split second focusing.

Trying to take sports with this Canon 75-300 has taught me the values of a fast AF - and a AF system that works. /rant


----------



## E_man

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
And split second focusing.

Trying to take sports with this Canon 75-300 has taught me the values of a fast AF - and a AF system that works. /rant









Haha, try shooting sports with a tamron 70-200. Slow to focus. I wouldn't have bought it if I shot sports much at all


----------



## iandroo888

ive played with the 14-24 and 24-70. fast focusing and hecka quiet ! >.<" i want my first pro lens nao ! xD


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
ive played with the 14-24 and 24-70. fast focusing and hecka quiet ! >.<" i want my first pro lens nao ! xD

Get the 17-55mm f/2.8 It's about as useful for the price as you can get if you want pro glass.


----------



## iandroo888

but for that price, couldnt i get a 24-70?


----------



## E_man

28-70 AF-S can be had for less rediculous prices if you can deal with the -4mm on the wide end


----------



## iandroo888

hm. i think the first pro lens id get is the 70-200. why? cuz i cant get away from the 18 on my lens now lol. i like wide but if i were to get 14-24, i need 24-70 to cover what i had before too lmao =X rawr !


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


hm. i think the first pro lens id get is the 70-200. why? cuz i cant get away from the 18 on my lens now lol. i like wide but if i were to get 14-24, i need 24-70 to cover what i had before too lmao =X rawr !


Then go with this suggestion.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Get the 17-55mm f/2.8 It's about as useful for the price as you can get if you want pro glass.


----------



## iandroo888

hmmm will think about it when the time comes... or rather when the fund comes hahahaha


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


but for that price, couldnt i get a 24-70?


No... The 17-55mm is about $850 used. The 24-70mm is about $1,300 used.

Plus 24mm on a Nikon DX isn't that wide... it's 36mm.

It's not a bad lens, it's just awkward on a DX body unless you want that range.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *E_man*


Haha, try shooting sports with a tamron 70-200. Slow to focus. I wouldn't have bought it if I shot sports much at all


Hey at least it has a constant 2.8

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


hm. i think the first pro lens id get is the 70-200. why? cuz i cant get away from the 18 on my lens now lol. i like wide but if i were to get 14-24, i need 24-70 to cover what i had before too lmao =X rawr !


I don't think I'll ever get a Nikon pro zoom, maybe a Nikon pro prime. I just can't justify the high price of the pro zooms. For example, for the cost of a 70-200 VR, I could have gotten myself the 105 VR macro, a 70-300VR, 85mm 1.8 and have enough money left over for filters for all of them. I mean it would be nice to have the 70-200 VR, but it's not wallet friendly, and that's where Sigma comes in.









It doesn't help that we receive it in the butt in regards to pricing where I live.


----------



## iandroo888

i c i c.

oh a question that just popped into head. something i was talkin to my cousin n uncle with. so im getting the 18-105 from my uncle right? and like.. im thinkin of getting a filter [since hes not giving me one.. he used it on this new 16-85]. i was thinking of getting this filter to use with something like this step up ring. why i want to get a 77mm? b/c i dont want to keep buying different size filters for every lens i get.. step up ring is cheap. friend told me using a step up ring gives a SLIGHT hindrance in the view or something? my uncle used a step up to a 77mm but hes hard to contact and i believe u guys would give me a better explanation xD

is it a good idea to do this? i wanna get a nice filter that i can use for a long while. whats difference between uv (0) and haze uv (0). price is pretty much same but whats the difference?


----------



## E_man

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Hey at least it has a constant 2.8


True, but doesn't make it a sports lens. Amazing for other things though. Before that I was using a 200$ sigma 70-300. Only difference I saw was the shutter speed, not the AF times. And the sharpness and dof, of course


----------



## E_man

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


i c i c.

oh a question that just popped into head. something i was talkin to my cousin n uncle with. so im getting the 18-105 from my uncle right? and like.. im thinkin of getting a filter [since hes not giving me one.. he used it on this new 16-85]. i was thinking of getting this filter to use with something like this step up ring. why i want to get a 77mm? b/c i dont want to keep buying different size filters for every lens i get.. step up ring is cheap.

is it a good idea to do this? i wanna get a nice filter that i can use for a long while. whats difference between uv (0) and haze uv (0). price is pretty much same but whats the difference?


It'll work without the lenshood. And the difference is probably in the coatings. Better coatings = more $$, less annoying reflections


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


i c i c.

oh a question that just popped into head. something i was talkin to my cousin n uncle with. so im getting the 18-105 from my uncle right? and like.. im thinkin of getting a filter [since hes not giving me one.. he used it on this new 16-85]. i was thinking of getting this filter to use with something like this step up ring. why i want to get a 77mm? b/c i dont want to keep buying different size filters for every lens i get.. step up ring is cheap. friend told me using a step up ring gives a SLIGHT hindrance in the view or something? my uncle used a step up to a 77mm but hes hard to contact and i believe u guys would give me a better explanation xD

is it a good idea to do this? i wanna get a nice filter that i can use for a long while. whats difference between uv (0) and haze uv (0). price is pretty much same but whats the difference?


You don't need a UV filter unless you need to protect the front element in extreme conditions or to complete the lenses weather-sealing.


----------



## E_man

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


You don't need a UV filter unless you need to protect the front element in extreme conditions.


This for sure


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


i c i c.

oh a question that just popped into head. something i was talkin to my cousin n uncle with. so im getting the 18-105 from my uncle right? and like.. im thinkin of getting a filter [since hes not giving me one.. he used it on this new 16-85]. i was thinking of getting this filter to use with something like this step up ring. why i want to get a 77mm? b/c i dont want to keep buying different size filters for every lens i get.. step up ring is cheap. friend told me using a step up ring gives a SLIGHT hindrance in the view or something? my uncle used a step up to a 77mm but hes hard to contact and i believe u guys would give me a better explanation xD

is it a good idea to do this? i wanna get a nice filter that i can use for a long while. whats difference between uv (0) and haze uv (0). price is pretty much same but whats the difference?


I wouldn't waste your money on UV filters. They reduce quality and don't offer much, if any insurance imo.

Not to jinx myself, but I've never broken an element before, and I have dropped a lens. I never use a filter for "protection".


----------



## iandroo888

but doesnt it at least protect the front element from scratches n dust or w/e at least? or maybe moisture in high humidity areas?


----------



## Marin

Unless you're careless and leave your lenses laying around without caps, then you're fine.


----------



## Danylu

I'm thinking of getting a UV filter to take the dust and scratches for my new 70-300mm VR, or should I just get a cleaning kit which can be used on all my lenses?

I read something about carbon based brushes that remove oils and stuff really well.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


but doesnt it at least protect the front element from scratches n dust or w/e at least? or maybe moisture in high humidity areas?


Keep your hood on, dust doesn't hurt a lens, moisture is in the air, including the air between the front element and filter AND inside the lens. Pro lenses are better sealed from moisture and dust anyways.









About the scratching bit, glass is very tough, more-so than some metals like steel and titanium. There are coatings on lenses which may not be as hard as glass though, so don't go around testing this on your friend's lenses


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
I'm thinking of getting a UV filter to take the dust and scratches for my new 70-300mm VR, or should I just get a cleaning kit which can be used on all my lenses?

I read something about carbon based brushes that remove oils and stuff really well.

I would forgo the UV filter, for reasons that Moots and Marin have already stated. For cleaning, a microfiber cloth and lens pen are all I ever need.


----------



## Quantum Man

I use the lens hood for protecting my lenses. No filters here for "protection".


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
I would forgo the UV filter, for reasons that Moots and Marin have already stated. For cleaning, a microfiber cloth and lens pen are all I ever need.

Agreed.


----------



## nuclearjock

Had a UV filter on a Nikkor zoom lens and to make a long story short, the lens/body (with the cap on) dropped ~1 foot onto a tile floor. The UV filter shattered, and a piece of broken filter scratched the first element of the lens that it was supposed to protect.

I don't like taking pictures through windows and that's basically what you're doing with a UV filter. My 400 doesn't have an option for a front element filter (uses 52mm drop in filters) so I'm forced to treat it carefully. I do the same with the rest of my lenses. Lens hood always, and lenspen/microfiber cloth will clean up any stains should they occur. A rocket blower will do just fine fine for dust on your lens, mirror box, as well as your sensor when the time comes.

I've yet to have UV light ruin a digital image.


----------



## iandroo888

i thought polarizer was the one for thru windows and reflective surfaces... lol


----------



## olli3

Good to read these comments on filters, I've always kept a filter on my D60 since I've had it just because I was told by someone that's what you should *always* do. But thinking about it now, I cant think of a time in the last year the lens would have been in any danger of being scratched lol. Only thing I'd worry about is when cleaning it that I'd put a mark on it but I guess with a lens pen and a being careful that should never happen.

Im going to test without having the filter on for a bit and see how it goes, if I can't see a difference then maybe I will just keep it on anyway


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
i thought polarizer was the one for thru windows and reflective surfaces... lol

I avoid shooting through windows whenever possible(unless I'm going for a special effect) because putting low quality pane-glass in between you and your subject is just silly.

This same logic can be applied to camera filters: Why put a relatively cheap piece of glass(UV filter) in between your sensor and your subject?
It will degrade quality, cause ghosting, and many other undesirable effects.

I only take out my filters for specific shots and even then it is sparingly.


----------



## nuclearjock

I use a filter when I want to create an effect e.g. 81a for warming, or a cp to deepen colors and remove glare on a sunny day,nd for slower ss etc.. I've yet to run into a situation where a shot would have looked better taken through a window.


----------



## trogalicious

I'd like to get in...

I'm shooting with: 
D70s (4gb CF)
D90 (16gb sd)
SB-800 speedlight
18-55/3.5-5.6 DX (standard kit lens)
18-200/3.5-5.6G VRII
70-300/4-5.6G 
50/1.8
Nikon ml-l3 wireless remote
Lowepro Nova 200 (If I'm carrying both)
Lowepro Inverse 200 (If I'm carrying one)

My flickr is linked to a yahoo account that seems to be borked at the moment, but I'm setting up a new one. I'll link to it eventually.


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


I use a filter when I want to create an effect e.g. 81a for warming, or a cp to deepen colors and remove glare on a sunny day,nd for slower ss etc.. I've yet to run into a situation where a shot would have looked better taken through a window.


Check out some really old neighbourhoods. Sometimes the super distorted windows can make a room look really interesting.


----------



## iandroo888

i c i c


----------



## porschedrifter

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


I don't like taking pictures through windows and that's basically what you're doing with a UV filter.


Windows are not optical UV filters. Any 'good' screw on uv filter is optically coated glass, and is virtually undetectable if you compare a with and without image, they are for specific purposes. Thats why you should ALWAYS keep one on to protect the lens.

You dropped your cam, and it shattered and scratched the lens.... 
Well, don't drop your camera. hahaha


----------



## sweffymo

Quote:



Originally Posted by *porschedrifter*


Windows are not optical UV filters. Any 'good' screw on uv filter is optically coated glass, and is virtually undetectable if you compare a with and without image, they are for specific purposes. Thats why you should ALWAYS keep one on to protect the lens.


Most screw on filters aren't that great, and I'm not going to spend $75 on a good Hoya filter for my 18-55mm Kit lens... Plus, they don't really protect your lenses from anything but dust. I have had filters shatter on me and it's a huge pain to clean the glass dust off the lens without micro-pitting the element...

I just shoot without filters nowadays because I don't need UV blocking (glass by itself blocks something like 90% of UV rays anyway)


----------



## iandroo888

im not getting one for my 18-55. gonna get one for my 18-105 using a 67 to 77mm step up ring because i wanted to get one that i can use on the pro lenses in the future if i ever get that far LOL


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
i thought polarizer was the one for thru windows and reflective surfaces... lol


Quote:


Originally Posted by *porschedrifter* 
Windows are not optical UV filters. Any 'good' screw on uv filter is optically coated glass, and is virtually undetectable if you compare a with and without image, they are for specific purposes. Thats why you should ALWAYS keep one on to protect the lens.

You dropped your cam, and it shattered and scratched the lens....
Well, don't drop your camera. hahaha

A flat piece of cheap glass on a lens is just like shooting pressed up to a window.

Note, if Nuke didn't have a filter on that lens, it probably would not have scratched it.

Filters will never help you from a dropped lens. Even if you drop the lens directly on the front element, a 2mm piece of glass is not going to adsorb enough energy to keep the 1cm piece of glass behind it from breaking, if there is enough energy there to even break it. And you'd be out your $80 filter.

Filters have their place, and can be _very_ useful. They just don't belong in the "protection" business. Anyone who tells you that is trying to sell you one.


----------



## iandroo888

mm i c. =X

whats difference between micro and macro lenses?


----------



## xlastshotx

delete


----------



## Quantum Man

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


mm i c. =X

whats difference between micro and macro lenses?


They're the same thing. Nikon calls it a Micro lens and Canon calls it a Macro lens.


----------



## shortfuse

I have a droid and it has 5.0 mp and this is my official camera. DROID DOES!


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Quantum Man* 
They're the same thing. Nikon calls it a Micro lens and Canon calls it a Macro lens.

Yup. There are a few Nikkor-Macro lenses too, they serve the same purpose though.


----------



## iandroo888

yeah but nikon uses both names =X so i was like uhhhh LOL


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *porschedrifter* 
Windows are not optical UV filters. Any 'good' screw on uv filter is optically coated glass, and is virtually undetectable if you compare a with and without image, they are for specific purposes. Thats why you should ALWAYS keep one on to protect the lens.

You dropped your cam, and it shattered and scratched the lens....
Well, don't drop your camera. hahaha

Alright if these UV filters are so important an option, then why aren't prime super teles (my $9k 400mm f/2.8 as an example) so equipped to protect the huge front element??? BTW your logic is il-logic. I didn't drop the camera. It fell ~1 foot. Also, consumer grade UV filters do in fact affect image quality. It's not present on cheaper kit lenses, but is apparent on pro glass, plain and simple.

I've shot sports for several years, none of the sideline guys use screw on filters period. Pro wildlife and landscape don't use them either.

"Protective" filters are nothing more than sales gimmicks used by camera store sales staff. Using your logic, treat your lens carefully, you won't need one.


----------



## mortimersnerd

So I got my ML-L3 remove from B&H today and the battery was dead. :/

I had another battery but thats aggravating.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mortimersnerd* 
So I got my ML-L3 remove from B&H today and the battery was dead. :/

I had another battery but thats aggravating.

Should have bought mine


----------



## mortimersnerd

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Should have bought mine









You had one for sale?


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mortimersnerd* 
You had one for sale?









No, but I have one since I sold my D60, and have no need for it.


----------



## iandroo888

i bought a cheap one from dealextreme.com LOL =X it works lmao


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *xlastshotx* 
Im selling all my camera gear here in the fs section, I think I have the stuff priced pretty good. If anyones looking to upgrade or get there first nice dslr setup.... link

Oh no! Giving it all up?


----------



## laboitenoire

Finally got around to uploading some shots from over the weekend. Had to do some damage control because I probably should have been more diligent about taking off the polarizer. Bit of irony, really, using Picasa to tweak the photos before uploading to Flickr


----------



## iandroo888

i like 4th n 5th one.


----------



## Lelin

Finally bought a 7D for real now! Can't wait to get it!! That hurt my pocket alot but it's well worth it.


----------



## dudemanppl

300mm f/2.8 AF-I on Thursday, I hate waiting for lenses. Also, does anyone want to buy a Nikon mount Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 HSM II or a Tamron 28-75 (I'll check later if its in body or screw drive).


----------



## iandroo888

5 dollah !


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dudemanppl* 
300mm f/2.8 AF-I on Thursday, I hate waiting for lenses. Also, does anyone want to buy a Nikon mount Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 HSM II or a Tamron 28-75 (I'll check later if its in body or screw drive).

Why do all the Sigma lenses come _after_ I make my tele zoom purchase. They said three working days so hopefully here tomorrow.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Lelin*


Finally bought a 7D for real now! Can't wait to get it!! That hurt my pocket alot but it's well worth it.


Congrats! I'll update your gear list. Any changes in lenses (or other gear)?

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Why do all the Sigma lenses come _after_ I make my tele zoom purchase. They said three working days so hopefully here tomorrow.


Well, they aren't here yet, and it's not as if everything Sigma makes is gold (some notable exceptions of course). Plus the Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 will likely be twice the cost (or more) of your 70-300. Be happy with your Nikon lens!


----------



## trogalicious

I finally had a few moments to pull some random shots from my picasa/flickr/photobucket accounts.

Hope you enjoy.. maybe a little.









































I hate that flickr merged with yahoo and I can't remember my yahoo account information. Just the same, I'll be uploading more to my picasa album.


----------



## Fletcher Carnaby

^^Nice!









Is that a sea turtle?


----------



## trogalicious

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Fletcher Carnaby*


^^Nice!









Is that a sea turtle?


Yeah Fletcher, it's a loggerhead. I visit the southern outer banks somewhat regularly and the aquarium there rescues some of the loggerheads and green turtles that don't make it out of the nests. Thankfully, they keep their windows clean... as well as their tanks.

..and thanks







glad you enjoyed.


----------



## iandroo888

love the bay n bridge picture.


----------



## Lelin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Congrats! I'll update your gear list. Any changes in lenses (or other gear)?

Well, they aren't here yet, and it's not as if everything Sigma makes is gold (some notable exceptions of course). Plus the Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 will likely be twice the cost (or more) of your 70-300. Be happy with your Nikon lens!


Thanks!

Yep some more lenses and stuff

*Lelin* - Canon EOS 7D
Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS
Canon EF 50mm f/1.8
Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8
Sigma 30mm f/1.4
Manfrotto 728b Tripod
Sigma 530DG Super Flash
Naneupro Sahara 217F Bag

Looks like I need a telephoto lens now (and a job)


----------



## Danylu

Nice turtle!


----------



## trogalicious

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
love the bay n bridge picture.


Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
Nice turtle!

much thanks. glad you guys enjoy.


----------



## iandroo888

what u guys think of these pictures

http://picasaweb.google.com/andymche...eat=directlink

just took em yesterday.. =X


----------



## Marin

Add the Epson V700 to my film gear.

This scanner is awesome.


----------



## Fletcher Carnaby

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


what u guys think of these pictures

http://picasaweb.google.com/andymche...eat=directlink

just took em yesterday.. =X


Nice n tight!









The full rig shot (#1) is sweet ...for obvious reasons.


----------



## laboitenoire

Y'all remember my essay I wrote on photography? Well apparently my writing instructor nominated me for Case's first-year essay competition and said that it should be the one I submit. There's a prize associated with it, so I've decided that if I win, part of the money will go to buying a DSLR


----------



## iandroo888

very nice. good luck !


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Y'all remember my essay I wrote on photography? Well apparently my writing instructor nominated me for Case's first-year essay competition and said that it should be the one I submit. There's a prize associated with it, so I've decided that if I win, part of the money will go to buying a DSLR










Part?

Good work


----------



## laboitenoire

Actually, it probably would be all, seeing as the prize appears to be $100. Still, I'm quite excited.


----------



## Marin

http://www.camera-pentax.jp/new/index.html

I want it now!


----------



## Lelin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
http://www.camera-pentax.jp/new/index.html

I want it now!

What cam is it?

I should soon receive my 7D, I've been looking at CF cards and I don't know anything about them. What kind of speed and capacity do I need for 1080P recording?


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Lelin*


What cam is it?


Pentax 645 Digital that's rumored to be priced at $6500.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Lelin* 
What cam is it?

I should soon receive my 7D, I've been looking at CF cards and I don't know anything about them. What kind of speed and capacity do I need for 1080P recording?

At the very minimum, a SanDisk Extreme III (30MB/s read/write) will suffice; better yet an Extreme IV (45MB/s). I haven't seen speed tests for the 7D yet (still waiting on them), but the fastest Canon and Nikon cameras are writing at about 32 MB/s max with CF cards rated at 45MB/s.

Full res 16MP RAW files weigh in at 21 to 25 MB apiece, so I would recommend something with a 16GB capacity, which will hold about 600 16MB RAW files.

As I said, an Extreme III will probably be good enough, but it's nice to have a fast CF card for offloading to your PC via a fast card reader (e.g. SATA CF card reader). I have a SanDisk Extreme 60MB/s 16GB card with a SATA CF card reader and it's wonderfully fast when dumping a full card onto my hard drive.


----------



## nuclearjock

GT, tell me about your sata card reader i.e. who makes it and where did you find it??


----------



## Lelin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


At the very minimum, a SanDisk Extreme III (30MB/s read/write) will suffice; better yet an Extreme IV (45MB/s). I haven't seen speed tests for the 7D yet (still waiting on them), but the fastest Canon and Nikon cameras are writing at about 32 MB/s max with CF cards rated at 45MB/s.

Full res 16MP RAW files weigh in at 21 to 25 MB apiece, so I would recommend something with a 16GB capacity, which will hold about 600 16MB RAW files.

As I said, an Extreme III will probably be good enough, but it's nice to have a fast CF card for offloading to your PC via a fast card reader (e.g. SATA CF card reader). I have a SanDisk Extreme 60MB/s 16GB card with a SATA CF card reader and it's wonderfully fast when dumping a full card onto my hard drive.


Thanks for the info, looks like this will be expensive...


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


GT, tell me about your sata card reader i.e. who makes it and where did you find it??


It's a "Nippon Labs" (seriously) brand multi-format reader, internal enclosure via the 5.25 bays. I want a small external reader to carry in my bag, but I can't find one with a eSATA/SATA interface, just USB 2.0 or Firewire. The one I have seems a bit slower than what I would expect for eSATA, I need to actually observe the transfer rate next time.

EDIT: I got it at the Egg.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Lelin*


Thanks for the info, looks like this will be expensive...


It's not too bad, I got my 16GB Extreme 60 MB/s for around $80 with a rebate. I guess it will be a bit more than that for you. I also have an Extreme IV 4GB card, and I can't tell any difference speed wise between the two when using them.


----------



## Quantum Man

I use the Sandisk Extreme Firewire card reader along with Sandisk Extreme IV cards. It is a very fast combo when I download. A full 8GB card will download in 3-4 minutes.

Here's the reader: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...lash_Card.html


----------



## Lelin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


It's a "Nippon Labs" (seriously) brand multi-format reader, internal enclosure via the 5.25 bays. I want a small external reader to carry in my bag, but I can't find one with a eSATA/SATA interface, just USB 2.0 or Firewire. The one I have seems a bit slower than what I would expect for eSATA, I need to actually observe the transfer rate next time.

EDIT: I got it at the Egg.

It's not too bad, I got my 16GB Extreme 60 MB/s for around $80 with a rebate. I guess it will be a bit more than that for you. I also have an Extreme IV 4GB card, and I can't tell any difference speed wise between the two when using them.


Yea they cost around 120$ here, the same price as the speeding ticket I got today.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Lelin*


Yea they cost around 120$ here, the same price as the speeding ticket I got today.


Ouch...you crazy Canadian drivers!

As I said, just get a cheap Extreme III and it'll be good enough.


----------



## iandroo888

sorry to hear about the ticket >.<"

anyone wanna trade a AF-S 35mm f/1.8 or AF 50mm f/1.8 + cash or AF-S 50mm f/1.4 *cough* shush on the last one.. cant a guy dream.. maybe someone would >.<" for my Cooler Master CSX V1 Spartan Case xD


----------



## xlastshotx

Threw together a bicycle mount for my 50D, gunna try my luck with stop-motion? photography. Any tips on shutter speeds/apertures for this type of thing would be appreciated.


YouTube- Custom DSLR Bicycle Mount





^Quick video of how I have it mounted, there is a piece of a 2x4 drilled and bolted (three bolts + plus bungies for emergencies) to my rear bicycle rack. The camera hangs about 1.5-2ft to the right of the bicycle, it is mounted with a bold that goes threw the end of the 2x4 into the tripod mount on the bottom of the camera, with a rag in between for shock absorption and to keep it tight. Then I have my camera linked via usb to my laptop in a backback that is running a program to trigger the camera every 5 seconds and save the picture to the laptop.

I did a 1 mile test ride with it to try some settings
manual - f/13 - 1/80th shutter - iso 800 - 50D -50mm f1.8

















Obviously the focus is way off, I think I might have to tape the focus ring so it doesnt move.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *xlastshotx* 
Threw together a bicycle mount for my 50D, gunna try my luck with stop-motion? photography. Any tips on shutter speeds/apertures for this type of thing would be appreciated.

The camera is triggered to go off every 5 seconds (via my laptop in backback), I will be riding 5-10mph.

I'd set it to Aperture Priority mode, and you should be fine.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888*
anyone wanna trade a AF-S 35mm f/1.8 or AF 50mm f/1.8 + cash or AF-S 50mm f/1.4 *cough* shush on the last one.. cant a guy dream.. maybe someone would >.<" for my Cooler Master CSX V1 Spartan Case xD

I'll trade you a 50mm AF-D f/1.8 + cash for that GTX260.


----------



## iandroo888

>.>"


----------



## xlastshotx

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


I'd set it to Aperture Priority mode, and you should be fine.


Yeah that is probably a good idea, that way it be lit right to whole time unlike in manual mode were if I ride into a dark area the exposure will be wrong.


----------



## Mr_Nibbles

Quote:



Originally Posted by *xlastshotx*


Yeah that is probably a good idea, that way it be lit right to whole time unlike in manual mode were if I ride into a dark area the exposure will be wrong.


If it is bright outside set the aperture to a high number in Av mode. That way your DOF will be as big as possible. If you set it to Tv or P, the DOF will be constantly changing and that could look weird.

On a side note: if you have a TI calculator you can write a little program to control the shutter. I just finished a time lapse project and was very happy with the results, good luck!


----------



## Lelin

Ended up buying Sandisk Extreme 16GB 60MB/s. It was cheaper than EIII and EIV. Crazy prices here.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mr_Nibbles*


If it is bright outside set the aperture to a high number in Av mode. That way your DOF will be as big as possible. If you set it to Tv or P, the DOF will be constantly changing and that could look weird.

On a side note: if you have a TI calculator you can write a little program to control the shutter. I just finished a time lapse project and was very happy with the results, good luck!


I have a TI-npsire. Will this work, and where are instructions? It would save me from having to carry a netbook around


----------



## mortimersnerd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


I have a TI-npsire. Will this work, and where are instructions? It would save me from having to carry a netbook around










I would assume its programmed in TI basic. http://tibasicdev.wikidot.com/


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mr_Nibbles*


If it is bright outside set the aperture to a high number in Av mode. That way your DOF will be as big as possible. If you set it to Tv or P, the DOF will be constantly changing and that could look weird.

On a side note: if you have a TI calculator you can write a little program to control the shutter. I just finished a time lapse project and was very happy with the results, good luck!


If you don't mind, I'd like to see that code.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mortimersnerd*


I would assume its programmed in TI basic. http://tibasicdev.wikidot.com/


I'm bad at codes and stuff, hopefully I could ask Mr Nibbles for his bit of code and see if it works on my calculator >.>


----------



## laboitenoire

I'm guessing it requires the 84, 89, or Nspire so you have a USB jack available.


----------



## Marin

Discontinued film binge.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *laboitenoire* 
I'm guessing it requires the 84, 89, or Nspire so you have a USB jack available.

You can send a signal over the 2.5mm port on the TI-83.


----------



## laboitenoire

Well, I was thinking it would go to the USB jack on the camera, but I suppose it could go to a remote release terminal.

EDIT: Found this by a simple Google search. 83 does work.


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Discontinued film binge.


Nice


----------



## JeremyFr

Wow time to update my info lol

(2) Canon 40D's
(1) Canon BG-E2 Battery Grip
(2) Tamron 28-75mm F2.8 EF
(2) Canon EF 50MM 1.8 Mk II
(1) Canon EF 75-300MM Mk II
and various other goodies. Lots has changed since I originally joined.


----------



## Bigevil89

Just placed an order for a Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ35


----------



## Mr_Nibbles

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
You can send a signal over the 2.5mm port on the TI-83.

This is the way I did it. I have a ti-84, but i know that 83's and maby some others work. The cable can be had for a few dollars and the code can be found online.

It is not a code you import into the calculator, you simply make a program ON the calculator. When I get back from sushi I will post a link to the guide.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *JeremyFr*


Wow time to update my info lol

(2) Canon 40D's
(1) Canon BG-E2 Battery Grip
(2) Tamron 28-75mm F2.8 EF
(2) Canon EF 50MM 1.8 Mk II
(1) Canon EF 75-300MM Mk II
and various other goodies. Lots has changed since I originally joined.


Need some clarification; am I adding the above to what's on your list now, or is there anything from the list that needs to be removed first? And I take the numbers in parentheses are quantities?


----------



## Mootsfox

: Prompt A
: While 1
: For (H,1,A,1)
: End
: Send(A)
: End

Is the code in the guide laboitenoire posted.

It's pretty simple, it prompts for input and goes into a For loop to set the delay, then use the send command.

The TI-83 does not have a reliable clock in it, the TI-84 does. Using a For loop as the delay is about the best you can do on a TI-83, but because of how the calculator stores memory, it will start to be inaccurate after maybe 30-40 loops. The delay will get longer and longer as it opens more loops.

It looks like it would be fine to use as a remote trigger. I wouldn't use it as an intervalometer if the time actually matters though.


----------



## Marin

Looks like my A12 back needs to go in for a CLA. Frames aren't even.


----------



## Mr_Nibbles

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


: Prompt A
: While 1
: For (H,1,A,1)
: End
: Send(A)
: End

Is the code in the guide laboitenoire posted.

It's pretty simple, it prompts for input and goes into a For loop to set the delay, then use the send command.

The TI-83 does not have a reliable clock in it, the TI-84 does. Using a For loop as the delay is about the best you can do on a TI-83, but because of how the calculator stores memory, it will start to be inaccurate after maybe 30-40 loops. The delay will get longer and longer as it opens more loops.

It looks like it would be fine to use as a remote trigger. I wouldn't use it as an intervalometer if the time actually matters though.


Yep, that is exactly what I used.


----------



## Mootsfox

I had a dream last night that I was in the passenger seat of a convertible sports car and went through a car wash with someone, with the top open. I had my camera in my lap for whatever reason, and quickly put the lens on and figured it would be ok. We both jumped out, they tried to put the top up while half way through the wash, but failed and the car filled with soapy water. After the wash was over, I looked at my camera and I didn't mount the lens right, there was a gap between the mount and lens, and when I took it off, there was moisture inside the body. I remember it being really detailed and then it ended.

In the next dream I had last night, I was in New York City and my camera gear was stolen. I spent awhile looking for it, but didn't find it and was pissed.

I dunno, maybe I should pick up some insurance on this stuff?


----------



## trogalicious

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
I dunno, maybe I should pick up some insurance on this stuff?

Perhaps adding onto your homeowners policy as a floater/rider? I have my firearms and my wife's jewelry added on to my policy. I guess I should add my gear to it as well.

check with your agent. renters and homeowners insurance companies can cover it.


----------



## bigblock

Sign me up to the camera thread!
I've bought and sold a ton of gear, I just switched to Nikon from Canon last year to keep things interesting. I have a P&S for motorcycle trips etc.

Thanks,
Mike

Nikon D300
Nikon 18-35 3.5-4.5 D
Nikon 24-85 3.5-4.5 G
Nikon 80-200 2.8 AF-S
Panasonic ZS3


----------



## Fletcher Carnaby

Stay warm bigblock!

May I join also?

This thread is so cool!









Humble Gear:
DSLR: Canon XSi, 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS
P&S: Olympus Stylus 9000

Been into P&S for years. Recently, I decided that I was ready to actually learn about photography and graduated to a DSLR system. And I thought _computers_ were an expensive hobby!!!









Next on the list is a decent macro lens. Any thoughts on this?

Some practice shots w/kit lens:


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *bigblock* 
Sign me up to the camera thread!
I've bought and sold a ton of gear, I just switched to Nikon from Canon last year to keep things interesting. I have a P&S for motorcycle trips etc.

Thanks,
Mike

Nikon D300
Nikon 18-35 3.5-4.5 D
*Nikon 24-85 3.5-4.5 G*
Nikon 80-200 2.8 AF-S
Panasonic ZS3

This lens was discontinued awhile back but I also have a copy and love it for kind of a walk around lens. Super sharp. Welcome to the dark side!!

Foxie, you gotta stop eating that rich stuff B4 bed time. Gives you strange dreams.


----------



## Marin

Wow, this scanner is amazing. I can't stop scanning stuff now.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Fletcher Carnaby* 
Stay warm bigblock!

May I join also?

This thread is so cool!









Humble Gear:
DSLR: Canon XSi, 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS
P&S: Olympus Stylus 9000

Been into P&S for years. Recently, I decided that I was ready to actually learn about photography and graduated to a DSLR system. And I thought _computers_ were an expensive hobby!!!









Next on the list is a decent macro lens. Any thoughts on this?

Some practice shots w/kit lens:

That's a great macro lens, dead sharp. Others to consider are the Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 macro and the Tamron 90mm f/2.8 macro, both excellent macro lenses. With macro lenses, the longer the focal length, the further away you can be from the subject at 1:1 mag ratio. However, the longer the focal length, the harder it is to hand hold shots.


----------



## Fletcher Carnaby

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


That's a great macro lens, dead sharp. Others to consider are the Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 macro and the Tamron 90mm f/2.8 macro, both excellent macro lenses. With macro lenses, the longer the focal length, the further away you can be from the subject at 1:1 mag ratio. However, the longer the focal length, the harder it is to hand hold shots.


Thanks, that is helpful.







The Tamron looks tempting (for what I can spend), but I think I might miss the IS feature on the Canon. I was hoping to use off-tripod sometimes. Is that even realistic?


----------



## bigblock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Fletcher Carnaby*


Thanks, that is helpful.







The Tamron looks tempting (for what I can spend), but I think I might miss the IS feature on the Canon. I was hoping to use off-tripod sometimes. Is that even realistic?


I played around with the Canon 100mm for a while, macro is not really my thing. The 60mm ef-s is supposed to be a nice lens also. 
Nice architecture shots, I love to shoot buildings.
Check out the Fred Miranda Forums, that's where I buy and sell gear.

Mike


----------



## Fletcher Carnaby

Quote:


Originally Posted by *bigblock* 
Nice architecture shots, I love to shoot buildings.
Check out the Fred Miranda Forums, that's where I but and sell gear.

Mike

Thanks, me too! The university here does an excellent job maintaining their buildings around campus. Many of the older ones are adorned with hand-carved sculptures and the names of great thinkers. I've lived here for 17 years and I still can't stop admiring the beauty of these things as well as the effort it took to create them.

It's gotten a little nicer here, I'll post some shots soon or maybe get my act together and join out Flickr group.

I'll check out Miranda, Thanks!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Fletcher Carnaby* 
Thanks, that is helpful.







The Tamron looks tempting (for what I can spend), but I think I might miss the IS feature on the Canon. I was hoping to use off-tripod sometimes. Is that even realistic?

IS? Maybe you're thinking of the Canon EF 100mm f/2.8L IS? That's a different story. I was referring to the non-L Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 USM. The 100mm L is very expensive and while a very good lens, the reviews I've read say that the IS isn't that effective at macro working distances. Don't expect to find IS on any other macro lens or prime. The 60mm is fairly easy to hand hold considering the focal length. I use it as a normal prime all the time. Here's a hand held shot with the 60mm:


----------



## Sparhawk

I could get the 1993-1997 version of the 80-200mm f/2.8 for around $500 CAD... deal or no deal?


----------



## E_man

Is it the push pull? If so, you could probably find it cheaper (at least in US)

If it's the two ring, I'd buy that for sure.


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:



Originally Posted by *E_man*


Is it the push pull? If so, you could probably find it cheaper (at least in US)

If it's the two ring, I'd buy that for sure.


It's the push-pull, and I know I could find it a little cheaper in the US but I'd probably get nailed with boarder charges, so it would probably even out.


----------



## Fletcher Carnaby

Quote:



The 60mm is fairly easy to hand hold considering the focal length. I use it as a normal prime all the time. Here's a hand held shot with the 60mm:


Yah, there we go. I'm really liking the 60mm.


----------



## Marin

Yeah, 60mm is nice for hand-holding on crops.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/4250487...7622423057511/


----------



## Mootsfox

Myfirstgif


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Myfirstgif


















A bit random with the light change I'll admit. But not bad for your first one









Is there a way to keep the shutter on my D60 open for like 10 minutes in Bulb mode without resorting to rubber bands? I'm going to try my hand at star trails tonight


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
A bit random with the light change I'll admit. But not bad for your first one









Is there a way to keep the shutter on my D60 open for like 10 minutes in Bulb mode without resorting to rubber bands? I'm going to try my hand at star trails tonight









Remote shutter release.

I use a cheap-o one from Zeikos that I got off of B&H.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
A bit random with the light change I'll admit. But not bad for your first one









Is there a way to keep the shutter on my D60 open for like 10 minutes in Bulb mode without resorting to rubber bands? I'm going to try my hand at star trails tonight









Lighting is not under my control. Granted, I could change the tint, but meh.









Get the ML-L3 remote and do it that way.


----------



## Danylu

Key word being tonight in about an hour or two >.>

I'm also unwilling to spend $37 on a remote =/


----------



## Marin

Time to get a hold of MacGyver.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
Key word being tonight in about an hour or two >.>

I'm also unwilling to spend $37 on a remote =/

Find some tape?


----------



## billbartuska

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Fletcher Carnaby*


Stay warm bigblock!

May I join also?

This thread is so cool!









Humble Gear:
DSLR: Canon XSi, 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS
P&S: Olympus Stylus 9000

Been into P&S for years. Recently, I decided that I was ready to actually learn about photography and graduated to a DSLR system. And I thought _computers_ were an expensive hobby!!!









Next on the list is a decent macro lens. Any thoughts on this?

Some practice shots w/kit lens:




















Just my 2Â¢


----------



## dodgyr

Got a quick question for everyone here.
I have a Canon EOS40D and have just upgraded to WIN7. I have tried installing the latest drivers, but when I plug my camera in via USB, it does not see the camera and neither does the EOS Utility. I have even tried "allowing" the utility in my firewall.
When I plug the camera in, nothing happens (it normally auto starts the EOS utility to allow downloading of photos), when I start the EOS utility manually, most of the options are blanked out (it does not recognise the camera).

Anyone know how to get around this?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dodgyr*


Got a quick question for everyone here.
I have a Canon EOS40D and have just upgraded to WIN7. I have tried installing the latest drivers, but when I plug my camera in via USB, it does not see the camera and neither does the EOS Utility. I have even tried "allowing" the utility in my firewall. 
When I plug the camera in, nothing happens (it normally auto starts the EOS utility to allow downloading of photos), when I start the EOS utility manually, most of the options are blanked out (it does not recognise the camera).

Anyone know how to get around this?


Did you try running the program as administrator (right-click icon, click "Run as Administrator").


----------



## equetefue

Guys in need of a Wimberly head II WH-200. Already have bought the Wimberly Flash Bracket and the replacement foot for the 500.

If you guys see one for sale used pm me asap.

Thanks


----------



## dodgyr

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Did you try running the program as administrator (right-click icon, click "Run as Administrator").


Yup.
Didn't work


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dodgyr*


Yup.
Didn't work










Hmm, I don't use the EOS Utility (I use a card reader). The only other thing I can think to try (this worked for me with a game I couldn't get to work) is reinstall the software as administrator.

Are you using the latest version of the utility?


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dodgyr*


Yup.
Didn't work


















There may be a mode you need to change on the camera body, with my D80 I had to change the default USB mode that the camera uses when plugged in. (this is done from the camera's menu)
I have "Mass Storage(MSC)" and "MTP/PTP" modes available, I needed to set mine to MSC for it to work.

You could also try seeing if the camera shows up as a device in your device manager window. If it does or shows up as an unrecognized device(or non-working device or something) then try un-installing the driver and rebooting, this should cause it to re-install the driver. I would also recommend not using the driver and just try plugging the camera in first, from my experience windows 7 usually has the driver or finds one automatically.


----------



## dodgyr

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Hmm, I don't use the EOS Utility (I use a card reader). The only other thing I can think to try (this worked for me with a game I couldn't get to work) is reinstall the software as administrator.

Are you using the latest version of the utility?

Well, Ionly have one user on the system and that user is an administrator user. (Unless there is another way to install programs as admin?)
Yup, the latest version. I used the latest version from the Canon website as well as another version which is later even than the one found on the canon website (?!).

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Sparhawk* 







There may be a mode you need to change on the camera body, with my D80 I had to change the default USB mode that the camera uses when plugged in. (this is done from the camera's menu)
I have "Mass Storage(MSC)" and "MTP/PTP" modes available, I needed to set mine to MSC for it to work.

You could also try seeing if the camera shows up as a device in your device manager window. If it does or shows up as an unrecognized device(or non-working device or something) then try un-installing the driver and rebooting, this should cause it to re-install the driver. I would also recommend not using the driver and just try plugging the camera in first, from my experience windows 7 usually has the driver or finds one automatically.

I don't seem to have those options








I also restored my computer back to before installing the drivers and then just plugging in the camera. It reports the same thing as when I had installed the drivers (Drivers not installed properly).

I think I will give canon support a call and see if they can fix it.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dodgyr*


Well, Ionly have one user on the system and that user is an administrator user. (Unless there is another way to install programs as admin?)
Yup, the latest version. I used the latest version from the Canon website as well as another version which is later even than the one found on the canon website (?!).


Sheesh, this is why you just get yourself a card reader.









by installing as administrator, I meant actually right-clicking the install file and selecting the "Run as Administrator" option. I had a problem with a game not working and that made it work. It has to do with UAC not allowing the installer to copy some files, even if you have UAC turned totally off! 7 isn't perfect.







May not have anything to do with your problem, but can't hurt to try. And do check what sparhawk suggested and see if Windows is even recognizing your camera let alone EOS Utility.

Tomorrow I'll find my EOS Utility install disk, dust it off, and see it I can get it working. I don't think I've used since I've had 7 anyways.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *gonetomorrow* 
sheesh, this is why you just get yourself a card reader.









+1


----------



## dodgyr

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Sheesh, this is why you just get yourself a card reader.









by installing as administrator, I meant actually right-clicking the install file and selecting the "Run as Administrator" option. I had a problem with a game not working and that made it work. It has to do with UAC not allowing the installer to copy some files, even if you have UAC turned totally off! 7 isn't perfect.







May not have anything to do with your problem, but can't hurt to try. And do check what sparhawk suggested and see if Windows is even recognizing your camera let alone EOS Utility.

Tomorrow I'll find my EOS Utility install disk, dust it off, and see it I can get it working. I don't think I've used since I've had 7 anyways.


lol ...
Yeah, I tried restoring to previous backup and reinstalling by right clicking and installing as admin.
I have a card reader. It works fine, problem is, it doesn't import under dates as folders which is more convenient for me.
The computer does not see the camera at all, not as a storage media, HDD, or anything else.

Here is more news -
I spoke to Canon. Supposedly there is no WIN 7 driver. The driver that it relies on is a driver called WIA which is provided as part of WIN 7. I told them that for some reason my install did not seem to recognise my camera. They todl me to go to MS.








Did some searches ... there is no WIA driver for WIN7. However, I know there is a driver somewhere as others have managed to get their cameras and computers talking. But there are also a lot like me who can't get it to work.
If anyone has got their computer and cameras talking, can you please do a search for a WIA driver on your computers and send me a copy please?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dodgyr*


lol ...
Yeah, I tried restoring to previous backup and reinstalling by right clicking and installing as admin.
I have a card reader. It works fine, problem is, it doesn't import under dates as folders which is more convenient for me.
The computer does not see the camera at all, not as a storage media, HDD, or anything else.

Here is more news -
I spoke to Canon. Supposedly there is no WIN 7 driver. The driver that it relies on is a driver called WIA which is provided as part of WIN 7. I told them that for some reason my install did not seem to recognise my camera. They todl me to go to MS.








Did some searches ... there is no WIA driver for WIN7. However, I know there is a driver somewhere as others have managed to get their cameras and computers talking. But there are also a lot like me who can't get it to work.
If anyone has got their computer and cameras talking, can you please do a search for a WIA driver on your computers and send me a copy please?


Tech support hell. Not a good place to be. I'll look for this mysterious WIA driver when I get home, and for that matter, see if my copy of 7 even recognizes my 7D (I do firmware updates and the like with my Vista laptop







).

One other place to try if you haven't already are the POTN forums, which is a Canon only forum, lots of knowledgeable people there.


----------



## dodgyr

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Tech support hell. Not a good place to be. I'll look for this mysterious WIA driver when I get home, and for that matter, see if my copy of 7 even recognizes my 7D (I do firmware updates and the like with my Vista laptop







).

One other place to try if you haven't already are the POTN forums, which is a Canon only forum, lots of knowledgeable people there.


roflmao ... that was only a summary I gave you. The first time I called, they told me to call some other company for the driver disks! I called the other company and they said they only had drivers for up to Vista.
Then I called Canon again, and I have to convince the guy that although he may be right that the camera may not need Canon drivers to communicate with the computer, mine nevertheless cannot communicate with my computer (I don't think he considered the possibility that I wouldn't be calling unless my camera REALLY is not communicating with my computer!). I don't think he believed me (perhaps he thought I called only because I enjoyed his company on the phone, who knows?!) so I told him to do a search for Canon EOS and win7 as the search terms. It was only then that he told me to go to MS!

Anyway, I would really appreciate it if you can find that driver in your install. I am also off to that forum you mentioned ... thanks!


----------



## Bigevil89

Gone, can you add the panasonic Lumix FZ35 to the list for me


----------



## equetefue

Some from the day... Something diferent for me. Lost some sharpness in the compression but oh well. For bigger and the rest of the series... http://equetefue.zenfolio.com/p798025160


----------



## iandroo888

looks great =]


----------



## laboitenoire

Just saw the announcement on DPReview about the Noktor 50mm f/0.95. Seems like it would be a hell of a lens for micro four thirds (pity it won't be on other mounts)


----------



## Marin

http://noktor.com/index.php

Vote for Canon!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Just saw the announcement on DPReview about the Noktor 50mm f/0.95. Seems like it would be a hell of a lens for micro four thirds (pity it won't be on other mounts)


It's an attempt to have an actual narrow depth of field capability for the 4/3 sensor size. With a 2x crop, it's already difficult, so I figure an f/0.95 lens is comparable to f/1.4 on APS-C and f/2.8 for full-frame.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


It's an attempt to have an actual narrow depth of field capability for the 4/3 sensor size. With a 2x crop, it's already difficult, so I figure an f/0.95 lens is comparable to f/1.4 on APS-C and f/2.8 for full-frame.


Hadn't thought of that. You've got a point there.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dodgyr* 
roflmao ... that was only a summary I gave you. The first time I called, they told me to call some other company for the driver disks! I called the other company and they said they only had drivers for up to Vista.
Then I called Canon again, and I have to convince the guy that although he may be right that the camera may not need Canon drivers to communicate with the computer, mine nevertheless cannot communicate with my computer (I don't think he considered the possibility that I wouldn't be calling unless my camera REALLY is not communicating with my computer!). I don't think he believed me (perhaps he thought I called only because I enjoyed his company on the phone, who knows?!) so I told him to do a search for Canon EOS and win7 as the search terms. It was only then that he told me to go to MS!

Anyway, I would really appreciate it if you can find that driver in your install. I am also off to that forum you mentioned ... thanks!

Well, I tried the EOS Utility (had already installed it turns out) and it works fine with my 7D. Windows recognizes it the camera in Device Manager as well. I have EOS Utility v2.7 installed.

Couldn't find any WIA driver anywhere, so I don't know what else to say. At Canon's website, for the 40D, they only drivers they have available are for Windows 2000, so Win 7 must have the driver somewhere.

Come to think of it, I seem to remember my 40D working fine with Win 7 when I had it. I did use it with the EOS Utility for checking the shutter count with the astrojargon utility.

So all I can think for you to do now is make sure that your camera has the latest firmware (you can use the CF card for this) and if possible, try it on another machine with Win 7 to see if maybe it's not a problem with your install and/or the camera.

Sorry I couldn't be of more help!


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
http://noktor.com/index.php

Vote for Canon!

Voted for Nikon!


----------



## sweffymo

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Voted for Nikon!

Why can't we vote for both?

To be honest, Canon needs it more







And I have one!


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Voted for Nikon!

Me too









Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
It's an attempt to have an actual narrow depth of field capability for the 4/3 sensor size. With a 2x crop, it's already difficult, so I figure an f/0.95 lens is comparable to f/1.4 on APS-C and f/2.8 for full-frame.

Man I wonder how little DoF there would be at f/1.4 on a full frame









Just an observation about Canon viewfinders, 500D and 50D, it seems very dark in the viewfinder and there is like a matte finish to the viewfinder, unlike the D60 finder. I hadn't noticed this until a friend pointed it out to me though. The 5D I had a look at didn't have this problem though.


----------



## Marin

f/1.1 on 35mm: http://www.flickr.com/photos/4250487...7623340367431/

f/2.8 on 120 (6x6): http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/4394101936/

Thin DoF is fun.


----------



## Mootsfox

Sweet deal?

http://www.adorama.com/ILXCF30032G2.html

Two Lexar Pro 300x *32GB* cards for $100 shipped.


----------



## Danylu

I'd say that's a great deal that you should jump on soon =]

I discovered that the school has a D70 and a D80 - I can use the D80 as wireless master


----------



## Lelin

Voted for Canon







!

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Sweet deal?

http://www.adorama.com/ILXCF30032G2.html

Two Lexar Pro 300x *32GB* cards for $100 shipped.


Wow, that looked great but they took it down...

A 16-35mm f2.8 MK1 for sale in my area, 600CAD (580USD). In good condition. I must stop buying but this is so tempting!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Lelin*


Voted for Canon







!

Wow, that looked great but they took it down...

A 16-35mm f2.8 MK1 for sale in my area, 600CAD (580USD). In good condition. I must stop buying but this is so tempting!


That's suspiciously cheap, I would check it out further first. They retail for more than twice that.


----------



## iandroo888

voted for nikon xD


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:

03/02/2010 order cancelled 1 item $99.95
ragggggeeeeeeee


----------



## Lelin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


ragggggeeeeeeee


Yep, too good to be true


----------



## iandroo888

lol o well =X

just sold my 18-55mm on CL for $150. now just waiting for my uncle to send me the 18-105mm =X


----------



## Lelin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
lol o well =X

just sold my 18-55mm on CL for $150. now just waiting for my uncle to send me the 18-105mm =X

Are Nikon kit lenses worth that much?


----------



## iandroo888

nope. it was estimated to be like 100 or something here.


----------



## Unknownm

YouTube- Close up & Slow motion [Sanyo Xacti CG-10]


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Lelin*


Are Nikon kit lenses worth that much?


No, it's $140 new (grey market) and like $120 used max on eBay...


----------



## Hellisforheroes

Would Like to Join please

Hellisforheroes

Photography persona: The Tourist

*Body*
Nikon D80 w/MBD80 Grip
Pentax ME Super

*Glass*
Nikkor 18-135mm
Sigma 70-300mm
Nikkor 50mm 1.8D
Pentax 80-200mm
Pentax 18mm

*Bag*
Lowepro Primus AW

*Tripod*
Manfrotto 055XPROB w/804RC2 Head
Gorillapod SLR


----------



## Lelin

Really bad news, I got charged 200$ for taxes or something?? I thought there were no taxes on photography equipment, it's the first time I have to pay that much, can't believe this, I don't have the 7D yet, I don't know what the guy that sold it to me put on the papers but that's horrible news.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Lelin* 
Really bad news, I got charged 200$ for taxes or something?? I thought there were no taxes on photography equipment, it's the first time I have to pay that much, can't believe this, I don't have the 7D yet, I don't know what the guy that sold it to me put on the papers but that's horrible news.

Did you get slammed by customs for an import?


----------



## Lelin

Yep, still came out 125$ cheaper than buying here but a guy was selling his used 7D for 200$ less than I bought mine







. Never again.

Kinda bothers me because I wanted to get a Alienbee package, the shipping is already expensive and I'll have to pay 12.5% more for the taxes...


----------



## equetefue

Woohooo ! Got the email today, Canon CPS shipped the 500L


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *equetefue* 
Woohooo ! Got the email today, Canon CPS shipped the 500L

And it's made out to my address, right?


----------



## Lelin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
And it's made out to my address, right?









, nice avatar by the way


----------



## tK FuRY

just facepalmed myself soooooooooooo hard over some comments I read not too long ago.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Oh boy, where can I get one of these? Supposed to be a 70-200 f/4 as a coffee mug, given to photographers at the Winter Olympics. I want an f/2.8 version so it can hold more coffee









http://gizmodo.com/5485401/greatest-...n-lens-thermos


----------



## iandroo888

lol i want one of these >.<"


----------



## Danylu

I want a DSLR USB thumb drive lol


----------



## Lelin

The coffee mug is so cool. They should sell them.

Tried the 7D on the field for the first time yesterday, had a hard time with finding where everything was but the difference is huge from my XSi, so much easier to get great results. Can't wait to get used to it.

Kinda looking for a bit more range... I thought about the Tokina 50-135mm f/2.8 or some primes 85mm 1.8, 100mm 2.0 or 2.8 macro but I'm not sure if I should get a zoom or primes (all I use atm is primes, except the Tokina but it's used like a 11mm or 16mm prime all the time...) The 70-200mm 2.8 is too big for me. The f4L IS looks interesting for it's weight and sharpness but doing mostly indoor stuff the f4L might be lacking. Didn't look at Sigma's or Tamron's offering.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Lelin* 
The coffee mug is so cool. They should sell them.

Tried the 7D on the field for the first time yesterday, had a hard time with finding where everything was but the difference is huge from my XSi, so much easier to get great results. Can't wait to get used to it.

Kinda looking for a bit more range... I thought about the Tokina 50-135mm f/2.8 or some primes 85mm 1.8, 100mm 2.0 or 2.8 macro but I'm not sure if I should get a zoom or primes (all I use atm is primes, except the Tokina but it's used like a 11mm or 16mm prime all the time...) The 70-200mm 2.8 is too big for me. The f4L IS looks interesting for it's weight and sharpness but doing mostly indoor stuff the f4L might be lacking. Didn't look at Sigma's or Tamron's offering.

Those are good lens choices. The Tokina 50-135 is somewhat legendary, I wouldn't mind having a copy of it myself. I strongly recommend the 70-200 f/4 IS. Amazing results paired with the 7D, and I use mine indoors quite a bit without many problems. The IS is very effective on it. Now if you plan on shooting indoor sports with it, then it can be limiting, but I've had good results even with that.


----------



## equetefue

got the 500L today. What a beast of a lens. Will go and play tomorrow and will report findings


----------



## nuclearjock

OK Edwin, let's kick off some long FL stuff.

D3 400mm f/2.8 VR + 2.0 Nikon tc (800mm effective) @f/7.1 ~80% crop
Shot off the monopod with an Induro full gimbal.
Tomorrow, 1200mm with the D300.










Shot off the monopod with an Induro full gimbal.


----------



## equetefue

ordered the full wimberly with the f9 bracket. Gets here on Monday.

Liking the lens for sure. It will be hard sending it back...but man definetely getting one now.


----------



## dudemanppl

I'll look on FM for you, since I check the buy and sell forum religiously anyways.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dudemanppl* 
I'll look on FM for you, since I check the buy and sell forum religiously anyways.

For that kind of investment I think I'd go ahead and buy a new lens especially for the warranty.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
For that kind of investment I think I'd go ahead and buy a new lens especially for the warranty.

Eh, I wouldn't bother. But we aren't the ones buying the lens.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Eh, I wouldn't bother. But we aren't the ones buying the lens.


I bought my 400 f/2.8 specifically for that reason, USA imported version gets an extra 4 years. 
Anyway opening that new box is like a religious experience..


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
I bought my 400 f/2.8 specifically for that reason, USA imported version gets an extra 4 years.
Anyway opening that new box is like a religious experience..

In my entire collection, not one of them was new when I bought it.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
In my entire collection, not one of them was new when I bought it.

And several of them are probably older than I am!


----------



## billbartuska

I tried this the other day and it worked well.


----------



## iandroo888

anyone in town for the WPPI convention ?

hmm. was at frys the other day. was playing with their various DSLRs [why dont they have any nikons???] they got canon, sony, and olympus. olympus..

i tried em all out with Aperture priorty [Av, A, etc] set to lowest f/stop and shot approx the same things throughout. banner on ceiling, far objects, close objects. etc

olympus...e something. LOL i didnt like it. LOL functions all weird. menu was hard to use. slow. seemed weird in a way. didnt feel like i was really using a dslr.

sony. their alpha line.. was ok. weird menu as well. feeling weird as well.

both the above had lenses like the nikon 18-55. design wise where the front part moves on focus. olympus had a weird # for focal length.. it was like 16-40 or something.

canon. had the t1i, 50d, and 7d there. t1i ive played with before. 50d and 7d. fast fps. fast AF. quite bulky. didnt like the feeling of either of em.. my hands arent small either. too many knobs and controls for the menu. didnt know which to use at times.. one part uses the wheel thing.. the other uses that joystick thingy. got confused. lol. for some reason, im not sure if its just wear from being a display or is it like that, the 24-105 lens on the 50d n 7d seems cheap.. quite loose. didnt give much of a solid feeling [i know its a kit lens but i think the nikon build on the kit lenses are better?]

maybe im just used to using nikons.. like for canon. the scroll wheel was behind the shutter button? where as nikons is like whhere ur thumb is.. and or where ur index finger is? iunoe maybe im just not used to it. seemed weird. overall, i liked the canon's too.. some opinions may of just been not having much experience with canon bodys to not be able to use the functions really correctly.

like iunoe. it seemed to me [for my d5000 anyway].. the menu is more organized.. and easily accessible by directional buttons whereas like i think either the olympus and/or sony.. or even the canon had this joystick thingy or wheel.. was confused on how to use it right lmao.. i think i was doing a lot of trial n errors. at first, i pretty much just switched the function dial to Aperture and set body to continuous shots vs single shot. just to test the FPS. some bodies took a while to find that option. =X i waslike looki all around.. thinkin it may be like the higher end nikon bodies where its somewher eon the body to select single, continuous low, continuous high or something. hahaa

@[email protected] ok. im done. *still waiting for 18-105 to arrive..* *is stuck with 24-200 to use with manual focusing.. and higher f stop..* xD like the lens is great outdoors with natural sunlight. very sharp pictures. but when the light is limited, its not that good. o well. cant expect too much i guess. la la la

ok enuf procrastinating.. MUST START STUDYING FOR ADVANCED COMPARATIVE ANIMAL PHYSIOLOGY AND BIOCHEMISTRY II !


----------



## Marin

The 24-105mm is a L lens. So you're probably mixing it up with some other lens since the build is miles ahead of kit lenses.

EDIT: Are you sure it wasn't the 28-135mm?

And all the high-end bodies from Canon, Nikon and Sony will be bulky, so you may be stuck with entry level cameras.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


anyone in town for the WPPI convention ?

hmm. was at frys the other day. was playing with their various DSLRs [why dont they have any nikons???] they got canon, sony, and olympus. olympus..

i tried em all out with Aperture priorty [Av, A, etc] set to lowest f/stop and shot approx the same things throughout. banner on ceiling, far objects, close objects. etc

olympus...e something. LOL i didnt like it. LOL functions all weird. menu was hard to use. slow. seemed weird in a way. didnt feel like i was really using a dslr.

sony. their alpha line.. was ok. weird menu as well. feeling weird as well.

both the above had lenses like the nikon 18-55. design wise where the front part moves on focus. olympus had a weird # for focal length.. it was like 16-40 or something.

canon. had the t1i, 50d, and 7d there. t1i ive played with before. 50d and 7d. fast fps. fast AF. quite bulky. didnt like the feeling of either of em.. my hands arent small either. too many knobs and controls for the menu. didnt know which to use at times.. one part uses the wheel thing.. the other uses that joystick thingy. got confused. lol. for some reason, im not sure if its just wear from being a display or is it like that, the 24-105 lens on the 50d n 7d seems cheap.. quite loose. didnt give much of a solid feeling [i know its a kit lens but i think the nikon build on the kit lenses are better?]

maybe im just used to using nikons.. like for canon. the scroll wheel was behind the shutter button? where as nikons is like whhere ur thumb is.. and or where ur index finger is? iunoe maybe im just not used to it. seemed weird. overall, i liked the canon's too.. some opinions may of just been not having much experience with canon bodys to not be able to use the functions really correctly.

like iunoe. it seemed to me [for my d5000 anyway].. the menu is more organized.. and easily accessible by directional buttons whereas like i think either the olympus and/or sony.. or even the canon had this joystick thingy or wheel.. was confused on how to use it right lmao.. i think i was doing a lot of trial n errors. at first, i pretty much just switched the function dial to Aperture and set body to continuous shots vs single shot. just to test the FPS. some bodies took a while to find that option. =X i waslike looki all around.. thinkin it may be like the higher end nikon bodies where its somewher eon the body to select single, continuous low, continuous high or something. hahaa

@[email protected] ok. im done. *still waiting for 18-105 to arrive..* *is stuck with 24-200 to use with manual focusing.. and higher f stop..* xD like the lens is great outdoors with natural sunlight. very sharp pictures. but when the light is limited, its not that good. o well. cant expect too much i guess. la la la

ok enuf procrastinating.. MUST START STUDYING FOR ADVANCED COMPARATIVE ANIMAL PHYSIOLOGY AND BIOCHEMISTRY II !


Odd ramblings...I have large hands myself (can palm a basketball) and I find the mid-range and pro bodies a dream to hold, both Canon and Nikon (even Sony). The Rebels seemed great when I used them, which despite their small size are very comfortable. But after gripping a 40D and now 7D, there's no comparison. It's like it was made for my hands!

And I agree with Marin, there's no way you were handling a 24-105. If it was, then you don't know a quality lens when you see it! The 24-105 f/4L is a "kit lens" (hardly a fitting description) for the 5D and 5D MkII. The 28-135 f/3.5-5.6 is one kit lens for the xxD line (20D, 30D, etc., the other kit lens being the 17-85) and it does rattle around quite a bit.

And the jog wheel and joystick combination is definitely disconcerting if you're not used to (I certainly was when I switched from an XTi to a 40D), but when you learn to use it, it very intuitive and quick. I wouldn't want it any other way. It's a tried and true scheme used on all Canon's mid-range and pro bodies.

The only thing I don't like about the 7D is how they moved the power switch to the mode dial. It was much quicker to access and turn on when it was just below the jog wheel. Speaking of which, having the jog wheel where the thumb is frees your index finger up from its already laborious task of operating not only the shutter release, but the top scroll wheel, MFn button, and buttons above the top LCD (WB, AF, ISO).


----------



## iandroo888

oops 24-135. forgot the numbers.. iunoe like canon's higher end bodies seems bulkier than nikons.. like im fine with using nikon ones but iunoe. persona preference i guess lmao.

im tryin to find a grip for my d5000 tho. xD noticed my pinky finger hangs around under the body sometimes lmao ...

i can palm a basketbal as well [but im not a basketball player.. me play tennis ^_^]

i know its not an L lens. its a kit lets so it must be the 28-135. maybe i said 105 b/c of the d90 kit 18-105. oops ?

yah as i said. not much experience with canon bodies so the jog wheel and joystick as you call it was confusing to me. maybe if i get the chance to play with one for a day or two, id be more used to it. standing there in the middle of the store for like an hour isnt enough time =P

lol another thing i noticed was different placements of the power switch. lmao. had to search for it on different bodies. i like it where nikon has it. around the shutter button. xD same place. all bodies. =P

anyone know is theres a grip made for the d5000? hearing lots of people saying some work for the battery part but the shutter release button not working... or the scroll wheel not working or something like that.

the one thing i am for sure not used to is the full frame bodies.. whether its the mark iv or the d3s.. lol.. not used to seeing a camera body being "square" vs the "rectangle" shape xD so far, i like the feeling of the bodies up to... d700 for nikon.. canon... must be a personal preference.. havent played one that felt good to me.. [maybe thats why my entire family uses nikons...]


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
*im tryin to find a grip for my d5000 tho. xD noticed my pinky finger hangs around under the body sometimes lmao ...*

That explains how I use my D60. I also end up holding it like a compact when I have the 35mm 1.8 attached, the barrel just seems too small.


----------



## dudemanppl

Gear update:

Nikon D300s + MB-D10 and Eneloops
Nikon D40

Nikkor 24mm f/2.8 AF-D
Nikkor 35mm f/1.8G AF-S DX
Nikkor 50mm f/1.4 AF-D
Nikkor 85mm f/1.8 AF-D
Nikkor 300mm f/2.8 AF-I D
Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 AF-D (temporary)
Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 HSM II (temporary)
Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G AF-S DX VR

Only the D300s was new and I only got it new because it was 1300.


----------



## Mootsfox

Resisted the urge to buy a 14-24mm f/2.8 and payed down a CC


----------



## iandroo888

lol =X mmm 14-24 such a fun lens to play with =P


----------



## equetefue

Love the 500mm !!!

Rest are here .... http://equetefue.zenfolio.com/p798025160


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dudemanppl* 
Gear update:

Nikon D300s + MB-D10 and Eneloops
Nikon D40

Nikkor 24mm f/2.8 AF-D
Nikkor 35mm f/1.8G AF-S DX
Nikkor 50mm f/1.4 AF-D
Nikkor 85mm f/1.8 AF-D
Nikkor 300mm f/2.8 AF-I D
Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 AF-D (temporary)
Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 HSM II (temporary)
Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G AF-S DX VR

Only the D300s was new and I only got it new because it was 1300.

Why's the Siggy a temp lens?


----------



## iandroo888

maybe he wants a nikkor







!


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *equetefue*


Love the 500mm !!!


Stunning Edwin. The long primes are really in a class by themselves aren't they?? Awesome feather detail.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
Why's the Siggy a temp lens?

Got them for a trade for my 17-55, but I need to sell them. Maybe I can trick my parents and keep the 70-200 and trade the 28-75 for 2 SB600s, we'll see.


----------



## ANP !!!

the sunset today was pretty good

Shot with Nikon D40 + Sigma 10-20


----------



## FadeToBright

Just picked up a Canon 50D


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ANP !!!*


the sunset today was pretty good

Shot with Nikon D40 + Sigma 10-20










b-e-a-utiful =] i want a view like that T.T


----------



## riko99

so with the Money i get back from taxes and the money were putting up the final decision is to go with the D300s and then keep the D60 most likely... might sell it to get a macro lens though. Cant wait until the end of April







.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *riko99*


so with the Money i get back from taxes and the money were putting up the final decision is to go with the D300s and then keep the D60 most likely... might sell it to get a macro lens though. Cant wait until the end of April







.


You'll sell it once you start using the D300s.

If you plan on shooting video or using live view a lot, grab the MB-D10 as well, you'll need it.

http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-MB-D10-B...7993709&sr=1-1


----------



## iandroo888

nikkor 50mm 1:1.2 [AI-S?] lens worth getting? i think its a f/1.2 50mm. heard it has uber sharp pictures =X comments? opinions?


----------



## Mootsfox

Yes, but it won't meter on your body.


----------



## iandroo888

not like i know how to use that yet =X lol


----------



## E_man

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


not like i know how to use that yet =X lol


He means youd have to manually set your exposure and aperture, with 0 help from your camera.

All your other lenses can either auto set settins (in P, A, S modes) or at leave give you a meter to look at in M mode. That won't except on the Dx00 and up I think.


----------



## Mootsfox

See page 88 of your manual: http://www.nikonusa.com/pdf/manuals/dslr/D5000_en.pdf

Quote:



Originally Posted by *E_man*


He means youd have to manually set your exposure and aperture, with 0 help from your camera.

All your other lenses can either auto set settins (in P, A, S modes) or at leave give you a meter to look at in M mode. That won't except on the Dx00 and up I think.


Yup, only the Pro and semi-pro bodies do it. My D1H, D300s and F100 can, but the D60 and D70 I had couldn't. Nor can the D80 or D90.


----------



## iandroo888

oh even the d90 cant? dang. lol

*must upgrade to d300s...* xD


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


oh even the d90 cant? dang. lol

*must upgrade to d300s...* xD


I think Nikon sort of replaced the D90 with the D5000. Really besides the build and wireless flash, the only thing the D90 has over the D5000 is the in body AF motor, though that's becoming less and less important with Nikon only releasing AF-S glass now.

The D90, D80, D5000 and D3000 all share the same AF system, the Multi-CAM1000. The D90 and D5000/3000 also share the same metering system, the 420 RGB pixel sensor.

The D300 and above share the 1005 RGB pixel sensor, and the 51 point AF Multi-CAM 3500 system.


----------



## iandroo888

very nice to know =]

thx u ^.^ now i wont considering upgrading to d90. now its the d300s ! >=[ lol


----------



## riko99

There's going to be quite a few of us with that body now.


----------



## laboitenoire

Went to Best Buy today. Tried out the cameras they had out (all the Sony models had no charge on the batteries), and I must say I liked the feel of the D3000 and D5000 a lot compared to the D40 I've tried in the past. The Canon bodies just felt weird...


----------



## iandroo888

^ *like* xD hes like me ! oh no ! xD


----------



## dudemanppl

Only thing I don't like about the MB-D10 is the focus point selector, but its better than none and the center button press is awesome for video.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dudemanppl* 
Only thing I don't like about the MB-D10 is the focus point selector, but its better than none and the center button press is awesome for video.

Why don't you like it?


----------



## iandroo888

wish someone had a grip for me to try on my d5000. wanna find out how it feels liek to have one on it. lol


----------



## E_man

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


wish someone had a grip for me to try on my d5000. wanna find out how it feels liek to have one on it. lol


You might find an aftermarket one. I had an aftermarket on my old D40x. made it waaay nicer to use.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Why don't you like it?


A bit too small, I prefer the one on the body a lot more.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:



Originally Posted by *E_man*


You might find an aftermarket one. I had an aftermarket on my old D40x. made it waaay nicer to use.


been lookin... dunoe which one fully works with d5000


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


wish someone had a grip for me to try on my d5000. wanna find out how it feels liek to have one on it. lol


Nikon doesn't make one :/ But there's plenty on eBay. Grips on small cameras feel odd though. The D90 class is the first one that a grip makes sense to me.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


A bit too small, I prefer the one on the body a lot more.


I rather like the short throw of that stick. Sometimes I find myself using it instead of the big one when I'm holding the camera horizontally.


----------



## E_man

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Nikon doesn't make one :/ But there's plenty on eBay. Grips on small cameras feel odd though. The D90 class is the first one that a grip makes sense to me.


My D40x was too small, and my pinky curled up under the body. Got the grip and it became sooo much more comfortable.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Nikon doesn't make one :/ But there's plenty on eBay. Grips on small cameras feel odd though. The D90 class is the first one that a grip makes sense to me.


how do i find out if they good or not?

cant find one with a built in scroll wheel. wish there was one like the mb-d10 for the d300 n d700 for mine T.T


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
how do i find out if they good or not?

cant find one with a built in scroll wheel. wish there was one like the mb-d10 for the d300 n d700 for mine T.T

I think the D5000 class only supports trigger release through the connection. The MB-D10 is about the best grip money can buy







I love the front scroll wheel on it, unlike my F100 with the MB-15 which only supports the rear wheel.


----------



## iandroo888

must... get... d300s... nao. xD

if i were to get 1k.. wonder if i can upgrade to a d300s and get a mb-d10


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
I think Nikon sort of replaced the D90 with the D5000. Really besides the build and wireless flash, the only thing the D90 has over the D5000 is the in body AF motor, though that's becoming less and less important with Nikon only releasing AF-S glass now.

You're right Foxie. Screw drives will probably soon become a thing of the past. But I've got some gems that I'll always need a body for, i.e. 85 f/1.4, 80-400, and my 200 f/4 micro. These are classics that I'll always need a body to drive.

These lenses will continue to surface in the form of used glass, so having at least one body with an internal motor might not be such a bad idea.


----------



## iandroo888

yah a lot of the older lenses are one of the best even to date. doesnt hurt to keep it around =]


----------



## equetefue

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


Stunning Edwin. The long primes are really in a class by themselves aren't they?? Awesome feather detail.



You are right about that. I'm amazed by the quality !!

Some from today. Rest here www.Photo-Galleria.com


----------



## iandroo888

i like the last 2. 2nd to last one is a cute little bird on some twigs.. nice slight yellow color on the body. looks nice..

and the last one.. i love reflection pictures... lmao the end. xD


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
^ *like* xD hes like me ! oh no ! xD

Yeah, while the D3000 and D5000 weren't as comfortable in my hands as my friend's D90 or my dad's D50, they weren't bad at all. The square edges on the Canon grips just felt strange.


----------



## E_man

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


I think the D5000 class only supports trigger release through the connection. The MB-D10 is about the best grip money can buy







I love the front scroll wheel on it, unlike my F100 with the MB-15 which only supports the rear wheel.


Unless somethings changed, they don't even support that. All they supported on the D40x/D60 (presumably up to the D5000) was battery. Some had a shutter button, but it was a bult in IR remote. You changed your camera into remote mode, and could trigger it then


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


You're right Foxie. Screw drives will probably soon become a thing of the past. But I've got some gems that I'll always need a body for, i.e. 85 f/1.4, 80-400, and my 200 f/4 micro. These are classics that I'll always need a body to drive.

These lenses will continue to surface in the form of used glass, so having at least one body with an internal motor might not be such a bad idea.


Yeah, I love that my D80 has the AF motor, so many more options for used lenses.








I don't really see much need to upgrade for a while, I'll stick to getting more glass. I'll probably go FX when I do upgrade the body.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *E_man* 
Unless somethings changed, they don't even support that. All they supported on the D40x/D60 (presumably up to the D5000) was battery. Some had a shutter button, but it was a bult in IR remote. You changed your camera into remote mode, and could trigger it then

Oh, damn. Doesn't make sense at all to use a grip with it then.


----------



## Marin

http://www.camera-pentax.jp/new/index.html

Almost announced...


----------



## ANP !!!

^ That DSLR means serious business.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Oh, damn. Doesn't make sense at all to use a grip with it then.

i saw some that uses an additional cable.. non-ir version i think. but eh. guess ill wait on the grip eitehr way


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Oh, damn. Doesn't make sense at all to use a grip with it then.



Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


i saw some that uses an additional cable.. non-ir version i think. but eh. guess ill wait on the grip eitehr way


All the battery grips for D60 sized bodies are a joke. The only reason to get them would be the extra battery capacity.


----------



## iandroo888

i see.. things im considering now if i get money.. either a prime 35mm f/1.8 or 50mm f/1.4 or maybe a f/2.8 zoom either like a 17-55mm or 24-70mm.. or d300s

o btw

can u update OP

*Nikon D5000*
Nikkor AF-S 18-105 f/3.5G ED VR
Tamron AF 28-200mm f/3.8
LowePro Slingshot 100AW


----------



## Mootsfox

17-55mm is only about $850 used and one of if not the best DX format zooms you can buy.

The 24-70mm is by no means bad, just more expensive and not as wide (36mm vs 25mm in DX).

The 17-55mm does work surprisingly well on FX. I shot my entire final project with it and a 24-120mm for a few telephoto shots. Vignetting starts around 22-24mm, making it worthy as a 24-55mm.


----------



## dodgyr

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 

Sorry I couldn't be of more help!

Thanks for all your help!
I thought I'd try reinstalling again, but this time, instead of reinstalling Win7 Ultimate N, I thought I'd install Win7 Ultimate instead. I thought the only difference was that the N version did not have Windows Media Player (according to MS site) .... but it seems to be missing more than just WMP.
The reinstall worked!

Thanks for your help and time!


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dodgyr*


Thanks for all your help!
I thought I'd try reinstalling again, but this time, instead of reinstalling Win7 Ultimate N, I thought I'd install Win7 Ultimate instead. I thought the only difference was that the N version did not have Windows Media Player (according to MS site) .... but it seems to be missing more than just WMP.
The reinstall worked!

Thanks for your help and time!


That's interesting.

And it sucks that Microsoft had to cripple their OS.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dodgyr*


Thanks for all your help!
I thought I'd try reinstalling again, but this time, instead of reinstalling Win7 Ultimate N, I thought I'd install Win7 Ultimate instead. I thought the only difference was that the N version did not have Windows Media Player (according to MS site) .... but it seems to be missing more than just WMP.
The reinstall worked!

Thanks for your help and time!


It might have been missing something like parts of the .NET framework.


----------



## Fletcher Carnaby

I just got my EF-S 60mm f/2.8 Macro in the mail today!









I've only had a little time with it, but wow this thing is soooo cool!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dodgyr*


Thanks for all your help!
I thought I'd try reinstalling again, but this time, instead of reinstalling Win7 Ultimate N, I thought I'd install Win7 Ultimate instead. I thought the only difference was that the N version did not have Windows Media Player (according to MS site) .... but it seems to be missing more than just WMP.
The reinstall worked!

Thanks for your help and time!


No problem, and that is weird that the N version was screwy. Maybe it was just a botched install to begin with.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Fletcher Carnaby*


I just got my EF-S 60mm f/2.8 Macro in the mail today!









I've only had a little time with it, but wow this thing is soooo cool!


Nice, have fun with!


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
17-55mm is only about $850 used and one of if not the best DX format zooms you can buy.

The 24-70mm is by no means bad, just more expensive and not as wide (36mm vs 25mm in DX).

The 17-55mm does work surprisingly well on FX. I shot my entire final project with it and a 24-120mm for a few telephoto shots. Vignetting starts around 22-24mm, making it worthy as a 24-55mm.

im tryin to consider getting lenses that i will keep that will work for my projected full frame that i will get sometime in my life lmao. =X

just wondering if id rather have the extra few mm towards the wide angle more or the longer focal length first lmao


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


just wondering if id rather have the extra few mm towards the wide angle more or the longer focal length first lmao


what u plan on shooting will dictate that (along with your pocketbook).
I shoot sports and wildlife (primarily) so I need wide apeture for blurred backgrounds, and fl for the long side of the sports field, and timid animals.

If u do landscapes and street shoots (people), u can go the other way (short fl but maybe still large f/).

Either way, you'd be wise to stick with fx lenses if u have any thoughts of full frame later.

I also shoot 35mm film so it's sorta a no brainer which fits my no brains just fine.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


im tryin to consider getting lenses that i will keep that will work for my projected full frame that i will get sometime in my life lmao. =X

just wondering if id rather have the extra few mm towards the wide angle more or the longer focal length first lmao


Lenses hold their value very well, so I wouldn't worry about buying DX lenses, because when and if you do go FF, you can just sell them. I was the same way about EF-S lenses for Canon, but there are so many great EF-S lenses that it seemed pointless not to buy them on the basis that I "might" go full-frame one day.


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:



Originally Posted by *E_man*


Unless somethings changed, they don't even support that. All they supported on the D40x/D60 (presumably up to the D5000) was battery. Some had a shutter button, but it was a bult in IR remote. You changed your camera into remote mode, and could trigger it then










My D80 supports shutter and command dial controls through the battery grip.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


what u plan on shooting will dictate that (along with your pocketbook).
I shoot sports and wildlife (primarily) so I need wide apeture for blurred backgrounds, and fl for the long side of the sports field, and timid animals.

If u do landscapes and street shoots (people), u can go the other way (short fl but maybe still large f/).

Either way, you'd be wise to stick with fx lenses if u have any thoughts of full frame later.

I also shoot 35mm film so it's sorta a no brainer which fits my no brains just fine.


Good advice









Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Lenses hold their value very well, so I wouldn't worry about buying DX lenses, because when and if you do go FF, you can just sell them. I was the same way about EF-S lenses for Canon, but there are so many great EF-S lenses that it seemed pointless not to buy them on the basis that I "might" go full-frame one day.


Also true, I guess it really comes down to how soon you think you'll want to upgrade.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Lenses hold their value very well, so I wouldn't worry about buying DX lenses, because when and if you do go FF, you can just sell them.


Have you heard the argument that DX will soon be a thing of the past??
Whether that's true or not, given the two scenarios of having all fx lenses which work perfectly on DX when one finally goes fx vs. selling DX lenses, I'd rather be flush with FX to begin with and not have to worry about selling DX glass.

In fact, if anyone sees a DX lens in my lineup that they'd like, pm me and we'll work out a deal.

Edit:
GT, my 55-200 and 18-55 are gone, the 50mm f/1.4G is an FX lens. That leaves only the 18-200.
Also tc 20E II was replaced with the tc 20E III.


----------



## iandroo888

yeah i know. i kind of want a 50mm AF-S to be my next lens. i used my cousins 35mm before and like it was a little wide (even on his d90).

was just thinkin of the future if possible.. 18-105 should last me a while.. covers most of the range a 18-200 does so i dont need to get that.. if anything, i want a prime lens... with a low aperture... both something i dont have yet.. a prime and low aperture lens.. so its good =X

lookin at the 50mm for now.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Sparhawk* 







My D80 supports shutter and command dial controls through the battery grip.

The D80 (And D70, D70s and D90 and arguebly the D50) is a class above the D5000/3000/60/40x/40.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
Have you heard the argument that DX will soon be a thing of the past??
Whether that's true or not, given the two scenarios of having all fx lenses which work perfectly on DX when one finally goes fx vs. selling DX lenses, I'd rather be flush with FX to begin with and not have to worry about selling DX glass.

We might see that in 10-15 years, but maybe not even then. Sensors aren't cheap, and the bigger they are, the less per wafer, which increases cost. DX should always have a spot, even if it's only in the entry level.

Nikon is hardly a company that forgets it's past either. The first FF body from them was the D3, three years ago. They _still_ manufacture manual focus lenses. I doubt that the life span of DX format is on the horizon.

Also nuke, any reason for the 50mm f/1.4 AF-S and 50mm f/1.4 AF-D? Maybe you'd like to sell one?









Finally, GT, could you update my stats to:
Nikon D300s; Nikon D1H
Nikkor 17-55mm f/2.8 AF-S
Nikkor 50mm f/1.8 AF-D
Nikkor 24-120mm f/3.5-5.6 AF-D
Nikkor AI-S 24mm f/2.8
Nikkor 35mm f/2.8 AI
Nikkor 50mm f/1.4 AiS
Nikkor AI 50mm f/2.0
Nikkor-S 50mm f/1.4
Sigma 30mm f/1.4 EX DC HSM


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


The D80 (And D70, D70s and D90 and arguebly the D50) is a class above the D5000/3000/60/40x/40.

We might see that in 10-15 years, but maybe not even then. Sensors aren't cheap, and the bigger they are, the less per wafer, which increases cost. DX should always have a spot, even if it's only in the entry level.

Nikon is hardly a company that forgets it's past either. The first FF body from them was the D3, three years ago. They _still_ manufacture manual focus lenses. I doubt that the life span of DX format is on the horizon.

Also nuke, any reason for the 50mm f/1.4 AF-S and 50mm f/1.4 AF-D? Maybe you'd like to sell one?










I NEED a DX body for my small birds. When the D300s was introduced, I found a lonely new D300 and bought it. it's in the box as a spare when my current D300 wears out.

GT, I don't own the 50mm f/1.4 AF-D so please remove it. Sorry Foxie, but if you want the 18-200 pm me.


----------



## Mootsfox

The 18-200mm isn't really my style. I've become a gold ring elitist and won't touch the mega zooms. I can make an exception for primes because I honestly can't think of a bad or even mediocre Nikkor prime.


----------



## iandroo888

im lookin for primes now. xD like the 50mm AF-S f/1.4 =] doubt i can find one for cheap >.<" prob gotta wait until i get money rawr


----------



## Sparhawk

Went and checked out an 80-200mm F/2.8 that is for sale locally; looks like it has been used twice







... but they are asking $799 OBO







, not sure what the best way to talk them down in price would be, but I see these things going for sub $600 all the time.

Any suggestions?


----------



## iandroo888

sub 600? really? lowest ive seen those go was like 800 - 900 =X and i still thought that was considerably cheap compared to the new 70-200 =X

whats the lowest price for an AF-S 50mm f/1.4 or 3rd party similar?


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
sub 600? really? lowest ive seen those go was like 800 - 900 =X and i still thought that was considerably cheap compared to the new 70-200 =X

whats the lowest price for an AF-S 50mm f/1.4 or 3rd party similar?

I've been looking at the push-pull 1993-1997 version, not the newer AF-S version.


----------



## iandroo888

not sure if the one im thinkin about is the push-pull one. it has like a rough design to it.. 80-200 f/2.8.. AF. not AF-S.

yay my 18-105mm VR lens came in today =]


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
not sure if the one im thinkin about is the push-pull one. it has like a rough design to it.. 80-200 f/2.8.. AF. not AF-S.

yay my 18-105mm VR lens came in today =]

Here's a list of 80-200mm revisions and info about each one.








hope it works well. You'd better go take some pictures with it







.


----------



## iandroo888

oooh the one im saying was the 97 - today AF-D one

*edit*

mmm the 18-105mm. different than the 18-55. no exterior moving parts during focusing. little noisy and little slow but for a kit lens. pretty good. cant compare to like the N series of cos but still pretty good. current dont have a filter on it. the hood is attached in storage position. camera "fits" better in bag now. hahaha had some extra space between lens and the bag when i had the 18-55. i like it. a cheaper alternative to getting the 18-200. lol.

was comparing with the 18-105mm with the 28-200mm. noticed difference between 105mm and 200mm isnt much.

theres definately a difference on the wide side. not only its wider [duh?] but the difference between f/3.5 and f/3.8 is actually a lot O_O which really makes me wonder how much difference in light captured between f/3.5 and f/1.4 or f/1.8 is now.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Sparhawk* 
Went and checked out an 80-200mm F/2.8 that is for sale locally; looks like it has been used twice







... but they are asking $799 OBO







, not sure what the best way to talk them down in price would be, but I see these things going for sub $600 all the time.

Any suggestions?

The AF-S one is worth a touch more than the AF-D one. I wouldn't bother with the push pull types.


----------



## iandroo888

how about the one i was talkin about compared to the 70-200 AF-S?

cuz i was considering that as an alternative to spending more on the new lenses... and getting the "older" revisions which are as good? =X


----------



## Marin

http://www.camera-pentax.jp/new/index.html

More of the camera has been revealed and the timeline changed colors. I want the Pentax 645 Digital so badly...


----------



## E_man

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
http://www.camera-pentax.jp/new/index.html

More of the camera has been revealed and the timeline changed colors. I want the Pentax 645 Digital so badly...

Gonna cost some $$$$$


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *E_man* 
Gonna cost some $$$$$









Rumored at $6500, which is insanely cheap for a MF camera.

Also Mamiya announced the DM40. What's interesting is the back is compatible with basically all their older MF SLR's and with 4x5" cameras.


----------



## E_man

Yeah, but insanely cheap MF = $$$$$$$ still, haha

At least the lenses are cheap.


----------



## iandroo888

does anyone know the difference between Hoya's UV Multicoated HMC, Super Haze UV(0) HMC, and DMC PRO1 Digital Multi-coated UV Filter?

[gotta look into getting one cuz uncle chipped in for me to get one when he sent me the 18-105mm]


----------



## Danylu

I found this rant pretty funny








YouTube- Hitler rants about D3x


----------



## iandroo888

lmao i saw the ipad one with that video. hecka funny


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Just found a brand-new Canon T1i for $360







Probably will keep it to myself and sell off my XTi, or I might even give my XTi to my girlfriend.

On a related note, found a 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM and 50mm f/1.8 II for $300 shipped.

Today must be my lucky day!


----------



## iandroo888

how da heck did u find that O_O


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


how da heck did u find that O_O


Through a combination of ADD and unintentional, diligent internet scouring









My source also has a 50D for sale for $550+shipping, and if he checks out with this current transaction I might buy it to pass the savings onto OCN.


----------



## iandroo888

very nice. grats. k


----------



## lemans81

I will join, I just picked up two point and shoots.

Fujifilm FinePix F70EXR 
Panasonic Lumix DMC-ZS3


----------



## Marin

http://www.dpreview.com/news/1003/10...n70mm300mm.asp

Looks like Tamron is finally using sonic motors. This is going to be interesting.


----------



## iandroo888

very nice. was overlooking tamron because they kept using the micro motor. now i can maybe consider tamron as well =]


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
http://www.dpreview.com/news/1003/10...n70mm300mm.asp

Looks like Tamron is *finally using sonic motors*. This is going to be interesting.

About time.

I think they look similar.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
http://www.dpreview.com/news/1003/10...n70mm300mm.asp

Looks like Tamron is finally using sonic motors. This is going to be interesting.

Now all they ned to do is use decent glass and optical formulae and it may in fact become interesting.

My 28-300 nikon mount Tammy LNIB is in the FS section. Focuses just fine.


----------



## dodgyr

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


No problem, and that is weird that the N version was screwy. Maybe it was just a botched install to begin with.

Nice, have fun with!


Nah. Downloaded 3 times and reinstalled 5 or 6 times (memory fails me now! Just remember all the apps I had to install and reinstall until I decided not to install anything at all until I got the camera to connect else it was back to XP for me).
Oh well, it works now and that is the most important thing (for me atm anyway! lol)
Finally managed to dump all my pictures onto my hdd and reinstalling everything else now ... woo hoo!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


I found this rant pretty funny

YouTube- Hitler rants about D3x


"There there, I hear he only shoots JPEG." LOL


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Just finalized a deal for










and










plus UV filters, caps, and lens hood for $300 here.

Needless to say, I'm excited


----------



## ANP !!!

10secs @ f8


----------



## iandroo888

if i were to get an amt of lets say, $1000. what would you guys recommend me getting?

I was thinkin of the 35 and/or the 50mm AF-S lenses, sb-600 w/ some sanyo eneloops.. or somehow find some f/2.8 zooms or d300s [$1000 + d5000 body? trade? lol] xD


----------



## Danylu

Standard Prime (35 1.8), Macro lens (3rd party or maybe 60 2.8/85 3.5). I don't see the need for a tele yet since you have the superzoom. I wouldn't bother with a new body yet.

Old school path (manual focus and manual exposure): Samyang 14mm 2.8, Samyang 85mm 1.4 and Samyang 500 f/8. The cheapest way to get a UWA fast prime, fast portrait and super tele


----------



## iandroo888

quick shopping cart list from B&H Photo

Nikkor AF-S 35mm f/1.8 = $199.95
Nikkor AF-S 60mm f/2.8 Macro = $539.95
Nikon SB-600 SpeedLight = $219.95
Sanyo Eneloop AA Rechargeable NiMH (4pk) = $17.95

Total = $977.80 + $4.45 s/h = $982.25

dang.. pretty good hahaha


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


quick shopping cart list from B&H Photo

Nikkor AF-S 35mm f/1.8 = $199.95
Nikkor AF-S 60mm f/2.8 Macro = $539.95
Nikon SB-600 SpeedLight = $219.95
Sanyo Eneloop AA Rechargeable NiMH (4pk) = $17.95

Total = $977.80 + $4.45 s/h = $982.25

dang.. pretty good hahaha


Go for it









Right now, I'm trying to find a nice, cheap Canon body for my girlfriend. Any chance someone can help me out?







I'm most likely going to give her my old Sigma lenses so I only need the body.

It's funny in a bit of a twisted way... I got out of one expensive hobby (computers) into a much more expensive hobby (photography). Granted though, photography is pretty awesome and while I'm not the best at it, I definitely enjoy every minute of it!


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Go for it









Right now, I'm trying to find a nice, cheap Canon body for my girlfriend. Any chance someone can help me out?







I'm most likely going to give her my old Sigma lenses so I only need the body.

It's funny in a bit of a twisted way... I got out of one expensive hobby (computers) into a much more expensive hobby (photography). Granted though, photography is pretty awesome and while I'm not the best at it, I definitely enjoy every minute of it!


lmao.. same for me... i was like... im hecka slowing down in computers but photography is increasing dramatically.. aiyahh !!! lol


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


lmao.. same for me... i was like... im hecka slowing down in computers but photography is increasing dramatically.. aiyahh !!! lol


Glad to see I'm not alone







Many of my friends don't understand why I went from an i7 w/ dual GPU setup to a C2Q w/ single GTX 260, but I think photography is worth it. Especially at a college that I believe overemphasizes science (this coming from a pre-med bio major, mind you







), I honestly think artistic expression is much more important than computers. That and, at the end of the day, I think it's extremely more satisfying to be able to publish a great photograph you made yourself than it is to post benchmarks and system specs


----------



## E_man

Haha, I did the same. I have several new lenses that stopped me from getting an i7+5970, but I'd say worth it


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *E_man*


Haha, I did the same. I have several new lenses that stopped me from getting an i7+5970, but I'd say worth it










Nice







I put my i7/9800GT money to my new EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM and EF 50mm f/1.8 Mk II, and I absolutely do not regret it.

Funny part is that OCN was the site that actually got me into photography.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Go for it









Right now, I'm trying to find a nice, cheap Canon body for my girlfriend. Any chance someone can help me out?







I'm most likely going to give her my old Sigma lenses so I only need the body.

It's funny in a bit of a twisted way... I got out of one expensive hobby (computers) into a much more expensive hobby (photography). Granted though, photography is pretty awesome and while I'm not the best at it, I definitely enjoy every minute of it!


You can find the Rebel XT , XTi, and the 20D for fairly cheap from Adorama and Keh, especially if you don't mind buying the Japanese "kiss" version







.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


You can find the Rebel XT , XTi, and the 20D for fairly cheap from Adorama and Keh, especially if you don't mind buying the Japanese "kiss" version







.


A bit of subtle hinting in the gift itself... I like the way you think!









In all seriousness, I forgot about the Japanese Kiss version. I'll definitely take a look, thanks!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Go for it









Right now, I'm trying to find a nice, cheap Canon body for my girlfriend. Any chance someone can help me out?







I'm most likely going to give her my old Sigma lenses so I only need the body.

It's funny in a bit of a twisted way... I got out of one expensive hobby (computers) into a much more expensive hobby (photography). Granted though, photography is pretty awesome and while I'm not the best at it, I definitely enjoy every minute of it!


Yep, I haven't updated my rig in over two years because of photography (almost $6000 or so invested so far







), but fortunately, my rig can handle even new games ok, just can't go to far with AA/AF. Actually, I did upgrade to Win 7, but that isn't hardware, plus I got it for free (legally).

What's your budget? There are plenty of used Rebels out there (original, XT, XTi, XS, etc.).


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Glad to see I'm not alone







Many of my friends don't understand why I went from an i7 w/ dual GPU setup to a C2Q w/ single GTX 260, but I think photography is worth it. Especially at a college that I believe overemphasizes science (this coming from a pre-med bio major, mind you







), I honestly think artistic expression is much more important than computers. That and, at the end of the day, I think it's extremely more satisfying to be able to publish a great photograph you made yourself than it is to post benchmarks and system specs










why did u name my system and my major as well lmao xD we are more in common than we thought lmao


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Glad to see I'm not alone







Many of my friends don't understand why I went from an i7 w/ dual GPU setup to a C2Q w/ single GTX 260, but I think photography is worth it. Especially at a college that I believe overemphasizes science (this coming from a pre-med bio major, mind you







), I honestly think artistic expression is much more important than computers. That and, at the end of the day, I think it's extremely more satisfying to be able to publish a great photograph you made yourself than it is to post benchmarks and system specs


















Yeah, I haven't seen the need to upgrade my computer in a while, since there are almost no games that I can't play at least at med-high settings. And now that I'm back at Uni I play almost no games any more. I still OC my gear, it's just not the newest stuff around.

Plus, like you said, it is much more gratifying to have people comment on the artistic quality of a photo you've posted than some numbers.

Speaking of posting photos... This one was chosen as UVic photo of the month.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Sparhawk*









Yeah, I haven't seen the need to upgrade my computer in a while, since there are almost no games that I can't play at least at med-high settings. And now that I'm back at Uni I play almost no games any more. I still OC my gear, it's just not the newest stuff around.

Plus, like you said, it is much more gratifying to have people comment on the artistic quality of a photo you've posted than some numbers.

Speaking of posting photos... This one was chosen as UVic photo of the month.











Well deserved in my opinion, that is a beautiful picture


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Sparhawk*









Yeah, I haven't seen the need to upgrade my computer in a while, since there are almost no games that I can't play at least at med-high settings. And now that I'm back at Uni I play almost no games any more. I still OC my gear, it's just not the newest stuff around.

Plus, like you said, it is much more gratifying to have people comment on the artistic quality of a photo you've posted than some numbers.

Speaking of posting photos... This one was chosen as UVic photo of the month.











Very nicely done.


----------



## Dragoon

Hey everyone, it's been a while since I stopped by OCN (shame on me







), but I need some help from you guys regarding a couple of things.

I was looking for a good and cheap film SLR, I've seen some photos taken with film and I was amazed at the difference to digital and... I always wanted to try out shooting film. I searched for a few Canon cameras (Good side is that I could use EF lenses) and the Olympus OM series, specially OM-1 and OM-2.

Second, what do you think about the *Super Takumar 50mm f/1.4* M42 mount lens? I've searched around the interwebs and I see alot of good reviews about this glass. And I can say this mount is quite popular... And for the price it has, I think it would be a good purchase.

Can it compete with newer 50mm f/1.4 lenses? Bang for buck wise, because I doubt a €60~€100 lens could outright outperform a €350 EF-S 50mm f/1.4, unless I'm mistaken...

Cheers


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dragoon*


Hey everyone, it's been a while since I stopped by OCN (shame on me







), but I need some help from you guys regarding a couple of things.

I was looking for a good and cheap film SLR, I've seen some photos taken with film and I was amazed at the difference to digital and... I always wanted to try out shooting film. I searched for a few Canon cameras (Good side is that I could use EF lenses) and the Olympus OM series, specially OM-1 and OM-2.

Second, what do you think about the *Super Takumar 50mm f/1.4* M42 mount lens? I've searched around the interwebs and I see alot of good reviews about this glass. And I can say this mount is quite popular... And for the price it has, I think it would be a good purchase.

Can it compete with newer 50mm f/1.4 lenses? Bang for buck wise, because I doubt a €60~€100 lens could outright outperform a €350 EF-S 50mm f/1.4, unless I'm mistaken...

Cheers


I haven't looked at any reviews for the lens either, but a lot of old film lenses could easily outperform a modern digital lens. The Takumar is cheap because it lacks any and all electronic components, such as USM and the CPU connection, which is what makes the Canon 50/1.4 more expensive. Plus, the Takumar isn't one of the "legendary" old brands like Zeiss, whose manual lenses are often very expensive.

As you probably know, you'll need an EF to M42 adapter, and you will only be able to manual focus, and your images shot with the lens will not record EXIF info.

I've wanted a Contax prime (made by Zeiss) for a while myself. They made a 45mm f/2.8 pancake prime which goes for about $400 or so, but they are hard to find.

In other news, I'm seriously considering selling my 7D, 10-22, 60 f/2.8, and 17-55 f/2.8 and getting a 5D MKII with a 24-70 f/2.8L. I'm probably crazy to do so (selling a body and three lenses just to get another body and one lens), but I've only ever used crop cameras and want to experience FF for change.


----------



## Marin

I'm planning on switching from my current digital setup to FF. APS-C just doesn't feel right as I'm shooting 35mm and Medium Format.

I'm thinking about getting a 5DMKII and a Zeiss 50mm f/1.4.


----------



## Dragoon

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
I haven't looked at any reviews for the lens either, but a lot of old film lenses could easily outperform a modern digital lens. The Takumar is cheap because it lacks any and all electronic components, such as USM and the CPU connection, which is what makes the Canon 50/1.4 more expensive. Plus, the Takumar isn't one of the "legendary" old brands like Zeiss, whose manual lenses are often very expensive.

As you probably know, you'll need an EF to M42 adapter, and you will only be able to manual focus, and your images shot with the lens will not record EXIF info.

I've wanted a Contax prime (made by Zeiss) for a while myself. They made a 45mm f/2.8 pancake prime which goes for about $400 or so, but they are hard to find.

In other news, I'm seriously considering selling my 7D, 10-22, 60 f/2.8, and 17-55 f/2.8 and getting a 5D MKII with a 24-70 f/2.8L. I'm probably crazy to do so (selling a body and three lenses just to get another body and one lens), but I've only ever used crop cameras and want to experience FF for change.

I wanted a Zeiss really, but I'm actually looking for a fast lens but with a longer focal range (for portraits), but the fastest Zeiss I can find are around f/2~2.8. I'm still going to get the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 to get the crop version of a "nifty fifty", plus, from the first one I had, aside the issue it had I was very happy with the photos it took.

I looked for few adapters as well, and I found some that have built in AF confirm which will help quite a bit too.

I could get the Takumar and a M42-EF with AF Confirm for probably less than 120â‚¬

You're selling your almost brand new 7D and all your EF-S lenses?







Specially the expensive 17-55 f/2.8... Changing from APS to FF is always an expensive change









Why don't you get a 24-105mm f/4L IS USM? IMHO the IS and longer range make up for the f/2.8... just my







Plus the 24-105 is cheaper, I am going to get one to swap for the 18-55mm IS.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
I'm planning on switching from my current digital setup to FF. APS-C just doesn't feel right as I'm shooting 35mm and Medium Format.

I'm thinking about getting a 5DMKII and a Zeiss 50mm f/1.4.

Let me know! I've been eyeing a 50D for some time, and really hope to find them for cheap


----------



## trogalicious

Alright, I put up a Canon EOS IX Lite in the appraisals forum, but had no helpful advice. Any thoughts from you guys? I know I can get very little for something that old... it's an APS film SLR. From my understanding, that's basically a dead format anyway.


----------



## Em1nenceFr0nt

Nikon D3000
18-55mm f3.5
18-200mm f3.5-5.6 VR
14-24mm f2.8


----------



## GoneTomorrow

I do love my 7D and will sorely miss its speed and AF system, but I want the better dynamic range and high ISO performance in the 5DMKII. If I had the wherewithal, I would keep the 7D as a back up.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Dragoon* 
I wanted a Zeiss really, but I'm actually looking for a fast lens but with a longer focal range (for portraits), but the fastest Zeiss I can find are around f/2~2.8. I'm still going to get the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 to get the crop version of a "nifty fifty", plus, from the first one I had, aside the issue it had I was very happy with the photos it took.

I looked for few adapters as well, and I found some that have built in AF confirm which will help quite a bit too.

I could get the Takumar and a M42-EF with AF Confirm for probably less than 120â‚¬

You're selling your almost brand new 7D and all your EF-S lenses?







Specially the expensive 17-55 f/2.8... Changing from APS to FF is always an expensive change









Why don't you get a 24-105mm f/4L IS USM? IMHO the IS and longer range make up for the f/2.8... just my







Plus the 24-105 is cheaper, I am going to get one to swap for the 18-55mm IS.

Yeah, it's crazy, I know. I'll miss those three lenses, they're amazing. I want the 24-70 f/2.8 for a couple of reasons, one it gives me the wide to medium telephoto range that I have with my 17-55 currently, and two it has the wider aperture that I absolutely need for indoor shooting (esp. for wedding work). I will still have my 70-200/4 IS, so I won't need the extra range of the 24-105. Plus the 24-70 is a hell of a lot sharper.


----------



## ANP !!!




----------



## Dragoon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Yeah, it's crazy, I know. I'll miss those three lenses, they're amazing. I want the 24-70 f/2.8 for a couple of reasons, one it gives me the wide to medium telephoto range that I have with my 17-55 currently, and two it has the wider aperture that I absolutely need for indoor shooting (esp. for wedding work). I will still have my 70-200/4 IS, so I won't need the extra range of the 24-105. Plus the 24-70 is a hell of a lot sharper.


The 24-70 sharper than the -105 even wide open? wow.. I never really compared both of them, and I actually considered adding the 24-70 to my wish list instead of the -105, but I only did not because it lacked IS, and the IS on the 18-55mm served me really well in low light conditions. I am willing to sacrifice a third of a stop for a higher image quality and focal range.

I've looked a bit more into film SLR cameras, currently I've seen the EOS 10, the EOS 5 and EOS 50E. The EOS 50E seems quite better than the 10, also newer. All of these 3 are quite affordable...

ANP!, that's a sweet shot! Gotta love lightning shots


----------



## Mootsfox

I honestly think you'd be better off with a Nikon film body, unless you already have a stack of EF glass.


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Well deserved in my opinion, that is a beautiful picture











Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Very nicely done.


Thanks!









@ANP !!! Good lightning shot.







Much harder to do in the city, due to possible overexposure of the cityscape.

EDIT: 1500 posts! cool!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dragoon*


The 24-70 sharper than the -105 even wide open? wow.. I never really compared both of them, and I actually considered adding the 24-70 to my wish list instead of the -105, but I only did not because it lacked IS, and the IS on the 18-55mm served me really well in low light conditions. I am willing to sacrifice a third of a stop for a higher image quality and focal range.

I've looked a bit more into film SLR cameras, currently I've seen the EOS 10, the EOS 5 and EOS 50E. The EOS 50E seems quite better than the 10, also newer. All of these 3 are quite affordable...

ANP!, that's a sweet shot! Gotta love lightning shots










Let me retract that, it's not a hell of lot sharper, because the 24-105 is a sharp lens in its own right. But the 24-70 is as sharp at f/2.8 as the 24-105 is at f/4, and throughout the focal range the 24-70 seems to have better overall corner sharpness. It's splitting hairs really, but the f/2.8 is what I'm mostly after.


----------



## Dragoon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


I honestly think you'd be better off with a Nikon film body, unless you already have a stack of EF glass.


Thanks for the tip Moots. Eh... I currently only have one, and I have another on my wish list...

Any specific camera you advise? I don't want to spend much money, It's just to learn, it doesn't need to be an AF.

I've looked into the FM2 body. It's quite affordable and it covers a ludicrous range of lenses... I'll need to look into their price.

Besides, I'm not thinking into getting it that soon, I want to "investigate" first.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dragoon*


Thanks for the tip Moots. Eh... I currently only have one, and I have another on my wish list...

Any specific camera you advise? I don't want to spend much money, It's just to learn, it doesn't need to be an AF.

I've looked into the FM2 body. It's quite affordable and it covers a ludicrous range of lenses... I'll need to look into their price.

Besides, I'm not thinking into getting it that soon, I want to "investigate" first.










The manual bodies will support all glass types, except type G, which don't have aperture control on them.

Any electrical body, basically any with AA batteries (older bodies use button cell for the meter) and an in body motor will support full metering, AF and VR if the lens has it.

The top of the lines are the F5 and F100. The F6 is considered by some to be the best, but it's more of a collector's item than anything, and I doubt you'd see one at a price you would want to pay.

The higher end mechanical bodies starting with the first F (1959) all have titanium shutters, and don't have the problem of the fabric shutters in some of the early FD mount Canon bodies, and other earlier Nikons.

You can get an FM or FE for about $50-100 with a e-series lens. The FM2 is a good choice if you can find a good price on one, they were in production for almost 20 years (up until 2001).

I've seen models like the N80/N90 which are roughly equal to a D70-80 in build and features go for $20-50. A good 50mm will set you back $40-150 (depending on speed).

Marin knows a lot about Nikon's film lineup too, he shoots with a F3HP for film 35mm.


----------



## Lelin

I've considered the 5d2 alot but for what I do these days I really need the speed of the 7D. I wish I could afford both. By the time I can afford to buy a 5d2 as a second body the 5d3 will be out tss tss

I need to upgrade my computer for editing. Quick question, does ram speed help alot for Photoshop/Premiere? IE If I could buy 12GB or 8GB of faster ram which should I choose?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Lelin*


I've considered the 5d2 alot but for what I do these days I really need the speed of the 7D. I wish I could afford both. By the time I can afford to buy a 5d2 as a second body the 5d3 will be out tss tss

I need to upgrade my computer for editing. Quick question, does ram speed help alot for Photoshop/Premiere? IE If I could buy 12GB or 8GB of faster ram which should I choose?


I would say get a better CPU before RAM, get a quad core. And more than 4GB of RAM won't matter without a 64-bit OS.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Lelin*


I've considered the 5d2 alot but for what I do these days I really need the speed of the 7D. I wish I could afford both. By the time I can afford to buy a 5d2 as a second body the 5d3 will be out tss tss

I need to upgrade my computer for editing. Quick question, does ram speed help alot for Photoshop/Premiere? IE If I could buy 12GB or 8GB of faster ram which should I choose?



IMO, get these upgrades before RAM (balancing cost and performance, in order of importance):

*CPU* -> Q6600 (Q9550 Recommended)

*OS*-> Windows 7 x64

*Harddrive* -> Add 1TB+ Storage Drive (RAW and movie files take up lots of space

Estimated Cost:
CPU: $120
HDD: $75
OS: $30 w/ Student Discount

Total: $225


----------



## Danylu

Alright Gone I finally received the 70-300 VR







. Anyone interested in a hands on reveal? If no one is, I'll make a brief review but if someone wants one, I can make a more detailed review in a week or so.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

My lenses just came in! I am especially in love with my Canon EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM! USM is so quiet and fast compared to my old DC motor lenses. I really don't think I can go back to my old lenses!

Oh, and the nifty fifty came in too, of course. I love my camera kit now


----------



## iandroo888

very nice =] hope u enjoy it !


----------



## Mootsfox

Very cool new filter system from Lee Filters for the 14-24mm f/2.8 (Nikon)


YouTube- Lee Filters Nikon 14-24mm filter holder


----------



## Danylu

A random link with a comparison between iPhone, 70mm, 200mm, 400mm and 800mm.

Most of us won't know what a 800mm shot would be like so it's pretty nice to know









http://xploit3d.com/blog/?p=215


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Most of us won't know what a 800mm shot would be like so it's pretty nice to know










A few pages back.

800mm


----------



## iandroo888

hope tehres something smaller, like the size of the 14-24mm cap or something that can be made into a filter.. 150mm square filter seems good but dang its big =X


----------



## Marin

Pffffffff, it's not that big.

And no, there will never be one that's the size of the cap. =p


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


A few pages back.

800mm


True, but my link has a comparison of a few different lengths


----------



## equetefue

Catch of the day !


----------



## iandroo888

why not a cap? and if u want to have a circular polarizer, just have it like a normal cir-pol at the end of the cap.. seems good to me =X

thats what is similar to what my cousin is lookin for for his 14-24 too


----------



## Marin

Ordering the 5DMKII.

I'm in a position right now where I can go with either Canon or Nikon, but the D700 can't record video. So...


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Ordering the 5DMKII.

I'm in a position right now where I can go with either Canon or Nikon, but the D700 can't record video. So...


You might wait a month or too. There's talk of a D700x or D800, and Nikon has been on the record saying "We want to surprise the market with our next models"


----------



## Marin

Can't wait a month. I need it this coming week so I can shoot with it. Last film of my Senior year so I'm going to make it count (two other groups are already using DSLR's, 7D and a T2i).

I also doubt Nikon's going to nail the video unless they've changed a lot of things since the D3s.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Can't wait a month. I need it this coming week so I can shoot with it. Last film of my Senior year so I'm going to make it count (two other groups are already using DSLR's, 7D and a T2i).

I also doubt Nikon's going to nail the video unless they've changed a lot of things since the D3s.


I'm looking forward to you putting that 50D on sale


----------



## computeruler

I have a t1i and the 18-55mm kit lense add me!


----------



## Lelin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Can't wait a month. I need it this coming week so I can shoot with it. Last film of my Senior year so I'm going to make it count (two other groups are already using DSLR's, 7D and a T2i).

I also doubt Nikon's going to nail the video unless they've changed a lot of things since the D3s.

Are you buying it new? if not I hope they release the firmware asap for you.

I just ordered a Gini Rig and a LCDVF, bought a used Rode Videomic and follow focus locally.







I hope they'll fix the AGC on the 7D too, anyway we have a Tascam recorder but ... I need to find a matte box but they're stupidly expensive.


----------



## Marin

Yeah, matte boxes are quite expensive. I think I'll just use my 4x4 filter holder and avoid shooting towards the sun.

And yes, I'm buying it new.

5DMKII

Zeiss 50mm f/1.4

Hoodman Cinema Kit HoodLoupe

Canon Eg-S

Lee 58mm Adapter Ring

I'm just going to use the audio equipment the school has, which should be fine. I'll just mount a shotgun mic into a shock mount and use a XLR to 3.5" adapter.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Yeah, matte boxes are quite expensive. I think I'll just use my 4x4 filter holder and avoid shooting towards the sun.

And yes, I'm buying it new.

5DMKII

Zeiss 50mm f/1.4

Hoodman Cinema Kit HoodLoupe

Canon Eg-S

Lee 58mm Adapter Ring

I'm just going to use the audio equipment the school has, which should be fine. I'll just mount a shotgun mic into a shock mount and use a XLR to 3.5" adapter.


How does the matte focusing screen work? I can't see any split circle in the middle.


----------



## Lelin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Yeah, matte boxes are quite expensive. I think I'll just use my 4x4 filter holder and avoid shooting towards the sun.

And yes, I'm buying it new.

5DMKII

Zeiss 50mm f/1.4

Hoodman Cinema Kit HoodLoupe

Canon Eg-S

Lee 58mm Adapter Ring

I'm just going to use the audio equipment the school has, which should be fine. I'll just mount a shotgun mic into a shock mount and use a XLR to 3.5" adapter.


Nice setup, here that hoodman kit costs over 200$







I saw a DIY matte box with a cokin filter holder that looked good, might try that. Will you be filming on a tripod or handheld?


----------



## Marin

It will be handheld, thus the reason for the 50mm. I'd love to shoot an 85mm or longer but I'd need to get a shoulder rig or else it would be too shaky.

*drool*

Anyways, I may order a few more 4x4 ND filters. My 1.2 might block too much light.

I'm also looking for a low priced UWA to use. I was thinking about getting an Olympus 21mm f/3.5 to hold me over until I can get a Zeiss 21mm f/2.8.


----------



## dudemanppl

Bought an EOS 1, now I can use my 17-35 L and 28-70 L! Yay!


----------



## Marin




----------



## Mootsfox

You could get the 9500 for $250







after rebate with that 5d...

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...0_Mark_II.html

Also, hate you. </3


----------



## Marin

That's awesome. The only downside with any printer is ink is insanely expensive. May just hold off and use the printers at college next year.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*












gee how much that setup run u


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


gee how much that setup run u


Clearly (lol @ pun) he doesn't want to tell us









I don't see why though but that's his choice.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin's B&H Bill*

Total: $ 3,527.13


Plus shipping of course.


----------



## Marin

$40 next day air shipping. I didn't post a price since some OCN members think it's bragging for some odd reason.


----------



## nuclearjock

Welcome to digital FX land Marin. I say digital 'cause you've been shooting real pictures (film) for sometime now. The 5DmkII's awfully perty. You're elevating youself up into the Ken Rockwell stratosphere now


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
Welcome to digital FX land Marin. I say digital 'cause you've been shooting real pictures (film) for sometime now. The 5DmkII's awfully perty. *You're elevating youself up into the Ken Rockwell stratosphere now*









Not sure if thats good or not.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Plus shipping of course.


ouchie ! but then again... its worth it =P right? @[email protected]

*wonders when in the future i will make a purchase like this... of a d700...800.. or w/e "low level" fx body nikon will have at that point in time*


----------



## Marin

Looks like I'm going to have some stuff up for sale soon.

- Canon 50D
- Sigma 30mm f/1.4 (going to have it calibrated first)
- Canon 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5
- Canon 60mm f/2.8 Macro


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Looks like I'm going to have some stuff up for sale soon.

- Canon 50D
- Sigma 30mm f/1.4 (going to have it calibrated first)
- Canon 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5
- Canon 60mm f/2.8 Macro

LOL, Marin, for some reason you and I always seem to be make major gear changes at the same time, and often the same gear!

I'm in the process of selling my equipment as well (7D, 17-55, 10-22, 60 macro) at *POTN*.

Unfortunately, I have to wait to make my sale before I can get my 5DII


----------



## iandroo888

man too bad u guys arent using nikon =X o well. saves my wallet from the agony.


----------



## dudemanppl

I didn't realize until now that you didn't have a strobe, Marin. Why is that?


----------



## Marin

Because I've made do with natural light and its worked fine. All about shooting at the right time and location.

Shot when the sun was behind the trees:



Shot at around 10-11 a.m. I exposed for the shadows and in the actual print I did in the darkroom (so the final result can't be seen in this scan) I burned in the highlights (thats why I love medium format, such a large dynamic range):


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Because I've made do with natural light and its worked fine. All about shooting at the right time and location.

Shot at around 10-11 a.m. I exposed for the shadows and in the actual print I did in the darkroom (so the final result can't be seen in this scan) I burned in the highlights (thats why I love medium format, such a large dynamic range):



Expose for shadows, develop for highlights


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Expose for shadows, develop for highlights


----------



## Lelin

17-55mm IS is tempting. Kinda need more range atm though. (and a PC)


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Lelin*


17-55mm IS is tempting. Kinda need more range atm though. (and a PC)


thats why im hesitating to get that as my first pro lens lmao =X *sigh*


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


thats why im hesitating to get that as my first pro lens lmao =X *sigh*


Psh, you don't.

If you actually do, grab the 55-200mm VR, 70-300mm VR, or 80-200mm f/2.8 ($150, 300 and $600 respectively).

The 17-55mm f/2.8 is an amazing piece of glass. Except for my f/1.4 lenses, the 17-55mm doesn't leave my D300s. It works extremely well as a walk around lens so to speak.

Just do it, you won't be sorry you did.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Psh, you don't.

If you actually do, grab the 55-200mm VR, 70-300mm VR, or 80-200mm f/2.8 ($150, *420* and $*1000* respectively).

The 17-55mm f/2.8 is an amazing piece of glass. Except for my f/1.4 lenses, the 17-55mm doesn't leave my D300s. It works extremely well as a walk around lens so to speak.

Just do it, you won't be sorry you did.

Fixed, he shoots a D5000 so no autofocus motor. I would say whats on my camera most is the 50 1.4 and the 85 1.8. Amazing glass that won't autofocus on the D5000!


----------



## iandroo888

yap xD wait why not the 50? the 1.4 is the AF-S version unless ur talkin about the 1.8 AF version.

cousin has the 85mm f/1.4 version.. sharp but u gotta stand far =X


----------



## dudemanppl

50mm f/1.4 AF-D


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Ah, how I love POTN. Listed my items earlier this evening and everything has sold already!


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Ah, how I love POTN. Listed my items earlier this evening and everything has sold already!










Guess I should do the same.


----------



## iandroo888

T_T how come there is no nikon POTN T_T


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
T_T how come there is no nikon POTN T_T

Because Ken Rockwell would join it and the forum would instantly fail.


----------



## E_man

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Because Ken Rockwell would join it and the forum would instantly fail.


----------



## iandroo888




----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Guess I should do the same.

Trust me Marin, they're beating down the door for gear over there! Make sure your PM box has space, because mine filled up last night! I updated your gear; do you still have your XSi and kit lens?

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
T_T how come there is no nikon POTN T_T

Try Fred Miranda, there's boatloads of gear for sale there (costs money to sell though).


----------



## Marin

Yeah, still got the XSi.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Ordered my 5D MarkII with 24-70 f/2.8L last night! Oh joy! Now I only need the 135 f/2L and the 100-400 f/3.5-5.6L and I will be complete (mostly).


----------



## XiCynx

Hi! I would like to join this group, I just have a basic point and click camera that I just picked up today, I was wondering what you guys thought of it. It's the Samsung SL600 I picked it up for ~$119.00. So far it seems pretty decent but I have also never been good with figuring out how to get pictures to look their best, I know a lot has to do with the ISO and a few other things, any advice so I can see what this camera can really do or would you recommend something else better in that price range?


----------



## iandroo888

oOo fred miranda is good. tempted on this 28mm sigma f/1.4 lol =X considerably more canon than nikon but at least its something =X


----------



## Danylu

Very nice, Gone, I can't believe your stuff sold in a day! Here it would take a week if I'm lucky









Post some shoots soon please


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


oOo fred miranda is good. tempted on this 28mm sigma f/1.4 lol =X considerably more canon than nikon but at least its something =X


Sigma makes a 28mm f/1.8 and a 30mm f/1.4. The 30mm is pretty good, high quality build, EX (Sigma's pro line) and HSM (Equal in noise to SWM, but not speed). CA is crazy on the 30mm, and some have focus issues.


----------



## iandroo888

Sigma 28mm f1.8 EX DG = $250

i think this is the lens i saw someone use on their d40 w/ sb400


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:


Originally Posted by *†Blade†* 
Hi! I would like to join this group, I just have a basic point and click camera that I just picked up today, I was wondering what you guys thought of it. It's the Samsung SL600 I picked it up for ~$119.00. So far it seems pretty decent but I have also never been good with figuring out how to get pictures to look their best, I know a lot has to do with the ISO and a few other things, any advice so I can see what this camera can really do or would you recommend something else better in that price range?

Welcome!









Looks like a fairly decent P&S camera.
Generally keeping the ISO number low results in better images(with less grain), but you also need shutter speed to be fast enough to capture a clear image(especially if you have a moving subject







).
Try shooting in "M" mode or "Manual" it should allow you to play with shutter speed, aperture, ISO and White balance settings(the most important settings).
The best way to learn what each does is to keep playing with settings and taking test pictures.








You can also read the manual if you are lost as to how to access these controls(some P&S cameras really try to hide the manual setting deep in the menu system).

.........

In other news, I have a new toy:

































































This thing is huge... that's what she said... ; )
Seriously, it weighs about 3lbs. I'll take some shots and post them up on flickr once I have a chance to take a break from school work.


----------



## Lelin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Ordered my 5D MarkII with 24-70 f/2.8L last night! Oh joy! Now I only need the 135 f/2L and the 100-400 f/3.5-5.6L and I will be complete (mostly).









Nice buy, what will you use the 135mm for?


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Sparhawk* 
Welcome!









Looks like a fairly decent P&S camera.
Generally keeping the ISO number low results in better images(with less grain), but you also need shutter speed to be fast enough to capture a clear image(especially if you have a moving subject







).
Try shooting in "M" mode or "Manual" it should allow you to play with shutter speed, aperture, ISO and White balance settings(the most important settings).
The best way to learn what each does is to keep playing with settings and taking test pictures.








You can also read the manual if you are lost as to how to access these controls(some P&S cameras really try to hide the manual setting deep in the menu system).

.........

In other news, I have a new toy:

































































This thing is huge... that's what she said... ; )
Seriously, it weighs about 3lbs. I'll take some shots and post them up on flickr once I have a chance to take a break from school work.









aww i want taht lens... but i need a diff body first


----------



## Mootsfox

Nice 80-200







I want the last version before the switch to AF-S.

Emailed the local shoppe about renting the 14-24mm f/2.8 since it's not on their rental page.

Quote:

Hey Joshua, Yes, It's $35.00 per day or for the weekend.

If you have the dates needed let me know and I'll reserve it for you.
XD


----------



## iandroo888

damn id rent it for a weekend.. =X or a 24-70 or 70-200. too bad tehre isnt n e here =[


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*









damn id rent it for a weekend.. =X or a 24-70 or 70-200. too bad tehre isnt n e here =[


http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&s...&aqi=&aql=&oq=


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
aww i want that lens... but i need a diff body first

It's in mint condition too!







Honestly looks like it has been in storage since production.

Yeah, I was super lucky that I chose the D80 back when I didn't know much about cameras. The fact that it has an AF motor wasn't one of the features I was aware of at the time...But I'm sure glad I have it now.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&s...&aqi=&aql=&oq=

none that provides rental services. at most, provide some kind of discount to students on some products. lol =[ *sob*


----------



## dudemanppl

Ordered that.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Very nice, Gone, I can't believe your stuff sold in a day! Here it would take a week if I'm lucky









Post some shoots soon please










Yeah, me too! I was certain that I would sell it within a few days or so considering the items I had up, but I had 30 PM's in 6 hours and sold everything!









Now the horrible wait for the camera to arrive...

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Sparhawk*


In other news, I have a new toy:


























































This thing is huge... that's what she said... ; )
Seriously, it weighs about 3lbs. I'll take some shots and post them up on flickr once I have a chance to take a break from school work.


Geez, don't hurt yourself with that thing! Looks great though, I'll add it to your list.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Lelin*


Nice buy, what will you use the 135mm for?


Weddings, and portraits in general. It's a lens I've always wanted, supposedly Canon's sharpest prime. It wasn't really a useful focal length for an APS-C sensor, but it's perfect for FF. The shots I've seen from this lens are astonishing, especially at f/2. Equetefue posted some nice ones a while back.


----------



## Lelin

Was asking because I'm interested in the 85mm 1.8. Or the 100mm 2.8 macro but I'm not sure if it would be too long for some portraits...


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dudemanppl* 








Ordered that.

Forget those. The Delta 400 Professional is the only 400ISO film you should use.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Forget those. The Delta 400 Professional is the only 400ISO film you should use.

HP5 has a larger dynamic range and more traditional grain than Delta 400. Delta 400 is sharper and has a more digital look due to the tubular-grain.

Both are good, just depends on ones preference and what they're shooting.


----------



## nuclearjock

D300 400 f/2.8 VR tc20e III (1200mm effective)
new tc is pretty decent. taken from ~ 50 ft.


----------



## Marin

Two lenses I really want...

Zeiss 21mm f/2.8

Zeiss 100mm f/2 Makro


----------



## Vbp6us

Nikon D200
50mm 2.8 lens AF-D

I joined the Flickr group as well.

Ocean Beach (duh), San Diego









Lake Martinez, Yuma









I want the Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 HSM II but this hobby and my PC building/OCing hobby leave me broke.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Lelin*


Was asking because I'm interested in the 85mm 1.8. Or the 100mm 2.8 macro but I'm not sure if it would be too long for some portraits...



Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Two lenses I really want...

Zeiss 21mm f/2.8

Zeiss 100mm f/2 Makro


Just read a review on the Zeiss 21mm, a very nice lens on the 5DII:

http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff...ss_zf_21_28_5d


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
HP5 has a larger dynamic range and more traditional grain than Delta 400. Delta 400 is sharper and has a more digital look due to the tubular-grain.

Both are good, just depends on ones preference and what they're shooting.

The rest are good right? Just trying out some film.
Gear update:
Nikon D300s + MB-D10 and Eneloops
Nikon D40
Canon EOS 1

Nikkor 24mm f/2.8 AF-D
Nikkor 35mm f/1.8G AF-S DX
Nikkor 50mm f/1.4 AF-D
Nikkor 85mm f/1.8 AF-D
Nikkor 300mm f/2.8 AF-I D
Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 AF-D (temporary)
Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 HSM II (temporary)
Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G AF-S DX VR
Canon 17-35mm f/2.8 L
Canon 28-70mm f/2.8 L


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


HP5 has a larger dynamic range and more traditional grain than Delta 400. Delta 400 is sharper and has a more digital look due to the tubular-grain.

Both are good, just depends on ones preference and what they're shooting.


I don't really believe that. I don't find myself needing 3 and 3.5 filters like I did with HP5. Normal contrast scenes.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


The rest are good right? Just trying out some film.
Gear update:
Nikon D300s + MB-D10 and Eneloops
Nikon D40
Canon EOS 1

Nikkor 24mm f/2.8 AF-D
Nikkor 35mm f/1.8G AF-S DX
Nikkor 50mm f/1.4 AF-D
Nikkor 85mm f/1.8 AF-D
Nikkor 300mm f/2.8 AF-I D
Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 AF-D (temporary)
Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 HSM II (temporary)
Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G AF-S DX VR
Canon 17-35mm f/2.8 L
Canon 28-70mm f/2.8 L


Nice, an EOS 1. And two older L lenses. Why a Canon film setup instead of Nikon? Find a good deal?


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Nice, an EOS 1. And two older L lenses. Why a Canon film setup instead of Nikon? Find a good deal?


Nope, I've had the Ls for quite a while and they're kinda broken so no use selling. To be honest I don't know how to load film (YAY I'M STUPID!).


----------



## iandroo888

anyone interested in a straight up trade for my CM CSX V1 Spartan case [No 71 of 300] for Nikkor AF-S 35mm F1.8 or SpeedLight SB600 lol

or Nikkor AF 50mm F1.8 + $$$ ...

or maybe Sigma 30mm F1.4 EX DC HSM or Nikkor AF-S 50mm F1.4 ? =X [just asking...]


----------



## Marin

Wooooooooooooooooooooooo!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Wooooooooooooooooooooooo!


Oh the agony! I can't wait to get mine! It looks damn sexy with that Zeiss glass!


----------



## savagebunny

Quote:



Originally Posted by *marin*


wooooooooooooooooooooooo!





fuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Wooooooooooooooooooooooo!




Achievement Unlocked: Full-frame








Gratz!


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Sparhawk*


Achievement Unlocked: Full-frame








Gratz!


hahahahaha


----------



## Marin

Updating the firmware to v2.0.3









http://www.dpreview.com/news/1003/10...iifirmware.asp

Quote:



Adds or changes the following movie frame rates.

NTSC: 
1920Ã-1080 : 30 fps (changed - actual 29.97 fps)
1920Ã-1080 : 24 fps (added - actual 23.976 fps)
640Ã-480 : 30 fps (changed - actual 29.97 fps)

PAL: 
1920Ã-1080 : 25 fps (added - actual 25.0 fps)
1920Ã-1080 : 24 fps (added - actual 23.976 fps)
640Ã-480 : 25 fps (added - actual 25.0 fps)

Adds a function for manually adjusting the sound recording level (64 levels).

Adds a histogram display (brightness or RGB) for shooting movies in manual exposure.

Adds shutter-priority AE mode (Tv) and aperture-priority AE (Av) mode to the exposure modes for shooting movies.

Changes the audio sampling frequency from 44.1 KHz to 48 KHz.

Fixes a phenomenon where communication between the camera and the attached lens is sometimes interrupted after manual sensor cleaning. (This phenomenon only affects units with Firmware Version 1.2.4.)


----------



## Lelin

Just on time







, that's a beauty


----------



## dudemanppl

I got my full frame Canon today too, bought a roll of 400 ISO Tri-X but the DX stuff didn't put the 400 ISO into the camera and I shot ISO 1600 for the first like 3 frames.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


I got my full frame Canon today too, bought a roll of 400 ISO Tri-X but the DX stuff didn't put the 400 ISO into the camera and I shot ISO 1600 for the first like 3 frames.










You could shoot the whole roll like that and develop at 1600, or you could open the roll up and cut off the first three shots and develop them separately. That takes a bit more work and luck though.


----------



## iGeekPro

Bot don't most places that develop, develop it by the roll?


----------



## E_man

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iGeekPro* 
Bot don't most places that develop, develop it by the roll?

That's why he'd have to cut it.

Personally, if I were you, I'd just shoot the rest at 400, and leave it be. Unless those first 3 were super important, it's not worth risking the other shots. Of course, my film experience was crap film that couldn't push to save it's life. Maybe yours can.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iGeekPro* 
Bot don't most places that develop, develop it by the roll?

He'll be processing it himself, as it's Gelatin Silver process, not C-41/CN-16.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


Originally Posted by *E_man* 
That's why he'd have to cut it.

Personally, if I were you, I'd just shoot the rest at 400, and leave it be. Unless those first 3 were super important, it's not worth risking the other shots. Of course, my film experience was crap film that couldn't push to save it's life. Maybe yours can.

No, the first 3 pictures were just pictures of iGeekPro's computer area place.


----------



## Danylu

Grats to all the guys with FF cams now







. Marin take some shots









I'm thinking of getting one of these for my D60 to get a bigger viewfinder. Would anyone have one of these by any chance and would care to give an opinion? Or give some speculation if you don't? I would appreciate a bigger viewfinder and the one or two posted reviews say that it can help with MF a bit.










Edit: I found this good review here, anyone read Chinese by any chance?

More importantly this part

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Above Link*

望入 View Finder 裡面的分別 (上面 DK-21M，下面原裝)


----------



## iandroo888

read the review..

as it progressed down..

first picture is just showing the new dk-21 viewfinder.
second picture is showing the old dk-20 installed
third picture is showing the new dk-21 installed. very secure. wont need to worry about losing. lol?
4th and 5th. comparison between new n old.. 4th new.. 5th old?? wt

used a p&s to take a picture. 1.17x magnification difference? bigger viewfinder. increased distance from ur eye to camera??? something about the new viewfinder has a view obstruction.. guess u can see in the 4th picture.. something about having to maneuver around to have complete view?

oh i guess the reviewer wears glasses.. said its better without glasses


----------



## Meta-Prometheus

I'm already on the member list with my Canon 35mm SLR. I just wanted to post some pics of the gear. The tripod isn't really worth showing though...


----------



## Meta-Prometheus

By the way, how do I get one of those photo gallery postbits???


----------



## Fletcher Carnaby

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Meta-Prometheus* 
By the way, how do I get one of those photo gallery postbits???

User Cp > Edit Options > check "Show Gallery Postbit" on bottom of page


----------



## Marin

After using the Zeiss 50mm f/1.4 for a little bit...

From f/2.8 it's extremely sharp and has the Zeiss 3D look. Contrast is also really good and the colors are fantastic. But at f/1.4 it's quite soft and suffers from a ton of chromatic aberrations.

So...

I'm returning it.

The replacement lens will be here Friday. What could it be...


----------



## iandroo888

no sample pix? xD


----------



## Marin

I have sample videos but don't feel like compressing them then uploading them.


----------



## iandroo888

boo.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
After using the Zeiss 50mm f/1.4 for a little bit...

From f/2.8 it's extremely sharp and has the Zeiss 3D look. Contrast is also really good and the colors are fantastic. But at f/1.4 it's quite soft and suffers from a ton of chromatic aberrations.

So...

I'm returning it.

The replacement lens will be here Friday. What could it be...

85mm f/1.2L II

If you're brave, Siggy 50mm f/1.4.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


read the review..

as it progressed down..

first picture is just showing the new dk-21 viewfinder.
second picture is showing the old dk-20 installed
third picture is showing the new dk-21 installed. very secure. wont need to worry about losing. lol?
4th and 5th. comparison between new n old.. 4th new.. 5th old?? wt

used a p&s to take a picture. 1.17x magnification difference? bigger viewfinder. increased distance from ur eye to camera??? something about the new viewfinder has a view obstruction.. guess u can see in the 4th picture.. something about having to maneuver around to have complete view?

oh i guess the reviewer wears glasses.. said its better without glasses 


Brilliant! Thanks you very much =]. At least it correlates with what some guy on a french forum said. Good for people without glasses.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


85mm f/1.2L II

If you're brave, Siggy 50mm f/1.4.


I'm gonna guess it's the 50mm f/1.2L based on his previous statement about not wanting a longer lens for shakiness.

lol if his brave, Siggy 50mm


----------



## Mootsfox

It's the Canon.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Got my 5DII and 24-70/2.8L today!

I don't have another camera to take a picture of it (you saw Marin's anyway







), so here's my 24-70:


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Got my 5DII and 24-70/2.8L today!

I don't have another camera to take a picture of it (you saw Marin's anyway







), so here's my 24-70:











Ooooh, shiny... Hope its sharper than my 28-70 which is basically Jesus (for a medium zoom that I've had).


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Ooooh, shiny... Hope its sharper than my 28-70 which is basically Jesus (for a medium zoom that I've had).


Actually, I read reviews for both lenses (photozone.de) and they rank the 28-70 better in terms of sharpness.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Actually, I read reviews for both lenses (photozone.de) and they rank the 28-70 better in terms of sharpness.









I'll do a straight trade!


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


I'll do a straight trade!










lol

Gone: Post some shots









About the VR and battery debate we had a while back, today I did four hours of concert shooting and ended up with about 700 shots. All had VR on and the ISO was usually @ 1600. The D60 battery indicator had 1 bar left. Not a very scientific test but for me it was food for thought.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dudemanppl* 
I'll do a straight trade!









HAHAHAHA...no. Didn't you say yours was broken?









Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
lol

Gone: Post some shots









About the VR and battery debate we had a while back, today I did four hours of concert shooting and ended up with about 700 shots. All had VR on and the ISO was usually @ 1600. The D60 battery indicator had 1 bar left. Not a very scientific test but for me it was food for thought.









Shots will come, it hasn't even seen daylight yet!


----------



## Meta-Prometheus

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Fletcher Carnaby*


User Cp > Edit Options > check "Show Gallery Postbit" on bottom of page


Thanks for the help on that again! Unfortunately I have tried unsuccessfully in getting my photos uploaded in the member's gallery. So I just linked my photo album from my profile in my sig. I hope that isn't against any rules or anything.


----------



## Fletcher Carnaby

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Meta-Prometheus*


Thanks for the help on that again! Unfortunately I have tried unsuccessfully in getting my photos uploaded in the member's gallery. So I just linked my photo album from my profile in my sig. I hope that isn't against any rules or anything.


No problem!







Took me a while to find it, too.

Were the photos you tried to upload really big? The max is 2.6 MB per photo.

Also, some photo galleries (can't remember if it's here or not) are caps sensitive, i.e. they see .jpg as different than .JPG.

edit: Nice Montana picts! I love the West. U geologist? - I did field work in the bighorns as well. And I just noticed your avatar is a micrograph







... I make sections for a living!


----------



## Marin

I am so glad I returned the Zeiss. I updated my sig with the new lens, so it shouldn't be hard to figure out what I got.

Anyways, wide open this lens is so sharp. Miles ahead of the Zeiss and in comparison to my old Sigma 30mm, the AF is spot on. The build quality is solid (the usual L quality) and the focus ring is very nice for an AF lens. Also the bokeh is extremely creamy instead of the harshness of the Zeiss.

I'm so happy.









EDIT: Pics up later once the lighting improves.


----------



## kinubic

hey guys just wondering if anyone can tip or advice on what lens to choose from this distance to get close shots on stage.

i found a website where u can borrow lenses .

from the distance im at what lens wud u guys recommend with the nikon? getting close shots on stage

http://www.borrowlenses.com

http://www.hollywoodbowl.com/tickets/seating-chart.cfm

seating is at Terrace boxes and Super seats H.
__________________


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *kinubic* 
hey guys just wondering if anyone can tip or advice on what lens to choose from this distance to get close shots on stage.

i found a website where u can borrow lenses .

from the distance im at what lens wud u guys recommend with the nikon? getting close shots on stage

http://www.borrowlenses.com

http://www.hollywoodbowl.com/tickets/seating-chart.cfm

seating is at Terrace boxes and Super seats H.
__________________

http://www.lensrentals.com/rent/niko...r-ii/for-nikon


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


I am so glad I returned the Zeiss. Miles ahead of the Zeiss


Wow, I'm surprised to hear this about a Zeiss lens. Bad copy?? Even that would be surprising.

In the end, you really can't go wrong with Canon/Nikkor primes, specially the pro grade stuff.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


Wow, I'm surprised to hear this about a Zeiss lens. Bad copy?? Even that would be surprising.

In the end, you really can't go wrong with Canon/Nikkor primes, specially the pro grade stuff.


Seems like the Zeiss 50mm f/1.4 and 85mm f/1.4 use the older design while the rest of the Zeiss line-up has been updated.


----------



## Meta-Prometheus

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Fletcher Carnaby* 
No problem!







Took me a while to find it, too.

Were the photos you tried to upload really big? The max is 2.6 MB per photo.

Also, some photo galleries (can't remember if it's here or not) are caps sensitive, i.e. they see .jpg as different than .JPG.

edit: Nice Montana picts! I love the West. U geologist? - I did field work in the bighorns as well. And I just noticed your avatar is a micrograph







... I make sections for a living!

Yeah I graduated last spring with my bachelor's in geology. I went to Indiana University's Field Camp out in there in Montana.

The sun provided very good lighting so the pictures turned out very well. I wasn't even using my good camera, I was using a crappy Kodak point and shoot.

I wish I had a job doing thin sections. My avatar was a project from a couple of years ago. Metamorphic petrology, really tough class. It's nice to see a fellow geologist on the forum here!


----------



## Marin

And a test shot:


----------



## olli3

Wow nice







and cool shoes!


----------



## Fletcher Carnaby

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Meta-Prometheus*


Yeah I graduated last spring with my bachelor's in geology. I went to Indiana University's Field Camp out in there in Montana.

I wish I had a job doing thin sections. My avatar was a project from a couple of years ago. Metamorphic petrology, really tough class. It's nice to see a fellow geologist on the forum here!



It is good to meet a fellow rockhead at that, sir! Metpet _is_ a tough one, isn't it?!

I'm greatful every day for my job. It's living a dream (of sorts) to be honest.









Earth Science, meet Shop Class. Lovechild = Thinsection Lab. Pure joy.

[Club members, we are refering to making microscope slides from geologic samples (thin sections) and images generated the from them (micrographs).]

Now if I could only figure out how to use my DSLR to capture with my 50-year old Zeiss microscope...









edit: I'll put up some micrigraphs/pictures of my work soon. The irony is, producing slides _en masse_ doesn't leave much time to photograph them!


----------



## dudemanppl

GT, gear update!
Nikon D300s + MB-D10 and Eneloops
Nikon D40
Canon EOS 1

Nikkor 24mm f/2.8 AF-D
Nikkor 35mm f/1.8G AF-S DX
Nikkor 50mm f/1.4 AF-D
Nikkor 85mm f/1.8 AF-D
Nikkor 300mm f/2.8 AF-I D
Nikkor 80-200mm f/2.8 AF-D 2 Ring
Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G AF-S DX VR
Canon 17-35mm f/2.8 L
Canon 28-70mm f/2.8 L

I'll probably turn that 2 ring into push pull and add 2 SB-600s.

Staples 50% off LENSES AND FLASHES (when you buy ANY camera, probably including disposables).


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:



Originally Posted by *olli3*


Wow nice







and cool shoes!


"He said, 'You must be joking son... where did you get those shoes?'" - Steely Dan, Pretzel Logic


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


And a test shot:


Wow, looks great at f/1.2!

Took mine out for a test run today as well.

These are with the 24-70:




























And these are with the Canon 50/1.4 @ f/1.4. This lens is very soft wide open (but dead sharp from f/2.8 up), but I think the shots still look great, and the bokeh isn't bad. And of course, the DOF is much wider on FF:


----------



## Meta-Prometheus

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Fletcher Carnaby* 
It is good to meet a fellow rockhead at that, sir! Metpet _is_ a tough one, isn't it?!

I'm greatful every day for my job. It's living a dream (of sorts) to be honest.









Earth Science, meet Shop Class. Lovechild = Thinsection Lab. Pure joy.

[Club members, we are refering to making microscope slides from geologic samples (thin sections) and images generated the from them (micrographs).]

Now if I could only figure out how to use my DSLR to capture with my 50-year old Zeiss microscope...









edit: I'll put up some micrigraphs/pictures of my work soon. The irony is, producing slides _en masse_ doesn't leave much time to photograph them!

Geology really is an interesting science isn't it?









Um, as far as using your DSLR for taking photo-micrographs, we had a kind of ghetto rigged microscope with a camera mount/bracket at the top. I think the microscope was designed for it but I can't remember the name of it.

Our other microscopes had mounts to a an internal camera that we linked to with our computers, then we had to capture video and edit images from that. Very time consuming.

I would love to see some of your work! Although, I'm not sure how much I'll recognize exactly. A year after you finish college and you start to forget things







.


----------



## Danylu

Gone your 2nd 50mm shot seems a bit strange to me. The bokeh looks like what I can expect from a 50mm, but the fov seems a LOT wider than what I would expect it to be. Maybe it was just because you were a bit further away. Either way FX looks great!


----------



## Marin

What's FX?


----------



## Mootsfox

36x24mm.


----------



## Marin

Ah, that's better. I don't understand Ken Rockwell.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Ah, that's better. I don't understand Ken Rockwell.

Ken Rockwell =/= Nikon.

Ken Rockwell = God D: - and it's why I'm atheist. Aw Snap!

Maybe I should stick to saying FF? Everyone gets that right?


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


And a test shot:



Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Wow, looks great at f/1.2!

Took mine out for a test run today as well.

These are with the 24-70:
And these are with the Canon 50/1.4 @ f/1.4. This lens is very soft wide open (but dead sharp from f/2.8 up), but I think the shots still look great, and the bokeh isn't bad. And of course, the DOF is much wider on FF:


Great shots guys.

I had this body for ~3 weeks and liked it a whole lot.

But;
1. Didn't af fast enough for sports.
2. not used to Canon handling.
3. Don't need the megapixels for sports, maybe wildlife.
4. definately don't need video, although the way things are going, ALL dslr's will probably have that feature in the near future.

I started with Nikon back in the 60's. Canon was non existant at that point. As time went by, I settled in with the black stuff. 
I honestly wish I didn't automatically choose Nikon when it came time to add digital to my film gear. At that point I wasn't really all that deep in nikkor glass. I can tell you now that if I had it to do over again, chances are better than 50% that I would have gone the Canon route for many reasons.

Enjoy your new gear, it looks awesome.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


I started with Nikon back in the 60's. Canon was non existant at that point. As time went by, I settled in with the black stuff. 
I honestly wish I didn't automatically choose Nikon when it came time to add digital to my film gear. At that point I wasn't really all that deep in nikkor glass. I can tell you now that if I had it to do over again, chances are better than 50% that I would have gone the Canon route for many reasons.

Enjoy your new gear, it looks awesome.


Don't say such hurtful things Nuke
















Hey, if you ever need a buyer for the D3 and those other pieces let me know









Also, just nabbed a FE and 50mm f/1.8 (not E) for $40!

Garage sale sellers thought it was jammed... The batteries are dead and the FE won't fire manually except in 1/90" or Bulb mode. It works great, smooth operation and it's in great condition









Just spent about an hour cleaning it <3


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Gone your 2nd 50mm shot seems a bit strange to me. The bokeh looks like what I can expect from a 50mm, but the fov seems a LOT wider than what I would expect it to be. Maybe it was just because you were a bit further away. Either way FX looks great!


I was about 5 feet away from that tombstone. It looks wider than what you expect because it is! 50mm is much wider on FF.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


Great shots guys.

I had this body for ~3 weeks and liked it a whole lot.

But;
1. Didn't af fast enough for sports.
2. not used to Canon handling.
3. Don't need the megapixels for sports, maybe wildlife.
4. definately don't need video, although the way things are going, ALL dslr's will probably have that feature in the near future.

I started with Nikon back in the 60's. Canon was non existant at that point. As time went by, I settled in with the black stuff. 
I honestly wish I didn't automatically choose Nikon when it came time to add digital to my film gear. At that point I wasn't really all that deep in nikkor glass. I can tell you now that if I had it to do over again, chances are better than 50% that I would have gone the Canon route for many reasons.

Enjoy your new gear, it looks awesome.


Yep, the AF on the 5DII is definitely a step down from my 7D. It's more like my 40D was. I miss the AF and other technological advancements on the 7D, but I found that I didn't really shoot much that required super fast AF. I definitely love the 5DII, it suits my shooting style much better. If I had the money, I would have kept the 7D as a back up, because it was superb, best crop sensor body out there.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
I was about 5 feet away from that tombstone. It looks wider than what you expect because it is! 50mm is much wider on FF.

Yep, the AF on the 5DII is definitely a step down from my 7D. It's more like my 40D was. I miss the AF and other technological advancements on the 7D, but I found that I didn't really shoot much that required super fast AF. I definitely love the 5DII, it suits my shooting style much better. If I had the money, I would have kept the 7D as a back up, because it was superb, *best crop sensor body out there.*

even compared to the d300s?

*edit*

hmm i think last night, i dreamed of a future design of a nikon DSLR. it was somewhat smaller than my d5000 but what i remember the best is that it at like a 3.5" touchscreen on the back @[email protected]


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


even compared to the d300s?

*edit*

hmm i think last night, i dreamed of a future design of a nikon DSLR. it was somewhat smaller than my d5000 but what i remember the best is that it at like a 3.5" touchscreen on the back @[email protected]


Yes!

And you're design dream probably isn't far from reality seeing how DSLR's are progressing.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


even compared to the d300s?

*edit*

hmm i think last night, i dreamed of a future design of a nikon DSLR. it was somewhat smaller than my d5000 but what i remember the best is that it at like a 3.5" touchscreen on the back @[email protected]


If they ever made a touch screen dslr that tried to replace some buttons I would immediately move to Canon.

But on the topic of dreams I imagined the D4 had 10fps and another stop of ISO performance. I guess the real feature was that the shutter was inaudible from more than 2 metres (6 feet) away. I kinda drew inspiration from the first gun suppressor demonstration to some US president a while ago.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
If they ever made a touch screen dslr that tried to replace some buttons I would immediately move to Canon.

But on the topic of dreams I imagined the D4 had 10fps and another stop of ISO performance. I guess the real feature was that the shutter was inaudible from more than 2 metres (6 feet) away. I kinda drew inspiration from the first gun suppressor demonstration to some US president a while ago.









I had a dream about the 16-35 a week before it was released, looked pretty much the same and was plasticy, creepy as hell.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dudemanppl* 
I had a dream about the 16-35 a week before it was released, looked pretty much the same and was plasticy, creepy as hell.

Do you envision a 50mm f/0.95 VR lens in the near future?

That reminds me, the rest of the features on that D4 of mine included instant AF in good lighting, and fast AF at night. You also cannot hear the AF no matter how close you get to the lens







The D4 also had 60fps 1080p







.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
Do you envision a 50mm f/0.95 VR lens in the near future?

That reminds me, the rest of the features on that D4 of mine included instant AF in good lighting, and fast AF at night. You also cannot hear the AF no matter how close you get to the lens







The D4 also had 60fps 1080p







.

No, but I did see me using my 300 and D300s. Photographers are so creepy.


----------



## Marin

Canon 14-24mm.

They better make it happen, they submitted patents already.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Yes!

And you're design dream probably isn't far from reality seeing how DSLR's are progressing.


Lies.

What about the D2Xs? Or the Canon 1D series?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Lies.

What about the D2Xs? Or the Canon 1D series?


APS-C is what I had in mind when I said that.


----------



## dudemanppl

Man I want a D2H bad, I don't even have a real reason!


----------



## iandroo888

whats so good about d2h considering its a DX body? theres a mint d2h w/ 5k actuations on CL here for $600


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
whats so good about d2h considering its a DX body? theres a mint d2h w/ 5k actuations on CL here for $600

Everthing. Build, buttons...


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
whats so good about d2h considering its a DX body? theres a mint d2h w/ 5k actuations on CL here for $600

Pro level build, High ISO noise that rivals current models, 8FPS, better controls, oh, and hella cheap for what it can do.

The D2Xs was still being used when the D3 came out because of the level of it's IQ.


----------



## iandroo888

hmmmmm *sells d5k n gets d2h* xD


----------



## mortimersnerd

Took a couple pictures tonight (4 minute and 10 minute exposure)



















I would take more night exposures but its cold whenever its clear (up north here), but tonight is one of the warmer nights in a while, that was clear, 17F.


----------



## E_man

Yeah, D2h is pretty awesome. If you need high speed photography on a budget, look no farther.

Nice shots mortimersnerd. I can never get out of the city on a clear day


----------



## raisethe3

Does digital camera count? I have a Nikon CoolPix L14.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *E_man*


Yeah, D2h is pretty awesome. If you need high speed photography on a budget, look no farther.

Nice shots mortimersnerd. I can never get out of the city on a clear day










Eman: But I already have a gripped D300s (better in pretty much every way), though my goal in life is to own all Nikon bodies / lenses (not at one time though!).

Mortimersnerd: I agree, those shots are awesome, I like the first one better but the second doesn't suck or anything.


----------



## E_man

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Eman: But I already have a gripped D300s (better in pretty much every way), though my goal in life is to own all Nikon bodies / lenses (not at one time though!).


Yeah, it's better, but also 2-2.5x as much. That's why I said on a budget. And such a noble goal. A quite expensive one might I add


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *E_man*


Yeah, it's better, but also 2-2.5x as much. That's why I said on a budget. And such a noble goal. A quite expensive one might I add










I'm looking at one for 400 with UPS Next Day ground from Fresno. Want, but don't want, ARAGH!


----------



## E_man

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


I'm looking at one for 400 with UPS Next Day ground from Fresno. Want, but don't want, ARAGH!


D300? 400$? Jump!! If you don't want it, resell it (or tell me where your getting it, and I might take it, Fresno local







)


----------



## iandroo888

d2h w/ approx 5k actuations for $600 worth getting to replace d5000?

*edit*

wow just noticed it was a 4.1mp dx sensor =X


----------



## Danylu

I want to get into macro but macros are too expensive for me so I had a look at a close up filter cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=270312309... (Under $6 shipped)!!

Anyone here personally used one? I'm planning to use it on my 35mm 1.8 because that is the sharpest I have.

I have no clue about close up filters either though D:. Do I lose AF? Do I lose any f-stops? Do I lose infinity focus [Does that mean I can still focus on things 5-10metres/15-30ft away?] Are there any other limitations I should be aware of?

If I bought the +10 diopter what focal length would that make my 35mm 1.8 equivalent to? Should I buy two and stack them or would one be enough?

=]


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


Originally Posted by *raisethe3* 
Does digital camera count? I have a Nikon CoolPix L14.

Technically, they're all digital cameras







But yes, P&S do count too!


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


d2h w/ approx 5k actuations for $600 worth getting to replace d5000?

*edit*

wow just noticed it was a 4.1mp dx sensor =X


The difference between a D300s and D1H at ISO 800 with a 50mm f/1.8, wide open.

D300s:









D1H:


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


The difference between a D300s and D1H at ISO 800 with a 50mm f/1.8, wide open.

D300s:

D1H:


Not sure what this is supposed to illustrate.









Hard to make a judgement on those pictures: jpg quality issues and focus point is different between the two images. If you're trying to show that they aren't very different at a small resolution then I would agree.


----------



## Mootsfox

Just that the noise at 800 is about the same.

I personally find that amazing when the camera on the bottom has an 11 year old sensor design.


----------



## Sparhawk

It is fairly impressive, or sad depending on how you want to look at it.

On a completely different note:
Thoughts on ISO vs. Shutter vs. aperture? I usually shoot attempting to get the lowest ISO number with the aperture set to whatever effect I'm going for, as a result shutter speed tends to be the one I'm fighting with the most. I've found shooting this way usually results in the clearest/sharpest looking photos(once I've managed to get a non-motion-blurred shot).

However, I've noticed other people using very high ISO numbers, (possibly to achieve higher shutter speeds?) sometimes in situations when high shutter speed isn't needed. Is there any reason for this, or is it just someone who doesn't know what they are doing? (I usually don't like extra noise in my pictures... and higher ISO usually effects the color reproduction too...)

EDIT:EDIT: lol, chrome still has the "vote now" buttom coming up instead of "save".


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Sparhawk*


It is fairly impressive, or sad depending on how you want to look at it.

On a completely different note:
Thoughts on ISO vs. Shutter vs. aperture? I usually shoot attempting to get the lowest ISO number with the aperture set to whatever effect I'm going for, as a result shutter speed tends to be the one I'm fighting with the most. I've found shooting this way usually results in the clearest/sharpest looking photos(once I've managed to get a non-motion-blurred shot).

However, I've noticed other people using very high ISO numbers, (possibly to achieve higher shutter speeds?) sometimes in situations when high shutter speed isn't needed. Is there any reason for this, or is it just someone who doesn't know what they are doing? (I usually don't like extra noise in my pictures... and higher ISO usually effects the color reproduction too...)


I've forgotten only to open them in Lightroom and go "damnit".

Otherwise, yeah, higher ISO. I usually shoot between 200-800. I only do Low1 when doing long exposures or otherwise have a tripod.

I listed a 50mm Nikkor prime for $35 in the FS section details through the link 
http://www.overclock.net/other-techn...ml#post6967224


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
I want to get into macro but macros are too expensive for me so I had a look at a close up filter cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=270312309... (Under $6 shipped)!!

Anyone here personally used one? I'm planning to use it on my 35mm 1.8 because that is the sharpest I have.

I have no clue about close up filters either though D:. Do I lose AF? Do I lose any f-stops? Do I lose infinity focus [Does that mean I can still focus on things 5-10metres/15-30ft away?] Are there any other limitations I should be aware of?

If I bought the +10 diopter what focal length would that make my 35mm 1.8 equivalent to? Should I buy two and stack them or would one be enough?

=]

Haven't used them, but questions about them pop up often on forums. The usual answer is that they cause massive amounts of CA and effect sharpness quite a bit.

Why not get some extension tubes instead?

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
d2h w/ approx 5k actuations for $600 worth getting to replace d5000?

*edit*

wow just noticed it was a 4.1mp dx sensor =X

4MP can still enlarge reasonably well (to a point), but you can forget about cropping with that resolution.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Sparhawk* 
It is fairly impressive, or sad depending on how you want to look at it.

On a completely different note:
Thoughts on ISO vs. Shutter vs. aperture? I usually shoot attempting to get the lowest ISO number with the aperture set to whatever effect I'm going for, as a result shutter speed tends to be the one I'm fighting with the most. I've found shooting this way usually results in the clearest/sharpest looking photos(once I've managed to get a non-motion-blurred shot).

However, I've noticed other people using very high ISO numbers, (possibly to achieve higher shutter speeds?) sometimes in situations when high shutter speed isn't needed. Is there any reason for this, or is it just someone who doesn't know what they are doing? (I usually don't like extra noise in my pictures... and higher ISO usually effects the color reproduction too...)

EDIT:EDIT: lol, chrome still has the "vote now" buttom coming up instead of "save".

I do the same, but sometimes cranking the ISO can be necessary, like for indoor sports where the lighting is poor. Or just for indoor with no flash. I know that some, trusting their camera's high ISO performance, leave the ISO setting to auto.


----------



## mortimersnerd

Quote:


Originally Posted by *E_man* 
Nice shots mortimersnerd. I can never get out of the city on a clear day










Quote:


Originally Posted by *dudemanppl* 

Mortimersnerd: I agree, those shots are awesome, I like the first one better but the second doesn't suck or anything.

Thanks. I love the sky in northern Michigan, very clear. If I would have had time last night I would have drove out away from the university where theres very little light. Hopefully it will be clear next weekend so I can.


----------



## iandroo888

i see i see

damn. so i just noticed today. my next camera related purchase has to be a flash. lol =X realized thats what i need at the moment [so i can stop asking cousin to borrow]. but too bad realized this a bit late..

asked cousin to borrow his this coming wednesday for a week for a photoshoot, and convention im going to.. but then found out that he needs it before he flies on thurs to visit his gf. at best i can use it for photoshoot but i wanted to use for convention...

anyone nice enuf to 3 day ship me one to borrow @[email protected] lol

any stores still have sb-600 in stock with no restocking fee? =X lol


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


i see i see

damn. so i just noticed today. my next camera related purchase has to be a flash. lol =X realized thats what i need at the moment [so i can stop asking cousin to borrow]. but too bad realized this a bit late..

asked cousin to borrow his this coming wednesday for a week for a photoshoot, and convention im going to.. but then found out that he needs it before he flies on thurs to visit his gf. at best i can use it for photoshoot but i wanted to use for convention...

anyone nice enuf to 3 day ship me one to borrow @[email protected] lol

any stores still have sb-600 in stock with no restocking fee? =X lol


I've got one in my for sale thread that I could sell you


----------



## iandroo888

but but i dont have the funds yet >.<" trade u for a cooler master csx v1 case? =X


----------



## E_man

Could buy an el cheapo manual flash on ebay. I have 2 that I really like, and use for Off camera flash. You'd have to watch your settings, but typically, you will use similiar settings in a convention, and adjust your iso/aperture to suit your lighting needs. Could be a cheap quick solution


----------



## iandroo888

like which? iunoe much about flashes except for the speedlight line.

but i need it before friday next week =X rawr *sigh*

ritz has restocking fee. BB doesnt have any instock [according to their site]. fry's doesnt carry nikon.


----------



## E_man

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
like which? iunoe much about flashes except for the speedlight line.

but i need it before friday next week =X rawr *sigh*

ritz has restocking fee. BB doesnt have any instock [according to their site]. fry's doesnt carry nikon.

Here is the model that I use (I have two). Don't worry that it says canon. I have one canon and one nikon, and honestly, weather I am doing Off camera flash or on camera, I just grab one and go (they are old, neither will do TTL with current camera's anyway)

It tilts from 0-90 degrees, swivels 180 one direction, and ~150 the other. Zooms from 28-80mm, can adjust from 1/1 power to, iirc 1/64 power, might be 1/128, but I don't think so. Has a built in slave, so you can take it off you can activate it remotely just by the light from another flash. All in all, a lovely light. I've debated getting a speedlight, but I like the DSZ so much.


----------



## iandroo888

thx for suggestion.

what does iTTL do n e way 

but current offer still stands.. Cooler Master CSX V1 Spartan [No 71 of 300] straight trade for a Nikon SpeedLight SB-600 [3 day ship plz. need before friday 03/26]


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


Originally Posted by *E_man* 
D300? 400$? Jump!! If you don't want it, resell it (or tell me where your getting it, and I might take it, Fresno local







)

No, D2H. Of course I would buy a D300 for 400 without hesitation!


----------



## iandroo888

same. =X howchu find one for 400 =X =[ i want inbody focus motor... metering and AF w/ most if not all lenses... fast FPS... *drools*


----------



## E_man

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


what does iTTL do n e way 


It's how Nikon makes their flashes auto adjust exposure. It fires a flash before the picture is taken, takes a reading, and uses that to calculate how much power is needed. With the flash I mentioned, you will have to take a shot, and use that to judge how you want to adjust exposure yourself

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


No, D2H. Of course I would buy a D300 for 400 without hesitation!


Ah, I see. Haha, if it was a D300, my D200 would be for sale right now


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *E_man*


Ah, I see. Haha, if it was a D300, my D200 would be for sale right now










D300s are getting down into the 800 range. You can probably sell the D200 for 600 too.

Iandroo: They're usually around that price, but this one needs a new battery which is like 40 from battery barn or whatever http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/top...rd=d2h#8253207


----------



## iandroo888

i c i c. i didnt realize for nikon that anything up to like the d2x were DX format until recently. does that mean canon had full frames before nikon?


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
i c i c. i didnt realize for nikon that anything up to like the d2x were DX format until recently. does that mean canon had full frames before nikon?

Canon had the first full frame with the 1D series. They also have 1.3x sensors in the 1Ds series.

Nikon's first FF was the D3. Currently they offer the D3s, D3x and D700 as their FF lineup.

TTL just means Through The Lens. The i in Nikon's is intelligent. All it means is that it's setting the flash power based on a pre flash that's fired before the shutter is opened that tells the camera what power to set the real flash at.


----------



## iandroo888

yah i know the current lineup but never knew before the D3 was all DX. i though the D1H and up where all full. xD guess not =X learned something new aside from the genetic vocabulary im going thru =.=


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
yah i know the current lineup but never knew before the D3 was all DX. i though the D1H and up where all full. xD guess not =X learned something new aside from the genetic vocabulary im going thru =.=

If I remember correctly, the D1/x/h had full frame mirrors.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dudemanppl* 
If I remember correctly, the D1/x/h had full frame mirrors.

Yup. The shutter is crop sized though. It's also white on my D1H, might be a replacement.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Canon had the first full frame with the 1D series. They also have 1.3x sensors in the 1Ds series.

Nikon's first FF was the D3. Currently they offer the D3s, D3x and D700 as their FF lineup.

TTL just means Through The Lens. The i in Nikon's is intelligent. All it means is that it's setting the flash power based on a pre flash that's fired before the shutter is opened that tells the camera what power to set the real flash at.


1D Series has the 1.3x crop. The 1Ds Series is full frame.


----------



## Mr_Nibbles

Update:
Canon 450D(XSi)
Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 with hood
Canon EF-S 18-55mm IS f/3.5-5.6
Lowepro Adventura 170 Case
Opteka Battery Grip


----------



## iandroo888

anyone have any good photoshoot suggestions? gonna have one with the "Executive board" of an community service organization i'm in on wednesday. want to have a good turnout =]


----------



## Sparhawk

Update(these are all the lenses I have atm):
Nikon 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6GII ED AF-S DX Nikkor
Nikon 50mm f/1.8D AF Nikkor
Nikon 80-200mm f/2.8D ED AF Nikkor


----------



## mortimersnerd

Its a sad day.... my Specialized Tarmac (carbon road bike) cracked while riding today. At least I could get a good picture of it:


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Canon had the first full frame with the 1D series. They also have 1.3x sensors in the 1Ds series.

Nikon's first FF was the D3. Currently they offer the D3s, D3x and D700 as their FF lineup.

TTL just means Through The Lens. The i in Nikon's is intelligent. All it means is that it's setting the flash power based on a pre flash that's fired before the shutter is opened that tells the camera what power to set the real flash at.


No, the 1Ds series are Canon's full-frame models. The 1D series (without the "s") are their APS-H 1.3x crop cameras.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mortimersnerd*


Its a sad day.... my Specialized Tarmac (carbon road bike) cracked while riding today. At least I could get a good picture of it:










Don't know much about bikes, but that looks expensive!
OT: This thread has been active, really active.


----------



## E_man

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


D300s are getting down into the 800 range. You can probably sell the D200 for 600 too.


Just not a big enough difference for what I shoot. Low ISO, often manual focused, etc. Mainly what I'd like more of is pixel density. With what I shoot (macro mainly) pixel density is what I want


----------



## mortimersnerd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


*D300s are getting down into the 800 range.* You can probably sell the D200 for 600 too.


Where are you seeing them for $800?

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Don't know much about bikes, but that looks expensive!
OT: This thread has been active, really active.


Should be covered by warranty, but if not its a $1900 frame. :/


----------



## BlankThis

Gripped D40 (Hopefully upgrading to a D200 body next year)
Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 GII ED AF-S DX Nikkor
Nikkor 55-200 f/4-5.6 G ED AF-S DX VR
*Soon* Nikkor 35mm AF-S DX


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mortimersnerd*


Where are you seeing them for $800?

Should be covered by warranty, but if not its a $1900 frame. :/


lol id like to know that too =X

*edit*

think its worth it to pay for 2 day or 3-5 day shipping for a flash for a week and return it? lol =X


----------



## laboitenoire

Dang... Did you hit a pothole or something? I think my cousin who does Ironman competitions has wrecked a few bikes before while riding, but he rides them incredibly hard (probably puts 6,000+ miles on in a year).


----------



## mortimersnerd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Dang... Did you hit a pothole or something? I think my cousin who does Ironman competitions has wrecked a few bikes before while riding, but he rides them incredibly hard (probably puts 6,000+ miles on in a year).


Never hit a big pothole on this bike. I was sprinting up a hill and it went "pop" without warning. Purchased the bike last June, about 2,500 miles on it so not too bad. At least Specialized has a lifetime warranty on their frames.


----------



## Lelin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mortimersnerd*


Never hit a big pothole on this bike. I was sprinting up a hill and it went "pop" without warning. Purchased the bike last June, about 2,500 miles on it so not too bad. At least Specialized has a lifetime warranty on their frames.


Sheesh, never saw a frame break like that before, good thing it has warranty


----------



## mortimersnerd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Lelin*


Sheesh, never saw a frame break like that before, good thing it has warranty


Yeah, my knowledge of physics says that it wouldn't have broken there unless there was some massive flaw in the carbon. The seat post extended about 3 inches further down the tube than the break point.

back on topic...

Anyone see any deals on a Nikon 70-200mm VR I. I'm currently looking, assuming I can get the bike repaired under warranty.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mortimersnerd* 
Where are you seeing them for $800?

They WERE 800 about a month ago, now around 950.


----------



## iandroo888

could check out FM. i c the 70-200 being put up a lot.


----------



## mortimersnerd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


They WERE 800 about a month ago, now around 950.


Opps, thought you said D300s instead of D300's.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


could check out FM. i c the 70-200 being put up a lot.


FM?


----------



## iandroo888

fredmiranda.com/forum


----------



## Mootsfox

Should stick with aluminum/steel frames yo.


----------



## mortimersnerd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


fredmiranda.com/forum


Thanks.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Should stick with aluminum/steel frames yo.


But I love a 17lb bike....


----------



## Mootsfox

But it's a better workout if it weighs 30


----------



## mortimersnerd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


But it's a better workout if it weighs 30










Same workout, you just go slower.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mortimersnerd*


Same workout, you just go slower.










At least my Specialized doesn't snap in half


----------



## mortimersnerd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


At least my Specialized doesn't snap in half










This clearly isn't a normal...


----------



## dudemanppl

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/880500
You can probably haggle to 1350 shipped.


----------



## Marin

5DMKII + 50mm f/1.2 + ISO 3200 = awesome.

I was also shooting it during the day, having a larger dynamic range is awesome. Nice blue skies. I'll post pics once I'm back from Boston and Chicago.


----------



## mortimersnerd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/880500
You can probably haggle to 1350 shipped.


Bahhh, I won't have the money until the end of this week. Cheapest I have seen one without issues though.

Its located in Canada I believe (according to the user profile). What are the odds that I would get stuck with import taxes...


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mortimersnerd*


Bahhh, I won't have the money until the end of this week. Cheapest I have seen one without issues though.

Its located in Canada I believe (according to the user profile). *What are the odds that I would get stuck with import taxes...*


Always good(that you would get stuck with them).

I usually avoid ordering things cross boarder, ...unless it's from china where they just mark things as being worth $2 so it passes through customs(kinda shady, but I guess it means I get cheap stuff).

oh, and metal frames ftw! lol, I'm using an ancient Miyata that I got for free.


----------



## iandroo888

http://skypointdigital.com/skypoint/...ucts_id=320979

d5000 body for 259?


----------



## laboitenoire

Total frauds.
http://thoughts-of-dave.blogspot.com...-bait-and.html


----------



## Mootsfox

Don't buy from them.

http://www.resellerratings.com/store/SkyPointDigital


----------



## iandroo888

alright xDDD just thought id ask b/c i saw it on slickdeals.net

-------------------------

hmm think ive decided on my next photography item purchase

sb600 + sanyo eneloops
35mm or 50mm AF-S prime for low light conditions


----------



## Danylu

I'm getting a 55mm 3.5 macro lens. Everything manual and I think it is like 40 years old









But it's a cheap way to get to 1:1


----------



## bentleya

The chalet which is the main feature of the shot, is just past the Prarion Ski lift in Les Houches and is part of a new development from chalet and apartment builds, "MGM". The background of the shot is Mount Blanc and i tried to capture the "White Mountain", without the normal "Hat". His hat is normally a small area of cloud resting around the top of the peak in the winter months.

1024 x 683 | Orignal Download | PhotoStream | Image Licence

You can use the image and edit, but full credit to myself Bentleya and a link to my photostream must be present if posting somewhere else. Please see Image Licence


----------



## MistaBernie

Got my new camera in today - nice to have a new DSLR again! (last one was in 2003, heh. Sigma SD9)

Pics taken from my new pocket and stranger camera, my Canon Powershot A590..

There were more pics, but they didn't come out very nice, so I wont go to the trouble of resizing them :X


----------



## iandroo888

enjoy your new kit ! t1i is good =] i question canon's box design tho haha


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
enjoy your new kit ! t1i is good =] i question canon's box design tho haha

Haha, yeah, when the UPS guy handed it to me (he was confused that I had to sign for this box but the others I've been getting for the last two months - 1-2 a week, ugh - no sig required) I was kinda like 'huh.. this feels _really_ light..' got from B&H, and it was just that the box they shipped it in was slightly larger than it, so it had the big bubble wrap suspending it in the carton. I dug it though









Now to find fellow OCNers selling EF-S lenses for deals...


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


Got my new camera in today - nice to have a new DSLR again! (last one was in 2003, heh. Sigma SD9)

Pics taken from my new pocket and stranger camera, my Canon Powershot A590..

There were more pics, but they didn't come out very nice, so I wont go to the trouble of resizing them :X


Congrats!

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


enjoy your new kit ! t1i is good =] i question canon's box design tho haha


LOL, I was thinking the same thing, kind of a throwback to their 90's film Rebels. Looks like the box for an RC monster truck! The boxes for Canon mid and pro grade bodies look totally different.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


Haha, yeah, when the UPS guy handed it to me (he was confused that I had to sign for this box but the others I've been getting for the last two months - 1-2 a week, ugh - no sig required) I was kinda like 'huh.. this feels _really_ light..' got from B&H, and it was just that the box they shipped it in was slightly larger than it, so it had the big bubble wrap suspending it in the carton. I dug it though









Now to find fellow OCNers selling EF-S lenses for deals...










Check POTN's for sale forum, tons of lenses there. You just missed my big sale, I sold three EF-S lenses recently. And remember that you can use EF lenses too, not just EF-S.


----------



## Lelin

Any backpackers around here? I'm going in Central America in July and I'm not sure what to bring or buy for the trip. I'll be traveling very lightly... Thinking about getting 15-85mm IS or 18-135mm IS or Tamron 18-270mm IS. And not sure if I should bring my Toki 11-16mm, will bring my nifty fifty for sure though.


----------



## iandroo888

u dont need so many. id say the 50, 18-270 and 11-16 should be the 3 u should have if anything.. probably even the 18-135 instead of 18-270


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Lelin*


Any backpackers around here? I'm going in Central America in July and I'm not sure what to bring or buy for the trip. I'll be traveling very lightly... Thinking about 15-85mm IS, 18-135mm IS, tamron 18-270mm IS. And not sure if I should bring my Toki 11-16mm, will bring my nifty fifty for sure though.


Me! I would bring one lens, maybe two at the most. In the past, I always brought my 7D/40D/XTi (depending on which I owned at the time), 10-22 and maybe my 70-200/4 if I felt like lugging it. Mostly I used my 10-22. With your setup, I would bring either your 18-135 and 11-16, or your 50 and 11-16. You will likely see wildlife that you will want to shoot, so maybe the first setup. I wouldn't bring too much camera gear, unless you really think that you will be switching more that two lenses. You can use your pack, a rock or other as a means of support to avoid bringing a tripod.

I would strongly recommend a Pelican case if you're going into an environment as wet as Central America. Your 7D is fully weather sealed, but your lenses are not. Definitely insure your camera if you haven't already.


----------



## Lelin

I meant I'd get either a 15-85mm IS or 18-135mm IS or 18-270mm VC oops! I never shot anything over 55mm yet... really thinking about the 15-85mm IS because it's wide enough so I wouldn't have to bring the 11-16mm 2.8 and it's sharp. If not I could get the 18-135mm IS for a bit more reach and a S P&S + water housing. Decisions decisions.

I will get insurance against theft and right, I should get for damage too. My bag is water resistant and I will buy a rain cover to put over it. It's gonna be rain season making me wish I had a 5d2 + 24-105L







. They need to start making screw on shower caps!

Here's my itinerary: Mexico DF (see friends), Guadalajara (friends), Puerto Vallarta (friends), Mexico DF, Veracruz, Ciudad del Carmen, Chichen Itza-Tulum, BÃ©lize city-cayes (Rainy!, Diving), part of Guatemala, Honduras (Copan and Roatan diving). El Salvador, back to Guatemala, Mexico Oaxaca region, Mexico DF, Home

PS: Broke my foot yesterday!


----------



## riko99

Woot tax return showed up today... 613 bucks towards the D300s lol







. All I'm hoping for is that i have all the money before the sale at the one place I'm buying it from ends.


----------



## edwardm

Quote:


Originally Posted by *MistaBernie* 
Got my new camera in today - nice to have a new DSLR again! (last one was in 2003, heh. Sigma SD9)

Pics taken from my new pocket and stranger camera, my Canon Powershot A590..

There were more pics, but they didn't come out very nice, so I wont go to the trouble of resizing them :X

Got my t1i last week too, loving it. I got it with the stock lens.

I want a new lens now, but pretty darn expensive!


----------



## dudemanppl

I tried a 7D today and it was WEIRD, video was cool and I put on my hooded 300 2.8 and D300s to steady it. I don't really see how the viewfinder is any special though.


----------



## Marin

What do you mean?


----------



## dudemanppl

Didn't feel right in my hands. The 1DII felt good, but the 7D was too grippy somehow. It just wasn't right. The guy who had it was in 10th grade, has the 7D, a 40D and a 5DII with a 70-200 2.8 IS 10-22mm AND HE HAS NO IDEA WHAT HES TALKING ABOUT. I raged inside quite a bit.


----------



## Lelin

Hehe, rich parents! The 7D feels right but I haven't compared with 1D grip.

Anyone has an idea for the best camera for 350$ a friend is looking for a Nikon P90, Canon SX10IS style camera.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Lelin*


Hehe, rich parents! The 7D feels right but I haven't compared with 1D grip.

Anyone has an idea for the best camera for 350$ a friend is looking for a Nikon P90, Canon SX10IS style camera.


G10, G11, S90, D40, D50, XT, XTi.


----------



## Lelin

Ok, it's for a friend's friend instead. She said she was gonna buy a big lens for the P90, the lens is integrated in that thing right? Probably thinking it's a DSLR...
So I guess she wants a SLR for 350$ brand new... impossible.


----------



## r3skyline

bought the D5000 package from best buy. yes it was pricey, but its fun!
came with a backpack, and a 55-200mm VR lens. i LOVE it!


----------



## iandroo888

how much did u pay?


----------



## Danylu

Oh my god, if you have not seen this yet, get ready to drop that jaw.
http://alienbabeltech.com/main/?p=16260

EDIT: Are there any rule of thumbs to exposure? I know Sunny 16 but I don't always want to shoot at f/16 on a sunny day. Another one I know is exposing to the right which I think is something along the lines of underexpose by 1 stop or expose for the highlights and develop for the midtones or something. I have no clue and I don't want a whole heap of randomly overexposed/underexposed shots on my first day with a fully manual lens. Would greatly appreciate the help =]


----------



## olli3

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Oh my god, if you have not seen this yet, get ready to drop that jaw.
http://alienbabeltech.com/main/?p=16260


Woah! That looks great! I wonder if it actually works like that or if those examples are chosen specifically to make it look good. Either way it should at least give a good starting point to doing what you want


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
Oh my god, if you have not seen this yet, get ready to drop that jaw.
http://alienbabeltech.com/main/?p=16260

EDIT: Are there any rule of thumbs to exposure? I know Sunny 16 but I don't always want to shoot at f/16 on a sunny day. Another one I know is exposing to the right which I think is something along the lines of underexpose by 1 stop or expose for the highlights and develop for the midtones or something. I have no clue and I don't want a whole heap of randomly overexposed/underexposed shots on my first day with a fully manual lens. Would greatly appreciate the help =]

The sunny 16 rule applies to whatever aperture you want. Using equivalences, work your way from f/16 to whatever you want.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Oh my god, if you have not seen this yet, get ready to drop that jaw.
http://alienbabeltech.com/main/?p=16260

EDIT: Are there any rule of thumbs to exposure? I know Sunny 16 but I don't always want to shoot at f/16 on a sunny day. Another one I know is exposing to the right which I think is something along the lines of underexpose by 1 stop or expose for the highlights and develop for the midtones or something. I have no clue and I don't want a whole heap of randomly overexposed/underexposed shots on my first day with a fully manual lens. Would greatly appreciate the help =]


The Sunny 16 rule was originally conceived for film camera shooter without light meters. There are rules for other conditions as well:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunny_16

Check out these shots taken by a photographer in Vietnam in 1965. His light meter was broken, so he used the Sunny 16 rule for all of his shots.

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...d.php?t=671277

I often underexpose as well (to the left for Canon cameras) if I'm dealing with a scene where I know that my camera dynamic range won't be able to cover properly, like a dark foreground with bright sky in the background. Sometimes I'll use the AE lock and meter off the sky and fix the shadows in PP.


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Oh my god, if you have not seen this yet, get ready to drop that jaw.
http://alienbabeltech.com/main/?p=16260

EDIT: Are there any rule of thumbs to exposure? I know Sunny 16 but I don't always want to shoot at f/16 on a sunny day. Another one I know is exposing to the right which I think is something along the lines of underexpose by 1 stop or expose for the highlights and develop for the midtones or something. I have no clue and I don't want a whole heap of randomly overexposed/underexposed shots on my first day with a fully manual lens. Would greatly appreciate the help =]


Yeah that spot fix tool would save me sooo much time.


----------



## riko99

that is the second example of their new Content aware spot healing tool. Both times I have watched it I am amazed how quick and accurate it is.


----------



## Marin

SAIC (School of the Art Institute of Chicago) is a Canon Beta Tester. I have been accepted there and took tour; may go there. Just waiting on RISD.

Also, selling the 70-200mm for a 135mm f/2L.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


SAIC (School of the Art Institute of Chicago) is a Canon Beta Tester. I have been accepted there and took tour; may go there. Just waiting on RISD.

Also, selling the 70-200mm for a 135mm f/2L.


Wow, great opportunity! There have always been great photography exhibits whenever I've been to the AIC. The School is legendary, nice going!

And the 135/2L is probably my next lens for sure, but I can't give up the 70-200/4!


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


SAIC (School of the Art Institute of Chicago) is a Canon Beta Tester. I have been accepted there and took tour; may go there. Just waiting on RISD.

Also, selling the 70-200mm for a 135mm f/2L.


Lol, I remember waiting for colleges this time last year. Wasn't fun







Worst was the half hour waiting for the Cornell admissions page to load just to see I was wait-listed.

Anywho, good luck on RISD! One of my sister's friends got in there and would have gone if she had gotten a better deal than Mass Art. Definitely visit there if you get in (assuming you haven't visited yet)! The Brown and RISD campuses are gorgeous, and Providence is a nice, quirky city (I live about 45 minutes north in MA).


----------



## Marin

I'm iffy on RISD. Great school but I like both the location and how SAIC is set up. So if I get accepted then I'll see how RISD is (tours weren't open when I was in Boston







).


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Lol, I remember waiting for colleges this time last year. Wasn't fun







Worst was the half hour waiting for the Cornell admissions page to load just to see I was wait-listed.

Anywho, good luck on RISD! One of my sister's friends got in there and would have gone if she had gotten a better deal than Mass Art. Definitely visit there if you get in (assuming you haven't visited yet)! The Brown and RISD campuses are gorgeous, and Providence is a nice, quirky city (I live about 45 minutes north in MA).


And if you decide to go to grad school you get to go through it all over again


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


And if you decide to go to grad school you get to go through it all over again










hey thats what im gonna go thru soon =X >=[ %@%&@$)%&@$


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


And if you decide to go to grad school you get to go through it all over again










I'll probably stick around for a fifth-year masters, and then go from there.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


hey thats what im gonna go thru soon =X >=[ %@%&@$)%&@$


I feel your pain. I applied to seven schools, took the GRE, and from all the application fees, transcript fees, mailing costs, etc. it cost me about $300. Go to wherever you get the most money! I got a graduate fellowship at UK so I stayed in state, although U.Chicago was so tempting.


----------



## iandroo888

havent applied yet.. need to take the GRE soon =X

what graduate program r u goin for?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
havent applied yet.. need to take the GRE soon =X

what graduate program r u goin for?

I got my MA in Classical Languages and Literature (Greek and Latin) in '06.


----------



## bentleya

The main part of this shot is the snow part leading up though the forest with Mount Blanc in the Background. The forest is a hidden Gem in Les Houches with view of Mont Blanc and clear walking paths which turn into the town cross country circuit during the winter months. The forest boasts many great features from small streams running down rocks, to vast ice walls which locals practise they ice climbing.

1024 x 683 | Orignal Download | PhotoStream | Image Licence

You can use the image and edit, but full credit to myself Bentleya and a link to my photostream must be present if posting somewhere else. Please see Image Licence


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


I got my MA in Classical Languages and Literature (Greek and Latin) in '06.


oic im goin for MPA (masters in physician assistant) i believe is what its called. >.<"


----------



## Fletcher Carnaby

^Grad school was sooo fun! Good luck w/the GRE!

Bentlya: nice pict! How tall is the peak?


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Fletcher Carnaby* 
^Grad school was sooo fun! Good luck w/the GRE!

Bentlya: nice pict! How tall is the peak?

4,810 m
One of the most famous mountains in the Alps for mountaineering, has some of the most popular routes in Europe


----------



## Marin

Photo of me in Boston. Canon 50mm f/1.2L shot wide open.


----------



## Mootsfox

I promise to only post macros of above to the mod forums.


----------



## iandroo888

goin to cali for a few days for a convention and some vacation time [spring break]. gonna be goin around to different museums (gettys center and california science center). and the beach, and what not.. maybe blizzard entertainment too xDDD

hope to get some nice pictures. no flash. only 18-105. couldnt get a hold of a sb600 and not willin to fork over for a sb900.. lol.


----------



## Marin

Where in California will you be? (too lazy to figure it out myself)


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Photo of me in Boston. Canon 50mm f/1.2L shot wide open.




Looks a bit awkward (Both you and the photo). But love that DoF.


----------



## Marin

Yeah, I'm not great at posing. No biggie.

Anyways, I'm loving the tones and details of both the lens and FF sensor. I can never go back to crop.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Fletcher Carnaby* 
^Grad school was sooo fun! Good luck w/the GRE!

For me it was academic hazing. Did a post doc at Scripps in La Jolla for a year which was a blast.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Where in California will you be? (too lazy to figure it out myself)


Probably in the LA area, near me.


----------



## r3skyline

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
how much did u pay?

i think it was like $900+ for the combo package. or somethin like that. haha. all i know is that when i bought the mem card and the blu ray trilogy of pirates, total was close to 1100. xD


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Photo of me in Boston. Canon 50mm f/1.2L shot wide open.




Love yer clothes!


----------



## Marin

Somehow my Canon 60mm f/2.8 Macro got a huge crack in the ring up top (where it says the info and stuff). Basically the ring can now be pulled off. Ugg... what to do...


----------



## equetefue

send it in for service. Should not be that much


----------



## max302

Today I went shopping for a cheap 35mm P&S, something more compact than my pentax that I could lug around on random bike runs or whatever events do not mandate a bigger camera.

I tried a thrift store... but I got nothing out of my trip if not wierd looks from young, hot employees (yeah that's right babe, I own an iPhone and I shop thrift stores, that's how much of a hipster I am).

I then called a place I though was a photo store but turned out to be a pro photographer. I asked him for some film cameras... he told me he had tons of "worthless film cameras". He went on and on about how he had always wanted to get rid of them but nobody ever wanted to buy film stuff, and rambled on how everything that's film depreciated something insane. I asked him to meet up.

I got there, and he whipped out the merch. My jaw promptly made contact with the floor.

3x Nikon F4, each with MB-21 battery grip
Nikon F5
Nikon F100 with matching battery grip as well.
Olympus 35SPn (which apparently is rare as foxtrot uniform charlie kilo)
Full Pentax 645 outfit with a 2.8 zoom lens he kept that one far away so I couldn't salivate on it.
We talked a bit and got down to business, I offered (a certain number of Spartan warriors)$ in cold, hard, Canadian currency for 2x F4, the F100 and the Oly, and he immediately said yes.

So here it is:



For OCN, and OCN ONLY!, I am willing to let the F4's go for 275$ with shipping anywhere in Canada and ConUS.

The F100 and the Oly will stay forever close to my heart.









I haven't tested the cameras yet since I don't have an FX lens, but I will be doing so tomorrow. PM me if you want one of the other cameras he has... The Pentax he really didn't really sound like he wanted to get rid of it... but with a little bit of work and a good (by his standards) price, I'm pretty sure we can pry it out of his hands.


----------



## laboitenoire

Daaaayuuuuum!!









I'm surprised you didn't snag the F5 as well...


----------



## max302

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Daaaayuuuuum!!









I'm surprised you didn't snag the F5 as well...


The only reason is that I didn't have enough cash on me... I'm going to call the dude before easter, I want all his stuff.


----------



## Marin

You should send the cameras to me for some testing.


----------



## max302

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


You should send the cameras to me for some testing.


Suuuuuuurreeee...


----------



## Marin

Who's the one with darkroom access?


----------



## Lelin

Hey guys, my mother's friend has a Nikon FE with a 50mm 1.8 and a Tamron 70-210mm f/3.8. Is this camera any good? I could basicly get it for free.
Also, would the Tamron be adaptable to 7D? Thanks


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Lelin* 
Hey guys, my mother's friend has a Nikon FE with a 50mm 1.8 and a Tamron 70-210mm f/3.8. Is this camera any good? I could basicly get it for free.
Also, would the Tamron be adaptable to 7D? Thanks

Nothing amazing but it's not bad.

And both the 50mm f/1.8 and 70-210mm f/3.8 can be used. Just get a F to EF adapter.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *max302*


Today I went shopping for a cheap 35mm P&S, something more compact than my pentax that I could lug around on random bike runs or whatever events do not mandate a bigger camera.

I tried a thrift store... but I got nothing out of my trip if not wierd looks from young, hot employees (yeah that's right babe, I own an iPhone and I shop thrift stores, that's how much of a hipster I am).

I then called a place I though was a photo store but turned out to be a pro photographer. I asked him for some film cameras... he told me he had tons of "worthless film cameras". He went on and on about how he had always wanted to get rid of them but nobody ever wanted to buy film stuff, and rambled on how everything that's film depreciated something insane. I asked him to meet up.

I got there, and he whipped out the merch. My jaw promptly made contact with the floor. 

3x Nikon F4, each with MB-21 battery grip
Nikon F5
Nikon F100 with matching battery grip as well.
Olympus 35SPn (which apparently is rare as foxtrot uniform charlie kilo)
Full Pentax 645 outfit with a 2.8 zoom lens he kept that one far away so I couldn't salivate on it.
We talked a bit and got down to business, I offered (a certain number of Spartan warriors)$ in cold, hard, Canadian currency for 2x F4, the F100 and the Oly, and he immediately said yes.

So here it is:



For OCN, and OCN ONLY!, I am willing to let the F4's go for 275$ with shipping anywhere in Canada and ConUS.

The F100 and the Oly will stay forever close to my heart.









I haven't tested the cameras yet since I don't have an FX lens, but I will be doing so tomorrow. PM me if you want one of the other cameras he has... The Pentax he really didn't really sound like he wanted to get rid of it... but with a little bit of work and a good (by his standards) price, I'm pretty sure we can pry it out of his hands.


Must...Practice...Self...Control...

In all honesty, as much as I'd love a film camera, it really isn't a viable option for me right now. Considering I'm renting apartments for college (and won't own until at least 7 more years after I'm done with Med/Grad school), I won't have a darkroom up anytime soon. I really do miss film photography though, and honestly wish I could jump on this


----------



## Lelin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Nothing amazing but it's not bad.

And both the 50mm f/1.8 and 70-210mm f/3.8 can be used. Just get a F to EF adapter.


Good thanks for the advice. I like the feeling of that camera, everything manual, fun. I don't have anything over 50mm at the moment so the 70-210 will be better than nothing, it's brand new, couldn't believe it when I inspected it. It was used one time then put in a box for like 20 some years.
Will the focus assist work with an adapter?

Thanks


----------



## Marin

Only if it's chipped.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *max302*


The only reason is that I didn't have enough cash on me... I'm going to call the dude before easter, I want all his stuff.


Absolutely jump on the F5. One of the classics. I had one for awhile and sold it to buy my F6 but I'm back in the market for an F5 in LNIB condition if I can find one. They're just that good. F6 is more compact and metering is better.


----------



## Marin




----------



## BlankThis

OK guys so I'm looking at upgrading my body (Currently a D40) at the end of the summer.

I want to be able to use the older lenses and still get metering and I know the D200 will be able to do that.

So which would you recommend between the D200 and the D90?

~B~


----------



## max302

MARIN WHAT HAPPENED!!!!?!??!?!?

On another note, I'm back from shooting a roll of a Superia 800 with one of my F4s with my brand new 50mm f1.8.










One of the local buyers wanted to see some film out of the camera before buying, and since I want a quick sell, well I set out to take some shots downtown and in a neighboring city. An hour and 8 km of biking later, no more film.







This thing is easy to shoot with it's unreal. AF isn't awesome in trickier conditions and is much slower than anything AF-s, but still does a decent job.

The heft of this thing also makes it nice and stable. I don't think I'd any problems shooting with shutter speeds of half my focal length on anything below 100mm.

I like the new lens too. Apparently f1.8 on a full frame is supposed to be creamier than the 1.8 from my 35mm dx despite the sensor crop equivalence, so I'm really looking forward to that.

*Add a Nikkor AF 50mm F1.8D to my gear please*


----------



## max302

Quote:



Originally Posted by *BlankThis*


OK guys so I'm looking at upgrading my body (Currently a D40) at the end of the summer.

I want to be able to use the older lenses and still get metering and I know the D200 will be able to do that.

So which would you recommend between the D200 and the D90?

~B~


The D90 has some awesome features like video... but then again are you going to use it? Liveview is for teenage girls who have no idea what they are doing or blind old men... so that's not all that important too.

I believe the D90 will yield slightly better battery life though. ISO performance is about the same from what I have seen. The D200 probably gets more FPS?

If you can get a D200 for under the price of a new D90... why not? Otherwise, don't buy used if you don't have too.

Or better yet, be like me and buy an insane amount of film cameras after selling your entry level DSLR, and then never have enough money to get that D300s you told yourself you were going to get!


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:



Originally Posted by *max302*


The D90 has some awesome features like video... but then again are you going to use it? Liveview is for teenage girls who have no idea what they are doing or blind old men... so that's not all that important too.

I believe the D90 will yield slightly better battery life though. ISO performance is about the same from what I have seen. The D200 probably gets more FPS?

If you can get a D200 for under the price of a new D90... why not? Otherwise, don't buy used if you don't have too.

Or better yet, be like me and buy an insane amount of film cameras after selling your entry level DSLR, and then never have enough money to get that D300s you told yourself you were going to get!


I like the video capabilities just because _sometimes_ a video is better than just a picture. I don't plan on letting any girls use my camera lol. Yes the D200 shoots faster but the D90 handles higher ISO better, neither of which I'm particularly bothered with, although better ISO performance would be nice. I plan on gripping either so battery life isn't a huge deal.


----------



## max302

With that said, get a D90. D200's are awesome, but there really is no way of knowing how many clicks a body went through... and considering that it was the flagship DX body at the time, it probably took some beatings.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *max302*









MARIN WHAT HAPPENED!!!!?!??!?!?


I don't know, found it like that yesterday.


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


I don't know, found it like that yesterday.


http://www.jbweld.net/products/jbweld.php


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *BlankThis*


OK guys so I'm looking at upgrading my body (Currently a D40) at the end of the summer.

I want to be able to use the older lenses and still get metering and I know the D200 will be able to do that.

So which would you recommend between the D200 and the D90?

~B~


I would go for the D90 personally, because of the features and better performance. If you really think you're going to use that many older non-CPU lenses, then the D200 would be better. It would benefit you to try both bodies out, but how to get a D200 to try out is the question.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *max302*


The D90 has some awesome features like video... but then again are you going to use it? *Liveview is for teenage girls who have no idea what they are doing or blind old men... so that's not all that important too.*

I believe the D90 will yield slightly better battery life though. ISO performance is about the same from what I have seen. The D200 probably gets more FPS?

If you can get a D200 for under the price of a new D90... why not? Otherwise, don't buy used if you don't have too.

Or better yet, be like me and buy an insane amount of film cameras after selling your entry level DSLR, and then never have enough money to get that D300s you told yourself you were going to get!


Not an essential feature, but I think if you tried it, you might find it useful. Live view is great for fine tuning focusing at macro distances. Otherwise, it's a necessary nuisance for video mode.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *max302*


With that said, get a D90. D200's are awesome, but there really is no way of knowing how many clicks a body went through... and considering that it was the flagship DX body at the time, it probably took some beatings.


Not true at all, Nikon embeds the shutter count in the EXIF. Easily viewable with an EXIF reader like Opanda.


----------



## olli3

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Not true at all, Nikon embeds the shutter count in the EXIF. Easily viewable with an EXIF reader like Opanda.


I think that can be reset though so can't always trust it.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *BlankThis* 
http://www.jbweld.net/products/jbweld.php

I'm selling it, so I'm not going to attempt to fix it.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


Originally Posted by *max302* 
The D90 has some awesome features like video... but then again are you going to use it? Liveview is for teenage girls who have no idea what they are doing or blind old men... so that's not all that important too.

Eh, half agree, half not.

While I think that one of the best points of a DSLR is the isolation from your environment that the viewfinder offers you, I've found times when live view would have been nice, namely shots where I'd have to hold my camera above my head and would make it impossible for me to look through the viewfinder.

But, generally, yea, I think liveview is useless and is more of a marketing gimmick than anything.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *olli3* 
I think that can be reset though so can't always trust it.

You think? I seriously doubt that can be readily done. Think about it. I'm sure if someone were enterprising enough they could do it (i.e., someone from Nikon), but it would probably involve fiddling with the firmware. It would be tantamount to rolling back the odometer on a car. At least there's some indication, unlike Canon DSLR's which for the most part cannot reveal the shutter count.


----------



## max302

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Not an essential feature, but I think if you tried it, you might find it useful. Live view is great for fine tuning focusing at macro distances. Otherwise, it's a necessary nuisance for video mode.


Tried it on my friend's D5000. Video would be totally unusable without it, but I wear glasses and generally have a hard time with small viewfinders and still prefer going old-school. Battery life is one factor, the other is that I really don't trust a screen on giving me an idea of how the picture is going to turn out. Your point on macro is valid though... I've never done any of it, so I wouldn't know.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Not true at all, Nikon embeds the shutter count in the EXIF. Easily viewable with an EXIF reader like Opanda.


That's not exactly super reliable. I know of two user-deployable firmware updates on the D200, including one that is a major release, 1.x.x to 2.0.0, that could very well have erased the shutter count.

http://support.nikontech.com/app/ans...the-shutter%3F


----------



## Mr_Nibbles

Quote:



Originally Posted by *max302*


Liveview is for teenage girls who have no idea what they are doing or blind old men... so that's not all that important too.


I thought that too until I actually spent some time and tried it out. It is awesome to be able to digitally zoom in live view, tweak focus in low light situations especially, then turn live view off and shoot with perfect focus. Also, macro shots when your camera is on a tripod are super easy to focus.


----------



## olli3

Yeah I think live view is pretty good to have sometimes. I use my D60 for a lot of more...snapshots as well as photography (ok that kinda doesn't make sense but you get what I mean), and I have wished I had liveview for a couple of shots where a viewfinder isn't really that easy to use. The viewfinder is great 99% of the time but I don't bash live view, it has its uses.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *max302* 
The D90 has some awesome features like video... but then again are you going to use it? *Liveview is for teenage girls who have no idea what they are doing or blind old men... so that's not all that important too.*

I believe the D90 will yield slightly better battery life though. ISO performance is about the same from what I have seen. The D200 probably gets more FPS?

If you can get a D200 for under the price of a new D90... why not? Otherwise, don't buy used if you don't have too.

*Or better yet, be like me and buy an insane amount of film cameras after selling your entry level DSLR,* and then never have enough money to get that D300s you told yourself you were going to get!

Seriously, I *hate* blanket statements such as yours. I'll take it you haven't used live view or tried focusing macros through the viewfinder? God, try the feature before you slam it.









Film might be better for you, but for others, it may not be as practical. Developing etc...

EDIT: OMG! 55mm 3.5 AI is brilliant. Absolutely brilliant. Almost 360 degrees to turn the focus ring from infinity to 1:2

I lol'd at these.


----------



## ANP !!!

Meet Twin Spark


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


Originally Posted by *ANP !!!* 
Meet Twin Spark









ANP, I'm both amazed by your photos yet afraid of the constant lightning where you live.


----------



## ANP !!!

Thanks








Yea, the weather recently has been out of control, this thunder storm happened in the middle of summer.

One more


----------



## Fletcher Carnaby

Quote:


Originally Posted by *ANP !!!* 
Thanks








Yea, the weather recently has been out of control, this thunder storm happened in the middle of summer.

One more
[URL=http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4045/4461659875_1e9d1e4daa_b.jpg%5B/%5C%5CIMG]http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4045/4461659875_1e9d1e4daa_b.jpg[/\\IMG[/URL]]
[/TD]
[/TR][/TABLE]
Another beauty! Where in India are you?


----------



## ANP !!!

Thanks.
Surat, Gujarat.


----------



## Danylu

Refresh this guy's favorites page every second and you'll see what I'm trying to get across.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/nobodys-hero/favorites/

Makes me wonder... how is is possible to get to the real art underneath all this stuff?


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

@Danylu: Love your sig rig!


----------



## mortimersnerd

So I went to an old smelter today and and thought that my AF-assist illuminator burned out... I get back at test it out and it only works when I'm on full auto, not for manual, performance, etc...

Any idea whats up?

I got some nice shots, I plan to go back tomorrow with a flash light if I can't get this fixed, had to manual focus all of the shots inside.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mortimersnerd* 
So I went to an old smelter today and and thought that my AF-assist illuminator burned out... I get back at test it out and it only works when I'm on full auto, not for manual, performance, etc...

Any idea whats up?

I got some nice shots, I plan to go back tomorrow with a flash light if I can't get this fixed, had to manual focus all of the shots inside.

Go to Custom Menu Settings and make sure the one that says AF Illuminator (or something to that effect) is on. AF-assist only works in AF-S and not AF-C.


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
Go to Custom Menu Settings and make sure the one that says AF Illuminator (or something to that effect) is on. AF-assist only works in AF-S and not AF-C.










Also AF-A if you have that setting.


----------



## mortimersnerd

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
Go to Custom Menu Settings and make sure the one that says AF Illuminator (or something to that effect) is on. AF-assist only works in *AF-S and not AF-C.*










Ah, thats it. Thanks. I set it to AF-C for some sports recently. Back to AF-A.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Sparhawk*


Also AF-A if you have that setting.










AF-A is AF-S/C, It just switches between them.


----------



## mortimersnerd

Heres a few photos. Some very interesting machinery inside, I plan to go back tomorrow with a tripod - its very dark inside. All of the external shots are over a fence, LV was handy for that.


----------



## savagebunny

Ya, my DSLR is getting shot out of the water, not enough income until I get into the Navy.

I was thinking something along the lines of this.

http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/pa...mc_zs3-review/


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


Originally Posted by *savagebunny* 
Ya, my DSLR is getting shot out of the water, not enough income until I get into the Navy.

I was thinking something along the lines of this.

http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/pa...mc_zs3-review/

For $399, I'd rather get a Refurbished Canon Rebel XS w/ kit lens from Adorama for just a bit more...


----------



## savagebunny

Quote:


Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d* 
For $399, I'd rather get a Refurbished Canon Rebel XS w/ kit lens from Adorama for just a bit more...

I'm looking at it now, how are these refurbished, sent back to the Manufacture or some other means?


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *savagebunny*


I'm looking at it now, how are these refurbished, sent back to the Manufacture or some other means?


To be honest, I am not entirely sure, but if I had to guess they were BNIB cameras purchased from Adorama and returned to the store itself for repair, or they were B-Stock items sent from Canon to Adorama.

Hopefully someone more knowledgeable than me can answer this accurately.

Personally, I'd jump on it. Adorama is a well-respected site and even refurbs come with a one-year warranty.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *savagebunny* 
I'm looking at it now, how are these refurbished, sent back to the Manufacture or some other means?


Yes, and Canon slaps them with a 90-day warranty, but as said, Adorama gives them a year warranty.


----------



## kinubic

hello guys. so now im stuck between canon XS+kit(found a deal for a 150 shutter count for $400) or a nikon D3000. and wondering wat good accessories can i get or maybe some links. thanks


----------



## max302

I barely slept yesterday because I was so excited about my new acquisitions. I also feel like a thief for getting them that cheap... but a happy thief.











It's definitive, I'm keeping the F5. I thought about keeping the F100, but after using it, keeping the F5 is the logical choice, even if it means 200$ less in my pockets.

http://www.facebook.com/video/video....50176681650593

The F5 was stored with the batteries for the past 3 years... It wouldn't start up and I freaked out. I had to take the batteries out and short the battery terminals to reset the camera and make it work properly, it now works like a charm. Just loaded some film in both the F100 and F5 for this weekend, hopefully there are no meter problems!

So if anybody is in the market for a gripped F100 or F4S, gimme a holla!


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *kinubic*


hello guys. so now im stuck between canon XS+kit(found a deal for a 150 shutter count for $400) or a nikon D3000. and wondering wat good accessories can i get or maybe some links. thanks


Honestly, there isn't much difference between the two in terms of functionality. Try out both cameras if you can, and simply go for the one that feels more natural in your hands. This is definitely a personal preference issue, so while everyone on here has their own personal opinions on this, their thoughts might not necessarily apply to you.

As for accessories, both Nikon and Canon have extremely extensive accessories markets along with third party parts. You'll be fine with any brand. I'd check out Adorama and B&H for accessories, as those are the two camera sites I go to the most.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *max302*


I barely slept yesterday because I was so excited about my new acquisitions. I also feel like a thief for getting them that cheap... but a happy thief.









It's definitive, I'm keeping the F5. I thought about keeping the F100, but after using it, keeping the F5 is the logical choice, even if it means 200$ less in my pockets.

http://www.facebook.com/video/video....50176681650593

The F5 was stored with the batteries for the past 3 years... It wouldn't start up and I freaked out. I had to take the batteries out and short the battery terminals to reset the camera and make it work properly, it now works like a charm. Just loaded some film in both the F100 and F5 for this weekend, hopefully there are no meter problems!

So if anybody is in the market for a gripped F100 or F4S, gimme a holla!


The only big difference between the F5 and F100 with grip is the manual rewind lever on the F5, speed increase (8 vs 5fps) and viewfinder shutter.

I'd keep the F5 too, and sell the rest


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


The only big difference between the F5 and F100 with grip is the manual rewind lever on the F5, speed increase (8 vs 5fps) and viewfinder shutter.

I'd keep the F5 too, and sell the rest










Or instead of sell, why not give it to a financially-challenged photographer on these forums?







*Points to self*


----------



## kinubic

Finally got my Canon Xs+kit lens for $350 today with 150 shutter count







need to find me a telephoto lens now for zoom









my friend taught me the simple basics like iso and fstop etc etc here are some 1st time pics i took. any tips for me wud be nice







thanks 
saw a random flower tree and just snapped lol
http://yfrog.com/5mimg0457rj
http://yfrog.com/4ximg0458tj
http://yfrog.com/1ximg0459fyj
http://yfrog.com/evimg0460xj


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *max302*


I barely slept yesterday because I was so excited about my new acquisitions. I also feel like a thief for getting them that cheap... but a happy thief.










Like I said, I had an F5, sold it to upgrade to my current F6. I LOVE my F6 and will keep it forever, but I'm buying a LNIB F5 to add to my list. I'm sorry I sold it, it's simply a beast and work of art.

Beautiful collection!!!


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *kinubic*


Finally got my Canon Xs+kit lens for $350 today with 150 shutter count







need to find me a telephoto lens now for zoom









my friend taught me the simple basics like iso and fstop etc etc here are some 1st time pics i took. any tips for me wud be nice







thanks 
saw a random flower tree and just snapped lol
http://yfrog.com/5mimg0457rj
http://yfrog.com/4ximg0458tj
http://yfrog.com/1ximg0459fyj
http://yfrog.com/evimg0460xj


Definitely a good deal









Do you mind telling me where you got it from? I've been looking for a Canon DSLR kit for my GF and a $350 XS w/ Kit Lens fits the bill perfectly!

As for Telephoto, not sure if this qualifies, but I absolutely love my EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM lens! *Points to sig*


----------



## kinubic

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Definitely a good deal









Do you mind telling me where you got it from? I've been looking for a Canon DSLR kit for my GF and a $350 XS w/ Kit Lens fits the bill perfectly!


got if of Craigslist but i had to drive 120 miles to and back home LOL! guy said he tried it but wasnt satisfied so he got the D90 lol and stopped using this LOL.
tehre was a t1i for 550 kit lens too with 1600 shutter count lol but it sold right when i called the guy.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *kinubic*


got if of Craigslist but i had to drive 120 miles to and back home LOL! guy said he tried it but wasnt satisfied so he got the D90 lol and stopped using this LOL.
tehre was a t1i for 550 kit lens too with 1600 shutter count lol but it sold right when i called the guy.


...If that was in the Central Valley, I'm going to cry


----------



## kinubic

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


...If that was in the Central Valley, I'm going to cry










lol it was in ventura? lol hahaha! the T1i for 550 kit + extra battery was near usc lol


----------



## iandroo888

got back from a convention and vacation trip to So Cal few hours ago. uploaded pictures to computer. will sort and post on my picasa sometime tomorrow or something =D

so many cameras at convention.. saw some 7d's, 5dmkII's, d40x, d60, d90, 20d, xsi...

majority had kit lenses. some out of the ordinary were like EF 50mm's, 28-70mm [canon and 3rd party versions...] EF 85mm f/1.8 [sigma?].. there was a photography workshop at the convention, went to that. didnt learn that much from the workshop itself due to majority being p&s users or phone camera users.. i asked the presenters on their opinions on filters and they hecka went off topic and told me what filters to get... and i think one person didnt really know what a polarizer or graduated filter was.. lol =X she was like.. that one filter that u can see like it fades from one color to another... fail [and she says shes a wedding photographer too...] well i guess she knows what shes using since shes a primarily M/P shooter using the 580ex? speedlights. asked her on some techniques and she was pretty good at explaining that. o well.


----------



## Wishmaker

Greetings,

My first post here. I also share a passion for photography, this is my equipment :

Quote:

Cameras:
- Nikon D3
- Nikon D300 w/MB-D10 VG
- Nikon D5000

Main Lenses:
- Nikon 12-24G F/2.8
- Nikon 14-24G F/2.8
- Nikon 24-70G F/2.8
- Nikon 70-200G F/2.8
- Nikon 50 f/1.4 AF-D F/1.4
- Nikon 18-200
- Nikon 18-55
- Nikon 55-200

Lights:
- SB -800s
- SB -900s
- B.I.G. umbrellas and softboxes
- Helios stands.


----------



## Marin

Give me your 14-24mm.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Give me your 14-24mm.


Give me your 5D and your fashion sense.

EDIT: And also the 50mm f/1.2. I'm a greedy boy







And where in NorCal are you?


----------



## Marin

My username.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Give me your 14-24mm.


Wth Marin, you know all 14-24mm's on OCN go to me first.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


My username.


Marin=Marin County... I'm facepalming a bit right now for not realizing it.


----------



## iandroo888

i want teh 24-70 and 70-200 >_> and 50 xD and.. sb900. xD


----------



## xlastshotx

oOoOo, I want the new Flickr Pad.


----------



## mortimersnerd

Quote:


Originally Posted by *xlastshotx* 
oOoOo, I want the new Flickr Pad.

lol.


----------



## dudemanppl

Take out 80-200, put Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8 AF-S G VR.


----------



## iandroo888

can you guys give me some c&c on this photoshoot i did last week? thx !

Click here xDDD


----------



## nuclearjock

They're back and doing some fix up on their nests from last year. Won't be long and the chicks will appear.
Crappy overcast day. Sky isn't blown, it actually looked that way!!
D300 400mm VR 2.8 + TC 2.0E III. Taken from ~ 150 feet, ~60% crop:


----------



## equetefue

lovely..


----------



## dudemanppl

Forgot to tell you to take out my temporary lenses. Awesome picture NJ, but it looks oversharpened, probably due to the crop though.


----------



## GAMERIG

I <3 CANON STUFFS AS CRAZY!








Those are EOS: ELAN 7 and 30D. However I always take DSLR the most.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Forgot to tell you to take out my temporary lenses. Awesome picture NJ, but it looks oversharpened, probably due to the crop though.


Actually sharpening was very minimal. Blame the glass.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


Actually sharpening was very minimal. Blame the glass.


Holy nuts. Gaussian blur?


----------



## Wishmaker

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


They're back and doing some fix up on their nests from last year. Won't be long and the chicks will appear.
Crappy overcast day. Sky isn't blown, it actually looked that way!!
D300 400mm VR 2.8 + TC 2.0E III. Taken from ~ 150 feet, ~60% crop:












Great photo. You've got quite a reach with that setup. The D300 is perfect for shots like these. Did you use NX2 or Camera Raw?


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Wishmaker* 
Great photo. You've got quite a reach with that setup. The D300 is perfect for shots like these. Did you use NX2 or Camera Raw?

Lightroom, and Neat image.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *equetefue* 
lovely..

Thx Edwin...


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GAMERIG* 
I <3 CANON STUFFS AS CRAZY!








Those are EOS: ELAN 7 and 30D. However I always take DSLR the most.









Nice, I'd like to have an ELAN myself, always wanted to try out the eye-controlled focus. Too bad they're still pretty pricey.


----------



## Nhb93

Just picked up this lens. I'm pretty happy with the pictures I've taken with it so far, but would like to get some opinions of it from more seasoned photographers. Got a bad price on it, but don't want to go into that.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Nhb93* 
Just picked up this lens. I'm pretty happy with the pictures I've taken with it so far, but would like to get some opinions of it from more seasoned photographers. Got a bad price on it, but don't want to go into that.

I'm going to assume that it is similar to the 75-300mm Canon. Slow and loudish AF, CA visible in viewfinder and an all round meh.


----------



## Wishmaker

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


Lightroom, and Neat image.



I wanted to check before I voice my opinion. Adobe RAW and Lightroom have a different interpretation when it comes to NEF files. It is advisable to use Capture NX because the depth and level of detail is higher. Capture NX simply reads the info better than anything else. In addition, a processing flow with Capture NX 2 will yield far better results, when it comes to Nikon cameras. You save TIFF in NX and open in CS4 or Lightroom. You will have better quality and results. This of course, if you are willing to put up with how bad Nikon codes their software. It is slow, clunky and annoying at times. In most of the cases, the results will be worth it.

Coming back to your picture, it is amazing but I am sure you can make it better with Capture NX. In some places it seems soft and this can be atributed to both the lens+converter and Lightroom processing. Other than that, I stand by what I said, it is an amazing photo.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Wishmaker*


I wanted to check before I voice my opinion. Adobe RAW and Lightroom have a different interpretation when it comes to NEF files. It is advisable to use Capture NX because the depth and level of detail is higher. Capture NX simply reads the info better than anything else. In addition, a processing flow with Capture NX 2 will yield far better results, when it comes to Nikon cameras. You save TIFF in NX and open in CS4 or Lightroom. You will have better quality and results. This of course, if you are willing to put up with how bad Nikon codes their software. It is slow, clunky and annoying at times. In most of the cases, the results will be worth it.

Coming back to your picture, it is amazing but I am sure you can make it better with Capture NX. In some places it seems soft and this can be atributed to both the lens+converter and Lightroom processing. Other than that, I stand by what I said, it is an amazing photo.


Is Capture NX a workflow manager or more like an alternative to Photoshop for photos?


----------



## Wishmaker

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
Is Capture NX a workflow manager or more like an alternative to Photoshop for photos?

When it comes to *processing Nikon RAW files*, Photoshop is nowhere near Capture NX. Nikon's software is far more better as I mentioned in my previous post.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Wishmaker*


When it comes to *processing Nikon RAW files*, Photoshop is nowhere near Capture NX. Nikon's software is far more better as I mentioned in my previous post.


I'm really tired but I think you implied that Capture NX is not like Lightroom then? lol.... really sorry!


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Wishmaker*


I wanted to check before I voice my opinion. Adobe RAW and Lightroom have a different interpretation when it comes to NEF files. It is advisable to use Capture NX because the depth and level of detail is higher. Capture NX simply reads the info better than anything else. In addition, a processing flow with Capture NX 2 will yield far better results, when it comes to Nikon cameras. You save TIFF in NX and open in CS4 or Lightroom. You will have better quality and results. This of course, if you are willing to put up with how bad Nikon codes their software. It is slow, clunky and annoying at times. In most of the cases, the results will be worth it.

Coming back to your picture, it is amazing but I am sure you can make it better with Capture NX. In some places it seems soft and this can be atributed to both the lens+converter and Lightroom processing. Other than that, I stand by what I said, it is an amazing photo.


I'll add this to my to do list. Thx for the input and thx for the cc. If I generate something more pleasing to the eye, I'll share it.


----------



## mortimersnerd

Upgraded to a 70-200mm VR, I have my 55-200mm for sale.


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Wishmaker*


I wanted to check before I voice my opinion. Adobe RAW and Lightroom have a different interpretation when it comes to NEF files. It is advisable to use Capture NX because the depth and level of detail is higher. Capture NX simply reads the info better than anything else. In addition, a processing flow with Capture NX 2 will yield far better results, when it comes to Nikon cameras. You save TIFF in NX and open in CS4 or Lightroom. You will have better quality and results. This of course, if you are willing to put up with how bad Nikon codes their software. It is slow, clunky and annoying at times. In most of the cases, the results will be worth it.

Coming back to your picture, it is amazing but I am sure you can make it better with Capture NX. In some places it seems soft and this can be atributed to both the lens+converter and Lightroom processing. Other than that, I stand by what I said, it is an amazing photo.


Wow! I just tried them side by side and NX2 is much better. Better Contrast, detail and color. I guess I'll be adding NX2 into my workflow. Only wish there was a faster way to get to photoshop from it.


----------



## iandroo888

*cough* offer still up for trade with a limited edition cooler master csx v1 case for a 35mm AF-S f/1.8 or sigma 30mm xDD

can someone give me some reasons how i fix uhm.. distortions? from pictures. i was recently at the Getty's Center and was taking pictures of some of the paintings.. after being able to download the pictures to my comp, i noticed how its a little distorted. is this a body/lens problem or was just the angle i took the picture at or something?

heres a link to the album

http://picasaweb.google.com/andymche...eat=directlink

also, see if anyone can give some C&C on the pictures i took at huntington beach. first time with a camera at the beach [yah i dont used to bring cameras to beach b/c i just wanted to swim ahaha]

http://picasaweb.google.com/andymche...eat=directlink


----------



## Marin

I never understood why people take pictures of artwork.

Anyways, distortion (barrel distortion to be exact) can be fixed in Photoshop. Search around for it on Google.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mortimersnerd*


Upgraded to a 70-200mm VR, I have my 55-200mm for sale.


Damn, you didn't wait too long before getting tired of that one, did you?

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


I never understood why people take pictures of artwork.

Anyways, distortion (barrel distortion to be exact) can be fixed in Photoshop. Search around for it on Google.


It proves you've been there!









I occasionally do it if I'm writing about a work of art for a class and I want a quick reference to look at. Some museums I will take tons of photos if given the opportunity to. Like the BMW museum...


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


I never understood why people take pictures of artwork.

Anyways, distortion (barrel distortion to be exact) can be fixed in Photoshop. Search around for it on Google.


oh ok. will look for it

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Damn, you didn't wait too long before getting tired of that one, did you?

It proves you've been there!









I occasionally do it if I'm writing about a work of art for a class and I want a quick reference to look at. Some museums I will take tons of photos if given the opportunity to. Like the BMW museum...


Well its pretty much for memory. seeing something that looks good, taking down a picture to look back in the future. ive taken pictures of a picture before. i will never say its mine. but i just like having a picture of it. good refresher item. lol

if its pictures from other photographers.. i take it down as something i can maybe refer to "improve" my own skills haha

and hey ! c&c plz xD


----------



## mortimersnerd

Quote:


Originally Posted by *laboitenoire* 
Damn, you didn't wait too long before getting tired of that one, did you?

Yeah, I purchased it 1/4/10. I wanted to get a 70-200mm VR but didn't have the money at the time. Selling it for almost the exact cost that I bought it for, and no difference in wear on the lens.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mortimersnerd* 
Yeah, I purchased it 1/4/10. I wanted to get a 70-200mm VR but didn't have the money at the time. Selling it for almost the exact cost that I bought it for, and no difference in wear on the lens.

u good. that was pretty quick for u to round up that amt of $$$ =X i wanna know how u do it xD i want faster lenses >.<" xD


----------



## mortimersnerd

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
u good. that was pretty quick for u to round up that amt of $$$ =X i wanna know how u do it xD i want faster lenses >.<" xD

I had the money but I didn't have a job secured this summer so I didn't know if I could spend it or if I would need to save... well I still need to save but I got a job at a local studio for the summer so that should offset the cost of the lens.


----------



## Marin

Awesome, finished my story sequence for photo. First time I've shot the 50mm f/1.2L @ f/2 (have shot it a few times at f/5.6 and f/8 though). It just keeps getting sharper as it stops down.









I'll post it up later.


----------



## Marin

I need either one huge pelican case or multiple pelican cases for storing my digital and film equipment in college. Go!

EDIT: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...with_Foam.html


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


I never understood why people take pictures of artwork.

Anyways, distortion (barrel distortion to be exact) can be fixed in Photoshop. Search around for it on Google.


Inspiration and to be able to go back to it later. I've done it with artwork I've come across, and take pictures so that if I ever want to analyze how the piece was composed, I'm able to.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d* 
Inspiration and to be able to go back to it later. I've done it with artwork I've come across, and take pictures so that if I ever want to analyze how the piece was composed, I'm able to.

^ this =] lol


----------



## Marin

Guess I just work differently.

Anyways, I just shot a scene for a school film I'm doing on my 5DMKII and it looks amazing.


----------



## dudemanppl

Canon video.







I can barely do anything with Nikon video, the only thing you can change is the aperture if the lens has an aperture ring, if not, there is NOTHING CUSTOMIZABLE.


----------



## Marin

Manuals actually manual with Canon







.


----------



## dudemanppl

I hope Nikon fixes that! What ND filters should I get for my 50 1.4? I want to shoot at f/1.4-f/2.8 without high shutterspeeds during video.


----------



## Marin

I currently use a Hitech 1.2 ND (square filter) and it works fine for shooting video during the day. Instead of using a matte box I just use my Lee filter holder.

I must say, square filters have been the best purchase yet for me since I've saved so much money. Anytime I want to use them on a different lens I just use a different filter holder adapter (for screw-in filters it's either a step-up adapter or a whole new set of filters).


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Canon video.







I can barely do anything with Nikon video, the only thing you can change is the aperture if the lens has an aperture ring, if not, there is NOTHING CUSTOMIZABLE.


What else is there exactly to change?

You can change the sensitivity, the aperture if you use a real MF or just non-G lens and focus is adjustable. You can also adjust mic sensitivity, and video size.


----------



## dudemanppl

Wait, sensitivity? Talking about the first one, unless you were talking about mic sensitivity too. Just remembered you can set exposure compensation, probably what you were talking about.
Sorta related note: my D300s aperture slide thingy is sticking sometimes, should I get it repaired or something?


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Wait, sensitivity? Talking about the first one, unless you were talking about mic sensitivity too.


Hold the play button while in video mode and press the dpad up or down. If it's changing the mic sens, press the right direction on the dpad and then up or down.


----------



## HelenOster

Quote:


Originally Posted by *savagebunny* 
I'm looking at it now, how are these refurbished, sent back to the Manufacture or some other means?


All refurbished units sold by Adorama Camera are factory refurbished by the manufacturer, for example, Canon cameras are refurbed at their manufacturing plant in Newport News, VA.; they can have simply been pulled from the production line if something appears faulty, or if it hasn't passed the final inspection. Most of the time it is a very minor issue that needs correcting, nevertheless, once it is pulled from the normal flow of production, it gets flagged as a refurbished model, so you may get a unit straight from the factory that has never been used.

A refurb may also be an ex-store demo, possibly used in field tests or sales displays, or it may have been ordered in error and returned to the retailer (who can't then sell it as 'new' so it has to be sent back to the manufacturer for refurbishment).

All refurbished items will have been checked over by the manufacturer by hand, inspected very thoroughly, diagnosed, and calibrated by experienced technicians, and could therefore turn out to be more dependable than a new item - which will only have been checked by a process of systematic quality control protocol (ie by random sampling as it comes off the conveyor belt).
The room that houses Canonâ€™s entire refurb process is said to be completely dust-free, and with every employee working in there being required to wear special booties.

In addition, Refurbs come into us with the firmware updates and latest fixes which were carried out at whatever stage it was at when we took delivery.

All Canon refurbished products from Adorama come with a 1 year return-to-Adorama warranty; the warranty we give covers anything the manufacturers warranty covers for a new unit, including shutter defects.
All other refurbs sold by Adorama come with a 90-day return-to-manufacturer warranty.

If you need additional firmware updates you can download them, but for any hardware fixes the unit would have to be sent to Canon.
[By the way, if you send a camera (any camera) to Canon for any hardware work, they will always update the firmware].

As to the individual history of a single item, the honest answer is we have no way of knowing. Refurbished equipment is not like new inventory; the manufacturers contact us when they have a batch to sell, and the availability is unpredictable. However, if you were to ask my personal opinion on whether the equipment that Adorama offers as refurbished is typically less than a year old, based on the regularity with which we receive batches, I'd be inclined to think it is all relatively new.

I hope this helps, but please don't hesitate to contact me directly if you need anything else.

Helen Oster
Adorama Camera Customer Service Ambassador

http://helenoster.blogspot.com

[email protected]
www.adorama.com


----------



## Wishmaker

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dudemanppl* 
Canon video.







I can barely do anything with Nikon video, the only thing you can change is the aperture if the lens has an aperture ring, if not, there is NOTHING CUSTOMIZABLE.


Nikon *still* makes DSLRs and not Video cameras. I think you would have better results with a video camera.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Wishmaker* 
Nikon *still* makes DSLRs and not Video cameras. I think you would have better results with a video camera.

For actual film making (not home movies and stuff, but real films), DSLRs are such a better option for getting great results without breaking the bank.

The cheapest way to get pretty close results would be to purchase this: http://www.letusdirect.com/cart/letus35-ultimate.html










And as you can see, support rods need to be used for it.

To be able to directly use lenses without a ground glass adapter you'd have to cough up even more cash.

Red One - $17,500

And as you can see it's a completely modular body. Advantage is you get a ton of flexibility, downside is it costs a ton of money to assemble a whole camera as you need to buy the body, lenses, batteries, support rods, LCD screen, lens mount, etc...


----------



## Wishmaker

In my opinion, we need not mix apples with oranges. A DSLR camera, by definition, will focus primarily on taking pictures. How it takes pictures, depends on the type of DSLR camera you buy and the lenses used. Nowadays, one can purchase a DSLR camera for a rather low price. There are so many offers and promotions where you can buy a Nikon or a Canon with 2 lenses without selling a kidney. Live view and filming are two traits we see in bridges. It was obvious that one day we will see the spillover effect to budget DSLRs. Heck, some DSLR cameras are in the same price range like some bridges.

I stand by the fact that complaining about the filming capabilites of a DSLR camera is not worth it. How would one make an actual film with a Canon 550 or a Nikon D90/D5000? One films in poor 1080 and the latter in 720. For film making, you will buy a proper camera according to your budget and if you want to make a home video, you will use your bridge/DSLR and if your expectations are too high, then you purchase a 1080 video camera from either Sony or Canon. Same price like a D5000 with 2 lenses and will film properly.

Just my opinion.

(c) Wishmaker


----------



## Marin

Um... my 5DMKII shoots 1080p at 24fps and so far the results are miles ahead of other cameras I've used, like the Panasonic HMC150. If you don't believe me about the results I'll post some films shot using DSLR's and post mine in a month once it's done.

Also the only DSLRs that are used for shooting films are...

- Canon 5DMKII
- Canon 1DMKIV
- Panasonic GH1
- Canon 7D

And some are trying out the T2i.

It's obvious that DSLRs are gaining a huge following for shooting films if you take some time to do research.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Adorama vendor rep here on OCN... sweet!


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
It's obvious that DSLRs are gaining a huge following for shooting films if you take some time to do research.

This may in fact be true, but it doen't make it "right"..

By right, I mean that if it costs a camera $X to add the video feature, then why not let the consumer choose if the extra $X should be applied to a video feature or possibly a better af or metering system.. I realize this means double the number of products (bodies), but I for one have absolutely no intention of shooting video with any of my dslr's.

As far as research is concerned, I did some and if you look here, 70% of the people who answered the poll said no video please.

It's great that you're happy with your "video" camera. I simply think it should be available as an option as opposed to a given/feature.

Edit:

Of course you'll note this is a poll taken from a Nikon forum. It may very well be that Canon's video is so stellar that the numbers would have fallen out differently but I could not find a similar poll on POTN.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


This may in fact be true, but it doen't make it "right"..

By right, I mean that if it costs a camera $X to add the video feature, then why not let the consumer choose if the extra $X should be applied to a video feature or possibly a better af or metering system.. I realize this means double the number of products (bodies), but I for one have absolutely no intention of shooting video with any of my dslr's.

As far as research is concerned, I did some and if you look here, 70% of the people who answered the poll said no video please.

It's great that you're happy with your "video" camera. I simply think it should be available as an option as opposed to a given/feature.


I completely agree with this. I'm a photographer, not a filmmaker, and would much rather have a better camera than video function.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


This may in fact be true, but it doen't make it "right"..

By right, I mean that if it costs a camera $X to add the video feature, then why not let the consumer choose if the extra $X should be applied to a video feature or possibly a better af or metering system.. I realize this means double the number of products (bodies), but I for one have absolutely no intention of shooting video with any of my dslr's.

As far as resea
rch is concerned, I did some and if you look here, 70% of the people who answered the poll said no video please.

It's great that you're happy with your "video" camera. I simply think it should be available as an option as opposed to a given/feature.


Point taken, but video capability on DSLR isn't going anywhere, and will now be a feature that consumers and even reviewers will use to size up different cameras. I also doubt that there will be an "a la carte" option for video capability, since many people have a why-not attitude when buying a camera. It's almost an essential feature for entry and mid level DSLRs, and even the pro bodies are getting this feature (Canon 1D Mark IV).

Personally, I could care less about video as well (haven't even taken a video with my 5D yet), but I can see how a still photographer who has at least a passing (or even serious) interest in video would appreciate HD video capability, without having to invest in a separate video camera.

And given the limitations of video on DSLR's, I wonder how much it really costs to add that feature? It seems like more sophisticated AF or metering would cost more.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
This may in fact be true, but it doen't make it "right"..

By right, I mean that if it costs a camera $X to add the video feature, then why not let the consumer choose if the extra $X should be applied to a video feature or possibly a better af or metering system.. I realize this means double the number of products (bodies), but I for one have absolutely no intention of shooting video with any of my dslr's.

As far as research is concerned, I did some and if you look here, 70% of the people who answered the poll said no video please.

It's great that you're happy with your "video" camera. I simply think it should be available as an option as opposed to a given/feature.

Edit:

Of course you'll note this is a poll taken from a Nikon forum. It may very well be that Canon's video is so stellar that the numbers would have fallen out differently but I could not find a similar poll on POTN.

What extra cost? Its all software. It's like complaining about scene modes.

Please drop the argument that it makes everything more expensive because it obviously doesn't. Both Canon and Nikons bodies are dropping in price with each release, so it's obviously not having a negative effect.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d* 
I completely agree with this. I'm a photographer, not a filmmaker, and would much rather have a better camera than video function.

*Video function is done through software.*

Removing such a function won't cause Canon or Nikon to magically start popping out cameras that can shoot at ISO 12800 without any noise.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Um... my 5DMKII shoots 1080p at 24fps and so far the results are miles ahead of other cameras I've used, like the Panasonic HMC150. If you don't believe me about the results I'll post some films shot using DSLR's and post mine in a month once it's done.

Also the only DSLRs that are used for shooting films are...

- Canon 5DMKII
- Canon 1DMKIV
- Panasonic GH1
- Canon 7D

And some are trying out the T2i.

It's obvious that DSLRs are gaining a huge following for shooting films if you take some time to do research.

Wow, no Nikons are used for video at all?

I see where Nuke and others are coming from. I notice often those types of comments are used by experienced photographers, people who've been with the craft for years or decades, and the people wanting and using are those who've started in the last zero to few years.

I love the video function, I use it at cons for cosplay skits and the raves. You CANNOT find a better, cheaper camera that it. If you want better control, you have to spend thousands. The ability to shoot skits, then pop it off the tripod and take shots makes it indispensable. I'm a college student, I don't have the money to own a good DSLR and a good Camcorder.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Wow, no Nikons are used for video at all?

I see where Nuke and others are coming from. I notice often those types of comments are used by experienced photographers, people who've been with the craft for years or decades, and the people wanting and using are those who've started in the last zero to few years.

I love the video function, I use it at cons for cosplay skits and the raves. You CANNOT find a better, cheaper camera that it. If you want better control, you have to spend thousands. The ability to shoot skits, then pop it off the tripod and take shots makes it indispensable. I'm a college student, I don't have the money to own a good DSLR and a good Camcorder.

Yeah, Nikons aren't used due to the resolution and the horrible rolling shutter.


----------



## Wishmaker

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Yeah, Nikons aren't used due to the resolution and the horrible rolling shutter.


We use Nikons for taking pictures in every condition







. I think that is more than enough. Best noise/quality ratio out there


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Wishmaker*


We use Nikons for taking pictures in every condition







. I think that is more than enough. Best noise/quality ratio out there










Okay, cool.

I'm surprised you guys are bashing on a video function yet are using digital, which was bashed on by film photographers yet they used auto-focus, which was bashed on by photographers who used manual focused yet they used color film, which was bashed on by photographers who thought such a film could never be art yet they...

*facepalm*


----------



## dudemanppl

I feel bad that I started this flame war.







Lets just all agree Canon has better video, be happy that Nikon DOES HAVE video and shut up. Video at f/2 just ruins my pants and is just awesome overall.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


I feel bad that I started this flame war.







Lets just all agree Canon has better video, be happy that Nikon DOES HAVE video and shut up. Video at f/2 just ruins my pants and is just awesome overall.


Sounds good to me. But since Nuke hasn't gotten his retorts in, I doubt it's over.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Okay, cool.

I'm surprised you guys are bashing on a video function yet are using digital, which was bashed on by film photographers yet they used auto-focus, which was bashed on by photographers who used manual focused yet they used color film, which was bashed on by photographers who thought such a film could never be art yet they...

*facepalm*


You've chosen the inflamitory word "bashing".

I use digital cause it's fast and I can get my sports/wildlife pics up quickly, but it will never surpass film for many reasons involving image quality. . All I'm saying is video capability for now will not enter into my decision to either buy or not to buy a certain camera body. Apparently other people feel this way as well.

I guess I'm still stuck in still photography. My kids are grown, so now it may be useful for my grandkids.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Wishmaker*


We use Nikons for taking pictures in every condition







. I think that is more than enough. Best noise/quality ratio out there










Okay, I shoot and prefer Nikon, but you really need to get off your high horse.
Why are people so against progress?
It is a new feature and still has kinks to be worked out.
Digtal was inferior to 35mm when it first came out, but now its the standard and I see you are shooting digital.


----------



## Wishmaker

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Okay, cool.

I'm surprised you guys are bashing on a video function yet are using digital, which was bashed on by film photographers yet they used auto-focus, which was bashed on by photographers who used manual focused yet they used color film, which was bashed on by photographers who thought such a film could never be art yet they...

*facepalm*



With all due respect, your analogy is flawed. Your arguments depict reluctance to improve photography which is the main function of a DSLR camera. You are not arguing photography and video recording which are two distinct things. Let us not mix them up.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie*


Okay, I shoot and prefer Nikon, but you really need to get off your high horse.
Why are people so against progress?
It is a new feature and still has kinks to be worked out.
Digtal was inferior to 35mm when it first came out, but now its the standard and I see you are shooting digital.



What you prefer and shoot is your business. What you call high horse, I call reality. You seem to be in the same boat like Marin mixing apples with oranges. Shooting pictures and video recording is not the same thing. Two distinct things. What you call progress, I call a desperate cry to attract new customers and to pollute a product. When I see people on boards choosing a DSLR camera because it has filming capability, it makes me sad.

This will be my last post regarding this issue.


----------



## Marin

All I see is arrogance and someone basically being Ken Rockwell 2.0.

Go read my other post, it's a function added through software that has taken nothing away from the camera. It hasn't effected your photography so stop complaining.


----------



## sweffymo

I personally think that including LiveView and video in SLR cameras is just a ploy to get soccer moms and teenagers to buy DSLRs.

The video quality will never be that of any decent video camera... Just like the "still photo" feature on camcorders is always ignored.

PS-- "I'm da Ken Rockwell 2.0, ZOMG!" (To be honest, I'm not sure whether that's a good thing or a bad thing... Because I've never been able to make good 40"x60" prints from even my 8MP camera, much less a 6MP one...)


----------



## mortimersnerd

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sweffymo* 
*I personally think that including LiveView and video in SLR cameras is just a ploy to get soccer moms and teenagers to buy DSLRs.
*
The video quality will never be that of any decent video camera... Just like the "still photo" feature on camcorders is always ignored.

PS-- "I'm da Ken Rockwell 2.0, ZOMG!" (To be honest, I'm not sure whether that's a good thing or a bad thing... Because I've never been able to make good 40"x60" prints from even my 8MP camera, much less a 6MP one...)

LV is nice for MF and times when you have to hold the camera so you can't use the view finder.


----------



## Marin

*This video was shot with a 1D Mark IV.*

I happily await your comments.








YouTube- VINCENT LAFORET | Nocturne EOS 1D mark IV Sample Video
(Video was shot mostly at ISO 6400 and a few shots at ISO 3200)

*5D Mark II*








YouTube- Canon EOS 5D Mark II Sample "I love my friends" FullHD

Making of it:







YouTube- 5D Mark II firmware update 2.03 - The making of 'I love my friends'

And another:








YouTube- Lifestyle Commercial Test - Canon 5D Mark II

Yeah guys, I'm totally sure your camcorder can do this.









Jeez...


----------



## xlastshotx

Just got a Canon P20-D, Took a picture of it:










Made in Japan 1983


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Sorry for my mistake, Marin









And now I must excuse myself before the flame war starts up again...


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d* 
And now I must excuse myself before the flame war starts up again...

No worries, my hose is always ready.


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
*This video was shot with a 1D Mark IV.*

I happily await your comments.

YouTube- VINCENT LAFORET | Nocturne EOS 1D mark IV Sample Video

(Video was shot mostly at ISO 6400 and a few shots at ISO 3200)

*5D Mark II*

YouTube- EOS 5D Mark II Sample Movies with New Firmware 2.0.3

Making of it: YouTube- 5D Mark II firmware update 2.03 - The making of 'I love my friends'

And another:

YouTube- Lifestyle Commercial Test - Canon 5D Mark II

Yeah guys, I'm totally sure your camcorder can do this.









Jeez...

Some pretty good clips. It would be fun to play around with video. I know there have been quite a few occasions where I've been wishing I had video...; the scene just couldn't be captured with a still shot.









Maybe when my shutter dies I'll get one that has video... hopefully nikon will have video figured out by then...


----------



## IEATFISH

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Wishmaker*


With all due respect, your analogy is flawed. Your arguments depict reluctance to improve photography which is the main function of a DSLR camera. You are not arguing photography and video recording which are two distinct things. Let us not mix them up.

What you prefer and shoot is your business. What you call high horse, I call reality. You seem to be in the same boat like Marin mixing apples with oranges. Shooting pictures and video recording is not the same thing. Two distinct things. What you call progress, I call a desperate cry to attract new customers and to pollute a product. When I see people on boards choosing a DSLR camera because it has filming capability, it makes me sad.

This will be my last post regarding this issue.


I actually DO see video and still photography morphing into one. Improving video quality in a DSLR IS improving photography. You see, now that video quality is getting to the point of a single photo (similar to real time graphics approaching the quality single renders) it is only a matter of time before single photos become obsolete. Sure, there will always be an enthusiast crowd and market for that, but the vast majority of photographers will take videos of a scene rather than individual photos.

Think about, you can take one picture after another at a rate of 2 or 3 a second manually. But when cameras reach great quality with video and you can record in 60 pictures a second, that is what will happen. Photographer will film their scene, subject, etc. for short videos and then have hundreds of shots to chose from. Same for any occasion. Rather than snapping pictures, they must only film it and then pick the best shots from that video. Taking single photos will simply be marking a point in a video at which general frame number you would like to scrutinize at a later time. Then you take that frame and those around it, find the best with regards to pose, focus, etc., and end up with a still photograph at equal quality to a current single photo, and you don't miss any moments.

But hey, that's my view on this topic in progression. You can claim they are separate but so were PDA's and cell phones, DVR boxes and cable/satellite boxes, and knives and pliers. Video and still photography will merge.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Yeah, Nikons aren't used due to the resolution and the horrible rolling shutter.


Yeah 720p is just crap. Can't take a video with it.

You're the only one that consistently complains about the rolling shutter. It's really not big deal unless you're taking video of a very high speed object (spinning helicopter blades) or trying to make a Blair witch documentary.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Yeah 720p is just crap. Can't take a video with it.

You're the only one that consistently complains about the rolling shutter. It's really not big deal unless you're taking video of a very high speed object (spinning helicopter blades) or trying to make a Blair witch documentary.


Yeah, and AF is slow for video on any DSLR that shooting anything but staged, static shots isn't practical.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Yeah, and AF is slow for video on any DSLR that shooting anything but staged, static shots isn't practical.


Well, it's still a still camera.

I think it's ok that it doesn't function exactly like a stand alone video camera.

After using it for awhile you can keep just about anything in focus, even while moving.

It's awesome for any place you want to capture video at good quality, in low light at a stationary or indoor area. I wouldn't recommend trying to take skate videos with it, but video taping theater performances is awesome. As is low light street videos, dance videos, etc. Especially when even a high end 720p or 1080p semi-pro/pro camera isn't going to be able to use a f/1.4 or f/1.2 lens without serious modification and cost.

You can start shooting real HD quality, low light videos for about $800 with a D5000 and a MF 50mm f/1.4. How much would it cost to do that with a Sony or Canon prosumer cam?


----------



## sweffymo

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mortimersnerd*


LV is nice for MF and times when you have to hold the camera so you can't use the view finder.


I just don't like to compose shots with LiveView. I started out using a point n' shoot, but now that I have an SLR I can't stand it for some reason. My sister just bought a really nice PowerShot that has manual focus, aperture, and shutter speed, as well as a gigantic screen and "Picture Styles" like on my 30D, but I find myself unable to use it for anything other than quick snaps of eBay items or things like that because it doesn't even _have_ a viewfinder...


----------



## Marin

Pretend the LCD screen is ground glass and voila, it's a viewfinder.


----------



## Mootsfox

Live view isn't really good for anything but tricky angle shots and video (no mirror). Studio macro shots and such are SOOOO much easier with liveview and being able to zoom in close on something.


----------



## Marin

Zuiko 50mm f/1.2 test shot (it isn't vignetting, that's the camera strap):










Zuiko 21mm f/3.5 test shot:


----------



## laboitenoire

Damn, those look like some pretty sharp primes. Crazy small, though...


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Wow, the Zuiko 21mm looks great on the 5DII!


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Wow, the Zuiko 21mm looks great on the 5DII!


Yeah, it completely slaughters the Canon UWA zooms in terms of IQ and distortion.


----------



## Mootsfox

Marin.

I'm gonna have you slap you now.


----------



## Danylu

Man all of these great features everyone is talking about.. I hope I get some of them in my next body. I'm open minded to new tech as long as they don't compromise on the old.

I watched some music videos recorded with a D300s so there are a few videographers on both sides of the fence.


----------



## GAMERIG

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Nice, I'd like to have an ELAN myself, always wanted to try out the eye-controlled focus. Too bad they're still pretty pricey.










Yeah three or four years ago, I won the actual auction of Elan 7 by ebay for 180 bucks! And awesome, it was an excellent condition like NEW!


----------



## dudemanppl

Do you have a fast supertelephoto Nikon
Do you have a fast supertelephoto Canon
Marin, I met that Nicholas Poon guy in real life, I have to say he looks kinda stupid. Thank god your watermark isn't any bigger.








Guess the aperture!


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dudemanppl* 
Do you have a fast supertelephoto Nikon

Yep, added my info.

Edit: also still have a wife. wife + supertelephoto = possible problem (solved with jewelry).
you can look at my equip list and say that's a lot of stuff, but each expenditure is mirrored
with a trip to the jeweler.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Hey there guys, just wanted to ask a quick question:

For close-up shots, would there be a big difference between the macro setting on my EF 28-135mm IS USM and a true macro lens?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Hey there guys, just wanted to ask a quick question:

For close-up shots, would there be a big difference between the macro setting on my EF 28-135mm IS USM and a true macro lens?


Huge difference. Just because the focal distance indicator says "macro" on the lens, doesn't mean it's a macro lens, it just means that it's the minimum focus distance. A true macro lens has a minimum focus distance of a few inches (the 60mm macro is 3.5") and a magnification factor of 1x (life size).

The 28-135 has an MFD of 19" and a mag. factor of .19x, which is typical of zoom lenses. You can get a closer MFD and better mag. factor by using extension tubes.


----------



## dudemanppl

Gear update! (again):
Nikon D300s + MB-D10 and Eneloops
Nikon D40
Canon EOS 1

Nikkor 24mm f/2.8 AF-D
Nikkor 35mm f/1.8 AF-S G DX
Nikkor 50mm f/1.4 AF-D
Nikkor 300mm f/2.8 AF-I D
Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G AF-S DX VR
Nikkor 28-70mm f/2.8 AF-S D
Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8 AF-S G VR
Canon 17-35mm f/2.8 L

Manfrotto 776YB Monopod
Lowepro Pro Trekker AW
Sandisk Extreme III 2GB 30 MB/s CF
Sandisk Ultra II 4GB 15 MB/s CF
Sandisk Ultra 8GB 30 MB/s CF
Sandisk Ultra 16GB 15 MB/s SD


----------



## xlastshotx

Look what I found in my backyard today







It was very bite-e


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


Yep, added my info.

Edit: also still have a wife. wife + supertelephoto = possible problem (solved with jewelry).
you can look at my equip list and say that's a lot of stuff, but each expenditure is mirrored
with a trip to the jeweler.


Yeah, I got into big trouble when my 5DII showed up at my doorstep, so we had to go shopping









Quote:



Originally Posted by *xlastshotx*


Look what I found in my backyard today

It was very bite-e


Cool, what is it?


----------



## xlastshotx

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Cool, what is it?


I think its some kind of salamander, im not completely sure though. I don't see these very often here.

**Edit**

I just found out that it is a Crocodile Lizard


----------



## Marin

http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/04/odds-ends-15/

WUH?!

They added a PL Mount to it, so awesome!!!


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/04/odds-ends-15/

WUH?!

They added a PL Mount to it, so awesome!!!


----------



## dudemanppl

Nikon D300s + MB-D10 and Eneloops
Nikon D40
Canon EOS 1

Nikkor 24mm f/2.8 AF-D
Nikkor 35mm f/1.8 AF-S G DX
Nikkor 50mm f/1.4 AF-D
Nikkor 300mm f/2.8 AF-I D
Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G AF-S DX VR
Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8 AF-S G VR
Canon 17-35mm f/2.8 L

Manfrotto 776YB Monopod
Lowepro Pro Trekker AW
Sandisk Extreme III 2GB 30 MB/s CF
Sandisk Ultra II 4GB 15 MB/s CF
Sandisk Ultra 8GB 30 MB/s CF x5
Sandisk Ultra 16GB 15 MB/s SD
Turns out I couldn't get that 28-70.







It was only 550 bucks too. D:


----------



## Danylu

Anyone know a good forum for photography? I don't like dpreview or photo.net's layout. I like POTN's layout but that seems Canon based - what would my reception be like if I joined that site? I'm already a member of an Aussie photography site but wanted to see if I could join a busier forum.


----------



## mortimersnerd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Anyone know a good forum for photography? I don't like dpreview or photo.net's layout. I like POTN's layout but that seems Canon based - what would my reception be like if I joined that site? I'm already a member of an Aussie photography site but wanted to see if I could join a busier forum.


fredmiranda.com is one that I joined recently. Thats where I found my 70-200mm VR.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Anyone know a good forum for photography? I don't like dpreview or photo.net's layout. I like POTN's layout but that seems Canon based - what would my reception be like if I joined that site? I'm already a member of an Aussie photography site but wanted to see if I could join a busier forum.


Actually, there are quite a few Nikon shooters at POTN, no seems to mind them (much)







I post at dcresource.com's forum sometimes, though it's not the busiest place. Have you tried nikoncafe.com?


----------



## Danylu

I'd rather a forum just for discussion and not one for buying and selling because I already have that covered. I'll join POTN and see what happens


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
I'd rather a forum just for discussion and not one for buying and selling because I already have that covered. I'll join POTN and see what happens









FM has a marketplace like most forums, and its pretty much the busiest on the net, most of the posts are there but they do have a Nikon forum Here


----------



## Wishmaker

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


I'd rather a forum just for discussion and not one for buying and selling because I already have that covered. I'll join POTN and see what happens











If you have a Nikon camera, I advise joining Nikonians. They are quick to respond and 99% of the time the advice you get is professional.


----------



## OmegaNemesis28

Got a Nikon D3000 with 18-55mm and 75-300mm lenses.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Yeah, I got into big trouble when my 5DII showed up at my doorstep, so we had to go shopping











GT, I know you engaged did you tie the knot yet??


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
GT, I know you engaged did you tie the knot yet??

June 19th


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


June 19th










My birthday.... All the best to you and your bride.


----------



## Marin

Finally!

Got my prescription lenses in my Wayfarers.



I love my 50mm f/1.2L. <3


----------



## iandroo888

Cooler Master CSX V1 Spartan [No 71 of 300] straight trade for SB 600 or nikkor 35mm f/1.8 =X

gonetomorrow - GRATS !

what does a PL mount do?


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
what does a PL mount do?

Lenses for 16mm and 35mm movie cameras.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arri_PL


----------



## iandroo888

holy crap... wonder how it looks like mounted...


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
holy crap... wonder how it looks like mounted...


----------



## nuclearjock

Great Blue Heron
D300 400VR + 1.7e II TC
Detail is decent for a shot from ~75 yards.


----------



## iandroo888

Marin - THATS CRAZY @[email protected]

man u get such nice wildlife @[email protected] nothing here =[ XD


----------



## nuclearjock

D300 400VR 1.7 tce-II Gitzo 5 series tripod Induro gimbal iso = 400 - 640, never higher.
from ~ 75 yards

1.









2.









3.









Some nests have moms incubating. A few yearling males still trying to figure it all out (i.e. #1).


----------



## Fletcher Carnaby

Those _are_ some nice wildlife shots. Are they in Illinois?


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Fletcher Carnaby* 
Those _are_ some nice wildlife shots. Are they in Illinois?


Yep, ~25 miles west of Chicago.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
My birthday.... All the best to you and your bride.

A happy day for both of us! Thanks!

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
Cooler Master CSX V1 Spartan [No 71 of 300] straight trade for SB 600 or nikkor 35mm f/1.8 =X

gonetomorrow - GRATS !

what does a PL mount do?

Thanks! And I think many here in this thread may have foregone computer gear







That lens is popular and I suspect many are holding onto theirs. You might have better luck just selling your case.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
D300 400VR 1.7 tce-II Gitzo 5 series tripod Induro gimbal iso = 400 - 640, never higher.
from ~ 75 yards

Some nests have moms incubating. A few yearling males still trying to figure it all out (i.e. #1).

Nice shots, I see these things all the time on KY River and other water bodies. I need to get the boat out myself. How skittish are they? I've never tried to get close to one, and 200mm is the farthest I can reach, on FF no less.


----------



## dudemanppl

Nikon D300s + MB-D10 and Eneloops
Nikon D40 + 18-55mm VR

Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6 EX DC HSM
Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8 AF-S G N
Nikkor 35mm f/1.8 AF-S G
Nikkor 50mm f/1.4 AF-D
Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8 AF-S G VR
Nikkor 300mm f/2.8 AF-I D

Manfrotto 776YB Monopod
Lowepro Pro Trekker AW
Sandisk Extreme III 2GB 30 MB/s CF
Sandisk Ultra II 4GB 15 MB/s CF
Sandisk Ultra 8GB 30 MB/s CF x4
Sandisk Ultra 16GB 15 MB/s SD

Going to get a F100 when I get back from Taiwan next month,still have more than 10 rolls of film.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
I've never tried to get close to one, and 200mm is the farthest I can reach, on FF no less.

But GT, it's a 21mp FF. You can crop 'till the cows come home!!









Seriously, if you can catch them in their nest, they're usually not real timid and they fly pretty slow so good practice for BIF's. It's also a blessing for my setup since the angle of view is so small, it's hard to frame them sometimes.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


But GT, it's a 21mp FF. You can crop 'till the cows come home!!









Seriously, if you can catch them in their nest, they're usually not real timid and they fly pretty slow so good practice for BIF's. It's also a blessing for my setup since the angle of view is so small, it's hard to frame them sometimes.


Ha ha, yeah, then why do have a 400mm lens?









It kind of sucks not having the crop factor anymore, but it's worth the trade because 21MP is awesome for cropping. 100% crops even look really good, but not as good as bird that fills the frame to begin with!









This shot is nearly a 100% crop, it looks ok I suppose, about 15 feet away:

Downy Woodpecker









This one is about a 30% crop, five feet away or so (bird blind):

Nuthatch









Red Crowned Field Sparrow









As you can see, it wasn't an all-star cast at the bird blind today, mostly grackles, sparrows, doves, the odd blue jay. I need to get out to the Cincy Zoo, they have the most amazing walk-in parrot cage.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Ha ha, yeah, then why do have a 400mm lens?










Easy. The GBH's I'm shooting are on an island away from humans, hence the reach. But the birds that do nest along shore allow you to approach directly under their nest which is usually ~ 30 feet in the air.


----------



## nuclearjock

This time D3 400VR + 2.0e III

1.









2.









3.


----------



## max302

SELLING MY FILM GEAR Y'ALL!

I don't remember who was in the market for an F5... but I've got one, and I want it to go.

The Super Program and my 35SPn (which is in repair right now) will be enough for film. I really want to go back to digital.


----------



## Danylu

Do you guys reckon a 55mm 1.2 or a 300mm 4.5 + 2x TC would be beneficial to me more? Both are AI spec lenses (manual everything, including manual aperture ring). The 55mm 1.2 is a bit less then half the price of the tele ($250) but I reckon I can bring him down at least a good $50 because the lens is in a pretty poor state. The 55mm would be amazing for low light but the 600mm would be useful, although such a telephoto would be a very specialist lens. I do like birding whenever I get the chance on whatever flying winged creature I find although currently the limiting factor for me would the D60.

I think the 2x TC may work on my 55mm 3.5 Macro which would give me 1:1 macro capabilities as well.

I currently have a 55mm 3.5 Macro, 18-55mm, 35mm 1.8, 70-300mm VR. I don't know where the thing in my sig went D:


----------



## Wishmaker

An interesting find here :

http://www.zacuto.com/shootout

Make sure you click on episode 1 first and then on episode 2. On the main page, episode 2 comes by default so you will have to look lower for episode 1.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Do you guys reckon a 55mm 1.2 or a 300mm 4.5 + 2x TC would be beneficial to me more? Both are AI spec lenses (manual everything, including manual aperture ring). The 55mm 1.2 is a bit less then half the price of the tele ($250) but I reckon I can bring him down at least a good $50 because the lens is in a pretty poor state. The 55mm would be amazing for low light but the 600mm would be useful, although such a telephoto would be a very specialist lens. I do like birding whenever I get the chance on whatever flying winged creature I find although currently the limiting factor for me would the D60.

I think the 2x TC may work on my 55mm 3.5 Macro which would give me 1:1 macro capabilities as well.

I currently have a 55mm 3.5 Macro, 18-55mm, 35mm 1.8, 70-300mm VR. I don't know where the thing in my sig went D:



I think you've answered your own questions here. Birding would be difficult with out manual focus. You would essentially need to pre-focus for a certain spot, because birds NEVER sit still for than a second it seems. And with your 2xTC, I'm not sure if the lens will even meter on your D60.

And if the 55/1.2 is in such a poor state, why buy it? If it's a local buy, then I would see it in person at least before considering it.


----------



## laboitenoire

You wouldn't have metering with just the tele lens, so I'd say that neither is a great buy...


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Wishmaker*


An interesting find here :

http://www.zacuto.com/shootout

Make sure you click on episode 1 first and then on episode 2. On the main page, episode 2 comes by default so you will have to look lower for episode 1.










I just learned so much! (can't wait for episode 3)

Makes me want to get the D3s... that lowlight performance is amazing!

They refer to optimal ISO levels for digital cameras, does anyone know an easy way to figure it out? or happen to know what they are for the D80... lol, I guess I could just go shoot a bunch of test shots.


----------



## Marin

Yeah, I've been watching that. Besides ISO, Nikons video is meh.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Yeah, I've been watching that. Besides ISO, Nikons video is meh.

Quit saying that.


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Yeah, I've been watching that. Besides ISO, Nikons video is meh.

Yeah I liked the skin tones better in the nikon, but in terms of overall quality the canon cameras were much better. I'm hoping by the time I want to(practically speaking, I would always love to upgrade







) upgrade from my D80 they will have figured out a bunch of the video stuff and released the D4(s).


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Quit saying that.


No, it's meh.


----------



## laboitenoire

Alright, I swear this will be the last post I'll make before pulling the trigger...

My parents said they would be willing to spend the money they usually spend on birthday gifts to help me purchase an SLR. Depending on how much I decide I want them to help me out with, I'm left between either buying a better body or just getting a cheaper setup with lower outlay from myself... I looked and I should be able to afford a refurb D3000 or a used D80 if I decide to go for the "better" body route. Having held both, I must say I'm more tempted to go for the D80 ergonomically.

I'm also thinking that to save some cash initially, I will probably ask my dad if I can have his old Sigma 70-200 f/3.8 (strange aperture, I know), which doesn't always meter properly with his D50 (it sometimes reads the wrong aperture or just overexposes). It's one of Sigma's original F-mount AF lenses (my dad bought with his N2020 when that just came out), so I'm thinking the camera might not necessarily like the lens. The three bodies I'm thinking at this point are a D50, a D70s, or a D80. Do you think the latter bodies would have a higher chance of working with the lens, or should I just pass on it?


----------



## Marin

If it doesn't work properly with the D50, then it most likely won't work for any of the newer bodies.

Anyways...

http://www.dpreview.com/news/1004/10...nicagaf100.asp

Quote:



Panasonic has announced the first professional camcorder with a Micro Four Thirds sensor. Capable of recording full 1080p HD videos at various frame rates, the AG-AF100 is compatible with the company's line up of Lumix G lenses, filters, and adapters. Building on the success of the DMC-GH1 camera with videographers, the company says this higher-end model is 'targeted at the video and film production communities.'












That better be a really rough mock-up. It looks like a toy.


----------



## dudemanppl

Real lens, fake body. Can't not be shooped.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


I think you've answered your own questions here. Birding would be difficult with out manual focus. You would essentially need to pre-focus for a certain spot, because birds NEVER sit still for than a second it seems. And with your 2xTC, I'm not sure if the lens will even meter on your D60.

And if the 55/1.2 is in such a poor state, why buy it? If it's a local buy, then I would see it in person at least before considering it.


Looks like I won't get the 300mm then. I'm considering getting it because I reckon I can get it for about double the price of a 50mm 1.8 and 2/3s of the price of a 50mm 1.4 AF-D. At this price range, I can deal with having to manual everything and I'm getting some good practise in with my 55mm 3.5.

The photos of the lenses themselves are here:
























http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/4455719995/


----------



## Mootsfox

Has it been converted to AI?

Even so, in that condition it's worth closer to $140-150.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Has it been converted to AI?

Even so, in that condition it's worth closer to $140-150.

Even if the conversion between US-> Aussie is much better (for aussies), these lenses in good condition go for $260 AUS pp on ebay. He is trying to flog his copy for $250 pp which is way too high. I was thinking of offering him $200 shipped. I don't know if it has been converted to AI because he uses a Canon adaptor to use on his 5D - so I think it has been converted? I'm still trying to get posting rights on that forum though









But as soon as I do, I'm going to offer $150


----------



## Marin

It doesn't need to be converted if it's used on an adapter (that means his copy probably isn't converted).

Also, the lens is okay but definitely not a gem. Rather take a 50mm f/1.4 or f/1.8 over it or cough up the extra for a 50mm f/1.2.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


It doesn't need to be converted if it's used on an adapter (that means his copy probably isn't converted).

Also, the lens is okay but definitely not a gem. Rather take a 50mm f/1.4 or f/1.8 over it or cough up the extra for a 50mm f/1.2.


Just noticed, you have two standard Nikon 1.2s. Any specific reason for keeping both?

I know it is only a 1/3 of a stop advantage over 1.4, but the 2nd hand market in Australia is extremely dry so I really gotta grab what I can, the other option is to import which incurs shipping prices of $35-$50. I also want to join the 1.2 club and I'm trying to do it for under $200


----------



## mortimersnerd




----------



## iandroo888

lmaooo !! thats how my body looks like mounted on that lens xD


----------



## mortimersnerd

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
lmaooo !! thats how my body looks like mounted on that lens xD

I'm scared that if I hold it only by the camera it will pull the body apart. That lens is heavy....


----------



## laboitenoire

That's because it's the same body









So I've decided: it's going to be a D50 or D80. The moment I see another D80 for around $400, I'll probably jump on it. If I do go the D50 route I'll use the saved money to pick up either another lens or a better lens than an 18-55 VR.


----------



## Marin

You should get a new body to balance it out.


----------



## mortimersnerd

I am poor now, but I got a job as a second shooter for weddings (working under a pro) this summer. Should help pay for some more upgrades.


----------



## iandroo888

ive used 14-24 and 24-70 on my body. front heavy after a while use but i guess its ok.

i wanna get a flash tho


----------



## dudemanppl

70-200 isn't heavy to me anymore. I'm not sure if thats good or bad, its probably because of the 300...


----------



## Xapoc

Haha, mortimersnerd, I hope you're happy with that thing. I could claim to have partly funded for that. =P


----------



## mortimersnerd

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dudemanppl* 
70-200 isn't heavy to me anymore. I'm not sure if thats good or bad, its probably because of the 300...

Its not bad, I will get used to it quickly. The weight of it brings back memories of marching band and hold up an instrument for multiple hour rehearsals.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Xapoc* 
Haha, mortimersnerd, I hope you're happy with that thing. I could claim to have partly funded for that. =P

Ah yes, the new owner of a 55-200mm vr. It was a good lens but I am looking forward to shooting with the new one. BTW, it should arrive tomorrow.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mortimersnerd*

Its not bad, I will get used to it quickly. The weight of it brings back memories of marching band and hold up an instrument for multiple hour rehearsals.


ahahaha i had percussion. we had it worse =X


----------



## tK FuRY

Wow ... I guess the film industry has finally noticed the power of DSLRs.

Quote:



A Canon 5D Mark II has become the first video-capable DSLR to film a whole episode of a US primetime series. Greg Yaitanes, director of FOX broadcasting company's medical drama series 'House', used the camera , a selection of of Canon's prime lenses, the 24-70mm and 70-200mm lenses to shoot the season finale. Speaking via Twitter, he said that this was to achieve a shallow depth of field and a 'richer look'. He also said he 'feels it's the future'.


I await this season finale!

EDIT: Apparently I'm blind and didn't see the thread about it lol.


----------



## mortimersnerd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


ahahaha i had percussion. we had it worse =X


Holding weight by your shoulders is much more comfortable. The model of mellophone we had (marching french horn) was just shy of 5 pounds with mouthpiece and that got heavy, especially when the director was pissed at the band and we would have to hold set for 15 min.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mortimersnerd*


I am poor now, but I got a job as a second shooter for weddings (working under a pro) this summer. Should help pay for some more upgrades.










I applied for a wedding photographer who was looking for someone, did not hear back from him though


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mortimersnerd* 
Holding weight by your shoulders is much more comfortable. The model of mellophone we had (marching french horn) was just shy of 5 pounds with mouthpiece and that got heavy, especially when the director was pissed at the band and we would have to hold set for 15 min.

Lol, clarinet and saxophone can be pretty uncomfortable, too. My clarinet is probably a solid four or five pounds (made of a dense hardwood and then covered in nickel keys) and I have to cantilever it on my thumb! Then there were the times when I tried playing either alto sax or alto clarinet with no neck strap! And tenor, even with the strap, was killer after a while.

And then there was the time when my jazz band went to a festival at the University of New Hampshire, and due to various circumstances I was both a clarinetist and a bassist that day. I walked half way across the campus carrying a 45 pound amp, my bass, and my clarinet!

So yeah, heavy cameras have never bothered me that much.


----------



## mortimersnerd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie*


I applied for a wedding photographer who was looking for someone, did not hear back from him though










Thats no fun.

I think it will be a good job, I'm going to school over the summer to get the last of my gen eds out of the way so I will only work the weekends.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Lol, clarinet and saxophone can be pretty uncomfortable, too. My clarinet is probably a solid four or five pounds (made of a dense hardwood and then covered in nickel keys) and I have to cantilever it on my thumb! Then there were the times when I tried playing either alto sax or alto clarinet with no neck strap! And tenor, even with the strap, was killer after a while.

And then there was the time when my jazz band went to a festival at the University of New Hampshire, and due to various circumstances I was both a clarinetist and a bassist that day. I walked half way across the campus carrying a 45 pound amp, my bass, and my clarinet!

So yeah, heavy cameras have never bothered me that much.


yah but after a few hrs.. bad on the back tryin to stay straight for so long @[email protected]


----------



## laboitenoire

I had to get a new strap for my tenor because my original one cut off circulation badly enough that I almost passed out after playing for fifteen minutes









But on a camera note... I'm finally getting a DSLR. I'm accepting my parents' offer to help me purchase a camera, which will allow me to spring for what is (IMO) a great deal: a refurb D5000. Sure, I won't be able to get a cheap nifty fifty for AF stuff, but I think the bump in image quality and the inclusion of a basic warranty and accessories is well worth it. Plus it's a huge savings over a brand new one! About the same price as a new D3000...

I'm giddy right now.


----------



## iandroo888

i remember i had to add some padding to the shoulder things to make it more comfortable.. when i first started, i got bruised from the weight of the thing >.<"

yay d5k xD which lens are u plannin on getting? or does it come with the 18-55?


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mortimersnerd* 
Thats no fun.

I think it will be a good job, I'm going to school over the summer to get the last of my gen eds out of the way so I will only work the weekends.

That sounds pretty cool.

I'm debating whether or not I should go down the pro-photo route or stick with MUS/CSC...


----------



## Danylu

I gotta say, Lenspen + Rocket Blower is absolutely brilliant for getting rid of dirty things on lenses. It doesn't look like much and for the small price that they are charging, you probably shouldn't be expecting much but it is brilliant if you remember to clean your stuff in a dust free environment


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


I had to get a new strap for my tenor because my original one cut off circulation badly enough that I almost passed out after playing for fifteen minutes









But on a camera note... I'm finally getting a DSLR. I'm accepting my parents' offer to help me purchase a camera, which will allow me to spring for what is (IMO) a great deal: a refurb D5000. Sure, I won't be able to get a cheap nifty fifty for AF stuff, but I think the bump in image quality and the inclusion of a basic warranty and accessories is well worth it. Plus it's a huge savings over a brand new one! About the same price as a new D3000...

I'm giddy right now.











What about the D80? Personally I would want the ability to AF with older lenses in favor of newer features (that's just me). The D5000 is a nice body though, and it's about time!


----------



## kinubic

hello id liek to join the OCn photography club LOL
since i jsut recently bought my dslr all i have is this

Canon Xs

Lens:
18-55 IS
Accessories: 
Kata DR-467
2x8gb class 10


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
What about the D80? Personally I would want the ability to AF with older lenses in favor of newer features (that's just me). The D5000 is a nice body though, and it's about time!

The D80 fluctuates in price a ton still... I figured that buying a product in a known condition that can be configured pretty easily was a good trade-off to AF with every lens. A D80 with a used 18-55 would probably be better in the long run, but it'll cost more definitely!

And Androo, the refurb kit comes with an 18-55.


----------



## iandroo888

oo ic

and wow u are one of the first to actually call me that.. everyone else calls me like droo or something.. im ike where do u see that?!? but androo is corrent hehe =D

hope u have fun with ur new kit ^_^


----------



## max302

I forgot to link to my FS thread. :/

3x F4s available.
1x F5 with 90 viewfinder.

http://www.overclock.net/other-techn...ml#post9031340


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

...must, not, click!


----------



## dudemanppl

I put the 10-20 on the EOS 1, the wideness is SCARY! Its so wide, it turns into a fisheye kinda. It vignettes throughout the range. Still gonna use it though, need tape to hold the aperture open.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie* 
...must, not, click!

Do the F5 schub, seriously.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


Do the F5 schub, seriously.


I wish I could








I am getting so low on funds and my prospects for a job this summer are not looking as good as I was hoping for


----------



## nuclearjock

I'm a sucker for a good profile.
D300 400VR + 1.7e II tc.


----------



## iandroo888

which is better? 18-70 or 18-105?


----------



## Mootsfox

I'm gonna take that back and say hunt for a 16-85mm.


----------



## iandroo888

whats good about the 16-85? uncle replaced his 18-105 [which went to me] with a 16-85.


----------



## Mootsfox

Metal mount, good VR, better optics, etc. The 18-70mm was the kit lens for the D70/80 and the 18-105mm VR is the kit for the D90.


----------



## iandroo888

i noticed the metal mount and different VR ability [normal/active]. something i noticed that the 18-70 had as well.

*edit*

think a 50mm f/1.8 is worth getting even if i have to AF manually?


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


I'm gonna take that back and say hunt for a 16-85mm.


For about the same price you can get an 18-200mm, the IQ might be slightly below that of the 16-85 in some cases but depending on what you want it for the added range more then makes up for it.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
I'm a sucker for a good profile.
D300 400VR + 1.7e II tc.










Absolutely brilliant there! Just a quick question for you - is the D3 viewfinder noticeably bigger than the D300 one?

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
i noticed the metal mount and different VR ability [normal/active]. something i noticed that the 18-70 had as well.

*edit*

think a 50mm f/1.8 is worth getting even if i have to AF manually?

The 18-70 has VR???

I haven't personally tried a 50mm 1.8, but my planned future lenses all happen to be full manual lenses. This will save me a lot of money









I have bidded for a Katzeye focusing screen though to try and make the focusing easier. I find manual focus alright although I'm still at the stage where I can't trust my eyes to find perfect focus and as a result composition fails a bit when I am shooting moving objects. I reckon I got about 80% in focus for a casual tennis match today.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie* 
For about the same price you can get an 18-200mm, the IQ might be slightly below that of the 16-85 in some cases but depending on what you want it for the added range more then makes up for it.









Valid argument. I personally would go for the 16-85mm because the 18-200mm creeps and the 16-85mm pairs well with my 70-300 VR.


----------



## riko99

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


i noticed the metal mount and different VR ability [normal/active]. something i noticed that the 18-70 had as well.

*edit*

think a 50mm f/1.8 is worth getting even if i have to AF manually?


Its worth it for the money you can't go wrong and manual focus isn't an issue because if your looking through your viewfinder you'll see a focus dot on the bottom corner to tell you if you are focused for your focus point selected. It hasn't left my D60 yet and I'm betting it will sit on the D300s when i get it and the 55-200 on the D60.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Absolutely brilliant there! Just a quick question for you - is the D3 viewfinder noticeably bigger than the D300 one?


Yup.


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


i noticed the metal mount and different VR ability [normal/active]. something i noticed that the 18-70 had as well.

*edit*

think a 50mm f/1.8 is worth getting even if i have to AF manually?


The focus ring feels a little too loose(still smooth motion) on the 50mm f/1.8 that I have (bought mine brand new) and it makes getting the focus right much harder because a slight bump to the lens will sometimes move the focus ring. More of an annoyance than an issue.

I think I'm just spoiled by the focus ring on my 80-200 f/2.8 which is amazingly smooth, tight and precise.

Quality wise it is a great lens, metal mount(plastic body), really sharp and it is a great value.


----------



## Eek

I'm gonna have to re-update my entire gear list









* Canon EOS 50D
* Canon BG-E5N Battery grip for 50D
* Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 Aspherical UWA
* Canon 100mm f/2.8L IS USM Macro
* Canon 50mm f/1.8 
* Sigma 30mm f/1.4 EX DC 
* Canon 70-200mm f/4L
* Canon 18-55mm f/3.4-5.6 IS Lens
* Kenko Extension Tube Set
* Canon 1.4x Teleconverter
* Feisol CM-1471 Carbon Fiber Monopod
* Photo Clam PC-44NS ballhead
* Feisol CT-3442 Carbon Fiber Tripod Legs with carbon fiber center column
* Crumpler 7 Million Dollar Home Camera Bag
* ThinkTank Streetwalker Hard drive Backpack


----------



## ohzer0

hmm dunno why i didnt see this thread earlier









:: Canon 1000D/XS gripped
:: EF 17-40mm f/4.0L
:: EF 50mm f/1.8
:: Speedlite 580EX II
:: Manfrotto 055XProB + 498RC2


----------



## ericeod

Recently upgraded:

- Canon EOS 50D
- Canon EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 (kit lens)
- Canon 50mm f/1.8

trying to decide on a few lenses now.


----------



## E_man

hint hint to anyone looking for a long nikon, I'm selling a tamron 70-200mm f/2.8


----------



## nuclearjock

D300 400VR 2.0e III

1.









2.









3.


----------



## Xapoc

I am loving number two. Wow!


----------



## Marin

Nice. Are any of the photos cropped?

Anyways...

- 50mm f/1.2L does nicely when focusing at MFD
- Finally picked a college


----------



## Danylu

I think the first one is better.


----------



## riko99

K quick question guys I am getting the D300s on Tuesday and I'll also be looking for a tripod given the choices below which would be the best to go with:

Slik Pro 340Dx Link for 99.95 (on sale from 159.95)

Velbon Sherpa 550R Link for 169.99$

or

Manfrotto 190XPROB w/ 496RC2 Ball head link for 279.99 (259.99 separate)

This being said i might be able to swindle a deal outta my buddy but which full set would be good or using the site linked if there is something better seen for under 200 what would be better.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Xapoc* 
I am loving number two. Wow!

Thx

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Nice. Are any of the photos cropped?

Thx Sam, 1 & 2 ~100%, 3 ~50%. The 2x tc kills some of the lens's sharpness, and the dof goes down the tubes, but it's alot cheaper than an 800 and a nice Canon body both of which I'd enjoy to the max but this combo seems to do a decent job and it saves me ~ $16k.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
I think the first one is better.

Again, thx.


----------



## xonix

Woo! Since last visiting here, I've upgraded to a Canon 40D


----------



## Mootsfox

Rumor mill

New bodies this year, 1080p video, 16MP sensor.

39 point AF sensor module expected for D90 replacement.

Patent for 35mm f/1.4 AF-S accepted.

85mm f/1.4 AF-S possible.










They also filed for a patent on a fuel cell powered body...


----------



## Marin

More lenses that would make me switch but...

... my future college has a boatload of Canon equipment. Oh well.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Rumor mill

New bodies this year, 1080p video, 16MP sensor.

39 point AF sensor module expected for D90 replacement.

Patent for 35mm f/1.4 AF-S accepted.

85mm f/1.4 AF-S possible.










They also filed for a patent on a fuel cell powered body...

Hopefully they have a FX DSLR with extra 1080p vid by the end of next year









EDIT: Can anyone recommend a good photo stitcher (for panoramic shots). Would prefer it to be easy like if I don't have a tripod on me.


----------



## Mootsfox

My $5 lens reversal ring came in from Deal Extreme.

Messing around with it and my MF 50mm f/1.8 for a bit while taking shots for eBay.


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
Hopefully they have a FX DSLR with extra 1080p vid by the end of next year









EDIT: Can anyone recommend a good photo stitcher (for panoramic shots). Would prefer it to be easy like if I don't have a tripod on me.

Autopano works quite well.


----------



## Mootsfox

Would anyone be interested in some Nikon lenses? Thinking about throwing up the 35mm f/2.8, 50mm f/1.8 (Both the AF and MF copies) and the AF-D 24-120mm.


----------



## Oscuro

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Would anyone be interested in some Nikon lenses? Thinking about throwing up the 35mm f/2.8, 50mm f/1.8 (Both the AF and MF copies) and the AF-D 24-120mm.

If I have money soon, I might be interested in relieving you of your 35mm...


----------



## iandroo888

interested in the 50mm f/1.8 maybe


----------



## Marin

I love FF.


----------



## sabret00the

I have Fujifilm Finepix S5800/S800
I used use the 3.2mp cam on my K790i cellphone but now that I use the E63 I hardly use it's shoddy excuse for a cam.


----------



## dudemanppl

Hmmm, for that rumored camera, If it replaces the D300s, I'm probably getting it. Mainly for the video... I'm in Taiwan, the 10-20 is epic, 24-70 is better than the 17-55, and I've fallen in love with the D300s again.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Hmmm, for that rumored camera, If it replaces the D300s, I'm probably getting it. Mainly for the video... I'm in Taiwan, the 10-20 is epic, 24-70 is better than the 17-55, and I've fallen in love with the D300s again.


I expect a D4000, D90 replacement and D700x/s. The D300s will NOT see a direct replacement for at least another year... it's only about 7 months old. The D700 and D90 are both about two years old. The D90 will be two in August, when these new bodies are expected to be released and Nikon _loves_ two year release cycles.

The D700 will be two in July, so maybe we'll hear more about it earlier, but I'd still expect August to have some new bodies for us.

Not saying that there will or will not be a better buy than the D300s this year, but I don't see a direct replacement for it anytime soon.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


I expect a D4000, D90 replacement and D700x/s. The D300s will NOT see a direct replacement for at least another year... it's only about 7 months old. The D700 and D90 are both about two years old. The D90 will be two in August, when these new bodies are expected to be released and Nikon _loves_ two year release cycles.

The D700 will be two in July, so maybe we'll hear more about it earlier, but I'd still expect August to have some new bodies for us.

Not saying that there will or will not be a better buy than the D300s this year, but I don't see a direct replacement for it anytime soon.


For some reason when I quote your post, suddenly 2 paragraphs appear out of nowhere :|

On the topic of 2 year cycles, what does the D4000 replace?

I found this table which I think is pretty informative.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Templat...n_DSLR_cameras


----------



## iandroo888

maybe replace the d3k? doubt they used a lower number to replace the d5k. =X d90 replacement.... d95? xD


----------



## riko99

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


I expect a D4000, D90 replacement and D700x/s. The D300s will NOT see a direct replacement for at least another year... it's only about 7 months old. The D700 and D90 are both about two years old. The D90 will be two in August, when these new bodies are expected to be released and Nikon _loves_ two year release cycles.

The D700 will be two in July, so maybe we'll hear more about it earlier, but I'd still expect August to have some new bodies for us.

Not saying that there will or will not be a better buy than the D300s this year, but I don't see a direct replacement for it anytime soon.


Im going to have to agree with Moots here on the D90 and D700 replace. Hoping that they release a nice firmware update for the D300s though. Also hoping that some more lenses work their way through.

Edit: On a side note getting the D300s and a Velbon Sherpa 200r today


----------



## max302

Lucky bastard. I'm just drooling all other that darned D300s, but I'd need you guys to buy my cameras if I want to get my paws on one.









Speaking of which, I dropped the price on both my F4S (2x left) and F5. *260$CAD shipped for the F4S*, *460$CAD shipped for the F5*! Anywhere in ConUS/Canada!!!

http://www.overclock.net/other-techn...ml#post9031340


----------



## laboitenoire

Lol, I've been working on a paper about El Greco and one of my articles started comparing him to Cervantes in how they both created characters that were seemingly insane...

Got me thinking how actually Ken Rockwell is a bit like Don Quixote. Fairly often he's amusing to read about, but whenever he has a moment of lucidity it's rather shocking.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *laboitenoire* 
Lol, I've been working on a paper about El Greco and one of my articles started comparing him to Cervantes in how they both created characters that were seemingly insane...

Got me thinking how actually Ken Rockwell is a bit like Don Quixote. Fairly often he's amusing to read about, but whenever he has a moment of lucidity it's rather shocking.









Art history class? El Greco is one of my favorites, I've seen many of his works.

EDIT: I think it's insulting to Cervantes to compare him to KR.


----------



## laboitenoire

I don't think he'll mind too much. After all, he's been dead for 400 years, right?

The class isn't an art history class, per se. It's the seminar I'm taking this semester, and the topic overall is "Mastering the Masterpiece." Basically we've been going to the museum and discussing both in class and with curators different ways in which a work of art might be considered a masterpiece. Our final assignment is to write 10-12 pages about a painting or several paintings, so I decided to talk about the two El Greco canvases owned by the CMA.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Hey guys, a bit of a random question but:

Would anyone know what a Zuiko 50mm f/1.4 be worth?


----------



## Mootsfox

Marin would.

$70 to $120 on eBay.


----------



## riko99

Loving the D300s so far got a shot of a Pidgeon from the balcony now its out of focus a little as i was just trying continuous on it and really enjoy it but the Fiance is playing with it for now









Also Gone could you update my gear please Adding in the D300s body and Velbon Sherpa 200r tripod


----------



## Danylu

A while ago someone mentioned saving your edits in like a XMP sidecart that goes along with each photo in case something happens to Lightroom... if someone can make sense of what I am blabbing about could you please tell me how to enable that









And I would to love to know how to stop Lightroom from opening everytime I plug in a hard drive or a USB key.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
A while ago someone mentioned saving your edits in like a XMP sidecart that goes along with each photo in case something happens to Lightroom... if someone can make sense of what I am blabbing about could you please tell me how to enable that









And I would to love to know how to stop Lightroom from opening everytime I plug in a hard drive or a USB key.

I copy my RAW files as .dng. I don't see anything happening to Lightroom, but you can backup your catalog and reload all your edits if needed. Then export to something else if you had to.

Should be in File->Auto Import->Auto Import Settings


----------



## Marin

Took this between scenes.


----------



## max302

Ok I'm polluting this thread for the last time.

My F4s (2 remaining) are now 220$USD shipped to anywhere in NA. I can't go lower than that.

http://www.overclock.net/other-techn...2x-f4s-f5.html

BTW Marin, beautiful scene.


----------



## riko99

So I am totally noticing the lower quality of my lenses now. What do you guys think of Tamrons line of 2.8's?


----------



## Mootsfox

I think you need the Nikon 17-55mm.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *riko99* 
So I am totally noticing the lower quality of my lenses now. What do you guys think of Tamrons line of 2.8's?

The 28-75 and 17-50 (non VC version) are known for their sharpness, but their focus speed and accuracy (esp. the 28-75) leave little to be desired.


----------



## laboitenoire

Hey guys, do you have any comments about how well CS4 works in Windows 7? It turns out my university offers all of CS4 to us students, and I'm debating whether I should download it or just wait and see if they put CS5 up.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Hey guys, do you have any comments about how well CS4 works in Windows 7? It turns out my university offers all of CS4 to us students, and I'm debating whether I should download it or just wait and see if they put CS5 up.


Extremely.

I have CS4 on my SSD... I haven't found anything that slows it down at all.

Be sure to enable the OpenGL boost as well, since it looks like your GPU can handle it.


----------



## riko99

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


I think you need the Nikon 17-55mm.



Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


The 28-75 and 17-50 (non VC version) are known for their sharpness, but their focus speed and accuracy (esp. the 28-75) leave little to be desired.


Moots Ideally that would be what I would get but the $ is the issue which is why I was looking at Tamron.

Gone thanks for the input that's what I've heard as well but I don't believe that the focus speed would be an issue for me as I do use manual focus alot.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *riko99* 
Moots Ideally that would be what I would get but the $ is the issue which is why I was looking at Tamron.

Gone thanks for the input that's what I've heard as well but I don't believe that the focus speed would be an issue for me as I do use manual focus alot.

I had this chat with my friend too, and after using the Tamron and mine he wasn't pleased with the Tamron.

When you buy Nikon glass, assuming you buy it used and treat it right, you're going to be able to sell it at the same price you bought it for. The same isn't usually true for third party brands.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
I had this chat with my friend too, and after using the Tamron and mine he wasn't pleased with the Tamron.

When you buy Nikon glass, assuming you buy it used and treat it right, you're going to be able to sell it at the same price you bought it for. The same isn't usually true for third party brands.

I think the only problem with that is when the owner becomes reluctant to sell it


----------



## Dragoon

Got my favorite lens back. This one's as sharp as ever, and no focus issues.



You can add that one to the list GT. Thanks.


----------



## nuclearjock

Ran across this nest:

1.









2.


----------



## ace8uk

Wow, was looking at some used photography equipment websites here in the UK and stumbled across this beast. If only I had Â£2500 to spare!


----------



## laboitenoire

damn, that seems like it would be really impractical for manual focus...


----------



## Marin

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...f_5_6L_IS.html


----------



## iandroo888

r those lenses really needed =____=


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
r those lenses really needed =____=

The smaller the bird, the bigger the lens...

I shot that 800 at a local Calumet photo one day Marin. They let me take it out in the parking lot and play around. It's definately something I'm lusting for. The Nikkor 800 5.6's are surfacing here and there, and the IQ's awesome but OS (VR) is really necessary on a tank like this. The IQ of the Canon lens is off the chart.

I'm still playing with my 400_2.0tc though.


----------



## Marin

I'd love to try one. Maybe ACCD has some supertelephotos...


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
The smaller the bird, the bigger the lens...

maybe thats what i dont really understand hehe. dont have much wildlife here. and rather not go into the desert and be at risk of snakes and scorpions


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
maybe thats what i dont really understand hehe. dont have much wildlife here. and rather not go into the desert and be at risk of snakes and scorpions

No offense but not much to shoot in Nevada apart from cacti and those rolling dead bush things...


----------



## iandroo888

yeah =X as my friends say, if u can figure out something to shoot and make it nice here, you good.

well do have red rock canyon [do plan on goin one day... for a hike and pictures xD] and mt charleston [snow during winter... at least more green than the desert city...]

*edit*

50mm f/1.4 AF-S or 60mm f/2.8 AF-S Macro ?


----------



## Mootsfox

You haven't been to Red Rock?

I don't live in Vegas and I've been there.

(Go, it's awesome)


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
No offense but not much to shoot in Nevada apart from cacti and those rolling dead bush things...

Owls nest in holes in cacti.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
50mm f/1.4 AF-S or 60mm f/2.8 AF-S Macro ?

Completely different beasts.

But I see you have two zooms, so I'm going to go ahead and suggest the 50mm 1.4. It'll also look quite nice with video. BUT if you specifically want macro capabilities then go with the 50mm. The 50mm isn't IF though so you might want to get a filter to make it quasi-IF. Lots of sand in Vegas.


----------



## iandroo888

not too bad in the air really..


----------



## nuclearjock

Sparrow

D300 400VR + 1.7tc


----------



## iandroo888

dang thats sharp


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Saw this at POTN:

Flying 7D


----------



## laboitenoire

I'd be so worried about power dying mid-flight...


----------



## olli3

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Saw this at POTN:

Flying 7D

Lol that is awesome! Could get some amazing shots with that but I'd be way too worried about crashing it! I guess being an experienced RC helicopter pilot is needed before attempting this


----------



## iandroo888

gee even if i was experienced i still wouldnt trust myself ahaha =X i love my camera too much xDD

*edit*

if i were to get a 14-24 or 24-70 from fredmiranda's buy & sell forum, u think i can get what i paid for back?


----------



## laboitenoire

What do you mean?


----------



## iandroo888

was plannin on acquiring a wide angle lens to use for a little bit but i dont wanna rent either . specifically the nikkor 14-24 and/or 24-70. wondering if i can get what i paid for back since usually lenses keep value right?


----------



## Mootsfox

Nikon 200-400mm f/4 VR II announced.

http://www.nikonusa.com/Find-Your-Ni...-ED-VR-II.html


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
Completely different beasts.

But I see you have two zooms, so I'm going to go ahead and suggest the 50mm 1.4. It'll also look quite nice with video. BUT if you specifically want macro capabilities then go with the 50mm. The 50mm isn't IF though so you might want to get a filter to make it quasi-IF. Lots of sand in Vegas.

i thought the 50mm f/1.4 is the same as the 35 mm f/1.8 where it has internal focusing?


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Nikon 200-400mm f/4 VR II announced.

http://www.nikonusa.com/Find-Your-Ni...-ED-VR-II.html


I've shot the 200-400 VR and it's really a nice lens. Handles nicely for BIF. Rather have a 500 f/4 though.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
i thought the 50mm f/1.4 is the same as the 35 mm f/1.8 where it has internal focusing?

The 50mm does not have IF. The 35mm is RF (rear focusing).

Nuke, I thought you said the 500mm f/4 was too heavy?


----------



## iandroo888

so how does it move when it focuses? like the 18-55?

but back to original question too.. would i be able to get approx amt paid for lens back if resold?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
was plannin on acquiring a wide angle lens to use for a little bit but i dont wanna rent either . specifically the nikkor 14-24 and/or 24-70. wondering if i can get what i paid for back since usually lenses keep value right?


Yes, lenses, esp. high-end lenses, retain value well if in good condition. If you just want to use one for a little while, just buy it new and return it, a lot easier than trying to sell it again.

Or just rent one.


----------



## iandroo888

was plannin to do that but BB doesnt have the 14-24. and not sure if the camera places allows returns w/o changing it into store credit.

*edit*

just checked. the only shop ive been to [b&c camera] does not do returns on lenses or bodies. ive asked BB and they said no restocking fee on flashes or lenses tho

hows the 12-24mm f/4 ? im just using for pictures of my house after remodel xD. the 14mm f/2.8 is a AF-D so no AF on my body. those are the two widest lenses BB has. unless i get the 16-85 or 17-55.. or the 10.5mm fisheye changed to not have the fisheye effect with PS? lmao


----------



## Marin

AF is basically pointless for UWA lenses, so no reason not to consider AF-D lenses. And since you're just using the lens once I insist on you renting.

http://www.lensrentals.com/for-nikon


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


The 50mm does not have IF. The 35mm is RF (rear focusing).

Nuke, I thought you said the 500mm f/4 was too heavy?


400 and 600 are front heavy. 500 f/4 is managable. Check out the cafe' and look at some of Randy's osprey posts. But the 200-400 is lighter than the 500.Have I talked you into it yet Foxie??


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


AF is basically pointless for UWA lenses, so no reason not to consider AF-D lenses. And since you're just using the lens once I insist on you renting.

http://www.lensrentals.com/for-nikon


why do u say that? is it because usual use for UWA lenses is for the wide DoF? so no 1 point is focused? or something like that? [nub.. xD]

57.50 for a tokina 11-16 f/2.8 for 4 days... =X


----------



## Marin

You'll mostly be focusing at infinity due to the DoF. For example, on my 10-22mm anything past 3 feet is focused at infinity.


----------



## iandroo888

i seeeeeeee


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
400 and 600 are front heavy. 500 f/4 is managable. Check out the cafe' and look at some of Randy's osprey posts. But the 200-400 is lighter than the 500.Have I talked you into it yet Foxie??

I haven't mounted anything over 55mm on my D300s in about 3 months. My longest lens right now is a 24-120mm AF-D and I'm only keeping that because it's FF. I never shoot tele, I'll probably pick up the 14-24mm, a FF body and then the 24-70mm.

I wouldn't mind renting one for a weekend to try out some wildlife photos though


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


why do u say that? is it because usual use for UWA lenses is for the wide DoF? so no 1 point is focused? or something like that? [nub.. xD]

57.50 for a tokina 11-16 f/2.8 for 4 days... =X


Judging from the reviews and reputation of the 14-24, I would just buy one. Chances are you'll love it. UWA is something to experience, very addictive. I sorely miss the 10-22 (EF-S







) and am currently in the market for a 16-35/2.8.


----------



## Mootsfox

The price tag is holding me back. I need to pay off other things first.

Or get a job...


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


The price tag is holding me back. I need to pay off other things first.

Or get a job...


You should just adapt some older glass... wait... nvm...


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


The price tag is holding me back. I need to pay off other things first.

Or get a job...


u got all that without a job O_O wt?!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


The price tag is holding me back. I need to pay off other things first.

Or get a job...


Haha, whoops, I actually meant to quote Iandroo for that, but the same applies for you







But in your case, I think you should get a decent FF DSLR first.


----------



## iandroo888

[side note. its supposed to be i Androo not Ian or w/e xD. real name Andrew. get it? xDDD]

was considering older lenses but no AF T.T


----------



## laboitenoire

I've always wondered, although not being a mechanical engineer I might have absolutely no clue, but why doesn't Nikon just put a faster and quieter AF motor in the body instead of slowly updating every lens to be AF-S? Other than to make money, of course.


----------



## Marin

Both Olympus 21mm lenses (f/3.5 and f/2) and the 18mm f/3.5 completely slaughter the Canon UWA lenses in IQ, distortion and corner to corner sharpness.

http://www.16-9.net/lens_tests/best19_21.html

Zuiko 21mm f/3.5 wide open:
(vignetting is the result of having two square filters stacked)



Test I did with my 21mm f/3.5 @ f/11:



Center:


Bottom Right Corner:


Bottom Left Corner:


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


u got all that without a job O_O wt?!


Some of it.

Most, including the bodies and D300s I got while at work, and got that one at the Nikon vendor rep discount


----------



## iandroo888

teach me!! i wanna get... a d300s xD


----------



## Mootsfox

Find a store that sells Nikon gear -> work there for 6 months (might be 3 actually) -> download price list -> drool -> become reasonable -> talk to store manager -> talk to Nikon rep -> save 30-50% off MSRP.


----------



## iandroo888

lol nice !


----------



## Marin

Shot on the 7D:

http://www.vimeo.com/8191217

(have tissues ready)


----------



## iandroo888

holy crap







sad story !! poor doggy >.<" o wait. are we talkin about what the video was talkin about or the video itself ? great quality. oh man. cant believe thats from a DSLR. was it modded to have those uhm video camera lenses or just a normal DSLR lens?


----------



## Marin

Normal lenses.


----------



## Danylu

Moots I have a quick question for you.

I'm planning to hire a D300s+MB-D10+50mm 1.4 AF-S. How long do you think it'll take to climb the learning curve with the D300s from a D60? I want to climb the full summit.

So I'm thinking of trying;
51 AF thing
Wireless i-TTL
Video
Time Lapse
and everything else. I can't think of anything else at the moment but I'm sure there is a lot to try.

If you want an idea of how much time I will set aside for this, I'll be shooting pretty much the whole day and part of the night every day for the duration of the hire lol. Do you think 3 days is enough? If it is 3 days I can afford to hire a 85mm 1.4 as well, or should I hire the 85mm 1.4 instead of the 50mm 1.4?

I'm thinking of buying a D300s and 50mm 1.4 next which is the main reason for hiring. I just want to try the MB-D10 for the vertical shutter and the slight fps increase from 7-8fps.

Thanks!


----------



## Mootsfox

I'm not sure how much it is to rent for you, but you won't need more than a day to decide if you want it or not. I decided in the local camera shoppe with a 10 minute hands on demo.

What I like about Nikon is they try to keep things similar between models and generations. If you know your D60 well, the learning curve won't be bad at all. The most notable improvements at first glance to me were the improved build quality, weight and front wheel to control aperture. I'm not sure I could live without that now. The 8 way Dpad (there's one on the MB-D10 as well) is amazing and makes going through the menus a breeze.

A lot of the basic functions that were menu only options or maybe possible to set to a fn button on the D60, like WB, ISO, AF, metering, AF/AE lock, quality, DoF preview, Bracketing, etc all have buttons on the D300s. A few on the buttons (I think 4-5) can be remapped as you wish, so if you say never use bracketing, but need to switch certain settings often, you can function one of the front buttons as that instead.

The grip is also amazing. Besides being able to handle a EN-EL4a (D3 battery), it can take a EN-EL3e or 8 AA's. It feels like a part of the camera and has none the flex that most grips have. And since it doubles the battery life (or triples with the EN-EL4a) you'll never take it off, it will become necessary to your shooting style.

Instead of the 50mm f/1.4 to rent, I think you should check out the 17-55mm f/2.8. It costs about twice as much, but it's not a plastic lens and is considered by many to be the best DX normal zoom ever made.


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


I'm not sure how much it is to rent for you, but you won't need more than a day to decide if you want it or not. I decided in the local camera shoppe with a 10 minute hands on demo.

What I like about Nikon is they try to keep things similar between models and generations. If you know your D60 well, the learning curve won't be bad at all. The most notable improvements at first glance to me were the improved build quality, weight and front wheel to control aperture. I'm not sure I could live without that now. The 8 way Dpad (there's one on the MB-D10 as well) is amazing and makes going through the menus a breeze.

A lot of the basic functions that were menu only options or maybe possible to set to a fn button on the D60, like WB, ISO, AF, metering, AF/AE lock, quality, DoF preview, Bracketing, etc all have buttons on the D300s. A few on the buttons (I think 4-5) can be remapped as you wish, so if you say never use bracketing, but need to switch certain settings often, you can function one of the front buttons as that instead.

The grip is also amazing. Besides being able to handle a EN-EL4a (D3 battery), it can take a EN-EL3e or 8 AA's. It feels like a part of the camera and has none the flex that most grips have. And since it doubles the battery life (or triples with the EN-EL4a) you'll never take it off, it will become necessary to your shooting style.

Instead of the 50mm f/1.4 to rent, I think you should check out the 17-55mm f/2.8. It costs about twice as much, but it's not a plastic lens and is considered by many to be the best DX normal zoom ever made.


Wow, totally just realized that the D60 didn't have a front wheel. I wouldn't be able to survive without both front and rear wheels(major reason I didn't go Canon when I bought my D80).

I think I'll be putting my camera/lens/flash purchasing on hold for a while as I have to get supplies for the mod competition.


----------



## riko99

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


I'm not sure how much it is to rent for you, but you won't need more than a day to decide if you want it or not. I decided in the local camera shoppe with a 10 minute hands on demo.

What I like about Nikon is they try to keep things similar between models and generations. If you know your D60 well, the learning curve won't be bad at all. The most notable improvements at first glance to me were the improved build quality, weight and front wheel to control aperture. I'm not sure I could live without that now. The 8 way Dpad (there's one on the MB-D10 as well) is amazing and makes going through the menus a breeze.

A lot of the basic functions that were menu only options or maybe possible to set to a fn button on the D60, like WB, ISO, AF, metering, AF/AE lock, quality, DoF preview, Bracketing, etc all have buttons on the D300s. A few on the buttons (I think 4-5) can be remapped as you wish, so if you say never use bracketing, but need to switch certain settings often, you can function one of the front buttons as that instead.

The grip is also amazing. Besides being able to handle a EN-EL4a (D3 battery), it can take a EN-EL3e or 8 AA's. It feels like a part of the camera and has none the flex that most grips have. And since it doubles the battery life (or triples with the EN-EL4a) you'll never take it off, it will become necessary to your shooting style.

Instead of the 50mm f/1.4 to rent, I think you should check out the 17-55mm f/2.8. It costs about twice as much, but it's not a plastic lens and is considered by many to be the best DX normal zoom ever made.


Ill agree with moots the Transition is not bad at all, there were a couple of things I had to look up in the manual but other than that it was a breeze for the switch over. Only problem now is the fact that the lenses I own other than the 50mm are all poor on the quality end







.

Decision I have to make now is to sell off the D60 kit with extra battery or keep it as a backup... Selling it off would get me either a Tamron 17-50 and possibly the MB-D10 used or the 60mm macro I want.


----------



## riko99

So Im looking forward to the next full moon because my buddy wants to bust out a 50-500mm sigma from his shop for a night... Potentially 2 one for us one for him to take star trails, moon shots and just general shooting







.


----------



## Wishmaker

Quote:



Originally Posted by *riko99*


So Im looking forward to the next full moon because my buddy wants to bust out a 50-500mm sigma from his shop for a night... Potentially 2 one for us one for him to take star trails, moon shots and just general shooting







.


Looking forward to seeing your results


----------



## Xapoc

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Shot on the 7D:

http://www.vimeo.com/8191217

(have tissues ready)

Wow, um. I just watched it and I cried. Beautiful and thank you for sharing.


----------



## wire

Hey you can remove the Nikon S600 from my name. I now currently have a Panasonic Lumix FP2. It seems like a nice small camera which is what I wanted.


----------



## The Pook

Sign me up.

Fujifilm FinePix S1800.


----------



## wiggy2k7

Ive just got this yesterday, Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ20:



My dad just got a new camera so he gave me his FZ20, its a few years old but hopefully i can get some decent shots with it.


----------



## Matrixvibe

I'd like to join! lol









My Flickr

P&S
Nikon Coolpix 4800
Nikon Coolpix S6

DSLR
Nikon D300S *new* 01/05/2010
Nikon D3000
Nikon 18-55mm f3.5-5.6 VR Kit Lens
Nikon DX AFS 35mm f1.8
Tamron 18-250mm f3.5-6.3
Nikon AS-15 Hot shoe PC Sync adapter

Film Gear
Nikon FM Film with battery grip
Nikon 35mm f2
Sigma 39-80mm f2.5
Tamron 80-210mm f3.8

Flashes
Sunpak Auto Zoom Thyristor 3600

Bags
Kata 3N1-10
Kata 3N1-30

Looking to upgrade soon...to either a D90 or D300s


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
I'm not sure how much it is to rent for you, but you won't need more than a day to decide if you want it or not. I decided in the local camera shoppe with a 10 minute hands on demo.

What I like about Nikon is they try to keep things similar between models and generations. If you know your D60 well, the learning curve won't be bad at all. The most notable improvements at first glance to me were the improved build quality, weight and front wheel to control aperture. I'm not sure I could live without that now. The 8 way Dpad (there's one on the MB-D10 as well) is amazing and makes going through the menus a breeze.

A lot of the basic functions that were menu only options or maybe possible to set to a fn button on the D60, like WB, ISO, AF, metering, AF/AE lock, quality, DoF preview, Bracketing, etc all have buttons on the D300s. A few on the buttons (I think 4-5) can be remapped as you wish, so if you say never use bracketing, but need to switch certain settings often, you can function one of the front buttons as that instead.

The grip is also amazing. Besides being able to handle a EN-EL4a (D3 battery), it can take a EN-EL3e or 8 AA's. It feels like a part of the camera and has none the flex that most grips have. And since it doubles the battery life (or triples with the EN-EL4a) you'll never take it off, it will become necessary to your shooting style.

Instead of the 50mm f/1.4 to rent, I think you should check out the 17-55mm f/2.8. It costs about twice as much, but it's not a plastic lens and is considered by many to be the best DX normal zoom ever made.

That makes sense. Now that I've tried D60,70,80 and 90 (D100 next?







). It seems very natural to adjust to the slight differences in control. But I was thinking of giving everything a serious go. Like, go to the zoo one day and allocate time for all of the new features. I would hire the 17-55mm but they don't have it. Only the 50mm 1.4 and 85mm 1.4 are within budget. Which one should I go for?


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
That makes sense. Now that I've tried D60,70,80 and 90 (D100 next?







). It seems very natural to adjust to the slight differences in control. But I was thinking of giving everything a serious go. Like, go to the zoo one day and allocate time for all of the new features. I would hire the 17-55mm but they don't have it. Only the 50mm 1.4 and 85mm 1.4 are within budget. Which one should I go for?

If you were full frame, I'd say the 85 without a doubt. But the 80's gonna give you alittle reach and oh the bokeh.. But it's a $1200 US lens. Do you want to go there?? I love my 85 and it will be in my bag forever. never shot it on an APC body though.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


If you were full frame, I'd say the 85 without a doubt. But the 80's gonna give you alittle reach and oh the bokeh.. But it's a $1200 US lens. Do you want to go there?? I love my 85 and it will be in my bag forever. never shot it on an APC body though.


Forgot to mention that the choice are for a rental because the 85 1.4 is a little bit more than the 50 1.4


----------



## Marin

Test shot wide open:


----------



## nuclearjock

Migrating up through Illinois. First one I've seen all year. Heavy crop so some loss of detail. These birds are real spooky. Also cloudy day so high iso (no-no on a D300).


----------



## Danylu

Marin how do you find the focusing with the 85mm 1.4 and your 5D?


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
Marin how do you find the focusing with the 85mm 1.4 and your 5D?

It's really easy.


----------



## Matrixvibe

Just a little update. Picked up a D300S tonight


----------



## iandroo888

*jealous*


----------



## tK FuRY

lol I can't believed I talk to this guy for more than 5 minutes, the first thing he said was "Full frame sensors are crappy, they don't help you do a damn thing at night" ....

I should have just walked away.


----------



## riko99

Hmmm so I got 290 bucks in gift cards to the local camera shop... To save them for the Tamron 17-50mm or get another battery/battery grip that's what I've got to decide on.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:



Originally Posted by *tK FuRY*


lol I can't believed I talk to this guy for more than 5 minutes, the first thing he said was "Full frame sensors are crappy, they don't help you do a damn thing at night" ....

I should have just walked away.


Wait, what happened?


----------



## iandroo888

maybe consider a flash?


----------



## tK FuRY

Quote:


Originally Posted by *laboitenoire* 
Wait, what happened?

I was helping out a guy who just purchased his first dSLR (Canon 50D) and was trying to take some night shots of my car. (Car Meet)

I gave him some pointers, then out of no where this pompous jackass decides "hey, Ill run up and make fun of his camera"

He proceeded to say "oh I shoot with ALL of the Canons, right now I own 2 70-200 f/2.8, 85mm f/1.4, and I have a Canon 30D, 40D, 50D, 7D"

Followed by "Make sure you get a crop sensor for night time, the ISO is better because of lighting...."












































So I start the argument of "Full Frame = better noise while using higher ISO (during this time he kept saying "hell no and shaking his head"), higher ISO = faster light = higher shutter speed.

Long story short, I laughed at him and went back to giving good advice not useless bull.

EDIT: Somewhere in the whole 15 minutes we talked I believe I heard something about "FF/FX have a crappy dynamic range".


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *tK FuRY*


I was helping out a guy who just purchased his first dSLR (Canon 50D) and was trying to take some night shots of my car. (Car Meet)

I gave him some pointers, then out of no where this pompous jackass decides "hey, Ill run up and make fun of his camera"

He proceeded to say "oh I shoot with ALL of the Canons, right now I own 2 70-200 f/2.8, 85mm f/1.4, and I have a Canon 30D, 40D, 50D, 7D"

Followed by "Make sure you get a crop sensor for night time, the ISO is better because of lighting...."












































So I start the argument of "Full Frame = better noise while using higher ISO (during this time he kept saying "hell no and shaking his head"), higher ISO = faster light = higher shutter speed.

Long story short, I laughed at him and went back to giving good advice not useless bull.


Well, I hope you explained why from a technical standpoint FF is better at high sensitivities, larger photosites, lower pixel density, etc. That tends to shut people like that up


----------



## dudemanppl

Trolling IRL, it DOES exist.


----------



## tK FuRY

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Well, I hope you explained why from a technical standpoint FF is better at high sensitivities, larger photosites, lower pixel density, etc. That tends to shut people like that up











Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Trolling IRL, it DOES exist.


I did, but I got the ignorant ... you're wrong!!! Lies! Response.

I don't think he was trolling IRL lol, he was being DEAD serious about his maddddd knowledge. Apparently, he can shoot 1/1000th of a second in dusk/sundown situations from his Canons during paintball tournaments (which have also been published in magazines) lolololol


----------



## dudemanppl

I've had a guy talk to me by putting together a bunch crap he's read on the internet. Its so goddamned funny, but they don't usually have a DSLR.


----------



## iandroo888

i have a friend who keeps telling me to take a photography class but judging from his current work, he should retake that class. haha =X


----------



## sweffymo

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
i have a friend who keeps telling me to take a photography class but judging from his current work, he should retake that class. haha =X

I'm taking PHOTO 100 for teh lulz over the summer at Penn State...

It's an online course, too. Seems like easy credits as the course requirements are that you own a digital camera... It's a gen-ed course that like 500 people take per semester.


----------



## Marin

Take a photo class where you use film.


----------



## sweffymo

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Take a photo class where you use film.

They don't have one as a gen-ed anymore.







I'd love an excuse to play with my 500DTL though...


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Take a photo class where you use film.


the first class we have to take [if we want to take digital photography class] is b&w film photography. been thinkin about it. might take it in fall.

anyone got a film setup i can borrow? Lol


----------



## sweffymo

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


the first class we have to take [if we want to take digital photography class] is b&w film photography. been thinkin about it. might take it in fall.

anyone got a film setup i can borrow? Lol


I'd lend you my 5000DTL, but it would cost a lot to ship and its light meter is out of batteries. It also needs a good cleaning. It hasn't been used since the mid-'80s...


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


the first class we have to take [if we want to take digital photography class] is b&w film photography. been thinkin about it. might take it in fall.

anyone got a film setup i can borrow? Lol


Just purchase a film camera, you can get most 35mm cameras for cheap.


----------



## iandroo888

NiKon ??


----------



## Marin

Nikon, Canon, Minolta, Olympus, Contax, Pentax, etc...


----------



## iandroo888

oh oops. was gonna ask which film bodies from nikon was good.


----------



## Mootsfox

FE, FM, FE2, FM10, F100, F90, F80, F2AS, F3HP, F3, F4, F5, etc.

Any of the metal or composite Nikons are awesome. Stay away from the N2002 and etc series. As well as the N65 and lower.


----------



## iandroo888

i believe theres a N one in the family. 6006 maybe?

iunoe what the other ones are. will ask

i see a F5 for 375 on CL

*edit*

whats a 5000DTL btw


----------



## sweffymo

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


i believe theres a N one in the family. 6006 maybe?

iunoe what the other ones are. will ask

i see a F5 for 375 on CL

*edit*

whats a 5000DTL btw


It's a Mamiya/Sekor pentax screwmount-type SLR from the 1970's.










Mine has the optional self-timer added!









It's a really fun camera to play around with, but as I said the built-in light meter is out of batteries so I can't do any serious shooting with it because I don't have a light meter of my own.


----------



## dudemanppl

Link Has alot of cheap lenses and stuff, they had a 70-200 2.8 IS for like 1150 buy it now, and now have a 1600 dollar 300 2.8 AF-I.


----------



## tK FuRY

speaking of film/photography classes, I might take one next semester just for the hell of it. But, I can already tell, from speaking to people in it, that I will be around a bunch of pompous jackasses who think their **** don't stink.

Pardon my French.


----------



## Marin

Majority of art classes will be like that.


----------



## SoBe8503

Hey guys,

Finally got my tax refund check. I want to get a new lens for my D60. Last year I used a Nikon 18-70 mm AF-S DX f/3.5-4.5G IF-ED Zoom Lens for my Brother's graduation party, and I fell in LOVE with it. It's been a year now, is it still worth while to get that lens? Any other suggestions? Am I too paranoid and should just shut up and get it?


----------



## riko99

What price range you looking for and what lenses do you already have SoBe?


----------



## SoBe8503

I'm looking at about $450, maybe a little more. I have a 50mm 1.8 Prime, and the 18-55 stock.


----------



## iandroo888

id prob suggest a 18-105mm. its a newer revision of the kit lenses. 18-70 to 18-55 to 18-105. pretty good. could look around and find a used one for 250.

dang ! that camera looks old =X lol i wonder which camera my friends have. they've taken the class already.

anyone know a cheap place to get paper and film?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Marin, have you gotten a different focusing screen for your 5DII? If so, which one?


----------



## laboitenoire

You Canon users need to be afraid: Ken Rockwell just admitted that with the newest firmware, he absolutely _loves_ the 5D Mark II


----------



## sweffymo

Ken Rockwell is a troll. We only listen to him because his photographs are super amazing.

The 5D MkII would be my next body, though. I've always wanted a 5D.


----------



## iandroo888

whatever he is, still a good base for learning imo =] learned a lot from reading his stuff


----------



## sweffymo

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
whatever he is, still a good base for learning imo =] learned a lot from reading his stuff

What he writes about taking photographs is good. What he writes about camera equipment (other than how he uses it) is pretty much just opinion. Like how nobody needs more than 8MP. Why? His camera has 8MP. Obviously since that's what he has nobody needs more, right?

/rant


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Marin, have you gotten a different focusing screen for your 5DII? If so, which one?

Eg-S


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sweffymo* 
What he writes about taking photographs is good. What he writes about camera equipment (other than how he uses it) is pretty much just opinion. Like how nobody needs more than 8MP. Why? His camera has 8MP. Obviously since that's what he has nobody needs more, right?

/rant

He does generally qualify his statement with the clause that X mp is good enough presuming your not printing larger than x by y. His P&S reviews are also very consistent, I find.


----------



## sweffymo

Quote:


Originally Posted by *laboitenoire* 
He does generally qualify his statement with the clause that X mp is good enough presuming your not printing larger than x by y. His P&S reviews are also very consistent, I find.

That's true. Maybe for the most part what he says is true, but it's just the wacky things he says that make me think he's a little bit weird.


----------



## Mootsfox

For someone who's been in the field for what... 25-30 years, he takes horrible photographs. His specs are usually spot on though. I use his site to compare or get basic info on out of date, unpopular today glass.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sweffymo* 
What he writes about taking photographs is good. What he writes about camera equipment (other than how he uses it) is pretty much just opinion. Like how nobody needs more than 8MP. Why? His camera has 8MP. Obviously since that's what he has nobody needs more, right?

/rant

After reading his ruminations about using tripods, I've given up hope on him altogether.


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
For someone who's been in the field for what... 25-30 years, he takes horrible photographs. His specs are usually spot on though. I use his site to compare or get basic info on out of date, unpopular today glass.

Yeah, I don't really see much in many of his photos but his glass reviews are usually pretty good and he has a review or at least a summary about almost every nikon lens that I've ever looked at.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
After reading his ruminations about using tripods, I've given up hope on him altogether.

I haven't the money for an expensive pod so I almost never use one. I find they are too slow and clunky unless you spend a ton of money.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Sparhawk*


I haven't the money for an expensive pod so I almost never use one. I find they are too slow and clunky unless you spend a ton of money.


Well, certain kinds of photography require them, e.g. long exposures. And you can get a decent tripod for $100.


----------



## sweffymo

I got my Slik U212 Deluxe w/ a $200 head for $8 at an auction.


----------



## iandroo888

wt where







iunoe whiat kinda tripod that is. never heard of it but hey. i still want one


----------



## mz-n10

sign me up to teh club
Body
Sony A900
Sony A200

Lens
Tamron 17-35/2.8-4
Sony Zeiss 24-70/2.8
Minolta 50/1.4
Minolta 70-210/4

Flash
Sony F42AM

Bag
Lowepro Fastpack 300
Tenba Insert + random bags

Tripod
Benro C-257M8
Benro BR168


----------



## Unknownm

Picked up this Camera from Value Village for 29.99, Everything seems to work so far. I loaded up the film and yeah just have to wait and see how they turn out










Can people give me some tips on how to work this. The Film I got is 400 so I've set it at 400, but the shutter speed I have between 30/60


----------



## Danylu

I use Ken because he is one of the very few reviewers with reviews of many of the old lenses.


----------



## iandroo888

yah i learned a lot about the older lenses from his site. makes me regret not getting a body with a inbody focus motor QQ


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


yah i learned a lot about the older lenses from his site. makes me regret not getting a body with a inbody focus motor QQ


But. The D40 is all the camera anyone will ever need!


----------



## Danylu

On the topic of old lenses, moots I just realised that most of your lenses are AI... I'm a bit slow yes I know :|

how do you find mf on the wide angles? And the 50s? I'm curious to know because I can't MF well if the subject doesn't fill at least a quarter of the frame. Maybe I'm expecting too much too soon from my sports :/


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


On the topic of old lenses, moots I just realised that most of your lenses are AI... I'm a bit slow yes I know :|

how do you find mf on the wide angles? And the 50s? I'm curious to know because I can't MF well if the subject doesn't fill at least a quarter of the frame. Maybe I'm expecting too much too soon from my sports :/


It's much easier on the D300s, and FF/FF mirror bodies (D1). It's harder to get accurate focus with the 24mm and 30mm especially during video because you have to use the LCD, which could really use more pixels.

The 50mm is easy though, you can see DoF shifting as you focus with it.

Which lenses did you get?


----------



## Danylu

I got the 55mm P.C. 3.5 macro a month ago. Excellent lens, CAs are virtually non-existent. I've tried my hand at sports with this lens and really, it is incredibly hard to focus something moving that is further than 5m (15 feet) away although this is a bit of a moot point because when they are further than 5 metres away, the reproduction ratio is low.

I was thinking of getting a short fast tele (Nikon 85mm 1.8 [$450] or 1.4 Samyang [$350]/Sigma or a 105mm 1.8[$500]/2.5[$250]). The Sigma of course is price dependent. Hoping triple digit territory. Another option would be a telescope. There are ones on eBay that go to 3000mm for $250. I've seen samples, CA horrendous but there isn't much that can compare to a 3000mm lens.

I've decided against hiring the D300s and I'll just assume it is awesome


----------



## Mootsfox

If you want a tele on the cheap, look at the 80-200mm f/2.8.

I have little experience with pre-AI glass, and most of that experience is sour. The 50mm f/1.4 pre-AI I have is soft at f/2.8, hard to focus and imho a bad lens. The 50mm f/1.4 AI I have and love is far better optically and easier to use.


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


I got the 55mm P.C. 3.5 macro a month ago. Excellent lens, CAs are virtually non-existent. I've tried my hand at sports with this lens and really, it is incredibly hard to focus something moving that is further than 5m (15 feet) away although this is a bit of a moot point because when they are further than 5 metres away, the reproduction ratio is low.

I was thinking of getting a short fast tele (Nikon 85mm 1.8 [$450] or 1.4 Samyang [$350]/Sigma or a 105mm 1.8[$500]/2.5[$250]). The Sigma of course is price dependent. Hoping triple digit territory. Another option would be a telescope. There are ones on eBay that go to 3000mm for $250. I've seen samples, CA horrendous but there isn't much that can compare to a 3000mm lens.

I've decided against hiring the D300s and I'll just assume it is awesome











Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


If you want a tele on the cheap, look at the 80-200mm f/2.8.

I have little experience with pre-AI glass, and most of that experience is sour. The 50mm f/1.4 pre-AI I have is soft at f/2.8, hard to focus and imho a bad lens. The 50mm f/1.4 AI I have and love is far better optically and easier to use.


The 80-200mm f/2.8 is amazing, I use it almost exclusively in MF because the auto-focus almost always rear-focuses(not really sure why, other than the fact that AF is contrast based and when shooting round things it'll focus on the sides which causes the front to be out of focus). You might be able to find one to rent(I did) after using it for a little while I didn't want to return it. I bought one soon after







.


----------



## Markeh

Sign me up please









Equipment:

Sony A200
Sony 18-70 lens 
Sigma zoom lens (70-300)
(haven't got the info straight in front of me)
Hama tripod
Point n Shoots:
HP Photosmart M425
Samsung ES15 (Worst. Purchase. Ever!)


----------



## dudemanppl

I need help making an HDR, does anyone have Photomatix? I already tried making one in the trial, but the watermarks are ehhhh. Didn't look HDRy, so that was good.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


I need help making an HDR, does anyone have Photomatix? I already tried making one in the trial, but the watermarks are ehhhh. Didn't look HDRy, so that was good.


I use it sometimes. I almost never use the HDR option (tone mapper), I use the exposure blend, which I think gives more natural results. It takes some serious finagling, but Photomatix can produce some results which no one would guess is an HDR. However, many use it simply to make the craptacular tone mapped HDR images that we all love.


----------



## dudemanppl

Finally got a picture of most of my gear.


----------



## iandroo888

Tripod Head, Bogen 3038E1 $ 95.00
Tripod Head, Bogen, Three WayG2 $ 35.00
Tripod, Bogen 3060G1 $ 75.00
Tripod, Mamiya, # 0011, GraphiteG1 $ 50.00
Tripod, small camera, Bogen, w headG1 $ 40.00
Unipod, Manfrotto, 3249B EquivalentVG1 $ 35.00

any of these good?

dudemanppl - wow !


----------



## mz-n10

@dukemanppl

wats the middle nikkor? 85/1.4?


----------



## iandroo888

looks like a 24-70. 85 not that long and doesnt use pedal hoods

anyone got any 67mm - 77mm multicoated UV filters avail? preferrably from hoya or b+w?


----------



## nuclearjock

Shot a store copy last weekend and all I can say is WOW...

My 24-70 more than does the job for me, don't do much wide angle shooting but if I did I'd be $2k poorer!!


----------



## iandroo888

bwahahahaha


----------



## dudemanppl

Yeah the middle one is the 24-70, and I just got called dukemanppl twice in a row.


----------



## iandroo888

http://www.engadget.com/2010/05/05/w...-with-a-twist/

wow that old guy pretty skilled. wonder if he can mass produce xDDDD


----------



## mills

Looking to join the club. I mainly shoot with a Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX3.


----------



## dudemanppl

Just ordered a Rode VideoMic, gonna record some videos for a friend.


----------



## Mootsfox

Listing my camera gear in case I need it for theft or insurance claim. I have a lot more stuff than I thought O.O


----------



## iandroo888

if theres anything not needed, send em my way =3 i want a 2nd lens. lol or flash? haha


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Listing my camera gear in case I need it for theft or insurance claim. I have a lot more stuff than I thought O.O


Had to do the same thing, Jesus Christ my stuff is expensive........... new. Insured for 17k right now because of the 300 2.8.


----------



## iandroo888

goin to a graduation tomorrow. what lens u think i can grab at a local BB to use?


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


goin to a graduation tomorrow. what lens u think i can grab at a local BB to use?


70-300mm.


----------



## iandroo888

think it would be enuf light for that lens? f/4.5


----------



## Mootsfox

Not ideally, but BB doesn't have f/2.8 teles.


----------



## iandroo888

yah QQ


----------



## nuclearjock

If it's being held outside and it's sunny, you've got it made.

If it's indoors, VR will be handy.


----------



## Marin

http://www.automotiverigs.com/

Do want.


----------



## mortimersnerd

How would a 70-200mm VR (on my D5000) do in a concert hall? I'd like not to have to use too high of ISO.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mortimersnerd*


How would a 70-200mm VR (on my D5000) do in a concert hall? I'd like not to have to use too high of ISO.


With f/2.8 and VR it will do excellently for static or slowly moving subjects, and the AF should be fine, but it all depends on just how well lit it will be and how much movement there will be. If you find that you will need to freeze movement, then you'll need the ratchet the ISO up, 800, 1600, whatever it takes. The closer to the stage the better, as shorter focal lengths are easier to handhold.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mortimersnerd*


How would a 70-200mm VR (on my D5000) do in a concert hall? I'd like not to have to use too high of ISO.


Depends on what instruments are being used. With my 70-300mm VR, I was able to use 1/30 ISO 1600 5.6 VR on. But I had made myself an impromptu beanbag by resting the lens on top of a railing with my jacket wrapped around the railing for extra padding







. The shots were pretty good for a D60 but I couldn't get any of the bows at the end of each piece sharp because of the movement haha


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


http://www.automotiverigs.com/

Do want.


+ Content Aware Fill = jesustime?


----------



## riko99

lol Should make for some interesting pictures


----------



## mortimersnerd

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
With f/2.8 and VR it will do excellently for static or slowly moving subjects, and the AF should be fine, but it all depends on just how well lit it will be and how much movement there will be. If you find that you will need to freeze movement, then you'll need the ratchet the ISO up, 800, 1600, whatever it takes. The closer to the stage the better, as shorter focal lengths are easier to handhold.


Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
Depends on what instruments are being used. With my 70-300mm VR, I was able to use 1/30 ISO 1600 5.6 VR on. But I had made myself an impromptu beanbag by resting the lens on top of a railing with my jacket wrapped around the railing for extra padding







. The shots were pretty good for a D60 but I couldn't get any of the bows at the end of each piece sharp because of the movement haha

The stage is well lit compared to the audience, but I can't really tell how well. The subjects won't be moving much (Choir). I will be able to put my feet on the chair in front of my and support my arms with my knees for a more stable shot. Hopefully I will be able to get away with 800 ISO, it starts to get noticeable above 1600 especially.


----------



## Unknownm

Got my first film finished and uploaded to filcker account

http://www.flickr.com/photos/audiotranceable/


----------



## Marin

Just went through my negative binder and found two rolls that I haven't scanned yet. Going to scan them later (I'm excited). Also, if they're good I'm going to do a couple of 10x10 prints.

Also, I think I'm going to try to squeeze in some time with the view camera before school ends.


----------



## Konkistadori

ADd meh to list plz









Canon EOS 350D
with Sigma lens (i dont remember model name of it..)

i need suggestions what macro lens to buy for my EOS :S.. I dont like the quality of this sigma when taking "close" shots..


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Konkistadori* 
i need suggestions what macro lens to buy for my EOS :S.. I dont like the quality of this sigma when taking "close" shots..

There are some sample pics from the Sigma 150mm f/2.8 macro here. I know of many members on the Nikon forum who are very fond of this lens and have posted some awesome macro shots with it.


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Unknownm*


Got my first film finished and uploaded to filcker account

http://www.flickr.com/photos/audiotranceable/


Hey! what were you doing in my town?!


----------



## Marin

My photo teacher is showing how to do HDR's right now and he's using exposure blending. Awesome!


----------



## Konkistadori

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


There are some sample pics from the Sigma 150mm f/2.8 macro here. I know of many members on the Nikon forum who are very fond of this lens and have posted some awesome macro shots with it.


Thanks! geez 625â‚¬ quite expensive for me







.. but when looked those photos it seems to be worth of money. But maybe i buy this one if there is no better macro for this price.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Konkistadori* 
ADd meh to list plz









Canon EOS 350D
with Sigma lens (i dont remember model name of it..)

i need suggestions what macro lens to buy for my EOS :S.. I dont like the quality of this sigma when taking "close" shots..

Please find out which Sigma lens, and I'll add you. Getting tired of putting mystery gear up. It should say on the bezel on the front of the lens and/or on the lens barrel itself.


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


My photo teacher is showing how to do HDR's right now and he's using exposure blending. Awesome!










I'm not sure how I feel about HDR... In some cases it looks really good(does what it is supposed to do... add more detail in shadows and highlights), but I've seen so many badly done blends that it is starting to bother me.


----------



## Marin

Proper exposure blending is when you take sections of multiple layers and combine them. The HDR's that people are used to seeing just combine everything and look like vomit.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Please find out which Sigma lens, and I'll add you. Getting tired of putting mystery gear up. It should say on the bezel on the front of the lens and/or on the lens barrel itself.










New gear list!
Nikon Big Square Camera
Nikon Smallish Camera with some Nikon Lens
Canon Crappy Old Film Camera

Sigma Medium Lens, this one lets me see ALL AROUND ME!
Nikkor Heavy Lens, I can see small things, but when I turn a ring, it gets bigger
Nikkor Small Lens, I can take good pictures of people with it!
Sigma Medium Lens
Nikkor Small Lens, doesn't work on Nikon Smallish Camera
Nikkor Heavier Lens, has red VR emblem which means Very Red, and the letters are very red, HOW CLEVER!
Nikkor Heaviest Lens, I can see very far away with this
Nikon Flashy Thingys x2


----------



## Mootsfox

I just got back from my wedding photo seminar. They had a rep from the local camera shop come and we could try out some lenses.

He brought the 70-200mm VRII, 17-55mm and 14-24mm f/2.8 as well as a 85 f/1.8, 12-24mm and some Canon glass that I didn't bother looking at









Got to try out the 14-24mm f/2.8, and I think I'm in love :3

This is with the 85mm f/1.8:


----------



## dudemanppl

Methinks Moots is getting a 85 1.8 soon...


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dudemanppl* 
Methinks Moots is getting a 85 1.8 soon...

lol

I'm getting a 50mm 1.4G. Looks like it'll be good


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Methinks Moots is getting a 85 1.8 soon...


Well...

One day I'd like to have a FF body, the 14-24, 24-70, 70-200 f/2.8's, 85 f/1.4, 50 f/1.4 (AF-S) and 24mm f/1.4.

I think I would be satisfied then.

I THINK I want to hold off on the 14-24mm until I get a FF body, because the extra 3mm is awesome, but not worth $1,400 (used) to me. I do love it though.

As for shooting weddings or similar events, I see the use in a 85mm f/1.8 or a 70-200mm, so a quick 85mm (or 105mm) might be in my future soon. If so, the 24-120mm AF-D is being sold, the 50mm f/1.8 and 35mm f/2.8 manual focus as well.


----------



## dudemanppl

Dany: How about the Sigma 50?

Moots: Sigma 12-24? Buy it now, its wide enough for the D300s, use it on FX later. 600 used. And why is there no supertelephoto in that list? No flash either?


----------



## Freelancer852

I've got the following:
Canon EOS Rebel T1i (500D) w/BG-E5 Battery Grip
EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS
EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Dany: How about the Sigma 50?

Moots: Sigma 12-24? Buy it now, its wide enough for the D300s, use it on FX later. 600 used. And why is there no supertelephoto in that list? No flash either?


Strobes. I might upgrade the SB-600 one day, but it works fine now.

The Siggy is too slow for my tastes. Currently my slowest lens is that 24-120mm. My second slowest lens is f/2.8


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dudemanppl* 
Dany: How about the Sigma 50?

Moots: Sigma 12-24? Buy it now, its wide enough for the D300s, use it on FX later. 600 used. And why is there no supertelephoto in that list? No flash either?

I had my eye on one of those first before I got outbid to the point of where it would have been good to get one grey imported.

This one looks new, pending inspection, and I can meet the guy in person to check it out. Any tips?


----------



## Unknownm

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Sparhawk*


Hey! what were you doing in my town?!










Moved here with my GF. Where are you located in Victoria?


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Unknownm* 
Moved here with my GF. Where are you located in Victoria?

I was out there for school, so I was living quite close to the University Campus. There are some really great places to get pictures in Vic... and the weather is amazing. I really wish I could be out there for the summer, but I found a job in Calgary instead.

You should check out Swan Lake and Beacon Hill park for sure.


----------



## Marin

http://www.nickbrandt.com/

http://www.artmo.com/Images/Artwork/...ng_on_Rock.jpg

I have his second book, A Shadow Falls.


----------



## Mootsfox

Very powerful B&W work.


----------



## Konkistadori

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Please find out which Sigma lens, and I'll add you. Getting tired of putting mystery gear up. It should say on the bezel on the front of the lens and/or on the lens barrel itself.










Ye ye i know i know. But i didint have my camera with me when i posted that. I will edit lens specs to this post soon









Canon EOS 350D
Sigma 28-105 aspherical 1:2.8/4


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dudemanppl* 
New gear list!
Nikon Big Square Camera
Nikon Smallish Camera with some Nikon Lens
Canon Crappy Old Film Camera

Sigma Medium Lens, this one lets me see ALL AROUND ME!
Nikkor Heavy Lens, I can see small things, but when I turn a ring, it gets bigger
Nikkor Small Lens, I can take good pictures of people with it!
Sigma Medium Lens
Nikkor Small Lens, doesn't work on Nikon Smallish Camera
Nikkor Heavier Lens, has red VR emblem which means Very Red, and the letters are very red, HOW CLEVER!
Nikkor Heaviest Lens, I can see very far away with this
Nikon Flashy Thingys x2

lawl

Canon extra big L telescope lens with extra whiteness

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Konkistadori* 
Ye ye i know i know. But i didint have my camera with me when i posted that. I will edit lens specs to this post soon









Canon EOS 350D
Sigma 28-105 aspherical 1:2.8/4

Thanks chief!


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Nikkor Heavy Lens, I can see small things, but when I turn a ring, it gets bigger


I think I have that lens too!


----------



## sweffymo

Quote:


Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie* 
I think I have that lens too!

Uhhh... I think Canon may be infringing on their patents, because I have one just like that but it says Canon on it!


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sweffymo*


Uhhh... I think Canon may be infringing on their patents, because I have one just like that but it says Canon on it!


Thats bull! Everything Canon makes sucks! Nikon had EVERYTHING first! Like video, IS/VR/OS, and Joe McNally!


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Thats bull! Everything Canon makes sucks! Nikon had EVERYTHING first! Like video, IS/VR/OS, and Joe McNally!


"All new camera gear is given to the camera god (Ken Rockwell) and determined of it's worthiness. The best gear is given a Nikon badge, the next best gear is labeled Canon, and the crap is labeled Pentax."


----------



## dudemanppl

I have decided I'm switching to Canon every Summer. Going to pick up a Gripped 5DII, already have a 17-35L, 28 1.8 or Sigmalux, 35L, 85 1.8, and 135L. Selling everything except the SB600s and 300. And I'm going to buy a D5000 to use my 300 on (will be used to trade for D300s when September comes round, which at that point I'll buy everything back + gripped D700).


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


I have decided I'm switching to Canon every Summer. Going to pick up a Gripped 5DII, already have a 17-35L, 28 1.8 or Sigmalux, 35L, 85 1.8, and 135L. Selling everything except the SB600s and 300. And I'm going to buy a D5000 to use my 300 on (will be used to trade for D300s when September comes round, which at that point I'll buy everything back + gripped D700).


Wait, what's the point of doing that exactly?


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Wait, what's the point of doing that exactly?


Thats what I was thinking


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


I have decided I'm switching to Canon every Summer. Going to pick up a Gripped 5DII, already have a 17-35L, 28 1.8 or Sigmalux, 35L, 85 1.8, and 135L. Selling everything except the SB600s and 300. And I'm going to buy a D5000 to use my 300 on (will be used to trade for D300s when September comes round, which at that point I'll buy everything back + gripped D700).


What is the secret to your madness.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Wait, what's the point of doing that exactly?


He's the dudeman. He does that stuff. Keeps you on your gear update toes GT


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Nikkor Heavy Lens, I can see small things, but when I turn a ring, it gets bigger


I've got one of those too dude. But no ring to turn on this one to make things bigger. Have to add teleconverters. Fortunately this lens likes all three (1.4 1.7 2.0) like they weren't there.

1.









2.









It takes pretty pictures, but when you add the body, tc, tripod, and gimbal you're upwards of 22 lbs which is a load to carry on a long trek. Here's one with the 1.7 tc, pof is the ducks eye,

3.


----------



## darklighthim

Got me a Nikon Coolpix 5400 as a point and shoot camera and also have D70 as a DSLR which isn't really mine (fathers) but i can use it if needed.

I'm not really into camera's and photography that much but there are a places i'd love to spend hours at taking pictures although that would be mainly for my enjoyment rather than showing of my photo's.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
I've got one of those too dude. But no ring to turn on this one to make things bigger. Have to add teleconverters. Fortunately this lens likes all three (1.4 1.7 2.0) like they weren't there.

1.









2.
[URL=http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4018/4606253866_2d257ebc94_o.jpg%5B/IMG]http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4018/4606253866_2d257ebc94_o.jpg[/IMG[/URL]
[/TD]
[/TR][/TABLE]
I think that is more likely one of these lenses

Quote:
[TABLE][TR][TD]Nikkor Heavier Lens, has red VR emblem which means Very Red, and the letters are very red, HOW CLEVER!
Nikkor Heaviest Lens, I can see very far away with this[/TD]
[/TR][/TABLE]


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:

Nikkor Heaviest Lens, I can see very far away with this
See very far and pay very much and carry big heavy and worry about front element. In return great pics.

Edit:
Schub,
I want to see some pics with your 70-200....


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


2.










Gotta love the show of perspective.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


He's the dudeman. He does that stuff. Keeps you on your gear update toes GT










No, that's equetefue's job







But the Dude does change gear like underwear.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


No, that's equetefue's job







But the Dude does change gear like underwear.


touche'


----------



## nuclearjock

HEY MARIN,

Ken Rockhead finally gives love to your 5DMKII. See his update for 5/14.

If it af'd faster, I'd buy another one.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


HEY MARIN,

Ken Rockhead finally gives love to your 5DMKII. See his update for 5/14.

If it af'd faster, I'd buy another one.


It seems like the only reason he likes it is for the C positions on the dial, which the 50D and 7D also have. The vast majority of his ramblings just talk about that feature alone.


----------



## nuclearjock

I think he's gone white mate!!!!! Congrats


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


I think he's gone white mate!!!!! Congrats










HAHAHAHA...no. Nikon is stuck with Rockwell taint for all eternity.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
See very far and pay very much and carry big heavy and worry about front element. In return great pics.

Edit:
Schub,
I want to see some pics with your 70-200....

I will get some posted!
Was going to bring it today on my canoe trip, but alas my one bag that I use to go in my drybag doesnt fit the dang thing








gonna need to get a pelican case soon.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


No, that's equetefue's job







But the Dude does change gear like underwear.


If that were true, nobody would go ANYWHERE REMOTELY near me!








So far I've have multiples or the Nikon 17-35, D300, and I have 2 SB600s.
Switching to Canon because I like what they have, no serious stuff to do during the summer (INSULTED!). Can any of you believe I'm 13? (I paid for a third of my gear by selling cans of soda for 2 bucks).


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie*


I think that is more likely one of these lenses


It has to be the Nikon Heaviest Lens with the Very Red lettering.


----------



## Steggy

Ordered a 430ex II from amazon. Waiting for it to arrive. It's gonna take a while :/. Just got my sto fen omnibounce today though, but without the flash it's just a piece of plastic lying around haha.

But now my gear list is

Canon EOS 500D
18-55mm IS
50mm 1.8
opteka macro addon lens
430 EX II
Sto Fen Omnibounce
opteka pc sync cord
cowboy studio umbrella light stand kit(going to get a softbox adapter for it soon enough to replace the cheap umbrella)

Yep. Going to have some fun lol. I need to get a serious lens though at some point ha


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


If that were true, nobody would go ANYWHERE REMOTELY near me!








So far I've have multiples or the Nikon 17-35, D300, and I have 2 SB600s.
Switching to Canon because I like what they have, no serious stuff to do during the summer (INSULTED!). Can any of you believe I'm 13? (I paid for a third of my gear by selling cans of soda for 2 bucks).


I'm only surprised someone that young is into photography. Then again, I got into photography at 14

If any of you have the 105mm 2.8 VR, could you compare the focus ring to your other lenses, thanks.

Gone please add the 50mm 1.4G to my list


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


I'm only surprised someone that young is into photography. Then again, I got into photography at 14

If any of you have the 105mm 2.8 VR, could you compare the focus ring to your other lenses, thanks.

Gone please add the 50mm 1.4G to my list










MFD to infinity is a very, very long turn. I did love that lens though, sharp as jeebus.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


MFD to infinity is a very, very long turn. I did love that lens though, sharp as jeebus.


I'm asking because previously I associated awesome focusing rings with old lenses and bad rings with G lenses, whereas now I think I know all macros have awesome focusing rings.

Now all I have to do is buy a 17-35mm 2.8 and the FX lenses are complete... then I'll need FX body.


----------



## riko99

So its official I like photography more than my other "toys". I'm returning my pioneer home theater (not fully happy with it anyway anymore) to put the money towards the 90mm Tamron macro. Tv sound for awhile will suck but after my wedding ill be getting a nice Onkyo setup.


----------



## Marin

I'm getting two 36x36" prints done.


----------



## Mr_Nibbles

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
I'm getting two 36x36" prints done.

Of what? And how much does that cost?


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mr_Nibbles* 
Of what? And how much does that cost?

Medium format night exposures and it costs a lot. But I'm hoping to get them up in a gallery.


----------



## Mr_Nibbles

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Medium format night exposures and it costs a lot. But I'm hoping to get them up in a gallery.

Nice. Good luck with the gallery.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


I'm asking because previously I associated awesome focusing rings with old lenses and bad rings with G lenses, whereas now I think I know all macros have awesome focusing rings.

Now all I have to do is buy a 17-35mm 2.8 and the FX lenses are complete... then I'll need FX body.


All AF-S focusing rings I've tried so far are pure crap. They feel like mush compared to the macho AI/-S or AF/-D lenses. 24-70 focus ring is kinda nice, but its not exact enough.
Pretty much final gear list (don't have anything except the Eneloops and 17-35L right now):
Canon EOS 5D Mark II + BG-E6 and Eneloops
Canon EF 17-35mm f/2.8 USM L
Canon EF 35mm f/1.4 USM L
Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II
Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM
Canon EF 135mm f/2 USM L
Canon EF 200mm f/2.8 USM L II

Want to try in Canon:
Canon EF 15mm f/2.8 Fisheye (fisheye filming, and I want to try it so I can say I've done fisheye)
Canon EF 28mm f/1.8 USM


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


All AF-S focusing rings I've tried so far are pure crap. They feel like mush compared to the macho AI/-S or AF/-D lenses. 24-70 focus ring is kinda nice, but its not exact enough.

<snip>

Want to try in Canon:
Canon EF 15mm f/2.8 Fisheye (fisheye filming, and I want to try it so I can say I've done fisheye)
Canon EF 28mm f/1.8 USM


So not just me then, I ask because today I had the opportunity to try out the 105mm 2.8 for 5 minutes and was perhaps hoping the 17-35 2.8 focusing ring was of a similar quality.

Yeah I saw a video filmed with fisheye and I want to try that as well.

Guys I have some form of hot/dead pixel. Its a red thing about 4x4 pixels big. I would try myself to batch solve this issue but here is the catch - the red dot moves. In about 5 photos it'll be 100 pixels to the right of the centre point, and then in the next five it'll have moved to 100 pixels south of the centre. What can I do to fix this and failing that, what are my chances of getting this replaced by warranty?


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


So not just me then, I ask because today I had the opportunity to try out the 105mm 2.8 for 5 minutes and was perhaps hoping the 17-35 2.8 focusing ring was of a similar quality.

Yeah I saw a video filmed with fisheye and I want to try that as well.

Guys I have some form of hot/dead pixel. Its a red thing about 4x4 pixels big. I would try myself to batch solve this issue but here is the catch - the red dot moves. In about 5 photos it'll be 100 pixels to the right of the centre point, and then in the next five it'll have moved to 100 pixels south of the centre. What can I do to fix this and failing that, what are my chances of getting this replaced by warranty?










lol, you don't even want to know how many hot pixels my D80 has... doesn't really make much of a difference because you can almost always just shop them out on a pixel level and you won't tell the difference. There are so many pixels anyway.

If it is still under warranty it couldn't hurt to call them and see if they will fix/replace it. I didn't know better until it was too late to get mine fixed.

Also good to make sure the sensor is clean, could be you have a large flake of something floating around in there.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dudemanppl* 
All AF-S focusing rings I've tried so far are pure crap. They feel like mush compared to the macho AI/-S or AF/-D lenses. 24-70 focus ring is kinda nice, but its not exact enough.
Pretty much final gear list (don't have anything except the Eneloops and 17-35L right now):
Canon EOS 5D Mark II + BG-E6 and Eneloops
Canon EF 17-35mm f/2.8 USM L
Canon EF 35mm f/1.4 USM L
Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II
Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM
Canon EF 135mm f/2 USM L
Canon EF 200mm f/2.8 USM L II

Want to try in Canon:
Canon EF 15mm f/2.8 Fisheye (fisheye filming, and I want to try it so I can say I've done fisheye)
Canon EF 28mm f/1.8 USM

I enjoy the focusing ring on the 14-24mm, 17-55mm and 70-200mm (only used briefly). I will say that it's less than stellar (like AI/AI-S) on the non-gold ring Nikkors.


----------



## Marin

http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/05/s...rief-hands-on/

Wow. This will rape in Canons future DSLR's. Wouldn't surprise me if the 5DMKIII uses it.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/05/s...rief-hands-on/

Wow. This will rape in Canons future DSLR's. Wouldn't surprise me if the 5DMKIII uses it.

Wow. The black noise is almost gone. However, fine detail is completely out the window. Not bad for a point and shoot, but that's going to have to be adjusted if it's to be used in a SLR.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Wow. The black noise is almost gone. However, fine detail is completely out the window. Not bad for a point and shoot, but that's going to have to be adjusted if it's to be used in a SLR.

Well yeah, it's at ISO 1600 and 3200 on a P&S. The noise is going to be significantly less as the sensor size increases.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Sparhawk* 
lol, you don't even want to know how many hot pixels my D80 has... doesn't really make much of a difference because you can almost always just shop them out on a pixel level and you won't tell the difference. There are so many pixels anyway.

If it is still under warranty it couldn't hurt to call them and see if they will fix/replace it. I didn't know better until it was too late to get mine fixed.

Also good to make sure the sensor is clean, could be you have a large flake of something floating around in there.

Yeah the sensor is clean, it is just annoying to fix it up because it pops up in different places.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Well yeah, it's at ISO 1600 and 3200 on a P&S. The noise is going to be significantly less as the sensor size increases.

I eagerly await the day my camera can see in the dark


----------



## Danylu

On the topic of repairs.









Anyone hazard a guess as to a repair price for this? If it isn't that high I might take the risk and buy it. [Owner has not given a price yet]


----------



## equetefue

Guys how are??? Been gone for a while. Closing deal on a new house and you guys know how that is. http://s152588970.onlinehome.us/PiCs...ouse%20!!!.JPG

As soon as i'm done with that i'll start sharing some fresh captures.

How is GoneTomorrow, Marin and Nuke ??


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


On the topic of repairs.









Anyone hazard a guess as to a repair price for this? If it isn't that high I might take the risk and buy it. [Owner has not given a price yet]


Which lens is that?

Nikon won't give you a quote without the lens in their hands (I've tried).

I hit some garage sales this weekend. Expect some Nikon and Canon (Sigma/Tamron EF) stuff up soon


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Which lens is that?

Nikon won't give you a quote without the lens in their hands (I've tried).

I hit some garage sales this weekend. Expect some Nikon and Canon (Sigma/Tamron EF) stuff up soon










You can't tell? 85 1.4 AF-D! Repair in America would be like 150-250, its supposed to break at that point; anywhere else is bad news.


----------



## iAligator

I have the Sony DSC-W290 with 4GB Class 4 Memory Stick and a 2GB Memory Stick (Not sure what class), I also have two batteries for it. I use the 720p video on it to record my YouTube videos.

Oh and I also have the Leather, Black, Carrying Case for it.


----------



## iAligator

Oh since most people here are camera experts, do you guys/girls know how to clean a lense? It's just dust sitting there.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iAligator* 
Oh since most people here are camera experts, do you guys/girls know how to clean a lense? It's just dust sitting there.

Lenspen Most camera stores carry them. ~$10.00 US.


----------



## xHassassin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *POTN Discussion*
A squeeze-bulb blower such as a Rocket Blower by Giottos, quality lens tissue (such as that sold by Kodak and now Tiffen), a good lens cleaning fluid, and PROPER TECHNIQUE is the way that I have cleaned my lenses for decades.

What is "proper technique"?

First - the goal is to clean the lens (or filter - I would use the very same process) without grinding any dirt/debris into the lens. To me, this absolutely dictates single-use surfaces for anything that touches the lens. That's why I use lens tissues instead of a washable cloth or - particularly - something like a lens pen.

Here are the steps that I use to clean a lens:

1. Use a squeeze-bulb blower to blow any loose dust off the lens. 90% of the time, step 1 is all that is necessary.

2. Take a lens tissue out of the pack. Fold it once, holding only what was the ends of the tissue. You want to be extremely careful to NEVER TOUCH the areas of the lens tissue that will be touching the lens. This will avoid transferring oils from your fingers to the lens.

3. Moisten the folded portion of the lens tissue with a little lens cleaner. You don't want the tissue dripping wet, but it must be damp.

CAUTION: NEVER apply lens cleaner directly to the lens (though it won't hurt a filter, you don't want liquid leaking into the lens' innards).

4. Wipe LIGHTLY across the lens ONCE with the damp tissue. Then either turn it over or fold it so that you can wipe again, but with an unused surface. You can do this as often as needed, as long as you never wipe the lens twice with any surface of the tissue. This prevents scratches. Again, make sure you never touch an area of the tissue that will touch the lens.

5. Ensuring that the lens is actually clean, use a dry tissue, handled the same way as above, to wipe the lens dry. Since you have already removed the dirt, there's no risk of scratching the lens with the dry tissue.

6. Dispose of the used lens tissues in a proper trash receptacle.

That's it in a nutshell. Simple and effective. I've been cleaning my lenses this way for over 40 years, and all of them have pristine glass (and none have ever worn "protective" filters).


Spudz cloths are great, I'm not a fan of lens pens though.


----------



## iandroo888

how do u guys find garage sale stuff? i dont even know where to start lookin =3


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
how do u guys find garage sale stuff? i dont even know where to start lookin =3

Probably at a garage sale.


----------



## iandroo888

like how do u find out what they have? i look on CL and they dont list.


----------



## iAligator

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
how do u guys find garage sale stuff? i dont even know where to start lookin =3

You walk around your community and looks for Garage Sale signs on weekends. Unfortunately, they are not posted on the internet and you're going to have to leave your house


----------



## iandroo888

unfortunately, communities are not small here.. even driving around with car may not find n e thing


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *xHassassin*


Spudz cloths are great, I'm not a fan of lens pens though.


I was at an authorized Nikon repair depot in the Chicago area recently and one of the techs there said they used Lenspens there for dust removal and small spots. I've used one on my most expensive glass with excellent results. 
The manual for my 400 says to use ethanol (like the drinkable kind) on a soft cloth for cleaning. I use triple distilled ethanol (from the lab at work) and a micro fiber cloth for cleaning tree sap spots that find their way onto my front element while in the field. Does a perfect job. The soft brush on the Lenspen is great for static dust that my rocket blower won't move, the other soft end of the Lenspen perfectly removes small non-stubborn spots. Tree sap as I said gets the alcohol treatment. Alcohol is always applied to the micro fiber cloth first as you said. Not directly to the lens element.

I never use lens paper. Lens cleaner can leach out paper sizing chemicals which can be deposited on the glass surface which is a no no.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iAligator*


You walk around your community and looks for Garage Sale signs on weekends. Unfortunately, they are not posted on the internet and you're going to have to leave your house










Be ready for disappointment though, usually they won't have something you're after.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


I was at an authorized Nikon repair depot in the Chicago area recently and one of the techs there said they used Lenspens there for dust removal and small spots. I've used one on my most expensive glass with excellent results. 
The manual for my 400 says to use ethanol (like the drinkable kind) on a soft cloth for cleaning. I use triple distilled ethanol (from the lab at work) and a micro fiber cloth for cleaning tree sap spots that find their way onto my front element while in the field. Does a perfect job. The soft brush on the Lenspen is great for static dust that my rocket blower won't move, the other soft end of the Lenspen perfectly removes small non-stubborn spots. Tree sap as I said gets the alcohol treatment. Alcohol is always applied to the micro fiber cloth first as you said. Not directly to the lens element.

I never use lens paper. Lens cleaner can leach out paper sizing chemicals which can be deposited on the glass surface which is a no no.


Nice. So why are you hitting trees with your lens?


----------



## Mootsfox

You CAN find some good deals if you look hard and get lucky.

Will probably need about 4-5 hours of cleaning and fungus removing, but for $15, I couldn't say no


















Also picked up this:


----------



## iandroo888

very nice.. =X


----------



## 420Assassin

canon rebel xti i have access too havnt gottin too deep into manual controls


----------



## 420Assassin

My point and shoot GE E1035 10.1megapixel


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


You CAN find some good deals if you look hard and get lucky.

Will probably need about 4-5 hours of cleaning and fungus removing, but for $15, I couldn't say no


















Also picked up this:











Can you take a photo of the fungus for a little before and after? Thanks

Very nice. So which AF Nikkors are on the bodies?


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Nice. So why are you hitting trees with your lens?










Not actually hitting trees. The sap just blows off into the air and deposits on things like small micro droplets.

My 400 has never been so much as bumped (so far). But a little girl did shoot water at it at a soccer game once. No harm, I took her picture later.


----------



## equetefue

I would have tapped her in the head the hood of the lens.... lol


----------



## Marin

Watch this now.

http://vimeo.com/11673745?hd=1

You'll react like this:


----------



## Raincheck

I want to join!

Nikon D90
Nikkor 18-105mm ED VR f/3.5-5.6
Nikkor 35mm f/1.8
Nikkor 50mm f/1.8
Nikkor 70-200mm VR II N f/2.8
Nikkor 16-35mm VR N f/4
Patriot LX Series 8GB Class 10 SDHC
Tripod + $2 mini tripod from microcenter








Knockoff ML-L3


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *equetefue*


Guys how are??? Been gone for a while. Closing deal on a new house and you guys know how that is. http://s152588970.onlinehome.us/PiCs...ouse%20!!!.JPG

As soon as i'm done with that i'll start sharing some fresh captures.

How is GoneTomorrow, Marin and Nuke ??


Nice place eq, I'm house hunting myself!


----------



## dudemanppl

MB-D10 and Eneloops
Nikon D40 + 18-55mm VR
Canon EOS 1

Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6 EX DC HSM
Nikkor 35mm f/1.8 AF-S G
Nikkor 50mm f/1.4 AF-D
Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II

Tis a sad day.


----------



## iandroo888

whats sad?  why u have a mb-d10 and a d40. they work together?


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
whats sad?  why u have a mb-d10 and a d40. they work together?

No. The MB-D10 is bigger than a D40


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


No. The MB-D10 is bigger than a D40










Way, WAYYYY bigger. I'm sad all my Nikon gear is gone, keeping the MB-D10 for when I get the D700 and D300s.


----------



## iandroo888

r u sellin all ur gear?  sellin the 35 or 50?


----------



## dudemanppl

50, I'm keeping the AF-D, Sigmalux is sold. 35, not sure if I want to; would you pay more for it because I bought it in Las Vegas?


----------



## iandroo888

uh no -.-" why would i pay more if u bought it here lol


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
uh no -.-" why would i pay more if u bought it here lol

No idea! PM coming your way.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
Not actually hitting trees. The sap just blows off into the air and deposits on things like small micro droplets.

My 400 has never been so much as bumped (so far). But a little girl did shoot water at it at a soccer game once. No harm, I took her picture later.

Fair enough.

I also sincerely believe this will aid you in your hunt for birds


----------



## riko99

Gone add to my gear

Tamron 90mm f2.8 Di II Macro

Was floored when i heard how much Panasonics SDXC cards are going to be... Now i know having a flash memory card at 64GB is nice but for 600 some odd dollars i'll upgrade the pc and keep multiple 8GB cards lol.

Also got a Crumpler Industry Disgrace strap... so much better than the Nikon d300s strap lol.


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:


Originally Posted by *riko99* 
Gone add to my gear

Tamron 90mm f2.8 Di II Macro

Was floored when i heard how much Panasonics SDXC cards are going to be... Now i know having a flash memory card at 64GB is nice but for 600 some odd dollars i'll upgrade the pc and keep multiple 8GB cards lol.

Also got a Crumpler Industry Disgrace strap... so much better than the Nikon d300s strap lol.

Haha, I just grabbed one of those straps too. So much better than the D80 strap.

I was in a store getting the newer version Nikon front cap(the old stock one is gawd-awful) for my 80-200mm and saw the straps. I had picked a different one out then I turned around to go pay and saw the crumpler rack that I had missed. Picked one up and pretty much decided I needed one right there.

Went out and did a bit of shooting right afterwards and was stunned at the difference it made.









Now I'm trying to justify spending $200 on a tripod and even more on a flash...


----------



## GoneTomorrow

It's a great strap for sure. I like the breathability of the neck syrap the most. The Canon "Professional" strap I had was lined with suede and the dye came off on my neck, not to mention suffocating my neck.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *riko99* 
Gone add to my gear

Tamron 90mm f2.8 Di II Macro

Was floored when i heard how much Panasonics SDXC cards are going to be... Now i know having a flash memory card at 64GB is nice but for 600 some odd dollars i'll upgrade the pc and keep multiple 8GB cards lol.

Also got a Crumpler Industry Disgrace strap... so much better than the Nikon d300s strap lol.


Quote:


Originally Posted by *Sparhawk* 
Haha, I just grabbed one of those straps too. So much better than the D80 strap.

I was in a store getting the newer version Nikon front cap(the old stock one is gawd-awful) for my 80-200mm and saw the straps. I had picked a different one out then I turned around to go pay and saw the crumpler rack that I had missed. Picked one up and pretty much decided I needed one right there.

Went out and did a bit of shooting right afterwards and was stunned at the difference it made.









Now I'm trying to justify spending $200 on a tripod and even more on a flash...


----------



## laboitenoire

Guess what?

Gone, you can finally add me to the DSLR list.

Nikon D5000
Nikkor 18-55 f/3.5-5.6 VR


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:


Originally Posted by *laboitenoire* 
Guess what?

Gone, you can finally add me to the DSLR list.

Nikon D5000
Nikkor 18-55 f/3.5-5.6 VR

<hears in background:> "Ding" "Leveled up, DSLR unlocked"








Gratz!

/offtopic: woot 100 reps! i has twice as many flames now!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *laboitenoire* 
Guess what?

Gone, you can finally add me to the DSLR list.

Nikon D5000
Nikkor 18-55 f/3.5-5.6 VR

Great Caesar's ghost! At long last, congrats!


----------



## Mootsfox

The Nikon pro straps are wonderful. After using the D1H and D1X straps on my D1H and F100 respectively, I picked up a new D2Xs strap for my D300s off of eBay for like $12 shipped. I figure it's ok to use, since the body is gripped, and they are both 12MP


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
The Nikon pro straps are wonderful. After using the D1H and D1X straps on my D1H and F100 respectively, I picked up a new D2Xs strap for my D300s off of eBay for like $12 shipped. I figure it's ok to use, since the body is gripped, and they are both 12MP









BlackRapid R-Strap, any of them. It makes me WANT to use the 300.


----------



## Mootsfox

I can't justify dropping $50 for a strap, when I can put $50 towards so many other hobbies


----------



## dudemanppl

Its SOOOO worth it. I'm buying a double strap so I can have a 70-200 VR no body on one side, and 24-70 or whatever on the D300s the other side or something like that.


----------



## Mootsfox

Moots using a Canon oh noes!










(Image shot with a D300s, so it's ok)


----------



## olli3

Bought a Nikkor 35mm 1.8f yesterday! Very pleased with it, not sure why I didn't have a prime lens before, the quality and the low light you can shoot in is outstanding! Nice and compact too so I will probably take this around with me quite a lot. Maybe a 50mm next...much of a big difference??


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *olli3* 
Bought a Nikkor 35mm 1.8f yesterday! Very pleased with it, not sure why I didn't have a prime lens before, the quality and the low light you can shoot in is outstanding! Nice and compact too so I will probably take this around with me quite a lot. Maybe a 50mm next...much of a big difference??

I have that lens and the 50mm 1.4. I haven't done any objective testing but my feel is that I get more working distance and 2/3 higher shutter speed


----------



## laboitenoire

Absolutely loving my camera... Probably shot off a couple hundred frames already just figuring out where stuff is. Love the fact that ISO 1600 looks better than ISO 200 did on my Fuji. Once I update ACR I'll probably post a few shots.


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Absolutely loving my camera... Probably shot off a couple hundred frames already just figuring out where stuff is. Love the fact that ISO 1600 looks better than ISO 200 did on my Fuji. Once I update ACR I'll probably post a few shots.


heh, yeah. It's super addicting. The same thing happens whenever you get a new lens or something to play with.









I've been hacking together a time-lapse timer/controller... took ~500+ shots last night just getting it working how I wanted it. Wish I could take smaller images(the smallest setting is still huge for video) with my camera... going to be fun watching a few thousand pictures load into my video editing program when I'm done.


----------



## Mootsfox

A bunch of Nikon stuff up:
http://www.overclock.net/other-techn...ale-nikon.html

It's going to eBay tonight or tomorrow night.

Offers are welcome


----------



## iandroo888

hmm i wonder if the 180mm AI-S is useful on my body =3 what u mean by needs cleaning? how much does that cost?


----------



## Adrienspawn

Canon EOS Rebel T1i (500D) w/BG-E5 Battery Grip, 4 batteries
Sigma 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 DC
"Big flash attachment"


----------



## theCanadian

I have a Minolta X-700 body (two actually, one is broken) and an unknown, reasonable medium range lens also manufactured by Minolta. Just starting this up, so if and when I post any pictures, be kind







.

Oh yeah, it's film. First roll will be ASA 100.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *thecanadian*


i have a minolta x-700 body (two actually, one is broken) and an unknown, reasonable medium range lens also manufactured by minolta. Just starting this up, so if and when i post any pictures, be kind







.

Oh yeah, it's film. First roll will be asa 100.


iso


----------



## Marin

A lot of the current film users. Majority of them are incompetent artists who think film turns crap into gold.


----------



## nuclearjock

No film here. Some prettty neat pano work done with your 5DMKII. Featured in this month's OP magazine.

This is something I'd like to play with once I retire and have some time to travel. Don't think I'll be treking up to 22,800 feet though as this guy did. It's an interesting read if you see the magazine.


----------



## Marin

Here's an awesome photographer. I saw some of this prints, one of them selling for 15k.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bradford_Washburn

This image does the actual print no justice (the prints insanely large and detailed, which is expected from large format).


----------



## nuclearjock

Pretty cool.

~$900 US, me want. Just cause it's cool. have to think of some trips to utilize it.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
Pretty cool.

~$900 US, me want. Just cause it's cool. have to think of some trips to utilize it.

One of my photo teachers has one and took a semi high res shot/pano of the class in the lecture hall.

http://www.gigapan.org/gigapans/23950/

See if you can spot a mootsfox.


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
One of my photo teachers has one and took a semi high res shot/pano of the class in the lecture hall.

http://www.gigapan.org/gigapans/23950/

See if you can spot a mootsfox.

lol, love the guy at the front with the photographic lobotomy.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


One of my photo teachers has one and took a semi high res shot/pano of the class in the lecture hall.

http://www.gigapan.org/gigapans/23950/

See if you can spot a mootsfox.


Fifth row, far left side, black shirt with a red gear on it.


----------



## dudemanppl

EDIT: BING CASHBACK ON EBAY IS BACK!!!!
Ordered a 85 1.8, my friend backed out on buying the gripped D300s, 24-70, 70-200 VR, and 300. D:

D300s
Nikon MB-D10 and Sanyo Eneloops
Canon EOS 1

Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6 EX DC HSM
Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8 AF-S G N
Nikkor 35mm f/1.8 AF-S G DX
Nikkor 50mm f/1.4 AF-D
Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II
Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8 AF-S G VR
Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM
Nikkor 300mm f/2.8 AF-I D
Nikon SB-600 x2
RODE VideoMic


----------



## laboitenoire

With a paid internship this summer, it will be hard not buying something camera-related.


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:


Originally Posted by *laboitenoire* 
With a paid internship this summer, it will be hard not buying something camera-related.

Yeah, I've got income again. Almost impossible to avoid buying things.









I lost my eyepiece cover(rubber one)...







dunno how it happened either...







Should I just get the same kind again? are there better ones? (for my D80)


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Here's an awesome photographer. I saw some of this prints, one of them selling for 15k.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bradford_Washburn

This image does the actual print no justice (the prints insanely large and detailed, which is expected from large format).




He is a mountaineering icon and is viewed as one of the people who helped make Denali (Mount McKinley) as popular as it is now due to his mapping and knowledge of the mountain.


----------



## Sparhawk

Saw a documentary on Ansel Adams the other day. Pretty cool guy. Very interesting listening to other's view of photography and its purpose. Also wish my dad had fueled my passions as completely as Ansel's did.

Almost wish we didn't have digital(even though I haven't used film much), it has created such an over-saturated market for photography... everyone and their dog think they can take photos... that's what grinds my gears today...


----------



## Marin

Everyone and their dogs can create mediocrity. The introduction of digital didn't suddenly make people better.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Sparhawk*


Saw a documentary on Ansel Adams the other day. Pretty cool guy. Very interesting listening to other's view of photography and its purpose. Also wish my dad had fueled my passions as completely as Ansel's did.

Almost wish we didn't have digital(even though I haven't used film much), it has created such an over-saturated market for photography... everyone and their dog think they can take photos... that's what grinds my gears today...


We were told in one of my photo classes that one of Adams' biggest regrets was "Not being able to see the digital age". Dunno if that's true or not, but interesting cause Ansel seemed to be something of a gear-***


----------



## Marin

He hated color photography so he'd probably hate digital just as much if he saw it now.


----------



## dudemanppl

Leave it like this for a while, don't want you to keep changing it because I feel bad for you.









Canon EOS 5D Mark II
Canon BG-E6 And Sanyo Eneloops
Canon EOS 1

Canon EF 17-35mm f/2.8 USM L
Canon EF 35mm f/1.4 USM L
Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II
Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM
Canon EF 135mm f/2 USM L
Canon EF 1.4x Extender II
RODE VideoMic

Nikkor 35mm f/1.8 AF-S G DX
Nikkor 50mm f/1.4 AF-D
Nikkor 300mm f/2.8 AF-I D
Nikon SB-600 x2

I'm probably gonna do 300 2.8 > Nikon-EOS converter > 1.4x II > 5DII just for the hell of it.


----------



## max302

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 









A lot of the current film users. Majority of them are incompetent artists who think film turns crap into gold.


Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Everyone and their dogs can create mediocrity. The introduction of digital didn't suddenly make people better.

Could the elitist hipster angst be settling in?









As a film user, I can only hope I'm not part of those people.

My latest uploads:









I'm kind of in a transitional stage in my army business right now, my scanner is 300 km away and I can't seem to find any time to just chill around town with a camera. Besides, my F5 is wayyyy too heavy to haul around.... the 35SPn should be here any day now, so that'll solve that problem.

I've got 3 rolls that still need to be scanned... and I still haven't found a B&W lab OR chemicals locally.


----------



## riko99

So far loving the Macro lens... just takes some getting used too. Here's my cats Eye lol little buggers wont stop moving they don't like the lens that close. No editing on this image.


----------



## ace8uk

Not bought a new lens in a while, so I decided to treat myself (as it's also my birthday on Sunday) to a Sigma 10-20mm f4-5.6. The widest lens I currently have is the Nikon 17-55mm f2.8 but I've always wanted something wider as I only have DX bodies. The woman in the shop also gave me a 10% discount as the shop is having a 10% off everything sale tomorrow, but she said she'd give me the discount today too, which was nice of her. Anyway, not had much time to play with it, but I took one quick shot of the Abbey outside the shop, mainly to make sure the lens worked properly. Seems alright so far, I'll probably update in a few days with some better samples though.










So yeah, Gone, if you could add the Sigma 10-20mm f4-5.6 to my gear list, that would be lovely


----------



## Boyboyd

Nevermind about what i said in the BOC ace. I found one









Looks pretty damn good actually. Image looks a bit compressed though.


----------



## ace8uk

I was thinking that it looks a little, strange. Like I said though, that was just one photo I took. Had to adjust the exposure quite a bit because I accidentally had the exposure compensation on in my camera (whoops!), so that would probably explain the loss in quality. Anyway, like I said in the BoC, I'll take some more photos over the weekend when I'm not in a rush.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


Originally Posted by *ace8uk* 
I was thinking that it looks a little, strange. Like I said though, that was just one photo I took. Had to adjust the exposure quite a bit because I accidentally had the exposure compensation on in my camera (whoops!), so that would probably explain the loss in quality. Anyway, like I said in the BoC, I'll take some more photos over the weekend when I'm not in a rush.

It's probably just your image host. Everything above where i've cropped it looks spot on.


----------



## innovate

I would like to join the club if thats alright









Bag:
Lowepro Rezo 180AW

Body:
Nikon D90

Lenses:
Nikkor AF-S DX VR 55-200 f/4-5.6G
Nikkor AF-S DX VR 18-105 f/3.5-5.6G

Accessories:
Nikon HB-32 Lens hood
Nikon HB-37 Lens hood
Hoya 52S UV Filter
B+W 010M 67 MRC UV Filter
SanDisk Extreme III 8GB SD card
Viola PV-64CB Tripod

I'm sure I'll be adding to this later on, got this kit 3 weeks ago.


----------



## nuclearjock

I guess we all gotta scratch now and then..

1.









Got it!! All done.
2.


----------



## Marin

http://www.flickr.com/photos/froderberg/4259051606/


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


http://www.flickr.com/photos/froderberg/4259051606/


I hate using my camera when its cold.


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
iso









I actually found an old roll of ASA 400/ISO 27Â° (I'm not sure which is more correct, wiki informs me ASA is obsolete, but the roll says 400), and I've snapped 2 macros and 3 regular shots. They looked really cool through the finder, I only hope that they look half as good developed, this being my first roll and all.

You guys have any suggestions for a first timer? I kinda anxious to shoot the rest of this roll so that I can get some feedback...


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


I actually found an old roll of ASA 400/ISO 27Â° (I'm not sure which is more correct, wiki informs me ASA is obsolete, but the roll says 400), and I've snapped 2 macros and 3 regular shots. They looked really cool through the finder, I only hope that they look half as good developed, this being my first roll and all.

You guys have any suggestions for a first timer? I kinda anxious to shoot the rest of this roll so that I can get some feedback...


How olds the film? If it's using ASA it's definitely expired so it's probably going to suffer from things such as loss of sensitivity, poor development, ugly grain, etc...

Anyways, Ilford makes excellent B&W film and I definitely recommend it. So if you need more film either buy it locally or online.









http://www.freestylephoto.biz/704927...xp.?cat_id=402

http://www.freestylephoto.biz/574577...xp.?cat_id=402

http://www.freestylephoto.biz/649651...xp.?cat_id=402

http://www.freestylephoto.biz/649587...xp.?cat_id=402

(B&H and Adorama also sell it)

Without getting technical, Delta has a more digital look and FP4+/HP5+ have a film look.


----------



## theCanadian

I'm mainly interested in how well *I'm* shooting. I'm playing a little bit with aperture and I'll probably be doing a lot of macros on this roll, so I'm just figuring things out. I'm sure 90% of the roll will be crap anyway, so it doesn't really matter. I don't ever expect to be taking black and white, and I'll be digitizing the film right there in the store when I get it developed, so if I want B&W I can do that in post processing.

And the lens by today's standards is fairly mundane, so I don't need to be shooting with anything kodac, etc. can't provide.

Thanks though.

Now what I was really after was ideas for subjects. I'll be heading to the park just down the road tomorrow, but I wanted to see if you guys had any other ideas.


----------



## Marin

This bag looks awesome.

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...d.php?t=874819

EDIT: Was out shooting right when the sun was setting.


----------



## riko99

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dudemanppl* 
I hate using my camera when its cold.









Same here but gotta get used to it in cold ol Canada... We actually had snow 2 days ago just light but still. Anyways love how it looks like a Canon lens and strap on a D3s...

Edit: Nvm was shot with a D3s, probably is a Canon.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *riko99*


Same here but gotta get used to it in cold ol Canada... We actually had snow 2 days ago just light but still. Anyways love how it looks like a Canon lens and strap on a D3s...

Edit: Nvm was shot with a D3s, probably is a Canon.


That and the fact that the title is "Frozen Canon Eos 1D Mark IV"


----------



## laboitenoire

Kinda funny seeing his nose there, as I personally hate using my right eye for shooting... I like using the left because the way my thumb falls on the body it naturally blocks my right eye so I'm not squinting. Much more comfortable.


----------



## riko99

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


That and the fact that the title is "Frozen Canon Eos 1D Mark IV"










Well apparently I need to be a bit more observant... Was up late drinking bit hung over.


----------



## Unknownm

Taken with my Praktica LLC.


----------



## theCanadian

LOL ^ Hurt Locker.


----------



## dudemanppl

5DII ordered.


----------



## theCanadian

Just a heads up guys. The Minolta X-700 body is going for like $35 on eBay. Some listings even come with a basic lens. It's a fairly respectable film SLR and is undoubtedly Minolta's most successful body with a production run of 18 years. My research indicates that it will accept lenses designed up to the year 2006, so it's still fairly modern in that sense. (Though I'm not sure what standards the (bayonet?) mating surface should be called. Someone fill me in?)

Sorry if this is old news.


----------



## Marin

The X-700 uses a SR Mount. It won't work with the newer lenses that use the A mount.


----------



## Unknownm

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*










LOL ^ Hurt Locker.


Yeah I took somewhere in Victoria. Forgot the name again


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
The X-700 uses a SR Mount. It won't work with the newer lenses that use the A mount.

Just looking at the frame, the X-700 is capable of mounting two types of lenses, how old is the SR mount? Is the "A mount" the current standard?


----------



## Marin

It's been around since 1958 and has had small tweaks made to it since then thus getting different names to it. The A mount is the current mount used by Sony. It was developed and used by Minolta for AF lenses and became their new mount. Sony purchased Minolta's camera tech in 2006, including the AF system, and re-released it as the Alpha mount. Starting the whole system from scratch while using the same mount.


----------



## nuclearjock

D300 400 f/2.8 VR tc20E III

1. Kingbird









2. Killdeer


----------



## theCanadian

Just took a picture of the moon with my 1:3.5-4.5 telephoto. (I have no idea what these numbers mean lol)

f/3.5 @ 1 second exposure.

I expect it to look like vomit.

Can some one fill me in on what these numbers on the lens mean? The only one I know is the one that tells you what size filter to use. At least point me to where I can read up on my own. I don't even know what to google for...


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *theCanadian* 
Just took a picture of the moon with my 1:3.5-4.5 telephoto. (I have no idea what these numbers mean lol)

f/3.5 @ 1 second exposure.

I expect it to look like vomit.

Can some one fill me in on what these numbers on the lens mean? The only one I know is the one that tells you what size filter to use. At least point me to where I can read up on my own. I don't even know what to google for...

3.5-4.5 is max aperture range of the lens. It's a variable aperture, so depending on the focal length, it will be f/3.5 to f/4.5 maximum. The smaller the f-stop number, the wider the aperture (diaphragm opening) and the more light is let in.

http://digital-photography-school.com/

^^ Start here


----------



## theCanadian

Thanks for the link, but that appears to be an exclusively digital forum.

But, I have a film camera. And I have no clue what I'm doing. I know DSLR is so much easier, but I'm strapped for cash and I'm not willing to wait. I've been shooting macros mostly, because I can usually take as long as I want setting up the shot.

I'm going to need a place that can answer questions like how to use my under-over exposure wheel, how different types of film should be used, etc...

I'll eventually get a DSLR, but to avoid that $600-$1000 purchase, I'm sticking with what I've got now. I hope to shoot about a dozen rolls this year, and then put the hobby down for a bit. So the cost is minuscule in comparison.


----------



## xHassassin

You can probably find a Canon XS w/ kit lens for around 350 if you look.


----------



## theCanadian

My dad has the Rebel XSI. I don't particularly like it.


----------



## Marin

Why?


----------



## theCanadian

It feels wrong; I hate setting things up on a display. I would much rather everything stay manual.

I guess I'm just used to the film camera.


----------



## Marin

That makes sense. Well, film also went that direction before digital took over. Like the Canon 1V.


----------



## theCanadian

Ew, just ew. I pray to god that an old school DSLR exists that doesn't cost an entire years paycheck.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


It feels wrong; I hate setting things up on a display. I would much rather everything stay manual.

I guess I'm just used to the film camera.


What do you mean by setting things up on a display? Personally, I never use my display LCD except to review pictures and change ISO.


----------



## theCanadian

I mean, I want the camera to be predominantly mechanical with as few automated processes as possible. I just feel more in tune that way.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


That makes sense. Well, film also went that direction before digital took over. Like the Canon 1V.


Psh, one LCD?



















Also one of a few film cameras (N90, F100, F5, F6) that can store EXIF data.


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


It feels wrong; I hate setting things up on a display. I would much rather everything stay manual.

I guess I'm just used to the film camera.



Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


I mean, I want the camera to be predominantly mechanical with as few automated processes as possible. I just feel more in tune that way.


I would tend to agree. I only use the LCD to review photos at the end of a session or when trying to get a 'perfect' shot(







usually the first one I take is the one I like the best anyway).

I like the top lcd because it allows quick control of almost all settings. The little bit I've used the cheaper canon cameras was a pain to change settings, I like having dedicated buttons for all mine... and two wheels









Love non-G lenses too, allowed me to get a 2xTC that didn't cost $300. The ability to control aperture manually is very handy.







There's something about full manual that makes it seem more like you are taking the picture rather than the camera.


----------



## theCanadian

Some of the best of my first roll is attached. These are pretty grainy... I'm regretting buying 4 rolls of 400 before I got this first one developed. I would have switched to 200.

The best one:










And the heart breaker. It would have been good.


















*Edit: Having some trouble with the upload. I cherry picked some photos and just attached them individually to the post. I know... the last three are overexposed.
*


----------



## theCanadian

Done... finally.


----------



## dr4gon

Ahhhh 400 ISO, My EYESSSS! LOL Nicely done. It's interesting to see such modern items have a film look. What camera/lenses?


----------



## mortimersnerd

A couple shots with my D5000 and 70-200mm VRI:



















I should crop this one...









I only got hit with the ball once... right there ^^^^


----------



## dudemanppl

I love the 5DII. It is just too good, autofocus isn't horrible, METERING SUCKS THOUGH.


----------



## dr4gon

It does? I haven't heard that before. Post examples?

So why the switch from the D300s and Nikon?


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dr4gon*


It does? I haven't heard that before. Post examples?

So why the switch from the D300s and Nikon?


Well metering isn't horrible, just horrible for ME. D300s always got it. I wanted to try Canon for the Summer and I'm loving it so far.


----------



## theCanadian

Two more pics for you guys. First one is overexposed, and that was my fault, I wasn't thinking when I took the photo. Second one is a little underexposed. The light was pretty bad.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

theCanadian, please keep posting. I love your pics!


----------



## theCanadian

Sorry, but I'm fresh out. All the rest that I took are quite garbage. If you wait till next week I might have some interesting ones.

And I think you're being overly kind with what I've posted anyway. The 360 controller was really the only good one of the set.

@dr4gon

A Minolta X-700 with an old Minolta 1:3.5-4.5 telephoto. Rather old gear, but I like it. Well, I don't like paying $0.50-1.00 a photo, but it's cheaper than getting a DSLR. In the short term anyway.

Edit: I lied. Here's one more. But this time I promise; I got no more. I had to download this one from Facebook, so excuse the compression.


----------



## Marin

120 Ektar has taken the place of Velvia for me. Saturation comes close, color accuracy is way better and the dynamic range is huge. I'll get some scans up later.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


Sorry, but I'm fresh out. All the rest that I took are quite garbage. If you wait till next week I might have some interesting ones.

And I think you're being overly kind with what I've posted anyway. The 360 controller was really the only good one of the set.

@dr4gon

A Minolta X-700 with an old Minolta 1:3.5-4.5 telephoto. Rather old gear, but I like it. Well, I don't like paying $0.50-1.00 a photo, but it's cheaper than getting a DSLR. In the short term anyway.

Edit: I lied. Here's one more. But this time I promise; I got no more. I had to download this one from Facebook, so excuse the compression.


for a guy that doesnt know what the 1:3.5-4.5 mean.

you take really good pictures. good job.

just out of curiosity you got a mm range for that lens?


----------



## theCanadian

Why thank you. But really, I have no experience and only a 15 minute sit down with my father where he explained how to use the camera. I'm just patient. All these photos were taken at my leisure, with the sole exception being the butterfly. And even then, I knew he wasn't going anywhere in a hurry. If you needed me to snap photos in a timely manner, I'm sure you'd see a big dip in what I was capable of producing.

I snapped a whole roll outside yesterday, got a couple squirrels, so we'll see how that looks.

As for the lens, it says 35-105mm. I'm told this is a good all purpose lens. And for the most part I would agree. However, I tried taking some macros of eyes yesterday and the lens just can't get close enough to do what I want.

I think there is some type of adapter I can get to help with that right??? I think it's called a teleconverter or something.


----------



## Marin

Extension tube.


----------



## theCanadian

Yay! A lot cheaper than a teleconverter. I'll have to get one.

http://www.gadgetinfinity.com/produc...cat=290&page=1

And it seems easy enough to learn how to use.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


Yay! A lot cheaper than a teleconverter. I'll have to get one.

http://www.gadgetinfinity.com/produc...cat=290&page=1

And it seems easy enough to learn how to use.


If you prefer on the fly macro then close up filters but I've gotten extension tubes myself [then again its for my macro lens].


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mz-n10* 
for a guy that doesnt know what the 1:3.5-4.5 mean.

you take really good pictures. good job.


Agreed, theCanadian really has an eye.


----------



## iandroo888




----------



## theCanadian

My second roll was a lot more successful. The bolded ones are the best in my opinion.

dr4agon, I took a couple more macros with you in mind. Enjoy!

One thing I've noticed is that in almost all of my macros, the subject is low in the frame. I don't know if it's me or an issue with the camera... It's probably me though.

Edit: I should note, these are untouched. I could really clean up a lot of these if I wanted.

*


















http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/4649925195/*
*http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/4649926255/*
http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/4650546144/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/4650548088/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/4649931189/
*http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/4650550772/*
*http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/4649933785/*
*http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/4650553030/*
http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/4649936243/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/4650555430/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/4650556812/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/4649940409/


----------



## ace8uk

Got a couple more shots taken with my new Sigma (Or is it Wigma?) 10-20mm. Both shots were taken in Bath, England, where I live. First shot is of the Royal Cresent, I'm gutted that I got there just as the sun was starting to set as it meant that the whole cresent wasn't lit up, but still. The second shot it of an interesting church I found by the river.



















Can't wait to use this lens some more, hopefully I'll get better at taking wide angle photos too!


----------



## xHassassin

Ohh, did you use a polarizer?

The second seems to show a lot of lens distortion...


----------



## ace8uk

No polariser, haven't bought one for this yet. I agree with you about the distortion though. At the moment I'm having to use a 32" tv at 1920x1080 to do post processing on, so I'm not sure if it's the lens or the TV! I'll have to get my old 22" monitor back out at some point for lightroom, as this tv isn't exactly practical.


----------



## dudemanppl

I like the 35 1.8 DX on the 5DII, vignetting is fine with me.


----------



## Angmaar

Took a few shots with my new D5000. I'm still learning all the settings though.


----------



## xHassassin

Kit lens?

I really like the bokeh in the 2nd.

Have fun with it


----------



## iandroo888

cropped kitty's feet on 3rd T_T woulda been nice.


----------



## Angmaar

Quote:



Originally Posted by *xHassassin*


Kit lens?

I really like the bokeh in the 2nd.

Have fun with it











Yeah, it's just a kit lens but it works ok. For now at least.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


cropped kitty's feet on 3rd T_T woulda been nice.


I took a close up of the feet but didn't post it.


----------



## Enigma8750

This is a picture of my son at Sun Rise on St. George Island. 6:00 am


----------



## Oscuro

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


Why thank you. But really, I have no experience and only a 15 minute sit down with my father where he explained how to use the camera. I'm just patient. All these photos were taken at my leisure, with the sole exception being the butterfly. And even then, I knew he wasn't going anywhere in a hurry. If you needed me to snap photos in a timely manner, I'm sure you'd see a big dip in what I was capable of producing.


Just to say: Your results trump your experience.

Also, do not be totally dismayed by your "win:lose" ratio on your rolls, you are doing very well, and I've so far enjoyed a log of your shots. Two that have really struck me, were;
1: The barn. This captures the fact that film, naturally, has so much more dynamic range than digital. Top it off with the, washed colours (not muted, but feel matte rather than vibrant) and it is a gorgeous shot.
2: I also really love the trail into the woods. I'm not sure what sort of film you are using, but the saturation gives your woodland shots a sort of, "dream-like" feeling, where all of the colours are strong and powerful, but at the same time, soft in...texture?

I don't know, I just really like your talent. Regardless of how long it takes you to set up a shot!

On the digital note, I can't think of any DSLRs that would really give you the "manual functionality" that you seek. There might be some, but they will be really quite old, and you probably would not be happy with the quality, size of the prints, or anything else that you get out of them compared to film.
You are part of an over-looked market of "retro-grouches", sorry to say.

However, I can say that it is rare for me to have to use menus when adjusting the settings on my D70. The Command and Sub-command dials give me a lot of direct control over the functions of the camera itself. The only times I need to enter the menu really, is to change flash settings (such as to commander to use remote flashes)and changing the settings on the self-timer, some of the auto-focus settings...uhmmm and things, rarely ever used by me. Otherwise, I control the ISO, White balance, Quality levels, bracketing, continuous shooting, Metering modes, exposure compensation, flash compensation etc straight from buttons on the body with a twist of the command or sub-command dials.


----------



## theCanadian

The barn was interesting. I think its overexposed just a touch too much where the barn is. I'll probably revisit that spot for another try.

As for the trail, I like the shot overall, but look at the hue of the leaves. It's blue. Easy enough to fix in a photo editing program, but certainly an interesting (and sometimes frustrating) thing that I'm going to have to deal with when using film.

Thank you for the comments, these two photos you commented on were really ones I had overlooked myself because of their flaws.


----------



## Mr_Nibbles

I went out at night to shoot the full moon for my second time. Is this about the best I can do with a 70-200 f/4L? If not tell me what to do next time. Help is appreciated as usual









FYI: This was taken on an XSi in RAW and cropped to this size.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mr_Nibbles* 
I went out at night to shoot the full moon for my second time. Is this about the best I can do with a 70-200 f/4L? If not tell me what to do next time. Help is appreciated as usual









FYI: This was taken on an XSi in RAW and cropped to this size.

Looks pretty decent.


----------



## nuclearjock

A dickcissel pondering something.










A kildeer chick.


----------



## jacobthellamer

Add me









Pentax K100D
AF-500FTZ - Flash
Pentax-DA 18-55 AL
Pentax-F 100-300
Pentax-A 35-80
Pentax-M 1.7 - 50mm
Sigma 2.8 22mm


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mr_Nibbles*


I went out at night to shoot the full moon for my second time. Is this about the best I can do with a 70-200 f/4L? If not tell me what to do next time. Help is appreciated as usual









FYI: This was taken on an XSi in RAW and cropped to this size.


Yes, that's about as good as it gets at 200mm. You need some serious reach for good moon shots. Some of the best moon shots I've seen were at 400mm and up. Here's one of my own attempts with the same lens (IS version; shot with a 7D):


----------



## Danylu

And at 300mm (equiv to 450mm)



Being the moon, not really an interesting subject. But there was this one time where the clouds were perfectly located, too bad it was 6 stops underexposed and the shot was gone in the next ten seconds. I didn't have a tripod either so that doesn't really help


----------



## Sparhawk

I've got a tripod mount for my 80-200mm on order... once I get it I should be able to pull off some pretty cool shots.


----------



## Marin

Almost lost $5800 worth of equipment. Go me.

Anyways, just got my Senior award for photography which is given to the top three students in the department. And found out that three of my prints are hung right now in the school office (assistant principal wants to buy one of them, but I'll probably just give it to her).


----------



## dr4gon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Almost lost $5800 worth of equipment. Go me.


hmmm?


----------



## Ryan747

My flickr is changed, it is now www.flickr.com/rbphoto1


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Almost lost $5800 worth of equipment. Go me.


Wat.


----------



## Mr_Nibbles

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Almost lost $5800 worth of equipment. Go me.


Go on...


----------



## Marin

I left my camera bag under the chair at school and realized I forgot it while at the sushi bar. So I sped back to school and luckily the bag was in the office.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
I left my camera bag under the chair at school and realized I forgot it while at the sushi bar. So I sped back to school and luckily the bag was in the office.

Lucky. I have a habit of wrapping my camera bag strap around my hand or I put a foot through it, so far so good


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


I forgot it while at the sushi bar.


You must really like sushi.

I had jellyed eels once while in the UK. Very different.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
You must really like sushi.

I had jellyed eels once while in the UK. Very different.

mmm sushi =D

jellied eel... hrm...

hm at least it was at school and luckily it was "turned in" by someone. i sometimes forget it at restaurants but not that long. just need someone else that sat near me to remind me when we leaving LOL


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
Lucky. I have a habit of wrapping my camera bag strap around my hand or I put a foot through it, so far so good









I usually have my camera in hand, but I've tried to leave my bag behind a couple times now.


----------



## Mootsfox

Rental for this weekend (Colossalcon):


----------



## nuclearjock

hopefully u realized what happened b4 you sushied up. If there's one thing that's gross it's projectile sushi!


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Rental for this weekend (Colossalcon):

*snip*


How do you like it so far?


----------



## iandroo888

mmm i want that 70-200... at least try it =3 lol never tried the 70-200. how much was the rental?


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


How do you like it so far?


Build wise it's amazing.

Optically I really don't know yet. Pictures so far have been meh, but I haven't left my room with it yet, and it was/is stormy and dark as well now. It will get use this weekend though.

Rental is $45/day or weekly for 3x the daily.

I'm gonna rent the 14-24mm f/2.8 in a few weeks for a "costume party" as Marin calls it, and test it with my film body.


----------



## Marin

Yes, they're costume parties.


----------



## dudemanppl

Please don't tell me the costumes are nothing or look like animals.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Build wise it's amazing.

Optically I really don't know yet. Pictures so far have been meh, but I haven't left my room with it yet, and it was/is stormy and dark as well now. It will get use this weekend though.

Rental is $45/day or weekly for 3x the daily.

I'm gonna rent the 14-24mm f/2.8 in a few weeks for a "costume party" as Marin calls it, and test it with my film body.

ive heard so much good things about the 14-24......im tempted to rent a whole system just to try it.


----------



## Mootsfox

I got to use it for a short time during one of my photo classes and fell in love with it.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mz-n10* 
ive heard so much good things about the 14-24......im tempted to rent a whole system just to try it.


Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
I got to use it for a short time during one of my photo classes and fell in love with it.

yah its very nice. used it for a day when cousin was in town with my d5k. very nice. lots of possibilities if u know how to use a ultra wide


----------



## mz-n10

i want to see it on film or fullframe.....on crop i can pick up a 11-16 tokina and effectively get the same speed range and "IQ".


----------



## Angmaar

You could kill someone with that lens. It's huge!


----------



## iandroo888

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...AF_Nikkor.html

Nikkor 28mm f/2.8D any good? found it for < 1/2 B&H price


----------



## mz-n10

for 180 bucks why not? worst case is you sell it for a profit or break even


----------



## iandroo888

180? found it for 110. =3


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


180? found it for 110. =3


at that price i would pick it up, and then remount it for sony lol


----------



## iandroo888

man its on the complete opposite side of town.. dont have time to go check it out =[


----------



## dudemanppl

Canon EOS 5D Mark II
Canon EOS 1D Mark II
Canon EOS 1

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4 USM L
Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II
Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM
Canon EF 135mm f/2 USM L
Canon EF 1.4x Extender II
Canon 430EXII
RODE VideoMic

Think Tank Pro Speed Belt
Think Tank Pixel Racing Harness
Think Tank Skin Chimp Cage
Think Tank Lens Changer 50
Think Tank Lens Changer 15 x3
Lowepro Pro Trekker AW
BlackRapid R-Strap Original

Nikkor 35mm f/1.8 AF-S G DX
Nikkor 300mm f/2.8 AF-I D
Nikon SB-600 x2

Temporary 1DII is here tomorrow, took it in as a D300s trade, but I need the money for a 17-40 (don't actually have it yet).


----------



## Mr_Nibbles

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Canon EOS 5D Mark II
Canon EOS 1D Mark II
Canon EOS 1

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4 USM L
Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II
Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM
Canon EF 135mm f/2 USM L
Canon EF 1.4x Extender II
Canon 430EXII
RODE VideoMic

Think Tank Pro Speed Belt
Think Tank Pixel Racing Harness
Think Tank Skin Chimp Cage
Think Tank Lens Changer 50
Think Tank Lens Changer 15 x3
Lowepro Pro Trekker AW
BlackRapid R-Strap Original

Nikkor 35mm f/1.8 AF-S G DX
Nikkor 300mm f/2.8 AF-I D
Nikon SB-600 x2

Temporary 1DII is here tomorrow, took it in as a D300s trade, but I need the money for a 17-40 (don't actually have it yet).


Wow. That is an amazing set up. I envy you sir.


----------



## laboitenoire

How good is KEH for selling stuff to them? I'm trying to ditch my S700, and it looks like it usually goes for around $55 on eBay, but their quote system said I would probably get about $70.


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Oscuro*


Your results trump your experience.


"I'm just a fool, playing with the master's tools."


----------



## theCanadian

Oh hey. I found a very nice kit lens in the bag too!

f/1.7-f/22 50mm 1:1.7

It'll be nice to have around for most indoor non-macro shots as well as a nice low light outdoor lens for when I'm going to be shooting at a set range. That big aperture makes all the difference.


----------



## dudemanppl

I got my Think Tank stuff, its AWESOME!


----------



## Marin

I really want a Think Tank Retrospective. It's like a Domke bag but not archaic.


















http://www.thinktankphoto.com/search...=retrospective

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...d.php?t=875885

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...d.php?t=883853








YouTube- Gear Review: Think Tank Retrospective 20 Camera Bag








YouTube- Think Tank Photo Retrospective 20 -- First Look Video








YouTube- Think Tank Retrospective 30 Un-Boxing


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


I really want a Think Tank Retrospective. It's like a Domke bag but not archaic.


















http://www.thinktankphoto.com/search...=retrospective

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...d.php?t=875885

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...d.php?t=883853

YouTube- Gear Review: Think Tank Retrospective 20 Camera Bag

YouTube- Think Tank Photo Retrospective 20 -- First Look Video

YouTube- Think Tank Retrospective 30 Un-Boxing



I swear that looks like the Lowepro Classified 160AW


----------



## nuclearjock

Caught this fellow just B4 he flew.










Thx for looking


----------



## Ryan747

Thanks for the update on my profile.


----------



## laboitenoire

So, I'm thinking of dabbling a bit in astrophotography, and I was wondering whether you think it would be better to pick up a long AI or AI-S lens (at least a 300 f/4.5 or 500 f/8 reflex), or buy a T-adapter to use my crappy 800mm 4-inch Newtonian telescope (only an f/8 or f/11 I think...). The way I see it, the 300 f/4.5 would probably be the best bet, as it's wide enough to still fit whole features and the (relatively) big aperture would allow for a lot of light to get in.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


So, I'm thinking of dabbling a bit in astrophotography, and I was wondering whether you think it would be better to pick up a long AI or AI-S lens (at least a 300 f/4.5 or 500 f/8 reflex), or buy a T-adapter to use my crappy 800mm 4-inch Newtonian telescope (only an f/8 or f/11 I think...). The way I see it, the 300 f/4.5 would probably be the best bet, as it's wide enough to still fit whole features and the (relatively) big aperture would allow for a lot of light to get in.


Get the T adaptor. 300mm is lacking in my opinion.


----------



## Mr_Nibbles

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
Get the T adaptor. 300mm is lacking in my opinion.

+1 300mm is indeed lacking.


----------



## mz-n10

t-adapter, 300 is way too short. but with a f/8 lens you might get some trailing from the earths rotation, i saw some diy stuff that could help. ill link if i find it again.

edit its called a "barn door tracker"


----------



## tK FuRY

finally got my rig back up and running







after a massive HDD failure. Thank goodness for RAID-1


----------



## theCanadian

Incredible photos, even downsized. Probably heavily touched though...

http://www.good.is/post/flora-and-fauna/


----------



## laboitenoire

Got my first paycheck today, and I'm really fighting the urge to buy a new lens...


----------



## Marin

Going to send my 50mm f/1.2L in for calibration next week and selling my 70-200mm f/4L IS (and all my crop lenses soon after).


----------



## dudemanppl

135l?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

So for my upcoming wedding, I decided to get my Best Man a new lens as a gift, since he still has only the kit lens. Hopefully it will open his eyes (or aperture). I got him a Canon EF 50 f/1.8, and I took it out to test it, and now I know what they mean when they say that it feels like a toy. Compared to my 50/1.4, it's significantly lighter and smaller, so light it seems hollow. Here it is next to the 50/1.4:










It focuses very slowly in low light, sometimes taking 5 seconds to confirm. However it's decently sharp wide open:


----------



## theCanadian

I spot crumbs.


----------



## Mr_Nibbles

Do you find the 1.4 to be worth the extra money gone?


----------



## theCanadian

Taking two rolls to be processed tomorrow. I had a lot of fun with the second roll and I think I'll have a lot of good ones.









Some photos were especially interesting to take. I'll clue you guys in when I post them.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


I spot crumbs.


And the iced tea stains...need to have a talk with the maid.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mr_Nibbles*


Do you find the 1.4 to be worth the extra money gone?


Absolutely, the faster and more accurate focusing alone are worth the extra cost. Plus the 50/1.4 is much sharper on full-frame.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Going to send my 50mm f/1.2L in for calibration next week and selling my 70-200mm f/4L IS (and all my crop lenses soon after).


why sell the 70-200/4? picking up a 70-200/2.8is?


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
So for my upcoming wedding, I decided to get my Best Man a new lens as a gift, since he still has only the kit lens. Hopefully it will open his eyes (or aperture). I got him a Canon EF 50 f/1.8, and I took it out to test it, and now I know what they mean when they say that it feels like a toy. Compared to my 50/1.4, it's significantly lighter and smaller, so light it seems hollow.

It's a full plastic lens (save the glass and electronics, of course), to save on costs. I agree that it def feels like a toy compared to the 1.4, but until I save up some extra money (aiming for a new body or a 24-105mm), I'll make do with my 50 f/1.8. It's still an excellent lens for the price, and your buddy will definitely be pleased!


----------



## equetefue

I have both the 70-200 f2.8 IS and the 135L, and the contrast and sharpness of the 135L is just amazing. Pics look 3d'sh


----------



## Mootsfox

Shot from the zoo with the rented 70-200mm. Love how sharp it is :3


----------



## honk_honk

Yay new lens arrived today. Actually by new I mean lightly used off ebay.
DA 14mm F2.8, my first "real" lens.
This lens is monstrous compared to my kit and 55-300mm. Unfortunately I haven't had time to take any serious pictures.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Shot from the zoo with the rented 70-200mm. Love how sharp it is :3










Good God, that might be cuter than my friend Corey holding a baby Three-Toed Sloth that got separated from its momma.

(I actually really, really like koalas.)


----------



## Mr_Nibbles

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Shot from the zoo with the rented 70-200mm. Love how sharp it is :3










Those claws... the facade of cuteness is used to trap prey.


----------



## laboitenoire

It's hard work stalking them Eucalyptus leaves!


----------



## Matrixvibe

Very nice pics everyone! I've been busy lately, so no new pics







. A little gear update, I picked up a Nikon SB-600 Speedlight!


----------



## theCanadian

Well, I got my rolls of film back. I'm pointing the camera in the right direction, but a lot of these pictures are coming out badly overexposed, I'll have to adjust. Maybe it's because ISO400 isn't well suited for high light situations... Here is the one stunner from the set.










Well, here's another...


----------



## mz-n10

mmmmmm filmy. that reminds me to develop my film i shot a year ago....


----------



## bk7794

Thinking of going DSLR, what do you think? I have a regular p&s and I can't tell you how much the quality is just terrible, I feel like there are holes in my photos. So I went to a walmart today and played with the cheapest DSLR they have there. I loved it. I actually felt like the whole photo was there. And this was a close up. Of course I couldn't really fully analyze this but do you think that what I said was true? The p&s has so much compression and loses out so much that you don't get alot out of the photo?

http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/4686431881/ here is one that I made from the Powershot A550. Tell me what you think.


----------



## Danylu

DSLR will slaughter a P&S in any aspect of image quality


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


DSLR will slaughter a P&S in any aspect of quality










i would take a g10/11 build quality over a t1i....and certain PS (F282) come awfully close to SLR quality during their time....


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


i would take a g10/11 build quality over a t1i....and certain PS (F282) come awfully close to SLR quality during their time....


I meant image quality sorry. Some of the lower end bodies are made with a lot of plastic which isn't great I agree.


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:



Originally Posted by *bk7794*


Thinking of going DSLR, what do you think? I have a regular p&s and I can't tell you how much the quality is just terrible, I feel like there are holes in my photos. So I went to a walmart today and played with the cheapest DSLR they have there. I loved it. I actually felt like the whole photo was there. And this was a close up. Of course I couldn't really fully analyze this but do you think that what I said was true? The p&s has so much compression and loses out so much that you don't get alot out of the photo?

http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/4686431881/ here is one that I made from the Powershot A550. Tell me what you think.


A DSLR (or SLR) will enable you to do a lot more with your photos. Notice in my last post how the grass near the top of the frame is out of focus. Did that on purpose. A point and shoot can't do that typically.


----------



## equetefue

Guys sorry I've been gone so long. This is the reason why. I had to get a new storage case for the cameras and lenses.










Closed on it Friday at 6pm. Brand new, 2600 sqf, 4 bedrooms, all tile, granit in bathrooms, kitchen, upgraded faucets, upgraded top of line appliances...

Very happy


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


Originally Posted by *equetefue* 
Guys sorry I've been gone so long. This is the reason why. I had to get a new storage case for the cameras and lenses.










Closed on it Friday at 6pm. Brand new, 2600 sqf, 4 bedrooms, all tile, granit in bathrooms, kitchen, upgraded faucets, upgraded top of line appliances...

Very happy

Didn't you already show us? Very nice looking house, that would be at least a million over here.


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dudemanppl* 
Didn't you already show us? Very nice looking house, that would be at least a million over here.











That's like a $300,000 house here. Well, IDK what the market has done in the past few years, but you get the point.


----------



## TurboTurtle

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dudemanppl* 
Didn't you already show us? Very nice looking house, that would be at least a million over here.


Where I am right now that'd be between $200,000 and $300,000. In the last place I lived it'd be an easy $1.5M, upwards of $2.25M if it where located on the coast (and I mean water front, or just barely back from waterfront).

Nonetheless, congrats!


----------



## nuclearjock

D3 400 f/2.8 VR @f/2.8


----------



## bk7794

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


DSLR will slaughter a P&S in any aspect of image quality










Most definitely.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


A DSLR (or SLR) will enable you to do a lot more with your photos. Notice in my last post how the grass near the top of the frame is out of focus. Did that on purpose. A point and shoot can't do that typically.


Yeah I think I am gonna start saving up for a DSLR. I was looking at the Canon EOS Digital Rebel Xs. I noticed some great photography on here and all were taken with DSLRs. I was amazed


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:



Originally Posted by *equetefue*


Guys sorry I've been gone so long. This is the reason why. I had to get a new storage case for the cameras and lenses.










Closed on it Friday at 6pm. Brand new, 2600 sqf, 4 bedrooms, all tile, granit in bathrooms, kitchen, upgraded faucets, upgraded top of line appliances...

Very happy


very nice house. how much? 2 story 2600 sq is like maybe 250k here. rest of it sounds like my house just remodeled hahaha

24" tile diamond arragement flooring, emerald pearl granite in kitchen n bathroom, delta faucets, whirlpool stainless steel stove n dishwasher and samsung double door stainless steel fridge. xD

pictures inside plz ! house looks great ! =D


----------



## riko99

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


very nice house. how much? 2 story 2600 sq is like maybe 250k here. rest of it sounds like my house just remodeled hahaha

24" tile diamond arragement flooring, emerald pearl granite in kitchen n bathroom, delta faucets, whirlpool stainless steel stove n dishwasher and samsung double door stainless steel fridge. xD

pictures inside plz ! house looks great ! =D


Really thinking of moving down to the states that house up here in Alberta would be probably 650k-1M CDN$ If I'm lucky I can get a Condo or townhouse in that price range


----------



## Marin

Zeiss glass is awesome.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Zeiss glass is awesome.




yes i concur....zeiss glass is special.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Apparently I have a camera bag addiction, as I just got got another camera bag (my 6th), a Think Tank Urban Disguise 30. It was very small looking in the store, so I pulled a 5DII display with my three lenses (sig) to test its capacity and they all fit! It even fits inside my Timbuk2 messenger bag.


----------



## dr4gon

What is it with you and Marin? I would love some TT gear or a Crumpler 7MDH. They both make excellent bags.

Guys, I'm selling my old A350, actually, it's really not that old. Less than 3500 clicks. It just needs a lens and a home







.

http://www.overclock.net/other-techn...ml#post9688257


----------



## Marin

70-200mm is going up for sale later tonight/tomorrow.


----------



## dr4gon

Wahh? Why? A350 is sold (elsewhere), lol that was fast. You moving to strictly primes? Man, a couple of my friends have really jumped on the prime train. I can't say I understand. I love my zooms!


----------



## Mootsfox

The 70-200mm is a waste of space if you never use it.


----------



## equetefue

well guys, you aint going to belive this one. Closed on Friday at 6pm right. Saturday i worked on house all day and left at 9pm. Get to house on Sunday at 4pm to find it's been broken into and they took my fridge !!!

Neighborhood opened for 3 years, very upscale, NEVER has the cops been called in there, and I have to be the first one. Interesting enough everyone including police and builder said it was an inside job as they new the type of fridge I had; it was worth $2900 with taxes. Son of a *****.

Whirlpool currently investigating delivery subcontracted company.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *equetefue*


well guys, you aint going to belive this one. Closed on Friday at 6pm right. Saturday i worked on house all day and left at 9pm. Get to house on Sunday at 4pm to find it's been broken into and they took my fridge !!!

Neighborhood opened for 3 years, very upscale, NEVER has the cops been called in there, and I have to be the first one. Interesting enough everyone including police and builder said it was an inside job as they new the type of fridge I had; it was worth $2900 with taxes. Son of a *****.

Whirlpool currently investigating delivery subcontracted company.


Crikey, did you a homeowner's insurance policy yet?


----------



## dr4gon

Quote:


Originally Posted by *equetefue* 
well guys, you aint going to belive this one. Closed on Friday at 6pm right. Saturday i worked on house all day and left at 9pm. Get to house on Sunday at 4pm to find it's been broken into and they took my fridge !!!

Neighborhood opened for 3 years, very upscale, NEVER has the cops been called in there, and I have to be the first one. Interesting enough everyone including police and builder said it was an inside job as they new the type of fridge I had; it was worth $2900 with taxes. Son of a *****.

Whirlpool currently investigating delivery subcontracted company.

That's crazy! Hope they catch the crooks!


----------



## Mootsfox

That's a pricey fridge... is it overclocked?

Hopefully insurance/Whirlpool pays for it!


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
The 70-200mm is a waste of space if you never use it.

I never use the 300, but having it and not needing it is better than... Well you get it. And everytime I use it its just beautiful. Sure I could just slap a 1.4 TC on the new 70-200 VRII, but at f/4 its just too slow for a lot of things. I always store the 300 with the hood in shooting position (24-70s fit in the hood) and its still worth every cubic centimeter and I would only sell it for a Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 for the zoom, but I'm not sure I want the compromise for sharpness and AF speed/accuracy. Oh and I think the 70-200 is tiny.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *equetefue*


well guys, you aint going to belive this one. Closed on Friday at 6pm right. Saturday i worked on house all day and left at 9pm. Get to house on Sunday at 4pm to find it's been broken into and they took my fridge !!!

Neighborhood opened for 3 years, very upscale, NEVER has the cops been called in there, and I have to be the first one. Interesting enough everyone including police and builder said it was an inside job as they new the type of fridge I had; it was worth $2900 with taxes. Son of a *****.

Whirlpool currently investigating delivery subcontracted company.


Hope these crooks aren't into photography!!


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:



Originally Posted by *equetefue*


well guys, you aint going to belive this one. Closed on Friday at 6pm right. Saturday i worked on house all day and left at 9pm. Get to house on Sunday at 4pm to find it's been broken into and they took my fridge !!!

Neighborhood opened for 3 years, very upscale, NEVER has the cops been called in there, and I have to be the first one. Interesting enough everyone including police and builder said it was an inside job as they new the type of fridge I had; it was worth $2900 with taxes. Son of a *****.

Whirlpool currently investigating delivery subcontracted company.


sorry to hear that. hope u can get a solution soon ! hope nothin to cost u any more than u already paid !


----------



## Marin

Zuiko 21mm f/3.5 @ f/11 (I think).


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Zuiko 21mm f/3.5 @ f/11 (I think).




Part of me wants to see it in color.


----------



## iandroo888

anyone interested in buying a Nikkor 12-24 f/4 ?

also, anyone got any opinion on the Zeikos ZE-NBG5000 battery grip? it says it can fully function b/c it uses that extra little cable connected to the body giving u ability to AF witht he shutter release on the grip too vs some other ones which is a straight infrared style like remote.


----------



## citruspers

Hey there, figured I'd join this club. I'm a (semi?)professional photographer, I shoot events/festivals/gatherings mostly.

It seems that everyone lists his/her gear, so I'll add:

Bodies:
Nikon D2H - 4 megapixel professional flagship from a couple of years ago. My main body.
Nikon D90 - Second body, gets the most use at darker venues due to nice noise performance.

Glass:
Sigma 10-20 F/4-5.6 - Temp-stop-shop until I get a 17-35 F/2.8 (or 14-24?), works wonders for " overview" shots and skate shots.
Nikon 35mm F/1.8 - A real gem. Extremely cheap, but optically VERY good. Actually works quite well on full frame too. My main walkaround lens.
Nikon 50mm F/1.4 (G) - Main workhorse for events, great for highlight shots/subject isolation. Works very well for stage lighting too.
Sigma 70-200 F/2.8 - Great for sports, fast AF. Frontfocuses at macro distances and CA gets bad up close, but decent for the occasional macro. Very nice for longer distances with the 2x Tele, although AF speed drops.

Bags:

Think Tank Speed Racer - Belt system with some accesory pouches. This is the perfect bag for events.
Lowepro TLZ 2 - Hardly use this anymore, but was nice to carry one camera around (I was afraid of scratching, lol).

Accesories/other stuff:

Sigma 2x Teleconverter - As mentioned, makes a 140-400 out of my 70-200 with acceptable sharpness wide open (F/5.6).
SB-600 Speedlight (hardly neccesary with my lenses).
Matin 5-in-1 foldable reflector - Great for outdoor portraits.
And the usual suspects, lens cleaner, microfiber cloth, polarizer, one UV filter for risky situations etc.

Here's some recent pics by the way:


----------



## Mr_Nibbles

Wow, nice shots. I especially like the skater and the guitarist. Is that bloc party?


----------



## citruspers

You're the second one to ask that question. No, sadly it was not, it was...the guitar player from Stereo I think. Thanks!


----------



## tK FuRY

I think I may have failed; I just noticed that the Photography class I signed up (just to kill some time during this semester lol), is 3 hours long... and the according to "ratemyprofessor" the two professors are "Extremely expensive, and only judge student's work on the negatives!"

Hmmm


----------



## Mootsfox

Hard to get a good print from a bad negative.


----------



## Boyboyd

Sign me up for this. I need to keep subscribed anyway, getting a DSLR next month and a lot of stuff goes straight over my head.

Currently god a konica minolta dimage A2 which i've borrowed. Been playing with it today (it's a nice day).


----------



## ace8uk

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*


Sign me up for this. I need to keep subscribed anyway, getting a DSLR next month and a lot of stuff goes straight over my head.

Currently god a konica minolta dimage A2 which i've borrowed. Been playing with it today (it's a nice day).


Looking forward to seeing some photos from you Boydy!

Haven't posted in here for a little while, so here's one of my latest snaps. Managed to climb out onto the top of my block of flats and catch the sunrise over Bath the other day. Here's the result with the sigma 10-20:


----------



## dudemanppl

Canon EOS 5D Mark II
Canon EOS 1

Sigma 15-30mm f/3.5-4.5 EX DG
Nikkor 28mm f/2 AI'd
Nikkor 35mm f/1.4 AI-S
Noct-Nikkor 58mm f/1.2 AI-S
Contax Zeiss Planar T* 85mm f/1.4
Canon EF 135mm f/2 USM L
Nikkor 180mm f/2.8 AI-S
Canon 430EXII
RODE VideoMic

I got munny from breaking the 17-35L, hate zooms. So I've done awesome primes, awesome zooms, now its time for MF PRIMES!


----------



## laboitenoire

Damn... Adorama has refurb 55-200 VRs for a whopping $130, and the 18-105 VR for $240! For not quite as cheap they have the 50 f/1.4 AF-S refurbed for $410 and the 70-300 VR for $460.

Decisions.


----------



## mz-n10

nikon 50/1.4 refurb is 400? might as well pay 100 more for the sigma 50/1.4.


----------



## Retoric

I want to join the club.

Point-and-shoot: CANON DIGITAL IXUS 95 IS

Next I gone get a video camera.


----------



## Xapoc

Is a Nikon 35mm f/1.8 worth getting used for 185 USD?


----------



## Mootsfox

I'll rephrase that.

No.

Because it's ~$190-200 new.

$160-170 for it used (in great/9+ condition) would be a good deal.


----------



## Xapoc

Thought so. Let's see if this craiglist user can be bargained with.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Xapoc*


Thought so. Let's see if this craiglist user can be bargained with.


Good luck









The people in Columbus don't seem to understand that the Photo/video section is for EQUIPMENT. It's not the place to sell their homemade porn (I'm not joking, that is what's posted right now).


----------



## Marin

What else are they going to do in Ohio?


----------



## iandroo888

there is a deal on crutchfield for a $20 off coupon for the 35mm f/1.8. + if u use discover card, an extra 5% cashback. so < 180 NEW !


----------



## Xapoc

Darn, someone else offered full asking price. Oh well, maybe I'll buy it off Crutchfield.

EDIT: Out of stock... =(


----------



## Boyboyd

You can add me to the list.

Nikon D5000 with a 18-55 VR lens.


----------



## ace8uk

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*


You can add me to the list.

Nikon D5000 with a 18-55 VR lens.


Waheeyy, you finally bought it! So, what lenses are you buying next payday?


----------



## Boyboyd

Probably a macro (or 'micro') or a telephoto.

Gonna see what old lenses i can salvage from my dad's cameara case. He looked one up on amazon, Nikon still make it, and it retails for Â£600. Trying to hang onto that one. It's a macro too (no AF)


----------



## Marin

*cracks knuckles*

Done with everything school related for now, so photo section time. Just need to wait for some new threads to pop up.


----------



## theCanadian

Minolta X-700. Purchase date: July, 1982


----------



## max302

I'm about to trade glass with a friend, need to know if we're on track value-wise.

I'd be trading my 35mm f1.8 with a Sigma UV filter + 100$CAD without the lens hood for his 18-70mm AF-S with hood, bag, filter.

Both lens are mint.

Good deal?


----------



## Marin

I'd keep the prime.


----------



## max302

I already have the 50 f1.8 though...


----------



## Marin

Different FoV's and compression.


----------



## dudemanppl

You're getting ripped off, 18-70s are around 200.


----------



## max302

I don't have a mid-range zoom yet, and I'd want something more pratical than fast.

I think I'll go with trade and just live with my 50 for low light/ portrait ish for now, because really, not having a single zoom doesn't make any sense. I'd really want an 85mm f1.4 for portrait stuff, with a 20mm f2.8 for the wider stuff. Nikon needs a fast ultrawide prime for DX.

Edit: Dude, you're right... I thought they were still in the ~350$ range... I'll keep my prime.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


You're getting ripped off, 18-70s are around 200.


ive seen em for much lower as well =3


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *max302*


I don't have a mid-range zoom yet, and I'd want something more pratical than fast.

I think I'll go with trade and just live with my 50 for low light/ portrait ish for now, because really, not having a single zoom doesn't make any sense. I'd really want an 85mm f1.4 for portrait stuff, with a 20mm f2.8 for the wider stuff. Nikon needs a fast ultrawide prime for DX.

Edit: Dude, you're right... I thought they were still in the ~350$ range... I'll keep my prime.


good choice, pick up a 20 or 24mm and you have your self a pretty nice set of primes a full frame equavilant of ~30-75mm.


----------



## laboitenoire

Just uploaded a bunch of new photos to my Flickr. Realized that I've barely touched it in the six weeks I've had the camera.


----------



## dr4gon

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Just uploaded a bunch of new photos to my Flickr. Realized that I've barely touched it in the six weeks I've had the camera.


gotta provide some links man!

I haven't touched mine in weeks until today either, but here's what I got.


----------



## iandroo888

ghost fish =3 it floats in mid-air


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Just uploaded a bunch of new photos to my Flickr. Realized that I've barely touched it in the six weeks I've had the camera.


You should post them to the OCN photopool.

http://www.flickr.com/groups/ocn/

I feel like i'm the only one spamming it.


----------



## Sparhawk

Just added a few to the group. 
I've been so busy working on my ocn-case-mod-comp entry I have been seriously neglecting my photos and haven't done much editing/uploading recently.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*


You should post them to the OCN photopool.

http://www.flickr.com/groups/ocn/

I feel like i'm the only one spamming it.


Totally forgot I had joined the group...

Anyway, here's a few of the new ones!









The sunset was tricky to get! It was hard to get the color balance right... The sky was way more vibrant than that!


----------



## Boyboyd

First thing that came to mind when i saw that was Kirmit the Frog.


----------



## dudemanppl

Gonna sell the Canon stuff, found a 200 f/2 VR for 3095! :O


----------



## laboitenoire

You just can't decide, can you?


----------



## xlastshotx

If anyone is looking for a hardware based monitor calibrator I'm selling my Spyder 2 Here.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dudemanppl* 
Gonna sell the Canon stuff, found a 200 f/2 VR for 3095! :O

The 200 VR is a legend. Hope you can get a FF body to go with it.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


Originally Posted by *laboitenoire* 
You just can't decide, can you?









What does that mean? I'll pair it with a D700 sometime in the future when I get more money and when the price drops.


----------



## Scorpion87

Here are a few random Pics. with my Sony DSC-W17



















I imagine i have a lot more back in Germany but didnt have the time to get them over here to Greece. Those are only 2 which where still on the cams memory.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


What does that mean? I'll pair it with a D700 sometime in the future when I get more money and when the price drops.


i thought u went from a nikon to a canon system. why not just get a cheap d300 and run dual systems? probably cheaper then switching....


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


What does that mean? I'll pair it with a D700 sometime in the future when I get more money and when the price drops.


A guy on the NikonCafe' just bought a used D3 with 1500 clicks and 2 batteries for ~$2100. They're out there. The AF system on the D3 series is the fastest and most accurate out there.

Canon makes a beautiful 200 f/2 as well as their crazy 200 f/1.8. I would think you could find one of those.


----------



## Eldin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *shajbot*











Canon Powershot A620. Recorded some songs and put them on youtube. Don't ask me for links though, them suck.










links or ****............ pl0xxxxxxx

...........^^^^
YARR YEE PESKY MODS FUNKIN WITH MAH GROOVE


----------



## Eldin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Eldin*


links or ****............ pl0xxxxxxx


links or gt(eff)o... ploxxxxxxxxxxxxxx........


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


A guy on the NikonCafe' just bought a used D3 with 1500 clicks and 2 batteries for ~$2100. They're out there. The AF system on the D3 series is the fastest and most accurate out there.

Canon makes a beautiful 200 f/2 as well as their crazy 200 f/1.8. I would think you could find one of those.


MOTHERFATHER, SOMEONE ELSE BOUGHT THE 200!







What do I do now, I have like 2800 dollars and no 5DII! Should I keep selling and start the switch back to Nikon? I really don't like Canon other than the 1DII, which is one solid body.


----------



## Marin

Save up for either a 1DMKIII or 1DMKIV.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Save up for either a 1DMKIII or 1DMKIV.


used 1d3 are going for <2800 now.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mz-n10* 
used 1d3 are going for <2800 now.

You mean <2000, but I don't want a 1DIII. I don't know why. I want to stick with Canon, but my heart is still in Nikon.

EDIT: so I'm bidding on a 400 2.8 that ends in 20 hours. Not really sure I want it but my max bid is 3200, almost as cheap as the 200 f/2, so I'll be happy.


----------



## laboitenoire

I love summer. Yes, I realize it's not fully in focus, but I love the effect and the colors are gorgeous.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


MOTHERFATHER, SOMEONE ELSE BOUGHT THE 200!







What do I do now, I have like 2800 dollars and no 5DII! Should I keep selling and start the switch back to Nikon? I really don't like Canon other than the 1DII, which is one solid body.


If you feel that way, then it's a used D3.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
If you feel that way, then it's a used D3.

Ugh, but then that leaves me with only one body. D700 + D300s seems like a hell of a combo.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dudemanppl* 
Ugh, but then that leaves me with only one body. D700 + D300s seems like a hell of a combo.

Are you talking used or new D700??


----------



## max302

Kept the prime and scraped the pennies out of everywhere I could, and got my glass for 150$


















To think I was going to be a sucker and shell out 400$ for the same thing, but packed in a cardboard box.


----------



## Boyboyd

My parents just bought me a 50-200 f4 Nikon lens for my 19th. How kind









Gonna take some pictures on my day off tomorrow.


----------



## nuclearjock

D3 85 f/1.4 @ f/1.4, nikkor CP:


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


Are you talking used or new D700??


I haven't bought new in FOREVER.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*


My parents just bought me a 50-200 f4 Nikon lens for my 19th. How kind









Gonna take some pictures on my day off tomorrow.


is it a constant f4 lens? cause it sounds like a 43rd lens.....


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


is it a constant f4 lens? cause it sounds like a 43rd lens.....


im pretty sure hes talkin about the 55-200mm f4-5.6 lens.


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


D3 85 f/1.4 @ f/1.4, nikkor CP:











That is... wow.

Is the pink plant on the left in the foreground or background?

I'm assuming the foreground.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mz-n10* 
is it a constant f4 lens? cause it sounds like a 43rd lens.....


Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
im pretty sure hes talkin about the 55-200mm f4-5.6 lens.

Bingo.

Sorry, no. I only stated the smallest (or largest) f stop as i thought it was the most important. Guess i'm still learning







It's not fixed aperture.

In other news: I'm really lucky that my nextdoor neighbour is a press-photographer and he's asked me to come to the next leeds united (local football team) with him. Should be an experience, taking my new zoom lens.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


I'm assuming the foreground.


Correctemundo!!!!


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


Correctemundo!!!!


What are those plants?


----------



## iandroo888

if i were to go north cali in aug, and i can ask to borrow cousins lenses, which should i use?

14-24mm AF-S
24-70mm AF-S
70-200mm VRII AF-S
85mm AF f/1.4
50mm AF f/1.8


----------



## mz-n10

14-24/24-70/70-200 is a nice kit.....

the other 2 is just frosting on the cake.


----------



## iandroo888

lol i know its a nice kit except the fact if i wanna carry that much. dont have a bag that can carry that much. if i were to carry all 3, id need to carry lenses in my bag.. and body and a lens outside of bag . lol


----------



## nuclearjock

D300 400 f/2.8 @f/2.8


----------



## Marin

I need more RAM.


----------



## Mr_Nibbles

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*


In other news: I'm really lucky that my nextdoor neighbour is a press-photographer and he's asked me to come to the next leeds united (local football team) with him. Should be an experience, taking my new zoom lens.


That should be fun! Does he shoot Nikon? (I see an opportunity to borrow nice lenses)


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
I need more RAM.










Holy shi-, the most I've ever used while ANYTHING was 6GBs.


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
I need more RAM.










or less layers...


----------



## iandroo888

why is there so many layers?

<<< lightroom n00b


----------



## Marin

Secret.


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


why is there so many layers?

<<< lightroom n00b


dof


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Sparhawk* 
dof

You sure? It just seems like the 50L wide open...


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mr_Nibbles*


That should be fun! Does he shoot Nikon? (I see an opportunity to borrow nice lenses)


He does indeed. He also sells a lot of his old lenses, but they're too pro for me. lol.

Next on my shopping list is a tripod or a monopod.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


You sure? It just seems like the 50L wide open...


looks like focus stacking for the bike


----------



## alexisd

Some new pics with a coolpix nikon s6000 im a real noob in the camera world.But trying to learn some settings.
Any good tips for better settings?


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


You sure? It just seems like the 50L wide open...



Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


looks like focus stacking for the bike


Yeah, take a look at the layer previews. They are covering all the different sections of the image. The bokeh seems a little too smooth in some parts, but it is a darn good shop job. I really want more practice(and knowledge) so I can do some that look that good.









EDIT: lol, just realized something... take a look at the spokes on that front wheel... looks like it might be a blend of a few images(taken at different focus points?).


----------



## Marin

Currently a secret but I'll tell you guys what I'm doing once I'm done (or if you can figure it out by then







). But the image you see is just a test, I need over 80 photos to get it looking right.


----------



## Danylu

That image isn't loading for me ATM for some reason but the discussion reminds me of a fake tilt shift of the Eiffel Tower - if only I had saved the link


----------



## OmegaNemesis28

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Currently a secret but I'll tell you guys what I'm doing once I'm done (or if you can figure it out by then







). But the image you see is just a test, I need over 80 photos to get it looking right.


you crazy


----------



## theCanadian

Sorry for uploading in full size, but I'd like you all to see how hazy it is in North Carolina. This picture was taken on a very clear day. Notice that the trees in the back are to the point of being almost out of focus (which technically they are, but still.) The color is sapped right out of the trees by the pollen and hugely high humidity. It's frustrating.

Tree line is no more than 300m away. Probably less.


----------



## laboitenoire

I don't miss the summers in North Carolina... Chapel Hill used to be too hot. However, Massachusetts gets humid and hazy as well in the summer.

Another reason to love my university: just got CS5 Design Premium for free!


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


Sorry for uploading in full size, but I'd like you all to see how hazy it is in North Carolina. This picture was taken on a very clear day. Notice that the trees in the back are to the point of being almost out of focus (which technically they are, but still.) The color is sapped right out of the trees by the pollen and hugely high humidity. It's frustrating.

Tree line is no more than 300m away. Probably less.

http://i49.tinypic.com/2wnmx4n.jpg[IMG]

[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
You thought about using a polarizing filter to combat the haze?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *theCanadian* 
Sorry for uploading in full size, but I'd like you all to see how hazy it is in North Carolina. This picture was taken on a very clear day. Notice that the trees in the back are to the point of being almost out of focus (which technically they are, but still.) The color is sapped right out of the trees by the pollen and hugely high humidity. It's frustrating.

Tree line is no more than 300m away. Probably less.

I think the out-of-focus parts are because your camera focused on the bits of grass in the foreground.

And yes, NC is even more miserable during summers than here. I lived on the coast and it was unbearable in any season.

EDIT: Everyone else, I'm back after marriage & honeymoon activities (will post some shots from Tahoe), so anyone who has requested to join the Camera Thread in the last three weeks and have not been added, please re-post your gear list or quote your original. Thanks.


----------



## Mr_Nibbles

I live in AZ. I will for having the most undesirable summer in the U.S.

Oh by the way... I'm off to Honduras at 4AM tomorrow. Bringing all my camera gear. Hopefully I will get some once in a lifetime pics when I'm not too busy working.

Talk to ya all in two weeks







Hopefully...


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


I think the out-of-focus parts are because your camera focused on the bits of grass in the foreground.

And yes, NC is even more miserable during summers than here. I lived on the coast and it was unbearable in any season.


Yes, the trees in the background are out of focus. It's just the way I wanted the shot. But they're only _just_ out of focus. The really telling factor is that the further the tree is from the lens, the less color it has.

That haze is killer. Makes for a terrible landscape shot.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*


You thought about using a polarizing filter to combat the haze?


I have one, it doesn't help much.

This was taken with a polarized filter (@ Jordan Lake). Too much sky, and pretty bad overall but whatever. I shoot film, so I don't have too many examples. That and I'm just starting:










Anyway. Enough about what isn't working for me. Here's some of what is.


----------



## theCanadian

Another one. Not framed the best... but hey.


----------



## Matrixvibe

Got some new gear today








-Nikon SB-600 speedlight (forgot to update, got it 2 months ago)
-Nikon SB-900 speedlight
-Manfrotto 190xprob tripod with 804RC2 Head

I keep on forgetting to post some photos here...lol gotta visit overclock.net more often.


----------



## Marin

Self portrait.



Picture I was taking before it (125 photos).


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Picture I was taking before it (125 photos).



How many MP is the real thing? D:


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Self portrait.

Picture I was taking before it (125 photos).


Your flickr photo tags reveal the method, but why so many photos for yours? I've looked at other shots on Flickr which used the same method with less than 20 shots.

On another note, I just splurged on LR3. No more Elements 7!


----------



## bleedingRoue

OCN camera thread and I can't view any of the pics, blasted work network!!!









I've been looking into upgrading my current camera and get the Nikon S8000 p&s camera, anyone have any thoughts on this camera?


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Your flickr photo tags reveal the method, but why so many photos for yours? I've looked at other shots on Flickr which used the same method with less than 20 shots.

On another note, I just splurged on LR3. No more Elements 7!









20 won't give the same effect. To really see the effect of mine, due to the nature of digital, it needs to be printed large.


----------



## YLDaryl

want to Join!

SX20IS
Speedlite 430EX II

Flickr name: DLotzBGSU


----------



## dudemanppl

Nikon D2H
Nikon F100 + MB-15 and Eneloops

Rokion 8mm f/3.5 AI-S Fish Eye
Sigma 12-24mm f/4.5-5.6 EX DG HSM
Sigma 24mm f/1.8 EX DG
Nikkor 35mm f/1.8 AF-S G DX
Nikkor 80-200mm f/2.8 AF-S D
Micro-Nikkor 105mm f/2.8 AF-S G N VR
Nikkor 300mm f/2.8 AF-I D

Nikon SB600 x2
Nikon SG-31 IR
Canon 430EX II
RODE VideoMic

All I've sold so far is the 5DII, 135L, and the 85 1.8. 2 lenses, 2 bodies, and 2 BGs before its complete. Maybe a 1.4 TC too. The 80-200 was 600 bucks!


----------



## laboitenoire

Why the D2H and not a higher-resolution body?


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Why the D2H and not a higher-resolution body?


250 bucks and its temporary, but I'll keep it as a third body.


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Nikon D2H
Nikon F100 + MB-15 and Eneloops

Rokion 8mm f/3.5 AI-S Fish Eye
Sigma 12-24mm f/4.5-5.6 EX DG HSM
Sigma 24mm f/1.8 EX DG
Nikkor 35mm f/1.8 AF-S G DX
Nikkor 80-200mm f/2.8 AF-S D
Micro-Nikkor 105mm f/2.8 AF-S G N VR
Nikkor 300mm f/2.8 AF-I D

Nikon SB600 x2
Nikon SG-31 IR
Canon 430EX II
RODE VideoMic

All I've sold so far is the 5DII, 135L, and the 85 1.8. 2 lenses, 2 bodies, and 2 BGs before its complete. Maybe a 1.4 TC too. The 80-200 was 600 bucks!


Love my 80-200mm. Haven't had a chance to get out and use it recently. But I'm sure I'll make time soon, the glass is calling me...


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Sparhawk*


Love my 80-200mm. Haven't had a chance to get out and use it recently. But I'm sure I'll make time soon, the glass is calling me...










Same with all of my stuff.







The 300 sat in the closet, "USE ME, USE ME!", but I didn't have a Nikon body to go with it.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Why the D2H and not a higher-resolution body?


I've stopped trying to understand why he buys what he does









The D2H is a great body though.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


I've stopped trying to understand why he buys what he does









The D2H is a great body though.


Yeah and you shouldn't try either...







I haven't had a PRO Nikon body, only a gripped D300/s. I love the 1DII, and the Nikon grip feels a lot better.


----------



## Mootsfox

The D300s with grip and D2 series feel and look pretty similar.

It's how I get away with a D2Xs strap on my D300s


----------



## nuclearjock

A somewhat different view with a somewhat unusual lens for this type of subject. D3 200 f/4 micro SB900 fill:


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Yeah and you shouldn't try either...







I haven't had a PRO Nikon body, only a gripped D300/s. I love the 1DII, and the *Nikon grip feels a lot better.*


That's what sold me when I was deciding between a rebel XT and a D80.

Picked 'em both up in a store and suddenly it wasn't a hard decision anymore.


----------



## laboitenoire

Nuke, one thing I've always wanted to ask is how much you rely on cropping in post processing in order to get your final image? That hummingbird shot looks great, but something tells me that a bird that small wouldn't fill the frame with a 200 mm unless you were really close.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *laboitenoire* 
Nuke, one thing I've always wanted to ask is how much you rely on cropping in post processing in order to get your final image? That hummingbird shot looks great, but something tells me that a bird that small wouldn't fill the frame with a 200 mm unless you were really close.

~100% crop.


----------



## slayerzav

Add me please.

I shoot video with a Panasonic HPX500.I really hope to get my hands on a new JVC. I'm starting to hate the 500 for more and more reasons.

Anyone else shoot video with cameras similar to these?


----------



## Boyboyd

Now that i have my camera, and 2 decent lenses. I've run out of stuff to photograph. There's a VW exhibition in August near to where i live, and a Forest Rally in late July, any other ideas?


----------



## dudemanppl

Found a D2X for 675 so I'm gonna have a D2X and D2H!







D2X is temporary though.


----------



## iandroo888

oOo d2x looks nice

wonder which is better. d5000 or d2x xDDD lol


----------



## ace8uk

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*


Now that i have my camera, and 2 decent lenses. I've run out of stuff to photograph. There's a VW exhibition in August near to where i live, and a Forest Rally in late July, any other ideas?


Car shows are good. If you can make it down to Silverstone on the 5th of September you should definately go to Trax. I've been for the past few years and it's been amazing each time. Plenty of things to photograph, by which I mean a lot of women and cars. They do some sick shows as well so you can get some good action shots. Couple of years ago they had a Japanese drifiting team and last year they had Ken Block doing tricks around a fairground themed track. Only problem is that you always end up coming back with more pictures of women than cars









Here's a couple of shots I took last year:



















Also, seeing as you're up t'north, you should probably take a little trip up to the Lake District. You could get some fantastic landscape shots up there, especially at this time of the year.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
oOo d2x looks nice

wonder which is better. d5000 or d2x xDDD lol

Better in different areas.

If I had to add one to my line up though, it'd be the D2X


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ace8uk*


Car shows are good. If you can make it down to Silverstone on the 5th of September you should definately go to Trax. I've been for the past few years and it's been amazing each time. Plenty of things to photograph, by which I mean a lot of women and cars. They do some sick shows as well so you can get some good action shots. Couple of years ago they had a Japanese drifiting team and last year they had Ken Block doing tricks around a fairground themed track. Only problem is that you always end up coming back with more pictures of women than cars









Also, seeing as you're up t'north, you should probably take a little trip up to the Lake District. You could get some fantastic landscape shots up there, especially at this time of the year.


I do go to the lake district for work a lot. Whenever i travel somewhere exotic like that to make a delivery i usually take my camera in the passenger footwell (in it's bag of course).


----------



## dr4gon

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dudemanppl* 
Found a D2X for 675 so I'm gonna have a D2X and D2H!







D2X is temporary though.

Where'd you find it for so cheap?


----------



## porschedrifter

9/10 because I like girls and cars









Keeping with the girl theme:
TWINS!








This was taken on a Sony H10 or whatever it's called, not bad for a very very entry level SLR, July 24th is Hot Import Nights, I will be taking stills with my D80


----------



## Marin

Sony H10 is a P&S, not a SLR.


----------



## Boyboyd

I found the interval shooting menu on my camera. This isn't that great but it's just a test.








YouTube- Cloud Time Lapse


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*


I found the interval shooting menu on my camera. This isn't that great but it's just a test.

YouTube- Cloud Time Lapse


What program did you use to merge them?


----------



## theCanadian

Since I'm having so much trouble with grain, exposure, saturation and hue, I was wondering what you guys thought might be worth trying, because it seems like your good old regular Kodac and Fuji-Film just don't cut it like they used to. Color negative please.


----------



## Marin

What films are you using?

Anyways, try Kodak Ektar 100 for landscapes and Kodak Portra 160VC/NC for portraits.


----------



## theCanadian

Before, some Kodak that I picked up from CVS...

Right now Fujifilm FUJICOLOR PRESS/SUPERIA 400 and Fujifilm FUJICOLOR 200. I don't think I've shot any of the 400 yet though...


----------



## Marin

Yeah, those are cheap-o films. I tried out Superia 400 and got horrible results. Definitely give my recommendations a shot, you should be pleased with them.


----------



## theCanadian

I guess I'll reserve those rolls for low light indoor shooting on a tripod. Those are the only shots that seem to come out.

Sadly, most of those shots have been experimental pictures. Usually of the floor. Joy.


----------



## tK FuRY

CSI:NY, just gave a shout out to Genuine Fractals on their Vampire episode!


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:



Originally Posted by *tK FuRY*


CSI:NY, just gave a shout out to Genuine Fractals on their Vampire episode!










That's a pretty good program. I've used it a few times when I was going to get a huge print done.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Sparhawk*


What program did you use to merge them?


i used this. Which looks like a cheap crap program but it's alright. Not a lot of settings though. But it does the Job.

http://www.snapfiles.com/get/jpgvideo.html


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Boyboyd* 
i used this. Which looks like a cheap crap program but it's alright. Not a lot of settings though. But it does the Job.

http://www.snapfiles.com/get/jpgvideo.html

Awesome. I was trying to do it in Adobe Premier and it was a pain in the butt, a case of too many options.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Sparhawk*


Awesome. I was trying to do it in Adobe Premier and it was a pain in the butt, a case of too many options.










I downloaded the trial of it. It's way to advanced for what i need it to do.


----------



## dudemanppl

Just got the Sigma 24 1.8. Closes focusing lens I've ever had (105mm focuses further, but is 105). This thing is CRAZY, sharp too. D2H coming tomorrow hopefully, using it on the 1DII.


----------



## DrunkenMonkies

Add me please! I love photography though its more of a hobby then a serious venture for me. Being an aquarium keeper the majority of my shots involve fish. I shoot with a Canon 5D Mark II. My backup is a Canon 300D Digital Rebel. Guess you could say this camera is my video camera too, 1080p video on this thing is crisp.

Some of my other equipment:
Canon 100mm f2.8 Macro
Canon 24-105mm f/4L IS
Canon 430ex II flash
Canon 580ex II flash
Canon ST-E2 transmitter for flashes

I'm a Canon fanboy.


----------



## Boyboyd

Ummm, anyone got any tips for removing stuck filters? I didn't put it on that tight but it seems to have got stuck.


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*


Ummm, anyone got any tips for removing stuck filters? I didn't put it on that tight but it seems to have got stuck.


Hmm, haven't got any stuck myself but you could try putting it somewhere cold to let the materials shrink a bit to allow for better movement.

Then gently trying to move it both ways to loosen it up.

Good luck.


----------



## Boyboyd

I'll give it a shot. It's only a skylight filter so it's not a big deal if i can't get it off immediately. Thanks.


----------



## mz-n10

pick up a set of filter wrenches....and keep it with your camera bag. i have had a magenta warming filter stuck on my lens for a day......

also dont pick up cheap filters with aluminum rings, they tend to stick compared to brass.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


pick up a set of filter wrenches....and keep it with your camera bag. i have had a magenta warming filter stuck on my lens for a day......

also dont pick up cheap filters with aluminum rings, they tend to stick compared to brass.


That's perfect, thanks so much. I've had a look online but all i can find is oil filter wrenches for cars, lol. I'll definitely keep an eye out though.

I was wrong. It's not a UV filter, it's a polarizing one.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*


That's perfect, thanks so much. I've had a look online but all i can find is oil filter wrenches for cars, lol. I'll definitely keep an eye out though.

I was wrong. It's not a UV filter, it's a polarizing one.


62-77mm
46-58mm

the 62-77 is sold out.....and your in the UK...

try a search for 55mm filter wrench maybe you will have some local store that stocks them.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


62-77mm
46-58mm

the 62-77 is sold out.....and your in the UK...

try a search for 55mm filter wrench maybe you will have some local store that stocks them.


$3.99 for you. Â£7.50 plus postage for us. I hate this country's economy, lol.

I suppose they're incredibly useful. But every pound i spend is one pound less i have for a tripod.


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*


$3.99 for you. Â£7.50 plus postage for us. I hate this country's economy, lol.

I suppose they're incredibly useful. But every pound i spend is one pound less i have for a tripod.


You should be able to get it off without the wrenches. This is just another example of why you shouldn't use filters... especially cheap ones. (I only use one on my 80-200mm because the front element is a pain to clean because it is recessed and huge. I occasionally use a polarizing filter on my smaller lenses.)


----------



## Boyboyd

I got it off now. It was easier with the lens off the camera and in MF mode. Still might think about getting a wrench one day, because knowing me i'll be stuck with a starburst / orange grad filter on all day, lol.


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*


I got it off now. It was easier with the lens off the camera and in MF mode. Still might think about getting a wrench one day, because knowing me i'll be stuck with a starburst / orange grad filter on all day, lol.


haha, then all your pictures would be hilariously awesome.

Woot! you got it off!


----------



## nuclearjock

I use ~12" wire ties (cable ties). Run it around the filter as tight as possible, then use it for leverage. Has worked for me many times.


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
I use ~12" wire ties (cable ties). Run it around the filter as tight as possible, then use it for leverage. Has worked for me many times.









cable ties. They are just so darn useful.


----------



## Boyboyd

Cable ties are a true man's multi-function tool.

Got no screws for a fan on your case? Cable tie.
Stuck filter? Cable tie
Bored and want to go to hospital? Put one round your johnson.


----------



## theCanadian

You like?


----------



## laboitenoire

Taking pictures of fire can be tricky, I'm finding.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Lightroom 3 is pretty darn nice, I must say. Who else is using it?


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Lightroom 3 is pretty darn nice, I must say. Who else is using it?

word


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Lightroom 3 is pretty darn nice, I must say. Who else is using it?


I am.


----------



## dudemanppl

Why the hell doesn't anyone want to buy a 1DII anymore?


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Lightroom 3 is pretty darn nice, I must say. Who else is using it?

tryin to learn to use it =3 me noob


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Lightroom 3 is pretty darn nice, I must say. Who else is using it?

I do not enjoy the new import screen. It lags horribly on my laptop, making working on photos away from home nearly impossible.


----------



## iandroo888

anyone got some nice starter tutorials for LR3 or LR in general for general picture PP


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
I do not enjoy the new import screen. It lags horribly on my laptop, making working on photos away from home nearly impossible.

What are the specs?


----------



## Mootsfox

1.6GHz C2D, 4GB RAM, 320GB 7200RPM HDD, 8600M GT and a 1680x1050 display.

LR2 (2.6) runs just fine, though slower than my desktop, it's usable.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Lightroom 3 is pretty darn nice, I must say. Who else is using it?


Yo.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Lightroom 3 is pretty darn nice, I must say. Who else is using it?


Me too. It's nice.


----------



## Xapoc

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Why the hell doesn't anyone want to buy a 1DII anymore?


I think it's because everyone who is interested or who can afford the 1D II can afford the 1D IV. Or they just want the latest and greatest.


----------



## Sparhawk

Since a bunch of people use LR3, maybe you can answer a question: 
Does it read NEF files better than other Adobe software?

I'm looking for any excuse to ditch NX2 because it is very glitch-y and crashes all the time... but it reads NEF 100% better than Photoshop CS4.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Sparhawk* 
Since a bunch of people use LR3, maybe you can answer a question:
Does it read NEF files better than other Adobe software?

I'm looking for any excuse to ditch NX2 because it is very glitch-y and crashes all the time... but it reads NEF 100% better than Photoshop CS4.

CS5 is 100% compatible with NEF. It was one of the main things they were focusing on (apparently).

But yes, LR3 also reads NEF.


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Boyboyd* 
CS5 is 100% compatible with NEF. It was one of the main things they were focusing on (apparently).

But yes, LR3 also reads NEF.

Sorry if I wasn't clear.

Have you ever opened a file in CS4 and compared the color reproduction to NX2?
It isn't even funny how badly CS4 fairs.







All the colors seem washed out and much less vibrant.

(I'm downloading the trial for CS5 right now and will give it a spin later.)


----------



## Boyboyd

Ahh i see. No, i honestly haven't.

Strange, i'll look into it.


----------



## dudemanppl

Hmm, should I buy LR3 or NX2, right now I use the original NX. Its pretty good and I know where everything is, but I was wondering LR3 or NX2 would be better. Since I'm in high school, I could probably get LR3 at the student rate.


----------



## Marin

LR3's lens correction tab = WIN!

This is such a huge upgrade from LR2.


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Hmm, should I buy LR3 or NX2, right now I use the original NX. Its pretty good and I know where everything is, but I was wondering LR3 or NX2 would be better. Since I'm in high school, I could probably get LR3 at the student rate.


If you shoot RAW then NX2 is probably a better bet. As stated up there^, I seem to get much better color reproduction from NX2 than from the CS4 line of products.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Sparhawk*


If you shoot RAW then NX2 is probably a better bet. As stated up there^, I seem to get much better color reproduction from NX2 than from the CS4 line of products.


I don't shoot raw only because I can't edit them, so I'm on the edge here... I can get LR3 for less than NX2.


----------



## Mootsfox

I think I solved my LR3 issues on my laptop.

I put the Core 2 Quad sticker that came with my Q6600 over the Core 2 Duo sticker. Should run faster now.

I thought about putting the Core i7 sticker on it from my 920, but I don't want the laptop to overheat.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


I think I solved my LR3 issues on my laptop.

I put the Core 2 Quad sticker that came with my Q6600 over the Core 2 Duo sticker. Should run faster now.

I thought about putting the Core i7 sticker on it from my 920, but I don't want the laptop to overheat.


Just get a TRUE and stick the Thermalright sticker on there







Zalman is the only other cooler manufacturer I remember making stickers, but I wouldn't cool an i7 with a Zalman...


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
I think I solved my LR3 issues on my laptop.

I put the Core 2 Quad sticker that came with my Q6600 over the Core 2 Duo sticker. Should run faster now.

I thought about putting the Core i7 sticker on it from my 920, but I don't want the laptop to overheat.


Quote:


Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d* 
Just get a TRUE and stick the Thermalright sticker on there







Zalman is the only other cooler manufacturer I remember making stickers, but I wouldn't cool an i7 with a Zalman...
















Free upgrade ftw.








It's okay you'll get a better laptop eventually.


----------



## Mootsfox

Hmmm, I do have a few Thermalright stickers from my HR-03's and HR-05's.

Would two cool it twice as gooder?


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Hmmm, I do have a few Thermalright stickers from my HR-03's and HR-05's.

Would two cool it twice as gooder?


For certain.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Hmmm, I do have a few Thermalright stickers from my HR-03's and HR-05's.

Would two cool it twice as gooder?


Only if you orient the stickers so their respective coolers work together in a push/pull fashion


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Hmmm, I do have a few Thermalright stickers from my HR-03's and HR-05's.

Would two cool it twice as gooder?

Hmmm probably. You better download some more RAM too, and while you're at it you should update the driver for your CPU.

http://www.downloadmoreram.com/


----------



## Danylu

Gear update:

In:
AF-S 50mm 1.4
AF-D 60mm 2.8 + 55mm of tubes
SB-800
Out:
AF-S 35mm 1.8
55mm 3.5 Macro

To be quite honest, both the lenses I sold are excellent in their own right, they're only leaving because they've been replaced with newer versions.

Community Service Announcement: NEVER buy ebay extension tubes. I got them stuck on my D60 body and now I have some dust that my rocket blower can't get rid of. I bought them on the presumption that because since there was no technology involved, it would be fine. I was wrong.

At least now I can experiment with a multiflash setup


----------



## Boyboyd

We've just had a months worth of rain in 20 mins. Thought i'd take some photos.


----------



## Marin

Score.


----------



## theCanadian

^ do not care. Just saying.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *theCanadian* 
^ do not care. Just saying.

Cool story, bro. It's a camera thread.


----------



## theCanadian

I wanna cut the blond one. What? I'm just sayin'.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Cool story, bro. It's a camera thread.


----------



## Marin




----------



## theCanadian

Please make reference to the hate. You are projecting something that does not exist.


----------



## Marin

Hmmm...


----------



## theCanadian

That's cute.


----------



## Marin

Anyways, about the camera for everyone else.









Picked it up locally for a nice price and the camera's barely been used. Probably seen a few rolls of film (this can be either good or bad. So far it seems to be good as the shutter functions fine from what I can tell). I need to clean out the VF but that should be pretty easy.

Anyways, for anyone looking to get a TLR it's definitely a different experience from a SLR. But it has it's benefits. The huge advantage over MF SLR's is not suffering from mirror slap. Pair that with the leaf shutter and you've got a camera that's perfect for low light use and that's insanely quiet.

Downside is the parallax error. Since you're focusing with a difference lens the image isn't going to have the same exact framing. There's ways to compensate though (I'm still trying to learn them).

Anyways theCanadian, shouldn't have jumped on you like that, lol. Just stressed and tired from editing wedding photo's all night.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Anyways, about the camera for everyone else.









Picked it up locally for a nice price and the camera's barely been used. Probably seen a few rolls of film (this can be either good or bad. So far it seems to be good as the shutter functions fine from what I can tell). I need to clean out the VF but that should be pretty easy.

Anyways, for anyone looking to get a TLR it's definitely a different experience from a SLR. But it has it's benefits. The huge advantage over MF SLR's is not suffering from mirror slap. Pair that with the leaf shutter and you've got a camera that's perfect for low light use and that's insanely quite.

Downside is the parallax error. Since you're focusing with a difference lens the image isn't going to have the same exact framing. There's ways to compensate though (I'm still trying to learn them).

Anyways theCanadian, shouldn't have jumped on you like that, lol. Just stressed and tired from editing wedding photo's all night.









What I wouldn't give to have even half of your knowledge and skills D:


----------



## laboitenoire

I've always thought TLRs were weird. I think it'd be fun to fool around with one, though.


----------



## theCanadian

No one picked up my fired up reference?


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *theCanadian* 
No one picked up my fired up reference?









Nope.


----------



## dudemanppl

I'm sanding all the paint off my D2H for no reason at all, looks pretty good so far.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


I'm sanding all the paint off my D2H for no reason at all, looks pretty good so far.


Pics, now. I want to see this, lol.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Pics, now. I want to see this, lol.


----------



## iandroo888

why would u do that O_O i want a d2h :[ or d2x..


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


What I wouldn't give to have even half of your knowledge and skills D:


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


why would u do that O_O i want a d2h :[ or d2x..


I've always dreamed of having a naked Nikon body, and its a fourth body anyway, after my F100, D300s, and D700.


----------



## Mootsfox

Why? The grip on Nikon bodies is too wonderful to remove ;.;


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Why? The grip on Nikon bodies is too wonderful to remove ;.;


I'm replacing the rubber grips, I had them off because I took it apart. The eyepiece was stuck.
EDIT: took the front element off my BROKEN 55-200 VR and it makes my 105 VR noticeably closer focusing.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mootsfox* 
why? The grip on nikon bodies is too wonderful to remove ;.;

t.t


----------



## Sparhawk

In the process of uploading a video of my build log to youtube... it takes forever on a crappy internet connection. (the 1.2GB file is not my friend right now)

This is probably the first video I've made since high school, kinda rushed but I'm mostly satisfied with how it has turned out.

Probably could have compressed the video a bit more but 1080p/23.97 is a pretty big format and I didn't have time to mess around with optimizations.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Sparhawk*


In the process of uploading a video of my build log to youtube... it takes forever on a crappy internet connection. (the 1.2GB file is not my friend right now)

This is probably the first video I've made since high school, kinda rushed but I'm mostly satisfied with how it has turned out.

Probably could have compressed the video a bit more but 1080p/23.97 is a pretty big format and I didn't have time to mess around with optimizations.


1.2 GIGS COMPRESSED? Must be one long video...


----------



## Boyboyd

All my videos that i uplaod to youtube look terrible. I'm too lazy to optimise them. Took a 720p video of some dirtbikers yesterday with my camera. Have to see what that looks like once it's uploaded.

In other news, i now own a tripod. Horray!


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dudemanppl* 
1.2 GIGS COMPRESSED? Must be one long video...

No, it wasn't compressed very well(~6min video). I didn't want to spend the time to figure out the best settings for compression.

Here it is:







YouTube- "Silence" : Mini-ITX Case Mod by Sparhawk

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Boyboyd* 
All my videos that i uplaod to youtube look terrible. I'm too lazy to optimise them. Took a 720p video of some dirtbikers yesterday with my camera. Have to see what that looks like once it's uploaded.

In other news, i now own a tripod. Horray!

Link us once you've got it up.

Tripods ftw! Which one do you have? Pics or it never happened.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Sparhawk* 
Link us once you've got it up.

Tripods ftw! Which one do you have? Pics or it never happened.









I got this Manfrotto 9321YB M-Y for Â£74 delivered. It's much better quality that i imagined it would be.

I had it delivered to work and i already had my camera there so i set it up when i had nothing to do. Looks kindof funky because it's a reflection in a double-glazed window.


----------



## dudemanppl

Almost done sanding the top. God this is worse than lapping a CPU by A LOT. MOTHERFATHER, I PUT IT BACK TOGETHER FOR THE LAST TIME AND NOW IT DOESN'T WORK. It worked all the last 10 times.







It'll be at Nikon on Tuesday.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*









It'll be at Nikon on Tuesday.


I'd like to be there when the Nikon techies open the box!


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


I'd like to be there when the Nikon techies open the box!


"Uh, sir? It looks like you tried taking the paint off and failed."
"That's why I'm sending it to you. I took the paint off and failed."

Anybody get the Iron Giant reference?


----------



## iandroo888

considering the price on new lenses, would it be a good idea to get something like the 28-70 AF-S f/2.8 and the 80-200mm AF-S f/2.8 vs the 24-70 and 70-200?

or maybe the 17-55mm + 80-200 AF-S


----------



## laboitenoire

Well, ask yourself how long you think it'll be before you go full-frame. If it's a long ways off, then I'd say get the 17-55. The extra few millimeters on the wide end will be more useful in my opinion than the slightly longer telephoto end.

So recently I've been asking myself if I should have gotten a D80, D90, or D200 instead of the D5000. Much as I love my camera, there's some lenses I'd be interested in buying that aren't available in AF-S format yet.









But on a different note... I'm debating whether to get a telephoto next or a good prime.


----------



## iandroo888

ill eventually sometime in my life go full frame but probably not any time soon... iunoe if its just me but i like the ruggedness of the 80-200 and 28-70 lens design compared to the plasticy new versions now


----------



## tK FuRY

****... if I had $2500 ...

http://atlanta.craigslist.org/atl/pho/1848742292.html


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *tK FuRY*


****... if I had $2500 ...

http://atlanta.craigslist.org/atl/pho/1848742292.html


Dolica tripod? That person is either scamming, or is an idiot.


----------



## tK FuRY

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Dolica tripod? That person is either scamming, or is an idiot.


I'm thinking it's a scam, I didn't really read into the ad very much.


----------



## laboitenoire

What was it? It's been taken down.


----------



## iandroo888

http://lasvegas.craigslist.org/pho/1848876706.html

lolwut?

$2500 for

D3x body
en-el4a battery
charger
original box
manuals
sb-900 speedlight
dolica 65" tripod
68" monopod
af-s 70-200 f/2.8 lens
and transferrable warranty
and accessories (extra battery, strap, cd, cables, caps)

??? me want if true. iirc, doesnt the body cost like 7k?


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Sparhawk*


Link us once you've got it up.










YouTube- Bold Dog motorcross display team.


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Boyboyd* 
YouTube- Bold Dog motorcross display team.

What's the frame-rate on that?
You definitely need a tripod or stabilization of some sort.


----------



## laboitenoire

So I'm pretty certain I want to get a prime, the question now is just what focal length I want to go for. I'm trying to decide between the Nikon 35 f/1.8, the Sigma 30 f/1.4, and the Nikon and Sigma 50 f/1.4 lenses.

Thoughts or comments? I like the 50 mm length a lot when shooting, but seeing as I do shoot a fair amount either indoors or in tighter surroundings, I'm wondering if it'd be better to go for a wider lens.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
ill eventually sometime in my life go full frame but probably not any time soon... iunoe if its just me but i like the ruggedness of the 80-200 and 28-70 lens design compared to the plasticy new versions now

theres nothing wrong with a old 28-70 or 80-200 they are great lenses. but theres no stabilization on the 80-200.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *laboitenoire* 
So I'm pretty certain I want to get a prime, the question now is just what focal length I want to go for. I'm trying to decide between the Nikon 35 f/1.8, the Sigma 30 f/1.4, and the Nikon and Sigma 50 f/1.4 lenses.

Thoughts or comments? I like the 50 mm length a lot when shooting, but seeing as I do shoot a fair amount either indoors or in tighter surroundings, I'm wondering if it'd be better to go for a wider lens.

if you are happy with a 50mm then pick up teh 50mm. but if you find yourself always stepping back to frame then you probably need a 35 or a 30mm
the difference between 30mm and 35mm is minimal

also consider the 50/1.8, its only 1/2 a stop slower but costs 1/4 of a 50/1.4G. you can pick up teh 50/1.8 + 35/1.8 for less then a nikon 50/1.4g.


----------



## laboitenoire

I would love the 50 f/1.8 (I play around a ton with my dad's), but then I would be without auto-focus.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *laboitenoire* 
So I'm pretty certain I want to get a prime, the question now is just what focal length I want to go for. I'm trying to decide between the Nikon 35 f/1.8, the Sigma 30 f/1.4, and the Nikon and Sigma 50 f/1.4 lenses.

Thoughts or comments? I like the 50 mm length a lot when shooting, but seeing as I do shoot a fair amount either indoors or in tighter surroundings, I'm wondering if it'd be better to go for a wider lens.

50mm on a crop sensor can be tight indoors, but I used it a lot on my 40D and 7D for weddings. If you like the 50mm FL, get it and then get a UWA zoom for wide angle work.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Sparhawk* 
What's the frame-rate on that?
You definitely need a tripod or stabilization of some sort.

24FPS. I was just taking photos that day. Just thought i'd see if the video mode on my camera even worked. lol.


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Boyboyd* 
24FPS. I was just taking photos that day. Just thought i'd see if the video mode on my camera even worked. lol.

Fair enough. Video is a bit addicting though; it is much easier to give a sense of what is going on in a scene with video than it is with still shots.








I actually used my D80 for video just the other day.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Sparhawk* 







I actually used my D80 for video just the other day.









How'd you manage that?


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


Originally Posted by *laboitenoire* 
I would love the 50 f/1.8 (I play around a ton with my dad's), but then I would be without auto-focus.









have u used it on your d5k? or on your dad's camera body? curious how well it works doing MF with that ens. i want a 50mm.


----------



## laboitenoire

It actually works pretty well on my D5000. My dad has the original AF version that he bought probably around 1989 or 1990 along with his N2020. I find that enabling rangefinder mode on the camera helps a ton for manual focus, as the confirmation dot can get a little yitzy at times. I'll post a few pics when I get a chance.


----------



## iandroo888

cool. been wantin to get a 50mm but cant afford the af-s. and been itchin to see if the 50mm AF works well. xD


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
cool. been wantin to get a 50mm but cant afford the af-s. and been itchin to see if the 50mm AF works well. xD

With a good eye, the 50mm should be fine







I use my Canon 50mm f/1.8 on manual focus, and have no issues with it (I hate the standard DC motor so I just use manual focus instead).


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


How'd you manage that?


Take 3fps shots then speed it up (~8x).


----------



## iandroo888

rofl


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Sparhawk*


Take 3fps shots then speed it up (~8x).










lol


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


lol










If you set it up right you can get better than "HD" quality/res.


----------



## BlankThis

Kit update:
Nikon D90
Nikkor 50mm f/1.8
Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 VR
Nikkor 55-200mm f/4.5-5.6 VR


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *BlankThis*


Kit update:
Nikon D90
Nikkor 50mm f/1.8
Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 VR
Nikkor 55-200mm f/4.5-5.6 VR


If you ever break the 55-200 VR, the front element is a good magnifying glass. EDIT: just won this.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


If you ever break the 55-200 VR, the front element is a good magnifying glass.


I'm not even going to ask why you know that...


----------



## Danylu

the 50 1.4 is tight indoors but it is brilliant for everything else on my d60


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


If you ever break the 55-200 VR, the front element is a good magnifying glass. EDIT: just won this.


lucky ! thats a great price !

http://www.amazon.com/Zeikos-ZE-NBG5...pr_product_top

does this sound like a good buy? yah it says it needs a separate cable attached to body for full functionality but thats ok. only sad part is that it cant use 2 batteries at same time [not like i have 2 anyway...] but thats ok right? with attached cable, full AF functionality on grip. and vertical shutter release. and makes body bigger for big handed people or balances weight for larger lenses


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


lucky ! thats a great price !

http://www.amazon.com/Zeikos-ZE-NBG5...pr_product_top

does this sound like a good buy? yah it says it needs a separate cable attached to body for full functionality but thats ok. only sad part is that it cant use 2 batteries at same time [not like i have 2 anyway...] but thats ok right? with attached cable, full AF functionality on grip. and vertical shutter release. and makes body bigger for big handed people or balances weight for larger lenses


No.

Gripped entry level bodies just feel... weird.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


No.

Gripped entry level bodies just feel... weird.


Some of us can't afford 5D Mk IIs


----------



## Marin

I just don't like grips. That's why the best 1 series body is the 1v.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Some of us can't afford 5D Mk IIs










Then buy a D700 or D300s. I don't see the problem here


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Then buy a D700 or D300s. I don't see the problem here










One's still expensive and the other has a sensor that would make the Heavy say "It's so tiny!".


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Then buy a D700 or D300s. I don't see the problem here










Both are >$1000. Still out of my price range







As my sig states, I'm a college student, which translates into "broke as hell".


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Both are >$1000. Still out of my price range







As my sig states, I'm a college student, which translates into "broke as hell".


agreed.


----------



## Marin

I have to buy more camera stuff for college. That means not upgrading my computer for awhile again, yay.

Some of the stuff I still need that I can remember off the top of my head is...

- 24-70mm f/2.8L
- View camera (must be fully adjustable)
- Buttload of darkroom equipment
- High-end light meter

I've got everything else though. I found out they're requiring all incoming photo majors to get FF cameras.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


I have to buy more camera stuff for college. That means not upgrading my computer for awhile again, yay.

Some of the stuff I still need that I can remember off the top of my head is...

- 24-70mm f/2.8L
- View camera (must be fully adjustable)
- Buttload of darkroom equipment
- High-end light meter

I've got everything else though. I found out they're requiring all incoming photo majors to get FF cameras.


Wow, I would love to see everyones gear there since I'm such a gearwhore. Where are you going again? EDIT: looked through your flickr, you're going to be less than 10 miles from me.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Wow, I would love to see everyones gear there since I'm such a gearwhore. Where are you going again? EDIT: looked through your flickr, you're going to be less than 10 miles from me.


Do you go to Arcadia HS?


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Do you go to Arcadia HS?


Will be freshman next year, why?

Nikon D700 + MB-D10 and Eneloops
Nikon F100 + MB-15 and Eneloops

Rokion 8mm f/3.5 AI-S Fish Eye
Sigma 12-24mm f/4.5-5.6 EX DG HSM
Sigma 24mm f/1.8 EX DG
Nikkor 35mm f/1.8 AF-S G DX
Sigma 50mm f/1.4 EX DG HSM
Nikkor 80-200mm f/2.8 AF-S D
Micro-Nikkor 105mm f/2.8 AF-S G N VR
Nikkor 300mm f/2.8 AF-I D

Nikon SB600 x2
Nikon SG-31 IR
RODE VideoMic

Buying gripped D300s and 85 1.8 in September...


----------



## riko99

Just a quick crop to a 1:2 ratio of a Pileated woodpecker that I managed to get with the 90mm tamron... was quite surprised that it let me get as close as I did (within 10 feet).


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dudemanppl* 
Will be freshman next year, why?

Nikon D700 + MB-D10 and Eneloops
Nikon F100 + MB-15 and Eneloops

Rokion 8mm f/3.5 AI-S Fish Eye
Sigma 12-24mm f/4.5-5.6 EX DG HSM
Sigma 24mm f/1.8 EX DG
Nikkor 35mm f/1.8 AF-S G DX
Sigma 50mm f/1.4 EX DG HSM
Nikkor 80-200mm f/2.8 AF-S D
Micro-Nikkor 105mm f/2.8 AF-S G N VR
Nikkor 300mm f/2.8 AF-I D

Nikon SB600 x2
Nikon SG-31 IR
RODE VideoMic

Buying gripped D300s and 85 1.8 in September...

how u afford so much things before high school =[

also, is using 8 eneloops better than using 2 li-ion batteries? longer usage? lighter?


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


how u afford so much things before high school =[

also, is using 8 eneloops better than using 2 li-ion batteries? longer usage? lighter?


8FPS. Also, like a boss. Sold sodas for 2 bucks each.


----------



## nuclearjock

At a small airport. 
D3 70-200 VRII tc-17E


----------



## mahtareika

Great shot.


----------



## Sparhawk

That bird looks like he's been hitting the drugz a bit too hard.


----------



## laboitenoire

So is it just me, or does one of the guys in the trailer for Dinner for Schmucks look an awful lot like Ken Rockwell?


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *laboitenoire* 
So is it just me, or does one of the guys in the trailer for Dinner for Schmucks look an awful lot like Ken Rockwell?

Steve Carell?


----------



## laboitenoire

No no no, the guy who's Swiss.


----------



## nuclearjock

Just got the ok from the head cfo (wife).

600 VR is ordered and on it's way. Not easy to find nowadays.

Edit

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


So is it just me, or does one of the guys in the trailer for Dinner for Schmucks look an awful lot like Ken Rockwell?


Please tell me no such living organism exists!!


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


Just got the ok from the head cfo (wife).

600 VR is ordered and on it's way. Not easy to find nowadays.

Edit

Please tell me no such living organism exists!!


How big is the cfo's new diamond ring


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
How big is the cfo's new diamond ring









You r kidding right?? that's up to her!


----------



## theCanadian

Anyone know where I can get MD lenses? I currently have a kit lens, good for portraits, and a telephoto, 35-105.

105 stops a bit short for me. Maybe something that puts me into the 200-300 range.... like this one. Or this sex.

Any old timers willing to help?


----------



## mz-n10

they are cheap and plentiful on EBAY and you can also try thrift stores.

one of the best MD telephoto is the 70-210/4 which is a shared design and production with the LEICA equivalent. theres one on ebay going for ~20 bucks.


----------



## theCanadian

Thanks... I'm thinking now I'll probably want a 300mm lens. And there's not many of those.

I'm currently going back and forth between this $50 Sigma 75mm-300mm f/4.5-5.6 which is used, and this $100 Phoenix 100mm-300mm f/5.6-6.7 which appears to be new.

What do you guys think I should get? I'd like to use it mainly at my college, for sports. Is 300mm too much? Can I get a better lens if I accept a shorter focal length?

Keep in mind my main lens is currently a Minolta 35mm-105mm f/3.5-4.5.

I don't know if it would be worthwhile to have some overlap with the two lenses or not... plus the Phoenix is new, and the Sigma is only an 8 (Well Used).

The Sigma is going to be more portable because it's compact, but the Phoenix may be a better lens because it's 'full size', particularly since it's new. I don't know, I don't know Phoenix at all, and only know Sigma for their bodies.

Thanks for the input.


----------



## Marin

Ah, sports. I'd recommend buying through KEH. Anything you buy from them in EX or EX+ condition is basically brand new. And for BGN, the majority of the time it's just scuff marks. They're extremely conservative with their ratings in comparison to sites like B&H and Adorama.

Anyways, there are different telephoto lenses you can buy depending on how close you are to the action.

135mm f/2.8
 (close to the range of your current lens but it's faster)

200mm f/4

300mm f/4.5

300mm f/5.6


----------



## theCanadian

Would a 300mm FFL lens be ok? If it's got too much power, that's no good either.

I think a FFL lens would be a little sharper/faster at the same price point, but it's no good if I can't use it.

Opinions on the telephotos I picked out?

I'm going for budget here. I'm an amature remember, I dont want a million lenses, particularly since I'm shooting film and will probably eventually make the switch to digital.

Personal experiences such as having different focal length lenses, whether or not you had any overlap with them, all that helps.


----------



## Marin

300mm would be fine, but you might want to pair it with something like a monopod to keep it steady due to the increased magnification.

If you want to know the good FL lengths for sports ask nuclearjock since he shoots that stuff.


----------



## theCanadian

My point is, I need a versatile lens. Buying a 300mm FFL lens leaves a bit of gap between 105 and 300mm, don't you think?

Would it be reasonable for me to go for this lens. It's macro lens, which is only a plus, and it covers me from 35mm-300mm without any gaps. It's pretty fast too. And cheap. And in good condition. I don't a a minus, other than it might not be _quite _as sharp as an FFL because it has more parts and groups (which doesn't always mean it's not sharp, obviously)


----------



## Marin

Eh, older zooms lenses aren't that great compared to primes (especially the 75-300mm lenses, for some reason they've never gotten a good design for it). I wouldn't get it but if you want versatility...


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Eh, older zooms lenses aren't that great compared to primes (especially the 75-300mm lenses, for some reason they've never gotten a good design for it). I wouldn't get it but if you want versatility...

Care to elaborate? It be really great not to have to buy any more lenses for this camera. If it's just a matter of figuring out a couple quirks or adjusting something, it'll be worth it.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *theCanadian* 
Care to elaborate? It be really great not to have to buy any more lenses for this camera. If it's just a matter of figuring out a couple quirks or adjusting something, it'll be worth it.

No, it's just bad optically. All big zooms are. Especially older, cheaper, slower ones.


----------



## dudemanppl

It seems like a lot of us have R-Straps.


----------



## laboitenoire

Well, I got a bag today! It's very old (older than me in fact), but it was a very nice bag when new and is still in great shape, and it was very free! Got it from my dad as he bought a Kata backpack to hold his stuff.

It looks very empty with just my D5000 and the kit lens, although it could probably hold a body with a 70-200 attached.









For a short while it had my Dad's D50, his N2020, 18-55 VR, 55-200 VR, Sigma 70-200 f/3.8 (in case he ever pulled out his N2020), a 50 f/1.8, battery charger, spare battery, filters, memory cards, and an expired roll of 24 exposure Kodak 400.

I could possibly ask him for the N2020, the 70-200, and his Sigma 28-70.


----------



## dudemanppl

BRAG BRAG BRAG BRAG BRAG


----------



## Danylu

As if not all gold boxes...

On another note what's the monster on the right?


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
As if not all gold boxes...

On another note what's the monster on the right?

Gaffered 300mm f/2.8 AF-I.


----------



## riko99

Let me guess you took that with the 12-24 2nd shot... cause there is noticeable barrel distortion.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *riko99* 
Let me guess you took that with the 12-24 2nd shot... cause there is noticeable barrel perspective distortion.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


Originally Posted by *riko99* 
Let me guess you took that with the 12-24 2nd shot... cause there is noticeable barrel distortion.

Course! If my 35 1.8 looked like that, THAT WOULD BE PRETTY AWESOME ACTUALLY.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


Originally Posted by *laboitenoire* 
Well, I got a bag today! It's very old (older than me in fact), but it was a very nice bag when new and is still in great shape, and it was very free! Got it from my dad as he bought a Kata backpack to hold his stuff.

It looks very empty with just my D5000 and the kit lens, although it could probably hold a body with a 70-200 attached.









For a short while it had my Dad's D50, his N2020, 18-55 VR, 55-200 VR, Sigma 70-200 f/3.8 (in case he ever pulled out his N2020), a 50 f/1.8, battery charger, spare battery, filters, memory cards, and an expired roll of 24 exposure Kodak 400.

I could possibly ask him for the N2020, the 70-200, and his Sigma 28-70.

nice kit he left for u =3 wish i had something like that

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dudemanppl* 
BRAG BRAG BRAG BRAG BRAG

















very nice. wish i had some of those lenses... specifically that af-s 80-200mm f/2.8 xD


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *riko99*


Let me guess you took that with the 12-24 2nd shot... cause there is noticeable barrel distortion.


You don't need to guess. BEHOLD! The online exif viewer

http://regex.info/exif.cgi?dummy=on&...b97f781d_b.jpg


----------



## Danylu

holy s! I did not know there was that much distortion lol.

I just auto assumed it was the fisheye :S


----------



## Mootsfox

You should get the 14-24mm f/2.8


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mootsfox*


you should get the 14-24mm f/2.8










Screw f/2.8, I HAS NO MONIES! And the wider the better.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Screw f/2.8, I HAS NO MONIES! And the wider the better.


says the guy with a 300/2.8 and d700.


----------



## riko99

Holy crap boyd didnt know that page even existed thank you my friend.


----------



## nuclearjock

D300 70-200 f/2.8 VRII ~70% crop
I'm loving the af speed and IQ of this lens more and more every day.
It also takes 1.4 and 1.7 tc's like thay were'nt there.
Still on the fence about the 2x tc.


----------



## theCanadian

Just picked up:


200mm Tele f/4 in EX for $56
24mm f/2.8 in BGN for $1.56
Lens and Rear caps for $12
2x Teleconverter in EX for $1.76
Yay, for used gear!

Oh, and a pic or two for you guys.




























I wish I had the software to rotate this last picture the 3-5 degrees counter-clockwise it needs to be...


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


says the guy with a 300/2.8 and d700.


300 2.8s are for poor people. The 14-24 would be around the price I got the D700 for and more than the 300 2.8. 12-24 is wider, costs less.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


300 2.8s are for poor people. The 14-24 would be around the price I got the D700 for and more than the 300 2.8. 12-24 is wider, costs less.


The 14-24mm is FF, the 12-24 is DX, so it's actually a 18-36mm.

The 14-24mm is the widest non distorting wide zoom for Nikon, and possible anyone.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


The 14-24mm is FF, the 12-24 is DX, so it's actually a 18-36mm.

The 14-24mm is the widest non distorting wide zoom for Nikon, and possible anyone.


Google: Sigma 12-24mm f/4.5-5.6 EX DG HSM. I LOVE PROVING PEOPLE WRONG!


----------



## theCanadian

No one ever critiques my photos


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


No one ever critiques my photos










Sorry, its because nobody likes you damn beavers. I don't see why the last one WOULDN'T be fine. And: 24mm f/2.8 in BGN for $1.56, I don't like you anymore.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Google: Sigma 12-24mm f/4.5-5.6 EX DG HSM. I LOVE PROVING PEOPLE WRONG!










f/4.5, doesn't count









Also I said non-distorting


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


I wish I had the software to rotate this last picture the 3-5 degrees counter-clockwise it needs to be...


-1.0 degrees:


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


f/4.5, doesn't count









Also I said non-distorting










It distorts as much as the 14-24. I'll take a picture right now. Using your logic the 1200mm f/5.6 is a crap piece of glass (which it is when you're trying to anything that doesn't require the focal length).


----------



## max302

Some of you may remember my Nikon film body heist from a while ago. I'm at it again.

Today, I picked up a Pentax 645 outfit with a 45-85 f3.5 (?) on a 645 NII body for a sum I will not disclose because some of you may have heart-related problems. Along with a Manfrotto tripod, sturdyass 075 legs with a 116 video head for 60$.










So if anybody's in the market for a kickass medium format rig, holla back.


----------



## Marin

645's are awesome. Especially since Pentax lenses are affordable.


----------



## dudemanppl

Max, that confirms me hating Canadians.
For moots:


----------



## Mootsfox

Now shoot it with teh 14-24mm.

And the 1200mm f/5.6 would suck, if they made a 1200mm f/2.8.

The front element would have to be like 18", but still


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


300 2.8s are for poor people. The 14-24 would be around the price I got the D700 for and more than the 300 2.8. 12-24 is wider, costs less.


touche, thought it was the 300/2.8VR. in sonyland we dont have the luxury of sub 2000USD 300/2.8......

Quote:



Originally Posted by *max302*


Some of you may remember my Nikon film body heist from a while ago. I'm at it again.

Today, I picked up a Pentax 645 outfit with a 45-85 f3.5 (?) on a 645 NII body for a sum I will not disclose because some of you may have heart-related problems. Along with a Manfrotto tripod, sturdyass 075 legs with a 116 video head for 60$.










So if anybody's in the market for a kickass medium format rig, holla back.


645D coming soon.....tempted to pick up a old 645 just to play with a MF.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Now shoot it with teh 14-24mm.

And the 1200mm f/5.6 would suck, if they made a 1200mm f/2.8.

The front element would have to be like 18", but still









18" isn't large enough, THEY NEED A 1200MM F/1 SUPER IS (so you can handhold the 200 lbs lens). Oh and the picture was from 3 feet away. Holy mother.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dudemanppl* 
18" isn't large enough, THEY NEED A 1200MM F/1 SUPER IS (so you can handhold the 200 lbs lens). Oh and the picture was from 3 feet away. Holy mother.

That isn't reasonable so I'll be happy if they compromise with a 14-600 2.8 N AF-S G VRII ED F ABCDEFGH


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
That isn't reasonable so I'll be happy if they compromise with a 14-600 2.8 N AF-S G VRII ED F ABCDEFGH









I prefer the IJKLMNOP version, since it also contains L, which means its good.


----------



## theCanadian

I've only ever shot the sun a couple times. Actually, twice. This is my second shot. But I can't decide if I like it or not. Please help me!


----------



## riko99

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Now shoot it with teh 14-24mm.

And the 1200mm f/5.6 would suck, if they made a 1200mm f/2.8.

The front element would have to be like 18", but still









Ah it would only be around 428mm wide... so 42.8cm or 16.9 inches... so you were close lol.


----------



## Danylu

Apart from me knocking the tripod halfway into the exposure, not too shabby right?



It was a moment of madness, but at least the lighting is very soft.


----------



## nuclearjock

take the uv filter off.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


take the uv filter off.


For a fleeting moment I was thinking of the iPad (Yes I know I'm crazy)

But now that I get what you mean. Why?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


For a fleeting moment I was thinking of the iPad (Yes I know I'm crazy)

But now that I get what you mean. Why?


Because it's completely ineffectual.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *riko99*


Ah it would only be around 428mm wide... so 42.8cm or 16.9 inches... so you were close lol.


Well, the diaphragm would have to be that size. The front element would have to be larger still.

The 1200mm f/5.6 has a diaphragm the size of a plate


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Well, the diaphragm would have to be that size. The front element would have to be larger still.

The 1200mm f/5.6 has a diaphragm the size of a plate










Plates vary in size.







WHY ARE WE STILL TALKING ABOUT A 1200 F/1?


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dudemanppl* 
Plates vary in size.







WHY ARE WE STILL TALKING ABOUT A 1200 F/1?

I'd buy a 1200mm f/1.2.

Assuming I, or anyone could afford it.


----------



## Marin

http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/535-zeiss50f2eosff

http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff...eiss50f14eosff

http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff...eiss85f14eosff

And here's why Zeiss should update their 50mm f/1.4 and 85mm f/1.4 already.


----------



## iandroo888

http://www.amazon.com/Straps-Lightwe...0033746&sr=8-1

has anyone ever used a blackrapid camera strap? someone on the walk yesterday had this strap for their camera. connects using the screw mount for tripod so can mount to body or to lens [if it has a tripod collar] we tried it. pretty comfortable. slings to the side of the body and easy accessable. pull it up and shoot and drop it back down when not using. better than the stock strap at least.. hate using taht neck strap. LOL but a wrist strap wasnt all that comfortable either.

was thinkin, get this strap. use wrist strap. mount the thing under the wrist strap. have both O.O


----------



## Sparhawk

Hit up the local Folk Festival this weekend = awesome.







Tons of 70-200mm f/2.8 and similar lenses at the event.
Pretty sure I was one of the only people using manual focus.
My 80-200mm just doesn't autofocus well on my D80. I think the depth of field is too narrow and possibly the AF sensor isn't accurate enough because the lens is too sharp for it or something.








Pics are incoming once I have a chance to upload them.

@androo: I've got a Crumpler strap right now and it is great, I laughed when I saw other photographers using the stock straps.


----------



## mz-n10

the black rapid strap takes up the tripod mount hole so you cant comfortable use it with a L bracket or a quick release plate which i find extremely annoying.

im using a OPTECH dual camera harness which so far seems nice, comfortable and cheap. ive used it for a 7d+70-200 2.8 is and a a900 + 24-70zeiss.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


the black rapid strap takes up the tripod mount hole so you cant comfortable use it with a L bracket or a quick release plate which i find extremely annoying.

im using a OPTECH dual camera harness which so far seems nice, comfortable and cheap. ive used it for a 7d+70-200 2.8 is and a a900 + 24-70zeiss.


Newest version is less awkward, the first version was complete sheet.


----------



## Marin

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...tal_Audio.html

Zoom H1 looks pretty awesome for recording audio. Low price, portable and if it's like the H4n it should have awesome audio quality.


----------



## iandroo888

oOo work with all cameras? is it video/audio synced or will u need to edit and combine it


----------



## Mootsfox

It has a line out, but I'm not sure it'd be the best choice for a video mic.


----------



## theCanadian

Question. Can you guys see the photos in in this post? There are three of them.

http://www.overclock.net/10113661-post7816.html


----------



## iandroo888

yap. good pix


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


Question. Can you guys see the photos in in this post? There are three of them.

http://www.overclock.net/10113661-post7816.html


Yes. Every one.


----------



## scc28

posted im wrong place sorry

hi all first post in this bit so here goes, i have currently a fuji s1pro dslr (old i know but it hast the best colour rendering ever) im looking to change to either a nikon d2x or a canon 1ds has anybody any thoughts? need something that has pretty fast fps as i would like to shoot sport and action stuff not interested in video.

cheers simon


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...tal_Audio.html

Zoom H1 looks pretty awesome for recording audio. Low price, portable and if it's like the H4n it should have awesome audio quality.











looks like omni-directional mic, might have a problem picking up stray noises....

stick with the tried and true...rode shotgun video + dead kitten

Quote:



Originally Posted by *scc28*


posted im wrong place sorry

hi all first post in this bit so here goes, i have currently a fuji s1pro dslr (old i know but it hast the best colour rendering ever) im looking to change to either a nikon d2x or a canon 1ds has anybody any thoughts? need something that has pretty fast fps as i would like to shoot sport and action stuff not interested in video.

cheers simon


the 1ds is a slow camera. you probably want to look at the canon 1d series (not 1ds) or 30d/40d/50d/7d.

nikon might actually be a better option for you, since i believe the s1 uses a f-mount.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *scc28*


posted im wrong place sorry

hi all first post in this bit so here goes, i have currently a fuji s1pro dslr (old i know but it hast the best colour rendering ever) im looking to change to either a nikon d2x or a canon 1ds has anybody any thoughts? need something that has pretty fast fps as i would like to shoot sport and action stuff not interested in video.

cheers simon


Budget? As mz said, the Canon 1Ds series isn't a sports camera. Get a 1D MkII or MkIII as they will do 10 FPS and has a good AF system.

What lenses do you have for the Fuji? It uses the Nikon F mount so if you got a Nikon DLSR, it could use the same lenses.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


It has a line out, but I'm not sure it'd be the best choice for a video mic.


I'd rather skip the line-out and just sync up the audio in post.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


looks like omni-directional mic, might have a problem picking up stray noises....

stick with the tried and true...rode shotgun video + dead kitten


Not a huge fan of plugging up shotgun mics right into the camera. While the audio quality is far superior to the built in mic, it still doesn't compare to using something externally like an H4n (from my experience).

When I was filming I opted for a boom hooked up to a H4n and had the audio synced up later in FCP.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Not a huge fan of plugging up shotgun mics right into the camera. While the audio quality is far superior to the built in mic, it still doesn't compare to using something externally like an H4n (from my experience).

When I was filming I opted for a boom hooked up to a H4n and had the audio synced up later in FCP.


ahh...boom mic work. too professional for me







.


----------



## Azone42

Mind adding me? I have a Nikon D5000 with the 18-55 AF-S DX VR mm kit lens (with hopes of getting a 55-200 mm lens at some point). I use it everyday for just about everything, trying to learn just about everything it can do.


----------



## Mr_Nibbles

Please add my new (old) lens to this list: Super Takumar 135mm f/3.5 with EF converter.

Thanks









BTW is there any new info on the new photo forum?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mr_Nibbles* 
Please add my new (old) lens to this list: Super Takumar 135mm f/3.5 with EF converter.

Thanks









BTW is there any new info on the new photo forum?

http://www.overclock.net/photography...l#post10140067


----------



## theCanadian

I was never put on the list.

Minolta X-700:
Minolta 35mm-105mm f/3.5-4.8
Minolta 50mm f/1.7
200mm f/4 MD Tele Rokkor-X
28mm f/2.8 Wide Angle
2X Vivitar 2X-5 Auto Teleconverter.


----------



## laboitenoire

Experimenting with the intervalometer on the D5000. I've got my body on my dad's tripod, and I've borrowed his 55-200 VR so I can stake-out a nest under my deck with three baby Robins (only a few days old).


----------



## Conspiracy

proud owner of a 7D. just got it today. will be buying more lenses down the road. as of right now just have the stock 28-135mm lens


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*


proud owner of a 7D. just got it today. will be buying more lenses down the road. as of right now just have the stock 28-135mm lens































The 7D with the Canon EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS is an amazing combination.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


The 7D with the Canon EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS is an amazing combination.


thanks ill look into that lens have already started saving up for more as well as i need to get me a polarized filter as well which isnt nearly as expensive


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Conspiracy* 
thanks ill look into that lens have already started saving up for more as well as i need to get me a polarized filter as well which isnt nearly as expensive









get the CPL at 77mm then use step down rings. you will save yourself a bundle doing that.


----------



## Mr_Nibbles

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mz-n10* 
get the cpl at 77mm then use step down rings. You will save yourself a bundle doing that.

+1


----------



## neonlazer

Never was added to the list but here ya go!

Canon 7D(just got today!)
Canon 50D

Canon 17-40 f/4L
Canon 70-200 f/4L

Canon 580EXII


----------



## dudemanppl

Whats wrong with me, my friend cracked my 1DII after the R-Strap failed (and after it crushed his finger), and I wasn't too concerned. Please help me.








I'm actually taking pictures now! http://www.flickr.com/photos/dudeman...7624606865884/


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dudemanppl* 
Whats wrong with me, my friend cracked my 1DII after the R-Strap failed (and after it crushed his finger), and I wasn't too concerned. Please help me.








I'm actually taking pictures now!

Time for a new friend and camera strap. And a call to Black Rapid


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Time for a new friend and camera strap. And a call to Black Rapid


Wait, what would they do if I called them?


----------



## iandroo888

which black rapid strap would u guys suggest? rs4? 5? 7? obviously not the double one since id ont even have two bodies


----------



## theCanadian

That RS7 looks nice. But I'm sure the other ones are too. And for $60 it better be. Holy hell.


----------



## Marin

http://www.dpreview.com/news/1007/10...pslrsystem.asp

Win.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


which black rapid strap would u guys suggest? rs4? 5? 7? obviously not the double one since id ont even have two bodies


You still want one after the poster above just said his broke?


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


You still want one after the poster above just said his broke?


well if u think about it.. nothin is 100% fail free.. just cuz their's broke doesnt mean is a bad item


----------



## dudemanppl

The connecting screw unscrewed because my friend is an idiot. I'm never gonna sell em, best strap ever.


----------



## Mootsfox

ML-L3 basically new, ready to ship $8:
http://www.overclock.net/other-techn...ale-nikon.html


----------



## theCanadian

Sitting in a metal chair, holding a metal tripod, photographing lighting. Brilliant.


----------



## riko99

Quote:


Originally Posted by *theCanadian* 
Sitting in a metal chair, holding a metal tripod, photographing lighting. Brilliant.

Aint it fun! lol Just remember if you feel a static charge hit the ground.


----------



## SoBe8503

Just got this lil guy. I'm pretty excited.










I used one for a wedding a few weeks ago and fell in love with it.


----------



## Conspiracy

wow thats pretty cheap. you like it? i might get one by them if its good.


----------



## SoBe8503

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*


wow thats pretty cheap. you like it? i might get one by them if its good.


It's a Tamron, not a Nikkor, some may not like that. Personally I don't care. As long as it takes good shots, I'm happy; especially for 1/4 the price. The macro feature is so cool. I was asked to take some shots at a wedding recently, and borrowed my friends lens. I fell in love with it. Has image stabilization, which is like Nikkor's VR.

I guess the focus is a little bit noisy, but I never cared about that. I just know some people don't like noise lol. It's fast and accurate, that's all I care about.


----------



## Conspiracy

the canon version of that lens doesnt have very good feedback. i think i would want to be able to test it before i bought it.


----------



## Marin

http://www.overclock.net/other-techn...l#post10195773

Buy it now!


----------



## nuclearjock

Nikon mount LNIB + receipt.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
http://www.overclock.net/other-techn...l#post10195773

Buy it now!

I WANT


----------



## nuclearjock

Here.


----------



## nuclearjock

Here.


----------



## Marin

Canon 135mm f/2L or 85mm f/1.2L? I'm so confused!!!


----------



## laboitenoire

Both?









I mean, you've already got the 85mm Zeiss, so figure out if you want to duplicate the focal length or get something longer.

So I borrowed my dad's 50 f/1.8 and his flash (a cheap, big Bower) to futz around with some photos for an ad I'm putting together for my glee club. Got a few good shots that I thought I was going to keep in color, but I was fooling around in Photoshop and discovered the stamp filter... I like the blue one a bit better, but I'm going with the black one because I'm pretty sure the ad needs to be b&w.


----------



## nuclearjock

Gone,

Decided to take a walk on the "wide side".

Please add a Nikon 14-24 f/2.8 to my gear list. Pics this weekend.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
Gone,

Decided to take a walk on the "wide side".

Please add a Nikon 14-24 f/2.8 to my gear list. Pics this weekend.











I've only gotten to play with that on my D300s for a short while, but it was a wonderful short while


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Canon 135mm f/2L or 85mm f/1.2L? I'm so confused!!!

135L135L135L135L135L135L135L135L135L, OH GODDD YES. And get something nice with the extra money, maybe some In-N-Out.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dudemanppl* 
OH GODDD YES. In-N-Out.

You need to get a room already. Wait, you're not in HS yet right??

(this might be sig material)...


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
You need to get a room already. Wait, you're not in HS yet right??

(this might be sig material)...

My daddy will be writing you a very angry letter!







Nice tasty In-N-Out.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dudemanppl* 
My daddy will be writing you a very angry letter!







Nice tasty In-N-Out.

I can't wait.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*











I've only gotten to play with that on my D300s for a short while, but it was a wonderful short while










haha right? got to borrow that earlier this year when cousin was in town for a wedding to shoot at a wedding. may be one of the first pro lenses i get soon. plannin on doing some real estate shooting. nice to have a wide fast lens


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


got to borrow that earlier this year when cousin was in town for a wedding to shoot at a wedding.


he used a 14-24 to shoot a wedding??


----------



## Mootsfox

Probably not the whole thing









Last time I got to use the 14-24mm was for a wedding setting


----------



## Danylu

I've never even seen one. I feel left out D:


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


I've never even seen one. I feel left out D:


Looky here: http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/14-..._4394-1200.jpg

Mine's in the air as we speak.


----------



## Sparhawk

I want one, but won't be able to afford one for a while yet. 
I'll be sticking with my ultra-portable 18-55mm for the moment(not exactly wide I know).


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


he used a 14-24 to shoot a wedding??


oh no no. we werent the photographers. we were just on the side. used 14-24 on d5k w/ video and close up shots. used 24-70 on d200 for photos.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


oh no no. we werent the photographers. we were just on the side. used 14-24 on d5k w/ video and close up shots. used 24-70 on d200 for photos.


That makes alittle more sense, but both of these lenses really shine on FF.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Canon 135mm f/2L or 85mm f/1.2L? I'm so confused!!!


The 135/2! The f/2 DOF at that focal length will be plenty shallow enough plus it's purported to be Canon's sharpest lens. And it's much cheaper than the 85/1.2.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


You need to get a room already. Wait, you're not in HS yet right??

(this might be sig material)...


Haha, I was thinking exactly the same thing! A Clockwork Orange was the first thing that popped in my head (obviously we have no In-N-Out's in my neck of the woods)!


----------



## Marin

Ordered the 135mm f/2L. Now to scrape some money up for the 24-70mm f/2.8L (since I forgot that I'm required to get one, lol).


----------



## laboitenoire

You have to buy a 24-70?

I'm always confused by art schools. How're you supposed to be creative individuals if they tell you exactly what gear to shoot with and how to shoot the picture?


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:


Originally Posted by *laboitenoire* 
You have to buy a 24-70?

I'm always confused by art schools. How're you supposed to be creative individuals if they tell you exactly what gear to shoot with and how to shoot the picture?

You have to know what the box is and its boundaries, before you can work outside of it.


----------



## theCanadian

Correct me if I am wrong. Hypothetically,

I am shooting with a lens at the 85mm FL. My f-stop is f/1.7 Therefore, my aperture is roughly 50mm in diameter.

Is that right? If so, how is the f-stop determined for a zoom lens?

Also, the FL of a lens is the distance from the SLR to which element?

And also:

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Ordered the 135mm f/2_*L*_. Now to scrape some money up for the 24-70mm f/2.8_*L*_ (since I forgot that I'm required to get one, lol).

WTH is the L?


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Ordered the 135mm f/2L. Now to scrape some money up for the 24-70mm f/2.8L (since I forgot that I'm required to get one, lol).

Tamron 28-75.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dudemanppl* 
Tamron 28-75.

Maybe...


----------



## nuclearjock

Gone,
Sold, please remove:
50mm f/1.4G AF-S Nikkor
18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 ED-IF AF-S VR DX
Tamron AF28-300mm F/3.5-6.3 XR Di VC

Purchased, please add:
14-24mm f/2.8G ED AF-S Nikkor

600 VR is on its way but not here yet.
It's being shipped to my sister in Indiana. I'll pick it up next week.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *theCanadian* 
Correct me if I am wrong. Hypothetically,

I am shooting with a lens at the 85mm FL. My f-stop is f/1.7 Therefore, my aperture is roughly 50mm in diameter.

Is that right? If so, how is the f-stop determined for a zoom lens?

Also, the FL of a lens is the distance from the SLR to which element?

And also:

WTH is the L?

Unless I'm mistaken, the diaphragm in a zoom lens adjusts to the proper diameter for whatever focal length the lens is set to, in order to achieve that f-stop. So the great the FL, the wider the diaphragm need be, which is why constant f/2.8 lenses are really huge (wide diameter barrel) compared to non-constant aperture lenses. Compare the size of the Canon EF-S 18-55 f/3.5-5.6 to the Canon EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS.

"L" is Canon's designation for their high-end line of lenses. It's supposed to mean "luxury."

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
Gone,
Sold, please remove:
50mm f/1.4G AF-S Nikkor
18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 ED-IF AF-S VR DX
Tamron AF28-300mm F/3.5-6.3 XR Di VC

Purchased, please add:
14-24mm f/2.8G ED AF-S Nikkor

600 VR is on its way but not here yet.
It's being shipped to my sister in Indiana. I'll pick it up next week.

Ah, trying to dodge that IL sales tax, huh?


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Ah, trying to dodge that IL sales tax, huh?

Not sure what you're referring to







. $700 helped pay for my wide zoom!!


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


Originally Posted by *theCanadian* 

And also:

WTH is the L?

L is their professional line. it has a red ring on the lenses. For nikons, in the "N" badge on their lenses with a gold ring. i know nikon's N means it has a nanocoat.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Maybe...

Forgot Canon's version sucks because of the POS AF, if you shot Nikon, you could get one without the motor because the body focuses it pretty fast.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


L is their professional line. it has a red ring on the lenses. For nikons, in the "N" badge on their lenses with a gold ring. i know nikon's N means it has a nanocoat.


Gold ring vs. Red ring. The N is mostly on Telephotos.


----------



## Marin

I got the Canon 135mm f/2L today, yay for cheap overnight shipping.

My reaction:









Pics later today.


----------



## nuclearjock

This is one BIG piece of glass!



















I just realized this makes me a member of the "trinity" club:


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
This is one BIG piece of glass!

I just realized this make me a member of the "trinity" club:

Damn that's some sexy glass.









Need pics!


----------



## iandroo888

very nice. cousin just joined it recently after he got the 70-200 vrII. ill join it soon enough (maybe in a year) xD


----------



## theCanadian

You can add a Sigma DL 75-300mm Telephoto Zoom to my list of film slr gear for my Minolta X-700. I'm now covered out to an effective 600mm. Can't wait for this lens to get here this week. But now that I have this huge focal range, I'll be needing a much better tripod. Especially since I'm using a teleconverter and these older lenses aren't all that fast to begin with (my longer focal length lenses are f/4).

I was thinking about building a fixed tripod out of wood. Any suggestions on how to go about constructing a mechanism to allow the camera to pivot up and down?


----------



## iandroo888

what bag to get? if setup was

trinity (14-24, 24-70, 70-200)
fx body (d700 or whatever it gets replaced with)
85mm f/1.4
and some accessories (circular polarizer, memory cards, batteries)


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


what bag to get? if setup was

trinity (14-24, 24-70, 70-200)
fx body (d700 or whatever it gets replaced with)
85mm f/1.4
and some accessories (circular polarizer, memory cards, batteries)


A Crumpler 7MDH would fit the bill nicely.


----------



## Marin

Lens was manufactured April 2010.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


A Crumpler 7MDH would fit the bill nicely.


You changed your avatar???







But why?


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*




Lens was manufactured April 2010.


Starting to miss 5DII and 135L combo...


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


You changed your avatar???







But why?


Well, I haven't used a different one in at least 3-4 years, so I thought why not.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Lens was manufactured April 2010.


Damn nice, I need either this lens or the 85/1.2 myself. Might end up being the 135/2 because it's so much cheaper.

On another note, I just found a Gitzo Mountaineer carbon fiber tripod used for $200. Time for a real tripod!


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 


Lens was manufactured April 2010.

...so I've been checking out shots taken with that lens... and it has been making me want to get a canon camera...


----------



## GoneTomorrow

The Kentucky State Nature Preserve Commission used one of my shots for its website. They cropped the hell out of it and used it for a banner graphic, but it's nice to have it up there!

http://naturepreserves.ky.gov/nature...tephenson.aspx

(at the top)

Here's the original shot where you can see how much they cropped:


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


The Kentucky State Nature Preserve Commission used one of my shots for its website. They cropped the hell out of it and used it for a banner graphic, but it's nice to have it up there!

http://naturepreserves.ky.gov/nature...tephenson.aspx

(at the top)

Here's the original shot where you can see how much they cropped:


That's a nice shot.







It always feels good to have your pictures posted somewhere public by someone other than yourself.

Unfortunately there isn't any way to get around cropping for banners. 
They would have to make the banner much larger to fit more. 
Although, personally, I would have extended the banner to fit a little more of the waterfall.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Sparhawk*


That's a nice shot.







It always feels good to have your pictures posted somewhere public by someone other than yourself.

Unfortunately there isn't any way to get around cropping for banners. 
They would have to make the banner much larger to fit more. 
Although, personally, I would have extended the banner to fit a little more of the waterfall.


Yeah, I told them they could do what they want with it outside of major changes (weird art filters and such), but I thought they were just going to post it as an image by itself. But, they didn't ask my web design advice so no big deal.


----------



## nuclearjock

Nice work GT.

Just got sponsored for sports shooters (sportsshooters.com). hope I make it on the first cut. I'll be bragging about if I do


----------



## Marin

Got my roll back that I ran through the Mamiya C330. Sharp, excellent contrast and amazing colors.

I'll get some scans up later (need to install my scanner again).


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Got my roll back that I ran through the Mamiya C330. Sharp, excellent contrast and amazing colors.

I'll get some scans up later (need to install my scanner again).


Who do you send away to, how much did it cost you, and what film did you shoot with?

Bitter sweet day for photography for me.

I have a feeling I loaded my latest roll incorrectly. I usually get 38 shots on a roll of 36, however, I shot 40 this time and stopped. And when I went to wind the roll, it felt very wrong. I'm going to take it to the camera store and have them open the camera in a dark room.

Anyone know if they would be able to determine if the whole roll was exposed or not? I get the feeling that I exposed frame one 40 times.

Been having a bit of trouble getting these rolls in properly lately. I hope there is nothing wrong with the winding mechanism.

So that's a bummer. I was expecting some really nice shots.

On the upside, I went out with the 'new' Sigma DL 75mm-300mm. Looking through the viewfinder, I want to say it may be one of the sharpest lenses I now have, though it was a pretty clear day today, so that may have had something to do with it. The real test comes when I actually expose some film (properly) with it.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


Who do you send away to, how much did it cost you, and what film did you shoot with?


I get it done locally. http://marinfilmworks.com/

Costs 4.49 a roll. And I shot with Kodak Ektar 100 (highly recommend it for landscape photography).


----------



## theCanadian

Lucky! It costs me nearly $9 to get a roll developed.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


Lucky! It costs me nearly $9 to get a roll developed.


Holy crap that's high. Where do you get it developed?


----------



## theCanadian

Wolf Camera. Only place within 20 miles that I can find that has CD service... and develops in shop. Everyone else has to send away.


----------



## Marin

Here's the scan (just a simple test shot). Content aware fill works nicely for cleaning up dust.



- Mamiya C330 + Mamiya-Sekor 55mm f/4.5
- Kodak Ektar 100


----------



## Matrixvibe

Just some random pics.

Gotta clean the gauge cluster...


...and engine bay as well...


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Here's the scan (just a simple test shot). Content aware fill works nicely for cleaning up dust.



- Mamiya C330 + Mamiya-Sekor 55mm f/4.5
- Kodak Ektar 100

Your 930's thirsty Marin. Time to go water!!!

I ran my 940 for awhile on air and it was darn toasty.

nice film and scan. Gotta go back there when field sports die down.

Gotta make hay while the sun shines though. The $$ these parents pay on the weekends is totally sick. I never would have dreamed it.
I paid for my 12-24 and 600 with money made this year alone.


----------



## Marin

I just realized I forgot to flip the scan in Photoshop. I'll fix it next week once I'm back home, lol.


----------



## dudemanppl

Might be trading the 300 for a 400 >







Freshman with 400 f/2.8 wat.


----------



## Marin

Hax.

Anyways, I'm in NYC right now. I'll be going to the B&H superstore.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Hax.

Anyways, I'm in NYC right now. I'll be going to the B&H superstore.


Too bad the 1200 sold.


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Hax.

Anyways, I'm in NYC right now. I'll be going to the B&H superstore.


Tell them to hurry up and stock some more 35mm Ektar 100 so I can buy some.


----------



## laboitenoire

Okay, went shooting yesterday at a local Audobon sanctuary, and long story short I decided I need a telephoto. Thinking of buying refurb, and I'm debating between the 55-200 VR or the 70-300 VR. I've used a 55-200 several times before, but I've not liked how it felt or the image quality on my camera. However, I'm not sure if the 70-300 is worth another $250.


----------



## theCanadian

What lenses do you already have?

From what I hear, large zoom lenses are not the way to go. However, I was pleasantly surprised to find that the 75mm-300mm lens that I recently purchased was quite sharp.

But since it does cover such a wide focal range, focusing is touchy and harder to get precise (Mine is a manual focus). Your camera may or may not have the same difficulty.

I think the 55-200 would be better. But then again, I have no feel for the world of digital cameras.


----------



## Mootsfox

I think the 70-300mm is a better piece of glass. I'd say get the 70-300mm AF-D instead cause it's $100, but you have a D5000


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


Originally Posted by *theCanadian* 
What lenses do you already have?

From what I hear, large zoom lenses are not the way to go. However, I was pleasantly surprised to find that the 75mm-300mm lens that I recently purchased was quite sharp.

But since it does cover such a wide focal range, focusing is touchy and harder to get precise (Mine is a manual focus). Your camera may or may not have the same difficulty.

I think the 55-200 would be better. But then again, I have no feel for the world of digital cameras.

I currently have the 18-55 VR. From what I've read, the 70-300 VR is slightly sharper than the 55-200 VR, and it has much sturdier construction.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
I think the 70-300mm is a better piece of glass. I'd say get the 70-300mm AF-D instead cause it's $100, but you have a D5000









Even if I could go with the AF-D version, I think I'd still go for the VR because I have reasonably shaky hands, so it would really limit me to higher shutter speeds.


----------



## nuclearjock

The 70-300 is a whole different lens. Different optical formula, the works.
I have one and it performs beautifully on my D3 as well as my D300. highly recommended.


----------



## Marin

Just went to B&H. It's awesome!

There's so much camera stuff there and I tried out a couple of lenses. And I got a 24-70mm coming in the mail now.


----------



## Danylu

The 70-300 VR is pretty good for a tele zoom that doesn't cost too much.


----------



## nuclearjock

Forgot to indicate VR as in 70-300 VR in my post above. 2 ED elements, plus different optical formula that makes a difference in IQ. more $$ but if u can hack it go for it.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Just went to B&H. It's awesome!

There's so much camera stuff there and I tried out a couple of lenses. And I got a 24-70mm coming in the mail now.










I wanted to go to B&H when I was in NYC a few weeks ago (as did my dad), but mom and the sister wouldn't stand for it.









On another note, I just pulled the trigger on a refurb 70-300 VR ($400 from Adorama) and an 8 gig SD card. I decided not to go for 3-day shipping, as I figure that I live close enough to New York that even if it ships on Wednesday, I should still get it by Monday with the $6 2-4 day shipping option. And if it arrives after I leave to go back to Cleveland, I'm sure the parents won't mind forwarding the box to my dorm.


----------



## Boyboyd

Later this month i'll hopefully be going to a music festival with a family friend who is a press photographer. I'm going to take my D5000 along and see what I can make of it.

I have a 55-200 but I was looking at renting a Lens for the day, any suggestions? Or if not, what kind of focal length should i be looking at? I'd be in the press pit which is between the crowd and the stage (not the best place to be standing concerning projectiles, lol). I've honestly got no idea what kind of lens a pro would use, because it's not quite sports photography :s


----------



## laboitenoire

What type of concert? If it was a metal festival, I'd just go with the 55-200 in case you get hit with something...


----------



## Boyboyd

haha, it's a mixed bag. Mostly Indie / Rock i'd say though. If anyone's interested it's Leeds Festival.

http://www.leedsfestival.com/lineup/index.aspx


----------



## nuclearjock

If it's gonna go into the evening, you might want f/2.8. On your cropped body, a 200 f/2 would be awesome, or a 70-200 f/2.8 would also do nicely.


----------



## Mootsfox

Buy my 180mm f/2.8









I would recommend renting the 70-200mm f/2.8 VRI or VRII.

Though, you'll want one for yourself after renting it


----------



## iandroo888

70-200mm indeed but maybe a 24-70 would be sufficient considering that ull be up close next to stage between crowd and performers


----------



## Mootsfox

The 24-70 is a nice piece of glass, but you'd be better off with the 17-55mm on a crop body.


----------



## iandroo888

or that. i keep forgetting about the 17-55 !


----------



## dudemanppl

Tamron 17-50? Nobody likes off brand here.









Nikon D700 + MB-D10 and Eneloops
Nikon F100 + MB-15 and Eneloops

Sigma 12-24mm f/4.5-5.6 EX DG HSM
Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di LD Non-BIM
Nikkor 80-200mm f/2.8 AF-S D

Rokion 8mm f/3.5 AI-S Fish Eye
Sigma 24mm f/1.8 EX DG
Nikkor 35mm f/1.8 AF-S G DX
Sigma 50mm f/1.4 EX DG HSM
Nikkor 85mm f/1.8 AF-D
Nikkor 300mm f/2.8 AF-I D

RODE VideoMic
Nikon SB600 x2
Yong Nuo 460 II x2
40" Shoot Through x2
Crappy $20 Lightstand x2
Crappy Canon Tripod
Manfrotto 776YB Monopod


----------



## Marin

Gear list update:

Quote:



*Body: *
- Canon 5D Mark II
- Nikon F3HP
- Hasselblad 201F + A12
- Mamiya C330
- Zeiss Ikon Contessa (Folder)

*Lenses: *
- Canon 50mm f/1.2L 
- Canon 135mm f/2L
- Canon 24-70mm f/2.8L
- Contax Zeiss 85mm f/1.4
- Nikkor 50mm f/1.2 AI
- Nikkor 55mm f/1.2 AI
- Zuiko 50mm f/1.4
- Zuiko 50mm f/1.2
- Zuiko 21mm f/3.5
- Hasselblad Zeiss 80mm f/2.8 T*
- Mamiya Sekor 55mm f/4.5
- Mamiya Sekor 80mm f/2.8
- Mamiya Sekor 180mm f/4.5

*Bags:*
- Crumpler 7MDH
- Domke F-4AF

*Tripods:*
- Benro A-269M8 + B-1 Ballhead

*Filters:*
- B+W Filters
- Lee 4x4" Filter Holder (foundation kit) 
- Hitech 4x4" ND 1.2 Resin Filter
- Hitech 4x5" GND 0.6 Resin Filter


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Tamron 17-50? Nobody likes off brand here.









Nikon D700 + MB-D10 and Eneloops
Nikon F100 + MB-15 and Eneloops

Sigma 12-24mm f/4.5-5.6 EX DG HSM
Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di LD Non-BIM
Nikkor 80-200mm f/2.8 AF-S D

Rokion 8mm f/3.5 AI-S Fish Eye
Sigma 24mm f/1.8 EX DG
Nikkor 35mm f/1.8 AF-S G DX
Sigma 50mm f/1.4 EX DG HSM
Nikkor 85mm f/1.8 AF-D
Nikkor 300mm f/2.8 AF-I D

RODE VideoMic
Nikon SB600 x2
Yong Nuo 460 II x2
40" Shoot Through x2
Crappy $20 Lightstand x2
Crappy Canon Tripod
Manfrotto 776YB Monopod


Next time you sell off to go back to Canon, talk to me about the 80-200mm


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Buy my 180mm f/2.8









I would recommend renting the 70-200mm f/2.8 VRI or VRII.

Though, you'll want one for yourself after renting it










Yeah, I'm avoiding renting one because I'll want to buy one to replace my 80-200mm.

I think when nikon release their next line of SLRs I'll grab some new glass to go with it. Time to start saving.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Next time you sell off to go back to Canon, talk to me about the 80-200mm










T.T i wanted that T.T


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Next time you sell off to go back to Canon, talk to me about the 80-200mm










Canon sucks, and the next time I switch is next summer. Gonna get a Zeiss Ikon and a Nokton 35 1.4. And the 80-200 has squeaky AF and makes a weird noise when MFing.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Canon sucks, and the next time I switch is next summer. Gonna get a Zeiss Ikon and a Nokton 35 1.4. And the 80-200 has squeaky AF and makes a weird noise when MFing.


So you'll sell it cheap?


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


So you'll sell it cheap?










I'll sell it for 850, if you want to wait a year!


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dudemanppl* 
I'll sell it for 850, if you want to wait a year!










Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*
Cheap

I'll quote myself.

I was thinking you'd do like $20 for your buddy Moots.


----------



## iandroo888

*cough* $50


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
I'll quote myself.

I was thinking you'd do like $20 for your buddy Moots.









How about 25?


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
The 24-70 is a nice piece of glass, but you'd be better off with the 17-55mm on a crop body.

I've just had a check for that one, it's quite reasonable (Â£57 for a week) but there's a Â£1000 deposit. Going to shop around and see if I can find one with a Â£500 deposit.

Edit: A thought occurs, i'm going with a professional photographer who uses a Nikon. I'll ask him if i can borrow one for the day.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Boyboyd* 
I've just had a check for that one, it's quite reasonable (Â£57 for a week) but there's a Â£1000 deposit. Going to shop around and see if I can find one with a Â£500 deposit.

Edit: A thought occurs, i'm going with a professional photographer who uses a Nikon. I'll ask him if i can borrow one for the day.

1000 pound deposit? The lens doesn't even cost that much...


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


1000 pound deposit? The lens doesn't even cost that much...


Yeah i know, it's a lot. On amazon.co.uk it costs Â£979.99. How much is it across the pond?

I've found a website that doesn't ask for a deposit, however if it gets damaged you have to pay for it (obviously).


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*


Yeah i know, it's a lot. On amazon.co.uk it costs Â£979.99. How much is it across the pond?

I've found a website that doesn't ask for a deposit, however if it gets damaged you have to pay for it (obviously).


Iunno, but they're like less than 900 bucks used in perfect condition, boxed and all.


----------



## Boyboyd

Curses... My friend's in New York now too. Think my next lens will be the 24mm f2.8 prime though.


----------



## laboitenoire

According to UPS, my lens is somewhere between the local distribution facility and Secaucus and will be arriving tomorrow. Sweet!

Unfortunately, I'll be at a business dinner tomorrow so I won't be able to play extensively with it.


----------



## sbao26975

T1i with EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS Lens and EF-S 55-250mm f/4.0-5.6 IS


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sbao26975*


T1i with EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS Lens and EF-S 55-250mm f/4.0-5.6 IS


Newegg combo deal?


----------



## laboitenoire

Hey Gone, could you add a Nikkor 70-300 f/4.5-5.6 VR to my profile when you get a chance?

Jesus, this lens is big... More than doubles the weight of my D5000.


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Hey Gone, could you add a Nikkor 70-300 f/4.5-5.6 VR to my profile when you get a chance?

Jesus, this lens is big... More than doubles the weight of my D5000.


Yeah, telephotos can be very heavy. My 80-200 is almost 3lbs.


----------



## theCanadian

My 75-300 is about 4. If not more.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Hey Gone, could you add a Nikkor 70-300 f/4.5-5.6 VR to my profile when you get a chance?

Jesus, this lens is big... More than doubles the weight of my D5000.


You should see what a 70-200 f/2.8 feels like on your camera. You have to be careful with heavy lenses and the smaller and lighter entry-level bodies when using a tripod as they can be front heavy. I believe there are aftermarket tripod collars for the Nikkor 70-300.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *theCanadian* 
My 75-300 is about 4. If not more.

I doubt that.

The 70-200 f/2.8 is a monster piece of metal and glass and it weighs a bit over 3lbs.










Also camera peen shot:


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
You should see what a 70-200 f/2.8 feels like on your camera. You have to be careful with heavy lenses and the smaller and lighter entry-level bodies when using a tripod as they can be front heavy. I believe there are aftermarket tripod collars for the Nikkor 70-300.

Yeah, I wouldn't want to hold my D80 by the body when my 80-200mm is on it. I had to pick up one of these. It's usable on many zoom and telephoto lenses.


----------



## iandroo888

somethin to consider is maybe a new strap. heard the black rapid straps are quite good for carrying around bodies with big lenses... very comfortable.


----------



## mz-n10

the 70-200/2.8 isnt really tat big nor heavy. you need to start worrying about the mount snapping when you go with a 300/2.8 or bigger prime.

imo rapid straps are hyped up. look into a crumpler or lowepro strap and if you need a dual body harness optech has a pretty cheap and nice one.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mz-n10* 
the 70-200/2.8 isnt really tat big nor heavy. you need to start worrying about the mount snapping when you go with a 300/2.8 or bigger prime.

imo rapid straps are hyped up. look into a crumpler or lowepro strap and if you need a dual body harness optech has a pretty cheap and nice one.

Mount doesn't snap with 300 2.8s, I've had a bunch of friends hold my gripped D300s with the 300 on like a point and shoot. I still don't know how the manage that.


----------



## iandroo888

crumpler or lowepro.. will look into those xD

ah they both have.. like iunoe an advanced more complex neck strap? reason why i like the RS straps is cuz its a cross body strap. i dislike neck straps.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Mount doesn't snap with 300 2.8s, I've had a bunch of friends hold my gripped D300s with the 300 on like a point and shoot. I still don't know how the manage that.


Once the lens weighs more than the body, you need to switch how you hold it imo.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Once the lens weighs more than the body, you need to switch how you hold it imo.


I know that, I never hold it like that. I cry inside when they do it.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *laboitenoire* 
Hey Gone, could you add a Nikkor 70-300 f/4.5-5.6 VR to my profile when you get a chance?

Jesus, this lens is big... More than doubles the weight of my D5000.

Glad you went the VR route not only for the VR but the glass as well. A very nice lens indeed. Have fun.


----------



## laboitenoire

Yeah, I must say the VR on this guy is pretty damn good! I can ocassionally get sharp shots at 300 with only 1/15 shutter speed.


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Yeah, I must say the VR on this guy is pretty damn good! I can ocassionally get sharp shots at 300 with only 1/15 shutter speed.


Yeah, VR tech is pretty amazing. 
If I can scrape enough money together to get a 70-200 VRII in the semi-near future I'll be very happy.







I've gotten used to shooting sans-VR but it really gets annoying trying to keep the shutter speed above the length of the lens. (200mm=~1/200s, 80mm=~1/80s, etc)









I've been noticing a lot of noise in my photos recently, even when shooting at ISO200. Also many hot pixels(I think there are more than before) Is this the sensor starting to fail on my camera?


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Sparhawk*


Also many hot pixels(I think there are more than before) Is this the sensor starting to fail on my camera?










Many hot pixels alone = failed sensor. Bad news.

Replacing the D80 with anything = Good news.

I had a D80 for about a week when they first came out and didn't like it at all. metering was inconsistent, af was funky. Bit the bullet and bought a D300 and never looked back. In retrospect, I probably should have kept the D80 and had it converted to IR.


----------



## sbao26975

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Newegg combo deal?










Nah, amazon free lens deal


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


Many hot pixels alone = failed sensor. Bad news.

Replacing the D80 with anything = Good news.

I had a D80 for about a week when they first came out and didn't like it at all. metering was inconsistent, af was funky. Bit the bullet and bought a D300 and never looked back. In retrospect, I probably should have kept the D80 and had it converted to IR.


I've really liked my D80, it had a few hot pixels when I first got it like maybe two, now there is about 10... makes post-processing a pita.

I have definitely noticed the metering and AF issues. It's not a huge deal if you are aware of the issue but can be annoying at times. I started shooting raw to help compensate for that a little bit. Using CaptureNX2 has helped a quite a bit too.

So you'd suggest a D300 as an upgrade/side-grade? What about the D90, as far as I know it is pretty much the same as my D80. Was hoping to go full-frame on my upgrade but with this sensor on the way out I guess I'll have to keep crop as I have no budget for a FF camera.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


crumpler or lowepro.. will look into those xD

ah they both have.. like iunoe an advanced more complex neck strap? reason why i like the RS straps is cuz its a cross body strap. i dislike neck straps.


Most neck straps are long enough for cross-body carriage. The Crumpler Industry Disgrace is very comfortable for either neck or cross-body.

The Black Rapid straps are nice, but I don't like that they connect to the tripod mount.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


the 70-200/2.8 isnt really tat big nor heavy. you need to start worrying about the mount snapping when you go with a 300/2.8 or bigger prime.

imo rapid straps are hyped up. look into a crumpler or lowepro strap and if you need a dual body harness optech has a pretty cheap and nice one.


I don't think anyone really expects the mount to snap, but the center of gravity is the problem. For example, a 70-200 f/2.8 on a Canon Digital Rebel mounted _without_ a collar will stay on fine, but the tripod can possibly tip forward. 70-200 f/2.8 lenses usually come with a collar for this reason, but the 70-300 lenses don't.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Sparhawk*


Yeah, VR tech is pretty amazing. 
If I can scrape enough money together to get a 70-200 VRII in the semi-near future I'll be very happy.







I've gotten used to shooting sans-VR but it really gets annoying trying to keep the shutter speed above the length of the lens. (200mm=~1/200s, 80mm=~1/80s, etc)









I've been noticing a lot of noise in my photos recently, even when shooting at ISO200. Also many hot pixels(I think there are more than before) Is this the sensor starting to fail on my camera?










Sample shots? It's easy to amplify noise unintentionally, like when you increase the exposure or brightness in post, especially if it's a low light shot. 
Also, longer exposures can cause hot pixels due to the extra heat in the sensor.


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Sample shots? It's easy to amplify noise unintentionally, like when you increase the exposure or brightness in post, especially if it's a low light shot. 
Also, longer exposures can cause hot pixels due to the extra heat in the sensor.


I don't have any uploaded at the moment, but should have a chance to get some shots up onto my flickr account later.

Most of the shots are day-time shots pretty normal exposures, ~1/200s-1/2000s. I'll see if I can find some decent comparison shots from when the camera was new and see if there is a difference. Maybe I'm just noticing the noise more recently.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Sparhawk*


I've really liked my D80, it had a few hot pixels when I first got it like maybe two, now there is about 10... makes post-processing a pita.

I have definitely noticed the metering and AF issues. It's not a huge deal if you are aware of the issue but can be annoying at times. I started shooting raw to help compensate for that a little bit. Using CaptureNX2 has helped a quite a bit too.

So you'd suggest a D300 as an upgrade/side-grade? What about the D90, as far as I know it is pretty much the same as my D80. Was hoping to go full-frame on my upgrade but with this sensor on the way out I guess I'll have to keep crop as I have no budget for a FF camera.


The D90 is a big update. The only thing that's similar to the D80 is the body and controls.

Unless you need the larger, more rugged body of the D300, the D90 would be better. The D90 sensor is (very slightly) better than the D300, and offers video.


----------



## Sparhawk

Hmm, does that apply to the D300s as well? According to KR the D90 is the way to go unless I want to go FF and grab the D700.

What kind of prices should I be looking for?(keep in mind I'm in Canada so prices are a bit higher here)


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Sparhawk* 
Hmm, does that apply to the D300s as well? According to KR the D90 is the way to go unless I want to go FF and grab the D700.

What kind of prices should I be looking for?(keep in mind I'm in Canada so prices are a bit higher here)

To a degree. The D90, D300 and D300s all have the same sensor, but different processors. If video has zero weight for you, it would be D90->D300->D300s. If you want to shoot video, then D300->D90->D300s from worst to best.


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
To a degree. The D90, D300 and D300s all have the same sensor, but different processors. If video has zero weight for you, it would be D90->D300->D300s. If you want to shoot video, then D300->D90->D300s from worst to best.

Video is kind of crippled on Nikon cameras so it's not a big factor at all. I'd be perfectly fine with my D80 but the hot pixels and noise are very troublesome.

So I guess I'll be looking at the D90. Aren't too many cheap used ones for sale, most are around $600-800 and new ones are $800. I was hoping to get a deal. I might look for another D80 that I can grab since they are going for about half that.

Also: +imaginary rep to the helpful mods.


----------



## laboitenoire

Try looking around for refurbs. Nikon is generally pretty good with them, as I've found with all of my current gear.

EDIT: Decided to go ahead and upgrade to a Pro Flickr account.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


I don't think anyone really expects the mount to snap, but the center of gravity is the problem. For example, a 70-200 f/2.8 on a Canon Digital Rebel mounted _without_ a collar will stay on fine, but the tripod can possibly tip forward. 70-200 f/2.8 lenses usually come with a collar for this reason, but the 70-300 lenses don't.


i knwo, like i said the 70-200/2.8 isnt tat heavy of a lens. but if you say had a 200/1.8 or 400/2.8 there might be a problem with teh mount snapping.


----------



## Sparhawk

Haven't had a chance to upload some sample shots, but I checked some raw shots from when I first got the camera and there weren't any hot pixels. Now there's about 10 or 20 I haven't actually counted.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Sparhawk*


Haven't had a chance to upload some sample shots, but I checked some raw shots from when I first got the camera and there weren't any hot pixels. Now there's about 10 or 20 I haven't actually counted.


That sucks. Under warranty still?

On another note, I finally got a better tripod (not that I don't like the Manfrotto 725b), a Gitzo G1127 Mk2 Mountaineer Sport Carbon:










Carbon fiber & magnesium goodness, weighing in at 2.5 lbs (3.2 w/head). And not only is my 5D "MkII," but so is the tripod!!!







It was a desperation sale, nabbed it for $150 on Craigslist. No head yet, but I just ordered a Manfrotto 494RC2 to top it.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*












Holy crap thats cheap. I only find good deals on lenses.


----------



## laboitenoire

Finally getting around to uploading photos from the past month or so to my Flickr...


----------



## theCanadian

I see dirty laundry. I hear the police are mighty interested in that kind of thing. Or something like that.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


I see dirty laundry. I hear the police are mighty interested in that kind of thing. Or something like that.


I'll have you know that's clean laundry!


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Finally getting around to uploading photos from the past month or so to my Flickr...


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


That sucks. Under warranty still?

On another note, I finally got a better tripod (not that I don't like the Manfrotto 725b), a Gitzo G1127 Mk2 Mountaineer Sport Carbon:










Carbon fiber & magnesium goodness, weighing in at 2.5 lbs (3.2 w/head). And not only is my 5D "MkII," but so is the tripod!!!







It was a desperation sale, nabbed it for $150 on Craigslist. No head yet, but I just ordered a Manfrotto 494RC2 to top it.










That very well might be the last tripod you buy GT. Gitzo's are built like tanks.
Nice choice. I've seen some RRS tripods at a couple of shoots that are also pretty sweet but they look like Gitzo knock offs. What's the load spec on that model??


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
That very well might be the last tripod you buy GT. Gitzo's are built like tanks.
Nice choice. I've seen some RRS tripods at a couple of shoots that are also pretty sweet but they look like Gitzo knock offs. What's the load spec on that model??

9.9 lbs. It's an older model, going back to at
least 2003. Not a quantum leap over my other, but features like the twist locks for the legs and the hyper extending legs are nice.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Boyboyd* 









Links will be forthcoming in a bit.

One thing that's been on my mind: What is your opinion about obscuring license plates?


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


Originally Posted by *laboitenoire* 
Links will be forthcoming in a bit.

One thing that's been on my mind: What is your opinion about obscuring license plates?

I only do my own, just because i don't want people on OCN knowing my registration number. I usually leave others alone though.


----------



## Squeeker The Cat

ok guys...........im saving for my first DSLR (EOS Rebel) to replace my S5 IS...anyway my wife wants a camera for her purse........she says...........

"something small, pink, and with a fast button" meaning she wants it to take a pic as she pushes button, not take pic after the object is gone!!

anyway guys, its going in her new Coach bag with matching Coach camera holder LOL so i dont want to spend a ton on a camera since i just spent a ton on her bags.........

what do you guys think?? whats pink, fast, and small?? (wow the jokes are filling my head)

EDIT.....as close to $200.00 as possible.......if over please not by too much...itll be just a camera for a purse that can take great quick pics!!


----------



## Marin

Budget?


----------



## Squeeker The Cat

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Budget?

LOL sorry $200.00 ish


----------



## Marin

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...S_Digital.html

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...S_Digital.html


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Squeeker The Cat*


ok guys...........im saving for my first DSLR (EOS Rebel) to replace my S5 IS...anyway my wife wants a camera for her purse........she says...........

"something small, pink, and with a fast button" meaning she wants it to take a pic as she pushes button, not take pic after the object is gone!!

anyway guys, its going in her new Coach bag with matching Coach camera holder LOL so i dont want to spend a ton on a camera since i just spent a ton on her bags.........

what do you guys think?? whats pink, fast, and small?? (wow the jokes are filling my head)

EDIT.....as close to $200.00 as possible.......if over please not by too much...itll be just a camera for a purse that can take great quick pics!!


The Canon Powershot SD cameras have some of the fastest shot-to-shot times in their category. My wife has a Canon Powershot SD1000 that we got 4 years ago and it's great. The current SD lineup is good too.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Amazing deal on the tripod Gone, I have wanted a Mountaineer for some time now, probably going to get a 190XPROB and 494RC2 combo for christmas.

And I FINALLY got out and a chance to use my 70-200mm from Nuke (I know, took me long enough







)

Anyway, I now miss how often I used to go out, and am glad I have the rest of the summer off.










































Needless to say I love the lens and want to get out birding now.

Wish I had got closer to the heron, but when you are soloing in a canoe its hard to move close and shoot at the same time


----------



## been11

Hello everybody I'd like to join the group.

I have a Canon Rebel T1i with an 18-55mm and an 80-200mm telephoto.

Here are some of my shots:


----------



## Sparhawk

Welcome. Some nice shots. Makes me want to get back out shooting more often. This summer has been very sparse.

Although, I have taken a few: http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/ (recently added a few dozen or so shots.)


----------



## been11

Thanks! You've got some great shots there. I haven't shot much this summer either. The ones I posted are a bit old.


----------



## Marin

Gah, scanning is annoying at times.



Anyways, took this at midnight. Was testing out my C330 but the VF is way too dim for night usage so I switched to my 201F. I have a new VF coming in the mail so hopefully that makes the C330 a lot more usable.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *been11* 
Hello everybody I'd like to join the group.

I have a Canon Rebel T1i with an 18-55mm and an 80-200mm telephoto.

Here are some of my shots:

Which 80-200?

Also, I've discussed this with the other staff, and it *is allowed* to advertise your FS thread (with camera gear for sale) in this thread. The reason this has been an issue is because members have been reporting such posts in this thread and they have been deleted by moderators. I'm not chastising those members either, because reporting is something that isn't done enough. But in this instance, advertising a personal sale posted in the FS forum in this thread doesn't violate the TOS.

However, it is _not_ permitted to start an entirely new thread to advertise your sale. Do it here only! Also, you cannot advertise an outside sale (eBay, etc.), just one in the FS forum.


----------



## laboitenoire

Here's some linkage:

From my weekend in NYC back in July:






Taken at my local Audobon Sanctuary:






And finally, some shots with my new 70-300 VR:


----------



## Sparhawk

Some pretty great shots there. I like the city-scape ones the best I think, I need more practice with city shots.
I'm actually just about to head off and take some photos of the local countryside.
(My excuse to test drive my car after tweaking the distributor.)


----------



## mz-n10

love the ny shots. wish you had a wider lens tho, a little foreground would have been icing on the cake.


----------



## laboitenoire

One more I forgot to post. This was about half way out on the Brooklyn Bridge.



And believe me, I'd like a wider lens, too! Too bad I won't be able to afford it for a while...


----------



## Squeeker The Cat

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...S_Digital.html

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...S_Digital.html



Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


The Canon Powershot SD cameras have some of the fastest shot-to-shot times in their category. My wife has a Canon Powershot SD1000 that we got 4 years ago and it's great. The current SD lineup is good too.


thanks Marin.....im liking that second camera...especially with the HD video part....

but do you guys suppose there is a "like" camera that does not use rechargeable batteries?? AA or AAA is soo much better LOL


----------



## Mootsfox

Rechargeable batteries are soo much better, really. They last longer, can be smaller and are usually better cameras overall.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mootsfox* 
rechargeable batteries are soo much better, really. They last longer, can be smaller and are usually better cameras overall.

+1


----------



## GoneTomorrow

In a moment of weakness today, I almost bought a new 85 f/1.2L at the camera shop. It was just staring at me (I went looking for a 135 f/2, but they didn't have any).


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


In a moment of weakness today, I almost bought a new 85 f/1.2L at the camera shop. It was just staring at me (I went looking for a 135 f/2, but they didn't have any).


You should buy it.









Anyways, got the 24-70mm today. It was made July 2010 and actually focuses way better than the one at B&H. Nails focus perfectly. (The lens at B&H shifted when focusing closer)









And a Zeiss Ikon Contessa. My grandfather got this back when he was stationed in Korea and gave it to me two months ago as a graduation gift.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


You should buy it.









Anyways, got the 24-70mm today. It was made July 2010 and actually focuses way better than the one at B&H. Nails focus perfectly. (The lens at B&H shifted when focusing closer)









And a Zeiss Ikon Contessa. My grandfather got this back when he was stationed in Korea and gave it to me two months ago as a graduation gift.










Couldn't splurge, they wanted $2050 for it (plus 6% tax). Often I will buy gear at higher markups (i.e. B&M and not online) because we have a really good local store that I support. But seeing as how I could save potentially $200 or more online, I passed. I would have bought the 135 if they had it, since it's much cheaper.

Really cool, the Zeiss. Would love to see shots from it!

The 24-70 is a great lens (Dec. '09, newer than mine!). Maybe not as sharp as the L primes, but still sharp and the contrast and colors are off the charts. And I think the AF issues with the 24-70 are hyped. Supposedly the focus can miss at 24mm and at the MFD, but honestly I've never had a shot ruined by it which I couldn't attribute to user error.


----------



## Marin

Yeah, the issue probably is exaggerated. Just like how POTN members think the microcontrast on Zeiss lenses is godlike.









I'm surprised about the weight of this lens. It's actually heavier than my 70-200mm f/4L IS (950g compared to 760g). Not a bad thing though since the lens feels really solid. Excellent build and nicely damped rings for an AF zoom lens.

And once I finish off the roll in the Zeiss I'll upload some scans.


----------



## theCanadian

What scanner do you use Marin?


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *theCanadian* 
What scanner do you use Marin?

Epson V700. Works nicely for Medium and Large format scans, but it's a pain in the butt for 35mm scans (it either batch scans them cropped or I have to individually scan them in order to obtain the whole photo).

Might have to give the SilverFast software a try...


----------



## ThaJoker

oooh yeahhhh i got my NEX5 on the weekend. best cam iv'e had by far, ill post some pics when i get home.


----------



## mz-n10

interested in some feedback for the nex5. been hankering to pick one up with the 16mm pancake but havent gotten around to it. do you shoot a dslr? if so which and how does it compare?


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


I almost bought a new 85 f/1.2L at the camera shop.


Wierd that Canon doesn't make an 85 f/1.4. I got a recent lecture from someone on the Nikon cafe' regarding the virtues of f/1.2 vs f/1.4 and the guy was probably right. f/1.2 really isn't all that compared to f/1.4, but if f/1.4 isn't offerred then I guess you have no choice. I like the 85mm fl though.

After shooting medium to long fl for so long, I'm really trying to wrap my hands around this new 14-24 f/2.8. The IQ is stunning, but you really need to re-think how you compose shots. I'll post something when I fugure out what I'm doing. On FF 14mm is really wide.


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


Wierd that Canon doesn't make an 85 f/1.4. I got a recent lecture from someone on the Nikon cafe' regarding the virtues of f/1.2 vs f/1.4 and the guy was probably right. f/1.2 really isn't all that compared to f/1.4, but if f/1.4 isn't offerred then I guess you have no choice. I like the 85mm fl though.

After shooting medium to long fl for so long, I'm really trying to wrap my hands around this new 14-24 f/2.8. The IQ is stunning, but you really need to re-think how you compose shots. I'll post something when I fugure out what I'm doing. On FF 14mm is really wide.


Hell yeah 14mm is REALLY wide. I've got a 28mm and I was like, 'wow, this is pretty wide'. And 14mm is 'twice' as wide. I can't imagine what a 6mm would be like...


----------



## nuclearjock

What's amazing about the 14-24 is the fact that there is little if any barrel distortion which is one of the reasons I decided on this lens over the 16-35 VR, (although I'll probably wind up with the 16-35 as well). What little there is, it's virtually gone by 18mm. Incredible. I may post some computer room pics later tonight just to show you what I'm talking about.


----------



## Boyboyd

14mm is classed as fisheye isn't it? Been through some pretty amazing weather today, shame i was driving so couldn't take photos (camera was in my boot).

Not sure if this belongs here but..

http://vimeo.com/4505537


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*


14mm is classed as fisheye isn't it? Been through some pretty amazing weather today, shame i was driving so couldn't take photos (camera was in my boot).

Not sure if this belongs here but..

http://vimeo.com/4505537


It's only fisheye if it distorts the image. You could have a 50mm fisheye if it had bad enough distortion.

The 14-24 is one of the best lenses for keeping straight lines straight, so it is probably further from fisheye than many regular lenses.

EDIT: They tend to call this type of lens "ultra wide."


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Sparhawk*


It's only fisheye if it distorts the image. You could have an 50mm fisheye if it had bad enough distortion.

The 14-24 is one of the best lenses for keeping straight lines straight, so it is probably further from fisheye than many regular lenses.


wow, never knew that before. Thanks


----------



## Sparhawk

Here's some good examples:

Shots from the 14-24: http://www.flickr.com/groups/nikon14-24mm/pool/

general Fisheye group: http://www.flickr.com/groups/fisheye_fanatics/


----------



## theCanadian

I've got a friend who's looking to extend his reach with an SLR. He's got the near field covered with a point n' shoot, and wanted something for perhaps shooting some wildlife around the house. As a college student, we're wanting to keep the cost down so we were looking at film SLR's. Any suggestions on bodies and/or lenses that aren't going to be too expensive but will still serve the purpose would be greatly appreciated.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
Wierd that Canon doesn't make an 85 f/1.4. I got a recent lecture from someone on the Nikon cafe' regarding the virtues of f/1.2 vs f/1.4 and the guy was probably right. f/1.2 really isn't all that compared to f/1.4, but if f/1.4 isn't offerred then I guess you have no choice. I like the 85mm fl though.

After shooting medium to long fl for so long, I'm really trying to wrap my hands around this new 14-24 f/2.8. The IQ is stunning, but you really need to re-think how you compose shots. I'll post something when I fugure out what I'm doing. On FF 14mm is really wide.

Yeah, and the lens is a horse. Freakin' huge!

I went through same experience when I first got the Canon 10-22. At first I had very few keepers with it and the perspective distortion was so pronounced that I ended up correcting and cropping a lot. But when I learned out to use it to my advantage, it became the only lens I used for several months.

I want to get another UWA now that I've gone FF, but for the price the Canon 16-35 f/2.8 L II isn't worth it (moreso when compared to the Nikon 14-24). Soft corners even at f/8 on that lens.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Boyboyd* 
14mm is classed as fisheye isn't it? Been through some pretty amazing weather today, shame i was driving so couldn't take photos (camera was in my boot).

Not sure if this belongs here but..

http://vimeo.com/4505537

Yeah, fishies are non-rectilinear lenses, meaning that a round lens produces round images (like the Steven Wright joke) unlike corrected lenses.


----------



## Marin

http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/08/l...lenses-lenses/

Mmmm rumors.


----------



## laboitenoire

I must say, the D3100 and the new lenses from Nikon are looking pretty impressive.


----------



## Marin

http://www.dpreview.com/news/1008/10081915nikon85mm.asp

About time they released it. I'm interested in seeing how it performs since it has a completely new optical design. For the rest of the stuff announced, meh.

Also, got a bunch of Sinar Large Format equipment today.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


http://www.dpreview.com/news/1008/10081915nikon85mm.asp

About time they released it. I'm interested in seeing how it performs since it has a completely new optical design. For the rest of the stuff announced, meh.

Also, got a bunch of Sinar Large Format equipment today.


I wonder who'll be the first to review it. I think it'll be dpreview. They're usually quick.

But the D3100 has a drive mode dial. Was a bit surprised to see this on an entry level body but its a good surprise









My take on the Nikon lenses:

85mm 1.4 - makes me wish my 50mm 1.4G had N coating. The pricing also gives the Sigma equiv a bit of room. Also too expensive for me.

55-300mm VR - Leapfrogs the 55-250mm Canon. Suppose it offers more 100mm more zoom over the current 55-200, but I have a 70-300mm VR so I'm not interested.

28-300mm - Well an upscaled 18-200mm lol. A rather curious lens. The 28-300L is a monster and if this does well, it'd be pretty good.

24-120mm VR - Has N coating. Looks promising.

Also on a side note, getting my first gold ring lens soon








180mm 2.8 AI-S courtesy of Mootsy








(I'm going to pay him soon)


----------



## Hazzman

Hi, please add me up!

Pentax K-x with Pentax 55-350mm lens and 18-55mm lenses









Here's a picture I took with it the other day:










I'm relatively new to photography but having a lot of fun with it so far, learning how to balance all the different factors and creating the perfect picture is great fun


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Yeah, and the lens is a horse. Freakin' huge!

I went through same experience when I first got the Canon 10-22. At first I had very few keepers with it and the perspective distortion was so pronounced that I ended up correcting and cropping a lot. But when I learned out to use it to my advantage, it became the only lens I used for several months.

I want to get another UWA now that I've gone FF, but for the price the Canon 16-35 f/2.8 L II isn't worth it (moreso when compared to the Nikon 14-24). Soft corners even at f/8 on that lens.


I've had good luck with the Korean 14/2.8 on fullframe, but I haven't had an extensive shoot with it yet. You might want to take a look at that lens if your aching for a ff uwa


----------



## dudemanppl

Nikon D700 + MB-D10 and Eneloops
Nikon F100 + MB-15 and Eneloops

Sigma 12-24mm f/4.5-5.6 EX DG HSM
Sigma 24mm f/1.8 EX DG
Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di LD
Sigma 50mm f/1.4 EX DG HSM
Nikkor 85mm f/1.8 AF-D
Nikkor 80-200mm f/2.8 AF-S D

Jesus Christ, my gear list is so lonely.







And I already got another 80-200 AF-S already, friend bought the first one and me 35 for 950.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Just picked up a Pelican 1500
Last year I had my camera in my camera bag and would stick that in a drybag.
Now the only bag I have that fits my camera and 70-200mm is my computrekker aw, and I cant fit that in a drybag.

I can just fit everything in it (D70 with any lens), room for all three lenses off the body and sb-600.

Will take a pic once I get it finished


----------



## Marin

For college.










Asterick is about renting the gear.


----------



## laboitenoire

Jesus, so you're basically spending a year's tuition just on equipment?


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Jesus, so you're basically spending a year's tuition just on equipment?


They're expecting the incoming students to have most of the gear since it's more of a grad school.


----------



## laboitenoire

Ahhhh... That vaguely explains it


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie*


Just picked up a Pelican 1500
Last year I had my camera in my camera bag and would stick that in a drybag.
Now the only bag I have that fits my camera and 70-200mm is my computrekker aw, and I cant fit that in a drybag.

I can just fit everything in it (D70 with any lens), room for all three lenses off the body and sb-600.

Will take a pic once I get it finished










I have a 1200 and 1400 myself. They're definitely tough. I use them for caving and boating.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


For college.










Asterick is about renting the gear.


D700x wut. I like how they require a 70-200, which you just sold. What do they teach?


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Hazzman*


Hi, please add me up!

Pentax K-x with Pentax 55-350mm lens and 18-55mm lenses









Here's a picture I took with it the other day:










I'm relatively new to photography but having a lot of fun with it so far, learning how to balance all the different factors and creating the perfect picture is great fun


Nice shot and very nice fur detail. Welcome.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


D700x wut. I like how they require a 70-200, which you just sold. What do they teach?


There's also a 135mm on the list. So it's all good.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


There's also a 135mm on the list. So it's all good.


Do they enforce the fact that its required?


----------



## Marin

Just the 24-70mm.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Just the 24-70mm.


I see. I think I might get a 5D and a 35L with my extra money (you know for like a month as always). That or a 35 AI-S.


----------



## theCanadian

Anyone have suggestions for a reasonable film SLR body for shooting birds in the lawn and such?


----------



## tK FuRY

finally bought a film camera, after not having one for years now.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


Anyone have suggestions for a reasonable film SLR body for shooting birds in the lawn and such?


Most of the film EOS and Nikon bodies are pretty reasonable these days. You can get some versions of the EOS 1, 3, Nikon F4 and F100 for well under $200.


----------



## laboitenoire

So I just made myself a ghetto flash diffuser using a piece of 96 bright paper and two staples. Actually seems to work pretty decently. Will need more experimenting to know for sure.


----------



## theCanadian

Apt. mate is going to be grabbing a Minolta Xtsi SLR w/AF 28-80 and 75-300 lenses.

Seems to be a pretty versatile piece. Times shot between 30 and 1/4000. Also has some different features to adjust for spotty light and strong color bias. Even has a pop up flash.

http://www.shutterbug.net/equipmentr...599sb_minolta/


----------



## duong01

wonder if i can join







?
i had an EOS 1D Mark II and a 50E QD
lens :
CZ Jena 135mm f3.5
Helios 44/58mm f2
Canon " Nifty Fifty " 50mm f1.8 Mark II
planning to get a 28mm " Hollywood " f2 or maybe a 17-40f4L as a walkaround lens


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:


Originally Posted by *laboitenoire* 
I must say, the D3100 and the new lenses from Nikon are looking pretty impressive.

The D3100 is almost a great camera. I won't be getting it because it is missing a few features I've come to enjoy on my D80. Top LCD and Auto-focus motor.

The 85mm lens and the 24-120mm lenses look promising. I'll be watching for reviews in the coming months.

I really want them to release a D300s or D700 replacement so I can go for a bit of an upgrade soon.


----------



## laboitenoire

Yeah, I was saying in another thread that with the pricing, the D3100 is likely to take away a lot of sales on the D5000.


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:


Originally Posted by *laboitenoire* 
Yeah, I was saying in another thread that with the pricing, the D3100 is likely to take away a lot of sales on the D5000.

Yeah, it looks like it will be a major contender for the low-end dslr range. I'd actually consider getting one for my dad to use since he hasn't really done much photography since his 35mm days.

I really want an excuse to upgrade my D80 since the stuck pixels are starting to become troublesome. They are only really noticeable in certain situations but it would be nice not to have to worry about it.


----------



## laboitenoire

Had a really good chance to put my 70-300 VR in action this evening. Shot a few frames at a pickup frisbee game, and then shot a few hundred more at a concert our programming board put on here at school with a few lesser known acts that weren't that bad, actually. Also shot some video, and while the video quality wasn't bad, the audio clipped really badly.

I'll post some shots tomorrow or on Sunday once my computer finishes chugging through all 375 RAW photos.


----------



## dudemanppl

Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 APO EX HSM, add that. I'll have the AF-I and Sigma for a day or two since the buyer did an E-Check.


----------



## Marin




----------



## UrbanSmooth

Canon PowerShot SD940 IS


----------



## PhaedraCorruption

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin*


----------



## Mootsfox

Marin, I hate you.

I want that rug.


----------



## dudemanppl

I find Ektar too red, but I still like it. I keep missing the 5DII, but I'm loving the D700.


----------



## Marin

I was going to put the Sinar F in the middle but it's not completely built yet. I still need a lens board for it.


----------



## Boyboyd

Took this earlier. Strange thing is, it hasn't rained today :s


----------



## biatchi

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*


Took this earlier. Strange thing is, it hasn't rained today :s











Well it pissed down in Lancashire


----------



## UrbanSmooth

*It's almost a TRIPLE RAINBOW!*


----------



## laboitenoire

I just about doubled the size of my photostream... Gotta love being able to upload to Flickr at ~1.2 MBps

Some new shots with my 70-300 VR. As always, check out Flickr if you want to see more, as I'm not sticking all the 215 new shots.







Most of the shots I took last night were at a concert my university put on. At first I wasn't planning on going (the headliner, Kate Voegele, has a top 40 hit which is usually out in my book), but I went and had a great time. The opener was also really good.


----------



## Boyboyd

Extreme Frisbee FTW! I was in my high school team.


----------



## Xapoc

Extreme Frisbee? Ultimate Frisbee.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *laboitenoire* 

Some new shots with my 70-300 VR.

Look'n good Lab.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
Look'n good Lab.

Thanks! I'm definitely glad I went for the 70-300 over the 55-200. Feels much nicer to shoot with.


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:


Originally Posted by *laboitenoire* 
Thanks! I'm definitely glad I went for the 70-300 over the 55-200. Feels much nicer to shoot with.

Seems to produce some good shots for sure.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Thanks! I'm definitely glad I went for the 70-300 over the 55-200. Feels much nicer to shoot with.


No question.. 70-300 VR is a much nicer lens.


----------



## dudemanppl

Nuke, have you gotten the 600 VR yet?


----------



## laboitenoire

Pardon me if this is a silly question, but do extension tubes decrease your effective aperture the same way a teleconverter does?


----------



## Marin

Nope.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Pardon me if this is a silly question, but do extension tubes decrease your effective aperture the same way a teleconverter does?


no it does not, it just reduces your MFD.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Nuke, have you gotten the 600 VR yet?


yep, it's at my sister's in Indiana. going to pick it up next weekend if i don't have a shoot.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


yep, it's at my sister's in Indiana. going to pick it up next weekend if i don't have a shoot.


Remember to get pictures here!


----------



## Aaron_Henderson

Would this be a good deal? http://www.factorydirect.ca/catalog/...p?pcode=KO0915 Anything is better than what I am using now I imagine, a Jazz brand POS, I mean, P&S. It's actually not a bad cam for what I paid for it, though the lighting has to be perfect. I know it's nothing fancy, but I want something with a descent amount of optical zoom and manual ISO, and don't have a lot of money to spend. The cam is brand new, no refurb as far as I know, and the place is local so I can pick it up in person.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Aaron_Henderson*


Would this be a good deal? http://www.factorydirect.ca/catalog/...p?pcode=KO0915 Anything is better than what I am using now I imagine, a Jazz brand POS, I mean, P&S. It's actually not a bad cam for what I paid for it, though the lighting has to be perfect. I know it's nothing fancy, but I want something with a descent amount of optical zoom and manual ISO, and don't have a lot of money to spend. The cam is brand new, no refurb as far as I know, and the place is local so I can pick it up in person.


There are only four reviews for that site, but they aren't nice, so beware:

http://www.resellerratings.com/store/factorydirect_ca

Kodak isn't the best company for a P&S camera. If you want quality, look at Canon, Panasonic or Fuji.

Check out some reviews:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/


----------



## riko99

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
There are only four reviews for that site, but they aren't nice, so beware:

http://www.resellerratings.com/store/factorydirect_ca

Kodak isn't the best company for a P&S camera. If you want quality, look at Canon, Panasonic or Fuji.

Check out some reviews:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/

Sadly also some Casio's according to DPreviews Best rated quite nicely... I for one do not get why but also have never had a complaint from customers who have bought one.


----------



## mz-n10

dpreview is owned by amazon...and with all reviews take with a grain of salt.


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


There are only four reviews for that site, but they aren't nice, so beware:

http://www.resellerratings.com/store/factorydirect_ca

Kodak isn't the best company for a P&S camera. If you want quality, look at Canon, Panasonic or Fuji.

Check out some reviews:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/


Agreed. Kodak make some really terrible P&S cameras.

Canon makes some really good ones from my experience.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


dpreview is owned by amazon...and with all reviews take with a grain of salt.


Didn't know that. However, DPReview has been at it since first DSLR's debuted, and I've never had doubts about their objectivity. It's always Phil Askey or someone else familiar doing the reviews, so the day I don't see their names attached to the reviews, I will have doubts.

But they aren't Gospel either. If I really want to get a broad picture of a camera, I will check DPReview, DCResource, Camera Lab, The Digital Picture, Photozone, etc to get an idea of the camera/lens.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


dpreview is owned by amazon...and with all reviews take with a grain of salt.


Always ignore opinionated reviews.

dpreview gives among the best and most in-depth camera reviews among anything online. They also give the same or better specs of a camera and same or better photos of the camera than the manufacturer. As long as you focus your attention on the data and facts of the review or preview, you'll be fine.


----------



## mz-n10

DPR is still my first source when i need samples or to look at a new lens or camera they do great on the "scientific" parts (testing etc) but their scoring is meh....to me their scoring is always CANON then NIKON then one of teh other manufacturers.


----------



## laboitenoire

I dunno... I remember for a while (not sure if they still are) they were dinging Canon and Nikon because they didn't use in-body image stabilization systems.


----------



## Marin

I never go by DPR's final score, I just use all the info they provide. Same goes for Photozone.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Well, my 785B has finally bit the dust, 4 years of hard work and abuse (it wasnt a fan of the cold







) and it is now retired.

Picked up a 190xprob and 486rc2 tonight, needed a new tripod for my trip anyway


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie* 
Well, my 785B has finally bit the dust, 4 years of hard work and abuse (it wasnt a fan of the cold







) and it is now retired.

Picked up a 190xprob and 486rc2 tonight, needed a new tripod for my trip anyway









:|

Should have bought my set of 190XPROB's. They are in perfect condition and never get used now that I have the 055's.


----------



## mz-n10

i know most of you here shoot canon or nikon but this might be interesting to you all.

sony slt a55

not really a "EVIL" like the GH1 but not really a DSLR......

this is really a step up from the usually mediocre low/mid range sony camera.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mz-n10* 
i know most of you here shoot canon or nikon but this might be interesting to you all.

sony slt a55

not really a "EVIL" like the GH1 but not really a DSLR......

this is really a step up from the usually mediocre low/mid range sony camera.

Ah, just like Canon 1N RS.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Ah, just like Canon 1N RS.

yea, Pellicle mirror.

just got done with the review and samples and it look like theres a good improvement on jpg noise compared to previous sony alpha.


----------



## Marin

Mamiya C330. I have the prism mounted instead of the waist level finder.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


:|

Should have bought my set of 190XPROB's. They are in perfect condition and never get used now that I have the 055's.


Did not know you had them otherwise I would.
But it was a very last minute thing, I leave for a canoe trip in 2 hours or so, and about 8:30 last night I was packing my 785B when one of the quick releases broke off (about the 5th one). Making that leg now not lock at all









So I decided to run to my local store and see what they had.

If it was a planned buy, I would have asked, but it was "I have 30 minutes before stores closed and I need something"


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie*


Did not know you had them otherwise I would.
But it was a very last minute thing, I leave for a canoe trip in 2 hours or so, and about 8:30 last night I was packing my 785B when one of the quick releases broke off (about the 5th one). Making that leg now not lock at all









So I decided to run to my local store and see what they had.

If it was a planned buy, I would have asked, but it was "I have 30 minutes before stores closed and I need something"










You're lucky you've got a good shoppe locally


----------



## xHassassin

Meh, the 055 is too high for me, should've gotten the 190. Would've been perfect if the ballhead was just one inch shorter or something.

Ah well, probably going to get the carbon fiber version in the near future anyways. The XPROB is way too heavy to go lugging around.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


remember to get pictures here!


y??


----------



## nlewandowski93

My Cameras, for now:

P&S/Ultra-Zoom:
Olympus SP-550UZ
Olympus C-3030

Cell Phone/P&S:
HTC EVO


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:



Originally Posted by *xHassassin*


Meh, the 055 is too high for me, should've gotten the 190. Would've been perfect if the ballhead was just one inch shorter or something.

Ah well, probably going to get the carbon fiber version in the near future anyways. The XPROB is way too heavy to go lugging around.


who uses tripods anymore? haha, I would buy a good one but when I use a tripod like <1% of the time it just doesn't make sense budget-wise. The few times I do need to use one I can deal with my cheap flimsy one.

Plus it saves me money for faster lenses... furthering my goal to never have to use a tripod(except for artsy long exposure shots).

EDIT: lol this post is 2020.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


y??


We all want to see big glass. And you know me, I'm a gear whore.


----------



## Marin

120 mp APS-H Sensor


----------



## mz-n10

mmmm better stock up on those 32gb cf cards


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
120 mp APS-H Sensor

I can has?

Seriously I just had to pick my jaw up off the floor.

I wonder if this thing is low-power enough to be put into a production camera?


----------



## Mootsfox

I'm somewhat afraid to see what the image quality would be on that.


----------



## Marin

I think it would out resolve any 35mm lens.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dudemanppl* 
We all want to see big glass. And you know me, I'm a gear whore.

ok, here:


----------



## Marin

Nikkor 8mm f/2.8?


----------



## PhaedraCorruption

Those huge lenses must be compensating for something...


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


Originally Posted by *PhaedraCorruption* 
Those huge lenses must be compensating for something...









lol


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *PhaedraCorruption* 
Those huge lenses must be compensating for something...









Hey, he said he was a gear whore!


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


Originally Posted by *PhaedraCorruption* 
Those huge lenses must be compensating for something...









yea compensating for not being able to walk closer to shoot


----------



## xHassassin




----------



## laboitenoire

I'm seeing nothing?


----------



## Marin

24-70mm is one large zoom for what FL it is.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
24-70mm is one large zoom for what FL it is has a big ass hood.










Fixed


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Fixed


I think it is quite a nice design as the wider you go the longer the lens gets, so the lens hood is useful somewhat at the tele end.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


24-70mm is one large zoom for what FL it is.











What's that on your hotshoe? A GPS tagger?


----------



## mz-n10

remote trigger for flash


----------



## Marin

Remote shutter release. The light of the remote can be seen in my hand.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Mamiya C330. I have the prism mounted instead of the waist level finder.


----------



## Boyboyd

I've started printing some of my favorite photos, i knew i shouldn't have.

Now i want a better printer D:

My uncle owns an A0 printer but he lives 300 miles away.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Boyboyd* 
I've started printing some of my favorite photos, i knew i shouldn't have.

Now i want a better printer D:

My uncle owns an A0 printer but he lives 300 miles away.


----------



## Boyboyd

Hehehe. Insanity wolf.

I've been messing around with some of my dad's old lenses. I thought i'd quite like a 24mm prime. Turns out they still make his :s. It's older than me.


----------



## tK FuRY

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*












I have to agree with this now, I used to shoot film back in the day, then switched to digital, and now I'm back to film ... =D


----------



## Marin

What is this tomfoolery? The Digital Picture now has Nikon reviews.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


What is this tomfoolery? The Digital Picture now has Nikon reviews.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/


Bookmarked.

I can't decide between the Nikon 28mm f2.8 or the 24mm f2.8. There's Â£100 difference.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*


Bookmarked.

I can't decide between the Nikon 28mm f2.8 or the 24mm f2.8. There's Â£100 difference.


What's your use for the lens?


----------



## nuclearjock

Some unusual glass. 300mm f/2 on left, 200mm f/2 on right.


----------



## Marin

How much do they go for?


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


How much do they go for?


15k and 3k.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


Some unusual glass. 300mm f/2 on left, 200mm f/2 on right.




Nice a 300 f2.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
What's your use for the lens?

Landscapes mostly.

Edit: Just got a Nikon 35mm F1.8 DX lens. I've heard they're supposed to be one of the best for the money. I quite like primes too.


----------



## Marin

UWA's are fun to use.


----------



## dudemanppl

Wide open? And I checked that guys facebook and he still doesn't have any of your pictures, kill the watermark!


----------



## Marin

Shot wide open.

And the watermark stays. My photo teacher convinced me to use them.


----------



## UrbanSmooth

Don't forget to add ole Urban to the list of point n' shoots.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Shot wide open.

And the watermark stays. My photo teacher convinced me to use them.










Boo hoo.








Damn when I was shooting Canon I was looking for those Oly 21s everywhere. Couldn't find any. I think I'll switch to canon when the 5DIII comes out and get the 5DII + 1DIII (then quickly switch back because I can).


----------



## nuclearjock

D300 + 70-200 VR II. Sharpness wide open is pretty decent.

1.


2.


----------



## Marin

Nikon G Lens to Canon EOS Camera

Nikon G Lens to Canon EOS with Dandelion Focus Confirmation Chip

Awesome. Way cheaper than the V3 adapter.


----------



## nuclearjock

D3 + 200mm f/4 micro


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dudemanppl* 
Boo hoo.







Damn when I was shooting Canon I was looking for those Oly 21s everywhere. Couldn't find any. I think I'll switch to canon when the 5DIII comes out and get the 5DII + 1DIII (then quickly switch back because I can).

Do you ever actually take pictures with your gear or do u just buy and sell??


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


Do you ever actually take pictures with your gear or do u just buy and sell??


What do you think? BUY AND SELL! But I do occasionally take pictures.


----------



## laboitenoire

You know Nuke, I don't think I've ever seen a hummingbird perched before...


----------



## UrbanSmooth

Just buy a hummingbird feeder, you'll see it a lot.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


What do you think? BUY AND SELL! But I do occasionally take pictures *of my gear.*


I thought so too.


----------



## laboitenoire

I've had hummingbird feeders before, but it seems like the birds never fully perched.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


I thought so too.


Hey its so my buyers can see the things they buy!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


D3 + 200mm f/4 micro




Damn, now that's sharp!


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Damn, now that's sharp!


Thx GT. The 200 f/4 micro is known for its sharpness. I don't shoot it very often though. Probably need to spend more time with it.


----------



## UrbanSmooth

Any touch-ups with software done, nuc?


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


Thx GT. The 200 f/4 micro is known for its sharpness. I don't shoot it very often though. Probably need to spend more time with it.



The two macros I have used so far, the 55 3.5 and the 60 2.8D are both beautifully sharp but have a spot of CA wide open. Problem solved when stopped down by a stop. Makes me wish I had more than 10Mpx

I'd say the 35 1.8 fits into that category stopped down two stops.


----------



## mz-n10

megapixels are overrated.

wish i had a 200/4 macro, or the lanthar apo 125/2.5.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *UrbanSmooth* 
Any touch-ups with software done, nuc?

Jpeg sooc & cropped.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mz-n10* 
megapixels are overrated.

wish i had a 200/4 macro, or the lanthar apo 125/2.5.

I'd much rather better ISO than megapixels, but now that I have a sharp enough lens, it makes me wonder what it'd be like with more pixels


----------



## Boyboyd

Dang, my camera bag's zip decided to completely pack in. Ontop of the fact that it doesn't support any of my gear i think i've decided what my next upgrade will be. Need to sell some odd bits and pieces I have lying around my room first though.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
I'd much rather better ISO than megapixels, but now that I have a sharp enough lens, it makes me wonder what it'd be like with more pixels









u feel like you need to crop everything and pixel peep.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mz-n10* 
u feel like you need to crop everything and pixel peep.









Enter Film!!!


----------



## Marin

Yeah, I crop the photo the majority of the time when enlarging since I'm too lazy to align it correctly. But it is fun to keep the borders for MF and LF.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


Enter Film!!!


already ahead of you....minolta xe-1 + 50/1.4


----------



## nuclearjock

Not really a toy, the metering is amazing though, (for an slr).


----------



## Marin

Where's the CF card slot? =P


----------



## mz-n10

how the liveview on the f6?


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Where's the CF card slot? =P


Right here:










http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...ikon_4779.html

Works with the F100, F5 and F6.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Right here:










http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...ikon_4779.html

Works with the F100, F5 and F6.


----------



## UrbanSmooth

Well, without sounding creepy, I have just met a very beautiful young woman that I am getting to know more. She really is truly beautiful, and I would like to shoot her.

With a camera, that is!

I need a really good sharp, high-quality camera for capturing her beauty. What's a good camera and setup for such an activity?


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *UrbanSmooth*


Well, without sounding creepy, I have just met a very beautiful young woman that I am getting to know more. She really is truly beautiful, and I would like to shoot her.

With a camera, that is!

I need a really good sharp, high-quality camera for capturing her beauty. What's a good camera and setup for such an activity?


This should work nicely.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


This should work nicely.


This one is better


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


This one is better


Ah yes. Paired with this lens.


----------



## UrbanSmooth

Not videos! I mean for taking photos, you perverts, LOL!


----------



## Marin

It is for taking photo's. It's a medium format camera.


----------



## laboitenoire

Those aren't video cameras... They're medium format digital still cameras. Totally overkill (they said it in jest).

But really, what you looking to spend?


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *UrbanSmooth*


Not videos! I mean for taking photos, you perverts, LOL!


what are you talking about







the hassel is a photo camera not a camcorder.


----------



## UrbanSmooth

Sorry, looked like a camcorder to me.


----------



## theCanadian

... A D40 would handle portraits with ease yeah?


----------



## Marin

I <3 Hasselblads.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Those aren't video cameras... They're medium format digital still cameras. Totally overkill (they said it in jest).

But really, what you looking to spend?


sir i think you underestimate how beautiful she is. he needs to capture every gorgeous detail which is her. a regular 35mm DSLR just will not do.


----------



## laboitenoire

Well, as we say online, pics or it doesn't exist









Can't make a judgment without seeing her.


----------



## UrbanSmooth

OK, no problem, pics you shall have. As soon as I buy the right camera. I just need a camera that will take pristine quality portraits. How about the Nikon D90? If so, what lenses, equipment, etc?


----------



## laboitenoire

If you're going to get an SLR, I'd suggest waiting a bit. Next month is *the* month for camera announcements, as this year is Photokina. Nikon's probably going to announce a D90 replacement among other things, so you can either decide to get the new model or snag a new D90 for cheap.

But, the D90 is a great camera, provided you're not hugely interested in video. If you paired that with a 50 f/1.8 or 50 f/1.4 you'd be all set for some pretty good portraiture.


----------



## Marin

Looking through my photo's. Here are two test shots from B&H.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mz-n10* 
u feel like you need to crop everything and pixel peep.









Isn't that why we have cameras?

Nah I just wish I had an easier way to get to higher more magnification with my macro. I also wish I had live view. I've managed to find myself a $2 magnifying glass with LEDs on it, I use the LEDs to illuminate what I'm trying to focus on lol









Quote:


Originally Posted by *UrbanSmooth* 
OK, no problem, pics you shall have. As soon as I buy the right camera. I just need a camera that will take pristine quality portraits. How about the Nikon D90? If so, what lenses, equipment, etc?

D3x + 80mm 1.8 stopped down to f/4.0 should be just passable for someone of that amazing beauty.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
Isn't that why we have cameras?

Nah I just wish I had an easier way to get to higher more magnification with my macro. I also wish I had live view. I've managed to find myself a $2 magnifying glass with LEDs on it, I use the LEDs to illuminate what I'm trying to focus on lol









D3x + 80mm 1.8 stopped down to f/4.0 should be just passable for someone of that amazing beauty.

Someone is selling the lovely 85mm f/1.4 on OCN right now









And I'm selling a tripod








http://www.overclock.net/other-techn...l#post10539950


----------



## iandroo888

wish i can get both of them.. but i cant afford either of em lol


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Isn't that why we have cameras?

Nah I just wish I had an easier way to get to higher more magnification with my macro. I also wish I had live view. I've managed to find myself a $2 magnifying glass with LEDs on it, I use the LEDs to illuminate what I'm trying to focus on lol









D3x + 80mm 1.8 stopped down to f/4.0 should be just passable for someone of that amazing beauty.


get extension tubes or even a close-up filter to get more magnification. theres actually a way to focus a macro with a flashlight shining through the viewfinder. i read it works for some lens/body set up so you might want to consider that if you are having trouble focusing.

and why pair a d3x with a 85/1.8? if you can afford a d3x might as well get the 85/1.4


----------



## laboitenoire

Or buy the D3 and use the savings to get the 85 f/1.4 and the 135 f/2 DC.


----------



## Marin

I spent almost three hours cleaning my tripod.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


get extension tubes or even a close-up filter to get more magnification. theres actually a way to focus a macro with a flashlight shining through the viewfinder. i read it works for some lens/body set up so you might want to consider that if you are having trouble focusing.

and why pair a d3x with a 85/1.8? if you can afford a d3x might as well get the 85/1.4


I have tubes, it's just annoying to use them.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


I spent almost three hours cleaning my tripod.


How would you recommend cleaning sticky legs, like they don't extend smoothly anymore.


----------



## Marin

Take the the whole tripod apart, clean it, grease it up again and put it back together.


----------



## theCanadian

How dirty would an SLR have to be to affect the light metering? Many of my photo's are overexposed and a logical conclusion would be the SLR is dirty. It looks clean to me, and a guy at Wolf Camera said it was in 'remarkable condition', but I swear to god I can see a discoloration through the viewfinder (perhaps the viewfinder is dirty in some way, I know they are interchangeable), but that shouldn't affect metering.

Example: I know the flowers are bright spots, but I compensated with at least a full stop and it was still overexposed to the point of 'burning'.


----------



## Marin

Reflective light meters, which are what SLR's use, aren't that accurate. So nothings wrong.

EDIT: When using my the built-in meters in my cameras I've had to compensate by more than two stops at times.


----------



## mz-n10

what you need is a grey card for metering. buy a 8x10 grey and meter off that.


----------



## Gollie

DO WANT the Zeiss 100mm f/2.0 Makro...just sayin.

Lens budget is fried. Sigh


----------



## Marin

Zeiss ZE 35 f/1.4 Tomorrow










Please be true...


----------



## riko99

Hey so while on vacation I decided to take some bracketed shots and just use CS5 to photomerge them into HDR the first one is more surrealistic and the second is Photorealistic let me know what you guys think.


----------



## Mootsfox

The second one is closer to a proper HDR.


----------



## riko99

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


The second one is closer to a proper HDR.


Yeah thats what I was hoping for should have maybe done a 5 shot on that to really bring out the blue in the pond but hey just starting to play with HDR lol.


----------



## Boyboyd

Just realised i've never taken a photo a proper photo at night before. I'm going to go out now and see what i can do. Shame my 35mm f1.8 isn't here yet. I'll see what the manual focus 24mm looks like.


----------



## laboitenoire

It was hot and hazy in Cleveland today. Luckily, my dorm common room has a fantastic view of downtown.

These were shot through the window screen, as I can't remove it easily, and I figure that it would lower quality less than shooting through the actual window. I actually like the effect it has on point sources of light.


----------



## Boyboyd

I prefer the second and last ones. The second one especially.

Got a delivery of some photography stuff today. Finally claimed my free prints that i got with my camera, those are pretty good. They're only 6x4 but it's nice to have physical photographs. My ND filter and new lens arrived too. Can't wait to get off work so i can try it out.


----------



## iandroo888

if anyone has some free time on their hands and dont mind lookin over this album of pictures i took recently on my Nor Cal trip in Aug, please gimme some opinions









http://picasaweb.google.com/andymcheung/NorCalTrip#


----------



## tK FuRY

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
if anyone has some free time on their hands and dont mind lookin over this album of pictures i took recently on my Nor Cal trip in Aug, please gimme some opinions









http://picasaweb.google.com/andymcheung/NorCalTrip#

some of them were a litte oof, but overall they are decent.

BTW, you sure love Vignette lol


----------



## iandroo888

lol for some reason. i liked the effect lately LOL


----------



## Xapoc

That can't be natural vignette. Is it?


----------



## iandroo888

nope


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


If you're going to get an SLR, I'd suggest waiting a bit. Next month is *the* month for camera announcements, as this year is Photokina. Nikon's probably going to announce a D90 replacement among other things, so you can either decide to get the new model or snag a new D90 for cheap.

But, the D90 is a great camera, provided you're not hugely interested in video. If you paired that with a 50 f/1.8 or 50 f/1.4 you'd be all set for some pretty good portraiture.


When should this happen? I think I'm going to break down and get a D90. Just looking for a price dive. Also, I've read some things indicating that the D90 commonly has software issues and sometimes thinks there is no lens attached, in addition to not liking cold weather. Should these things scare me away?

I've got a camera now that should mechanically last me another 20 years at least. I don't want to drop $1000 on a camera that's going to die in a year.


----------



## Gollie

I would wait. Nikon is for sure having a press release on the 15 (maybe 16th). Just wait and see what is released. Personally, I'd be sick if I missed an upgrade by WEEKS!

The D90 is a cool camera but if the specs on the D7k are legit, you want to wait for the next evolution. Higher ISO capabilities, higher MP, better resolution and probably 1080 video.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


When should this happen? I think I'm going to break down and get a D90. Just looking for a price dive. Also, I've read some things indicating that the D90 commonly has software issues and sometimes thinks there is no lens attached, in addition to not liking cold weather. Should these things scare me away?

I've got a camera now that should mechanically last me another 20 years at least. I don't want to drop $1000 on a camera that's going to die in a year.


In my opinion the D90 is just fine in cold weather









Click it








http://www.flickr.com/photos/skunkabilly/3169875208/

My D60 is already dying and its been 1 and a half years. HotShoe Flash is inconsistent and lots of dust is IN the LCD. Thank god for extended warranties


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


When should this happen? I think I'm going to break down and get a D90. Just looking for a price dive. Also, I've read some things indicating that the D90 commonly has software issues and sometimes thinks there is no lens attached, in addition to not liking cold weather. Should these things scare me away?

I've got a camera now that should mechanically last me another 20 years at least. I don't want to drop $1000 on a camera that's going to die in a year.


I'd sell you one of my D300 bods (both mint), but I think you'd get screwed once it crosses the border with taxes. I sold Schub my 70-200 VR1, declared it a gift, and he got nailed.


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


lol for some reason. i liked the effect lately LOL


Me too. It creates a more focused image draws you into the center of the picture rather than letting your eyes wander off the edges.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


When should this happen? I think I'm going to break down and get a D90. Just looking for a price dive. Also, I've read some things indicating that the D90 commonly has software issues and sometimes thinks there is no lens attached, in addition to not liking cold weather. Should these things scare me away?

I've got a camera now that should mechanically last me another 20 years at least. I don't want to drop $1000 on a camera that's going to die in a year.


My D80 has some hot pixels but still works just fine and I've used it quite heavily(hiking, backpacking etc) for about three years. 
It performs just fine in the cold(I live in Alberta we get REAL winter here). 
If anything it will last longer outside than I will before freezing up. 
Just be careful going back inside as it'll fog up and you'll have to wait for the temperature to normalize.









Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


I'd sell you one of my D300 bods (both mint), but I think you'd get screwed once it crosses the border with taxes. I sold Schub my 70-200 VR1, declared it a gift, and he got nailed.


I think if you ship using the express shipping options the border charges are less. 
Or at least that's what I was told by a fedEx rep the last time I was charged a bunch for a shipment. 
They(Canadian Gov't) really should stop taxing imported goods so much.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


I'd sell you one of my D300 bods (both mint), but I think you'd get screwed once it crosses the border with taxes. I sold Schub my 70-200 VR1, declared it a gift, and he got nailed.


He was unlucky with customs with my SB-600 that I sent him as well... I think I see a pattern... Canada


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *tK FuRY*


some of them were a litte oof, but overall they are decent.

BTW, you sure love Vignette lol



Quote:



Originally Posted by *Sparhawk*


Me too. It creates a more focused image draws you into the center of the picture rather than letting your eyes wander off the edges.


It's something that can very easily be overdone, especially if the vignette is very pronounced. There are other ways to draw the eye to subject, e.g. shallow DOF (blurred BG), ROT, etc.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


lol for some reason. i liked the effect lately LOL


i think u over did it with the vignette.....and some of the contrast (anything with grass) looks way over done.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Xapoc*


That can't be natural vignette. Is it?


it could be, but in this case no. sometimes when i shoot my 24-70 with stacked filters (cpl, nd grad) i can get some pretty pronounced vignetting. but in this case its post effect.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
I'd sell you one of my D300 bods (both mint), but I think you'd get screwed once it crosses the border with taxes. I sold Schub my 70-200 VR1, declared it a gift, and he got nailed.


Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
He was unlucky with customs with my SB-600 that I sent him as well... I think I see a pattern... Canada









Indeed, got nailed on both purchases


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Gollie* 
I would wait. Nikon is for sure having a press release on the 15 (maybe 16th). Just wait and see what is released. Personally, I'd be sick if I missed an upgrade by WEEKS!

The D90 is a cool camera but if the specs on the D7k are legit, you want to wait for the next evolution. Higher ISO capabilities, higher MP, better resolution and probably 1080 video.

A long feature list is not what I'm looking for. A sharp image and high durability and life is what I want.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
In my opinion the D90 is just fine in cold weather









Click it








http://www.flickr.com/photos/skunkabilly/3169875208/

*My D60 is already dying and its been 1 and a half years.* HotShoe Flash is inconsistent and lots of dust is IN the LCD. Thank god for extended warranties









That's no good!

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
I'd sell you one of my D300 bods (both mint), but I think you'd get screwed once it crosses the border with taxes. I sold Schub my 70-200 VR1, declared it a gift, and he got nailed.

Think again









Quote:


Originally Posted by *Sparhawk* 
My D80 has some hot pixels but still works just fine and I've used it quite heavily(hiking, backpacking etc) for about three years.
It performs just fine in the cold(I live in Alberta we get REAL winter here).
If anything it will last longer outside than I will before freezing up.
Just be careful going back inside as it'll fog up and you'll have to wait for the temperature to normalize.









I'm looking for a camera that will at bare minimum, last me for 5 years, preferably 10. I'm going with Nikon because apparently the F mount is forever.

The D90 has been out for a while now, enough to at least extrapolate a reasonable rate of failure. It could be the best camera in the world for $300, but if I have to buy a new one every year or two, I don't want it.


----------



## laboitenoire

Thinking of going to Cleveland's air show this weekend. Weather is supposed to be cool and sunny tomorrow afternoon, glorious on Sunday, and warm and sunny on Monday. I've been getting pretty hyped up because the Blue Angels keep on flying over my dorm while practicing their formations.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mz-n10* 
it could be, but in this case no. sometimes when i shoot my 24-70 with stacked filters (cpl, nd grad) i can get some pretty pronounced vignetting. but in this case its post effect.

18-55 on full frame.


----------



## mz-n10

hehe ive done before with the a900 and the sony 17-80. leme see if i can dig that picture back up.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


The D90 has been out for a while now, enough to at least extrapolate a reasonable rate of failure. It could be the best camera in the world for $300, but if I have to buy a new one every year or two, I don't want it.


That seems the best choice for you. Maybe they designed the D60 to not be used as much. I've gone through 24k shots and all my friends say the shutter sounds a bit funny. There's this high pitched sound after the shutter has closed D:


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


That seems the best choice for you. Maybe they designed the D60 to not be used as much. I've gone through 24k shots and all my friends say the shutter sounds a bit funny. There's this high pitched sound after the shutter has closed D:


RIP Dany's D60.


----------



## theCanadian

Thanks for the input guys. Though I wish someone would try to talk me out of it.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


Thanks for the input guys. Though I wish someone would try to talk me out of it.










Not gonna happen on this forum


----------



## dudemanppl

I picked up a D90 once, nice camera. Wait to get it after the D7000.


----------



## Danylu

The Nikon 17-55mm 2.8 on a D60 - redefining front heavy :|

Please add the 17-55mm 2.8 to the list









Moots, thanks for an easy and quick buying process for the 180mm. Highly recommended seller.


----------



## Danylu

The Nikon 17-55mm 2.8 is very front heavy on a D60, now I wonder what a 200 f2 would feel like









Please add that to my list please Gone


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
The Nikon 17-55mm 2.8 on a D60 - redefining front heavy :|

Please add the 17-55mm 2.8 to the list









Moots, thanks for an easy and quick buying process for the 180mm. Highly recommended seller.











The 17-55mm DX is godly. It balances quite well on the D1/F100(hush, it works) and D300 with grip... it's just heavy


----------



## nuclearjock

Stop whining and try a 600 f/4 on any body!!


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


Stop whining and try a 600 f/4 on any body!!


Should buy a Pronea and slap it on there.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


Stop whining and try a 600 f/4 on any body!!


If you can send yours to me I'd be glad to try it out


----------



## iandroo888

biggest lenses ive tried on my d5k is a 14-24 or 24-70. has a little front heavyness but u get used to it if u support urself with other hand on lens. dont notice it much. ur not supposed to be shootin with 1 hand anyway right? XD besides, most of us, our left is probably weaker anyway so its a little workout =P


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


biggest lenses ive tried on my d5k is a 14-24 or 24-70. has a little front heavyness but u get used to it if u support urself with other hand on lens. dont notice it much. ur not supposed to be shootin with 1 hand anyway right? XD besides, most of us, our left is probably weaker anyway so its a little workout =P


The small Nikons are hard to hold with one hand. If you have a strong grip and short nails it's not too hard to hold the bigger ones with one hand.


----------



## iandroo888

well i dont have ae problem to hold with one hand. i do self pix a lot with dslr which is quite amazing imo. didnt think i can find a spot to hold it comfortably. Lol

guess my hand isnt as big as i thought? xD


----------



## mz-n10

try doing a self portrait of your shelf with a d700 and 24-70


----------



## Marin

I did with my 5DMKII and 24-70mm. It's like holding up a couple of bricks but I managed to do it.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


try doing a self portrait of your shelf with a d700 and 24-70


Battery grip makes it somehow easier.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


try doing a self portrait of your shelf with a d700 and 24-70


i did it with d5k n 14-24. was easy. xD


----------



## duong01

you guys should try to make a self portrait with a 1D mark II and a jupiter 6 ( Zeiss Sonnar ) 180mm f2.8
i tried , but it was out of focus .....


----------



## iandroo888

hmm.. next ces. i should try the mark iv w/ like a 24-70. LOL or a d3s w/ 24-70 xD


----------



## duong01

or maybe a 10x12 with a 500mm f6.3 on it =))


----------



## dudemanppl

Yay, I took some pictures again finally!








Some more here.


----------



## WIGILOCO

Hello all!

What do you guys think of these few example pics? Please give comments and advices!



















More on www.flickr.com/photos/wigiloco


----------



## Manyak

Wigiloco, you've got a god eye


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


Originally Posted by *WIGILOCO* 
Hello all!

What do you guys think of these few example pics? Please give comments and advices!









~snip snip~

More on www.flickr.com/photos/wigiloco









Manyak put it well, you _do_ have a good eye. You also seem to have developed your own style.

My monitors display completely different images to each other. I don't even know which one to believe anymore. I looked at hardware screen calibration but it was about Â£200, and I don't want to spend that much at the moment.


----------



## Manyak

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Boyboyd* 
Manyak put it well, you _do_ have a good eye. You also seem to have developed your own style.

My monitors display completely different images to each other. I don't even know which one to believe anymore. I looked at hardware screen calibration but it was about Â£200, and I don't want to spend that much at the moment.

Colorimeters are SO worth it. I put it off for the longest time too, but ever since I got one I can't believe I lived without it.

And if you get a monitor who's gamut is > sRGB, it's pretty much a necessity.


----------



## WIGILOCO

Thank you guys! Really appreciate your comments.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Boyboyd* 
My monitors display completely different images to each other. I don't even know which one to believe anymore. I looked at hardware screen calibration but it was about Â£200, and I don't want to spend that much at the moment.

Find a store that sells it that accepts returns. I thought thats what everyone did?
Edit: Bought a 17-55 and SB-800 both boxed for 1010. Gonna sell the 17-55 and have a 100 dollar SB800 then sell my SB-600s and get another SB800 or a SB900.


----------



## ace8uk

Oh my, the new Nikon 85mm f1.4 is looking very nice. Some examples have been posted up on here. The model isn't too bad either!


----------



## Marin

Why is it so hard to find lens boards. Gah.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Manyak* 
Colorimeters are SO worth it. I put it off for the longest time too, but ever since I got one I can't believe I lived without it.

And if you get a monitor who's gamut is > sRGB, it's pretty much a necessity.

The thing is: I have a really good sony 17" one that I do photo editing on, and a cheap samsung 22" that just has everything else. Is it still worth it with a cheap panel?

I'll see if i can find an old model being sold off.


----------



## Manyak

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*


The thing is: I have a really good sony 17" one that I do photo editing on, and a cheap samsung 22" that just has everything else. Is it still worth it with a cheap panel?

I'll see if i can find an old model being sold off.


As long as it's not a choice between a better monitor vs the colorimeter, I think it's completely worth it. ESPECIALLY if you ever print your photos.


----------



## duong01

do you guys think the 1D mark II N's 2.5" lcd is better than the 1D Mk II original one ?
to be honest i used the LCD to only check if the WB is right , not the image's sharpness LMAO
or should i skip the N version of my camera and buy a 1D mk IV/1Ds Mk III instead ?


----------



## Gollie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ace8uk*


Oh my, the new Nikon 85mm f1.4 is looking very nice. Some examples have been posted up on here. The model isn't too bad either!











_INCOMING FAN BOY COMMENT_

I know there are a lot of Canon guys on this forum but SERIOUSLY. Look at the sharpness, micro contrast and the COLOR saturation of this lens. This is with natural light and one speed light...REDIC!

All the camera's are good (ahem some focus better than others) but the glass coming out of Nikon over the last 3 years is a leap forward. Canon just can't match it. I know I'm biased because I'm a fan boy and I work with Nikon but I look at and study a lot of photography. The most beautiful work is coming from Nikon with Nikon or Zeiss glass and Canon with Zeiss glass.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Gollie*


_INCOMING FAN BOY COMMENT_

I know there are a lot of Canon guys on this forum but SERIOUSLY. Look at the sharpness, micro contrast and the COLOR saturation of this lens. This is with natural light and one speed light...REDIC!

All the camera's are good (ahem some focus better than others) but the glass coming out of Nikon over the last 3 years is a leap forward. Canon just can't match it. I know I'm biased because I'm a fan boy and I work with Nikon but I look at and study a lot of photography. The most beautiful work is coming from Nikon with Nikon or Zeiss glass and Canon with Zeiss glass.


My fanboy filter broke lol. I much prefer the Nikon system in general but there are some lenses that Nikon doesn't have which can be found on the Canon system.


----------



## Xapoc

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


My fanboy filter broke lol. I much prefer the Nikon system in general but there are some lenses that Nikon doesn't have which can be found on the Canon system.


50 f/1.2L comes to mind. Sigh, Nikon...


----------



## equetefue

Quote:


Originally Posted by *duong01* 
do you guys think the 1D mark II N's 2.5" lcd is better than the 1D Mk II original one ?
to be honest i used the LCD to only check if the WB is right , not the image's sharpness LMAO
or should i skip the N version of my camera and buy a 1D mk IV/1Ds Mk III instead ?


If is only for chequing the WB/highlights the 1d2 is just enough. For anything other get the 1d3 or IV.

I jumped from the 1d2 to the 1d3 and diference is big, but the screen is not the best either.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Gollie* 

_INCOMING FAN BOY COMMENT_

I know there are a lot of Canon guys on this forum but SERIOUSLY. Look at the sharpness, micro contrast and the COLOR saturation of this lens. This is with natural light and one speed light...REDIC!

All the camera's are good (ahem some focus better than others) but the glass coming out of Nikon over the last 3 years is a leap forward. Canon just can't match it. I know I'm biased because I'm a fan boy and I work with Nikon but I look at and study a lot of photography. The most beautiful work is coming from Nikon with Nikon or Zeiss glass and Canon with Zeiss glass.

I looked at it and thought, "oh hai, it's a Canon 85mm f/1.2L."


----------



## ocman

Hi all, is there a top 10 list for point and shoot and for DSLR from both Nikon and Canon?

I'm looking to buy a point and shoot and a DSLR... looking the best performance/cheapest price.


----------



## equetefue

Some from yesterday in overcast Florida









































































and finally a "Crappy" landing


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Is that an Osprey in the 5th picture and a kingfisher in the 7th?

Both of those are so very rare around here


----------



## ace8uk

Well, since we're posting pictures of birds, here's one of many pictures I took today:










Oh wait, that's a different sort of bird!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Gollie* 

_INCOMING FAN BOY COMMENT_

I know there are a lot of Canon guys on this forum but SERIOUSLY. Look at the sharpness, micro contrast and the COLOR saturation of this lens. This is with natural light and one speed light...REDIC!

All the camera's are good (ahem some focus better than others) but the glass coming out of Nikon over the last 3 years is a leap forward. Canon just can't match it. I know I'm biased because I'm a fan boy and I work with Nikon but I look at and study a lot of photography. The most beautiful work is coming from Nikon with Nikon or Zeiss glass and Canon with Zeiss glass.


Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
I looked at it and thought, "oh hai, it's a Canon 85mm f/1.2L."

Agreed, while the sample shots look damn good, I wouldn't say it blows the Canon 85/1.2 out of the water.


----------



## murderbymodem

Quote:


Originally Posted by *equetefue* 
Some from yesterday in overcast Florida

Did you manually put all of the camera settings into the bottom of the photo, or is there a program that automatically does that?


----------



## equetefue

auto based on exif... Done in CS3


----------



## nuclearjock

F/1.2 and beneath are for bragging rights only.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
F/1.2 and beneath are for bragging rights only.

But I like f/1.1.


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
But I like f/1.1.



I would put large sums of money on a bet that says that photo was not taken at f/1.1


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *theCanadian* 
I would put large sums of money on a bet that says that photo was not taken at f/1.1

It was.











That's it mounted on a M6. All the indoor shots with the lens were shot wide open since I was using Ilford Delta 100.


----------



## Danylu

Add me a D3 and a Nikon 24-70 2.8.

looool


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Add me a D3 and a Nikon 24-70 2.8.

looool


Really?


----------



## Marin

Pics.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


I would put large sums of money on a bet that says that photo was not taken at f/1.1


And how are you so sure? Not only does it look it, but I know for a fact that it is.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Add me a D3 and a Nikon 24-70 2.8.

looool


Bull...


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


And how are you so sure? Not only does it look it, but I know for a fact that it is.










Well, I guess I stand corrected. I barely ever use my 50mm lens. I was judging the aperture based on the DoF in the picture and my experience with my other lenses. But now that I've actually put my 50mm on my camera and checked it out for myself, I know the truth first hand.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Really?


Yes really.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Bull...


The one person to call bull had to be the 14 year old who changes camera systems every six months


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


The one person to call bull had to be the 14 year old who changes camera systems every six months










I like changing stuff.







How much was the combo and why'd you get it?!

Nikon D700 + MB-D10 and Eneloops
Nikon D7000 + whatever grip and Eneloops
Nikon F100 + MB-15 and Eneloops
Canon S90

Sigma 12-24mm f/4.5-5.6 EX DG HSM
Nikkor 17-55mm f/2.8 AF-S G DX
Sigma 24mm f/1.8 EX DG
Sigma 50mm f/1.4 EX DG HSM
Nikkor 85mm f/1.8 AF-D
Nikkor 80-200mm f/2.8 AF-S D
Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 APO EX HSM

Temporary 17-55 is temporary.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


I like changing stuff.







How much was the combo and why'd you get it?!

Nikon D700 + MB-D10 and Eneloops
Nikon D7000 + whatever grip and Eneloops
Nikon F100 + MB-15 and Eneloops
Canon S90

Sigma 12-24mm f/4.5-5.6 EX DG HSM
Nikkor 17-55mm f/2.8 AF-S G DX
Sigma 24mm f/1.8 EX DG
Sigma 50mm f/1.4 EX DG HSM
Nikkor 85mm f/1.8 AF-D
Nikkor 80-200mm f/2.8 AF-S D
Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 APO EX HSM

Temporary 17-55 is temporary.


It was too good to pass up.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


It was too good to pass up.


If it was less than 3k USD for the combo, I hate you with a passion right now.


----------



## Marin

Finally my gear list isn't outdone by a 14 year old.









*Body: *
- Canon 5D Mark II
- Nikon F3HP
- Hasselblad 201F + A12
- Mamiya C330
- Zeiss Ikon Contessa (Folder)
- Sinar F

*Lenses: *
- Canon 50mm f/1.2L 
- Canon 135mm f/2L
- Canon 24-70mm f/2.8L
- Contax Zeiss 85mm f/1.4
- Nikkor 50mm f/1.2 AI
- Nikkor 55mm f/1.2 AI
- Zuiko 50mm f/1.4
- Zuiko 50mm f/1.2
- Zuiko 21mm f/3.5
- Hasselblad Zeiss 80mm f/2.8 T*
- Mamiya Sekor 55mm f/4.5
- Mamiya Sekor 80mm f/2.8
- Mamiya Sekor 180mm f/4.5
- Nikkor 180mm f/5.6

*Bags:*
- Crumpler 7MDH
- Domke F-4AF
- Lowepro SlingShot 200 AW

*Tripods:*
- Benro A-269M8 + B-1 Ballhead
- Tiltall TE-01B

*Filters:*
- B+W Filters
- Lee 4x4" Filter Holder (foundation kit) 
- Hitech 4x4" ND 1.2 Resin Filter
- Hitech 4x5" GND 0.6 Resin Filter


----------



## dudemanppl

I feel like we should meet someday (since I'm so close), but what the hell would there be to do?


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dudemanppl* 
If it was less than 3k USD for the combo, I hate you with a passion right now.

lol


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
lol

Answer if I should be hating you with a passion now please. It gives me hope that I might have people hate me for the same reason someday.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dudemanppl* 
Answer if I should be hating you with a passion now please. It gives me hope that I might have people hate me for the same reason someday.

lol


----------



## Danylu

@Nuke: How do I set the D3 to show all remaining photos on both memory cards combined, or how do I change the top LCD to show one or the other.

I still also don't understand what the microphone function does. Am I meant to... leave an audio note?

EDIT: Is there anything devastatingly wrong with compressed RAW?


----------



## duong01

maybe ..... i guessed
i think microphone port on these pro body is just a waste of time, money and parts. i'm not going to plug in a stupid microphone and shout " THIS PIC WAS TAKEN WITH A 1D MARK II AND SOME MANUAL FOCUS LENS . ANY COMMENTS ? "
anyway , how was this . taken with a extremely cheap Russian Helios 58mm f2


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
@Nuke: How do I set the D3 to show all remaining photos on both memory cards combined, or how do I change the top LCD to show one or the other.

I still also don't understand what the microphone function does. Am I meant to... leave an audio note?

EDIT: Is there anything devastatingly wrong with compressed RAW?

Sounds like you need to download the manual here.

Yes, the microphone is for leaving an audio note regarding individual shots.

Never shot compressed so can't comment.
Hope you got the 2-bay charger, make sure your batterie's calibrated if the calibrate light blinks when you install the battery in the charger, or cal is indicated in the battery menu.

D3/24-70 is a beautiful combo, congrats.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
But I like f/1.1.

://farm3.static.flickr.com/2489/4097040628_aff7323aaa_z.jpg

I rest my case.


----------



## Conspiracy

DUDE! WHAT! f/1.1

link me that lens lol


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Conspiracy* 
DUDE! WHAT! f/1.1

link me that lens lol

Ok.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
It was.











That's it mounted on a M6. All the indoor shots with the lens were shot wide open since I was using Ilford Delta 100.


----------



## Boyboyd

I really want an F1.2. Just for DOF shots really.


----------



## laboitenoire

Just fooling around:


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *danylu* 
add me a d3 and a nikon 24-70 2.8.

Looool

</3


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


Sounds like you need to download the manual here.

Yes, the microphone is for leaving an audio note regarding individual shots.

Never shot compressed so can't comment.
Hope you got the 2-bay charger, make sure your batterie's calibrated if the calibrate light blinks when you install the battery in the charger, or cal is indicated in the battery menu.

D3/24-70 is a beautiful combo, congrats.


Thanks. My intuition has got me through about 95% of the D3, suppose I'll need the manual for the last five.

I'll give audio notes a shot. Sounds like it could be useful.

I <3 you too Moots. I'll give the 180 a shot on the D3 tonight.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *laboitenoire* 
Just fooling around:

Brings back memories.
BS/MS chemistry, U of Illinois
PhD Analytical chemistry, Northwestern University.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
Brings back memories.
BS/MS chemistry, U of Illinois
PhD Analytical chemistry, Northwestern University.

That's quite the educational resume o_o


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Conspiracy* 
DUDE! WHAT! f/1.1

link me that lens lol

Here's some more ultra wide aperture pr0n for you:

Canon 50mm f/.95:










Zeiss 50mm f/.7 (video lens, but still







):


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Just fooling around:








ew ochem sp hydridization...


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
Brings back memories.
BS/MS chemistry, U of Illinois
PhD Analytical chemistry, Northwestern University.

Nice! My sister actually goes to UIUC. She should be graduating this December with a civil engineering BS. I almost went there, but decided to go to Case.


----------



## Marin

Messing around with the 135mm.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Messing around with the 135mm.




You've need to PM me a guide to portraits... I suck majorly at them.


----------



## Marin

I don't have any guides.









I've been self-taught for the majority of this stuff.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Messing around with the 135mm.




1/13 wat.


----------



## iandroo888

any idea what a low actuation count (approx 8k) d90 kit can sell for? cousin thinkin of selling his (or anyone interested...) xDDD


----------



## dudemanppl

$750, but tell him its 400 only, and you can buy it for that price maybe.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dudemanppl* 
$750, but tell him its 400 only, and you can buy it for that price maybe.

So that's how you afforded your gear...


----------



## nuclearjock

GT, one of my D300's was coming up on 40k clicks so I donated it to my daughter and bought a D300s. Not a major gear tweak, but one ntl.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
So that's how you afforded your gear...

Some of my gear was only to buy and sell.







I've made at least a thousand doing that.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
GT, one of my D300's was coming up on 40k clicks so I donated it to my daughter and bought a D300s. Not a major gear tweak, but one ntl.

Notice any difference between them?


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Notice any difference between them?

AF seems alittle "snappier" on the s for both -d and -s lenses, dynamic tracking also seems a bit more accurate. Still not a D3, almost a D700.

It's got video.


----------



## Sparhawk

Okay, I've been fighting with color-spaces recently and I'm wondering what is the "best" one to work in?
When I view pictures in Adobe Bridge they look much brighter and have 'less' contrast(properly exposed) than when view on flickr or facebook once they are uploaded. Online they seem really dark and brooding... not exactly the effect I was going for...


----------



## tK FuRY

I've always shot in Adobe RGB, processed under ProPhoto, then for web I processed into sRGB.

A lot of browsers don't have color-spaces set, if you're on FF, you can enable it.


----------



## Manyak

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Sparhawk* 
Okay, I've been fighting with color-spaces recently and I'm wondering what is the "best" one to work in?
When I view pictures in Adobe Bridge they look much brighter and have 'less' contrast(properly exposed) than when view on flickr or facebook once they are uploaded. Online they seem really dark and brooding... not exactly the effect I was going for...

You should always pre-process your photos to sRGB before uploading them.

And just FYI, if your monitor can't display the full Adobe98 gamut (which, if you're using that Samsung 2443BW for image editing, it can't), then it's likely that you aren't seeing what the images _really_ look like in Adobe98 anyway.


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Manyak* 
You should always pre-process your photos to sRGB before uploading them.

And just FYI, if your monitor can't display the full Adobe98 gamut (which, if you're using that Samsung 2443BW for image editing, it can't), then it's likely that you aren't seeing what the images _really_ look like in Adobe98 anyway.

I've always pre-processed them... they just look different when viewed in adobe programs versus the windows viewer or online. I think it might have something to do with the color management settings in windows 7.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Sparhawk* 
I've always pre-processed them... they just look different when viewed in adobe programs versus the windows viewer or online. I think it might have something to do with the color management settings in windows 7.









I generally process my photos to use the same color settings as the "vivid" in-camera setting on Nikon. I personally find the colors a lot more lifelike in most cases. However, I've also noticed that if I set a photo as my background, the colors are noticeably different from the .jpg when viewed through Photoshop or the Windows viewer.


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:


Originally Posted by *laboitenoire* 
I generally process my photos to use the same color settings as the "vivid" in-camera setting on Nikon. I personally find the colors a lot more lifelike in most cases. However, I've also noticed that if I set a photo as my background, the colors are noticeably different from the .jpg when viewed through Photoshop or the Windows viewer.

I'll see if I can get a screenshot later when I'm back home. The difference is fairly substantial.


----------



## iandroo888

anyone know what kind of a color scheme my dell 2407wfp-hc has?


----------



## tK FuRY

I believe it's a 92% color gamut, if that's what you mean by scheme.


----------



## Marin

http://www.dpreview.com/news/1009/10...nikonp7000.asp

Check out that G11... wait a minute...


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
http://www.dpreview.com/news/1009/10...nikonp7000.asp

Check out that G11... wait a minute...

That looks nothing like the G11


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dudemanppl* 
Some of my gear was only to buy and sell.







I've made at least a thousand doing that.

True. Which is why I don't have a D3 or a 24-70 anymore









It's almost the perfect camera for me. If it had video that'd be perfect. I also don't shoot often enough to find it worthwhile to have a D3









Quote:


Originally Posted by *Sparhawk* 
I'll see if I can get a screenshot later when I'm back home. The difference is fairly substantial.

All I know is that I don't print enough to find it worthwhile to calibrate my monitors.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
True. Which is why I don't have a D3 or a 24-70 anymore









It's almost the perfect camera for me. If it had video that'd be perfect. I also don't shoot often enough to find it worthwhile to have a D3










Can't you just tell us (more like me...) what it cost?


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dudemanppl* 
Can't you just tell us (more like me...) what it cost?









Two kangaroos.


----------



## WIGILOCO

Crack den.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dudemanppl* 
Can't you just tell us (more like me...) what it cost?









There was also a joey in the pouch.

Be happy with your D700! If not then move up to the D3


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
http://www.dpreview.com/news/1009/10...nikonp7000.asp

Check out that G11... wait a minute...

Hmmm... The 28-200 equivalent zoom intrigues me.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
http://www.dpreview.com/news/1009/10...nikonp7000.asp

Check out that G11... wait a minute...

It seems to have a 3" 920k dot display, that's rather good. Probably lifted from the D90.


----------



## Marin

http://news.yahoo.com/video/tech-157...-film-21784416

Talking about lomo's and stuff. Lame.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


There was also a joey in the pouch.

Be happy with your D700! If not then move up to the D3










I'm going to stop caring, you aren't telling anytime soon! Unless you were serious, in that case what do kangaroos eat?

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


http://news.yahoo.com/video/tech-157...-film-21784416

Talking about lomo's and stuff. Lame.


What the **** did just watch?


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


What the **** did just watch?


Proof Yahoo News has absolutely no brains.

They discredited themselves at "as simple as point and shoot".


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dudemanppl* 
I'm going to stop caring, you aren't telling anytime soon! Unless you were serious, in that case what do kangaroos eat?

What the **** did just watch?

Australia is the only country that eats its national animal









What difference does it make if I say I got it for $3000?

What difference does it make if I say I got it for $4000?

So to answer your question, yes you have a reason to hate me.


----------



## duong01

well , we vietnamese eat our water buffalos too
national #2 animal


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
Australia is the only country that eats its national animal









What difference does it make if I say I got it for $3000?

What difference does it make if I say I got it for $4000?

So to answer your question, yes you have a reason to hate me.

Boo hoo.







What are you getting with the money?


----------



## Mr_Nibbles

I am rediscovering aperture settings, ISO, and shutter speeds...

/s


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mr_Nibbles* 
I am rediscovering aperture settings, ISO, and shutter speeds...

/s

Wait til you try lomography. It's much better and more sophisticated than the point and shoot you do with your fancy DSLRs.


----------



## iandroo888

for real estate photography, difference between a 12-24mm f/4 DX vs 14-24 f/2.8 FX is approx 9 degrees wider (according to nikon's lens simulator).

according to my cousin, for a DX body, 12-24 is just as good as 14-24... difference in view angle is 90 degrees for the 14-24 vs 99 degrees for the 12-24. not counting the 14-24 being a stop faster, would there be any other difference? typically a room's corner is 90 degrees. that means the picture if taken from a corner, would not show the left and right walls adjacent to the camera.. if 99 degrees, it may show a bit of it??

any one have experience with real estate photography? generally for apt/condo, rooms arent taht big. limited space. in some cases, the room may not have natural lighting as well or even a light (ext flash diffused a good idea??)

how about the 10-24mm f/3.5-4.5? 109 degree view. +19 more than 14-24, +10 more then 12-24


----------



## mz-n10

i dont do real estate shoots, but generally with UWA you dont want to use flashes because flashes have trouble covering the whole frame. if the nikkor 14-24 is the recommended lens for real estate, then you probably want to look at the 11-16 tokina. its just as fast and has about the same FOV.


----------



## iandroo888

isnt the tokina an AF lens?


----------



## mz-n10

yes the tokina is an AF lens


----------



## iandroo888

need AF-S lens


----------



## Marin

It's a UWA. As if you need AF.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
It's a UWA. As if you need AF.

In case the wardrobe starts running. With this 24-70 I'm starting to like the wide angle perpective. Now im going to hunt for a tokina 11-16 2.8


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
need AF-S lens









nikon has way too many abbreviations for a non-nikoner to understand.....but i guess you are telling me the 11-18 tokina doesnt autofocus because you have a low end body with no inbody motor?

if so it shouldnt really be a problem considering infinity focus on the 11-18 is at 7ft.


----------



## duong01

guys , i just got a new lens








Russian Jupiter-6 180mm ( a direct copy of the 1938 " Olympic " Sonnar ) f2.8


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
need AF-S lens









It's expensive, but I just bought a 14-24 f/2.8. This is my first UWA and I bought it just because I didn't have one and wanted to start fooling around with the UWA perspective. Marin's right, AF is no big deal here and obviously I haven't started doing much with the lens cause I haven't posted anything with it here yet.

Two aspects of this lens:
1. Insanely sharp
2. The degree to which Nikon has minimized barrel distortion in this lens has to be seen to be believed.

Well alright, here's one on the first day @15mm, Jpeg sooc 90 degree rotation only:



Now the canting in of the building doors is easily corrected in photoshop using lens coefficients. Nothing has been done to this photograph. I was literally inches from the base of the lamp post, matrix metering to get the sky in. Taken FF on the D3. I'll try and post some interiors. It's expensive, but if you can swing it or rent it, you wont be sorry







.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mz-n10* 
i dont do real estate shoots, but generally with UWA you dont want to use flashes because flashes have trouble covering the whole frame. if the nikkor 14-24 is the recommended lens for real estate, then you probably want to look at the 11-16 tokina. its just as fast and has about the same FOV.

True about using flash with an UWA, but my 430EXII has a built-in wide angle diffuser which is effective to 14mm. It actually does a decent job of widening the flash cone.

With a UWA, I've found that they're so steady (owing to the wide angle) that you can get away with some slow shutter speeds and lower ISOs.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
for real estate photography, difference between a 12-24mm f/4 DX vs 14-24 f/2.8 FX is approx 9 degrees wider (according to nikon's lens simulator).

according to my cousin, for a DX body, 12-24 is just as good as 14-24... difference in view angle is 90 degrees for the 14-24 vs 99 degrees for the 12-24. not counting the 14-24 being a stop faster, would there be any other difference? typically a room's corner is 90 degrees. that means the picture if taken from a corner, would not show the left and right walls adjacent to the camera.. if 99 degrees, it may show a bit of it??

any one have experience with real estate photography? generally for apt/condo, rooms arent taht big. limited space. in some cases, the room may not have natural lighting as well or even a light (ext flash diffused a good idea??)

how about the 10-24mm f/3.5-4.5? 109 degree view. +19 more than 14-24, +10 more then 12-24

Anyone will tell you that the 14-24 is the best of the bunch in terms of IQ. I didn't do real estate photography, but I shot indoors plenty with the Canon 10-22 when I had it. I found myself often at 15-20mm even indoors, because at 10-15mm, the perspective distortion is so pronounced that all the straight lines in a building are warped, requiring correction and cropping in post. And the Canon 10-22 is not an f/2.8 lens (f/3.5-4.5), but wide angles are so steady that I found it not to be a significant problem.

Since it's for a crop sensor, you might consider something as wide as possible nonetheless (like the Tokina 11-16), since at ultra wide angles on a crop, a few degrees is a big difference (the difference between 10 and 15mm was huge on my 40D/7D).

Quote:


Originally Posted by *duong01* 
guys , i just got a new lens








Russian Jupiter-6 180mm ( a direct copy of the 1938 " Olympic " Sonnar ) f2.8

M42 mount? I'd like to see sample shots from these old lenses you're packing.


----------



## Boyboyd

Bah.

My friend is being paid several hundred Â£s to shoot a wedding tomorrow, and he's my age.

Admittadly he did go to college to do Photography. I'm jealous.

Edit:

Quote:


Originally Posted by *duong01* 
guys , i just got a new lens








Russian Jupiter-6 180mm ( a direct copy of the 1938 " Olympic " Sonnar ) f2.8









That's one of the best looking lenses i've ever seen. Looking forward to some sample shots.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


Originally Posted by *duong01* 
guys , i just got a new lens








Russian Jupiter-6 180mm ( a direct copy of the 1938 " Olympic " Sonnar ) f2.8









the name is actually Carl Zeiss Olympic 180/2.8. the silver one i believe isnt multicoated so you might have to watch out for flares. but it is a great lens, cant wait to see some samples.

btw how much you pay for it? ive been playing with the idea of a longer portrait lens.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
True about using flash with an UWA, but my 430EXII has a built-in wide angle diffuser which is effective to 14mm. It actually does a decent job of widening the flash cone.

i dont think 14mm aps-c is considered UWA.
but that reminds me, if you stick on a "GF light sphere" you might be able to get coverage to 10mm aps-c. might be a option to pick up a lightsphere or knock off lightsphere.


----------



## ace8uk

Iandroo, I am by no means experienced in real estate photography, but I'd suggest going as wide as you can. Although the 14-24 is an amazing lens optically, it's not really that wide on cropped format. I got the Sigma 10-20mm for a bargain price at my local camera shop, so here's a shot just to give you an idea of what 10mm is like inside on the DX format:


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ace8uk*


Iandroo, I am by no means experienced in real estate photography, but I'd suggest going as wide as you can. Although the 14-24 is an amazing lens optically, it's not really that wide on cropped format. I got the Sigma 10-20mm for a bargain price at my local camera shop, so here's a shot just to give you an idea of what 10mm is like inside on the DX format:












Where did you get that poster? Link?

Also, anyone heard of Quantary?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *theCanadian* 
Where did you get that poster? Link?

Also, anyone heard of Quantary?

Do you mean Quantaray? They were a third-party maker of lower-end lenses. Nothing special about them.


----------



## Boyboyd

Ace I wish you wouldn't post pictures of your uni accom. You're making me jealous, lol.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

HDR Video


----------



## iandroo888

so if in cases i get the tokina 11-16 f2.8, having it set on manual focus at infinity should do the job for rooms? (dont understand that.. yet)

i noticed the uhm.. sb600 by nikon has a built in diffuser for wide angles i believe. when u pull it out of its set position, flash auto goes to like a wide angle focal length (forgot the number. believe it may be 14mm). if i were to use that with like a tokina 11-16mm, good?

oh btw. sorry for using nikon terms. AF-S means built in motor in the lens. i use a body with no built in auto focus motor.

from what i understand, using an UWA lens, i can set to infinity and should be ok?

------

on the side note, anyone interested in a pentax k20d? how much could this kit sell for?


----------



## dudemanppl

I bought a 35mm f/1.4 AI-S in class today, I think I may have a problem.


----------



## ace8uk

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
so if in cases i get the tokina 11-16 f2.8, having it set on manual focus at infinity should do the job for rooms? (dont understand that.. yet)

i noticed the uhm.. sb600 by nikon has a built in diffuser for wide angles i believe. when u pull it out of its set position, flash auto goes to like a wide angle focal length (forgot the number. believe it may be 14mm). if i were to use that with like a tokina 11-16mm, good?

oh btw. sorry for using nikon terms. AF-S means built in motor in the lens. i use a body with no built in auto focus motor.

from what i understand, using an UWA lens, i can set to infinity and should be ok?

------

on the side note, anyone interested in a pentax k20d? how much could this kit sell for?

The photo I posted was taken on my D70 with an SB800 with the diffuser on. I think it works pretty well. And, yes, the focal length changes to 14mm.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *theCanadian* 
Where did you get that poster? Link?

Also, anyone heard of Quantary?

I got it at a poster fair at my University. I only went to it because I had nothing else to do between lectures and a few friends were going, I normally hate posters, but I saw that and I had to have it.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Boyboyd* 
Ace I wish you wouldn't post pictures of your uni accom. You're making me jealous, lol.


Haha, if it makes you feel any better, I've moved out of that flat now. Me and my housemates left it really late looking for a house for our second year as well, so the house I'll be moving into in a couple of days is pretty crappy. Still, gives me a good excuse to do some DIY!


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
so if in cases i get the tokina 11-16 f2.8, having it set on manual focus at infinity should do the job for rooms? (dont understand that.. yet)

i noticed the uhm.. sb600 by nikon has a built in diffuser for wide angles i believe. when u pull it out of its set position, flash auto goes to like a wide angle focal length (forgot the number. believe it may be 14mm). if i were to use that with like a tokina 11-16mm, good?

oh btw. sorry for using nikon terms. AF-S means built in motor in the lens. i use a body with no built in auto focus motor.

from what i understand, using an UWA lens, i can set to infinity and should be ok?

------

on the side note, anyone interested in a pentax k20d? how much could this kit sell for?

http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html

Go to the bottom of that page and all the info you need about hyperfocal distance is there.

I think the "14mm" SB-600 setting means 14mm on an FX camera so it should be ok. *should*

I might actually get the Tokina 11-16 as well. Leave it at hyperfocal distance and shoot away...


----------



## SpookedJunglist

I always thought it was less about the camera and more about the person taking the pictures.

This was taken with my canon a530 but I have an Eos-5D







.

the a530 goes everywhere with me







I did add the tear later with gimp...









and another pic with the a530


----------



## duong01

whew , i just done my first hands-on on the new lens
my first impression is this ***** is so f***** heavy
really good colour rendition but as usual , this lens is prone to purple fringe ( it's not multicoated like the later contax Sonnar 180mm )
after spending 40min shooting landscape with this i found out that the M42 to EF bronze adapter adds up a little bit more space between the glass and the sensor so most of the time the picture was focus beyond infinity. also i was a short sighted dumb so i can't see things properly too
anyway , will find a way to get him to work , will try later on


----------



## theCanadian

I'm going to attempt an HDR photo set tomorrow. I'm working with my film SLR.

I'm assuming that I just shoot +/- 2 EV with the same DoF and then everything else is done in post processing? Should I shoot some extra's, or some different EV's? Any tips?


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


Originally Posted by *SpookedJunglist* 
I always thought it was less about the camera and more about the person taking the pictures.

This was taken with my canon a530 but I have an Eos-5D







.

the a530 goes everywhere with me







I did add the tear later with gimp...









and another pic with the a530









the tear looks horribly fake.....


----------



## dudemanppl

Me likey S90. Yes that is my sister.


----------



## Marin

For the Nikon users...

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...postcount=5821

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...postcount=5823

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...postcount=5898

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...postcount=5910

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...postcount=5930

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...postcount=5913


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


For the Nikon users...

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...postcount=5821

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...postcount=5823

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...postcount=5898

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...postcount=5910

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...postcount=5930

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...postcount=5913


Looks pretty sweet.


----------



## nuclearjock

I love my 85 f/1.4 af-d. For me to sell it and pick up the new 85G would make me ~$900 lighter. The difference just isn't there for $900. If I was into shooting basketball or something like that, the AF-s might be handy but according to a user on the nikoncafe' who did a side by side, the AF-s is ~20% faster. Just isn't worth it for me. My 85-d stays.


----------



## iandroo888

very sharp


----------



## laboitenoire

The 85 f/1.8 doesn't look that bad wide open in the comparison thread... If I had an in-body motor and wanted the 85 mm FL, I'd get that and save a ton of cash.


----------



## dudemanppl

*waits for Sigma 85 1.4...*


----------



## laboitenoire

Well, if the Sigma 50 f/1.4 is anything to go by, an 85 f/1.4 would cost even more than the Nikon...


----------



## riko99

Quote:


Originally Posted by *laboitenoire* 
Well, if the Sigma 50 f/1.4 is anything to go by, an 85 f/1.4 would cost even more than the Nikon...

Just like there 70-200 f2.8 OS I still can't believe a 3rd party companies lens is more expensive.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


Originally Posted by *laboitenoire* 
Well, if the Sigma 50 f/1.4 is anything to go by, an 85 f/1.4 would cost even more than the Nikon...

Its $899. Find me a AF-S for that and me love you long time.


----------



## mz-n10

dont you shoot fx why do you need an af-s?


----------



## Unknownm

picked up a Fujifilm Finepix S2000HD. Like the reviews said. Anything over 800 ISO and the picture is crap. Besides that it records 720p pretty decent, only cost me 125 used at a pawn shop


----------



## Marin

I really want a Canon 1V but it's like Russian roulette when buying one. Stupid custom profiles.


----------



## WIGILOCO

May I ask that which one is better? The original shot is with the pipe in the left side. Some people find the pipe distracting because it was screaming red with the lights. I took a lot saturation off from the pipe and here's the result. What do you think?


----------



## duong01

i just took some test shot with the 180mm f2.8 today
my conclusion about it is : for $230 off ebay , i got a Russian version of the Sonnar 180mm f2.8 which cost about 8-10 times less , a better aperture mechanical ( this one got a metal wheel , not a plastic wheel which i found that quite easy to be worn off ) and really good colour rendition ( although it was designed for black & white film )
test shot








i can't focus properly for crap's sake as there was some sort of bush next to my cat's face as you can see

some more pics from these old lens i currently have
Carl Zeiss Jena 135mm f3.5









Helios 44-4 58mm f2 ( the Zenit-12's kit lens )


----------



## duong01

@ wigiloco :
i think the #2 is better . I too found the glowing pipe a bit distracting


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *duong01* 
@ wigiloco :
i think the #2 is better . I too found the glowing pipe a bit distracting

Agreed

Quote:


Originally Posted by *duong01* 
i just took some test shot with the 180mm f2.8 today
my conclusion about it is : for $230 off ebay , i got a Russian version of the Sonnar 180mm f2.8 which cost about 8-10 times less , a better aperture mechanical ( this one got a metal wheel , not a plastic wheel which i found that quite easy to be worn off ) and really good colour rendition ( although it was designed for black & white film )
test shot








i can't focus properly for crap's sake as there was some sort of bush next to my cat's face as you can see

some more pics from these old lens i currently have
Carl Zeiss Jena 135mm f3.5









Helios 44-4 58mm f2 ( the Zenit-12's kit lens )









180mm 2.8s are great lenses









I should go and shoot some more with mine but this 17-55mm 2.8 of mine is hogging the lime light lol


----------



## duong01

after try the 180mm f2.8 today i found a big problem with it
this lens is actually made for M39 SLR , so if i use an M39-M42 and a M42-EF adapter then I can't use the lens's tripod plate ( which is kinda stupid as this lens weight more than 1.5kg and i need something stronger than my hands to hold it for low-light shooting )
just wonder that if i use a M39-EF adapter , will it be possible to me to focus to infinity ? i think this one is a M39 made for SLR ( older Zenit ) , not Gorky rangefinder so it might be able to focus at infinity


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Unknownm*


picked up a Fujifilm Finepix S2000HD. Like the reviews said. Anything over 800 ISO and the picture is crap. Besides that it records 720p pretty decent, only cost me 125 used at a pawn shop










On my camera I won't go above ISO 500. I probably could but I always edit my photos at 100% zoom so I feel pain when i see noise.

Haven't used my camera in a few days actually. But the nights are getting longer, so i may feel the need for an obligitory traffic long-exposure soon.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Its $899. Find me a AF-S for that and me love you long time.


Wait, Sigma released an 85 f/1.4?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


dont you shoot fx why do you need an af-s?


Faster AF, by virtue of an ultrasonic motor.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


I really want a Canon 1V but it's like Russian roulette when buying one. Stupid custom profiles.


Me too, but what do you mean exactly? Custom profiles in the camera body? Why is that problematic?

Quote:



Originally Posted by *WIGILOCO*


May I ask that which one is better? The original shot is with the pipe in the left side. Some people find the pipe distracting because it was screaming red with the lights. I took a lot saturation off from the pipe and here's the result. What do you think?


If you want to eliminating distracting background elements in a portrait, decrease the DOF. Instead of shooting at f/5, open it up (f/3.5 for your lens, use a prime!).

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*


On my camera I won't go above ISO 500. I probably could but I always edit my photos at 100% zoom so I feel pain when i see noise.

Haven't used my camera in a few days actually. But the nights are getting longer, so i may feel the need for an obligitory traffic long-exposure soon.


Get over the noise fear. Using a DSLR means being able to use 800 ISO and up without hesitation. Otherwise, you'll have a lot of blurry shots from trying to get away with slower shutter speeds from not using high enough sensitivities. A sharp 800 ISO shot at 1/100" will look better than a blurry 1/30" shot at 400 ISO.

Also wean yourself from pixel peeping. It's unrealistic to always do that, and drives you crazy, because such details aren't noticeable at common print/display sizes anyway.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Wait, Sigma released an 85 f/1.4?


End of Sept.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Get over the noise fear. Using a DSLR means being able to use 800 ISO and up without hesitation. Otherwise, you'll have a lot of blurry shots from trying to get away with slower shutter speeds from not using high enough sensitivities. *A sharp 800 ISO shot at 1/100" will look better than a blurry 1/30" shot at 400 ISO*.


This never occurred to me. I do think that lightroom's noise reduction works quite well. I'll try that next time.

Just a thought, has anyone had any luck selling shots on any websites? I'm not sure if i'm allowed to link to it on OCN but there is one in particular my dad claims he's sold a few photos to. He says some of their picture calls are very very specific. "Young carribean girl looking hopefully at the moon" ETC.


----------



## WIGILOCO

Noise is no enemy. I even add it to my photos. It adds feeling to them. Maybe because I like retro kind of pics.. But here's few example:


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Me too, but what do you mean exactly? Custom profiles in the camera body? Why is that problematic?

From the looks of it the profiles can be changed via software but you need the manual to understand them. But I have no experience with it since I don't own the camera.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


Originally Posted by *WIGILOCO* 
Noise is no enemy. I even add it to my photos. It adds feeling to them. Maybe because I like retro kind of pics..

qftw to an extent.....

i dont need to add noise but i shoot at 1600iso without thinking twice.


----------



## theCanadian

Messing around in Paint.NET. I don't know... something about the angelic glow and sharp shadow across the face makes me like it.










Edit: You guys were talking about noise. Well, here is noise.

The original:


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Also wean yourself from pixel peeping. It's unrealistic to always do that, and drives you crazy, because such details aren't noticeable at common print/display sizes anyway.

Good advice


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *theCanadian* 
The original:










Original is better in my opinion.


----------



## iandroo888

anyone interested in a sony alpha 330 kit or pentax k20d or nikon d90 kit?


----------



## theCanadian

What's in the d90 kit?


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


What's in the d90 kit?


d90 w/ 8,236 shutter actuations, 18-105mm f/3.5 - 5.6 AF-S kit lens, B+W 67mm UV filter, boxes and accessories. think it has that plastic screen cover thing too. perfect condition with no physical blemishes. clean glass. smoke-free household xP

Sony Alpha 330 w/ DT 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 lens, boxes and accessories. Less than 2.5k shutter actuations. Blemishes on play & delete button.


----------



## Danylu

The D7k has an interesting mode switch with the shooting mode ring underneath it.


----------



## laboitenoire

Drive mode dial. I can see markings for *S*ingle, *C*ontinuous *H*igh, and *C*ontinuous *L*ow.


----------



## iPodder

Add me! Nikon d40 w/ 18-55mm kit lens and an sb-600.


----------



## iandroo888

something on the dX00's and up. nice to see it on the d7k


----------



## duong01

haven't using my 50mm f1.8 for a while
took a shot today with it , then tweak it a bit in lightroom


----------



## Boyboyd

Nifty Fifty huh? I have a 35mm 1.8 which is a 52.5mm on a crop body. But Nifty 52.5mm doesn't sound as good.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *laboitenoire* 
Drive mode dial. I can see markings for *S*ingle, *C*ontinuous *H*igh, and *C*ontinuous *L*ow.

Yeah that's what I meant but I forgot what it was called


----------



## theCanadian

What do you guys think of the Sony Cybershot DSC-H10.

Cybershots, IIRC, are good, but can my friend do better for less? He already has an older Cybershot and it takes good enough quality photo's for the pictures he takes on his trips, but he's looking for something with a bit more zoom. Any suggestions? Or is this a good one to go with?


----------



## laboitenoire

It's not a bad camera. I used one extensively this summer at my workplace and I was pleasantly surprised with the image quality. The shutter release is a little weird at first, though.


----------



## laboitenoire

Just as a heads up, B&H currently has the D3000 kit on sale for $460 right now... Probably to clear them out for the D3100.


----------



## dudemanppl

Damn, I want my 17-55 sold. Boxed with hood and caps, too. *wink wink*

Nikon D700 + MB-D10 and Eneloops
Nikon D7000 + MB-D11 and Eneloops
Nikon F100 + MB-15 and Eneloops
Canon S90

Sigma 12-24mm f/4.5-5.6 EX DG HSM
Sigma 24mm f/1.8 EX DG
Nikkor 35mm f/1.4 AI-S
Sigma 50mm f/1.4 EX DG HSM
Nikkor 85mm f/1.8 AF-D
Nikkor 80-200mm f/2.8 AF-S D
Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 APO EX HSM

RODE VideoMic
Nikon Speedlight SB-800 x2
Nikon Speedlight SB-600 x2
Yong Nuo 460 II x2
40" Shoot Through x2
Crappy $20 Lightstand x2
Crappy Canon Tripod
Manfrotto 776YB Monopod

After I sell the 17-55. EDIT: It just occured to me I need more lightstands and sich.


----------



## Mr_Nibbles

I am selling my XSi kit: Body, 18-55 IS, 25 gb of memory, a lowepro bag, opteka grip, 4 batteries, great condition. Also comes with the manuals and stuff. This is a full setup with everything you need to get into digital photography.

I am looking to sell it for $550 so PM me if you are interested.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mr_Nibbles* 
I am selling my XSi kit: Body, 18-55 IS, 25 gb of memory, a lowepro bag, opteka grip, 4 batteries, great condition. Also comes with the manuals and stuff. This is a full setup with everything you need to get into digital photography.

I am looking to sell it for $550 so PM me if you are interested.

Upgrading?


----------



## Mr_Nibbles

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Upgrading?

Well I sold this kit to a friend a couple weeks ago and now he screwed me over and decided he doesn't want a dslr. He would rather have a sub for his truck. I know it isn't my responsibility to re sell it, but I decided to try and help him out.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mr_Nibbles* 
Well I sold this kit to a friend a couple weeks ago and now he screwed me over and decided he doesn't want a dslr. He would rather have a sub for his truck. I know it isn't my responsibility to re sell it, but I decided to try and help him out.

Did you ever make a rant thread on that? This sounds really familiar for some reason...

I'll ask some of my friends. They're interested in DSLRs and just need the convincing to spring for one


----------



## Mr_Nibbles

Quote:


Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d* 
Did you ever make a rant thread on that? This sounds really familiar for some reason...

I'll ask some of my friends. They're interested in DSLRs and just need the convincing to spring for one









No I didn't rant







But I would appreciate the help selling this. I have it posted on craigs too, but I would love to help an OCN'r get into photography.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dudemanppl* 
Damn, I want my 17-55 sold. Boxed with hood and caps, too. *wink wink*

Nikon D700 + MB-D10 and Eneloops
Nikon D7000 + MB-D11 and Eneloops
Nikon F100 + MB-15 and Eneloops
Canon S90

Sigma 12-24mm f/4.5-5.6 EX DG HSM
Sigma 24mm f/1.8 EX DG
Nikkor 35mm f/1.4 AI-S
Sigma 50mm f/1.4 EX DG HSM
Nikkor 85mm f/1.8 AF-D
Nikkor 80-200mm f/2.8 AF-S D
Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 APO EX HSM

RODE VideoMic
Nikon Speedlight SB-800 x2
Nikon Speedlight SB-600 x2
Yong Nuo 460 II x2
40" Shoot Through x2
Crappy $20 Lightstand x2
Crappy Canon Tripod
Manfrotto 776YB Monopod

After I sell the 17-55. EDIT: It just occured to me I need more lightstands and sich.

Did you sell the 300 AF-I?


----------



## nuclearjock

Was gonna buy the Kirk window unit but this looks interesting for about 1/10th the price. Called the company and the guy said he uses it with his 600 no prob. Anybody used one??

Cars sometimes make excellent blinds btw.


----------



## mz-n10

call me old school...but ill just get a beanbag and call it a day.


----------



## Boyboyd

I've never heard of the beanbag thing until my grandad (of all people) mentioned it to me a few days ago. Funny when stuff like that happens.

I found a place in town today that will print an A4 picture and sandwich it between 2 acrylic blocks for Â£30. I think that's pretty good value.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


Originally Posted by *laboitenoire* 
Did you sell the 300 AF-I?

Yup.







Twas a thing of beauty, that lens.


----------



## laboitenoire

That's too bad...

EDIT: I took my camera to a campus event tonight (swimming competition held by one of our sororities) and I set my camera to use auto ISO. However, I was noticing that most of my pictures were seriously underexposed. Does anybody else who shoots Nikon notice underexposure with auto ISO? I didn't have any EV set, and pictures I took without auto ISO exposed just fine...

I need a fast telephoto so I don't need to be shooting at ISO 1600+ to get at least 1/60 s.


----------



## dudemanppl

When I use auto ISO, its usually on manual (ISO shift manual <3) and it does seem to underexpose more than manually putting it in. Don't know why, but most shots work out fine.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


Originally Posted by *laboitenoire* 
That's too bad...

EDIT: I took my camera to a campus event tonight (swimming competition held by one of our sororities) and I set my camera to use auto ISO. However, I was noticing that most of my pictures were seriously underexposed. Does anybody else who shoots Nikon notice underexposure with auto ISO? I didn't have any EV set, and pictures I took without auto ISO exposed just fine...

I need a fast telephoto so I don't need to be shooting at ISO 1600+ to get at least 1/60 s.









I didn't notice that, but auto ISO always set it too high for my liking. Instead i binded the function button to ISO.


----------



## laboitenoire

Yeah, I've got ISO bound to the Fn button on my camera as well, but sometimes I just can't change it fast enough.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mz-n10* 
call me old school...but ill just get a beanbag and call it a day.

Old school,

When I rest my 400 VR and 600 VR on a bean bag, they interfere with and sometimes move the focus ring. That's why I can't use bean bags with the big guns.


----------



## Mootsfox

Better to underexpose and get a bit of noise, than to overexpose and get blur.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Better to underexpose and get a bit of noise, than to overexpose and get blur.

I agree. Personally I couldn't care less about noise (within reason). Even at ISO 3200 the D5000 isn't horrible. However, the Hi modes definitely look a bit yitzy in darker areas...


----------



## dudemanppl

Just tried out the 28-300 VR. Jeebus its sharp, epicly good VR too. The 24 1.4 I tried back focused like 3 cm...


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


That's too bad...

EDIT: I took my camera to a campus event tonight (swimming competition held by one of our sororities) and I set my camera to use auto ISO. However, I was noticing that most of my pictures were seriously underexposed. Does anybody else who shoots Nikon notice underexposure with auto ISO? I didn't have any EV set, and pictures I took without auto ISO exposed just fine...

I need a fast telephoto so I don't need to be shooting at ISO 1600+ to get at least 1/60 s.










How's your metering set?? Matrix, spot, cw??
i.e. if you're spot metering on something bright, iso will bump down and you'll be u.e.

If you need a fast telephoto, buy one. There's lots of good ones out there.


----------



## iandroo888

Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 (no in-lens focus motor) or Nikkor 12-24 f/4 (has in-lens focus motor)?

will be used on D5000 body (no in body focus motor). got real-estate photography.

should i get an ext flash too like a sb600? i know i cant use in-body flash cuz it will create a shadow..

i dont mind having to PP pictures.. as long as i can get the wide angle shot i want.. i understand at lower focal ranges, the lines will be kinda bulged.

and for clarification from what people has told me.. when doing super wide angle photography... the focus is usually at infinity? that makes sense for like landscape or scenic but does that apply to photography in like a room too? was going off this site that someone on this thread posted about DoF or something and i tried simulating numbers.. didnt quite understand... one of the numbers was like 900 something ft when i set it to like 7ft.. if i changed the distance of the "object" like 8 ft, it goes to infinity.. does that mean when focusing, ill be slightly under infinity then?


----------



## theCanadian

I don't get why your question matters. Shouldn't you be focusing based on what actually puts it all in focus and not what your numbers say should be in focus?

Also, I'd be interested in this link.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
How's your metering set?? Matrix, spot, cw??
i.e. if you're spot metering on something bright, iso will bump down and you'll be u.e.

If you need a fast telephoto, buy one. There's lots of good ones out there.

I was trying everything. Matrix was by far the worst, and spot was a bit better. Center ended up working pretty well.

While I need/want a fast tele, I can't afford one.


----------



## mz-n10

i have no idea what your asking. but if infinity is at 3ft anything 3ft and pass will be in focus. in real-estate photography i believe you want the widest possible lens, and the 14-24 (IMO) just isnt wide enough on aps-c.

if you are worried about focus, then bring a tripod along and buy the 10-20 sigma. its slower then the tokina but it has HSM.

and i wouldnt bother with a single smart expensive flash, and instead just get 2 cheaper dumb flashes and fire off camera.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mz-n10* 
i have no idea what your asking. but if infinity is at 3ft anything 3ft and pass will be in focus. in real-estate photography i believe you want the widest possible lens, and the 14-24 (IMO) just isnt wide enough on aps-c.

if you are worried about focus, then bring a tripod along and buy the 10-20 sigma. its slower then the tokina but it has HSM.

and i wouldnt bother with a single smart expensive flash, and instead just get 2 cheaper dumb flashes and fire off camera.

Can't control off-camera on the D5000. Unless you buy optical slaves.


----------



## mz-n10

radio, optical, pc-sync (assuming there is one) it doesnt matter as long as the flash trips.


----------



## iandroo888

wouldnt firing off camera require like a commander thing on the body ?

http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html

if subject distance is 7ft

it says

Depth of field
Near limit 3.51 ft
Far limit 913.1 ft
Total 909.6 ft

so anything from 3.51ft - 913.1ft is in focus?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 (no in-lens focus motor) or Nikkor 12-24 f/4 (has in-lens focus motor)?

will be used on D5000 body (no in body focus motor). got real-estate photography.

should i get an ext flash too like a sb600? i know i cant use in-body flash cuz it will create a shadow..

i dont mind having to PP pictures.. as long as i can get the wide angle shot i want.. i understand at lower focal ranges, the lines will be kinda bulged.

and for clarification from what people has told me.. when doing super wide angle photography... the focus is usually at infinity? that makes sense for like landscape or scenic but does that apply to photography in like a room too? was going off this site that someone on this thread posted about DoF or something and i tried simulating numbers.. didnt quite understand... one of the numbers was like 900 something ft when i set it to like 7ft.. if i changed the distance of the "object" like 8 ft, it goes to infinity.. does that mean when focusing, ill be slightly under infinity then?

I think you're worrying about the wrong things. Consider the lenses from their price point, IQ, FL and aperture range. As I said, a non-f/2.8 lens isn't necessarily a deal-breaker so long as it isn't pitch black inside. With average interior lighting, I've managed fine using the 10-22 f/3.5-4.5.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mz-n10* 
i have no idea what your asking. but if infinity is at 3ft anything 3ft and pass will be in focus. in real-estate photography i believe you want the widest possible lens, and the 14-24 (IMO) just isnt wide enough on aps-c.

if you are worried about focus, then bring a tripod along and buy the 10-20 sigma. its slower then the tokina but it has HSM.

and i wouldnt bother with a single smart expensive flash, and instead just get 2 cheaper dumb flashes and fire off camera.

I think 14mm is plenty wide enough on APS-C, having used that FL quite a bit both for interior and landscape work. It's a nice compromise in terms of minimizing distortion types, which are quite extreme when venturing to 10mm (or less), not to mention other aspects of IQ. On the Canon 10-22, 14mm was the sweet spot IMO.


----------



## theCanadian

I say, shoot with a tripod. I don't think you want to be shooting wide open anyway. If you can stop it down a bit that simplifies the shot a lot.

At 14mm at f/11 and a focusing distance of 3 feet, everything from 1.5ft to infinity is going to be in focus. That's plenty. You could loosen that up quite a bit and still be fine.


----------



## iandroo888

true. reason why im going with a SWA lens is because want a shot wider than 90 degrees if shot from a corner of a room, can show the adjacent walls. believe 14mm is at 90 degrees.

the matter of worry for me is if i can use a lens without an AF motor or not.. if its not simple enough to AF manually, then ill consider only ones with a AF motor. i have MF'ed lenses before but not for like this type of photography... and it was mostly outdoors with sunlight.


----------



## theCanadian

Yeah, but by the same token, the room isn't going to run away from you if you don't nail the focus on the first shot.


----------



## iandroo888

yah i know.. but for a wide angle shot with the adjacent walls, wouldnt camera need to be quite close to the corner? not sure if i can be behind the camera.. xD unless i handheld or flip screen down and focus manually sitting under teh camera xDDD

either way if i upgrade body, unless i go FF, it should be a lens to keep either way right? tokina sounds really good.. worse case scenario i sell it lol... xDDD


----------



## theCanadian

You know the FL you'll be shooting at. You know distance you should focus to.

I say:


 Set it up on the tripod to where you can get behind it to look through the viewfinder.
 Frame it up properly.
 Get out from behind the tripod and scoot it back into the corner.
 Set the timer.
 Release timer and dash from the room.


----------



## laboitenoire

Intriguing. If it weren't for the retro styling I think it'd be very tempting.

Also, a few pics from the other night.













They're more than a bit noisy, but lighting was pretty abysmal in the pool house so I was at high ISO in order to get good shutter speeds. If you're wondering about the goofy subject matter, one of CWRU's sororities had its philanthropy event the other night. I went primarily to photograph my fraternity (1st and 3rd pics), and overall had a very fun time! Took video of our synchronized swimming routine... If I had a faster tele I probably would have stuck exclusively with photos.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Intriguing. If it weren't for the retro styling I think it'd be very tempting.


Do want.

EDIT:

My Concept 1 teacher is having us shoot slide film so we have no room for mistake and so he can project the work. Looks like I'm finally ordering the Canon 1v, lol.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Do want.

EDIT:

My Concept 1 teacher is having us shoot slide film so we have no room for mistake and so he can project the work. Looks like I'm finally ordering the Canon 1v, lol.


The 1 is quite nice, very minimalist.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


Originally Posted by *theCanadian* 
You know the FL you'll be shooting at. You know distance you should focus to.

I say:


Set it up on the tripod to where you can get behind it to look through the viewfinder.
Frame it up properly.
Get out from behind the tripod and scoot it back into the corner.
Set the timer.
Release timer and dash from the room.

lol xD bah Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 it is. now just to wait to get it >_> Get a Hoya HD 77mm UV and Cir-Pol too =D

$599.95 (from B&H) F/S + ($78.42 Hoya HD 77mm UV (from 2filters.com) + $163.22 Hoya HD 77mm Cir-Pol + $7.91 Filter Wrench) $249.55 = Little under $750 xD


----------



## Unknownm

trying out close ups (finepix S2000HD). Auto 800 ISO sucks







besides that it's alright for basic use. Grr I need DSLR

http://img843.imageshack.us/img843/3076/dscf1242.jpg
http://img31.imageshack.us/img31/9799/dscf1244j.jpg
http://img97.imageshack.us/img97/7051/dscf1247t.jpg
http://img710.imageshack.us/img710/6586/dscf1253o.jpg
http://img835.imageshack.us/img835/2443/dscf1255d.jpg
http://img693.imageshack.us/img693/8428/dscf1259o.jpg

Close up on the first picture. Shows the auto focus isn't so bad


----------



## theCanadian

Holy crap. $250 on two filters. No thank you.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Do want.

EDIT:

My Concept 1 teacher is having us shoot slide film so we have no room for mistake and so he can project the work. Looks like I'm finally ordering the Canon 1v, lol.

Gah, slide film. I shot tons of slide film when I interned in my college's slide library. 4 hours a day at the copy stand. I don't know if the teacher will have you mount the slides (probably so if he will project them), but it was the biggest pain keeping dust motes and hair out of the slide mounts.


----------



## Frankie007

wow been lurking around here for 6 months and didn't know we had an official camera thread. Well count me in. I have a Nikon D80 with a nikon 50mm f1.8, sigma 28-70 mm and sigma 70-300 mm macro lenses.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
lol xD bah Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 it is. now just to wait to get it >_> Get a Hoya HD 77mm UV and Cir-Pol too =D

$599.95 (from B&H) F/S + ($78.42 Hoya HD 77mm UV (from 2filters.com) + $163.22 Hoya HD 77mm Cir-Pol + $7.91 Filter Wrench) $249.55 = Little under $750 xD

did you check to see if the tokina can fit filters? alot of these wides have a bulb from element that cant use screw on filters without significant vignette.

for 170 bucks for a hoya hd, you might want to consider the b+w f-pro xs cpl they are thinner then the HD so there might be less vignetting, but you need to use the included lens cap.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *theCanadian* 
Holy crap. $250 on two filters. No thank you.

filters are expensive, thats why you buy 77mm filters and use step down rings


----------



## Manyak

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Do want.

EDIT:

My Concept 1 teacher is having us shoot slide film so we have no room for mistake and so he can project the work. Looks like I'm finally ordering the Canon 1v, lol.

lol, you should just use a Nikon F or something. Metering what?


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mz-n10* 
did you check to see if the tokina can fit filters? alot of these wides have a bulb from element that cant use screw on filters without significant vignette.

for 170 bucks for a hoya hd, you might want to consider the b+w f-pro xs cpl they are thinner then the HD so there might be less vignetting, but you need to use the included lens cap.

filters are expensive, thats why you buy 77mm filters and use step down rings

it says its filter size is 77mm... so should be able to?

the B+W cir pol filter seems more expensive


----------



## koruki

Canon shooter here

5D-MK2
24-105 F/4 L
35 F/1.4 L
85 F/1.2 L II
135 F/2 L

Speedlight 580EX II (Sanyo Eneloop's)
Manfrotto CF tripod
Lowepro Toploader 45W
Lowepro Nova190
Lowepro Fastpack 350

Sandisk Extreme III CF, B+W filters etc


----------



## koruki

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
it says its filter size is 77mm... so should be able to?

the B+W cir pol filter seems more expensive

B+W makes some of the best filters hence the price. The 77mm is a good size as you can use them on your smaller lenses(72mm etc) with a step down ring which cost a few dollars. The only slightly annoying thing is if you use a step down you might not be able to fit your hood on, but you can still use the hood if you put it on first. I usually don't use my hoods so it's not a big issue.


----------



## laboitenoire

So what's the current opinion of the D2H? I realize it's a really old body, but I'm evaluating it as a cheap (and FAST) option for using screw-drive lenses, some of which can focus quite quickly on the right body. That would seriously improve my options for getting good lenses on the cheap.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
it says its filter size is 77mm... so should be able to?

the B+W cir pol filter seems more expensive

the tokina does not have a bulb front end so you will be ok.

hmm....sorry b+w f-pro is only for UV filters

bhphoto has the b+w kaseman cpl 77mm for 178. which is 15 bucks more then the hoya you priced.

if you want to go a bit cheaper theres the sony zeiss CPL. some sony folks swear by it, but i just stick to good old b+w.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


Originally Posted by *laboitenoire* 
So what's the current opinion of the D2H? I realize it's a really old body, but I'm evaluating it as a cheap (and FAST) option for using screw-drive lenses, some of which can focus quite quickly on the right body. That would seriously improve my options for getting good lenses on the cheap.

you cant really go wrong with nikon dX series. but it really depends on what you are shooting and if you like/need to crop. also the size of pro bodies are kinda awkward for everyday shooting.

maybe you can consider selling the d5000 and picking up a used d300/s.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


you cant really go wrong with nikon dX series. but it really depends on what you are shooting and if you like/need to crop. also the size of pro bodies are kinda awkward for everyday shooting.

maybe you can consider selling the d5000 and picking up a used d300/s.


The D300 series is still way out of my price range. I've considered selling the D5000 and getting a D200, but I love the overall ergonomics of the D5000 as a general shooter, and so the other body would be more "specialized," for lack of a better word.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


So what's the current opinion of the D2H? I realize it's a really old body, but I'm evaluating it as a cheap (and FAST) option for using screw-drive lenses, some of which can focus quite quickly on the right body. That would seriously improve my options for getting good lenses on the cheap.


It's great, unless you need to crop. I miss a vertical grip when I'm shooting with my D60.

I tried The 28-300 VR yesterday and it feels heavy, but not solid heavy like the 24-70mm, it feels heavy like the 70-300 VR. The salespeople weren't going to haggle so it looks like I won't be getting a Tokina 11-16.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


Originally Posted by *laboitenoire* 
The D300 series is still way out of my price range. I've considered selling the D5000 and getting a D200, but I love the overall ergonomics of the D5000 as a general shooter, and so the other body would be more "specialized," for lack of a better word.

You thought about the D90? Since the announcement of the D7000 they've plummeted in price. I found one for Â£60 more (body only) than i paid for my D5000. Pretty sure my dad's getting one for his birthday.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Frankie007*


wow been lurking around here for 6 months and didn't know we had an official camera thread. Well count me in. I have a Nikon D80 with a nikon 50mm f1.8, sigma 28-70 mm and sigma 70-300 mm macro lenses.



Quote:



Originally Posted by *koruki*


Canon shooter here

5D-MK2
24-105 F/4 L
35 F/1.4 L
85 F/1.2 L II
135 F/2 L

Speedlight 580EX II (Sanyo Eneloop's)
Manfrotto CF tripod
Lowepro Toploader 45W
Lowepro Nova190
Lowepro Fastpack 350

Sandisk Extreme III CF, B+W filters etc


Welcome to you both!


----------



## dudemanppl

I got bored and took gear to school.


----------



## Marin

I just spent $900 on photo equipment with a student discount. Meaning I probably spent the least in my class.










Among the stuff I purchased was a Sekonic L-758DR. The discount caused it to be $60 cheaper than B&H.


----------



## dudemanppl

What exactly did you buy other than the 1v (which is epic sexy)?


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


What exactly did you buy other than the 1v (which is epic sexy)?


Edited my post with one of the things I bought. Also got a bunch of darkroom equipment and have to order some more.


----------



## Sparhawk

Hey, what price should I be able to get for my D80? (bought in 2007)

I got an offer for $400, I'm tempted to take it because it'll only depreciate more once the D7000 is released.

Thoughts?


----------



## laboitenoire

How beat up is it? KEH sells ones in excellent and like new condition for $450-525 USD.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

I'm not sure if this is appropriate, but can someone give me an appraisal for my camera kit?


----------



## riko99

Well I currently am in talks with a lady to buy the D60 kit off of me for use with a local scout group. There budget was 550 which is what I was asking for so I sent some general photos over to them and they are reviewing it... Now the 550 is including extra El-E9 battery 8GB SDHC and a UV filter plus the Body and 18-55.

This means we will have the extra cash to buy the Tamron 17-50 f2.8 which if all the reviews are completely right should be quality leaps and bounds over the kit lens.


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:


Originally Posted by *laboitenoire* 
How beat up is it? KEH sells ones in excellent and like new condition for $450-525 USD.

It's in great condition. Nothing functionally wrong with it. Some dust and dirt that I can probably clean off. A few cosmetic marks around the tripod base. It's had the screen cover on it since I bought it so there aren't any scratches on the LCD.

Had the sensor cleaned a year ago.

It's got about 35000 actuations, which puts it at just over half life-expectancy.

The battery still performs like it did out of the box.

I'm including a 4GB card and all the accessories, including the original box and packaging.


----------



## theCanadian

Almost bought a Tokina 500mm mirror lens. Not being spendy is so boring.


----------



## dudemanppl

Click, 30 second setup for basically all of them.


----------



## Danylu

What do you guys think of the SB-400? Would it be strong enough for basic bouncing and fill-flash with its GN of 69ft @ 35mm (2/3 of the SB-600). I'm looking to downsize my kit into something more portable. There's also this vertical tilt adaptor for the SB-400 - anyone know what its called? I found it once and forgot to note down its name.

I'm downsizing my kit. I think I'll be getting rid of the SB-600 and SB-800. I don't use off camera flash as much as I envisioned


----------



## iandroo888

how much for sb600? *cough* discount for ocn? xD *cough*


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 

I'm downsizing my kit. I think I'll be getting rid of the SB-600 and SB-800. I don't use off camera flash as much as I envisioned









Buy a monopod, umbrella, and a flash bracket. Use the SB800 off camera. You shall have much fun.


----------



## Marin

http://www.engadget.com/2010/09/22/h...ormat-excelle/

Almost there.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


http://www.engadget.com/2010/09/22/h...ormat-excelle/

Almost there.


At first glance i thought that was a DV camera.


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
http://www.engadget.com/2010/09/22/h...ormat-excelle/

Almost there.

God damn Ferrari.

http://www.engadget.com/2010/09/22/h...es-to-talk-pr/


----------



## ocman

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*


God damn Ferrari.

http://www.engadget.com/2010/09/22/h...es-to-talk-pr/


Wow... those Hasselblad looked pretty high end... 50MP???


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


http://www.engadget.com/2010/09/22/h...ormat-excelle/

Almost there.


the 645D is still cheaper...if it ever comes to the states...

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*


God damn Ferrari.

http://www.engadget.com/2010/09/22/h...es-to-talk-pr/


looks like a rattle can job....


----------



## ryanmh

I am saving up to get a DSLR. I've seen some at the local pawn shop for $100-200


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ocman*


Wow... those Hasselblad looked pretty high end... 50MP???










50mp isnt that much anymore.

sigma has a 45mp DSLR and hassel is planning a 200mp back.....


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


the 645D is still cheaper...if it ever comes to the states...


Pentax needs to learn how to market their stuff first.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


50mp isnt that much anymore.

sigma has a 45mp DSLR and hassel is planning a 200mp back.....


With the Sigma, yes and no. It's 46mp due to the three layers of the Foveon sensor but for actual resolution it's around 15mp.


----------



## iandroo888

http://www.overclock.net/appraisals/...cessories.html

assistance in appraisal please 







(none of these are mine if u guys are wondering that...)


----------



## Marin

Well this is just brilliant. I got my Canon 1v, yay awesome. Oh wait, I need a battery for it.

*punches wall*

EDIT: Figured out I need a 2CR5.


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Well this is just brilliant. I got my Canon 1v, yay awesome. Oh wait, I need a battery for it.

*punches wall*

EDIT: Figured out I need a 2CR5.










That's brutal. I hate getting a new toy and not having batteries. It was the bane of my childhood.


----------



## theCanadian

If I know that a shot needs to be taken at 1/250 @ f/4 @ ISO 1600, how do I figure out how to take the same shot at f/4 @ ISO 100?


----------



## Sun

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


If I know that a shot needs to be taken at 1/250 @ f/4 @ ISO 1600, how do I figure out how to take the same shot at f/4 @ ISO 100?


Stop down 4 times I believe. So 1/15?


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Sun*


Stop down 4 times I believe. So 1/15?


Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day. _Teach a man to fish_ and he will eat for a lifetime.


----------



## Sun

Quote: 
   Originally Posted by *theCanadian*   Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day. _Teach a man to fish_ and he will eat for a lifetime.  
   Bryan Peterson told me all I know.

ISO "steps" 100, 200, 400, 800, 1600... (doubles)

ISO is sensitivity to light, so if you move from ISO 100 to ISO 200, the camera is twice as sensitive to light, requiring half the shutter speed.

To go from ISO 1600 to 100, I "stepped" 4 times down the scale. This means at the same aperture value, you decrease your shutter speed four steps.

1/125, 1/60, 1/30, 1/15

Aperture follows a similar pattern. f/4, f/5.6, f/8, f/11 are full stops.

EDIT: Here is a slightly condensed version of his explanation.


----------



## Shane1244

1/15.625

I have no idea if this is right, just my assumption..

ISO 1600 lets in 16x more light than ISO 100.

1/250 * 16 = 0.064
1 / 0.064 = 1/15.56 of a second


----------



## theCanadian

Nice. I made myself a nice chart. Might try a long exposure tonight. Obviously this math doesn't apply to life so cleanly. But it's ball park math to begin with so...


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Pentax needs to learn how to market their stuff first.

With the Sigma, yes and no. It's 46mp due to the three layers of the Foveon sensor but for actual resolution it's around 15mp.

pentax first need the product to be on the market, before they can market it.

i know the sigma is a bit of a marketing gimmick. but it is suppose to give you 3 times the "resolution" of color since theres no bayer matrix.


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


Originally Posted by *theCanadian* 
Nice. I made myself a nice chart. Might try a long exposure tonight. Obviously this math doesn't apply to life so cleanly. But it's ball park math to begin with so...

:O Wanna post the chart? I'd love it!


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
how much for sb600? *cough* discount for ocn? xD *cough*

Any discount I give will probably get slaughtered by import taxes and shipping fees.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dudemanppl* 
Buy a monopod, umbrella, and a flash bracket. Use the SB800 off camera. You shall have much fun.

I was thinking about it, but I'm not that interested in portraits.

I was thinking of working my way down this list;
SB-400
Tokina 11-16
Nikon 70-200
Nikon 2x tc


----------



## XuhQshinR

_"And if you want to join the club, post saying you want to join and tell us what camera and equipment you use"_

Camera I Use is a *Nikon D90* with various Glass.

Not a pro by any means, but love to take photos.









Have owned it since October 2008


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Shane1244* 
:O Wanna post the chart? I'd love it!









It's really only useful if it's in your camera bag but sure. These are full stops only. I have these on a piece of paper in columns next to each other. Makes it easier to 'stop up' and 'stop down' correctly.

I really don't see why you'd need this if you shoot with a camera that can already do 30s exposures. I'm stuck at 4s. Even then I'd probably only use it rarely.

For example:
I take a light reading at night with an ISO value of 1600 and an aperture of f/4. My camera spits out a value of 1/15s. But I have a roll of ISO 100 in and I want to shoot at f/11. I can use this chart to determine that I must expose the film for approximately 8 seconds at f/11 to obtain a correct exposure with ISO 100 film. From there I can put my camera in manual shutter mode and use a stop watch to approximate the correct length of exposure.

*F-stops*
f/1
f/1.4
f/2
f/2.8
f/4
f/5.6
f/8
f/11
f/16
f/22
f/32

*ISO Stops*
25
50
100
200
400
800
1600
3200
6400

*Shutter Stops*
30s
15s
8s
4s
2s
1s
1/2s
1/4s
1/8s
1/15s
1/30s
1/60s
1/125s
1/250s
1/500s
1/1000s
1/2000s
1/4000s


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Shane1244* 
:O Wanna post the chart? I'd love it!









you shoot digital right?

just hit AEL then adjust away....

Quote:


Originally Posted by *theCanadian* 
It's really only useful if it's in your camera bag but sure. These are full stops only. I have these on a piece of paper in columns next to each other. Makes it easier to 'stop up' and 'stop down' correctly.

I really don't see why you'd need this if you shoot with a camera that can already do 30s exposures. I'm stuck at 4s. Even then I'd probably only use it rarely.

For example:
I take a light reading at night with an ISO value of 1600 and an aperture of f/4. My camera spits out a value of 1/15s. But I have a roll of ISO 100 in and I want to shoot at f/11. I can use this chart to determine that I must expose the film for approximately 8 seconds at f/11 to obtain a correct exposure with ISO 100 film. From there I can put my camera in manual shutter mode and use a stop watch to approximate the correct length of exposure.

does your in body meter not work?


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mz-n10* 
does your in body meter not work?

The meter works fine. The problem is even though my my camera can take a shot at 4 seconds, if it's metering anything below 1 second, I don't know what the shutter speed is. It just flashes an arrow that indicates "below 1s".

So, if the camera wants to shoot at 2s, I don't know that. All I know is that it's less than 1 second. To me, that means the shot might require a 6 second exposure, in which case the shot would have to be totally manual. But if I can confirm that it's 2s, I can still take the shot with a lot less fuss, (though I'm pretty sure that below 1s my shutter speeds aren't stopless anymore).

Old Cameras FTW.

*Edit:*

*Should I get Kodak Gold Max 400 or Kodak Portra 400NC? The Portra is twice the price.*


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu*
Any discount I give will probably get slaughtered by import taxes and shipping fees.

oops forgot about that part xDD


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *theCanadian* 

*Edit:*

*Should I get Kodak Gold Max 400 or Kodak Portra 400NC? The Portra is twice the price.*

Get Portra. It's worth it.


----------



## theCanadian

Prepping for the impending DSLR purchase.

Gonna grab a tripod and a backpack since I already have an old school shoulder bag.

I'm looking for a very minimalist backpack. I'd like it to be able to hold my body with a lens attached, a hotshoe flash, and *at most* two medium-large lenses, with some extra pockets and such for water/snacks.

Price of less than $60 would be nice.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *theCanadian* 
Prepping for the impending DSLR purchase.

Gonna grab a tripod and a backpack since I already have an old school shoulder bag.

I'm looking for a very minimalist backpack. I'd like it to be able to hold my body with a lens attached, a hotshoe flash, and *at most* two medium-large lenses, with some extra pockets and such for water/snacks.

Price of less than $60 would be nice.

For $160, I would pass on the Vanguard (used have a similar one and it wasn't nearly as good as Manfrotto or others). Go for a better brand like Manfrotto, Slik, Gitzo, Benro, etc. Look into the Manfrotto 190 series.

As for backpacks, most are fairly pricey for the major brands, but you shouldn't need to spend much more than $100 or so. Check used gear (such as at POTN or Fred Miranda) if you want to save on a bag.

Some good backpack style bags are the Lowepro Slingshot series (if you like the single cross-body strap), the Lowepro Fastpack series, and ThinkTank, Kata and Crumpler make some nice packs, though they're among the pricier companies.


----------



## laboitenoire

The Kata backpacks are very nice! I've had a chance to use one, and it held everything snugly! I think the one I tried was about $70 and could hold a body, three lenses, and a flash. It also had a top pocket for personal effects.


----------



## hubwub

I'm done with zoom lenses. I am now addicted to primes! AHH!


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


For $160, I would pass on the Vanguard (used have a similar one and it wasn't nearly as good as Manfrotto or others). Go for a better brand like Manfrotto, Slik, Gitzo, Benro, etc. Look into the Manfrotto 190 series.

As for backpacks, most are fairly pricey for the major brands, but you shouldn't need to spend much more than $100 or so. Check used gear (such as at POTN or Fred Miranda) if you want to save on a bag.

Some good backpack style bags are the Lowepro Slingshot series (if you like the single cross-body strap), the Lowepro Fastpack series, and ThinkTank, Kata and Crumpler make some nice packs, though they're among the pricier companies.



The Vanguard has a load capacity of more than twice a 190 tripod, is heavier and I haven't been able to find one negative review. Plus it has a taller max height. Everyone claims the Vanguard's head is smooth too. I'm torn.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


The Vanguard has a load capacity of more than twice a 190 tripod, is heavier and I haven't been able to find one negative review. Plus it has a taller max height. Everyone claims the Vanguard's head is smooth too. I'm torn.


how big is your biggest lens?

the general rule is you need 3 times the capacity vs. your max load. so for a 22lbs you are looking for 7lbs of gear.

on the flip side you need to carry a 7lbs tripod around.


----------



## theCanadian

I'd say with an autowinder attached, my flash and my 35-105mm I'm approaching about 5 pounds. If for some extenuating circumstance I needed to throw on my 75-300mm with a flash, I'd be over 5 pounds. I kind a need the extra capacity. Plus, overkill offers great peace of mind. And I can use a stone bag to help lower the center of gravity if need be.

My current tripod simply cannot handle the load. It's about equivalent to what $30 will get you these days. If I load it up, the legs bow and the feet creep. Not to mention that there is noticeable camera shake when the shutter actuates on my longer lenses, even when fully collapsed.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *theCanadian* 
The Vanguard has a load capacity of more than twice a 190 tripod, is heavier and I haven't been able to find one negative review. Plus it has a taller max height. Everyone claims the Vanguard's head is smooth too. I'm torn.

Yes, but you probably don't need that much load capacity. And 7 lbs for a tripod is heavy. I suppose if your tripod won't travel around much it's ok, but I hike a lot and need lighter weight. My tripod supports 10 lbs. and holds up anything I have, and is only 3 lbs.

Looking at the Vanguard more closely, it looks decent. I suppose even the likes of Vanguard and ProMaster can make a decent product.


----------



## ericld

Something I am a complete noob at. Ha, I'm game, count me in. I have an old Sony 5 megapixel Cyber-shot, model DSC-P10. It actually was my wife's old camera and I got it for work when I got her a new one. Unfortunately she lost it on her recent trip to Vietnam, but, now I have an excuse to get a new one. All the pics you see in my profile albums are from this camera. I will post some more soon.
My Flickr screen name is Ericld1.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *hubwub* 
I'm done with zoom lenses. I am now addicted to primes! AHH!

Same for me with 3 exceptions on the dark side.

14-24, 24-70, and 70-200 all f/2.8. I'll shoot these along side primes all day. Especially the 14-24 and 70-200.


----------



## dudemanppl

Primes for mid range FTW. Everything else is zooms.


----------



## Marin

Samy's Camera has a whole shelf full of Lomo's. I wish I could set it on fire...


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


Originally Posted by *theCanadian* 
I'd say with an autowinder attached, my flash and my 35-105mm I'm approaching about 5 pounds. If for some extenuating circumstance I needed to throw on my 75-300mm with a flash, I'd be over 5 pounds. I kind a need the extra capacity. Plus, overkill offers great peace of mind. And I can use a stone bag to help lower the center of gravity if need be.

My current tripod simply cannot handle the load. It's about equivalent to what $30 will get you these days. If I load it up, the legs bow and the feet creep. Not to mention that there is noticeable camera shake when the shutter actuates on my longer lenses, even when fully collapsed.

i think you are over estimating your camera weight but theres nothing wrong with it if you dont mind lugging around a 7lbs tripod.


----------



## mz-n10

got bored today at my friend's house so we decided to throw some gear on the sofa and take a picture.....



















my sony is kinda lonely in a sea of canon.........


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dudemanppl* 
Primes for mid range FTW. Everything else is zooms.

You've never shot the 24-70 have you?? Unless you need f/1.8 or 1.4


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Hey, so I need some help.

I'm looking at third party batteries for my 50D, but I've no idea what brands to look at or how to choose the right battery. I know a lot of third party companies overrate their batteries, but I don't know how to check for accurate ratings or know which company is reliable.

Help?


----------



## D3FiN3 SiN

Quote:


Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d* 
Hey, so I need some help.

I'm looking at third party batteries for my 50D, but I've no idea what brands to look at or how to choose the right battery. I know a lot of third party companies overrate their batteries, but I don't know how to check for accurate ratings or know which company is reliable.

Help?

You literally just changed your sig from the XTi to the 50D







.

And I would recommend this grip.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


Originally Posted by *D3FiN3 SiN* 
You literally just changed your sig from the XTi to the 50D







.

And I would recommend this grip.

Unfortunately I'm a bit broke now following my buy, and a spare battery is a bigger need than a grip right now


----------



## D3FiN3 SiN

Quote:


Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d* 
Unfortunately I'm a bit broke now following my buy, and a spare battery is a bigger need than a grip right now









For some reason I extracted grip from your quote, lol.

I swear I can't find 50D batteries, ANYWHERE.

2 AM fail.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


Originally Posted by *D3FiN3 SiN* 
For some reason I extracted grip from your quote, lol.

I swear I can't find 50D batteries, ANYWHERE.

2 AM fail.

2AM fail, insomnia win. Perhaps in the morning then


----------



## D3FiN3 SiN

Quote:


Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d* 
2AM fail, insomnia win. Perhaps in the morning then









Five Hour Energy win?

No, that is just a bad idea. I will get no sleep. PM me, I may come across some random stroke of genius and be able to use Google.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


Originally Posted by *D3FiN3 SiN* 
Five Hour Energy win?

No, that is just a bad idea. I will get no sleep. PM me, I may come across some random stroke of genius and be able to use Google.

Will do









Oh, and to make it official, GoneTomorrow,

*New kit update!*

*Canon EOS 50D*
Canon EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM
Canon EF 50mm f/1.8


----------



## SoBe8503




----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Hey, so I need some help.

I'm looking at third party batteries for my 50D, but I've no idea what brands to look at or how to choose the right battery. I know a lot of third party companies overrate their batteries, but I don't know how to check for accurate ratings or know which company is reliable.

Help?


At POTN, many use Sterlingtek and Opteka batteries and claim that they're just as good. Many reviews for these brands are good, so it's worth considering them. Personally, I stick to Canon brand only.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Hey there GoneTomorrow, bit of a mistake in the OP. I have a Canon 50D, not a Canon Rebel 50D







I think you were the one that suggested I step away from the Rebel line in the first place


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Hey there GoneTomorrow, bit of a mistake in the OP. I have a Canon 50D, not a Canon Rebel 50D







I think you were the one that suggested I step away from the Rebel line in the first place










Haha, whoops. I just backspaced "XTi" and replaced it with 50D.







I'll get that nasty Rebel off there.


----------



## laboitenoire

Ugh, I'm really fighting the urge to buy either an f/2.8 zoom or a 35 f/1.8...

On the off chance I do buy a lens, which would you consider the best? The Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 or the Sigma 18-50 f/2.8? How about their stabilized versions?


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


Originally Posted by *laboitenoire* 
Ugh, I'm really fighting the urge to buy either an f/2.8 zoom or a 35 f/1.8...

On the off chance I do buy a lens, which would you consider the best? The Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 or the Sigma 18-50 f/2.8? How about their stabilized versions?

I'm the same, sorry i can't offer any advice on your Tamron / Sigma debate.

I get paid on Thursday and i was thinking about putting half of it aside to save up for a 10-20mm. Sigma, Tamron, and Nikon all make them. Nikon's is twice the price though, and both the Sigma and the Tamron versions have built-in AF motors.


----------



## D3FiN3 SiN

Sigma > Tamron, any day of the week.


----------



## theCanadian

Purchased a Slingshot 200 for $70 shipped.







Should be here next week. I can't wait to enter the 21st century of camera transportation.


----------



## D3FiN3 SiN

Quote:


Originally Posted by *theCanadian* 
Purchased a Slingshot 200 for $70 shipped.







Should be here next week. I can't wait to enter the 21st century of camera transportation.

I use a Civil War sack for my Leica gear.


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:


Originally Posted by *D3FiN3 SiN* 
I use a Civil War sack for my Leica gear.

You have me beat. I have a shoulder bag from the 80's. Still looks brand new though! Even the bottom of it. It's made from magic nylon.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


Originally Posted by *D3FiN3 SiN* 
Sigma > Tamron, any day of the week.

sigma has horrible QC.....


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *laboitenoire* 
Ugh, I'm really fighting the urge to buy either an f/2.8 zoom or a 35 f/1.8...

On the off chance I do buy a lens, which would you consider the best? The Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 or the Sigma 18-50 f/2.8? How about their stabilized versions?

Well, the Tamron 17-50/2.8 (non VC) is very popular and razor sharp. The only complaints I hear about are slow/inaccurate AF and lesser build quality (in comparison to Nikon and Canon versions).

And as for the VC version, the review I have read say there is a drop in IQ over the non-VC version.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *theCanadian* 
Purchased a Slingshot 200 for $70 shipped.







Should be here next week. I can't wait to enter the 21st century of camera transportation.

It's a nice bag! Don't forget that it has the rain cover (I didn't notice it at first). And the slip-lock loop on the side is perfect for carrying a tripod (by sticking a leg through the loop).

Quote:


Originally Posted by *D3FiN3 SiN* 
Sigma > Tamron, any day of the week.

Be serious. You can't possibly think that every Sigma lens is superior to every Tamron lens, mainly because of the below quote. Some Sigma lenses are better, some Tamron lenses are better. If anything, Tokina beats them both.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mz-n10* 
sigma has horrible QC.....

Yeah, but from what I've heard, Sigma is good about calibrating their misfocusing lenses as part of warranty service.


----------



## laboitenoire

Hmm... From reviews it looks like the OS version of the Sigma is really damn good. Too bad it's $650.









I think I might just get the 35 f/1.8 now and then wait until my tax refund to see about replacing my kit zoom.


----------



## bk7794

I was wondering, is Canon or Nikon gonna be coming back with any other DSLRS?


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Yeah, but from what I've heard, Sigma is good about calibrating their misfocusing lenses as part of warranty service.

They'd better be good about it if they hope to stay in business.

Seriously GT. Would you buy a lens knowing that you'll have to send it in for calibration??? That's kinda lame. Mind you, Nikon and Canon are not absolved of this, but their products have nowhere the misfocusing issues of Sigma.

I guess you get what you pay for in the end. If possible, it's always best to shoot the lens at the dealer first B4 taking it home if possible. Specially the bargain stuff.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
They'd better be good about it if they hope to stay in business.

Seriously GT. Would you buy a lens knowing that you'll have to send it in for calibration??? That's kinda lame. Mind you, Nikon and Canon are not absolved of this, but their products have nowhere the misfocusing issues of Sigma.

I guess you get what you pay for in the end. If possible, it's always best to shoot the lens at the dealer first B4 taking it home if possible. Specially the bargain stuff.

No I wouldn't







. That's why I don't own any Sigma lenses. I also hear that the "crinkle finish" paint they use peels off after a while.


----------



## dudemanppl

Nikon mount Sigmas have a LOOOOT less bad-AF stories than Canon mounted versions.


----------



## iandroo888

hows the sigma 10-20mm compared to tokina or nikon?


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
hows the sigma 10-20mm compared to tokina or nikon?

Great lens, buy one. Not sure about distortion because I never really shoot brick walls and such, but in my experience (where I kept the lens at f/8 basically all the time), its worth the 350 it goes for used.


----------



## iandroo888

hm. i read about it somewhere that the motor makes a weird noise?

chances are im gonna have it stopped down to like f/9 - f/11 or so cuz im gonna use it for RE photography.

hows the idea of using a SU-800 and two sb-600's wirelessly for lighting


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
hm. i read about it somewhere that the motor makes a weird noise?

chances are im gonna have it stopped down to like f/9 - f/11 or so cuz im gonna use it for RE photography.

hows the idea of using a SU-800 and two sb-600's wirelessly for lighting

YN460IIs and RF602s. Cheap and more powerful. You have to set the power at the flash though, which can take a while.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
hm. i read about it somewhere that the motor makes a weird noise?

chances are im gonna have it stopped down to like f/9 - f/11 or so cuz im gonna use it for RE photography.

hows the idea of using a SU-800 and two sb-600's wirelessly for lighting

the 10-20 should now be a hsm motor so it shouldnt make any noise at all.

the flash setup sounds great, but that set up is 2-3 times teh cost of the lens. it might just be easier to bring a few work lights there and just light the room constantly.


----------



## Marin

Ever since I got the Sekonic L-758DR I've been like this when looking at each photo.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mz-n10* 
the 10-20 should now be a hsm motor so it shouldnt make any noise at all.

the flash setup sounds great, but that set up is 2-3 times teh cost of the lens. it might just be easier to bring a few work lights there and just light the room constantly.

yeah i was lookin around online at homedepot or lowes.. they have some cheap work lights. 250w.. would that be too bright?

yah i know the setup is expensive.. but when the things being listed are in the millions, its well worth it Lol


----------



## tK FuRY

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
yeah i was lookin around online at homedepot or lowes.. they have some cheap work lights. 250w.. would that be too bright?

yah i know the setup is expensive.. but when the things being listed are in the millions, its well worth it Lol

For certain situations it could be too bright, and for other's it will be too dim.

My main concern with continuous lighting is heat and color temperature of the light. I'm pretty sure the light you are looking at are halogen bulbs, so it will get pretty damn hot.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
No I wouldn't







. That's why I don't own any Sigma lenses. I also hear that the "crinkle finish" paint they use peels off after a while.

People on the Nikon forum really like the "bugma", but that's about it for the Siggys. The 50mm f/1.4 looks like a nice lens but it's plagued with random af issues. we'll see about the 85mm f/1.4. Many people think it will be a low cost alternative to the 85mm f/1.4 G and D lenses. I have my doubts.

I also hear the crinkle is being replace with a smooth finish.


----------



## laboitenoire

Welp, so far Ken Rockwell is very positive about the 85 f/1.4 G and the 28-300 VR.


----------



## Marin

And here I was thinking Ken would hate them.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


People on the Nikon forum really like the "bugma", but that's about it for the Siggys. The 50mm f/1.4 looks like a nice lens but it's plagued with random af issues. we'll see about the 85mm f/1.4. Many people think it will be a low cost alternative to the 85mm f/1.4 G and D lenses. I have my doubts.

I also hear the crinkle is being replace with a smooth finish.


Let's hope so. I've been jonesing for the Canon 85/1.2 for a while, but if Sigma puts out a decent version that's significantly cheaper, I might be swayed.


----------



## dudemanppl

Gonna sell the 85 1.8 for the Siggy 1.4. It is my DESTINY.


----------



## mz-n10

If the new 70-200 os is anything to go by the 85 will be a dissapointment


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *laboitenoire* 
Welp, so far Ken Rockwell is very positive about the 85 f/1.4 G and the 28-300 VR.

You're busted Lab. Now we all know you read Rockwell!!

He says the 85 G's sharper in the corners. I don't think many people buy this lens for it's corner sharpness. The jury's still out for me on this one. Gonna go to a shop in Chi town that has them in stock and take one outside and shoot it. The bokeh's gotta be as good as the D then maybe..


----------



## nuclearjock

This explains why we didn't have many mosquitos on our patio this summer









D300 200mm f/4 micro Nikkor SB900


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
You're busted Lab. Now we all know you read Rockwell!!

He says the 85 G's sharper in the corners. I don't think many people buy this lens for it's corner sharpness. The jury's still out for me on this one. Gonna go to a shop in Chi town that has them in stock and take one outside and shoot it. The bokeh's gotta be as good as the D then maybe..

I don't really like the subjective opinions he proposes, but I do read him for more technical evaluations...


----------



## Lelin

Can't believe it, I'm going to NYC thursday to saturday and I had the intentions to buy alot of stuff at B&H (17-55mm, Benro TRAB 169, ATH-M50s cans and a HT receiver) but it's gonna be closed until sunday!

Hopefully I can find some of it at other stores but I cannot find any other place carrying the cans at the same price


----------



## Marin

Process of developing film at my school.

1. Load film onto film holder
2. Put into processor
3. ???
4. Developed film!!!


----------



## dudemanppl

Is it free? :O


----------



## Marin

Yes.


----------



## dudemanppl

Can random people, say a 14 year old, go in and do that?


----------



## Marin

Nope. You have to be a student at the school.


----------



## dudemanppl

Does it only process color?


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dudemanppl* 







Does it only process color?

Three machines. B&W, E-6 and C-41.

Anyways, got the negatives and they look amazing. Think I'll scan one of them tonight.


----------



## nuclearjock

Looks like the ladies can mix it up as well.

1.









2.


----------



## laboitenoire

Went to an awesome event today held by Case. The university owns a farm in Hunting Valley, Ohio, and usually they have some sort of event every fall at the farm. It used to be Halloween, but last year they didn't have any farm events, but this year they decided to have a harvest festival instead. Went to go sing with my glee club and brought the camera along, too. It was a beautiful fall day. Overcast, windy, and brisk: the way I like it.







Great to get out of the city, especially seeing as yesterday the high was 92 and today it was 62.









Overall got some nice shots.















Overall, the barn shot is my favorite of the day. I need to tweak the image some more, as I adjusted the gamma on my display and it now looks different then before. I'm thinking of getting it professionally printed, though, as right now I just have a crappy printout from my inkjet.


----------



## Danylu

Hi guys whats the simplest HDR and stitching tool. I've got a shot of the Chinese Pavilion (20 actually) that I want to combine into one huge photo.

I've heard about photomatix - anyone tried it?


----------



## Marin

Large format. IQ puts DSLR's to shame and it's only a scan. But one things for sure, I don't like using monorail camera's. They're extremely bulky and take awhile to setup. I'd rather use a field camera and lose some of the flexibility.


----------



## theCanadian

Wound up buying the Slik Pro 700DX. If anyone wants a word on it I'll let you know what I think when I get it.


You Tube





I just realized that about half of my techy stuff uses a model number of 700.

JVC RX700, AD700, Minolta X-700, Slik Pro 700DX

*Edit: Interesting collection of articles here. It's an older page, but I think it's really neat. I particularly like the comment about how digital isn't going to stick around for long.*


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Lelin* 
Can't believe it, I'm going to NYC thursday to saturday and I had the intentions to buy alot of stuff at B&H (17-55mm, Benro TRAB 169, ATH-M50s cans and a HT receiver) but it's gonna be closed until sunday!

Hopefully I can find some of it at other stores but I cannot find any other place carrying the cans at the same price 

Yeah, some devout Jews running that place apparently, closing EVERY Jewish holdiay, even closing online!

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
Hi guys whats the simplest HDR and stitching tool. I've got a shot of the Chinese Pavilion (20 actually) that I want to combine into one huge photo.

I've heard about photomatix - anyone tried it?

I've used Photomatix for a while and it's very full-featured, with a few different methods available for creating HDR's, batch processing, etc. Works very well.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Yeah, some devout Jews running that place apparently, closing EVERY Jewish holdiay, even closing online!


According to my friends at Columbia, that's the case with almost every NYC business. Apparently the Jewish population is significant enough that they close on every Jewish holiday, regardless of the owner's religion.

And Adorama also closes on Jewish holidays as well, so there goes my two main source of camera equipment. I don't know what I'd do if I suddenly need camera gear during the holidays...


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


According to my friends at Columbia, that's the case with almost every NYC business. Apparently the Jewish population is significant enough that they close on every Jewish holiday, regardless of the owner's religion.

And Adorama also closes on Jewish holidays as well, so there goes my two main source of camera equipment. I don't know what I'd do if I suddenly need camera gear during the holidays...


Shop at non-NYC stores.







(Abe's of Maine, Beach Camera, Amazon, etc.)


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Shop at non-NYC stores.







(Abe's of Maine, Beach Camera, Amazon, etc.)

I did not know those places existed (aside from Amazon of course). Thanks!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


I did not know those places existed (aside from Amazon of course). Thanks!










Yeah, I've shopped at Abe's before and they're a decent reseller, good inventory and prices. Haven't shopped at Beach but they've good ratings.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


2.










Facepalm, and she seems to have kneed her opponent in the yoohoo.

Can anyone tell me how to view the number of shots taken on a nikon camera?


----------



## iandroo888

opanda


----------



## Manyak

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Large format. IQ puts DSLR's to shame and it's only a scan. But one things for sure, I don't like using monorail camera's. They're extremely bulky and take awhile to setup. I'd rather use a field camera and lose some of the flexibility.


Do want


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Boyboyd* 
Facepalm, and she seems to have kneed her opponent in the yoohoo.

Can anyone tell me how to view the number of shots taken on a nikon camera?

It's 'hidden' in the EXIF data. If you open your most recent picture using adobe bridge and go to properties you can find it(or many other exif viewing programs).


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*


Facepalm, and she seems to have kneed her opponent in the yoohoo.

Can anyone tell me how to view the number of shots taken on a nikon camera?



Quote:



Originally Posted by *Sparhawk*


It's 'hidden' in the EXIF data. If you open your most recent picture using adobe bridge and go to properties you can find it(or many other exif viewing programs).


https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/3905/


----------



## WIGILOCO

What you guys think about this one?


----------



## max302

Beautiful light, I like how warm and fuzzy it its, I thought it was film at first.


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:


Originally Posted by *WIGILOCO* 


What you guys think about this one?

I really like the lighting; if you don't mind what are you doing in post-process to the photo?

Can't help but notice, what looks like lens distortion(behind the subject, most noticeable on the ground). Maybe that lens just has weird bokeh.


----------



## laboitenoire

People say that the Canon 50 f/1.8 has kinda ugly bokeh...


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:


Originally Posted by *laboitenoire* 
People say that the Canon 50 f/1.8 has kinda ugly bokeh...

Yeah, just did a bit of quick research.

Here's a good comparison to the 50 f/1.4

http://photo.net/equipment/canon/ef50/


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *laboitenoire* 
People say that the Canon 50 f/1.8 has kinda ugly bokeh...

Well, not as ugly as say, the Canon 35mm f/2. But you can see an obvious defect in Wigiloco's photo. The bokeh has some harsh outlines (not that the picture itself is bad).


----------



## Marin

Someone turned the lights on in the processing room while I was gone. I'm going to strangle them to death with this clear reversal film...


----------



## Manyak

Quote:


Originally Posted by *laboitenoire* 
People say that the Canon 50 f/1.8 has kinda ugly bokeh...

Yeah, the aperture has 5 practically straight blades, which gives you a bunch of pentagons.

But you know what? For a lens you can get for under $100, you can't really be picky.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Someone turned the lights on in the processing room while I was gone. I'm going to strangle them to death with this clear reversal film...

ouch


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Well, not as ugly as say, the Canon 35mm f/2. But you can see an obvious defect in Wigiloco's photo. The bokeh has some harsh outlines (not that the picture itself is bad).

its not tat bad....look at the minolta or sony 500mm reflex mirror

now thats bad bokeh


----------



## Marin




----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mz-n10* 
its not tat bad....look at the minolta or sony 500mm reflex mirror

now thats bad bokeh

Seen it, and yes, no bokeh is quite as bad as that!


----------



## Boyboyd

I had a 300mm Mirror lens but i never saw any doughnut bokeh :'(


----------



## Adrienspawn

http://www.dealextreme.com/search.dx/search.lens%20mug

ohhhh yeeessssssssss


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 


You got a new baby! Congrats


----------



## WIGILOCO

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Sparhawk* 
I really like the lighting; if you don't mind what are you doing in post-process to the photo?

Can't help but notice, what looks like lens distortion(behind the subject, most noticeable on the ground). Maybe that lens just has weird bokeh.

Thanks!

I used Lightroom 3's one preset what makes colours like magenta'ish. Then adjusted exposure. Then in CS5 I changed colours second time in selective colour to my liking (I adjusted blacks and neutral colors). Then it looked still little too dark, added fill layer with 3-5% white/light cyan colour. A little unsharp mask on the end.









Here's another pic with quite the same technique (added little grain to make it look "rough")


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Manyak* 
Yeah, the aperture has 5 practically straight blades, which gives you a bunch of pentagons.

But you know what? For a lens you can get for under $100, you can't really be picky.

I agree, it's still a fantastic deal for $100. If it weren't for the fact I'd have no autofocus, I'd buy the 50 f/1.8 for my setup. Might buy it anyway...

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mz-n10* 
its not tat bad....look at the minolta or sony 500mm reflex mirror

now thats bad bokeh

I actually like the donut bokeh you get with reflex lenses... It's cool!

Quote:


Originally Posted by *WIGILOCO* 
Thanks!

I used Lightroom 3's one preset what makes colours like magenta'ish. Then adjusted exposure. Then in CS5 I changed colours second time in selective colour to my liking (I adjusted blacks and neutral colors). Then it looked still little too dark, added fill layer with 3-5% white/light cyan colour. A little unsharp mask on the end.









Here's another pic with quite the same technique (added little grain to make it look "rough")



Overall, very nice picture! First one, too! Don't misunderstand me!


----------



## WIGILOCO

Thank you!


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*


I had a 300mm Mirror lens but i never saw any doughnut bokeh :'(


shoot into a highlighted back ground


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Adrienspawn*


http://www.dealextreme.com/search.dx/search.lens%20mug

ohhhh yeeessssssssss


I might actually order one of these... what are the chances it doesn't use lead paint though... haha, I don't really care I'm ordering one.









Quote:



Originally Posted by *WIGILOCO*


Thanks!

I used Lightroom 3's one preset what makes colours like magenta'ish. Then adjusted exposure. Then in CS5 I changed colours second time in selective colour to my liking (I adjusted blacks and neutral colors). Then it looked still little too dark, added fill layer with 3-5% white/light cyan colour. A little unsharp mask on the end.









Here's another pic with quite the same technique (added little grain to make it look "rough")


I'll have to give some of those steps a try. I generally don't do much more than some sharpening, color fix and contrast/brightness adjustment.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Manyak*


Yeah, the aperture has 5 practically straight blades, which gives you a bunch of pentagons.

But you know what? For a lens you can get for under $100, you can't really be picky.

ouch










You should be picky for any lens, especially ones that are cheap and easy to make like the 50mm f/1.8's.


----------



## theCanadian

There is a device, I'm not sure what they are called, which can be used to fish the lead out from inside a canister of unexposed film which has been accidentally rewound. It may not be the device's primary function, but I know such a device exists.

If anyone knows the name of it, that would be awesome.


----------



## Manyak

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


You should be picky for any lens, especially ones that are cheap and easy to make like the 50mm f/1.8's.


The problem here is that because of how well the lens performs in comparison to its price, if they changed the aperture to give the same bokeh as the 1.2 then the 1.4 would barely sell at all, to the point where they might even be forced to discontinue it. So they'd need to increase the price to compensate for the lost profits, and we'd be left with no cheap 50mm anymore.

Though it would be nice if they re-made a 50/1.0 with better optics, and made the 1.2 the mid-level and the 1.4 the cheap one.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Sparhawk* 
I might actually order one of these... what are the chances it doesn't use lead paint though... haha, I don't really care I'm ordering one.









I'll have to give some of those steps a try. I generally don't do much more than some sharpening, color fix and contrast/brightness adjustment.

I've got the Nikon 24-70 lens mug. There are some black spots on the bottom


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

50D arrived today! 86 actuations on it, so almost like new. I had to share


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Adrienspawn* 
http://www.dealextreme.com/search.dx/search.lens%20mug

ohhhh yeeessssssssss

wheres my sony 70-200G or sony 24-70 zeiss??

in for 1....cant wait for the glares i am going to get from my canon friends when i purposely drop the 70-200/4 on the floor for fun.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *theCanadian* 
There is a device, I'm not sure what they are called, which can be used to fish the lead out from inside a canister of unexposed film which has been accidentally rewound. It may not be the device's primary function, but I know such a device exists.

If anyone knows the name of it, that would be awesome.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...nd_ESA367.html

Do it in a dark room, or bag if you can. When the felt strip stretches it will let in light and mess with a few frames.


----------



## theCanadian

I bought the 70mm-200mm because not only is it badass, it appears to be made from stainless steel as well, instead of just plastic.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d* 
50D arrived today! 86 actuations on it, so almost like new. I had to share









Nice! Time for some red-striped lenses now.


----------



## iandroo888

waiting to get gold ring ones here ;D


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Nice! Time for some red-striped lenses now.









Oh trust me, I'm getting there







Selling off my speakers, sound card, spare PC gear, and considering downgrading to an e8400 for some nice L-glass.


----------



## theCanadian

I'll stick with my:

$30 75-300mm f/4-5.6
$3 28mm f/2.8
$0 35-105mm f/3.5-4.5
$0 50mm f/1.7
$1.50 2x teleconverter
$50 200mm f/4


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
I've got the Nikon 24-70 lens mug. There are some black spots on the bottom









I'm sure the black marks aren't anything too sinister. Probably just some paint... I'm sure it's rohs compliant. (not...)

Just ordered one. We're required to drink coffee in mugs where I work, so i figured it would work well.









Also picked up some lasers and a bunch of lens pens.


----------



## Manyak

Quote:


Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d* 
Oh trust me, I'm getting there







Selling off my speakers, sound card, spare PC gear, and considering downgrading to an e8400 for some nice L-glass.

Once you get that L glass the next step is an Adobe98 capable monitor and calibrator, and you're all set









Quote:


Originally Posted by *theCanadian* 
I'll stick with my:

$30 75-300mm f/4-5.6
$3 28mm f/2.8
$0 35-105mm f/3.5-4.5
$0 50mm f/1.7
$1.50 2x teleconverter
$50 200mm f/4

Do share your secret....


----------



## iandroo888

thinkin of pickin up a canon 24-70 for friends bday and a nikon for myself. xD

has anyone gotten the canon 24-70? is it really plastic inside? would that be safe for hot stuff?


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Manyak* 
Do share your secret....

I'm shooting with a film SLR that had one of the longest production runs in all of history, if not THE longest production run. Nearly two decades of production. There's used gear floating around everywhere.

$500 would set you up with EVERYTHING. Nice stuff too. A body in mint condition would only cost you about $120. Hell, I found one the other day that had only shot one roll of film. $90. Some people are giving this body at $35!!!! Lenses are incredibly abundant and cheap. A good flash would cost you $50-$75 and you can get a motor drive in excellent condition for $50. The remote trigger however, will run you a pretty penny if you can find it.

Minolta X-700.


----------



## Manyak

Quote:


Originally Posted by *theCanadian* 
I'm shooting with a film SLR that had one of the longest production runs in all of history, if not THE longest production run. Nearly two decades of production. There's used gear floating around everywhere.

$500 would set you up with EVERYTHING. Nice stuff too. A body in mint condition would only cost you about $120. Hell, I found one the other day that had only shot one roll of film. $90. Some people are giving this body at $35!!!! Lenses are incredibly abundant and cheap. A good flash would cost you $50-$75 and you can get a motor drive in excellent condition for $50. The remote trigger however, will run you a pretty penny if you can find it.

Minolta X-700.

Well that would explain it, lol.

I often thought about picking up a Minolta Maxxum 7000 and some gear, just for the nostalgia (it was my first SLR), but meh....


----------



## Marin

Get a Nikon F3.


----------



## Danylu

Quick opinion:
Do I keep my 70-300mm VR
or
Do I sell it and buy a 80-200mm 2.8 AF-S

I will be $350 Aussie out of pocket.

The 80-200 is faster (AF and aperture), better built, No VR. "Sharpest _Nikon_ tele zoom ever"
The 70-300 is smaller, more convenient (VR). It's sharp, not as bad as the naysayers make it out to be.

I'd love the original 70-200mm VR but I'm not eager to pay double the price of the 80-200mm for one.

I shoot whatever pops up. I do some portraiture, haven't really done much candid. Do birding whenever I can.

I may also be getting a Tokina 11-16 if I win the auction.

Edit:

Just analysed my photo info from my trip in Shanghai.










Looks like I was right in saying I might find a UWA useful.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Sparhawk*


I'm sure the black marks aren't anything too sinister. Probably just some paint... I'm sure it's rohs compliant. (not...)

Just ordered one. *We're required to drink coffee in mugs where I work*, so i figured it would work well.









Also picked up some lasers and a bunch of lens pens.










As opposed to what? Out of a leather glove?









Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Quick opinion:
Do I keep my 70-300mm VR
or 
Do I sell it and buy a 80-200mm 2.8 AF-S

I will be $350 Aussie out of pocket.

The 80-200 is faster (AF and aperture), better built, No VR. "Sharpest _Nikon_ tele zoom ever"
The 70-300 is smaller, more convenient (VR). It's sharp, not as bad as the naysayers make it out to be.

I'd love the original 70-200mm VR but I'm not eager to pay double the price of the 80-200mm for one.

I shoot whatever pops up. I do some portraiture, haven't really done much candid. Do birding whenever I can.

I may also be getting a Tokina 11-16 if I win the auction.

Edit:

Just analysed my photo info from my trip in Shanghai.

Looks like I was right in saying I might find a UWA useful.


Go for the 80-200, the constant f/2.8 alone makes it more worthwhile.


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


As opposed to what? Out of a leather glove?


















They need to have a sealed top on the mug. lol.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Sparhawk*









They need to have a sealed top on the mug. lol.










On the topic of seals the one in mine has fallen off already. I have health concerns over drinking from it so how about you drink from yours daily for a year and tell us how it goes









Nah it's probably just mine that's stuffed up


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Quick opinion:
Do I keep my 70-300mm VR
or 
Do I sell it and buy a 80-200mm 2.8 AF-S

I will be $350 Aussie out of pocket.

The 80-200 is faster (AF and aperture), better built, No VR. "Sharpest _Nikon_ tele zoom ever"
The 70-300 is smaller, more convenient (VR). It's sharp, not as bad as the naysayers make it out to be.

I'd love the original 70-200mm VR but I'm not eager to pay double the price of the 80-200mm for one.

I shoot whatever pops up. I do some portraiture, haven't really done much candid. Do birding whenever I can.

I may also be getting a Tokina 11-16 if I win the auction.


what lenses do you have?

it looks like you the fast 2.8 lenses.


----------



## Boyboyd

Just seen the most spectacular strange sunset ever. Pictures to follow much later tonight when i get back from the pub.


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
On the topic of seals the one in mine has fallen off already. I have health concerns over drinking from it so how about you drink from yours daily for a year and tell us how it goes









Nah it's probably just mine that's stuffed up









Well that's unfortunate. Depending on how it looks when I get it, I may just use it as a conversation piece.

Slightly more "on topic" ... I want the D7000... it needs to be released sooner.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Manyak* 
Once you get that L glass the next step is an Adobe98 capable monitor and calibrator, and you're all set









Oh, you, contributing to my debt while stimulating the photographic economy.









Quote:


Originally Posted by *Sparhawk* 
Well that's unfortunate. Depending on how it looks when I get it, I may just use it as a conversation piece.

Slightly more "on topic" ... I want the D7000... it needs to be released sooner.

When is it going to be released? And what model does the D7k replace?

Nikon needs to fix their naming scheme.

D3100 -> D5000 -> D90 -> D7000? -> D300S?

Kinda wish they'd keep it like Canons, in all honesty.

EOS xxxx -> EOS xxx -> xxD -> xD ->1D

Really easy to see where the model falls into place.


----------



## tK FuRY

Quote:


Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d* 
Oh, you, contributing to my debt while stimulating the photographic economy.









When is it going to be released? And what model does the D7k replace?

Nikon needs to fix their naming scheme.

D3100 -> D5000 -> D90 -> D7000? -> D300S?

Kinda wish they'd keep it like Canons, in all honesty.

EOS xxxx -> EOS xxx -> xxD -> xD ->1D

Really easy to see where the model falls into place.

It's essentially the same way, they are trying to phase out the Dxx series, and make way for Dxxxx series.

So it goes down to ..

Consumer level : Dxxxx
ProSumer/Pro : Dxxx
Pro : Dx

pretty much what Canon is doing.


----------



## bk7794

guessing nikon or canon aren't gonna release any new DSLRs anytime soon?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *bk7794* 
guessing nikon or canon aren't gonna release any new DSLRs anytime soon?

www.canonrumors.com
www.nikonrumors.com

Both have recently released or announced a few new models, so it's hard to say what's next. I'd like to see a Canon 5D MkIII personally.


----------



## theCanadian

Just gonna leave this here:

 CaseCrown Rugged Travel Sling-Back

Looks like a Slingshot 100 duplicate. If I didn't just buy the Slingshot 200, I would probably would have picked this one up. Doubling down on the price is no joke.


----------



## iandroo888

is tehres any good straps u guys are using on your cameras thats long enough to sling across body like the blackrapid straps... (longer than the stock nikon strap)


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *theCanadian* 
Just gonna leave this here: CaseCrown Rugged Travel Sling-Back

Looks like a Slingshot 100 duplicate. If I didn't just buy the Slingshot 200, I would probably would have picked this one up. Doubling down on the price is no joke.

Hmm...I'll stick with a name I know and not an imitator that I don't know. Could have terrible construction. Plus it doesn't seem to have the AW cover.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
is tehres any good straps u guys are using on your cameras thats long enough to sling across body like the blackrapid straps... (longer than the stock nikon strap)

I use a Crumpler Industry Disgrace and it's long enough to sling across my 6'1" frame:


----------



## iandroo888

hmm still seems kinda high. i have a 6' wide shoulder frame as well (im chinese too !)


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
hmm still seems kinda high. i have a 6' wide shoulder frame as well (im chinese too !)

6 foot wide shoulder frame?







That would make you square shaped.

As you can see in the picture, there's plenty of slack left in the strap. If I let it out all the way, it would dangle past my waist.


----------



## iandroo888

oops i meant im 6' tall with a wide shoulder frame xD

will look into it


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
oops i meant im 6' tall with a wide shoulder frame xD

will look into it

What I like about the Crumpler is the pad. It's designed in such a way that it grips your shoulder, whether it's cross body or slung on one shoulder.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
What I like about the Crumpler is the pad. It's designed in such a way that it grips your shoulder, whether it's cross body or slung on one shoulder.

I think I'll look into the strap as well. I realized that my 50D is a bit too heavy around my neck with my 28-135mm on it, and probably will be a pain to carry when my grip arrives. I think I need a strap to sling across my shoulder like this one now.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d* 
I think I'll look into the strap as well. I realized that my 50D is a bit too heavy around my neck with my 28-135mm on it, and probably will be a pain to carry when my grip arrives. I think I need a strap to sling across my shoulder like this one now.

Yeah, the Canon straps were ok, but uncomfortable and I didn't like how that faux suede lining felt.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Yeah, the Canon straps were ok, but uncomfortable and I didn't like how that faux suede lining felt.

I actually don't mind, but my girlfriend (a huge fashion lover) gets bugged about it much more than I do. It's more the fact that I don't want a neckbrace at the ripe age of 25 that makes me want to get a new strap


----------



## theCanadian

I use the (traditional) neck strap when I shoot. If I sling it over my shoulder like that, the camera sits just below *on* my bottom rib. I wouldn't walk around all day like that, but if I need to bend over, or do some local chores, or move around a bit, it doesn't feel awkward at all. So having it just above the hip should be fine.

Hell, sometimes when I need the camera to stay close to my body, I even shoot from that position. Having a short strap helps to add a little stability to my stance. You can push against it, instead of trying to hold the camera still.

Granted that's not to say having it even lower wouldn't be better.


----------



## Manyak

I've got a question...about how long does Canon keep each camera in it's lineup before its replaced?


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Manyak* 
I've got a question...about how long does Canon keep each camera in it's lineup before its replaced?

Completely conjectural and drawing off of past trends, but the Rebel xxxDs look like a year, xxDs to be a year and a half, xDs to be two years, 1d/s to be a year and a half to two years.


----------



## Manyak

Quote:


Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d* 
Completely conjectural and drawing off of past trends, but the Rebel xxxDs look like a year, xxDs to be a year and a half, xDs to be two years, 1d/s to be a year and a half to two years.

Sounds like the 5Dii is due to be replaced quite soon then.

I dunno, I'm really thinking about canceling the order for it and going back to the 7D. The AF system and FPS just wipes the floor with the 5Dii, and by the time the 5Diii (or whatever it's called) comes out the camera won't have depreciated as much. And since the D700 is basically a 5Dii that trades video for better AF, it wouldn't surprise me if the next 5D is basically just a full frame 7D so that they can one-up Nikon with it.


----------



## Marin

Canon wouldn't do that with the next 5D since it would effect 1Ds sales.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

I'd wait for the 5D refresh to come out, in all honesty. The 5D Mk II is a fantastic camera, but it's still a $2k+ investment, and seeing as how the Mk II is nearing the lifespan of the Mk I, I'd wait. Besides, as you've said the 7D is still a fantastic camera and there's no real need to upgrade right now.

@Marin: Personally, I don't think it'd matter as much. It didn't stop Canon with the t2i though. It did compete heavily with the 50D when released.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Manyak* 
Sounds like the 5Dii is due to be replaced quite soon then.

I dunno, I'm really thinking about canceling the order for it and going back to the 7D. The AF system and FPS just wipes the floor with the 5Dii, and by the time the 5Diii (or whatever it's called) comes out the camera won't have depreciated as much. And since the D700 is basically a 5Dii that trades video for better AF, it wouldn't surprise me if the next 5D is basically just a full frame 7D so that they can one-up Nikon with it.

The 5D series so far hasn't had a high-end AF system, so I wouldn't be surprised if the successor is the same. They might add a few more selectable AF points and maybe go to all cross-type, but I doubt it will be as good as even the 7D.

It all depends on what you will shoot. I had the 7D and it's AF system is pretty darn good, but at the end of the day, I wasn't blown away by its high ISO performance (hell, even low ISO had some noise), not to mention a problem with maze patterns in RAW shots.

Have you received the 5DII yet? If not, you should at least give it a shot. That sensor is just amazing.


----------



## Manyak

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Canon wouldn't do that with the next 5D since it would effect 1Ds sales.

This is true, unless they update that one too. That one's even older.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d* 
I'd wait for the 5D refresh to come out, in all honesty. The 5D Mk II is a fantastic camera, but it's still a $2k+ investment, and seeing as how the Mk II is nearing the lifespan of the Mk I, I'd wait. Besides, as you've said the 7D is still a fantastic camera and there's no real need to upgrade right now.

Yeah. I _really_ want full frame, shooting is so much easier with it IMO. But it just doesn't make sense to get it right now.

And if the 7D _has_ depreciated a lot by the time the 5Dii refresh comes out, I could always just keep it as a second body.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Manyak* 
This is true, unless they update that one too. That one's even older.

Yeah. I _really_ want full frame, shooting is so much easier with it. But it just doesn't make sense to get it right now.

And if the 7D _has_ depreciated a lot by the time the 5Dii refresh comes out, I could always just keep it as a second body.

Even if it did depreciate, I'd assume it'd still go somewhere close to $1000, or at least in the upper hundreds. It's not close to where it would be new, but it's still a very significant chunk of money (and enough for an L-lens).


----------



## r34p3rex

Am I special enough to join?

*r34p3rex*
Body: Canon T2i

Lenses: EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS
EF-S 55-250mm f/4.5-5.6 IS
EF 50mm f/1.8
EF 85mm f/1.8 USM
Sigma 50mm f/2.8 Macro
Sigma 30mm f/1.4

Looking to get a EF-S 17-55mm 2.8 to replace my kit







Also, I reallly want a 7D.. so Manyak, if you decide to sell your 7D, you know who to go to


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *r34p3rex* 
Am I special enough to join?

*r34p3rex*
Body: Canon T2i

Lenses: EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS
EF-S 55-250mm f/4.5-5.6 IS
EF 50mm f/1.8
EF 85mm f/1.8 USM
Sigma 50mm f/2.8 Macro
Sigma 30mm f/1.4

Looking to get a EF-S 17-55mm 2.8 to replace my kit







Also, I reallly want a 7D.. so Manyak, if you decide to sell your 7D, you know who to go to









NO

Kidding, of course.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


Originally Posted by *r34p3rex* 
Am I special enough to join?

*r34p3rex*
Body: Canon T2i

Lenses: EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS
EF-S 55-250mm f/4.5-5.6 IS
EF 50mm f/1.8
EF 85mm f/1.8
Sigma 50mm f/2.8 Macro
Sigma 30mm f/1.4

Looking to get a EF-S 17-55mm 2.8 to replace my kit







Also, I reallly want a 7D.. so Manyak, if you decide to sell your 7D, you know who to go to









Well, the equipment is good, but you're still not too special









In all seriousness, why not go for some L-lenses instead of a 7D? Or a grip?

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
No way it would drop that low. The 5D classic still goes for $1000+ on the used market and it's 5 years old.

Worst case scenario







I always assume the worst case depreciation (within reason), just in case.


----------



## theCanadian

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recipro...rocity_failure

This angers me.

This is probably a question for Marin. How do I know when and how much to compensate for the film I'm using?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d* 
Well, the equipment is good, but you're still not too special









In all seriousness, why not go for some L-lenses instead of a 7D? Or a grip?

Worst case scenario







I always assume the worst case depreciation (within reason), just in case.

No, you're probably right about the 7D. I initially thought you were referring to the 5DII.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *theCanadian* 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recipro...rocity_failure

This angers me.

This is probably a question for Marin. How do I know when and how much to compensate for the film I'm using?

They have charts for it but I've never bothered with it since I've never done exposures to the point where it's that much of an issue.

Best place to ask this question is on APUG.


----------



## laboitenoire

Took a look at Rockwell's high ISO comparison of the D40, D3100, and D3. It looks unbelievably clean...


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mz-n10* 
what lenses do you have?

it looks like you the fast 2.8 lenses.

Currently winning a Tokina 11-16 2.8
17-55mm 2.8
50 1.4G*
60mm 2.8D
18-55mm (Haven't used this properly in over a year lol)
180 2.8
70-300 VR*

*In the process of selling these ones.

Yeah it looks like I like the fast lenses.

On the topic of camera straps, I'm thinking of getting one that attaches to the tripod plate because with the stock Nikon strap on my D60 and 17-55, the bottom edge of the corner (below the LCD) keeps ramming into me... very uncomfortable, although it stops happening when I attach my gorillapod to the camera.


----------



## tK FuRY

Quote:


Originally Posted by *theCanadian* 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recipro...rocity_failure

This angers me.

This is probably a question for Marin. How do I know when and how much to compensate for the film I'm using?

This is where I come in







.

It all definitely depends on the film, a lot of major film manufacturers have a chart on their site somewhere stating the times up to 1 hour exposures (which usually means 4+ hours) and a development adjustment.

What film are you using?


----------



## theCanadian

Kodak Ektar 100
Kodak Portra 160VC
Kodak Portra 160NC
Kodak Portra 400NC
Kodak Gold Max 400

I'm not a Kodak fanboy! It just happened that way


----------



## Mr_Nibbles




----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


*When is it going to be released?* And what model does the D7k replace?

Nikon needs to fix their naming scheme.

D3100 -> D5000 -> D90 -> D7000? -> D300S?

Kinda wish they'd keep it like Canons, in all honesty.

EOS xxxx -> EOS xxx -> xxD -> xD ->1D

Really easy to see where the model falls into place.


Supposed to be around the end of oct.

It replaces the D90... and my D80...


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Sparhawk*


Supposed to be around the end of oct.

It replaces the D90... and my D80...










According to Nikon it's between the D90 and D300s which I think is marketing code for: We'll EOL the D90 when we sell off all remaining stock.


----------



## r34p3rex

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mr_Nibbles*





Woah nice! How did you take that?


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r34p3rex*


Woah nice! How did you take that?


Rig on the hood. Suction cups and a boom arm, with post to take that out. Thats one shot I wouldn't do (only because I don't have PS and don't want to learn how to use it). Oh yeah and I replaced my D700 with a D700! The latter is in much better condition and I'm MAKING money selling the first one.


----------



## theCanadian

Kodak Ektar 100: 1/10,000 - 1s
Kodak Portra 160VC: 1/10,000 - 10s
Kodak Portra 160NC: 1/10,000 - 10s
Kodak Portra 400NC: 1/10,000 - 10s
Kodak Gold Max 400: Unknown

I was unable to find any correction values however...


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *theCanadian* 
Kodak Ektar 100: 1/10,000 - 1s
Kodak Portra 160VC: 1/10,000 - 10s
Kodak Portra 160NC: 1/10,000 - 10s
Kodak Portra 400NC: 1/10,000 - 10s
Kodak Gold Max 400: Unknown

I was unable to find any correction values however...

If you're talking about contrast correction, it varies with each roll.


----------



## theCanadian

Talking about reciprocity failure. Kodak seems to have taken down most of their data sheets, and non are accessible directly from the Kodak webpage.


----------



## drb328

ADD ME to the list

Body:
Canon T1i

Lenses:
Canon EF-S 18-55mm 1:3.5-5.6 IS
Canon EF-S 55-250mm 1:4-5.6 IS
Canon EF 28-80mm 1:3.5-5.6 II
Canon EF 75-300mm 1:4.5-5.6 III USM
Canon EF 50mm 1:1.8 II

Canon Speedlite 430EXII


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


Originally Posted by *drb328* 
ADD ME to the list

Body:
Canon T1i

Lenses:
Canon EF-S 18-55mm 1:3.5-5.6 IS
Canon EF-S 55-250mm 1:4-5.6 IS
Canon EF 28-80mm 1:3.5-5.6 II
Canon EF 75-300mm 1:4.5-5.6 III USM
Canon EF 50mm 1:1.8 II

Canon Speedlite 430EXII

Quite a lot of zooms you have! Mind me asking why the 55-250mm and 75-300mm?


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


Originally Posted by *drb328* 
ADD ME to the list

Body:
Canon T1i

Lenses:
Canon EF-S 18-55mm 1:3.5-5.6 IS
Canon EF-S 55-250mm 1:4-5.6 IS
Canon EF 28-80mm 1:3.5-5.6 II
Canon EF 75-300mm 1:4.5-5.6 III USM
Canon EF 50mm 1:1.8 II

Canon Speedlite 430EXII

im guessing you have a film canon body too?


----------



## drb328

Quote:


Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d* 
Quite a lot of zooms you have! Mind me asking why the 55-250mm and 75-300mm?


Quote:


Originally Posted by *mz-n10* 
im guessing you have a film canon body too?

I dont personally but my father had a rebel SLR that he doesnt use so i inherited the lenses until i ship to bootcamp.

The non-IS lenses are his, except the 50, that ones my latest


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


Originally Posted by *drb328* 
I dont personally but my father had a rebel SLR that he doesnt use so i inherited the lenses until i ship to bootcamp.

The non-IS lenses are his, except the 50, that ones my latest

yea the 2 EF lenses look like they came from a film kit.


----------



## drb328

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


yea the 2 EF lenses look like they came from a film kit.


Oh they definitely did, probably at least 5 years old. no glass issue on either and the 300 still looks like it came out of the box yesterday!

The 80mm does have some wear and thres a bubble in the lens that doesnt affect image quality though


----------



## Marin

Went to freestyle today and finally found some 2cr5's, woo. Canon 1v is up and running. Also picked up some more film since the Samy's Camera that's near me has a mediocre darkroom section.

Got...

- Fujichrome 64T x4
- Fujichrome Velvia 100 x4
- Fujichrome Astia 100F x4
- Fujichrome Provia 100F x4


----------



## AMC

I just picked up my first DLSR system

Canon Rebel XSI(450D)
Opteka Body grip
Canon EF-S 18-55
Canon EF 75-300
Soon a nifty fifty.


----------



## riko99

Gone remove the D60 and 18-55 from my gear. will be adding 17-50 f2.8 Tamron in the near future but have to wait until my buddy is back at work to purchase it.


----------



## iandroo888

anyone have the 10-20mm f/4-5.6 want to critique on how the lens is? may consider that lens over tokina 11-16 and grab some sb600s n sb800 xD

Current estimation of kit to get

Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 OR Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6
Hoya HD 77mm UV Filter
Hoya HD 77mm Cir-Pol filter
filter wrench (had hard time taking cousins 77mm cir-pol off... just want something to take it off easier with)
TWO SB-600
SB-800 OR SU-800 (approx $70 difference?)
TWO or THREE stofen diffusers
Sanyo Eneloops (8pk + 4pk w/ charger)
on the side note.. i am lookin for another sb600 and sb800 or su800.. and diffusers.. xD


----------



## Boyboyd

I'd also be interested in a review of the 10-20 (sigma?). I was seriously considering it after I saw some of the pictures taken with it on flickr.

E: Ken Rockwell says the Sigma 10-20 feels cheap, but that's ok because it _is_ cheap. He gives quite a mixed review of it actually.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
anyone have the 10-20mm f/4-5.6 want to critique on how the lens is? may consider that lens over tokina 11-16 and grab some sb600s n sb800 xD

Current estimation of kit to get

Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 OR Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6
Hoya HD 77mm UV Filter
Hoya HD 77mm Cir-Pol filter
filter wrench (had hard time taking cousins 77mm cir-pol off... just want something to take it off easier with)
TWO SB-600
SB-800 OR SU-800 (approx $70 difference?)
TWO or THREE stofen diffusers
Sanyo Eneloops (8pk + 4pk w/ charger)
on the side note.. i am lookin for another sb600 and sb800 or su800.. and diffusers.. xD


Quote:


Originally Posted by *Boyboyd* 
I'd also be interested in a review of the 10-20 (sigma?). I was seriously considering it after I saw some of the pictures taken with it on flickr.

E: Ken Rockwell says the Sigma 10-20 feels cheap, but that's ok because it _is_ cheap. He gives quite a mixed review of it actually.

http://www.photozone.de/nikon--nikko...report--review

http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showp...uct/171/cat/31

http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/s...&cat=37&page=1

Personally, I'd take the Tokina any day over the Sigma. Sharp, f/2.8, great build quality.


----------



## Manyak

I dunno about the 10-20, but the 14-24 is really good if you wanna get that instead...


----------



## Boyboyd

Thanks for the links, they're bookmarked. I'm going to bed in a sec.

I would love the 14-24. But I don't have that kind of money just lying around lol.


----------



## iandroo888

of cos if i had a FF body, its 14-24 of cos.. but it doesnt reach the angle i need for real estate photography on crop body =[

i totally considered the 11-16 tokina tho. unless someone can convince me not being to AF is not an issue then its 11-16. people have said that the 11-16 will show the wall to wall effect i want when shot from a corner for real estate photography.. im considering the 10-20 for the HSM built in motor


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
of cos if i had a FF body, its 14-24 of cos.. but it doesnt reach the angle i need for real estate photography on crop body =[

i totally considered the 11-16 tokina tho. unless someone can convince me not being to AF is not an issue then its 11-16. people have said that the 11-16 will show the wall to wall effect i want when shot from a corner for real estate photography.. im considering the 10-20 for the HSM built in motor

True, I forget that you don't have an AF body. I say upgrade to an AF body and get the Tokina.







But in all seriousness, I would much rather have AF.


----------



## Marin

It's an UWA. AF is about as useful as body armor for cameras.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
of cos if i had a FF body, its 14-24 of cos.. but it doesnt reach the angle i need for real estate photography on crop body =[

i totally considered the 11-16 tokina tho. unless someone can convince me not being to AF is not an issue then its 11-16. people have said that the 11-16 will show the wall to wall effect i want when shot from a corner for real estate photography.. im considering the 10-20 for the HSM built in motor

Hyperfocal distance and we'll be done. I won the auction so I'm getting one soon , it should be good.


----------



## iandroo888

i dont quite understand hyperfocal distance =3


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


i dont quite understand hyperfocal distance =3


On a lens that wide, everything is in focus (roughly).


----------



## theCanadian

Yeah man. At 11mm @ f/11 focused to 2 feet, everything beyond 1 feet is in focus.

According to the DoFMaster anyway.


----------



## iandroo888

i c.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


i c.


You'll only need to focus if they're really close.


----------



## Unknownm

My camera just sucks. ISO 100 is worst than 200. ISO 400 and up starts to show. *Here is ISO 6400 pictures
*

















it also *suffers from chromatic aberrations*, sigh. Although it's outdated and not DSLR, it makes do for my needs during day time. However at night time, different story...


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Unknownm*


Although it's outdated and not DSLR, it makes do for my needs during day time. However at night time, different story...


Most point and shoots are. They're designed for general purpose use, and all <$200 P&S cameras I've seen are barely there for night shots


----------



## Unknownm

Quote:


Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d* 
Most point and shoots are. They're designed for general purpose use, and all <$200 P&S cameras I've seen are barely there for night shots









It's a Fujifilm S2000 HD. Which I guess is still point and shoot. Very zoomable though


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Unknownm*


It's a Fujifilm S2000 HD. Which I guess is still point and shoot. Very zoomable though


In terms of performance, it's a P&S. I mean, you can use it and adjust settings like a DSLR, but it has the image sensor of a point and shoot, and the sensor is what really matters when it comes to image quality (and how they keep down the cost of this camera).

It's not a bad camera at all, it's just not my choice for low light shots.


----------



## Unknownm

Quote:


Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d* 
In terms of performance, it's a P&S. I mean, you can use it and adjust settings like a DSLR, but it has the image sensor of a point and shoot, and the sensor is what really matters when it comes to image quality (and how they keep down the cost of this camera).

It's not a bad camera at all, it's just not my choice for low light shots.

I really got it because it does 720p and CLOSE up shots.

Can someone explain the difference between F4.4 and F8.8. I notice these 2 settings change during the lighting and F8.8 requires more shutter speed


----------



## Manyak

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Unknownm*


I really got it because it does 720p and CLOSE up shots.

Can someone explain the difference between F4.4 and F8.8. I notice these 2 settings change during the lighting and F8.8 requires more shutter speed


It's the aperture.

Basically it's like an adjustable _hole_ in the lens - the wider it is (the smaller the F number), the more light passes through. The smaller it is, the wider the depth of field (meaning, both close and far objects are in focus at the same time).


----------



## Unknownm

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Manyak*


It's the aperture.

Basically it's like an adjustable _hole_ in the lens - the wider it is (the smaller the F number), the more light passes through. The smaller it is, the wider the depth of field (meaning, both close and far objects are in focus at the same time).


ah well I tried both and didn't notice the depth of field different


----------



## Manyak

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Unknownm*


ah well I tried both and didn't notice the depth of field different


Long story short, that's because the sensor in that camera is tiny.


----------



## Unknownm

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Manyak*


Long story short, that's because the sensor in that camera is tiny.


Yeah it sucks, this camera is sooo limited. I am trying to look for a low light camera with great shutter speed (high ISO) with great image quality. I saw one review like 2 weeks ago about one camera that did this with ISO 8000. Drools lol


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Unknownm*


Yeah it sucks, this camera is sooo limited. I am trying to look for a low light camera with great shutter speed (high ISO) with great image quality. I saw one review like 2 weeks ago about one camera that did this with ISO 8000. Drools lol


High ISO doesn't necessarily mean good shots. At those settings, sure there probably won't be camera blur, but with a point and shoot sensor I'm willing to bet lots of money that the pictures will be absolutely full of noise at that high an ISO. If not, the camera probably has an in-house post-processing algorithm that eliminates noise at the cost of image quality.

The only point and shoots I've seen that can take decent low light shots are very expensive and at the same price point as DSLRs.


----------



## theCanadian

Got the SLIK 700DX with the stock three way panhead today. Like a kitchen table. This thing is solid. There is some negligible shake in the center column. And I mean negligible. Field testing it this weekend.


----------



## nuclearjock

D3 14-24 @14mm poor lighting.


----------



## WIGILOCO

Something from the forests:


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
D3 14-24 @14mm poor lighting.










This i like. A lot. We don't have orange leaves yet :s


----------



## laboitenoire

I need to get out shooting sometime this weekend, if I have time. Leaves are looking fantastic around here.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Boyboyd* 
This i like. A lot. We don't have orange leaves yet :s

thx, gonna try another a bit earlier in the afternoon today.


----------



## iandroo888

what are some advantages d200 have on d5000? and is there anything that makes the d5000 better than d200?

whats a decent bag taht can hold body w/ zoom lens, another lens.. 3 flashes... and maybe room for anotehr lens or something and pocket for accessories and such? was lookin at crumpler's 7MD and 8MD.. anything else? lol


----------



## *the_beast*

Ohh photo club! Can I get in on this? I've got a Canon XSi w/ kit 18-55mm, 70-200mm f/4L IS, 100mm f/2.8 L IS USM Macro, 430EX II flash, PW Plus II triggers, Manfrotto 055XPROB tripod w/ 488RC2 ballhead, Manfrotto light stand w/ 2 umbrellas and some other misc things (remotes/filters/memory/etc.)


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
what are some advantages d200 have on d5000? and is there anything that makes the d5000 better than d200?

whats a decent bag taht can hold body w/ zoom lens, another lens.. 3 flashes... and maybe room for anotehr lens or something and pocket for accessories and such? was lookin at crumpler's 7MD and 8MD.. anything else? lol

Well, besides the better build quality and built-in motor, the D200 doesn't have a whole lot going for it. People say that the ISO performance is rather so-so, and compared to the D5000 I'd say it's a step down in image quality.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *theCanadian* 
Got the SLIK 700DX with the stock three way panhead today. Like a kitchen table. This thing is solid. There is some negligible shake in the center column. And I mean negligible. Field testing it this weekend.

There usually is shake in the center column. Only the geared ones are truly solid when extended.

Looks like a nice tripod though. Does the head remove?

On another note, I broke down and bought a Canon 135/2. <sigh> Might have a Canon 50/1.4 for sale soon.


----------



## dudemanppl

lolbrbprocessing1600picturesitooktoday.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


what are some advantages d200 have on d5000? and is there anything that makes the d5000 better than d200?

whats a decent bag taht can hold body w/ zoom lens, another lens.. 3 flashes... and maybe room for anotehr lens or something and pocket for accessories and such? was lookin at crumpler's 7MD and 8MD.. anything else? lol


The D200 has more buttons, a second screen and a better build quality.

The D5000 has a swivel screen, 720p video.


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


There usually is shake in the center column. Only the geared ones are truly solid when extended.

Looks like a nice tripod though. Does the head remove?


Yep, head comes out. In fact the center column will also split in half for when you need to get super low.

It's a massive tripod. Not too heavy or awkward to throw over your shoulder and walk for a long time, so long as you switch shoulders every 10 or so minutes. I was walking around with it all day and it didn't wear me out. And I'm a relatively small guy. Wouldn't hike with it though, unless I could get it on my back.

The bag that comes with it isn't all that great. Wouldn't really use it unless you were just throwing it in the trunk of your car (which I don't have).

I'm impressed with it overall though. Makes my other SLIK look like a joke.


----------



## dudemanppl

http://www.flickr.com/photos/dudeman...7625129447196/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/dudeman...7625129434084/


----------



## Danylu

Anyone got some Nikon gear that they want to let go of? The strong aussie dollar is awesome









@Nuke: Did you ever take some shots with the original Nikon 70-200mm VR and the new TC-20E III, if so, could I please see? Did that combo work out well for you?


----------



## iandroo888

d200 with 71k actuations for $300. good deal?


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


d200 with 71k actuations for $300. Good deal?


Do et.


----------



## iandroo888

whats the life on a d200 shutter? 150k? how much would cost of replacement be

also anyone know any good sites for buying/selling photography equip? other than CL and FM?


----------



## theCanadian

... Anyone know of a good lab that I can mail away to that will develop 35mm film and put my pictures on a CD?


----------



## Marin

http://www.marinfilmworks.com/


----------



## Danylu

The seller of the 11-16 decided not to sell it









Might as well update my gear list then;

Old:

Code:


Code:


Danylu - Nikon D3; Nikon D60
Nikon AF-S 24-70mm f/2.8
Nikon AF-S 17-55mm f/2.8
Nikon AF-S 50mm f/1.4G
Nikon AF-S 18-55mm
Nikon AF-S 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G IF-ED VR
Nikon AF-S 50mm 1.4
Nikon AF-D 60mm 2.8 + 55mm of tubes
Nikon SB-800
Nikon SB-600

New:

Code:


Code:


Danylu - Nikon D60
Nikon AF-S 50mm f/1.4G
Nikon AF-S 18-55mm
Nikon AF-S 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G IF-ED VR
Nikon AF-S 50mm 1.4
Nikon AF-D 60mm 2.8 + 55mm of tubes
Nikon SB-800
Nikon SB-600
Nikon AF-S 70-200mm 2.8 VR

Do you guys think I should sell it all and go with a Leica M8 and 35mm 1.4 CV? If I sell all my Nikon gear, I can afford it and still have some spare change.

Tried my hand at 2:1 macro photography. Anyone got some macro protips that they want to share


----------



## ripster

F22 and LOTS of light.

Most of the closeup pics in the OCN Mechanical Keyboard Guide were taken with this rig.

AFS Micro Nikkor VR 105mm FTW!



Forensic scientists and serial killers all agree with me.


----------



## Xapoc

Dexter? I kind of fell out of it... Should get back to watching.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
whats the life on a d200 shutter? 150k? how much would cost of replacement be

also anyone know any good sites for buying/selling photography equip? other than CL and FM?

You mean used equipment? Adorama, B&H, and KEH have used gear.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 

Do you guys think I should sell it all and go with a Leica M8 and 35mm 1.4 CV? If I sell all my Nikon gear, I can afford it and still have some spare change.


A rangefinder is a whole other ball of wax. I say not for a few reasons. For one, Leica lenses and accessories are drastically expensive (their cheapest lens is their 50mm at $1400), so you might be stuck with the one lens for a while. Secondly, the sensor in the M8 isn't full-frame (closer to APS-H) and it has some nastly color casting problems and no UV filter over the sensor, requiring filters to correct.

A rangefinder would be awesome to have as a secondary camera, but as a primary camera, it would be a difficult transition and a big loss of features.

If you had to get one, I would go for the M9 over the M8. Full-frame sensor and a host of other technical improvements.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 

A rangefinder is a whole other ball of wax. I say not for a few reasons. For one, Leica lenses and accessories are drastically expensive (their cheapest lens is their 50mm at $1400), so you might be stuck with the one lens for a while. Secondly, the sensor in the M8 isn't full-frame (closer to APS-H) and it has some nastly color casting problems and no UV filter over the sensor, requiring filters to correct.

A rangefinder would be awesome to have as a secondary camera, but as a primary camera, it would be a difficult transition and a big loss of features.

If you had to get one, I would go for the M9 over the M8. Full-frame sensor and a host of other technical improvements.

^^yes

m9+50mm noctilux is all you will ever need


----------



## xlastshotx

Any reason why I shouldn't buy the Sigma 17-50mm f2.8 EX DC OS HSM?


----------



## Marin

RF's are nice to use. But they're restrictive for composition.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


Originally Posted by *xlastshotx* 
Any reason why I shouldn't buy the Sigma 17-50mm f2.8 EX DC OS HSM?

if u have anything else other than a canon... otherwise that lens wont work ;D xDD


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
Do you guys think I should sell it all and go with a Leica M8 and 35mm 1.4 CV? If I sell all my Nikon gear, I can afford it and still have some spare change.

Do you have more money than you know what to do with, or do you value trendiness more than usefulness?

If you answered yes to either, get a Leica.


----------



## Marin

One day you'll use one.


----------



## dudemanppl

Yay, I get 10 bucks to shoot a football game with my 3k+ worth of gear. :/


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dudemanppl* 
Yay, I get 10 bucks to shoot a football game with my 3k+ worth of gear. :/

Charge for prints.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Charge for prints.

Eh, some other guy does that. Newspaper offering me some stuff, maybe I can work my way up and be PJ, but they make crap money.


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
http://www.marinfilmworks.com/

I refuse to pay $11 a roll for CD Service. That's practically theft.

Particularly if that company can't even get their address right on their mail in forms.


----------



## theCanadian

Marinfilmworks wasn't entirely useless. A whois look up generated some related sites. Found Clark Color Labs. They still use dip processing instead of a minilab.

A review, linked above, indicates top notch service. Will give them a go first, since they're less than half the price. And they also send you mailers for free. So you don't have to pay to ship your rolls out.


----------



## Marin

Then go to Costco or something. I just linked a place that has good service.

EDIT: Looking at the reviews it's obvious why they're half the price.


----------



## mz-n10

there are photographers that print at costco. the costco by my house prints on kodak lustre and fuji gloss which is fine with me.

edit....nm i forgot you shoot film, no idea how costco scanning is.....


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Then go to Costco or something. I just linked a place that has good service.

*EDIT: Looking at the reviews it's obvious why they're half the price.*


Yeah, they do developing en mass. They're positioned very comfortably in the market.


----------



## xlastshotx

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
if u have anything else other than a canon... otherwise that lens wont work ;D xDD

lol, yeah I have a 50D.

Ive been wanted something wide, and I heard that lens was quite good. Gunna sell my Canon 85mm f1.8 and some other things to get that. I have been needing a wide lens for panoramas and landscapes, but both of my lens's especially the 85mm are to telephoto with my cropped sensor, and I am kinda getting sick of foot zoom... I will miss how sharp my 85mm is though.


----------



## iandroo888

give some to get some i guess for the lower end xD


----------



## theCanadian

The next full stop after f/32 is f/45 correct?


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *theCanadian* 
The next full stop after f/32 is f/45 correct?

44/45. At that point there's not much difference in calling it f/45 instead of f/44.


----------



## mz-n10

wow your lens can stop down pass f32? i dont think any of my lenses can stop down that far.....


----------



## dudemanppl

Mmmmm, me likey F100.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *ripster* 
F22 and LOTS of light.

Most of the closeup pics in the OCN Mechanical Keyboard Guide were taken with this rig.

AFS Micro Nikkor VR 105mm FTW!









Forensic scientists and serial killers all agree with me.

















I'm often at f22 to get about 0.5cm of dof. 2x magnification is epic! I use a SB-600 and SB-800 to get enough lighting.

On the topic of SB-800, Gonetomorrow could you please remove that from my list - just sold it


----------



## Danylu

Wow I didn't know the M8 wasn't full frame! I'm definitely not buying it now...


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mz-n10* 
wow your lens can stop down pass f32? i dont think any of my lenses can stop down that far.....

Mine stops down to f/64.


----------



## WIGILOCO

Some new, tell me what you like.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Mine stops down to f/64.


the 17-80 kit lens stops down to f36...


----------



## Marin

17-80mm?


----------



## lavieinjuste

Sweet. I have been here all this time and never knew this thread was here!

I have a D90 with NIKKOR 18-105mm && 55-200mm lenses.

EDIT:

Here's some I have taken recently:


----------



## dudemanppl

Ugh I want to get my D700s sold to get a D3. Then sell the D3 to get a gripped D700. I'm that crazy.


----------



## Danylu

How much you selling the D700 for ^__^


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mz-n10* 
wow your lens can stop down pass f32? i dont think any of my lenses can stop down that far.....

Mine only stop down to that at maximum focal lengths. So i bought an 8 stop ND filter.


----------



## nuclearjock

Yellow rump warbler migrating through our area in fall plumage.

D3 800mm


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mz-n10* 
wow your lens can stop down pass f32? i dont think any of my lenses can stop down that far.....

My 200mm prime can stop down to f/32. If I throw a 2x teleconverter on it, I loose a stop. So f/45. It's not really a practical stop, but I was just wondering. You'd probably be able to point the damn thing directly into the sun and still be at a (relatively) low shutter speed.


----------



## Marin

http://www.timbuk2.com/tb2/products/...mera-messenger

Finally. Going to order one soon.


----------



## markag

Hi guys.

Just a few weeks ago I purchased a Nikon D90 with the standard 18-105mm VR lens. My wife and I are going to be starting a family before too long and we wanted to get a good camera for when the time comes.

I don't have too many pictures with it yet. I've put a few up on my Flickr page (http://www.flickr.com/photos/markag6/). I'm looking to start selling some of my images on microstock sites and maybe ear some cash on the side from it. I have a few images up at a couple of sites right now, but I need to keep shooting more.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


Originally Posted by *markag* 
Hi guys.

Just a few weeks ago I purchased a Nikon D90 with the standard 18-105mm VR lens. My wife and I are going to be starting a family before too long and we wanted to get a good camera for when the time comes.

I don't have too many pictures with it yet. I've put a few up on my Flickr page (http://www.flickr.com/photos/markag6/). I'm looking to start selling some of my images on microstock sites and maybe ear some cash on the side from it. I have a few images up at a couple of sites right now, but I need to keep shooting more.

Sounds good!









Just a bit of advice: That's a nice kit you have there, but you might also want an external flash as well. My cousin recently bought the same kit (D90 w/ 18-105mm) when her daughter was born, and the flash is extremely useful for those family shots at night or in low light indoors situations.


----------



## Konkistadori

Something with my 350d and Canon EF-S 60mm usm macro







..

im considering to upgrade to 5d mk1, i could get used one for 700euros but sadly i have to sell this EF-s macro :/..


----------



## markag

Quote:


Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d* 
Sounds good!









Just a bit of advice: That's a nice kit you have there, but you might also want an external flash as well. My cousin recently bought the same kit (D90 w/ 18-105mm) when her daughter was born, and the flash is extremely useful for those family shots at night or in low light indoors situations.

I'd like to pick up a flash and 2 more lenses over time. I'm thinking the SB600 flash would work well for me. The lenses that have me interested are the 50mm 1.8f AF prime lens and the new 55-300 VR zoom lens that Nikon just came out with recently.

I don't have the budget right now for those things, but I plan on saving up for them over time. We are still at least a year away from having kids, so I've got some time.


----------



## citruspers

The SB-600 was the first thing I bought after I got my D90 + 18-105.....but I stopped using it after I got some fast primes. I'd definitely give fast lenses another thought before you get a flash, especially the 35mm F/1.8!


----------



## iandroo888

getting sb800 n sb600 soon

still thinkin what lens to get.. 11-16 tokina.. 10-20 sigma..

----

anything better than hoya 77mm HD uv and cir-pol? $246.50 for these two


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Boyboyd* 
Mine only stop down to that at maximum focal lengths. So i bought an 8 stop ND filter.

yea i also have a 8 stop nd. but i was thinking of DOF of f45...or f64

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
http://www.timbuk2.com/tb2/products/...mera-messenger

Finally. Going to order one soon.

time to get a cheap messenger bag and throw in a camera insert and save yourself 80 bucks.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
getting sb800 n sb600 soon

still thinkin what lens to get.. 11-16 tokina.. 10-20 sigma..

----

anything better than hoya 77mm HD uv and cir-pol? $246.50 for these two

b+w f-pro and a b+w kaseseman cpl for about a little more then the hoya.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mz-n10* 
yea i also have a 8 stop nd. but i was thinking of DOF of f45...or f64

True dat...

I thought DOF got to near infinite at f32.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mz-n10* 
time to get a cheap messenger bag and throw in a camera insert and save yourself 80 bucks.

I would not trust my messenger bag to protect my lenses. Ever.

I'd rather go for that bag. In fact...


----------



## iandroo888

man i want those crumpler laptop camera backpacks.. so nice but so expensive =[


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d* 
I would not trust my messenger bag to protect my lenses. Ever.

I'd rather go for that bag. In fact...

there are padded inserts you can get. currently i am using one in a puma messenger bag and it works pretty well, other then the fact that when its loaded up it weights a ton......

heres the link incase anyone was interested.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mz-n10* 
there are padded inserts you can get. currently i am using one in a puma messenger bag and it works pretty well, other then the fact that when its loaded up it weights a ton......

heres the link incase anyone was interested.

...

+Rep. I am interested.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
http://www.timbuk2.com/tb2/products/...mera-messenger

Finally. Going to order one soon.

Hmm, I wonder how sturdy it is. I have a Timbuk2 laptop messenger bag, which I love, but it's flimsy and the Velcro flap won't stay shut. The Crumper xMDH bag are super sturdy, even when empty.

Though I do like how that Timbuk2 bag can easily remove the camera compartment and serve as a regular messenger bag.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Konkistadori* 

























Something with my 350d and Canon EF-S 60mm usm macro







..

im considering to upgrade to 5d mk1, i could get used one for 700euros but sadly i have to sell this EF-s macro :/..

No biggie, just sell it and get the EF 100mm f/2.8 (the non-L version), it's just as good as the 60.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mz-n10* 
time to get a cheap messenger bag and throw in a camera insert and save yourself 80 bucks.

What interests me in getting the bag instead of just the insert is the velcro flap that holds the insert. So I don't have to worry about the insert shifting around and stuff.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Hmm, I wonder how sturdy it is. I have a Timbuk2 laptop messenger bag, which I love, but it's flimsy and the Velcro flap won't stay shut. The Crumper xMDH bag are super sturdy, even when empty.

Though I do like how that Timbuk2 bag can easily remove the camera compartment and serve as a regular messenger bag.

That's actually the reason I want it.









I really don't like carrying the sturdy messenger bags around (I like bags that form to my body, if you get what I mean) and would rather just throw my gear into my old Timbuk2 bag.

And the foam insert should be more than enough. People have gotten by fine with Domke bags so this should be the same.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Boyboyd* 
True dat...

I thought DOF got to near infinite at f32.

In theory...

Images usually start to get softer after f/16 or so.


----------



## dudemanppl

Want a D3, but I just learned the 11 grid selection option isn't as good as the D700. Quite a large turn off. BUT 11 FPS IN DX! D:


----------



## Unknownm

getting a nikon D5000 I hope this weekend or next week. Better than my crappy current camera







. Expect more photos from me


----------



## Manyak

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Want a D3, but I just learned the 11 grid selection option isn't as good as the D700. Quite a large turn off. BUT 11 FPS IN DX! D:


Use movie mode on a 5DmkII and separate the frames into images on a PC - you get 30FPS on full frame









Of course, 1920x1080 isn't very good unless you're just shooting for the web.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Manyak*


Use movie mode on a 5DmkII and separate the frames into images on a PC - you get 30FPS on full frame









Of course, 1920x1080 isn't very good unless you're just shooting for the web.


MF sports does not work out well at all.


----------



## Manyak

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dudemanppl* 
MF sports does not work out well at all.

Just set it to hyperfocal and blur the background in photoshop later


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Manyak*


Just set it to hyperfocal and blur the background in photoshop later










I should, shouldn't I...


----------



## Manyak

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


I should, shouldn't I...


...

You really think I'm serious, don't you?


----------



## Marin

If you actually did that I'd have to take all your camera stuff away and give you a Kodak P&S.


----------



## Unknownm

Hey guys so like in my post before, I'm getting a Nikon D5000 with stock lens which is a upgrade from Fujifilm finepix S2000HD. My question is any tips for a newbie?

Getting the camera for $549 with stock lens, it's new with student discount (taxes are in the price). Also attending Vancouver film school in oct 25th







, taking this so expect more out of me in terms of posts


----------



## iandroo888

kodak p&s.. rofl disposable camera? >_> lol xD

film school... dslr.. film school.. dslr.. why does that not fit right in my head


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


If you actually did that I'd have to take all your camera stuff away and give you a Kodak P&S.


Sigged


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Unknownm*


Hey guys so like in my post before, I'm getting a Nikon D5000 with stock lens which is a upgrade from Fujifilm finepix S2000HD. My question is any tips for a newbie?

Getting the camera for $549 with stock lens, it's new with student discount (taxes are in the price). Also attending Vancouver film school in oct 25th







, taking this so expect more out of me in terms of posts










That's a good price on a new D5k.

For a newbie, I'd definitely read up on basic photography skills. There's a million and one out there on the internet, and most of them tend to be detailed and factually correct, so I'm not too picky on which guide to use. The most important things, IMO, are composition and exposure. The two are very basic skills yet are the foundation for all the photography you'll ever do. It's one of those things that are pretty basic yet takes a lot of practice to intuitively "know", but stands to make-or-break your photographs.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


If you actually did that I'd have to take all your camera stuff away and give you a Kodak P&S.


PLEASE MARIN, NOT KODAK! I DON'T EVEN WANT A 5DII!







Anyway, 300 hyperfocal is derrrrp. (Well yes I do, but that is antoher story).


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


PLEASE MARIN, NOT KODAK! I DON'T EVEN WANT A 5DII!







(Well yes I do, but that is antoher story).


Give me your sigrig and I'll make Marin give you your camera gear back


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Give me your sigrig and I'll make Marin give you your camera gear back










To be honest I don't have like any of that. I put that there to see what could be done on like a 1500 budget. Forgot to change it back.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Want a D3, but I just learned the 11 grid selection option isn't as good as the D700. Quite a large turn off. BUT 11 FPS IN DX! D:


Why DX? It has 11fps in FX as well.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Want a D3, but I just learned the 11 grid selection option isn't as good as the D700. Quite a large turn off. BUT 11 FPS IN DX! D:


I find that hard to believe as they both use the exact same AF sensor. (Multi-CAM3500 FX)

http://imaging.nikon.com/products/im...nsor/index.htm


----------



## Unknownm

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


kodak p&s.. rofl disposable camera? >_> lol xD

film school... dslr.. film school.. dslr.. why does that not fit right in my head


it's not fitting in your head because I didn't give you details on the course. I'm taking foundation from VFS, which in bold. Fixes your problem

Quote:



What you will learn in the multidisciplinary Foundation program covers a wide range of skills and experiences, from Drawing, *Photography,* Cinematography, and Animation to Storyboarding, Sound Design, Writing, and Acting, to name a few. You'll use vital tools like Flash, After Effects, and Maya, enabling you to further explore your craft.


I'm using this nikon D5000 camera more from practice and some projects. I like the idea of manual focus in 720p!

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


That's a good price on a new D5k.

For a newbie, I'd definitely read up on basic photography skills. There's a million and one out there on the internet, and most of them tend to be detailed and factually correct, so I'm not too picky on which guide to use. The most important things, IMO, are composition and exposure. The two are very basic skills yet are the foundation for all the photography you'll ever do. It's one of those things that are pretty basic yet takes a lot of practice to intuitively "know", but stands to make-or-break your photographs.


Of course read up online, I was just wondering if you guys knew anything more than internet provides







. The thing I know what's going to suck is the lens, It's stock. ex also had the same camera and no close up shots for me


----------



## Danylu

I just had one of the biggest DOH! moments ever.

I realised in a moment of genius that my Velbon ballhead can be screwed OFF my big tripod and can be put on my gorillapod









Does anyone know why tripod heads are so expensive? My tripod would cost $198 new, the head of that tripod costs $196!!


----------



## Marin

Shot with the Canon 1v.


----------



## iandroo888

gone can you update please =]

Nikon D5000 
Nikon Nikkor AF-S 18-105mm f/3.5 - 5.6G ED DX VR
Nikon Speedlight SB-800
Nikon Speedlight SB-600
Nikon ML-L3 IR Remote
Sto-fen Omnibounce Diffuser
12x Sanyo Eneloops NiMH Batteries
Hoya HD 67mm UV Filter
Lowepro Slingshot 100AW
Ancient aluminum tripod


----------



## WIGILOCO

*Tell me which one of these hot pics is better, or do I need to delete them both?







*


----------



## Boyboyd

2nd, there's too little light in the first one.


----------



## iandroo888

ones over ones under. lol


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


I just had one of the biggest DOH! moments ever.

I realised in a moment of genius that my Velbon ballhead can be screwed OFF my big tripod and can be put on my gorillapod









Does anyone know why tripod heads are so expensive? My tripod would cost $198 new, the head of that tripod costs $196!!


Materials, the usual brand-name markup, etc. Which Velbon head? That is pretty pricey. My Manfrotto head was $70, but it's a simple ball head for light loads.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
Does anyone know why tripod heads are so expensive? My tripod would cost $198 new, the head of that tripod costs $196!!

depends on the materials, build, features and mounting plate. the mounting plate actually causes a head to shoot up in price, i have a vanguard soemthing head with a vanguard QR plate for 100. getting the one with acra swiss plate cost 250...same head just different QR plates.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
I find that hard to believe as they both use the exact same AF sensor. (Multi-CAM3500 FX)

http://imaging.nikon.com/products/im...nsor/index.htm

D3








D700 is the same as 11 point on your D300s.
Oh yeah, take everything out of my gear list and add:
Cannon 5 EOS D II Mark
Tamran 18-270mm f/5.6


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dudemanppl* 
D3








D700 is the same as 11 point on your D300s.

That looks sweet! Why can't Canon do that for the xxD series?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d* 
That looks sweet! Why can't Canon do that for the xxD series?

No need really, the 9 cross-type AF points are sufficient. I don't see how two extra selectable points is a big deal as they both cover the center of the image.

Now having the ability to select *fifty-one* AF points is just awesome (the D700 has two modes, 11 or 51 selectable points).


----------



## Marin

Ordered the Timbuk2 Snoop Camera Messenger Bag.


----------



## WIGILOCO

Some pigeons!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

^^^^ Nice shot, but I think a tighter crop to bring the pigeons more in the foreground would help (I didn't notice there were pigeons until you said so).


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d* 
That looks sweet! Why can't Canon do that for the xxD series?

D700 11 point is MUUUUUCH more spread out. Only 3 are cross type (the middle).


----------



## GoneTomorrow

The 135/2L:

Nesting Dolls by gonetomorrow00, on Flickr

Nesting Dolls by gonetomorrow00, on Flickr

Nesting Dolls by gonetomorrow00, on Flickr

All I have to say is: why didn't I get this lens sooner?! All wide open with minimal processing (_slight_ increase in sharpness).


----------



## dudemanppl

Hehe, forgot you got a 5DII , was just about to tell you to get full frame. 135L + 5DII is one hell of an unbeatable combo.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


That looks sweet! Why can't Canon do that for the xxD series?


cause teh d700/d300s are more inline with the 5d2 and 7d.


----------



## iandroo888

crumpler industry disgrace. yes or no? anyone use this across body? does the body n stuff mounting like tilt forward or would it stay against body? or is there no way around that? lol


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


crumpler industry disgrace. yes or no?


Yes.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


anyone use this across body?


Yes.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


does the body n stuff mounting like tilt forward or would it stay against body? or is there no way around that? lol


Stay against your body (if your talking about the screen pressing against you). But it depends on the lens.


----------



## iandroo888

some reviews saying stuff about not supposed to using it cross body as it was advertised for neck? is there any uncomfort using it across body?


----------



## Marin

I always use it like that and it's comfortable. And so does GoneTomorrow. So whatever reviews say that, they're doing it wrong.


----------



## iandroo888

hm. if you two like it, sounds good to me. ordering now =]


----------



## Danylu

I'm looking at getting one as well


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
hm. if you two like it, sounds good to me. ordering now =]

I ordered one a few days ago myself and I'm just waiting on it to arrive









Something about a gripped 50D just seems bad for your neck.


----------



## Marin

Shoot! I forgot to adjust the ISO on my meter since I was shooting Ilford FP4+ earlier on my 4x5. Hoping the bracketing manages to save some of the shots on the Fujichrome 64T.


----------



## ThaJoker

hey guys i dont know if this is the best place to ask but i was wondering which was a good macro lens, i'd rather not buy the more expensive one but if the cheaper one is just crapper than crap then i'd rather get the better one lol.

http://www.sony.com.au/product/sal30m28

http://www.sony.com.au/product/sal50m28

honest opinions.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *ThaJoker* 
hey guys i dont know if this is the best place to ask but i was wondering which was a good macro lens, i'd rather not buy the more expensive one but if the cheaper one is just crapper than crap then i'd rather get the better one lol.

http://www.sony.com.au/product/sal30m28

http://www.sony.com.au/product/sal50m28

honest opinions.

Most macros are very sharp. I'm going to guess the 30mm focus ring is bad compared to the 50mm. Perhaps go third party mate?


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


Originally Posted by *ThaJoker* 
hey guys i dont know if this is the best place to ask but i was wondering which was a good macro lens, i'd rather not buy the more expensive one but if the cheaper one is just crapper than crap then i'd rather get the better one lol.

http://www.sony.com.au/product/sal30m28

http://www.sony.com.au/product/sal50m28

honest opinions.

The 28mm is not a bad lens. From the reviews, looks very sharp. Some slight CA @ f/2.8, but I doubt most people would notice that.

In short, it's a good buy for the money.


----------



## ThaJoker

Quote:


Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d* 
The 28mm is not a bad lens. From the reviews, looks very sharp. Some slight CA @ f/2.8, but I doubt most people would notice that.

In short, it's a good buy for the money.

Thanks, i dont wanna spend $1300 on a 100mm but i may spend the money on the 50mm. I have a Nex 5 entry level DSLR and am still learning. I've seen what nice photo's macro lenses can produce (DOF and such). So really i just want to start getting some good photos under my belt.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dudemanppl* 
Hehe, forgot you got a 5DII , was just about to tell you to get full frame. 135L + 5DII is one hell of an unbeatable combo.

Indeed!

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
crumpler industry disgrace. yes or no? anyone use this across body? does the body n stuff mounting like tilt forward or would it stay against body? or is there no way around that? lol


Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
some reviews saying stuff about not supposed to using it cross body as it was advertised for neck? is there any uncomfort using it across body?

The Crumpler ID is very comfortable and very lightweight, something which many reviews might not mention. The neck pad is very breathable. And again, there is absolutely no problems slinging cross-body with it, stays with you.

About the camera tilting, it will fall in the same position as with any strap that attaches to the camera's strap buckles. Only Black Rapid straps (which attach to the tripod mount) will point straight down.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
I always use it like that and it's comfortable. And so does GoneTomorrow. So whatever reviews say that, they're doing it wrong.

Yeah, I do







and yes they are.


----------



## riko99

Alright add in the Tamron 17-50 f2.8 to my gear Gone it showed up yesterday picking it up today and will have some "Glam" shots up tonight.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d* 
The 28mm is not a bad lens. From the reviews, looks very sharp. Some slight CA @ f/2.8, but I doubt most people would notice that.

In short, it's a good buy for the money.

wheres teh 28mm?









Quote:


Originally Posted by *ThaJoker* 
Thanks, i dont wanna spend $1300 on a 100mm but i may spend the money on the 50mm. I have a Nex 5 entry level DSLR and am still learning. I've seen what nice photo's macro lenses can produce (DOF and such). So really i just want to start getting some good photos under my belt.

nex5 isnt really a entry level DSLR...it is a mirrorless system....

the 50/2.8 is a better lens but....

it really depends on how comfortable you are with manual focus, im assuiming you have a LAEA1 adapter the 50/2.8 will NOT AUTOFOCUS but will have aperture priority.

the 30/2.8 will autofocus on the LAEA1 (after the new FW) but from what i have read its rather slow.....

PS. you can also take a look at used MINOLTA MAXXUM/DYXUM gear lenses (not minolta MC or MD). these will also have aperture priority.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mz-n10* 
wheres teh 28mm?









Ahahaa, forgive me, it was late at night. I mistook the f/2.8 for 28mm


----------



## ThaJoker

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mz-n10* 
wheres teh 28mm?









nex5 isnt really a entry level DSLR...it is a mirrorless system....

the 50/2.8 is a better lens but....

it really depends on how comfortable you are with manual focus, im assuiming you have a LAEA1 adapter the 50/2.8 will NOT AUTOFOCUS but will have aperture priority.

the 30/2.8 will autofocus on the LAEA1 (after the new FW) but from what i have read its rather slow.....

PS. you can also take a look at used MINOLTA MAXXUM/DYXUM gear lenses (not minolta MC or MD). these will also have aperture priority.


Yes i bought the adapter the other day. so you reckon the 50mm. Whats a mirrorless system?. I dont mind manually focusing on the 50mm i thuoght thats how all good macros are taken.


----------



## laboitenoire

Trying to teach myself how to pan... I was shooting soccer the other night, and even with ISO 3200 wide open I was struggling to hit 1/40-1/60 of a second. So I tried to pan.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *ThaJoker* 
Yes i bought the adapter the other day. so you reckon the 50mm. Whats a mirrorless system?. I dont mind manually focusing on the 50mm i thuoght thats how all good macros are taken.

Mirrorless means no optical viewfinder. In other words, you can only look at the LCD to compose.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
Mirrorless means *no optical viewfinder*. In other words, you can only look at the LCD to compose.

I couldn't deal with that. I'd be lost if i couldn't look through the viewfinder.


----------



## ThaJoker

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Boyboyd* 
I couldn't deal with that. I'd be lost if i couldn't look through the viewfinder.

Yeah i know what you mean ive used others b4 but im starting to get used to it. I mean the screen is crystal clear you can see every little detail. its pretty good.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


Originally Posted by *ThaJoker* 
Yeah i know what you mean ive used others b4 but im starting to get used to it. I mean the screen is crystal clear you can see every little detail. its pretty good.

It's all personal taste, but personally I avoid LiveView if I can. The viewfinder gives me better isolation from the outside world, and it's technically not a DSLR if it's mirrorless.


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:


Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d* 
It's all personal taste, but personally I avoid LiveView if I can. The viewfinder gives me better isolation from the outside world, and it's technically not a DSLR if it's mirrorless.

If the sensor is the same and glass is the same it doesn't really matter, because the quality will be the same in the end.
Although I much prefer the isolation that you get with a proper viewfinder.


----------



## riko99

Ok so got the Tammy today and am happy as a clam


















And my Fiance Playing in the leaves


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Sparhawk* 
If the sensor is the same and glass is the same it doesn't really matter, because the quality will be the same in the end.
Although I much prefer the isolation that you get with a proper viewfinder.









I said technically, and the defining characteristic of a DSLR isn't the sensor, IQ, or manual controls, but the mirror


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ThaJoker*


Yes i bought the adapter the other day. so you reckon the 50mm. Whats a mirrorless system?. I dont mind manually focusing on the 50mm i thuoght thats how all good macros are taken.


since you said you were new i didnt know if you were comfortable enough to manual focus. if you dont mind manual focusing then the 50/2.8 is fine.

you can also take a look at a used 200/4 (say FD 200/4) its all fair game for the emount + adapter. you just need to set your own aperture. this way you have a longer 1:1 so you can get a bit further away from jumpy bugs and stuff.

btw i lied....the 50/2.8 isnt the best, i had a brain fart. the minolta maxxum 200/4 is the best macro for sony/minolta but it will set you back at least 1k used if you can find it.

a mirrorless system is what the nex3/5 is. you can change lenses but there is no mirror between the sensor and rear element. more importantly mirrorless cameras uses "contrast detect autofocus" vs "phase detect autofocus" found in most DSLR. contrast detect is usually slower but more accurate then phase detect AF.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Trying to teach myself how to pan... I was shooting soccer the other night, and even with ISO 3200 wide open I was struggling to hit 1/40-1/60 of a second. So I tried to pan.










1/60 is pretty hard to to get a good pan, especially since in soccer players run in 2 dimensions. if you are a right eye shooter try to keep your left eye open when you shoot, i find it a lot easier to pan cars that way.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


It's all personal taste, but personally I avoid LiveView if I can. The viewfinder gives me better isolation from the outside world, and it's technically not a DSLR if it's mirrorless.


of course it technically isnt a (D)SLR since SLR means SINGLE LENS *REFLEX* camera. it doesnt have anything to REFLEX


----------



## LemonSlice

Tomorrow, front door, box, Nikon D90 my first DLSR







. Been planning this for almost a month







and very excited, but I still need to wait until after school.

and
AF-S 18-105mm f/3.5-5.6 VR
AF-S 55-200mm f/4-5.6G VR
AF 50mm f/1.8D
Hoya HMC filters for the above lenses
MC-DC2 shutter release cable
Manfrotto 7302YB tripod


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *LemonSlice*


Tomorrow, front door, box, Nikon D90 my first DLSR







. Been planning this for almost a month







and very excited, but I still need to wait until after school.

and
AF-S 18-105mm f/3.5-5.6 VR
AF-S 55-200mm f/4-5.6G VR
AF 50mm f/1.8D
Hoya HMC filters for the above lenses
MC-DC2 shutter release cable
Manfrotto 7302YB tripod


Any chance you can PM me your address, when the package is due to arrive, and when you'll actually be home? Thanks!

And in all seriousness, congrats


----------



## Shane1244

JUST got my 35 f/1.8 in the mail, Havn't had any time with it yet, here's the first picture that came out of it. Shot on Auto.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


1/60 is pretty hard to to get a good pan, especially since in soccer players run in 2 dimensions. if you are a right eye shooter try to keep your left eye open when you shoot, i find it a lot easier to pan cars that way.


I do what I can.









Shot some more tonight. Manually exposed everything just by making a few test shots during warm-ups. Ended up settling on ISO 2000, 1/80, +5.0 EV, and then the widest aperture possible. Lighting was a bit better tonight, so it turned out a lot better than Monday. I'll post some shots once I finish sorting/tweaking the 750 shots I made tonight.

The intramural coordinator was at the game tonight, and came over to ask if I was shooting (duh, I'm holding a camera...). Mentioned that he had been trying to get a camera for IM usage, but didn't have the budget approval. Gave me his card so I can send him pics of any games I shoot. I'm interested, just unsure what protocol I should follow. He said I'd get credit for any pictures he uses.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


I do what I can.









Shot some more tonight. Manually exposed everything just by making a few test shots during warm-ups. Ended up settling on ISO 2000, 1/80, +5.0 EV, and then the widest aperture possible. Lighting was a bit better tonight, so it turned out a lot better than Monday. I'll post some shots once I finish sorting/tweaking the 750 shots I made tonight.

The intramural coordinator was at the game tonight, and came over to ask if I was shooting (duh, I'm holding a camera...). Mentioned that he had been trying to get a camera for IM usage, but didn't have the budget approval. Gave me his card so I can send him pics of any games I shoot. I'm interested, just unsure what protocol I should follow. He said I'd get credit for any pictures he uses.


personally i do a lot of free jobs just to get my name out there. because you never know when you get a big event that pays for your new a900 (or in your case a d700)


----------



## laboitenoire

I had been assuming free. I'm just wondering whether I should watermark my photos or send them as-is.

And I think I'd rather get some fast zooms and a good prime before I got a D700... Although I wouldn't complain!


----------



## dudemanppl

LOL, you actually changed my gear list.

Nikon D700 + MB-D10 and Eneloops
Nikon D700
Nikon F100 + MB-15 and Eneloops
Canon S90
Logitech G5

Sigma 12-24mm f/4.5-5.6 EX DG HSM
Sigma 24mm f/1.8 EX DG
Nikkor 28-200mm f/3.5-5.6 AF-G
Sigma 50mm f/1.4 EX DG HSM
Nikkor 85mm f/1.8 AF-D
Nikkor 80-200mm f/2.8 AF-S D
Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 APO EX HSM

RODE VideoMic
Nikon Speedlight SB-800 x2
Yong Nuo 460 II x2
40" Shoot Through x2
Crappy $20 Lightstand x2
Crappy Canon Tripod
Manfrotto 776YB Monopod

BlackRapid DR-1 Double Strap
BlackRapid Original
Think Tank Airport Acceleration v2.0
Think Tank Pro Speed Belt
Think Tank Pixel Racing Harness
Think Tank Skin Chimp Cage
Think Tank Chimp Cage
Think Tank Large Lens Drop In x3
Think Tank Lens Changer 15 x3
Think Tank Lens Changer 75 Pop Down
Sandisk Ultra 8GB 30 MB/s CF x5
Sandisk Ultra 16GB 30 MB/s CF
Sandisk Ultra 16GB 15 MB/s SD

This shall do. But I'm shooting for:

Nikon D700 + MB-D10 and Eneloops
Nikon F100 + MB-15 and Eneloops
Canon S90

Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8 AF-S G N
Sigma 24mm f/1.8 EX DG
Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8 AF-S G N
Sigma 50mm f/1.4 EX DG HSM
Nikkor 80-200mm f/2.8 AF-S D
Sigma 85mm f/1.4 EX DG HSM

AlienBee 1600
AlienBee 800
Vagabond Mini Lithium
Foldable Stripbox + Grid
Foldable Large Softbox + Grid
10, 20, 30, 40 degree Grids

I only ever use the monopod to put flashes on. I've never used it for its intended purpose on either the 300 AF-I or the Sigma 120-300. I'm quite strange.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

What is a G5 doing on that list?


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


What is a G5 doing on that list?


He's stat padding.


----------



## r34p3rex

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


What is a G5 doing on that list?



Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


He's stat padding.


LOL!!!!!!!!!! I was wondering the same thing..


----------



## dudemanppl

Inside joke....


----------



## Danylu

Whether or not you're comfortable with manual focusing, you don't have much of a choice whilst doing macro.

Gear List - starting to get small, looks like I gotta work on it









Nikon D60
Nikon AF-S 50mm f/1.4G
Nikon AF-S 18-55mm
Nikon AF-D 60mm 2.8 + 55mm of tubes
Nikon AF-S 70-200mm 2.8 VR
Nikon SB-600


----------



## Marin

I got the Timbuk2 Snooper Messenger bag. This bag is awesome, totally worth the money. Functions just like a normal Timbuk2 bag but designed for use with camera equipment so it has extra pockets for filters and such.

The padding in the insert is the same material as Crumpler xMDH bags.


----------



## dudemanppl

When I look at Crumplers on the website, they look HUGE. Then I saw it in store, I thought the 6MDH was like a 4MDH. Really really weird.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


When I look at Crumplers on the website, they look HUGE. Then I saw it in store, I thought the 6MDH was like a 4MDH. Really really weird.


Same for me but with lenses and bodies.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


When I look at Crumplers on the website, they look HUGE. Then I saw it in store, I thought the 6MDH was like a 4MDH. Really really weird.


Yeah, the 7MDH is smaller than the Snooper yet feels bulkier due to the amount of padding.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dudemanppl* 
LOL, you actually changed my gear list.

Nikon D700 + MB-D10 and Eneloops
Nikon D700
Nikon F100 + MB-15 and Eneloops
Canon S90
Logitech G5

Sigma 12-24mm f/4.5-5.6 EX DG HSM
Sigma 24mm f/1.8 EX DG
Nikkor 28-200mm f/3.5-5.6 AF-G
Sigma 50mm f/1.4 EX DG HSM
Nikkor 85mm f/1.8 AF-D
Nikkor 80-200mm f/2.8 AF-S D
Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 APO EX HSM

RODE VideoMic
Nikon Speedlight SB-800 x2
Yong Nuo 460 II x2
40" Shoot Through x2
Crappy $20 Lightstand x2
Crappy Canon Tripod
Manfrotto 776YB Monopod

BlackRapid DR-1 Double Strap
BlackRapid Original
Think Tank Airport Acceleration v2.0
Think Tank Pro Speed Belt
Think Tank Pixel Racing Harness
Think Tank Skin Chimp Cage
Think Tank Chimp Cage
Think Tank Large Lens Drop In x3
Think Tank Lens Changer 15 x3
Think Tank Lens Changer 75 Pop Down
Sandisk Ultra 8GB 30 MB/s CF x5
Sandisk Ultra 16GB 30 MB/s CF
Sandisk Ultra 16GB 15 MB/s SD

This shall do. But I'm shooting for:

Nikon D700 + MB-D10 and Eneloops
Nikon F100 + MB-15 and Eneloops
Canon S90

Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8 AF-S G N
Sigma 24mm f/1.8 EX DG
Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8 AF-S G N
Sigma 50mm f/1.4 EX DG HSM
Nikkor 80-200mm f/2.8 AF-S D
Sigma 85mm f/1.4 EX DG HSM

AlienBee 1600
AlienBee 800
Vagabond Mini Lithium
Foldable Stripbox + Grid
Foldable Large Softbox + Grid
10, 20, 30, 40 degree Grids

I only ever use the monopod to put flashes on. I've never used it for its intended purpose on either the 300 AF-I or the Sigma 120-300. I'm quite strange.

Changed.

To everyone else, check your entries and make sure everything is accurate, been updating a lot lately and I might have missed a few.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

I'm kinda surprised with the amount of people with DSLRs on the first page, we don't get more activity on here.


----------



## dudemanppl

Sorry GT.


----------



## laboitenoire

Hey Gone, I just realized you don't have my Flickr linked from my DSLR listing. And you might as well remove my name from the P&S list... I haven't touched my Fuji since I got my Nikon.


----------



## Boyboyd

Just realised I'm not on the official list.

Nikon D5000
18-55mm
55-200mm
35mm f1.8
24mm manual focus
50mm Nikor Micro manual focus

The 35mm prime is my favourite. It sounds most of it's time on my camera. The 50mm micro is a really good portrait lens because of the dx crop factor though.


----------



## droolsainte

i have a
Nikon D90
stock lense

Hopefully, soon I can have enough money to get a portrait 50mm F1.8.


----------



## laboitenoire

Man, if it weren't for the fact I don't like Canon's ergonomics on the bodies I can afford, I'd strongly consider jumping ship. The lack of affordable, fast primes is really depressing me on Nikon.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


Originally Posted by *laboitenoire* 
Man, if it weren't for the fact I don't like Canon's ergonomics on the bodies I can afford, I'd strongly consider jumping ship. The lack of affordable, fast primes is really depressing me on Nikon.

Are you talking about Rebels or the xxD series? Because I consider the xxD series to be a huge step up from the Rebels in terms of ergonomics, and a used 40D can be had for about $550 used on POTN.


----------



## laboitenoire

That's my recent memory of the Rebels. Been a long time since I held an xxD, so I'd have to refresh myself.


----------



## LemonSlice

One of my better shots, at least I think so. First day with my camera, don't bite me







. Shot with my 55-200mm


Leaf in the Rain by LemonSlice762, on Flickr


----------



## OmegaNemesis28

NY Comic Con and Anime Fest
excuse some of the compression from my site. I like to keep the pictures smaller on the web for bandwidth.


----------



## iandroo888

anyone got a SWA lens for sale?


----------



## laboitenoire

Well, I decided that I didn't like any of the photos I took Monday... I just had no good shots it seemed.

However, I uploaded a bunch from last night. I think I got some nice ones.

Anyway, pictures are from my fraternity's (Sigma Nu) IM soccer game against CWRU's chapter of Delta Upsilon. We had like twelve or fifteen guys show up, whereas they just had the minimum needed to play. Even with subs, we couldn't beat them in regulation and lost in penalty kicks 2-1. Better than our past two 2-0 and 6-0 losses, though...













As always, comments and criticism appreciated.


----------



## theCanadian

The third one could do with a crop and a horizon adjustmetnt. Last one is rather messy because of the net. Would of been great midfield, and a higher shutter speed... matter of fact, they could all do with about a stop faster shutter speed, but I'm guessing you were shooting as fast as you could at around ISO 800.

More noise is better than a blurred picture in my opinion. Only thing that should be blurred is the ball, or the tip of someone's foot. I'd shoot at around 1/500th, higher, or not at all. 1/300 at an absolute minimum.

For example. Very noisy but there is no blurring during a moment of contact, often a violent event.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

^^^^ They look good for what you're working with, and the focus looks decent, but you need some faster glass! The shutter speeds are too slow and the high ISO noise is fairly high (only upon looking at the large versions).


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Look at what I almost ran over today:


IMG_3284 by gonetomorrow00, on Flickr


IMG_3286 by gonetomorrow00, on Flickr

This guy was a juvenile, only about 10 inches to the tip of his tail. I've found snappers three feet long weighing a couple hundred pounds before.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


The third one could do with a crop and a horizon adjustmetnt. Last one is rather messy because of the net. Would of been great midfield, and a higher shutter speed... matter of fact, they could all do with about a stop faster shutter speed, but I'm guessing you were shooting as fast as you could at around ISO 800.

More noise is better than a blurred picture in my opinion. Only thing that should be blurred is the ball, or the tip of someone's foot. I'd shoot at around 1/500th, higher, or not at all. 1/300 at an absolute minimum.


I was shooting wide open, ISO 2000, +5.0 EV, and even with 1/80 I was still underexposing. However, the results were more usable then what I got the other night thanks to the slightly better lighting...

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


^^^^ They look good for what you're working with, and the focus looks decent, but you need some faster glass! The shutter speeds are too slow and the high ISO noise is fairly high (only upon looking at the large versions).


Yeah, much as I love my 70-300 VR, it's waaaaaaay too slow. Unfortunately I can't afford much better than that. About the only fast tele I could really afford (and that would be a stretch and would need me to save up some or blow my entire tax refund check) would be the 105 f/2.8 VR or the Sigma 70-200 f/2.8. Hence why I was lamenting a few posts back that Canon seems to have such a nice selection of fast tele primes that are reasonably priced...


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


I was shooting wide open, ISO 2000, +5.0 EV, and even with 1/80 I was still underexposing. However, the results were more usable then what I got the other night thanks to the slightly better lighting...


Umm, that +5EV won't do anything to the exposure in manual...


----------



## laboitenoire

Really?

I could have sworn it was doing something...

EDIT: Lol, you're right... Learn something new everyday!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


I was shooting wide open, ISO 2000, +5.0 EV, and even with 1/80 I was still underexposing. However, the results were more usable then what I got the other night thanks to the slightly better lighting...

Yeah, much as I love my 70-300 VR, it's waaaaaaay too slow. Unfortunately I can't afford much better than that. About the only fast tele I could really afford (and that would be a stretch and would need me to save up some or blow my entire tax refund check) would be the 105 f/2.8 VR or the Sigma 70-200 f/2.8. Hence why I was lamenting a few posts back that Canon seems to have such a nice selection of fast tele primes that are reasonably priced...


Well, since you mention 3rd party, it's often cheaper than Canon. And while Sigma and Tamron's 70-200/2.8 lenses aren't as good as Canon or Nikon's, they're still pretty nice. You could get the Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 non-OS for a reasonable price, especially after selling your 70-300. Something to think about if you like shooting sports.

And tax refunds were made to blow on camera gear!


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Well, since you mention 3rd party, it's often cheaper than Canon. And while Sigma and Tamron's 70-200/2.8 lenses aren't as good as Canon or Nikon's, they're still pretty nice. You could get the Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 non-OS for a reasonable price, especially after selling your 70-300. Something to think about if you like shooting sports.

And tax refunds were made to blow on camera gear!


I'm not sure if I'd want to sell my 70-300. Sure, it would be kinda silly to have two long tele zooms, but the 70-300 is so versatile, especially seeing as sports is relatively low on my preferred subject. I can comfortably handhold it down to as low as 1/5 at 300 mm thanks to the VR. Plus, it's nice and compact compared to a 70-200 f/2.8.

However, if I can find a good deal, I might go for a 70-200 of some sort, especially if I end up being elected guardian of tradition for the fraternity, in which case I'd be taking a lot more of these kinds of photos...


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Man, if it weren't for the fact I don't like Canon's ergonomics on the bodies I can afford, I'd strongly consider jumping ship. The lack of affordable, fast primes is really depressing me on Nikon.


Lack of fast primes?


----------



## laboitenoire

Let me clarify:

Affordable fast primes that can AF on lower-end bodies.









I mean, most of Canon's primes are USM, whereas most of Nikon's seem to still be screw-drive, and the range of FL seems better on Canon.


----------



## max302

I've been checking stuff out for a while now, and I'm pretty sure I'm getting a D7000. It's the ideal compromise that I wanted between a D300S and a D90. Let's see what kind of employee discount I'll be getting.

Also, I've contemplated getting a Bronica SQ system to mess around with MF a bit. I never shot more than a test roll with my Pentax 645Nii, I sold that sucker way too fast.









Anybody have something laying around?


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Yeah, much as I love my 70-300 VR, it's *waaaaaaay too slow*. Unfortunately I can't afford much better than that. About the only fast tele I could really afford (and that would be a stretch and would need me to save up some or blow my entire tax refund check) would be the 105 f/2.8 VR or the Sigma 70-200 f/2.8. Hence why I was lamenting a few posts back that Canon seems to have such a nice selection of fast tele primes that are reasonably priced...


You are a college student shooting an intramural soccer game *at night* and still achieving acceptable/near acceptable results. Realistically, you have to be thankful for what you were able to walk away with. Blowing $700+ dollars on a lens for some 'college moments' that you didn't even play in (or did you?) is not practical. Unless you're a photography major/making money with it otherwise and plan to use the lens for a long time, I would work with what you have.

I have a 75-300mm lens with the same specs as you. Unfortunately, even with all the money in the world, my chances of finding a faster lens of this type is slim to none. However, I don't think that it's 'too slow'. Just accept that at the longer focal lengths of that lens, it's daylight glass.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Well, I decided that I didn't like any of the photos I took Monday... I just had no good shots it seemed.

However, I uploaded a bunch from last night. I think I got some nice ones.

Anyway, pictures are from my fraternity's (Sigma Nu) IM soccer game against CWRU's chapter of Delta Upsilon. We had like twelve or fifteen guys show up, whereas they just had the minimum needed to play. Even with subs, we couldn't beat them in regulation and lost in penalty kicks 2-1. Better than our past two 2-0 and 6-0 losses, though...

[Photos]

As always, comments and criticism appreciated.


You're doing well with what you have. But like it has been said, is it worth it upgrading to that 70-200mm VR? For me, the answer was yes









If you want cheap, work with the Nikon brand to its strength, try some AI-S glass. Manual focus yes, but you'll get better very quickly. I'd suggest you find a copy of an AI-S 180mm 2.8 - nice glass and decent focusing ring. There are also many AI or AI-S 300mm f4.5 out there which would work quite well and would work better with a monopod. I'd think 180mm is on the short end for a soccer match but ah well, there are compromises everywhere for a night match.


----------



## theCanadian

Sports + Manual Focus is all about anticipation. Hell of a lot more fun than just bursting the shutter and throwing away the trash. Well, I'd imagine anyway. I can't exactly speak from experience now can I?









Also:









Quote:



What looks like someone pasted the business end of a bazooka onto a handheld camera is an actual lens from manufacturer Sigma. For the low price of $29,000, wedding photographers no longer have to actually be at the wedding, and paparazzo can steal shots of celebrity vaginas from 30 blocks away.
While the guy in the above picture jokingly posed with the camera sans tripod, we have to think that anyone who actually owns this thing will mostly be pointing it down at their lap, finally able to offer photographic evidence of the tiny equipment they're clearly compensating for.

Read more: http://www.cracked.com/article_17665...#ixzz12PsNlg2l


I know there's even bigger glass out there, but this is too funny.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Well, since you mention 3rd party, it's often cheaper than Canon. And while Sigma and Tamron's 70-200/2.8 lenses aren't as good as Canon or Nikon's, they're still pretty nice. You could get the Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 non-OS for a reasonable price, especially after selling your 70-300. Something to think about if you like shooting sports.

And tax refunds were made to blow on camera gear!


the tamron and sigma 70-200 are really nice. the tamron i used on a canon 7d was razer sharp but had a noisy AF and with the lack of IS was hard to hand hold at 1/60. i actually liked the tamron over the 70-200/2.8 IS (mk1) due to the much shorter MFD.

and yes tax returns are made to be spent on cameras


----------



## Boyboyd

I've got a day off today. Going out to see if I can take any decent macro shots. It's not quite autumn yet over here.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


You are a college student shooting an intramural soccer game *at night* and still achieving acceptable/near acceptable results. Realistically, you have to be thankful for what you were able to walk away with. Blowing $700+ dollars on a lens for some 'college moments' that you didn't even play in (or did you?) is not practical. Unless you're a photography major/making money with it otherwise and plan to use the lens for a long time, I would work with what you have.

I have a 75-300mm lens with the same specs as you. Unfortunately, even with all the money in the world, my chances of finding a faster lens of this type is slim to none. However, I don't think that it's 'too slow'. Just accept that at the longer focal lengths of that lens, it's daylight glass.



Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


You're doing well with what you have. But like it has been said, is it worth it upgrading to that 70-200mm VR? For me, the answer was yes









If you want cheap, work with the Nikon brand to its strength, try some AI-S glass. Manual focus yes, but you'll get better very quickly. I'd suggest you find a copy of an AI-S 180mm 2.8 - nice glass and decent focusing ring. There are also many AI or AI-S 300mm f4.5 out there which would work quite well and would work better with a monopod. I'd think 180mm is on the short end for a soccer match but ah well, there are compromises everywhere for a night match.


You guys do have a point about practicality, which does cause part of me to want to say to hell with it and just continue having fun with what I've got.

On another note, I plan to finally get some shooting in this weekend. Going to Pittsburgh for fall break!


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


Originally Posted by *theCanadian* 
Also:









I know there's even bigger glass out there, but this is too funny.

500mm is a lot shorter than you would think.


----------



## Marin

Next to a 7MDH (Snooper is Medium).



















(Canon 1v w/ Olympus 21mm f/3.5, 135mm f/2L and a 24-70mm f/2.8L. What can't be seen in the pocket below the 135mm is the Zeiss 85mm f/1.4 and a Sekonic L-758DR)









I haven't messed around with configuring the insert yet. It also came with one extra blue divider, which isn't in the pic. But as it can be seen there is a lot of room the spare, just the dividers need to be repositioned to make better use of it.










15" MBP.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Pics

That bag is so sexy... I love the color scheme on it!


----------



## Boyboyd

Has anyone heard anything about the Sigma SD1?

It's a 46Mp camera with an APS-C sensor. I'm not sure I understand this.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Boyboyd* 
Has anyone heard anything about the Sigma SD1?

It's a 46Mp camera with an APS-C sensor. I'm not sure I understand this.

It uses a Foveon sensor which has three layers, one for each color. So it's really around 15mp's for resolution.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Boyboyd* 
Has anyone heard anything about the Sigma SD1?

It's a 46Mp camera with an APS-C sensor. I'm not sure I understand this.

It's actually 3 layers of pixels stacked vertically, with each layer containing 15 MP (and change), for a total of 46 MP, although the actual images produced are 15 MP. Confusing, but a unique approach with supposedly unrivalled color reproduction.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foveon_X3_sensor

EDIT: Ninja'd by marin!


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
It's actually 3 layers of pixels stacked vertically, with each layer containing 15 MP (and change), for a total of 46 MP, although the actual images produced are 15 MP. Confusing, but a unique approach with supposedly unrivalled color reproduction.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foveon_X3_sensor

EDIT: Ninja'd by marin!

I've heard that on average, film has twice the dynamic range as a DSLR. I wonder how this new sensor and film compare. Does the Foveon X3 max out the file format? Doesn't seem to make much sense to shoot jpg with that camera.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *theCanadian* 
I've heard that on average, film has twice the dynamic range as a DSLR. I wonder how this new sensor and film compare. Does the Foveon X3 max out the file format? Doesn't seem to make much sense to shoot jpg with that camera.

Well, judging from the descriptions, the main benefit of the Foveon X3 is color accuracy and sharpness per pixel, but not necessarily an increase in dynamic range, since the Foveon sensor is APS-C sized so the photosites are no bigger than any other (each layer of the Foveon X3 is dedicated to one of the RGB channels). Larger photosites means larger dynamic range for digital sensors.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
It uses a Foveon sensor which has three layers, one for each color. So it's really around 15mp's for resolution.

Interesting. Never knew that before and the magazine i read it in didn't mention anything like that. Thanks.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


I've heard that on average, film has twice the dynamic range as a DSLR. I wonder how this new sensor and film compare. Does the Foveon X3 max out the file format? Doesn't seem to make much sense to shoot jpg with that camera.


the foveon x3 is a mixed blessing. i heard the color is reproduction is "sharp and crisp" but it has a high noise problem.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


the foveon x3 is a mixed blessing. i heard the color is reproduction is "sharp and crisp" but it has a high noise problem.


I read about that as well, could hurt any chance of success it might have, but the reviews will tell just how bad it is.


----------



## iandroo888

i need a new bag =3 what can fit 2 flashes, body + lens, addition lens.. and maybe room for another lens too and accessories

crumpler ID strap and sb-800 arrived today. filled most of bag already =3


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


i need a new bag =3 what can fit 2 flashes, body + lens, addition lens.. and maybe room for another lens too and accessories

crumpler ID strap and sb-800 arrived today. filled most of bag already =3


I thought the idea of a bag was to bring what you need with you.

If you do need to have that much gear with you, I suggest that you try the Lowepro Bag Finder for a start.


----------



## iandroo888

well the setup would be d5000 + 18-105, 12-24, sb 600, sb 800... batteries.. charges.. cables... tripod can be handheld.

and just wanted an extra "space" for an additional lens or flash if i need in the future..


----------



## Danylu

http://bagfinder1.lowepro.com/lp/choose-profile

I would help, but the search is very specific. I don't know what additional lens you would be talking about. Note that if you really need to, you could push the bag .

For example, the Lowepro Classified 160AW is supposed to fit 1 D3 sized body and 2 70-200 lenses.

I've managed to shove in it; an iPad, a D3 with 24-70 and a D60 with 70-300 VR









---------------------------------

Has anyone here managed to wash their camera bag? I bought a 2nd hand bag and it could do with a wash. I'm thinking handwash + soapy warm water should solve the problem. I'm slightly concerned about killing the bag if I machine clean it.


----------



## Hamburglar

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


i need a new bag =3 what can fit 2 flashes, body + lens, addition lens.. and maybe room for another lens too and accessories

crumpler ID strap and sb-800 arrived today. filled most of bag already =3


Ape Case ACPro1800









..if you don't mind a backpack style bag that is


----------



## theCanadian

... Why is noise bad? You may see noise, yeah, but unless it's distracting or detracts from the photo in some way, who cares? It takes a lot of noise to damage a photo.

Just saying...


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


... Why is noise bad? You may see noise, yeah, but unless it's distracting or detracts from the photo in some way, who cares? It takes a lot of noise to damage a photo.

Just saying...


IMO, I think it depends on the application. Now that I'm trying to do portraits, noise is definitely a much bigger concern and irritation than it was with urban landscape photography.


----------



## Marin

Unless it's film grain with B&W film, it looks ugly IMO.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


... Why is noise bad? You may see noise, yeah, but unless it's distracting or detracts from the photo in some way, who cares? It takes a lot of noise to damage a photo.

Just saying...


It only looks good with b/w, looks terrible in color images IMO.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


i need a new bag =3 what can fit 2 flashes, body + lens, addition lens.. and maybe room for another lens too and accessories

crumpler ID strap and sb-800 arrived today. filled most of bag already =3


The Slingshot 100AW is fairly small. I think my 200AW is a tad small and it would be hard pressed to fit your gear list, but it probably would. A Crumpler 7MDH would fit everything as well.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


I thought the idea of a bag was to bring what you need with you.

If you do need to have that much gear with you, I suggest that you try the Lowepro Bag Finder for a start.


The idea of a bag is to transport and protect, not just to be minimalistic. Different situations require different outfits for some. I have a bag for just the camera and one lens all the way up to one that holds everything. If I'm backpacking, I don't need everything, but for a wedding, I would need more.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


*The idea of a bag is to transport and protect*, not just to be minimalistic. Different situations require different outfits for some. I have a bag for just the camera and one lens all the way up to one that holds everything. If I'm backpacking, I don't need everything, but for a wedding, I would need more.


Which was what I said









Surprisingly enough, I also have a bag for one lens on body to one that holds many things.

It was just from the way he said it, it sounded like he wanted to throw everything into a bag, which I used to want to do as well, until I realised it was impractical for me. YMMV


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Which was what I said









Surprisingly enough, I also have a bag for one lens on body to one that holds many things.

It was just from the way he said it, it sounded like he wanted to throw everything into a bag, which I used to want to do as well, until I realised it was impractical for me. YMMV


It depends on the situation. If I'm just going for a quick and simple shoot, I just bring my smaller bag with my body, grip, and lens. If I'm going on a vacation, I need my bigger bag to carry everything.


----------



## dudemanppl

Tee hee. I boxed up everything and its one huge ass stack. 
PROTIP: Learn strobes, you won't have to screw around with ISOs above 400 much after that for portraits and whatnot. But please don't use them for everything, like those idiots in stadiums that can't seem to figure out their flashes won't affect exposure 100 meters away.


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


IMO, I think it depends on the application. Now that I'm trying to do portraits, noise is definitely a much bigger concern and irritation than it was with urban landscape photography.


To each his own. A super sharp picture usually isn't the most flattering when it come to portraits. In my opinion.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


I read about that as well, could hurt any chance of success it might have, but the reviews will tell just how bad it is.


i havent look at any reviews, but when actual sigma users go to sony looking for better noise.....i could only imagine how bad noise is









Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


... Why is noise bad? You may see noise, yeah, but unless it's distracting or detracts from the photo in some way, who cares? It takes a lot of noise to damage a photo.

Just saying...


theres a difference between noise on film and noise on digital.


----------



## iandroo888

any bag thats like the 7 Million Dollar Home by Crumpler for cheaper ?? and why doesnt amazon have the black 7 Million Dollar Home rawr !

is cheapest 141.99 @ B&H?


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


theres a difference between noise on film and noise on digital.


I'm intrigued, please explain.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


I'm intrigued, please explain.


Noise looks better in black and white film than it does in colour digital photos. Of course, this is all subjective.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


I'm intrigued, please explain.


well simply put, noise on digital are pixels of different colors vs larger grain on the film.

so if i say take a picture of a blue car, on film there might just be larger film grains but those grains keep the same color. on digital the blue car will also have specks of red or green or magenta......

thats why one of the tricks for high noise digital is to convert to BW then add more noise and play it off as being artistic.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


any bag thats like the 7 Million Dollar Home by Crumpler for cheaper ?? and why doesnt amazon have the black 7 Million Dollar Home rawr !

is cheapest 141.99 @ B&H?


That sounds about right, but I can tell you that there definitely are plenty of used Crumpler bags on the used market:

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...rchid=21540437

(you don't need to be a Canon shooter to buy at this site!)


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
That sounds about right, but I can tell you that there definitely are plenty of used Crumpler bags on the used market:

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...rchid=21540437

(you don't need to be a Canon shooter to buy at this site!)

too bad POTN doesnt have a filter function like FM or in buy/sell thread search

if anyone sees a 7MDH black/gunmetal [newer version?? i think theres 2 versions??] for sale some where, tell me plz =D


----------



## OmegaNemesis28

setup my photography gallery
http://lssclan.urldownload.com/anth/gallery/

excuse alot of the poor shots, I don't sort through the really good ones and the bad ones too often.


----------



## LemonSlice

DSC_0530 by LemonSlice762, on Flickr


DSC_0528 by LemonSlice762, on Flickr

Camera newbie would like some criticism







. D90 w/ 18-105mm


----------



## iandroo888

1st picture is nice.

2nd one... needs to be cropped imo. the water part takes up 1/2 the picture.. maybe crop 2/3 or 1/2 of it out xD


----------



## LemonSlice

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
1st picture is nice.

2nd one... needs to be cropped imo. the water part takes up 1/2 the picture.. maybe crop 2/3 or 1/2 of it out xD

Yea, I figured it looked a little empty. Cropping out most of the water would make almost make a panoramic-like view for a wallpaper or some sort







.


----------



## Marin

Just another day after class.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


Originally Posted by *LemonSlice* 
Yea, I figured it looked a little empty. Cropping out most of the water would make almost make a panoramic-like view for a wallpaper or some sort







.

i like it panoramic .. gives full attention to the scene of desire (im pretty sure there is another way of saying that but i cant think of it) ... if cropped, should look pretty cool. bridges on each side.. looks nice


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Just another day after class.










Why did that make me lose the game.


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dudemanppl* 
Why did that make me lose the game.

DAMN YOU. I was doing so well. Like 3 months.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


DAMN YOU. I was doing so well. Like 3 months.


Just Roofie yourself and you'll forget this whole thing


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


DAMN YOU. I was doing so well. Like 3 months.


dot dot dot...... *sigh*


----------



## Lu(ky

Hello all first post with new camera... Just bought a Canon 5D Mark II with a 100mm f/2.8L IS USM Macro Lens.

I have a couple question below if some of you could help.. Thanks..

1. What is is the best MODE DIAL to use when shooting Micro shots? (With or without tripod)
2. Looking for new Tripod something versatile for Landscape, Micro, and some HD Video shooting 720/1080P. (I like Manfrotto but open to anything that has carbon fiber) 
3. Next lens I plan on buying is the new Canon 70-200mm 2.8F IS II (I think these new version II lenses from Canon really bring out these Full Frame cameras)
I was thinking of going this route with new lens..
16-35mm f2.8 II, 50mm & 85mm (canon or Zeiss going to rent to see what I like) Canon 100-400mm? What would you recomend?
Also here is my first test shot of my new Micro 100mm 2.8F IS (hand held IS on no flash)

Thanks for your help...


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Lu(ky*


Hello all first post with new camera... Just bought a Canon 5D Mark II with a 100mm f/2.8L IS USM Macro Lens.

I have a couple question below if some of you could help.. Thanks..

1. What is is the best MODE DIAL to use when shooting Micro shots? (With or without tripod)
2. Looking for new Tripod something versatile for Landscape, Micro, and some HD Video shooting 720/1080P. (I like Manfrotto but open to anything that has carbon fiber) 
3. Next lens I plan on buying is the new Canon 70-200mm 2.8F IS II (I think these new version II lenses from Canon really bring out these Full Frame cameras)
I was thinking of going this route with new lens..
16-35mm f2.8 II, 50mm & 85mm (canon or Zeiss going to rent to see what I like) Canon 100-400mm? What would you recomend?
Also here is my first test shot of my new Micro 100mm 2.8F IS (hand held IS on no flash)

Thanks for your help...


1. Is this your first DSLR? For macro shots, it's like other shots, just at a much closer distance. Support is often a must for macros, unless there's plenty of light (and IS might help). I like to use a monopod often for macro.

As for the mode dial, I use either M or Av typically for macros with the center AF point selected (or one of the others). Usually narrower apertures. Your fly shot looks blurry or OOF. EXIF?

2. Manfrotto, Slik, Gitzo, Benro are all good tripod brands. Consider the weight of the tripod and how mobile you will be. For me, I hike a lot with my gear, so I have a very light tripod (3 lbs.). The Manfrotto 190 and 055 series are good places to start. You'll also want to look into what kind of head you prefer.

3. Before you start dropping a lot of cash on L lenses, you need to spend some time with your camera and figure out what you like to shoot, and at what focal lengths. If you wanted to buy any lens in the mean time, go for standard zoom, like the 24-105 f/4L or 24-70 f/2.8L. Renting lenses is a great idea to see if it's something you'll use.


----------



## mz-n10

1) most people shoot macros on M mode or AV so they can control the DOF.

2) Gitzo, Benro, Manfrotto and Slik are all good brands to start with. but even with CF you have to consider how much weight you want to carry, if you like to go on hikes like Gone 3lbs (with head) would be an ideal setup. but theres no free lunch in the world. heavier tripods are most stable. right now i am using a CF (benro c269 or soemthing) which weighs about 3lbs without head, its stable enough for a 5d2 + 70-200L.

3) 70-200L is definably one of the best lenses for canon. but its heavy and kind of awkward to shoot (everyone stares at you since its big and white). 24-70 or 24-105 as Gone said might be better.

100-400L is a very very dated lens, and personally i cant stand the pump zoom. but its hte only canon in that range so you are stuck between a rock and a hard place(unless you want sigma or tamron)

Zeiss primes on canon do not AF so be aware of that when you rent.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Well, managed to find a sweet deal on a Nikon AI-S 28mm f/2.8 Series E lens and EOS adapter. A bit older and I need to manually adjust aperture and focus on the lens, but for the price I don't think I could have passed this up. In short, very excited


----------



## iandroo888

yay all equip is here ! now waiting for accessories before i start burning thru non-rechargeable batteries xDDD

B+W filters and batteries/diffuser should deliver today =]

*edit*

side question...

if like every once in a while, i find 1 or 2 pictures of sets have a partially corrupted picture (funny i can tell the corrupted part.. it was taken somewhere else at one point in time..)

does that mean the card is getting "used" =3 need to be replaced ?


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Just another day after class.











Art students! Run!


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

My Crumpler The Industry Disgrace just came in today! So far, I am loving it! Absolutely better than my stock neckstrap.

Now I'm just wondering whether or not I should get a handstrap for my battery grip... I'd love it for portrait shots, but of course, if I do get a handstrap I can never put my camera upright.

On a related note, does anyone know if its possible to attach a handgrip to the bottom of my battery grip?


----------



## laboitenoire

Just got back from a trip to Pittsburgh... The best of ~550 pictures will be online sometime tomorrow, most likely.


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Just got back from a trip to Pittsburgh... The best of ~550 pictures will be online sometime tomorrow, most likely.


Looking forward my man.


----------



## iandroo888

dang.. def need a new bag. slingshot 100AW isnt gonna cut it now =[ d5k + 12-24 w/ crumpler industry disgrace... and sb800 in main compartment.. sb600 in the top smaller compartment..

what are some brands i can look into other than lowepro and crumpler?


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


dang.. def need a new bag. slingshot 100AW isnt gonna cut it now =[ d5k + 12-24 w/ crumpler industry disgrace... and sb800 in main compartment.. sb600 in the top smaller compartment..

what are some brands i can look into other than lowepro and crumpler?


I've been eyeing that Timbuk2 messenger bag that Marin brought up a while back... I'm pretty sure I'll be getting that as my next bag (also because it can be used as a normal messenger bag and I <3 messenger bags).

Other than that, I'm using that one $40 Canon backpack to lug all my gear. It's a bit big and a bit bulky, but I currently have two backpacks, and the bigger Canon is to store all my gear whereas a smaller backpack is used to bring whatever gear I need to a shoot. Maybe a similar arrangement with yourself?


----------



## iandroo888

plannin on getting a new bag... and sellin the slingshot 100aw to a friend who wants a bigger bag.

that timbuk2 bag is nice but kinda pricey. with that price, could just get a 7mdh Lol

*edit*

lol currently i threw all the equip into the bag and have body and 12-24 out. xD


----------



## Marin

Except the 7MDH is smaller.


----------



## iandroo888

 how much more can u carry in the timbuk2 vs the 7mdh? just so i can have a general idea of interior space compared to the 7mdh


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Except the 7MDH is smaller.





















Trying to decide if I want that or a great bag from J.Crew... unfortunately I can only afford one. Blah, and Timbuk2 still doesn't have the green/gunmetal color up. Not sure if it's my computer or if they're sold out









Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


 how much more can u carry in the timbuk2 vs the 7mdh? just so i can have a general idea of interior space compared to the 7mdh


*Small*









*Medium*


----------



## Marin

Here's an interior comparison.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Here's an interior comparison.











Wait, so that's the small bag then?


----------



## Marin

Medium.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

After using my Industry Disgrace a bit more, I am in love with it. It's definitely much more comfortable around the neck than my old strap, and for once the gripped 50D with 28-135mm doesn't feel so heavy. Not only that, but the strap makes a great shoulder sling. Thanks for the suggestion, GoneTomorrow


----------



## Marin

Old Timbuk2 bag.










Timbuk2 Snooper.



















And the gear that's in it.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


plannin on getting a new bag... and sellin the slingshot 100aw to a friend who wants a bigger bag.

that timbuk2 bag is nice but kinda pricey. with that price, could just get a 7mdh Lol

*edit*

lol currently i threw all the equip into the bag and have body and 12-24 out. xD


you might also want to consider a backpack instead of a messenger. when i fully load my messenger it gets rather heavy, its fine for short periods but it gets uncomfortable in a hour or two.

the timbuk2 looks like a awesome bag btw....i like the laptop slot, but i have a feeling the bag gets heavy fast with a laptop.


----------



## Boyboyd

I reallly like the look of that bag. But I don't think I could deal with a shoulder bag. I'd prefer a back pack.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


dang.. def need a new bag. slingshot 100AW isnt gonna cut it now =[ d5k + 12-24 w/ crumpler industry disgrace... and sb800 in main compartment.. sb600 in the top smaller compartment..

what are some brands i can look into other than lowepro and crumpler?


Domke, Tamrac, ThinkTank, Kata, etc.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


After using my Industry Disgrace a bit more, I am in love with it. It's definitely much more comfortable around the neck than my old strap, and for once the gripped 50D with 28-135mm doesn't feel so heavy. Not only that, but the strap makes a great shoulder sling. Thanks for the suggestion, GoneTomorrow










Welcome!


----------



## Hamburglar

Hey guys quick question. I just got my 24-70 L about a week and a half ago, it didn't dawn on me until yesterday that I didn't get a warranty card with it. Is that a big deal or not? I called B+H and they said it wasn't but the guy I talked to didn't sound too confident of his answer.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Hamburglar*


Hey guys quick question. I just got my 24-70 L about a week and a half ago, it didn't dawn on me until yesterday that I didn't get a warranty card with it. Is that a big deal or not? I called B+H and they said it wasn't but the guy I talked to didn't sound too confident of his answer.


Unless I'm mistaken, without the warranty card, you can't get Canon's warranty service on the camera if something were to happen.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*

Domke, Tamrac, ThinkTank, Kata, etc.


anyone use backpack style they'd like to recommend?

yeah atm i dont think messenger style was a really good idea after all.. messenger is pretty much a larger version of my back.. moves around if u like tilt or bend .. ><


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


anyone use backpack style they'd like to recommend?

yeah atm i dont think messenger style was a really good idea after all.. messenger is pretty much a larger version of my back.. moves around if u like tilt or bend .. ><


is that all the gear you have/plan to carry with you? if so then the lowepro fastpack250/350 is a nice bag to carry. i have the fastpack350 and it is a bit small for 2-3 large fullframe 2.8 zooms but with aps-c lenses it should be ok. it is also a very comfortable bag to carry, i acutally did halfdome with this bag on my back and after 16hr hike it was still relatively comfortable. but there is 1 problem with this bag, theres no place to put your tripod/monopod.

also take a look at the kata dr465/467, i had a dr465 when i was using my a200 and it fit my 70-210/4, 18-80, 50/1.4 and a flash fine. this bag is also well built and if memory serves me correctly very comfortable.


----------



## theCanadian

Quote: 
   Originally Posted by *iandroo888*   anyone use backpack style they'd like to recommend?

yeah atm i dont think messenger style was a really good idea after all.. messenger is pretty much a larger version of my back.. moves around if u like tilt or bend .. ><  
I like my slingshot (cross-body strapped backpack) But then again, the only other thing I've used is a bag like this.










By the way. I use the Lowpro Slingshot 200AW.

Fits:
50mm prime
28mm prime
200mm prime
75-300mm zoom
35-105mm zoom
1 flash
1 body
Plus it has *plenty* of pockets for everything else. Filters, memory cards, sync cables, etc. Also has these things on the side that you can use for accessories. I slip a tripod in there. I can also sneek a teleconverter inside if I want.

To carry all that, I have to have a longer FL on the body, unless I know I don't need something, which is usually the case so it's a non-issue. And most of the time, if I need everything, I'm going to have time to set up and swap lenses so it doesn't matter anyway.

  This one is worth looking at, just for the price alone. A Slingshot 100 knock off. Doesn't have the All Weather cover, but if you don't need it... Also, whoever took those pictures for amazon is a moron. Who would pack that bag like that?

Edit: Just realized you were selling the 100AW... nevermind.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Hamburglar* 
Hey guys quick question. I just got my 24-70 L about a week and a half ago, it didn't dawn on me until yesterday that I didn't get a warranty card with it. Is that a big deal or not? I called B+H and they said it wasn't but the guy I talked to didn't sound too confident of his answer.

It's not necessary for warranty service. Canon will ask for either the card OR receipt of purchase.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
anyone use backpack style they'd like to recommend?

yeah atm i dont think messenger style was a really good idea after all.. messenger is pretty much a larger version of my back.. moves around if u like tilt or bend .. ><

Well, if you like the Slingshot, but need more room, look into the 200AW and 300AW. Otherwise, check out LowePro Fastpack series.


----------



## iandroo888

will look into fastpack.. wont get another slingshot. XDD worse case scenario, i keep for travel.

*edit* hmm the fastpacks look like the backpack verson of the slingshots... 350 looks decent.. wonder how this bag looks IRL

how much room is left after body + lens, lens, and 2 flashes would u think in the 350?

cousin got a kata brand bag. didnt like the section design


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Whoo! I just secured a deal for an EF 85mm f/1.8! The second to last lens I've been wanting. Now last on the list is a 50mm f/1.4, but that can wait









And yes, I know, I know, I should be getting L-lenses. Unfortunately, they're out of my reach for a very long time









Sig updated to reflect all my new gear! GoneTomorrow, if you can be so kind...


----------



## Marin

Darn it. Both of the 24mm TS-E's were checked out at school. Oh well, have it reserved for Monday.


----------



## laboitenoire

Pittsburgh photos here.

Been fooling around with panoramas from the trip. Got two that turned out pretty much perfectly, and a third that has only one noticeable error (other than variances in exposure because the sun changed...







).

Biggest of the three is 52 megapixels in resolution...


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


is that all the gear you have/plan to carry with you? if so then the lowepro fastpack250/350 is a nice bag to carry. i have the fastpack350 and it is a bit small for 2-3 large fullframe 2.8 zooms but with aps-c lenses it should be ok. it is also a very comfortable bag to carry, i acutally did halfdome with this bag on my back and after 16hr hike it was still relatively comfortable. but there is 1 problem with this bag, theres no place to put your tripod/monopod.

also take a look at the kata dr465/467, i had a dr465 when i was using my a200 and it fit my 70-210/4, 18-80, 50/1.4 and a flash fine. this bag is also well built and if memory serves me correctly very comfortable.


I have the Fastpack 350, only problem is that it can only take a 70-200 not mounted on a camera. But other than that, it's awesome.


----------



## Unknownm

I figured I ask you guys, I'm interested in lens now but I have to understand them first..

Q:

I understand that if the aperture number is smaller the more brighter which means faster shutter speed. However can someone explain how the DOF works with aperture?

Also my camera has 18-55mm, what's this mean. If I were to get something lower what would be the effect, or something higher what would be the effect

Looking into getting a lens that will zoom up the middle but leave the sides of the picture kinda the same. What's this lens called and will it fit D5000?

Is bigger lens only for zooming or is there more to it?

Anything else I should know about lens


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Unknownm*


I figured I ask you guys, I'm interested in lens now but I have to understand them first..

Q:

I understand that if the aperture number is smaller the more brighter which means faster shutter speed. However can someone explain how the DOF works with aperture?

*The larger the aperture (the lower the f-number) then the more shallow the DOF will be. Only a specific distance will be in focus which works well for marco photography and portraits, but less so for other things.*

Also my camera has 18-55mm, what's this mean. If I were to get something lower what would be the effect, or something higher what would be the effect

*A lower number is effectively a wider lens, so you would get a wider field of view. and a larger number means the image is more magnified.*

Looking into getting a lens that will zoom up the middle but leave the sides of the picture kinda the same. What's this lens called and will it fit D5000?

Is bigger lens only for zooming or is there more to it?

*If you mean actual size, the size of the lens has nothing to do with the focal point. You can get massive 14mm-24mm lenses, and tiny 300mm mirror lenses.*


Hope that answered a few questions.


----------



## Unknownm

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*


Hope that answered a few questions.



Quote:



The larger the aperture (the lower the f-number) then the more shallow the DOF will be. Only a specific distance will be in focus which works well for marco photography and portraits, but less so for other things.


so if you use manual focus and focus on a object, you can see when you turn the lens in manual mode where the focus line is. Bigger Aperture = smaller focus line but adds more blurriness to everything around it.

Quote:



A lower number is effectively a wider lens, so you would get a wider field of view. and a larger number means the image is more magnified.


lower mm = room - outside shots. More closer shots = higher mm. Is that what you mean?

Quote:



If you mean actual size, the size of the lens has nothing to do with the focal point. You can get massive 14mm-24mm lenses, and tiny 300mm mirror lenses.


I see lens that are huge, some that are long. I was just wondering if long lens are just more for zoom.


----------



## Boyboyd

Usually a longer lens will have more zoom, yeah.

Quote:



lower mm = room - outside shots. More closer shots = higher mm. Is that what you mean?


Yep, exactly that.

Quote:



so if you use manual focus and focus on a object, you can see when you turn the lens in manual mode where the focus line is. Bigger Aperture = smaller focus line but adds more blurriness to everything around it.


and that too.

Large Aperture (small f-number)

[url=http://i136.photobucket.com/albums/q190/Bonishphoto/IMG_3518copy.jpg]Small Aperture (larger f-number).

It's also worth pointing out that different lenses are different qualities at each aperture. For instance, some older lenses are less sharp at f2.8 than they are at f5.6. Usually that's not a problem anymore though.


----------



## Unknownm

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*


Usually a longer lens will have more zoom, yeah.

Yep, exactly that.

and that too.

Large Aperture (small f-number)

[url=http://i136.photobucket.com/albums/q190/Bonishphoto/IMG_3518copy.jpg]Small Aperture (larger f-number).

It's also worth pointing out that different lenses are different qualities at each aperture. For instance, some older lenses are less sharp at f2.8 than they are at f5.6. Usually that's not a problem anymore though.






Oh I see, so Large Aperture = less focus on everything around the focused part and at the same time the focused part gets smaller depending on how big the aperture is?


----------



## Boyboyd

Yep. Exactly.


----------



## Unknownm

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*


Yep. Exactly.


How about any camera tricks (any really). One I like doing is adding 4second shutter speed + flash to give the background look and a light trail.










Is there any other type of neat tricks I can do besides slow shutter speeds?


----------



## LemonSlice

Just got an SB-600 speedlight, so if you wouldn't mind adding that







.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Unknownm*


How about any camera tricks (any really). One I like doing is adding 4second shutter speed + flash to give the background look and a light trail.










Is there any other type of neat tricks I can do besides slow shutter speeds?


There's light painting, zoom blur, and long exposure. You can get pretty creative with those.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Unknownm*


I see lens that are huge, some that are long. I was just wondering if long lens are just more for zoom.


"zoom" is a bad word to use for it. We usually use that term to describe the minimum and maximum focal lengths of a lens. Zoom means it can change focal lengths. Fixed, or prime means that it can not.

For example, the 80-400mm Nikon is a zoom lens, and it is fairly small. The Nikon 400mm f/2.8 is a prime lens, and is anything but small.

80-400mm extended with hood:









400mm with hoods:









We call short focal lengths wide angle, medium ones normal, and long focal lengths telephoto.


----------



## theCanadian

This is for Unknownm:


You Tube





The whole series is really easy to follow.


----------



## Marin

Here's my Timbuk2 Snooper Messenger (medium) setup.










5DMKII + 24-70mm f/2.8L, 1v + 50mm f/1.2L (Olympus 21mm f/3.5 and Contax Zeiss 85mm f/1.4 are under the 1V), 135mm f/2L and a Sekonic L-758DR.


----------



## Unknownm

REP+ to helpers up top

Here is my first image from Nikon D5000. I took it because it reminds me of HDR a bit!










http://www.flickr.com/photos/audiotranceable/


----------



## xlastshotx

Just got a new Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 EX DC OS HSM, Im loving the VR, very noticeable. And the quality is awesome.

So now I need an update in the op please:

*xLastShotx* - Canon EOS 50D
Zeikos ZE-CBG50 Battery Grip 
Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II
Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 EX DC OS HSM


----------



## 88EVGAFTW

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*












datass


----------



## LemonSlice

I was bored









DSC_0503 by LemonSlice762, on Flickr


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *88EVGAFTW*


datass


Your avatar completes that.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:



Originally Posted by *xlastshotx*


Just got a new Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 EX DC OS HSM, Im loving the VR, very noticeable. And the quality is awesome.

So now I need an update in the op please:

*xLastShotx* - Canon EOS 50D
Zeikos ZE-CBG50 Battery Grip 
Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II
Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 EX DC OS HSM


You wanna post shots of it? I'm interested in how the lens performs...


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

USPS has lost the 28mm I ordered. It showed up as "delivered" today but no package was in my mailbox nor was there a slip of any kind. Talking to the seller about this but man this sucks.


----------



## riko99

Quote:



Originally Posted by *xlastshotx*


Just got a new Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 EX DC OS HSM, Im loving the VR, very noticeable. And the quality is awesome.

So now I need an update in the op please:

*xLastShotx* - Canon EOS 50D
Zeikos ZE-CBG50 Battery Grip 
Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II
Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 EX DC OS HSM


See I'm glad I went with the Non VC Tamron in the end. So far it has been one of my sharpest lenses and on top of that being able to shoot at about 1/15" at f2.8 for me just don't need the VC or OS or VR at this wide angle... but that's me...


----------



## iandroo888

im sad. i ordered a B+W 77mm cir-pol when i ordered the UV.. only the UV came. on the invoice, the cir-pol was highlighted?? i tried emailing 2filter. they havent replied me. been like 4 days.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *riko99* 
See I'm glad I went with the Non VC Tamron in the end. So far it has been one of my sharpest lenses and on top of that being able to shoot at about 1/15" at f2.8 for me just don't need the VC or OS or VR at this wide angle... but that's me...

Well, from the reviews I've read of the VC version, it supposedly has worse IQ than the non-VC.


----------



## mortimersnerd

Which white balance do you guys like better? Still have some touch ups to do on the image.

Original:









Modified white balance:


----------



## LemonSlice

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mortimersnerd* 
Which white balance do you guys like better? Still have some touch ups to do on the image.

Original:
-snip-

Modified white balance:









^I think this one looks cooler, more of an eerie effect, but that's my opinion.

Does anyone have advice for night shooting? This was my attempt, but I found it hard to focus. My other shot was way out of focus but I couldn't tell until zooming in heavy on the photo review.

DSC_1236 by LemonSlice762, on Flickr


----------



## Marin

For shots like that just shoot at infinity.


----------



## Manyak

Quote:


Originally Posted by *LemonSlice* 
^I think this one looks cooler, more of an eerie effect, but that's my opinion.

Does anyone have advice for night shooting? This was my attempt, but I found it hard to focus. My other shot was way out of focus but I couldn't tell until zooming in heavy on the photo review.

DSC_1236 by LemonSlice762, on Flickr

There are 4 ways of achieving perfect focus at night, besides being really good at eyeballing it:
1 - Use a split-prism focusing screen
2 - Switch to live view and zoom in where you're trying to focus
3 - Focus at the hyperfocal distance
4 - Focus at infinity


----------



## LemonSlice

How would I know I'm at infinity? I know turning clockwise looking through the viewfinder is moving to farther objects, but even when pointed at the moon, turning all the way clockwise will even put the moon out of focus. My lens doesn't have markings since autofocus doesn't actually turn the focus ring, which gives me the ability to override AF when I want, but at the loss of markings.

Hyperfocal distance and all that stuff is a bit to complex for me, I've only had this camera for less than 2 weeks







.


----------



## Manyak

Quote:



Originally Posted by *LemonSlice*


How would I know I'm at infinity? I know turning clockwise looking through the viewfinder is moving to farther objects, but even when pointed at the moon, turning all the way clockwise will even put the moon out of focus. My lens doesn't have markings since autofocus doesn't actually turn the focus ring, which gives me the ability to override AF when I want, but at the loss of markings.


What lens do you have?


----------



## LemonSlice

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Manyak*


What lens do you have?


Nikon AF-S 18-105mm f/3.5-5.6. Kit lens with the D90.


----------



## Marin

135mm f/2L is fun to use.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

^^^ It is, great separation even at long distances.


----------



## Marin

Definitely. I also used it for a headshot (which I'll post later) and the bokeh is insanely creamy.

And it looks like the 85mm f/1.2L just got pushed down farther on my list. Been messing around with my Zeiss 85mm f/1.4 and when used right the dream like look (which occurs when shot wide open) looks awesome.


----------



## Manyak

Quote:



Originally Posted by *LemonSlice*


Nikon AF-S 18-105mm f/3.5-5.6. Kit lens with the D90.


Meh, it makes it tough without a distance window or any sort of scale.

But read this. It's a lot of info about one little thing, but if you learn it you'll be the master of manual focusing!


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
135mm f/2L is fun to use.


I want a 5DII and 135L again suddenly.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

I want all of your incomes.


----------



## Danylu

I want the 24mm 1.4...

and the 17-35mm.


----------



## Marin

Other shot taken with the 135mm f/2L.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


I want the 24mm 1.4...

and the 17-35mm.


i want the trinity xD


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


i want the trinity xD


I only need to own the 14-24 and I can say that I've had them all


----------



## iandroo888

ive played/used all 3.. but i want my own set =3


----------



## laboitenoire

Hell, I just want money to buy more gear with


----------



## iandroo888

think next thing id get is either new body. 24-70 or 70-200


----------



## mortimersnerd

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
think next thing id get is either new body. 24-70 or 70-200

I love my 70-200mm VRI with my D5000 though I want a D300s to go with it. I'd get better glass before the body though.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Hey GoneTomorrow, the Photo Contest link needs updating!


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mortimersnerd* 
I love my 70-200mm VRI with my D5000 though I want a D300s to go with it. I'd get better glass before the body though.

may be interested in a 70-200 first.. considering i have 12-105 covered for now. xD


----------



## Eek

Updated gear list,

Photography Gears.

Bodies/ Grip

* Canon EOS 50D
* Canon BG-E2N Battery grip for 50D

Glass

* Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 Aspherical UWA Lens
* Canon 15-85mm f/3.5-f/5.6 IS USM
* Canon 100mm f/2.8L IS USM Macro
* Canon 135 f/2.0L USM Lens
* Canon 50mm f/1.8 Lens
* Sigma 30mm f/1.4 EX DC HSM lens
* Canon 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM Lens
* Canon 1.4x Teleconverter
* Kenko Extension Tube Set

Lights

* Canon Speedlite 430 EXII
* Canon Speedlite 580 EXII

Camera Supports

* Feisol CM-1471 Carbon Fiber Monopod
* Photo Clam PC-44NS ballhead
* Feisol CT-3442 Carbon Fiber Tripod Legs with carbon fiber center column
* Crumpler Industry Disgrace
* Domke Gripper

Light Modifiers

* Yongnuo RF-602 Wireless Flash Triggers
* Rosco Strobist 55-Piece Filter Kit
* 2x Savage 10' Aluminum Heavy Duty Air-Cushioned Lightstand
* Savage Port-A-Stand, Free Standing Background Support System
* Photoflex Telescopic LiteDisc Holder
* 2x Photoflex Shoe Mount Multiclamp
* Adorama 40" White Interior Umbrella with Removeable Black Cover.
* Westcott 45" Optical White Satin Umbrella
* Westcott Photo Basics 40" 5-in-1 Collapsible Reflector

Bags

* Crumpler 7 Million Dollar Home Camera Bag
* ThinkTank Streetwalker Hard drive Backpack
* Canon 200EG
* Lee Multi-Filter Pouch
* Domke Post Office Strap

Filters

* Lee Model FK Filter Holder System
* Lee 62mm Adapter Ring
* Lee 67mm Adapter Ring
* Lee 72mm Wide Angle Adapter Ring
* Lee 77mm Wide Angle Adapter Ring
* Lee Big Stopper 10-Stop 3.0 Solid ND filter
* Hitech 4x5 Gradual ND 0.6 Soft Edge Filter
* Hitech 4x5 Gradual ND 0.9 Soft Edge Filter
* Hitech 4x5 Gradual ND 0.9 Hard Edge Filter
* Hitech 4x4 Solid ND 0.9 Filter
* Hitech 4x4 Solid ND 1.2 Filter
* Marumi 77mm Super DHG Circular Polarizer Filter
* B+W 67mm MRC Kaesemann Circular Polarizer Filter
* B+W 72mm MRC Kaesemann Circular Polarizer Filter
* Quanta Ray 67mm Multi-Coated Circular Polarizer Filter

Misc.

* ColorChecker Passport
* X-Rite ColorMunki Photo Spectrophotometer
* Canon Pixma Pro9000 Wide format printer.


----------



## dudemanppl

Its BG-E2N BTW. I'm very good with remembering things like that...


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dudemanppl* 
Its BG-E2N BTW. I'm very good with remembering things like that...

The man is right, it's BG-E2N. The BG-E5 is for either the XSi or T1i, if I remember right.


----------



## sweffymo

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dudemanppl* 
Its BG-E2N BTW. I'm very good with remembering things like that...


Quote:


Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d* 
The man is right, it's BG-E2N. The BG-E5 is for either the XSi or T1i, if I remember right.

Yep, you guys are right.

BG-E2N is for the XXD series (I think it works with all of them... I have a 30D)

The BG-E5 is for the Rebel series.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sweffymo* 
Yep, you guys are right.

BG-E2N is for the XXD series (I think it works with all of them... I have a 30D)

The BG-E5 is for the Rebel series.

BG-E2 and BG-E2N work on the 10D-50D; the newest 60D requires a new grip. Slight differences between the two, and the only part I do remember is that the BG-E2N has weatherproofing whereas the BG-E2 (my grip) does not.


----------



## Eek

Oh facepalm -_- major fail on my part.

You guys caught me with my pants down. : /


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d* 
Hey GoneTomorrow, the Photo Contest link needs updating!









Right


----------



## nuclearjock

D3 85mm f/1.4D @f/1.4 I think I prefer the old 85's cream to the newer G's. But I'm still debating. Regardless, I'm not selling my D and adding ~$800 for the G.










100%









Edit:

Sorry, forgot Nikon CP in front.


----------



## Unknownm

here is my picture in victoria. With stock lens on D5000


----------



## WIGILOCO

Something new from the weekend..


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *WIGILOCO*





I'm liking this one!


----------



## Marin

Can't decide.

Voigtlander R2M

+

Voigtlander Nokton 50mm f/1.1

or

Voigtlander Nokton 35mm f/1.4

This will be more of a walk-around setup where the 1v is too much to bring around.

Also, this will probably be my last purchase for the next couple of years besides replacing broken gear (hopefully that doesn't happen).


----------



## dudemanppl

Zeiss Ikon + Nokton 35 1.4, don't get the Single Coat. Zeiss Ikons regularly go for 900-ish on eBay, and are, to me, much better looking. Random note: Next summer I'll either sell some lenses or something for that combo, or almost everything for a Leica M9 and the Voigtlander 35.
EDIT: Link to BIN auction on eBay


----------



## WIGILOCO

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


I'm liking this one!










Thanks!


----------



## Marin

Hmmm, it is quite a bit cheaper than its normal price.


----------



## Manyak

Marin: Get this


----------



## Marin

Meh. It is fast but the Noctilux wipes the floor with it (expected though) and so does the Nokton.


----------



## SKSpark

Untitled by S[K], on Flickr

____________________________________________

D200 with Nikon 18-135mm

Also have: Nikon 50mm f/1.8
mb-d200 battery grip
Crap 5 year old Sony Tripod
Optech strap <3
Hoya UV filters


----------



## LemonSlice

Hmm it's my new profile picture









DSC_1527 by LemonSlice762, on Flickr


----------



## WIGILOCO

Some new with my EOS 550D + 50mm 1,8 II


----------



## grishkathefool

Terrific Composition. I thought at first it was busy, but that made me look longer! I don't like the barrel in the foreground though.


----------



## iandroo888

did anyone buy that 24-70 thermos cup? considering in getting one. weather getting cold @[email protected]


----------



## theCanadian

I bought the 70-200mm. It's pretty legit. I've also realized that it would make a great 'safe'. Just put your 'substance/merch' in the thermos and throw it in with your camera gear. Not that I have anything to hide.


----------



## iandroo888

question tho. can the cap be used like a coffee cup? like open to drnik or do u need to take entire lid off?

*edit* canon's 70-200 has the opening... nikons... looks like a snap on cap =3


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


did anyone buy that 24-70 thermos cup? considering in getting one. weather getting cold @[email protected]


i dont think teh 24-70 has a stainless core....


----------



## theCanadian

http://www.dealnique.com/blog/Cool-C...70-Coffee-Mug/










That's the cap. The tab slides up and you drink. And of course the cap comes off.

The one in that article is slightly worse than the one I got from deal extreme.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


i dont think teh 24-70 has a stainless core....


24-70 nikon has stainless.. canon does not.


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


24-70 nikon has stainless.. canon does not.


False my friend. It is most certainly stainless steel. I made sure before I purchased. And I'm holding it in my hand now. So I better know.


----------



## iandroo888

oh. the ones ive seen were like some kind of plastic... =3 xD

still no answer for original question... can nikon ones be opened to drink without removing entire cap?


----------



## theCanadian

Looked around at some pictures, it does not appear that you can. Hell, just put the lid in with your lens caps.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


oh. the ones ive seen were like some kind of plastic... =3 xD

still no answer for original question... can nikon ones be opened to drink without removing entire cap?


Nope, the whole thing comes off. I'm sure my thermos experience is a once off though with the rust


----------



## iandroo888

hmmm maybe ill buy a canon one xDDD


----------



## theCanadian

It's boss. I'm gonna shoot some games and stuff with it once it gets really cold. To see if anyone notices.









That boy crazy! He keeps kissing his lens. He must really like taking photos!


----------



## Unknownm

You Tube


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


24-70 nikon has stainless.. canon does not.


Whether it's plastic or steel, it all tastes disgusting. Ceramic or paper are the only two materials I can drink coffee out of without a chemical taste.


----------



## Manyak

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Whether it's plastic or steel, it all tastes disgusting. Ceramic or paper are the only two materials I can drink coffee out of without a chemical taste.


Agreed. It's even more prevalent with soda in plastic bottles. I only buy soda in cans or glass bottles, and do whatever I can to stock up on the "throwback" ones made with sugar. Corn syrup makes my spit really sticky, and doesn't taste quite the same :/


----------



## theCanadian

Drinking coffee regularly is pointless. Caffeine is a pretty okay drug to use for what it's used for. However, after only a week of regular drinking, your brain compensates and then you're back to baseline. At that point, technically you're physically addicted. And there are no benefits to continue drinking, other than say for the antioxidants in the bean.

However, the only reason you might want to stop is to save some money. Other than that, there's no harm in continuing to drink, assuming you're able to work off all the sugar and calories.

Just saying. I put cocoa in my thermos.


----------



## iandroo888

i drink tea.. usually just for the experience of drinkin an aromatic tea or to be warm


----------



## theCanadian

Tea is damn good. I love tea. Come to think of it, I don't know why I dont drink it more often.


----------



## iandroo888

i drink it pretty often.. starting a nice collection of teas at home hehehehe

a friend just brought one back for me. they said it was quite expensive. each pot/cup gets 1. when u put it in hot water, it opens up like a blooming flower... or something like that.. almost like $3 each. Lol cant wait to try that !


----------



## laboitenoire

If the stainless is clean and good-quality it shouldn't react too badly with the coffee as coffee is only mildly acidic...

Tea is my preferred caffeinated beverage now. English breakfast, Irish breakfast, Lapsong Souchong, and assorted green teas are my favorites.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
i drink it pretty often.. starting a nice collection of teas at home hehehehe

a friend just brought one back for me. they said it was quite expensive. each pot/cup gets 1. when u put it in hot water, it opens up like a blooming flower... or something like that.. almost like $3 each. Lol cant wait to try that !









those are very fragrant.....but watch out for the cheap ones. i bought some in Hong Kong when i was on vacation for ~100hkd for 4 blossom. then when i went to Taiwan i bought 200 blossom for about 10 american.

the HK ones smelled great (a bit weak in taste for me) but the Taiwan one tasted and smelled like nothing. so now i drop the cheap blossoms into a glass kettle with other tea just to entertain people.


----------



## iandroo888

ah. i meant $3 USD. not HKD or RMB. @[email protected]


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *theCanadian* 
Drinking coffee regularly is pointless. Caffeine is a pretty okay drug to use for what it's used for. However, after only a week of regular drinking, your brain compensates and then you're back to baseline. At that point, technically you're physically addicted. And there are no benefits to continue drinking, other than say for the antioxidants in the bean.

However, the only reason you might want to stop is to save some money. Other than that, there's no harm in continuing to drink, assuming you're able to work off all the sugar and calories.

Just saying. I put cocoa in my thermos.

Well, by the same token, drinking cocoa regularly is pointless, with all the processed sugar that goes into it, not to mention the fact that chocolate has caffeine in it.

And if you don't drink coffee like a fiend, you won't be addicted necessarily. I drink one or two cups per day before noon during the school year. During the summers, I rarely drink it and don't jones for it.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *laboitenoire* 
If the stainless is clean and good-quality it shouldn't react too badly with the coffee as coffee is only mildly acidic...

Tea is my preferred caffeinated beverage now. English breakfast, Irish breakfast, Lapsong Souchong, and assorted green teas are my favorites.

I can still taste it, be it steel, aluminum, plastic. And I love tea as well. A nice oolong or darjeeling suits me.


----------



## laboitenoire

So I learned that one of the professors in my department used to design photo masks for semiconductor lithography, and so he did a lot of business with Nikon and Canon. He said the lenses in their stepper machines are as tall as a full grown man and weigh several hundred pounds...


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*

I can still taste it, be it steel, aluminum, plastic. And I love tea as well. A nice oolong or darjeeling suits me.

oolong or jasmine me like ! theres a few im not sure what the english name is that are nice and light too =] sometimes i drink ginseng tea too


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
oolong or jasmine me like ! theres a few im not sure what the english name is that are nice and light too =] sometimes i drink ginseng tea too

Last thing about tea before we get to OT







If you want awesome tea, get it from here:

www.uptontea.com


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Well, by the same token, drinking cocoa regularly is pointless, with all the processed sugar that goes into it, not to mention the fact that chocolate has caffeine in it.

And if you don't drink coffee like a fiend, you won't be addicted necessarily. I drink one or two cups per day before noon during the school year. During the summers, I rarely drink it and don't jones for it.

Cocoa tastes good and it's good to drink in the cold. The amount of caffeine in chocolate is negligible and in such small doses has health benefits (reference dark chocolate for reading material).

I mean, let's be honest. Anytime you drink coffee, at least a small part of it is for the caffeine, even if it's just to have a cup with a friend.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *theCanadian* 
Cocoa tastes good and it's good to drink in the cold. The amount of caffeine in chocolate is negligible and in such small doses has health benefits (reference dark chocolate for reading material).

I mean, let's be honest. Anytime you drink coffee, at least a small part of it is for the caffeine, even if it's just to have a cup with a friend.

Coffee also tastes good and is good to drink in the cold. And caffeine won't make your ass fat.


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Coffee also tastes good and is good to drink in the cold. And caffeine won't make your ass fat.


Fair enough. That's why I said no reason to stop if you're not addicted. I'd just rather stay away from that risk all together.

So, um. How bout them 50mm's?


----------



## laboitenoire

God, all this talk about tea is making me thirsty...


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


Fair enough. That's why I said no reason to stop if you're not addicted. I'd just rather stay away from that risk all together.

So, um. How bout them 50mm's?










LOL them 50's rock


----------



## Marin

They need a 85mm f/1.2L mug. And a 50mm f/1.2L cup.


----------



## dudemanppl

Bah, hate tea. I prefer water. Cold without ice.


----------



## xonix

Hey guys,

Been a long time since I came to OCN!

Anyways, so I'm thinking of going to a trackday with some mates so I can take photos of them noobing it up at the track.

I want to take 2 bodies and 2 lenses: EOS 40D and EOS 5D, and 17-40mm and 75-300mm.

So my question is: Which combination should I use the bodies and lenses in (ie 40D + 17-40 and 5D + 75-300 or vice versa) and why?

Thanks!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *xonix*


Hey guys,

Been a long time since I came to OCN!

Anyways, so I'm thinking of going to a trackday with some mates so I can take photos of them noobing it up at the track.

I want to take 2 bodies and 2 lenses: EOS 40D and EOS 5D, and 17-40mm and 75-300mm.

So my question is: Which combination should I use the bodies and lenses in (ie 40D + 17-40 and 5D + 75-300 or vice versa) and why?

Thanks!


The 75-300, is that the Canon EF 75-300? If so, that's a notoriously crappy lens all around in terms of IQ. But to answer your questiom, put the 75-300 on the 40D to take advantage of the extra crop and the 40D's faster AF and burst. The 17-40 on the 5D to get the widest angle possible (no crop with the 5D).


----------



## xonix

Thanks GT!

But just to clarify:

Bodies: EOS 40D and EOS 5D MkII
Lenses: Canon EF 17-40mm f/4 USM L and Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III

I will also look at getting another zoom lens, maybe Canon 70-200 F4L IS USM or Canon 100-400 F4-5.6L IS USM. Will also get an extender as well, just for that extra reach


----------



## mz-n10

on a aps-c the 70-200 is fine if you get media or circuit side.


----------



## Unknownm




----------



## Lu(ky

Here is a couple of with my new Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM lens with a 5D MKII. All I can say this new lens is SHARP ** See the Mallard Duck ------> *H E R E*


----------



## max302

Guys... my manager is going ape**** at work, I can get you a Canon 50D kit at substantiel discounts.

Canon 50D + 17-85 lens, without the box (store demo), mint condition with original documentation and all accessories. It has been sitting under a glass counter ever since it is at the store.

I can get it out for 1200 shipping included to anywhere in North America.

PM if interested, I have no other use for this camera since I'm a Nikon guy, so I won't be buying unless I have a somebody interested. Due to the nature of this, I might ask for a small deposit.


----------



## Marin

I've started a wall of reject prints.


----------



## laboitenoire

Are those prints that you don't like or that your instructors don't like?


----------



## Marin

Both. B&W prints on the right are just RC prints, good for quick tests but nowhere near the quality of fiber. Large print up top is a test print done in class. DPI is too low even though it looks fine (scan was at 2400 DPI, 3200 DPI would have been better). Two long exposure prints on the bottom are actually fine but I don't like them. Scanned 35mm isn't sharp enough. And the print to the right of them is boring.


----------



## otterpopjunkie

just read through this thread, there's some nice work out there!

joking. this thing is gigantic! so I'll throw this out to the wind.. anyone else pre-ordered a D7000? Man I can't wait for Crutchfield to start shipping! Argg!


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:


Originally Posted by *otterpopjunkie* 
just read through this thread, there's some nice work out there!

joking. this thing is gigantic! so I'll throw this out to the wind.. anyone else pre-ordered a D7000? Man I can't wait for Crutchfield to start shipping! Argg!

I'm thinking about ordering one soon. I have to make sure I have the money first though.


----------



## max302

Price drop dued to very harsh negotiations. 1050$CAD shipped to anywhere in North America for:

-50D body, super low actuactions
-17-85mm f4-5.6 IS
-All accessories and battery
-4GB high-speed CF card

Only thing not present is the box. Remember, this is a factory demo which spent most/all of it's life under bulletproof glass without a lens attached.

PM for details, pictures are coming soon.


----------



## iandroo888

opinions on the thinktank streetwalker bag ?

http://www.thinktankphoto.com/produc...-backpack.aspx

whats difference between this and the pro version?

lookin to fit d5k + 12-24mm, 18-105mm, 50mm, sb-600, sb-800 and accessories with room for maybe 1 or 2 more lenses [future additions hehe]


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


Originally Posted by *max302* 
Price drop dued to very harsh negotiations. 1050$CAD shipped to anywhere in North America for:

-50D body, super low actuactions
-17-85mm f4-5.6 IS
-All accessories and battery
-4GB high-speed CF card

Only thing not present is the box. Remember, this is a factory demo which spent most/all of it's life under bulletproof glass without a lens attached.

PM for details, pictures are coming soon.

I'm gonna be straight, thats not a good deal. I hope this doesn't make you hate me...


----------



## max302

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dudemanppl* 
I'm gonna be straight, thats not a good deal. I hope this doesn't make you hate me...

Why, thank you for informing me. What would be a good deal?


----------



## NrGx

Picked up my D3000 with a lens for $540 AUD. Pretty good deal for a starter kit in my opinion.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *NrGx*


Picked up my D3000 with a lens for $540 AUD. Pretty good deal for a starter kit in my opinion.


Very nice, where from?


----------



## Unknownm




----------



## NrGx

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Very nice, where from?


Ted's on Elizabeth Street. Oh and she threw in a camera bag


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *NrGx*


Ted's on Elizabeth Street. Oh and she threw in a camera bag










Yeah all the Ted's are supposed to throw in a camera bag if you whinge enough. I got the mini toploader thing when I bought my D60 a while ago


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *max302*


Why, thank you for informing me. What would be a good deal?


i would expect the kit to be sub 1000usd. does it still have factory warranty?


----------



## riko99

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


i would expect the kit to be sub 1000usd. does it still have factory warranty?


remember that that is CD$'s guys and we do spend alot more on camera equip up here.


----------



## max302

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mz-n10* 
i would expect the kit to be sub 1000usd. does it still have factory warranty?

Yup, unregistered warranty with proof of purchase supplied.


----------



## Unknownm

You Tube


----------



## laboitenoire

Well, I might have an excuse to invest either Christmas money or my tax refund into camera gear, as I've been nominated for a position within my fraternity chapter that amounts to being the archivist (and thus responsible for photographing and/or video taping chapter events). Nobody else has run in the past few years, and everybody's joking that I've already got the position thanks to my involvement.

So I'm thinking a used pro or prosumer Nikon might be in order for durability's sake. Probably a D2H or D200.


----------



## dudemanppl

17-55.


----------



## Marin

http://www.dpreview.com/news/1010/10...mamiyarz22.asp

Prices are slowly getting better.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Whoo! Replacing my nifty fifty with the Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM









EDIT: And a Timbuk2 Snoop as well. Think I'm done upgrading for a very long time.


----------



## Marin

Omg...


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Omg...




Not the .95. Good enough though.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Not the .95. Good enough though.


It is the .95.


----------



## kalluka

Hi OCN.I am from Estonia and i love photography.I have Sony Alpha 550 with kit lens 55-80mm SAM i will buy new lens soon.

Here is two pictures one is me and second is made in Estonia!
Hi OCN.I am from Estonia and i love photography.I have Sony Alpha 550 with kit lens 55-80mm SAM i will buy new lens soon.I have bunch of beautiful pictures from Estonia uploaded at Facebook and Orkut if anyone is interested.I can make a online album if anyone wants to.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Not the .95. Good enough though.


Look again, says 1/0.95 right on the bezel.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Not the .95. Good enough though.


Nope, it is. Says so on the lens


----------



## Manyak

That is definitely the 0.95.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Not the .95. Good enough though.


Oh yeah, in case you missed it, it's the f/.95









Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


It is the .95.



Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Look again, says 1/0.95 right on the bezel.



Quote:



Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*


Nope, it is. Says so on the lens











Quote:



Originally Posted by *Manyak*


That is definitely the 0.95.


----------



## Marin

I was at the zoo for around 3 hours shooting for my assignment. Kind of limited since my longest lens is the 135mm since I sold off the 70-200mm (and I didn't feel like dropping by school and trying to rent one). Anyways, I think I made the 135mm work. Got some insane close-ups of birds while using Fujichrome Velvia 100 so hopefully they look nice.

Just need to go to school later and process them. Also, the 1v is awesome. I prefer having buttons over the dial.


----------



## dudemanppl

I just read the "1".







I'm such a failure.


----------



## laboitenoire

Of course, is f/0.95 _really_ necessary?


----------



## theCanadian

I ought to lambast you.


----------



## Xapoc

I see what you did there.


----------



## dudemanppl

Got my grade for the month (I shoot for the newspaper):

I'm giving you a 23/25 this month. Your homecoming football photos usually had a decent amount of motion blur and were maybe a little too tight. That and I don't want to see your friend's crotch ever again.

f/4 ISO 6400 1/400 420mm


----------



## laboitenoire

You didn't screen for crotch shots? Fail, dude...

But yeah, I would think you'd need faster SS to really freeze football. Ah well, chalk it up to learning experience.


----------



## NrGx

Just bought Lightroom 3. Got sick of using Adobe Bridge or organize my images. In other news... *why do Adobe not offer dual platform installations!*. I want to move back to a Mac but don't want to buy another product.

Oh well, guess I'm stuck with Windows for a while at least


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


Originally Posted by *laboitenoire* 
You didn't screen for crotch shots? Fail, dude...

But yeah, I would think you'd need faster SS to really freeze football. Ah well, chalk it up to learning experience.

Got lazy because I did all of this after I shot for 3 hours. Stupid me.







I'll stick to the 120-300 bare.


----------



## Danylu

Should I buy a Nikon F4 with 50mm 1.8D? I'm thinking I can get it for $300.

Scratch that, I'm offering him $225. It doesn't come with the vertical grip part


----------



## iandroo888

hmm the B+W Kaesemann filter just came in today. quite thicker than i imagined. 7mm thick (not including threads) wonder if i shoulda got the slim one instead? i got this one cuz i thought maybe id be shooting outdoors for a period of time and may need ability to cap it up.. thoughts?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
hmm the B+W Kaesemann filter just came in today. quite thicker than i imagined. 7mm thick (not including threads) wonder if i shoulda got the slim one instead? i got this one cuz i thought maybe id be shooting outdoors for a period of time and may need ability to cap it up.. thoughts?

Check to see if it vignettes before deciding on the slim.


----------



## iandroo888

probably try later this weekend when i have time. really nice build quality tho. quite heavy


----------



## Shane1244

What's a good camera that I can buy locally (BestBuy or Henrys) that can hold a Nikon D3000 with lens, Extra Batteries, and two additional lenses? Along with a pouch for memory cards, cables etc..


----------



## iandroo888

lowepro slingshot 100aw xD


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Shane1244* 
What's a good camera that I can buy locally (BestBuy or Henrys) that can hold a Nikon D3000 with lens, Extra Batteries, and two additional lenses? Along with a pouch for memory cards, cables etc..

lol......i took 3 retakes.

at my local BB there the lowepro flipside and fastpack which will fit everything above assuming the two additional lenses are small zooms or small primes.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*


What's a good camera that I can buy locally (BestBuy or Henrys) that can hold a Nikon D3000 with lens, Extra Batteries, and two additional lenses? Along with a pouch for memory cards, cables etc..


Hmm, well I guess an old-school wooden large format camera would have enough space inside to cram a D3000.

But in all seriousness, check out the LowePro Slingshots. Best Buy should have the 200 AW at least.


----------



## Boyboyd

I can't decide if i want a timbuk2 messenger bag or a backpack now.

Also 101 Photos taken with the lens detatched


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*


I can't decide if i want a timbuk2 messenger bag or a backpack now.

Also 101 Photos taken with the lens detatched


Easy: get both.







Seriously, I have a Crumpler 7MDH and a LowePro Slingshot (and many others). I find that different outings are suited for different bags. However, if I had to pick only one, I'd go for a messenger style bag.


----------



## Boyboyd

There's a thought









I do really like the 7MDH, and when i travel i rarely need to take all of my lenses with me, and i only have a small D5000 so space really isn't an issue. A messenger bag is much easier access too, i hate having to physically take my backpack off.

All i know is i definitely *need* a good bag. I foolishly bought the cheapest one on amazon because i could barely afford a DSLR as it was. The zip is already broken.


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*


Also 101 Photos taken with the lens detatched


I've never really messed around with this too much... maybe I'll give it a try when my studio softbox arrives.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*


There's a thought









I do really like the 7MDH, and when i travel i rarely need to take all of my lenses with me, and i only have a small D5000 so space really isn't an issue. A messenger bag is much easier access too, i hate having to physically take my backpack off.

All i know is i definitely *need* a good bag. I foolishly bought the cheapest one on amazon because i could barely afford a DSLR as it was. The zip is already broken.


In that case, check out the 6MDH, might be better suited to you. Crumpler's bags are very sturdy. They stay shut very tightly, even if only by the Velcro.

Check out the ThinkTank Urban Disguise bags as well. They hold the most gear in proportion to their size, very streamline and compact. I have a UD30 myself, which is my small bag, although it still holds a body plus three lenses.


----------



## Boyboyd

I've heard good things about crumpler bags, and i like the look of the 6mdh but it's not very available. I'll keep looking though, or get the 7mdh.

I've looked at the ThinkTank bags too. They all look pretty good tbh. Especially the Retro 10

Thanks a lot for the recommendations.


----------



## Manyak

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


In that case, check out the 6MDH, might be better suited to you. Crumpler's bags are very sturdy. They stay shut very tightly, even if only by the Velcro.

*Check out the ThinkTank Urban Disguise bags as well. They hold the most gear in proportion to their size, very streamline and compact.* I have a UD30 myself, which is my small bag, although it still holds a body plus three lenses.


The ThinkTank Retrospectives are the same in that regard. I've got the Retrospective 20, and it holds 3 large lenses + a flash, but I think it's a bit bigger than what you need (in one "pocket" alone it fits a gripped 5DmkII with a 24-70/2.8 mounted, with the hood NOT reversed). But yeah, look at the Retro 10 and the UD bags and I think you'll find something you like.

And IMO the crumpler MDH bags don't look very professional. They're good quality though, if you like that green....

Edit: Beat me to my own recommendation, lol


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Well, as far as messenger bags go, Timbuk2 restocked their Snoop bags and I ordered one for myself. The best part is my friend has one of their other messenger bags as well; it looks like new yet is six years old. Personally, I think that's a bargain for a bag that lasts that long.


----------



## Marin

Get the Snooper. I'm liking mine a lot more than my 7MDH and when it's not completely filled with gear it conforms to your body like a messenger bag should.


----------



## max302

A little sample from my second roll out of my 35SPn. The perspective is awesome, the 8mm that seperates it from a "normal" 50mm really gives it an edge. The resolution on Superia 200 kinda sucks though, I would really like to shoot a nice panchro B&W to see how much IQ I can get out of the Zuiko glass.

On another note, does anybody have hands-on experience with the Spider holster?


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Well, as far as messenger bags go, Timbuk2 restocked their Snoop bags and I ordered one for myself. The best part is my friend has one of their other messenger bags as well; it looks like new yet is six years old. Personally, I think that's a bargain for a bag that lasts that long.


My Minolta bag is older than I am. It looks new. Any sort of good quality nylon is basically Magic Material(tm).


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Got my 50mm f/1.4 in today! So far, I'm loving the lens, esp the USM motor and FTM focusing. The only question I have now is whether or not this lens is worth the ~$240 price difference...


----------



## iandroo888

having a motor makes a big difference for me.. dont lose those shots inbetween me manually focusing xD


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d* 
Got my 50mm f/1.4 in today! So far, I'm loving the lens, esp the USM motor and FTM focusing. The only question I have now is whether or not this lens is worth the ~$240 price difference...

I don't think anything can beat the value of the 50mm f/1.8, but for the better build quality, better bokeh, and faster focusing, I'd think the f/1.4 is worth the upgrade.


----------



## iandroo888

sometimes i wonder how some "photographers" are using a 85mm and taking up close up shots being like 3 ft away.. must be taking a picture of their nose or something... so freakin close lol

i want a 50mm f/1.4 AF-S

*edit*

anyone have a Crumpler 7MDH for sale?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d* 
Got my 50mm f/1.4 in today! So far, I'm loving the lens, esp the USM motor and FTM focusing. The only question I have now is whether or not this lens is worth the ~$240 price difference...

Well, I got a 50/1.8 for someone as a gift recently, and took the opportunity to try the lens out and IMO the 1.4 is worth the extra cost. Though the 1.8 is plenty sharp, it falls short in other areas, esp. AF speed.


----------



## dudemanppl

I loved my Canon 1.8 on the 5DII. D: I didn't use it much because I hate the 50 focal length (which makes me wonder why I love the Sigma 50 so much...).


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
sometimes i wonder how some "photographers" are using a 85mm and taking up close up shots being like 3 ft away.. must be taking a picture of their nose or something... so freakin close lol

I use mine for portraits. I definitely have to stay further back to properly frame the shot, but I much prefer this lens over the other lenses I had (although now I have to compare it to the new 50mm f/1.4). I love it as a portrait lens and as a fast faux-telephoto, but as you pointed out, the focal point is a bit too narrow for me to use it as a walkaround lens.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
Well, I got a 50/1.8 for someone as a gift recently, and took the opportunity to try the lens out and IMO the 1.4 is worth the extra cost. Though the 1.8 is plenty sharp, it falls short in other areas, esp. AF speed.

After playing around with it a bit more, I definitely have to agree. I'm pretty sure I'm keeping it now because of the USM motor. It's definitely very quick, and my f/1.8 was responsible for some missed shots with its slow AF motor. I'm a bit surprised, because the USM motor here seems faster than that of my 28-135mm. But anyways, I'm keeping the f/1.4 and selling the f/1.8!


----------



## Manyak

Quote:


Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d* 
Got my 50mm f/1.4 in today! So far, I'm loving the lens, esp the USM motor and FTM focusing. The only question I have now is whether or not this lens is worth the ~$240 price difference...

I'd say it depends on your usage habits, but I can tell you this: If I had your exact same equipment I'd probably be using the 50mm prime the most, which would make the upgrade worth it.

And then I'd make my next purchase a full frame body







.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Just got my Timbuk2 bag, and man is it big! I ordered the medium bag in gunmetal/limeaide, and it looks fantastic. Space-wise, I can fit all the gear in my sig + my three extra batteries, four CF cards, and cleaning wands + cloths. I should also note that the 85mm f/1.8, 50mm f/1.4, and 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 all have their hoods attached in reverse in the bag, fitting comfortably. Definitely do not regret this purchase!

Oh, and despite the weight of my gear, having this as a messenger bag makes the weight distribution very comfortable for me.


----------



## laboitenoire

Shot some more soccer tonight. Had a bag over my camera as it was drizzling off and on (the rain is actually visible in some shots), and it was cold, but I think I'm getting better. I said to hell with it and went to the high ISOs (3200+), and wide open I wasn't horribly underexposed at 1/200. Motion blur was pretty good, too.

I must say, even though my setup is far from ideal for shooting sports at night, it's still fun to try and see what I can do. It's a game in and of itself...

However, I think a 3rd party 70-200 f/2.8 is in order, once I have the cash and the arms to maneuver the beast.


----------



## xonix

Hey guys:

Wondering if there are any technical differences between these two lenses are:

Sigma 70-200mm F2.8 EX DG OS HSM
Canon 70-200mm F2.8 EF IS II USM

From the looks of things I've read only, mainly the build quality and price.


----------



## mz-n10

IQ on the canon is superior to the sigma. i believe the sigma has a shorter MFD, and is a tad smaller and lighter.


----------



## Marin

Just reserved a Canon 300mm f/2.8L. Don't know which version it is though.


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Just reserved a Canon 300mm f/2.8L. Don't know which version it is though.

To buy or rent?


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Shane1244* 
To buy or rent?

Pretty sure it's to rent. Marin said something a while back about how he's not spending anymore money on new gear.


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Pretty sure it's to rent. Marin said something a while back about how he's not spending anymore money on new gear.


I don't believe that for one second. haha


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Shane1244* 
I don't believe that for one second. haha

I don't either, but I guess we'll see!


----------



## max302

Yeah, I call bull too.


----------



## dudemanppl

300s are light if you aren't an old sack of bones, at which point you are allowed to use a monopod.


----------



## Marin

Renting from my school.


----------



## riko99

Hey guys quick question!

So last year my work asked us to take photo's of our kids Christmas party which we obliged to do now this year they want to pay us to do it.

So first question is How much do you guys consider to be a good price for about 50 children's photo's.

Second anyone have any idea as to something fun we can do the last 2 years they have had one of the managers dress up as Santa and sit on the same chair in the same place now I cannot change the location as it is fun for the kids but something a little more fun for them to do would be great.


----------



## Unknownm




----------



## Marin

Lots of film. I'll probably have to restock the 35mm slide film within a few weeks.


----------



## dudemanppl

The only film I have left is 2 rolls of Ektar.







When I get more its gonna be Ektar and FP4+. Maybe Pan F if i get a Zeiss Ikon...


----------



## mz-n10

nantucket nectars huh?


----------



## Manyak

I wonder what expired film looks like


----------



## Boyboyd

There's only one way to find out









I usually hate selective desaturation, so i'm a hypocrite.


Aperture Laboratories by James_Boyd, on Flickr


----------



## Manyak

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*


There's only one way to find out










Know of a good place I can send the film to get developed and scanned? If so I'll shoot them in a few days.


----------



## Boyboyd

I'm not familiar with any photos hops over there. So Costco

*runs and hides*


----------



## Manyak

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*


I'm not familiar with any photos hops over there. So Costco

*runs and hides*


----------



## theCanadian

Mostly sad news mixed with some good news.

http://www.bjp-online.com/british-jo...0-version-film

I guess I should order some 400NC and VC. And then try the regular 400 when it ships.


----------



## Marin

Lame; saw this awhile ago and forgot about it. At least they still have 160VC and NC.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Lots of film. I'll probably have to restock the 35mm slide film within a few weeks.

Needs more organics.


----------



## Live_free

I have a Nikon D90.
I have the kit lens 18-105 3.5-5.6. Nikkor
- Nifty Fifty - 50mm 1.8 Nikkor 
- 70-200mm 2.8 VRII Nikkor
- 18-55 2.8 Nikkor


----------



## WIGILOCO

Something new how you fellas like it?


----------



## laboitenoire

Dear God, I soooooooooooo want a D7000 right now. It looks positively... Beautiful.


----------



## Marin

Needs a larger sensor.


----------



## laboitenoire

I dunno, the high ISO results look fantastic considering it's a crop sensor.


----------



## max302

It's not the size of your sensor... it's how you use it. (Says the guy with a small sensor







)

No but really, for those less fortunate than Marine, the D7000 looks like a great buy. I'm waiting on my store to get some so I can get an employee discount on one. Can't wait to see what the DX flagship is going to be all about. Nightvision-high ISO like the D3 updates?


----------



## theCanadian

Thinking of getting a 135mm f/2.8... good idea?

I already have a 35-105mm and a 200mm and a 75-300mm. f/3.5-4.5, f/4, and f/4-5.6 respectively. So it's not like I don't have the focal range covered already...


----------



## Danylu

I just have to say. The colours of sunrise are MUCH better than the colours of sunset. But both are good


----------



## Marin

What could this be.


----------



## theCanadian

an iphone?


----------



## mz-n10

some dude thats takings a DSLR portrait wrong


----------



## Mootsfox

I like your shower Marin.


----------



## USFORCES

Your dads?

My DSLR comes today







Estimated delivery 11/10/2010

Canon EOS 1000D (XS)
EF-S 18-55mm F/3.5-5.6 IS 
EF-S 55-250mm F/4-5.6 IS


----------



## laboitenoire

I'm guessing it's a rented 300 or 400 f/2.8 on your 1V?


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
I like your shower Marin.











Quote:


Originally Posted by *USFORCES* 
My DSLR comes today







Estimated delivery 11/10/2010

Canon EOS 1000D (XS)
EF-S 18-55mm F/3.5-5.6 IS
EF-S 55-250mm F/4-5.6 IS

Congrats!







Enjoy the DSLR!

Quote:


Originally Posted by *laboitenoire* 
I'm guessing it's a rented 300 or 400 f/2.8 on your 1V?

I thought he was just excited to see his iPhone.


----------



## Boyboyd

Behold! The wall of Endless Interestingness.

Link


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *theCanadian* 
an iphone?


Quote:


Originally Posted by *mz-n10* 
some dude thats takings a DSLR portrait wrong


Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
I like your shower Marin.











Quote:


Originally Posted by *USFORCES* 
Your dads?


Quote:


Originally Posted by *laboitenoire* 
I'm guessing it's a rented 300 or 400 f/2.8 on your 1V?

School rental. And it's on my 5DMKII.

Edit: 300mm f/2.8L IS.


----------



## biatchi

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
What could this be.










Quite apt that you have it mounted to a Canon









Quote:


Originally Posted by *Boyboyd* 
Behold! The wall of Endless Interestingness.

Link

That is sweet


----------



## dudemanppl

Is the viewfinder hump on the 1V magnesium too? Take some portraits very far away with it, it destroys backgrounds.


----------



## theCanadian




----------



## mz-n10

wow that is unbelievably freaky


----------



## USFORCES

Oh man this is my first real camera and I'm going to have fun with this the live view on the PC is cool as heck I took a few night photo's and really liking it so far as my old camera couldn't take them like this.

Haven't really figured out how to use it yet so don't laugh...


----------



## Shane1244

and what camera is it exactly..?


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*


and what camera is it exactly..?


rebel XS

check the EXIF ppl.....


----------



## Danylu

I just bought a SB-400 with a swivel head adaptor









Thanks Gone.


----------



## Marin

Zeiss Ikon + Voigtlander 35mm f/1.4 or a Canon 35mm f/1.4L.

Hmmm...


----------



## Sparhawk

Argh! The D7000 needs to be released in canada already.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mz-n10* 
rebel XS

check the EXIF ppl.....

In Chrome you can't right-click to see the image properties like in every other browser out there...


----------



## Unknownm

Got baked, than took some photos after school (vancouver film school)


























http://www.flickr.com/photos/audiotranceable/


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *laboitenoire* 
In Chrome you can't right-click to see the image properties like in every other browser out there...

You can't view the EXIF data with any browser, even Firefox, by default; it requires an add-on, which Chrome has:

https://chrome.google.com/extensions...emlang=&q=exif


----------



## Mootsfox

Anyone want to buy a D1H (complete with box, manuals, charger, original discs, cords and battery) with a CHA error, and/or a F100 w/ grip? Both are in great condition, save for the error on the D1H.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Zeiss Ikon + Voigtlander 35mm f/1.4 or a Canon 35mm f/1.4L.

Hmmm...

Hehehe, thats what I thought. I say 35L since you have a 1V so you can do film stuff with that and then also use it on the 5DII.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mootsfox*


Anyone want to buy a D1H (complete with box, manuals, charger, original discs, cords and battery) with a CHA error, and/or a F100 w/ grip? Both are in great condition, save for the error on the D1H.


What's the CHA error do?


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


What's the CHA error do?


Memory card error. It's infamously popular on the D70.

The D1H works great before I shelved it, I left the card in it during, and I think that might have been the problem.


----------



## Mootsfox

Wow, this camera is a tank and I'm an idiot.

CHA error was from the card (2GB) being in FAT32 instead of FAT16.


----------



## Marin

More idiotic things have been done, like people who manage to jam CF cards in backwards.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Memory card error. It's infamously popular on the D70.

The D1H works great before I shelved it, I left the card in it during, and I think that might have been the problem.

Yeah I had a quick google and came with that and was about to mention it. The olden days of FAT 16....


----------



## Marin

Picked up a 35mm f/1.4L from Samy's Camera.


----------



## dudemanppl

That and the 135L were the 2 lenses I wanted to try when I went Canon this summer (for like a month...). I want a 35 AI-S but I suck at MFing, and there aren't any cheap screens like for the 5DII.







Stupid Nikon...


----------



## Deadric8

fujifilm fine pix a610 6.3mp camera w/ both optical and digital shooting modes...2.5inch display w/flash and tons of other goodies...1 rare thing about this camara is it actualy has a 'nightvision' for the lcd display for nightshots...so you can actualy see what you are taking a picture of...in a greenish tint before you take the picture...also does 6.3mp video w/audio 4gb sd card...basicly a mid ranged camara...cost $350 new...get it for $100 used from a friend...i love taking pictures will upload when i get over to my laptop again...dont use it much at home cause i like my desktop better..


----------



## Marin

135mm f/2L and Fujifilm Velvia 100.


----------



## dudemanppl

*sigh* I wish that guy didn't steal your pictures because I want to see them bigger.


----------



## iandroo888

whats a cheap macro lens for a canon xs body? friend lookin into one. theres a EF-S 60mm f/2.8 one for 325 on CL locally.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


whats a cheap macro lens for a canon xs body? friend lookin into one. theres a EF-S 60mm f/2.8 one for 325 on CL locally.


Definitely the 60 macro. One of the sharpest EF-S lenses, well worth the money. There's also the 100mm macro for more working distance, and the reviews for the Tamron 90mm are good.


----------



## laboitenoire

The Tokina 100 macro is also supposed to be good, from what I've heard.


----------



## Unknownm

Why does the light do that?


----------



## iandroo888

stop down aperture a little bit.. or a little down on the exposure.


----------



## Unknownm

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
stop down aperture a little bit.. or a little down on the exposure.

thanks


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Unknownm* 









Why does the light do that?

It's called ghosting, when a very bright light source reflects off the sensor then back again off the internal elements. Cheap lenses ghost easily. Stopping down or adjusting exposure won't help. ND filters can help.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
You can't view the EXIF data with any browser, even Firefox, by default; it requires an add-on, which Chrome has:

https://chrome.google.com/extensions...emlang=&q=exif

Thanks for that! Makes viewing pictures much easier for me now


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
It's called ghosting, when a very bright light source reflects off the sensor then back again off the internal elements. Cheap lenses ghost easily. Stopping down or adjusting exposure won't help. ND filters can help.

If he's using a cheap UV filter then that's probably what's causing the ghosting.


----------



## theCanadian

Can't you spot that in the viewfinder though? It's just something you have to shoot around.

Or spend alot of money


----------



## Unknownm

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
It's called ghosting, when a very bright light source reflects off the sensor then back again off the internal elements. Cheap lenses ghost easily. Stopping down or adjusting exposure won't help. ND filters can help.

Thanks it was our schools camera's. Canon Rebel XS, I took it in manual mode (I forgot the shutter/ISO/F). Just proves that I should bring my Nikon D5000 to school to take pictures...

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
If he's using a cheap UV filter then that's probably what's causing the ghosting.

It was stock lens the Rebel XS comes with. I guess this proves they aren't great?

Quote:


Originally Posted by *theCanadian* 
Can't you spot that in the viewfinder though? It's just something you have to shoot around.

Or spent alot of money


If you were talking about mine, than yes I did see it in viewfinder. The class was about taking a picture and applying it as the white balance than taking another picture in that custom white balance

How do you change the white balance in Nikon. I set PRE and selected my image in the settings for the custom white balance but when I take the picture it's not the custom white balance


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Unknownm* 
It was stock lens the Rebel XS comes with. I guess this proves they aren't great?

They're great for what they cost. For $100, the 18-55 IS is pretty darned sharp. But it's excellence ends there.


----------



## Unknownm

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
They're great for what they cost. For $100, the 18-55 IS is pretty darned sharp. But it's excellence ends there.

ah that's a shame


----------



## Boyboyd

Just like the 18-55 that comes with the D5000, the Cannon equivelent is supposed to be very good too.


----------



## biatchi

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Boyboyd* 
Just like the 18-55 that comes with the D5000, the Cannon equivelent is supposed to be very good too.

Likewise the Pentax 18-55 kit lens is decent too


----------



## GoneTomorrow

A few recent shots with the 135L. This lens annihilates backgrounds!

Yes, my brother-in-law doesn't know how to hold a DSLR properly (he's learning):

IMG_3471 by gonetomorrow00, on Flickr


Boyd's Orchard by gonetomorrow00, on Flickr


Boyd's Orchard by gonetomorrow00, on Flickr


Boyd's Orchard by gonetomorrow00, on Flickr


----------



## Shane1244

Wow, That second picture is so cool. No PP blurring?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*


Wow, That second picture is so cool. No PP blurring?


Nope


----------



## Shane1244

That's too awesome









A 'wee bit expensive though.


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*


That's too awesome









A 'wee bit expensive though.










How so? All you need is a long focal length. The rest is just where you stand.


----------



## Marin

Quote: 
   Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*   A few recent shots with the 135L. This lens annihilates backgrounds!
 
Yeah, it's an awesome lens. I've found that I use it more than the 85mm for portraits.

And I have to do street portraiture for my class so I went to the flea market with some friends (camera stuff sucked there but I did pick up    The Print by Ansel Adams for $5) and just used the 35mm f/1.4. I must say, what an awesome focal length to use for walkaround shots. It's just right for general use and a lot easier to frame than a 50mm.


----------



## Squeeker The Cat

hey guys........im looking into replacing my canon S5 IS.....its having issues lately. im not sure if im ready for DSLR yet..so some people have pointed me in the direction of these new "EVIL" cameras...like the olympus E-PL1.

anyway what do you all think is a decent upgrade to my S5 IS? im by no means even a decent photographer.....though i do get lucky often with a "wonderful pic"

im afraid that with a DSLR or even an "EVIL" camera i might not ever use a majority of these options.........

id like a camera that has HD video...and well.....thats easy to use....price wise, i just the other day ordered my wife a Canon POWERSHOT SD1400 IS to keep in her purse. so itll be a month or so before i get some money up for a new one for me. so im starting my research now.......


----------



## theCanadian

I've all but decided on a Nikon D90 for Christmas. But, just for solidarity, is there a better camera/setup for the money (both with or without a kit lens). And if I do get a D90 (body only) what lens do you think I should get?

I've been using mostly wide angle and long focal lengths for landscape photography and sports on my 35mm 'full frame'.


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


I've all but decided on a Nikon D90 for Christmas. But, just for solidarity, is there a better camera/setup for the money (both with or without a kit lens). And if I do get a D90 (body only) what lens do you think I should get?

I've been using mostly wide angle and long focal lengths for landscape photography and sports on my 35mm 'full frame'.










It's DX right? If so, I'd definitely recommend the 35 1.8 <3 Might not be as wide as you want though...


----------



## dudemanppl

Sell a testicle for a 17-55 and 70-200 VR. And no, thats not how I get my gear.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


I've all but decided on a Nikon D90 for Christmas. But, just for solidarity, is there a better camera/setup for the money (both with or without a kit lens). And if I do get a D90 (body only) what lens do you think I should get?

I've been using mostly wide angle and long focal lengths for landscape photography and sports on my 35mm 'full frame'.










Well, which would you prefer to shoot from the get-go with your camera? Landscapes or sports?

For landscapes, I'd suggest a good wide-angle zoom like Tokina's 11-16 f/2.8, their 12-24 f/4, or either the Nikon 10-24 or 12-24.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dudemanppl* 
Sell a testicle for a 17-55 and 70-200 VR. And no, thats not how I get my gear.

So you're saving the other one for the 200 f2?









Random question: Anything think its a good idea to spray silicone under the focusing ring of a 105mm 2.8 AI-S Nikon lens? The focusing ring is very stiff...


----------



## dudemanppl

That doesn't sound like a good idea at all, but I don't know anything about the inner working of lenses.


----------



## theCanadian

I'd ask Nikon what they recommend.


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Squeeker The Cat* 
hey guys........im looking into replacing my canon S5 IS.....its having issues lately. im not sure if im ready for DSLR yet..so some people have pointed me in the direction of these new "EVIL" cameras...like the olympus E-PL1.

anyway what do you all think is a decent upgrade to my S5 IS? im by no means even a decent photographer.....though i do get lucky often with a "wonderful pic"

im afraid that with a DSLR or even an "EVIL" camera i might not ever use a majority of these options.........

id like a camera that has HD video...and well.....thats easy to use....price wise, i just the other day ordered my wife a Canon POWERSHOT SD1400 IS to keep in her purse. so itll be a month or so before i get some money up for a new one for me. so im starting my research now.......

In my opinion, every household should have an SLR of some type, be it film or digital.

But, if you want a camera that is simply easy to use, and nothing more, stick with the point and shoot cameras.

To help aid your decision, I'd suggest you head down to the local camera shop and have them explain to you:

The relationship between ISO, Aperture, and Shutter Speed
f-stops
Depth of Field
Focal Length
Exposure Value Compensation

If they have an old manual film slr, these concepts can be easily shown. If not they are still easy to explain and understand. All this information is readily available on the internet with untold amounts of tutorial videos. I just suggest the camera shop to have a hands on experience.

In fact, it would be best to have both a manual slr and a DSLR for the demonstration. That way he/she can show you the manual workings on the manual SLR and you can see the results on the DSLR.


----------



## iandroo888

ah wth 80-400 f/4.6-5.4?? aw was so hoping for a 70-200 f/4


----------



## laboitenoire

Yeah, seems like a strange aperture range...


----------



## iandroo888

they need to push a 70-200 f/4 =.= those butts


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


I've all but decided on a Nikon D90 for Christmas. But, just for solidarity, is there a better camera/setup for the money (both with or without a kit lens). And if I do get a D90 (body only) what lens do you think I should get?

I've been using mostly wide angle and long focal lengths for landscape photography and sports on my 35mm 'full frame'.










dont go to teh dark side.....stay in the minolta family









the d90 is a fine camera but take a look at the d7000 if you can afford it. also the canon 60d looks to be pretty good too.

the sony a55 or pentax k-r are a bit cheaper but the sony is without weather sealing and uses a EV. the pentax has no fullframe upgrade path and 3rd part support worst then sony.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


I've all but decided on a Nikon D90 for Christmas. But, just for solidarity, is there a better camera/setup for the money (both with or without a kit lens). And if I do get a D90 (body only) what lens do you think I should get?

I've been using mostly wide angle and long focal lengths for landscape photography and sports on my 35mm 'full frame'.










D7000, it's the replacement to the D90, which is going to start not being sold anymore.


----------



## iandroo888

whats a good place to buy camera bags? im lookin at the crumpler 7MDH or timbuk2 snoop camera bag.. which would fit my equip better? maybe possibly a 70-200 in the future too

was lookin at ebags, B&H, amazon, ...


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


whats a good place to buy camera bags? im lookin at the crumpler 7MDH or timbuk2 snoop camera bag.. which would fit my equip better? maybe possibly a 70-200 in the future too

was lookin at ebags, B&H, amazon, ...


From my post on your Wanted thread:

You should definitely get the Timbuk2 Snoop! I got one two weeks ago in Medium with Gunmetal Grey/Limeaide colors, and it's an absolutely great bag. I love the colors, the space, the materials, and I can simply take the camera insert out and use it as a normal messenger bag for college. Unfortunately the mediums are all sold out ATM so I heavily recommend you be patient and wait for them to restock. I don't regret buying this bag whatsoever









And no, I am not giving mine up


----------



## iandroo888

yah i was wondering if there was a medium. was lookin at the site and the uhm.. measurements showed a medium but u only get to pick the small.. that confused me...

so wait huh.. mmkay

whats average/good price on the snoop?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


ah wth 80-400 f/4.6-5.4?? aw was so hoping for a 70-200 f/4


The interchangeable sensor patent is equally strange, not to mention the 1500-6000mm f/5-20 and 375-1500mm f/5-20 lens patents. Nikon is cooking up some strange stuff!

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


they need to push a 70-200 f/4 =.= those butts


Yeah, it's strange that Nikon hasn't done this considering the popularity of Canon's 70-200/4.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


yah i was wondering if there was a medium. was lookin at the site and the uhm.. measurements showed a medium but u only get to pick the small.. that confused me...

so wait huh.. mmkay

whats average/good price on the snoop?


The smalls go for $130; the mediums go for $150.

I again heavily suggest you wait for the mediums. They're definitely worth it, IMO.


----------



## theCanadian

Quote: 
   Originally Posted by *mz-n10*   dont go to teh dark side.....stay in the minolta family









the d90 is a fine camera but take a look at the d7000 if you can afford it. also the canon 60d looks to be pretty good too.

the sony a55 or pentax k-r are a bit cheaper but the sony is without weather sealing and uses a EV. the pentax has no fullframe upgrade path and 3rd part support worst then sony.  
I actually have two X-700's now. One of the earlier Japanese with the brass body and a new Chinese plastic one which has apparently only been used once. So I don't intend to stop using the Minolta.

I don't have the cash for a D7000. And the D90 is damn cheap these days.

Check this deal out:   [IMG alt="Amazon.com: Nikon D90 12.3 MP Digital SLR Camera with 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G VR Lens + Sigma 70-300MM Macro Zoom Lens + High Capacity Li-Ion Battery + 4 GB Memory Card + 50" Titanium Anodized Tripod + 6 Piece Accessory Kit + Deluxe Padded Camera Bag + Multi-Coated Glass UV Filter + Multi-Coated Glass Polarizer Filter + 3 Year Warranty Repair Contract: Camera & Photo"]images/misc/amazon_icon.gif[/IMG] Amazon.com: Nikon D90 12.3 MP Digital SLR Camera with 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G VR Lens + Sigma 70-300MM Macro Zoom Lens + High Capacity Li-Ion Battery + 4 GB Memory Card + 50" Titanium Anodized Tripod + 6 Piece Accessory Kit + Deluxe Padded Camera Bag + Multi-Coated Glass UV Filter + Multi-Coated Glass Polarizer Filter + 3 Year Warranty Repair Contract: Camera & Photo
 You can pick up a body only for almost half that price now.


----------



## laboitenoire

I wouldn't do that kit... The Sigma 70-300 is okay, but definitely not great.

And yeah, the price difference between the D90 and D7000 is substantial. Considering a used or refurb D90 typically runs between $650-750 depending on the dealer and the D7000 is still $1200 body only, that $450 could buy some glass... Such as the Tamron or Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 or 18-50 f/2.8. Could also get the Nikon 20-35 f/2.8 for not much more than that...

Even though I really want the D7000, the fact that D90 prices are so low right now is really tempting me. Much as I love my current lenses, I want to get some of the lenses out there that haven't had AF-S incarnations yet.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


The smalls go for $130; the mediums go for $150.

I again heavily suggest you wait for the mediums. They're definitely worth it, IMO.


mmm =3

yah those lenses are quite weird. is the demand on such long zoom telephotos that big?? i want a 70-200 f/4 =[ a step towards the 2.8 xD


----------



## laboitenoire

Nikonrumors was thinking they might be new field scopes.


----------



## dudemanppl

Facebook upload quality sucks.


----------



## iandroo888

QUICKLY !







oOo ! incomplete trinity D: but still nice ! i loved those two lenses


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:


Originally Posted by *laboitenoire* 
I wouldn't do that kit... The Sigma 70-300 is okay, but definitely not great.

And yeah, the price difference between the D90 and D7000 is substantial. Considering a used or refurb D90 typically runs between $650-750 depending on the dealer and the D7000 is still $1200 body only, that $450 could buy some glass... Such as the Tamron or Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 or 18-50 f/2.8. Could also get the Nikon 20-35 f/2.8 for not much more than that...

Even though I really want the D7000, the fact that D90 prices are so low right now is really tempting me. Much as I love my current lenses, I want to get some of the lenses out there that haven't had AF-S incarnations yet.

Yeah, I wouldn't bother with the kit either. But the deal is pretty good.


----------



## Marin

I seriously hate scanning 35mm film. It's never sharp unless you rape it with sharpening, it barely prints that large and it's a pain to edit.

Here's a shot with my 35L. sRGB made it look meh like usual, managed to bring back some of the colors.



And the 50L. Kept scanning in soft so whatever.


----------



## dudemanppl

Send it off to a shop? I didn't know it was that much work scanning... Learn something every day.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
I seriously hate scanning 35mm film. It's never sharp unless you rape it with sharpening, it barely prints that large and it's a pain to edit.

Sounds like I'm lucky I didn't buy the F4 then.


----------



## Marin

Just to point out, I'm referring to the stock scanners (as in stock holders and such). There are methods to obtain sharper scans but at the moment I don't feel like paying even more money for this stuff.


----------



## LemonSlice

Just sold and dropped the 55-200mm off my equipment list, but now I have a Tokina SD 11-16 f/2.8 AT-X wide angle in my mix







. It's hard to compose with this wide of a lens







.


----------



## iandroo888

takes a little getting used to but once u get it, that lens wont come off ! my 12-24's on my body more than 18-105 now


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
takes a little getting used to but once u get it, that lens wont come off ! my 12-24's on my body more than 18-105 now

thats probably has less to do with the focal length and more to do with the quality of the glass.

my 24-70 doesnt come off my camera even tho i have a 17-35 and a 14mm.


----------



## dudemanppl

I barely care for amazing IQ anymore, unless its truly crap. I just shoot whatever aperture I need to, I love stuff wide open. I can't get the hang of this 24-70, I think I made a bad purchase. Zooming is weird.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mz-n10* 
thats probably has less to do with the focal length and more to do with the quality of the glass.

my 24-70 doesnt come off my camera even tho i have a 17-35 and a 14mm.

True. I went from 35mm 1.8 to 50mm 1.4 to 24-70mm to 17-55mm to 70-200mm VR. That last one should be good enough proof LOL.

I want a second body, that and an UWA, then I'd be set.


----------



## Marin




----------



## iandroo888

yummy L lenses..

dudemanppl.. if u dont like taht 24-70... send it over ;D


----------



## Marin

There we go, got the scanner working better. Manual cropping and adding sharpening in Photoshop.


----------



## theCanadian

^ It almost looks like the photo is being compressed or transcoded in some way. Unless that speckling on the hat is in the original too.


----------



## riko99

New Largest image created by the 360 panorama guys. This one is weighing in at 80 Gigapixels have fun searching through this one now







.

360 London


----------



## biatchi

Quote:



Originally Posted by *riko99*


New Largest image created by the 360 panorama guys. This one is weighing in at 80 Gigapixels have fun searching through this one now







.

360 London


Wow


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *riko99*


New Largest image created by the 360 panorama guys. This one is weighing in at 80 Gigapixels have fun searching through this one now







.

360 London


thats the largest 360 panaramic......

largest image is still http://www.gigapan.org/gigapans/58857/


----------



## iandroo888

to those who use speedlights...

do u guys leave it on TTL-BL or do u guys set it manually? do u use a diffuser? what diffuser do u use?

ive tried the sb800 diffuser than comes with it and as well as a stofen sb600 one.. i still get slightly overexposed pictures... not sure if im using it right

with a diffuser, does that allow user to point the flash at object? or do u still point it up to bounce?

or do u guys just shoot having it over/underexposed and correcting it with PP?


----------



## dudemanppl

I am satisfied with my lens lineup.
Sigma 12-24mm f/4.5-5.6 EX DG
HSM
Nikkor 18mm f/2.8 AF-D
Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8 AF-S G N
Sigma 24mm f/1.8 EX DG
Sigma 50mm f/1.4 EX DG HSM
Nikkor 80-200mm f/2.8 AF-S D
Nikkor 85mm f/1.4 AF-D
Maybe a bit more length...


----------



## Manyak

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
to those who use speedlights...

do u guys leave it on TTL-BL or do u guys set it manually? do u use a diffuser? what diffuser do u use?

ive tried the sb800 diffuser than comes with it and as well as a stofen sb600 one.. i still get slightly overexposed pictures... not sure if im using it right

with a diffuser, does that allow user to point the flash at object? or do u still point it up to bounce?

or do u guys just shoot having it over/underexposed and correcting it with PP?

I go between TTL and manual depending on the situation. I use manual when:

1 - The camera is being stupid (which happens so often it's actually most of the time)

2 - When I want to eliminate any possible variance from shot-to-shot

3 - When using it off-camera (well duh







)

4 - When trying to "meter" with a digital body, only to move the flash onto a film body to take the shot


----------



## Marin




----------



## theCanadian

So I got some scans emailed to me from Clark Color Labs. I do not recommend the scan service. Under saturated, low resolution, and 'liney'. Hopefully the prints are ok.

Original:









2 Second Edit (Dirt and skin tones are roughly accurate, grass is off):


----------



## Marin

Weird. It's like they scanned the actual print.


----------



## WIGILOCO

Just fresh outta flickr. How OCN about this?


----------



## theCanadian

Interesting. I performed a little experiment since I'm having some trouble with exposure.

I set up my tripod and put my old X-700 + 50mm on it. Metered 1/30s. Then I set up the 'new' X-700 with the same 50mm and metered ~1/12s.

Now here's the kicker. Most of the time, the old X-700 is overexposed. The new X-700 is, for all intents and purposes, brand new out of the box.

I don't know what to make of this.

Edit:
I repeated the experiment again.
New X-700: Still 1/12
Old X-700: 1/45

Mind is blown.


----------



## Marin

Yeah, that happens to all light meters.


----------



## theCanadian

DOH! New X-700 was at ISO 100, old one was at ISO 400

Also tested roommates camera, a Minolta Maxxum STsi. All cameras read 1/6s @ 50mm @ f/5.6 @ ISO 400. And far from solving anything, it actually makes it more baffling.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Yeah, that happens to all light meters.

You mean with age or all light meters in general? I knew light meters were iffy, but I thought they just varied by like half a stop or something.

Also, would this lens have auto focus capabilities on a camera with no in body motor, such as the D5000? It's not AF-S, I think.
 Amazon.com: Nikon 28-200mm f/3.5-5.6G ED IF Autofocus Nikkor Zoom Lens: Camera & Photo

No.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *theCanadian* 

You mean with age or all light meters in general? I knew light meters were iffy, but I thought they just varied by like half a stop or something.


Yeah, the difference between different meters isn't huge if they're working normally. I was in class so I didn't notice how large of a shutter speed difference you were getting.


----------



## Unknownm

had to take some pictures for len-base media. Which was foreground / midground / background of focus (DOF). Normal - wide - Telephoto of the same subject on the 18-55 Canon Lens


----------



## Marin




----------



## mz-n10

mmmm mayo....


----------



## Unknownm

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*





















in the first image, can I get one for my nikon D5000. I want correct lighting and although the light meter on the d5000 isn't bad it still is off


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Unknownm* 
in the first image, can I get one for my nikon D5000. I want correct lighting and although the light meter on the d5000 isn't bad it still is off

That's a bit odd, perhaps choose different metering modes? Failing that, I think external light meters work irrespective of the camera brand.


----------



## dudemanppl

I use spot 98% of the time. Works fine for me. I'm using a D80 right now and the max (native) ISO is 1600. 2 stops under D700.


----------



## laboitenoire

What happened to the 700?


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Unknownm*


in the first image, can I get one for my nikon D5000. I want correct lighting and although the light meter on the d5000 isn't bad it still is off


take a shot then readjust the EV. you only really need a real light meter when you shoot film.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


Originally Posted by *laboitenoire* 
What happened to the 700?

Need to shoot some longish stuff tomorrow. 80-200 is short on FF.









Quote:


Originally Posted by *mz-n10* 
take a shot then readjust the EV. you only really need a real light meter when you shoot film.

But film has more dynamic range... wutlol.


----------



## Unknownm

it was really off today when I was taking pictures. Adjusting the F/stop to around 20 outside today, which ended up around 1/500 to the light meter (If in middle), however the photo was way to dark. Adjusting it to 1/120 which to the light meter was way to bright, the photo turned out perfect.

I don't trust my light meter anymore when adjusting my f/stops. Infact, I will never trust any light meter again when it's integrated in the camera


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dudemanppl* 
But film has more dynamic range... wutlol.

I once read about a guy who just for giggles took a photo at 0 EV and then +5 EV. In developing, he was able to make them look pretty much the same. I don't know how. Don't ask. But this is what he claims.


----------



## dudemanppl

Thats quite a many dynamic range.


----------



## USFORCES

Ok I bought a Canon EOS 1000D (XS) with a EF-S 55-250mm F/4-5.6 IS telephoto lens and I'm not overly impressed with the distance I can zoom too sure I can read licence plates a couple blocks away..... But what telephoto zoom lens do I need to buy for this camera be really impressed by?


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


Originally Posted by *USFORCES* 
Ok I bought a Canon EOS 1000D (XS) with a EF-S 55-250mm F/4-5.6 IS telephoto lens and I'm not overly impressed with the distance I can zoom too sure I can read licence plates a couple blocks away..... But what telephoto zoom lens do I need to buy for this camera be really impressed by?

buy A 600L.


----------



## Marin

You need a 1200mm f/5.6L.


----------



## dudemanppl

I just tried the Brenezier Method. I'm pooping at the DOF. Too bad the D80 missed focus.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dudemanppl* 
But film has more dynamic range... wutlol.

sure does, but i rather use the DR for something other then bad metering.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *USFORCES* 
Ok I bought a Canon EOS 1000D (XS) with a EF-S 55-250mm F/4-5.6 IS telephoto lens and I'm not overly impressed with the distance I can zoom too sure I can read licence plates a couple blocks away..... But what telephoto zoom lens do I need to buy for this camera be really impressed by?

you need the 5200mm f14


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mz-n10* 
sure does, but i rather use the DR for something other then bad metering.

you need the 5200mm f14

@USFORCES: Or if you prefer something hand holdable perhaps try the 400 5.6?


----------



## USFORCES

Thanks guys,
Some of the lenses you pointed out are a little out of my price range... The Canon 1200mm f/5.6L EF USM Lens-used only $99,000 and the Canon 5200mm f/14 lens would be cool but at 220 pounds -$55,000 isn't going to happen either









Maybe a canon EF Telephoto lens - 800 mm - F/5.6 even though I could swing it $11K might piss the wife off a little, LOL

How would something like this do a Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM and a 2x extender would give me 800mm. Total-$1800 new...


----------



## Marin

100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L is good and definitely popular. But with the 2x extender it will be insanely slow and AF will be disabled (taping pins will allow it again but AF is barely usable due to the lack of light). Basically, the lens will be of more use as a paperweight with the extender.


----------



## USFORCES

Thanks I'm still trying to figure out which will be the best way to go here before I make a commitment....


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


Originally Posted by *USFORCES* 
Thanks I'm still trying to figure out which will be the best way to go here before I make a commitment....

Maybe try renting some lenses?


----------



## Marin

Good suggestion.

http://www.lensrentals.com/for-canon


----------



## mz-n10

50-500 sigma or the canon/sigma/tamron 70-200+2x tc might be a better choice then the 100-400.


----------



## Marin

Finally put the roll in the processor. I had to kill the roll off early since I needed to load the camera up with slide film, so the only decent shot is the first test shot.




Camera is a Zeiss Ikon Contessa.


----------



## dudemanppl

Finally ordered my Alien Bees. They should be here next Monday (which is good because I'm going to Yosemite from like Thursday to Sunday, hopefully with my new ND filter).


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Finally put the roll in the processor. I had to kill the roll off early since I needed to load the camera up with slide film, so the only decent shot is the first test shot.


Do you not have a film picker? They're like six bucks shipped on ebay and are a savior if you want to swap film types/accidentally rewind the lead.


----------



## iandroo888

does anyone know how to turn off the flash on the sb-800 to act as a wireless commander for the other slaves by wireless? like i just want the slaves to fire and not the sb-800


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


does anyone know how to turn off the flash on the sb-800 to act as a wireless commander for the other slaves by wireless? like i just want the slaves to fire and not the sb-800


 Not possible.


----------



## iandroo888

oh.


----------



## theCanadian

Ok, I take back what I said about clark color labs scanning the images. High resolution photos are available. You just have to do some extra steps and it downloads in a zip.

100% Crop:









Full resolution:


----------



## Marin

Current lens lineup is my 35L, 50L and 135L. It will probably stay like that too.


----------



## dudemanppl

50 is the worst FL on FF. Not wide, not long. Blah. I would have 35 and 85 over it any day.


----------



## theCanadian

I don't use my 50 either. It's my best lens lol.


----------



## Manyak

What's funny is that I've been debating on selling my 50/1.4 all week and getting a 35/2 instead.

Either that, or sell both the 50 and 85 and get a 70-200mkII. Which I like the sound of better. But then I'd be left with no primes, and 2.8 just isn't fast enough sometimes....


----------



## Boyboyd

I haven't paid more than Â£200 for a lens yet. But i think my 55-200 is the best lens i have. I might get the 18-200 and sell the 55-200 after christmas.


----------



## laboitenoire

I personally think the 18-200 VR is overrated. Sure it does everything well enough, but for the price you could get the Tamron or Sigma 17/18-50 f/2.8 and a refurbished Nikon 70-300 VR, which would be a much more versatile combination (in my opinion).


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Manyak*


What's funny is that I've been debating on selling my 50/1.4 all week and getting a 35/2 instead.

Either that, or sell both the 50 and 85 and get a 70-200mkII. Which I like the sound of better. But then I'd be left with no primes, and 2.8 just isn't fast enough sometimes....


Manyak, are you not a member of the club? You're not in the list.

Anyway, I was just going to check if you had any wide angle stuff. If I was you, I'd always keep something at or below a 28mm effective in the bag. I love my 28mm/2.8

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*


I haven't paid more than Â£200 for a lens yet. But i think my 55-200 is the best lens i have. I might get the 18-200 and sell the 55-200 after christmas.


I was thinking about that 18-200 for when I get a DSLR, but I don't know if it's worth the price tag.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


I personally think the 18-200 VR is overrated. Sure it does everything well enough, but for the price you could get the Tamron or Sigma 17/18-50 f/2.8 and a refurbished Nikon 70-300 VR, which would be a much more versatile combination (in my opinion).


I don't even know anymore. I was leaning towards the sigma 10-20 actually. Or a portrait lens (currently using a mf micro nikor).


----------



## Manyak

Quote:


Originally Posted by *theCanadian* 
Manyak, are you not a member of the club? You're not in the list.

Anyway, I was just going to check if you had any wide angle stuff. If I was you, I'd always keep something at or below a 28mm effective in the bag. I love my 28mm/2.8

I was thinking about that 18-200 for when I get a DSLR, but I don't know if it's worth the price tag.

The Club? I dunno but my gear list is here.

And I always carry my 17-40mm









But yeah, I just thought about it a bit more today, and I think I want to get what I'm about to call the holy trinity of zooms:

16-35/2.8 mkII
24-70/2.8
70-200/2.8 mkII

So maybe I'll just sell off everything and stick with those and that's it.


----------



## dudemanppl

I'm in love with the 85 1.4.


----------



## mz-n10

nation geographic photo competition

http://www.boston.com/bigpicture/201...photograp.html


----------



## Marin

Man, I love Velvia.


----------



## dudemanppl

BF1-Bs are nice. Best body cap I have ever used.


----------



## Eagle1337

I got:
Canon t1i
Tokina11-16mm f/2.8
Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4.0 HSM OS
Canon ef 50mm f/1.8
Canon Ef-s 55-250mm
Canon ef 100mm Macro.


----------



## laboitenoire

What do you think of the Sigma 17-70, out of curiosity?


----------



## Eagle1337

Quote:


Originally Posted by *laboitenoire* 
What do you think of the Sigma 17-70, out of curiosity?

I love it, it's been on my camera since i bought it and it's rarely come off. It does have some draw backs. The non OS version is sharper (to be expected), HSM is what i call gimped hsm which is that the focus ring turns and no full time manual, but other then that no issues with it, I can post sample shots if you want.


----------



## theCanadian

BTW, I got the prints back from Clark Color. Much better than the scans. Properly saturated and MUCH sharper. Really the only bad part was my performance. I didn't get too many good ones out of those rolls. One of the rolls was at a soccer game. I got one keeper from the whole roll. Not looking forward to what I get out of the other two rolls from that game. Manual focus has no place in action sports. My sunsets were pretty good though. Plus the over all exposure is better.

All of that tells me they print from the negative, not the negative scan.


----------



## Manyak

The only way I can see manual focus being useable for sports is if you make your DOF large enough pre-focused at a certain point, and wait until someone runs into that sweet spot.


----------



## theCanadian

Pretty much. @ 300 mm with a 35mm frame, you're talking about 2.5-6 feet of sharpness at 50-75 feet @ f/5.6. It's pretty challenging.

It's not too bad for sports like softball and baseball, but it's still hard to grab that shot of the basemen/runners charging the plate.


----------



## Manyak

Quote:


Originally Posted by *theCanadian* 
It's not too bad for sports like softball and baseball, but it's still hard to grab that shot of the basemen/runners charging the plate.

Well yeah, and you can easily do golf and croquet too. But still, I mean, if you're going to make sports shooting a habit it might be cheaper in the long run to go digital with how many rolls you'd go through with only a few usable shots on them.

I still shoot film sometimes too, but I won't shoot sports with it lol.


----------



## theCanadian

Even before I sent the rolls in, I was saying, "Never again." You don't have any convincing to do here. I don't regret doing it though. It was quite exciting at times. I don't think I would have had the same experience with a DSLR.


----------



## Manyak

you'd be surprised...I shot a wrestling match last weekend with a 5DmkII, and believe me it wasn't easy lol. It's not like all DSLRs can focus like the 1D and D3


----------



## theCanadian

Well even still, I was scrambling to speed load the film into the camera, making sure the uptake spool was winding properly, etc. You're never really scrambling like that with a DSLR.

I'm a self proclaimed retro grouch. And I've been accused of it too. I enjoy the process of doing it old school more than I have a right to.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


Well even still, I was scrambling to speed load the film into the camera, making sure the uptake spool was winding properly, etc. You're never really scrambling like that with a DSLR.

I'm a self proclaimed retro grouch. And I've been accused of it too. I enjoy the process of doing it old school more than I have a right to.


I personally don't think there's anything wrong with that.

I was thinking about this the other day.

DSLRs are better than Point and Shoot cameras because they pass off more of the settings to the user. A lot of users (me included) keep some of these options set to auto (i.e. shutter priority, aperture priority, white balance etc).

So, shouldn't SLRs be even better because they give *more* flexibility? Like type of film, type of post, fewer auto options?


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*


I personally don't think there's anything wrong with that.

I was thinking about this the other day.

DSLRs are better than Point and Shoot cameras because they pass off more of the settings to the user. A lot of users (me included) keep some of these options set to auto (i.e. shutter priority, aperture priority, white balance etc).

So, shouldn't SLRs be even better because they give *more* flexibility? Like type of film, type of post, fewer auto options?


but the more options you have the more options there are to go wrong.


----------



## Marin

And DSLR's seem to make people lazy. /random


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


but the more options you have the more options there are to go wrong.


That's true. I forgot to point out that. I should of said "a really experienced photographer _should_ get better photos the more options he/she has.


----------



## otterpopjunkie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


And DSLR's seem to make people lazy. /random


so do zoom lenses









But I say photoshop is the worst, more so than any of the above.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *otterpopjunkie*


so do zoom lenses









But I say photoshop is the worst, more so than any of the above.


Well, let's not get carried away... lol


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *otterpopjunkie*


so do zoom lenses









But I say photoshop is the worst, more so than any of the above.


I disagree; I say zoom lenses. Photoshop takes effort to learn and use. Zooms do not


----------



## Manyak

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*


So, shouldn't SLRs be even better because they give *more* flexibility? Like type of film, type of post, fewer auto options?


With the editing power you have on a computer, digital actually gives you MORE options than film. The effects of using different film (and processing it differently) can be mimicked very easily on the PC.

Film, on the other hand, gives many more chances for something to go wrong. You could get distracted and leave it in the developer too long, the developer could spontaneously fail and leave you with nothing (see Xtol), you drop the film and scratch it, someone can open the door to your darkroom at a bad time, ..... there are just so many chances for something to happen.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *otterpopjunkie*


so do zoom lenses










Zoom lenses can sometimes be a necessity though. Case in point: shooting ringside at a wrestling match. When the wrestlers are at your end of the ring you need 20-24mm, and when they are on the opposite end you need 70mm-85mm. Otherwise you'll either miss the action when they're close or you'll lose a lot of detail when they're far away (because of how much you'll have to crop).


----------



## Marin

IMO, if you aren't careless the chances of something going wrong with film are slim.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


IMO, if you aren't careless the chances of something going wrong with film are slim.


There's only a teeny tiny minority of people who are careless *and* into photography *and* shoot film.


----------



## Manyak

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


IMO, if you aren't careless the chances of something going wrong with film are slim.


I can't tell you how many times I've gotten distracted by the TV and screwed up development somehow. I've never had a complete loss, but I've definitely pushed the film by accident a few times


----------



## KGIXXER7

new guy, and I would like to join the club please








Nikon D3000, 18-55 lens that came with it.

a couple pics...
Attachment 182013
Attachment 182014
Attachment 182015


----------



## biatchi

@TheCanadian you could get a dslr, an old prime and leave the camera in full manual mode giving you the convenience of digital with the involvement of old school.


----------



## Boyboyd

I was bored











I prefer the flickr one though. I was going to spell "overclock" but i only have one 'o'


----------



## dudemanppl

I can't use a normal zoom (24-70). It doesn't work in my mind. Oh and I killed the D700's rear LCD, I'm that stupid, so I have to borrow my friends iPad to view photos when I go to Yosemite. Le Sigh. In other news, I hope this ND filter will have a use.


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


I can't use a normal zoom (24-70). It doesn't work in my mind. Oh and I killed the D700's rear LCD, I'm that stupid, so I have to borrow my friends iPad to view photos when I go to Yosemite. Le Sigh. In other news, I hope this ND filter will have a use.


Ouch! how'd you manage to kill the LCD?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


I can't use a normal zoom (24-70). It doesn't work in my mind. Oh and I killed the D700's rear LCD, I'm that stupid, so I have to borrow my friends iPad to view photos when I go to Yosemite. Le Sigh. In other news, I hope this ND filter will have a use.


It sounds like you're really hard on your gear. I mean you did sand the paint off another camera.


----------



## wire

Considering picking up a T1i with kit lens for $500. Is that a great deal or should I be looking else where?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Where are you looking to begin with?


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *wire*


Considering picking up a T1i with kit lens for $500. Is that a great deal or should I be looking else where?


Sounds about on par with a used camera kit. Where are you looking? If it's adorama, B&H, or a photographer forum I'd jump on it.

If it's ebay, I'd skip it.


----------



## wire

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Sounds about on par with a used camera kit. Where are you looking? If it's adorama, B&H, or a photographer forum I'd jump on it.

If it's ebay, I'd skip it.


Canon.com

http://shop.usa.canon.com/webapp/wcs...0051_214560_-1

It's backordered but it still allows me to purchase it.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *wire*


Canon.com

http://shop.usa.canon.com/webapp/wcs...0051_214560_-1

It's backordered but it still allows me to purchase it.


$500 looks like a good deal then. That's the price of a used T1i body only. Seeing as how it comes with the lens as well and is from Canon themselves, I'd jump on it!


----------



## dudemanppl

<div style="margin:20px; margin-top:5px; ">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px">Quote:</div>
<table cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="99%">
<tr>
<td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset">

<div>
Originally Posted by <strong>GoneTomorrow</strong>
<a href="showthread.php?s=18c9b6a381ea2c82787afc71db22dae8&p=11433067#post11433067" rel="nofollow"><img class="inlineimg" src="http://static.overclock.net//img/forum/go_quote.gif" border="0" alt="View Post" /></a>
</div>
<div style="font-style:italic">It sounds like you're really hard on your gear. I mean you did sand the paint off another camera.</div>

</td>
</tr>
</table>
</div>LOL. That was a D2H, no real loss. (But they are quite the nice bodies) I was taking it apart to clean the dust that had accumulated on the rear LCD area. I'm kinda OCD about that.<br />
<br />
EDIT: D3 and 24-70 coming Monday. Order total: $3,615.50 Sweet. Selling my old 24-70 for 1400, then the D700 gripped for 2150 or so. 50 bucks to upgrade to a D3. lololololololololol


----------



## Boyboyd

How wet would you say you'd have to get a D5000 to break it?


----------



## Marin

Throw it into a bucket of water.


----------



## Manyak

So a friend of mine bought a Rebel XS today, and I played with it for a while. It's not the first time I pick up a rebel, but the first time I actually try to use one seriously - and let me tell you, the longer you use it the worse it becomes lol. No really, it feels like a giant P&S, especially with the tiny viewfinder and without direct focus point selection.


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Manyak* 
So a friend of mine bought a Rebel XS today, and I played with it for a while. It's not the first time I pick up a rebel, but the first time I actually try to use one seriously - and let me tell you, the longer you use it the worse it becomes lol. No really, it feels like a giant P&S, especially with the tiny viewfinder and without direct focus point selection.

Yeah. The viewfinder is pretty crap. I used my dad's Rebel a couple times on our vacation to Boon/Linville Falls. It never seems to focus quite where you want it. Plus I don't like that Canon has re-labeled everything. Even the EV compensation is not simply "EV"


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Manyak* 
So a friend of mine bought a Rebel XS today, and I played with it for a while. It's not the first time I pick up a rebel, but the first time I actually try to use one seriously - and let me tell you, the longer you use it the worse it becomes lol. No really, it feels like a giant P&S, especially with the tiny viewfinder and without direct focus point selection.

It does have AF point selection unless you're talking about something else.


----------



## Unknownm

would you guys pick Nikon 3DS or the Canon EOS 1D Mark IV?

I love my D5000 but having ISO at 6400-12K and have great picture quality with it.. Just makes me drool.


----------



## Manyak

Quote:


Originally Posted by *theCanadian* 
Yeah. The viewfinder is pretty crap. I used my dad's Rebel a couple times on our vacation to Boon/Linville Falls. It never seems to focus quite where you want it. Plus I don't like that Canon has re-labeled everything. Even the EV compensation is not simply "EV"

Yeah that's pretty much what I was going through trying to use it. It was horrible









Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
It does have AF point selection unless you're talking about something else.

No I'm talking about _direct_ selection. Like, just tilt the little joystick and boom you've got the AF point you want selected. With the rebel you have to go into a menu and look at the screen to select the one you want. And going back to auto-selection can take like 3 or 4 button presses.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Unknownm* 
would you guys pick Nikon 3DS or the Canon EOS 1D Mark IV?

I love my D5000 but having ISO at 6400-12K and have great picture quality with it.. Just makes me drool.

That depends on which Nikon lenses you already have. And I wouldn't pick either of those two anyway - I'd wait and take the 1Ds Mk IV when it comes out.


----------



## Marin

I'd take the 1Ds Mark IV.


----------



## Unknownm

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Manyak* 
That depends on which Nikon lenses you already have. And I wouldn't pick either of those two anyway - I'd wait and take the 1Ds Mk IV when it comes out.

I understand. I should find a F-mount lens with lower aperture. Which will be cheaper than getting a 3Ds/3Dx.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
I'd take the 1Ds Mark IV.

Good choice, reading reviews the movie modes


----------



## Manyak

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Unknownm* 
I understand. I should find a F-mount lens with lower aperture. Which will be cheaper than getting a 3Ds/3Dx.

No I meant that if you have a lot of lenses it will be pretty expensive to switch!

I have no idea what lenses you have









I also don't know where you're finding reviews on the 1Ds Mark IV, it hasn't even been announced yet.


----------



## Unknownm

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Manyak* 
No I meant that if you have a lot of lenses it will be pretty expensive to switch!

I have no idea what lenses you have









I also don't know where you're finding reviews on the 1Ds Mark IV, it hasn't even been announced yet.



You Tube





I also just have stock lens 18-55mm 3.5/5.6


----------



## Manyak

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Unknownm* 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vkg7pAxi4gE

I also just have stock lens 18-55mm 3.5/5.6

That's the 1DmkIV, not 1D*s*.


----------



## Unknownm

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Manyak* 
That's the 1DmkIV, not 1D*s*.

oh my mistake. I must of had that camera in my mind when I was trying to type out those 2


----------



## Shane1244

If it hasn't been announced.. Why do you keep talking about it?







The name doesn't exist?


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Shane1244* 
If it hasn't been announced.. Why do you keep talking about it?







The name doesn't exist?

Drugs are bad.

D3 and 24-70 on the first. Sigh. In other news, I took apart the D700 10 minutes before we went to Yosemite, broke a cable retention latch and now the damn thing works perfectly. lolwut. Not one to complain though. Setting up the Think Tank bag with:
Nikon D700 with MB-D10 and Eneloops
Nikon F100 with MB-15 and Eneloops

Sigma 12-24mm f/4.5-5.6 EX DG HSM
Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8 AF-S G N
Nikkor 80-200mm f/2.8 AF-S D
Nikkor 85mm f/1.4 AF-D

Velly nais keet. I'm typing this on my friends iPad and this is infuriating.


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dudemanppl* 
Drugs are bad.

D3 and 24-70 on the first. Sigh. In other news, I took apart the D700 10 minutes before we went to Yosemite, broke a cable retention latch and now the damn thing works perfectly. lolwut. Not one to complain though. Setting up the Think Tank bag with:
Nikon D700 with MB-D10 and Eneloops
Nikon F100 with MB-15 and Eneloops

Sigma 12-24mm f/4.5-5.6 EX DG HSM
Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8 AF-S G N
Nikkor 80-200mm f/2.8 AF-S D
Nikkor 85mm f/1.4 AF-D

Velly nais keet. I'm typing this on my friends iPad and this is infuriating.

I'd be infuriated too!


----------



## Unknownm

You Tube


----------



## Unknownm

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Shane1244* 
If it hasn't been announced.. Why do you keep talking about it?







The name doesn't exist?

because I want


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Drugs are bad.

D3 and 24-70 on the first. Sigh. In other news, I took apart the D700 10 minutes before we went to Yosemite, broke a cable retention latch and now the damn thing works perfectly. lolwut. Not one to complain though. Setting up the Think Tank bag with:
Nikon D700 with MB-D10 and Eneloops
Nikon F100 with MB-15 and Eneloops

Sigma 12-24mm f/4.5-5.6 EX DG HSM
Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8 AF-S G N 
Nikkor 80-200mm f/2.8 AF-S D
Nikkor 85mm f/1.4 AF-D

Velly nais keet. I'm typing this on my friends iPad and this is infuriating.


I don't think you'll use the 85 that often. Tell us how it goes though









Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


I'd be infuriated too!


Just me who can touch type on an iPad?


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Throw it into a bucket of water.


Well mine got about 10 snowflakes on it last night and stopped working. I left it for a few hours and nothing.

Left it overnight and it's fine now.


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*


Well mine got about 10 snowflakes on it last night and stopped working. I left it for a few hours and nothing.

Left it overnight and it's fine now.



I'm no expert, but subjecting your camera to extreme temperature changes without taking precaution first doesn't seem like a good idea. Try letting it cool (and warm) in a ziplock bag next time?

@Danylu:

I won't buy a touch type device for as long as I can help it. Or until the technology improves radically. It's simply an inferior system.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


Originally Posted by *theCanadian* 
I'm no expert, but subjecting your camera to extreme temperature changes without taking precaution first doesn't seem like a good idea. Try letting it cool (and warm) in a ziplock bag next time?

@Danylu:

I won't buy a touch type device for as long as I can help it. Or until the technology improves radically. It's simply an inferior system.

It wasn't really an extreme temperature change. No condensation formed on the lens because i left it in the cold kitchen for a while. It was at the very least -1Â°c outside.

It seems to have fixed itself though, but ill try putting it in a ziploc next time though.


----------



## iandroo888

im pretty sure a few snowflakes wont make it not work. friend has dropped a canon rebel dslr in snow.. wiped clean and dry. works fine.

mine has had snow thrown on it.. wiped. all good.


----------



## Boyboyd

Must have been the change in temperature then. If it had broken because of the snowflakes i'd have returned it and bought a weathersealed model.


----------



## iandroo888

whats a good way of protecting equipment from such temp changes?? its gotten really cold here thse few days.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *theCanadian;*
I'm no expert, but subjecting your camera to extreme temperature changes without taking precaution first doesn't seem like a good idea. Try letting it cool (and warm) in a ziplock bag next time?

@Danylu:

I won't buy a touch type device for as long as I can help it. Or until the technology improves radically. It's simply an inferior system.

Life is about compromises, true?

I type slower than on a physical keyboard of course, but I have no problems taking notes on this in a lecture environment, in fact, I'm way ahead of everyone else with pen and paper. To me, it's worth it for the small profile and extremely long battery life, although the MacBook Air, a few iterations down the track, would be excellent in this regard as well.

Care to share what kind of improvements could be made? I can't say it's perfect, but I can't really think of anything off the top of my head.


----------



## theCanadian

Exactly! The current technology can only be pushed so far. As I said, touch type devices are simply inferior to mechanical type devices. Not only are they slower and less accurate, but they provide no tactile response. This is something that cannot be overcome. Not without some sort of genius idea to break that barrier.

Anyway, we've drifted off topic.

Going back to the previous conversation; some camera models and serial numbers are susceptible to locking up in freezing temperatures. The ziplock back locks in air which will help slow the cooling and hopefully reduce the 'shock' to the camera.

When warming up, the ziplock bag only is to keep out moisture, so taking out all the air from the bag has no impact. In the summer months, a ziplock bag is only needed when going from the cold indoors to the hot outside.


----------



## Shane1244

Any ideas on how to get this picture even sharper? I mostly just want the top icons nice and sharp. Both camera and phone were handheld, and shot at f/1.8

100% Crop


----------



## Manyak

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Shane1244* 
Any ideas on how to get this picture even sharper? I mostly just want the top icons nice and sharp. Both camera and phone were handheld, and shot at f/1.8

Step the aperture down.


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:


Originally Posted by *theCanadian* 
Exactly! The current technology can only be pushed so far. As I said, touch type devices are simply inferior to mechanical type devices. Not only are they slower and less accurate, but they provide no tactile response. This is something that cannot be overcome. Not without some sort of genius idea to break that barrier.

Swype-typing(or trace typing) kicks those tiny mechanical keyboards where it hurts.

I can type faster with one finger than most people can with two thumbs on a mini mechanical keyboard.

Nothing beats a regular desktop keyboard though.

...on topic...)
I want to get the D7000 but I haz no monehs.


----------



## Unstableiser

I have recently had time to get back into photography and would like some opinions so I can improve as I am not happy with most of my tries. I have a Flickr account. Not all of those pics are 'proper ones' and some of them are taken on a camera phone but hopefully you can tell in which ones I tried







I have never had any lessons or read much about photography but I know the basics. I have a Canon SX110 IS which I think is a great starter camera but I'm starting to be unhappy with some of it's qualities, although macro is awesome. I recently tried out the CHDK update as well, which is incredible to say the least ^^


----------



## theCanadian

PhotoGavin on youtube has some good ideas. You can know all the technicalities of photography and still be bad. In my case, with my film SLR, I know almost all of it's qualities but I usually forget just one thing that keeps me from getting the shot.

More oft than not, I forget to cover the viewfinder to prevent light leaking in while I use my tripod. Destroys my shutter speed. Or I Adjust EV in the wrong direction because I'm over thinking it. lawl.


----------



## max302

For all the Canadians who want info on the D7000 body's availability... Futureshop has a bit over 50 bodies inbound to the eastern distribution center, a couple more for web orders. I don't have an ETA but they've been on order for something like a week, so my guess is another week or two and it's available, at least on the web.

Webcode is 10156328. As soon as it pops up online you know that it's a matter of days.

My funds have been ready for a while now, pulling the trigger on the D7000 as soon as it's available. FINALLY, a return to digital!


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


Originally Posted by *max302* 
For all the Canadians who want info on the D7000 body's availability... Futureshop has a bit over 50 bodies inbound to the eastern distribution center, a couple more for web orders. I don't have an ETA but they've been on order for something like a week, so my guess is another week or two and it's available, at least on the web.

Webcode is 10156328. As soon as it pops up online you know that it's a matter of days.

My funds have been ready for a while now, pulling the trigger on the D7000 as soon as it's available. FINALLY, a return to digital!

We have them in the store, and in the warehouse at BestBuy.


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Manyak* 
Step the aperture down.

What aperture do you think I could get away with, and still have a blown background?


----------



## theCanadian

Depends on the distance to the subject. Try a couple different apertures and see what you get. Also, use a tripod.


----------



## theCanadian

Did FujiFilm announce EOL on Velvia or is that still an option? If and when I get a DSLR, film will be my secondary, used only when I want prints and/or a very high Dynamic Range whilst shooting landscapes. At that point I'll probably be shooting Ektar and some other slide film. I'd like to make it Velvia 100 because I love lots of saturation, but if it's not going to be around, I'll need to find something else.


----------



## Marin

Velvia is going to be around due to it's popularity.


----------



## theCanadian

Ok good, must have been some other Fuji that was going EOL.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*


What aperture do you think I could get away with, and still have a blown background?


put the phone at the minimum focus distance and shoot against a distant background. Even at a smaller aperture this will cause the background to be defocused.

Also, use a tripod maybe.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*


Any ideas on how to get this picture even sharper? I mostly just want the top icons nice and sharp. Both camera and phone were handheld, and shot at f/1.8


Primes are softest wide open, as is any lens. However, I think in this instance the softness is motion blur (1/160, though not exactly slow, can easily be blurred hand held). Switch to 200 or 400 ISO to get the shutter speed up, or better yet, stabilize (tripod or makeshift).


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


*Primes are softest wide open*, as is any lens. However, I think in this instance the softness is motion blur (1/160, though not exactly slow, can easily be blurred hand held). Switch to 200 or 400 ISO to get the shutter speed up, or better yet, stabilize (tripod or makeshift).


I wish someone would have told me this earlier. I just figured out the other day that the sweet spot is f/8-f11


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


I wish someone would have told me this earlier. I just figured out the other day that the sweet spot is f/8-f11


To be fair, the Nikon 35/1.8 is actually very sharp wide open, so it's relative when I say softest wide open. With primes, it's usually the corners that are soft wide open. So long as the center is plenty sharp, it's usually not a problem.


----------



## mz-n10

Max sharpness is usually 2-3 stops from wide open. But anything pass f16 starts to get defraction


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


Max sharpness is usually 2-3 stops from wide open. But anything pass f16 starts to get defraction


I've never really understood. How do you determine a full stop? As far as I know, it's double the amount of light/per stop.


----------



## Manyak

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


Max sharpness is usually 2-3 stops from wide open. But anything pass f16 starts to get defraction


Meh, it really depends on each individual lens/sensor combination. It depends on the diameter of the aperture and the size of each sensor 'pixel' - and f/5.6 is a much larger aperture at 800mm than at 50mm.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*


I've never really understood. How do you determine a full stop? As far as I know, it's double the amount of light/per stop.


f/1, f/1.4, f/2, f/2.8, f/4, f/5.6, f/8, f/11, f/16, f/22, f/32, f/45, f/64.....

Basically, you start with f/1 and f/1.4, and then every multiple of those (sometimes rounded) is a full stop.


----------



## laboitenoire

It's a scale...

f/1, 1.4, 2, 2.8, 4, 5.6, 8, etc.

I can't remember the exact pattern to how the numbers increase...

EDIT: Damn, Manyak beat me to it!


----------



## Manyak

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


It's a scale...

f/1, 1.4, 2, 2.8, 4, 5.6, 8, etc.

I can't remember the exact pattern to how the numbers increase...

EDIT: Damn, Manyak beat me to it!


The _exact_ pattern is on wikipedia









It's sqrt(2)^n, starting from from n=0.


----------



## Unknownm

I was looking at this lens ( http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/18-105mm.htm ).

Look at the chart for Distortion. 35mm to 105mm more correction is needed. If this lens works on my D5000, will the "auto distortion correction" feature on my camera fix high distortion when using 35mm to 105mm?


----------



## Shane1244

Rep to all thanks!







I read a review, and apparently it's best is around f/3.5, I'll try that tomorrow, I'll also use a tripod.

Rep to all.


----------



## laboitenoire

I'm honestly not sure how effective auto distortion correction is on the D5000. However, in my very brief testing with my 18-55 VR and 70-300 VR it appears to work pretty well.


----------



## Manyak

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Unknownm*


I was looking at this lens ( http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/18-105mm.htm ).

Look at the chart for Distortion. 35mm to 105mm more correction is needed. If this lens works on my D5000, will the "auto distortion correction" feature on my camera fix high distortion when using 35mm to 105mm?


I dunno about in-camera, but lightroom should do it.


----------



## Unknownm

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


I'm honestly not sure how effective auto distortion correction is on the D5000. However, in my very brief testing with my 18-55 VR and 70-300 VR it appears to work pretty well.


Do you think I should get that lens if it fits my camera?

I want good pictures but the fact that it needs to be corrected at high zoom puts me off

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Manyak*


I dunno about in-camera, but lightroom should do it.


Yeah true. I guess i'll be relaying on lightroom


----------



## laboitenoire

Honestly, don't worry about the distortion. It's easy enough to correct either in camera or in post production. I've mentioned before that I'm not a big fan of the 18-105 (overpriced for what you get, in my opinion). However, if you think the range of focal lengths of the lens is what you're looking for, then go for it. Personally I'd either go for a 3rd party 17/18-50 f/2.8 zoom or the Nikon 16-85 VR before I bought the 18-105, but that's because I'd want my kit lens replacement to have better construction (the 18-105 still has a plastic bayonet mount).


----------



## Unknownm

Quote:


Originally Posted by *laboitenoire* 
Honestly, don't worry about the distortion. It's easy enough to correct either in camera or in post production. I've mentioned before that I'm not a big fan of the 18-105 (overpriced for what you get, in my opinion). However, if you think the range of focal lengths of the lens is what you're looking for, then go for it. Personally I'd either go for a 3rd party 17/18-50 f/2.8 zoom or the Nikon 16-85 VR before I bought the 18-105, but that's because I'd want my kit lens replacement to have better construction (the 18-105 still has a plastic bayonet mount).

Well right now I have 18-55mm. I want more zoom and have the blur background with great quality.

I'm unsure about sensor size and how that works with lens. All I know is my camera is a F mount and a DX sensor?


----------



## iandroo888

if u have the d5000, all the AF-S lenses will autofocus and meter on it. i use 18-105 on my d5000, works great. light and decent focal zoom length. nice walk around lens.

on the note about it being a plastic bayonet, unless u are careless in using ur camera, it shouldnt matter too much. ive had my 18-105 for almost a year. its like brand new.

if u want to have really nice bokeh, ur gonna need to find a lens faster than f/3.5.. ull get some bokeh but its not really a nice deep one.

oh also, F mount is just the name for the mount nikon uses for their lenses.. its been F mount since early film days (hence why nikon DSLR bodies can use hecka old film lenses).. companies like canon for example changed around over time and have compatibility issues with older lenses...

DX sensor means its a small sensor. slight crop of 1.5x or so.. so ur 18-55 is like 27-82mm on a full frame or film body.


----------



## laboitenoire

Getting a good level of background blur will be tricky with the 18-105 VR, because it has a relatively small aperture throughout its zoom range. Unless you shoot wide open at very short distances from your subjects, it'll be tough.

You might consider the AF-S 50 f/1.4 if you really need to blur backgrounds...

If you need to zoom in more, I'd go for the 55-200 VR. Cheap, good image quality, and it has decent bokeh when wide open (although it's not the sharpest lens out there at those apertures).


----------



## Unknownm

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
if u have the d5000, all the AF-S lenses will autofocus and meter on it. i use 18-105 on my d5000, works great. light and decent focal zoom length. nice walk around lens.

on the note about it being a plastic bayonet, unless u are careless in using ur camera, it shouldnt matter too much. ive had my 18-105 for almost a year. its like brand new.

if u want to have really nice bokeh, ur gonna need to find a lens faster than f/3.5.. ull get some bokeh but its not really a nice deep one.

oh also, F mount is just the name for the mount nikon uses for their lenses.. its been F mount since early film days (hence why nikon DSLR bodies can use hecka old film lenses).. companies like canon for example changed around over time and have compatibility issues with older lenses...

DX sensor means its a small sensor. slight crop of 1.5x or so.. so ur 18-55 is like 27-82mm on a full frame or film body.

for the DX sensor, is there a chart I can follow when finding lens.

Well I hate the fact that when I zoom the f/ goes to 5.6 already. Maybe I should find a manual lens with manual aperture


----------



## iandroo888

even if u get a AF lens with the aperture ring, the body wont let u set it manually. thats more of a film function that doesnt have a body that knows how to control the aperture elements inside the lens.

whats ur budget for a "new" lens? in a way, ur asking a lot for just getting into photography. lol to have a deeper bokeh, ull need a lens with a faster aperture 2.8 or higher (up to 1.4... in some cases 1.2 or 1 >_>) to have a zoom + 2.8 or higher aperture means ur gonna step into the pro lenses almost.. $800 and up lol.. unless u go third party... can be cheaper

the 55-200 is a great zoom telephoto if u want the range. 55-200 VR can be had for liek $200 new or something


----------



## Unknownm

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
even if u get a AF lens with the aperture ring, the body wont let u set it manually. thats more of a film function that doesnt have a body that knows how to control the aperture elements inside the lens.

whats ur budget for a "new" lens? in a way, ur asking a lot for just getting into photography. lol to have a deeper bokeh, ull need a lens with a faster aperture 2.8 or higher (up to 1.4... in some cases 1.2 or 1 >_>) to have a zoom + 2.8 or higher aperture means ur gonna step into the pro lenses almost.. $800 and up lol.. unless u go third party... can be cheaper

the 55-200 is a great zoom telephoto if u want the range. 55-200 VR can be had for liek $200 new or something

I take pictures with my hands because I don't have a tripod so I take it aperture will help.
http://vancouver.en.craigslist.ca/pho/

That's where i'm looking for my lens. If you have time find me a good lens and pretty cheap. I'm going to sell my 18-55mm lens to help pay for the new one


----------



## iandroo888

ur not gonna get much from the 18-55 kit lens.. at best $100 USD. i see a lot go for like 80


----------



## Unknownm

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
ur not gonna get much from the 18-55 kit lens.. at best $100 USD. i see a lot go for like 80

Understandable but least it will help me get a new lens


----------



## iandroo888

almost every lens has some sort of distortion at some point. u cant get away from it. dont let distortion or w/e be something that hinders your decision in getting a lens... distortion is something easily corrected in lightroom. and how much distortion can u get from normal shooting... only time i ever worried about distortion is when i use my 12-24mm in real estate photography.. .

so u never answered my question from before... whats your budget..


----------



## Unknownm

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
almost every lens has some sort of distortion at some point. u cant get away from it. dont let distortion or w/e be something that hinders your decision in getting a lens... distortion is something easily corrected in lightroom. and how much distortion can u get from normal shooting... only time i ever worried about distortion is when i use my 12-24mm in real estate photography.. .

so u never answered my question from before... whats your budget..

Oh sorry. Budget is around 200 max 300. I linked vancouver craigslist because because I hate waiting for shipping, limited to credit card - paypal (online). Unless you know some shops in Vancouver, B.C


----------



## dudemanppl

I say don't whine about what's wrong with the lens. In the end it still works and its not manual focus. VR on it works nicely, and it has a nice focal range. Just raise the ISO as you please.


----------



## Unknownm

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dudemanppl* 
I say don't whine about what's wrong with the lens. In the end it still works and its not manual focus. VR on it works nicely, and it has a nice focal range. Just raise the ISO as you please.

Alright, alright alright







. Lets move on from the lens distortion. Does anyone recommend me some lens that I should look for?

I want a better aperture while keeping the cost down. I have about 200-300 to spend (CAD). I want to use craigslist for the convince but please link to anything anyways.


----------



## Manyak

50mm f/1.8


----------



## laboitenoire

Nikon 35 f/1.8. The 50 f/1.8 won't auto-focus on the D5000.


----------



## Manyak

Quote:


Originally Posted by *laboitenoire* 
Nikon 35 f/1.8. The 50 f/1.8 won't auto-focus on the D5000.

Oh yeah, no motor. /doh


----------



## Shane1244

Nikkor 35mm f/1.8. It's a great lens, but it might not have the focal distance you want.


----------



## iandroo888

focal distance can often be solved by a few steps =D


----------



## Unknownm

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Manyak* 
Oh yeah, no motor. /doh

I have a feeling that I will regret that later. I already read that in wiki D5000 page about no motor.


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
focal distance can often be solved by a few steps =D

Sorry, I meant telephoto. I think he wanted a longer/narrower lens.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Unknownm* 
I have a feeling that I will regret that later. I already read that in wiki D5000 page about no motor.

It's not a big deal unless you like older lenses. What sucks is not being able to meter on Non-CPU lenses.


----------



## Unknownm

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
It's not a big deal unless you like older lenses. What sucks is not being able to meter on Non-CPU lenses.

oh god.. the meter on mine is pretty bad already but I manage with adding more light most of the time.


----------



## iandroo888

anyone spot any nice cyber monday deals? particularly, bags like timbuk2 snoop camera medium or crumpler 7 million dollar home xDD


----------



## Marin

After using the Snoop since it's launch there's no way I can go back to the 7MDH.


----------



## riko99

Not sure if you guys have heard of the origin of the Rule of Thirds but man oh man is this video creepy.

  
 the Fibonacci Rule


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
focal distance can often be solved by a few steps =D

dis-tor-tion


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


After using the Snoop since it's launch there's no way I can go back to the 7MDH.


Hmm, how much would you sell it for? A local deal could work. 
EDIT: Oh wait, I don't want a Crumpler bag...


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *riko99*


Not sure if you guys have heard of the origin of the Rule of Thirds but man oh man is this video creepy.

the Fibonacci Rule


Not watched the whole thing, but its interesting with the golden man, rectangles etc...


----------



## dudemanppl

D3 only has 47k actuations?1?!/ Thats less than my D700..... All for 2500 boxed.


----------



## Boyboyd

It's forecast -14Â°c for Thursday. I really hope that's not accurate.


----------



## Triangle

D700
D2H
F3/T
Way too many lenses to list.


----------



## dudemanppl

Stitching stuff together. Process images as HDR then put together as panorama OR stitch panorama then HDR?


----------



## Boyboyd

Stitch then HDR


----------



## laboitenoire

I say try both and see which you prefer.


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


I say try both and see which you prefer.


If you don't stitch them first, I believe the only difference would be that you could possibly not have matching values.


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


To be fair, the Nikon 35/1.8 is actually very sharp wide open, so it's relative when I say softest wide open. With primes, it's usually the corners that are soft wide open. So long as the center is plenty sharp, it's usually not a problem.


I was speaking more to my lenses. They were made back when that tended to mean a little bit more.


----------



## dudemanppl

Hmm I guess you're right. Stitch then HDR. Sanks bro. Somehow I got the 24-70 to flare.


----------



## Boyboyd

I've been stuck in my village since monday. There's only a certain number of times i can photograph snow, and i've run out of ideas.


----------



## Unknownm

Pictures

http://www.overclock.net/intel-mothe...ntium-3-a.html


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Boyboyd* 
I've been stuck in my village since monday. There's only a certain number of times i can photograph snow, and i've run out of ideas.

I know what you mean. I find it hard to get inspired to get outside and take 100 pictures of snow.

Might have to play around with some studio stuff this season.


----------



## biatchi

You could say you have, snow inspiration







I'll leave now


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


Originally Posted by *biatchi* 
You could say you have, snow inspiration







I'll leave now


----------



## dudemanppl

Tried a 50 AF-S. Soft and it has crap build. Would NEVER consider buying one (unless forced at gunpoint).


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dudemanppl* 
Tried a 50 AF-S. Soft and it has crap build. Would NEVER consider buying one (unless forced at gunpoint).


----------



## iandroo888

is the build on the 50mm f/1.4 sigma better?


----------



## Marin

I said no more purchases but I'm getting annoyed with using monorail cameras due to how bulky they are and how long they take to setup. Probably why they're mainly studio cameras.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...w_180_223.html

Used it costs around $700. Not bad when I already have a Nikkor-W 180mm f/5.6 that I can use.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
is the build on the 50mm f/1.4 sigma better?

Yes.


----------



## dudemanppl

Wat do? Just kidding. Selling one and gripped D700 for a 300 VR and 1.7 TC. Sell that for a 200-400 VR, sell that for a 200 VR. Which I will then sell. Renting gear for negative monies is fun (2k+ is to be made during this endeavor). Shall be fun, I don't even know what to do with the money.


----------



## iandroo888

why do u have two? gimme one =3


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d* 
















Can't kill a dead person!

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
why do u have two? gimme one =3


http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/960589/
If thats not allowed, just remove the link. I bought a crap condition one from lens rentals for 1100, need to sell the good one.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dudemanppl* 
Tried a 50 AF-S. Soft and it has crap build. Would NEVER consider buying one (unless forced at gunpoint).

I'm not too concerned about the build quality, but the 50 is very sharp @ f4-5.6, although I wish I nabbed the Sigmalux last week and sold my AF-S 50mm.

Anyone used Topaz InFocus? I'm going to give that a shot to try and rescue some blurry photos.


----------



## Lu(ky

Thanksgiving fun... 85mm 1.2L


----------



## dudemanppl

I NEVER shoot stopped down more than a stop.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*










Wat do? Just kidding. Selling one and gripped D700 for a 300 VR and 1.7 TC. Sell that for a 200-400 VR, sell that for a 200 VR. Which I will then sell. Renting gear for negative monies is fun (2k+ is to be made during this endeavor). Shall be fun, I don't even know what to do with the money.










Great Caesar's Ghost! Test both thoroughly and sell the less sharp copy.


----------



## dudemanppl

Already did.


----------



## Marin

Messing around with my reflector.


----------



## Boyboyd

Is good.


----------



## iandroo888

anyone use expodiscs for custom WB?


----------



## dudemanppl

Shoot RAW, correct in post.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Shoot RAW, correct in post.


That sounds like a meme.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Boyboyd* 
That sounds like a meme.

http://memegenerator.net/ BUT WHO DO WE PUT IN THE MIDDLE?


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dudemanppl* 
http://memegenerator.net/ BUT WHO DO WE PUT IN THE MIDDLE?

The polar opposite of Ken.


----------



## dudemanppl

KR upside down and reverse color?
I'm going to sell the F100 for a F3HP.


----------



## max302

Bad I know...


----------



## Marin

I win.


----------



## Shane1244




----------



## theCanadian

^ badassery.


----------



## max302




----------



## Marin




----------



## Shane1244

I love his videos ^


----------



## dudemanppl

Sometimes he sounds like he doesn't know what hes talking about. And I don't like his processing...


----------



## theCanadian

This one kinda looks like it belongs on a poster. But I'm biased. What do you think? I'm considering making this my first enlargement.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


I NEVER shoot stopped down more than a stop.


then how do u shoot pans or in snow?


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


then how do u shoot pans or in snow?


Never as in not many times.







Who shoots landscapes at f/1.4?


----------



## theCanadian

Why are all the good FLs so expensive? Anything below 35mm is horrendously expensive.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Never as in not many times.







Who shoots landscapes at f/1.4?


lol i thought you....

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*











Why are all the good FLs so expensive? Anything below 35mm is horrendously expensive.


cheapest fullframe UWA wide.....
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search...2&N=4293919655
and its dirt cheap IMO

if ur still shooting that minolta SR mount anything but fisheye 16mm should be dirt cheap.


----------



## theCanadian

Is there a medium format film camera and (wide angle) lens combo that can be had for ~ $200? Since the majority of my shots are landscape shots, it kinda makes more sense to be shooting something in the ballpark of 120 roll. The larger format should give me exemplary sharpness, even compared to a DSLR, while staying away from the much more expensive 4x5 format.

I was thinking something like a Seagull 109.

I was hoping for something in the ball park of 35mm effective. I doubt I'll find it though.

On the down side, a simple system like this has pretty limited functionality. Only able to shoot with limited shooting speed, non interchangeable lenses and no metering what so ever as far as I can tell.

Anyone aware of similarly priced systems please chime in. I've run across the Yashica 635, but am unsure.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


cheapest fullframe UWA wide.....
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search...2&N=4293919655
and its dirt cheap IMO

if ur still shooting that minolta SR mount anything but fisheye 16mm should be dirt cheap.



Were you trying to link the Samyang 14mm?

Also, the Samyang is really only usable on digital due to the insane amount of distortion that needs to be corrected in post.


----------



## theCanadian

So I spent like 10 minutes trying to pull the lead out of a roll of film with my film picker. I put that roll down, and tried to do it on another roll with instant results. Pick my first roll back up; no dice.

So I stick a wet leader from another roll into the gate and out pops the leader I've been working on for almost 20 minutes. I swear, sometimes the gadget gods like to watch me struggle, only to laugh at me by providing some absurd solution which will ultimately result in me throwing my arms in the air and saying (rather loudly), "Really?!" or "About time!" or some other things which cannot be repeated in polite company.

/rant


----------



## rocstar96

Is 7D Better than the 550D?


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *rocstar96*


Is 7D Better than the 550D?


The two have very similar IQ, but the 7D has better AF, higher FPS, weather sealing, larger magnesium alloy body, scroll wheel, 100% coverage and magnification pentaprism viewfinder, as well as more advanced features like AF microadjust.

If this is your first camera though, I think the 550D is much better suited for the beginner as with the extra money you can invest in better lenses.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Were you trying to link the Samyang 14mm?

Also, the Samyang is really only usable on digital due to the insane amount of distortion that needs to be corrected in post.


yes i was.

architecture is not my forte so i dont mind the bent lines.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dudemanppl* 
KR upside down and reverse color?
I'm going to sell the F100 for a F3HP.

My dad has 2 F3HPs. No idea why.

They get quite a good review from ken rockwell.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Boyboyd* 
My dad has 2 F3HPs. No idea why.

They get quite a good review from ken rockwell.

I hope that wasn't why.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nuclearjock* 
I hope that wasn't why.

haha I doubt it. I just googled them out of curiosity.

I think one might be a regular F3 actually now that i think about it.


----------



## Marin

Pretty easy to tell them apart since the HP has a larger prism, has HP labeled on it and the VF can be viewed at a farther distance.

I <3 my F3HP. Even though my 1v has replaced it as my workhorse. I wish current cameras had VF's like the F3HP so I could use them with glasses.


----------



## Mootsfox

I recently sold my F100.

And my D1H is up for sale on eBay at the moment.

I'm kinda sad to be selling my gear, but I just don't need it anymore (bought it when I had a D60 so I could have a faster framerate).

I'm down to my D300s, 17-55, 50 f/1.4 and 30 f/1.4 (and 24mm f/2.8 which is going up for sale soon).


----------



## dudemanppl

F3HP for 150, sounds tasty. I love KEH. Haven't pulled the trigger yet though. Gonna go shoot some basketball.


----------



## Danylu

I want a film camera for their small size but decent scanners are expensive, which turns me away from them


----------



## dudemanppl

Coolscan 4000 or IV at school. Coolios.


----------



## Marin

Rental I've been using this term.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dudemanppl* 
Coolscan 4000 or IV at school. Coolios.

Yeah looked at the coolscan 4000. That comes in at a hefty $800 shipped and for that money I'd much rather buy a D2x or something of a similar calibre.


----------



## max302

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
I want a film camera for their small size but decent scanners are expensive, which turns me away from them









I have a Plustek Opticfilm 7200i, pretty decent for the 200$ if you have the patience to use the ****ty software and prep your film properly. It makes it possible for my to lug around my "beater" camera(s) when I'm drunk/doing something risky for any other camera.

But any way you look at it, film is going to be expensive. If I had all the film / dev money I pissed away in the past year, I'd probably have enough money for a sick wide-angle.

Don't be an idiot like I was, get a scanner that does 120 though. Well worth the additional 100$.


----------



## theCanadian

Might I point out that shooting film to scan is almost entirely pointless.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *max302* 
I have a Plustek Opticfilm 7200i, pretty decent for the 200$ if you have the patience to use the ****ty software and prep your film properly. It makes it possible for my to lug around my "beater" camera(s) when I'm drunk/doing something risky for any other camera.

But any way you look at it, film is going to be expensive. If I had all the film / dev money I pissed away in the past year, I'd probably have enough money for a sick wide-angle.

Don't be an idiot like I was, get a scanner that does 120 though. Well worth the additional 100$.

What do you shoot 120 with? I'm looking for a cheap/used camera that does 120. I've found some, but none have TTL, which means I'll need to use my 35mm to meter the scene. I don't want a Holga.


----------



## laboitenoire

Probably the old Pentax or Mamiya 645 bodies?


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *theCanadian* 
Might I point out that shooting film to scan is almost entirely pointless.

Keeping in mind that I've never shot film before, the other only option is to print true? I'm not one who prints their photos unless I'm going to give them to somebody.


----------



## Marin

It's not pointless to shoot and scan 120 and 4x5.


----------



## max302

Quote:


Originally Posted by *theCanadian* 
Might I point out that shooting film to scan is almost entirely pointless.

What do you shoot 120 with? I'm looking for a cheap/used camera that does 120. I've found some, but none have TTL, which means I'll need to use my 35mm to meter the scene. I don't want a Holga.

Pointless? Then shooting film is pointless. If you're not gonna scan your film, what are you going to do with it? Keep boxes of prints and film in your basement for the hell of it? How about shooting 25 rolls on camera that works on a watch battery? How about not depending on solid state digital storage? How about not being afraid of dropping your camera from a couple of stories up?

I have to agree with you, scanning film if the only thing you're doing is web-distribution is stupid. But in many cases film makes sense. Not to mention that analog feel.

I used to have a Pentax 645, sold now, and I'm currently passively looking around for a beat up Mamiya with a prime to mess around with.

EDIT: For TTL, my 645 had it. But if you do not want to use a meter, then that probably means that you'll shoot in-situ events or whatnot... and in that case you do not want the heft of a Pentax 645 SLR.


----------



## Marin

Going to cross process Ektar since I need a positive film so I can use it on the projector. I'm already doing a 2 stop compensation so hopefully this works out.


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
It's not pointless to shoot and scan 120 and 4x5.

True. But I think you need being playing some other angle beyond just shoot+scan, otherwise it just doesn't make any sense.


----------



## dudemanppl

People who make digital files look like film make me mad.


----------



## nuclearjock

An interesting tidbit. Just received my 2011 RRS catalog. They list a camera body plate (BD4) for the Nikon D4 "body to be released in mid 2011, see website for details". Unfortunately, no details on the website.


----------



## laboitenoire

Yeah, Nikonrumors mentioned that a couple of days ago...


----------



## Marin

Cross processed the Ektar. It looks awesome!


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Yeah, Nikonrumors mentioned that a couple of days ago...


Appropriate.


----------



## riko99

Hmm so the D4 and by the sounds of the D7000 pretty much schooling the D300s in most factors I'm sure we will get the D300H/X next year as well.


----------



## Boyboyd

D4 you say?


----------



## iandroo888

sigma 50mm f/1.4 or nikon 50mm f/1.4? reasons?


----------



## mz-n10

sigma - sharper, uses 77mm so no step up rings for cpl or for other filters

nikon - cheaper, smaller/lighter, doesnt have QC issues like sigma


----------



## dudemanppl

Get the Sigma. Nikon is soft and has horrible build.


----------



## iandroo888

whats QC?


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iandroo888* 
whats QC?

Quality Control


----------



## Danylu

TBH, I'm getting over primes (except macro), so I'd recommend a fast zoom of any description


----------



## Marin

Zooms are meh. Selling off my 24-70mm soon.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
TBH, I'm getting over primes (except macro), so I'd recommend a fast zoom of any description









Eh, I still prefer primes. I've started using my 50mm f/1.4 as a walkaround lens instead of my 28-135mm, and it actually is pretty useful still.


----------



## Marin

Cross processed Ektar 100.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Zooms are meh. Selling off my 24-70mm soon.

Same here. I think I'll get a 135 f/2. (to add to my 35 1.4)


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d* 
Eh, I still prefer primes. I've started using my 50mm f/1.4 as a walkaround lens instead of my 28-135mm, and it actually is pretty useful still.

For a walkaround situation, yes I still use my 50 1.4, but after using the 17-55 2.8 extensively for a week, I'm starting to see the appeal of the pro zooms. (Still hate variable aperture zooms though)

Maybe it's just me, but I've missed quite a few shots from having a prime on. I'm thinking of getting a 2nd body, getting an UWA, and dual wielding









ie D60 + 50 1.4 and some other small DX body + UWA.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Zooms are meh. Selling off my 24-70mm soon.

I'm becoming more of a Canon admirerer, but I have to say that my 14-24, 24-70, and 70-200 VR II were all done right. These three lenses are in no way ~meh.

You know I shoot lots of long stuff, and the Canon primes 200 and greater are pretty awesome. The pics I've seen from the 800 are not quite tack sharp but I think that's more long lens technique and steadying such a large lens rather than optics.


----------



## dudemanppl

Ugh, f/2.8 is SOOO slow. The biggest reason I don't want to use the 24-70.


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dudemanppl* 
Ugh, f/2.8 is SOOO slow. The biggest reason I don't want to use the 24-70.

lol.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dudemanppl* 
Ugh, f/2.8 is SOOO slow. The biggest reason I don't want to use the 24-70.

Alot of photojournalists disagree.


----------



## Marin

Too slow.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Ugh, f/2.8 is SOOO slow. The biggest reason I don't want to use the 24-70.


whats the point of a 1.4 or 1.2 when you have to be 20ft back cause the DOF is razer thin.


----------



## theCanadian

You guys are jokes. 2.8 is not slow. Especially on a DSLR. I was shooting at dusk/sunset @ f/8 at ISO 100 and was only *just* having a few issues keeping the shutter speed above 1/60th s with a 50mm lens.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Ugh, f/2.8 is SOOO slow. The biggest reason I don't want to use the 24-70.


Not really. Granted there are faster primes, but when you can't switch out lenses every other shot, having the ability to change your focal length far outweighs an extra stop or two.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


Originally Posted by *theCanadian* 
You guys are jokes. 2.8 is not slow. Especially on a DSLR. I was shooting at dusk/sunset @ f/8 at ISO 100 and was only *just* having a few issues keeping the shutter speed above 1/60th s with a 50mm lens.

It is too slow when I want a thinner DoF. This same mindset goes on over on POTN and it's annoying.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mootsfox* 
Not really. Granted there are faster primes, but when you can't switch out lenses every other shot, having the ability to change your focal length far outweighs an extra stop or two.

That sums it up for me









ISO performance is continually improving so an extra stop or two on the lens will become less significant over time.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
It is too slow when I want a thinner DoF. This same mindset goes on over on POTN and it's annoying.

Wow.


----------



## Marin

Wow what.


----------



## theCanadian

Then you shouldn't have said 2.8 is too slow. You should have said the DoF on a 2.8 is too thick. Though really that's just complaining. Just use a longer focal length.


----------



## Marin

If I used a longer focal length then the compression and FoV will change.


----------



## theCanadian

Duh. Are you complaining about optical physics here? I don't get it. Besides, it sounds like this is only for one shot.

As with any art, sometimes the tools do not meet the imagination. At it happens, this is not one of them. Photoshop your fuzzies.


----------



## Marin

I don't get what you're getting at.


----------



## theCanadian

You've made the generalization that 2.8 isn't good enough. The reality is, you're in a circumstance for which you lack the tools to execute. Welcome to life. 99.9% of the time, 2.8 is plenty thin and plenty fast.


----------



## Marin

I lack the tools? Got them right here and they're all faster than f/2.8. Shoot them a lot at apertures wider than f/2.8. So whatever. This conversation isn't going anywhere.


----------



## theCanadian

It's quite obvious that you've not made yourself clear. You lead me on to believe that you were trying to compose a shot with your 24-70mm f/2.8 and were unable to do so because the DoF was too thick for that particular shot.


----------



## Marin

Lets just change the topic since I think we're talking about two different things.

New lens from Tamron.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Lets just change the topic since I think we're talking about two different things.

New lens from Tamron.

yes....

i see sony love......







too bad its a crop lens, i need a light walk around.


----------



## Shane1244

wow, that's pretty much a all-in-one lens, too bad it's not a bit faster.


----------



## Marin

Get this for walk around use.


----------



## mz-n10

ive considered the 35G but i dont like the how it produces images.

i am considering this tho


----------



## Marin

Ooo, that's a sick lens. I was also considering a 24mm but ended up going with the 35mm since I found it easier to work with (for me of course. Experiences will differ, lol).


----------



## dudemanppl

I just got the 35 AI-S. Softest lens I have ever used. I don't want to try it stopped down since I want the look of a 35mm lens thats at f/1.4. Also got the F3HP. Most amazing thing I have ever touched. It just works. Nothing wrong with it. I have also convinced one of my friend girls to get one. It makes me happy even when I know I'm taking horrible pictures. Oh yeah and who wants to buy a 24-70? PM me and then in a week you'll get a verdict. The range sucks, too long on the wide end and too short on the long end. Good PJ stuff is done with a 16/17-35mm f/2.8 IMO. 24Ls and 35Ls work too.

Lolwut


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dudemanppl* 
I just got the 35 AI-S. Softest lens I have ever used. I don't want to try it stopped down since I want the look of a 35mm lens thats at f/1.4. Also got the F3HP. Most amazing thing I have ever touched. It just works. Nothing wrong with it. I have also convinced one of my friend girls to get one. It makes me happy even when I know I'm taking horrible pictures. Oh yeah and who wants to buy a 24-70? PM me and then in a week you'll get a verdict. The range sucks, too long on the wide end and too short on the long end. Good PJ stuff is done with a 16/17-35mm f/2.8 IMO. 24Ls and 35Ls work too.

Lolwut

















Is the 35mm 1.4 really that soft? When you do decide to sell it, gimme a price because I was thinking of trying one.

Also, just curious, what do you use for a background in your product shots?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dudemanppl* 









That's quite the dust contamination under the front element.







(or perhaps it's outside, looks underneath to me)


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Good PJ stuff is done with a 16/17-35mm


You're actually right here Dude. I frequent a couple of large stores in Chicago and usually run into SunTimes or Trib photogs there. As far as Nikon is concerned they're almost all carrying the old 17-35 /2.8 on a D3/D3s. Some also haul the 70-200 /2.8 beside or in addition. All are flashed btw. In no flash venues, they're shooting 24 or 35mm /1.4's or /1.8's.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Is the 35mm 1.4 really that soft? When you do decide to sell it, gimme a price because I was thinking of trying one.

Also, just curious, what do you use for a background in your product shots?


Eh, never shipped to Australia, don't want to try. All I use is a piece of poster board I got from some dollar store and then smooth the *expletive* out of it in post.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


That's quite the dust contamination under the front element.







(or perhaps it's outside, looks underneath to me)


Element separation.







Its on the far edges so it doesn't matter anyway. That and its on the front not rear element, so if it were worse, it still wouldn't show up. BGN from KEH, so I don't really care.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


You're actually right here Dude. I frequent a couple of large stores in Chicago and usually run into SunTimes or Trib photogs there. As far as Nikon is concerned they're almost all carrying the old 17-35 /2.8 on a D3/D3s. Some also haul the 70-200 /2.8 beside or in addition. All are flashed btw. In no flash venues, they're shooting 24 or 35mm /1.4's or /1.8's.


Those "old" (younger than me by like 3 years...) 17-35s are amazing pieces of glass if you don't care about corners. Fast AF, and will capture the picture. Newspapers print TINY, even smaller online. I want to sell the 24-70 for that, but I want the 35 1.4 AF-S...


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


but I want the 35 1.4 AF-S...


It's a nice lens to be sure, but $1799 is no less than gouging. Sorry. Just like the 24 /1.4 and 85 /1.4. both are way too pricey.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


It's a nice lens to be sure, but $1799 is no less than gouging. Sorry. Just like the 24 /1.4 and 85 /1.4. both are way too pricey.


Totally agree, makes me want to go Canon...


----------



## theCanadian

Why are canon lenses so much cheaper? This makes no sense to me.


----------



## Marin

Nikon tax.

Anyways, stitching almost 300 images together for an environmental portrait. Hope my computer doesn't explode.


----------



## theCanadian




----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Nikon tax.

Anyways, stitching almost 300 images together for an environmental portrait. Hope my computer doesn't explode.


Better than doing so with my PC


----------



## sti_boy

I just got my copy of LR3 (got it for $149.99 on Amazon a couple of weeks ago). Really liking some of the new features. I think its worth it just for the NR alone (it actually works now). I was going to get the upgrade, but it was cheap enough (and it will allow me to sell my copy of LR2).

The other thing I really liked is the lens correction profiles. Worked nicely with wider-angle shots. Also been playing around with perspective correction manually - really cool. If you're on the fence whether to upgrade, I'd say its totally worth it.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dudemanppl* 
Totally agree, makes me want to go Canon...

Same, canon do have some really good + affordable lenses. Even the L glass is much more competatively priced than the equiv. nikon stuff.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dudemanppl* 
Eh, never shipped to Australia, don't want to try. All I use is a piece of poster board I got from some dollar store and then smooth the *expletive* out of it in post.

Just do what mootsfox did and wrap it in yellow cloth









and then put it inside ten padded envelopes : D


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Boyboyd* 
Same, canon do have some really good + affordable lenses. Even the L glass is much more competatively priced than the equiv. nikon stuff.

I've got to agree as well. I never really was aware of Nikon's lens selection until a friend of mine picked up a D3000 and asked me to select lenses for him. The prices are pretty high compared to Canon, esp considering most of the cheaper primes are AF, meaning they'd be unable to focus on his entry-level body.


----------



## Marin

Finished stitching them. Image is 25gb's at this point. Don't know if I should keep stitching the RAW files and maybe convert them before.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Finished stitching them. Image is 25gb's at this point. Don't know if I should keep stitching the RAW files and maybe convert them before.

Post it on here. Rage ensues.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Boyboyd* 
Post it on here. Rage ensues.

Actually, I'd like to see it if your interwebs doesn't explode.


----------



## dudemanppl

Compress to JPG, but upload as full res. I want my computer to explode.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dudemanppl* 
Totally agree, makes me want to go Canon...

its cause of those NANO crystals you guys have







...what you should do is switch to SONY....you pay more than canon and nikon and you get a little blue lens logo









on a serious note....if you went canon the then the 85/1.2 would be 2k.....


----------



## Marin

Seems RAW files don't play nice with photomerge. Onto TIFF files.


----------



## ImmortalKenny

Sign me up, just bought a T2i today.


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 
Seems RAW files don't play nice with photomerge. Onto TIFF files.


PNG is a lossless format too! But it seems to me if it doesn't work in TIFF it won't work at all without significant finagling.


----------



## Marin

Might give PNG a shot if TIFF doesn't work since it might be an issue with the file size.


----------



## dudemanppl

Stupid question: How do you make it so all the exposures match and have it look like it was just one image?


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dudemanppl* 
Stupid question: How do you make it so all the exposures match and have it look like it was just one image?

AE lock if your talking about in-camera. i have yet to figure it out in post.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mz-n10* 
AE lock if your talking about in-camera. i have yet to figure it out in post.

In post... I didn't know people used AE lock, I just switch it to M and dial in my settings there LOL.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dudemanppl* 
In post... I didn't know people used AE lock, I just switch it to M and dial in my settings there LOL.

pressing 1 button far faster then switching to M and spinning dials.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mz-n10* 
its cause of those NANO crystals you guys have







...what you should do is switch to SONY....you pay more than canon and nikon and you get a little blue lens logo









on a serious note....if you went canon the then the 85/1.2 would be 2k.....

Just noticed your signature, how do you like the 85mm 1.4?


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danylu* 
Just noticed your signature, how do you like the 85mm 1.4?

its a fun lens, i admit i havent used it much since its MF.

random shot i did a while back with my friend messing with her dog. dont let the colors in this picture throw you off, this is AWB + SOOC.








a900+85/[email protected]


----------



## Unknownm




----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


Why are canon lenses so much cheaper? This makes no sense to me.


Just a theory of mine, but I think it's because Canon is a larger company with more overhead, and can therefore keep prices down.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sti_boy*


I just got my copy of LR3 (got it for $149.99 on Amazon a couple of weeks ago). Really liking some of the new features. I think its worth it just for the NR alone (it actually works now). I was going to get the upgrade, but it was cheap enough (and it will allow me to sell my copy of LR2).

The other thing I really liked is the lens correction profiles. Worked nicely with wider-angle shots. Also been playing around with perspective correction manually - really cool. If you're on the fence whether to upgrade, I'd say its totally worth it.


Good price, I paid out the ass for mine because I got it just after launch. It's definitely Adobe's best photo processing software yet, and I always use it for processing large numbers of photos, although it still can't convert RAW images as well as DPP in my opinion. If it converted as well as DPP, LR3 would be the ultimate PP software.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


its cause of those NANO crystals you guys have







...what you should do is switch to SONY....you pay more than canon and nikon and you get a little blue lens logo









on a serious note....if you went canon the then the 85/1.2 would be 2k.....


LOL, yeah right, Sony's Zeiss lenses are outrageously expensive also. Now their camera bodies are a different story, more reasonably priced (esp. the A800).

And Canon's 85/1.2 is one lens that's too pricey. Their other L lenses are reasonable.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ImmortalKenny*


Sign me up, just bought a T2i today.










Just the body?

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


pressing 1 button far faster then switching to M and spinning dials.


AE lock is awsome, I use constantly. In a split second I can meter and lock off the sky for a landscape shot.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


its a fun lens, i admit i havent used it much since its MF.

random shot i did a while back with my friend messing with her dog. dont let the colors in this picture throw you off, this is AWB + SOOC. 








a900+85/[email protected]4


Definitely adjust the WB, has that typical putrid yellowness seen in indoor shots. Also, it doesn't look that sharp in the center. Low SS/ISO or what? Or just hard to MF wide open?


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Just a theory of mine, but I think it's because Canon is a larger company with more overhead, and can therefore keep prices down.


Yeah, but Nikon has a separate division dedicated to optics. Nikkor will make high performance optics for anything that needs it. Hunting Scopes, ariel photography, etc. Something tells me that since lens choices depend on the platform, Nikon does a good job of selling the platform, and then Nikkor maximizes profit.


----------



## Marin




----------



## dudemanppl

24LII, 85LII, 135L, 50 1.0L. Nais. I love Juza's 1DsIII.


----------



## michintom

michintom
-Nikon D3100
-Nikkor 18-55mm VR
-Nikkor 55-200mm VR
-Nikkor 35mm 1.8
-flickr.com/imxkal


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow* 
LOL, yeah right, Sony's Zeiss lenses are outrageously expensive also. Now their camera bodies are a different story, more reasonably priced (esp. the A800).

yep that little blue logo adds 500 bucks

Quote:

Definitely adjust the WB, has that typical putrid yellowness seen in indoor shots. Also, it doesn't look that sharp in the center. Low SS/ISO or what? Or just hard to MF wide open?
shot at 800iso and 1/50

its my focusing, i focus behind her ear on the hair and theres no LV on the sony fullframe









Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marin* 


















i read the f/1.0 doesnt offer much thinner DOF then then the 1.2 and isnt as sharp as teh 1.2


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


i read the f/1.0 doesnt offer much thinner DOF then then the 1.2 and isnt as sharp as teh 1.2


It's really desired by cinematographers due to the dream-like look that's obtainable with the lens.


----------



## dudemanppl

Or smear Vaseline on a filter.


----------



## theCanadian

dudemanppl, I see you postin all the time, but you have hardly any posts... wth?


----------



## dudemanppl

Holy shiznit, I have 224! :O Photo used to be a thread in OT, Photo section was moved to a more official part of the boards but for a while posts still didn't count. Then like 3 months ago they started counting. I had only 40 or so posts for a hell of a long time (and like 7 rep).


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;11639067*
> Holy shiznit, I have 224! :O Photo used to be a thread in OT, Photo section was moved to a more official part of the boards but for a while posts still didn't count. Then like 3 months ago they started counting. I had only 40 or so posts for a hell of a long time (and like 7 rep).


Yep, me too. If all my photography posts counted since inception, I bet I would have twice as many posts at least.


----------



## Mr_Nibbles

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;11639138*
> Yep, me too. If all my photography posts counted since inception, I bet I would have twice as many posts at least.


Same with me. It's kind of annoying but who really cares how many posts anyone has lol.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Really? My post count seems to be a bit high for myself. Nowadays most of my posts are in the photo and OT sections.


----------



## dudemanppl

Might switch to Canon again. Meow.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;11639767*
> Might switch to Canon again. Meow.


Doo Eet









Also, why the switch?


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;11639807*
> Doo Eet
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also, why the switch?


I traded the D700 for a 5DII in a desperate act since nobody wants to buy a D700 for some reason. I'm loving the video since all my lenses are 77mm and I have a 77mm vari-ND filter. Its from Lightware and a whole lot cheaper and as good as the Singh-Ray. 160th sync is a ***** though.


----------



## mz-n10

my WC forums padding must have paid off


----------



## OmegaNemesis28

http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?pid=31008415&l=99ef5b2b4b&id=1349665732


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


I traded the D700 for a 5DII in a desperate act since nobody wants to buy a D700 for some reason. I'm loving the video since all my lenses are 77mm and I have a 77mm vari-ND filter. Its from Lightware and a whole lot cheaper and as good as the Singh-Ray. 160th sync is a ***** though.


Nice! What lenses have you got paired up with it?

I'm actually starting to be sad that I don't have video now. I really don't need it, but the idea hit me that doing videos with a narrow DoF on my 50mm could be sort of fun to try out.


----------



## Marin

Get a proper shoulder rig. It will make shooting movies so much easier.


----------



## dudemanppl

But I are so cheap. And I don't know how to process videos.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;11640719*
> But I are so cheap. And I don't know how to process videos.


Final Cut and Magic Bullet.


----------



## dudemanppl

Eh, I think video for me is mostly for fun. Anything remotely serious is done on my crappy tripod, which at least holds the camera still.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Might switch to Canon again. Meow.


Buy my lens first.


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


I traded the D700 for a 5DII in a desperate act since nobody wants to buy a D700 for some reason. I'm loving the video since all my lenses are 77mm and I have a 77mm vari-ND filter. Its from Lightware and a whole lot cheaper and as good as the Singh-Ray. *160th sync* is a ***** though.










Workin with 1/60th over here.


----------



## Marin

I can sync at anything. Leaf shutters FTW.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


I can sync at anything. Leaf shutters FTW.


As long as it's at 1/500th or slower.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mootsfox;11640872*
> Buy my lens first.


Eh, turns out I'm using exclusively the 35, sorry broski.


----------



## iandroo888

sigma 30mm or 50mm f/1.4?


----------



## theCanadian

Personally, I'd go for the 30, just on the FL alone.


----------



## meru

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


sigma 30mm or 50mm f/1.4?


Sigma 30 1.4, going to pick this up as well.

50mm too tight indoors, might get it as a portraiture lens.


----------



## iandroo888

yah thats what i was thinkin actually.. i borrowed my cousins 35mm f1.8. wish it had a faster focus so HSM would be great. and wanted a little wider than 35.. maybe 30 would be best


----------



## mz-n10

30/1.4


----------



## Danylu

IMO, sell your 50 1.8 and get the 30 1.4, the 35 is nice, but you can't go wrong with 1.4


----------



## Boyboyd

The power of post

http://www.moodaholic.com/behind-the-scenes/


----------



## dudemanppl

I only realized yesterday I have both of the Nikon 3s.








Full res 5DII if you want


----------



## Marin

http://www.finepix-x100.com/latest-updates/raw-functionality-explained
Quote:


> The X100 captures 12-bit RAW images using the RAF file type that can be converted using customised Silkypix software


----------



## citruspers

Another reason to love Lightroom...


----------



## Marin

Still isn't the same as using the included converter.


----------



## Squeeker The Cat

hey guys..............im getting a new camera.......ive always had point and shoots, the camera i have now is a canon s5-is. im looking into the new canon sx30-is. its got a wicked 35x zoom takes 720p movies....all around seems to be a nice camera. for a point and shoot.

BUT im thinking its time to get into a DSLR. and am looking also at the canon t2i. my question is.......the lens that comes with the t2i......whats its zoom length? im quite sure its not comparable to 35x, but i don't know about the dslr numbers enough to know what its zoom length is.....ive been told that in order to get a zoom even close to 35x ill need to shell out like $1200.00 for a lens. im NOT willing to do that at this time. but the t2i has 1080p video and is really a great camera so im thinking its time to get my big boy pants on and jump to dslr. but again whats its lens zoom in "x" terms LOL

im pretty sure ill really never use the full zoom of the sx30-is, its just a gimmick lol


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Squeeker The Cat*


hey guys..............im getting a new camera.......ive always had point and shoots, the camera i have now is a canon s5-is. im looking into the new canon sx30-is. its got a wicked 35x zoom takes 720p movies....all around seems to be a nice camera. for a point and shoot.

BUT im thinking its time to get into a DSLR. and am looking also at the canon t2i. my question is.......the lens that comes with the t2i......whats its zoom length? im quite sure its not comparable to 35x, but i don't know about the dslr numbers enough to know what its zoom length is.....ive been told that in order to get a zoom even close to 35x ill need to shell out like $1200.00 for a lens. im NOT willing to do that at this time. but the t2i has 1080p video and is really a great camera so im thinking its time to get my big boy pants on and jump to dslr. but again whats its lens zoom in "x" terms LOL

im pretty sure ill really never use the full zoom of the sx30-is, its just a gimmick lol


When they refer to 35x zoom, they are just talking about the difference between the widest end, and the narrowest end. Zoom doesn't really refer to how far away from the subject you can be.

A telephoto lens lets you see and photograph things in the distance, a zoom lens covers a range of distances.

A telephoto lens can be a zoom lens, if it covers a range. For example a 70 - 300 mm telephoto zoom.

Prime lenses have a fixed focal length, from as little as 10mm up to several hundred mm. A telephoto prime lens could be a 300mm, but it more likely referred to as just a telephoto lens.

From what i understand canon have some really good telephoto lenses, if that's what you're after.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Squeeker The Cat*


hey guys..............im getting a new camera.......ive always had point and shoots, the camera i have now is a canon s5-is. im looking into the new canon sx30-is. its got a wicked 35x zoom takes 720p movies....all around seems to be a nice camera. for a point and shoot.

BUT im thinking its time to get into a DSLR. and am looking also at the canon t2i. my question is.......the lens that comes with the t2i......whats its zoom length? im quite sure its not comparable to 35x, but i don't know about the dslr numbers enough to know what its zoom length is.....ive been told that in order to get a zoom even close to 35x ill need to shell out like $1200.00 for a lens. im NOT willing to do that at this time. but the t2i has 1080p video and is really a great camera so im thinking its time to get my big boy pants on and jump to dslr. but again whats its lens zoom in "x" terms LOL

im pretty sure ill really never use the full zoom of the sx30-is, its just a gimmick lol


18-55mm = 55mm/18mm = 3x zoom.

The zoom factor means nothing though. It's the focal length that does. A 70-200mm has a zoom factor of 2.8x, but it can zoom in *much* closer than an 18-55mm at 3x zoom.

Zoom lenses usually come with a focal length "___mm-___mm". It's those numbers you'd want to be looking at. The higher the number, the farther away the lens reaches. If you want to go Canon, an *EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS* is a great place to start for cheap. The lens itself retails for ~$220. It can reach further than most point and shoots are able to, yet still retain much better image quality. If you want a bit more, a 70-300mm would be another excellent choice, but keep in mind that @ 300mm, the camera gets sensitive to sway and you may need a tripod to keep your images sharp.

If you want some good advice on lenses, start a thread on the photo forum. I can guarantee you we'll point you to some good buys, and won't give you crap advice like "You'd need a $1,200 lens"









Also, keep in mind that lenses with large zoom factors usually aren't good lenses.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

On an unrelated note to my previous post, I'm considering selling my 28-135mm and buying a 15-85mm. I thought about the 17-55mm but I can definitely use the narrower focal lengths of the 15-85...


----------



## Squeeker The Cat

thanks guys.im kinda understand what your saying LOL. on another forum i was told the same thing about the EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS lens. as long as i can "get up in there" so to speak, i just dont want to have to be right on top of the subject in order to get the pic. behind our house is a large open-space area and also a large farm with corn fields for miles...sometimes i like to sit on the back patio and just take pics of the corn blowing in the wind, the bunnies and birds..and if im lucky every so often i get a coyote in my sights... so as long as i have a lens that i can get a good pic of a bird or coyote etc from say half a football fields distance away im good!! so if you think that the
EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS lens or even the lens that comes with the t2i is good then great!


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

The 18-55mm might not be enough to get those shots, so I think you should consider the 55-250mm. Of course, it doesn't hurt to buy the camera kit only and get the 55-250mm only after trying out the camera with the kit lens


----------



## Squeeker The Cat

i saw somewhere they sold the t2i body and both the 18-55 and the 55-250 lenses?? hmmmmmm


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote: 
   Originally Posted by *Squeeker The Cat*   i saw somewhere they sold the t2i body and both the 18-55 and the 55-250 lenses?? hmmmmmm  
That'd be Amazon.

  Capture Extra Savings with the Combined Purchase of the Canon T1i or T2i Rebel Digital SLRs and Lenses


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Squeeker The Cat*


thanks guys.im kinda understand what your saying LOL. on another forum i was told the same thing about the EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS lens. as long as i can "get up in there" so to speak, i just dont want to have to be right on top of the subject in order to get the pic. behind our house is a large open-space area and also a large farm with corn fields for miles...sometimes i like to sit on the back patio and just take pics of the corn blowing in the wind, the bunnies and birds..and if im lucky every so often i get a coyote in my sights... so as long as i have a lens that i can get a good pic of a bird or coyote etc from say half a football fields distance away im good!! so if you think that the
EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS lens or even the lens that comes with the t2i is good then great!


Sounds like you're going to want a sunrise filter.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...d_Sunrise.html


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;11664757*
> I only realized yesterday I have both of the Nikon 3s.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Full res 5DII if you want


Do you take pictures with your gear?? Should be some pretty impressive stuff.
Post 'em up.


----------



## Marin

Why would he do such a silly thing?


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *theCanadian;11673575*
> Sounds like you're going to want a sunrise filter.
> 
> http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/58001-REG/Tiffen_58CGSUN_58mm_Graduated_Sunrise.html


old skool......

just do it in post and save yourself 30 bucks








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nuclearjock;11675683*
> Do you take pictures with your gear?? Should be some pretty impressive stuff.
> Post 'em up.


i think he just buys and sells gear, i think of him as B&H of SoCal.....


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10;11676938*
> 
> i think he just buys and sells gear, i think of him as B&H of SoCal.....


Does that mean he also closes shop every Jewish holiday?


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;11676956*
> Does that mean he also closes shop every Jewish holiday?


Damn, I laughed. I do take pictures, like the one I took of my gear!








EDIT: Have a lookthrough. http://www.flickr.com/photos/dudemanppl/ About half is just pictures of my gear to sell.







I should up[load some more recent shots...


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;11676956*
> Does that mean he also closes shop every Jewish holiday?


maybe....i dont think so tho, i believe hes asian so no holidays at all.


----------



## dudemanppl

LOL, I only get like 20 bucks for Chinese New Year.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10;11677307*
> maybe....i dont think so tho, i believe hes asian so no holidays at all.


Psh, Lunar New Year's is our Christmas/Hanukkah









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;11677344*
> LOL, I only get like 20 bucks for Chinese New Year.


In my experience, once you reach a certain age, the only thing you'd get are wishes of a good year and to do well in college, become a doctor/lawyer/CEO, and get paid well so your parents won't have to work anymore.

Ah, to be an Asian...


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;11677344*
> LOL, I only get like 20 bucks for Chinese New Year.


than i see business is good for the B&H of socal....

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;11677359*
> Psh, Lunar New Year's is our Christmas/Hanukkah
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In my experience, once you reach a certain age, the only thing you'd get are wishes of a good year and to do well in college, become a doctor/lawyer/CEO, and get paid well so your parents won't have to work anymore.
> 
> Ah, to be an Asian...


what are you married? i think your parents are just cheaping out on you....lol

i think we've gone a bit off topic......


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10;11677439*
> what are you married? i think your parents are just cheaping out on you....lol
> 
> i think we've gone a bit off topic......


No, I'm just Asian myself. Once you're a high school senior, all your parents care about is you becoming an M.D./J.D./M.B.A. and getting a six-figure salary. Not really much love until that happens









And yes, we have, but hey, it's for cultural awareness!

It's kinda sad, really. I met some people who grew up in predominately-white cities and thought these sorts of things are just untrue stereotypes, but it really is how a lot of Asian parents think.


----------



## dudemanppl

I'm happy thats not what my parents think and they're willing to set me up with some people to shoot. Yay.


----------



## max302

Just saw the X100 Marin linked to.... it's awesome except for the fact that it's in Leica price ranges.

Still waiting on a cheap, compact, fixed focal and large aperture APS-C point and shoot. I don't care much for stuff like the hybrid viewfinders if it's going to add a couple of greenbacks on the price tag, which it will.

Till then, I'll continue using my 35SPn.


----------



## dudemanppl

[ame="[URL=http://www.amazon.com/gp/redirect.html?ie=UTF8&linkCode=ur2&camp=1789&creative=9325&tag=overclockdotnet-20&location=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.amazon.com%2FSigma-DP2S-FOVEON-Digital-Camera%2Fdp%2FB003AMMZRG]http://www.amazon.com/Sigma-DP2S-FOVEON-Digital-Camera/dp/B003AMMZRG"]http://www.amazon.com/Sigma-DP2S-FOVEON-Digital-Camera/dp/B003AMMZRG[/ame[/URL]]


----------



## max302

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;11696597*
> http://www.amazon.com/Sigma-DP2S-FOVEON-Digital-Camera/dp/B003AMMZRG


FASTER! CHEAPER!

I'm talking something GROUNDBREAKINGLY CHEAP.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *max302;11696569*
> Just saw the X100 Marin linked to.... it's awesome except for the fact that it's in Leica price ranges.
> 
> Still waiting on a cheap, compact, fixed focal and large aperture APS-C point and shoot. I don't care much for stuff like the hybrid viewfinders if it's going to add a couple of greenbacks on the price tag, which it will.
> 
> Till then, I'll continue using my 35SPn.


Probably won't happen anytime soon. No matter how much they strip down the camera body itself, the sensor will always keep a camera's cost high, esp. one as large as APS-C. Consider the difference in price between a camera like the 7D and the 5DII, nearly $1000 difference, mostly because of the 5DII huge sensor.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;11696597*
> http://www.amazon.com/Sigma-DP2S-FOVEON-Digital-Camera/dp/B003AMMZRG


Not exactly cheap and not APS-C, so moot in regard to max's comment.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;11696739*
> 
> Not exactly cheap and not APS-C, so moot in regard to max's comment.


It is APS-C.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *max302;11696646*
> FASTER! CHEAPER!
> 
> I'm talking something GROUNDBREAKINGLY CHEAP.


That's never going to happen.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;11696771*
> It is APS-C.
> 
> That's never going to happen.


The Foveon sensor is smaller than APS-C, right?


----------



## Marin

The sensor is 20.7 x 13.8mm's thus fitting within the specifications for the sensor type (if I recall correctly).


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;11696830*
> The sensor is 20.7 x 13.8mm's thus fitting within the specifications for the sensor type (if I recall correctly).


(checking) Yes, but it's funny how it's not the same size as actual APS-C film. None of the APS-C sensors are it seems.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;11696876*
> (checking) Yes, but it's funny how it's not the same size as actual APS-C film. None of the APS-C sensors are it seems.


Correct.









What I find funny is how the most widely used format for DSLR's at the moment completely tanked when it was used for film.









Anyways, going to Hawaii on Monday so more photos.


----------



## Boyboyd

I've never even heard of aps-h until now. Interesting...


----------



## max302

TTL viewfinder, no screen, 10 mpx sensor the size of the Foveon, without prioprietary battery pack, with a simple 7-8 element fixed focal anywhere in the "normal" range with something like f2 or f2.4. I'm talking stripped down as F.

It has to be possible for under 400$.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Boyboyd;11697001*
> I've never even heard of aps-h until now. Interesting...


It's been around since the first 1D.









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *max302;11697013*
> TTL viewfinder, no screen, 10 mpx sensor the size of the Foveon, without prioprietary battery pack, with a simple 7-8 element fixed focal anywhere in the "normal" range with something like f2 or f2.4. I'm talking stripped down as F.
> 
> It has to be possible for under 400$.


Not going to happen.









While we're at it lets have affordable digital rangefinders on the market, lol.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;11696907*
> Correct.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What I find funny is how the most widely used format for DSLR's at the moment completely tanked when it was used for film.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Anyways, going to Hawaii on Monday so more photos.


Why is that? Just curious.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *max302;11697013*
> TTL viewfinder, no screen, 10 mpx sensor the size of the Foveon, without prioprietary battery pack, with a simple 7-8 element fixed focal anywhere in the "normal" range with something like f2 or f2.4. I'm talking stripped down as F.
> 
> It has to be possible for under 400$.


I suppose if some miraculously cheaper method for manufacturing large CMOS/CCD sensors is discovered, it could happen, but not currently.

I can't see a company investing in something so minimal in a digital camera. Without a screen to review images, you're taking away one of the main reasons to shoot digital, the ability to shoot properly without excessive chimping not withstanding.


----------



## dudemanppl

I want to switch to Canon, but the D3 sits on my desk and every time I look at it I stop.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;11697122*
> Why is that? Just curious.


Why is what?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;11697133*
> Why is what?


Sorry, the comment about the DLSR format tanking for film.

EDIT: Nevermind, you were referring to APS film. I was thinking 35mm originally.


----------



## dudemanppl

I just realized although I love the D3, I don't have fun using it. F3 is fun, 5DII is fun too, so I guess I'm getting a 5DII with a 35L and 135L and some other fun stuff.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Why don't you have fun using it? Lost its novelty?


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;11696907*
> Correct.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What I find funny is how the most widely used format for DSLR's at the moment completely tanked when it was used for film.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Anyways, going to Hawaii on Monday so more photos.


To be fair, 16mm *made* the film (video) industry.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *theCanadian;11697736*
> To be fair, 16mm *made* the film (video) industry.


I'm just referring to the Advanced Photo System.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;11697050*
> It's been around since the first 1D.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not going to happen.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *While we're at it lets have affordable digital rangefinders on the market, lol.*


On that note, I want Nikon to produce F mount digital rangefinders that cost the same as a D3100 does today.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;11697715*
> I just realized although I love the D3, I don't have fun using it. F3 is fun, 5DII is fun too, so I guess I'm getting a 5DII with a 35L and 135L and some other fun stuff.


Is it the size? Did you have fun with the D700? Donate your D3 to me?

I'm curious to know as well


----------



## theCanadian

Occasionally, when very bored, I watch Burn Notice. Currently Weston is taking pictures with a DSLR that has a film winder in it. Or at least that's what it sounds like.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *theCanadian;11698524*
> Occasionally, when very bored, I watch Burn Notice. Currently Weston is taking pictures with a DSLR that has a film winder in it. Or at least that's what it sounds like.


They have different cameras throughout the show. Sometimes it's a 1980s style SLR film camera, sometimes it's a Canon DSLR, and once a Nikon DSLR that was smashed by Carla in Season 2. Needless to say, it felt as if she ripped out my heart when she dropped that camera on the pavement.


----------



## Marin

Why? It's a Nikon. She was doing him a favor.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;11698632*
> Why? It's a Nikon. She was doing him a favor.


No camera deserves to eat pavement like that


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;11698555*
> and once a Nikon DSLR that was smashed by Carla in Season 2. Needless to say, it felt as if she ripped out my heart when she dropped that camera on the pavement.


What a Rebel.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;11697721*
> Why don't you have fun using it? Lost its novelty?


No, it was never fun. Just amazing to use.







D700 was fun to use without the grip, but the D3 is just too damn big.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;11698752*
> What a Rebel.


http://www.instantrimshot.com/


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Boyboyd;11697001*
> I've never even heard of aps-h until now. Interesting...


you have much to learn young grasshopper
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *max302;11697013*
> It has to be possible for under 400$.


link probably as close as your going to get this year....


----------



## Marin

So I just realized my school has a Hasselblad scanner. Don't know which version it is though.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/463800-REG/Hasselblad_70380301_Flextight_X5_Scanner.html

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/463799-REG/Hasselblad_70380201_Flextight_X1_Scanner.html


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;11699620*
> So I just realized my school has a Hasselblad scanner. Don't know which version it is though.
> 
> http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/463800-REG/Hasselblad_70380301_Flextight_X5_Scanner.html
> 
> http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/463799-REG/Hasselblad_70380201_Flextight_X1_Scanner.html


simple solution, buy both then find out.


----------



## Marin

Think I'm going to sell off the 24-70mm so I can get some lighting gear.


----------



## dudemanppl

Thats what I did, except with a Siggy 120-300. So worth the money. Light is fun to screw around with.


----------



## Marin

Yeah, I just need to figure out what I should start with.


----------



## dudemanppl

Alienbees are good for the money, Elinchrom D Lite it 4s are around the price of an Alienbee 1600. Less power but Elinchrom is proven, although there have been many complaints about the D Lite its. If you buy a monolight, buy this: http://alienbees.com/vmini.html.


----------



## nuclearjock

Just bought one of THESE. Haven't tried it out yet but I've learned that a car can be one of the best bird blinds you can use. Certain species especially raptors have become accustomed to cars driving up close. Need to get a beefy ballhead, probably a RRS BH-55. My gimbal will be too tall for this.


----------



## Marin

Lol!


----------



## dudemanppl

Theres something wrong with that boy's head...
EDIT: THIS IS WHAT HAPPENS IN 5 HOURS OF WORK... http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/965449/


----------



## Danylu

Do any of you guys have a good opportunity (weather, cloud cover etc) to take some snaps of the Lunar Eclipse? I don't think I can see it here where I live


----------



## theCanadian

When and where can this eclipse be seen? I'm guessing sometime around the 21st?

Edit: nasa eclipse calander website is down :/

http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/


----------



## Boyboyd

Its on Tuesday night.

If it's clear skies I was planning on taking some photos of it.


----------



## laboitenoire

It's gonna be snowing at home


----------



## Shane1244

The dads hand position is questionable.


----------



## mortimersnerd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nuclearjock;11701418*
> Just bought one of THESE. Haven't tried it out yet but I've learned that a car can be one of the best bird blinds you can use. Certain species especially raptors have become accustomed to cars driving up close. Need to get a beefy ballhead, probably a RRS BH-55. My gimbal will be too tall for this.


You can have drive-by shootings now.


----------



## dudemanppl

I guess I'm getting a 5DII, 1DIII, and 400 2.8. But whatever works.


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mortimersnerd;11710109*
> You can have drive-by shootings now.


and more easily stalk people. Ohhhhhh the convinces.


----------



## Marin

So that Nikon FA I ordered a year ago, looks like it never got returned. It's just been sitting in some closet in my parents house (still in the packaging and stuff).

Actually worked out since I was looking for a second manual 35mm to rock alongside my F3HP.


----------



## theCanadian

That Nikon FA is actually fairly photogenic in itself. And it looks pretty impressive for early 80's. How well did that early matrix system really work though?


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;11698666*
> No camera deserves to eat pavement like that


Agreed, although I'd be happy to see more Canon cameras get dropped so the world could be rid of terrible canon ergonomics.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;11705635*
> Lol!


It hurts my eyes with how much sharpening has been applied to that photo.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Danylu;11707103*
> Do any of you guys have a good opportunity (weather, cloud cover etc) to take some snaps of the Lunar Eclipse? I don't think I can see it here where I live


I'm not sure what the weather is supposed to be like, but the last lunar eclipse we had I was able to snag some shots.

I may have to attempt to get some shots of this one too...


----------



## biatchi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Boyboyd;11707386*
> Its on Tuesday night.
> 
> If it's clear skies I was planning on taking some photos of it.


We live in northern England so I'm guessing the weather will be somewhere between crap and abysmal


----------



## dudemanppl

Canon EOS 1D Mark III
Canon EOS 5D Mark II + BG-E6
Nikon F3HP
Canon S90

Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8 USM L II
Canon EF 28-70mm f/2.8 USM L
Canon EF 35mm f/1.4 USM L
Nikkor 35mm f/1.4 AI-S
Sigma 50mm f/1.4 EX DG HSM
Canon EF 135mm f/2 USM L
Canon EF 400mm f/2.8 USM L
Canon EF Extender 1.4x II

Ho ho ho. Once I finish like 3 more rolls of film, I'm selling the F3HP and 35 1.4.


----------



## Triangle

What do you guys think about the Singh-Ray LB Neutral Polarizer Filter?
http://www.overclock.net/photography...polarizer.html


----------



## iandroo888

how waterproof is a sb800 or d5000 or 12-24 =3


----------



## Boyboyd

D5000 isn't incredibly waterproof. It's not weatherproofed like some of the professional bodies.


----------



## Lelin

A few changes, sold 18-55mm, sold 30mm 1.4, sold tripod, got 17-55mm, getting benro tripod.

Lelin - Canon EOS 7D
Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8
Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS
Canon EF 50mm f/1.8
Sigma 530DG Super Flash
Naneupro Sahara 217F Bag

I'm really hesitating between a 100mm Macro 2.8 IS or a 85mm 1.8 + 60mm EF-S Macro. Worked alot, could also get a few strobes, maybe ABs but the import fees are crazy


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Lelin*


A few changes, sold 18-55mm, sold 30mm 1.4, sold tripod, got 17-55mm, getting benro tripod.

Lelin - Canon EOS 7D
Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8
Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS
Canon EF 50mm f/1.8
Sigma 530DG Super Flash
Naneupro Sahara 217F Bag

I'm really hesitating between a 100mm Macro 2.8 IS or a 85mm 1.8 + 60mm EF-S Macro. Worked alot, could also get a few strobes, maybe ABs but the import fees are crazy


I've heard that the tonika 11-16 is very good. With my d5000 had an in-body motor


----------



## Lelin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*


I've heard that the tonika 11-16 is very good. With my d5000 had an in-body motor










Yes, the Tokina 11-16mm is really great I love it. I think I got a great copy it's so sharp. The Sigma 30mm 1.4 focused like crap, at the moment I trust only Canon and Tokina for lens quality.

Not sure if I understood the thing about in body motor


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lelin;11740765*
> Yes, the Tokina 11-16mm is really great I love it. I think I got a great copy it's so sharp. The Sigma 30mm 1.4 focused like crap, at the moment I trust only Canon and Tokina for lens quality.
> 
> Not sure if I understood the thing about in body motor


Nikon AF-S lenses have the motor and electronics for focusing in the actual lens, but some of the older lenses and 3rd party lenses aren't AF-S.

I'm not sure i understand if 100% either, all i know is that the tonika and other older autofocus lenses won't work on anything less than a D90 (e.g. 3100 and 5000)


----------



## Lelin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*


Nikon AF-S lenses have the motor and electronics for focusing in the actual lens, but some of the older lenses and 3rd party lenses aren't AF-S.

I'm not sure i understand if 100% either, all i know is that the tonika and other older autofocus lenses won't work on anything less than a D90 (e.g. 3100 and 5000)


Aaaah, that's too bad! I should really learn more about Nikon


----------



## iandroo888

I really considered the 11-16 tokina before I got my 12-24. If I get a better body that's not full frame, ill probably sell my 12-24 for 11-16 not for that 1mm but f2.8 and incredible sharpness I keep hearing about.

Yah I knew d5000 isn't really weatherproof like the dx00 and up but just wondering. How about falshes ans lens? How weatherproof are they?


----------



## jadawgis732

I own a Sony A200
Lenses:
Sony 18-70mm F3.5-5.6
Minolta 50mm F1.7
Minolta 35-70 F4

Tripod
Dolica AX620B100 62-Inch Proline Tripod and Ball Head

Lighting
2x500W Workforce Halogen
1x500W Craftsman Halogen

A few samples:


----------



## laboitenoire

The D5000 can take a little bit of abuse. I've had it out in light rain without any troubles shooting with my 70-300 VR. The lens has the ass-gasket but otherwise isn't sealed, and it was fine. I just kept plastic bags handy and left the hood on in order to keep water off the front element.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


I really considered the 11-16 tokina before I got my 12-24. If I get a better body that's not full frame, ill probably sell my 12-24 for 11-16 not for that 1mm but f2.8 and incredible sharpness I keep hearing about.

Yah I knew d5000 isn't really weatherproof like the dx00 and up but just wondering. How about falshes ans lens? How weatherproof are they?


holy crap, i thought u bought the 14-24/2.8 for the longest time. was about to say what a boss you were with a 14-24 on a d5000.

no bodies are WATERPROOF, they are weatherproof or weather-resistant. most cameras are pretty resilient.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *jadawgis732*


I own a Sony A200
Lenses:
Sony 18-70mm F3.5-5.6
Minolta 50mm F1.7
Minolta 35-70 F4

Tripod
Dolica AX620B100 62-Inch Proline Tripod and Ball Head

Lighting
2x500W Workforce Halogen
1x500W Craftsman Halogen


how you like that 35-70? been thinking of getting that and/or the 24-50 for fun.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> holy crap, i thought u bought the 14-24/2.8 for the longest time. was about to say what a boss you were with a 14-24 on a d5000.
> 
> no bodies are WATERPROOF, they are weatherproof or weather-resistant. most cameras are pretty resilient.
> 
> Lol i had the 14-24 and 24-70 for a few weeks when i borrowed from cousin but i couldnt afford the hefty price for my own set. xD i have used 14-24 quite a few times on my d5000. quite funny when you are on vacation, seeing people with like pro bodies and like a prime and u pull out a d5000 with pro lenses xD off proportion in both ways
> 
> oh i meant weatherproof. vegas been rainin for the past week or so and should continue for next few days. i do real estate photography with a friend so lots of in and out of houses and places and gotta be outside for some pictures as well.. just wondering how much rain can get on it before i should worry.. so far its just a little sprinkle if anything on it. i try to keep it as dry as i can lol... umbrella more for the camera then myself


----------



## dudemanppl

Wat. Primes > zooms.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;11745283*
> Wat. Primes > zooms.


not the good primes. meant like. ive seen d300s w/ 50mm f/1.8 or d700 with that.. then u randomly have one using a 24-120 or something lol.


----------



## dudemanppl

50 1.8s are great!


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;11745490*
> 50 1.8s are great!


Post some pics with your MKIII & 400 2.8. Gear pics ok, but real live stuff.


----------



## dudemanppl

The stuff will be here Friday. I don't know what to shoot, maybe I'll do some 400mm portraits.


----------



## theCanadian

Wut. Stalker.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *theCanadian;11747061*
> Wut. Stalker.


lol.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iandroo888;11744896*
> Lol i had the 14-24 and 24-70 for a few weeks when i borrowed from cousin but i couldnt afford the hefty price for my own set. xD i have used 14-24 quite a few times on my d5000. quite funny when you are on vacation, seeing people with like pro bodies and like a prime and u pull out a d5000 with pro lenses xD off proportion in both ways
> 
> oh i meant weatherproof. vegas been rainin for the past week or so and should continue for next few days. i do real estate photography with a friend so lots of in and out of houses and places and gotta be outside for some pictures as well.. just wondering how much rain can get on it before i should worry.. so far its just a little sprinkle if anything on it. i try to keep it as dry as i can lol... umbrella more for the camera then myself


1. get a plastic bag.
2. cut a hole for the lens.
3. put camera in bag.
4. stick the tip of the lens through the hole and wedge the bag between hood + lens.
5. ?????
6. $$$$$$


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;11746975*
> The stuff will be here Friday. I don't know what to shoot, maybe I'll do some 400mm portraits.


Birding?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10;11749048*
> 1. get a plastic bag.
> 2. cut a hole for the lens.
> 3. put camera in bag.
> 4. stick the tip of the lens through the hole and wedge the bag between hood + lens.
> *5. Kill Camera with Static
> 6. ?????
> 7. $$$$$$*


Fixed









That digital rangefinder idea is growing on me, thanks to my friend planting the idea in my head...


----------



## dudemanppl

No birds here mang. Tomorrow, tomorrow! Sigma 50 might come today, then I'll have 2!
21 MP file
EXIF
1/100 handheld 400. lolololololol.


----------



## SKl

Could i be added to the DSLR?
I have a nikon 3100D with the 18-55mm kit lens
Thanks







.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Birding?

Fixed










thanks to Farraday it wont happen


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


thanks to Farraday it wont happen


I can't join the dots between Faraday and birding


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


I can't join the dots between Faraday and birding










The implication was that; as plasic bags have a reputation for being 'sticky with static' it might kill the camera with static electricity. However, this is unlikely because even though the bag does conduct electricity, if it is at least semi-open and grounded, the build up of electricity will be minimal, as the bag is essentially a Faraday cage.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *theCanadian;11763667*
> The implication was that; as plasic bags have a reputation for being 'sticky with static' it might kill the camera with static electricity. However, this is unlikely because even though the bag does conduct electricity, if it is at least semi-open and grounded, the build up of electricity will be minimal, as the bag is essentially a Faraday cage.


----------



## Mr_Nibbles

Merry Christmas guys!


----------



## Marin

Used a ND 3.0 filter and exposure blending.










EDIT:

As you can see I'm still editing it.


----------



## dudemanppl

100 dollar 28-70L. Anyone jelly?


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;11769243*
> 100 dollar 28-70L. Anyone jelly?


----------



## dudemanppl

I also got a 28 2.8 tilt shift.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;11769396*
> I also got a 28 2.8 tilt shift.


You keep that, I'll take the 28-70mm for $100


----------



## dudemanppl

And they're the same lens.


----------



## Marin

So it's broken.


----------



## dudemanppl

It works pretty well 40-70. Good AF too. I guess I'll send it to Canon, still cheap at 100 boxed with everything.


----------



## mz-n10

so its not much shift and more tilt?


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *theCanadian;11763667*
> The implication was that; as plasic bags have a reputation for being 'sticky with static' it might kill the camera with static electricity. However, this is unlikely because even though the bag does conduct electricity, if it is at least semi-open and grounded, the build up of electricity will be minimal, as the bag is essentially a Faraday cage.


Aaaah. I get it









Anyone tried shooting locusts in flight? Man getting them in the frame is half the battle...

After watching the digitalrev video on tilt shift lenses, I actually would like one, it could have it's uses, but it would be too specialized for me.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;11769095*
> Used a ND 3.0 filter and exposure blending.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EDIT:
> 
> As you can see I'm still editing it.


thats beautiful. Best thing ive seen of yours so far.

Finally got a decent bag for Christmas, wanted the 7mdh but they're impossible to get hold of here. Gotma tarmac rally 5 instead.


----------



## dudemanppl

5DII's left strap lug (looking from the back) has a huge gap from the body and it. Weakest link in the 5DII IMO. I know that because when I get bored, I take apart my cameras. Taking apart Canons is SOOO much easier than Nikons.


----------



## [CyGnus]

Simple compact camera but it fits my needs though i want a better one but it needs to be compact open to any suggestions.

I own a Olympus X-880 its a 8MP camera with 5x Optical Zoom and that is the thing that matters too me a good optical Zoom and a good Macro in a compact deseign.


----------



## dudemanppl

Canon S95.
EDIT: Gonna replace 5DII top, rear and CF card door. Grand total 300.74, wah wah wah. Maybe I'll ask Canon first.


----------



## theCanadian

Guess who?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mr_Nibbles*


Merry Christmas guys!



Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


Guess who?



















Since it's a push-pull zoom, I'm guessing either a 100-400L or 28-300L.


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Since it's a push-pull zoom, I'm guessing either a 100-400L or 28-300L.



Yeah, it's the 100-400L. But it's not for me. It's for the dad. This hunk of glass outclasses his Rebel XSi pretty well.

I did get a Nikon D3100 with the 18-55mm DX kit lens. Birthday is in a couple days so I'm excited to see if I get any glass for that. Should be updating the list for me soon here!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


Yeah, it's the 100-400L. But it's not for me. It's for the dad. This hunk of glass outclasses his Rebel XSi pretty well.

I did get a Nikon D3100 with the 18-55mm DX kit lens. Birthday is in a couple days so I'm excited to see if I get any glass for that. Should be updating the list for me soon here!


Awesome! My birthday is just before Christmas, so it's a good time of year









Oh, to everyone else, if you have gear list updates, I'll get to them when I can, fairly busy at the moment with my new build


----------



## citruspers

I'm not in the list yet, but no stress


----------



## Shane1244

I would like to join!









Nikon D3000
18-55mm VR
35 f/1.8
flickR is in my signature!


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *citruspers*


I'm not in the list yet, but no stress










Consider yourself on probationary status









Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*


I would like to join!









Nikon D3000
18-55mm VR
35 f/1.8
flickR is in my signature!










How are you liking that new 35mm?


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Consider yourself on probationary status









How are you liking that new 35mm?










Oh, I love it!







There's quite a bit of CA at 1.8, but after like 2.2 it goes away.. depending on lighting conditions.

Definitely the best budget Nikon lens!


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Boyboyd;11769865*
> thats beautiful. Best thing ive seen of yours so far.


Thanks.







Going to take better photos than that over the course of this week.

Anyways, made more progress on it but I won't be able to finish it until I get back to school since they have color calibrated cinema displays.

Lightroom has the same file open.


----------



## laboitenoire

Got some small things for the camera...

Bower SFD35N Flash
Nikon ML-L3
Vista Monopod

Also got some Christmas money, so I'm thinking of using it to pick up either a new bag that can hold all my stuff or a 35 f/1.8.


----------



## Marin

Day 2 of shooting. I don't know if I should try to get rid of the vignette.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;11777950*
> Day 2 of shooting. I don't know if I should try to get rid of the vignette.


Marin, your images are absolutely gorgeous.

And in my opinion, I think you should keep the vignette. They add a bit of emphasis to the sun and how the light plays off against the water, and it's a much better effect overall.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;11777950*


Where is that?


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;11777998*
> Marin, your images are absolutely gorgeous.
> 
> And in my opinion, I think you should keep the vignette. They add a bit of emphasis to the sun and how the light plays off against the water, and it's a much better effect overall.


Thanks.









Yeah, I think I'll keep vignette since everyone I've shown it to likes it and it's a pain in the butt to remove (I might lighten it up a little in Lightroom). But I really need to get a Lee Big Stopper. It's a pain to shoot with the B+W ND 3.0 and it vignettes on my lens from the smaller filter size (49mm filter and the only lenses that outperform it are the Olympus 21mm f/2 and Zeiss 21mm f/2.8).

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;11778046*
> Where is that?


Maui.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Ok, I think I added or updated gear for those who requested it. Since it's just after Christmas, there are likely to be a lot of gear list changes, so if everyone could PM me there changes, that would be easiest. Between the holidays, building my new system, and selling the old, I'm likely to miss a post.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Yep, I foresee a lot of new T2i and D3100 users on here soon


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Yep, I foresee a lot of new T2i and D3100 users on here soon










I was put off by the 3100 in the store, but since getting one, it's got some pretty stuff loaded in there. Biggest complaint: There's something about this camera that makes me forget to take the lens cap off.







I'm gonna look rather noob with this camera for a while.









And that nikon strap is gonna have to go!


----------



## Boyboyd

I can't believe i only learnt last night that you have to click lens hoods in place. lol


----------



## dudemanppl

Loaded up Magic Lantern on my 5DII. Cool stuff here.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *theCanadian;11783054*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I was put off by the 3100 in the store, but since getting one, it's got some pretty stuff loaded in there. Biggest complaint: There's something about this camera that makes me forget to take the lens cap off.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm gonna look rather noob with this camera for a while.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And that nikon strap is gonna have to go!


The D3100 is a pretty loaded camera and great for the price, as is the Canon T2i. It's why I predict that most newcomers on the Photo forum here will be T2i and D3100 users, along with some XS/D3000 users.

Definitely welcome the new life to the forum though


----------



## Marin

I still need to correct the distortion as much as possible (the Olympus has moustache distortion just like the Zeiss 21mm, so I can't fully correct it) and make some changes to the color once I get to a calibrated monitor. Hoping to do some 44" prints once I get back to school.


----------



## dudemanppl

Hmm, vignetting on the first one looks a bit much. Half a stop less should be fine, because vignetting is good just not that much. What ND are you using?


----------



## Marin

B+w nd 3.0.


----------



## dudemanppl

I would have thought you would have a Lee 3.0, but thats basically the same thing. Coo.


----------



## Marin

I didn't have time to order the Big Stopper. Need to get around to it since the B+W vignettes.


----------



## dudemanppl

Hmm, if you had 2 Big Stoppers would it be 100 stops or 20...


----------



## Marin

20 Stops.


----------



## dudemanppl

Thats still f/1.4 to f/1376. Or 1/8000 to 128 seconds.


----------



## theCanadian

nvm


----------



## Ysbl

Nikon D200, Nikkor 70-210mm f/4-5.6, Nikon 50mmf/1.8


----------



## drb328

Got an addon to my camera kit

BG-E5 grip for christmas


----------



## dudemanppl

1DIII is quite nice.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *drb328;11806517*
> Got an addon to my camera kit
> 
> BG-E5 grip for christmas


Battery grips are







, in my opinion.

My only issue with them is that Canon is horrible at weatherproofing their grips. I had to take my grip off for an SF trip yesterday because I didn't want water in my battery compartment


----------



## laboitenoire

Would it be too much of a cheapskate move for me to pick up old AI/AIS lenses even though they won't meter on the D5000?









Been wanting a fast prime, but I've been on a tight budget recently.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire;11809242*
> Would it be too much of a cheapskate move for me to pick up old AI/AIS lenses even though they won't meter on the D5000?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Been wanting a fast prime, but I've been on a tight budget recently.


Are you sure they don't meter? I have an AI-S on my Canon 50D and it meters just fine. I just have to manually focus and set aperture on the lens, but that's about it.


----------



## laboitenoire

They don't meter on any Nikon below the Dx00, Dx, and D7000. Several of the EOS -> F-Mount adapters are chipped to allow metering.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire;11809242*
> Would it be too much of a cheapskate move for me to pick up old AI/AIS lenses even though they won't meter on the D5000?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Been wanting a fast prime, but I've been on a tight budget recently.


So how will you get proper exposure? Hand held meter, or just guess work?


----------



## laboitenoire

Guess work is what I was planning, but as I said it's more of a cheapskate move than a serious idea.


----------



## Marin

Leica M6 + Voigtlander 35mm f/1.4 or Fuji GF670.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire;11809730*
> Guess work is what I was planning, but as I said it's more of a cheapskate move than a serious idea.


Hm, sounds like a bad idea to me. Either get an AF-S lens or get a D7000+!
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;11809820*
> Leica M6 + Voigtlander 35mm f/1.4 or Fuji GF670.


Leice M6 plus this.


----------



## Marin

I'd rather use the money for tuition.









Anyways, I'm leaning towards the Leica M6 right now for street photography. I'm liking the GF670 but it just seems to bulky to carry around at times.


----------



## Danylu

the two ais lenses that i have owned weren't too bad. The only problem is when you very quickly move in and out of shade and sunlight. After a while you get better at working out exposure just by looking at your subject. I usually underexposed by a third of a stop just in case.


----------



## theCanadian

Found out today when Stanley Kubrick was filming "Barry Lyndon", he had a Zeiss f/0.7 50mm, lens custom mounted to his camera.










Serious glass friends.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *theCanadian;11810594*
> Found out today when Stanley Kubrick was filming "Barry Lyndon", he had a Zeiss f/0.7 50mm, lens custom mounted to his camera.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Serious glass friends.


Yeah, Zeiss made only three, originally for NASA, but Kubrick used one of them for candlelit shots in Barry Lyndon.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;11810715*
> Yeah, Zeiss made only three, originally for NASA, but Kubrick used one of them for candlelit shots in Barry Lyndon.


hell yea my film teacher told us about that lens. i would give up all my tuition for 50 f/0.7 but that probably wouldnt be smart lol


----------



## theCanadian

Cool! Didn't know that.

Hey, So I'm decked out with a nikon D3100 and the Nikkor 18-55 and the 55-200 which will cover me for pretty much everything except a few pieces here and there.

But I also take a fair bit of macro shots when the opportunity arises. So I'm looking for a lens to do me there. It can be prime or zoom, has to be f/3.5 or faster, preferably f/2.8 and have a minimum focusing distance of around 4-6 inches at the worst. I usually shoot in the 28mm-50mm (effective) range for these shots. I'll dual purpose the lens for landscapes.

The key thing here though is I'm on a pretty *tight budget*. I'm used to manual focus with my Minolta, so AF isn't necessarily a big deal, but would be a bonus. Any suggestions?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


Cool! Didn't know that.

Hey, So I'm decked out with a nikon D3100 and the Nikkor 18-55 and the 55-200 which will cover me for pretty much everything except a few pieces here and there.

But I also take a fair bit of macro shots when the opportunity arises. So I'm looking for a lens to do me there. It can be prime or zoom, has to be f/3.5 or faster, preferably f/2.8 and have a minimum focusing distance of around 4-6 inches at the worst. I usually shoot in the 28mm-50mm (effective) range for these shots. I'll dual purpose the lens for landscapes.

The key thing here though is I'm on a pretty *tight budget*. I'm used to manual focus with my Minolta, so AF isn't necessarily a big deal, but would be a bonus. Any suggestions?


The longer the FL of the macro lens, the longer the working distance (for 1:1). The drawback is that the longer FL, the more lens shake there will be. I used to have the Canon 60mm/2.8 macro, which was damned sharp, but the working distance was very close, almost right on top of the subject. When/if I get a FF macro, I'm going for at least 100mm, maybe the 180 L.

But as for suggestions, the Tamron 90mm f/2.8 is popular and damn nice judging from reviews.


----------



## Boyboyd

I have a 55mm macro, i find that to get close enough to be in the working distance i'm usually in the way of the light source.

Makes for a great portrait lens though.


----------



## theCanadian

Idk, I guess I'm used to my 35-105mm macro on the Minolta. That thing can focus to 4" if not closer. And I rather enjoy being that close. I've had a look around and it doesn't seem anything with what I'm asking for exists, which I find rather odd, considering my 35-105mm is like 20+ years old. I'll try some macro shots the way you guys are suggesting with my current line up DSLR gear and see how I like it before I make a purchase.

I've found this which seems to be optically similar to my 35-105, but I'll have to call B&H to see if they can give me a focusing distance.

This was taken with the 35-105, likely at around 8" and 35mm or there about:


----------



## Shane1244

Macro != Close Focusing


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


Idk, I guess I'm used to my 35-105mm macro on the Minolta. That thing can focus to 4" if not closer. And I rather enjoy being that close. I've had a look around and it doesn't seem anything with what I'm asking for exists, which I find rather odd, considering my 35-105mm is like 20+ years old. I'll try some macro shots the way you guys are suggesting with my current line up DSLR gear and see how I like it before I make a purchase.

I've found this which seems to be optically similar to my 35-105, but I'll have to call B&H to see if they can give me a focusing distance.

This was taken with the 35-105, likely at around 8" and 35mm or there about:


I doubt that your 35-105 or the Nikon you linked are actual 1:1 macro lenses. Manufacturers will sometimes label a zoom lens macro only because it can focus a little closer than most, resulting in some magnification but not enough to call it a macro lens. A 1:1 macro lens will always be a prime.

http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography...MF/3570mm1.htm


----------



## jadawgis732

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


how you like that 35-70? been thinking of getting that and/or the 24-50 for fun.


I don't, really. I haven't been able to take really sharp pics with it yet. I bought it used on ebay for $50 with shipping so I can't complain.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


Idk, I guess I'm used to my 35-105mm macro on the Minolta. That thing can focus to 4" if not closer. And I rather enjoy being that close. I've had a look around and it doesn't seem anything with what I'm asking for exists, which I find rather odd, considering my 35-105mm is like 20+ years old. I'll try some macro shots the way you guys are suggesting with my current line up DSLR gear and see how I like it before I make a purchase.

I've found this which seems to be optically similar to my 35-105, but I'll have to call B&H to see if they can give me a focusing distance.

This was taken with the 35-105, likely at around 8" and 35mm or there about


Problem with old AI and AIS lenses is that they don't meter on the D3100... You'd have to guess or use an external meter. The Tamron 90 f/2.8 is probably a good bet, or you might consider the Micro-Nikkor 105 f/2.8 AF-D. It won't autofocus on the D3100, but it will have full metering, and is a full frame lens if you ever move in that direction.


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


I doubt that your 35-105 or the Nikon you linked are actual 1:1 macro lenses. Manufacturers will sometimes label a zoom lens macro only because it can focus a little closer than most, resulting in some magnification but not enough to call it a macro lens. A 1:1 macro lens will always be a prime.

http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography...MF/3570mm1.htm


I see. So a 50mm it is.

Edit: So, Sigma 50mm f/2.8 No AF Will have to save up money for it.
Or A BGN Tamron 90mm f/2.8 for $250
Or this Nikon 35-135 (does it autofocus on 3100?)

What do you think?

This manual focus 55, looks nice too.


----------



## dudemanppl

Just got 35L. 100% disappointed, this lens is as sharp as Nikon's 30 year old design. So its as soft as something not very hard.


----------



## Marin

Bad copy IMO since mines sharp wide open.


----------



## dudemanppl

Well it suck MFed. And I don't want to send it in because I'm already spending more than I need to since my D700 that I sold apparently had a broken hotshoe and the owner wants to half and half the repair (FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF).


----------



## Marin

I'm on a slow connection right now so here's the only pic I have with the lens that's shot digitally.










Pic is at 240 dpi.


----------



## dudemanppl

Well it looks good at that size... Anything huge? Its a little better on the 1DIII since the middle point isn't helped by the 6 useless as *explitive* assist points. All they do is make pictures out of focus.


----------



## Marin

http://www5.picturepush.com/photo/a/4762713/img/4762713.jpg


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jadawgis732;11812156*
> I don't, really. I haven't been able to take really sharp pics with it yet. I bought it used on ebay for $50 with shipping so I can't complain.


even at f8? well i guess it doesnt really matter to me since i just want a light walk around. i dont know if you have used the mino 70-210/4 but if the colors are similar i am going to add one to my gear soon....
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *theCanadian;11812525*
> I see. So a 50mm it is.
> 
> Edit: So, Sigma 50mm f/2.8 No AF Will have to save up money for it.
> Or A BGN Tamron 90mm f/2.8 for $250
> Or this Nikon 35-135 (does it autofocus on 3100?)
> 
> What do you think?
> 
> This manual focus 55, looks nice too.


keep in mind that film SLR use a much bigger and brighter prism than the d3100 and also your d3100 does not have a focusing screen, which makes MF that much harder at 1:1 macro. i would recommend getting an AF macro lens.

the BGN tamron looks like a good choice, or even a set up highend close up filters.
canon 250d

or even

Raynox DCR250.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;11814889*
> http://www5.picturepush.com/photo/a/4762713/img/4762713.jpg


Anything in PP? EDIT 2: Oh, just default LR3 RAW import stuff.

EDIT: Just used my Sigma 50, its like a 35L without a oil smeared front element. Damn this is sharp. But 35 is a much better FL...

EDIT 3: Maybe I am expecting too much ut of it. It is as good as the Nikkor 50mm f/1.4 AF-D (my friends AF-S copy sucks). Not bad until the price I paid for it...







Also tried my friends 35 1.4 AF-S, amazing sharpness, absolutely mind-blowing.


----------



## Marin

Just the default amount of sharpening that LR applies.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *theCanadian;11812525*
> I see. So a 50mm it is.
> 
> Edit: So, Sigma 50mm f/2.8 No AF Will have to save up money for it.
> Or A BGN Tamron 90mm f/2.8 for $250
> Or this Nikon 35-135 (does it autofocus on 3100?)
> 
> What do you think?
> 
> This manual focus 55, looks nice too.


The 35-135 will not autofocus on your camera (and isn't a true macro) and the manual focus lens will not meter!


----------



## theCanadian

I don't understand how a lens wouldn't meter. I understand modern lenses have chips in them that talk to the camera, but is there no light meter in a D3100? That's absurd?

The reason I want a close focusing lens is a comfort issue. Whether or not it's a true macro lens doesn't bother me all that much.


----------



## laboitenoire

The meter on cheap bodies just doesn't couple with old manual lenses. AI and AI-S lenses have a mechanical lug that physically tells the camera what the maximum aperture is, and the cheap bodies don't have the feeler that checks that. However, AI-P, AF, AF-D, AF-I, and AF-S lenses all are chipped to tell the camera that information.


----------



## dudemanppl

Theres a little switch that tells the camera it has a lens on and if it doesn't have a chip it won't meter. I remember with the D40, it wouldn't take a shot either except on manual. If you really need it, you can chip it for 60 bucks but thats stupid.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *theCanadian;11812525*
> I see. So a 50mm it is.
> 
> Edit: So, Sigma 50mm f/2.8 No AF Will have to save up money for it.
> Or A BGN Tamron 90mm f/2.8 for $250
> Or this Nikon 35-135 (does it autofocus on 3100?)
> 
> What do you think?
> 
> This manual focus 55, looks nice too.


The Tamron looks nice, but I don't know about its BGN condition. Can it be returned or does KEH sell BGN as is?

I would probably pass on the Sigma due to the short FL and Sigma's QC.

The 35-135 isn't a macro lens, so I'd definitely pass on that.

The Nikon 55 has too short of an FL too.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *theCanadian;11816946*
> I don't understand how a lens wouldn't meter. I understand modern lenses have chips in them that talk to the camera, but is there no light meter in a D3100? That's absurd?
> 
> The reason I want a close focusing lens is a comfort issue. Whether or not it's a true macro lens doesn't bother me all that much.


So are you actually looking for a 1:1 macro lens, or do you just want something with a closer MFD? Remember that you can reduce the MFD for any lens just by installing extension tubes. Kenko makes decent ones.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;11817522*
> So are you actually looking for a 1:1 macro lens, or do you just want something with a closer MFD? Remember that you can reduce the MFD for any lens just by installing extension tubes. Kenko makes decent ones.


I think he has the 18-55 VR which won't have aperture control with tubes, if it did I would totally recommend those over these lenses. At least you have Live View so its not THAT bad.


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;11817522*
> So are you actually looking for a 1:1 macro lens, or do you just want something with a closer MFD? Remember that you can reduce the MFD for any lens just by installing extension tubes. Kenko makes decent ones.


I guess that begs the question, how is a 1:1 useful over a standard lens? I've done fine with my 35-105 so far, which I've had a look at, and it actually focuses about 6 inches from the film plane, which is extremely useful to me, but it's only 1:3.5.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *theCanadian;11818682*
> I guess that begs the question, how is a 1:1 useful over a standard lens? I've done fine with my 35-105 so far, which I've had a look at, and it actually focuses about 6 inches from the film plane, which is extremely useful to me, but it's only 1:3.5.


Well, it isn't very useful in terms of versatility, but 1:1 is used when you want to get seriously close. At 1:1, the subject is the same size as it is being projected onto the medium, which results in a substantial magnification.

Here's a 1:1 shot I took a while agoCanon 60mm/2.8), note the dime for scale:








(


----------



## nuclearjock

Longer focal length in a macro lens is a good thing imho. First off, there are lots of potential subjects that you don't want to get real close to. Bees, wasps, snakes, you get the idea. I have the nikkor 200mm f/4 and love it. As far as minimum apeture is concerned, you'll be shooting at >f/8 and more like f/16 anyway to make up for the shallow dof inherent at 1:1. If you have auto iso, you can shoot in apeture mode, set min ss to something reasonable and let iso run.

GT, I know QC is a big concern with Sigma, but alot of folks at the Nikon Cafe' swear by the Sigma 150mm macro. This appears to be one lens that Sigma got right.

I haven't used extension tubes but have seen lots of great images taken with them.


----------



## iandroo888

also a longer focal length will allow u to be a bit farther away so u arent blocking any light


----------



## Gigalisk

How did i not jump on this thread sooner! Post me up dawg! Camera Specs in Sig (Photography)


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iandroo888;11819856*
> also a longer focal length will allow u to be a bit farther away so u arent blocking any light


I almost always use fill flash, even on sunny days. faster ss is a good thing for hand held macro photography.


----------



## theCanadian

Alright, I hear you guys on the longer FL. While I enjoy photography immensely, I don't really get a lot of shutter time, and most of my early experience with macro/closeup type shots has been pretty enjoyable with the shorter FL and larger apertures. But as time goes on (recently) I've seen the need for smaller apertures and longer FL's.

I just happen to be more comfortable with the shorter FL's is all.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nuclearjock;11819579*
> Longer focal length in a macro lens is a good thing imho. First off, there are lots of potential subjects that you don't want to get real close to. Bees, wasps, snakes, you get the idea. I have the nikkor 200mm f/4 and love it. As far as minimum apeture is concerned, you'll be shooting at >f/8 and more like f/16 anyway to make up for the shallow dof inherent at 1:1. If you have auto iso, you can shoot in apeture mode, set min ss to something reasonable and let iso run.
> 
> GT, I know QC is a big concern with Sigma, but alot of folks at the Nikon Cafe' swear by the Sigma 150mm macro. This appears to be one lens that Sigma got right.
> 
> I haven't used extension tubes but have seen lots of great images taken with them.


Good point on the Sigma 150, I've also heard nothing but good things about it.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nuclearjock;11819955*
> I almost always use fill flash, even on sunny days. faster ss is a good thing for hand held macro photography.


What lighting setup do you use? I really want a ring or twin macro flash set up, but they are prohibitively expensive. I've even seen great portraits with the Canon MR14EX.


----------



## laboitenoire

Just pulled the trigger on a Kata 123-GO-20. Poked around with my dad's bag (the -10 model) and decided I wanted something a skosh bigger. Looking forward to getting something a bit more comfortable!


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


Alright, I hear you guys on the longer FL. While I enjoy photography immensely, I don't really get a lot of shutter time, and most of my early experience with macro/closeup type shots has been pretty enjoyable with the shorter FL and larger apertures. But as time goes on (recently) I've seen the need for smaller apertures and longer FL's.

I just happen to be more comfortable with the shorter FL's is all.



The easiest route to more magnification for a one lens solution would be to pop on a few magnification/diopter filter things on the front of your lens. I forget what they are called.


----------



## theCanadian

Macro filters... And they're not cheap.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


Macro filters... And they're not cheap.


Deal Xtreme knockoffs are a couple of bucks each.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Deal Xtreme knockoffs are a couple of bucks each.


But there is a reason why they're so cheap.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


But there is a reason why they're so cheap.


Because they're amazing.


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Danylu;11823582*
> Deal Xtreme knockoffs are a couple of bucks each.


Even some of the cheaper macro filters on B&H are little better than a magnifying glass. You use them to take pictures of coins and stamps to sell on the internet, not to do real photography.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;11823629*
> Because they're amazing.


I wish you still used your rage guy avatar. Then I could put it here, oh well. I have a front element of a 55-200 VR if anyone wants it, it magnifies. But I have to find it first. 580EXII is nice, BG-E6 is surprisingly nice, but I can't control AF points vertically...


----------



## Drizzt5

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;11818903*
> Well, it isn't very useful in terms of versatility, but 1:1 is used when you want to get seriously close. At 1:1, the subject is the same size as it is being projected onto the medium, which results in a substantial magnification.
> 
> Here's a 1:1 shot I took a while agoCanon 60mm/2.8), note the dime for scale:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (


Ugh, I woulda smashed that thing before I would take a pic of it.

D90 + Sony DSC-H50 here. I use the H50 a lot cause it feels like a nice balance to me







.
Honestly D90 is a camera I share with a family member. Most of my pictures taken with it are on vacations (Ireland) and around the house. I use the h50 during track meets a lot.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Drizzt5;11823982*
> Ugh, I woulda smashed that thing before I would take a pic of it.
> 
> D90 + Sony DSC-H50 here. I use the H50 a lot cause it feels like a nice balance to me
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> Honestly D90 is a camera I share with a family member. Most of my pictures taken with it are on vacations (Ireland) and around the house. I use the h50 during track meets a lot.


LOL, it's a tarantula spiderling (Brazilian pink salmon I think). No need to kill it, as it never survived to adulthood.


----------



## Drizzt5

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;11824060*
> LOL, it's a tarantula spiderling (Brazilian pink salmon I think). No need to kill it, as it never survived to adulthood.


Wait...
So it's a baby tarantula?
At first I was gonna say kill it with that dime.
Now I say

Kill it with fire!

I have a rule I try to follow, if they are outside... leave them alone, they have a right to exist. If they are in my house... no mercy. I save mice and birds though when they come in the house.

Are you suppoused to post photos in this thread?
I've got a d90 and a sony dsc-h50.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Drizzt5;11824171*
> Wait...
> So it's a baby tarantula?
> At first I was gonna say kill it with that dime.
> Now I say
> 
> Kill it with fire!
> 
> I have a rule I try to follow, if they are outside... leave them alone, they have a right to exist. If they are in my house... no mercy. I save mice and birds though when they come in the house.
> 
> Are you suppoused to post photos in this thread?
> I've got a d90 and a sony dsc-h50.


I'm a bit worried that you don't have "humans" on your list









And posting photos isn't necessary. If you want to look at my sig, you'd see that I have nothing to take a photo of my camera gear with!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Drizzt5;11824171*
> Wait...
> So it's a baby tarantula?
> At first I was gonna say kill it with that dime.
> Now I say
> 
> Kill it with fire!
> 
> I have a rule I try to follow, if they are outside... leave them alone, they have a right to exist. If they are in my house... no mercy. I save mice and birds though when they come in the house.
> 
> Are you suppoused to post photos in this thread?
> I've got a d90 and a sony dsc-h50.


LOL , well, it's like Dr. Doolittle's house here. Here's the current roster:

Five cats
One dog
Three tarantulas (one of which is the oldest of all my pets at 10+ years)
One guinea pig


----------



## theCanadian

I just found this picture, I thought I'd share:


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;11820927*
> What lighting setup do you use? I really want a ring or twin macro flash set up, but they are prohibitively expensive. I've even seen great portraits with the Canon MR14EX.


After I bought the 600, I had to stop all large purchases for 2010, (you know the marriage thing). But I'm thinking R1C1 early next year. For now it's just an SB900 straight up mounted right on the hot shoe, no diffuser etc. I used a diffuser once for ladybugs since they're so reflective.

On really bright sunny days, I'll even use the D300s vs D3 for added reach.

BTW, bought a D7000 for my daughter for x-mas. She loves it.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *theCanadian;11825771*
> I just found this picture, I thought I'd share:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [/QUOTE]
> 
> What is it? It looks delicious.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Boyboyd;11827559*
> What is it? It looks delicious.


That's a ladybug. Probably don't want to eat it.


----------



## laboitenoire

So I ordered my camera bag last night, right? Got it this morning, and Adorama even threw in a free SD card...


----------



## Sparhawk

lol, for extreme macro you can always flip the lens around, hold it in front of the camera mount and set the camera to manual mode. It's a bit awkward trying to get everything in focus, exposed right etc, but it can yield some amazing results... and for free!

My 18-55 works very well for this purpose.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Which SD card?

I was cleaning out some old PC games and parts yesterday, and I found the first CF card I ever had: a Lexar 8 MB (megabyte) with a whopping 4X speed! Originally had it for a Nikon CoolPix 5700 several years ago. It can't even hold one shot from my 5DII.


----------



## Boyboyd

I have a 4 diopter close-up filter but I've never really found much uses for it. I might see if I can use it.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;11830150*
> Which SD card?
> 
> I was cleaning out some old PC games and parts yesterday, and I found the first CF card I ever had: a Lexar 8 MB (megabyte) with a whopping 4X speed! Originally had it for a Nikon CoolPix 5700 several years ago. It can't even hold one shot from my 5DII.


It was a 2 gig PNY SD card. I've got two others like it and they work fine, just small and slow.


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Sparhawk*


lol, for extreme macro you can always flip the lens around, hold it in front of the camera mount and set the camera to manual mode. It's a bit awkward trying to get everything in focus, exposed right etc, but it can yield some amazing results... and for free!

My 18-55 works very well for this purpose.










I've tried free lensing before. The front element (or the the one behind it) makes it so hard to center the aperture on the 18-55. The bulge in that element makes the aperture appear so damn small. That stacked on top of the fact that everything is mirrored, makes for a true challenge.


----------



## Drizzt5

I bought this when it was a little more expensive for my D90

  Amazon.com: Eye-Fi Pro X2 8 GB Class 6 SDHC Wireless Flash Memory Card EYE-FI-8PC: Electronics It is soooooooooo nice. I was taking pics at a muse concert at the prudential center once and some of them were already uploaded to my computer (and some on facebook) by the time I got home.

Anyone else have experience with it? I wish I could put one in all my cameras.


----------



## laboitenoire

While the concept is intriguing, I think they're too expensive.


----------



## mz-n10

i have a 8mb smart media from my old olympus.....ahh those were the days.


----------



## Drizzt5

Here is a picture taken with the D90
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1370/5118037710_c0ae3b6262_b.jpg
Here is a picture taken with the DSC-H50
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4056/4240600347_32b9533789_b.jpg

The first one was uploaded to my computers HDD and Facebook before I even got home. I think thats freaking awesome.


----------



## theCanadian

On the D3100 there are several shooting modes. Single Shot. Continuous. Self Timer. And a Q mode, that I don't know the purpose of.

It seems to do everything more slowly. What I mean is, it lifts the SLR, closes the iris to the correct aperture size, pauses to allow everything to settle, then captures the image. I'm assuming this is to reduce shake and make sure the iris has completely settled before capturing the image. Can anyone confirm?


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


On the D3100 there are several shooting modes. Single Shot. Continuous. Self Timer. And a Q mode, that I don't know the purpose of.

It seems to do everything more slowly. What I mean is, it lifts the SLR, closes the iris to the correct aperture size, pauses to allow everything to settle, then captures the image. I'm assuming this is to reduce shake and make sure the iris has completely settled before capturing the image. Can anyone confirm?


It's a quiet mode, designed to space out the sounds so it gives the illusion of being quieter


----------



## 808MP5

My hobby kit contains
Nikon D5000
Nikon 10.5mm fisheye
Nikon 12-24mm
Nikon 18-55 kit lens
Nikon 35mm f/1.8
Nikon 85mm micro
Nikon 70-300mm vr
Nikon Sb-600 flash
and a walmart tripod

And A Few Shots...
Night Shot









Macro









Moving Targets









Many More At My Flickr... hehe please be gentle... 99.8% of my shots don't have any post production
http://www.flickr.com/photos/808mp5/


----------



## Drizzt5

I love that night shot.


----------



## laboitenoire

What lens was that first one? I'm guessing the 12-24, but you didn't keep the EXIF data...


----------



## 808MP5

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Drizzt5;11843082*
> I love that night shot.












Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire;11843438*
> What lens was that first one? I'm guessing the 12-24, but you didn't keep the EXIF data...


Your absolutely correct. I'm not sure how to embed the exif data when posting the picture. But it maintained it when I uploaded it

http://www.flickr.com/photos/808mp5/sets/72157624984506975/


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire;11843438*
> What lens was that first one? I'm guessing the 12-24, but you didn't keep the EXIF data...


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *808MP5;11844385*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your absolutely correct. I'm not sure how to embed the exif data when posting the picture. But it maintained it when I uploaded it
> 
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/808mp5/sets/72157624984506975/


It's not his fault. Flickr for whatever reason will only embed EXIF in the "Original" size and strips it when automatically creates the other smaller sizes. So the only way to ensure that your posted image will have EXIF is to post the original size.

Here's a link to the original size for 808MP5's image. As you can see, it has EXIF.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/808mp5/5057980030/sizes/o/in/set-72157624984506975/


----------



## 808MP5

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;11844448*
> It's not his fault. Flickr for whatever reason will only embed EXIF in the "Original" size and strips it when automatically creates the other smaller sizes. So the only way to ensure that your posted image will have EXIF is to post the original size.
> 
> Here's a link to the original size for 808MP5's image. As you can see, it has EXIF.
> 
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/808mp5/5057980030/sizes/o/in/set-72157624984506975/


Thanks for the heads up about the EXIF data... didn't know that... reason i didn't post the full image is because...
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;3618652*
> *NB - please limit the size of any photos you post to 1000 pixels on a side (or thereabouts)! If you want to show off a full resolution image, then just link to it please.*


Figure I follow the guidelines... I know in some forums ppl get all moddy


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *808MP5;11844515*
> Thanks for the heads up about the EXIF data... didn't know that... reason i didn't post the full image is because...
> 
> Figure I follow the guidelines... I know in some forums ppl get all moddy


That's right, and thank you for doing so. Although OCN auto resizes posted images, it doesn't change the file size, which is the reason for the rule. If everyone posted 10 MP + full resolution images, it would be slow to navigate.

It's just flickr's fault. One way to work around it is to use the "Share this" option and copy the BB code for whatever size you want. This will at least link your posted photo back to the flickr photo page so anyone can view the EXIF.

Looks like this:


Midway, KY by gonetomorrow00, on Flickr


----------



## 808MP5

^^
where's the REP+ button... great info


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *808MP5;11844707*
> ^^
> where's the REP+ button... great info


Editors don't have REP buttons in their respective forum.







Thanks though.


----------



## Gigalisk

Forgot to post some of my stuff.


----------



## Drizzt5

Guess what I take pictures of after there is a blizzard in New Jersey?
SNOWSNOWSNOWSNOWSNOW


----------



## ericld

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *808MP5;11842759*
> My hobby kit contains
> Nikon D5000
> Nikon 10.5mm fisheye
> Nikon 12-24mm
> Nikon 18-55 kit lens
> Nikon 35mm f/1.8
> Nikon 85mm micro
> Nikon 70-300mm vr
> Nikon Sb-600 flash
> and a walmart tripod
> 
> And A Few Shots...
> 
> Moving Targets
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Many More At My Flickr... hehe please be gentle... 99.8% of my shots don't have any post production
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/808mp5/


Very nice shot of the Raptor. AB+High AOA with a little thrust vectoring. Must have been humid that day too. I would gift wrap that one to the Air Force.


----------



## Gigalisk

That is a great shot of F-22. I guess this was Pass in Review at an Air Show?

Gigalisk
(Forward Deployed)


----------



## 808MP5

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ericld;11847877*
> Very nice shot of the Raptor. AB+High AOA with a little thrust vectoring. Must have been humid that day too. I would gift wrap that one to the Air Force.


thanks... it's always humid here... this was actually a marine flying it... i don't think the air force would appreciate it...
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gigalisk;11854063*
> That is a great shot of F-22. I guess this was Pass in Review at an Air Show?
> 
> Gigalisk
> (Forward Deployed)


yup took it at an air show... wanted to try and shoot moving targets and achieve some motion blur at the same time... didn't really get it with that shot though guessing clouds won't show too much anyways


----------



## Boyboyd

Anyone got any gift ideas for someone who's new to DLSRs but pretty talented? Preferably something about £30.

Related: I really don't like the sony A390. The lens feels well built though.


----------



## Marin

Polarizer.


----------



## Boyboyd

That's perfect, i was thinking strap but i think that's better.

Thanks.


----------



## theCanadian

Or a leather bound portfolio.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Boyboyd;11855637*
> Related: I really don't like the sony A390. The lens feels well built though.


I picked up a Sony SLT in a store the other day. Entry level SLTs are shooting in the range of 6-8 FPS. I think SLTs will become the one and only way to do action photography. The boosted FPS along with continuous focusing and reduced shutter lag is a big deal for that field.


----------



## Boyboyd

He has hinted that he wants one of his photos printing large to put on his wall at university, but that's more expensive that i'd like.

I'll go with the hoya CPL filter once i can find one that's 58mm.

The nikon SB600 is now less than £200 from amazon. Tempting.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *theCanadian;11855865*
> 
> I picked up a Sony TLR in a store the other day. Entry level TLRs are shooting in the range of 6-8 FPS. I think TLRs will become the one and only way to do action photography. The boosted FPS along with continuous focusing and reduced shutter lag is a big deal for that field.


Sony has a TLR?


----------



## Boyboyd

My bad, for some reason i thought you were quoting me and i'd put TLR.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;11855921*
> Sony has a TLR?


I'm scratching my head too. I assume TLR is Twin Lens Reflex when I read it:


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;11855921*
> Sony has a TLR?


My bad, SLT.

Also, not to mention that if you're anticipating taking lots of photos, as you might with sports, not having a reflex mirror means that you won't be burning through bodies as quickly.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *theCanadian;11855989*
> My bad, SLT.
> 
> Also, not to mention that if you're anticipating taking lots of photos, as you might with sports, not having a reflex mirror means that you won't be burning through bodies as quickly.


Yes, but it still has a shutter, which wears out long before the mirror box anyway.


----------



## dudemanppl

Gonna sell the 35L for Voigtlander R3a and Voigtlander 35 1.2. And some film too.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Boyboyd;11855637*
> Anyone got any gift ideas for someone who's new to DLSRs but pretty talented? Preferably something about £30.
> 
> Related: I really don't like the sony A390. The lens feels well built though.


the a390 has a really bad VF.....


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10;11858063*
> the a390 has a really bad VF.....


For the life of me I can't figure out what vf stands for.


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Boyboyd;11858716*
> For the life of me I can't figure out what vf stands for.


View Finder.


----------



## Boyboyd

of course... Thanks


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;11856243*
> Yes, but it still has a shutter, which wears out long before the mirror box anyway.


It's just one less moving part, which I suppose is a good thing overall, assuming no loss of IQ.


----------



## dudemanppl

Love/hate relationship with this picture.... Sometimes it looks great but other times I see the flaws and I hate it. Oh well, what do you guys think?


----------



## Marin

The car is distracting. And I don't like HDR images. =P


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


The car is distracting. And I don't like HDR images. =P


Agree on both. But I no know how fix the first one. And there isn't enough DR to have the trees not stupidly dark.


----------



## Drizzt5

Whats wrong with HDR?


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Agree on both. But I no know how fix the first one. And there isn't enough DR to have the trees not stupidly dark.


Exposure blend it.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Drizzt5*


Whats wrong with HDR?


Looks gross.


----------



## Xyro TR1

And I haven't known about this thread how? Derp.

I've had my camera since mid-2009. I haven't much improved my skillset, just taken a multitude of crappy photos.

SETUP:
Canon 500D (Rebel T1i)
- Canon 17-85mm IS
- Canon 70-300mm IS
- Canon 50mm f/1.8
- Sigma 10-20mm Wide
- Vivitar 500mm f/8 Mirror (just 'cause)
- Kenko 3x Multiplier (also just 'cause)
- Speedlite 430EX
- Photoshop CS5/Lightroom 3

No, its nothing special or good by any stretch of the imagination, but it gets me by. Sometime soon I'll also be getting a Canon Vixia HF200 which should be amusing...


----------



## Drizzt5

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Looks gross.


Sometimes in photos of old barns and stuff that helps the pictures.

But in this particular picture I like the HDR. It makes the photo a little more interesting. The card needs to go though, it is distracting.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Drizzt5*


Sometimes in photos of old barns and stuff that helps the pictures.

But in this particular picture I like the HDR. It makes the photo a little more interesting. The card needs to go though, it is distracting.


Cover it with your hand, I'm too lazy to crop.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

You could probably clone out the car with all the snow.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Xyro TR1;11861623*
> And I haven't known about this thread how? Derp.
> 
> I've had my camera since mid-2009. *I haven't much improved my skillset, just taken a multitude of crappy photos.*
> 
> SETUP:
> Canon 500D (Rebel T1i)
> - Canon 17-85mm IS
> - Canon 70-300mm IS
> - Canon 50mm f/1.8
> - Sigma 10-20mm Wide
> - Vivitar 500mm f/8 Mirror (just 'cause)
> - Kenko 3x Multiplier (also just 'cause)
> - Speedlite 430EX
> - Photoshop CS5/Lightroom 3
> 
> No, its nothing special or good by any stretch of the imagination, but it gets me by. Sometime soon I'll also be getting a Canon Vixia HF200 which should be amusing...


You should probably be focusing less on the gear and more on the skills then







The equipment you have should be more than enough to take good photos.


----------



## Xyro TR1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;11864563*
> You should probably be focusing less on the gear and more on the skills then
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The equipment you have should be more than enough to take good photos.










Not to worry, I'm not looking to get any more photography-related gear for a while. I will be getting a dedicated video camera soon, though, because that just looks like fun (and I love cutting videos!).


----------



## Unknownm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Xyro TR1;11864731*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not to worry, I'm not looking to get any more photography-related gear for a while. I will be getting a *dedicated video camera* soon, though, because that just *looks like fun (and I love cutting videos!*).


me and you man. I'm trying to do the same. What application are you using to edit. Sony and adobe for me


----------



## Xyro TR1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Unknownm;11868926*
> me and you man. I'm trying to do the same. What application are you using to edit. Sony and adobe for me


Same, Vegas 9 Pro and Premiere CS5. Amusingly enough, I usually cut on my laptop since I do it for work on occasion.


----------



## Marin

Ordered a new camera. What could it be?


----------



## Unknownm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Xyro TR1;11869063*
> Same, Vegas 9 Pro and Premiere CS5. Amusingly enough, I usually cut on my laptop since I do it for work on occasion.


Upgrade to Sony vegas 10. PMed


----------



## dudemanppl

We need hints.


----------



## Marin

It uses film.


----------



## dudemanppl

Zeiss Ikon!


----------



## mz-n10

lecia or ikon


----------



## 3XPeriment

Hey man thanks for maintaining this thread. Add me up:

Point and Shoot:
Panasonic Lumix DMC-FP8 12MP/HTC Droid Incredible 8MP

DSLR:
Nikon D7000/Nikon D80
AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D
AF-S DX Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G EDII
AF-S DX Nikkor 18-105mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR
AF-S Nikkor 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G IF-ED VRII


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10;11869379*
> lecia or ikon


Neither.


----------



## mortimersnerd

Decided to throw a couple prints up on Ebay to see if they will sell. Ebay's running their typical free listing promo so I figure why not. Priced it so I can't lose any money. Made an order for a few hundred dollars in prints today for some people. Finally starting to make back some of the money I spend on photo equipment, though I do it for fun.

Looking to pick up a D700 eventually and a good wide angle. Going to be spending about $4k on a new mountain bike, wish I could spend that on photography...


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mortimersnerd;11869765*
> Decided to throw a couple prints up on Ebay to see if they will sell. Ebay's running their typical free listing promo so I figure why not. Priced it so I can't lose any money. Made an order for a few hundred dollars in prints today for some people. Finally starting to make back some of the money I spend on photo equipment, though I do it for fun.
> 
> Looking to pick up a D700 eventually and a good wide angle. Going to be spending about $4k on a new mountain bike, wish I could spend that on photography...


Hobby's are just so darn expensive!


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Neither.


RF or SLR? And what format?


----------



## mortimersnerd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*


Hobby's are just so darn expensive!


Yeah, and I seem to have picked up the expensive ones: photography, cycling, skiing, computers. I've spent at least 15k on those. If I wasn't giving 20k/year to my university, it would be a lot easier lol.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;11869969*
> *Fun* Hobb*ies* are just so darn expensive!


Fix'd for spelling and correctness. It explains why no one takes up rock collecting as a hobby even though it's cheap









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mortimersnerd;11870098*
> Yeah, and I seem to have picked up the expensive ones: photography, cycling, skiing, computers. I've spent at least 15k on those. *If I wasn't giving 20k/year to my university*, it would be a lot easier lol.


In the same boat as you.

Of course, we probably would still be just as bad off with only a HS diploma to find a job.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


RF or SLR? And what format?


Rf.


----------



## dudemanppl

35mm?


----------



## theCanadian

Pentax 645N?


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


Pentax 645N?


its a rangefinder so it wont be that....

voigtlander bessa


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;11870980*
> 35mm?


Mf.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10;11871069*
> its a rangefinder so it wont be that....
> 
> voigtlander bessa


Close. Really close.


----------



## theCanadian

Dude. I saw RF and thought, "Roll Film". LMAO!


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;11871073*
> Close. Really close.


Bessa III


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10;11871111*
> Bessa III


Close. Reeeeeally close.


----------



## dudemanppl

http://www.kenrockwell.com/mamiya/6.htm I have a feeling I'm wrong.


----------



## Marin

Nope.


----------



## mz-n10

lol.....these are all the MF RF i know of...

fuji g rangefinder
bronica rf645


----------



## Marin

The Bessa III was almost on the money.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;11871244*
> The Bessa III was almost on the money.


bessa, bessa66, bessa II


----------



## Marin

Nope.


----------



## mz-n10

i give up....


----------



## Marin

Then I'll reveal it on Tuesday.


----------



## Drizzt5

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Nope.


bessa IV
bessa V


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Nvm


----------



## dudemanppl

We should do this for the lenses/bodies I buy. We could go on forever!


----------



## PCWIZMTL

Hi!

I'd like to join the club!

Nikon D80


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PCWIZMTL;11873357*
> Hi!
> 
> I'd like to join the club!
> 
> Nikon D80


You must be one hell of a photographer to not need lenses!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;11873690*
> You must be one hell of a photographer to not need lenses!


He just pokes a hole in the center of the body cap and BAM! Instant lens (actually works).


----------



## Marin

I also got a bayonet adapter and some filters for my Hasselblad. B+W 091 Dark Red Filter and a B+W ND 3.0. So that's a 13 stop light reduction.

Once I get around to it I'm going to pre-order a Lee Big Stopper (since they're still back ordered, ugggg...).


----------



## laboitenoire

Ugh... I tried taking pictures a few nights ago of some of the snow drifts we were getting in my back yard following the nor'easter that pounded New England. I thought I had gotten some decent shots but when I was processing them today they didn't really come out.


----------



## Marin

http://www.lensrentals.com/rent/video/cameras/miniature/gopro-hd-video-action-cam

Renting it, lol.


----------



## Shane1244

They're actually so sick







What will you be mounting it too?

POV sex movies?


----------



## Marin

I wish.









I'm mounting it on my helmet. Going up to tahoe on Sunday to snowboard. Hopefully I can get some sick footage in the glades and on the blacks.


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;11907398*
> I wish.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm mounting it on my helmet. Going up to tahoe on Sunday to snowboard. Hopefully I can get some sick footage in the glades and on the blacks.


Oh sick!







Go to like BestBuy and buy the Chest Strap too, I find it gives a really cool feel to the video. Just take it back after your rental is done!









Cant wait to see the footage.


----------



## Marin

I was thinking that the chest harness would be odd when snowboarding.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yo3M6EB8kmk&hd=1[/ame]

Like it's used here and it looks decent in the park, but for runs it probably won't be as interesting.


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;11907584*
> I was thinking that the chest harness would be odd when snowboarding.
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yo3M6EB8kmk&hd=1
> 
> Like it's used here and it looks decent in the park, but for runs it probably won't be as interesting.


That true actually, since when you are snowboarding, your chest doesn't face forward..









Do you hit the jumps?


----------



## Marin

I rarely go to the parks since my board isn't really cut out for it. But I still love my Never Summer Titan because it's awesome for everything else (just a little trickier for tight turns).


----------



## Drizzt5

How much is the camera in that video Marin? Those videos look great.


----------



## Marin

$300.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/657013-REG/GoPro_CHDHH_001_HD_Helmet_HERO_Camcorder.html


----------



## Shane1244

You can get the version that records at 960p (instead of 1080p) for about 35% less.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;11908541*
> You can get the version that records at 960p (instead of 1080p) for about 35% less.


960p version has a FoV of 170 degrees while the 1080p version has a FoV of 127 degrees. And I can't figure out what accessories LensRentals is going to include so I added a chest harness and head strap to be on the safe side.

Hopefully they include a mount for my helmet since I prefer to be wearing one when going through trees (cause head injuries are srs business).


----------



## Shane1244

So the cheaper one has a wider FOV..? or did you mix it up? I would have never noticed that.

EDIT: Read up on it, the 1080p version is 127 degrees at 1080p, but has 170 degrees at 960/720p. Any idea on how that works? :S


----------



## dudemanppl

One is FE, one isn't.


----------



## Marin

Put it down right but got confused for a second. Don't get why they did that; guess if you want the wider FoV and want it to be at 1080p you need to upscale from 960p. That's just fantastic...


----------



## dudemanppl

Wait, no they're both FE, I'm just stupid. WHY ARE LESS WIDE?


----------



## Shane1244

Also, the 1080p can do 720p 60fps. I imagine they are all the same, there's got to be a way to flash them to make a 960p into a 1080p.

Also, what's FE?

Lets figure out how they can change the FOV....? :S


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;11908697*
> Also, the 1080p can do 720p 60fps. I imagine they are all the same, there's got to be a way to flash them to make a 960p into a 1080p.
> 
> Also, what's FE?


Fisheye.


----------



## Shane1244

Gotcha!









Ah, 1280*960 is 4:3, 1920*1080 is 16:9, so I guess they rate the FOV on width and height.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;11908728*
> Gotcha!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ah, 1280*960 is 4:3, 1920*1080 is 16:9, so I guess they rate the FOV on width and height.


Nope.
Quote:


> Camera Optics
> Lens Type: Fixed Focus (2ft/.6m - ∞), glass
> Aperture: f/2.8 (high performance in low-light situations)
> Angle of View: 170º ultra wide angle in WVGA, 720p, or 960p mode
> Angle of View: 127º wide angle in 1080p mode


Quote:


> Video
> HD Video Resolution Modes: (subject to change, pending final firmware release)
> 1080p = 1920x1080 pixels (16:9), 30 fps, 15 Mbit/s data rate
> 960p = 1280x960 pixels (4:3), 30 fps, 12 Mbit/s data rate
> 720p = 1280x720 pixels (16:9), 60 fps, 15 Mbit/s data rate
> 720p = 1280x720 pixels (16:9), 30 fps, 8 Mbit/s data rate
> WVGA = 848x480 pixels (16:9), 60 fps, 8 Mbit/s data rate


Don't get what they're doing.


----------



## Shane1244

Oh, available in 720p too. Hmmp.. That's messed.

Google time.


----------



## Unknownm

no edits, just slow shutter speed and non shaking hands (at the time)


----------



## dudemanppl

Resizing is also fun.


----------



## Unknownm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;11909010*
> Resizing is also fun.


Yes I know, I should of made it a bit smaller in imageshack.

Least you get to test out the quad core you have. Previewing that image must be like melting butter. On my AMD Neo processor, google chrome stops for a few seconds than the images loads


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Unknownm;11909038*
> Yes I know, I should of made it a bit smaller in imageshack.
> 
> Least you get to test out the quad core you have. Previewing that image must be like melting butter. On my AMD Neo processor, google chrome stops for a few seconds than the images loads


No, It's the downloading of the image that sucks, viewing it is fine.


----------



## Marin

Took my dads Leica M6 out since I had a roll of Ektar in it from last year. I wish other cameras were built as well as it.


----------



## mz-n10

u should mount ur 5d2 with a 24-70L to your helment...now thats a video i want to see


----------



## Marin

That would break my neck.


----------



## max302

Some of you may remember my previous camera heists (Nikon film bodies, 35SPn, Pentax 645Nii)... I'll be contacting my source this week to purchase a fleet of 3 pro-used gripped D200's, which might be on sale in a near future. What's the market price on those? 300-400 depending on the condition?

One might get the Lifepixel IR conversion, I'm feeling crafty these days.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


That would break my neck.










Rent the 300 again and use the hood as a hat, very nice. Pretty light too.


----------



## mrwesth

I want one!
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/699919-REG/Mamiya_322_157_DM56_Digital_Camera_System.html

in other gear news...
My 5dII is supposed to get here on the 10th. I get on a plane for Alaska on the 16th. My 70-200 is begging me not to trade it for 85 1.2. My 24-70 has what looks like a hair in the rear element. CPS is in Dallas in 2 weeks but I'll be on a plane so I can't get it cleaned.

I'm torn between one profoto head and 3 SB700's to be like the strobist.

Oh what has the world come to.

On a side note, I live in a shack, drive a pos, and eat raman noodles daily. So this is the glamorous life a fotografer. Least girls still take their clothes off for a fancy camera!

<3 pixels!

PS. anyone got some lee ND's for sale? BH has sketchy inventory atm.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mrwesth;11914470*
> I want one!
> http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/699919-REG/Mamiya_322_157_DM56_Digital_Camera_System.html
> 
> in other gear news...
> My 5dII is supposed to get here on the 10th. I get on a plane for Alaska on the 16th. My 70-200 is begging me not to trade it for 85 1.2. My 24-70 has what looks like a hair in the rear element. CPS is in Dallas in 2 weeks but I'll be on a plane so I can't get it cleaned.
> 
> I'm torn between one profoto head and 3 SB700's to be like the strobist.
> 
> Oh what has the world come to.
> 
> On a side note, I live in a shack, drive a pos, and eat raman noodles daily. So this is the glamorous life a fotografer. Least girls still take their clothes off for a fancy camera!
> 
> <3 pixels!
> 
> PS. anyone got some lee ND's for sale? BH has sketchy inventory atm.


Hey, so long as you're living a productive life you're happy with, what's there to complain about?


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mrwesth;11914470*
> I want one!
> http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/699919-REG/Mamiya_322_157_DM56_Digital_Camera_System.html
> 
> in other gear news...
> My 5dII is supposed to get here on the 10th. I get on a plane for Alaska on the 16th. My 70-200 is begging me not to trade it for 85 1.2. My 24-70 has what looks like a hair in the rear element. CPS is in Dallas in 2 weeks but I'll be on a plane so I can't get it cleaned.
> 
> I'm torn between one profoto head and 3 SB700's to be like the strobist.
> 
> Oh what has the world come to.
> 
> On a side note, I live in a shack, drive a pos, and eat raman noodles daily. So this is the glamorous life a fotografer. Least girls still take their clothes off for a fancy camera!
> 
> <3 pixels!
> 
> PS. anyone got some lee ND's for sale? BH has sketchy inventory atm.


why sb700 when you can pick up lumopro 160 or a yongnuo 560 for pennies....


----------



## mrwesth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10;11914626*
> why sb700 when you can pick up lumopro 160 or a yongnuo 560 for pennies....


For multi-flash setupd... CLS?

Dunno. Depends on the shooter. I use canon 580 and 430s + Paull C Buff... so its all irrelevant to my setup.

Was just ranting/joking mostly.


----------



## mz-n10

well if you shoot nikon, sure CLS, but you still need line of sight which isnt as useful as pw.


----------



## mrwesth

PW can cost as much as the flash head (or more)... and that's more gear.
IMO los isn't an issue with these heads and their near full range of motion. Only time you can have issues is when using reflectors between camera and flash, but that can be creatively worked around as well.

Point being the SB700 are a good value if you use all the features packed into them. If not, as you suggested there can be cheaper serviceable alternatives.


----------



## laboitenoire

Well, he also has a 5D Mark II... I don't think the Nikon flash is going to work with a Canon body.


----------



## mz-n10

they do just as dumb flashes.....


----------



## mrwesth

Completely forgot I ordered a new backpack... and UPS just dropped it off!

YAY!
http://www.thinktankphoto.com/products/airport-addicted-backpack.aspx

... and its friggin big. Probably weighs 5-10lbs without gear in it. Oh well, this is why I go to the gym! Hopefully it gets worn out before I get back problems wearing it. lol!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mrwesth;11915420*
> Completely forgot I ordered a new backpack... and UPS just dropped it off!
> 
> YAY!
> http://www.thinktankphoto.com/products/airport-addicted-backpack.aspx
> 
> ... and its friggin big. Probably weighs 5-10lbs without gear in it. Oh well, this is why I go to the gym! Hopefully it gets worn out before I get back problems wearing it. lol!


NICE bag. I have an Urban Disguise and I love it. I find that use it way more than my Crumpler 7MDH.


----------



## mz-n10

thats a pretty hefty bag, any reason to get that over a pelican 1510?


----------



## Drizzt5

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;11908443*
> $300.
> 
> http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/657013-REG/GoPro_CHDHH_001_HD_Helmet_HERO_Camcorder.html


And that comes with helmet mount?
Wow that looks like a great deal. Maybe I will save up for one and get it next Christmas.


----------



## mrwesth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;11915672*
> NICE bag. I have an Urban Disguise and I love it. I find that use it way more than my Crumpler 7MDH.


Which urban disguise?
I've looked at them for a while and really like a lot about them. I just don't know how much I'd use it for what I do.

Plus I have a speedbelt/harness from days on sidelines that is really convenient for on site shoots too.

The think tank guys have never failed me.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mrwesth;11916544*
> Which urban disguise?
> I've looked at them for a while and really like a lot about them. I just don't know how much I'd use it for what I do.
> 
> Plus I have a speedbelt/harness from days on sidelines that is really convenient for on site shoots too.
> 
> The think tank guys have never failed me.


I have the UD30.


----------



## dudemanppl

I have a TT Airport Acceleration, it is just BRILLIANT. I got it for 115 too. I can't imagine a bag getting any better.


----------



## ljason8eg

Any recommendations on brands of filters? I was looking for UV filters for my two current lenses but really don't know what's good for the money. Tiffen a decent brand?

I'd like to join the club too!

Canon Rebel T2i
EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS
EF-S 55-250mm f/4.0-5.6 IS


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg;11919894*
> Any recommendations on brands of filters? I was looking for UV filters for my two current lenses but really don't know what's good for the money. Tiffen a decent brand?
> 
> I'd like to join the club too!
> 
> Canon Rebel T2i
> EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS
> EF-S 55-250mm f/4.0-5.6 IS


Hoya and B+W seem to be the most popular choices. Cheap ones like Tiffen are generally the least popular.


----------



## Lelin

Got a brand new 15-85mm IS today for 550$!


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Lelin*


Got a brand new 15-85mm IS today for 550$!


Please share where you got it from







I've been looking for one at a great price!


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg;11919894*
> Any recommendations on brands of filters? I was looking for UV filters for my two current lenses but really don't know what's good for the money. Tiffen a decent brand?
> 
> I'd like to join the club too!
> 
> Canon Rebel T2i
> EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS
> EF-S 55-250mm f/4.0-5.6 IS


Hoya and B&W are usually good choices. Another thing worth looking into is a circular polarising filter.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg;11919894*
> Any recommendations on brands of filters? I was looking for UV filters for my two current lenses but really don't know what's good for the money. Tiffen a decent brand?
> 
> I'd like to join the club too!
> 
> Canon Rebel T2i
> EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS
> EF-S 55-250mm f/4.0-5.6 IS


I honestly wouldn't bother with UV filters... Anything cheap is just going to degrade image quality, and if you're careful with your gear it won't really offer a whole lot. I've got one of Hoya's HMC UV filters on my 70-300 VR, and even though it's a pretty high quality filter I can notice some differences in image quality at lower sharpening settings.


----------



## Shane1244

AFAIK, theres no need for a UV filter on a DSLR..?

I also think that buying one to _protect_ your front element is stupid, The front element is generally very thick, if the UV filter breaks, the shards of the filter will almost definitely scratch the element, doing more damage.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;11925344*
> AFAIK, theres no need for a UV filter on a DSLR..?
> 
> I also think that buying one to _protect_ your front element is stupid, The front element is generally very thick, if the UV filter breaks, the shards of the filter will almost definitely scratch the element, doing more damage.


It's debatable. As far as I know there is no one "right" answer yet. Some pros prefer UV filters, some don't. It's just up in the air.

Although I am now part of the no cheap UV filter crowd. I have a Hoya on my 50mm f/1.4 and that's about it. All my other lenses don't carry UV filters.


----------



## Shane1244

I'm pretty sure DSLR's don't even pick on UV light. I think the money can definitely be spent better elsewhere.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;11925427*
> I'm pretty sure DSLR's don't even pick on UV light. I think the money can definitely be spent better elsewhere.


Well, truth be told, the only reason I use my Hoya filter is because it's a Hoya and it came with my 50mm f/1.4 when I bought it. Although now I just realized I could probably sell it and put the money to a 15-85mm


----------



## biatchi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;11925344*
> AFAIK, theres no need for a UV filter on a DSLR..?
> 
> I also think that buying one to _protect_ your front element is stupid, The front element is generally very thick, if the UV filter breaks, the shards of the filter will almost definitely scratch the element, doing more damage.


What what about a gentle love tap that is strong enough to scratch the filter but not break it? I'd rather a cheap filter get pwned than a lens tbh.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *biatchi;11926181*
> What what about a gentle love tap that is strong enough to scratch the filter but not break it? I'd rather a cheap filter get pwned than a lens tbh.


That's why i use a UV filter.

Mostly to protect from scratches, dust, and grease. It's not going to protect from a serious impact, but than again, when is my lens ever going to feel that?


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;11925344*
> AFAIK, theres no need for a UV filter on a DSLR..?
> 
> I also think that buying one to _protect_ your front element is stupid, The front element is generally very thick, if the UV filter breaks, the shards of the filter will almost definitely scratch the element, doing more damage.


flying sand or dust could scratch your front element and kids or pets like to lick/touch the front element so i keep a UV filter on. and the chances of a breaking UV filter scratching your lens is fairly small since most of the time if your lens bumps into something it is usually pointed down toward teh floor.

but i know a lot of professionals that just use a hood.


----------



## theCanadian

Those of you who don't like lens filters for protection should at least have a hood on. I'd rather pay $15-30 for a hood than $400+ for a new lens.


----------



## Marin

Knew it. They didn't include the helmet mount. Well, looks like I won't be able to wear my helmet all the time. :\


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Boyboyd;11928058*
> That's why i use a UV filter.
> 
> Mostly to protect from scratches, dust, and grease. It's not going to protect from a serious impact, *but than again, when is my lens ever going to feel that?*


I bet nearly everyone who actually did break their lens said that same thing.

I've never used UV lenses barring a few cheap ones in the beginning and have never had any damage (I've been caving, hiking, etc with my gear) because I use the amazing LENS CAP.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;11929512*
> I bet nearly everyone who actually did break their lens said that same thing.
> 
> I've never used UV lenses barring a few cheap ones in the beginning and have never had any damage (I've been caving, hiking, etc with my gear) because I use the amazing LENS CAP.


You mean to say that wasn't a very small coaster that came with my lens?









In all seriousness, lens caps are the way to go. I bought a few lens cap leashes as well, and they are extremely useful. It's one of those things you never really care about until you actually have them. No lost caps for me!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;11929553*
> You mean to say that wasn't a very small coaster that came with my lens?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In all seriousness, lens caps are the way to go. I bought a few lens cap leashes as well, and they are extremely useful. It's one of those things you never really care about until you actually have them. No lost caps for me!


I'm fairly fastidious about keeping my cap on when not shooting. However, I can see how this isn't a viable option for some types of shooting (sports, etc.). If I ever go shooting in a dust storm, then I will definitely use a UV filter.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;11929634*
> I'm fairly fastidious about keeping my cap on when not shooting. However, I can see how this isn't a viable option for some types of shooting (sports, etc.). If I ever go shooting in a dust storm, then I will definitely use a UV filter.


I think if a dust storm ever hits surburbia Fremont, CA, I'd probably be more concerned over whether it's the end of the world rather than taking pictures









The only time I ever came across a situation where lens caps weren't a good option would be whenever I visit the city (i.e., SF), as sometimes the moment would be gone when I try to take off my lens cap.

On a side note, I wish Canon would change their lens cap designs to ones like Nikon's. I really love how the pinch tabs aren't exposed at all.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;11929679*
> I think if a dust storm ever hits surburbia Fremont, CA, I'd probably be more concerned over whether it's the end of the world rather than taking pictures
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The only time I ever came across a situation where lens caps weren't a good option would be whenever I visit the city (i.e., SF), as sometimes the moment would be gone when I try to take off my lens cap.
> 
> On a side note, I wish Canon would change their lens cap designs to ones like Nikon's. I really love how the pinch tabs aren't exposed at all.


Yes, it would be nice, but so far I haven't had a cap come off accidentally.


----------



## Rowbin

I'd love to join! My camera is a Kodak EasyShare Z950 point-and-shoot. It's nothing great, but I got it as my first camera to see if I really liked photography as much as I thought I would. And I did. I love this thing, plenty of features and great lens (10x optical zoom) all for $100 w/ a 4GB SDHC. Really wanting to upgrade to a DSLR but that's gonna be out of my price range for a while :x


----------



## theCanadian

You could always grab a third party cap. The bower lens caps are very similar to the Nikon ones. I bought one for my 200mm f/4 and it's pretty nice. Snaps on tight.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search?Ntt=bower+lens+cap&N=0&InitialSearch=yes


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


You could always grab a third party cap. The bower lens caps are very similar to the Nikon ones. I bought one for my 200mm f/4 and it's pretty nice. Snaps on tight.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search...tialSearch=yes











BUT THEN IT WOULDN'T SAY CANON ULTRASONIC!


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Problem:

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


BUT THEN IT WOULDN'T SAY CANON ULTRASONIC!










Solution









In all seriousness, I'll check those lens caps out. For whatever reason my 50mm's cap tends to come off accidentally. Doesn't happen to any of my other lenses.


----------



## Marin

So with the GoPro Hero I think I'm going to shoot 960p and crop down to 720p. (4:3 --> 16:9)


----------



## GoneTomorrow

10000 posts!


----------



## Marin

I got 9999.


----------



## theCanadian

Marin you got the 10,000 reply.


----------



## laboitenoire

10,002!! Woooo!

But in all seriousness, I must say my Kata did its job admirably when I was flying from Boston to Cleveland. Also was a great carry-on for under the seat as it could hold some snacks and my Zune. Almost crapped a brick though because I was selected for "additional screening" at the gate in Baltimore where they searched both my carry-ons, and I was worried the security guy was going to open the bag and dump everything on the ground. But he didn't









Unfortunately, I still got back-scattered and had Southwest play floor hockey with my suitcase. Hopefully my monopod survived in the suitcase...


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


Marin you got the 10,000 reply.


Double fail.


----------



## theCanadian

So... screw macro filters. If you're willing to go that route, look at this.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/580340-REG/Bower_VL46BC_Auxiliary_0_42x_Fisheye.html

No pun intended with screwing filters.


----------



## Shane1244

Don't waste money on garbage like that, save up for a full macro lens, no matter how long it takes you.


----------



## Marin

Meh.







Just get some extension tubes.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/375102-REG/Kenko_AEXTUBEDGC_Auto_Extension_Tube_Set.html

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/375238-REG/Kenko_AEXTUBEDGN_Auto_Extension_Tube_Set.html

Or this.

http://www.fotodiox.com/product_info.php?products_id=501

http://www.fotodiox.com/product_info.php?products_id=500


----------



## theCanadian

I've always been unsure of the exact optical impacts of an extension tube system. Does it affect FOV or effective focal length, what are the cons, are there any other pros besides a closer focusing distance and increased magnification? Just how extreme is the effect with minimum and max extension with systems like the one ones linked? Is effective aperture affected?

Related question: If effective aperture changes, does that refer to only the 'brightness' or is DoF affected too?


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *theCanadian;11956652*
> I've always been unsure of the exact optical impacts of an extension tube system. Does it affect FOV or effective focal length, what are the cons, are there any other pros besides a closer focusing distance and increased magnification? Just how extreme is the effect with minimum and max extension with systems like the one ones linked?


When focal length changes, FOV changes, and vice versa. They are pretty much the same thing, measured in different units.

Cons, My guess is that any defects in cheaper glass would become more evident.

A close focusing lens will give you much better IQ than a strap on magnifier.

I have no idea. My guess would be it would magnify it the same percentage as the distance moved. Say the lens is 3cm away from the sensor, and you get a 1cm extension, My guess is you'd get a 33% magnification? I really have no idea though.


----------



## Shane1244

My camera oriented Facebook profile.


----------



## theCanadian

Mr. Wilkinson. You missed a spot.


----------



## Shane1244

Haha, Took me a while to find that one. Oh well, I tryed!


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;11956981*
> Haha, Took me a while to find that one. Oh well, I tryed!


Nevermind, it's also in your flickr username. As is mine.

Personally i'm not too bothered how many people know my surname, lol.

There's a professional (and good) photographer called james boyd, and yet my little crappy website comes before his on google because mine has 11 pages with the title "james boyd photography".

I love SEO sometimes.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

I'm not bothered either. In fact, if you've seen my watermark you pretty much know my name. Still, there's a million people out there with my name.

I consider it an extra privacy setting on FB. People I meet who want to be my friend have a hard enough time using the search function









EDIT: Also, any word on a new photo contest?


----------



## AlanScott

can I join?

*Camera Body:*

Nikon D700

*Lens*

Nikon 20mm 2.8
Nikon 50mm 1.8
Nikon 80-200mm 2.8
Lensbaby something or another

*Lighting Gear*

Alien Bees B800 x2
Alien Bees ABR800
Alien Bees softboxes, umbrellas, blah blah blah


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;11974085*
> I'm not bothered either. In fact, if you've seen my watermark you pretty much know my name. Still, there's a million people out there with my name.
> 
> I consider it an extra privacy setting on FB. People I meet who want to be my friend have a hard enough time using the search function
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EDIT: Also, any word on a new photo contest?


I don't mind people knowing what my surname is, either... It's not like my SSN or credit card information is in the public view. My Flickr has half of my name in its URL, and my full name is given to the community anyway. Besides, it makes people think I'm related to the NPR guy...


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;11974085*
> I'm not bothered either. In fact, if you've seen my watermark you pretty much know my name. Still, there's a million people out there with my name.
> 
> I consider it an extra privacy setting on FB. People I meet who want to be my friend have a hard enough time using the search function
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EDIT: Also, any word on a new photo contest?


New photo contest is up:

http://www.overclock.net/photography/912483-ocn-photo-contest-10-january-24-a.html


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;11974588*
> New photo contest is up:
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/photography/912483-ocn-photo-contest-10-january-24-a.html


Excellent. I'm supprised i didn't loose the last one. There was some good competition and my entry wasn't that good.


----------



## mz-n10

cirlces huh.....


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlanScott;11974350*
> can I join?
> 
> *Camera Body:*
> 
> Nikon D700
> 
> *Lens*
> 
> Nikon 20mm 2.8
> Nikon 50mm 1.8
> Nikon 80-200mm 2.8
> Lensbaby something or another
> 
> *Lighting Gear*
> 
> Alien Bees B800 x2
> Alien Bees ABR800
> Alien Bees softboxes, umbrellas, blah blah blah


Of course you can join!

Just remember to send in your monthly membership fee of $20. Checks may be made out to "Our Glorious Leader GoneTomorrow".

With membership comes our excellent HMO health plan to our exclusive OCN Photo Club in Nova Scotia as well as 50,000 frequent flyer miles on Pan American World Airways usable on any date before 1991.

Enjoy









I know, I'm bored.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10;11975339*
> cirlces huh.....


I forsee a lot of bokeh light photos.

Althought strictly speaking aren't they usually heptagonal?

Or doughnut?


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Boyboyd;11975379*
> I forsee a lot of bokeh light photos.
> 
> Althought strictly speaking aren't they usually heptagonal?
> 
> Or doughnut?


hehe, depends....if i use a 500 mirror ill get donuts...if i use a 135STF i get circles....

(i have neither of the lenses







)


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;11975365*
> Of course you can join!
> 
> Just remember to send in your monthly membership fee of $20. Checks may be made out to "Our Glorious Leader GoneTomorrow".
> 
> With membership comes our excellent HMO health plan to our exclusive OCN Photo Club in Nova Scotia as well as 50,000 frequent flyer miles on Pan American World Airways usable on any date before 1991.
> 
> Enjoy
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I know, I'm bored.


This is for real, he speaks the truth. PM me for my PayPal info.
Sike! ..or is it "Psych"?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Boyboyd;11975379*
> I forsee a lot of bokeh light photos.
> 
> Althought strictly speaking aren't they usually heptagonal?
> 
> Or doughnut?


It depends on the aperture value, focal length, number of blades, shape of blades. Generally speaking, the wider the aperture, the rounder the bokeh and at narrower apertures, bokeh beings to show the aperture shape (good lenses will be rounder at narrower apertures).


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Boyboyd;11975379*
> I forsee a lot of bokeh light photos.
> 
> Althought strictly speaking aren't they usually heptagonal?
> 
> Or doughnut?


I actually already have some images in mind. Hope it stops raining tonight so I can go out and take some pictures!

Need to start participating in these photo contests myself


----------



## Concept_357

heyy guys, new to OCN here, For the record:
I have:

Canon EOS 550D
Canon 18-55 IS
Canon 50mm 1.4

Really need some new lens, looking for a good alrounder with a greater focal range. No specific budget but stay reasonable, dont try to make me buy a 85 1.2 or some 400mm. I really want one of those 17-50 VC's from Tamron. But there are other options like the 70-200 F4L IS or the 24-105IS which are better alrounders....

HELP!


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Concept_357;11976478*
> heyy guys, new to OCN here, For the record:
> I have:
> 
> Canon EOS 550D
> Canon 18-55 IS
> Canon 50mm 1.4
> 
> Really need some new lens, looking for a good alrounder with a greater focal range. No specific budget but stay reasonable, dont try to make me buy a 85 1.2 or some 400mm. I really want one of those 17-50 VC's from Tamron. But there are other options like the 70-200 F4L IS or the 24-105IS which are better alrounders....
> 
> HELP!


In the <$500 category, I'd recommend the 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM for you. I've used the lens myself and it is excellent for the money. They can be had used for $200.

In the <$750 category, I'd choose the 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 USM. The 17-55mm is another popular choice in that range, but you said you wanted a greater focal range and I think +1mm on the wide end isn't what you were looking for







The 18-55mm is actually my next upgrade from the 28-135mm. They can be had used for around $650.

Beyond that, I'd go for the 24-70mm or 24-105mm. I don't own either lens but I've seen results from the two and they are absolutely spectacular.


----------



## Concept_357

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;11976550*
> In the <$500 category, I'd recommend the 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM for you. I've used the lens myself and it is excellent for the money. They can be had used for $200.
> 
> In the <$750 category, I'd choose the 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 USM. The 17-55mm is another popular choice in that range, but you said you wanted a greater focal range and I think +1mm on the wide end isn't what you were looking for
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The 18-55mm is actually my next upgrade from the 28-135mm. They can be had used for around $650.
> 
> Beyond that, I'd go for the 24-70mm or 24-105mm. I don't own either lens but I've seen results from the two and they are absolutely spectacular.


heyy thanks for the pointers, the 28-135 and 15-85 are definitely on my list of "to get" if I cant get the 24-105, actually, that 28-135 looks very nice for the price. i might just get that and save up for a 70-200 f4l IS so I wont have to ever worry about long range shots evA! then itll be the primes: 85 1.8 then the 100 2.5 IS







droool... and maybe a 85 1.2 LOL


----------



## mz-n10

if you want more range then get the tamron 17-270 but the 28-135 is definitely far too long for a useful walk around on a APS-C. the 15-85 is a good range but from the reviews it doesnt look like its much better than the 18-55 kit lens. you are far better off getting the 17-50 tamron (vc or not) and have a slight gap in your lenses when you get the 70-200/4IS.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10;11977670*
> if you want more range then get the tamron 17-270 but the 28-135 is definitely far too long for a useful walk around on a APS-C. the 15-85 is a good range but from the reviews it doesnt look like its much better than the 18-55 kit lens. you are far better off getting the 17-50 tamron (vc or not) and have a slight gap in your lenses when you get the 70-200/4IS.


It depends by what you mean with walkaround.

I think the focal range of the lens is pretty great for city photography. The only issue with it really is the barrel creep of the lens.


----------



## Marin

Screw zooms, get a prime lens.


----------



## dudemanppl

For about a month I had a 24, 35, 50, 85, and 300. It was fun. Also VERY cheap.


----------



## Arretu

I'd like to join this club









Currently using an Olympus E-620 with:
14-42mm f 3.5-5.6
40-150mm f4-5.6

A few of my photos can be found here.


----------



## Triangle

I would like to join

Nikon D700 with grip
Nikon D2H
Nikon F3/T

Too many lenses.


----------



## Unknownm




----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


It depends by what you mean with walkaround.

I think the focal range of the lens is pretty great for city photography. The only issue with it really is the barrel creep of the lens.


for me 28mm is far too long even for FF. so i would hate 28mm on apsc


----------



## Boyboyd

I'm looking at the Sigma 10-20. It's a choice between an ultrawide and a fast tele-zoom. I think i'd get more use out of the ultra wide. I've read it has some pretty serious distortion in the corners though. Is it easy enough to correct in post?


----------



## theCanadian

Distortion is easy enough to correct in post from what I hear. Even with some of the more complex distortion it's not all that noticeable with even the simplest of correction.


----------



## Boyboyd

This is good news. As soon as i find my wallet i might order one...


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

With Lightroom 3, all I really have to do is check a box. I'm not sure if your lens is profiled in the program by Adobe, but if it is that's all you really have to do. If not, there are always user profiles you can download yourself.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;11984270*
> With Lightroom 3, all I really have to do is check a box. I'm not sure if your lens is profiled in the program by Adobe, but if it is that's all you really have to do. If not, there are always user profiles you can download yourself.


I love Lightroom 3.

The 18-55 nikon doesn't have a profile, but my 35mm prime does. Can you download user created profiles? Might have to start googling.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Boyboyd;11984291*
> I love Lightroom 3.
> 
> The 18-55 nikon doesn't have a profile, but my 35mm prime does. Can you download user created profiles? Might have to start googling.


If you update to the newest version of ACR, the 18-55 VR is definitely in there... It certainly is in my copy of CS5.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire;11984812*
> If you update to the newest version of ACR, the 18-55 VR is definitely in there... It certainly is in my copy of CS5.


I thought it was up to date, but clearly not. thanks.


----------



## iandroo888

distortion is easily corrected even without a profile. i have a 12-24mm f/4 Nikon UWA lens. easily corrected. needs to be corrected every time b/c i do real estate photography. would be weird to have slightly bowing walls right? XDD


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *max302*


Some of you may remember my previous camera heists (Nikon film bodies, 35SPn, Pentax 645Nii)... I'll be contacting my source this week to purchase a fleet of 3 pro-used gripped D200's, which might be on sale in a near future. What's the market price on those? 300-400 depending on the condition?

One might get the Lifepixel IR conversion, I'm feeling crafty these days.


Let me know about the d200s, at that price I might just pick one up


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Oh yea, finally got a Flickr


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:



Originally Posted by *max302*


Some of you may remember my previous camera heists (Nikon film bodies, 35SPn, Pentax 645Nii)... I'll be contacting my source this week to purchase a fleet of 3 pro-used gripped D200's, which might be on sale in a near future. What's the market price on those? 300-400 depending on the condition?

One might get the Lifepixel IR conversion, I'm feeling crafty these days.


I might be in for one in a month or so to use as a backup/oh shioooot kinda camera.


----------



## theCanadian

Anyone noticed what sounds something like capacitor squeal while holding the shutter release in the half position on the D3100? It's particularly audible when I have the 55-200mm lens on. Maybe capacitors for the lens motor? It makes no sense because the squeal exists even while not focusing, anytime the shutter release is half pressed.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *theCanadian;11998609*
> Anyone noticed what sounds something like capacitor squeal while holding the shutter release in the half position on the D3100? It's particularly audible when I have the 55-200mm lens on. Maybe capacitors for the lens motor? It makes no sense because the squeal exists even while not focusing, anytime the shutter release is half pressed.


Do you have the VR version of the 50-200? If so, the noise you hear might be the VR engaging. Canon's IS makes a faint "grinding" sound when engaged. Try turning VR off and see the noise persists.


----------



## theCanadian

Go figure. When I try to reproduce the sound, it doesn't want to. However. I can hear the 'grinding' you mention. It's very faint, I have to put my ear to the camera to hear it. And it does go away when I turn VR off, but the squeal is quite audible when it does it.

An unrelated issue: I've noticed with DSLRs that while focusing, the reflex mirror visibly bounces a little bit sometimes. Out of curiosity, I was wondering what causes that motion. Is it maybe the camera applying potential energy in preparation for a shot?

It does not happen with my 35mm. Of course the shutter design is probably different.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Well, random but after a year of photography I finally feel as if I'm improving. Photography feels much more natural to me now and it's less about fumbling with gear/settings. Everything is finally coming intuitively and my pictures now are much better than the ones I took three months ago.

Just wanted to rave


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Just picked up a 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM. It's not as good as the 15-85, for sure, but Gov. Brown just cut UC funding another 18%, so I couldn't buy the 15-85mm in good conscience knowing that there's going to be more tuition increases around the corner.


----------



## dudemanppl

I fixed my friend's 5D. Yay! First camera I've fixed which I haven't broken first.
EDIT: The 5D gripped cost 500. Good deal, eh?
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FgxzUg_RLSY[/ame]


----------



## Marin

Shot off an e-mail about getting my Hasselblad serviced. Going to be using my Mamiya C330 as a backup.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;12017874*
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FgxzUg_RLSY


thats a good way for spraying 100k+ shutter


----------



## Danylu

opinions on the Fuji X100?


----------



## Marin

Needs to be FF.


----------



## mz-n10

needs to be released.


----------



## raidmaxGuy

I want in!

MY Cameras:

Canon AE-1 With ALL original accessories and original battery







(includes 2 50mm, and a 100-200mm
Canon Rebel G w/ 35-80mm
Sony A230 w/ 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6


----------



## kade.sirin

count me in:

Current list of photography gear, careful, it's long.

Cameras:
Digital:
- Panasonic Lumix GF1 Black
- Canon G10
- Canon SD1000
- Ricoh GX200

Film:
- Konica Minolta TC-1
- Canon P Rangefinder

Glass:
Micro4:3:
- Lumix 14 - 45mm f/3.5 - 5.6

FD/FL:
- Canon 24mm f/2.8
- Canon 50mm f/1.4
- Canon 50mm f/3.5 Macro
- Vivitar 24mm f/2.8
- Sigma 28 - 70mm f/3.5 - 4.5
- Soligor 35 - 140mm f/3.5 Macro
- Vivitar 2x Macro Focusing Teleconverter
- Vivitar AT-4 12mm, 20mm, 36mm Extension Tube

AR:
- Konica Hexanon 40mm f/1.8
- Konica Hexanon 50mm f/1.7

LSM/M39:
- Leica Leitz Hektor 135mm f/4.5
- Leica Noctilux 50mm f/1.0

Lighting:
Camera Flash:
- Canon Speedlite 244T
- Nikon Speedlight SB-15

Strobes:
- Yake M-110 Strobe
- Photogenic Flashmaster AA06A Powerpack
- 2x Photogenic Flashmaster 8050 Flashead

Stands/Supports
Tripods:
- Fox DT-140D Tripod

Lightstands
- 2x Novatron 8' Lightstand
- 1x Bogen 10' Lightstand

Other:
Remote Triggers:
- 1x Quantum Radio Slave 4i Sender (Frequency D)
- 1x Quantum Radio Slave 4i Receiver (Frequency D)
- 1x DRT-4G Radio Trigger
- 2x DRT-4G Radio Receiver


----------



## theCanadian




----------



## kade.sirin

lol.

other than the flash system, the GF1 w/ the Noctilux and the GX200.. I've noticed the rest of my gear kinda sits around unless I'm doing some special.


----------



## dudemanppl

You have all this average gear. And then the Noctilux...


----------



## max302

Just thought I'd let you guys know, I have a G11 up for sale.

http://www.overclock.net/other-technology/918471-new-canon-g11-360-shipped.html


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Got my 17-85mm today. Pretty much decided that I'd rather go with a set of primes instead.

I need to be better about making up my mind


----------



## 77Pat

Count me in. I have a Panasonic DMC-ZS3.


Sunrise at Asbury Park Beach by 77Pat, on Flickr


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kade.sirin;12057651*
> lol.
> 
> other than the flash system, the GF1 w/ the Noctilux and the GX200.. I've noticed the rest of my gear kinda sits around unless I'm doing some special.


Give me your Noctilux.


----------



## Exfiltrate

Nikon D7000 
Nikkor 18-200mm DX lens
Sigma 70-200 2.8 
Nikkor 28mm 2.8 AI-s lens


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Got my 17-85mm today. Pretty much decided that I'd rather go with a set of primes instead.

I need to be better about making up my mind










the 17-85 is a meh kit lens......get the 24-70 or the 17-55


----------



## kade.sirin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Give me your Noctilux.


It was my graduation gift from my dad, even if it was some standard lens I wouldn't part with it. 
I think the receipt he has for it shows $700something back in 1977

Now I just need to save up enough for a Leica body for it.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


the 17-85 is a meh kit lens......get the 24-70 or the 17-55


No money. If I did, I would have jumped straight for the 24-70 already


----------



## dudemanppl

Don't worry, I think standard zooms suck too. MOAR PRIMMEESSS!


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;12065881*
> Don't worry, I think standard zooms suck too. MOAR PRIMMEESSS!


Yea, I mean honestly it's not that bad of a lens. Distortion at the wide end sure (for whatever reason, I've a friend who actually loves the distortion







), but overall a good lens for the price I paid for it.

It's just that I'd rather have the image quality of a prime instead, and I found that I'd be willing to swap out lenses in the field over the convenience of the zoom for IQ's sake.


----------



## dudemanppl

I hate the convenience of a zoom, I would rather have a 35, 50, and 85 over an imaginary 35-85mm f/1.4 ANY DAY.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;12066578*
> Yea, I mean honestly it's not that bad of a lens. Distortion at the wide end sure (for whatever reason, I've a friend who actually loves the distortion
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ), but overall a good lens for the price I paid for it.
> 
> It's just that I'd rather have the image quality of a prime instead, and I found that I'd be willing to swap out lenses in the field over the convenience of the zoom for IQ's sake.


you pixel peeping artists........


----------



## Sparhawk

I have been neglecting the photographic part of my life.







(partially due to me being busy and partially because it's freaking cold here... -30C does not make cameras or the fingers holding them very happy)

Time to get some lights for my lightcube! I'm gonna see if I can blow a breaker in my house, flood-lights ftw.


----------



## Boyboyd

I've been trying some night-sky photography (not really astrophotography). I'd have thought that my 18-55 @ 18mm would have a decent hyperfocal distance. So set to infinity, trees and stars would both be in focus. Not the case.

When i set infinity focus, the stars are out of focus. I know it's not the best lens for it. But it's the widest and fastest lens i have at the moment.


----------



## Shane1244

Buying lots of primes gets expensive, and for things like sports, they just wouldn't work. If you have time to set up your shot, then primes are always going to be the best.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Boyboyd;12067558*
> I've been trying some night-sky photography (not really astrophotography). I'd have thought that my 18-55 @ 18mm would have a decent hyperfocal distance. So set to infinity, trees and stars would both be in focus. Not the case.
> 
> When i set infinity focus, the stars are out of focus. I know it's not the best lens for it. But it's the widest and fastest lens i have at the moment.


How long are you exposing for? Don't forget that stars move, so if you wait too long you will start to see star trails, even at relatively wide angles.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire;12069592*
> How long are you exposing for? Don't forget that stars move, so if you wait too long you will start to see star trails, even at relatively wide angles.


A few seconds, it was only an hour past sunset.

Going to go out now with my 24mm prime. It might be a bit too wide on a crop body, but i'll see.


----------



## dudemanppl

If its MF, then infinity focus is easy. Its the hardest on the AF-S lenses which don't have a focus distance window. The hard stop at the end isn't infinity at all.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


If its MF, then infinity focus is easy. Its the hardest on the AF-S lenses which don't have a focus distance window.* The hard stop at the end isn't infinity at all.*










that's where i've been falling down then. Thanks for telling me that, been bugging me for ages. I just assumed it was.

Yeah it's a manual-focus 24mm f/2.8 with a focus scale, it's giving much better results.

Currently doing a time-lapse of the moon, for the next hour.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*


Buying lots of primes gets expensive, and for things like sports, they just wouldn't work.


Huh??

Last time I looked at what sports photogs were using on the sidelines, they were long primes...

90% of the field sports I shoot is with a 400 f/2.8..


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


Huh??

Last time I looked at what sports photogs were using on the sidelines, they were long primes...

90% of the field sports I shoot is with a 400 f/2.8..










Oh, how wrong you are. This is the standard lens that sports photographers use.










They also spray paint them white.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Oh, how wrong you are. This is the standard lens that sports photographers use.










They also spray paint them white.











amidoinitrite?


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*










amidoinitrite?


You forgot the red ring, when you're done with that, I'd be happy to fork out 3k for that lens.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


You forgot the red ring, when you're done with that, I'd be happy to fork out 3k for that lens.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*












PM me payment details.


----------



## Danylu

Payment sent, thanks for PM.


----------



## jdcrispe95

I have a Olmpus X-43
this 1 to be exact.









Heres a S-Macro shot of my RAM in the old laptop


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Resize!


----------



## jdcrispe95

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Resize!










dont worry, ive done it down to 1600x1200


----------



## Shane1244

That picture was taken with a X44/ js.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*












thats 1 too many red rings


----------



## kade.sirin

yep.. there's just one, on a lens like that maybe on the front just under the hood.... and hey, if its legit I'll buy it.. BUT. its a zoom. Not as fast as a prime.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Oh, how wrong you are. This is the standard lens that sports photographers use.
They also spray paint them white.


My mistake, I forgot the Norcal thing.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10;12075827*
> thats 1 too many red rings


Thats where you're WRONG. These Tamrons are really that good.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;12074754*


Should i be concerend that the casing is transparent?


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;12077881*
> Thats where you're WRONG. These Tamrons are really that good.


ooo in that case it should be like this










you know its pro when its nothing but a red ring


----------



## Marin

Pentax fails for sticking with APS-C.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;12079269*
> Pentax fails for sticking with APS-C.


That made me go on dpreview only to find that Pentax hasn't announced a full frame body.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10;12079088*
> ooo in that case it should be like this
> you know its pro when its nothing but a red ring



















Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;12079269*
> Pentax fails for sticking with APS-C.


FF isn't uber enough for Pentax, so they showed everyone by going to MF instead.


----------



## mz-n10

yes sir, i think its time for me to take a break


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


yes sir, i think its time for me to take a break


LOL, just joking. You may proceed.


----------



## theCanadian

How's the Tamron 18-250 Di-II for $280? I might get that as an all in one and sell off the 18-55 and 55-200. I think the only thing I'll miss is the closer focusing distance of the 18-55, which beats the Tamron by 7 inches.

Does the Tamron have VR or an equivalent? How much are the kit lenses worth respectively?

This option precludes the possibility of getting a prime, which I don't like. I'd like to have something pretty wide open eventually.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


FF isn't uber enough for Pentax, so they showed everyone by going to MF instead.










And yet their MF camera is still crop.









And Pentax has been in the MF market for a long time, they'd be stupid to ignore it just like FF.


----------



## ____

My friend (who is moving) is selling his Cannon EOS 50D with the lens for $700. It's condition is "lightly used". I'm not really in the market for a DSLR, but if it's a good deal, I won't pass it up.


----------



## laboitenoire

Which lens? Body only, that's already a pretty good deal.


----------



## ____

I'm assuming it's very, very normal lens. How much do those cost?


----------



## Marin

'Very normal lens' doesn't tell us what it is.









Best to find out what lens it is.


----------



## dudemanppl

50mm f/1 L is normal.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


LOL, just joking. You may proceed.










my feeling are still hurt.....







lol

Quote:



Originally Posted by *____*


I'm assuming it's very, very normal lens. How much do those cost?


even without a lens the 50D is still a good deal.


----------



## laboitenoire

Ugh... There's too much camera gear I want right now... A D7000 or D700, a fast normal prime, a wide zoom, and then a 3-way tie between the 105 f/2.8 VR, 105 f/2 DC, and 135 f/2 DC. If only I was independently wealthy.


----------



## Marin

D700.


----------



## laboitenoire

That doesn't solve the whole me being a poor college student who can't really afford any of these things.


----------



## Marin

Dumpster dive for food.


----------



## mz-n10

sell your body for camera gear


----------



## Shane1244

Pick a corner, work it.


----------



## dudemanppl

105 VR sucks, 105 f/2 sucks, 135 f/2 is sort of suckish. Buy a 70-200 VR.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire;12084919*
> Ugh... There's too much camera gear I want right now... A D7000 or D700, a fast normal prime, a wide zoom, and then a 3-way tie between the 105 f/2.8 VR, 105 f/2 DC, and 135 f/2 DC. If only I was independently wealthy.


Between the D7000 and D700 i know what i'd choose.

I have no idea why, but i have the urge to buy a fisheye lens. Even though i know they're very very hard to use well.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;12085245*
> 105 VR sucks, 105 f/2 sucks, 135 f/2 is sort of suckish. Buy a 70-200 VR.


You're the only person I know who's said that... Every review I've read speaks pretty damn highly of them and says they're some of the sharpest Nikon lenses out there.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire;12087731*
> You're the only person I know who's said that... Every review I've read speaks pretty damn highly of them and says they're some of the sharpest Nikon lenses out there.


He's probably taken these lenses apart and "fixed" them.


----------



## dudemanppl

LOL, SHUSH! I will never take apart a Nikon lens, the aperture lever is hard as hell to put back in. Canon lenses are EASY. 105s sucking is 90% due to the fact that 100~mm is the worst focal length ever IMO. 135 is beast, but they've been known for focus problems (which I didn't know until 3 months ago) and the 135L is better in almost every way. DC is also basically useless.


----------



## laboitenoire

From what I heard the focus issues were only the very first models, and that they've all been more or less dead-on since then. Plus, I actually find I'm using the 135 focal length on my 70-300 a lot more than the others...


----------



## Marin

Ooooo.


----------



## laboitenoire

Shooting instant film now?


----------



## Marin

Makes it easier to shoot 4x5 for class.


----------



## dudemanppl

Marin, do you still have your DRebel and 50D?


----------



## Marin

Yes.


----------



## dudemanppl

Wait, how about the 70-200 f/4 IS?


----------



## Marin

Sold it.


----------



## dudemanppl

Oh, why do you have your 50D and XSi still then?


----------



## Marin

Haven't bothered listing it.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Haven't bothered listing it.


You should probably list your 50D now then. XSi's prices are going to be stable for a long time, but used 60Ds are now starting to appear in the marketplace, pushing the 50D's price down. 50D prices have already dropped $50 within the past two months.


----------



## dudemanppl

400 is the best focal length EVER. You can use it for every sport. Amazing lens.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;12096896*
> *400 is the best focal length EVER*. You can use it for every sport. Amazing lens.


Not if you're me and you don't shoot sports


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;12096909*
> Not if you're me and you don't shoot sports


You could always go to the beach. Only a few hundred miles away for you.


----------



## Shane1244

Or if the action gets close.. Sports photographers have several cameras with primes, or one with a good zoom. Not really ONE lens that's good for sports, if you want to cover the whole game.


----------



## dudemanppl

Yeah, I was shooting basketball today, 1DIII + 70-200 2.8 IS and 5DII + 400 2.8. Very good combo.


----------



## laboitenoire

Doing my first photoshoot for some friends today... Should be interesting.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;12097037*
> Yeah, I was shooting basketball today, 1DIII + 70-200 2.8 IS and 5DII + 400 2.8. Very good combo.


I use a D300s/70-200 VRII, D3/400 2.8 VR combo for all field sports and it (they) cover everything. I've taken the 600/D3 to a couple college football games where I'm stuck in one place and was sorry I did. F/2.8 is the real deal maker for ugly bg's.


----------



## laboitenoire

Argh... Already off to a bad start as my 8 gig card is missing somewhere in my room. Have to fall back on the 2 gig cards. Why are SD cards so goddamn small?!?


----------



## Marin




----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


I use a D300s/70-200 VRII, D3/400 2.8 VR combo for all field sports and it (they) cover everything. I've taken the 600/D3 to a couple college football games where I'm stuck in one place and was sorry I did. F/2.8 is the real deal maker for ugly bg's.


5DII AF is really really surprisingly good.


----------



## dudemanppl

Sold first 35L, bought another. OH LAWWWDYY DIS THING BE GOODY. Good enough to double post about.


----------



## Marin

So it was a bad copy.


----------



## Shane1244

Sold a lens and bought the same one?

?


----------



## dudemanppl

It was a bad copy. Bought the first for 1050, sold for 1120. Hehe.


----------



## Shane1244

Nice dude.







How much was the new one?

and, I didn't know they made bad lenses, I assumed for 1k, they tested each one.


----------



## dudemanppl

1200. But now my 1DIII is gone too, so I don't care! I'll miss her, but the 35L is OH LAWDDDYY sharp. Like Sigma 50 sharp.


----------



## Marin

Told ya.


----------



## dudemanppl

I'm sorry, master Marin.


----------



## Shane1244

Thoughts on selling my Nikkor AF-S 35 f/1.8 and buying a AF-S 50mm f/1.4?


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;12106987*
> Thoughts on selling my Nikkor AF-S 35 f/1.8 and buying a AF-S 50mm f/1.4?


I'd go for it. I've found that the 50mm makes a nice walkaround lens. Of course I've also heard people say otherwise, so it may be a personal taste thing.


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;12107037*
> I'd go for it. I've found that the 50mm makes a nice walkaround lens. Of course I've also heard people say otherwise, so it may be a personal taste thing.


I realized with school I won't be able to afford the Sigma 70-200 I wanted, so I figured I'd get something a little longer, and faster.

Is it sharper than the 35?


----------



## lifeskills

Heya fellas, I got a D90, and love it. Lately I have been using one of these along with it, great for night shots, delays, and time lapses:

http://www.amazon.com/Satechi-Timer-Remote-Control-Shutter/dp/B00181WFN0]Amazon.com: Satechi TR-G Timer Remote Control Shutter for Nikon D80 D70s: Electronics[/URL]
Wasn't 80 bux when I bought it, but I would pay that much for it

Anyway anyone got the new Nikon D3100 yet? Looks pretty good!


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;12107055*
> I realized with school I won't be able to afford the Sigma 70-200 I wanted, so I figured I'd get something a little longer, and faster.
> 
> Is it sharper than the 35?


Canon shooter myself, so unfortunately I can't comment on the Nikon lens.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lifeskills;12107146*
> Heya fellas, I got a D90, and love it. Lately I have been using one of these along with it, great for night shots, delays, and time lapses:
> 
> Amazon.com: Satechi TR-G Timer Remote Control Shutter for Nikon D80 D70s: Electronics
> Wasn't 80 bux when I bought it, but I would pay that much for it
> 
> Anyway anyone got the new Nikon D3100 yet? Looks pretty good!


Welcome to the club









I think someone on here has picked up a D3100 already, but I can't seem to remember who. It does look like a nice body though. I'd wish Nikon would upgrade their D3000 as well. It's a bit sad that their only counterpart to the Canon Rebel XS still uses a CCD sensor.


----------



## dudemanppl

Sigma 50.


----------



## mushrooshi

Panasonic Lumix ZS3... just getting around to unlocking it's potential. I won't pretend it is a DSLR, but it gets the job done very nicely for a P&S IMO


----------



## ljason8eg

Alrighty I'm finally starting to get the hang of this T2i. Looking to buy another lens. Currently I only have the 18-55mm kit lens and the 55-250 3.5/5.6 telephoto zoom.

I'm thinking about the 50mm 1.4. Went to the local camera shop and looked at both the cheaper 1.8 and the 1.4 (1.2 is sorta out of the price range lol) and noticed that the 1.8 feels like a cheap toy compared to the 1.4. Now I'm not planning on being hard on my stuff but the difference in build quality seemed tremendous. So I'm asking....is it worth it to spend extra and grab the 1.4?


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg;12109668*
> Alrighty I'm finally starting to get the hang of this T2i. Looking to buy another lens. Currently I only have the 18-55mm kit lens and the 55-250 3.5/5.6 telephoto zoom.
> 
> I'm thinking about the 50mm 1.4. Went to the local camera shop and looked at both the cheaper 1.8 and the 1.4 (1.2 is sorta out of the price range lol) and noticed that the 1.8 feels like a cheap toy compared to the 1.4. Now I'm not planning on being hard on my stuff but the difference in build quality seemed tremendous. So I'm asking....is it worth it to spend extra and grab the 1.4?


Image-quality wise, the two are very similar. The only real difference in IQ is the bokeh each produces. Since the 1.4 has more blades, the bokeh is smoother versus the pentagonal shape of the 1.8.

Functionally, the 1.4 also has an Ultrasonic Motor (USM) which is both quieter and faster than a normal AF motor. It also gave me better low-light performance compared to my old 1.8 with autofocusing. The 1.4 also has Full Time Manual (FTM), where the lens can be manually adjusted safely even when AF is on, meaning you don't have to switch back and forth between MF and AF when manually focusing.

Of course, you also noticed the build quality as well. The 1.4 is sturdier and has a nice metal mount.

Personally, I think it's worth it. The USM alone made me love the lens more compared to my old 1.8.


----------



## ljason8eg

Thanks man. Looks like I'll go for the 1.4 then.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*


Thoughts on selling my Nikkor AF-S 35 f/1.8 and buying a AF-S 50mm f/1.4?



Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


I'd go for it. I've found that the 50mm makes a nice walkaround lens. Of course I've also heard people say otherwise, so it may be a personal taste thing.


I personally wouldn't do it. 50 is a bit of an awkward focal length on DX bodies. I feel the 35 is a much more versatile lens.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


I personally wouldn't do it. 50 is a bit of an awkward focal length on DX bodies. I feel the 35 is a much more versatile lens.


Like I said, not everyone agrees









The best thing to do really is probably play around with an 18-55mm lens at both 30mm and 50mm and see which focal length is the most comfortable.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*


Thanks man. Looks like I'll go for the 1.4 then.


AF on the 50 f/1.4 is slooooooow. IQ os ok. the 35 is a better fl on a dx body imho.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


5DII AF is really really surprisingly good.


I had one for a couple of weeks and thought it sucked speed wise.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


AF on the 50 f/1.4 is slooooooow. IQ os ok. the 35 is a better fl on a dx body imho.


are you talking about the canon one? cause the USM is pretty quick on it....


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


AF on the 50 f/1.4 is slooooooow. IQ os ok. the 35 is a better fl on a dx body imho.


We're talking about the Canon 50mm f/1.4, which is loads faster than the Nikon AF-wise because of the USM motor.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*


Alrighty I'm finally starting to get the hang of this T2i. Looking to buy another lens. Currently I only have the 18-55mm kit lens and the 55-250 3.5/5.6 telephoto zoom.

I'm thinking about the 50mm 1.4. Went to the local camera shop and looked at both the cheaper 1.8 and the 1.4 (1.2 is sorta out of the price range lol) and noticed that the 1.8 feels like a cheap toy compared to the 1.4. Now I'm not planning on being hard on my stuff but the difference in build quality seemed tremendous. So I'm asking....is it worth it to spend extra and grab the 1.4?


+1 on the 50/1.4, I used both the 1.8 and 1.4 with both crop and FF bodies. There's no comparison. The AF on the 1.4 is worlds faster, despite not being ring type like most other USM lenses.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


We're talking about the Canon 50mm f/1.4, which is loads faster than the Nikon AF-wise because of the USM motor.


I think he just mixed up posts. Shane1244 was just asking about the Nikon 50/1.4.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


I had one for a couple of weeks and thought it sucked speed wise.


Well maybe it was just the 400...









OH AND ANYONE WANTING TO GET A 50, GET A SIGMA 50. Canon 1.4 focus motors have been known to go out. EVERYONE GET A SIGMA 50!!!


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


I think someone on here has picked up a D3100 already, but I can't seem to remember who. It does look like a nice body though. I'd wish Nikon would upgrade their D3000 as well. It's a bit sad that their only counterpart to the Canon Rebel XS still uses a CCD sensor.


I've got the 3100. It's definitely a nicely featured body. The button layout is pretty good. Everything is pretty well easily reachable that you need. Flash and ISO (function) control are a little fumbley to reach for at first but now that I'm familiar with the body I don't mind it.

The interesting thing about the body is that it lends itself to being pressed against your brow rather hard, which give a much more stable shooting platform, even without VR, over my 35mm body.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*


Thoughts on selling my Nikkor AF-S 35 f/1.8 and buying a AF-S 50mm f/1.4?


I think either FL is a good one. How much you want to get rid of the 35 for? Personally, I'd go for the 50mm, on a crop sensor, 35mm on FF. I find the 50mm FL (effective) to be no-man's-land, though it does have it's uses.


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *theCanadian;12115701*
> 
> I think either FL is a good one. How much you want to get rid of the 35 for? Personally, I'd go for the 50mm, on a crop sensor, 35mm on FF. I find the 50mm FL (effective) to be no-man's-land, though it does have it's uses.


Probably like $160 on here ISH. or full price on eBay.

and, I'm assuming you ment 35 on a crop, 50 on a full?


----------



## theCanadian

Nope. Read it how I wrote it. Though I'm still considering the 35mm cause I don't have a fast prime at all and it's cheap.... BUT I just spent a bunch of money on other stuff like headphones and turntables so I'll have to evaluate my finances.


----------



## Shane1244

Care to explain? My reasoning of my questioning is 35 on a crop is 52.5, or basically 50mm..

After I evaluate mine, maybe you can buy mine. It's brand new, no a single mark on it.


----------



## theCanadian

I like 35mm over 50mm. I like 75mm over 50mm. I understand this is a DX lense, I'm just saying....


----------



## Shane1244

Ah, Makes sense. With my 18-55, Most of the time I'll either shoot at 18, or 55, and then just adjust my position for framing. I mean, I'm already moving left to right, up and down anyways to adjust framing..

I think I'm going to go for the 1.4







Just have to wait till the 4th to get payed. I can buy it now, but I'm attempting to save for school.. xD


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*


Ah, Makes sense. With my 18-55, Most of the time I'll either shoot at 18, or 55, and then just adjust my position for framing. I mean, I'm already moving left to right, up and down anyways to adjust framing..

I think I'm going to go for the 1.4







Just have to wait till the 4th to get payed. I can buy it now, but I'm attempting to save for school.. xD


Same.


----------



## iandroo888

http://slickdeals.net/forums/showthread.php?t=2600805

gitzo g1177m magnesium ball head for 25 bux after 80 dollar rebate..

how do these ball heads mount? is it a different screw than ones that u screw to body/lens? or is it the same? cuz im not sure if i can put a head on my tripod or not. very old tripod










thats how my tripod looks like.. 40+ yrs old. very lightweight. the "head" part got damaged somehow (before i got it).. but the hassle part is i cant take vertical pictures w/ tripod D:


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Well maybe it was just the 400...










Huh??

Don't/didn't own a canon 400. Bought a 5dII, rented a 200mm f/2 and shot it for a week. Af was too slow for field sports. The camera clearly was not designed for this purpose. Also, one doesn't need >12mp for field sports any way. Just uses up card space. A fast body and good glass are the ticket for crisp, subject isolated shots. F/2.8 is also critical.

Returned the 5dII for credit. If I were a Canon shooter, I woulda kept it. I liked the canon 200mm f/2 lots, but again the Nikon 200 f/2 is essentially the same thing.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


http://slickdeals.net/forums/showthread.php?t=2600805

gitzo g1177m magnesium ball head for 25 bux after 80 dollar rebate..

how do these ball heads mount? is it a different screw than ones that u screw to body/lens? or is it the same?


with older tripods like that i dont think you can remove the head to mount a different head, so you need a bushing reducer to mount the gitzo head on the tripod. it sits the gitzo head ontop of the existing head it might or might not allow your camera to go into portrait depending on how big the base plate for your tripod is.

btw gitzo heads arent up to the same standard as their tripods, plus the one you linked does not have a quick release plate.


----------



## theCanadian

You can get a pretty decent tripod for $80. It's not likely to be a rock solid studio tripod, but if you're on the go, that's not really something you want to lug around.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


You can get a pretty decent tripod for $80. It's not likely to be a rock solid studio tripod, but if you're on the go, that's not really something you want to lug around.


link me. may include a new tripod in next camera equip purchase =3


----------



## Boyboyd

I bought a cheap manfrotto tripod for Â£60 and i dont regret it. I hardy use it, just for long exposures and night shots.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


Huh??

Don't/didn't own a canon 400. Bought a 5dII, rented a 200mm f/2 and shot it for a week. Af was too slow for field sports. The camera clearly was not designed for this purpose. Also, one doesn't need >12mp for field sports any way. Just uses up card space. A fast body and good glass are the ticket for crisp, subject isolated shots. F/2.8 is also critical.

Returned the 5dII for credit. If I were a Canon shooter, I woulda kept it. I liked the canon 200mm f/2 lots, but again the Nikon 200 f/2 is essentially the same thing.


I say its almost as good as the 1DIII which is as good as the D700 which is almost as good as the D3.


----------



## MijnWraak

Noob to photography, looking to expand my horizons a bit and have my girlfriend show me the ropes (as well as getting as much info online as possible of course!) Ordered an Olympus Pen E-PL1 and getting it at the end of the week. Should be a lot of fun


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


link me. may include a new tripod in next camera equip purchase =3


http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...ini_II_GM.html

Take you're pick. They're all basically the same at this price point. This one gives you a quick release and a ball head. If you plan to mount any especially long lenses, a panhead might be better so you can lock it down.


----------



## iandroo888

Slik a good brand? that tripod doesnt have a handle thing u can turn the head with


----------



## mz-n10

that tripod is a ballhead and not a panhead so therefore no handle.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...ini_II_GM.html

Take you're pick. They're all basically the same at this price point. This one gives you a quick release and a ball head. If you plan to mount any especially long lenses, a panhead might be better so you can lock it down.



Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


Slik a good brand? that tripod doesnt have a handle thing u can turn the head with


Slik is a very good brand, but that tripod in particular is really, really light and small (supports 4.4 lbs with a max height of 42"). Probably fine for short lenses and entry/mid-grade bodies, but I wouldn't put more than that on it.


----------



## iandroo888

lookin to maybe get a 70-200 and maybe upgrade body sometime this year... would that be too heavy for that tripod?


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



The On/Off switch surrounds the shutter button, which is a traditional-looking affair that includes threading for a mechanical cable release. Beside it is the Fn button, which can be assigned to various functions. However in what appears to be a rather dramatic conflict, not only is it the only quick way to set ISO without menu-diving, it is also the only way to initiate movie recording.


Does that mean if you want to set ISO quickly you lose move recording? Or am I reading it wrong









http://www.dpreview.com/previews/fujifilmx100/


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Danylu;12134431*
> Does that mean if you want to set ISO quickly you lose move recording? Or am I reading it wrong
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.dpreview.com/previews/fujifilmx100/


I interpret that to mean that for initiating video recording or changing the ISO on the fly, you must use the Fn button for one or the other (but not both).


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


lookin to maybe get a 70-200 and maybe upgrade body sometime this year... would that be too heavy for that tripod?


Certainly too heavy. This would be better: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...um_Tripod.html

It won't be too rugged, it's only aluminum, but it should be strong enough to hold up a long lens. The nice thing about this tripod is that if you're not loaded up with flashes and long lenses and a heavy body, it's got a weight hook on the center column which can be used to improve the stability by significantly lowering the center of gravity. And the extra weight will reduce bounce and shake.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Lowepro Camera Messenger bag for $19 for those of you interested!


----------



## MijnWraak

Any bags that are a type of military/army bag? I think that'd pretty badass if they exist







if not I'll head down to the army navy store downtown and find something that fits.


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MijnWraak*


Any bags that are a type of military/army bag? I think that'd pretty badass if they exist







if not I'll head down to the army navy store downtown and find something that fits.


These may be something you'll want to get.

http://www.google.com/search?sourcei...era+bag+insert


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *theCanadian;12141801*
> Certainly too heavy. This would be better: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/633398-REG/Cullmann_CU_55191_Magnesit_519_Aluminum_Tripod.html
> 
> It won't be too rugged, it's only aluminum, but it should be strong enough to hold up a long lens. The nice thing about this tripod is that if you're not loaded up with flashes and long lenses and a heavy body, it's got a weight hook on the center column which can be used to improve the stability by significantly lowering the center of gravity. And the extra weight will reduce bounce and shake.


has anyone used this one?


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iandroo888;12146568*
> has anyone used this one?


i have no used that tripod, but take a look at the 2 reviews on BH for it. neither reviews talk about stability.....

i personally have not use this tripod either, but there are far more reviews on it and i have used a davis & sanford cf tripod which is rock solid.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/620713-REG/Davis_Sanford_VOYAGER3H_Vista_Voyager_Tripod_with.html

its also rated for 10lbs load which is always good to have more then you need.


----------



## iandroo888

cool will look into that one


----------



## Marin

I was carrying my Manfrotto 058B + 808RC4 combo (along with my 4x5) and tweaked my back. Yay.


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


I was carrying my Manfrotto 058B + 808RC4 combo (along with my 4x5) and tweaked my back. Yay.


Make sure to lift with your back in an upwards twisting motion....









on another note: I'm trying to convince myself to avoid buying the D7000... it's not going well...


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Sparhawk*


Make sure to lift with your back in an upwards twisting motion....









on another note: I'm trying to convince myself to avoid buying the D7000... it's not going well...


I'd get more lenses first


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Sparhawk*


Make sure to lift with your back in an upwards twisting motion....









on another note: I'm trying to convince myself to avoid buying the D7000... it's not going well...


You need to remove a zero then you'll have the right camera.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


I was carrying my Manfrotto 058B + 808RC4 combo (along with my 4x5) and tweaked my back. Yay.


Ouch. Back injuries hurt. Almost every nerve in your body goes throughh it.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Sparhawk*


on another note: I'm trying to convince myself to avoid buying the D7000... it's not going well...


the d7000 sensor is made by SONY MUAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHA

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


You need to remove a zero then you'll have the right camera.










yes


----------



## theCanadian

WUUUT! The D7000 has 4GB of DDR2 RAM?


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


the d7000 sensor is made by SONY MUAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHA

yes


Designed by Nikon, Fabricated by Sony. What's your point?


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


WUUUT! The D7000 has 4GB of DDR2 RAM?


I pooped too. I wonder what all of that is for....


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


WUUUT! The D7000 has 4GB of DDR2 RAM?


Holy hell...


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*


Designed by Nikon, Fabricated by Sony. What's your point?


what kind of self righteous nikonian wants a camera with a sony sensor?









its a tweaked a580/a55 sensors btw.....


----------



## mortimersnerd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10;12155693*
> what kind of self righteous nikonian wants a camera with a sony sensor?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> its a tweaked a580/a55 sensors btw.....


As long as its a good product, I could care less about the band on the camera or who makes the parts inside it...


----------



## Marin

This should be fun.










EDIT: And anyone who's interested in film, buy from http://www.freestylephoto.biz/ since they actually care about film. It's awesome going to a store and being able to talk to people who know what they're doing.


----------



## laboitenoire

I just saw a horrible thing... Apparently there's an iPhone app that adds cutesy/hipster backgrounds to the photos, and one of them makes it looks like the crappy iPhone photo was shot on medium-format Velvia 100. *shudder*


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


I'd get more lenses first










I'm still not sure, I might want a wider one but I hate changing lenses so it would be nice to be able to switch between my 80-200 and 18-55 just by picking up the other body.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


You need to remove a zero then you'll have the right camera.










I might wait for the replacement for the D700 to be released... low-light performance is what I really want, the D7000 kicks the D80 in the butt in that regard.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


the d7000 sensor is made by SONY MUAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHA



Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*


Designed by Nikon, Fabricated by Sony. What's your point?



Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


what kind of self righteous nikonian wants a camera with a sony sensor?









its a tweaked a580/a55 sensors btw.....



Quote:



Originally Posted by *mortimersnerd*


*As long as its a good product, I could care less about the band on the camera or who makes the parts inside it...*


This.

Only reason I'm sticking with Nikon is because I like how their bodies feel in my hands(canon makes my hands cry







) and because I've already got a few lenses.


----------



## mz-n10

u guys are taking my comment too seriously...


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10;12167598*
> u guys are taking my comment too seriously...


Thus proving your original statement hahaa!


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire;12157757*
> I just saw a horrible thing... Apparently there's an iPhone app that adds cutesy/hipster backgrounds to the photos, and one of them makes it looks like the crappy iPhone photo was shot on medium-format Velvia 100. **shudder**


exactly


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


u guys are taking my comment too seriously...


Haha, it was fairly obvious you weren't too serious. As long as it takes good pictures it doesn't matter all that much.


----------



## iandroo888

whats the difference between the 190xb and 190xdb legs from manfrotto ?

which head is better? 391RC2 3-way pan/tilt or 804RC2 3-way pan/tilt ?


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


whats the difference between the 190xb and 190xdb legs from manfrotto ?

which head is better? 391RC2 3-way pan/tilt or 804RC2 3-way pan/tilt ?


190XB has a lower minimum height but is slightly heavier (by .2kg's). They also use different types of locks. Just get the XB, it's better.

And I wouldn't get either head.







Get something that uses Arca-Swiss plates.


----------



## iandroo888

examples?


----------



## Marin

Haven't been paying that much attention to tripods so I'm going to partially wing it here (and quickly browse POTN).

Quick research: Markins is good but probably way out of your budget (since their heads cost more than the legs you're considering). Same with Photo Clam...

Benro and Induro are probably in your price range.


----------



## Nemesis158

Got myself 2 cameras:

A P&S that i hardly use anymore:
Canon Powershot A570 IS

My DSLR:
Nikon D3000
18-55MM Nikkor Kit lens
Nikon BR-2A Lens Reversing ring
Nikon BR-3 Reverse lens filter thread
extra battery

My Work: http://nemesis158.deviantart.com/


----------



## Marin




----------



## dudemanppl

Looks interesting...


----------



## Marin

Just a lighting assignment. Don't worry, I took some portraits after.


----------



## dudemanppl

Whats the sync speed of that camera?


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;12202594*
> Whats the sync speed of that camera?


Leaf shutter so it can sync at anything.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Since when did the price of a used 28mm f/1.8 jump up $100?


----------



## SteveClay

Cannon T2i rebel

Check out my album I have a few pics there


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SteveClay;12204423*
> Cannon T2i rebel
> 
> Check out my album I have a few pics there


Hope you have some lenses and not just a body by itself


----------



## laboitenoire

Man, it really bothers me that I still can't find my 8 gig Sandisk Extreme... I was shooting IM basketball today and my 2 gig PNY cards are just so slow compared to the Sandisk...


----------



## Deano12345

Okay, I'm planning on picking up some new gear on Wednesday. Definitely a Flipside 300 but I'm going to trade in my trusty 18-55mm kit lens for an 18-70mm (to better compliment my 70-300mm Sigma).

Now the two lenses they have on their site that suit me are the Sony DT18-70mm (€100 new) and the (from what i can gather, identical) Minolta AF18-70 (€100 used). It appears these are identical in their technical specs, but would there be any difference in the quality of the casings, zoom rings etc ?

I'm goggling it now, but I figure I should ask the experts


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Leaf shutter so it can sync at anything.


Impossible. Light Speed > Anything


----------



## Marin

Within it's shutter speed range.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Deano12345*


Okay, I'm planning on picking up some new gear on Wednesday. Definitely a Flipside 300 but I'm going to trade in my trusty 18-55mm kit lens for an 18-70mm (to better compliment my 70-300mm Sigma).

Now the two lenses they have on their site that suit me are the Sony DT18-70mm (â‚¬100 new) and the (from what i can gather, identical) Minolta AF18-70 (â‚¬100 used). It appears these are identical in their technical specs, but would there be any difference in the quality of the casings, zoom rings etc ?

I'm goggling it now, but I figure I should ask the experts










the 18-55 is a WAY WAY better then the 18-70, and the 15mm on the long end isnt even really noticeable. but if u really want to trade, i can send you my 18-70 for your 18-55mm









the sony 18-70 and the minolta 18-70 are identical, there is absolutely no optical difference between the two. visually there are differences, the biggest in the rubber zoom ring.


----------



## laboitenoire

Yeah, the 18-55 from Sony is leaps and bounds ahead of the old 18-70. And as mz-n10 said, the difference between 55 and 70 isn't that huge. Just take a few more steps.


----------



## dudemanppl

Its so lonely in here. Who else has an L cup?


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Its so lonely in here. Who else has an L cup?


Do you have a 300mm L cup?


----------



## dudemanppl

Eh, too heavy. Can't throw at parents as easily. And if I threw it up in the air, it would suck to see it land.


----------



## Danylu

Well there is no glass left in the cup to shatter upon impact


----------



## mz-n10

i have a 135 zeiss cup


----------



## Deano12345

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Yeah, the 18-55 from Sony is leaps and bounds ahead of the old 18-70. And as mz-n10 said, the difference between 55 and 70 isn't that huge. Just take a few more steps.



Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


the 18-55 is a WAY WAY better then the 18-70, and the 15mm on the long end isnt even really noticeable. but if u really want to trade, i can send you my 18-70 for your 18-55mm









the sony 18-70 and the minolta 18-70 are identical, there is absolutely no optical difference between the two. visually there are differences, the biggest in the rubber zoom ring.


Thanks guys, I'll guess I'll leave it then ! Still, Im really looking forward to getting my bag


----------



## Marin

http://www.engadget.com/2011/02/01/g...as-no-room-fo/


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

This forum has been quiet lately...

Well, 28mm f/1.8 has arrived!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

I'm in a photographic funk right now, no desire to get out there and shoot. :| No matter, it will pass.


----------



## Deano12345

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Well, 28mm f/1.8 has arrived!


Very Nice !









I see your lens, and raise you a new bag !










Excuse the quality, iPhone photo


----------



## dudemanppl

I realized I don't normally just go out and shoot.







But when I do its very fun stuff.


----------



## laboitenoire

I haven't had the time really... Shot some basketball earlier in the week, but I haven't even downloaded the pictures yet.

Been far too busy.


----------



## laboitenoire

Sorry for the double post, but I'm debating a new memory card purchase.

I only trust Sandisk and Lexar, so I'm debating whether it's better to get the Lexar Professional line of SDHC cards or the Sandisk Extreme line... The 8 gig I lost was a Sandisk Ultra, which was pretty fast, but I still filled the buffer in about five or six shots. According to DP Review, the D5000 should be good for 100 frames in JPEG and 11 in RAW with the Sandisk Extreme. However, they're so pricey; I can get a 16 gig Lexar for the same price as the 16 gig Class 6 Sandisk Extreme. The Class 10 Sandisk Extreme (what DP used) is the same price, but only for 8 gigs...


----------



## Deano12345

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Sorry for the double post, but I'm debating a new memory card purchase.

I only trust Sandisk and Lexar, so I'm debating whether it's better to get the Lexar Professional line of SDHC cards or the Sandisk Extreme line... The 8 gig I lost was a Sandisk Ultra, which was pretty fast, but I still filled the buffer in about five or six shots. According to DP Review, the D5000 should be good for 100 frames in JPEG and 11 in RAW with the Sandisk Extreme. However, they're so pricey; I can get a 16 gig Lexar for the same price as the 16 gig Class 6 Sandisk Extreme. The Class 10 Sandisk Extreme (what DP used) is the same price, but only for 8 gigs...


Ive got the older Sandisk Extreme III (still 30mb/s) and it is awesomely quick, that being said, they are horribly expensive. IMO well worth it if you don't take HUGE amounts of photos (which I don't)


----------



## Boyboyd

I really want a fisheye for some strange reason. Need to talk some sense into myself and get the 10-20 which i would probably use a lot more for almost half the price.


----------



## Deano12345

Sorry for the double post but I just realized I'm not listed in the OP at all, cause Im nearly sure I never put my details in, anyway, here they are.

Sony DSC W110- Point & Shoot (backup camera) with 1GB Sandisk Memory Stick Pro Duo
Sony A230- SLR (Main Camera) With :
- 18-55mm Sony SAM (think its 3.5-5.6)
- 70-300mm Sigma F4-5.6 APO DG Macro (<that was a mouthful)
- Sony HVL F42AM Flash Gun
- Sandisk Extreme III 8GB (30mb/s Edition )

All Carried in a Lowepro Flipside 300 which holds

- GorrillaPod SLR Zoom
- Chargers for laptop, spare camera and main camera.
- Data Cables for spare camera
- Various (2, 4, 8GB) Flash sticks
- Laptop
- Cleaning cloth
- Pens/pencil and small notepad.

I realise ^^^that^^^ may be too detailed, but sure its better to have to much info than too little !


----------



## biatchi

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*


I really want a fisheye for some strange reason. Need to talk some sense into myself and get the 10-20 which i would probably use a lot more for almost half the price.


Could you not get a fisheye and remove the distortion in post for ultra wide images?


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*


I really want a fisheye for some strange reason. Need to talk some sense into myself and get the 10-20 which i would probably use a lot more for almost half the price.


i think you shoot a canon right? if you do you can get a glassless m42 to eos adapter and pick up a old m42 pentax FE. with fisheyes you dont really need AF.

or you can get a 8mm peleng and call it a day


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*


I really want a fisheye for some strange reason. Need to talk some sense into myself and get the 10-20 which i would probably use a lot more for almost half the price.


Funny, I have a knee-jerk reaction against fisheye lenses for reasons I can't explain myself


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


i think you shoot a canon right? if you do you can get a glassless m42 to eos adapter and pick up a old m42 pentax FE. with fisheyes* you dont really need AF*.

or you can get a 8mm peleng and call it a day


That's what i was thinking. But no, i shoot Nikon. If i didn't have so many lenses i'd consider switching sides.


----------



## mz-n10

grab a peleng or samyang 8mm and end your lens lust.


----------



## Marin

I really want this lens.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;12268064*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I really want this lens.


Is that the one that went for 40K on eBay?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Deano12345;12264155*
> Sorry for the double post but I just realized I'm not listed in the OP at all, cause Im nearly sure I never put my details in, anyway, here they are.
> 
> Sony DSC W110- Point & Shoot (backup camera) with 1GB Sandisk Memory Stick Pro Duo
> Sony A230- SLR (Main Camera) With :
> - 18-55mm Sony SAM (think its 3.5-5.6)
> - 70-300mm Sigma F4-5.6 APO DG Macro (
> - Sony HVL F42AM Flash Gun
> - Sandisk Extreme III 8GB (30mb/s Edition )
> 
> All Carried in a Lowepro Flipside 300 which holds
> 
> - GorrillaPod SLR Zoom
> - Chargers for laptop, spare camera and main camera.
> - Data Cables for spare camera
> - Various (2, 4, 8GB) Flash sticks
> - Laptop
> - Cleaning cloth
> - Pens/pencil and small notepad.
> 
> I realise ^^^that^^^ may be too detailed, but sure its better to have to much info than too little !


Is too detailed actually. No biggie though, I always pair it down to bodies, lenses, support, lighting, and storage. The world doesn't need need to know that you have a lens cloth.







Anyway, added!


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Is that the one that went for 40K on eBay?


Nah, their price ranges from 1k to 3k.


----------



## dudemanppl

Using a 135L without the outer plastic casing is REALLY weird. Still AFed and everything.


----------



## ljason8eg

Ordered the Canon 50mm 1.4. Hopefully its here by the weekend as I have a car show on Saturday and it'd be nice to have a lens better than the 18-55 to shoot with.


----------



## Danylu

I feel camera releases these days are incremental and not revolutionary. Video autofocus has been the only new recent feature unless I've missed something.

Am I being too optimistic?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


I feel camera releases these days are incremental and not revolutionary. Video autofocus has been the only new recent feature unless I've missed something.

Am I being too optimistic?


Well, the Sony A55 did revive the use of the pellicle mirror for digital, which I consider fairly groundbreaking. Much of the "revolutionary" releases seem to come in the form of EVIL cameras and lenses, and higher-end point-and-shoots. DSLR's seem to be progressing slowly with the exception of the A55.


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


I feel camera releases these days are incremental and not revolutionary. Video autofocus has been the only new recent feature unless I've missed something.

Am I being too optimistic?


SLT: 6-8 FPS in a consumer grade body? Not to mention full time autofocus and reduced camera noice. I call that a big step forward....


----------



## dudemanppl

DSLRs haven't evolved since the D1. Its just a camera with AF, a sensor, VF, LCD, etc. Not much to change to be honest. An evolution would be a small manual focus only body, but thats a step backwards to go forward. (although I would totally buy one)


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


DSLRs haven't evolved since the D1. Its just a camera with AF, a sensor, VF, LCD, etc. Not much to change to be honest. *An evolution would be a small manual focus only body*, but thats a step backwards to go forward. (although I would totally buy one)


You mean like a Leica M8/M9?


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


You mean like a Leica M8/M9?


Got $7000?


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


You mean like a Leica M8/M9?


Well I meant more of an SLR. and they're too expensive. I would rather buy 2 Leica M7s and load them with different films.


----------



## max302

Guys, thought I'd let you know: I've got two JVC full HD camcorders, one GZ-HM300 in NIB condition and one GZ-HM320, slightly scuffed demo unit.

I'm not going to try to sell them on here because I need a fast sale, but if any of you are interest, shoot me a PM. Both come with unfilled warranty papers and a proof of purchase.

Reasonable offers will not be refused.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Well I meant more of an SLR. and they're too expensive. I would rather buy 2 Leica M7s and load them with different films.


or just buy a EVIL and use old lenses.....


----------



## ljason8eg

So I got my media credential to shoot at the track so now the stupid fence won't get in my way anymore. Now for a better telephoto lens. Most of the races are at night (lit with stadium type lighting) so I need something fast for my T2i. I was thinking the 70-200mm 2.8L. 200mm 2.8L is much cheaper but I think I'd rather have the versatility of the zoom.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


or just buy a EVIL and use old lenses.....


That is funny to me. No EVIL until they get decent menus, ISO performance, etc.


----------



## mz-n10

gf2 has decent iso, menu system and ergonomics.....


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


gf2 has decent iso, menu system and ergonomics.....


NEX5 is even better noise wise.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


NEX5 is even better noise wise.


but it has a horrible lack of buttons.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


That is funny to me. No EVIL until they get decent menus, ISO performance, etc.


The ISO is fine for me, but it's the ergonomics of the thing that kills it for me. Uncomfortable for me to hold with anything but a pancake lens, buttons too lacking for me (spoiled by the easily-accessible options on my 50D), and it just lacks the streamlined user interface that I feel with my camera.

Maybe it's just me, but that's my whole take on it. I definitely feel more of a "wall" between myself and my camera when using an EVIL.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*


So I got my media credential to shoot at the track so now the stupid fence won't get in my way anymore. Now for a better telephoto lens. Most of the races are at night (lit with stadium type lighting) so I need something fast for my T2i. I was thinking the 70-200mm 2.8L. 200mm 2.8L is much cheaper but I think I'd rather have the versatility of the zoom.


Canon just announced the development of a 200-400mm f/4L IS USM with integrated 1.4x TC







If f/4 is fast enough for you, that integrated TC, focal length, and constant aperture might do you well.

By the way, how does a constant aperture work on a zoom lens? If f-stops are a ratio between the focal length and aperture diameter, that means the aperture also has to change as you're changing focal lengths, and, well, how does that work out?


----------



## Marin

Someone needs to make an affordable digital rangefinder (that's FF). Way better to use than an EVIL camera.


----------



## dudemanppl

I enjoy VFs a lot more than LCDs. I prefer SLRs more only because I haven't tried a rangefinder. But that should change sort of soonish maybe.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


SLT: 6-8 FPS in a consumer grade body? Not to mention *full time autofocus* and reduced camera noi*s*e. I call that a big step forward....


Full time autofocus was what I meant by video autofocus, I couldn't remember the proper name for it when I made my post









The rest of your features are evolutionary or incremental as opposed to revolutionary. What I guess I am looking for are "new" features and not just spec upgrades, which undoubtedly are nice, but it'd be great to see new features appearing.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Well, the Sony A55 did revive the use of the pellicle mirror for digital, which I consider fairly groundbreaking. Much of the "revolutionary" releases seem to come in the form of EVIL cameras and lenses, and higher-end point-and-shoots. DSLR's seem to be progressing slowly with the exception of the A55.


Yeah I forgot about the A55, that seems to be the latest "new" feature. There doesn't seem to be too much innovation in the DSLR arena.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Someone needs to make an affordable digital rangefinder (that's FF). Way better to use than an EVIL camera.


This. But I don't see this happening anytime soon unless someone makes a Leica-esque system


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Canon just announced the development of a 200-400mm f/4L IS USM with integrated 1.4x TC







If f/4 is fast enough for you, that integrated TC, focal length, and constant aperture might do you well.


I have a feeling that lens is going to be a bit more than ~$1360 lol.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg;12303432*
> So I got my media credential to shoot at the track so now the stupid fence won't get in my way anymore. Now for a better telephoto lens. Most of the races are at night (lit with stadium type lighting) so I need something fast for my T2i. I was thinking the 70-200mm 2.8L. 200mm 2.8L is much cheaper but I think I'd rather have the versatility of the zoom.


Just curious, what's the price difference between those 2? I was going to recommend the 70-200. It's quite difficult to use a prime telephoto well, but the quality will be slightly better (slightly)


----------



## dudemanppl

135L and crop? f/2 and sharp as hell.


----------



## Deano12345

My dad borrowed my SLR for the weekend a few weeks ago, and won a prize last weekend from his dive club, this was voted ''Best Above Water Photo''










Now I have to try and find where I saved it on my computer to see which lens he used, i think it was my 18-55


----------



## Boyboyd

The reflection is incredible but the horizon isn't level. and that's so easy to fix in post-processing (or ideally, when you shoot it)


----------



## Deano12345

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Boyboyd;12306903*
> The reflection is incredible but the horizon isn't level. and that's so easy to fix in post-processing (or ideally, when you shoot it)


Wanna explain how to fix it (im a photo editing noob







) Cause were thinking of getting it printed and framed and I wouldn't mind touching it up before hand


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Deano12345;12307137*
> Wanna explain how to fix it (im a photo editing noob
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ) Cause were thinking of getting it printed and framed and I wouldn't mind touching it up before hand


It's really easy to do in the GIMP or paint.net (which are both free). Just rotate it until the horizon looks level.


----------



## Deano12345

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Boyboyd;12307207*
> It's really easy to do in the GIMP or paint.net (which are both free). Just rotate it until the horizon looks level.


Done ! Thanks man









Edit : Should have mentioned were getting it printed for his birthday, I'm also buying him a HD Hero, but Ill get to use it too so i guess you can add it to my gear !


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;12304818*
> Someone needs to make an affordable digital rangefinder (that's FF). Way better to use than an EVIL camera.


I wish Canon would do it. They made film rangefinders after all. It would be a nice response to all the EVIL cameras out there, though I doubt it would have as much commercial appeal.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Boyboyd;12306260*
> Just curious, what's the price difference between those 2? I was going to recommend the 70-200. It's quite difficult to use a prime telephoto well, but the quality will be slightly better (slightly)


The 200 f/2.8L (not to be confused with the much pricier 200 f/2L) can be had easily for under a grand. It's a rather old lens compared to the 70-200 f/2.8. It's pretty sharp, sharper than the mark I 70-200 but the not the mark II. It's also not weather sealed believe it or not.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;12306467*
> 135L and crop? f/2 and sharp as hell.


There's an idea. Slap a TC on it and it's still top notch.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Boyboyd;12306260*
> Just curious, what's the price difference between those 2? I was going to recommend the 70-200. It's quite difficult to use a prime telephoto well, but the quality will be slightly better (slightly)


Going by Amazon its $779 for the prime and $1369 for the zoom.


----------



## Boyboyd

Personally at that price i'd get the prime.

But that's just me.


----------



## ljason8eg

I'm just concerned that the 200mm prime might be a bit challenging to frame the cars when I'm standing at the fence since they're not that far away. For other shots, yeah the prime would work no problem but I can think of a couple spots that it might not.


----------



## Boyboyd

Panning shots might be difficult, because like you said you're right next to them. But you should be able to look up and down track from where you are standing.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*


Going by Amazon its $779 for the prime and $1369 for the zoom.


70-200 2.8s are 900 used in EPICLY good condition. Perfect. But if 200 is too long, get a 135L. You gain a stop.


----------



## dudemanppl

Double post time! And you guys can call me crazy again. I'm trading the gripped 5DII, 35L, 135L, 580EXII and 1.4x TC for a D3, 17-35, and 24-70! I'll use it for like 2 weeks and then start to try and sell it. Whee! Then I'll rebuy the 5DII, 35L, 135L, and 1.4x TC.


----------



## laboitenoire

Seriously dude, can you not be content with your current gear and just shoot pictures?


----------



## Shane1244

Photography is more than just a hobby about art.


----------



## dudemanppl

I am content.







I just like to sell things when I know I'll make money. You can make a lot of money doing that, I've made at least 1.5k ish.


----------



## theCanadian

Why do cameras need to sync the flash? Why can't the flash just pop for say 1/60s and then open the shutter for whatever duration you want in between that time using normal TTL metering?


----------



## Boyboyd

Good question. and one i can't answer.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


Why do cameras need to sync the flash? Why can't the flash just pop for say 1/60s and then open the shutter for whatever duration you want in between that time using normal TTL metering?


It's very confusing and I would just stammer trying to explain, but the Wiki seems to make it at least somewhat clear:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Focal_plane_shutter


----------



## Shane1244

The whole shutter isn't opened all at the same time, so it would leave uneven exposure.


----------



## Dream Killer

Cameras can only open the shutter to reveal the sensor fully below a certain speed (your sync). That's when the flash can go and fire becuase it instantly blasts the whole scene with light at a mere 1/10000-1/4000s.

This used to matter, not so much with high-speed sync mode units in modern times. With high-speed sync, the flash goes off multiple times to cover the entire sensor as the shutter is moving very close together forming a slit. I always leave this mode on (at the cost of range) and the flash automatically calculates and shows you guide number once you get past your camera's sync speed.


----------



## dudemanppl

BTW, an ND filter and cheap manual flashes will be cheaper than having TTL flashes that will do HSS. Just a tip, but it applies more for off camera flash.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


BTW, an ND filter and cheap manual flashes will be cheaper than having TTL flashes that will do HSS. Just a tip, but it applies more for off camera flash.


That reminds me, I need to learn how to use NDs, GDs, and CPLs. I'm a bit horrible at using filters for my photography and it seems like a useful/interesting facet to learn.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


That reminds me, I need to learn how to use NDs, GDs, and CPLs. I'm a bit horrible at using filters for my photography and it seems like a useful/interesting facet to learn.


There's not much to them really, fairly easy to use. The hard part is deciding what brand and type to get.


----------



## Shane1244

I have my Nikon D3000 for sale. I'm ready to upgrade!









http://www.overclock.net/other-techn...55mm-lens.html


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;12335825*
> I have my Nikon D3000 for sale. I'm ready to upgrade!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/other-technology/937832-nikon-d3000-nikkor-18-55mm-lens.html


What are you upgrading to?


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;12336382*
> What are you upgrading to?


I'm thinking of going to a D90 pretty much has everything I want aside from higher ISO. I might spring the extra money for the D7000, but I'm not sure. I'm also looking into the D3100 as it's still a pretty good upgrade, and I can get it for cheap with my employee discount.

I'm hoping to find a cheap D90 body only. I don't need the 18-55.


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;12336502*
> I'm thinking of going to a D90 pretty much has everything I want aside from higher ISO. I might spring the extra money for the D7000, but I'm not sure. I'm also looking into the D3100 as it's still a pretty good upgrade, and I can get it for cheap with my employee discount.
> 
> I'm hoping to find a cheap D90 body only. I don't need the 18-55.


I spoke with several retail reps and they all pretty much said they think the D3100 is the better buy over the D5000, even though the D5000 is technically the better camera, (though the D3100 has some features the D5000 lacks). D7000 was out of my price bracket, but the D5000 has the same sensor as the D90. After using the D3100 for a while now, I like to think of it as fully featured, minus lockup. But their is still the bulb + stop watch option, assuming you have a sturdy tripod.


----------



## Boyboyd

All i know is that i'm thoroughly disappointed with the ISO performance of my D5000. Love the rest of it though.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*


All i know is that i'm thoroughly disappointed with the ISO performance of my D5000. Love the rest of it though.


Time to make the jump to full frame. It doesn't get much better on APS-C.


----------



## Shane1244

I can get a brand new D90 body for $630, or a used one for like $550. I'll obviously go for the new, I just need to find a way to get one to my store. :/

I mostly just want video.


----------



## max302

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*


I can get a brand new D90 body for $630, or a used one for like $550. I'll obviously go for the new, I just need to find a way to get one to my store. :/

I mostly just want video.


Save up and get the D7000. Noise performance is stellar, magnesium construction makes it feel like a tank, and the button layout is jizz-tastic. I haven't really needed the weather-sealing yet, but it's pretty nice to have.

I love mine.


----------



## Shane1244

I've got enough money for one, But I think the extra ~$400 would do better in lenses.

They REALLY need a D5000 replacement, they don't have anything new in the ~$800 range.


----------



## max302

BTW guys, just a heads up, I'm selling my Flip. Flip SlideHD 16gb, 140$ shipped to anywhere in North America.

http://www.overclock.net/other-techn...l#post12341873


----------



## Shane1244

Frig that's cheap.. I'll need to see what I can dig up :/


----------



## Danylu

Anybody got tips for swimming shots?

I'm planning on bringing my 70-200 and my flash, hopefully they'll let me use the flash.


----------



## theCanadian

I'm pretty sure you can only use a flash while the race is on, and only at small venues where races occur one at a time. They often use flash guns to signal the start of the race since the speed of sound is much much slower. If everyone is doing flash photography, you'll start getting a lot of false starts.

Tips: Stand at the finish line, or on the side. And don't be afraid to crank your ISO if you're having trouble keeping the shutter at 1/500 or better. Common sense.


----------



## Deano12345

What software does everyone here use to watermark their photos ? I've a watermark made, just not sure how to actually batch add it to my photos

Edit : Knew I forgot to say something, I bought a copy of Lightroom today










Edit 2 : Lightroom does what I need, didnt see that in the half an hour ive been using it. Whoops


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


I'm pretty sure you can only use a flash while the race is on, and only at small venues where races occur one at a time. They often use flash guns to signal the start of the race since the speed of sound is much much slower. If everyone is doing flash photography, you'll start getting a lot of false starts.

Tips: Stand at the finish line, or on the side. And don't be afraid to crank your ISO if you're having trouble keeping the shutter at 1/500 or better. Common sense.



Yeah I read about that, but I'm 95% certain that they are using a beep. Most of the races are relays so it looks like I'll be standing at the side :/


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;12328524*
> BTW, an ND filter and cheap manual flashes will be cheaper than having TTL flashes that will do HSS. Just a tip, but it applies more for off camera flash.


The whole point of having HSS is to have a high shutter speed. Like for stopping action and blur at telephoto ranges. Using an ND is terribly inefficient because you're wasting away battery power. Also TTL flash's biggest advantage is speed in automation. For street photography / fill (balance), just set your flash to -1.3ev and shoot like normal.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*


The whole point of having HSS is to have a high shutter speed. Like for stopping action and blur at telephoto ranges. Using an ND is terribly inefficient because you're wasting away battery power. Also TTL flash's biggest advantage is speed in automation. For street photography / fill (balance), just set your flash to -1.3ev and shoot like normal.


If you need to freeze action, there is no good alternative to high speed sync, but HSS wastes a lot more battery power than an ND filter. For fill flash, an ND filter is stupid.


----------



## Boyboyd

Can anyone explain why this happens? It happens with every single image i take, but only when i set it as a desktop wallpaper.


----------



## laboitenoire

I'm wondering myself, as it *really* bothers me that Windows changes the colors of the image...


----------



## Shane1244

What fixed it for me was going into Internet Explorer, opening the imagine in it, and then right clicking and setting as desktop.

For me, using any "Apply as Wallpaper" command in windows, changes the color and looses detail. idk why..


----------



## Boyboyd

i just tried that, even in internet explorer the colours are different. Windows explorer and windows picture view are fine. As is firefox.

<-- Cries.


----------



## biatchi

Does it still happen if you use a non Windows program like Irfanview to set the wallpaper?


----------



## Boyboyd

Yeah it still does it.

Here's the thing, if i just "export" it with lightroom, and set it with the right click in windows explorer it works just fine. It has to be something to do with my photoshop settings.


----------



## biatchi

Do you have Photoshop/your Camera set to Adobe RGB and Windows uses SRGB to set the wallpaper maybe? I have no idea to be honest and all of what I just said might not even be right


----------



## Boyboyd

Even if i tell photoshop to save in Adobe RGB it still happens. Might have to switch to srgb.


----------



## theCanadian

Here's an idea. Find the location where your wallpaper is saved to (it's not where the original is saved, windows copies it to a new location), and then replace it with your own. It's what I did.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


Here's an idea. Find the location where your wallpaper is saved to (it's not where the original is saved, windows copies it to a new location), and then replace it with your own. It's what I did.


That's clever. Now to find out where 7 saves wallpapers.


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*


That's clever. Now to find out where 7 saves wallpapers.


I forget, sorry.

Might want to start looking around in C:\\Windows\\Web. You can paste a photo in there and see if it turns up in Personalization. Might have to reboot...


----------



## BSB27

HAHA it's really cool to see that there is a thread now that has to do with cameras and photographers. Im in another forum jsut for this topic. Thank you


----------



## Marin

Today was a good day.


----------



## Shane1244

Woah, that second picture has a beautiful view! Can't wait to see the results.


----------



## Gigalisk

Pic i took from the sandy place.

Gigalisk
(Forward Deployed)


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gigalisk;12398097*
> Pic i took from the sandy place.
> 
> Gigalisk
> (Forward Deployed)


Lightroom is amazing.


----------



## Gigalisk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *theCanadian;12398446*
> Lightroom is amazing.


LOL Good shtuff canadian. I like.


----------



## Shane1244

The picture feels too inbalanced. I'd straighten the horizen.


----------



## dudemanppl

I had 2 middle aged men taking turns running towards me. A.K.A., I sold my 400...


----------



## Shane1244

I don't get it.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*


I don't get it.


They were trying to test the AF.


----------



## Shane1244

Gotcha


----------



## Gigalisk

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*


The picture feels too inbalanced. I'd straighten the horizen.


That's because those are mountains. I tried straightening them out...God got mad, so i stopped.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;12400517*
> I had 2 middle aged men taking turns running towards me. A.K.A., I sold my 400...


Sounds so wrong...


----------



## biatchi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;12406910*
> Sounds so wrong...


He should have lied to us and told us it was 2 hot 19 year old chicks


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *biatchi;12406990*
> He should have lied to us and told us it was 2 hot 19 year old chicks


in his case it would be 2 hot 14 year old chicks.....







i kid i kid


----------



## dudemanppl

No, I'm pretty sure I would enjoy 19 year olds more...


----------



## Gigalisk

but you enjoy 14 year olds a lil' bit right?


----------



## dudemanppl

I am 14...


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


No, I'm pretty sure I would enjoy 19 year olds more...










You wish!


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

I think we just popped OCN onto the FBI's radar


----------



## dudemanppl

Uhhhh, I HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS IT WAS ALL RE1NCARNAT3D'S FAULT.


----------



## Shane1244

First pictures from my 60D and 50 1.4

My Sisters Rat:









Here's a 100% Crop:


----------



## ljason8eg

That's pretty sharp looking, Shane.

I have a question. I've been thinking about getting a B+W 58mm Circular Polarizer filter. I see they have one marked "MRC" that is about $30 more than the one that is not marked that way. Any benefit to the one marked MRC?


----------



## dudemanppl

MRC = Multi Something Coated. Get that one.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*


That's pretty sharp looking, Shane.

I have a question. I've been thinking about getting a B+W 58mm Circular Polarizer filter. I see they have one marked "MRC" that is about $30 more than the one that is not marked that way. Any benefit to the one marked MRC?


Multi-resistant coating. I believe it prevents flare and reflections caused by the filter. I would spend the extra $30 for it personally, especially if you use for landscapes where flare is more likely.


----------



## ljason8eg

Thanks guys. Its this filter if you two were wondering.

  Amazon.com: B+W 58mm Circular Polarizer MRC Filter: Camera & Photo


----------



## iandroo888

if u are gonna spend such a premium on a cir-pol, might as well get a 77mm one and use a step-up ring. wont have to ever purchase another cir-pol again =P

http://www.2filter.com/prices/B+W_filters/B+WCircularPolarizers.html

i have the 77mm B+W Kaesemann cir-pol


----------



## ljason8eg

That actually looks like a good idea because eventually I want to purchase the 70-200mm 2.8L for use at the racetrack, which I'm pretty sure is 77mm, so the filter would work for it too.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg;12417225*
> That actually looks like a good idea because eventually I want to purchase the 70-200mm 2.8L for use at the racetrack, which I'm pretty sure is 77mm, so the filter would work for it too.


yup the 70-200mm as well as a lot of pro level lenses are 77mm.


----------



## Marin

My DSLR is starting to collect dust.


----------



## dudemanppl

I'll buy it if you want.


----------



## theCanadian

< Likely to become officially semi pro in the next month. And I already have my first job!

(If $10 a photo counts...)


----------



## mortimersnerd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


< Likely to become officially semi pro in the next month. And I already have my first job!

(If $10 a photo counts...)


Hmm. $10 * 5 shots/sec burst * 60 seconds * 60 min = $180,000/hr.


----------



## Shane1244

>buys 1dmk4
>makes $360,000/hr
>flips off bill gates


----------



## theCanadian

The fine print reads "per section of the paper" there might only be a couple sections an issue. But it's something. And it's not a bad way to find out about things going on either.


----------



## Shane1244

60D video goodness! I shouldn't have kept it wide open, but it still looks amazing!

  
 You Tube


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*


60D video goodness! *I'm glad I kept it wide open, and* it still looks amazing!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IrLwLNhxiKM


Fixed.







Wide open is my mantra.

And it's time to change your profile picture. You're a Canonite now.


----------



## Shane1244

Haha, It's nice when the video is small, but when you make it a bit larger, you can see a lot of colour fringing on the brighter areas









Any tips with the 50mm f/1.4?


----------



## mz-n10

correct in post or dont shoot at 1.4









thats a pretty cool video, i got a 60d for like a week or two just for video. but the continuous AF wasnt as good as i would have hoped.....


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*


Haha, It's nice when the video is small, but when you make it a bit larger, you can see a lot of colour fringing on the brighter areas









Any tips with the 50mm f/1.4?










Even many of the best primes (even Zeiss glass) will show purple fringing/lateral CAs wide open, it's the nature of the beast.

It shouldn't be a reason not to shoot wide open necessarily, just correct it in post like mz said, or be mindful of high contrast scenes (like sky lit windows) and highly reflective surfaces, etc.

You could also stop down slightly. The 50/1.4 is somewhat soft wide open, but it's beastly sharp at f/2.


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


correct in post or dont shoot at 1.4









thats a pretty cool video, i got a 60d for like a week or two just for video. but the continuous AF wasnt as good as i would have hoped.....


Continuous AF in video mode is a joke on the D3100 as well, but the AF-C mode is pretty good. That's continuous servo, for action sports and race cars for example.


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


correct in post or dont shoot at 1.4









thats a pretty cool video, i got a 60d for like a week or two just for video. but the continuous AF wasnt as good as i would have hoped.....



Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Even many of the best primes (even Zeiss glass) will show purple fringing/lateral CAs wide open, it's the nature of the beast.

It shouldn't be a reason not to shoot wide open necessarily, just correct it in post like mz said, or be mindful of high contrast scenes (like sky lit windows) and highly reflective surfaces, etc.

You could also stop down slightly. The 50/1.4 is somewhat soft wide open, but it's beastly sharp at f/2.


I don't have a CLUE on how to PP video :/ I have after effects, but I can't seem to get the same kind of results like I do from Photoshop. I can't even find a way to get a fair sized, high quality output.

Now, I need something more wide for when I'm taking pictures in houses, and of landscapes etc.. I was thinking Canon 24mm f/2.8? I'm not sure how wide that is though. I was hoping for a prime around $400ish, Zooms are fine, I just need a deecent aperture. DO NOT want a fisheye.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;12435933*
> I don't have a CLUE on how to PP video :/ I have after effects, but I can't seem to get the same kind of results like I do from Photoshop. I can't even find a way to get a fair sized, high quality output.
> 
> Now, I need something more wide for when I'm taking pictures in houses, and of landscapes etc.. I was thinking Canon 24mm f/2.8? I'm not sure how wide that is though. I was hoping for a prime around $400ish, Zooms are fine, I just need a deecent aperture. DO NOT want a fisheye.


If you stretch your budget, you can get a Tokina 11-16 f/2.8. You could get one used in the $500 range (POTN). It's renowned for it's IQ, though is rather prone to CA.

Canon has a 20/2.8, 24/2.8, 28/2.8 and a 28/1.8, but aren't exactly ultra-wide on APS-C. Those are the widest primes that Canon has barring the 14/2.8L which goes for nearly $2K. Fortunately, there are numerous UWA zoom lenses for APS-C now, such as the Tokina 11-16 I mentioned, the Canon 10-22, Sigma 10-20, etc.


----------



## Shane1244

What would be the best price/performance UWA Zoom?

The tokina looka nice, but after shipping and duties etc.. it's a little pricey.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;12436556*
> What would be the best price/performance UWA Zoom?
> 
> The tokina looka nice, but after shipping and duties etc.. it's a little pricey.


Well, most of the UWA lenses have variable apertures, so if you want constant f/2.8, it will cost. If by "decent aperture" you mean the ability to get steadier shots indoors, then it's nothing to worry about. The wider the angle, the easier to hand hold at slower shutter speeds. I used to own the Canon 10-22, and at 10mm I could pull off hand held shots of 1/2" or more with the right technique.

But for best price/performance, the Sigma 10-20 f/4-5.6 is often lauded for just that reason. I think it's around $500 new, and I see them go for $400 at POTN.

http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/171/cat/31


----------



## sub50hz

50D incoming on Tuesday. This might be the longest 4 days of my life.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


50D incoming on Tuesday. This might be the longest 4 days of my life.


Only 96 hours to go...


----------



## theCanadian

If you ignore peripherals, 28mm on FF is about what you see with your eye. 17mm if you include peripherals.


----------



## Sparhawk

In hawaii atm. Loving this weather compared to Calgary. Taking boatloads of photos.


----------



## sub50hz

I'll bet. A friend of mine is stationed there (USMC), and continually reminds me that they did not get 25 inches of snow at any point this winter.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Just got $400 in Lunar New Year money (Yay for being Asian!). Now to decide on a point and shoot (which I do not have) or an 85mm f/1.8.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Just got $400 in Lunar New Year money (Yay for being Asian!). Now to decide on a point and shoot (which I do not have) or an 85mm f/1.8.


85. I don't get much for Chinese New Year, but I don't really mind.


----------



## ljason8eg

Oh I forgot to post this here. Got a 50mm f/1.4 the other day.


----------



## sub50hz

85mm, all day. Every time I think I want a p+s, I look at the smartphone market. With my G2, I find I don't miss having a dedicated camera in _many_ situations.

Plus, the 85mm f/1.8 is still, IMO, the greatest non-L lens Canon makes. It's super sharp, light, small and mostly -- *inexpensive*. You will not regret it, I assure you. I have said this before, but I will often back up quite a bit if possible just so i can use it instead of my 35mm f/2.0 -- it's that good.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*


Oh I forgot to post this here. Got a 50mm f/1.4 the other day.


Congrats! Out of the lenses I've used, this is by far my favorite non-L lens







Good quality wide open (sharper than my 28mm f/1.8). The only issue I have with it is the 50mm focal point is too tight indoors on a crop body. But beyond that, excellent lens nevertheless!

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


85mm, all day. Every time I think I want a p+s, I look at the smartphone market. With my G2, I find I don't miss having a dedicated camera in _many_ situations.

Plus, the 85mm f/1.8 is still, IMO, the greatest non-L lens Canon makes. It's super sharp, light, small and mostly -- *inexpensive*. You will not regret it, I assure you. I have said this before, but I will often back up quite a bit if possible just so i can use it instead of my 35mm f/2.0 -- it's that good.



Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


85. I don't get much for Chinese New Year, but I don't really mind.










Guess I'm going 85mm f/1.8 then


----------



## Shane1244

Zero PP. *** is going on here haha.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Guess I'm going 85mm f/1.8 then










Hmmm, Sigma 10-20mm f/4.5-5.6 EX DC HSM? Just throwing stuff out to see if you'd be interested.


----------



## sub50hz

That's next on my list. Or the EF-S 10-22, neither of which is coming in any recent future, haha.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Hmmm, Sigma 10-20mm f/4.5-5.6 EX DC HSM? Just throwing stuff out to see if you'd be interested.


That's actually my next planned lens after the 85mm f/1.8









My planned upgrade path:

85mm f/1.8, 10-22mm (Sigma or Canon, undecided), 135mm f/2L, 5D Mk (whatever is current when I buy it).


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


That's actually my next planned lens after the 85mm f/1.8









My planned upgrade path:

85mm f/1.8, 10-22mm (Sigma or Canon, undecided), 135mm f/2L, 5D Mk (whatever is current when I buy it).


Same here!







Except..

10-22 (Also Undecided), 135L, 5DmkII successor.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Found an 85mm f/1.8 with hood and warranty card for $335


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Found an 85mm f/1.8 with hood and warranty card for $335










all primes?


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


all primes?


All primes. I've tried to use zoom lenses twice now, but I found that I cannot account for zoom in my photographic intuition (that is, I naturally prefer to move myself than zoom with the lens), and I constantly find myself craving a large, constant aperture (the 24-70mm f/2.8L is still out of my budget...)

It probably seems "out there" to most people, but an all-prime setup is what I naturally prefer


----------



## dudemanppl

Dude basically all the FF Canon shooters here have a 135L, not even kidding. Well, Marin, Gone, and me...

Normal zooms are complete crap. I agree completely with r3incarnat3d. 100%.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Dude basically all the FF Canon shooters here have a 135L, not even kidding. Well, Marin, Gone, and me...


That lens looks absolutely lovely, but seeing as how I need the wide angle and med telephoto ranges covered first, the 135L has to wait a bit.

Still, I've seen the pictures (including one wide-open shot from GoneTomorrow) and it makes me salivate.

One day!

As for the 5D, I'd love full frame but that'll have to wait too. By the time I get the money for it, it's very likely the Mk III or even Mk IV will be out!


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


All primes. I've tried to use zoom lenses twice now, but I found that I cannot account for zoom in my photographic intuition (that is, I naturally prefer to move myself than zoom with the lens), and I constantly find myself craving a large, constant aperture (the 24-70mm f/2.8L is still out of my budget...)

It probably seems "out there" to most people, but an all-prime setup is what I naturally prefer










it really depends on which zooms you have used, the 24-70L is pretty nice, so is the 16-35 or even teh 17-55/2.8.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Normal zooms are complete crap. I agree completely with r3incarnat3d. 100%.


bhphoto of socal your opinions dont matter since you have all the lenses in the world...


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


it really depends on which zooms you have used, the 24-70L is pretty nice, so is the 16-35 or even teh 17-55/2.8.


I've my eye on the 24-70L, but like I said, it's out of my budget, as is the 17-55mm. But I do admit, those zooms are nice!


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


I've my eye on the 24-70L, but like I said, it's out of my budget, as is the 17-55mm. But I do admit, those zooms are nice!


I'm selling mine.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


I'm selling mine.


I need to put together the money first, which is now non-existent









Although with a lens like that, I'm pretty sure you don't need my help to have it move fast!

So you're going for an all-prime setup too?


----------



## Marin

Yes.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


bhphoto of socal your opinions dont matter since you have all the lenses in the world...










I'm being pretty hypocritical right now since all I have is a 17-35 and 24-70.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


That's next on my list. Or the EF-S 10-22, neither of which is coming in any recent future, haha.



Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


That's actually my next planned lens after the 85mm f/1.8









My planned upgrade path:

85mm f/1.8, 10-22mm (Sigma or Canon, undecided), 135mm f/2L, 5D Mk (whatever is current when I buy it).



Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*


Same here!







Except..

10-22 (Also Undecided), 135L, 5DmkII successor.


The Canon 10-22 is awesome. I really loved that lens. It's far better than anything Sigma or Tamron currently offers IMO. It's so resistant to flare that I actually had a bit of difficulty trying to intentionally reproduce it.

I see them regularly at POTN's FS forum. I actually bought mine there for $550 (and sold it for more







).

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Dude basically all the FF Canon shooters here have a 135L, not even kidding. Well, Marin, Gone, and me...

Normal zooms are complete crap. I agree completely with r3incarnat3d. 100%.


Come on, normal zooms aren't complete crap, only pixel peepers and gear heads say that. I agree that primes are great and definitely superior, but there's a lot to like about a high quality zoom lens.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


That lens looks absolutely lovely, but seeing as how I need the wide angle and med telephoto ranges covered first, the 135L has to wait a bit.

Still, I've seen the pictures (including one wide-open shot from GoneTomorrow) and it makes me salivate.

One day!

As for the 5D, I'd love full frame but that'll have to wait too. By the time I get the money for it, it's very likely the Mk III or even Mk IV will be out!


And like the 5DC, the 5DII will live on and continue to be a great camera, so I don't see why so many people are desperate for the mkIII. Don't get me wrong, I'd love to have it myself, but the mkII is fantastic.

And I still love the 135L. If it had rounded aperture blades, it would be perfect.

And since we're seeming to post our upgrade plans:

16-35 f/2.8L II and/or 70-200 f/2.8 L II. I'll sell my 70-200 f/4 IS to fund one of those two.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


And like the 5DC, the 5DII will live on and continue to be a great camera, so I don't see why so many people are desperate for the mkIII. Don't get me wrong, I'd love to have it myself, but the mkII is fantastic.


It's not so much that I dislike the 5D Mk II (I think it's a brilliant camera), but that the Mk III will most likely be what's new when I'm able to get a FF camera. It's just one of those things that I'd actually like to buy brand new, and given my finances it's just likely the Mk III will be the new camera out when I finally save up $2k for a 5D camera.


----------



## Aden Florian

I gave in and bought my first DSLR yesterday, after wanting one for a while now.

Canon EOS Rebel T2i
Kit lens - EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS

I got the T2i for the extra video features over the T1i, now I just need to learn how to make the video look like this:

  
 You Tube


----------



## Deano12345

Im a bit stumped here lads. I'm starting to realize that getting Sony stuff used is very difficult and theres not a huge amount of new stuff available for me to buy, whereas for Nikon and Canon theres a huge amount, so I'm thinking about trading in all my gear, and going to Nikon Or Canon (Im looking at a 1D Mk.II, 40D, or a D3100. All €500) but I dont know if its worth jumping, like I'd probably only be able to afford one lens for any of the above cameras and i'd also lose my flashgun (that being said used Flash guns for Canon/Nikon are easy for me to get, and cheap too)

So whats everyones opinions on the situation ? Advice ?

Edit : Should have mentioned, both Canon bodies are used, the Nikon would be new


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Aden Florian*


I gave in and bought my first DSLR yesterday, after wanting one for a while now.

Canon EOS Rebel T2i
Kit lens - EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS

I got the T2i for the extra video features over the T1i, now I just need to learn how to make the video look like this:


With a large aperture. Most likely you'll have to invest in a prime lens to get that large of an aperture for the DoF it offers. The 50mm f/1.8 is a good place to start.


----------



## theCanadian

Anyone had an issue with Lightroom where the default slider locations are non-zero? It started doing it when I first imported RAW. Maybe it's my shooting profile... But the default values are a bit extreme. +50 brightness and +25 contrast. A lot of the photos actually look washed out, versus when I was shooting jpeg, and it looked fine.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *theCanadian;12445888*
> Anyone had an issue with Lightroom where the default slider locations are non-zero? It started doing it when I first imported RAW. Maybe it's my shooting profile... But the default values are a bit extreme. +50 brightness and +25 contrast. A lot of the photos actually look washed out, versus when I was shooting jpeg, and it looked fine.


I had that problem. Ever image i imported had 4 stops added to the exposure.

Preferences --> Presets --> Restore Library Filter Presets


----------



## biatchi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Boyboyd;12446118*
> I had that problem. Ever image i imported had 4 stops added to the exposure.
> 
> Preferences --> Presets --> Restore Library Filter Presets


Ouch 4 stops


----------



## Deano12345

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Boyboyd;12446118*
> I had that problem. Ever image i imported had 4 stops added to the exposure.
> 
> Preferences --> Presets --> Restore Library Filter Presets


Was having the same problem as you and theCanadian, it wasnt too extreme though, still annoying. Done what you said there, sorted, Thanks.

Also, reconsidering the value of my gear, I'm between the EOS 20D and the D60. D60 includes a lens for the same price as the 20D. Comparing specs, the Canon seems to be superior. I'm gonna go have a look at both bodies and lenses on Monday, decide then I think


----------



## Boyboyd

It took me about a week to find out how to fix it, was a very annoying week. Had to manually zero every slider.

As a Nikon user, i'd have to say Canon have a better selection of lenses.


----------



## Shane1244

Whats wrong with your A230?


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;12446746*
> Whats wrong with your A230?


Where'd this question come from?


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;12446767*
> Where'd this question come from?


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Deano12345;12446566*
> Was having the same problem as you and theCanadian, it wasnt too extreme though, still annoying. Done what you said there, sorted, Thanks.
> 
> Also, reconsidering the value of my gear, I'm between the EOS 20D and the D60. D60 includes a lens for the same price as the 20D. Comparing specs, the Canon seems to be superior. I'm gonna go have a look at both bodies and lenses on Monday, decide then I think


His Sig:
Quote:


> Cable Management 101
> Audio : FLAC/WAV or 320KB's MP3 > Xonar DS > Scythe Kama Amp > Q Acoustic 2010
> *Camera : Sony A230 l 18-55 Sony l 70-300 Sigma*


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Ah, sorry, was just majorly confused because everyone was talking about LR beforehand


----------



## Shane1244

No worries. xD


----------



## Deano12345

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;12446746*
> Whats wrong with your A230?


Nothing, mechanically. Its just I want to have more choice for future upgrades . Comparing the A230, and the 20D's, specs, the Canon does seem to be a better camera, so I figure why not. As well as that, I dont find my A230 comfortable to hold compared to the Canon's and Nikons I've tired, but thats a personal thing.

And to confuse people even more, LR has decided to change my settings again, after I plugged in the HD Hero. This needs investigating


----------



## SilverPotato

Add me for a Canon T2i as well please


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;12445481*
> 
> Come on, normal zooms aren't complete crap, only pixel peepers and gear heads say that. I agree that primes are great and definitely superior, but there's a lot to like about a high quality zoom lens.


I don't mean they aren't sharp. My 24-70 is the sharpest thing I have ever. I just don't like zooming. Not wide enough and now long enough. if I want to be restricted, might as well not zoom (and I only use my zooms at the extremes so PRIMEES EVERYWHERE!). Oh I don't care about sharpness. Just have it not stupid soft (like my out of calibrating 35L) and I am fine.


----------



## sub50hz

Well, today marks the first time in a long while that a security guard (outside a petroleum plant) tried to rough me up for trying to take photos of the sunset behind a bunch of vapor stacks. Real great time.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Deano12345*


Im a bit stumped here lads. I'm starting to realize that getting Sony stuff used is very difficult and theres not a huge amount of new stuff available for me to buy, whereas for Nikon and Canon theres a huge amount, so I'm thinking about trading in all my gear, and going to Nikon Or Canon (Im looking at a 1D Mk.II, 40D, or a D3100. All â‚¬500) but I dont know if its worth jumping, like I'd probably only be able to afford one lens for any of the above cameras and i'd also lose my flashgun (that being said used Flash guns for Canon/Nikon are easy for me to get, and cheap too)

So whats everyones opinions on the situation ? Advice ?

Edit : Should have mentioned, both Canon bodies are used, the Nikon would be new


Jumping to Canikon is fine, but one good thing about Sony are the large amount of old Minolta glass and AF Zeiss lenses. But I see what you're saying nevertheless.

Big difference in the Canon 1D series and xxD. The 1D's are large with an integrated grip and very heavy. However, the build quality is superb, with heavy duty sealing. The xxD's are a step down, but still have excellent build quality.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


I don't mean they aren't sharp. My 24-70 is the sharpest thing I have ever. I just don't like zooming. Not wide enough and now long enough. if I want to be restricted, might as well not zoom (and I only use my zooms at the extremes so PRIMEES EVERYWHERE!). Oh I don't care about sharpness. Just have it not stupid soft (like my out of calibrating 35L) and I am fine.


Odd, but I think I follow you. I'd love an all prime setup too (who wouldn't), but having only one body and doing the kind of photography I do make it cumbersome. If I'm several miles into a trail, having two bodies and several primes would be a PITA.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Well, today marks the first time in a long while that a security guard (outside a petroleum plant) tried to rough me up for trying to take photos of the sunset behind a bunch of vapor stacks. Real great time.


I've had some run-ins myself when shooting abandoned sites. Unfailing politeness and feigned naivete will get you out of a lot of pickles.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Jumping to Canikon is fine, but one good thing about Sony are the large amo
I've had some run-ins myself when shooting abandoned sites. Unfailing politeness and feigned naivete will get you out of a lot of pickles.










Oh that applies to so many things in life... Got me out of speeding tickets successfully so far


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


I've had some run-ins myself when shooting abandoned sites. Unfailing politeness and feigned naivete will get you out of a lot of pickles.










Sadly, I pretty much had to leave before my anxiety got the best of me and I swung back. I managed one so-so shot before I turned away.


Air Quality by sub50hz, on Flickr


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Odd, but I think I follow you. I'd love an all prime setup too (who wouldn't), but having only one body and doing the kind of photography I do make it cumbersome. If I'm several miles into a trail, having two bodies and several primes would be a PITA.


Primes everywhere except for wide zooms (14-24,16-35,17-35) and the 70-200s. Reaaaaal nice.


----------



## Deano12345

@GoneTomorrow : (sorry for not quoting, but my phone makes it a pain). Well, in an idea l world, I'd love the 1D, but I don't think I'll have the money for it, which is why I've been really looking at the 20D. It all depends on how much I get for my Sony gear really. Still, I wouldn't be surprised if I end up posting here on Monday as a 1D owner
















Thanks for your help too !


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Deano12345*


@GoneTomorrow : (sorry for not quoting, but my phone makes it a pain). Well, in an idea l world, I'd love the 1D, but I don't think I'll have the money for it, which is why I've been really looking at the 20D. It all depends on how much I get for my Sony gear really. Still, I wouldn't be surprised if I end up posting here on Monday as a 1D owner
















Thanks for your help too !


ergonomically speaking the a230 is a pretty horrible camera. since you dont have many lenses its a good time to switch to canikon if you dont like the sony position. but i wouldnt recommend going with a 1Dii or a 20d. the 20d is such a old body that its not really worth switching for and as for the 1dii, it is a very very heavy body and you wont see the IQ difference if you dont have a nice L or even a higher end glass. save up a bit more money and pick up a 50d or 7d.

the nikon d90 or d7000 are also very very good cameras, and ergonomically speaking the nikon is more similar to sony.


----------



## Marin

Print I made for my view camera class. We we're given different themes and mine was Magic.

So I took a picture of my friend on the stage with a single spotlight. Had a black seamless on the background and cut some of it and laid it on top of some crates. I then enlarged the negative onto RC paper and made a contact print with the RC print. Thus my final print is a negative and satisfies my goal of making it look like she's floating.










EDIT: Photo makes my hand look weird.


----------



## theCanadian

Trying to shoot sports inside without a FF body and good glass is like trying to have safe sex without a condom. You're not _really_ going to accomplish anything.

Unless you have a bunch of remote flashes set up like mister lucky who I was shooting beside tonight.


----------



## Marin

For Canon APS-H is used more for sports (from what I've seen).


----------



## theCanadian

... I meant good body's which are going to have good noise control and aren't going to rely on in-lens focusing motors...


----------



## dudemanppl

Well yeah since the 1Ds and 5D series do some really low framerates...


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Well yeah since the 1Ds and 5D series do some really low framerates...


You're telling me you'd pick an entry level DSLR with slightly higher FPS over a professional body? Good! That means you and I can trade then!


----------



## Marin

Nah, he'd just get a 1DMKIV.


----------



## mz-n10

or jump to a d3s


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Nah, he'd just get a 1DMKIV.


How is that an entry level body?


----------



## Shane1244




----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*












It's served me well







I'm sure you'll grow to love that lens as well!


----------



## Marin

Until the motor breaks.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Until the motor breaks.










That happens?


----------



## Shane1244

I'm loving it so far!







I've yet to take it outside yet though.

@Marin, Guessing there's a problem w/ it? So far I've used MF like 80% of the time.

Plus, If the motor breaks I'll just buy a new one locally and pull the switcherooo and take it back.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


That happens?










Yeah, seems to occur with that lens.


----------



## Shane1244

Looked it up, Seems to be a problem. But with everything, It's probably only happening to a small amount of people. Hopefully not me!







I assume they wouldn't be selling it if every lens was prone to the problem.


----------



## Deano12345

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


ergonomically speaking the a230 is a pretty horrible camera. since you dont have many lenses its a good time to switch to canikon if you dont like the sony position. but i wouldnt recommend going with a 1Dii or a 20d. the 20d is such a old body that its not really worth switching for and as for the 1dii, it is a very very heavy body and you wont see the IQ difference if you dont have a nice L or even a higher end glass. save up a bit more money and pick up a 50d or 7d.

the nikon d90 or d7000 are also very very good cameras, and ergonomically speaking the nikon is more similar to sony.


Speaking of other bodys, I could probably switch to a 1000D also, which is very similar to my A230, but id be on Canon instead of Sony. Ive got a few options, and I think I really need to get in there tomorrow and actually hold some of the bodies to see how they feel in my hand. Its just wait and see now, I'll report back though


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Nah, he'd just get a 1DMKIV.


Eh, compromise and get 2 gripped D700s. 8FPS, good performance at high ISOs, and you get double the body for the same price.


----------



## Shane1244

I say don't waste your money, save up and get something decent.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;12453169*
> Looked it up, Seems to be a problem. But with everything, It's probably only happening to a small amount of people. Hopefully not me!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I assume they wouldn't be selling it if every lens was prone to the problem.


It doesn't happen nearly as often as some like to claim. It's just a stock con people unfurl when the opportunity presents itself. I've had my copy for close to 4 years now and the AF motor is fine (and I only ever used AF with it).


----------



## Shane1244

Well thats a relief. I know people love to blow things out of proportion all the time. :/


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Deano12345;12454981*
> Speaking of other bodys, I could probably switch to a 1000D also, which is very similar to my A230, but id be on Canon instead of Sony. Ive got a few options, and I think I really need to get in there tomorrow and actually hold some of the bodies to see how they feel in my hand. Its just wait and see now, I'll report back though


definitely not worth going to canon to use a rebel.

just out of curiosity what lenses do you see that sony lacks?


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10;12456753*
> definitely not worth going to canon to use a rebel.
> 
> just out of curiosity what lenses do you see that sony lacks?


Good ones.

jk/ but yeah, Sony seems to have some nice spec'd lenses for pretty good prices. I'm not sure about how good they are optically though.


----------



## laboitenoire

Woot has a carbon fiber Sunpak tripod today for $100...


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;12457028*
> Good ones.
> 
> jk/ but yeah, Sony seems to have some nice spec'd lenses for pretty good prices. I'm not sure about how good they are optically though.


Sony has the benefit of having a fair amount of Zeiss glass for its mount, AF Zeiss glass no less.

I see Sony being up there with Canikon in a few years. They've made great advances in their camera bodies and are releasing new and better glass (slowly but surely). Not to mention all the old Minolta glass that can be used.


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;12457714*
> Sony has the benefit of having a fair amount of Zeiss glass for its mount, AF Zeiss glass no less.
> 
> *I see Sony being up there with Canikon in a few years.* They've made great advances in their camera bodies and are releasing new and better glass (slowly but surely). Not to mention all the old Minolta glass that can be used.


This. If I didn't think the rest of sony was such crap, I'd probably invest in stock.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

I'm thinking that this might be my next lens:

http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/595-tokina162828eosff

It bests the Canon 16-35 f/2.8 II in all areas except CAs, which, despite being Tokina's weak point, is reasonably well controlled.

And, it's *one-half the cost.*

Yay?


----------



## Marin

The *HUGE* issue with it, that the Nikkor 14-24mm and Sigma 12-24mm also have, is due to the huge bulbous front element you can't use filters using normal methods.

http://www.leefiltersusa.com/camera/products/finder/ref:C4BA23B4F81D79/

http://www.2filter.com/Leefilters/LeeSW-150_holder_filter_kit.html

You need something like that but who knows when Lee's going to expand the system (as they've mentioned in the past).

Or you can just make your own if you have the resources.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


The *HUGE* issue with it, that the Nikkor 14-24mm and Sigma 12-24mm also have, is due to the huge bulbous front element you can't use filters using normal methods.

http://www.leefiltersusa.com/camera/...4BA23B4F81D79/

http://www.2filter.com/Leefilters/Le...ilter_kit.html

You need something like that but who knows when Lee's going to expand the system (as they've mentioned in the past).

Or you can just make your own if you have the resources.


Yeah, I noticed that, but then I thought to myself "what better excuse to get a holder and square filters?"









Thanks for the links, I was just about to ask about a good setup.


----------



## Marin

Still need to wait for Lee to release an adapter.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Still need to wait for Lee to release an adapter.










Oh, ****.







Time for improvisation, which means holding a CPL in front of the lens.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*


Good ones.

jk/ but yeah, Sony seems to have some nice spec'd lenses for pretty good prices. I'm not sure about how good they are optically though.


most the sony lenses are pretty equal to their canikon counterparts. as with any system there are some real gems (anything zeiss) and some real dogs (35G).

the reason why i asked was because he said that there arent enough "new stuff" to buy. with new you have the 16-35/24-70/70-200 all 2.8 lenses, most the primes (24/2; 35/1.4 and 1.8; 50/1.4 and 1.8; 85/1.4; and 135/1.8). only real holes in the lens line up is a tiltshift; UWA prime and telephoto primes(theres a 500/4 sometime soon....).

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


I'm thinking that this might be my next lens:

http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff...ina162828eosff

It bests the Canon 16-35 f/2.8 II in all areas except CAs, which, despite being Tokina's weak point, is reasonably well controlled.

And, it's *one-third the cost.*

Yay?


thats one hell of a lens, wish they had it for sony mount......they made teh 11-18 for sony so theres still hope lol.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


thats one hell of a lens, wish they had it for sony mount......they made teh 11-18 for sony so theres still hope lol.


Yeah, and to clarify, it's half the cost of the Canon version at $849 (not one-third like I said earlier). Still a steal though! This will take careful planning and finagling (wife), but I think I can make it happen next month. I've been jonesing for the Canon 16-35 for so long, but couldn't justify the cost.


----------



## dudemanppl

I want the 16-28, the problem is that I'll really miss the 35mm on the long end. A problem big enough for me to spend money on.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;12460836*
> I want the 16-28, the problem is that I'll really miss the 35mm on the long end. A problem big enough for me to spend money on.


Yeah, that's some weird Tokina thing. Like the 11-16/2.8 for example. They like short FL ranges on their zooms for some reason.


----------



## Marin

Hey Gone, looks like the Tokina 16-28mm is pretty susceptible to flare.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;12460919*
> Yeah, that's some weird Tokina thing. Like the 11-16/2.8 for example. They like short FL ranges on their zooms for some reason.


the shorter zoom range makes it easier to design with less exotic glass, thats why the 16-28 is "better" when compared to the 16-35 but at 1/2 the cost.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;12465944*
> Hey Gone, looks like the Tokina 16-28mm is pretty susceptible to flare.


BUT FLARE IS THE COOLIEST, ITS A PLUS!

/sarcasm


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;12465944*
> Hey Gone, looks like the Tokina 16-28mm is pretty susceptible to flare.


Hm, didn't notice that in the review I read. That sucks! The Canon 17-55 flared badly and it was the one thing I hated about it.

Back to the drawing board. It's bad enough that I'll have to put up with CAs in the Tokina.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10;12466555*
> the shorter zoom range makes it easier to design with less exotic glass, thats why the 16-28 is "better" when compared to the 16-35 but at 1/2 the cost.


Makes sense.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;12466602*
> BUT FLARE IS THE COOLIEST, ITS A PLUS!
> 
> /sarcasm


Death to flare.


----------



## jjsoviet

Canon Powershot SD1400 IS here. Very sleek, compact, and takes great pictures.


----------



## nuclearjock

Ok, so I admit I was looking an KR's page. Sometimes there's entertaining stuff to be found and this time was no exception. Have a look at a review someone wrote for the Nikon F6. Probably a joke.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nuclearjock;12468802*
> Ok, so I admit I was looking an KR's page. Sometimes there's entertaining stuff to be found and this time was no exception. Have a look at a review someone wrote for the Nikon F6. Probably a joke.


LOL, funny review. Gotta be a joke, like the wolf t-shirt that Amazon had.

And shame on you for giving KR more revenue! He might be a genius who intentionally acts likes a douche just to garner attention. Maybe we've all been Punk'd.


----------



## mortimersnerd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;12469234*
> LOL, funny review. Gotta be a joke, like the wolf t-shirt that Amazon had.
> 
> And shame on you for giving KR more revenue! He might be a genius who intentionally acts likes a douche just to garner attention. Maybe we've all been Punk'd.


That's what adblock is for...

I'd be curious to know how much he gets in PP donations. I'm sure there are those who think he is god so they click his ads and affiliate links, then send him money via PP.


----------



## riko99

Check it out if your in Sweden or Belgium you can get a shot at buying this limited edition prime Nikon set.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


And shame on you for giving KR more revenue! He might be a genius who intentionally acts likes a douche just to garner attention. Maybe we've all been Punk'd.


I think his attitude just doesn't click (read: not what people want to hear) with a lot of other photographers. His opinions are quite humorous at times, and while he may be a tad condescending, he's a little more "real-world" than lots of compulsive gear buyers/owners care for.

I would never donate money to him, though, as opinions don't require/necessitate charity as far as I'm concerned (save for those in literary works, which are more than well-deserved).

Also, my 50D shipped this morning. It'll be on my doorstep tomorrow -- damn shame that this rain is going to let up only for snow to come through. Between that and working 12 hours a day, I doubt I'll have much energy/desire to shoot outdoors tomorrow night.


----------



## CalypsoRaz

Id like to join =)

I use a Nikon D90
Nikkor 50mm f/1.4
Nikkor 55-200mm 
Sb-600


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *riko99;12469986*
> Check it out if your in Sweden or Belgium you can get a shot at buying this limited edition prime Nikon set.


Nice, a package deal! Even if it's more expensive to buy them separately, I could never drop $6700 at once. I'd still by the lenses separately (if Canon were doing something similar that is).
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;12470080*
> I think his attitude just doesn't click (read: not what people want to hear) with a lot of other photographers. His opinions are quite humorous at times, and while he may be a tad condescending, he's a little more "real-world" than lots of compulsive gear buyers/owners care for.
> 
> I would never donate money to him, though, as opinions don't require/necessitate charity as far as I'm concerned (save for those in literary works, which are more than well-deserved).
> 
> Also, my 50D shipped this morning. It'll be on my doorstep tomorrow -- damn shame that this rain is going to let up only for snow to come through. Between that and working 12 hours a day, I doubt I'll have much energy/desire to shoot outdoors tomorrow night.


I don't think it's so much his condescending attitude, but some of the things he says are so utterly ludicrous and in complete defiance of establish photographic principles and techniques, and not in a thoughtful or ingenius way. His biggest offense is intentionally instigating the photographic community with outright stupid suggestions for technique. For example, one time he said that he never used tripods ever, but instead used burst mode and afterward picked whichever shot looked sharp (if any). Plus some of his own shots are God awful nightmares of over saturation and poor technique.

More strange Rockwell quotes here:
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showpost.php?p=3495499&postcount=32

In his own defense, however, he does have some informative bits on his site and some of his shots are actually decent, so he's great for beginners (mostly), but again many of his concepts are, from an objective standpoint, completely erroneous. These bizarre comments he makes are what seem to stick in everyone's craw. Over at POTN he's the butt of every joke, often ad nauseam.

I think the thing that irks me the most about him are pictures of him. He's such a weird looking dude. I think nuclearjock will agree with me on this one.


----------



## laboitenoire

As I've said in the past, I think Ken is reasonably useful for the more objective parts of gear reviews. For his techniques and the subjective parts of his reviews, I take everything with a large grain of salt.


----------



## sub50hz

Meh. To me, he's just another weird bag of skin behind a viewfinder. I don't agree or disagree with much of what he says/claims, but he's at least an interesting read here and there.

edit: Snowing. Hard. Pretty sure FedEX will delay my 50D "due to conditions". Even having the big corporate preferred account won't help much this time. Rats.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Meh. To me, he's just another weird bag of skin behind a viewfinder. I don't agree or disagree with much of what he says/claims, but he's at least an interesting read here and there.

edit: Snowing. Hard. Pretty sure FedEX will delay my 50D "due to conditions". Even having the big corporate preferred account won't help much this time. Rats.


That sucks. You could always preempt them and have them hold it for pickup. UPS delivers to my house at such inane times that I'm never home to receive it, so I end up having them hole for pick up half the time.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


That sucks. You could always preempt them and have them hold it for pickup. UPS delivers to my house at such inane times that I'm never home to receive it, so I end up having them hole for pick up half the time.


I usually just call our preferred account line, tell them it's mission critical stuff, and then they go the extra mile to deliver it -- I only do this with air packages, though. Both UPS and FedEX delay Next/2Day shipments at the drop of a hat, since their sort schedules in local air hubs are so far apart. Real awful.

Thankfully, it stopped snowing, so I am assuming we'll still be good for tomorrow. El yay.


----------



## mz-n10

exciting weekend coming up, going to get my hands on a minolta maxxum 7 and i can finally use my sony lenses on film.


----------



## Marin

Edited with a Wacom tablet today. Here's my reaction.










So I'm probably getting this: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/609530-REG/Wacom_PTK640_Intuos4_Digital_Tablet_Medium.html


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Added an 85mm f/1.8 and a Sony DSC-H55 point and shoot to my equipment.


----------



## sub50hz

50D is out for delivery. Had I not been holed up in the hospital last week for a couple days, today would have been a great "personal" day to take off.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Edited with a Wacom tablet today. Here's my reaction.

So I'm probably getting this: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...et_Medium.html


So I take it barfing a rainbow means it's good? I like using tablets too. Used to use a really large Wacom (can't remember the model) at my last job at a TV station. I'd like to have one again eventually myself.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


50D is out for delivery. Had I not been holed up in the hospital last week for a couple days, today would have been a great "personal" day to take off.


Don't you wish you could track the delivery guy live via GPS? I've had packages form UPS say "Out for delivery" in the AM, but not actually arrive until the early evening.









Sorry about the hospital visit, hope all is well.


----------



## gerickjohn

I wanna join, Currently have a Nikon D40 DSLR with both Kit Lens and an extra one, will update on the other lens i have. Also do can video cameras be included? Namely a Sony XR-HDR200?


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Don't you wish you could track the delivery guy live via GPS? I've had packages form UPS say "Out for delivery" in the AM, but not actually arrive until the early evening.










It's Priority Overnight, so it should be alright.

Quote:



Sorry about the hospital visit, hope all is well.


It's some stupid inner ear disorder, BPPV. Blacked out at work on Thursday, a real suck time.


----------



## laboitenoire

Hmm... Adorama has a Canon 10D for $40 used with the Err 99 issue. People said it can be fixed just by cleaning the lens contacts with an eraser (or probably even electrical contact cleaner). I'm really tempted to pick it up so I can fool around with Canon for a bit... Thoughts?


----------



## Shane1244

You need lenses for it?


----------



## laboitenoire

I would, but I could just pick up something cheap like the nifty fifty. It only works with EF lenses, though...


----------



## biatchi

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Hmm... Adorama has a Canon 10D for $40 used with the Err 99 issue. People said it can be fixed just by cleaning the lens contacts with an eraser (or probably even electrical contact cleaner). I'm really tempted to pick it up so I can fool around with Canon for a bit... Thoughts?


I have a 10D that gets the er99 because the shutter is knackered. er99 is a general error and could be as simple as the contacts needing cleaning like you said or it could be something worse.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *gerickjohn*


I wanna join, Currently have a Nikon D40 DSLR with both Kit Lens and an extra one, will update on the other lens i have. Also do can video cameras be included? Namely a Sony XR-HDR200?


Yes, we have a video camera section. Tell me the other lens and I'll add you, that way I don't have to edit twice (the OP is so long that it takes a while to wait for the editable version to load).

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Hmm... Adorama has a Canon 10D for $40 used with the Err 99 issue. People said it can be fixed just by cleaning the lens contacts with an eraser (or probably even electrical contact cleaner). I'm really tempted to pick it up so I can fool around with Canon for a bit... Thoughts?


I wouldn't bother personally. As biatchi said ("knackered," LOL you Brits







), err99 could range from something as innocuous as dirty contacts to total FUBAR.

You could go for a 20D, which is a big jump from a 10D. They're going for around $200 or so at POTN. Get a used 50/1.8 with it and I bet you can have both for less than $300.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


I would, but I could just pick up something cheap like the nifty fifty. It only works with EF lenses, though...


The Canon 50/1.8 is and EF mount lens, so it would work.


----------



## Nemesis158

Just got my Nikon 50mm 1:1.8D and I'm loving it so far. Definitely thinking about a 35mm for better indoor shots also....


----------



## sub50hz

I got home just now. Look what I found!


----------



## Shane1244

NICE!









50 1.4 on that, right?


----------



## sub50hz

85 f/1.8. It's smaller than pictures might lead you to believe.


----------



## Shane1244

Now that I spun my camera around and looked at it, I notice the size difference









Also, the focus window is on the other side of the focus ring.


----------



## mz-n10

wow the hood is huge....


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10;12488389*
> wow the hood is huge....


It does look like it in the picture, doesn't it? It's not bad, really. Couple inches long, maybe.


----------



## sub50hz

Ah, yes. This thing addresses every single issue I had with my XS, and then some. Excellent. Can't wait to get out and shoot some this weekend.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;12488908*
> Ah, yes. This thing addresses every single issue I had with my XS, and then some. Excellent. Can't wait to get out and shoot some this weekend.


I absolutely love mine too


----------



## sub50hz

Do you use your 28mm much?


----------



## ljason8eg

Ok I'm about to pull the trigger on one of these telephoto lenses since I now have the funds, just need to make up my mind if I'd rather get IS, or a bigger aperture.

http://www.amazon.com/Canon-70-200mm-2-8L-Telephoto-Cameras/dp/B00006I53W/ref=sr_1_7?ie=UTF8&qid=1298429699&sr=8-7]Amazon.com: Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM Telephoto Zoom Lens for Canon SLR Cameras: Camera & Photo[/URL]
http://www.amazon.com/Canon-70-200mm-Lens-Digital-Cameras/dp/B000I1X3W8/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1298429699&sr=8-1]Amazon.com: Canon EF 70-200mm f/4 L IS USM Lens for Canon Digital SLR Cameras: Camera & Photo[/URL]

Note they don't have to be from amazon, and I'm open to a third party lens in the same price range, but I'd like to buy it new unless I can get a really nice deal on a used one.

This will mostly be used for motorsport since I've acquired a media credential and a few teams have expressed interest in me photographing their cars in action. I'm thinking the IS would be rather useless at shutter speeds of 1/640 or above, and I'd get more use out of the larger aperture.

Thoughts?


----------



## mz-n10

shooting during the day? or night?


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10;12489270*
> shooting during the day? or night?


About 70% night. Typical stadium-type lighting.


----------



## sub50hz

2.8, no question.


----------



## mz-n10

wait, if you are shooting cars (im guessing nascar from your avatar) you should probably shoot at a much slower shutter speed (<1/200 i am guessing) and pan so you can get nice motion blur in the background and SHARP cars.

either way tho, i would get the 70-200/4 IS of course im assuming you can shoot at 1/640 at f4. the 70-200/4IS is much sharper then the mk1 70-200/2.8, it is also lighter and easier to handhold.


----------



## sub50hz

Hrm, I guess I didn't quite think about panning shots.


----------



## Shane1244

Even at f/4, you'll still have TONS of light to freeze the car during the day. I'd get whatever one is sharper, mz-n10 says it's the f/4, so I'd get that one.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;12489128*
> Do you use your 28mm much?


It's actually becoming my most-used lens. My 50mm f/1.4 has been seeing less action since I've gotten it, and I'm contemplating selling it.

The only problem I have with the 28mm is that it's softer and more prone to CA than my 50mm. Not much, but I do notice it. Stop it down to f/2.8 though and I'm extremely happy with it.


----------



## sub50hz

You should check out the 35 f/2.0 -- it's a really awesome lens, and it's even shown to be as good or better than the 35L in some regards. I looked at the 28 and 35 back to back, and even though I liked the USM and aesthetics, it was just too soft for me. Highly recommended.

edit:

Here's a decent example -- wide open, and only 25 @ 1.0 sharpening added in LR, resized by flickr.










1/40, ISO 800 on the XS. I was also pretty hammered, so I was stuck on Aperture Priority for the evening.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;12489576*
> You should check out the 35 f/2.0 -- it's a really awesome lens, and it's even shown to be as good or better than the 35L in some regards. I looked at the 28 and 35 back to back, and even though I liked the USM and aesthetics, it was just too soft for me. Highly recommended.


I can't do that; USM is too good of a tool for me to give up.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;12489589*
> I can't do that; USM is too good of a tool for me to give up.


I can do without it on the 35, for sure. The ring is clutched, and the AF/MF switch is easily accessed while holding the camera -- it might be noisy, but it's still very fast.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10;12489348*
> wait, if you are shooting cars (im guessing nascar from your avatar) you should probably shoot at a much slower shutter speed (<1/200 i am guessing) and pan so you can get nice motion blur in the background and SHARP cars.
> 
> either way tho, i would get the 70-200/4 IS of course im assuming you can shoot at 1/640 at f4. the 70-200/4IS is much sharper then the mk1 70-200/2.8, it is also lighter and easier to handhold.


Yeah, its various NASCAR series. I'm pretty sure I can't get that fast of a shutter speed with the 4L at night, which is why I was leaning toward the 2.8L. How much sharpness would I be losing? Only telephoto lens I've shot with is the 55-250 3.5-5.6 IS, which is terrible at night at the track.


----------



## Shane1244

I don't think that 1 stop will do much help.


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;12489813*
> I don't think that 1 stop will do much help.


This. Unless it's the difference between 1/250 and 1/500


----------



## mz-n10

with stadium lights i would think something like 1/400 at 1600iso @ f2.8 or 1/200 at f4 @ 1600iso. u have any sample shots with exif at night shots?


----------



## Shane1244

You can always slightly underexpose with the F4, than bring it back with RAW.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*


You can always slightly underexpose with the F4, than bring it back with RAW.


That is possible since I have Lightroom.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


with stadium lights i would think something like 1/400 at 1600iso @ f2.8 or 1/200 at f4 @ 1600iso. u have any sample shots with exif at night shots?


I have hardly anything in motion at night since everything was so blurry or way underexposed with the 55-250. I I didn't have a media pass back then either so I was shooting from the stands, which sucks TBH.

Here's a couple quick ones that I had on my hard drive. Full res link should have exif

http://www4.picturepush.com/photo/a/...x/IMG-0914.jpg
http://www5.picturepush.com/photo/a/...x/IMG-0884.jpg


----------



## Shane1244

For anyone without the Chrome EXIF plugin..

Picture one:
1/100, ISO 1600, f/4.5

Picture two:
1/125, ISO 3200, f/4


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*


That is possible since I have Lightroom.

I have hardly anything in motion at night since everything was so blurry or way underexposed with the 55-250. I I didn't have a media pass back then either so I was shooting from the stands, which sucks TBH.

Here's a couple quick ones that I had on my hard drive. Full res link should have exif

http://www4.picturepush.com/photo/a/...x/IMG-0914.jpg
http://www5.picturepush.com/photo/a/...x/IMG-0884.jpg


ic.....in this case i would suggest the 2.8 you still cant freeze action but you can use a more reasonable iso for a t2i.

but you should really consider buying a used 70-200/2.8IS and work on your panning.


----------



## ljason8eg

I suppose I could consider that since it won't be too much more. What are some good websites/forums to start looking for a used one?


----------



## sub50hz

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/index.php


----------



## Shane1244

Which reminds me.. What's with all those cheap bastards with the "add 3%".

People could just go around there getting people to gift them money, then peacing.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;12490825*
> Which reminds me.. What's with all those cheap bastards with the "add 3%".
> 
> People could just go around there getting people to gift them money, then peacing.


Which is why you also have the option to pay with regular PP









I've only done gift with people who have 100% feedback, and I haven't been cheated so far. So long as you're careful with who you're dealing with and making sure that they actually are reputable, I think you should be fine.


----------



## Shane1244

Where do you check their feedback?

It's just annoying, soon as you see a good deal, then it's "add 3%" idk, kind of annoying.







I should be used to it, paying 13% on everything, every day... xD


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*


Where do you check their feedback?

It's just annoying, soon as you see a good deal, then it's "add 3%" idk, kind of annoying.







I should be used to it, paying 13% on everything, every day... xD


They have a feedback thread where people post feedback on transactions. Unfortunately it's very unorganized and not like what we have here, so usually you're better off PMing them asking for their feedback. Chances are they want to make a sale enough to give you the proper credentials


----------



## Marin




----------



## Shane1244

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


They have a feedback thread where people post feedback on transactions. Unfortunately it's very unorganized and not like what we have here, so usually you're better off PMing them asking for their feedback. Chances are they want to make a sale enough to give you the proper credentials










Oh okay thanks! I'll start saving up, I'm not sure what I want more, a UWA (like 10-20) or a f/4L 70-200. I'll end up with both, but what first.. hmmm









Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*





















You're either loaded, or one seriously in debt student... xD


----------



## Marin

Debts fun.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;12490825*
> Which reminds me.. What's with all those cheap bastards with the "add 3%".
> 
> People could just go around there getting people to gift them money, then peacing.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;12490920*
> Which is why you also have the option to pay with regular PP
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I've only done gift with people who have 100% feedback, and I haven't been cheated so far. So long as you're careful with who you're dealing with and making sure that they actually are reputable, I think you should be fine.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;12490979*
> Where do you check their feedback?
> 
> It's just annoying, soon as you see a good deal, then it's "add 3%" idk, kind of annoying.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I should be used to it, paying 13% on everything, every day... xD


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;12490994*
> They have a feedback thread where people post feedback on transactions. Unfortunately it's very unorganized and not like what we have here, so usually you're better off PMing them asking for their feedback. Chances are they want to make a sale enough to give you the proper credentials


I always buy at fredmiranda.com. POTN has a horrible rating system and most people that are selling in POTN mirror their sale at FM. 3% isn't bad really bad. I can talk most FMers to split it with me down to 1.5%.

As always, practice safe business. Never use PP gift since you will have zero protection. If you want something with no fees, look for people accepting Chase Quickpay. It's just as safe, just a bit slower and the buyer or seller needs to a Chase checking account.


----------



## theCanadian

If people ask for +3%, they are violating the TOS of Paypal. Tell them to include it in the full price if they're worried. Cash, checks and money orders don't have Terms of Service.

If you really want the deal, tell them you'll report them to paypal if they insist.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Hey Marin, are you drooling rainbows yet?


----------



## Marin




----------



## dudemanppl

Argh, I want to stay Nikon now since this 24-70 is so SHAAARRPP its now enjoyable, but I hate it, but I love it. GRR, WHY AM I STUPID? D3 is gone for sure. 35 is in, 50 is in, 85 is in. But too much money!


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Argh, I want to stay Nikon now since this 24-70 is so SHAAARRPP its now enjoyable, but I hate it, but I love it. GRR, WHY AM I STUPID? D3 is gone for sure. 35 is in, 50 is in, 85 is in. But too much money!


Irony hits hard.


----------



## theCanadian

How many stops can that underexpose in RAW, correct in Lightroom trick be used for? I might need to use it tonight.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Argh, I want to stay Nikon now since this 24-70 is so SHAAARRPP its now enjoyable,


You might like the 70-200 VRII as well. Sharp as the 24-70. The 14-24 ain't too shabby either.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


How many stops can that underexpose in RAW, correct in Lightroom trick be used for? I might need to use it tonight.


depends on your camera, i can do almost 9 stops on my a900 and get a usable photo...but i wouldnt go more then 3-4 stops normally.


----------



## theCanadian

That's more than plenty then, I'll only need 2. Maybe less.


----------



## Shane1244

Wow, I wouldn't have thought that much!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*


Ok I'm about to pull the trigger on one of these telephoto lenses since I now have the funds, just need to make up my mind if I'd rather get IS, or a bigger aperture.

Amazon.com: Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM Telephoto Zoom Lens for Canon SLR Cameras: Camera & Photo
Amazon.com: Canon EF 70-200mm f/4 L IS USM Lens for Canon Digital SLR Cameras: Camera & Photo

I think it's been said well enough which would be better, but the f/4 IS does have the Mode 2 stabilization which is specifically for panning (only stablizes one direction, horizontal or vertical depending on which direction you're panning).

The other thing to note, which isn't that big a of deal really, but the the f2.8 it much heavier (twice as heavy) and wider than the f/4.

Note they don't have to be from amazon, and I'm open to a third party lens in the same price range, but I'd like to buy it new unless I can get a really nice deal on a used one.

This will mostly be used for motorsport since I've acquired a media credential and a few teams have expressed interest in me photographing their cars in action. I'm thinking the IS would be rather useless at shutter speeds of 1/640 or above, and I'd get more use out of the larger aperture.

Thoughts?



Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


How many stops can that underexpose in RAW, correct in Lightroom trick be used for? I might need to use it tonight.


Like mz, I can underexpose by quite a bit and get acceptable results. It's so effective that I never need to combine exposures or do HDRs anymore. The only thing to worry about (especially with crop sensors) is that noise can increase dramatically when lifting shadows.


----------



## Shane1244

yeah, there's no way boosting that much exposure would result in a printable photo.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*


yeah, there's no way boosting that much exposure would result in a printable photo.


Yeah, because there's not only noise, but really bad banding. But you have more headroom with FF. In the photo below, the original was metered off the sky through the opening, and the interior was completely pitch black. However, I was able to somewhat balance the exposure by using dodge/burn brush in LR3:


Old Airdrie Iron Furnace by gonetomorrow00, on Flickr


----------



## Shane1244

Wow, That's pretty amazing! Any idea on the reasoning behind the FF being able to do it better? Is it just because the initial quality is greater?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;12496184*
> Wow, That's pretty amazing! Any idea on the reasoning behind the FF being able to do it better? Is it just because the initial quality is greater?


Full-frame sensors have lower pixel density, resulting in larger photosites which are able to gather a larger range of light. How of a range a sensor can capture is called its dynamic range. Full-frame has more DR than APS-C, and medium format sensors have even more, and film trumps them all.

This article explains it better than I can:

http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/digital-camera-sensor-size.htm


----------



## Dream Killer

My experience has been the opposite regarding DR. Digital more apparent or usable DR due to the granular control RAW converters. Pushing film isn't a very accurate process and introduce uncontrollable contrast and grain. In RAW, you can apply whatever tone curve you want as well as exposure, fil light, black level, white level, local and global contrast.

This only applies mostly to negative film. For positive slides, forget it - 1/2 to 1 stop off and you're done.

I agree with larger digital sensors having more DR, however.


----------



## dudemanppl

Hm, I've never really tried underexposing then doing all the good stuff in post. Never really needed to, but now I know I can do it quite well in an emergency.


----------



## theCanadian

Sharp vs Aliased.


----------



## Marin

I get to use the Flextight X5 that my school has now. Going in on Saturday so I can do some scans on it.

There are also a couple of X1's but why use that when there's a X5.


----------



## mz-n10

mmmmm delicious film scanner.........


----------



## ace8uk

Has anyone here had any experience with under water photography? I'll be going to Barbados for a week at the end of April and every time I'm snorkelling along a nice piece of coastline I regret not having my camera. I know you can go all out and get camera body specific housings, but I don't have that much money to spend. I've been looking at bags like this as it would only be used at depths of about 10-20 metres at most.


----------



## mortimersnerd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ace8uk*


Has anyone here had any experience with under water photography? I'll be going to Barbados for a week at the end of April and every time I'm snorkelling along a nice piece of coastline I regret not having my camera. I know you can go all out and get camera body specific housings, but I don't have that much money to spend. I've been looking at bags like this as it would only be used at depths of about 10-20 metres at most.


Reviews don't look too hot on that in terms of quality of photos. The plastic between the subject and lens wouldn't be good for the quality. Look to see if you can rent an underwater camera?


----------



## ace8uk

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mortimersnerd*


Reviews don't look too hot on that in terms of quality of photos. The plastic between the subject and lens wouldn't be good for the quality. Look to see if you can rent an underwater camera?


I was thinking that... Might be a little silly to stick a cheap piece of plastic in front of a lens that's worth hundreds of pounds... I'll have a look around at some reviews of similar products. I guess renting could be an option, I have a little Casio point and shoot that is waterproof up to 15m, but the photo quality underwater was pretty rubbish last time I used it.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ace8uk*


Has anyone here had any experience with under water photography? I'll be going to Barbados for a week at the end of April and every time I'm snorkelling along a nice piece of coastline I regret not having my camera. I know you can go all out and get camera body specific housings, but I don't have that much money to spend. I've been looking at bags like this as it would only be used at *depths of about 10-20 metres at most*.


Probably not a good idea as that bag is only rated for 15 feet (4.5 meters). I wouldn't use my DSLR in it. Why not just buy a waterproof P&S? Or you could rent a housing, though a quick Google search shows that it's fairly pricey.


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ace8uk*


Has anyone here had any experience with under water photography? I'll be going to Barbados for a week at the end of April and every time I'm snorkelling along a nice piece of coastline I regret not having my camera. I know you can go all out and get camera body specific housings, but I don't have that much money to spend. I've been looking at bags like this as it would only be used at depths of about 10-20 metres at most.


I would get a fully hard plastic case, even if it prevented you from getting at some of the buttons. Gaskets are godly compared to the ziplock bag you're looking at.


----------



## biatchi

1: Get a periscope
2: Turn it upside down
3: Attach camera
4: Profit??


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Probably not a good idea as that bag is only rated for 15 feet (4.5 meters). I wouldn't use my DSLR in it. Why not just buy a waterproof P&S? Or you could rent a housing, though a quick Google search shows that it's fairly pricey.


I think it's worth it. Another option is to go with a high-end point and shoot. My cousin used to go snorkeling with a Canon G7 in a waterproof housing, and she has some very nice shots with it. Her husband also has a waterproof housing for a Nikon film SLR that I can't remember the model number of.

If you go snorkeling a lot, it's something to consider.


----------



## ace8uk

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Probably not a good idea as that bag is only rated for 15 feet (4.5 meters). I wouldn't use my DSLR in it. Why not just buy a waterproof P&S? Or you could rent a housing, though a quick Google search shows that it's fairly pricey.


Doh, my bad, I meant feet, not metres! I'm a little nervous at the thought of dunking my D70 in the sea, despite being in a 'waterproof' bag, and I can imagine myself absolutely cacking my pants the first time I do it. Obviously I'd test it with nothing inside first just to test for water-tightness. Not sure I'd ever consider submerging the 17-55 f2.8, either!

I'll have a look see if I can perhaps rent a decent camera specific housing or something, as I can't see myself using my camera under water apart from on holiday, as the UK's not exactly known for it's crystal clear waters, or even sunlight for that matter!


----------



## theCanadian

Any physics enthusiasts in here?

The electronic flash attachment for a camera contains a capacitor for storing the energy used to produce the flash. In one such unit, the potential difference between the plates of a 775 µF capacitor is 330 V.

(a) Determine the energy that is used to produce the flash in this unit.

(b) Assuming that the flash lasts for 5.0*10^-3 s, find the effective power or "wattage" of the flash.

So far:
0.000775 Farads= Coulumbs / 330V
Coulumbs=0.25575C

Now here I'm not sure what to do next.

But I push on:
1A=1C/s

So:
0.25575C/5x10^-3s=51.15A

P=IV

P=51.15A*330V=16879.5W

But, that answer is kicked backed as wrong, and I'm not quite sure how to go about part A if part B is wrong.

Otherwise I would have just converted watt*hours to joules.


----------



## sub50hz

Got the 50D's menus and buttons set up how I like them (for now) -- it's typically very dim in my house, so I took that as an opportunity to try some of the higher ISO settings. Not sure how I feel about shooting above 2000, as the images do get quite noisy and have a trashy white speckling to them. In time, with more shots, I'm sure I can learn to deal with it more in PP, but for now I'm just interested in learning what the images look like straight out of the camera.

Here's an example, 85mm f/1.8, 1/100 ISO 3200:









I wish my hands were a bit more steady, this was a lucky shot, haha.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Got the 50D's menus and buttons set up how I like them (for now) -- it's typically very dim in my house, so I took that as an opportunity to try some of the higher ISO settings. Not sure how I feel about shooting above 2000, as the images do get quite noisy and have a trashy white speckling to them. In time, with more shots, I'm sure I can learn to deal with it more in PP, but for now I'm just interested in learning what the images look like straight out of the camera.

Here's an example, 85mm f/1.8, 1/100 ISO 3200:

I wish my hands were a bit more steady, this was a lucky shot, haha.


Nice for a ISO 3200 shot







Obviously not the best blown up, but at the resized res it looks like a great pic.

And just a few suggestions for your 50D:

Back Button AF (Absolute love!)
Set C1 and C2 settings according to unusual yet common forms of photography you do (My C1 is set to sports, C2 set to low light)


----------



## sub50hz

Thanks for the tips! I'm gonna wait until I get my "most used" settings dialed in a bit more to set the C1 and C2 profiles, but I've got the My Menu set up as follows:

-Exposure Comp/AEB
-Highlight Tone Priority (this is temporary until I can see if it's worth using)
-White Balance
-Custom WB
-Highlight Alert
-Flash Control

I've also set up the joystick for AF points, which is a HUGE improvement from the Rebels' implementation.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;12516117*
> Thanks for the tips! I'm gonna wait until I get my "most used" settings dialed in a bit more to set the C1 and C2 profiles, but I've got the My Menu set up as follows:
> 
> -Exposure Comp/AEB
> -Highlight Tone Priority (this is temporary until I can see if it's worth using)
> -White Balance
> -Custom WB
> -Highlight Alert
> -Flash Control
> 
> I've also set up the joystick for AF points, which is a HUGE improvement from the Rebels' implementation.


Definitely









The way I look at it, going from a Rebel to an xxD camera, the extra features are a "want" more than a "need, but once you get accustomed to those extra features, they become a need that you can't live without.


----------



## sub50hz

Well, for me, the high-ISO settings, better AF, continuous RAW shooting speed and ergonomics were more needs than wants (ok, ergonomics might fall more under the want category, lol). Now if it would hurry up and turn to spring, I could go get some good action shots and test the effectiveness of the AF in AI Servo. Hard to do in the house.


----------



## Dream Killer

This and the 24G are the only lenses I'll ever need. My life is now complete.


----------



## dudemanppl

Dream Killer, what gear do you have? On the front page it says XTi, 17-55 IS, and 70-200 f/4 IS. I assume thats changed...


----------



## Dream Killer

Yeah, I switched over to Nikon because I'm tired of waiting for Canon's answer to the D700. Canon will never do one because there will never be a full-frame 7D to prevent a challenge to the 1Ds and 5D line. I also find Nikon's ergonomics to be superior by leaps and bounds.

The only Canon gear I have left is the XTi, the 1Ds MK2, 70-200 F/4 IS, 35 1.4, 85 1.2 and a 580ex II. I also have a gigantic (and mostly useless now) 200 F/2 IS that no one wants to buy. I'm probably going to end up e-baying them but I don't want deal with the double paypal/ebay seller fee.

EDIT:
Current gear is a D700, 24mm 1.4g, 16-35 f/4 VR, SB-700. Probably going to get a 70-200 VR2 or an 85 1.4g next week.


----------



## theCanadian

42 joules
.20 watts


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *theCanadian;12515566*
> Any physics enthusiasts in here?
> 
> The electronic flash attachment for a camera contains a capacitor for storing the energy used to produce the flash. In one such unit, the potential difference between the plates of a 775 µF capacitor is 330 V.
> 
> (a) Determine the energy that is used to produce the flash in this unit.
> 
> (b) Assuming that the flash lasts for 5.0*10^-3 s, find the effective power or "wattage" of the flash.
> 
> So far:
> 0.000775 Farads= Coulumbs / 330V
> Coulumbs=0.25575C
> 
> Now here I'm not sure what to do next.
> 
> But I push on:
> 1A=1C/s
> 
> So:
> 0.25575C/5x10^-3s=51.15A
> 
> P=IV
> 
> P=51.15A*330V=16879.5W
> 
> But, that answer is kicked backed as wrong, and I'm not quite sure how to go about part A if part B is wrong.
> 
> Otherwise I would have just converted watt*hours to joules.


17kW... Toasty.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *theCanadian;12515566*
> Any physics enthusiasts in here?
> 
> The electronic flash attachment for a camera contains a capacitor for storing the energy used to produce the flash. In one such unit, the potential difference between the plates of a 775 µF capacitor is 330 V.
> 
> (a) Determine the energy that is used to produce the flash in this unit.
> 
> (b) Assuming that the flash lasts for 5.0*10^-3 s, find the effective power or "wattage" of the flash.
> 
> So far:
> 0.000775 Farads= Coulumbs / 330V
> Coulumbs=0.25575C
> 
> Now here I'm not sure what to do next.
> 
> But I push on:
> 1A=1C/s
> 
> So:
> 0.25575C/5x10^-3s=51.15A
> 
> P=IV
> 
> P=51.15A*330V=16879.5W
> 
> But, that answer is kicked backed as wrong, and I'm not quite sure how to go about part A if part B is wrong.
> 
> Otherwise I would have just converted watt*hours to joules.


W (stored in capactor) = .5CV^2

W = .5*0.000775F*330v^2 = 42.2Joules

Power = W/t

P = 42.2J/5.0*10^-3s = 8440W

Final answer = 8.44kW

or 11.32 horsepower. more than your scooter or lawnmower!


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer;12517345*
> This and the 24G are the only lenses I'll ever need. My life is now complete.


friends got the older 17-35. got to say its one hell of a lens and im assuming this is even better with that fancy nano coating.

edit. ahh i see its the f4, i was thinking damn i need to pay more attention to nikon cause they just launched a wide f/2.8 VR.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10;12517809*
> friends got the older 17-35. got to say its one hell of a lens and im assuming this is even better with that fancy nano coating.
> 
> edit. ahh i see its the f4, i was thinking damn i need to pay more attention to nikon cause they just launched a wide f/2.8 VR.


f/4 = half the weight, vr = f*ck it, might as well be 2.8. i tried the 17-35 f/2.8, it's way to heavy for a general purpose lens.


----------



## mz-n10

that thing is built like a tank tho. 700ish grams isnt that bad, my 24-70 is bout that weight as my walk around.

my 17-35/2.8-4 is about 400g and i can see why you would prefer that weight over 700g lens.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10;12518000*
> that thing is built like a tank tho. 700ish grams isnt that bad, my 24-70 is bout that weight as my walk around.
> 
> my 17-35/2.8-4 is about 400g and i can see why you would prefer that weight over 700g lens.


this 16-35 f/4 vr has the same build quality as my canon 70-200 f/4 IS, it's no slouch in mechanical quality.

coming from carrying 2.8 zooms all weekend for boring weddings and parties, i definitely prefer f/4 . however the king of lightweight uwa lenses is definitely the canon ef-s 10-22 i sadly sold. this is really a replacement for that lens.


----------



## Marin

Tried out the new Portra 400. This stuff scans nicely.


----------



## Triangle

I would love a Nikon 14-24....


----------



## dudemanppl

I love my 17-35. 14-24 is too limited for me.


----------



## Shane1244

Here's a video on the t2i/550D "flip" edition xD

  
 You Tube


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*


EDIT:
Current gear is a D700, 24mm 1.4g, 16-35 f/4 VR, SB-700. Probably going to get a 70-200 VR2 or an 85 1.4g next week.


You're gonna love the 70-200 VRII. I upgraded from the VRI and am real happy I did. As sharp as my 400 VR and 600 VR. Hard to imagine. I also have the 85 1.4 but the old d version. If you wanna try something cool, the 200mm f/4 micro is also one of Nikon's sharpest lenses.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


I love my 17-35. 14-24 is too limited for me.


17-35 = wa
14-24 = uwa

Two entirely different lenses. 14-24 = uwa effect on ff + much sharper than the 17-35. 17-35 was one of my first "pro" lenses but has been outclassed by many of the newer Nikkors, the 16-35 f/4 as a prime example. If you need to blow your bg's and you're close to your subject f/4 is ok. It's not f/2.8 but it's acceptable.

BTW, just shot some winter birds with the 600 VR + 1.4 tcII/F6 on Ektar 100.
Gonna try and get some scans up this weekend. Must say I'm real happy with the 5x7's I've seen so far.

Edit:
16-35 >>> 17-35 any day. Buying a LNIB 200 f/2 VR tomorrow here in Chi town, but the 16-35 and a used D700 are high on my to purchase list for walk arounds.


----------



## nuclearjock

GT,
Got some new stuff but haven't had a chance to update.

D300s
Nikkor 200mm f/2 VR
Zeiss 100mm f2 makro-planar chipped

Thx


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


GT,
Got some new stuff but haven't had a chance to update.

D300s
Nikkor 200mm f/2 VR
*Zeiss 100mm f2 makro-planar chipped*

Thx


Damn!

So is the D300s a replacement for your D300?


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


17-35 = wa
14-24 = uwa

Two entirely different lenses. 14-24 = uwa effect on ff + much sharper than the 17-35. 17-35 was one of my first "pro" lenses but has been outclassed by many of the newer Nikkors, the 16-35 f/4 as a prime example. If you need to blow your bg's and you're close to your subject f/4 is ok. It's not f/2.8 but it's acceptable.


Me being me, I've had a 14-24 before. Never used it. I like my 12-24 more. 17-35 is more useful. And I don't think 17mm on FF is wide anymore... 17-35 was my first pro lens, I'm on my third now. I would love to be a PJ for 6 months, seems like something fun. And a 17-35 would be great for that.

And I am jelly for your 100 ZF.2, but that applies a lot more to the 200 VR.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Damn!

So is the D300s a replacement for your D300?


Yup. D300 went to my daughter. She's REALLY good.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

85mm came in today; my setup is complete


















Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


Yup. D300 went to my daughter. She's REALLY good.










to you! I still hold to the idea that parents encouraging their kids art is a great thing.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


Yup. D300 went to my daughter. She's REALLY good.


Me want see pictures she took and her.


----------



## mz-n10

I wish my dad (assuming your a guy) would hand me down a d300.....


----------



## theCanadian

.... I'm broke. After I work over the summer, I'm debating buying a gold bar as my first investment, or a nice lens. It's a tough choice.


----------



## Shane1244

Bar? You'd get like a ounce of gold for the same price as a high end lens.
That's.. if you were serious.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;12537966*
> Bar? You'd get like a ounce of gold for the same price as a high end lens.
> That's.. if you were serious.


maybe its a 1200/5.6L hes goign to buy.


----------



## dudemanppl

Invest in gold.


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;12537966*
> Bar? You'd get like a ounce of gold for the same price as a high end lens.
> That's.. if you were serious.


I meant an ounce. But I would buy a bar shaped ounce. Just to be cute.


----------



## Dream Killer

After getting back from my Saturday street photography walk, I have mixed feelings about the 16-35. The 24mm 1.4G does a better job. Then again, I am comparing Nikon's _ultimate_ prime against a medium speed zoom so maybe I just haven't grown into it yet.

I'm still shocked on how sharp the 16-35 is, though.


----------



## theCanadian

I'm confused by this picture I took:


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


I'm confused by this picture I took:


Me too. The pitcher is in the middle of a wind-up (with the ball in hand), but at the same time the first baseman (er, woman) is being thrown a ball? h4x? Or maybe it's just a pre-game warm-up.


----------



## aliteDC

I need some advice on shooting nightsky photos. Will a good digital cam do the job? Can you name some good cams. I want to take photos when I'm in Turkey in an area which the stars can be best seen. Thanks.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *aliteDC*


I need some advice on shooting nightsky photos. Will a good digital cam do the job? Can you name some good cams. I want to take photos when I'm in Turkey in an area which the stars can be best seen. Thanks.


Kinda hard to recommend anything without a budget.


----------



## aliteDC

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Kinda hard to recommend anything without a budget.


Max 350euros(~$480)


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *aliteDC*


Max 350euros(~$480)


Any entry-level DSLR would work - Canon 1000D/1100D, Nikon D3000/D3100, etc.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Any entry-level DSLR would work - Canon 1000D/1100D, Nikon D3000/D3100, etc.


+1, although it'd most likely be the D3000 or 1000D. The 1100D is only for sale in Asia right now if I recall properly (due out in other markets in March) and the D3100 is a bit out of your budget.


----------



## aliteDC

I just saw this for under 70 euros, the price seems extremely low. Should I get it? Also a 18-55 lens is included.
http://www.e-bug.de/shop/product_inf...58195&refID=ff


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *aliteDC*


I just saw this for under 70 euros, the price seems extremely low. Should I get it? Also a 18-55 lens is included.
http://www.e-bug.de/shop/product_inf...58195&refID=ff


No way that's the actual price. The K-x is fairly new and goes for $500 retail in the US. I wouldn't trust it personally. The Pentax K-x is a very decent DSLR though.


----------



## sub50hz

Just picked up a grip for the 50D. It seems odd to me that neither Helix or Calumet stock the BG-E2N anymore, and one of the local Best Buy stores had 5 in stock. Weird. At least they price matched B+H.


----------



## iandroo888

best company for SDHC cards?

Lexar? Kingston? Sandisk?

which line under those companies are the best?


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iandroo888;12547039*
> best company for SDHC cards?
> 
> Lexar? Kingston? Sandisk?
> 
> which line under those companies are the best?


http://www.amazon.com/Sony-SDHC-Card-SF-8N4-Black/dp/B0036GK3DO]Amazon.com: Sony SDHC Card 8 GB SF-8N4 (Black): Electronics[/URL]

Ten to eleven frame bursts in RAW @ 14.2 MP with no problem. 30+ frame bursts in JPEG.

What that translates into is ~3 photos written to disk by the time my camera runs out of memory at 3.5FPS.

Clearly not the best, but it works for me.


----------



## iandroo888

class 4? sony?  totally didnt expect that one

currently...

my kingston sdhc 8gb class 4 does up to 7 raw
my lexar platinum 16gb class 4 does up to 6 raw

but nikon does RAW+JPG.. dont know if that makes a difference

tho my main purpose is for a more "realiable" card. one that more professionals like to use... not only for its read/write speed but less prone to it corrupting... lol


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iandroo888;12547278*
> class 4? sony?  totally didnt expect that one
> 
> currently...
> 
> my kingston sdhc 8gb class 4 does up to 7 raw
> my lexar platinum 16gb class 4 does up to 6 raw
> 
> but nikon does RAW+JPG.. dont know if that makes a difference


Nikon can shoot raw only if you so choose. At least my D3100 does.

I've been shooting a lot of sports for the last few weeks, all in raw, and I've come no where near maxing out the buffer. 3 frame bursts usually.

Was at a shoot on Thursday where we were doing some strobing, and that would have maxed the cards, but the flashes were maxing out too. You need some nicer flashes to need anything better.

I'm not one of those people who like to lay on the trigger for too long I suppose.


----------



## Shane1244

Maximum burst is Dependant on your cache size, not your memory card speed. The only time the card will effect the burst speed is when your cache is full and it resorts to writing it onto the SD at like 20mb/s. Which for me, is less than 1FPS. (My Raw files are typically 21mb's)

The only time you really need a fast card for most cameras is when you're taking HD video at a very high bit rate. Which you only need a class 6 for.

That being said, I have a 16Gb Lexar Platinum II that I got for $23, and it works well, I can pull a 1Gb movie from my camera in like ~30 seconds.

For instance, his D3100 can do 13 RAW's, or 9 Raw + Jpeg's.
http://imaging.nikon.com/products/imaging/lineup/digitalcamera/slr/d3100/spec.htm


----------



## sub50hz

Wow, that Sony card is pricey. Microcenter runs specials *all the time* on A-Data Class 10 cards for dirt cheap (my pair of 8GBs were 14.99 a piece just about a month ago -- sadly, can't use them now that I've moved up to the 50D).


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *theCanadian;12547486*
> Nikon can shoot raw only if you so choose. At least my D3100 does.
> 
> I've been shooting a lot of sports for the last few weeks, all in raw, and I've come no where near maxing out the buffer. 3 frame bursts usually.
> 
> Was at a shoot on Thursday where we were doing some strobing, and that would have maxed the cards, but the flashes were maxing out too. You need some nicer flashes to need anything better.
> 
> I'm not one of those people who like to lay on the trigger for too long I suppose.


hrm apparently there is a raw only.. forgot the reason why i went RAW+JPG? maybe it was so people can pull the JPG off afterwards? iunoe.. or was it someone said u cant see raw files on camera after taking them? dunoe

nvm switched it to raw only now. up to 9 burst on raw on the kingston now..

but thats not the point of why i wanna get a new SDHC card. i know there are some brands that are more "prone" to corruption then others... by experience, which are the less "prone" ones?


----------



## theCanadian

Corruption? How frequent? I've fired off 3400 frames now and never lost a photo.


----------



## Shane1244

Same, except many more. Over the like 3 years I've used SD cards, I've never had a problem. I'm pulling data off them almost every day.


----------



## iandroo888

i sometimes see pictures that is like partially corrupted with like a picture from a while ago.. like 1/2 is the picture i just took.. 1/2 is a picture from like weeks ago...


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

CF cards here, but haven't run into a problem as well. I swap between an 8GB Sandisk Extreme III and 8GB Patriot cheapo and neither have had any issues.


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iandroo888;12549316*
> i sometimes see pictures that is like partially corrupted with like a picture from a while ago.. like 1/2 is the picture i just took.. 1/2 is a picture from like weeks ago...


Format your card(s). Write some random data to the whole card a few times. Should go away.

It sounds like having similar data slotted in over and over again is causing some issues. But these things are good for millions of writes. Some new data should help.


----------



## iandroo888

so should i just fill it up with random stuff then format it or something


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iandroo888;12549416*
> so should i just fill it up with random stuff then format it or something


Yeah. If you have a game or two that you could drop the program group onto the card, it will help. Might want to do it a couple times with different data sets....


----------



## Full_Tilt

Well, heres my collection (minus my Nikonos U/W camera and strobe):










Sorry foer the crappy picture, all the _good_ cameras wernt available obviously, haha

Im thinking of upgrading to a better Canon body.
The Pentax was purchased to basically make use of some old lenses I had from when I was shooting film, but then I sorta became my main camera as I found it to be better about noise at high ISO (I shoot in low light pretty often).


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Full_Tilt;12549637*
> Im thinking of upgrading to a better Canon body.
> The Pentax was purchased to basically make use of some old lenses I had from when I was shooting film, but then I sorta became my main camera as I found it to be better about noise at high ISO (I shoot in low light pretty often).


You can probably make a fair bit of money by offloading your camera gear







And considering the new Rebels were just released and there's been a nice price drop in the market, it's a pretty good time to get a new camera. Check with CLP; prices have been dropping there recently.


----------



## ljason8eg

So I figured out that my old kingston SDHC Class 4 cards aren't fast enough for HD video. Would this card be a good deal? Or should I look at something else?

  Amazon.com: PNY Professional 16 GB Class 10 Hi-Speed SDHC 20MB/s 133x Flash Memory Card P-SDHC16G10-EF (Black): Electronics


----------



## Nemesis158

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*


So I figured out that my old kingston SDHC Class 4 cards aren't fast enough for HD video. Would this card be a good deal? Or should I look at something else?

Amazon.com: PNY Professional 16 GB Class 10 Hi-Speed SDHC 20MB/s 133x Flash Memory Card P-SDHC16G10-EF (Black): Electronics


YES. I have that exact card and i can take pictures faster with it than i could an old class 4 4gb card (d3000 camera, the higher speed lets the camera empty its buffer faster)


----------



## iandroo888

those transcend class 10 8gb sdhc's any good? 12.49 each on amazon :3


----------



## theCanadian

My class 4 Sony card that I just posted handles 1080P 24 FPS for the full 10 minutes my camera supports....


----------



## Nemesis158

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


My class 4 Sony card that I just posted handles 1080P 24 FPS for the full 10 minutes my camera supports....


Different cameras encode at different frame-rates, formats, and bit-rates. Thus his camera may need a little more speed....


----------



## Full_Tilt

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


You can probably make a fair bit of money by offloading your camera gear







And considering the new Rebels were just released and there's been a nice price drop in the market, it's a pretty good time to get a new camera. Check with CLP; prices have been dropping there recently.


Possibly. Ive considered consolidating, basically selling all 7 billion pentax lenses, the pentax DSLR, and my Canon DSLR, and then buying a new Canon body and some canon lenses to replace the lost pentax lenses.
Im just afraid I wont make enough to get what I need, like for instance with the pentax I have a phenomenal 100mm Macro and a 200mm 1.8 aperture monster which a modern lens with those specs would be hella expensive.... so idk.


----------



## laboitenoire

Then I'd consider getting a nicer Pentax body. The K-5 in particular is a fantastic camera, and by offloading your unnecessary gear it wouldn't be too much money out of pocket.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Full_Tilt;12550642*
> Possibly. Ive considered consolidating, basically selling all 7 billion pentax lenses, the pentax DSLR, and my Canon DSLR, and then buying a new Canon body and some canon lenses to replace the lost pentax lenses.
> Im just afraid I wont make enough to get what I need, like for instance with the pentax I have a phenomenal 100mm Macro and a 200mm 1.8 aperture monster which a modern lens with those specs would be hella expensive.... so idk.


Why not grab a Pentax body, or a lens mount adapter?


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Nemesis158*


Different cameras encode at different frame-rates, formats, and bit-rates. Thus his camera may need a little more speed....


Just saying.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Full_Tilt*


Possibly. Ive considered consolidating, basically selling all 7 billion pentax lenses, the pentax DSLR, and my Canon DSLR, and then buying a new Canon body and some canon lenses to replace the lost pentax lenses.
Im just afraid I wont make enough to get what I need, like for instance with the pentax I have a phenomenal 100mm Macro and a 200mm 1.8 aperture monster which a modern lens with those specs would be hella expensive.... so idk.


200mm f/1.8 made by who?


----------



## Full_Tilt

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


200mm f/1.8 made by who?


Its a Pentax lens, Im not sure of the age, but its a fixed focal length, manual focus. Oh and Its a 2.0 aperature, Im not sure where I got 1.8 from.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Why not grab a Pentax body, or a lens mount adapter?


I have a Pentax DSLR (k100d) and I have a Canon DSLR (350D).
I have a bunch of great old Pentax lenses and a few great new canon lenses, I canmt decide which ones to give up, haha.
From what I understand an adapter is impossible, I looked into it at one point, I cant really remember what the reasoning was, but its apparently not doable.


----------



## dudemanppl

Canon 200 1.8Ls are 3kish.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Full_Tilt*


Its a Pentax lens, Im not sure of the age, but its a fixed focal length, manual focus. Oh and Its a 2.0 aperature, Im not sure where I got 1.8 from.


You sure it's f/2?


----------



## mz-n10

If you wnat the best card i say go with sandisk exteme. I persoanlly don't use them cause they are too expensive, I use lexmark (8,8,16gb) and a a-data 16gb.


----------



## Full_Tilt

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


You sure it's f/2?


*feels stupid*

Its f/2.5
Its been a while since Ive used it I guess









Its this exact lens:
http://www.pentaxforums.com/lensrevi...php?product=13

Still a pretty great lens, but maybe it wouldnt be terribly difficult to replace.
Ive only had a few occasions where Ive had a use for it, but those few times it really created a nice image with that limited depth of field in addition to the foreshortening you get from it being telephoto.


----------



## iandroo888

anyone have input on the brand "Transcend" ? has a fair amt of reviews on amazon. lookin to get 1 or 2 of the 8gb class 10's

  Amazon.com: Transcend 8 GB Class 10 SDHC Flash Memory Card TS8GSDHC10E: Computer & Accessories
or should i try not to be cheap and go for the sandisk ultra's or extremes? lol

  Amazon.com: SanDisk Extreme III 8 GB Class 6 SDHC Flash Memory Card SDSDRX3-8192-A21: Computer & Accessories
this is the one id get if i were not to get the transcends or other brand. good pick?


----------



## mz-n10

i think there was a issue about transcend CF cards and nikon d300 a while ago. i dont know if it has anything to do with SD cards.


----------



## iandroo888

hmm sandisk it is just for safety xD

has anyone use this kind of reflector

 [IMG alt="Amazon.com: 43" 110CM Round Multi Disc Light Reflector! Portable, 5 in 1: Translucent, Silver, Gold, White, and Black! Collapsible! Perfect for Studio or any Photography Situation!: Electronics"]images/misc/amazon_icon.gif[/IMG] Amazon.com: 43" 110CM Round Multi Disc Light Reflector! Portable, 5 in 1: Translucent, Silver, Gold, White, and Black! Collapsible! Perfect for Studio or any Photography Situation!: Electronics


----------



## Marin

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...it_6_in_1.html

I have that one, works great.


----------



## iandroo888

expensiveeee D:


----------



## Marin

Quality ain't cheap.









I've used it enough in the studio to justify the price.


----------



## iandroo888

says the one with that list of equip >< i just want something that is portable that can reflect so i dont need to use peoples windshield covers for their cars lmao !


----------



## Marin

Well, what exactly are you using it for?

Headshots, full body shots, group shots (as a size example)? Obviously, the larger the size the more you can reflect and wrap around the subject. But the larger the size the harder it can be use. If it's just you, you're going to want a smaller size. If you can get someone to help or get some c-stands then larger sizes are great.


----------



## iandroo888

its gonna be used for outdoor photoshoots

1/2 body shots usually. due to some places the person wants to have photoshoot and the sun position, can create shadows on one side so i thought a reflector to bounce some light to fill those shadows a bit would be a good idea...

usually have other people with me (usually more than a 1 person photoshoot) so they could help me with the reflector.


----------



## Marin

42" should be great then. It will give you a lot of flexibility for reflecting light. Just don't go crazy with using it (like I've seen on POTN where the lighting looks like garbage since they've filled everything).


----------



## iandroo888

is there anything wrong with my idea tho by using a reflector in those situations? or is there some other ways of doing it


----------



## Marin

Reflectors work fine in those situations just you need to remember they're completely dependent on what lights available. You could also try using a large shiny white board.


----------



## iandroo888

yah ive considered like glossy boards or whatever but i thought getting one of these would be much more portable and easy to carry and less prone to breaking xD

mmkay. thx a lot marin :]


----------



## Deano12345

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


anyone have input on the brand "Transcend" ? has a fair amt of reviews on amazon. lookin to get 1 or 2 of the 8gb class 10's

Amazon.com: Transcend 8 GB Class 10 SDHC Flash Memory Card TS8GSDHC10E: Computer & Accessories


Ive actually got a 32GB one of those Transcend Class 10's arriving on wednesday, I'll post back here when I pick it up and test it out


----------



## iandroo888

i used to think bigger was better but after some people tellin me its a better idea to get smaller cards for lower chance of losing pictures... and i dont shoot that many pictures nowadays before unloading off to a comp... no need for such a big capacity card.


----------



## Deano12345

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


i used to think bigger was better but after some people tellin me its a better idea to get smaller cards for lower chance of losing pictures... and i dont shoot that many pictures nowadays before unloading off to a comp... no need for such a big capacity card.


Im actually the same (8GB Extreme III) but its not for me, its for my dad and his HD Hero, I tried telling him just to get a 16GB, but he wouldn't listen to me so 32GB it is, still should be a fast card for the money (plus I can bring it as a spare with me when I take the camera out







)


----------



## aliteDC

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


No way that's the actual price. The K-x is fairly new and goes for $500 retail in the US. I wouldn't trust it personally. The Pentax K-x is a very decent DSLR though.


LOL I ordered this, next day I got a message it was sold to another customer. They just didn't want to sell it for that price


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...it_6_in_1.html

I have that one, works great.


I have a very similiar kit, only difference is that the reflectors are round.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


says the one with that list of equip >< i just want something that is portable that can reflect so i dont need to use peoples windshield covers for their cars lmao !


Actually, the windshield cover isn't much different. There are different colored reflectors though, and one diffuser (placed between the subject and light source). I've only used mine outdoors and not in a studio. Reflectors are great for using sunlight for fill (but not too much like Marin said).

Quote:



Originally Posted by *aliteDC*


LOL I ordered this, next day I got a message it was sold to another customer. They just didn't want to sell it for that price










Classic bait 'n' switch. We have them here to, mostly in NYC.


----------



## dudemanppl

60D actually feels quite good in the hands.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


60D actually feels quite good in the hands.


Eh, I didn't like it too much, to be honest. I mean, I definitely respect its performance, but it just felt too cramped and small in my hands. I definitely prefer the heftier body of my 50D to the 60D.


----------



## dudemanppl

I prefer it to the D3.







But my D3 rubber is all old and worn out, may the the culprit.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iandroo888;12553107*
> i used to think bigger was better but after some people tellin me its a better idea to get smaller cards for lower chance of losing pictures... and i dont shoot that many pictures nowadays before unloading off to a comp... no need for such a big capacity card.


Wise. I use only a 16GB SanDisk Extreme 60MB/sec and another 8 GB for my 5DII, with 20MB+ RAW files.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;12560199*
> 60D actually feels quite good in the hands.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;12560232*
> Eh, I didn't like it too much, to be honest. I mean, I definitely respect its performance, but it just felt too cramped and small in my hands. I definitely prefer the heftier body of my 50D to the 60D.


It's not bad actually. It fits my large hands well, but as reincarnated said, it's a step down from the 50D and earlier.


----------



## dudemanppl

I'm not sure what counts as "large hands", but I'm sure mine aren't too small. If the 60D didn't have a flippy screen and was full frame, I would totally buy one. EDIT: And microadjust...


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


I'm not sure what counts as "large hands", but I'm sure mine aren't too small. If the 60D didn't have a flippy screen and was full frame, I would totally buy one. EDIT: And microadjust...


Well, you're 14 and I'm 33 for starters (unless you have a pituitary disorder or something). I'm 6'1" and can palm a basketball, and it's 8" from the bottom of my palm to the tip of my yoo-hoo finger.

And the 60D doesn't have AF micro adjust.


----------



## dudemanppl

Your hand is around 2 inches longer than mine.







Anyway, don't randomly bid on Voigtlander R3as, you might actually win them. Who wants to buy a 24-70?


----------



## Shane1244

So.. I've never known what it's for.. The dial beside the viewfinder, all it seems to do is make it blurry. :S


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*


So.. I've never known what it's for.. The dial beside the viewfinder, all it seems to do is make it blurry. :S


It's for blind jerks who can't see without their glasses on (myself included).


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*


So.. I've never known what it's for.. The dial beside the viewfinder, all it seems to do is make it blurry. :S


Yeah, that's the view finder diopter, used to adjust for uncorrected vision.


----------



## Unknownm

I found a Nikon F2 (f/1.4 50mm) with a add on at a pawn shop. It was 650 (without tax)

Is it worth it? and if so, over my D5000?


----------



## dudemanppl

Thats a silly price. Maybe if it was titanium or something. And what is the add on?


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Well, you're 14 and I'm 33 for starters (unless you have a pituitary disorder or something). I'm 6'1" and can palm a basketball, and it's 8" from the bottom of my palm to the tip of my yoo-hoo finger.


My lord those are pretty large hands... I'm 5'11" and my hands are reasonable. Thumb to pinky when fingers are spread is 9" and base of palm to tip of the middle is 7.5", so the tiniest of bodies (including my D5000) do start to feel cramped after a while.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Well, you're 14 and I'm 33 for starters (unless you have a pituitary disorder or something). I'm 6'1" and can palm a basketball, and it's 8" from the bottom of my palm to the tip of my yoo-hoo finger.

And the 60D doesn't have AF micro adjust.


Yep, I'm 6'0 and can palm a basketball as well. Don't have a ruler handy so I can't measure my palms, but I definitely do feel a bit cramped in the camera.

I definitely like the performance of the 60D, the swivel screen took me by surprise because it's much sturdier and useful than I thought it'd be, and overall a robust body. However, it definitely is too small for my taste and I definitely had some issues with the smaller scroll wheel as well.

But that's why there's now the 7D


----------



## Unknownm

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Thats a silly price. Maybe if it was titanium or something. And what is the add on?


i don't know what it was for but it's like the add on for the nikon's. You put it on the bottom of the camera.

So it's not worth it eh?


----------



## dudemanppl

Motor drive? Probably worthless.


----------



## laboitenoire

You mean a motor drive/power winder?


----------



## Unknownm

must be it. I couldn't look but man... a f/1.4 lens







.


----------



## dudemanppl

You could get f/1.2 at that price...


----------



## Unknownm

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


You could get f/1.2 at that price...


Very true. I just hate my stock lens, but those f/1.2-4's are hard to get when you are a college student on limited income.


----------



## mz-n10

you can get a sigma 30/1.4 for <400......


----------



## Unknownm

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


you can get a sigma 30/1.4 for <400......


I guess online shipping. Craigslist always over charges here in vancouver.


----------



## mz-n10

well the msrp for the sigma is 439.99 so a used one should be more then 400.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Well, you're 14 and I'm 33 for starters (unless you have a pituitary disorder or something). I'm 6'1" and can palm a basketball, and it's 8" from the bottom of my palm to the tip of my yoo-hoo finger.

And the 60D doesn't have AF micro adjust.


Woah palming a basketball D:

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


My lord those are pretty large hands... I'm 5'11" and my hands are reasonable. Thumb to pinky when fingers are spread is 9" and base of palm to tip of the middle is 7.5", so the tiniest of bodies (including my D5000) do start to feel cramped after a while.


My hand is about the same size as yours and I share your pain regarding the smallest bodies. My pinky goes under the camera :/

On another note, I tried out a D90 for a couple of hours today and even though I have held one before, using it is a different story altogether. It actually matches my 70-200, compared to my D60, it's much better ergonomically and everything. Such is it's epicness that my Canon-photocopier-machine fanboy friend is considering selling his 5D Mk1 for a D90. I mean, 11 AF points was alright with tracking, but wasn't too good, of course, I wasn't expecting it to be as good as I found the D3 whilst tracking tennis but I thought 11 was a bit sub-par. The gaps between the AF points are too much. With the D7000, 39 AF points would be great. Also, the D90 viewfinder is quite large, comparable to the 5D Mk 1's viewfinder.


----------



## mz-n10

you would think that a higher end body would be more comfortable..... i have ~7" from palm to tip of middle finger, and i now find the a900/5d2 a bit small. eventually u just want a battery grip on every camera body.....


----------



## iandroo888

hmm next lens purchase.... sigma 30mm f/1.4 or sigma 50mm f/1.4

B+W F-Pro or XS-Pro filter... technically same glass right? just thinner ring? does the xs-pro with the threads on both sides mean it allows the cap to be used?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10;12565553*
> you would think that a higher end body would be more comfortable..... i have ~7" from palm to tip of middle finger, and i now find the a900/5d2 a bit small. eventually u just want a battery grip on every camera body.....


5D2, 40D, XTi, all felt fine in my hands. I think that despite the small size of the Rebels and Nikon entry-levels, they're still well-designed even for large hands. The 5D2 is about as large as I want in a camera (not that I would turn down a 1D Mark IV, I think I could make do







).


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;12566987*
> 5D2, 40D, XTi, all felt fine in my hands. I think that despite the small size of the Rebels and Nikon entry-levels, they're still well-designed even for large hands. The 5D2 is about as large as I want in a camera (not that I would turn down a 1D Mark IV, I think I could make do
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ).


I agree that overall, the entry-level bodies aren't that bad. I can't stand my dad's D50, though. My fingers always bottom out on the other side of the grip (it's too shallow), which is really uncomfortable.


----------



## Shane1244

I hold my camera with my pinky finger under the camera, it's not because the lack of room, but I just find it's more stable, and comfy.


----------



## theCanadian

After shooting with an old 80's film SLR for 6 months, I don't mind that I have to sometimes wrap my little finger under the body, or that the grip doesn't quite fill my hand.

Surprisingly though, despite the generic boxy shape of those old SLR's, the ergonomics were actually pretty good.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;12569530*
> I hold my camera with my pinky finger under the camera, it's not because the lack of room, but I just find it's more stable, and comfy.


ninja'd me


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *theCanadian;12569560*
> After shooting with an old 80's film SLR for 6 months, I don't mind that I have to sometimes wrap my little finger under the body, or that the grip doesn't quite fill my hand.
> 
> Surprisingly though, despite the generic boxy shape of those old SLR's, the ergonomics were actually pretty good.


The weight got me. I had no idea they were that heavy. All that metal, been used to my plastic D5000 for a while now.


----------



## theCanadian

80's cameras just looked better.

But then again, I'm rockin a turntable and speaker cabinets from the early 70's. I also think my bike from the 80's looks cool. I think there is a chance I might be biased in this opinion.


----------



## Boyboyd

There's a new DSLR that looks just like an SLR. I forget who makes it.

So that was a useless post, lol. I think it's Olympus or Pentax though.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *theCanadian;12569648*
> 80's cameras just looked better.
> 
> But then again, I'm rockin a turntable and speaker cabinets from the early 70's. I also think my bike from the 80's looks cool. I think there is a chance I might be biased in this opinion.


Lol, I was rocking some vintage Harmon/Kardon and Akai receivers for a while until they died. Still have my electric blue with white and pink highlights Trek 850 mountain bike, though! It's older than I am!


----------



## theCanadian

_A_ DSLR? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exception_that_proves_the_rule


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire;12569849*
> Lol, I was rocking some vintage Harmon/Kardon and Akai receivers for a while until they died. Still have my electric blue with white and pink highlights Trek 850 mountain bike, though! It's older than I am!


My bike died recently







The matainance got away from me and the front bracket as it is apparently called got twisted in the frame as the bearings wore out. Sad day.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *theCanadian;12569906*
> My bike died recently
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The matainance got away from me and the front bracket as it is apparently called got twisted in the frame as the bearings wore out. Sad day.


The bottom bracket? The only time that's not replaceable is if it gets cold-welded into the frame (only applicable with threaded BBs) or they're so close to being stuck then when the cups are backed out, they wreck the threads in the shell.

What kind of bike was it?


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


The bottom bracket? The only time that's not replaceable is if it gets cold-welded into the frame (only applicable with threaded BBs) *or they're so close to being stuck then when the cups are backed out, they wreck the threads in the shell.*

What kind of bike was it?


That one.
Miele Aries 400. Mountain bike.


----------



## sub50hz

We used to take old steel frames like that which were still in decent condition to our machinist friend who would turn the shell down so we could pop in some spanish (6902 IIRC, a BMX size) bearings and make a decent frame functional again. I should ride more, le sigh.


----------



## theCanadian

I'll mention that when I pick it up from the shop. Thanks.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iandroo888;12566016*
> hmm next lens purchase.... sigma 30mm f/1.4 or sigma 50mm f/1.4
> 
> B+W F-Pro or XS-Pro filter... technically same glass right? just thinner ring? does the xs-pro with the threads on both sides mean it allows the cap to be used?


o i dont remember where i read about it but i heard there was 2 versions of one or both of these lenses now? like something about it having a different finish? how do u tell which one it is


----------



## sub50hz

Well, 6902s won't work unless you go with a different set of cranks. It's not going to be small change either way you splice it. Plus, I'm betting most shops won't be interested in doing what I've described, as I've found more bike shops suck than don't. Good luck either way, man.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*


There's a new DSLR that looks just like an SLR. I forget who makes it.

So that was a useless post, lol. I think it's Olympus or Pentax though.


You might be thinking of the Fujifilm X100, or perhaps even the Leica M8/M9, though neither are DSLRs technically.


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Well, 6902s won't work unless you go with a different set of cranks. It's not going to be small change either way you splice it. Plus, I'm betting most shops won't be interested in doing what I've described, as I've found more bike shops suck than don't. Good luck either way, man.


Well, these guys told me up front if there was any damage, it probably wouldn't be worth it. I got the call a few days later, "It's damaged, what do you want to do?" So they're at least dedicated to the customer's best interest. They've given me free adjustments and are super friendly down there, so, they have me as customer.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


You might be thinking of the Fujifilm X100, or perhaps even the Leica M8/M9, though neither are DSLRs technically.


Yeah, I posted about the M9, but edited it out, because it wasn't technically a DSLR.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


You might be thinking of the Fujifilm X100, or perhaps even the Leica M8/M9, though neither are DSLRs technically.


I was thinking of the Pentax K5. But the more i look at it the less it looks like an SLR.










Got a really good review actually. Just a hint of 80s SLRs. It's the top part, near the hotshoe and viewfinder that reminds me.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*


I was thinking of the Pentax K5. But the more i look at it the less it looks like an SLR.

Got a really good review actually. Just a hint of 80s SLRs. It's the top part, near the hotshoe and viewfinder that reminds me.


I see what you mean. The pentaprism housing is very geometric like the old Asahi's.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


I see what you mean. The pentaprism housing is very geometric like the old Asahi's.











the asahi looks more like the a900 pentaprism....









i think hes talking about the pentaprism that looks like this....


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Either way...


----------



## mz-n10

lol


----------



## theCanadian

I'm talking about the package deal:


























Beauts.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

I see Canon AE-1's for sale all the time on Craigslist. Need to pick one up just for the hell of it.


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;12576375*
> I see Canon AE-1's for sale all the time on Craigslist. Need to pick one up just for the hell of it.


http://www.keh.com/Camera/format-35mm/system-Canon-Manual-Focus/category-Camera-Bodies?s=1&bcode=CA&ccode=2&cc=79256&r=WG&f

All day.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *theCanadian;12576458*
> http://www.keh.com/Camera/format-35mm/system-Canon-Manual-Focus/category-Camera-Bodies?s=1&bcode=CA&ccode=2&cc=79256&r=WG&f
> 
> All day.


Too pricey at KEH. I see them on CL here pretty regulary for these kinds of prices:

($40)
http://lexington.craigslist.org/pho/2234840878.html


----------



## theCanadian

Nice. Though I guess some of the extra cost is justifiable in that you know exactly what you're buying.


----------



## Full_Tilt

I love my old K1000, one of the best cameras Ive ever owned. That one posted above looks like an older version of it (screw mount perhaps?)


----------



## dudemanppl

Nobody sells 35 1.2s used.


----------



## sub50hz

I'll have to grab a few shots of my recently-repaired AE-1 soon.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;12576504*
> Too pricey at KEH. I see them on CL here pretty regulary for these kinds of prices:
> 
> ($40)
> http://lexington.craigslist.org/pho/2234840878.html


Buying gear off CL is such a gamble. Even if you know what to look for you can still get ripped off. Stick to KEH and buy BGN if you want to save some money.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *theCanadian;12576531*
> Nice. Though I guess some of the extra cost is justifiable in that you know exactly what you're buying.


Yes, but of course I would check out any camera I bought first in person for obvious signs of wear and/or damage. But for $40, why not?


----------



## MistaBernie

ha, I have a Minolta X-370 somewhere with a bunch of lenses.. I should go try to dig it up and use it as practice for some product shots...


----------



## iandroo888

whats the resell value of the sigma 30mm and 50mm f/1.4's? can they be traded directly? theres only $10 difference when bought new.

*edit*

both new are almost $500.. on FM, 30mm goes around 300.. 50mm goes around 400... D:


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iandroo888;12588248*
> whats the resell value of the sigma 30mm and 50mm f/1.4's? can they be traded directly? theres only $10 difference when bought new.
> 
> *edit*
> 
> both new are almost $500.. on FM, 30mm goes around 300.. 50mm goes around 400... D:


Yea, I was about to say, I'm not sure if there's a difference with Nikon, but with the Canon-mount Sigmas, the 30mm is $300 whereas 50mm is $400.

My guess as to the reason why is that while the jury is out on the Canon 28mm vs Sigma 30mm as to who has the better IQ, most people on POTN seem to agree that the Sigma 50mm has better IQ than the Canon 50mm f/1.4.

So, in short: The 30mm has a counterpart from Canon, the 50mm doesn't really have one, which raises the resale value.

Disclaimer: Just what I've read on the interwebs. I've never used either Sigma lens myself so I can't really give my own opinion on it.


----------



## sub50hz

There's also a large group of people on POTN who report focusing and centering issues with Sigma lenses... and some reviews confirm it a bit.

http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/521-sigma50f1450d


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;12589543*
> Yea, I was about to say, I'm not sure if there's a difference with Nikon, but with the Canon-mount Sigmas, the 30mm is $300 whereas 50mm is $400.
> 
> My guess as to the reason why is that while the jury is out on the Canon 28mm vs Sigma 30mm as to who has the better IQ, most people on POTN seem to agree that the Sigma 50mm has better IQ than the Canon 50mm f/1.4.
> 
> So, in short: The 30mm has a counterpart from Canon, the 50mm doesn't really have one, which raises the resale value.
> 
> Disclaimer: Just what I've read on the interwebs. I've never used either Sigma lens myself so I can't really give my own opinion on it.


I've considered getting the Sigmalux myself for sometime now since most people who own it rave about it, but I've looked at several reviews and they all show that the Sigmalux is only sharper than the Canon f/1.4 wide open (and at f/1.8). However, from f/2 and up, both lenses are fairly equal in sharpness (check the photozone and slrgear reviews).

The fact that the Sigma is sharper wide open is reason enough for me to switch, but the one thing that irks me is Sigma's focus issues. I've seen mention of that too many times on other fora to be comfortable dropping $500 on it. I've also read about the crinkle finish of Sigma's lenses peeling off.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;12589734*
> There's also a large group of people on POTN who report focusing and centering issues with Sigma lenses... and some reviews confirm it a bit.


Yep, this is apparently true, but in most of the instances where posters reported it, most said that Sigma recalibrated their lenses under warranty no problem. I believe that Marin used to have the Sigma 30/1.4 and had it successfully calibrated.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;12589888*
> I've considered getting the Sigmalux myself for sometime now since most people who own it rave about it, but I've looked at several reviews and they all show that the Sigmalux is only sharper than the Canon f/1.4 wide open (and at f/1.8). However, from f/2 and up, both lenses are fairly equal in sharpness (check the photozone and slrgear reviews).
> 
> The fact that the Sigma is sharper wide open is reason enough for me to switch, but the one thing that irks me is Sigma's focus issues. I've seen mention of that too many times on other fora to be comfortable dropping $500 on it. I've also read about the crinkle finish of Sigma's lenses peeling off.


Definitely echo that sentiment. I thought about a Sigmalux when upgrading from my 50mm f/1.8 myself, but I didn't want to risk a QC issue and I figured that I'd be unlikely to shoot so wide open since the DoF is razor-thin and prone to CA. Turns out I was right, since my most-used aperture on my 50mm is f/2.8, which really negates the need for sharpness on the wide end anyways.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Definitely echo that sentiment. I thought about a Sigmalux when upgrading from my 50mm f/1.8 myself, but I didn't want to risk a QC issue and I figured that I'd be unlikely to shoot so wide open since the DoF is razor-thin and prone to CA. Turns out I was right, since my *most-used aperture on my 50mm is f/2.8*, which really negates the need for sharpness on the wide end anyways.


I used to shoot at the magic f/2.8 a lot too, but these days it's wide open or not at all.







Wide open with FF is just magic. And even the Canon 50/1.4, despite being soft wide open, still looks pretty damn good with my 5DII I think:


Pisgah Church, KY est. 1784 by gonetomorrow00, on Flickr


----------



## dudemanppl

Traded D3 + Alienbees for D700, D300s, D2H, 2 MB-D10s and some other stuff. Also sold my 24-70 to him. Profit? SIX FIDDY. Free camera/lens time!


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Traded D3 + Alienbees for D700, D300s, D2H, 2 MB-D10s and some other stuff. Also sold my 24-70 to him. Profit? SIX FIDDY. Free camera/lens time!


When will you ever be happy with the gear you have?


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


when will you ever be happy with the gear you have?










ITS ALL ABOUT THE MONEY, BABY!

lolcaps


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


ITS ALL ABOUT THE MONEY, BABY!

lolcaps


Send me some free stuff


----------



## dudemanppl

If you didn't live in Australia I would ship you.... Uhhhh. 1 Eneloop!


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Yea, I was about to say, I'm not sure if there's a difference with Nikon, but with the Canon-mount Sigmas, the 30mm is $300 whereas 50mm is $400.

My guess as to the reason why is that while the jury is out on the Canon 28mm vs Sigma 30mm as to who has the better IQ, most people on POTN seem to agree that the Sigma 50mm has better IQ than the Canon 50mm f/1.4.

So, in short: The 30mm has a counterpart from Canon, the 50mm doesn't really have one, which raises the resale value.

Disclaimer: Just what I've read on the interwebs. I've never used either Sigma lens myself so I can't really give my own opinion on it.


heard from a lot of people, not just from OCN that the sigma is considerably better than the nikon counterpart (50mm f1.4). better build, better IQ, etc

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


There's also a large group of people on POTN who report focusing and centering issues with Sigma lenses... and some reviews confirm it a bit.

http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/521-sigma50f1450d


heard theres some front or rear focusing issues on some.. but a lot of people send it in to be calibrated? how does that work

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


The fact that the Sigma is sharper wide open is reason enough for me to switch, but the one thing that irks me is Sigma's focus issues. I've seen mention of that too many times on other fora to be comfortable dropping $500 on it. I've also read about the crinkle finish of Sigma's lenses peeling off.

Yep, this is apparently true, but in most of the instances where posters reported it, most said that Sigma recalibrated their lenses under warranty no problem. I believe that Marin used to have the Sigma 30/1.4 and had it successfully calibrated.


o. oOo... so the calibration fixes it.... oOo

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


I used to shoot at the magic f/2.8 a lot too, but these days it's wide open or not at all.







Wide open with FF is just magic. And even the Canon 50/1.4, despite being soft wide open, still looks pretty damn good with my 5DII I think:


Pisgah Church, KY est. 1784 by gonetomorrow00, on Flickr


dang.. lookin at all these.. doesnt help my indecisiveness between a 30mm and 50mm...

GT, that looks great =3

---------------------------------------

no one answered me before when i asked.. is tehre like a new version of the 30mm or 50mm by sigma? with like a different finish? i read somewhere that it did.. but i cant tell from pictures D:


----------



## MistaBernie

@Gone -- out of shear curiosity, what makes 50mm/f2.8 so great?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


heard from a lot of people, not just from OCN that the sigma is considerably better than the nikon counterpart (50mm f1.4). better build, better IQ, etc

heard theres some front or rear focusing issues on some.. but a lot of people send it in to be calibrated? how does that work

o. oOo... so the calibration fixes it.... oOo

dang.. lookin at all these.. doesnt help my indecisiveness between a 30mm and 50mm...

GT, that looks great =3

---------------------------------------

no one answered me before when i asked.. is tehre like a new version of the 30mm or 50mm by sigma? with like a different finish? i read somewhere that it did.. but i cant tell from pictures D:


Thanks. Honestly, I would get the Sigma 50/1.4 over the Sigma 30/1.4 if I were shooting a crop sensor, because you will get a shallower DOF wide open owing to the longer focal length (though the difference wouldn't be great). Also, the 50/1.4 has better overall sharpness, better bokeh, and suffers from less CA.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


@Gone -- out of shear curiosity, what makes 50mm/f2.8 so great?


At f/2.8 on that lens, it's pretty sharp even in the corners, whereas at f/1.4 and f/2 the corners are fairly soft.

Check this out (zoom the slider from f/1.4 to f/2.8 and you'll see):

http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/zprod...14/tloader.htm

Of course, corner-to-corner sharpness for such a wide aperture isn't that big of deal since the corners of your shot are like to be OOF areas anyhow.


----------



## dudemanppl

I've never looked in the corners except for the Sigma 12-24, which are absolutely abysmal at 12mm and wide open. Pure mush with 3-4 stops of vignetting. Still like it though.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


@Gone -- out of shear curiosity, what makes 50mm/f2.8 so great?


Just so there's no misunderstanding, he meant the 50mm f/1.4 at f/2.8, not a 50mm f/2.8 lens (think Sigma makes one of those).


----------



## mz-n10

the sigma 50/2.8 is a macro lens.


----------



## riko99

Decision Decisionssss..... So did me and the Fiance's taxes last night and were getting 1665$ back we were going to buy a Dyson but we decided to wait until after the wedding to do that... Now how does everyone feel about the Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 non OS.


----------



## Marin

Got a 4x5 pinhole camera (tested it out with some instant film, works great and the images are quite sharp for a pinhole) and now have a bunch of IR film in 35mm, 120 and 4x5.


----------



## Full_Tilt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;12597238*
> Got a 4x5 pinhole camera (tested it out with some instant film, works great and the images are quite sharp for a pinhole) and now have a bunch of IR film in 35mm, 120 and 4x5.


Very cool, I havent played with a pinhole in years. When I did I was always just exposing a negative on paper, so theyre weren't that great once they were transfered, but its still fun.


----------



## laboitenoire

Hmm... Decisions on spring break packing. I don't want to have to check a bag, so I'm trying to limit myself to two carry-on sized bags.

I can do camera bag, backpack with laptop and six days of clothing and laptop, but no textbooks for homework.

Backpack with laptop and textbooks, duffel with six days of clothing. Fit camera body and lens into the backpack. Limited to one lens over break.

Camera bag. Backpack with four days of clothing and textbooks. Haven't tested yet, but would probably work. Only downside is having to do laundry twice instead of once at home.

Or I can suck it up, pay $50 to check a bag round trip, and then get camera bag, backpack with textbooks, and suitcase with either six days or full nine days of clothing.

If only I'd brought my massive LL Bean backpack to school instead of this piddling Swiss Gear...


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire;12597698*
> Hmm... Decisions on spring break packing. I don't want to have to check a bag, so I'm trying to limit myself to two carry-on sized bags.
> 
> I can do camera bag, backpack with laptop and six days of clothing and laptop, but no textbooks for homework.
> 
> Backpack with laptop and textbooks, duffel with six days of clothing. Fit camera body and lens into the backpack. Limited to one lens over break.
> 
> Camera bag. Backpack with four days of clothing and textbooks. Haven't tested yet, but would probably work. Only downside is having to do laundry twice instead of once at home.
> 
> Or I can suck it up, pay $50 to check a bag round trip, and then get camera bag, backpack with textbooks, and suitcase with either six days or full nine days of clothing.
> 
> If only I'd brought my massive LL Bean backpack to school instead of this piddling Swiss Gear...


Unless you're going someplace exotic, bring a (relatively cheap) P&S that you wont worry all that much about having knocked around/into drinks/pools/etc.. it's spring break, and unless you're going someplace really scenic, etc, it's a vacation, and the last thing you'll want to worry about is planning your day around photo gear..


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *riko99;12597055*
> Decision Decisionssss..... So did me and the Fiance's taxes last night and were getting 1665$ back we were going to buy a Dyson but we decided to wait until after the wedding to do that... Now how does everyone feel about the Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 non OS.




















Plan B?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *riko99;12597055*
> Decision Decisionssss..... So did me and the Fiance's taxes last night and were getting 1665$ back we were going to buy a Dyson but we decided to wait until after the wedding to do that... Now how does everyone feel about the Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 non OS.


The wife and I have a Dyson, and it's as good as the ads claim.







However, I say LENS ALL THE WAY. Screw it, who needs a clean floor when you have awesome glass?









BUt in all seriousness, for the price, the Sigma looks good, excellent build quality, fast AF, but a bit soft at f/2.8. Not as sharp as the Nikon 70-200, but certainly much cheaper.

And congrats on the engagement.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie;12598712*
> Unless you're going someplace exotic, bring a (relatively cheap) P&S that you wont worry all that much about having knocked around/into drinks/pools/etc.. it's spring break, and unless you're going someplace really scenic, etc, it's a vacation, and the last thing you'll want to worry about is planning your day around photo gear..


Pssh... I'm going home







Parents won't let me go anywhere exotic, so I'm just going to probably go to the local botanic garden, maybe go into Boston or New York for the day. Nothing fancy.


----------



## MistaBernie

good point.. why even bring clothes if you're going home though? I used to leave a few changes of clothes at home when I was away at school so I didn't have to bring anything back with me if I had to go home for a few days..


----------



## dudemanppl

The R3a is one hell of a camera, but I can't get the film door open for some reason.
EDIT: Why is it that I tried 100 times before it, but the first time after I post this, it opens...


----------



## sub50hz

Anyone have any experience with the Spyder Pro colorimeters? I don't know if it's even worth it for my crappy TN Samsung.


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


The R3a is one hell of a camera, but I can't get the film door open for some reason. 
EDIT: Why is it that I tried 100 times before it, but the first time after I post this, it opens...


Because technical problems always resolve themselves, but only after you ask for help.

Same thing with trying to open a pickle jar.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Anyone have any experience with the Spyder Pro colorimeters? I don't know if it's even worth it for my crappy TN Samsung.


Look for them used, buy one, use it, sell it again. Thats basically what everyone does.


----------



## sub50hz

I'd prefer to keep one around, although I suppose I could have my younger sister borrow one from the lab at UIC before she graduates.


----------



## laboitenoire

Found a solution. Removed one pair of jeans and a sweatshirt, and everything fits! Textbooks, laptop, Zune, reading book, camera gear, and six days of clothing in my backpack and camera bag!


----------



## riko99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;12598913*
> The wife and I have a Dyson, and it's as good as the ads claim.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> However, I say LENS ALL THE WAY. Screw it, who needs a clean floor when you have awesome glass?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BUt in all seriousness, for the price, the Sigma looks good, excellent build quality, fast AF, but a bit soft at f/2.8. Not as sharp as the Nikon 70-200, but certainly much cheaper.
> 
> And congrats on the engagement.


Thanks and it seems after talking with her were going Plan C; Some spending money each (probably around 300), YoungNuo flash and remote, and then put the rest into the fund for the wedding. Lenses can always come later not like were in much of a rush and I'll start getting my bonus next Xmas so 1700$ extra could go a long way







.


----------



## theCanadian

Buy a lens 'for the wedding'. "But honey, don't you want good pictures?"


----------



## sub50hz

Time to the Chicago Flower and Garden Show -- forgot I was going to help a friend shoot for TimeOut magazine. OUP SPAGETT.


----------



## dudemanppl

If you put your mind to it, you can make a film rangefinder with a film advance lever go 5 FPS.


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;12625288*
> If you put your mind to it, you can make a film rangefinder with a film advance lever go 5 FPS.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *theCanadian;12626411*


Yeah, don't ask...


----------



## sub50hz

Today's recap:

-First Press Pass
-2 hours of waiting for a 5-car wreck to clear on I-55
-3 bottles of Jack Daniels
-Preventing a human from aspirating on his own vomit

We'll see if I got any decent shots tomorrow.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;12629072*
> Today's recap:
> 
> -First Press Pass
> *-2 hours of waiting for a 5-car wreck to clear on I-55
> -3 bottles of Jack Daniels
> -Preventing a human from aspirating on his own vomit*
> 
> We'll see if I got any decent shots tomorrow.


I feel as if there's a story there...


----------



## sub50hz

Ok, I'm still really hammered, but I'll try to fill in the details:

-- 2:30 p.m.: Leave home to go downtown; it's snowing quite hard, very cold and very windy.

-- 3:10 p.m.: Discover that parking at Navy Pier is 24 dollars and park a mile away. See above weather recap for potential complications

-- 3:15 p.m.: Realize that I am still wearing black jeans and a black peacoat despite looking like a snowman. Can't feel any exposed flesh anymore. Still 6 blocks to go.

-- 3:20(ish) p.m.: Arrive at Navy Pier, find out that the press room is _literally_ at the farthest accessible indoor end of the building. Another 1/2 mile or so to walk. Realize half-way there that neither of us locked the car doors. Also forgot all 3 tripods. Lost my lighter.

-- 3:30 p.m.: Acquire press pass as a "+1" -- no admission fee. Sick deal.

-- 3:30-4:40 p.m.: Machine gun shots of flowers, weird people, fake houses/dogs, real dogs, owls, wood cutters, people trying to bounce flashes off a 100-foot ceiling... real weird stuff.

-- 4:50 p.m.: Realize we have 10 minutes left on our street parking slip, have to run back to car -- problem: wind is now blowing off the lake at 60-70mph. Watch some tween get blown _across an intersecion while unintentionally moonwalking_. Help a woman get her daughter/stroller across said intersection at a 45* angle. Intense. Can't find my cigarettes.

-- 5:00 p.m.: Get to car, no ticket, head down State St to pick up another friend at his place. Take LSD to I-55 only to find out it's going to take us 2 hours to drive a mile. Oh, did I mention the highway didn't get salted during this period? Watched several 2mph fender-benders. Played a lot of Angry Birds and sang a few Styx songs.

--5:40 p.m.: Finally get to Chipotle in the burbs -- no chicken for the next 15 mins. Slam a carnitas bowl into my face and we embark to the store to acquire boozes.

--6:00-6:30 p.m.: Dick around until we find fifths of Jack on sale for 17 dollars a pop. Buy 4, head to a friend's place for an engagement party.

--8:00 p.m.-1:00 a.m.: Play Apples to Apples and drink a lot of booze. real hazy. Bottle swigs got out of hand until we killed the first 3 -- at which point one person disappeared and we discovered him in a hallway on his back, nearly aspirating on his own vomit. Is this college again? Awful.

--2:00 a.m.: Someone claims to be sober enough to drive me home, which apparently was good enough for me. Kids, this is why drinking is bad. Find a DD, please. I get home, find some spaghetti leftovers from the other night, let the dogs out, and come to OCN.

If none of this makes sense, I'll edit it in the morning. It's been real tough trying to type this all out without any glaring errors.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

http://merced.craigslist.org/pho/2249863913.html

For sale in my local area if anyone is interested (not mine). Wouldn't mind picking it up + shipping it if any of you guys want it.


----------



## iandroo888

wow if only i had the money


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Yep, I'm a bit surprised. Given how small my college town is (sue me, I grew up in the SF Bay Area, I'm spoiled







), I'm a bit surprised to find something like this. Nevertheless, the combination of lack of funds + love for Canon ergonomics + too lazy to sell off my Canon lenses for Nikon primes + lack of SWM for comparable Nikon primes makes me not want to pick this up.


----------



## Marin

Wow, using a tablet makes editing so relaxing (and addicting).


----------



## theCanadian

I should bust mine out...


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

I love my friends









Being the cool and awesome people we are, we're planning to go to Twin Peaks for spring break to get some awesome daytime + nighttime vistas of SF rather than do... whatever it is normal college students do.


----------



## iandroo888

sounds fun.. i dont get much of a spring break this year... taking classes at the university and the college. doesnt have same spring break week so one week i have classes one place, next week i have classes at another place =3 dont get to do any vacationing


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


http://merced.craigslist.org/pho/2249863913.html

For sale in my local area if anyone is interested (not mine). Wouldn't mind picking it up + shipping it if any of you guys want it.


About $200 too exp. Going for ~$900 LNIB on FM.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


About $200 too exp. Going for ~$900 LNIB on FM.


It WAS a D700 for 1600, but I guess that changed.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


I love my friends









Being the cool and awesome people we are, we're planning to go to Twin Peaks for spring break to get some awesome daytime + nighttime vistas of SF rather than do... whatever it is normal college students do.


wow a week long photo expedition.....hardcore


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


About $200 too exp. Going for ~$900 LNIB on FM.



Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


It WAS a D700 for 1600, but I guess that changed.


Looks like that CL poster realized he was charging too much. I sometimes will tell people that their items are too pricey, after seeing them repost, week after week, the same listing, often selling something like a an original Digital Rebel (300D) for $500.









EDIT: Just noticed that it was originally a D700 and is now a D300. Makes me wonder about the seller...


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;12642493*
> It WAS a D700 for 1600, but I guess that changed.


Forget it. I would never consider a D700 that had been converted to a D300!


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Yeaup, now it just screams scammer. It's a shame; there's never anything good over here


----------



## dudemanppl

Boo hoo, I was gonna buy it.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;12644454*
> Boo hoo, I was gonna buy it.


Yea, strangely enough I emaield him when you PMed me yesterday and he hasn't replied...


----------



## sub50hz

Started editing some shots from the Flower and Garden Show:


IMG_0147 by sub50hz, on Flickr


IMG_0092 by sub50hz, on Flickr


IMG_0166 by sub50hz, on Flickr


IMG_0043 by sub50hz, on Flickr

More to come at a later time, I'm bushed for tonight.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Cheers for the 50D!


----------



## dudemanppl

Saw one for 650. SO fricken cheap. Me want.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Saw one for 650. SO fricken cheap. Me want.


$560 via CLP now.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


$560 via CLP now.


OH THATS EVEN CHEAPER. Too bad I don't need one. I bought 2 broken PowerShots a long while ago the week they discontinued the 5DII.







WAS GONNA MAKE 300 BUCKS EACH.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


OH THATS EVEN CHEAPER. Too bad I don't need one. I bought 2 broken PowerShots a long while ago the week they discontinued the 5DII.







WAS GONNA MAKE 300 BUCKS EACH.


T2is are ~$460 (forgot the exact number) for body only. If you really want one, grab it and sell for $100-$150 profit or enjoy some nice video.

Forgot, you have a 5D Mk II! Nevermind


----------



## dudemanppl

:O HOLY CRAP I JUST REMEMBERED! Thanks reincarnated, just remembered my friend was going to buy a T2i, Tamron 17-50, and 50 1.8 through me. Now I can make even more cash off of him!


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


:O HOLY CRAP I JUST REMEMBERED! Thanks reincarnated, just remembered my friend was going to buy a T2i, Tamron 17-50, and 50 1.8 through me. Now I can make even more cash off of him!


Well, if you want, I just ordered one for my friend from this guy. Pretty outstanding transaction and he's in SoCal like you are, so it should arrive quickly


----------



## iandroo888

would it be worthwhile to take a "semi-nonfunctional" canon P&S, trade up to a DSLR and sell? i have a SD550 here that can take pictures but not when flash is on.. got dropped one too many times >_> just sitting around since now


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


would it be worthwhile to take a "semi-nonfunctional" canon P&S, trade up to a DSLR and sell? i have a SD550 here that can take pictures but not when flash is on.. got dropped one too many times >_> just sitting around since now


You'd still have to spend money on a DSLR, and you can't sell on POTN. Those fellows know about CLP and they won't pay more for your camera when they can go to CLP themselves


----------



## iandroo888

there goes that idea xD


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

A friend of mine is selling me his Rebel II + 35-80 (although I'll prob be selling/giving this away, I prefer primes) at a damn good price. EF mount so my current lenses will mount on it too. I am so excited


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Small update: just found out he's also selling a Canonet 28 + the attached 40mm f/2.8 for the same price. I'm going to be switching over to the rangefinder


----------



## dudemanppl

Film is be the most fun time ever.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;12657125*
> Film is be the most fun time ever.


Yep! It's been over four years since I've last worked with film, and I'm dying to get back into it again. Not to mention I'll finally get to play with a rangefinder, which has been at the top of my want list for a while now


----------



## dudemanppl

I'll have ISO 800 film in the rangefinder and ISO 100 in the F3. F3 has more vibrations = higher shutter speed, so use it in the day. ISO 800 in the RF because its easier to focus in low light, also I can just put an ND filter on it and the finder will still be as bright.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

So...

A few months ago I did a deal with a POTN user for $200 worth of equipment. When the equipment arrived, he couldn't send out the money because of a family emergency. Even though it sounded like a scam, this guy seemed legit so I waited several months. He just PMed me now saying he's sending me $1000 to make up for the time I had to wait.

Now I'm trying to figure out what to get









I'm pretty sure part of it is going to that U2311H + calibrator. With the rest, not sure yet. I'm thinking about another lens but I can't figure out which one. I am pretty happy with my 50D though so I'm pretty sure I'm not giong for a body upgrade just yet.


----------



## Shane1244

Don't need a longer lens?

But, IF he actually send you $1000, that's pretty epic.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;12659463*
> Don't need a longer lens?
> 
> But, IF he actually send you $1000, that's pretty epic.


To be honest, not really. Want? Definitely, that 135L is an absolute want for me, but given my sort of photography I don't actually use long lenses all that much.


----------



## dudemanppl

LUCKY. Also, U2410. 310 on ebay refurbed.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


LUCKY. Also, U2410. 310 on ebay refurbed.


Thought about it, but I already own 2x 1920x1080 monitors and I'm too lazy to swap em out for x1200 monitors. I really want Eyefinity


----------



## dudemanppl

Oh I didn't realize those were 1080. Forgot that 24s come in both resolutions. 135L is good, maybe a wide lens?


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Oh I didn't realize those were 1080. Forgot that 24s come in both resolutions. 135L is good, maybe a wide lens?


Yea, two ideas I've been having is either a 10-22 or similar lens, or a 24-70 f/2.8L or 17-55 f/2.8 and sell off my 50mm f/1.4.


----------



## dudemanppl

Or Olympus and Nikkor primes. Or a 5D.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Yea, two ideas I've been having is either a 10-22 or similar lens, or a 24-70 f/2.8L or 17-55 f/2.8 and sell off my 50mm f/1.4.


What happened to all primes and nothing else?

And between the 24-70 and 17-55, definitely the 17-55. It's significantly lighter and smaller and delivers similarly high IQ, not to mention IS. And if you ever go FF, the 17-55 sells very easily (mine sold on POTN the first day).

And the 10-22 is an amazing lens as well, so it's a tough choice.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Yea, two ideas I've been having is either a 10-22 or similar lens, or a 24-70 f/2.8L or 17-55 f/2.8 and sell off my 50mm f/1.4.


if i were to build a canon ef-s system again, definitely the 10-22 first.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


What happened to all primes and nothing else?

And between the 24-70 and 17-55, definitely the 17-55. It's significantly lighter and smaller and delivers similarly high IQ, not to mention IS. And if you ever go FF, the 17-55 sells very easily (mine sold on POTN the first day).

And the 10-22 is an amazing lens as well, so it's a tough choice.


It's all ideas I'm playing around in my head right now. And as much as I love primes, I have to admit both the 24-70 and 17-55 offer extremely good IQ. I'm really not sure yet on these though because again I just naturally have a hard time adjusting to zooms. My biggest concern is that I pick any of these up and use them without changing the focal length, negating the need for a zoom in the first place.

Right now, I'm leaning towards the 17-55 since I shoot more in the general focal points, and based on your recc I'll probably go 17-55 > 24-70. If I do, I'll let go of my 50mm since it's the most unused focal point from all of my primes, and I'll keep my 28mm for indoors and 85mm for portraits.

I thought about an UWA prime but the only ones I could find are fisheyes. I thought about moving to L-primes but the prices are still a bit too high for me.

Although admittedly, I am perfectly happy with my setup so maybe I'll just save it.

EDIT: Would the gold CPS program be worth it for the lens evaluation program?


----------



## sub50hz

Got out to shoot some riding photos at a new indoor park today. Would have been a bust with the XS, 2000-3200 ISO all day. BE READY FOR NOISE.


----------



## sub50hz

http://www.flickr.com/photos/sub50hz/sets/72157626102926709/

Some shots in there, will get at some more tomorrow.


----------



## mz-n10

man i want a tilt/shift lens really really bad all of a sudden......

damn contax ziess pc-distagon......i lusted after you once....now i lust after you again.....


----------



## theCanadian

You can make a tiltshift with an old scool large format lens, a body cap, some billows, and some glue.


----------



## Marin

I just use a view camera.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10;12664537*
> man i want a tilt/shift lens really really bad all of a sudden......
> 
> damn contax ziess pc-distagon......i lusted after you once....now i lust after you again.....


Same here. I would love to have the Canon TS-E 24mm f/3.5L II.


----------



## dudemanppl

If I ever get a tilt-shift (which I probably will considering its me), then I would probably NEVER use it except once to make super hipstery pictures with nothing in focus. But If you do buy like a 45mm f/2.8 TS-E or something used, it would sell well since NOBODY sells them. Free rentals FTW.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *theCanadian;12664820*
> You can make a tiltshift with an old scool large format lens, a body cap, some billows, and some glue.


ive looked into that...but a bit ghetto and doesnt really cure the LUSTING over a 1300 dollar specialty lens i will use once.....
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;12664835*
> I just use a view camera.


which i dont have.....sadly
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;12667630*
> Same here. I would love to have the Canon TS-E 24mm f/3.5L II.


i saw the canon one used for video on the 5d2 and its something i really want to check out.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;12667844*
> If I ever get a tilt-shift (which I probably will considering its me), then I would probably NEVER use it except once to make super hipstery pictures with nothing in focus. But If you do buy like a 45mm f/2.8 TS-E or something used, it would sell well since NOBODY sells them. Free rentals FTW.


the pc-distagon is even rarer......problem is i need to do a mount change to sony and take the hit on the conversion.....


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;12667844*
> If I ever get a tilt-shift (which I probably will considering its me), then I would probably NEVER use it except once to make super hipstery pictures with nothing in focus. But If you do buy like a 45mm f/2.8 TS-E or something used, it would sell well since NOBODY sells them. Free rentals FTW.


Yeah, unfortunately when most think of a tilt-shift lens, they just think about the DOF manipulation, making the "miniature" scenes, but I want one just for the distortion correction (for buildings and such) and for making super _deep_ DOFs.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Yeah, unfortunately when most think of a tilt-shift lens, they just think about the DOF manipulation, making the "miniature" scenes, but I want one just for the distortion correction (for buildings and such) and for making super _deep_ DOFs.


I don't think I've ever shot any buildings, so that part is useless for me. And I'm one of those guys who likes very little DOF. If I shot macro, the 90 + tubes would be super nice stuff.


----------



## mz-n10

with a tiltshift you can actually shift the focus plane so even if your not shooting perfectly perpendicular to your subject you can still get a flat focusing plane (macro) or you can throw tilted focusing plane and have just 1 subject in focus and have some crazy DOF (miniaturization).


----------



## laboitenoire

Debating what to spend my tax refund on...


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire;12676003*
> Debating what to spend my tax refund on...


Zeiss 35mm pc-distagon


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire;12676003*
> Debating what to spend my tax refund on...


A nice, fast prime.


----------



## laboitenoire

Yeah, I'm debating between a prime, a wide zoom, or something to replace my 18-55. Or maybe two of those... My refund will likely be close to $700.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10;12676110*
> Zeiss 35mm pc-distagon


I just googled it and it doesn't even tilt. I would prefer a 35L to that ANY DAY OF THE SECOND.


----------



## theCanadian

Went to the zoo and used my 300mm + 2x tele. Thing is damn heavy.

1.1 lbs for the body alone. Another 2+ lbs for the lens, a couple ounces for the teleconverter, factor in the fact that the weight is applied over a length. It's a battle without some sort of support.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;12676516*
> I just googled it and it doesn't even tilt. I would prefer a 35L to that ANY DAY OF THE SECOND.


you are correct the pc-distagon doesnt tilt, but i want it for perspective control so tilt isnt necessary.

the 35L is nice but it doesnt shift so its a prime i really have no use for....


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire;12676283*
> Yeah, I'm debating between a prime, a wide zoom, or something to replace my 18-55. Or maybe two of those... My refund will likely be close to $700.


30mm sigma f1.4


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;12669610*
> Yeah, unfortunately when most think of a tilt-shift lens, they just think about the DOF manipulation, making the "miniature" scenes, *but I want one just for the distortion correction (for buildings and such) and for making super deep DOFs.*


That's why I want one. But I'm looking into a body upgrade first lol


----------



## MistaBernie

...

I've been bitten by the bug. I'm going to try to score a 7D via the CLP... how, I'm not 100% sure.


----------



## sub50hz

Been eyeing the 17-40 f/4L for the last 2 days myself. Really tempted.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;12688110*
> Been eyeing the 17-40 f/4L for the last 2 days myself. Really tempted.


Why not sell your 35mm and 18-55mm and grab a 17-55mm f/2.8? More on the narrow focal lengths + larger aperture.


----------



## sub50hz

Because the 35mm is riduclously sharp and those 2 stops are a godsend in low-light situations. The 18-55 is a decent backup, and I rarely shoot my 50mm -- 40mm is plenty for me. I can quick-change to the 50 if absolutely necessary.


----------



## MistaBernie

So, opinion question time --

Am I crazy for wanting to switch from a T1i to a 60D or 7D?

I just posted my T1i kit (with options for additional stuff) up in the marketplace (and on POTN...) - as long as the body and grip both go, I should have the money to pick up a refurbed 60D. I really liked the 7D I was messing around with (that auto-focus screen is funky!) but I really can't justify it unless I sell some more stuff, which would leave me with a 7D and essentially the 70-200m -- that and canon doesn't seem to have any refurbs in at the moment for CLP..


----------



## Boyboyd

The 60D is an incredible camera, but i've always head people say you should upgrade the glass before the body. Unless is has some feature you really really need obviously.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*


The 60D is an incredible camera, but i've always head people say you should upgrade the glass before the body. Unless is has some feature you really really need obviously.


That's definitely true -- my idea is this though -- if I can sell this stuff, I can get the body for little - no out of pocket cost. Glass, I have to shell out cash or credit for -- a 50mm f/1.8 isn't going to go far in getting me a f/1.4.

Also, I really like the features of the 60D & 7D, and it will improve the quality of my indoor shots because of the handling of higher ISOs..


----------



## laboitenoire

Well, you already have some decent glass, so I'd say go for it! Don't forget, you an always snag a broken Powershot to use with the Canon Loyalty Program and then sell your T1i seperately.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Well, you already have some decent glass, so I'd say go for it! Don't forget, you an always snag a broken Powershot to use with the Canon Loyalty Program and then sell your T1i seperately.


Already got one -- that's why i'm selling the T1i & Grip







60D refurb = $639 + tax in CLP. I found a place selling them NIB on eBAY for ~$880 though, but I think I'll go refurb.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


So, opinion question time --

Am I crazy for wanting to switch from a T1i to a 60D or 7D?

I just posted my T1i kit (with options for additional stuff) up in the marketplace (and on POTN...) - as long as the body and grip both go, I should have the money to pick up a refurbed 60D. I really liked the 7D I was messing around with (that auto-focus screen is funky!) but I really can't justify it unless I sell some more stuff, which would leave me with a 7D and essentially the 70-200m -- that and canon doesn't seem to have any refurbs in at the moment for CLP..


The 7D is an incredible camera, one of the top APS-C cameras on the market IMO. I bought it at launch and really loved the AF system, which can really deliver great results with the customizable tracking modes, zone AF point selection, 8 FPS, etc. Plus the 7D's build quality is superb, even better than my 5DII. In the end I didn't really take advantage of the OCF function or the AF system that much, so the 5DII was a better fit, worse AF be damned.

So, those features are worthy of serious consideration, but as a general purpose DSLR, the 7D is awesome if you can fork it over. The 60D is an entirely different camera in comparison, though its high ISO performance is comparable. The 60D is kind of like a neutered 50D, though it is a capable camera.

The adage about glass before body is definitely true, especially considering that high resolution APS-C sensors can actually magnify flaws in the glass. However, having a DSLR body with great ergonomics, robust build, and great performance is definitely a big factor.


----------



## Shane1244

Isn't the only thing lower on the 60D over the 50D the frames per second?
Quote:


> 60D Advantages over 50D
> Slightly better Viewfinder with more information displayed.
> Noticeably better Rear LCD, 3:2 Ratio, 1040K dots, w/tilt & swivel.
> Better sensor, 18MP, higher sensitivity, 6400 native.
> Multiple Image Ratios, 3:2, 4:3, 16:9, 1:1
> Better Battery, LP-E6, same as 5D-II, 7D w/more info and capacity.
> Better Exposure Compensation, -5 to +5, shown in VF & top LCD.
> Better Metering, Multi (63 area), Color, Dual layer.
> Better Auto ISO adjustment.
> DOF preview button moved to right side for one handed use as in 1D series.
> Now with built in image adjustments, resizing and RAW conversion.
> HD Movie capture, 1080p (30/24fps), Manual control, w/Audio adjustment.
> Wireless Remote Flash control built in.
> Infrared Remote capability built in.
> EyeFi control built in.
> 60D same as 50D
> Same Autofocus
> Same Shutter and Mirror assy.
> Same Interchangeable Focus Screens.
> 
> 60D disadvantages to 50D
> Slightly slower fps, 5.3 vs. 6.3.
> NO Manual Lens adjustment built in. (BAD Canon)
> No PC terminal. (My guess is that much less than 1% has ever needed it)
> 
> Other differences w/no real great advantage, it's just personal preference.
> Plastic Composite Body Shell vs. Magnesium Shell.
> SDXC vs. CF memory cards.
> Slightly smaller body and slightly less weight.
> Slightly different Control layout.


Everyone seems to think that a plastic body makes the entire camera garbage, When it's stronger and lighter, and cheaper.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;12693361*
> The 7D is an incredible camera, one of the top APS-C cameras on the market IMO. I bought it at launch and really loved the AF system, which can really deliver great results with the customizable tracking modes, zone AF point selection, 8 FPS, etc. Plus the 7D's build quality is superb, even better than my 5DII. In the end I didn't really take advantage of the OCF function or the AF system that much, so the 5DII was a better fit, worse AF be damned.
> 
> So, those features are worthy of serious consideration, but as a general purpose DSLR, the 7D is awesome if you can fork it over. The 60D is an entirely different camera in comparison, though its high ISO performance is comparable. The 60D is kind of like a neutered 50D, though it is a capable camera.
> 
> The adage about glass before body is definitely true, especially considering that high resolution APS-C sensors can actually magnify flaws in the glass. However, having a DSLR body with great ergonomics, robust build, and great performance is definitely a big factor.


I too would like to know a bit more why the 60D is a neutered 50D (though I think I know some answers):

1) Body is made less out of magnesium than the 50D
2) Lower FPS (5.3 iirc)

But it has 30fps 1080P video and (from what I've read) better noise handling than the 50D.

It's my understanding that the 50D and the T1i share the same sensor, so it's a true sidegrade with an upgrade to the body but a loss of video... I think I want that 30fps 1080p video now (or at least the option to shoot it) after watching some video off of my fiancee's old P&S A590IS..


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;12694111*
> Isn't the only thing lower on the 60D over the 50D the frames per second?


The 60D also has a smaller body, loses that joystick, uses an (in my opinion) inferior smaller scroll wheel, lacks AF microadjust, and IMO feels smaller to use.

I have a love/hate thing with the 60D. I actually love its IQ performance, but I'm too used to my 50D's body ergonomics to change over.


----------



## Shane1244

Well going from a Gripped body to a non gripped would do that, I believe the actual size isn't much different. I have more than enough room to curl my three fingers around, and have tons of room to spare.

It's not a piratical upgrade from 50D owners, but when it comes down to actually taking pictures (and video) in every way it's a better camera.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;12694211*
> Well going from a Gripped body to a non gripped would do that, I believe the actual size isn't much different. I have more than enough room to curl my three fingers around, and have tons of room to spare.
> 
> It's not a piratical upgrade from 50D owners, but when it comes down to actually taking pictures (and video) in every way it's a better camera.


It wasn't really the grip/not grip that bothered me. The 60D has a narrower body than my 50D, esp in the grip area. The rocker switch wasn't something I was fond of, the scroll wheel was too small for me, and the camera grip area was just cramped. Adding a grip would give me some nice weight to it, but it wouldn't help with those things.

I blame my big hands









And yea, I do agree that the IQ of the 60D is better, hence why I was looking at it in the first place. The 7D was out of my price range and the T2i had a rebel body which I really can't use anymore, which left the 60D. It really does make me sad that Canon changed xxD ergonomics.


----------



## Shane1244

Ohhh, I see.

I got used to it pretty fast, My hands are 23cm long, and I have flat thumbs. I was used to using the Nikon d3000 wich feels like a point and shoot now









I picked up the T3i at work last night and held it for like 10 seconds, It absolutely ended any and all buyers remorse I had. It's soo tiny!


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;12694305*
> Ohhh, I see.
> 
> I got used to it pretty fast, My hands are 23cm long, and I have flat thumbs. I was used to using the Nikon d3000 wich feels like a point and shoot now
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I picked up the T3i at work last night and held it for like 10 seconds, It absolutely ended any and all buyers remorse I had. It's soo tiny!


Aha, yep, definitely sounds like me. When I upgraded from my XTi -> 50D, I didn't find the ergonomics to be that impressive, really. A week later though, I went to check out the T2i because I had some buyer's remorse. Basically, when I upgraded, I debated between the T2i vs 50D, and chose the 50D's body over the T2i's IQ. Handling a rebel body again after only a week with my 50D ended any buyer's remorse for me as well, despite the added features of high ISO performance and video.









It's just one of those things that you never truly appreciate until you go back, like... a mechanical keyboard for example.


----------



## Marin

Used a Sinar P to shoot my Prolimatech Armageddon. Being able to correct the perspective distortion is awesome.

I'll upload a scan this weekend.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Oh hey this post reminds me:

So I'm going to start trying out film photography again this Spring Break and wanted to ask you guys about the best or most practical ways for me to print film? Using university resources isn't an option since my school is geared more towards the sciences and our photography department is nonexistent (we are that new).


----------



## Marin

Develop your own B&W.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;12694462*
> Develop your own B&W.


I don't have access to the machines/chemicals myself. This is my first option too


----------



## Marin

Buy chemicals.









Developing B&W is as simple as making a sandwich.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;12694483*
> Buy chemicals.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Developing B&W is as simple as making a sandwich.


I'm still thinking about that. The issue with this though is that I don't have an enlarger to use to make prints either







The film will be one thing, but darn it I also want prints!


----------



## Marin

Buy an enlarger, you can find cheap used ones.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;12694502*
> Buy an enlarger, you can find cheap used ones.


Now this I did not know!









Do you have any reccs for sites to buy them?


----------



## MistaBernie

I had someone next town over selling an enlarger on CL for like $35 last week. Can't find it now, but looks just like the ones I used while I was in school.


----------



## Marin

You can check around on CL's. There aren't sites like KEH for this stuff.

Also, buy your supplies from Freestyle (since they actually care about this stuff) if you can't get them locally.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;12694111*
> Isn't the only thing lower on the 60D over the 50D the frames per second?
> 
> Everyone seems to think that a plastic body makes the entire camera garbage, When it's stronger and lighter, and cheaper.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie;12694174*
> I too would like to know a bit more why the 60D is a neutered 50D (though I think I know some answers):
> 
> 1) Body is made less out of magnesium than the 50D
> 2) Lower FPS (5.3 iirc)
> 
> But it has 30fps 1080P video and (from what I've read) better noise handling than the 50D.
> 
> It's my understanding that the 50D and the T1i share the same sensor, so it's a true sidegrade with an upgrade to the body but a loss of video... I think I want that 30fps 1080p video now (or at least the option to shoot it) after watching some video off of my fiancee's old P&S A590IS..


I'll answer these with this:
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;12694179*
> The 60D also has a smaller body, loses that joystick, uses an (in my opinion) inferior smaller scroll wheel, lacks AF microadjust, and IMO feels smaller to use.
> 
> I have a love/hate thing with the 60D. I actually love its IQ performance, but I'm too used to my 50D's body ergonomics to change over.


Basically the differences have less to do with the image quality of the sensor, and more to do with ergonomics (the most significant IMO), burst speed, features such as micro adjust,etc.

The joystick and jog wheel controls are what make the xxD series (and the entire pro line of Canon DSLRs) great. Once you are accustomed to it, it's very efficient and quick. The wheel on the 60D isn't as good and the joystick is missing.

And about the magnesium alloy versus plastic. It used to matter a lot early on, as plastic tends to crack on impact whereas magnesium alloy will bend, thereby protecting the interior of the body better. But these days so-called "engineering plastics" are stronger than ever, hence the reason they're being used instead of magnesium.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;12694543*
> I'll answer these with this:
> 
> Basically the differences have less to do with the image quality of the sensor, and more to do with ergonomics (the most significant IMO), burst speed, features such as micro adjust,etc.
> 
> The joystick and jog wheel controls are what make the xxD series (and the entire pro line of Canon DSLRs) great. Once you are accustomed to it, it's very efficient and quick. The wheel on the 60D isn't as good and the joystick is missing.
> 
> And about the magnesium alloy versus plastic. It used to matter a lot early on, as plastic tends to crack on impact whereas magnesium alloy will bend, thereby protecting the interior of the body better. But these days so-called "engineering plastics" are stronger than ever, hence the reason they're being used instead of magnesium.


Know what's odd? While I was trying out the 7D vs 60D, I felt the joystick was counter-intuitive on the 7D..


----------



## theCanadian

Probably ABS plastic. It has a density about equal to water, so it's not exactly light either.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;12694502*
> Buy an enlarger, you can find cheap used ones.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie;12694601*
> Know what's odd? While I was trying out the 7D vs 60D, I felt the joystick was counter-intuitive on the 7D..
> 
> I really need to kind of mull this over on the quick -- I have an offer out to a friend to buy the body/grip and I can't justify going 7D yet, so I'm back on to the 50D vs 60D argument... I want video though.... *gah, wish I could put the 60D's innards in a 50D casing. >.<*[/B]


*
As do I (and probably many others)









The biggest advantage of the joystick for me is direct AF point selection. You literally just push that sucker to assign it to an AF point, or click it to use the center AF point. Very fast to do in the field, and much better than the old method of looking at your screen while using the dial.

*
*Quote:*


> *Originally Posted by Marin;12694539
> You can check around on CL's. There aren't sites like KEH for this stuff.
> 
> Also, buy your supplies from Freestyle (since they actually care about this stuff) if you can't get them locally.*


*
I'd Rep you if I could







*


----------



## laboitenoire

It could be ABS, but I thought I heard somewhere that the 60D was using a fiber-reinforced impact-modified polycarbonate? It'd be lighter, probably cheaper, and a whole lot tougher than ABS.

EDIT: Also, any of you Nikonians have an opinion on the 16-85 VR?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie;12694601*
> Know what's odd? While I was trying out the 7D vs 60D, I felt the joystick was counter-intuitive on the 7D..
> 
> I really need to kind of mull this over on the quick -- I have an offer out to a friend to buy the body/grip and I can't justify going 7D yet, so I'm back on to the 50D vs 60D argument... I want video though.... gah, wish I could put the 60D's innards in a 50D casing. >.<


As I was saying, once you become accustomed to it, it's the bees knees. There's a reason that same joystick-wheel combo is on the 5D and 1D bodies.

To alleviate some of your consternation, the 60D would work just fine for you judging from what your needs seem to be. Photographers are all about specs, most of which are very nit-picky and have little real impact (and some specs are arguably more critical, like the button layout). It's still a great camera, with a very high performing sensor.

One other plus for the 60D is that the kept the same AF point arrangement, 9 cross-type points. Very nice, especially in low light. My 5DII has just one cross-type point and AF in low-light can be tricky.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;12694620*
> As do I (and probably many others)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The biggest advantage of the joystick for me is direct AF point selection. You literally just push that sucker to assign it to an AF point, or click it to use the center AF point. Very fast to do in the field, and much better than the old method of looking at your screen while using the dial.


+1, I can change AF points in a split second thanks to the joystick. It also makes navigating through the menus easier.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire;12694634*
> It could be ABS, but I thought I heard somewhere that the 60D was using a fiber-reinforced impact-modified polycarbonate? It'd be lighter, probably cheaper, and a whole lot tougher than ABS.
> 
> EDIT: Also, any of you Nikonians have an opinion on the 16-85 VR?


According to DPReview, it's "aluminium and polycarbonate resin with glass fibre."


----------



## Shane1244

I don't even see the use for the joystick, I'm like never in the menu. The only time I use the d pad (i don't know what to call it) is when I select my focus point in the viewfinder.

EDIT: I can change the AF point ina split second too, I still don't see what the big deal about it is.


----------



## Marin

They've used polycarbonate since the start of the EOS system. First magnesium body was the 1v.


----------



## theCanadian

Hmm. I would have assumed ABS since it's quite impact resistant and depending on how it's formulated, even has a good bit of flex.


----------



## MistaBernie

Any word if the astro-jargon.net tool will work on the 60D to count the shutter clicks?


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *theCanadian;12694790*
> Hmm. I would have assumed ABS since it's quite impact resistant and depending on how it's formulated, even has a good bit of flex.


It's definitely has something added to it, it's a lot harder. I think I remember reading it has like aluminum strands in it or something?


----------



## Boyboyd

Amazon UK have the nikon D90 for £500 brand new now. Thinking about selling my 5000 and upgrading. Really would quite like an AF motor.


----------



## Shane1244

That's pretty good. How much is the D7000 in £ over there?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie;12694824*
> Any word if the astro-jargon.net tool will work on the 60D to count the shutter clicks?


Who knows. It's supposed to work with any Digic III/IV camera, but I couldn't get it to work with the 7D. Works with the 5DII though.

The EOSinfo tool is long overdue for an update (last version was released in 2009), so that's the best we can hope for.

The real question is: why is Canon so opposed to their customers knowing the shutter count? Nikon embeds the shutter count in the EXIF.


----------



## iandroo888

just cuz this is a photography forum..

http://www.theatlantic.com/infocus/2011/03/earthquake-in-japan/100022/

heres pictures of aftermath of japan's earthquake & tsunami last night


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;12694882*
> Who knows. It's supposed to work with any Digic III/IV camera, but I couldn't get it to work with the 7D. Works with the 5DII though.
> 
> The EOSinfo tool is long overdue for an update (last version was released in 2009), so that's the best we can hope for.
> 
> The real question is: why is Canon so opposed to their customers knowing the shutter count? Nikon embeds the shutter count in the EXIF.


Because then we can't get charged to send it in and have it checked. And then suggested for cleaning. Etc. EOSInfo seems to work with most _except_ the 500D (meaning likely not the 550D either) -- I bet POTN has a way of telling us how to get the clicks, but then I can't stay here and talk to awesome people.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;12694854*
> That's pretty good. How much is the D7000 in £ over there?


£900 body only is the best price i've seen.


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie;12694824*
> Any word if the astro-jargon.net tool will work on the 60D to count the shutter clicks?


This article claims it does. And the suggested website for my nikon did work.


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Boyboyd;12694965*
> £900 body only is the best price i've seen.


Oh wow. NEVERMIND!









I imagine the 5100 has to be coming sooner or later..?


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;12694997*
> Oh wow. NEVERMIND!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I imagine the 5100 has to be coming sooner or later..?


I honestly can't say. Probably best to sell mine before they announce it and the price for mine drops though.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Boyboyd;12694834*
> Amazon UK have the nikon D90 for £500 brand new now. Thinking about selling my 5000 and upgrading. Really would quite like an AF motor.


I'd jump on it. The D90 is a pretty good camera







Especially with the D7000 now, D90 prices have been dropping pretty well recently.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;12694472*
> I don't have access to the machines/chemicals myself. This is my first option too


if you are in teh bay, there are still a few wet community darkrooms.

Looking glass is the one I know off the top of my head.


----------



## dudemanppl

Hes a few hundred miles from the bay. But thanks for informing me there are community darkrooms. Had not known before.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;12698268*
> Hes a few hundred miles from the bay. But thanks for informing me there are community darkrooms. Had not known before.


I go back every break and summer and about once a month, so it's definitely an option for me







God knows there's much more to do there than here anyways!


----------



## Danylu

In Australia the D90 body only is $30 or so more than a D3100 body only lol...


----------



## dudemanppl

Developing film is cheaper than I thought. I just checked and all the chemicals and such would cost like 60 bucks from B&H.


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


In Australia the D90 body only is $30 or so more than a D3100 body only lol...


I don't even...

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Developing film is cheaper than I thought. I just checked and all the chemicals and such would cost like 60 bucks from B&H.


I'm lazy. What are the chemicals you need for B&W?


----------



## Dream Killer

film is always more expensive per picture than digital.

i just tried an 85mm 1.4g at the store today. after i snapped the pic below, i'm completely sold. will definitely be buying it in a few days.

*"Mark"*








note: no sharpening added! (shot in jpeg, though)


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


I'm lazy. What are the chemicals you need for B&W?


Fixer, developer, and stop. I might be missing something though, Marin will probably see this and correct me if I'm wrong.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer;12700667*
> film is always more expensive per picture than digital.


MF digital.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;12700758*
> Fixer, developer, and stop. I might be missing something though, Marin will probably see this and correct me if I'm wrong.


You should also get some stuff like Photo-Flo for the negs. Also different films work better with different developers.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer;12700667*
> 
> note: no sharpening added! (*shot in jpeg*, though)


That means sharpening was added.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;12700828*
> MF digital.
> 
> That means sharpening was added.


touché!

but i was referring to developing/printing on a per picture basis, not price of equipment. if it was equipment, both film and digital can scale up to unobtainable.

and yeah, the camera does sharpening (i have it at the d700's default, whatever it is) but i can sharpen a raw file a lot higher than the the camera could. a lot of people call this "strait-out-of-camera" but there's really no such no thing so i didn't use that term.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*


film is always more expensive per picture than digital.

i just tried an 85mm 1.4g at the store today. after i snapped the pic below, i'm completely sold. will definitely be buying it in a few days.

*"Mark"*








note: no sharpening added! (shot in jpeg, though)


I was like this:









Then I was like this:









Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


You should also get some stuff like Photo-Flo for the negs. Also different films work better with different developers.


If I were to shoot color negatives, would developing be different than with B&W, or is there some reliable place I can go to get the color film negs developed?


----------



## dudemanppl

AI-S lenses are so easy to take apart.
I take that back, how do you get this thing apart?!? Also, 500 posts.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


If I were to shoot color negatives, would developing be different than with B&W, or is there some reliable place I can go to get the color film negs developed?


It's trickier developing color but it can be done. Freestyle has kits it or you can hunt down something like a Jobo.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


It's trickier developing color but it can be done. Freestyle has kits it or you can hunt down something like a Jobo.


Thanks!







Srsly, you should write a book about everything you know. I'd buy it.


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Thanks!







Srsly, you should write a book about everything you know. I'd buy it.


To be fair, many pros do. I think Marin would argue that he's not at a point in his career where he's ready to do that.


----------



## Marin

Definitely.

Anywho, my stuff on my Flickr page looks so mediocre now compared to the work I'm doing at school.


----------



## dudemanppl

What are you planning to do when you get out of school, anyway? And I don't mean that in any negative way, I was just curious.


----------



## Marin

Product photography or go back to school.

But that can change, especially the type of photography.


----------



## Shane1244

Have any samples of the stuff you've been doing recently?


----------



## Marin

I've been too lazy to scan.


----------



## Danylu

Grr, quick LR question. When adding brushes, there used to be this little marker thing on the photo that let you modify one "set" of brush strokes. But now I can't find it anymore :S


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Grr, quick LR question. When adding brushes, there used to be this little marker thing on the photo that let you modify one "set" of brush strokes. But now I can't find it anymore :S


Press "H". Went though the same thing myself several months ago


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Press "H". Went though the same thing myself several months ago










Loving you very much right now









Next problem: Upgrading my computer to make LR lag less >.>


----------



## dudemanppl

How did you manage to get a D60 to run LR?


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Loving you very much right now









Next problem: Upgrading my computer to make LR lag less >.>


Assuming it's that "Big Black Box" build you have, I'm a bit astonished really you're having lag issues with LR. The Q6600 + 4GB of RAM shouldn't lag anywhere except with panos or when exporting. Is there any chance you have [email protected] running? That's the only conflict I had, because even with my old GTX 260 it'd lag with a standard 15MP shot.

But yea, looking at your build, it could be faster definitely, but I wouldn't think it'd lag either.

EDIT: Actually, looking it over again, I think it might be Vista. Compared to W7, it did use up more resources.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


How did you manage to get a D60 to run LR?


I told the D60 I'd buy a 2.8 lens to keep it company if it could run LR.

And that's why I have a 70-200 2.8.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Assuming it's that "Big Black Box" build you have, I'm a bit astonished really you're having lag issues with LR. The Q6600 + 4GB of RAM shouldn't lag anywhere except with panos or when exporting. Is there any chance you have [email protected] running? That's the only conflict I had, because even with my old GTX 260 it'd lag with a standard 15MP shot.

But yea, looking at your build, it could be faster definitely, but I wouldn't think it'd lag either.

EDIT: Actually, looking it over again, I think it might be Vista. Compared to W7, it did use up more resources.


Speaking of which, I just updated it









Major changes = I have 8gb of RAM now and I have W7 instead of Vista.

It takes a couple of seconds to render each photo in the loupe, and I see CPU usage rise to 75% and RAM usage increase by 150mb whilst the photo is being rendered. After the photo finishes rendering, this all drops back to previous levels.

[email protected] isn't running when I use Lightroom. Could it be the hard drives perhaps? I know I've always had this LR lag problem with this computer, and I've formatted several times already, so I think it is a hardware bottleneck.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;12702663*
> Assuming it's that "Big Black Box" build you have, I'm a bit astonished really you're having lag issues with LR. The Q6600 + 4GB of RAM shouldn't lag anywhere except with panos or when exporting. Is there any chance you have [email protected] running? That's the only conflict I had, because even with my old GTX 260 it'd lag with a standard 15MP shot.
> 
> But yea, looking at your build, it could be faster definitely, but I wouldn't think it'd lag either.
> 
> EDIT: Actually, looking it over again, I think it might be Vista. Compared to W7, it did use up more resources.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Danylu;12702760*
> I told the D60 I'd buy a 2.8 lens to keep it company if it could run LR.
> 
> And that's why I have a 70-200 2.8.
> 
> Speaking of which, I just updated it
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Major changes = I have 8gb of RAM now and I have W7 instead of Vista.
> 
> It takes a couple of seconds to render each photo in the loupe, and I see CPU usage rise to 75% and RAM usage increase by 150mb whilst the photo is being rendered. After the photo finishes rendering, this all drops back to previous levels.
> 
> [email protected] isn't running when I use Lightroom. Could it be the hard drives perhaps? I know I've always had this LR lag problem with this computer, and I've formatted several times already, so I think it is a hardware bottleneck.


I had a similar setup to Dany's and had lag. I had a [email protected] with 8GB DDR2, 9800GTX x2 and two Seagate Barracuda in RAID0, with Win7 64. Even with that, I would get really bad lag when culling shots full screen in the library and when exporting, but nowhere else.

Loving my current setup, it ***** slaps LR3 on a regular basis.







Doesn't lag anywhere even with 21MP RAW files.


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;12704232*
> I had a similar setup to Dany's and had lag. I had a [email protected] with 8GB DDR2, 9800GTX x2 and two Seagate Barracuda in RAID0, with Win7 64. Even with that, I would get really bad lag when culling shots full screen in the library and when exporting, but nowhere else.
> 
> Loving my current setup, it ***** slaps LR3 on a regular basis.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Doesn't lag anywhere even with 21MP RAW files.


I only have issue with LR while running [email protected] in windows seven on this rig: http://www.overclock.net/system.php?i=39549

If I shutdown [email protected], it runs lightning quick.


----------



## dudemanppl

Weird, my old rig and the one before that never had any problems with it. (Q8200 @ 2.8, 9800GTX+ SLI, 8 gigs of RAM).


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;12704232*
> I had a similar setup to Dany's and had lag. I had a [email protected] with 8GB DDR2, 9800GTX x2 and two Seagate Barracuda in RAID0, with Win7 64. Even with that, I would get really bad lag when culling shots full screen in the library and when exporting, but nowhere else.
> 
> Loving my current setup, it ***** slaps LR3 on a regular basis.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Doesn't lag anywhere even with 21MP RAW files.


That's interesting...

So compared to your old system, you have;

New processor (Perhaps something in the L2 cache or rather helped)
Less RAM that is faster
Better Graphics Card

A quick google of GPU acceleration and LR3 brings up the thread I made over a year ago









But it also brings up this thread;
Quote:


> I recently changed the video card in my system from an ATI 2600 Pro to an AMD 5450. The latter card is three generations newer, has lower power consumption, is DX11 compliant, and has several other goodies that were appealing to me. With that said, the 5450 is a tad behind the 2600 pro in raw processing power.
> 
> Since I do not do any gaming, I figured the slight hit in GPU processing power wasn't a big deal.
> 
> Well, after changing out the video card, the local adjustment brushes in lightroom have gotten a lot slower. They have gone from very slow to almost unusably slow. The only thing I did was change the video card and update the driver. Nothing else.
> 
> Specs of the system:
> 3.0Ghz Core 2 quad processor
> 8GB RAM
> Intel 80GB SSD as primary LR disk.
> Win7 64-bit
> 
> CPU usage seems to be between 50% and 85% (avg over all 4 cores) whenever I'm using the adjustment brushes.
> 
> *So basically, the point of this thread was to note the apparent slow down from changing the video card*. This is odd because Lightroom isn't supposed to take advantage of any sort of GPU acceleration. Hopefully Lightroom 3 changes this.


But that is with LR2, I'm not sure if much could have changed.

This was my proposed upgrade plan at the end of the year:

$200 graphics card upgrade (Guessing about a GTX570 by November)
4x2TB hard drives (2 in RAID 0, 2 in RAID 1)
Perhaps a watercooling kit for my CPU?

EDIT: Blah dudeman, there goes my five minutes of trying to find proof.

EDIT 2: I also only have 180gb free space out of 1TB so I'm not sure if that has anything to do with it :/


----------



## dudemanppl

Its probably because you are upside down, so your hard drives don't work as well. And my hard drives have less than 100GBs free.


----------



## Deteeguple

Buy Pharmacy Online!

Auswirkungen der tylenol bei Sauglingen
Flonase Levitra myonlinemeds biz Nexium Stimulation
Viagra Propecia Propecia Xenical Xenical Celebrex
aufzugebenden Lisinopril
Celebrex lupus
tylenol coumadin Reaktion
Naproxen XoD
Dosis Ritalin
OxyContin Online-Kauf
Diatvorschriften fur coumadin
Was ist der Oberbegriff fur Atarax
meridia r Ductil Sibutramin RSS Feed
Losungen Medrol Dosis Pack
Xenical kaufen in UK
synthroid Sodbrennen
Moglichkeiten zur Steigerung Testosteron
meridia Gewichtsverlust Informationen
Drogen fiorcet generischen Wellbutrin Zyrtec
Alkohol-Gemisch xanax
flomax Generika
Penicilline und Wirkmechanismus
erhohten Testosteron bei der Frau
tylenol Promethazin
Sildenafil Citrat caducidad
Fosamax Reaktion


----------



## dudemanppl

All photographers secretly go on KR's website at least once a week. True story.


----------



## Marin

Nope.


----------



## dudemanppl

Is that too mainstream?


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;12749407*
> Is that too mainstream?


Does not know what KR is.


----------



## sub50hz

Ken Rockwell: Maniac, dissenter, takes a lot of pictures of bathrooms.


----------



## theCanadian

I went to his website once, while you guys were talking about him before. I found his website unprofessional. I have not visited it since.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;12749619*
> Ken Rockwell: Maniac, dissenter, takes a lot of pictures of bathrooms.










Don't know how I could have not made the connection.

Eh, I browse to see his opinion. Always with a grain of salt though. Or grains, depending on his review. Sometimes an entire salt block.


----------



## Danylu

I know someone who takes Rockwell's words as law. I do not know why I jump off the nearest cliff when he quotes Rockwell.


----------



## theCanadian

lol attending my first shoot.
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6BtMNNZwzPU[/ame]


----------



## mz-n10

why is it so dark?


----------



## theCanadian

Because that's the way the photos were:


----------



## biatchi

Great action shot


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Film came in today. On a friend's recommendation, I got two rolls of Ektar 100 and Velvia 50 each and will try them out in SF on Wed. Definitely excited


----------



## dudemanppl

Psh, shoot black and white.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Psh, shoot black and white.


I don't know why, but all Ilford fim has been hard to find around here lately. Sad.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


I don't know why, but all Ilford fim has been hard to find around here lately. Sad.


I just order from B&H. I don't know if its any cheaper in store.


----------



## Marin

It's really easy to get Ilford out here. Also, support Ilford.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;12772906*
> Film came in today. On a friend's recommendation, I got two rolls of Ektar 100 and Velvia 50 each and will try them out in SF on Wed. Definitely excited


good luck on weds.....weve had *****ty weather all week......


----------



## MistaBernie

oh man, I used to buy Ilford 50/100 speed b&w in bulk during college. I miss those black and orange/green boxes..


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie;12777097*
> oh man, I used to buy Ilford 50/100 speed b&w in bulk during college. I miss those black and orange/green boxes..


What's worth seeing/shooting in Boston? Going there with the wife this summer. Never been before.


----------



## laboitenoire

Just walk the Freedom Trail. TONS of awesome stuff on the way. Paul Revere House, Faneuil Hall and Quincy Market, Bunker Hill, USS Constitution... Beacon Hill and the Back Bay are also pretty cool. Make sure you go to the North End if you like Italian food!

Also you can walk around the various college campuses in the city. Very pretty, especially Harvard.


----------



## Boyboyd

<--- Never been to the US of A









I really want to go to Yellowstone national park in the summer though.


----------



## MistaBernie

Freedom trail is great. It really depends what you want to see -- if you actually walk the Freedom Trail, you'll see some great historical buildings & architecture, while being able to turn around and see state of the art stuff pretty much right next to it.

What are some of you and the wife's hobbies, etc, besides photography?


----------



## sub50hz

I like Boston. If I left Chicago, it would be #2 on my places of cities to live in (first being San Diego -- suck it, winter).


----------



## dudemanppl

Winter doesn't exist here.


----------



## Dream Killer

Boston was pretty good for street photography. Distinctively different kind of people from NYC and by extension the interactions and emotions are unique to that city.

I'm still biased towards NYC for street photos though. There's no other city with diverse characters like the ones we have here.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Just walk the Freedom Trail. TONS of awesome stuff on the way. Paul Revere House, Faneuil Hall and Quincy Market, Bunker Hill, USS Constitution... Beacon Hill and the Back Bay are also pretty cool. Make sure you go to the North End if you like Italian food!

Also you can walk around the various college campuses in the city. Very pretty, especially Harvard.


Thanks for the suggestions; I'm wise to the Freedom Trail for sure.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*


<--- Never been to the US of A









I really want to go to Yellowstone national park in the summer though.


Come to Kentucky! It rocks here! I haven't been to the UK in a couple of years. Need to get back soon.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


Freedom trail is great. It really depends what you want to see -- if you actually walk the Freedom Trail, you'll see some great historical buildings & architecture, while being able to turn around and see state of the art stuff pretty much right next to it.

What are some of you and the wife's hobbies, etc, besides photography?


Wife could care less about photography, so I'll have a bit of a leash when it comes to shooting









Yeah, I had figured in the touristy sites like the Freedom Trail. Any areas where there are abandoned buildings and such? And what about natural areas? Any good nature preserves or parks in the vicinity? Or just any interesting out of the way spots?

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*


Boston was pretty good for street photography. Distinctively different kind of people from NYC and by extension the interactions and emotions are unique to that city.

I'm still biased towards NYC for street photos though. There's no other city with diverse characters like the ones we have here.


Definitely bringing the 135L for some street candids. Man do I wish I had the Canon TS-E 24mm. May see about renting it up there.


----------



## laboitenoire

If you're looking for wide-open green spaces, they're hard to find in the city limits. The Boston Common is probably your best bet. You could always go up to Revere Beach, as well. If you have the time, taking the ferry to Provincetown is also a fun trip! If you don't want to go that far, though, I think you'll plenty to do in the city.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


If you're looking for wide-open green spaces, they're hard to find in the city limits. The Boston Common is probably your best bet. You could always go up to Revere Beach, as well. If you have the time, taking the ferry to Provincetown is also a fun trip! If you don't want to go that far, though, I think you'll plenty to do in the city.


As I figured. I do enough nature photography here in KY, but still hoped to at least find some natural spots. Any such places in the vicinity, even if they're 50 miles away? Any decent waterfalls in MA? We should be staying there for quite a while, so we should have time for extra-urban excursions.


----------



## laboitenoire

In that case, you can do Wachusett Mountain in Princeton (north-central, about 45 minutes from Boston), Walden Pond in the Lexington-Concord area (itself very pretty, especially Minuteman State Park), or Blue Hills Reservation. Not sure of any waterfalls in the area, though... Definitely in the western part of the state, but eastern not so much.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;12782481*
> Come to Kentucky! It rocks here! I haven't been to the UK in a couple of years. Need to get back soon.


I'd be thankful to see any part of the world other than the part i live in at the moment. Not been away in a long while.


----------



## dudemanppl

I got my third 135L, WHEE WHOO, ITS JUST LIKE BEFORE! But its bigger this time than I recall before. Maybe I'm going crazy?


----------



## Marin

Threw this together, lulz.


----------



## iandroo888

when using a reflector outdoors... what color is best? silver or gold?

i know the gold one would give it a warmer light on the person.. is that a good thing? wouldnt using the silver side give it a kinda harsh light? i have a gold, silver, black, and white side... would white be good? or can that not reflect? lol


----------



## dudemanppl

Buy both, they aren't exactly expensive. Or just buy a gold one and then wrap a piece of cardboard with aluminum foil for the silver reflector.


----------



## Danylu

For some strange reason, ended up going through the photos I took whilst I had a D3, there's something unexplainable about it, but I quite like it.

Dammit, I'm losing the fight against temptation. Someone save me D:


----------



## dudemanppl

Have fun ordering your D3s tomorrow!


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


when using a reflector outdoors... what color is best? silver or gold?

i know the gold one would give it a warmer light on the person.. is that a good thing? wouldnt using the silver side give it a kinda harsh light? i have a gold, silver, black, and white side... would white be good? or can that not reflect? lol


theres no best side to use on a reflector. if you want a more sterile light then use the silver side, if you want a warmer lighting then use the gold. it really depends on the ultimate goal you want to accomplish. for people i would think to use gold side, but if its say sunset and theres already a really warm lighting then the silver might be more useful.

it depends on the reflectors, some of the silver reflectors are "softer" because they are textured when compared to a white reflector.


----------



## MistaBernie

Dangit all.. wish I had known about this _before_ I shipped my T1i out this AM









The 60D isn't in the Refurb program yet. So, I either have to pay the $799 for a refurb.. or $899 for brand new (which I would have to do within the next four hours if I wanted to take advantage of,







)...

I suppose I have other options, but I sold my t1i/body/50mm with a specific budget in mind, and now that's all messed up... and what's worse, due to the pending situation of the money from my T1i sale, my card may not be able to make the purchase tonite (and thus, I lose another $100)... le sigh.

So, right now in my bag..

Canon EF 28-135mm f/3.5-f/5.6
Canon EF-S 17-85mm f/4-f/5.6
Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L
YN 460 flash

(no body, and the payment from my sale hasn't cleared yet.







)

Hm. Revised plan -- I could actually purchase a 50D from the CLP and _make_ money on my trade, but I effectively get the same image quality and lose video, and downgrade from a mint body with < 1000 clicks to probably something similar, but one can never know..


----------



## sub50hz

Canon seems to do a great job refurbishing DSLRs. My 50D looked brand new out of the box, even had the plastic on the screen.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie;12794573*
> \
> 
> Hm. Revised plan -- I could actually purchase a 50D from the CLP and _make_ money on my trade, but I effectively get the same image quality and lose video, and downgrade from a mint body with < 1000 clicks to probably something similar, but one can never know..


I highly doubt a camera from CLP will come with anything close to 1000 clicks. It'd probably be less than 100, honestly.

And if I were in your position, I'd take the deal and would be happy with it. Sure it's the same sensor and you lose video, but the "semi-pro" features like the better body, rear dial, joystick, larger pentaprism viewfinder, and quick-access shooting options are all things I now can't live without. It's why after all this time I haven't traded in for a T2i, since even though the T2i offers video and a better sensor, the body and features of the 50D are something I now consider necessary.


----------



## Nemesis158

apparently we are having a super perigee full moon tonight. makes me wish i had a tele lens for my D3000. wonder if my 50MM 1.8D would do any good......


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nemesis158;12794979*
> apparently we are having a super perigee full moon tonight. makes me wish i had a tele lens for my D3000. wonder if my 50MM 1.8D would do any good......


Well, I took this with my 50mm f/1.4 @ f/8.


----------



## MistaBernie

I'm actually arranging a 60D purchase tonite w/ a friend of mine that's doing me a solid (well, kinda paying me back for something too, heh).


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;12792193*
> Have fun ordering your D3s tomorrow!


lol you aren't helping! xD
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;12795013*
> Well, I took this with my 50mm f/1.4 @ f/8.


Very nice, a more unique shot of the moon









Here's mine @ 200mm.


DSC_5458-Edit Merged.jpg by Dany a Photographr, on Flickr


----------



## iandroo888

clouds covering the city







dont get to see anything again like the eclipse


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nemesis158;12794979*
> apparently we are having a super perigee full moon tonight. makes me wish i had a tele lens for my D3000. wonder if my 50MM 1.8D would do any good......


The "super moon" doesn't look any more impressive to me than an ordinary full moon. Only 14% larger.


----------



## dudemanppl

Hmm, I just figured out split toning in LR. Now my pictures will look hipstery!


----------



## iandroo888

what shutter speeds and aperture are you guys using? mine are all coming out overexposed


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iandroo888;12797644*
> what shutter speeds and aperture are you guys using? mine are all coming out overexposed


Do you mean the moon? Spot metering! It's close to what daylight meters.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;12796854*
> Hmm, I just figured out split toning in LR. Now my pictures will look hipstery!


Split-tone a picture of a Holga for a maximum tight-pants simulation.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;12797722*
> Do you mean the moon? Spot metering! It's close to what daylight meters.


lol i kept it at matrix metering.. shot at around 1/200 f/9. came out decent


----------



## dudemanppl

I wonder how skinny jeans work...


----------



## Marin

You wear them.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;12797833*
> I wonder how skinny jeans work...


They make you _look *cool*_. Hang around a skatepark, and try and count the number of times those kids have to "adjust" them.

P.S. A large amount of my friends are quite hipstery, and they all think my 505s are "baggy". I get a hearty laugh out of that now and again.


----------



## Danylu

I wanted to look cool as well, like all my mac toting friends, so I buy skinny jeans that are 4 sizes too big so I can be comfortable whilst being technically cool!

Oh, being technical makes me a geek.


----------



## Marin

I find them to be comfortable.


----------



## dudemanppl

I love getting off topic. So hows about that Samyang 35 1.4? I think I might have to try one out...


----------



## Marin

It's like the 35L except lame.


----------



## Danylu

Bah, this is a shot of the moon that I like. Wish I could drive out to wherever I wanted to take photos









http://www.flickr.com/photos/peterjbailey/5540602127/


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;12798474*
> It's like the 35L except lame.


Don't say that, that makes sad panda cry. Anyway, I just bought a water damaged D2X and 24-70 for 400. Should go for around 1500 on ebay. NBD.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;12798709*
> Don't say that, that makes sad panda cry. Anyway, I just bought a water damaged D2X and 24-70 for 400. Should go for around 1500 on ebay. NBD.


Are you gonna clean em up?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Bah, this is a shot of the moon that I like. Wish I could drive out to wherever I wanted to take photos









http://www.flickr.com/photos/peterjbailey/5540602127/


... and have a 500 f/4L with a 2X TC. Doesn't matter if the moon is at its closest, the most reach will get the best close-up moon shots.

This is the best I could ever manage with only 200mm of reach (it was with a 7D, so there was some extra reach). Heavy cropping on this one:


IMG_0059 by gonetomorrow00, on Flickr


----------



## Shane1244

Did any of you guys even get pictures on the moon when it was close and super bright orange?

It was massive: (not my pic)


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*


Did any of you guys even get pictures on the moon when it was close and super bright orange?


It was covered with a thin gauze of clouds here. Didn't look good at all.


----------



## Shane1244

Darn, I never got to see it cresting over the earth either. Apparently there is some illusion's that when the moon crests over the earths horizon that makes it look MASSIVE. Once it's up in the sky, it's only 14% bigger. I herd about it on some NASA video on youtube and they said that the illusion is unexplainable.


----------



## Danylu

I'm going to have another crack it tonight with something special









But I do wish that I had visibility of the moon near moonrise


----------



## laboitenoire

Unexplainable? It's simple physics... Light gets refracted at weird angles and magnifies the image.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Are you gonna clean em up?


Yeah, of course.


----------



## iandroo888

thats the best i could do last night with 18-105 and cropping :3

really wanted to do a rise or set picture.. said to be biggest at those times but city was covered in clouds during those times -.- like it was screwin with me to not let me get a picture







it cleared up when it was highest in the sky D:


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

I was planning to, but all I could see were dark clouds and rain. Darn you Bay Area weather patterns


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iandroo888;12803312*
> 
> thats the best i could do last night with 18-105 and cropping :3
> 
> really wanted to do a rise or set picture.. said to be biggest at those times but city was covered in clouds during those times -.- like it was screwin with me to not let me get a picture
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> it cleared up when it was highest in the sky D:


The moon isn't actually larger at set/rise. It just appears that way since when it's in the sky, it's a dot in the sky, where as if it were low, it appears about the size of a building.

I think full moon shots are generally kinda dull. I like this better.


----------



## riko99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;12802206*
> Did any of you guys even get pictures on the moon when it was close and super bright orange?
> 
> It was massive: (not my pic)


How come this shot looks like a Shop to me... Check the cloud cover now it may be because of the size but it just seems like the clouds go behind the moon.


----------



## theCanadian

The proximity of the foreground objects and the clouds lead me to believe that was a shop. To pull that effect off, you usually need a long telephoto and to be quite far from your subject.


----------



## Marin

Composite.


----------



## Danylu

I'm going to post some 900mm shots of the moon this weekend. It's a shame that moonrise is an hour after sunset so no awesome lighting for me


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Unexplainable? It's simple physics... Light gets refracted at weird angles and magnifies the image.


Misconception, as the moon gets very near to the horizon it actually gets compressed vertically due to the refraction of the atmosphere.

And shane was correct, there is still debate over what makes the moon be perceived as larger when near the horizon then a zenith moon.


----------



## Marin

Mamiya C330 + 180mm f/4.5 is so addicting to use. I can't stop using this combo since the results are so awesome.

And for studio use I use my Hasselblad with the schools 180mm f/4. My reaction every time I use it.


----------



## sub50hz

Where on earth do you get your money?


----------



## Marin

Forge it.

But I've owned these camera's for awhile. I've had the Hasselblad for over a year now and got the C330 with three lenses for cheap over the summer.


----------



## Shane1244

Student Debt** ?


----------



## Marin

That too.


----------



## sub50hz

I'm not criticizing your apparent wealth, just curious.


----------



## Shane1244

I envy it.


----------



## mz-n10

i envy the 14 year with a 5d2 or a d700 or a 1ds3 or a d3x or whatever other camera he has now


----------



## dudemanppl

I've never gone that far up the food chain. I haven't owned any D(insertnumberhere)x cameras or 1Dss.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*


I envy it.


Ask yourself -- why?

_Let's get deep, here, bros._


----------



## dudemanppl

Its human nature to want better stuff.


----------



## RealEyes

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Ask yourself -- why?

_Let's get deep, here, bros._


Let's not waste our time with envy.

dA


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Its human nature to want better stuff.


Sure, but to be envious of it? That's just stupid. You can want without being a wuss about it.

Want it? Find a way to get it. Sadly, this philosophy is lost on most of today's youth.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Sure, but to be envious of it? That's just stupid. You can want without being a wuss about it.

Want it? Find a way to get it. Sadly, this philosophy is lost on most of today's youth.


Heh, not me. Be smart, make money. Get stuff you want. Easy!


----------



## RealEyes

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Heh, not me. Be smart, make money. Get stuff you want. Easy!


Amen?


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Heh, not me. Be smart, make money. Get stuff you want. Easy!


Aren't you a youngin yourself? Maybe I am thinking of someone else... but I don't think so.


----------



## Marin

I'm 13.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Aren't you a youngin yourself? Maybe I am thinking of someone else... but I don't think so.


14. Don't be stupid with money. I buy and sell a lot because it just makes me more money since I'm perfectly content with my gear.

















Look thats me, I look 14 right?


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Heh, not me. Be smart, make money. Get stuff you want. Easy!



Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


14. Don't be stupid with money. I buy and sell a lot because it just makes me more money since I'm perfectly content with my gear.


At 14 years old, how could you possibly be giving financial advice? I don't get it. You're not even (I guess depending on state labor laws) old enough to have worked an entire year!

Lots of OCNers are being fed with a silver spoon, it seems. That being said, it makes me feel that much better to have worked hard for everything I can show for it.


----------



## Marin

I just have this gear since I kind of have to have it.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


At 14 years old, how could you possibly be giving financial advice? I don't get it. You're not even (I guess depending on state labor laws) old enough to have worked an entire year!

Lots of OCNers are being fed with a silver spoon, it seems. That being said, it makes me feel that much better to have worked hard for everything I can show for it.


I haven't worked.







Although I work for all my stuff, its not officially any work. My parents supported me with a D40 when I first started (but then I paid them back) and when I went to Taiwan my grandparents gave me like 700 or something.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


I just have this gear since I kind of have to have it.


That's fine. Again, not criticizing you or trying to make you look like a prick for having it.


----------



## dudemanppl

Oh and that picture of "me" is Marin, hes in college. ACCD, in fact.


----------



## Marin

Stop stalking me.


----------



## sub50hz

I know it's him. I wish I was still in college, le sigh.

edit: For the record, you almost *do* look 14 in that photo, Marin. May I suggest more synthetic animal hormones, booze and street fights?


----------



## dudemanppl

Not in Pasedena, bro. The ghettoest place around here is El Monte and thats not ghetto at all. And I remember facts about people well, its sort of creepy.


----------



## sub50hz

What makes you think those things only occur in the ghetto? Lol, *you're killin me, Smalls*.


----------



## dudemanppl

I should get to sleep. I really don't think anyone should take medical advice from OCN.


----------



## Danylu

I did biology. I can be your doctor B-D


----------



## MistaBernie

My 60D is in and I'm already happy with my decision to switch up...

so happy that instead of buying a nifty fifty to replace the one I sold as part of my kit, I bought a 50mm f/1.4


----------



## sub50hz

28-135 _and_ 17-85 *and* 70-200?? I'd start selling a couple of those if I were you, haha.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;12828757*
> 28-135 _and_ 17-85 *and* 70-200?? I'd start selling a couple of those if I were you, haha.


I know.. I'm still feeling it out









The logical choice seems to be to keep the 17-85 & 70-200, but I really like my 28-135. I feel like at the wide end, the 17-85 tends to have too much distortion -- I know this can be fixed, but I really like the fact that I _dont_ have to fix the images from the 50, 28-135 or the 70-200 (besides minor color corrections because I can never settle on a decent white balance).

I even had a poll, and it started out being really one-sided to keep the 17-85, but now it's pretty close.. add to that the fact that I bought the 28-135 used on CL and dont have any packaging for it, etc, and that makes shipping it illogical (that and of the three, it's the cheapest lens).


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie;12828845*
> I know.. I'm still feeling it out
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The logical choice seems to be to keep the 17-85 & 70-200, but I really like my 28-135. I feel like at the wide end, the 17-85 tends to have too much distortion -- I know this can be fixed, but I really like the fact that I _dont_ have to fix the images from the 50, 28-135 or the 70-200 (besides minor color corrections because I can never settle on a decent white balance).
> 
> I even had a poll, and it started out being really one-sided to keep the 17-85, but now it's pretty close.. add to that the fact that I bought the 28-135 used on CL and dont have any packaging for it, etc, and that makes shipping it illogical (that and of the three, it's the cheapest lens).


I've sent out lenses wrapped heavily in bubble wrapped and double boxed; never had an issue with damage before.


----------



## theCanadian

Our photo department in Student Media is going to be given a $6,000 budget. We're picking up an AF-S 70-200 VR and some basic flashes, and probably a couple cheap tripods to put them on. And we'll also probably pick up a similar canon lens.

Which should still leave some room for some other stuff. I think I'm going to request we pick up the 35mm AF-S f/1.8, but what else...?


----------



## sub50hz

Hard to say without knowing what's already there.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Added the Canonet 28 to my collection







My first film rangefinder camera. I also just got a Rebel II film camera (EF lens mount!). Also hoping to add an AE-1 as well.


----------



## dudemanppl

I budgeted and I have extra money... 1DIIn, 5D, or 70-200 f/2.8 L?


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


I budgeted and I have extra money... 1DIIn, 5D, or 70-200 f/2.8 L?


Doesn't help without a gear list and what you're planning to do with it, but out of those three I'd choose the 70-200 f/2.8L for myself.

What I wouldn't give to be at a KARA concert with that lens...


----------



## sub50hz

Who the hell is KARA?

Also, dudemanppl, have you ever linked any of your work? I'm interested.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Who the hell is KARA?

Also, dudemanppl, have you ever linked any of your work? I'm interested.


Kpop group.

Shush, you








Everyone has their guilty pleasures.


----------



## sub50hz

Kpop?

edit: I googled.... well, _I'm sorry_.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Kpop?

edit: I googled.... well, _I'm sorry_.


Aha, yea. Usually not my cup of tea, but like I said, everyone has their guilty pleasures


----------



## sub50hz

Lol, I did a little youtubing -- that's gotta be the guiltiest pleasure I've ever heard of, haha.


----------



## laboitenoire

Got my state tax refund. Now to wait until I get the fed refund and then I can buy something...


----------



## shinigamibob

Woot... so glad I found this thread.

I would like to be a member of this awesomely awesome club. Here is my equipment:

Canon EOS Rebel T1i
Canon EF-S 18-55mm
Canon EF-S 55-250mm
A bunch of Polaroid Filters


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Hard to say without knowing what's already there.


point and shoot cameras lol. That's all we have. We're using our own personal cameras. We're wanting to keep it in the consumer range, since most likely people are going to have entry to mid level DSLR's, thus, the AF-S for Nikon.

So again 6 Grand budget, with a 70-200 MM f/2.8 and some cheap flashes and tripods locked in.

Edit: Also, the T3i showed up on the scene rather quietly. I found out from Amazon haha.


----------



## sub50hz

Any reason you're set on Nikon? If the media department is multi-faceted and may include video capture, something like a 60D would be hard to ignore.


----------



## theCanadian

We're assuming that people are at least going to have a body and kit lens. So we're grabbing the 70-200 AF-S for the nikon users and likely something similar for canon. Our department of student media is photography. We have other people who work on video. And they already have nice things







.


----------



## sub50hz

So, 6G for some inexpensive accessories and a couple lenses? How many tripods do you need?


----------



## theCanadian

Wait wait wait. Does HSM focusing motors (Sigma) work on the consumer bodies? If so, I'm going to battle for this instead:

  Amazon.com: Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 DG HSM II Macro Zoom Lens for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras: Camera & Photo


----------



## sub50hz

Is this for a high school or college?


----------



## theCanadian

College.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


Wait wait wait. Does HSM focusing motors (Sigma) work on the consumer bodies? If so, I'm going to battle for this instead: Amazon.com: Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 DG HSM II Macro Zoom Lens for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras: Camera & Photo


Yes they do. That Sigma lens isn't as a good a performer as even the mark I of either the Canon or Nikon versions. It is much cheaper I realize, but since you've got the budget...


----------



## sub50hz

Someone keep me from buying a 50/1.4 right now. I... had an unfortunate accident with my 1.8 today while up on my roof.


----------



## Shane1244

Sell ya mine, It's too tight for me.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


What I wouldn't give to be at a KARA concert with that lens...


im sure you like them for their music.....









Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Someone keep me from buying a 50/1.4 right now. I... had an unfortunate accident with my 1.8 today while up on my roof.


why would you want a sharper, faster, quieter lens? dont do it.


----------



## sub50hz

Would have to be a pretty appealing price to have to deal with customs and whatnot. And also to put it in my hands by Friday.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


why would you want a sharper, faster, quieter lens? dont do it.


Because the valium/vicodin cocktail running through me right now makes most things sound like good ideas, although it's very difficult to _actually do_ them.


----------



## theCanadian

In that case, NOT buying the f/1.4 will make you feel like you have masterful selfcontrol later on and it is therefore a good idea to abstain. At least for the immediate future.


----------



## Shane1244

I can get around customs and duties. Friday on the other hand won't be possible.


----------



## MistaBernie

Sucks Sub, B&H actually had a refurb today at one point. Not anymore.

I wont mention who actually bought it though







Hope you're feelin' better though!


----------



## dudemanppl

Link I have to admit there's a lot of stuff on there I'm not proud of at all.

EDIT: and for TheCanadian, I recommend a lot of D40s and 35 1.8s.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;12832385*
> Doesn't help without a gear list and what you're planning to do with it, but out of those three I'd choose the 70-200 f/2.8L for myself.
> 
> What I wouldn't give to be at a KARA concert with that lens...


Canon EOS 5D Mark II + BG-E6
Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8 USM L II
Canon EF 35mm f/1.4 USM L
Sigma 50mm f/1.4 EX DG HSM
Sigma 85mm f/1.4 EX DG HSM
Canon EF 135mm f/2 USM L
Canon EF Extender 1.4x II


----------



## sub50hz

Hrm... Canon 50/1.4 or Sigmalux...

I'm ordering by noon, you suckers have 8 hours to convince me one way or the other.


----------



## Marin

http://www.mentalfloss.com/blogs/archives/15131


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *theCanadian;12833122*
> Wait wait wait. Does HSM focusing motors (Sigma) work on the consumer bodies? If so, I'm going to battle for this instead: Amazon.com: Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 DG HSM II Macro Zoom Lens for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras: Camera & Photo


What type of photography? If the college sends you guys out to cover some college events make sure you all have 2.8 tele zooms.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;12835526*
> Hrm... Canon 50/1.4 or Sigmalux...
> 
> I'm ordering by noon, you suckers have 8 hours to convince me one way or the other.


The Sigmalux wins in the bokeh department and sharpness wide open, but both are closer than some like to claim. The Sigmalux beats the Canon out in build quality and AF speed for sure, though the Sigma seems suffer from focus shifting apparently (though from what I've read, it happens mostly when stopped down).

I've thought about trying the Sigmalux myself instead of my Canon, but don't want to deal with the focus issues.


----------



## Danylu

Okay so big problem, I have not used the tripod for two days and now two of the joints in one of the legs is extremely stiff. I can just extend the upper part but I can't even make the lower section budge. The lower lever seems to lack any resistance when I try to lock the leg so I'm guessing that has somehow disconnected with the leg section.

Anyone got a solution short of disassembling the tripod and cleaning it completely? I don't have the time for that unfortunately. I'm thinking of giving it a bit of lubricant and seeing if that helps.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;12835526*
> Hrm... Canon 50/1.4 or Sigmalux...
> 
> I'm ordering by noon, you suckers have 8 hours to convince me one way or the other.


Eh, a month ago I would have said Canon, but now the 50mm focal point is almost unused. The only reason I haven't sold it is because it's godly on my film camera.


----------



## laboitenoire

Yeah, try a little bit of a silicone-based lubricant and see if that fixes it.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


The only reason I haven't sold it is because it's godly on my film camera.


The only time I really use it is on film, but I still have the occasional desire to toss it on my 50D. I forgot to order because I was medicated beyond belief and woke up about 20 minutes ago.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Okay so big problem, I have not used the tripod for two days and now two of the joints in one of the legs is extremely stiff. I can just extend the upper part but I can't even make the lower section budge. The lower lever seems to lack any resistance when I try to lock the leg so I'm guessing that has somehow disconnected with the leg section.

Anyone got a solution short of disassembling the tripod and cleaning it completely? I don't have the time for that unfortunately. I'm thinking of giving it a bit of lubricant and seeing if that helps.


See if you can get your hands on either Tri-Flow or PB Blaster. PB works better/faster, but Tri-Flow has a million other uses in your home/recreational life.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;12837550*
> Eh, a month ago I would have said Canon, but now the 50mm focal point is almost unused. The only reason I haven't sold it is because it's godly on my film camera.


really? i havent used my 50/1.4 much recently since i havent found a reason to use it.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10;12847503*
> really? i havent used my 50/1.4 much recently since i havent found a reason to use it.


Well, the 50mm f/1.4 has almost the same FoV as the cropped focal length of my 28mm on my 50D, which is what I've been using much more often. To me, that whole 50mm FF/30mm cropped region is very comfortable to shoot with.

EDIT: Also just got back from SF. If anyone was there today and saw people horseback racing on each other at Union Square this afternoon... yea


----------



## sub50hz

Maybe it's just time I rolled the dice on the Sigma 30mm, and sold my Canon 35. I don't know anymore. Everything I shoot is with 35/50/85 and I only occasionally long for more because... who knows? I should probably just buy a 50 and call it. Sigmalux or Canon, though? Most signs point to Canon.


----------



## Marin

And now I have access to strobes. Used some broncolor strobes and used both a Flexbody and my 201F. I'll try to get some scans up since the pics are sick.


----------



## sub50hz

I went crazy and ordered the Sigma 10-20. WHY.


----------



## laboitenoire

The constant aperture one or the variable aperture? Either way, they're both good lenses.


----------



## sub50hz

Variable. I don't need the 3.5 in an UWA, and they're all ridiculously soft there to begin with.


----------



## laboitenoire

Lol, I'm having commitment issues deciding on my new lens. I really want to replace my 18-55 VR with either the 16-85 VR or the Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 OS, but at the same time I don't have a fast prime like the 35 f/1.8 or 30 f/1.4. And then there's the temptation to go wide angle. Probably either the Sigma 8-16 or Tokina 12-24, or maybe even the Sigma 10-20.

Why can't I decide!?!?!


----------



## Boyboyd

Don't canon do a super-wide that's much better? 10-22 or something? Or is it 5x the price?

I was thinking of getting the variable aperture sigma as my next lens.


----------



## Nemesis158

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire;12855150*
> Lol, I'm having commitment issues deciding on my new lens. I really want to replace my 18-55 VR with either the 16-85 VR or the Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 OS, but at the same time I don't have a fast prime like the 35 f/1.8 or 30 f/1.4. And then there's the temptation to go wide angle. Probably either the Sigma 8-16 or Tokina 12-24, or maybe even the Sigma 10-20.
> 
> Why can't I decide!?!?!


>Get them all
>?????????
>Profit










I myself have a D3000 with 18-55VR Kit lens, plus the 50 F/1.8.
Need to get myself a 35MM 1.8/1.4, a good wide-angle, and a telephoto.......


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;12854751*
> Variable. I don't need the 3.5 in an UWA, and they're all ridiculously soft there to begin with.


Depends on which UWA! The Canon 10-22 is dead sharp wide open (f/3.5)
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire;12855150*
> Lol, I'm having commitment issues deciding on my new lens. I really want to replace my 18-55 VR with either the 16-85 VR or the Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 OS, but at the same time I don't have a fast prime like the 35 f/1.8 or 30 f/1.4. And then there's the temptation to go wide angle. Probably either the Sigma 8-16 or Tokina 12-24, or maybe even the Sigma 10-20.
> 
> Why can't I decide!?!?!


I say go for a fast standard zoom first. Very nice to have. And splurge for the Nikon 17-55.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Boyboyd;12855257*
> Don't canon do a super-wide that's much better? 10-22 or something? Or is it 5x the price?
> 
> I was thinking of getting the variable aperture sigma as my next lens.


Yep, the 10-22. I used it with an XTi, 40D and 7D. One of the best lenses I've used. I cried when I had to sell after going FF.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Boyboyd;12855257*
> Don't canon do a super-wide that's much better? 10-22 or something? Or is it 5x the price?
> 
> I was thinking of getting the variable aperture sigma as my next lens.


It's almost 900 bucks, compared to the 440 I just paid from Abes. I tried the Canon out in-store at Calumet -- it was nice, but for a lens I don't expect to use very often, I had a hard time justifying the price.

For the record, that Canon _is_ a better lens. Just didn't want to pay for it.


----------



## Shane1244

I'm saving up for a Sigma 10-20.. I can't decide if I want to save up more for the 3.5, I know it will come in very hand for when I'm zooming in video, but I'm not sure if I'll ever be making anything more than family videos etc..


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;12855331*
> Depends on which UWA! The Canon 10-22 is dead sharp wide open (f/3.5)


It's also more money than I was willing to spend. I'm not usually a fan of 3rd party stuff, but the more samples I see from the Sigma, I'm very impressed.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;12855346*
> It's almost 900 bucks, compared to the 440 I just paid from Abes. I tried the Canon out in-store at Calumet -- it was nice, but for a lens I don't expect to use very often, I had a hard time justifying the price.
> 
> For the record, that Canon _is_ a better lens. Just didn't want to pay for it.


The retail price is steep, but the used price is much lower. At POTN, the 10-22 goes for between $500 and $600 (I got mine for $575). Plus there always seems to be plenty for sale from people switching to FF.


----------



## sub50hz

Every one of them I have seen as of late was at least 650. That's still a bit more than I wanted to spend, to be honest. I've still gotta order that 135L, you know.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;12855605*
> Every one of them I have seen as of late was at least 650. That's still a bit more than I wanted to spend, to be honest. *I've still gotta order that 135L, you know.*


So true!


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;12855331*
> Yep, the 10-22. I used it with an XTi, 40D and 7D. One of the best lenses I've used. I cried when I had to sell after going FF.


I have heard excellent things about it. There's some impressive shots in it's flickr group too.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;12855346*
> It's almost 900 bucks, compared to the 440 I just paid from Abes. I tried the Canon out in-store at Calumet -- it was nice, but for a lens I don't expect to use very often, I had a hard time justifying the price.
> 
> For the record, that Canon _is_ a better lens. Just didn't want to pay for it.


That is a lot more money. Can't believe I was convincing myself to go canon because their lenses are cheaper than nikon.


----------



## sub50hz

Canon has great lenses. And by great lenses, I mean L zooms and L/non-L primes. They have a new non-L zooms that are quite good, but when it really comes down to it, it seems like Nikon offers a lot more (though, for a lot more $$$$$$) in the zoom arena. Which, concurrently, is what most people want anyway. If their ergonomics didn't disagree so badly with my hands, I'd probably own a D700 or D300s instead of my 50D. They truly feel awful in my hands. Awful.


----------



## Deano12345

I'm jealous of ye, and your money









I'm also debating that 10-20 Sigma though, well, once I'm off for Summer. Either that or an A55, I don't know.

Also, does anyone have the Backpack (its the LCD attachment thing for the HD Hero) Probably will pick one up for my da soon-ish I think, so I was wondering is it any good ?


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;12856090*
> Canon has great lenses. And by great lenses, I mean L zooms and L/non-L primes. They have a new non-L zooms that are quite good, but when it really comes down to it, it seems like Nikon offers a lot more (though, for a lot more $$$$$$) in the zoom arena. Which, concurrently, is what most people want anyway. If their ergonomics didn't disagree so badly with my hands, I'd probably own a D700 or D300s instead of my 50D. They truly feel awful in my hands. Awful.


I understand that, it's also why i'll probably never own a sony dslr.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Deano12345;12856136*
> I'm jealous of ye, and your money
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm also debating that 10-20 Sigma though, well, once I'm off for Summer. Either that or an A55, I don't know.
> 
> Also, does anyone have the Backpack (its the LCD attachment thing for the HD Hero) Probably will pick one up for my da soon-ish I think, so I was wondering is it any good ?


a55 (or a77 if its out). i really hate that a230....lol


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Nemesis158*


>Get them all
>?????????
>Profit


Lol, my tax refund isn't that big!

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


I say go for a fast standard zoom first. Very nice to have. And splurge for the Nikon 17-55.










The only thing holding me back from a fast standard zoom is that I'm not sure how much I'd prefer having f/2.8 over VR. If Nikon updated the lens with VR, then I'd probably get it! That being said, $800 used is waaaay out of my price range.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire;12860580*
> Lol, my tax refund isn't that big!
> 
> The only thing holding me back from a fast standard zoom is that I'm not sure how much I'd prefer having f/2.8 over VR. If Nikon updated the lens with VR, then I'd probably get it! That being said, $800 used is waaaay out of my price range.


I personally prefer larger apertures over IS. Both help with camera shake in different ways (larger aperture allows you to raise shutter speed), but IS can't also manipulate DoF like aperture can.


----------



## laboitenoire

Ugh, now I'm debating the possibility of selling my D5000 and getting a D200 or D300... I have *way* too much camera angst, and for no reason... I know lenses should come before bodies, but the Tokina 11-16 is calling, and I'd have no AF on my D5000.


----------



## Nemesis158

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire;12861219*
> Ugh, now I'm debating the possibility of selling my D5000 and getting a D200 or D300... I have *way* too much camera angst, and for no reason... I know lenses should come before bodies, but the Tokina 11-16 is calling, and I'd have no AF on my D5000.


I Manage MF just fine on my D3000 with the nikon 50mm 1.8D


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nemesis158;12861242*
> I Manage MF just fine on my D3000 with the nikon 50mm 1.8D


No lie? I struggle quite a bit with MF without a split prism, EF-S focusing screen, rangefinder, or 100% coverage viewfinder (with which I still have difficulty sometimes)


----------



## sub50hz

Really? You know, the focus points light up for confirmation, which can help. Years of shooting a manual-focus camera helps. Most of the time, I couldn't care less about AF, except when shooting moving subjects, which is akin to laying in a lounge chair and just worrying about compo.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;12861436*
> Really? You know, the focus points light up for confirmation, which can help. Years of shooting a manual-focus camera helps. Most of the time, I couldn't care less about AF, except when shooting moving subjects, which is akin to laying in a lounge chair and just worrying about compo.


It's not that great with me. AF on my 50D is more accurate than MF with AF point confirmation for whatever reason. I find that even if the AF point lights up, the picture can still be a bit OOF (esp noticeable with text and such).

It may also have to do with how my first "real" jump into photography started last year with an XTi, so I don't have the years of experience with old-fashioned MF cameras that most of you do. Seeing how many people can easily MF with their old cameras, I'm almost convinced it's an experience thing.


----------



## Nemesis158

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;12861367*
> No lie? I struggle quite a bit with MF without a split prism, EF-S focusing screen, rangefinder, or 100% coverage viewfinder (with which I still have difficulty sometimes)


well here are some pictures that i have taken with it in MF:








































And i've only had this lens for about 3 weeks now.........


----------



## laboitenoire

Have to downgrade my plans... Just remembered I have to pay dues next week for the fraternity.







So even when the rest of my tax refund shows up, I won't be buying anything huge.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire;12861550*
> Have to downgrade my plans... Just remembered I have to pay dues next week for the fraternity.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So even when the rest of my tax refund shows up, I won't be buying anything huge.


Camera gear > fraternity









On a more serious note, it looks like you're going for a 35mm f/1.8 then!


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;12861482*
> It's not that great with me. AF on my 50D is more accurate than MF with AF point confirmation for whatever reason. I find that even if the AF point lights up, the picture can still be a bit OOF (esp noticeable with text and such).
> 
> It may also have to do with how my first "real" jump into photography started last year with an XTi, so I don't have the years of experience with old-fashioned MF cameras that most of you do. Seeing how many people can easily MF with their old cameras, I'm almost convinced it's an experience thing.


na dont feel bad, i cant MF with my a900 (its got a bright 100% vf...) but since it doenst have a split prism.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire;12861550*
> Have to downgrade my plans... Just remembered I have to pay dues next week for the fraternity.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So even when the rest of my tax refund shows up, I won't be buying anything huge.


Define huge. Do you feel like there's anything lacking in your kit? After renting a pair of teles last weekend and sending my 50mm to a concrete grave, I decided to re-evaluate my needs (read: wants), and I'm glad they didn't cost me a bundle.


----------



## Dream Killer

I used to be borderline addicted to mini-golf, so judging distances is easy for me. This carries over to focusing manually. With a 35mm lens, if I set the lens to 4 feet, It's guaranteed that everything about 3.5-5 feet will be in focus at f/4. It helps for street photography.

Too bad the newest lenses are optimized for quick-AF. Therefore DoF markings and proper distance windows are useless on the newer lenses. USM/SWM technology also did away with hard focusing because of the clutch. It was nice to be able to pre-set distances while my camera was still in my pocket.

Maybe I should e-bay some Nikon MF lenses and run around with them?


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;12861482*
> It's not that great with me. AF on my 50D is more accurate than MF with AF point confirmation for whatever reason. I find that even if the AF point lights up, the picture can still be a bit OOF (esp noticeable with text and such).
> 
> It may also have to do with how my first "real" jump into photography started last year with an XTi, so I don't have the years of experience with old-fashioned MF cameras that most of you do. Seeing how many people can easily MF with their old cameras, I'm almost convinced it's an experience thing.


Are you using a long lens or something?


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*


Maybe I should e-bay some Nikon MF lenses and run around with them?


Please do not give me any ideas, as a couple really nice FD Ls have shown up on Keh in the last week. My AE-1 is doin' _just fine_ chiliin in my bag.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


Are you using a long lens or something?


Sadly, even with my 28mm I have issues...


----------



## theCanadian

You must be shooting near field pretty wide open then?


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


You must be shooting near field pretty wide open then?


Not necessarily. I've done shots ranging from f/2.8 to f/8 with the lens, and still have the OOF issue.

I do have to admit though that moving up from my XTi's smaller viewfinder, the degree of how OOF I am has lowered a lot.

But yea, it's probably a lack of experience with me. Without a split prism or the mechanism used in rangefinders, I have a hard time MF.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Please do not give me any ideas, as a couple really nice FD Ls have shown up on Keh in the last week. My AE-1 is doin' _just fine_ chiliin in my bag.


Or maybe I should just pony up the repair bill for my M3. I do miss that super-silky leica ring (it's a bit gritty now). I just don't have time to develop b/w film anymore and those 1-hour shops _always_ pushes/pulls the exposure wrong.


----------



## sub50hz

I've actually had really good luck with Costco on my last few rolls, of all places.


----------



## Marin

Since I still haven't gotten around to scanning stuff I just snapped a quick pic of a 8x10 contact I made today.

Obviously an iPhone pic won't do it justice but whatever. Used Ilford Warmtone glossy paper and Neutal WA developer.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


No lie? I struggle quite a bit with MF without a split prism, EF-S focusing screen, rangefinder, or 100% coverage viewfinder (with which I still have difficulty sometimes)


i had a 50mm f/1.8 and a 28-200mm AF lens.. takes a bit of practice but once u get the hang of it, the images come out quite nice. yah its not fast but works great for a lot of non-on the spot shots

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Camera gear > fraternity









On a more serious note, it looks like you're going for a 35mm f/1.8 then!


agreed...

on the side note, is trading up my sb-600 for a su-800 a good idea? my d5000 doesnt have commander mode so i cant shoot off-body flash without a commander.. the has sb-600 been sitting around.. thought if id trade it for a su-800, i could shoot off body flash with my sb-800...

good idea? thought it was a cheaper alternative for now instead of getting the whole alienbee set that i cant afford at the moment xD

oh is there like a tripod attachment for the umbrella attachment  xD like i need an attachment that mounts onto the tripod (where u mount camera body or lens to) that gives a hole for the umbrella and still can mount something on top like a flash


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Since I still haven't gotten around to scanning stuff I just snapped a quick pic of a 8x10 contact I made today.

Obviously an iPhone pic won't do it justice but whatever. Used Ilford Warmtone glossy paper and Neutal WA developer.











Woah, thats some cool stuff, but whats up with the tab in the top left side of the picture?


----------



## Marin

It's the rebate edge of the neg since it's a contact print.


----------



## dudemanppl

I don't understand any of that.


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Not necessarily. I've done shots ranging from f/2.8 to f/8 with the lens, and still have the OOF issue.

I do have to admit though that moving up from my XTi's smaller viewfinder, the degree of how OOF I am has lowered a lot.

But yea, it's probably a lack of experience with me. Without a split prism or the mechanism used in rangefinders, I have a hard time MF.


Well, the focus on the new AF lenses feels more linear, as opposed the more exponential focus of the MF. So that doesn't help either...


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


I don't understand any of that.


he put a negative on top of a photopaper then exposed the paper to make a contact sheet.


----------



## Marin

I'll break it down.

When a film holder is used there are tabs inside that holds the film down.










Obviously the parts being covered by the tabs aren't exposed when the picture is taken. You're seeing that in the pic since I made a contact print.

EDIT: It's also seen in enlargements since some photographers prefer it. For example Avedon left it in a lot of his photos.


----------



## mz-n10

how big is that negative?


----------



## Marin

8x10. Here's the camera I used.


----------



## Danylu

I think I'm going to buy a gripped D7000 @ the end of the year and probably buy a five year warranty on top of that. I also think I'm going to sell my 50/1.4 and rebuy a 35/1.8. I'm not a huge fan of the 50 focal length on a crop body :/

Then I'll need a wide angle.


----------



## sub50hz

Man, UPS in this area rocks. Slept in until 9, and this was at my door when I got up to make coffee.










Package also included a new nifty, but everybody's already seen _that_ 1000 times.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;12860628*
> I personally prefer larger apertures over IS. Both help with camera shake in different ways (larger aperture allows you to raise shutter speed), but IS can't also manipulate DoF like aperture can.


It depends on the lens. IS is very useful for a 70-200/2.8 at the long end (for reasons that mz mentioned), but it's mostly superfluous for a 17-50/55, though not totally useless. It allowed me to get away with some fairly long shutter speeds when I had the Canon version.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire;12861219*
> Ugh, now I'm debating the possibility of selling my D5000 and getting a D200 or D300... I have *way* too much camera angst, and for no reason... I know lenses should come before bodies, but the Tokina 11-16 is calling, and I'd have no AF on my D5000.


That's the common admonition, lenses before bodies, but depending on a persons gear, it can be the obvious thing to do. Since you want AF for all your lenses, present and future, it seems a logical choice to upgrade to a D300/D7000.

Of course the ideal thing to do is to upgrade the body _and_ lenses and be done with it.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;12865322*
> Man, UPS in this area rocks. Slept in until 9, and this was at my door when I got up to make coffee.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Package also included a new nifty, but everybody's already seen _that_ 1000 times.


Nice. Funny though, it looks like it says "SLO Glass" on the box (yes I know it's super low dispersion).


----------



## sub50hz

Haha. It's slow anyways -- but useable wide open in garbage light at ISO 2000 (yes, I'm in bed eating breakfast). Gonna be interesting once I can actually get out and use it (head CT at noon, neurologist at 3).


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;12862571*
> I'll break it down.
> 
> When a film holder is used there are tabs inside that holds the film down.
> 
> Obviously the parts being covered by the tabs aren't exposed when the picture is taken. You're seeing that in the pic since I made a contact print.
> 
> EDIT: It's also seen in enlargements since some photographers prefer it. For example Avedon left it in a lot of his photos.












I'm getting my broken D2X and 24-70 today!

And the Samyang 35 1.4 is hugely dissapointing.


----------



## laboitenoire

Grr... I was literally about to buy the Nikon 35 f/1.8, but it's out of stock everywhere right now... I thought it was made in a plant that was in Thailand?

EDIT: Never mind. My federal tax refund came today, so I just pulled the trigger on a used Sigma 30 f/1.4 in demo condition from Adorama for $390!


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Grr... I was literally about to buy the Nikon 35 f/1.8, but it's out of stock everywhere right now... I thought it was made in a plant that was in Thailand?

EDIT: Never mind. My federal tax refund came today, so I just pulled the trigger on a used Sigma 30 f/1.4 in demo condition from Adorama for $390!


A friend of mine has it for Canon and swears by it over the Canon 28mm f/1.8


----------



## laboitenoire

Yeah, I'm really looking forward to it!


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Yeah, I'm really looking forward to it!


Yea, to be honest I'm considering the lens myself. The 28mm is a nice length, but it's unusable on f/1.8 for me because of the CA and lack of sharpness.


----------



## dudemanppl

So I'm taking apart a 24-70 and this is fun stuff.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


So I'm taking apart a 24-70 and this is fun stuff.










I really hope it was already broken to begin with!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*









I really hope it was already broken to begin with!


Well, if not, it might be now!


----------



## dudemanppl

I bought it with a broken D2X for 400. ALL Y'ALL BE MEAN.







Its going well I haven't lost a screw but I'm sort of stuck right now. Oh well.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


I bought it with a broken D2X for 400. ALL Y'ALL BE MEAN.







Its going well I haven't lost a screw but I'm sort of stuck right now. Oh well.


Don't feel bad, I personally wouldn't dare try and disassemble a lens nor especially a camera. Not that I couldn't, just not worth screwing something up.

Actually I could do this, just a few steps:

http://geckojuice.wordpress.com/2011...n-efs-17-55mm/


----------



## dudemanppl

Saw that on POTN, if I wasn't going to resell it (FAT CHANCE) I would leave it there, it won't affect IQ.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire;12868481*
> Grr... I was literally about to buy the Nikon 35 f/1.8, but it's out of stock everywhere right now... I thought it was made in a plant that was in Thailand?
> 
> EDIT: Never mind. My federal tax refund came today, so I just pulled the trigger on a used Sigma 30 f/1.4 in demo condition from Adorama for $390!


Do tell us how that works out for you, I'm looking at getting the 30/1.4 or the 35/1.8


----------



## Dream Killer

for lols:


----------



## sub50hz

I'm getting my AE-1 out tomorrow. I hate you.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Danylu;12874810*
> Do tell us how that works out for you, I'm looking at getting the 30/1.4 or the 35/1.8


Sure thing. You don't already have the 35 f/1.8? I would have thought so based on your sig...


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;12874906*
> I'm getting my AE-1 out tomorrow. I hate you.


again:









The previous owner modified the camera to only shoot wide open so it works with G lenses. The metering works fine and the flash fires. Can't wait to try it out


----------



## Marin




----------



## sub50hz

You gotta be.... FFFFFFFF... the FD 85 1.2L that was on Keh 2 DAYS AGO -- GONE.


----------



## Andrea87

Subscribed to the thread.

Actually: Nikon D90, 18-105 VR, 50mm F/1.8 AF.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;12875249*
> You gotta be.... FFFFFFFF... the FD 85 1.2L that was on Keh 2 DAYS AGO -- GONE.


Why would you want it?


----------



## sub50hz

Because when the AE-1 was handed down to me some 13 years ago, it was with 2 lenses -- the kit 50 1.8 and the 85 1.2L. They belonged to my father who shot tons of photos with that camera for a long time. And one month into shooting, I fumbled the thing while shooting downtown and it got the ol "goodnight sweet prince" into the depths of Lake Michigan. Of course, I was only 13 at the time, and it had been handed down to me, so I didn't really have any _obligation_ to replace it, but something sentimental like that is hard to get over.

In case you wanted to know, that is.


----------



## dudemanppl

Tell me the 85L wasn't mounted.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire;12874979*
> Sure thing. You don't already have the 35 f/1.8? I would have thought so based on your sig...


Had one, then sold it to get the 50/1.4G, now I'm going back the other way









As much as I liked the D3, I don't think I can justify the cost of another one, (or at least that's what I'm trying to convince myself to believe), and I don't like 50mm on a crop body, so I want something in the 30mm range.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer;12874889*
> for lols:


Is that an f3hp?


----------



## laboitenoire

It's an EM


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Boyboyd;12875938*
> Is that an f3hp?


Nikon EM. I have one. Not that great of an SLR since the shutter speed is automatic only.


----------



## Boyboyd

Wow, i've never even heard of that until now. The more you know...


----------



## Dream Killer

yup, got it for a dollar at a recent garage sale


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer;12877387*
> yup, got it for a dollar at a recent garage sale


It may not be a great camera, but I think even just as a prop, it's worth the price.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Boyboyd;12875938*
> Is that an f3hp?


The quality of F3's is insane. Almost all the other SLR's made around the time feel cheap in comparison (just need to try a Leica R).


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;12875648*
> Tell me the 85L wasn't mounted.


It mounted itself onto a rock before being swept away into icy, mile-deep death. Every time I'm over in that area (sea walls near the Planetarium), it bums me out.

edit: Here's where I'm talking about:


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;12879221*
> The quality of F3's is insane. Almost all the other SLR's made around the time feel cheap in comparison (just need to try a Leica R).


Is it really that good? I never felt it being OH LAWD THIS STUFF IS AMAZING, but it doesn't feel like an EOS 1. Wasn't it built around the same time as the Oly OM series? I thought those were good...









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;12879306*
> It mounted itself onto a rock before being swept away into icy, mile-deep death. Every time I'm over in that area (sea walls near the Planetarium), it bums me out.


YOU HORRIBLE HORRIBLE PERSON! Oh well at least it wasn't something like a 58 Noct-Nikkor.


----------



## sub50hz

I might have to break my never-buy-from-eBay rule today. One has surfaced that looks promising.


----------



## Cacophony

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;12879650*
> I might have to break my never-buy-from-eBay rule today. One has surfaced that looks promising.


link? i need to splurge on a camera


----------



## sub50hz

It's for an FD-mount 85L, not a camera.

http://cgi.ebay.com/Canon-FD-85mm-f-1-2-L-MF-Lens-EX-w-Caps-FREE-SHIP-/290549160877?pt=Camera_Lenses&hash=item43a6145bad


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Anyone know anything about the Canon EOS 1? I mean the original EOS 1 and not the 1v. Any good? Just noticed one on CL for $400.


----------



## sub50hz

I've got a 1N. I use it here and there -- it must be in mint condition for them to want 400 bucks for it, though -- my 1N was an "EX+" from Keh and it looks like it's never been used -- and it was $250.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


I've got a 1N. I use it here and there -- it must be in mint condition for them to want 400 bucks for it, though -- my 1N was an "EX+" from Keh and it looks like it's never been used -- and it was $250.


Yeah, the price is too high. I would definitely talk him down.


----------



## sub50hz

http://www.keh.com/camera/Canon-EOS-Camera-Bodies/1/sku-CE029990350020?r=FE

Buy this instead. Or a 1N.


----------



## Colonel Sanders

Hey guys, i'd like to be added to the club! Just picked up my EOS Rebel T3i, got it with the 18-55mm IS II lens kit.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


The quality of F3's is insane. Almost all the other SLR's made around the time feel cheap in comparison (just need to try a Leica R).


I've heard amazing stuff about them. There's one downstairs but it has K14 kodachrome film in it. I think it's halfway through the roll...


----------



## dudemanppl

EOS 1s are worth 100 bucks at most. I have the shutter if you want it. I also have the prism. And the back...


----------



## sub50hz

Findin' old stuff. Gossen Luma-Pro, Cokin A kit, FD extension tubes, Vivitar 3500 (with both Canon and Standard modules) and a Kodak Tele Ektra (with GE flash bulb kits and an unopened cartridge of Kodacolor II). Cleaned up the AE-1 also.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

I've been thinking about getting an old-style metal body SLR, similar to the AE-1. Does anyone have any recommendations? I figured that since none of Canon's have an EF mount, I might as well not limit myself to any brands.


----------



## sub50hz

Buy an AE-1 program and go wild on lenses. Most shops have them en masse for dirt cheap. I stopped and picked up a Vivitar 28 f/2.8 for 25 dollars in mint condition. Now I just have to find a battery for this damn thing, and clean up the power winder's battery terminals.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;12879623*
> Is it really that good? I never felt it being OH LAWD THIS STUFF IS AMAZING, but it doesn't feel like an EOS 1. Wasn't it built around the same time as the Oly OM series? I thought those were good...


OM bodies are awesome but their build feels cheap in comparison to the F3. And the EOS 1 is built with polycarbonate poop.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;12880648*
> Anyone know anything about the Canon EOS 1? I mean the original EOS 1 and not the 1v. Any good? Just noticed one on CL for $400.


The AF is frustrating to use at times. Now the 1v, oh boy, makes the 5DMKII's AF feel like a Canon ELPH.

EDIT: $400? For a bit more you can just get a 1v off KEH. And the EOS 1 sells for a fraction of the price on KEH.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;12884382*
> OM bodies are awesome but their build feels cheap in comparison to the F3. And the EOS 1 is built with polycarbonate poop.


I was saying it was poop.







And for reincarnated, get an F3! Around 150 on KEH, and you can adapt the lenses to your 50D juuuuuust fine (I love my 35 1.4 AI-S on my 5DII)


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;12884219*
> I've been thinking about getting an old-style metal body SLR, similar to the AE-1. Does anyone have any recommendations? I figured that since none of Canon's have an EF mount, I might as well not limit myself to any brands.


If you want the true metal-body SLR experience get the original Nikon F. Then get a real light meter.

Or just do it right and get a rangefinder.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;12884898*
> I was saying it was poop.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And for reincarnated, get an F3! Around 150 on KEH, and you can adapt the lenses to your 50D juuuuuust fine (I love my 35 1.4 AI-S on my 5DII)


Oh, thought you were saying the opposite.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer;12885048*
> If you want the true metal-body SLR experience get the original Nikon F. Then get a real light meter.
> 
> Or just do it right and get a rangefinder.


Real light meter you say? Here's what I use (got a student discount on mine).

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/460371-REG/Sekonic_401_758_L_758DR_DigitalMaster_Flash_Meter.html


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;12885244*
> Oh, thought you were saying the opposite.
> 
> Real light meter you say? Here's what I use (got a student discount on mine).
> 
> http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/460371-REG/Sekonic_401_758_L_758DR_DigitalMaster_Flash_Meter.html


here's what I use: http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/pocket-light-meter/id381698089?mt=8

just for giggles though. i don't do studio lighting or shoot film anymore.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;12885244*
> Oh, thought you were saying the opposite.


Rebels feel better than the EOS 1. Pure junk.

And if you're cheap like me you can just use your DSLR to meter and set the exposure like that but its a bit klunky...


----------



## Marin

I can set off pocket wizards with my light meter.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;12885644*
> I can set off pocket wizards with my light meter.


I can set off pocket wizards with... pocket wizards?


----------



## Marin

I want some Profoto strobes. Maybe if I sell some of my cameras...


----------



## sub50hz

I buy and sell people like you _every day_.


----------



## Marin

Focus is off.


----------



## sub50hz

More concerned with holding some idiot's 250 thousand dollars worth of rock in a pair of non-locking tweezers.

e: You do realize that's from a phone, don't you? Or are there too many dollars in the way?

e2: I posted it because I thought we were swinging dicks.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;12885778*
> I buy and sell people like you _every day_.


Oh look a dime


----------



## sub50hz

Money is much more interesting than jewelry, although both of them tend to bring out the craziest in people.


----------



## RedAndBlueNotebook

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;12885778*
> I buy and sell people like you _every day_.


Looks fake.


----------



## sub50hz

I'm sure you're the foremost expert on grading a diamond using the output results of the camera on an HTC Dream.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;12885775*
> I want some Profoto strobes. Maybe if I sell some of my cameras...


Light is so fun to play around with. DO ET. But you can always go cheap like me and go alienbees, the build quality isn't really all that bad and I doubt your going to go around dropping the every chance you get.


----------



## Marin

Meh. I've been using the Broncolors at my school and they work fine. If I want my own strobes seems it's best to just go all the way.


----------



## dudemanppl

True. Are you looking at a monohead or a pack?


----------



## Marin

Don't know yet. Haven't look into them much yet since I lack the funds.

Anyways, I need to try these out sometime since my school has them.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/115470-REG/Broncolor_31_454_07_Minipuls_Location_Kit_2.html


----------



## dudemanppl

Woah, those don't go too far down in power. If I did my math correctly the lowest setting is equal to 2 and a half SB800s on full power. EDIT: Oh, its just 1 and a quarter SB800s, still thats a lot. And holy crap thats expensive.


----------



## Marin

Yeah but still a pretty awesome option for a portable kit. Not a lot of people check them out though.


----------



## dudemanppl

Not checked out a lot? Thats even better for you! Whats the longest you can lend stuff out? Also do they have a 400 2.8?


----------



## Marin

48 hours or the whole weekend if it's checked out on Friday. And they have a 300mm f/2.8.

Currently have a Hasselblad Flexbody, 180mm f/4 and a 40mm f/4 checked out.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;12879623*
> Is it really that good? I never felt it being OH LAWD THIS STUFF IS AMAZING, but it doesn't feel like an EOS 1. Wasn't it built around the same time as the Oly OM series? I thought those were good...


There is a certain solidness to the F line and Single digit D line that doesn't get replicated much.


----------



## Marin

F, yes. D, no.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;12886023*
> I'm sure you're the foremost expert on grading a diamond using the output results of the camera on an HTC Dream.


I laughed.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


F, yes. D, no.


I used to rinse the D3 under water when it got dirty, but the same with the F3.







Hell I do that with all cameras, I don't get why people are such sissies thinking cameras will just break if you spit on them.


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


I used to rinse the D3 under water when it got dirty, but the same with the F3.







Hell I do that with all cameras, I don't get why people are such sissies thinking cameras will just break if you spit on them.


People tend to be highly protective both of things that are very expensive and in some cases, help put food on the table.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *theCanadian;12892706*
> People tend to be highly protective both of things that are very expensive and in some cases, help put food on the table.


I know but pro gear is meant to take abuse. I can see where you're going with lower end gear since most people consider a Rebel XS to be a "HUGE PRO CAMERA!"

Oh yeah and I sold my broken 24-70 for 1000. Pretty good return on 400 bucks.


----------



## theCanadian

http://www.break.com/index/wedding-photographer-fail.html

Not cool.


----------



## laboitenoire

He totally deserved that one by wrecking the video...


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;12891906*
> I used to rinse the D3 under water when it got dirty, but the same with the F3.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hell I do that with all cameras, I don't get why people are such sissies thinking cameras will just break if you spit on them.


I'm talking about the fact that there are other bodies on the market which are like the Dx's.


----------



## Dream Killer

spring cleaning today:


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

I absolutely love my setup, but everytime I upload pics to Flickr I have the urge to sell off all my gear for an XSi/18-55mm IS setup and spend the rest on upgrading my Upload speeds









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer;12895757*
> spring cleaning today:


If you feel like being charitable, I can PM you my address









On a more serious note, looks like some nice things you have in there. You'd probably make some vintage collectors very happy if you were to sell it all off (not to mention funding your tuition/camera gear, whichever one you value more!)


----------



## dudemanppl

I bought a 50mm f/1.2 AI-S.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;12898859*
> I bought a 50mm f/1.2 AI-S.


I demand pics of and with the lens


----------



## dudemanppl

It should be here before Friday. WIDE OPEN ONLY, ITS HOW I ROLL.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;12898868*
> It should be here before Friday. WIDE OPEN ONLY, ITS HOW I ROLL.


If only my 28mm didn't CA so badly wide open







Shooting this past Wed in SF with a friend has me interested in the Sigma 30mm f/1.4. Her copy doesn't CA noticeably wide open, and is much sharper...


----------



## dudemanppl

I don't know how to reduce CA in post. So I just leave it there, its not really that bad with my glass!







And I just found out the seller might be from Japan, so before Friday? Maybe not...


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;12898919*
> I don't know how to reduce CA in post. So I just leave it there, its not really that bad with my glass!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And I just found out the seller might be from Japan, so before Friday? Maybe not...


Yea, I'm still learning post, and CA isn't something I've learned yet. The sharpness at f/1.8 (or lack of) bothers me as well, since my 50mm and 85mm perform better wide open. It's a bit sad since 28mm is my most used lens.

That Siggy 30mm is starting to look very attractive.


----------



## dudemanppl

Hey they sell used at the same price...


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;12898989*
> Hey they sell used at the same price...


Yea, but nobody on POTN wants to trade with me







I think they're afraid they'll catch my noob if they touch my equipment.

Gah, hoping someone bites though. I got an offer today for my 50mm and 28mm -> 24-105mm f/4L, but I love primes too much even for an L-zoom.


----------



## Danylu

WD-40 has fixed my tripod


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Yea, but nobody on POTN wants to trade with me







I think they're afraid they'll catch my noob if they touch my equipment.

Gah, hoping someone bites though. I got an offer today for my 50mm and 28mm -> 24-105mm f/4L, but I love primes too much even for an L-zoom.


I think most people that have the Sigma versions of those lenses are plenty happy with it and would be taking a gamble to switch to Canon. :/

Shame, I'd be interested in the 28mm to use as my wide angle, but I'd need to sell my 28-135 first.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Yea, but nobody on POTN wants to trade with me







I think they're afraid they'll catch my noob if they touch my equipment.

Gah, hoping someone bites though. I got an offer today for my 50mm and 28mm -> 24-105mm f/4L, but I love primes too much even for an L-zoom.


Trade, sell, rebuy. You might make some money too. Enough to buy a Sigma 50...


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;12891906*
> I used to rinse the D3 under water when it got dirty, but the same with the F3.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hell I do that with all cameras, I don't get why people are such sissies thinking cameras will just break if you spit on them.












And you sell these bodies right??

Frigg'n nuts.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nuclearjock;12904039*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And you sell these bodies right??
> 
> Frigg'n nuts.


I've never rinsed mine with water, but I've taken my 50D in heavy pouring rain multiple times and it never skipped a beat.


----------



## Boyboyd

I took my 5000 (which isn't water/weather proofed at all) out in the snow. The cold killed it before the snow did.


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Boyboyd;12904558*
> I took my 5000 (which isn't water/weather proofed at all) out in the snow. The cold killed it before the snow did.


Yeah, Lithium batteries don't do well in sub-zero temperatures.


----------



## Boyboyd

Actually i think it was something else, the display (viewfinder display, not rear LCD) started to display all 8s. But the shutter and everything else still worked.

Didn't get any good shots though so it was still a waste of time, lol.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nuclearjock;12904039*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And you sell these bodies right??
> 
> Frigg'n nuts.


Surprisingly, nobody yet has come back to me to tell me that a body or lens has stopped working. I've had 2 that have arrived at the buyer not up to spec and that was all the fault of USPS, but its always insured so whatever!


----------



## Dream Killer

My awesome handmade leather strap arrived today. I f---in love it! Goodbye stupid skin-irritating nylon.
*Made by: Loray:n*


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Putting my 50mm up for sale







Never thought I'd see this day.


----------



## dudemanppl

D: Why?


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;12910662*
> D: Why?


It hasn't seen any action at all. Especially since during all of last week when I went on a photography binge and I never once had the urge to pull it out of my bag, I think it's time to give it a better home


----------



## dudemanppl

You wanna get wider or longer?

INB4 Thats what she said.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;12911648*
> You wanna get wider or longer?
> 
> INB4 Thats what she said.


I'm actually thinking of sticking with a single lens/body setup for now, since almost all of my photos are now with my 28mm. I haven't had the urge to go wider or longer really. The only thing I can think of changing is swapping out my 28mm for a Siggy 30mm f/1.4, since the 28mm is a bit horrible wide open IMO.


----------



## sub50hz

Do you take all your lenses out every time you shoot? Go out with the 50 by itself and see how your habits and opinions change.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;12911713*
> Do you take all your lenses out every time you shoot? Go out with the 50 by itself and see how your habits and opinions change.


Depending on the where/what/when, sometimes I take some lenses and sometimes I go with just one lens/body. The 50mm I've had long before the 28mm. It's just since I've gotten the 28, I haven't touched my 50mm much. The focal length is just so nice to work with, IMO.

I'd feel I know my 50mm pretty well (and I really wish my 28mm was as good wide open as my 50mm), but at the end I just prefer to work with the wider focal length really.


----------



## Marin

50mm on APS-C = Eew.


----------



## dudemanppl

I hate 50mm equiv, no idea why. 35 is amazing, 85 is amazing. Never tried like 55 or 58 and the like though. 50mm and 100mm are the 2 focal lengths I absolutely suck with (100 more than 50).


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;12911736*
> I'd feel I know my 50mm pretty well (and *I really wish my 28mm was as good wide open as my 50mm*), but at the end I just prefer to work with the wider focal length really.


I really wish that 28 1.8 was a better lens:
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;12733971*
> Out of curiosity, why not swap your 35mm for a 28mm for wider shots + USM?


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;12733999*
> Because the 28 USM has CA like crazy, and isn't nearly as sharp as the 35 f/2.0 -- it's possible I rented 2 bad copies in a row, but reviews and recommendations say otherwise.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;12911743*
> 50mm on APS-C = Eew.


That depends. I still use mine here and there -- just because it doesn't work for you doesn't mean it won't be appropriate for someone else.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;12911786*
> I hate 50mm equiv, no idea why. 35 is amazing, 85 is amazing. Never tried like 55 or 58 and the like though. 50mm and 100mm are the 2 focal lengths I absolutely suck with (100 more than 50).


Didn't like 30mm on APS-C that much. 50mm on FF has its moments where it shines. 80mm on MF (6x6) is awesome. Still need to experiment with 4x5 and 8x10.


----------



## dudemanppl

Yeah fast 50 primes wide open are great for horizontal pictures of people filling the frame (I hope you get what I talking about). It just looks GOOD.


----------



## Dream Killer

i'm another 50mm hater. they're so darn compact though


----------



## Danylu

The only reason you would see me with a 50mm equiv lens would be because the 35mm equiv is too expensive for full frame and crop sensors


----------



## ljason8eg

Well I'm back from the race in Fontana. Had a great time. Got to chill with my buddy Landon Cassill and hang out with Dale Earnhardt Jr. in his hauler for a little bit as well.

Also got some good pictures. Have a lot to sort through still when I get time tomorrow but here's one I liked of Landon in final practice. Could use some cropping and such but meh, too tired right now.


----------



## laboitenoire

Deliver truck is out with my lens


----------



## laboitenoire

Got my Sigma 30 f/1.4, and all I can say is DAMN! This is a nice lens! Sharp, fast focus, and I don't have any front/back-focus issues. The only things I don't like are that the lens doesn't balance that well on a D5000, and also the full-time manual focus is flaky. If I twist the ring after it's focused, it will clunk back into auto mode fairly often. I can get around this by just using AE-L/AF-L, but I don't get a focus confirmation dot in manual mode...

EDIT: So Gone, go ahead and add:

Sigma 30 f/1.4 DC HSM


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire;12924390*
> If I twist the ring after it's focused, it will clunk back into auto mode fairly often. I can get around this by just using AE-L/AF-L


That's how USM/HSM work. If you release the shutter half-press to adjust focus, the second you half-press again, it re-initiates the AF routine.


----------



## Dream Killer

i was at my parent's house this weekend for spring cleaning. my mom basically said, "i'm turning your room into a guest room, get your garbage out!." anyway, here's my best nat geo mags going to the trash. i love them to death, but my studio apt is way too small for me to house them. afghan girl looks sad to go, too bad =(
*spring cleaning 2.0*


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer;12924573*
> i was at my parent's house this weekend for spring cleaning. my mom basically said, "i'm turning your room into a guest room, get your garbage out!." anyway, here's my best nat geo mags going to the trash. i love them to death, but my studio apt is way too small for me to house them. afghan girl looks sad to go, too bad =(
> *spring cleaning 2.0*


Something about this feels like sacrilege...


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;12924562*
> That's how USM/HSM work. If you release the shutter half-press to adjust focus, the second you half-press again, it re-initiates the AF routine.


I know that's how it works... My 70-300 VR is a ring-type focus. What I'm saying is it will go back to autofocus even if I don't release the shutter.

If I flip the camera to MF, then I've found the confirmation dot works, but manually focusing at f/1.4 is difficult to say the least.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire;12924649*
> I know that's how it works... My 70-300 VR is a ring-type focus. What I'm saying is it will go back to autofocus even if I don't release the shutter.
> 
> If I flip the camera to MF, then I've found the confirmation dot works, but manually focusing at f/1.4 is difficult to say the least.


Back button AF?


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;12924602*
> Something about this feels like sacrilege...


it is, most of it is in perfect condition too because when i bought them at a garage sale, they had the leather book covers too.

i'm really sad to see them go, but i don't think i'll miss them


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire;12924649*
> What I'm saying is it will go back to autofocus even if I don't release the shutter.


So, if you half-press to initiate AF, turn the ring to adjust focus and try and completely press the shutter, it re-focuses?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg;12913440*
> Well I'm back from the race in Fontana. Had a great time. Got to chill with my buddy Landon Cassill and hang out with Dale Earnhardt Jr. in his hauler for a little bit as well.
> 
> Also got some good pictures. Have a lot to sort through still when I get time tomorrow but here's one I liked of Landon in final practice. Could use some cropping and such but meh, too tired right now.


I like the slogan on the car!
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;12924562*
> That's how USM/HSM work. If you release the shutter half-press to adjust focus, the second you half-press again, it re-initiates the AF routine.


This is why using the rear AF button is nice for MF.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer;12924573*
> i was at my parent's house this weekend for spring cleaning. my mom basically said, "i'm turning your room into a guest room, get your garbage out!." anyway, here's my best nat geo mags going to the trash. i love them to death, but my studio apt is way too small for me to house them. afghan girl looks sad to go, too bad =(
> *spring cleaning 2.0*


That makes me wonder if my collection is still at the homestead. Mine goes from the mid 60s to the early 2000s (my dad started it







). National Geographic is one cultural tidbit that goaded me into photography to begin with.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;12924791*
> This is why using the rear AF button is nice for MF.


True as it may be, it's not really what I was trying to point out.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire;12924390*
> Got my Sigma 30 f/1.4, and all I can say is DAMN! This is a nice lens! Sharp, fast focus, and I don't have any front/back-focus issues. The only things I don't like are that the lens doesn't balance that well on a D5000, and also the full-time manual focus is flaky. If I twist the ring after it's focused, it will clunk back into auto mode fairly often. I can get around this by just using AE-L/AF-L, but I don't get a focus confirmation dot in manual mode...
> 
> EDIT: So Gone, go ahead and add:
> 
> Sigma 30 f/1.4 DC HSM


oooooh how is it







i wanna get it too.. been lookin at it past week or so


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer;12924750*
> it is, most of it is in perfect condition too because when i bought them at a garage sale, they had the leather book covers too.
> 
> i'm really sad to see them go, but i don't think i'll miss them


No chance you can donate them to someone who could use em, like a library or a school?


----------



## sub50hz

Great idea.


----------



## wilykat

Or a school or church for their art dept for cut out.










*ducks and runs from NG collectors*


----------



## Dream Killer

double post. disregard


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;12925006*
> No chance you can donate them to someone who could use em, like a library or a school?


r13, you know very well that i've been more than generous to the local photography club (a very happy 7th grader thanks you for the 18-55).

i have a really huge pile of these and it would definitely take more than two trunk-full trips on my car to move them. it's too much hassle. the shot you see is as much as i can carry to pose them for a shot.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer;12925550*
> r13, you know very well that i've been more than generous to the local photography club (a very happy 7th grader thanks you for the 18-55).
> 
> i have a really huge pile of these and it would definitely take more than two trunk-full trips on my car to move them. it's too much hassle. the shot you see is as much as i can carry to pose them for a shot.


Oh nevermind then, I thought that shot was it


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire;12924649*
> I know that's how it works... My 70-300 VR is a ring-type focus. What I'm saying is it will go back to autofocus even if I don't release the shutter.
> 
> If I flip the camera to MF, then I've found the confirmation dot works, but manually focusing at f/1.4 is difficult to say the least.


From _this guy:_
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ken Rockwell*
> The problem I discovered with the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 is that my Nikons' focus confirmation lights, critical for manual focusing, don't work properly unless you deliberately put the camera into the manual focus mode. This negates much of the magic of having instant manual focus override, since you may not have enough precision using only the ground glass to focus at f/1.4. (The ground glass only shows the view at about f/2.8, not at f/1.4.)
> 
> Nikon lenses work correctly, which means that any time you grab the manual focus ring with the shutter pressed halfway, even with the camera left in autofocus mode, the focus confirmation light works properly. With this Sigma lens, the light locks up in either on or off, wherever it was when you grabbed the ring.
> 
> Creepier, after you've grabbed the manual focus ring in AF-C (continuous) mode, the Sigma will revert to AF mode instead of locking the manual focus properly.
> 
> Correct operation, which is what you get with real Nikon lenses, is that even if you're in AF-C mode and grab the manual focus ring that the focus stays set where you put it until you release and retap the shutter buton halfway.
> 
> This gets worse on my D40, since my D40 has no external AF/MF switch. On the D40 I need to go into a menu to select manual focus, and to select between single (S) or continuous (C) or automatic selection (AF-A) AF modes. Therefore, when I grab the manual focus ring on my D40 in the D40's default AF-A mode, if the subject is not moving I can set focus manually (still without a focus confirmation light) on the Sigma 30mm f/1.4. Heaven help me if the D40 thinks the subject is in motion, because the D40 will automatically be tracking the subject. Now if I grab the Sigma's manual focus ring, I'll get manual focus for a moment, and then the D40 will take over again and continue to autofocus.


----------



## Dream Killer

canon users won't know what you're talking about. because the usm lenses are not as good of a manual focus lens as nikkor swms are.

if you grab the focus ring in af-continuous mode with canons, the camera will still AF even if you turn the ring (you'll actually feel the mechanism slide under the ring). with nikon's swm, the lens knows you grabbed the ring and immediately cut off AF and only resume when you start it again with the af-on or release and half press the shutter again.

i suspect the sigmas are built with canon's style of AF


----------



## dudemanppl

Rear AF button for autofocus + FTMF lens + Continuous AF = NO NEED TO EVER CHANGE A MODE. Single point AF? AF, let go. Manual focus? Turn ring, don't press AF button. Tracking something? Sit at your computer looking at a UPS webpage refreshing every five seconds. Uh I mean hold down the AF button...


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;12927371*
> Rear AF button for autofocus + FTMF lens + Continuous AF = NO NEED TO EVER CHANGE A MODE. Single point AF? AF, let go. Manual focus? Turn ring, don't press AF button. Tracking something? Sit at your computer looking at a UPS webpage refreshing every five seconds. Uh I mean hold down the AF button...


This (possibly including the UPS part as well







). Back button AF is the best. Ever since I switched to it, I can't go back to shutter button AF.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;12927490*
> this (possibly including the ups part as well
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ). Back button af is the best. Ever since i switched to it, i can't go back to shutter button af.


+1


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

So a guy I know asks me this on FB:

Quote:



my little bag is getting too small ): needing camera backpack something that could possibly hold *two, three tripods* as well? Alot of pocket AND space compartments!


I ask him about his budget and uses, and he said:

Quote:



Any budget. I hope bags don't go for more than $150....but space for flash units. *Bout 5-6 future lens. *Point and shoot. My camera body. And *tripods* for the *flash units*. Need the space now cause cramped and for future camera gear.










And this is coming from a guy who takes photos like these:










































I'm not sure if I should feel annoyed but I do right now.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


So a guy I know asks me this on FB:

I ask him about his budget and uses, and he said:








And this is coming from a guy who takes photos like these:

I'm not sure if I should feel annoyed but I do right now.


Just show him the biggest rolling bag you can find.

Here:
http://www.thinktankphoto.com/produc...ling-case.aspx


----------



## Shane1244

He looks like a bit of a douche to begin with..

http://www.facebook.com/yomommamap


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Just show him the biggest rolling bag you can find.

Here:
http://www.thinktankphoto.com/produc...ling-case.aspx


Yea, I probably will. I'm still a bit annoyed tbh that he's getting 5-6 lenses when he takes photos like that, and he constantly asks me what aperture and shutter speed are or how they affect depth of field and such


----------



## MistaBernie

Tell him to pick up Understanding Exposure 3rd Edition by Bryan Peterson and call it a day?


----------



## dudemanppl

Psh, why pay for things when you can just read them online? And I hope hes just an epicly good troll...


----------



## blackbuilder

I'd like to join, I've got a Sony DSC-H20


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;12935975*
> Psh, why pay for things when you can just read them online? And I hope hes just an epicly good troll...


No, he's serious







For a lack of a better term, he's a gear whore. The sad part is I recc'd him to the Siggy 30mm f/1.4 in hopes that he'd learn how to take nice low light/narrow DoF shots, but obviously that hasn't been the case.

He's been looking at some pretty damn expensive setups, yet he asks me continuously about shutter speed and aperture and always gets them wrong/mixed up, despite me sending him tons of material on the subject. Sometimes he still thinks higher f-stop = larger aperture, or smaller aperture = narrower DoF









And +1 to the reading online thing. I pretty much learned exclusively from the internet.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *blackbuilder;12936171*
> I'd like to join, I've got a Sony DSC-H20


Please submit your membership fee check of $100 to Gone Tomorrow, and be sure to include in the memo "For 35mm L"


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;12936350*
> No, he's serious
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> For a lack of a better term, he's a gear whore. The sad part is I recc'd him to the Siggy 30mm f/1.4 in hopes that he'd learn how to take nice low light/narrow DoF shots, but obviously that hasn't been the case.
> 
> He's been looking at some pretty damn expensive setups, yet he asks me continuously about shutter speed and aperture and always gets them wrong/mixed up, despite me sending him tons of material on the subject. Sometimes he still thinks higher f-stop = larger aperture, or smaller aperture = narrower DoF
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And +1 to the reading online thing. I pretty much learned exclusively from the internet.


I learnt my the technical stuff off a book and all the creative stuff off websites.

If you want to be kinda passive aggressive just buy him this book for Easter/his birthday.

Also, regarding the bags, he just took future proofing to a whole new level.


----------



## Cole19

So....

Canon 70-200 F4L IS? Do I get it?


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Cole19;12936875*
> So....
> 
> Canon 70-200 F4L IS? Do I get it?












I personally want one myself, but the non-IS doesn't offer full weather sealing and the IS is out of my price range, as is the f/2.8.

EDIT: So sold my 50mm, considering letting go of my 85mm...


----------



## sub50hz

Lol, really? The 85 is my bread-and-butter lens. I love it.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;12936350*
> Please submit your membership fee check of $100 to Gone Tomorrow, and be sure to include in the memo "For 35mm L"


Chortle!







If only it were so easy...
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Cole19;12936875*
> So....
> 
> Canon 70-200 F4L IS? Do I get it?


YES!


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Sold my 50mm, 85mm pending trade for a Siggy 30mm. Once I get that, I'll sell off my 28mm and will probably stick to my 30mm exclusively.

Will probably use some of the money to get my brother a Nifty, but beyond that, there's not really much in camera gear right now that I want (that I can afford, anyways).

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;12938159*
> Chortle!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If only it were so easy...


You're a teacher, correct? Well, I'm sure there's always kids who need extra credit....


----------



## dudemanppl

5D classic and Sigma 50?


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;12938638*
> 5D classic and Sigma 50?


No funds for that right now.

It may sound a bit strange, but I've grown very fond of my 50D, since it's the camera I really learned photography with. I just can't sell it off because of that. And without selling off my 50D, there's no funds for a 5DC


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;12938605*
> You're a teacher, correct? Well, I'm sure there's always kids who need extra credit....


LOL, no, I'm not like the teacher on Hangover who collects money from his students for a "field trip."








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;12938738*
> No funds for that right now.
> 
> It may sound a bit strange, but I've grown very fond of my 50D, since it's the camera I really learned photography with. I just can't sell it off because of that. And without selling off my 50D, there's no funds for a 5DC


I think you might change your mind if you tried one.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;12938762*
> I think you might change your mind if you tried one.


I have. It's a beautiful camera and IQ is much better than my 50D, as is the high ISO performance, but it's like I said, I've a bit of an emotional fondness for my 50D and I just find it hard to sell it









That will be my next goal though, to go FF once I managed to save up.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Actually, how well-recommended is the 70-200mm f/4 non-IS? Is the IQ any different than the IS version? Is the lack of weather sealing an issue with this lens?


----------



## sub50hz

5D classics are still too much money. At 800 bucks, I would buy one today.


----------



## Shane1244

That's just stupid.. lol

I'm saving up for the 5DIII.. I'm assuming it'll be out in a year or so?


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;12938815*
> Actually, how well-recommended is the 70-200mm f/4 non-IS? Is the IQ any different than the IS version? Is the lack of weather sealing an issue with this lens?


The IS version is a bit better, and if weather-sealing hasn't been an issue for you with your current lens lineup (you said you've been out in the elements quite a bit), I wouldn't let it be a deal breaker.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;12938831*
> That's just stupid.. lol
> 
> I'm saving up for the 5DIII.. I'm assuming it'll be out in a year or so?


Your guess is as good as anyone's. For whatever reason, Canon is notoriously tight-lipped about their new releases.

Some are easy to predict (such as how they change out Rebel models in Feb/Mar of every year), but some are a lot harder to predict. Unfortunately, the 5D is one of these models.


----------



## Shane1244

I've never done any person research into the release cycle, but I've herd for pro bodies it's around 3-4 years. IIRC, the 5DII came out in june 2008?


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;12938831*
> That's just stupid.. lol


What's stupid is writing off a body you've probably never used.


----------



## Shane1244

Mine? I've used it tons, just can't be bothered uploading to flickr n such. Plus, I'm good at selling stuff with minimal loss.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;12938931*
> Mine? I've used it tons, just can't be bothered uploading to flickr n such. Plus, I'm good at selling stuff with minimal loss.


He means the 5Dc, I think. Or whatever it was that you called "stupid" earlier. Not really sure what you were referring to, to be honest.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;12938841*
> The IS version is a bit better, and if weather-sealing hasn't been an issue for you with your current lens lineup (you said you've been out in the elements quite a bit), I wouldn't let it be a deal breaker.


You make a good point with weather sealing. I guess it just bugs me that it's the only L lens to not be weather sealed, but I guess it hasn't bothered me so far with my gear.

Also, is the IS better because it includes IS, or is the IS better because it's optically superior (like the 18-55mm vs 18-55mm IS?)


----------



## sub50hz

So what you're trying to say is that you've shot a ton of photos with a 5Dc that you've never talked about but can't be bothered to upload them to flickr?


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;12938956*
> So what you're trying to say is that you've shot a ton of photos with a 5Dc that you've never talked about but can't be bothered to upload them to flickr?


Oh, No.. I was saying that r31ncarnat3d's emotional feelings for his camera. xD

I thought you meant it was stupid to upgrade from a 60D to a 5DIII.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;12939092*
> Oh, No.. I was saying that r31ncarnat3d's emotional feelings for his camera. xD
> 
> I thought you meant it was stupid to upgrade from a 60D to a 5DIII.


I'm a sentimental guy


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;12938939*
> You make a good point with weather sealing. I guess it just bugs me that it's the only L lens to not be weather sealed, but I guess it hasn't bothered me so far with my gear.
> 
> Also, is the IS better because it includes IS, or is the IS better because it's optically superior (like the 18-55mm vs 18-55mm IS?)


There are actually a couple of non-sealed L lenses.

And the IS version uses 4 more elements (although still one fluorite and 2 UD), along with having IS. If you shoot on a tripod a lot, I would say the IS probably isn't worth the marginal increase in IQ.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;12939162*
> There are actually a couple of non-sealed L lenses.
> 
> And the IS version uses 4 more elements (although still one fluorite and 2 UD), along with having IS. If you shoot off a tripod a lot, I would say the IS probably isn't worth the marginal increase in IQ.


Well, seeing as how I'm a bio major and the most intensive thing I do everyday is lift up the fume hood shield, I don't think I can manage to shoot it hand-held









Well, will consider it some more, but it looks like if I do get it I'll get the non-IS. Thanks!


----------



## sub50hz

200mm isn't terribly bad to hand-hold. At f/4, you're likely to be shooting in daylight with fast shutter speeds anyway... I would rent both to see if the IS makes a difference, just don't get caught up in *deliberately* shooting in scenarios that would require a tripod/IS.


----------



## MistaBernie

I need to get my hands on a 28mm to try out, if I like it, I might be looking for you R31..


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie;12939421*
> I need to get my hands on a 28mm to try out, if I like it, I might be looking for you R31..


I'm currently talking to someone about trading my 85mm for a 30mm. If the deal goes through when he gets back this weekend, my 28mm will be free


----------



## dudemanppl

Free 28 1.8? I'LL TAKE IT! In other news the 17-55 IS isn't nearly that crappy. Build isn't shaky, but it feels really hollow inside when you tap the plastic. And its also much bigger than you'd think (my friend who bought it thought it would be 18-55 size for some reason...). And monitors make GREAT hand warmers.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;12939859*
> Free 28 1.8? I'LL TAKE IT! In other news the 17-55 IS isn't nearly that crappy. Build isn't shaky, but it feels really hollow inside when you tap the plastic. And its also much bigger than you'd think (my friend who bought it thought it would be 18-55 size for some reason...). And monitors make GREAT hand warmers.


I meant up for grabs


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;12939907*
> I meant up for grabs


Lol, 2 x bad wording.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;12939926*
> Lol, 2 x bad wording.


OKAY IT WILL GO ON SALE









God my brain is just not working today. Whoops.


----------



## Dream Killer

My friend has been rocking a 35mm DX on her d700 lately and getting very nice shots. I called her after work and tried out the 35mm f/1.8 DX lens in full FX format today, it's one impressive optic even in FX. Nikon definitely over-engineered this one - it barely has any vignetting at full-frame.

*taro drink and my lens








*

Sorry for the ****ty shot, I was not ready to lend her my 24g for a 35 dx.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Free 28 1.8? I'LL TAKE IT!* In other news the 17-55 IS isn't nearly that crappy.* Build isn't shaky, but it feels really hollow inside when you tap the plastic. And its also much bigger than you'd think (my friend who bought it thought it would be 18-55 size for some reason...). And monitors make GREAT hand warmers.


Of course it isn't. In fact, it's fantastic.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*


My friend has been rocking a 35mm DX on her d700 lately and getting very nice shots. I called her after work and tried out the 35mm f/1.8 DX lens in full FX format today, it's one impressive optic even in FX. Nikon definitely over-engineered this one - it barely has any vignetting at full-frame.


As an Asian stuck in a not-Asian town for college, I applaud your choice of boba tea









Damn do I miss home...


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


As an Asian stuck in a not-Asian town for college, I applaud your choice of boba tea









Damn do I miss home...


Yeah, that's good stuff! I haven't had it in a while.


----------



## dudemanppl

Yay, lets go off topic again! Where are you from reincarnated? And the 17-55 IS sucks on the 5DII because it sort of... vignettes... But you can see the IS working so its sort of cool.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*


My friend has been rocking a 35mm DX on her d700 lately and getting very nice shots. I called her after work and tried out the 35mm f/1.8 DX lens in full FX format today, it's one impressive optic even in FX. Nikon definitely over-engineered this one - it barely has any vignetting at full-frame.


Almost my favorite lens on full frame. The rendering is just amazing, and its also unbelievably cheap.


----------



## sub50hz

Boba tea is *so* awful.


----------



## JoeUbi

Hrmm... Got a D3100 in December, it's pretty cool. Takes some sick shots and amazing videos. Not bad for the price. I already jacked up the kit lens though. :-/


----------



## sub50hz

In DeKalb? Did you run into a tall block of empty space?

(zing)

P.S. Please tell me Brew City is still available there. It's so terrible.


----------



## Full_Tilt

This may not be the best thread for this, but I figure its close enough.

You see, Ive got a plan.
I have a Toshiba Camileo x100, basically a good, cheap camera for shooting video of day to day stuff. I can leave it in my car without worrying about it, take it to bad neighborhoods, etc.
It has one very big flaw though, the focal length is too long. So, I need a wide screw one lens, but (even bigger flaw) it has no threads for an add-on lens.









So Im thinking that Ill get a ~1.75" diameter add-on lens and modify it with some tabs that will come out around the front of the camera and be held in place my a few set screws.
Then I just have to figure out to prevent light leaks...

Any ideas?


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Boba tea is *so* awful.


maybe you just never had good bubble tea?


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*


maybe you just never had good bubble tea?


Not my bag, really. This, however:










is directly up my alley.


----------



## Dream Killer

well, i like beer too.


----------



## sub50hz

That's good. I just find boba tea revolting. The texture of it all, I think.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Yay, lets go off topic again! Where are you from reincarnated?


Fremont, California. If you don't know where that is, I can sum it up like this: One of the things I miss most about home is hearing Hindu and Mandarin spoken in public, and I was genuinely excited when I heard a couple speak in Mandarin at a supermarket here.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *JoeUbi*


Hrmm... Got a D3100 in December, it's pretty cool. Takes some sick shots and amazing videos. Not bad for the price. I already jacked up the kit lens though. :-/


How so?

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*


maybe you just never had good bubble tea?


Boba, not bubble







And yes, this!


----------



## dudemanppl

Oh, no wonder it says // Fremont. I've been there. LOTS A ASIANS. Just like here!


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Oh, no wonder it says // Fremont. I've been there. LOTS A ASIANS. Just like here!


Yeaup! Over here in Merced, it's a question of "Where can we find pho/dim sum/boba tea?" Back in Fremont, it's a question of "Which restaurant?"


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Yeaup! Over here in Merced, it's a question of "Where can we find pho/dim sum/boba tea?" Back in Fremont, it's a question of "Which restaurant?"


The schools are like 70% Asian. Its amazing. Hopefully the 50 will come tomorrow.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Yeaup! Over here in Merced, it's a question of "Where can we find pho/dim sum/boba tea?" Back in Fremont, it's a question of "Which restaurant?"


In NYC, you'd go crazy with all the ethnic foods and level choices of crappy to godly restaurants. Though I've been to SF before and it was equally as infinite.

Anyway here's another shot from the 35mm DX. It's about as bad as I can get the vignetting. Also the high-order distortion is pretty bad outside its DX sweet spot as the red part of the wall on the top right is supposed to be strait. Still a lovely lens, however - just look at that super-smooth bokeh. I might even get one just to mess around (if I can find the damn thing for sale!).

*"Bubble Tea, Photography, and Gangsigns"








*


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*


In NYC, you'd go crazy with all the ethnic foods and level choices of crappy to godly restaurants. Though I've been to SF before and it was equally as infinite.


Must. Get. Into. Columbia.


----------



## sub50hz

Chicago's better.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Must. Get. Into. Columbia.


It's all about MSSM, bro!


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*


It's all about MSSM, bro!


Perhaps I'll see you in two years


----------



## jsigone

my canon XS modded for AP, I have a XSi for daytime duties
Telescope Rig by jsigone, on Flickr

results:

NGC6960 Veil Nebula, 60min total by jsigone, on Flickr

Horse head n flame, 1min x75, 75 darks added by jsigone, on Flickr


----------



## dudemanppl

HOLY CRAP! I love how ghetto rigged that looks with the weights sticking off the bottom. Whats the focal length on that?


----------



## sub50hz

Wow, wicked.

Side note: Anybody use DxO Optics Pro? Watched a friend use it earlier, looks like it might be worth trying.


----------



## mz-n10

i used the demo of dxo for a bit, personally im so use to LR i thought it was garbage. but the noise control was nice on it.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer;12941762*
> In NYC, you'd go crazy with all the ethnic foods and level choices of crappy to godly restaurants. Though I've been to SF before and it was equally as infinite.
> 
> Anyway here's another shot from the 35mm DX. It's about as bad as I can get the vignetting. Also the high-order distortion is pretty bad outside its DX sweet spot as the red part of the wall on the top right is supposed to be strait. Still a lovely lens, however - just look at that super-smooth bokeh. I might even get one just to mess around (if I can find the damn thing for sale!).
> *"Bubble Tea, Photography, and Gangsigns"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *


According to this guy, the vignetting gets worse, the closer you get to infinity.

http://nutterphotog.blogspot.com/2009/05/nikon-35mm-18-dx-lens-on-d700-in-fx.html

But I don't think anyone is complaining, considering the intended users for the 35 1.8


----------



## Boyboyd

Is there any point in having both a sigma 30 f/1.4 and a nikon 35 f/1.8?


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Boyboyd;12944950*
> Is there any point in having both a sigma 30 f/1.4 and a nikon 35 f/1.8?


If that is directed at me, I currently own neither


----------



## Boyboyd

Sorry, didn't clarify.

I own the 35 and i've been looking at getting the 30. But i think i'd sell the 35 if i did choose to upgrade.


----------



## dudemanppl

No, unless you'd like a second lens if you're out shooting with someone with only a kit lens (?).


----------



## Boyboyd

That's never going to happen. The only people i go out shooting with have canon and sony bodies.

Looks like my next upgrade then. Thanks.


----------



## dudemanppl

If its anything close to my Sigma 50, it'll be amazing.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Boyboyd;12945343*
> Sorry, didn't clarify.
> 
> I own the 35 and i've been looking at getting the 30. But i think i'd sell the 35 if i did choose to upgrade.


How is the Sigma 30 and upgrade to the Nikon 35? Keep your 35 (it's the sharper of the two anyway).


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;12945792*
> How is the Sigma 30 and upgrade to the Nikon 35? Keep your 35 (it's the sharper of the two anyway).


I've just head amazing things about the 30. I know my 35 is sharp, but i thought the 30 was better.

There are a few things i'm looking to get before spring kicks in. Ultra-wide zoom. Fast-tele, or a flash kit.

I don't think i'd get the sigma 50. It's a difficult focal length for me to use, and i already have a nikkor 55 micro.


----------



## jsigone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;12942001*
> HOLY CRAP! I love how ghetto rigged that looks with the weights sticking off the bottom. Whats the focal length on that?


F5 500mm...lol yah the 11lb weight that came w/ the mount was too much for my light setup so those 2.5# $2 weights work awesome

Here is my new scope
F4.8 740mm
ES MN152mm F4.8 by jsigone, on Flickr


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Boyboyd;12946063*
> I've just head amazing things about the 30. I know my 35 is sharp, but i thought the 30 was better.
> 
> There are a few things i'm looking to get before spring kicks in. Ultra-wide zoom. Fast-tele, or a flash kit.
> 
> I don't think i'd get the sigma 50. It's a difficult focal length for me to use, and i already have a nikkor 55 micro.


Well, just from reviews at Photozone and SLRGear, the Nikon is the better of the two. The Sigma and Nikon seem to be equal in terms of center sharpess, but the Sigma is soft in the corners. However the difference isn't much and for all intents and purposes the two lenses are comparable in terms of performance, but I wouldn't say the 30 is better by any means.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;12946440*
> Well, just from reviews at Photozone and SLRGear, the Nikon is the better of the two. The Sigma and Nikon seem to be equal in terms of center sharpess, but the Sigma is soft in the corners. However the difference isn't much and for all intents and purposes the two lenses are comparable in terms of performance, but I wouldn't say the 30 is better by any means.


Thanks for the advice. I'll probably get a sigma 10-20 instead then. They were about the same price.


----------



## Shane1244

Definitely do that!


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Boyboyd;12946456*
> Thanks for the advice. I'll probably get a sigma 10-20 instead then. They were about the same price.


Hope you get a good copy. Luckily, from the bit I've taken so far, looks like I did well in the Sigma lottery. Specifically with the 10-20, look for left- or right-side softness. The new finish is also _very_ nice, I never liked the Nikon-style crinkle.


----------



## Boyboyd

Thanks. I still haven't been paid for March yet so i'll get that as soon as possible.

I'm going for the variable aperture one, i've heard that it's better quality than the fixed one. But i do loose a few stops.


----------



## sub50hz

You only lose 1/3 - 1 1/3 stops with the variable version (which is what I own). Easily made up for in ISO adjustment _if necessary_. f/3.5 on UWAs still doesn't throw the background OOF enough for it to be worth it, and 3.5 is still slow-ish for lower-light indoor use. If you want speed, the Tokina 11-16 is a wicked lens, but with a _very_ limited focal length. Also pretty tough to find, they're still quite popular.


----------



## Boyboyd

I hardly ever use lenses like that wide-open anyway. Like you said, UWAs don't really
create bokeh.

My first choice was the tokina 11-16. But it wouldn't AF on my body.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Also keep in mind that UWA lenses are much easier to hand hold. When I had the Canon 10-22 (f/3.5-4.5), I could get decent hand held shots even as slow as 1/2".


----------



## Boyboyd

Never really thought about that. I got a free tripod yesterday. It's not great but i plan on leaving it in the back of my car all the time in case i ever need one when i haven't planned for it.


----------



## Dream Killer

UWA for life. If it's not 35mm or lower, I don't want it.


----------



## mz-n10

i picked up a dell xps 15 for photowork to replace my aging hdx16t.

might take some "showoff pics" later when i get off my lazy butt....


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10;12951808*
> i picked up a dell xps 15 for photowork to replace my aging hdx16t.
> 
> might take some "showoff pics" later when i get off my lazy butt....


Not possible to do a desktop? Or just not feasible?


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Why is it so hard to find a Siggy 30mm?









If only that 35L wasn't so darn expensive...

On another note, my AE-1 comes in Monday!


----------



## Shane1244

AE-1? I feel as if I know what it is, but I can't pinpoint it.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;12954709*
> AE-1? I feel as if I know what it is, but I can't pinpoint it.


Here you go.

If I can remember right, it was one of the most popular SLRs back in the day. Lucky for me because it means I can get it for a cheap price, and I love the old-school metal bodies.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;12954058*
> Not possible to do a desktop? Or just not feasible?


i have a desktop (still using a q6600 lol), just dont really use it cause i spend most my time out of the house.


----------



## dudemanppl

50 1.2 isn't here yet. If its any good, I'm probably selling the Sigma 50. I might mod it so the aperture is declicked so I can do third stops and stuff.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Does anyone have any recommendations for some FD lenses on the cheap?

I've also been thinking of ditching the kit 50mm f/1.8 FD for a 50mm f/1.4, but unfortunately info on FD lenses on the internet is lacking big time. Anyone have any insight?


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;12954734*
> I love the old-school metal bodies.


Well, lol, you're in for quite a surprise when the AE-1 shows up.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;12955067*
> Well, lol, you're in for quite a surprise when the AE-1 shows up.


I am really bad with phrasing things:

I like the style of those bodies, rather than the black SLRs we have now


----------



## sub50hz

I am bored. Want to shoot, but can't go anywhere (16 consecutive days of vertigo, WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO). Too late for internet chatters. Going insane.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;12955188*
> I am bored. Want to shoot, but can't go anywhere (16 consecutive days of vertigo, WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO). Too late for internet chatters. Going insane.


Get creative with self-portraits!


----------



## sub50hz

Absolutely not, haha. I did, however, find out that my new nifty needed a +20 MA to AF properly. Pretty awful. My 85 needs +9, my 35 is fine, and my Sigma is (gasp!) fine also. I have some more rehab Saturday morning, so I might be able to get a bit of shooting in on Sunday.


----------



## sub50hz

Saw this posted on another forum I used to be real active on -- such an awesome photo, I had to repost it here.


----------



## MistaBernie

Must be nice to have MA on the 50D... *grumble grumble stupid 60D that I love so..*


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie;12957180*
> Must be nice to have MA on the 50D... *grumble grumble stupid 60D that I love so..*


Just got it right? It's not too late to return it for a 7D! PEER PRESSURE.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;12957654*
> Just got it right? It's not too late to return it for a 7D! PEER PRESSURE.


It IS only a week old, but I got it with instant rebates through B&H and didn't use 'conventional funding' that I could transfer over and use to buy a refurb 7D with...

Although, given the current pricing situation.. I could probably get $900 for it with the Meike grip and 2nd authentic battery.. and then just spend the ~$200 on a refurb 7D..

DAMNIT, dont do that!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie;12957802*
> It IS only a week old, but I got it with instant rebates through B&H and didn't use 'conventional funding' that I could transfer over and use to buy a refurb 7D with...
> 
> Although, given the current pricing situation.. I could probably get $900 for it with the Meike grip and 2nd authentic battery.. and then just spend the ~$200 on a refurb 7D..
> 
> DAMNIT, dont do that!


Well, if you were to do it, you wouldn't regret it. That camera is a work of art, and if I had the money, I would have kept it as a second body (had to sell to fund the 5DII unfortunately).

And if you sold your 60D at POTN, you'd probably sell it in a day or two. Such a great forum for selling gear. Speaking of which, you could probably find a 7D there as well if you want to by used.

Sorry to put ideas in your head.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;12958732*
> Well, if you were to do it, you wouldn't regret it. That camera is a work of art, and if I had the money, I would have kept it as a second body (had to sell to fund the 5DII unfortunately).
> 
> And if you sold your 60D at POTN, you'd probably sell it in a day or two. Such a great forum for selling gear. Speaking of which, you could probably find a 7D there as well if you want to by used.
> 
> Sorry to put ideas in your head.


I'm hoping you don't teach money management


----------



## dudemanppl

They're much cheaper from the Canon Loyalty Program! I've only used it once, and I hated it because the VF was cluttered since I didn't know how to work it.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;12959612*
> They're much cheaper from the Canon Loyalty Program! I've only used it once, and I hated it because the VF was cluttered since I didn't know how to work it.


They sell out within a day in CLP though (literally!). You really have to be quick if you want a 7D through there.

I really wouldn't be surprised if there was a whole mess of people hanging onto a broken P&S, waiting for them to restock on 7Ds everytime.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


I'm hoping you don't teach money management










LOL, definitely not.







I teach Latin and Computer Applications. And for my part, I'm not in debt because of camera gear (or in debt period)!


----------



## dudemanppl

WHEOAHWOAWOAH. GONE. YOU HAS 35L? Did i miss some posts or something?


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


WHEOAHWOAWOAH. GONE. YOU HAS 35L? Did i miss some posts or something?


He sold his 70-200mm and 50mm within an hour and used the money for a 35L


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;12960260*
> He sold his 70-200mm and 50mm within an hour and used the money for a 35L


Yeah, I just stumbled upon that thread now. 1100 for 70-200 f/4 IS? Man these guys are sort of crazy for paying that much.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Yeah, I just stumbled upon that thread now. 1100 for 70-200 f/4 IS? Man these guys are sort of crazy for paying that much.


It was for the 70-200 and the Canon tripod collar ($140 retail), so it wasn't outrageous, though I was surprised that the buyer didn't try haggle (We're supposed to haggle! Life of Brian anyone?







).

The battle for the 50/1.4 was epic though. I had 6 offers within an hour. I wish now that I offered $350 instead of $300, but it's not a big deal.

35L arrives Tuesday, just in time for Spring Break.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


It was for the 70-200 and the Canon tripod collar ($140 retail), so it wasn't outrageous, though I was surprised that the buyer didn't try haggle (We're supposed to haggle! Life of Brian anyone?







).

The battle for the 50/1.4 was epic though. I had 6 offers within an hour. I wish now that I offered $350 instead of $300, but it's not a big deal.

35L arrives Tuesday,* just in time for Spring Break.*










I won't lie. If it weren't for a fact that you're a teacher, this would sound completely awkward


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


I won't lie. If it weren't for a fact that you're a teacher, this would sound completely awkward










How so? A college student with a new lens might say the same thing.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


How so? A college student with a new lens might say the same thing.


Well, a teacher or a student then







I've seen enough people creeping on women on the beach in SD with their cameras to be weired out by it.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Well, a teacher or a student then







I've seen enough people creeping on women on the beach in SD with their cameras to be weired out by it.


LOL, I see what you mean. I guess it would be really weird if I had gotten a 500mm f/4L and was like "SPRING BREAK, I'M HITTIN' THE BEACH WITH MY NEW GIGANTIC TELEPHOTO LENS!"


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


LOL, I see what you mean. I guess it would be really weird if I had gotten a 500mm f/4L and was like "SPRING BREAK, I'M HITTIN' THE BEACH WITH MY NEW GIGANTIC TELEPHOTO LENS!"










with a 500L you might actually have a real excuse....
"o i was birding, see that seagull?"

but wth a 35L....your a real creeper....lol


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


with a 500L you might actually have a real excuse....
*"o i was birding, see that seagull?"*

but wth a 35L....your a real creeper....lol


Tell that to someone at a European beach and see if it flies (pun).


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Just bought a Sigma 30mm f/1.4. Once that arrives, my 28mm will be up for sale as well and hopefully the money from that + my 85mm can be used to fund a 70-200 f/4L non-IS.


----------



## sub50hz

What a baseball day. I wish I could be in Cleveland to shoot photos of all the tears streaming down the Indians fans' faces.


----------



## laboitenoire

Ugh... My Sigma has focus issues... It's not noticeable once I get to f/2, but at f/1.8 and larger I tend to notice that my subject is out of focus. It seems to be worst near the ends of the focus range, but I need to do some more testing to be certain.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Ugh... My Sigma has focus issues... It's not noticeable once I get to f/2, but at f/1.8 and larger I tend to notice that my subject is out of focus. It seems to be worst near the ends of the focus range, but I need to do some more testing to be certain.


Try it from different distances as well, since some lenses suffer from focus shifting the closer to the MFD they are. I haven't heard of this lens having this problem (can't recall if it has a floating rear element or not), so it just might be calibration time (seems like SOP for this lens from the posts I've seen).


----------



## sub50hz

They don't call it the "Sigma Lottery" on POTN for nothing.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


They don't call it the "Sigma Lottery" on POTN for nothing.


Well, here's to hoping I win it


----------



## dudemanppl

I've had:
1 Sigma 10-20mm f/4.5-5.6 EX DC HSM
2 Sigma 12-24mm f/4.5-5.6 EX DG HSMs
3 Sigma 50mm f/1.4 EX DG HSMs
1 Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 EX DG HSM II
and 1 Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 EX HSM
(+ my friend's 85mm f/1.4 EX DG HSM)

None have been out of spec and have been used if not abused, and still ended up in working order, but all but one have been Nikon mount, so that might be a contributing factor.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;12961509*
> Tell that to someone at a European beach and see if it flies (pun).


bird pun intended


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Sold my 85mm f/1.8, now waiting for my 30mm to come in so I can sell my 28mm and get that 70-200.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Huh, anyone else notice the sudden love for Drobos in POTN?


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;12967729*
> Huh, anyone else notice the sudden love for Drobos in POTN?


Anything regarding computer hardware on POTN I ignore.

Anyways, this thread needs a second chance. It just needs to get off on the right foot.


----------



## newbie1911

i think my batteries are going dead. i have this charger and batteries for my dslr and they seem to run out of juice awfully fast. for example the last time i shot they were charged up,kept in the dslr for about a week with about 10 random shots taken without flash prior to the day i intended to use it and after that i only got 30 or so shots before they depleted. to be fair it was night time and i used the built in flash for every shot but i still think they should last more than that. also it kept saying that the batteries are depleted but after a couple of minutes it would work again for a little while until it wouldn't even switch on.
i spoke to some guy at a photo shop about it and he said that it might be the fast charger killing the lifespan of the batteries. i have an energizer charger which is rated for 140 mA output ( 1400 mA on the fast charger ) but it seems to charge for more than 20 hours at a time compared to about 2 on the fast one...
so in conclusion: are my batteries dying? are they dying because of the fast charger?


----------



## Danylu

The fast charger would have contributed - also, how old are your batteries?


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Danylu;12969802*
> The fast charger would have contributed - also, how old are your batteries?


And adding onto this: Are they genuine OEM or third party? If third party, what brand?


----------



## newbie1911

they're this brand. also they're pretty old, i assume them to be about a year old at the least. right now im pretty sure i need new ones, i just don't want to ruin them with the fast charger if it's to blame for.


----------



## sub50hz

I think a better first question is: what happened to the LiPo/Li-Ion battery/batteries designed for the camera? Nickel-metals don't like repeated quick charges (long time R/C racer), so if they've taken a year of abuse, they're likely toast.


----------



## newbie1911

so should i just get new ones and charge em with the slow charger? i could get 4 packs of batteries for 20$ and just rotate em so i still have 3 sets when one set is charging.
Quote:


> In the base of the camera's hand grip is the battery compartment, the door is opened by sliding a lock lever to the left and then pulling the door towards the front of the camera. Inside the compartment supports either four AA or two CR-V3 Lithium non-rechargable batteries.


Quote:


> • 4 x AA batteries (NiMH rechargeable recommended)
> or • 2 x CR-V3 Lithium (non-rechargeable)
> • Optional AC adapter


----------



## sub50hz

What brand/model SLR is this for?

edit: K100D?


----------



## newbie1911

yup. pentax k100d.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Anything regarding computer hardware on POTN I ignore.

Anyways, this thread needs a second chance. It just needs to get off on the right foot.


The problem is that it's already been given a second chance and it's turning into a trainwreck _again._ Post reports are already streaming in.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


The problem is that it's already been given a second chance and it's turning into a trainwreck _again._ Post reports are already streaming in.










Aside from the "Moar" pic, it seems to be going well


----------



## laboitenoire

Whew... Finally getting around to converting the various RAW files I've accumulated in the past month (well over 1000, I'd say). Should have samples from the Sigma uploaded in a bit...

Speaking of my lens, Gone, could you please add

Sigma 30 f/1.4 DC HSM

to my list? I asked a while back and you didn't confirm.

EDIT: NVM, just saw that it was updated.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Aside from the "Moar" pic, it seems to be going well










That's because moderators are now deleting posts left and right, so you're not seeing some posts. I am hopeful that it surives. If the Rate the Photo above you thread can weather the trolls and simpletons, then hopefully that one can.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d




----------



## dudemanppl

So I bought a broken 300 2.8 IS. IS and AF works, just water on elements. I suppose it'll take 5 hours to make 1000 dollars.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;12975136*
> So I bought a broken 300 2.8 IS. IS and AF works, just water on elements. I suppose it'll take 5 hours to make 1000 dollars.


Fungal growth danger?


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;12975153*
> Fungal growth danger?


Hope not...


----------



## dudemanppl

WHY DO PEOPLE ON EBAY PAY SO MUCH FOR BROKEN STUFF?
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...m=170621106207 My COMPLETELY DEAD D2X with basically no hopes of reviving.


----------



## Danylu

I don't get it either. How much did you pay for the D2x?


----------



## sub50hz

I found my 52mm Cokin A ring!


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


So I bought a broken 300 2.8 IS. IS and AF works, just water on elements. I suppose it'll take 5 hours to make 1000 dollars.


i'd be surprised if CPS can't fix that.


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


WHY DO PEOPLE ON EBAY PAY SO MUCH FOR BROKEN STUFF?
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...m=170621106207 My COMPLETELY DEAD D2X with basically no hopes of reviving.


What's broken on it? Just because you can't fix it, doesn't mean someone else cant. On another note, how much would a used, but perfectly working D2X go for?


----------



## sub50hz

I'm also a bit surprised he didn't note in the item description what's broken on it/how broken it is. Seems a bit shady, although I can see the "condition" listed as non-functional.


----------



## Shane1244

I suffer from WOS (Wide Open Syndrome) I always think that I won't ever can any CA, long behold I load up the RAW's and it's like ew.


----------



## dudemanppl

To most people on OCN, they wouldn't be able to spot it. It took me about 30 seconds.

OT: I hate how long the tubes are on my H50. And I couldn't get my Q9550 up too high on my 750i FTW either!
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Danylu;12982467*
> I don't get it either. How much did you pay for the D2x?


400 including the 24-70 which I already sold for 1K.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer;12982587*
> i'd be surprised if CPS can't fix that.


Then you'll be surprised.







Canon won't touch anything with water. But thats okay, I have my screwdrivers ready! It isn't all that hard.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;12982729*
> What's broken on it? Just because you can't fix it, doesn't mean someone else cant. On another note, how much would a used, but perfectly working D2X go for?


Waterdamaged, its pretty much gonna take a replacement of all the boards to fix it. It would go around 800-950ish.


----------



## Shane1244

Where are you buying from anyways? POTN?

Also, GLWS, 30 mins left!









And yeah, the tubes are too long for my case, and the 750i isn't the best overclocking board. D:


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;12987872*
> Where are you buying from anyways? POTN?
> 
> Also, GLWS, 30 mins left!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And yeah, the tubes are too long for my case, and the 750i isn't the best overclocking board. D:


Ebay, I paid 2500







Top bidder is from France, which I didn't realize earlier. Super rage time!


----------



## Shane1244

2500 for what? :S I thought you paid $400 for it.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;12988165*
> 2500 for what? :S I thought you paid $400 for it.


For the 300 2.8 IS or the D2X and 24-70? I guess I misread what you put. The latter is 400 while the 300 is 2500.


----------



## Shane1244

Sniped.


----------



## dudemanppl

Thank god, I wasn't going to ship to France...


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;12988298*
> Thank god, I wasn't going to ship to France...


French people need love and broken camera gear too!


----------



## canoners

Hmm, I'm thinking of getting the Canon S95. Does anybody here use it?


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;12988314*
> French people need love and broken camera gear too!


Hehe.









Too bad the person who bought the 24-70 refused the shipment and said he never received the lens.


----------



## Boyboyd

people are jackasses


----------



## Kluitenberg

I'd like to join the list







Only recently started photography with a DSLR so I might have a few questions under way at a later date









*Body:*

Nikon D90

*Lenses*

Nikkor 35mm F/1.8
Nikkor 18-105mm VR F/3.5-5.6
Nikkor 55-200mm VR F/4-5.6

*Flash*

Nikon SB-900

*Memory*

2x SanDisk Extreme Pro 8GB

*Accessories*

ThinkTank Retrospective 20 bag
Black Rapid RS-7 strap
2x B+W 007 XS-Pro UV Filter 52mm
Carl Zeiss T* UV Filter 67mm
Carl Zeiss Lens cleaning kit
MB-D80 Battery grip


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kluitenberg;12988971*
> I'd like to join the list
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Only recently started photography with a DSLR so I might have a few questions under way at a later date


The Photo forum is always open to questions









If you haven't already, you should also check out the guides by myself and Dream Killer if you're just starting out with photography.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;12988355*
> Hehe.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Too bad the person who bought the 24-70 refused the shipment and said he never received the lens.










I hope you transferred the money to your bank account before the refund was issued!


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;12989093*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I hope you transferred the money to your bank account before the refund was issued!


Already spent it on the 50 1.2 and that 17-55.


----------



## Shane1244

:drool:1.2


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;12987872*
> 
> And yeah, the tubes are too long for my case, and the 750i isn't the best overclocking board. D:


yah the tubes are a little long but thats how it can be "universal" for a lot of cases.. yah doesnt look THAT clean but its still really clean compared to a lot of setups xD

hey.. why is the sb-600 for $300 on b&h now D:

anyone wanna trade my sb-600 for a 35mm f/1.8 AF-S nikkor or sb-600 + cash for 30mm f/1.4 HSM sigma.. i wanna post on FM but buy n sell subscription. xD should i get the subscription? its like what.. $25 a year? i know dudemanppl is on there lol...


----------



## dudemanppl

Get an FM subscription. Best photography buy and sell on the internet.


----------



## iandroo888

even compared to POTN (even tho they are primarily canon) ?


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iandroo888;12989414*
> even compared to POTN (even tho they are primarily canon) ?


Yeah, much more stuff comes around. And they sell stuff of every mount.


----------



## iandroo888

true. k *subscribes* Lol


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


true. k *subscribes* Lol


Subscribe as in pay money (paid subscription in order to sell at FM, but not buy).


----------



## Shane1244

I can wireless trigger a 430EX II with my 60D right? Seems the best bang-for buck flash out there. (Considering I can get it at cost at BB)


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*


I can wireless trigger a 430EX II with my 60D right? Seems the best bang-for buck flash out there. (Considering I can get it at cost at BB)


Yes it can, and much like the 7D, doesn't do the greatest job at it. Sometimes it wouldn't work at all with the 7D. Radio triggers are still the best way to go.

And the 430EXII is a great flash for the money. Only thing I hate about it is the clunky interface. The 580EXII has a much better interface.


----------



## Shane1244

Hmm, Well I REALLY, and I mean REALLY have no idea when to use flashes, and how to use them. I've never used them on either of my DSLR's when setting up a shot. AFAIK, The popup flash is useless because direct lighting=useless lighting


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*


Hmm, Well I REALLY, and I mean REALLY have no idea when to use flashes, and how to use them. I've never used them on either of my DSLR's when setting up a shot. AFAIK, The popup flash is useless because direct lighting=useless lighting


Well, just pick up a 430EXII and experiment with bounce flash. It's relatively easy to learn.


----------



## Shane1244

That's what I was thinking. I think it's around $220, and I'll need one eventually anyways. 19th Bday is on the 20th, but I get my gifts on the 16th, so that's when I'll buy it.


----------



## iandroo888

pick one up and play around. start by NOT pointing the flash at the subject ;D haha!

-----

whats with the crazy inflation on stuff lately o_o sb-600s and 35mm f/1.8s goin for almost 300 now D:


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


pick one up and play around. start by NOT pointing the flash at the subject ;D haha!

-----

whats with the crazy inflation on stuff lately o_o sb-600s and 35mm f/1.8s goin for almost 300 now D:


Supposedly because of the Japanese earthquake, and some are saying retailers are price gouging as a result, so who knows. Sometimes prices just go up.


----------



## iandroo888

but i thought it was only to the "pro" series like all the gold ringed ones.. or so thats what the announcement said...

man


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;12991693*
> Supposedly because of the Japanese earthquake, and some are saying retailers are price gouging as a result, so who knows. Sometimes prices just go up.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iandroo888;12991886*
> but i thought it was only to the "pro" series like all the gold ringed ones.. or so thats what the announcement said...
> 
> man


It's also what Nikon themselves said. You can have a video tour of the Sendai factory. It's pretty interesting actually.##

So happy that my SB-600 and Sigma 10-20 are businesses expenses. Now i can claim back the tax on them


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *canoners;12988335*
> Hmm, I'm thinking of getting the Canon S95. Does anybody here use it?


Bought one for the wife's purse. Alot of folks on the Nikoncafe' are very happy with their smallness, and IQ. Highly rec., but a bit pricey.


----------



## Boyboyd

Just bought a Nikon fit sigma 10-20 for £360. 2 companies were having a price war on amazon. It was £380 a few days ago.

Don't think i'll be able to afford food this weekend.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Saw this posted on POTN. A foul ball broke this guy's front element (and perhaps more) and looks understandably nonplussed:









Source

Looks maybe like a 300/2.8 but I can't tell for sure. Let's see a UV filter prevent _that_!


----------



## MistaBernie

I'm not sure whether to laugh, cry or do both.







Not that I would wish this on anyone or anything like that.. I wonder if we can find video of it.. do we know what game?

Actually.. some investigation indicates this is from a 2007 Yankees game.. it does kind of look like old Yankees stadium from that angle...


----------



## Boyboyd

He'll be insured. What hit that? Baseball?

Edit: Yankees is baseball right?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie;12996227*
> I'm not sure whether to laugh, cry or do both.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not that I would wish this on anyone or anything like that.. I wonder if we can find video of it.. do we know what game?
> 
> Actually.. some investigation indicates this is from a 2007 Yankees game.. it does kind of look like old Yankees stadium from that angle...


The source site doesn't say anything about it. I just love how the guy looks so defeated, unable to take anymore shots while everyone around him is.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Boyboyd;12996380*
> He'll be insured. What hit that? Baseball?
> 
> Edit: Yankees is baseball right?


Oh you Brits.







That's cute.


----------



## dudemanppl

Its a 400.







Oh well, the front element is more of a protective filter anyway.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Boyboyd;12994254*
> It's also what Nikon themselves said. You can have a video tour of the Sendai factory. It's pretty interesting actually.##
> 
> So happy that my SB-600 and Sigma 10-20 are businesses expenses. Now i can claim back the tax on them


oOo wheres the video tour?

oOo thats a good idea... i do plan on doing some purchases of lenses, maybe a body this year...







>=D


----------



## ace8uk

Not posted in here for a while!







Currently deciding whether to upgrade my D70 to a D7000 or go all out and get a D700.







Full frame is tempting...


----------



## iandroo888

depends on what lenses u have


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ace8uk*


Not posted in here for a while!







Currently deciding whether to upgrade my D70 to a D7000 or go all out and get a D700.







Full frame is tempting...


FF is amazing. I'll never go back to crop.


----------



## Shane1244

700. do it, providing your lenses aren't DX.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


depends on what lenses u have



Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*


700. do it, providing your lenses aren't DX.


He has the 18-70 and the 17-55. Not a big deal, he can use them in DX mode or just sell them. Makes the transition easier just to sell. The 17-55 will be a sore loss though; he'd need the 24-70 to have something comparable.


----------



## ace8uk

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


depends on what lenses u have


A mixture, can easily get rid of the DX stuff if I need to though.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


FF is amazing. I'll never go back to crop.










This is what I was thinking.... Kind of annoying that the D700 lacks some newer features, really hoping Nikon release an update for the D700 soon. Saying that, every time I look at samples from the D700, I think to myself, do I need those newer features?


----------



## Shane1244

I'd do it in that case.


----------



## Boyboyd

You mean an update to the 700 as in firmware, or as in an updated model?


----------



## Shane1244

Model. Hence the lens talk.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


He has the 18-70 and the 17-55. Not a big deal, he can use them in DX mode or just sell them. Makes the transition easier just to sell. The 17-55 will be a sore loss though; he'd need the 24-70 to have something comparable.


17-55 is one great lens, but the 24-70 is just whole 'nother world of sharpness, that is if you get a good copy (2 out of 4 of mine have been a little subpar).


----------



## ace8uk

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*


You mean an update to the 700 as in firmware, or as in an updated model?


Updated model.


----------



## laboitenoire

Well, D5100 has been announced. Do not want. Ergonomics look awful in terms of button placement.


----------



## Shane1244

I"m glad I didn't wait for it.


----------



## iandroo888

ew @ d5100


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ace8uk*


A mixture, can easily get rid of the DX stuff if I need to though.

This is what I was thinking.... Kind of annoying that the D700 lacks some newer features, really hoping Nikon release an update for the D700 soon. Saying that, every time I look at samples from the D700, I think to myself, do I need those newer features?


Besides video, what newer features are you looking for from the D700 vs D7000?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*


Besides video, what newer features are you looking for from the D700 vs D7000?


Same here. What doesn't the D700 offer besides video and possibly a higher MP count?


----------



## ace8uk

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*


Besides video, what newer features are you looking for from the D700 vs D7000?



Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Same here. What doesn't the D700 offer besides video and possibly a higher MP count?


Other than video, I guess there's nothing really when I think about it. I think I'm just subconsciously worried about buying the D700 and then Nikon releasing a brand new 'entry level' full frame.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ace8uk*


Other than video, I guess there's nothing really when I think about it. I think I'm just subconsciously worried about buying the D700 and then Nikon releasing a brand new 'entry level' full frame.


With digital electronics, it's always like this.

Just wait 'till fall. It should be when the D3 and D700 gets refreshed to a new model (D4/D700 "S" "X" or "D800").

I think you should be more worried about which camera is more comfortable to you. The technical differences between d700 and d7000 isn't that much, but the way they handle and respond used are worlds apart.

Also the D7000 and D700 has a really huge price gap - big enough to be not overlooked. Even if you do wait for the newer FX camera, it's going to be near $3000 MSRP while the D7000 will likely fall down below $1000 and the D700 will fall below $2000 (new).


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Saw this posted on POTN. A foul ball broke this guy's front element (and perhaps more) and looks understandably nonplussed:









Source

Looks maybe like a 300/2.8 but I can't tell for sure. Let's see a UV filter prevent _that_!


if his lens wasnt white, maybe they wouldnt have aimed the foul ball at him...


----------



## Shane1244

A new FF Nikon camera will obviously come out soonish.. but it won't have the 3? 4? years of price droppage!


----------



## iandroo888

man nikon really effed up on the d5100 this time... all the usual buttons that should be to the left of the LCD is all over the place... D: should have just kept the old way


----------



## Shane1244

The way it was was worse.


----------



## laboitenoire

What was really dumb was not including the drive mode lever of the D3100...


----------



## Shane1244

Iso 102400. Lolo


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*


The way it was was worse.


how it was before? really? how so? thats the general design for nikons tho

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


What was really dumb was not including the drive mode lever of the D3100...


yah. its like what.. a button by the shutter release now? (at first i typed uhh the uncensored version of poop'er.. release.... lmao)

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*


Iso 102400. Lolo


even if they took out a digit, id still not believe it lol


----------



## Maian

I would like to join the club









I own a *Canon EOS Rebel T2i* with just a run-of-the-mill EF-S 18-55mm lens with UV filter.


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


how it was before? really? how so? thats the general design for nikons tho

yah. its like what.. a button by the shutter release now? (at first i typed uhh the uncensored version of poop'er.. release.... lmao)

even if they took out a digit, id still not believe it lol


It's only for video is my guess, They call it "night vision mode"


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


What was really dumb was not including the drive mode lever of the D3100...


This is one of Nikon's features I wish Canon would pick up. It's a minor thing, but man is it useful. Personally, I think it can be an on/off switch all in itself (Off/Timer/Burst/Single)

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Maian*


I would like to join the club









I own a *Canon EOS Rebel T2i* with just a run-of-the-mill EF-S 18-55mm lens with UV filter.


Run of the mill, but a damn sharp lens for the money.


----------



## Marin

http://www.re35.net/#

Even though this is an April fools joke, the funny thing is something like this could be done.


----------



## theCanadian

Possible legit.

http://www.roggeundpott.de/projekte_de/alle-projekte_de/re-35/


----------



## FinalFrontier

Good to see some photography enthusiasts on here! I own a Canon 7D w/ EF 24-105mm f/4L. Interested in joining the club. Some pics attached of my new rig at high ISO and also small JPEG setting (didn't feel like dealing with RAW).


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13001866*
> 17-55 is one great lens, but the 24-70 is just whole 'nother world of sharpness, that is if you get a good copy (2 out of 4 of mine have been a little subpar).


Really? I didn't notice much of a difference between the two when I had them? Perhaps I should go back and pixel peep some more


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Danylu;13006977*
> Really? I didn't notice much of a difference between the two when I had them? Perhaps I should go back and pixel peep some more


Well I dunno, maybe its just the full frame sensor being oh lawd.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13007005*
> Well I dunno, maybe its just the full frame sensor being oh lawd.


Actually now that I've done a bit of peeping of D60 + 17-55 vs D3 + 24-70, here's what I think;

Despite the fact that I took thousands of photos with each lens, I am unable to find two decent photos to give myself a point of comparison. Although one portrait I took with the D3 combo seemed to have a nice contrasty pop to it, both seem quite sharp. The 17-55 seemed to falter a bit at the edges though.


----------



## dudemanppl

I don't really pixel peep. I look at the whole image, and in my uses I remember the 24-70 to be sharper. And 70mm @ f/2.8 on a 24x36mm sensor looks better than 55mm @ f/2.8 on APS-C.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iandroo888;13005158*
> man nikon really effed up on the d5100 this time... all the usual buttons that should be to the left of the LCD is all over the place... D: should have just kept the old way


There's too few buttons i think, and i actually prefer the drive lever on the 3100.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iandroo888;13005158*
> man nikon really effed up on the d5100 this time... all the usual buttons that should be to the left of the LCD is all over the place... D: should have just kept the old way


It has seemingly placed more emphasis on videographers this time.


----------



## Boyboyd

It does have the same sensor as the 7000 though. Which is an improvement.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Boyboyd;13008160*
> It does have the same sensor as the 7000 though. Which is an improvement.


I for one am very interested to see how they implemented "Night Vision" in the D5100 though


----------



## Boyboyd

I'm not, because i'm almost certain it will be terrible.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Boyboyd;13008194*
> I'm not, because i'm almost certain it will be terrible.


It'll have to resemble something decent for them to have put it in in the first place. Or least I'm hoping so.


----------



## Boyboyd

My D5000 goes up to iso 24,000 i believe. I don't use it past 800. It drops off considerably in quality.

I'm still interested as to what it looks like though.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

My 35L arrived today!










Canon EF 35mm f/1.4L USM by gonetomorrow00, on Flickr

Here are the first two shots I took:


35L by gonetomorrow00, on Flickr


35L by gonetomorrow00, on Flickr

100% crop of above:

35L_crop by gonetomorrow00, on Flickr


----------



## Shane1244

I'm jelly.

So whats the deal with the green ringed canon lenes? I know they have some weird different feature, but what is it?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*


I'm jelly.

So whats the deal with the green ringed canon lenes? I know they have some weird different feature, but what is it?


Those are DO lenses (Diffractive Optics), and there are only two, the 70-300mm and 400mm. The DO lenses have special elements to reduce CAs, which I believe is the only benefit, aside from such lenses being a bit smaller than non-DO counterparts.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*


There's too few buttons i think, and i actually prefer the drive lever on the 3100.


This. The rear grip also looks amazingly cramped and small...


----------



## Boyboyd

That 35L looks good GT. Especially like the first pic.


----------



## mz-n10

sexy 35L


----------



## dudemanppl

There was one LNIB yesterday on FM for 1,000. But I missed it by an hour. :/


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*


That 35L looks good GT. Especially like the first pic.


Thanks. That cherry tree is right out the window, and blooms for a couple of weeks.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


sexy 35L


Indeed, if this lens were a woman...

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


There was one LNIB yesterday on FM for 1,000. But I missed it by an hour. :/


Good price. I monitored POTN for a while, but none were selling for under $1300 or so. No matter, I prefer new anyway (got it from B&H).


----------



## Shane1244

Screw the flash, I want a new lens for my birthday.

Best UWA Prime or Zoom for say under $500?


----------



## MistaBernie

I'll take pics of your 35L when you come to Boston (and maybe I'll even buy you a beverage of your choice!)


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*


Screw the flash, I want a new lens for my birthday.

Best UWA Prime or Zoom for say under $500?


Sigma 10-20 or Tokina 11-16 maybe? Can't help you with a UWA prime, as they don't really make any for crop, although there are 14mm primes. Nikon makes one, but it's pricey, and Sigma and Tamron make one for a reasonable price, but they don't seem to be in stock anywhere.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


I'll take pics of your 35L when you come to Boston (and maybe I'll even buy you a beverage of your choice!)










LOL, lens envy?







Sounds like a plan. We'll be up in August.


----------



## Shane1244

Pretty much seems like the 10-20 will be my best bet. I'm just making the assumption that the Bower 14mm 2.8 is garbage. Going to look at reviews now.

EDIT: Yep, It's crap.

Also, Is there any optical difference between the 10-20 3.5 fix vs 4-5.6? I know the Fixxed will be good for video, but I'm not sure how much I'll be zooming in video anyways. :S


----------



## dudemanppl

Bower 14mm f/2.8 is better than the 14mm f/2.8 AF-D from Nikon and the 14mm f/2.8 USM L (not the II version) from Canon.


----------



## Shane1244

Really? I ended up ona forum with everyone trashing it. Does that mean to say that it's GOOD? Got any good reviews or sources?

for $419 it seems to good to be true.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*


Really? I ended up ona forum with everyone trashing it. Does that mean to say that it's GOOD? Got any good reviews or sources?

for $419 it seems to good to be true.


http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/53...ng14f28eosapsc


----------



## Shane1244

Reading now, Thanks.

I'm assuming no AF on a UWA wouldn't be a big deal. Aperture ring probably wouldn't be a big deal either as I'll almost always be in either 2.8 or like f/11.


----------



## sub50hz

I like my zoom UWA. 14mm just isn't always wide enough. Didn't take long to figure that one out.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*


Pretty much seems like the 10-20 will be my best bet. I'm just making the assumption that the Bower 14mm 2.8 is garbage. Going to look at reviews now.

EDIT: Yep, It's crap.

Also, Is there any optical difference between the 10-20 3.5 fix vs 4-5.6? I know the Fixxed will be good for video, but I'm not sure how much I'll be zooming in video anyways. :S


I read that the fixed aperture isn't as good optically as the variable one. But it might be just as good if you stop it down.


----------



## Shane1244

I'll probably stop by Henry's one day with my 60D and try out some lenes. 10mm to 14mm sounds like nothing, but it's 40% more viewing space. When I had my 18-55, I didn't ever feel like I needed to back up more, but at the same time, I didn't any better.

So is the "major" downfall of the Samyang 14mm the lack of motor's? I can't figure out the price. I just don't want to buy it and have something extremely disappointing pop up.


----------



## sub50hz

10mm-14mm is a HUGE difference.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/R...ns-Review.aspx


----------



## Shane1244

Hmm, a bit more than I thought. 1.5 stops is also quite a bit. I've ruled out getting the 3.5, just because of the price. I'm just hesitating because I want to use this indoors too. Hmmmm..


----------



## Cole19

Just ordered the 70-200 F4L. Comes in on Friday!!!!!!


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*


Reading now, Thanks.

I'm assuming no AF on a UWA wouldn't be a big deal. Aperture ring probably wouldn't be a big deal either as I'll almost always be in either 2.8 or like f/11.


its not really a big deal if you shoot anything more then 7ft. but on samyang 14/2.8 (same lens) i sometimes shoot wideopen in 1-2ft range its hard to MF.


----------



## Shane1244

Yeah, I was playing around with this: http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html and after like you said 7 or so feet, there is large room of error that you have to play with.

So, how do you like it? Worth it?


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Cole19*


Just ordered the 70-200 F4L. Comes in on Friday!!!!!!


I _really_ need to get out and shoot with mine. Did you get the IS version?


----------



## Cole19

No, I didn't. I had wanted to, and will probably soon. Just don't have the cash right now. Could've waited another two weeks, but I need it as I start having paid shoots this Saturday night!


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;13015472*
> I'm just hesitating because I want to use this indoors too.


ISO 2500, go to town. 1600 is workable at f/4 in mediocre light.


----------



## Shane1244

Ordering a 10-20 then next payday.







I should go get a credit card so I don't have to use my moms... that way she won't know how much I pay for the retched hobby.


----------



## sub50hz

No, BAD IDEA. You will own way too much stuff and carry _way too much_ debt before you know it. I've been through it once before, it takes a lot of financial restraint to not blow your wad on hobbies.

That being said, if you have no credit, it might be a good time to get started *as long as you can pay for the stuff you buy with it.* Every time I use my CC, I just put the equal amount in cash aside.


----------



## sub50hz

On another note, anyone wanna trade their 50/1.4 for a pair of 5850s?


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13016227*
> On another note, anyone wanna trade their 50/1.4 for a pair of 5850s?


A month ago I would have said yes, but *Points to sig rig*


----------



## sub50hz

Hah! Sell one of them, and Crossfire.


----------



## Shane1244

I have have tonnes of money to blow lol, it won't really be credit, ause I pay off anything I buy right away. But, the less I spend of my savings, they smaller my student debt will be after I'm out.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;13016563*
> *I have have tonnes of money to blow* lol, it won't really be credit, ause I pay off anything I buy right away. But, the less I spend of my savings, they smaller my student debt will be after I'm out.


Then why don't I see a red "L" in your sig?!


----------



## Shane1244

Too cheap. hahha, and like I said, my moms credit card. she would KILL me.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;13016754*
> Too cheap. hahha, and like I said, my moms credit card. she would KILL me.


"But mom! We're studying optics and light diffraction!"


----------



## Shane1244

Once I'm in residence, B&H will be my home page. I've been working two jobs like 50 hours a week for like 2 years, living at home, and my tuition is paid for. I'll be *L*oving life. Haha


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;13011723*
> Thanks. That cherry tree is right out the window, and blooms for a couple of weeks.
> 
> Indeed, if this lens were a woman...
> 
> Good price. I monitored POTN for a while, but none were selling for under $1300 or so. No matter, I prefer new anyway (got it from B&H).


Nice you got the 35L! I loved that lens too, I just hated how it has loads of CA and it's not always easily correctable. Comes with the territory of large-aperture wide-angles I guess.


----------



## MistaBernie

look ma, 100% crop (my current focus for improving my shooting is aperature/DOF and indoor stuff (proper use of my crappy YN460 flash).










based off of (reduced size, obviously)









(A couple of the pics I took for my F/S thread for my 17-85... more can be seen here -- with the exception of the through the optic shot and the 70-200 quick shots I took when it arrived) And yes, the flash was pointed at the ceiling and bouncing, and the diffuser was out and over it.


----------



## Shane1244

So this was shot with the 28-135 I'm guessing? Pretty sharp! Shoulda thrown her down to ISO 100


----------



## MistaBernie

I didn't even realize I bumped up the ISO to compensate for the aperture (probably could have tripod mounted, live and re-learn) -- but yeah, this was the 28-135, f/11 1/60 @ ISO 400.. but I've had some really good luck with my 28-135, hence why I'm not having much of an issue of putting the 17-85 up on POTN.. (4 days, 153 views, one PM about the two lenses and which is better







)


----------



## Shane1244

I'm sure it'll sell, just gotta wait!







Oh, Figured you were on a tripod, Whenever my camera touches a tripod it's on ISO 100


----------



## MistaBernie

Yeah, I've been known to do strange things.. like shoot at 1/10 sec hh @ 1000 iso.. basically to try them, see if I still have the hand strength I used to when I shot B&W at night, etc..


----------



## Shane1244

Haha, I do that too sometimes, not quite THAT bad though. xD but sometimes I get too excited to shoot, then once I look at them on my PC and look at the EXIF data, I'm like What in the world was I thinking!


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;13015782*
> Yeah, I was playing around with this: http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html and after like you said 7 or so feet, there is large room of error that you have to play with.
> 
> So, how do you like it? Worth it?


its a great lens for 400 bucks. but i shoot fullframe so i dont really have a 10-20 sigma to choose from (i have a 12-24 tho.....)


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10;13018723*
> its a great lens for 400 bucks. but i shoot fullframe so i dont really have a 10-20 sigma to choose from (i have a 12-24 tho.....)


I forgot about my ambition to go FF one day soon. Arg!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer;13017342*
> Nice you got the 35L! I loved that lens too, I just hated how it has loads of CA and it's not always easily correctable. Comes with the territory of large-aperture wide-angles I guess.


Do you mean lateral CA's or bokeh fringing? I took several wide open shots today, outdoors in the bright sun, and was astounded at how well it controls lateral CA's (almost non-existant in fact). It does suffer from bokeh fringing wide open, but a lot lenses do at such wide apertures.


----------



## CalypsoRaz

I keep lusting after a 10-24. I rented one awhile back to shoot crater lake and omg, that lens was amazing. it would pretty much never leave my camera.


----------



## Shane1244

ooooh! $500, no one told me about this guy. Faster, and 4mm longer! Research time!

EDIT: Unless you were talking about the Nikon one?


----------



## sub50hz

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Tamron-10-24mm-f-3.5-4.5-DI-II-Lens-Review.aspx

Better off with the Sigma.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;13018902*
> Do you mean lateral CA's or bokeh fringing? I took several wide open shots today, outdoors in the bright sun, and was astounded at how well it controls lateral CA's (almost non-existant in fact). It does suffer from bokeh fringing wide open, but a lot lenses do at such wide apertures.


yeah "color bokeh" or more specifically spherochromatism. all the canon big lenses have it (85 1.2, 50 1.2). even stopped down to 2.8 it was apparent. it's hard to tell on screen when re-sized to workable resolutions but i've lost a lot of good wedding pictures that needed to be on print because of it.

a lot happier with the nikon 24mm 1.4g. though it's not fair to compare an older design like the 35L to the 24G - they're more than 10 years apart. canon needs to make a "II" version.


----------



## sub50hz

Guys, I need some guidance --

1. I have a 6970
2. I have a pair of 5850s

I stopped using the 5850s because my last mobo would shat a brick when my Xonar was in the top slot, making CF real dicey. Now that I have up/side-graded, I would like to sell either the 6970 or the pair of 5850s in order to put the money towards my "buy some more camera garb" fund.

Before I make a final choice, I will ask in this thread first if anyone has gear to trade/is interested in either of those things. _*This is not an official "For Sale" post.*_


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13019735*
> Guys, I need some guidance --
> 
> 1. I have a 6970
> 2. I have a pair of 5850s
> 
> I stopped using the 5850s because my last mobo would shat a brick when my Xonar was in the top slot, making CF real dicey. Now that I have up/side-graded, I would like to sell either the 6970 or the pair of 5850s in order to put the money towards my "buy some more camera garb" fund.
> 
> Before I make a final choice, I will ask in this thread first if anyone has gear to trade/is interested in either of those things. _*This is not an official "For Sale" post.*_


buy a better mobo? nvm lol, graveyard shift.


----------



## sub50hz

I got a free (for doing a build) Crosshair IV. I had the III -- you missed where I said my _last mobo_ was the source of the CF issues.

Since I've gotten the 6970, though, I don't know that I really need to go back to all that glorious CF power at 1920x1080. The pros and cons for either setup are pretty neck-and-neck, but the 6970 is _technically_ worth more in raw return than the pair of 5850s (which is actually a better setup in almost every regard).

Dunno. I don't really _need_ anything, but if someone here is looking to upgrade and simultaneously unload some gear, we can be happy ending lovers forever.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

I'd sell off the 6970. It'll be hard to find a buyer for two of those together, and shipping each card individually will cut into your profit margin.

Although truthfully I think even one 5850 would cut it, and you'd have even more money to invest in lenses


----------



## sub50hz

Shipping costs me virtually nothing, UPS preferred accounts are great. My biggest issue is that I no longer use PayPal, and nobody ever wants to do cert check/money order. I gave up on that after putting my 5850s for sale in December.

Like I said, I don't _need_ anything, but if there's something I can use more than a couple of 350-dollar video cards sitting in boxes on a shelf, and someone happens to be looking for said cards (or even the 6970).... I'm open to offers/discussion.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13019908*
> Shipping costs me virtually nothing, UPS preferred accounts are great. My biggest issue is that I no longer use PayPal, and nobody ever wants to do cert check/money order. I gave up on that after putting my 5850s for sale in December.
> 
> Like I said, I don't _need_ anything, but if there's something I can use more than a couple of 350-dollar video cards sitting in boxes on a shelf, and someone happens to be looking for said cards (or even the 6970).... I'm open to offers/discussion.


No Google Checkout? Well, I suppose you can always try trading. There's some camera gear floating around Anand, and I ran into an [H] guy on POTN the other day (bought my 85mm on POTN).

Although on POTN I'd imagine that unless your heatsinks are 100% aluminium and have an Apple on the heatsink, they might not be popular...


----------



## Boyboyd

I appear to have found a lens that will meter on my d5000. An older nikon 24-70(d).

It's still MF but I can deal with that. Found it on an N90 downstairs.

10-20 still isn't here, and i ordered it on Monday.


----------



## laboitenoire

If it's AF or AF-D, it'll meter... It's only AI and AI-S lenses that won't meter.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Boyboyd;13035163*
> I appear to have found a lens that will meter on my d5000. An older nikon 24-70(d).
> 
> It's still MF but I can deal with that. Found it on an N90 downstairs.
> 
> 10-20 still isn't here, and i ordered it on Monday.


You mean the 28-70mm?


----------



## max302

Scanned some film, Kodak Pro 100 graymarket asian stuff that I bought from Thailand on ebay. By far the coolest color film I've shot with, really digging the saturation and color tone. Shot with my 35SPn.





The lab molest my last 3 rolls again... rolled it up instead of cutting like I specifically asked, and manipulated it without gloves, finger crud and scratches all over the place.

Since I've got my D7000 now, I think I'll just shoot B&W with my film gear and dev my own film and get rid of the problem. Thoughts or suggestions about self-dev'ing from home? Gear, chemical recommendations? I'd really like to get some bulk tri-x and do some experiments with insane pushing and print manipulation.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;13039694*
> You mean the 28-70mm?


I did mean the 28-70. Well spotted. They never made a 24-70d.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *max302;13039842*
> Scanned some film, Kodak Pro 100 graymarket asian stuff that I bought from Thailand on ebay. By far the coolest color film I've shot with, really digging the saturation and color tone. Shot with my 35SPn.


What's that stripe going through the middle? Light leak? /film noob


----------



## dudemanppl

TAKING APART THE 300 IS THE MOST FUN THING I HAVE EVER DONE. Everyone should take apart a 4000 dollar lens at least once in their lifetimes.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


TAKING APART THE 300 IS THE MOST FUN THING I HAVE EVER DONE. Everyone should take apart a 4000 dollar lens at least once in their lifetimes.


We need to find you a girlfriend.


----------



## max302

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


What's that stripe going through the middle? Light leak? /film noob


It's actually a reflection from a window that's softened up from being WAYYYY out of focus. I know right, taking pictures behind windows!









It really does look similar to a light leak though.


----------



## Shane1244

It must be a light leak, it's there in both pictures at the same spot.


----------



## Marin

I don't think it's a light leak.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


TAKING APART THE 300 IS THE MOST FUN THING I HAVE EVER DONE. Everyone should take apart a 4000 dollar lens at least once in their lifetimes.












You gotta get out more, dude.

P.S. Building a rotary engine in a weekend is way more fun. And, coincidentally, less money. But money seems like it's not an object for you.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


TAKING APART THE 300 IS THE MOST FUN THING I HAVE EVER DONE. Everyone should take apart a 4000 dollar lens at least once in their lifetimes.


I've done that on the same exact lens =) How'd it go? can you blow dry out all the water then send it to CPS?


----------



## Shane1244

I woulda' bought a crap load of silica gel, and then put it in there for a week or so.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*


I woulda' bought a crap load of silica gel, and then put it in there for a week or so.


Throw a packet in a bowl of water while you're at it. Quite fun.


----------



## Shane1244

That's what I always do with them haha. POPOPOPOPOP


----------



## dudemanppl

Its just dried crap, so I can't silica gel it. And I love you, reincarnated.


----------



## Shane1244

Ouch, that sucks. Pics of the deconstruction process?


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Its just dried crap, so I can't silica gel it. And I love you, reincarnated.


Call me old fashioned, but I must be paid a dowry of a full frame camera and two L lenses before I can be woo-ed.

This convo just took a turn for the awkward.


----------



## Marin

35mm is too tiny.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


FF is too tiny.


I plan to upgrade to medium format if he wants to propose
I'm not going to say yes though.


----------



## Marin

Medium format is tiny.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Medium format is tiny.


I'm out of photographic size standards


----------



## Marin

Step it up to LF.


----------



## frankth3frizz

i need a camera. i want something that takes really good pictures and i wanna get into photography. i have a budget of around $300-$400. help :/ i have NO CLUE about cameras. the last camera i had is a sony cybershot. this one that i got when it came out.

http://reviews.cnet.com/digital-came...-31307472.html


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Step it up to LF.


Speaking of LF/MF, would an older Mamiya 645 (manual) be a decent first step into MF? I've been seeing some blow across Keh for a while now.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *frankth3frizz*


i need a camera. i want something that takes really good pictures and *i wanna get into photography*. i have a budget of around $300-$400. help :/ i have NO CLUE about cameras. the last camera i had is a sony cybershot. this one that i got when it came out.

http://reviews.cnet.com/digital-came...-31307472.html


I suggest you read the guides that I and Dream Killer (grammatically incorrect, but phrased in the order you should read them) first. Link to mine is in my sig, link to DK's is in my guide.

As far as cameras go, look at a refurbished Rebel XS or Nikon D3000. The D3000 is covered in my guide as well, the XS is a now-outdated model that can still take some great images. Both are excellent choices for beginners.


----------



## sub50hz

I've gotta sell my XS. <1100 actuations, gripped, sitting in a box. Great investment.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


I've gotta sell my XS. <1100 actuations, gripped, sitting in a box. Great investment.


Sell for $300 on POTN, or buy an $80 18-55mm IS and sell for $400 here. Or trade for a 50 f/1.4.

(My speech gets more direct the less sleep/more coffee I have)


----------



## sub50hz

For 300 bucks I would rather keep it as a backup. It still has the kit lens, and the grip is Canon branded.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Speaking of LF/MF, would an older Mamiya 645 (manual) be a decent first step into MF? I've been seeing some blow across Keh for a while now.


For MF probably step it up to 6x6 or 6x7. Mamiya RZ's sell for cheap and are still being released by Mamiya (and now have a digital system). If you want something smaller though and don't want to pay for a Hasselblad then I guess 645 is fine. Just it's smaller in comparison to the other formats.

EDIT: And stay away from Bronica.


----------



## dudemanppl

AF is pooped. OMG NVM IT WORRRKSS! <3<3<3


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


For MF probably step it up to 6x6 or 6x7. Mamiya RZ's sell for cheap and are still being released by Mamiya (and now have a digital system). If you want something smaller though and don't want to pay for a Hasselblad then I guess 645 is fine. Just it's smaller in comparison to the other formats.

EDIT: And stay away from Bronica.


http://www.keh.com/camera/Mamiya-RZ-...990521450?r=FE

Something along these lines?


----------



## Marin

That can work but it has a 220 back.


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


AF is pooped. OMG NVM IT WORRRKSS! <3<3<3


1. ???
2. ???
3. profit


----------



## sub50hz

Should I look for one with a 120/220, then?


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*


1. ???
2. ???
3. profit


Nevermind its broken.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Should I look for one with a 120/220, then?


Just get a 120 back.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


P.S. Building a rotary engine in a weekend is way more fun. And, coincidentally, less money. But money seems like it's not an object for you.


lies.....rolling handgrenade blows up and shoots apex seals of doom at any time.....









i have yet have a lens blow up and shoot the front element out


----------



## Shane1244

What made you think it was working? Is there a controller board in the lens? or is it just the motor? Either way I'd think you might be able to find a way to get replacements staright from Canon.


----------



## Marin

Yeah, you can buy parts from Canon. You just need to be able to specify exactly what you need.


----------



## Shane1244

That's good news. I might get into fixing stuff soon. Major profits can be made, and I definitely have the patients and accuracy for it, providing they are only as uncomplicated as I think they are.

I wonder how much it would cost to replace EVERY piece except for the glass.


----------



## dudemanppl

The AF sorta stutters. Me no know what wrong.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


I suggest you read the guides that I and Dream Killer (grammatically incorrect, but phrased in the order you should read them) first. Link to mine is in my sig, link to DK's is in my guide.

As far as cameras go, look at a refurbished Rebel XS or Nikon D3000. The D3000 is covered in my guide as well, the XS is a now-outdated model that can still take some great images. Both are excellent choices for beginners.


dang i need to update it with basic flash. just sooooo lazy!


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


lies.....rolling handgrenade blows up and shoots apex seals of doom at any time.....










Not when they're packing 1.2 liters of downdraft-carb'd glory.

old pic:


----------



## sub50hz

Haha, finding these old pics of this car. Note: when building a 12A, do not forget to cap the oil injector, or you end up with this garbage on your driveway:


----------



## Shane1244

Buddys got a souped up taxi. lols


----------



## sub50hz

That was my DD/Solo2 car:










Still have it, needs a MAF or something. Too lazy to check.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Not when they're packing 1.2 liters of downdraft-carb'd glory.

old pic:










ahh good old fb/sa22. i have a pair of fcs and a 13bt in my backyard.....got tired of it and switched to a miata....

maybe one day ill drop a LS1 into the fc.


----------



## sub50hz

One of these days I'll do a Miata, but I've got my heart set on a 240Z. They are impossible to find in the midwest (unless you're a great welder and can replace the entire floorpan), and all the ones I can find elsewhere are overpriced thanks to all of these drift-tards snatching them up and dropping ridiculous motors in them. I would also settle for a 510, my neighbor had the cleanest one I've ever seen until a moving truck turned the corner in front of my house and made a truck-510-tree sandwich in his front yard. It was on the street for an hour while he was cleaning his driveway.


----------



## iandroo888

ls1 into fc D: why does people like that conversion so much


----------



## sub50hz

Because it's dirt cheap to do, and the LS1 (being all-alum) is quite light. Good weight balance, fast car. Tons of dimwit teens love to wreck LS1-powered cars the day they get behind the wheel, so LS1s are pretty plentiful.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


One of these days I'll do a Miata, but I've got my heart set on a 240Z. They are impossible to find in the midwest (unless you're a great welder and can replace the entire floorpan), and all the ones I can find elsewhere are overpriced thanks to all of these drift-tards snatching them up and dropping ridiculous motors in them. I would also settle for a 510, my neighbor had the cleanest one I've ever seen until a moving truck turned the corner in front of my house and made a truck-510-tree sandwich in his front yard. It was on the street for an hour while he was cleaning his driveway.


miata is great fun and dirt cheap too gotta love it. i got my car with a old aerocharger turbo in mine for like 2500.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


ls1 into fc D: why does people like that conversion so much


i love the 13b as much as the next rotorhead....but they dont make enough power (with reasonable reliability).

on the other hand a ls1 takes tons of abuse, are dirt cheap, make great power and weight maybe 100-200lbs more then the 13b. and unlike dropping a ls1 in a fd, the fc is big enough to easily fit one in.

sub50hz beat me by a couple of seconds....


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*


dang i need to update it with basic flash. just sooooo lazy!


I know what you mean. Just blame school









I'm dreading a bit when the D5100 comes out, because even though my guide isn't as advanced/detailed as yours, it still means I have to look up reviews, compare the camera to others, and write a quick spot about it.

Eh, I guess that's why we have summer and dead week.

As for where this thread is going, /over my head.


----------



## sub50hz

Can somebody extract EXIF from this? It's pretty old, and I don't remember what this guy was shooting with.


----------



## Shane1244

There isn't any.


----------



## sub50hz

Well, that's why I asked if someone could use some ninja-magic method to reach back in time before it had been resized and molested.


----------



## Shane1244

If it was edited and saved, then a brand new file was created, so there isn't going to be any EXIF data no matter how far you dig.


----------



## sub50hz

Use your gypsy magic, Shane. I believe in you.

edit: I hope it's clear at this point that I'm dicking around.


----------



## Shane1244

I think I got it..


----------



## sub50hz

I don't know what's going on, but I'm disappointed you skipped the opportunity to draw something inappropriate.


----------



## Shane1244

EXIF says Canikon D3 MK III

Goodnight.


----------



## dudemanppl

Trololol... I think it needs a board replaced... If I knew how to solder I could do it myself.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


If I knew how to solder I could do it myself.


Soldering is thuper-easy. Iron, wire, magnifier. Do work.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Soldering is thuper-easy. Iron, wire, magnifier. Do work.


But I'm scared as hell of hot things. Don't know why. Recommend me stuff to buy and maybe I do it.

EDIT: http://f20c.com/stuff/canon/partslist/ This place is amazing. Super useful.


----------



## sub50hz

It depends on what size iron you need (normal/micro) and what kind of variance you want in heat settings. For 75% of gp electronics work, a 10 dollar banger from Radio Shack will do. I use a Weller station at home (they cost around a hundo), I've owned it for the better part of 10 years and only had to change tips. You'll need a bunch of 60/40 soldering wire (lead/tin with flux), and a solder-sucker. Magnifying headbands are great, I use a 4x or 8x Optivisor for most stuff. There should be plenty of tutorials on the Tube about how to solder, it's quite easy. With a little practice, you'll find you've greatly expanded your electronics assembly/repair skills.

edit: Don't be scared of the heat. Sophomore year of HS, I got some molten flux in my right eye. Hurt like hell, but it didn't do any perma-damage. All better in a couple weeks.


----------



## dudemanppl

Flux in eye. Do not want... Whats a solder sucker?


----------



## sub50hz

http://www.radioshack.com/product/in...ductId=2062745

You basically press down the button at the end until it click-stops in the middle of the body, heat up the solder pad/ball/area on the part you want to remove, get this close to it and release the spring. It vacuums all the molten solder inside the body and off the working area. Some people don't use them, but they're sloppy jerks.


----------



## Shane1244

It'd be easiest if you showed us what exactly you have to solder. If it's just a few wires than thats easy, can be done with pretty much any iron with no other tools.


----------



## wilykat

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13041774*
> TAKING APART THE 300 IS THE MOST FUN THING I HAVE EVER DONE. Everyone should take apart a 4000 dollar lens at least once in their lifetimes.


Try having fun with Canon 1200mm f5.6L

Make a mistake and not only you'd be out about $100,000, you'd also be destroying the rarest Canon lens.


----------



## Shane1244

I miss my Nikkor 35 1.8. Such an amazing lens for the price.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*


I miss my Nikkor 35 1.8. Such an amazing lens for the price.


Siggy 30 f/1.4.

EDIT: Or my 28mm when my Siggy comes to replace it


----------



## iandroo888

anyone interested in purchasing a great condition SB-600? includes everything that came with it, with also a Stofen diffuser that i had bought for it.

I'm tryin to fund for a nikon 35mm f/1.8 or sigma 30mm f/1.4


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Siggy 30 f/1.4.

EDIT: Or my 28mm when my Siggy comes to replace it










I'll probably end up trading my 50 1.4 + $ for one.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*


I'll probably end up trading my 50 1.4 + $ for one.


You might be better off selling it in all honesty. In my experience, people in the normal-crop focal lengths rarely like to move up to 50mm.


----------



## Dream Killer

finally caved in and traded my 24mm for 35mm 1.8 DX for a day. i think it's great on FX and i don't mind the vignetting but that holy mother of god distortion is the reason i won't get one (look at pic). i'm better off with the 16-35mm f/4 vr since the 35mm 1.8 dx is hecka soft wider than f/4 on FX anyway.

*1:03am, E-train to Jamaica*









Nikon D700 
35mm 1/125th F4 ISO2500


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

I thought you already tried out the 35 f/1.8?


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*









I thought you already tried out the 35 f/1.8?


yeah it was during dinner with a friend and most of the shots was of her across the table. i really wanted to give the 35mm 1.8 a real test for its intended purpose (street for me).


----------



## dudemanppl

The 35 1.8 on a D700 makes me happy downstairs. It just looks... good. I don't know if its the jesusload of vignetting or what, but I really like what I get from it wide open on full frame.

Whoop whoop, buy guys I'm going to go shoot: http://www.runnerspace.com/ArcadiaInvite right now


----------



## frankth3frizz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


I suggest you read the guides that I and Dream Killer (grammatically incorrect, but phrased in the order you should read them) first. Link to mine is in my sig, link to DK's is in my guide.

As far as cameras go, look at a refurbished Rebel XS or Nikon D3000. The D3000 is covered in my guide as well, the XS is a now-outdated model that can still take some great images. Both are excellent choices for beginners.


saw this on craigslist.

http://seattle.craigslist.org/see/pho/2299973898.html

and i saw that, that camera goes for 1,000+ brand new?


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *frankth3frizz*


saw this on craigslist.

http://seattle.craigslist.org/see/pho/2299973898.html

and i saw that, that camera goes for 1,000+ brand new?


Don't get that. Its WAYYY too old. And although I don't really have much against old things, you'd be getting sorta ripped off too.


----------



## frankth3frizz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Don't get that. Its WAYYY too old. And although I don't really have much against old things, you'd be getting sorta ripped off too.


oh ok. im most likely getting this


----------



## dudemanppl

That's even more of a ripoff... you can find that setup for 350ish used.


----------



## Shane1244

Plus, this stomps it for $50 more.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...3_Digital.html


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*


Plus, this stomps it for $50 more.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...3_Digital.html


I agree with this. If buying used, a Rebel XS for $380 (inc 18-55mm IS lens) is the way to go. If buying new, I personally think the T3 is a better deal.

Also, camera batteries finally arrived. AE-1 and Canonet are in perfect working condition. Hells yes


----------



## dudemanppl

Manal focus 300 2.8 isn't that bad at all. I'll post some results in 30 minutes because I'm still shooting.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13057129*
> Manal focus 300 2.8 isn't that bad at all. I'll post some results in 30 minutes because I'm still shooting.


You can still probably make a good amount of money selling it.


----------



## iandroo888

totally didnt know there was a T3 version. thought it was T3i xD


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iandroo888;13057836*
> totally didnt know there was a T3 version. thought it was T3i xD


Canon has been less-than-friendly with their North American naming, in my opinion.

I really prefer to call them the 1100D and 600D.


----------



## dudemanppl

http://www.kenrockwell.com/trips/2011-02-yosemite/26.htm My eyes hurt from the sharpening.
Manual focus 300 2.8 time! And my friend with the 400 made the worst pictures imagineable.


----------



## Shane1244

Screw Sigma.
Quote:


> Bower BO14C
> 14mm f/2.8 Ultra Wide Angle Manual Focus Lens for Canon EOS Digital ...
> 
> 1
> $419.99
> $419.99
> 
> Sub Total
> $419.99
> 
> Shipping
> $9.82
> 
> Duties & Tax
> $57.80
> 
> Total
> $487.61


Only like $460 CDN. I hope I'm happy.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;13067959*
> Screw Sigma.


Ok?

Every lens is making a compromise between certain things, I chose the Sigma because it suited my needs/wants.


----------



## Shane1244

Don't take it literal haha, I understand that. But it my case it was screw the sigma, the Samyang fitted my needs.

Which were Low CA, Fast and FF Compatible, and cheaper of course.

Sure is going to be weird for me with a aperture ring.

There are some Sigma's I want my hands on.

God damn ear.


----------



## dudemanppl

Sigma made an autofocus 14 that goes for around 450ish and is as good as the Nikon AF-D.


----------



## sub50hz

Don't worry about the aperture ring. I still feel for it sometimes.


----------



## dudemanppl

http://www.flickr.com/photos/dudeman...7626458982278/
Updated with more pictures. I'm used to manual focusing now!


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


http://www.flickr.com/photos/dudeman...7626458982278/
Updated with more pictures. I'm used to manual focusing now!


Yeah you've nailed the focus. Is it just me or do your photos seem a bit washed out.


----------



## dudemanppl

Its not you. I need to add some more crap in post...


----------



## dudemanppl

Yeah for some I couldn't figure out how I could make it look better, so I just left it like that.

Edit: FFFFFFFFFFFF, I THOUGHT THE POST BEFORE THIS WASN'T POSTED. Damn you buggy forums.


----------



## sub50hz

Ugh. I'm going to go find a battery for me AE-1, Wolf (of all places) has HP5 and Delta 3200 in stock. Probably at a price I will be unhappy about.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*


Screw Sigma.

Only like $460 CDN. I hope I'm happy.


good stuff, its a great lens to play around with.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Ugh. I'm going to go find a battery for me AE-1, Wolf (of all places) has HP5 and Delta 3200 in stock. Probably at a price I will be unhappy about.


I just bought mine online


----------



## Theory

Took this when the moon was really big a few weeks ago
Attachment 204888

Cannon Rebel Xs


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


good stuff, its a great lens to play around with.


I can't wait!







everyone I talked to said that if I don't need the wider focal length over the sigmathan this lens was a no brainer.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


I just bought mine online










I ended up going to Calumet, they finally got their Ilford shipment in, so I took what they had left of Delta 400. 2 rolls. Bummer.


----------



## Marin

Feels good to be near Freestyle.


----------



## dudemanppl

Hollywood isn't close.







I thought it'd be in like Pasedena. Oh wells.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Hollywood isn't close.







I thought it'd be in like Pasedena. Oh wells.


Stop being lazy and drive there.









I drive there all the time and I'm in Pasadena. And Arcadia is right next to Pasadena... so...

EDIT: Oh wait, you don't have a license.


----------



## dudemanppl

Thats why I said it wasn't close.







I just order film from B&H.


----------



## Marin

Yesterdays trip to freestyle.


----------



## sub50hz

How is the Delta 100? Oddly, I have never shot any B+W film with a lower ISO than 400.


----------



## Marin

It's good. I've been developing it with Xtol and liking the results it has with sharpness and tone (even though Xtol doesn't make the grain appear sharp like Rodinal does).

But I've been shooting with Pan F 50 a lot and developing it in Rodinal at a 1+50 dilution.


----------



## sub50hz

Interesting. I'm gonna blow through a roll this week and bring it to a lab that I discovered is biking distance from home (actually near the bike shop I used to work at, about 8 miles each way).


----------



## Shane1244

I have a friend (you could say) that sent me a photo, of his "awesome" HDR photography.

Link: http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/5608007396/?v=1?ref=nf

He raged because my criticism was that it was oversaturated, underexposed and that he didn't understand the concept of HDR. The picture kinda has the "glow" that HDR photo's sometimes have, but the level of dynamic range is so incredibly low.

I then told him how to take a HDR photo by combining multiple exposures, and he said... .
Quote:


> Ive been accepted to college for photography and really dont need to be educated by you..












Also, Read the picture info, this was REUPLOAD, because it was too dark before.. lol?


----------



## Marin

Ask him what school. I'm curious, lulz.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;13077127*
> I have a friend (you could say) that sent me a photo, of his "awesome" HDR photography.
> 
> Link: http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/5608007396/?v=1?ref=nf
> 
> He raged because my criticism was that it was oversaturated, underexposed and that he didn't understand the concept of HDR. The picture kinda has the "glow" that HDR photo's sometimes have, but the level of dynamic range is so incredibly low.
> 
> I then told him how to take a HDR photo by combining multiple exposures, and he said... .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also, Read the picture info, this was REUPLOAD, because it was too dark before.. lol?


Oh my god my eyes have diabetes.


----------



## mortimersnerd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;13077127*
> I have a friend (you could say) that sent me a photo, of his "awesome" HDR photography.
> 
> Link: http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/5608007396/?v=1?ref=nf
> 
> He raged because my criticism was that it was oversaturated, underexposed and that he didn't understand the concept of HDR. The picture kinda has the "glow" that HDR photo's sometimes have, but the level of dynamic range is so incredibly low.
> 
> I then told him how to take a HDR photo by combining multiple exposures, and he said... .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also, Read the picture info, this was REUPLOAD, because it was too dark before.. lol?


It reminds me of some of the people I saw taking pictures at my last cycling race. They had no concept of perspective for sports shots though they had expensive gear. Also greatly lacking humility...


----------



## dudemanppl

Yeah, mortimers is one of the few folks with D5000s with work I actually quite like. And then there are the folks with D3s on Program...


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;13077161*
> Ask him what school. I'm curious, lulz.


Fanshawe, It's a good school... just not for arts.. As far as I know, it's close to non-existent.

http://www.fanshawec.ca/EN/index.html
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13077184*
> Oh my god my eyes have diabetes.


Ikr. :/


----------



## sub50hz

I ran into a woman today all geared out with a 40D/24-70L trying to shoot this girl walking. Green box. I had to help her.


----------



## Marin

Did I post this before?


----------



## dudemanppl

No, and WHY DON'T YOU SCAN THEM?







I'm sure all of use would want to see huge versions of those prints.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;13077127*
> I have a friend (you could say) that sent me a photo, of his "awesome" HDR photography.
> 
> Link: http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/5608007396/?v=1?ref=nf
> 
> He raged because my criticism was that it was oversaturated, underexposed and that he didn't understand the concept of HDR. The picture kinda has the "glow" that HDR photo's sometimes have, but the level of dynamic range is so incredibly low.


I know people like that. Long story short, they saw me with my DSLR and wanted one themselves. Now I know I'm not the best photographer here, but I think I'm good enough to say holy crap those guys suck (think I linked to one of their albums before). Whenever I bring up the shortcomings of their shots (OOF, uninteresting angle, bad composition, etc), they QQ and compensate by buying more gear.

Now I just don't talk to those people.









On a side note, I did meet an awesome woman over break who knows a crapload about photography and I managed to talk with her the whole day about it (and about food and wine as well). Where's the *Crosses Fingers* emoticon?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mortimersnerd;13077213*
> It reminds me of some of the people I saw taking pictures at my last cycling race. They had no concept of perspective for sports shots though they had expensive gear. Also greatly lacking humility...


It goes on both ends of the spectrum, really. I've seen people with pro and entry-level gear that have flagpoles up their rear-end, and people with pro and entry-level gear that are just absolutely amazing.

Meh, my attitude now is that it really doesn't concern me. I just chat up photogs I see, and the ones that are cool I keep in touch with. The ones that have no humility, I just ignore.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13077285*
> I ran into a woman today all geared out with a 40D/24-70L trying to shoot this girl walking. Green box. I had to help her.


Might have been her husband's camera. A 40D with a high-end lens like the 24-70L looks much more like a combination used by a skilled photog, not a new gearwhore.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;13077367*
> Did I post this before?


Nope. Is that a soldering iron in the background? Mind walking this film noob through what's going on there?







Looks pretty cool!


----------



## Marin

I'm working on my finals right now. I'll probably start scanning stuff next week on the Hasselblad X5.

And as you can also see my Flickr link is gone. Work is too mediocre compared to my current stuff.









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;13077468*
> 
> Nope. Is that a soldering iron in the background? Mind walking this film noob through what's going on there?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Looks pretty cool!


Yeah.

There's an iron for pressing dry mount tissue onto paper and two dry mount presses (upper right corner and bottom left corner). I don't like dry mounting my stuff since it kind of ruins the print (in terms of reusing it).

For the prints (going from left to right starting on the top).

- Ilford Delta 100 developed in something. Printed on Ilford Warmtone Glossy using Kodak Dektol.

- Ilford Pan F 50 developed in Xtol. Printed on Foma Warmtone Glossy using Neutol WA.

- Ilford Pan F 50 developed in Xtol. Printed on Ilford Warmtone Glossy using Neutol WA.

- Ilford Pan F 50 developed in Rodinal. Printed on Foma Warmtone using Neutol WA.

- Ilford Pan F 50 developed in Rodinal. Printed on Foma Warmtone using Neutol WA.

- Ilford Pan F 50 developed in Rodinal. Printed on Foma Warmtone using Neutol WA.

- Ilford Pan F 50 developed in Xtol. Printed on Ilford Warmtone Glossy using Neutol WA.

- Ilford Pan F 50 developed in Rodinal printed on Foma Warmtone Glossy using Neutol WA.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;13077468*
> 
> On a side note, I did meet an awesome woman over break who knows a crapload about photography and I managed to talk with her the whole day about it (and about food and wine as well). Where's the *Crosses Fingers* emoticon?


Don't marry/go out with her. Then she will know what you get in the mail since a BIG BLACK CAMERA can mean gripped rebel or 1D.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;13077468*
> Might have been her husband's camera. A 40D with a high-end lens like the 24-70L looks much more like a combination used by a skilled photog, not a new gearwhore.


She gave me her laminated business card. When i do laundry tonight i will take a pic of it and post it.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;13077469*
> Yeah.
> 
> There's an iron for pressing dry mount tissue onto paper and two dry mount presses (upper right corner and bottom left corner). I don't like dry mounting my stuff since it kind of ruins the print (in terms of reusing it).
> 
> For the prints (going from left to right starting on the top).
> 
> - Ilford Delta 100 developed in something. Printed on Ilford Warmtone Glossy using Kodak Dektol.
> 
> - Ilford Pan F 50 developed in Xtol. Printed on Foma Warmtone Glossy using Neutol WA.
> 
> - Ilford Pan F 50 developed in Xtol. Printed on Ilford Warmtone Glossy using Neutol WA.
> 
> - Ilford Pan F 50 developed in Rodinal. Printed on Foma Warmtone using Neutol WA.
> 
> - Ilford Pan F 50 developed in Rodinal. Printed on Foma Warmtone using Neutol WA.
> 
> - Ilford Pan F 50 developed in Rodinal. Printed on Foma Warmtone using Neutol WA.
> 
> - Ilford Pan F 50 developed in Xtol. Printed on Ilford Warmtone Glossy using Neutol WA.
> 
> - Ilford Pan F 50 developed in Rodinal printed on Foma Warmtone Glossy using Neutol WA.


That sounds pretty cool. I've been trying to get more into film lately, but man, it is so much more complex than digital. Lots to learn for me.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13077568*
> Don't marry/go out with her. Then she will know what you get in the mail since a BIG BLACK CAMERA can mean gripped rebel or 1D.


But conversely, I can always use "Lightroom is running slow on my computer, I think I need to upgrade" as an excuse to go tri-SLI with whatever Intel CPU will be top of the line then









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13077574*
> She gave me her laminated business card. When i do laundry tonight i will take a pic of it and post it.


All I can say is: Wow...


----------



## Marin

I thought digital was easier too, but after being in my current imaging class (digital stuff) I'd have to say otherwise. But then again having a teacher who retouches as a career does raise the difficulty.


----------



## Shane1244

I missed my favoruite quote.
Quote:


> Your opinion, Its a photo editing program I use called photoshop. You may have heard of it. Its got tons of tools i can use to edit photos.. This photo in particular I am using Sharpening filters to bring out the colors.


Maybe I'm doing it wrong, but I use sharpening to sharpen my photos.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;13077798*
> I missed my favoruite quote.
> 
> Maybe I'm doing it wrong, but I use sharpening to sharpen my photos.


Noobcakes. Everyone knows you use sharpening to bring out the colors, and saturation to sharpen your images


----------



## dudemanppl

And increase contrast to lighten the image. Duh!


----------



## Marin

And I'm using the high pass filter to bring out the shadow details.


----------



## sub50hz

I'm too lazy to post that business card right now, here's the website on it:

http://www.dogdayart.com/photography/


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13077968*
> I'm too lazy to post that business card right now, here's the website on it:
> 
> http://www.dogdayart.com/photography/


Meh, nothing to write home about.


----------



## sub50hz

I didn't expect much. To her credit, she was very nice and quite thankful that I could help her out.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;13077127*
> I have a friend (you could say) that sent me a photo, of his "awesome" HDR photography.
> 
> Link: http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/5608007396/?v=1?ref=nf
> 
> He raged because my criticism was that it was oversaturated, underexposed and that he didn't understand the concept of HDR. The picture kinda has the "glow" that HDR photo's sometimes have, but the level of dynamic range is so incredibly low.
> 
> I then told him how to take a HDR photo by combining multiple exposures, and he said... .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also, Read the picture info, this was REUPLOAD, because it was too dark before.. lol?


That's such an awful shot. God is it terrible. As his friend, you ought to send him here for C&C so that he can learn a thing or two (an open his eyes).
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13077968*
> I'm too lazy to post that business card right now, here's the website on it:
> 
> http://www.dogdayart.com/photography/


Anyone else really getting sick of everyone with a new DSLR all of a sudden labeling everything " Photography" as though they had some sort of business all of a sudden? No offense to anyone here who does that, but it's unbelievably lame. It doesn't give your work any more gravitas than it may or may not already have.


----------



## dudemanppl

The only reason I dislike being Asian is that my last name wouldn't work in a business name.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;13079013*
> Anyone else really getting sick of everyone with a new DSLR all of a sudden labeling everything " Photography" as though they had some sort of business all of a sudden? No offense to anyone here who does that, but it's unbelievably lame. It doesn't give your work any more gravitas than it may or may not already have.


*Raises hand*

Although I am guilty of using that as a watermark early on. It's a dark part of my pass I'd like to pretend never happened








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13079066*
> The only reason I dislike being Asian is that my last name wouldn't work in a business name.


My last name is Nguyen. God knows I can never use that for a business name because, seriously, how many Viet people do you know with a last name other than Nguyen?


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;13079013*
> Anyone else really getting sick of everyone with a new DSLR all of a sudden labeling everything " Photography" as though they had some sort of business all of a sudden? No offense to anyone here who does that, but it's unbelievably lame. It doesn't give your work any more gravitas than it may or may not already have.


watermarking is incredibly annoying to me. just post it at a small resolution (500x333 works well for me) if you don't want your photo to be stolen or whatever. if you really have to do it at least have the decency to use a frame and put the watermark between the frame and picture and not inside the picture where it ruins the photo.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer;13079469*
> watermarking is incredibly annoying to me. just post it at a small resolution (500x333 works well for me) if you don't want your photo to be stolen or whatever. if you really have to do it at least have the decency to use a frame and put the watermark between the frame and picture and not inside the picture where it ruins the photo.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;13079256*
> *Raises hand*
> 
> Although I am guilty of using that as a watermark early on. It's a dark part of my pass I'd like to pretend never happened
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My last name is Nguyen. God knows I can never use that for a business name because, seriously, how many Viet people do you know with a last name other than Nguyen?


Well, if people want to do it, so be it, but I always wonder why people insist on putting "Photography" after their name on watermarks. I understand the importance of protecting your work, but we all know that it's photography, no need for the extra label.







Plus I think any watermark, no matter how inconspicuous, really ruins a photo. A photo should be "unsigned" so to speak (IMO).

I felt the need to the same thing in the beginning as well, but didn't because it seemed like I was putting on airs or thought my work was brilliant, and also because I didn't want to give anyone the impression that I was a pro.

and LOL about your name. A Viet friend of mine said that Nguyen was the Asian "Smith."







I still have trouble pronouncing it.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer;13079469*
> watermarking is incredibly annoying to me. just post it at a small resolution (500x333 works well for me) if you don't want your photo to be stolen or whatever. if you really have to do it at least have the decency to use a frame and put the watermark between the frame and picture and not inside the picture where it ruins the photo.


This, a million times over. I especially hate it when people slap it all over the photo at like 70% transparency.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer;13079469*
> watermarking is incredibly annoying to me. just post it at a small resolution (500x333 works well for me) if you don't want your photo to be stolen or whatever. if you really have to do it at least have the decency to use a frame and put the watermark between the frame and picture and not inside the picture where it ruins the photo.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13079577*
> This, a million times over. I especially hate it when people slap it all over the photo at like 70% transparency.


I suppose sometimes it's a necessary evil. I remember when someone claimed Marin's work as their own and he had to start stamping his shots.


----------



## sub50hz

Well, I've gone and donated my 1N to my sister for school (she's an art ed major at UIC). Now I need another EOS film body. Don't think I wanna pony the green for a 1V, but the 3 is scratching my brain again. Hrm.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;13079575*
> Well, if people want to do it, so be it, but I always wonder why people insist on putting "Photography" after their name on watermarks. I understand the importance of protecting your work, but we all know that it's photography, no need for the extra label.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Plus I think any watermark, no matter how inconspicuous, really ruins a photo. A photo should be "unsigned" so to speak (IMO).
> 
> I felt the need to the same thing in the beginning as well, but didn't because it seemed like I was putting on airs or thought my work was brilliant, and also because I didn't want to give anyone the impression that I was a pro.
> 
> and LOL about your name. A Viet friend of mine said that Nguyen was the Asian "Smith."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I still have trouble pronouncing it.


Yea, I feel the photography watermark a phase most photographers go through. In a few months I'll probably start disliking watermarks in general.

The "putting on airs" thing is spot on. I dropped the whole huge watermark thing because I felt it was being pretentious and a bit stupid, like I was trying to save my photo with a watermark.

And Nguyen is definitely the Asian "Smith". It doesn't really help that my first name is Daniel either. Common American first name + Common Viet last name = good luck finding me on social networking sites







The pronunciation isn't fun either. Most people I know simply introduce themselves as "New-en" because it's easier for everyone to say.


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;13079013*
> Anyone else really getting sick of everyone with a new DSLR all of a sudden labeling everything " Photography" as though they had some sort of business all of a sudden? No offense to anyone here who does that, but it's unbelievably lame. It doesn't give your work any more gravitas than it may or may not already have.


I'm innocent.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=39kFbcd6oKU[/ame]


----------



## dudemanppl

Horrible pictures + huge watermark in comic sans = super epic rage time. And you all know that makes you mad too.


----------



## Marin

Quick scan I did a week ago on the Hasselblad X5. Haven't touched it up yet.


----------



## Shane1244

Gas mask's ALWAYS make scary pictures. D:

Pretty cool, I really wanna see the scan of that last picture with the gas mask you posted PIP mode.


----------



## Marin

Oh, the 8x10. I need to figure out a way to scan it cleanly on my Epson since the Hasselblads only go up to 4x5.

I don't like the image that much anyways. I'm going to reshoot it next term as part of a project. Just need an air canister for it and some models to pose nude.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Horrible pictures + huge watermark in comic sans = super epic rage time. And you all know that makes you mad too.


Papyrus makes me rage more. In fact, Papyrus on anything makes me rage.


----------



## Marin

Love/hate relationship with Helvetica. It's waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay overused yet it's so appealing.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Love/hate relationship with Helvetica. It's waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay overused yet it's so appealing.


I think of Helvetica as I do HDR: When done properly, it looks great, but often is over- and improperly- used.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


My last name is Nguyen. God knows I can never use that for a business name because, seriously, how many Viet people do you know with a last name other than Nguyen?










LOL'd. And you're right, about 3...


----------



## Danylu

Surprisingly enough, most of the people I have recommended DSLRs are quite receptive of my advice and are willing to not attack me for it. But there is one guy I know, complete gear head. I don't think he has taken a single shot yet he is on his 2nd DSLR already.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


I'm too lazy to post that business card right now, here's the website on it:

http://www.dogdayart.com/photography/


The URL looks like "dodgey art"

Her website needs some serious work, but her stuff isn't the worst i've ever seen.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Surprisingly enough, most of the people I have recommended DSLRs are quite receptive of my advice and are willing to not attack me for it. But there is one guy I know, complete gear head. I don't think he has taken a single shot yet he is on his 2nd DSLR already.


Complete opposite for me. Everyone who's asked me for DSLR advice stopped listening as soon as they bought it.

One guy takes pretty crappy photos (which honestly is next to impossible with the Siggy 30mm f/1.4), and another barely takes shots at all. The few he does take are completely hipster. Both also share the whole "Post processing ruins photos and isn't photography and is for people with no skills with a camera".

Meh, the only people I've met in real life who do photography well are ones who picked it up on their own accord, without advice from others. One is a very good friend of mine since 8th grade, the other is his friend from college (again ,crossing my fingers with her).

Just not sure why the people I introduced into photography turned out to be so.... bad









Quote:



Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*


The URL looks like "dodgey art"

Her website needs some serious work, but her stuff isn't the worst i've ever seen.


The broken "fashion" link on the home page doesn't help.

And on that note, time to sleep. Yay for sleeping at 2:35!


----------



## dudemanppl

I didn't notice until now that it WASN'T "dodgy art". I'm a complete failure. And I think I'll get a D40 and Sigma 30 as a "take everywhere" body. Small, sharp, light, and around 500 bucks.

AND HOLY CRAP YOU'RE RIGHT, THE PERSON THAT I INTRODUCED TO PHOTOGRAPHY IS COMPLETE CRAP. On the other hand the girl I told to read up on aperture and the exposure triangle and stuff like that is GODLIKE.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


I didn't notice until now that it WASN'T "dodgy art". I'm a complete failure. And I think I'll get a D40 and Sigma 30 as a "take everywhere" body. Small, sharp, light, and around 500 bucks.


With most of the cost coming from the Sigma







Sounds like a good plan though! Easy enough to find and pretty cheap.

Okay last post tonight I swear!


----------



## Unknownm




----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*


The URL looks like "dodgey art"


Yeah I read it like that as well.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Complete opposite for me. Everyone who's asked me for DSLR advice stopped listening as soon as they bought it.

One guy takes pretty crappy photos (which honestly is next to impossible with the Siggy 30mm f/1.4), and another barely takes shots at all. The few he does take are completely hipster. Both also share the whole "Post processing ruins photos and isn't photography and is for people with no skills with a camera".

Meh, the only people I've met in real life who do photography well are ones who picked it up on their own accord, without advice from others. One is a very good friend of mine since 8th grade, the other is his friend from college (again ,crossing my fingers with her).

Just not sure why the people I introduced into photography turned out to be so.... bad









The broken "fashion" link on the home page doesn't help.

And on that note, time to sleep. Yay for sleeping at 2:35!



Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


I didn't notice until now that it WASN'T "dodgy art". I'm a complete failure. And I think I'll get a D40 and Sigma 30 as a "take everywhere" body. Small, sharp, light, and around 500 bucks.


Me too


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


I didn't notice until now that it WASN'T "dodgy art". I'm a complete failure. And I think I'll get a D40 and Sigma 30 as a "take everywhere" body. Small, sharp, light, and around 500 bucks.

AND HOLY CRAP YOU'RE RIGHT, THE PERSON THAT I INTRODUCED TO PHOTOGRAPHY IS COMPLETE CRAP. On the other hand the girl I told to read up on aperture and the exposure triangle and stuff like that is GODLIKE.


My friend asked me what camera he should get, ignored my advice, and got the cheapest new sony he could. however his actual photography isn't bad, he listens to my advice too.

On the watermark thing, my website is jamesboydphoto. Only because jamesboyd.com was taken, and looks strange. I know i'm not trying to form a career out of photograhy, and i don't class myself a as a photographer.


----------



## MistaBernie

The only reason why I put Photography on my watermarks is because my old watermarks were just my initials, and people thought I was involved w/ B&H Photo.. that and when I got out of college, I had a few instances of copyright violation after I posted my final project of my digital photography class. I'll try to dig out the C&D letter I had sent to a news agency that took my photo and had on their website and as the backdrop of one of their graphics for a particular news article.

Ever since I started actually shooting again, it's just been a habit to use a watermark, but I use a formula so that it's only in my web-ready images, it's not saved to the original image ever, and it's just about always the same size and in one of two places (and I change sides dependent on what's in the photo around it, so if it's going to block subject matter, it gets moved).


----------



## mz-n10

not quite the same as you guy's recommendation stories....but...

ive had a friend ask me about picking up a DSLR to photograph her kids. i recommended either the sony a33 or a55 since they have PD LV and it makes it far easier to shoot hyper active kids....but i told her if she was comfortable with VF she could pick up either the 60d or d7000 since they are better cameras in general. she told me she would be fine with the viewfinder, and she bought a 60d in a week or two. well its been like a month and she just asked me why AF takes so long in LV.







told her, welcome to photography time to look through the hole when you shoot....

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Both also share the whole "Post processing ruins photos and isn't photography and is for people with no skills with a camera".


i for one also believe that post ruins photos....


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


i for one also believe that post ruins photos....


I'm so on the fence about this, it's not even funny. Being a realist and hardly an artist (at least, not in this iteration of my photography), I barely even crop some of my photos (and yeah, I know, it can be obvious); the thing is, I feel like I more appreciate the stuff I throw out there that has only minor corrections. That is to say, contrary to what it may look like, I do put most of my stuff through some post - color corrections, or more accurately, adjustments, since they hardly ever come out 'correct'.









Sometimes (like the photo I just put up in the 'Rate the Photo Above You' thread, I'll use a crop. There was a little too much open space around the subject(s), while at the same time, a couple of people/objects in the area drew attention away from what I was trying to shoot. I feel like it makes me a slightly better photographer to not crop, since for my keepers, I feel like I'm 'getting it right', and not trying to salvage an image out of something I snapped that wasn't quite right there.

That being said, there's alot to be said for good post work. (This got omitted from my initial response and was not intentional).


----------



## theCanadian

..h.. how... does a camera miss the focus like this?


----------



## dudemanppl

Lolwut. What's wrong with post?


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Lolwut. What's wrong with post?


They didn't have it back in the "old days", so when we get new tools to makes things better in the future, were not aloud using them.

The only thing I don't do is crop, and that's just so when I'm shooting, I'm putting more thought into the framing.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


i for one also believe that post ruins photos....


Even for crops, WB adjustments, and such?

Personally I believe it's useful, and just another tool to be used by the photographer, especially to turn down the exposure for ETTR.


----------



## Cole19

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


..h.. how... does a camera miss the focus like this?



















Probably camera shake...

They whoever they are seem to have very large mouths, not being offensive, and maybe I'm just crazy.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Papyrus makes me rage more. In fact, Papyrus on anything makes me rage.


Papyrus is the new Comic Sans. I saw it on a plumber's pick-up truck recently.


----------



## dudemanppl

Yeah, if you got it then use it. PP is super fun. I can do it for hours.


----------



## Boyboyd

I had to remove comic sans from my mother's laptop. She would not stop using it.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie;13084502*
> I'm so on the fence about this, it's not even funny. Being a realist and hardly an artist (at least, not in this iteration of my photography), I barely even crop some of my photos (and yeah, I know, it can be obvious); the thing is, I feel like I more appreciate the stuff I throw out there that has only minor corrections. That is to say, contrary to what it may look like, I do put most of my stuff through some post - color corrections, or more accurately, adjustments, since they hardly ever come out 'correct'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sometimes (like the photo I just put up in the 'Rate the Photo Above You' thread, I'll use a crop. There was a little too much open space around the subject(s), while at the same time, a couple of people/objects in the area drew attention away from what I was trying to shoot. I feel like it makes me a slightly better photographer to not crop, since for my keepers, I feel like I'm 'getting it right', and not trying to salvage an image out of something I snapped that wasn't quite right there.
> 
> That being said, there's alot to be said for good post work. (This got omitted from my initial response and was not intentional).


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13085648*
> Yeah, if you got it then use it. PP is super fun. I can do it for hours.


I used to spend so much time in post, but these days I hate doing to much of it. That's why I like using FF and decent lenses as it decreases the need for excessive PP.

However, I'm definitely not against PP like some Luddites seem to be. For many PP techniques, there's often an analogue in film processing.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;13084603*
> They didn't have it back in the "old days", so when we get new tools to makes things better in the future, were not aloud using them.
> 
> The only thing I don't do is crop, and that's just so when I'm shooting, I'm putting more thought into the framing.


I thought that until I had 21 MP to work with.







Nothing wrong with cropping and enlarging, it's done in film too. However, it can be abused like any other PP technique.


----------



## Shane1244

I don't have anything against using it. I just think it'll make me a better photographer in the long run.


----------



## laboitenoire

I don't do a lot in PP. Maybe some correction to lens distortion or vignetting, adjusting the colors (as in I change from Adobe Standard to Camera Standard in ACR), white balance, minor cropping, slight exposure adjustments if needed.


----------



## Boyboyd

I sometimes bracket shots together. Wouldn't necessarily call it HDR though.


----------



## Cole19

What kind of flower is this?


Simplicity by colbyjax, on Flickr


----------



## laboitenoire

What are these "flowers" of which you speak? Cleveland is still bare...


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire;13087141*
> What are these "flowers" of which you speak? Cleveland is still bare...


We've cherry blossoms here!









Except when you're Asian, cherry blossoms are beautiful but normal.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;13087154*
> We've cherry blossoms here!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Except when you're Asian, cherry blossoms are beautiful but normal.


I have a cherry blossom tree in my garden that has yet to blossom :\

This might sound big-headed, but. The longer i stay out shooting, the better my photos get. It's a trend that keeps repeating itself.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Boyboyd;13087215*
> I have a cherry blossom tree in my garden that has yet to blossom :\
> 
> This might sound big-headed, but. The longer i stay out shooting, the better my photos get. It's a trend that keeps repeating itself.


No, it's how it is for me too. Especially since I don't shoot year round (school and internships), it takes a while for me to ease back into my comfort zone when shooting. Very often, the majority of my keepers will be later on in the day.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13084570*
> Lolwut. What's wrong with post?


theres nothing per se wrong with post. i post my shots but im against when people do 100 saturation and 100 contrast and pass it off as a good picture.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;13084603*
> They didn't have it back in the "old days", so when we get new tools to makes things better in the future, were not aloud using them.
> 
> The only thing I don't do is crop, and that's just so when I'm shooting, I'm putting more thought into the framing.


you'll be surprised how much "post processing" you can do in the darkroom.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Boyboyd;13087215*
> I have a cherry blossom tree in my garden that has yet to blossom :\
> 
> This might sound big-headed, but. The longer i stay out shooting, the better my photos get. It's a trend that keeps repeating itself.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;13087250*
> No, it's how it is for me too. Especially since I don't shoot year round (school and internships), it takes a while for me to ease back into my comfort zone when shooting. Very often, the majority of my keepers will be later on in the day.


I get a lot of good shots when I go shooting with a partner. I don't know what it is, but I often feel more emboldened and creative with someone shooting alongside me. Just recently I met up with beldecca and he showed me around Southwestern OH, and I think I got some good keepers:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/gonetomorrow00/sets/72157626472299444/


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;13088477*
> I get a lot of good shots when I go shooting with a partner. I don't know what it is, but I often feel more emboldened and creative with someone shooting alongside me.


Oh yea, definitely this too. Over Spring Break I went shooting with one of my closest friends for the past six years now, and he and I both got some great shots. Maybe it's something about being with another photographer that allows myself to get out of my "comfort zone" when shooting and try new perspectives that otherwise would look awkward/weird to a person who isn't a photog.

Who else scales fences and climbs two stories up a wall for photographs?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Cole19;13086819*
> What kind of flower is this?


I thought it might be a clematis at first, but clearly not. I suck at flower identification. From some quick searching, it might be some kind of lily, maybe gladiolus.

http://healthyhomegardening.com/Flower_Identifier.php?m1=3&pet=5&pet=6


----------



## mortimersnerd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13077230*
> Yeah, mortimers is one of the few folks with D5000s with work I actually quite like. And then there are the folks with D3s on Program...


Thanks. I'm hoping to pick up a D700 or D3 down the road, probably won't be for another year though.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;13077468*
> It goes on both ends of the spectrum, really. I've seen people with pro and entry-level gear that have flagpoles up their rear-end, and people with pro and entry-level gear that are just absolutely amazing.
> 
> Meh, my attitude now is that it really doesn't concern me. I just chat up photogs I see, and the ones that are cool I keep in touch with. The ones that have no humility, I just ignore.


Its more the fact that the inexperienced with expensive equipment tend to look down on the people with entry level bodies, even though I have a 70-200mm VR I attached to the D5000.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*


This might sound big-headed, but. The longer i stay out shooting, the better my photos get. It's a trend that keeps repeating itself.


Possibly correlating to the fact you're getting better, more dramatic lighting and shadows as the day progresses?









I'll admit, one of my greatest photographic weaknesses is shooting candids later in the day, I always get weird shadows on peoples' faces and bodies -- something I _really_ need to work on now that the weather is nicer.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


theres nothing per se wrong with post. i post my shots but im against when people do 100 saturation and 100 contrast and pass it off as a good picture.


Thats not post bro, thats Ken-Rockwelling it.

And I'm totally not mad. Got my 50 1.2 AI-S today and can't seem to find the F to EF adapter.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Possibly correlating to the fact you're getting better, more dramatic lighting and shadows as the day progresses?









I'll admit, one of my greatest photographic weaknesses is shooting candids later in the day, I always get weird shadows on peoples' faces and bodies -- something I _really_ need to work on now that the weather is nicer.


FLASH - use it


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mortimersnerd*


Thanks. I'm hoping to pick up a D700 or D3 down the road, probably won't be for another year though.

Its more the fact that the inexperienced with expensive equipment tend to look down on the people with entry level bodies, even though I have a 70-200mm VR I attached to the D5000.


I see your D5000 with 70-200mm VR and raise you a D60 with 70-200mm VR









I might be getting myself a 500mm, f7.1
but it depends on if the seller will respond to me or not









And then I need to find myself a Kenko 2x TC. Then I should probably buy myself a midrange.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Possibly correlating to the fact you're getting better, more dramatic lighting and shadows as the day progresses?










I just considered that actually, lol.

Still no Sigma 10-20. I need it this week for work too. I'm not happy with this amazon seller. It took him 4 days to post and it's now the 9th day (7th working day).


----------



## Shane1244

So r31ncarnat3d... you only have the 28mm??


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;13097582*
> So r31ncarnat3d... you only have the 28mm??


Yeaup. Is it odd to say "I regret nothing"?

So far, I'm finding that this is the only lens I need







Something tells me I should be needing more lenses, but in actual practice I'm perfectly happy with just my 28mm.

Odd, really.

Although I am thinking of renting a 70-200 f/2.8L for my family's vacation to Santa Barbara this summer, but again it'll be a rental since it's such a temporary thing.


----------



## dudemanppl

Just buy and sell one. You'll lose much less than renting probably.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13097645*
> Just buy and sell one. You'll lose much less than renting probably.


I thought about that, but unfortunately I don't have the $1,000 needed to buy one in the first place


----------



## dudemanppl

Hmm, yeah I can see how that could be an issue. They're good lenses, I've had one.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;13097615*
> Yeaup. Is it odd to say "I regret nothing"?
> 
> So far, I'm finding that this is the only lens I need
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Something tells me I should be needing more lenses, but in actual practice I'm perfectly happy with just my 28mm.
> 
> Odd, really.
> 
> Although I am thinking of renting a 70-200 f/2.8L for my family's vacation to Santa Barbara this summer, but again it'll be a rental since it's such a temporary thing.


the best lens is the one you have on your camera. this is my philosophy and as to why i don't carry more than one at a time these days. too much to think about rather than just go and do it already. even if the lens i have on is a ridiculous for the purpose (portrait at 14mm, shooting indoors with a 70-200), you'll find angles you would never think of because of all the lenses in the bag.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer;13098001*
> the best lens is the one you have on your camera. this is my philosophy and as to why i don't carry more than one at a time these days. too much to think about rather than just go and do it already. even if the lens i have on is a ridiculous for the purpose (portrait at 14mm, shooting indoors with a 70-200), you'll find angles you would never think of because of all the lenses in the bag.


Yea, I've definitely found it to be the case with my 28mm sometimes. It's a very nice lens and easy to work with, but fun when those odd challenges come up. I don't know, I'm pretty happy with just this one lens right now







Thanks for the input.

Oh, and I'm not sure if any OCN Photogs are in the area, but I'll be visiting UCLA May 14-15th, so if any of you guys want to meet up


----------



## Shane1244

God I hate having to get things shipped... I was hoping it would come today.. Today was my first day off in 8 days, and I work every day for the next two weeks. D:


----------



## iandroo888

found a person to trade my sb-600 for a 35mm f/1.8. wonder how much ill like it... maybe ill switch it to a 30mm f/1.4 sigma in the future


----------



## dudemanppl

I think I'm finally gonna get a non-crap tripod. Probably a 190XB, don't know what head yet though.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13106914*
> I think I'm finally gonna get a non-crap tripod. Probably a 190XB, don't know what head yet though.


All that equipment/money at your disposal and I'm surprised you still have a crap tripod


----------



## dudemanppl

Yeah, it cracked when I put the 400 on it.







I'm actually reconsidering it now. I never use tripods and I don't want 250 bucks sitting around when I can donate to Syrillian.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13106942*
> Yeah, it cracked when I put the 400 on it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm actually reconsidering it now. I never use tripods and I don't want 250 bucks sitting around when I can donate to Syrillian.


If you've money to spare, grab a refurbed XS through CLP and put it up for auction?


----------



## dudemanppl

Eh, if I wanted to give that much then I'll do it directly.








I told you I was posting from on top my lens.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iandroo888;13106751*
> found a person to trade my sb-600 for a 35mm f/1.8. wonder how much ill like it... maybe ill switch it to a 30mm f/1.4 sigma in the future


The sb600 is worth about £50 more here. But the 35mm is a great lens for the price


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Good day. Swapping my 28mm for a 30mm!


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Boyboyd;13107438*
> The sb600 is worth about £50 more here. But the 35mm is a great lens for the price


used they are about the same price before the "new" inflation on the new ones. they were about the same price new before the inflation


----------



## dudemanppl

http://nikonrumors.com/2011/04/13/confusion-new-af-s-nikkor-50mm-f1-8g-lens.aspx
http://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/lens/singlefocal/normal/af-s_50mmf_18g/index.htm
Nikon is either screwing with us or thats a new lens that NIKON leaked.
Heres the 50 1.4 AF-S G for comparison.

EDIT: Yeah its totally real, no way its a joke. MTF is different, optical design is different, body is different, there are 2 less aperture blades, its lighter, and it comes with a LF-4 instead of an LF-1 (newer releases come with the LF-4 like the 24-120 f/4 VR and newer).

And it seems quite a bit sharper than the old AF-D/


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13109178*
> http://nikonrumors.com/2011/04/13/confusion-new-af-s-nikkor-50mm-f1-8g-lens.aspx
> http://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/lens/singlefocal/normal/af-s_50mmf_18g/index.htm
> Nikon is either screwing with us or thats a new lens that NIKON leaked.
> Heres the 50 1.4 AF-S G for comparison.
> 
> EDIT: Yeah its totally real, no way its a joke. MTF is different, optical design is different, body is different, there are 2 less aperture blades, its lighter, and it comes with a LF-4 instead of an LF-1 (newer releases come with the LF-4 like the 24-120 f/4 VR and newer).
> 
> And it seems quite a bit sharper than the old AF-D/


arg, i just bought a 50mm 1.4g


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13109178*
> http://nikonrumors.com/2011/04/13/confusion-new-af-s-nikkor-50mm-f1-8g-lens.aspx
> http://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/lens/singlefocal/normal/af-s_50mmf_18g/index.htm
> Nikon is either screwing with us or thats a new lens that NIKON leaked.
> Heres the 50 1.4 AF-S G for comparison.
> 
> EDIT: Yeah its totally real, no way its a joke. MTF is different, optical design is different, body is different, there are 2 less aperture blades, its lighter, and it comes with a LF-4 instead of an LF-1 (newer releases come with the LF-4 like the 24-120 f/4 VR and newer).
> 
> And it seems quite a bit sharper than the old AF-D/


Re: your comment on my comment about "Does that mean a new full frame camera without a focus motor?"

If Nikon does release a FX camera without a focus motor I think it will be a very low specced and priced camera as what I've noticed in the Nikon line up is that you don't lose features as you buy a more expensive model cough Canon.

The real question though for me is: Why didn't the NR Admin get any word of this before?


----------



## dudemanppl

Nobody really expected an AF-S 50 1.8.


----------



## potitoos

Highly-annoyed, I suspect that the flickr pics you posted above are miss-tagged. It appears to me that both are WAYYY too vibrant to not be HDR.

On another note, does the 20D sport a full HDR on a chip sensor, or is it just the Expanded Dynamic range DPreview is talking about? What is full HDR again, something like 32 bit color right?


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Nobody really expected an AF-S 50 1.8.


Yeah.. I don't understand D:

It doesn't look like it's a cheap lens to counter the Canon 50mm f/1.8 MkII


----------



## laboitenoire

This is intriguing... I don't think I'd buy a 50 f/1.4 for DX, but a 50 f/1.8 might be tempting.


----------



## Shane1244

Got to take one picture with the 14mm before work.


----------



## Marin

http://www.dpreview.com/news/1104/11...ikon501p8g.asp

Oh wait, posted.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


http://nikonrumors.com/2011/04/13/co...1-8g-lens.aspx
http://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/lens..._18g/index.htm
Nikon is either screwing with us or thats a new lens that NIKON leaked. 
Heres the 50 1.4 AF-S G for comparison.

EDIT: Yeah its totally real, no way its a joke. MTF is different, optical design is different, body is different, there are 2 less aperture blades, its lighter, and it comes with a LF-4 instead of an LF-1 (newer releases come with the LF-4 like the 24-120 f/4 VR and newer).

And it seems quite a bit sharper than the old AF-D/


LOL, Nikon took the page down already.







Someone's ass is grass I think. Even DPReview updated its news post.


----------



## nuclearjock

Getting ready to board his personal Gulfstream IV.










Sorry for the lousy IQ, taken @300mm from a long way away.


----------



## MistaBernie

Is that Vijah Singh? maybe Michael Jordan?


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


Is that Vijah Singh? maybe Michael Jordan?



Nope, def MJ. The tail # is N236MJ

23 Jersey #
6 6 championships
MJ def not VJ


----------



## iandroo888

stalker


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


Nope, def MJ.


Somewhat of a God in these parts.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iandroo888;13116003*
> stalker


Actually I was sitting at the airport and he showed up!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nuclearjock;13116824*
> Actually I was sitting at the airport and he showed up!


LOL nuke, you posted shots of his jet some time ago, so I'm going to call stalker too.


----------



## Shane1244

^ This.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *potitoos;13110512*
> Highly-annoyed, I suspect that the flickr pics you posted above are miss-tagged. It appears to me that both are WAYYY too vibrant to not be HDR.
> 
> On another note, does the 20D sport a full HDR on a chip sensor, or is it just the Expanded Dynamic range DPreview is talking about? What is full HDR again, something like 32 bit color right?


i have no idea what anything you said means....


----------



## Shane1244

Took this a while ago, just found it.


----------



## Dream Killer

i was shooting a concert tuesday night with my 16-35mm's vr switch on the off position the whole time. i didn't realize it until i got home and lost some good pics at 1/10s, 1/5s shutter speeds (where it's usually sharp). i hammered a toothpick in the switch to jam it on the on position and it worked wonders for tonight's show.
*wood meets plastic








*


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer;13119360*
> i was shooting a concert tuesday night with my 16-35mm's vr switch on the off position the whole time. *i didn't realize it until i got home and lost some good pics at 1/10s, 1/5s shutter speeds* (where it's usually sharp). i hammered a toothpick in the switch to jam it on the on position and it worked wonders for tonight's show.


That's a tad bit depressing to hear









On a side note though, I love that photo title.

Also, isn't it 2AM over there?


----------



## mz-n10

yea i hate it when i turn off SSS on my a900 for tripod and forget to turn it back on.....and theres a HUD display that tells you teh SSS is off on the a900....


----------



## Marin

Just put gaffer tape over it. Gaffer tape fixes all without ruining it like duct tape.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

What is this IS you all speak of? *Points to primes*


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;13119425*
> What is this IS you all speak of? *Points to primes*


I dun know.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/647011-USA/Canon_3554B002_EF_100mm_f_2_8L_Macro.html

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/542292-REG/Canon_2297B002_Telephoto_EF_200mm_f_2L.html

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/732108-USA/Canon_4411B002_EF_300mm_f_2_8L_IS.html

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/732109-USA/Canon_4412B002_EF_400mm_f_2_8L_IS.html

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/754507-USA/Canon_5124B002_500mm_f_4L_EF_IS.html

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/186153-USA/Canon_2534A002_Telephoto_EF_600mm_f_4_0L.html

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/542293-REG/Canon_2746B002AA_EF_800mm_f_5_6L_IS.html


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;13119425*
> What is this IS you all speak of? *Points to primes*


SSS, super steady shot. it stabilizes the image so you can shoot at lower shutterspeeds on ALL your lenses, PRIMES, zooms, even lenses you remount.....ALL YOUR LENSES


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;13119456*
> I dun know.
> 
> http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/647011-USA/Canon_3554B002_EF_100mm_f_2_8L_Macro.html
> 
> http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/542292-REG/Canon_2297B002_Telephoto_EF_200mm_f_2L.html
> 
> http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/732108-USA/Canon_4411B002_EF_300mm_f_2_8L_IS.html
> 
> http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/732109-USA/Canon_4412B002_EF_400mm_f_2_8L_IS.html
> 
> http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/754507-USA/Canon_5124B002_500mm_f_4L_EF_IS.html
> 
> http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/186153-USA/Canon_2534A002_Telephoto_EF_600mm_f_4_0L.html
> 
> http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/542293-REG/Canon_2746B002AA_EF_800mm_f_5_6L_IS.html


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;13119456*
> I dun know.


Ehehe, not like I can afford those anyways


----------



## Marin

Last photoshoot tomorrow for the term. Hasselblad 180mm, Pan 50, some broncolor strobes, some softboxes and a gas mask. Last time I'm going to do a gas mask shoot.


----------



## Shane1244

You said you need a nude model? AHEM.
/Slips business card


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;13119508*
> You said you need a nude model? AHEM.
> /Slips business card


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;13119386*
> That's a tad bit depressing to hear
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On a side note though, I love that photo title.
> 
> Also, isn't it 2AM over there?


yeah, 2:30am now. all the good concert venues are in brooklyn / deep in manhattan and i live in queens. after about 12am (just about the time when I get my three songs done), the subway trains run very sporadically and what normally takes a 30-min train ride turns into a 2-hour journey.

i really didn't lose that many pics that night. i borrowed my friend's 70-200 vr2 for the night just to get out of my wide-angle mania and most of my pics came from that. i might get one just for the photo compression as my editors are constantly nagging "'s face is too distorted - we cant use this!"

i decided to surprise them with some telephoto action just for that night.
*TV on the Radio @ Music Hall of Williamsburg 4/12/11
*








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;13119416*
> Just put gaffer tape over it. Gaffer tape fixes all without ruining it like duct tape.


i used to do that when i did weddings. i didn't like how it felt on the lens barrel (even though i wear gloves when shooting).


----------



## Marin

Wah, TV on the Radio. I want to see them...


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;13119615*
> Wah, TV on the Radio. I want to see them...


if you're ever around nyc, i might be able to get you in some concerts. i'm usually at terminal 5, bowery ballroom, knitting factory and music hall. my passes are always "+ 1" but sometimes the editor hops in as the extra


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer;13119644*
> if you're ever around nyc, i might be able to get you in some concerts. i'm usually at terminal 5, bowery ballroom, knitting factory and music hall. my passes are always "+ 1" but sometimes the editor hops in as the extra












Have you ever shot a Vienna Teng concert?


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;13119508*
> You said you need a nude model? AHEM.
> /Slips business card


Underage.

And Dream Killer, dat be purrrddyy picture.


----------



## Boyboyd

So my replacement 10-20 arrived.

In an un-sealed jiffy bag. I'm frankly amazed it got here. I now know why my second one went missing.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;13119416*
> Just put gaffer tape over it. Gaffer tape fixes all without ruining it like duct tape.


On that note, black duct tape is NOT gaff tape. Good gaffer tape starts at $20 a roll and goes up from there.

We usually use the Pro-gaff brand for shows (2" and 3" rolls) cause it's cheap for the quality and it's easy to buy by the box.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *potitoos*


Highly-annoyed, I suspect that the flickr pics you posted above are miss-tagged. It appears to me that both are WAYYY too vibrant to not be HDR.

On another note, does the 20D sport a full HDR on a chip sensor, or is it just the Expanded Dynamic range DPreview is talking about? What is full HDR again, something like 32 bit color right?


Highly-Annoyed hasn't posted here for a long, long time, so I think you're responding to quite an old post.

Don't know what you're talking about either regarding an "HDR on a chip," but modern Canon DSLR's (and most other brands) have the Auto Lighting Optimizer, which attempts to balance light and shadow to a very, very small degree (usually not even a noticeable difference).

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*


i was shooting a concert tuesday night with my 16-35mm's vr switch on the off position the whole time. i didn't realize it until i got home and lost some good pics at 1/10s, 1/5s shutter speeds (where it's usually sharp). i hammered a toothpick in the switch to jam it on the on position and it worked wonders for tonight's show.

*wood meets plastic

*


That often happened to me when taking lenses out of my Urban Disguise, but it's always the AF/MF switch, which protrudes a bit further than the IS switch.

And I no longer own any IS lenses! Not that I wouldn't again, but the 135L might be the only tele I ever own again, unless I impulse buy a 70-200/2.8 IS II (wife will prevent that from ever happening).

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*


yeah, 2:30am now. all the good concert venues are in brooklyn / deep in manhattan and i live in queens. after about 12am (just about the time when I get my three songs done), the subway trains run very sporadically and what normally takes a 30-min train ride turns into a 2-hour journey.

i really didn't lose that many pics that night. i borrowed my friend's 70-200 vr2 for the night just to get out of my wide-angle mania and most of my pics came from that. i might get one just for the photo compression as my editors are constantly nagging "<artist's name here>'s face is too distorted - we cant use this!"

i decided to surprise them with some telephoto action just for that night.

*TV on the Radio @ Music Hall of Williamsburg 4/12/11
*

i used to do that when i did weddings. i didn't like how it felt on the lens barrel (even though i wear gloves when shooting).


Weird, why gloves?

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*


if you're ever around nyc, i might be able to get you in some concerts. i'm usually at terminal 5, bowery ballroom, knitting factory and music hall. my passes are always "+ 1" but sometimes the editor hops in as the extra


The Knitting Factory! I saw Bernie Worrell there in '03.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*











Have you ever shot a Vienna Teng concert?


can't say i have. i like high powered bands, not tear jerkers









Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


And I no longer own any IS lenses! Not that I wouldn't again, but the 135L might be the only tele I ever own again, unless I impulse buy a 70-200/2.8 IS II (wife will prevent that from ever happening).

Weird, why gloves?

The Knitting Factory! I saw Bernie Worrell there in '03.


until about three days ago, the longest lens i own for nikon was 35mm









so far i'm the only person i see wearing gloves (my mountain biking gloves to be exact) to shoot photos, it just works better in long periods of time because of sweat. metal also gets very very hot under sunlight and i suspect this is going to get worse because nikon doesn't have white lenses. a bonus is no fingerprints on front element/viewfinder.

come back and support us!


----------



## Boyboyd

I'm officially cursed. I my 10-20 nikon fit came for Canon AF. Sending it back.

Ahready purchsed a replacement for delivery tomorrow with another seller on amazon.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*


I'm officially cursed. I my 10-20 nikon fit came for Canon AF. Sending it back.

Ahready purchsed a replacement for delivery tomorrow with another seller on amazon.


Wow, they sent you the wrong mount? That is derelict to the extreme!


----------



## Boyboyd

I think he's just one man who has stock of everything. He seems to know nothing about cameras or lenses.

I've left him positive feedback already, because i didn't even think to check







I thought the mount looked bigger. He should still give me a refund though. Sadly, im going to have to cover the postage cost of returning this one.


----------



## dudemanppl

Stupid people make me sad.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*


can't say i have. i like high powered bands, not tear jerkers










Aha, that's a shame. If you could get me into one to take photos, I'd bro-love you for life


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Underage.

And Dream Killer, dat be purrrddyy picture.


Nope, I'm 19 on the 20th.


----------



## Shane1244

The focal distance meter on my 14mm seems to be way off. Infinite is super blurry. I'm just going to say to hell with it and return it for a Sigma 10-20. I found it quite hard to focus with such a wide angle, Probably because of my bad eyes. I am going to miss the build quality though, this thing is built like a absolute rock. D:

-You told me so.


----------



## Cole19

Just found a Canon AE-1 Program on ebay, that no one had bid on and picked it up for $4.76, now I just need to find a FD 28mm lens. = )


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Cole19;13128625*
> Just found a Canon AE-1 Program on ebay, that no one had bid on and picked it up for $4.76, now I just need to find a FD 28mm lens. = )


Wow, lucky! I got mine for $40 and I thought that was a sweet deal









And 28mm? That's pretty wide! I hope you're taking the crop factor from your DSLR to your film camera into account. A 35mm film camera counts as a FF, so the 28mm on your DSLR gives you a narrower field of view as it would on your AE-1 P.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Cole19;13128625*
> Just found a Canon AE-1 Program on ebay, that no one had bid on and picked it up for $4.76, now I just need to find a FD 28mm lens. = )


You mean this:









http://cgi.ebay.com/Canon-FD-85mm-F-1-2-L-85-1-2-Lens-W-Hood-Case-Mint-/120709583323?pt=Camera_Lenses&hash=item1c1ada11db


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;13128767*
> And 28mm? That's pretty wide!


28-35 are awesome on film/full frame.

By the way, GT, I am tired of being tempted into buying another FD 85L.







I've still got to buy another EOS film body before I can think about that thing!


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;13128767*
> Wow, lucky! I got mine for $40 and I thought that was a sweet deal
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And 28mm? That's pretty wide! I hope you're taking the crop factor from your DSLR to your film camera into account. A 35mm film camera counts as a FF, so the 28mm on your DSLR gives you a narrower field of view as it would on your AE-1 P.


I've found 28mm to be a pretty useful and fun FL for my film SLR. If I was given a choice between a 50mm and 28mm it'd be a hard one.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;13128528*
> The focal distance meter on my 14mm seems to be way off. Infinite is super blurry. I'm just going to say to hell with it and return it for a Sigma 10-20. I found it quite hard to focus with such a wide angle, Probably because of my bad eyes. I am going to miss the build quality though, this thing is built like a absolute rock. D:
> 
> -You told me so.


1. Probably allows focus beyond infinity. Too many lenses do this, IMO.

2. It's quite difficult to focus at wide apertures if you've always shot with AF bodies and without the aid of a split-prism screen.

3. Don't worry about the quality -- the 10-20 is _very_ good, easily better than any EF-S lens and just a hair below many cheaper Ls (in terms, solely, of build quality, of course).


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13128966*
> 1. Probably allows focus beyond infinity. Too many lenses do this, IMO.
> 
> 2. It's quite difficult to focus at wide apertures if you've always shot with AF bodies and without the aid of a split-prism screen.
> 
> 3. Don't worry about the quality -- the 10-20 is _very_ good, easily better than any EF-S lens and just a hair below many cheaper Ls (in terms, solely, of build quality, of course).


1. Seems pointless







Like, The indicator is RIGHT on infinite, but the actual infinity is around 1.75m

2.Yeah, Everything like always looks in focus :/ Except for the low and high extremes.

3. How is it in comparison to the Canon 50 1.4? I'm somewhat happy with it's build quality.

I'm going to miss the f/2.8.. but oh well.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13128946*
> 28-35 are awesome on film/full frame.
> 
> By the way, GT, I am tired of being tempted into buying another FD 85L.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I've still got to buy another EOS film body before I can think about that thing!


I've seen some great shots from it adapted to EF mount. Personally, I'd rather spend the money on towards the 16-35 II, which hopefully will be my next lens.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;13124601*
> Nope, I'm 19 on the 20th.


You look 15. :3

Oh and I've decided against the 16-35L II for a Tokina 16-28.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13129248*
> You look 15. :3
> 
> Oh and I've decided against the 16-35L II for a Tokina 16-28.


That is a fine looking lens indeed, but it suffers from Tokina's usual off-the-chart CA and it's very prone to flare, both very undesirable flaws for a landscape lens. The price is definitely nice though.


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13129248*
> You look 15. :3
> 
> Oh and I've decided against the 16-35L II for a Tokina 16-28.


Yeah, That was just how the picture was taken + edited. I do look younger than I am, I usually get 17. At the same time, I sometimes don't get ID'ed for bars.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;13129282*
> Yeah, That was just how the picture was taken + edited. I do look younger than I am, I usually get 17. At the same time, I sometimes don't get ID'ed for bars.


Meh, put on a good sportcoat and tie and don't act like a giddy 17 year old "OMG I'm drinking LOLOL!" and you usually don't get ID'ed.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;13129303*
> Meh, put on a good sportcoat and tie and don't act like a giddy 17 year old "OMG I'm drinking LOLOL!" and you usually don't get ID'ed.


He lives in Canada, broseph. If you're not wearing flannel and hockey attire in most bars, you're likely in for a rough night.

P.S. Don't _ever_ go to Vancouver wearing Blackhawks *anything*. Very, very dicey.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13129471*
> He lives in Canada, broseph. If you're not wearing flannel and hockey attire in most bars, you're likely in for a rough night.
> 
> P.S. Don't _ever_ go to Vancouver wearing Blackhawks *anything*. Very, very dicey.


Ah, nvm then.









On a side note, that would make for a great photo opportunity. If you can survive it.


----------



## Dream Killer

legal drinking age in canada = 19


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;13129131*
> 1. Seems pointless
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Like, The indicator is RIGHT on infinite, but the actual infinity is around 1.75m
> 
> 2.Yeah, Everything like always looks in focus :/ Except for the low and high extremes.
> 
> 3. How is it in comparison to the Canon 50 1.4? I'm somewhat happy with it's build quality.
> 
> I'm going to miss the f/2.8.. but oh well.


Not too many EF lenses have a hard stop at infinity. I'm not sure why as I'm no engineer, but it's fairly annoying for shooting from the hip. The 10-20 is worlds better than the 50 1.4, and even quite a bit better than the 85 1.8 (which is a very solid non-L lens). You won't miss the 2.8 a ton, most likely, especially since the 60D churns out quite good images at higher ISOs. Even with the 50D, if I am shooting for web I don't worry in the slightest about shooting at 3200 all day long if I have to.


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13129577*
> Not too many EF lenses have a hard stop at infinity. I'm not sure why as I'm no engineer, but it's fairly annoying for shooting from the hip. The 10-20 is worlds better than the 50 1.4, and even quite a bit better than the 85 1.8 (which is a very solid non-L lens). You won't miss the 2.8 a ton, most likely, especially since the 60D churns out quite good images at higher ISOs. Even with the 50D, if I am shooting for web I don't worry in the slightest about shooting at 3200 all day long if I have to.


Yeah, It's dumb. :S Like why bother putting the distance scale on it, if it's not accurate AT ALL. UNLESS, the focus is different on FF cameras?

I hope not! I did notice I could get some ******ed slow shutter speeds, and still get sharp photos.


----------



## sub50hz

You'll be able to do the same wide open on the Sigma. Not to the same extent, of course, but the extra stop wouldn't be a dealbreaker in a UWA scenario for me.


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13129637*
> You'll be able to do the same wide open on the Sigma. Not to the same extent, of course, but the extra stop wouldn't be a dealbreaker in a UWA scenario for me.


Oh yeah I know, I meant to kind of put that just as a extra for discussion. There doesn't seem to be any better UWA lenses in my price range, so It's what i'll go with.


----------



## dudemanppl

Your 14 is broken. Don't sell it. Return it. You got screwed over. Why am I typing such short sentences? And they're all accurate unless the lens is broken.


----------



## Shane1244

Yeah, I am returning it for store credit. B&H


----------



## dudemanppl

Oh good, no lens should be like that EVER.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Not too many EF lenses have a hard stop at infinity. I'm not sure why as I'm no engineer, but it's fairly annoying for shooting from the hip. The 10-20 is worlds better than the 50 1.4, and even quite a bit better than the 85 1.8 (which is a very solid non-L lens). You won't miss the 2.8 a ton, most likely, especially since the 60D churns out quite good images at higher ISOs. Even with the 50D, if I am shooting for web I don't worry in the slightest about shooting at 3200 all day long if I have to.


It's to allow for FTM focusing if I recall correctly.


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13130034*
> Oh good, no lens should be like that EVER.


That's what I thought.. It's a good inch off of where it should be.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*


The focal distance meter on my 14mm seems to be way off. Infinite is super blurry. I'm just going to say to hell with it and return it for a Sigma 10-20. I found it quite hard to focus with such a wide angle, Probably because of my bad eyes. I am going to miss the build quality though, this thing is built like a absolute rock. D:

-You told me so.


sample pics?


----------



## Shane1244

I acidently formated my card, and right now all thats on it is like 5 OOF pictures. I'm going to flat out say it's IMPOSSIBLE to focus with just the optical viewfinder. I'll get some sample pictures tomorrow, If I havn't sent it back by then, I'm waiting on a RMA.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*


I acidently formated my card, and right now all thats on it is like 5 OOF pictures. I'm going to flat out say it's IMPOSSIBLE to focus with just the optical viewfinder. I'll get some sample pictures tomorrow, If I havn't sent it back by then, I'm waiting on a RMA.


i don't think it's impossible to MF with modern viewfinders. i did it with my 10-22 on 1.6x and 16-35 on my ff. your camera doesn't focus confirm?


----------



## Shane1244

I'll check for that...

+Rep for someone that can find the alteration


----------



## sub50hz

Reversed Canon logo.


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Reversed Canon logo.


Dang! haha.

And yeah it has it, It works on my 50, but not on my 14. I even tried on a tripod, centered focus on a textured subject. Wouldn't beep.


----------



## sub50hz

I didn't think focus confirm worked unless there was an electrical coupling to the lens.


----------



## dudemanppl

No beep since theres no contacts... Buy a split screen and a bunch of MF Nikkors. GOGOGO!


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*


I'll check for that...

+Rep for someone that can find the alteration
img



Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*


Dang! haha.

And yeah it has it, It works on my 50, but not on my 14. I even tried on a tripod, centered focus on a textured subject. Wouldn't beep.



Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


I didn't think focus confirm worked unless there was an electrical coupling to the lens.


arg, forgot that ef needed a chip for focus confirm

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


No beep since theres no contacts... Buy a split screen and a bunch of MF Nikkors. GOGOGO!


or get a nikon body with an electronic rangefinder and you have focus confirm on any lens - no chip needed =)


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer;13129515*
> legal drinking age in canada = 19


18 in Alberta, Manitoba, and Quebec.

I don't think Quebec counts though.


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


18 in Alberta, Manitoba, and Quebec.

I don't think Quebec counts though.










Agreed.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*


or get a nikon body with an electronic rangefinder and you have focus confirm on any lens - no chip needed =)


Its not even CLOSE to split screen. Its a whole different experience.


----------



## theCanadian

Do they even make a focusing screen for the Nikon D3100? A quick google search leads me to believe not.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


Do they even make a focusing screen for the Nikon D3100? A quick google search leads me to believe not.


If I remember correctly, focusing screens are usually a semi-pro+ feature.


----------



## dudemanppl

http://www.focusingscreen.com/work/d5000en.htm Should be the same, my D40 used to work that way.

http://www.focusingscreen.com/produc...roducts_id=941 This SHOULD work. EDIT: Just checked, its different. Wait until they have one since the next best one is the Katz Eye at more than double the price.


----------



## Shane1244

Do the screens alter the way the camera does AF too?


----------



## dudemanppl

No.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Its not even CLOSE to split screen. Its a whole different experience.


i'm more of a film rangefinder guy anyway. split screen sucks


----------



## theCanadian

I just realized that I had read some Ken Rockwell reviews a while back. At the time I didn't know who he was. In retrospect, I didn't find it all that impressive a review, but it at least provided a perspective from someone who'd used it a little bit.

You can take that to mean however you want.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

So a friend of mine at UCLA has plux-x pan 125, kodachrome 64, kodachrome 25, and ektachrome 160. About a hundred or so rolls total, all expired, but should still be fun.

Anyone have any suggestions on where to start with these films? (With the kodachrome, we were planning to do B&W).


----------



## dudemanppl

*cough*shiphalftome*cough* And my next puchases aregoing to be a Nikon mount Sigma 30mm f/1.4 and 2 split prism focusing screen for both my DSLRs.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


*cough*shiphalftome*cough* And my next puchases aregoing to be a Nikon mount Sigma 30mm f/1.4 and 2 split prism focusing screen for both my DSLRs.


My Siggy is coming in tomorrow, hoping to give it a test run









And no, you can afford your own


----------



## dudemanppl

Y U GOTTA BE HATIN', HATER? If it focus is off then consider it an act of karma.







Thats why buying Sigma lenses used is better, you have someone that has already tested the lens beforehand, either confirming its pure crap or that its jesus time.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Y U GOTTA BE HATIN', HATER? If it focus is off then consider it an act of karma.







Thats why buying Sigma lenses used is better, you have someone that has already tested the lens beforehand, either confirming its pure crap or that its jesus time.


It's not. One of the benefits of buying used from POTN









And because, um, I'm kinda interested in the friend who's letting me use her film









Seriously, do you know how damn hard it is to find a brilliant woman who's into computers/photography/city exploring/finding new restaurants/great music? Especially when you go to school in the Central Valley?


----------



## dudemanppl

I can already tell you guys will make babies.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


I can already tell you guys will make babies.


...

Even if it goes that far, that's still far off into the future. I want my PhD before I want little mes running around. I mean, I'm already going into debt; I don't need to make my financial situation worse


----------



## dudemanppl

OT: And me posting "Y U GOTTA BE HATIN', HATER?" made me think of epicmealtime, which I already watched for the week, so I went to REGULAR ORDINARY SWEDISH MEAL TIME. If you haven't watched it yet, they actually make appetizing meals. http://www.youtube.com/user/SwedishMealTime


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Meh, put on a good sportcoat and tie and don't act like a giddy 17 year old "OMG I'm drinking LOLOL!" and you usually don't get ID'ed.


I laughed. I don't usually get ID'd anymore except in nightclubs, and I hardly ever go. I am 2 years above the drinking age though.

Off to pick up my *third* 10-20 today. This one better be nikon fit.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*


or get a nikon body with an electronic rangefinder and you have focus confirm on any lens - no chip needed =)


I think even the cheapest nikon bodies have an electronic rangefinder. My 5000 does.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*


I laughed. I don't usually get ID'd anymore except in nightclubs, and I hardly ever go. I am 2 years above the drinking age though.

Off to pick up my *third* 10-20 today. This one better be nikon fit.


Five bucks on Pentax mount?


----------



## Boyboyd

Don't even joke about that, lol.


----------



## MistaBernie

I'll take that bet Re!

In sad news, I missed a nice priced Sigma 30 f/1.4 by not too long on POTN


----------



## Boyboyd

Good news, it actually arrived and works. The AF actually feels better and quicker than any nikon lens i own.



Now i need to learn how to use a UWA zoom.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*


Good news, it actually arrived and works. The AF actually feels better and quicker than any nikon lens i own.

(picture)

Now i need to learn how to use a UWA zoom.


Let me know how you like it, etc. I'm quickly learning towards one of these (I might have a line on one relatively cheap)


----------



## dudemanppl

Buy one. I've had one, its EPIC.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;13133565*
> It's not. One of the benefits of buying used from POTN
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And because, um, I'm kinda interested in the friend who's letting me use her film
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Seriously, do you know how damn hard it is to find a brilliant woman who's into computers/photography/city exploring/finding new restaurants/great music? Especially when you go to school in the Central Valley?


where do i sign up?

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie;13135837*
> Let me know how you like it, etc. I'm quickly learning towards one of these (I might have a line on one relatively cheap)


already got tired of that 14/2.8?


----------



## iandroo888

@dudemanppl - ur lookin for a sigma 30mm NIKON on FM? i thought u went canon recently. lol thx for that comment ;D


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10;13137199*
> already got tired of that 14/2.8?


What 14/2.8??


----------



## dudemanppl

I bought a D40.


----------



## Boyboyd

10mm is so wide. Can't believe i was considering the sigma 8-16 :O


----------



## MistaBernie

brb, pulling trigger on potential deal.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Boyboyd;13137563*
> 10mm is so wide. Can't believe i was considering the sigma 8-16 :O


The 8-16 makes you poop so hard. I had 12-24 on full frame and my pants exploded.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13137541*
> I bought a D40.


ohh why? light weight setup?

im gonna play with 35mm f/1.8 for a little bit.. if i dont like it too much, ill switch to the 30mm sigma.. have u used both? ur thoughts?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Boyboyd;13135560*
> Good news, it actually arrived and works. The AF actually feels better and quicker than any nikon lens i own.
> 
> Now i need to learn how to use a UWA zoom.


Check for back/front focusing on that sucker.

As for using a UWA, it's easier than it seems, just have to frame shots which don't exaggerate distortion (buildings do this, but it can be corrected at the cost of extreme cropping) and be careful not to have empty foreground space since you can fit a large amount of space in the frame.

And portraits with UWA lenses are often less than flattering (IMO).
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13137787*
> The 8-16 makes you poop so hard. I had 12-24 on full frame and my pants exploded.


Geez, enough about poop already. I'm starting to wonder about you.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Siggy 30 coming in today, PP refund coming in next week from the person who originally scammed me of a Siggy 30, and considering a 70-200 f/2.8...

EDIT: Also, as I found out from over-zealously opening my FD 50mm f/1.4 package yesterday, it is perfectly possible to cut yourself with car keys


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;13138776*
> Check for back/front focusing on that sucker.
> 
> As for using a UWA, it's easier than it seems, just have to frame shots which don't exaggerate distortion (buildings do this, but it can be corrected at the cost of extreme cropping) and be careful not to have empty foreground space since you can fit a large amount of space in the frame.
> 
> And portraits with UWA lenses are often less than flattering (IMO).


It looks really good so far, i've not even taken it outside yet though so i can't tell for sure. Focus seems right, it's also the best feeling lens i own. It feels well built.

I also own 2 for the short time.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


ohh why? light weight setup?


Yuppers, I find the 5DII heavy while I don;t think 400 2.8s aren't too bad. My reasoning doesn't make sense.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


EDIT: Also, as I found out from over-zealously opening my FD 50mm f/1.4 package yesterday, it is perfectly possible to cut yourself with car keys










HAHA.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Geez, enough about poop already. I'm starting to wonder about you.










Replace poop with a 4 letter word starting with shi and ending with t, which is more of what I mean. Hopefully that won't get me an infraction...


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Yuppers, I find the 5DII heavy while I don;t think 400 2.8s aren't too bad. My reasoning doesn't make sense.

HAHA.

Replace poop with a 4 letter word starting with shi and ending with t, which is more of what I mean. Hopefully that won't get me an infraction...


Oh I get it, it's just that you seem to be ruining a lot of pairs of pants.


----------



## iandroo888

hey u didnt answer my other questions, dudemanppl


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Oh I get it, it's just that you seem to be ruining a lot of pairs of pants.










Or the same ones repeatedly


----------



## dudemanppl

Oh, I sort of ignored that cause I didn't see the questions at the end, sorry 'bout that. :3
Anyway, the 35 1.8 is stupidly good, but it feels really cheap (still miles ahead of the 50 1.8 II from Canon though). Great lens, the sharpness is silly, and it works great on full frame if you don't mind a bit of vignetting and have a zoom in that range (doesn't work well past f/4 or so since you can start to see the internal barrel of the lens like a circular fisheye).

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Or the same ones repeatedly










Spent everything on gear and I can't afford clothes, DON'T JUDGE ME.


----------



## iandroo888

but u prefer the sigma 30mm f/1.4 over the nikkor 35mm f/1.8 for what reasons ?


----------



## dudemanppl

Well I've never tried a Sigma 30, thats why I buying one.


----------



## iandroo888

oh. xD oops. xD hah. thought ud had considering u went thru how many sigma 50s? xD


----------



## dudemanppl

I'm only on my third...


----------



## sub50hz

This will be a great way to get coffee into my facehole:


----------



## dudemanppl

That confused me for a little. And I just paid for a Sigma 30, should be here Tuesday, paid 325 for LNIB.

EDIT:
Current actual gear list, DON'T PUT THIS ON THE FRONT PAGE GONE.
Canon EOS 5D Mark II + BG-E6
Nikon D2H
Nikon D40
Nikon F3HP
Voigtlander Bessa R3a
Canon S90

Canon EF 28-70mm f/2.8 USM L 
Sigma 30mm f/1.4 EX DC HSM
Voiglander Nokton 35mm f/1.4
Sigma 50mm f/1.4 EX DG HSM
Nikkor 50mm f/1.2 AI-S
Canon EF 135mm f/2 USM L
Canon EF 300mm f/2.8 IS USM L

As you can see, its really really stupid. The Sigmalux is being lent out to a friend for a week or so. And offer for anything, especially the D2H.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13142017*
> Spent everything on gear and I can't afford clothes, DON'T JUDGE ME.


My dad said this morning "if you don't start throwing away all the shirts that are too small for you i will"

I said "i can't afford new shirts, i need money for filters"

Decided i'm only going to buy 77mm ones now, and get a 52-77 step up ring.


----------



## grishkathefool

My father is looking at some negative scanners. Does anyone have any input regarding them, the Plustek OpticFilm 7600i Ai in particular?

Thanks


----------



## theCanadian

My dad bought one like that, be prepared to do color correction for every single photo.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


This will be a great way to get coffee into my facehole:


I have the Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 one. It's awesome.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13142751*
> This will be a great way to get coffee into my facehole:


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *theCanadian;13151044*
> My dad bought one like that, be prepared to do color correction for every single photo.
> 
> I have the Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 one. It's awesome.


Know what's even better? The real lens.


----------



## theCanadian




----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Know what's even better? The real lens.










Eh. I still wish Canon could make a good 24-105 2.8 -- that would be a killer on film and FF. The f/4 version is still a great lens though, although a bit slow for its focal range.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

My Siggy 30mm f/1.4 came in today! Oh man this thing is sharper and has less CA at f/1.4 than my 28mm did at f/1.8!


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Eh. I still wish Canon could make a good 24-105 2.8 -- that would be a killer on film and FF. The f/4 version is still a great lens though, although a bit slow for its focal range.


that would be so big and heavy......


----------



## TigerLord

Pentax K10D
AF540-FGZ Flash

Pentax 12-24mm f/3.5
Tamron XRi 28-75mm f/2.8
Pentax 50mm FA f/1.4
Pentax 77mm FA Limited f/1.8
Pentax SMCP-DA 35mm f/2.8 Macro Limited

3x AB400 Strobes and multiple accessories!

Upgrading to the K-5 with the 50-135mm soon! woohoo


----------



## Dream Killer

*who cares if the sb-700 isn't weather sealed?*


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

What Sigma focusing issues?


























Shot wide open (f/1.4) with 0 AF microadjust.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


that would be so big and heavy......


Meh. So are the 70-200 2.8IS and 24-70, but I wouldn't mind hand-holding either of them all day. I wish I had enough engineering backgroud to estimate the size and weight of said hypothetical lens.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


What Sigma focusing issues?









Shot wide open (f/1.4) with 0 AF microadjust.


To me, that looks as if it's front-focusing ever so slightly.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


To me, that looks as if it's front-focusing ever so slightly.


Nah, the focus is actually on that big line under the 0. Given how far I was from the little... thingy and my viewfinder, it was much easier for me to focus on the large line below the 0 instead of the smaller ones.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Nah, the focus is actually on that big line under the 0. Given how far I was from the little... thingy and my viewfinder, it was much easier for me to focus on the large line below the 0 instead of the smaller ones.


Shouldn't you be focusing on the object on the vertical portion of the chart? Since the leading and trailing sections of the angled portion intersect the vertical portion at zero, it doesn't make any sense to try and focus anywhere else.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Shouldn't you be focusing on the object on the vertical portion of the chart? Since the leading and trailing sections of the angled portion intersect the vertical portion at zero, it doesn't make any sense to try and focus anywhere else.


...


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*












Sorry, wasn't trying to brag or anything.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Sorry, wasn't trying to brag or anything.




















On an unrelated note, I'm pretty sure I have to send my 85 in. It has awful fringing issues that take forever to fix in post, and its AF is so unreliable, it's impossible to adjust even with micro in the camera. Very frustrating for a lens that is stupid sharp and that I keep on my camera 90% of the time.


----------



## sub50hz

Just tried using DxO Pro for a couple days. What a horrible piece of software. The distortion corrections, however, are incredibly good (better than Adobe's by a mile). Its solution for conversion is to absolutely butcher the IQ and over-saturate the hell out of the image. Awful.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13154564*
> Just tried using DxO Pro for a couple days. What a horrible piece of software. The distortion corrections, however, are incredibly good (better than Adobe's by a mile). Its solution for conversion is to absolutely butcher the IQ and *over-saturate the hell out of the image*. Awful.


I guess I now know what PP software most portrait photogs in my area use


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13153692*
> Meh. So are the 70-200 2.8IS and 24-70, but I wouldn't mind hand-holding either of them all day. I wish I had enough engineering backgroud to estimate the size and weight of said hypothetical lens.


there a formula somewhere..... but it would be far bigger then the 24-70


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10;13154603*
> there a formula somewhere..... but it would be far bigger then the 24-70


Oh, I'm well aware.


----------



## Danylu

Anyone know much about the "Mamiya RZ Pro body"?

There's one for sale in my area. Looks interesting but I don't even know where I could get film for the 220 or polaroid backs, let alone find a decent scanner :/


----------



## laboitenoire

220 is still quite common, and you can buy instant film from Fuji that works just fine.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Danylu;13155168*
> Anyone know much about the "Mamiya RZ Pro body"?
> 
> There's one for sale in my area. Looks interesting but I don't even know where I could get film for the 220 or polaroid backs, let alone find a decent scanner :/


Order from freestyle. I'll link some scanners later.

And the RZ's were used a ton in studios and are still produced for digital and film.


----------



## Dream Killer

fisheyes on fullframe is fun...er why do i have an extra hand growing on my left side?
*playing with shadows*


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer;13167063*
> fisheyes on fullframe is fun...er why do i have an extra hand growing on my right side?


Think one of the labs at your school might have had an accident


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer;13167063*
> fisheyes on fullframe is fun...er why do i have an extra hand growing on my right side?


Cuz you went back to Nikon?
















ack, stupid double post >.<
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13153712*
> To me, that looks as if it's front-focusing ever so slightly.


Out of shear curiosity, how can you tell? Asking because I pulled the trigger on a Sigma 10-20, and I keep hearing all about the 'Sigma lottery'... /nervous


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie;13167120*
> Out of shear curiosity, how can you tell? Asking because I pulled the trigger on a Sigma 10-20, and I keep hearing all about the 'Sigma lottery'... /nervous


Because it appears that it's focused a bit forward of the zero line.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie;13167120*
> Out of shear curiosity, how can you tell? Asking because I pulled the trigger on a Sigma 10-20, and I keep hearing all about the 'Sigma lottery'... /nervous


Sigma is reported to have some bad QC issues. Some lenses are spot on, some lenses front/back focus.

I can't really say whether or not this is true from my experience because I've only one Sigma lens. Personally though, if you buy used, it shouldn't be a problem since most people on POTN sell lenses that have been calibrated already or without any issues out of the box.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;13167372*
> Sigma is reported to have some bad QC issues. Some lenses are spot on, some lenses front/back focus.
> 
> I can't really say whether or not this is true from my experience because I've only one Sigma lens. Personally though, if you buy used, it shouldn't be a problem since most people on POTN sell lenses that have been calibrated already or without any issues out of the box.


I bought new (I received a gift card and used that towards it)... if I take it out and have problems with it (apparently front/back focusing, etc) would a calibration be covered under the warranty? Heh, I realize R3's probably not the best person to ask about this since his Sigma is his first, but why not, I like it over here tonite better than POTN, lol


----------



## sub50hz

Yes, calibration would be covered.


----------



## MistaBernie

Thanks sub! That 'omg what did I do?!' feeling in my stomach has subsided..

either that, or I'm just _really_ hungry


----------



## sub50hz

I have that same feeling, but it's residual from last night's..... "affairs".


----------



## iandroo888

sigma knows the problem for the lenses and will do the calibration... u just gotta send it in lol


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iandroo888;13167535*
> sigma knows the problem for the lenses and will do the calibration... u just gotta send it in lol


That was a problem for me, personally. I'm just too impatient to wait for them to finish calibrating my lens









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie;13167435*
> I bought new (I received a gift card and used that towards it)... if I take it out and have problems with it (apparently front/back focusing, etc) would a calibration be covered under the warranty? Heh, I realize R3's probably not the best person to ask about this since his Sigma is his first, but why not, I like it over here tonite better than POTN, lol


Yea, I'm probably not the best person to ask. I do love my 30mm though. Prefer it much more to my 28mm. Which Sigma lens did you get? Your sig isn't updated









And yea, I love the camera talk here more than POTN.


----------



## dudemanppl

POTN is weird... FM is good, and DPreview is just wrong.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13167609*
> POTN is weird... FM is good, and *DPreview is just wrong.*


In so many ways...


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;13167542*
> Which Sigma lens did you get? Your sig isn't updated


Updated, but I grabbed the 10-20 f/4-5.6. I needed something wider (and higher quality) than the low end of the 28-135 (although I will say, I actually rather like the 28-135 as a walk around; I shot most of my fianceé's bridal shower with one and the on-board flash (stupid YN). By far, not my best work, but it was good enough to capture moments, so I'm happy.


----------



## sub50hz

We need a Photographer's Lounge thread. A place to shoot the breeze, a little more casual than this thread.

BTW, Bernie, had quite a night yesterday at Three Floyds. I wish I could eat and drink there every day, but I'd be dead in a week.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13168317*
> We need a Photographer's Lounge thread. A place to shoot the breeze, a little more casual than this thread.


We need to find a pianist to give the lounge some mood music first, and probably a 24/7 bartender.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;13169302*
> We need to find a pianist to give the lounge some mood music first, and probably *a 24/7 bartender*.


not probably. must have.


----------



## dudemanppl

But I can't drink.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13169516*
> But I can't drink.


You're coatcheck.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;13169534*
> You're coatcheck.


thankfully i dont really wear jackets


----------



## dudemanppl

I guess I'll just drink apple juice out of a sippy cup.


----------



## Marin

I can legally drink outside of the US.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


We need to find a pianist to give the lounge some mood music first, and probably a 24/7 bartender.


I've had extensive bar-tending experience. Not sure i can manage 24 hour shifts though.


----------



## Marin

Dropped by BB and got some HDD's since they were cheaper than Newegg. Got a WD 2TB External (with USB 3.0, weee) for backing up my photos and a WD 1TB Passport (USB 3.0 also) for using when I tether on my MBP and for moving files around.

Think I'll go back on Wednesday and pick up one more 2TB External.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


We need to find a pianist to give the lounge some mood music first, and probably a 24/7 bartender.


There's an idea.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


But I can't drink.










Only seven years to go!

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


I can legally drink outside of the US.


I can drink legally ANYWHERE. Except in a fundamentalist Islamic country perhaps.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*


I've had extensive bar-tending experience. Not sure i can manage 24 hour shifts though.


I'll be the other bartender.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Dropped by BB and got some HDD's since they were cheaper than Newegg. Got a WD 2TB External (with USB 3.0, weee) for backing up my photos and a WD 1TB Passport (USB 3.0 also) for using when I tether on my MBP and for moving files around.

Think I'll go back on Wednesday and pick up one more 2TB External.


I have that same HDD. USB 3 is actually fast like it claims! Knocks the socks off eSATA.


----------



## dudemanppl

USB 3 is faster than eSATA? :O Might be getting an external USB 3 HDD instead of some internal WD Blacks then.

This is what happens when you ask for computer help on FM (wasn't me btw):

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Some guy on FM*

AMD chips generally run cooler than Intel, resulting in longer life, over all. Also, when AMD gives a running speed, that's the true speed, not quite so with Intel.


Herp a derp.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


USB 3 is faster than eSATA? :O Might be getting an external USB 3 HDD instead of some internal WD Blacks then.

This is what happens when you ask for computer help on FM (wasn't me btw):

Herp a derp.


What... the... hell. lol

I assume in the 2nd part he's referring to speedstep. But i'm not sure what he was on about in the first sentence.


----------



## dudemanppl

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1000575
Have fun, don't be too harsh.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


USB 3 is faster than eSATA? :O Might be getting an external USB 3 HDD instead of some internal WD Blacks then.

This is what happens when you ask for computer help on FM (wasn't me btw):

Herp a derp.


I meant in terms of usefulness as an external HDD connection rather than raw speed. However, the few benchmarks I've seen between USB 3.0 and eSATA have them being nearly equal, with USB 3.0 beating eSATA in some cases. USB 3.0 does blow USB 2.0 and FireWire out of the water though.

I hated eSATA because the cords were very short, and the connectors were fragile and crappy, often pulling out accidentally. Also, laptops and most typical pre-build vendor PC's often don't have eSATA ports, whereas USB 3 is backward compatible with even USB 1.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

For whatever reason, I couldn't get E-SATA to ever work for me either.

This is probably the wrong place to ask it but eh: Is it worth getting a USB 3.0 external enclosure for a 5400RPM drive?


----------



## dudemanppl

I think I'll do Revodrive boot, 2 1 TB Blacks in RAID for Steam and whatnot, and 2 2 TB externals for photos (one for backup?). But I don't think I'll start my case mod until BF3 comes out so I can upgrade to GTX 580s.


----------



## Shane1244

Yep. USB 2.0 is slow.


----------



## riko99

Wow just realized after taking pictures at The motorshow yesterday that the Fiance bumped the ISO up to 2000 for a shot and here I still thought I was shooting ISO 640







.

So In short any bracketed shot I took and put together once resized looks horrid due to the amount of noise.
In the end the pics turned out OK other than the ones I was going to fool around and do HDR.


----------



## ace8uk

I've pretty much decided on getting the D7000 over the D700 due to the price differences between the two. Can anyone recommend any SD cards for the D7000? I know they're rated in classes and what not, but I've only ever used compact flash cards. Any suggestions would be much apprectiated, thanks!


----------



## laboitenoire

I only really use Sandisk and Lexar for memory these days. I had a few PNY cards in the past and they were alright... Lost a few photos with them.

I just recently picked up a pair of 16 GB Lexar Platinum II cards for like $40 (probably less) and they are fantastic. However with the file size of the D7000 you might need something a little faster.


----------



## Shane1244

If you're doing video, you'll need a class 10. I got a Lexar Platinum II 16Gb for like $23, and I've never even had the overflow meter come up on video, whereas with my class 6 kingston it would come up after just a few seconds of recording. (Depending on the conditions)


----------



## laboitenoire

The Platinum II is only Class 6 (100x) but it's still pretty spritely.


----------



## ace8uk

I was looking at Transcend and PNY, they have class 10 cards for £18, which seems pretty good. Usually I only go for Sandisk, but I don't want to spend about £80 on an SD card.


----------



## Shane1244

Oh jeeze, You're right. The problem I had was on a class 4. The difference between Class 6 & 10 isn't much, you're already fine for video,.. One the buffer fills for photo, then either card is going to drop the camera to like 1fps.


----------



## Shane1244

I got my RMA set up for my lens, and they told me to use their UPS account. They just give me their UPS account number.. does anyone know how I use it? :S


----------



## Nemesis158

I have a Patriot 16GB LX series Class 10 for my D3000. holds about 2500 RAW pics. love it.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nemesis158;13177659*
> I have a Patriot 16GB LX series Class 10 for my D3000. *holds about 2500 RAW pics.* love it.










My 8GB CF cards only hold 230 RAW photos.


----------



## Nemesis158

depends on the camera and MP i think. how large are your RAW files? and how many MP is your camera? mines only a 10.2 MP and my RAW files (.nef) are about 7-10mb each

Also, i just checked the Dump i pulled off my card cause it was full. totals 2030 Raw Files.....


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

My RAWs are usually about an average of 22MB/file, which shouldn't give me 10% of your capacity...


----------



## Shane1244

Mine are around 23mb average. I've seen them as low as 19mb, and as high as 27mb. I can hold around 570 photos.


----------



## Cole19

Got some water behind my camera's LCD during a sports shoot that got really really rainy. Had a trashbag over the body and lens, but I think some water got in. = (

How do I fix? Where do I get silica gel?


----------



## Nemesis158

well 8gb/230 files = ~34MB per file so maybe theres something wrong with your card. 22mb you should get 360 files....


----------



## Shane1244

Just put it in a bunch of rice, take bother battery's out.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nemesis158;13177998*
> well 8gb/230 files = ~34MB per file so maybe theres something wrong with your card. 22mb you should get 360 files....


It's an estimated average off. I get anywhere from 19MB-30MB/file, so it sounds about right still. What I don't understand is though is how it's still about 10% of your card's capacity









I mean, even with the larger size of your card and the larger file sizes I have, it shouldn't be THAT much of a difference.


----------



## Nemesis158

well my RAWs are an average of 7.7MB, and yours are ~25MB, actual calculations state that my card should hold 2078 RAW files and yours should hold 320 files. i know it seems weird but thats how it all works out if you do the math..... i think you need to get yourself a 16/32GB card......


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;13177698*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My 8GB CF cards only hold 230 RAW photos.


Weird, because my 16GB card will hold 554 21MP RAW files. I should be getting far less than you.

I know that shooting at higher ISO's will increase file size, so that may or may not be a factor in your case.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;13177698*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My 8GB CF cards only hold 230 RAW photos.


i wouldnt depend on one card to hold so many photos.. rather lose 2-300 than 2-3000 if the card decides to poop out


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;13178309*
> Weird, because my 16GB card will hold 554 21MP RAW files. I should be getting far less than you.
> 
> *I know that shooting at higher ISO's will increase file size*, so that may or may not be a factor in your case.


Maybe that's why. I usually shoot at ISO 400 myself. I've never heard of this happening though; how come it increases the file size?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;13178404*
> Maybe that's why. I usually shoot at ISO 400 myself. I've never heard of this happening though; how come it increases the file size?


Well, apparently it's because of noise. At ISO 100, a file needs less space since something like a clear blue sky is uniform with almost no artifacts, whereas ISO 800 creates a lot of artifacting, which needs more space.

The difference in different ISO RAW files is much less than JPEGs, so I don't know if it's enough to make your file sizes so large.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;13178471*
> Well, apparently it's because of noise. At ISO 100, a file needs less space since something like a clear blue sky is uniform with almost no artifacts, whereas ISO 800 creates a lot of artifacting, which needs more space.


Huh, thanks for that. It's the first time I've ever heard of that phenomenon. +1 Rep IOU


----------



## Nemesis158

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iandroo888;13178353*
> i wouldnt depend on one card to hold so many photos.. rather lose 2-300 than 2-3000 if the card decides to poop out


Flash cards usually only crap out if they are of a cheap brand or you do something to them that can be damaging....... so far i have no reason not to trust my 16GB Patriot card


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nemesis158;13178632*
> Flash cards usually only crap out if they are of a cheap brand or you do something to them that can be damaging....... so far i have no reason not to trust my 16GB Patriot card


Nevertheless, dual memory card slots is a nice insurance feature.

Get on it, Canon!


----------



## dudemanppl

Oh my. The D40 is amazing. But I have no memory cards for it because I forgot it took SD.


----------



## ace8uk

Thanks for the suggestions on SD cards guys, I just went for a couple of 16GB class 10 PNY cards as they were only Â£18 each, which I don't think is too bad. If worse comes to worse and one/both crap out on me, I'll just consider it a lesson learned and stick to Sandisk or Lexar. My D7000 should be coming on Wednesday, needless to say I'm super excited!


----------



## dudemanppl

PNY isn't a horrible brand and I've always wanted to try out a D7000.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


PNY isn't a horrible brand and I've always wanted to try out a D7000.


Great camera; one of Nikon's best so far IMO.


----------



## ace8uk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13180590*
> PNY isn't a horrible brand and I've always wanted to try out a D7000.


I'm sure the PNY cards will be fine, just hoping that two 16GB cards will be sufficient. I've heard and seen good things regarding the D7000. After checking the bank balance and having a thorough comparison of the prices of the D7000 and the D700, the price differences were a lot more than I feel I could justify. Don't get me wrong, I still hope to one day move up to full frame, but right now I can't afford the £700-£800 difference between the two, and it means that I don't have to sell my Sigma 10-20 or the Nikon 17-55 and worry about getting new (expensive) ultra wide and mid range zooms to replace them for full frame.


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Only seven years to go!


Yup, only half of his whole life!


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


Yup, only half of his whole life!


----------



## Dream Killer

i was doing some biopsies and the nurse handed over a jar that had this familiar logo on it - i was surprised. MSSM dept. of pathology is definitely steppin' up their game!

*Leica Formalin Jar*


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*


i was doing some biopsies and the nurse handed over a jar that had a familiar logo on it and i was surprised. MSSM dept. of pathology is definitely steppin' up their game!


Nice! The most photographic-thing we have at CPMCRI are the Nikon microscopes (which really are pretty common anyways)









EDIT: Since when did Leica make Formalin?


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Nice! The most photographic-thing we have at CPMCRI are the Nikon microscopes (which really are pretty common anyways)









EDIT: Since when did Leica make Formalin?










my school uses leica microscopes but i didn't know that they provided the jars too.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


Yup, only half of his whole life!



Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*












pwnt


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*


my school uses leica microscopes but i didn't know that they provided the jars too.


Haha, I can definitely see the microscopes, but the Formalin was a bit odd for me. I mean, I can definitely see how it'd be something you'd need with microscopy, but still, it's like finding out Nikon also makes immersion oil


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Haha, I can definitely see the microscopes, but the Formalin was a bit odd for me. I mean, I can definitely see how it'd be something you'd need with microscopy, but still, it's like finding out Nikon also makes immersion oil










yeah it caught me off guard too. but formalin is formalin. it's probably just leica's label on it because all the jars look the same whichever lab it comes from.


----------



## iandroo888

new toy is here :] but time to say good bye to my sb-600 :[ ... oh well


----------



## dudemanppl

Sigma 30 tomorrow, whoopee! And I'll gladly enjoy a cup of apple juice to celebrate it.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


new toy is here :] but time to say good bye to my sb-600 :[ ... oh well










Nice! But a lens like that deserves better than a crappy phone shot!


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Sigma 30 tomorrow, whoopee! And I'll gladly enjoy a cup of apple juice to celebrate it.










Don't forget the sippy cup!

But really, I'm loving the lens so far. No regrets about selling my 28mm for it


----------



## laboitenoire

Same, I have no regrets buying my Sigma 30.

And as far as optical toys, we have some very nice inverted microscopes from Nikon in my department, as well as a laser-guided confocal microscope from Olympus with micron-resolution! And then we have the professor who worked in lithography and so talks about the million-dollar Nikon and Canon stepper systems...


----------



## sub50hz

We sell Leica scopes for gem inspection. They're nice. That is all I have to add at this time, as it's my birthday and I am far gone. Good day.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Nice! But a lens like that deserves better than a crappy phone shot!










yah i know D: but battery was being charged >< and i couldnt wait to share the excitement xD


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Same, I have no regrets buying my Sigma 30.

And as far as optical toys, *we have some very nice inverted microscopes from Nikon in my department*, as well as a laser-guided confocal microscope from Olympus with micron-resolution! And then we have the professor who worked in lithography and so talks about the million-dollar Nikon and Canon stepper systems...


Might be the same one I'm using. I'm not going to lie; I love the Nikon inverted much more than the Olympus inverted in the lab next door.

I'd wish I had the training (and a reason, really) to use the TEM as well


----------



## sub50hz

This was all before the food came tonight:




























Getting a little blurry by Hop Rod time. Gumballhead and Dogfish Head 120-minute also made appearances.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


This was all before the food came tonight:

Getting a little blurry by Hop Rod time. Gumballhead and Dogfish Head 120-minute also made appearances.


God how I love Dogfish Head, particularly the 90 min. Old Rasputin isn't bad either.

Felicem diem natalem tibi!


----------



## iandroo888

better picture xD


----------



## GoneTomorrow

^^ Optime!


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


God how I love Dogfish Head, particularly the 90 min.


See if you can find a good place with 3 floyds' Arctic Panzer Wolf on tap. Hops in face-annihilating quantities.

Also, got 2 tix to Dark Lord Day just now. Stoked, haven't been for 4 years.


----------



## dudemanppl

Everybody who shoots crop has a Sigma 30, everyone who shoots full frame Canon has a 5DII and a 135L. I fit in both, yay.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Everybody who shoots crop has a Sigma 30


Not I. Since I seem to have one of the better 35 f/2 copies out and about, I;m satisfied.

I _do_, however, feel the need for a 70-200. Back on this 135L kick, however. Sad.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Everybody who shoots crop has a Sigma 30, everyone who shoots full frame Canon has a 5DII and a 135L. I fit in both, yay.


I thought FF get the 35L?

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Not I. Since I seem to have one of the better 35 f/2 copies out and about, I;m satisfied.

I _do_, however, *feel the need for a 70-200*. Back on this 135L kick, however. Sad.


Same here. I've been drooling over the f/2.8 non-IS, but unfortunately I don't shoot telephoto enough to justify the cost


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


I thought FF get the 35L?


Oh right, that too. So 5DII, 35L, 135L. Thats a pretty good gear list already.


----------



## Mako0312

I want a D3100


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Same here. I've been drooling over the f/2.8 non-IS, but unfortunately I don't shoot telephoto enough to justify the cost










I just don't think I would use a tele zoom as much as I imagine. A hole is being burned in my pocket, perhaps it's time to invest in something else.

*[[[SUGGESTION BOX]]]*

Please deposit.


----------



## dudemanppl

Oh god Portal 2 is amazing. To keep it related, when you hi five or whatever in front of a camera it shows it having sort of a split screen which is odd to me.


----------



## iandroo888

hm.

D7000/D400 + *12-24 *+ 17-55 + 70-200 <= overlapping focal lengths

or

D7000/D400 + *12-24 *+ 24-70 + 70-200 <= this makes more sense no?

bold being what i have already


----------



## dudemanppl

Second. 24-70 is jesus time. Trust me, I've had 5.


----------



## Mr_Nibbles

Sigma 10-20mm came in.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


I just don't think I would use a tele zoom as much as I imagine. A hole is being burned in my pocket, perhaps it's time to invest in something else.

*[[[SUGGESTION BOX]]]*

Please deposit.



Sell the 18-55mm for a 17-55mm f/2.8 as an all-purpose lens
Sell the 35mm f/2.0 for the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 for large aperture on that focal length
Get your girlfriend something nice


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Second. 24-70 is jesus time. Trust me, I've had 5.


5? ***. bad copies? kept changing canon <-> nikon? why 5?

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*



Sell the 18-55mm for a 17-55mm f/2.8 as an all-purpose lens
Sell the 35mm f/2.0 for the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 for large aperture on that focal length
Get your girlfriend something nice


yes #1. Yes #2. Put #3 priority before u do 1 and 2 before she kills u


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


yes #1. Yes #2. Put #3 priority before u do 1 and 2 before she kills u










Psh, multitask. Find a photographer girlfriend. Then #1 and #2 will also be #3


----------



## Nemesis158

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*



*
[*]Sell the 18-55mm for a 17-55mm f/2.8 as an all-purpose lens*
Sell the 35mm f/2.0 for the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 for large aperture on that focal length
Get your girlfriend something nice


Would this also apply to my D3000?
Currently i have the 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 VR Kit lens
And a 50mm f/1.8D
+ BR-2A reversing ring and BR3 Reverse filter thread mount (which can be combined to form an extension ring)
Want to get a 35mm 1.8 or 1.4 but dunno if i can afford ($200+)
Maybe if i can start to sell some of my pics i can justify it......
What do you guys think? 
Wallpaper Devart page
Photography devart page 
and that isn't even all the stuff i have that i think i could sell.....


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Nemesis158*


Would this also apply to my D3000?
Currently i have the 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 VR Kit lens
And a 50mm f/1.8D
+ BR-2A reversing ring and BR3 Reverse filter thread mount (which can be combined to form an extension ring)
Want to get a 35mm 1.8 or 1.4 but dunno if i can afford ($200+)
Maybe if i can start to sell some of my pics i can justify it......
What do you guys think? 
Wallpaper Devart page
Photography devart page 
and that isn't even all the stuff i have that i think i could sell.....


If you can't afford the $200 35mm f/1.8, you definitely can't afford the 17-55mm f/2.8. That's three times the price of the 35mm.


----------



## iandroo888

35mm f/1.8 is 200.. 1.4 is 400... 17-55 is about 850... used. xD


----------



## Nemesis158

say i could afford it, would i be better off to have it rather than the kit lens (especially with the wider aperture)? and do you guys think my pics are sell-able?


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Nemesis158*


say i could afford it, would i be better off to have it rather than the kit lens (especially with the wider aperture)? and do you guys think my pics are sell-able?


I'd rather take the 35mm, to be honest. Easier focal length to work with indoors than the 50mm, larger aperture, and honestly when you're working with models, you have the time/ability to use a prime and use foot zooming.

And unfortunately, I'd have to say your photos aren't sellable yet. Please don't take this personally


----------



## iandroo888

all the lenses that were suggested have a constant aperture of 1.4, 1.8, or 2.8... kit lens start with 3.5 and as you zoom, go up to 5.6..

the constant aperture allows the same aperture throughout all the focal lengths (the 17-55) and allows more light = faster shutter speed in lower light conditions.

using the primes (30-35mm, or the 50mm) is something u have to get used to. no luxury of zooming so you got to manually zoom with your foot. xD but with the wide open aperture of 1.4 or 1.8, very nice bokeh (some better than others depending on the lens) and faster shutter speed if lets say u were workin indoors..

the pictures arent bad.. iunoe if they are sell-able though.


----------



## Nemesis158

ok so when i do that ill go for the 35. any tips on how i should improve my pictures?

also, idk which of the links u guys checked, but most of my GOOD work is on the wallpaper page.....


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


hm.

D7000/D400 + *12-24 *+ 17-55 + 70-200 <= overlapping focal lengths

or

D7000/D400 + *12-24 *+ 24-70 + 70-200 <= this makes more sense no?

bold being what i have already


But the 17-55 is an amazing lens. Even if the focal lengths do overlap.


----------



## iandroo888

so is the 24-70







wish i knew someone here that had the 17-55 i can try xD. have used 24-70 a few times before.. it was really nice

and dang it. now that i have a 3rd lens, i really need a new bag LOL


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;13183812*
> I thought FF get the 35L?


The most common L lenses are the 17-40, 135L and 70-200 f/4L, those being among the cheapest of L lenses.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iandroo888;13185256*
> hm.
> 
> D7000/D400 + *12-24* + 17-55 + 70-200 <= overlapping focal lengths
> 
> or
> 
> D7000/D400 + *12-24* + 24-70 + 70-200 <= this makes more sense no?
> 
> bold being what i have already


Don't get caught up in whether your lenses overlap. Pick the best lenses that suit your camera and shooting habits. The 17-55 is immensely more useful on a crops sensor. The 24-70 is not very wide at all at 24mm. Try both lenses out and you'll see what I mean.


----------



## Shane1244

L has to be the best marketing gimmick ever.


----------



## ace8uk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iandroo888;13186001*
> so is the 24-70
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> wish i knew someone here that had the 17-55 i can try xD. have used 24-70 a few times before.. it was really nice
> 
> and dang it. now that i have a 3rd lens, i really need a new bag LOL


I'd go for the 17-55 to be honest, it truly is an awesome lens and it's useful to have 17mm on the wide end. Despite having use of a 17-55 myself, I've also considered picking up a Tamron 28-75 f2.8 as well as it can be bought for new under £300 and sometimes I feel 55mm just isn't enough reach. From what I've seen the Tamron 28-75 seems to be like the poor man's 24-70!


----------



## riko99

Alright here's one of the few shots that was somewhat noisy because of the high ISO and the photo-merge adding in extra noise due to 5 shots being combined.










Edit: Framing is Blah as well I'll post some better ones soon.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

The price of the Canon 5d Mark II body only just went up $200! $2499 to $2699. Glad I got mine before that happened.

EDIT: Ok, I normally don't go on Ken Rockwell hate rampages, but this has to be the most ludicrous page I have seen on his site:

http://www.kenrockwell.com/analprobe/dissent.htm


----------



## iandroo888

d700 is around there too now


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


The price of the Canon 5d Mark II body only just went up $200! $2499 to $2699. Glad I got mine before that happened.

EDIT: Ok, I normally don't go on Ken Rockwell hate rampages, but this has to be the most ludicrous page I seen on his site:

http://www.kenrockwell.com/analprobe/dissent.htm












Is this serious?


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*



Sell the 18-55mm for a 17-55mm f/2.8 as an all-purpose lens
Sell the 35mm f/2.0 for the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 for large aperture on that focal length
Get your girlfriend something nice



1. Nah. Not wide enough, not long enough.

2. f/2.0 is sufficient for my habits.

3. Due to the nature of my work, the only thing she wants is something I'm not ready for (engagement ring).

I might swing by Calumet tonight and check out the 70-200 again.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Who knows with him.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


*1. Nah. Not wide enough, not long enough.*

2. f/2.0 is sufficient for my habits.

3. Due to the nature of my work, the only thing she wants is something I'm not ready for (engagement ring).

I might swing by Calumet tonight and check out the 70-200 again.


If the 17-55 were wider and longer like you want, it wouldn't be as good of a lens. There's a reason the range is relatively short and why "vacation lenses" are poor quality.


----------



## iandroo888

if it were able to create a 18-200 f/2.8, it would be huge and super expensive (i think). xD thats why the trinity are seperated as it is.. 14-24, 24-70, 70-200.. each themselves are already a fairly large lens even with the "smaller" focal range

"vacation" lenses are designed to be an all-around small type lens that can cover most of teh ranges you'd need without having to carry more than one lens.. ive gotten used to switchin lenses now.. esp when i had 14-24 and 24-70 borrowed from my cousin. the 18-105 is the last of that kind of lens ill probably have...

post 12001? top of new page?









---------------------------------------

Those of you who have the Timbuk2 Snoop Camera Medium bag, how comfortable is it to carry? how much gear to you have in yours? does it move around when u like bend over or something like the lowepro slingshot does?


----------



## MistaBernie

I guess my 'vacation lens' is my 28-135 (since I sold my 17-85). On a crop, it's got some decent reach, while getting me close enough with an almost reasonable aperture. Of course, the fact that the lens was dropped at some point by the previous owner and the fact that I dont really care what happens to it is probably what REALLY makes it a vacation lens for me, since now I'm just about covered without it (10-20, 50, 70-200), though it does compliment my 20-70 range pretty nicely.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


If the 17-55 were wider and longer like you want, it wouldn't be as good of a lens. There's a reason the range is relatively short and why "vacation lenses" are poor quality.


I... do not want. I think you're taking that out of context, I am simply not interested in such a lens. If it were both wider _and_ longer, it would simply be too expensive to be of consideration anyhow.


----------



## ljason8eg

Alright so I'm going back to the east coast for the Coke 600 NASCAR race and since I'll have a hot pass again I figured I'd try renting a lens or two to take with me on the trip. Currently I only have the 18-55mm kit lens, 55-250 IS, and 50mm 1.4 to go with my T2i. I was thinking about renting a 70-200mm 2.8 IS II since the race is at night. Also thinking about something on the wider end that will be better than my 18-55. 17-55 2.8 perhaps? Or anything else that would be good to rent for the track?


----------



## iandroo888

70-200 is prob best

im not sure what the hot pass will give u in terms of location wise on the track... 17-55 or 24-70 is a good fast zoom.. or since ur shooting at night, maybe a short prime like a 50mm or something at f/1.4 or f/1.8 would be nice too


----------



## MistaBernie

I'm starting to think that being able to take pictures of things that I find boring may just make them more interesting to me.


----------



## iandroo888

if u can do that, u good


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


70-200 is prob best

im not sure what the hot pass will give u in terms of location wise on the track... 17-55 or 24-70 is a good fast zoom.. or since ur shooting at night, maybe a short prime like a 50mm or something at f/1.4 or f/1.8 would be nice too


I have the 50mm 1.4 so I'll be sure to take that. I was thinking about the 24-70 or 24-105 but I'm worried about 24 not being wide enough on a crop body.

A hot pass gets you anywhere except the photographer's stands. Garage area and pit road are both fair game. Standing at the pit wall at Auto Club Speedway let me get some good shots like this one with the 55-250, but I know it'll struggle at night.


----------



## iandroo888

if ur 55-250 was able to do that during day.. then 70-200 is what u need at night xD

imo i wouldnt worry too much on the wide side of the lens unless ur friggen close to the cars... and since u said garage and pit was fair game areas... im sure if u were a bit "long" on the wide side, u could take a step back lol


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iandroo888;13191249*
> if ur 55-250 was able to do that during day.. then 70-200 is what u need at night xD
> 
> imo i wouldnt worry too much on the wide side of the lens unless ur friggen close to the cars... and since u said garage and pit was fair game areas... im sure if u were a bit "long" on the wide side, u could take a step back lol


Well I could literally get right up to and touch the cars in the garage if I wanted to, of course the teams wouldn't be happy with that lol. I used the 50mm in the garage at Auto Club Speedway and there were a few times I wished it was a bit wider since there was times I couldn't back up far enough.


----------



## iandroo888

17-55 and 70-200 is probably a good combo to rent then


----------



## Shane1244

What about the 200mm 2.8L?


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;13192176*
> What about the 200mm 2.8L?


I'm not sure how far the pit wall is from the track. 200mm focal length was a bit tight at Auto Club and I think the pit wall at Charlotte is closer to the track. I think I'd rather have the versatility of a zoom. The prime would save some money though.


----------



## dudemanppl

135L + 1.4 is almost like a zoom, albeit a very very clunky zoom. And the 30 1.4 is simply wonderful. I would pay 600 for the performance it gives.


----------



## iandroo888

time to ditch 35mm f/1.8 for 30mm f/1.4? xD


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13194129*
> 135L + 1.4 is almost like a zoom, albeit a very very clunky zoom. And the 30 1.4 is simply wonderful. I would pay 600 for the performance it gives.


Does the TC slow down the AF much? Thinking about picking one up. Which TC are you using?


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13190652*
> 1. Nah. Not wide enough, not long enough.
> 
> 2. f/2.0 is sufficient for my habits.
> 
> 3. Due to the nature of my work, the only thing she wants is something I'm not ready for (engagement ring).
> 
> I might swing by Calumet tonight and check out the 70-200 again.


Save up for #3 then?









The 70-200mm definitely is a nice lens, but that's still on the backburner for a long time for me. I don't shoot telephoto nearly enough to justify a $1k lens. Still, if you do though, the f/2.8L is a sweet lens








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;13190661*
> Who knows with him.
> 
> If the 17-55 were wider and longer like you want, it wouldn't be as good of a lens. There's a reason the range is relatively short and why "vacation lenses" are poor quality.


It's also sad that I'm not surprised at all by this.

And +1 on the "Vacation lens" thing. To be honest though, I've never found shooting at those focal lengths to be a big deal. It's not "proper" photography to some people, but I have room to crop with my body if I ever need to/find my lens is too wide.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iandroo888;13194227*
> time to ditch 35mm f/1.8 for 30mm f/1.4? xD


I'd do it


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;13194605*
> It's not "proper" photography to some people, but I have room to crop with my body if I ever need to/find my lens is too wide.
> I'd do it


I crop using the original aspect ratio of the camera.... or on the one or two occasions that I've wanted a square crop from the get go.

Not that I'm a pro... it's just my take.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13190652*
> 1. Nah. Not wide enough, not long enough.
> 
> 2. f/2.0 is sufficient for my habits.
> *
> 3. Due to the nature of my work, the only thing she wants is something I'm not ready for (engagement ring).*
> 
> I might swing by Calumet tonight and check out the 70-200 again.


Take the plunge! I did last June!








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;13194605*
> Save up for #3 then? LD
> 
> The 70-200mm definitely is a nice lens, but that's still on the backburner for a long time for me. I don't shoot telephoto nearly enough to justify a $1k lens. Still, if you do though, the f/2.8L is a sweet lens
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's also sad that I'm not surprised at all by this.
> 
> And +1 on the "Vacation lens" thing. To be honest though, I've never found shooting at those focal lengths to be a big deal. It's not "proper" photography to some people, but I have room to crop with my body if I ever need to/find my lens is too wide.


To be fair, I've seem some impressive vacation lenses (the Canon 18-135 isn't half bad), but they all seem to be jacks of all trades and masters of none, so to speak.

And about using just a wide angle lens and cropping, yes you can get by like that, but you miss out on the advantages of telephoto (even just medium telephoto), namely image compression, shallower DOF, less artifacting from cropping and enlarging, etc. You owe it to yourself to at least give a lens like the 85/1.8 a shot.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iandroo888;13194227*
> time to ditch 35mm f/1.8 for 30mm f/1.4? xD


Maybe I'm missing something, but from the reviews I've read on both lenses, the Nikon is the better of the two. The Sigma is razor sharp in the center, but the corners seem to be soft throughout the aperture range.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *theCanadian;13194890*
> I crop using the original aspect ratio of the camera.... or on the one or two occasions that I've wanted a square crop from the get go.
> 
> Not that I'm a pro... it's just my take.


Same here, I always keep it 3:2, no matter what. It's just pleasing to the eye (for me at least).


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;13195140*
> Take the plunge! I did last June!


Haha.... absolutely not.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Does the TC slow down the AF much? Thinking about picking one up. Which TC are you using?


I used the Canon 1.4x first version (optically same as the second though) and when its focus limited its about the same as a bare 135L throughout the entire range.


----------



## MistaBernie

@Gone --

Teleconverters and their other (usually unknown) side effects..


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


@Gone --

Teleconverters and their other (usually unknown) side effects..


Thanks, I'm aware of the drawbacks, but was just wondering how it affected specifically the 135L in terms of AF speed. TC's are intentionally designed to auto focus slower to improve accuracy. And for a lens like the 135L, the hit in IQ is probably negligible since it has so much resolving power to begin with.


----------



## sub50hz

Anyone ever buy a refurb lens direct from Canon? My 50D arrived as if brand new, and they have a lens I am potentially interested in.


----------



## laboitenoire

I've bought Nikon refurbs that were refurbed by Nikon themselves. No difference between body and lenses.


----------



## sub50hz

I ordered it after realizing after I added it to my cart, the site showed zero left in stock. Saving 100 bucks on a 70-200? Winful.


----------



## laboitenoire

Nice.


----------



## MistaBernie

their stuff is usually absurdly good -- my 50 f/1.4 was canon refurbed but bought from B&H (roughly same price iirc) and it looked brand new (except for the refurb box)


----------



## sub50hz

It sort of sucks that Canon charges state sales tax on their store, but even with 2-day shipping _and tax_, it was 620 dollars. It would be stupid to buy it new locally at some 790 dollars (yep, thanks a lot, Cook County sales tax/low item availability).


----------



## mz-n10

non is 70-200/4?


----------



## Shane1244

No doubt.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


non is 70-200/4?


Fo sho. I don't really need the IS for what I shoot,mm and the 2.8 is simply out of my price range with all of these insane price hikes.


----------



## Cole19

Its such a great lens, I absolutely love mine. Though I think I will be upgrading to the 70-200 F/2.8 IS II here within a couple months. Depending on how much work I have lined up.


----------



## sub50hz

Baller. I don't sell any prints or images, so I can't justify dropping so much coin on the 2.8 IS II-- but I would certainly not refuse one should it come to me free of charge.

Also, is the internet rediscovering HDR.... _again?_ God, I hate it. So much.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13207836*
> Baller. I don't sell any prints or images, so I can't justify dropping so much coin on the 2.8 IS II-- but I would certainly not refuse one should it come to me free of charge.
> 
> Also, is the internet rediscovering HDR.... _again?_ God, I hate it. So much.


I thought toy cameras are the internet's big photography thing right now?


----------



## sub50hz

Do you mean toy cameras like Holgas? Becasue if you're wearing skinny jeans, Holgas _never_ went out of style (until enough people found out about them).


----------



## iandroo888

Those of you who have the Timbuk2 Snoop Camera Medium bag, how comfortable is it to carry? how much gear to you have in yours? does it move around when u like bend over or something like the lowepro slingshot does?


----------



## sub50hz

Can't comment on the Timbuk, but I think I'll be picking up a Kata 3-in-1 soon. Great slings.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13207870*
> Do you mean toy cameras like Holgas? Becasue if you're wearing skinny jeans, Holgas _never_ went out of style (until enough people found out about them).


It caught on beyond that crowd. It made me facepalm, honestly. I see the reason behind wanting to "break the rules" and be unconventional, but IMO you have to know and practice the rules well to be able to break them, otherwise you're just publishing crap and supplementation lack of skill with "it's art".

Bit of a mini-rant.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iandroo888;13207944*
> Those of you who have the Timbuk2 Snoop Camera Medium bag, how comfortable is it to carry? how much gear to you have in yours? does it move around when u like bend over or something like the lowepro slingshot does?


Extremely. I use it as my school bag as well, and it fits my laptop (UL30A), binder, four notebooks, and a book or two without any issues. Camera-gear wise, I actually use my smaller bag for outings and only use my Timbuk2 Snoop for storage (like to keep my gear all in one place), but it still was able to carry a 28 f/1.8, 50 f/1.4, 85 f/1.8, my gripped 50D, speedlite, and tripod (via slings at the bottom) up a hill comfortably for an hour-long hike.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13205496*
> Fo sho. I don't really need the IS for what I shoot,mm and the 2.8 is simply out of my price range with all of these insane price hikes.


i think the non IS is a older design...but either way its a great lens.

i have a 20yr old minolta 70-210/4 i use on my a900, and the 70-200/4 IS canon L is only better when you pixel peep...makes me wonder how much worst the non IS actually is....


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iandroo888;13207944*
> Those of you who have the Timbuk2 Snoop Camera Medium bag, how comfortable is it to carry? how much gear to you have in yours? does it move around when u like bend over or something like the lowepro slingshot does?


I can carry all my 5DMKII gear in my sig, so yeah. It holds a lot.


----------



## MistaBernie

Speaking of the 70-200 F/4L, All these photos I took at the Red Sox last Sunday (ok, 99.8% of them) were taken with the 70-200 F/4L (non IS, no mono/tripod).

And yes, some of them are a bit magenta-y. These are all essentially straight out of the camera and robo-processed just so I could get them off and start perusing (I had multiple people ask me for some of my shots during the game so I threw them up on my page for people to get an idea of what I shot). Awesome part is, I only deleted ~10% of what I shot that day (while I shot).


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


I can carry all my 5DMKII gear in my sig, so yeah. It holds a lot.


hmm how convenient is it to switch things out? how does it organize in the bag? does smaller things get stacked with dividers inbetween?

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*

Extremely. I use it as my school bag as well, and it fits my laptop (UL30A), binder, four notebooks, and a book or two without any issues. Camera-gear wise, I actually use my smaller bag for outings and only use my Timbuk2 Snoop for storage (like to keep my gear all in one place), but it still was able to carry a 28 f/1.8, 50 f/1.4, 85 f/1.8, my gripped 50D, speedlite, and tripod (via slings at the bottom) up a hill comfortably for an hour-long hike.


hmmm cool

---------------------------

maybe ill have people get me this for graduation present from some ppl


----------



## sub50hz

Looks like since Canon had this little gem in Southern Wisconsin, I get next-day for free.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Post pics with it!


----------



## Cole19

Just trying posting from my GoogleTV, its pretty sweet. Easter Present from my Boss. =)


----------



## dudemanppl

Woah, since when have people given Easter presents?


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Post pics with it!










Soon, hopefully. I've been going through some rough patches with constant vertigo in the last month, still haven't really gotten a chance to shoot my Sigma either.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Took a photo for the Represent OCN thread, and:










EDIT: And from the Lanyard Giveaway:










I am loving this Sigma lens. My old 28mm had issues at f/1.8.


----------



## dudemanppl

I like the D40 more than the 5DII.


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Woah, since when have people given Easter presents?


Since always.


----------



## dudemanppl

I'm Asian, we don't get presents.


----------



## michintom

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


I'm Asian, we don't get presents.










What?! Is that the reason why I never got any presents?


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *michintom*


What?! Is that the reason why I never got any presents?










No, it's because you got an A- in calculus. Who does that?


----------



## sub50hz

I wish I could gift a box of tissue to Roberto Luongo right now.


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Took a photo for the Represent OCN thread.


Link? I can't find it.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


Link? I can't find it.


Here you go.

It's a defunct contest now, I think. No winners in about a year and Admin hasn't been seen online in more than a year. Anyone know what happened to him?







It's a bit sad, esp since he was a photog himself.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


I wish I could gift a box of tissue to Roberto Luongo right now.


Or a bro-hug.


----------



## theCanadian

Did he catch one in the nuts or something?


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Just picked up a U2311h and a Spyder. Finally will get to move to a calibrated IPS


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Or a bro-hug.


Pfft. Every dirty player and teary-eyed goalie on that shameful team can suck it. Throw elbows all you want, it doesn't put the puck in the back of the net.


----------



## dudemanppl

U2410 <3.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


U2410 <3.


I also want Eyefinity, and my other two monitors are 1080.


----------



## dudemanppl

Yeah but you can also buy 3 U2410s. Just sell your 50D!


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Yeah but you can also buy 3 U2410s. *Just sell your 50D*!


No camera?







But then what reason would I have to live?


----------



## dudemanppl

Sony DSC-H55
Canon AE-1 Program | Canon FD 50mm f/1.8 | Canonet 28 | Canon 28mm f/2.8


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Sony DSC-H55
Canon AE-1 Program | Canon FD 50mm f/1.8 | Canonet 28 | Canon 28mm f/2.8


But I love my 50D...


----------



## dudemanppl

Use your Rebel II.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Use your Rebel II.










Shush you. Go to sleep. It's a school night


----------



## Marin

Not for me.


----------



## dudemanppl

We want to see pictures from Marin.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Not for me.


But we're in college


----------



## Marin

Terms over for me.


----------



## dudemanppl

Bye, I'm sleeping.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


I'm Asian, we don't get presents.











Quote:



Originally Posted by *michintom*


What?! Is that the reason why I never got any presents?










lol... sounds about right... even xmas we dont get much or at all xD


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Bye, I'm sleeping.


Oh hey so you did end up getting that 30mm.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


lol... sounds about right... even xmas we dont get much or at all xD


Or allowances. I find it odd when other people talk about allowances. It's a completely foreign concept to me.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Or allowances. I find it odd when other people talk about allowances. It's a completely foreign concept to me.


Hey I'm white and never had an allowance!









It did teach me to work hard and to appreciate everything I've bought for myself though.


----------



## iandroo888

allowance? never had that either D:


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*


Hey I'm white and never had an allowance!









*It did teach me to work hard and to appreciate everything I've bought for myself though.*


Oh yea, definitely. I won't lie though; would like an extra income to save up for a 70-200 better


----------



## Marin

Never got an allowance.


----------



## iandroo888

http://slickdeals.net/forums/showthread.php?t=2859761

Timbuk2 Snoop medium black/gun metal $111.46.
Crumpler 7 Million Dollar Home red $85
Crumpler 7 Million Dollar Home Black/Gun metal $101.49


----------



## theCanadian

I received money for mowing the lawn. Never got money for hauling multiple yards of mulch all over the place in 85 degree weather with 3000% humidity though.


----------



## nden

Hi, can I join the club? Here is what I have atm:

_ Canon 5D Mark II
_ Canon EF 50mm F1.4 USM
_ Canon EF 24mm F1.4L II USM
_ Canon EF 100mm Macro F2.8L IS USM
_ Canon Speedlite 430EX
_ Manfrotto Tripods

Also my website: www.tLaPhotos.com


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;13224308*
> No, it's because you got an A- in calculus. Who does that?


Haha, I took Calc I 3 times. Failed, withdrew, A-. Who does _*that?!*_

Also, Admin's been around, just behind the scenes from what I can tell.







Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nden;13227501*
> Hi, can I join the club? Here is what I have atm:
> 
> _ Canon 5D Mark II
> _ Canon EF 50mm F1.4 USM
> _ Canon EF 24mm F1.4L II USM
> _ Canon EF 100mm Macro F2.8L IS USM
> _ Canon Speedlite 430EX
> _ Manfrotto Tripods
> 
> Also my website: www.tLaPhotos.com


Sorry, we're not accepting new members at the moment... unless you send me that 5D







Just kiddin of course, welcome!


----------



## dudemanppl

So photographers were all neglected as a child/were in lower class families?








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;13226015*
> Oh hey so you did end up getting that 30mm.


Still don't have an SD card for it though. :/


----------



## Shane1244

Again, Does anyone know what B&H means when they tell me to send my lens back using their UPS account? All they gave me was a 6 digit number. I'm hoping for free shipping somehow?


----------



## michintom

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;13228427*
> Again, Does anyone know what B&H means when they tell me to send my lens back using their UPS account? All they gave me was a 6 digit number. I'm hoping for free shipping somehow?


It means they will get charged for the UPS shipping fee. UPS account number is 6 digits and you can use the UPS account number B&H gave you.


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *michintom;13228447*
> It means they will get charged for the UPS shipping fee. UPS account number is 6 digits and you can use the UPS account number B&H gave you.


How do I use it though? Any way I can do it online and print out a label?

EDIT: Figured it out!


----------



## sub50hz

Well, I got a little practice in with the 70-200 today. It's definitely not going to win any contests in low-light usability, but when the light is sufficient, it's awesome. Had to dial _down_ saturation (I usually shoot +1 on every lens besides the 85) -- color is great. AF is spot-on and extremely fast, and the size and weight are perfect. It doesn't make the 50D feel lopsided (although sans grip I would imagine it might), and gives me great hope for an all-day candid lens. I would still love the 135L in the future, but this is a great hold-over. Excellent resistance to CA, which is a huge plus after my 85 turned into the fringing machine.

Only negative: people _really_ notice you with this thing.


----------



## Shane1244

Snapped this cute little picture of my cousin today.


----------



## Marin

Driving back to the bay area so I can bring all my gear.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;13237156*
> Driving back to the *bay area* so I can bring all my gear.












I'll actually be making the opposite trip myself in a month. Fremont to UCLA.


----------



## iandroo888

timbuk2 bag just came today. (ON A SATURDAY) O_O i thought u guys said there were more inserts.. 

------------------------------

hmm i need bigger lenses... xDDDD !! *feels obligated to buy new big lenses to fill up this space* xDDD


----------



## sub50hz

Calumet had mono and tripods on sale today. 40 bucks for a Manfrotto 680B? Hell yeah.


----------



## Shane1244

Manfrotto are marked up like no tomorrow. We have the Carbon Fiber ones at BestBuy for under $100 on staff. /resist

Are they pretty much the best Tripods you can get without going the uber expensive route?


----------



## sub50hz

Manfrottos are nice, I enjoy my 055XB/498RC2 combo.... when I use it. The best tripods for the money are probably the Calumet-branded ones. They are tanks, though, eat your protein.


----------



## Marin

Wonder what gear I should go back home with. I'm thinking...

- 5DMKII and all the gear with it.

- Hasselblad since I can use any of my filters on it easily. Yay bayonet filter mount.

- Maybe the C330 since I have a 55mm and 180mm for it. Hasselblad only has an 80. But the coatings aren't as good... And I need to order some step-up ringers.

- Not sure if I should being my Manfrotto 058B. It's mad heavy but it's soooooooooo stable.

- GF670 is definitely coming. Slips right into my messenger bag.

Going to be shooting in Point Reyes a lot since I live close to it. Search it and you may be jelly.


----------



## sub50hz

The 055XB is as stable as I could ever want, although the biggest/heaviest combo I've had on it was a Mamiya 645AF and its 80mm.


----------



## dudemanppl

Gimme whatever you aren't taking. <3


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;13246837*
> - Not sure if I should being my Manfrotto 058B. It's mad heavy but it's soooooooooo stable.


Well, I mean, if you're driving back down, why not?







At worst you can just leave it in your apartment if you don't want to/need to use it, but at least it'll be there and easily accessible if the need arises.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*


Manfrotto are marked up like no tomorrow. We have the Carbon Fiber ones at BestBuy for under $100 on staff. /resist

Are they pretty much the best Tripods you can get without going the uber expensive route?


You saw a CF Manfrotto for under $100? The only Manfrotto I've ever seen at BestBuy was a tiny aluminum one for P&S cameras. The only CF tripods I've seen at BestBuy are the in-house brands.

Manfrotto kind of is an expensive brand, though the lower end of the high end spectrum, with brands like Gitzo (et al.) being much pricier

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Wonder what gear I should go back home with. I'm thinking...

- 5DMKII and all the gear with it.

- Hasselblad since I can use any of my filters on it easily. Yay bayonet filter mount.

- Maybe the C330 since I have a 55mm and 180mm for it. Hasselblad only has an 80. But the coatings aren't as good... And I need to order some step-up ringers.

- Not sure if I should being my Manfrotto 058B. It's mad heavy but it's soooooooooo stable.

- GF670 is definitely coming. Slips right into my messenger bag.

Going to be shooting in Point Reyes a lot since I live close to it. Search it and you may be jelly.


I thought you had given up on the lowly 5DII? Might as well take most of your gear since it's for the summer. Nothing worse than wishing you had brought something in particular.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


The 055XB is as stable as I could ever want, although the biggest/heaviest combo I've had on it was a Mamiya 645AF and its 80mm.


I'm beginning to want new legs myself. The Gitzo legs I have are decent, but I've really come to hate the twist locks. I much prefer lever locks, much faster and easier to use, water/dust proofing be damned.


----------



## Shane1244

Staff discount. The markup on them is ******ed. Staff Discount is cost + 5%


----------



## grishkathefool

oops, sorry


----------



## mz-n10

i find manfrotto stuff way over priced at most places. if you can find a good sale theyre well worth the money. i picked up my CF benro for 220usd, my friend picked up the CF manfrotto 055xb for over 400...and its less stable then the benro i grabbed.


----------



## iandroo888

i found a use for my 42" reflector... to block sunlight while window is open xD


----------



## adamkatt

I have a Canon 30d with a 50mm 1.4 lens
I dream of a Leica m9 lol


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;13253999*
> 
> I thought you had given up on the lowly 5DII? Might as well take most of your gear since it's for the summer. Nothing worse than wishing you had brought something in particular.


Don't have access to the Phase One backs until next term.


----------



## dudemanppl

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...42&postcount=2
I like how this guy rates lenses.


----------



## ntuason

I'm getting a Nikon D90 real soon! I cant wait, so excited.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:



Originally Posted by *DorkSterr*


I'm getting a Nikon D90 real soon! I cant wait, so excited.


yes! more nikon people!


----------



## ntuason

Lol are there not enough people on Nikons side? Which is better for DSLR cameras Cannon or Nikon?


----------



## Marin

Phase One.


----------



## Shane1244

Made a makeshift lightbox with a LCD Monitor and a florescent tube light... Turned out well I think.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*










[/center]


Could use a bit more fill lighting on the bottom of the image/left side of the phone here. The image looks a tad bit flat, and some added light could give the phone a bit more dimension here.

Other than that, looks good!


----------



## Marin

If you every do a tethered shoot, use Capture One and Capture Pilot.


----------



## Shane1244

Yeah, It was more of a test. I only had the one light, plus the light from the monitor underneath. I'll probably re-shoot on Tuesday, with more lighting.







 I tried as hard as I could to bring back the darker areas, but I couldn't do so without too much grain. D:

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


If you every do a tethered shoot, use Capture One and Capture Pilot.


I was just shooting with the swivel screen on the 60D. I've never done tethered before. Does the EOS utility suck?

The LCD I referred too was the monitor I flipped on it's side and used it as a background.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*


I was just shooting with the swivel screen on the 60D. I've never done tethered before. Does the EOS utility suck?


I thought it was great when it worked, but unfortunately it quit on me three months ago and now can't recognize my camera anymore. I'm not exactly sure if it's the camera, PC, or software, but something is happening.

Still, when it worked, I thought it was a great tool.


----------



## Marin

Yeah, EOS utility is bleh. You can tether via Lightroom or Capture One. With Lightroom you can apply settings from one photo to future photos while tethered. So you can white balance in Lightroom and every photo imported after that is balanced.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Yeah, EOS utility is bleh. You can tether via Lightroom or Capture One. With Lightroom you can apply settings from one photo to future photos while tethered. So you can white balance in Lightroom and every photo imported after that is balanced.


----------



## iandroo888

is there a way to "tether" DSLR wirelessly to lightroom? by use of like an eye-fi wifi sd card?


----------



## dudemanppl

Its not working on my 5DII?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


is there a way to "tether" DSLR wirelessly to lightroom? by use of like an eye-fi wifi sd card?


Yes, Google it. Lots of tuts out there for this.


----------



## iandroo888

how about wired? xD cuz i dont have that card yet xDDD


----------



## Shane1244

Pretty sure it's not available on your camera.


----------



## iandroo888

o well. *waits until i upgrade*


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;13266495*
> Pretty sure it's not available on your camera.


Yup. I've done tethered capture with lightroom on my D5000. It's actually pretty useful if you have a long enough cable.

Or a laptop.


----------



## iandroo888

ooo do tell how


----------



## Boyboyd

It's as simple as connecting it up, then firing up lightroom and choosing "tethered capture" from the 'file' menu.

I think... It's been a while since i've done it. I don't really have a reason to.


----------



## theCanadian

You could walk around with a netbook in a backpack. Mad useful.


----------



## Marin

http://www.fotodiox.com/product_info...roducts_id=749


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *theCanadian;13273497*
> You could walk around with a netbook in a backpack. Mad useful.


or whoever releases an actual HD tablet (whether it be apple or android) xD totally waiting for that. noticed this new bag makes my current laptop feel quite heavy.


----------



## nuclearjock

Check it out.


----------



## iandroo888

ok time to dump 35mm while price is going for 240-250 shipped and get a 30mm sigma lmao


----------



## Marin

Or go FF.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;13297642*
> Or go FF.


Much better idea.


----------



## iandroo888

is either of u two donating your 5dmkII to me? if so, ill do it. Lol


----------



## dudemanppl

Get a 5D. You will lick every single part of it everyday.


----------



## iandroo888

u wanna donate me one too dudemanppl? lol


----------



## dudemanppl

Oh, sure just send a 950 dollar donation to the "dudemanppl wants random crap" fund.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13298228*
> Get a 5D. You will lick every single part of it everyday.


I know you're 14, but we have got to introduce you to some women.

We worry about you.


----------



## dudemanppl

Don't worry, I have friends.







AND NO, THEIR NAMES ARE NOT LEFTY AND RIGHTY.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;13298445*
> I know you're 14, but we have got to introduce you to some women.
> 
> We worry about you.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13298462*
> Don't worry, I have friends.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AND NO, THEIR NAMES ARE NOT LEFTY AND RIGHTY.


i lol'ed xDD !


----------



## dudemanppl

I still remember in 5th grade some 3rd grader (with a really deep voice, weird considering he was like 4' 2" max) asked me if I liked girls, to which I obviously answered "yes". Then he called me gay.


----------



## iandroo888

maybe u had a high pitched voice


----------



## dudemanppl

I did.







But then he followed with, "ITS GAY TO LIKE GIRLS! LOLOLOLOLOLOL"


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13298679*
> I did.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But then he followed with, "ITS GAY TO LIKE GIRLS! LOLOLOLOLOLOL"


i lol'ed again....


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13298462*
> Don't worry, I have friends.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AND NO, THEIR NAMES ARE NOT LEFTY AND RIGHTY.


one of your friends named 5d2?


----------



## dudemanppl

No, I like the D40 and R3A much more than the 5DII.


----------



## boogschd

add me









Nikon D60
Nikon AF-S 35mm f1.8G DX
Tamron 18-200mm f3.5-6.3 Di-II LD Aspherical (IF) 
YongNuo YN-467
YongNuo CTR-301P

http://www.flickr.com/photos/bogskiii/


----------



## iandroo888

u guys think its a good idea to sell the 35mm 1.8 nikon for 30mm 1.4 sigma?


----------



## sub50hz

Have you tried a Sigma?


----------



## Shane1244

No.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Have you tried a Sigma?


no. well.. once on someones d40 a long time ago...


----------



## sub50hz

Go rent one and try it on the D5000. Just rent it for like 2 days, you *might* even be able to use LensRentals if they have it.


----------



## iandroo888

no rental places here.. lensrental.. 24 bux for 4 days + 21 shipping OUCH !

ok. everyones opinion. pros and cons about the nikon 35mm f/1.8 and sigma 30mm f/1.4 GO !


----------



## boogschd

You Tube  



 
might help ?


----------



## mz-n10

i really like how digital rev is now a creditable source for reviews.....

is 1/2 a stop really worth the trouble of selling and taking the sigma lotto?


----------



## dudemanppl

lol'd at above. 35 1.8 is a great lens on full frame but on crop, the 30 1.4 is a ton better in almost every single way. I don't see why Kai calls it crap build quality because the barrel is made out of metal thicker than OEM cases (which isn't saying much lol).


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


i really like how digital rev is now a creditable source for reviews.....

is 1/2 a stop really worth the trouble of selling and taking the sigma lotto?


It is if you buy used!

And yea, I like their photography-based reviews (Why lenses > body, why cheap tripods are garbage), but not their camera reviews.

I will admit though; entertaining stuff.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


lol'd at above. 35 1.8 is a great lens on full frame but on crop, the 30 1.4 is a ton better in almost every single way. I don't see why Kai calls it crap build quality because the barrel is made out of metal thicker than OEM cases (which isn't saying much lol).


Yea, like I said, I don't like their reviews much







He complained about how the 1100D is red, even though red is an optional, non-standard color. I mean, hey, he chose the color


----------



## sub50hz

Silly asians and your colored cameras.


----------



## Dream Killer

i love my d700 even more now:




























it's awesome because the viewfinder is now even larger, i don't have to shade the bright lights with my left hand to prevent viewfinder glare, and i don't have to press my nose into the camera's lcd and make it all oily and my nose all itchy.


----------



## boogschd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


i really like how digital rev is now a creditable source for reviews.....

is 1/2 a stop really worth the trouble of selling and taking the sigma lotto?


oh, im not suggesting that its that much credible for reviews and such









just thought it might help


----------



## iandroo888

lol digital rev is funny to watch... iunoe how much id use it for actual reviews tho

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


i really like how digital rev is now a creditable source for reviews.....

is 1/2 a stop really worth the trouble of selling and taking the sigma lotto?


well i already have a buyer for the 35mm... <3 FM forums lmao


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*


it's awesome because the viewfinder is now even larger, i don't have to shade the bright lights with my left hand to prevent viewfinder glare, and i don't have to press my nose into the camera's lcd and make it all oily and my nose all itchy.


I wish they made a bigger eyecup for the 50D.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


I wish they made a bigger eyecup for the 50D.










http://www.hoodmanusa.com/prodinfo.asp?number=H-EYEC18


----------



## sub50hz

I don't care much for that swooping style, but I'll keep it in mind, thanks.


----------



## dudemanppl

I HOPE THAT D700 ON PROGRAM AND ISO AUTO WAS BECAUSE YOU LENT TO TO A FRIEND.







Anyway, the DK-19 is one thing I seriously miss from the D700. The thing is just amazing. It really separates the outside world and photography and makes it a completely different experience.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*


i love my d700 even more now:

it's awesome because the viewfinder is now even larger, i don't have to shade the bright lights with my left hand to prevent viewfinder glare, and i don't have to press my nose into the camera's lcd and make it all oily and my nose all itchy.


I am loving those straps you're using! OT, but it had to be said.


----------



## dudemanppl

http://www.bocaphoto.com/products/ne...n/nikonacc.htm And then ctrl+f for "EC-3". Just bought 2, since I'm damn sure I'll lose one.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


http://www.bocaphoto.com/products/ne...n/nikonacc.htm And then ctrl+f for "EC-3". Just bought 2, since I'm damn sure I'll lose one.


Holy crap are their prices wrong. They're charging $60 for a Canon RF remote that I picked up twice for $10 ea.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


I HOPE THAT D700 ON PROGRAM AND ISO AUTO WAS BECAUSE YOU LENT TO TO A FRIEND.







Anyway, the DK-19 is one thing I seriously miss from the D700. The thing is just amazing. It really separates the outside world and photography and makes it a completely different experience.


only exposure compensation matters to me now therefore i shoot in P + auto-iso, what'chu gonna do about it?









Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


I am loving those straps you're using! OT, but it had to be said.


thanks, if you want them you gotta special order em from a special lady in hong kong: http://www.loraynblog.blogspot.com/

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


http://www.bocaphoto.com/products/ne...n/nikonacc.htm And then ctrl+f for "EC-3". Just bought 2, since I'm damn sure I'll lose one.


lol that fast huh? and how do you lose it if it's locked into the viewfinder?


----------



## dudemanppl

Well I bought 2 anyway.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*


only exposure compensation matters to me now therefore i shoot in P + auto-iso, what'chu gonna do about it?










Fight! Fight! Fight!

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*


thanks, if you want them you gotta special order em from a special lady in hong kong: http://www.loraynblog.blogspot.com/


Oh, definitely thanks for the link! I just did a quick look and spotted that photo that you took earlier. That latest white one does interest me though. I know a certain woman photographer who might be interested in that


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*


only exposure compensation matters to me now therefore i shoot in P + auto-iso, what'chu gonna do about it?










lol'd. Well yeah? I shoot my 5DII on green box with the 50 1.2 AI-S and then the camera explodes because it gets confused, BEAT THAT.

EDIT: Just set it to green box for the first time and it turns out thats not what happens. The menu is so tiny on green box. I can almost say its cute.


----------



## Dream Killer

well i wouldn't go as far as using a non-oem lens lol. but it's the truth. 99% of the photos i've posted on this forum so far is in P/Auto-ISO. the other 1% being in M for flash.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


lol'd. Well yeah? I shoot my 5DII on green box with the 50 1.2 AI-S and then the camera explodes because it gets confused, BEAT THAT.


I'll be honest: I'm surprised the 5DII even has a green box mode!


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


I'll be honest: I'm surprised the 5DII even has a green box mode!


Well, it needs to be there for the 50% of people who buy it just because they can.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Well, it needs to be there for the 50% of people who buy it just because they can.


...

I'm just wrapping my head around the idea of people spending $2000 on a camera they don't know how to use properly.

In case you couldn't tell, that's not sarcasm. That's legitimate shock







I mean, I know of one person with lenses, but still, $2000 on a single body...


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Oh, definitely thanks for the link! I just did a quick look and spotted that photo that you took earlier. That latest white one does interest me though. I know a certain woman photographer who might be interested in that










after you meet Lorayn, you might have to leave that certain woman photographer


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


I know of one person with lenses, but still, $2000 on a single body...


Spend a few hours on a Saturday at Calumet Photo in Oak Brook -- I've seen at least 6 over-2000-dollar bodies sold to wealthy couples that admit they have never even used a camera before.

P.S. Almost all of them were Nikons.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*


after you meet Lorayn, you might have to leave that certain woman photographer


Hard _meh._


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*


after you meet Lorayn, you might have to leave that certain woman photographer


She's tiny. RZ67 is a bulky camera but she makes it look monstrous.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


She's tiny. RZ67 is a bulky camera but she makes it look monstrous.


through my observation in years of portrait photography, asian women only come in two sizes, tiny (as she is) or really fat. i never really found a "normal" (to americans at least) 5'11" asian woman.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*


after you meet Lorayn, you might have to leave that certain woman photographer


Oh, you









Nevertheless, that is one great Flickr and some extremely good photographs. I'm bookmarking that. Thanks!

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*


through my observation in years of portrait photography, asian women only come in two sizes, tiny (as she is) or really fat. i never really found a "normal" (to americans at least) 5'11" asian woman.


That... is close to the truth. Very close to the truth. Kinda sucks when you're a 6'0 Asian guy.

Judging from photos I've seen from Eek, I think he has this problem too.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Oh, you









Nevertheless, that is one great Flickr and some extremely good photographs. I'm bookmarking that. Thanks!

That... is close to the truth. Very close to the truth. Kinda sucks when you're a 6'0 Asian guy.

Judging from photos I've seen from Eek, I think he has this problem too.



Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*


through my observation in years of portrait photography, asian women only come in two sizes, tiny (as she is) or really fat. i never really found a "normal" (to americans at least) 5'11" asian woman.


my uncle (6' 1") married a 5' 10" ... he got lucky. Lol

my friends (the girls anyway) range from like 4'11" to about 5'9".. more towards the lower end... im 6'0"







hard to find a right height gf ><


----------



## Eek

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Oh, you









Nevertheless, that is one great Flickr and some extremely good photographs. I'm bookmarking that. Thanks!

That... is close to the truth. Very close to the truth. Kinda sucks when you're a 6'0 Asian guy.

Judging from photos I've seen from Eek, I think he has this problem too.


I love petite women.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*


i love my d700 even more now:

it's awesome because the viewfinder is now even larger, i don't have to shade the bright lights with my left hand to prevent viewfinder glare, and i don't have to press my nose into the camera's lcd and make it all oily and my nose all itchy.


Sticks out quite a bit, but I suppose that's the point. How does it do being taken in and out of the bag?

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


...

I'm just wrapping my head around the idea of people spending $2000 on a camera they don't know how to use properly.

In case you couldn't tell, that's not sarcasm. That's legitimate shock







I mean, I know of one person with lenses, but still, $2000 on a single body...


I once saw a guy in a restaurant with a Leica M8 and a Sekonic light meter, looking like a kid with a toy. He was taking pictures of his wife sitting across from him, throwing up the Sekonic every time. It was comical.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Oh, you









Nevertheless, that is one great Flickr and some extremely good photographs. I'm bookmarking that. Thanks!

That... is close to the truth. Very close to the truth. Kinda sucks when you're a 6'0 Asian guy.

Judging from photos I've seen from Eek, I think he has this problem too.



Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


my uncle (6' 1") married a 5' 10" ... he got lucky. Lol

my friends (the girls anyway) range from like 4'11" to about 5'9".. more towards the lower end... im 6'0"







hard to find a right height gf ><


Jeez, you guys will remain single if you're being so selective.







Every girl I've dated has been way shorter than me, and guess what - didn't care. You'd be hard pressed to find even white women who are tall.







And I had a Chinese girlfriend once upon a time, and she wasn't the shortest I've dated! And I'm 6'1" (Caucasian case anyone cares







) and my wife is 5'2".


----------



## laboitenoire

Yeah, I'm 5'11" and don't have any issues dating shorter women. My last girlfriend was 4'11" and my current girlfriend is 5'2".

Anywho, Andrew, in regards to Nikon versus Sigma, I honestly wouldn't do it. Unless you really need f/1.4, I doubt you'll notice a huge difference. If it had been in stock, I probably would have bought the Nikon. That said, I have the Sigma now and absolutely love it. It's been on my camera about 95% of the time since I bought it. 4.8% of the time was my 70-300 VR for tele shots, and then I pulled out my 18-55 for a little bit because I needed something that focused closer than the Sigma.


----------



## Cole19

I'm 6'4 and she's 5'11. It just works. =)


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;13303962*
> Sticks out quite a bit, but I suppose that's the point. How does it do being taken in and out of the bag?


it's very soft rubber so it folds in like so:









it's also better that way since somehow im compelled to pick up slrs by their prisms (thumb on the viewfinder, middle on the main logo)


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire;13304144*
> Yeah, I'm 5'11" and don't have any issues dating shorter women. My last girlfriend was 4'11" and my current girlfriend is 5'2".
> 
> Anywho, Andrew, in regards to Nikon versus Sigma, I honestly wouldn't do it. Unless you really need f/1.4, I doubt you'll notice a huge difference. If it had been in stock, I probably would have bought the Nikon. That said, I have the Sigma now and absolutely love it. It's been on my camera about 95% of the time since I bought it. 4.8% of the time was my 70-300 VR for tele shots, and then I pulled out my 18-55 for a little bit because I needed something that focused closer than the Sigma.


mmm... iunoe i still wanna try it. been wanting to get that lens for a long while... o well.. whether it be a good choice or not.. xD i still got more money for it than originally xD so not really any loss...

does this 30mm have the weather sealing? (even tho d5k doesnt) Lol

lol i 6' 0".. my gf's ranged from 4'11" to about 5..7" i dont really care about height too much... just dont want them taller than me.. hehehehe which is rarer than hitting a jackpot.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13302472*
> Spend a few hours on a Saturday at Calumet Photo in Oak Brook -- I've seen at least 6 over-2000-dollar bodies sold to wealthy couples that admit they have never even used a camera before.
> 
> P.S. Almost all of them were Nikons.


i let a friend use my a900 last sunday and figured he knew how to shoot (he has a rebel....) i get my camera back and notice its on green box.....im kinda scared to look at the photos....
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer;13302496*
> through my observation in years of portrait photography, asian women only come in two sizes, tiny (as she is) or really fat. i never really found a "normal" (to americans at least) 5'11" asian woman.


i met a chinese girl the other day that was at least 6'3". im 5'11" and it felt rather awkward looking UP to talk to her.


----------



## dudemanppl

Cameras and asian girls, this thread is weird.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iandroo888;13306288*
> mmm... iunoe i still wanna try it. been wanting to get that lens for a long while... o well.. whether it be a good choice or not.. xD i still got more money for it than originally xD so not really any loss...
> 
> does this 30mm have the weather sealing? (even tho d5k doesnt) Lol


Well, in that case go for it! It is definitely a nice lens... No weather sealing, though.


----------



## Cole19

Going to the camera shop after work to pick up some B&W film for my AE-1 Program... Any suggestions?


----------



## Marin

Ilford FP4 and HP5.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire;13308189*
> Well, in that case go for it! It is definitely a nice lens... No weather sealing, though.


ah thats fine. just curious. will hopefully have a different setup by the time i go on my projected trip


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13307771*
> Cameras and asian girls, this thread is weird.


It keeps the doors open.


----------



## sub50hz

Yeesh, AE-1s blowin up on OCN.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13308953*
> Yeesh, AE-1s blowin up on OCN.


I just got mine because it was a cheap film SLR









Really, that was the reason why.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;13308979*
> I just got mine because it was a cheap film SLR


I'm still on the fence about an EOS 3 or a 1V.....

...or a Mamiya 645AF.


----------



## Cole19

I got mine because I saw it going on ebay with zero bids and 30 seconds left. Picked it up for $4.76 and free shipping. =)

Its an AE-1 Program with a Tokina 28-85 F/3.5... Seems to be really nice, I just shot my first roll of film through it. Looks like I will be picking up some HP5 for some shooting this evening. =)


----------



## sub50hz

Shoot HP5 forever. Don't get hooked on Delta 400 like I did.


----------



## Cole19

I am going to pick up a roll or two, do you develop it yourself?


----------



## sub50hz

Not anymore, I don't feel like paying for chems, and the only space I can really use here for a darkroom is my workshop downstairs.... which has the furnace in it. I use a lab that's a few miles from home, my plan is to shoot a roll a week downtown on my work breaks and ride to the lab on Saturday mornings, pick up negs/prints on Mondays.


----------



## Cole19

I think Richmond Camera here will develop my BW film, so that shouldn't be too bad. Thats where I am going to pick it up at... Should be good either way. I may start developing it myself just for fun, and then just scan in the negs.


----------



## Marin

Develop yourself, it's worth it. I develop a lot of my stuff in Rodinal since it makes the grain "sharper".

Pan F 50 + Rodinal, mmmmmm.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;13309277*
> Develop yourself, it's worth it. I develop a lot of my stuff in Rodinal since it makes the grain "sharper".


This may sound like a stupid question, but what about ventilation requirements? I'm seriously considering it, but all I have to work with is my apartment's bathroom with the crapper fan (I don't know what it's really called).

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer;13302361*
> thanks, if you want them you gotta special order em from a special lady in hong kong: http://www.loraynblog.blogspot.com/


After looking at her Etsy some more, I'm seriously in love with some of those straps.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;13309277*
> Develop yourself, it's worth it.


It's not feasible from a monetary or space perspective for most people.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;13309296*
> This may sound like a stupid question, but what about ventilation requirements? I'm seriously considering it, but all I have to work with is my apartment's bathroom with the crapper fan (I don't know what it's really called).


For some chemicals ventilation is required but I've known some people who do it in their own bathrooms.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13309316*
> It's not feasible from a monetary or space perspective for most people.


Make it work.


----------



## Cole19

Thats what I was thinking, how much can a "Developing kit" cost, 60-70? How do you learn how to do it, if no one is around to teach you? Its something I am really interested in doing.


----------



## Marin

You can find instructions online, it's insanely simple. And you just need developer, stop (you can also do a water stop thus avoiding the need to buy actual stop) and fix (and of course a tank and reel for the film). Just don't dump fix down your drain.

EDIT: And buy everything through Freestyle if possible since they're legit and actually care about the film community.


----------



## Cole19

The local shop here, Richmond Camera, always has film and film devoloping stuff. So if/when I do buy it will probably be from them. On ventilation req's... Bathroom with running crappa fan?


----------



## Marin

Ask on APUG and see what they say about that.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;13309332*
> Make it work.


Typical single college student attitude.


----------



## Dream Killer

today i got a text from my friend to pick up her order with just an address of the store the package is in. it was this store: http://microsites.lomography.com/stores/gallery-stores/nyc

makes me want to go back to film...almost


----------



## sub50hz

Film is the new digital... at least for fine arts.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Film is the new digital... at least for fine arts.


Wuh?


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;13310255*
> Wuh?


In that the popularity is rising due to the increase in people shooting film for fine arts purposes. Didn't you know that every hipster is an artist? Walk around a major city for a day, you'll see what I mean.


----------



## Dream Killer

i attended an auction of fine-art photographs at brooklyn academy of music a few weeks back. digital prints was constantly out selling the film prints. the curator valued similar photos from both digital and film camps. even landscapes done by a 5dm2 vs a large format printed to the same size were valued about the same

i dont think medium matters anymore in photography


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*


i dont think medium matters anymore in photography


My sarcasm emitter must not be operating at 100% today.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


In that the popularity is rising due to the increase in people shooting film for fine arts purposes. Didn't you know that every hipster is an artist? Walk around a major city for a day, you'll see what I mean.


Confusing fine art wih garbage.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Confusing fine art wih garbage.


Confusing humor with seriousness.


----------



## Marin

Confusing seriousness with humor.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Confusing seriousness with humor.


Touch me.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13310484*
> Touch me.


Till I can get my satisfaction.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13310484*
> Touch me.


I love it when weird stuff like this happens. I was just listening to this

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PECk9A-07Pw[/ame]


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


My sarcasm emitter must not be operating at 100% today.










blame the *digital* internet for removing emotion in conversations =P


----------



## sub50hz

I bet Jim Morrison was a great toucher.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*


blame the *digital* internet for removing emotion in conversations =P


I prefer the *analog* internet.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

I leave for several minutes to set up my Eyefinity, and I come back to this


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


I prefer the *analog* internet.


now that's hardcore. i remember when modems meant attaching a speaker and mic to your phone's headset


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*


now that's hardcore. i remember when modems meant attaching a speaker and mic to your phone's headset


My earliest memory of internet was using Compuserve. That, and learning how to configure Procomm at something like 5 years old. My father was really crazy into PCs back in the day, I remember playing Wolfenstein/Doom and taking turns with him. Now that I approach 30, I wish for those days.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13310688*
> My earliest memory of internet was using Compuserve. That, and learning how to configure Procomm at something like 5 years old. My father was really crazy into PCs back in the day, I remember playing Wolfenstein/Doom and taking turns with him. Now that I approach 30, I wish for those days.


I started on Prodigy.


----------



## sub50hz

Yeah, but you're old.er than me.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Yeah, but you're old.er than me.


LOL, barely older than you.

And Ninja text is against the TOS.


----------



## sub50hz

They don't teach ninja text in the Marines?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13310800*
> They don't teach ninja text in the Marines?


No, not the most literate branch.


----------



## sub50hz

Everytime I talk to a friend of mine who's on base in Hawaii, he tells me about this guy who sounds a lot like Ralph Wiggum. Guy's been in for 6 years, barely made it to LCpl.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13310867*
> Everytime I talk to a friend of mine who's on base in Hawaii, he tells me about this guy who sounds a lot like Ralph Wiggum. Guy's been in for 6 years, barely made it to LCpl.


A career LCpl. I knew lots of guys like that. I got Sgt. in less than four years, in infantry which was a slow promoting MOS in those days.


----------



## dudemanppl

I bought some chemicals and a tank from some guy on FM, herp a derp. Hopefully I won't ruin anything. And I need a bottle opener for mah filmses.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


I bought some chemicals and a tank from some guy on FM, herp a derp. Hopefully I won't ruin anything. And I need a bottle opener for mah filmses.


Nope. All you need to do is open it up from the slot.


----------



## ntuason

Yay! I just got my Nikon D7000.










Still using iPhone 3GS cam LOL.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Nope. All you need to do is open it up from the slot.


Explain. Me r be dumn.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *DorkSterr*


Yay! I just got my Nikon D7000.


Congrats!


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:



Originally Posted by *DorkSterr*


Yay! I just got my Nikon D7000.










Still using iPhone 3GS cam LOL.


nice camera for sure. i had a chance to play with it for a day and it was a delight. you just have to be careful with the newer meter on it. it knows you're shooting raw or jpeg. raw will be overexposed by up to .7 stop but jpegs come out fine.


----------



## sub50hz

Interesting -- forced ETTR?


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Explain. Me r be dumn.












See where the films coming out. Grab it there and pull the slot open.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


See where the films coming out. Grab it there and pull the slot open.










I was taught to take the film container, with the protusion side down (for reference, the part that's on top in your photo), and apply pressure until the opposite side pops open.

Is that way not good?


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*









I was taught to take the film container, with the protusion side down (for reference, the part that's on top in your photo), and apply pressure until the opposite side pops open.

Is that way not good?


Dun know. Tearing it open is easy.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;13312296*
> Dun know. Tearing it open is easy.


Huh, going to try that out with the next rolls I develop then. Thanks


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13312098*
> Interesting -- forced ETTR?


maybe. some people complain that the new meter does it by itself. i haven't checked to see if there's a custom function to enable/disable it.

i set my d700 to -.3 ev on matrix, +.5 on center-weight, 0 on spot.


----------



## MistaBernie

you can also just pop the top with a regular can opener. That's what I used to do.

All this talk about b&w is making me want to buy R3's film rebel and start shooting b&w again..


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie;13317371*
> you can also just pop the top with a regular can opener. That's what I used to do.
> 
> All this talk about b&w is making me want to buy R3's film rebel and start shooting b&w again..


----------



## Cole19

Shot a roll of HP5 last night, on my way to the shop to pick up all the developing supplies and try my hand at it this evening. I am just going to pick up the Ilford Developer and Rapid fixer, along with a tank and spool. And just use water as the stop. Should be everything I need right, maybe some film clips for drying?

Wish me luck, hopefully I'll have some negs to scan in tonight... And then run a invert filter and hopefully have a picture????


----------



## Marin

Also pick up some Photoflo. Then you can wash in unfiltered water and use the Photoflo after to cut down the surface tension so it can dry properly.

And what scanner are you going to use?

EDIT: You can also wash it in distilled water and avoid having to use Photoflo.


----------



## Cole19

I am just going to use my flatbed, but it scans at 3600dpi. I'll wash with distilled... Know of any tutorials?


----------



## Marin

Search around on google. There are a ton of different washing methods. Some people just leave the reel in a tub with the water running while others wash it in the tank.


----------



## Cole19

I have read a few tut's now, I am just gonna do it. =)

How hard can it be. =)


----------



## SoBe8503

Hey guys, Got a question. Who here has been able to get their work up in any shops / stores / galleries / etc.?? How? There are a bunch around me, and I would love to get my work displayed.


----------



## Cole19

Patron the shops, become friends. Bring in some of your work's... Ask if they would let you display it.

Its really not hard, just make friends, have good stuff, and its a no brainer. =)


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *SoBe8503*


Hey guys, Got a question. Who here has been able to get their work up in any shops / stores / galleries / etc.?? How? There are a bunch around me, and I would love to get my work displayed.


- Have good work
- Know the people there
- Be able to talk your way into stuff

There are many ways of doing it.


----------



## sub50hz

Looks like Canon completed repairing my 85mm, only took them 4 days from receipt. I hope it's all good.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:



Originally Posted by *SoBe8503*


Hey guys, Got a question. Who here has been able to get their work up in any shops / stores / galleries / etc.?? How? There are a bunch around me, and I would love to get my work displayed.


i can't say i've been to an auction or gallery but i've done weddings/events and concert photography.

the usual procedure with galleries/auctions is to get face time with the curator, or even get him/her over the phone. work your way into at least getting your work seen (e-mail a few jpegs, physically mail a cd-rom, meeting with a portfolio).

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


- Have good work
- Know the people there
- Be able to talk your way into stuff

There are many ways of doing it.


*75% of it is knowing how to sell yourself*


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*


*75% of it is knowing how to sell yourself*


I don't like pulling out statistics since a lot of them are bull.







But yeah, you need to be able to sell yourself.

And your work identifies who you are as a photographer. So if your portfolio looks like it was thrown together they'll probably reject the work. Always pay attention to the details.


----------



## SoBe8503

Awesome. Thanx guys, that helps a lot!


----------



## dudemanppl

Do I need wetting agent?


----------



## Cole19

It worked....

Full strip

Individual Neg


----------



## ntuason

This might be a weird question but, is there a way to update my frimware without an SD card reader? I plug in my camera to my computer but cannot past the .BIN file outside DCIM folder.


----------



## dudemanppl

Nope.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Nope.


Are you sure? For example, the EOS Utility lets you do it while tethered, does Nikon not offer something similar?


----------



## dudemanppl

Nikon offers almost nothing software wise with their cameras. Some cameras could set the SD/CF card to a mass storage device but not the D700 or newer cameras basically (D300s could though...).


----------



## Dream Killer

^ what he said (nikon software sucks balls). you should have a card reader anyway. i have an old sandisk imagemate v1 from a million years ago and i also have an internal one on an external 3.5" bay.


----------



## dudemanppl

I don't have a card reader.







I'm too cheap to buy one.


----------



## Boyboyd

Mine was Â£4, and came with a free 4GB slow SD card.


----------



## ntuason

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


I don't have a card reader.







I'm too cheap to buy one.


Ya I know same here! And the only time I'll use it is when I need to update my firmware.


----------



## sub50hz

Looking at EOS 3s on the bay. Probably gonna buy one.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13332399*
> I don't have a card reader.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm too cheap to buy one.


You have cameras worth more than some peoples' cars and you can't buy a $15 external card reader?


----------



## theCanadian

I'd like to get a cheap flash. Sub $100 used. Nikon. If it'll work, in any capacity on my Minolta SLR that'd be a bonus, but the priority here is on the nikon.

Thinking SB-25?


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *theCanadian;13339408*
> I'd like to get a cheap flash. Sub $100 used. Nikon. If it'll work, in any capacity on my Minolta SLR that'd be a bonus, but the priority here is on the nikon.
> 
> Thinking SB-25?


SB-400 would also work.


----------



## mz-n10

some old cameras use 12v instead of 6v to trigger the flash.....


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


I'd like to get a cheap flash. Sub $100 used. Nikon. If it'll work, in any capacity on my Minolta SLR that'd be a bonus, but the priority here is on the nikon.

Thinking SB-25?


SB-25 will not work on your Nikon (it's a D3100, right?) as it uses a different metering mode. Honestly, a cheap third-party flash is probably your best bet, or the SB-400. I have a cheap Bower flash and it works fine. Not a whole lot of control, but it does bounce and only cost like $45. Fairly high output, too.


----------



## theCanadian

I probably wouldn't use the flash TTL. TTL only ballparks it, which is something I can do by taking a few test shots. I just want something with decent output, zoom from 28mm equivalent to 80mm equivalent and the ability to swivel the head in both axis.


----------



## iandroo888

anyone selling a Sigma 30mm f1.4 EX DC HSM for nikon? XDD


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *theCanadian;13345791*
> TTL only ballparks it, which is something I can do by taking a few test shots.


If you've got test/setup time, sure.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iandroo888;13346489*
> anyone selling a Sigma 30mm f1.4 EX DC HSM for nikon? XDD


Sure. Paypal 600 to [email protected].


----------



## laboitenoire

I haven't seen them used recently. I think because the Nikon 35 f/1.8 went up so much in price that everybody bought the used Sigmas for not much more. That's certainly what I did


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

IIRC, there's a good number of people on here who shoot Sigma 30mms with Nikon.


----------



## dudemanppl

I almost considered selling the D40 and Sigma 30 today for a 50D. I hadn't realized they were so cheap!


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13346947*
> I almost considered selling the D40 and Sigma 30 today for a 50D. I hadn't realized they were so cheap!


Do it


----------



## dudemanppl

No, go away.







50D is too big and heavy.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13347015*
> No, go away.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 50D is too big and heavy.


Then why have a 5D Mk II?


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13346520*
> If you've got test/setup time, sure.


So... is there a flash out there that does what the SB-25 does + TTL on the 3100 then for <$100 used?

Preferably with a 1/250 sync speed or better...

I know this is alot for under $100, but I really wouldn't mind dropping TTL. It's not a big deal.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;13347022*
> Then why have a 5D Mk II?


Because its full frame.


----------



## sub50hz

For sure. The CLP price is ridiculously low.

Off topic: I've been making beer bread for the last couple hours.

Round 1: Butter + Leinenkugel's Fireside Nut Brown










Made a turkey bacon swiss sandiwich with southwest ranch. Smart.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *theCanadian;13347025*
> So... is there a flash out there that does what the SB-25 does + TTL on the 3100 then for <$100 used?
> 
> Preferably with a 1/250 sync speed or better...
> 
> I know this is alot for under $100, but I really wouldn't mind dropping TTL. It's not a big deal.


Not really.









The SB-400 gets full compatibility on the D3100 for <$100 used, but no support for old cameras. The SB-600 and SB-800 will work with every Nikon ever made, but cost way more than $100 used. The SB-25 and SB-28 would work great if you didn't mind using manual mode on the flash to set things (annoying).


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13346552*
> Sure. Paypal 600 to [email protected].


wtcrap SCAMMER ! lol jk ... might as well buy a new one =.= and still have money left over *waits patiently* x_x

lol someone on local CL selling d40 and 30mm. lens is 2 years old. listed lens at 350 firm. front focusing issue. Lol


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iandroo888;13347274*
> wtcrap SCAMMER ! lol jk ... might as well buy a new one =.= and still have money left over *waits patiently* x_x
> 
> lol someone on local CL selling d40 and 30mm. lens is 2 years old. listed lens at 350 firm. front focusing issue. Lol


I'd grab it. If you can wait, Sigma does free calibration. Why they don't just do it at the factory with each lens as it ships out, I don't know, but it is free.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;13190180*
> The price of the Canon 5d Mark II body only just went up $200! $2499 to $2699. Glad I got mine before that happened.
> 
> EDIT: Ok, I normally don't go on Ken Rockwell hate rampages, but this has to be the most ludicrous page I have seen on his site:
> 
> http://www.kenrockwell.com/analprobe/dissent.htm


So I got bored, and:

http://whois.domaintools.com/analprobe.org

Registered to him. Now I'm not sure if he's joking or bat**** insane.


----------



## Danylu

Does anyone know the appeal of lomography? I'm a bit stuck for an answer D:


----------



## theCanadian

Quote: 
   Originally Posted by *Danylu*   Does anyone know the appeal of lomography? I'm a bit stuck for an answer D:  
Lack of rules:

  
 You Tube


----------



## dudemanppl

Thats dumb. There are no rules for normal photography either.


----------



## Shane1244

Lomography is so dumb.


----------



## riko99

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


So... is there a flash out there that does what the SB-25 does + TTL on the 3100 then for <$100 used?

Preferably with a 1/250 sync speed or better...

I know this is alot for under $100, but I really wouldn't mind dropping TTL. It's not a big deal.



Yeah the YongNuo flashes would work for you generally a better choice over an SB400 anyway... plus down the road if you get the 467 you can slave it off body.

Heres a link to their Ebay store

YongNuo


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*


Lomography is so dumb.


I really want to write an essay about why I agree with you (there are so many reasons), but eh, a +1 will suffice for now.

Although with the new digitalrev video out on lomo, I'm pretty ticked off at how a lot of lomo users are going "If you hate lomo you're a moron because film is the best!"







Excuse me if I like my film to be properly used.


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


I really want to write an essay about why I agree with you (there are so many reasons), but eh, a +1 will suffice for now.

Although with the new digitalrev video out on lomo, I'm pretty ticked off at how a lot of lomo users are going "If you hate lomo you're a moron because film is the best!"







Excuse me if I like my film to be properly used.


HAha!

You just take pictures of everything you see, and long behold you have a few keepers by accident.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*


HAha!

You just take pictures of everything you see, and long behold you have a few keepers by accident.


The problem I have with it is the whole mindset and how it's used by most lomo people.

I mean, I definitely see the point in abandoning the rules every now and then and just shooting, but IMO you have to actually know the rules to abandon them. I've admittedly seen some great lomo shots from some talented photographers, but by and large a lot of shots I see are from people who can't tell aperture from ISO from a viewfinder, and they excuse their horrible skills with "It's lomo therefore it's art." It's become less of a photo counterculture, IMO, and more of an excuse as to why it's okay to suck, to not learn the rules, to not learn anything about photography, etc.


----------



## Shane1244

Couldn't agree more.


----------



## sub50hz

Lomo is ******ed -- although I guess the mindset satisfies all those belonging to the "green box" DSLR movement. Shoot first, make your own website and call yourself a photographer later.


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:



Originally Posted by *riko99*


Yeah the YongNuo flashes would work for you generally a better choice over an SB400 anyway... plus down the road if you get the 467 you can slave it off body.

Heres a link to their Ebay store

YongNuo


Thanks! The 467 actually has a minimum shutter speed that's too fast! The 560 looks like what I'll be getting, eventually. Claims support for 'any camera'.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Lomo is ******ed -- although I guess the mindset satisfies all those belonging to the "green box" DSLR movement. Shoot first, make your own website and call yourself a photographer later.


I see this a lot at the track. There's a woman that comes to the track almost every week, 5D mkii, 50L, 85L, 70-200 2.8L IS II...green box. Forgive me for not remembering her name or her website but I remember last time we were racing she stopped in our pit trying to sell us some pics. She had some sample prints with her and honestly, I'm no pro, nowhere close, but I've got better racing shots with my T2i and EFS 55-250.


----------



## sub50hz

What kills me is like... how do these people with all this gear know anything about what thy are buying? I mean, that lineup you just listed is orgasmic for a Canon shooter who knows what the equipment is... but... ?????????

People are dumb.


----------



## Shane1244

At least have the decency to go to AV with ISO-A and Auto WB









They know it's good cause it's expensive.


----------



## Boyboyd

I just found WB bracketing on my camera. Does it just take 3 frames with slightly different white balances?


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*


At least have the decency to go to AV with ISO-A and Auto WB









They know it's good cause it's expensive.










This thread makes me want to open up a camera store in Palo Alto that sells only 5DIIs and D700s. I feel there's good money in that


----------



## Shane1244

Yep. Useless if shooting RAW.


----------



## sub50hz

Anyone here with a 7MDH know if the 70-200 will fit *mounted* on a body? I'm split between that and the large Kata 3-n-1.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Anyone here with a 7MDH know if the 70-200 will fit *mounted* on a body? I'm split between that and the large Kata 3-n-1.


Yes, I had my 5DII with the 70-200/f4 IS mounted and stowed in the center compartment. Fits just fine.


----------



## MistaBernie

which side did you take out? It seems like an awful lot of waste of a great bag to do so... (unless you re-position the dividers alot)


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


which side did you take out? It seems like an awful lot of waste of a great bag to do so... (unless you re-position the dividers alot)


I never had to remove any dividers. I had mine arranged with four slots for lenses flanking a central space for the body with lens mounted, with room for five lenses total.

Just like this (not my image):


----------



## iandroo888

lol funny how i found out what lomography was thru that video digitalrev just did lol


----------



## Shane1244

Same. Did some research. Will be a hater for life.


----------



## Cole19

Going car shopping after work. =) So excited!


----------



## Shane1244

Pics or it didn't happen.


----------



## Cole19

I will post pics as always, don't have any of my cameras with me though. So it looks like it will DroidX time. =)

Btw, this weekend I got.

Canon 30D
Tamron 28-70 2.8
Benro Trip with Manfrotto Head
4 Norman lights w/ modeling
1 Norman 1600 W/S Power Pack
4 Light Stands
4 Umbrellas (reflective and shoot through)
2 Large Softboxes
Backdrops
Backdrop Stands

And a bunch of other stuff. =)


----------



## Dream Killer

i dunno what the hate with P mode is all about, it's the best mode out of all of them. all i have to do is meter and the camera picks out an exposure, if i want a different aperture, i move the sub-command dial (1/2 stop increments) and it automatically changes shutter to match the new aperture, if i want a different shutter speed, spin the main command dial and it matches aperture. it's Av, Sv and M all combined! if i want different ev compensation, there's a button for that.

M, Av, and Sv works okay, but it's really an archaic way of doing things in the digital age

also auto-iso is on a leash between 200-5000 and it only goes up if the shutter speed falls below a certain value (depends on the lens i'm using).


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer;13356724*
> i dunno what the hate with P mode is all about, it's the best mode out of all of them. all i have to do is meter and the camera picks out an exposure, if i want a different aperture, i move the sub-command dial (1/2 stop increments) and it automatically changes shutter to match the new aperture, if i want a different shutter speed, spin the main command dial and it matches aperture. it's Av, Sv and M all combined! if i want different ev compensation, there's a button for that.
> 
> M, Av, and Sv works okay, but it's really an archaic way of doing things in the digital age
> 
> also auto-iso is on a leash between 200-5000 and it only goes up if the shutter speed falls below a certain value (depends on the lens i'm using).


P-mode is definitely nice if I am in a situation where I can't have re-dos, but I like a more hands-on approach with my photography if time isn't an issue. It's hard to put into words really, but I just feel like I am more "in-touch" with my photos in M.

Still, when I do event, I do switch into Av. I should give P a try one day. I haven't actually figured out how it works yet


----------



## Marin

I always use manual.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;13356771*
> I always use manual.


I'm not quick enough on the adjustments for manual with event photography







I usually stick with Av with some EV compensation.


----------



## Dream Killer

my philosophy has always been different about photography even within my own circle. i go take pictures to get photos, not play with my camera and equipment. i never cared about the experience of process of taking photos, only the result. i need my tool to be as transparent from thought as much as possible so i can concentrate other things. this is the reason why i abandoned manual and why all my film equipment are in storage.


----------



## Marin

I like to have as much control as possible in order to get the results I want. Every detail is important and relying on an automatic mode is just going to prevent that from being noticed.

Also 8-ply museum board is sick.


----------



## dudemanppl

I've been using manual much more frequently now. I used to only use it for exposure compensation, but I'm pretty good at guessing exposure now.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;13356987*
> I like to have as much control as possible in order to get the results I want. Every detail is important and relying on an automatic mode is just going to prevent that from being noticed.
> 
> Also 8-ply museum board is sick.


there's as much control in P compared to M (see my previous post).

and yes, that is sick.


----------



## Sweet Apple

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;13356760*
> P-mode is definitely nice if I am in a situation where I can't have re-dos, but I like a more hands-on approach with my photography if time isn't an issue. It's hard to put into words really, but I just feel like I am more "in-touch" with my photos in M.
> 
> Still, when I do event, I do switch into Av. I should give P a try one day. I haven't actually figured out how it works yet


Yep. For me when I just want the picture I'll use "P", but for more control I'll switch into AV.


----------



## dudemanppl

I use my lenses wide open. Why pay for f/1.4 when you shoot at 5.6?


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13357132*
> I use my lenses wide open. Why pay for f/1.4 when you shoot at 5.6?


Wanting to capture multiple things at varying distances.

I'm pretty much always wide open.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;13356987*


Flip flops? You have gone native in SoCal!


----------



## Shane1244

He has Jorts too.


----------



## iandroo888

theres quite a bit of sigma 30s on ebay... but for some reason, i feel like its more of a lottery on top of the lottery it already has xD


----------



## Dream Killer

yo dawg... we heard you like to play the sigma lotto, so we put a lottery in yo' lottery so you can gamble while gambling!

in all seriousness, buy from reputable sources like FM or POTN and only from a highly rated member. never use a pay method where it puts you at risk even if you have to pay a bit more.


----------



## iandroo888

yeah thats what i thought. if i buy from FM, at least the previous owner had already tested and know if theres anything with it.

so im just gonna wait... even tho i really dont want to xD


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer;13356724*
> i dunno what the hate with P mode is all about, it's the best mode out of all of them. all i have to do is meter and the camera picks out an exposure, if i want a different aperture, i move the sub-command dial (1/2 stop increments) and it automatically changes shutter to match the new aperture, if i want a different shutter speed, spin the main command dial and it matches aperture. it's Av, Sv and M all combined! if i want different ev compensation, there's a button for that.
> 
> M, Av, and Sv works okay, but it's really an archaic way of doing things in the digital age
> 
> also auto-iso is on a leash between 200-5000 and it only goes up if the shutter speed falls below a certain value (depends on the lens i'm using).


Agreed, I usually shoot in Program. However, I'm always shifting it because my camera likes to pick the aperture I don't want for the shot... As such I go into Aperture Priority a lot. I only do manual if I'm doing time-lapse or macro work and I use Shutter Priority when I'm shooting action.


----------



## dudemanppl

When I shoot sports its MANUAL ONLY. Both the gyms at school are ISO 6400 f/2.8 1/640. The field at night is the same, and during the day it varies, but usually 1/2000 f/2.8 ISO 100.


----------



## Shane1244

I understand the concept of the Sigma Lottery, but what are the things that are usually wrong with it? Focusing problems?


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;13357786*
> I understand the concept of the Sigma Lottery, but what are the things that are usually wrong with it? Focusing problems?


Yeaup, front/back focusing.

It's one of the reasons why I went for a used lens. Not only is it cheaper, but usually any focusing issues are taken care of by the previous owner. My lens came in tack sharp.


----------



## iandroo888

i like the cheaper part. Lol. and hassle free xD


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;13357822*
> Yeaup, front/back focusing.
> 
> It's one of the reasons why I went for a used lens. Not only is it cheaper, but usually any focusing issues are taken care of by the previous owner. My lens came in tack sharp.


Figured lol. Do places like B&H accept returns?


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;13357900*
> Figured lol. Do places like B&H accept returns?


Yeaup, but Sigma also calibrates it for free. Again I don't know why they offer the service free when they could just do it when they originally make the lens in the first place, but there you go.


----------



## iandroo888

i guess they offer the service for free to those that are already "out" in the world xD


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;13357159*
> Flip flops? You have gone native in SoCal!


They're Toms.

http://www.toms.com/mens/ash-canvas-classics-shoes


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;13357915*
> Yeaup, but Sigma also calibrates it for free. Again I don't know why they offer the service free when they could just do it when they originally make the lens in the first place, but there you go.


Seriously.. Must be cheaper that way. Although, I'd pay an extra $10 to have a 100% tested lens.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer;13356906*
> i never cared about the experience of process of taking photos, only the result.


That's a shame, because traveling to places you've never been, or places you go to all the time for a new perspective are great experiences, and play a big role in how I view photographic enjoyment.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13358092*
> That's a shame, because traveling to places you've never been, or places you go to all the time for a new perspective are great experiences, and play a big role in how I view photographic enjoyment.


ditto !







its so fun going to new places !


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13358092*
> That's a shame, because traveling to places you've never been, or places you go to all the time for a new perspective are great experiences, and play a big role in how I view photographic enjoyment.


I'm going to answer for him, hopefully it's right.

Striving for the result will bring him to all those places. I think that bending and contorting into different potions and changing tons settings on the fly is the part that he dislikes.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;13358139*
> I'm going to answer for him, hopefully it's right.
> 
> Striving for the result will bring him to all those places. I think that bending and contorting into different potions and changing tons settings on the fly is the part that he dislikes.


+1. i actually hiked a mountain last week, camped overnight in the freezing rain, woke up at 4:30am to set up the gear, all for a landscape shot.

by experience i don't mean traveling to different places. what i mean is using M when i can get the same exact result faster in some other mode (aka doing it manually). when i'm capturing a photo, the last thing i want to be thinking about is my camera.


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer;13358452*
> +1. i actually hiked a mountain last week, camped overnight in the freezing rain, woke up at 4:30am to set up the gear, all for a landscape shot.
> 
> by experience i don't mean traveling to different places. what i mean is using M when i can get the same exact result faster in some other mode (aka doing it manually). when i'm capturing a photo, the last thing i want to be thinking about is my camera.


It takes no more effort to roll the dial in P than it does in A or S. Which is why I use A and S 99 percent of the time. It ensures that the camera doesn't leave it too wide open, or that shutter is too slow.

The reason I do it this way is because you usually know ahead of time, "Hey, my shutter speed needs to above this." or, "My background is noisy, I need to shoot wide open."

It's really no more distracting than having to check that the settings P has picked are going to work out (either by looking at the numbers beforehand or 'chimping' the result.)


----------



## Shane1244

Went out light painting today..


----------



## dudemanppl

I realized how cheap the 120-300 is and how much the 135L is in relation to it and I'm going to sell the l for the Sigma.


----------



## sub50hz

If you decide to sell the 135L, pm me before you release it to the masses.

<3


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


If you decide to sell the 135L, pm me before you release it to the masses.

<3


Don't do it. He's going to want to meet up in a dark alley, where he'll just jump you and take your lens


----------



## sub50hz

Don't blow up my spot here, _Daniel._


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Don't blow up my spot here, _Daniel._


Us Asians stick together!


----------



## Shane1244

I think danmanppl trys to sell to chumps.


----------



## Marin

Anyone want to buy a 24-70?


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Anyone want to buy a 24-70?


I just rented one Saturday to shoot on film, awaiting results (film @ lab). Price?


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


I just rented one Saturday to shoot on film, awaiting results (film @ lab). *Price*?


This.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


I just rented one Saturday to shoot on film, awaiting results (film @ lab). Price?


Buying a 135L and 24-70L at the same time?







This just screams illicit income!

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*


I think danmanppl trys to sell to chumps.


Why do I see my name mixed with his?


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Us Asians stick together!










That's why Seagal's sweep-kicks are so effective -- SPREAD OUT A LITTLE.


----------



## dudemanppl

Banned. And my name isn't Dan.







I'm thinking 900 shipped.


----------



## Marin

Need to figure out a price, lol.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Buying a 135L and 24-70L at the same time?







This just screams illicit income!


Nah, not illicit. I'm considering selling my car, as riding to the train station is much easier in this weather -- I haven't started my car in, oh, 5-6 weeks now.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Banned. And my name isn't Dan.







I'm thinking 900 shipped.


I know it's not, _Tom_. Tom's a real, old-fashioned *white guy* name. It amuses me.


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Need to figure out a price, lol.


What if I think of one for you.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


That's why Seagal's sweep-kicks are so effective -- SPREAD OUT A LITTLE.












Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Banned. And my name isn't Dan.







I'm thinking 900 shipped.


That's my name









Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Need to figure out a price, lol.


$1100 shipped + 40 mortal souls?

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Nah, not illicit. I'm considering selling my car, as riding to the train station is much easier in this weather -- I haven't started my car in, oh, 5-6 weeks now.


Aha, how I wish that were an option for me. I don't mind biking to school, but I still need my car for whenever I drive back home to the Bay.


----------



## dudemanppl

40 souls? Where in the hell do you find those? THAT WAS JOKE, YOU GET IT? Anyway, my name is Tommy, not Tom.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Aha, how I wish that were an option for me. I don't mind biking to school, but I still need my car for whenever I drive back home to the Bay.


I have another car I can use, just not as often. She keeps it cleaner than I do mine, also.

P.S. Anybody want to buy a car?


----------



## Marin

My friends trying to convince me to keep the 24-70. Blarg. This happens every time I try to sell it.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


My friends trying to convince me to keep the 24-70. Blarg. This happens every time I try to sell it.


I'm going to drive to California and pry it out of your PBR-chilled hipster hands.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


My friends trying to convince me to keep the 24-70. Blarg. This happens every time I try to sell it.


But aren't you an almost-purely prime shooter though? If so, I'd sell it. You can either get something new with it or recover from the massive debt you say you have from buying your sig equipment.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


I'm going to drive to California and pry it out of your PBR-chilled hipster hands.


I'm driving down to SoCal in two weeks. His school is along the way to UCLA. Just saying.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


I'm going to drive to California and pry it out of your PBR-chilled hipster hands.


I don't like to drink.









I'm like Scott Pilgrim.









Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


But aren't you an almost-purely prime shooter though? If so, I'd sell it. You can either get something new with it or recover from the massive debt you say you have from buying your sig equipment.


Yeah. Less debt would be nice. Need to figure out the pricing through, POTN is seriously everyone. They need an appraisal section like OCN... maybe 1200... cause this copy is epic...


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


I'm going to drive to California and pry it out of your PBR-chilled hipster hands.


Shane1244 likes this.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Yeah. Less debt would be nice.


Haha, well, all joking aside, it is your own personal finances and no one else's


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


I don't like to drink.


Not _yet_.

Quote:



I'm like Scott Pilgrim.


I never saw that movie. *Drink up*.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


I'm driving down to SoCal in two weeks. His school is along the way to UCLA. Just saying.


My parents have a place in Oceanside. I'm long overdue for a mini-vaca in SoCal.


----------



## dudemanppl

ACCD is wayyy past UCLA and is like 5 miles from me.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


I never saw that movie.


Same. I read a ton of graphic novels.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Same. I read a ton of graphic novels.


Me so sorry, I'm just a braindead consumer who thinks all stories originate in Hollywood. Translation: I was not aware that was a graphic novel.


----------



## Marin

Get it, it's worth it.









  Amazon.com: Scott Pilgrim's Precious Little Boxset (9781934964576): Bryan Lee O'Malley: Books


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Get it, it's worth it.









Amazon.com: Scott Pilgrim's Precious Little Boxset (9781934964576): Bryan Lee O'Malley: Books


Buy one 24-70L from Marin, get a Scott Pilgrim Boxset free!


----------



## dudemanppl

Make it the other way around, and sure.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Get it, it's worth it.









Amazon.com: Scott Pilgrim's Precious Little Boxset (9781934964576): Bryan Lee O'Malley: Books


I think the last book I bought was House of Leaves. This was not long after it was released, and I've never had the occasion to finish it. I have, however, read my collection of George Carlin books several times since then. Boy... that makes me feel old.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Buy one 24-70L from Marin, get a Scott Pilgrim Boxset free!












Ok, that got me pretty good.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Make it the other way around


Dirty thoughts for a 14-year-old.


----------



## dudemanppl

DATS DURTEE.








Why can't you do caps...


----------



## iandroo888

orly..? hope i can get the 30mm by next weekend.. so someone can use it on my graduation D:


----------



## dudemanppl

If you fly me over, I'll shoot it.







And how does your school end in May? Aren't you in high school?


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


If you fly me over, I'll shoot it.







And how does your school end in May? Aren't you in high school?


Some schools end in May. In the Bay Area, San Jose schools get out almost a month before Fremont does.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


Lack of rules:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bmkd7SWiqaE


I saw that, then wondered; you aren't forced to adhere to a magical list of rules with a 'normal' camera, so why?

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


The problem I have with it is the whole mindset and how it's used by most lomo people.

I mean, I definitely see the point in abandoning the rules every now and then and just shooting, but IMO you have to actually know the rules to abandon them. I've admittedly seen some great lomo shots from some talented photographers, but by and large a lot of shots I see are from people who can't tell aperture from ISO from a viewfinder, and they excuse their horrible skills with "It's lomo therefore it's art." It's become less of a photo counterculture, IMO, and more of an excuse as to why it's okay to suck, to not learn the rules, to not learn anything about photography, etc.


I've seen some good lomos, but if they were taken with a normal camera, they would have been great photos anyway if you get what I mean?

http://inspix.net/photo/best-of-lomo-lc-a-part-2/
http://inspix.net/photo/best-of-lomo-lc-a-part-1/


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


If you fly me over, I'll shoot it.







And how does your school end in May? Aren't you in high school?


vegas schools start earlier than cali. also, im considerably older than you, little one. dood only 4 hrs away. drive ur *** over here. wait r u old enough to drive yet?

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Some schools end in May. In the Bay Area, San Jose schools get out almost a month before Fremont does.


yup.

-------------------------

im 23 graduating with a B.S. in Biological Sciences fyi. and i think im gonna rent out the 17-55 f/2.8 for the occassion :]


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


vegas schools start earlier than cali. also, im considerably older than you, little one. dood only 4 hrs away. drive ur *** over here. wait r u old enough to drive yet?

yup.

-------------------------

im 23 graduating with a B.S. in Biological Sciences fyi. and i think im gonna rent out the 17-55 f/2.8 for the occassion :]


FYI, proposing a 14 year old to drive and visit you (a 23 year old) might be enough to get the FBI on OCN









And







for another bio major!


----------



## iandroo888

is he really 14? how da hell did he get that money? D:


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


is he really 14? how da hell did he get that money? D:


No clue, but you're not the only college student he makes feel financially inadequate


----------



## Marin

I'm on break.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


No clue, but you're not the only college student he makes feel financially inadequate


----------



## Boyboyd

I want to get some ND and ND Grad. filters for my birthday this month.

Am I better getting regular screw-in filters or a cookin / lee filter kit? I've been looking at 77mm ones and getting a 52-77 step up ring.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*


I want to get some ND and ND Grad. filters for my birthday this month.

Am I better getting regular screw-in filters or a cookin / lee filter kit? I've been looking at 77mm ones and getting a 52-77 step up ring.


For a regular ND, a screw-in is fine. I use a 77mm B+W F-Pro 1.8 (6-stop). I haven't used a screw-in grad. ND that I liked, so ideally a square filter would work better, both in terms of quality and adjustability (can't move a screw-in up or down, just rotate).

I'm definitely going for a square filter set myself soon.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Boyboyd;13364659*
> I want to get some ND and ND Grad. filters for my birthday this month.
> 
> Am I better getting regular screw-in filters or a cookin / lee filter kit? I've been looking at 77mm ones and getting a 52-77 step up ring.


Get a Lee foundation kit and use Hitech filters if you want to save some money.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;13362813*
> No clue, but you're not the only college student he makes feel financially inadequate


In the past 2 months I've made 3000 from investing. But they're not traditional investments.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13368444*
> In the past 2 months I've made 3000 from investing. But they're not traditional investments.


So you're a 14 year old drug lord?


----------



## sub50hz

Anybody ever purchase a body from Keh in 'BGN' condition? There's something I am considering.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;13368563*
> So you're a 14 year old drug lord?


i had investments as well... but due to busy school schedule a year ago, they all broke out even now D: [email protected]*)&^@$*&^@$ didnt pay attention to the stock market Lol :3

now im goin into real estate investments.. lol... properties at a low right now.. good to buy and rent out.. decent ROI =] and potential on increasing in a few years


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;13368563*
> So you're a 14 year old drug lord?


Yes.

Bought 300 2.8 broken for 2400, selling for 3400. Bought broken 28-70L for 250, selling for 800. Bought broken 17-55 for 275, selling for 850. Bought broken D2X for 400, sold for 400. Bought broken 24-70 for 0 (came with the D2X), sold for 900. Bought laptop for 775, sold for 1400. (sort of related somehow) Beautiful.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Boyboyd;13364659*
> I want to get some ND and ND Grad. filters for my birthday this month.
> 
> Am I better getting regular screw-in filters or a cookin / lee filter kit? I've been looking at 77mm ones and getting a 52-77 step up ring.


do as gone and marin says and get square filters for ND grad. if you get a circle nd grad you cant really position the gradient correctly since you have to move the whole camera to move where the grad transition line is.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iandroo888;13368714*
> now im goin into real estate investments.. lol...


wow thats quite boss....


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13368609*
> Anybody ever purchase a body from Keh in 'BGN' condition? There's something I am considering.


BGN is a bit of a gamble but you can always return it.


----------



## sub50hz

A gamble from an aesthetics or functionality standpoint? I'm not really too concerned about how it looks, as long as it works. Keh's descriptions don't really say anything about operating condition. It's a film body, if that matters.


----------



## dudemanppl

Oh then buy it. It'll work perfect just be a little ugly is all.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> wow thats quite boss....


i do work for a real estate company that does investments as well... :] but just busy right now with school... after i graduate and stuff... hoping to be able to get enough and jump to full frame sometime this year before i go on vacation (or at least d7000 or d400)


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13368846*
> A gamble from an aesthetics or functionality standpoint? I'm not really too concerned about how it looks, as long as it works. Keh's descriptions don't really say anything about operating condition. It's a film body, if that matters.


I bought a 28mm f/2.8 Minolta MD lens from KEH in BGN for less than $2. It looks and works fine. I think it was so cheap just because of the barrel distortion. It is NOT a real estate lens.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13368846*
> A gamble from an aesthetics or functionality standpoint? I'm not really too concerned about how it looks, as long as it works. Keh's descriptions don't really say anything about operating condition. It's a film body, if that matters.


Both.

My friend got a 500C/M that was in BGN condition. It looked great on the outside but the curtain didn't raise all the way so it would block part of the frame.

Other friend got a RZ. Bodies in awesome condition but the lens has separation between the elements.


----------



## sub50hz

Hrm. It's a 1N RS, so I'm fairly skeptical about the condition of the shutter blades and pelicle mirror. This is a toughie.


----------



## sub50hz

Nobody? You guys suck today. Come on Marin, HELP ME SPEND MONEY.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Nobody? You guys suck today. Come on Marin, HELP ME SPEND MONEY.


Jut go for it already. Like he said, just send it back if it's bunk.


----------



## mikeseth

I want to join, here is the equipment I use:

Canon 60D + BG-E9 Grip
Canon EF-S 18-200mm IS f/3.5-5.6 Kit
Canon 75-300mm IS f/4-5.6 III
Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM
Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 USM
2x Canon Speedlight 430Ex II
Rode Video Mic with Mount
LowePro Slingshot 200AW Bag
LowePro Fastpack 250 Bag
Assortment of filters, white balance caps, grey cards, batteries, diffusers.

That's pretty much it!


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Jut go for it already. Like he said, just send it back if it's bunk.










So much hassle, though.


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


So much hassle, though.










Then don't get it in BGN? Go for EX. Or call and ask.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


Then don't get it in BGN? Go for EX. Or call and ask.


I'm not sure how "available" you realize a 1N RS is in the first place. This is the first time I've seen one pop up there, and I check pretty regularly.


----------



## theCanadian

I mean, I can guess. 10 FPS, pellicle mirror... yeah. So you wouldn't want to miss the opportunity then?


----------



## sub50hz

I'm too indecisive, lol. I _really_ want an EOS 3, but the only place i can find them priced reasonably is on the bay -- and I'm not sure how I feel about that.


----------



## sub50hz

Balls, I have to pass. A new bag is more important to me at the moment.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

If a manual camera isn't important to you, why not post up your AE-1 and FD lenses to help pay for the EOS 3?


----------



## sub50hz

Because it was my father's before it was handed down to me. I won't sell it. It's got a lot of sentimental value to me, and it what I started shooting on some 12 years ago.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Because it was my father's before it was handed down to me. I won't sell it. It's got a lot of sentimental value to me, and it what I started shooting on some 12 years ago.


Oh, I did not know that. Um, nevermind then!


----------



## sub50hz

Now I have to find a bag. I'm sort of split between this Kata 3-in-1 and a 7MDH. Problem with primes is having to carry _everything_, *all the time*. Even if I only shoot one lens all day, I still feel more confident having everything else with me.

I'm also considering a larger bag like a Tenba Shootout or LowePro Computrekker AW so i can have room for another body (more on this later) and the rest of my kit, plus 1 flash.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Now I have to find a bag. I'm sort of split between this Kata 3-in-1 and a 7MDH. Problem with primes is having to carry _everything_, *all the time*. Even if I only shoot one lens all day, I still feel more confident having everything else with me.

I'm also considering a larger bag like a Tenba Shootout or LowePro Computrekker AW so i can have room for another body (more on this later) and the rest of my kit, plus 1 flash.


If you'll be changing lenses often, a shoulder bag is a must IMO. The 7DMH is stiff and not flimsy, so even if not full, it's a nice "work space" when you're switching lenses, looking for gear, etc. Extremely strong velcro on the flap, hardly even needs the fastex clips.


----------



## sub50hz

The only thing putting me off is the amount of weather-proofing the 7MDH offers. My Fastpack does pretty well in our awful weather, it even withstood a 2-mile walk to Navy Pier in 60mph snow-filled winds -- not a drop of water got in anywhere.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Yeah, it doesn't have that rain fly that LowePro bags have, but it's fairly rain resistant owing to the thick nylon. The base is actually totally waterproof, in case it's put on a wet surface.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Whoo! My Photography Guide made Thread of the Month!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Whoo! My Photography Guide made Thread of the Month!










Congrats! I nominated it.


----------



## Marin

Kind of related, I have three Timbuk2 bags now, weeeee. One for my gear, one for everything else and an extra one.


----------



## iandroo888

could consider the timbuk2 snoop bag.. quite large.. would fit trinity easily and a full frame.. with my current setup, i have tons of space... tho i wish i had a smaller laptop or a tablet i can put in there instead of my current mobile workstation w/ extra battery =3

----------------

i use my timbuk2 for school too... gets kinda heavy when its my laptop and a textbook or two... no place to put bottles like my swiss army backpack had.. but its pretty good.. if i dont have my laptop, it quite conforms to the body xD

--------------

side question, is it worth it to calibrate monitor? i have a dell 24" 2407wfp-hc... bought it... uhhh... prob 5ish years ago? yah i know most people wont have calibrated monitors but at least u get to see the real thing right? XDDD


----------



## sub50hz

I could probably still EP a Timbuk2 through the bike shop I used to work at (QBP carries their lineup), but I'm really not too fond of some of their stuff. I bought and quickly sold one of their messenger bags in favor of a Banjo Brothers bag, which has taken a beating but still looks brand new.


----------



## mz-n10

since we're talking about bags, anyone know of a smallish lightweight backpack that can carry say a 5d2 + 24-70L and a 16-35L. i have a fastpack350 and its killing me how big and heavy the bag is on short trips.


----------



## sub50hz

My Fastpack 200 will happily carry that. All of my digital stuff is in there, and I can cram the AE-1 with the 28mm in there if I care to.


----------



## Bogie07

I'd like to join.

Canon 20d

Canon 50mm 1.8 mk i
Canon 18-55 3.5-5.6
Canon 55-250 4.0-5.6


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Kind of related, I have three Timbuk2 bags now, weeeee. One for my gear, one for everything else and an extra one.


I have a Timbuk2 to carry my Timbuk2. Get at me.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


My Fastpack 200 will happily carry that. All of my digital stuff is in there, and I can cram the AE-1 with the 28mm in there if I care to.


i have the fastpack 350 but its so bulky and heavy just on its own.....

i had a kata dr-465 a while ago, i dont remember if it was big enough to fit a 5d2 + 24-70 mounted....but that was a light and comfortable bag.


----------



## iandroo888

helping uncle sell d90 and 18-35

http://www.overclock.net/camera-equi...l#post13375120


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


i have the fastpack 350 but its so bulky and heavy just on its own.....


Yikes. I'm sure the 200 is smaller and lighter (does not carry a laptop) but I'm too lazy to look it up. I'll sell you mine for a _good price_.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


do as gone and marin says and get square filters for ND grad. if you get a circle nd grad you cant really position the gradient correctly since you have to move the whole camera to move where the grad transition line is.


I'm probably going to get a square grad. ND and the lee foundation kit. But i'd just like a normal ND filter as well. I figured i should just get a square one of those too, if i'm getting the filter holder anyway.

I'm getting Â£370 back for one of my 10-20s and a pay rise this month, so i think i'm going to do this. Thanks.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10;13375082*
> i have the fastpack 350 but its so bulky and heavy just on its own.....
> 
> i had a kata dr-465 a while ago, i dont remember if it was big enough to fit a 5d2 + 24-70 mounted....but that was a light and comfortable bag.


The Slingshot 100 is fairly small if you like that kind of bag.


----------



## dudemanppl

If you are a student and have a backpack, just get some sort of insert for it. I use a Think Tank Skin Chimp Cage, which really isn't designed for that purpose, but fits a Sigma 50, 135L, and 5DII. And thats not even with the popping out feature.


----------



## sub50hz

Well, I ordered that Kata 3-in-1 30 plus the tripod holder. Also grabbed a B+W 007 clear for my 70-200.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;13376389*
> The Slingshot 100 is fairly small if you like that kind of bag.


i know this bag will fit a body + 70-200 in the main compartment and 14-24 in the top compartment. xDDD


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Well, I ordered that Kata 3-in-1 30 plus the tripod holder. Also grabbed a B+W 007 clear for my 70-200.


Nice choice. I have the 123-GO-20 which is absolutely fantastic for my needs. Kata makes nice stuff


----------



## Shane1244

I wanna play around with Macro before I go out and buy a lens...

..Thoughts on extension tubes?


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


My friends trying to convince me to keep the 24-70. Blarg. This happens every time I try to sell it.


standard zooms are _boring_, SELL IT!

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*


I wanna play around with Macro before I go out and buy a lens...

..Thoughts on extension tubes?


go for it. there really isn't any difference between cheap and expensive ones in terms of IQ


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*


I wanna play around with Macro before I go out and buy a lens...

..Thoughts on extension tubes?


To get 1:1 magnification with tubes, you need to have as much tubes as the focal length of the lens, so for your 50 you would need 50mm worth of tubes. Tubes are better for decreasing the MFD of a lens more than making it a macro (IMO).

Definitely check out the Canon EF-S 60mm f/2.8 macro. Unbelievably sharp lens and doubles as a decent portrait prime.


----------



## sub50hz

I got my 85 back from Canon -- the labor sheet says they performed no work but the lens has been cleaned and no longer fringes like crazy. Coincidence? I think not. I am considering selling this lens, however, as I'm really getting hooked on the Sigma 50 for some reason.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


I got my 85 back from Canon -- the labor sheet says they performed no work but the lens has been cleaned and no longer fringes like crazy. Coincidence? I think not. I am considering selling this lens, however, as I'm really getting hooked on the Sigma 50 for some reason.


no work usually means they didn't replace anything. but standard CPS workup is to take the lens apart to clean the elements and check for focus (which was probably adjusted).


----------



## MistaBernie

I've decided that it may be worthwhile to pick up a quality monopod. For some reason, I keep leaning towards the Manfrotto 679B. The price seems pretty nice for what seems to be a sturdy monopod ($44.96 @ B&H right now). I guess my question(s) are this:

1) I kind of want a quick release plate for it. Seems like that single screw thing would be tedious, but the 234 or 234RC only has a max weight of ~5 lbs. I dont think that would support my 60D/Grip/70-200mm and thus, point would be defeated.

2) Given #1, what would be a decent quick release plate that's not like $80? I dont necessarily need swivel/etc, so I would assume that quick release plates wouldn't necessarily have a max weight like the Manfrotto 234/234RC listed above..

And finally..

3) Do I really even need a monopod? I mean, it's light (much lighter than the Velbon DF-60 I usually lug around), but I very rarely use it. Granted, I've been considering doing some indoor / low-light stuff where having a decent tripod would be nice, but I think the monopod would treat me better for some of that stuff.

And yeah, I know asking a 'do I really need it' question is supposed to be answered by me, but what can I say, I value the opinions of this community (apparently more than the other photo forum I sometimes post on!).


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


To get 1:1 magnification with tubes, you need to have as much tubes as the focal length of the lens, so for your 50 you would need 50mm worth of tubes. Tubes are better for decreasing the MFD of a lens more than making it a macro (IMO).

Definitely check out the Canon EF-S 60mm f/2.8 macro. Unbelievably sharp lens and doubles as a decent portrait prime.


Ah, I'll probably just wait and save up for a Macro lens then.. I'll probably just look for a close focusing lens, rather than true 1:1 Macro. More versatile.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


I've decided that it may be worthwhile to pick up a quality monopod. For some reason, I keep leaning towards the Manfrotto 679B. The price seems pretty nice for what seems to be a sturdy monopod ($44.96 @ B&H right now). I guess my question(s) are this:

1) I kind of want a quick release plate for it. Seems like that single screw thing would be tedious, but the 234 or 234RC only has a max weight of ~5 lbs. I dont think that would support my 60D/Grip/70-200mm and thus, point would be defeated.

2) Given #1, what would be a decent quick release plate that's not like $80? I dont necessarily need swivel/etc, so I would assume that quick release plates wouldn't necessarily have a max weight like the Manfrotto 234/234RC listed above..

And finally..

3) Do I really even need a monopod? I mean, it's light (much lighter than the Velbon DF-60 I usually lug around), but I very rarely use it. Granted, I've been considering doing some indoor / low-light stuff where having a decent tripod would be nice, but I think the monopod would treat me better for some of that stuff.

And yeah, I know asking a 'do I really need it' question is supposed to be answered by me, but what can I say, I value the opinions of this community (apparently more than the other photo forum I sometimes post on!).


I'm using a 680B that I got a week or 2 ago from Wolf for like 45 bucks -- and stopped at Calumet last Sunday for a standard Manfrotto QR adapter. It's a nice setup -- I used it a little bit last weekend, it's most definitely sturdy enough for my gripped 50D and 70-200. In fact, the 680B is rated to hold 22 pounds.

I plan on carrying it more often than my 055xprob/498RC2 combo, FWIW.

edit: The adapter I got is the Manfrotto 323, which does not seem to have a listed weight rating, but I'm really not concerned, it's quite burly.


----------



## MistaBernie

Yeah, I was most concerned about the ball head supporting the weight.

I didn't see this one, looks like it would do me well.

Manfrotto 323 RC2 System Quick Release adapter

This anything like the one you just got?


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie;13382747*
> This anything like the one you just got?


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13382663*
> edit: The adapter I got is the Manfrotto 323, which does not seem to have a listed weight rating, but I'm really not concerned, it's quite burly.












Don't bother with a ball head on a monopod, I tried it out and it's ridiculously difficult to keep steady. The 323 was a perfect addition to the 680B. The combo is possibly good enough to be used as a "deterrent"/motivator should an altercation arise.


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;13382657*
> Ah, I'll probably just wait and save up for a Macro lens then.. I'll probably just look for a close focusing lens, rather than true 1:1 Macro. More versatile.


Why not just get the tubes then?


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *theCanadian;13383682*
> Why not just get the tubes then?


The tubes that support CPU are like $100, or more. I want to get a Tele anyways, seems like a waste.


----------



## sub50hz

Whatever happened with your Samyang, Shane?


----------



## Shane1244

Sent it back for a full refund. Not sure what I want to replace it yet..


----------



## sub50hz

How much do you have to spend?


----------



## Shane1244

Around the same. $500ish, Would love to keep it around $350. I cant decide what I want more, UWA, or something around 25mm~ ..or even telephoto


----------



## sub50hz

25mm is not very wide on a crop. You're better off with something like the Sigma 10-20, or saving another 150 bucks or so and hunting a 10-22 on POTN.

That is, if you're set on a wider lens. Hell, if you check Canon refurbs, I got my 70-200 for just over 500 -- a steal.


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13384143*
> 25mm is not very wide on a crop. You're better off with something like the Sigma 10-20, or saving another 150 bucks or so and hunting a 10-22 on POTN.
> 
> That is, if you're set on a wider lens. Hell, if you check Canon refurbs, I got my 70-200 for just over 500 -- a steal.


I don't think I can get the refurbs in Canada? ..not sure though. Will check out.

I'd definitely get the Sigma over the Canon. I do want to be able to landscapes and such, but I think I'd have more fun with a telephoto, preferably the 70-200.


----------



## theCanadian

Guys. I have something to confess. I bought [ame="[URL=http://www.amazon.com/gp/redirect.html?ie=UTF8&linkCode=ur2&camp=1789&creative=9325&tag=overclockdotnet-20&location=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.amazon.com%2Fgp%2Fproduct%2FB002VSM7LE]http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B002VSM7LE"]this[/ame[/URL]]. No I'm not trolling. I legit bought this. Haha.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *theCanadian;13384688*
> Guys. I have something to confess. I bought this. No I'm not trolling. I legit bought this. Haha.


Quote:


> List Price: $129.99
> Price: $5.00
> You Save: $124.99 (96%)


Lol, why the hell not. I hope you just added this to an order of other stuff, though.


----------



## iandroo888

lmao tell us how it is xD


----------



## sub50hz

I think I'm gonna get sucked into a Lee foundation kit, along with the "big stopper" 10-stop ND. Damnit.


----------



## max302

10 stops on one filter! Damn that's insane. Stack three of those, close up tight and expose for YEARS!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


I think I'm gonna get sucked into a Lee foundation kit, along with the "big stopper" 10-stop ND. Damnit.


Same here. I'm finding my 6-stop B+W not dark enough sometimes.


----------



## sub50hz

Word. I have a 4-stop Cokin I've used before, but it's not very dark at all.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *theCanadian;13384688*
> Guys. I have something to confess. I bought this. No I'm not trolling. I legit bought this. Haha.


Tell us how that goes, with samples of course.

I have a three stop ND. I still find myself at f22. Should have bought the six stop or a big stopper


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13381681*
> I am considering selling this lens, however, as I'm really getting hooked on the Sigma 50 for some reason.


HUMM OH JEEZ I'M TOTALLY NOT SELLING A SIGMA 50 AT THE MOMENT. *COUGH*
/caps


----------



## sub50hz

If you can confirm that it focuses correctly and is in good condition, shoot me a price. Public or private, I don't care.


----------



## Marin

Not excited abouts the shots but whatever. I'll just get the roll developed locally and see whats up.


----------



## dudemanppl

I think I'll get an infraction if I do it publicly. So check your PMs...
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;13386766*


I see seagull tracks around your tripod.


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *max302;13385469*
> 10 stops on one filter! Damn that's insane. Stack three of those, close up tight and expose for YEARS!


... you wouldn't even live that long. I did the math. Starting from 1/250 @ f/4, if you stopped it down to f/22, it'd be 139 years. Of course, if you open it up 1 stop, it's possible. But you'd have to start at like age 15 at the latest.


----------



## dudemanppl

I think you mathed it wrong. I calculated 640 days. You could sort a raise a kid in that time!


----------



## iandroo888

anyone lookin for a 55-200mm VR ? got one for sale


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;13385694*
> Same here. I'm finding my 6-stop B+W not dark enough sometimes.


Same with my 8 stop. I was thinking of getting a 16 stop.


----------



## sub50hz

UPS delivered my package 2 hours ago. I've been too lazy to open it. What a Cinco de Mayo.


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


I think you mathed it wrong. I calculated 640 days. You could sort a raise a kid in that time!


http://www.google.com/search?q=%281%2F250%29%2F%282^40%29&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-USfficial&client=firefox-a#sclient=psy&hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=CY3&rls=org.mozilla:en-US%3Aofficial&biw=1366&bih=587&source=hp&q=%281%2F 250%29*%282^40%29seconds&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&pbx=1& bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&fp=c9365e657b732f11

Also, can someone with CS5 see how well Content Aware works on the corners?


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *theCanadian;13387402*
> Starting from 1/250 @ f/4, if you stopped it down to f/22


Wait -- why on earth would you use f/22?


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13396554*
> Wait -- why on earth would you use f/22?


To say you did a 130 year exposure!


----------



## sub50hz

Haha. What a time.

edit: This Kata bag is awesome. I have to take some stuff out, though, carrying 3 bodies is dumb.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *theCanadian;13392480*
> http://www.google.com/search?q=%281%2F250%29%2F%282^40%29&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-USfficial&client=firefox-a#sclient=psy&hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=CY3&rls=org.mozilla:en-US%3Aofficial&biw=1366&bih=587&source=hp&q=%281%2F250%29*%282^40%29seconds&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&fp=c9365e657b732f11
> 
> Also, can someone with CS5 see how well Content Aware works on the corners?
> 
> *Snip*


With such a large selection content aware will screw up. The feature doesn't function like on Adobes cherry picked image.









But I can give it a shot later.


----------



## Shane1244

This is the only one it kinda worked with... Your images are small, and don't have much to work with.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *theCanadian;13392480*
> http://www.google.com/search?q=%281%2F250%29%2F%282^40%29&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-USfficial&client=firefox-a#sclient=psy&hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=CY3&rls=org.mozilla:en-US%3Aofficial&biw=1366&bih=587&source=hp&q=%281%2F250%29*%282^40%29seconds&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&fp=c9365e657b732f11


I did 1/250 f/4, which converted to f/22 is 1/8. 1/8 + 30 stops
1/4, 1/2, 1(s), 2, 4, 8, 15, 30, 60, 1(m), 2, 4, 8, 15, 30, 60, 1(h), 2, 4, 8, 15, 30, 60, 120, 240, 480, 960, 1920, 3840, 7680. 320 days. Damn. now I'm confused.


----------



## theCanadian

Oh I see the error of my ways. When I looked at the stop chart on wiki, I counted all the way out to f/128 lawl.

It would actually be (1/250)*(2^35) which is 1590.7 days. This is just as arbitrary as the previous number though.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13396554*
> Wait -- why on earth would you use f/22?


Because we are hypothetically speaking about 3 10-stop ND filters stacked on top of each other plus an aperture that is "closed up tight".


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *theCanadian;13397171*
> Because we are hypothetically speaking about 3 10-stop ND filters stacked on top of each other plus an aperture that is "closed up tight".


I'm still not sure I follow. Diffraction is anally violating your image at f/22 -- I would simply use whatever aperture setting I required for the desired DoF and add another 3 or 4 stop ND.


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13397317*
> I'm still not sure I follow. Diffraction is anally violating your image at f/22 -- I would simply use whatever aperture setting I required for the desired DoF and add another 3 or 4 stop ND.


This is not my hypothetical. Talk to max302.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *theCanadian;13397397*
> This is not my hypothetical. Talk to max302.


I don't see that he mentioned aperture anywhere.


----------



## Shane1244

Do you need a cable release to expose for longer than 30 seconds? Is there not a way on bulb mode to push to start, then push again to stop?


----------



## theCanadian

I mean... what would you say he meant?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *max302;13385469*
> 10 stops on one filter! Damn that's insane. Stack three of those, close up tight and expose for YEARS!


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;13397561*
> Do you need a cable release to expose for longer than 30 seconds? Is there not a way on bulb mode to push to start, then push again to stop?


Depends on the camera body me thinks. Of course you can get clever with rubber bands and such.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;13397561*
> Do you need a cable release to expose for longer than 30 seconds? Is there not a way on bulb mode to push to start, then push again to stop?


On older remote cables, there was a set screw to hold the shutter button in place. I somehow broke the one I had for the AE-1 the other day by getting it snagged on something.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;13397561*
> Do you need a cable release to expose for longer than 30 seconds? Is there not a way on bulb mode to push to start, then push again to stop?


http://www.freestylephoto.biz/157120-Premium-12-inch-Cable-Release-with-Vinyl-Sheath

Has a lock. And the other method you mentioned can be done on view cameras, set it to T and it's good to go.


----------



## Shane1244

I was referring to digital. I'm not sure what a cable release is called in the digital world.. but one of those remotes.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;13397789*
> I was referring to digital. I'm not sure what a cable release is called in the digital world.. but one of those remotes.


Ooooooooooh. I'm still in film mode.

My cheapo remote keeps the shutter open on bulb after a few seconds of depression. After that I just need to press it again to close it.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/654651-REG/Vivitar_VIV_RC_200_40D_VIV_RC_200_40D_Wireless_Remote_Shutter.html


----------



## Shane1244

How does it connect to the camera? 2.5mm jack? The 60D isn't on the computability list, but I'm sure it just wasn't updated.

Wireles.. looks awesome for the price.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;13397877*
> How does it connect to the camera? 2.5mm jack? The 60D isn't on the computability list, but I'm sure it just wasn't updated.
> 
> Wireles.. looks awesome for the price.


I just use some Made-in-China RF remotes I picked up for $10 apiece. They work well, haven't broken, haven't misfired, and are cheap.

Does the 60D use the Rebel's single 2.5mm (I think that's the size?) jack or the 50D's three-pronged jack?

As for bulb exposure, with my experience, the remotes I've used require you to keep holding the button for Bulb.


----------



## Marin

Looks like you need this one for it: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/654650-REG/Vivitar_VIV_RC_200_XSI_VIV_RC_200_XSI_Wireless_Remote_Shutter.html

Since the 5DMKII uses a different port along with all the other higher end bodies.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;13397902*
> Looks like you need this one for it: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/654650-REG/Vivitar_VIV_RC_200_XSI_VIV_RC_200_XSI_Wireless_Remote_Shutter.html
> 
> Since the 5DMKII uses a different port along with all the other higher end bodies.


Well that answers the compatibility question I have.

Most remotes usually come in two SKUs for either connector anyways. The 60D's connector is common to the Rebels, so any remote that functions on the Rebels should also work for the 60D.


----------



## Shane1244

Appears so. Thanks!







I'm going to pick one of those up!


----------



## laboitenoire

I know with my Nikon remote and my camera set to bulb mode it stays open until I push the button again.


----------



## sub50hz

Good news: Dizziness FINALLY fading.

Bad news: It's 12:30 a.m., it's raining and I'm bored. Blech, at least I get to go shoot a first communion on Saturday.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Good news: Dizziness FINALLY fading.

Bad news: It's 12:30 a.m., it's raining and I'm bored. Blech, at least I get to go shoot a first communion on Saturday.


Tangent -- I made mine the Saturday before Easter. _This year. _


----------



## iandroo888

http://gizmodo.com/#!5798644/this-industrial+grade-camera-clipholder-wants-to-make-the-neckstrap-obsolete

hmmm he never mentioned out it would be if u sat down. xD


----------



## dudemanppl

Woah, Marin is a mod now.


----------



## Marin

No, I'm not.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;13409593*
> No, I'm not.


Then I rescind my congratulations.


----------



## Marin

This is clearly still showing.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;13409632*
> This is clearly still showing.


hhhhwhat?


----------



## dudemanppl

You should ban yourself for lying.


----------



## iandroo888

i see the 2nd one


----------



## Marin

That's obviously shooped.


----------



## Cole19

All of you guys know I'm engaged, thought I'd throw up a picture that I can't stop smiling about. Straight outta the camera!!!


IMG_4216.jpg by colbyjax, on Flickr


----------



## IEATFISH

Yeah, you'd have to be crazy to make Marin a mod...


----------



## Marin

Yeah, I'd just ban all of you. Good thing I'm not a mod.


----------



## dudemanppl

I was gonna upgrade my rig, then I realized I could get a 120-300 and 1DII.


----------



## Marin

But then you realized you'd use it once then sell it.


----------



## dudemanppl

Pshh, thats not true! Maybe. Yeah, I don't need a 1DII. Everyone seriously needs a 400mm 2.8 though. Everything I brought it to I used it and it was super. 120-300 is so versatile, so thats a good buy too. Way better than a stupid 70-200.


----------



## dudemanppl

DOUBLE POST BUT WHO CARES? I HAVE JUST MADE AN AMAZING DISCOVERY. If you take out the superimposed focus point screen, it makes it 9001 times easier to manual focus. I went from a 20% hit rate to about 90%, and thats just with the crap standard screen.


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


DOUBLE POST BUT WHO CARES? I HAVE JUST MADE AN AMAZING DISCOVERY. If you take out the superimposed focus point screen, it makes it 9001 times easier to manual focus. I went from a 20% hit rate to about 90%, and thats just with the crap standard screen.


What camera is this?


----------



## dudemanppl

5dii.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


http://gizmodo.com/#!5798644/this-in...strap-obsolete

hmmm he never mentioned out it would be if u sat down. xD


i kinda wonder if my belt can handle a 4lbs camera.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Cole19*


All of you guys know I'm engaged, thought I'd throw up a picture that I can't stop smiling about. Straight outta the camera!!!


i dont think i knew so.....congratz


----------



## riko99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10;13413730*
> i kinda wonder if my belt can handle a 4lbs camera.


Yeah I have to agree there although I do like the idea of having it strapped to a bag.

Also whats with this trend of videos showing people changing the lens whilst the camera is facing upwards... Noticed it first in a Canon commercial and was just sitting there going







now I may be wrong but I always thought it to be a bad idea to point the camera up when changing lenses.


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *riko99;13416543*
> Yeah I have to agree there although I do like the idea of having it strapped to a bag.
> 
> Also whats with this trend of videos showing people changing the lens whilst the camera is facing upwards... Noticed it first in a Canon commercial and was just sitting there going
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> now I may be wrong but I always thought it to be a bad idea to point the camera up when changing lenses.


I feel the same way but people seem to think that nothing bad can happen.


----------



## mz-n10

im probably one of the more lax ppl when change lenses on my dslr. i will have my lens off my camera for maybe 10-20 seconds capping and putting away my currently lens then pulling out a new lens to mount, and sometimes teh camera does get pointed up. i dont think its much of an issue, dust on the sensor is kind of an inevitable part of DSLR plus sensor cleaner are cheap.

ive had my current a900 for a bit over a year now and im starting to get some dust on teh sensor. its not a huge chunk just little tiny peice, and i have shot over 20000 frames this year and have shot over 10k in dusty Lin He China (very close to mongolia) and humid Hong Kong/Guang Zhou.


----------



## iandroo888

i know my belt cant handle much weight... maybe id i had a leather one would help a bit... but still =3

when i change lenses, i know im not the more efficient lens changer but during that time, i point body down at an angle .. iunoe if it helps but at least no random dust is landing from top xD


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *riko99;13416543*
> Also whats with this trend of videos showing people changing the lens whilst the camera is facing upwards... Noticed it first in a Canon commercial and was just sitting there going
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> now I may be wrong but I always thought it to be a bad idea to point the camera up when changing lenses.


So Canon can charge 50 bucks for a sensor cleaning.


----------



## theCanadian

It doesn't really matter which way you point the body for dust. Dust floats. It's bird crap and spittle that falls.


----------



## Boyboyd

And snow.

I almost learnt that the hard way, then i had a moment of common sense.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *theCanadian;13420559*
> It doesn't really matter which way you point the body for dust. Dust floats. It's bird crap and spittle that falls.


yah but yah xD when i used my lowepro slingshot, i actually placed the body inside the bag facing one of the dividers "minimizing" The amount of open area for dust to go in while i cover/undercover lenses xD


----------



## foothead

It seems I haven't joined this club yet. Can someone add me?

Here's my collection:










Olympus Evolt E-410 / Zuiko Digital 14-42mm 1:3.5-5.6 / Zuiko Digital 40-150mm 1:4-5.6 / Vivitar 50mm 1:1.7 (M42) / Photax 500mm 1:8 (M42)
Pentax 645 / Pentax 75mm 1:2.8 / Pentax 45mm 1:2.8
Vivitar XC-3 / Vivitar 50mm 1:1.7 / Photax 500mm 1:8
Olympus Fe-210
Ansco Readyflash
Olympus Quickmatic
Kodak Brownie Hawkeye
Valiant 620
Kodak Duaflex II
Imperial Mark XII
Kodak Brownie target six 20
Kodak Instamatic 104
Imperial six-twenty
Polaroid EE 100 Special
Polaroid Colorpack 80
Polaroid Colorpack II

Oh, and I just won an auction on eBay for a Minolta Maxxum 9000 with a Sigma 75-210mm lens, a Kodak Folding Brownie, and a Brownie Hawkeye.


----------



## laboitenoire

^^^ Nice collection!

As far as lens changing, I point the body up to take the lens on and off, but when I'm capping the old lens and pulling out the new one it naturally points down on my strap. Seeing as the D5000 has the sensor cleaner built-in, I figure it's better to risk getting dust in the camera where it'll be cleaned than on the lens where I have to clean it.


----------



## robchaos

Somehow I missed out in joining this club as well.
Here is my equipment list:
-Nikon D40x DSLR body

-Nikkor 18-55 kit lens

-Sigma 18-50mm 1:2.8 - A surprisingly sharp and fast high quality "Macro" lens (not true macro, as magnification is only 1:3) That can focus in at 0.65"

-Nikkor AF 50mm 1:1.4 Fast sharp prime. Classic glass.

-Tamron 90mm 1:2.8 Macro 1:1 magnification Very well rated and in terms of image quality, is up there with the twice its cost Nikkor lenses.

-Nikkor 55-200 1:4-5.6 VR. A step up from the standard issue telephoto lens. Vibration reduction and some nice optics make for an inexpensive yet very useable lens.

-Nikon SB-600 speedlight. Great flash.

Hopefully in the future I will be able to afford a Nikon R1C1 close up flash system and then after that my next purchase will be a fast long zoom telephoto lens.


----------



## sub50hz

Shot the 70-200 indoors sans flash all day yesterday. Challenging, but thankfully these people only want 5x7s, so ISO 2000-3200 all day.


----------



## robchaos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13428427*
> Shot the 70-200 indoors sans flash all day yesterday. Challenging, but thankfully these people only want 5x7s, so ISO 2000-3200 all day.


That is a nice lens with some good image stabilization too. My dad owns a canon and the luxury line of lenses are some quality glass. Do you shoot professionally, or do you just do events for friends?


----------



## iandroo888

was the sigma 30mm 1.4 always at 400 used? for some reason i remember seeing it at 300....


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


was the sigma 30mm 1.4 always at 400 used? for some reason i remember seeing it at 300....


Nope, it used to be at $300, then the Japan earthquake/tsunami turned up prices on almost every piece of camera equipment out there.


----------



## iandroo888

cuz i was lookin at old posts back a few months and they were like 350-400 too.. thats why i was like huuuhhh


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Nope, it used to be at $300, then the Japan earthquake/tsunami turned up prices on almost every piece of camera equipment out there.


Yep, it's so inflated right now that I'm considering selling my 24-70 to get a good price and then waiting til prices drop to get the 16-35 II.


----------



## iandroo888

i got an email from a guy for a sigma 30mm f/1.4. one of his last dx lenses. he just got it sent to sigma for a HSM motor issue and recalibration. said it costed him $170 which he'll include receipt (out of warranty). $310 shipped and paypalled. im waiting for pictures now.. if the condition is good, should i hop on this one?

theres anotehr guy who got the sigma 30 too.. used a few times for bmx shooting... fairly new bought 2 months ago. said he wants at least 400

opinions?

i heard sigma was puttin a new smooth ex finish on the lenses now.. has it hit the 30s yet? ive read around that the 50s got it now but havent seen anything on the 30s..


----------



## Shane1244

Get the first one.


----------



## redhat_ownage

Nikon D40X with Nikon 35mm f/1.8


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


i heard sigma was puttin a new smooth ex finish on the lenses now.. has it hit the 30s yet? ive read around that the 50s got it now but havent seen anything on the 30s..


It's on all the new EX stuff. I love it on my 10-20, the crinkle finish that Nikonians are so fond of absolutely disgusts me. The new finish is also easier to clean. it's really just a matter of preference.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Yep, it's so inflated right now that I'm considering selling my 24-70 to get a good price and then waiting til prices drop to get the 16-35 II.


Can't you get a better price with that 35L? Or even, why not sell both off and go with some cheaper intermediate lens like the 50 f/1.4 until prices drop a bit, then sell that again and pick up the 35L and 24-70L again at a cheaper price?

Just a thought









Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


i got an email from a guy for a sigma 30mm f/1.4. one of his last dx lenses. he just got it sent to sigma for a HSM motor issue and recalibration. said it costed him $170 which he'll include receipt (out of warranty). $310 shipped and paypalled. im waiting for pictures now.. if the condition is good, should i hop on this one?

theres anotehr guy who got the sigma 30 too.. used a few times for bmx shooting... fairly new bought 2 months ago. said he wants at least 400

opinions?

i heard sigma was puttin a new smooth ex finish on the lenses now.. has it hit the 30s yet? ive read around that the 50s got it now but havent seen anything on the 30s..


I'd definitely go for the first one. It's why I like to buy used lenses: calibration means you don't have to play the "Sigma lotto". For whatever reason, it's also cheaper









And the smooth finish has hit 30mms. They're a bit hard to find on the used market though.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *redhat_ownage*


Nikon D40X with Nikon 50mm f/1.8


Manual focus only?


----------



## theCanadian

Quote: 
   Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*   Manual focus only?  
It's probably this one    Amazon.com: Nikon 50mm f/1.8G AF-S NIKKOR Lens for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras: Electronics
Edit: I take that back. Hasn't been released yet. Unless he somehow got hit hands on a prototype.


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


^^^ Nice collection!


Thanks! I actually just developed my first roll from the Ansco. The results were rather interesting... I'll post them when they're done drying.

EDIT: okay, maybe not. My scanner seems to be useless for dark negatives.










Seriously, I can barely tell what's going on.

2EDIT: I put a sheet of paper on top of the negative and pointed a lamp straight down on it. The result is still pretty bad, but it can give an idea of what it should look like.










... and that brings me to my original point. What's up with the weird vertical black lines on the picture? Is that because of the film touching itself in development? I've never had it happen before.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*

I'd definitely go for the first one. It's why I like to buy used lenses: calibration means you don't have to play the "Sigma lotto". For whatever reason, it's also cheaper









And the smooth finish has hit 30mms. They're a bit hard to find on the used market though.


what if the 2nd one is a smooth finish xDDD i just got pictures.. looks great










asking the owner if theres any front/rear focusing issues... whres the AF/M switch O_O !! isnt it supposed to be to the left of the focusing window...

if the owner bought it 2 months ago.. and sells it to me.. can i still send it in to sigma for calibration or what not if needed?


----------



## dudemanppl

Sigma 30 doesn't have one. And too bad the Timbuk2 is too big. Ohs wells.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Can't you get a better price with that 35L? Or even, why not sell both off and go with some cheaper intermediate lens like the 50 f/1.4 until prices drop a bit, then sell that again and pick up the 35L and 24-70L again at a cheaper price?

Just a thought










No, too much hassle for all that. I enjoy and use my gear too much to waste my time finagling a few dollars.







I really am considering selling the 24-70 for the 16-35, not just because of the current market, though it is goading me a bit.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Sigma 30 doesn't have one. And too bad the Timbuk2 is too big. Ohs wells.


oh didnt know that HAH...

too big? for your amount of equip? or what? or too big for you to handle? xDD

310 for old finish recalibrated and fixed for 400 for new finish... im asking him to use the focus chart to see how the lens focuses


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Sigma 30 doesn't have one. And too bad the Timbuk2 is too big. Ohs wells.


Actually, I think it's just the newer finish Sigma 30s. My crinkle finish 30 has the MF/AF switch to the left of the focusing window.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


oh didnt know that HAH...

too big? for your amount of equip? or what? or too big for you to handle? xDD

310 for old finish recalibrated and fixed for 400 for new finish... im asking him to use the focus chart to see how the lens focuses


I'd still grab the $310 one. Calibrated by Sigma and $90 cheaper. That money could be put to much better use, in my opinion. Doesn't look like you've a tripod in your sig anywhere...


----------



## dudemanppl

OLD FINISH. Its too big. The max I would want to bring around is a body + lens (on R-Strap, no need for a bag) and maybe 2 extras. If I want to bring everything, I'll use the Think Tank Airport Acceleration which I think my friend stole.

EDIT:

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Actually, I think it's just the newer finish Sigma 30s. My crinkle finish 30 has the MF/AF switch to the left of the focusing window.


I think the Nikon ones don't have it if I remember correctly, theres no option in camera on Canons to turn AF off, so they need a switch.


----------



## theCanadian

You can just point the lens at a piece of paper with text @ 45 degrees, snap a photo and see what's up. This 'chart' business is bit much. Worry about that only if there is a problem.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


I think the Nikon ones don't have it if I remember correctly, theres no option in camera on Canons to turn AF off, so they need a switch.


Ah, that would make sense then. Didn't know there's a switch on Nikon bodies for that... or that the switch ever existed on bodies in the first place


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Actually, I think it's just the newer finish Sigma 30s. My crinkle finish 30 has the MF/AF switch to the left of the focusing window.

I'd still grab the $310 one. Calibrated by Sigma and $90 cheaper. That money could be put to much better use, in my opinion. Doesn't look like you've a tripod in your sig anywhere...


i got a 40+ year old aluminum tripod xD its light !


----------



## dudemanppl

The D70 and up bodies have them next to the mount. Lower end bodies have it in menus.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


The D70 and up bodies have them next to the mount. Lower end bodies have it in menus.


oh yah forgot about that. ha ! fail


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


i got a 40+ year old aluminum tripod xD its light !


Then it's time for a SB upgrade!







The $90 + money from sales of your S775 components should cover most of the cost.


----------



## dudemanppl

I loves me some Sandy.


----------



## sub50hz

I'm surprised at how good my high-ISO images look SOOC with the 70-200L. At 85mm, though, the 85 1.8 is sharper by a hair, but the L produces better color. I shoot +3 saturation in camera on all lenses, I find that the finished result is often nicer than using ACR or DPP to boost it.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Then it's time for a SB upgrade!







The $90 + money from sales of your S775 components should cover most of the cost.


wot. im not selling my comp D:

--------------------

uhhh this might be a stupid question, does sigma's warranty cross over to new owner ?? like if i were to buy a sigma lens from someone, would i be able to use warranty?? like fixing something or recalibration?


----------



## Boyboyd

My 10-20 has no MF/AF switch. I really miss it actually.


----------



## chasent

I like this thread!
I have a Canon 500D + 18-55 kit lens + 50mm f/1.8.
I also own a FED-1 camera + 50mm f/3.5 + Jupiter-12 35mm f/2.8
Currently, the FED just sits around looking pretty as I no longer have any access to a darkroom. Its a shame, I feel that using film forces you to engage in your image so much more than people ever do with digital.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*


My 10-20 has no MF/AF switch. I really miss it actually.


Yeah, it's so odd not having the switch on my 30 f/1.4. However, the lens came out when Nikon still had the in-body motor on all of its lenses so the bodies had the external switch to control AF mode.


----------



## Dream Killer

why would you need a switch in the first place, it has hsm


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*


My 10-20 has no MF/AF switch. I really miss it actually.


luckily my 12-24 has it xD

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Yeah, it's so odd not having the switch on my 30 f/1.4. However, the lens came out when Nikon still had the in-body motor on all of its lenses so the bodies had the external switch to control AF mode.


makes sense.. o well...

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*


why would you need a switch in the first place, it has hsm


wot..? thats not the reason why u would want a switch (or at least not for me anyway)

-------------------------------

on the side note, i got the pictures of the older gen 30mm f/1.4 from owner































looks good?


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


wot..? thats not the reason why u would want a switch (or at least not for me anyway)


He has a point though. The only two reasons why I think someone would want the AF/MF switch is to either manually adjust the AF, or go fully manual focusing.

With the first, the AF/MF switch isn't needed since the 30mm is an HSM and has FTM, whereas with the second, you can also simply set your camera to back button AF and not use the back button at all.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


on the side note, i got the pictures of the older gen 30mm f/1.4 from owner

looks good?


Looks good to me.


----------



## iandroo888

for me if i were to use a lens to not AF is either a landscape at infinity or maybe night shots of moon or stars where AF is kind of hard... iunoe me a nub









i asked for a body picture of the lens cuz for some reason all his shots were all of the front and rear element.. uhm.. if the body picture looks good.. and he has the hood.. im probably gonna get it from him. sounds like a really good guy who takes care of his stuff (esp since he did that repair before sell O.O) and i looked him up.. he has his own photography studio too.. probably gonna grab a B+W F-Pro UV MRC 62mm Filter from 2filter too


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


for me if i were to use a lens to not AF is either a landscape at infinity or maybe night shots of moon or stars where AF is kind of hard... iunoe me a nub









i asked for a body picture of the lens cuz for some reason all his shots were all of the front and rear element.. uhm.. if the body picture looks good.. and he has the hood.. im probably gonna get it from him. sounds like a really good guy who takes care of his stuff (esp since he did that repair before sell O.O) and i looked him up.. he has his own photography studio too.. probably gonna grab a B+W F-Pro UV MRC 62mm Filter from 2filter too


Even then, you have full time manual, so you can just not hit the AF button and still be able to manually focus that sucker









And sounds like a plan. I'd also grab a CPL for the lens as well.

But yea, why I like buying my stuff used







All my gear came from people on POTN. My 50D came from a guy who bought the camera for his grandma but never used it because of the weight. $700 on Sept '09 for a camera with 20 actuations on it. All my lenses also came in fantastic shape, and never really had one with bad AF issues or anything of that sort.


----------



## iandroo888

mmm... should i get a seperate CPL or should i just get a step up ring and use my 77mm B+W Kaesemann CPL?


----------



## Cole19

I've been gone for a couple days shooting a wedding with my PPIC, pics from that will be up in about 6 months lol.

I will be back more now though, going to check out ANOTHER S2000 this evening. I think this may be the one that I take home. (On Saturday when my bank paperwork goes through.)


----------



## sub50hz

S2000 as in Honda S2000?


----------



## iandroo888

is there another s2000 that i dont know about? other than the honda that i cant fit it >=[ (too tall QQ)


----------



## max302

Just found this nice alternative to the Spider Holster:










http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/...m?ref=category

50$USD! I don't really know how much the inability to pivot on a belt mount matters, but I'm pretty sure it's worth getting 50$ off.


----------



## iandroo888

guy needs examples of if u were to sit down in a sit.. if the camera would tilt and hit the chair... or something like that...


----------



## theCanadian

Want Sigma 17-70 HSM, has no moneys


----------



## theCanadian

Oh well, the 18-55mm + $5 screw on macro adapter isn't half bad!

100%'s
http://i.imgur.com/1F1pX.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/i6dHa.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/lch39.jpg

I have yet to see how the wide angle end of this adapter works... probably test that tomorrow.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *max302*


Just found this nice alternative to the Spider Holster:

http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/...m?ref=category

50$USD! I don't really know how much the inability to pivot on a belt mount matters, but I'm pretty sure it's worth getting 50$ off.


I guess I shouldn't knock it until I try it, but these belt clip holsters seem like the worst idea. Besides pulling your pants down, you always have to watch where you sit, not to mention the fact that once you remove the camera, there's no strap keeping it tethered to your person. Plus, I don't see how it's any faster than using a neck strap.

And lastly, it just looks absurd, like some sort of confused gunslinger.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


I guess I shouldn't knock it until I try it, but these belt clip holsters seem like the worst idea. Besides pulling your pants down, you always have to watch where you sit. Plus, I don't see how it's any faster than using a neck strap.

And lastly, it just looks absurd, like some sort of confused gunslinger.


Isn't one of the rules of lomo "Shoot from the hip"?







Maybe it's marketed towards DSLR users who want to try lomo for some odd reason.

...
I'm a bit ashamed that I know that.


----------



## sub50hz

I think it's a great idea for people using 2 bodies, ideally wedding and event photogs. One of these on your left and a Black Rapid-style setup to your right would be super fast. For Average Joe? Probably terrible. I'm not always trapsing through the most friendly surroundings, so being able to hold and control my camera with my hands is very important.


----------



## dudemanppl

REINCARNATED IS A MOD TOO NOW? :O

And that alternative to the Spider Holster is crap for everyone. You have to be really exact to put it in right. I'll stick to R-Straps.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13446058*
> I think it's a great idea for people using 2 bodies, ideally wedding and event photogs. One of these on your left and a Black Rapid-style setup to your right would be super fast. For Average Joe? Probably terrible. *I'm not always trapsing through the most friendly surroundings, so being able to hold and control my camera with my hands is very important.*


That's what worries me. It just looks like someone could easily snatch your DSLR right off your belt.

Slinging your camera cross body is the best IMO.


----------



## dudemanppl

Oh and I got an EG-S screen for the 5DII. Its AMAAAAAAZINNNGGGG.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13446172*
> REINCARNATED IS A MOD TOO NOW? :O
> 
> And that alternative to the Spider Holster is crap for everyone. You have to be really exact to put it in right. I'll stick to R-Straps.


Don't know what you're talking about







My username font is still black.

Think you need to get your monitor calibrated









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;13446178*
> That's what worries me. It just looks like someone could easily snatch your DSLR right off your belt.
> 
> *Slinging your camera cross body is the best IMO.*


Definitely how I use my camera. It's honestly very hard for me to do that with the stock Canon straps since they're so small (even with a Rebel), but it feels great with the Industry Disgrace.

Although when I'm walking around places where I think I'll need to bring up my camera quickly for a photo, I usually just walk around with the strap around my neck and my hand holding my camera.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13446172*
> REINCARNATED IS A MOD TOO NOW? :O


What are you talking about?


----------



## Shane1244

?


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Photoshopped.


----------



## Shane1244

Pfft, that'd take way too long.

YOUR ELEMENT HAS BEEN INSPECTED!


----------



## Marin

You guys need to stop with the trololo.


----------



## dudemanppl

Everybody shoots Canon now except NJ, Andrew, and like 3 others. Weird.


----------



## sub50hz

I got 5 minutes into my photo ride after dinner and my chain snapped. Then it started raining. Running in clipless shoes with a bag of gear in the rain is quite possibly the worst thing I've done in a while.


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13446592*
> Everybody shoots Canon now except NJ, Andrew, and like 3 others. Weird.


I want to own both.

OT: Who's waiting for a 5DIII?


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;13446641*
> I want to own both.
> 
> OT: Who's waiting for a 5DIII?


Half of POTN.

I'm just waiting for the subsequent price drop of the 5DIIs. There's no way I'd be able to afford a $2,000 body anyways.

I will be sad though when I have to give up this Siggy 30...


----------



## Cole19

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iandroo888;13443953*
> is there another s2000 that i dont know about? other than the honda that i cant fit it >=[ (too tall QQ)


Not taller than me
6'4 250lbs

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk


----------



## sub50hz

S2000s are balls for commuting. They're basically gutless until you can get them on the highway. I raced one for a season in 2004, it was great on the track. Wish I would have kept it.


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;13446652*
> Half of POTN.
> 
> I'm just waiting for the subsequent price drop of the 5DIIs. There's no way I'd be able to afford a $2,000 body anyways.
> 
> I will be sad though when I have to give up this Siggy 30...


I'm going to do whatever it takes to get one. I'm still a bit of a noob, but .../drool


----------



## sub50hz

I would invest that money in glass, the 60D is a very capable camera.


----------



## Cole19

Meh new whip.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tap







atalk


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;13446652*
> Half of POTN.
> 
> I'm just waiting for the subsequent price drop of the 5DIIs. There's no way I'd be able to afford a $2,000 body anyways.
> 
> I will be sad though when I have to give up this Siggy 30...


I like how people were waiting back when I bought my 5DMKII. Now I've owned it for a year.

I r smarter.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;13446766*
> I like how people were waiting back when I bought my 5DMKII. Now I've owned it for a year.
> 
> I r smarter.


Haha, believe me, if I had $2,000 to spend I would have picked up the 5DII already. But unfortunately I only have $1k to spend on a body and _I really want video!_

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Cole19;13446731*
> Meh new whip.
> 
> Sent from my DROIDX using Tap
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> atalk


New car, soon-to-be new wife, life is loving you Cole!


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;13446766*
> I like how people were waiting back when I bought my 5DMKII. Now I've owned it for a year.
> 
> I r smarter.


Bought a brand new 5DII for 2k back when Bing cashback was going on. GOOD TIMES.

EDIT: Derp. Read it wrong. Thought it said whos waiting for a 5DII. Oh well.

S2000 is tasty, but isn't its really un-torquey at lower RPM?


----------



## iandroo888

un-torquey? are you making up words now? when are you getting your drivers licence?


----------



## max302

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13446887*
> S2000 is tasty, but isn't its really un-torquey at lower RPM?


You mean like every Honda out there? I don't get how regardless of the engine being oversquare or undersquare, (F22C or F20C), all Hondas that I know of have torque figures much lower than their HP.

Quick revving is cool... but I'd rather have a healthy amount of torque. Which is why I'm more of a german car guy I guess.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *max302;13447298*
> all Hondas that I know of have torque figures much lower than their HP.


Because HP is only a factor of torque and RPM. You could have an engine that produces only 100ft/lbs of torque, but if it does it at 14,000 RPM, well... you see where this is going.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iandroo888;13447249*
> un-torquey? are you making up words now? when are you getting your drivers licence?


Hey, I'm a car guy too.







The S2000 seems fine, but for the same price (used) I'd rather have an E39 M5.


----------



## MistaBernie

Should I sell my Sigma 10-20 and switch up to a 17-40? I NEVER find myself using the 10-20 and I feel like the 17-40 would be a nice walk around (50 has been just a bit too long lately)


----------



## sub50hz

Only buy the 17-40 if you have an EOS film body or a full-frame DSLR. It's... questionable on a crop. That being said, I still want one, but I have other needs (135L) that come first.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *max302;13447298*
> Quick revving is cool... but I'd rather have a healthy amount of torque. Which is why I'm more of a german car guy I guess.


you mean american right?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13447418*
> Because HP is only a factor of torque and RPM. You could have an engine that produces only 100ft/lbs of torque, but if it does it at 14,000 RPM, well... you see where this is going.


doesnt mean you cant have more torque VS hp....


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13447460*
> I'd rather have an E39 M5.


Gross.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10;13447504*
> doesnt mean you cant have more torque VS hp....


Nope, I never said you couldn't. In fact, my daily driver has higher peak tq than hp, but I don't know how you wouldn't expect that out of a motor with a 100mm stroke.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13447513*
> Gross.


Whats wrong?


----------



## max302

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10;13447504*
> you mean american right?


Not to that extent. BMWs and VWs put out good torque, without necessarily relying on displacement to do so. The germans I've driven (m50-m52-m54 powered in bimmers, ABAs & AAA in VWs) felt much more peppy than the B16/B18 powered Civics I've driven. Never driven a 6 cyl Honda though, maybe it's better?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13447513*
> Gross.


Gross? An e39 is far from gross.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13446249*
> Oh and I got an EG-S screen for the 5DII. Its AMAAAAAAZINNNGGGG.


Doesn't it darken the VF quite a bit?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;13446707*
> I'm going to do whatever it takes to get one. I'm still a bit of a noob, but .../drool


Nah, you've done your time with crop. Time for FF.







See what 50mm is supposed to look like!
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13446719*
> I would invest that money in glass, the 60D is a very capable camera.


And there's this. So many excellent EF-S lenses out there.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;13446766*
> I like how people were waiting back when I bought my 5DMKII. Now I've owned it for a year.
> 
> I r smarter.


Same here. People will wait for things indefinitely it seems. Not that waiting is bad, but waiting for a price drop for months on end would drive me insane.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie;13447472*
> Should I sell my Sigma 10-20 and switch up to a 17-40? I NEVER find myself using the 10-20 and I feel like the 17-40 would be a nice walk around (50 has been just a bit too long lately)


Spend a bit more for the 17-55 f/2.8. You won't regret it. And don't sweat the fact that it's EF-S. That lens has an excellent resell value and is in constant demand.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13447502*
> Only buy the 17-40 if you have an EOS film body or a full-frame DSLR. It's... questionable on a crop. That being said, I still want one, but I have other needs (135L) that come first.


I assume you mean in terms of the range and aperture? Because the sharpness of the 17-40 is actually worse on FF (much like any other lens).


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *max302;13447685*
> Never driven a 6 cyl Honda though, maybe it's better?


If you get a chance to drive an NSX-R, it will change everything you thought you knew about Hondas. One of our vendors in Dallas has a pair of them, and they are an absolute blast to drive.

Quote:


> Gross? An e39 is far from gross.


I don't care for BMW/Audi/Benz styling.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;13447710*
> I assume you mean in terms of the range and aperture?


Yep. And it's really not that bad -- it's just not 16-35 _good._


----------



## Marin

<3 Audi.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13447768*
> If you get a chance to drive an NSX-R, it will change everything you thought you knew about Hondas. One of our vendors in Dallas has a pair of them, and they are an absolute blast to drive.


does it matter if i drive a v6 accord :| Lol >< hey shush i wanted 4 doors >_>

my friends dad owns a white NSX. then entire family each got brand new subaru imprezza wrx 5-doors (total 3 at the same time).. the dad's imprezza is overpowered. 1k+ hp. shown in a few mags. same for the nsx. such beasts..


----------



## MistaBernie

17-55 would be out of my range for now.









at this point I'm considering a refurb 28 f/1.8 since I can basically get it for what I'd sell the 10-20 for..


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *max302;13447685*
> Not to that extent. BMWs and VWs put out good torque, without necessarily relying on displacement to do so. The germans I've driven (m50-m52-m54 powered in bimmers, ABAs & AAA in VWs) felt much more peppy than the B16/B18 powered Civics I've driven. Never driven a 6 cyl Honda though, maybe it's better?


feel like a m54 3 series.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13447527*
> Nope, I never said you couldn't. In fact, my daily driver has higher peak tq than hp, but I don't know how you wouldn't expect that out of a motor with a 100mm stroke.


what car? my daily miata/fusion hybrid are both equally torqueless....thought i didnt mind....

anyways, gonna go to vegas this week. hopefully ill be able to break my streak of crappy pictures.....


----------



## iandroo888

oh? when u coming down? where u staying


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie;13447996*
> at this point I'm considering a refurb 28 f/1.8 since I can basically get it for what I'd sell the 10-20 for..


Don't do it. That lens is atrociously bad.


----------



## MistaBernie

ok... (I'm just starting to read that the 28 f/1.8 is bad in other places too, thanks Sub)

how about the Sigma 17-50 instead then?


----------



## mz-n10

going to drive down tomorrow, planning to hotels.com it when i get there.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie;13448042*
> how about the Sigma 17-50 instead then?


Ack. You haven't even had the 10-20 that long! Go use it!


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13448068*
> Ack. You haven't even had the 10-20 that long! Go use it!


I have been, it's been mediocre at best. Ok, that's not 100% true, it's been pretty good when I shot with it. The problem is that most stuff I shoot, I dont bother breaking it out. I know, I know, I should -- but I've been breaking out my smaller bag and only bringing one other lens with me when I go out and about, and if I only bring the 50mm and the 10-20, I never bother taking the 50mm off the camera (though I think I might need to have Canon check it out, I think it's a little soft).

The reason for switching would essentially be that it would cover more of the range and with a larger aperature at the wide end so it would get more use.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10;13448047*
> going to drive down tomorrow, planning to hotels.com it when i get there.


lol ! wait where r u coming from? alone? damn too bad its finals week or id join up with u or something


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie;13447996*
> 17-55 would be out of my range for now.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> at this point I'm considering a refurb 28 f/1.8 since I can basically get it for what I'd sell the 10-20 for..


I sold my 28 f/1.8 for a Sigma 30mm f/1.4. Just saying.


----------



## sub50hz

An UWA is very difficult to use as a walkaround (or, really, altogether if you're not patient). Mine has only come out once since I bought it, but I'm ok with that. It's a special-purpose lens, not an everyday shooter.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;13448113*
> I sold my 28 f/1.8 for a Sigma 30mm f/1.4. Just saying.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13448126*
> An UWA is very difficult to use as a walkaround (or, really, altogether if you're not patient). Mine has only come out once since I bought it, but I'm ok with that. It's a special-purpose lens, not an everyday shooter.


Maybe it's time to sell the Canon 50 for a Sigma 30 then.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iandroo888;13448103*
> lol ! wait where r u coming from? alone? damn too bad its finals week or id join up with u or something


SF bay area, im going to my cousins wedding so i wont be alone. i actually dont know what time i have to actually shoot on the strip but im sure i can make time when i get there.


----------



## dudemanppl

I love how everyone has the exact same gear list (sort of). The Sigma 30 is jesus, get one. Its on my top 10 of awesome lenses.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13448194*
> I love how everyone has the exact same gear list (sort of). The Sigma 30 is jesus, get one. Its on my top 10 of awesome lenses.


i dont


----------



## iandroo888

 when is ur cousins wedding....?


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13448194*
> I love how everyone has the exact same gear list (sort of). The Sigma 30 is jesus, get one. Its on my top 10 of awesome lenses.


I have been really itching to get something wider than the 50. It's been just a bit too long lately (or so it seemed). The problem being, if I do switch the 50 for a 30, it'll probably _never_ leave my body. Then I'll have a 10-20, 28-135 and 70-200 hanging around literally gathering dust.

Ok, that's not entirely true -- my neighbor was jokingly asking me what I was going to get for a second body so I could keep the 70-200 ready all the time, and I told him I wasn't sure because I didn't want to go backwards in tech, but I _really_ dont need a second body. At all. Seriously, no. It'd be different if I was shooting for someone and making money (or doing small stuff on the side and at least getting paid) but right now it's basically an exceedingly expensive hobby that's fun.

But yeah... after replacing my YongNoFlash with at least one 430EX II, I think the 30mm is on my short list of new stuff to try/buy.


----------



## iandroo888

i just bought a 30 too







cant wait to get it


----------



## sub50hz

Hrm, TDP's review of the 17-40 is actually very good. I might start hunting one down again.


----------



## mz-n10

what wide to bring to vegas.....17-35 or 14mm.....


----------



## iandroo888

hm.. versatility or crop later xD


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10;13448732*
> what wide to bring to vegas.....17-35 or 14mm.....


Seeing as how your 14mm isn't faster than your 17-35mm at the wide range, I'd go with the 17-35 for versatility.


----------



## theCanadian

I'm surprised no one had anything to say about my macros. I was blown out of the water personally.


----------



## iandroo888

oh sorry. thought i did lol

they were surprisingly pretty good.. we shall call it the poor man's macro set ! XD did it help much on the minimum AF distance?

-----------------

*sniff sniff* bye bye lowepro slingshot 100aw =3 u will have a new owner later today


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


I'm surprised no one had anything to say about my macros. I was blown out of the water personally.


Haha, I saw them. Surprisingly good, I must say! I was expecting a fair amount of CA, but it's really not all that bad.

And yeah, to all of you lusting after the Sigma 30, it's a dangerous lens. It's only left my camera a handful of times since I bought it. Such a beautiful lens...


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Haha, I saw them. Surprisingly good, I must say! I was expecting a fair amount of CA, but it's really not all that bad.

And yeah, to all of you lusting after the Sigma 30, it's a dangerous lens. It's only left my camera a handful of times since I bought it. Such a beautiful lens...


If the Sigma 30 is dangerous, then the 35L is...Skynet.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


If the Sigma 30 is dangerous, then the 35L is...Skynet.


You're on full frame, leave us mortals alone!









No, but seriously.. for the cost, the 30 f/1.4 has really gotten _excellent_ reviews everywhere I look, at a price that I can justify without getting my skull crushed by my soon-to-be-wife..


----------



## laboitenoire

Haha, I suppose.

BTW, for anybody in the Boston area, today's Living Social deal is $40 for a $100 gift card to the Photo Video Store in Wayland... Sounds like a great deal!


----------



## MistaBernie

Boston area? That sounds like me.. hm.

OH! They have a custom framing shop... I wonder if I can use the $40 gift cards towards the framing shop in there, I have an autographed David Krejci Winter Classic 2010 Bruins Jersey that I've been meaning to do something with.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


You're on full frame, leave us mortals alone!










No, but seriously.. for the cost, the 30 f/1.4 has really gotten _excellent_ reviews everywhere I look, at a price that I can justify without getting my skull crushed by my soon-to-be-wife..


Just wait til she's your actual wife! I'm glad I bought most of my gear before I got married.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Just wait til she's your actual wife! I'm glad I bought most of my gear before I got married.










Hahahaha, so true. I better get my gear purchases in soon, as everything else we make going forward is going to be split amongst finishing our basement for an office (coughstudiocough) and just stockpiling cash for starting a family..


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


oh sorry. thought i did lol

they were surprisingly pretty good.. we shall call it the poor man's macro set ! XD did it help much on the minimum AF distance?


That's the thing. That's all it does. It's a nice magnifying lens really. You have to get right up on your subject to shoot it. And you really need a lens that already focuses pretty close. It's pretty well useless on the 55-200mm.

The UWA portion of this adapter works alright though. Better than you could get with a point and shoot in terms of sharpness if you don't mind the heavy edge distortion. Samples?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


Hahahaha, so true. I better get my gear purchases in soon, as everything else we make going forward is going to be split amongst finishing our basement for an office (coughstudiocough) and just stockpiling cash for starting a family..


CALL DIBS ON YOUR OFFICE NOW! Trust me, I barely got my office before it was turned into a sewing room or some such garbage. We're house hunting now as well, so I'm ready to call shotgun when find the right place.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


CALL DIBS ON YOUR OFFICE NOW! Trust me, I barely got my office before it was turned into a sewing room or some such garbage. We're house hunting now as well, so I'm ready to call shotgun when find the right place.










Hahaha, the office is going downstairs, the small office upstairs is turning into a guest/2nd bedroom (officially, instead of being half office, half guest room). I highly doubt I'll be able to 'call' it, unless I get her a new battery for her laptop... hm.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


Hahaha, the office is going downstairs, the small office upstairs is turning into a guest/2nd bedroom (officially, instead of being half office, half guest room). I highly doubt I'll be able to 'call' it, unless I get her a new battery for her laptop... hm.


Learn how to build a portable nuclear battery if you have to; it's worth it!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


Hahaha, the office is going downstairs, the small office upstairs is turning into a guest/2nd bedroom (officially, instead of being half office, half guest room). I highly doubt I'll be able to 'call' it, unless I get her a new battery for her laptop... hm.


Small price to pay for a man cave.


----------



## Shane1244

I can't wait to set up my dorm room in September. Call me a ****, but I love decorating and such, especially when there's lots of electronics involved.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*


I can't wait to set up my dorm room in September. Call me a ****, but I love decorating and such, especially when there's lots of electronics involved.


Ahh the dorms. So glad I didn't stay in them TBH. Just roomed with 3 other guys in an old house. Good times!

And one's office decorum is the of the highest importance. Get yourself a really good desk if you don't already have one. I cheaped out on desks for years and wish I hadn't.


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Ahh the dorms. So glad I didn't stay in them TBH. Just roomed with 3 other guys in an old house. Good times!

And one's office decorum is the of the highest importance. Get yourself a really good desk if you don't already have one. I cheaped out on desks for years and wish I hadn't.


I'm going to be getting a rather nice dorm.. Double bed, cable, internet, double closet, kitchenette, L desk, air conditioning, washroom with shower and a nice big window. Plus, in the city I'm going to be going into, believe it or not it's pretty much cheaper to go on residence. Also, It's close to a BestBuy and they are going to transfer me up there.


----------



## sub50hz

http://www.flickr.com/photos/ryanpalser/sets/72157624786182542/

Clicky.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;13453684*
> Just wait til she's your actual wife! I'm glad I bought most of my gear before I got married.


my cousin just gets something for his wife while he gets new things... last thing he needs now is a full frame body.. he has the trinity and 85mm 1.4 xD


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;13455881*
> Ahh the dorms. So glad I didn't stay in them TBH. Just roomed with 3 other guys in an old house. Good times!
> 
> And one's office decorum is the of the highest importance. Get yourself a really good desk if you don't already have one. I cheaped out on desks for years and wish I hadn't.


White text...









Nothing wrong with home decor though. Seriously, if you're going to live there, might as well make it as comfortable as possible.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;13456743*
> White text...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nothing wrong with home decor though. Seriously, if you're going to live there, might as well make it as comfortable as possible.


What white text?


----------



## ljason8eg

Bought a 430EX II!


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;13456836*
> What white text?











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg;13457007*
> Bought a 430EX II!


----------



## Cole19

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;13446799*
> Haha, believe me, if I had $2,000 to spend I would have picked up the 5DII already. But unfortunately I only have $1k to spend on a body and _I really want video!_
> 
> New car, soon-to-be new wife, life is loving you Cole!


Yep, lifes being pretty nice right now. But I've worked my ass off for years with help from no one. So I think I've earned a little of the good life. =)

Some more pics from Yesterday. I can't take delivery until Saturday though. =(


----------



## Dream Killer

word, s2k with red seats. i had a black 2002 with red interior when i was 21.


----------



## dudemanppl

28-70 is back. REAL nice lens. Anybody interested?


----------



## iandroo888

can i borrow for a few weeks??







total serious question. x_X


----------



## sub50hz

Might fish my 85 + 35 + cash for a 135L on POTN tonight. I used one this afternoon on lunch for candids downtown, and I am again blown away by it.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13458879*
> Might fish my 85 + 35 + cash for a 135L on POTN tonight. I used one this afternoon on lunch for candids downtown, and I am again blown away by it.


I love the wide-open bokeh the 135L produces. I seldom use mine, but no way I'd ever sell it.


----------



## sub50hz

I just want something a *little* longer for candids. In reality, the 100L macro would also do, but at roughly the same asking price, I would be a fool to take it over the 135L. Maybe.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13459204*
> I just want something a *little* longer for candids. In reality, the 100L macro would also do, but at roughly the same asking price, I would be a fool to take it over the 135L. Maybe.


But you get a much shallower DOF with 135mm @f/2 than 100mm @f/2.8. Get the 135 and if you want a macro lens, just go for the 100/f/2.8 (non-L), 60/2.8, or Tamron 90. That way you can have both!


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Holy crap moderating is hard work. I miss my favorite section









Except for dudemanppl.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;13459267*
> But you get a much shallower DOF with 135mm @f/2 than 100mm @f/2.8. Get the 135 and if you want a macro lens, just go for the 100/f/2.8 (non-L), 60/2.8, or Tamron 90. That way you can have both!


I don't know how much I would use the macro, but the IS on a 100mm lens is pretty nice. I'm also considering the 200 f/2.8L again, as they go relatively cheap as of late.

edit: Please give me your 135L. Man, I have a TON of RC racing stuff to sell. Although gathering by the ecstatic respone this forum gives to Traxxas product, I doubt many people would be interested in serious race setups.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;13459282*
> Holy crap moderating is hard work. I miss my favorite section
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Except for dudemanppl.


LOL, I bet your inbox is full of post reports. Thankfully not very many come from here.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13459359*
> I don't know how much I would use the macro, but the IS on a 100mm lens is pretty nice. I'm also considering the 200 f/2.8L again, as they go relatively cheap as of late.
> 
> edit: Please give me your 135L. Man, I have a TON of RC racing stuff to sell. Although gathering by the ecstatic respone this forum gives to Traxxas product, I doubt many people would be interested in serious race setups.


Take dudemanppl's. We can beat him up for it.







I got your back.

Wow, RC racing, huh? Surely there are umpteen forums sites out there dedicated to that with FS sections?

EDIT: nvm, doesn't look like he has a 135L at the moment, but give it time.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;13459479*
> Wow, RC racing, huh? Surely there are umpteen forums sites out there dedicated to that with FS sections?


It's actually easiest to sell at the track after you ruin everyone in the final main, but I just don't get out there much anymore -- plus, I'm still set up on the buggy for indoor racing from wintertime, and my 1/10 TC needs to be corner-weighted. That being said, I've got enough gear to sell to buy the 135L a few times over, but I always get real apprehensive about selling because it's just so damn fun.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13459541*
> It's actually easiest to sell at the track after you ruin everyone in the final main, but I just don't get out there much anymore -- plus, I'm still set up on the buggy for indoor racing from wintertime, and my 1/10 TC needs to be corner-weighted. That being said, I've got enough gear to sell to buy the 135L a few times over, but I always get real apprehensive about selling because it's just so damn fun.


Sounds like you have quite a few pricey hobbies.







My wherewithal is tapped for hobbies (pretty much PCs and photography; thankfully I have all the backpacking gear I'll ever need).

Speaking of which, I really want the 16-35 before my vacation in June, but the only way that will happen is to offload the 24-70. What to do.


----------



## dudemanppl

NOBODY LIKES ME.







And the 28-70 is CANON mount, Andrew. If you're still okay with that and can pay shipping to and from and maybe a smallish rental fee, then yeah.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Sounds like you have quite a few pricey hobbies.







My wherewithal is tapped for hobbies (pretty much PCs and photography; thankfully I have all the backpacking gear I'll ever need).

Speaking of which, I really want the 16-35 before my vacation in June, but the only way that will happen is to offload the 24-70. What to do.


Sell it. DUH. Then get a Tokina 16-28 and Tamron 28-75.


----------



## sub50hz

Tommy, do you want to sell that 28-70? PM me.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


NOBODY LIKES ME.








And the 28-70 is CANON mount, Andrew. If you're still okay with that and can pay shipping to and from and maybe a smallish rental fee, then yeah.

Sell it. DUH. Then get a Tokina 16-28 and Tamron 28-75.


doh was hoping it be the old nikon version 28-70 . o well. xD


----------



## Phoriver

Add me!!! Panasonic zs7, beautiful advanced compact.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Sounds like you have quite a few pricey hobbies.







My wherewithal is tapped for hobbies (pretty much PCs and photography; thankfully I have all the backpacking gear I'll ever need).


I have too many hobbies. R/C, guitar/bass, PCs, photography, cycling.... I'm sure there's more that I can't think of.

edit: Pic from last summer's A-Main winning setup 4 weekends in a row:


----------



## Dream Killer

broke my right shoulder. will be off my slr and bike for a while =(

that's two hobbies down, boo.


----------



## sub50hz

Booo! What do you ride, DK?


----------



## Dream Killer

2008 iron horse sunday for the big stuff, 2010 niner jet9 for the smoother stuff.

i busted my shoulder coming down epitaph at diablo last saturday


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer;13460687*
> broke my right shoulder. will be off my slr and bike for a while =(
> 
> that's two hobbies down, boo.


If you don't have a GF, that's three hobbies down.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer;13460687*
> broke my right shoulder. will be off my slr and bike for a while =(
> 
> that's two hobbies down, boo.


Ouch, not good! What exactly did you break?


----------



## dudemanppl

I actually do have a 135L at the moment, but I'm planning to sell it. WINK WINK WINK WINK WINK.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


I actually do have a 135L at the moment, but I'm planning to sell it. WINK WINK WINK WINK WINK.


What? Trade for 85+35+cash. Do it. NOW.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Ouch, not good! What exactly did you break?


the right glenohumeral joint. my rotator cuff is in question too, i'm waiting on the mri results for that one.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*


2008 iron horse sunday for the big stuff, 2010 niner jet9 for the smoother stuff.

i busted my shoulder coming down epitaph at diablo last saturday


I always liked Niners, but we don't have any good DH riding here, and I'm too lazy to go out to CO or something. I'll stick to road/track/XC/BMX.... I may have a problem.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


I always liked Niners, but we don't have any good DH riding here, and I'm too lazy to go out to CO or something. I'll stick to road/track/XC/BMX.... I may have a problem.


going from 26 to 29 is like going from full-frame to medium format.


----------



## sub50hz

I still don't know about 29. Too sluggish for our quick, fast singletrack. I rode a Stumpjumper 29 last year for a month, absolutely hated it.


----------



## Marin

Hmm...

http://www.keh.com/camera/Large-Form...99038260N?r=FE

http://www.keh.com/camera/Large-Form...09015075E?r=FE


----------



## Shane1244

26 & 29 is tire size, yes??


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*


26 & 29 is tire size, yes??


Yes.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*


26 & 29 is tire size, yes??


Wheel diameter.


----------



## Shane1244

Thought so. Been out of biking for too long. I got a Specialized Hardrock when I was like 12, and I've been meaning to upgrade for such a long time now. There's so much to choose from, and I don't even know what style I want completely.


----------



## dudemanppl

HEY HOW ARE YOU ALL DOING, CAUSE THAT JUST HAPPENED. Pentaprism is done for, the top needs a replacement too. Everything still works except the viewfinder is a lil funky.


----------



## Shane1244

How'd you do that?


----------



## solidsquirrell

could you please add me? Canon 60D EF-S 18-135mm, 50mm II 1.8.
Raynox M-250
thanks


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


I still don't know about 29. Too sluggish for our quick, fast singletrack. I rode a Stumpjumper 29 last year for a month, absolutely hated it.


try the gary fishers because the g2 forks make a HUGE difference. i got a g2 on my niner that i got off ebay and now it feels like my old giant anthem in handling


----------



## Shane1244

I'm thinking about picking up a EyeFi card to use when I'm at home.. for quick uploads.

Anyone have one?


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*










HEY HOW ARE YOU ALL DOING, CAUSE THAT JUST HAPPENED. Pentaprism is done for, the top needs a replacement too. Everything still works except the viewfinder is a lil funky.


dood. OUCH ! i shivered when i saw that


----------



## Marin

This throws a huge wrench into his buying/selling scheme.


----------



## Dream Killer

live view it up!


----------



## dudemanppl

It all still works pretty well. Just the crack.







I think I needs me a call to Canon parts tomorrow.


----------



## laboitenoire

I take it this is from changing the focus screen? Or did you drop it?


----------



## dudemanppl

Changing the focusing screen cracks 5DIIs.


----------



## sub50hz

I expect a PM to be in my inbox when I wake up for work in 3 hours about that 135l, _sir._


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


I expect a PM to be in my inbox when I wake up for work in 3 hours about that 135l, _sir._


Meow. ME NO TAKE PICTURE. Is LNIB. Thank you sir.


----------



## sub50hz

I meant re: my last PM to you, re: trading, re: GO LOOK. I must bed now. Good nettes.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Hmm...

http://www.keh.com/camera/Large-Form...99038260N?r=FE

http://www.keh.com/camera/Large-Form...09015075E?r=FE


Thoughts.


----------



## dudemanppl

Get the 55.


----------



## Marin

But I get more movements with the 75mm.


----------



## dudemanppl

You answered your own question sort of.


----------



## Marin

But the 55mm is wider and has a more unique look. Hmmmmmmm...


----------



## Shane1244

Get both. Problem solved.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*


Get both. Problem solved.


And create a new one: debt









Also, because I don't want to multiquote:

Dream Killer: Ouch, what happened?







How's your shoulder now?

Dudemanppl:







How'd you manage to do that?

Gone_Tomorrow: Haha, no reports from Photography, but then again I'm not a photography mod (going to talk to Manual about that). Y'all are some well behaved people


----------



## iandroo888

instead of a gold ring or red ring, u get a green ring ! O_O


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


And create a new one: debt










Me think it's wouldn't be new, it'd just grow.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


instead of a gold ring or red ring, u get a green ring ! O_O


Time for a 50mm f/1.2 DO

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*


Me think it's wouldn't be new, it'd just grow.










Touche


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*









How'd you manage to do that?


I was taking pictures of the 28-70L and then sort of... screwed up... Anyway, what do you do when that happens (pentaprism is done for too)? YOU KEEP ON SHOOTING. I took like 4 more pictures lul. But then I took it apart and its fricken' done for. I have failed. I am sorry. Everything is in the right place, but it just hates me.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


time for a 50mm f/1.2 do

touche










lmao !


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


lmao !












Don't forget the 50mm f/1.4 L IS telephoto!









Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


I was taking pictures of the 28-70L and then sort of... screwed up... Anyway, what do you do when that happens (pentaprism is done for too)? YOU KEEP ON SHOOTING. I took like 4 more pictures lul. But then I took it apart and its fricken' done for. I have failed. I am sorry. Everything is in the right place, but it just hates me.



So I take it you dropped it or something? Because that magnesium alloy is some heavy-duty stuff!

What's the repair estimate from Canon?


----------



## dudemanppl

No estimate yet, wait 2 months. Need to update the insurance gear list, wait a bit, then say I dropped it. Because right now the the list they have says D700 and basically everything on there I don't have (its from all the way in September). Magnesium alloy is so brittle and thin, if I had a Rebel, I would still have a working camera. Both Canon bodies I have dropped have cracked, but all the Nikons I've dropped are still working, just not in my hands.









EDIT: Don't you think YOU'D drop an F-bomb if you broke a 2100 dollar camera?


----------



## ljason8eg

Sanyo Eneloop batteries would be a good choice for the 430EX II, correct? I've got a few laying around that need a home.

Oh and browsing around some old pics on a website...this might be the dirtiest sensor I've ever seen!! https://nascar-assets.americaneagle....e%20Texas2.jpg


----------



## iandroo888

yup. i use eneloops in my flashes. works great :]


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Eneloops are my ideal choice as well.

Not to mention the clean, white look of the batteries are damn sexy


----------



## iandroo888

xDDD iknorite? xD


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Get to try out 4x5 camera + color slide film this Friday/Saturday


----------



## nden

Does anyone here is using a m4/3 camera? cause I just bought one and it's a beauty


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*











Don't forget the 50mm f/1.4 L IS telephoto!




















:notsureifserious.jpg:

I'll give it one thing, it's a good looking piece of glass.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*











:notsureifserious.jpg:

I'll give it one thing, it's a good looking piece of glass.


It was from a POTN thread about repainting lenses


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


It was from a POTN thread about repainting lenses










_wow,_ that came out pretty good!

Hm. I wonder how it would look white w/ a gold ring...


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*


Oh and browsing around some old pics on a website...this might be the dirtiest sensor I've ever seen!! https://nascar-assets.americaneagle....e%20Texas2.jpg


Clean that picture up, I really quite like it even though I hate Nascar.


----------



## Boyboyd

My 77mm UV filter arrived. It's probably the least exciting camera purchase i've ever made. I was all like "woo, yeah". Then screwed it on and "now what..."


----------



## Shane1244

UV filter...? Why?


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*











My 77mm UV filter arrived. It's probably the least exciting camera purchase i've ever made. I was all like "woo, yeah". Then screwed it on and "now what..."


lol iknoright? XDDD i got a 62mm coming for my sigma

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*


UV filter...? Why?


its a long fight. those who doesn't prefer it, leave us alone D: we have our own opinions ! xD


----------



## dudemanppl

I tried filters, I didn't understand them, so I don't use em anymore.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;13465899*
> UV filter...? Why?


Just to protect the front element from grit, fingerprints, and dust. I know it's not going to absorb any kind of real impact.


----------



## iandroo888

i use it to protect from everyday accidental scratches, dust, fingerprints... super dust places.. easy to clean. decent amount of protection. whichever.. if it really does block UV or not, iunoe.. cirpol is definitely useful


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iandroo888;13467963*
> i use it to protect from everyday accidental scratches, dust, fingerprints... super dust places.. easy to clean. decent amount of protection. whichever.. if it really does block UV or not, iunoe.. cirpol is definitely useful


They really do block UV, although that's only useful for film. Hold one under a blacklight and you'll see. Looks pretty cool actually!


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;13465899*
> UV filter...? Why?


I have B+W clears for all of my lenses -- super useful around pets, kids, mist, rain, etc.


----------



## Boyboyd

Cheaper to replace a £29 UV filter than the front element of a 10-20.


----------



## MistaBernie

So..

This might be a newb question, but here goes. I've noticed the autofocus on my 50 f/1.4 is a bit soft thru the pentaprism, but if I use it in Live View, even without magnification it's usually somewhat sharper.

Is this normal? if it's not, is there a relatively easy way for me to isolate whether it's the lens or the body? (keeping in mind, I only have one body at the moment).


----------



## Boyboyd

There should be a slider to the right of the viewfinder. You've probably knocked that out. Use live view to AF and then switch it off, look through the VF and adjust the slider so that it looks right.

It's designed so that people with glasses can use the viewfinder without their glasses on.


----------



## iandroo888

just look thru the viewfinder and keep moving the slider until it looks sharp. moved all the way in one direction should be no correction 20/20 to like iunoe maybe like +1.00 or +2.00. mines all the way to 20/20


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;13462463*
> Dream Killer: Ouch, what happened?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How's your shoulder now?


was going down a steep and technical mountain on a bike at about 35mph. mountain biking is an inherently dangerous activity.

i got my mri results back, rotator cuff is okay, so no surgery









what sucks balls is this happened right at the beginning of the season, i'm pretty much going to be off the mountain for 2011. i'm just gonna road bike it up the rest of the summer.

as for holding a camera, right now it's still awkward. i can't even hold a p&s because all shutter releases are on the right. i should be back on the SLR (and ear popping concerts) in about a month, though

ps, typing with just the left hand is as sucky as using t9


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie;13469416*
> So..
> 
> This might be a newb question, but here goes. I've noticed the autofocus on my 50 f/1.4 is a bit soft thru the pentaprism, but if I use it in Live View, even without magnification it's usually somewhat sharper.
> 
> Is this normal? if it's not, is there a relatively easy way for me to isolate whether it's the lens or the body? (keeping in mind, I only have one body at the moment).


Ditto, you probably just accidentally adjusted the diopter. I did that once and thought I was going blind.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer;13469808*
> was going down a steep and technical mountain on a bike at about 35mph. mountain biking is an inherently dangerous activity.
> 
> i got my mri results back, rotator cuff is okay, so no surgery
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> what sucks balls is this happened right at the beginning of the season, i'm pretty much going to be off the mountain for 2011. i'm just gonna road bike it up the rest of the summer.
> 
> as for holding a camera, right now it's still awkward. i can't even hold a p&s because all shutter releases are on the right. i should be back on the SLR (and ear popping concerts) in about a month, though
> 
> ps, typing with just the left hand is as sucky as using t9


Ah, get well soon buddy


----------



## dudemanppl

35 mph... I can see how you could have broken something. EVERYBODY WORSHIP DREAM KILLER HE IS THE BEST.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


35 mph... I can see how you could have broken something. Its so annoying not having my 5DII. Its fun to hit it though.


Hey hey hey, this is Dream Killer appreciation time, not dudemanppl. Be patient


----------



## MistaBernie

I'm not talking about the view through the pentaprism itself - what I mean is images taken via regular AF vs Live Mode AF. The actual images are out of focus in comparison. I'll try to post them up tomorrow of regular AF vs Live View AF (posting from bed) unless a diopter adjustment messes with AF..


----------



## sub50hz

Perhaps an AF issue?


----------



## MistaBernie

POTN suggested disabling silent shooting - I'm gonna do some testing tomorrow with my tripod and my 50 as well as my 70-200..


----------



## dudemanppl

Focus screen shims?

Just traded the 135L for 35 f/2, 85 f/1.8, and some cash. Yay.


----------



## Marin

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...on_N_Lens.html

Ordered that for cheap off of KEH in EX condition. Score.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Focus screen shims?

Just traded the 135L for 35 f/2, 85 f/1.8, and some cash. Yay.


Coincidentally, I just traded an 85, a 35 and cash for a 135L. Crazy.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

What are the odds?


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

wonder if they met up with each other without realizing it.


----------



## Boyboyd

They're at almost opposite ends of the country but it's possible.


----------



## sub50hz

No meet up, I don't need a Chris Hansen encounter or something.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13479012*
> No meet up, I don't need a Chris Hansen encounter or something.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13479012*
> No meet up, I don't need a Chris Hansen encounter or something.


Why don't you have a seat over there? LOL


----------



## dudemanppl

Subs a nice guy, we met halfway. There was a nice man there who talked to sub for a little while though, said his name was Hiss Cranson? Don't remember though...


----------



## raidmaxGuy

Got another camera to add to my arsenal, didnt come with everything but it was free!

Canon 
Rebel EOS II
1000N (or 1000S, unsure)

Quantaray
28-80mm Zoom Lens
1:3.5-5.6

w/ Speedlite 200m
and a Minolta Auto 14


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Subs a nice guy, we met halfway. There was a nice man there who talked to sub for a little while though, said his name was Hiss Cranson? Don't remember though...


Using Google Maps, looks like "halfway" between Arcadia and Chicago is a shady motel just off the highway.


----------



## dudemanppl

*cough*


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Using Google Maps, looks like "halfway" between Arcadia and Chicago is a shady motel just off the highway.


Mirrored ceilings are the only way to go, my friend.


----------



## sub50hz

Gettin batteries charged for the 135L arrival -- gonna take some time after work to shoot in Union Station's Grand Hall. For you cultured types, you've seen it in The Untouchables. Great place to shoot, and also they have beer. Win/win.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

For us even more cultured types, we don't need to see The Untouchables to know about the Grand Hall


----------



## Shane1244

I wanna drink and shoot one night.. hmmm.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*


I wanna drink and shoot one night.. hmmm.


I really hope you mean with your camera


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


For us even more cultured types, we don't need to see The Untouchables to know about the Grand Hall










If by cultured you mean "drink beer in there after work on Fridays", well, you get it. Have you been there?


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;13484904*
> I really hope you mean with your camera


Also acceptable with firearms.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;13484896*
> I wanna drink and shoot one night.. hmmm.


But you don't have any IS lenses...


----------



## sub50hz

Pfft. IS is not needed after a couple drinks. Your body motions decrease quite a bit. It's like the anti-coffee, and the pro-everythingelse.


----------



## dudemanppl

Hmm, apparently someone wants to use my picture for some banner or something.
http://www.diamondleague-newyork.com/ Only photo credits and no money... Wat do?


----------



## mortimersnerd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13485259*
> Hmm, apparently someone wants to use my picture for some banner or something.
> http://www.diamondleague-newyork.com/ Only photo credits and no money... Wat do?


I doubt photo credits would lead to any sales of future pictures. I'm not a fan of that whole system where photographers give their pictures out just to have their name on it. If they really want the photo they can buy it.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13485259*
> Hmm, apparently someone wants to use my picture for some banner or something.
> http://www.diamondleague-newyork.com/ Only photo credits and no money... Wat do?


I'd pass myself.

Usually photo credits are obscure and no one sees it anyways, and even then it's usually just your name. Unless you're well known enough so that your name comes up first on search engines, it probably won't help you at all.

That and I'm personally peeved off by people who like to go "We don't have to pay you, we're getting your name out there for you and giving you experience."


----------



## dudemanppl

Well I asked him 2 days ago already and this is what he said:
Quote:


> I talked to my boss and we can't compensate you financially. We can offer a photo credit in the profile and press credentials for the event on June 11th.
> 
> That's the best we can do.
> 
> Is that acceptable?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> NCM


I don't need credentials since its sort of in New York... I don't think they know I'm 14 and go to the same school as the guy they wanted a picture of.


----------



## mortimersnerd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13485311*
> Well I asked him 2 days ago already and this is what he said:
> 
> I don't need credentials since its sort of in New York... I don't think they know I'm 14 and go to the same school as the guy they wanted a picture of.


If they would some how advertise your photography site/services along with the picture I could see it being worth it, otherwise no since you don't need the credentials.


----------



## iandroo888

hello sigma 30mm ^_^ hello gary fong diffuser which the velcro just ripped... -.-"


----------



## dudemanppl

Oh no, Gary Fongs...


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iandroo888;13485464*
> hello sigma 30mm ^_^ hello gary fong diffuser which the velcro just ripped... -.-"


Pics or neither happened. _you know how this works._


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Pics or neither happened. _you know how this works._


im OCN zip-tie'ing it up now lmao xD


----------



## MistaBernie

Just to give you guys an idea of what I was talking about w/ the focus, etc..

AF through the Pentaprism (focus is on the 11)









Live View (focus is on the 11)









The actual size images can be viewed by clicking here.. If you do click, you can see the individual tiny tiny dots on the Live View version of the same photo.

Yeah, the colors are different too, I did minor adjustments in color in post so I could easily identify which was which (you know, because names are too confusing







)

This was before I switched over to silent shooting. I'm not noticing a difference with my 70-200 between the two (Live view and pentaprism) but I have yet to do a new test with the 50.. maybe tomorrowish.


----------



## solsamurai

I would like to join. My wife and I just got our first DSLR!









Cannon EOS Rebel T3 with stock EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS Type II Lens.


----------



## iandroo888




----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13485259*
> Hmm, apparently someone wants to use my picture for some banner or something.
> http://www.diamondleague-newyork.com/ Only photo credits and no money... Wat do?


I've been asked this before. I let one site use a shot of mine, because it was for the Kentucky State Nature Preserve Commission, so I knew it wouldn't be used for advertising being a government organization, plus I love the SNP's in Central KY (if anyone ever comes to KY, I can show you some sites!







).

If you let them use your image, make sure to find out if they will edit your photo in anyway. My shot for the SNP site was cropped to fit the top banner, which kind of irked me, but I didn't care as was nice to see my shot there.









http://naturepreserves.ky.gov/naturepreserves/Pages/jbstephenson.aspx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie;13485606*
> Just to give you guys an idea of what I was talking about w/ the focus, etc..
> 
> AF through the Pentaprism (focus is on the 11)
> 
> Live View (focus is on the 11)
> 
> The actual size images can be viewed by clicking here.. If you do click, you can see the individual tiny tiny dots on the Live View version of the same photo.
> 
> Yeah, the colors are different too, I did minor adjustments in color in post so I could easily identify which was which (you know, because names are too confusing
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )
> 
> This was before I switched over to silent shooting. I'm not noticing a difference with my 70-200 between the two (Live view and pentaprism) but I have yet to do a new test with the 50.. maybe tomorrowish.


Wow, I definitely see what you're talking about. Never heard of such an issue before.


----------



## Danylu

Well I'm selling my 50 1.4 tomorrow









Bye bye 1.4 awesomeness!


----------



## Boyboyd

What do you plan on replacing it with?


----------



## sub50hz

Bernie, maybe there's something jacked with the prism. I would send that in.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13489211*
> Bernie, maybe there's something jacked with the prism. I would send that in.


It only seems to be happening with my 50 though. I'm going to do some more testing tonite/tomorrow. My honeymoon is in two weeks and I'd like to have a camera to bring with me!


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Boyboyd;13488775*
> What do you plan on replacing it with?


One of many things could happen;
11-16 2.8
30 1.4
17-55 2.8

I'm currently negotiating a 17-55 so I'll see how that goes


----------



## sub50hz

Do you have live view set to contrast AF, or does it flip the mirror?


----------



## MistaBernie

How would I check this? I feel the mirror flip open when I go to Live View..


----------



## dudemanppl

After you set it in live view, does the mirror flipdown again to AF or does it stay up?


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Today's the day I get to try out 4x5 LF!


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


After you set it in live view, does the mirror flipdown again to AF or does it stay up?


Almost positive it stays down up during AF, but that doesn't make sense because I feel it move to take the shot. Now I'm confused...







I'm at work w/o the camera at the moment; I'd check if it were here obviously.


----------



## Nemesis158

Ok guys, i could use some help here. Someone wants me to take wedding pictures for them. it will be the first job i have ever done with photography. Currently i have a D3000 with 18-55 VR kit lens (which i know is out of the question for this shoot. not enough light in the building for that lens) and a 50mm 1.8, which has no Autofocus on the D3000, making portrait shots near impossible. The lens that would probably be much better suited for a job like this would be a 35mm, such as the 35 1.8 that does have autofocus on the D3000.

So I'm asking you guys, Should i get that lens? or is there another one within my price range that would be better? (the 35mm 1.8 is already pushing it at ~$200)
also any tips you guys might have on weddings would be awesome as well.......


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

If $200 is pushing it, then the 35mm is the only way to go.

I'm also not sure if this is a legitimate paid job and if you're the only photographer there, but I'd just want to stress caution: wedding photography is a different kind of monster, and if you are the primary photographer there and this is your first go-around, I'd be extremely cautious. I'm not trying to knock your skills, but given the nature of weddings, your first couple go-arounds most likely won't yield professional quality results.


----------



## Nemesis158

Ok i will try to get myself one of those.

As far as i know i will be the only one there. pay probably wont be much as the people who want me there are a little strapped for cash, i think mainly because they are paying for everything.... but if i can pull it off it may help get my name out there....


----------



## MistaBernie

@Nemesis...

Make sure you have a decent flash, extra charged battery.. extra cards.. borrow a longer lens from someone. Find out where they're getting married (If at a church) and ask to speak to someone about what they permit in terms of shooting (from where and when). Outside of that, since these people appear to be paying for everything themselves (dealing with that exact scenario right now as a matter of fact) remember that you're officially hired to work. Be ready to move around ALOT. Catch as much as possible, but dont try to impose on people.

Talk to the couple that's getting married and ask them about their expectations so you can plan out what you need to do and not be essentially shooting from the hip. Find out where they want to take their big group photos, how many people they're going to have, etc, so you can try to overcome any challenges ahead of time (or have alternative suggestions available). Going further, even if it seems like an informal 'they're gonna give me a few hundred bucks' kind of deal, throw together a contract so you can outline exactly what's going to go down (ie how long the event is, clarifying that you'll likely be expected to be there the whole time, clarifying any unknowns such as whether or not you're going to be doing any printing for them, _*who owns the rights to the photos officially, *_etc. (Believe it or not, that's a big deal -- many wedding photographers retain (or try to) the rights to the photos they take. Clarify this ahead of time, it's worth it).

These are just some of the many things you really should do if you want to try to turn this into new business, etc. The one thing I will say after all this is just keep shooting. Make sure you have enough battery and card to capture a few thousand images. Nothing worse than getting to the first dance and realizing you're out of either... space can be rectified, but a single dead battery is a headshot to your credibility as a photog.

Good luck!


----------



## Nemesis158

Extra battery: Check. these batteries last a while regardless, but i got an extra one right after i got the camera anyway.
Flash: all i have is the one that's built into the camera....
Card: i have a 16GB main card and a couple of 4GB backups, so check
location: its a church with poor lighting, hence why i wont be using my kit lens.

I will definitely think about the rest of that stuff









I don't remember the 35's going for $300+ on ebay, what happened there?
is there somewhere else i should look for one, such as craigslist or a pawn shop?


----------



## MistaBernie

I'm no good at Nikon prices for stuff; that being said if YongNuo makes Nikon compatible flashes, you might want to look into getting one. You can probably get one for relatively cheap that should serve your purposes adequately, but seriously, light is the main component of photography - poor light = poor photographs. I personally think you should pick up a quality flash, but if you cant, try to find something relatively cheap as an alternative that will provide better power than the on-board flash.


----------



## sub50hz

God, I hate packing for trade shows. So busy.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


Almost positive it stays down during AF, but that doesn't make sense because I feel it flip up to take the shot. Now I'm confused...







I'm at work w/o the camera at the moment; I'd check if it were here obviously.



Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


How would I check this? I feel the mirror flip open when I go to Live View..


The mirror box flips up for live view, exposing the sensor (it has to, otherwise it blocks the sensor). By default, the camera should be set to use the phase detection sensor during live view, which causes the box to flip down momentarily (the AF sensor is directly above in the pentaprism housing), which is rather loud.

If you have either of the silent modes selected, then the mirror box stays up and just the sensor itself will auto focus (contrast detection, much slower).

Go to your Live View settings in the menu to see ("Silent Mode" is what toggles the two AF modes):


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


The mirror box flips up for live view, exposing the sensor (it has to, otherwise it blocks the sensor). By default, the camera should be set to use the phase detection sensor during live view, which causes the box to flip down momentarily (the AF sensor is directly above in the pentaprism housing), which is rather loud.

If you have either of the silent modes selected, then the mirror box stays up and just the sensor itself will auto focus (contrast detection, much slower).

Go to your Live View settings in the menu to see ("Silent Mode" is what toggles the two AF modes):











I know about silent mode (or thought I did). It was in Silent mode 1 previously; I'm going to try it in a bit when I get home w/ silent mode off (and on a tripod, etc). I was getting tack sharp images out of my 70-200 f/4 hand held indoors with poor light (through the viewfinder) so I'm (sadly) thinking it's the lens, but if it is the lens I can at least still have a camera to bring with me at the end of the month.

The other thing that was suggested was to do a full reset of the camera's settings, but I dont want to do that because I use my image #s to keep track of clicks. Yeah, I could write it down (I'm about to hit 2000 on a 2 month old body!) but it's just easier to do it this way..


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


I know about silent mode (or thought I did). It was in Silent mode 1 previously; I'm going to try it in a bit when I get home w/ silent mode off (and on a tripod, etc). I was getting tack sharp images out of my 70-200 f/4 hand held indoors with poor light (through the viewfinder) so I'm (sadly) thinking it's the lens, but if it is the lens I can at least still have a camera to bring with me at the end of the month.

The other thing that was suggested was to do a full reset of the camera's settings, but I dont want to do that because I use my image #s to keep track of clicks. Yeah, I could write it down (I'm about to hit 2000 on a 2 month old body!) but it's just easier to do it this way..


It is a strange problem indeed. After testing the lens with silent mode disabled, I would try it on a different camera body if possible. Looks like the lens is the culprit, but for the life of me I can't figure why it would focus accurately with contrast detect AF and not with the AF sensor.

Shoot Canon an e-mail and see what they think. They respond fairly quickly and will give their opinion before asking you to send it in.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


It is a strange problem indeed. After testing the lens with silent mode disabled, I would try it on a different camera body if possible. Looks like the lens is the culprit, but for the life of me I can't figure why it would focus accurately with contrast detect AF and not with the AF sensor.

Shoot Canon an e-mail and see what they think. They respond fairly quickly and will give their opinion before asking you to send it in.


Email's already away







I didn't think that email address worked anymore, but it does! Theyve already responded with a couple of follow up questions that I thought I answered in the initial email (which I hadn't). Thanks as always GT!









If you check out some of these images from the other night.. it was super low light, and while the 50 was my best option for low light, I ended up using my 28-135 most of the night. I wasn't exactly looking for 11x17 prints here, just literally capturing stuff.. some of the stuff (???) is pretty dark in places, but I think I like how most of it came out. Minimal post work; I could have tried to draw more detail out but it would have been contrasty, noisy and nasty. But in general, the focus seemed to be working fine via viewfinder (especially for low light and no tripod/monopod)

http://mistabernie.smugmug.com/event...pring-Concert/


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Nemesis158*


Ok i will try to get myself one of those.

As far as i know i will be the only one there. pay probably wont be much as the people who want me there are a little strapped for cash, i think mainly because they are paying for everything.... but if i can pull it off it may help get my name out there....


Oh, something to note:

You should write up something about who owns the images. Standard professional photography practices are that the *clients own the prints*, but *the photographer owns the image itself*


----------



## Danylu

Alright, I'm getting a 17-55mm 2.8









Having now recently used both the 550D and D3100 for video, I have to say that the Canon is miles ahead in terms of video usability!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Awesome! ^^^


----------



## Dream Killer

snapped this at work, this headline is hilarious!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

LOL! That's what she said!


----------



## dudemanppl

Dude the 35 f/2 is good lensy time.


----------



## Danylu

17-55, feels good to have it back. Now I just need a UWA, decent body and 30/1.4


----------



## iandroo888

equip for today's graduAsian event (yes it says asian. its an asian pacific ceremony for this semesters graduates (w00t im one of them too !!!)

d3100 + sigma 30mm f/1.4
d5000 + 17-55 f/2.8 + sb-800
d90 + 70-200 f/2.8 + sb-600


----------



## robchaos

man that sb-800 is a monster flash


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13495393*
> Dude the 35 f/2 is good lensy time.


I think it's a really underrated lens, and I'll probably buy another copy sometime in the near future. I take it by this post you got the package -- was everything good inside? I always worry that I don't have enough packing material, but I've been told I go overkill anyway.


----------



## dudemanppl

Everything was good, yeah. I think I might keep these for a little while since they are pretty damn good.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *robchaos*


man that sb-800 is a monster flash


Someone here hasn't seen an SB-900...


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


It is a strange problem indeed. After testing the lens with silent mode disabled, I would try it on a different camera body if possible. Looks like the lens is the culprit, but for the life of me I can't figure why it would focus accurately with contrast detect AF and not with the AF sensor.

Shoot Canon an e-mail and see what they think. They respond fairly quickly and will give their opinion before asking you to send it in.


i didnt take a look at the full res picture, but simply PDAF can suffer from back/front focus while CDAF doesnt not (just how CDAF works). the lens is probably just a bit off focus, send it in to get the focus readjusted OR if you have micro focus adjust use it.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*











equip for today's graduAsian event (yes it says asian. its an asian pacific ceremony for this semesters graduates (w00t im one of them too !!!)

d3100 + sigma 30mm f/1.4
d5000 + 17-55 f/2.8 + sb-800
d90 + 70-200 f/2.8 + sb-600


wheres the fullframes?


----------



## dudemanppl

I really want a D3100, they're so boss.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


i didnt take a look at the full res picture, but simply PDAF can suffer from back/front focus while CDAF doesnt not (just how CDAF works). the lens is probably just a bit off focus, send it in to get the focus readjusted OR if you have micro focus adjust use it.


No MA on the 60D unfortunately.


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


I really want a D3100, they're so boss.


I'm kinda pissed off at the way the LCD on it punches out the colors and makes everything look brighter and more saturated than it is. But I'm gonna guess that's a common practice?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


I'm kinda pissed off at the way the LCD on it punches out the colors and makes everything look brighter and more saturated than it is. But I'm gonna guess that's a common practice?


Do you use Nikon's RAW converter or PS/LR? I ask because the camera's own converters will produce images that look like what they do on the camera LCD (unlike PS/LR, etc). True for Canon and DPP anyway.


----------



## theCanadian

Been shooting JPEG lately, I've had the time to set up my shots so I haven't been needing RAW. I'll check it out.

But for for comparative purposes:

From the camera:








Corrected to appear more or less how the LCD displays it, maybe slightly darker:


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Do you use Nikon's RAW converter or PS/LR? I ask because the camera's own converters will produce images that look like what they do on the camera LCD (unlike PS/LR, etc). True for Canon and DPP anyway.


I find that ACR does a pretty good job, although it definitely loses some small amount of saturation, while DPP is pretty spot-on. I just got too used to LR, so it's not as fast to work with DPP.


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


I really want a D3100, they're so boss.


 ill buy you two for your 5DII


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


I find that ACR does a pretty good job, although it definitely loses some small amount of saturation, while DPP is pretty spot-on. I just got too used to LR, so it's not as fast to work with DPP.


ACR seems to really make the OOF parts of a really shallow DOF shot look like total crap. Takes a lot of tweaking to get it looking decent (for me anyway).


----------



## mrwesth

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


ACR seems to really make the OOF parts of a really shallow DOF shot look like total crap. Takes a lot of tweaking to get it looking decent (for me anyway).


I've never noticed that.
But then, I've always used lightroom to process raw. 
Any sample/example images of what your talking about?


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*


ill buy you two for your 5DII


3 and its a deal.


----------



## Shane1244

No way man, your 5DII is dinked. Hahah


----------



## dudemanppl

Damn! Anyway, I can make a many monies buying broken stuff and selling it on ebay. This is brilliant, I can pull in at least 3k a month.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mrwesth*


I've never noticed that.
But then, I've always used lightroom to process raw. 
Any sample/example images of what your talking about?


Not near my PC at the moment, but I'll post some up later.


----------



## mrwesth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;13506076*
> Not near my PC at the moment, but I'll post some up later.


Awesome.
Always looking for ways to improve my product.


----------



## Marin

Got my lens from KEH. For some reason EX = Brand New (but I'm not complaining).


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13505928*
> Damn! Anyway, I can make a many monies buying broken stuff and selling it on ebay. This is brilliant, I can pull in at least 3k a month.


Hahha! That's badass, if I had the time I'd do that too, I used to do it with other stuff.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;13506649*
> Got my lens from KEH. For some reason EX = Brand New (but I'm not complaining).


BGN = EX. And now I think about it, I think I'm gonna sell the D40 and Sigma 30 for a CLP 7D. Not having a camera really sucks and the 7D would pair great with the 120-300.


----------



## Shane1244

Seems like a decent idea to me. So you're not getting a replacement 5D?


----------



## dudemanppl

Oh I am, its just a second body that compliments the 5DII. It'd only be 750 if I sold the D40 and Sigma 30.


----------



## Shane1244

7D as a backup..


----------



## Marin




----------



## GoneTomorrow

Smaller than I imagined it.


----------



## dudemanppl

Whats up with the patch of in focus fly screen in the bokeh ball? The way things work is so crazy.


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;13508572*
> Smaller than I imagined it.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;13495297*
> LOL! That's what she said!


Not to me, to you.


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13508643*
> Whats up with the patch of in focus fly screen in the bokeh ball? The way things work is so crazy.


There is a street lamp or something behind the screen. It just boosts the contrast, it's not actually in focus. What gets me is how one lens is blurry, but the other isn't. I guess since it was shot wide open the DOF is so narrow?


----------



## BlankThis

Came across this and found it incredibly cute... I want both.


----------



## mrwesth

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


There is a street lamp or something behind the screen. It just boosts the contrast, it's not actually in focus. What gets me is how one lens is blurry, but the other isn't. I guess since it was shot wide open the DOF is so narrow?


Think that has more to do with it being shot handheld. Looks like a little shake blurred the top of the 50.


----------



## Marin

It's the DoF. 50mm is wider than the 75mm so it's not in focus. Shot it with my 35L wide open so the DoF is thin.


----------



## mrwesth

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


It's the DoF. 50mm is wider than the 75mm so it's not in focus. Shot it with my 35L wide open so the DoF is thin.


Yeah, I thought that too at first... but check the photo again. 50mm on the bottom portion of the lens is tack sharp, while the text around the filter ring is not. Could be depth of field, but the 75 is fairly sharp top to bottom. Also pay close attention to the right edge of the 50 and you see a slight blur, meaning your shutter was open long enough for the ambient light to show slight camera shake.

Again, part of that is dof, but looks like it is enhanced by shake. Could be wrong, fire another test shot, now I'm curious.


----------



## sub50hz

Friend of our ships out monday to San Diego for basic. I got real drunk, shot some photos, and DJ'd for 6 hours tonight. Jack Daniels, I hate you.

edit: I fly to Colorado Springs in 4 hours. Whoops.


----------



## dudemanppl

Treat the 135L well...

And for the shot of Marin's lenses, PLANE OF FOCUS DERP. Hes shooting from up top, so the plane is at an angle.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13510476*
> Treat the 135L well...


Haha, I treat all my stuff well, as you can surely see by the condition of what I sent you. It was raining and 42 degrees tonight, but I managed a hundred shots or so. Can't wait to see how many of them are raped by camera shake!

P.S. Women love Skee Lo. Well, maybe only women who are awesome. Either way, if dancing is required, remember that I wish I was a little bit taller.


----------



## mrwesth

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Treat the 135L well...

And for the shot of Marin's lenses, PLANE OF FOCUS DERP. Hes shooting from up top, so the plane is at an angle.


Lol.
Yeah I looked at that photo way too long.
Mainly just because I've seen similar results in some of my images. It's a combination of factors and the plane being at an angle contributes. But the text is still far blurrier then it should be. The white text against a black background is able to pick up a lot of light during the slight shake at one point in the exposure. I doubt he put much effort into getting a perfect shot just to show the 2 lenses and @ 1/80... you get the drift









On a side note, the 50 1.2 is my favorite lens


----------



## 222Panther222

My first dslr today, i should have my lens Tuesday (Sigma 30mm F1.4).

























Now let's wait 8 hours for the battery to charge.. fffff


----------



## ljason8eg

Nice man! Battery will be charged a lot sooner than that haha.


----------



## 222Panther222

The guy recommended 8-10 hours since it's the first charge..


----------



## Marin

Attach a flux capacitor to it and it should be done faster.


----------



## dudemanppl

Or make everything explode.


----------



## 222Panther222

Can't wait til tuesday i want my sigma 30 1.4 :/


----------



## MistaBernie

6-8 hours my foot. when the charger says it's full, it's full. technology > 'the guy'


----------



## GoneTomorrow

The T2I manual says nothing about charging 8 hours the first time. Just says 2 hours to fully charge from a drained state.


----------



## mortimersnerd

I got some studio equipment, time for some learning.










And a quick shot while I was messing around.


----------



## dudemanppl

Are you using the pop up flash to trigger them?


----------



## mortimersnerd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Are you using the pop up flash to trigger them?


Yeah, just put a note card in front of it so it doesn't hit the subject. Need to find a cost effective trigger system.


----------



## theCanadian

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search...050+4293918158

Looking at heads to put on an ancient SLIK tripod. the center column is 3/4" in diameter and uses a recessed grove at the top to hold the head. How do I know what's compatible?


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mortimersnerd*


Yeah, just put a note card in front of it so it doesn't hit the subject. Need to find a cost effective trigger system.


http://cgi.ebay.com/Wireless-remote-...ht_5669wt_1139 
I use those, pretty reliable. And thats from personal experience. Triggers it 100% of the time when connected properly. The connection is sorta wonky though, so test it out before using it for anything critical (like if you were shooting film or something).


----------



## theCanadian

Interesting story behind this photo. I was riding the train back home and I was bored, so I pulled out the camera to entertain myself. I decided to take a page out of the lomo book and braced the camera between my chin and my shoulder and pointed it in the general direction of my gaze. Anything that tickled my fancy I'd just press the shutter.

I only fired two frames and both were actually ok, but I liked this one. Pretty good for not composing huh? Slightly OOF though. And that's motion blur across the bottom.


----------



## mortimersnerd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


http://cgi.ebay.com/Wireless-remote-...ht_5669wt_1139 
I use those, pretty reliable. And thats from personal experience. Triggers it 100% of the time when connected properly. The connection is sorta wonky though, so test it out before using it for anything critical (like if you were shooting film or something).


Would those work with Alien Bees? There is no hot shoe connect, just RJ-11 (I believe) and 1/8" jack.


----------



## Shane1244

Back in the P&S days..


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mortimersnerd*


Would those work with Alien Bees? There is no hot shoe connect, just RJ-11 (I believe) and 1/8" jack.


Yeah they work, I used to use them. They come with an adapter to 1/8" but I recommend getting a better all metal one.


----------



## mrwesth

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mortimersnerd*


I got some studio equipment, time for some learning.

56kEDIT[/IMG]http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2543/5725027882_9cd840a110_b.jpg[/IMG]

And a quick shot while I was messing around. 
56kEDIT[/IMG]http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5177/5724955394_a20af33e09_b.jpg[/IMG]


Cool. New toys are always fun









Wish I had space for a studio, I borrow time at nearby universities. (they don't know... shhhh)









EDIT** 
oh and wired triggering is the only way to go for cheap. Hobby tells you how to make badass sync cords on the wayyy cheap. Check out lighting 101 on strobist.com.


----------



## mortimersnerd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Yeah they work, I used to use them. They come with an adapter to 1/8" but I recommend getting a better all metal one.



Quote:



Originally Posted by *mrwesth*


Cool. New toys are always fun









Wish I had space for a studio, I borrow time at nearby universities. (they don't know... shhhh)









EDIT** 
oh and wired triggering is the only way to go for cheap. Hobby tells you how to make badass sync cords on the wayyy cheap. Check out lighting 101 on strobist.com.


What adapter would I need for wired? They came with a sync cord but I don't have the port on the D5000.


----------



## dudemanppl

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...l_Adapter.html


----------



## mortimersnerd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...l_Adapter.html


Just plug in one and sync the other with the flash from the first?


----------



## mrwesth

d5000 doesn't have pc sync port? Shameful.
What does it have? Just the hotshoe?
Can go with any multitude of adapters on bh I guess. I've never had that issue tbh.

Could also check flashzebra.com. I've used them before and they are decent.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mortimersnerd*


Just plug in one and sync the other with the flash from the first?


Oh crap, right you need to sync 2... Plug one in and have the other trigger by the other light? Me no know.

EDIT: Haha, I'm so dumb, I didn't even read your post.


----------



## mrwesth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mortimersnerd;13521038*
> Just plug in one and sync the other with the flash from the first?


AB's usually can trigger off a flash fire. If not just daisy chain a sync cord from one to the other.


----------



## dudemanppl

Whoo, getting a 16-28 on Tuesday. Meeting with some guy in La Canada.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mortimersnerd*


What adapter would I need for wired? They came with a sync cord but I don't have the port on the D5000.


you can actually get a simple fleabay hotshoe to pc port adapter then getting a PC cord to 1/8" cable (or 3.5mm then a 1/8" adapter) then just dasiy chain off the first.

but i have those wireless triggers and they work fairly well. highly recommend them if you want to go wireless but its far cheaper to just go wired if you dont need to go wireless.


----------



## sub50hz

135L came out when I was loaded on Saturday. It survived.


Party Girl by sub50hz, on Flickr


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Whoo, getting a 16-28 on Tuesday. Meeting with some guy in La Canada.


Post some shots when you get it dude. Especially ones on bright sunlight, as I'm curious to see how well this lens does with flare and CA.

And don't forget to bring Chris Hansen and the camera crew with you.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


135L came out when I was loaded on Saturday. It survived.


Party Girl by sub50hz, on Flickr


Can't see the shallow DOF in this shot. I'm curious to see how shallow it is with this lens on APS-C. It does look plenty sharp though!

And you'll be amazed at just how far away you can cast a shallow DOF with this lens. No need to get to close!


----------



## 161029

You know there's little kids here, even though that's only a doll.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Can't see the shallow DOF in this shot. I'm curious to see how shallow it is with this lens on APS-C. It does look plenty sharp though!


The DoF was intentional -- the only thing behind it is padded/carpeted walls (it's a recording studio). It's also framed very tightly on the left side because directly next to the neon is a _really_ loud Hendrix poster.

edit: The DoF is very shallow on APS-C it seems, but it's exactly what I was loking for. It's the perfect length for me for candids (I prefer keeping a distance, Chicago is full of "questionable" characters) and great for headshots, or half-body at a reasonable distance. Can't wait to travel somewhere else with it.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Post some shots when you get it dude. Especially ones on bright sunlight, as I'm curious to see how well this lens does with flare and CA.

And don't forget to bring Chris Hansen and the camera crew with you.


Course, can't forget the crew! Apparently its gonna rain tomorrow though. I'll be sure to bring the Nikon 14-24 to compare.


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HybridCore;13530681*
> You know there's little kids here, even though that's only a doll.


You know, Disney routinely displays violence, poverty, and sexuality. Chill out.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

It's nothing new, but it's new to me and I enjoyed learning about this photographer:

  
 You Tube


----------



## MistaBernie

I've made an executive decision:

I _seriously_ need to learn to retouch photos better. Anybody can pull something up in PSE9, run it through quick auto, make a couple of other adjustments and improve the quality of most pictures -- I really want to be able to pick like 5-10 shots out of however many I shot for the day and really just make them pop.

I took a 400 level digital photography course in college after a couple of years of film classes (I believe I did most of my work with Photoshop 7 - _not Elements, PS7_), and switching to PSE9 was a bit of a change because things were a bit more streamlined (or outright hidden/different/gone). Ugh, damn my requirement to constantly attempt to better myself!


----------



## Shane1244

How close does the 135L focus? Anyone have a shot at it's closest focusing distance?


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*


How close does the 135L focus? Anyone have a shot at it's closest focusing distance?


.9m, IIRC.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*


How close does the 135L focus? Anyone have a shot at it's closest focusing distance?


Its UNBELIEVABLY close. You can fill someones face with it (and thats on full frame), and the background will be just nothing and the nose will be out of focus.


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Its UNBELIEVABLY close. You can fill someones face with it (and thats on full frame), and the background will be just nothing and the nose will be out of focus.


Brb, fetching wallet and changing pants.

I'm starting to get all the bills for my school, I gotta buy all the stuff now while I can. xD


----------



## dudemanppl

I sell 135L, everyone else buys 135L. Wut.


----------



## Shane1244

Why'd you sell?


----------



## MistaBernie

I didn't buy a 135L.... yet.







Mayhaps the 28-135 goes, 135L / 17-40L take its place... then the lineup would be Sigma 10-20, Canon 17-40, 50 f/1.4, 135L, 70-200L..


----------



## sub50hz

I took my 50 out of my bag today. Normals on digital are boring me.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*


Why'd you sell?


Because I made him.


----------



## theCanadian

I yearn to use my film SLR. But I can't afford it right now. I'm actually feeling kinda emotional about this plight.


----------



## sub50hz

No money for film?


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Because I made him.


Bad man.

What is a used one worth in pristine condition? $850-$900?


----------



## MistaBernie

In college, I shot ~10 rolls of Ilford B&W a week (and processed most of it too) -- man, i wish I still had those negatives. I might have a small batch somewhere, though if they are where I think they are, they're water damaged and done for


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*


Bad man.

What is a used one worth in pristine condition? $850-$900?


900-950 I suppose. The one I got is good, although there's some dirt under the focus ring. Not a big deal.


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


No money for film?


I don't even have the money for the 5 rolls I've already shot. It's been months since I exposed them.

Pretty much everything I make this summer is going to be wiped out by food.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


900-950 I suppose. The one I got is good, although there's some dirt under the focus ring. Not a big deal.


WAT? Oh no, something I looked over. Crap. Anyway, I sold it to buy a 120-300.


----------



## sub50hz

I'll probably ship it off to Canon for a going-over before I take vacation.


----------



## dudemanppl

NO THEY OVERCHARGE. /caps


----------



## theCanadian

Hey guys, I'm looking for a nice DSLR for $500 new or used with landscaping in mind. Maybe something that's nice but may have fallen off the technology curve.

Was looking at the Sigma SD10, but it's only 3.4 MP. A little too off the radar.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


Hey guys, I'm looking for a nice DSLR for $500 new or used with landscaping in mind. Maybe something that's nice but may have fallen off the technology curve.

Was looking at the Sigma SD10, but it's only 3.4 MP. A little too off the radar.


Rebel XS with 18-55mm IS from CLP for $319 + wide angle lens of your choice with leftover money?


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Rebel XS with 18-55mm IS from CLP for $319 + wide angle lens of your choice with leftover money?


CLP? What? I dont...


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


CLP? What? I dont...


Canon Loyalty Program.


----------



## dudemanppl

Buy broken camera, call Canon up, order refurbed DISLER or whatnot, receive DISLER, send Canon broken camera. The broken camera should at most cost like 20 which isn't bad for a 20% discount IIRC.


----------



## iandroo888

wth when did dudemanppl ditch his d40 + sigma for 7d? what happened with ur 30mm?


----------



## dudemanppl

BTW, its still all here, I just don't want to change all of it later cause I'm a lazy people.

Canon EOS 5D Mark II + BG-E6
Canon EOS 5D Mark II x2 (broken)
Canon EOS 20D + BG-E2 (broken)
Nikon D40 (selling)
Nikon F3HP (selling)
Voigtlander Bessa R3a (selling later)
Canon S90

Tokina 16-28mm f/2.8 AT-X Pro
Nikon 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 AF-S G
DX VR (broken)
Canon EF 24-105mm f/4 IS USM L (broken)
Canon EF 28-70mm f/2.8 USM L (selling)
Sigma 30mm f/1.4 EX DC HSM (selllling)
Canon EF 35mm f/2 (selling)
Voiglander Nokton 35mm f/1.4 (selling later)
Sigma 50mm f/1.4 EX DG HSM (selling)
Nikkor 50mm f/1.2 AI-S
Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM (selling)
Canon EF 300mm f/2.8 IS USM L (still at repair shop)


----------



## MistaBernie

how much you want for the 28-70?


----------



## iandroo888

how much for sigma 30


----------



## MistaBernie

Dangit, I didn't even notice he was selling the Sigma 30!







eh, all for the best anyway - I'd be more likely to buy something cheaper anyway.


----------



## Shane1244

I'll take the Canon 35 f/2 probably


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;13539434*
> I'll take the Canon 35 f/2 probably


Do it. That was my copy, and a very good one.


----------



## dudemanppl

850, 350, and 320 respectively. And PP would be extra. Everything is boxed with cases/manuals.


----------



## Shane1244

I can get it brand new from B&H for $310 lol.


----------



## sub50hz

No you can't -- out of stock and sans hood.


----------



## MistaBernie

I'll have to see about moving some music gear, but I'm interested in the 28-70. If I decide to do it, I'll PM you and post up a 'wtb' thread.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie;13540170*
> I'll have to see about moving some music gear


Do go on. I am thinking about selling my Aguilar 1 x 12 cabinet, as I don't play out much anymore.


----------



## BlankThis

Is the Tokina 16-28 Canon or Nikon mount?

EDIT: NVM It's in your sig with 2 Canon bodies so it must be Canon


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Do go on. I am thinking about selling my Aguilar 1 x 12 cabinet, as I don't play out much anymore.


we have the weirdest bunch of people on this site, I swear..







Where else can you find computer photoraphy and music enthusiasts that also have experience in home repair/carpentry?

Back to the (off)topic -- I'm not playing out _at all_ anymore, so I'm thinking my 5 string American Fender Jazz, Bassman 400 Pro and 1x15 extension can probably go. Of course, if I had done that before I bought the 60D I'd probably have a 5Dii at this point instead...


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


No you can't -- out of stock and sans hood.


Hood is $20, and it'll be in stock soon enough.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;13540777*
> Hood is $20, and it'll be in stock soon enough.


Last time I checked, Sigma 30mm @ B&H = $489..









good thing you're talking about the 35 f/2


----------



## iandroo888

the sigma i got has a squeeky motor.. which the originally owner had sent it in for to be fixed and re-calibrated.

owner giving me two options, 1) to gimme back $50 (which makes it $260 from the original $310 i had paid) and give me the form and stuff to send it in... or 2) refund me completely and he'll deal with the fixing and stuff...

what u guys think? either i repair this one or i refund it and grab dudemanppl's... *cough* wanna give an OCN/FM discount ;D <3 lol maybe like 325 shipped?


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie;13540826*
> Last time I checked, Sigma 30mm @ B&H = $489..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> good thing you're talking about the 35 f/2


$475 for me.









I'm at a loss as to what I want for a new lens, I want a UWA zoom, but also a telephoto prime/ :/


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


we have the weirdest bunch of people on this site, I swear..







Where else can you find computer photoraphy and music enthusiasts that also have experience in home repair/carpentry?

Back to the (off)topic -- I'm not playing out _at all_ anymore, so I'm thinking my 5 string American Fender Jazz, Bassman 400 Pro and 1x15 extension can probably go. Of course, if I had done that before I bought the 60D I'd probably have a 5Dii at this point instead...


Pics of American Jazz, plz. I sold my Geddy a few years ago and turned a huge profit (bought it on release day) but I _really_ regret it. I've thinned my stable, and currently play a Rebop 5 and NS2 through my GK 400RB-IV/Aguilar combo. Also have a few guitars/amps including a 1967 Strat.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13540950*
> Pics of American Jazz, plz. I sold my Geddy a few years ago and turned a huge profit (bought it on release day) but I _really_ regret it. I've thinned my stable, and currently play a Rebop 5 and NS2 through my GK 400RB-IV/Aguilar combo. Also have a few guitars/amps including a 1967 Strat.


I'll snap a few tonite when I get home. It's a mid 90's. Gigged, but not abused. I had a GK400-RB that I played through a SWR Goliath III for a few years, it was pretty nice. The combo was actually after selling my SVT Classic head & 6x10. Sadly, I actually needed that much power in my last band - a three piece SRV/Jimi Hendrix tribute band


----------



## sub50hz

Dang, that's beast. I got to the point where most places would just PA everything (which was ok because they were using good equipment), so I relegated my 2x10 for a monitor and plopped the 1x12 at our drummer's left.

It is strange, though, how many unrelated common interests seem to surface in this thread. I don't suppose you're a beer snob too?


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Dang, that's beast. I got to the point where most places would just PA everything (which was ok because they were using good equipment), so I relegated my 2x10 for a monitor and plopped the 1x12 at our drummer's left.

It is strange, though, how many unrelated common interests seem to surface in this thread. I don't suppose you're a beer snob too?


Ever heard of the Alchemist's Club? the goal is to drink 200+ different beers in a year.

I'm a 2x member







(2007, 2008, respectively)


----------



## sub50hz

Nice. I've done some of the local "drink xxxx beers" clubs, and I had the most fun at Map Room. Regular Three Floyds visitor here.


----------



## MistaBernie

I think you've specifically mentioned the Floyds to me previously -- I dont quite remember why, but thought it was fitting.

I've been going through phases. I'm actually changing over to summer mode and I really do prefer lighter stuff in the summer.. I usually park next door to Bukoswki's Tavern when I go to Sox games, get a couple of real beers, and walk to Fenway.


----------



## sub50hz

That's one thing I despise about Sox games here -- garbage beer only. they have a cart with a couple Leines variants on it, but we've got to go to Milwaukee for anything decent inside the park.


----------



## theCanadian

Sam Adams Imperial White is by far the best beer I've had so far. It's so intense. And in my opinion, is a great beer to have with a meal.


----------



## MistaBernie

Ah, Leinenkugel -- one of my favs from a couple of summers ago.

Whoops --- isn't this a photography thread?

Hey, where's GT? Haven't seen him for like.. hours..

... wanna go ride bikes??? And no, DK can't come till his shoulder is better.

/adhd


----------



## sub50hz

Uh... bikes... another vice of mine... thread _derailed_. Again.

I think conversations like this go to show that even though a forum with a subject so focused can be so much more once people have the ability to relax.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


Sam Adams Imperial White is by far the best beer I've had so far. It's so intense. And in my opinion, is a great beer to have with a meal.


Imperial White... is that one of the brews they sell in the 4-packs?


----------



## MistaBernie

I dont really ride bikes, so you have me there..

We should probably have a discussion thread like Folding has so that we're not needlessly bumping the camera thread. Just some


----------



## sub50hz

Eh, it's a sticky. Perma-bumped.

I have been thinking about renting a 300 f/4 IS soon, as we get a strange influx of some sort of crane (bird) when the plants bloom in a slough near my house. Lots of guys are out there every year with tons of equipment, so it might be something special. I'm not sure exactly, as I'm not a birding guy, but it might be interesting to try something new.


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13541411*
> Imperial White... is that one of the brews they sell in the 4-packs?


Yeah, the Imperial Stout is good too. Chocolate and cherries and coffee. Not for everyone though. The Double Bock is quite good, but I have yet to pass my final verdict though. One more case ought to do it. Still have yet to even see the Wee Heavy.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie;13541351*
> Ah, Leinenkugel -- one of my favs from a couple of summers ago.
> 
> Whoops --- isn't this a photography thread?
> 
> Hey, where's GT? Haven't seen him for like.. hours..
> 
> ... wanna go ride bikes??? And no, DK can't come till his shoulder is better.
> 
> /adhd


Oh you bachelors and your endless hobbies.







Nothing like a marriage to seriously cull your expensive hobbies. I gave up biking because it was edged out slowly by photography, so now it's just PCs, aforementioned photography, and hiking/backpacking.

I may have bought my last lens ever without selling another first. Speaking of which, there may be a 24-70L available in the next month.







(Trying to procure a 16-35 or 14L.

And the new contest is up everyone. Let's have a lot of entries this time!


----------



## tommykl

Cameras:
Nikon D2h
Film SLR
N80 with battery grip
FM-10

Lenses
Nikon 50mm f1.8
Tamron 28-300mm f3.5-6.3
Nikon 35-70mm

Other camera
1958 Kodak tourist II

Bag
Crumpler 5 million dollar home


----------



## MistaBernie

Hey- I'm only a bachelor for 11 more days...


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie;13543998*
> Hey- I'm only a bachelor for 11 more days...


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie;13541351*
> Ah, Leinenkugel -- one of my favs from a couple of summers ago.
> 
> Whoops --- isn't this a photography thread?
> 
> Hey, where's GT? Haven't seen him for like.. hours..
> 
> ... wanna go ride bikes??? And no, DK can't come till his shoulder is better.
> 
> /adhd












my sunday is broken too. fork is leaking oil on the damper side, the front brake is leaking hydraulic fluid (and no it's not the hose) and the seatpost has a big crack down the middle:


----------



## sub50hz

Just an FYI, that's pretty normal for Easton bars/posts. We warrantied a ton of them when I worked at the bike shop. I'll forever and ever run Thomson posts and Deda bars.


----------



## dudemanppl

16-28 is winning. 35 f/2 is more winning than I thought, if I wasn't such an f/1.4 whore, I'd keep it. 85 1.8 is god. New 5DII is in worse condition than I thought.

EDIT: FIRST FLAAAAAAAME.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Congrats on the flame dude.


----------



## MistaBernie

Sub, the bass pics are coming, I swear.. just cleaning them up a bit!

See?


































The rest of the stuff is in the way downstairs and I'm too tired to go down there, set up decent light and shoot..


----------



## sub50hz

I don't need perfect pictures, haha.


----------



## MistaBernie

who said anything about perfect? lol

Ignore the fact that I could have avoided using the flash and taken better pictures by using the tripod that's lying on the floor behind my bass.


----------



## sub50hz

What a beauty. Sadly, I'm on the lookout for a maple neck/white pg American 5. PM me with an asking price anyway, worst I can do is say no.


----------



## MistaBernie

Yeah, I really like my maple neck early 80s Fernandez JP. True story, I bought and started playing on it in the early 90s, sold it back to the store I bought it at, then went back and bought it back again a year and a half later.

As for the American Jazz, I didn't realize you were (potentially) interested in buying it, heh. I dont really want to ship it as I have nothing to ship it in safely (for your protection and mine). That being said, I'll keep my eyes open. I used to work at a shop and I used to be able to track down just about anything.


----------



## Kaoz

Just bought my self a Canon Rebel XS and the 50mm f1.8 lens :-D Just thought I'd share cause OCN camera club was pretty much one of the deciding factors of picking up a DSLR camera hehe! Nothing like a new hobby hehe :-D


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Kaoz*


Just bought my self a Canon Rebel XS and the 50mm f1.8 lens :-D Just thought I'd share cause OCN camera club was pretty much one of the deciding factors of picking up a DSLR camera hehe! Nothing like a new hobby hehe :-D


wooo! welcome to the club! try not to get GAS like I did (gear acquisition syndrome). Two months ago I had a T1i and a nifty fifty..


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Just an FYI, that's pretty normal for Easton bars/posts. We warrantied a ton of them when I worked at the bike shop. I'll forever and ever run Thomson posts and Deda bars.


it's just a risk i'd have to accept running carbon bits (said broken brake lever is an avid carbon). before this serious crash, i've had this post since i got my frame (about late 2008) and i've crashed it a ton of times. i also run the easton dh carbon bar on the sunday and it's been bombproof. i don't think it's a specific problem with the brand.

i'm probably getting a thompson next, though.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


As for the American Jazz, I didn't realize you were (potentially) interested in buying it, heh. I dont really want to ship it as I have nothing to ship it in safely (for your protection and mine). That being said, I'll keep my eyes open. I used to work at a shop and I used to be able to track down just about anything.


Haha, no problem. I miss my Geddy, what a mistake of a sale that turned out to be.


----------



## MistaBernie

I was pissed. Back when I had just quit from gigging out every weekend for two years with my old band, my boss took in an Aguilar Bass Head (for the life of me I can't remember the model). What I remember is, it retailed for $2799 and he wanted $800 (the amount of rent owed by the guy whose room it was in).

I just couldn't justify the purchase at the time (of course, I was also making about 1/2 the money I'm making now).


----------



## sub50hz

Aguilar stuff is so great. I hate when deals slip away on you like that, but it seems to happen all the time with instruments.


----------



## dudemanppl

What the hell just happened to this thread?

OT: Does anyone else use caps lock to capitalize the first letter of a sentence? :3


----------



## MistaBernie

Check THIS out Sub..

When I was in the band, I had a Fender Blues Deluxe reissue that got the most incredible tone that I've ever heard. It had only a minor problem -- physically, it looked like it had been abused and stored in a makeshift crack house.

This was very minor (especially since I paid a whopping $200 for it).

Looked like this --










but in worse than this condition..










My guitar player had to have it. So badly, that he traded me his Fender Custom Shop Two Tone Blues Junior for my blues deluxe + $200 cash.

So now, I'm out $400, but I have the above $1800 amp (well, that's the used cost).

After playing guitar for a bit, I decided it wasn't worth it to keep it around. So, I traded that amp, and got the Ampeg SVT Classic _*and*_ the 5 String American Jazz Bass that you saw above for the amp, straight up.

Total investment: $400.
Total return: well, I still have the bass, but the Classic head got me a nice pro combo and 1x15, so I'd have to say ~$2200 if I sold the stuff.

And she wonders why I'm always on the lookout for buying/selling/trading stuff..








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13545434*
> What the hell just happened to this thread?
> 
> OT: Does anyone else use caps lock to capitalize the first letter of a sentence? :3


Sub and I jacked it to rock it with the awesomeness of our rock goodness. Slap dat bass mon!


----------



## sub50hz

Yeesh, tradesville. I've got a Peavey Delta Blues 1x15 loaded with GTs that sounds phenomenal with my Strat. picked it up for like 30 bucks, all that was wrong was a single blown EL84. Joyous.

P.S. Slappa da bass.


----------



## MistaBernie

Is that Carl Winslow?!


----------



## sub50hz

Yes, it got me real good when I google imaged "slappa da bass" hoping to find a banger of Paul Rudd.









Still hangin onto that 28-135, eh?


----------



## MistaBernie

It was either that, or try to use the 50 in live view or the 10-20... that 28-135 is a great 'now what?' lens -- every time I've tried something that didn't work, I grab it, dust it off, twist it on and just shoot shoot shoot. I've been real happy with the IQ and it's just versatile enough. I shot almost all of a really poorly lit indoor show with it because I wasn't trusting the 50 f/1.4 (Canon sent me a return thing, but they want the camera and the lens.. idk if I'm gonna do it or not, the camera works perfectly with most of my other lenses)


----------



## sub50hz

Sell the 50, wash your hands of it.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13545670*
> Sell the 50, wash your hands of it.


seconded


----------



## MistaBernie

I'm seriously considering it. Might toss it up for trade for a Sig 30/f 1.4


----------



## sub50hz

Can you bring it to a store and check it on another body? Just tell them you're looking for a new body and want to see how your lens looks on it. If they don't let you, don't shop there anymore.


----------



## MistaBernie

That's not a bad idea. Of course, I could always just bring it to my mom's neighbor this weekend and have him shoot with it a bit to check it out. Regardless, it may be worth it for me to send it in to canon to have them check it out - I'm within the 90 days and everything, and then I know I can sell it without feeling like I ripped someone off ..

(mostly because since I live outside of Boston, I only know of one brick and mortar place that isn't Best Buy and I dont know if he would have anything for me to test it with)


----------



## dudemanppl

I has dilemma. I just remembered the 7D has no Magic Lantern so I sort of want it less, but I don't want to get a 60D cause of the stupid flippy screen or a T2i cause then everybody on the school newspaper will have one and we already have 17-55 IS duplicates (among other things)... Do I get a 1DIIN or a 5D right now and wait for the 1DIII to fall in price and then buy one of those? OR JUST SCREW EVERYTHING AND GET A 1DIII?!


----------



## sub50hz

Why don't you just go out and shoot?


----------



## MistaBernie

My 60D + cash for your 7D?


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


I has dilemma. I just remembered the 7D has no Magic Lantern so I sort of want it less, but I don't want to get a 60D cause of the stupid flippy screen or a T2i cause then everybody on the school newspaper will have one and we already have 17-55 IS duplicates (among other things)... Do I get a 1DIIN or a 5D right now and wait for the 1DIII to fall in price and then buy one of those? OR JUST SCREW EVERYTHING AND GET A 1DIII?!


Whats so stupid about it? especially when you're concerned with video..? Have you ever used it while you were out and about?


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Why don't you just go out and shoot?


NAH NOT AN OPTION LUL.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*


Whats so stupid about it? especially when you're concerned with video..? Have you ever used it while you were out and about?


To be honest the flippy screen is pretty nice, I just wouldn't use the flippy function of it. I barely use live view and when I do I'm content with my not flippy one.


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


NAH NOT AN OPTION LUL.

To be honest the flippy screen is pretty nice, I just wouldn't use the flippy function of it. I barely use live view and when I do I'm content with my not flippy one.


I use it the odd time for video, but I really love it when I'm on a tripod, saves my back/neck from straining.







It's really high res though, Makes everything look way better than it really is.


----------



## dudemanppl

Who needs a neck or back?


----------



## mrwesth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13545789*
> I has dilemma. I just remembered the 7D has no Magic Lantern so I sort of want it less, but I don't want to get a 60D cause of the stupid flippy screen or a T2i cause then everybody on the school newspaper will have one and we already have 17-55 IS duplicates (among other things)... Do I get a 1DIIN or a 5D right now and wait for the 1DIII to fall in price and then buy one of those? OR JUST SCREW EVERYTHING AND GET A 1DIII?!


Assuming your sig is listing your current gear... why do you need a new camera?
And why do you need a magic lantern?

Just curious. You seem to have adequate gear to perform most photographic functions. At least, the last thing I would think you would need is a new body. Maybe a different lens or lighting, but you have two fabulous cameras. Switching to a 1dII from a 7d is a huge downgrade. Switching to a 1dIII from a 7d is fairly lateral but a slight upgrade. Both offer different advantages.

I think your focus might be misplaced, or were you just joking?
.Curious


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mrwesth;13546740*
> Assuming your sig is listing your current gear... why do you need a new camera?
> And why do you need a magic lantern?
> 
> Just curious. You seem to have adequate gear to perform most photographic functions. At least, the last thing I would think you would need is a new body. Maybe a different lens or lighting, but you have two fabulous cameras. Switching to a 1dII from a 7d is a huge downgrade. Switching to a 1dIII from a 7d is fairly lateral but a slight upgrade. Both offer different advantages.
> 
> I think your focus might be misplaced, or were you just joking?
> .Curious


He needs to feel superior to the other school photographers and turn a profit at the same time


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mrwesth;13546740*
> Assuming your sig is listing your current gear... why do you need a new camera?
> And why do you need a magic lantern?
> 
> Just curious. You seem to have adequate gear to perform most photographic functions. At least, the last thing I would think you would need is a new body. Maybe a different lens or lighting, but you have two fabulous cameras. Switching to a 1dII from a 7d is a huge downgrade. Switching to a 1dIII from a 7d is fairly lateral but a slight upgrade. Both offer different advantages.
> 
> I think your focus might be misplaced, or were you just joking?
> .Curious


remember hes the B&H of southern California, hes mostly into buying and sell used EQ and dabbles in actual shooting on his spare time.


----------



## dudemanppl

To be honest, I don't really care about gear. I don't really get jelly unless its a M9 and Noct APSH. I get gear that suits my uses, if I wanted the best I wouldn't have Sigma or Tokina or the 50 1.2. Its more of a "don't lose money, free rental why not" sort of thing is why I switch stuff around every 2 weeks or so... max.


----------



## mrwesth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13549363*
> To be honest, I don't really care about gear. I don't really get jelly unless its a M9 and Noct APSH. I get gear that suits my uses, if I wanted the best I wouldn't have Sigma or Tokina or the 50 1.2. Its more of a "don't lose money, free rental why not" sort of thing is why I switch stuff around every 2 weeks or so... max.


I have no issues with that.
I've used most of these cameras through work and associates so was merely commenting on the comparison if it would help you decide on a need to switch.

My comment about magic lanterns though was general confusion. Why would the availability of a magic lantern guide ever be involved in a purchase decision for cameras of this caliber?
Did I miss something in the rebel ML I glanced through? What do they offer for a specific camera other then beginner tips on funcionality?
.Curious


----------



## dudemanppl

http://magiclantern.wikia.com/wiki/M..._Firmware_Wiki

I need the lyrics for the Meow Mix theme song.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


It was either that, or try to use the 50 in live view or the 10-20... that 28-135 is a great 'now what?' lens -- every time I've tried something that didn't work, I grab it, dust it off, twist it on and just shoot shoot shoot. I've been real happy with the IQ and it's just versatile enough. I shot almost all of a really poorly lit indoor show with it because I wasn't trusting the 50 f/1.4 (Canon sent me a return thing, but they want the camera and the lens.. idk if I'm gonna do it or not, the camera works perfectly with most of my other lenses)


You should just send it in. Otherwise, you'll have to sell it cheap since it's misfocusing.

And they want your camera sent in probably because they apparently will cailbrate lenses to a specific camera, so it's for the best. And who knows, maybe there is someting awry with your camera.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Why don't you just go out and shoot?


+1


----------



## dudemanppl

Its weird that I don't really shoot unless someone tells me to. I don't think I've ever just shot for no reason. Plus I don't usually upload to flickr, but I think I'll put some stuff up today when I get home. I shot some baseball on Friday, but I didn't really like the pictures. I do need more crap on there though.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Its weird that I don't really shoot unless someone tells me to. I don't think I've ever just shot for no reason. Plus I don't usually upload to flickr, but I think I'll put some stuff up today when I get home. I shot some baseball on Friday, but I didn't really like the pictures. I do need more crap on there though.


I shoot too much it seems. I have way too much crap uploaded to my flickr (2400+ shots). I need to go through and cull some of the garbage.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13550783*
> Its weird that I don't really shoot unless someone tells me to. I don't think I've ever just shot for no reason.


It is weird -- you're 14 and sans car. Get out of the house, go walk around and make a day of shooting things you normally wouldn't.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


It is weird -- you're 14 and sans car. Get out of the house, go walk around and make a day of shooting things you normally wouldn't.


Sometimes I wish I lived in like Chinatown. Would make it much easier.


----------



## sub50hz

Can you take public trans there?


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Can you take public trans there?


could also ride a bike.

anyway my sister posted the following on my fb. it's two things i love in one shot - red velvet and cameras


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*


could also ride a bike.


True, and with all the gear re-selling he does, I'm sure there's a decent chunk of change laying around for, say, a Pinarello.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


You should just send it in. Otherwise, you'll have to sell it cheap since it's misfocusing.


I have the FSC Repair Request Form for the 50 sitting right here. It's going in; if it comes back and it works fine, great. If not, I'll send in both at that point (this wont leave me without a camera for my honeymoon)


----------



## sub50hz

I played with a 100L Macro at lunch today. Now, I want. Real bad.


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


I played with a 100L Macro at lunch today. Now, I want. Real bad.


I'm lusting for a Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4 HSM OS Macro.


----------



## ljason8eg

Awesome! The 70-200mm 2.8L IS II and 17-55mm 2.8 IS that I rented from lens rentals shipped today, with arrival scheduled for Friday. My 9 day rental doesn't start until Monday so looks like I'll have the weekend to play around with them!


----------



## dudemanppl

I've wanted to try a 70-200IS II but for the prcie you can get an amazing condition Sigma 120-300.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


I've wanted to try a 70-200IS II but for the prcie you can get an amazing condition Sigma 120-300.


You've torn apart a lot of cameras dude, so I have a question. Have you tried to remove the AA filter from a Canikon DSLR (and still have it working)? I ask because I was reading about how the M9 doesn't have an AA filter, which is why it's so fudging sharp. I looked at full-res shots from the M9 and I don't notice any jaggies or artifacting as a result of not having an AA filter.

I've been daydreaming at work about just getting an M9 with a moderately wide and medium telephoto lens lately, and bagging my whole DSLR kit (probably won't happen in all honesty, but I've done stranger things).


----------



## Nemesis158

Just ordered my 35mm 1.8 from Amazon. Kinda odd, you can get one new from Amazon for $200, but used ones are going for $250-300+ on ebay


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


You've torn apart a lot of cameras dude, so I have a question. Have you tried to remove the AA filter from a Canikon DSLR (and still have it working)? I ask because I was reading about how the M9 doesn't have an AA filter, which is why it's so fudging sharp. I looked at full-res shots from the M9 and I don't notice any jaggies or artifacting as a result of not having an AA filter.

I've been daydreaming at work about just getting an M9 with a moderately wide and medium telephoto lens lately, and bagging my whole DSLR kit (probably won't happen in all honesty, but I've done stranger things).


im pretty sure the AA filter is built directly on the sensor and theres no way of removing it (sort of like bayer filters). the only filter i know that can be removed is the hot mirror for UV.


----------



## murderbymodem

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Nemesis158*


Just ordered my 35mm 1.8 from Amazon. Kinda odd, you can get one new from Amazon for $200, but used ones are going for $250-300+ on ebay
























Lucky. I wish there was a Canon 30/35mm 1.8 for that price.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


You've torn apart a lot of cameras dude, so I have a question. Have you tried to remove the AA filter from a Canikon DSLR (and still have it working)? I ask because I was reading about how the M9 doesn't have an AA filter, which is why it's so fudging sharp. I looked at full-res shots from the M9 and I don't notice any jaggies or artifacting as a result of not having an AA filter.

I've been daydreaming at work about just getting an M9 with a moderately wide and medium telephoto lens lately, and bagging my whole DSLR kit (probably won't happen in all honesty, but I've done stranger things).


Dude, super coincidence. The 5DII I bought had the AA filter removed. On the 5DII I could do it in about 30 minutes. I think I might see a very small difference, but I only shoot wide open so it doesn't matter. I'll list the cameras I've taken apart and how easy it would be to take out the AA filter:
D700 - easy
D3 - easier
5DII - hard cause you have to take the front off too
D2(any) - medium, but its been a while
and its very easy on any film camera.


----------



## laboitenoire

Went to Kettle Moraine State Forest near Eagle, Wisconsin the other day. Gorgeous day, and got some nice shots.

Driving there, saw this and almost died of cuteness:





I also did this one in black and white. Not sure which I prefer.




Also, decided I'm ditching the UV filter on the 70-300. Even though I bought a high quality Hoya, my images at longer focal lengths are just mush. That turkey vulture was one of the few decently sharp shots I got.


----------



## Boyboyd

I really like the 3rd one. I think i'd prefer the colour one to the B&W though. But saying that, i've not seen the B&W version yet.


----------



## ~sizzzle~

Ah-Ha, so this is sort of like the General Team Discussion thread (pseudo on topic hangout for the OCN Team Competition folders) of the photog section I see..... Hello to all.

Playing around with a 55-200 today.

Vicious creature otherwise known as The Fred. Thought he made for some good target practice. He's too mean to get scared off, and too fat to go very fast when he decides he wants to go somewhere.







Straight from Camera. (D3100)


----------



## Boyboyd

I know I say this a lot, but I think that the 55-200 is an incredibly good lens for the money.


----------



## dudemanppl

20mp UNSHARPENED 16-28 sample Yeah, its a crap picture, but damn is it sharp. Vignetting wide open is pretty bad against pure white, but other than that its not horrible, barely noticeable in real shots.

Also, I have newer peectures on flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/dudemanppl/


----------



## SkipSkovhugger

I'd like to join the club. I'm just starting out in DSLR, so I've only got rather low-end equipment. I had an Nikon FE2 that I got from my oncle years ago. It finally let go a few years ago, so I saved up for some DSLR gear, and I've now gotten the following:

Nikon D3000
Nikkor 18-55 ED
Nikkor AF-S 35mm f1.8G
Nikkor AF-S 70-300mm f4.5 - 5.6G IF-ED VR
Velbon Sherpa 435 Tripod
Some old flash from my FE2


----------



## Marin

So I've had this Nikkor-W 180mm f/5.6 sitting here since I couldn't get it to fit onto a lens board and never got around to getting another ring. Well turns out the ring was on a different lens I have. So now I've got a 75mm f/4.5 and a 180mm f/5.6. My 4x5 is good to go. Woo.


----------



## ljason8eg

Just messing around with my 430EX II, this thing is great. Just a quick snapshot that was taken in total darkness (flash bounced off ceiling) and is straight out of the camera. Yeah composition and such isn't good but I just wanted to see what it would do.

Probably won't amaze anyone but me but hey, guess I'm easily impressed lol


----------



## Marin

Using a Phase One back later today (since it's now the AM) on my Hasselblad.


----------



## ~sizzzle~

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*


I know I say this a lot, but I think that the 55-200 is an incredibly good lens for the money.


Well I'm no sort of expert but so far I can say I'm very happy with it. Picked it up on a whim as part of a package deal with camera and 18-55 after reading a few reviews on it (55-200).

Quote:



Originally Posted by *SkipSkovhugger*


I'd like to join the club. I'm just starting out in DSLR, so I've only got rather low-end equipment. I had an Nikon FE2 that I got from my oncle years ago. It finally let go a few years ago, so I saved up for some DSLR gear, and I've now gotten the following:

Nikon D3000
Nikkor 18-55 ED
Nikkor AF-S 35mm f1.8G
Nikkor AF-S 70-300mm f4.5 - 5.6G IF-ED VR
Velbon Sherpa 435 Tripod
Some old flash from my FE2










Nice setup. Almost went similar route myself (D3000 and more glass) but decided to spend a bit extra on the 3100 and save for more glass as I go. Impatiently wating for AF-S 50mm f/1.8G.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Using a Phase One back later today (since it's now the AM) on my Hasselblad.


What's the resolution of that back? Definitely post some wide open shots with it. I'd like to see how ridiculously thin the DOF of MF can get.


----------



## Shane1244

On their website their lowest res is 39MP... Dear lord.


----------



## sub50hz

Grrr. 135L backfocuses beyond 10m. Not happy.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *~sizzzle~*


Nice setup. Almost went similar route myself (D3000 and more glass) but decided to spend a bit extra on the 3100 and save for more glass as I go. Impatiently wating for AF-S 50mm f/1.8G.


i think you should consider the 35/1.8 nikon or the 30/1.4 sigma. when you are new you will read millions of reviews on how useful 50mm is but that only applies to fullframe cameras. with a aps-c sensor its more of a mild telephoto so its far less useful.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Grrr. 135L backfocuses beyond 10m. Not happy.


10m? isnt that at infinity already?


----------



## sub50hz

No, but it's not far from infinity. I'm beginning to wonder if something is up with my focusing screen/body. Oddly enough, from MFD to about 10m it's spot on. I'll get it out tonight to retest.


----------



## ~sizzzle~

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


i think you should consider the 35/1.8 nikon or the 30/1.4 sigma. when you are new you will read millions of reviews on how useful 50mm is but that only applies to fullframe cameras. with a aps-c sensor its more of a mild telephoto so its far less useful.


Thanks for the input. I've actually used a AF 50/1.8 on both a D300 and my D3100 and liked it other then I'd rather have autofocus capability for the D3100. Eventually I'd like both 50 and the 35 but figured I'd start with the 50 since I sort of already have a feal for what it's about. That Sigma 30/1.4 might be very tempting.


----------



## theCanadian

Does anyone have an estimation for how much the AF-S 50mm/1.8 is gonna cost?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


Does anyone have an estimation for how much the AF-S 50mm/1.8 is gonna cost?


http://www.adorama.com/NK5018GU.html...m_source=gbase


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


http://www.adorama.com/NK5018GU.html...m_source=gbase


ouch, thought the sony 50/1.8 was expensive at $150....


----------



## Boyboyd

I think 50 is a strange length on APSc. I'd rather use a 35 or a 100 personally.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


ouch, thought the sony 50/1.8 was expensive at $150....


It's a hell of a lot cheaper than the Canon 50/1.4.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


It's a hell of a lot cheaper than the Canon 50/1.4.


but its also hell of a lot more then the canon 50/1.8


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


but its also hell of a lot more then the canon 50/1.8


Of course, the Canon 50/1.8 is cheap for a reason (construction, old micro motor). But the new Nikon 50/1.8 looks to be more similar to the Canon 50/1.4, having similar build quality and ultra sonic focusing.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;13566096*
> Of course, the Canon 50/1.8 is cheap for a reason (construction, old micro motor). But the new Nikon 50/1.8 looks to be more similar to the Canon 50/1.4, having similar build quality and ultra sonic focusing.


I thought it was just a normal in-lens motor? I didn't see any mention of SWM.

EDIT: I'm wrong


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;13566809*
> I thought it was just a normal in-lens motor? I didn't see any mention of SWM.
> 
> EDIT: I'm wrong


That's what AF-S means.


----------



## dudemanppl

Nikon doesn't have any in-lens motors that aren't either SWM or a DC motor since the coupling is from the camera. 5DII + round eyecup + EG-S screen + 50 1.2 AI-S = basically everything I could ever want from a camera ever.


----------



## sub50hz

135L does not backfocus. Must have been some really weird anomaly I was getting yesterday. :ashamed:

You may commence your 40 lashings, dudemanppl.


----------



## sub50hz

Also of note: +1 saturation on the 135L is OVERKILL. Damn, such awesome color.


----------



## dudemanppl

I normally shoot -2 saturation and contrast, still too much.


----------



## sub50hz

I have to play with it some more to get a good balance, so it's both useful and less time-consuming in post.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;13566817*
> That's what AF-S means.


I thought AF-S just means there's an internal motor in the lens, and SWM is something else entirely.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;13567063*
> I thought AF-S just means there's an internal motor in the lens, and SWM is something else entirely.


The S stands for "Silent" IIRC and all AF-S lenses have the SWM motor.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13566997*
> Also of note: +1 saturation on the 135L is OVERKILL. Damn, such awesome color.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13567038*
> I normally shoot -2 saturation and contrast, still too much.


Totally. I used to think that L lenses were just about sharpness until I got one myself. They reproduce color and contrast in a way that PPing can't reproduce IMO.


----------



## sub50hz

Slow thread lately.


----------



## dudemanppl




----------



## sub50hz

dealwithitdog.gif: always acceptable.


----------



## dudemanppl

Hyuk hyuk. Gonna pay for the 120-300 tonight. Should be here in time for something I have to shoot next Wednesday.


----------



## Shane1244

...How much?


----------



## dudemanppl

1300.







/capsforsomereason


----------



## Shane1244

..... no way. How.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13568785*
> Slow thread lately.


It's because I'm no longer frequenting









Oh man, I am so happy I was introduced to Persona 4 AFTER finals. If I started playing before, I'd probably fail all my finals.


----------



## dudemanppl

It was 1500, but he said, "OH 1300 I MAKE YOU WAIT (it was like a week), JUST FOR YOU." That and its not 100% condition. Lotsa peeling, but I cannot honestly care less.


----------



## sub50hz

There's a fix for any kind of peeling finish:


----------



## BlankThis

dudemanppl, how is your Tokina 16-28mm f/2.8 wide open? I'm really interested in it but no local shops here have them in stock (Order only







) and renting isn't my thing.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis;13569545*
> dudemanppl, how is your Tokina 16-28mm f/2.8 wide open? I'm really interested in it but no local shops here have them in stock (Order only
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ) and renting isn't my thing.


Nobody has it in stock. I got it used for the same price as new since I really needed it.

Horrible picture, but its sharp (f/2.8 16mm): http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5021/5735289965_4846a8494c_o.jpg

Horrible picture, but wide open, 16mm, MFD:
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2743/5735860442_9019138f43_o.jpg


----------



## Nemesis158

Quote: 
   Originally Posted by *theCanadian*   Does anyone have an estimation for how much the AF-S 50mm/1.8 is gonna cost?  
 Quote: 
   Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*   http://www.adorama.com/NK5018GU.html...m_source=gbase  
If you have a body with a built in focus drive or can do without autofocus, you could just get the older version only $160:    Amazon.com: Nikon 50mm f/1.8D AF Nikkor Lens for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras: Camera & Photo


----------



## dudemanppl

The new one is basically a Sigma 50 1.4 thats broken and won't open past 1.8. Best way I can put it...


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


The new one is basically a Sigma 50 1.4 thats broken and won't open past 1.8. Best way I can put it...


how so? there hasn't been any sample pics yet of the 50mm f/1.8 and the sigma is hella expensive.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*


how so? there hasn't been any sample pics yet of the 50mm f/1.8 and the sigma is *hella expensive.*


Bay Area boy?


----------



## BlankThis

Any internal design changes (Besides the SWM) between the older AF to the new AF-S?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Nobody has it in stock. I got it used for the same price as new since I really needed it.

Horrible picture, but its sharp (f/2.8 16mm): http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5021/...46a8494c_o.jpg

Horrible picture, but wide open, 16mm, MFD:
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2743/...19138f43_o.jpg


Maybe it's just motion blur/technique, but those two shots are incredibly soft dude. I wouldn't even call them somewhat sharp. It has to be sharper than that judging from the reviews I've read.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Bay Area boy?










ex is originally from LA.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Maybe it's just motion blur/technique, but those two shots are incredibly soft dude. I wouldn't even call them somewhat sharp. It has to be sharper than that judging from the reviews I've read.


Let me get some better pictures up later, I'm too lazy to do anything.


----------



## Nemesis158

Quote:



Originally Posted by *BlankThis*


Any internal design changes (Besides the SWM) between the older AF to the new AF-S?


Yes. compared the two on Nikon's website. here are the differences:
Minimum Aperture: New: f/16, old: f/22
maximum angle of view: New: 47 deg, old: 46 deg
Lens Elements/groups: New: 7/6, Old: 6/5
New version is not compatible with 35mm film
the old version does not have any aspherical lens elements, while the new one has 1
Filter size: New: 58mm, Old: 52mm

Edit: Just Got my 35mm 1.8 in the mail














gonna go take some pictures......


----------



## Boyboyd

The 35 f/1.8 is an incredible lens.


----------



## Nemesis158

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis;13572605*
> Any internal design changes (Besides the SWM) between the older AF to the new AF-S?


Also just found lens construction on both of them.
Old 50mm f/1.8:








New 50mm f/1.8:








blue indicates the aspherical element


----------



## sub50hz

Oh, _Nikon talk_.









Today is the slowest day of work I have ever had. Why I get here so early sometimes... I'll never know.


----------



## dudemanppl




----------



## laboitenoire

I'm pretty sure there's a special circle of hell reserved for people like you dudemanppl... /sarcasm


----------



## Shane1244

dudemanppl, did I mention what an amazing person you are?


----------



## BlankThis

I... I just don't understand...


----------



## dudemanppl

Two are broken, but hey, whatever!

EDIT: Guess the WORKING one and I'll paypal you a dollar.


----------



## theCanadian

The one in the crook of your arm?


----------



## dudemanppl

Whoops, I derped. I meant working.


----------



## theCanadian

I can maths I knew what you meant.


----------



## theCanadian

Also, I keep forgetting; I've been looking for a non-seasonal brew that's heavy. Like could pass for a meal kind of heavy with massive mouth feel. Anyone got any good ones?


----------



## dudemanppl

Damn, I owe you a dollar. Anyway, try water. Its real good.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *theCanadian;13578117*
> Also, I keep forgetting; I've been looking for a non-seasonal brew that's heavy. Like could pass for a meal kind of heavy with massive mouth feel. Anyone got any good ones?


chimay blue


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer;13578216*
> chimay blue


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *theCanadian;13578117*
> Also, I keep forgetting; I've been looking for a non-seasonal brew that's heavy. Like could pass for a meal kind of heavy with massive mouth feel. Anyone got any good ones?


Chimay Grand Reserve or Rochefort #10, or any Belgian quadrupel. Or if you like Imperial Stouts, try Founder's Kentucky Breakfast Stout, it's like motor oil.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer;13578216*
> chimay blue


BAM!


----------



## dudemanppl

And I totally don't have a BG-E2 for sale. Or a 35 f/2.

So I was looking for places to shoot my product shots and I didn't have reflectors so I went on my bed and then I realized... PILLOWS WORK! Super ghetto light time. (and 16-28 wide open samples)
http://www.flickr.com/photos/dudemanppl/sets/72157626767144150/

This:








Makes this:


----------



## theCanadian

I've been interested in the KBS, but where would I find it? It's definitely a seasonal brew. I'm guessing I'd have to go to a specialty store?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *theCanadian;13578654*
> I've been interested in the KBS, but where would I find it? It's definitely a seasonal brew. I'm guessing I'd have to go to a specialty store?


Yeah, it's not your typical grocery store brew, but if I can get here, surely you can find it in NC. I don't think it's seasonal as I always see it around here. Founder's is a fairly widely distributed micro brew. And although KBS is Beer Advocate's top rated IS, I really, really didn't like it. It's so thick that it barely has a head, and light doesn't even pass through it.


----------



## Danylu

Hey guys what's a good price for a AI/AI-S Nikon 35mm 1.4? I'm not sure what the condition is though D:


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *theCanadian;13578117*
> Also, I keep forgetting; I've been looking for a non-seasonal brew that's heavy. Like could pass for a meal kind of heavy with massive mouth feel. Anyone got any good ones?


Xingu. Be warned, it is the black death. Incredible, though.


----------



## theCanadian

I mean, the Imperial Stout from Sam was opaque as well. Very good though.

However, The Guinness Extra Stout was the most disgusting beer I ever drank.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;13578419*
> Or if you like Imperial Stouts, try Founder's Kentucky Breakfast Stout, it's like motor oil.


Dark. Lord.









Goose Island Bourbon County Stout if you're feeling adventurous... I never liked it, a little boozy for me.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *theCanadian;13578654*
> I've been interested in the KBS, but where would I find it? It's definitely a seasonal brew. I'm guessing I'd have to go to a specialty store?


Do you guys have Binnys in NC? Great place to wander and peruse.


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13579052*
> Do you guys have Binnys in NC? Great place to wander and peruse.


Nope, a quick look at their website reaveals that they are purely an Illinois phenomenon.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *theCanadian;13579106*
> Nope, a quick look at their website reaveals that they are purely an Illinois phenomenon.


Where in NC? I used to live on the coast.

And the Sigma SD-1 is going to cost $9700!







Superior color depth or not, who would pay so much for an APS-C camera?

http://www.dpreview.com/news/1105/11052010sigmasd1.asp


----------



## theCanadian

Currently in the Raleigh area, though in ~6 weeks I'll be going back to Charlotte.


----------



## Nemesis158

Here is one of my first pics with the new lens:









i know its not the best (foreground blur) but its a start


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *theCanadian;13579214*
> Currently in the Raleigh area, though in ~6 weeks I'll be going back to Charlotte.


Traffic on I-40 there SUCKS. Wilmington and Asheville were two of my favorite places to go in NC.

And Raleigh is a fairly large city, so surely they have decent places to get specialty brews.


----------



## ljason8eg

Speaking of Charlotte I'm going out there next Tuesday. Hoping for some great shots at the track.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gonetomorrow;13579134*
> and the sigma sd-1 is going to cost $9700!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Superior color depth or not, who would pay so much for an aps-c camera?
> 
> http://www.dpreview.com/news/1105/11052010sigmasd1.asp


HOLY CRAP WHAT IN THE COMPLETE FLYING FUNK IS GOING ON IN SIGMA'S HEAD? /caps


----------



## theCanadian

I'm not 21 'till the end of the year, so it's kind of a moot point.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *theCanadian;13579428*
> I'm not 21 'till the end of the year, so it's kind of a moot point.


LOL, then why are you asking for beer recommendations?


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *theCanadian;13579428*
> I'm not 21 'till the end of the year, so it's kind of a moot point.


Ah, a beer man in the works, excellent.


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;13579454*
> LOL, then why are you asking for beer recommendations?


I have "connections".


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *theCanadian;13579428*
> I'm not 21 'till the end of the year, so it's kind of a moot point.


Shoulda stayed in Canada. (I'm assuming you're originally Canadian.. haha)


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *theCanadian;13579568*
> I have "connections".


Sigh, the US and our ridiculously old legal drinking age. Funny story when I turned 21. I was in Spain, where the drinking age was 18 IIRC.


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;13579573*
> Shoulda stayed in Canada. (I'm assuming you're originally Canadian.. haha)


One of these days..... and it's going to feel good to do it too.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;13579656*
> Sigh, the US and our ridiculously old legal drinking age. Funny story when I turned 21. I was in Spain, where the drinking age was 18 IIRC.


I was at a Sox game with a bunch of friends and my parents (who also like to party). Great day.


----------



## sub50hz

Buy a 'blad, get a 'pad. TIME TO GO TO THE CASINO.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13580351*
> Buy a 'blad, get a 'pad. TIME TO GO TO THE CASINO.


Well then, let me just run right out and get one. Seriously though, if I had $20k weighing me down... I would buy bunch of L lenses!


----------



## sub50hz

Hah! I don't have any reason to even _want_ a digital MF camera, but if someon's genuinely looking, this is a great deal. No tax *and* a free iPad? Make it rain all over Calumet's face.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;13578419*
> Chimay Grand Reserve or Rochefort #10, or any Belgian quadrupel. Or if you like Imperial Stouts, try Founder's Kentucky Breakfast Stout, it's like motor oil.
> 
> BAM!


sha-bam! this thread made me think about it all night so i went and got six rounds of the stuff plus some super red wine


----------



## ljason8eg

L lenses are amazing! At least the 70-200mm 2.8L IS II is. That is all.


----------



## Nemesis158

Here is all of my stuff so far







A little Challenge for you, How many times does the word "Nikon" appear in this picture?








Nikon D3000 DX Format DSLR Body.
Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 18-55mm 1:3.5-5.6G DX Lens.
Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 35mm 1:1.8G DX Lens with HB-46 Hood.
Nikon AF NIKKOR 50mm 1:1.8D FX Lens (75mm equiv. on DX).
Nikon BR2A Lens Reverse Mount for Macro Options.
Nikon BR-3 Reverse lens Filter Thread mount, to protect rear element when lens is reversed.
BR2A And BR-3 Can be combined to form an Extension ring, for more Macro Options.
Nikon ML-L3 Shutter Remote.
2 Nikon EN-EL9a Batteries.
Patriot LX Series 16GB Class 10 SDHC memory Card.
Sandisk 4GB Class 2 SDHC Memory Card.


----------



## dudemanppl

14! Do I get anything?


----------



## Nemesis158

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


14! Do I get anything?


That's right








+1


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Nemesis158*


Here is all of my stuff so far







A little Challenge for you, How many times does the word "Nikon" appear in this picture?


too many times....


----------



## theCanadian

I only count 13. Unless that way OOF text on the bag says nikon....


----------



## dudemanppl

BF1B. /caps


----------



## theCanadian

WTH. Now I only count 12, including the body cap.

Also, post pics taken with BR-3 and BR2A.


----------



## Nemesis158

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


I only count 13. Unless that way OOF text on the bag says nikon....



Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


WTH. Now I only count 12, including the body cap.

Also, post pics taken with BR-3 and BR2A.


The batteries say it 2 times, each....

This was taken with the 50mm 1.8 And the BR2A/BR-3 extension ring, and curve altered in PS:


----------



## Nemesis158

As was this:









You can find a few more on my deviantart page: http://nemesis158.deviantart.com/
Already having the BR2A and the BR-3 Helped me justify getting the 50mm 1.8 so i could use it for Macro


----------



## dudemanppl

Special place in hell for me.


----------



## theCanadian

I'll trade you that dollar for a body?


----------



## dudemanppl

I can ship you some air if you'd like.


----------



## sub50hz

I love sleeping in 'til 8, having my coffee outside, and realizing I don't have a _damn_ thing to do today. Maybe I can go shoot for a bit before the impending rain.


----------



## Nemesis158

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*










Special place in hell for me.


I'm Betting only the one on the bottom works. which nikon body is that?


----------



## Shane1244

Pretty sure a D40.


----------



## theCanadian

"zoom and enhance"

it's a stacked D40


----------



## Marin

http://www.crumpler.com/us/Camera-Bags/Camera-Straps-Accessories/Popular-Disgrace.html?LanguageCode=EN&SKU=PDE001-G00000

Me likey.


----------



## Shane1244

Thats actually badass, I love the colour mostly.


----------



## dudemanppl

Haha, Popular Disgrace. Too bad I hate any strap that goes on strap lugs.


----------



## Shane1244

What do you use the straps that go on the tripod mount?


----------



## Dream Killer

whoa they remade the barney rustle. i like my older version though


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;13586880*
> What do you use the straps that go on the tripod mount?


R-straps. But I think I lost one... Thats okay, I have 3 others.


----------



## theCanadian

I wish there was a more affordable Black Rapids strap.


----------



## sub50hz

Shot the 135L a little today while taking a riding break. Pics to follow.


----------



## sub50hz

IMG_2947 by sub50hz, on Flickr


----------



## sub50hz

Dog stopped running long enough to snap him in the yard.


Condor by sub50hz, on Flickr


----------



## mortimersnerd

Messing around with my new strobes....


----------



## Unknownm

Fujica ST705 w/ Fujinon 1:1.8 55m. Len's is very heavy. All B&W photos are from Kodak Professional B&W 400

Note: The images are matte and scanned from a early 2000's scanner (cheap right now).


----------



## Dream Killer

i just ordered this:


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Oh man! Your upload speeds!


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;13597483*
> Oh man! Your upload speeds!


I KNOW!

i don't even know what to do with 25mbps upload. i just got it because it's only $10 more a month vs the 15/5mbps.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer;13597596*
> I KNOW!
> 
> i don't even know what to do with 25mbps upload. i just got it because it's only $10 more a month vs the 15/5mbps.


Time for someone to take high resolution panoramas of the Manhattan skyline and upload them in full res glory!


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;13597693*
> Time for someone to take high resolution panoramas of the Manhattan skyline and upload them in full res glory!


i'm gonna look for online cloud backup solutions for my pictures. it wasn't possible with 768k upload but 25mbps would do well.

as for the skyline, it's been something on my mind for a while but i'm really not a landscape type of person and ny has been panorama'd to death.


----------



## savagebunny

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer;13597740*
> i'm gonna look for online cloud backup solutions for my pictures. it wasn't possible with 768k upload but 25mbps would do well.
> 
> as for the skyline, it's been something on my mind for a while but i'm really not a landscape type of person and ny has been panorama'd to death.


Since you have all that upload speed soon. You can setup a Apache webserver, and then just host the pictures if you wanna do that


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer;13597740*
> *i'm gonna look for online cloud backup solutions for my pictures. it wasn't possible with 768k upload but 25mbps would do well.*
> 
> as for the skyline, it's been something on my mind for a while but i'm really not a landscape type of person and ny has been panorama'd to death.


Oh nice, I hadn't even considered that!


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer;13597740*
> ...and ny has been panorama'd to death.


Ditto on Chicago. So many skyline shots from the hill outside the Planetarium/Aquarium on Lake Michigan.


----------



## Dream Killer




----------



## Boyboyd

I'm stuck here with 350Mb/s up


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Boyboyd;13598487*
> I'm stuck here with 350Mb/s up


Wow, that's approaching USB speeds. You could move multiple GB in under a minute probably.


----------



## Boyboyd

Crap, meant Kb/s. lol

That's the 2nd time i've done that today.


----------



## theCanadian

Oh well then I feel your pain. I get 8 or 10 Mbps down and only .35 up so... same boat as you.

We've been talking about everything *but* cameras in here lately.


----------



## Marin




----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *savagebunny;13597752*
> Since you have all that upload speed soon. You can setup a Apache webserver, and then just host the pictures if you wanna do that


i want to backup my stuff in a different location other than my place not host a website


----------



## Boyboyd

I want to do that, but my photo folder is 58GB. I keep a second copy of it at work on the server, but that's it.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

I love their grading scale. 84% = A-.

If only my university agreed...


----------



## dudemanppl

JUST A SLIGHTLY BIT JELLY. My phone has faster internet since I live about 100 meters from a cell tower.


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13597891*
> Ditto on Chicago. So many skyline shots from the hill outside the Planetarium/Aquarium on Lake Michigan.


I'm hoping to do one of Montreal this summer


----------



## mortimersnerd

Oh the good old days of a university network









My current connection, not bad for $35/mo though I miss the upload speed.


----------



## mrwesth

My $90/month connection...









Though we should get cable internet offerings here sometime in the next year or so.


----------



## dudemanppl

I think I'm done planning...


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


I live about 100 meters from a cell tower.


Possibly cancerous


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *BlankThis*


Possibly cancerous


Perfect, my astrological sign is Cancer!


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis;13600375*
> Possibly cancerous


Or will cause him to gain superpowers.


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Or will cause him to gain superpowers.


Knowing him he'll probably start sprouting 5DIIs on his body


----------



## dudemanppl

I'd prefer to grow a supertelephoto, but 5DIIs work too.


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


I'd prefer to grow a supertelephoto, but 5DIIs work too.



Just what every 14 yo male needs


----------



## dudemanppl

That was less subtle than I thought...


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mortimersnerd*


Oh the good old days of a university network









My current connection, not bad for $35/mo though I miss the upload speed.










You're getting a better deal than people around here:










That's what I get for $49.99/mo. The speed is as advertised, but over 10 Mb/s gets insanely expensive.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mrwesth*


My $90/month connection...









Though we should get cable internet offerings here sometime in the next year or so.


Holy crap, looks like typical Alaska prices?


----------



## dudemanppl

Fffff-, found a 1DIIN with new shutter for 450, so out goes the T2i I was gonna buy.


----------



## BlankThis

How!?

EDIT:







Find me a D700/D3


----------



## dudemanppl

Rear LCD is broken, buy it from Canon parts for cheapy time and it'll be boss.


----------



## BlankThis

Good find.


----------



## theCanadian

*http://snapsort.com/compare*


----------



## dudemanppl

Eh, sort of useless to me IMO. If you know anything about cameras and what you needed, you wouldn't need that chart. Oh and in the next two weeks I'll make about 1250...


----------



## Marin

The old 24L TS-E stinks.


----------



## dudemanppl

I wanted to try one of those, but I honestly would use it for two pictures. f/3.5 is so slow its sad.


----------



## Marin

If you used it just for a tilt-shift image I'd smash your camera. Seriously.









It's good for architecture. That also means the speed doesn't matter since you're going to stop down anyways.


----------



## BlankThis

I hate tilt-shift... I don't know why


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;13604900*
> If you used it just for a tilt-shift image I'd smash your camera. Seriously.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's good for architecture. That also means the speed doesn't matter since you're going to stop down anyways.


Then you'd smash my camera.







I don't shoot architecture, so I don't care for a tilt shift. I think I'll get my sister a Bamboo Craft since shes graduating and gonna draw and stuff or something, 80 bucks isn't much.


----------



## Marin

That's what I'd want to use.


----------



## mrwesth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;13601422*
> Holy crap, looks like typical Alaska prices?


Not really... anchorage gets typical 20-25 meg cable at around $50-60.

I know other people in my little town get a much better deal, but 3 meg wasn't even offered on my street (way up on the side of a mountain) until two months ago. So they can charge whatever they want and get away with it I guess.

Funny part is my neighbor one lot up is a billionaire--literally. Wish he actually used that house so he'd pay for lines to the street.


----------



## Marin

Actually this.


----------



## mrwesth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;13605037*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's what I'd want to use.




It's funny... I used to cover NCAA football games where a spec photog would set up his t/s as a remote in the endzone. I was like 

...He also got kicked out a few times for lieing on credentials. Then would change clothes and sneak back in. The odd people that pick up cameras.
(he also posted about his adventures on an online forum and got hammered by the pro community)


----------



## Rystofer

Would love to Join the photo club, comps and cameras just go together! Shot with a Nikon N6006 for many years...When the industry started changing was busy doing other stuff like fly fishin and guiding in Alaska...Then I moved to PA and my focus has changed again...I got a a Canon Ti2 with 3 lenses so far, an 18-55/5.6 a 55-250/5.6 and a 75-300/F5.6 all w/image stablizer...New lenses on the horizon only faster and much more expensive







I'm lookin at a 35/1.4 and a 50/1.4 and maybe a 85...Then I'll need a cigarette









Thank god I have a beautiful and understanding wife that has almost NO hobbies


----------



## dudemanppl

Holy poop. This 120-300 is about the second sharpest telephoto I've used.

Rankings:
1. 300 2.8 IS
2. Canon Sigma 120-300
3. Nikon 300 2.8 AF-I
4. Nikon 300 2.8 AI-S
5. Nikon Sigma 120-300
6. Canon 400 2.8


----------



## sub50hz

Have you used the 300 f/4 IS? I'm thinking about renting it for a couple weeks for June Sprints at RA.


----------



## dudemanppl

No but they look promising... Just buy a 2x TC for the 135L if you're going to rent it for a few weeks. 270mm f/4L woot woot.


----------



## sub50hz

Hrm, maybe. I've never used extenders, would love to see some shots with that combo.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

From what I've read, the Canon 2x TC slows down the AF quite a bit, which is intentional on Canon's part, supposedly to improve AF accuracy.


----------



## dudemanppl

To be honest, manual focusing isn't that hard. Prefocusing is the best! Oh and AF isn't even all that slow, its like half speed, so if you limit it its basically the same.


----------



## sub50hz

Honestly, I don't find the 135L's focusing speed as impressive as I've read. This also went for the samples I rented -- the 85 1.8 has it beat indefinitely.


----------



## dudemanppl

Really? I found it pretty epic. The Nikon 14-24-70 has some super fast and silent AF, fastest I've found so far, but the focus throw sucks, so thats a large tradeoff.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Honestly, I don't find the 135L's focusing speed as impressive as I've read. This also went for the samples I rented -- the 85 1.8 has it beat indefinitely.


The 85/1.8's focus speed is pretty hard to top from what I've read. Have you tried the 135 with the focus delimiter switched to 1.6m - ∞? It speeds it up noticeably.


----------



## dudemanppl

I just realized I prefer manual focus lenses. Its just a better experience overall.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Have you tried the 135 with the focus delimiter switched to 1.6m - ∞? It speeds it up noticeably.


Yeah, it helps a little, and it's not really *slow*, but I'm fairly certain my 70-200 tops it. Gonna have to try again back-to-back.


----------



## Shane1244

Thoughts on the 100m f/2?


----------



## sub50hz

85 f/1.8 is better on a crop. I won't be buying a 100 unless it's the L macro.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;13613712*
> Thoughts on the 100m f/2?


A very decent lens judging from reviews. Kind of pricey though, especially compared to the 85/1.8.


----------



## Shane1244

Hmmmm. Seems a little short. I'm trying to get something to sooth my needs of 70-200 range, but be really fast.. Also cheaper.

I've been looking at the 100 f/2, 135 f/2.8 and the 85 f/1.8. Maybe there's something better third party?


----------



## dudemanppl

100 f/2 sucks. My friend has one. Its soft as hell. I'd get a 85 1.8, but thats me.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;13613840*
> Hmmmm. Seems a little short. I'm trying to get something to sooth my needs of 70-200 range, but be really fast.. Also cheaper.
> 
> I've been looking at the 100 f/2, 135 f/2.8 and the 85 f/1.8. Maybe there's something better third party?


70-200 refurb? Mine was like 515 bucks.


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13613866*
> 70-200 refurb? Mine was like 515 bucks.


I'll look at one. But two possible problems, I really want 2.8 or better, and I doubt I can get one in Canada.


----------



## sub50hz

Perhaps a Sigma, then. I've found over the past few weeks that f/4 is quite suitable for what I needed, and the price discrepancy between it and the 2.8 isn't worth it. especially after nabbing the 135L.


----------



## Shane1244

Yeah, Not available in Canada for sure. D:

~$665 on BH though. Hmm.. Zoom would be nice.. and the 70mm would close the gap from my 50mm. Sigma is $925.. I shoulda got one when it was $799. JEBUS WHATDO.


----------



## sub50hz

Let dudemanppl be your liason for finding used gear.


----------



## dudemanppl

HI, YOU WANTED GEAR?








Not much help for you Canadians though. Sorry.


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13614143*
> HI, YOU WANTED GEAR?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not much help for you Canadians though. Sorry.


Disappointed.

Did you ever mess around with Sigma's 24-70 offering? HSM version.


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13614143*
> HI, YOU WANTED GEAR?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not much help for you Canadians though. Sorry.


If you ever find anything that located in Canada, let a bro know?


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;13614700*
> If you ever find anything that located in Canada, let a bro know?


Especially if it's Nikon


----------



## Shane1244

 Just figured out I can print out a forum to let me use my EPP at bestbuy online. I'll let you know if I find any good deals. You live in Quebec if I remember correctly?


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13614043*
> Let dudemanppl be your liason for finding used gear.


i never thought about asking him to find used gear......not a bad idea.


----------



## sub50hz

It seems as though he encounters/resells a ton of equipment, although it does seem to be 100% Canikon. Worth a shot, though.


----------



## dudemanppl

I basically just look on FM, not all that hard.


----------



## sub50hz

Being 14, you have a _lot_ of extra time to browse FM. Lots of the older guys don't.


----------



## Shane1244

Being Asian probably helps too.


----------



## dudemanppl

LOL. Never even thought about it. Just use search and BOOM, you got it.


----------



## Shane1244

/attempts


----------



## ljason8eg

Well...packed for the race weekend in Charlotte. Main gear I'm taking not including necessities like the bag, batteries, cards, chargers, etc.

Gotta love the piss poor camera on my HTC Thunderbolt too.


----------



## dudemanppl

I took apart a 17-55 AF-S. That was fun.


----------



## ljason8eg

Speaking of 17-55s, really digging that EFS 17-55 2.8 IS that I rented. Might have to look into purchasing one of those.


----------



## dudemanppl

I held on to my friends for a day before she picked it up. Its honestly a really really good lens for the price, hell its a good lens PERIOD. But theres vignetting at all FLs on 36x24mm, while Nikon's can do 24-55.


----------



## ljason8eg

Oh yeah man I compared it to the kit lens and its like holy crap what a difference. Very sharp wide open for a zoom too I think, though the 70-200 MKII I also rented is in a class of its own. I can't wait to shoot with it at the track.


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;13614885*
> Just figured out I can print out a forum to let me use my EPP at bestbuy online. I'll let you know if I find any good deals. You live in Quebec if I remember correctly?


What is this? I'm enticed. And yeah I live in Quebec.


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:



Originally Posted by *BlankThis*


What is this? I'm enticed. And yeah I live in Quebec.


Employee Purchase Program. You know how on BB.ca theres a deecent amount of lenses? While in store the only have the 50 f/1.8, 55-200, and some other crap lol. Anyways, someone told me about a forum where I can buy stuff from online with my discount. Discounts are normally between 5-30% on lenses, so if your interested of anything online, let me know and I'll tell you how much I can get it for you. aha


----------



## BlankThis

Ohhh awesome! Thanks









I'm having a crisis... I kind of like the 5DII.... :S


----------



## sub50hz

A little late to the party, but T-Mobile fired up some new HSPA+ switches today:










3x faster than my home DSL. I wish Verizon would lay fiber out here.


----------



## derickwm

What lenses would you guys recommend for the Canon 7D? Thanks


----------



## sub50hz

That's too broad of a question. What's your budget? What do you like to shoot? What do you have now? Do you need IS/weather sealing/additional features?


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13625839*
> That's too broad of a question. What's your budget? What do you like to shoot? What do you have now? Do you need IS/weather sealing/additional features?


Pretty much all of this. We could recommend you anything from the 50mm f/1.4 to the 300mm f/2.8 and anywhere in between.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis;13620726*
> Ohhh awesome! Thanks
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm having a crisis... I kind of like the 5DII.... :S


It's nice.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *derickwm;13625814*
> What lenses would you guys recommend for the Canon 7D? Thanks


As they said, we need to know what you shoot and what lenses you have already. Nevertheless, the Canon 17-55 f/2.8 is a damn nice pairing with the 7D (used to have a 7D with that same lens, killer!)


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis;13620726*
> Ohhh awesome! Thanks
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm having a crisis... I kind of like the 5DII.... :S


Turns out only Nikon has a EPP program, 3100 body was $410, D90 body was $530, D300 body was $1080, D700 body was like $1720 <-- I might be slightly wrong on that one, but it's close)


----------



## sub50hz

If that's the real D700 price, I know someone who would want to pay you to ship one to the states.


----------



## Shane1244

I'll print out the forum tomorrow, I only had a quick second to look at it. I know for sure that it was under 2k.

50% everything monster, 30% everything Logitech, %50 everything bose. Working at Bestbuy is dope.


----------



## dudemanppl

Hmmm, whats the most you can buy at one time? I'm thinking you can become a reseller on fleabay, making like 500 a body.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;13626517*
> Turns out only Nikon has a EPP program, 3100 body was $410, D90 body was $530, D300 body was $1080, D700 body was like $1720 <-- I might be slightly wrong on that one, but it's close)


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13626562*
> If that's the real D700 price, I know someone who would want to pay you to ship one to the states.


I got my d700 used with 3700-ish actuations, a 16GB and 4GB Extreme III card, extra battery, extra focus screen with box and all other stuff for $1950.

This was before the 'quake though.

PS: Jogging while wearing a sling is awkward.


----------



## Shane1244

I'm only aloud to buy for myself and direct family. That give me four bodies.. haha I'll just wait for my dumb manager to be in and she'll sign off on them.









What do they go for on ebay?


----------



## dudemanppl

Brand new I think around 2300.


----------



## sub50hz

I mean.... for 1800 I would consider dumping ALL of my Canon stuff and switching.... maybe.


----------



## dudemanppl

I mean.... for 1800 I would consider dumping some of my Canon stuff and switching.... maybe.

Actually no, thats dumb. The only lens I'd rather have on a D700 would be the 120-300, which I probably won't be able to find again for 1300.


----------



## sub50hz

Ah, one day you'll know what it's like to have to support yourself.


----------



## dudemanppl

I can live in a Corolla. And eat ramen. And not take showers?


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13626897*
> I can live in a Corolla. *And eat ramen.* And not take showers?


Udon.


----------



## Shane1244

I'm tempted to get a D700 too. :/ I want full frame..


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;13627005*
> I'm tempted to get a D700 too. :/ I want full frame..


if you really must have a 35mm dslr, a used canon 5dc is under $1k


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;13626953*
> Udon.


Dude, udon is too espensive.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13627062*
> Dude, udon is too espensive.


u can live in a corolla but since u cant drive it....kinda defeats the purpose. might as well fine a nice bridge to live under.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;13627005*
> I'm tempted to get a D700 too. :/ I want full frame..


Well, you aren't too deeply invested in Canon, but...
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer;13627041*
> if you really must have a 35mm dslr, a used canon 5dc is under $1k


...This! 5dc still has great IQ and high ISO noise performance.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;13627240*
> This! 5dc still has great IQ and high ISO noise performance.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;13625667*
> I would pass on the 40D *because of the LCD* (I'm a big chimper
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ) and *no AF micro adjust alone*. It's a superb body otherwise.












Just kidding, just messing with you


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;13627251*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just kidding, just messing with you


LOL, well, we're not talking about me here.


----------



## Shane1244

Buy D700, Sell D700. Sell 60D for $750? Buy an amazing 5DC for $1000?

$250 profit, But I guess i'll need CF cards?


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;13627320*
> Buy D700, Sell D700. Sell 60D for $750? Buy an amazing 5DC for $1000?
> 
> $250 profit, But I guess i'll need CF cards?


Don't forget the crop factor. I'm not sure if you're comfortable with the focal length of your 50mm, but with FF, the sensor will now peek into the corner of the lenses, giving you a "wider" (I know that's not proper but I don't know how else to explain it) FoV on the 5D compared to your 60D.

So if you're comfortable with and want to keep the 50mm FoV you have now, something to keep in mind


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;13627371*
> Don't forget the crop factor. I'm not sure if you're comfortable with the focal length of your 50mm, but with FF, the sensor will now peek into the corner of the lenses, giving you a "wider" (I know that's not proper but I don't know how else to explain it) FoV on the 5D compared to your 60D.
> 
> So if you're comfortable with and want to keep the 50mm FoV you have now, something to keep in mind


I'm aware yes, one of the main reasons why I want it, that and sexy bokehness







50mm is a little tight.

It'll be quite the decision.. It's a bit of a dinosaur of a camera, not sure if I'll like it. No where to try one out..


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;13627415*
> I'm aware yes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 50mm is a little tight.
> 
> It'll be quite the decision.. It's a bit of a dinosaur of a camera, not sure if I'll like it. No where to try one out..


I had my hands on one before. Great camera, excellent IQ. The only reason I kept my 50D and didn't ditch it for a 5DC was because the LCD was too low-res for me.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;13627371*
> Don't forget the crop factor. I'm not sure if you're comfortable with the focal length of your 50mm, but with FF, the sensor will now peek into the corner of the lenses, giving you a "wider" (I know that's not proper but I don't know how else to explain it) FoV on the 5D compared to your 60D.
> 
> So if you're comfortable with and want to keep the 50mm FoV you have now, something to keep in mind


True, and 50mm is pretty awesome on FF, especially wide open. Much shallower DOF.


----------



## dudemanppl

50 1.2 <3<3<3<3.


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;13627431*
> I had my hands on one before. Great camera, excellent IQ. The only reason I kept my 50D and didn't ditch it for a 5DC was because the LCD was too low-res for me.


I almost hate the LCD on my 60D because it's too high res, It makes everything look better than it really is, lol. The difference isn't toooo big between the 50D and 5D. 70,000 Pixels.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;13627473*
> I almost hate the LCD on my 60D because it's too high res, It makes everything look better than it really is, lol. The difference isn't toooo big between the 50D and 5D. 70,000 Pixels.


Wha? The 50D's rear LCD has 3x the pixels as the 5D's (920k vs 230k). And if you might miss the high res LCD on your 60D after using one of the older bodies. When I had the 40D, I would not notice small amounts of motion blur or slight OOF on the LCD, which would stick out on a monitor.


----------



## dudemanppl

50D has 920k dots, 5D has 230k. But dots != pixels. Low res screens are weird.


----------



## BlankThis

1800 for a new D700? :O

I'm a little stuck between the D700 and 5DII

I'm not all investing in Nikon anymore so I don't have a problem switching. But the 5DII offers video over the D700. That being said I am not to fond (or maybe familiar) the Canon's ergonomics... Hm.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis;13627538*
> 1800 for a new D700? :O
> 
> I'm a little stuck between the D700 and 5DII
> 
> I'm not all investing in Nikon anymore so I don't have a problem switching. But the 5DII offers video over the D700. That being said I am not to fond (or maybe familiar) the Canon's ergonomics... Hm.


Maybe rent a 5DII and give it a shot. You might find that you just aren't used to it, as many are quick to dismiss the handling and ergonomics of one or the other brand having only handled a body briefly. The jog wheel and joystick combo on Canon mid-level and pro bodies is fabulous.


----------



## mrwesth

I have a 50 1.2. Its one of 3 primes I own and its a great lens.
However, I did find this post (from sportsshooter.com message board) very informative and interesting regarding focal length...
Quote:


> Jim Colburn, Photographer, Photo Editor
> McAllen | TX | USA | Posted: 9:34 PM on 05.16.11
> ->> Geek Alert!
> 
> Okay. The least useful lens has go to be the 50mm (on a full frame 35mm camera or its equivalent).
> 
> It all dates back to Ernst Leitz and his design for the original Leica. He doubled the then-normal 18x24mm movie frame to make a 24x36mm format. He decided that a "normal" lens should be equal to the diagonal of his new format (A squared plus B squared equals C squared so C = 43mm!) Why? Who knows.
> 
> If 43mm was Ernst "normal" lens why did every camera come with a 50mm?
> 
> Because Leits had a rockin' design for a 50mm f/3.5 (the Elmar) on the books that they could make good, and cheap (relatively). A 43mm would have required some serious redesigning. 43mm? 50mm? Close enough!
> 
> So Leicas shipped with a 50mm lens.
> 
> Why does 50mm suck so much?
> 
> The human eye may "take in" 140ish degrees but it only pays attention, normally, to about 27-29 degrees. Your eye flicks around A LOT and your brain puts things together but your eye likes the equivalent of a 73mm lens, hence the Leica 75mm (and earlier 73mm) lenses.
> 
> When you (your brain) "focuses" on something you're paying attention to something in the 12 degree range, which is why a 180-200mm lens seems to be such a "natural" long focal length.
> 
> When you (your brain) "steps back" and thinks wide it does so to about a 85 degree angle and that is why a 28mm lens seems like a comfortable wide angle lens. Anything wider seems a bit "unnatural".
> 
> Why does the 50mm lens exist? Marketing.
> 
> As a lens it's pretty useless.
> 
> And forget the "Cartier-Bresson shot with a 50" arguement because it turns out he REALLY liked the 35mm Leica lenses and usually wandered around with one of them on his camera instead of a 50.


While he argues against a 50 for good reasons, it doesn't change the fact it is a great lens at that focal length. Just wish they would've made that 43mm! I might opt for my 24-70 more often now and dial it in to see if I prefer that focal length--if indeed it does look more natural then the 50.


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;13627569*
> Maybe rent a 5DII and give it a shot. You might find that you just aren't used to it, as many are quick to dismiss the handling and ergonomics of one or the other brand having only handled a body briefly. The jog wheel and joystick combo on Canon mid-level and pro bodies is fabulous.


I do love the wheel. But I like my shutter control dial on the back... My friend has one so maybe I'll give it a borrow.


----------



## dudemanppl

35 > 50. Try a 5DII, I actually prefer it to the ergonomics of Nikon bodies, but the actual grip is better on Nikons with that indent for your fingertips instead of just index finger.


----------



## mrwesth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;13627569*
> Maybe rent a 5DII and give it a shot. You might find that you just aren't used to it, as many are quick to dismiss the handling and ergonomics of one or the other brand having only handled a body briefly. The jog wheel and joystick combo on Canon mid-level and pro bodies is fabulous.


5dII is awesome.
I just wish I weren't so heavily invested in canon because the d3, d3s are awesomer. Yeah I know different target market, but canon really doesn't have an offering to compare to the d3's ff sensor, iso performance, fps.

Anyway more relevant to this post--the d3/s/x in my humble opinion is the most fantastic camera ergonomically.

-Just a canon fanboy giving nikon its due props.


----------



## BlankThis

But then there's the D700... Pretty much a D3 if you grip it


----------



## mrwesth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis;13627703*
> But then there's the D700... Pretty much a D3 if you grip it


Yeah, good camera in its own right, but not quite a d3.
Plus d3 can be had so cheap now, its hard to opt for the d700 imo.


----------



## BlankThis

I'd go for a D700 over the straight D3... Much newer tech.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mrwesth;13627678*
> Anyway more relevant to this post--the d3/s/x in my humble opinion is the most fantastic camera ergonomically.


I would shoot myself in the dick if I had to use a D3 variant. They feel _awful_ to me. By contrast, I am having a hard time with my newfound love for the 1DIV. It.... may be coming.


----------



## dudemanppl

D3 vert grip SUCKS. Normal grip makes me lose control of many bodily functions. And its just so solid. I do like the D700 more though, ungripped D700 + 35 AI-S is best.


----------



## BlankThis

Just didn't like the ergonomics of the D3?


----------



## dudemanppl

Hold button + spin dial sucks. And it was hard to transition from the D700 to the D3 since instead of ISO and quality being on top, its at the bottom.


----------



## Disturbed117

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13627915*
> *I would shoot myself in the dick* if I had to use a D3 variant. They feel _awful_ to me. By contrast, I am having a hard time with my newfound love for the 1DIV. It.... may be coming.










that sounds like it would hurt.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *disturbed117;13628193*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> that sounds like it would hurt.


The pain would be more bearable than having to fumble with a button-loaded, scooped-grip Nikon body all day. I want to love Nikons.... they just don't fit my hands well.


----------



## Disturbed117

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13628204*
> The pain would be more bearable than having to fumble with a button-loaded, scooped-grip Nikon body all day. I want to love Nikons.... they just don't fit my hands well.


hmm. never had a nikon. i have only had trashy point shoots tho.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *disturbed117;13628230*
> hmm. never had a nikon. i have only had trashy point shoots tho.












vs.










Obviously, impossible to tell without holding them both -- many people love Nikon's ergonomics, but I am not one of them.


----------



## dudemanppl

When you have the camera up to your eye, Nikon wins so hard. In the menus, Canon is a slightly bit better, easier to sort through, which is also a drawback since you have to remember where a certain custom setting is. The FEL button is both useless and in the worst place imaginable. The on switch on Canons is pure crap. And I think on the 1D series its hold and turn dial too, so thats a tie.


----------



## Dream Killer

be aware that the 1-series bodies require you to push two-three buttons all at once to change a setting.

after using a 1ds mk2 for years then using a d700 (back to single buttons) it was quite refreshing.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer;13628423*
> be aware that the 1-series bodies require you to push two-three buttons all at once to change a setting.


Not all settings require a combo press, but even the ones that do aren't bothersome (to me). The problem is that both systems appeal to people for different reasons, and a lot if it comes down to how one's brain works. In actuality, Nikon's layout choices make more sense, and should be faster in use. However, I have a hard time with the funny location of said buttons and switches, and find myself _constantly_ fumbling to change settings while using Nikon bodies. By contrast, I can pick up any Canon from the XT to the 1DsIII and get to work immediately with very little learning curve. Button locations that change are labeled very clearly and less abbreviated than Nikon's.

It is what it is, and you can't have it all with either variant -- there are some things each mfr does a little bit better, just comes down to the individual to decide which of those things are more comfortably sacrificed.


----------



## dudemanppl

If you shoot Nikon, its pretty much the same. It takes me about a week to switch from the replay button on the 5DII to Nikon's (which is up top).


----------



## Dream Killer

you can't expect to switch brands and get used to it right away. for instance, when borrowing a friend's camera or playing with it at the store.

i came from using an XTi/1ds2 almost everyday to renting a d700 (also rented the 5dm2 a week before). at first i hated it and it took me about 2 weeks to get the d700 dialed in to my settings. now everything is muscle reflex.

do i like the d700 better than canon's ergonomics? yeah. is it going to make a difference? probably not. if i only had say, a 5d2 i can probably work with it as fast as i can work my d700 given enough time. i just can't live without those wonderful middle/pinky custom func buttons though.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer;13628670*
> you can't expect to switch brands and get used to it right away. for instance, when borrowing a friend's camera or playing with it at the store.


After 2 weeks, when I am still having trouble with comfort and usability, I'm pretty confident I'm using _the wrong camera_. Nikons just don't work for me, plain and simple. I've got nothing against them and have no problem recommending them to others, but on a personal level, they just don't work.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer;13628670*
> i just can't live without those wonderful middle/pinky custom func buttons though.


QFT. I had the lower one set up for live view, the top one for bracketing. And the AE/AF-L was for the first thing on my CSM that I set, which was the commander for the pop up flash. It was amazing.


----------



## Marin

I tried a Nikon D700. Buttons were confusing for me.


----------



## dudemanppl




----------



## mrwesth

Personal preference I guess.
I still think the d3 is a great design and does a better job of preventing accidental exposure change when switching between 2-3 bodies, especially for indoor sports.

But end of the day I love my canon glass... just wish they would offer a ff high fps camera that can compete with the d3/s iso. Give it 8mp, I don't care. Sadly the 1d iv makes it seem canon likes that 1.3.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis;13627851*
> I'd go for a D700 over the straight D3... Much newer tech.


Sorry to jump in late. What's newer tech on the D700???


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nuclearjock;13629834*
> Sorry to jump in late. What's newer tech on the D700???


Screen and sensor cleaning comes to mind.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *BlankThis*


Screen and sensor cleaning comes to mind.



Screen??

I can clean my D3 sensor in <15 seconds. A rocket blower does a better job than the ultrasonic vibs.

I wet clean it once a year. That takes me ~ 2 minutes.

Seroiusly, 8fps helps me with sports and wildlife. Other than that, the D700 is just a smaller and lighter D3. My D300 and D300s have sensor cleaning, but the D300 was released B4 the D3.... So sensor cleaning really isn't newer tech.

Wish I had a D700 though. Love my D3.


----------



## BlankThis

I don't need 8fps, although I can get that by buying a $200 grip rather than spending twice as much.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *BlankThis*


I do love the wheel. But I like my shutter control dial on the back... My friend has one so maybe I'll give it a borrow.



Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Hold button + spin dial sucks. And it was hard to transition from the D700 to the D3 since instead of ISO and quality being on top, its at the bottom.


This is why I wish that Canon had implemented the custom button feature earlier. On the 7D, you can change nearly any button on the body, including the jog wheel and quick dial.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


When you have the camera up to your eye, Nikon wins so hard. *In the menus, Canon is a slightly bit better, easier to sort through, which is also a drawback since you have to remember where a certain custom setting is*. The FEL button is both useless and in the worst place imaginable. The on switch on Canons is pure crap. And I think on the 1D series its hold and turn dial too, so thats a tie.


Dude, that's what the My Menu feature is for. Going through the CFn menu every time is for the birds.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mrwesth*


Personal preference I guess.
I still think the d3 is a great design and does a better job of preventing accidental exposure change when switching between 2-3 bodies, especially for indoor sports.

But end of the day I love my canon glass... just wish they would offer a ff high fps camera that can compete with the d3/s iso. Give it 8mp, I don't care. Sadly the 1d iv makes it seem canon likes that 1.3.


Another feature I wish Canon had thought of earlier: locking mode dial! Almost every time I pull my 5DII out, the dial is not where I had it last.

And although I do little in the way of sports, wildlife, etc., I hope that the 5D MK III at least has all cross-type sensors. The outer AF points on the 5DII are pretty crappy, and unusable in low light. Focus and recompose with the center AF point gets old after a while.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *BlankThis*


I don't need 8fps, although I can get that by buying a $200 grip rather than spending twice as much.


No see there's more than that. i.e. the memory buffer upgrade which is standard on the D3s.

The 5:4 aspect ratio.

Second CF card slot, ( this is alot handier than you think).

D3 has a microphone for image notation which sounds wacky but has proven itself to be very useful come PP time.

Finally the D3's build is far superior to the D700 which helps when you're shooting 2 bodies and laying one on the ground.

Again, I'd love to own one for vacations and as a walk around body. If I can find a clean used one It may happen. But adding a grip to a D700 doesn't give you anything approaching a D3.


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


No see there's more than that. i.e. the memory buffer upgrade which is standard on the D3s.

The 5:4 aspect ratio.

Second CF card slot, ( this is alot handier than you think).

D3 has a microphone for image notation which sounds wacky but has proven itself to be very useful come PP time.

Finally the D3's build is far superior to the D700 which helps when you're shooting 2 bodies and laying one on the ground.

Again, I'd love to own one for vacations and as a walk around body. If I can find a clean used one It may happen. But adding a grip to a D700 doesn't give you anything approaching a D3.


1. Again don't need even 3fps
2. Not a fan
3. You have a point but I don't think I will have an issue
4. Notebook? That's what I do now for film 
5. Proof?


----------



## robchaos

So I guess this is as good a place as any to ask, 
Soon I am possibly looking to upgrade to a higher end Nikon DSLR body. I have a D40X which is good for my needs, but lacks a few features such as AEB bracketing, Off camera flash control, and an autofocus motor in the body. I am looking to spend under $550 for a body (can be used). I am heavily leaning toward the Nikon D80. Does anyone have any suggestions or alternatives to consider?


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis;13630387*
> 4. Notebook? That's what I do now for film
> 5. Proof?


4. No time for writing with field sports in progress.

5. Been at several pro events where there are lots of D3's (including mine) laying on the wet grass and being tripped over and still rise to the occasion. The D700 may survive such conditions but if that's the case I'm surprised I never see any. Don't know about you but it's enough proof for me. If one my bodies goes DOA during an event, that's lost $$. My gear needs to first pay for itself, and second put some $$ in my pocket.

Technically superior, don't think so.


----------



## dudemanppl

I wouldn't give if someone peed on my D3. Just run it under a faucet. I'm really bad at giving examples...

ANYWAY, hey NJ! Hows your house and such?


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


I wouldn't give if someone peed on my D3. Just run it under a faucet. I'm really bad at giving examples...

ANYWAY, hey NJ! Hows your house and such?


Are you asking about my house?


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *robchaos*


So I guess this is as good a place as any to ask, 
Soon I am possibly looking to upgrade to a higher end Nikon DSLR body. I have a D40X which is good for my needs, but lacks a few features such as AEB bracketing, Off camera flash control, and an autofocus motor in the body. I am looking to spend under $550 for a body (can be used). I am heavily leaning toward the Nikon D80. Does anyone have any suggestions or alternatives to consider?


Had a D80 for ~ 1week and didn't like the metering. seemed like it was all over the place. Returned it, bit the bullet and bought a D300. Then the floodgates opened and bought a D3 and a D300s.

Can you get a used or refurbed D90 for ~$550??


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *robchaos;13630497*
> So I guess this is as good a place as any to ask,
> Soon I am possibly looking to upgrade to a higher end Nikon DSLR body. I have a D40X which is good for my needs, but lacks a few features such as AEB bracketing, Off camera flash control, and an autofocus motor in the body. I am looking to spend under $550 for a body (can be used). I am heavily leaning toward the Nikon D80. Does anyone have any suggestions or alternatives to consider?


+1 on the D90. The difference is not extreme, but there are a few improvements that make it worthwhile over the D80, namely higher resolution rear LCD (great if you're a chimper like me), live view (useful for some applications, e.g. macro), articulating screen, dust removal system, video mode (720p), wider ISO range, etc.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nuclearjock;13630732*
> Are you asking about my house?


You're the one who got a family right? Don't remember, its been so long.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;13630800*
> +1 on the D90. The difference is not extreme, but there are a few improvements that make it worthwhile over the D80, namely higher resolution rear LCD (great if you're a chimper like me), live view (useful for some applications, e.g. macro), *articulating screen*, dust removal system, video mode (720p), wider ISO range, etc.


Articulating screen? Crazy old man...


----------



## MistaBernie

Random question -- what would (roughly) the canon equivalent of the Nikon D3000 be? I just found one locally that I could get w/ the kit lens for $200 and I was thinking about grabbing it as my walk-around, 'dont care *** happens' camera.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


You're the one who got a family right? Don't remember, its been so long.

Articulating screen? Crazy old man...










Oh, whoops, I thought it had it. That's what I get for posting off the cuff. Everything else is true.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


Screen??

I can clean my D3 sensor in <15 seconds. A rocket blower does a better job than the ultrasonic vibs.

I wet clean it once a year. That takes me ~ 2 minutes.

Seroiusly, 8fps helps me with sports and wildlife. Other than that, the D700 is just a smaller and lighter D3. My D300 and D300s have sensor cleaning, but the D300 was released B4 the D3.... So sensor cleaning really isn't newer tech.

Wish I had a D700 though. Love my D3.


what do u use to wet clean? i need to wet clean my a900 soon


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


what do u use to wet clean? i need to wet clean my a900 soon


Same here, my 5DII has some tenacious motes that the built in cleaner and old bulb blower can't dislodge. I've been looking at the Copperhill kit.


----------



## dudemanppl

Breathe on sensor, wipe condensation off with q tip. Hasn't failed me yet.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie;13630860*
> Random question -- what would (roughly) the canon equivalent of the Nikon D3000 be? I just found one locally that I could get w/ the kit lens for $200 and I was thinking about grabbing it as my walk-around, 'dont care *** happens' camera.


Worse than the T3, sell it for like 450 and get a T2i.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Worse than the T3, sell it for like 450 and get a T2i.


I hadn't even THOUGHT of reselling for profit. Man, where's my head at?!

Oh yeah







T-3 days..

Offer sent -- if the owner has the receipt, etc, then I'd pick this up just to resell.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10;13630872*
> what do u use to wet clean? i need to wet clean my a900 soon


Eclipse fluid and the right size sensor swab. The website is here. Their videos are also helpful. If you know someone who works in a laboratory, Eclipse is nothing more than ultra high purity methanol. Beware, it must be ultra high purity.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13630902*
> Breathe on sensor, wipe condensation off with q tip. Hasn't failed me yet.


I wouldn't suggest this, (coming from a guy who doesn't care if people pee on his camera).


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;13630879*
> Same here, my 5DII has some tenacious motes that the built in cleaner and old bulb blower can't dislodge. I've been looking at the Copperhill kit.


i was looking at copperhill kit too.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nuclearjock;13631021*
> Eclipse fluid and the right size sensor swab. The website is here. Their videos are also helpful. If you know someone who works in a laboratory, Eclipse is nothing more than ultra high purity methanol. Beware, it must be ultra high purity.


hmm gf works as a chemist in chevron....but i rather pay the 10 bucks to get eclipse. maybe ill pick up a pack of 4 prewet kit.


----------



## ntuason

What's wrong with exhaling into the camera? I'm worried now because I do it all the the and nothing bad has happen yet. Then I gently wipe the image sensor with my glasses cloth. Is this cleaning process bad?


----------



## dudemanppl

I've done it with all my cameras. Its sort of harder with my current 5DII because it has no AA filter on top of the actual sensor so I'm breathing on to the actual sensor. First, rocket blower, then qtip, then blow again.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


QFT. I had the lower one set up for live view, the top one for bracketing. And the AE/AF-L was for the first thing on my CSM that I set, which was the commander for the pop up flash. It was amazing.


i set mine to artificial horizon, spot metering and 1st item on my menu (auto iso toggle)

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Dude, that's what the My Menu feature is for. Going through the CFn menu every time is for the birds.

Another feature I wish Canon had thought of earlier: locking mode dial! Almost every time I pull my 5DII out, the dial is not where I had it last.

And although I do little in the way of sports, wildlife, etc., I hope that the 5D MK III at least has all cross-type sensors. The outer AF points on the 5DII are pretty crappy, and unusable in low light. Focus and recompose with the center AF point gets old after a while.


1) word

2) you can get the upgrade, but you already knew that. the c1-c2-c3 dials on the 5d2 rocks, though

3) the d700's extreme corner af sucks balls, too. but as far as focus-recompose, 3d-tracking + continuous focus on nikons is far ahead of 5dmk2's af. most of my shots are portraits or people anyway, face-detection works better for me (it always magically focuses on the eyes)

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


I've done it with all my cameras. Its sort of harder with my current 5DII because it has no AA filter on top of the actual sensor so I'm breathing on to the actual sensor. First, rocket blower, then qtip, then blow again.


having no aa filter ruins the focus doesn't it? even if people do the no-aa filter mod, there always has to be a piece of glass to compensate.


----------



## dudemanppl

Having no AA filter makes it sharper. And I'm shooting something right now and its epic. Percussion is number one in the world.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Having no AA filter makes it sharper. And I'm shooting something right now and its epic. Percussion is number one in the world.


yes but if you remove the filter and don't substitute it with a piece of glass, your focus should shift.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


hmm gf works as a chemist in chevron....but i rather pay the 10 bucks to get eclipse. maybe ill pick up a pack of 4 prewet kit.


Tell her you need an ounce or two of HPLC grade methanol.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*


yes but if you remove the filter and don't substitute it with a piece of glass, your focus should shift.



Should.







its just a peice of flat glass in front of the actual sensor.


----------



## MistaBernie

May have just found someone to trade me their Sigma 30mm for my Canon 50mm


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Having no AA filter makes it sharper. And I'm shooting something right now and its epic. Percussion is number one in the world.


You should post some shots with and without the AA filter. I'm curious to see how much of a detriment it really has on sharpness.


----------



## mortimersnerd

My 70-200mm VR I makes a very nice coat rack.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mortimersnerd;13636171*
> My 70-200mm VR I makes a very nice coat rack.


Uhh, I'm not sure if thats the intended purpose of it...










Guess which one has no AA filter?







EDIT: LOL I'M DUMB, IT SAYS SO ON THE BOTTOM.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13636679*
> Uhh, I'm not sure if thats the intended purpose of it...


This is coming from someone who uses his camera with a 300mm attached as a seat.
Quote:


> Guess which one has no AA filter?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EDIT: LOL I'M DUMB, IT SAYS SO ON THE BOTTOM.


I seee what they mean. It seems somewhat sharper, as best as I can tell with my phone screen.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;13637186*
> This is coming from someone who uses his camera with a 300mm attached as a seat.


I thought everyone did that.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Maybe you're light enough to do that without damaging it, but I wouldn't put all 200 lbs. of me on it.


----------



## dudemanppl

140 isn't too far off. Photo stuff is a lot more durable than you'd think.


----------



## sub50hz

*yawn*

Bored. Pouring rain. hail. Power out (laptop/cell tether). UHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13636679*
> Uhh, I'm not sure if thats the intended purpose of it...
> 
> *snip*
> 
> Guess which one has no AA filter?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EDIT: LOL I'M DUMB, IT SAYS SO ON THE BOTTOM.


Now go take a picture of a mesh screen.


----------



## dudemanppl

This is going to be fun. Selling my 50 1.2.







50L is a fair replacement right? lololololol


----------



## MistaBernie

My honesty prevented me from trading that guy my 50 f/1.4 for his 2009 Sigma 30... son, I am disappoint. It's going back after Aruba (probably with the 60D to get calibrated to it), but I might pick up a 30mm after I get back regardless.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer;13632292*
> 
> 2) you can get the upgrade, but you already knew that. the c1-c2-c3 dials on the 5d2 rocks, though


Yeah, but not for $100 and who knows how long to get it done. Plus they screwed up in the implementation. You have to hold the button down while turning the dial. That would really slow things down, especially when needing to quickly switch to one of the custom settings. They should have just made it a toggle button (press once to lock/unlock). Cheers to Canon though for even doing it.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;13645387*
> Yeah, but not for $100 and who knows how long to get it done. Plus they screwed up in the implementation. You have to hold the button down while turning the dial. That would really slow things down, especially when needing to quickly switch to one of the custom settings. They should have just made it a toggle button (press once to lock/unlock). Cheers to Canon though for even doing it.


Its not that bad. Theres never usually enough rush, its second nature once you get used to it. I just picked up one of the dead 5DIIs which didn't have it and the first place my index finger went was the center of the wheel.








C1 for me is aperture priority at f/2 and everything else pretty much auto and AF-ON set to shutter release instead of back button for my friends to use. C2 is North Gym at my school. C3 hasn't been set yet...


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13645441*
> Its not that bad. Theres never usually enough rush, its second nature once you get used to it. I just picked up one of the dead 5DIIs which didn't have it and the first place my index finger went was the center of the wheel.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> C1 for me is aperture priority at f/2 and everything else pretty much auto and AF-ON set to shutter release instead of back button for my friends to use. C2 is North Gym at my school. C3 hasn't been set yet...


I wonder if Canon will sell the dial a la carte? How hard would it be to install?


----------



## dudemanppl

16 screws. Don't do it man, DON'T DO IT.


----------



## BlankThis

Shane can you give me a price for a D700 body-only with your connection?

Thanks


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis;13646901*
> Shane can you give me a price for a D700 body-only with your connection?
> 
> Thanks


Turns out its more than I originally said, I was looking at and unupdated forum. It's $1970, Not sure about taxes and shipping.

The D300 I had was the right price, cept it was actually a D300S.


----------



## BlankThis

Damn. Still not bad though seeing as they retail for more like 2500.

Does anybody know of a decent photography forum (That has Nikon users) that I don't have to pay or make 1000 posts before using the classifieds section?


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis;13647883*
> Damn. Still not bad though seeing as they retail for more like 2500.
> 
> Does anybody know of a decent photography forum (That has Nikon users) that I don't have to pay or make 1000 posts before using the classifieds section?


fredmiranda.com


----------



## dudemanppl

On FM, you only have to pay if you want to list stuff.


----------



## BlankThis

Ah thanks guys


----------



## ljason8eg

Gotta love gear breaking for no reason especially when I'm on the road and need it. 50 1.4 won't focus anymore. Not even manual focus works. The ring spins but something must be locked up inside.


----------



## dudemanppl

Holy crap, thats sad. Thats why I had a manual focus 50 1.2 (basically nothing to go wrong) and Sigma 50 (L quality build) over the Canon 1.4 which was known for the motor to die.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Holy crap, thats sad. Thats why I had a manual focus 50 1.2 (basically nothing to go wrong) and Sigma 50 (L quality build) over the Canon 1.4 which was known for the motor to die.


So if the motor is dead it won't even manually focus?


----------



## dudemanppl

It probably would, but I have no idea. Some lenses focus by wire, but I don't remember the 50 doing that.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


It probably would, but I have no idea. Some lenses focus by wire, but I don't remember the 50 doing that.


Yeah its just done I guess. Stuck just before infinity no matter what I do. It's only like 3 or 4 months old too. Maybe 400 shots with it. Ah well guess I should be thankful its under warranty


----------



## dudemanppl

Hopefully covered under warranty. Canon might reject it, hope you don't have any marks on it or they'll call it impact damage.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg;13650986*
> So if the motor is dead it won't even manually focus?


all usm-type lenses use a clutch systemto engage/disengage the focus ring. maybe that broke and it locked up the mechanism preventing auto/mf focus. either way, you gotta send it in.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Hopefully covered under warranty. Canon might reject it, hope you don't have any marks on it or they'll call it impact damage.


It's as pristine as pristine gets and has never been dropped. Hopefully the warranty process will be easy.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*


all usm-type lenses use a clutch systemto engage/disengage the focus ring. maybe that broke and it locked up the mechanism preventing auto/mf focus. either way, you gotta send it in.


Even the micromotor USM in the 50?


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*


all usm-type lenses use a clutch systemto engage/disengage the focus ring. maybe that broke and it locked up the mechanism preventing auto/mf focus. either way, you gotta send it in.


Wat. Not a clutch. Its a ribbon cable that leads to something that disengages it. Not a clutch.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Wat. Not a clutch. Its a ribbon cable that leads to something that disengages it. Not a clutch.


That's what I was looking for. And yes, it has to be a clutch to engage/disengage manual drive, but it works differently in micromotor and ring USM types.


----------



## BlankThis

Damn D700's seem to hold their value... Shane the price you quoted me is cheaper than some guys selling them like-new with 25k clicks.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis;13653653*
> Damn D700's seem to hold their value... Shane the price you quoted me is cheaper than some guys selling them like-new with 25k clicks.


that's only because of the 'quake. i've seen them go for 1600-1700 for 25-70k clicks before.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg;13651094*
> Yeah its just done I guess. Stuck just before infinity no matter what I do. It's only like 3 or 4 months old too. Maybe 400 shots with it. Ah well guess I should be thankful its under warranty


Good thing it's under warranty! And although it sucks that your copy is having this issue, I don't think it's as common as people try to claim. It just gets sensationalized every time it happens to someone's copy. Mine lasted for three years no problem (sold it), and there are people on POTN who still have working copies from the 90's.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer;13654706*
> that's only because of the 'quake. i've seen them go for 1600-1700 for 25-70k clicks before.


True. The 5D II was even selling for under $2k used, but now that the retail price went up to $2699, it's through the roof again. Good time to be selling camera gear (unlike the housing market)!


----------



## ljason8eg

Well on the bright side, the 70-200 2.8L and 17-55 2.8 work fantastic! The AF of the 70-200 is freakin amazing even on my T2i.


----------



## r34p3rex

Any idea when the 5D MKIII will be coming out? I've been itching to go FF but the 5DMKII is too expensive for me right now xD


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r34p3rex;13656585*
> Any idea when the 5D MKIII will be coming out? I've been itching to go FF but the 5DMKII is too expensive for me right now xD


No one knows for certain, but most guesses are for sometime in the summer.

http://www.canonrumors.com/category/photography/canon-5d-mark-iii/


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer;13654706*
> that's only because of the 'quake. i've seen them go for 1600-1700 for 25-70k clicks before.


Shane can get one for 2k new... Probably lower when things settle in Japan.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis;13657880*
> Shane can get one for 2k new... Probably lower when things settle in Japan.


too bad that's only through a special employee discount and in limited quantities for his household.


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer;13658347*
> too bad that's only through a special employee discount and in limited quantities for his household.


Shhhh.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r34p3rex;13656585*
> Any idea when the 5D MKIII will be coming out? I've been itching to go FF but the 5DMKII is too expensive for me right now xD


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;13656971*
> No one knows for certain, but most guesses are for sometime in the summer.
> 
> http://www.canonrumors.com/category/photography/canon-5d-mark-iii/


if it"s this year, it would be accnounced sept during PMA (Cliq).


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer;13658434*
> if it"s this year, it would be accnounced sept during PMA (Cliq).


I thought they moved that to January or something? Also, 35L is winning. It seems wider than the 35 f/2. Like theres more perspective distortion, but you don't really see more. Its super trippy.

I have someone ready to send payment for the 35 f/2 and 50 1.2 AI-S, just waiting to get some more cash in and to find a 50L to buy...


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13658472*
> I thought they moved that to January or something? Also, 35L is winning. It seems wider than the 35 f/2. Like theres more perspective distortion, but you don't really see more. Its super trippy.
> 
> I have someone ready to send payment for the 35 f/2 and 50 1.2 AI-S, just waiting to get some more cash in and to find a 50L to buy...


spring is photokina

edit: ah, it was moved to jan so they can mash it together with ces. 'till 2012 then!


----------



## dudemanppl

I changed the top of my working 5DII and I couldn't switch over the locking dial and now I need to break the habit of pressing down...

EDIT: 35L is easy to get dust out of. That only took like 10 minutes.


----------



## ljason8eg

Whisky River is f-ing awesome! VIP table and drinks on the house ftw! Gotta be at the track at like 10am too for a shoot. Bah I'll suck it up tomorrow


----------



## Dream Killer

i temporarily traded my d700 for my older sister's g11. at least i can use a manual camera again. minus the 285hv of course


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Nice^^

Also, leet page.


----------



## ljason8eg

Well today was interesting. I ended up doing some work for the #09 Sprint Cup team in practice. They wanted pics of the car under maximum travel so I headed to the infield and found a nice elderly couple who let me stand up on top of their motorhome. Got some awesome shots of the action. Moments like these are where I wish I had a laptop so i could edit before I get back home.


----------



## Dimaggio1103

Add me plz. Canon T1i EOS 500D stock lens.


----------



## sub50hz

Flea market extravaganza today -- picked up a Pentax K1000 SE film body and a 135 f/2.8 lens for 60 bucks. Picks later.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer;13654706*
> that's only because of the 'quake. i've seen them go for 1600-1700 for 25-70k clicks before.


Everything with a chip from Japan in it has gone up in price. Cars, cameras, etc, not the best time to best new right now.


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mootsfox;13669487*
> Everything with a chip from Japan in it has gone up in price. Cars, cameras, etc, not the best time to best new right now.


It's not a good time to buy period. The price hikes have even trickled into a lot of the used market.


----------



## BlankThis

Did a friend a favor today and shot a bit of a show he was doing with his 5D2, also giving me a chance to try it out. Once I got used to the change in ergonomics I liked it a lot. From what I noted in low light the autofocus wasn't very good on the outside points but I generally lock it to center point focus on my D90 so doing the same was no problem.

Video is delicious... I think I would have a really bad addiction with filming everything if I bought one.


----------



## Marin

Looks like it's time to sell my gear.


----------



## dudemanppl

lolwut.


----------



## Marin

What?


----------



## dudemanppl

Why sell gear? You aren't 14.


----------



## Marin

Because I don't use it.


----------



## dudemanppl

Somehow I read "all my gear"... What are you selling?


----------



## Marin

24-70mm.
Maybe a 50D.


----------



## dudemanppl

50D has lost so much value after the 7D came out. And mid range zooms are icky.


----------



## Marin

Except people eat up mid-range zooms.


----------



## sub50hz

The aforementioned Pentax. I have been drinking for 12 hours. God damnit.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;13674092*
> Except people eat up mid-range zooms.


Disgusting. Absolutely vile. I think I'm actually going to stick with my gear list for a hell of a long time. I am completely content with WA fast zoom, 35L, 50L, 85, and 120-300. Its just so good. I can do everything.


----------



## sub50hz

Hrm... curiously, this K1000 is an M42 mount, and everything I can find about K1000s says they're all K mount. Weird.


----------



## dudemanppl

IT JUST MEANS YOU CAN SELL FOR SUPER MONEY NOW! lolcaps


----------



## sub50hz

F that. This thing is super clean, and the Makinon (JC Penney branded, for the lols) 135 looks brand new. Gonna run a couple rolls through it this weekend, see how it goes. The rails above and below the shutter curtain are slightly corroded, which leaves a bit of scratching on the film, but not in the image space, so I think it'sll be alright.


----------



## sub50hz

OUPPO SPAGHETTI -- it's K-mount, but the adapter was cold welded into the body. Little bit of TriFlow fixed that RIGHT UP.


----------



## dudemanppl

Smart guy.


----------



## sub50hz

It threw me off because the adapter, when stuck in the body, is completely flush with the camera surface and is stamped "PENTAX". I'm also _slightly_ intoxicated, which makes things inherently more complicated.


----------



## dudemanppl

When I grow up I want to be just like you!


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13674281*
> When I grow up I want to be just like you!


I find pleasure in more things than flipping camera gear, although at half my age, I don't necessarily expect you to understand that.


----------



## Mootsfox

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;13674010*
> Because I don't use it.


I feel the same way.

I need to get a P&S.


----------



## Blech

Hi guys,
Love the thread. I am wanting to get more into shooting myself. My fried helped me shoot my submission build: http://www.overclock.net/intel-general/1028621-blechs-i5-sandy-budget-brawler.html and he used a Canon S95.

From what I understand this is a dated camera but fits my needs (I think) I am wondering if the new Canon G12 will be like it and a plausible starter or is it too steep to start out with. I am ready to step away from P&S but don't want to go full DSLR action as it's way confusing for someone like me.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Blech;13674339*
> Hi guys,
> Love the thread. I am wanting to get more into shooting myself. My fried helped me shoot my submission build: http://www.overclock.net/intel-general/1028621-blechs-i5-sandy-budget-brawler.html and he used a Canon S95.
> 
> From what I understand this is a dated camera but fits my needs (I think) I am wondering if the new Canon G12 will be like it and a plausible starter or is it too steep to start out with. I am ready to step away from P&S but don't want to go full DSLR action as it's way confusing for someone like me.


It's actually not that confusing, in all honesty. The S95 shines compared to other point and shoots in part because of its manual settings; the same manual settings that you'll gain with a DSLR. In fact, the only thing the S95/G12 have over a DSLR is portability.

Given how the S95/G12 are the same price as an entry-level DSLR, I'd rather grab a DSLR and save myself an extra ~$400 down the road.

If all the extra settings confuse you, stick it on auto and read a lot of guides/take lots of photos/gain experience as you take these settings off of auto and into manual one by one, slowly gaining confidence and skill along the way.

It's just my two cents. So long as you've a motivation to learn, you've nothing to fear by going straight into a DSLR, and it'll save you hundreds as well.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;13674092*
> Except people eat up mid-range zooms.


qft, mid-range zooms are boring. i mean, why would you want to take pics with an slr that has a p&s' viewangle?


----------



## Boyboyd

For science!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13674135*
> Disgusting. Absolutely vile. I think I'm actually going to stick with my gear list for a hell of a long time. I am completely content with WA fast zoom, 35L, 50L, 85, and 120-300. Its just so good. I can do everything.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer;13676164*
> qft, mid-range zooms are boring. i mean, why would you want to take pics with an slr that has a p&s' viewangle?


I'm about to sell my 24-70 as well I think. I actually wouldn't mind keeping it, but I really need a UWA lens, either a 16-35 or 14L.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Blech;13674339*
> Hi guys,
> Love the thread. I am wanting to get more into shooting myself. My fried helped me shoot my submission build: http://www.overclock.net/intel-general/1028621-blechs-i5-sandy-budget-brawler.html and he used a Canon S95.
> 
> From what I understand this is a dated camera but fits my needs (I think) I am wondering if the new Canon G12 will be like it and a plausible starter or is it too steep to start out with. I am ready to step away from P&S but don't want to go full DSLR action as it's way confusing for someone like me.


The S95 is not dated.


----------



## BlankThis

Used 5D2 and 17-40L?

I think I caught the Canon bug yesterday


----------



## laboitenoire

Lol, I've been cleaning out my bedroom closet, and found a bin full of old photos. I was quite the hipster photographer, shotting weird stuff on expire Kodak Gold 400 with a fixed-focus Kodak point and shoot.


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;13676462*
> The S95 is not dated.


His friend was using a S90. Which is kindaaa dated, but not really.


----------



## dudemanppl

S90 is BAWWWWWS.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;13676462*
> I'm about to sell my 24-70 as well I think. I actually wouldn't mind keeping it, but I really need a UWA lens, either a 16-35 or 14L.


16-28 if you don't mind losing range and no filters. But no 14L. Its so stupidly overpriced and its super soft too. Get a Samyang 14 for sure, maybe a 14-24 even. Anything but the 14L, worst Canon lens ever.


----------



## Shane1244

I loved my Samyang 14mm, only problem was the inaccurate focus.


----------



## dudemanppl

But I've never heard of that issue before, and you can return it anyway if thats the case.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13678475*
> But I've never heard of that issue before, and you can return it anyway if thats the case.


he demonstrated it about a month or two ago (it's several pages back). it was softer than ice-cream after five minutes under the sun at the beach


----------



## Shane1244

Yeah, I must have gotton a bad apple. B&H didn't refund the shipping either :/ most companies do.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13678265*
> S90 is BAWWWWWS.
> 
> 16-28 if you don't mind losing range and no filters. But no 14L. Its so stupidly overpriced and its super soft too. Get a Samyang 14 for sure, maybe a 14-24 even. Anything but the 14L, worst Canon lens ever.


I'm talking about the 14L II. All the reviews I've read about it say the sharpness is stellar. And the Tokina 16-28 is very sharp indeed, but still suffers from the legendary Tokina CA and is very flare prone. I'd rather pay the premium for the 16-35 II.


----------



## dudemanppl

Don't get a 14LII, that was what I was talking about. 14L is only 1k, not as bad as the LII, which is still crap.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13679467*
> Don't get a 14LII, that was what I was talking about. 14L is only 1k, not as bad as the LII, which is still crap.


Dude, everything is either crap or amazing to you, so I don't know if I trust your opinion. Especially since you probably owned the 14L for 5 minutes, shot the inside of your room, then sold it.









In all seriousness though, I agree about the price, which is why I'm leaning more towards the 16-35LII.


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;13679583*
> Dude, everything is either crap or amazing to you, so I don't know if I trust your opinion. Especially since you probably owned the 14L for 5 minutes, shot the inside of your room, then sold it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In all seriousness though, I agree about the price, which is why I'm leaning more towards the 16-35LII.


I lol'ed.


----------



## Blech

Thanks for the great info and direction guys. Good stuff; and yeah you were right about the version I got the camera wrong. It is the other one he was using. 
Trying to work with lightning and washing shadows out without wrecking the interior gave me a new respect for what you guys can do.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Dude, everything is either crap or amazing to you, so I don't know if I trust your opinion. Especially since you probably owned the 14L for 5 minutes, shot the inside of your room, then sold it.









In all seriousness though, I agree about the price, which is why I'm leaning more towards the 16-35LII.


LOL. Yeah, just about 5.







To be honest, its not all that crap, just the fact that you can have a 14-24, which is a ZOOM, for 500 or so less and blow it out of the water is what makes it just a completely silly lens. 16-35L II is fine though. Get it. NOW.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13680570*
> LOL. Yeah, just about 5.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> To be honest, its not all that crap, just the fact that you can have a 14-24, which is a ZOOM, for 500 or so less and blow it out of the water is what makes it just a completely silly lens. 16-35L II is fine though. Get it. NOW.


Are you talking about adapting the Nikon 14-24? As much fun as that sounds, spending $200+ for a decent adapter does not, nor does losing auto focus.

And I'm just now realizing that the 14L doesn't accept screw filters. Annoying. And the 16-35 uses uber pricey 82mm filters (don't have the money to invest in a filter holder either). UWA is expensive for FF.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Are you talking about adapting the Nikon 14-24? As much fun as that sounds, spending $200+ for a decent adapter does not, nor does losing auto focus.

And I'm just now realizing that the 14L doesn't accept screw filters. Annoying. And the 16-35 uses uber pricey 82mm filters (don't have the money to invest in a filter holder either). UWA is expensive for FF.










Thank goodness for Fotodiox.

http://www.fotodiox.com/product_info...roducts_id=572

http://www.fotodiox.com/product_info...roducts_id=571

Also, UWA's are expensive for everything.


----------



## Dream Killer

canon = king of tele
nikon = king of wide angle

it's just how it is


----------



## Marin

4x5 & larger WA has a pop to it. I dig it.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


4x5 & larger WA has a pop to it. I dig it.


i meant of all the 35mm dslrs.


----------



## Marin

Student discount at Samy's.


----------



## MistaBernie

ok -- so I'm about to hop on a plane (roughly 9 hours, but only ~5 hours to decide which bag to bring with me/use for this trip). Aruba for ~8 days, so I'm obviously flying. I have a couple of choices:

1) Canon 200 EG Deluxe Backpack
2) Crumpler 7 Million Dollar Home

It would be to carry all of the gear in my sig (though, it may not be necessary to bring everything, I'm thinking I'd kick myself if I didn't).

The other option is, enjoying this as a vacation, and bringing only my old Point and Shoot. I'm pretty sure my wife might like that a bit more, but part of the appeal of me buying some of the stuff that I bought was the fact that I could bring it to Aruba.

So, any last minute thoughts/ideas?


----------



## dudemanppl

Mercedes Benz uses for product shots:
Phase One P45; dunno what lens
Leaf AFi-75; dunno what lens
Leica S2; 35 f/2.5, 70 f/2.5
Canon 1DsIII; 24-70L, 70-200 2.8L IS I
Nikon D3x, D3s; 24-70, 70-200 2.8 VR I (that surprised me)

Oh and they don't strip EXIF. And they have in-house photographers.

EDIT: Bernie, bring the 10-20 and the 50. Nothing more. It'll be basically a point and shoot, enjoy it.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


ok -- so I'm about to hop on a plane (roughly 9 hours, but only ~5 hours to decide which bag to bring with me/use for this trip). Aruba for ~8 days, so I'm obviously flying. I have a couple of choices:

1) Canon 200 EG Deluxe Backpack
2) Crumpler 7 Million Dollar Home

It would be to carry all of the gear in my sig (though, it may not be necessary to bring everything, I'm thinking I'd kick myself if I didn't).

The other option is, enjoying this as a vacation, and bringing only my old Point and Shoot. I'm pretty sure my wife might like that a bit more, but part of the appeal of me buying some of the stuff that I bought was the fact that I could bring it to Aruba.

So, any last minute thoughts/ideas?


Do you already own these bags or are thinking about buying one?


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Do you already own these bags or are thinking about buying one?


Already own - I essentially got the backpack for free for helping a local shop make a couple of sales.


----------



## dudemanppl

I've helped the Samy's in Pasedena rake in around 10 grand in sales. QQ.


----------



## BlankThis

dudemanppl/5D2 owners, what's the deal with the weather sealing on the 5D2. From what I've read it's partially sealed... That's going to be a huge deciding factor for me between with D700 and 5D2, which is better suited for weather. Any first hand experience? I know you've probably pulled yours apart a dudemanppl, so what's the deal?


----------



## Dream Killer

if you want to go in the rain with the 5d2 or d700 they'll both work fine. for the 5d2 you need to use L lenses + filter and for the d700 you need the newer lenses with the rubber gasket on the mount (all af-s lenses) + filter.


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer;13685921*
> if you want to go in the rain with the 5d2 or d700 they'll both work fine. for the 5d2 you need to use L lenses + filter and for the d700 you need the newer lenses with the rubber gasket on the mount (all af-s lenses) + filter.


It's actually going to be snow probably... Might be getting a gig shooting skiing events


----------



## Dream Killer

that's even easier. just be sure to do the ziplock bag technique to prevent condensation


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer;13686004*
> that's even easier. just be sure to do the ziplock bag technique to prevent condensation


Yeah. I've shot before with my D90 it's just a bit scary with no sealing. I ended up taping hand warmers to it to keep the battery happy.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;13681162*
> Thank goodness for Fotodiox.
> 
> http://www.fotodiox.com/product_info.php?products_id=572
> 
> http://www.fotodiox.com/product_info.php?products_id=571
> 
> Also, UWA's are expensive for everything.


They aren't for crop, which was the basis of my gripe, but I didn't expect it to be cheaper anyhow.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie;13682729*
> ok -- so I'm about to hop on a plane (roughly 9 hours, but only ~5 hours to decide which bag to bring with me/use for this trip). Aruba for ~8 days, so I'm obviously flying. I have a couple of choices:
> 
> 1) Canon 200 EG Deluxe Backpack
> 2) Crumpler 7 Million Dollar Home
> 
> It would be to carry all of the gear in my sig (though, it may not be necessary to bring everything, I'm thinking I'd kick myself if I didn't).
> 
> The other option is, enjoying this as a vacation, and bringing only my old Point and Shoot. I'm pretty sure my wife might like that a bit more, but part of the appeal of me buying some of the stuff that I bought was the fact that I could bring it to Aruba.
> 
> So, any last minute thoughts/ideas?


I think it would be pointless to have invested all the money into your DSLR kit and not bring at least some of it, but that's just my opinion. I've traveled abroad and always brought my DSLR, and I'm glad I did, despite lugging the gear around (I went light, 7D w/50 + 10-22, but I was on the move a lot).

With that being said, I think that your 50 and 10-20 are the only two lenses I'd bring, unless you foresee a specific need for a telephoto lens. But it couldn't hurt to bring it anyway (you could leave it in the hotel room safe if you didn't want to carry it around).

As for bags, the 7DMH is what I'd bring. It will make for a nice bag to carry your gear while your out, as opposed to an awkward backpack (just picturing someone walking on the beach with a big black backpack is off-putting).
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis;13685948*
> It's actually going to be snow probably... Might be getting a gig shooting skiing events


I think it will be just fine. Bring a cloth to wipe off snow just case. I once dropped my 5DII + 24-70 into deep snow, lens first, and it didn't slow it down. And if you shoot skiing, you might want something with a better AF like the D700 or Canon 1D MkIII.


----------



## mrwesth

I used to shoot in heavy rain with a 40d. Just bring some plastic baggies and gaffers tape/rubber bands and any body can handle any weather conditions. Never had any moisture issues.


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;13686388*
> And if you shoot skiing, you might want something with a better AF like the D700 or Canon 1D MkIII.


I really like the idea of the video as well though. Maybe if the next Nikon offering is affordable.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis;13687076*
> I really like the idea of the video as well though. Maybe if the next Nikon offering is affordable.


To be fair, the 5DII is not impossible to shoot sports with, as many will attest. It's just nice to have a camera with decent servo AF. The 7D had a very effective servo AF mode IMO.


----------



## BlankThis

I'll have to try it out in some action scenarios and see.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;13687357*
> To be fair, the 5DII is not impossible to shoot sports with, as many will attest. It's just nice to have a camera with decent servo AF. The 7D had a very effective servo AF mode IMO.


More fps in burst also helps.


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nuclearjock;13688643*
> More fps in burst also helps.


Not a huge issue since it will be 90% terrain park with mostly rails and boxes.


----------



## dudemanppl

5DII has no sealing, whatever Canon tells you is like cake. I've buried the D700 in snow for fun, it just makes my face cold. Even with no sealing, I'd sure use it in snow, just don't bury it.


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13689314*
> *5DII has no sealing*, whatever Canon tells you is like cake. I've buried the D700 in snow for fun, it just makes my face cold. Even with no sealing, I'd sure use it in snow, just don't bury it.


Wow good to know, thanks!


----------



## dudemanppl

Don't get me wrong, its still put together really snugly and water SHOULDN'T seep in, but eventually, it will.


----------



## BlankThis

Well one of the reasons why I'm looking to move to a semi-pro body is the durability...


----------



## dudemanppl

Its durable, just don't drop it head first onto concrete from 3 feet up.







:sad-smile:sad-smile:sad-smile:sad-smile


----------



## BlankThis

Similar to how I lost my first 35 f/1.8


----------



## ~sizzzle~

nvm


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13689314*
> 5DII has no sealing, whatever Canon tells you is like cake. I've buried the D700 in snow for fun, it just makes my face cold. Even with no sealing, I'd sure use it in snow, just don't bury it.


Ok, now you're just misleading people outright. The 5DII *is* sealed (and you know it), just not as well as the 1ds/1d series or Nikon FF cameras.


----------



## dudemanppl

Nikon has foam strips at the edges, the 5DII doesn't. Well thats what I consider sealing, dunno about you.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13698106*
> Nikon has foam strips at the edges, the 5DII doesn't. Well thats what I consider sealing, dunno about you.


Doesn't matter. If you say the 5DII has *no sealing whatsoever,* that gives someone the impression who doesn't know to begin with that the 5DII's construction is no different than a Rebel, which is BS to the umpteenth power.









It's fine to say that it's not as good (and it's not), but to say it doesn't have it is foolish. The 5DII does have sealing materials and is not just "well built."


----------



## dudemanppl

Yes, its put together very well and I doubt there would be much trouble in rain, but theres no weather strips like the D700 or D3 (thats all I've taken apart).
Thats the gap in the panel I talked about a few months ago:









And yes I did just take apart my 5DII for you.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

You just removed the rear panel, and as you well know, there are more parts to it than that.

This is the information I'm seeing:
Quote:


> "The battery compartment, memory card door, LCD and the camera buttons are all fitted with sealing materials (indicated in red). In addition the adoption of high precision split-level alignment of the magnesium-alloy external covers, high precision dial construction and external rubber grip covers (indicated in green), has improved the camera's dust and water resistance."


----------



## dudemanppl

I'll take the top off when I get home if you'd like.








Thats the most I've taken apart the 5DII to and I don't remember any sealing.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Dude, don't ruin your camera on my account. For all I know, the gap in your camera might be there because of your taking it apart.


----------



## Boyboyd

I feel the need to upgrade my body now. It's kind of a sad feeling.

I'm thinking about either a used D90 or spalshing out the £400 extra for a 7000. I'll go with the latter if i get a 70-200 f/2.8 this weekend.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;13698441*
> Dude, don't ruin your camera on my account. For all I know, the gap in your camera might be there because of your taking it apart.


I have broken 5DIIs laying around too.







And by looking at the extra top I have, theres nothing.


----------



## Shane1244

..has the D700 body always been $2700 on B&H?


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;13699393*
> ..has the D700 body always been $2700 on B&H?


That's more expensive than retail here...


----------



## Shane1244

Yeah It's still $2500 at BestBuy, although it usually takes a while for price changes to take place on bigger things like this.


----------



## sub50hz

Went to Central Camera on lunch -- _expired_ Delta 3200 for 9 dollars a roll? Ridiculous.


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Went to Central Camera on lunch -- _expired_ Delta 3200 for 9 dollars a roll? Ridiculous.


Ilford HP5 Plus 400 $6 a roll


----------



## sub50hz

400 != 3200

I haven't shot HP5 since I discovered how wonderful Delta 400 is -- and it pushes much better, which is good because 800 has been ideal for me lately.


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13700936*
> 400 != 3200
> 
> I haven't shot HP5 since I discovered how wonderful Delta 400 is -- and it pushes much better, which is good because 800 has been ideal for me lately.


I'm still working on a roll of 125... I bought the roll for some highway long exposure shots but now I'm finding it difficult to finish the roll, too slow.


----------



## sub50hz

I only use 100 on occasion, and make it a point to blast the roll through quickly since our weather is so unpredictable, making it weeks before I can use it again.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

5DII firmware update is out:

https://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/support/consumer/eos_slr_camera_systems/eos_digital_slr_cameras/eos_5d_mark_ii?selectedName=ServiceAndSupport#DriversAndSoftware


----------



## dudemanppl

R3a dropped onto hard concrete from 6 feet (not my fault this time!). Nothing happened except its slightly uglier now!


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;13706556*
> 5DII firmware update is out:
> 
> https://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/support/consumer/eos_slr_camera_systems/eos_digital_slr_cameras/eos_5d_mark_ii?selectedName=ServiceAndSupport#DriversAndSoftware


Where can I see what changes have been made?


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis;13707075*
> Where can I see what changes have been made?


http://www.canonrumors.com/2011/05/firmware-5d-mark-ii-2-0-9/


----------



## BlankThis

Nothing major.


----------



## foothead

Has anyone here used the Olympus 35mm f/3.5 macro? It looks really good for the price, but I'm worried it might have the same godawful focusing ring as the 14-42 and 40-150.


----------



## Boyboyd

I'm not sure how they can call a 35mm lens macro. Especially on 35mm.


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*


I'm not sure how they can call a 35mm lens macro. Especially on 35mm.


Because it focuses down to 5cm. Also, Olympus uses four thirds, which has a 2x crop factor. So basically, think of it as a 70mm lens.


----------



## Boyboyd

Ah i see. That's not so bad if it's 1:1 macro. I didn't know they used M4/3.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Boyboyd;13710901*
> Ah i see. That's not so bad if it's 1:1 macro. I didn't know they used M4/3.


He means regular 4/3, not M4/3 (both are 2X FOV crop). Olympus DSLR's use 4/3 mount, while the PEN EVIL cameras use M4/3.


----------



## Boyboyd

Wow.

I thought that micro 4/3 and regular 4/3 were one and the same.

Every day is a school day.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Boyboyd;13711126*
> Wow.
> 
> I thought that micro 4/3 and regular 4/3 were one and the same.
> 
> Every day is a school day.


Same sensor size for both. M4/3 can use an adapter for regular 4/3, but not the other way around (AFAIK).


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead;13710521*
> Has anyone here used the Olympus 35mm f/3.5 macro? It looks really good for the price, but I'm worried it might have the same godawful focusing ring as the 14-42 and 40-150.


it indeed does have an awful manual focusing ring.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Boyboyd;13710760*
> I'm not sure how they can call a 35mm lens macro. Especially on 35mm.


because its a 1:1 lens


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Same sensor size for both. M4/3 can use an adapter for regular 4/3, but not the other way around (AFAIK).


This. M4/3 has a much shorter flange distance due to the lack of a mirror, so it can use pretty much anything if you can find an adapter.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


it indeed does have an awful manual focusing ring.


As I suspected... I'll have to give it some thought then. Maybe I'll save up and get the 50mm f/2 and the extension ring, though that's a lot more than I'd like to spend.


----------



## dudemanppl

Nikkor 55mm f/3.5?


----------



## Marin

You Tube


----------



## dudemanppl

I'm really craving a 1DsIII right about now, even though the rear LCD is complete poopy.


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;13721437*
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lMu_m203YaY


Way less automated than I expected


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13721972*
> I'm really craving a 1DsIII right about now, even though the rear LCD is complete poopy.


Sit quietly in a dark place for awhile. It wil subside.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nuclearjock;13724163*
> Sit quietly in a dark place for awhile. It wil subside.


Ha! I think I'm good with 5DIIs. BUT BUILD QUALITY IS SO GOOD.

Don't want the 1DsIII anymore. No ISO 6400 and up. Useless.


----------



## BlankThis

WAH!

I just want prices to go back down and then 5DmkIII to be released already.


----------



## ljason8eg

Canon, I never would have guessed that would be the reason you need my phone number to complete a repair...


----------



## Nemesis158

none of us can see that picture (or at least i cant anyway, says "Access Forbidden")


----------



## ljason8eg

Should be fixed now. Gallery was on private for some odd reason.


----------



## Nemesis158

nope still not working


----------



## BlankThis

dasfdafdafdaasdfdadsafdasadfaasdfdasf kljlkjlklkjjhkjlkljhjklj;lk


----------



## Shane1244

Works fine, and I'm viewing it on my phone..


----------



## Boyboyd

Works for me, but i had to clear the cache.

A lot of places ask for phone numbers now. I always take mine and change a digit somewhere in it. If they want me they can email me.


----------



## ljason8eg

Yeah I don't care if they have it, I just found the balloon message amusing.


----------



## Boyboyd

I didn't even notice that? I can only think of 1 reason they would need it, to call you.


----------



## sub50hz

I give my google voice number for things like that -- it's possible they'll need your number to expedite some part of the repair process, why delay it by switching up a number?


----------



## Boyboyd

I'd give it to canon or nikon, but i'm not giving it when i get a quote for car insurance and stuff like that.


----------



## laboitenoire

Oh man, this is dangerous. I just got my first paycheck for the summer today... I don't _need_ new gear, per se, but it'd sure be nice, lol.


----------



## Shane1244

Shut up and buy something already.


----------



## dudemanppl

It is your destiny.


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire;13729162*
> Oh man, this is dangerous. I just got my first paycheck for the summer today... I don't _need_ new gear, per se, but it'd sure be nice, lol.


Bro you need a D90 and 50mm f/1.8

I got you covered. Hit me up


----------



## sub50hz

Well, someone had to.


----------



## laboitenoire

Yeah, I think this summer's purchase might be a UWA or a D7000. We'll have to see. I am tempted to make the jump to full-frame, but that would mean I'd have to say goodbye to my Sigma


----------



## dudemanppl

Say goodbye to that Sigma and buy another Sigma. The 50 is beyond beast.


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Yeah, I think this summer's purchase might be a UWA or a D7000. We'll have to see. I am tempted to make the jump to full-frame, but that would mean I'd have to say goodbye to my Sigma










Or you could buy my D90 w/ 50mm 1.8 AND a UWA


----------



## dudemanppl

I also have a broken 17-55 if you'd like it.


----------



## BlankThis

Should I buy a film scanner? I saw one for about $150 here... I would really like to have digital copies of my film work as well.


----------



## laboitenoire

Haha, Blank, I'm not sure I want a D90. The image quality wouldn't be any better than my D5000, and I really would like better high ISO performance (among other things).

And Dude, what's wrong with it?


----------



## dudemanppl

Don't buy it it's broken.


----------



## BlankThis

It's in perfect condition ACTUALLY







. Including everything that it came with and an extended warranty.

I'm just looking to go FF and while I would like to hang onto it as a secondary/backup the extra cash would be nice.


----------



## dudemanppl

LOL I WAS TALKING ABOUT MY 17-55. Buy his D90, they're good for your health.


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


LOL I WAS TALKING ABOUT MY 17-55. Buy his D90, they're good for your health.


Proven to cure herpes.


----------



## mortimersnerd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *BlankThis*


Proven to cure herpes.


You speak from experience?


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mortimersnerd*


You speak from experience?


----------



## dudemanppl

How would the D90 be applied to affected areas?


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13733291*
> How would the D90 be applied to affected areas?


Heat vigorously, _*apply rectally.*_


----------



## dudemanppl

I don't want his D90 anymore.


----------



## Boyboyd

I'd buy it in a heartbeat. International shipping sucks though.


----------



## dudemanppl

You Brits are kinky as hell.


----------



## Marin

Whenever I use my 1v it makes my 5DMKII's AF feel like junk.


----------



## dudemanppl

I don't know why but when I use my friends D3 it just feels exactly the same AF-wise.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;13736736*
> Whenever I use my 1v it makes my 5DMKII's AF feel like junk.


Hm, I don't need to use a camera with better AF to feel the junkiness of the AF of my 5DII.


----------



## BlankThis

I just got it cleaned!

AF is overrated.


----------



## iandroo888

anyone lookin for a d90 by any chance? been tryin to sell one.. $625 shipped anywhere US48. can include extra battery for +$25


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *BlankThis*


AF is overrated.


Unless you use live view, I hope you have a split-image screen.


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


anyone lookin for a d90 by any chance? been tryin to sell one.. $625 shipped anywhere US48. can include extra battery for +$25


Late to the game









Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Unless you use live view, I hope you have a split-image screen.


Center focus point + focus confirmation. But yeah a split screen would be nice. Too bad I would never have the guts to install one myself.


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Unless you use live view, I hope you have a split-image screen.


This


----------



## Boyboyd

Used a d3x today. Oh good god...

I also just got a 70-300 vr as a late birthday present. Time to update my body soon I think.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *BlankThis*


Center focus point + focus confirmation.


This way sucks. Have you used a camera with a split screen? It definitely makes me not miss AF.


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


This way sucks. Have you used a camera with a split screen? It definitely makes me not miss AF.


No it does not. It works for me.

Yes I have. I prefer a micro-prism but whatever.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:



Originally Posted by *BlankThis*

Late to the game










but ive posted about this before  i was just mentionin about it again if in cases anyone was interested


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Strobing is some very fun stuff. I think I may have found a new addiction...


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


but ive posted about this before  i was just mentionin about it again if in cases anyone was interested


I'm not selling mine for a while so don't worry about me


----------



## dudemanppl

YAY! Finally you have discovered the wonders of LIGHT.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


YAY! Finally you have discovered the wonders of LIGHT. found a way to access equipment you've already known the joys of before but had no financial means to obtain yourself.


Fixed


----------



## dudemanppl

LOL, well I was close enough. Imma go develop some feelm now. Hope it turns out well....


----------



## Marin

No Phase Ones today but I somehow managed to snag a Leaf. Usually there aren't any backs on the weekend unless they're reserved ahead of time.


----------



## Shane1244

Samples.


----------



## dudemanppl

50L didn't come today.


----------



## Shane1244

Did you sell it yet?


----------



## dudemanppl

Surprisingly no. Reminds me of a time when I bought a lens without even touching it. Bought a 70-200 VR II to trade for someones 14-24 and 85 1.4. Made like 400 bucks only, but I loved both those lenses, so whatever.


----------



## Shane1244

Took some video, Quality is /drool

My bad on the dog pissing/shakey video, I was trying to hard to focus.. and I failed at that too. To be fair, I had a tripod still strapped to it.

OPEN IN YOUTUBE
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LE94MIJBg4U[/ame]


----------



## foothead

How does the mirror lock on Olympus cameras work? I've been searching all over in the settings, but I cannot find the option.

EDIT: I found it. It was labeled as anti-shock. Lol. I now have an extreme macro rig set up. The FOV amounts to like 4mm. Any ideas what I should shoot?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead;13744730*
> How does the mirror lock on Olympus cameras work? I've been searching all over in the settings, but I cannot find the option.


Olympus calls it "Anti-Shock":


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;13744909*
> Olympus calls it "Anti-Shock":


LOL, I found it literally right before you posted that. Thanks though.

EDIT: 

1/4 watt resistor









Stranded copper wire









Ballpoint pen tip


----------



## mz-n10

what lens is that?


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10;13745391*
> what lens is that?


500mm Photax + Backwards lens shade + backwards 135mm noname lens. The whole setup looks like this:


----------



## BlankThis

Just got offered to shoot my first paid wedding... Not sure if I'm going to take it yet but they emailed me that they would supply the equipment...

Canon 5D Mark II Body, Canon EF 16-35 mm L F/2.8 USM II, Canon EF 50 mm F/1.2 L USM, Canon EF 24-70 mm F/2.8 L USM, Canon EF 70-200 mm F/2.8 L IS USM II

If I were to run away who could hide me in their basement until it blew over?


----------



## dudemanppl

If I get the 16-35, then sure.


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13746555*
> If I get the 16-35, then sure.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis;13746088*
> Just got offered to shoot my first paid wedding... Not sure if I'm going to take it yet but they emailed me that they would supply the equipment...
> 
> Canon 5D Mark II Body, Canon EF 16-35 mm L F/2.8 USM II, Canon EF 50 mm F/1.2 L USM, Canon EF 24-70 mm F/2.8 L USM, Canon EF 70-200 mm F/2.8 L IS USM II
> 
> If I were to run away who could hide me in their basement until it blew over?


Never heard of the bride/groom/family offering their gear to a photog to shoot their own wedding. Ask for a speedlite too. You'd have to familiarize yourself with Canon equipment as well. I used a 5DII with 24-70 and 70-200 to shoot a few weddings, works very well.


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Never heard of the bride/groom/family offering their gear to a photog to shoot their own wedding. Ask for a speedlite too. You'd have to familiarize yourself with Canon equipment as well. I used a 5DII with 24-70 and 70-200 to shoot a few weddings, works very well.


It's a rental package. 
IF I take it I'm going to ask for the kit a day or two before the actual gig to get used to everything.


----------



## dudemanppl

Hmmm, seems to me the 50L is a pretty unremarkable lens. 90% sure I'm selling for a Sigma 50. Its the same thing except really expensive. So that means mo munny for my second 5DII!
I think I'll be buying a 7D for 800. AWWW YEAAA.


----------



## KidLi

_First off, sorry to interrupt the topic of discussion currently taking place._

*My Equipment*

Nikon D3100








Kit Lens Nikkor 18-55mm
60" Sunpak Tri-Pod
Adobe Photoshop CS5








I also found and tried this awesome simple free software called DIYPhotobits.
I can hook up my Nikon via USB and release the shutter via the software on my laptop. Transfer images automatically to a folder on the comp. It also has full manual controls so you can change camera settings from the comp. Also has a time lapse feature with easy to set parameters. Yes I know a shutter release remote with time interval is much easier than the computer hook up, but its nice for a noob like me.

http://www.diyphotobits.com/

Her is a test time lapse video I made with that DIYPhotobits software + Sony Vegas 8. Watch the vid in HD to really see the few stars I caught.

[ame="[URL=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XlRalGj_vdM]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XlRalGj_vdM"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XlRalGj_vdM[/ame[/URL]]

I attached a few first shots I took with the new Nikon.


----------



## BlankThis

Cool time lapse


----------



## KidLi

Thanks! I will get an intervalometer some day with some spectrum filters to shoot some rad stuff.


----------



## dudemanppl

Why do Hasselblads have to be so much more expensive than Mamiyas.


----------



## nuclearjock

GT,

Sold the 600 VR, bought a 500 VR. 600 was way too much to haul around. 500 VR is much lighter and can actually be hand held for short periods of time. Tried one at a bird shoot and was sold. The extra weight didn't justify the additional 100mm fl. The 500 plays real nice with my 1.4 tc when I need the extra fl. Next the 300 and I'll be done







.


----------



## Takendown2

Borrowed Uncles 5D Mark II+24-70mm f/2.8L USM. 3 Weeks of photography+filming, i am in love now. Wish i had the money for that type of system


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


GT,

Sold the 600 VR, bought a 500 VR. 600 was way too much to haul around. 500 VR is much lighter and can actually be hand held for short periods of time. Tried one at a bird shoot and was sold. The extra weight didn't justify the additional 100mm fl. The 500 plays real nice with my 1.4 tc when I need the extra fl. Next the 300 and I'll be done







.


Oh lawd I want pictures of a 500 VR next to a 400 VR.


----------



## max302

Don't know for you guys, but down here it's garage sale season. Any cheap and rare finds? I'd love to put my hands on another beater rangefinder from the 70's.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *max302;13772703*
> Don't know for you guys, but down here it's garage sale season. Any cheap and rare finds? I'd love to put my hands on another beater rangefinder from the 70's.


I've found a couple old polaroid land cameras and a Chinon manual SLR at garage sales, but typically there isn't much. I've had much better luck at flea markets and thrift shops. Oh, and eBay. Don't forget eBay.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13770355*
> Oh lawd I want pictures of a 500 VR next to a 400 VR.


Ordered the 500 Saturday. UPS tracking says delivery Wednesday.

Also found an E+++ 300 VR that I'm gonna make a bid on tonight.


----------



## dudemanppl

3, 4, 5?! I have to recommend the 200 f/2 VR though. Its cheaper and its four (1.4, 1.7, 2) REALLY good lenses at basically the same time.


----------



## TC_Fenua

Hello !
I'm new here and I love photography. I've been shooting since I was 14 or so, but with huge breaks ( money was missing, haha ). I started on an old used Nikon F2 with a Nikkor 50mm f/1.8 as a lens and nothing else, hehe, and shot primarly in B&W ( less expensive







).

Now I'm a Canon user, and currently I have a 50D ( back up camera since my 1Dmk3 died last year ), and I'm waiting for the 5Dmk3.

Here's my gear (shot with the 50D and a nifty fifty 50 f1.8







):


_100 f/2.8L macro ( sold )
_17-40 f/4.0L
_24 f/2.8L ( sold )
_16-35 f/2.8L ( sold )
_24-70 f/2.8L
_85 f/1.2L
_135 f/2.0L ( sold )
_70-200 f/4.0L IS
_70-200 f/2.8L IS ( sold )
_300 f/2.8L
_500 f/4L
_580 EXII x2
_1.4 and 2x converters

But I'm going to sell some lenses since there are some I don't use anymore.
You can check my flickr if you want, but there's nothing special on it, just some shots I like. Sometimes I spend weeks/months without shooting anything, and sometimes I'm on a frenzy









A shot I like :


_Sun at night ?_
Hello from Tahiti


----------



## ljason8eg

That's a sick collection of gear man. I'd kill for either the 300 or 500 for shooting motorsport. Drool-worthy indeed.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


3, 4, 5?! I have to recommend the 200 f/2 VR though. Its cheaper and its four (1.4, 1.7, 2) REALLY good lenses at basically the same time.


I don't know if this is directed at me dude, but I already own the 200 VR II. Check my gl.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *TC_Fenua*


Hello !
I'm new here and I love photography.


So do I!! Welcome to the party. Awesome set of gear. I hope I can visit Tahiti some day.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


I don't know if this is directed at me dude, but I already own the 200 VR II. Check my gl.


WHAT? You has one hell of a gear list sir.

EDIT: And then in that case, look into a Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 OS. My non OS is beast, and the new one is sharper apparently. Focuses silly close at 120, not so much so at 300, but still a great lens. 300mm, f/2.8, and stabilization for only 3300 is a deal to me.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13783378*
> WHAT? You has one hell of a gear list sir.
> 
> EDIT: And then in that case, look into a Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 OS. My non OS is beast, and the new one is sharper apparently. Focuses silly close at 120, not so much so at 300, but still a great lens. 300mm, f/2.8, and stabilization for only 3300 is a deal to me.


Sorry, My history with Siggy glass is not good. Strictly Nikkor, (except for the Voigtlander and Zeiss).


----------



## ~sizzzle~

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TC_Fenua;13781508*
> 
> A shot I like :
> 
> _Sun at night ?_


Love that pic. Fantastic shot.


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13783378*
> WHAT? You has one hell of a gear list sir.
> 
> EDIT: And then in that case, look into a Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 OS. My non OS is beast, and the new one is sharper apparently. Focuses silly close at 120, not so much so at 300, but still a great lens. 300mm, f/2.8, and stabilization for only 3300 is a deal to me.


[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=41D0WV2ojFw[/ame]

Super sharp! Look at the picture at the end, he hand held 300mm cropped (450mm) at 1/100.


----------



## ~sizzzle~

"....and you're like sniffing the gasss fumes...."

















That guy cracks me up.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nuclearjock;13783806*
> Sorry, My history with Siggy glass is not good. Strictly Nikkor, (except for the Voigtlander and Zeiss).


Let me qualify that statement. I've shot the 180mm macro and liked it very much. My Nikkor 200 f/4 still tops it IQ wise. f/2.8 is kinda silly for a macro lens anyway. I shoot at f/9 and up.

The new 85mm f/1.4 is also a nice lens for the $$$ imho. But I don't need super fast focus and I like the bokeh better from my 85 f/1.4d. The $$$ on the Siggy version is awfully attractive though. If I had aspirations of upgrading, I'd go the Nikkor route though. Their 85 f/1.4G is awesome. Again, fast focus and focus tracking are not issues for me and I don't shoot 85mm prime that much anyway.


----------



## TC_Fenua

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *~sizzzle~;13784047*
> Love that pic. Fantastic shot.


Thank you


----------



## nuclearjock

GT,

300 VR f/2.8's a done deal. Please add this as well. Gonna shoot some girl's fast pitch this weekend, I'll post up some pics next week.


----------



## dudemanppl

How much? :O


----------



## Shane1244

So... How many lenses do you have? :S Seems like you have everything lol.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13770355*
> Oh lawd I want pictures of a 500 VR next to a 400 VR.


Brown truck came early. Good thing the neighbors were home.










400 VR on the left, 500 VR on the right. If you want the 300, you'll have to wait a couple more days.


----------



## sub50hz

Where in IL are you, NJ?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


GT,

300 VR f/2.8's a done deal. Please add this as well. Gonna shoot some girl's fast pitch this weekend, I'll post up some pics next week.


Added, and I cleaned up your gear list and organized it better. It's pretty epic looking.


----------



## sub50hz

Pfft, I'm _not even in the OP._ :-(


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Pfft, I'm _not even in the OP._ :-(


All you have to do is ask! I've just assumed up til now that you were on it. Added.


----------



## Boyboyd

While you're at it

Boyboyd - Nikon D5000
Sigma 10-20
18-55mm
55-200mm
70-300mm VRII
35mm f1.8
24mm f/2.8 manual focus
50mm f/2.8 Nikkor Micro manual focus

The new stuff is in red. The 70-300 was a gift.

Thanks


----------



## ljason8eg

Since its update your gear list time, I'd appreciate if the following was added to mine:

Canon EF 50mm f/1.4
Canon 430 EX II


----------



## dudemanppl

I really quite want to format the whole thing.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


I really quite want to format the whole thing.


Quite honestly, I think your grammar may need some work.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*


Since its update your gear list time, I'd appreciate if the following was added to mine:

Canon EF 50mm f/1.4
Canon 430 EX II


Uh-oh, I better keep the edit window open. I smell a gear update chain reaction coming on.









Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


I really quite want to format the whole thing.


It's become quite the unmanageable beast. I once started to put the whole list into a Google spreadsheet, but it was taking ages and I had to abandon it.

But you have a lot time on your hands, so I can send you the whole list in a text file if you want crack at it.


----------



## dudemanppl

And I'll try to do everything CaNikon by head.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


snip

And I'll try to do everything CaNikon by head.


Ok, but I reserve the right not to use it if it sucks. But I have faith in you grasshopper.


----------



## nuclearjock

Next up, R1C1.

Gonna do some shopping for the lowest price, but it's probably gonna be B&H.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Ok, but I reserve the right not to use it if it sucks. But I have faith in you grasshopper.










*cracks knuckles*
I'll format it like this: http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/vie...ame=dudemanppl


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Added, and I cleaned up your gear list and organized it better. It's pretty epic looking.


Moocho gracioso GT...


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Ok, here it is dude.


----------



## dudemanppl

I won't do the point and shoots BTW.







Too lazy and not enough experience.

U2410 FLIPPED VERTICAL AAWWWW YEAAAA.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13790493*
> I won't do the point and shoots BTW.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Too lazy and not enough experience.


Say what? This should be interesting. Make sure the VB tags are good to go.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


Next up, R1C1.

Gonna do some shopping for the lowest price, but it's probably gonna be B&H.


ive played around with the r1c1 on a d700 once and fell in love with it. wish there was something like that for sony.....


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


ive played around with the r1c1 on a d700 once and fell in love with it. wish there was something like that for sony.....


That's good enough for me.

It's up. It's in the cart. It's outa here, (on its way).


----------



## dudemanppl

Only two hours... (Had an hour long rest) Didn't do film, made all the Powershots into PowerShot and simple stuff like that for point and shoots. Sony and Oly, I added aperture, but thats it. Sigma, most are good; Tamron none are good (aperture for most though); Tokina (there are a hell of a lot of 11-16s...) was sort of bad, but half of it was just 11-16s so easy; Nikon is perfect as is Canon. I shoulda been studying... Also, I want to throw up just a little bit.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Pfft, I'm _not even in the OP._ :-(


You have to pay for that privilege


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Only two hours... (Had an hour long rest) Didn't do film, made all the Powershots into PowerShot and simple stuff like that for point and shoots. Sony and Oly, I added aperture, but thats it. Sigma, most are good; Tamron none are good (aperture for most though); Tokina (there are a hell of a lot of 11-16s...) was sort of bad, but half of it was just 11-16s so easy; Nikon is perfect as is Canon. I shoulda been studying... Also, I want to throw up just a little bit.


Thanks dude, this helps a lot! I wasn't always the OP of this thread, so there were lots of inconsistencies floating around, but now everything is square!


----------



## dudemanppl

Everything hurrrrts.


----------



## Dream Killer

ahh, to be young and have free time again.


----------



## sub50hz

Tell me about it. I leave for work in 2 hours, and I'm still up remotely dicking with some garbage on our AIX machine. Gonna be a _great day._


----------



## foothead

Did anyone else just get a free copy of Photoshop CS5 extended in the mail? I got an email a while back, but had the understanding that it was simply going to be an upgrade. However, the copy I just got appears to be a full version, complete with a serial and everything.

email:
Quote:


> We're sending you a complimentary copy of
> Adobe® Photoshop® CS5 Extended software
> 
> Dear valued Adobe customer:
> 
> We sent an e-mail notifying you that your recent purchase entitled you to a courtesy upgrade to Adobe Creative Suite® 5.5 software. Unfortunately, because the product you purchased was not upgraded in the latest suite, this benefit did not actually apply to you.
> 
> However, to make good on our promise and honor your customer loyalty, we are offering you a complimentary copy of Adobe Photoshop CS5 Extended.
> 
> With this feature-packed version, you'll be well-equipped to enter a new dimension of creativity. Adobe Photoshop CS5 Extended includes everything in Photoshop CS5, PLUS powerful features that let you create and edit 3D imagery and motion-based content. Learn more about Photoshop CS5 Extended.
> 
> There is no further action required to get your complimentary copy of Photoshop CS5 Extended. We will send your software to the address you gave when you registered for the upgrade. Please allow 4-6 weeks for delivery.
> 
> We apologize for the mix-up, and we hope you enjoy using Photoshop CS5 Extended.
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Adobe Customer Service


And here's what happened when I typed the key in on my laptop, which doesn't have photoshop installed:










Is this serial attached to my account in any way, or could someone else use the software?


----------



## Nemesis158

Only One way to find out........


----------



## Shane1244

Give me the key, I'll let you know. jk


----------



## Boyboyd

That is so unbelievably cool. +1 for Adobe.

I just tried to do some video with my camera. I am terrible, like... really terrible at manual focus.


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Boyboyd;13798862*
> That is so unbelievably cool. +1 for Adobe.
> 
> I just tried to do some video with my camera. I am terrible, like... really terrible at manual focus.


What lens and aperture?


----------



## Boyboyd

35mm f/1.8.

I forgot which way the ring went 3 times. Most people would learn after the 2nd time they got it wrong, lol.


----------



## iandroo888

weee renting a 24-70 for a wedding


----------



## ~sizzzle~

What's the best place to rent from ?


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *~sizzzle~;13799285*
> What's the best place to rent from ?


lensrentals.com was awesome to me. A little more expensive than other places but their customer service was excellent and the equipment hardly looked used.


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Boyboyd;13799043*
> 35mm f/1.8.
> 
> I forgot which way the ring went 3 times. Most people would learn after the 2nd time they got it wrong, lol.










It happens lol


----------



## sub50hz

Think I might give the Tokina 35/2.8 macro a shot soon. Tried it a bit this afternoon, I was pretty impressed -- especially with the build, super solid.


----------



## kid spartan

My parents kindly bought me a P+S for my birthday. It is an

  Olympus VR-320 . I was kind of hoping for a DSLR but no biggie. I don't have the time at the moment to get into serious photography, but it's something i wanna do eventually. Anyway, is this a good camera for the money? I would just like to use it to take decent quality videos and a few pictures here and there. Manual settings aren't a big deal to me. It's obviously a budget camera, but the few reviews i read had pretty good things to say, at least that's what i gathered.

Huge thanks!


----------



## ljason8eg

It'll take decent snapshots but video, ehh I've never really seen a cheaper P&S do video very well. Of course I could be more critical than average.


----------



## Shane1244

I've always wondered... why don't they do ISO50, ISO25.. etc? That'd eliminate the need for stop filters.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *~sizzzle~;13799285*
> What's the best place to rent from ?


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg;13799413*
> lensrentals.com was awesome to me. A little more expensive than other places but their customer service was excellent and the equipment hardly looked used.


lensrentals.com and borrowlens.com is great. borrowlens.com has a FB page too. you can see other peoples work from when they borrowed the lenses. Their customer service is superb. Ordered a lens from each place before for an event. both lenses came in great condition.. comes with the hood as well and caps.. Both will require you to supply them with forms of ID, etc, just for their own security since they are renting you such expensive equipment. Lol.

rented a 17-55 from lensrental... 70-200 from borrowlens.. for previous event

just rented a 24-70 from borrowlens. should come friday. cant wait to play with the 24-70 again :]


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;13803915*
> I've always wondered... why don't they do ISO50, ISO25.. etc? That'd eliminate the need for stop filters.


its cause most sensors have a native ISO of 100 or 200. anything lower is just the sensor overexposing then pulling back in post.

and if the sensor is a 25 or 50iso base then the high iso would suffer.....


----------



## dudemanppl

But can't they change the base ISO of a sensor? Some folks would like ISO 6 while sacrificing 400 and over (not me though).


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13806672*
> But can't they change the base ISO of a sensor? Some folks would like ISO 6 while sacrificing 400 and over (not me though).


I'm sure they could, but 100 seems to be the best compromise.


----------



## sub50hz

There's a _lot_ more math involved than that.


----------



## ljason8eg

Why do I find this shot so incredibly hawt?


Kimi Raikkonen by JLofing, on Flickr


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iandroo888;13804931*
> just rented a 24-70 from borrowlens. should come friday. cant wait to play with the 24-70 again :]


The day I purchased mine and brought it home happened to be the day of a family summer BBQ. Perfect opportunity to try it out. I popped it on my D3 and started shooting randomly.
When I got home I transferred the images to my pc and started looking. I couldn't believe my eyes. This was my first pro 2.8 Nikon zoom and I had no idea what to expect. I felt like I was back at the BBQ. Everything was rendered absolutely flawlessly. Thes were large, fine jpegs sooc. Since then, I've used the lens extensively with incredible results. I'm fortunate to own the "trinity" (14-24, 24-70, and 70-200 VRII), three lenses that Nikon really got right. The 24-70 will never leave my collection. It's that good imho.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg;13807252*
> Why do I find this shot so incredibly hawt?
> 
> http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2413/5801327685_54c6cb4a7a_b.jpg
> Kimi Raikkonen by JLofing, on Flickr


Your panning has gotten killer even since your first few shots you posted









I miss panning action shots.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg;13807252*
> Why do I find this shot so incredibly hawt?


Because it is


----------



## scottath

Thought id pop in here - as im yet to......

recently changed my setup as i saved for a bit....

Had:
Canon 350D gripped
18-55 f3.5-5.6
55-250 f4-5.6
50 f1.8

Sold that lot for my New body and acquired my 2 good lenses just before the body:
Canon 550D Gripped
Tamron 11-18mm f4-5.6
Tamron 28-75mm f2.8

got my best works so far on my site (hosted atm home - so is a tad slow for you US folk....pretty good otherwise)
http://scottath.dyndns.org

and flickr - although most images will be duplicated from my site - there are a few more older ones on flickr
http://www.flickr.com/photos/scottath/


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie;13809086*
> Your panning has gotten killer even since your first few shots you posted
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I miss panning action shots.


Thanks!

I'm really looking to the race at Infineon Raceway in a couple weeks. Pretty much limitless places to shoot the action and a lot of angles that just aren't possible on an oval.


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


I'm fortunate to own the "trinity" (14-24, 24-70, and 70-200 VRII), three lenses that Nikon really got right.


If I had the money...


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;13809096*
> Because it is


Damn, I was about to say the same exact thing,


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*


Why do I find this shot so incredibly hawt?



Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Because it is











Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Damn, I was about to say the same exact thing,


Am I the only one bothered by the angle of the picture... ?









When I turn my head I like it...







Just feels off-balance when it's rotated like that.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Sparhawk*


Am I the only one bothered by the angle of the picture... ?









When I turn my head I like it...







Just feels off-balance when it's rotated like that.


Better?









I dunno I liked the tilted look on that particular shot. Guess its one of those things that either you like it or you don't.


Kimi Raikkonen by JLofing, on Flickr


----------



## Boyboyd

Great shot. Your panning is good.


----------



## Marin

Small update for you guys. Starting a new project with my 4x5. Scanned it instead since I had to fix a few things up with liquify and remove the agitation marks since it didn't develop right. So I can't make a nice C-print but atleast I can save it and make an inkjet print (and still use it as portfolio work).

Final image is going to have more muted colors (for future C prints I'm going to achieve the muted colors through pushing the film and pulling during development).


----------



## foothead

I've always been told that you couldn't push/pull color film because it'd shift the color. Do you have an example?


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


The day I purchased mine and brought it home happened to be the day of a family summer BBQ. Perfect opportunity to try it out. I popped it on my D3 and started shooting randomly.
When I got home I transferred the images to my pc and started looking. I couldn't believe my eyes. This was my first pro 2.8 Nikon zoom and I had no idea what to expect. I felt like I was back at the BBQ. Everything was rendered absolutely flawlessly. Thes were large, fine jpegs sooc. Since then, I've used the lens extensively with incredible results. I'm fortunate to own the "trinity" (14-24, 24-70, and 70-200 VRII), three lenses that Nikon really got right. The 24-70 will never leave my collection. It's that good imho.


haha. ive used the 24-70 and 14-24 on my bay area vacation last august, borrowed from my cousin. i was still quite noobish in terms of using a DSLR but it still produced great pictures. that was the first time i used two pro f/2.8 lenses.

recently less than a month ago, borrowed 17-55 and 70-200 for an asian/pacific islander graduASIAN (get it?.. lol) event. 17-55 workin at a "photobooth" area and 70-200 workin from near back of room. came out great. had a friend use the 70-200 during the actual graduation ceremony next day (cuz i was in the ceremony... lol). pictures came out great as well.

renting this 24-70 for a wedding on saturday and the pre-thing event on friday. hope it will work out well







cant wait until i get my own set of the trinity









---------------------------------------------

on the side note, HOW TO SCAN PICTURES WITHOUT SO MUCH DUST D: i tried scanning with my flatbed scanner on my HP, so much dust.. doesnt matter how much i clean the glass.. i noticed there was dust on the inside of the machine under the glass too D: son of a.. rawr D:


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


---------------------------------------------

on the side note, HOW TO SCAN PICTURES WITHOUT SO MUCH DUST D: i tried scanning with my flatbed scanner on my HP, so much dust.. doesnt matter how much i clean the glass.. i noticed there was dust on the inside of the machine under the glass too D: son of a.. rawr D:



Have you tried something like this?

EDIT: Or you could use the document feed thing if your scanner has it. That way, you only have to worry about keeping a tiny strip of glass clean.


----------



## sub50hz

Is that even any good? I've been driving 40 miles on weekends to use a friend's drum scanner, so being able to avoid that would be a nice option.


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Is that even any good? I've been driving 40 miles on weekends to use a friend's drum scanner, so being able to avoid that would be a nice option.


From reading reviews, that one is not good. However, I've seen a few similar ones that worked quite well.


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*


Better?









I dunno I liked the tilted look on that particular shot. Guess its one of those things that either you like it or you don't.


Kimi Raikkonen by JLofing, on Flickr


I'm on the fence. It looks pretty darn good both ways. I just get this tilted/unbalanced feeling when I first look at the slanted one.

Anyway. Great shot!


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *foothead*


I've always been told that you couldn't push/pull color film because it'd shift the color. Do you have an example?


You correct the colors on the enlarger.


----------



## Unknownm

picked up a 200mm fixed lens. Not maco, 2.5 (8) is how close it gets


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Unknownm;13814805*
> Not maco, 2.5 (8) is how close it gets


Que?


----------



## nuclearjock

Let's do our part for the enviornment.


----------



## sub50hz

Surely a business in Will County.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13815191*
> Surely a business in Will County.


Sorry, Waukegan (lake county).


----------



## sub50hz

Nearly the same thing.


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13815079*
> Que?


My thoughts.


----------



## foothead

Just got it from someone selling on craigslist. It came with a Schneider 90mm f/8 Super Angulon, an adjustable shade, 32 film holders, about 50 sheets of kodak tri-X, two cable releases, two cases (one for film holders, one for camera), a darkcloth, and a polaroid holder.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13815079*
> Que?


2.5 meters is ~ 8 feet, so he's most likely talking about how close it focuses.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead;13815919*
> 2.5 meters is ~ 8 feet, so he's most likely talking about how close it focuses.


That's what I assumed, but if there's one thing I've learned about this thread, it would have to be not to ever assume anything.


----------



## dudemanppl

Ugh why the hell do I keep dropping things... need to replace the front name ring on the 50L now...


----------



## Unknownm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13815079*
> Que?


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis;13815724*
> My thoughts.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead;13815919*
> 2.5 meters is ~ 8 feet, so he's most likely talking about how close it focuses.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13816098*
> That's what I assumed, but if there's one thing I've learned about this thread, it would have to be not to ever assume anything.


Yeah it's how close it focuses. I need to get some 800asa film for the 6pm area since 400asa @ 3.5 doesn't seam to impress my light meter


----------



## sub50hz

I've been shooting delta 400 almost exclusively for a while, and it pushes really well. If you're looking for a good 800 color film, can't help ya -- I don't shoot color film.


----------



## Boyboyd

Just used aperture on my friend's mbp to edit some nef files quickly. I actually prefer it to lightroom.


----------



## ljason8eg

Well my 50 1.4 came back this morning from the service center. Canon claims the focus motor wasn't broken, just "jammed" which is strange; wonder what could cause that? But, in any case they cleaned it up nice and it works as good as it ever has, so I'm happy.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg;13823603*
> Well my 50 1.4 came back this morning from the service center. Canon claims the focus motor wasn't broken, just "jammed" which is strange; wonder what could cause that? But, in any case they cleaned it up nice and it works as good as it ever has, so I'm happy.


About how long was the turnaround? About to send my 50 1.4 and my 60D in to ensure there aren't any probs and to calibrate them.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie;13824232*
> About how long was the turnaround? About to send my 50 1.4 and my 60D in to ensure there aren't any probs and to calibrate them.


I shipped it last friday USPS priority and it arrived back this morning so exactly one week.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg;13824460*
> I shipped it last friday USPS priority and it arrived back this morning so exactly one week.


They didn't give you prepaid labels for UPS? Dang. I'm sending mine in tomorrow AM then if that's how long it takes. Thanks!


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie;13825367*
> They didn't give you prepaid labels for UPS? Dang. I'm sending mine in tomorrow AM then if that's how long it takes. Thanks!


No, they didn't, although I didn't ask. I just went through the automated process on their website.


----------



## Killhouse

Hey guys, I bought a new camera a few months ago (Fujifilm S1600) and took it on a trip to Sweden and Northern Norway. Thought I'd share my favourite photos for constructive criticism. I am by no means a good photographer, but I'm looking to improve.


----------



## Unknownm

Can someone recommend me a site that shows (most) film that's been pushed passed stock asa. I have Kodak 400 color film, and trying Push 2. I have no idea how it will turn out but I am willing to screw around with a roll to find the correct results.

I know down the road I will have to get more professional film to get better sharper results with higher than recommend asa. http://www.digitaltruth.com/devchart.php?doc=pushproc

site doesn't have retail film listed. Well they do but not very much


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Killhouse;13826554*
> Hey guys, I bought a new camera a few months ago (Fujifilm S1600) and took it on a trip to Sweden and Northern Norway. Thought I'd share my favourite photos for constructive criticism. I am by no means a good photographer, but I'm looking to improve.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -snip-


I rather like the panorama. Could you upload it at a higher resolution? For the last one, remember the rule of thirds. It'd look a lot better if there was more water, less sky.

I'm looking for some reasonably cheap 4x5 film to use until I get the camera totally figured out. What do y'all recommend? I have about 50 sheets of what I thought was kodak Tri-X, but it seems to be randomly assorted films all shoved in one box, so I'm wasting a lot by exposing incorrectly.


----------



## Killhouse

Thanks foothead, you can see the big version here.

Unfortunately you can see that the right 3rd doesent line up







I need to get better at lining up the shots. There was no easy horizon to fix it on :/


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Killhouse;13826554*
> Hey guys, I bought a new camera a few months ago (Fujifilm S1600) and took it on a trip to Sweden and Northern Norway. Thought I'd share my favourite photos for constructive criticism. I am by no means a good photographer, but I'm looking to improve.


The second photo could use a little bit of post processing. I'd boost the saturation and play with the levels a tad, as it's a little muted in color and dim.


----------



## Killhouse

Thanks laboitenoire, I appreciate the feedback. I've never done any photo editting at all, maybe I'll have a go


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Killhouse;13829644*
> Thanks foothead, you can see the big version here.
> 
> Unfortunately you can see that the right 3rd doesent line up
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I need to get better at lining up the shots. There was no easy horizon to fix it on :/


That's awesome. Where exactly was the photo taken?

Buy this and just leave it attached to your camera at all times. Sure it's intended to lock into a tripod, but it'd be quite good for leveling the camera when using live view. EDIT: or do you mean something else?


----------



## Gigalisk

Sorry i havent been on in a bit...but this photography side job has got me runnin!

Please take some time to look at my photo facebook page...think i sigg'd it.

Thanks,

Gigalisk


----------



## Killhouse

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead;13829970*
> That's awesome. Where exactly was the photo taken?
> 
> Buy this and just leave it attached to your camera at all times. Sure it's intended to lock into a tripod, but it'd be quite good for leveling the camera when using live view.


I might just do that, thanks for the recommendation. +rep









It's taken in a big town called Narvik, 140 miles inside the Arctic Circle in Norway.
streetview link

And this is how we got there, 20 hours on this train.... (that's my girlfriend's head







).


----------



## dudemanppl

Done packing.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

It looks like everything would rattle around and bang against each other quite a bit in that bag. It needs some extra compartments.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;13833872*
> It looks like everything would rattle around and bang against each other quite a bit in that bag. It needs some extra compartments.


cotton t-shirts


----------



## BlankThis

How do you like your Rode Videomic? Seems pretty popular


----------



## dudemanppl

That's not the final layout. Just laying all my crap out so you can see. I'm keeping the 5DII and 35L out cause that's my out and about combo. Now I need to borrow a 72-77 step up ring (or buy one from Samy's







) and a tripod...

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis;13834506*
> How do you like your Rode Videomic? Seems pretty popular


Not really an audio guy, but its obviously better than the built in mic. But if I had to do it over again I'd get like a 50 dollar Audio Technica one since its basically the same thing.


----------



## BlankThis

The only thing I don't like about it is the fact that you can't shoot (pictures) with it mounted because of the shock-absorber. Well at least that's what it looks like from pictures.

EDIT:

I just realized I now have the same avatar as boyboyd. DAMN


----------



## dudemanppl

VideoMic Pro? It's like the VideoMic, but small. Change it to something MLP, MLP is best.


----------



## robchaos

GoneTomorrow, I just added a D90 to my equipment list if you could update the first post. Thank you!


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *robchaos;13835300*
> GoneTomorrow, I just added a D90 to my equipment list if you could update the first post. Thank you!


Congrats


----------



## robchaos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis;13835374*
> Congrats


Thank you! Upgrading from a D40, this Camera is much nicer. I'm liking the dedicated thumb wheels and buttons for shutter, aperature, and the ease of changing ISO, AEB, and the DOF preview is real nice to have too. Only thing I'm missing is MLU but that can be worked around using exposure delay mode or the self timer.

Nikon had a memorial day sale going on that included a nice Nikon camera bag, instructional DVD, and a 4gb memory card.


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *robchaos;13835447*
> Thank you! Upgrading from a D40, this Camera is much nicer. I'm liking the dedicated thumb wheels and buttons for shutter, aperature, and the ease of changing ISO, AEB, and the DOF preview is real nice to have too. Only thing I'm missing is MLU but that can be worked around using exposure delay mode or the self timer.
> 
> Nikon had a memorial day sale going on that included a nice Nikon camera bag, instructional DVD, and a 4gb memory card.


I made the same jump a year ago. I just wish the D90 could handle higher ISO better.


----------



## robchaos

Yea, that is one of the disadvantages of the smaller sensor as opposed to a full frame. Iirc the d90 just does not use some pp noise reduction that canon cameras employs, and that has its own advantages and disadvantages. I was messing around in low light, I wouldn't use 3200 or high iso except if I needed to squeeze out some emergency shots and I didn't have my flash.


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *robchaos;13835537*
> Yea, that is one of the disadvantages of the smaller sensor as opposed to a full frame. Iirc the d90 just does not use some pp noise reduction that canon cameras employs, and that has its own advantages and disadvantages. I was messing around in low light, I wouldn't use 3200 or high iso except if I needed to squeeze out some emergency shots and I didn't have my flash.


I'm happy up to 1600 on 8x10 prints.


----------



## 222Panther222

I subscribed and forgot to post something loll, well i brought a T2i with a Sigma 30mm f1.4 and i paid 1700$ for it brand new with the lens, (bear in mind that here in quebec it's 15% taxes)


----------



## robchaos

In the states that camera can be found for $800-850 new with kit lens, sigma 30mm lens less than $500. How are you liking it?


----------



## dudemanppl

Oh man for 1700 you can get a T2i a 30 1.4, Sigma 70-200 2.8, and a Tamron 17-50 2.8 if you get it all used.


----------



## 222Panther222

I know, i know i've paid way too much, but it's my first dslr and i wanted it brand new with a L or Ex lens for filming capability, going from a canon 1.8 50mm (140$) to a sigma ex 1.4 30mm (630$), all the difference i can see is the colors are a bit more bright, almost no sound when focusing, more wide, and bokeh, but is it worth 5 times the price of the canon 50mm, i would say no :/


----------



## BlankThis

Nifty 50s are legendary bang for your buck though.


----------



## robchaos

Nothing beats a nice fast 50mm. I love my f1.4 nikkor. Especially now that I have a camera with autofocus in the body!


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *222Panther222;13836448*
> I know, i know i've paid way too much, but it's my first dslr and i wanted it brand new with a L or Ex lens for filming capability, going from a canon 1.8 50mm (140$) to a sigma ex 1.4 30mm (630$), all the difference i can see is the colors are a bit more bright, almost no sound when focusing, more wide, and bokeh, but is it worth 5 times the price of the canon 50mm, i would say no :/


Law of diminishing returns. Comes into play with almost everything you can buy.


----------



## Marin

Two more packs of the 400 in my car. Supposed to suck for printing but I'm going to make an attempt to make it usable.


----------



## BlankThis

In the fridge? Smart man.


----------



## Marin

Yesh. My fridge door is just film.


----------



## BlankThis

I don't understand why you need such a large stock but that's pretty sweet.


----------



## Marin

It's only 80 sheets of Ektar. Not that much. And I have the resources right now to develop & c-print a ton of stuff.


----------



## dudemanppl

God I love developing film. 10 minutes of sloshing around some chemicals and you get 38 images out of it. Its addicting.


----------



## robchaos

Someone local is selling a Sigma 70-300mm f4-5.6 lens for $80. Supposedly in good condition.
I know that this is a budget telephoto lens, and also not the preferable APO version with SLD glass, but at $80...
I plan on trying out a little bit of sports shooting, is it going to be worth it to get that extra little bit of zoom over my Nikon 55-200 VR? Ultimately I am saving up for something along the lines of the Tamron 70-200 f2.8

I am almost tempted to go for it just based off the fact that I'm sure I could make my money back if or when I resell it.
Any thoughts?


----------



## dudemanppl

No reason to.


----------



## dudemanppl

No reason to. And Vegas sucks (sorry Andrew).


----------



## laboitenoire

Don't bother. The 55-200 VR has much faster AF and with VR it will just kill that Sigma for usability.

Ugh, so I'm totally torn right now. I'm really tempted to pick up a D7000 right now, but I'm also seriously considering selling everything and picking up a 5D classic... Somebody talk me out of it.


----------



## theCanadian

The 55-200mm gives you an angle of view of about 8 degrees, and the 70-300mm will give you an angle of view of about 5.5 degrees. This is on a crop sensor.


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire;13843856*
> Don't bother. The 55-200 VR has much faster AF and with VR it will just kill that Sigma for usability.
> 
> Ugh, so I'm totally torn right now. I'm really tempted to pick up a D7000 right now, but I'm also seriously considering selling everything and picking up a 5D classic... Somebody talk me out of it.


I'm switching teams too champ. Nikon hasn't been cutting it for me lately.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire;13843856*
> Don't bother. The 55-200 VR has much faster AF and with VR it will just kill that Sigma for usability.
> 
> Ugh, so I'm totally torn right now. I'm really tempted to pick up a D7000 right now, but I'm also seriously considering selling everything and picking up a 5D classic... Somebody talk me out of it.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis;13844130*
> I'm switching teams too champ. Nikon hasn't been cutting it for me lately.


Why?


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis;13834576*
> The only thing I don't like about it is the fact that you can't shoot (pictures) with it mounted because of the shock-absorber. Well at least that's what it looks like from pictures.
> 
> EDIT:
> 
> I just realized I now have the same avatar as boyboyd. DAMN


u can shoot pictures with the rode shotgun mic mounted, just need to put the mount on the rear of the mic so you dont stab your own forehead tryin to shoot.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;13844423*
> Why?


why not? all the pros use canon.









the 5dc kinda makes sense since its such a cheap fullframe. id rather pick up a use d700 or sony a850 pending if i wanted low noise or high mp.

but a jumping ship cause you dont like nikon? every system has their own problems...


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;13844423*
> Why?


No new bodies that actually interest me
Lack of interesting lenses
Generally more expensive lenses
No decent video


----------



## mortimersnerd

Does anyone have a Speedlight I could barrow for June 24th? My younger brother is testing for 4th dan (I think) Taekwondo and would like to get some shots of it. The lighting in there requires 2000+ ISO on my D5000 with my 70-200 f2.8 and is a little too noisy for my tastes.


----------



## BlankThis

If I owned one I would lend it to you.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire;13843856*
> Don't bother. The 55-200 VR has much faster AF and with VR it will just kill that Sigma for usability.
> 
> Ugh, so I'm totally torn right now. I'm really tempted to pick up a D7000 right now, but I'm also seriously considering selling everything and picking up a 5D classic... Somebody talk me out of it.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10;13844490*
> why not? all the pros use canon.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the 5dc kinda makes sense since its such a cheap fullframe. id rather pick up a use d700 or sony a850 pending if i wanted low noise or high mp.
> 
> but a jumping ship cause you dont like nikon? every system has their own problems...


Just curious. I could understand if someone wanted to switch from Olympus, Pentax, or Sony to Canikon (not that any of those systems are bad), but switching from Nikon to Canon or vice versa doesn't make sense, since, in all honesty, both systems are great and are comparable to one another. If wouldn't be so costly, I'd switch to Nikon just for the experience of it.

And I agree about the 5Dc, it still packs a punch IQ wise, but anyone going from a modern mid-range DSLR will be in for "feature shock" going to a six year old body (low resolution LCD, slow burst, no pop-up flash with OCF control, possibly worse high ISO noise).
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis;13844557*
> No new bodies that actually interest me
> Lack of interesting lenses
> Generally more expensive lenses
> No decent video


I see. Minor differences aside, Nikon has equivalent lenses to everything Canon has, but the cost for some are prohibitive I agree. You should consider getting all your Canon gear used, as trying to get anew setup comparable to your current kit will cost a lot.

Speaking of which, what Canon setup are you going for?


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;13844423*
> Why?


For me, it's mostly the chance at going full frame for (relatively) cheap. I love the depth of field you can get, plus Canon has come out with some really interesting lenses recently that look really nice in reviews. However, the age of the body, the cost of switching systems, and the fact that I've generally been nonplussed by Canon ergonomics all keep from doing it.

I'm thinking that if I can find a buyer for my D5000, I'm gonna pick up a D7000 this summer. I can afford it right now, but I'm sure the parents would disapprove.







I figure that for the price I get a good balance in body ergonomics and weight, one of Nikon's best AF systems, compatibility with the old MF lenses and AF/AF-D lenses, weather resistance, and very respectable video, all which I could really use at times. And then there's the high ISO performance...


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;13844667*
> I see. Minor differences aside, Nikon has equivalent lenses to everything Canon has, but the cost for some are prohibitive I agree. You should consider getting all your Canon gear used, as trying to get anew setup comparable to your current kit will cost a lot.
> 
> Speaking of which, what Canon setup are you going for?


Definitely going used if I can.

5Dmk2
17-40 f/4L OR Tokina 16-28 f/2.8
35mm f/2
50mm f/1.8 (Maybe 1.4 if I can swing it)
70-200 f/4L
85mm f/1.8 (Eventually)

What do you think?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire;13844680*
> For me, it's mostly the chance at going full frame for (relatively) cheap. I love the depth of field you can get, plus Canon has come out with some really interesting lenses recently that look really nice in reviews. However, the age of the body, the cost of switching systems, and the fact that I've generally been nonplussed by Canon ergonomics all keep from doing it.
> 
> I'm thinking that if I can find a buyer for my D5000, I'm gonna pick up a D7000 this summer. I can afford it right now, but I'm sure the parents would disapprove.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I figure that for the price I get a good balance in body ergonomics and weight, one of Nikon's best AF systems, compatibility with the old MF lenses and AF/AF-D lenses, weather resistance, and very respectable video, all which I could really use at times. And then there's the high ISO performance...


Not that I don't believe you, but I think many are quick to dismiss one or the other camera's ergonomics without actually becoming accustomed to it first. And mean more than just borrowing someone's camera for a few hours. I've had a fair bit of hands on with some Nikon bodies (older Dxx series mostly) and I find their ergonomics just fine.


----------



## theCanadian

I adjust to ergonomics stupid fast. I borrowed my dad's Canon for like.... 10 frames. Did a lens swap. Found myself reaching for the ISO button in the wrong place and twisting lenses on the wrong way when I went back.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;13844695*
> Not that I don't believe you, but I think many are quick to dismiss one or the other camera's ergonomics without actually becoming accustomed to it first. And mean more than just borrowing someone's camera for a few hours. I've had a fair bit of hands on with some Nikon bodies (older Dxx series mostly) and I find their ergonomics just fine.


I've tried a Rebel T2i and a 50D, and neither was that comfortable for me. I'm sure if I gave it a longer try it would be totally different, but I like how the minute I hold a Nikon it feels like it was custom-molded for my hands.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis;13844692*
> Definitely going used if I can.
> 
> 5Dmk2
> 17-40 f/4L OR Tokina 16-28 f/2.8
> 35mm f/2
> 50mm f/1.8 (Maybe 1.4 if I can swing it)
> 70-200 f/4L
> 85mm f/1.8 (Eventually)
> 
> What do you think?


you can have basically that exact same setup on nikon....and none of these lenses are really the exciting exotic stuff.

like gone said, it makes more sense to switch from pen-oly-sony to canon since there are holes in the lens setup.

the grass is always greener on teh other side. i was goin to switch from sony to canon a few months ago but ultimately decided to stay with my current system. was planning to go with a 7d cause of the AF, 17-55, 70-200/2.8is but realized that i have that exact range already on FF sony plus i couldnt give up inbody stabilization.


----------



## BlankThis

I don't think Nikon has a competitive body to the 5Dmk2 in terms of what I'm looking for. Video is a feature I'm really interested in. A similar lens setup with Nikon is going to cost more as well.


----------



## dudemanppl

Canon has more megapickles. I don't think I could live without my megapickles anymore man.


----------



## Marin

Phase One rep was at my college on Friday. Oh man, I want one now. Using a P65+ was tight. Now I want to try the IQ180.

Also, if any of you are interested in tethering, use Capture One. I've been using it for the past few weeks for tethering and it's legit.


----------



## foothead

Can someone update my gear list? I need added : Graflex Graphic View / Schneider Super Angulon 90mm f/8 / 32 assorted film holders / converted telescope tripod


----------



## dudemanppl

Awesome few days of shooting coming up. Rocky Mountain NP then Black Canyon of the Gunnison NP then Mesa Verde then Monument Valley. I am excited. And don't take that the wrong way.


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Awesome few days of shooting coming up. Rocky Mountain NP then Black Canyon of the Gunnison NP then Mesa Verde then Monument Valley. I am excited. And don't take that the wrong way.


Got zoom-creep?


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Awesome few days of shooting coming up. Rocky Mountain NP then Black Canyon of the Gunnison NP then Mesa Verde then Monument Valley. I am excited. And don't take that the wrong way.


Is your mom taking you?








I jest.

edit: Hopefully I'll have some editing time tomorrow, but I liked a lot of what I saw in-camera from the weekend. BMX, a fatal car wreck, 21st century polarized moonwalks and more.


----------



## Dream Killer

my friend phoned in today and asked the question, "If you can sum up a D700 review in one sentence, what would it be?" I replied, "ISO3200 is the new ISO400."

edit: also,* i learned how to shoot my d700 with my left hand*. i turn the cam is upside down and i flip the image back in photoshop. after not shooting for about 2 months, i walked around for a good six hours downtown. i may get a lighter walk around lens because i'm a little shaky. however, all in all i'm happy i'm back in business.

*"Trinket shop"*


----------



## ljason8eg

Well, I bought a 300 f/4 L IS for my motorsports stuff since I've found 200 and even 250 to be not quite enough reach for my liking. Figure if I don't like it I can always sell it; cheaper than renting anyway if I choose to do that.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *BlankThis*


Got zoom-creep?


Slightly. But I'm sad since my 120-300 doesn't screw into the tripod.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Is your mom taking you?


Hell yeah dawg! For some reason I am really fascinated by the Cajon Pass.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


edit: Hopefully I'll have some editing time tomorrow, but I liked a lot of what I saw in-camera from the weekend. BMX, a fatal car wreck, 21st century polarized moonwalks and more.


I don't even. Fatal car assident?!?! D:

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*


edit: also,* i learned how to shoot my d700 with my left hand*. i turn the cam is upside down.


.......... It's much easier with a vertical grip.









Quote:



Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*


Well, I bought a 300 f/4 L IS for my motorsports stuff since I've found 200 and even 250 to be not quite enough reach for my liking. Figure if I don't like it I can always sell it; cheaper than renting anyway if I choose to do that.


I sense a 1.4 teleconverter in your future. 250 to 300 ain't much but that 300 pairs well with the 1.4 to make 420 f/5.6.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13853606*
> I sense a 1.4 teleconverter in your future. 250 to 300 ain't much but that 300 pairs well with the 1.4 to make 420 f/5.6.


Will it still auto focus on a rebel body with a 1.4 TC?


----------



## sub50hz

Any EOS body will AF to f/5.6, but only the 1-series will focus at f/8.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Great. My 24-70's front bezel (with the filter threads) must be bent, because it takes a lot of effort to screw on a filter (tried three different ones). None of the threads are damaged and the bezel itself looks perfectly circular. Argh. Off to Canon I guess. No biggie as I wanted to get it calibrated anyway (seems way softer at f/2.8 then when I first got it and no amount of AF micro adjust seems to help).


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13855763*
> Any EOS body will AF to f/5.6, but only the 1-series will focus at f/8.


Thanks man. So guess that means the 1.4x would be fine but the 2x is out of the question for a f/4 lens.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13853606*
> .......... It's much easier with a vertical grip.


how so? it's still right handed, only now the camera is oriented in portrait mode. if you're wondering how i trip the shutter, it's with my right hand via cable release

also makes the whole thing even heavier so even if it is easier to hold, it would be counter productive


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg;13855816*
> Thanks man. So guess that means the 1.4x would be fine but the 2x is out of the question for a f/4 lens.


I can't help but wonder if the lens you're _really_ looking for is the 100-400.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13857878*
> I can't help but wonder if the lens you're _really_ looking for is the 100-400.


I find my self always wanting more reach though. I'm not sure how much use I'd get out of the bottom half of the zoom range of the 100-400. Suppose I could find one used and compare the two and sell the one I don't want.


----------



## nuclearjock

GT,

I've had the MH-01 monopod head for quite awhile but never added it to my gl.
I would highly recommend it to anyone who shoots a heavy rig from a monopod. Extremely well made (as is all RRS stuff), and will hold a ton of gear.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nuclearjock;13859474*
> GT,
> 
> I've had the MH-01 monopod head for quite awhile but never added it to my gl.
> I would highly recommend it to anyone who shoots a heavy rig from a monopod. Extremely well made (as is all RRS stuff), and will hold a ton of gear.


200 plus for a monopod head.....that's more then most ppl tripod lol


----------



## laboitenoire

So I've decided I'm going to get a D7000 by the end of the summer. I'll have the money, and my friend is interested in buying my D5000 and the kit lens. I'm basically charging him more than I'd get by selling it to a dealer and less than he'd pay buying from a dealer.


----------



## BlankThis

Aw.

No FF love for youuu.


----------



## dudemanppl

I love my R3a. It's really damn affordable for what it does (which is a lot).


----------



## kid spartan

I'd love to join, add me up! I just recently got into photography, wanted a DSLR but ended up with an Olympus VR-320. I've learned quite a bit in just the few days I've had it.

Here's what I've got so far. Nothing artsy, just testing out different settings and such.




























Looking into getting a cheap tripod just to hold the camera still.


----------



## sub50hz

Drat. I think I am getting sucked into an RB67.

edit: For that matter, has anyone bought 35mm or medium format bodies off of Keh?


----------



## foothead

I just developed some test shots from the 4x5 camera. Of the four exposures, one had a severe light bleed and two were color film despite the holder being tagged black and white.

Is there a way to tell what type of film the color is in case I run across any more of it? It has "1161 K°ODAK" imprinted on it, and the notch is shaped like this:
\______/-\/-\/-|

I got no visible image whatsoever, so I'm guessing it's not C-41.

EDIT: This is the one that came out okay.










I accidentally touched the paper and didn't realize until I had already put everything away.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire;13860985*
> So I've decided I'm going to get a D7000 by the end of the summer. I'll have the money, and my friend is interested in buying my D5000 and the kit lens. I'm basically charging him more than I'd get by selling it to a dealer and less than he'd pay buying from a dealer.


Same here. Only i was hoping to get mine next month, and i don't have a buyer for my 5000, and i'm keeping the kit lens.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10;13859772*
> 200 plus for a monopod head.....that's more then most ppl tripod lol


When I shoot field sports, I jave a D3 + 400 f/2.8 mounted on my monopod. I wanna make sure it's secure!!


----------



## dudemanppl

I don't see why you need a head though...


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13867619*
> I don't see why you need a head though...


Presumably, for shooting portrait.


----------



## sub50hz

Finally got a roll through the flea market Pentax. Hopefully I can drop it off on the way home before the lab closes, would like to have some scans by Friday.


----------



## BlankThis

You don't do your own developing/printing?


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Presumably, for shooting portrait.


Thx. Also, it mounts the lens to the monopod.


----------



## nuclearjock

GT,

Also bought one of these recently. Sometime your car can be a great blind. Some birds seem to be used to them in particuar raptors looking for road kill. If you'd add this to my gl that'd be cool.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


GT,

Also bought one of these recently. Sometime your car can be a great blind. Some birds seem to be used to them in particuar raptors looking for road kill. If you'd add this to my gl that'd be cool.


Hm, looks it would get in the way while driving!


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *BlankThis*


You don't do your own developing/printing?


Not anymore. I just don't have a place for chemicals, nor the desire to do it. I do have a printer, though, on which I can print up to 19x13 -- but I use that for my digital stuff, mostly, although that will change when I pick up a scanner tomorrow. The big stuff or odd medium (aluminum/vinyl/glass) gets done at the lab that devs my film.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


Thx. Also, it mounts the lens to the monopod.


the tripod rings rotate to portrait mode, too


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Not anymore. I just don't have a place for chemicals, nor the desire to do it. I do have a printer, though, on which I can print up to 19x13 -- but I use that for my digital stuff, mostly, although that will change when I pick up a scanner tomorrow. The big stuff or odd medium (aluminum/vinyl/glass) gets done at the lab that devs my film.


How much does your lab charge per roll of 35mm? I've always done it myself and used an old Beseler enlarger to do 8x10 prints.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


Thx. Also, it mounts the lens to the monopod.


Wat... A direct connection to the monopod would be a hell of a lot more secure. Monopod heads make no sense to me. If you need it to rotate, and your lens doesn't have a tripod collar, you are weaksauce.


----------



## sub50hz

They're really cheap, for a 36 roll of 35mm b+w plus a 600dpi scan to cd is like $5.50 after tax.


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13874014*
> They're really cheap, for a 36 roll of 35mm b+w plus a 600dpi scan to cd is like $5.50 after tax.


Jeez...


----------



## Shane1244




----------



## dudemanppl

I don't understand what is happening but that's cool as hell.


----------



## Triangle

My dad isn't happy, as his D2H isn't doing vey well while I have a D700..!








It got messed up last year at Yosemite in the rain/snow. AF isn't working well. Nothing is very crisp.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;13872177*
> Hm, looks it would get in the way while driving!


Not so bad for cruising down back roads which is where I use it. Not for busy traffic.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13873314*
> Wat... A direct connection to the monopod would be a hell of a lot more secure. Monopod heads make no sense to me. If you need it to rotate, and your lens doesn't have a tripod collar, you are weaksauce.


No, the lens has a lens collar to permit rotation. I shoot most of my field stuff kneeling, and it turns out that the most stable orientation of a monopod when kneeling is with the monopod at an angle pointing away from you, hence the need to tilt the camera lens to accomodate this orientation.

I also often carry a monopod while birding. Here it's necessary to tilt the lens/camera up to hit targets in trees.

I guess you don't shoot stuff like field sports or wildlife. If you did, this would be obvious to you.


----------



## dudemanppl

I do, I just handhold the 400 when I borrow it from my friend. Its like a monopod but with more freedom. And he has the AF-I which weighs more than four pounds more than the VR. THe VR actually seems really managable to me (just checked and its onlY 13 pounds with a D3 attatched, less than an AF-I!).


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


I don't understand what is happening but that's cool as hell.


Light painting.

Used a flash to expose him, than had an additional 5 seconds to go run around with a flash light.

Here's another one I did.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*


Light painting.

Used a flash to expose him, than had an additional 5 seconds to go run around with a flash light.

Here's another one I did.


Oh I thought you were pouring out some sort of glowing liquid. :3


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


I do, I just handhold the 400 when I borrow it from my friend. Its like a monopod but with more freedom. And he has the AF-I which weighs more than four pounds more than the VR. THe VR actually seems really managable to me (just checked and its onlY 13 pounds with a D3 attatched, less than an AF-I!).


I don't know anybody including myself who hand holds a 400mm f/2.8 lens. No way. VR or no VR. It's just too heavy. Even the monopod is marginal for birds. Tripod is the best but hardest to transport in the field.

Please link me up to some of your hh 400mm wildlife shots. I'd like to see them.


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nuclearjock;13883280*
> I don't know anybody including myself who hand holds a 400mm f/2.8 lens. No way. VR or no VR. It's just too heavy. Even the monopod is marginal for birds. Tripod is the best but hardest to transport in the field.
> 
> Please link me up to some of your hh 400mm wildlife shots. I'd like to see them.


Clearly you need moar muscles then.







lol, not all photographers are tiny people.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sparhawk;13884264*
> Clearly you need moar muscles then.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> lol, not all photographers are tiny people.












I'm 5'11", 210 and I would not want to hand-hold that lens all day.


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13884719*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm 5'11", 210 and I would not want to hand-hold that lens all day.


Yeah, I wouldn't be doing that all day long, but for a few shots here and there it would work. Especially if I hadn't had a chance to get the tripod out yet.


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13884719*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm 5'11", 210 and I would not want to hand-hold that lens all day.


Height/Weight != Strength


----------



## laboitenoire

Well, I'm 5'10", 140 pounds, can do a lot of pull ups, and I rock climb. I still wouldn't handhold that big of a lens all day long...


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;13885401*
> Height/Weight != Strength


I still powerlift as a hobby, although I haven't competed in 2 years.

Just because you _can_ do something doesn't mean it's comfortable nor ideal. You could hold a bottle of water all day, right? Of course, putting it in something like a backpack or cupholder makes things a lot easier.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13884719*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm 5'11", 210 and I would not want to hand-hold that lens all day.


6'3"/225. I'll haul it around all day but hold it up in shooting position and follow a bird, or worse yet shoot an entire soccer game?? Good luck with that.


----------



## iandroo888

hey dudemanppl, where to get replacement parts for nikon? one of the rubber grips on my body is coming off..


----------



## Segovax

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13884719*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm 5'11", 210 and I would not want to hand-hold that lens all day.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire;13885429*
> Well, I'm 5'10", 140 pounds, can do a lot of pull ups, and I rock climb. I still wouldn't handhold that big of a lens all day long...


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nuclearjock;13885977*
> 6'3"/225. I'll haul it around all day but hold it up in shooting position and follow a bird, or worse yet shoot an entire soccer game?? Good luck with that.


Why is everyone on the internet so big, tough, and strong?

Get a tripod or something tough guys.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Get a tripod or something tough guys.


Monopods, you don't understand them.


----------



## Segovax

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13887405*
> Monopods, you don't understand them.












This right?


----------



## robchaos

No, that's an octopod, moron.


----------



## BlankThis




----------



## sub50hz

Lol, on a 28mm no less. Great looking Konica, though.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis;13887953*


I'll see your Konica and raise you a 5DII:










(source - good article)


----------



## sub50hz

Wow, that 300L is a lot smaller than it looks in pictures on its own (yes, I know it's the f/4L).


----------



## dudemanppl

5'5" and 135. This makes so little sense. Almost as little sense as that 300 f/4. Honestly I don't have many pictures with the combo up anywhere and the ones I do have sort of suck. :3
http://www.flickr.com/photos/dudemanppl/sets/72157625871226206/


----------



## sub50hz

I'm taking a break from digital for a little bit, as I'm rediscovering how much better my shots are when the mindset is so different. Gonna throw down on a Minolta XD11/50 1.4 combo tomorrow, and possibly trading a bunch of R/C stuff for an RZ67 this weekend. Hopefully all my film comes in Friday.


----------



## dudemanppl

Lol, I use the 5DII to meter then take a shot with the R3a.


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13889701*
> Lol, I use the 5DII to meter then take a shot with the R3a.


I had to do this with my Olympus OM-1 before I scored a Canon FTb.

The Konica isn't mine guys, just came across the picture and thought you would enjoy.


----------



## foothead

Has anyone here tried removing the IR blocking filter from their camera? I'm considering it, but idk what it'll do to white balance.


----------



## dudemanppl

Nothing really happens to white balance, but you could change it in post anyway.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


5'5" and 135. This makes so little sense. Almost as little sense as that 300 f/4. Honestly I don't have many pictures with the combo up anywhere and the ones I do have sort of suck. :3
http://www.flickr.com/photos/dudeman...7625871226206/


You're saying in an open forum that it makes little sense to use support in the form of a monopod or tripod for a pro body/super telephoto combo?? Am I understanding you correctly?

300 F/4?? What does this have to do with support?


----------



## aksthem1

I just got my 30D with a Phottix grip and 18-55mm IS after being without a camera for months. Sold my T1i and nifty fifty to upgrade, ended up spending the money on audio. :|

Time to start snapping.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13890581*
> Nothing really happens to white balance, but you could change it in post anyway.


It definitely messes up white balance. This is from a D70 with no filter:










source

I'd need an equivalent filter to use for normal shooting, but I haven't been able to find one. I may just wait until I upgrade (probably when Olympus replaces the E-30) and convert my E-410 then. That way, I could put the IR pass filter on the sensor and still have a viewfinder and autofocus.


----------



## sub50hz

What about one of those IR filters Leica had to supply with the whole M8 debacle?

Side note: Found an XD11 in mint condition at Central just now with a 50/1.4 for 100 bucks! Shutter was just replaced, the metering works correctly, and the kicker -- _it's a black model with no leather shrinkage!_ Super pumped, I looked for a black one at a decent price for a _long_ time, could never find one under 300. Pics later.


----------



## Unknownm

Picked up ILFORD super B&W 400. With my 200mm lens. Will post shots after it's processed


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13895956*
> What about one of those IR filters Leica had to supply with the whole M8 debacle?





















source

Unless leica made no attempt whatsoever to correct color sensitivity, I doubt it'd be what I need.

EDIT: He seems to have gotten it under control using a "BG18" filter.










Is that the blue bandpass filter made by schott? It allows 300-700nm, which seems about right.


----------



## sub50hz

I'm actually not quite sure what the deal was with the Leica, I just remember reading about it.


----------



## Dream Killer

the original Leica M8.0s were sensitive to IR and UV. The 8.2's don't have that problem but using a UV+IR filter on the M8.0s worked as a fix.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


You're saying in an open forum that it makes little sense to use support in the form of a monopod or tripod for a pro body/super telephoto combo?? Am I understanding you correctly?

300 F/4?? What does this have to do with support?


300 f/4 IS with all those filters makes sense to you? Also, I have opinion, nmust be trollan'. Tripods are so limiting, and monopods are even more limiting.


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Tripods are so limiting, and monopods are even more limiting.


I have to agree.


----------



## dudemanppl

But I think we should stop this argument, it's obviously going to get ugly. Basically; do whatever the hell suits YOU and don't listen to other people.


----------



## iandroo888

dudemanppl. where to you get replacement part for nikon body's? i need to replace a rubber grip on my d5k.

(asked u here and pm'ed u before..... u never answered D


----------



## sub50hz

Gettin down on some MINOLTA.


----------



## mz-n10

looks like the 50/1.7. ive been eyeing the 50/1.2 rokkor for a while.....


----------



## sub50hz

MD 1.4, actually. I love how quiet this thing is, super stealth mode engage!


----------



## mz-n10

my xe7 actually just broke a year ago during my hike to half dome, it was a great camera....


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iandroo888;13902224*
> dudemanppl. where to you get replacement part for nikon body's? i need to replace a rubber grip on my d5k.
> 
> (asked u here and pm'ed u before..... u never answered D


Call them... and remember folks, GOOGLE IS YOUR FRIEND. Also, the internet in rural areas sucks.


----------



## MistaBernie

Sigma 17-50 en route... probably going to try to ditch the 28-135 and stick to 10-20 / 17-50 / 70-200 for now... I may even sell my 50f/1.4 that's getting cleaned up/checked out..


----------



## sub50hz

Turns out that XD11 has a little mirror alignment issue. Returning today. Sads, otherwise an incredible camera.


----------



## MistaBernie

I can't find my X370.. had a sweet little outfit for it too. I think it might have been stolen. That being said, I still have a couple of places I think I can check...


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13901185*
> 300 f/4 IS with all those filters makes sense to you? Also, I have opinion, nmust be trollan'. Tripods are so limiting, and monopods are even more limiting.


I have no clue to what you're referring with regard to the 300 IS and filters.
As far as tripod/monopod, monopods are essential for field sports with heavy rigs. If you think otherwise, just check out the photogs on the sidelines at any major sporting event. I'm sure they avoid limitations. Maybe you just need to practice your technique.


----------



## Lost Prophet

Not sure if I should be included in this club but I take pictures at work as kind of a side task, since I contribute to our company blog/newsletter

I use a Sony NEX-5 with a 55mm zoom lens. I must say the little thing takes some great pictures


----------



## BlankThis

Prophet you've got a nice office







As much as I hate these mirrorless contraptions your combo delivers some very nice pictures.


----------



## Lost Prophet

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis;13907801*
> Prophet you've got a nice office
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As much as I hate these mirrorless contraptions your combo delivers some very nice pictures.


Thank you! I also get to play around with this when I feel like shooting video (pic taken with an iPhone 4)


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13902332*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gettin down on some MINOLTA.


Nice. I like my X-700. Though, yours has a sync speed almost twice mine, and I don't have Speed Priority.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nuclearjock;13906900*
> I have no clue to what you're referring with regard to the 300 IS and filters.
> As far as tripod/monopod, monopods are essential for field sports with heavy rigs. If you think otherwise, just check out the photogs on the sidelines at any major sporting event. I'm sure they avoid limitations. Maybe you just need to practice your technique.


I already have a technique. Handholding. Also when talking to your gay friend and you want to have a contest to see who can shoot at the lowest shutterspeed without blur, do NOT call it a "handholding contest". It gets slighly awkward.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13906428*
> Call them... and remember folks, GOOGLE IS YOUR FRIEND. Also, the internet in rural areas sucks.


i cant find that part googling.. there like battery doors, screws, etc.. but not that rubber part LOL


----------



## laboitenoire

So my friend said he does indeed want to buy my D5000... Now I just need to get myself a D7000.

Almost lost it in Best Buy this afternoon. I just stopped by to hold the D7000 and get a little bit familiar with it and also compared it to the 60D and 7D they had as well (just in case, you never know...), and UGH!!!! Everything was in Auto mode, the lens had a massive scratch on the element and was cracked near the mount (damn plastic mount on the 18-105...), and when I first used it I thought the lens was either soft or having focus issues because the diopter was all messed up. Finally got it reasonably back to normal.

This entire time there's an employee next to me helping these two Hispanic gentlemen who were shopping for lenses. The one didn't appear to speak English well, so his (presumably) friend was translating, but the employee was incredibly rude, sometimes ignoring the friend and trying to make himself heard by the one who was shopping. To make matters worse, the guy started saying how they had to buy a UV filter to go with the brand new 70-300 VR the guy was buying, and that they happened to have Rocket Fish ones, and by the way they were quite good (gag!). I almost thought about decking the guy at the risk of being thrown out of the store.

So glad I actually buy things from other stores...


----------



## iandroo888

lol i find it so funny when they dont know what they are talkin about ! xD


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


I already have a technique. Handholding. Also when talking to your gay friend and you want to have a contest to see who can shoot at the lowest shutterspeed without blur, do NOT call it a "handholding contest". It gets slighly awkward.


Shoot a full day soccer tournament with a 400 2.8 and let me know how it works for you. Matter of fact shoot half of a game.


----------



## dudemanppl

I've shot a whole game, pretty okay, but my combo weighed 4 pounds more than yours. The new IS II from Canon is stupid light.


----------



## theCanadian

Slow shutter + Tripod + Zoom Out + High Winds = ???


----------



## dudemanppl

http://www.nikonusa.com/Service-And-Support/Service-And-Repair.page
ANDREW, Y U SO BAD AT GOOGLING?!?!


----------



## Dream Killer




----------



## sub50hz

6ms? Gat dang.

edit: Used an EOS 3 today, blew 2 rolls through and I'm convinced this is what I've been looking for all along. Sad thing is, the A2 was just as good, for like 1/3 of the money. Decisions.


----------



## riko99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire;13910095*
> 
> So glad I actually buy things from other stores...


Yeah my sister brought her Dell to Geek Squad to get a virus removed instead of asking me 200$ later all they did was reformat.... (and not save any of her saveable files). Personally I would be calling them and asking where my files were and saying that for the money I payed that this was not justified so to refund at least part.


----------



## laboitenoire

I mean for small things I don't mind Best Buy, it's just big purchases I'll make online.

Hey Gone, you wanna remove the D5000 and 18-55 VR from my name? I've sold it, so I'm pulling the trigger on the D7000 in like the next few hours.


----------



## dudemanppl

I think I'll be selling the 16-28 for a Tokina 17mm f/3.5 since I never shoot wide. I'll be saving myself about 500 dorrars. And the 50L for Sigma 50 should get me 750ish and then I'll get a 24L.


----------



## laboitenoire

Does anybody know whether refurbished cameras from KEH are the factory refurbs? They have a good price on a refurb D7000 so I shot them an email and they haven't responded. The price looks right, though.


----------



## sub50hz

D700, do it for great full-frame justice.


----------



## Shane1244

D7000 wait for D800 (or whatever it may be). Sell D7000 for little loss.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;13918437*
> D7000 wait for D800 (or whatever it may be). Sell D7000 for little loss.


With all the Japan shenanigans, I wouldn't plan on waiting for _anything_ for the forseeable future.


----------



## Shane1244

I don't think that's slowed production for them has it? I thought it was just problems with shipping.


----------



## sub50hz

Any kind of shipping mishap will interrupt a designed supply chain and impact manufacturing schedules.


----------



## laboitenoire

Can't afford the D700, and I'd have to sell my 30 which I absolutely love. Plus video is really tempting on the D7000...


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13917653*
> *I think I'll be selling the 16-28 for a Tokina 17mm f/3.5 since I never shoot wide*. I'll be saving myself about 500 dorrars. And the 50L for Sigma 50 should get me 750ish and then I'll get a 24L.


Wait what?


----------



## laboitenoire

Don't question his logic









No seriously, don't...


----------



## BlankThis

Shane whats the price on a 5D2 with your hook-up?


----------



## dudemanppl

800 dollar lens sitting around vs 275 dollar lens sitting around. Also, you can put filters on the 17. And I think I'll get the Sigma 24 1.8 over the L since I shouldn't splurge on anything that isn't 35 or 85 (fav FLs). Might even get a Rokion 85 1.4 since its so easy to manual focus.


----------



## laboitenoire

Well, I officially took the plunge. D7000 ordered with next-day shipping, so probably on Tuesday.


----------



## max302

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Well, I officially took the plunge. D7000 ordered with next-day shipping, so probably on Tuesday.


You'll enjoy it. Still in love with mine.


----------



## Marin

Found a cool location. Finally get to test out my Rodenstock 75/4.5.


----------



## Unknownm

Film ILFORD B&W 400 (c-41 process because I don't have a dark room)

The body is fujica st705, and I do enjoy it besides having to press the DOF + half shutter to get light meter to work with non Fuji lens, however my last roll showed some interesting things, I believe it could be shutter issues?


















Here are some images that turned out perfect w/ the same shutter speed as the images up above


































With those shared, I got a Pentax Spotmatic SP II for a replacement, with a 28mm Wide Angle lens for $40

Vivitar f2.8 fixed 28mm










Auto Argon f3.5 fixed 200mm










Fujinon f1.8 fixed 55mm


----------



## dudemanppl

It can basically only be a shutter problem. Also, putting together a 53 picture panorama. PS is steaming its way through, already made a preview and it was AWESOME.


----------



## Inteller

Hi guy's and gal's!

Yes I'd like to join your OCN Camera Club.
I own an old Canon EOS Rebel SLR 6.1 Megapixel.
For lens's I have the original EF 18-55mm,
& also a telephoto EF 100-300mm

I'm strictly an amateur/noob at taking pictures, but I still enjoy it!
Although my Canon is old, it's been well taken care or, and still works like new. The only thing I've had to do is get a replacement battery. I do really love the quality of pictures I can get out of this camera!

Here's a few photo's I've taken. Before becoming disabled, I was a custom wood worker, and built everything you will see in these pics.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/


----------



## ljason8eg

Ok, quick question about when I'm shooting at the track. I've posted a photo below with some rather large sun glare on the car caused by the angle of the sun in relation to where I'm standing. Now, short of moving to a different location or waiting for the sun to move a bit, what, if anything can be done by this? Would a C-PL help at all?

What I'm talking about:


Brad Keselowski by JLofing, on Flickr


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Unknownm;13925052*
> Film ILFORD B&W 400 (c-41 process because I don't have a dark room)
> 
> The body is fujica st705, and I do enjoy it besides having to press the DOF + half shutter to get light meter to work with non Fuji lens, however my last roll showed some interesting things, I believe it could be shutter issues?


Have you checked to make sure the shutter is light tight and operates smoothly? Minute holes and sticky operation are both quite common in old curtain shutters.

I need a second battery for my E-410. Should I go for OEM, or are there any third party brands that I can trust?


----------



## laboitenoire

Sterlingtek is a decent third-party brand that I know some people like a lot. I personally only buy OEM.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Unknownm;13925052*
> Film ILFORD B&W 400 (c-41 process because I don't have a dark room)
> 
> The body is fujica st705, and I do enjoy it besides having to press the DOF + half shutter to get light meter to work with non Fuji lens, however my last roll showed some interesting things, I believe it could be shutter issues?


does the negative show the same streak? it could be an issue with developing.


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis;13920706*
> Shane whats the price on a 5D2 with your hook-up?


I only get the EPP from Nikon right now.


----------



## Marin

Weeee, Sunday shoot. Got a 9 foot seamless setup in my apartment. Also have a bunch of Broncolor Primo heads (and two packs) & two 4bank Kino Flo's.


----------



## sub50hz

Damnit, I skipped going riday yesterday because I was feeling lazy -- and then THIS happens in the field next to the park:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/chibrknews-small-plane-crashes-in-burbank--20110618,0,5252870.story

What a colossal failure on my part.


----------



## Unknownm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead;13926022*
> Have you checked to make sure the shutter is light tight and operates smoothly? Minute holes and sticky operation are both quite common in old curtain shutters.
> 
> I need a second battery for my E-410. Should I go for OEM, or are there any third party brands that I can trust?


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10;13927351*
> does the negative show the same streak? it could be an issue with developing.


It did on my first roll. However I thought it could be the machines that develop it, than it kept on coming no matter what roll I put it in.

http://lewiscollard.com/cameras/fujica-st-705/

that guy has the same issue. Could be a bad shutter speed, it only seems to happen @ 1/1500, anything lower works amazing

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13928941*
> Damnit, I skipped going riday yesterday because I was feeling lazy -- and then THIS happens in the field next to the park:
> 
> http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/chibrknews-small-plane-crashes-in-burbank--20110618,0,5252870.story
> 
> What a colossal failure on my part.


Don't feel bad, I didn't go to vancouver because I was to lazy and the riot happened. I could of got some awesome shots.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Unknownm;13929041*
> Don't feel bad, I didn't go to vancouver because I was to lazy and the riot happened. I could of got some awesome shots.


The burning M5 made me die a little a lot inside.


----------



## Boyboyd

Has anyone ever used a 16 stop ND? Is it too much for daylight long-exposures?


----------



## Unknownm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13928941*
> Damnit, I skipped going riday yesterday because I was feeling lazy -- and then THIS happens in the field next to the park:
> 
> http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/chibrknews-small-plane-crashes-in-burbank--20110618,0,5252870.story
> 
> What a colossal failure on my part.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13929218*
> The burning M5 made me die a little a lot inside.


Yeah, thank god the next day tons of people went back to vancouver to clean up the mess.

There is a website for people that started the riot, you can visit it here: http://www.vancouverriotpics.ca/

What makes me angry was most of the people that STARTED the riot weren't even from here, and that causes us to look bad. Vancouver is a nice place.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Unknownm;13929290*
> Vancouver is a nice place.


It'll be even nicer when you export that crybaby Luongo.


----------



## dudemanppl

444 megapixel panorama, not even sure what to do with it.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13929393*
> 444 megapixel panorama, not even sure what to do with it.


Print it on 8x4.

or A0.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13929393*
> 444 megapixel panorama, not even sure what to do with it.


Go kill peoples' bandwidth


----------



## dudemanppl

To be honest its not too great of a picture, but the sheer resolution of it is mind boggling. I do have another picture which is only about 190 megapixels, and I seriously love it. I never like my own work. Ill have a smaller version up on flickr in a bit. Also, 444 megapixels = at least 10 feet across at 300 DPI.


----------



## theCanadian

Why? Or mightn't I take laboitenoire's advise here too?


----------



## robchaos

Just a question for anyone who might have more experiences with old lenses. One of my friends has an old (circa 1979) Nikon F mount AI lens that I cannot find any information on whatsoever, but he only wants $20 for it. The lens is a manual focus MC PHASE2 cct 135 mm f1:2.8 macro. I could not find any information on whether the Macro was a true 1:1, or if it was just a "close up" lens (most manufacturers feel they can label anything that is 1:4 or under as Macro") I see they sell for anywhere from $20-$50 online, but I cannot find any information whatsoever about this lens aside from the fact that it looks like it was made by a subsidiary of Pentax back in the late 70's. It would work with my camera body, but would be manually focusing and metering. Would this be worth getting just to mess around with? I have seen some pretty cool photos shot with old glass.

I already have a macro in the 90mm range, so this would just be a "toy" purchase to play around with.


----------



## Shane1244

It's $20, go for it. Nothing to loose.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


Why? Or mightn't I take laboitenoire's advise here too?


My advice on what?


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:



Originally Posted by *robchaos*


*(most manufacturers feel they can label anything that is 1:4 or under as Macro")*


Depending on who you talk to, a lens which creates a 1:4 image is the technical specification for macro. A 1:4 negative/positive printed on a 6x4 creates about a 1:1 image if you're using a 35mm frame/sensor.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *robchaos;13930954*
> Just a question for anyone who might have more experiences with old lenses. One of my friends has an old (circa 1979) Nikon F mount AI lens that I cannot find any information on whatsoever, but he only wants $20 for it. The lens is a manual focus MC PHASE2 cct 135 mm f1:2.8 macro. I could not find any information on whether the Macro was a true 1:1, or if it was just a "close up" lens (most manufacturers feel they can label anything that is 1:4 or under as Macro") I see they sell for anywhere from $20-$50 online, but I cannot find any information whatsoever about this lens aside from the fact that it looks like it was made by a subsidiary of Pentax back in the late 70's. It would work with my camera body, but would be manually focusing and metering. Would this be worth getting just to mess around with? I have seen some pretty cool photos shot with old glass.
> 
> I already have a macro in the 90mm range, so this would just be a "toy" purchase to play around with.


You don't stand to lose much if it's $20.


----------



## dudemanppl

I finally have a picture I'm proud of taking. Original resolution is 180 mp, I think I'll be printing this stupidly large.


----------



## laboitenoire

Nice!


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13935572*
> http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5269/5852338764_9c0347751f_b.jpg
> I finally have a picture I'm proud of taking. Original resolution is 180 mp, I think I'll be printing this stupidly large.


Casual observation here, but the sky looks photoshopped for some reason. _*I'm not saying it is /B]*_ -- I dont know if it's the angle of the clouds, etc.. it's really cool either way, and I'll assume that it's a regular photo unless you come back with 'LULZ yeah the sky is totally shopped'.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Nice weather here in Boston, Bernie.


----------



## MistaBernie

Isn't it though? Were you here Saturday for the rolling rally?? If my 60D were here, I just may have passed on the golf tournament I was in just to shoot it (although I'm kind of glad I didn't, it's not every round you can sink 5 birdie putts for your team and win a golden putter)


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


Isn't it though? Were you here Saturday for the rolling rally?? If my 60D were here, I just may have passed on the golf tournament I was in just to shoot it (although I'm kind of glad I didn't, it's not every round you can sink 5 birdie putts for your team and win a golden putter)


We rolled in Saturday night, so we didn't see much. Spent Sunday tooling around the Freedom Trail. Currently enjoying a Harpoon IPA at the Bell-in-Hand.







I wish we were here for game 7, seems like it was pretty crazy down here.


----------



## Unknownm

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


It'll be even nicer when you export that crybaby Luongo.


I wish lol


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*


I only get the EPP from Nikon right now.


Shame









Is it just me or have the rumors of the D800 just disappeared and now they're just talking about the D400 and D4.. Nikon needs to stop loving the first-time DSLR buyer and pull their pants up.


----------



## iandroo888

i want d400 :]


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Nice weather here in Boston, Bernie.










You arrived at the right time... The early part of the month has been terrible weather in MA.

If you like Harpoon, give the Wachusett Brewing Company a try. You should be able to find somebody with them in Boston.

EDIT: Box has left Secaucus, can't wait.


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


i want d400 :]


I see no point.... FF is the only feature besides weatherproofing that my D90 doesn't offer.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire;13942136*
> You arrived at the right time... The early part of the month has been terrible weather in MA.
> 
> If you like Harpoon, give the Wachusett Brewing Company a try. You should be able to find somebody with them in Boston.
> 
> EDIT: Box has left Secaucus, can't wait.


Well, at $7.50/pt, I won't be trying too much more of anything.







These days it's an IPA or Belgian tripel/quadrupel or not much else it seems. And it's funny whenever we travel and are asked to show some ID. Everyone always says, "Wow, this is the first KY ID I've seen!"









More on topic: I've seen Canon DSLR's 10 to 1 to Nikon here. All Rebels with kit lenses, except one 5DII with an 85L I saw. A few Nikon Dxxx here and there. On the flip side, most P&S cameras I've seen are Nikon.

Off to Salem and maybe Cape Cod tomorrow.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie;13936514*
> Casual observation here, but the sky looks photoshopped for some reason. _*I'm not saying it is /B]*_ -- I dont know if it's the angle of the clouds, etc.. it's really cool either way, and I'll assume that it's a regular photo unless you come back with 'LULZ yeah the sky is totally shopped'.


I was going to do an HDR, but it didn't stitch together the same in post, so I just took the sky from the -1 exposure and pasted it on there.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;13943713*
> Well, at $7.50/pt, I won't be trying too much more of anything.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> These days it's an IPA or Belgian tripel/quadrupel or not much else it seems. And it's funny whenever we travel and are asked to show some ID. Everyone always says, "Wow, this is the first KY ID I've seen!"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> More on topic: I've seen Canon DSLR's 10 to 1 to Nikon here. All Rebels with kit lenses, except one 5DII with an 85L I saw. A few Nikon Dxxx here and there. On the flip side, most P&S cameras I've seen are Nikon.
> 
> Off to Salem and maybe Cape Cod tomorrow.


Jesus, is it really $7.50 a pint for Wachusett??

And yeah, there's a lot of Canon shooters in MA, especially the tourists. However I was at the botanic garden the other day and saw husband and wife with matching D300's with 18-200 VRs, and then there was a guy who had either a D3 or D3X, but looked like he only had a crappy 24-120 VR on it... Overall I saw more Nikon that day than I had in a long time.

EDIT: Have fun with your trip! If you do go to the Cape, I strongly suggest making it to either Chatham or Provincetown. Both very eclectic places, especially P-town. Plus they have some of the more "classic" Cape beaches (Nauset/Lighthouse beach in Chatham, and the entire seashore in P-town with dunes and the sight of Marconi's experiment).


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;13943713*
> Well, at $7.50/pt, I won't be trying too much more of anything.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> These days it's an IPA or Belgian tripel/quadrupel or not much else it seems. And it's funny whenever we travel and are asked to show some ID. Everyone always says, "Wow, this is the first KY ID I've seen!"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> More on topic: I've seen Canon DSLR's 10 to 1 to Nikon here. All Rebels with kit lenses, except one 5DII with an 85L I saw. A few Nikon Dxxx here and there. On the flip side, most P&S cameras I've seen are Nikon.
> 
> Off to Salem and maybe Cape Cod tomorrow.


When I'm at the track I'd say the ratio of DSLRs is very similar to what you've seen. Its crazy to think Canon markets that much better. Mostly kit lenses as well, to go along with a lot of superzooms. I didn't see any fan with decent glass at Charlotte.

Then, I took a trip inside the media center to the room where all the pro photographers upload their pics and my lord...the money in there. 500mm f/4L's everywhere and enough 70-200 2.8 MKII's for everyone of us who frequents this thread and then some.

...and that was just the Canon stuff.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire;13945330*
> Jesus, is it really $7.50 a pint for Wachusett??
> 
> And yeah, there's a lot of Canon shooters in MA, especially the tourists. However I was at the botanic garden the other day and saw husband and wife with matching D300's with 18-200 VRs, and then there was a guy who had either a D3 or D3X, but looked like he only had a crappy 24-120 VR on it... Overall I saw more Nikon that day than I had in a long time.
> 
> EDIT: Have fun with your trip! If you do go to the Cape, I strongly suggest making it to either Chatham or Provincetown. Both very eclectic places, especially P-town. Plus they have some of the more "classic" Cape beaches (Nauset/Lighthouse beach in Chatham, and the entire seashore in P-town with dunes and the sight of Marconi's experiment).


No, it was $7.50 for the Harpoon and for their in-house stuff. I've been to some pricey tourist type bars, but that's robbery. It's not like Harpoon is some rarity. That's the kind of price I would pay for Dogfish Worldwide Stout or something similar (I wish, it actually costs more than that in a liquor store, LOL).

Thanks for the recommendations for the Cape. We had no ideas where to go, but we'll check out Provincetown for sure since we were considering driving the length of it anyway, LOL.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg;13945437*
> When I'm at the track I'd say the ratio of DSLRs is very similar to what you've seen. Its crazy to think Canon markets that much better. Mostly kit lenses as well, to go along with a lot of superzooms. I didn't see any fan with decent glass at Charlotte.
> 
> Then, I took a trip inside the media center to the room where all the pro photographers upload their pics and my lord...the money in there. 500mm f/4L's everywhere and enough 70-200 2.8 MKII's for everyone of us who frequents this thread and then some.
> 
> ...and that was just the Canon stuff.


Generally I see more Canon DSLRs at any given place, but the ratio here is quite Canon-heavy. I was at the Cincy Zoo recently and saw equal parts Canon and Nikon.

And speaking of race tracks, when Keeneland (horse racing track) is up and running, it's a gear bonanza. Cameras strategically placed all around the track with wireless setups, right on the ground in many cases.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;13946086*
> Generally I see more Canon DSLRs at any given place, but the ratio here is quite Canon-heavy. I was at the Cincy Zoo recently and saw equal parts Canon and Nikon.
> 
> And speaking of race tracks, when Keeneland (horse racing track) is up and running, it's a gear bonanza. Cameras strategically placed all around the track with wireless setups, right on the ground in many cases.


Oh yeah man, any sort of race track is like that. Its nuts.

Oh by the way, could you be so kind to update my gear list with a 300mm f/4 L IS?


----------



## Marin

OS X = CR2 previews. Windows 7 = No CR2 previews. Awesome.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;13948119*
> OS X = CR2 previews. Windows 7 = No CR2 previews. Awesome.


Thats why I shoot RAW+JPG.


----------



## MistaBernie

GT -- If you head down to Cape Cod, you're passing me on the highway (I literally live within ~ 2 miles of Rt 3). Wave when you get to exit 14!







If I didn't have plans tonite, I'd invite you by on your way back up towards Boston (I'm out relatively early today).

In related news, both my 60D and 50 f1/4 are out for delivery Fed-Ex. I tried to re-route them to a local Fed Ex store for me to pick up, I dont know how I feel about 'indirect signature' (ok for neighbors to sign ???), but also, my 17-50 should be there today when I get home. It's like Christmas in June!









I get CR2 previews in Win7 (at least I think I do) -- when I'm exploring, the preview comes up on the bottom of the window, I bet it worked in the preview pane too... and yeah, I'm sure it was the raws, the way I organize my shots, I was in a raw folder.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg;13947775*
> Oh by the way, could you be so kind to update my gear list with a 300mm f/4 L IS?


Grats on the 300 -- you should be able to shoot races from home with that thing


----------



## Mako0312

I miss going to Cape Cod, and going to the beach.......









One thing I HATE about Kentucky. NO OCEAN!!!!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


OS X = CR2 previews. Windows 7 = No CR2 previews. Awesome.


I have them. I use a program called Fast Picture Viewer Codec and it works fine for 32 or 64-bit. The sucky thing is that they no longer have a free version (got mine while it was free).

http://www.fastpictureviewer.com/codecs/

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Mako0312*


I miss going to Cape Cod, and going to the beach.......









One thing I HATE about Kentucky. NO OCEAN!!!!


True enough, but we do have the most amount of navigable waterways in the country, not to mention a fair amount of lakes, and none of that equals a beach, but it's better than nothing.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


GT -- If you head down to Cape Cod, you're passing me on the highway (I literally live within ~ 2 miles of Rt 3). Wave when you get to exit 14!







If I didn't have plans tonite, I'd invite you by on your way back up towards Boston (I'm out relatively early today).


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;13948119*
> OS X = CR2 previews. Windows 7 = No CR2 previews. Awesome.


Weird, I get previews when I'm pulling them from my camera. No add-ons.


----------



## robchaos

Gonetomorrow, I've got a gear update! Picked up 3 old ai manual focus lenses listed in my Sig. 
Thank you


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*


Weird, I get previews when I'm pulling them from my camera. No add-ons.


I get them as well.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


I was going to do an HDR, but it didn't stitch together the same in post, so I just took the sky from the -1 exposure and pasted it on there.


Kinda surprised that's the case -- even more surprised I saw it. Still an epic image regardless


----------



## Unknownm

Death to my ST-705. Shutter started to show more issues, and than I decided to take it apart. Failed to get inside to the light meter, so I took everything and put it inside a box until I google.

Waiting to finish my ILFORD Super XP2 with the Spotmatic SP II. Can you gives me some tips on the light meter, or should I just always try to level it out in the middle


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


Grats on the 300 -- you should be able to shoot races from home with that thing










Lol I know right? No more sitting in the 100 degree weather to get some shots.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Unknownm*


Can you gives me some tips on the light meter, or should I just always try to level it out in the middle


Do you mean the built-in meter?


----------



## laboitenoire

I got visited by the magic van this morning







D7000 is officially here!


----------



## Shane1244

Woo!


----------



## laboitenoire

Well I must say, the resolution on this camera is really taxing on lenses. My 70-300 now looks pretty soft at 300, no matter what settings I'm shooting with.


----------



## Shane1244

Samples? Link to the full res, don't post .


----------



## laboitenoire

I'll get to it eventually. My test shots probably could be under a bit more ideal conditions so I'm shooting as close to base ISO as possible.

EDIT: Photos are up here.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/alchadw/sets/72157626892757455/

Upon further testing, it seems perfectly normal for the lens. Probably I'm just out of practice with my tele







Also I was shooting at low ISO in bright light at a large-ish static target, not small birds at ISO 800 in shade.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;13948119*
> OS X = CR2 previews. Windows 7 = No CR2 previews. Awesome.


FastPictureViewer WIC Codec Pack = Preview any RAW file in Windows 7


----------



## Unknownm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13953373*
> Do you mean the built-in meter?


Yep.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Unknownm;13957175*
> Yep.


Smack dab in the middle will be correctly metered, but remember that the Spotmatic (and most 60s-80s SLRs) meters center-weighted.


----------



## Dream Killer

there is no correct way of metering. it is what it is.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer;13957268*
> there is no correct way of metering. it is what it is.


It will be metered "correctly" (for correct exposure) for the area (center-weighted) that it measures. You know full well what I meant.


----------



## robchaos

So, any tips for stuck pixels on the LCD screens? I have a couple on the d90 and gently massaging doesn't fix them. What is nikons policy on that? I know some manufacturers won't warranty something for an LCD problem unless there is over a certain number of stuck/dead pixels.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *robchaos;13957870*
> So, any tips for stuck pixels on the LCD screens? I have a couple on the d90 and gently massaging doesn't fix them. What is nikons policy on that? I know some manufacturers won't warranty something for an LCD problem unless there is over a certain number of stuck/dead pixels.


Is the camera capable of video playback? If so, run a screencap of jscreenfix on it and see if it helps.


----------



## MistaBernie

Yay -- getting both my 60D and my 50 f/1.4 back.

Double yay -- getting my new Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 (man, does this thing take some torque to extend).

Boo -- deciding _against_ bringing my camera to Fenway tonite. I might have chosen otherwise if I knew I was going to be sitting in the 5th row, straight away center field (approximately 15 ft from the most commonly used TV cameras in the place).


----------



## sub50hz

200mm from center field would put you in the middle of Cropsville, USA. I tried at the Sox game here a week or so ago -- took it out of my bag, zoomed to max, capped the lens and bought a series of beverages. No shooting for me.

Dugout seats, though, hell yes.


----------



## sub50hz

Follow-up thought:

Anybody have any experience with the P+S Canons with IS? I kind of want something smaller to bring to parties and whatnot.

Ninja edit: I also need something with a flash that doesn't take 900 years to recharge. I don't really care what brand, Canon/Sony/Panasonic/whatever.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13959380*
> 200mm from center field would put you in the middle of Cropsville, USA. I tried at the Sox game here a week or so ago -- took it out of my bag, zoomed to max, capped the lens and bought a series of beverages. No shooting for me.
> 
> Dugout seats, though, hell yes.


Oh yeah, if you're not first deck you're going to need some serious reach. Got some tickets to Giants/A's last weekend and this was about the best I could get from the second deck. 300mm, little bit of a crop.


IMG_3732.jpg by JLofing, on Flickr


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13957355*
> It will be metered "correctly" (for correct exposure) for the area (center-weighted) that it measures. You know full well what I meant.


it wont, because center-weighing meters always meters for neutral gray. this means metering at +-0 will be too bright in dark scenes, and too dark in bright scenes.

if you shoot film, try using positive film


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer;13959435*
> it wont, because center-weighing meters always meters for neutral gray. this means metering at +-0 will be too bright in dark scenes, and too dark in bright scenes.


It's close enough to shoot and learn. I'm too tired to put in further .02 on this, so I'll let you handle it.


----------



## BlankThis

I'm so uninspired lately... Went and took this today. I've hit the point where I hate everything I produce.










Taken with the kit 18-55 since my only other lens right now is my 50.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13959380*
> 200mm from center field would put you in the middle of Cropsville, USA. I tried at the Sox game here a week or so ago -- took it out of my bag, zoomed to max, capped the lens and bought a series of beverages. No shooting for me.
> 
> Dugout seats, though, hell yes.


The shots I took in my April 2011 set were all from one of the last rows of the grandstand, past 3rd base. I cropped the few that I worked on but it was nothing significant. Fenway is a _tiny_ ballpark

From my seats tonite, with my camera phone, no zoom attached.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis;13959558*
> I'm so uninspired lately... Went and took this today. I've hit the point where I hate everything I produce.


I love that feeling. That's why I've switched back and forth between Canon and Nikon. I switch when I'm uninspired. Try new things and such.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *BlankThis*


I'm so uninspired lately... Went and took this today. I've hit the point where I hate everything I produce.










Taken with the kit 18-55 since my only other lens right now is my 50.


I like the "feel" of this shot Bernie. Seems like a nice place to recline and snooze.


----------



## MistaBernie

??? Blankthis's name is Bernie too? I has a confused...


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


??? Blankthis's name is Bernie too? I has a confused...


You and I are in fact the same person... Brace yourself.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


I like the "feel" of this shot Bernie. Seems like a nice place to recline and snooze.


*Feel* is everything. A photo can be technically amazing but have no feel.

Also, I sense a Tyler Durden moment.


----------



## BlankThis

I have a bad habit of adding vignette in post... I KIND OF LOVE IT.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


??? Blankthis's name is Bernie too? I has a confused...


That's what I get for commenting B4 coffee.


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


That's what I get for commenting B4 coffee.


Hahaha been there.


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:



Originally Posted by *BlankThis*


I have a bad habit of adding vignette in post... I KIND OF LOVE IT.


Have to be careful with it, sometimes it can really change a shot for the worse.

*It seems to work nicely with your above pic.


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Sparhawk*


Have to be careful with it, sometimes it can really change a shot for the worse.

*It seems to work nicely with your above pic.


Thank you


----------



## robchaos

Quote:



Originally Posted by *foothead*


Is the camera capable of video playback? If so, run a screencap of jscreenfix on it and see if it helps.


I didn't even think of that. I'll put it in live view and aim it at my computer screen and run a pixel fixer! Hopefully that will work. if not I talked To the camera shop I bought it from, I still have 18 days for a no questions asked exchange. Hopefully I won't have to though.


----------



## BlankThis

Couldn't you in theory load the actual video onto your SD card and play it back in camera?


----------



## robchaos

I could, but the app I already have is an executable freeware program. Either way would be as much work as the other.


----------



## laboitenoire

Well I must say I'm really liking the D7000. AF with screw lenses is absolutely blistering compared to my dad's D50 (even with his crap late 80s/early 90s Sigma 28-70 f/3.5-4.5!), and in general doesn't hunt as much as the D5000 did.

Only annoying thing is that live view doesn't really work with my Sigma 30. Other than that it's great!


----------



## Unknownm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13957253*
> Smack dab in the middle will be correctly metered, but remember that the Spotmatic (and most 60s-80s SLRs) meters center-weighted.


so other words. Portrait shots or anything in the middle will have correct lighting?

nvm reading up on it. Turns out Center-weighted lighting is like a upgraded version of spot metering. It covers more of the object, which I don't mind for film
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13957355*
> It will be metered "correctly" (for correct exposure) for the area (center-weighted) that it measures. You know full well what I meant.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer;13959435*
> it wont, because center-weighing meters always meters for neutral gray. this means metering at +-0 will be too bright in dark scenes, and too dark in bright scenes.
> 
> if you shoot film, try using positive film


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13959502*
> It's close enough to shoot and learn. I'm too tired to put in further .02 on this, so I'll let you handle it.


Other words, if I want the correct lighting I would have to point the middle at what I wanted lighted corrected and everything around it will but not correct?

I figured it out


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire;13967715*
> Well I must say I'm really liking the D7000. AF with screw lenses is absolutely blistering compared to my dad's D50 (even with his crap late 80s/early 90s Sigma 28-70 f/3.5-4.5!), and in general doesn't hunt as much as the D5000 did.
> 
> Only annoying thing is that live view doesn't really work with my Sigma 30. Other than that it's great!


How doesn't it work exactly?

In other news,the weather has just turned to garbage in Boston. We had a good run at least. There's a great Chihuly exhibit at the MFA, of which I got some good shots.


----------



## scottath

Hey all,

Looking to get a cheap flash unit for my DSLR for night/event use etc.
Either going to buy it tomorrow + express shipping (if in Aust) or just buy one in time. (Im doing an event Friday night).

I have lined up a 580exII for friday that i can use if i dont get the flash by then.

atm im looking at a YongNuo YN-468 for ~$100.

Budget atm is ~$100 (just had car rego + insurance :/)
Obviously this isnt a what to buy thread - so just a few suggestions.....

Thanks in advanced

scottath


----------



## Unknownm

Another question (you will get alot because I love camera's and photos).

How can I correctly tell if my SPII lighter meter is working without getting my film develop. I was reading google, and people say adding 0.1v + makes the meter incorrect. Normally the SPII takes a 1.3v, which I cannot find without ebay. I got a 1.4v instead which made the light meter work.


----------



## r34p3rex

Canon, WHERE IS THE 5D MKIII?!?!!?! Release it already so I can get my hands on a cheap 5D MKII xD


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r34p3rex*


Canon, WHERE IS THE 5D MKIII?!?!!?! Release it already so I can get my hands on a cheap 5D MKII xD


I have a feeling it's going to be somewhat of a revolutionary camera. Obviously really pushing the extremes on DSLR video, probably some cool AF stuff too. Packed with like 30mp pictures. :/drool.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


How doesn't it work exactly?

In other news,the weather has just turned to garbage in Boston. We had a good run at least. There's a great Chihuly exhibit at the MFA, of which I got some good shots.


It won't focus in live view. It just focuses more and more closely every time you attempt to autofocus.


----------



## sub50hz

AF in live view sucks, anyway.


----------



## laboitenoire

Actually my 70-300 focuses really well in live view...


----------



## Unknownm

Never mind. I found "ULTIMATE EXPOSURE COMPUTER" and printed them out. I know now the "sunny f/16" and follow the chart compared to my light meter.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


AF in live view sucks, anyway.


Af is slower in live view but it's usually pretty accurate for me, many times more than viewfinder


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


Af is slower in live view but it's usually pretty accurate for me, many times more than viewfinder


then u need to micro adjust your lens. AF on LV is more accurate since its suppose to be contrast AF which does not suffer form back and front focusing.


----------



## dudemanppl

I use a surprising lot of live view. Mostly to check exposure for my R3a though and depth of field and dumb stuff like that.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Unknownm*


Never mind. I found "ULTIMATE EXPOSURE COMPUTER" and printed them out. I know now the "sunny f/16" and follow the chart compared to my light meter.


I usually stick to 1/8000 f/1.4 (1/60 f/16) ISO 100 and change based on that, shooting against the sun add 1 and a half stops. And then just keep going lower and lower. Seems to be working well so far.


----------



## Marin

First a Phase One demo and now a Broncolor demo. Pretty legit.


----------



## dudemanppl

I wanna go to ACCD now. Plus my sisters going there.


----------



## Unknownm

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


I use a surprising lot of live view. Mostly to check exposure for my R3a though and depth of field and dumb stuff like that.

I usually stick to 1/8000 f/1.4 (1/60 f/16) ISO 100 and change based on that, shooting against the sun add 1 and a half stops. And then just keep going lower and lower. Seems to be working well so far.


thanks but I don't have 1/8000 on my spotmatic spII. I overall stop using the light meter and started to use that guide plus a pocket sized one on the go


----------



## dudemanppl

My R3a tops out at 1/2000. :







Just stop down or buy ND filters.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Unknownm*


thanks but I don't have 1/8000 on my spotmatic spII. I overall stop using the light meter and started to use that guide plus a pocket sized one on the go




















other then just guessing that has to be by far the most inaccurate way of metering....


----------



## dudemanppl

Guessing would be better. Randomly picking would be worse.


----------



## Unknownm

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


I use a surprising lot of live view. Mostly to check exposure for my R3a though and depth of field and dumb stuff like that.

I usually stick to 1/8000 f/1.4 (1/60 f/16) ISO 100 and change based on that, shooting against the sun add 1 and a half stops. And then just keep going lower and lower. Seems to be working well so far.



Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


other then just guessing that has to be by far the most inaccurate way of metering....



Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


other then just guessing that has to be by far the most inaccurate way of metering....


why's that?

I'm new to film and light meters, so please explain and direct me to correct way of getting best results using a light meter or no light meter.


----------



## dudemanppl

If you're shooting black and white, just try to get sort of in the ballpark. You have quite the lot of exposure latitude. Or just shoot digital around and you'll get the hang of exposure values of a certain scene, I'm usually about a half stop off.


----------



## Unknownm

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


If you're shooting black and white, just try to get sort of in the ballpark. You have quite the lot of exposure latitude. Or just shoot digital around and you'll get the hang of exposure values of a certain scene, I'm usually about a half stop off.


using ILford xp2 b&w 400. Alright, any tips?


----------



## dudemanppl

I usually shoot ISO 100 film, but it doesn't really matter, personal preference. Some people find shooting overexposed (basically a lower ISO) and then developing for that gives more dynamic range, but I haven't tried that yet. Try to see the world in tones, points of darkness and brightness, instead of colors. I still don't have that yet and keep taking pictures of flowers... :3


----------



## Unknownm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13973599*
> I usually shoot ISO 100 film, but it doesn't really matter, personal preference. Some people find shooting overexposed (basically a lower ISO) and then developing for that gives more dynamic range, but I haven't tried that yet. Try to see the world in tones, points of darkness and brightness, instead of colors. I still don't have that yet and keep taking pictures of flowers... :3


same here man. I'm using B&W to not think of colors, I guess it's best to start picturing everything in tones.

Got a link to share where I can start thinking about tones?


----------



## dudemanppl

No, I usually just piece together bits of information I find browsing around the interwebs. Sorry.
OT: Watching some of Kubrick's films. A Clockwork Orange is interesting.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;13970673*
> AF in live view sucks, anyway.


It's dead-slow, but it's also more accurate. I use live view AF when i'm doing macro stuff for work.

Just got a D7000 for £773. I think I got a good price. Cheapest seller on amazon was £100 more.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10;13971154*
> then u need to micro adjust your lens. AF on LV is more accurate since its suppose to be contrast AF which does not suffer form back and front focusing.


dont you microadjust the body to the lens? And you can't with the 60D (Canon removed the functionality from the xxD series, the 50D had it though







)

I got my camera and 50 f/1.4 back from Canon. It _seems_ better than it was, but there's no indication on the repair forms of whether or not the body was adjusted to the 50... (also no shutter count on the repair slip, but I have a ballpark of where it is).


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;13970194*
> I have a feeling it's going to be somewhat of a revolutionary camera. Obviously really pushing the extremes on DSLR video, probably some cool AF stuff too. Packed with like 30mp pictures. :/drool.


Seriously doubt it. You can't let it overshadow their 1 series.

It's still gonna be another year till they release it most likely.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aksthem1;13975455*
> Seriously doubt it. You can't let it overshadow their 1 series.
> 
> It's still gonna be another year till they release it most likely.


Maybe not. Canon's stopped shipping (and possibly producing) the 1DsIII, so.. possibly 5DIII/1DsIV this fall? Speculation on my part, of course.


----------



## BlankThis

Someone sell me their 5D2 cheap. Just got booked for a 50th Anniversary so I'm going to have to rent almost everything.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire;13970661*
> It won't focus in live view. It just focuses more and more closely every time you attempt to autofocus.


Wha


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire;13970661*
> It won't focus in live view. It just focuses more and more closely every time you attempt to autofocus.


What lens? That happens on my 70-300. I have to manually focus until it's close, then start af.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Unknownm;13973169*
> why's that?
> 
> I'm new to film and light meters, so please explain and direct me to correct way of getting best results using a light meter or no light meter.


using a light meter it gives an accurate reading how much light there is.

With a chart or table you are basically eyeballing if it is cloudy or sunny and estimating what the current lighting conditions are.

the best way is to get a standalone meter, say a sekonic. They are accurate and will give you the best readings, BUT they are expensive.

You can also get a camera with a built in meter, but they do get fooled when you are shooting against a black or white background. So carry a grey card with you for those times.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie;13975431*
> dont you microadjust the body to the lens? And you can't with the 60D (Canon removed the functionality from the xxD series, the 50D had it though
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )


yes you would need to microadjust the body. but you can also mail back the lens and have the factory adjust the lens for you.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Boyboyd;13976448*
> What lens? That happens on my 70-300. I have to manually focus until it's close, then start af.


do you have focus range on your lens? cause if its set to say 10m-infinity it wont focus if its closer then 10m.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10;13976644*
> Do you have focus range on your lens? cause if its set to say 10m-infinity it wont focus if its closer then 10m.


I don't think there is a focus range, no.


----------



## ~sizzzle~

Looking threw first few shots taken with the Nikkor AF-S 35mm f/1.8G DX that wifey/daughter gave me for fathers day. I think I'm going to like this lens a lot.....


----------



## BlankThis

OK I think I found what I'm going to rent for this gig.

D90 (Own)
SB-900 ($30 rental for the weekend)
AF-S 17-55 mm F/2.8 DX IF ED ($35 for the weekend)
AF-S 70-200 mm F/2.8 VR II ($60 for the weekend)

I'm going to have to do some reading on external flash usage since I never use flashes, only hot lighting for school.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Boyboyd;13976448*
> What lens? That happens on my 70-300. I have to manually focus until it's close, then start af.


My Sigma. I hit the button, lens focuses closer by a smidge. Hit it again and it'll keep doing it until it hits the end of the range.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire;13979749*
> My Sigma. I hit the button, lens focuses closer by a smidge. Hit it again and it'll keep doing it until it hits the end of the range.


With my Nikon if it's really far out of focus it will do the same, edge closer to focus each time I hit the shutter until it eventually focuses. Unless i'm close to the focus already, usually happens in low light though.

Hoping it will be faster on the new body.


----------



## Unknownm

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


using a light meter it gives an accurate reading how much light there is.

With a chart or table you are basically eyeballing if it is cloudy or sunny and estimating what the current lighting conditions are.

the best way is to get a standalone meter, say a sekonic. They are accurate and will give you the best readings, BUT they are expensive.

You can also get a camera with a built in meter, but they do get fooled when you are shooting against a black or white background. So carry a grey card with you for those times.

yes you would need to microadjust the body. but you can also mail back the lens and have the factory adjust the lens for you.

do you have focus range on your lens? cause if its set to say 10m-infinity it wont focus if its closer then 10m.


I was reading up about grey cards. I'm shooting B&W XP2 400, and want the correct lighting using my spotmatic with a gray card. Do I put the grey card infront of the object, adjust the shutter/fstop and than move the grey card out of the way, and shoot?


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:



Originally Posted by *aksthem1*


Seriously doubt it. You can't let it overshadow their 1 series.

It's still gonna be another year till they release it most likely.


It's obviously going to be better than the current 1 series. Plus, the 1dsIII is nearing 4 years old, so it's more in need of a refresh.

Look at the massive jump in-between 5D and 5D II


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;13980834*
> It's obviously going to be better than the current 1 series. Plus, the 1dsIII is nearing 4 years old, so it's more in need of a refresh.
> 
> Look at the massive jump in-between 5D and 5D II


I love my 5DII, but a better AF system is awfully tempting. I'd settle just for all cross-type AF points. The outer AF points are crap in lowlight.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


My Sigma. I hit the button, lens focuses closer by a smidge. Hit it again and it'll keep doing it until it hits the end of the range.


Bottom line, if you play with the third parties it's a crap shoot. The success stories are enough to entice people to buy them. When you get a good copy, all's good. But if you've got a good eye and it's funky, you're pissed.

I've been happy with Nikon/Voigtlander/Zeiss. My next venture might be a Leica conversion but we'll see, (btw with the Zeiss you won't have this problem).

On limited budgets, Sigma, Tammy, Promaster, etc, all are tempting. But most of you guys apppreciate pretty IQ. I know I do. I know my customers do. Even if you have to buy used from a good source, I'd stick with the big boys. Bodys are disposable imho. Glass for the most part can be for a long time. 'Specially if it's tasty.

If you peeps come back with the "oh my Siggy 50/1.4, Tammy 90 macro, etc." thing I know. They're out there. But at the end of the day, Nikon, Canon, Zeiss and Leica know optics and how to produce them commercially and consistantly. So just buy big name glass and get on with the hard part. Creativity. Or shoot sports/wildlife like me if creativity isn't you're thng.


----------



## laboitenoire

The optics are there with the Sigma. It's just that they have to reverse engineer Nikon's AF system


----------



## ljason8eg

Off to the race track once again! This time, featuring both right and left turns!


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg;13988583*
> Off to the race track once again! This time, featuring both right and left turns!


No way!

/sarcasm

I'll be watching your flickr closely.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Boyboyd;13988866*
> I'll be watching your flickr closely.


Italicized = Stalker talk.


----------



## Sparhawk

I think most of you here will appreciate the read:

http://www.lytro.com/renng-thesis.pdf

In regards to this.


----------



## Unknownm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sparhawk;13993616*
> I think most of you here will appreciate the read:
> 
> http://www.lytro.com/renng-thesis.pdf
> 
> In regards to this.


thanks very interesting, rep+

Will read more later on


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Boyboyd;13988866*
> No way!
> 
> /sarcasm
> 
> I'll be watching your flickr closely.


Good day today. Heading to the SF Giants game now. I'll upload some of the better ones when I get home.


----------



## Dream Killer

anyone used the new Nikkor 50mm 1.8g? i'm curious if it has less distortion than the 1.4g


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nuclearjock;13982127*
> 
> I've been happy with Nikon/Voigtlander/Zeiss. My next venture might be a Leica conversion but we'll see, (btw with the Zeiss you won't have this problem).


Phase One conversion.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer;13997840*
> anyone used the new Nikkor 50mm 1.8g? i'm curious if it has less distortion than the 1.4g


Less distortion.

http://www.photozone.de/nikon_ff/441-nikkor_afs_50_14_ff?start=1

http://www.photozone.de/nikon_ff/631-nikkorafs5018ff?start=1


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

SF trip tomorrow, will stop by Camera Heaven and Fireside for my friend to try out the Siggy 10-20 and 50 f/1.4, Tokina 11-16, and Canon 85 f/1.8.

Obviously also going to be a photography filled day.

Feels nice to go to SF for something other than work


----------



## dudemanppl

Hope you bring a credit card...


----------



## ljason8eg

Uploaded a few from today before I go to bed here. Got a lot more to go through for sure but these stood out as favorites. Those little cars are called Legends cars. Pretty popular and usually driven on short ovals, so they're pretty wild on a road course. The other three pictures are Sprint Cup cars like normal.


#13 Legend by JLofing, on Flickr


#12 Legend by JLofing, on Flickr


Dale Earnhardt Jr. by JLofing, on Flickr


Jeff Gordon by JLofing, on Flickr


Jeff Gordon flame by JLofing, on Flickr


----------



## dudemanppl

Left AND right turns, I knew it was Infineon!







Loved that track in GT4.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13998744*
> Left AND right turns, I knew it was Infineon!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Loved that track in GT4.


Omg i know right? Who woulda thunk those big 'ole boxes on wheels could turn right AND left! Amazing!









Its a really awesome track to watch them at though. There needs to be a couple more road courses on the schedule.


----------



## Unknownm

you guys recommend me a full frame dslr that can fit m42 (adapter). I want something large ISO with best image quality to it


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;13998413*
> Hope you bring a credit card...


Hahahaha, I hope you're kidding me there







The lenses are for her, and she's the one with a paid internship, not me!


----------



## nuclearjock

Uploaded a few from today before I go to bed here. Got a lot more to go through for sure but these stood out as favorites. Those little cars are called Legends cars. Pretty popular and usually driven on short ovals, so they're pretty wild on a road course. The other three pictures are Sprint Cup cars like normal.

Nice shots. Very nice IQ.

Your bg's are exposed perfectly but the cars are a tad ue. What metering mode are you using??


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


Nice shots. Very nice IQ.

Your bg's are exposed perfectly but the cars are a tad ue. What metering mode are you using??


Center weighted. I tried spot metering for awhile yesterday and it does seem to work a touch better, unless there's glare somewhere on the car (which most of the pictures have). I don't know what it is about those cars but they reflect light extremely well. Anyone know if a circular polarizing filter would get rid of the glare?

EDIT: Actually the glare i'm talking about is present in the last picture of the 24 car with the flame coming out the exhaust. Look on the left front of the nose. Big glare. Now, since I wear polarized sunglasses, I can't see that with the naked eye which is why I was thinking a polarizing filter would possibly cut that glare.


----------



## MistaBernie

well, there's a relatively simple way to test it. Find a still life photo with some glare in it, put your sunglasses in front of your lens and shoot through the polarized sunglasses lens. Yeah, it's not ideal since you're not necessarily going to get the same polarization, etc from the filter, but it's a rudimentary test that could tell you fairly easily if a CPL will get rid of the glare you're experiencing.


----------



## Boyboyd

This might sound like a stupid question, but:

Are lee "wide angle adaptor rings" absolutely necessary for ultra-wide angle lenses? I ask because they're twice the price of their standard brothers.


----------



## biatchi

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*


Omg i know right? Who woulda thunk those big 'ole boxes on wheels could turn right AND left! Amazing!










Lewis Hamilton commented on how well they actually handle when he drove Tony Stewarts.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*


This might sound like a stupid question, but:

Are lee "wide angle adaptor rings" absolutely necessary for ultra-wide angle lenses? I ask because they're twice the price of their standard brothers.


Yes, unless you like vignetting.


----------



## Unknownm

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Unknownm*


you guys recommend me a full frame dslr that can fit m42 (adapter). I want something large ISO with best image quality to it


thanks if anyone knows


----------



## dudemanppl

1DsIII.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:



Originally Posted by *biatchi*


Lewis Hamilton commented on how well they actually handle when he drove Tony Stewarts.


I have a feeling he was being nice for the camera lol. A big 3400 pound car with 900 HP and rather hard tires is a big handful.


----------



## dudemanppl

Holy crap I didn't know stock cars weighed so much. I would love to drive a Formula One car someday (somehow), 0-60 in less than two seconds YES PLEASE!


----------



## biatchi

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*


I have a feeling he was being nice for the camera lol. A big 3400 pound car with 900 HP and rather hard tires is a big handful.


I think he was too


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Unknownm*


you guys recommend me a full frame dslr that can fit m42 (adapter). I want something large ISO with best image quality to it


M42 can be adapted to most any modern DSLR, so it's a matter of which body you want. A Canon 5D classic is a relatively inexpensive FF choice for around $1000 used. Anything else will be pretty pricey.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;14002171*
> Yes, unless you like vignetting.


I do not.

Thanks. Now all i have to do is choose what ND grad filter I want. I'm spoilt for choice.


----------



## ljason8eg

Whoo got back at a decent hour today. Not much going on at the track but I still got a few good ones. Legends/Thunder Roadsters and K&N West Series races.


Legends cars start by JLofing, on Flickr


Greg Pursley by JLofing, on Flickr


IMG_4227.jpg by JLofing, on Flickr


IMG_4182.jpg by JLofing, on Flickr


Track's this way fella! by JLofing, on Flickr


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Unknownm;13998788*
> you guys recommend me a full frame dslr that can fit m42 (adapter). I want something large ISO with best image quality to it


leica m9 or nikon d3x


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;13997864*
> SF trip tomorrow, will stop by Camera Heaven and Fireside for my friend to try out the Siggy 10-20 and 50 f/1.4, Tokina 11-16, and Canon 85 f/1.8.
> 
> Obviously also going to be a photography filled day.
> 
> Feels nice to go to SF for something other than work


gay parade this weekend in SFO... i avoided goin over today... (currently in OAK) lol

gonna be lots of traffic :3


----------



## Unknownm

D700 & D7000 score 80 on DxOMark.

If I was to use m42 mount on D7000 (not full frame) will it really effect the image to the sensor compared to getting d700?


----------



## laboitenoire

What do you mean? The only obvious difference will be the field-of-view crop. IQ-wise the D700 will only really be distinguishable at high ISO.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


leica m9 or nikon d3x


Don't know about the Leica, but the D3x isn't that quiet at high iso.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Unknownm*


D700 & D7000 score 80 on DxOMark.

If I was to use m42 mount on D7000 (not full frame) will it really effect the image to the sensor compared to getting d700?


Keep in mind that DxO Mark just rates the sensor. Much more to a camera than just the sensor of course.

When using a given full frame lens on both crop and full-frame cameras, the crop will have fewer corner flaws (softness, vignetting, CA), since it sees the "sweet spot," whereas full-frame sees most of the image circle. With a good lens, the difference is minimal, and IMO the benefits of full-frame still outweigh crop despite this.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


Don't know about the Leica, but the D3x isn't that quiet at high iso.


Any Leica M9 review I've read say that the high ISO isn't that great, but not a deal breaker necessarily (I've seen amazing shots from the M9).


----------



## foothead

Is there any cheap color film available in 4x5? Most of it seems to be around $2.50/shot, which is pretty absurd considering I can get a roll of 120 ektar for $3.69.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


Don't know about the Leica, but the D3x isn't that quiet at high iso.


Extreme high ISO aside the d3x IMO bests all other camera in IQ. It has great DR, resolution, color rendition and fairly good high ISO.


----------



## Unknownm

http://www.overclock.net/photography...l#post14012492


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *foothead*


Is there any cheap color film available in 4x5? Most of it seems to be around $2.50/shot, which is pretty absurd considering I can get a roll of 120 ektar for $3.69.


Nope.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10;14011980*
> Extreme high ISO aside the d3x IMO bests all other camera in IQ. It has great DR, resolution, color rendition and fairly good high ISO.


I have a D3, the D3x left me severly unimpressed for $8k.
I shot one for 3 days,, High Iso was not good, cropping was good, better than my 12mp D3, but NOT worth $8k. Nikon blew it on this body. If you don't have to pay for it, then that's a different story. No way I'll consider one though. If you look at my gear sig I'll buy it if it's nice. D3x imho not anywhere worth the $$$.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nuclearjock;14017177*
> I have a D3, the D3x left me severly unimpressed for $8k.
> I shot one for 3 days,, High Iso was not good, cropping was good, better than my 12mp D3, but NOT worth $8k. Nikon blew it on this body. If you don't have to pay for it, then that's a different story. No way I'll consider one though. If you look at my gear sig I'll buy it if it's nice. D3x imho not anywhere worth the $$$.


completely agree with you, that its not worth the money







, but the question was the best camera that can accept m42.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nuclearjock;14010672*
> Don't know about the Leica, but the D3x isn't that quiet at high iso.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;14010864*
> Any Leica M9 review I've read say that the high ISO isn't that great, but not a deal breaker necessarily (I've seen amazing shots from the M9).


When you buy a Leica, it's not about the body - it's all about the lenses.


----------



## BlankThis

74 images, 54 minutes stitching, one unhappy Macbook. My first attempt.










Terrible spread.


----------



## dudemanppl

I love Ryan Brenizer. I need to make one with the 120-300 at 300 and wide open.


----------



## BlankThis

I'll offer you some advice and do groups of 10-15 then save as PSDs. Once you're done your groups do the final stitch. PS didn't like playing with 74 12mp files at once for me...


----------



## dudemanppl

I resize to 400 then see if it works well then do it all at once. I love Sandy.


----------



## ljason8eg

Couple from Sunday's race before I pass out here. Look at that 20 car carry the left front tire!


Joey Logano by JLofing, on Flickr


Esses 1 by JLofing, on Flickr


Kurt Busch by JLofing, on Flickr


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


I resize to 400 then see if it works well then do it all at once. I love Sandy.


My poor mobile i5...


----------



## foothead

I did a 50 picture panorama on my aunt's dual i7 mac pro and it still took well over an hour. It seems that the photomerge feature can only use one core.

This might seem like a silly question, but how do I turn my pentax 645 off? I've always had to remove the grip or take the batteries out. The on/off switch does nothing but disable the shutter release.


----------



## dudemanppl

When I photomerge, its more RAM eating than CPU usage, the latter of which hovers around 20% use. I don't get photoshop...


----------



## BlankThis

I couldn't even check my resources when doing them on my MBP with CS5 which supposedly fixed a lot of the threading. Couldn't get the Dashboard to open up aha.


----------



## biatchi

I was under the impression that Nikon's won't reach infinity focus with M42 lenses.


----------



## Unknownm

Quote:



Originally Posted by *biatchi*


I was under the impression that Nikon's won't reach infinity focus with M42 lenses.


that's what i heard to.


----------



## BlankThis

D90 w/ 50mm f/1.8 @ f/2 (Wide open is a bit soft to me)

Which option do you guys like the best? Unfortunately I didn't grid it very well since we were in a bit of a hurry. This was my first attempt at it so if you have tips I'd love to hear them. No processing as of yet.

Option 1:









Option 2:









Option 3:


----------



## sub50hz

AE-1 stopped working again today. Ordering an A2E I guess. Boo.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Number 2 looks best to my eyes Blank. The portrait orientation lines the frame up nicely with the guy's pose, as well as the edge of the pier (or whatever it is). Would look even better if the DOF were shallower; full-frame time!


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;14027229*
> Number 2 looks best to my eyes Blank. The portrait orientation lines the frame up nicely with the guy's pose, as well as the edge of the pier (or whatever it is). Would look even better if the DOF were shallower; full-frame time!


Thank you







I'm thinking of maybe a 5Dc if one pops up, otherwise holding out until 5D2s drop.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis;14027317*
> Thank you
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm thinking of maybe a 5Dc if one pops up, otherwise holding out until 5D2s drop.


Yeah, the DOF gets insanely shallow on FF. One of things I love about it.

And I'm seeing several 5Dc's on POTN right now. And although all of them seem to be CONUS only, I'm sure if you contacted them and asked if they would ship to Canada, you would get it.


----------



## nuclearjock

Nikon USA finally released a bunch of these babies.

J&R has them in stock for $9,999.99

1. This is the lowest price I've seen in many years.
2. They've been elusive for as many years as well.

Scarf 'em up. You won't be sorry. The optical quality of the 600 is second only to the 400 VR and 200 VR and equal to the 500 VR.


----------



## dudemanppl

I think you're the only one here who can afford one of those.







And for blank, crop it square or 4:3.


----------



## murderbymodem

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nuclearjock;14027897*
> Nikon USA finally released a bunch of these babies.
> 
> J&R has them in stock for $9,999.99
> 
> 1. This is the lowest price I've seen in many years.
> 2. They've been elusive for as many years as well.
> 
> Scarf 'em up. You won't be sorry. The optical quality of the 600 is second only to the 400 VR and 200 VR and equal to the 500 VR.


If I had that kind of money to spend on Photography, I'd much rather buy a few 5D Mark IIs and misc cheap lenses, get a bunch of friends together, and shoot a movie.


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;14027802*
> Yeah, the DOF gets insanely shallow on FF. One of things I love about it.
> 
> And I'm seeing several 5Dc's on POTN right now. And although all of them seem to be CONUS only, I'm sure if you contacted them and asked if they would ship to Canada, you would get it.


Do I need to be a member to see for sale threads? That might explain a few things...


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis;14028267*
> Do I need to be a member to see for sale threads? That might explain a few things...


Yeah, and you need 30 posts or 30 days to sell, but no restrictions PM a seller with an offer. Just show them good credentials elsewhere.

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/search.php?searchid=27176247


----------



## BlankThis

Did some work on it in Aperture...










Critiques?


----------



## Shane1244

Really cool! The only thing I would have done differently, is put him in more contrasting colours, he kind of blends in.


----------



## dudemanppl

I want the original file to play around with.


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;14029270*
> Really cool! The only thing I would have done differently, is put him in more contrasting colours, he kind of blends in.


I played with it but I ended up pulling colour out because I like the vibe it gives off because of it.

dudemanppl, full-sized or resized to 10MB?


----------



## dudemanppl

I'll go with 10 MB LOL.


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;14029320*
> I'll go with 10 MB LOL.


EDIT: Nevermind found another way

http://www.megafileupload.com/en/file/317825/option2resized-jpg.html


----------



## dudemanppl

AND WE'RE GONNA HAVE A BALL TODAY.


----------



## BlankThis

Hmmm. I like the warmth too...


----------



## Unknownm

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


AE-1 stopped working again today. Ordering an A2E I guess. Boo.


off topic but everytime i see your avatar than start reading your text. I imagine that your text is his voice, I love Harvey birdman


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


I think you're the only one here who can afford one of those.







And for blank, crop it square or 4:3.


I could probably get a small mortgage and buy one.

I'd be lost on how and where to use it though. 600 on a crop body?


----------



## riko99

So Grabbed a Nikon FG Chrome with an Nikon E-Series 50mm 1.8 the other day at an Antique mall for 20$. The body doesn't work but I have managed to get the shutter curtain straightened, The Mirror to drop and the film advance lever to actually crank (all were related to the curtain being stuck awkwardly. The lens is clean no scratches on the front element and very little dust on the rear as well as the blades are free of all oil... It looks to be a bit sharper than my AF 50mm as well as better built will have to do some test comparisons when I actually have time. So in conclusion I paid 20$ for the 50mm and a nice displayable camera as the only scratch on it is from me trying to get a ring screw out but the scratch is buried by the film rewind.

So gone can you at least add Nikkor E-series 50mm f1.8 to my gear list and if I can fix it completely than I will want the body added.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Unknownm*


off topic but everytime i see your avatar than start reading your text. I imagine that your text is his voice, I love Harvey birdman


Lol, it only took a year or so for anyone to notice -- I actually got a PM from an undisclosed member at one time asking why "such a slow system" was named X The Eliminator. I laffed.


----------



## sub50hz

New 50D Firmware:

http://canonctd.cusa.canon.com/ctd/lu?RID=1-24PX06&CON=1-2NHR-1785&PRO=&AID=&OID=1-21P6KR&CID=1-21P6M7&COID=1-21P6MK&T=http%3a%2f%2fwww.usa.canon.com%2fcusa%2fprofessional%2fproducts%2fprofessional_cameras%2fdigital_slr_cameras%2feos_50d%23DriversAndSoftware&Z=b9299142f9707528f6b68eec7efbdb9&TN=EOS+50D+Firmware+Update&RT=Clicked+On+URL


----------



## nuclearjock

[/IMG]

Guess he didn't like having his mug shot. This was a Boeing plane for their execs leaving Waukegan, Il for Calgary. Sorry 'bout the blown out whites.


----------



## Unknownm

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Lol, it only took a year or so for anyone to notice -- I actually got a PM from an undisclosed member at one time asking why "such a slow system" was named X The Eliminator. I laffed.


well I started to rewatch that show again. Makes me laugh everytime


----------



## laboitenoire

Debating if it's worth purchasing Lightroom 3 with my student discount for $85...


----------



## Unknownm

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Debating if it's worth purchasing Lightroom 3 with my student discount for $85...


sure


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Debating if it's worth purchasing Lightroom 3 with my student discount for $85...


Hell yes. I paid triple that for my copy. It's definitely nice, but I think I'd rather have just CS5 instead.


----------



## dudemanppl

I have the urge to say something about LR3 being cheaper than that, but I've never had an infraction before, and I'd like to keep it that way.


----------



## BlankThis

It's kind of a toss up between PS CS5 and LR3 for me. CS5 will do much more things but you can't compete with the ease and workflow of LR3. For that reason I bought LR3 even after my parents bought me PS. 90% of my work goes through LR but sometimes PS is necessary to save a photo or achieve a desired effect.


----------



## MistaBernie

I think I need to find a good priced copy of LR3, PSE9 was a good hold me over...


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Hell yes. I paid triple that for my copy. It's definitely nice, but I think I'd rather have just CS5 instead.



Quote:



Originally Posted by *BlankThis*


It's kind of a toss up between PS CS5 and LR3 for me. CS5 will do much more things but you can't compete with the ease and workflow of LR3. For that reason I bought LR3 even after my parents bought me PS. 90% of my work goes through LR but sometimes PS is necessary to save a photo or achieve a desired effect.


I currently have CS5 and my university just uploaded our free student copies of CS5.5 to our software center, so from a functionality standpoint I can do anything. I'm just not sure if it's worth it to get LR3 just for the workflow it provides.


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


I'm just not sure if it's worth it to get LR3 just for the workflow it provides.


Have you tried it out? Not that I'm suggesting this or anything but you can acquire it for free and just try it out. It's a wonderful piece of software. LR makes it much easier to work on a set of photos.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


I currently have CS5 and my university just uploaded our free student copies of CS5.5 to our software center, so from a functionality standpoint I can do anything. I'm just not sure if it's worth it to get LR3 just for the workflow it provides.


Download the trial before buying. I can see why LR has such appeal, but PS5 works better for me since I use DPP as much as I can and like using PS for those shots which require extra measures. When I shot weddings and events, LR was invaluable.


----------



## Unknownm

D7000 with 18-70mm (D70 stock lens)


----------



## dudemanppl

GJ twisting the hood on that last one.


----------



## Unknownm

on my D7000 "U1 mode" i can adjust the ISO/shutter speed and LCD shows what the result will look like

However in manual mode when I adjust the ISO/shutter the LCD shows the same thing, nothing gets brighter or darker compared to U1

My question is how do I enable this in manual mode, U1 only allows me to hit 1/30 shutter or higher.


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Unknownm;14059473*
> on my D7000 "U1 mode" i can adjust the ISO/shutter speed and LCD shows what the result will look like
> 
> However in manual mode when I adjust the ISO/shutter the LCD shows the same thing, nothing gets brighter or darker compared to U1
> 
> My question is how do I enable this in manual mode, U1 only allows me to hit 1/30 shutter or higher.


Sounds like a limitation of Live-View. Anything slower than 1/30 second would result in a less-than live-view. Basically not enough light being collected to provide an accurate preview.

You could do what most people do, and just snap a picture and check the resulting exposure and adjust accordingly.


----------



## Unknownm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sparhawk;14059703*
> Sounds like a limitation of Live-View. Anything slower than 1/30 second would result in a less-than live-view. Basically not enough light being collected to provide an accurate preview.
> 
> You could do what most people do, and just snap a picture and check the resulting exposure and adjust accordingly.


well manual mode did show the preview like U1 but I reset the settings for the camera so now my manual mode doesn't but my preset U1 does still :\

It's still bugging me. I'm not sure what option enables it...

I ask this because I would love to use it under "low light conditions". Knowing how much ISO noise is with the image before taking it.


----------



## max302

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Unknownm*


well manual mode did show the preview like U1 but I reset the settings for the camera so now my manual mode doesn't but my preset U1 does still :\\

It's still bugging me. I'm not sure what option enables it...

I ask this because I would love to use it under "low light conditions". Knowing how much ISO noise is with the image before taking it.


Live view isn't going to give you an accurate representation of noise anyways, the screen is too small, and the conditions under which the sensor operates when it's in LV and when you're actually taking a picture are totally different.

For low light, I use a preset on my D7000, U2. I set it to use minimum ISO while keeping at least 1/40 exposure, it goes up to max ISO if necessary. Shoot in RAW, correct what you can in post. With a good short-ish prime, it works wonders. You can always manually adjust it on the fly to 1/60 or higher if you're having trouble with blurry shots, or simply snap out of U2 into A or P if lighting conditions suddenly change.


----------



## BlankThis

Ouf!

My dad just found some 10 year old film at the bottom of our freezer and decided I could have it!


----------



## Unknownm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *max302;14061961*
> *Live view isn't going to give you an accurate representation of noise anyways, the screen is too small, and the conditions under which the sensor operates when it's in LV and when you're actually taking a picture are totally different.
> *
> For low light, I use a preset on my D7000, U2. I set it to use minimum ISO while keeping at least 1/40 exposure, it goes up to max ISO if necessary. Shoot in RAW, correct what you can in post. With a good short-ish prime, it works wonders. You can always manually adjust it on the fly to 1/60 or higher if you're having trouble with blurry shots, or simply snap out of U2 into A or P if lighting conditions suddenly change.


Right, thank you for giving me some advice but it didn't answer my question. I wanted to know how to "enable it" or if not, what would I type in google to find out. It would be nice to know how it would "generally look" using manual mode.

I know it works because before I reset the options, manual mode did preview the noise/shutter (like U1). Pop down to 1" shutter speed and the screen is almost white, I know it works. I was just stupid and reset the camera settings, so I am asking on camera thread to see if any Nikon D7000 or any users know the option to enable it.

EDIT: *(replying under Bold in your quote)*. It works amazing if I was in movie mode under manual settings, U1 doesn't allow me to go under 1/30, and I know changing the shutter speed changes the lighting and the ISO also, However how can I if I'm limited to 1/30. If I'm recording a movie, I wanna see what it actually looks like and take full advantage of my camera instead of being limted to 1/30 to 1/8000 compared to 30" to 1/8000 with real time live preview.


----------



## MistaBernie

Crap, how can I consider Re's Film Rebel when I can find a deal like this?

AE-1 Program with:
Canon 70-210/4.0 zoom lens
Canon 35-70/3.5-4.5 zoom lens
Canon 24/2.8 lens
Canon 50/1.8 lens
Canon Speedlite 188A with leather pouch
and a bunch of other stuff, almost all w/ original boxes, etc, for $300


----------



## SmokinWaffle

Just got my first DSLR from BoyBoyd, a D5000









I took Photography in school for GCSE and I seemed to have a knack for it, so I'm looking forward to learning everything, and getting some great pictures as I live in a very beautiful area.


----------



## Unknownm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SmokinWaffle;14069691*
> Just got my first DSLR from BoyBoyd, a D5000
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I took Photography in school for GCSE and I seemed to have a knack for it, so I'm looking forward to learning everything, and getting some great pictures as I live in a very beautiful area.


that was my first DSLR to, even with the same lens.

Congrats, it was a nice neat camera for cheap.


----------



## SmokinWaffle

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Unknownm*


that was my first DSLR to, even with the same lens.

Congrats, it was a nice neat camera for cheap.


It is.

Did a few test shots in Manual mode (Auto ISO), still having a play around, these are resized (obviously), but I'm loving it. Hopefully go out later/tomorrow and get some pictures of the surrounding area.


----------



## max302

Quote:



Originally Posted by *BlankThis*


Ouf!

My dad just found some 10 year old film at the bottom of our freezer and decided I could have it!


I've never shot all the other stuff, but I can tell you that the Superia is going to be _NASTY_.


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:



Originally Posted by *max302*


I've never shot all the other stuff, but I can tell you that the Superia is going to be _NASTY_.


I'm not expecting wonders from stuff that's been sitting in the freezer for ~10 years. No expectations for free film.


----------



## max302

Quote:



Originally Posted by *BlankThis*


I'm not expecting wonders from stuff that's been sitting in the freezer for ~10 years. No expectations for free film.


You could probably make something fun out of it though. Mine came out grainy as hell, with heavy green hues all over and specially around the shadows, if that's of any help choosing what you'll shoot on it.


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:



Originally Posted by *max302*


You could probably make something fun out of it though. Mine came out grainy as hell, with heavy green hues all over and specially around the shadows, if that's of any help choosing what you'll shoot on it.










Lemme just grab my Holga...

I kid, don't kill me.

I have no idea what I'm going to shoot... I've got 20 rolls from 32 up to 3200 to play with. Some colour, some are B&W.


----------



## sub50hz

Bank on the Pan F being usable. I used a couple rolls like 12 years ago that were LONG expired and came out great.


----------



## BlankThis

Awesome thanks!


----------



## Marin




----------



## dudemanppl

Mayo and film sandwich.
EDIT: I have found something fantastic. Take out the superimposed focus point screen out of the 5DII, get an EC-S screen for the 1D series, grind off the tab and then put it in the 5DII. Wonderful. Now I have an idea where the center point is and still have the wonderful Canon super matte screen.


----------



## BlankThis

Needs more mayo.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*












that looks like my fridge except its full of kodak 100' 16mm rolls for motion pictures rather than photo


----------



## spRICE

I would like to join.
I have a:
Nikon D3000
Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 DX AF-S VR
Tamron 70-300 f/4-5.6 Di AF Tele-macro


----------



## MistaBernie

Freakin Meike grip stopped reading the left battery. Lost trust in grip. Body alone is so light... Must get authentic BG-E9.....


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


Freakin Meike grip stopped reading the left battery. Lost trust in grip. Body alone is so light... Must get authentic BG-E9.....


Thus, why I don't trust 3rd party grips.


----------



## Shane1244

I've seen a BG-E9 in my warehouse at work that I know will never sell... Ihoping my sales manager will give it to me for $120.

As for the broken grip.. they are stupid simple built.. just bust it open, it was probably just a failed solder joint.


----------



## Unknownm

Quote:



Originally Posted by *SmokinWaffle*


It is.

Did a few test shots in Manual mode (Auto ISO), still having a play around, these are resized (obviously), but I'm loving it. Hopefully go out later/tomorrow and get some pictures of the surrounding area.




















Those are nice, congrats on the camera. Get some new lens and maybe some filters (if they are cheap).


----------



## robchaos

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Unknownm*


Those are nice, congrats on the camera. Get some new lens and maybe some filters (if they are cheap).


Unfortunately, the good filters aren't cheap. Cheap filters can actually hurt IQ. Save up for some Hoya or B+W


----------



## BlankThis

Shot a wedding for my friend yesterday using his 5D2, 24 f/1.4, 50 f/1.4 and 85 f/1.8.

God I want one.


----------



## Unknownm

Quote:



Originally Posted by *robchaos*


Unfortunately, the good filters aren't cheap. Cheap filters can actually hurt IQ. Save up for some Hoya or B+W


I was thinking "sale" or "used". Cheap filters suck, I know because I bought 10 dollar ones and they just make the picture crap.

I need to invest into a cold/warm. Any recommendations?


----------



## capitaltpt

Add me to the club:

Nikon D300
Tokina 17-35mm f/2.8-4
Nikon 24-70mm f/2.8 AF-S
Nikon 50mm f1.4D
Nikon 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 AF-S VR
Nikon SB-600
Nikon SB-800
Feisol 3371 Tripod
Photo Clam 40-N Ball head


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *robchaos*


Save up for some Hoya or B+W



I've had good luck with Nikon filters on Nikon glass.


----------



## robchaos

GoneTomorrow, I've got another addition for my gear list.
Just picked up a Slik M410 Master Pro Deluxe tripod for cheap off craiglist. This thing is an 8 lb. beast but rigid as hell.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


I've had good luck with Nikon filters on Nikon glass.


Today I learnt that Nikon make filters...


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*


Today I learnt that Nikon make filters...


This.


----------



## Unknownm

so I followed the THE ULTIMATE EXPOSURE guide, the image turned out amazing. The light meter told me I was way to low but following that chart gave a good even lighting

http://www.flickr.com/photos/matthewacbro/5903880339/in/photostream


----------



## dudemanppl

Well it's late at night so I figured out for the next two months I'll be shooting RANGEFINDERS!

Canon EOS 5D Mark II
Leica M8
Voigtlander R3a

Voigtlander 15mm f/4.5 Super-Wide 
Heliar 
Voigtlander 28mm f/2 Ultron
Voigtlander 35mm f/1.4 Nokton
Voigtlander 50mm f/1.1 Nokton
Voigtlander 75mm f/1.8 Heliar
Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 EX APO 
HSM

The SLR gear is mainly because I got the 120-300 really stupid cheap and they don't often go for sale used. But I'm keeping the 5DII because I love it so much. It has doesn't have focus points or an AA filter, and I don't want to try and find another one without an AA filter (probably 50 5DIIs in the world with the modification) because it is just so sharp.

Edit: reading up M8 reviews, I now know why my blacks are purple sometimes. No IR filter... WHY AM I DUMB?


----------



## mortimersnerd

I got lucky with this shot last night:


----------



## laboitenoire

That's really sweet!


----------



## mortimersnerd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


That's really sweet!


Thanks. I didn't get as many fireworks shots as I would have liked, that storm moved in quickly. This has to be one of my favorite fireworks shots of all time:


----------



## laboitenoire

I thought about taking my camera last night, but I'm glad I didn't. Where we were sitting had fantastic views, but we had fallout from the fireworks raining on us during the whole show... And yes we were in the designated area to watch.


----------



## mortimersnerd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire;14116138*
> I thought about taking my camera last night, but I'm glad I didn't. Where we were sitting had fantastic views, but we had fallout from the fireworks raining on us during the whole show... And yes we were in the designated area to watch.


It was a little too windy for the fireworks last night, they didn't keep good form. We were out on a dock so had a good view since they shot them over the harbor.


----------



## BlankThis

Lovely shot mort! I like how it spills out of the frame


----------



## laboitenoire

So I have more pictures incoming from this weekend... Just need to finish going through them. Must say the D7000 meter tends to overexpose in bright outdoor light or with weird backlighting, it seems. Indoors and in lower lighting it seems just about perfect. Also, it's amazing how big the files from the camera are. On average they're twice as big as my D7000 files between the lack of compression, the extra resolution, and the 14-bit color.


----------



## mortimersnerd

I also have this one:










And this one, but I bumped the camera during the exposure. :/


----------



## BlankThis

The bump adds a cool effect. Took me a second to even notice it really.


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis;14119294*
> The bump adds a cool effect. Took me a second to even notice it really.


This


----------



## L1eutenant

Hi Guys,

Hope i've come to the right place.

I want to use my sig rig for more then just gaming.

I was thinking of buying a SLR and buying photoshop and start taking photos and messing around with photos.

But around $1,200 is a lot to fork out to try something (as i may not like it)

Would it be better to use my current digital camera and get the trial version of photoshop before splashing out?

And my other questions is, is there hobbies (on the computer) that you would recommend, eg. photoshop, 3d modeling?


----------



## ~sizzzle~

Quote:



Originally Posted by *L1eutenant*


Hi Guys,

Hope i've come to the right place.

I want to use my sig rig for more then just gaming.

I was thinking of buying a SLR and buying photoshop and start taking photos and messing around with photos.

But around $1,200 is a lot to fork out to try something (as i may not like it)

Would it be better to use my current digital camera and get the trial version of photoshop before splashing out?

And my other questions is, is there hobbies (on the computer) that you would recommend, eg. photoshop, 3d modeling?


Definately try it out first. Many programs like Lightroom 3 and Elements 9 have free trials. You can do alot more with the higher end programs but that will get your feet wet at least. Just keep in mind that photo editing programs can take a lot of time to habituate to and getting good at it (not that I am) takes a bunch of practice. Also usually the less editing you do the better and for it to come out well you have to have a good photo to start with.

As far as cameras. Just start with the point and shoot you have. Almost everybody does. Although DSLR's are very nice and can add a lot to your photography, it isn't really about the hardware.

Other hobbies... Endless choices maybe. Folding (you better be folding for OCN with that 970!!







), Video creation, music recording to name a few.


----------



## Unknownm

Shot in RAW, than used Photoshop to edit back the colors. I used my old flash that I got from my SLR. I can only take pictures up to 1/500, after that I get a black line because it's out of sync.

edit: video test

  
 You Tube


----------



## theCanadian

Apparently the portion of SDHC cards that is in in the center of this picture is damn important. My camera won't pick up the card now that the corner is chipped.









Edit: Actually both sides are chipped. How the heck did that happen?


----------



## max302

Fiyah.



I was on spot metering when I began shooting, exposure was kinda off with the flames and all the heterogeneous light. ISO performance from the D7000 is still impressing me.


----------



## robchaos

Doesn't look like there is too much wrong with that shot max (as long as you weren't the owner of that house







) what iso was that shot at?


----------



## sub50hz

1600 -- it says right in the exif.


----------



## robchaos

I'm viewing it from an iPod. Don't have an exif reading app on this beast yet...


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *robchaos;14126525*
> I'm viewing it from an iPod. Don't have an exif reading app on this beast yet...


Why would you need an app? I can see it in the flickr link just fine, no special app required.


----------



## Boyboyd

My 7000 goes up to 2000 --> 2500 depending on the light. You can start to see unattractive noise in the shadows at 2500.


----------



## Unknownm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Boyboyd;14126642*
> My 7000 goes up to 2000 --> 2500 depending on the light. You can start to see unattractive noise in the shadows at 2500.


yeah, that's why I switch to b&w with 3200 and up.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Unknownm*


yeah, that's why I switch to b&w with 3200 and up.


Man, you guys are really crazy about a little noise. I made the following print at 11x14 with only the default (25) chromatic NR in LR, and it was just fine:

(3200 ISO, 50D)

IMG_3219 by sub50hz, on Flickr

Noise is subjective, but I would most often prefer detail over a little grain, especially printing for web or, most recently, newsprint.


----------



## laboitenoire

Yeah, I had few reservations shooting 3200 on my D5000, and I have even fewer with my D7000. 3200 is about as clean as 800 is on my dad's D50...


----------



## dudemanppl

If the exposure is right I don't care about noise.


----------



## Dream Killer

d700/5dmk2, iso 6400, done


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*


d700/5dmk2, iso 6400, done


I've found the 6400 images out of the 1DIV to be pretty good, I can't imagine how many more keepers I might have on full frame -- sadly, there's no "extra" 1DsIII laying around for me to use.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Finally got my 24-70 back from Canon, after three weeks. Turned out "worn zoom collars" were what was causing soft images. That's a new one to me!


----------



## laboitenoire

So does that make the 24-70 a plastic fantastic?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


So does that make the 24-70 a plastic fantastic?










Maybe. It's built very solidly, but not like an old solid metal lens.


----------



## dudemanppl

The decisions I make at 3:00 a.m. are dumn. Now I'm thinking sell all my SLR stuff and then replace the M8 with an M9 and borrow gear as needed. HMMMMM.


----------



## BlankThis

Yes, dumb.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


The decisions I make at 3:00 a.m. are dumn. Now I'm thinking sell all my SLR stuff and then replace the M8 with an M9 and borrow gear as needed. HMMMMM.


Brilliant!


----------



## dudemanppl




----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;14130272*
> Man, you guys are really crazy about a little noise. I made the following print at 11x14 with only the default (25) chromatic NR in LR, and it was just fine:
> 
> (3200 ISO, 50D)
> 
> IMG_3219 by sub50hz, on Flickr
> 
> Noise is subjective, but I would most often prefer detail over a little grain, especially printing for web or, most recently, newsprint.


Whyd you need IS) 3200 outside?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;14138522*
> Whyd you need IS) 3200 outside?


If you check the EXIF, it looks like the shot time was around 7:30 PM, so not so bright. Even at f/2, he had to use ISO 3200 just to get 1/250" shutter speed.

And a better test for high ISO noise is indoor low light. Most any DSLR can have low noise with high ISO in plenty of light.


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;14138573*
> If you check the EXIF, it looks like the shot time was around 7:30 PM, so not so bright. Even at f/2, he had to use ISO 3200 just to get 1/250" shutter speed.
> 
> And a better test for high ISO noise is indoor low light. Most any DSLR can have low noise with high ISO in plenty of light.


Ah, My EXIF plugin said there wasn't any data.


----------



## dudemanppl

Click the link to his page on flickr.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;14139076*
> Ah, My EXIF plugin said there wasn't any data.


I just looked at the flickr page for it. Flickr annoyingly strips EXIF from the smaller sizes, and keeps it only for the largest size.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;14138522*
> Whyd you need IS) 3200 outside?


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;14138573*
> If you check the EXIF, it looks like the shot time was around 7:30 PM, so not so bright. Even at f/2, he had to use ISO 3200 just to get 1/250" shutter speed.


This^^

The sun sets behind the reactor cooling tower in Michigan City, and casts a huge shadow over the park (directly across the street), where only 2 measly halogen lights do a piss-poor job of lighting the place evenly:










Gotta stop action somehow.


----------



## VortexBlast

I would like to join the camera club. I've been into photography for quite some time, more than a year I think but I'm not very pro, just an amateur that is very interested in photography.
Here's my gear.

From left to right:
Canon 24-105 LensCup, EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro, Canon EOS 7D + BG-E7 Battery Grip, EF 24-105L f/4 IS USM, EF 28-135 f/3.5-5.6 IS USM (I want to sell it but I'm not able to), Hoya HD Circular Polarizer, Speedlite 430EXII, EF 50mm f/1.8.
This was shot using my father's Panasonic GF1 with a 14mm f/2.5 prime lens.


----------



## BlankThis

Nice kit







Needs more primes though.


----------



## VortexBlast

Quote:



Originally Posted by *BlankThis*


Nice kit







Needs more primes though.


Yes, there's a disturbing lack of prime lenses. I will probably invest in one in the near future but I must also consider how much it costs.
My next lens purchase will probably be a 35mm prime so on APS-C, it equals to 56mm but I don't want it to be very expensive since the 35L costs €1400 in Vienna, way beyond my budget.
Other than the 35mm f/2 from Canon, are there others that are better but without burning my wallet?


----------



## sub50hz

The Sigma 30mm f/1.4 is very popular, and nearly as good as the 35L (better in some regards) for way less money.


----------



## mortimersnerd

Anyone have any good links for guides on product and studio photography? I understand the mechanics behind all of my gear and strobes but lacking on the perspective and setup.


----------



## sub50hz

If you're shooting on a table/with backgrounds, stop it down. Especially with closeups like the above -- unless you're deliberately trying to use a shallow DoF for accentuating a certain portion of the image, make use of getting everything in. Product photography is all about showing it all, not highlighting a small portion.


----------



## VortexBlast

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


The Sigma 30mm f/1.4 is very popular, and nearly as good as the 35L (better in some regards) for way less money.


The Sigma 30mm f/1.4 is very tempting, twice the price of the 35 f/2 but a third of the price of the 35L f/1.4. But the one thing that scares me off is if I get a bad copy, one that front or back focuses too much then that's not ideal. I can adjust it though in my 7D.


----------



## sub50hz

You can also have it calibrated by Sigma. The general consensus is that buying used is the best course of action, as most users that _have_ had an issue have already taken the initiative of sending it in for a free adjustment.


----------



## ljason8eg

Yeah I was going to say the same thing, buy a used copy. Cheaper and the user will have already had any adjustment done if needed.


----------



## mortimersnerd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


If you're shooting on a table/with backgrounds, stop it down. Especially with closeups like the above -- unless you're deliberately trying to use a shallow DoF for accentuating a certain portion of the image, make use of getting everything in. Product photography is all about showing it all, not highlighting a small portion.


That was f/8 with 70-200mm VR I. I don't like to stop it down more than that since it seems to get pretty soft and doesn't add much more DoF. I'm so close to the min focal distance the DoF is already quite shallow.

I can highlight more by shooting directly at the product, instead from the side, but doesn't seem very interesting.


----------



## Marin

Awesome, managed to overpower the sun.

Setup:

- Canon 5DMKII + 35L
- Hitech 1.2 ND
- Broncolor Picolite + Mobil A2R.

I'll post the pics later.


----------



## cravinmild

Hey all, how cool is this. A place for computer nuts (me) and in the same site i can talk about photography too









Ive been interested in these kinds of things since i was a kid, now that im older i have the means (money) to participate more and im learning a ton. My wife and i made the plunge a few years back and upgraded from a simple point and shot (cannon-gift) to a dslr. We bought a Pentax K200d with dual lens (18-55, 50-200mm), cost alot but the entertainment and fun of learning is well worth the money......oh, shots of the kids also.
Lately ive been shooting static objects for 3d conversion using Roxio 2012 pro. I have produced some fantastic shots but it is limmited in what you are able to shoot. I have started to pour over these forums now that i have found them and there is so much to learn here, im drooling on my keyboard lol.
Here are a few of our shots taken with the pentax, we didnt know about the rule of thirds or how to really set up shots, dumb luck rules on our outings. I hope to gain more control in my shots and think there is alot to learn here. Hope i can be a memeber of this group of yours and if lucky pass on some knowledge. If any of you have 3d setups ill post a link to the site ive uploaded many of my shots too.....if i can do that....mods









So here goes a few shots over the last few years:

kamloops lake by cravinmild, on Flickr

our cam was acting funny here, few days after purchase, auto settings (noob) were producing the oddest shots, after this the cam stopped working and was RMA. The raw (auto) shot was over 21mb

sunset at noon by cravinmild, on Flickr

sunpeaks-kamloops by cravinmild, on Flickr

Great moon shot 2 by cravinmild, on Flickr

Wife insists she is identified as the shooter of this shot










_IGP1673_0796 by cravinmild, on Flickr

kamloops bc by cravinmild, on Flickr

pink flower by cravinmild, on Flickr

You know what, im just going to stop here. I didnt realize how many shots we have taken over the years and posted to flickr. Ok you get the idea
If the mods allow ill post links to where my 3d shots are hosted and clicking on a shot will bring you to flickr...cant help that now can i lol

great club, hope to be a member


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Awesome, managed to overpower the sun.

Setup:

- Canon 5DMKII + 35L
- Hitech 1.25 ND
- Broncolor Picolite + Mobil A2R.

I'll post the pics later.


YOU NEVER POST ANYMORE!







And overpowering the sun isn't too hard, I can almost do it with ONE YN460II which is 50 bucks.


----------



## Unknownm

can anyone recommend a m42 adapter for nikon F (d7000). I wanna try my old school m42 lens but I've heard that cheap adapters with the glass make it not worth it overall.


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mortimersnerd*


That was f/8 with 70-200mm VR I. I don't like to stop it down more than that since it seems to get pretty soft and doesn't add much more DoF. I'm so close to the min focal distance the DoF is already quite shallow.

I can highlight more by shooting directly at the product, instead from the side, but doesn't seem very interesting.


I'm under the impression that you would want to use a shorter FL than that. Would give you a deeper depth of field. But that's my opinion.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mortimersnerd*


That was f/8 with 70-200mm VR I. I don't like to stop it down more than that since it seems to get pretty soft and doesn't add much more DoF. I'm so close to the min focal distance the DoF is already quite shallow.

I can highlight more by shooting directly at the product, instead from the side, but doesn't seem very interesting.


when i shoot up macro or products up close, i shoot at f16+ on a 35mm and like f64 on a field camera. the lens definitely suffers a bit due to diffraction, but im not pixel peeping so it doesnt matter.


----------



## dudemanppl

Got the Sigma 24 1.8 and it only needs +17 microadjust...


----------



## BlankThis

Finally turned 18 (I can legally drink now but more importantly vote) today so you guys can send me that 5D2 and L series you've been saving for this occasion.

PM me for the shipping address.


----------



## solsamurai

First time posting in this thread with a question.







I plan on taking my Cannon EOS Rebel T3 to the beach in a couple weeks and need to find a good enclosure to protect it from the sand/wind/people running by. Any suggestions would be much appreciated!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis;14158487*
> Finally turned 18 (I can legally drink now but more importantly vote) today so you guys can send me that 5D2 and L series you've been saving for this occasion.
> 
> PM me for the shipping address.


Congrats! Your camera and lens are ready. They're at the following address, just ask for the gear there:

420 9th Avenue, New York, NY

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *solsamurai;14169601*
> First time posting in this thread with a question.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I plan on taking my Cannon EOS Rebel T3 to the beach in a couple weeks and need to find a good enclosure to protect it from the sand/wind/people running by. Any suggestions would be much appreciated!


Enclosure? I suppose you could throw a rain hood on or use a plastic bag, but I would just use caution. It's not like it's going to be the desert with sand storms blowing.


----------



## solsamurai

Really? Lol, I've heard if a few grains of sand get inside the body it's really bad. Will look into the rain hood. I was thinking about a UV filter as well. Still pretty new to this. Thanks for the answers!


----------



## solsamurai

Found

  this rain sleeve on Amazon. Seems like it would do the job based on the reviews. What do you guys think?


----------



## laboitenoire

Honestly, like Gone said, you shouldn't worry too much. As long as you're prudent with your camera it'll be fine. I went to the beach last week with my camera, even changed lenses a couple times, and didn't get a single grain of sand in it.


----------



## solsamurai

Ok cool. I will be careful.







What do you think about using a UV or Polarizing filter? Sorry for all the questions! You guys are really helpful.


----------



## laboitenoire

Unless it's high quality (i.e. it cost like $50 or more) UV filters are just another piece of glass to lower your image quality. There's an endless debate about whether they're worth it, but if you're going to use them at least buy good ones.

I personally used to use UV filters but recently have stopped. I didn't notice enough benefit. If you're not always kind to your gear, then it might be worth it to protect the front element.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


If you're not always kind to your gear, then it might be worth it to protect the front element.


I'm guessing you've not had an opportunity to shoot in an environment that _requires_ a protective filter in order to save the front of a lens. You'll be really sorry you hadn't spent 50 bucks when you get a 300+ dollar repair bill for a front element replacement.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


I'm guessing you've not had an opportunity to shoot in an environment that _requires_ a protective filter in order to save the front of a lens. You'll be really sorry you hadn't spent 50 bucks when you get a 300+ dollar repair bill for a front element replacement.


What. Scratches don't affect IQ. Looks bad but dealwithit.jpg.


----------



## laboitenoire

If you're referring to like paintball matches, then no, I've never had to shoot them. I do have a couple on hand just in case I run into that kind of circumstance.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;14170795*
> What. Scratches don't affect IQ. Looks bad but dealwithit.jpg.


Where on earth do you see the word "scratches" in my post? The 135L was saved last weekend when some dip**** threw some kind of hard candy off a float at the pride parade, which destroyed the B+W I decided to slap on in the morning. Front element of 135L saved, 60 dollar filter in the garbage. They don't make sense for everyone, but to completely discount their usage and then incorrectly extrapolate words out of my post is just ignorant.


----------



## dudemanppl

1. That guy has some hella good aim.
2. Front elements aren't made out of tissue paper.
3. You broke a 60 dollar filter...
4. Front elements are 100 bucks max and are super easy to replace if you know how.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;14170951*
> 1. That guy has some hella good aim.


You ever throw a handful of anything?
Quote:


> 2. Front elements aren't made out of tissue paper.


If it had enough velocity to shatter a filter, it's pretty likely it would have done some real damage to the lens itself.
Quote:


> 3. You broke a 60 dollar filter...


How did _I_ break it? I guess if all I shot was high school track, I wouldn't buy filters either.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;14171002*
> You ever throw a handful of anything?


Oh I thought it was just one like out of his mouth and he was mad at L glass or something.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;14171002*
> If it had enough velocity to shatter a filter, it's pretty likely it would have done some real damage to the lens itself.


Filters are damn weak sauce. I broke one dropping it. I still haven't cracked any lenses.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;14171002*
> How did _I_ break it? I guess if all I shot was high school track, I wouldn't buy filters either.


Not what I meant, but sure. Also I guess you're right, I don't keep gear long enough to break it.







NO NEED FOR FILTERS THEN!


----------



## Shane1244

Most front elements are quite thick. Anything that's going to break your front element, isn't going to be saved by a filter. They are useless.


----------



## slowdown

I would like to join, I use a Canon T2i with canon 18-55,50mm 1.4 and a Sigma 30mm 1.4.


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Congrats! Your camera and lens are ready. They're at the following address, just ask for the gear there:

420 9th Avenue, New York, NY


Giggity







I didn't know B&H liked me that much!


----------



## ljason8eg

I went to a model railroad expo today. I only took one lens, the 50 1.4, but I think I got some good shots. I'll post some up later.

I will say one thing; it was hard getting used to the DOF when shooting miniature scenes.


----------



## BlankThis

How so? Make the DOF preview your friend


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:



Originally Posted by *BlankThis*


How so? Make the DOF preview your friend










I think it was more the fact that everything is so tiny making the perspective very different from reality. I got used to it though. It was more about how to use it effectively since I was working with mostly large apertures because the lighting was so poor.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *BlankThis*


How so? Make the DOF preview your friend










Only works at f/2.8 or smaller, and sucks either way you splice it. Maybe it's better with other focusing screens, but on the standard ones, it's nearly useless.


----------



## ljason8eg

I'm not a huge model train guy and I dunno how thrilled I am with these but my dad loves them and wanted to take some pics for him. I think these turned out alright. I actually liked the detail of the scenes more than the trains lol.


IMG_4585.jpg by JLofing, on Flickr


IMG_4582.jpg by JLofing, on Flickr


IMG_4543.jpg by JLofing, on Flickr


IMG_4505.jpg by JLofing, on Flickr


----------



## dudemanppl

Haha, I thought you bought a tilt shift.


----------



## VortexBlast

I was wondering, my parents want to sell their Nikon D90 for something much smaller which they already have, a Panasonic GF1.
It consists of a Nikon D90 in great condition with a 3071 shutter count, a Tokina 12-24 f/4 DX IF II and two Nikkors from the '80s, the AF 35-70 f/3.3-5.6 and the AF 70-210 f/4. The lenses are in good condition with no visible scratches or dust inside but the 70-210 had fungus inside which has been taken care of. It was taken to a specialist and he removed it.
I'm asking, how much will it sell for? Because I might be able to convince my parents to fund with the money from the sale for a 5DMkII body.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;14175716*
> Haha, I thought you bought a tilt shift.


Lol it does kinda give that same effect.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Haha, I thought you bought a tilt shift.


Same here actually.


----------



## SmokinWaffle

Even just taking everyday pictures with the D5000 seems awesome. So nice to just have a crisp, well coloured image after so long with a shocking digital!


----------



## laboitenoire

So, any opinions on the Nikon 16-85 VR? It's really tempting because I kinda miss having a standard zoom, and it's supposed to be the sharpest of Nikon's DX zooms. I think the VR, price and the sharpness advantage make it worth it over the 17-55 f/2.8, and given how my Sigma 30 acts goofy at times with my D7000 I'm hesitant to get a 3rd-party f/2.8 zoom. I suppose there are the older f/2.8 pro zooms, but they're so heavy and don't go that wide on DX...


----------



## GoneTomorrow

I say skip the zoom and get a longer prime.


----------



## sub50hz

I find that I rarely need wider than 24mm unless I'm _really_ going for odd perspective, in which case I just toss the 10-20 on. 24/28-70 may be what you're looking for.


----------



## Shane1244

Same. When I had the Nikkor 30mm, I never felt the need to go wider, with the exception of landscapes.


----------



## BlankThis

I considered that lens a while ago too. I also looked at the 24-85 f/2.8-4 which I believe is cheaper but you sacrifice the wide end and VR for the faster glass and potential use on full frame.


----------



## dudemanppl

The 2.8-4 sucks. The f/3.5-4.5 is super boss and also AF-S.

http://nikonrumors.com/2011/07/12/new-nikon-af-s-dx-micro-nikkor-40mm-f2-8g-lens-announced.aspx/


----------



## Unknownm

Walking around beacon hill park. 18-70mm lens, I'm impressed with this camera.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire;14184548*
> So, any opinions on the Nikon 16-85 VR? It's really tempting because I kinda miss having a standard zoom, and it's supposed to be the sharpest of Nikon's DX zooms. I think the VR, price and the sharpness advantage make it worth it over the 17-55 f/2.8, and given how my Sigma 30 acts goofy at times with my D7000 I'm hesitant to get a 3rd-party f/2.8 zoom. I suppose there are the older f/2.8 pro zooms, but they're so heavy and don't go that wide on DX...


Speaking of the 17-55 2.8. I bought one (again) recently









I quite like it. Never managed to try the 16-85 although I'd like to.


----------



## nuclearjock

I just wanna give props for GT taking the time to maintain this whole thing. Hope he's impressed that I know how to use the large font thing









Thx GT. Many happy pics.


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


The 2.8-4 sucks. The f/3.5-4.5 is super boss and also AF-S.

http://nikonrumors.com/2011/07/12/ne...nnounced.aspx/


Funny, I've heard otherwise...


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


I say skip the zoom and get a longer prime.


The problem is that I miss the convenience of a good zoom for use as a walk-around. I'd love to get a 50 or an 85, but there's times where it's either inconvenient or inappropriate to change lenses and as such a zoom would be ideal.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


I find that I rarely need wider than 24mm unless I'm _really_ going for odd perspective, in which case I just toss the 10-20 on. 24/28-70 may be what you're looking for.


I didn't use the wide end too often on my 18-55 when I had it, but I was always glad to have it during those times where I wanted the perspective it can create. Hence why I think the 16-85. I'm not keen to buy 3rd-party f/2.8 lenses, so the Nikon 24-70 f/2.8 is definitely out, and the 28-70 f/2.8 is still huge and doesn't really go that wide...

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*


Same. When I had the Nikkor 30mm, I never felt the need to go wider, with the exception of landscapes.


I do find that 30 is pretty good most of the time, and I've been doing panoramas when I need to get more into the frame in a landscape situation. But wider would always be nice to have...

Quote:



Originally Posted by *BlankThis*


I considered that lens a while ago too. I also looked at the 24-85 f/2.8-4 which I believe is cheaper but you sacrifice the wide end and VR for the faster glass and potential use on full frame.


I think I either want VR or a constant f/2.8.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


Speaking of the 17-55 2.8. I bought one (again) recently









I quite like it. Never managed to try the 16-85 although I'd like to.


Could you post sample pics of the 17-55 sometime?

Also, what about the 24-120 f/4 VR? It's border performance is rather meh on FX, but on DX bodies it's razor sharp even wide open throughout most of the range.


----------



## BlankThis

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qKpxd8hzOcQ&feature=player_embedded[/ame]

Just made my day


----------



## MistaBernie

As Epic as that is... the saddest part is that the lens that got the hammer is either a 24-70 or a 24-105, and I'd bet it's the 24-70...


----------



## Boyboyd

Or a mug version of that lens


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire;14193281*
> Could you post sample pics of the 17-55 sometime?
> 
> Also, what about the 24-120 f/4 VR? It's border performance is rather meh on FX, but on DX bodies it's razor sharp even wide open throughout most of the range.


I'm heading off to the snow in a few days, I'll see if I can grab anything that is a good indication of performance.

I've always found 24mm not wide enough personally. If they did make a 16-85mm f/4 VR though... yum.

Any opinions on Nikon's new macro? I guess it's for beginners.


----------



## Davidsen

Taken with my D3100, still in the process of learning how to use it :/ Haven't gotten around to outside shots, weather hasn't been all that nice lately

Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 AF-S G DX VR


----------



## Unknownm

what's the sharpest for Nikon AF 18-70mm 3.5 lens?

I've notice f22 or higher it's really blurry. I tend to shoot around f16 when it's sunny.


----------



## Shane1244

I'd assume ~f/9.0


----------



## laboitenoire

According to both the reviews on SLR Gear and Photozone, it appears that at all focal lengths it's best between f/5.6 and f/8, which is generally the "sweet spot" on APS-C.


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*


Or a mug version of that lens










This I think.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Unknownm*


what's the sharpest for Nikon AF 18-70mm 3.5 lens?

I've notice f22 or higher it's really blurry. I tend to shoot around f16 when it's sunny.


Somehow i've gotten it into my head that f/8 is sharpest. I've noticed pretty serious diffraction at as low as f/16 on some lenses I own though.


----------



## dudemanppl

Diffraction is limited by camera, not lens.


----------



## Shane1244

f/5.6 on my 50 f/1.4


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;14205391*
> Diffraction is limited by camera, not lens.


completely untrue. Diffraction is based entirely the design of the lens and has nothing to do with the camera or sensor.

Diffraction is caused by light bouncing off blade edge of the aperture.


----------



## Shane1244

Ya, How can the camera diffract light? :S


----------



## sub50hz

http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/diffraction-photography.htm

Something anyone who's prepared to argue about diffraction should read before flailing their dick around.


----------



## laboitenoire

Interesting read.


----------



## dudemanppl

THEMOREYOUKNOW.JPG Well it's both camera and lens.







Did not know that.


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;14207489*
> http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/diffraction-photography.htmbefore flailing their dick around.


He's only 14!

No excuses.


----------



## aznofazns

I would like to be removed from the point-and-shoot section and added into the DSLR section.









I recently bought a Canon Kiss X3 (sounds cooler than T1i) with an EF 50mm f/1.8 II lens. I also have an old Tamron 28-200mm AF.

Here's a random shot I took with the 50mm f/1.8 wide open:


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;14208763*
> THEMOREYOUKNOW.JPG Well it's both camera and lens.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Did not know that.


it still has nothing to do with the camera.

different camera might record the distortion differently but the cause of the distortion is still the aperture.


----------



## dudemanppl

GOSH YOU GUYS ARE SO MEAN I'M GOING TO CRY IN THE CORNER NOW.







/caps


----------



## BlankThis

Don't dribble on your M9


----------



## dudemanppl

I'm still selling my stuff! http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1025638/


----------



## BlankThis

Ugh your 1DIIn is soo tempting.


----------



## max302

The only piece of Canon gear gets knocked the fruck out!

  
 You Tube


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *aznofazns*


I would like to be removed from the point-and-shoot section and added into the DSLR section.









I recently bought a *Canon Kiss X3 (sounds cooler than T1i)* with an EF 50mm f/1.8 II lens. I also have an old Tamron 28-200mm AF.

Here's a random shot I took with the 50mm f/1.8 wide open:


No, it definitely does not. Try making "Kiss" the official US name for Canon Rebels and see how many they sell.


----------



## MistaBernie

Speakin' of which Gone, I know you're busy moving and all, but i'm not on the list?


----------



## SmokinWaffle

Anyone here got any reccomendations on a decent tripod for under Â£20/30?

Want one to take with me to Wales to use with my D5000 (with the standard 18-55).


----------



## sub50hz

Nope. Anything at that price will be a colossal jar of suck.


----------



## Kreeker

Hey guys,

I bought a d80 a few years ago and never really used it seriously. Now I really want to get into photography, but I'm still using the kit lens. Should I sell the d80 for a newer canon or nikon? or just upgrade the lens?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


Speakin' of which Gone, I know you're busy moving and all, but i'm not on the list?


Fixed.









Quote:



Originally Posted by *SmokinWaffle*


Anyone here got any reccomendations on a decent tripod for under Â£20/30?

Want one to take with me to Wales to use with my D5000 (with the standard 18-55).











Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Nope. Anything at that price will be a colossal jar of suck.


Like he said, you get what you pay for with tripods. Expect to spend at least $150 or so for a decent set of legs and head. A cheap one will get the job done, but they aren't nearly as sturdy and precise.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Kreeker*


Hey guys,

I bought a d80 a few years ago and never really used it seriously. Now I really want to get into photography, but I'm still using the kit lens. Should I sell the d80 for a newer canon or nikon? or just upgrade the lens?


No, keep your kit the way it is and get out and shoot. Once you've learned the ropes, then you can consider new gear. A new body and/or lens won't facilitate the learning process any more. You have what you need to start/restart.


----------



## Techboy10

I'd like to join!

Camera+lenses:

Canon 7D

Canon 10-22mm f3.5-4.5 USM
Canon 28-135mm f3.5-5.6 IS USM
Canon 70-300mm f4-5.6L IS USM
Canon 50mm f1.8 II
Canon 35-80mm f4-5.6 II (soon to be converted into a macro lens)

Accessories:

Thinktank Retrospective 10 - Pinestone
Thinktank Streetwalker
Manfrotto 055XPROB tripod + 496RC2 ballhead
knockoff TC80N3 intervalometer

that's all the important stuff


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:



Originally Posted by *SmokinWaffle*


Anyone here got any reccomendations on a decent tripod for under Â£20/30?

Want one to take with me to Wales to use with my D5000 (with the standard 18-55).










If you're just vacationing, pretty much anything will do. I've said it before and I'll say it again, when you account for the high ISO performance of modern cameras and impressive image stabilization (which can reduce the minimum shutter speed by up to 4 stops in most cases), a superb tripod is no longer mandatory. I'd say you're good out to 4 seconds on a crap tripod and if you're careful. A tip for some of those cheap tripods though. You may actually be able to get a better picture by applying a little bit of steady downward pressure as you take the shot versus trying not to touch the tripod at all.

Sunpak 620-060


----------



## sub50hz

Grrr.. have a coupon code for Adorama, but I can't put it in anywhere. NEED TO ORDER.

edit: Got it.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;14216452*
> Grrr.. have a coupon code for Adorama, but I can't put it in anywhere. NEED TO ORDER.
> 
> edit: Got it.


Nice, you picked up a 1D4?


----------



## sub50hz

I've been doing event coverage for one of the Tribune subsidiaries in the 'burbs -- it's (sadly) not mine unless I want to buy it from them, which I just might. It's got about 12k clicks on it, but it looks and feels brand new. I'm the only one there that uses it, most of the other guys have their own bodies and pick from a stock of available lenses (plus their own kit). It's quite a body, extremely solid and excellent size/ergo -- but the IQ, at least for the size the stuff is printed, is indistingushable from a 30D. I know this because one of the guys I shoot with uses one. Unless it's a large event where the results will make it to full page/gloss print in another publication, it's nearly useless to have any 1-series or FF body.

I guess the only real benefits are the ridiculous 10FPS shooting and weather sealing, really. It's great, though, but until I can get something really good printed huge (and in color), I'm not entirely convinced I need it, at all.


----------



## Unknownm

I found a fish-eye lens 8mm for canon mount. Called "Rokinon 8mm Fisheye f/3.5". Someone is offering $250 used. Would it be a great investment for my D7000?

I can get EOS EF to F adapter easy


----------



## Shane1244

Here's that same lens brand new..

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/635177-REG/Bower_SLY358N_SLY_358N_8mm_f_3_5.html

They make REALLY high quality stuff.


----------



## Unknownm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;14218805*
> Here's that same lens brand new..
> 
> http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/635177-REG/Bower_SLY358N_SLY_358N_8mm_f_3_5.html
> 
> They make REALLY high quality stuff.


So it's not worth it if I save like 50 - 70 dollars?


----------



## Marin

I wouldn't say it's high quality.


----------



## Unknownm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;14218834*
> I wouldn't say it's high quality.


alright compared to Nikon 18-70 f3.5-5.6


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;14218598*
> I've been doing event coverage for one of the Tribune subsidiaries in the 'burbs -- it's (sadly) not mine unless I want to buy it from them, which I just might. It's got about 12k clicks on it, but it looks and feels brand new. I'm the only one there that uses it, most of the other guys have their own bodies and pick from a stock of available lenses (plus their own kit). It's quite a body, extremely solid and excellent size/ergo -- but the IQ, at least for the size the stuff is printed, is indistingushable from a 30D. I know this because one of the guys I shoot with uses one. Unless it's a large event where the results will make it to full page/gloss print in another publication, it's nearly useless to have any 1-series or FF body.
> 
> *I guess the only real benefits are the ridiculous 10FPS shooting and weather sealing, really.* It's great, though, but until I can get something really good printed huge (and in color), I'm not entirely convinced I need it, at all.


What about the AF system? That's the biggest advantage of using a 1D4 if you ask me.


----------



## Shane1244

They're solid metal..


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;14218846*
> What about the AF system? That's the biggest advantage of using a 1D4 if you ask me.


Eh, it's alright. I don't ever have problems with the 50D's Servo, although maybe the 1D works a little better at night -- I couldn't say for sure. It's not enough where I pay attention to it, I just shoot. I might have a higher keeper rate when tracking, but I would have to try them side by side to check -- maybe I will this weekend.


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;14218834*
> I wouldn't say it's high quality.


It's a Samyang which besides the fact that it's manual focus, kills the competition for the price.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis;14219120*
> It's a Samyang which besides the fact it's manual focus, kills the competition for the price.


I know it's Samyang and I stand by what I said, it's not high quality.


----------



## Shane1244

But you wont explain why.


----------



## BlankThis

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=1054369

Their 35mm f/1.4 gives your $1,500 35L a run for its money.

As does their 85mm f/1.4 to both Canon and Nikons much more expensive 85mm f/1.8s.


----------



## Marin

And I don't consider either to be high quality.


----------



## sub50hz

Oh god, I can see where this is going.
Quote:


> My X is better than _your_ X because YYYYYYY.


----------



## BlankThis

So your opinion is moot if we are here to consider the quality of the product. The build quality has been raved about repeatedly. It is just as if not better than it's much more expensive rivals all at the cost of losing auto focus, which on a 8mm won't matter jack.


----------



## Marin

If you want to believe Samyang has amazing build quality than go for it. But I don't. A lot of the 35mm stuff lately seems to cut corners in some aspect and people take it.


----------



## Shane1244

Should have know he was going to bring up lf/mf...


----------



## Dream Killer

My beloved Iron Horse Sunday is officially unrepairable. That crash that broke my shoulder also broke the rear triangle (hairline crack on the chainstay). The fork also leaked all its oil while it was in the garage. So I said F' it and put together a brand new bike:


----------



## sub50hz

Awesome. Wish we had DH riding here. Sadly, when I worked at the shop, the most use our Big Hits saw were several roof jumps into the banked front lawn.


----------



## dudemanppl

I've had a Samyang 8mm, build quality is top notch although it's mostly plastic. It's sharp too. BUT, there is no such thing as an EF to F adapter (F goes to EF though).


----------



## xxrabid93

First day with the 5Dc that i just recently bought that i actually shot a decent number of photos.







Mostly did some sequences with my friend. He is the one in all the sequences.

First sequence i took today; not that great, lol.










A little better...



















Now my two favorites.



























Oh, and then i had some fun with his shiny sunglasses. That's me in the reflection!










C&C welcome.


----------



## nuclearjock

GT,

Pls add 1DsMkIII body (used, mint, no glass ((yet))). The guy has a 500, but I wanna shoot it this weekend. Just have to learn to use the body. Feels kind of funky!!


----------



## dudemanppl

Oooh, shiny. No AA filter and the 35L are so well mated. 21MP file: http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6139/5941086427_06b2c479dd_o.jpg No sharpening in post and wide open.


----------



## laboitenoire

Too bad there's a fair amount of coma in the corners...


----------



## dudemanppl

Lol, I don't check corners.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire;14246545*
> Too bad there's a fair amount of coma in the corners...


Eh. I don't pay much attention to that -- critiquing an image based on nitpicky BS like that is just _way_ too technical.


----------



## laboitenoire

Lol because the image took forever to load on my computer that was the first thing I noticed due to the large size...


----------



## max302

Won this on ebay. It's a gonna be a cool outdoor beater, and if it turns out that it doesn't work then it's gonna be a nice rebuild project!

http://cgi.ebay.ca/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=270779878825&ssPageName=STRK:MEWNX:IT#ht_1450wt_1139


----------



## dudemanppl

How do you focus that?


----------



## Marin

It's fixed.


----------



## max302

Actually this is an EE S with a focus ring, since aperture dropped to 2.8. You have 3 preset settings, near, intermediate, far.


----------



## Conspiracy

looks like fun


----------



## sub50hz

Ohhhhhh I have so much to edit tonight, but Breaking Bad just came on.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Ohhhhhh I have so much to edit tonight, but Breaking Bad just came on.


watching that too. so far amazing!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## laboitenoire

Got to test my D7000 the other night at stupid-high ISO with my 70-300 VR... This little guy was flitting outside on the feeder near my house. I didn't want to scare him off, so I was shooting at an angle through the window. Still surprisingly sharp. It was getting dark, and with the light changing every second I don't think I had enough time to get shots at faster speeds in order to freeze his wings.

ISO 6400:

Hummingbird by laboitenoire, on Flickr

ISO 25600 (still usable!):

Hummingbird by laboitenoire, on Flickr

Must say, very impressed with how the D7000 handles high ISO.


----------



## Shane1244

Gotta love Nikon for noise..


----------



## laboitenoire

Yeah, the only thing I did hear was knock down color noise. Luminance is completely untouched.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Got to test my D7000 the other night at stupid-high ISO with my 70-300 VR...

Must say, very impressed with how the D7000 handles high ISO.


For the sizes posted in this thread, sure... but even at the Large size on Flickr, the softness is pretty off-putting. I wouldn't print that 25600 shot, but the 6400 might look alright at like 5x7 or so.

Time for some faster glass if you plan on shooting in such low light.


----------



## laboitenoire

Eh, it's not gonna be a frequent thing. More of a good-for-when-I-need-it.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Time for some faster glass if you plan on shooting in such low light.


Time to whip out the 300 2.8 VRII!


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


Time to whip out the 300 2.8 VRII!


I keep 2 of those in my jacket pocket.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


I keep 2 of those in my jacket pocket.










skills


----------



## max302

Getting rid of gear. I have a Canon HV30 w/ a Raynox 3032 pro + mucho accessories that needs to go, also getting rid of a solid-ass Manfrotto tripod with fluid head. PM me offers, otherwise I'll link to the FS threads once I have them posted.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:



Originally Posted by *max302*


Getting rid of gear. I have a Canon HV30 w/ a Raynox 3032 pro + mucho accessories that needs to go, also getting rid of a solid-ass Manfrotto tripod with fluid head. PM me offers, otherwise I'll link to the FS threads once I have them posted.


could care less about the camera but i would totally take the tripod off your hands since i need one and i am poor. what other accessories you have and how much for them.

btw this is the photography section not video. i know it can be misleading because your in a camera thread.

post pics of that manfrotto dude. i might make an offer. wish it was sachtler because they make awesomely expensive video tripods


----------



## Unknownm

GF has it, look interesting to a take a couple of shots


----------



## dudemanppl

I realized how much more stuff I could have if I didn't buy an M9. Gear list changed accordingly...


----------



## Boyboyd

I've decided to get out and use mine more before I buy any more glass. The last thing I bought was a 67-77mm step up ring.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;14279231*
> I realized how much more stuff I could have if I didn't buy an M9. Gear list changed accordingly...


i hate you. wish i could afford more gear


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


I keep 2 of those in my jacket pocket.










They's purty. I can use all three of my tc's (1.4, 1.7, 2.0) and everything is beautiful..

300 f/2.8 VRII naked is in f******credible. Nikon teles rock. My 200 f/2 is my portrait lens.

My 200 f/4 micro is as shrarp, but f/4. Bokeh is close though.

GT:

Shot the Canon 500. All's good, but the guy wants $$$$. He either has to come down in price, or I'll buy the 85 f/1.2. I've made it a goal to become comfortable with Canon bodies.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*


i hate you. wish i could afford more gear


Shoot more, want less gear.


----------



## pn0yb0i

Canon 500d / T2i / Kiss X2
Canon Rebel G (35mm film body)

Lenses:

Canon 50mm F/1.8 MK2
Canon EF-S 70-255mm IS
Tamron 17-50mm F/2.8


----------



## Triangle

My dad used to have a 15mm nikon lens, but it got stolen. He isn't happy.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Triangle*


My dad used to have a 15mm nikon lens, but it got stolen. He isn't happy.










15mm AF-D?


----------



## Triangle

AF-D??? No.
f/3.5 AI-s

EDIT : I think. I will have to ask him... lol


----------



## Boyboyd

Sweet. I suppose manual focus would be easy with a 15mm focal length.


----------



## dudemanppl

The 3.5 AI-S is like 1k! It's known for flare though.


----------



## Boyboyd

It was made before anti-flare coating I think. All of the ais lenses I have flare and ghost terribly.


----------



## dudemanppl

Also, never be jelly of gear. If I had to sell like everything to get by, I would have a Samyang 35 1.4 and like a F3 and be extremely happy still.
Unrelated note: I lend out my gear way too much. My friend has my 120-300, other friend has my 35L.


----------



## iandroo888

if only u were in vegas and had more nikon gear. xD


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nuclearjock;14283024*
> They's purty. I can use all three of my tc's (1.4, 1.7, 2.0) and everything is beautiful..
> 
> 300 f/2.8 VRII naked is in f******credible. Nikon teles rock. My 200 f/2 is my portrait lens.
> 
> My 200 f/4 micro is as shrarp, but f/4. Bokeh is close though.
> 
> GT:
> 
> Shot the Canon 500. All's good, but the guy wants $$$$. He either has to come down in price, or I'll buy the 85 f/1.2. I've made it a goal to become comfortable with Canon bodies.


Well, you could have at least 2 85's for the price of one 500/4L.


----------



## BlankThis

I want a Samyang 35 f/1.4 >


----------



## Marin

I should have my site up in a few more weeks. Just need to finish the term up.


----------



## Shane1244

Whats the URL?


----------



## sub50hz

I am looking for this strap:










...but I can't find it anywhere. Red stripes on the thin nylon that holds the d-rings is sexy. Help computer.


----------



## dudemanppl

Dunno what it's called but I have one right in front of me. Comes with the 1D series.


----------



## sub50hz

Hrm, I can't even find any replacement from Canon/B&H/Adorama that looks similar. Dang.

Got my 1N back from my sister tonight -- it has died. Completely non-functional, along with my 50/1.8 -- both were hastily dropped into a hot tub last night. Real sad, now I have to buy another EOS film body (and a new 50).


----------



## max302

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;14289111*
> Hrm, I can't even find any replacement from Canon/B&H/Adorama that looks similar. Dang.
> 
> Got my 1N back from my sister tonight -- it has died. Completely non-functional, along with my 50/1.8 -- both were hastily dropped into a hot tub last night. Real sad, now I have to buy another EOS film body (and a new 50).


Are you going to get the film done just for shiznitz and giggles? Sorry about your loss, but I really want to know what kind of uncanny abuse a roll of film can withstand.


----------



## sub50hz

Nah, it's dead -- the 16 or so frames she had shot were lost to the light when she popped the back open immediately to drain the body. Apparently, the weather seals were not up to being submerged (lol, WHO'DA THUNK).


----------



## laboitenoire

Hmm... I would have thought it could take that abuse. I've seen plenty of stories about the 1D bodies and the pro Nikons taking a brief swim and they weren't any worse for wear... Canon must have improved the seals on the digital bodies.


----------



## sub50hz

Well, "apparently" it was sitting on the filter lid when some chump leaned over and dragged the strap into the tub, where it was a good 5-10 seconds before it was found. The seals were also probably older than most of the people posting in this forum, so I can't say I'm surprised. I guess this sort of thing was meant to be, since now I can put the money she owes me towards an EOS 3.


----------



## Unknownm

bought a m42 adapter off ebay, so far my 28mm lens has this weird effect while the 55mm & 200mm don't.

Look at the second picture on the left middle side of the lens.


----------



## BlankThis

Very odd...


----------



## Unknownm

Quote:



Originally Posted by *BlankThis*


Very odd...


only on that 28mm. 55mm works pretty good.


----------



## Danylu

I'd guess flare from the light hitting the front element. Is that the Nikon MHD-11? just curious, how do you find it? Does it wriggle?


----------



## Conspiracy

is your WB off looks like it is

i dont see what yall are talking about being weird


----------



## sub50hz

It's just flare. I have a Vivitar 28 in FD mount that flares like crazy. I don't use it when the sun's out.


----------



## BlankThis

Look at the text around the inside of the filter ring. Specifically on the left.


----------



## sub50hz

Just ordered a 7MDH. Brown and orange ftw.


----------



## mz-n10

It just a flare. You young guns are too use to having good coatings on even your kit lenses


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


You young guns are too use to having good coatings on even your kit lenses


Canon's SC and SSC were good on FD stuff from the 70s, the FD 50/1.8 I have is as good or better than my EF 50/1.8 with regards to flare.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;14289013*
> I am looking for this strap:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ...but I can't find it anywhere. Red stripes on the thin nylon that holds the d-rings is sexy. Help computer.


Not exactly the same strap, but it's close:

http://milo.com/canon-pro-digital-camera-neck-strap?near=chicago

I actually own this strap, bought from Best Buy a few years ago. It has quick release buckles on it, which are more robust than they seem. I used it for a good while and had no issues with it.


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10;14294424*
> It just a flare. You young guns are too use to having good coatings on even your kit lenses


I've never seen flare like that... I'll take your word for it. That being said I shoot an almost 40 year old FTb and 28mm f/2.8 SC and I've never seen this.


----------



## dudemanppl

Now that I look at it again, its flare for sure. You're pointing the light straight into the lens at an angle...


----------



## Unknownm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Danylu;14291299*
> I'd guess flare from the light hitting the front element. Is that the Nikon MHD-11? just curious, how do you find it? Does it wriggle?


I got the camera used. So i'm unsure where he got it, however the thing is so handy when my main battery dies out. I have 2 of the same batterys and the other stays in the grip as backup
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;14292978*
> It's just flare. I have a Vivitar 28 in FD mount that flares like crazy. I don't use it when the sun's out.


Damn. What's funny is when using that lens on my film camera. I never had a flare in any photos
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis;14293285*
> Look at the text around the inside of the filter ring. Specifically on the left.


No photoshop, i can tell you that.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10;14294424*
> It just a flare. You young guns are too use to having good coatings on even your kit lenses


Yeah the lens came with the film camera I bought. For the film camera it works amazing.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis;14298759*
> I've never seen flare like that... I'll take your word for it. That being said I shoot an almost 40 year old FTb and 28mm f/2.8 SC and I've never seen this.


It's a first for me.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;14298775*
> Now that I look at it again, its flare for sure. You're pointing the light straight into the lens at an angle...


Correct, I wanted some light on the camera.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy;14292562*
> is your WB off looks like it is
> 
> i dont see what yall are talking about being weird


eh WB doesn't always have to be correct. UFRAW can fix that


----------



## laboitenoire

Well, I might be doing some concert photography tomorrow. I'm going to Mayhem Festival, and my buddy from Bridgewater State scored press passes for some interviews. He wasn't planning on using the photo passes, so if they're separate he'll give them to me so I can get behind the barricade for some up-close shots of the bands.

I think it could be awesome, but at the same time I don't want to break my camera, and it's also going to be 100 degrees tomorrow (heat index of 110), so in the event that I can't get the passes I'm worried about leaving the camera in my car for a few hours, even out of sight with the windows cracked open. I'm getting there after my buddy though, so I told him to text me the minute he figures out so I can decide what to do. Still debating...

Should be a sweet concert. The headliners are Trivium, Megadeth, Godsmack, and Disturbed. In Flames is also playing a side stage, which could probably be some of the coolest shots seeing as it would be outside of the shed at the venue. I'm actually vaguely sad that Trivium is a headliner this year instead of a supporting act, as the last time I saw them at Mayhem I was literally ten feet away from the stage and now I'll be a couple sections back... Also surprised that Godsmack and Disturbed have higher billing over Megadeth.


----------



## Unknownm

http://www.flickr.com/photos/matthew...7627128326761/


----------



## mz-n10

actually now that im looking at it again, i didnt realize it shift the whole image. that white blob is definitely flare, but that shift is just weird.

maybe its the mirror your shooting isnt quite flat or its a rendering problem in post?


----------



## laboitenoire

Hmmm... Would you guys leave your camera in a car on a 100 degree day? Even with the windows cracked?


----------



## dudemanppl

It's not the heat, it's the risk of being stolen.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Hmmm... Would you guys leave your camera in a car on a 100 degree day? Even with the windows cracked?



Yes? Just put it in your bag so it's not in direct sunlight. Mine sat in the trunk of my car on and off for the last week. It still works.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire;14304932*
> Hmmm... Would you guys leave your camera in a car on a 100 degree day? Even with the windows cracked?


there are some issues with old minolta lenses and heat. the oil that lubs the aperture blades will start to lose viscosity and run down the blades causing the shutter to stick. I duno if thats an issue with other companies lenses.

but i do keep my gear in the trunk of my car from time to time. nothing bad has happened yet (knock on wood....).


----------



## sub50hz

Just got my 7MDH -- much smaller than I had imagined, it fits _inside_ my Banjo Bros. medium messenger bag:


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire;14304932*
> Hmmm... Would you guys leave your camera in a car on a 100 degree day? Even with the windows cracked?


I think the only thing you might want to avoid is rapid extreme changes. And that's just off the top of my head. Going from an air conditioned house to humid outdoors will usually result in condensation which will go away in a short while, it's just the inner electronics that might be a problem. But they're probably coated with a protective film anyway.

I've left superteles in a hot trunk for hours on end at field events and never had a problem.


----------



## laboitenoire

Well, it's going to be a non-issue... Turns out the photo passes can't be separated from the rest of the press package. Now I'm ticked that my friend is +1'ing my friend who isn't gonna contribute anything to the interviews or to the material my friend can work with and really just wants to say he met people...


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire;14301577*
> Well, I might be doing some concert photography tomorrow. I'm going to Mayhem Festival, and my buddy from Bridgewater State scored press passes for some interviews. He wasn't planning on using the photo passes, so if they're separate he'll give them to me so I can get behind the barricade for some up-close shots of the bands.
> 
> I think it could be awesome, but at the same time I don't want to break my camera, and it's also going to be 100 degrees tomorrow (heat index of 110), so in the event that I can't get the passes I'm worried about leaving the camera in my car for a few hours, even out of sight with the windows cracked open. I'm getting there after my buddy though, so I told him to text me the minute he figures out so I can decide what to do. Still debating...
> 
> Should be a sweet concert. The headliners are Trivium, Megadeth, Godsmack, and Disturbed. In Flames is also playing a side stage, which could probably be some of the coolest shots seeing as it would be outside of the shed at the venue. I'm actually vaguely sad that Trivium is a headliner this year instead of a supporting act, as the last time I saw them at Mayhem I was literally ten feet away from the stage and now I'll be a couple sections back... Also surprised that Godsmack and Disturbed have higher billing over Megadeth.


That's awesome. I'm seeing Godsmack for the third time at the end of august.








I really should hit up some contacts and get a press/photo pass for some concerts.









EDIT: ninja'd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire;14307978*
> Well, it's going to be a non-issue... Turns out the photo passes can't be separated from the rest of the press package. Now I'm ticked that my friend is +1'ing my friend who isn't gonna contribute anything to the interviews or to the material my friend can work with and really just wants to say he met people...


So lame. I'd break the other friend's legs so I could go instead.


----------



## sub50hz

Offer to buy him some beer or something. Beer and food are great motivators.


----------



## laboitenoire

Well it's too late. I had to work until noon today and I'm leaving in a bit (don't need to see the early bands...), but their first interview was at 1 so they're already down.

And I can't buy him beer... Not 21 yet









EDIT: And I don't want to break his legs! He's my bodyguard at concerts, lol. I'm 5'10" and only 140 pounds, whereas he's 6'7" and 320 pounds... He saved me from getting sucked into a huge circle pit at Cool Tour last year, lol.


----------



## MistaBernie

I almost went to Mayhem Fest. I also went to Bridgewater State. Really small world.

Sucks about the passes though. Too hot for that crap today though, especially @ ComcastWoods.


----------



## Triangle

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*


Sweet. I suppose manual focus would be easy with a 15mm focal length.


Got stolen before I was born...








He lost more stuff too. His F3T went bye bye. Now he has his second F3T.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


I almost went to Mayhem Fest. I also went to Bridgewater State. Really small world.

Sucks about the passes though. Too hot for that crap today though, especially @ ComcastWoods.


Yeah, it was hotter than hell down at the Comcast Center. Plus for Mayhem they have two side stages out in one of the lots so on the pavement it was easily over 100. Left early though because it was too hot, I was tired, and a total douchebag behind us spat a mixture of water and chewing tobacco on my best friend. Our other friend almost started a fight over it, so we got security and then decided to leave. Too bad, as management was thinking of bumping us up to nicer seats for Godsmack and Disturbed.

Saw some crazy ass photographers there. One guy had a D3 with a 70-200 and the other had a D700 with either a 16-35 VR or a 24-70 on it (couldn't tell as I saw it in passing).


----------



## dudemanppl

http://www.flickr.com/photos/dudemanppl/
Scanned my film.


----------



## laboitenoire

What film were you shooting?


----------



## MistaBernie

Hey you -- YEAH YOU! Check out the deal I just found and posted over in the Deals forum (stolen from POTN, true, but it ticked my 'good enough to buy and repost' alarm) --

http://www.overclock.net/online-deals/1073588-newegg-adobe-lightroom-3-119-99-a.html

Lightroom for $119.99 after $30 coupon w/ free shipping from the Egg. Coupon code required, looks to be dated today. Good luck!


----------



## Nemesis158

Going to my first wedding shoot today







wish me luck


----------



## riko99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie;14317283*
> Hey you -- YEAH YOU! Check out the deal I just found and posted over in the Deals forum (stolen from POTN, true, but it ticked my 'good enough to buy and repost' alarm) --
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/online-deals/1073588-newegg-adobe-lightroom-3-119-99-a.html
> 
> Lightroom for $119.99 after $30 coupon w/ free shipping from the Egg. Coupon code required, looks to be dated today. Good luck!


Adobe sent out a coupon to Registered users for 100$ off.... To bad the thing i registered was LR3 lol.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nemesis158;14317319*
> Going to my first wedding shoot today
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> wish me luck


good luck dude post a few of your favs when you get a chance


----------



## laboitenoire

More shooting with the D7000 + 70-300 VR. This was earlier in the evening, so light was pretty good overall. Still had to boost ISO so I could stop down a bit.


DSC_1151 by laboitenoire, on Flickr


----------



## BlankThis

Anyone have any experience with the Canon EE-S manual focus screen or any of their matte focus screens? How accurate are they for MF work?


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Nemesis158*


Going to my first wedding shoot today







wish me luck










good luck indeed...


----------



## Nemesis158

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*


good luck dude post a few of your favs when you get a chance










I think they turned out ok, haven't gone through them yet.
I would post some but the party involved asked me not to publish them anywhere


----------



## sub50hz

Having a huge jam session at my house tonight -- 15 or 16 people coming to be obnoxiously loud. Will have to charga-my-BATREES.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *BlankThis*


Anyone have any experience with the Canon EE-S manual focus screen or any of their matte focus screens? How accurate are they for MF work?


You can see the difference between 1.2 and 1.4.


----------



## xILukasIx

Hey guys, thought I would drop my question from here in this thread, since it should be the right place









My main problem is that on the pictures I take with my EOS 450D I always have three white spots.
Cleaning the lenses did not help, but I noticed something.
The white spots only appear on the JPEG images, not on the RAW images.
Here's a comparison, first one is the JPEG, second one is the RAW converted to JPEG in Photoshop, only editing was highlighting the white spots:
http://img823.imageshack.us/img823/27/jpegyu.jpg
http://img225.imageshack.us/img225/6358/rawtojpeg.jpg
(God, that RAW looks so much better...)

At first I thought that the spots mean there is something wrong with my sensor, but now that I saw that the RAWs do not have the problem... What could it be? Something my camera messes up when converting the images to JPEG?


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


You can see the difference between 1.2 and 1.4.


Is the light loss as bad as Canon claim it to be? Coming from a tiny dark DX viewfinder so I don't think that it could be an issue really.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


It's not the heat, it's the risk of being stolen.










lol... that is indeed the reason why i dont leave it in the car. If i have my equip that day, all of it goes with me no matter where i go (school, someones house, casino, etc) unless it is specifically noted that i cannot bring a camera in or something, then i wouldnt even have the camera with me anyway Lol. the only time i remember recently that i left it in the car and should have took it with me was when i was forced to do valet cuz my friends were drunk.. so that was the closest area to the elevators to the hotel room... and i couldnt grab my bag cuz i had to hold up two girls... shouldnt leave things in the car even for valet huh.. they may steal it ???

but for current generation DSLRs and lenses as well as whatever accessories you may have (filters, batteries, etc)... considering the temperatures in vegas in the summer reaching 100+ or even 110+ mid day... which could translate to like 140+ in the car, would it damage the equipment in any way? i read earlier about oil in the aperture blades losing its viscosity and coming out... would that be an issue?


----------



## Marin

It can screw up the glue holding the elements.


----------



## iandroo888

so keeping it out of the heat is a good thing. okie dokie. *continues with original habit and taking it with me* lol thx marin


----------



## BlankThis

Yeah I don't thin anything (Besides cookie dough) would benefit from being exposed to those temperatures... If I ever leave my camera or laptop in the car I usually put it in the trunk.


----------



## iandroo888

but even in the trunk, temps will get hot when its so hot outside in direct sun.. if its in a garage, then thats a different story.. big temp difference but i wont leave it in a car thats under direct sun ever lol


----------



## BlankThis

I was referring to the trunk as a place to keep it out of sight. We don't get crazy temperatures like that here so I don't really need to worry so much.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *BlankThis*


Is the light loss as bad as Canon claim it to be? Coming from a tiny dark DX viewfinder so I don't think that it could be an issue really.


If you have any glass slower than 1.4, it'll be darker than my D40 and 30 1.4 with the stock screen. Still not a big problem though the VF is so much bigger. Can still see easily at f/8.

Oh and 30 1.4 wide open = 50 2.8 on the 5DII. Holy crap... M6 comes on Tuesday, M6 TTL comes next Tuesday. I'll cover the Leica red dot and M6 bits with Hello Kitty stickers on both because nobody wants to steal a crappy old looking Hello Kitty camera right?


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis;14325606*
> I was referring to the trunk as a place to keep it out of sight. We don't get crazy temperatures like that here so I don't really need to worry so much.


Except this past week when it was 47 with the humidity.. At least over where I am.


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;14327248*
> Except this past week when it was 47 with the humidity.. At least over where I am.


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis;14327806*


Did you guys not get the heat? On Thursday it was 37 without humidity.


----------



## BlankThis

We got the heat but it topped out at maybe 34 or so. Not sure what it was with the humidity though.


----------



## xILukasIx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xILukasIx;14321789*
> Hey guys, thought I would drop my question from here in this thread, since it should be the right place
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My main problem is that on the pictures I take with my EOS 450D I always have three white spots.
> Cleaning the lenses did not help, but I noticed something.
> The white spots only appear on the JPEG images, not on the RAW images.
> Here's a comparison, first one is the JPEG, second one is the RAW converted to JPEG in Photoshop, only editing was highlighting the white spots:
> http://img823.imageshack.us/img823/27/jpegyu.jpg
> http://img225.imageshack.us/img225/6358/rawtojpeg.jpg
> (God, that RAW looks so much better...)
> 
> At first I thought that the spots mean there is something wrong with my sensor, but now that I saw that the RAWs do not have the problem... What could it be? Something my camera messes up when converting the images to JPEG?


Anyone?


----------



## HOTDOGS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xILukasIx;14329831*
> Anyone?


Get your sensor cleaned.


----------



## xILukasIx

Care to explain why the spots do not appear on RAW images then?


----------



## Conspiracy

just shoot raw instead then lol. or get your sensor cleaned


----------



## mikeseth

*Updated Gear:*

Canon 60D + BG-E9 Grip
Canon EF-S 18-200mm IS f/3.5-5.6 Kit
Canon 75-300mm IS f/4-5.6 III
Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM
Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 USM
Canon Speedlight 580EX II
Canon Speedlight 430EX II
Rode Video Mic with Mount
2x Transcend 16gb Class 6 SDHC
Patriot LX 32gb Class 10 SDHC
LowePro Fastpack 350 Bag

Thanks! *And you put me under Film SLR by mistake. It's all digital gear; DSLR.*


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xILukasIx;14329888*
> Care to explain why the spots do not appear on RAW images then?


Send your example images in an email to Canon service.


----------



## mikeseth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xILukasIx;14329888*
> Care to explain why the spots do not appear on RAW images then?


Did you enable dust correction (dust delete data / image) using a jpeg on your sd card? If so disable it.. It's probably failing compensating for them.


----------



## Marin

Search: Uncomfortably Close: Richard Learoydâ€™s, Presences

Quote:



In British artist Richard Learoydâ€™s new portrait series Presences, his minutely detailed life-size prints bring the viewer uncomfortably close, invoking a dichotomy of intimacy and loneliness.

Courtesy Richard Learoydâ€"Fraenkel Gallery, San Francisco
Richard Learoyd's Camera
Using the most basic form of photography, the camera obscura, Learoyd marries old technology with new: strobe lighting, state of the art optics and Ilfochrome printing to create unexpected voyeurism. â€œI suppose people see it as alternative process,â€ says Learoyd, â€œbut I see it as an alternative use of modern materials.â€

Each of Learoydâ€™s unique portraits are born through a laborious commitment of both physical and mental stamina. Models arrive at his studio prepared for a full day, and often two, of sitting still under hot lights. â€œThe way I do things is like taking one photograph and the exposure is 8 hours, the whole day is the exposure,â€ says Learoyd. â€œThere is hardly anybody who works in studios in the context that I do because itâ€™s painful. Its difficult. Itâ€™s a brain ache.â€

Some models have been participating in these marathon sessions for more than five years. â€œI like to work with the same people,â€ says Learoyd, â€œbecause the process is awkward and difficult and it takes a while to teach people how to do it.â€ Often, they are friends of friends with the sort of timeless features and style that wonâ€™t date the images down the road. In the closed world of the studio, he plays the role of therapist for some, for others he is just an eccentric. But at the end of the day, Learoyd is careful to keep his distance. â€œI donâ€™t socialize with them,â€ says Learoyd. â€œI donâ€™t mingle.â€ He sees the relationship as productive without the muddied distractions of friendship.

The collaboration produces a one-of-a-kind, direct positive print, with no negative. Editing is done as each picture is made: â€œI decide if something is good or bad, then I live with it.â€ He destroys the discarded images by slashing them, spray painting them and rolling them up wet. â€œYou have to be brutal with yourself. Itâ€™s only you who can make those decisions and I make them instantaneously. â€ says Learoyd.

Learoydâ€™s portraits question the ability of the viewer to truly know another person. â€œThere is a closeness people crave from others that is always thwarted,â€ says Learoyd. â€œQuite often I think weâ€™d like to merge with others, but thereâ€™s always something in between. In this case, its the surface of a photograph.â€

]



This guys a boss. Saw his work at the fraenkel gallery and was amazed by it (had to pick up a signed copy of his book).


----------



## xILukasIx

Hmm, I can't find any option to disable it...


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Search: Uncomfortably Close: Richard Learoydâ€™s, Presences


Interesting. Very depressing feel.


----------



## Deano12345

First off, apologies if this is the wrong thread for it, but only having very tempermental 3G as my web access, I wanted to post somewhere that I can find easily









Anyway, I've been looking to replace my kit lens (18-55) for a while now for a nicer piece of glass, and on holidays I've found a 17-70 Sigma F 2.8-4 here for quite a bit less than at home (500 + vs 365) but I can't really wade through a lot of reviews like I normally would, so my question is, is the Sigma worth picking up over my kit lens ?

Thanks in advance









...anyway, I'm off to try and read some reviews before this connection goes, again


----------



## iandroo888

the 2.8 would be beneficial ONLY if its a constant 2.8. that sigma you mentioned still changes in aperture as you zoom which doesnt make it that much better than your kit lens.


----------



## laboitenoire

I can barely notice those... Probably just an artifact that's popped up in your camera's jpeg conversion. I'd honestly just shoot RAW and not worry.

^^ That was about the guy with the 450D... I didn't notice the replies after it, lol.

EDIT: Also, experimented with framing today as I had a cool vintage Tintin poster to frame. Decided that while I love the look of a thick mat, my cutting skills need to improve as cutting through 300 lb vellum board is a pain in the ass... However I will say that Strathmore's vellum board products are fantastic for matting, as they're quite cheap and are archival quality compared to actual rag mats. I got a 20" x 28" frame and a 20" x 30" piece of vellum for $25 at Michael's today due to a sale.


----------



## Marin

Mat cutting is easy.


----------



## JedixJarf

JedixJarf would like to join the club









Canon t3i

EFS 18-135mm lens


----------



## Marin

http://kuler.adobe.com/#

Been using this. Helps.


----------



## dudemanppl

I don't get what it does.


----------



## Marin

Picking a color palette for a photo.


----------



## dudemanppl

Don't get it still.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;14336757*
> Don't get it still.


I think it follows a similar principle to this.

Link


----------



## biatchi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Boyboyd;14337051*
> I think it follows a similar principle to this.
> 
> Link


Nice link


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Boyboyd;14337051*
> I think it follows a similar principle to this.
> 
> Link


Hmm that's quite interesting, but the examples are crap.

Unrelated: I'm so excited, my new point and shoot comes today.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;14338236*
> Hmm that's quite interesting, but the examples are crap.
> 
> Unrelated: I'm so excited, my new point and shoot comes today.


Some are better than others. But most are crap. I need to try it for myself.

The interesting part is that painters spend years studying colour before they even paint a subject.


----------



## dudemanppl

And now that I think about it I think Marin is talking about mats.


----------



## Marin

No, it's for picking colors before shooting. Color choice plays a huge role in photography yet it's insanely overlooked.


----------



## dudemanppl

Wat. NOW I'M EVEN MORE CONFUSED I'M GONNA PLAY BC2 NOW.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Wat. NOW I'M EVEN MORE CONFUSED I'M GONNA PLAY BC2 NOW.


_Get a job._


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


_Get a job._


like +1


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


like +1


another +1


----------



## dudemanppl

Too young to get a job. I make like 1k a month though from buying broken stuff and selling it.


----------



## sub50hz

Work permit.


----------



## dudemanppl

Nah, I'm good.


----------



## sub50hz

Working > sitting at home playing video games all day. Or go shoot. Summer = no vidja games.


----------



## laboitenoire

Back when I had my D5000, I was worried to crop portrait photos out of a landscape file, but with the resolution on the D7000 I cropped this image from 3:2 to 5:4 and it's still plenty resolution for printing. Allowed me to try and crop with rule of thirds.


Liz by laboitenoire, on Flickr


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;14342981*
> Too young to get a job. I make like 1k a month though from buying broken stuff and selling it.


You'd be surprised. I worked when i was 14 and it really helped.

Granted, i did only make £4/hour but it was still my money and I could do what i wanted with it.


----------



## laboitenoire

I made $15 a week under the table just singing at my church when I was a junior and senior.


----------



## Boyboyd

How well do Nikon 'G' lenses work on their AF film cameras? I was going to get some velvia 50 and ilford delta 100 but all of my lenses are either manual focus or G.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Too young to get a job. I make like 1k a month though from buying broken stuff and selling it.



Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


_Get a job._


seriously if i was making 1k a month flipping photogear i would just dump more time into that....


----------



## Shane1244

Ya honestly.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


seriously if i was making 1k a month flipping photogear i would just dump more time into that....


That's got to be incredibly boring, though.


----------



## dudemanppl

Do you know how exciting it is to watch an auction on ebay for a camera you bought for 100 go for 1200 at the last second? Same goes for a 1650 lens going for 3k.


----------



## MistaBernie

I have to agree, if I could do it regularly I'd flip photography gear for a living...


----------



## dudemanppl

Protip: if you can wait, ALWAYS WAIT for Lensrental's sales. They're amazing. I got a D3 in $3300 condition for 2500 a long while back.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


That's got to be incredibly boring, though.


depends from person to person. can't be worst then basically any job a 15 year old can get.

it will be similar to any reseller. buy low, markup then resell.


----------



## r34p3rex

Just placed an order for my studio lighting kit (well.. it's going to be used on-location since my apartment is small)!

AlienBee B800
Vagabond Mini Power Pack
10 foot light stand
24x36 Softbox


----------



## iandroo888

gee id flip equip if i knew how.. if u have a pretty good idea on how much u could get, pretty good deal.. and u get to play with many lenses xD


----------



## MistaBernie

One thing I'd been considering doing is an extension of what DMP does -- imagine if you had someone that you could turn to and say 'hey, I want to get my hands on a decent 17-40L, but I really only want to pay ~$575'.

DMP would say - ok, I can find you one. It'll be 6.5% of what you spend, but I'll get you a good working one for your price, so it would come to ~$600, but you have what you're looking for, without spending the time looking for it (higher % if you need it sooner, lower if you want fully functional but less than perfect copies, etc). Essentially, a personal buyer.

Obviously, the fixed % thing wouldn't work out all that well -- the % should go up the cheaper the item (up to 9%) so that the buyer gets theirs (DMP, not the customer) but goes down for higher ticket stuff (fund a 5Dii for someone for 1700, you only get ~6% but still ~$100 for putting together a sale). Hell, you could charge a monthly fee (cheaper for the longer you want the service) or else the % goes up ~5% (lower %s for monthly subscribers).

Plus, it would let me search around all day on sites for deals/used gear and actually make money..


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


depends from person to person. can't be worst then basically any job a 15 year old can get.

it will be similar to any reseller. buy low, markup then resell.



Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


gee id flip equip if i knew how.. if u have a pretty good idea on how much u could get, pretty good deal.. and u get to play with many lenses xD


"Get a job" was more of a suggestion of "get the hell out of the house, it's the end of July." Money is irrelevant, working a crappy low-paying job is awesome when you're 14. It concurrently teaches you how to dick off at work while still maintaining some level of responsibility. Sorta.


----------



## dudemanppl

LOL. Well I have colorguard practice Tuesday-Thursday 5-9...


----------



## TC_Fenua

Just pulled the trigger and ordered a 85L. Now I'm like a squirrel on cocaine : " It is here yet ??!! It is here yet ??!! It is here yet ??!! etc "


----------



## Shane1244

Whats the rest of your gear?


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;14356300*
> LOL. Well I have colorguard practice Tuesday-Thursday 5-9...


C...colorguard? Didn't see that one coming.


----------



## TC_Fenua

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;14356477*
> Whats the rest of your gear?


Here









The 1Dmk3 is dead since that picture was taken though, dropped it in the sea along with the 70-200 f/2.8 IS ... Yes, it still hurts ...


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TC_Fenua;14356583*
> Here
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The 1Dmk3 is dead since that picture was taken though, dropped it in the sea along with the 70-200 f/2.8 IS ... Yes, it still hurts ...












and wow that sucksssssssssss. I'd cry.


----------



## TC_Fenua

I fell off the boat while photographing some surfers at Tehaupoo for the Billabong Pro event, haha. I didn't see the wave coming from behind and it rocked the boat pretty hard


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;14356574*
> C...colorguard? Didn't see that one coming.


Yeah I know, not a manly thing. There are like 60 people and only two guys. So many nice asses. How do you know what colorguard is? And the M6 is the most amazing piece of engineering I have ever touched.


----------



## Boyboyd

Have you ever touched an M3?


----------



## dudemanppl

No.







Don't fancy its film loading and price. Or the fact it's chrome. Or the finder.


----------



## Boyboyd

If BSG has taught me anything it's that chrome things are always good.

The only M3s i can find are cheaper than M6s.


----------



## dudemanppl

Around 800ish when converted from pounds? I got my M6 for 1100, I say it's worth it for the convenience.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;14356830*
> How do you know what colorguard is? And the M6 is the most amazing piece of engineering I have ever touched.


I know what colorguard is because I, too, was in high school at one time.

And in a turn of coincidence, I was toying with an M6 at International Camera on my lunch today. Nice, but.. eh. Too many monies.


----------



## dudemanppl

Wow, I didn't know people went to high school, that's mind boggling. Anyway, M6 feels good eh?


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;14356982*
> Around 800ish when converted from pounds? I got my M6 for 1100, I say it's worth it for the convenience.


That's way better than the ones i've seen over here. I must not be looking very well.


----------



## Shane1244

Assuming you're using the same lens and film, there's nothing a film camera can make it better quality is there?


----------



## dudemanppl

Pretty much no.


----------



## Boyboyd

Not image quality, but some meter better than others.

Then again, metering can change between different cameras of the same model.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;14355807*
> "Get a job" was more of a suggestion of "get the hell out of the house, it's the end of July." Money is irrelevant, working a crappy low-paying job is awesome when you're 14. It concurrently teaches you how to dick off at work while still maintaining some level of responsibility. Sorta.


well it was more of a .. at night at home kind of thing i was thinkin of... during the day, i have work with a real estate company with office work and real estate photography for rentals/brochures.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;14356300*
> LOL. Well I have colorguard practice Tuesday-Thursday 5-9...


wow didnt see that one coming... which colorguard are you talking about? band colorguard or ROTC colorguard? i did the ROTC colorguard for a little bit before i went armed drill team in high school.. fun days xD

on the side note.. yay borrowlenses.com has a branch in vegas now... but they still have a $20 flat fee on top of the rental instead of the $32+ shipping.. was hoping it was just rental fee =3 LOL o well.. better than nothing.. xD may pick up the sigma 50mm f/1.4 for an engagement photoshoot for a friend


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iandroo888;14357527*
> wow didnt see that one coming... which colorguard are you talking about? band colorguard or ROTC colorguard? i did the ROTC colorguard for a little bit before i went armed drill team in high school.. fun days xD


Band colorguard. We also have winterguard. Here's last years show:

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RZNIu11I3Sg[/ame]

And I'm excited.


----------



## Shane1244

I lol'ed


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;14357110*
> Anyway, M6 feels good eh?


It's nice and all, but it didn't really make me _want_ it. Maybe if I shot a roll through one or something... I dunno. Not a "must have" I suppose, although I wouldn't turn it down if it was given to me. I did like the size of the Summicrons (50 and 35), though -- very stealthy.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;14356574*
> C...colorguard? Didn't see that one coming.


meh rich kids...who knows....


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


I have to agree, if I could do it regularly I'd flip photography gear for a living...


I was at one point with computer hardware and photo equipment.

It was easy money I would make like ~$300 a week in profit. Mostly from camera bodies and laptops.

Got a little carried away and thought I could make a decent profit from a Panasonic HVX200. I bought it for $1,800, but a few days later it was destroyed.

I was skating inside a parking garage (with the camera in my hand), slid out from too much speed. So the camera dropped from my hands, tumbled a bit and fell about 8-10 feet onto another floor.

Lesson learned to not play with capital.


----------



## dudemanppl

...That's pretty fricken' sad. Hey i play with my capital all the time, just don't skate with it.







Anyway I almost finished a roll of film and the M6 is so intoxicating. I don't think I'd want a digital M though, way too loud. Urge to sell 5DII and stuff and buy 35 Summilux APSH... Never used a better camera in my life, probably the MP-3 LHSA would be the only camera better.


----------



## iandroo888

lol after reading what dudemanppl just said, i almost thought he was older, then i re-realized he was only alive for 14 years... lol


----------



## dudemanppl

I will take that as a compliment. And I'm 15 now!


----------



## sub50hz

Age 15:

-Get job
-Get learner's permit
-Get loose
-Have fun

I seriously wish I was 15 again.


----------



## Marin

I don't.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Age 15:

-Get job
-Get learner's permit
-Get loose
-Have fun

I seriously wish I was 15 again.


yah

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


I don't.


but yah too... i rather not go thru HS and college again >_>


----------



## ljason8eg

Yeah screw high school lol. Those were a terrible four years. I seriously associate with like 2 people from high school and I only graduated 4 years ago.


----------



## iandroo888

it wasnt a bad 4 years... lots of good times but also bad times... lots of drama.. i only talk to like.. 1 person now from high school.. most of my friends are from college. i graduated hs 6 years ago D:


----------



## nuclearjock

My favorite time was my first four years as an undergraduate in college. 
Graduate school seemed more like academic hazing!

Edit:

GT, next time you're updating (with DMP it's probably daily) you can remove my 14-24. Sold.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Yeah I know, not a manly thing. There are like 60 people and only two guys. *So many nice asses.* How do you know what colorguard is? And the M6 is the most amazing piece of engineering I have ever touched.


Ok, are you trying to throw us off with that statement? I don't buy it. I admit to being in my high school marching band, and I've been searching my brain trying to recall if there were any male color guard members other than the two gay instructors. Couldn't come up with anything.







I kid.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*


Yeah screw high school lol. Those were a terrible four years. I seriously associate with like 2 people from high school and I only graduated 4 years ago.



Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


it wasnt a bad 4 years... lots of good times but also bad times... lots of drama.. i only talk to like.. 1 person now from high school.. most of my friends are from college. i graduated hs 6 years ago D:


15 years ago for me!









Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


My favorite time was my first four years as an undergraduate in college. 
Graduate school seemed more like academic hazing!

Edit:

GT, next time you're updating (with DMP it's probably daily) you can remove my 14-24. Sold.


I loved graduate school, wish I could be a perpetual grad student (without being totally derelict of course).


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


I loved graduate school, wish I could be a perpetual grad student (without being totally derelict of course).


I did my Phd in 2 parts. My first advisor believed that everyone should be in grad school for a minimum of 5 years. I however had a new wife that wanted me to get a job and start making some money. The second half of my thesis research with a new advisor was much better. He also hooked me up with a one year post doc at the Scripps Oceanographic Institute in La Jolla Ca. which was an absolute blast.


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


...That's pretty fricken' sad. Hey i play with my capital all the time, just don't skate with it.







Anyway I almost finished a roll of film and the M6 is so intoxicating. I don't think I'd want a digital M though, way too loud. Urge to sell 5DII and stuff and buy 35 Summilux APSH... Never used a better camera in my life, probably the MP-3 LHSA would be the only camera better.


I was pissed off at my self. I've fallen with my cameras before, but I never dropped one before that. I do tinker with them, but not go out and shoot with them.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;14363577*
> Ok, are you trying to throw us off with that statement? I don't buy it. I admit to being in my high school marching band, and I've been searching my brain trying to recall if there were any male color guard members other than the two gay instructors. Couldn't come up with anything.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I kid.


I have to admit I lol'd hard at this. So... Hows about that new C63 AMG Coupe Black Edition?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aksthem1;14363936*
> I was pissed off at my self. I've fallen with my cameras before, but I never dropped one before that. I do tinker with them, but not go out and shoot with them.


True story, I take apart EVERYTHING before I sell em. See if I can fix them.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;14366444*
> I have to admit I lol'd hard at this. So... Hows about that new C63 AMG Coupe Black Edition?


love it....but ill settle for a regular c63


----------



## dudemanppl

I prefer bimmers. Mercedes are soft.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nuclearjock;14363730*
> I did my Phd in 2 parts. My first advisor believed that everyone should be in grad school for a minimum of 5 years. I however had a new wife that wanted me to get a job and start making some money. The second half of my thesis research with a new advisor was much better. He also hooked me up with a one year post doc at the Scripps Oceanographic Institute in La Jolla Ca. which was an absolute blast.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;14363577*
> I loved graduate school, wish I could be a perpetual grad student (without being totally derelict of course).


The more I think about it, the more I want to go ahead and get my PhD. My original plan was get my MS, go work in industry for a few years, and then get my PhD and go into academics. But I think getting it right away would be sweet. Plus then I could have doctor as my title







Although Materials Science PhD programs are insanely competitive! Case is already ranked in the top 30, so I'm probably gonna have to go big or go home.

On a camera note, sooooooooooooo pissed at Snapfish right now. I overnighted some 8x10s and some 4x6s for myself and as gifts for friends, and Fedex dented the envelope (delivered when I wasn't home, so I didn't notice it until after I opened the package). The 4x6s were fine, but the dent showed up on like five of the eight 8x10s I ordered, because they weren't sandwiched by two pieces of cardboard...


----------



## theCanadian

Anyone want a novelty sized SDHC card? lol

http://www.consumerdepot.com/products.asp?id=SF-8C4-MH


----------



## Marin

Gosh, I love my 4x5.


----------



## iandroo888

u gonna do a self portrait with that sinar yet? XD


----------



## Marin

Too much effort.


----------



## Unknownm

best light meter for d7000?


----------



## dudemanppl

Rear LCD.


----------



## Unknownm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;14376172*
> Rear LCD.


waste battery, but this post is very true.


----------



## dudemanppl

If you got it, use it. I use the 5DII to meter all the time LOL. But only when I'm around the house screwing around.
OT: ORIGIN SO DUMB, ALONG WITH 2WIRE ROUTERS. So my 2wire goes out, then my BF3 Alpha download stops at like 75%, so I restart it to get the download up again and now it's at 19%


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire;14369372*
> The more I think about it, the more I want to go ahead and get my PhD. My original plan was get my MS, go work in industry for a few years, and then get my PhD and go into academics. But I think getting it right away would be sweet. Plus then I could have doctor as my title
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Although Materials Science PhD programs are insanely competitive! Case is already ranked in the top 30, so I'm probably gonna have to go big or go home.


CWR is an excellent school. A long time back I used to know a guy in the physics dept. by the name of Paul Gillette. He's probably long gone by now.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire;14369372*
> The more I think about it, the more I want to go ahead and get my PhD. My original plan was get my MS, go work in industry for a few years, and then get my PhD and go into academics. But I think getting it right away would be sweet. Plus then I could have doctor as my title
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Although Materials Science PhD programs are insanely competitive! Case is already ranked in the top 30, so I'm probably gonna have to go big or go home.
> 
> On a camera note, sooooooooooooo pissed at Snapfish right now. I overnighted some 8x10s and some 4x6s for myself and as gifts for friends, and Fedex dented the envelope (delivered when I wasn't home, so I didn't notice it until after I opened the package). The 4x6s were fine, but the dent showed up on like five of the eight 8x10s I ordered, because they weren't sandwiched by two pieces of cardboard...


I had aspirations (and sometimes still do ironically) for a PhD myself. Academia is a tough road, so make sure that's what you want to do. Being a new PhD is rough; you must go to whatever school hires you and endure triennial job contracts (different for different schools) and if you appease your masters, one day in your grey hairs you may get tenure, provided that you have prolifically published.

That's how it is with my field anyhow (classics), might be less dog-eat-dog for yours. If I had the wherewithal, I would get a PhD just for the sake of getting it.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;14377263*
> I had aspirations (and sometimes still do ironically) for a PhD myself. Academia is a tough road, so make sure that's what you want to do. Being a new PhD is rough; you must go to whatever school hires you and endure triennial job contracts (different for different schools) and if you appease your masters, one day in your grey hairs you may get tenure, provided that you have prolifically published.
> 
> That's how it is with my field anyhow (classics), might be less dog-eat-dog for yours. If I had the wherewithal, I would get a PhD just for the sake of getting it.


Very much so. Politics everywhere. I chose industry and never looked back.
If I get bored when I retire, I may teach at the junior college level but I really doubt it.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Unknownm*


best light meter for d7000?


http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...ash_Meter.html

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Rear LCD.


Because reviewing jpegs on an un-calibrated LCD screen is totally accurate.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Because reviewing jpegs on an un-c...ure looks right, it should be savable in RAW.


----------



## Marin

Still doing it wrong.


----------



## dudemanppl

Oh and that "Duh, of course is best" was sarcastic. What IS the right way?


----------



## laboitenoire

Ugh... So there's part of me that wants to start shooting film, and part of me that wants to try medium format... Any opinion on buying a used Bronica as a foray into both worlds? It's relatively inexpensive to get a body, finder, and lens, especially compared to the Hasselblad used market.


----------



## akrEAGLE

I'm honestly thinking about cracking open my EOS 7D (which I use for video), removing all of the image processing IC's, overclocking the crystal oscillators (or equivalent) connecting a CF card / local RAID array directly to the CMOS sensor, and finally using a small active air cooler to prevent overheating. This would eliminate all of the rest of these silly artificial limitations on video resolution, frame rate, audio gain control, compression, and chroma resolution.

It's probably 50/50 I end up bricking the camera but I think the end result may be worth it.

I did want to ask you guys though what interface the CMOS sensor uses to connect to the video processing IC, or if it's strictly proprietary.


----------



## ljason8eg

I found this entertaining. Their "professional" equipment is quite funny.

  
 You Tube


----------



## iandroo888

wasnt it like a xti or something with a 18-55 haaha yah this is still amusing lol


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:



Originally Posted by *akrEAGLE*


I'm honestly thinking about cracking open my EOS 7D (which I use for video), removing all of the image processing IC's, overclocking the crystal oscillators (or equivalent) connecting a CF card / local RAID array directly to the CMOS sensor, and finally using a small active air cooler to prevent overheating. This would eliminate all of the rest of these silly artificial limitations on video resolution, frame rate, audio gain control, compression, and chroma resolution.

It's probably 50/50 I end up bricking the camera but I think the end result may be worth it.

I did want to ask you guys though what interface the CMOS sensor uses to connect to the video processing IC, or if it's strictly proprietary.


It's VERY proprietary. It's hard enough for people to develop custom firmware for a camera... You'd probably need an EE degree to do what you're thinking...


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *akrEAGLE*


I'm honestly thinking about cracking open my EOS 7D (which I use for video), removing all of the image processing IC's, overclocking the crystal oscillators (or equivalent) connecting a CF card / local RAID array directly to the CMOS sensor, and finally using a small active air cooler to prevent overheating. This would eliminate all of the rest of these silly artificial limitations on video resolution, frame rate, audio gain control, compression, and chroma resolution.

It's probably 50/50 I end up bricking the camera but I think the end result may be worth it.

I did want to ask you guys though what interface the CMOS sensor uses to connect to the video processing IC, or if it's strictly proprietary.


Lay off the ganja. 50/50 is more like 120%. Connecting a CF card to the sensor wat. You do know how electronics work right?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *akrEAGLE*


I'm honestly thinking about cracking open my EOS 7D (which I use for video), removing all of the image processing IC's, overclocking the crystal oscillators (or equivalent) connecting a CF card / local RAID array directly to the CMOS sensor, and finally using a small active air cooler to prevent overheating. This would eliminate all of the rest of these silly artificial limitations on video resolution, frame rate, audio gain control, compression, and chroma resolution.

*It's probably 50/50 I end up bricking the camera but I think the end result may be worth it. *

I did want to ask you guys though what interface the CMOS sensor uses to connect to the video processing IC, or if it's strictly proprietary.


I'd say it's greater than that, not to denigrate your abilities or anything. This might be worth trying on a less expensive DSLR first, maybe a T1i or something.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*


I found this entertaining. Their "professional" equipment is quite funny.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RjBSIvg3pjc


LOL, this has been posted a lot here, but it's still funny.


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*


I found this entertaining. Their "professional" equipment is quite funny.


lol, that was awesome.

Using the basic kit lenses for shooting a wedding... inside... without flash...


----------



## akrEAGLE

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


It's VERY proprietary. It's hard enough for people to develop custom firmware for a camera... You'd probably need an EE degree to do what you're thinking...


I'm pretty sure that the data is not "controlled" by Canon's firmware until it hit their video processing IC, which means that no custom firmware would need to be developed. Maybe I'm a little off base, but I'm just trying to intercept and collect the RAW data before it is manipulated by any of Canon's circuits which hackers have had such a hard time getting through via software.

I guess I'm decent at EE, but I do have a friend with an EE degree who can help out if necessary.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Lay off the ganja. 50/50 is more like 120%. Connecting a CF card to the sensor wat. You do know how electronics work right?


You know what I mean. The goal is to intercept and record the raw RGB data from the I/O path. I'm just trying to find out if it's encrypted, etc. If I didn't know what I was talking about I wouldn't even think about risking a $1200 camera attempting to do something crazy like this in the first place.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


I'd say it's greater than that, not to denigrate your abilities or anything. This might be worth trying on a less expensive DSLR first, maybe a T1i or something.


Maybe I should do that... I may save my 7D's life, although I honestly doubt I am actually going to break anything seeing that I am using more passive measures. But hey, what do I know? Maybe it has a switch that triggers when you open the DSLR to auto self-destruct... jk


----------



## laboitenoire

I'm saying that people have had enough of a hassle as it is developing the custom firmware solutions that do exist for Canon cameras... I don't think this is easily doable. Theoretically, it is entirely possible. You would just need to know exactly the algorithms needed to decode the data stream off of the sensor, get a complete circuit diagram so you could trace pins for soldering and the like, etc, etc... By the time you were done you'd have a >90% chance of having a bricked camera. Why not just get a 60D or 5DII and install Magic Lantern?


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg;14384281*
> I found this entertaining. Their "professional" equipment is quite funny.
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RjBSIvg3pjc


wow thats hilarious. trying to pull the wool over peoples eyes and the judge ends up knowing a lot about photography. why even bother at that point? they lost before they could even defend themselves lol


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy;14386697*
> wow thats hilarious. trying to pull the wool over peoples eyes and the judge ends up knowing a lot about photography. why even bother at that point? they lost before they could even defend themselves lol


Yeah I was actually surprised how much the judge knew lol. Made it even more awesome.

Now I was out playing fetch with my dog today and tried to take a few shots. All I can say is thank god most of my motorsport shooting is done at distances that the focus stays at infinity or really close to it. The T2i sucks, IMO, at tracking a moving object. The center AF point is ok-ish but any of the outer ones are horrific. I did get one shot I was happy with though as she was running back toward me. 
Playing Fetch by JLofing, on Flickr


----------



## Draggin

10. The fake log just makes me smile.


----------



## Conspiracy

yea do you not have a real stick in the backyard lol nice capture though


----------



## ljason8eg

Surprisingly she doesn't eat the fake stick like she does the real ones lol. I give her anything edible and its destroyed.

It also squeaks and she loves toys that squeak.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg;14386868*
> Surprisingly she doesn't eat the fake stick like she does the real ones lol. I give her anything edible and its destroyed.


I can't give my pup anything except deer antlers, because he's a maniac that chews through _everything_. Tennis balls are gone in less than 30 seconds. He's a real jerkoff ball of energy, too -- as I type this, he's chasing a fly around the house.


----------



## ljason8eg

That's a real nice looking dog you have there. Mine was really bad with chewing when she was a puppy. She'd chew up anything and everything. Now she's pretty lazy for most of the day but still can get wound up on occasion.


----------



## dudemanppl

M6 meter sucks, I'll stick to guessing exposure from now on (which I'm pretty good at).
http://www.flickr.com/photos/dudemanppl/
10 out of 36, not bad (36 not 38 because I screwed up the loading. :3). I need to pick up some faster film.


----------



## MistaBernie

I can get a Nikon D60 for $250 (body kit w/ all accessories except lens). Worth it to try out Nikon on the cheap and resell if I dont like?


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


I need to pick up some faster film.


What are those last images shot with? They're not real contrasty, although the grain is alright.


----------



## Niko-Time

FILM.

hullo


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


I can get a Nikon D60 for $250 (body kit w/ all accessories except lens). Worth it to try out Nikon on the cheap and resell if I dont like?


Well, you'd have to get a lens... which is going to be almost doubling your cost unless you get one of the cheaper lenses.

You can pick up a 50mm f/1.8 for about $120 new. 
The kit lens that comes with a lot of nikon cameras (18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G) should be around 100-150 used.

Both lenses I mentioned are quite good for how cheap they are.


----------



## MistaBernie

Yeah, I think I'm gonna pass, I was messing around with a D5000 last night and I cant wrap my head around the ergonomics. What I MAY do is pick up a few ND 77mm filters for time lapse with longer shutter speeds..


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


What I MAY do is pick up a few ND 77mm filters for time lapse with longer shutter speeds..


Buy a holder and square glass.


----------



## serothis

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


I can get a Nikon D60 for $250 (body kit w/ all accessories except lens). Worth it to try out Nikon on the cheap and resell if I dont like?


I have d40x (which I got years ago for much more that $250







) and I absolutely love it. Although It's a horrific addiction because I keep contemplating getting lenses that are more expensive than the camera itself


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Sparhawk*


Well, you'd have to get a lens... which is going to be almost doubling your cost unless you get one of the cheaper lenses.

You can pick up a 50mm f/1.8 for about $120 new. 
The kit lens that comes with a lot of nikon cameras (18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G) should be around 100-150 used.

Both lenses I mentioned are quite good for how cheap they are.


50mm f/1.8D will not AF on that body. could consider the new AF-S f/1.8G version around 200 =] or a 35mm f/1.8G


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Buy a holder and square glass.


like a lee foundation kit?


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


like a lee foundation kit?


Just get a Cokin P kit for uber dirt cheap, and then if you like the images and want to spring for the Lee, good -- if not, you're not out 200 bucks.


----------



## MistaBernie

Good call... perhaps that'll be my next venture.

Oh, I think I've decided to sell the 5 string American Jazz and sink the money into a Marcus Miller 4..


----------



## sub50hz

Bah, I almost contemplated offering you my NS2 for it last week, but forgot. I think I might sell my GK/Aguilar setup though, just don't use it too much anymore.


----------



## MistaBernie

Did you get rid of it? What color was it? Strangely enough, there's a _chance_ I might find myself in Chicago on Columbus Day weekend..


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


Did you get rid of it? What color was it? Strangely enough, there's a _chance_ I might find myself in Chicago on Columbus Day weekend..


It _was_ black -- I started removing the lacquer last weekend, gonna see how the grain looks and possibly just oil finish it.

If you're up here on October, I'll likely be around -- I work downtown 5-7 days a week.


----------



## laboitenoire

So the more I think about it, the more I want a Bronica ETRSi or SQ-A... Must fight the urge to go medium format!!


----------



## sub50hz

645AF from Keh, bargain condition. Do it.


----------



## dudemanppl

There's one on FM which comes with a bunch of stuff. EDIT: NVM It's gone... Here's another though: http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/top...rd=645#9797476 Offer 800. And show him this one: http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/top...rd=645#9795941 And sub, the only thing I shoot is FP4+, but I'm switching to Portra 400 and HP5+.

OT: My friend got robbed through his UNLOCKED front door... GG.


----------



## r34p3rex

WOO my Vagabond Mini arrived today







Can't wait to bring my strobe to the great outdoors for some shots!


----------



## BlankThis

The 16-35 f/4 VR is orgasmic on a crop body... I'm in love.


----------



## dudemanppl

17-35 on FF is beast combo.


----------



## Enthusiast

Canon 550D (Main)
EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS USM
EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS USM
Canon 1000D (Backup)
EF-S 18-55 f/3.5-5.6
EF-S 55-250 f/4.0-5.6 IS


----------



## GoneTomorrow

The next photo contest is up everyone:

http://www.overclock.net/photography/1079150-ocn-photo-contest-29-july-12-a.html


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;14395349*
> 645AF from Keh, bargain condition. Do it.


Too pricey, either Mamiya or Pentax... The Bronica cameras are cheap. You can get a whole setup for about $300.


----------



## Marin

There's a reason Bronica is so cheap.


----------



## laboitenoire

I've read nothing but good things... Sure, it's not a Hassleblad, but they are still very usable cameras.


----------



## dudemanppl

Oh god what have I done.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire;14398944*
> I've read nothing but good things... Sure, it's not a Hassleblad, but they are still very usable cameras.


Then you aren't reading enough.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


And sub, the only thing I shoot is FP4+, but I'm switching to Portra 400 and HP5+.


That's what I've been shooting lately, but I got a box of Portra NC that expires in 2 months for half price. Try a roll of Delta 400, that's become my go-to film since it's plentiful here again and pushes cleaner at 800 than HP5.


----------



## Marin

Pan 50 and Rodinal makes me happy.


----------



## sub50hz

I think he said he was looking for faster film earlier, though.


----------



## dudemanppl

Figured if I have ND filters, doesn't really matter and I can still shoot at f/1.1 and f/1.2 everywhere. Take the filters off and be boss. And I'd probably shoot Delta if that 2 for 1 deal for HP5 wasn't there. SO CHEAP.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Then you aren't reading enough.










So what bad things have you read about them?


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *BlankThis*


The 16-35 f/4 VR is orgasmic on a crop body... I'm in love.


Never tried one on a crop body, but on FF BD was bad and skies got x-tra wierd with a CPL. I actually liked the 24-120 better on FF for landscapes.


----------



## sub50hz

Picked up a 17-40 this morning -- might sell my 70-200, I find that when I need telephoto the 135L and a 1.4TC do the job quite well. And much less conspicuous if not using the TC at all.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


Never tried one on a crop body, but on FF BD was bad and skies got x-tra wierd with a CPL. I actually liked the 24-120 better on FF for landscapes.


I'm not sure exactly how xtra weird they looked, but i think it's because the sky naturally is different colours as you move across it. The CPL filter just accentuates that difference on an UWA lens because you have a super-wide field of view.

Then again, i could just be talking baloney...


----------



## max302

Stuck shutter... kind of expected from what I read about the entire Pen EE series. I'll try myself at the overhaul, apparently it's MUCH simpler than, say, my 35SPn.


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


Never tried one on a crop body, but on FF BD was bad and skies got x-tra wierd with a CPL. I actually liked the 24-120 better on FF for landscapes.


I'm using it for a 50th anniversary I'm shooting tonight. Played with it last night and my god it's sharp.


----------



## MistaBernie

I love stumbling onto cool events - I hate finding out after the fact that I have something on my sensor...


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


I love stumbling onto cool events - I hate finding out after the fact that I have something on my sensor...










Garbage on the sensor is the worst...


----------



## laboitenoire

So today I randomly decided to call out Ken Rockwell on his insistence that ISO is pronounced as I-S-O and not as one word, saying that it's an acronym. If you actually go on www.iso.org, they tell you that the correct acronym in English is IOS (International Organization for Standardization) and that ISO is the short one-word name to use in all countries due to different acronyms around the world. They chose it because it means "equal."

We'll have to see if he replies to my email, lol.


----------



## runeazn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *max302;14404161*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Stuck shutter... kind of expected from what I read about the entire Pen EE series. I'll try myself at the overhaul, apparently it's MUCH simpler than, say, my 35SPn.


thats a piece of vintage camera goodyness


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire;14418037*
> So today I randomly decided to call out Ken Rockwell on his insistence that ISO is pronounced as I-S-O and not as one word, saying that it's an acronym. If you actually go on www.iso.org, they tell you that the correct acronym in English is IOS (International Organization for Standardization) and that ISO is the short one-word name to use in all countries due to different acronyms around the world. They chose it because it means "equal."
> 
> We'll have to see if he replies to my email, lol.


I think it's rather pedantic to split hairs about it, although what you say is true. However, along with RAW (which also isn't an acronym), I have to wonder why, if ISO and RAW are meant to be pronounced as words, then _why the hell are they always capitalized like acronyms?_ It is for that reason that I can't blame anyone for calling it "I-S-O." (which I admit to doing myself







)


----------



## foothead

I just found this thing for 2.95 at a local thrift store.










It came with a stereo slide viewer. Is it actually worth using? Slide film costs me like $15/roll when I factor in developing costs.

EDIT: I may use B&W film, then duplicate it onto more B&W film to test it.


----------



## Marin

Everyone I know says I-S-O. That's including professionals.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;14419045*
> Everyone I know says I-S-O. That's including professionals.


Same here. I've never heard anyone use it as an acronym.


----------



## laboitenoire

Well they're not engineers, who actually use ISO standards for far more than photographic film... (one reason I'm ashamed that KR says I-S-O, as he claims to be an EE).


----------



## Marin

I don't get what that guy does for a living. Maybe he has a money tree or something.


----------



## Conspiracy

everyone i know says ASA. im the only one among my friends that says I-S-O.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire;14419071*
> Well they're not engineers, who actually use ISO standards for far more than photographic film... (one reason I'm ashamed that KR says I-S-O, as he claims to be an EE).


What Ken Rockwell says and does should be left well alone. While some of his claims might be rather outlandish, he's no better or worse than many others. I don't see him pushing outward into other internet spaces flaunting his opinions, so the guy can't be a _total_ idiot.


----------



## Marin

Maybe he doesn't know how to use the internet properly. I mean look at his site.


----------



## sub50hz

Ok, lol, you got me there.


----------



## dudemanppl

I think Ken also designed craigslist, looks the same.


----------



## xxpinoyxx

My babies (excuse the cell phone pic, can't find my P&S):










Canon 7D w/ BG-E7
24-105L
10-22 USM
Sigma 30 f/1.4
Speedlite 430 EX2


----------



## laboitenoire

Hiked Mount Jefferson the other day (third tallest of the Presidential Range at 5716 feet), and the best views of the day happened when I was almost off the mountain, lol.


Down from the Sky (Mount Jefferson, NH) by laboitenoire, on Flickr


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Hiked Mount Jefferson the other day (third tallest of the Presidential Range at 5716 feet), and the best views of the day happened when I was almost off the mountain, lol.


Down from the Sky (Mount Jefferson, NH) by laboitenoire, on Flickr


Wow, awesome. Good thing you weren't near the peak when that cloud got there. I was in one on Pike's Peak a few years ago, and it was scary as hell. There were actually sparks jumping off the backpack frames.

Can someone help me out with photoshop? I'm kind of a noob. When I create a path, is there a way to sort of taper it out? i'm retouching a photo of a tiger I took a couple years ago, and some the whiskers were obstructed by a fence. EDIT: Figured it out.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


I don't get what that guy does for a living. Maybe he has a money tree or something.


Rich inlaws.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:



Originally Posted by *foothead*


Wow, awesome. Good thing you weren't near the peak when that cloud got there. I was in one on Pike's Peak a few years ago, and it was scary as hell. There were actually sparks jumping off the backpack frames.


These were just clouds of moisture, as we had a ton of rain the night before. And I was in the cloud the whole hike up... When we parked at the trailhead (3009 feet) it was almost as cloudy as that.

EDIT: And KR replied and flatly ignored my point about how ISO chose its short name. Figures...


----------



## dudemanppl

Why the hell is he up so early... Anyway, I figured out how to scan better.

CAUTION, HUGE FILES!
First time around: 
http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6022/...e8e8fc71_o.jpg

Second time:
http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6130/...3f6f6309_o.jpg

Much more sharpness. I took like 10 minutes removing dust though. :3


----------



## laboitenoire

Why is who up so early? I'm up for work, and he emailed me while it was 9:30 in California.


----------



## BlankThis

Ken Rockwell is a moron. I hope he Google's his name and finds this post.


----------



## sweffymo

"Googles" is a verb and needs no apostrophe.









On topic, look what I found in my backyard the other day!


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


EDIT: And KR replied and flatly ignored my point about how ISO chose its short name. Figures...


Did you leave a donation?


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


Did you leave a donation?


Gotta support the family.

dudemappl is that HP5? What scanner are you using? Who developed your negatives.


----------



## sub50hz

Why does everyone care so much about Ken Rockwell?


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Why does everyone care so much about Ken Rockwell?


I feel pretty indifferent about him.

His gallery is ok though. It's obvious his favourite colour is orange as well.


----------



## BlankThis

It's all over-saturated for my taste.

I just hate how he has become this final word in the world of photography but really he can be quite misleading. That and the fact that he constantly contradicts himself.


----------



## xILukasIx

I uploaded some of my favorite shots, I'll post the links here instead of embedded pictures.

The first three are all of a bird in our garden last summer 
http://img13.imageshack.us/img13/9369/img2138n.jpg
http://img651.imageshack.us/img651/9193/img2142z.jpg
http://img546.imageshack.us/img546/7672/img2147au.jpg

The next three are from a show room in the Globe at CERN:
http://img825.imageshack.us/img825/9315/img2987e.jpg
http://img717.imageshack.us/img717/1583/img2983jv.jpg
http://img827.imageshack.us/img827/3056/img2984c.jpg
All of these were shot WITHOUT a tripod, I was very happy to see they came out pretty good, considering the low light in there.

The last of the three shots from CERN kind of reminded me of the cookie monster, so I thought I'd throw this picture in aswell








http://img171.imageshack.us/img171/2172/img2497i.jpg

And last but not least, a picture of an awesome looking candle I got from my girlfriend for christmas:
http://img97.imageshack.us/img97/3729/img2745o.jpg


----------



## laboitenoire

I like him for technical info on things, and his comparison shoots are decent (even if I think they look horrendously down-scaled or compressed...). For anything even vaguely subjective (lens X is better than lens Y because of Z, jpeg is soooo much better than RAW, etc.) I ignore him.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis;14423872*
> dudemappl is that HP5? What scanner are you using? Who developed your negatives.


FP4+, Epson V500 with betterscanning.com glass (like 150 total!







), developed by myself.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis;14426003*
> It's all over-saturated for my taste.
> 
> I just hate how he has become this final word in the world of photography but really he can be quite misleading. That and the fact that he constantly contradicts himself.


He also states that real professionals use film, yet he is apparently the end word of digital photography somehow. I think he just has really good SEO.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;14424024*
> Why does everyone care so much about Ken Rockwell?


Who dat?


----------



## foothead

Has anyone here tried contact printing B&W negs onto B&W film to get a slide? If so, how's it come out?


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire;14427543*
> I like him for technical info on things, and his comparison shoots are decent (even if I think they look horrendously down-scaled or compressed...). For anything even vaguely subjective (lens X is better than lens Y because of Z, jpeg is soooo much better than RAW, etc.) I ignore him.


The worst is when he tells DX users not to touch full frame glass but instead buy the crappier DX option. HOLY HELL IT'S NOT WASTED BECAUSE LENS QUALITY IS EVERYTHING


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis;14429823*
> The worst is when he tells DX users not to touch full frame glass but instead buy the crappier DX option. HOLY HELL IT'S NOT WASTED BECAUSE LENS QUALITY IS EVERYTHING


There are some DX/EF-S lenses that are more appropriate than their full-frame counterparts, though.


----------



## BlankThis

For sure like the 35 f/1.8 vs 35 f/2

Is it worth shooting some 10 year old slide film that's been in deep freeze all this time and get it developed/scanned?


----------



## dudemanppl

I say only shoot film if you dev and scan by yourself.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


I say only shoot film if you dev and scan by yourself.


And that's why nobody listens to you.









Seriously, and I feel old saying this, but you'll see when you get older. Not everyone is afforded the immense span of "what do I do now?" time that you've got at 14.


----------



## dudemanppl

LOL, I'm feeling like Ren Kockwell now. It just gets so expensive when you send it off to a lab.


----------



## sub50hz

Not at $3.44 a roll, it doesn't.


----------



## dudemanppl

Too expensive!


----------



## sub50hz

Pfft. Again, inability to comprehend how a small sum of money greatly outweighs having to explain to a significant other why you all of a sudden have 1 less usable bathroom in the house.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Pfft. Again, inability to comprehend how a small sum of money greatly outweighs having to explain to a significant other why you all of a sudden have 1 less usable bathroom in the house.


Yeah, bathrooms are worth their volume in gold... Why I'm kinda tempted to shoot color slide film and black and white Polaroid if I ever start shooting medium format.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Hm, a bit random, but is there any chance someone here has an Arca Swiss plate they can spare? I'm hoping for one for very cheap. $50 new is too high a price for me









Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Pfft. Again, inability to comprehend how a small sum of money greatly outweighs having to explain to a significant other why you all of a sudden have 1 less usable bathroom in the house.


Sharing a shower. Need I say more?


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Sharing a shower. Need I say more?


Yeah, would have been great like 5 years ago when I was still at the "I can handle this before work" stage. Now I would probably just go back to bed or have a _really_ long day in the office.


----------



## Shane1244

I lol'ed

&I thought you were like 20.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*


I thought you were like 20.


Hell, I'm only 27, but I sure wish I was 20 again. 18, maybe -- what a curiously excellent time to be alive.


----------



## dudemanppl

Heh, I don't have an enlarger so whatever. I use a tank to develop, I do it in the kitchen lol.


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


LOL, I'm feeling like Ren Kockwell now. It just gets so expensive when you send it off to a lab.


I'm only set up to do B&W. I can develop and enlarge here but a decent scanner is a couple hundred bucks and you can spend maybe $7 and save the time, cost of chemicals, and get decent scans.


----------



## dudemanppl

C41 is basically the same thing but you have to keep the developer hot for about 4 minutes. Epson V500 is decent and cheap refurbed.


----------



## Marin

Pagani Huayra shoot going down at my school. Going to be helping out.


----------



## iandroo888

jealous !! take some good photos of the pagani !


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Pagani Huayra shoot going down at my school. Going to be helping out.


Do you know how much I hate you? By that I mean can I get a ride? <3<3<3

off topic edit: Randomly going on people's tumblrs (hey I don't personally have one) and I saw a "TILT MONITOR BACK" picture and then I realized I could see the text and I lol'd. When I did tilt it back I was like, "HAHA INFERIOR LCD PANELS"! <3 IPS forever.


----------



## BlankThis

Going on my tumblr now are we?


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis;14436549*
> Going on my tumblr now are we?


We had to settle. Finding your MySpace was too hard


----------



## BlankThis

Oh that hellish place.

Anyone interested in a mint 13 month old D90 LNIB with all accessories and extended warranty with a 50 f/1.8? Can anyone suggest an asking price?


----------



## MistaBernie

B&H sells the body used for ~$630 in 8/10 condition, $650 in refurbished. Not sure of the demand, I'd suggest lens & body starting @ $750, accept down to $700?


----------



## Shane1244

I'd say $650.


----------



## dudemanppl

Hey, I'll take it for about 50 bucks right here right now. I know it's worth more but I need to pay overhead.


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


B&H sells the body used for ~$630 in 8/10 condition, $650 in refurbished. Not sure of the demand, I'd suggest lens & body starting @ $750, accept down to $700?


This is what I was thinking...

Gentlemen... I'm weeks away from a 5D. I'm planning on spending $1k on the body and buying the 35mm and 85mm Samyangs.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Hey Blank, I just noticed: How come your name is still blue? Don't like the darker grey font?


----------



## BlankThis

I haven't changed it...? I never really noticed haha.


----------



## tincanman

Pentax K-x w/ DAL18-55mm f3.5-5.6 and DAL55-300mm f4.0-5.8 
plus old pentax 50mm f1.7

P&S: canon A75(old, but still gets great photo quality)


----------



## Unknownm

I feel stupid, I bought a Cheap m42 to nikon F adapter for my D7000. (it was 10 dollars at the time I bought it). Using F/8 on any m42 lens, it's sharp but lower than f/8 it's blurry and out of focus. Is there a actual adapter that can give me great sharpness at lower F/stop?

example using m42 adapter with 28mm:

f2.8









f8









While I was taking pictures on the ferry (Victoria). My 200mm @ F/8 & max distance, pictures turns out blurry past 200mm.


----------



## Marin

So I guess along with the Heayra they're also bringing in a Zonda. Think I'll shoot them with my 5DMKII + 35L.


----------



## dudemanppl

MARIN WHEN IS THIS? The sound of this excites me in funny places. I want to se a Huraruayaura.
And unknownm, your lens sucks a whole lot more than you think it does.
And Blank, how much does it cost for the stuff to cross the border, I can help you get a gripped 5D frome the States which should run about 900. Also get an EE-S focusing screen. If you'd like I'll take out the focus point screen since you're using MF glass anyway.


----------



## Unknownm

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


MARIN WHEN IS THIS? The sound of this excites me in funny places. I want to se a Huraruayaura.
And unknownm, your lens sucks a whole lot more than you think it does.


it's sharp on my film camera. What would be route, canon for cheaper lens?


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


MARIN WHEN IS THIS? The sound of this excites me in funny places. I want to se a Huraruayaura.


Students only and they're only allowing 10 people to assist.


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


MARIN WHEN IS THIS? The sound of this excites me in funny places. I want to se a Huraruayaura.
And unknownm, your lens sucks a whole lot more than you think it does.
And Blank, how much does it cost for the stuff to cross the border, I can help you get a gripped 5D frome the States which should run about 900. Also get an EE-S focusing screen. If you'd like I'll take out the focus point screen since you're using MF glass anyway.


I'm not sure what the damage would be on duty fees... That's what worries me. I found one with 30k on the shutter but had the PCB fixed, gripped, for 1k on POTN. I kind of want to keep the focus points but definitely going EE-S

Want a laugh? Scroll down to the last picture in this Samyang 35mm f/1.4 review and try to not gag at the model.

http://frontallobbings.blogspot.com/...14-as-umc.html


----------



## Marin

http://www.flickr.com/photos/kinemat...in/photostream

What...


----------



## dudemanppl

What did I do to deserve that?


----------



## Marin




----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Students only and they're only allowing 10 people to assist.


Wait is it indoors?







I can use my friends 400 2.8 if not.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Unknownm*


it's sharp on my film camera. What would be route, canon for cheaper lens?


Like FD? Wut. Use a Nikkor 28 2.8 AI-S, one of the best 28s in the world.


----------



## BlankThis

lol.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Wait is it indoors?







I can use my friends 400 2.8 if not.


Yeah, it's indoors. It's a legit shoot on stage.


----------



## dudemanppl

Set up your MBP or whatever and show a live stream. Car softboxes are huge.

Whaaa, FP4+ pushed two stops and it still has basically the same grain.


----------



## sub50hz

So, I assume you've just started shooting B+W?


----------



## dudemanppl

Well, I've never tried pushing before, just been shooting at the rated ISO.


----------



## Conspiracy

ive never pushed still film photos before but i have had to push 16mm film from a movie i shot and it worked nicely considering i exposed wrong and had to push 2 stops. kodak developed it for me i think


----------



## BlankThis

I've had mixed results pushing film. Maybe it's just my developing.


----------



## Conspiracy

i wish i learned how to develop. i always wondered how the whole process worked. i always threw my money at the developing company because i never got high enough classes where we developed our own film reels


----------



## xILukasIx

Quote:



Originally Posted by *xILukasIx*


I uploaded some of my favorite shots, I'll post the links here instead of embedded pictures.

The first three are all of a bird in our garden last summer 
http://img13.imageshack.us/img13/9369/img2138n.jpg
http://img651.imageshack.us/img651/9193/img2142z.jpg
http://img546.imageshack.us/img546/7672/img2147au.jpg

The next three are from a show room in the Globe at CERN:
http://img825.imageshack.us/img825/9315/img2987e.jpg
http://img717.imageshack.us/img717/1583/img2983jv.jpg
http://img827.imageshack.us/img827/3056/img2984c.jpg
All of these were shot WITHOUT a tripod, I was very happy to see they came out pretty good, considering the low light in there.

The last of the three shots from CERN kind of reminded me of the cookie monster, so I thought I'd throw this picture in aswell








http://img171.imageshack.us/img171/2172/img2497i.jpg

And last but not least, a picture of an awesome looking candle I got from my girlfriend for christmas:
http://img97.imageshack.us/img97/3729/img2745o.jpg


Either no one actually clicks links to pictures or they must be bad








Are embedded pics better?


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*


i wish i learned how to develop. i always wondered how the whole process worked. i always threw my money at the developing company because i never got high enough classes where we developed our own film reels


Must be some big tanks for 16mm...


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*


i wish i learned how to develop. i always wondered how the whole process worked. i always threw my money at the developing company because i never got high enough classes where we developed our own film reels


Start doing it. Developing B&W is very straight forward.

Also shot a pic of the Huayra and they're bringing in a Zonda R tomorrow. First Huayra in the US.


----------



## Conspiracy

well unfortunately i only shot on film for my film class at school. so it was a rented camera but i am happy that when i shot 16mm film it was on an old school bolex hand crank camera. i have wanted to buy a bolex to shoot more but i dont have the money to buy and develop film and digitize motion pictures either.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Also shot a pic of the Huayra and they're bringing in a Zonda R tomorrow. First Huayra in the US.


That Huayra is very underwhelming-looking. Not a fan.


----------



## mortimersnerd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *xILukasIx*


Either no one actually clicks links to pictures or they must be bad








Are embedded pics better?


Embedded pictures are good if they are ~300kb or less. The pics of CERN are cool.


----------



## iandroo888

this may sound like a really noobish question but how do u use a circular polarizer correctly ? seems like a hit and miss for me... sometimes it works really well, sometimes it doesnt work at all... sometimes i can just turn it a bit and i can see it working... sometimes i can just stand there turning it 3 4 times over and nothing has changed. Lol

any tips on how to do it? if i remember physics correctly, u had to go like 90 degrees to the reflective surface to counter the reflection which causes the reflection to "disappear" or something like that.. been a few years since i took physics... i dont remember anymore Lol..

i read some stuff that if u have like.. the light source behind n above ur shoulder, its a good place to start... but if in cases the reflective plane is perpendicular to urself like a framed portrait or a glass door... or something, how would u go about working against that?


----------



## nuclearjock

Assuming I'm viewing through the lens, I aim the lens at a body of water even a puddle and rotate the polarizer for minimum reflection. At this setting, the logo of the polarizer manufacturer usually lines up at the top (pointing towards the sun) of the front of the lens. I note that position and just leave it there. I check from time to time to make sure it hasn't moved and that's it.

I've kinda backed off the polarizer thing though. I used to use one frequently but the novelty kinda wore off I guess.


----------



## dudemanppl

I realized I haven't really picked up the 5DII in about two weeks. I just shoot with the M6. Meep, I love having 5000 bucks in gear sitting around.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;14459064*
> I realized I haven't really picked up the 5DII in about two weeks. I just shoot with the M6. Meep, I love having 5000 bucks in gear sitting around.


you are terrible sir.

i been thinking about trying to shop around pawn shops and thrift stores to find a super cheap film slr. i found a ton of old film rolls in my dads fridge in the garage


----------



## dudemanppl

Just buy like a Yashica Electro 35 variant of some sort. Cheap and good stuff. Might want an ND filter if you want to shoot wide open though.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*


i been thinking about trying to shop around pawn shops and thrift stores to find a super cheap film slr. i found a ton of old film rolls in my dads fridge in the garage


Most any 70s-80s japanese-made SLR will do, Olympus OM series is pretty boss -- you're just gonna have to handle a bunch of stuff and go from there. Feature-wise, there's a big range of stuff from that era.

My choice would be a Minolta XD11, for what it's worth.


----------



## Conspiracy

thanks. im going to try my luck at the thrift store today. i have seen cameras that you guys have mentioned at pawn shops at affordable prices. would make a fun toy if i can get it for a good price


----------



## foothead

Look on Craigslist. I've seen old Pentax/Canon SLRs for $20 or less before.

Oh, how I hate Louisiana. Everything is always foggy from the humidity. I made sure to leave my stuff out yesterday, and the magnifying loupe still kept fogging up because the temperature under the darkcloth was slightly higher than the case. Right now, I have my 35mm camera sitting under the carport so I can use it in an hour.


----------



## Conspiracy

i saw some on craigslist. i want to try thrift stores first because it gives me an excuse to get out of the house


----------



## sub50hz

Thrift and Antiques Stores can have awesome finds.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Thrift and Antiques Stores can have awesome finds.


oh yea! i just wish i had more money to spend at them


----------



## foothead

Cross your eyes and refocus to view. Not bad for a $2.95 thrift store lens. I'm definitely gonna try some C-41 next time.


----------



## Shane1244

Works pretty well! Thats awesome!


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


Assuming I'm viewing through the lens, I aim the lens at a body of water even a puddle and rotate the polarizer for minimum reflection. At this setting, the logo of the polarizer manufacturer usually lines up at the top (pointing towards the sun) of the front of the lens. I note that position and just leave it there. I check from time to time to make sure it hasn't moved and that's it.

I've kinda backed off the polarizer thing though. I used to use one frequently but the novelty kinda wore off I guess.


if its a body of water, that usually works... assuming the angle of reflection or something along the lines of that... but if its straight on... like a piece of glass in front of u, (glass.. not mirror...) can u cut the reflection that way?


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:



Originally Posted by *foothead*






































Cross your eyes and refocus to view. Not bad for a $2.95 thrift store lens. I'm definitely gonna try some C-41 next time.


I don't get it....

Also, can someone with a calibrated monitor tell me if this looks correctly exposed or about 2/3 stop too dark. I've calibrated my monitor, but I think I downed the gamma too much....
http://i.imgur.com/FKpPQ.jpg


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


I don't get it....

Also, can someone with a calibrated monitor tell me if this looks correctly exposed or about 2/3 stop too dark. I've calibrated my monitor, but I think I downed the gamma too much....
http://i.imgur.com/FKpPQ.jpg


Cross your eyes, than one image forms in the middle.


----------



## iandroo888

what tripod n head combo would u guys suggest... mmm 100-150?

maybe a good leg .. cheap head for now but with a quick release cuz in the future, im considering a RRS ball head and plate


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iandroo888;14467605*
> in the future, im considering a RRS ball head and plate


It's not only overkill, it's likely an egregious waste of money for casual shooters like yourself.

For 100 bucks, buy a Calumet tripod, they come with decent pan heads, but the legs are just as good as most other "pricey" brands.


----------



## equetefue

Hows everyone doing. Havent been here in a while. Marin nuclear how is shooting these days?

---
I am here: http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=28.410894,-81.694260
- Sent from my iPhone


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;14467743*
> It's not only overkill, it's likely an egregious waste of money for casual shooters like yourself.
> 
> For 100 bucks, buy a Calumet tripod, they come with decent pan heads, but the legs are just as good as most other "pricey" brands.


never knew about calumet tripods... theres two to pick from in the price range... a 7100 and a 7300 with a 3-way QR head. price difference... $20.. max height difference.. 10".. im 6' tall.. so probably the 7300 one cuz its 68".. 5' 8"?

opinions?


----------



## sub50hz

I would go with the 7300, and when you get some money later on you can add a better/smaller head if you wish. I like my 498RC2, even though I use my tripod like.... never.


----------



## theCanadian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;14465054*
> Cross your eyes, than one image forms in the middle.


The advantage being? It's pretty blurry to cross your eyes.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *theCanadian;14468931*
> The advantage being?


_It's different_.


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *theCanadian;14468931*
> The advantage being? It's pretty blurry to cross your eyes.


It's 3D. You need to learn to focus them, for me its just as clear as either the left or right image.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


I would go with the 7300, and when you get some money later on you can add a better/smaller head if you wish. I like my 498RC2, even though I use my tripod like.... never.


oh the 7100 cant get a new head? i use my tripod a fair amount in real estate for longer exposures at night.


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *theCanadian*


The advantage being? It's pretty blurry to cross your eyes.


Not nearly as effective as cross-eyed, but here you go:


----------



## dudemanppl

I'm going to get a seiz-HNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNGGGGGGGGG


----------



## theCanadian

@ Stereoscopic GIF. Much better.

Can someone check out my link and get me an answer? http://www.overclock.net/14465035-post14599.html


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *theCanadian;14473991*
> @ Stereoscopic GIF. Much better.
> 
> Can someone check out my link and get me an answer? http://www.overclock.net/14465035-post14599.html


I'm not at my calibrated setup right now, but it does seem a bit dark.


----------



## ljason8eg

Well I've been on a vacation of sorts the last few days and I think for what I want to do, the T2i isn't going to cut it anymore. The AI Servo sucks and its getting to be very annoying. Upgrade time.

I'm thinking there's two choices in my budget: 7D from CLP or a used 1DMKII. The 1D would get me the best AF and build quality of the two but at a cost of more than half the resolution. I haven't really compared noise levels between the two but it just seems like the 7D, being so much newer and still having far superior AF compared to my T2i, would he the better choice for me overall.

Thoughts?


----------



## sub50hz

Save some more and try for a 1DIII. Huge difference in IQ and noise.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;14477839*
> Save some more and try for a 1DIII. Huge difference in IQ and noise.


Well guess I'm about halfway there then lol.


----------



## sub50hz

1DIIs aren't bad by any means, but between it and the 7D, I would likely pick the 7D. It's better in most aspects, save for the weather sealing.


----------



## ljason8eg

Yeah I really don't think I'd have to have weather sealing. Is the 7D close on AF performance?


----------



## d3310n

not boad for a first try EVER with a real mans camera. took these with a sony a350.

edit: sorry, ocn is forbidding me to upload all my other shots, ill edit and link to photobucket or something

edit 2: my picsa album. enjoy! https://picasaweb.google.com/108601316692313124266/DropBox?authuser=0&authkey=Gv1sRgCKG19qXpk7jJbA&feat=directlink


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg;14477482*
> Well I've been on a vacation of sorts the last few days and I think for what I want to do, the T2i isn't going to cut it anymore. The AI Servo sucks and its getting to be very annoying. Upgrade time.
> 
> I'm thinking there's two choices in my budget: 7D from CLP or a used 1DMKII. The 1D would get me the best AF and build quality of the two but at a cost of more than half the resolution. I haven't really compared noise levels between the two but it just seems like the 7D, being so much newer and still having far superior AF compared to my T2i, would he the better choice for me overall.
> 
> Thoughts?


Well I do have a 1DIIn for sale...







Interface SUCKS, LCD SUCKS, other than that it's a bang on camera. I had a 1DIII, loved it to bits, I'd wait until finding one for about 1600 before you buy it.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;14479356*
> Well I do have a 1DIIn for sale...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Interface SUCKS, LCD SUCKS, other than that it's a bang on camera. I had a 1DIII, loved it to bits, I'd wait until finding one for about 1600 before you buy it.


Think ill ever find one for $1600 that hasnt been beat to hell and back?


----------



## pangolinman

I have no idea about photography, or cameras, but have been looking on craigslist for a DSLR under $300 and was wondering is $280 for a Nikon D70 18-70mm + a sigma 70-200mm macro lens a good deal?


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg;14479804*
> Think ill ever find one for $1600 that hasnt been beat to hell and back?


Yeah, that used to be the average going price for a LNIB one on ebay about a year back. Don't remember how much I paid for the one I had though. Wasn't in terrible shape at all though. Suuuuch a solid body. If I didn't like 5DII video and full frameyness so much, I would totally have one.


----------



## Shane1244

Just get a 7D..


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Yeah, that used to be the average going price for a LNIB one on ebay about a year back. Don't remember how much I paid for the one I had though. Wasn't in terrible shape at all though. Suuuuch a solid body. If I didn't like 5DII video and full frameyness so much, I would totally have one.


Hmm I think i could do $1600. Guess ill save up a bit more and have a look around.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*


Just get a 7D..


Or this works too lol. Decisions, decisions.


----------



## dudemanppl

I've tried a 7D once, hated it so much. Fun fact, the VF in the 7D is bigger than a 1DII/n VF.


----------



## Conspiracy

VF?

and what didnt you like about the 7D? i think its great for what it is. i havent had any issues with mine that made me hate it


----------



## dudemanppl

For one I don't like crop, and then the VF (viewfinder) is too cluttered. Used it for all of a minute though.


----------



## BlankThis

I would go with the 7D man.


----------



## dudemanppl

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1033412
W
What are the chances? This guy is selling TWO 1DIIIs for 1600 each. Pretty good condition too, just some gaffer residue.


----------



## ljason8eg

Not bad at all. Now hopefully he doesnt sell them for a couple weeks.


----------



## dudemanppl

I'm thinking they'll be sold in the next two days.







Sucks for you though.


----------



## Marin

Need to sell some stuff so I can get Profoto's.


----------



## equetefue

Get 1d3 or 7d. You will hate the gui on the 1d2

As far as the af the 7d after lots of used was close to the 1d2 af but not close at all in the acquiring of the subject compare to the 1d3

Save somr much and youll be happy you did

Ed

---
I am here: http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=28.410820,-81.694205
- Sent from my iPhone


----------



## laboitenoire

So. Samyang 14 f/2.8 or Tokina 11-16?


----------



## sub50hz

Tokina.


----------



## Marin

Tokina. I'm not a fan of the amount of barrel distortion the Samyang 14mm has.


----------



## max302

Wider = better. Plus the Tokina is a proven performer.

Also, CROSS-POSTING FOR SUCCESS! Check out my HV30 FS thread.

http://www.overclock.net/camera-equipment/1083472-canon-hv30-raynox-fisheye-full-kit.html


----------



## Conspiracy

its a good camera but i refuse to shoot on miniDV after the countless hours spent capturing footage. i now proudly only shoot on card or disc unless i just have no choice then i will shoot tape but not a fan anymore


----------



## ROM3000

Hey guys. I'd like to join the club. I have a Nikon D3100 with the standard 18-55mm VR lens. Here's a link to my flickr.


----------



## Conspiracy

i wish i was a bazillionaire so i could get a custom made lens that is like a 16-200 IS USM f1.4L that would be cool to have. i would still use primes but that would be a fun zoom lol


----------



## dudemanppl

Don't drunk post.


----------



## BlankThis

dudemanppl buy my D90.


----------



## dudemanppl

No I hate Canadians.


----------



## iandroo888

lol...... damn 14 and already racist xD

whats a good tripod head that you guys would suggest?


----------



## BlankThis

I'm heartbroken.


----------



## dudemanppl

I love Canadians, I will pay for your D90 right now.
Oh and Rokinon is going to make a 24 1.4 for FF so I'm totally getting one of those.

Gonna shoot a roll of FP4+ at 800 and see how well it does. 3 stop push GOGOGO.


----------



## BlankThis

I wish they would chip their CanOn lenses already


----------



## SalisburySteak

I want to join in! As of right now, I only have a point and shoot (Sony H55). However, whenever I see my sister, I'll use her Canon T2i with the kit lens. I know how to use it better than her







.

Yesterday, I learned that me and Nikon don't mix very well. My brother came from a wedding and somebody told him to hold on to their Nikon D90. My brother told me to help set it up for him, but he was in a hurry. I did not know where anything was lol. I felt like so stupid. It looked like I never held a camera in my life.


----------



## iandroo888

s'ok. i look like that with a canon in my hand xD


----------



## max302

Going to shoot an event next Sunday in Montreal: Picnik Electronique! I'm going there mainly for Addison Groove and Scuba, but the rest of the lineup should kick equal amounts of ass. Borrowing a friend's Siggy 80-200 and bringing along a long prime and a short one.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *BlankThis*


I wish they would chip their CanOn lenses already


To have in body aperture control? They'd need to reverse engineer the EF mount protocol to do that. Or do you just mean focus confirm? Apparently they're working on that, but they have supplier issues.


----------



## Tank

I would like to join, New to the DSLR/SLR cameras but I learn quick and cant wait to dive further into this new obsesion of mine, hehe.

Gear: Nikon D5000 W/ 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G lens kit
and a Tru Digital Tripod mount, lost the bracket for this but looking for it now







.


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


To have in body aperture control? They'd need to reverse engineer the EF mount protocol to do that. Or do you just mean focus confirm? Apparently they're working on that, but they have supplier issues.


I would really like aperture control...


----------



## Marin

My ballhead finally bit the dust. Can't rotate it anymore (knob twists off) which makes it a pain to use. Oh well, only can expect so much out of Benro.


----------



## dudemanppl

50 1.1 doesn't do click stops anymore.







I needa stop playing with the aperture ring.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Lol I just realized this morning my ballhead is stuck to my legs. No matter how much I turn it, it never gets any looser. Guess I'm eternally using my 486RC2.


----------



## sub50hz

Oup, shoulda used anti-seize. Get a can of PB blaster, spray some in a CERAMIC (if you use foam, you'll be real sorry) cup, and use an eyedropper or cotton swab to get the fluid as near to the threads as possible.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;14509714*
> Lol I just realized this morning my ballhead is stuck to my legs. No matter how much I turn it, it never gets any looser. Guess I'm eternally using my 486RC2.


did you tighten the anti-rotating screws on your tripod?

unless your tripod has been sitting in a lot of moisture it shouldnt be stuck.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


did you tighten the anti-rotating screws on your tripod?

unless your tripod has been sitting in a lot of moisture it shouldnt be stuck.


I actually have no idea why it's stuck. I can rotate my head just fine, freely and loosely, but it just never moves. It just makes the same 360-degree circle repeatedly without ever moving up/down the threads.


----------



## mz-n10

is the center column spinning? try to spin it some more, on my benro the bolt holding the head in spins and comes loose on the other side.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10;14511026*
> is the center column spinning? try to spin it some more, on my benro the bolt holding the head in spins and comes loose on the other side.


Center column isn't spinning; just the ball head. I actually loosened the friction knob so much it came out entirely, and even then my head wouldn't detach. I could put the knob back in and adjust friction like usual, but yea, lowering the friction to the point the knob falls out did nothing.


----------



## sub50hz

Vice grips.

I'm actually appalled at how many people screw crap together with the threads on both ends being dissimilar metals and forget/choose not to use anti-seize.


----------



## ljason8eg

Was hiking this morning and had my 300mm with me since there's a good chance at seeing deer or bears where I was headed. Long story short I picked the wrong rock to stand on crossing the stream and into the drink the 300mm lens went. Pulled it out real quick, dried it off and it works fine. Doesn't look like any water got inside. I'm thinking the bag might have done just enough to save it. Guess L stood for lucky today.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*


Was hiking this morning and had my 300mm with me since there's a good chance at seeing deer or bears where I was headed. Long story short I picked the wrong rock to stand on crossing the stream and into the drink the 300mm lens went. Pulled it out real quick, dried it off and it works fine. Doesn't look like any water got inside. I'm thinking the bag might have done just enough to save it. Guess L stood for lucky today.


Dibs if it develops issues later.


----------



## laboitenoire

Hoowee, bet you thought you were gonna have a heart attack after that!


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Dibs if it develops issues later.










Lol







. I'm crossing my fingers that since it works now it should be alright.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Hoowee, bet you thought you were gonna have a heart attack after that!


When I saw the bag floating, yeah I panicked big time. Once I got it out and realized there was just a small amount of water in the bag I felt better.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*


When I saw the bag floating, yeah I panicked big time. Once I got it out and realized there was just a small amount of water in the bag I felt better.


lol you must have been packed light...cause i would expect my bag to sink like a rock.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


lol you must have been packed light...cause i would expect my bag to sink like a rock.


The camera bag didn't fall in, just the bag the lens comes with. I was actually surprised it floated too lol.

Edit: only thing different about the lens is this spot of red paint on the metal mount kinda smeared some more when I dried it off. No idea what that paint is for. Must not be anything important since I had smeared it a bit once before trying to get some gunk off the mount.


----------



## dudemanppl

The red dot on the mount shows you where to mount it LOL. But there's another on the barrel so whatever. That would scare the poop out of me. And I realized I still haven't had a real tripod yet in my two and a half years of photographing. And yet I have four bodies on my desk (5DII, M6, R3a, Bessa L). And I found a new investment opportunity that should net me about three grand so w00t.


----------



## ljason8eg

Oh that's what that paint is for? Whoever dabbed the paint on there during assembly missed the mounting location by a good amount then lol.


----------



## BlankThis

Buy my D90 and 50 1.8


----------



## dudemanppl

Make a thread on FM.


----------



## iandroo888

d90 should sell pretty easily about $600 or so for body only. 50 1.8 probablu like 80 bux


----------



## Eek

Time for an update.

*Bodies/ Grip*
Canon 5D Mark II
Canon EOS 7D
*Glass*
Canon 100mm f/2.8L IS USM Macro
Canon 135 f/2.0L USM Lens
Canon 24-70mm f/2.8L USM Lens
Sigma 50mm f/1.4 EX DC HSM
Canon 50mm f/1.8 Lens
Sigma 50mm f/1.4 EX DG HSM lens
Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L Mark II IS USM Lens
Canon 1.4x Teleconverter
Kenko Extension Tube Set
*Lights*
Canon Speedlite 430 EXII
Canon Speedlite 580 EXII
Paul C. Buff Vagabond Mini Lithium 120VAC Portable Power Pack
2x Paul C. Buff Einstein 640w/s Studio Flash Unit
AlienBee B800 320w/s Studio Flash Unit
*Camera Supports*
Feisol CM-1471 Carbon Fiber Monopod
Photo Clam PC-44NS ballhead
Feisol CT-3442 Carbon Fiber Tripod Legs with carbon fiber center column
Numerous OEM Canon Straps
Crumpler Industry Disgrace
Canon Professional Domke Gripper Strap
Luma Loop
Black Rapid DR-1 Dual Harness Strap
Canon OEM Hand Strap
*Light Modifiers*
Pocket Wizard Plus II
2x Paul C. Buff CyberSync CST Trigger Transmitter
2x Paul C. Buff CyberSync CSXCV Transceiver Module
2x Paul C. Buff CyberSync CSRB+ Receiver Module
Yongnuo RF-602 Wireless Flash Triggers
Paul C. Buff 22-inch High Output Beauty Dish White
Orbis Ring Flash
Orbis Ring Flash Extention Arm
Paul C. Buff Parabolic Umbrella Silver 64in 16 rib
Paul C. Buff PLM Front Diffuser Fabric, 64in white
[*2x ]Paul C. Buff 12"x36" foldable stripbox with grids.
Paul C. Buff 7" 10Âº Honeycomb Grid
Paul C. Buff 7" 20Âº Honeycomb Grid
Paul C. Buff 7" 30Âº Honeycomb Grid
Paul C. Buff 7" 40Âº Honeycomb Grid
Fotodiox Pro Softbox 32"x48"
LumiQuest ProMax Softbox III
LumiQuest UltraStrap
Hohl Photo Speed Strap
Hohl Photo 8" Speed Snoot/ Reflector
Hohl Photo 1/8" Speed Grid
Rosco Strobist 55-Piece Filter Kit
2x Manfrotto 420B 3- Section Combi- Boom Stand
Paul C. Buff Backlight stand
2x Savage 10' Aluminum Heavy Duty Air-Cushioned Lightstand
Savage Port-A-Stand, Free Standing Background Support System
PBL Heavyduty Sandbags x4
Photoflex Telescopic LiteDisc Holder
2x Photoflex Shoe Mount Multiclamp
Adorama 40" White Interior Umbrella with Removeable Black Cover.
Westcott 45" Optical White Satin Umbrella
Westcott Photo Basics 40" 5-in-1 Collapsible Reflector
Lastolite Tri-grip Diffuser
Lastolite Tri-grip Soft Gold and Soft Silver Reflector
*Bags*
Pelican 1624 Hard case with dividers
Crumpler 7 Million Dollar Home Camera Bag
ThinkTank Streetwalker Hard drive Backpack
Canon 200EG
Think Tank Retrospective 20
Paul C. Buff Vagabond Mini Carrying Bag
Paul C. Buff Einstein Studio Strobe Carrying Bag
Lee Multi-Filter Pouch
*Filters*
Lee Model FK Filter Holder System
Lee 62mm Adapter Ring
Lee 67mm Adapter Ring
Lee 72mm Wide Angle Adapter Ring
Lee 77mm Wide Angle Adapter Ring
Lee Big Stopper 10-Stop 3.0 Solid ND filter
Hitech 4x5 Gradual ND 0.6 Soft Edge Filter
Hitech 4x5 Gradual ND 0.9 Soft Edge Filter
Hitech 4x5 Gradual ND 0.9 Hard Edge Filter
Hitech 4x4 Solid ND 0.9 Filter
Hitech 4x4 Solid ND 1.2 Filter
Marumi 77mm Super DHG Circular Polarizer Filter
B+W 67mm MRC Kaesemann Circular Polarizer Filter
B+W 72mm MRC Kaesemann Circular Polarizer Filter
Quanta Ray 67mm Multi-Coated Circular Polarizer Filter
*Misc.*
ColorChecker Passport
Pantone Huey Pro Monitor Calibrator
X-Rite ColorMunki Photo Spectrophotometer
Westinghouse L2410NM 24" MVA panel monitor
Dell U2410 Wide Gamut H-IPS Panel Monitor
Canon Pixma Pro9000 Wide format printer.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Eek*


Time for an update.

*Glass*
Canon 100mm f/2.8L IS USM Macro
Canon 135 f/2.0L USM Lens
Canon 24-70mm f/2.8L USM Lens

Sigma 50mm f/1.4 EX DC HSM
Canon 50mm f/1.8 Lens
Sigma 50mm f/1.4 EX DG HSM lens
Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L Mark II IS USM Lens
Canon 1.4x Teleconverter
Kenko Extension Tube Set


Wait, wat.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Eek*


Time for an update.

*Bodies/ Grip*
Canon 5D Mark II
Canon EOS 7D
*Glass*
Canon 100mm f/2.8L IS USM Macro
Canon 135 f/2.0L USM Lens
Canon 24-70mm f/2.8L USM Lens
Sigma 50mm f/1.4 EX DC HSM
Canon 50mm f/1.8 Lens
Sigma 50mm f/1.4 EX DG HSM lens
Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L Mark II IS USM Lens
Canon 1.4x Teleconverter
Kenko Extension Tube Set
*Lights*
Canon Speedlite 430 EXII
Canon Speedlite 580 EXII
Paul C. Buff Vagabond Mini Lithium 120VAC Portable Power Pack
2x Paul C. Buff Einstein 640w/s Studio Flash Unit
AlienBee B800 320w/s Studio Flash Unit
*Camera Supports*
Feisol CM-1471 Carbon Fiber Monopod
Photo Clam PC-44NS ballhead
Feisol CT-3442 Carbon Fiber Tripod Legs with carbon fiber center column
Numerous OEM Canon Straps
Crumpler Industry Disgrace
Canon Professional Domke Gripper Strap
Luma Loop
Black Rapid DR-1 Dual Harness Strap
Canon OEM Hand Strap
*Light Modifiers*
Pocket Wizard Plus II
2x Paul C. Buff CyberSync CST Trigger Transmitter
2x Paul C. Buff CyberSync CSXCV Transceiver Module
2x Paul C. Buff CyberSync CSRB+ Receiver Module
Yongnuo RF-602 Wireless Flash Triggers
Paul C. Buff 22-inch High Output Beauty Dish White
Orbis Ring Flash
Orbis Ring Flash Extention Arm
Paul C. Buff Parabolic Umbrella Silver 64in 16 rib
Paul C. Buff PLM Front Diffuser Fabric, 64in white
[*2x ]Paul C. Buff 12"x36" foldable stripbox with grids.
Paul C. Buff 7" 10Âº Honeycomb Grid
Paul C. Buff 7" 20Âº Honeycomb Grid
Paul C. Buff 7" 30Âº Honeycomb Grid
Paul C. Buff 7" 40Âº Honeycomb Grid
Fotodiox Pro Softbox 32"x48"
LumiQuest ProMax Softbox III
LumiQuest UltraStrap
Hohl Photo Speed Strap
Hohl Photo 8" Speed Snoot/ Reflector
Hohl Photo 1/8" Speed Grid
Rosco Strobist 55-Piece Filter Kit
2x Manfrotto 420B 3- Section Combi- Boom Stand
Paul C. Buff Backlight stand
2x Savage 10' Aluminum Heavy Duty Air-Cushioned Lightstand
Savage Port-A-Stand, Free Standing Background Support System
PBL Heavyduty Sandbags x4
Photoflex Telescopic LiteDisc Holder
2x Photoflex Shoe Mount Multiclamp
Adorama 40" White Interior Umbrella with Removeable Black Cover.
Westcott 45" Optical White Satin Umbrella
Westcott Photo Basics 40" 5-in-1 Collapsible Reflector
Lastolite Tri-grip Diffuser
Lastolite Tri-grip Soft Gold and Soft Silver Reflector
*Bags*
Pelican 1624 Hard case with dividers
Crumpler 7 Million Dollar Home Camera Bag
ThinkTank Streetwalker Hard drive Backpack
Canon 200EG
Think Tank Retrospective 20
Paul C. Buff Vagabond Mini Carrying Bag
Paul C. Buff Einstein Studio Strobe Carrying Bag
Lee Multi-Filter Pouch
*Filters*
Lee Model FK Filter Holder System
Lee 62mm Adapter Ring
Lee 67mm Adapter Ring
Lee 72mm Wide Angle Adapter Ring
Lee 77mm Wide Angle Adapter Ring
Lee Big Stopper 10-Stop 3.0 Solid ND filter
Hitech 4x5 Gradual ND 0.6 Soft Edge Filter
Hitech 4x5 Gradual ND 0.9 Soft Edge Filter
Hitech 4x5 Gradual ND 0.9 Hard Edge Filter
Hitech 4x4 Solid ND 0.9 Filter
Hitech 4x4 Solid ND 1.2 Filter
Marumi 77mm Super DHG Circular Polarizer Filter
B+W 67mm MRC Kaesemann Circular Polarizer Filter
B+W 72mm MRC Kaesemann Circular Polarizer Filter
Quanta Ray 67mm Multi-Coated Circular Polarizer Filter
*Misc.*
ColorChecker Passport
Pantone Huey Pro Monitor Calibrator
X-Rite ColorMunki Photo Spectrophotometer
Westinghouse L2410NM 24" MVA panel monitor
Dell U2410 Wide Gamut H-IPS Panel Monitor
Canon Pixma Pro9000 Wide format printer.


Soo.... What time of day are you usually out of your house for long periods of time?


----------



## Mako0312

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;14515908*
> Soo.... What time of day are you usually out of your house for long periods of time?


Lol.

Question for you camera elites.
Is the D5100 worth the extra money over the D3100?

Seems an extra $200 over the D3100. $800 is the common price tag I'm seeing for the D5100.


----------



## iandroo888

if the d5100 is anything like the d5k, it would be worth it. even tho my d5k is a generation older than the d3100.. it still contains the sensor that is the same as the d90 and d300.. iso performance is still better than the d3100..

if u can afford it, id do the extra 200 even tho i dont like the design of the d5100


----------



## Boyboyd

I think the 5100 has too few buttons. A lot of integral stuff has to be accessed through a menu. Other than it has the 7000 sensor i don't really consider it an improvement over the 5000.


----------



## Conspiracy

lol eek ill take that extra sigma 50 off your hands since you posted saying you have 2 of them


----------



## MistaBernie

Might have just scored a deal of the week!

7D for under $600 (Error 40, but within warranty, else I wont buy it).


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie;14521006*
> Might have just scored a deal of the week!
> 
> 7D for under $600 (Error 40, but within warranty, else I wont buy it).


nice!


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*


I think the 5100 has too few buttons. A lot of integral stuff has to be accessed through a menu. Other than it has the 7000 sensor i don't really consider it an improvement over the 5000.


i dont see much of an improvement either.. if anything, a bit downgrade.. they messed with the button setup entirely cuz of the new design on the articulating screen.. all the buttons that are usually lined up on the left are all over the place now. i tried playing with a d5100 before.. i found myself pressing into nothin cuz i was used to the buttons being there lol


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


Might have just scored a deal of the week!

7D for under $600 (Error 40, but within warranty, else I wont buy it).


Deal of the week?! You must get a lot of great deals then!









Thats awesome but strange too. If its under warranty why wouldn't they send it in?


----------



## Nemesis158

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


i dont see much of an improvement either.. if anything, a bit downgrade.. they messed with the button setup entirely cuz of the new design on the articulating screen.. all the buttons that are usually lined up on the left are all over the place now. i tried playing with a d5100 before.. i found myself pressing into nothin cuz i was used to the buttons being there lol


I Myself have been thinking about upgrading from my D3K to a D5100, Worth it?


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*


Deal of the week?! You must get a lot of great deals then!









Thats awesome but strange too. If its under warranty why wouldn't they send it in?


Already bought a 5D2 apparently, couldn't be without the body for the length of time it was going to be gone . Makes sense if you're working.


----------



## sub50hz

That's what CPS is for.


----------



## dudemanppl

Randomly decided to join CPS last night at like 12, Silver!


----------



## BlankThis

Any chance that the CLP has any 5Ds?

I don't want some feature-laden APS-C body...


----------



## dudemanppl

You don't have CLP in Canada anyway, you guys are sad. Wait do you mean OG 5Ds or the 5DII? I don't think Canon has ever sold refurbed 5Ds.


----------



## iandroo888

currently on the market for Manfrotto 496RC2 ball head and Manfrotto 055XPROB


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis;14526701*
> Any chance that the CLP has any 5Ds?
> 
> I don't want some feature-laden APS-C body...


The 5DMKII used to be part of the program but was removed due to people reselling them for profit IIRC. I have read on POTN that people have had luck getting reps to let them buy one with the discount but i wouldn't count on it.


----------



## dudemanppl

THE 6D IS COMING. Sorta leaked by Canon Australia.


----------



## sub50hz

Boring. 3D, prease.


----------



## dudemanppl

But moar numbers.







I shall upgrade to CPS Gold soon and I hope they'll keep lending out the old IS I supertelephotos because then I can lend a 300/400/500/600 for like one month each hehe.


----------



## sub50hz

A 3D would be hilarious to try and market. Imagine how many people would expect stereoscopic images.

If Canon could bring back ECF to be a little better than in the EOS 3, it would be super boss.


----------



## Stealth Pyros

< Working towards getting a Canon T3i. No deep photography experience, but I'm pretty good and creative at it. I might get a body only because my friend has a nice upgraded lens he's willing to give me. I'm saving up and looking into maybe even a refurbished one which I'd get SquareTrade warranty for.


----------



## dudemanppl

Get a T2i body only for like 500 after buying a broken CANON point and shoot on ebay and sending it in to CLP. T3i is overpriced for what it is, might as well get a 60D.


----------



## ljason8eg

Yeah I'd recommend the T2i as well. Money saved can be spent on glass or a nice flash.


----------



## Stealth Pyros

I wanted the T3i because of the flip-out screen.


----------



## dudemanppl

....... Oh god. I tried out a 60D, don't find the screen to be all that wonderful being flippy and such. It hasn't ever been a limiting factor on my 5DII so far.


----------



## Stealth Pyros

How would you normally take a photo from really low, like say with the camera on the floor? I really don't want to have to lay down... and the same can apply for a photo taken from overhead. You can flip the screen to face upwards or downwards.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Stealth Pyros;14527971*
> How would you normally take a photo from really low, like say with the camera on the floor? I really don't want to have to lay down... and the same can apply for a photo taken from overhead. You can flip the screen to face upwards or downwards.


thats definitely a convenience Lol.. i use it for real estate photography.. either low shot for a room or a high for like house or something


----------



## ljason8eg

I guess if you took pictures like that often it could be worth it. I really don't see anyone making use of that feature too often though.


----------



## dudemanppl

If I see it's a good shot, I'll go down. And I'll just shoot in the air, no biggie. Biggest problem is getting a tilted picture, but just do it in post.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Stealth Pyros;14527971*
> How would you normally take a photo from really low, like say with the camera on the floor? I really don't want to have to lay down... and the same can apply for a photo taken from overhead. You can flip the screen to face upwards or downwards.


the autofocus in liveview (viewing on teh rear screen) is slow as molasses....unless you are shooting static objects you are probably better off laying down to take the picture.


----------



## iandroo888

what i usually do is get it right with the screen, turn off LV, focus then shoot lol


----------



## Boyboyd

The LV AF is slow, but it's more accurate.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*


The LV AF is slow, but it's more accurate.


+1 on that. With my 50/f1.4 wide open, I miss about ~10-15% if light isn't optimal. In Live View, it's more like 1-1.5% miss rate.

And, I've used the flippy screen for low/odd angles and I do rather like it.

That being said, I wont be too heartbroken if/when the 5D3/6D/9000+D _doesn't_ come with one.


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;14527603*
> Get a T2i body only for like 500 after buying a broken CANON point and shoot on ebay and sending it in to CLP. T3i is overpriced for what it is, might as well get a 60D.


The 60D isn't that much better either. It's just an over glorified Rebel.


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;14526777*
> You don't have CLP in Canada anyway, you guys are sad. Wait do you mean OG 5Ds or the 5DII? I don't think Canon has ever sold refurbed 5Ds.


The OG homie. I have access to a Florida address so..


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Stealth Pyros;14527971*
> How would you normally take a photo from really low, like say with the camera on the floor? I really don't want to have to lay down... and the same can apply for a photo taken from overhead. You can flip the screen to face upwards or downwards.


That's what distance markings on lenses are for. You can approximate framing, just like people used to before flip out screens and digital sensors. Get down and dirty if you need to.


----------



## Stealth Pyros

I do see myself taking low and high shots using the flipout screen, so I think it's going to be useful to me.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


That's what distance markings on lenses are for. You can approximate framing, just like people used to before flip out screens and digital sensors. Get down and dirty if you need to.


I don't often wear casual/old tshirts and jeans that I don't care about. You can say I'm a "prep," I really don't want to lay down on asphalt to get the nice low shot photo I want of something, like my car for example.


----------



## sub50hz

Pfft. That's hilariously lame, don't expect stunning shots unless you're willing to go the distance.


----------



## Anton338

Cool thread. Just got a new DSLR too.. add me please?

Canon EOS Rebel T2i (550D)

Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS II


----------



## Stealth Pyros

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Pfft. That's hilariously lame, don't expect stunning shots unless you're willing to go the distance.


I apologize for not wanting to ruin ~$40 shirts? Sorry if that's "lame" to you. I find it pretty ridiculous to go prone on the ground like I'm under gunfire to take a few photos, when there's a perfectly sensible solution to it with a flip-out screen; that's my view of it.


----------



## MistaBernie

I've stopped hearing back from dude guy about my $500 7D. I has a sad.

In other news, I'm considering treating myself to a 100-400 F/4-5.6L/IS after the holidays (or sooner if I decide to unload my bass gear).


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Stealth Pyros*


I apologize for not wanting to ruin ~$40 shirts?












I don't think laying down for a few seconds is going to ruin your shirt, but to each his own, I suppose. You could, alternately, buy some cheapo clothes to go out and shoot in. Make a trip to WalMart or something.


----------



## ljason8eg

FWIW I never have ruined a shirt by laying down and those low car shots are easily done without a flippy screen or needing to lay on the ground.


----------



## Zerkk

Picked up a Nikon D3000 with the stock 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G AF-S lens off a fellow OCN member awhile back, I'm really enjoying it. Hoping to get a new lens when the holiday season comes around.


----------



## MistaBernie

For ground shots you could always just keep a clean blanket in your trunk or something similar too.. though after you put it on the ground, it'll get dirty.


----------



## sub50hz

Bring an oriental rug, so you don't look like a classless prick.


----------



## biatchi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;14533155*
> Bring an oriental rug, so you don't look like a classless prick.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Stealth Pyros;14532682*
> I apologize for not wanting to ruin ~$40 shirts? Sorry if that's "lame" to you. I find it pretty ridiculous to go prone on the ground like I'm under gunfire to take a few photos, when there's a perfectly sensible solution to it with a flip-out screen; that's my view of it.


eventually you get use to a particular lens to be able to just shoot down low and know roughly how its framed. try the camera out in LV first before buying, cause when i say af is slow i mean SLOW.

i had a 60d i sold to my friend. Her only complaint to me is that LV is super slow.


----------



## dudemanppl

Bernie, buy a EF-S screen, then you can easily MF the 50 1.4, but keep the other screen around for using your zooms.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;14533508*
> Bernie, buy a EF-S screen, then you can easily MF the 50 1.4, but keep the other screen around for using your zooms.


I dont mind giving that a shot, but I kind of feel like if I was gonna go MF, I'd sell my Canon and buy a Zeiss.. how would the EF-S be with the 10-20 / 17-50?


----------



## dudemanppl

2.8 is fine, 4.5-5.6 is really dark, but still not unusable in bright sunlight where you would use it.


----------



## mz-n10

does the 60d have "user" replaceable focusing screens?


----------



## ljason8eg

I've always wondered...when I import photos into Lightroom it seems to underexpose them by a third of a stop or so. Like I'll click a photo from the recently imported list so I can edit it, it opens with the typical "loading" text at the bottom. When the loading text disappears, the photo darkens. I have a feeling this is not normal and can't really describe it any better than that lol. Any clue on what could be causing it? Some custom profile that has been accidentally enabled?


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg;14536563*
> I've always wondered...when I import photos into Lightroom it seems to underexpose them by a third of a stop or so. Like I'll click a photo from the recently imported list so I can edit it, it opens with the typical "loading" text at the bottom. When the loading text disappears, the photo darkens. I have a feeling this is not normal and can't really describe it any better than that lol. Any clue on what could be causing it? *Some custom profile that has been accidentally enabled?*


That's what happened to me, when i imported photos they were all over-exposed by 4 stops.

Preferences --> Develop --> Reset all develop presets.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Boyboyd;14537061*
> That's what happened to me, when i imported photos they were all over-exposed by 4 stops.
> 
> Preferences --> Develop --> Reset all develop presets.


I just did that and all the photos still appear darker when I import them compared to when I view them prior to importing.

I tried searching around on the help section of Lightroom but no dice so far :/


----------



## sub50hz

Remember that if you're shooting RAW the in-camera picture styles aren't applied anywhere but the rear LCD. What you see is not what you get unless you import to DPP.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;14537305*
> Remember that if you're shooting RAW the in-camera picture styles aren't applied anywhere but the rear LCD. What you see is not what you get unless you import to DPP.


Also worth noting. How the camera processes it for viewing on the rear LCD will be different to how LR processes them. And both will be different to how Propriatory software does too.

You could change your defaults in LR so that they match up to your LCD preview.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Boyboyd;14537321*
> You could change your defaults in LR so that they match up to your LCD preview.


Or just shoot with the "Neutral" style.


----------



## ljason8eg

I think I got it. In LR the camera calibration profile was set as Adobe standard. If I change it to camera neutral, it looks much more like it appears before importing. Adobe standard moves the histogram a bit to the left compared to camera neutral as well, so this must be what I was seeing.


----------



## Dream Killer

Selling my Nikon 50mm f/1.4g. Any takers?


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg;14536563*
> I've always wondered...when I import photos into Lightroom it seems to underexpose them by a third of a stop or so. Like I'll click a photo from the recently imported list so I can edit it, it opens with the typical "loading" text at the bottom. When the loading text disappears, the photo darkens. I have a feeling this is not normal and can't really describe it any better than that lol. Any clue on what could be causing it? Some custom profile that has been accidentally enabled?


you can also use DPP and get the same exact output from the camera. you can then export to photoshop or some other program if you save as tiff.


----------



## dudemanppl

Holy mother that's cheap. I was gonna jokingly offer a nickel on here, but that is honestly the cheapest 50 1.4 I've ever seen. That would sell in half an hour on FM.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;14538101*
> Holy mother that's cheap. I was gonna jokingly offer a nickel on here, but that is honestly the cheapest 50 1.4 I've ever seen. That would sell in half an hour on FM.


That's the point! Also, I don't want to pay the FM fee =( I could wait like 2 weeks and maybe get 375-400 out of it but I'm crazy impatient here.


----------



## BlankThis

If I wasn't eventually switching teams I would jump on that.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer;14538020*
> you can also use DPP and get the same exact output from the camera. you can then export to photoshop or some other program if you save as tiff.


I'll try that then, thanks.

I seem to prefer the colors the camera gives the photos rather than what Lightroom gives them.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer;14538002*
> Selling my Nikon 50mm f/1.4g. Any takers?


=.= ur gonna make me reconsider getting the sigma 50 for this 50 cuz its so cheap D:


----------



## Shane1244

Shut up and buy it!


----------



## sub50hz

Been playing with my nifty the last week or so -- I sometimes wonder why I ignore it in my bag or leave it home in favor of another 50, because it's really damn good. Sure, it doesn't have the greatest bokeh, but there's so much more to photography than shooting every damn thing wide open. Also, 17-40 on APS-H = winful. Pretty good on 1.6 too, but deifnitely not a single-lens solution. Color is _really_ good, I'm really impressed.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;14538335*
> Shut up and buy it!


i would if i had the money right now.. im waiting for some commission and payments to come :3


----------



## dudemanppl

17-40 on APS-H is amazing. Loved the range, not too wide, not too long. And I thought your sister drowned your nifty?


----------



## sub50hz

I bought another. Skipping an EOS film body for now, contemplating something else.


----------



## ljason8eg

DPP did just what I wanted, thanks for the help guys! The file sizes of TIFFs are huge though. Much bigger than RAW.

Oh, and I finally caved and ordered a 7D through CLP.


----------



## BlankThis

'Attaboy.


----------



## ljason8eg

Oops. Just realized I need some CF cards for the 7D lol.

Anything better than this?

  Amazon.com: Sandisk 8GB Extreme CF memory card - UDMA 60MB/s 400x (SDCFX-008G-A61, Retail Package): Electronics


----------



## dudemanppl

Just buy Ultras, 30 MB/s is good enough for like anything.


----------



## Conspiracy

most people only use the 60MB/s for video mode i think. although i dont know but i guess it might be helpful shooting sports if your shooting continuous at 8fps maybe the 60MB/s would be needed. i would think 30MB/s would still be fine since each raw is still just barely less than 30MB


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Just buy Ultras, 30 MB/s is good enough for like anything.



Quote:



Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*


most people only use the 60MB/s for video mode i think. although i dont know but i guess it might be helpful shooting sports if your shooting continuous at 8fps maybe the 60MB/s would be needed. i would think 30MB/s would still be fine since each raw is still just barely less than 30MB


Both very true. If you're doing critical work, just buy a ton of 2GB cards to spread the files around so you don't lose them all if something happens to the card.

I only buy extremes because I go out in crazy weather like -20F days or pouring rain days with my camera. Otherwise, I'd just go all ultras.


----------



## Conspiracy

i didnt know that about my extreme, i just knew i needed the extra speed for recording video so the camera can keep up with the big files. i have a 16GB extreme 60MB/s. i wanted a 90 but i think its overkill and insanely expensive lol


----------



## Shane1244

Lulz, you don't need 60mb/s for video.


----------



## sub50hz

I just buy whatever's cheap. I think I have a Kingston 16GB and a pair of SDUs, couldn't even tell you what any of them are rated for. They work just fine, although the Kingston takes a bit longer to dump the buffer in the 1D. Not a big deal, I don't machine gun stuff often.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;14547259*
> Lulz, you don't need 60mb/s for video.


well im not disappointed with my purchase either way. i just bought it because i knew it wouldnt hurt


----------



## sub50hz

'tis better to have and not need than need and not have. It's why I have 25 backup Lambos.

-Thank you.


----------



## Conspiracy

only 25 backups? and you call yourself prepared lol


----------



## foothead

I finally got a stepping ring so I can use the pentax stereo lens on my E-410. Any stereo picture requests?


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;14548136*
> 'tis better to have and not need than need and not have. It's why I have 25 backup Lambos.
> 
> -Thank you.


Why only 25? Weaaaak.

Also 7D can only record up to 35 MB/s in camera, going higher is pure derp.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;14549149*
> Why only 25? Weaaaak.
> 
> Also 7D can only record up to 35 MB/s in camera, going higher is pure derp.


I use a CF Firewire reader so going higher means faster reads on the card reader. Back when I was using Ultra IIs, there was a time I was unloading a 16GB card to my PC (using a 3.5" bay USB CF reader), ate dinner at the table, then came back and it was still unloading.

This is why faster cards are valuable specially for pros who shoot a boatload of pictures in an event.


----------



## Conspiracy

ah which explains why my video friends told me to get the 60MB/s since the 90 was so much. they all use 90MB/s which i understand now considering they have insane amounts of money spent on equipment too.

i just need to get a card reader built into my computer so i can take advantage of my card lol

right now i just have a cheap USB reader


----------



## dudemanppl

I don't even use a card reader, I just have it connected to the camera. :3 Too cheap to buy one.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


I don't even use a card reader, I just have it connected to the camera. :3 Too cheap to buy one.


This. Don't bother with a card reader.


----------



## MistaBernie

Camera is faster than my cheapie card reader on my pc.. Haven't tried el laptopo


----------



## Conspiracy

i bought one because my card got corrupted after a basketball game one night and i had to recover all the pics and was informed that the best way todo it was with a card reader. so i bought a cheap one at walmart


----------



## foothead

I bought one for like 24 cents at office depot a while back. Ended up mounting it in my laptop.


----------



## ljason8eg

7D will be here Monday!









I think I'm going to send my T2i in for service. The rubber grip is separating from the body up close to the shutter release button. After that, not sure what I'm going to do with it.

I've started to go through pictures from vacation as well. Stuck with the 18-55 for landscape and other wide angle work but it does a fine job for now.


No Camping by JLofing, on Flickr


----------



## sub50hz

I "unofficially" borrowed a 24L II from the vault today. I'm pretty sure I would sell every other lens in my bag for this. Too fun to use, I should shoot more wide stuff. Kinda getting bored of shooting teles all the time.


----------



## mz-n10

my cheapo card reader takes forever to transfer....i need to get a usb3 one soon.


----------



## xxpinoyxx

USB3 READER + FAST 32GB CARD (90MBs/600x and half full in my case) = TRANSFERRING SECKS.

I intentionally wait until my card has a few gigs on it before I transfer just so I can see "80-90MB/s" in the details window.

...Is there something wrong with me?


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


I "unofficially" borrowed a 24L II from the vault today. I'm pretty sure I would sell every other lens in my bag for this. Too fun to use, I should shoot more wide stuff. Kinda getting bored of shooting teles all the time.


Whats in the vault? 35L on full frame is a party everyday.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *xxpinoyxx*


USB3 READER + FAST 32GB CARD (90MBs/600x and half full in my case) = TRANSFERRING SECKS.

I intentionally wait until my card has a few gigs on it before I transfer just so I can see "80-90MB/s" in the details window.

...Is there something wrong with me?


what cardreader?


----------



## xxpinoyxx

I have this one:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16820162030

Any other one will do; the bottleneck will be your card.

Unfortunately there isn't any readers that use internal USB3 pins but there are adapters (USB3 header to port).


----------



## mz-n10

ahh....ic.

i need external usb one (i know this is but yea) cause i use my laptop most the time.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Whats in the vault? 35L on full frame is a party everyday.


i keep hearing FF users loving their 35L

i wish i had a FF with 35L... everyone makes it sounds like its the next best thing since toasted bread


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;14553668*
> Whats in the vault?


Photo/video gear for the paper -- you just sign out what you take for assignments, and check it back in when you're done. I forgot to write my name down, so technically nobody has any idea where it's at -- gotta call em this morning.


----------



## dudemanppl

Well I got that much.







But what's in there specifically?

Also, FF + 35L is the best thing since anything. I wanted a Contax 645 a little bit back, then I realized how much it cost.


----------



## sub50hz

Several bodies/lenses. Pretty much everything from Nikon/Canon except teles over 400mm, it's pretty dialed.


----------



## dudemanppl

Dude, what newspaper is this?!


----------



## sub50hz

It's a Chicago Tribune subsidiary. Unfortunately, I can't post anything I shoot until it's been printed, and even then there's all kinds of red tape involved if I want to use it elsewhere. It's kind of a raw deal, but it's side money and it can be fun. Quitting soon though, no way am I doing this crap during winter, as the jewelry industry gets insano busy from October - February.


----------



## dudemanppl

Take picture of said vault?


----------



## sub50hz

If you can find any company that will allow you to photograph their inventory vault and post it on the internet, let me know.


----------



## dudemanppl

Just say you were testing the gear to see if it was working.


----------



## sub50hz

We do that, but they don't even allow CF cards in there -- that's the only thing they don't supply.


----------



## dudemanppl

Why would they be so protective? Probably a dumb question to ask...

That was the worst l33t post ever.


----------



## sub50hz

It's insurance. Any time you have a protected vault, there's real ridiculous stipulations written into your policy -- publishing a public image of the interior, if discovered, would result in immediate policy termination (at least, that's how ours reads, I assume it is the same for most other companies). It also prohibits stuff like non-employee entry and other crap. Red tape. I hate it.


----------



## dudemanppl

So disappointing.


----------



## sub50hz

Flying Dog single hop IPA = DD required. what a night, forgot my olympus party cam at home. Lame.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*


i keep hearing FF users loving their 35L

i wish i had a FF with 35L... everyone makes it sounds like its the next best thing since toasted bread


Best thing since toasted _and_ sliced bread.







CA can be quite aggressive wide open, but if you know how to minimize it, it's rarely an issue.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Flying Dog single hop IPA = DD required. what a night, forgot my olympus party cam at home. Lame.


Nice, drinking some Dogfish 90 min. right now. A four pack of that in an hour will do the trick!


----------



## ljason8eg

Might have a job lined up at a local race track next Saturday night. Hopefully it happens as I'll have the 7D by then.

Got around to going through most of my vacation shots as well. Not my best but I thought I'd share some anyway.


Wright's Lake by JLofing, on Flickr


IMG_5100.jpg by JLofing, on Flickr


Canada Geese by JLofing, on Flickr


IMG_5335.jpg by JLofing, on Flickr


Bear Beach Cafe by JLofing, on Flickr


----------



## ImmortalKenny

Just ordered one of these...










Haters gonna hate.


----------



## iandroo888

once guy confirms on the condition of the glass, gonna be pickin up a sigma 50mm f/1.4 EX DG HSM :]

said it was sharp on their d700 with no AF tune. $330 used


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ImmortalKenny;14575969*
> Just ordered one of these...
> 
> Haters gonna hate.


The start of an addiction to primes


----------



## xxpinoyxx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ImmortalKenny;14575969*
> Just ordered one of these...
> 
> Haters gonna hate.


But really, for a cheapo lens it's great. Unfortunately I broke mine trying to clean it because mine sucked up huge particles of dust in between elements.

I sure do love my Ls and Sigma 30. The only thing I need to clean on those is the filter covering up the front element.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xxpinoyxx;14576478*
> If you got it for <$100, it's one hell of a lens; especially for what it's worth.
> 
> If you got it for more than $100, you're not very smart; just saying.
> 
> But really, for a cheapo lens it's great. Unfortunately I broke mine trying to clean it because mine sucked up huge particles of dust in between elements.
> 
> *I sure do love my Ls and Sigma 30. The only thing I need to clean on those is the filter covering up the front element.*


No kidding. It's no L, but my Sigma 30mm has taken everything I've thrown at it, including San Francisco downpours. The expressions on my friends' faces as they saw me continue shooting with my 50D/Sigma 30mm was a mix between shock and absolute horror.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ImmortalKenny;14575969*
> Just ordered one of these...
> 
> Haters gonna hate.


Why would we hate?







Its build quality can use some work and AF is spotty, but for <$100 it's a hell of a lens, and probably the "gateway prime" that got most of us into prime lenses. That's the lens that ended up convincing me to ditch all my zooms, and since then I've owned the Canon 28mm f/1.8, Canon 50mm f/1.4, Canon 85mm f/1.8, and Sigma 30mm f/1.4 all as a result of my exposure to primes with the Nifty


----------



## dudemanppl

You're gonna be poor in a few weeks. Just look at me.


----------



## mz-n10

meh primes....


----------



## Marin

meh zooms...


----------



## dudemanppl

I don't like zooms, I just use the two extremes and might as well have good quality if I'm gonna do that.


----------



## ImmortalKenny

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg;14576448*
> The start of an addiction to primes


YES!







Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;14576741*
> Why would we hate?


Because I had a feeling a bunch of people would tell me to save up and get the Sigma 30mm 1.4 or 50mm 1.4 instead, but I was wrong.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;14576956*
> I don't like zooms, *I just use the two extremes* and might as well have good quality if I'm gonna do that.


I find myself doing the exact same thing.


----------



## dudemanppl

I think I'm selling the 50 1.1 to watercool and do a case mod.


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ImmortalKenny;14576988*
> I bought it on B&H for $118 shipped, it's really not that big of a deal. I need it for next weekend and didn't want to deal with buying it second hand online.
> YES!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Because I had a feeling a bunch of people would tell me to save up and get the Sigma 30mm 1.4 or 50mm 1.4 instead, but I was wrong.


It's one of the go to lenses for a beginner. Actually one of the must have lenses for new photographers.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aksthem1;14578670*
> It's one of the go to lenses for a beginner. Actually one of the must have lenses for new photographers.


definitely, i think i got the 50/1.4 as my 2nd or 3rd lens.


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;14577303*
> I think I'm selling the 50 1.1 to watercool and do a case mod.


----------



## xxpinoyxx

Meh DSLRs


----------



## BlankThis

u jelly?


----------



## Boyboyd

Found a lab that will do E6 processing, scan to disk, and mail back for £7.96 per roll. Or £4.40 per roll once i get a decent transparency scanner. I'm ok with this.

Now I just need to finish this roll.


----------



## Marin

Wonder if I should bring a changing bag back home during break so I can load my 4x5 holders.


----------



## sub50hz

Why not?

Also, I simultaneously lost my red filter and chipped the glass on my yellow filter earlier this week. Kinda bummed.


----------



## iandroo888

aw what a b****... told guy id send money via PP after he would confirm the condition of the glass n body... by the time i woke up, he sold it to someone else


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *BlankThis*




















I don't really like the 50 FL as I've said many many times before and it costs more than the Sigmalux. But I want to keep it.....


----------



## sub50hz

I found my red filter on my FD 50 in a lens pouch. EMBARASS. Dunno why I never put it on my nifty, although I am in some sort of "cheap lens epiphany" stage. Much better than using the monochrome/red filter picture style.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Why not?


Since the film will probably get dusty. It's not a big deal for scanning since it can be cleaned up but I want to also do c-prints.


----------



## riko99

Bought a Konica Autoreflex TC with a 50mm F1.7 today works very well there's a slight amount of oil on the aperture blades and some scratches on the mirror but other than that nothing mechanically wrong with it... the Fiance wanted to know it worked so she bought some Kodak 400 and will get a roll developed tomorrow to make sure everything really works well.


----------



## dudemanppl

Fricken' a, just developed a roll where I used the 50 1.1 and the focus is off on the ones after I took it apart...


----------



## MistaBernie

So, I'm probably using the wrong term for this.. but when I shoot with my Sigma 17-50, I get (what I'm calling) 'ghosting' wide open - it almost looks like camera shake, but it's not. If I stop down at all, it goes away. I dont get this on my Canon 50 f/1.4, and since it goes away if I stop down, I feel like something is wrong (I feel pretty worried about shooting wide open with it). Thoughts?

(I'll try to upload examples in a bit)


----------



## mz-n10

it looks like CA (chromatic aberration)

and welcome to the world of fast zooms....


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


So, I'm probably using the wrong term for this.. but when I shoot with my Sigma 17-50, I get (what I'm calling) 'ghosting' wide open - it almost looks like camera shake, but it's not. If I stop down at all, it goes away. I dont get this on my Canon 50 f/1.4, and since it goes away if I stop down, I feel like something is wrong (I feel pretty worried about shooting wide open with it). Thoughts?

(I'll try to upload examples in a bit)


Could be CA like mz said, but it's hard to tell with white text against a black field. It might also just be softness from shooting wide open at 50mm. Most zoom lenses are softest wide open, and also at the long end of their focal range, so when put together, it can make for a softer image.

My 24-70 exhibited similar looking images at 70mm f/2.8, but that was resolved after being sent off to Canon.


----------



## MistaBernie

well, if I'm shooting indoors I'm probably using a flash anyway, so I can close it down a bit if necessary, and when outdoors it wont be much of an issue anyway. That and those are 100% crop of medium raw images.

I actually DO see a bit of it on my 50/f1.4 as well. Anyone know how long Sigma takes for stuff like this?


----------



## dudemanppl

If you send it in they'll send it back and call you stupid.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


well, if I'm shooting indoors I'm probably using a flash anyway, so I can close it down a bit if necessary, and when outdoors it wont be much of an issue anyway. That and those are 100% crop of medium raw images.

I actually DO see a bit of it on my 50/f1.4 as well. Anyone know how long Sigma takes for stuff like this?


Well, I wouldn't let that keep me from shooting wide open. Send it off to Sigma. I shoot often at 70mm f/2.8, since it allows for the thinnest DOF I can achieve with my 24-70, so I wouldn't want to stop shooting at those settings (which is why I had it fixed).


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


it looks like CA (chromatic aberration)


To me, it looks like a leprechaun, to me.

Really though, coma.


----------



## nuclearjock

I shoot my 70-200 VRII @200mm f/2.8 and never see anything like this. The only way I know the shot was taken at large apeture (or wide open for that matter) is the dof.

I posted some girl's fast pitch taken with this lens last summer if you want to have a look. they were shot wide open in an attempt to blow out an ugly fence.


----------



## dudemanppl

I think the 400 2.8 would illustrate that better.









Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Really though, coma.


SPHERICAL ABERRATION. If I got the wrong one, then this will be embarrassing.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


I shoot my 70-200 VRII @200mm f/2.8 and never see anything like this. The only way I know the shot was taken at large apeture (or wide open for that matter) is the dof.

I posted some girl's fast pitch taken with this lens last summer if you want to have a look. they were shot wide open in an attempt to blow out an ugly fence.


I admittedly misread that as "in an attempt to blow out an ugly face"


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


I admittedly misread that as "in an attempt to blow out an ugly face"










Guilty as charged, lol.


----------



## ljason8eg

Happy time!
























Canon 7D by JLofing, on Flickr


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*


Happy time!
























Canon 7D by JLofing, on Flickr


Congrats!







Now give me your T2i!


----------



## biatchi

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


I admittedly misread that as "in an attempt to blow out an ugly face"











Quote:



Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*


Guilty as charged, lol.


me too


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Congrats!







Now give me your T2i!


Lol









I think I'm gonna hold onto it for now. Needs to be sent in for service before I decide anyway.


----------



## sub50hz

Well, wouldn't ya know -- the AE-1's eyecup fits the 50D, and it's pretty decent. Still thinking of getting that Nikon DK-17M/DK-22 combo and breaking out the dremel, but I'm unsure I wanna spend the cash for it. Maybe I'm being a penny pincher here, but man do Canon viewfinders suck.


----------



## dudemanppl

DK-17M is useless. DK19 is the second best piece of rubber ever.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg;14593884*
> Happy time!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Canon 7D by JLofing, on Flickr


congrats! you wont be disappointed


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


DK-17M is useless.


You ever look through an x0D VF, or did you not have enough time when you were flipping it?









It sorely needs some magnification. Canon doesn't make anything, so I've gotta get creative.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


You ever look through an x0D VF, or did you not have enough time when you were flipping it?









It sorely needs some magnification. Canon doesn't make anything, so I've gotta get creative.


For some reason I thought you shot full frame... Just get a 7D, the VF is bigger than the 1DII and I think equal to the 1DIII/IV


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


It sorely needs some magnification. Canon doesn't make anything, so I've gotta get creative.


time to stop using the VF and switch to LV old man









Pentax magnifying eye piece fits on canon i believe.


----------



## ljason8eg

The 7D's VF is awesome for me so far. Sooooo much better than the T2i you hardly can compare them. dudemanppl, I'm wondering if the 7D you tried had a bunch of stuff like the grid and non-active AF points turned on, because I don't find the VF cluttered at all.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


For some reason I thought you shot full frame... Just get a 7D, the VF is bigger than the 1DII and I think equal to the 1DIII/IV


Sorry, I don't think I need to piss 1500 bucks away just for a viewfinder. The 1DIV is alright, but I only use it for work stuff, it's not my everyday shooter.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


time to stop using the VF and switch to LV old man









Pentax magnifying eye piece fits on canon i believe.


Hah. I've noticed others recommending the Pentax and some other Nikon (1.17x) eyepiece, maybe I will give those a try as well. My eyes are fine, but the small image in the finder is frustrating after shooting MF film bodies that have excellent finders (OM1 > every SLR ever made).


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Sorry, I don't think I need to piss 1500 bucks away just for a viewfinder. The 1DIV is alright, but I only use it for work stuff, it's not my everyday shooter.


CLP + selling the 50D = like 500-600. But if you're okay with it then there's no reason for it.


----------



## MistaBernie

Yeah, I'm trying to think of what to get rid of to fund a 7D..


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;14603449*
> CLP + selling the 50D = like 500-600. But if you're okay with it then there's no reason for it.


I would rather put 600 towards something else right now, I have plenty of gear. Rallycross season is coming up, and a guy on my block is trying to dump his 2.5RS for cheap.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;14603768*
> I would rather put 600 towards something else right now, I have plenty of gear. Rallycross season is coming up, and a guy on my block is trying to dump his 2.5RS for cheap.


what year?

been to a rallycross a few years back, great times. im on a similar boat as you, trying to get my miata scca spec'd to run at infineon later this year....but the lack of time and more importantly $$$ has kept me from finishing it.


----------



## sub50hz

I think it's a 98, but I'm gonna go take a look at it tomorrow night to get some info. The interior is a damn wreck, which is why he's had trouble selling it -- but I don't care, as all of it would come out anyway.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;14603992*
> I think it's a 98, but I'm gonna go take a look at it tomorrow night to get some info. The interior is a damn wreck, which is why he's had trouble selling it -- but I don't care, as all of it would come out anyway.


throw a cage in it and call it a day


----------



## sub50hz

Maybe, good 4140 cages cost megabucks, and Rallycross really doesn't require anything crazy, maybe a roll bar and trunk crossbrace, but I'm not going full out dash/door bars on something that's likely going to be sent for scrap in 6 months anyway.


----------



## MistaBernie

I potentially have a buyer lined up for my Jazz bass. That will give me most of the $ I need for a 7D upgrade via CLP..


----------



## sub50hz

Fffff, must resist. I don't play out enough to need to buy another bass, though -- too much gear already.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;14629283*
> Fffff, must resist. I don't play out enough to need to buy another bass, though -- too much gear already.


I'm just trying to decide what to do with the cash at this point (if the sale happens). I asked $900, I have someone that offered that but looks like flaky mcflakeperson, so I have someone lined up ready to pay $850 (who tried to lowball me starting around 700), so I need to figure out how serious they are about the purchase. Last time I sold a guitar on Craigslist, I fell for the old 'yeah, I know I offered to pay x amount, but I really only have y amount'. I talked them up closer to the agreed upon amount, but this time I seriously think I'd kick the guy in the nuts if he was like 'oh, I can't pay that'.










The sad part is, that might mean I might just sell off my rig altogether. It would inject my photography fund with some $$$.. but I think I would have a sad ( I could probably get ~$1000 for the Fender Bassman Pro 400 Combo w/ extension cab and probably about $400 for my schecter... that would put me up in the 5Dii range, but I wouldn't be able to use hardly any of my glass







-- OOH, with the rest of my rig, I could pick up a 100-400, but I dont see the reselling market for these doing well (I just missed out on a used one the other day for $900, I would have bought at that price whether I had the money or not







)


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


I'm just trying to decide what to do with the cash at this point (if the sale happens). I asked $900, I have someone that offered that but looks like flaky mcflakeperson, so I have someone lined up ready to pay $850 (who tried to lowball me starting around 700), so I need to figure out how serious they are about the purchase. Last time I sold a guitar on Craigslist, I fell for the old 'yeah, I know I offered to pay x amount, but I really only have y amount'. I talked them up closer to the agreed upon amount, but this time I seriously think I'd kick the guy in the nuts if he was like 'oh, I can't pay that'.


Dang. I would say that you should just keep the 60D and keep playing -- I wouldn't sell my stuff unless I absolutely needed it to pay bills or something, I already made that mistake on a Les Paul Custom and Geddy Jazz a few years ago.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


I'm just trying to decide what to do with the cash at this point (if the sale happens). I asked $900, I have someone that offered that but looks like flaky mcflakeperson, so I have someone lined up ready to pay $850 (who tried to lowball me starting around 700), so I need to figure out how serious they are about the purchase. Last time I sold a guitar on Craigslist, I fell for the old 'yeah, I know I offered to pay x amount, but I really only have y amount'. I talked them up closer to the agreed upon amount, but this time I seriously think I'd kick the guy in the nuts if he was like 'oh, I can't pay that'.










*The sad part is, that might mean I might just sell off my rig altogether. It would inject my photography fund with some $$$.*. but I think I would have a sad ( I could probably get ~$1000 for the Fender Bassman Pro 400 Combo w/ extension cab and probably about $400 for my schecter... that would put me up in the 5Dii range, but I wouldn't be able to use hardly any of my glass







-- OOH, with the rest of my rig, I could pick up a 100-400, but I dont see the reselling market for these doing well (I just missed out on a used one the other day for $900, I would have bought at that price whether I had the money or not







)


Leaving what for PP? I would hate not having a fast rig for PP'ing photos. I hate doing it on my laptop.


----------



## sub50hz

Bass rig, brosef.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Bass rig, brosef.










I see...this is what happens when things get


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Leaving what for PP? I would hate not having a fast rig for PP'ing photos. I hate doing it on my laptop.


You guys and your i7s


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


You guys and your i7s










i7 ftw


----------



## laboitenoire

Ha. I chug through photos no problem on my laptop. Sure it can get a little slow and a little hot, but it's no slouch, lol. Although I am thinking of buying a better system, we'll see.


----------



## Shane1244

/flex


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire;14632825*
> Ha. I chug through photos no problem on my laptop. Sure it can get a little slow and a little hot, but it's no slouch, lol. Although I am thinking of buying a better system, we'll see.


I think you have been without a real rig for too long.







There's nothing like cold starting LR3 in 2 seconds and chugging through RAW conversions _whilst_ playing Portal 2.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;14631747*
> You guys and your i7s


Is your AMD that bad?


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;14635024*
> Is your AMD that bad?


I can't imagine it is. I can blow through multiple converted exports in Lightroom in no time.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;14635024*
> I think you have been without a real rig for too long.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There's nothing like cold starting LR3 in 2 seconds and chugging through RAW conversions _whilst_ playing Portal 2.
> 
> Is your AMD that bad?


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;14635078*
> I can't imagine it is. I can blow through multiple converted exports in Lightroom in no time.


Oh no, not a bad CPU at all. But you have to admit i7s are better and shinier.

It's like how my 50D is a perfectly good camera, but I envy all of you with 5D IIs and red rings


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;14635482*
> Oh no, not a bad CPU at all. But you have to admit i7s are better and shinier.


Meh. I use an i7 machine in my office, and it's not a huge difference. Photoshop seems a smidgen quicker on occasion, but in most scenarios including general editing and batch exports, if it's any quicker it's most certainly imperceptible.


----------



## Dream Killer

1366 i7s come into play with RAM intensive stuff like applying filters to multiple layers on full-res .tiff files. Triple channel RAM and hyper-threading really boost processing on PS.


----------



## MistaBernie

kind of makes me wish I had kept the other 6gb I had initially...


----------



## dudemanppl

Ram is very useful when stitching. I think I'll buy 8 more gigs of ram.


----------



## r34p3rex

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Ram is very useful when stitching. I think I'll buy 8 more gigs of ram.


You can never have too much RAM..


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r34p3rex*


You can never have too much RAM..










Unless you're running a 32-bit OS


----------



## r34p3rex

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;14643265*
> Unless you're running a 32-bit OS


In which case you should be put out back and shot for using such an antiquated OS









In other news, I don't think I'll be getting a 5D2 anymore (for now at least). Do you guys reckon the upgrade to a 7D is worth it? ISO performance-wise, is it comparable to the T2i or better?


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r34p3rex;14643789*
> In other news, I don't think I'll be getting a 5D2 anymore (for now at least). Do you guys reckon the upgrade to a 7D is worth it? ISO performance-wise, is it comparable to the T2i or better?


I haven't done any side by side testing, but the two seem pretty similar which makes sense since they use the same sensor. The 7D isn't any worse, that's for sure. You'll love the AF system and control layout though. Both are a million times better than what's on the Rebel bodies. It was worth it for me because I normally shoot stuff that is moving so better AF system is huge.


----------



## r34p3rex

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg;14643903*
> I haven't done any side by side testing, but the two seem pretty similar which makes sense since they use the same sensor. The 7D isn't any worse, that's for sure. You'll love the AF system and control layout though. Both are a million times better than what's on the Rebel bodies. It was worth it for me because I normally shoot stuff that is moving so better AF system is huge.


Yea that's what I figured. I'm rethinking my upgrade plan and now I'm thinking... 7D for now.. 5D3 when it comes out ;D

I can pick up a refurb 7D for around $1150 or so


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r34p3rex;14643789*
> In which case you should be put out back and shot for using such an antiquated OS
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In other news, I don't think I'll be getting a 5D2 anymore (for now at least). Do you guys reckon the upgrade to a 7D is worth it? ISO performance-wise, is it comparable to the T2i or better?


7D uses the _exact_ same sensor as the T2i. You're going to get a lot of features (superior AF, better VF, mag alloy body, weather sealing), but there will be no IQ benefits since the sensors are the same.


----------



## MistaBernie

doesn't the 7D use two of the Digic IV Processors though?

It does -- but that's more quantity than quality (same quality since it's the same sensor) - just part of the reason why AF is better (and FPS is higher)


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie;14644062*
> doesn't the 7D use two of the Digic IV Processors though?


Yes, but that's mostly so it can achieve 8 FPS.


----------



## Marin

Bringing my 4x5 back home for the break. Should be fun.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r34p3rex;14643789*
> In which case you should be put out back and shot for using such an antiquated OS
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In other news, I don't think I'll be getting a 5D2 anymore (for now at least). Do you guys reckon the upgrade to a 7D is worth it? ISO performance-wise, is it comparable to the T2i or better?


Get neither, *spend money on a superior lens* that will last you a lifetime. Bodies refresh every two years but a 35L, 70-200L (any), or 16-35L will keep its value longer than you can live.

Upgrade your lens then find out your limit on your camera and upgrade accordingly.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer;14645137*
> Get neither, *spend money on a superior lens* that will last you a lifetime. Bodies refresh every two years but a 35L, 70-200L (any), or 16-35L will keep its value longer than you can live.
> 
> Upgrade your lens then find out your limit on your camera and upgrade accordingly.


+1, great advice.


----------



## r34p3rex

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer;14645137*
> Get neither, *spend money on a superior lens* that will last you a lifetime. Bodies refresh every two years but a 35L, 70-200L (any), or 16-35L will keep its value longer than you can live.
> 
> Upgrade your lens then find out your limit on your camera and upgrade accordingly.


I've actually been contemplating the 16-35.. the 24-105 simply isn't wide enough. Any idea if the MKII version is worth the premium over the MKI?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r34p3rex;14645429*
> I've actually been contemplating the 16-35.. the 24-105 simply isn't wide enough. Any idea if the MKII version is worth the premium over the MKI?


If you aren't going FF anytime soon, get the Canon 10-22 instead of the 16-35. Kind of a waste getting the 16-35 on a crop IMO.


----------



## r34p3rex

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;14645694*
> If you aren't going FF anytime soon, get the Canon 10-22 instead of the 16-35. Kind of a waste getting the 16-35 on a crop IMO.


I'm hoping to go full-frame in the coming months.. definitely by the holidays. MAN I CAN'T DECIDE.. one second I want FF.. the next I want some new glass..


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r34p3rex;14645718*
> I'm hoping to go full-frame in the coming months.. definitely by the holidays. MAN I CAN'T DECIDE.. one second I want FF.. the next I want some new glass..


Oh, I thought you just said you were getting a 7D. Either way, get the 10-22 until you go FF if you're hankering for some serious wide angle. You won't regret it and you can sell the 10-22 in a day for 80%+ of retail, or get it used and you can sell it back for 100% (or more) of what you paid for it.


----------



## r34p3rex

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;14645990*
> Oh, I thought you just said you were getting a 7D. Either way, get the 10-22 until you go FF if you're hankering for some serious wide angle. You won't regret it and you can sell the 10-22 in a day for 80%+ of retail, or get it used and you can sell it back for 100% (or more) of what you paid for it.


I have the money for a 7D right now (well, used at least). I'm just afraid of jumping on the 5D2 bandwagon if the 5D3 is coming soon


----------



## sub50hz

Hell, if I had 5D2 money laying around I would get a 1DIII. Just sayin.


----------



## dudemanppl

I just realized I had a 16-28 still. Anybody want it?







And APS-C and full frame are completely different beasts, it's mindblowing. And I wouldn't get a 1DIII because I like video and small size. But if I needed a second body I would get a 1DIII. Crop + FF, EPIC AF + crap AF, high FPS + low FPS, low res + high res. They basically do what the other one cant do, prefect couples.


----------



## MistaBernie

16-28? hit me up..

Wait, is it the Tokina?


----------



## mz-n10

the urge to buy a 1.2 50ish lens is setting in again......BLAH!!!


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Hm, personally, I'd go with:

Stick with your T2i
Sigma 10-20 (f/4-5.6 is cheaper, but f/3.5 is awesome







)
Sigma 30mm f/1.4
Canon 85mm f/1.8 (for portraits)
Canon 70-200 f/2.8L

Your 24-105L can fund almost all of your 70-200 f/2.8L purchase, 17-50 f/2.8 is around the same price as a 30 f/1.4 so you can try to find a straight trade there, and you can probably front about $100-$150 after the sale of your 70-300 for a 10-20.

All in all, you'd probably be out $250 or so by my estimates, which is still a lot less than if you were to go with a 7D, and you'd have my ideal lens setup









My dream setup right there!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r34p3rex;14646249*
> I have the money for a 7D right now (well, used at least). I'm just afraid of jumping on the 5D2 bandwagon if the 5D3 is coming soon


To each his own, but I wouldn't get caught up in waiting for the latest body. The 5DII will still be a great body for a while yet.


----------



## MistaBernie

See, I can't justify switching to a 5Dii either, mostly because of my 10-20 and my 17-50.. granted, I could sell them and get something better (24-70 seems pretty awesome on FF).. but I am trying to pick up a second body in case of emergencies/issues (I'm shooting for a friend tomorrow on the 60D alone, wish me luck that nothing bad happens!)


----------



## r34p3rex

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;14647289*
> Hm, personally, I'd go with:
> 
> Stick with your T2i
> Sigma 10-20 (f/4-5.6 is cheaper, but f/3.5 is awesome
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )
> Sigma 30mm f/1.4
> Canon 85mm f/1.8 (for portraits)
> Canon 70-200 f/2.8L
> 
> Your 24-105L can fund almost all of your 70-200 f/2.8L purchase, 17-50 f/2.8 is around the same price as a 30 f/1.4 so you can try to find a straight trade there, and you can probably front about $100-$150 after the sale of your 70-300 for a 10-20.
> 
> All in all, you'd probably be out $250 or so by my estimates, which is still a lot less than if you were to go with a 7D, and you'd have my ideal lens setup
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My dream setup right there!


I used to be a prime lover but then I got my 17-50 and 24-105 and now I can't stop using zooms







During photoshoots, I feel like I rarely use my 85

Man, if only there was a f1.8 zoom.







I don't want to imagine the price tag though..
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;14647585*
> To each his own, but I wouldn't get caught up in waiting for the latest body. The 5DII will still be a great body for a while yet.


Well, I don't intend on getting the 5D3







I intend on picking up one of the many 5D2's that will go on the market from people upgrading to the 5D3 xD


----------



## Takendown2

Finally got my first camera







. After playing with my uncles 5D2 and 24-70L... i was too excited not to get my own.

Gear:
Canon 600D + 16gb Class 10 SD Card
Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM
Canon EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM (Got for free)

Anyways... questioning if the 85 f1.8 is gonna be worth it?


----------



## sub50hz

85/1.8 is one of Canon's best bang-for-your-buck lenses. Super sharp, probably the fastest AF of any EF lens (135L close behind), excellent portrait focal length for a crop body. Buy one.


----------



## r34p3rex

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


85/1.8 is one of Canon's best bang-for-your-buck lenses. Super sharp, probably the fastest AF of any EF lens (135L close behind), excellent portrait focal length for a crop body. Buy one.


Really? I always thought the 135L was the fastest lens in the EF line up


----------



## sub50hz

They're pretty close in most regards, actually.


----------



## r34p3rex

Mehhh someone just offered me a 5D2 + Grip for $1950 :\\


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r34p3rex*


I used to be a prime lover but then I got my 17-50 and 24-105 and now I can't stop using zooms







During photoshoots, I feel like I rarely use my 85

*Man, if only there was a f1.8 zoom.







I don't want to imagine the price tag though..*

Well, I don't intend on getting the 5D3







I intend on picking up one of the many 5D2's that will go on the market from people upgrading to the 5D3 xD


As someone once said on POTN, "neither your arms nor your wallet could handle it." The IQ of such a lens wouldn't be so great either.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Takendown2;14650969*
> Finally got my first camera
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . After playing with my uncles 5D2 and 24-70L... i was too excited not to get my own.
> 
> Gear:
> Canon 600D + 16gb Class 10 SD Card
> Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM
> Canon EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM (Got for free)
> 
> Anyways... questioning if the 85 f1.8 is gonna be worth it?


I'd sell off that 28-135. Quite a bit of overlap with the 17-55mm and if you want more on the tele side, I think a 55-250mm (can be had for less than the 28-135mm sells for) is a better compliment to the 17-55mm than the 28-135mm is.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r34p3rex;14652643*
> Mehhh someone just offered me a 5D2 + Grip for $1950 :\


I'd jump on that. Even when the 5DIII comes out, used prices for a 5DII won't get much better.


----------



## Boyboyd

And it's not as if the 5DII will be any less of a camera when the 3rd instalment comes out.


----------



## BlankThis

Itching to pick up a Samyang 35 f/1.4 in Nikon mount to tie me over until I finally hop over to Canon with a 5Dc. $550 is still a lot of cashmoney for me right now.


----------



## dudemanppl

It's gonna suck manually focusing that without an aftermarket focusing screen.


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;14653939*
> I'd jump on that. Even when the 5DIII comes out, used prices for a 5DII won't get much better.


Rumours is that there will be a 5DII price drop, so it will effect it.


----------



## dudemanppl

I just loaded the M6 while holding 7 rolls of film. I don't even know why... Anyway, four rolls of new Portra 400, three of HP5+. Turns out the 50 1.1 wasn't broken! The M6 was, so I calibrated the rangefinder and all is good.


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;14654711*
> It's gonna suck manually focusing that without an aftermarket focusing screen.


This is what I was thinking but I've been messing around with my 50 f/1.8 wide open and I'm pretty happy with the results I can get with it manually and the 35 should be easier since it's wider and actually designed to be manually focused rather than twisting a scrap of plastic around. Most of my photography is static.

Oh dudemanppl is a M3 in 9/10 condition worth $900?


----------



## dudemanppl

Loading an M3 is a sort of tedious process, but I personally would save up like 200 more and look for an M6 (mine was 1100). Black is more sex to me and I basically only use 35.


----------



## murderbymodem

So, I'm thinking about buying an old Canon film SLR to slap my nifty fifty on and play around with. I'm currently looking at a used Rebel XS, do you guys think that would be good? I've never used a film SLR in my life so I'll be totally new to it and I want something cheap and easy to use.


----------



## Shane1244

Isn't the XS digital..?


----------



## murderbymodem

There's an old Rebel XS. Also know as the EOS 500 in Europe.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Canon-EOS-Rebel-XS-35mm-Film-Auto-Focus-Camera-Body-/150650697367?pt=Film_Cameras&hash=item23137b3697


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Redmist;14664390*
> So, I'm thinking about buying an old Canon film SLR to slap my nifty fifty on and play around with. I'm currently looking at a used Rebel XS, do you guys think that would be good? I've never used a film SLR in my life so I'll be totally new to it and I want something cheap and easy to use.


How cheap? A2s and Elan 7s are great EOS film bodies. That being said, I would recommend just ponying up a bit more cash and picking up a manual-focus film body + lens -- you may find your approach to be considerably different, and it's a great technique builder.


----------



## murderbymodem

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;14664609*
> How cheap? A2s and Elan 7s are great EOS film bodies. That being said, I would recommend just ponying up a bit more cash and picking up a manual-focus film body + lens -- you may find your approach to be considerably different, and it's a great technique builder.


Pretty cheap. ~$40 since film and batteries will cost money as well.

Are the old lenses optically superior? I was planning on focusing manually, but just figured I'd use the 50 I already have instead of buying another one, since the old film bodies that came with lenses I saw were a bit more than I was willing to spend.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Redmist;14664686*
> Pretty cheap. ~$40 since film and batteries will cost money as well.
> 
> Are the old lenses optically superior? I was planning on focusing manually, but just figured I'd use the 50 I already have instead of buying another one, since the old film bodies that came with lenses I saw were a bit more than I was willing to spend.


The old lenses aren't superior, no, but if you're planning on focusing manually with a nifty on an EOS body, _good luck._ It's well worth it to spend a couple hundred bucks on a film body and lens if you're going to shoot film in any capacity.


----------



## murderbymodem

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;14664719*
> The old lenses aren't superior, no, but if you're planning on focusing manually with a nifty on an EOS body, _good luck._ It's well worth it to spend a couple hundred bucks on a film body and lens if you're going to shoot film in any capacity.


Well the main plan was something super cheap and just to play with, and also the fact that it wouldn't cost me much would allow me bring it take it with me to places where I would worry about bringing my 60D, or any other expensive equipment.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Redmist;14664686*
> I just want something to play with, and super cheap so that I could dare to bring it places where I would worry about having my 60D with me.


This is why insurance exists. If you're worried about being seen, you're going to miss an awful lot of good photos. Cover it in gaffers tape, leave the battery grip at home, cover it with a towel... there's lots of ways to not be seen, although with the size of DSLRs, it's much more difficult. Small, black manual-focus film bodies with quiet shutters (Leica/Minolta) are quite good for street photography, as it helps you avoid being noticed.


----------



## ~LL~

Another member comes knocking - hook me up please....

website: http://chrismckayphotography.com

Gear: Gear as in here


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *~LL~;14666151*
> Another member comes knocking - hook me up please....
> 
> website: http://chrismckayphotography.com
> 
> Gear: Gear as in here


Nice kit, and thanks for formatting everything nicely!


----------



## laboitenoire

Went to a cool open house day at the Collings Foundation (people who do the B-24 and B-17 tours across the US) and got some good pictures... However I'm going to wait until tomorrow when I'm back on campus where my upload speeds are like 70 Mbps. And that's under peak traffic. Best I've ever seen is 240


----------



## max302

I've had this idea about changing the format of the gear listing. How about having a single member list, with a permalink to a post listing the user's gear? The user could then maintain his/her own gear according to either a proposed format or a custom list.

It seems like the admin overhead would be much less important, and users like dudemanppl who change gear every 8 hours could keep their profile up to date more easily.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *max302;14667398*
> I've had this idea about changing the format of the gear listing. How about having a single member list, with a permalink to a post listing the user's gear? The user could then maintain his/her own gear according to either a proposed format or a custom list.
> 
> It seems like the admin overhead would be much less important, and users like dudemanppl who change gear every 8 hours could keep their profile up to date more easily.


I've toyed with that idea actually. While I like the idea (POTN does something similar), it's nice to scroll through a list and see what gear everyone is using on a single page, rather than endlessly following links.

And I don't mind adding and/or changing gear lists (except for dude's







); it's nice to see what people are getting into.


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;14664609*
> How cheap? A2s and Elan 7s are great EOS film bodies. That being said, I would recommend just ponying up a bit more cash and picking up a manual-focus film body + lens -- you may find your approach to be considerably different, and it's a great technique builder.


This. I hate how my D90 feels in my hands now after spending a bunch of time shooting my FTb.


----------



## ROM3000

Hey I was wondering if any of you could recommend some other photography oriented forums, specifically for Nikon equipment? Thanks.


----------



## dudemanppl

I lol'd at how everyone referenced at how much I change my gear list.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ROM3000;14669056*
> Hey I was wondering if any of you could recommend some other photography oriented forums, specifically for Nikon equipment? Thanks.


Nikon cafe seems like the obvious place to start. I'm a member there but i can't seem to visit it regularly like i do OCN.


----------



## dudemanppl

Fred Miranda. Mostly old folks though. Wedding forum is top notch and they critique stuff super hard. It also contains most if the under 30 crowd of the website (and take much better pictures than most of the sections except the Alt forum which has nateventure).


----------



## Conspiracy

my zeikos grip should be coming in the mail tomorrow


----------



## ROM3000

Thanks for the replies. I'm signing up now.


----------



## sub50hz

I am trying so incredibly hard not to buy a 1DIII and 1N RS in the same shot right now. Ffffffffffffffffffffffff.


----------



## Conspiracy

dude 1DIII is awesome wish i had one. a friend of mine has 2 i thought about borrowing it forever


----------



## sub50hz

Ok, 1nRS on the way, waiting for 1D guy to call me back.


----------



## spRICE

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;14677496*
> Fred Miranda. Mostly old folks though. Wedding forum is top notch and they critique stuff super hard. It also contains most if the under 30 crowd of the website (and take much better pictures than most of the sections except the Alt forum which has nateventure).


I went on to the wedding photography section and I was like







The photos on there makes everything on OCN that I have seen seem amateur (no offence of course).


----------



## sub50hz

Guys, get to Borders if there are any open near you -- I just picked up a couple of really good books for like 50 bucks (Crewdson and, oddly enough, Sammy Davis Jr.).


----------



## r34p3rex

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Guys, get to Borders if there are any open near you -- I just picked up a couple of really good books for like 50 bucks (Crewdson and, oddly enough, Sammy Davis Jr.).


All the Borders in my area are gone


----------



## Conspiracy

Books? what are those? some type of video game?


----------



## Boyboyd

Well, i'm an idiot...

Just re-wound some film i wasn't done with yet. Now there's no leading edge so i can't fix it back on. Don't suppose there's a way to manually wind it back out?

Still, learn from your mistakes and all that.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Boyboyd;14686047*
> Well, i'm an idiot...
> 
> Just re-wound some film i wasn't done with yet. Now there's no leading edge so i can't fix it back on. Don't suppose there's a way to manually wind it back out?
> 
> Still, learn from your mistakes and all that.


http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/86403-REG/General_Brand_ESA367_35mm_Film_Leader_Retriever.html


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy;14683133*
> Books? what are those? some type of video game?







12 dollars.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;14686361*
> Amazon.com: Gregory Crewdson (9783775716222): Martin Hochleitner, Urs Stahel, Stephan Berg, Martin Hentschel, Gregory Crewdson: Books
> 
> 12 dollars.


oooh that looks good. ill have to go to borders and see whats up


----------



## r34p3rex

How usable is the 70-200 2.8 without IS? I'm thinking of ditching the tammy 70-300 and 85 1.8 to get a 70-200 2.8 non-IS. While I'd love to get the IS version, my wallet would NOT be happy


----------



## dudemanppl

Non-IS is grrrreeatttt. I barely took advantage of the IS. Sharp sharp sharp. And get a leader retriever to that other guy, I change film mid roll all the time.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;14686234*
> http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/86403-REG/General_Brand_ESA367_35mm_Film_Leader_Retriever.html


Thanks. It's also good to know that i'm not the first person to ever do that. I'll look and see if they have any available over here.


----------



## r34p3rex

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;14687655*
> Non-IS is grrrreeatttt. I barely took advantage of the IS. Sharp sharp sharp. And get a leader retriever to that other guy, I change film mid roll all the time.


Awesome.. gonna go snipe me one on ebay


----------



## Conspiracy

just got my zeikos grip in the mail for the 7D. works great. unfortunately i can put my camera in my bag with a lens on but ill just have to adjust the sections so it all fits









feels plasticy when adjusting the shutter speed while holding it vertical but thats not an issue since i didnt want to buy the canon grip that is $100 more and made out of metal


----------



## Marin

Never really been a fan of grips since there's always some amount of movement with them.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Never really been a fan of grips since there's always some amount of movement with them.


Nikon's grips seem to have _way_ less flex, the D300/700 grip is awesome.


----------



## Thebreezybb

Sony Announcing the A77 soon is getting me really Excited. I wanna jump back in Photography like the old days...


----------



## Marin

24mp APS-C sensor. That's going to be so dense.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


24mp APS-C sensor. That's going to be so dense.


_Eh._


----------



## Thebreezybb

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


_Eh._


+2


----------



## r34p3rex

Found a 70-200 f2.8 for $1120 shipped. UY date code, perfect condition body/glass.

Opinions?


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


24mp APS-C sensor. That's going to be so dense.


Not down.

Edit: r34 thats a deal here in Canada


----------



## sub50hz

Watch the Sell forum on POTN for a while.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


24mp APS-C sensor. That's going to be so dense.


Jeez...what would the diffraction limit be on that? Canon's 18MP APS-C is diffraction limited at around f/9 IIRC.


----------



## r34p3rex

Alright gonna go for it! Anyone wanna buy my other lenses?









I have a 85 1.8, Tammy 70-300 VC, and Tammy 17-50 non-VC


----------



## sub50hz

You're dumping everything for a 70-200? Interesting choice.


----------



## r34p3rex

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


You're dumping everything for a 70-200? Interesting choice.


Nah i'm just retooling.







Gonna go with a 10-22, 24-70, and 70-200







I'd have all my bases covered


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*


Jeez...what would the diffraction limit be on that? Canon's 18MP APS-C is diffraction limited at around f/9 IIRC.


diffraction is more a aperture issue then a sensor issue. Noise on teh other hand is gonna be interesting with sony's past noise history







.


----------



## r34p3rex

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


24mp APS-C sensor. That's going to be so dense.


I don't even want to imagine how much noise that's going to produce..


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r34p3rex*


Alright gonna go for it! Anyone wanna buy my other lenses?









I have a 85 1.8, Tammy 70-300 VC, and Tammy 17-50 non-VC


85 has been in my radar for a bit - let me check on a few things..


----------



## r34p3rex

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


85 has been in my radar for a bit - let me check on a few things..


Why do I feel like I've seen your name on POTN..


----------



## Thebreezybb

Seems like the A77 will be Around $1400! which is a lot more than i hoped it would be. 
I think I'll go for it when it comes it. Been out for a long time now I can't take it anymore!!


----------



## mz-n10

Amazon jumped the gun....


----------



## r34p3rex

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


Amazon jumped the gun....


Man if only I could use my Canon lenses on it..


----------



## mz-n10

yea its not bad...G.A.S. (gear acquisition syndrome) kicking in......

theres some other cool stuff come out....

  nex-5N
in teh specs "LA-EA2" ads a translucent mirror to the adapter so there is full speed AF on sony alpha lenses even on a EVIL camera.


----------



## Thebreezybb

Ordered! Now I wait


----------



## Marin

Where's Sony's FF update.


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Thebreezybb;14693396*
> Ordered! Now I wait


you paid 200 too much.


----------



## Marin

Too.


----------



## Shane1244

nvm, I was looking at the nex7


----------



## Thebreezybb

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;14694202*
> Where's Sony's FF update.


Maybe next year.


----------



## BlankThis

Why can Nikon not create a feature-stripped budget oriented FF body?


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis;14695014*
> Why can Nikon not create a feature-stripped budget oriented FF body?


maybe because canon didnt do it so they dont need to create something to compete against. although if nikon had a budget FF that had great performance just no features id totally be using nikon i think. love my 7D but i dont use ALL the features. i do love the AF though


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis;14695014*
> Why can Nikon not create a feature-stripped budget oriented FF body?


Becuase Nikon and "budget" are at two opposite ends of the financial spectrum. I shoot Nikon pro gear, but I'm sorry to say they are nothing short of a rip off when it comes to price. Availability sucks as well.


----------



## biatchi

Lack of autofocus motor in non pro bodies would be a prime example of them being a bit of a rip off.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Thebreezybb;14692839*
> Seems like the A77 will be Around $1400! which is a lot more than i hoped it would be.
> I think I'll go for it when it comes it. Been out for a long time now I can't take it anymore!!


It's still cheaper than the 7D.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nuclearjock;14695854*
> Becuase Nikon and "budget" are at two opposite ends of the financial spectrum. I shoot Nikon pro gear, but I'm sorry to say they are nothing short of a rip off when it comes to price. Availability sucks as well.


LOL, this. Although Nikon's entry-level bodies are competitively priced.


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy;14695256*
> maybe because canon didnt do it so they dont need to create something to compete against. although if nikon had a budget FF that had great performance just no features id totally be using nikon i think. love my 7D but i dont use ALL the features. i do love the AF though


I find DSLRs have too many features these days. I would kill for a simple/streamlined FX body.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis;14699410*
> I find DSLRs have too many features these days. I would kill for a simple/streamlined FX body.


i agree i dont need half of the features that the 7D has but if you took all the features and kept the simple performance of it with its AF and ISO performance it makes a great camera. honestly who needs a digital level or more than one AF point?


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis;14699410*
> I find DSLRs have too many features these days. I would kill for a simple/streamlined FX body.


sony tried it with the a850 (msrp <2000USD) but they discontinued it. However they kept the more expensive a900....from that i would assume that the a850 wasnt doing as well as the a900 so they discontinued it, but i havent seen any hard sale numbers so who knows.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis;14699410*
> I find DSLRs have too many features these days. I would kill for a simple/streamlined FX body.


Leica M9, lol.

Anyways, 35mm is meh. I want to get a Phase One.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;14709841*
> Anyways, 35mm is meh. I want to get a Phase One.


I backed off the 1DIII because I'm looking into a 645AFD -- film back, though. No PhaseOne baller nonsense for me.


----------



## Conspiracy

what the eff is this PhaseOne thing


----------



## Marin

So you're buying into Phase One anyways, lol. They own most of the MF stuff out their currently.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy;14709905*
> what the eff is this PhaseOne thing


MF backs that are used by professionals. They're dominating the market right now.

http://www.phaseone.com/


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;14709906*
> So you're buying into Phase One anyways, lol.


Haha, essentially. I'm finding the 645AF to be _quite a bit_ cheaper, though, and I don't know that's need to be digital ready..... ever. Anyways, this little gem showed up just now:


----------



## Marin

Back when Canon was repping polycarbonate for their professional gear.


----------



## sub50hz

CFRP is actually pretty great stuff. I've been into RC racing for a long time, and CFRP parts almost _always_ outlast their magnesium/titanium counterparts. I'm not missing a metal body frame at all, this is quite rigid -- it's no 1V, but it was also 1/3 of the price.


----------



## Marin

I just don't like the feeling of it.


----------



## sub50hz

In all honesty, neither am I, but the 1N is quite a bit more solid than Elans and other EOS bodies of its era.


----------



## Marin

Oh I know, I've used the EOS-1 and EOS-3 before. They don't feel cheap at all and have a heft to them.


----------



## sub50hz

You still have your 1V?


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Leica M9, lol.


Pretty much. Minus the ridiculous price tag.


----------



## MistaBernie

So, let's say I was contemplating getting a FF body..

after this weekend, the 10-20 is gone, and I add an 85 f/1.8 to the mix. The only glass I'd have to worry about is the Sigma 17-50.

The most cost-effective option, I believe, would be switching it for a 17-40. I dont think I would need a FAST zoom on full frame if I've got the 50 f/1.4. In reality though, the only fast zoom I would be able to get for full frame that would be similar to a 17-50 would be 24-70 (by my calculations)... is that really true?


----------



## sub50hz

Man, lots of full-frame lust on here lately and almost nobody shooting film. Tsk tsk.


----------



## MistaBernie

I shot plenty of film between 2000-2002. I actually found a 100 sheet box of 4x6s in my basement the other day. I'd scan them but I'm shy..


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


You still have your 1V?


Yes.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Man, lots of full-frame lust on here lately and almost nobody shooting film. Tsk tsk.


well since u asked......

im currently looking at a minolta maxxum 7 for film. i have a canon elan 7 but without lenses it just does feel right.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


So, let's say I was contemplating getting a FF body..

after this weekend, the 10-20 is gone, and I add an 85 f/1.8 to the mix. The only glass I'd have to worry about is the Sigma 17-50.

The most cost-effective option, I believe, would be switching it for a 17-40. I dont think I would need a FAST zoom on full frame if I've got the 50 f/1.4. In reality though, the only fast zoom I would be able to get for full frame that would be similar to a 17-50 would be 24-70 (by my calculations)... is that really true?


Pretty much. And one unfortunate feature of FF is that is shows lens flaws much worse than crop, so if you get a fast standard zoom, it has to be pretty good. Fortunately, the Tamron 28-75 is a good compromise and very nicely priced compared to the Canon 24-70.

And the 17-40 is great on crop, but the corners are more or less non-existant on FF, at least when shooting wide open. It makes for a decent landscape lens though, when stopped down of course.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Man, lots of full-frame lust on here lately and almost nobody shooting film. Tsk tsk.


I know, all talk and no FF cameras being bought!







And I wish I had the time or money to shoot film more. My Nikon EM really sucks, but it's all I have. If I got a Canon film body, it would have to be something worthwhile like the 1v, but the money issue again. I've spent my limit on photography, so film isn't too likely for me unfortunately.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


well since u asked......

im currently looking at a minolta maxxum 7 for film. i have a canon elan 7 but without lenses it just does feel right.



At first I thought you were talking about the digital body.


----------



## dudemanppl

If I were to get a 645 body I would get a Contax because that 80 f/2 is basically a 50 f/0.85 in terms of DOF on 24x36. Too bad they're stupid expensive (says the kid with too much gear).


----------



## r34p3rex

Just found a 70-200 2.8 IS for $1200









I was set to pick up a 70-200 2.8 non-IS this weekend for $1150 but this sounds like a way better deal..

How's the sharpness of the IS version compared to the non-IS? I know on some lenses, the non-IS version is quite a bit sharper.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r34p3rex*


Just found a 70-200 2.8 IS for $1200









I was set to pick up a 70-200 2.8 non-IS this weekend for $1150 but this sounds like a way better deal..

How's the sharpness of the IS version compared to the non-IS? I know on some lenses, the non-IS version is quite a bit sharper.


Slightly better on the IS version as it's a newer lens with an updated optical design, to include circular aperture blades.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;14713425*
> Slightly better on the IS version as it's a newer lens with an updated optical design, to include circular aperture blades.


Actually, the non-IS is a bit sharper than the IS version, but not the IS *II*.


----------



## dudemanppl

Sub I hate you so muc, I was waiting for someone to post so I could get 15k get but I'm at band camp and I needed to go practice. Anyway if it isn't gone I would go for it.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;14715266*
> Sub I hate you so muc, I was waiting for someone to post so I could get 15k get but I'm at band camp and I needed to go practice.


Lol, band camp. _What a high school._


----------



## spRICE

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;14715345*
> Lol, band camp. _What a high school._


Don't be hatin


----------



## r34p3rex

Am I the only one who thought of this when he said band camp?


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r34p3rex;14715477*
> Am I the only one who thought of this when he said band camp?


Probably, but I would attribute that more to you having been the only person who has ever seen that movie.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;14715488*
> Probably, but I would attribute that more to you having been the only person who has ever seen that movie.


Well make that two of us that have seen it lol


----------



## mz-n10

I thought of the original American pie.... Not that abomination


----------



## dudemanppl

I love making the posts here super off topic. Anyway, everytime I give my friends my camera they always get one shot I deem super epicly good. 5DII and 35L magic dawg. Its on auto everything except f/1.4.


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Man, lots of full-frame lust on here lately and almost nobody shooting film. Tsk tsk.


I shoot film more than my D90 aha.


----------



## ljason8eg

The grip for my 7D got here today. I'm liking it so far and it has none of the wiggle that some were talking about other grips having.


----------



## Marin

Oh, there's movement. They all have flex.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;14724671*
> Oh, there's movement. They all have flex.


I'm sure its not perfect but from what I was reading I started to expect it to be this wiggly thing that would be annoying as hell to the point I wouldn't want to use it. Guess I should have known people tend to exaggerate things.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;14724671*
> Oh, there's movement. They all have flex.


Solved by wedging in a small piece of paper/cardboard -- film boxes are the perfect thickness. My 50D's grip feels much better after discovering that.


----------



## aksthem1

I can barely feel any flex on the Phottix grip on my 30D. If I do I have to put a lot of pressure to make it flex.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

I understand the appeal of grips, but I've never felt hindered not having one. Battery life on the 5DII is awesome and it never bothers me shooting in portrait without a grip (yes, I have used one before).


----------



## MistaBernie

It's weird, ever since I attached a grip to my T1i like 6 months ago, shooting without one has felt weird. I just feel like the body feels different - I rarely even use the buttons, I just like having it there. Kind of like a photography version of a security blanket.. only cooler...?


----------



## ljason8eg

Just from a few test shots it feels like the grip has allowed me to hold the 300mm more stable. Its like the extra weight and size balances it out more.


----------



## aksthem1

I think a lot of people get them for the e-peen factor.

My battery regularly last like 1,200+ shots. Plus I mostly use it when I know I'm going to be shooting in portrait mode for an extended period of time.

It also helps me stabilize with larger lenses.

Edit: ljsaon8eg hit it spot on.

And MistaBernie, I know the feeling. When I first got it I just kept it on, because of laziness. Then shooting without it feels weird.


----------



## dudemanppl

I mostly hate grips. Only good with 300 2.8s and longer, everything else is fine without. Two off topic points: everytime I see Syr's name I get sad, and wow there are a lot of people watching this thread right now.


----------



## Marin

I've only seen two legit grips. Phase One and Sony.

Sony since they have all the controls on the grip (thanks to Konica Minolta). And Phase One since they have a built in Profoto Air flash trigger.


----------



## dudemanppl

MB-D10/11 are close to perfect. Command dials (duh), AF-ON (wasn't on the BG-E2), and the little nub to change AF points that no other grips other than the Sony ones have. Very tasty. Plus no battery stalk, which I find to be useless and time consuming.


----------



## Dream Killer

Big hurricane this sunday. I'm really debating if i should go out and take street photography in 60mph winds.


----------



## BlankThis

Do it! D700 could take it easily.


----------



## Dream Killer

it's not the d700 im worried about, its me. lol


----------



## sub50hz

60mph winds? You'll be bummed if you don't.


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*


it's not the d700 im worried about, its me. lol


pfffft. Just chain yourself to something heavy.


----------



## ljason8eg

I have some tungsten ballast for race cars you could strap to your legs. Should keep you grounded.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis;14731659*
> pfffft. Just chain yourself to something heavy.


Like the D700?


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;14733780*
> Like the D700?


I was actually going to suggest he picks up a couple D1's to strategically attach to his body in various places.


----------



## Conspiracy

just get a 24-70 2.8 apparently its called the brick and is supposed to be heavy. i used one for an afternoon and it is not that heavy but yea... get one of those lol


----------



## dudemanppl

This is what happens when you give your friend a 5DII/35L and put it on basically auto and f/1.4. Not bad at all.


----------



## Conspiracy

pretty good


----------



## dudemanppl

Take this down if it's not allowed, but I'm one of those guys.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;14737632*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Take this down if it's not allowed, but I'm one of those guys.


band camp kids......


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Someone lost a bet?


----------



## Marin

I found the one white kid.


----------



## dudemanppl

You failed since theres two. Seniors dress up underclassmen in each cabin. One year someone gave them panties too. *shudder*


----------



## sub50hz

Do not watch Eraserhead if you've taken any drugs. Wow.

Sidenote: 1N RS is fun.


----------



## Marin

Movies just weird. Now Twin Peaks, good stuff.


----------



## sub50hz

Totally agree. Lynch is a weird dude. Throwing down a Red Bull so I can rewatch Dr. Strangelove for the millionth time -- after some more Borderlands.

edit: It's so quiet outside, might be time for a dark bike path ride on the fixed-gear.


----------



## xxpinoyxx

Picked up a Custom SLR Glide Strap with C-Loop; it's pretty neat.

The strap is extremely comfortable, lightweight, and durable. It actually does relieve the weight of the camera on your neck/shoulders. I can't even tell I'm carrying anything.


----------



## dudemanppl

So it's just a funny looking R-Strap?


----------



## xxpinoyxx

Basically.

I find it more comfortable than an R-Strap though. Also, the shoulder pad is non-slip. The pad stays in place because of the rotating clips at the ends of the pad. The rotating clips allow you to move the camera any way you want while the pad is stationary on your shoulder (for the most part).


----------



## Dream Killer

Yeah, basically.


----------



## dudemanppl

I shall present you with one internet. If an earthquake happens I'll be excited to go out and shoot.


----------



## Dream Killer

you just missed one in virginia


----------



## dudemanppl

I want a big one where people die, more interesting. Then I'd have to get downtown somehow, probably lotsa coo stuff there too.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;14738721*
> I want a big one where people die, more interesting. Then I'd have to get downtown somehow, probably lotsa coo stuff there too.


Shut it. I'm currently at a friend's dorm at UCLA right now. I'd like any potential earthquakes to wait until I'm safely back in my apartment, kthanks.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Totally agree. Lynch is a weird dude. Throwing down a Red Bull so I can rewatch Dr. Strangelove for the millionth time -- after some more Borderlands.

edit: It's so quiet outside, might be time for a dark bike path ride on the fixed-gear.


Yep, Blue Velvet anyone? Hopper is pure gold in that. I laugh my ass off when I watch it. Also, Dune is probably my favorite sci-fi movie, mostly for nostalgic reasons

Quote:



Originally Posted by *xxpinoyxx*


Picked up a Custom SLR Glide Strap with C-Loop; it's pretty neat.

The strap is extremely comfortable, lightweight, and durable. It actually does relieve the weight of the camera on your neck/shoulders. I can't even tell I'm carrying anything.


It relieves the weight mostly because it slings cross-body, which is how I've always carried my camera with my Crumpler ID.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


*I want a big one where people die, more interesting.* Then I'd have to get downtown somehow, probably lotsa coo stuff there too.


You must live an incredibly sheltered life to say something so insensitive. Kids.


----------



## dudemanppl

That was partially sarcastic, I love people! Also reincarnated is sort of close, you, me, and Marin?


----------



## foothead

Why does nobody make a grip that bolts onto the bottom of dslr cameras and allows left-handed shooting?


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:



Originally Posted by *foothead*


Why does nobody make a grip that bolts onto the bottom of dslr cameras and allows left-handed shooting?


because the dont make left handed cameras. if the grip was left handed and the camera was still right handed it would make goign back and forth from horizontal and vertical more of a pain, well for right handed people.

its all about ergonomics and keeping the buttons close together for easier access rather than spreading them out.

that is just my observation though. im right handed


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy;14741075*
> because the dont make left handed cameras. if the grip was left handed and the camera was still right handed it would make goign back and forth from horizontal and vertical more of a pain, well for right handed people.
> 
> its all about ergonomics and keeping the buttons close together for easier access rather than spreading them out.
> 
> that is just my observation though. im right handed


Yeah, but it'd be an optional accessory, only for lefty handed people. I'd definitely use one if they were available.

Anyway, I ordered a cheap shutter release, and I'm going to try making one, just to see how it works.

EDIT: Think this










but it attaches via the tripod mount and, obviously, goes on the other side.


----------



## sub50hz

My dreams of riding at 2am were shattered when I remembered my leg was still broked. Sads.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *foothead*


Why does nobody make a grip that bolts onto the bottom of dslr cameras and allows left-handed shooting?


Because only 5 to 10% of a given population is left handed, so it wouldn't be very profitable for the manufacturers.


----------



## xxpinoyxx

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


It relieves the weight mostly because it slings cross-body, which is how I've always carried my camera with my Crumpler ID.


I haven't tried the Crumpler ID but have tried/test (in-store) the R-Strap and a couple other straps. IMO the CSLR relieves the weight the best.

I've always used the stock Canon strap cross-body and I felt every ounce; especially since the strap is stiff and leather(?). After an hour or two my neck/shoulder would start to strain.

Whatever the case may be I think CSLR is on to something. They're still a very young company but definitely have the potential to improve an already great product.


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Because only 5 to 10% of a given population is left handed, so it wouldn't be very profitable for the manufacturers.


5-10% of the DSLR market is still a lot of people. If they came out with a universal one, I'm sure enough people would be interested to make it worthwhile.

As of now, it's rather hard for me to hold the camera steady when using longer lenses. I used to be able to do it just fine, but my right arm was broken in a car accident last year and still hasn't regained full strength/mobility.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *foothead*


5-10% of the DSLR market is still a lot of people. If they came out with a universal one, I'm sure enough people would be interested to make it worthwhile.


Well, if they make left-handed guitars, I don't see why not. I've never heard of a left-hand grip, let alone a camera. All I've seen are people modifying cameras by essentially flipping them upside down (Jimi Hendrix flipped right-hand guitars upside down.







).


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Well, if they make left-handed guitars, I don't see why not. I've never heard of a left-hand grip, let alone a camera. All I've seen are people modifying cameras by essentially flipping them upside down (Jimi Hendrix flipped right-hand guitars upside down.







).


Yeah, I've tried that, but I'm really not happy with it. Right-handed gives better results than upside-down.


----------



## sub50hz

It _would_ be interesting to see an SLR manufacturer create a *real* DSLR system camera with interchangable grip sides, finders, etc., but it won't happen.


----------



## laboitenoire

Shoot square medium format?


----------



## Conspiracy

so im not the most knowledgeable person on lenses much less photography equipment BUT is it possible to shoot sports like soccer with a 70-200 2.8 MACRO? i tried to do that today with a borrowed SIGMA 70-200 macro and missed so many shots









is it user error or is that just the wrong lens for the job?

average setting was ISO 200 f2.8 1/2500 in sunlight with single center point AF servo


----------



## sub50hz

It's just "macro" because it has a higher maximum magnification than usual. it's not a 1:1 macro lens.


----------



## Conspiracy

i still dont understand why i missed so many shots though. the best shots i got were the ones really close to me within 50 feet. i dont expect it to be sharp across the field at 200 since its maximum focus on the readout was 25 feet.

idk maybe it was the shallow DOF, i know i was holding it steady and kept my focus points on the player and even used the expanded focus in case maybe i was not perfectly holding it on the player for the servo to follow. still was not getting good clean shots









and i have shot with a canon 70-200 2.8 USM but never had this problem at 2.8

i guess its user error.


----------



## sub50hz

Servo? Center point only. 7D has good AF, but it's no 1D -- that is to say, when I used one, I didn't find the servo hit rate to be very good unless using the center point, in which case it was a bit better than my 50D.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


That was partially sarcastic, I love people! Also reincarnated is sort of close, you, me, and Marin?


No can do. Back in Merced now









Although I did manage to get some nighttime shots at LACMA with the lights display, and went to Griffith for sundown yesterday.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Servo? Center point only. 7D has good AF, but it's no 1D -- that is to say, when I used one, I didn't find the servo hit rate to be very good unless using the center point, in which case it was a bit better than my 50D.


yea i did all that and i feel like the AF is pretty solid i do admit its not perfect. mine does very well for basketball but im closer to the players in that sport.

im just really disappointed. i dont think i want to shoot field sports anymore unless its with my own glass which i dont own anything long enough to capture the action. i just cant figure out if my problem is my user error or sigma or the f2.8

either way unless they pay for me to rent a canon telephoto im not shooting soccer for them anymore because my sigma experience today was terrible because like i mentioned canon 70-200 @ 200 2.8 i didnt have trouble keeping focus much less missing it in servo :|


----------



## sub50hz

You said the lens was borrowed?


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;14743614*
> You said the lens was borrowed?


yup first mistake i realized at the end of the game. i asked if he calibrated it to his t2i and he didnt know what that meant either.

shots that i wish werent missed and i just dont understand why









two more examples of missed shots where center focus point is dead on the player both shots focus is dead center on the player's stomach...



















i give up.

----

decent photo slightly cropped same settings as all my bad out of focus shots







no adjustments other than crop


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire;14742436*
> Shoot square medium format?


I'm only getting bad camera shake with long tele lenses. Medium format would be totally impractical for 200-300mm EFL.

I do shoot lots of MF though. It's just always wide angle.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy;14743703*
> yup first mistake i realized at the end of the game. i asked if he calibrated it to his t2i and he didnt know what that meant either.
> 
> shots that i wish werent missed and i just dont understand why
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> two more examples of missed shots where center focus point is dead on the player both shots focus is dead center on the player's stomach...
> 
> i give up.
> 
> ----
> 
> decent photo slightly cropped same settings as all my bad out of focus shots
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> no adjustments other than crop


Have you experimented with the settings in the AF/Drive menu (C.Fn)? When I had the 7D, I tried a lot of different settings there, and with some trial and error, I was able to get a great keeper rate with a 70-200 f/4 IS. If I recall correctly, the AF servo sensitivity can be adjusted, and you can set the priority for tracking or focus.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;14744647*
> Have you experimented with the AF/Drive menu (C.Fn)? When I had the 7D, I tried a lot of different settings, and with some trial and error, I was able to get a great keeper rate with a 70-200 f/4 IS.


idk what to experiment with, but ill try anything after what happened today. i also dont want to shoot soccer with just a 70-200 anymore just isnt long enough. 70-200 with a 1.4X maybe

my biggest problem hands down is that a lot of shots that could have been good had the single center focus point directly on the player no question about it and still missed horribly either putting the background in focus or absolutely nothing in focus and sometimes it came out with girls far in the background in focus that were no where near my AF point in the VF. im just so confused and sad from all the shots i missed today. i kind of wish it was a canon zoom instead of sigma because i never had any trouble with anything canon before


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy;14744665*
> idk what to experiment with, but ill try anything after what happened today. i also dont want to shoot soccer with just a 70-200 anymore just isnt long enough. 70-200 with a 1.4X maybe
> 
> my biggest problem hands down is that a lot of shots that could have been good had the single center focus point directly on the player no question about it and still missed horribly either putting the background in focus or absolutely nothing in focus and sometimes it came out with girls far in the background in focus that were no where near my AF point in the VF. im just so confused and sad from all the shots i missed today. i kind of wish it was a canon zoom instead of sigma because i never had any trouble with anything canon before


Well, read the manual on the AF/Drive menu, it explains what the different settings do pretty well actually. I used a 7D + 70-200 f/4 to shoot greyhounds and BIF's and was surprised at how many keepers I had.

EDIT: Forgot to ask, and maybe a dumb question, but are you shooting in burst mode?


----------



## dudemanppl

lol7DAFbeingworsethanmy5DII.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;14744785*
> lol7DAFbeingworsethanmy5DII.


I've owned both and I can tell you that's BS. It's not hard to beat the 5DII's AF.


----------



## sub50hz

Looks to me like you were too fast or too slow with your tracking. They're not just slightly out of focus as if it were a lens issue, those are real good misses.


----------



## ljason8eg

If I had to guess it would be the tracking sensitivity being too high. Even at the normal setting it'll try to swap subjects really fast if your AF point drifts off your target a bit.

EDIT: Also, first time at the track with the 7D today. The image quality might be the same as my T2i but its sooooo much easier to use. I've got like 350 shots to go through but this one already stands out, at least for me.

Danica Patrick by JLofing, on Flickr


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;14744733*
> Well, read the manual on the AF/Drive menu, it explains what the different settings do pretty well actually. I used a 7D + 70-200 f/4 to shoot greyhounds and BIF's and was surprised at how many keepers I had.
> 
> EDIT: Forgot to ask, and maybe a dumb question, but are you shooting in burst mode?


yes i was shooting burst. i dont know why i did, i stopped doing it a while ago but for some reason did it today. im guessing that was a bad choice right?

i was doing high speed burst and it actually was shooting really slow for some reason even when shooting jpeg


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;14743384*
> It's just "macro" because it has a higher maximum magnification than usual. it's not a 1:1 macro lens.


"macro" now dont even mean higher magnification, just closer focus.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy;14743568*
> yea i did all that and i feel like the AF is pretty solid i do admit its not perfect. mine does very well for basketball but im closer to the players in that sport.
> 
> im just really disappointed. i dont think i want to shoot field sports anymore unless its with my own glass which i dont own anything long enough to capture the action. i just cant figure out if my problem is my user error or sigma or the f2.8
> 
> either way unless they pay for me to rent a canon telephoto im not shooting soccer for them anymore because my sigma experience today was terrible because like i mentioned canon 70-200 @ 200 2.8 i didnt have trouble keeping focus much less missing it in servo :|


i dont even think you need 2.8, grab a canon 70-200/4IS and call it a day.

i remember when teh 7d just came out there were issues with AF switching too quickly. i dont think the sigma could keep up (was it a HSM 70-200?)


----------



## Conspiracy

yea it was a HSM it focused fast but never locked focus properly.

and if i do buy a 70-200 it will be f4 since i dont see myself becoming a professional sports photog i dont need f2.8 telephotos


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy;14746621*
> yes i was shooting burst. i dont know why i did, i stopped doing it a while ago but for some reason did it today. im guessing that was a bad choice right?
> 
> i was doing high speed burst and it actually was shooting really slow for some reason even when shooting jpeg


No, burst is a good thing IMO, especially for the 7D since it can do 8 FPS. Call it "spray 'n' pray" if you want, but a lot of sports photogs do it for very fast action.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg;14746243*
> If I had to guess it would be the tracking sensitivity being too high. Even at the normal setting it'll try to swap subjects really fast if your AF point drifts off your target a bit.
> 
> EDIT: Also, first time at the track with the 7D today. The image quality might be the same as my T2i but its sooooo much easier to use. I've got like 350 shots to go through but this one already stands out, at least for me.


Good call on the tracking sensitivity being too high. The 7D is quite capable in the right hands; many who dismiss its "lack" of ability haven't delved into the settings enough.


----------



## Conspiracy

mines set at normal. so i guess it wouldnt hurt to set it one more down between slow and normal and if thats fast of course take it down to the next lowest. still doesnt explain why when tracking a subject that is alone in the frame moving slowly why it would miss terribly after pretty much locking focus other than the tiny little adjustments from servo it should still be kinda close. and when tacking subjects that are running towards me it just never locked focus and servo'd them the subject just stayed our of focus for like 8 or so frames, i think this is the lens.

im speaking with the athletics department today anyway because they want my photos really bad and at this point they arent getting anything until im compensated and provided with better glass because they have the budget to even rent me a lens for a weekend to get shots if they wanted and obviously i wouldnt need to rent for every game they are just trying to build their archive and have photos for news articles on their site


----------



## riko99

My guess is that you kept focus locking back behind the subject and then tracked but I could be completely off on that.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *riko99;14750793*
> My guess is that you kept focus locking back behind the subject and then tracked but I could be completely off on that.


i dont even know. but i do now know this. i set my servo tracking speed slower so it doesnt hunt so fast and all that.


----------



## wanako

I'll bite.









I bought this camera back in 2006 or something and I absolutely love it.
Body: Canon 30D (8 MP of awesome!)
Lenses: Canon EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM
Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM (My favorite. I absolutely love this lens!!)
Flash: Vivitar 285 HV
Backup Media: Creative Labs Zen Vision W

and of course,
Body: Canon AE-1
Lens: Canon 50mm f/1.8

I have a wide angle and a telephoto for this one but I can't remember the exact specs at the top of my head. I'll update later. I learned all I know about photography with this camera. It is very dear to me.









here is a couple of my shots. mostly film. I haven't updated with alot of my digital shots yet. wanako.deviantart.com


----------



## Marin

http://www.engadget.com/2011/08/29/photographer-goes-digital-blows-half-a-million-dollars-on-a-10m/


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;14756888*
> http://www.engadget.com/2011/08/29/photographer-goes-digital-blows-half-a-million-dollars-on-a-10m/


Whoa.

Also, http://www.huhmagazine.co.uk/2684/panasonic-lumix-gf-pro


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;14756888*
> http://www.engadget.com/2011/08/29/photographer-goes-digital-blows-half-a-million-dollars-on-a-10m/


Lols at 10MP being unprintable. I guess those with a 30D or 1D Mk II never made it to print before the advent of the 450D


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;14757080*
> 
> Also, http://www.huhmagazine.co.uk/2684/panasonic-lumix-gf-pro


Pics of it would be nice.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;14757136*
> Lols at 10MP being unprintable. I guess those with a 30D or 1D Mk II never made it to print before the advent of the 450D


I ignore what they say. Too much stupid.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;14757160*
> Pics of it would be nice.


Yeah, I know -- I think they're inferring it's going to look like a _more_ retro LC1. I don't know what to think of m4/3 these days, I'm still not impressed by them in any regard, but they seem to be quite the hot ticket. I don't know.

sidenote: Want 24LII real bad, been having a blast shooting film with this thing the last week. Would trade multiple pieces of gear for it, as I am far too poor to buy one outright.


----------



## Marin

I've only been impressed by the NEX-7 at this point (for mirrorless bodies).


----------



## BlankThis

I don't know how it lines up against the NEX-7 but I think the only mirrorless system I would buy would be the X100. Stunning pictures from such a compact and classy package.


----------



## mz-n10

x100 is more point and shoot then mirrorless system.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10;14757410*
> x100 is more point and shoot then mirrorless system.


But with an APS-C sensor and dedicated manual controls, I wouldn't be too quick to jumble it up with point and shoots either.


----------



## BlankThis

Just because it has a fixed lens I wouldn't toss it in with the crappix family.


----------



## mz-n10

ok i admit its got a large sensor....but there isnt much "system" when you cant take off the lens. its a good camera, but its not a mirrorless system.


----------



## BlankThis

If it were interchangeable I would own one so fast...


----------



## mz-n10

ditto, i think the just released a cheaper one called a x50 or soemthing. waiting for a nex7 now lol


----------



## dudemanppl

That 10x8 back is about as dense as the iPhone 4 screen.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10;14757607*
> ditto, i think the just released a cheaper one called a x50 or soemthing. waiting for a nex7 now lol


Fuji x10 or x50, depending on which market you're in. IIRC, for the US it's the x10.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;14756888*
> http://www.engadget.com/2011/08/29/photographer-goes-digital-blows-half-a-million-dollars-on-a-10m/












Seems like they could've used some sort of prism/lens to reduce it to a more reasonable size, though. A medium format sensor would be more than enough for preview shots.


----------



## sub50hz

This is way off topic:

I need a couple people for Fantsay Football, Thursday night draft. ESPN league, full defensive picks, pick trading, coach slot. Anybody?


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;14762136*
> This is way off topic:
> 
> I need a couple people for Fantsay Football, Thursday night draft. ESPN league, full defensive picks, pick trading, coach slot. Anybody?


What exactly is fantasy football? This has always puzzled me.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead;14764947*
> What exactly is fantasy football? This has always puzzled me.


You and a bunch of buddies form a league and have a draft. You each take turns picking players to fill out the roster spots on your team. Then, each week you go head to head against another member of your league and the team who's players score the most points win. Points are scored based on statistics such as passing/rushing/receiving yards and touchdowns.


----------



## sub50hz

It's a good way to kill time at work, haha.


----------



## sub50hz

Seriously, I need one more person, someone who can live draft Thursday night at 8PM Central -- everyone else I know is already tied up in multiple leagues and I don't want to do an odd-man bye week format with 9 teams. Come on, photo bros.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead;14764947*
> What exactly is fantasy football? This has always puzzled me.


I don't care a whit about football, but even I know what fantasy football is.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;14766312*
> Seriously, I need one more person, someone who can live draft Thursday night at 8PM Central -- everyone else I know is already tied up in multiple leagues and I don't want to do an odd-man bye week format with 9 teams. Come on, photo bros.


Hell I'll do it since I'm only in two leagues so far. I've never done a league with defensive players, pick trading or a coach slot but what the hell, sounds fun.


----------



## sub50hz

PM me your email, brosef.


----------



## sub50hz

Oh, I nix'd the defensive roster because the draft would take forever with 90 second picks, although I left 2 LB slots, because the league is pretty stacked with good players -- moved to the standard D/ST otherwise.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;14766432*
> Oh, I nix'd the defensive roster because the draft would take forever with 90 second picks, although I left 2 LB slots, because the league is pretty stacked with good players -- moved to the standard D/ST otherwise.


PM sent, and sounds good man.


----------



## laboitenoire

Just bought 2 lenses off of KEH: Tokina 12-24 f/4 (I think the earlier screw-drive model), and a Nikkor 50 f/1.4D. Looking forward to getting a box in a few days time


----------



## MistaBernie

I think I'm coming down with prime fever.. I know I wanted to have a second body for safety/redundancy purposes, but I'm thinking of picking a 135 f/2... I kind of wonder if I'm crazy or what, but it seems like a good idea at the time (which is now)


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie;14776842*
> I think I'm coming down with prime fever.. I know I wanted to have a second body for safety/redundancy purposes, but I'm thinking of picking a 135 f/2... I kind of wonder if I'm crazy or what, but it seems like a good idea at the time (which is now)


Do it, that lens is so awesome.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;14776928*
> Do it, that lens is so awesome.


You're not supposed to encourage my reckless spending due to gear acquisition syndrome!







what kind of moderator are you??

Oh, and if someone accidentally types :zoso: instead of sozo, they should get the album cover for Led Zeppelin IV, just sayin'.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie;14777090*
> You're not supposed to encourage my reckless spending due to gear acquisition syndrome!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> what kind of moderator are you??
> 
> Oh, and if someone accidentally types :zoso: instead of sozo, they should get the album cover for Led Zeppelin IV, just sayin'.


He's not a moderator; he's an editor.

I'm a moderator on the other hand, and I say buy one. Heck, buy two


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;14777185*
> He's not a moderator; he's an editor.
> 
> I'm a moderator on the other hand, and I say buy one. Heck, buy two


I guess that makes him about as good a moderator as I am personal trainer..

Yeah, I'm thinking 135L might be a great utility lens, but I have to wait till I move some other stuff before I consider splurging on glass. At least glass doesn't lose value like bodies (bought my 60D brand new towards the middle of March, can now get a refurb for ~2/3 what I paid)


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie;14777090*
> You're not supposed to encourage my reckless spending due to gear acquisition syndrome!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> what kind of moderator are you??
> 
> Oh, and if someone accidentally types :zoso: instead of sozo, they should get the album cover for Led Zeppelin IV, just sayin'.


There's nothing "moderate" about any recommendation for gear you might get around here.







If someone posts asking if they should get a Canon 200 f/2L or make a house payment, well, that person would be missing a house payment.









And yes, typing :zoso: should produce a









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;14777185*
> He's not a moderator; he's an editor.
> 
> I'm a moderator on the other hand, and I say buy one. Heck, buy two


True (I've had to explain this numerous times in PMs), though at the bottom of the photography forum page, my name is listed under "Moderators."


----------



## sub50hz

I'm considering selling mine, I don't use it too much -- although I am certain I would regret it. I want my bag to be 50D/1N RS/24LII/135L/17-40L/50 1.8, although I am ever so close to being finished with paying on this 1D, which means I will have far too much gear -- the 50D will probably have to go.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;14777320*
> I'm considering selling mine, I don't use it too much -- although I am certain I would regret it. I want my bag to be 50D/1N RS/24LII/135L/17-40L/50 1.8, although I am ever so close to being finished with paying on this 1D, which means I will have far too much gear -- the 50D will probably have to go.


Well, if you decide you can live without it, keep me in mind as by the time you decide to sell I very well may be ready to pull the trigger.


----------



## dudemanppl

This is why OCN is my favorite place to post. Also if you buy Sub's 135L then you'll be buying mine which is an honor.


----------



## MistaBernie

Sweet!


----------



## BlankThis

Samyang 35mm and 85mm f/1.4 or Nikkor 50mm f/1.2 (non-NOCT)? Hmmm.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


This is why OCN is my favorite place to post. Also if you buy Sub's 135L then you'll be buying mine which is an honor.


I think I want your 35L.


----------



## dudemanppl

YOU SAY THAT LIKE I'M EVER GONNA LET GO OF IT. Too best to sell man. Also blank, add a 5D and an EE-S focus screen and my pants would be ruined. Forever. 50 1.2 sucks such hard ass at f/1.2, barely usable. At f/1.4 it's as sharp as the Sigma, the problem is that it's the same price as the Sigma which has AF (and if it turns out to be crap, use it as an MF lens, you woulda done so with the 1.2 anyway) and MUCH smoother bokeh. Unless your into the funky bokeh of the 50 1.2 (which is also shared by the 24/28 f/2s if you're wondering).

Also, I find shooting RAW to be useless for me. Not once have I found it useful. And I process JPGs so much sexier than RAWs.


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


which is also shared by the 24/28 f/2s


Oh god no thank you. Been there, did not like.

Yeah the plan is a 5D and EE-S


----------



## Marin

Mines fine at 1.2.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;14777272*
> 
> True (I've had to explain this numerous times in PMs), though at the bottom of the photography forum page, my name is listed under "Moderators."


Shame you're not a moderator. Then you'd get to see the awesomeness that's going down in the Moderator forum


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;14786155*
> Mines fine at 1.2.


As are both copies I've tried. I like the 50L, shame it's kinda soft stopped down, else I would be hunting for one.


----------



## dudemanppl

L? I thought we were talking about the AI-S. But I hate the L more.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;14786317*
> As are both copies I've tried. I like the 50L, shame it's kinda soft stopped down, else I would be hunting for one.


Forgive my ignorance, but i'd expect anything below f/2 to be soft wide-open. That's usually part of it's charm. I mean... it can be too soft, or the wrong kind of soft. But at those apertures i'd be less concerned with sharpness and more concerned about feel.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*


Forgive my ignorance


I'll forgive you for thinking "stopped down" means larger aperture.


----------



## Shane1244

Is there a better alternative to the Canon 18-55? I'm broke right now because of school, and I really need something wide just so I can hold off on my craving to take landscapes.


----------



## sub50hz

Don't get into debt to satiate a desire for lenses. Bad path.


----------



## Shane1244

I was just going to pick up something used, then resell.


----------



## dudemanppl

If you have like a 0% interest credit card, buying used then reselling is the best rental ever.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


If you have like a 0% interest credit card, buying used then reselling is the best rental ever.


But that would defeat the purpose of a bank issuing credit cards!


----------



## laboitenoire

Maybe something like the old Tokina 20-35? The f/3.5-4.5 version sells for about $100 USD in Nikon mount.


----------



## dudemanppl

Don't do it. There's a reason why its 100. Also, you suddenly have gear!


----------



## laboitenoire

It's an old lens, but it's still reasonably well regarded.

And yeah, I just bought the 12-24 and the 50 the other day. Shipment from KEH should arrive on Tuesday it looks like.


----------



## mz-n10

i thought u had a 12-24 nikon.....


----------



## Shane1244

So there's no 50mm f/1.8 MKII of WA lenses?


----------



## laboitenoire

Couldn't afford it, lol. Tokina is more or less just as good for waaaaaaay less cash.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;14790387*
> I'll forgive you for thinking "stopped down" means larger aperture.


Ah, my bad. I clearly didn't read that right


----------



## foothead

LOL, boredom.










I had one of those POS 4x6 sheetfed scanners that sells for like $30, so I ripped it apart, removed the LEDs, and am going to basically strap it to my 4x5 camera to see if I can get a picture. I have no idea what the heck it's going to look like since the color is created by pulsing RGB LEDs.

If I can get a remotely usable image from this, I'd consider buying an 8x10 or 11x14 camera and a high quality CCD scanner so I can get 200+ megapixel images. That'd be amazing.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;14792931*
> So there's no 50mm f/1.8 MKII of WA lenses?


Not really, as wide angle lenses have a lot more flaws to correct, so the design of the lens is trickier. There are several Tamron and Sigma WA lenses that are reasonably priced, but not in the $100 range.


----------



## Conspiracy

so once i get enough money saved im thinking about maybe buying a flash and stand and all that before buying my 85 1.8, im starting to get my paychecks again for my freelance video doing live sports even though its only $100 a game every little bit helps. so once i decide to on my next purchase as either the 85mm or the beginners flash kit this is what i have picked out, let me know if im doing it wrong lol, i could only find a 6' cord


----------



## mz-n10

just picked up a pelican 1510. great little case and tsa approved to boot.


----------



## Deano12345

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10;14797228*
> just picked up a pelican 1510. great little case and tsa approved to boot.


They are a lovely case alright









Picked up an Op/Tech camera strap, replaced my crappy old one (The Sony one is terrible IMO, im sure any other Sony shooters will agree )

Have a chance at getting a Sigma 17-35 2.8-4 for a decent price, waiting to hear back weather its the DG model or not. Anyone else have it/ used it ? Looks good, a little soft @ 2.8 but not bad at all from what I see !


----------



## ljason8eg

It is hot as balls in Atlanta. Shot the race track with a temp gun and it read 158F. Its one of those days you've got to thank Canon for making the L telephotos a light color.


----------



## r34p3rex

Just sold my T2i. Forcing myself to not be lazy and upgrade xD Camera-less for the weekend









Although, I did spot a BNIB 5D2 for $2150 (locally).


----------



## dudemanppl

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1041001
Cheap 5D, I could probably fix the sensory issue for anyone on here that would buy that.


----------



## BlankThis

hnnnnnng. Do want.


----------



## foothead

Almost finished. My soldering iron is worn out, so I have to wait until tomorrow to install the buttons. Then I can paint. Hopefully I can find some that matches the camera's finish.


----------



## dudemanppl

Dude I don't even. But good luck I think?


----------



## BlankThis

Uhh what am I looking at?


----------



## foothead

DIY left-handed grip for my E-410.

Here are 2 more pics (sorry, I had to use a cell phone)



















It's actually quite comfortable. I'd say more so than my Pentax 645, less than the right hand grip on the E-410. I'll probably end up using the normal grip for the 14-42 lens, and the left-handed one for the 40-150.

Plus, it gives me the advantage that I can double fist cameras.


----------



## Conspiracy

Why? besides possibly being left handed.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy;14810363*
> Why? besides possibly being left handed.


My right arm's been broken twice, so my right hand shakes. It makes it very difficult to use telephoto lenses without bumping the ISO into the nearly unusable range.


----------



## Marin

Breaking arms is fun. My left arm bends an inch less than my right one.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;14810667*
> Breaking arms is fun. My left arm bends an inch less than my right one.


wow that stinks


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*


wow that stinks












It's fine extended so it doesn't make a difference.


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Breaking arms is fun. My left arm bends an inch less than my right one.


I have a permanent bend just below the right shoulder. It's pretty freakish looking on an X-ray.


----------



## Marin

I think I lost my x-rays. :\

I snapped my humerus so they had to put three pins through my elbow so the bone could be held in place. Getting them removed was awesome (srs), it's such an odd but cool feeling.


----------



## dudemanppl

My right leg has a crap range of motion. Stupid femoral head, Y U HAVE TO BREAK?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1041001
Cheap 5D, I could probably fix the sensory issue for anyone on here that would buy that.


That shaved mirror looks like crap; I'd be amazed if he sold it at all, especially since he mentioned the $500 repair cost. Though I wonder if, with the modded mirror, EF-S lenses could be mounted somehow.

And wow, a lot of you have really had some serious breaks. Somehow I've managed to not break anything, even after 4 years in the Marines.


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


And wow, a lot of you have really had some serious breaks. Somehow I've managed to not break anything, even after 4 years in the Marines.










My dad fell asleep driving, and managed to put the car upside down in a ditch at 50 mph. I had fallen asleep in the back seat while the car was still parked (we'd been hiking for the last 20 hours and my brother and father were eating), so I didn't have a seatbelt on. I'm glad it was just my arm that got broken.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


That shaved mirror looks like crap; I'd be amazed if he sold it at all, especially since he mentioned the $500 repair cost. Though I wonder if, with the modded mirror, EF-S lenses could be mounted somehow.


Shaved mirror is for FD glass and such. EF-S shrouds make the focus screen come out, but it's a hell of a lot easier just taking the shroud off. I honestly considered selling my 5DII to buy that. Easy fix for the sensor, if I bought it I would just remove it.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *foothead*


My dad fell asleep driving, and managed to put the car upside down in a ditch at 50 mph. I had fallen asleep in the back seat while the car was still parked (we'd been hiking for the last 20 hours and my brother and father were eating), so I didn't have a seatbelt on. I'm glad it was just my arm that got broken.


Whoa, glad you walked away from that one.


----------



## r34p3rex

Picking up a BNIB 7D with receipt for $1350 tomorrow







Also have a Zeikos grip and 32GB Duracell 600x CF coming


----------



## Conspiracy

^nice!


----------



## r34p3rex

I really wanted to go 5D2 but after playing with a 70-200 2.8.. I was sold. Can't afford both a 5D2 and the 70-200









Hopefully picking up the 70-200 in the coming weeks xD


----------



## Marin

http://www.sabinedelcour.com/


----------



## dudemanppl

I think I'll try to trade my 5DII for that 5D.


----------



## Takendown2

Anyone else tried using m42 mount manual lens for a Canon EOS? I recently bought a Super Takumar 135mm f/3.5 +m42 to EF mount for $120. This 40 year old lens is surprisingly well maintained and sharp even wide open.

Manual focus is abit hard tbh, but 7 out of 10 shots i can use the viewfinder to focus without problem. Just thought id share a cheap but great way of buying some very nice primes.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r34p3rex;14813517*
> Picking up a BNIB 7D with receipt for $1350 tomorrow
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also have a Zeikos grip and 32GB Duracell 600x CF coming


Nice. I owned the 7D briefly, and although it has a bit of a learning curve, it's an extremely capable camera. The only thing I didn't like about it was the occasional maze pattern I would get and there was visible noise at ISO 200, but the noise levels were reasonably low even at ISO 6400.

Duracell CF card huh. Get a good reader for it for sure, like USB 3.0 reader. I just got a Lexar USB 3.0 reader and it transfers at more than double my old USB 2.0 reader. Now I just need this to take full advantage of it.









[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hvu3UstOIuE&feature=player_embedded[/ame]


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Takendown2;14817452*
> Anyone else tried using m42 mount manual lens for a Canon EOS? I recently bought a Super Takumar 135mm f/3.5 +m42 to EF mount for $120. This 40 year old lens is surprisingly well maintained and sharp even wide open.
> 
> Manual focus is abit hard tbh, but 7 out of 10 shots i can use the viewfinder to focus without problem. Just thought id share a cheap but great way of buying some very nice primes.


I got a focus confirm m42 and K mount adapters for my 30D. It gets easier with time to focus, but it still depends on the lenses.


----------



## r34p3rex

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;14818467*
> Nice. I owned the 7D briefly, and although it has a bit of a learning curve, it's an extremely capable camera. The only thing I didn't like about it was the occasional maze pattern I would get and there was visible noise at ISO 200, but the noise levels were reasonably low even at ISO 6400.
> 
> Duracell CF card huh. Get a good reader for it for sure, like USB 3.0 reader. I just got a Lexar USB 3.0 reader and it transfers at more than double my old USB 2.0 reader. Now I just need this to take full advantage of it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hvu3UstOIuE&feature=player_embedded


Yup







Apparently it's not a true 600x card.. it gets up to 90MB/s read but only around 60MB/s write but I can't complain considering it was only $61 shipped









I definitely need to look into a USB3.0 reader. I thought emptying out a 16GB SD card was a pain..

Man waiting for the battery to charge is so rage inducing









Mmmm shiny


----------



## BlankThis

Resisting Samyang 35mm goodness still. Convince me it's not worth it!


----------



## laboitenoire

Hmmm... Looking at my bank statement it appears that KEH didn't charge me for the lenses even though they shipped... I definitely saw the hold the other day but now I see nothing.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis;14819397*
> Resisting Samyang 35mm goodness still. Convince me it's not worth it!


noone can be cause its sooo worth it







:cheers:


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire;14819445*
> Hmmm... Looking at my bank statement it appears that KEH didn't charge me for the lenses even though they shipped... I definitely saw the hold the other day but now I see nothing.


That's normal for any transaction. It takes a while to process, especially a while from KEH. It was almost two weeks before it was finalized for one of my orders.


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


Hmmm... Looking at my bank statement it appears that KEH didn't charge me for the lenses even though they shipped... I definitely saw the hold the other day but now I see nothing.


Do the right thing (for yourself) and not say anything.


----------



## xxpinoyxx

Quote:



Originally Posted by *aksthem1*


That's normal for any transaction. It takes a while to process, especially a while from KEH. It was almost two weeks before it was finalized for one of my orders.


This.

Trust, they *WILL* charge you. Especially if they have your information...


----------



## laboitenoire

I'm not trying to get out of the charge. It's just the first time I've ever seen a merchant put a hold on my card for the amount I purchased and then seen the hold disappear. I'm sure it'll be charged in a few more days.


----------



## BlankThis

600 dowwwers must resisssst


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis;14824206*
> 600 dowwwers must resisssst


???


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis;14824206*
> 600 dowwwers must resisssst


Oh just buy it already. And keep the receipt.


----------



## sub50hz

Well, I have a hat-line of sunburn on my face. Rode and shot from 8:15 A.M. to 4:30 P.M. -- on the other hand, I spent all day shooting UWAs, and found the Sigma to be quite good stopped down a little bit. I've been editing for the past couple hours, and if I can post some before I fall asleep (or before I turn on Lost Highway) I will. GODSPEED.


----------



## sub50hz

IMG_4628 by sub50hz, on Flickr


IMG_4544 by sub50hz, on Flickr


IMG_4564 by sub50hz, on Flickr


IMG_4920 by sub50hz, on Flickr


IMG_4893 by sub50hz, on Flickr


IMG_4674 by sub50hz, on Flickr

As promised. Now, time to sleep.


----------



## BlankThis

Love the last one


----------



## Takendown2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aksthem1;14818564*
> I got a focus confirm m42 and K mount adapters for my 30D. It gets easier with time to focus, but it still depends on the lenses.


I Actually recently took it on a test shot, the manual focus even without confirmation seemed decent enough for most subjects







...

The real reason... im too broke to afford Digital glass


----------



## foothead

Does anyone know what the deal with Olympus is right now? It's been almost three years since they introduced an entry-level/midrange DSLR. Is there any hope for an E-30 replacement, or should I consider switching to nikon?

I only ask because I'm considering the 35mm macro, but I really don't want to get too invested in a system that's going to disappear in a few years.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead;14829689*
> Does anyone know what the deal with Olympus is right now? It's been almost three years since they introduced an entry-level/midrange DSLR. Is there any hope for an E-30 replacement, or should I consider switching to nikon?
> 
> I only ask because I'm considering the 35mm macro, but I really don't want to get too invested in a system that's going to disappear in a few years.


Hard to say, but it seems to me like they're focusing all their attention on the EVIL cameras. Can't go wrong with Canikon.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;14830014*
> Hard to say, but it seems to me like they're focusing all their attention on the EVIL cameras. Can't go wrong with Canikon.


That's what it looks like to me too, except they released the E-5 not that long ago, so there's still hope. I really don't want to have to re-buy lenses or end up having to carry around two DSLRs.

I guess I'll wait and see. I was planning on buying an E-3 towards the end of the year, but I suppose I could get an entry-level Nikon instead. I just wish they had the awesome weatherproofing the Olympus cameras have.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *foothead*


That's what it looks like to me too, except they released the E-5 not that long ago, so there's still hope. I really don't want to have to re-buy lenses or end up having to carry around two DSLRs.

I guess I'll wait and see. I was planning on buying an E-3 towards the end of the year, but I suppose I could get an entry-level Nikon instead. I just wish they had the awesome weatherproofing the Olympus cameras have.


Olympus has awesome lenses, especially primes, but IMO they're limited by the 4/3 sensor. It's just too small and it's limiting for them to not have a full frame option. But, the 4/3 mount has kind of forced them into that position. Pentax on the other hand has no excuse for not having a FF body.


----------



## biatchi

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Olympus has awesome lenses, especially primes, but IMO they're limited by the 4/3 sensor. It's just too small and it's limiting for them to not have a full frame option. But, the 4/3 mount has kind of forced them into that position. *Pentax on the other hand has no excuse for not having a FF body*.


Hopefully Ricoh make that their first order of business *crosses fingers*


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *biatchi;14830582*
> Hopefully Ricoh make that their first order of business *crosses fingers*


They're too busy making ridiculously complex, overpriced, and under-performing point and shoot cameras.


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Olympus has awesome lenses, especially primes, but IMO they're limited by the 4/3 sensor. It's just too small and it's limiting for them to not have a full frame option. But, the 4/3 mount has kind of forced them into that position. Pentax on the other hand has no excuse for not having a FF body.


Totally agree, but really, an APS-C sensor isn't /that/ much of an improvement. Assuming 4/3 isn't going away, I'd only be willing to switch for a full frame, and even then I'd hang onto my E-410. The main reason I went with it in the first place is because it's ridiculously small and light (wonderful for hiking), and Olympus didn't cripple it by removing features.

And I'm as confused as you are about Pentax not having a 35mm FF. Why would they skip that when they have a medium format DSLR?


----------



## BlankThis

You Tube  



 
I really want to try this


----------



## biatchi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead;14830663*
> And I'm as confused as you are about Pentax not having a 35mm FF. Why would they skip that when they have a medium format DSLR?


The general feeling is that Hoya only wanted access to the medical arm of Pentax and couldn't really give a flying one about their DSLR's


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *foothead*


Totally agree, but really, an APS-C sensor isn't /that/ much of an improvement. Assuming 4/3 isn't going away, I'd only be willing to switch for a full frame, and even then I'd hang onto my E-410. The main reason I went with it in the first place is because it's ridiculously small and light (wonderful for hiking), and Olympus didn't cripple it by removing features.

And I'm as confused as you are about Pentax not having a 35mm FF. Why would they skip that when they have a medium format DSLR?


I think it would be nice if Olympus introduced a new FF body with a new lens mount designed for it. The new mount could be also compatible with 4/3 bodies, and then they would have a system like Canon's EF-S/EF and Nikon's DX/FX.

And Pentax has so much great legacy glass. It's a shame they don't have an FF body. They should do what Sony did and release an affordable FF body, since more and more amateur photogs are gravitating towards them it seems.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *BlankThis*


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AgOTk4ApEYs

I really want to try this


Interesting! Looks like there could be some sort of manufactured adapter for this besides using a paper cup.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *BlankThis*


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AgOTk4ApEYs

I really want to try this


Rather use the X5 and X1.


----------



## dudemanppl

I wish drum scanners were cheaper.







Like 100 dollar cheap.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis;14830670*
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AgOTk4ApEYs
> 
> I really want to try this


I just tried it with a random medium format neg i had lying around.

Straight out of camera:










inverted:










Really, not bad, but it's not great either. You'll probably get better results out of scanning a contact print, assuming you have a halfway decent scanner.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;14830757*
> I think it would be nice if Olympus introduced a new FF body with a new lens mount designed for it. The new mount could be also compatible with 4/3 bodies, and then they would have a system like Canon's EF-S/EF and Nikon's DX/FX.


An adapter would definitely be necessary. The flange distance on 4/3 is much smaller than any 35mm slr. It'd be nice if they brought back the original OM mount.


----------



## Marin

If they had regular flatbeds with a lens that could focused... pure awesome...


----------



## laboitenoire

FedEx stopped by.


New toys by laboitenoire, on Flickr


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

New eraser, score!


----------



## MistaBernie

Nice LBN. Something tells me you're really gonna enjoy that 50mm.









ok, I'm kind of stuck.

I currently have three things on my list of 'things to pick up relatively soon'.

1) 135 F/2L
2) 7D
3) Fuji X100

Yeah, those are definitely a mish mash of stuff, I get it. My thoughts are this.

The 135 -- I've been wanting to lean more towards using primes (although I feel I work easier with zooms at the moment). I might be able to eliminate this by using it and determining that it doens't fit my style, but until I do, it's on the list.

The 7D -- I want a backup body, and I dont mind upgrading my main body and making my 60D a backup. I can't put the thing down when I'm in Best Buy.

The Fuji X100 -- I've been considering getting a high quality P&S to keep with me, and I like the Finepix for a number of reasons.. the reviews and research I've done seem to indicate it will be a great P&S that I will be able to use for a while, but I find it hard to put $1200+ into a P&S.

What would YOU do?


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *foothead*


That's what it looks like to me too, except they released the E-5 not that long ago, so there's still hope. I really don't want to have to re-buy lenses or end up having to carry around two DSLRs.

I guess I'll wait and see. I was planning on buying an E-3 towards the end of the year, but I suppose I could get an entry-level Nikon instead. I just wish they had the awesome weatherproofing the Olympus cameras have.


take a look at pentax or sony since uve been exposed to sensor shift stabilization there is no turning back...


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


Nice LBN. Something tells me you're really gonna enjoy that 50mm.









ok, I'm kind of stuck.

I currently have three things on my list of 'things to pick up relatively soon'.

1) 135 F/2L
2) 7D
3) Fuji X100

Yeah, those are definitely a mish mash of stuff, I get it. My thoughts are this.

The 135 -- I've been wanting to lean more towards using primes (although I feel I work easier with zooms at the moment). I might be able to eliminate this by using it and determining that it doens't fit my style, but until I do, it's on the list.

The 7D -- I want a backup body, and I dont mind upgrading my main body and making my 60D a backup. I can't put the thing down when I'm in Best Buy.

The Fuji X100 -- I've been considering getting a high quality P&S to keep with me, and I like the Finepix for a number of reasons.. the reviews and research I've done seem to indicate it will be a great P&S that I will be able to use for a while, but I find it hard to put $1200+ into a P&S.

What would YOU do?


135L: Rent first before buying. Try it out for a weekend and see how you like shooting with it.

7D: I must ask; why do you need a backup body? Truth be told the only reason I can think of for backup bodies are if you're a professional (if your main body messes up, you won't lose business as you get it fixed). Not to mention both bodies use the same sensor (it isn't a case of one body for FF, one body for APS-C), so yeaup.

x100: You should PM michintom. He's experience with the x100 and DSLR. I know he went back to a DSLR a while ago, so it might be worth it to ask about his opinion of the x100 and how it handles.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


135L: Rent first before buying. Try it out for a weekend and see how you like shooting with it.

7D: I must ask; why do you need a backup body? Truth be told the only reason I can think of for backup bodies are if you're a professional (if your main body messes up, you won't lose business as you get it fixed). Not to mention both bodies use the same sensor (it isn't a case of one body for FF, one body for APS-C), so yeaup.

x100: You should PM michintom. He's experience with the x100 and DSLR. I know he went back to a DSLR a while ago, so it might be worth it to ask about his opinion of the x100 and how it handles.


135L - that's the plan.









7D - FPS & auto-focus improvements, but not only that, I have been hired for a couple of shoots lately and I've been paranoid about only having one body. Also, I can have something like my Sigma 17-50 on one and my 70-200 on the other and cover a decent focal length without changing lenses.

x100 - good call, I will. Thanks!

+cookies (since rep is invisible)


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


New eraser, score!










Haha, that's a Staedler! Good stuff!

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


Nice LBN. Something tells me you're really gonna enjoy that 50mm.










I hope I enjoy it too. I figured it was pretty cheap (BGN off of KEH) so I couldn't really go wrong with a 50. Only issue with it is two tiny dust specs inside that don't affect the image quality and the lens tube is cracked just behind the filter thread on one side (not very large, though).


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


135L - that's the plan.









7D - FPS & auto-focus improvements, but not only that, I have been hired for a couple of shoots lately and I've been paranoid about only having one body. Also, I can have something like my Sigma 17-50 on one and my 70-200 on the other and cover a decent focal length without changing lenses.

x100 - good call, I will. Thanks!

+cookies (since rep is invisible)


Ah, that makes more sense. Hm, what sort of photography are you hired to do? And congrats on finding paid work


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Ah, that makes more sense. Hm, what sort of photography are you hired to do? And congrats on finding paid work










Thanks! Nothing sustaining yet, but everyone has to start somewhere. So far, a couple of portrait sessions (including a freebie for some good friends of ours that are having their second child soon to see if I can survive doing newborns), a couple of parties.. an engagement session coming up in the next few months.

In reality, I'm offering to shoot most of these for relatively low prices (I'm not completely low-balling other local photogs) but for the most part my clientele is friends or friends of friends.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


7D - FPS & auto-focus improvements, but not only that, I have been hired for a couple of shoots lately and I've been paranoid about only having one body. Also, I can have something like my Sigma 17-50 on one and my 70-200 on the other and cover a decent focal length without changing lenses.


when i shoot events i use two bodies for this exact reason. i miss so many shots when i cant get a telephoto (or a wide) when i need it....

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


Thanks! Nothing sustaining yet, but everyone has to start somewhere. So far, a couple of portrait sessions (including a freebie for some good friends of ours that are having their second child soon to see if I can survive doing newborns), a couple of parties.. an engagement session coming up in the next few months.


newborns are rough.....ive had problems with how perfect their skin is the camera has some trouble focus locking. the 85/1.2 (or 100/2.8 macro) might actually be better for this then the 135L if you were planning to use the 135L


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


newborns are rough.....ive had problems with how perfect their skin is the camera has some trouble focus locking. the 85/1.2 (or 100/2.8 macro) might actually be better for this then the 135L if you were planning to use the 135L


That's why I dont focus on the skin







Ideally, I would like to upgrade from the 85 and 50 to the 1.2 versions, but it's not (yet) in the cards. The 85L would probably be best for something like that, but in the interim I'll probably use the 1.8 and manual focus and call it a day.

I'd LOVE to get something with a decent hyperfocal range at F/8 (at least marked on the distance screen). I really was thinking about the 135L to use instead of my 70-200 for sports, but I'm starting to reconsider based on how I plan out my shots..


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Hm, just a thought of mine: Do you really need the extra FPS and the AF of the 7D? If not, why not get a T2i via CLP for your second body and put the money saved towards the 135L? Or even, with the money saved, sell off your 70-200 f/4 and grab the f/2.8. I think it'd fit your work much better.


----------



## Conspiracy

so how do yall feel about shooting soccer in very light rain with 7D using 70-200 2.8 mkII with 1.4X. should i worry about the gear and light rain? i know the 70-200 can take it but with the 1.4X and my 7D?


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*


so how do yall feel about shooting soccer in very light rain with 7D using 70-200 2.8 mkII with 1.4X. should i worry about the gear and light rain? i know the 70-200 can take it but with the 1.4X and my 7D?


My gear is much cheaper than yours and I've shot in SF downpour before. And I don't mean light sprinkling; I mean raining bucketloads of water. 50D and my old EF 28mm f/1.8 handled it without any issues. My current 50D and Sigma 30mm still are able to do it just fine.

So in short, you're fine


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Hm, just a thought of mine: Do you really need the extra FPS and the AF of the 7D? If not, why not get a T2i via CLP for your second body and put the money saved towards the 135L? Or even, with the money saved, sell off your 70-200 f/4 and grab the f/2.8. I think it'd fit your work much better.


the t2i and the 7d are completely two different animals....build, ergonomics and VF is where the 7d shines....

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*


so how do yall feel about shooting soccer in very light rain with 7D using 70-200 2.8 mkII with 1.4X. should i worry about the gear and light rain? i know the 70-200 can take it but with the 1.4X and my 7D?


no need to worry, ive shot a kit lens on an a200 in heavy rain with no problems.


----------



## MistaBernie

Yeah, if I were gonna skimp on the backup, I'd just get another 60D from CLP for like $650. I feel like a 7D is worth it at the moment, though I might wait until they announce something new and see if any prices start dropping.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


the t2i and the 7d are completely two different animals....build, ergonomics and VF is where the 7d shines....


I'm not saying the 7D is better than the T2i; I'm just saying if MB finds himself in a situation where the 7D's extra features are unneeded, it's an option to consider









Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


Yeah, if I were gonna skimp on the backup, I'd just get another 60D from CLP for like $650. I feel like a 7D is worth it at the moment, though I might wait until they announce something new and see if any prices start dropping.


Welp, nevermind then.

And good luck on that. Canon is always a bit private when it comes to their new offerings. I have no idea why, but they just are


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Welp, nevermind then.

And good luck on that. Canon is always a bit private when it comes to their new offerings. I have no idea why, but they just are










You know I appreciate and value your feedback R3 -- it makes alot of fiscal sense, so if I were hard up for a budget backup it would make complete sense.

One question remains (kinda intermixed) -- are there any non ~$2000 lenses that have decent hyperfocal ranges at f8 (as marked on the range finder)?


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


You know I appreciate and value your feedback R3 -- it makes alot of fiscal sense, so if I were hard up for a budget backup it would make complete sense.

One question remains (kinda intermixed) -- are there any non ~$2000 lenses that have decent hyperfocal ranges at f8 (as marked on the range finder)?


Haha, no offense taken at all. "Welp" is just one of those quirky words I have when typing online.

And no clue on the lens, sorry! Venturing a guess here: Perhaps the 70-200 f/2.8? I know it gets a fair amount of use with regards to wildlife, but again just a guess.


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


take a look at pentax or sony since uve been exposed to sensor shift stabilization there is no turning back...










E-410 actually doesn't have IS. It's the tradeoff for it being so small.

Does Pentax have any weather sealed cameras?


----------



## MistaBernie

Usually the hyperfocal range finder is only on primes.. take a look at the 50 f/1.2L's rangefinder vs the 50 f/1.4 You'll see the 50 f/1.4 has a 22, whereas the 1.2 has 8, 11 and 16. Notice as you stop the lens down, the range gets wider -- this makes sense because you're stopping down the aperture. Zooms (even constant minimum aperture ones) wont have this simply because the DOF changes at different focal lengths (as I understand it).

The Zeiss 50 f/1.4 seems to have a better defined hyperfocal range but I'd prefer a non-MF lens..


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *foothead*


E-410 actually doesn't have IS. It's the tradeoff for it being so small.

Does Pentax have any weather sealed cameras?


i know the k7 and k5 are weather sealed and i believe all DA lenses are sealedn (i know the DA-stars are sealed)....


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie;14841743*
> Nice LBN. Something tells me you're really gonna enjoy that 50mm.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ok, I'm kind of stuck.
> 
> I currently have three things on my list of 'things to pick up relatively soon'.
> 
> 1) 135 F/2L
> 2) 7D
> 3) Fuji X100
> 
> Yeah, those are definitely a mish mash of stuff, I get it. My thoughts are this.
> 
> The 135 -- I've been wanting to lean more towards using primes (although I feel I work easier with zooms at the moment). I might be able to eliminate this by using it and determining that it doens't fit my style, but until I do, it's on the list.
> 
> The 7D -- I want a backup body, and I dont mind upgrading my main body and making my 60D a backup. I can't put the thing down when I'm in Best Buy.
> 
> The Fuji X100 -- I've been considering getting a high quality P&S to keep with me, and I like the Finepix for a number of reasons.. the reviews and research I've done seem to indicate it will be a great P&S that I will be able to use for a while, but I find it hard to put $1200+ into a P&S.
> 
> What would YOU do?


What about a 5D classic instead? If you're shooting events and not sports so much, it would save you a bundle. Or go for broke and get a 5DII. FF really makes primes even better. 5D/5DII +135L is something that has to be experience to be believed.

And if I had $1200 to spend on a P&S like the x100, I'd rather get a decent EVIL camera (like a NEX-5) instead with a pancake prime.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;14844523*
> What about a 5D classic instead? If you're shooting events and not sports so much, it would save you a bundle. Or go for broke and get a 5DII. FF really makes primes even better. 5D/5DII +135L is something that has to be experience to be believed.
> 
> And if I had $1200 to spend on a P&S like the x100, I'd rather get a decent EVIL camera (like a NEX-5) instead with a pancake prime.


I'm a vain man. I'd rather get the x100 for its old school rangefinder stylings.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10;14843480*
> i know the k7 and k5 are weather sealed and i believe all DA lenses are sealedn (i know the DA-stars are sealed)....


I just looked on their website and it's only the DA* lenses. The 16-50mm/2.8 is $1500. So much for that. Oly has a weather sealed 14-54/2.8-3.5 for $400-500.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;14844523*
> What about a 5D classic instead? If you're shooting events and not sports so much, it would save you a bundle. Or go for broke and get a 5DII. FF really makes primes even better. 5D/5DII +135L is something that has to be experience to be believed.
> 
> And if I had $1200 to spend on a P&S like the x100, I'd rather get a decent EVIL camera (like a NEX-5) instead with a pancake prime.


I'd considered going FF, but I wouldn't want to step backwards that far (to the 5DC), and I have no real need to make that big of a jump yet. I mean, I could sell my Sigma 17-50 and have another $600 to put towards it, but Canon never has the refurbs in, and used ones are still $2100 plus. That being said, it's not completely out of the realm of possibility (if I can sell my music gear, it'll easily pay for a 5D2 and maybe the 135)..


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead;14844798*
> I just looked on their website and it's only the DA* lenses. The 16-50mm/2.8 is $1500. So much for that. Oly has a weather sealed 14-54/2.8-3.5 for $400-500.


i dont have any experience with either lenses but i would assume that the DA-star lenses are better because they would be classed similarly to the Super High Grade 14-35/2.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10;14845253*
> i dont have any experience with either lenses but i would assume that the DA-star lenses are better because they would be classed similarly to the Super High Grade 14-35/2.


Most likely, but I don't need the super high end stuff. I just want a decent camera/lens that I don't have to worry about getting soaked when I'm out hiking.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;14844612*
> I'm a vain man. I'd rather get the x100 for its old school rangefinder stylings.


I'd rather get an M3 and 35 1.4 for it's actual old school rangefinder styling.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;14844612*
> I'm a vain man. I'd rather get the x100 for its old school rangefinder stylings.


YOU'RE WELCOME








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie;14844825*
> I'd considered going FF, but I wouldn't want to step backwards that far (to the 5DC), and I have no real need to make that big of a jump yet. I mean, I could sell my Sigma 17-50 and have another $600 to put towards it, but Canon never has the refurbs in, and used ones are still $2100 plus. That being said, it's not completely out of the realm of possibility (if I can sell my music gear, it'll easily pay for a 5D2 and maybe the 135)..










DO IT. You'll thank me.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Serious: How's the IQ on that? Never heard of it before.

Also, GT: Just looked through your Flickr and noticed you took part in Where's Nifty? Nice!


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;14845842*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DO IT. You'll thank me.


I thought the rule was 'improve glass first, then bodies later'...


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie;14846497*
> I thought the rule was 'improve glass first, then bodies later'...


Overridden by OCN's rule: Spend money now, think later.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;14846296*
> Serious: How's the IQ on that? Never heard of it before.
> 
> Also, GT: Just looked through your Flickr and noticed you took part in Where's Nifty? Nice!


Don't know first hand, but I've read some nasty reviews about it. But then again, it was never meant to be a "serious" camera really, as you can buy it at Urban Outfitters, right next to the pile of Holga and Lomo cameras.






And Where's Nifty was fun, only took just over a year to get it! Put your name on the list and a few years down the road, who knows?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie;14846497*
> I thought the rule was 'improve glass first, then bodies later'...


Well, I think you've already improved your glass quite nicely, now it's time for some FF action.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;14846680*
> Overridden by OCN's rule: Spend money now, think later.


You make a compelling argument sirs..


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;14846680*
> Overridden by OCN's rule: Spend money now, think later.


No joke, I'd love to somehow know what all of OCN members' collective debt is spent on technology.


----------



## Marin

That's how.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead;14845722*
> Most likely, but I don't need the super high end stuff. I just want a decent camera/lens that I don't have to worry about getting soaked when I'm out hiking.


unless you are planning to walk through a waterfall with your camera completely exposed, i wouldnt worry too much about weather sealing.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10;14846938*
> unless you are planning to walk through a waterfall with your camera completely exposed, i wouldnt worry too much about weather sealing.


I've done that before, had to leave the camera behind. Same with whitewater rafting and a couple mountain climbs when the weather turned bad. I'll definitely use it.


----------



## mortimersnerd

Currently waiting for Lr to export ~1500 images. My Q9650 is starting to seem slow.


----------



## Conspiracy

currently importing like 500 raws from tonights soccer game from horrible field lighting that gave me about 2 stops under exposed at ISO 6400 1/1000 f4. 70-200 2.8 +1.4X

so glad LR3 can recover these and help bring some back. also cant wait to shoot a daytime game with this new lens and extender this sunday









btw when it comes to 70-200's the canon 2.8 IS USM mkII is the bees knees


----------



## sub50hz

1/1000? Jesus, what a waste of ISO.


----------



## laboitenoire

Absolutely loving the 12-24 f/4 so far. I was using it with my flash (quite the heavy combo in use) about an hour ago for some fraternity stuff and I got a lot of nice stuff. Can't wait to find the time (and get the weather) to take it outside!


DSC_2035 by laboitenoire, on Flickr


DSC_2043 by laboitenoire, on Flickr


DSC_2052 by laboitenoire, on Flickr

I need to poke around with the AF microadjust on my 50 f/1.4. It appears to have fairly strong backfocus, so I guess I'm getting out the test charts...


----------



## mortimersnerd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy;14848429*
> currently importing like 500 raws from tonights soccer game from horrible field lighting that gave me about 2 stops under exposed at ISO 6400 1/1000 f4. 70-200 2.8 +1.4X
> 
> so glad LR3 can recover these and help bring some back. also cant wait to shoot a daytime game with this new lens and extender this sunday
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> btw when it comes to 70-200's the canon 2.8 IS USM mkII is the bees knees


Is 1/1000 really needed? I just shot 1/500 or 1/750 for the mountain bike race this past weekend with the racers coming at me and that worked fine.


----------



## r34p3rex

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mortimersnerd;14848335*
> Currently waiting for Lr to export ~1500 images. My Q9650 is starting to seem slow.


*coughsandybridgecough*


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r34p3rex;14849138*
> *coughsandybridgecough*


Shut it.


----------



## r34p3rex

Loving the 7D.. the shutter sound makes my T2i sound like a baby. Also.. didn't realize how beastly the battery is.. probably wouldn't have bothered with a second battery if I knew I could go take 800 shots and still have power to spare


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r34p3rex;14849188*
> Loving the 7D.. the shutter sound makes my T2i sound like a baby. Also.. didn't realize how beastly the battery is.. probably wouldn't have bothered with a second battery if I knew I could go take 800 shots and still have power to spare


Yes on both accounts!

The battery is so awesome. Shooting a whole race weekend without charging is a good possibility with the grip and two batteries.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;14848457*
> 1/1000? Jesus, what a waste of ISO.


lighting was seriously that bad and i didnt want a ton of motion blur in every single shot. and was my first day playing with settings to try and get them right since i now will be able to consistently use this lens anyway. so i have time to get all the settings down since there are parts of our field were its not possible to get shots. even 20 feet in front of the goals is just darkness. only part of the field that has some light is the middle


----------



## dudemanppl

Why are you shooting RAW sports? Lose the 1.4. 2.8 > any sort of reach at that level of darkness. Also, my school is 1/800 f/2.8 ISO 6400, 2/3rds a stop off. Basically, shoot JPG and on manual at the average (my field is super derp too, just dealwithit.jpg).


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead;14847189*
> I've done that before, had to leave the camera behind. Same with whitewater rafting and a couple mountain climbs when the weather turned bad. I'll definitely use it.


you might want to reconsider taking ANY DSLR rafting.....even the sealing on a 24-70L is nothing more then a little rubber gasket around the mount and by no means WATERPROOF.....

ive taken my camera and lens which are not marketing as weathersealed in heavy rain and have had no problems. and if you really need some weathersealing just get a bag and cut a hole for the lens, cost nearly nothing and works well.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Oh hey, I just realized my name is misspelled and my gear list in OP is off. GT, do you mind editing to:

*Canon 50D*
Sigma 30mm f/1.4 HSM
Yongnuo YN-468

Pretty much what I've downgraded my gear to.


----------



## dudemanppl

Anybody interested in a minty 17-55 IS? 895 shipped USPS Priority and such.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dance_belt I have to wear this... Don't open this at work.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Oh hey, *I just realized my name is misspelled* and my gear list in OP is off. GT, do you mind editing to:

*Canon 50D*
Sigma 30mm f/1.4 HSM
Yongnuo YN-468

Pretty much what I've downgraded my gear to.


Whoops. That's what happens when you spell your user name in leet speak.







Fixed.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Anybody interested in a minty 17-55 IS? 895 shipped USPS Priority and such.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dance_belt I have to wear this... Don't open this at work.


If by 17-55 you mean 35L and it's the same price, then I'll take it!


----------



## Conspiracy

im considering a samyang/rokinon 14mm f2.8 for my UWA since it can be had for a very reasonable price of approximately $300 i think

anyone had any experience working with one of these MF 3rd party fast UWA primes? i would like to have a UWA but dont want to pay top dollar for a 14L or 16-35 and not nearly even as much as a canon 10-22


----------



## mz-n10

i have that 14/2.8. fairly sharp and the color is ok. i dont think its really worth it since you can pick up a 10-20 sigma for roughly the same price and have AF.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


i have that 14/2.8. fairly sharp and the color is ok. i dont think its really worth it since you can pick up a 10-20 sigma for roughly the same price and have AF.


+1; 14mm is extremely wide on FF, but not so much on crop. Look into the Siggy as the difference of just 4mm focal length is pretty big. 10mm on crop nice.


----------



## Conspiracy

thanks ill check the sigma out. this lens is really going to be more for fun than anything so i dont want to drop too much cash on it


----------



## dudemanppl

Not too much cash = same price as your most expensive lens. I don't even.


----------



## PCSarge

hmm i should join... i need to find that old film camera of mine and put it to good use... i have a variety of lenses for it, its so old it has a wind lever instead of a wheel xP.

will post ap ic of it with my phone when i find it, time to dig thru the crawlspace


----------



## xxrabid93

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*


im considering a samyang/rokinon 14mm f2.8 for my UWA since it can be had for a very reasonable price of approximately $300 i think

anyone had any experience working with one of these MF 3rd party fast UWA primes? i would like to have a UWA but dont want to pay top dollar for a 14L or 16-35 and not nearly even as much as a canon 10-22


Apparently the Vivitar 13mm 2.8 is really good. Here's a thread on it on POTN: http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...hlight=vivitar

Here is a thread on the Samyang/Rokinon(/Vivitar) 14mm 2.8: http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...hlight=vivitar

Looks pretty damn good, imo, for $300-400, even if it is MF. If you don't need AF, i would think it would be an awesome choice.

The Vivitar is apparently the same as the Samyang/Rokinon 14mm, but it has a different # of groups and elements. Around the same price though.


----------



## lifeskills

Hey GT will you add me to the list?

Been lurkin this thread for a while...

Nikon D90
Nikkor 18-55 3.5-5.6 (kit)
Nikkor 70-300 AF 4.5-5.6
Dynamic Perception Stage Zero Dolly (6ft)

Saving for the Nex 7 when that comes out too.


----------



## xxrabid93

Oh, and i guess i haven't told anyone to add me to the front list. Well i guess now would be a good time.









DSLR:

Canon 5D Classic

Canon 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5
(on the way) Canon 70-200mm f/2.8
2x Nikkor AI 50mm f/1.4
Nikkor pre-AI 50mm f/2
Nikkor pre-AI 200mm f/4

Nikkor-EOS lens adapter
Kata 3N1-33 bag
Old Vivitar tripod

SLR:

Canon 1n
2x Nikkormat/Nikon EL2
Nikkormat EL

same lenses as above

Thanks.


----------



## lifeskills

Anyone used the AF-S Micro Nikkor 60mm f2.8 ED?

I have a lot of experience with the AF version here

I'm thinking of picking one of these up to do close up dolly slides of computer parts/ stuff like that. I am rendering some files shot with the later lense and they look great, just curious what the differences between those would be. One is made for a regular slr?

If you have used either let me know what you think


----------



## mortimersnerd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r34p3rex;14849138*
> *coughsandybridgecough*


Every time I go to upgrade my computer, I end up spending the money on camera gear. It took 30-45 minutes to export those but I wasn't in much of a hurry.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10;14849673*
> you might want to reconsider taking ANY DSLR rafting.....even the sealing on a 24-70L is nothing more then a little rubber gasket around the mount and by no means WATERPROOF.....
> 
> ive taken my camera and lens which are not marketing as weathersealed in heavy rain and have had no problems. and if you really need some weathersealing just get a bag and cut a hole for the lens, cost nearly nothing and works well.


The camera would be in the bag whenever there's any real tipping risk. Besides, I've heard quite a few stories of Oly cameras being dropped in the water, and they always came out fine. I've even seen people who intentionally put them underwater to get photos of streambeds.

I've tried using my E-410 in the rain, and it didn't work out well. The zoom lenses seemed to wick water inside, and I don't have any "normal" primes.


----------



## ljason8eg

50 1.4 came back from Canon. Works great now! I'm glad that's the one lens I bought new because its the only one I've had problems with.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xxrabid93;14853638*
> Apparently the Vivitar 13mm 2.8 is really good. Here's a thread on it on POTN: http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=1089026&highlight=vivitar
> 
> Here is a thread on the Samyang/Rokinon(/Vivitar) 14mm 2.8: http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=909272&highlight=vivitar
> 
> Looks pretty damn good, imo, for $300-400, even if it is MF. If you don't need AF, i would think it would be an awesome choice.
> 
> The Vivitar is apparently the same as the Samyang/Rokinon 14mm, but it has a different # of groups and elements. Around the same price though.


if the vivitar as different groups it isnt the same lens....but im pretty sure they are identical.

the 14/2.8 is pretty good lens, especially on FF. but on aps-c its not wide enough (only a hair wider then the kit lens) and you cant use filters on it cause of the bulb front element.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lifeskills;14853873*
> Anyone used the AF-S Micro Nikkor 60mm f2.8 ED?
> 
> I have a lot of experience with the AF version here
> 
> I'm thinking of picking one of these up to do close up dolly slides of computer parts/ stuff like that. I am rendering some files shot with the later lense and they look great, just curious what the differences between those would be. One is made for a regular slr?
> 
> If you have used either let me know what you think


They're both AF lenses actually. The f/2.8D is an older lens without an auto focus motor in the lens, depending on the screw-drive found in mid and higher end Nikon DSLRs (D50/D80/D90, D100/200/300, D700, D7000, D3x, D3, etc). Your D90 should auto focus fine with it. The other is the newer AF-S lens with the built in ultrasonic AF motor, which will auto focus on any Nikon DSLR.

Image quality wise, I don't know the difference between the two, but they're probably relatively minor.


----------



## mz-n10

have you considered the tamon 60/2? its about 200 cheaper and a stop faster (making it a good dual purpose lens).


----------



## lifeskills

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;14854811*
> They're both AF lenses actually. The f/2.8D is an older lens without an auto focus motor in the lens, depending on the screw-drive found in mid and higher end Nikon DSLRs (D50/D80/D90, D100/200/300, D700, D7000, D3x, D3, etc). Your D90 should auto focus fine with it. The other is the newer AF-S lens with the built in ultrasonic AF motor, which will auto focus on any Nikon DSLR.
> 
> Image quality wise, I don't know the difference between the two, but they're probably relatively minor.


thanks, i have been shooting the crosshair v with the older one and like it a lot, the only reason i would go for the ED version is for future upgrade to an FX body.

the only difference that i could see would be that the older lens would be magnified a little when used on a digital body, so instead of 60mm it would be a little more
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10;14854926*
> have you considered the tamon 60/2? its about 200 cheaper and a stop faster (making it a good dual purpose lens).


Thanks, i hadn't seen that yet. It has a closer focus distance as well, which i'm looking for. will definitely consider this one.

currently i just get my girlfriend to rent out lenses from her school, and the Nikkor 60mm is always there for now. they are on ebay quite often as well so i may be able to find it cheaper


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lifeskills;14855354*
> thanks, i have been shooting the crosshair v with the older one and like it a lot, the only reason i would go for the ED version is for future upgrade to an FX body.
> 
> the only difference that i could see would be that the older lens would be magnified a little when used on a digital body, so instead of 60mm it would be a little more
> 
> *snip*


Actually, both versions will mount and function on either an APS-C or full-frame camera (only Nikon lenses designated DX are made for crop cameras). You're right about the crop conversion factor, which is 1.5x for Nikon APS-C cameras, but it will apply to *both lenses.* So, you will see the full-frame equivalent field-of-view of 90mm on your D90, and for a D3/D3x it would be a true 60mm FOV.


----------



## laboitenoire

Hmm... I think I'm gonna return the 50. It has pretty severe back-focus (I'm set at -14 on the D7000 to compensate), and even at that setting while everything is pretty sharp at close focus at further focal distances it's horrifically soft. Plus, this thing has a crack that's over an inch long on the inner lens tube. Definitely not in KEH's description for bargain.


----------



## dudemanppl

Get a Sigma, I have never been happier with a 50. Also I think I found two X25-E 64 gigs for 300 bucks, sell one and then get one for basically free.


----------



## laboitenoire

The Sigma is too expensive. That's why I got the 50 f/1.4 AF-D.


----------



## dudemanppl

1.8 AF-S G? I've heard nothing but good from it. I've had a sharp 1.4 AF-D before and I loved it. I still don't get how only one of the 60+ lenses I've owned had bad AF.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Seems like there have been a lot of gear changes lately, so (I'm going to regret this







) check your gear list in the first post for accuracy, or if you want to be added, let me know!


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;14856297*
> Seems like there have been a lot of gear changes lately, so (I'm going to regret this
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ) check your gear list in the first post for accuracy, or if you want to be added, let me know!


Add a gripped 7D to mine.


----------



## MistaBernie

dropped the 10-20, picked up an 85 f/1.8


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;14856297*
> Seems like there have been a lot of gear changes lately, so (I'm going to regret this
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ) check your gear list in the first post for accuracy, or if you want to be added, let me know!


I switched the vivitar 50/1.7 for a Chinon 55/1.8 and added a Pentax stereo lens converter and a vanguard VT-126 tripod.

Also, my large format camera is under film SLR. Perhaps we should have a dedicated section for that?


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;14856287*
> 1.8 AF-S G? I've heard nothing but good from it. I've had a sharp 1.4 AF-D before and I loved it. I still don't get how only one of the 60+ lenses I've owned had bad AF.


Well it's weird. I'm comparing my observations with the reviews, and I guess it is more or less on from a sharpness perspective, but it just has rather low contrast, which is what the reviews say. The back-focus is quite real, although I do have it pretty well corrected at -15.

And upon further inspection the crack is definitely before the first element, so that shouldn't be affecting the image quality.

We shall have to wait and see.

Anyway, Gone, here's my updated list for the OP:

Nikon D7000
Tokina 12-24 f/4 AT-X Pro
Sigma 30 f/1.4 EX DC HSM
Nikon Nikkor 50 f/1.4 AF-D
Nikon Nikkor 70-300 f/4.5-5.6 VR


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;14856297*
> Seems like there have been a lot of gear changes lately, so (I'm going to regret this
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ) check your gear list in the first post for accuracy, or if you want to be added, let me know!


Whatever is in my sig, it's probably in need of updating.


----------



## foothead

I'm in need of some new developer. Should I just get rodinal, or is there something else worth trying? I've been shooting mostly fomapan and neopan lately.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg;14856354*
> Add a gripped 7D to mine.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie;14856400*
> dropped the 10-20, picked up an 85 f/1.8


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire;14856440*
> Well it's weird. I'm comparing my observations with the reviews, and I guess it is more or less on from a sharpness perspective, but it just has rather low contrast, which is what the reviews say. The back-focus is quite real, although I do have it pretty well corrected at -15.
> 
> And upon further inspection the crack is definitely before the first element, so that shouldn't be affecting the image quality.
> 
> We shall have to wait and see.
> 
> Anyway, Gone, here's my updated list for the OP:
> 
> Nikon D7000
> Tokina 12-24 f/4 AT-X Pro
> Sigma 30 f/1.4 EX DC HSM
> Nikon Nikkor 50 f/1.4 AF-D
> Nikon Nikkor 70-300 f/4.5-5.6 VR


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead;14856438*
> I switched the vivitar 50/1.7 for a Chinon 55/1.8 and added a Pentax stereo lens converter and a vanguard VT-126 tripod.
> 
> Also, my large format camera is under film SLR. Perhaps we should have a dedicated section for that?


Yep, looks like I'll need to keep an edit window open in a new tab tonight. Got all these changed. foothead, instead of making a dedicated section, I changed the section header to include MF & LF film.


----------



## Marin

Why do all DSLR's have such garbage VF's. It's frustrating.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;14856614*
> Why do all DSLR's have such garbage VF's. It's frustrating.


Because of the smaller sensor?


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

I'd help you out, GT, but I don't have mod privs in the photography section


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead;14856633*
> Because of the smaller sensor?


Same applies to FF.


----------



## xxrabid93

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;14856542*
> Yep, looks like I'll need to keep an edit window open in a new tab tonight. Got all these changed. foothead, instead of making a dedicated section, I changed the section header to include MF & LF film.


Don't forget me too. This was from a few pages back:
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xxrabid93;14853806*
> Oh, and i guess i haven't told anyone to add me to the front list. Well i guess now would be a good time.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DSLR:
> 
> Canon 5D Classic
> 
> Canon 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5
> (on the way) Canon 70-200mm f/2.8
> 2x Nikkor AI 50mm f/1.4
> Nikkor pre-AI 50mm f/2
> Nikkor pre-AI 200mm f/4
> 
> Nikkor-EOS lens adapter
> Kata 3N1-33 bag
> Old Vivitar tripod
> 
> SLR:
> 
> Canon 1n
> 2x Nikkormat/Nikon EL2
> Nikkormat EL
> 
> same lenses as above
> 
> Thanks.


----------



## sub50hz

And me, ya jerk. <3


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;14856664*
> I'd help you out, GT, but I don't have mod privs in the photography section


Oh, it's not a big deal really to do, I kid. Thanks though.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;14856913*
> And me, ya jerk. <3


No one likes you.


----------



## sub50hz

What a sad.


----------



## Marin

http://www.chamonixviewcamera.com/

Still want.


----------



## mz-n10

o crap 900 for a new 4x5? that aint bad....


----------



## MistaBernie

5Diis in stock refurb... must.. resist.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mistabernie;14857052*
> 5diis in stock refurb... Must.. Resist.


clp?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xxrabid93;14856907*
> Don't forget me too. This was from a few pages back:


I got ya.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;14856913*
> And me, ya jerk. <3


You never officially asked, and I'm pretty sure I never got the filled-out PDF application here







You have been added!


----------



## sub50hz

I'll run it by your secretary later.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;14857064*
> clp?


If I could talk them into a CLP purchase I'd do it in a heartbeat. Still out of the program for now.. still thinking of going 7D, but with all the thinking I've been doing lately about it, it kind of seems like a waste..


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;14856947*
> http://www.chamonixviewcamera.com/
> 
> Still want.


Wow that looks incredibly well constructed. And they make a 20x24 version. I can't imagine there are many lenses for that.

Personally, I'd prefer a cherry Tachihara. That thing is beautiful.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie;14857139*
> If I could talk them into a CLP purchase I'd do it in a heartbeat. Still out of the program for now.. still thinking of going 7D, but with all the thinking I've been doing lately about it, it kind of seems like a waste..


Where are you finding the refurbs then?


----------



## mz-n10

i just saw the 5d2 on cpl when you linked in the other thread mista......


----------



## MistaBernie

It's on the refurb site, but not available in the CLP (according to people who have tried recently). Not everything on the refurb site is available in the CLP (for example, the 60D when I tried to pick mine up initially, wasn't on the CLP, it was just added around 8/20/11).


----------



## lifeskills

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XM09WH9kQDI&feature=youtube_gdata_player[/ame]

Some shots taken with the 60 mm micro. Found out halfway through that 60fps is much better for up close timelapses, so might redo some of those. Needs some stabalization too


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;14856664*
> I'd help you out, GT, but I don't have mod privs in the photography section


I don't have any mod privileges here either.









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;14856707*
> Same applies to FF.


You mean they're tiny or cluttered?


----------



## Marin

Tiny.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;14857755*
> Tiny.


What are you comparing to? I tired out a 5DII a while back, and it seemed to be about on par with 35mm SLRs. Everything looks tiny after using a 645 though.


----------



## Marin

When I had an Olympus OM-4, now that was a VF.

EDIT:










EDIT 2: And 645 is tiny.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;14858086*
> EDIT 2: And 645 is tiny.


? The VF is 52mm diagonal. That's far bigger than the OM-1 at 38mm.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead;14859056*
> ? The VF is 52mm diagonal. That's far bigger than the OM-1 at 38mm.


Oh I know that, it's still tiny compared to 6x6 and 6x7.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;14859072*
> Oh I know that, it's still tiny compared to 6x6 and 6x7.


Oh. Well, there really isn't that much difference between it and 6x6, since most of the extra gets cropped off when printing 6x6. It just makes it more important to frame the photo correctly.

I've been wanting a Pentax 67 for ages now. I just can never justify spending so much money on another medium format camera when I don't use the first one all that much.


----------



## Marin

I'd just go for a RZ67, awesome camera system that's still supported.

And 6x6 is only cropped if you're trying to conform it to the papers dimensions. I always print square with 6x6.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;14859136*
> I'd just go for a RZ67, awesome camera system that's still supported.
> 
> And 6x6 is only cropped if you're trying to conform it to the papers dimensions. I always print square with 6x6.


Haha, well I'm probably going to get neither, since I already have the 645 and a 4x5. That does look really awesome though, despite the lack of a reasonably priced prism finder.

I always crop my photos to 4:5 when printing. Even my 35mm prints get cropped. There's just something about that aspect that makes them look better to me.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lifeskills;14857566*
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XM09WH9kQDI&feature=youtube_gdata_player
> 
> Some shots taken with the 60 mm micro. Found out halfway through that 60fps is much better for up close timelapses, so might redo some of those. Needs some stabalization too


Pretty cool, though the lighting is uneven in some parts, causing a flashing effect. And I must say, how is this better than just panning with a dolly? Doesn't really show any obvious lapsed time (sorry to pick, your other vids were really cool).
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;14857643*
> I don't have any mod privileges here either.


Lord help us if you did.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;14858086*
> When I had an Olympus OM-4, now that was a VF.
> 
> EDIT:


Wow, the XTi has a tiny VF. I had that camera in '07, but I didn't know what good VF was then so I didn't even notice.







I wish the 7D was on the comparison. It was quite nice, though I can't tell much of a difference from my 5DII.


----------



## lifeskills

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;14859232*
> Pretty cool, though the lighting is uneven in some parts, causing a flashing effect. And I must say, how is this better than just panning with a dolly? Doesn't really show any obvious lapsed time (sorry to pick, your other vids were really cool).


No worries, I put it up here to see what others thought. The aperature flicker can be a pain when shooting timelapse. Shooting wide open usually solves this, but I was trying to get a larger DOF for some of the board shots, so I cranked up the fstop a little on some of these. I also didn't light the shot, it was all ambient light, and I was moving around so I'm sure a lot of the flicker was caused by me... Oh well this was just sort of a test, I will probably be re-shooting some of these with lighting.

I think timelapse is great for product videos and such because even though there are no moving parts, a raw file holds so much more info than a frame captured by a typical video camera, and a dslr will capture a much larger dynamic range. (Assuming you get the lighting right and the flicker down)

Im sure I could get some great shots with a nice video camera, but one with the customization and quality of a dslr will run tens of thousands of dollars.

Thanks for the input, cheers


----------



## sub50hz

About to put my 135L up for sale/trade in order to acquire a MF, likely a 645AF or similar. Any takers/traders?


----------



## BlankThis

I actually have a mint OM-1 besides the fact that it has a broken light meter


----------



## ljason8eg

Lol this has to be a cursed lens...

I got my 50mm 1.4 back from service today as it was front focusing terribly at 8-12 feet. Service details state they found a problem fixed it, and replaced a bunch of stuff in the AF system. I get it back today and do about 4 test shots....and the AF system totally locks up. Can't do manual focus either. What a piece of s***.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


About to put my 135L up for sale/trade in order to acquire a MF, likely a 645AF or similar. Any takers/traders?


May be interested... Let me see about a couple of things


----------



## sub50hz

Word, I figured on you having first dibs anyway, Bernie.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg;14860206*
> Lol this has to be a cursed lens...
> 
> I got my 50mm 1.4 back from service today as it was front focusing terribly at 8-12 feet. Service details state they found a problem fixed it, and replaced a bunch of stuff in the AF system. I get it back today and do about 4 test shots....and the AF system totally locks up. Can't do manual focus either. What a piece of s***.


That sucks man.







Maybe they put it back together incorrectly. Call them and raise some hell.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


That sucks man.







Maybe they put it back together incorrectly. Call them and raise some hell.


Yeah I just gave them a call. This will be the third time since May the lens has been in for repair. First for AF lockup, second for the focus problem that started when it came back from the first repair, and now the AF locks up again. At this point it would likely cost them less to give me a new one, which is what I told the guy on the phone but I guess they can't do that, according to him anyway. So back to service it goes. Even though its paid for, still just sucks. It'll be another 2 weeks before its back.


----------



## BlankThis

This happened to my friend twice with his Canon 50 f/1.4. Well different issue but there was a "notch" in the focus that the AF would get jammed on. He got fed up and bought another from Best Buy just to return the bad lens saying that he actually had a Nikon camera.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg;14860366*
> Yeah I just gave them a call. This will be the third time since May the lens has been in for repair. First for AF lockup, second for the focus problem that started when it came back from the first repair, and now the AF locks up again. At this point it would likely cost them less to give me a new one, which is what I told the guy on the phone but I guess they can't do that, according to him anyway. So back to service it goes. Even though its paid for, still just sucks. It'll be another 2 weeks before its back.


Weird. I've always read on POTN about the AF motor in the 50/1.4 being unreliable, but I had my copy for over two years and never had a single issue, and it was heavily used.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:



Originally Posted by *BlankThis*


This happened to my friend twice with his Canon 50 f/1.4. Well different issue but there was a "notch" in the focus that the AF would get jammed on. He got fed up and bought another from Best Buy just to return the bad lens saying that he actually had a Nikon camera.


That doesn't sound like a bad idea, even if its not real ethical lol. I actually thought about keeping it in the packaging and selling it when it came back from repair. Glad I didn't do that now.


----------



## dudemanppl

Get it fixed, sell it for a Sigma. But buy the Sigma used or you'll have a bad copy probably.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Get it fixed, sell it for a Sigma. But buy the Sigma used or you'll have a bad copy probably.


It couldn't be any worse than this lol. I'm thinking about a Sigma 30 though. Might be a more comfortable FL on a crop.


----------



## dudemanppl

Bleh, 30 1.4 on crop = 50 2.8 on FF. So much DOF it hurts.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*


It couldn't be any worse than this lol. I'm thinking about a Sigma 30 though. Might be a more comfortable FL on a crop.


Do it!


----------



## ljason8eg

Well hmmm...idk. I guess the first order of business is getting this damn thing shipped off and fixed again.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Do it!










Ah yes i knew you'd say that


----------



## Marin

Liked my Sigma 30mm when I had it. Sold it to r34p3rex.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*


Ah yes i knew you'd say that










I only say it because it's true.







Owned quite a few primes and by far this is my favorite.

Great FL to work with (better than 50mm on crop IMO), and is sharper/less artifacts at f/1.4 than the Canon 28 at f/1.8









And for e-peen factor, the filter size is bigger. 62mm prime > 58mm


----------



## ljason8eg

I'll consider that if I can find a decently priced used one. Figure a used one will focus correctly or at least within what a little MA can fix.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*


I'll consider that if I can find a decently priced used one. Figure a used one will focus correctly or at least within what a little MA can fix.


If you buy from POTN, usually the people are OCD enough to have sent their lenses into Sigma for calibration if AF is off.


----------



## ljason8eg

Yeah, so I should be safe when it comes to that. 30mm would be the perfect FL for shooting pit road from on top of the pit box as well. Can't wait for Charlotte, Phoenix, and Miami!


----------



## MistaBernie

What the... Dudeman you used to say the 30 was epic sauce.. was that a 14 thing?


----------



## fishman78

Hey guys

Long time snooper first time poster in this thread. Figured I'd start by listing my meh gear. Hope to be able to contribute in the future, still a little new to the hobby









Olympus Evolt E620 12.3MP with IS
14-42mm f/3.5-5.6 Zuiko Lens and 40-150mm f/4.0-5.6 Zuiko Lens.
70-300mm telephoto (600mm equiv.) f/4.0-5.6 Zuiko lens
Hoya UV filters and hoods.
IR remote
cabled shutter release remote.
Olympus FL-36R Electronic Flash/Speedlight
Velbon Tripod.

Canon PS ELPH 300

So with that I only have one question. I'm looking for a good prime lens for this body, or maybe a macro lens. Anyone know where I can find a good deal on an Olympus lens?


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fishman78;14864588*
> Hey guys
> 
> Long time snooper first time poster in this thread. Figured I'd start by listing my meh gear. Hope to be able to contribute in the future, still a little new to the hobby
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Olympus Evolt E620 12.3MP with IS
> 14-42mm f/3.5-5.6 Zuiko Lens and 40-150mm f/4.0-5.6 Zuiko Lens.
> 70-300mm telephoto (600mm equiv.) f/4.0-5.6 Zuiko lens
> Hoya UV filters and hoods.
> IR remote
> cabled shutter release remote.
> Olympus FL-36R Electronic Flash/Speedlight
> Velbon Tripod.
> 
> Canon PS ELPH 300
> 
> So with that I only have one question. I'm looking for a good prime lens for this body, or maybe a macro lens. Anyone know where I can find a good deal on an Olympus lens?


There are 2 macros available, the 50mm f2 macro and the 35mm f3.5 macro. If it isn't out of your price range, the 50mm is pretty much regarded as the best lens Olympus makes.

Other than that, there are 3 more primes, the 25mm f2.8 pancake (don't buy this unless you need ultra lightweight), and the 150mm f2 and 300mm f2.8, both of which are super high grade, and probably way out of your budget.

50mm f2 for $399 at Adorama

By the way, how is the 70-300? I just noticed it's on sale, and that never happens for Olympus stuff.


----------



## fishman78

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead;14865264*
> There are 2 macros available, the 50mm f2 macro and the 35mm f3.5 macro. If it isn't out of your price range, the 50mm is pretty much regarded as the best lens Olympus makes.
> 
> Other than that, there are 3 more primes, the 25mm f2.8 pancake (don't buy this unless you need ultra lightweight), and the 150mm f2 and 300mm f2.8, both of which are super high grade, and probably way out of your budget.
> 
> 50mm f2 for $399 at Adorama
> 
> By the way, how is the 70-300? I just noticed it's on sale, and that never happens for Olympus stuff.


hey thanks! I'll check out the 50mm F2 for sure!

The 70-300 isn't too bad. Images are nice and sharp if you have enough light. AF is quite quick A good lens at that price point! I got mine on sale for 299 here in Canada. I find at 300 a tripod is a must, but that may be the IS in the camera isn't all that great. A good buy if you get it at a good price.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fishman78;14865570*
> hey thanks! I'll check out the 50mm F2 for sure!
> 
> The 70-300 isn't too bad. Images are nice and sharp if you have enough light. AF is quite quick A good lens at that price point! I got mine on sale for 299 here in Canada. I find at 300 a tripod is a must, but that may be the IS in the camera isn't all that great. A good buy if you get it at a good price.


Hmmm, thanks. I looked around a bit, and it seems to be available for around 300 used, so I think I'll pass for now. It's definitely on my future purchase list though.

50mm f2 macro review <- Some info


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie;14864059*
> What the... Dudeman you used to say the 30 was epic sauce.. was that a 14 thing?


15 THING. And it IS epic sauce. Great build, awesome AF, great sharpness. But I'm a DOF whore.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;14866206*
> 15 THING. And it IS epic sauce. Great build, awesome AF, great sharpness. But I'm a *DOF* whore.


It's a shame; I just thought of a completely great interpretation of that acronym to embarrass you, but my mod status prevents me from saying it publicly.


----------



## Conspiracy

im my researching and looking around for a UWA i now found the rokinon 8mm fisheye instead of the 14mm 2.8

for $300 i can have a UWA for my camera unfortunately it is intended for crop cameras and vignettes hard on FF but i dont see myself going FF any time soon and love my 7D. totally buying this for myself as a present at the end of the semester


----------



## mz-n10

pm me and ill say it...you can even give me an infraction after im done saying it









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy;14867639*
> im my researching and looking around for a UWA i now found the rokinon 8mm fisheye instead of the 14mm 2.8
> 
> for $300 i can have a UWA for my camera unfortunately it is intended for crop cameras and vignettes hard on FF but i dont see myself going FF any time soon and love my 7D. totally buying this for myself as a present at the end of the semester


on FF i think it turns into a fisheye....so not completely wasted.


----------



## dudemanppl

It goes from a fisheye to a... fisheye? No but if you cut off the hood, it becomes a nice circular FE.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;14868510*
> It goes from a fisheye to a... fisheye? No but if you cut off the hood, it becomes a nice circular FE.


thank you


----------



## foothead

I'm having some problems with Bridge CS5, maybe someone can help me here.










Note how the thumbnails run off the edge of the page. I'm missing seven photos in each line. It does this no matter what size the window is or how much I zoom out. How do I fix it? This is making the program unusable.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10;14867726*
> pm me and ill say it...you can even give me an infraction after im done saying it
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> on FF i think it turns into a fisheye....so not completely wasted.


huh? what would you be getting an infraction for? unless saying that the rokinon 8mm is a piece of junk lol which for the price may be possible but if its good enough quality its totally a great bang for your buck UWA fisheye


----------



## sub50hz

Huck it. Chuck it. FOOTBALL. _All night._


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


huck it. Chuck it. Football. _all night._


Finally!


----------



## sub50hz

I know. Also, GB is absolutely killing it for me, thank you A Rodg. Also, I'm certain I will burn in Chicago hell for that.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;14872142*
> I know. Also, GB is absolutely killing it for me, thank you A Rodg. Also, I'm certain I will burn in Chicago hell for that.


Only person better than A.Rodg tonite was D.Brees, 40 pts for me there alone


----------



## foothead

I tried out microsoft ICE earlier today, and I must say I'm impressed. The program itself is crap (kept freezing up on me), but the results are far better than photoshop.

link to my test photo


----------



## scottath

might have to give it a go for some of my panos..... - thanks for the link


----------



## Shane1244

foothead, it must be your computer.. It was very stable for me, and holy crap was it fast. I just made one right now for my room while im in college.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Why are your windows so small?


----------



## fishman78

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;14875362*
> Why are your windows so small?


Probably a basement room, or maybe a fancy prison...


----------



## Conspiracy

lol fancy prison


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;14875362*
> Why are your windows so small?


I'm in the basement!


----------



## BlankThis

Just applied to LCC (London College of Communications) to their BA program in Photojournalism.

:S


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;14878157*
> I'm in the basement!


I'm going to ignore your answer and pretend you said "Fancy prison" instead.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis;14878585*
> Just applied to LCC (London College of Communications) to their BA program in Photojournalism.
> 
> :S


Good luck!


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis;14878585*
> Just applied to LCC (London College of Communications) to their BA program in Photojournalism.
> 
> :S


London like UK London? Oh my god I felt so stupid asking that... I'd much rather do PJ in the US, it's just so much bigger.


----------



## 98uk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis;14878585*
> Just applied to LCC (London College of Communications) to their BA program in Photojournalism.
> 
> :S


LCC is 70th overall in the UK (and 37th for Arts). How come you chose there?


----------



## Conspiracy

70th out of how many. i dont live there but if its like 70th out of 1,000 thats not bad. but 70th out of like 80 i would look at a different school lol


----------



## 98uk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy;14879008*
> 70th out of how many. i dont live there but if its like 70th out of 1,000 thats not bad. but 70th out of like 80 i would look at a different school lol


I believe there are between 140-150 registered Universities in the UK. That ranges from Cambridge to some hole like Southampton Solent.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;14878890*
> I'd much rather do PJ in the US, it's just so much bigger.


Lol, I would like to know what experience you have that could lend any credibility to that statement.


----------



## Shane1244

He's probably going in London, Ontario.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Hm, going back to SF tomorrow for photography







Thinking of heading to Twin Peaks for some nighttime shots as well. Hopefully the cloud cover with be minimal.

Oh how I wish I had money. I've been eyeing the 70-200 f/2.8 for some time now and I really wish I had it on this trip. Ah well


----------



## investmenttechnology

hi, I am a proud owner of a Nikon D700, can I be added to the first post?


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;14879149*
> He's probably going in London, Ontario.


Hell naw.

I'm going to be applying to several schools in the London (England) area but LCC was highly recommended to me. Any other suggestions? I'm not rich and I'm going to have to pay my own way.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *investmenttechnology;14879752*
> hi, I am a proud owner of a Nikon D700, can I be added to the first post?


I'd sure hope that D700 comes with lenses!







Do share, what other equipment do you have paired with the D700?


----------



## investmenttechnology

d700, 50mm f/1.4G, and sb900


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *investmenttechnology;14879903*
> d700, 50mm f/1.4G, and sb900


Welcome!! Might want to add your rig while you're at it.


----------



## foothead

I just did a couple more old panoramas in Microsoft ICE.

http://photosynth.net/view.aspx?cid=...d-a2372db5f3ce

http://photosynth.net/view.aspx?cid=...4-5a263ab2fb79

sidenote: Everyone had altitude sickness on that climb. As I go through my pictures, they become more and more erratic as we went up. By the time I got to the top, the feeling was pretty much the same as being extremely drunk.

EDIT: http://regex.info/blog/lightroom-goodies/gps I'm gonna have to try this out next time I go shooting. Hopefully it'll work with the lightroom trial.


----------



## investmenttechnology

don't have a desktop yet... was trying to a external GPU with PE4H to connect gtx560 to my Thinkpad x200t using Nando's method on notebookreview.com/forum.

However got a faulty pe4h, so planning to build my first desktop for photoshopping and video editing and hence joined this forum.


----------



## laboitenoire

Learning new stuff about my D7000 everyday recently, it seems. Just discovered that I can set it to let me set aperture on the ring if the lens has it and not complain. Hallelujah I can finally get fully manual video control! And it doesn't spit the -fEE- error at me!

Also finally playing around with the U1 and U2 banks. Not sure how I want to set them up yet.


----------



## dudemanppl

That took a while.







On my 5DII U1 is set to settings so I can hand it off to a friend and the pictures won't suck completely, U2 is exposure/WB/everything set for the Gym (volleyball and stuff) and the football field (same exposure wat).


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


That took a while.







On my 5DII U1 is set to settings so I can hand it off to a friend and the pictures won't suck completely, U2 is exposure/WB/everything set for the Gym (volleyball and stuff) and the football field (same exposure wat).


I'm still waiting for a camera with this.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *foothead*


I'm still waiting for a camera with this.





















Photo of a P&S on full auto taken by a DSLR on full auto.

U mad?









On a side note, never again. Wanted to pull my hair out when I couldn't select AF points, use a faster shutter speed with wider aperture, or use back button AF.


----------



## foothead

Haha, I know, right? My camera lives in either M or A mode, occasionally S. All the others don't exist as far as I'm concerned.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Currently is a thread on POTN that's making me









Long story short, a new DSLR user is taking horrible images (soft, OOF, direct lighting. EXIF says very high ISO with f/5.6 and 1/30 on tripod). Goes about going "I need better photos; what gear should I buy?!". When people tell her it's not the gear, but her (lower ISO, smaller aperture, indirect lighting, use longer exposure on tripod), she starts going on about how she needs the photo ASAP and how she doesn't have time to learn the right techniques for photography. And now she's talking about post processing without ever taking the abovementioned changes to her technique into consideration.

Makes me









Reminds me very much of parents of lazy students asking their teachers "Why is my kid not a 4.0 GPA wunderkind?!"


----------



## dudemanppl

Troll thread for sure dude.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Troll thread for sure dude.


Meeting these people IRL makes me believe she isn't a troll.

One of them was actually a guy who went to high school with me. Think I posted up his photos on here before, but long story short he also wanted to be a gear whore but still always came out with blurry, under/overexposed photos. No way in hell that's the Siggy 30's fault.

Also, we need a new name for the Siggy 30. I mean, 50 f/1.4 = Sigmalux, 50-500 = Bigma, 10-20 = Wigma.

This needs to happen.


----------



## mz-n10

i shoot green box on my camera. its great, dont have to think at all just click the button....


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *foothead*


I'm still waiting for a camera with this.











You know, if the manufacturers really started calling it that, I bet it would actually make people try some of the manual modes.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Currently is a thread on POTN that's making me








Long story short, a new DSLR user is taking horrible images (soft, OOF, direct lighting. EXIF says very high ISO with f/5.6 and 1/30 on tripod). Goes about going "I need better photos; what gear should I buy?!". When people tell her it's not the gear, but her (lower ISO, smaller aperture, indirect lighting, use longer exposure on tripod), she starts going on about how she needs the photo ASAP and how she doesn't have time to learn the right techniques for photography. And now she's talking about post processing without ever taking the abovementioned changes to her technique into consideration.

Makes me









Reminds me very much of parents of lazy students asking their teachers "Why is my kid not a 4.0 GPA wunderkind?!"


Link please!

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


i shoot green box on my camera. its great, dont have to think at all just click the button....


That's why you suck.

j/k


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *foothead*


Haha, I know, right? My camera lives in either M or A mode, occasionally S. All the others don't exist as far as I'm concerned.


I hardly use manual anymore, aperture priority and exposure compensation are my lifeblood. Shutter priority for panning at SCCA events, and occasionally program if I'm feeling adventurous.


----------



## Sean Webster

What's up guys?







I haven't posted in this thread before as far as I know...that's quite bizarre to me. lol.

Also, I'm glad I sold my nifty ffifty and 55-250 b/c I got a great deal on a 100mm macro usm from silvrr! I can't wait for it to get here monday.


----------



## Hickeydog

Might as well throw my name in there....

Canon T2i
Canon 50mm 1.8f prime.
Sigma 17-70mm 2.8-4.5f

Light selection. For now. Should probably drop the $800 on a good telephoto, but not now.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Hickeydog;14883733*
> Might as well throw my name in there....
> 
> Canon T2i
> Canon 50mm 1.8f prime.
> Sigma 17-70mm 2.8-4.5f
> 
> Light selection. For now. Should probably drop the $800 on a good telephoto, but not now.


70-200 f/4L is $500 used


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;14883463*
> I hardly use manual anymore, aperture priority and exposure compensation are my lifeblood. Shutter priority for panning at SCCA events, and occasionally program if I'm feeling adventurous.


Yeah, Av is great. I think mostly in apertures when I shoot these days.


----------



## Dream Killer

NYPD in the subway station thought my d700 was a bomb inside my messenger bag. stupid 9/11 bull**** made me 15 minutes late for work.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer;14884021*
> NYPD in the subway station thought my d700 was a bomb inside my messenger bag. stupid 9/11 bull**** made me 15 minutes late for work.


Yeah, I was just watching some news bites about how tense things are there.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;14883154*
> 
> That's why you suck.
> 
> j/k


Totally...Sony is noob. Need to get some L in my life.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10;14884300*
> Totally...Sony is noob. Need to get some L in my life.


Perhaps a little more Carl instead?


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;14884324*
> Perhaps a little more Carl instead?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

lol That's exactly what I meant.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;14883463*
> I hardly use manual anymore, aperture priority and exposure compensation are my lifeblood. Shutter priority for panning at SCCA events, and occasionally program if I'm feeling adventurous.


I shoot at least 50% of my photos on film lately, so I prefer to use manual on my digital camera. It's basically practice so I don't waste expensive film by screwing up the exposure.

That said, aperture priority is great if I need the photo quickly or I can't afford to mess it up.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead;14885364*
> I shoot at least 50% of my photos on film lately, so I prefer to use manual on my digital camera. It's basically practice so I don't waste expensive film by screwing up the exposure.


I've become pretty accustomed to my meters in all 3 bodies, and spot meter areas when in doubt.

edit: Regardless of what more you're shooting in, it should meter +/- 0EV for the same settings in Av, Tv and Manual. This is what I never understood, I only use manual if the exposure compensation required is outside of the camera's range, i.e. +/- 2EV on the 50D.


----------



## investmenttechnology

Almost everybody here on this site use Canon lol.


----------



## ljason8eg

I shoot Canon simply because they had the better deal when I wanted a DSLR. T2i+18-55+55-250 the cost of the normal kit, plus the Pixma Pro9000 MKII had a $400 rebate.

I also prefer their ergonomics.


----------



## yakuzapuppy

Can I get in on this?

Pentax K200D
Pentax ME Super
FA 35mm f2
FA 50mm f1.4
Vivitar Series 1 70-200 f3.5
Vivitar 35mm f1.9 (M42)

I'm considering switching teams, but it'd be hard to part with my FA35...


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *investmenttechnology;14886132*
> Almost everybody here on this site use Canon lol.


I think I am the only one of like 3 that shoot Sony. The so dnt feel bad being a nikonian...


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *investmenttechnology;14886132*
> Almost everybody here on this site use Canon lol.


Canon?


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *investmenttechnology;14886132*
> Almost everybody here on this site use Canon lol.


hello fellow nikonian


----------



## MistaBernie

The only time my camera is on the green box of noob is when I hand it off to someone else to take a picture for me


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie;14888121*
> The only time my camera is on the green box of noob is when I hand it off to someone else to take a picture for me


Ha! I do the same thing.

Even then I'm hesitant to let someone else use it that doesn't know what they are doing at least.


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *aksthem1*


Even then I'm hesitant to let someone else use it that doesn't know what they are doing at least.


Haha, this. If someone has no clue whatsoever, I give them a point and shoot. If they keep insisting to use my SLR, I set it to manual and tell them to have fun.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead;14890682*
> Haha, this. If someone has no clue whatsoever, I give them a point and shoot. If they keep insisting to use my SLR, I set it to manual and tell them to have fun.


Haha, that's exactly what I do with my friends. Then they get mad at the camera and say their point and shoot is better than my dslr.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *investmenttechnology*


Almost everybody here on this site use Canon lol.


There are more Nikon shooters here than you think, though there are clearly more Canon people. I wish I had the cash to DUAL BOOT - Canon and Nikon.

My decision to go to Canon was utterly capricious - found an XTi buried at a closing CompUSA and got it for 60% off.


----------



## Conspiracy

WHAT! you have CompUSA. they disappeared here like 5+ years ago


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*


WHAT! you have CompUSA. they disappeared here like 5+ years ago










I have one down he street and go there every now and then for sales...


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy;14891861*
> WHAT! you have CompUSA. they disappeared here like 5+ years ago


Note that I said "XTi," which I bought brand new in early '07. It was literally the last DSLR they had there, and it was hidden under a pile of empty boxes. If it had been a Nikon D40, I might be shooting Nikon instead (I already had a bias towards Nikon at that time, having used a Nikon film SLR and Nikon P&S cameras).


----------



## yakuzapuppy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;14891984*
> Note that I said "XTi," which I bought brand new in early '07. It was literally the last DSLR they had there, and it was hidden under a pile of empty boxes. If it had been a Nikon D40, I might be shooting Nikon instead (I already had a bias towards Nikon at that time, having used a Nikon film SLR and Nikon P&S cameras).


Ha, I did the same in search of a D40 that year, too. Of course, I'm always late every time there's a big sale for something I'd want


----------



## ljason8eg

Shot my first airshow today. I think I did alright, we shall see when I get home. I could just be full of it, but I swear the meter in my 7D is better than my T2i as well.


----------



## r34p3rex

Made use of the 8FPS burst today







Got some awesome shots of people doing flips over other people


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy;14891861*
> WHAT! you have CompUSA. they disappeared here like 5+ years ago


They're owned by tigerdirect now. The few that remain open are pretty awesome from what I've heard.


----------



## Shane1244

Anyone got a EF-S 18-55 for cheap? Just got accepted as a youtube partner and I need something cheap for video. Lens quality isn't a big deal for me.


----------



## dudemanppl

I'm super not used to shooting football again. First half consisted of practice for me so I barely did any real shooting.


----------



## mz-n10

why bw?


----------



## Sean Webster

Nice pics, what were the settings?


----------



## Marin

Two of my teachers this term:

http://www.hacob.com/

http://www.bielenberg.net/


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10;14896079*
> why bw?


everything looks better in b&w lol

nice action either way.


----------



## biatchi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy;14898564*
> everything looks better in b&w lol
> 
> nice action either way.


Except rainbows ofc


----------



## riko99

So I finally broke down and bought the Fuji F550 EXR p&s camera for vacationing purposes (going to mexico for the honeymoon and didn't want to haul around the full DSLR and gear there anyways). Now to actually get out and test some of those features that it has.


----------



## MistaBernie

Huh... not sure how I overlooked this, but one benefit to shooting in raw -- automatic lens profile corrections in LR3.


----------



## laboitenoire

Yeah, it's a nice feature. Although I've gotten so used to the distortion and vignetting on my lenses that it looks odd when corrected. I pretty much only do CA correction these days.


----------



## Conspiracy

just shot a great game of soccer today. looking forward to getting some feedback. i am wondering if anyone knows which tribal dance to do to make the sky overcast rather than completely clear lol. harsh sunlight it tough to work with but i think i managed


----------



## BlankThis

I love vignette.

Bring the hate.


----------



## Marin

Depends on the picture. I prefer vignettes that aren't uniform.


----------



## Conspiracy

interesting. i like vignettes but definitely not on everything. i guess i dont pay much attention because i dont think i have seen them that arent uniform


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;14901611*
> Depends on the picture. I prefer vignettes that aren't uniform.


True.

It depends on the shot but yeah it can help balance the frame out by having it vignette harder on one side. I just use the grad filter in LR3 to do so.


----------



## Shane1244

Rokinon or Bower? I know they're the same design, but ones got to be better than the other.


----------



## BlankThis

They're both made by Samyang I do believe. No difference.


----------



## Conspiracy

as blankthis said they are all the same just re-brands of the same product, all of it is originally samyang i believe.

im am like a few days away from getting a rokinon 8mm fisheye and a beginner speedlight setup with a YN-560


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy;14905620*
> as blankthis said they are all the same just re-brands of the same product, all of it is originally samyang i believe.
> 
> im am like a few days away from getting a rokinon 8mm fisheye and a beginner speedlight setup with a YN-560


That's what I'm wanting to get is the 8mm.. $290 @ BH?

Differences in warranty?

I guess the branding is just a regional thing or something.


----------



## Conspiracy

yea you cant buy samyang in north america unless its second hand. or that is what i have found from looking around. im totally going with the rokinon.

my only issue is do i buy me a fun new fisheye or do i try to start learning lights and get a beginner speedlight? i dont want to do both

----

edit:

somehow just a minute ago i decided to do the lens. my reason partially comes from the fact that i dont get much money doing portraits and therefore have no need to buy a speedlight to try and do single point lighting on people that arent paying me to not take their pictures lol. i think i will be happier with a fisheye since once i buy lights i dont see them getting nearly as much use


----------



## dudemanppl

Neat.


----------



## yakuzapuppy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;14906076*
> Neat.


And sad to look at. What happened?


----------



## xxrabid93

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;14906076*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Neat.


Oooh, shiny.









What kind of camera is that btw?


----------



## dudemanppl

Just some EXTREME sensor cleaning.


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;14906076*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Neat.


Poke.


----------



## BlankThis

Ugh I can't imagine doing any flash-work without iTTL


----------



## Conspiracy

so i dont know much about this stuff but when i get my rokinon 8mm i know its a manual lens but will my camera still meter or am i completely manual with this glass. i dont know if im guessing on the settings of if i will have that meter in the VF that lines up when i have a proper exposure


----------



## Shane1244

My Bower 14mm f/2.8 metered.


----------



## dudemanppl

Don't get it, save it for a lens that isn't completely dumb.


----------



## Conspiracy

i can but i dont really know what i want to get. i realize im not the greatest at portraits but i am still up in the air about try to start in some lighting and buy a beginner kit to see how it goes.

i could go for the cheap 14mm samyang instead thats not a completely dumb purchase but it wont be incredibly wide on my crop because i dont think i honestly need UWA

i do definitely think that i am better with candid photos, random junk, and sports than i am at portraits

yea now that i think about it the 8mm fisheye would be a dumb choice and limit what i can do with it outside of messing around and having fun. right now i think ill go for the either the 14mm 2.8 MF or the sigma UWA zoom or the 85 1.8 which i already know i want to get since i dont have any longer focal lengths


----------



## MistaBernie

wait, are you taking about getting the 8mm for _portraits??_


----------



## Shane1244

No, He's not. He dosn't know if he should get lighting for portraits, or get UWA for landscapes. He wants both, but doesn't know what he wants to learn first.

AFAIK anyways..


----------



## Conspiracy

what shane said. the wide lens would be used for some landscapes and more for sports scene setters like huddle shots and exaggerated shots. a wide would help in telling the story

and the lights would be to start learning lights which would make me lean towards the 85 if i want to continue doing portraits.

im leaning more towards the 14mm so i can do more with a wide lens whereas the 85 would really only be for portraits which i dont do often anyway.


----------



## dudemanppl

As I said, something not completely dumb. Sigma 10-20.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;14909431*
> As I said, something not completely dumb. Sigma 10-20.


Get this Conspiracy. It's worth the little bit extra it costs over the 14/2.8.

And for portraits, you already have two primes, so start with those, the 30 for full/half body shots and the 50/1.4 for head shots. A longer focal length prime is ideal for head shots because of the image compression and narrower DOF, but what you have is good for a start. And if you can't get lighting just yet, then just work on posing/framing etc. in natural light until you can acquire a lighting setup. BTW a single flash isn't ideal for static, posed portraits, but it's great for candids. I use a 430 EX II + Fong Lightsphere Cloud anytime I shoot candids at and event or wedding.


----------



## MistaBernie

10-20 was an awesome landscape lens. I miss it, but not enough to justify re-buying it (yet).


----------



## KShirza1

Add me...

Nikon D3100 > replacing D60
Nikkor 35 1.8
Nikkor 18-55 vr
Nikkor 55-200
Nikon SB400
Nikon MC-DC2
Manfrotto 190XDB
Manfrotto 804RC2


----------



## Conspiracy

thanks guys. right now where i am in photography my needs are in the longer and extremely short focal lengths since i do have the middle covered. i really appreciate how well you guys help me as well as many other think through needs versus wants to ensure buying the best glass for what i do. i think that for the extra money the sigma 10-22 is what i need. i have about $300 saved up so im not too far off from the goal for $480

yall are the best to come to for advice. i feel spoiled when i go and do my video work because the lens i use is like a 8.6-90mm f1.6 constant with a built in 2X extender. so i have trouble knowing what i need with my photography since im not as experienced with photos

i wish the canon 10-22 wasnt so expensive but for the price i am going with the sigma, i doubt it possible to have terrible front/back focus on a wide lens so i feel pretty good about going with them


----------



## dudemanppl

10-20s are like 350 used.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *BlankThis*


I love vignette.

Bring the hate.


love vignetting on UWA, especially when its a cpl'd blue sky.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *xxrabid93*


Oooh, shiny.









What kind of camera is that btw?


looks like a fullframe...so d3? d3x?

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*


so i dont know much about this stuff but when i get my rokinon 8mm i know its a manual lens but will my camera still meter or am i completely manual with this glass. i dont know if im guessing on the settings of if i will have that meter in the VF that lines up when i have a proper exposure


i believe canons will meter without chip, so you can shoot on aperture priority.

if you want a good between ground between the sigma and the canon (10-20 vs 10-22) is the 11-16 tokina.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;14910533*
> 10-20s are like 350 used.


im a little nervous about buying used for some reason but where would the best most reliable place be? i honestly dont order much online i usually buy in the store since i only have cash most of the time. and when i do order online its from amazon. and for the extra give or take about $100 i dont mind buying new but if i can go used and have a nice like new copy i would be happy


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*


thanks guys. right now where i am in photography my needs are in the longer and extremely short focal lengths since i do have the middle covered. i really appreciate how well you guys help me as well as many other think through needs versus wants to ensure buying the best glass for what i do. i think that for the extra money the sigma 10-22 is what i need. i have about $300 saved up so im not too far off from the goal for $480

yall are the best to come to for advice. i feel spoiled when i go and do my video work because the lens i use is like a 8.6-90mm f1.6 constant with a built in 2X extender. so i have trouble knowing what i need with my photography since im not as experienced with photos

i wish the canon 10-22 wasnt so expensive but for the price i am going with the sigma, i doubt it possible to have terrible front/back focus on a wide lens so i feel pretty good about going with them


You're welcome (if I contributed that is). And a constant 8.6-90mm f/1.6? Must be a giant of a lens.

If you really want the be-all end-all Canon crop UWA, the Canon 10-22 is where it's at. I loved the hell out of that lens. I bought mine used for $575, and though it would be more of a wait, it's well worth it. The flare and CA control on that lens is remarkable, as is the sharpness.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*


im a little nervous about buying used for some reason but where would the best most reliable place be? i honestly dont order much online i usually buy in the store since i only have cash most of the time. and when i do order online its from amazon. and for the extra give or take about $100 i dont mind buying new but if i can go used and have a nice like new copy i would be happy


With Sigma lenses, it's actually best to buy used, because chances are, the seller has already encountered and had fixed focus issues, if any. POTN is a great place to buy used, as is Fred Miranda.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


You're welcome (if I contributed that is). And a constant 8.6-90mm f/1.6? Must be a giant of a lens.

If you really want the be-all end-all Canon crop UWA, the Canon 10-22 is where it's at. I loved the hell out of that lens. I bought mine used for $575, and though it would be more of a wait, it's well worth it. The flare and CA control on that lens is remarkable, as is the sharpness.

With Sigma lenses, it's actually best to buy used, because chances are, the seller has already encountered and had fixed focus issues, if any. POTN is a great place to buy used, as is Fred Miranda.


thanks you have helped a lot. i want to avoid potn since i dont do paypal and my parent would kill me for doing it because they think ill get screwed. ill check out this fred miranda site. if i find a affordable used canon 10-22 ill totally do that since i know the quality will be much higher than the sigma

im going to have to save a little longer since i am currently waiting on paychecks that will be enough but for some reason our checks for one of my video crew are taking forever to process. and i have a few other freelance jobs that will net me about $500 or so but i wont get paid until the end of november most likely. by then i will be 100% on my decision and ready to buy, i dont want to rush it too much since i know what i honestly need i just have to pull the trigger and buy


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*


thanks you have helped a lot. i want to avoid potn since i dont do paypal and my parent would kill me for doing it because they think ill get screwed. ill check out this fred miranda site. if i find a affordable used canon 10-22 ill totally do that since i know the quality will be much higher than the sigma


Well, with POTN, the sellers are often very good, just be sure to ask for credentials (eBay feedback, POTN feedback). Same with Fred Miranda. A lot of people here at OCN have bought at POTN, like reincarnated who I believe has bought everything he's ever owned used from POTN.

If you don't use Paypal, you can always ask if the seller will take alternatives (check, money order), but Paypal is usually favorable to buyer anyway in disputed purchases. Just NEVER agree to pay a seller with a Paypal Gift, because you lose all buyers' rights.

And get a bank account and/or debit card for online purchases (or use a Paypal account). You save a TON of money over B&M prices, which are always at least retail or higher. Plus there's no sales tax for online purchases, (unless you live in the same state as where the website's HQ/warehouses are located) which can add up when purchasing camera gear in the hundreds and thousands of dollars.


----------



## Conspiracy

i have a credit card and debit card i just keep cash most of the time. and i am trying hard not to run my credit card bill too high because i have a lot of money in freelance jobs that i have contracts signed but they money has not come through yet which makes it hard to do purchases at least right now. i am currently due $300 and growing from my football broadcast crew


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Well, with POTN, the sellers are often very good, just be sure to ask for credentials (eBay feedback, POTN feedback). Same with Fred Miranda. A lot of people here at OCN have bought at POTN, like reincarnated who I believe has bought everything he's ever owned used from POTN.


Yes!

My first DSLR setup (XTi, two Sigma lenses) were actually traded on OCN. But after I got past that, "Shinyyy, I have a big black camera now!" phase and really started learning photography and the equipment, everything since I've bought from POTN used.

To list it out:

Canon 50mm f/1.8
Canon 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM
Canon 50D
Canon 50mm f/1.4 USM
Canon 85mm f/1.8 USM
Canon 28mm f/1.8 USM
Sigma 30mm f/1.4 HSM
Yongnuo YN468
2x Compact Flash cards
1x Spyder 2
I rather love POTN. If it helps, you could talk to your parents about how it is a community of mostly professionals and very dedicated enthusiasts. People like these are much more likely to take care of their equipment and, if are professionals, have a business name and face tied to that account.

So long as you ask for credentials (Ebay, POTN positive feedback, etc), you should be fine. It's not so much different from OCN when you look at our Trader Rep and Heat; only difference is ours is a much more comprehensive and convenient solution.

Alternatives to PP would be Chase Quickpay, Google Checkout, or Amazon Payments. I have all three and prefer to use these over PayPal.


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


looks like a fullframe...so d3? d3x?


I know he owns(ed) a 1D2n


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *BlankThis*


I know he owns(ed) a 1D2n


Gotta be a Nikon D1/2/3. They put the review and delete buttons at the top like that, whereas Canon puts them vertically to the left of the LCD. Plus that VF cup screams Nikon.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Gotta be a Nikon D1/2/3. They put the review and delete buttons at the top like that, whereas Canon puts them vertically to the left of the LCD. Plus that VF cup screams Nikon.


I agree. The delete/review buttons are where they are on nikon bodies. And it's only the D:1/2/3s that have a vertical grip built-in.


----------



## sprig9an

hi guys! can I join here? I'm using a point and shoot too.. it's a Sony DSC-HX1..


----------



## dudemanppl

Friend's D3. Wanted me to clean the sensor, didn't state how. How can you guys not tell bodies? It's scary. Dual card slots, AF-ON button placements, HDMI port, huge (relatively) sensor.


----------



## aksthem1

Not everybody has used every body out there, plus even then some are more familiar with certain companies.

I knew it was a D3 due to the large sensor and HDMI. The biggest giveaway.


----------



## dudemanppl

Half sarcastic, I get that you guys actually have lives. Weirdos.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Half sarcastic, *I get that you guys actually have lives.* Weirdos.


It's what happens when we don't have a 9PM bedtime


----------



## mz-n10

I don't shoot nikon but I know nikon has a circle round vf port it has a integrated grip and what looks like a fullframe based on sensor size. So its either the d3x or d3 since I believe they have the exact same body.....

And yes I have no life lol that's why I could figure it out.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

So during my trip Saturday, I accidentally bumped some buttons on my camera while walking and turned the saturation on my photos way up. Luckily since I shoot in raw, photo options aren't changed.

My butt got saved


----------



## dudemanppl

Tommy tip: Check all settings before shooting!


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;14914025*
> Tommy tip: Check all settings before shooting!


Not only that. Check that you have your battery or memory card installed too!

I don't remember all the times I left the house forgetting one or the other. lol


----------



## ljason8eg

Went through some of the airshow pics and, not too good. Definitely not near as fun as shooting cars at the track and probably won't do it again.

95% of them are backlit which kills it, IMO. It wasn't until late in the show that the sun moved to an angle that lit the planes as they went by, but by then the sky was so hazy and gray...just sucked. I'm reasonably happy with these three:


P51 Mustang & F15 by JLofing, on Flickr


IMG_1469.jpg by JLofing, on Flickr


IMG_1241.jpg by JLofing, on Flickr


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;14912766*
> Friend's D3. *Wanted me to clean the sensor, didn't state how.* How can you guys not tell bodies? It's scary. Dual card slots, AF-ON button placements, HDMI port, huge (relatively) sensor.


Note to self: do not let dudemanppl clean my sensor.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg;14914911*
> Went through some of the airshow pics and, not too good. Definitely not near as fun as shooting cars at the track and probably won't do it again.
> 
> 95% of them are backlit which kills it, IMO. It wasn't until late in the show that the sun moved to an angle that lit the planes as they went by, but by then the sky was so hazy and gray...just sucked. I'm reasonably happy with these three:
> 
> *snippity*


These three look extremely good. Nice work.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;14914979*
> These three look extremely good. Nice work.


Thanks bud. Those three have some color in the sky at least lol.


----------



## sub50hz

Polarizer!


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;14915408*
> Polarizer!


I have one too lol....

I tested it out panning before and it didn't work so well (I think because the angle of the sun in relation to the filter is constantly changing.). So I ended up not bringing it. Maybe I should have.


----------



## mz-n10

you get some nice blue skys with a cpl....nice shots anyways


----------



## laboitenoire

Ick, I think the 50 is going back to KEH. I spent waaaaaaay more money than I thought in the past few weeks and I've decided I probably can't afford it, much as I've enjoyed having it.


----------



## MistaBernie

7D en route. It'll be good because I can teach the mrs. on the 60D while I practice and master the 7D's AF system. I didn't sell all of my music gear and this was the most reasonable option. Yeah, I could have spent it on glass, but this made the most sense (at the time at least) and if I dont like it, I'll just turn around and flip it for $1300.









OOH, and raws from the 7D will start showing up in Windows now! (it turns out if the metadata contains the 60D, the Microsoft Camera Codec pack wont display it).


----------



## sub50hz

Man, I wonder why so many people are getting 7Ds.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Man, I wonder why so many people are getting 7Ds.


For me, it's a relatively low-risk investment.

I decided I wanted the security of a 2nd body. I shot with a 7D for a few hours last week and I liked some of the things it offered (higher FPS for if/when I start shooting more sports, nicer VF, the 19 point AF system, just the general feel of the body, and a few other things).

Having gotten it for just over what I sold my jazz bass for, if I shoot with it and decide it was a bad idea, I put it up for $1300 and accept my first $1200 offer, making money on the deal.

Finally, with everything I've heard lately, Canon likely wont have new DSLR releases until 2012, so I've got at least a few months before it gets revamped (if it even does, I doubt we'll see a 7D mk2 but crazier things have happened).


----------



## Conspiracy

if there happens to be a 7D mkII the original 7D will still remain a really good camera i think. ill be jealous if a new one comes out but ill be very pleased with my current camera. but if i win the lotto you know ill be buying a new camera and my 7D might become a backup lol


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*


if there happens to be a 7D mkII the original 7D will still remain a really good camera i think. ill be jealous if a new one comes out but ill be very pleased with my current camera. but if i win the lotto you know ill be buying a new camera and my 7D might become a backup lol


Truth. Of course, if I won the lottery, I think I'd be selling most of my Canon gear and going Phase One. Ok, not really, but I'd definitely be getting some L glass (and maybe a 1Div to shoot it on).


----------



## r34p3rex

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Man, I wonder why so many people are getting 7Ds.


For me, it was either the 5D2 or the 7D. I really wanted to go 5D2 but then more recently, I've been getting into fast action shots and after playing with the 7D's 8FPS burst + amazing AF (relatively speaking of course), I had to get one









I'm probably going to end up getting a 5D2 sometime down the line.. planning on keeping my 7D as a second body


----------



## dudemanppl

Yashica rangefinders have some dark ass viewfinders.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Y'all and your money


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Y'all and your money










i have no money. all mine is tied up in freelance work that doesnt pay off till the jobs are done. so im stuck buying a super cheap wide angle lens rather than a fairly nice one. i wish i had money. i blew the bank on my 7D but thankfully between using it and my freelance video work i am still able to make money to buy food and pay for my tuition.

if i had extra money to spend i would have so much more and better glass


----------



## sub50hz

So what's everyone getting their 7D for, dollar-wise? Because I have to imagine it's not far off a used 1DIII.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Y'all and your money










I thought I had money... But I didn't realize how much money I've spent recently and so in order to pay my fraternity dues I'm returning the 50 f/1.4.


----------



## MistaBernie

A 1D3 used is still going for close to $2000 from what I've seen. My 7D is coming in just over half that.

(the above originally read 1D3s used are still going for $2000. Obviously, the 1D3s is still $7500+. An eBay search indicates that the normal range is still ~$2100 for the 1D3, though there are exceptions from time to time for sure).


----------



## sub50hz

Check FM, I've seen them with 50k clicks going for 1800. I guess my point is that if you're buying a new 7D, a used 1DIII is certaintly worth consideration, especially because it's boss sauce compared to any 1.6x camera Canon has ever made.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Check FM, I've seen them with 50k clicks going for 1800. I guess my point is that if you're buying a new 7D, a used 1DIII is certaintly worth consideration, especially because it's boss sauce compared to any 1.6x camera Canon has ever made.


There's certainly some merit to that avenue, but I (personally) like the security of buying directly from a major company (especially for the price I got). I would have a problem buying a used 1Diii from someone I didn't know, even if it was local.


----------



## Jobotoo

I have a used 1Diii with under 10K clicks that I was considering I would sell. What do you think it would go for these days? Maybe $2,200 - $2,400?


----------



## mz-n10

i would expect about 2000usd for a 1d3.


----------



## Jobotoo

Thanks!


----------



## sub50hz

You may have an interested party if you decide, in fact, to sell.


----------



## dudemanppl

I got mine for 1600...


----------



## laboitenoire

Hey Gone, when you get a chance, remove the 50 f/1.4 from my profile.


----------



## Sean Webster

I just got my macro lens!







Here's my first pic. I know it's not all in focus...I like it that way.










Got a macro lens! by seanwebster1212, on Flickr


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;14924651*
> I got mine for 1600...


Still have it?


----------



## dudemanppl

HAHAHA, good one sub!


----------



## sub50hz

That was a legitimate question, lol.


----------



## Jobotoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;14924284*
> You may have an interested party if you decide, in fact, to sell.


Cool! Let me see what eBay has them at, but feel free to PM me an offer, or as soon as I get one more rep, I can post it in the Marketplace.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Jobotoo*


Cool! Let me see what eBay has them at, but feel free to PM me an offer, or as soon as I get one more rep, *I can post it in the Marketplace.*










Please do, as offering items for sale outside the For Sale forum is against the TOS.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;14932529*
> Please do, as offering items for sale outside the For Sale forum is against the TOS.


If you want to get technical, so wasn't asking for the appraisal of his item outside of the appraisals forum, but I wont go there.


----------



## mz-n10

quiet forums today....


----------



## Sean Webster

I know...me so bored lol


----------



## Conspiracy

i have been doing reading HW all afternoon and night trying to work ahead because i have to skip my classes to do a far away football broadcast this friday... i dont know why they cant make the teams come to us

but yea the forums are pretty quite, im told ill get paid very very soon which means im closer to making my ultra wide angle purchase soon and ill have a bunch of new photos to get some feedback and suggestions on. still have not decided on what lens i want to get yet







i like the idea of getting a manual focus to save money since its an UWA and i dont need auto focus but i cant find anything other than the sigma 10-20 in my price range and i dont see any good wide primes other than the rokinon 14mm which isnt really very wide on my crop. so far the sigma is in the lead for my next purchase i think unless something changes my mind


----------



## sub50hz

Eh, busy week at work. 12 custom jobs due Friday, and one of our model makers is on vacation. Ripping my dick somethin' fierce.


----------



## BlankThis

Doing a "family" portrait brenizer style tomorrow. Loving the effect.


----------



## laboitenoire

I've been going insane today prepping for a ton of stuff...


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


I've been going insane today prepping for a ton of stuff...


Photo shoots?


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*


i have been doing reading HW all afternoon and night trying to work ahead because i have to skip my classes to do a far away football broadcast this friday... i dont know why they cant make the teams come to us

but yea the forums are pretty quite, im told ill get paid very very soon which means im closer to making my ultra wide angle purchase soon and ill have a bunch of new photos to get some feedback and suggestions on. still have not decided on what lens i want to get yet







i like the idea of getting a manual focus to save money since its an UWA and i dont need auto focus but i cant find anything other than the sigma 10-20 in my price range and i dont see any good wide primes other than the rokinon 14mm which isnt really very wide on my crop. so far the sigma is in the lead for my next purchase i think unless something changes my mind


Do you shoot canon? The sigma 10-20 is good but it's not as good as the canon 10-22.


----------



## foothead

I developed some 135 film earlier. There has to be a better way to do this.










Also, It seems I got developer on my shoes. :/


----------



## Boyboyd

After my first roll of film i gave up when i saw the results. Turns out the place i sent it to just has TERRIBLE scanning. I mean... truely terrible. From now on i'll just pay the Â£5 for developing + Â£1.80 for glass mounts and scan them myself.

The actual projections look pretty good. Just gotta remember that the Nikkor 35mm 1.8G vignetts too much.


----------



## Conspiracy

just came across this interesting lens which i cant find any info on but is cheap and wide. although not supper wide on my crop at 16mm

anyone know anything about this _possibly_ great value lens

http://www.amazon.com/Fisheye-Zenitar-Lens-Canon-Camera/dp/B0036WQHTW/ref=sr_1_2?s=photo&ie=UTF8&qid=1316089115&sr=1-2]Amazon.com: Fisheye Zenitar 2.8/16 MC Lens for Canon EOS Camera: Camera & Photo[/URL]


----------



## BlankThis

Splashy splashy with the developer... How did you manage to get all that on your shoes and not in the tank?


----------



## sub50hz

Any of you younger guys interested in buying a BMX bike? Built a new one last summer and rode it twice, time to unload for very low dollars methinks.


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy;14944122*
> just came across this interesting lens which i cant find any info on but is cheap and wide. although not supper wide on my crop at 16mm
> 
> anyone know anything about this _possibly_ great value lens
> 
> Amazon.com: Fisheye Zenitar 2.8/16 MC Lens for Canon EOS Camera: Camera & Photo


since you don't seem to be adverse to MF take a look at:

http://www.amazon.com/Rokinon-FE14M-C-Ultra-Canon-Black/dp/B003VSGQPG/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1316094477&sr=8-1]Amazon.com: Rokinon FE14M-C 14mm F2.8 Ultra Wide Lens for Canon (Black): Camera & Photo[/URL]

It has been getting some good reviews.

As someone else said the Sigma 10-20 is a pretty good lens but may be a bit above your price point.


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SeanWebster;14924708*
> I just got my macro lens!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here's my first pic. I know it's not all in focus...I like it that way.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Got a macro lens! by seanwebster1212, on Flickr


Nice first shot, glad the lens is working out for you. I took a look at your flickr, don't forget you can stop it down, it really shines about a stop down.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy;14944122*
> just came across this interesting lens which i cant find any info on but is cheap and wide. although not supper wide on my crop at 16mm
> 
> anyone know anything about this _possibly_ great value lens
> 
> Amazon.com: Fisheye Zenitar 2.8/16 MC Lens for Canon EOS Camera: Camera & Photo


the zenith is a fishy so lines wont stay straight. plus at 16mm you might as well just buy a kit lens.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *silvrr;14944687*
> since you don't seem to be adverse to MF take a look at:
> 
> Amazon.com: Rokinon FE14M-C 14mm F2.8 Ultra Wide Lens for Canon (Black): Camera & Photo
> 
> It has been getting some good reviews.
> 
> As someone else said the Sigma 10-20 is a pretty good lens but may be a bit above your price point.


that lens is great on fullframe but pointless on crop...theres a 8/2.8 from samyang for crop.


----------



## Conspiracy

yea im just trying my best to save money on my next lens purchase because i have money waiting to come in and some will buy my new lens and the rest goes into savings and a little goes to the girlfriend to spoil her.

according to my executive producer for one of my jobs all the paperwork will be processed within the next week so ill have a large direct deposit into my account soon i hope

as much as it has not been advised by others i might do the 8mm since on my crop it wont be too fishy i dont think because i dont care if its fisheye or rectilinear i just want the short focal length. if the 8mm was f2.8 instead of 3.5 it could give me some extra light but i am comfortable shooting higher ISO to get my shots


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis;14944251*
> Splashy splashy with the developer... How did you manage to get all that on your shoes and not in the tank?


I'm not really sure. There wasn't any on the floor, so I guess the tank dribbled onto my foot when I was inverting. Seems like I would've noticed it leaking though.

Conspiracy, have you looked at the Sigma 8-16/4.5-5.6? It looks pretty decent considering the ridiculously short focal length.


----------



## silvrr

I should have asked this first but have you shot with an UWA before, what was your widest lens?

The gap from 30mm to 10 or even 8 mm is *huge*. The gap from even the stock 18mm kit lens out to 10mm is huge. Be sure to try a local camera store or even try a rental of a UWA if you haven't shot with one before, its wider than most think. Controlling distortion also becomes a bigger issue depending on what you shoot.

I would also be careful buying a fisheye if you haven't tried/rented one before, again the effect can be rather strong at 8mm and it is again wider than most think.

These show the difference a bit

Not sure if this is crop or full frame but it helps show the difference









Im pretty sure this is a crop but not sure of the factor on the pentax. You can see the differnece between 18 and 10mm here.


----------



## Conspiracy

the widest i have ever shot is 8.6mm on a professional 35mm video camera.

im just keeping my eyes on craigslist right now as well as potn and keh. trying to get used to save money.

that sigma 8-16 is out of my price range even used possibly. but i am considering the sigma 10-20 used just need to find one. noone wants to get rid of them it looks like. majority of these UWA zooms are out of my range that i am comfortable spending right now even used. as i find more stead use and need for the UWA ill invest in a quality lens later but i think i want to start with a cheap prime/used sigma zoom which looks like the 10-20


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy;14946394*
> the widest i have ever shot is 8.6mm on a professional 35mm video camera.
> 
> im just keeping my eyes on craigslist right now as well as potn and keh. trying to get used to save money.
> 
> that sigma 8-16 is out of my price range even used possibly. but i am considering the sigma 10-20 used just need to find one. noone wants to get rid of them it looks like. majority of these UWA zooms are out of my range that i am comfortable spending right now even used. as i find more stead use and need for the UWA ill invest in a quality lens later but i think i want to start with a cheap prime/used sigma zoom which looks like the 10-20


8.6 on a 35mm video is similar to what you would see with an 8 on your aps-c.


----------



## Conspiracy

so then going with the 8mm might actually be a good idea? because i was unsure but knew that its one of my few options. i just wish it was a rectilinear rather than fisheye but honestly for the money im saving not buying more expensive glass that is not at all a deal breaker to be honest.

the 8-16 is a great idea i just cant afford it right now for a while until my paychecks become more steady then i look forward to selling what i buy next to fund a more quality investment


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy;14946924*
> so then going with the 8mm might actually be a good idea? because i was unsure but knew that its one of my few options. i just wish it was a rectilinear rather than fisheye but honestly for the money im saving not buying more expensive glass that is not at all a deal breaker to be honest.
> 
> the 8-16 is a great idea i just cant afford it right now for a while until my paychecks become more steady then i look forward to selling what i buy next to fund a more quality investment


Once more:

Sigma 10-20. They go cheap used, and don't suffer as far as I can tell by all accounts, from focusing issues. Great lens, I use mine (at least recently) very often. Excellent build, fast and silent AF, not a _ton_ of weird distortion. Hella cheaper than the EF-S 10-22.


----------



## Conspiracy

im just not finding any used sigma 10-20's but since im not trying to buy one right now im still keeping my eyes open for one


----------



## MistaBernie

I've seen them coming and going a bit on POTN lately. Heck, I've even seen a couple of Sigma 17-50s come up for sale lately, which is apparently rare.


----------



## dudemanppl

I have the huge urge to belt out many expletives. Get a 10-20. Don't even think about anything else. For that price there is NOTHING on crop you can get that will be better in any way.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy;14947236*
> im just not finding any used sigma 10-20's but since im not trying to buy one right now im still keeping my eyes open for one


i actually have a bunch of canon gear up for sale on CL this weekend (and there is a 10-20 sigma in the lot)......pm me if your interested.


----------



## Conspiracy

i have to wait like 2-3 more weeks. i have one check that i was told today will be in the mail soon for $500 and then my sports broadcast check has totaled up to $400 as of this friday and so ill have some good money coming in. i still dont want to pay more than $400 for the new lens and thats at the very most. ill have to keep my eyes on all the used sites and i just remember buying canon refurb if i get really lucky, which isnt likely since i dont have my eyes on anything canon unless they have a 10-22 for $300 lol


----------



## MistaBernie

IF you could find a 10-22 for $300 that would be the only case where I would recommend it over the 10-20 if budget is an issue. Otherwise, the 10-20 is a stud. I loved mine when I used it, but every time I reached for a lens I just passed it..


----------



## Conspiracy

yea i know whatever UWA i get will get used well. i just hope i get a good deal. i wish my camera wasnt crop because super wide on a crop is really hard to get. but i just dont need FF that bad to justify the price tag since my 7D is a champ


----------



## dudemanppl

UWA on crop is so much cheaper than on full frame.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy;14945592*
> yea im just trying my best to save money on my next lens purchase because i have money waiting to come in and some will buy my new lens and the rest goes into savings and a little goes to the girlfriend to spoil her.
> 
> according to my executive producer for one of my jobs all the paperwork will be processed within the next week so ill have a large direct deposit into my account soon i hope
> 
> as much as it has not been advised by others *i might do the 8mm since on my crop it wont be too fishy i dont think because i dont care if its fisheye or rectilinear i just want the short focal length.* if the 8mm was f2.8 instead of 3.5 it could give me some extra light but i am comfortable shooting higher ISO to get my shots


You really should care about this, because fish eye and rectilinear are very different. Fish eye shots get old very quickly.

And forget these Rokinon and Zenitar lenses. The Sigma UWA's aren't much more, and can be nearly the same price used.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;14948217*
> UWA on crop is so much cheaper than on full frame.


Alas.


----------



## dudemanppl

Oh and by that I meant APS-C is cheaper if there was any confusion.


----------



## sub50hz

I love the 17-40 for filmsies. Also boss hoss sauce on 1D.


----------



## mz-n10

yes UWA for fullframe is pure ridiculousness.....900 for a mediocre 12-24 sigma.


----------



## Conspiracy

i have faith that by the time i get paid ill be able to find a sigma 10-20. i just wish i had more money. i dont know how much to trust this fred miranda website because the store section is poorly maintained and there are lenses for sale that the picture is of other lenses and some give no details, i though it was supposed to be for used gear but i found a sigma 10-20 but it was going for retail on fred miranda and it sent me to amazon to buy it... also keh is almost just as bad although i hear more about them than fred miranda, found a used sigma 10-20 on keh like new but i wouldnt be saving enough through them since they wanted like $20 less than new price for it used :|


----------



## MistaBernie

It's heeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeere!


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10;14948822*
> yes UWA for fullframe is pure ridiculousness.....900 for a mediocre 12-24 sigma.


Wait, bro what? 600 bucks (used prices) for the widest rectilinear lens in the entire world for 35mm is a ripoff? Don't understand what you're getting at.


----------



## Conspiracy

is there somewhere to find older manual focus lenses out there that i can adapt to my camera or would old wide film glass still be really expensive? i would be willing to try and hunt down old vintage glass if there are shorter focal length out there that is affordable and i can adapt.

of course i might be stretching a little too far but its totally worth a try asking


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy;14949362*
> i have faith that by the time i get paid ill be able to find a sigma 10-20. i just wish i had more money. i dont know how much to trust this fred miranda website because the store section is poorly maintained and there are lenses for sale that the picture is of other lenses and some give no details, i though it was supposed to be for used gear but i found a sigma 10-20 but it was going for retail on fred miranda and it sent me to amazon to buy it... also keh is almost just as bad although i hear more about them than fred miranda, found a used sigma 10-20 on keh like new but i wouldnt be saving enough through them since they wanted like $20 less than new price for it used :|


Well, like any forum that has a FS section, there are respectable and oddball sellers, so it takes some time to look. As I and others have said, don't buy unless the seller has good creds. If you cast off so easy, then by all means get jacked by B&M prices. Meanwhile all of us here will reap the rewards of used deals.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;14949878*
> Wait, bro what? 600 bucks (used prices) for the widest rectilinear lens in the entire world for 35mm is a ripoff? Don't understand what you're getting at.


What he's getting at is the point you just made.







And it is mediocre, widest in the world or not.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy;14950003*
> is there somewhere to find older manual focus lenses out there that i can adapt to my camera or would old wide film glass still be really expensive? i would be willing to try and hunt down old vintage glass if there are shorter focal length out there that is affordable and i can adapt.
> 
> of course i might be stretching a little too far but its totally worth a try asking


http://mflenses.com/ These people are fanatic about old MF film lenses, and they have a FS forum.


----------



## Conspiracy

thanks im trying to do as much searching as possible to get the best deal possible. i have no problem buying a used lens on a forum and doing like a money order but like you said i want to make sure the seller has good feedback. just need to find someone selling a 10-20


----------



## dudemanppl

As we said, full frame is more expensive. 12-24 isn't that mediocre, I loved that thing.

















I didn't even know that was possible. Tokyo camera style be cool guy.


----------



## Conspiracy

yea everything cameras seems expensive for me right now. but i know down the road ill be able to afford the expensive stuff, but until then ill stick with the used 3rd party glass. and if i cant find the wide angle lens i want then ill just have to do without and wait until i find one. i saw one on potn but it just sold







once i have the money im going to spend like a week watching the forums and used areas close to find my siggy 10-20


----------



## Shane1244

http://www.engadget.com/2011/09/15/c...red-carpet-on/

Considering how much the 5DII is used for cinematography, I wouldn't be surprised to see a 5DIII


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*


http://www.engadget.com/2011/09/15/c...red-carpet-on/

Considering how much the 5DII is used for cinematography, I wouldn't be surprised to see a 5DIII


totally possible. or a new professional video camera dslr hybrid. no matter what im sure its going to be pure awesome. i think a 7D mkII is not likely since i see way more 5D being used for cinematic video. it could be anything or i hope its a bunch of new stuff. pretty exciting to say the least


----------



## MistaBernie

Hey Gone, can you add a 7D to my gearlist please?

(260 shutter activations according to gphoto2)


----------



## ljason8eg

I got a phone call today from the Canon repair center, I'm guessing because my 50 1.4 is in for a repeat repair. In any case, the tech found a problem with the AF front focusing. Imagine that. I really would love to know why they sent the lens back to me the first time when it clearly was faulty.

Hopefully they fix it this time but I have this gut feeling that its going to be the same. Frustrating. Hell at this point it would probably be cheaper for them to just send me another copy instead of wasting time fixing it.


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*


totally possible. or a new professional video camera dslr hybrid. no matter what im sure its going to be pure awesome. i think a 7D mkII is not likely since i see way more 5D being used for cinematic video. it could be anything or i hope its a bunch of new stuff. pretty exciting to say the least
























I seriously doubt they are going to announce the 5D MkIII or 7D MkII. Sure the 5D MKII is used a lot in cinematography, but I can't say it will be a great historic moment.

I give it another year before they announce any plans for the 7D MKII, but maybe this year they could announce info about the 5D MKIII or 1Ds MKIV.

I'm leaning more towards a video camera with a DSLR sensor. Panasonic released the AG-AF100 a while back. It has their 4/3 sensor and can be used with some 4/3 and micro 4/3 lenses.


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:



Originally Posted by *aksthem1*


i seriously doubt they are going to announce the 5d mkiii or 7d mkii. Sure the 5d mkii is used a lot in cinematography, but i can't say it will be a great historic moment.

I give it another year before they announce any plans for the 7d mkii, but maybe this year they could announce info about the 5d mkiii or 1ds mk*iiii*.

I'm leaning more towards a video camera with a dslr sensor. Panasonic released the ag-af100 a while back. It has their 4/3 sensor and can be used with some 4/3 and micro 4/3 lenses.


IV
caps


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*


IV
caps


Oh man, I can't believe I just did that.


----------



## MistaBernie

1Ds4 specs are already being leaked (CR2) on CanonRumors..


----------



## Conspiracy

yea i would like to see 1Ds mkIV and for them to announce their 4/3 sensor camera or just something new and awesome and unique


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *aksthem1*


I seriously doubt they are going to announce the 5D MkIII or 7D MkII. Sure the 5D MKII is used a lot in cinematography, but I can't say it will be a great historic moment.

I give it another year before they announce any plans for the 7D MKII, but maybe this year they could announce info about the 5D MKIII or 1Ds MKIV.

I'm leaning more towards a video camera with a DSLR sensor. Panasonic released the AG-AF100 a while back. It has their 4/3 sensor and can be used with some 4/3 and micro 4/3 lenses.


canon isnt really a camcorder company.....so i dont think it will be an interchangeable lens camcorder. maybe its a new xf100.


----------



## dudemanppl

mz, did you just say Canon isn't a camcorder company...? Check yo facts yo.


----------



## Conspiracy

yea canon produces some of the higher quality video cameras, obviously its debatable based on brand loyalty and the job itself. but yes canon make professional video cameras and camcorders but honestly camcorders are worthless with what your cell phone can do these days


----------



## Shane1244

Forgot my disc at home... Any way to download EOS Utility? I can only find the updater.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;14953885*
> Forgot my disc at home... Any way to download EOS Utility? I can only find the updater.


If you want I can file transfer it to you.


----------



## Shane1244

That'd be really nice of you







How big is it?

Speaking of file transfer, I'll check torrents first.









EDIT: Torrent 25% done lol

Thanks any ways +rep


----------



## Sean Webster

The whole cd is ~170MB...I'm going to look for a link first lol.

Edit: I found a torrent but i'm not sure if it's clean

Edit 2: Ok then thanks. I'm going to upload a copy to media fore anyways for my self.


----------



## Shane1244

I found a 35mb torrent, It installed fine, but I didn't virus check it.


----------



## Sean Webster

Hopefully it was clean. The EOS folder from my disk was 12 mb...I'm sure there are other folders associated with it anyways. But if you want the full disk it will be done uploading in ~ 10-15 min.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

The updater is also the full program installer. You need to do a simple registry edit to get it to install the full program on your PC, but it works. I'd know


----------



## Shane1244

Yeah I was reading that, I was too lazy to do it lol.


----------



## Sean Webster

I had a feeling about that. Could you tell us how? Or a link?









Here's the Canon EOS Digital Solution Disk Ver.23.0 If anyone wants/needs it too.








http://www.mediafire.com/?ocj166pc18v311n


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;14952928*
> mz, did you just say Canon isn't a camcorder company...? Check yo facts yo.


i know they have camcorders....but to my knowledge (i admit im not a video guy







) canon's highest end camcorder (xf305, from a google search) is not considered a "cinema" camera like the sony f35 or red epic, etc.

but the reason why i dont think they are making an aps-c camcorder is that it just doesnt make sense for them to develop a new mount just for a camcorder. it would make more sense to develop a EVIL then adapt it into a camcorder, like what sony and panasonic did (nex-fs100 and ag-af100 respectively).

also bear in mind sony and panasonic are HUGE compared to canon from a corporation standpoint.


----------



## Conspiracy

canon does professional glass but they do not make professional cinema cameras. their high-end camcorders are used for brodcast and electronic news gathering.

obviously canon doesnt stack up camera wise to sony or panasonic in cinema or the studio because canon isnt in those markets camera-wise BUT all the sony and panasonic cinema cameras that i have worked with in the past usually have a piece of canon glass hanging off the front that cost more than the camera.

so yea you are right canon isnt in the professional camera market but that is because they make all their money off their broadcast quality glass


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy;14955626*
> canon does professional glass but they do not make professional cinema cameras. their high-end camcorders are used for brodcast and electronic news gathering.
> 
> obviously canon doesnt stack up camera wise to sony or panasonic in cinema or the studio because canon isnt in those markets camera-wise BUT all the sony and panasonic cinema cameras that i have worked with in the past usually have a piece of canon glass hanging off the front that cost more than the camera.
> 
> so yea you are right canon isnt in the professional camera market but that is because they make all their money off their broadcast quality glass


make sense considering canon is a huge optics company.

question, how do they class professional camcorders. im looking at all 3 procamcorder sites (canon, pana, sony) and i have no idea what im looking at....


----------



## Conspiracy

in my work place we class our cameras based on the recording format and the the media they record to.

the top of the line canon cameras are technically more prosumer than professional but they are used by many professionals


----------



## sub50hz

Hey guys. I'm not doing anything at work today. Let's rap.


----------



## Sean Webster

Rap? lol I got a funny rap for you. All original too.









seanny boy here on the mic
favorite shows are chuck and physc
playin cod aimin down sights
rapin noobs from left to right

into computers, there on mind
what i can do may leave you blind
Do what I want every day
this is my future its on its way

takin photos of whatever
i can do this **** forever
got my pugs by my side
gettin girls nationwide

pro player, its my hobby
wanna play? get in my lobby
even with juggernaut you cant stop me
see the beard? yeah you cant top me


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SeanWebster;14957559*
> Rap? lol I got a funny rap for you. All original too.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> seanny boy here on the mic
> favorite shows are chuck and physc
> playin cod aimin down sights
> rapin noobs from left to right
> 
> into computers, there on mind
> what i can do may leave you blind
> Do what I want every day
> this is my future its on its way
> 
> takin photos of whatever
> i can do this **** forever
> got my pugs by my side
> gettin girls nationwide
> 
> pro player, its my hobby
> wanna play? get in my lobby
> even with juggernaut you cant stop me
> see the beard? yeah you cant top me


We can't be friends.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;14957425*
> Hey guys. I'm not doing anything at work today. Let's rap.


I want your job, sub.







I'm busier than a one-legged man in an ass-kicking contest at mine.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;14957706*
> We can't be friends.










fine!


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;14957709*
> I want your job, sub.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm busier than a one-legged man in an ass-kicking contest at mine.


I was busy all week, but everything cleared up last night so a big group of us went out and got inappropriately under the influence for a Thursday night. I got here at 6 to open up and napped for 2 hours before anyone got here. Now I'm gonna drink Red Bull and jack around online all day, every once in a while the boss gets a free pass.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SeanWebster;14957712*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> fine!


Lol.


----------



## Sean Webster

Where's your rap sub?







That's what I thought! All talk and no game.


----------



## sub50hz

I am far too caucasian/suburban to rap.


----------



## Boyboyd

I could rap about white people problems.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Boyboyd;14958067*
> I could rap about white people problems.


My Starbucks was cold this morning, and my peacoat is dirty. The plight of middle-class ******.


----------



## Boyboyd

Petrol is expensive, I no-longer fit in my top hat.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;14958079*
> My Starbucks was cold this morning, and my peacoat is dirty. The plight of middle-class ******.


White people problems are problems too. Now make a rap.

Speaking of white people problems, I found a copy of Catcher in the Rye in my library that I forgot to return to my old high school. Whoops


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;14957729*
> I was busy all week, but everything cleared up last night so a big group of us went out and got inappropriately under the influence for a Thursday night. I got here at 6 to open up and napped for 2 hours before anyone got here. Now I'm gonna drink Red Bull and jack around online all day, every once in a while the boss gets a free pass.


What do you do exactly, if I may ask?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Boyboyd;14958067*
> I could rap about white people problems.


And with a British accent, I would pay to see that.


----------



## sub50hz

Jewelry manufacturing. Casting/design/repair/etc., our customers are essentially the retailers you guys would go to for something.


----------



## MistaBernie

Sub, accept my Fender Bassman 400 Pro as trade for your 135L.


----------



## sub50hz

Negative. I hardly use my GK/Aguilar anymore.


----------



## MistaBernie

Exactly. Sell the GK/Ag for more $$$, keep the nice fender and lose the 135. Profit!


----------



## sub50hz

Nah. 135L goes when I decide to jump ship for a 24LII.


----------



## sub50hz

You guys are boring today.


----------



## dudemanppl

School is 75% Asian, white people are an oddity to me. I'm reading Catcher in the Rye for English right now... FEEL OLD YET?


----------



## sub50hz

Hah! Not even to Slaughterhouse Five, which you will most likely hate because at 15, you can't possibly be anything _but_ uncouth.


----------



## dudemanppl

I think we should get back to photography discussion... I sort of want an M9 again, but its so dumb and I hate it. If the M10 has a cloth shutter and manual cocking of the shutter I will buy it for sure.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Slaughterhouse 5 I liked, but as for Catcher in the Rye, I still maintain the book could be renamed to "White People Problems"


----------



## dudemanppl

GODDAMNED PHOTOGRAPHY. I'm gonna make 3k from an investment, don't know what to buy.


----------



## Sean Webster

Buy a big L lens.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


GODDAMNED PHOTOGRAPHY. I'm gonna make 3k from an investment, don't know what to buy.


Get me a 70-200 f/2.8.


----------



## dudemanppl

No you're a loser.


----------



## Sean Webster

Hey, my friend might grab a Nikon D3 for $3,000. Is that a good deal?


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;14960170*
> Slaughterhouse 5 I liked


Vonnegut was amazing, Sirens of Titan, S5 and Breakfast of Champions are too good. I still re-read them all from time to time.


----------



## kow_ciller

Got myself an Olympus Evolt e-420 w/ Zuiko 14-42mm f3.5-5.6
Thinking about getting a bigger lense though.


----------



## Shane1244

Why do I remember your username...? Were you on Crysis Online?


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *SeanWebster*


Hey, my friend might grab a Nikon D3 for $3,000. Is that a good deal?


Well I got one a year ago for 2500 boxed in perfect condition and 35k actuations, so I would say no. Wait for lens rentals sales they have the best prices usually (though not so much so recently).


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Well I got one a year ago for 2500 boxed in perfect condition and 35k actuations, so I would say no. Wait for lens rentals sales they have the best prices usually (though not so much so recently).


Thanks!


----------



## ljason8eg

Well scratch going to the Reno Air Races this weekend. About two hours ago a plane crashed into an area where people were sitting watching the show.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*


Well scratch going to the Reno Air Races this weekend. About two hours ago a plane crashed into an area where people were sitting watching the show.


Yeah, I just read about it, tragic!


----------



## sub50hz

Uploading some film stuff now. No real bangers, just a quick roll through the 1N.


----------



## MistaBernie

Might be able to trade the 60D for a 5Dc... Torn as to whether or not I should...


----------



## Shane1244

What do you shoot?


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


Might be able to trade the 60D for a 5Dc... Torn as to whether or not I should...


Are you kidding? If you don't, I will drive to Mass and punch you.


----------



## Sean Webster

I say to do it. I would like to do that myself, pair that up with the 50 1.4 you have and it would be the perfect setup in my eyes. Besides the 7D and the 60D are so similar you should trade and go FF... that set up would be the best for portraits from what I've seen.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


Might be able to trade the 60D for a 5Dc... Torn as to whether or not I should...


Hell yeah, I would do it. It would go nicely with your 7D.


----------



## MistaBernie

Ill see what's up.. Not sure if they want cash on top. Asking $1000 with grip, 5 batteries and cf cards, don't know how much cash I would add...


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

I think you'll like that 50mm mounted on the 5Dc


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


I think you'll like that 50mm mounted on the 5Dc










That's what I'm thinking... Hopefully the offer is reasonable. I just feel like its a bit of a step back in tech just to go full frame... Hopefully I get over it and we work something out!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


I think you'll like that 50mm mounted on the 5Dc










It's brilliant.







Not 35L brilliant, but close enough.


----------



## MistaBernie

Looks like we may be off in what I would need to throw in for cash. Canon screwed me by adding the 60d to the CLP


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


Looks like we may be off in what I would need to throw in for cash. Canon screwed me by adding the 60d to the CLP










Wow only $640 on CLP...how bad do you want FF?

Think of it this way. If you go through with it you spent what you spent on the 60D + the extra for the 5Dc, so ~1300-1400 for the 5Dc.

And if canon releases a new 5dMKIII then that will make the 5Dc drop in value a little more, and a lot of people are going to be selling off their 5DMKII's. And if you want to sell it then you will lose more $.

You could sell the 60D for 850-900 on eBay or Craigslist though. And then you would loose less cash. But then how long do you have to sell it? There will always be more 5Dc's for sale later on too.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Oh man, tempted to sell my 50D for a 60D now...


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Oh man, tempted to sell my 50D for a 60D now...


Yep, glad I have one myself.
















Edit: The flip screen is beyond handy for a lot of my shots and video.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *SeanWebster*


Yep, glad I have one myself.
















Edit: The flip screen is beyond handy for a lot of my shots and video.


Gotta figure out first if the swap is "worth it". This isn't a clear upgrade perse, as I'd be gaining and losing some.

On one hand, better sensor + video. On the other, (IMO) worse ergonomics and losing AF MA.


----------



## Sean Webster

I was going to say something about the loss of AF MA, I want it, but I haven't had any problems with my lenses so far. And as for the ergonomics, I don't know how they compare, but using the dial to choose the AF point is a pain in the @55. It is awkward. Doesn't the 50D have the little toggle that does that? If so just stay with the 50D for that reason IMO. But if you are going to really want to do video take the loss and grab the 60D...or get a cheap camcorder. lol


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *SeanWebster*


I was going to say something about the loss of AF MA, I want it, but I haven't had any problems with my lenses so far. And as for the ergonomics, I don't know how they compare, but using the dial to choose the AF point is a pain in the @55. It is awkward. Doesn't the 50D have the little toggle that does that? If so just stay with the 50D for that reason IMO. But if you are going to really want to do video take the loss and grab the 60D...or get a cheap camcorder. lol


50D has a direct-selection scheme with an 8-way joystick. Essentially, push it in the direction of the AF point you want or click it for the center AF point. Works very well IMO, and the loss of the joystick is one of my gripes with the ergonomics of the 60D (along with smaller rear dial).

Aha, I think my best option might actually to just wait out for monies for a 7D.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;14963653*
> 50D has a direct-selection scheme with an 8-way joystick. Essentially, push it in the direction of the AF point you want or click it for the center AF point. Works very well IMO, and the loss of the joystick is one of my gripes with the ergonomics of the 60D (along with smaller rear dial).
> 
> Aha, I think my best option might actually to just wait out for monies for a 7D.


This. You won't like going from a 50D to a 60D for reasons you have already stated. The 7D however is virtually the same in terms of handling and ergonomics. However, the 50D sells used for well under a grand these days, leaving a lot for you to spend to get the 7D.


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;14963653*
> 50D has a direct-selection scheme with an 8-way joystick. Essentially, push it in the direction of the AF point you want or click it for the center AF point. Works very well IMO, and the loss of the joystick is one of my gripes with the ergonomics of the 60D (along with smaller rear dial).
> 
> Aha, I think my best option might actually to just wait out for monies for a 7D.


60D has the same thing, it's just a D-Pad instead. If it's really that big of a deal you can just super glue a nub to the D-PAD and it'd be the exact same thing...


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;14964245*
> 60D has the same thing, it's just a D-Pad instead. If it's really that big of a deal you can just super glue a nub to the D-PAD and it'd be the exact same thing...


Nah, Dave.


----------



## Sean Webster

It's really not the same. I've used my friends 7D and having the toggle makes it so I don't have to reposition my hand to change the focus point. I'm so jealous of that!


----------



## sub50hz

Man, I can't wait to read the responses here when you guys get a 1D in your hands for the first time.


----------



## Sean Webster

OMG that would be like...


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;14964393*
> Man, I can't wait to read the responses here when you guys get a 1D in your hands for the first time.


What do I do with this stupid spinning wheel on the back?


----------



## sub50hz

Digital is boring me lately, I haven't even seen my 50D in 2 weeks.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis;14964422*
> What do I do with this stupid spinning wheel on the back?


Oh, the 60D has a wheel, it just sucks major ass.


----------



## BlankThis

The whole EOS series has it right?


----------



## sub50hz

Well in _digital_ EOS, anything that's not a Rebel has a wheel. they all pretty much feel the same save for the 60D. I doubt we'll see that replicated on any newer models, I don't think it was very well received by most users.


----------



## dudemanppl

AF film cameras are so boring. It's like a crappy digital camera.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;14964817*
> AF film cameras are so boring. It's like a crappy digital camera.


Haha, I don't think I have ever used an AF film camera in my life. I grew up using my mom's Canon TL, then I saved up and bought a konica autoreflex T when I was 8. I still miss that thing, the shutter eventually jammed and I ended up replacing it with a cheap vivitar xc-3. I hate that stupid electronic shutter. If the batteries get low, it starts firing at 1/60 second every time, but the meter still works so I have no way of knowing unless I do a very long or short exposure.

In other news, I just rebuilt all the joints on my tripod. Five of the six had shattered the retaining piece for the locking lever, so I drilled out the metal pin in the levers (much harder than it sounds since the pin is like 1/16 inch diameter) and replaced them with bolts. Then Itook some sheet metal, wrapped it around the old retainers, and put the bolts through. It seems to work okay now (it can actually hold up my 645 without slowly compresskng) but we'll see for sure tomorrow.

Also, what's th deal with nikon's kit lenses? I was playing with one of their cameras at the store today, and it just felt utterly crap-tastic. The camera (D5100) felt that way too, but not nearly as severe. But wow, that lens. I felt like I was going to break it by zooming too quickly.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;14964817*
> AF film cameras are so boring. It's like a crappy digital camera.[/QUOTE
> 
> ALERT!!!! MANUAL FOCUS STILL POSSIBLE!!!
> 
> Find me a MF body that uses EOS lenses, has 1/8000, weather sealing and doesn't cost 3000 dollars. Good luck.


----------



## dudemanppl

Auto film advance is boring.


----------



## MistaBernie

5D deal may be happening! Need to check on a few things..


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie;14969076*
> 5D deal may be happening! Need to check on a few things..


Like the over 200,000 clicks he didn't tell you about, the thick layer of dust on the sensor and viewfinder, and broken auto focus. lol jk


----------



## dudemanppl

Then you realized you can sell the 7D and 60D for a 5DII.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;14969284*
> Then you realized you can sell the 7D and 60D for a 5DII.


Ugh, seller sold it on FM after agreeing on a price...

And I would rather have the two bodies. I think I'm glad the deal didnt happen in a way, part of me had a hard time giving up a 6 month old body for a 6 year old with 25k clicks .


----------



## BlankThis

1Ds2 or 1D3?

They're both not that much more than a 5D but a heck of a lot more camera.


----------



## Shane1244

Assuming I'm thinking of the right cameras... The only advantage the 1Ds2 has over the 1D3 is the fact that it's FF, I'm pretty sure the 1D3 beats it in everything else.


----------



## foothead

Well, I learned the hard way not to take family members when I go shooting. After the hundredth complain in the first fifteen minutes, I just gave up and ended up basically doing a hike.Oh well,at least I didn't bring the 4x5 camera this time. That would've been a nightmare to lug around in 33 degree ,80% humidity weather.


----------



## ljason8eg

Picked up a Lowepro Flipside 400 AW today. I like it a lot.









Quote:



Originally Posted by *foothead*


Well, I learned the hard way not to take family members when I go shooting. After the hundredth complain in the first fifteen minutes, I just gave up and ended up basically doing a hike.Oh well,at least I didn't bring the 4x5 camera this time. That would've been a nightmare to lug around in 33 degree ,80% humidity weather.


Yeah I've tried that before...not the greatest lol.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *foothead*


Well, I learned the hard way not to take family members when I go shooting. After the hundredth complain in the first fifteen minutes, I just gave up and ended up basically doing a hike.Oh well,at least I didn't bring the 4x5 camera this time. That would've been a nightmare to lug around in 33 degree ,80% humidity weather.


I either go solo or with another photog.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

At least you didn't have to take photos _of_ family members. I always find that to be more aggravating.


----------



## Sean Webster

I just did a small shoot and I think I'm done with portraits...too much of a hassle getting the person to do what you want! Then they complain saying that "this pose doesn't feel right," but it looks good in the pic, etc. Friends and family suck! lol


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


I either go solo or with another photog.










Yeah, the plan was to go with a friend, but that didn't work out.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


At least you didn't have to take photos _of_ family members. I always find that to be more aggravating.


Oh my gosh, yes. My response is always "I don't do portraits." If they keep insisting, I make it apparent that I don't know what I'm doing. Lens stopped down to F/22 + speedlight on max pointed directly at the subject usually gives great results. Lol. Or I could always bring my Graphic View and stop down to f/64 then make them stay perfectly still for like 20 seconds. I'll have to try that next time.


----------



## Conspiracy

so finally took my camera to work and although i only have a 30 i soon with have my sigma 10-20 soon but here is my attempted landscape shot from the top of the press box in middle of nowhere GA,










my attempted capture of the sunset during the game, i think im lacking stuff to capture a good sunset/rise like probably a graduated ND filter or something i have no clue how people get awesome sunset shots. unfortunately while the sky was red i wasnt able to get off my camera because the game was going on but it looked amazing










and my camera that i shoot with that is pointed towards the parking lot shooting people entering the stadium


----------



## Boyboyd

An ND grad is the next thing on my list too. I can't believe I don't have one already. Might sell my 55-200 to pay for a good one.


----------



## Conspiracy

oh yea and my director totally caught me trying to figure out whether that HDTV lens would fit on my 7D i knew it wouldnt but i mean cmon $30K piece of glass totally worth the try.

its a 7.6-168mm f1.6 with built in 2X extender


----------



## BlankThis

Develop an adapter


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis;14977950*
> Develop an adapter


im not sure even what type of mount it is but if i could use that lens i dont need anything else...


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy;14976775*
> oh yea and my director totally caught me trying to figure out whether that HDTV lens would fit on my 7D i knew it wouldnt but i mean cmon $30K piece of glass totally worth the try.
> 
> its a 7.6-168mm f1.6 with built in 2X extender


Too bad it wasn't a constant f/1.6.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;14978346*
> Too bad it wasn't a constant f/1.6.


nvm its not a constant f1.6 i just said it was but i was wrong lol, because i remember it did stop down when zoomed all the way in

and i made a mistake... the one i use is actually a f1.9. there is a f1.6 one out there, i think its the super wide that is like 4.5-60mm f1.6-fsomething


----------



## Shane1244

Looks like this one:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/429039-REG/Canon_HJ22EX7_6B_ITS_RE_eHDxs_HJ22ex76BITS_22x_2_3.html


----------



## Conspiracy

that is it

i got to use this one yesterday working with a freelancer that owned his own glass and had 2 different HDTV lenses.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/635036-REG/Canon_HJ14EX4_3B_ITS_RE_HJ14ex4_3B_ITS_RE_eHDxs_14x.html

and let me tell you 4.3mm is amazingly wide.

im new to HDTV glass but its really amazing. i still love and would prefer using zeiss on some 16mm or 35mm film cameras but this HDTV thing is fun


----------



## dudemanppl

If the focus plane wasn't curved, I would love the 50L. But because of that, the Sigma 50 is better in almost every way possible (already was anyway...).


----------



## Conspiracy

yea once i get my money together i would like to upgrade to a 50 1.4 but i dont know which one to get. i already know that micro-USM in the canon 50 has the potential to cause problems and frustration that i dont want to deal with. i really like the samples i see on potn from the sigma 50 and i just all around hear great things about the sigma 50. and then there is the zeiss 50 1.4 which is also awesome but several hundred dollars more. im definitely looking at buying a better 50 for my birthday in march









you should post more from your sigma 50







lens is pretty awesome i bet


----------



## Jobotoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;14972579*
> At least you didn't have to take photos _of_ family members. I always find that to be more aggravating.


OMG!!! I promised myself never to do this ever again . . .

Sorry family!


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy;14979646*
> you should post more from your sigma 50
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> lens is pretty awesome i bet


Yeah I regret selling it so much. Still have the L right now... :3 It's the closest thing SLRs have to the Summilux-M ASPH.


----------



## Conspiracy

have you used the zeiss 50 1.4? and what do you think of that 50? there is a used one on craigslist waiting to hear how much the seller wants


----------



## dudemanppl

Piece of crap. Unless it's 300 for the ZE, then buy it and sell it to get a Sigma for 300 bucks.


----------



## Conspiracy

yea if they ask $300 or less im totally going to buy it. if they say less i might be suspicious but will still check it out. now if i got lucky they posted it wrong because they are less than knowledgeable and its the zeiss 50 makro-planar would i go to hell if i got it for $300?

zeiss holds its value pretty well i would hope so i could maybe flip it as you said. i kinda really would like a sigma 50 but its not at the top of my list

if its in nice condition and i manage to get it for like $200 i might keep it for a while and sell it later


----------



## dudemanppl

You aren't gonna get any in focus pictures with a 7D.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


You aren't gonna get any in focus pictures with a 7D.


why? its supposed to have focus confirm


----------



## dudemanppl

That is so much slower than a Canon S screen.


----------



## Conspiracy

i have no clue what that is lol? like canon s series camera?

and im not sure what makes its much slower BUT if i get lucky and get this lens for cheap ill most likely end up trying to flip it for a sigma 50 anyway


----------



## BlankThis

Focus screen man.

Use a _real_ camera and discover it for yourself.


----------



## Conspiracy

still not sure about the focus screen lol. i guess i have never used a real camera before









i do know this. if i can snag this zeiss 50 1.4 on CL for $300 im going for it as long as its in good working condition otherwise im going to pass and save for a sigma 50 like i have planned for a while now


----------



## dudemanppl

Is it ZE or ZF.2? If not then derp. Also, I prefer the 5DII to split screens I've used in film cameras/


----------



## Conspiracy

i hope its ZE. i know ZF is for nikon i dont know about the .2 is that like version 2?

im still waiting on an email back from the seller on CL

if its a ZE canon mount zeiss then im pursuing it otherwise not


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*


An ND grad is the next thing on my list too. I can't believe I don't have one already. Might sell my 55-200 to pay for a good one.


I have a B+W F-Pro 1.8 (6-stop) and it's really great, though I'm considering getting a darker one.


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *BlankThis*


Focus screen man.

Use a _real_ camera and discover it for yourself.


Or you can buy one and install it in a DSLR. http://www.katzeyeoptics.com/page--C...ns--store.html
I've been wanting to get one for my E-410, but I usually just use film with my manual focus lenses and it seems to mess up spot metering on slower lenses, so it's kinda low on my priority list.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Is it ZE or ZF.2? If not then derp. Also, I prefer the 5DII to split screens I've used in film cameras/


Man, you really _are_ somethin' else.


----------



## dudemanppl

Katz eyes are for people who don't any better. Split screens not made of ground glass are pure crap. http://www.focusingscreen.com/

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Man, you really _are_ somethin' else.


Too distracting.


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Katz eyes are for people who don't any better. Split screens not made of ground glass are pure crap. http://www.focusingscreen.com/


Wow, it's a lot cheaper too. I guess I'll go with one of those.


----------



## dudemanppl

What I recommend is a Canon EF-S screen and then just dremel/sand it to size. Cheaper if you already have materials.


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


What I recommend is a Canon EF-S screen and then just dremel/sand it to size. Cheaper if you already have materials.


Is it not made of glass? It's nearly impossible to cut glass with a dremel without it fracturing. Besides, it's only $12 more for it pre-cut using the link you gave me.


----------



## dudemanppl

Nope, all plastic for the longest time.


----------



## Conspiracy

still dont know why you asked if its ZE or ZF.2

obviously ZE is canon mount

is ZF.2 still nikon or is it something different. the zeiss website doesnt have ZE.2 so im confused a little. obviously i dont really want the nikon mount unless somehow its better than the same lens with a canon mount...

and after looking at chart comparison the sigma is sharper wide open even though that doesnt matter too much to me. and they both suffer from about the same amount of CA


----------



## Shane1244

I think he means the Zeiss 50mm F/2 rather than the f/1.4

But I don't know.


----------



## Conspiracy

possibly i do know the zeiss 50 f2 is amazing but expensive and after looking further into it the zeiss 50 1.4 is the zeiss equivalent of the canon 50 1.8 just much more expensive and is great bang for your buck but not top of the line lol except anything zeiss is expensive its just this one lens is like their entry level cheapo i guess. still a great lens but by no means on the same level as the other zeiss lenses


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*


still dont know why you asked if its ZE or ZF.2

obviously ZE is canon mount

is ZF.2 still nikon or is it something different. the zeiss website doesnt have ZE.2 so im confused a little. obviously i dont really want the nikon mount unless somehow its better than the same lens with a canon mount...

and after looking at chart comparison the sigma is sharper wide open even though that doesnt matter too much to me. and they both suffer from about the same amount of CA


ZF.2 is just an update which allows electronic communication. There's no ZE.2 since Canon has it to begin with since that's the whole point of the EOS system.

ZF & ZF.2 = F-Mount

ZE = EF Mount.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*


possibly i do know the zeiss 50 f2 is amazing but expensive and after looking further into it the zeiss 50 1.4 is the zeiss equivalent of the canon 50 1.8 just much more expensive and is great bang for your buck but not top of the line lol except anything zeiss is expensive its just this one lens is like their entry level cheapo i guess. still a great lens but by no means on the same level as the other zeiss lenses


Whole issue with the 50/1.4 and 85/1.4 is that Zeiss hasn't updated the optical design so it's quite old in comparison to others. And when put up against modern day lenses it really doesn't hold it's own in terms of IQ.


----------



## Conspiracy

as much as i like zeiss and would enjoy being a zeiss owner im going to pass and go sigma for my 50. unless my mind changes by the time i have the money around next march. my next lens is still going to be an UWA







unless this zeiss 50 on CL is in great condition and they are willing to take $300 or less which is doubtful but possible

thanks for clearing that up


----------



## Marin

Playing devil's advocate here, huge reason to go with the Zeiss lenses is for manual focus. It's far superior to the manual focus on AF lenses.


----------



## foothead

It's crazy how much Samyang has changed recently. Back when I shot 35mm as my primary format, most of their lenses were "high quality optical plastic" and basically regarded as trash. My Photax 500/8 (exactly the same as the older samyang 500/8) has to be used at f/16 or 22 to get even a somewhat decent picture from it.


----------



## Marin

That's better. Now lets keep it friendly.


----------



## Shane1244

Buy others that are just as good for cheaper and paint a red ring.


----------



## Conspiracy

honestly no big deal lol

shanes idea is pretty good though. i went to art school so i can paint a pretty amazing red ring


----------



## dudemanppl

If I had a car, I would get a 4x5 camera, but there's only so many things to shoot in a one mile radius...


----------



## sub50hz

Man, Breaking Bad always has the coolest-looking timelapses. Oh, and the best content of any show on television.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;14983983*
> Man, Breaking Bad always has the coolest-looking timelapses. Oh, and the best content of any show on television.


dude watching it too. and from a video/film background this is hands down one of the best shot show i have ever seen on TV. this rivals most big budget movies.

on a side note walt jr was so disappointed getting that PT Cruiser after that new muscle car lol


----------



## sub50hz

If you're watching it, you know why I just










myself into submission.


----------



## Conspiracy

Yes!


----------



## lifeskills

dont say anything... watching at 10 lol...

I agree the timelapses are good in Breaking Bad. Have you noticed that in the latest season they have started to use motion controlled dollys? thats my dream job


----------



## Conspiracy

working with the photographer of that show on anything would be my dream job. breaking bad is the most artistic film work i have seen from a major production. im all about being creative and doing work as far from hollywood as possible but this show makes me want to work with the big shots


----------



## sub50hz

Not to mention, above all else, the writing and dialogue is incredible. If you can think of another show that was this good thought this many seasons (and don't say Dexter, because it's close), shoot.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;14983983*
> Man, Breaking Bad always has the coolest-looking timelapses. Oh, and the best content of any show on television.


:/ I love the show, but I really cannot enjoy it because AMC looks like total crap for me. Screw cox and their government-endorsed monopoly. I want decent cable.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;14984151*
> Not to mention, above all else, the writing and dialogue is incredible. If you can think of another show that was this good thought this many seasons (and don't say Dexter, because it's close), shoot.


there is nothing better than breaking bad in my book

now i will add that the style of shows on USA such as burn notice, suits, white collar, etc.. are great but they are by no means as artistic as breaking bad

if you analyze the shows on USA they are almost all identical in visual style which i think is totally awesome. analyze the camera work, editing, writting, costumes... all the mise-en-scene. they are like the same shows







nerd moment


----------



## lifeskills

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;14984151*
> Not to mention, above all else, the writing and dialogue is incredible. If you can think of another show that was this good thought this many seasons (and don't say Dexter, because it's close), shoot.


for sure. The storyline in Breaking bad continues seamlessly from season to season. A lot of the time tv shows will have one major theme, or conflict, through each season, which kind of annoys me


----------



## Conspiracy

amazing episode. it will not disappoint you lifeskills.

i dont know if i can wait another 7 days for the next


----------



## sub50hz

Well, one thing's for sure -- you guys watching later better be ready for the best episode of this season so far.


----------



## BlankThis




----------



## sub50hz

Oh, Canada. If you don't get Breaking Bad there, buy the first season on DVD and tell me I was wrong.


----------



## Conspiracy

encore. so watching it again!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## dudemanppl

So weird to think its the same guy from Malcolm in the Middle...


----------



## Jobotoo

One of my favorite shows!


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;14984313*
> Oh, Canada. If you don't get Breaking Bad there, buy the first season on DVD and tell me I was wrong.


We do.


----------



## sub50hz

OK, even though I realize probably nobody in this thread will have one, I am officially putting my 135L up for trade for a Mamiya 645AF + lens + 120/220 back + cash. I would consider a 2-lens kit or something, but feel free to float any offer by me. I love the 135, but I can't get over my desire for MF. You guys posting in this thread have first dibs until I put it up on POTN/Clist/etc.

edit: I would also consider letting the 70-200 go for body/back/lens and I will include cash if it is exceptionally nice.

double edit: Also interested in an AF Contax setup.


----------



## Conspiracy

would like to have a 135L but i dont have that camera nor have i heard of mamiya and dont know what lenses it uses.

i am wanting to get into MF lenses but im starting slow and i dont have nearly as much of an appreciation for the older makes and models of lenses and cameras that yall have


----------



## sub50hz

MF = medium format.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;14984863*
> MF = medium format.


thanks i got that. just dont know anything MF other than hassleblad


----------



## dudemanppl

Good luck... I'd get a 120 camera, but I don't know what I would do with it.


----------



## sub50hz

I would love a 6x7, but portability is a huge issue for me. I'm not able or willing to take a tripod with me every day when I'm downtown.


----------



## xxrabid93

Any tips for night time street photography? I think i am going to make a trip to walmart soon tonight (life of a college kid) and was thinking of bringing my camera with.

Also, what lens should i use? I was thinking of using my old Nikkor 50mm f/1.4 as it has the biggest aperature of all my lenses. Would it be hard to manual focus though at night on my 5Dc?


----------



## dudemanppl

Pentax 67 can't be that bad... I don't get what I'd do with it that I can't with my 35mm stuff though.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;14985078*
> Pentax 67 can't be that bad... I don't get what I'd do with it that I can't with my 35mm stuff though.


Pentax 67 is absolutely massive and difficult to use without a very sturdy tripod. 6x7 mirror + shutter = tons of vibration. IIRC, Hassleblad and Mamiya have some leaf shutter lenses, which would probably be best for 6x7.

I have a Pentax 645, which is a great camera, but it is still quite heavy (2kg with the 45/2.8) and difficult to use for long exposures. Even with mirror lockup, the shutter manages to vibrate the entire tripod.


----------



## dudemanppl

I'd just buy it to look through the viewfinder, poop, then sell it. Must be GRAND.


----------



## Jobotoo

I miss my 6x9 Mamiya RZ67, but boy was it heavy. I usually did weddings with a pair of MF Pentax and some strobes (forgot the name of the strobes). I still have, and use the tri-pod I used for it, and my 4x5 LF camera.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;14985187*
> I'd just buy it to look through the viewfinder, poop, then sell it. Must be GRAND.


Ignorance is bliss, isn't it?


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;14985187*
> I'd just buy it to look through the viewfinder, poop, then sell it. Must be GRAND.


Haha, I can't imagine what that looks like. The VF on my 645 is so big that I literally have to look around to see everything. It's wonderful, but it also makes framing a bit more difficult when shooting handheld.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;14985234*
> Ignorance is bliss, isn't it?


<3 luv uu subzz!

Oh and the DK-17M is very very nice on a 5DII. VERY nice. Rivals an OM-1 body probably. Fricken huge.


----------



## sub50hz

I would probably give up photography if all I shot was used gear and high school football games.

Get out and shoot, or at least post some of what you're seemingly holding back -- photography is best when shared, you have more gear than anyone here and post so little. There's gotta be some gems hiding behind the monetary worth of what some of us _drive to work_.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;14985386*
> I would probably give up photography if all I shot was used gear and high school football games.
> 
> Get out and shoot, or at least post some of what you're seemingly holding back -- photography is best when shared, you have more gear than anyone here and post so little. There's gotta be some gems hiding behind the monetary worth of what some of us _drive to work_.


2002 Hyundai Santa Fe with 129k miles on it. Yeaup, I think I qualify here.


----------



## dudemanppl

http://www.flickr.com/photos/dudemanppl/
NOTHING OF VALUE.







Mostly stuff for sale. Haven't been shooting anything recently, but I'll bring the M6 to school tomorrow just for you.


----------



## scottath

Just thinking to myself - i cannot afford it right now but anyhow.....

Most of my photos are landscapes.
Currently using a 550D - as an upgrade - should i be looking at a 5D / 5DmkII
Im using a tamron 11-18mm lens mostly so id need to upgrade that too - so thats more expense....im just thinking out aloud.

Also - just posted this: http://www.overclock.net/photography/1120633-wedding-photography-equip.html#post14986205

Looking for advice re wedding photography


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scottath;14986211*
> Just thinking to myself - i cannot afford it right now but anyhow.....
> 
> Most of my photos are landscapes.
> Currently using a 550D - as an upgrade - should i be looking at a 5D / 5DmkII
> Im using a tamron 11-18mm lens mostly so id need to upgrade that too - so thats more expense....im just thinking out aloud.
> 
> Also - just posted this: http://www.overclock.net/photography/1120633-wedding-photography-equip.html#post14986205
> 
> Looking for advice re wedding photography


Replied


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scottath;14986211*
> Just thinking to myself - i cannot afford it right now but anyhow.....
> 
> Most of my photos are landscapes.
> Currently using a 550D - as an upgrade - should i be looking at a 5D / 5DmkII
> Im using a tamron 11-18mm lens mostly so id need to upgrade that too - so thats more expense....im just thinking out aloud.


I much prefer medium format for landscapes. The picture quality is superior to digital, and you get a lot more creative control. Plus, developing by hand is half the fun.

You can get a Mamiya 645 + 45/2.8 lens for a whole lot less than just a 5D body.

Anyway, just a suggestion.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xxrabid93;14985009*
> Any tips for night time street photography? I think i am going to make a trip to walmart soon tonight (life of a college kid) and was thinking of bringing my camera with.
> 
> Also, what lens should i use? I was thinking of using my old Nikkor 50mm f/1.4 as it has the biggest aperature of all my lenses. Would it be hard to manual focus though at night on my 5Dc?


Hm, Wal-Mart doesn't immediately come to mind when I think about "street photography." I know everyone can't be lucky enough to be in or near a large metropolis (myself included), but take a short trip somewhere, where there are actual people on the streets. I suppose you could practice at Wal-Mart, but you're likely to get some strange reactions.

And some of the most legendary street photogs used manual focus only, but it will be challenging. A split focus screen, or least a high-precision screen like the EF-S screen would be ideal.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;14985288*
> <3 luv uu subzz!
> 
> Oh and the DK-17M is very very nice on a 5DII. VERY nice. Rivals an OM-1 body probably. Fricken huge.


What did you have to do to adapt it to your 5DII? Any decent magnifiers made for Canon?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;14985386*
> I would probably give up photography if all I shot was used gear and high school football games.
> 
> Get out and shoot, or at least post some of what you're seemingly holding back -- photography is best when shared, you have more gear than anyone here and post so little. There's gotta be some gems hiding behind the monetary worth of what some of us _drive to work_.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;14985549*
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/dudemanppl/
> NOTHING OF VALUE.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mostly stuff for sale. Haven't been shooting anything recently, but I'll bring the M6 to school tomorrow just for you.


I have to agree here dude. A gear recommendation from you would go a lot further with examples of usage in a variety of different situations, though think a lot of your sports work is very good. Put up or shut up.


----------



## scottath

haha - i dont have the time or money to play with film atm - just like my 550d + 11-18mm uwa lens atm.


----------



## sub50hz

GT, the 17M fits Canon bodies. I bought one on a whim, it's alright... but nothing can save Canon's terrible eye relief.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scottath;14987643*
> haha - i dont have the time or money to play with film atm - just like my 550d + 11-18mm uwa lens atm.


It's really cheaper than digital unless you shoot all the time or have a habit of taking hundreds of pictures at a time. $500 would get you a decent MF setup, versus 1100 for a 5D + 600-800 for a decent wide angle lens. That extra 1200-1400 dollars would buy you a TON of film. You can always send it off for development if you don't feel like doing it yourself. I still do that for color.


----------



## Boyboyd

There's no way i'd even attempt to process E6 myself. I've considered it for monochrome though.

I really want a MF camera, but the only ones i can find are holgas


----------



## biatchi

MF is tempting but I'm not sure if I could be arsed with the bulkyness of it.


----------



## scottath

i like the ability to touch little things in Lightroom. I know that sounds like taking the art out of photography - but i hate doing it also, but its nice to be able to do.
I like as much as possible to get the shot right the first time and not touch it at all - but its nice to have the ability to touch it if needed.
But i suppose your right - its a large upfront cost (digital) vs a smaller upfront and an ongoing cost (film).....

Its not jsut landscapes i do though - thats jsut what i enjoy doing the most


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Boyboyd;14988058*
> There's no way i'd even attempt to process E6 myself. I've considered it for monochrome though.


I've considered E-6, but it'd be really difficult to do in a bathroom. The temperature has to be well controlled, which means storing everything in water bath with a heater. I simply don't have room for that.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Boyboyd;14988058*
> I really want a MF camera, but the only ones i can find are holgas


Wait, what? Are you trying to buy locally or something?


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead;14988138*
> I've considered E-6, but it'd be really difficult to do in a bathroom. The temperature has to be well controlled, which means storing everything in water bath with a heater. I simply don't have room for that.
> 
> Wait, what? Are you trying to buy locally or something?


I've not even looked in a physical shop. Just the internet. I decided to stick to 35mm for the time being.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scottath;14988134*
> i like the ability to touch little things in Lightroom. I know that sounds like taking the art out of photography - but i hate doing it also, but its nice to be able to do.
> I like as much as possible to get the shot right the first time and not touch it at all - but its nice to have the ability to touch it if needed.
> But i suppose your right - its a large upfront cost (digital) vs a smaller upfront and an ongoing cost (film).....
> 
> Its not jsut landscapes i do though - thats jsut what i enjoy doing the most


Ah, okay then. What's worked out best for me is to use medium- and large-format film for landscape work, and a cheap DSLR (E-410) for other things. It actually is possible to correct errors in exposure/framing when printing film, and you can always get it scanned when you send it off, then edit that in lightroom, but both are definitely more hassle than digital.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Boyboyd;14988181*
> I've not even looked in a physical shop. Just the internet. I decided to stick to 35mm for the time being.


How is it hard to find a medium format then? Is it just out of your price range? Older mamiya outfits seem to start around $300 on ebay.

EDIT: Speaking of mamiya, what is the proper way to pronounce it? Is it Mam-ee-yuh or Muh-My-uh? I've heard both.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead;14988212*
> How is it hard to find a medium format then? Is it just out of your price range? Older mamiya outfits seem to start around $300 on ebay.
> 
> EDIT: Speaking of mamiya, what is the proper way to pronounce it? Is it Mam-ee-yuh or Muh-My-uh? I've heard both.


Thanks. I didn't know what to search for.


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;14984936*
> Good luck... I'd get a 120 camera, but I don't know what I would do with it.


Most likely shoot half a roll then sell it.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Boyboyd;14988288*
> Thanks. I didn't know what to search for.


Oh, lol. What you probably want is the mamiya 645. They make some 6x7s as well, but they're a bit too heavy to carry around all day. I'd probably get the 45/2.8 and the 80/2.8, and just ignore the telephoto lenses for a while.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;14987826*
> GT, the 17M fits Canon bodies. I bought one on a whim, it's alright... but nothing can save Canon's terrible eye relief.


Good to know, I just did a quick search and notice some comments about people "adapting" them to their Canon DSLRs. I may have pick one up.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Boyboyd;14988058*
> I really want a MF camera, but the only ones i can find are holgas


Really? Buy online, a friend of mine has a Mamiya 645AF he got from Keh in "BGN" condition (like new) for 500 for body and back. Lenses are cheap.

You could do manual focus medium format, as foothead mentioned, for south of 400 bucks. If you want to make bigger prints than you can with 35mm, MF should be a go-to. 6 x 4.5 puts 32 exposures on a 220 roll, and it's barely more expensive than professional 35mm film.


----------



## Boyboyd

I'm not interested with AF on film. When i'm using film, i'm careful, slow, and never photographing anything that's moving fast at all.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Boyboyd;14988824*
> I'm not interested with AF on film. When i'm using film, i'm careful, slow, and never photographing anything that's moving fast at all.


That's all well and good, but there are times when AF can be useful. 645AFs are awesome to handle and shoot with, compared to their MF counterpart.


----------



## xxrabid93

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;14987614*
> Hm, Wal-Mart doesn't immediately come to mind when I think about "street photography." I know everyone can't be lucky enough to be in or near a large metropolis (myself included), but take a short trip somewhere, where there are actual people on the streets. I suppose you could practice at Wal-Mart, but you're likely to get some strange reactions.


I think you misunderstood me. I wasn't going to photograph in/around walmart. That would be dumb.







I was going to do it on my way there, as i walked around town. But just my luck, a few minutes after i had posted, it started downpouring so i didn't end up going.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;14987614*
> A split focus screen, or least a high-precision screen like the EF-S screen would be ideal.


I think it'd be easier to say "S" screen, 1 series is Ec-S, 5D is Ee-S, 5DII is Eg-S, 40-60D is Ef-S. But then again, it will get really confusing...
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;14987614*
> I have to agree here dude. A gear recommendation from you would go a lot further with examples of usage in a variety of different situations, though think a lot of your sports work is very good. Put up or shut up.


But all my pictures are of my friends and such.







It'd be sorta creepy. And I forgot to bring the M6 cause I woke up sort of late.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;14989576*
> 
> But all my pictures are of my friends and such.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It'd be sorta creepy. And I forgot to bring the M6 cause I woke up sort of late.


So are most of mine


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;14989576*
> 
> But all my pictures are of my friends and such.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It'd be sorta creepy. And I forgot to bring the M6 cause I woke up sort of late.


ha, last year i took over 700 pics of my friends in high school, man I miss it now. lol Here's some of the pics i did if you want to see. https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.1663701602023.2078823.1521727141&type=1


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;14989576*
> But all my pictures are of my friends and such.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It'd be sorta creepy.


Wha? You use all that Leica gear to shoot pics of your friends in school?


----------



## dudemanppl

Wat. I do have Leica shots on my flickr, in fact the first few pages. Digital is for friends, FILM IS FOR SERIALS.

Also, I only shoot sports because I have to. I wouldn't own a 120-300 if I wasn't on the school newspaper. But I stay because we're the best in the area, it's a free A, and we have AJC (Angry Japanese Cougars).


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xxrabid93;14989363*
> I think you misunderstood me. I wasn't going to photograph in/around walmart. That would be dumb.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I was going to do it on my way there, as i walked around town. But just my luck, a few minutes after i had posted, it started downpouring so i didn't end up going.


That's a relief. Sorry, but when I think of "going to Wal-Mart," I don't envisage walking down the block in the old city center. Every Wal-Mart I've been to is remote and huge and has to be driven to, where its prey is better located.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;14989576*
> I think it'd be easier to say "S" screen, 1 series is Ec-S, 5D is Ee-S, 5DII is Eg-S, 40-60D is Ef-S. But then again, it will get really confusing...


That's right, I thought Ef-S was for the 5D. Got it mixed up with Eg-S, which isn't right either. It's even more confusing that they call it "Ef-S" because of the lens mount of the same name.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;14989576*
> But all my pictures are of my friends and such.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It'd be sorta creepy. And I forgot to bring the M6 cause I woke up sort of late.


Don't you bring your camera when your family goes on vacation? Make some driving-age friends and go hiking with them or something. You're in an area rife with places conducive for photography of all types. Otherwise, I guess you'll have to wait until you can legally drive to get out and about.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;14989758*
> You're in an area rife with places conducive for photography of all types. Otherwise, I guess you'll have to wait until you can legally drive to get out and about.


I think I'll go out shooting Thursday. Only free day of the week... Chose something for me that's in a five mile radius. Also, I don't even really know if my 50 1.1 for the M6 is working. Infinity focus isn't at infinity...


----------



## sub50hz

Five miles? That's weaksauce. Get a bike and make a 40 mile round trip, and bring lots of film. You really have anything better to do? Go with some friends, bring some lunch or something and make a day of it, I guarantee you'll have a good time.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


I think I'll go out shooting Thursday. Only free day of the week... Chose something for me that's in a five mile radius. Also, I don't even really know if my 50 1.1 for the M6 is working. Infinity focus isn't at infinity...


Day trip. Santa Monica. Do it.


----------



## lifeskills

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy;14984328*
> encore. so watching it again!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


It was good for sure!


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *lifeskills*


It was good for sure!


Hard cliffhanger, real foreshadowey stuff with Gus taking 2/3 activated charcoal pills. Die? Coma? ??????? Everything is so dicked, no idea where this is going.

Also, wasn't the cartel chemist the Don in Boondock Saints?


----------



## lifeskills

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Hard cliffhanger, real foreshadowey stuff with Gus taking 2/3 activated charcoal pills. Die? Coma? ??????? Everything is so dicked, no idea where this is going.

Also, wasn't the cartel chemist the Don in Boondock Saints?


yeah I think it was


----------



## dudemanppl

Guys, remember I have school. It'd take a while to get to Santa Monica, and I'm too cheap.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Guys, remember I have school. It'd take a while to get to Santa Monica, and I'm too cheap.


Not too serious about photography, eh? Go the extra mile -- sometimes it aint easy, but the payoff is huge even if you just get that one shot you wanted.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;14988942*
> That's all well and good, but there are times when AF can be useful. 645AFs are awesome to handle and shoot with, compared to their MF counterpart.


I can't think of one situation where I wanted AF on my medium format camera. The viewfinder is so large and bright that I can focus almost as fast as an older AF system.

I mean, yeah it'd probably be nice to have, but it's not worth the extra money for the AF lenses.

Does anyone still make a darkroom timer that glows in the dark? It's annoying as hell having to throw a towel on top of the safelight to check development times on a stopwatch.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;14991657*
> Guys, remember I have school. It'd take a while to get to Santa Monica, and I'm too cheap.


It's called the weekend dude. No one suggested that you skip class. I know your school must have a long weekend for some or another reason every now and then, fall break?

You need to get out more, clearly! When I was 15 I went hiking and canoeing all the time. I just wish I gave a hoot about photography back then like you do now.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead;14994166*
> I can't think of one situation where I wanted AF on my medium format camera. The viewfinder is so large and bright that I can focus almost as fast as an older AF system.
> 
> I mean, yeah it'd probably be nice to have, but it's not worth the extra money for the AF lenses.
> 
> Does anyone still make a darkroom timer that glows in the dark? It's annoying as hell having to throw a towel on top of the safelight to check development times on a stopwatch.


I have a Seiko dive watch with tritium dials that's so bright you can see it from space. Why not something like that? Even a typical Timex Expedition should have a glowing minute hand.


----------



## BlankThis

1D2 in mint condition (75K on it) for $700 on Craigslist here... New battery too.

MUST RESIST.

MUST SAVE FOR 5D + GLASS OR 1D3.

AHHH!


----------



## sub50hz

1DIIs are good, but it's like stepping back in time as far as operations are concerned. Check POTN, still a _ton_ of 1DII shooters.


----------



## BlankThis

I know but I'm not willing to take the large of a blast to the past... Unless the deal is sweet enough.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;14994472*
> It's called the weekend dude. No one suggested that you skip class. I know your school must have a long weekend for some or another reason every now and then, fall break?


I'll go somewhere next three day weekend, probably Old Town. Or somewhere else I really have no clue. I have practice on Saturdays 8-5 and it makes me not want to do anything on Sunday.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis;14995019*
> I know but I'm not willing to take the large of a blast to the past... Unless the deal is sweet enough.


How many clicks? 1DII is still relevant, just don't plan for it to be an amazing low-light body. Daytime sports? Yes, plz.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead;14994166*
> I mean, yeah it'd probably be nice to have, but it's not worth the extra money for the AF lenses.


Mamiya AF lenses are still pretty damn cheap. What I like most about the 645AF/AFD is the in-hand feel. It works very well for me, althougth I would expect most purists shake their heads at that, for some ridiculous reason.


----------



## foothead




----------



## sub50hz

All I see is Tiger shower curtains.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;14996053*
> All I see is Tiger shower curtains.


LOL. I live in Baton Rouge, so yeah...

EDIT: So I may be going to New Orleans this weekend. Should I order some more color film, or just use black & white? If color, what do y'all suggest? I usually do landscapes, so velvia 100F and reala are the only color films I really have experience with


----------



## Boyboyd

Try velvia 100 (not 100f), or provia.


----------



## foothead

I've never used provia, but velvia 100 is too oversaturated for city shots imo. I'd actually prefer something that looks a little bit washed out.


----------



## Boyboyd

I see. Maybe try a kodachrome then? Since K-14 went out of production their E6 stuff isn't nearly as vibrant.


----------



## xxrabid93

Hey guys, does anyone have a general list of some nice legacy glass that i could use with my 5D? Also, i have some old Nikon film bodies too (and lenses that are actually really nice, even on my 5D), so old Nikkor suggestions would be cool too.

I have been looking into old glass, but i don't really know what's good and what's not. I would like any type that doesn't require glass to adapt to the EOS mount (ex. Nikkors).

Manual focus and manual aperature is fun to me, as long as it's not on a moving subject.


----------



## dudemanppl

You have an S screen right? If not, get one. Minolta made a nice 58mm f/1.2 that are like 550ish, nothing else really stands out that isn't obscenely expensive.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *foothead*


I've never used provia, but velvia 100 is too oversaturated for city shots imo. I'd actually prefer something that looks a little bit washed out.


Portra 400NC. None of this VC or no-designation crap.


----------



## xxrabid93

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


You have an S screen right? If not, get one. Minolta made a nice 58mm f/1.2 that are like 550ish, nothing else really stands out that isn't obscenely expensive.


I actually don't but was going to get one if i get some old glass. (Right now i have the Nikkor-EOS adapter with focus confirm chip, and it seems to work pretty well, though an S screen would probably help even more).

What about say, a Nikkor pre-AI 55mm f/1.2? http://www.keh.com/camera/Nikon-Manu...990232520?r=FE
Or a Nikkor AIS 50mm f/1.2? http://www.keh.com/camera/Nikon-Manu...990318200?r=FE

Any other different focal length glass that might be good? Any 85mm, or any good WA/UWA lenses maybe?


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Whoo, now have mod rights in the Photography section. Now I can help you out with gear list edits, GT


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Portra 400NC. None of this VC or no-designation crap.


Excellent. Does the 160NC look about the same? My camera only goes to 1/1000 shutter speed, so I want to be able to use larger apertures in sunlight.


----------



## sub50hz

Yeah, but 160NC is _hard_ to find.


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Yeah, but 160NC is _hard_ to find.


http://www.adorama.com/KKP160NC120P.html

First place I looked, in stock.


----------



## sub50hz

Locally, I meant -- at least for me, Central Camera down the street from my office only has a couple 120 rolls of 160NC left forever. They don't make it anymore. I guess I didn't really think about buying film online, I only do that if I'm stocking up.


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Locally, I meant -- at least for me, Central Camera down the street from my office only has a couple 120 rolls of 160NC left forever. They don't make it anymore. I guess I didn't really think about buying film online, I only do that if I'm stocking up.


Oh. Well, buying locally isn't really an option for me. We have two camera stores in Baton Rouge. One has converted itself into nothing more than a "digital printing service" store, and the people at the other one just look at me funny if I ask for any film besides 35mm.


----------



## sub50hz

Luckily for us, downtown Chicago has 3 of the best-stocked stores around (except for NYC, those guys get Ado and B&H) in Helix, Calumet and Central. The bad part? Cook County sales tax is 10.25%.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Luckily for us, downtown Chicago has 3 of the best-stocked stores around (except for NYC, those guys get Ado and B&H) in Helix, Calumet and Central. The bad part? Cook County sales tax is 10.25%.


How is Calumet? I've been thinking about stopping by the one in Cambridge to check it out.. they have the Bower grips that I can put on the 7D.


----------



## Jobotoo

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


How is Calumet? I've been thinking about stopping by the one in Cambridge to check it out.. they have the Bower grips that I can put on the 7D.


I've used the one in Santa Barbara, San Diego, and Santa Barbara quite a few times and the have been excellent.


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Luckily for us, downtown Chicago has 3 of the best-stocked stores around (except for NYC, those guys get Ado and B&H) in Helix, Calumet and Central. The bad part? Cook County sales tax is 10.25%.


10% Here. And that's not enough, they're trying to raise it to 11.

EDIT: Does anyone make a clamp that can attach to a normal tripod head so a camera can be attached to a fence? I've lost quite a few shots lately because I couldn't get the 4x5 camera to shoot through fences.


----------



## xxrabid93

Quote: 
   Originally Posted by *foothead*   10% Here. And that's not enough, they're trying to raise it to 11.

EDIT: Does anyone make a clamp that can attach to a normal tripod head so a camera can be attached to a fence? I've lost quite a few shots lately because I couldn't get the 4x5 camera to shoot through fences.  
Will a Manfrotto Super Clamp work?

  Amazon.com: Manfrotto 035RL Super Clamp with 2908 Standard Stud - Replaces 2900 (Black): Camera & Photo


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *xxrabid93*


Will a Manfrotto Super Clamp work?

Amazon.com: Manfrotto 035RL Super Clamp with 2908 Standard Stud - Replaces 2900 (Black): Camera & Photo


I probably need something a bit more substantial. I'm using a 4x5 view camera, not a small SLR like that is designed for.

Like this:


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


How is Calumet? I've been thinking about stopping by the one in Cambridge to check it out.. they have the Bower grips that I can put on the 7D.


The one here in Chicago is their main store, and the one in Oak Brook is a major satellite, so their ability to keep stock is really good. They have AWESOME Calumet-branded cheapo strobes that I know a few of my friends that do portraits use. Typically, they're pretty helpful, and the ones here have a few attractive girls working for them -- which is always a plus.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *foothead*


I probably need something a bit more substantial. I'm using a 4x5 view camera, not a small SLR like that is designed for.

Like this:












Hell, grab a McMaster/Grainger catalog and _do work_. Probably be a hell of a lot better _and_ cheaper than something you'd buy off the shelf.


----------



## xxrabid93

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Hell, grab a McMaster/Grainger catalog and _do work_. Probably be a hell of a lot better _and_ cheaper than something you'd buy off the shelf.


McMasterCarr and Grainger both FTW. They are awesome. I get so much stuff from them (not ususally photohraphy related though







).


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Hell, grab a McMaster/Grainger catalog and _do work_. Probably be a hell of a lot better _and_ cheaper than something you'd buy off the shelf.


Yeah, that's what I was expecting to have to do. I'd rather buy a readymade product if the price is reasonable though.

EDIT: I need one of those rubber eyecups for a vivtar XC-3. I scratched the hell out of my last pair of glasses with it, and I really don't want that to happen again. They don't seem to be available though.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;15002343*
> Whoo, now have mod rights in the Photography section. Now I can help you out with gear list edits, GT


That's awesome! You can catch the adds that I miss when I skip a day not checking the camera thread.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;15003839*
> Luckily for us, downtown Chicago has 3 of the best-stocked stores around (except for NYC, those guys get Ado and B&H) in Helix, Calumet and Central. The bad part? *Cook County sales tax is 10.25%*.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead;15004245*
> *10% Here. And that's not enough, they're trying to raise it to 11.*
> 
> EDIT: Does anyone make a clamp that can attach to a normal tripod head so a camera can be attached to a fence? I've lost quite a few shots lately because I couldn't get the 4x5 camera to shoot through fences.


Damn, not surprising though. Still 6% here, but no one's beating down KY's door for camera gear.


----------



## Sean Webster

Hey GoneTomorrow, could you add me and my sig gear to the members list? And here's the link to my Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/seanwebsterhd/


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SeanWebster;15006942*
> Hey GoneTomorrow, could you add me and my sig gear to the members list? And here's the link to my Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/seanwebsterhd/


Done.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *seanwebster;15006942*
> hey gonetomorrow, could you add me and my sig gear to the members list? And here's the link to my flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/seanwebsterhd/
> 
> :d


nvm


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead;15005113*
> I need one of those rubber eyecups for a vivtar XC-3. I scratched the hell out of my last pair of glasses with it, and I really don't want that to happen again. They don't seem to be available though.


Try an eyecup for a Rebel. My 50D eyecup fits both my AE-1 and K1000.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;15007131*
> Done.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;15007155*
> You're actually already on there, but I updated your lens list.


Thanks!


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;15007155*
> You're actually already on there, but I updated your lens list.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;15007165*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ok, now you're messing with my head.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LOL


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;15007166*


Lol i was wondering why Gone wrote that lol.


----------



## Reddog9287

Hello, I'd like to join this club>

I'm currently a noob, I'm using a Nikon D3000 with a Nikkor 18-55mm and a Tamron XR DiII 18-200mm lens

I also have a Konica Minolta Dynax 5 but I don't have a lens


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Reddog9287;15007330*
> Hello, I'd like to join this club>
> 
> I'm currently a noob, I'm using a Nikon D3000 with a Nikkor 18-55mm and a Tamron XR DiII 18-200mm lens
> 
> I also have a Konica Minolta Dynax 5 but I don't have a lens


Well, we'll leave "noob" out of your entry..for now. Welcome to the club.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;15007156*
> Try an eyecup for a Rebel. My 50D eyecup fits both my AE-1 and K1000.


Don't think it'll work then. It's quite different than my Canon TL and E-410.










TL At the top, XC-3 at the bottom, with the E-410 eyecup placed on it. The most notable differences are that it's smaller than both, and the slot that would attach to the camera should be thicker.


----------



## sub50hz

Just shove it on there, it'll probably work. My Pentax takes a bit of motivation, but plastic is flexible.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;15007544*
> Just shove it on there, it'll probably work. My Pentax takes a bit of motivation, but plastic is flexible.


It'd break. The slot is more than twice as thick.

EDIT: It's 2.5mm thick, the canon is 1.


----------



## sub50hz

I meant a Rebel eyecup.


----------



## foothead

Well, if a rebel eyecup fits your AE-1, that makes it the same size as the TL. If I have to, I wouldn't be too averted to shaving the slot to make one fit, but obviously I'd rather not have to do that.

EDIT: 5 rolls of Portra 160NC and some smaller developing trays incoming from adorama. Hopefully they get here before Sunday.

Another edit: Ordered a Nikon eyecup for £1.57 from eBay.


----------



## Shane1244

The new mirror less Nikon's are such a let down. Tiny sensor.. I'd take a sony any day of the week.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Luckily for us, downtown Chicago has 3 of the best-stocked stores around (except for NYC, those guys get Ado and B&H) in Helix, Calumet and Central. The bad part? Cook County sales tax is 10.25%.



Quote:



Originally Posted by *foothead*


10% Here. And that's not enough, they're trying to raise it to 11.


20% here. So stop your whining.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Luckily for us, downtown Chicago has 3 of the best-stocked stores around (except for NYC, those guys get Ado and B&H) in Helix, Calumet and Central. The bad part? Cook County sales tax is 10.25%.


Not only do the NYC shops have better stock, (although I've found some hard to find items at Helix) but you we pay 0% sales tax which adds up on high ticket items. The NYC shops will also match prices, the Chicago shops will seldom if ever do so.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


Not only do the NYC shops have better stock, (although I've found some hard to find items at Helix) but you pay 0% sales tax which adds up on high ticket items. The NYC shops will also match prices, the Chicago shops will seldom if ever do so.


While what you say is true, it's really only practical if you have a 3-weekday window to wait for your items to arrive. I usually only buy online if I have time, since it's _usually_ more reasonable to pay the sales tax than pay for priority overnight shipping. The stuff I buy most often like film and small parts I prefer to buy locally because they're both available and easily accessible (LaGrange Camera has very good 35mm film stock). If you need something in a pinch or prefer to test a lens or something before you buy, there is no replacement for local businesses.

That being said, Helix _will_ price match if you sweet talk them. Calumet is really hit or miss, but the Oak Brook store is _always_ a no-go -- which is ok, as I've given up going there since a Pompei was put in a mile from my house (Orland).


----------



## Conspiracy

my first paycheck has finally come in the mail only a month late and paying me for one day worth of work. i hope to see the rest of my checks come soon and then on to search for my new lens purchase of hopefully a used lens. gotta call my producer to confirm im getting all my money otherwise my next lens purchase might not go as planned







but i feel pretty good that it will all work out


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*


my first paycheck has finally come in the mail only a month late and paying me for one day worth of work. i hope to see the rest of my checks come soon and then on to search for my new lens purchase of hopefully a used lens. gotta call my producer to confirm im getting all my money otherwise my next lens purchase might not go as planned







but i feel pretty good that it will all work out










Congrats!


----------



## MistaBernie

Found a nice deal on a 5Dc, working on selling the 60D for it so it's not costing me anything out of pocket.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


Found a nice deal on a 5Dc, working on selling the 60D for it so it's not costing me anything out of pocket.


I just noticed you have C-H's sig on POTN


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


i just noticed you have c-h's sig on potn










c-h?


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


c-h?


Console-Hater


----------



## MistaBernie

huh, didn't realize that.


----------



## Marin

http://www.engadget.com/2011/09/21/n...-cmos-2-7-inc/

Not impressed at all.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


While what you say is true, it's really only practical if you have a 3-weekday window to wait for your items to arrive. I usually only buy online if I have time, since it's _usually_ more reasonable to pay the sales tax than pay for priority overnight shipping. The stuff I buy most often like film and small parts I prefer to buy locally because they're both available and easily accessible (LaGrange Camera has very good 35mm film stock). If you need something in a pinch or prefer to test a lens or something before you buy, there is no replacement for local businesses.

That being said, Helix _will_ price match if you sweet talk them. Calumet is really hit or miss, but the Oak Brook store is _always_ a no-go -- which is ok, as I've given up going there since a Pompei was put in a mile from my house (Orland).


You're right, I'm talking about lenses, bodies, etc. As far as evaluating a lens, I returned three copies of my 70-200 2.8II before finding one that I was happy with. B&H was awesome with regard to the exchanges. I've also returned a lens because I didn't like it's performance. They also accepted the return no questions asked.

I've NEVER had a price matched at Helix or Calumet OB, NEVER.

I was at the Calumet in OB one day when the Induro rep was showing his gadgets and I asked him how his gimbal compared to a wemberly. He handed it to me and told me to try it for a month and get back to him. I liked it and contacted him to tell him as much and offered to return it. His response was "oh I forgot about that". He asked me to shoot him an email detailing my evaluation and told me I could keep it!! Not too shabby.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


You're right, I'm talking about lenses, bodies, etc. As far as evaluating a lens, I returned three copies of my 70-200 2.8II before finding one that I was happy with. B&H was awesome with regard to the exchanges. I've also returned a lens because I didn't like it's performance. They also accepted the return no questions asked.


That's good on B+H, actually a better experience than I had with a lens at Calumet in OB.

Quote:



I've NEVER had a price matched at Helix or Calumet OB, NEVER.


I worked sales for quite some time, and I've made some "arrangements" with the Helix guys based on being B2B beneficiaries.

Quote:



I was at the Calumet in OB one day when the Induro rep was showing his gadgets and I asked him how his gimbal compared to a wemberly. He handed it to me and told me to try it for a month and get back to him. I liked it and contacted him to tell him as much and offered to return it. His response was "oh I forgot about that". He asked me to shoot him an email detailing my evaluation and told me I could keep it!! Not too shabby.


That's wild -- how often do you get out and shoot? I should give you a holler next time I plan on being out that way.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


http://www.engadget.com/2011/09/21/n...-cmos-2-7-inc/

Not impressed at all.


Overwhelmingly unimpressed as well.


----------



## dudemanppl

Yay just sold a 35 1.4 and 105 macro for a friend in four hours while at school. Now I can use it to pay for an investment!


----------



## sub50hz

Great, now you can acquire another piece of gear to take pictures of on top of its own box!


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;15016571*
> Great, now you can acquire another piece of gear to take pictures of on top of its own box!


lol


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;15015055*
> http://www.engadget.com/2011/09/21/nikon-unveils-v1-and-j1-mirrorless-cameras-10-1mp-cmos-2-7-inc/
> 
> Not impressed at all.


2.7x crop. And here I am thinking m43 is already pushing it.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;15016484*
> Yay just sold a 35 1.4 and 105 macro for a friend in four hours while at school. Now I can use it to pay for an investment!


Ok, curiosity got the best of me. What are these investments you speak of? More gear? Playing in the stock market? Precious metals? Buying broken gear, fixing it, and reselling?


----------



## xxrabid93

So i got my Canon 70-200 2.8 a while ago. I haven't had much time to shoot, but i did some focus testing. It seems to back focus more so a 70mm than 200mm. It is noticeable at 70mm, and barely noticeable at 200mm.

I first tested it by just focusing on various items, and then i did a focus sheet test as shown here: http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/technical/focus_testing.html. Both shooting items, and the focusing sheet showed some back focus at 70mm and a little bit a 200mm. I setup everything correctly for the focusing test, and focused on the middle line. For reference, on the focus sheet in that link, at 70mm, the far 3 (or a little past it, maybe like a 4 or 5) would be the most in focus, and at 200mm, the far 1 would be the most in focus.

Any insight? Should i try and send it to Canon to get it calibrated? How much would that cost? How much would it cost to calibrate to my body, not just a general spec calibration?

Thanks


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie;15015541*
> Overwhelmingly unimpressed as well.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;15017055*
> 2.7x crop. And here I am thinking m43 is already pushing it.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;15015055*
> http://www.engadget.com/2011/09/21/nikon-unveils-v1-and-j1-mirrorless-cameras-10-1mp-cmos-2-7-inc/
> 
> Not impressed at all.


Check out DPReview's "defense" of Nikon's new cameras:

http://www.dpreview.com/articles/9716229576/why-make-a-small-sensor-mirrorless-camera

But I feel the same way. If, according to the DPReview article, buyers of such a camera "probably won't buy other lenses," then why make the V1/J1 with interchangeable lenses at all? The sensors are so small that making prime lenses will be pointless. Can't polish a turd.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xxrabid93;15017521*
> So i got my Canon 70-200 2.8 a while ago. I haven't had much time to shoot, but i did some focus testing. It seems to back focus more so a 70mm than 200mm. It is noticeable at 70mm, and barely noticeable at 200mm.
> 
> I first tested it by just focusing on various items, and then i did a focus sheet test as shown here: http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/technical/focus_testing.html. Both shooting items, and the focusing sheet showed some back focus at 70mm and a little bit a 200mm. I setup everything correctly for the focusing test, and focused on the middle line. For reference, on the focus sheet in that link, at 70mm, the far 3 (or a little past it, maybe like a 4 or 5) would be the most in focus, and at 200mm, the far 1 would be the most in focus.
> 
> Any insight? Should i try and send it to Canon to get it calibrated? How much would that cost? How much would it cost to calibrate to my body, not just a general spec calibration?
> 
> Thanks


Does your body have microadjust? I'd start with playing with that since its just barely off.


----------



## xxrabid93

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xxrabid93;15017521*
> So i got my Canon 70-200 2.8 a while ago. I haven't had much time to shoot, but i did some focus testing. It seems to back focus more so a 70mm than 200mm. It is noticeable at 70mm, and barely noticeable at 200mm.
> 
> I first tested it by just focusing on various items, and then i did a focus sheet test as shown here: http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/technical/focus_testing.html. Both shooting items, and the focusing sheet showed some back focus at 70mm and a little bit a 200mm. I setup everything correctly for the focusing test, and focused on the middle line. For reference, on the focus sheet in that link, at 70mm, the far 3 (or a little past it, maybe like a 4 or 5) would be the most in focus, and at 200mm, the far 1 would be the most in focus.
> 
> Any insight? Should i try and send it to Canon to get it calibrated? How much would that cost? How much would it cost to calibrate to my body, not just a general spec calibration?
> 
> Thanks


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg;15017683*
> Does your body have microadjust? I'd start with playing with that since its just barely off.


Nope, Canon 5D classic. No MA unfortunately.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

My response to DPR:
Quote:


> Producing a relatively small sensor mirrorless system provides a middle ground between compact cameras and DSLRs - precisely the kind of need that Panasonic, Sony and Olympus have been explicitly targeting.


Except Panasonic and Olympus use the bigger m43 sensor while Sony uses APS-C IIRC.
Quote:


> It's a market of people who would never buy a DSLR and (if they behave anything like entry-level DSLR buyers), probably won't buy other lenses either


1. Again, pointing to the other EVILs with m43 and APS-C. You don't need a sensor this small.
2. Those cameras don't behave like DSLRs.
3. If you're not going to buy lenses and don't want a DSLR, then why mirrorless? Based off this argument, why not a simple point and shoot with manual settings?
Quote:


> The 1" sensor allows the Nikon 1 system to fill a gap in the company's lineup without risking damaging its own DSLR sales.


EVILs and DSLRs are different enough that most people wouldn't directly compare the two. Most people I come across either want a compact system of an EVIL or the ergonomics and controls of a DSLR. Plus, Sony offers APS-C EVILs without cannibalizing its DSLR sales. If anything it pulls in people who want a DSLR sensor in a smaller package.
Quote:


> Such a system would also have a distinct size (and potentially price) advantage over the larger sensor mirrorless systems.


The cheaper package is 550 GBP, which comes out to $850 USD. Nikon already has cheaper DSLRs than that...

This shows why I'm not a fan of DPR. Bad logic annoys me very much.


----------



## Reddog9287

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;15007404*
> Well, we'll leave "noob" out of your entry..for now. Welcome to the club.


Haha okay thanks so much


----------



## foothead

Why does anyone even buy EVIL cameras? I can get an Olympus E-600 with two lenses for $399. It has a lot more features, a proper viewfinder, and better lenses for the same price or cheaper.

I played with one of those "mirrorless viewfinder" cameras at best buy and it made me want to puke. Why would they make it run at like 20 fps?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead;15018742*
> Why does anyone even buy EVIL cameras? I can get an Olympus E-600 with two lenses for $399. It has a lot more features, a proper viewfinder, and better lenses for the same price or cheaper.
> 
> I played with one of those "mirrorless viewfinder" cameras at best buy and it made me want to puke. Why would they make it run at like 20 fps?


Well, if I had money burning a hole in my pocket, I'd get an EVIL with a pancake prime just for the hell of it and keep in the glove box. However, I feel the same way about them in general; I prefer to have my DSLR 10 to 1 even though it means hauling around lots of gear.

ALSO:

It's raining fruity cameras!


----------



## ljason8eg

Lol those just scream "steal me!!"


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

I seriously want to chew on those cameras. Downside of fruity colors.


----------



## sub50hz

My first thought at all of those colors was "How Not to be Seen." Anybody who knows what I am referencing is awesome.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;15019209*
> My first thought at all of those colors was "How Not to be Seen." Anybody who knows what I am referencing is awesome.


Monty Python


----------



## sub50hz

Wow, it only took a minute, lol.

edit: You can reveal a lot about someone's age just by posting things like that.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;15019248*
> Wow, it only took a minute, lol.
> 
> edit: You can reveal a lot about someone's age just by posting things like that.


Or if they were ever in AP classes back in high school









Seriously, you start burning through so many movies when you take AP tests in May but school does not end until June.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;15018932*
> Well, if I had money burning a hole in my pocket, I'd get an EVIL with a pancake prime just for the hell of it and keep in the glove box. However, I feel the same way about them in general; I prefer to have my DSLR 10 to 1 even though it means hauling around lots of gear.


Olympus E-450 + 25/2.8 pancake. Weighs less than 500 grams.










I played with an E-PL3 a while back, and it actually felt bigger than my E-410.

I've actually thought about getting that lens for hiking, but it's only like 100 grams more to carry around the kit lens, which is worth it imo.


----------



## sub50hz

I remember watching A Clockwork Orange in my AP Lit class senior year. The techer retired the following year, which sucks because I got to read a ton of awesome stuff in that class, sad to think how many kids are missing out.


----------



## sub50hz

I guess while we're steering this thread off-topic for the nine millionth time, I'm going to go watch Blues Brothers for..... about the nine millionth time.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;15019248*
> Wow, it only took a minute, lol.
> 
> edit: You can reveal a lot about someone's age just by posting things like that.


Yeah, and especially when they have old characters from Kubrick classics in their avvy.







And that's kind of on topic since Kubrick had the famous Zeiss 50mm f/0.7 lens commission specially for Barry Lyndon.

I loved Comedy Central when they used to show Flying Circus. "Mrs. Smegma, will you stand up please?"








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead;15019549*
> Olympus E-450 + 25/2.8 pancake. Weighs less than 500 grams.
> 
> I played with an E-PL3 a while back, and it actually felt bigger than my E-410.
> 
> I've actually thought about getting that lens for hiking, but it's only like 100 grams more to carry around the kit lens, which is worth it imo.


True enough, and it has an optical VF to boot.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;15019559*
> I remember watching A Clockwork Orange in my AP Lit class senior year. The techer retired the following year, which sucks because I got to read a ton of awesome stuff in that class, sad to think how many kids are missing out.


Thankfully a colleague of mine teaches a great film crit class here; they start with Edison's early silent films.


----------



## ljason8eg

I got my 50 1.4 back from Canon again for the third time. Its still broken!









I still get front focus on everything past 8-10 feet away from me. I tried shooting the same stuff in live view x10 and the focus is dead on. Once again it does the same exact thing on my 7D and T2i. What should I do now? I'm afraid if I call Canon they're just going to want it back again, which I'm done with.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*


I got my 50 1.4 back from Canon again for the third time. Its still broken!









I still get front focus on everything past 8-10 feet away from me. I tried shooting the same stuff in live view x10 and the focus is dead on. Once again it does the same exact thing on my 7D and T2i. What should I do now? I'm afraid if I call Canon they're just going to want it back again, which I'm done with.


That sucks...did you send your body in with it? If you didn't you could try that once more. If you don't just sell it and grab the sigma 50 1.4. Or the 50L...


----------



## sub50hz

Lemon Law?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*


I got my 50 1.4 back from Canon again for the third time. Its still broken!









I still get front focus on everything past 8-10 feet away from me. I tried shooting the same stuff in live view x10 and the focus is dead on. Once again it does the same exact thing on my 7D and T2i. What should I do now? I'm afraid if I call Canon they're just going to want it back again, which I'm done with.


Wow, this really sucks. I'd be pretty fed up as well at this point. I would call Canon up again and demand a new copy. I don't see how they could refuse at this point. You could also ask them if you could send your body in with the lens, so that they can see for themselves. Afterall, surely they test a lens after being repaired?


----------



## xxrabid93

Quote:



Originally Posted by *xxrabid93*


So i got my Canon 70-200 2.8 a while ago. I haven't had much time to shoot, but i did some focus testing. It seems to back focus more so a 70mm than 200mm. It is noticeable at 70mm, and barely noticeable at 200mm.

I first tested it by just focusing on various items, and then i did a focus sheet test as shown here: http://www.bobatkins.com/photography...s_testing.html. Both shooting items, and the focusing sheet showed some back focus at 70mm and a little bit a 200mm. I setup everything correctly for the focusing test, and focused on the middle line. For reference, on the focus sheet in that link, at 70mm, the far 3 (or a little past it, maybe like a 4 or 5) would be the most in focus, and at 200mm, the far 1 would be the most in focus.

Any insight? Should i try and send it to Canon to get it calibrated? How much would that cost? How much would it cost to calibrate to my body, not just a general spec calibration?

Thanks










Anyone? This thread always has so much activity so my posts seem to get buried alot.


----------



## ljason8eg

I did not send my body in with it. I asked the last two times and they told me that's not necessary because it does the same thing on both bodies. I dunno if that's right, that's just what the guy on the phone told me.

The funny thing is, the first time I sent it in, they told me "the adjustment of the AF assembly was incorrect. The AF did not operate properly. Electrical adjustments were carried out on the AF assembly and *product functions were confirmed*"

Now, the paper I got today says "your product has been examined and *it was found that the lens assembly did not operate properly* causing the focus to operate improperly" Now how in the hell did it work when it left the first time, but not a week later when they got it back because it was still broken?

I also don't think it would be a good idea to sell it, since I really do think something is wrong with it and I don't want to screw someone that would be getting a lens that potentially doesn't function correctly.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xxrabid93;15020370*
> Anyone? This thread always has so much activity so my posts seem to get buried alot.


Got any real-world examples illustrating the problem? You can e-mail Canon and at least get a quote.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg;15020385*
> I did not send my body in with it. I asked the last two times and they told me that's not necessary because it does the same thing on both bodies. I dunno if that's right, that's just what the guy on the phone told me.
> 
> The funny thing is, the first time I sent it in, they told me "the adjustment of the AF assembly was incorrect. The AF did not operate properly. Electrical adjustments were carried out on the AF assembly and *product functions were confirmed*"
> 
> Now, the paper I got today says "your product has been examined and *it was found that the lens assembly did not operate properly* causing the focus to operate improperly" Now how in the hell did it work when it left the first time, but not a week later when they got it back because it was still broken?
> 
> I also don't think it would be a good idea to sell it, since I really do think something is wrong with it and I don't want to screw someone that would be getting a lens that potentially doesn't function correctly.


Wow, I would definitely make a big stink, but that's me. As I said, demand a brand new replacement or refund barring that.


----------



## ljason8eg

Just to illustrate what I'm dealing with here, here's two shots at f/2.0, 7D on a tripod. Focus is on the knot in the tree trunk. The first shot is live view 10x, the second is through the viewfinder with spot focus. Check them out at original res, though its even apparent at much less.


Focus test-live view by JLofing, on Flickr


Focus test-viewfinder by JLofing, on Flickr


----------



## sub50hz

Hah! Same thing my 85 did, and that took 2 trips to Canon before it was right.

Also, interesting note, my Nifty takes +20 on the 50D, but 0 on the 1D and 1N. Weirdness.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Hah! Same thing my 85 did, and that took 2 trips to Canon before it was right.

Also, interesting note, my Nifty takes +20 on the 50D, but 0 on the 1D and 1N. Weirdness.


I'm glad I'm not the only one that has had a problem like this lol!

I wish MA would fix my problem. Thing is, its spot on from MFD to 7-8 feet, then goes to hell.


----------



## foothead

Does canon not test their lenses or something? This seems way too common.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *foothead*


Does canon not test their lenses or something? This seems way too common.


If I had to chalk it up to anything, it would be the variety of AF systems in EF bodies, even in the current lineup. Most of them are anomalies, and it really isn't as prevalent as you think.


----------



## ljason8eg

Yeah I don't think its a widespread thing. The silent majority is busy having fun shooting with lenses that AF correctly while the vocal minority is busy on a forum *****ing about their copy that doesn't.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg;15021107*
> Yeah I don't think its a widespread thing. *The silent majority is busy having fun shooting with lenses that AF correctly while the vocal minority is busy on a forum *****ing about their copy that doesn't.*


Very true, a fact which calls into question how frequent Sigma lens issues are.


----------



## BlankThis

Pull a switcheroo


----------



## ljason8eg

Well I called tech support again and all he could do was send me another label to send it back in since the service center has been closed for a couple hours. Obviously that's not good enough for me. Guess I'll call back tomorrow morning and have a chat with the service center.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *BlankThis*


Pull a switcheroo


That is a possibility. We'll see what the service center has to say before I take that route.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *foothead*


Why does anyone even buy EVIL cameras? I can get an Olympus E-600 with two lenses for $399. It has a lot more features, a proper viewfinder, and better lenses for the same price or cheaper.

I played with one of those "mirrorless viewfinder" cameras at best buy and it made me want to puke. Why would they make it run at like 20 fps?


cause you can mount any lens on it and the camera is smaller with the same IQ as a DSLR.

EVIL serves a different purpose then regular DSLR, i will never give up my DSLR for a EVIL, even a lecia m9. I will buy a EVIL by the beginning of next year so i dont have to carry around 4lbs of camera gear just to take a picture.


----------



## BlankThis

Jason you're a very patient man. Good on you









dudemanppl, why can I not find a decently priced 1D3?


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:



Originally Posted by *BlankThis*


Jason you're a very patient man. Good on you










I try to be. I could go all hardcore rage mode but I don't think that'd get me anywhere. Plus I'd have a headache afterward.


----------



## foothead

Definitely not pretty, but it works well. I'll see how much actual use I get, then decide if I want to make a better one or not.

EDIT: for anyone who doesn't remember, it's a left-handed grip for my DSLR.


----------



## Sean Webster

That makes me rofl. lol What is it made out of?


----------



## mz-n10

how do you hit the shutter?


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *SeanWebster*


That makes me rofl. lol What is it made out of?


Aluminum strips, paper, and lots of bondo.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


how do you hit the shutter?


There are two buttons drilled into it, one on the back to focus, one on the top to activate the shutter. I took the cable from a $3 shutter release from ebay and used tact switches I pulled from an old VCR.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*


Ok, curiosity got the best of me. What are these investments you speak of? More gear? Playing in the stock market? Precious metals? Buying broken gear, fixing it, and reselling?


Buy broken gear for cheap on anything but ebay, sell it stupidly expensive on ebay. Buying a 5D, 5DII, 35L, 50 1.4, Sigma 85 1.4, 70-200 2.8 IS II, and some 580s or something all waterdamaged for 2000.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *BlankThis*


dudemanppl, why can I not find a decently priced 1D3?


Simply put, because you're Canadian.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *foothead*


There are two buttons drilled into it, one on the back to focus, one on the top to activate the shutter. I took the cable from a $3 shutter release from ebay and used tact switches I pulled from an old VCR.


Didn't know MacGyver frequented the forums...

Jason, I would have sent that lens straight back to wherever the hell it came from. I've only had two duds, a Sigma 24 1.8 and a 35L (surprisingly) The Sigma needed +18, straight back to the seller who said he had calibrated it... I sold the 35L to some guy for more than I paid though.


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Didn't know MacGyver frequented the forums...


Lol. You should see my laptop. That thing is nuts.










Here's what it looks in hand. This camera is freaking tiny, so it looks kinda funny.










Took like ten minutes to get this picture off my FE-210 (didn't want to drop my phone taking such an awkward picture) because it kept giving me a card error. Bleh, I hope it's the card, not the camera.


----------



## dudemanppl

Oh so you did finish the GhettoBook, I stopped following mods... ALSO, why do you have nail polish?


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Oh so you did finish the GhettoBook, I stopped following mods...


It's far enough along that I can call it finished. Every once in a while, I'll think of something else I need to do.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


ALSO, why do you have nail polish?


Because I feel like it.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*


I got my 50 1.4 back from Canon again for the third time. Its still broken!









I still get front focus on everything past 8-10 feet away from me. I tried shooting the same stuff in live view x10 and the focus is dead on. Once again it does the same exact thing on my 7D and T2i. What should I do now? I'm afraid if I call Canon they're just going to want it back again, which I'm done with.


You'd be better off returning it to the store you got it from, then just buying a new one.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*


I try to be. I could go all hardcore rage mode but I don't think that'd get me anywhere. Plus I'd have a headache afterward.


You'd be surprised how well rage mode can work, especially when all else has failed. Just sayin'.









Quote:



Originally Posted by *foothead*


Aluminum strips, paper, and lots of bondo.


Sounds like my first car. <rimshot>

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*


You'd be better off returning it to the store you got it from, then just buying a new one.


I should hope so, though he might be past the return window, or it could be used.


----------



## BlankThis

Just do a swap at a best buy you never plan on using again. Pay cash.


----------



## MistaBernie

switcheroo wont work if you're trying to switch it with a NIB, they check for the warranty card, and they check the SN. Unless, of course, you have the blank warranty card for the other one.. then in that case, I'd hate to see the look on the face of the guy that gets a "good deal" at BB for buying an open box and calls up about an issue, only to hear it's been returned 3x by someone else..

(Not that I don't actually condone this. I seemed to recall having similar issues with my 50 f/1.4 on my 60D (sharp in live view, not always thru VF), but that doesn't make it whichever company you return it to's fault.. I can totally agree that it would be frustrating to have to deal with, but I seriously think you should just call the service center and let them know you've had the lens back twice now, tried it on multiple bodies and had the same issue on both, and that you believe it's time they send you a new copy).


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *foothead*


Because I feel like it.


----------



## xxrabid93

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Got any real-world examples illustrating the problem? You can e-mail Canon and at least get a quote.


Here are the focus test sheets. I cropped in on the sheet for both so you can see the focus better. Focus should be on the middle line (that is where i focused).

Here is at 70mm f/2.8:










Here is at 200mm f/2.8:










I did multiple tests of both, and manually focused back to infinity between tests so the AF would start from the same place, and these results were pretty consistent.


----------



## MistaBernie

I _always_ forget, do they tell you to test at the widest or the longest? It seems like at 200 it's pretty close, but it definitely appears to be back focusing pretty strong @ 70..

also, not to imply the obvious here, but you were on a tripod, right?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *xxrabid93*


Here are the focus test sheets. I cropped in on the sheet for both so you can see the focus better. Focus should be on the middle line (that is where i focused).

Here is at 70mm f/2.8:

Here is at 200mm f/2.8:

I did multiple tests of both, and manually focused back to infinity between tests so the AF would start from the same place, and these results were pretty consistent.


I see what you mean, but by "real world examples," I meant shots in the field, from whatever it is you shoot with it. I don't always trust focus test charts, especially downloaded PDF ones.


----------



## dudemanppl

If you calibrate for 70, you'll be off at 200. I'd just leave it be if you shoot at 200 mostly.

360 for LNIB Sig 10-20 for Canon: http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1046037
Just passin' around deals.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;15026260*
> Just passin' around deals.


any minolta/sony love?


----------



## dudemanppl

Well I don't look for Sony stuff... :3


----------



## Conspiracy

GAH!!!!!!!

i need that sigma 10-20 but i dont have all my money yet!!!

im disliking my job right now. i got one paycheck but it was only for my first day of work i have not yet got the rest of my checks for my 5 other days of work...

i pm'ed him anyway to try and get a deal for $300 and i only have cash :|

i wish he lived in GA rather than VA







id skip class to go buy it from him today


----------



## MistaBernie

I keep hearing all these rumors that 5DII prices are dropping.. apparently bodies can be found NIB from CAN for $1999...


----------



## dudemanppl

Bernie, that 5D you're looking at is pretty nice. If you want to replace the bottom plate it would take 10 minutes and like 15 dollars. I'd do it for free if you buy the part.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy;15026615*
> GAH!!!!!!!
> 
> i need that sigma 10-20 but i dont have all my money yet!!!
> 
> im disliking my job right now. i got one paycheck but it was only for my first day of work i have not yet got the rest of my checks for my 5 other days of work...
> 
> i pm'ed him anyway to try and get a deal for $300 and i only have cash :|
> 
> i wish he lived in GA rather than VA
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> id skip class to go buy it from him today


Did you sign an actual contract for this job? I wouldn't work anywhere that doesn't pay when I'm supposed to be paid. Unemployment pays on time at least.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;15026731*
> Did you sign an actual contract for this job? I wouldn't work anywhere that doesn't pay when I'm supposed to be paid. Unemployment pays on time at least.


yea i did but its a government job so they are slow to pay









i work for Georgia Public Broadcasting which is owned by PBS

being a lead camera operator for a live sports broadcast looks better on my resume than unemployment lol


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;15026655*
> Bernie, that 5D you're looking at is pretty nice. If you want to replace the bottom plate it would take 10 minutes and like 15 dollars. I'd do it for free if you buy the part.


I have a line on another one for a trade for my 60D.. I'm still thinking about it, but I'm weirded out that they offered me cash on top of my 60D + grip.. but I also have a line on someone locally buying my stuff for $900 and then turning around and buying the one I'm looking at on FM.

I may take you up on that.


----------



## ljason8eg

Well 45 minutes on the phone with Canon and I'm not sure what was accomplished. Obviously they won't refund me, and I'm past my return window for Amazon so they want it back at the service center. I even showed them the same pictures I posted in this thread and the guy was like "oh yeah that should be easily fixed!" I reminded him of the situation and he just went silent.

Supposedly, if the senior technician says the lens can't be fixed, I get a new one. I pressed and pressed on getting a replacement now and they wouldn't budge, so I'm expecting the same broken lens back in a couple weeks.

I asked the most senior supervisor that I spoke with why they keep wanting it back, its a $379 lens. Its not like we're trying to fix a 400/2.8 or a 500/4, this is a cheap ass 50/1.4! He said he didn't know how to answer that question....

Maybe I'll be surprised and they will replace it but man, I really doubt it with what has happened so far.


----------



## MistaBernie

Best of luck man, certainly a not great situation









ARGH, I have an option of a replaced shutter 5D that looks great (~20k on the new shutter) _plus $50_, and I'm still balking on a trade (shutter replacement done by previous owner)...

Wait, if I call Canon will the service center tell me if they replaced the shutter? If they do that.. hm. Back in a bit..


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie;15026803*
> Best of luck man, certainly a not great situation


Yeah it pretty much sucks. I mean, I could do the whole switcheroo but there's a huge paper trail with this lens, including my name and address lol. Now maybe whoever bought my lens if I did the switch would be happy with it, but if they're not and they call Canon about it I'm just paranoid it'll all be traced back to me.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg;15026829*
> Yeah it pretty much sucks. I mean, I could do the whole switcheroo but there's a huge paper trail with this lens, including my name and address lol. Now maybe whoever bought my lens if I did the switch would be happy with it, but if they're not and they call Canon about it I'm just paranoid it'll all be traced back to me.


Yeah, I dont think a switcheroo would be worth the risk. Try to sell it locally maybe and cut the loss a bit is about all I would do if it comes back again not working. Bring the latest receipt from the repair because it will either say 'fixed AF, etc' or they'll give you a new one (hopefully!).


----------



## Conspiracy

i dont even remember what your original problem was that left you with a broken canon 50 1.4...

im kind of glad im not interested in that lens although i do know its a pretty good value


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy;15026890*
> i dont even remember what your original problem was that left you with a broken canon 50 1.4...
> 
> im kind of glad im not interested in that lens although i do know its a pretty good value


I was in Charlotte on Memorial Day weekend for a race when the AF froze up. I sent it in to get it fixed, got it back and the AF worked so I was happy. I used the lens for the model train pics on my Flickr after it came back and they seemed fine. Now I know they seemed fine because the subjects were all really close to me.

I noticed the problem when I went camping in August. Bad front focus when the subject was ~10 feet away or more. At the time I figured low light...eh must not have been enough light to focus on my T2i.

Then I got my 7D and confirmed that something was really wrong and the focus was way off. Easy to replicate, the whole bit. Now its been back to Canon twice and it came back both times with the same issue.

And now you know the rest of the story.


----------



## Conspiracy

yea ill pass on the canon 50 1.4

sorry to hear your having to go through all this.


----------



## ljason8eg

I won't lie, its a pretty crappy situation. I'd like to have it or some other prime around its range before I leave for Charlotte again on October 10th. Might just have to bite the bullet and buy something else and deal with the lens when I come back, assuming they don't replace it.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg;15027011*
> I won't lie, its a pretty crappy situation. I'd like to have it or some other prime around its range before I leave for Charlotte again on October 10th. Might just have to bite the bullet and buy something else and deal with the lens when I come back, assuming they don't replace it.


i think its time to just buy a used 50/1.8. if canon ends up replacing your 50/1.4 you could always sell the 50/1.8 for the price you paid.


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;15026260*
> If you calibrate for 70, you'll be off at 200. I'd just leave it be if you shoot at 200 mostly.
> 
> 360 for LNIB Sig 10-20 for Canon: http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1046037
> Just passin' around deals.


Might be mine... My credit card needs to get ASAP.


----------



## MistaBernie

The 50 isn't all that bad. I was trying to test out my 85 on my 7D yesterday, and I realized my aperture was down to 1.4, I was like 'huh? -- oh...' because I had the 50 on. It was focusing like a champ though.

Unrelated, but I find it such a pain to go from the 7D to the 60D. It's like after my brain has made the first mistake of where certain buttons are, it seems to be like '7D time/60D time' and then it's fine..


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10;15027453*
> i think its time to just buy a used 50/1.8. if canon ends up replacing your 50/1.4 you could always sell the 50/1.8 for the price you paid.


Or a Sigma 30!









My shipping label they gave my says "ATTN: Supervisor" on it and I wrote him a nice letter inside complete with a CD with 10 pictures on it illustrating what is wrong. If I get a broken lens back a third time, I won't be so nice.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg;15028138*
> Or a Sigma 30!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My shipping label they gave my says "ATTN: Supervisor" on it and I wrote him a nice letter inside complete with a CD with 10 pictures on it illustrating what is wrong. If I get a broken lens back a third time, I won't be so nice.


I handle our returns and repairs here, and I can confidently say that this should _never_ happen, and they better be using a UPS call tag instead of making you pay shipping.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;15028708*
> I handle our returns and repairs here, and I can confidently say that this should _never_ happen, and they better be using a UPS call tag instead of making you pay shipping.


I haven't paid shipping since the original repair when the AF died.


----------



## sub50hz

That's good. I wouldn't be surprised if you get a little "goodie package" when that lens/a new lens comes back to you.


----------



## mz-n10

maybe theyll upgrade u to a 50/1.2L


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10;15028983*
> maybe theyll upgrade u to a 50/1.2L


Or maybe they'll just take his f/1.4 and paint a red ring around it.


----------



## MistaBernie

I still want a white one of those.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;15028952*
> That's good. I wouldn't be surprised if you get a little "goodie package" when that lens/a new lens comes back to you.


What are the contents of said goodie package?








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10;15028983*
> maybe theyll upgrade u to a 50/1.2L


Lol wouldn't that be something? I think I'd sell it TBH. Fund a couple other lenses.


----------



## dudemanppl

Canon won't give you anything extra.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;15029193*
> Canon won't give you anything extra.


Even if it's just a coupon, they'll give him something. The general rule in manufacturing is "3rd time's the charm", aka "losing a customer". They give you a small benefit to sideline your frustration so that you keep buying their stuff. If they don't, well, Canon sucks at customer satisfaction.


----------



## MistaBernie

I think they should send him this.


----------



## ljason8eg

Assuming the body and lens come together, yes!!


----------



## mortimersnerd

We are doing a photo contest for ftwpc products. If you have any of our products, I'm sure a lot of really good photos could come out of this group.

http://www.overclock.net/ftw-pc/1123...00-prizes.html


----------



## Conspiracy

thanks for sharing. if i owned some of your stuff i would participate


----------



## Marin

Cool.


----------



## dudemanppl

Damn, don't have anything from you guys.







Nikon 17-55 2.8 vs 35L at 2.8, actually very very similar. If the 17-55 didn't have vignetting, it'd be hard to tell the difference.


----------



## MistaBernie

POTN, why you no buy my 60D w/ BG-E9? Everyone's flakey mc flackerperson that I've been dealing with... I've got one guy locally that I just chopped the price for and one guy 'asking for his girlfriend', which in itself seems sketch (especially since they asked if the AA grip was included w/ the BG-E9, when the picture of what's included clearly shows it next to the camera body).

Man, I might need to put my foot down and just say the hell with it and just hold onto it. I found a couple of VERY nice deals on 5Ds but most end up costing me money, not worth it yet (since i'm not shooting in a professional capacity really).

And FM is a weird bunch. I got a couple of PM's asking my price on the 60D kit I have.. I'm so used to treating that as sketch, but the first guy that msg'ed me was at like 12k posts..

Also, I legit want someone to make my 50 look like the one above. Probably cost half the lens to do it though.. and I'd never be able to get rid of it to anyone on POTN..


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie;15037150*
> POTN, why you no buy my 60D w/ BG-E9? Everyone's flakey mc flackerperson that I've been dealing with... I've got one guy locally that I just chopped the price for and one guy 'asking for his girlfriend', which in itself seems sketch (especially since they asked if the AA grip was included w/ the BG-E9, when the picture of what's included clearly shows it next to the camera body).
> 
> Man, I might need to put my foot down and just say the hell with it and just hold onto it. I found a couple of VERY nice deals on 5Ds but most end up costing me money, not worth it yet (since i'm not shooting in a professional capacity really).
> 
> And FM is a weird bunch. I got a couple of PM's asking my price on the 60D kit I have.. I'm so used to treating that as sketch, but the first guy that msg'ed me was at like 12k posts..
> 
> Also, I legit want someone to make my 50 look like the one above. Probably cost half the lens to do it though.. and I'd never be able to get rid of it to anyone on POTN..


Hard to say, but it seems to me that the 60D has been very popular, so there are a lot of 60D owners out there, hence not a great demand for them. Plus, since they are fairly new, most used prices are not much lower than retail, so perhaps most would prefer just to buy new for not much more and get a warranty. I'd say either drop the price or hang onto it for a while, or sign up at Fred Miranda and try it there.

About the lens, I bet someone here at OCN could powder coat it, or via some other method (not sure what the best method of painting would be). Lots of case modders here who are very knowledgeable about such things. And I would think that it would sell for a premium price on POTN very easily, considering the novelty and uniqueness of it.

Someone should paint the Canon 17-55/2.8 to look like an L lens, just to piss everyone off (some 17-55 owners like to put "17-55 f/2.8L in their sigs because they think it's L quality).


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

If I had the spare cash, I'd certainly pay a premium for an "L" 50 f/1.4. In fact, if you do decide to go through with it MB, let me know. I might be interested in doing the same for my 30.

On a side note, yay all nighter?


----------



## Conspiracy

wish my tv show work had more money. i keep getting stuck having to take stills while out on video shoots and i would totally rather be running a 2nd camera.

and they make me use a nikon d90 with a 18-55 which is weird to use because everything is backwards lol


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;15037409*
> Hard to say, but it seems to me that the 60D has been very popular, so there are a lot of 60D owners out there, hence not a great demand for them. Plus, since they are fairly new, most used prices are not much lower than retail, so perhaps most would prefer just to buy new for not much more and get a warranty. I'd say either drop the price or hang onto it for a while, or sign up at Fred Miranda and try it there.
> 
> About the lens, I bet someone here at OCN could powder coat it, or via some other method (not sure what the best method of painting would be). Lots of case modders here who are very knowledgeable about such things. And I would think that it would sell for a premium price on POTN very easily, considering the novelty and uniqueness of it.
> 
> Someone should paint the Canon 17-55/2.8 to look like an L lens, just to piss everyone off (some 17-55 owners like to put "17-55 f/2.8L in their sigs because they think it's L quality).


Yeah.. I was a bit concerned about the whole price thing.. someone offered an OK price, I came back with a counter offer. If they accept, I'll probably move it at that price; if not, I'll probably pull it. I have found a couple of very nice 5Ds for reasonable prices and it would be awesome to have, but at the same time, I'm wondering if I should just sell my 17-50 on top of it and wait till the 1st of October and grab myself either a refurb 5Dii or a NIB (I keep hearing about new refurbs).

also, the powder coating wouldn't really be the issue. The issue would be the details (the red ring, the focus window, the logos..)


----------



## IXcrispyXI

Hi i was just wondering if anyone could give me some tips to getting better shots with a camera, ive only got a sony cybershot so nothing spectacular, just wondering what sort of settings i could put on to make my shots colours look more realistic, vibrant, just so things stad out better i guess


----------



## Shane1244

You can do a bit of sharpening, boost saturation and contrast.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *IXcrispyXI;15037911*
> Hi i was just wondering if anyone could give me some tips to getting better shots with a camera, ive only got a sony cybershot so nothing spectacular, just wondering what sort of settings i could put on to make my shots colours look more realistic, vibrant, just so things stad out better i guess


Edit colors in post. Play with color saturation, vibrancy, and contrast. Keep in mind though that oversaturation is a very common problem and that overdoing it simply makes your photo look, for lack of a better word, noobish.

Although I think that framing and composition is more integral to a great photo than color saturation.


----------



## Shane1244

Also, You might want to have a look at split toning.


----------



## foothead

Definitely keep saturation down. I cannot stand looking at otherwise good pictures that people ruin by cranking it to 200%.


----------



## MistaBernie

Screw it, I'm gonna wait for Canon's next FF offering and see what that does for prices... I dont NEED full frame right now, and it's been a workhorse of a camera while I had it (even if I have to re-teach myself how to shoot with it every time I pick it up now since buying the 60D). I might not get quite as much for it if I sell it later, but by the time Canon's new stuff comes out, I should have my annual bonus anyway.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead;15038293*
> Definitely keep saturation down. I cannot stand looking at otherwise good pictures that people ruin by cranking it to 200%.


Badly tone mapped HDR with oversaturated colors and more halos than a Church's stained glass windows?


----------



## BlankThis

Any interested in a D90? Absolutely perfect condition, LNIB.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;15038816*
> Badly tone mapped HDR with oversaturated colors and more halos than a Church's stained glass windows?


Oh gosh, I hate HDR. The only situation where I've ever seen it look good is sunsets.

It seems I got the last three rolls of portra from Adorama. They just refunded me $10.


----------



## sub50hz

Haha, I _told_ you 160NC was hard to find.


----------



## mz-n10

all this talk about film is making me want to buy a film minolta body....


----------



## dudemanppl

Portra 400 + ND filters.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Portra 400 + ND filters.


Nope. Portra 160 is infinitely cleaner than 400, there _is_ a reason it's hard to find.


----------



## xxrabid93

What would be the cause of a really stiff focus ring?

On one of my old Nikkor 50mm 1.4 lenses, its focus ring is really hard to turn for about 3/4 of the focusing distance, and then it loosens up a bit when you get near infinity focus, but still tighter than my other lenses.

Also, the filter that is on it has a dent, so i am thinking it was dropped at one point. Could that have to do with the stiff focus?


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Haha, I _told_ you 160NC was hard to find.


LOL, you were right. I guess I'll try the new 160 after I finish this. It doesn't seem to have that nice washed out look though.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


all this talk about film is making me want to buy a film minolta body....


Do it. Or get an old Konica autoreflex. Those Hexanon lenses are amazing.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *foothead*


LOL, you were right. I guess I'll try the new 160 after I finish this. It doesn't seem to have that nice washed out look though.


Avoid the new stuff then, as it's closer to VC than NC. I'm surprised your 160NC isn't washed out enough, I'll have to find you an example of something a friend of mine recently shot with it.


----------



## dudemanppl

Who cares how "clean" it is when you can get the picture anyway because of motion blur? For 120/220 I'd get 400 then push it to 800 because the lenses are slower.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *foothead*


Do it. Or get an old Konica autoreflex. Those Hexanon lenses are amazing.


no dice, i already some SR mount minolta, plus i shoot sony so all FF alpha mount.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Who cares how "clean" it is when you can get the picture anyway because of motion blur? For 120/220 I'd get 400 then push it to 800 because the lenses are slower.


This post shows your lack of experience. If he's going to shoot landscapes, slower film with less grain is going to be better than PUSHING faster film -- 99% of people shooting larger formats shoot most of their work off a tripod anyway.


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Who cares how "clean" it is when you can get the picture anyway because of motion blur? For 120/220 I'd get 400 then push it to 800 because the lenses are slower.


Wait, what? My camera only goes to 1/1000 second. 800 ISO would be unusable most of the time except for the really tiny apertures, which would cause me to lose sharpness.

F2.8 isn't really slow...


----------



## dudemanppl

My camera only goes to 1/1000 too. I have faster 1.4 lenses yet I still use ISO 400. Just get an ND filter.

Also, sub I don't know if this is 4x5 or 120. I don't know what he shoots, but what I shoot I'd need ISO 800. 2.8 800 = 1.4 200 which is too slow for me.


----------



## scottath

I know you lot are all talking about your film....but,
Looking at a cheapish flash - and im almost sold on a Yongnuo YN-565EX - unless someone wants to talk me out of it / recommend something of a similar price range
Probably buy it early next week

The other consideration - looking at long exposure daytime photography - so im looking at a B+W 110 or a Hoya ND400 - opinions on either of them would be appreciated as well.

Thanks


----------



## dudemanppl

If that's a more powerful version of the 468 then get it, my 460IIs have yet to fail me and have a wonderful price to epicness ratio.


----------



## scottath

yea its a 580exII knock off basically.... - i ninja edited if you know anything on ND's too


----------



## dudemanppl

http://lightcraftworkshop.com/product.php?id=2
Slow website, great product.


----------



## scottath

ouch - dont have that much to spend - the non-ultra looks ok though. ive not heard anything about that brand though.....hmm


----------



## dudemanppl

Well, cinematographers love it. They aren't so big with still photographers since nobody uses ND filters anymore.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;15046367*
> Well, cinematographers love it. They aren't so big with still photographers since nobody uses ND filters anymore.


Hey! I used one...once lol. They are very handy during the day when you want to photo water moving to make it like silk or fog.


----------



## dudemanppl

Yeah, probably 0.0001% of the current generation understands that.


----------



## wizek

I want to join the club!








I have a Canon 600D
and a film camera, Canon AE1.


----------



## scottath

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SeanWebster;15046418*
> Hey! I used one...once lol. They are very handy during the day when you want to photo water moving to make it like silk or fog.


yea - if you take a look through most of my images they are rather late at night - 30+ sec exposures.....i love them - long exposures + 3:1 crops


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scottath;15046896*
> yea - if you take a look through most of my images they are rather late at night - 30+ sec exposures.....i love them - long exposures + 3:1 crops


Yeah, I've seen them, they are very nice. I haven't taken many long exposure shots myself. I think I'll try some out now lol. Also, how do you take the photos of the stars like this: http://www.flickr.com/photos/scottath/6079501646/in/photostream









I've tried before but it was crap. It there a process like stacking images?


----------



## scottath

alot of people like that image.....
exif should be intact though. Thats actually a single image
ISO1600, f4.5, 30 sec, 11mm, 550D

That was just a special night - with the fog etc and its a good 20km from the nearest major town.....

I love my long exposure night shots and my 3:1s (as you probably noticed on my flickr) - and its what im best at doing....doing a wedding in December though so that will be interesting :/

easiest method for long exposure:

use as high and iso as possible to compose.
set iso to <400 (on my 550d at least, your 60 has the same sensor so the same applies)
sit and wait









as a general idea
iso 400 for no moon
iso 100 if possible (full moon etc)
If you want stars like in my image you linked - you need a high iso to get points of light.
Due to the rotation of the earth you will get the star trails.
For my Tamron 11-18 @ 11mm ill get trails after about 33 seconds.
Greater the focal length, the shorter that time.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scottath;15046980*
> alot of people like that image.....
> exif should be intact though. Thats actually a single image
> ISO1600, f4.5, 30 sec, 11mm, 550D
> 
> That was just a special night - with the fog etc and its a good 20km from the nearest major town.....
> 
> I love my long exposure night shots and my 3:1s (as you probably noticed on my flickr) - and its what im best at doing....doing a wedding in December though so that will be interesting :/
> 
> easiest method for long exposure:
> 
> use as high and iso as possible to compose.
> set iso to <400 (on my 550d at least, your 60 has the same sensor so the same applies)
> sit and wait
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> as a general idea
> iso 400 for no moon
> iso 100 if possible (full moon etc)
> If you want stars like in my image you linked - you need a high iso to get points of light.
> Due to the rotation of the earth you will get the star trails.
> For my Tamron 11-18 @ 11mm ill get trails after about 33 seconds.
> Greater the focal length, the shorter that time.


Thanks, this helps a lot! I got 15mm on the wide end so I'll try some when it isn't cloudy. I'll post them up when done.


----------



## Conspiracy

....aaaaand.... i just woke up at 4:45am to make my 6:00am call time for my double booked weekend of video shoots for the same producer. why oh why am i still an intern for this producer yet get paid by another... i dont get it. but i sure hope they hire me for as much good work that i have been doing lately


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SeanWebster;15046418*
> Hey! I used one...once lol. They are very handy during the day when you want to photo water moving to make it like silk or fog.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;15046631*
> Yeah, probably 0.0001% of the current generation understands that.


also great for fast lenses during daytime to get more dof and you don't have a camera with a 1/8000 shutter or want to have a moving taxi in the background.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scottath;15045815*
> I know you lot are all talking about your film....but,
> Looking at a cheapish flash - and im almost sold on a Yongnuo YN-565EX - unless someone wants to talk me out of it / recommend something of a similar price range
> Probably buy it early next week
> 
> The other consideration - looking at long exposure daytime photography - so im looking at a B+W 110 or a Hoya ND400 - opinions on either of them would be appreciated as well.
> 
> Thanks


I would get at least a 6-stop ND. I have a B+W F-Pro 1.8 and it's sometimes isn't dark enough. I'm looking into a 10 stop or higher currently. If only Sing-Ray wasn't so damned expensive.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;15046367*
> Well, cinematographers love it. They aren't so big with still photographers since nobody uses ND filters anymore.


I think they're more prevalent than you think. I see lots of people with them who cleary don't know what they're for, thinking that they're UV filters.


----------



## Boyboyd

I have a 16. It's dark enough to blur motion at moderate apertures (f/8 ish) in bright daylight at iso 100.


----------



## dudemanppl

You mean x16? That's like 4 stops if I remember correctly.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;15048065*
> I think they're more prevalent than you think. I see lots of people with them who clearly don't know what they're for, thinking that they're UV filters.


How can anyone be that stupid...

Vari ND + M6 = best. Just keep it at 1/500 and move the filter around.


----------



## lifeskills

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;15048065*
> I would get at least a 6-stop ND. I have a B+W F-Pro 1.8 and it's sometimes isn't dark enough. I'm looking into a 10 stop or higher currently. If only Sing-Ray wasn't so damned expensive.
> 
> I think they're more prevalent than you think. I see lots of people with them who cleary don't know what they're for, thinking that they're UV filters.


Yeah lots of people use ND's. They're really big in landscape photography, I personally have been looking at them for timelapse to drag the shutter out a little more.

Dudeman nice link that filter looks nice


----------



## sub50hz

6-stop and higher really only have practicality when used for landscape work -- they are _way_ too dark for shooting action sports and motorsports. I have 3-stop B+W screw-ins for shooting road races and road cycling, FWIW.


----------



## dudemanppl

I've used the max ND of the fader before. 16000/8000/4000/2000/1000/500/250/125/60 (1/50 f/1.4 ISO 100). Also a great way to overpower ambient with strobes and such. But yeah other than those, they aren't all too useful.


----------



## Shane1244

Jeeze, I never even realized that the 5DII is only $1999 new. I thought it was like $2500~

EDIT: I'm confused..

http://www.photoprice.ca/product/02699/Canon-EOS-5D-Mark-II-price.html
Quote:


> An instant rebate of $300.00 is available if purchased in Canada.
> The final price for Canadian stores includes the rebate.


Why we do get such a better deal over the US?


----------



## Dee.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;15056440*
> Jeeze, I never even realized that the 5DII is only $1999 new. I thought it was like $2500~
> 
> EDIT: I'm confused..
> 
> http://www.photoprice.ca/product/02699/Canon-EOS-5D-Mark-II-price.html
> 
> Why we do get such a better deal over the US?


http://www.canonrumors.com/2011/09/big-5d-mark-ii-price-drops-in-canada-usa/


----------



## Shane1244

5DIII must be coming soon.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;15056645*
> 5DIII must be coming soon.


I think I will faint when I order mine due to the shear happiness.


----------



## foothead

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/800804225-USE/Digital_Concepts_918AF_OLY_DSLR_Bounce_Zoom_Swivel.html

Tempting... I wonder how well the TTL metering works.


----------



## Boyboyd

I've been tempted to switch to team canon solely for the 5dii.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Boyboyd;15058135*
> I've been tempted to switch to team canon solely for the 5dii.


Why? video? For stills the d700 is better.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SeanWebster;15058144*
> Why? video? For stills the d700 is better.


I only have 3 FX lenses anyway, and 2 of them are MF only. So i'd have to buy all new or shoot in DX mode.

At the moment though i'm more than happy with my 7000.


----------



## foothead

I just figured this out. It isn't strictly camera related, but I figure it could help a lot of photographers.

*How to use USGS 1:24k topo maps with your android phone's GPS*

First off, you need:
Rmaps ( https://market.android.com/details?id=com.robert.maps&hl=en )
Mobile Atlas Creator 1.8 ( http://code.google.com/p/robertprojects/downloads/detail?name=Mobile%20Atlas%20Creator%201.8.zip&can=2&q= )

How to:

1. Install Rmaps from the android market.
2. Download and unzip Mobile Atlas creator.
3. Run the exe file
4. Set map source to "Yahoo maps" and zoom to the approximate area you want. You can zoom in with the mouse wheel and move around with right click.
5. Change the map source to "Terraserver-USA Map
6. Select the zoom levels you want. I usually select all of them up to 16. selecting 17 will make the files excessively large.
7. Use left click + drag to select the map area.
8. Under "atlas content" type in the name you want to use for your map. Then click "add selection" to add it.
9. Change the format to RMaps SQlite
10. Click "create atlas" to download and compile the map. This may take a while depending on the area you selected.
11. When that is done, the file will be saved in the "atlases" folder. Move it to /sdcard/rmaps/maps on your phone.
12. Unplug the phone and open the Rmaps application.
13. Hit the menu button, then select more, then settings.
14. open "user defined maps" then click the name of your map. This will bring up a menu. Tick the "enabled map" box to enable it.
15. Go back to the main screen, hit menu, maps, then the name of your map to display it.
16. Enjoy.


----------



## lifeskills

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*


I've been tempted to switch to team canon solely for the 5dii.


I have too, especially since I'm not too invested in Nikon yet. I have a couple of cheap lenses right not so not too worried about switching. I'm gonna save like 3 grand and see whats out. The main factor for me right now is that cannon can be bulb ramped during timelapse, and also Nikon's tend to have worse flicker.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *foothead*


I just figured this out. It isn't strictly camera related, but I figure it could help a lot of photographers.

*How to use USGS 1:24k topo maps with your android phone's GPS*


Very Cool! does that app rotate the map based on direction?


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *lifeskills*


I have too, especially since I'm not too invested in Nikon yet. I have a couple of cheap lenses right not so not too worried about switching. I'm gonna save like 3 grand and see whats out. The main factor for me right now is that cannon can be bulb ramped during timelapse, and also Nikon's tend to have worse flicker.


Couldn't you ramp any camera though? It just depends on the intervalometer.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *lifeskills*


Very Cool! does that app rotate the map based on direction?


Yes. Hit menu, then select "compass."


----------



## lifeskills

Quote:



Originally Posted by *foothead*


Couldn't you ramp any camera though? It just depends on the intervalometer.

Yes. Hit menu, then select "compass."



You can ramp Nikons, and there are people working on making it better, but right now Canon is the best solution for bramping, with out of the box solutions like The Little Bramper.

I guess that Nikon's bodies have a set exposure value time, such as 40ms.(different depending on body) This means that no matter what the external intervalometer is set to with each shot, the camera will round down to the nearest 40ms increment. So say you start with a second exposure and start ramping at 7 milliseconds per shot, the first five shots will round down to the 1000ms, while the last will round down to 1040ms.

I'm still trying to wrap my head around this, but here is a thread about it on Timescapes

It may be worth it to wait based on his research but I don't know Canon's are looking real good to me right now


----------



## dudemanppl

I have to say the 5DII is much better for stills than the D700. AF is barely a restriction, just the banding at over ISO 6400 gets annoying. And it might be a little worse than a D700 (noisewise), but I tried a T2i and I disliked the noise I got at 1600, which was about 6400 on the 5DII.


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


I have to say the 5DII is much better for stills than the 5DII. AF is barely a restriction, just the banding at over ISO 6400 gets annoying. And it might be a little worse than a D700 (noisewise), but I tried a T2i and I disliked the noise I got at 1600, which was about 6400 on the 5DII.



The 5DII is better than the 5DII?


----------



## dudemanppl

Yes, yes it is. fffffffffffffffffffff-


----------



## Conspiracy

OMG what an amazing breaking bad tonight


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*


OMG what an amazing breaking bad tonight


What happened?


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *SeanWebster*


What happened?


Watch it yourself.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Watch it yourself.










I don't have tv...lol


----------



## lifeskills

well last week was epic so this weeks got to be good. watching when I get home from work


----------



## foothead

Wow, that flash sold quickly. I was going to buy it tomorrow. :/

I'm also looking at a sigma 70-300 f4-5.6 in Nikon mount. It appears to be an older version with an aperture ring on the lens barrel. Does that mean it could be used in full manual mode?

EDIT: Meh, I just went ahead and ordered it. There's no way that was going to last priced at $50. If nothing, I can buy a cheap 35mm Nikon to use it with.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

I was reading this BBC article the other day, and a royal photographer in the article described a humorous encounter:
Quote:


> A royal photographer for 35 years, Mr Edwards - appointed an MBE in 2003 for services to journalism - also recounted one of his early jobs, when he was given the task of taking Prince Charles's picture.
> 
> The prince had just moved into Highgrove House and Mr Edwards was tasked to photograph him on his estate so he chose a public footpath at the bottom of the gardens as his position to take the shot.
> 
> "I'm walking along this path with a big telescopic lens on my shoulder and he came galloping up on his horse," he said.
> 
> "'What are you doing on my land?' he screamed and I said 'I'm not on your land, I'm on a public footpath sir'.
> Arthur Edwards Arthur Edwards has been a royal photographer for the Sun for more than 35 years
> 
> "He said 'public footpaths are for walking on, not taking pictures from'. I didn't know what else to say so I just said 'I'm doing my job' and he said 'some job'. So I said 'at least I've got a job'.
> 
> "I didn't mean it as an insult but he took it as one and he just whacked his horse and went back to the house with steam coming out of his ears."


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SeanWebster;15065931*
> I don't have tv...lol


but you have internet. go find it and watch it... you wont regret it


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;15069065*
> I was reading this BBC article the other day, and a royal photographer in the article described a humorous encounter:


Some of the stuff Prince Charles says is absolutely timeless. Even if he does embarrass our entire country.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*


Some of the stuff Prince Charles says is absolutely timeless. Even if he does embarrass our entire country.


Well, I think we can agree that America is tops in terms of its political figures embarrassing us.







Afterall, this is the country where wings take dream.

The article itself was kind of funny. Prince William drove a classic Aston-Martin around with the e-brake on. Interesting how that alone is even newsworthy.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;15070045*
> Well, I think we can agree that America is tops in terms of its political figures embarrassing us.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Afterall, this is the country where wings take dream.
> 
> The article itself was kind of funny. Prince William drove a classic Aston-Martin around with the e-brake on. Interesting how that alone is even newsworthy.


Yep. If i recall correctly that was the most read news article on the BBC a few days ago. It's sad really.

I have some pretty controversial views on our monarchy, that probably shouldn't be expressed on OCN. lol


----------



## Jobotoo

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


You may have an interested party if you decide, in fact, to sell.


Thanks, its in the for Sale section.


----------



## sub50hz

Nice. Sadly, I have been dealing with UPS over the past 4 hours as they decided to lose a package of mine with an insured value of $18k. Spaghetti, what a Monday.


----------



## MistaBernie

oof... sorry to hear that Sub.

In other news, does anyone else ever get their significant others to basically 'volunteer to lend out your backup body' so their brother's girlfriend can 'try out' a dslr? And then she tries to give me the business when I tell her 'uh, I'm potentially selling it while I can get decent money for it'.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


In other news, does anyone else ever get their significant others to basically 'volunteer to lend out your backup body' so their brother's girlfriend can 'try out' a dslr? And then she tries to give me the business when I tell her 'uh, I'm potentially selling it while I can get decent money for it'.


That's a really sticky situation. Say the wrong thing and you're in for an excrement-storm. I think you made the right decision though.

I just found out i'll be getting backdated pay this week. I want to save a fair portion though, but i've thought about selling a lens to fund a ND *grad*, and a set of extension tubes. Seeing as how i mainly do macro and landscapes. I wouldn't mind a gold reflector too.

I can afford them all right away, but i have too many lenses anyway.


----------



## Jobotoo

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Nice. Sadly, I have been dealing with UPS over the past 4 hours as they decided to lose a package of mine with an insured value of $18k. Spaghetti, what a Monday.


Ayayayayaay!!! I hope that gets resolved soon and satisfactorily!!!

(Not sure if that last word is actually a word.)


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*


That's a really sticky situation. Say the wrong thing and you're in for an excrement-storm. I think you made the right decision though.

I just found out i'll be getting backdated pay this week. I want to save a fair portion though, but i've thought about selling a lens to fund a ND grad, and a set of extension tubes. Seeing as how i mainly do macro and landscapes. I wouldn't mind a* gold reflector *too.

I can afford them all right away, but i have too many lenses anyway.


Please don't use it for portraits. I see it used all the time, and the subject always just looks ill.

So I just got that nikon eyecup I ordered, and it's even bigger than the olympus. I guess it's duct tape time...


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *foothead*


Please don't use it for portraits. Every time I see a portrait taken with one, the subject just looks ill.

So I just got that nikon eyecup I ordered, and it's even bigger than the olympus. I guess it's duct tape time...


Not that I doubt you or anything, i'm always eager to learn. But do you have any examples? I've seen quite a few lately with that reflector and they look far better to me than with any other colour.

What would you suggest? Just white? Or use a flash with a diffuser off camera?


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


oof... sorry to hear that Sub.

In other news, does anyone else ever get their significant others to basically 'volunteer to lend out your backup body' so their brother's girlfriend can 'try out' a dslr? And then she tries to give me the business when I tell her 'uh, I'm potentially selling it while I can get decent money for it'.


Yes this is tricky. My situation wasn't with a significant other, rather it was just simply a friend, but she basically told her brother that he could use my T2i for a weekend. I told her well maybe, but what if he drops it/breaks it? He gonna pay up? She keeps telling me "oh he won't break it."







That's not what I asked! It ended up being a big brawl over nothing. My camera. My rules. Not his.


----------



## MistaBernie

Yeah, I really should have been like 'sure. She cuts me a check for $1500, she can use whatever gear she wants. If I get my gear back in the same condition, she can have her check back'. That way, when they say 'oh, they wont break it', I say 'great, then it shouldn't be a problem to give me a check'.


----------



## BlankThis

What's the general consensus on reflectors? I'm thinking about picking up a white/silver 32" for $30. I saw gold for that price too but I dunno. It's going to be used 99% of the time for portrait work...


----------



## sub50hz

Women, I am told, _have_ brains, but for some reason do not use them.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


In other news, does anyone else ever get their significant others to basically 'volunteer to lend out your backup body' so their brother's girlfriend can 'try out' a dslr? And then she tries to give me the business when I tell her 'uh, I'm potentially selling it while I can get decent money for it'.


throw a nice lens on there on it and tell her she can borrow it but if you break it thats a 1700 dollar lens on a 2600 dollar body.....that usually gets them off my back about using my gear....


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*


Not that I doubt you or anything, i'm always eager to learn. But do you have any examples? I've seen quite a few lately with that reflector and they look far better to me than with any other colour.

What would you suggest? Just white? Or use a flash with a diffuser off camera?


Search google images for "gold reflector." It either has no visible effect or it makes the person looks jaundice.

Natural light almost always looks best for portraiture, so I'd go with silver. A flash with a diffuser, set at a low setting also helps to remove shadows, but make sure it isn't overwhelming.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


Yeah, I really should have been like 'sure. She cuts me a check for $1500, she can use whatever gear she wants. If I get my gear back in the same condition, she can have her check back'. That way, when they say 'oh, they wont break it', I say 'great, then it shouldn't be a problem to give me a check'.


Exactly. People think you're being a prick when you do that but really all you're doing is covering your backside.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Women, I am told, _have_ brains, but for some reason do not use them.


aaaaaand sigged.

I have no problem _teaching_ someone how to shoot on a DSLR... but loaning gear out w/o me there to say 'omg what are you doing, dont sit on that lens, who are you, dudemanppl?!'


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *foothead*


Search google images for "gold reflector." It either has no visible effect or it makes the person looks jaundice.

Natural light almost always looks best for portraiture, so I'd go with silver. A flash with a diffuser, set at a low setting also helps to remove shadows, but *make sure it isn't overwhelming*.


I can't stand portraits with balanced light from all angles. It might just be personal preference but I like it to look almost natural. The only time i'd use flash on a portrait is just to draw_ some_ detail back from the shadow.

I searched google and flickr for gold reflectors. You're right, there are some Terrible examples, and some quite good ones.

I'll probably get a silver/gold/white kit anyway, and only use it to bounce natural light. Not flash.


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*


I can't stand portraits with balanced light from all angles. It might just be personal preference but I like it to look almost natural. The only time i'd use flash on a portrait is just to draw_ some_ detail back from the shadow.


Hence why I said not to make it overwhelming. Without it, portraits taken during midday will have extremely harsh shadows. The point of the flash is to reduce them.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*


I searched google and flickr for gold reflectors. You're right, there are some Terrible examples, and some quite good ones.

I'll probably get a silver/gold/white kit anyway, and only use it to bounce natural light. Not flash.


That "quite good" one you posted looks awful to me. It looks like she has hepatitis or something, lol. I guess it's subjective, but I really wouldn't want anyone taking pictures of me that look like that.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


oof... sorry to hear that Sub.

In other news, does anyone else ever get their significant others to basically 'volunteer to lend out your backup body' so their brother's girlfriend can 'try out' a dslr? And then she tries to give me the business when I tell her 'uh, I'm potentially selling it while I can get decent money for it'.



Quote:



Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*


Yes this is tricky. My situation wasn't with a significant other, rather it was just simply a friend, but she basically told her brother that he could use my T2i for a weekend. I told her well maybe, but what if he drops it/breaks it? He gonna pay up? She keeps telling me "oh he won't break it."







That's not what I asked! It ended up being a big brawl over nothing. My camera. My rules. Not his.


Screw that. There are a select few people I would loan my DSLR, but I know for a fact that they're good for it if they break it.

And my wife knows better than to "volunteer" my gear.









Quote:



Originally Posted by *BlankThis*


What's the general consensus on reflectors? I'm thinking about picking up a white/silver 32" for $30. I saw gold for that price too but I dunno. It's going to be used 99% of the time for portrait work...


They're a pain to drag around, but worth it. I did an engagement shoot with a set of Westcott reflectors. Only used the white and silver discs.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *foothead*


Search google images for "gold reflector." It either has no visible effect or it makes the person looks jaundice.

Natural light almost always looks best for portraiture, so I'd go with silver. A flash with a diffuser, set at a low setting also helps to remove shadows, but make sure it isn't overwhelming.


Silver is usually too reflective I find. The matte white discs work well even in bright sunlight.


----------



## BlankThis

Birds are really hard to photograph... I couldn't get close enough with my 55-200 VR.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *BlankThis*


Birds are really hard to photograph... I couldn't get close enough with my 55-200 VR.










Bird blind.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *foothead*


That "quite good" one you posted looks awful to me. It looks like she has hepatitis or something, lol.


No kidding. Probably the least flattering.... everything. Expression, framing, lighting, processing.... I think we're on the same page here.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


No kidding. Probably the least flattering.... everything. Expression, framing, lighting, processing.... I think we're on the same page here.


I was going just by lighting and colour, lol.


----------



## BlankThis

C&C? I hate this lens...


----------



## laboitenoire

55-200? I don't think it's that bad, you just have to work with the (relatively) short focal length if you're trying to do birding.


----------



## BlankThis

That was my biggest issue... I couldn't get even close...


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis;15076050*


Holy vignette, Batman!

Please tell me that was added in post...


----------



## BlankThis

It was. I find that when I export with LR3 the vignette gets darker than how I wanted it when editing the RAW file.


----------



## foothead

Oh, okay then. I'd leave it without the vignette personally, but that's up to you.

How did you have your AF set? All the photos except the first are out of focus slightly. I usually leave mine set to center point only for birding.


----------



## BlankThis

Center point but I was knee-deep in marshcrap free handing... That being said I've NEVER gotten exceptionally sharp/accurate focus out of this 55-200 VR.


----------



## scottath

Flash - Ordered then YN-565








ND Filter - About to order a B+W 110 ND - just confirming that its a MRC first.








- wallet = empty :/


----------



## dudemanppl

Just a warning, you'll probably get vignetting on the wide end of the 11-18.


----------



## solsamurai

After drooling over all the macro photography on the cable sleeve gallery and elsewhere on OCN I'm looking into gettting my first macro lens. Please tell me I can get a decent one for less than $300!


----------



## scottath

Yea i thought about that with the 11-18mm.....

It has a UV filter (non-slim one) and it doesnt vignett with that on, and i wont use both filters together so im hoping that it will be fine with it......


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *solsamurai;15079707*
> After drooling over all the macro photography on the cable sleeve gallery and elsewhere on OCN I'm looking into gettting my first macro lens. Please tell me I can get a decent one for less than $300!


Can you show examples of what you want to take pictures of? If I'm picturing what you're talking about correctly, you might not need a macro lens, depending on the MFD of your current lenses.


----------



## solsamurai

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*


Can you show examples of what you want to take pictures of? If I'm picturing what you're talking about correctly, you might not need a macro lens, depending on the MFD of your current lenses.


As far as pictures of cable sleeve something like this.

Some examples of what I've shot with my DSLR (Canon EOS Rebel T3 with included 55mm lens). I'm still very new to this.





















I can get pretty far in there, but wondering if a different lens could do better. Especially when it comes to stuff like cable sleeve. Thanks so much for the help!


----------



## ljason8eg

A macro lens would get you closer, but your kit lens will shoot those kind of shots just fine, especially if you crop a bit afterward. If you want close ups of sleeving, yeah you'd need a macro lens for best results.

For a lens suggestion, I personally wouldn't go any cheaper than the 60mm macro. http://www.amazon.com/Canon-EF-S-Macro-Digital-Cameras/dp/B0007WK8KS/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1317098817&sr=8-1]Amazon.com: Canon EF-S 60mm f/2.8 Macro USM Digital SLR Lens for EOS Digital SLR Cameras: Camera & Photo[/URL]


----------



## solsamurai

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg;15080316*
> A macro lens would get you closer, but your kit lens will shoot those kind of shots just fine, especially if you crop a bit afterward. If you want close ups of sleeving, yeah you'd need a macro lens.
> 
> For a lens suggestion, I personally wouldn't go any cheaper than the 60mm macro. Amazon.com: Canon EF-S 60mm f/2.8 Macro USM Digital SLR Lens for EOS Digital SLR Cameras: Camera & Photo


Lol, I was looking at that one earlier.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:



Originally Posted by *solsamurai*


Lol, I was looking at that one earlier.










Its a nice lens. If you wanted more working distance, you could get the 100mm macro, which is a bit more money and more working distance is not something you need for computer macro shots.


----------



## solsamurai

What about super close-ups of capacitors on motherboards where only one or two are in focus? Would I need something like the 100mm for that?


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *solsamurai;15080405*
> What about super close-ups of capacitors on motherboards where only one or two are in focus? Would I need something like the 100mm for that?


Nah you won't need the 100mm for that. The 60mm will give you super thin DOF if you shoot near its minimum focus distance. In fact, you might have to stop down a bit to get what you want in focus.


----------



## solsamurai

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*


Nah you won't need the 100mm for that. The 60mm will give you super thin DOF if you shoot near its minimum focus distance. In fact, you might have to *stop down a bit* to get what you want in focus.


Lol, does that mean open up the aperture more? Sorry I'm not too familiar with the verbage just yet.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *solsamurai;15080490*
> Lol, does that mean open up the aperture more?


stop down means close the aperture (larger f/stop number)

if you dont mind using 3rd party both the tamron [ame="[URL=http://www.amazon.com/gp/redirect.html?ie=UTF8&linkCode=ur2&camp=1789&creative=9325&tag=overclockdotnet-20&location=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.amazon.com%2FTamron-AF-90mm-2-8-SP%2Fdp%2FB00021EEA4%2Fref%3Dsr_1_4%3Fie%3DUTF8%26qid%3D1317099804%26sr%3D8-4]http://www.amazon.com/Tamron-AF-90mm-2-8-SP/dp/B00021EEA4/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&qid=1317099804&sr=8-4"]90mm[/ame[/URL]] and [ame="[URL=http://www.amazon.com/gp/redirect.html?ie=UTF8&linkCode=ur2&camp=1789&creative=9325&tag=overclockdotnet-20&location=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.amazon.com%2FTamron-AF-60mm-2-0-II%2Fdp%2FB00200K9MM%2Fref%3Dsr_1_1%3Fs%3Delectronics%26ie%3DUTF8%26qid%3D1317099870%26sr%3D1-1]http://www.amazon.com/Tamron-AF-60mm-2-0-II/dp/B00200K9MM/ref=sr_1_1?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1317099870&sr=1-1"]60mm[/ame[/URL]] are excellent.


----------



## solsamurai

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10;15080500*
> stop down means close the aperture (larger f/stop number)
> 
> if you dont mind using 3rd party both the tamron 90mm and 60mm are excellent.










So I had it backwards. Any reason why the 90mm is marked down that much?

EDIT: Nevermind, read some reviews and they all point to issues with the lens hunting too much in low light. That doesn't sound so great to me.







Appreciate the suggestion! Got anything else to reccomend?


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *solsamurai;15080405*
> What about super close-ups of capacitors on motherboards where only one or two are in focus? Would I need something like the 100mm for that?


If all you're doing is shooting computers/stationary things, you could always get a manual focus lens and some extension rings. It's a whole lot cheaper than a proper macro lens. IQ won't be as good, but it's excellent to learn on, and you could put that money elsewhere.

I assume this is what you want to do:



















Taken with an old 55mm f1.7 photax.

Those two weren't intended to be great pics, I was just trying to show someone the bulging caps on an old dell, but you get the idea. If I had cleaned the components and used proper lighting/angles, they would look excellent.


----------



## solsamurai

Yeah that's what I'm aiming for. I really like making various parts of the m/b look like a type of cityscape.







I have time to save for something nice if it means superior IQ. The manual route does sound fun as well.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *solsamurai;15080602*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So I had it backwards. Any reason why the 90mm is marked down that much?
> 
> EDIT: Nevermind, read some reviews and they all point to issues with the lens hunting too much in low light. That doesn't sound so great to me.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Appreciate the suggestion! Got anything else to reccomend?


slow AF is an issue with all macros (even the 100 macro L), hunting on the other hand could be a problem (ive used the lens on a d90 without any issues).

but the lens should be set on MF since 1:1 macro is only at MFD (minimum focus distance).

extension tubes as foothead suggested is also an excellent option.

something to be aware of with extension tubes is not all lenses can get to 1:1. if you have no idea what 1:1 means then this isnt an issue for you

edit: MSRP for the tamron 90mm is about 500 before rebate, amazon just likes to display skyhigh prices to make it seem like a deal.


----------



## solsamurai

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


slow AF is an issue with all macros (even the 100 macro L), hunting on the other hand could be a problem (ive used the lens on a d90 without any issues).

but the lens should be set on MF since 1:1 macro is only at MFD (minimum focus distance).

extension tubes as foothead suggested is also an excellent option.

something to be aware of with extension tubes is not all lenses can get to 1:1. if you have no idea what 1:1 means then this isnt an issue for you









*edit: MSRP for the tamron 90mm is about 500 before rebate, amazon just likes to display skyhigh prices to make it seem like a deal.*


Lol, good to know. Yeah I don't really know what 1:1 means.







Could I try an extension tube on the stock lens that came with the camera?


----------



## foothead

Your lens requires an electronic connection to perform certain functions, like aperture and focus. This is why I specifically stated that it has to be a manual focus lens.

But really, all you need to get started is a cheap 50mm m42 lens, a set of m42 extension rings, and an m42 to EOS adapter. All three should cost less than $50 on ebay.

EDIT:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/M42-PENTAX-50mm-f2-VIVITAR-LENS-4-PS-PENTAX-CAMERA-/370544914876?pt=Camera_Lenses&hash=item564632b1bc#ht_585wt_1396
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Macro-Extension-Tube-Ring-L8D-M42-42mm-screw-mount-/190489871340?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2c5a14c3ec#ht_500wt_1396
http://www.ebay.com/itm/M42-Lens-adapter-Canon-EOS-550D-500D-60D-50D-7D-/190562987844?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2c5e706f44#ht_500wt_1396

Cleaning marks on the lens won't affect picture quality.


----------



## solsamurai

Got it. Thanks for the info. This is a much cheaper option indeed. Will there be a big difference in image quality?


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *solsamurai*


Got it. Thanks for the info. This is a much cheaper option indeed. Will there be a big difference in image quality?


It won't be as sharp as a proper macro lens, but it'd be more than usable. I actually have the same lens sitting on my desk right now, so I'll take some macros with it and post them here.


----------



## foothead

Okay, here you go. Judge the lens, not the pictures, lol. I couldn't find my flash diffuser, so that's what's causing all the hexagonal reflections in the bokeh. It won't be nearly that bad with proper lighting. Also, my camera has a 2x crop factor, so your APS-C camera should give higher sharpness due to reduced diffraction.

This one was shot at 800 ISO, the rest are 100 because I could use a flash.










100% crop



















100% crop



















100% crop



















100% crop










So sharpness is quite good, considering how close I was working. Bokeh isn't pretty, but it won't be too bad if you can keep your lighting under control.


----------



## scottath

pretty sure it has to do with the lens and how its aperture works.
Im guessing you have a 6 blade aperture.....

Its like the nifty fifty is a 5 blade aperture and you get pentagons.


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *scottath*


pretty sure it has to do with the lens and how its aperture works.
Im guessing you have a 6 blade aperture.....

Its like the nifty fifty is a 5 blade aperture and you get pentagons.


Yep. That's why lens makers make a big deal out of having a "circular aperture" on certain lenses.

It only happens like that when light is reflected from a small, out of focus point within the frame. It's perfectly possible to get smooth bokeh with stopped down lenses, it just requires good lighting or a nonreflective background.

By the way, my canon 50/1.8 has six blades. Seems strange that they'd reduce the number on newer versions.


----------



## scottath

According to wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon_E...EF_50mm_lenses) youd have the macro 50mm to have 6 blades.... ?

Basic reason - less parts / less precisely placed parts = cheaper


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *scottath*


According to wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon_E...EF_50mm_lenses) youd have the macro 50mm to have 6 blades.... ?

Basic reason - less parts / less precisely placed parts = cheaper











Nope. It's a standard non-macro one.










http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flange_focal_distance So I guess canon would be the best choice if I want a film camera that's compatible with as many lens systems as possible. Interesting.


----------



## solsamurai

Quote:



Originally Posted by *foothead*


Okay, here you go. Judge the lens, not the pictures, lol. I couldn't find my flash diffuser, so that's what's causing all the hexagonal reflections in the bokeh. It won't be nearly that bad with proper lighting. Also, my camera has a 2x crop factor, so your APS-C camera should give higher sharpness due to reduced diffraction.

This one was shot at 800 ISO, the rest are 100 because I could use a flash.

So sharpness is quite good, considering how close I was working. Bokeh isn't pretty, but it won't be too bad if you can keep your lighting under control.


Thanks a ton for the images. Very helpful!







I like the hexagonal reflections.


----------



## scottath

Found it - its an old lens....
Canon FL range:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon_FL

Shameless plug for my images:
https://plus.google.com/photos/10674...03094891010689


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *scottath*


Found it - its an old lens....
Canon FL range:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon_FL


Yep, it's quite old. It's also the best constructed SLR lens I've ever used, by far. It puts the newer canon lenses to shame.


----------



## Danylu

This one, pure awesome (Y). Love the glow behind the trees.

I might be a bit late for the debate, but anyone planning on the Nikon mirrorless cams?


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


I might be a bit late for the debate, but anyone planning on the Nikon mirrorless cams?


Haha, no. The sensor in them is just too small. M4/3 or Sony are much better options.

I really don't get why Nikon didn't use an APS-C sensor. Intercompatibility with their SLR lenses would've made it a good system.


----------



## scottath

probably encroach in that slr market......


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *solsamurai*


Lol, good to know. Yeah I don't really know what 1:1 means.








Could I try an extension tube on the stock lens that came with the camera?


1:1 means that a macro lens projects a life-sized image onto the medium (film or sensor). 2:1 would be twice life sized, and so on. The Canon MP-E 65mm macro can go all the way up to 5:1 (5x life size).

Any decent macro lens will be 1:1. If you need more mag., add extension tubes or use a lens like the MP-E.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Danylu*


This one, pure awesome (Y). Love the glow behind the trees.

I might be a bit late for the debate, but anyone planning on the Nikon mirrorless cams?


We all spent a few pages bashing the new Nikon mirrorless cams. Sensors are just too small IMO.


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *scottath*


probably encroach in that slr market......


Good point, but I really don't see Nikon going the way of Olympus. The only area I could really see it encroaching on is the budget SLRs, which'll sell like hotcakes either way.


----------



## BlankThis

I'm having wet dreams about a 5D and Samyang 35 f/1.4 combo...


----------



## dudemanppl

You have issues.


----------



## biatchi

Another option for macro and what I use personally is, M39 or M42 bellows and enlarging lenses. I've got a Rodagon 50 2.8, Minolta 75 4.5 and a Will Wetzlar 105 4.5 and all are excellent way past 1:1


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;15084830*
> You have issues.


Yes the lack of both.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;15084830*
> You have issues.


Coming from the guy with the lowest shots:gear ratio, I lolled.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead;15081123*
> Your lens requires an electronic connection to perform certain functions, like aperture and focus. This is why I specifically stated that it has to be a manual focus lens.


some EOS extension tubes have electronic contacts so you have full aperture control.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10;15087597*
> some EOS extension tubes have electronic contacts so you have full aperture control.


Will the focus even work with an extension tube? The canon kit lens doesn't have a manual focus ring iirc.


----------



## mz-n10

autofocus works depending on lens, but iirc all EOS lenses have a manual focus ring.

canon kit 18-55 has a focusing ring, its just looks like a part of the front element/filter assembly. also fyi all canon eos lenses sit wide open when not attached to a body. so even dumb extension tubes are usable, its just you shoot wide open.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;15087394*
> Coming from the guy with the lowest shots:gear ratio, I lolled.


luv uuu subbb!!


----------



## sub50hz

I love giving you a hard time, haha.

edit: ATTN: FBI -- ABOVE COMMENT IS NOT TO BE MISCONSTRUED IN A MANNER WHICH MAY IMPLICATE ME IN CHILD SEDUCTION

-Thank you


----------



## MistaBernie

This shizzle just got weird.

Sub, you still looking for 645 stuff?


----------



## sub50hz

Yeah, sorry, I got your PM but I've been so busy at work lately that I totally forgot about it. Why, did you find something?


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;15088861*
> Yeah, sorry, I got your PM but I've been so busy at work lately that I totally forgot about it. Why, did you find something?


Well.. I had a line on some stuff last week but it's apparently gone. I'm keeping my ear to the ground though, looks like a local pro was liquidating some pretty decent stuff.. couple of 645AF bodies with 2x 120 backs and I think a 35mm lens for $650 or something like that..

I'm trying to decide if I should pursue a used 5D or a 135L... convince me because I should have the money for one (not both) in an hour or so..


----------



## sub50hz

925 shipped. ****, I'm not sure I'm ready for this, lol.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10;15088026*
> canon kit 18-55 has a focusing ring, its just looks like a part of the front element/filter assembly. also fyi all canon eos lenses sit wide open when not attached to a body. so even dumb extension tubes are usable, its just you shoot wide open.












Wait, so their manual focus solution is to use external focusing and just have people rotate the front of the lens? Wow, that's ghetto. I guess using polarizers is out of the question then.

Oh, and macro work is pretty much impossible without having the ability to stop down.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead;15089316*
> Wait, so their manual focus solution is to use external focusing and just have people rotate the front of the lens? Wow, that's ghetto. I guess using polarizers is out of the question then.


Yes. The drawbacks of cheap glass. The 55-250 is similar but it actually has a focus ring instead of just turning the end of the lens. It is kind of stupid though, and yeah, makes a polarizer harder to use


----------



## MistaBernie

isn't that what a circular polarizer is for?


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg;15089345*
> Yes. The drawbacks of cheap glass. The 55-250 is similar but it actually has a focus ring instead of just turning the end of the lens. It is kind of stupid though, and yeah, makes a polarizer harder to use


My Olympus kit lenses have proper internal focus. The manual focus is electronically coupled, but that's still a lot better than what canon did.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie;15089372*
> isn't that what a circular polarizer is for?


They're more expensive, less effective, and most photogs already have a linear one. Besides, it's not just polarizers, it'd also make any sort of grad filter unusable.


----------



## mz-n10

yea the kit lens rotates when focusing.....cause canon (sony too) figured if your using a kit lens you dont have a CPL.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie;15089372*
> isn't that what a circular polarizer is for?


CPL still has a "orientation"
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead;15089459*
> They're more expensive, less effective, and most photogs already have a linear one. Besides, it's not just polarizers, it'd also make any sort of grad filter unusable.


linear polarizers messes with PD-AF so lenses might not focus properly.


----------



## foothead

Looks like Nikon did it too...










Are there any companies left who actually have decent build quality on their low end stuff? Just because I don't have thousands of dollars to spend on a lens doesn't mean I'm okay with buying cheap, chinese made crap.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10;15089630*
> linear polarizers messes with PD-AF so lenses might not focus properly.


Manual focus is still an option on lenses with internal focusing mechanisms.


----------



## sub50hz

Pentax maybe.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;15089731*
> Pentax maybe.


Looks like you're right.










I still haven't completely given up faith on Olympus, but it's nice to know I have another decent option for the future.


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie;15088893*
> Well.. I had a line on some stuff last week but it's apparently gone. I'm keeping my ear to the ground though, looks like a local pro was liquidating some pretty decent stuff.. couple of 645AF bodies with 2x 120 backs and I think a 35mm lens for $650 or something like that..
> 
> I'm trying to decide if I should pursue a used 5D or a 135L... convince me because I should have the money for one (not both) in an hour or so..


1. Buy 5D
2. Sell 17-50 f/2.8
3. Sell 60D
4. Purchase 135L and whatever else you want with the remaining cashmoney.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis;15089838*
> 1. Buy 5D
> 2. Sell 17-50 f/2.8
> 3. Sell 60D
> 4. Purchase 135L and whatever else you want with the remaining cashmoney.


What remaining cash money?

1) Buy 5D -- this leaves me net -~$1000 (but up 1 5D)
2) Sell 17-50. I'll probably get about $600 for this, leaving me net -$400
3) I'm (hopefully) going to net approximately $900 for the 60D. net $500
4) Purchase 135L. Average used prices are between $800 and $950. at $875, I'm down $375, and no longer have a fast zoom or anything in my bag wider than 50mm.


----------



## Conspiracy

opinions on the SMC takumar 50 1.4 with a m42 adapter with focus confirm on my 7D. i have been suggested this lens from several people and it looks like a very solid performer and very affordable because its a much older lens. or the super takumar? from what i have seen rom looking around the SMC takumar 50 1.4 is better than the super takumar


----------



## solsamurai

Thanks for all the additional macro info guys.


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


What remaining cash money?

1) Buy 5D -- this leaves me net -~$1000 (but up 1 5D)
2) Sell 17-50. I'll probably get about $600 for this, leaving me net -$400
3) I'm (hopefully) going to net approximately $900 for the 60D. net $500
4) Purchase 135L. Average used prices are between $800 and $950. at $875, I'm down $375, and no longer have a fast zoom or anything in my bag wider than 50mm.


Your logic is flawed. I never suggested that it would make you a profit.


----------



## dudemanppl

Sell 17-50, 60D, buy 5D, 17-40L.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Sell 17-50, 60D, buy 5D, 17-40L.


That actually was one of my ideas - if I ever actually get paid for my damn 60D!


----------



## MistaBernie

Waiting on payment info, I'm going 5D baby!


----------



## BlankThis

Just got back from the World Press Photo 2011 exhibit that's in Montreal right now. I'm now fairly convinced this is something that I want to aspire to as a career.

The exhibit really showed me that there's so much more to an amazing photograph than tack sharp focus, level horizons, rule of thirds framing, or any of the things we nit-pick over in each others work.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *BlankThis*


The exhibit really showed me that there's so much more to an amazing photograph than tack sharp focus, level horizons, rule of thirds framing, or any of the things we nit-pick over in each others work.


:clapclapclap:

I am so glad to read stuff like this, and you probably understand why I view the "Rate the Photo Above You" thread as a complete trainwreck.


----------



## BlankThis

I've given up on it.


----------



## dudemanppl

A good photo tells a story, and not many do. And I want to be a PJ too, but the pay...


----------



## sub50hz

Lolhard at your system name. MUCH LOVE, G. What's your opnion on a 1DIIN? Thinking about picking one up for rainy-day little league football games, as I absolutely hate bagging the 50D and don't always have the IV at my disposal (and very shortly no availability at all).


----------



## dudemanppl

I'll let it go for like 850, I think it has like 230k clicks though. Menu sucks, everything else is boss. Why won't you be able to access the 1D anymore? D:


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


*A good photo tells a story*, and not many do. And I want to be a PJ too, but the pay...


Agreed.

Unfortunately I'm not that good yet


----------



## ljason8eg

Sooo Charlotte in two weeks. Since its just a trip for fun and to hang out with the good ole boys at the track, I want to rent a lens. Something I haven't tried yet. I can bring my whole kit, though who knows what the heck is going to be going on with my 50mm, but lets assume I have that too.

What should I rent? 10-22 or other UWA? Some L prime? It probably will be for use in the garage area in pits mainly since the 300 will take care of the on track stuff. I'm pretty much game for anything besides something with more reach than a supertele since I don't want to pay that much lol.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg;15097097*
> Sooo Charlotte in two weeks. Since its just a trip for fun and to hang out with the good ole boys at the track, I want to rent a lens. Something I haven't tried yet. I can bring my whole kit, though who knows what the heck is going to be going on with my 50mm, but lets assume I have that too.
> 
> What should I rent? 10-22 or other UWA? Some L prime? It probably will be for use in the *garage area in pits* mainly since the 300 will take care of the on track stuff. I'm pretty much game for anything besides something with more reach than a supertele since I don't want to pay that much lol.


I would say something on the wide end, the 10-22 would be nice...


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SeanWebster;15097113*
> I would say something on the wide end, the 10-22 would be nice...


That's what I was thinking, especially since I'm considering purchasing that lens anyway. Be nice to give it a test drive in the environment I shoot most of my pics in.


----------



## Sean Webster

This guy uses it all the time, http://www.flickr.com/photos/raymondn/


----------



## ljason8eg

Mmmm those are pretty hot.


----------



## Sean Webster

Yea, for the rolling shots he attaches a rod and mounts the camera on it and Photoshops it out pretty well. I would have never thought of that. Those pics are my fav. lol


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg;15097097*
> Sooo Charlotte in two weeks. Since its just a trip for fun and to hang out with the good ole boys at the track, I want to rent a lens. Something I haven't tried yet. I can bring my whole kit, though who knows what the heck is going to be going on with my 50mm, but lets assume I have that too.
> 
> What should I rent? 10-22 or other UWA? Some L prime? It probably will be for use in the garage area in pits mainly since the 300 will take care of the on track stuff. I'm pretty much game for anything besides something with more reach than a supertele since I don't want to pay that much lol.


Definitely try out the 10-22. Phenomenal lens; I used one on the 7D when I had it, killer pairing. I wish there were an equivalent FF lens of comparable quality and at the same price point.


----------



## scottath

I may have just sold 3 of my images








What sort of markup on cost price do you guys do (if youve sold things before?) i was thinking 40% ?


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scottath;15098309*
> I may have just sold 3 of my images
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What sort of markup on cost price do you guys do (if youve sold things before?) i was thinking 40% ?


40%? That's crazy. You're giving your work away at that price (unless it's for a friend/family member, then you're still pretty nice).

Are we talking like local sale, someone saw your stuff and wants a big print? The bigger they get, the more expensive they are. A nice 16x20 should easily be like $150 (which from a decent lab, not on canvas, would be somewhere along the lines of 250-300%)


----------



## scottath

its my first sale so i have no clue.....

I printed 4 shots - 100*33cm framed prints.
Cost was $95 (got a deal doing 4 at once and used cheaper paper) - normal cost would be $135 if done individually.

Its for a school - will be 2* 100*33cm + another larger one (4:1 ratio...so 132*33cm possibly).
My contact i know through church - but technically it would be the government paying








Just awaiting to find out their budget - she said 600ish but needs "upstairs" to give her actual figures.

I have no name for myself - and thats 15-20% down on others around the areas prices (assuming they produce for the same costs)

Doing the following shots:
3:1 crop of this
















and a slightly further edited version of:









the first is already printed and framed - thats the one she liked - then i showed her the others on my phone and she really liked them too......

I have no clue on pricing - hense the question







.
Local people have prints going for $375 - dunno if thats framed or not - but they have a name for themselves too......(same size btw)

EDIT - i was wrong with percentages - i was thinking ~$250 each.... - do people do bulk discounts in photography at all? im assuming ones of the same size likely as framing is cheaper....although these will be different sizes.


----------



## MistaBernie

those are pretty big. If they're costing you $100 to print, you should be selling them for at least double....

that being said, the person you're setting the deal up through is someone you know through church, and I have a somewhat soft spot for people who actually believe in something. That being said, the government is supposedly paying for it.. if they say the budget is $600 and you have no other expenses to deliver, then if they're willing to pay that much I say 'yeah, that's about what I was looking to get for them'.

If it was for an individual, then I would have charged the higher prices (probably $300/ea) but you dont want to wait on 'higher ups' to raise budgets if it really is government funded.. takes _forever (at least here)._


----------



## scottath

the time period will be short - they be looking to have them by the end of school holidays (2 weeks) so i wont be waiting much....
when i first said $250 each - she said stretching to 750 would be hard for the 3 of them, but thats all the indication she had for the pricing range she had in mind.

Cost price for the 2 100*33s is $130 + the other is at a guess $180 if they want 133*33.
Total = $440 if i add $15 for travel
then 40% makes it $616....
I dont know how much to milk it - as its my first sale....


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scottath;15098792*
> the time period will be short - they be looking to have them by the end of school holidays (2 weeks) so i wont be waiting much....
> when i first said $250 each - she said stretching to 750 would be hard for the 3 of them, but thats all the indication she had for the pricing range she had in mind.
> 
> Cost price for the 2 100*33s is $130 + the other is at a guess $180 if they want 133*33.
> Total = $440 if i add $15 for travel
> then 40% makes it $616....
> I dont know how much to milk it - as its my first sale....


Oh, ouch. I miscalculated something, if your total _cost_ is over $450 (if you include travel, which is legit if you ask me), then you _should_ be asking for ~$900.

I can completely understand the desire to not overcharge when you start out, but remember this -- in 6 months, if they want more shots and you have stuff to provide them, they have a price point. It'll be harder in the future for you to sell to them at your normal price if you cut them a deal without some sort of caveat, etc.

That being said, the first time you sell something, it really does feel good. Perhaps you can work out a deal where they will prominently display your name (and maybe a website?) wherever they display your work (if you're still willing to accept $600)


----------



## scottath

As far as im aware they dont mind having my name on them - although i didnt specifically ask.

Your not the first to mention the "6 months later" aspect.....
Still i dont want to overprice it such that i lose the sale.
anyhow - im seeing the lady again tomorrow - where ill show her the proper (not on my phone) versions of the 2 prints she hasnt seen actually printed and see what i can discuss further.....
Dam - selling artwork is as much of a pain as getting up at 430am to make the artwork lol


----------



## MistaBernie

I make an excellent devil's advocate, or so I've been told. I went as far as to hold up the sale of my 60D because the address on the Paypal transaction was unconfirmed even though the seller said that it was confirmed on his side. I refunded his payment, they sent the payment again and the 2nd time it went through as confirmed (which indicates to me that the address status is tied to the unique transaction).

TheMoreYouKnow.jpg

Also, you're not 'milking' anything. If you look at it as milking it, you're effectively saying 'so what, I took a couple of nice photos'. That's not the case. To capture a nice image, it takes alot of things - gear (which takes money), time and timing(which to many people equals money), and being able to see and capture it (skill, which takes time, which equals money). That adds up to _alot_ of money in my book.


----------



## scottath

yea - up to about $2k on gear with no return....its a hobby though so i dont mind that cost as much - still a return is nice
Time - yep...as i said 4:30am wake up is hard as i usually get up well past 8am.....yay for uni students









i guess time will tell.....anyone else feel free to chime in - im about to go to bed though - just past midnight here....


----------



## dudemanppl

I'm just pissed off I haven't gotten my early access BF3 yet. How can a T2i and those lenses be 2k?! Prices in Australia are terrible...


----------



## Conspiracy

have they started giving out early access for BF3 yet?


----------



## foothead

Open beta goes live tomorrow.


----------



## Phil~

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


I'm just pissed off I haven't gotten my early access BF3 yet. How can a T2i and those lenses be 2k?! Prices in Australia are terrible...


2K? That is more than twice the price of what it's worth. Now that what I call an exchange discrepancy lol.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Everyone seems to have great photographic activities going on lately! Between work, my mother-in-law being in town (for a *week*), and being in a total rut, I've shot jack squat lately.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*


have they started giving out early access for BF3 yet?


Supposed to be given out oh... 28 hours ago.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Everyone seems to have great photographic activities going on lately! Between work, my mother-in-law being in town (for a *week*), and being in a total rut, I've shot jack squat lately.










yea seriously....photo envy....


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Everyone seems to have great photographic activities going on lately! Between work, my mother-in-law being in town (for a *week*), and being in a total rut, I've shot jack squat lately.










lol I haven't seen my camera in a week.


----------



## laboitenoire

I've gotten some shooting in... Just haven't had time to process the RAW files.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


I'm just pissed off I haven't gotten my early access BF3 yet. How can a T2i and those lenses be 2k?! Prices in Australia are terrible...



Quote:



Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*


have they started giving out early access for BF3 yet?



Quote:



Originally Posted by *foothead*


Open beta goes live tomorrow.


I'm going to play the beta out of sheer peer pressure, but I could care less really. Who wants to play a buggy and unfinished game? I prefer the final product, which, knowing EA, should be plenty buggy in itself.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*


I've gotten some shooting in... Just haven't had time to process the RAW files.


This is my other problem. I enjoy shooting more than PP I think.







I have so many RAW files that I haven't processed.


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


This is my other problem. I enjoy shooting more than PP I think.







I have so many RAW files that I haven't processed.


That's why I like shooting film. Hand processing film is far more interesting than messing with digital files.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *foothead*


That's why I like shooting film. Hand processing film is far more interesting than messing with digital files.


Yes, if only I had the time, money, space, and inclination.







And of course a decent film body.


----------



## dudemanppl

Hour long hold, finally got to talk to some guy and I got a code for BF3. Said I love you to the guy so many times and he replied with, "As awkward as this is, I love you too."

ANYWAY... I love developing film. First time I did it I didn't know if I had done it right and the satisfaction of pulling out actual tangible material was neat.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


I'll let it go for like 850, I think it has like 230k clicks though. Menu sucks, everything else is boss. Why won't you be able to access the 1D anymore? D:


This weekend is my last week at the paper, it's crazy time from now til like March in the jewelry business.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Everyone seems to have great photographic activities going on lately! Between work, my mother-in-law being in town (for a *week*), and being in a total rut, I've shot jack squat lately.










I have midterms for four bio classes. My camera has been sitting on my desk for the past two weeks, looking at me with very sad eyes


----------



## BlankThis

Before I went to shoot those birds I had to dust off my poor D90









Full-time student + 30 hrs a week work + papers/assignments + life = No photog time.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *BlankThis*


Before I went to shoot those birds I had to dust off my poor D90









Full-time student + 30 hrs a week work + papers/assignments + life = No photog time.


No sleep time either, for that matter.

Doing the rough math, I'm deficient about 1800 hours of sleep since college started, or 75 days.


----------



## sub50hz

I keep the 1N with me at all times. Don't try and "make a day" of shooting all the time, just bring a cam with you when you're commuting and you'll be amazed how many opportunities will arise.


----------



## scottath

$2k was total spending.....
Bought a 350D + 18-55 + 55-250 + 50mm
Sold that lot for a 550D
Bought the 28-75 and 11-18mm too.

To replace what i have now at the costs i got them for (second hand ) its about 1400 (other gear too bought, flash / ND, battery grip, tripod etc etc)


----------



## robchaos

Can I get an update to my gear list? 
Add 
Nikon N70 SLR








Sigma EF430 super flash
Strobofram 350 Flash Bracket with I-ttl hotshoe cable
Nikon 35-80 f4-5.6

I picked up the N70 for $25 off craiglist with a tiffen UV filter, Hoya cross screen filter, r,b,y filters, a nice nikon camera bag and a cool looking old school olive green nikon strap that I put on my d90.

I just have to get batteries for this beast and I'm going to start carrying it around.

The guy even threw in 6 canisters of film for me. 5 were regular old kodak 200 and 1 was kodak tmax 400 b&w. I should have fun with that one.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis;15103313*
> Full-time student + 30 hrs a week work + papers/assignments + life = No photog time.


i feel ya. i run on red bull, coffee and bagels. sometimes, i self-administer IV fluids just to get back on track.


----------



## Sean Webster

I've slept for 5 hrs total last week.







4 so far this week though.


----------



## BlankThis

Some really cool photos from this guy... http://onlyapicture.tumblr.com/

Nothing that really makes you think but I find them very visual appealing.


----------



## Dream Killer

my co-worker showed this to me. i was f-in crackin' up all the way.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer;15107713*
> my co-worker showed this to me. i was f-in crackin' up all the way.


HAHAAHAHA, so true! OMG! lol

"Which one has the most MPs, I want the one with the most MPs. Does it have a zoom?"


----------



## dudemanppl

BF3 DOESN'T WORKING, I NEED 7 FOR IT TO WORK AND I'M MAD CAUSE I DON'T HAVE AN EXTRA DRIVE. How are you folks doin'?


----------



## solsamurai

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;15107780*
> BF3 DOESN'T WORKING, I NEED 7 FOR IT TO WORK AND I'M MAD CAUSE I DON'T HAVE AN EXTRA DRIVE. How are you folks doin'?


----------



## iandroo888

what would you guys suggest to get first...

sell the 18-105 and get 24-70... then eventually 70-200

OR

keep 18-105 and get 70-200.. then sell 18-105 and get 24-70


----------



## Sean Webster

For Canon or Nikon? Canon is most likely to release a new 24-70 soon, I would say keep 18-105 and get the 70-200atm.


----------



## iandroo888

nikon as it says in signature. yah i had that idea too cuz i dont think they'd make a VRIII anytime soon so probably safer to get 70-200mm f/2.8 VRII since that just came out not THAT long ago.. then wait for the VR version of the 24-70..


----------



## Sean Webster

Yea, that sounds like a plan... I didn't see your sig sorry! lol very tired, 4 hours of sleep all week


----------



## r34p3rex

Saw a 70-200 2.8 on Craigslist for $950 today.. It was gone by the time I called


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r34p3rex;15109676*
> Saw a 70-200 2.8 on Craigslist for $950 today.. It was gone by the time I called


f/4 IS?


----------



## dudemanppl

Dude you REALLY need some bed rest...


----------



## r34p3rex

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SeanWebster;15109691*
> f/4 IS?


2.8 non IS


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r34p3rex;15109676*
> Saw a 70-200 *2.8* on Craigslist for $950 today.. It was gone by the time I called


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SeanWebster;15109691*
> f/4 IS?


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;15109780*
> Dude you REALLY need some bed rest...


Man speaks the truth.

Well, boy.


----------



## Sean Webster

Lol holy crap you guys are right...I am trying lol. Stupid insomnia.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r34p3rex;15109787*
> 2.8 non IS


I would love that lens...its my next purchase.


----------



## dudemanppl

120-300!

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1041348/0?keyword=120-300mm#9892608
Holy crap silly good price on that. Whoever buys it I shall be eternally jelly of.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


nikon as it says in signature. yah i had that idea too cuz i dont think they'd make a VRIII anytime soon so probably safer to get 70-200mm f/2.8 VRII since that just came out not THAT long ago.. then wait for the VR version of the 24-70..


FWIW, my 70-200 VRII is ALWAYS plugged into one of my bodies, it's that good. IQ is incredible, goes toe to toe with primes in that range. VRII is nice, I've done some experiments with it and it does work but I use VR very seldom.
The IQ @ f/2.8 has to be seen to be believed.
I think you'll be waiting a long time for VR on the 24-70. Nikon has lots of other stuff on their plate and a 24-70 VRII is most likely low on their priority list. I'm personally hot for an 80-400 AFS VRII.


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


120-300!

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/top...-300mm#9892608
Holy crap silly good price on that. Whoever buys it I shall be eternally jelly of.


They have one for $450 at pawn shop near me. I was astounded at the price, but there has to be something wrong with it.


----------



## dudemanppl

What the flying funk? Even if it's broken, it's worth more than that.


----------



## MistaBernie

I was literally going to say 'I'll give you $600 to go buy it and mail it to me' and I'd send it to you to be fixed.


----------



## Conspiracy

i think i want to get a SMC takumar 50 1.4 its so affordable and there are a few on different sites. and i just got my paycheck just waiting for it to deposit. took forever but the last $300 of my money just came in yesterday, i hope it doesnt take this long to get the rest now that they are caught up


----------



## foothead

I was looking through some stuff and found a Tamron 35-210 F3.5-4.2 lens that apparently belonged to my mom. One problem though - She dropped it. The lens mount is crushed and it won't go onto a camera. All the glass is intact, and the aperture works smoothly.










Worth fixing, or no? It's an adaptall 2 model, so I can pull the mount off and put a new one. I checked eBay and it costs about $15 for a nikon mount.


----------



## Conspiracy

i dont see why it would be a bad idea. im sure at least it can turn a little profit possibly and might be another lens to just play around with


----------



## robchaos

I can't think of many working lenses that wouldn't be worth a $15 repair. Go for it.


----------



## foothead

Hmmm... http://www.adaptall-2.org/lenses/26A.html

It actually looks like it may be a pretty good lens. I've been looking at getting a nikon SLR so I can use autofocus with the 70-300, so I guess I'll get the nikon adapter while I'm at it. 35-210mm would make an excellent all purpose lens for 35mm.


----------



## dudemanppl

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=220865443182
Need to stop randomly bidding. Not a terrible deal though.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;15116248*
> http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=220865443182
> Need to stop randomly bidding. Not a terrible deal though.


The description on that made me lol.
Quote:


> I don't know much about cameras so that is why I can not tell you more about it. I asked my mom for a digital camera for Christmas and this is what she got me and I can't carry this around taking pictures, so I bought me a small camera for 99.00.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg;15116308*
> The description on that made me lol.


I was about to say the same. It's apparent that the seller is using a $99 camera too, just look at the photos.


----------



## dudemanppl

Eh, no charger, comes with 16 gig card. Seems REALLY stolen to me. But then again, I have almost no morals when it comes to photo gear. 120 dollar discount for no battery charger cause I said they were worth 150. Plus I have an extra one heh. Does anybody here want a free legit Canon BG-E2? Can't get it sold. Just pay like 15 for shipping and it's yours in box.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;15116417*
> Eh, no charger, comes with 16 gig card. Seems REALLY stolen to me. But then again, I have almost no morals when it comes to photo gear. 120 dollar discount for no battery charger cause I said they were worth 150. Plus I have an extra one heh. Does anybody here want a free legit Canon BG-E2? Can't get it sold. Just pay like 15 for shipping and it's yours in box.


If it was a BG-E4 then you'd have a deal...

In related news, got my used BG-E7. Seems pretty solid, but for some reason I feel like I prefer shooting the 7D _without_ the grip. I kept reading that the shutter button on the grips tend to be much more sensitive, and in my testing it actually does seem considerably more sensitive. Maybe I just need to give it another shot..


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;15116417*
> Eh, no charger, comes with 16 gig card. Seems REALLY stolen to me. But then again, I have almost no morals when it comes to photo gear. 120 dollar discount for no battery charger cause I said they were worth 150. Plus I have an extra one heh. Does anybody here want a free legit Canon BG-E2? Can't get it sold. Just pay like 15 for shipping and it's yours in box.


I'll grab it. Found a 30D for 150 bucks with 40K on the shutter, might as well make it usable.


----------



## dudemanppl

But read the name of my rig... CSS knife battle?


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;15116726*
> But read the name of my rig... CSS knife battle?


I approve


----------



## sub50hz

Huh? I don't play CSS. I am too lazy to do any work for it, so sell it to someone else if you want.


----------



## foothead

Nikon's cameras are confusing as hell. http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/compatibility-lens.htm

Apparently, there are only five models that work with all lens types, four of which cannot use matrix metering with manual glass, and two of which don't support VR.

I cannot afford an F6 at the moment, so what do you all recommend? I'm looking at the F70, but faster flash sync would be awesome.


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;15116417*
> Eh, no charger, comes with 16 gig card. Seems REALLY stolen to me. But then again, I have almost no morals when it comes to photo gear. 120 dollar discount for no battery charger cause I said they were worth 150. Plus I have an extra one heh. Does anybody here want a free legit Canon BG-E2? Can't get it sold. Just pay like 15 for shipping and it's yours in box.


I'll knife battle you in CSS for the chance to get it.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;15113178*
> What the flying funk? Even if it's broken, it's worth more than that.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie;15113186*
> I was literally going to say 'I'll give you $600 to go buy it and mail it to me' and I'd send it to you to be fixed.


Yeah I would think it would be. I should probably test it out. I'd definitely buy to resell too, but I'm short on funds to buy that lens.


----------



## laboitenoire

Trust me, you're not gonna run into too many pre-AI lenses that you'll want to use, and AI-converted are also pretty rare. I'd say just get either an F100 or an F5. Sure, you lose matrix meter on older lenses, but they're still very good cameras. Alternatively, if you can live without VR, get the F4.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire;15117171*
> Trust me, you're not gonna run into too many pre-AI lenses that you'll want to use, and AI-converted are also pretty rare. I'd say just get either an F100 or an F5. Sure, you lose matrix meter on older lenses, but they're still very good cameras. Alternatively, if you can live without VR, get the F4.


I don't worry about pre-AI, but I shoot manual focus glass all the time, so AI support is important.

I'll look at the F5 and F100, but they seem to be enormous and heavy, and they cost more than I wanted to spend.


----------



## dudemanppl

I keep hearing UPS trucks and it's killing me.


----------



## Conspiracy

what you waiting for?


----------



## dudemanppl

Broken gear I bought. 27 pound package...


----------



## dudemanppl

Well I just sorta pooped my pants. 35L waterdamaged, AF perfectly fine....


----------



## Shane1244

So then whats the damage on it?


----------



## lifeskills

What do yall think about this hdr grossness


----------



## Conspiracy

i think its the worst photo i have ever seen and you need to get your new rig setup and start cranking out 360 degree panos lol

not bad though its not over the top like most HDR shots


----------



## dudemanppl

Not the worst I've seen. HDR hobos are the worst. 50 1.4 micro-USM is very interesting.


----------



## Marin

Halo.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;15119744*
> Not the worst I've seen. HDR hobos are the worst. *50 1.4 micro-USM is very interesting.*


Don't get me started on that...lol.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead;15117396*
> I don't worry about pre-AI, but I shoot manual focus glass all the time, so AI support is important.
> 
> I'll look at the F5 and F100, but they seem to be enormous and heavy, and they cost more than I wanted to spend.


F100 is pretty cheap. You can get one in great shape for under $150 these days.


----------



## lifeskills

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*


i think its the worst photo i have ever seen and you need to get your new rig setup and start cranking out 360 degree panos lol

not bad though its not over the top like most HDR shots


Lol actually I lied, my telescope head can't do 360 panos because it doesn't center the lenses on its nodal axis. I guess I need something like this...
http://store.nodalninja.com/products...eveler-II.html

Thanks, I thought the hdr came out quite nice, don't usually shoot bracketed but last night was a good time.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Halo.


You're right, I didn't even spot that. Oh well they say video is more forgiving. This is just one frame out of like 500, and I got photomatix crankin out the rest right now, hopefully the halos don't get too bad. Looks perfectly fine to me though.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*


Don't get me started on that...lol.


Haha, I'd be so pissed off if I were you.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Haha, I'd be so pissed off if I were you.


I am to an extent. For the fact that I paid for a new lens with warranty which has been useless for some time now thanks to their inability to diagnose and/or fix the problem. On the other hand, there's not much I can do since I have no idea how to fix it myself. Hands are pretty much tied.

They've had it at the service center since last Friday and not a single bit of communication yet so guess I'll keep being patient.


----------



## mz-n10

ouch....peoples a little touchy?
http://www.techradar.com/news/photography-video-capture/cameras/nikon-apologises-for-facebook-camera-gaffe-1030434


----------



## dudemanppl

Wow I understand the recall now, the 5D mirror came off with a fingernail...


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nuclearjock;15110398*
> FWIW, my 70-200 VRII is ALWAYS plugged into one of my bodies, it's that good. IQ is incredible, goes toe to toe with primes in that range. VRII is nice, I've done some experiments with it and it does work but I use VR very seldom.
> The IQ @ f/2.8 has to be seen to be believed.
> I think you'll be waiting a long time for VR on the 24-70. Nikon has lots of other stuff on their plate and a 24-70 VRII is most likely low on their priority list. I'm personally hot for an 80-400 AFS VRII.


would be nice to have the range of the 70-200 and at 2.8. was considering the 70-200 cuz its the like focal range i dont have now. i have 12-105 covered.. 12-24 and 18-105... even tho the difference from 105 to 200 may not be that much (i think), it would be nice to have the focal length i think.

really about the 24-70? i thought the demand on wanting VR 24-70 would make it be produced faster... guess not D: would have thought they'd work on a VR version after the 24-70 had been out for a few years already


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire;15120411*
> F100 is pretty cheap. You can get one in great shape for under $150 these days.


That's the thing... it's $150, versus the F70, which I can get for $25. The only functional differences are faster flash sync and higher max shutter speed. This isn't going to be my main camera (actually, my fourth camera...) so I think I'd rather save that $125 for something more important, like lenses.


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iandroo888;15123394*
> would be nice to have the range of the 70-200 and at 2.8. was considering the 70-200 cuz its the like focal range i dont have now. i have 12-105 covered.. 12-24 and 18-105... even tho the difference from 105 to 200 may not be that much (i think), it would be nice to have the focal length i think.
> 
> really about the 24-70? i thought the demand on wanting VR 24-70 would make it be produced faster... guess not D: would have thought they'd work on a VR version after the 24-70 had been out for a few years already


Here is a tool that will show you the differnce between 105 and 200 (or any FL for that matter). Not perfect but a bad tool.

http://tamron-usa.com/lenses/learning_center/tools/focal-length-comparison.php


----------



## dudemanppl

The F100 is by far the best deal for a film camera. I was considering selling everything for like four and a 14-200 the G primes.


----------



## robchaos

I picked up am N70 (also known as f70) for $25 with lens and 5 filters. It's definitely a good buy for that cheap, but I am not a big fan of the digital menu for controlling everything.it is a weird interface and I would have rather had knobs.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iandroo888;15123394*
> would be nice to have the range of the 70-200 and at 2.8. was considering the 70-200 cuz its the like focal range i dont have now. i have 12-105 covered.. 12-24 and 18-105... even tho the difference from 105 to 200 may not be that much (i think), it would be nice to have the focal length i think.
> 
> really about the 24-70? i thought the demand on wanting VR 24-70 would make it be produced faster... guess not D: would have thought they'd work on a VR version after the 24-70 had been out for a few years already


I would dump your 12-105 in favor of a Nikon 17-55. No reason really to own a 24-70 on a crop body.

And I wouldn't get so caught up in covering every millimeter of a particular range with your lenses. It's pointless to think in those terms IMO. Think about what *usages* you need in a lens. If you need a fast standard walkaround zoom, then look for a 17-55/2.8 or equivalent. If you need a longer sports lens, look for a 70-200.


----------



## MistaBernie

I'm gonna miss my fast zoom... meeting with a potential buyer tomorrow afternoon. On the up side, if the deal happens I'll be able to get a nice 17-40 for relatively cheap, and all of my glass will work with both of my bodies (5D should hopefully be here today).


----------



## foothead

Just got my Sigma 70-300. Why is everything backwards?

Other than that, it looks good. This thing is huge (other lens is ZD 40-150)


----------



## BlankThis

duemanppl sell me your 5D

k thx bai.


----------



## Shane1244

Worst lens ever.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;15128003*
> Worst lens ever.


Not on four thirds.


----------



## Shane1244

Oh really? I'd image it'd be sharper, but does it get rid of a lot of the CA?


----------



## foothead

http://www.wrotniak.net/photo/43/zd-070-300.html Looks like it.


----------



## dudemanppl

I don't intend to ever ship to Canadia. Too much hassle. Anybody want to buy a 24-70 from me though?


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;15128828*
> I don't intend to ever ship to Canadia. Too much hassle. Anybody want to buy a 24-70 from me though?


I'll CSS knife fight you for _that._

I have no idea how a cascading style sheet holds a knife though.


----------



## sub50hz

HAHAHAHAHA. Probably some small-sensor garbage or maybe mirrorless SLR? If it's 5DIII, xmas sales would be huge.


----------



## mz-n10

5d3 sounds likely since the 5d2 is on discount


----------



## dudemanppl

Dear hellos550,

I promise this is not stolen, my mom didnt actually buy it for me like I said, but I am sellin it for my friend and his mom bout it at a sale but like I said it is a great camera and comes with everything listed if you dont want it I can cancel it

Hell of a shady guy, doncha think?


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;15129036*
> Dear hellos550,
> 
> I promise this is not stolen, my mom didnt actually buy it for me like I said, but I am sellin it for my friend and his mom bout it at a sale but like I said it is a great camera and comes with everything listed if you dont want it I can cancel it
> 
> Hell of a shady guy, doncha think?


Wait, you were the one who bought that 5D/24-70 kit on ebay you linked to yesterday?


----------



## MistaBernie

@ dudemanppl -- yes. avoid that like the fricken plague.

@ sub -- probably the official Pixma Pro1 series launch (according to a CR3 on Canonrumors)

@ mz-10 -- _very_ unlikely to get a new canon DSLR body this year. The rebates are a result of production adjustments due to the quake and slowly growing supply from everything I've seen. Though, I have been wrong in the past. I can't tell if the rumors are indicating 'no new bodies available' or 'no new bodies announced' this year. In a way, I hope it's available, means that we could get the big announcement(s) some of us have been waiting for in November.


----------



## sub50hz

Doubt they would print EOS on there for nothing.


----------



## mz-n10

possible, only reason why i would think its a new body is cause it says EOS at the footer. maybe its a printer + eos integration?


----------



## MistaBernie

Sub, care to make it interesting? Could be new glass but I'm willing to make a wager it's not a New or Upgrade to an existing DSLR body.


----------



## dudemanppl

I like dogs more than cats.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie;15128851*
> I'll CSS knife fight you for _that._
> 
> I have no idea how a cascading style sheet holds a knife though.


LOL, that's what I immediately think when I see "CSS." I guess we should say CS:S or something to differentiate. Style sheets FTW!!
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;15128924*
> HAHAHAHAHA. Probably some small-sensor garbage or maybe mirrorless SLR? If it's 5DIII, xmas sales would be huge.


Ooh..ahh...and not a damn will be given. Hard to believe it's any new DSLR since the overwhelming rumor-consensus is no new DSLR announcements in '11. And the 5D3 just has to be the next new body. It's way past due, as is the successor to the 1DsIII.


----------



## dudemanppl

Honestly I wouldn't much be interested in a 5DIII unless it had D3s noise performance. Everything else is useless for me.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;15129180*
> Ooh..ahh...and not a damn will be given. Hard to believe it's any new DSLR since the overwhelming rumor-consensus is no new DSLR announcements in '11. And the 5D3 just has to be the next new body. It's way past due, as is the successor to the 1DsIII.


Yeah, what I've seen is the 5D3 and the successor to the 1DsIII are the highest likelihood bodies -- as well as the fabled 'Nikon Killer', which I doubt would be the 5D3 or 1Ds4 themselves (the most consistent rumor I've seen is the 6D)


----------



## mz-n10

does canon come out with a new rebel annually?


----------



## dudemanppl

So far from the XSi (450D) onward they have.


----------



## MistaBernie

I dont know how I feel about that. I mean, *currently,* they have the Rebel line (T3 and T3i), then the 60D, then the 7D, then the 5Dii, then the various 1D iterations (1DsIII, 1D4, etc). If you include all the older versions of the rebels.. it's just a mish-mash. Does Canon really need to supply that many different bodies concurrently?


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie;15129261*
> I dont know how I feel about that. I mean, *currently,* they have the Rebel line (T3 and T3i), then the 60D, then the 7D, then the 5Dii, then the various 1D iterations (1DsIII, 1D4, etc). If you include all the older versions of the rebels.. it's just a mish-mash. Does Canon really need to supply that many different bodies concurrently?


I could see how its easy to be confused if you're a consumer that just wants a DSLR, knows nothing about them other than brand names, and goes to like, Best Buy for the purchase. There's just too many to pick from.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;15128828*
> I don't intend to ever ship to Canadia. Too much hassle.


Go to post office, ask for a flat rate international box. It's no more hassle than shipping it domestic.

If I go to best buy and tell them that I want to make sure my lens is compatible with one of their cameras, would they let me test it? I don't have a nikon yet, so I want to make sure the autofocus is okay.


----------



## MistaBernie

I'm pretty sure I've seen them do this foothead.. some guy in scrubs had a backpack with some gear and it looked like he was trying out a lens. I have to imagine you'd have a much better chance going to a local shop if you have one though. Been thinking about checking out Bromfield tomorrow after I sell my Sigma, so I can see where my 5D came from last month.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie;15129261*
> I dont know how I feel about that. I mean, *currently,* they have the Rebel line (T3 and T3i), then the 60D, then the 7D, then the 5Dii, then the various 1D iterations (1DsIII, 1D4, etc). If you include all the older versions of the rebels.. it's just a mish-mash. Does Canon really need to supply that many different bodies concurrently?


Consumers looking for entry-level don't know any better and will immediately want the "latest" Rebel body. As long as that mindset persists, Canon will make new Rebels left and right. It's their biggest money-maker.

Mid-range cameras and higher are different. Most who invest in such a camera tend to be more knowledgeable and realize the longevity a camera body can have, so it would be pointless for Canon to update their mid-range and pro line so often.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie;15129261*
> I dont know how I feel about that. I mean, *currently,* they have the Rebel line (T3 and T3i), then the 60D, then the 7D, then the 5Dii, then the various 1D iterations (1DsIII, 1D4, etc). If you include all the older versions of the rebels.. it's just a mish-mash. Does Canon really need to supply that many different bodies concurrently?


the rebel line for canon currently are (xs, t1i, t2i, t3,t3i) all priced about 50-100 bucks different from each other.....

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead;15129286*
> Go to post office, ask for a flat rate international box. It's no more hassle than shipping it domestic.
> 
> If I go to best buy and tell them that I want to make sure my lens is compatible with one of their cameras, would they let me test it? I don't have a nikon yet, so I want to make sure the autofocus is okay.


yes they will let you test on their bodies.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10;15129351*
> the rebel line for canon currently are (xs, t1i, t2i, t3,t3i) all priced about 50-100 bucks different from each other.....


They're not still making anything before the t3 though, but they do refurb them (at least to my knowledge)


----------



## mz-n10

you could be right, i just based my list off of BH. But on the official canon site they sell the t3,t2i,t3i. which makes sense since last year it was xs, t1i, t2i.


----------



## MistaBernie

Makes sense.

Hey, we're talking photo stuff! Yay.

I hope I dont get mugged tomorrow after (hopefully) successfully selling my 17-50. Kind of sad to switch to the 17-40, I like the low light goodness of the 17-50, but I've been messing with flash lately and I think it might be good practice for me to start working on that a bit more.

Instead of using full tripods, anyone have a line on relatively inexpensive light stands sturdy enough to hold 430EX IIs (or their YN copies) mounted on Cowboy Studio receivers?


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *robchaos;15127040*
> I picked up am N70 (also known as f70) for $25 with lens and 5 filters. It's definitely a good buy for that cheap, but I am not a big fan of the digital menu for controlling everything.it is a weird interface and I would have rather had knobs.


I found an N90 (Also know as an F90x). Even my first roll produced pretty good shots. I didn't realise this at first though, as the scanning done by the lab that did the processing was diabolical.

Just get them in glass mounts now, and do them myself.


----------



## mz-n10

i use a set of davis and sanford 10ft lighting stands, but i have also used a cheap tripod (

  like this ) for lighting. the difference is with lighting stands you can get up higher so you can do hair lights, etc.


----------



## Conspiracy

so the pawn shop near my school has a minolta 50 f1.7, worth trying to buy and adapt to my camera?


----------



## foothead

Just went to best buy. The only camera they had that would even power on was a d5100. It wouldn't allow me to set af on, but the aperture and metering both worked. I guess the camera isn't compatible? How can I tell the AF types apart?

EDIT: I found a little screw that seems to be coupled to the lens's autofocus. Well, I guess that answers my question.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*


so the pawn shop near my school has a minolta 50 f1.7, worth trying to buy and adapt to my camera?


how much and which mount?

Quote:



Originally Posted by *foothead*


Just went to best buy. The only camera they had that would even power on was a d5100. It wouldn't allow me to set af on, but the aperture and metering both worked. I guess the camera isn't compatible? How can I tell the AF types apart?

EDIT: I found a little screw that seems to be coupled to the lens's autofocus. Well, I guess that answers my question.


you need a d7000 or above to autofocus that lens. i know costco has a kit.


----------



## Conspiracy

im not sure what mount it is. i dont know the other types of mounts, i can go back and check. they wouldnt give me a price yet only because they just got it and it hasnt been priced yet. i think they didnt want me to rip them off because i went into the store and went straight to the photo stuff. they have a ton of old film gear none of the glass seemed worth bragging about mostly slow zooms. they had a weird lens i might go back and check again tomorrow. it was a JC Penny brand lens that was a 135 f2.8 ill have to double check but i know it was 135mm and JC penny which is a department store in the south.

i might go back and get that JC Penny 135mm just out of curiosity.


----------



## dudemanppl

Minolta lens, Minolta mount. Don't, cause you can't.


----------



## robchaos

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*


I found an N90 (Also know as an F90x). Even my first roll produced pretty good shots. I didn't realise this at first though, as the scanning done by the lab that did the processing was diabolical.

Just get them in glass mounts now, and do them myself.



I have a feeling that soon I will be purchasing a film scanner. My father gave me this old Pentax MX for free today with 3 lenses. I'm just waiting to use up this roll of B&W in the N70 and I will head off to the lab to get some prints made and see how they turned out! I'm lucky. I've got at least a couple reputable camera shops around for developing. none of this ritz camera or walmart bs


----------



## Conspiracy

yea after looking around it seems like minoltas stay as is and arent really adapted with ease


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*


im not sure what mount it is. i dont know the other types of mounts, i can go back and check. they wouldnt give me a price yet only because they just got it and it hasnt been priced yet. i think they didnt want me to rip them off because i went into the store and went straight to the photo stuff. they have a ton of old film gear none of the glass seemed worth bragging about mostly slow zooms. they had a weird lens i might go back and check again tomorrow. it was a JC Penny brand lens that was a 135 f2.8 ill have to double check but i know it was 135mm and JC penny which is a department store in the south.

i might go back and get that JC Penny 135mm just out of curiosity.


look on front ring, if it says maxxum or dyxum or alpha then thats a 100 dollar lens and i would say flip it on ebay. if it says rokkor then its a 10 bucks lens, its a pretty hard lens to convert since you need to file down the mount to remount.

JC penny makes some decent lenses, i believe they are rebranded honeywell(pentax) lenses. might be worth looking if its m42.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10;15130662*
> you need a d7000 or above to autofocus that lens. i know costco has a kit.


Yeah, I read that. Good thing I shoot film.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy;15130777*
> yea after looking around it seems like minoltas stay as is and arent really adapted with ease


http://brandymorecastle.org/projects/fourthirds/minolta-on-four-thirds.html


----------



## Conspiracy

yea im going to learn up on what all the different mounts look like so i can identify this JC penny 135mm.

as far as the minolta im going to pass and try to find a SMC takumar 50 1.4 since i know that is an easy MF lens to adapt and is a good one to start with since its not nearly as expensive as the nikkor 50 1.2 or the rokkor 58mm 1.2 that i was suggested on potn


----------



## mz-n10

smc takumar just uses a m42 mount. so you can find a m42 adapter.


----------



## Conspiracy

yup thats what i planned on once i find one which isnt that hard. they are all over various used sites. and a bunch on ebay mainly


----------



## biatchi

You'll want a chipped one with focus confirm. I had one for my 10D and it was pre programmed to insert f1.4 into exif.


----------



## BlankThis

Really hoping 5D3 is coming soon. Thus everyone offloading their 5D2s for it and everyone else offloading their 5Dcs for a 5D2.

Me? Profiting on old tech.


----------



## MistaBernie

We will very likely not be able to purchase a 5D3 until Q1 of 2012.. would be nice to see it announced in November though


----------



## robchaos

gonetomorrow, add a few more things to my list for film slr. Pentax MX SLR, Pentax M 50mm 1.7, Super Albinar 2x teleconverter, Quantaray 28mm f2.8

Thanks


----------



## Conspiracy

this afternoon if i dont find anything in any of the other pawn shops i plan to buy me a takumar 50 off one of the sites you guys have directed me towards for MF lenses. and ill get a AF confirm adapter off amazon probably


----------



## MistaBernie

I think this is the first time I've ever seen something sent USPS priority mail not arrive on the third day. Hasn't changed since Thursday (processed through a VA sort facility).. really hope my 5D gets here on Monday...


----------



## robchaos

Usps has been slacking lately.they are underwater right now financially.


----------



## biatchi

Got some Cactus V5's yesterday, they seem really nice







Haven't properly used them yet though.


----------



## MistaBernie

Man, I hate people that can't read. Guy tried to give me a Postal money order as partial payment for my 17-50...all sorts of sketch to boot. Was in love with the lens and raged hard when I told him no dice.
Luckily I lined up a backup sale.


----------



## Conspiracy

just shot the toughest soccer game. not only was there hardly any action because i couldnt keep a good angle but the sun just had to screw everything up lol. got about 30 good shots though, wish i got more but our soccer team is tough to shoot


----------



## sub50hz

Hey, I'm back. What a ridiculous weekend so far.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Hey, I'm back. What a ridiculous weekend so far.


What happened sir?


----------



## sub50hz

I'll run over the fun times tomorrow (too tired now), but it involved a lot of drinking, loose women, antiquing, crazy people and venturing into areas that should, by all rights, not be ventured into.

Sneak peek:


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*


just shot the toughest soccer game. not only was there hardly any action because i couldnt keep a good angle but the sun just had to screw everything up lol. got about 30 good shots though, wish i got more but our soccer team is tough to shoot


Which end do you mostly sit at? The home end or the away end?


----------



## Conspiracy

i sit at the away end to get my players running towards me and i put the setting set at my back so i dont get bad silhouetting which eventually happened more as there were super bad shadows on the field lol.

but yea i usually dont move too much to try and get the action but this was not a very exciting game which made it a little tougher to shoot i guess


----------



## MistaBernie

Ok, question: my 5D passed through a USPS sort facility on the 29th in VA and hasn't moved since. My thought is the seller should be the one to follow up with USPS re: where the package is, etc until the point where the system says it was felivered. Any thoughts? (I haven't yet asked him to do so, but just want to see what people think..)


----------



## robchaos

The USPS tracking system isn't like UPS, they don't update it every step of the way. I'd give it a few more days before you get worried.


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;15145088*
> loose women


ouf.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie;15147412*
> Ok, question: my 5D passed through a USPS sort facility on the 29th in VA and hasn't moved since. My thought is the seller should be the one to follow up with USPS re: where the package is, etc until the point where the system says it was felivered. Any thoughts? (I haven't yet asked him to do so, but just want to see what people think..)


Yeah, USPS tracking is basically useless. Sometimes it gives you a good idea of what's going on, but other times I've had no updates other than the package was delivered.


----------



## sub50hz

Wow, I don't even remember posting here last night. 2-day bender of bar-hopping and weird places will do that to you. Oh, and plenty of these:










I forgot how expensive city bars are, especially Bro Bars like Bull and Bear. We rented a table with a keg/tap in it and still managed to spend 450 bucks more on hard liquor. Went with some girl and her roommate back to their condo in the city and woke up on their balcony at 9 a.m., and promply got the hell out of there. I had to stop at Urban Outfitters and buy clothes because mine smelled like gross perfume and cigarettes, and train it back to my buddy's place in Ukranian Village. Then we went to Feed, which is an awesome breakfast place in Humboldt Park (pulled pork hash FTW), and then walked over to the Harvest Design Festival where we found some really awesome interior stuff (albeit way expensive). Got wrecked off cider and drove out to Marquette Camera (questionable neighborhood) and then for some reason decided going to a thrift store at 51st and Ashland (think East L.A.) was a good idea. I found a model M keyboard for 5 bucks, then we went back to the apartment, made some mexican food and drove way up north to a couple antique malls and garage sales. Ended up back in Wicker Park where we met some girls who gave us free tickets to see Social D on Thursday night, went to dinner with them, bought some Obey peacoat and then waled around shooting for a bit. Drove to Honky Tony BBQ in Pilsen, had a couple more drinks and listened to some free Country music for a bit, then came home to my two insane dogs. Now it's football time.


----------



## dudemanppl

Sub I've always wondered what you looked like. Post picture of self now.


----------



## robchaos

my pentax mx seems to either have shutter or mirror troubles at slower shutter speeds







. It sticks open.

Once I'm through this roll of film I might be disassembling it to check and see if I can figure out why


----------



## koulaid

Wow for some reason i never notice this thread. I'll join the club!


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;15149041*
> Sub I've always wondered what you looked like. Post picture of self now.


I'm more of an enigma, but pictures of me DO exist in some places.










June 2010, post-Hawks Stanley Cup craziness.


----------



## BlankThis

Is that the popo coming after to you?


----------



## sub50hz

Crowd control. After the game recap, the streets were flooded with people going insane. I had work the next day, so I was trying not to do anything that would get me arrested.


----------



## sub50hz

Haha, I found this gem from this summer:










On the right, reppin' the beer gut.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg;15148155*
> Yeah, USPS tracking is basically useless. Sometimes it gives you a good idea of what's going on, but other times I've had no updates other than the package was delivered.


It's not so much the tracking (which I've apparently had good luck with in the past). It's the fact that a package in VA on Wednesday should have gotten to Boston by Saturday for Priority Mail, and it didnt. If it doesn't get delivered on Monday, I'm going to be slightly bothered. If not here Tuesday, the seller's gonna have to do some investigation.


----------



## dudemanppl

I dunno why, but I always thought you'd look sort of like what your avatar was.


----------



## sub50hz

Sterling Hayden is more man than this entire forum _combined._


----------



## dudemanppl

I thought you'd be a skinny white guy because everyone on OCN is a skinny white guy. lolidunno


----------



## sub50hz

When did you pick up that 24/2.8? Still really want a 24L II.


----------



## dudemanppl

I haven't yet, actually... But I need a small prime set (17,24,40,50).


----------



## sub50hz

I'd be interested in seeing some stuff out of that 5D/5DII with it on, I'm contemplating nabbing one for kicks while I wait out a 1DIII or 24L.


----------



## sub50hz

Jeez, is anyone watching Packers/Broncos? Ridiculous. Maybe as ridiculous as Dallas eating a huge dick in the 2nd half at the hands of Calvin Johnson. WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO


----------



## Deano12345

Got a Siggy 17-35 a few weeks ago and been out shooting a ton more !


Japfest 2011-106 by DeanK12345, on Flickr

Any drift fans will know that car







for those who don't, its Freddie Aasbo at the prodrift final a few weeks ago


untitled shoot-005-2 by DeanK12345, on Flickr

And this one I took one handed, not looking through the viewfinder (me and my friend were bored waiting for the bus to pull off) it came out decently enough I think


----------



## sub50hz

I wouldn't call that second one "decent enough", it's just the back of someone's head with a truckload of lens flare.

edit: You know what, I feel like I should elaborate on that; there's just nothing to like. There's no feel to that at all, you can't see where the person is at, if they're waiting for something, what their expression is like and there's no evidence of any surroundings to reinforce any atmoshphere. Shooting from the hip can make for some interesting photos (lots of excellent street photogs emplore this method), but shooting a headshot from... the back... is certainly not what I would call inspired.


----------



## Deano12345

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


I wouldn't call that second one "decent enough", it's just the back of someone's head with a truckload of lens flare.


It seems to divide opinion for sure, there's people who have seen it like yourself who don't like it and then others who do


----------



## robchaos

I like the way his hair lays, and you can make out a little bit of earlobe, and that lens flare really brings out the stray light entering the lens.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Deano12345*


It seems to divide opinion for sure, there's people who have seen it like yourself who don't like it and then *others who do*


What do they like _about_ it?


----------



## Deano12345

Quote:



Originally Posted by *robchaos*


I like the way his hair lays, and you can make out a little bit of earlobe, and that lens flare really brings out the stray light entering the lens.


Cant tell if the last bit of your comment is sarcastic or not haha







(ive had a long day







) but thanks anyway









Yeah, from a technical standpoint, its meh (with the flare and that) but I had fun shooting that day and that's what everyone should get out of photography, regardless of how/what they shoot IMO

@sub50hz : Haven't really asked anyone specifically , they purely said they liked it is all


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Deano12345*


I had fun shooting that day and that's what everyone should get out of photography, regardless of how/what they shoot IMO


Photography isn't about looking for a good time, it's about creating something that inspires some kind of feeling or thought process inside of someone else. By all means, enjoy it, but try to objectively think about your work instead of just settling for sub-par because it's somehting you thought was "different".


----------



## BlankThis

If you like it than that's all that really matters, on the amateur level that is. It's all about capturing that moment in time, taking it out of context but keeping the context at the same time. Whether it's for you or for others, that's your decision.


----------



## robchaos

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Deano12345*


Cant tell if the last bit of your comment is sarcastic or not haha







(ive had a long day







) but thanks anyway









Yeah, from a technical standpoint, its meh (with the flare and that) but I had fun shooting that day and that's what everyone should get out of photography, regardless of how/what they shoot IMO


lol a little of both.







Flares don't always ruin a picture. In the sense that when I saw that shot I sort of felt like I could tell what that kid was thinking or doing, in that way it is effective. 
As a portrait no, maybe it works as more of an abstract.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *robchaos*


when I saw that shot I sort of felt like I could tell what that kid was thinking or doing


I'm interested in finding out what you're seeing that I'm not. There's no support in the image, it's just the back of a head.


----------



## Deano12345

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Photography isn't about looking for a good time, it's about creating something that inspires some kind of feeling or thought process inside of someone else. By all means, enjoy it, but try to objectively think about your work instead of just settling for sub-par because it's somehting you thought was "different".



Quote:



Originally Posted by *BlankThis*


If you like it than that's all that really matters, on the amateur level that is. It's all about capturing that moment in time, taking it out of context but keeping the context at the same time. Whether it's for you or for others, that's your decision.


Could type another reply out, but BlankThis summarised what I would have said in a much more eloquent way.

In other news, gonna try out my first prime during the week I think. Probably pick up either a 30 (2.8 I think) or a 50 1.8, both Sony. Have to wait for pay-day however !


----------



## sub50hz

*shrug*

What good is photography if you're only shooting to please yourself? I don't get that at all. It's like people with thousands of dollars in gear that have never made a print.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Deano12345*


Cant tell if the last bit of your comment is sarcastic or not haha







(ive had a long day







) but thanks anyway









Yeah, from a technical standpoint, its meh (with the flare and that) but I had fun shooting that day and that's what everyone should get out of photography, regardless of how/what they shoot IMO

@sub50hz : Haven't really asked anyone specifically , they purely said they liked it is all


True enough, everyone should enjoy shooting. However, beyond the feel someone gets from looking at a photo, there are things that can be evaluated objectively. I agree with what sub said about your second shot. The whole head is dark because of the back lighting, the top of the head is cut off, the flare of course, little if any context is seen in the framing, and a shot from the front with a well-lit face would look so much more interesting IMO. A little constructive criticism never hurts, especially in photography. I like receiving criticism as much as praise for a photo.

And the first shot is really good I think. The framing is nice, as the blurred BG, and the thumbs-up make it a great shot.


----------



## robchaos

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


I'm interested in finding out what you're seeing that I'm not. There's no support in the image, it's just the back of a head.


Haha don't get the wrong idea, i wouldn't put it in a magazine or anything. To me it looks like the kid is in the bus, he is resting his chin in his arms on the seat back watching the passing scenery. Possibly boredom or interest in the passing sights is what I get from it.

That is why I say maybe it works as an abstract. It is not such a horrible picture that it does not warrant further looking. I saw it, my focus was immediately drawn to the back of a kids head, I was not very interested by it, but I still took a minute to look a little more in depth and piece together a few minor details about it. All I'm saying is I've seen worse on tumblr from people who've probably thought it was better


----------



## BlankThis

Sub I respect your knowledge and skill a great deal, but to me photography is an art just like painting or dancing. Yes it has a very powerful ability, but unless I'm getting contracted by someone, I shoot for myself.

That being said I can see precisely where you are coming from.


----------



## Deano12345

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


*shrug*

What good is photography if you're only shooting to please yourself? I don't get that at all. It's like people with thousands of dollars in gear that have never made a print.


If I put up a photo, its cause I like it, or its interesting. If people like it, cool. However if they don't, it doesn't bother me. I think the two of us have completely different views on photography so I guess we can agree to disagree I guess.

@ everyone else posting above, thanks for the input. I've got some more shots from that day too










Japfest 2011-86 by DeanK12345, on Flickr

Could be a little sharper IMO, the copious amounts of smoke was fun however

The second one, im not sure weather only the sticker being in focus is a good thing or not. Opinions ?


Japfest 2011-68 by DeanK12345, on Flickr


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *BlankThis*


unless I'm getting contracted by someone, I shoot for myself.


Why? Sharing and making impressions on others with your work is the most rewarding part of being a photographer. Ansel Adams didn't get to be so widely-known by stockpiling his images underneath his bed.


----------



## BlankThis

Differing opinions bud. You're probably right, being the professional, but I'm happy doing what I'm doing.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *BlankThis*


Differing opinions bud.


Fair enough, although I'm unsure why someone _wouldn't_ want to share their work. Sure, there are good photos and bad photos (and I have taken plenty of the latter, believe me), but how would anyone ever know the difference unless another person took the time to tell them about it?


----------



## BlankThis

Valid point. But don't you think that you almost lose some of your originality by trying to fit this mold that is deemed to a good photo?


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *BlankThis*


But don't you think that you almost lose some of your originality by trying to fit this mold that is deemed to a good photo?


How do you mean? I'm not trying to evaluate on some list of rules, but there are some very basic things about shooting people that are no-nos, especially when shooting them from behind. Without a face you don't have expression, without surroundings you don't have atmosphere, and without those 2 things there are _too_ many unanswered questions.


----------



## dudemanppl

I haven't printed anything cause all my pictures suck. Only one of the pictures I've taken I have considered printing. Sometime in the next few weeks I'll go downtown and shoot stuff, but only with RF stuff. I honestly don't really like shooting SLRs anymore, I'd get an M9 but I really don't know.


----------



## sub50hz

I wasn't implicating you with that statement, lol. Just a generalization, you know -- those people shooting green box with their 1DsIII and 24-70 -- the jerkoff that rolls up in a car that costs more than my house.


----------



## dudemanppl

1DsIIIs don't have green box... but yeah everything I own costs more than my house too but. I agree with you photography is an art form, but landscapes don't evoke thought for me... Interesting things are interesting. Basically all non-photos wouldn't get what the hell you're talking about sub. Also to be honest I suck at taking pictures of friends because I put too much thought in to composition and I always want to wait for that "moment", you guys know what I'm talking about right?


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


1DsIIIs don't have green box...


Yeah, you know what I meant. I don't think they ever made a 1-series body with green box, have they?


----------



## dudemanppl

Nope, DEY TOO PRO. I love the 1DIIn, so cheap but so good. Pair it with a 120-300 and you'll be able to shoot everything.


----------



## sub50hz

I'm considering it, but I have my heart set on a 1DIII.


----------



## dudemanppl

Yeah as far as epicness of cameras I've had, D3 is first cause its full frame, but the 1DIII is easily the best crop camera I've ever handled. Great with a wide zoom like a 16-35.


----------



## sub50hz

17-40 was so awesome on APS-H. ISO handling in the 1DIV was good enough for me to ignore the one-stop diffrerence between it and the 16-35.


----------



## BlankThis

Kay well sell me your 5D then


----------



## biatchi

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*


Yeah, USPS tracking is basically useless. Sometimes it gives you a good idea of what's going on, but other times I've had no updates other than the package was delivered.


Royal Mail's tracking is the same.


----------



## foothead

My mom just found my old Hexanon 40/1.8 pancake in a random drawer. I just remove the black ring, then there are two screws holding the aperture pin in place, correct?










I went on a hike earlier today. I have a few pictures uploading, I'll post them when they're done.

Also, I took this panorama at Lake Martin, LA 2 weeks ago. It was midday, so lighting was terrible, but I think it came out okay. I had probably 200 mosquitoes swarming around me at the time.

EDIT: Okay, here's a panorama I took today. Other than that, there really wasn't that much to photograph since I left my long lenses at home. It was a pretty nice hike though, especially when the geese were chasing me around.


----------



## Conspiracy

wow that was an intense episode of breaking bad tonight


----------



## sub50hz

Just finished it. My heart is going pretty good here, not sure if I breathed once during that last scene.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Just finished it. My heart is going pretty good here, not sure if I breathed once during that last scene.


i know right. next sunday is it!


----------



## sub50hz

I hope they don't wait 9 months for season 5, I would be real pissed about having to endure that again.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Deano12345*


Could type another reply out, but BlankThis summarised what I would have said in a much more eloquent way.

In other news, gonna try out my first prime during the week I think. Probably pick up either a 30 (2.8 I think) or a 50 1.8, both Sony. Have to wait for pay-day however !


35/1.8 is what you should spend your money on


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *biatchi;15153122*
> Royal Mail's tracking is the same.


"Your parcel is in our system"

Is sometimes all I get, lol.

Just ordered 36 exposures of ektar 100. Got no idea what to do with print film with regards to the internet.


----------



## foothead

I was playing with my Oly kit lens earlier, and I managed to do this (sorry for bad cell phone pic, I obviously couldn't use my DSLR)










I'm seriously tempted to shave a bit off of that ring and fit a gasket in there. Anyone ever done this?


----------



## BlankThis

Ew.


----------



## foothead

Weathersealed ZD 14-42.









Now I just need to find some sort of O-ring that I can mount on the camera.

Sidenote: Why do all camera manufacturers put the gasket on the back of the lens, instead of on the camera? It'd cut down costs and it'd make non-weathersealed primes somewhat more safe in rain.


----------



## MistaBernie

Dont ever leave your house during your lunch hour when you're expecting something signature required USPS. It will inevitably show up, even if you're only gone for 15 minutes, and you'll miss the delivery.


----------



## silvrr

Quote:



Originally Posted by *foothead*


Sidenote: Why do all camera manufacturers put the gasket on the back of the lens, instead of on the camera? It'd cut down costs and it'd make non-weathersealed primes somewhat more safe in rain.


I think it is an expense that is added when a lens is weathersealed. There is more to sealing up a lens than the rear seal. The lens body interface is just one peice of the equation. Yes your body is sealed off but the rest of the lens could let moisture in.


----------



## dudemanppl

Weathersealing = the thinnist little bit of felt around gaps. Nothing to poop over. Best sealed peice of camera equipment I have seen thus far is the 580EX II, every gap has copious amounts of rubber seals. But they were submerged for a long while so it got in through the LCDs and flashhead. Also if I get kicked off the school newspaper I'm buying an M9.

And if the D800 rumors prove true, I'm totally dumping the 5DII.


----------



## iandroo888

ive decided. next lens, 24-70. LOL borrowed a friends 70-200 during photowalk.. way too long for practical use. see a few being sold on FM for about 1500.


----------



## sub50hz

24-70 sucks on a crop. BWOOSH.


----------



## Conspiracy

i agree its great but doesnt feel right on a crop. i would also rather have a prime instead like just a 50 on a crop rather than a 24-70


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


ive decided. next lens, 24-70. LOL borrowed a friends 70-200 during photowalk.. way too long for practical use. see a few being sold on FM for about 1500.


1. Why not a 17-55? I feel it's better on a crop.

2. I do hope you're planning to sell off some gear







A lot of overlap with that 18-105.


----------



## MistaBernie

I'm so spoiled by my 7D's menu, I feel like the 5D's should be in black and white or something.


----------



## dudemanppl

I love the 24-70 on crop... :3 Probably because 35 is my favorite FL on 35mm. 36-105 is a nice range. Sharp as hell and just good to use.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


1. Why not a 17-55? I feel it's better on a crop.

2. I do hope you're planning to sell off some gear







A lot of overlap with that 18-105.


if i get 24-70, 18-105 will be sold.

ive used the 24-70 quite a few times. i have used the 17-55 as well but id like a little more reach and since i have 12-24 anyway


----------



## koulaid

24-70L is decent on crop. But it shines a bit more on FF. But personally for me. Primes all the way.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


if i get 24-70, 18-105 will be sold.

ive used the 24-70 quite a few times. i have used the 17-55 as well but id like a little more reach and since i have 12-24 anyway


This is very true.

I also just noticed you have the same camera bag and strap as me. What color/size is your Timbuk2?


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


This is very true.

I also just noticed you have the same camera bag and strap as me. What color/size is your Timbuk2?


medium. black

ive kept the 18-105 is best condition possible when being used. had a hoya HD filter on it since i got it from uncle. he had a filter on it as well. should be able to get about 200 shipped from it...


----------



## ljason8eg

I swear the Canon service center is ******ed. I called last Friday asking what was going on with my lens because it had been 5 days since they got it. Guy told me they hadn't got my lens in yet. I thought that was really odd, but I couldn't find the UPS tracking number so I had no proof it got there.

Now today I found my tracking number...they got it on the 26th of September. A week ago today. Yet they claim that they don't have it....


----------



## foothead

I wish I could get it on upright. One of the tabs is slightly longer than the other two, so it can only go on like that.

Oh well, it seems to work great otherwise. Focuses a tad beyond infinity, but it's not a big deal on this lens.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iandroo888;15165894*
> medium. black
> 
> ive kept the 18-105 is best condition possible when being used. had a hoya HD filter on it since i got it from uncle. he had a filter on it as well. should be able to get about 200 shipped from it...


Sounds like a reasonable price. I'd stick it up for sale here on OCN. Good number of new Nikon users, judging from the looks of the photo section, and a few of them might be interested in an 18-105 for less than retail








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg;15166020*
> I swear the Canon service center is ******ed. I called last Friday asking what was going on with my lens because it had been 5 days since they got it. Guy told me they hadn't got my lens in yet. I thought that was really odd, but I couldn't find the UPS tracking number so I had no proof it got there.
> 
> Now today I found my tracking number...they got it on the 26th of September. A week ago today. Yet they claim that they don't have it.


Yikes









Hopefully it's just a mixup on their part. I swear, that 50 of yours is cursed or something. You didn't happen to buy it from a place built on an Indian burial ground, did you?


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;15166101*
> Yikes
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hopefully it's just a mixup on their part. I swear, that 50 of yours is cursed or something. You didn't happen to buy it from a place built on an Indian burial ground, did you?


I bought it from Amazon lol. I've dealt with a lot of RMAs over the years and I have never experienced something like this. I'm going to call back in the morning when a higher up manager is in. I still say it would cost them less to just give me a new one.


----------



## dudemanppl

Dude, drive down to Irvine and throw your 50 in someones face at the service center.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;15166328*
> Dude, drive down to Irvine and throw your 50 in someones face at the service center.


That's like a 7 hour drive lol.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg;15166367*
> That's like a 7 hour drive lol.


Grab some Bay Area OCN photogs and have a road trip!


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;15166424*
> Grab some Bay Area OCN photogs and have a road trip!


Hmmm...if we split gas!


----------



## dudemanppl

Dude we can have a meetup. Jason, reincarnated, Marin, me, and I'm pretty sure there's one more guy sort of close to you folks.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg;15166493*
> Hmmm...if we split gas!










This trip needs to be given some serious thought. Could be fun!
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;15166573*
> Dude we can have a meetup. Jason, reincarnated, Marin, me, and I'm pretty sure there's one more guy sort of close to you folks.


mz is also in the Bay Area.


----------



## dudemanppl

Five people... HMMM.


----------



## sub50hz

Just come to Chicago.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;15166881*
> Just come to Chicago.


Pay for my flight first









This year, planning to visit UCs SD, LA, Davis, and Cal. Hoping to save up money for a flight to NJ to visit one of my closest friends and go visit NYC with her.

Where all my spare money is tied up


----------



## Dream Killer

Too bad I'm on the awesomer side of the country.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;15166973*
> Pay for my flight first
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This year, planning to visit UCs SD, LA, Davis, and Cal. Hoping to save up money for a flight to NJ to visit one of my closest friends and go visit NYC with her.
> 
> Where all my spare money is tied up


Is that going to be a date where it's going to be awkward if she tags along on a photowalk? (i got an extra dslr though!)


----------



## Conspiracy

oh really. i think im on the awesomer side of the country


----------



## r34p3rex

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer;15167061*
> Too bad I'm on the awesomer side of the country.


This


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy;15167071*
> oh really. i think im on the awesomer side of the country


we're on the same side!
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r34p3rex;15167073*
> This


exactly.

in other news, 9/11 memorial site is booked basically until oblivion. ughhhhhh


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;15166594*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This trip needs to be given some serious thought. Could be fun!


speaking of Socal....i gotta wake up at 4am...fly to LAX then walnut tomorrow, then el sagundo on Wednesday then back to teh bay that night....


----------



## Conspiracy

southside lol

but east side is the best


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer;15167061*
> Too bad I'm on the awesomer side of the country.


*Cough*

Awesomer city, I will concede. Awesomer side, ehhhh









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer;15167061*
> Is that going to be a date where it's going to be awkward if she tags along on a photowalk? (i got an extra dslr though!)


Nah, I doubt it'd be awkward. It also wouldn't be a date. She and I are like siblings except we're only vaguely genetically related.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy;15167071*
> oh really. i think im on the awesomer side of the country


*More coughing*
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r34p3rex;15167073*
> This


Oh jeez, now I need a lozenge.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10;15167249*
> speaking of Socal....i gotta wake up at 4am...fly to LAX then walnut tomorrow, then el sagundo on Wednesday then back to teh bay that night....










Why the frequent flights?


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;15166573*
> Dude we can have a meetup. Jason, reincarnated, Marin, me, and I'm pretty sure there's one more guy sort of close to you folks.


I'm flying in.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie;15165623*
> I'm so spoiled by my 7D's menu, I feel like the 5D's should be in black and white or something.


Better yet no menus?

I hate modern DSLRs for how stupidly complicated they've made them. Meanwhile Leica has what I want... For 9K.


----------



## dudemanppl

M6. Its like a M9, but better.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*
> Sounds like a reasonable price. I'd stick it up for sale here on OCN. Good number of new Nikon users, judging from the looks of the photo section, and a few of them might be interested in an 18-105 for less than retail


i dont really care where i sell it.. whether it be on OCN or FM. as long as it goes to a good buyer that wont give me trouble and they will take care of it xDDD


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iandroo888;15169667*
> i dont really care where i sell it.. whether it be on OCN or FM. as long as it goes to a good buyer that wont give me trouble and they will take care of it xDDD


So I'm not allowed to buy it just to throw it at a stranger on the street?


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;15168367*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why the frequent flights?


business trip....


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10;15169679*
> business trip....


Yikes; well, at least it's all within the same time zone. Safe travels to you! (And hopes of less fondling by the TSA and no slow pokes at the X-ray machines)


----------



## laboitenoire

So I discovered today that the library at my university has a total of five Nikon Coolscan V scanners, one Coolscan 9000, a Pacific Image Powerslide 3650, an Epson Perfection 4990, and a Perfection 10000XL. And you can book any of the equipment for two hours at a time free of charge.

My inhibitions towards shooting film just dropped by several orders of magnitude.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;15169692*
> Yikes; well, at least it's all within the same time zone. Safe travels to you! (And hopes of less fondling by the TSA and no slow pokes at the X-ray machines)


thanks....yea tsa are going to be tight after killing al-awlaki today

im looking at a film body and theres one on sale at keh in BGN condition for 120 shipped. theres the same body for 106 shipped in V condition at adorama....which should i go for?


----------



## dudemanppl

Here, have a random 35L shot from like two months ago from Facebook.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


So I'm not allowed to buy it just to throw it at a stranger on the street?










.... as long as u pay for it in full and you video record it happening...


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Dude we can have a meetup. Jason, reincarnated, Marin, me, and I'm pretty sure there's one more guy sort of close to you folks.



Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Just come to Chicago.



Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Pay for my flight first









This year, planning to visit UCs SD, LA, Davis, and Cal. Hoping to save up money for a flight to NJ to visit one of my closest friends and go visit NYC with her.

Where all my spare money is tied up











Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*


Too bad I'm on the awesomer side of the country.

Is that going to be a date where it's going to be awkward if she tags along on a photowalk? (i got an extra dslr though!)



Quote:



Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*


oh really. i think im on the awesomer side of the country


None of you have anything on the the awesomeness that is KENTUCKY.







I dare any of you to come here.


----------



## sub50hz

We do Louisville a couple times a year. KY is _alright_.


----------



## MistaBernie

Huh. I'm wondering if I have someone's bad luck with 50s all of a sudden. My 50 f/1.4 seems soft on my 5Dc..


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Here, have a random 35L shot from like two months ago from Facebook.


LOL colorguard.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


We do Louisville a couple times a year. KY is _alright_.


In italics no less! It's pretty boring here really, but it's tops for nature and the like.








Plus my city has a relatively low cost of living and some of the highest quality of living in the US.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


Huh. I'm wondering if I have someone's bad luck with 50s all of a sudden. My 50 f/1.4 seems soft on my 5Dc..


Soft at all apertures? At wider than f/2, the 50 is fairly soft, esp. at 1.4, but I always found it useable nevertheless.


----------



## MistaBernie

Soft may not have been the right word, but I may just be used to an articulating screen where I feel like I can see things a little sharper. Jury hasn't even left the room yet, I plan on doing some thorough testing this weekend (hopefully).

And not sitting around my office, test, retest, re-retest testing, but hopefully going out and doing some actual shooting and seeing what I can get at _an actual focal length of 50mm_ (it seems more wide than I thought it would on FF)


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


Soft may not have been the right word, but I may just be used to an articulating screen where I feel like I can see things a little sharper. Jury hasn't even left the room yet, I plan on doing some thorough testing this weekend (hopefully).

And not sitting around my office, test, retest, re-retest testing, but hopefully going out and doing some actual shooting and seeing what I can get at _an actual focal length of 50mm_ (it seems more wide than I thought it would on FF)


Oh yeah, I bet it might have to do in part at least with the 5Dc's LCD screen. It has less than one-third or so the number or dots that the newest Canon DSLR's have, so judging sharpness is difficult with such a low res screen. I had the same issue with the 40D. The low-res screen actually led me to believe that some shots weren't that sharp, though they were actually sharp on a monitor.

And primes make shooting FF so worthwhile.


----------



## MistaBernie

Now I just need to get a decent card reader... transfers out of my 7D take no time, but out of the 5D take _forever... _ and the cheap card reader I have took 9 minutes for ~40 raws.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote: 
   Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*   Now I just need to get a decent card reader... transfers out of my 7D take no time, but out of the 5D take _forever... _ and the cheap card reader I have took 9 minutes for ~40 raws.  
USB 3.0 or eSATA reader all the way. I got a    Lexar USB 3.0 reader and blows the lid off USB 2.0 or Firewire. I can dump a 16 GB CF card full with 20 MB+ each RAW files in about 5 min. or less.


----------



## MistaBernie

P6T doesn't handle USB 3.0 (afaik)... I'd be willing to try an E-sata reader though. Actually.. would I be able to put a card with 5D images in my 7D and try to transfer them that way? For some reason, it's like a couple of seconds per image for raws coming from my 7D, and it's like ... way too long through the 5D.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


P6T doesn't handle USB 3.0 (afaik)... I'd be willing to try an E-sata reader though. Actually.. would I be able to put a card with 5D images in my 7D and try to transfer them that way? For some reason, it's like a couple of seconds per image for raws coming from my 7D, and it's like ... way too long through the 5D.


Well, there's always the USB 3.0 PCI adapters, but eSATA is fine, and roughly the same speed anyway.

Weird that the 5Dc is slow in transferring from the camera directly. I'm pretty sure it's USB 2.0 like the 7D is (maybe the 5Dc doesn't support UDMA cards?). And I don't see why popping a CF card from a 5Dc to a 7D wouldn't work, since Windows just recognizes them as mass storage devices.


----------



## MistaBernie

The 5Dc doesn't in fact support UDMA cards. UDMA cards are backwards compatible though, so I can save info on them. Since the 7D does support UDMA I'll give that a go tonite.


----------



## r34p3rex

Ohhh I see you've finally picked up that 7D


----------



## MistaBernie

Yep yep, got it... two weeks ago? Then I found someone willing to give me $925 for my 60D and grip, so I turned that into a 5Dc. What with the refurb price bringing the 60D under $700 via CLP, I had to.


----------



## r34p3rex

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


Yep yep, got it... two weeks ago? Then I found someone willing to give me $925 for my 60D and grip, so I turned that into a 5Dc. What with the refurb price bringing the 60D under $700 via CLP, I had to.


Haha nice. Next step.. 7D+5Dc for 5D2


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r34p3rex*


Haha nice. Next step.. 7D+5Dc for 5D2










Nope, then I'd only have one body again. Besides, if the announcements are coming at the end of this year w/ a refresh at the beginning (hoepfully) of next year, then 5Dii might find its way onto the CLP. I sell the 5Dc for a little less than I paid for it since I can't confirm shutter count and make the difference up out of my annual bonus (or I just splurge for the super new one, which I doubt I would do.. at least without living). The 5Dii is slowly starting to come down in value.. I just need to time my attack right.

Besides, I really do like the focus system and the FPS the 7D can put out. True story, I was able to make a sandwich before my 5Dc could take 8 frames (Ok, not really, unless I tried the cartoon method of shuffling bread, deli meat and cheese). Unless the next 5D or the 'Nikon-Killer' (which I still think will be the 6D) competes with it, then I'm perfectly happy with a high quality crop body. Besides, it effectively becomes a 1.6x for all my lenses. Nice to have the 70-200 f/4L getting me an effective 320mm.


----------



## Prpntblr95

I would like to join

I have a Grip'd Canon 40D
Canon EF 70-200L f/4 USM
Canon EF-S 55-250 f/4-5.6 IS
Canon EF 28-90 f/4-5.6 USM


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Prpntblr95*


I would like to join

I have a Grip'd Canon 40D
Canon EF 70-200L f/4 USM
Canon EF-S 55-250 f/4-5.6 IS
Canon EF 28-90 f/4-5.6 USM


Welcome!


----------



## Prpntblr95

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie;15175089*
> Welcome!


Thank you


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Prpntblr95;15175070*
> I would like to join
> 
> I have a Grip'd Canon 40D
> Canon EF 70-200L f/4 USM
> Canon EF-S 55-250 f/4-5.6 IS
> Canon EF 28-90 f/4-5.6 USM


Added


----------



## Prpntblr95

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;15175307*
> Added


Do you guys have a Sig link thingy?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Prpntblr95;15175392*
> Do you guys have a Sig link thingy?


Welcome! We don't have an "official" sig link, but you're welcome to use mine:



PHP:


[IMG alt="camera.gif"]https://www.overclock.net/images/smilies/camera.gif[/IMG][URL=http://www.overclock.net/art-graphics/312165-camera-thread.html]Official OCN Camera Club[/URL] [IMG alt="camera.gif"]https://www.overclock.net/images/smilies/camera.gif[/IMG]


----------



## Prpntblr95

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;15175605*
> Welcome! We don't have an "official" sig link, but you're welcome to use mine:
> 
> 
> 
> PHP:
> 
> 
> [IMG alt="camera.gif"]https://www.overclock.net/images/smilies/camera.gif[/IMG][URL=http://www.overclock.net/art-graphics/312165-camera-thread.html]Official OCN Camera Club[/URL] [IMG alt="camera.gif"]https://www.overclock.net/images/smilies/camera.gif[/IMG]


Ok sweet thanks!


----------



## dudemanppl

35L never ceases to blow me away.


----------



## sub50hz

www.overclock.net/overclock-net-related-news-information/1130639-editorial-positions-available-overclock-net.html

Vote me up. Love you all, LONG TIME.


----------



## MistaBernie

For what position?


----------



## sub50hz

This forum, silly.


----------



## Jobotoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;15178433*
> This forum, silly.


Isn't GoneTomorrow the editor for this forum?


----------



## sub50hz

He needs assistance, it came to me in a vision.


----------



## MistaBernie

I'll CSS Knife fight you for his assistant position...


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie;15178846*
> I'll CSS Knife fight you for his assistant position...


I'll drink you under the table for it.

BOSTON vs. CHICAGO SOUTH SIDE IRISH BOOZE BATTLE 2011


----------



## dudemanppl

Lawd, that sounds quite fun. Especially cause nothing ever goes bad here except that penis one time...


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;15179121*
> I'll drink you under the table for it.


Seeing as how I seem to be one of the few Asians with a functioning alcohol dehydrogenase gene expression, you're on!


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;15179121*
> I'll drink you under the table for it.
> 
> BOSTON vs. CHICAGO SOUTH SIDE IRISH BOOZE BATTLE 2011


Lol, Chicago Irish vs Boston Irish? You's trollin...


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


Lol, Chicago Irish vs Boston Irish? You's trollin...


You don't even know.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mount_Greenwood,_Chicago

They didn't ban the South Side Irish Parade for nothing (imagine being told that it was the reason you drank so much in college -- to prepare for parade day).

We could make it the BATTLE FOR GT's ASSISTANT EDITOR by doing the Bourbon Challenge as an homage to his home state.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Seeing as how I seem to be one of the few Asians with a functioning alcohol dehydrogenase gene expression, you're on!










BRING IT ON







whats happening? im one of the few too xD no glow. extremely high tolerance


----------



## MistaBernie

It's funny. I was supposed to be heading to Chicago soon but the wife vetoed for Florida next month instead.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


BRING IT ON







whats happening? im one of the few too xD no glow. extremely high tolerance




















That's you on the right


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie;15180530*
> It's funny. I was supposed to be heading to Chicago soon but the wife vetoed for Florida next month instead.


Chicago in October? A gamble if there ever _was_ one. Could be 80 degrees, could be 20. Nobody ever knows. Last Halloween it was 78 and rainy, the year before that it snowed 4 inches. Then it was 75 on Thanksgiving.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iandroo888;15180455*
> BRING IT ON
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> whats happening? im one of the few too xD no glow. extremely high tolerance











I THOUGHT I WAS THE ONLY ONE!! but I'm too old for that hahaha


----------



## ljason8eg

Latest episode in the 50 1.4 saga:

Remember how they supposedly hadn't got the lens as of yesterday? Well, today I got an email saying the repair was done and it has been shipped back to me lol. It should arrive Thursday. We shall see...


----------



## sub50hz

What a load.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


What a load.


Tell me about it. I'd put money on it not being fixed.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*











That's you on the right :d


lol !


----------



## sub50hz

I hope you're all ready for this.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


I hope you're all ready for this.











I love scotch


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


He needs assistance, it came to me in a vision.


LOL, maybe so!

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


You don't even know.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mount_Greenwood,_Chicago

They didn't ban the South Side Irish Parade for nothing (imagine being told that it was the reason you drank so much in college -- to prepare for parade day).

We could make it the BATTLE FOR GT's ASSISTANT EDITOR by doing the Bourbon Challenge as an homage to his home state.



Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


I hope you're all ready for this.











LOL, now hold on - if it's going to be a Bourbon Challenge, then why the Scotch? How 'bout some Woodford Reserve? It's a 20 min. drive from my house.


----------



## sub50hz

It's the closest thing I could think of. I don't drink bourbon very often, _but I will for this job_.

edit: That picture was from maybe 4 years ago, when my buddy from AZ was in -- that was the damage from the two of us in about 3 hours, and we ended up doing a lot of _really_ stupid things like using a pellet gun to shoot beer bottles out of each others' hands. I want to go back to college. Oh yeah, Johnny Walker isn't so great when it's revisited hours later.


----------



## MistaBernie

All I see are two of probably many bottles that Sub couldn't finish. Just sayin'...


----------



## sub50hz

Lol. Come here, we'll go to Three Floyds.


----------



## MistaBernie

lol, if I had the money to fly to Chicago and enter the _ultimate_ pissing match with you (let's face it, if we were drinking half as much as our heads are telling us we'd be drinking, that's exactly what it'd be) I wouldn't be spending it on .. well.. flying to Chicago to enter a pissing match with you.









You know I'm just messin with you though Sub.. those days are long behind me now anyway, can't drink like I'm 20-24 anymore..


----------



## sub50hz

True, true. I can barely hold it down like I was 21 again, but if you or anyone else here, for that matter ever find yourselves in Chicago, rest assured you'll endure somg long days of shooting and drinking the best beer you'll ever have.


----------



## dudemanppl

Ffffffffffffffffffffff- My dad says he can get drunk from alcohol fumes. Welp. 35 1.2 comes tomorrow, I am excite. Finish my rolla film in the M6.

Also, sub. Money for 5D, buy sofas or something.










So many dislers at school on auto. I'm scared. Real scared.


----------



## Boyboyd

I've nominated sub, I think... The ticket system was confusing. I might make a ticket rallying for a simpler ticket system.

Back on topic, did i hear someone say that porta 160NC was good, and hard to find? It's available in large quantities at my local camera shop. 5 rolls for Â£22.


----------



## nuclearjock

Had my D3/70-200 VRII in a think tank holster on my desk ready tp leave on a 4:00 AM shoot. Apparently it wasn't balanced properly and fell ~3 feet onto a heavily carpeted floor. No biggie, everything looked fine and off I went. A week later I went to use my 85 f/1.4d on my D3 and got the fEE error on the top LCD. Checked the lens was @ min apeture, still no go. Tried my other "-d" lenses and all no go. "G" lenses were all fine.

Sent to Nikon, bent mount and damaged circuit board, $450!!!!!!









F me!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;15183191*
> Lol. Come here, we'll go to Three Floyds.


Just had some Dreadnaught last weekend.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nuclearjock;15185575*
> Had my D3/70-200 VRII in a think tank holster on my desk ready tp leave on a 4:00 AM shoot. Apparently it wasn't balanced properly and fell ~3 feet onto a heavily carpeted floor. No biggie, everything looked fine and off I went. A week later I went to use my 85 f/1.4d on my D3 and got the fEE error on the top LCD. Checked the lens was @ min apeture, still no go. Tried my other "-d" lenses and all no go. "G" lenses were all fine.
> 
> Sent to Nikon, bent mount and damaged circuit board, $450!!!!!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> F me!


F you indeed, that sucks! So it broke even though it was inside your bag? Of course, D3 + 70-200 is pretty damned heavy, so it probably made little difference.


----------



## MistaBernie

Now THIS is the USPS Priority I'm used to.. tracking my 17-40 from RI (shipped yesterday)

Sorting Complete, October 05, 2011, 8:25 am, BOSTON, MA
Arrival at Unit, October 05, 2011, 8:18 am, BOSTON, MA
Processed through Sort Facility, October 04, 2011, 8:55 pm, PROVIDENCE, RI 02904
Electronic Shipping Info Received, October 04, 2011
Processed through Sort Facility, October 04, 2011, 8:45 pm, PROVIDENCE, RI 02904
Acceptance, October 04, 2011, 4:48 pm, CRANSTON, RI 02910

Now my second qualm w/ USPS: they internally require signatures for anything insured above $200. So even though he sent it delivery confirmation, it wont get left in my parcel locker because it requires a signature (even though the sender didn't ask for it). I might have to ask if I can work from home for the second half of my shift to go pick this up (else I wont be able to go pick it up until Saturday).


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Boyboyd;15185525*
> Back on topic, did i hear someone say that porta 160NC was good, and hard to find? It's available in large quantities at my local camera shop. 5 rolls for £22.


Yep. I was trying to find some a couple weeks back. I ended up buying five rolls from adorama, and they only shipped me three. Nobody else seems to have it.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie;15186890*
> tracking my 17-40 from RI


17-40 is boss. You will enjoy.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;15186173*
> Just had some Dreadnaught last weekend.


Dreadnaught is also boss. I ENJOY. If you can get your hands on Zombie Dust, it's incredible. Replaced Gumballhead as my fav Floyds brew -- it's so unbelievably perfect.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;15183826*
> Also, sub. Money for 5D, buy sofas or something.


Film is my full-frame fix. I'm still debating whether or not I really want/need a 1DIII.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;15187949*
> Dreadnaught is also boss. I ENJOY. If you can get your hands on Zombie Dust, it's incredible. Replaced Gumballhead as my fav Floyds brew -- it's so unbelievably perfect.


It is, hoppy to the extreme. Fortunately, I'm discovering that my local store here has a decent selection of TF, so I'll work on them for a while. Time for a break from the Belgians (who IMO make the best beers in the world).


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead;15187876*
> Yep. I was trying to find some a couple weeks back. I ended up buying five rolls from adorama, and they only shipped me three. Nobody else seems to have it.


Excellent. Strange that it seems to be in great supply here, i might go ahead and buy a roll then.

Decided to save up for a scanner (probably a v700). The last "professional photo lab" i sent film to scanned it so poorly. I thought I was to blame, but the actual transparencies are exactly like I thought they would be.


----------



## sub50hz

I dunno, I have a hard time with Belgians -- not really my forte I guess. Karmeleit is amazing, though.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;15188312*
> I dunno, I have a hard time with Belgians -- not really my forte I guess. Karmeleit is amazing, though.


I'll have the sniff that one out. I guess I should clarify: Belgian abbey ales are the best in the world. Belgian lagers, pilserners, etc. don't stack up to Germany or Czech Rep.

And if you try Rochefort OR Westvleteren and like neither, then you don't like Belgian abbey ales, as they are considered among the finest of such.









And to keep it OT, here's a couple of beer & cheese still lives for your viewing pleasure (old shots used to test new lenses, LOL):


----------



## laboitenoire

Mmm, Franziskaner.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire;15188643*
> mmm, franziskaner.


UNDERAGE ALERT!


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Boyboyd;15188300*
> Excellent. Strange that it seems to be in great supply here, i might go ahead and buy a roll then.


What format? 35mm seems to be available still, but 120 and 220 are very hard to come by.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;15188673*
> UNDERAGE ALERT!


Lol, Louisiana has no legal age for alcohol consumption. As long as you're on private property, it's fine. I've never really understood why other states don't work this way.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead;15188699*
> Lol, Louisiana has no legal age for alcohol consumption. As long as you're on private property, it's fine. I've never really understood why other states don't work this way.


Other states do, just to different degrees. Some states allow alcohol consumption even for pre-adolescents, provided that it is at home and allowed by the parents. I think such laws were originally enacted to placate immigrant families, where wine and what not was drank by all people at the table.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead;15188699*
> Lol, Louisiana has no legal age for alcohol consumption. As long as you're on private property, it's fine. I've never really understood why other states don't work this way.


I can actually explain this one! Well.. sorta.

There is no 'federal' drinking age (as implied by the fact that there is no legal age for alcohol consumption in Louisiana). The laws around here, iirc, have to do with minors in possession and minors purchasing. The way they skirt having to pass a federal drinking age is by controlling highway budgets. For example, let's say Mississippi repealed whatever laws they have against underage drinking -- Congress would start withholding federal highway construction funds (Passed by Congress in 1984).

See: http://report.nih.gov/NIHfactsheets/ViewFactSheet.aspx?csid=21

Also, to remain on topic.. I'm thinking about getting a Leica C-Lux 3 as a pocket camera.. Dudeman, got any hello kitty stickers left?


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;15188673*
> UNDERAGE ALERT!


I'm surprised you didn't ring this on me a few pages ago when talking about scotch









/Is 20


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;15188673*
> UNDERAGE ALERT!


Actually, I had Franziskaner when I was in Munich for New Year's Eve a few years ago. Perfectly legal there


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;15188927*
> I'm surprised you didn't ring this on me a few pages ago when talking about scotch
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> /Is 20


No age listed in your profile.







BUT NOW I KNOW.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire;15189191*
> Actually, I had Franziskaner when I was in Munich for New Year's Eve a few years ago. Perfectly legal there


Here's some irony. When I turned 21, I was in Spain, where the legal drinking age was 16.


----------



## sub50hz

When I turned 21, we had a Sox game limo party, which ended up at a dueling piano bar which we almost got thrown out of, had my father not basically told the bouncer to go bone himself. Then a friend of mine paid a bum 20 bucks to sketch my portrait, then took the 20 back and gave him a single.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead;15188699*
> What format? 35mm seems to be available still, but 120 and 220 are very hard to come by.


That's a fair point, 35mm is everywhere. But i've just checked and a few online stores have stock of 120.

I didn't expect to be able to find any on the net. My local shop (Which is almost all digital now) actually has stock of 120. Going tomorrow to buy some 35mm slide mounts.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Boyboyd;15190028*
> But i've just checked and a few online stores have stock of 120.


Interesting. Nobody in the US still has it.

So I have tickets to Duran Duran friday night. I'm fairly sure they'll allow me to bring my camera, but I've never shot at a concert before. Advice?


----------



## MistaBernie

So, I'm not quite sure who told me to sell my 7D & 5D and pick up a 5Dii but now I cant get the idea out of my head. Jerks..


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


So, I'm not quite sure who told me to sell my 7D & 5D and pick up a 5Dii but now I cant get the idea out of my head. Jerks..


Here 

But in all seriousness, if you don't need the AF and speed of the 7D, then the 5DII is the way to go. That's what I did. I really enjoyed the 7D and once I learned how to tweak the AF, it was really a phenomenal camera for BIF, sports, etc. However, I tend to shoot more static shots and indoor, so the 5DII was a better fit for me.

Now, if you can get the 5DII *and* keep the 7D, then you, sir, win.


----------



## dudemanppl

Hell yeah I have Hello Kitty stickers, but get an S90 instead.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Here 

But in all seriousness, if you don't need the AF and speed of the 7D, then the 5DII is the way to go. That's what I did. I really enjoyed the 7D and once I learned how to tweak the AF, it was really a phenomenal camera for BIF, sports, etc. However, I tend to shoot more static shots and indoor, so the 5DII was a better fit for me.

Now, if you can get the 5DII *and* keep the 7D, then you, sir, win.










That's the plan ultimately. I may be able to do so around the beginning of the year (which could be fortunate for me since that's hopefully when the new greatest and latest should be announced). For now, I think I'm just gonna have fun shooting my 5D & 17-40..

Oh, and I got my 17-40!









DMP, I can get the Leica for $200.. still a bad deal?


----------



## sub50hz

17-40 is one of the best bang-for-buck lenses Canon makes. Throw it on the 7D as well, it's a good walkaround on crop.


----------



## MistaBernie

Yeah, it's my only tight zoom at the moment so I'll be using it on both bodies. Kinda miss the Sigma 17-50, but thus far I'm really liking what I'm seeing out of the 17-40 and the 5D... just junk photos thus far but they really do just have a different level of quality to them compared to my 7D/17-50..










I buy expensive stuff and take pictures of it with cheaper stuff.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


DMP, I can get the Leica for $200.. still a bad deal?


Not a bad deal per say, but the S90 will blow it out of the water.


----------



## MistaBernie

Eh, I'll just use the 5D as my walk around. I didn't buy it to sit in a bag or to take pictures of it with my other camera... Besides, I can save that money and put it towards more glass. Probably a 35L or something..


----------



## sub50hz

24/35/135L combo would be my ideal bag. If only two of those, hard call between the 24 and 35 + the 135.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


24/35/135L combo would be my ideal bag. If only two of those, hard call between the 24 and 35 + the 135.


Mine would be the 14/35/135. Just need the 14, but it's nearly cost of the other two lenses.


----------



## sub50hz

I think I would have a hard time using a 14 on 35mm/FF, that's insane wide. Very specialized shots could use it, but it would most definitely be hard to just toss on and shoot.


----------



## Marin

I find myself rarely using digital right now. LF looks so much better.


----------



## sub50hz

I haven't touched my 50D for almost a month, Been shooting more film as well. No view cameras for me, though.


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


I find myself rarely using digital right now. LF looks so much better.


Same here. I've mostly been using medium format though. Large format film is too expensive for me, so I've been using it very sparingly.

I have been meaning to pick up some 4x5 velvia though. I can't imagine how incredible it'll look on a light table (or in my case, a monitor backlight)

EDIT: Also, I need a new meter. Is the Gossen Luna Pro a good choice?


----------



## sub50hz

I have a Luna Pro. Worked really good in high school and college, haven't used it for years and the batteries are dead. Need to find some.


----------



## Marin

Sekonic 758DR is where it's at.


----------



## sub50hz

It better for 600+ dollars. Marin, can you recommend a _cheaper_ meter? I don't need it for flash, but I'm thinking of picking up an RB and might want a new meter to go along with it.


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


I have a Luna Pro. Worked really good in high school and college, haven't used it for years and the batteries are dead. Need to find some.


http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc..._Zinc_Air.html

I guess I'll buy one then. My current pos meter likes to underexpose by like 3 stops. It's totally unusable.


----------



## sub50hz

Does your Pentax have TTL metering or no? I've been hung up on picking up the Mamiya 645AF mostly because it has a meter, but I'm _really_ liking RBs lately.

edit: Zinc Air batteries? Hell, I might have these at work.


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Does your Pentax have TTL metering or no? I've been hung up on picking up the Mamiya 645AF mostly because it has a meter, but I'm _really_ liking RBs lately.


Yes, it does. It works extremely well. Pictures almost always come out perfectly metered without any exposure compensation.

The camera is really nice, my only complaints are that the back cannot be switched mid-roll, and the camera cannot be properly turned off without removing the grip/battery holder/thing.


----------



## sub50hz

Is that a standard feature?


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Is that a standard feature?


Yes. The camera is mostly automatic, it works more like a dslr than a manual film camera, like I'm used to. The only thing that really isn't automatic is focus, though I think the later models added that. It's quite nice shooting in aperture priority. No fooling around with the shutter speed dial trying to get the needle to line up.

The 45/2.8 is an epic lens btw. It's scary sharp, especially when stopped down to around f/8-f/11 (yay, no diffraction) but even at 2.8, the results are great. I don't shoot a lot with the 75/2.8, but it seems to be just as good.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


It better for 600+ dollars. Marin, can you recommend a _cheaper_ meter? I don't need it for flash, but I'm thinking of picking up an RB and might want a new meter to go along with it.


http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...ter_Meter.html


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead;15195963*
> Yes. The camera is mostly automatic, it works more like a dslr than a manual film camera, like I'm used to. The only thing that really isn't automatic is focus, though I think the later models added that.
> 
> The 45/2.8 is an epic lens btw. It's scary sharp, especially when stopped down to around f/8-f/11 (yay, no diffraction) but even at 2.8, the results are great. I don't shoot a lot with the 75/2.8, but it seems to be just as good.


http://www.keh.com/camera/Pentax-645-Camera-Outfits/1/sku-PM019990886480?r=FE

Eh?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;15196090*
> http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/221078-REG/Sekonic_401_358_L_358_Flash_Master_Meter.html


Thanks man, that's actually the one I was wondering about.


----------



## pezcore

Bought a Nikon D3000 VR Kit from Target last week; came with the 18-55 VR lens, nothing too fancy. Thinking of picking up the 55-200 lens sometime this year. Loving it so far!


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;15196161*
> http://www.keh.com/camera/Pentax-645-Camera-Outfits/1/sku-PM019990886480?r=FE
> 
> Eh?


The photo is of a 645N, not a 645, but it looks good other than that. The price is quite good, I think mine was like $600.

You'd probably be better off skipping the 75mm lens though. You'll want something wider.


----------



## sub50hz

Actually, with the bit of 6x4.5 I've shot, I found 75-90mm to be quite complimentary to my shooting style. I'm not big on wides, although the pair of them in my sig might lead you to believe otherwise. I would probably like to have a 45 _and_ a 75 if I end up picking up the Pentax, but I've gotta find one to handle first. From what I am reading, it's a pretty light/compact body? The 645AF is just about perfect size for street shooting, and it doesn't look overly.... _obvious_ like an RB or 500C. Decisions.


----------



## Marin

It'll be pretty obvious when you lift it up to compose.


----------



## foothead

It'd be nice for street photography. It has that handle thing on the side, so it can be carried around in hand like you'd do for a small SLR.

It's definitely big though. I'm not really sure about mamiyas as I've never used them, but this thing dwarfs pretty much everything else I've used. It makes my E-410 feel like a toy.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;15196372*
> It'll be pretty obvious when you lift it up to compose.


It's still, by and large, less obvious than cradling a 6x6 or 6x7 behemoth. Maybe. I rarely caught a look using the Mamiya for a couple weeks, and even then people would normally just shrug it off.


----------



## Marin

RB and RZ's are behemoths but Hasselblads, not so much.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;15196500*
> It's still, by and large, less obvious than cradling a 6x6 or 6x7 behemoth. Maybe. I rarely caught a look using the Mamiya for a couple weeks, and even then people would normally just shrug it off.


Yeah, I don't recall ever getting weird looks from using the 645. Now the 4x5, that's another story...


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;15196517*
> RB and RZ's are behemoths but Hasselblads, not so much.


Hrm. Never used a blad, never thought about buying one. I like what I see out of RBs and 645s, are you subtly recommending something else?

edit: 645AF also has 1/4000, another big plus to that. Maybe I just want one so badly because I've had a really positive experience using one, rather than something like an RB or 500C which then require toting a meter and most often, a tripod.

Any help with selection is appreciated, guys.


----------



## dudemanppl

Why is Marin suddenly active again?


----------



## sub50hz

His local H&M must have run out of skinny jeans.

(?????????)


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


His local H&M must have run out of skinny jeans.

(?????????)


Ok, I admit I lol'd at this one.

In reality, he's probably been knee-deep in academia, which is a good place to be.


----------



## MistaBernie

I've moved to filterless (unless it's a special effects type of deal). Still have my circular polarizer and my ND 0.9 (I think)... gonna have some fun with that and my 17-40 methinks..

Also, the 17-40 supports rear mounted gels.. any ideas where I can learn more about this? I assume it would be a similar effect to using a red filter or something for B&W film (which, I assume, is all I would be able to use it for).


----------



## ljason8eg

My 50 just got here. Says they replaced the "lens assembly" again. Guess its time to try it out...


----------



## MistaBernie

Oooh, good luck!


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


Oooh, good luck!


Thanks! Now for it to just stop raining...


----------



## MistaBernie

What is this stuff I'm getting from CanonRumors about a 1Dv being announced on October 18th? That doesn't make _any_ sense..


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


What is this stuff I'm getting from CanonRumors about a 1Dv being announced on October 18th? That doesn't make _any_ sense..


Hmm...well I guess it's called CanonRumors for a reason.









In other news, the 50 is not fixed. Its actually worse than before. There was a note inside telling me to send my bodies in for calibration if its not fixed this time, but jesus christ it does the same exact thing on both my bodies while all my other lenses work fine. Surely that's a problem with the lens...

Time for a not so pleasant phone call.


----------



## sub50hz

Be firm, and hold your ground without being a dick.

edit: Also, good luck and such.


----------



## ljason8eg

Well, I actually got someone on the phone that knew what they were talking about. He pulled up the repair logs and noticed they've replaced the same thing (lens assembly) 3 times. He wondered why it kept being replaced if didn't fix the problem after the first time. He also noted that the "brains" of the lens (which I'm guessing is the circuit board and all other electronic parts??) have not been touched. Now this got me thinking well crap, if it doesn't focus right, maybe something to do with the electronics is bad? I dunno how it all works though.

In any case, they want it back again to replace these "brains." Talked to two different people and again the only way they'll replace the lens is if they deem it to be unrepairable (it should be unrepairable since its costing them more than the lens is worth to perform the repair). Sooo back it goes again, and now I'm left with no fast lens for Charlotte but oh well not much I can do.


----------



## sub50hz

Grab a Nifty, dude. 100 bucks and return it if you absolutely hate it (which you won't).


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg;15205110*
> Well, I actually got someone on the phone that knew what they were talking about. He pulled up the repair logs and noticed they've replaced the same thing (lens assembly) 3 times. He wondered why it kept being replaced if didn't fix the problem after the first time. He also noted that the "brains" of the lens (which I'm guessing is the circuit board and all other electronic parts??) have not been touched. Now this got me thinking well crap, if it doesn't focus right, maybe something to do with the electronics is bad? I dunno how it all works though.
> 
> In any case, they want it back again to replace these "brains." Talked to two different people and again the only way they'll replace the lens is if they deem it to be unrepairable (it should be unrepairable since its costing them more than the lens is worth to perform the repair). Sooo back it goes again, and now I'm left with no fast lens for Charlotte but oh well not much I can do.


If I had known this earlier, I would have sent you mine for the weekend.







(unless you found something wrong with mine, at which point I would have raged. hard.)


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg;15205110*
> Well, I actually got someone on the phone that knew what they were talking about. He pulled up the repair logs and noticed they've replaced the same thing (lens assembly) 3 times. He wondered why it kept being replaced if didn't fix the problem after the first time. He also noted that the "brains" of the lens (which I'm guessing is the circuit board and all other electronic parts??) have not been touched. Now this got me thinking well crap, if it doesn't focus right, maybe something to do with the electronics is bad? I dunno how it all works though.
> 
> In any case, they want it back again to replace these "brains." Talked to two different people and again the only way they'll replace the lens is if they deem it to be unrepairable (it should be unrepairable since its costing them more than the lens is worth to perform the repair). Sooo back it goes again, and now I'm left with no fast lens for Charlotte but oh well not much I can do.


Have you ever tried your 50 on a different body altogether? This would decisively rule out it being a body issue, if trying it on your own bodies to begin with wasn't verifiable enough for Canon.

I don't think there's anyway they test repaired lenses, barring a quick test to see if the AF motor works and acquires. Clearly they aren't looking at actual images from the lens. And I bet every time you send it in, no one is checking any kind of log to see what previous repairs, if any, have been done on the lens. They're just performing the same repair which has worked 9 out of 10 times on most other lenses.

There's a small circular bit of PCB towards the rear of the lens, so this must be the "brains" he mentioned.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nuclearjock;15185575*
> Had my D3/70-200 VRII in a think tank holster on my desk ready tp leave on a 4:00 AM shoot. Apparently it wasn't balanced properly and fell ~3 feet onto a heavily carpeted floor. No biggie, everything looked fine and off I went. A week later I went to use my 85 f/1.4d on my D3 and got the fEE error on the top LCD. Checked the lens was @ min apeture, still no go. Tried my other "-d" lenses and all no go. "G" lenses were all fine.
> 
> Sent to Nikon, bent mount and damaged circuit board, $450!!!!!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> F me!


Got my D3 back today, everything's back to normal but I noticed my 70-200 seems to require a bit of extra effort to mount it on a body. Why? because its mount is bent as well!!!!! F me again and the $150 additional I had to spend to have the mount replaced.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;15206058*
> Have you ever tried your 50 on a different body altogether? This would decisively rule out it being a body issue, if trying it on your own bodies to begin with wasn't verifiable enough for Canon.
> 
> I don't think there's anyway they test repaired lenses, barring a quick test to see if the AF motor works and acquires. Clearly they aren't looking at actual images from the lens. And I bet every time you send it in, no one is checking any kind of log to see what previous repairs, if any, have been done on the lens. They're just performing the same repair which has worked 9 out of 10 times on most other lenses.
> 
> There's a small circular bit of PCB towards the rear of the lens, so this must be the "brains" he mentioned.


I've only tried it on my two bodies, but it does the same exact thing on both. Short of going to a local camera shop, there's no one I know close to me who has a Canon DSLR.

You're probably right about what happens when it goes in for repair. This last time a supervisor was supposed to oversee it and I sent in a CD with sample images but obviously that didn't work.


----------



## Conspiracy

so there is a sigma 50 1.4 for sale on potn and it is local to me. the seller has dropped the price to $405 recently.

how rude/irritating do you think it would be if i tried to get it from him for maybe $350 or even $300. he is selling because it is barely used and gets no use. it is 1 year old and includes everything, box and papers and hood and lens of course.

as i am being realistic and would like a sigma 10-20 i dont *need* one but the 50mm length i use quite a lot especially for basketball and honestly my 50 1.8 is great but the overall IQ is not spectacular and i think the upgrade would help produce images with considerably better contrast and overall IQ and i am pretty certain it will be a little more accurate and faster with the focus


----------



## Sean Webster

I would say 325-350 shipped would be a good start, its 500 new. I don't think it would really be rude, he will probably offer you a lower price than 400 or say no at the worst.


----------



## Conspiracy

i was going to try and do like i guess $325 and i would be able to pick it up from him locally and he wont have to ship

assuming he goes for that price and i check it out and test it on my camera to make sure it works and all that in the AF department and make sure nothing is funky about it


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy;15207120*
> i was going to try and do like i guess $325 and i would be able to pick it up from him locally and he wont have to ship
> 
> assuming he goes for that price and i check it out and test it on my camera to make sure it works and all that in the AF department and make sure nothing is funky about it


Do it, that would be best, there is nothing like getting a lens that doesn't auto focus correctly lol


----------



## Conspiracy

just messaged him offering $325 and would meet him anywhere public in the city to buy and test from him.

i hope he goes for it. i have a pretty good feeling this would be a smart purchase for me. and it will be nice to have a new lens in my kit. i have been feeling pretty down lately from over working myself. i havent even touched my camera in weeks other than for a soccer game :*(


----------



## iandroo888

used sigma 50 f/1.4s are generally 400.. if u can get it for lower thats sharp and doesnt have front focus issues, thatsa good deal !


----------



## Conspiracy

as long as it performs well and has no internal issues i can micro adjust it or send it in if it came down to it









if i test it and it is insanely off where it might look like a micro adjust isnt possible i might pass because it would inconvenience me since i only have one body and shoot for my school on a regular basis

i am nervous about trying to buy used just because this is my first time. i am not normally the type of person to go used because i am comfortable with pristine stuff but i really dont want to have to buy new with glass because it is unfortunately expensive.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy;15207271*
> as long as it performs well and has no internal issues i can micro adjust it or send it in if it came down to it
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> if i test it and it is insanely off where it might look like a micro adjust isnt possible i might pass because it would inconvenience me since i only have one body and shoot for my school on a regular basis
> 
> i am nervous about trying to buy used just because this is my first time. i am not normally the type of person to go used because i am comfortable with pristine stuff but i really dont want to have to buy new with glass because it is unfortunately expensive.


I only buy used now lol, i cant stand to pay retail when I can get used like new items for 2/3 teh price of new.


----------



## lvl8Hacker

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy;15207271*
> as long as it performs well and has no internal issues i can micro adjust it or send it in if it came down to it
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> if i test it and it is insanely off where it might look like a micro adjust isnt possible i might pass because it would inconvenience me since i only have one body and shoot for my school on a regular basis
> 
> i am nervous about trying to buy used just because this is my first time. i am not normally the type of person to go used because i am comfortable with pristine stuff but i really dont want to have to buy new with glass because it is unfortunately expensive.


I just picked up another EF24-105mm f/4L. I sold the one that came with my 5D mkII kit so I could put money into a EF24-70mm f/2.8L. I have to say buying it used saved me a ton of cash and boy the IS on this lens is a great feature for a walk around lens. And tack sharp on top of it.


----------



## SimpleTech

Just got my Nikon D90 with 18-105mm f/3.5-5.6G ED AF-S VR DX Nikkor Zoom Lens from Newegg today.

My first DSLR and should be a nice upgrade from my Panasonic Lumix DMC-FX07.


----------



## dudemanppl

Don't lowball good deals... Research prices and if you find they're normal, don't lowball. It's frowned upon greatly on FM if you lowball in public. You get like three people in the thread going "Please kill yourself".


----------



## Conspiracy

i didnt lowball him to try and steal it from him. i literally only have $350 and offered him $325 and explained why my offer was low and apologized for offering considerably less and understand if the seller is not interested in my offer.

i simply made an offer for what i have. i dont have a lot of money and i only have cash i dont have money in a paypal account :|

i wouldnt be surprised if he doesnt respond since i do admit it is a really low offer on a lens that has been sitting in the FS section on potn with like no offers


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SimpleTech;15207656*
> Just got my Nikon D90 with 18-105mm f/3.5-5.6G ED AF-S VR DX Nikkor Zoom Lens from Newegg today.
> 
> My first DSLR and should be a nice upgrade from my Panasonic Lumix DMC-FX07.


Congrats!


----------



## SimpleTech

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SeanWebster;15208042*
> Congrats!


Thanks! Only paid $701 for it. He he.


----------



## ljason8eg

You know it finally hit me tonight. I am really, really fed up with my whole issue with my 50 1.4. I have a feeling this wouldn't be happening if this was a 70-200 2.8 IS II or 400 2.8 I was having issues with. I bet if I was in CPS it wouldn't be happening either.

I'm so fed up I'm thinking of stupid, outrageous things like is another lens I buy going to have the same issue? But then that doesn't make any sense because my other lenses work fine on both my bodies. Hell I even thought of selling my whole kit and just saying screw it, maybe this isn't for me, but I don't want to do that. I really enjoy this.

I've got a 10-22 coming tomorrow. Maybe that'll cheer me up.


----------



## lifeskills

Quote:



Originally Posted by *SimpleTech*


Just got my Nikon D90 with 18-105mm f/3.5-5.6G ED AF-S VR DX Nikkor Zoom Lens from Newegg today.

My first DSLR and should be a nice upgrade from my Panasonic Lumix DMC-FX07.










Were camera brothers!!! lol enjoy the D90 I've had mine about 2 years now and its been great.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*


You know it finally hit me tonight. I am really, really fed up with my whole issue with my 50 1.4. I have a feeling this wouldn't be happening if this was a 70-200 2.8 IS II or 400 2.8 I was having issues with. I bet if I was in CPS it wouldn't be happening either.

I'm so fed up I'm thinking of stupid, outrageous things like is another lens I buy going to have the same issue? But then that doesn't make any sense because my other lenses work fine on both my bodies. Hell I even thought of selling my whole kit and just saying screw it, maybe this isn't for me, but I don't want to do that. I really enjoy this.

I've got a 10-22 coming tomorrow. Maybe that'll cheer me up.










It probably will, they're supposed to be good. I seriously hope it works when they swap the "brains" of the lens out.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*


It probably will, they're supposed to be good. I seriously hope it works when they swap the "brains" of the lens out.


Yeah man all I can do is hope. It makes sense that it could be the problem. I'm just sort of appalled that the customer service has been this piss poor. Doesn't give me a whole lot of confidence in the brand.


----------



## dudemanppl

Hey if you want you can have the brains of my 50 1.4 for free if you wanna swap. I'm pretty damn sure its working perfectly, only the AF motor is dead.

Oh and androo, if you're gonna buy that D300 from tomas, I know the guy. He drives a TSX and has been to my house twice.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*


You know it finally hit me tonight. I am really, really fed up with my whole issue with my 50 1.4. I have a feeling this wouldn't be happening if this was a 70-200 2.8 IS II or 400 2.8 I was having issues with. I bet if I was in CPS it wouldn't be happening either.

I'm so fed up I'm thinking of stupid, outrageous things like is another lens I buy going to have the same issue? But then that doesn't make any sense because my other lenses work fine on both my bodies. Hell I even thought of selling my whole kit and just saying screw it, maybe this isn't for me, but I don't want to do that. I really enjoy this.

I've got a 10-22 coming tomorrow. Maybe that'll cheer me up.










Yeah, it's pretty bad, but all customer service sucks to some degree. My own experience with Canon has been great, but then again I sent them an L lens.







In all seriousness, I would stay on them, it'll get resolved.

And the 10-22 would cheer anyone up! I wish I had a second crop body so I could use one again.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*


Yeah man all I can do is hope. It makes sense that it could be the problem. I'm just sort of appalled that the customer service has been this piss poor. Doesn't give me a whole lot of confidence in the brand.


Like GT said, most customer service is poor but they should eventually get it sorted. Sounds like you've gotten in contact with someone who really knows what they're talking about though.

It's still not fun to be jerked around so much.


----------



## dudemanppl

http://www.petapixel.com/2011/10/06/...of-steve-jobs/


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


http://www.petapixel.com/2011/10/06/...of-steve-jobs/


Interesting read, thanks!

In unrelated news, I'm carrying most of my 5D kit (except for my 50, to stand in solidarity with Jason) around with me today. I'll try to get some snapshots during the course of the day, but I forgot I'm scheduled for mass deliveries today so I may be too busy.

I do know that this weekend is supposed to be like end of August warm, so I'm really hoping to go out and get some shots (especially at the beach where people will probably amass to try to thwart off the Fall)


----------



## Conspiracy

well the sigma 50 im trying to get just went on ebay. so i think its a goner. the seller said that if it doesnt get bought in 2 days on ebay then he will give it to me for about $350 or so

got my fingers crossed. i had the money to buy it from him but i wouldnt be able to eat if i gave him everything i got


----------



## MistaBernie

I kind of doubt he wont get what he wants on eBay, but good luck!


----------



## Conspiracy

well he has it buy it now $430

but the starting bid is $375

i got my fingers crossed i can get this deal but i doubt many on ebay will pass up on it. i offered him more since i will have it if he does sell to me so he doesnt lose too much selling to me


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*


well he has it buy it now $430

but the starting bid is $375

i got my fingers crossed i can get this deal but i doubt many on ebay will pass up on it. i offered him more since i will have it if he does sell to me so he doesnt lose too much selling to me


You did remind him that between Paypal and eBay they're gonna keep like 18%...

$430 - $77 = $353 net.. no shipping, cash, not trackable in Paypal (in case they ever turn around and have to turn over sales records for tax purposes, which could happen).


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


Interesting read, thanks!

In unrelated news, I'm carrying most of my 5D kit (except for my 50, to stand in solidarity with Jason) around with me today. I'll try to get some snapshots during the course of the day, but I forgot I'm scheduled for mass deliveries today so I may be too busy.

I do know that this weekend is supposed to be like end of August warm, so I'm really hoping to go out and get some shots (especially at the beach where people will probably amass to try to thwart off the Fall)


Yes, good weather indeed this weekend. I'm going to head up to WV where there's a phenomenal old mill with a waterfall cascading below it.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*


well he has it buy it now $430

*but the starting bid is $375*

i got my fingers crossed i can get this deal but i doubt many on ebay will pass up on it. i offered him more since i will have it if he does sell to me so he doesnt lose too much selling to me


Why does he have such a high starting bid? If he sells it at all, it will be with one bid that will have been made minutes before the auction will have ended. Low starting bids encourage competitive bidding and in the end, a higher sale price.


----------



## MistaBernie

Cheaper to start with a higher start price than a reserve (IIRC, I could be wrong, it's been a while since I sold anything on eBay personally)


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Why does he have such a high starting bid? If he sells it at all, it will be with one bid that will have been made minutes before the auction will have ended. Low starting bids encourage competitive bidding and in the end, a higher sale price.










i dont know. but i know im not going to hold my breath but i will keep my fingers crossed that noone bids and gets this. because its a pretty good deal and if he does sell it to me i will try to give him at least $350 for it

so far its been up for several hours and no bids, im pretty excited about this one because i have been wanting to upgrade my 50 to a higher quality one especially since it is my main focal length for basketball unless my new 30 just blows it out of the water. and a new sigma 50 is really expensive


----------



## MistaBernie

wait, have you been shooting your soccer games with just the 30 and 50?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

He's using his school's 70-200/2.8L II I believe.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


He's using his school's 70-200/2.8L II I believe.


I was gonna say... that's either mad cropping or you're running on the field or court


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Hey if you want you can have the brains of my 50 1.4 for free if you wanna swap. I'm pretty damn sure its working perfectly, only the AF motor is dead.


That would be fantastic except I have noooo idea how to go about swapping them myself lol.


----------



## SimpleTech

Quote: 
   Originally Posted by *lifeskills*   Were camera brothers!!! lol enjoy the D90 I've had mine about 2 years now and its been great.  










-----

Since I'm not camera guru, if I needed a macro lens, would    this be the one to get with my D90? Any cheaper alternatives?


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *SimpleTech*











-----

Since I'm not camera guru, if I needed a macro lens, would this be the one to get with my D90? Any cheaper alternatives?


That would be a good choice if you can spring for it 85mm on a crop body is a pretty good focal length for macro. In my experience, 50 is too short. 40 is waaaaaaaaaaaay too short.


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *SimpleTech*


Since I'm not camera guru, if I needed a macro lens, would this be the one to get with my D90? Any cheaper alternatives?


I'm not well versed in Nikon, but I'd consider the 105mm f2.8 macro. The 85mm is a DX lens, so it only works on crop cameras. This one will work on 35mm/full frame or APS-C. It also has a longer focal length, which is better for macro, and a wider aperture so you could probably use it as a portrait lens.

EDIT: $430 BIN on eBay. http://www.ebay.com/itm/Nikon-Nikkor...ht_4341wt_1396


----------



## MistaBernie

I _seriously_ need to evaluate what's important to carry around.

Currently in the Tamrac Rally 4 -- 5D w/ 17-40 on, 70-200, 85 f/1.8, iPad 2 with cable and charger, mini lens cleaning kit, extra battery, spare body/lens cap.. number of times I've changed my lens since I took the 5D out: none. Now, the spare battery is staying in (the battery that came in the camera didn't seem to last all that long, but it didn't seem to take all that long to charge either so I'm skeptical to its actual lifespan).

I did realize in messing around with the 17-40 that it's a HORRIBLE group shot lens. I was trying to show someone just how wide the 17 was (me sitting at one corner of a table, shooting a group of four(ish) coworkers on the other side of the table, and the people on the outsides are right in that area where they get stretched quite a bit. I have to imagine I can fix this in LR (those profiles save my life when I shoot raw!) but it was good to see because I know to watch out for it now going forward.


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


I _seriously_ need to evaluate what's important to carry around.

Currently in the Tamrac Rally 4 -- 5D w/ 17-40 on, 70-200, 85 f/1.8, iPad 2 with cable and charger, mini lens cleaning kit, extra battery, spare body/lens cap.. number of times I've changed my lens since I took the 5D out: none. Now, the spare battery is staying in (the battery that came in the camera didn't seem to last all that long, but it didn't seem to take all that long to charge either so I'm skeptical to its actual lifespan).


Heh, that isn't bad at all. I recently went on a hike, and my backpack had:

Olympus E-410
ZD 14-42
ZD 40-150
Vanguard tripod
Vivitar 50/1.8
Vivitar XC-3
Photax 500/8
Pentax stereo lens
random promaster speedlight
Pentax 645
Pentax 45/2.8
Pentax 75/2.8
a set of macro extension tubes
about six filters + stepping rings
five rolls of film
and a bag of random accessories.

Oh, and I was also carrying water and food for three people. It's a good thing I decided to leave the large format camera, because I didn't get the chance to use most of what I had. My dad and brother became super impatient if I'd stop for more than 30 seconds.


----------



## MistaBernie

It's not even really a 'woe is me, my bag is heavy' kind of deal. It's getting out of hte mindset that 'oh, this shot might be better with xxx lens which I own, so I should carry everything with me' mentality and going with 'I have my 17-40 on my 5D. I'm not gonna be stopping birds at flight at 50 yards, but I'll be able to do most of what I'd want to do.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie;15215219*
> I _seriously_ need to evaluate what's important to carry around.
> 
> Currently in the Tamrac Rally 4 -- 5D w/ 17-40 on, 70-200, 85 f/1.8, iPad 2 with cable and charger, mini lens cleaning kit, extra battery, spare body/lens cap.. number of times I've changed my lens since I took the 5D out: none. Now, the spare battery is staying in (the battery that came in the camera didn't seem to last all that long, but it didn't seem to take all that long to charge either so I'm skeptical to its actual lifespan).
> 
> I did realize in messing around with the 17-40 that it's a HORRIBLE group shot lens. I was trying to show someone just how wide the 17 was (me sitting at one corner of a table, shooting a group of four(ish) coworkers on the other side of the table, and the people on the outsides are right in that area where they get stretched quite a bit. I have to imagine I can fix this in LR (those profiles save my life when I shoot raw!) but it was good to see because I know to watch out for it now going forward.


I have different sizes and types of bags for different outings. I usually carry my ThinkTank UD30 with my 5DII plus one or two lenses for small outings, and I have the Crumpler 7MDH which holds everything plus tripod, then sometimes I'll take the Slingshot for longer hikes. I got over carrying everything with me at all times a while ago.

And the stretching you mention from the 17-40 is perspective distortion in action. It's more pronounced in subjects closer to the lens. It's fairly easy to correct in post, but it's destructive because of the cropping required.


----------



## dudemanppl

Basically my normal kit is 35L. Plus the 5DII. Need to shoot longer? Oh well. Need to shoot wider? Stich a pano. Also, stop lowball that fricken' guy on the second best 50mm lens you can EVER PURCHASE. You can wait to get money dude,


----------



## sub50hz

Just realized I havn't shot anything but the nifty since Labor Day weekend. CREHZEE


----------



## ljason8eg

10-22 is nice; and oh my...IT FOCUSES CORRECTLY (yes yes I know it has a crapload of DOF but still!!







 )
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;15218076*
> Just realized I havn't shot anything but the nifty since Labor Day weekend. CREHZEE


With your gear list? You are crazy!


----------



## mz-n10

I usually carry my a900 with the 24-70. If I'm traveling light I might carry only the 17-35 and the 50.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg;15219011*
> 10-22 is nice; and oh my...IT FOCUSES CORRECTLY (yes yes I know it has a crapload of DOF but still!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )
> 
> With your gear list? You are crazy!


Best crop UWA zoom IMO.

In other news, I'm chaperoning a dance right now. ***.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;15219324*
> Best crop UWA zoom IMO.
> 
> *In other news, I'm chaperoning a dance right now. ***.*


Who talked you into doing that?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg;15219404*
> Who talked you into doing that?


I would never be talked into this garbage. We're required to chaperone one dance a year. At least it's not prom, just a lame Sadie Hawkins dance.


----------



## biatchi

<-- Brit had to Google Sadie Hawkins dance


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;15219497*
> I would never be talked into this garbage. We're required to chaperone one dance a year. At least it's not prom, just a lame Sadie Hawkins dance.


Yeah that does not sound fun at all. Probably a massive amount of facepalming involved.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *biatchi;15219658*
> <-- Brit had to Google Sadie Hawkins dance


LOL I didn't know what it was until I became a teacher.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg;15219660*
> Yeah that does not sound fun at all. Probably a massive amount of facepalming involved.


It's mainly the music that's getting to me; dub step, Gaga, etc. Just waiting for some Jonas Bros next.


----------



## Marin

Oh 75mm, why are you so awesome?

Now I just need the 150mm f/2.8...


----------



## Shane1244

Who is requiring you to do this? :S


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*


With your gear list? You are crazy!










Haha, the nifty gets way less credit than it deserves. Oddly enough, as I was walking around this morning some lady bumped into the the hood, and now I don't have to MA on my 50D. Win?

edit: I hope these Samyang 24/1.4 rumors are true.


----------



## Shane1244

Whats the rumour?


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Haha, the nifty gets way less credit than it deserves. Oddly enough, as I was walking around this morning some lady bumped into the the hood, and now I don't have to MA on my 50D. Win?


So what you're saying is I should bang around my 50 1.4 a little bit? lol.


----------



## sub50hz

http://oliviatech.com/make-canon-paper-camera-models

Oh, also, I guess that 24 is confirmed. I will wait for some tests, but Samyan's reputation precedes them -- I expect good things. Maybe not great, but it'll probably be cheap enough for me to not care.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


http://oliviatech.com/make-canon-paper-camera-models

Oh, also, I guess that 24 is confirmed. I will wait for some tests, but Samyan's reputation precedes them -- I expect good things. Maybe not great, but it'll probably be cheap enough for me to not care.


Wow, talk about too much time on your hands.


----------



## sub50hz

I dunno, sorta cool if you're into crafty kinda stuff. Or spending a ton of time on something for zero reward.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;15220525*
> I dunno, sorta cool if you're into crafty kinda stuff. *Or spending a ton of time on something for zero reward.*


Like moderation?


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Like moderation?










I wanna be a mod


----------



## Shane1244

No you don't.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;15220812*
> No you don't.


I'm on here like all day lol. I would love going through tons of spam and help people with issues that I don't know how to handle myself.


----------



## Shane1244

I used to be the forum Admin on StrategyInformer forums, and it was not fun at all. It sure seemed like it would be..

It kind of changes everything. Forums to me are a place I go when I get home from school/work and unwind and just relax. It's not fun having to go back to work. I'm not sure about here, but for me it was work, and soooooo much drama.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;15220901*
> I used to be the forum Admin on StrategyInformer forums, and it was not fun at all. It sure seemed like it would be..
> 
> It kind of changes everything. Forums to me are a place I go when I get home from school/work and unwind and just relax. It's not fun having to go back to work. I'm not sure about here, but for me it was work, and soooooo much drama.


Ok then I officially demote myself to power user? lol


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


http://oliviatech.com/make-canon-paper-camera-models


That's pretty cool. I might have to try one if I get bored one weekend. I made a Master chief a while back, and it came out awesome.



















Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Oh 75mm, why are you so awesome?

Now I just need the 150mm f/2.8...


 A 150/2.8 lens for 4x5? That must cost a fortune.


----------



## dudemanppl

44 yard pass, caught the catch. Super happy time. And some other crazy touchdown thing. Don't know anything about football, not a man's sport.


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


http://oliviatech.com/make-canon-paper-camera-models

Oh, also, I guess that 24 is confirmed. I will wait for some tests, but Samyan's reputation precedes them -- I expect good things. Maybe not great, but it'll probably be cheap enough for me to not care.


I love me some papercraft.

Too bad I need to get some more ink. >_>


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


44 yard pass, caught the catch. Super happy time. And some other crazy touchdown thing. Don't know anything about football, not a man's sport.


You crazy. What would you say is a mans sport?


----------



## biatchi

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


You crazy. What would you say is a mans sport?


Rugby?!


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


You crazy. What would you say is a mans sport?


Curling


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *biatchi*


Rugby?!










Rugby is girzzly as hell.

I suggest anyone ready to debate American Football's (there, I covered _that_ for you tea-swilling jerks across the pond







) manliness should watch George Carlin's comparison of Football and Baseball.


----------



## biatchi

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Rugby is girzzly as hell.

I suggest anyone ready to debate American Football's (*there, I covered that for you tea-swilling jerks across the pond







*) manliness should watch George Carlin's comparison of Football and Baseball.


Nice









Youtubing it now.


----------



## sub50hz

http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2011...mera-variation

A great blog post by Roger concerning lens and AF variation. Everyone should read this.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *SeanWebster*


I wanna be a mod










No noobs allowed.

j/k









Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2011...mera-variation

A great blog post by Roger concerning lens and AF variation. Everyone should read this.


There was a similar article on LR that was always posted whenever someone pissed and moaned about their misfocusing lens on POTN.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Rugby is girzzly as hell.

I suggest anyone ready to debate American Football's (there, I covered _that_ for you tea-swilling jerks across the pond







) manliness should watch George Carlin's comparison of Football and Baseball.


Everyone knows that pankration is the manliest sport in history (gladiatorial combat is a close second).

And that's a classic Carlin bit. I've got a huge stack of Carlin CD's that I've meant to rip for a while now.


----------



## dudemanppl

Rally. Group B to be exact. That is a MAN'S MAN'S MAN'S sport.


----------



## xxrabid93

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Rally. Group B to be exact. That is a MAN'S MAN'S MAN'S sport.


I love rally.







And ya, group B was crazy. So much power and speed compared to the more regulated stuff of today. Unfortunately that's why it was so short lived(big crashes and some deaths).







I love the Audi Quattro S1 group B car though; that thing is awesome.









I would consider a lot of different car racing a Man's sports too though. Most racing takes huge balls and huge skills.


----------



## ljason8eg

Oh yes, most sports need a ball to play. Racing takes two.


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg;15227009*
> Oh yes, most sports need a ball to play. Racing takes two.


That is sexist. I kid.


----------



## dudemanppl

lol'd. Never heard that line before.

Even more OT than before: I was looking at my computer and thinking about those 4,000 RPM Delta fans. Then I imagined replacing the fan blades with razors... Neat.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;15227547*
> lol'd. Never heard that line before.
> 
> Even more OT than before: I was looking at my computer and thinking about those 4,000 RPM Delta fans. Then I imagined replacing the fan blades with razors... Neat.


Nothing like a good finger hazard in your case.


----------



## dudemanppl

I've only shot 14,00 pictures this year. My friend has a T2i with 60k actuations and the plastic is all smooth and shiny.


----------



## Marin

Still want.


----------



## Nemesis158

Got to see an 18-200 in action today. that thing was HEAVY compared to the dinky lenses i have. I want to upgrade something with my camera gear, but i'm not sure which way to go.

1. I want a better body, preferably a D5100, so i can shoot HD video...
2. I want a longer lens, was looking at the 18-200mm, so i can take those shots that 55m just wont do..... plus then i could get rid of my 18-55mm (total overlap there)

What would you guys do? both options cost about the same for me......


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Nemesis158*


Got to see an 18-200 in action today. that thing was HEAVY compared to the dinky lenses i have. I want to upgrade something with my camera gear, but i'm not sure which way to go.

1. I want a better body, preferably a D5100, so i can shoot HD video...
2. I want a longer lens, was looking at the 18-200mm, so i can take those shots that 55m just wont do..... plus then i could get rid of my 18-55mm (total overlap there)

What would you guys do? both options cost about the same for me......


What gear do you have right now?

And personally I'd rather grab a 55-200mm VR to compliment your 18-55. I'm not a fan of superzooms myself, and the 55-200mm has great IQ for the money.


----------



## Nemesis158

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


What gear do you have right now?

And personally I'd rather grab a 55-200mm VR to compliment your 18-55. I'm not a fan of superzooms myself, and the 55-200mm has great IQ for the money.


what i have right now is the D3000 with the Kit 18-55mm, a 50mm f/1.8 (old one), and a 35mm f/1.8. Looks like i have alot of overlap right now. all my other stuff is in my sig.
I think i'd rather consolidate and keep just 3 lenses. 
then again, if I get a 55-200 I might still be able to get a 5100.......


----------



## Xeroeth

Hey, I want to join the camera club.
My camera & other stuff are here


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nemesis158;15230186*
> what i have right now is the D3000 with the Kit 18-55mm, a 50mm f/1.8 (old one), and a 35mm f/1.8. Looks like i have alot of overlap right now. all my other stuff is in my sig.
> I think i'd rather consolidate and keep just 3 lenses.
> then again, if I get a 55-200 I might still be able to get a 5100.......


I too would avoid a superzoom. While it is convenient to have that much range in one lens, the image quality will be worse than your kit lens.

I tooled around a bit at a car show today with the 10-22. I like it. Idk how much I like my shots since shooting waxed cars in bright sunlight is never that fun, but the lens is awesome. I thought this one came out ok.


IMG_1706.jpg by JLofing, on Flickr


----------



## MistaBernie

I feel like I'm underwhelmed by my 5Dc. It gives me more space to work with.. but I've had some noisy images that are properly exposed @ ISO 100 (in light areas) that I'm somewhat surprised by. Granted, LR seems to handle them just fine, but I think I might have had slightly higher (perhaps unreasonable) expectations... here, have a look.










Check out the inside of the left boat leaning against the railing. Seems like alot of noise for ISO 100 (though now that I think about it, I guess that's not exactly going to be the best lit area of the photo, so maybe I am just being a douche).

The downside to cleaning up the noise is that it makes the chipped and faded wood of the rail under the boat look different, which I dont know that I like. It also takes out alot of the detail of some of the age marks of the boat, etc..

That being said, one of my few keepers from today. Wasn't planning on shooting (says the guy that put everything in my sig into a backpack and went to my hometown), so it wasn't a 'these shots suck, I'm not keeping them' lack of keepers. I bumped the saturation because I liked what it did to it in general (and I really overdid it with another that I wont post).


----------



## dudemanppl

That's weird. Shouldn't be happening. I don't get problems with the 5DII and that's supposed to be complete crap with noise.


----------



## MistaBernie

I posted an example above. I might just be ultra nit picking at this point, as I thought it was an exposed area of the shot that was noisy (it's light enough to see in there, but that doesn't mean there's enough light to prevent noise).


----------



## dudemanppl

Psh, thats nothing dude. Try film or something.


----------



## MistaBernie

Yeah, I was peepin hard core I guess.. I almost want to go back and kill some of that smoothing.. in fact, I'm gonna.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


Yeah, I was peepin hard core I guess.. I almost want to go back and kill some of that smoothing.. in fact, I'm gonna.


its cause you are pixel peeping. one of the beauty of FF is that it has huge DR. Sometimes the blacks get a bit noisey but at least you have details.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Nemesis158*


what i have right now is the D3000 with the Kit 18-55mm, a 50mm f/1.8 (old one), and a 35mm f/1.8. Looks like i have alot of overlap right now. all my other stuff is in my sig.
I think i'd rather consolidate and keep just 3 lenses. 
then again, if I get a 55-200 I might still be able to get a 5100.......










If you've the 35 f/1.8, why keep the 50mm f/1.8? It can't autofocus and I find the 35mm FL to be much easier to work with than the 50mm on a crop body.

Personally, I'd sell that 50mm and use it to fund a 55-200mm. Keep the 35mm for nice prime goodness.

If after the 55-200mm you can afford the D5100, go for it. It's an excellent camera. But in any case, the 35mm f/1.8, 18-55mm, and 55-200mm VR is an excellent combo to have.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Xeroeth*


Hey, I want to join the camera club.
My camera & other stuff are here










Added


----------



## mz-n10

w00t w00t, just bought a maxxum 7 with a vertical grip. cant wait to start shooting film again...(and not use a elan7...)


----------



## Conspiracy

someone bid on the sigma 50 i was going to get if it didnt sell on ebay







they bid one dollar above min bid of course. so its now up to $380

ill just keep looking and saving up


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*


I too would avoid a superzoom. While it is convenient to have that much range in one lens, the image quality will be worse than your kit lens.

I tooled around a bit at a car show today with the 10-22. I like it. Idk how much I like my shots since shooting waxed cars in bright sunlight is never that fun, but the lens is awesome. I thought this one came out ok.


One thing to keep in mind for car shows are CPLs. It helps with reflections and if you have a tripod with you, then take a few shots. So as to combine the shots and keep the reflections away off of certain areas.


----------



## AlbertMwugabi

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


I've only shot 14,00 pictures this year. My friend has a T2i with 60k actuations and the plastic is all smooth and shiny.


My camera is just the same. Me and my moms boyfriend bought our D300 at the same time, mine have done about 50k actuations and my moms boyfriend have done max 5k. His looks brand new and mine is just as you say, smooth and really shiny.

Here's a little comparison between the two cameras.


















Mine is, ehm to the right.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


Yeah, I was peepin hard core I guess.. I almost want to go back and kill some of that smoothing.. in fact, I'm gonna.


It actually looks ok to me too. Noise patterns are way different on the 5D versus the 7D. The 7D's pixels are much smaller (relatively) so the noise "grain" is tiny, making it less apparent when not viewing at 100%, not to mention that the 7D handles noise at least as well as the 5D. The 5D has such an awesome low pixel density that the photo sites are really large, allowing for excellent DR as mz said.

I think that lots of detail with some noise is better than smoothed-over shots with PP NR.

And frankly, I found noise at low ISO's to be pretty bad on the 7D; even at ISO 200 I would see distinct maize patterns in full light daylight.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


w00t w00t, just bought a maxxum 7 with a vertical grip. cant wait to start shooting film again...(and not use a elan7...)


What did you find wrong with the Elan 7? I ask because I've been eyeing one for sale at my camera shop, mostly for the novelty of it, but partially because I have no Canon film body (and can't spend the money on a pro film body).

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*


someone bid on the sigma 50 i was going to get if it didnt sell on ebay







they bid one dollar above min bid of course. so its now up to $380

ill just keep looking and saving up


Time to bite the bullet, get Paypal & eBay accounts, and bid on that lens. You're really cutting yourself out of the vast majority of online used gear by dealing in cash only. It sucks, but it's the nature of the beast.

That lens listing will either sell barely for $400 (or lower), or a huge bidding war will break out in the last 10 min. and it will go for close to $500 (the latter is very likely as I all I see otherwise are Buy It Now only listings).

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*


I too would avoid a superzoom. While it is convenient to have that much range in one lens, the image quality will be worse than your kit lens.

I tooled around a bit at a car show today with the 10-22. I like it. Idk how much I like my shots since shooting waxed cars in bright sunlight is never that fun, but the lens is awesome. I thought this one came out ok.


19mm? Come on, it goes to 10mm! I loved shooting that lens at 10mm. Canon should make an EF-S 10mm f/2.8 prime (yeah right).

Quote:



Originally Posted by *AlbertMwugabi*


My camera is just the same. Me and my moms boyfriend bought our D300 at the same time, mine have done about 50k actuations and my moms boyfriend have done max 5k. His looks brand new and mine is just as you say, smooth and really shiny.

Here's a little comparison between the two cameras.









Mine is, ehm to the right.










Jeez, what happened to the rubber grip, and all the rest of it for that matter?


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


19mm? Come on, it goes to 10mm! I loved shooting that lens at 10mm. Canon should make an EF-S 10mm f/2.8 prime (yeah right).


Let me find one shot at 10mm. It makes the cars' hoods look reallllyyyyy long lol.


----------



## AlbertMwugabi

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Jeez, what happened to the rubber grip, and all the rest of it for that matter?










The rubber grip came off after about 3 years of use, i tried to glue back on, but it came loose again after a short period, i even think it was ducttaped for a while. But it have been used very well under sometimes hard conditions, especially in the winter time, i could spend 5 hours every day day at the local ski hill and it's -10 degrees fahrenheit.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


I posted an example above. I might just be ultra nit picking at this point, as I thought it was an exposed area of the shot that was noisy (it's light enough to see in there, but that doesn't mean there's enough light to prevent noise).


One of the few things Nikon offers is ADL which in some cases can be helpful. I've claimed some keepers with ADL set to normal that I couldn't save with ADL off and PP.

Just say'n.


----------



## mz-n10

There's nothing really wrong with the elan7. Sure the af isnt the best but the biggest problem i have is my lack of eos glass. I could borrow the glass but it just makes it more complicated.

Also of you get the elan make sure you get a grip. The body only takes cr123 so it gets expensive to shoot.


----------



## Nemesis158

Ok, so it looks like i will try to get a D5100 and another lens. If i go through B&H i can get $150 off a bundle of the D5100 + 55-300MM, or $100 off a bundle with the D5100 + 55-200MM. Ive read that the 55-300 has slightly better IQ, is that true? Which one should i go for?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nuclearjock;15235891*
> One of the few things Nikon offers is ADL which in some cases can be helpful. I've claimed some keepers with ADL set to normal that I couldn't save with ADL off and PP.
> 
> Just say'n.


Canon DSLR's have the same feature, they just call it "auto lighting optimizer." The effect even set to "strong" isn't very noticeable to me.


----------



## dudemanppl

Nikon's ADL is much better than Canon's whatever it is.

And Albert, just swap the rubber, give it back. He probably won't ever notice.


----------



## Nemesis158

So, from B&H, i can get a D5100 + 55-200MM VR lens for $755. Is this a good deal?
thinking i should also get a spare battery









How much do you think I would be able to get for my D3000 body + 2 batteries and charger, assuming i could even sell it at all?


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nemesis158;15237048*
> So, from B&H, i can get a D5100 + 55-200MM VR lens for $755. Is this a good deal?
> thinking i should also get a spare battery
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How much do you think I would be able to get for my D3000 body + 2 batteries and charger, assuming i could even sell it at all?


New, it's about what you can find anywhere. Used, it's a bad deal.

As for the D3000, I'd say you're looking at $200-$250 for that, depending on condition.


----------



## Nemesis158

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;15237148*
> New, it's about what you can find anywhere. Used, it's a bad deal.
> 
> As for the D3000, I'd say you're looking at $200-$250 for that, depending on condition.


as far as what i have seen from other retailers, its a good deal, unless i go hunting for both of those on eBay for 2 months.

If i were to go to Walmart, it would be $1000 for the pair, though I'm sure it would be a bit less elsewhere.
The camera lists new on eBay for $680-750 and $700-800 on retail sites. B&H has it listed on their main pages for $750, so it seems to me like buying the body and getting the lens free









My 3000 is in fairly good condition considering what Ive put it through.
The screen has few scratches, and the only part of the body that has gotten worn and shiny is right under the shutter speed knob. i do believe it has at least 3-4K shutter cycles on it, didn't really keep track.....


----------



## Conspiracy

so after looking around and honestly not seeing very many used sigma 50's for sale on potn, fred miranda, ebay, B&H, adorama, craigslist (suggest more if im missing out lol)

and looking at most of the used prices for like new condition i would only be saving like $60 in most cases but not all and that doesnt include shipping. so im kind of considering that for what ill be saving i can easily go buy new in a few days once my check from last fridays game comes in since it will put me at $500 saved. in this situation i dont 100% see the benefit of buying used when in total ill be almost paying new price to buy this lens in particular. although i do admit i see lots of spectacular deals on used glass but i dont need any of those lenses

the only thing about buying new is ill be paying like $535 new rather than $450 approximate used.


----------



## dudemanppl

Buy a used one. It will be better than new. New Sigma primes are a dumb thing to buy. Copy variation?


----------



## AlbertMwugabi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;15236752*
> And Albert, just swap the rubber, give it back. He probably won't ever notice.


Haha







My mom said i should change his camera for mine and that he wouldn't notice any difference.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;15237904*
> Buy a used one. It will be better than new. New Sigma primes are a dumb thing to buy. Copy variation?


i just dont fully understand buying used for like $50 less than the price of it new. i realize that odds are good i will need a little micro adjusting but wont just about any copy i buy technically?

right now i dont see any good used ones that are deals at least. im going to wait until after my first basketball game which is where it would get the most use. I will see how my 30 holds up, most likely it will do good but only for close shots of players right under the basket. ill also be using the 70-200


----------



## mz-n10

a used sigmalux from POTN will probably have been sent back to sigma for focusing issues. buying new you are almost GUARANTEED it will back or front focus...especially on canon.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10;15239359*
> a used sigmalux from POTN will probably have been sent back to sigma for focusing issues. buying new you are almost GUARANTEED it will back or front focus...especially on canon.


This. Most used copies are guaranteed to have no focusing issues, and are $50 cheaper? I find that a huge bargain.


----------



## foothead

Just updated my lenses to the 1.3 firmware. Am I crazy, or is the AF faster? It seems like that'd have more to do with camera fw.


----------



## silvrr

I believe the lens has the code on how to focus but the body tells it where to go. They could have taken some steps out of the code or made it less complex which would speed up the AF.


----------



## mz-n10

firmware on 43rd lenses do make AF faster. i believe it was to do with CD vs PD or seomthing....


----------



## dudemanppl

I just realized I've never seen another Leica.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *silvrr;15241322*
> I believe the lens has the code on how to focus but the body tells it where to go. They could have taken some steps out of the code or made it less complex which would speed up the AF.


That makes sense. Olympus's lenses are highly automated, so I guess I could see the lens having the AF firmware, instead of the camera.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;15241589*
> I just realized I've never seen another Leica.


I've never seen a leica period.


----------



## Conspiracy

awesome season finale for breaking bad. i hope they keep their promise and still do another season. this one ended too easy


----------



## Conspiracy

yay. someone on potn saw my interest in the sigma 50. and has offered to sell me his copy and hold it for me for a few extra days while i get all the money together and will also take payment as a cashier check/mail order

he said it came good right out of the box and worked on both a FF and crop camera. hes asking $430.

im thinking about setting up a paypal to make the purchase easier and safer. just dont know 100% how to use paypal, i know you can straight send money or "gift money"


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy;15246299*
> yay. someone on potn saw my interest in the sigma 50. and has offered to sell me his copy and hold it for me for a few extra days while i get all the money together and will also take payment as a cashier check/mail order
> 
> he said it came good right out of the box and worked on both a FF and crop camera. hes asking $430.
> 
> im thinking about setting up a paypal to make the purchase easier and safer. just dont know 100% how to use paypal, i know you can straight send money or "gift money"


wow....how do you fleabay without PP?


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy;15246299*
> yay. someone on potn saw my interest in the sigma 50. and has offered to sell me his copy and hold it for me for a few extra days while i get all the money together and will also take payment as a cashier check/mail order
> 
> he said it came good right out of the box and worked on both a FF and crop camera. hes asking $430.
> 
> im thinking about setting up a paypal to make the purchase easier and safer. just dont know 100% how to use paypal, i know you can straight send money or "gift money"


I would use the regular paypal and eat the $12 dollars if the seller won't. If you send the money as a gift you get now buyer protection. I only use it with someone who has a lot of feedback on POTN and I can track down easily (i.e. lists their photo business, facebook, ect.)


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;15241589*
> I just realized I've never seen another Leica.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead;15241789*
> I've never seen a leica period.


I've played with an M9 in a shop before. I once saw a middle-aged guy with an M8 and a Sekonic meter, with his wife in a restaurant. He kept holding the meter right up to her face, then snapping a shot, repeating this numerous times. Pretty comical to watch.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy;15246299*
> yay. someone on potn saw my interest in the sigma 50. and has offered to sell me his copy and hold it for me for a few extra days while i get all the money together and will also take payment as a cashier check/mail order
> 
> he said it came good right out of the box and worked on both a FF and crop camera. hes asking $430.
> 
> im thinking about setting up a paypal to make the purchase easier and safer. just dont know 100% how to use paypal, i know you can straight send money or "gift money"


Paypal sucks, but it's one of those necessary evils. There are alternatives, like Google Checkout et al., but almost everyone does Paypal.

Never send money as a Paypal gift! Sellers will ask you to pay that way to avoid Paypal fees, but if you pay as a gift, you surrender all buyer's rights and cannot get a refund or file a complaint with Paypal.

One thing I like about Paypal is that it's sort of like your own personal "spending account" of sorts. If I want to start saving for a lens or PC component, I'll throw some cash into my Paypal account every now and then to save up for it. Plus that way the wife can't see it.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;15247028*
> Plus that way the wife can't see it.


lol wow

i think im going to have to do paypal and set it up this week. im waiting to see photos of the lens. i have seen 2 samples (1 headshot and one ruler test with a pen perpendicular)

i think this is a fairly good deal, from what he said. $430 total and he will ship fedex insured and comes with everything... box, hood, case, papers, and lens. and it has not been registered with sigma and is only a few months old.

im going to see if my girlfriend happens to have a paypal account already that way my bank doesnt screw me on extra charges like it has been lately for debit card use. and if not ill setup my own paypal.

guy has 15 positive feedbacks on potn so i think that is pretty legit in my book. all say great things

also he told me there is no rush and i can take my time deciding what i want to do considering i was going to wait until basketball started to see how my 30mm goes. but honestly if i bought this it would not go unused anyway

on another side note.. do yall think its a little too much to try and shoot basketball with a 30 1.4, 50 1.4, and a 70-200 2.8 with only one body? 70-200 would be used the least i would imagine and only to get hero shots and a few sportraits


----------



## Boyboyd

I'm under the impression that sigma 50s sometimes have focusing issues, but on one forum a member said "that's not a problem really, seeing as how they can be sent to sigma for free re-calibration".

Does anyone know if this is true? I wouldn't mind one if it is.


----------



## silvrr

Its more the hassle of sending it in and sometimes they won't come back right. Sometimes it can be fixed with micro adjust, other times it is out of the realm of being a bit of front or back focus.


----------



## Conspiracy

yea, as silvr very well put it, if your body has a micro-adjust feature you can fix it yourself majority of the time. but the issue everyone fears with sigma is the pain it is to have to send your new lens to be calibrated when you would rather be out enjoying it. i think the sigma issue can occur with almost any lens in their lineup not specifically the 50 as my sigma 30 came out of the box front focusing very slightly but enough to cause a portrait shot to be off so i micro adjusted and now it is hardly every off my body unless i am shooting sports and have to use a telephoto lens

i have played with several sigmas and they are great and fast lenses, their version of canons USM focus motor is pretty fast and reliable i think. i have not been a sigma owner for very long but i do enjoy my sigma 30. it saved me a lot of money over the 35L which is not even affordable anyway. and the other quality option i think is the rokinon 35 1.4 which is a manual focus lens

i did have a bad experience with a sigma 70-200 2.8 but honestly it was more user error than sigma error, although under the right conditions the sigma 70-200 2.8 macro suffers from bad chromatic aberrations it still takes a good photo and there are lots of great samples you can check out on potn for just about every lens as well


----------



## Boyboyd

That's a good point actually. I've got no idea where i'd have to send it to either.

I'm staggered by how cheap the Nikon 50 f/1.4 is. I've got no idea how they compare IQ wise though.


----------



## Conspiracy

if you go on sigma's website they list the places to send them. i think basically you can chose between new york or japan, and they list authorized places as well. but i would rather they directly do it than a 3rd party company


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy;15247577*
> if you go on sigma's website they list the places to send them. i think basically you can chose between new york or japan, and they list authorized places as well. but i would rather they directly do it than a 3rd party company


Apparently there's a sigma building in Roedrmark, Germany. On Carl Zeiss Street. Ironically.


----------



## Conspiracy

lol awesome


----------



## biatchi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Boyboyd;15247550*
> That's a good point actually. I've got no idea where i'd have to send it to either.
> 
> I'm staggered by how cheap the Nikon 50 f/1.4 is. I've got no idea how they compare IQ wise though.


Dpreview compared the Sigma to the Canon, Nikon and Pentax equiv's in their review but alas no samples. http://www.dpreview.com/news/0808/08081802sigma50review.asp


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy;15247376*
> im going to see if my girlfriend happens to have a paypal account already that way my bank doesnt screw me on extra charges like it has been lately for debit card use. and if not ill setup my own paypal.


You don't have to use your debit card for Paypal. You can have funds draw directly from your account, and deposit to the same, for no charge (from Paypal that is).

And I don't see why your bank would charge you for ACH debits from Paypal. I've had a Paypal account for nearly 10 years now and no bank I've had has charged me for using Paypal.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy;15247376*
> on another side note.. do yall think its a little too much to try and shoot basketball with a 30 1.4, 50 1.4, and a 70-200 2.8 with only one body? 70-200 would be used the least i would imagine and only to get hero shots and a few sportraits


I think it definitely would be too much for one body, though it's possible. I shot a couple of weddings with one body plus 3 lenses, and it was awful having to switch constantly. I did the rest of the weddings with a 5D + 40D and it was worlds better.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Boyboyd;15247464*
> I'm under the impression that sigma 50s sometimes have focusing issues, but on one forum a member said "that's not a problem really, seeing as how they can be sent to sigma for free re-calibration".
> 
> Does anyone know if this is true? I wouldn't mind one if it is.


It is if the lens is under warranty.


----------



## BlankThis

Any tips for shooting into the sun?


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis;15248632*
> Any tips for shooting into the sun?


Don't look into it lol, I hurt my eyes one day doing that.









Set your camera to manual (duh lol) and use a flash to light up the subject if the sun isn't.

What do you want to know exactly?


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis;15248632*
> Any tips for shooting into the sun?


The best way to focus is to look into the viewfinder and manually focus yourself.

...









(Please don't do that)


----------



## sub50hz

Found a really sweet old Velbon tripod at my parents' house this weekend -- so much lighter than the 055/498, gonna try this thing out for a hot minute.


----------



## KShirza1

Update...

upgraded to the D7000 from D3100... WOW.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KShirza1;15249235*
> Update...
> 
> upgraded to the D7000 from D3100... WOW.


Lol, I actually misread that as "From the D7000 to the D3100" at first and was









But yeaup, the jump from entry level to semi-pro is a great one!


----------



## Nemesis158

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;15249355*
> Lol, I actually misread that as "From the D7000 to the D3100" at first and was
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But yeaup, the jump from entry level to semi-pro is a great one!


If i had the money i would definitely have jumped for a D7000, but it would have cost me $500 more than the D5100, so i'll use that and see where it gets me


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;15249355*
> Lol, I actually misread that as "From the D7000 to the D3100" at first and was
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But yeaup, the jump from entry level to semi-pro is a great one!


I read it that way too! lol

Congrats on the upgrade the D7000 is a nice camera.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis;15248632*
> Any tips for shooting into the sun?


Fill flash for your back-lit subjects and a lens hood (and a lens that has decent flare resistance). Although it can be impossible to avoid flare if the sun is right in the frame.


----------



## iandroo888

For Sale ! Nikkor AF-S 18-105mm f/3.5 - 5.6 Lens ! Comes with a Hoya HD Multicoated Filter ! In mint condition with no dust or scratches or blemishes. Very well taken care off. In non-smoking environment. $200 Shipped US48 ! if anyone is interested...


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


For Sale ! Nikkor AF-S 18-105mm f/3.5 - 5.6 Lens ! Comes with a Hoya HD Multicoated Filter ! In mint condition with no dust or scratches or blemishes. Very well taken care off. In non-smoking environment. $200 Shipped US48 ! if anyone is interested...


I remember this lens being discussed in a thread somewhere in the past week or so. It might be worth looking into the recent threads.


----------



## iandroo888

from what it looks like, a lot of swayed to different lenses... either a 3rd party f/2.8 or something else..

B> 24-70mm f/2.8G Nikkor AF-S ...... or trade Cash + CSX V1 Spartan? xDDD !!


----------



## sub50hz

Man, I wish some of you guys would post some really inspired stuff, I'm getting really bummed looking at all these grab shots posted here. The availability of DSLRs is a double-edged sword, I suppose.


----------



## dudemanppl

Well Marin is gone so we gots nothin' for you.

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/top...40#lastmessage Or go there.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Well Marin is gone so we gots nothin' for you.


Oh, come on now, I know some of you guys have it in you.


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Oh, come on now, I know some of you guys have it in you.


How about you? I see a lot of talk but never any pictures.


----------



## Sean Webster

Were are your newest pics subz???

Here are some of mine. http://www.overclock.net/photography...-cpu-pics.html

Also my flickr has some new stuff.


----------



## sub50hz

I keep a permalink to Flickr in my sig, and post what I can when I can. I print more than I post, since I don't have a scanner of my own. I haven't uploaded a digital photo in more than a month.

I'm not trying to demean anyone's work, I would just love to see less snapping and more serious work, not some over-hyped HDR or wide-open macro of some uninteresting mediocrity.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *SeanWebster*


Were are your newest pics subz???


Been busy, mostly partying and rehabbing my leg (finally cast-free!) -- probably won't have a lot of serious time to shoot until after the new year, as next week begins the 15-hour work days (plus my 3hr round trip commute). I have 4 rolls to drop off sometime this week, but I've been lazy. Maybe I'll bring my 50D tomorrow and see if I can't get something through.

Been real thin on inspiration, which is why I asked to see some more good stuff.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Man, I wish some of you guys would post some really inspired stuff, I'm getting really bummed looking at all these grab shots posted here. The availability of DSLRs is a double-edged sword, I suppose.


Yea, I haven't had as much time for practice as I'd like, and I know I'm on the noobier end of the users here









Hopefully when break comes around.


----------



## Conspiracy

yea i was about to say being in a cast would make it tough to take new pictures to post lol.

i never have anything to post unless its after a sports event at school. i cant find time to take photos for fun since my main work i do is video which eats up my schedule. i can post a link to my webcast every time we go live if you want to watch GA high school football lol

i have not watched it myself but im told we put on a pretty solid broadcast


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*


i never have anything to post unless its after a sports event at school.


It's alright, shooting sports is another world entirely. I only enjoy shooting BMX about 2% of the time, and I would love to get out some more and explore but it's been rough being dependent on other for rides and the inability to hop on my bike and just cruise somewhere with a couple rolls of film, the Fugazi discography and a whole lotta time. I can't push it yet unless I put a brake back on, riding fixed would surely cause rehab issues. Can't drive because I snapped my clutch bracket and since i am newly single, there's no automatic-transmission vehicle around anymore.

Sad times lately, light on inspiration and heavy on alcohol consumption. Working+commuting for 18 hours a day now will surely put any plans of shooting or partying to rest until the new year. Bummer.


----------



## djriful

Just a pic... too lazy to list the details at the moment.
Maybe you can guess them out. =P _yup, i'm not expecting to be added to the op list anyways._

I have like 2-3 more lenses, flash, accessories which is not shown in the pic.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


It's alright, shooting sports is another world entirely. I only enjoy shooting BMX about 2% of the time, and I would love to get out some more and explore but it's been rough being dependent on other for rides and the inability to hop on my bike and just cruise somewhere with a couple rolls of film, the Fugazi discography and a whole lotta time. I can't push it yet unless I put a brake back on, riding fixed would surely cause rehab issues. Can't drive because I snapped my clutch bracket and since i am newly single, there's no automatic-transmission vehicle around anymore.

Sad times lately, light on inspiration and heavy on alcohol consumption. Working+commuting for 18 hours a day now will surely put any plans of shooting or partying to rest until the new year. Bummer.


i hear you on the working your butt off part. when im not in class i feel like im always on a video shoot. i will say in my young age i have not become fed up with sports yet like most of the people i work with, video or photos. i enjoy doing sports coverage.

this wednesday ill post some hopefully nice sports shots for you. i think i have improved quite a bit. although i will say no matter what your level of experience its tough battling a setting sun while it goes down during a game and a practically pitch black field lol i am so thankful for high ISO. but it provides a challenge for me to get better at


----------



## BlankThis

I need to get a job that allows me to do something more creative than cook for people...


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *BlankThis*


I need to get a job that allows me to do something more creative than cook for people...


Dude, I actually can't imagine many more jobs that allow for and foster as much creativity as being a chef. Did you go to school for it? I would drop everything I had to do that, but I'm neck deep into a commitment that I can't get out of for the forseeable future.


----------



## dudemanppl

I love shooting games that go from bright sunlight to after the sun goes down. It's like 1/2000 f/2.8 ISO 100 then suddenly 1/640 f/2.8 ISO 6400.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *djriful*


Just a pic... too lazy to list the details at the moment.
Maybe you can guess them out. =P _yup, i'm not expecting to be added to the op list anyways._

I have like 2-3 more lenses, flash, accessories which is not shown in the pic.











This post might as well read "Challenge for dudemanppl"


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Dude, I actually can't imagine many more jobs that allow for and foster as much creativity as being a chef. Did you go to school for it? I would drop everything I had to do that, but I'm neck deep into a commitment that I can't get out of for the forseeable future.


It's not exactly as great as you might think it is... I didn't go to school but I worked my way up from my first job as a dishwasher at 13 to being a line cook now at 18. The hours aren't great, nor is the money. The stress is the real killer. Unless you're working at some Gordon Ramsay-ish place you're running for about 3 to 5 hours in a sweltering hot kitchen. Your feet ache, back is sore, bruises and cuts on your hands are a regular ordeal. You spend so little time pushing your creativity with your cooking or design of the plate because everything becomes automated almost.

I don't mean to deter you away from the industry, it's just not for me.


----------



## sub50hz

Like I said, I would if I could. Sitting in an office for 12-20 hours a day has a way of really wearing you down.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Like I said, I would if I could. Sitting in an office for 12-20 hours a day has a way of really wearing you down.


Oh yea, school has the same darn effect on me.


----------



## scottath

I just came home to a new toy !
Yongnuo YN565 Flash
Now to learn and play with it before my first wedding late december


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:



Originally Posted by *scottath*


I just came home to a new toy !
Yongnuo YN565 Flash
Now to learn and play with it before my first wedding late december










Sweet! Tell me how you like it, i still haven't got around to getting mine lol.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;15255600*
> This post might as well read "Challenge for dudemanppl"


F3 non-HP, no idea what lens on it. SB-12 as it says. 75-150 Series E in the upper left? 18-105mm f/3.5-5.6 AF-S G DX VR. Polaroid something or another. D90 with 35 1.8.


----------



## scottath

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SeanWebster;15255889*
> Sweet! Tell me how you like it, i still haven't got around to getting mine lol.


well its doing as it should do....how else to i test it lol....
might take it to indoor soccer tonight.


----------



## ljason8eg

Boarding my flight to Charlotte in 6 hours. I should be in bed...


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg;15257387*
> Boarding my flight to Charlotte in 6 hours. I should be in bed...


I was about to make a slightly inappropriate and awkward comment, but decided not to.

You are spared.


----------



## Boyboyd

The more I see them, the more I hate HDR.

There's a time and a place. And a method. The correct method is to take multiple exposures then dodge/burn detailing back into the shadows/highlights.

Also, it hasn't stopped being grey and rainy, for nearly 4 days now.

/ranting


----------



## dudemanppl

You can just move somewhere that isn't the UK. Half your problems would be fixed.


----------



## Boyboyd

The vast majority of my problems would be fixed lol.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;15255031*
> I keep a permalink to Flickr in my sig, and post what I can when I can. I print more than I post, since I don't have a scanner of my own. I haven't uploaded a digital photo in more than a month.
> 
> I'm not trying to demean anyone's work, I would just love to see less snapping and more serious work, not some over-hyped HDR or wide-open macro of some uninteresting mediocrity.
> 
> Been busy, mostly partying and rehabbing my leg (finally cast-free!) -- probably won't have a lot of serious time to shoot until after the new year, as next week begins the 15-hour work days (plus my 3hr round trip commute). I have 4 rolls to drop off sometime this week, but I've been lazy. Maybe I'll bring my 50D tomorrow and see if I can't get something through.
> 
> Been real thin on inspiration, which is why I asked to see some more good stuff.


I'm definitely guilty of not posting much.







My problem isn't a lack of time to shoot, but more of a bipolar attitude about my shots. I'll come back for an outing, excited about the shots I had, even when viewing them on my monitor. However, after a few days when (if) I get around to PP'ing them, then I suddenly hate all my shots.







So I have literally a couple hundred unprocessed RAW images going back a few months. I think with Fall Break starting here at work soon, that I may finally get around to processing them.


----------



## Conspiracy

so yea the guy on potn wanting to sell me his 50 is wanting me to pay him as a paypal gift. not so sure about that but im going to try and see if he can let me do a normal paypal payment because i dont care about fees if it adds security to my purchase so i dont get screwed


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy;15262707*
> so yea the guy on potn wanting to sell me his 50 is wanting me to pay him as a paypal gift. not so sure about that but im going to try and see if he can let me do a normal paypal payment because i dont care about fees if it adds security to my purchase so i dont get screwed


+1. Let him know you're willing to eat the fees. If he wants $450, you need to send him $463.75.

http://ppcalc.com/


----------



## Sean Webster

Or see if he will take amazon payments.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie;15263006*
> +1. Let him know you're willing to eat the fees. If he wants $450, you need to send him $463.75.
> 
> http://ppcalc.com/


Or just multiply the value by 1.03% in any calculator









@GoneTomorrow: I've a bit of a random question for you. Since you teach at a school, have you ever tried to start a photography class or organization? Random curious question.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy;15262707*
> so yea the guy on potn wanting to sell me his 50 is wanting me to pay him as a paypal gift. not so sure about that but im going to try and see if he can let me do a normal paypal payment because i dont care about fees if it adds security to my purchase so i dont get screwed


Usually when it's a situation like that I offer to pay the fees. I only paid for something once using a gift, and I ended up regretting it.


----------



## dudemanppl

I don't even considering hesitatng using gift on FM. Very comfortable place.


----------



## Conspiracy

i dont 100% trust everyone on potn since half of them give terrible advice and thats free lol

im shooting the first basketball game this thursday and im going to use my 30 and see how it goes and ill decide on the sigma 50 after the game.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy;15262707*
> so yea the guy on potn wanting to sell me his 50 is wanting me to pay him as a paypal gift. not so sure about that but im going to try and see if he can let me do a normal paypal payment because i dont care about fees if it adds security to my purchase so i dont get screwed


Well, it's a tough one because I'm sure there will be plenty of takers who are willing to pay as a gift without reservation, so it's your call. If you refuse, he might go to the next taker. I think you mentioned that his credentials were good, so perhaps it would be ok to do so in this instance.

And I agree with the others that offering to pay the fees might be a good option, as he wouldn't have to pay fees and you would still have your buyer's protection, so both would win (except that you would have to pay a small amount extra).

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;15263225*
> Or just multiply the value by 1.03% in any calculator
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> @GoneTomorrow: I've a bit of a random question for you. Since you teach at a school, have you ever tried to start a photography class or organization? Random curious question.


Well, there is a photography class in the art department, and it's decent from what I've gleaned. They do both film and digital, though I have my doubts about how much technical knowledge is taught.

I help shoot some of the school events, with students shooting along side me, so that's my outlet for teaching photography (honestly I'm way too loaded down to take on another class, though I would love to). Most of the journalism students are clueless and don't get much in the way of instruction for their cameras; they all use our school's Canon T3's, XT's, and Nikon D40's, all with kit lenses. They use overhand grips to hold the lens barrel while shooting and shoot green square only. Like I said, not much in the way of technical instruction here, but decent gear and opportunities for the students at least.


----------



## dudemanppl

Luckily our newspaper peeps (that aren't me) all have pretty decent gear. T2i, 17-55 IS all round (bought with own money).


----------



## KShirza1

Some of my stuff

love the size of the d3100 with the 35 1.8. LOVE the D7000.

also to point out its weird to take a pic of my pic gear...


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;15264357*
> I don't even considering hesitatng using gift on FM. Very comfortable place.


same. if the person allows it, ill do gift as well. people on FM are super reliable since most are reputable already and selling items kept it top shape. though i havent dont as many deals as dudemanppl but ive still had the best experience so far


----------



## jsigone

got my new to me lens today!! Very minty super tak 28mm/3.5 with original hood. It looks like it spent allot of its 40+yrs in its velvet lined case.


----------



## BlankThis

lawl.










http://www.dchome.net/viewthread.php?tid=777127


----------



## mz-n10

now thats a lens


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Well, there is a photography class in the art department, and it's decent from what I've gleaned. They do both film and digital, though I have my doubts about how much technical knowledge is taught.

I help shoot some of the school events, with students shooting along side me, so that's my outlet for teaching photography (honestly I'm way too loaded down to take on another class, though I would love to). Most of the journalism students are clueless and don't get much in the way of instruction for their cameras; they all use our school's Canon T3's, XT's, and Nikon D40's, all with kit lenses. They use overhand grips to hold the lens barrel while shooting and shoot green square only. Like I said, not much in the way of technical instruction here, but decent gear and opportunities for the students at least.


What do you teach GT? I have it in my head you teach English. Not sure why I think that.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*


What do you teach GT? I have it in my head you teach English. Not sure why I think that.


No, it's even better; I teach Latin & Ancient Greek! Also computer applications and web design.









And although I love the subject, I'm very glad that I don't teach English. Those teachers have the most amount of grading to do at any given time hands down.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


No, it's even better; I teach Latin & Ancient Greek! Also computer applications and web design.









And although I love the subject, I'm very glad that I don't teach English. Those teachers have the most amount of grading to do at any given time hands down.


That's interesting, you must teach at a pretty large school then? I'm not sure I know of any (bar one here) that teach Latin and Ancient Greek.

I wonder why I thought you taught English...


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:



Originally Posted by *BlankThis*


lawl.










http://www.dchome.net/viewthread.php?tid=777127



do want


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*


That's interesting, you must teach at a pretty large school then? I'm not sure I know of any (bar one here) that teach Latin and Ancient Greek.

I wonder why I thought you taught English...


Around 800 students, which is large for a private parochial high school I suppose (around here anyway). Almost no secondary schools offer Ancient Greek and even here it's not a typical course offering, only taught on an independent basis (I just have one student for Greek this semester).

And Fall Break begins at noon today for me!







Definitely going to get out to do some exploratory shooting.


----------



## biatchi

Quote:



Originally Posted by *BlankThis*


lawl.










http://www.dchome.net/viewthread.php?tid=777127


Wow


----------



## MistaBernie

I went to Newburyport on Columbus Day. It was a pretty nice day and I thought I would be inspired to shoot, but I really wasnt. Had my small bag with me (5D/17-40/70-200) and walked away with like 32 shots total (27 or so were of a random band we came upon and even those weren't very good). I didn't end up posting _any_ of them, and if I did it would probably just be some rusted Studebaker that I saw at some antique shop.

I'm definitely in need of some inspiration. I have been dying to try to do some portraits for some reason, but I haven't had any drive whatsoever.


----------



## sub50hz

Lol, so you went out with a UWA and a tele zoom and you're surprised about your keeper rate?

Take the 5D and your 50 and forget you own anything else.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;15277763*
> Lol, so you went out with a UWA and a tele zoom and you're surprised about your keeper rate?
> 
> Take the 5D and your 50 and forget you own anything else.


Most of the shots were keepers. It was just that they didn't feel like anything special. Whats wrong with the 17-40? I actually like it more than my 50 at the moment


----------



## sub50hz

Nothing, except it's hardly what I would recommend for just walking around.


----------



## MistaBernie

I feel like a 50 prime is more restrictive than a 17-40.. 50, you have to 'be there'. 17-40, you may need to get a little closer.. but you dont have to worry about getting further away.

Either way, I'm actually due to slap the 50 on the 5D, as if I dont find myself using the focal length, then it's probably gonna go up for sale/trade.


----------



## sub50hz

Really? 50 on FF is where it's at.


----------



## Boyboyd

I like 35 on film. I'd imagine it's the same on full frame.


----------



## MistaBernie

I'll give it another go. I dont know when, I'm busy all weekend this weekend.

Dudeman, $50 Canon 20D on POTN - dropped, occasional errors..

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=1103232


----------



## jsigone

good deal for someone looking to use CLP


----------



## Conspiracy

2 soccer matches tonight. i have been requested to get shots of specific players (seniors) tonight :| going to stink if they dont get played or even touch the ball..


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *jsigone*


good deal for someone looking to use CLP


there's better (cheaper) options usually available. Look up 'Fibrepunk' on POTN, he usually has broken P&S camers for $16 specifically for the CLP. In fact, when you get the box, he includes step-by-step instructions on what you need to do to use the CLP. I already knew, but I thought it was very thoughtful and useful for sure.

I was thinking of Dudemanppl for something like this because I could see it being something that he may be able to repair or mess around with. Hell if he could get it working, I'd probably get it IR converted to mess around with it.


----------



## dudemanppl

Already have a broken 20D.







Got it for free too! 17, 35, 85 = walkaround. Or with the M6 just the 35.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*


2 soccer matches tonight. i have been requested to get shots of specific players (seniors) tonight :| going to stink if they dont get played or even touch the ball..


posed shots


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Or with the M6 just the 35.


Leica shooters seem to have a real affinity for that 35.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


posed shots










i actually asked if they wanted action and the ball in the shots considering that one of the players is honestly less skilled than the others and doesnt do much..

i was going to just snap portraits of them standing around on the field but they really want action shots. so i guess ill do whatever it takes to deliver even if it takes yelling at the player to do something lol (i am friends with all the athletes so i think that would be ok right?







)


----------



## ljason8eg

Should get some night shots at the track tomorrow. I think I'll be fine with the 300mm f/4 since I'll be mostly panning and the track is very well lit. I wish i had this BMW M5 all the time too. Freakin awesome.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg;15280760*
> Should get some night shots at the track tomorrow. I think I'll be fine with the 300mm f/4 since I'll be mostly panning and the track is very well lit. I wish i had this BMW M5 all the time too. Freakin awesome.


You driving an M5 currently? My dad almost bought one last weekend, £24,995. In the end he got a regular 5. Slower than mine too.


----------



## dudemanppl

I'm gunning for an E39, they're like 10kish. Also, I loved 35 before I got my Leica. 50 is so tight.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

I also like 35mm on FF as a walk around much better than 50mm. And I used the 10-22 has a walk around for crop all the time. Depends on where you're walking around.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*


You driving an M5 currently? My dad almost bought one last weekend, Â£24,995. In the end he got a regular 5. Slower than mine too.


Yeah its my friend's "other" car so I drive it when I'm in Charlotte. I wish it was mine its so much fun to drive.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*


Yeah its my friend's "other" car so I drive it when I'm in Charlotte. I wish it was mine its so much fun to drive.


His "other" car is an M5?







What does he normally drive then?


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


His "other" car is an M5?







What does he normally drive then?


Bentley Continental GT. I'd honestly rather have the M5 but that's just me lol.


----------



## sub50hz

I want to be friends with your friends.

-Thank you.


----------



## foothead

So I'm starting to look for a wide angle lens. Is the Olympus 9-18 my best bet?


----------



## Conspiracy

so shooting soccer only for specific shots of certain players is really hard especially when some of those players never touch the ball the entire game. i wish my school just asked me to shoot the game like normal, would have got more keepers rather than shooting from certain spots in attempt to get what they want

didnt get many shots that i am happy with and none of them are spectacular (most are just sportraits rather than great action shots), the dull colors of a field full of dead grass just takes away from the images a little

i get to shoot a little basketball tomorrow so i hope my 30 is up for the challenge


----------



## sub50hz

I bought a couple books today to see if I can get some inspiration flowin'.

http://www.amazon.com/Street-Seen-Psychological-Photography-1940-1959/dp/379135034X]Amazon.com: Street Seen: The Psychological Gesture in American Photography, 1940-1959 (9783791350349): Lisa Hostetler: Books[/URL]

http://www.amazon.com/Portraits-America-William-Albert-Allard/dp/0792264185]Portraits of America[/URL]


----------



## dudemanppl

http://www.worlddriftseries.com/pikespeak/11/day3.html

God these are inspiring.

OT: [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S2iSusw-ncM[/ame]

My school. <3


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg;15281863*
> Bentley Continental GT. I'd honestly rather have the M5 but that's just me lol.


Same here. Not a big fan of poser's cars, even if they may be miracles of engineering.


----------



## MistaBernie

CanonRumors just released a CR3 (actually looks like it's from late last night) that there will be a new DSLR on Tuesday of next week (the 18th, not the 26th that people have been waiting for). Apparently, the most recent indications are that it's the 1Dv and NOT the 5DIII, 7DII or 6D aka Nikon Killer.

If it IS the 1Dv, the speculation on the specs would be indicative of a 1D body..

16-18mp
Full Frame
ISO *51,200*
Dual Digic V
Crazy frame rates of *12-14fps* have been reported
61 AF points has also been reported

I really want to see what good ISO 51,200 native does... maybe for photojournalism/newspaper stuff... but other than that..


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


If it IS the 1Dv, the speculation on the specs would be indicative of a 1D body..

16-18mp
Full Frame
ISO *51,200*
Dual Digic V
Crazy frame rates of *12-14fps* have been reported
61 AF points has also been reported

I really want to see what good ISO 51,200 native does... maybe for photojournalism/newspaper stuff... but other than that..


1DsIV dimensions were already leaked months ago.

P.S. 1D bodies are 1.3x crop, 1Ds bodies are FF.


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


1DsIV dimensions were already leaked months ago.

P.S. 1D bodies are 1.3x crop, 1Ds bodies are FF.


Wait, canon still makes APS-H cameras? I thought that had died out years ago.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


CanonRumors just released a CR3 (actually looks like it's from late last night) that there will be a new DSLR on Tuesday of next week (the 18th, not the 26th that people have been waiting for). Apparently, the most recent indications are that it's the 1Dv and NOT the 5DIII, 7DII or 6D aka Nikon Killer.

If it IS the 1Dv, the speculation on the specs would be indicative of a 1D body..

16-18mp
Full Frame
ISO *51,200*
Dual Digic V
Crazy frame rates of *12-14fps* have been reported
61 AF points has also been reported

I really want to see what good ISO 51,200 native does... maybe for photojournalism/newspaper stuff... but other than that..


holy crap 14fps? i want to see the slow motion of that mirror flapping around.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *foothead*


Wait, canon still makes APS-H cameras? I thought that had died out years ago.


nope, all 1D (not 1DS) are aps-h.


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


nope, all 1D (not 1DS) are aps-h.


Why? It's not like there are many lenses dedicated to APS-H. Seems like a waste to have to use full frame lenses on a crop camera.

I asked this last night, but nobody answered. I'm looking at ultra wide angle lenses. Right now, the only one I'm really considering is the ZD 9-18, but I'd be open to any suggestions. It doesn't matter what mount, as long as it isn't APS-C. I'd actually prefer manual focus if it'll save me money.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *foothead*


Why? It's not like there are many lenses dedicated to APS-H. Seems like a waste to have to use full frame lenses on a crop camera.


There are _zero_ APS-H lenses. FF lenses work quite well on a 1D, and most people in need of full frame will just buy a 5D anyway. Or a 1Ds if they're max baller.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *foothead*


Why? It's not like there are many lenses dedicated to APS-H. Seems like a waste to have to use full frame lenses on a crop camera.


Aps-h is a good compromise between ff and Aps-c. It also takes the sweet spot in most ff lenses so shots are sharper and its easier to have a Aps-h size mirror flapping at 10 fps then ff

Quote:



I asked this last night, but nobody answered. I'm looking at ultra wide angle lenses. Right now, the only one I'm really considering is the ZD 9-18, but I'd be open to any suggestions. It doesn't matter what mount, as long as it isn't APS-C. I'd actually prefer manual focus if it'll save me money.


That's the biggest problem with 43rd, lenses that wide for ff is extremely expensive.


----------



## dudemanppl

Tried my friends 1DsII, very tasty stuff. But he sold all his EF SLR gear for a Leica DL3.


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


Aps-h is a good compromise between ff and Aps-c. It also takes the sweet spot in most ff lenses so shots are sharper and its easier to have a Aps-h size mirror flapping at 10 fps then ff


It just seems like such a waste when using wide angle lenses. You can always crop a full frame photo, but there's no way to get that extra area on APS-H. It isn't like APS-C where there's a significantly reduced price either, the 1DIV retails for like $5000.

If there were wide angle lenses designed for APS-H, I'd agree that it could be a great system, but given that there aren't any, it seems like it shouldn't exist anymore.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


That's the biggest problem with 43rd, lenses that wide for ff is extremely expensive.


I'm not sure I follow. How is it a problem for four thirds if the lenses are cheaper than their full frame counterparts? It seems to me like that'd be an advantage.

EDIT: I'm not totally sure if you understood. I'm not looking for full frame lenses to use on four thirds, I'm looking for full frame lenses to use on full frame, or medium format lenses to use with medium format.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


CanonRumors just released a CR3 (actually looks like it's from late last night) that there will be a new DSLR on Tuesday of next week (the 18th, not the 26th that people have been waiting for). Apparently, the most recent indications are that it's the 1Dv and NOT the 5DIII, 7DII or 6D aka Nikon Killer.

If it IS the 1Dv, the speculation on the specs would be indicative of a 1D body..

16-18mp
Full Frame
ISO *51,200*
Dual Digic V
Crazy frame rates of *12-14fps* have been reported
61 AF points has also been reported

I really want to see what good ISO 51,200 native does... maybe for photojournalism/newspaper stuff... but other than that..


Wow, a CR3 rumor for a change, might actually be true this time. Let's hope it's a 1Ds mkIV, since that body seriously needs an update.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *foothead*


Wait, canon still makes APS-H cameras? I thought that had died out years ago.



Quote:



Originally Posted by *foothead*


Why? It's not like there are many lenses dedicated to APS-H. Seems like a waste to have to use full frame lenses on a crop camera.


There are a lot more EF than EF-S lenses out there, and for primes EF is the only real choice. So it's the nature of the beast. Plus I bet the difference in cost between an APS-H and FF sensors is a lot, and the 1D series are already pricey to begin with. For sports shooting, FF doesn't seem like a necessity to me.

And the sweet spot effect from using FF glass makes a huge difference in some lenses, like the 17-40L.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *foothead*


I asked this last night, but nobody answered. I'm looking at ultra wide angle lenses. Right now, the only one I'm really considering is the ZD 9-18, but I'd be open to any suggestions. It doesn't matter what mount, as long as it isn't APS-C. I'd actually prefer manual focus if it'll save me money.


Well, considering the 2x crop factor, the wider the better, so the 9-18 makes sense to me. And after a quick peruse of reviews, the 9-18 looks really good. A big advantage of m43 is that the glass elements are smaller, and as a result have excellent IQ even in the corners.


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Well, considering the 2x crop factor, the wider the better, so the 9-18 makes sense to me. And after a quick peruse of reviews, the 9-18 looks really good. A big advantage of m43 is that the glass elements are smaller, and as a result have excellent IQ even in the corners.


I also shoot 35mm, 645, and 4x5. The lens doesn't necessarily have to be for 4/3. Sorry, I should have been more clear.

As of now, the widest lens I have is the 45/2.8 on 645.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *foothead*


I also shoot 35mm, 645, and 4x5. The lens doesn't necessarily have to be for 4/3. Sorry, I should have been more clear.

As of now, the widest lens I have is the 45/2.8 on 645.


Hm, 45mm on 645 is a similar FOV to something like 30mm on 35mm (right?). So it's somewhat wide.

But, for a non m43 lens, there's the Sigma 8-16mm f/4.5-5.6 DC HSM. It's for APS-C, and despite how insanely wide it is, it's damned sharp (looking at reviews), so it would be great on m43 sensor.

http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showp...ct/1330/cat/31


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;15296079*
> Hm, 45mm on 645 is a similar FOV to something like 30mm on 35mm (right?). So it's somewhat wide.


28mm.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;15296079*
> But, for a non m43 lens, there's the Sigma 8-16mm f/4.5-5.6 DC HSM. It's for APS-C, and despite how insanely wide it is, it's damned sharp (looking at reviews), so it would be great on m43 sensor.
> 
> http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/1330/cat/31


No aperture ring. :/ I wouldn't be able to use it on my olympus camera.

By the way, I'm using normal four thirds, not micro four thirds. The sensor is the same, but the flange distance is much shorter on m4/3 due to the lack of a mirror.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;15295487*
> Tried my friends 1DsII, very tasty stuff. But he sold all his EF SLR gear for a Leica DL3.


i have a friend that shoots with 2X 1DsII and he says he wont give them up for anything and will not upgrade until both break, he said if one breaks then he will only shoot with only one body...

he also has a 200mm f1.8L


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead;15296193*
> 
> By the way, I'm using normal four thirds, not micro four thirds. The sensor is the same, but the flange distance is much shorter on m4/3 due to the lack of a mirror.


Yeah, you're right. It's such a habit to type "m43" since it's often a topic of discussion these days.


----------



## bk7794

Hey can you add me to the DSLR column? I have a Rebel T3 with the EFS 18-55mm lens.


----------



## Nemesis158

My D5100 just arrived!


----------



## foothead

Has anyone here used a view camera that focuses by sliding a second bed around inside the main one? like this:










I'm trying to figure out how it folds. It seems like the bellows would have to be disconnected or the front standard removed or something.

EDIT: Figured it out. That's not at all what I was thinking.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YZ-11_Jaoco[/ame]


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead;15295634*
> It just seems like such a waste when using wide angle lenses. You can always crop a full frame photo, but there's no way to get that extra area on APS-H. It isn't like APS-C where there's a significantly reduced price either, the 1DIV retails for like $5000.
> 
> If there were wide angle lenses designed for APS-H, I'd agree that it could be a great system, but given that there aren't any, it seems like it shouldn't exist anymore.


i would guess that the market for the 1d series are generally sports photographer so the wide angle aspect doesnt really affect them. they would rather get a slight "telephoto effect" and the sweet spot in their lens.

Quote:


> I'm not sure I follow. How is it a problem for four thirds if the lenses are cheaper than their full frame counterparts? It seems to me like that'd be an advantage.
> 
> EDIT: I'm not totally sure if you understood. I'm not looking for full frame lenses to use on four thirds, I'm looking for full frame lenses to use on full frame, or medium format lenses to use with medium format.


yea i probably misunderstood your question. but i still dont really understand lol







but ill try to take another stab at it.

if you are looking for a FF manual rectilinear UWA (im thinking <15mm), the samyang 14/2.8 is probably the cheapest. anything wider then 17mm was considered fairly exotic back in the film days and those lenses werent really that good.

as for MF, well i have no idea i dont shoot anything larger then 35mm.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10;15299769*
> yea i probably misunderstood your question. but i still dont really understand lol
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> but ill try to take another stab at it.
> 
> if you are looking for a FF manual rectilinear UWA (im thinking <15mm), the samyang 14/2.8 is probably the cheapest. anything wider then 17mm was considered fairly exotic back in the film days and those lenses werent really that good.
> 
> as for MF, well i have no idea i dont shoot anything larger then 35mm.


I've looked at the samyang 14/2.8, and I'm not impressed. It just has way too much distortion to be usable on film.

Really, I'd be okay with anything wider than 20mm EFL if I get better optics.


----------



## MistaBernie

Official noob moment of the day (well.. that's putting it nicely)...

'stumbling' across FEL, and seeing how it changes exposure with my 430 EX II.. I particularly like the default m-fn button's use for it on my 7D and realized how much I missed shooting my 7D since I effectively haven't put my 5D down since I got it.

... and in the matter of seconds, I absolutely make the above look absolutely effing brilliant.

I decided I was going to re-organize how I was storing my photos so synchronizing in LR wouldn't take so long whenever I imported new raws, etc... little did I know that once I moved my original raws, _all the work that I did to them would be lost by Lightroom._ FANTASTIC. Epic fail face. Like need a drink failface.


----------



## Conspiracy

sooooo i didnt realize how wonderful primes are until i shot in my gym with the 70-200 @ f2.8 and my settings were 1/640-800 ISO 5000....

even with the primes at f2 i was at ISO 3200 which is not bad at all at 1/800

from what it looks like my 30 1.4 held out ok with some test basketball shots of players dunking. a few missed focus but overall considering the price of the lens and shooting ambient gym light im pretty happy that the focal length works


----------



## dudemanppl

Hey I shot basketball 400mm at f/2.8, 1/640, ISO 5000. No problemos. 120-300 works really well too.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Hey I shot basketball 400mm at f/2.8, 1/640, ISO 5000. No problemos. 120-300 works really well too.


yea i noticed that if i am shooting at ISO 5000 and the lighting is at least even the noise isnt nearly as bad as when im shooting those night soccer games. i mean if i have a 1dmkIV i bet at 5000 there would be less noise but im not complaining if i can shoot and be able to capture the action. i dont think i would be able to get decent shots shooting ambient if i had a camera with a max ISO of 1600


----------



## foothead

What does ISO 5000 look like nowadays? My E-410 only goes to 1600, and that is pretty much unusable unless I scale the image or do noise reduction.


----------



## Conspiracy

ISO 5000 on a 7D looks rough full size but viewing samples its not bad but after noise reduction its honestly not that bad.


----------



## sub50hz

I don't think I would print anything bigger than 5x7 at that level.


----------



## foothead

Any chance you can post a sample?


----------



## Conspiracy

the thread i just posted with sigma 30 1.4 basketball shots are all at ISO 4000 i think and here is one at 5000

ISO 5000 f2.8 1/400 shot with a 70-200 mkII (she walked on the court while the rest of her team ran which is why i shot so fast a shutter speed) its a little dark on my screen, hopefully its not terribly underexposed ... :|

i did do some noise reduction in LR3 as well as a little bump in contrast and thats it


----------



## foothead

Huh, that's not as bad as I expected. How did it look before noise reduction?


----------



## Conspiracy

one frame before. this one is straight out of camera same settings


----------



## dudemanppl

Holy crap crop cameras are so noisy... Probably because its underexposed though. Proper exposure + high ISOs = pretty fine pictures.


----------



## ljason8eg

I tried panning race cars going 200 mph at 1/60 handheld. I think I got some keepers but too much jagermeister tonight to do anything but suck at call of duty until I pass out.


----------



## mz-n10

GT slight update in gear:

Sony a900; Sony a200; Minolta 7

Tamron 17-35/2.8-4
Sony Zeiss 24-70/2.8
Minolta 50/1.4
Minolta 70-210/4
Samyang 85/1.4
Samyang 14/2.8

Sony F42AM
Benro C-257M8
Benro BR168
Lowepro Fastpack 300
Tenba Insert + random bags


----------



## dudemanppl

God you've had that stuff forever now...


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*


sooooo i didnt realize how wonderful primes are until i shot in my gym with the 70-200 @ f2.8 and my settings were 1/640-800 ISO 5000....even with the primes at f2 i was at ISO 3200 which is not bad at all at 1/800

from what it looks like my 30 1.4 held out ok with some test basketball shots of players dunking. a few missed focus but overall considering the price of the lens and shooting ambient gym light im pretty happy that the focal length works


Have you tried 1/250 - 1/320 ss for indoor sports. That's what I've been using for bb and indoor vb and the keeper rate is very decent.

BTW, it's $$$ but I LOVE my 200 f/2 in the gym on ff. Buying a 35 f/1.4 G to use on a second body for close in stuff

Dudeman, you never cease to amaze. 400 f/2.8 indoors?? You must be shooting close ups of cheerleaders parts


----------



## MistaBernie

Am I the only person that thinks her skin looks green in the second one? It's ok if I am.. I'm on my crappy work 19" widescreen non-calibrated monitor..


----------



## Conspiracy

for some reason i was not thinking and did not look back at my old images because i normally shoot basketball at 1/500 i have no clue why i shot faster... just had a lot going on and didnt think everything through


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*


for some reason i was not thinking and did not look back at my old images because i normally shoot basketball at 1/500 i have no clue why i shot faster... just had a lot going on and didnt think everything through


even 1/500 is a bit fast. Try experimenting during warm ups with slower speeds. You may find you can reduce iso and improve your IQ.

For bb, you'll typically want a few players in focus, so anything < f/2.8 might be too thin especially if you're on the floor close to the players.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*


I tried panning race cars going 200 mph at 1/60 handheld. I think I got some keepers but too much jagermeister tonight to do anything but suck at call of duty until I pass out.


I like your style.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


I like your style.


Me 2 except for the jagermeister. Hurl city for me.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


even 1/500 is a bit fast. Try experimenting during warm ups with slower speeds. You may find you can reduce iso and improve your IQ.

For bb, you'll typically want a few players in focus, so anything < f/2.8 might be too thin especially if you're on the floor close to the players.


our lighting has a strange and uneven layout in the ceiling and its actually mixed lighting which confuses me bad about WB but i usually shoot tungsten and adjust temperature a little.

but yea, i had a weird day and feel pretty stupid for shooting that fast. i normally do shoot 1/500 as for some of our players 1/400 just barely gets them and on occasion actually gives a lot of motion blur, im ok with some but their feet and hands were super blurred sometimes so i bumped to 1/500.

i appreciate the ability to share my photos with you guys because sometimes i just screw up like this and push my settings higher than needed.

thanks all you guys.

also on a side note, i do admit that i am still learning kinda or when it comes to metering but i shot last night with partial metering and sub50 mentioned that i should have shot spot metering especially for the shots with ceiling lights in the background. should i just shoot spot meter for the whole game. i shot partial in the past for basketball and it seemed ok, i mean obviously its not professional quality but i was happy with the results although i have more experience now and i think i have improved quite a bit too thanks to the help. photography is soo different from video...


----------



## jsigone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10;15302652*
> GT slight update in gear:
> 
> Sony a900; Sony a200; Minolta 7
> 
> Tamron 17-35/2.8-4
> Sony Zeiss 24-70/2.8
> Minolta 50/1.4
> Minolta 70-210/4
> Samyang 85/1.4
> Samyang 14/2.8
> 
> Sony F42AM
> Benro C-257M8
> Benro BR168
> Lowepro Fastpack 300
> Tenba Insert + random bags


how do you like your Samyang 14/2.8? Got some nice shots to show with that sucker? I'm looking into getting a super wide MF prime like that or a macro..I can't make up my mind


----------



## Shane1244

I had the 14/2.8 and it was really, really good. My only problem with it was that mine had a defective focus distance indicator. So it made it a little hard to focus..


----------



## jsigone

that's allot of money to have some focus issues and on a MF lens!! I borrowed a friend's Tokina 11-16/2.8 and that was an AWESOME lens but 700ish new


----------



## MistaBernie

CanonRumors is really pushing this announcement for next week now. Pretty much confirming new DSLR, available in March.. looks like it's going to basically be an amalgamation of the 1D/1Ds lines..


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie;15307025*
> CanonRumors is really pushing this announcement for next week now. Pretty much confirming new DSLR, available in March.. looks like it's going to basically be an amalgamation of the 1D/1Ds lines..


i guess we will just have to eagerly wait and hope that they dont disappoint


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jsigone;15306613*
> how do you like your Samyang 14/2.8? Got some nice shots to show with that sucker? I'm looking into getting a super wide MF prime like that or a macro..I can't make up my mind


i will have to dig through for a sample shot (havent used it recently) but its pretty good, the corners are fairly distorted but it is expected on a 14mm lens.

but unless you shoot FF i dont think its worth it for you.


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy;15301270*
> one frame before. this one is straight out of camera same settings


I much prefer it without noise reduction.. Looks too soft with NR.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nuclearjock;15305772*
> Me 2 except for the jagermeister. Hurl city for me.


Yeah, I can't say I would have picked Jager either. Somebody would have my number with a bottle of JW Green, though.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nuclearjock;15304160*
> Dudeman, you never cease to amaze. 400 f/2.8 indoors?? You must be shooting close ups of cheerleaders parts


lol'd in class...







Nah, cheerleaders don't even go to basketball games, our gym is too small. But I was at the bottom of the stands and got some pictures when they were at the opposite side. This is on FF, so not too crazy, pros do it with 400s all the time and Nikon shooters usually have 70-200-400 combo.

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1052111 So cheap... I wouldn't use it though.


----------



## BlankThis

My boss' 5D2 and 24 f/1.4L II were stolen at a show we did last night... Not a good night.


----------



## MistaBernie

I saw the P1 back too, I was a bit surprised by both its presence and price..


----------



## nuclearjock

GT, when you get a chance, nikkor 35mm f/1.4. Don't tell the wife.


----------



## sub50hz

So I shot 4 days this week and have MAYBE 3 keepers. Luckily, I found some beer and picked up a guitar, and have been jamming for the last 2 hours. Sometimes I find what I am playing to be the weirdest stuff, from ELO to Opeth to NOFX to Samiam.... what a human.


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


GT, when you get a chance, nikkor 35mm f/1.4. Don't tell the wife.



Ouf.. How do you like it?


----------



## foothead

http://www.raymentkirbycameras.co.uk...era/index.html

Hmmm... I need a new project. Should I stick with 4x5 or go 8x10?


----------



## sub50hz

When I think 8x10, my brain goes directly to Crewdson. Not a bad thing if you've got, you know, unlimited funds.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:



Originally Posted by *foothead*


http://www.raymentkirbycameras.co.uk...era/index.html

Hmmm... I need a new project. Should I stick with 4x5 or go 8x10?


that is awesome! cant wait to see how the build goes


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *foothead*


http://www.raymentkirbycameras.co.uk...era/index.html

Hmmm... I need a new project. Should I stick with 4x5 or go 8x10?


8x10 is absolutely awesome. But it's expensive and 4x5 can be shot way more when taking cost into consideration. If I don't need the amount of detail or the look of 8x10 I opt for 4x5.

So if you're fine with paying way more, then go for it.


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


When I think 8x10, my brain goes directly to Crewdson. Not a bad thing if you've got, you know, unlimited funds.


I almost exclusively do landscape-type photos. Crewdson's pictures are amazing though.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*


that is awesome! cant wait to see how the build goes


Well, I'm not totally sure if I'm going to do it, but it's definitely something I've been considering for a long time, and it really seems right up my alley.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


8x10 is absolutely awesome. But it's expensive and 4x5 can be shot way more when taking cost into consideration. If I don't need the amount of detail or the look of 8x10 I opt for 4x5.

So if you're fine with paying way more, then go for it.


Yeah, I'm not totally sure if I'm okay with paying $15 per photo for film & development costs right now. I may build a 4x5 for now, then do an 8x10 later, using everything I learn from the 4x5. That's probably my best bet.

I'll have to see if I can convince my father to help. He's excellent at woodworking.


----------



## dudemanppl

35 1.4 AF-S is no where near the level of the 35L. Still wouldn't hesitate using it, but the 35L is just so much better.


----------



## Danylu

So did anyone get the 4s? I would be interested in some low light shots... Taken by an actual photographer lol.

I'm not expecting miracles, but I'm curious.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Danylu;15317931*
> So did anyone get the 4s? I would be interested in some low light shots... Taken by an actual photographer lol.
> 
> I'm not expecting miracles, but I'm curious.


Couple of my friends got theirs yesterday and I played with the camera a bit. There's a lot less noise in low light when compared to the 4, but the 4s still has quite a bit, as is expected. Also seems like the 4s is much more resistant to flare. I didn't really test it much so those are just some quick observations.

Sorry, no shots I can post right now since they're not my phones.


----------



## sub50hz

I love making emergency dentist appointments at 4am. _Love em._


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead;15313297*
> http://www.raymentkirbycameras.co.uk/build-your-own-camera/index.html
> 
> Hmmm... I need a new project. Should I stick with 4x5 or go 8x10?


Definitely need to post a build log for this.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;15315535*
> 35 1.4 AF-S is no where near the level of the 35L. Still wouldn't hesitate using it, but the 35L is just so much better.


I've looked at a lot of reviews for the two, and I agree that the 35L is better, but only slightly so. The 35L wins the most in center sharpness wide open and is better with CA, but the two are similar otherwise. Interesting considering that the design of the 35L is twelve years older.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;15315535*
> 35 1.4 AF-S is no where near the level of the 35L. Still wouldn't hesitate using it, but the 35L is just so much better.


I tried the 35L and almost bought it for my first Canon lens but liked the IQ of the 35 G better. as usual, whatever you say I do the opposite.


----------



## foothead

Has anyone here ever messed with daguerrotypes? I was just reading up on the process. Seems fun.

I'll definitely post a build log if I go through with the field camera. It might be a while though, some of these parts are proving hard to source. Plus, I want to finish with my Halloween projects first.


----------



## RussianJ

I guess its time for me to join, just got a D3100 in yesterday


----------



## dudemanppl




----------



## iandroo888

hey dudemanppl, is it common for you to purchase things on FM without the warranty papers? (i.e... nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G....) lol theres a guy selling a mint one with no papers or hood.. hood can be replaced but is the papers important to u?


----------



## sub50hz

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...&v=ItZyaOlrb7E

Wayyyyyyy off-topic, too awesome to not share with my photo frenzz.

edit: Thomasina, what kind of tape is that on the 35L? I've been using hockey stick tape, but it doesn't last too long.


----------



## laboitenoire

It's probably gaffer tape. Any theater/audio supplier will have it.


----------



## sub50hz

It's hard to tell, it looks quite a bit more glossy then the gaffer's tape I've used in the past.


----------



## xxrabid93

probably electrical tape because it doesn't look too much like most gaffer tape.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *xxrabid93*


probably electrical tape because it doesn't look too much like most gaffer tape.


Leaves _way_ too much residue after a short time.


----------



## xxrabid93

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Leaves _way_ too much residue after a short time.


Well ya, but maybe its just gonna be on there forever.


----------



## scottath

http://www.overclock.net/photography...a-16-10-a.html

Second outing with my new 10 stop...


----------



## sub50hz

Bit of a suggestion: lose the watermark.


----------



## scottath

Usually i dont have it on there - but had people keep saying put it on.....
this is the first set with it...
Probably will loose it - just more of a deterrent for people to copy i guess....


----------



## dudemanppl

Tomasina. :') Anyway, its electrical tape. I have a bunch for my flag, not residuing yet (that's not a word is it...). I think I'll redo it with gaffer though, but my type of gaffer doesn't bend well. There's two types on B&H and I have the kind that isn't General Brand, which DOES go around curves and such well.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *scottath*


http://www.overclock.net/photography...a-16-10-a.html

Second outing with my new 10 stop...



















Looks promising! Get closer to the water and/or find a beach with more water movement, because I can't see any sense of movement or other ND effect in your shot. Looks like a standard shot without an ND.


----------



## scottath

Yea - there was almost no waves at all this morning....


----------



## sub50hz

Sold my 055XPRO and 498 -- boom, cash in HAND.


----------



## Dream Killer

Best costume in the whole convention IMO.

*Hardgay*
Comic Con NY 2011


----------



## Conspiracy

that reminds me of rob halford (judas priest)


----------



## Dream Killer

i spent the day photographing everyone until my flash batteries ran out. the cosplayers were better this year, but the convention was better last year. besides getting to personally play the ME3 demo - the booths plain sucked.


----------



## ljason8eg

Goodyear cannot build a good racing tire. That is all.

I feel for anyone who spent their hard earned money to go to that race.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer;15325856*
> Best costume in the whole convention IMO.
> *Hardgay*
> Comic Con NY 2011


hardgay?


----------



## KShirza1




----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KShirza1;15326794*


I'd recognise that camera anywhere.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dream killer;15325856*
> best costume in the whole convention imo.
> *hardgay*
> comic con ny 2011


hah i love hardgay.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Who doesn't love good cosplay?









/Asian -slash- geeky side showing


----------



## dudemanppl

I hate auto-uncaps. Makes me look like an idiot.


----------



## iandroo888

hmmm whats difference between canadian and US versions of lenses?


----------



## dudemanppl

Nothing. Also warranty card means nothing.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iandroo888;15327920*
> hmmm whats difference between canadian and US versions of lenses?


Just the warranty i believe.


----------



## iandroo888

have u guys bought canadian versions used from FM?


----------



## dudemanppl

Nope, theres no difference though since you're buying used anyway.


----------



## iandroo888

don't know if I should buy this 24-70 or not... 1500 shipped has everything. Mint condition. Canadian version..


----------



## mz-n10

24-70 is a bad range on aps-c


----------



## biatchi

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


24-70 is a bad range on aps-c


If you want to go wide yes but that focal range might shoot their shooting style.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *biatchi*


If you want to go wide yes but that focal range might shoot their shooting style.


true but when i shot my 24-70 on an aps-c, it sat in a weird range where i need to take a few steps back if i wanted wide or i needed a few steps forward if i need a telephoto.


----------



## nuclearjock

GT, ok so my 1D has been sitting around with no lens for a few months now, time to play with it.

Bought my first Canon lens this morning, add an 85mm f/1.2 to my list. The lens is used and in great shape optically, but needs af calibration.

So it's off to Canon for af calibration and an overall going over.

Will post some bokeh shots when it gets back.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


don't know if I should buy this 24-70 or not... 1500 shipped has everything. Mint condition. Canadian version..


Ugh I miss when Lens Rentals sales used to be good deals. Got one in great condition for 1200.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


GT, ok so my 1D has been sitting around with no lens for a few months now, time to play with it.

Bought my first Canon lens this morning, add an 85mm f/1.2 to my list. The lens is used and in great shape optically, but needs af calibration.

So it's off to Canon for af calibration and an overall going over.

Will post some bokeh shots when it gets back.


Excellent, possibly Canon's best prime. I was so dead set on getting a copy after I rented one for a day. Very sharp even at f/1.2. In the end I went for the much cheaper 135mm f/2.


----------



## nuclearjock

I bought the lens from a guy I sorta know for $1k. Plus he said he'll reimburse me for the lens service, so we'll see. I did some research on the lens on FM and the images looked pretty cool. It's a frigg'n big chunk of glass though. I actually bought it cause it looks really cool on the 1D body.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nuclearjock;15336281*
> I bought the lens from a guy I sorta know for $1k. Plus he said he'll reimburse me for the lens service, so we'll see. I did some research on the lens on FM and the images looked pretty cool. It's a frigg'n big chunk of glass though. I actually bought it cause it looks really cool on the 1D body.


Yeah, it made my 5DII feel like a Rebel-sized camera.


----------



## dudemanppl

1k... Much dislike for you NJ. 85 on FF is so good, too bad 1Ds are crop.


----------



## robchaos

Hey gonetomorrow, Can you take the Pentax stuff out of my film list and then add a nikon FG, Nikon series E Manual Focus 50mm 1.8, 50mm 1.8 AF, Vivitar MF 75-300 4.5-5.6, and a vivitar 28-200 3.5-5.3 ?
thanks!


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *robchaos;15337239*
> Hey Blank, Can you take the Pentax stuff out of my film list and then add a nikon FG, Nikon series E Manual Focus 50mm 1.8, 50mm 1.8 AF, Vivitar MF 75-300 4.5-5.6, and a vivitar 28-200 3.5-5.3 ?
> thanks!


Hacking GoneTomorrow as we speak. Shouldn't take much longer.


----------



## robchaos

haha **** brain fart. OP edited to ask the correct person. I knew it was one of you guys that I see posting in here all the time.


----------



## TC_Fenua

New toy :



And I might order a 5DmkII next week


----------



## nuclearjock

Small world!!


----------



## iandroo888

that looks yummmy


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;15336568*
> 1k... Much dislike for you NJ. 85 on FF is so good, too bad 1Ds are crop.


My 1DsmkIII is ff dude.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *robchaos;15337288*
> haha **** brain fart. OP edited to ask the correct person. I knew it was one of you guys that I see posting in here all the time.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis;15337281*
> Hacking GoneTomorrow as we speak. Shouldn't take much longer.


lulz...good timing on the response Blank.









Updated your gear robchaos.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nuclearjock;15339235*
> Small world!!


Damn, wish I could jump on the 85L bandwagon! I don't have enough red-ring bling.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;15339783*
> Damn, wish I could jump on the 85L bandwagon! I don't have enough red-ring bling.


Yea, and living in Tahiti wouldn't be so bad either!


----------



## Boyboyd

I always get Tahiti and Hati mixed up


----------



## biatchi

I'd like to got to Tahiti but Haiti not so much tbh.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nuclearjock;15339670*
> My 1DsmkIII is ff dude.


Even more hate for you. Thought you had a plain jane 1DIII.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Even more hate for you. Thought you had a plain jane 1DIII.


Bitterness will inhibit your creativity.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


Yea, and living in Tahiti wouldn't be so bad either!


Didn't work out so well for Gauguin, lol, but I'll give it a shot.


----------



## TC_Fenua

Bah, Tahiti is really overrated anyway. Bora Bora on the other hand ...


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Get a good look:









http://www.dpreview.com/news/1110/11101210sigmasd1wood.asp

I'm sure many of you have heard about this abomination, but the comment thread at DPReview is even more hilarious.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow;15346162*
> Get a good look:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.dpreview.com/news/1110/11101210sigmasd1wood.asp
> 
> I'm sure many of you have heard about this abomination, but the comment thread is hilarious at DPReview is even more hilarious.


What the hell? If they're going to go through the trouble to make a wooden camera, they better actually make it out of wood instead of just sticking a plastic camera into a wooden holder. That thing just looks like crap as it is.


----------



## Conspiracy

lol at those trying so hard to defend sigma.

and even funnier thats it says its from some rare tree that takes 60 hours to cut that case for the camera. that is not at all cost effective...


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy;15346825*
> lol at those trying so hard to defend sigma.
> 
> and even funnier thats it says its from some rare tree that takes 60 hours to cut that case for the camera. that is not at all cost effective...


It is if they sell it for a lot...


----------



## Conspiracy

this is true but who is going to seriously want this?


----------



## Dream Killer

http://tv.adobe.com/watch/max-2011-sneak-peeks/max-2011-sneak-peek-image-deblurring/

BOOM! Goodbye IS/VR.


----------



## Shane1244

Thats incredible.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer;15347767*
> http://tv.adobe.com/watch/max-2011-sneak-peeks/max-2011-sneak-peek-image-deblurring/
> 
> BOOM! Goodbye IS/VR.


LOL, "Reverse Beer Goggles." I hope that ends up being the actual name.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer;15347767*
> http://tv.adobe.com/watch/max-2011-sneak-peeks/max-2011-sneak-peek-image-deblurring/
> 
> BOOM! Goodbye IS/VR.


Oh wow, I saw that yesterday lol

It would be awesome if they make it mainstream.


----------



## Conspiracy

oh ma gosh thats awesome.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer;15347767*
> http://tv.adobe.com/watch/max-2011-sneak-peeks/max-2011-sneak-peek-image-deblurring/
> 
> BOOM! Goodbye IS/VR.


I use primes and what is this IS/VR you speak of?









Just a general question: How come IS/VR usually isn't implemented in primes? I'd definitely love to get a few extra usable stops with low light.


----------



## Monocog007

So i have a question for you guys, which should i choose?

Canon T3 for $500
Nikon D3100 for $500
Canon T3i for $800

Is the last one worth the extra price? I'm trying to stay below 800 if you guys have suggestions..


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;15349164*
> I use primes and what is this IS/VR you speak of?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just a general question: How come IS/VR usually isn't implemented in primes? I'd definitely love to get a few extra usable stops with low light.


what are you talking about? all my primes are stabilized.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Monocog007;15349207*
> So i have a question for you guys, which should i choose?
> 
> Canon T3 for $500
> Nikon D3100 for $500
> Canon T3i for $800
> 
> Is the last one worth the extra price? I'm trying to stay below 800 if you guys have suggestions..


T2i w/ 18-55mm IS via CLP for $512. Check the sticky here on the Canon Loyalty Program.

Same camera as the T3i sans swivel screen and some video settings. Share the exact same image sensor and therefore have the same image quality.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10;15349222*
> what are you talking about? all my primes are stabilized.


Oh, you.


----------



## dudemanppl

I'm so excited for the 1Dx. Hopefully the tech will trickle down to a 3D or 5DIII.


----------



## Monocog007

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;15349235*
> T2i w/ 18-55mm IS via CLP for $512. Check the sticky here on the Canon Loyalty Program.
> 
> Same camera as the T3i sans swivel screen and some video settings. Share the exact same image sensor and therefore have the same image quality.


Alright cool thanks for that! Is there any large difference between the t2i and the 50D? I mean, am i gonna run into problems with shooting speed because the t2i uses an SD and the 50D uses CF?


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer;15347767*
> http://tv.adobe.com/watch/max-2011-sneak-peeks/max-2011-sneak-peek-image-deblurring/
> 
> BOOM! Goodbye IS/VR.


Wow, that's incredible. The stupid video would only load like 5 seconds at a time though, so I only made it halfway. Did they show how it affected fine details?

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;15349164*
> I use primes and what is this IS/VR you speak of?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just a general question: How come IS/VR usually isn't implemented in primes? I'd definitely love to get a few extra usable stops with low light.


Proper IS:


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead;15349601*
> Proper IS:


looks scary.....


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer;15347767*
> http://tv.adobe.com/watch/max-2011-sneak-peeks/max-2011-sneak-peek-image-deblurring/
> 
> BOOM! Goodbye IS/VR.


HOLY O_O..... i want :]


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Get a good look:









http://www.dpreview.com/news/1110/11...gmasd1wood.asp

I'm sure many of you have heard about this abomination, but the comment thread at DPReview is even more hilarious.










If Leica did this it would sell









No but seriously, who designed that... Half plastic and half wood is oh so painful to look at.


----------



## Boyboyd

It just looks like plastic sitting in a wooden docking station.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Get a good look:









http://www.dpreview.com/news/1110/11...gmasd1wood.asp

I'm sure many of you have heard about this abomination, but the comment thread at DPReview is even more hilarious.










The only DSLR I know of that's a potential fire hazard. Looks kinda slippery too. Beavers will snap 'em up though. Digital photography could definately use more beaver love.


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


The only DSLR I know of that's a potential fire hazard. Looks kinda slippery too. Beavers will snap 'em up though. Digital photography could definately use more beaver love.


Plastic is generally easier to burn than wood.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *foothead*


Plastic is generally easier to burn than wood.


That's why my bodies are magnesium.


----------



## scottath

Works that you print and sell - do you guys sign them?
If so - where abouts, how large and typed or actually signed with pencil or something ?
Anyone got an example to show to would be appreciated.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *scottath*


Works that you print and sell - do you guys sign them?
If so - where abouts, how large and typed or actually signed with pencil or something ?
Anyone got an example to show to would be appreciated.


Depends. Sharpie on the front is sorta "autographic". I sometimes put my particulars on the reverse side. But this runs the risk of being covered by a frame. My preference though is not on the front. Let the customer enjoy the print without distraction. Now on the other hand if you've officially "arrived" as a photographer, then people may want your sig on the front. I'm definately a backside kinda guy.


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


That's why my bodies are magnesium.


Have you ever burned magnesium? Holy crap, it looked like I had a mini-sun in my fireplace when I lit one of those magnesium fire starters. I've never seen that room so brightly lit. Heck, if you drop it in water, it only makes the fire bigger because it then starts burning the water.

Basically, never set your camera on fire.


----------



## Boyboyd

I thought the ignition temperature of magnesium was very, very high?

Edit: 630Â°c. I was confusing it with it's burning temperature, 3600Â°c. That's why it's used to light thermite.

I believe camera bodies are a magnesium alloy too.


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*


I thought the ignition temperature of magnesium was very, very high?

Edit: 630Â°c. I was confusing it with it's burning temperature, 3600Â°c. That's why it's used to light thermite.


Yeah, it isn't that hard to ignite. I did it with an ordinary cooking torch. Magnesium is what's used in sparklers though, so it can definitely be ignited with much less, albeit in significantly smaller particles

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*


I believe camera bodies are a magnesium alloy too.


They typically are. I doubt the camera manufacturers do burn tests on their cameras though, so we don't know if they're more or less flammable.

That would be fun to test though. Anyone know where I can get a random chunk of camera to set fire to?


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *foothead*


They typically are. I doubt the camera manufacturers do burn tests on their cameras though, so we don't know if they're more or less flammable.

That would be fun to test though. Anyone know where I can get a random chunk of camera to set fire to?


Yeah that's what i meant, they'd probably be less flamable I think.

Ask DMP if he has any pro bodies that are broken beyond repair.


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *boyboyd*


yeah that's what i meant, they'd probably be less flamable i think.

Ask dmp if he has any pro bodies that are broken beyond repair.


dmp?

EDIT: lol, I just realized who you meant. I'm not used to people abbreviating random things.


----------



## Boyboyd

Sorry, i just do it in my head when I read his name. lol


----------



## foothead

Looking through older camera models, It looks like Magnesium is a fairly recent development (2000 for canon, 1996 for nikon). Doesn't bode well for me finding an ultra-cheap one to "experiment" on.


----------



## dudemanppl

Yes I do actually. I sanded the paint off a D2H once, then I realized I was making magnesium powder and realized that was a bad thing, so I kept on going. Sold it to a friend still somehow... Not gonna burn it though.









And the 1Dx is the most awkward looking camera ever. So ugly it just downright turns me off. And I wish it cost more in line with the D3s when it was introduced. BECAUSE ITS BASICALLY A CANON D3S.


----------



## r34p3rex

The 1Dx shall be mine!!!!!!!!!! i wish..


----------



## foothead

Why is it so big? If I had one, I'd probably end up never using it because of the size/weight. The only time I really use my E-410 is when carrying around medium/large format gear is impractical. This thing is so big that I might as well just use the 645.


----------



## Conspiracy

wow the 1D X looks so weird but dang those specs are pretty awesome


----------



## r34p3rex

Quote:



Originally Posted by *foothead*











Why is it so big? If I had one, I'd probably end up never using it because of the size/weight. The only time I really use my E-410 is when carrying around medium/large format gear is impractical. This thing is so big that I might as well just use the 645.


Looks the same size as the 1Ds and 1Dmk4


----------



## silvrr

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r34p3rex*


Looks the same size as the 1Ds and 1Dmk4










And looks pretty similar. It seems like people think this is an all new camera. Its basically the 1D series with new internals and a few new buttons on the outside. And who cares what it looks like, from the spec list it should be an amazing camera to shoot with.


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r34p3rex*


Looks the same size as the 1Ds and 1Dmk4










Yeah, that's the thing. It's like canon is intentionally making their cameras gianormous. Given all the technological advancements in the last decade or so, there's no reason for them to still be using the same external design of the original 1D.

Why not try to recreate the Kodak DCS 4xx while we're at it?


----------



## silvrr

Quote:



Originally Posted by *foothead*


Yeah, that's the thing. It's like canon is intentionally making their cameras gianormous. Given all the technological advancements in the last decade or so, there's no reason for them to still be using the same external design of the original 1D.


Have you ever shot with a gripped XXD or a 1D series? To me it feels really nice in the hand and having the built in grip to go to portrait orientation is really nice.


----------



## Conspiracy

i know i want one. thankfully i dont need it though or i would go broke trying to get it. my 7D does a great job and will be used for a very long time


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *silvrr*


Have you ever shot with a gripped XXD or a 1D series? To me it feels really nice in the hand and having the built in grip to go to portrait orientation is really nice.


They are nice for certain situations. However, I'd really like the ability to remove the thing. If I'm out shooting landscapes, what's the point of carrying around an extra pound worth of uselessness?


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:



Originally Posted by *foothead*


They are nice for certain situations. However, I'd really like the ability to remove the thing. If I'm out shooting landscapes, what's the point of carrying around an extra pound worth of uselessness?


You mean the battery right? Who needs it anyway.


----------



## Conspiracy

as someone that mainly only shoots sports its very helpful the way its designed but i can see where those that rarely shoot vertical really dont need the grip built in. but honestly its just one of those things and i dont really see that many people complain about it. it does have a different type of battery that takes up that extra space though...


----------



## r34p3rex

Quote:



Originally Posted by *foothead*


They are nice for certain situations. However, I'd really like the ability to remove the thing. If I'm out shooting landscapes, what's the point of carrying around an extra pound worth of uselessness?


If you're shooting landscapes with this bad boy, I think you need to reconsider your choice of camera







I think the 1Dx is mainly geared towards fast action shooters with its fast AF and high burst. For landscape shooting, a 5DII would be more appropriate


----------



## biatchi

The wood on that Sigma kinda looks like plastic. The design is possibly only out-mentalled by this multi coloured Pentax K-x (I kinda like the sheer lunacy of it tbh)


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r34p3rex*


If you're shooting landscapes with this bad boy, I think you need to reconsider your choice of camera







I think the 1Dx is mainly geared towards fast action shooters with its fast AF and high burst. For landscape shooting, a 5DII would be more appropriate



I suppose so. Still, I'd hate to have to buy two cameras just so I don't have to carry around such a bulky thing to go on a hike. It just seems to me like it'd be much nicer to have it come with a removable battery grip.


----------



## Conspiracy

i agree that this 1D X is geared more towards action photographers and extreme low light photographers. i think that when it comes to portraits most will stick with either their 1dmkIII or 5dmkII


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r34p3rex*


If you're shooting landscapes with this bad boy, I think you need to reconsider your choice of camera







I think the 1Dx is mainly geared towards fast action shooters with its fast AF and high burst. For landscape shooting, a 5DII would be more appropriate


It's also for versatility and a workhorse. Forensic teams and police officials will use 1D and Dx a lot.

For stills the 5D would be the better option.


----------



## r34p3rex

Quote:



Originally Posted by *foothead*


I suppose so. Still, I'd hate to have to buy two cameras just so I don't have to carry around such a bulky thing to go on a hike. It just seems to me like it'd be much nicer to have it come with a removable battery grip.


The problem of using a removeable grip vs integrated grip is that removable grip reduces the amount of usable volume for electronics and such. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the 1Ds/IDIV only has a single battery slot. The rest of the "grip" is used to house extra electronics.


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r34p3rex*


The problem of using a removeable grip vs integrated grip is that removable grip reduces the amount of usable volume for electronics and such. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the 1Ds/IDIV only has a single battery slot. The rest of the "grip" is used to house extra electronics.


Thing is that they could fit all the electronics in a normal sized body if they wanted to. Nikon already proved that with the D3/D700.










Yes, the battery will need to be smaller, but the grip can hold more than one of them, so it makes up for that.


----------



## biatchi

Surely the same electronics in a bigger body are better protected from knocks than in a smaller body though.


----------



## MistaBernie

Suggested retail price of $6800.. Yeah, my wife will kill me.

The specs look great though - up to 14 fps, up to 29:59 of hd video, expandable ISO to 204800, that's nuts. And rated for 400,000 cycles?

I know CR stated the lines would amalgamate but I guess I'm still a bit shocked


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *foothead*


Thing is that they could fit all the electronics in a normal sized body if they wanted to. Nikon already proved that with the D3/D700.










Yes, the battery will need to be smaller, but the grip can hold more than one of them, so it makes up for that.


but you need teh grip + battery to shoot at 9fps (or whatever the max is)


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *mz-n10*


but you need teh grip + battery to shoot at 9fps (or whatever the max is)


Okay, but I don't see how this is any different than what I've been saying.

Remove the grip for a lightweight, landscape camera.

Add the grip for a fast motion/sports camera.

Seems logical to me.


----------



## sub50hz

Built-in vertical is something I wish every DSLR had. Once you use it, it's impossible to give up the better ergonomics for an insignificant increase in weight. I mean, honestly, if it's a pound is that really something notable? Even while hiking?


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead;15355207*
> Thing is that they could fit all the electronics in a normal sized body if they wanted to. Nikon already proved that with the D3/D700.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, the battery will need to be smaller, but the grip can hold more than one of them, so it makes up for that.


I don't beleive your comparing apples to apples there. However, im not very framiliar with Nikons lineup. Does the D700 support all the same features as the D3 and have the same AF and metering systems?


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;15356124*
> Built-in vertical is something I wish every DSLR had. Once you use it, it's impossible to give up the better ergonomics for an insignificant increase in weight. I mean, honestly, if it's a pound is that really something notable? Even while hiking?


Yeah, a pound definitely is noticeable when you've been carrying around it your neck/shoulder for 15 miles on difficult terrain.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *silvrr;15356138*
> I don't beleive your comparing apples to apples there. However, im not very framiliar with Nikons lineup. Does the D700 support all the same features as the D3 and have the same AF and metering systems?


They are basically the same camera electronically, except Nikon removed a couple of features from the D700 so it wouldn't become superior to the D3.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead;15356270*
> Yeah, a pound definitely is noticeable when you've been carrying around it your neck/shoulder for 15 miles on difficult terrain.


I would figure you would bag it at SOME point during that trip. Still, I frequently take my entire bag on hikes that are ~10-12 miles in sand, and I've never found an additional pound to be an issue.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;15356419*
> I would figure you would bag it at SOME point during that trip. Still, I frequently take my entire bag on hikes that are ~10-12 miles in sand, and I've never found an additional pound to be an issue.


I typically keep it out because I tend to miss shots whenever I put the camera away.

You must not be into the same type of hikes that I am if you think a pound is negligible though.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead;15356609*
> You must not be into the same type of hikes that I am if you think a pound is negligible though.


We usually hike the Indiana or Warren (Michigan) Dunes, or Starved Rock Statre Park. Our big hike is at Mt. Baldy -- we all ride our bikes from home to the Dunes (80ish mile round trip) and hike for about 8-10 miles. This year I'm gonna try it on my singlespeed, I assume I will be quite tired by the time I get home.

We don't have a lot of, erm, _elevation_ changes to speak of here, but hiking those dunes is intense. I probably won't bring all of my gear, but I'll definitely be planning on ~50lbs worth of pack.


----------



## foothead

Well, I guess that qualifies then. My preference is the 14000 foot peaks. It gets ridiculous those last 1000 feet or so when you can hardly keep your breath standing still.


----------



## sub50hz

Yeah, I bet I might take issue with that -- but I'm not really into... heights. They usually result in heavy consideration of changing my pants.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;15356963*
> Yeah, I bet I might take issue with that -- but I'm not really into... heights. They usually result in heavy consideration of changing my pants.


Haha, well when you're at the top, it really doesn't feel any different than a 10,000 foot peak. Except for the altitude. I don't even know how to explain how that feels.


----------



## dudemanppl

I dunno, but the D3 grip houses like 1.5 cm of PCB that hangs out of the body and thats it. Everything else is just battery and there are almost no electronics in there. Also built in grips all suck huge dick. MB-D10 > everything, and I prefer the BG-E6 to the vert grip of the 1Ds (they're all the same anyway). They both have the problem of not having enough grip area and the 1D grip is super thin. But as I said, tech will probably trickle down and I'd love to buy a 5DII with new sensor and other related stuff. New Canon body design is too smooth though. I liked the angles at the top of the pentaprism on the 5DII, 1D/sIII, and 1DIV.


----------



## sub50hz

If I had the tiny hands of a 15-year-old asian boy, I would probably wish for a gripless camera as well. The horizontal grip on every non-pro body from either brand is too short for me.


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;15357991*
> If I had the tiny hands of a 15-year-old asian boy, I would probably wish for a gripless camera as well. The horizontal grip on every non-pro body from either brand is too short for me.


----------



## CiBi

I have an Sony DSLR Alpha 390
with these lenses:
Sony DT 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 SAM
Sony 75-300mm f4.5-5.6

And to list all the 'gear':
I also have an extra battery (real sony







), a Lowepro Messenger camera bag, a gorillapod (the heaviest one), some old monopod, a few sandisk ultra SD cards (24GB in total) and some UV filters for my lenses

Can i pleas join now???









//EDIT: you could also add my MacBook Pro 17" and my Wacom Bamboo to the list of photography gear


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:



Originally Posted by *silvrr*


I don't beleive your comparing apples to apples there. However, im not very framiliar with Nikons lineup. Does the D700 support all the same features as the D3 and have the same AF and metering systems?


same controls, same sensor, same metering, same af system, same ergonomics. only real difference is half the max FPS, half the cards/batteries it can hold and a less robust weather sealing though i have taken my d700 out during a hurricane and it came out fine.

the best part is it's half the price.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


I'm so excited for the 1Dx. Hopefully the tech will trickle down to a 3D or 5DIII.


unfortunately, that's not canon's way of doing things =(


----------



## sub50hz

I think I have a 645 camera coming Friday. Spaghetti.


----------



## dudemanppl

Spaghetti camera. Sweet.


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


I think I have a 645 camera coming Friday. Spaghetti.


Nice! What camera?


----------



## sub50hz

I found a good deal on a Bronica ETRSI/75 2.8/220 back that I couldn't pass up. I'm just getting my feet wet in medium format, I didn't think it was necessary to go balls-out and buy an RZ or the like, only to find out it's not what I was looking for. I'm already pretty comfortable with 645, and I wasn't sure if I should spend a bit more and get a square-format system -- nor did I want to lug around an RB. I dunno, for less than 200 bucks, I'm not gonna be too finnicky. I wanted the ETRSI mostly because the ETRS doesn't have mirror lock-up.


----------



## Shane1244

Fast....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=bYxsi1L5cRM#t=41s


----------



## MistaBernie

So.. I'm considering offering my 5Dc + 70-200 F/4L up as a trade for a 5Dii.. dont know how many takers I'll get (if any), but the way I see it, the money I was going to spend on an upgrade to the 5Dii I can then turn around and instead spend on a 70-200 f/2.8L instead (or perhaps a 135L instead)


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


So.. I'm considering offering my 5Dc + 70-200 F/4L up as a trade for a 5Dii.. dont know how many takers I'll get (if any), but the way I see it, the money I was going to spend on an upgrade to the 5Dii I can then turn around and instead spend on a 70-200 f/2.8L instead (or perhaps a 135L instead)


You're right, I can't imagine who would make that trade (unless it's someone like dude). I would just sell the two outright and use the cash for a 5DII.


----------



## MistaBernie

Yeah, that's probably my best bet and will probably get me ~75% of what I'd need for a refurb.. maybe once my current CC debt is paid off I'll do that and then just splurge for a brand new one (my fear is the dropping of value of the 5Dc as time goes on. I've already seen them drop since I bought mine _last week_...


----------



## mz-n10

didnt you just get that 5dc?


----------



## MistaBernie

Sure did. It was my first non-store bought body.. i dont have any documentation for it, I cant get an accurate shutter count off of it via gphoto or astro-jargon, I dont know if it's had the mirror fix done and these kind of make me feel a little uneasy (previous owner claimed ~10k on the shutter). I _think_ I can call Canon and ask for the repair history by serial number though I'm not sure if they'd tell me anything or not.

I'd rather have the piece of mind (and extra features) of the 5Dii.. to date, that I know of, there's nothing actually _wrong_ with my 5Dc (although I do feel like my images are coming out slightly under saturated)..


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


piece of mine


----------



## MistaBernie

fixed


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


piece of mind












What does that mean? Like brain matter?

Tip: The proper phrase is "Peace of mind." Think about it, it actually makes sense that way. I guess it's something like "I could care less," where people get used to repeating it constantly without ever stopping to think about what it actually means.

/Grammar Nazi


----------



## iandroo888

So helping a friend. He wants to get a DSLR. budget around 500-600...

new...

on b&h... its like a t3 kit, d3100, XS...

used...

was lookin around FM, a "used" t2i or d5100 kit kinda fits the bill..

or should i get them to buy like.. d5000 and my 18-105 HAHAHA

*edit* oh i see a d5k + 18-55 + 35mm f/1.8 for 625


----------



## MistaBernie

yeah, I was confusing two devices -- giving a 'piece of my mind' and 'peace of mind'. My bad.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *iandroo888*


So helping a friend. He wants to get a DSLR. budget around 500-600...

new...

on b&h... its like a t3 kit, d3100, XS...

used...

was lookin around FM, a "used" t2i or d5100 kit kinda fits the bill..

or should i get them to buy like.. d5000 and my 18-105 HAHAHA

*edit* oh i see a d5k + 18-55 + 35mm f/1.8 for 625 



Why not utilize the Canon Loyalty Program and get a T2i kit for like $511.99 (See sig)


----------



## iandroo888

ooh right ! i forgot about that program !


----------



## sub50hz

Bernie, _you're drunk._


----------



## MistaBernie

Only on Nyquil... I drink it during the day when I feel a cold coming on..


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;15368811*
> Fast....
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=bYxsi1L5cRM#t=41s


[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FgxzUg_RLSY[/ame]


----------



## sub50hz

I've wasted most of my day on a Tylenol 3/Norco cocktail, gotta get this friggin tooth pulled tomorrow so I can be normal again.


----------



## MistaBernie

I prefer JW Blue to Tylenol 3 w/ Codeine.. if its really bad, I use both.


----------



## r34p3rex

There was a 70-200 2.8 on eBay the other day for $950 BIN. UX date code, near perfect condition. I thought I could wait until I got home to buy it, but it was gone by the time I got home


----------



## sub50hz

Tylenol 3 sucks alone. Barely relieves any pain, waste of time -- I would rather dump 4 ibuprofen down, to be honest.


----------



## dudemanppl

Also bernie, you sure as hell aren't going to get a 5DII with that little amount of gear. If I were you, 5DII + T2i.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r34p3rex;15371855*
> There was a 70-200 2.8 on eBay the other day for $950 BIN. UX date code, near perfect condition. I thought I could wait until I got home to buy it, but it was gone by the time I got home


JW Blue can fix that too.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;15371875*
> Also bernie, you sure as hell aren't going to get a 5DII with that little amount of gear. If I were you, 5DII + T2i.












('splain.)


----------



## MistaBernie

This was a double post.


----------



## dudemanppl

5D + 70-200 is worth like 1600. 1600 is not 2000.


----------



## xxrabid93

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;15371831*
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FgxzUg_RLSY











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r34p3rex;15371855*
> There was a 70-200 2.8 on eBay the other day for $950 BIN. UX date code, near perfect condition. I thought I could wait until I got home to buy it, but it was gone by the time I got home


$950 is an ok deal. I got my Canon 70-200 2.8 (non-IS) for $900 including shipping and paypal fees from a guy on POTN, and it is awesome. If you look around for a bit you could probably find one for $900. Mine had a few paint chips here and there, but nothing major. And the glass is pristine.


----------



## dudemanppl

Hell I got mine for 680.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


5D + 70-200 is worth like 1600. 1600 is not 2000.


I thought that's what you meant. Yeah, we already determined that, I'm starting to see the prices drop from $2000 (couple on POTN for $1800-1900) but yeah, I know I'd likely need to add cash.


----------



## Boyboyd

70-200 is a nice focal length on 35mm. Especially the short end.


----------



## MistaBernie

I really like it on full frame actually. I like the reach I can get out of it on the 7D, but on the 5D I can almost use it as a walk-around.

Hey, other 7D users -- do you guys use the VR grid or no? I took a few snaps with it last night and I THINK I like it, but I dont know if I like it enough to justify leaving it on alot.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


I really like it on full frame actually. I like the reach I can get out of it on the 7D, but on the 5D I can almost use it as a walk-around.

Hey, other 7D users -- do you guys use the VR grid or no? I took a few snaps with it last night and I THINK I like it, but I dont know if I like it enough to justify leaving it on alot.



I used it quite a bit actually, mostly for landscapes and architectural shots. I definitely didn't like the level finder display in the VF, where the AF point overlay was used.


----------



## MistaBernie

wait, there's a level finder display for the VF?? Not that it really matters (or that I'd use it), I'd just use the grid or the focus points.. but I didn't even know it was an option.


----------



## Deano12345

Painkillers and lens discussions on one page
















Wanna get some peoples opinion on something.

Do you mind/allow your freinds to use your equipment ? I'm not talking about mates who just want to borrow an SLR to mess around with, but the ones who are interested in photography ?

Reason being, my freind needs to have a DSLR for college (photography module) thought it was odd that they didnt start with film but anyway. They asked me for advice, and spending the kind of money on even a cheaper second hand body + lens was out of the question (Cheap-ish Kit lens + camera will run around €350) for them so I told them they could borrow my gear.

Now while chatting to some of the people in my course, some say they wouldnt mind, and others have questioned my sanity.

Opinions ?


----------



## MistaBernie

My short answer would be no. I trust my friends, and I dont want to hold it against them if something happens to my gear (I dont have accidental insurance on my gear, so if I break it, my bad, I'll replace it, but if you break it, you better be ready to shell out the cash to replace or repair it, and I would feel kind of bad asking someone to do that even if it's right).

That being said, if I'm out with a friend that shoots from time to time and I have my two bodies on me, I'll toss him one to shoot with. Ok, not really toss, but you know what I mean (I think).

I think I talked about this a bit ago, my wife 'volunteered' me to lend out my 'backup' camera to her brother's girlfriend to see if she likes it and I basically told her 'sure, if she writes me a check for $1500 that I can hold onto while she 'borrows' it'. I dont quite think she realizes that there's damn near $5000 in gear in that bag I lug around with me sometimes (and this may be for the better, now that I think about it).

I had edited this, but Mr. 500 error kept kicking me out --

I re-read what you wrote above, and if the person that you're talking about has an actual interest in photography and a basic understanding of A) how things work and B) how to safely handle gear, and you can be without the gear that you'd be lending out, then this seems like a situation that you could lend gear out in. I personally wouldn't with my current gear list, but if I had another cheap backup body like a T2i or something, I wouldn't be too troubled by lending it out. I'd probably pick up a 50 f/1.8 or a cheap 18-55 kit lens or something to send out with it so that I wouldn't be without any glass in my bag, but that would just be me.

The other thing goes back to my first response - be prepared for the worst (broken, or worse - stolen or lost gear) and be OK with assuming you wont get the gear back in the same condition you left it out (it'll obviously have more shutter counts on it, but there could be other nicks and scrapes etc on it when you get it back). If you're ok with the above, then yeah, lend it out.


----------



## Deano12345

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


My short answer would be no. I trust my friends, and I dont want to hold it against them if something happens to my gear (I dont have accidental insurance on my gear, so if I break it, my bad, I'll replace it, but if you break it, you better be ready to shell out the cash to replace or repair it, and I would feel kind of bad asking someone to do that even if it's right).

That being said, if I'm out with a friend that shoots from time to time and I have my two bodies on me, I'll toss him one to shoot with. Ok, not really toss, but you know what I mean (I think).

I think I talked about this a bit ago, my wife 'volunteered' me to lend out my 'backup' camera to her brother's girlfriend to see if she likes it and I basically told her 'sure, if she writes me a check for $1500 that I can hold onto while she 'borrows' it'. I dont quite think she realizes that there's damn near $5000 in gear in that bag I lug around with me sometimes (and this may be for the better, now that I think about it).


Na I get you, tossing a camera at someone would hurt them







In seriousness though, I agree with you to a point, and even my (cheap by comparison) gear wouldn't get loaned to a friend if they were walking around with it, I just let my freind borrow it since she's going straight to a studio where I guess its less likely to be dropped/stolen/rained on. Its one of those things theres no right answer to, just a limit on how much expensive camera gear anyone would loan to someone









People presuming they can bother my gear is really annoying, my dad does it all the time without telling me -_- Good answer you gave though !

Thanks for replying anyway, nice to hear from someone who has some expensive gear.

Edit : Very expensive gear hahah !


----------



## laboitenoire

I've lent gear to friends before, but only if I knew they would be careful with it and as long as I knew where they were taking it. For example, my buddy wanted to borrow my Sigma and my flash to shoot a family wedding reception, and I said sure. When he asked to borrow my 70-300 VR to go to the Occupy Cleveland protest, I said hell no.


----------



## Deano12345

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire;15381713*
> I've lent gear to friends before, but only if I knew they would be careful with it and as long as I knew where they were taking it. For example, my buddy wanted to borrow my Sigma and my flash to shoot a family wedding reception, and I said sure. When he asked to borrow my 70-300 VR to go to the Occupy Cleveland protest, I said hell no.


I have to say, I don't know would I be less willing to loan my gear if it was more expensive, I probably wouldn't be as much as I am now, but yeah, it definitely depends on the location


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire;15381713*
> I've lent gear to friends before, but only if I knew they would be careful with it and as long as I knew where they were taking it. For example, my buddy wanted to borrow my Sigma and my flash to shoot a family wedding reception, and I said sure. When he asked to borrow my 70-300 VR to go to the Occupy Cleveland protest, I said hell no.


LOL, yeah, the only thing I'd bring to shoot an Occupy #place protest would be a water canon. Damn hippies, dont get me started on that whole mess.


----------



## Boyboyd

I'd lend a lens but never a body. Not even to my closest friend.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Deano12345;15381575*
> Painkillers and lens discussions on one page
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wanna get some peoples opinion on something.
> 
> Do you mind/allow your freinds to use your equipment ? I'm not talking about mates who just want to borrow an SLR to mess around with, but the ones who are interested in photography ?
> 
> Reason being, my freind needs to have a DSLR for college (photography module) thought it was odd that they didnt start with film but anyway. They asked me for advice, and spending the kind of money on even a cheaper second hand body + lens was out of the question (Cheap-ish Kit lens + camera will run around €350) for them so I told them they could borrow my gear.
> 
> Now while chatting to some of the people in my course, some say they wouldnt mind, and others have questioned my sanity.
> 
> Opinions ?


i let them borrow my stuff but i give always make them sign a consent form stating they'll pay for any repair for damages from the moment i hand it to them until i get it back.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Deano12345;15381575*
> Painkillers and lens discussions on one page
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wanna get some peoples opinion on something.
> 
> Do you mind/allow your freinds to use your equipment ? I'm not talking about mates who just want to borrow an SLR to mess around with, but the ones who are interested in photography ?
> 
> Reason being, my freind needs to have a DSLR for college (photography module) thought it was odd that they didnt start with film but anyway. They asked me for advice, and spending the kind of money on even a cheaper second hand body + lens was out of the question (Cheap-ish Kit lens + camera will run around €350) for them so I told them they could borrow my gear.
> 
> Now while chatting to some of the people in my course, some say they wouldnt mind, and others have questioned my sanity.
> 
> Opinions ?


Depends on who. I've a few close friends who I know will take care of my equipment and have no problems with handing my camera off. However that's probably only five people I know. Everyone else, not a chance.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Deano12345;15381575*
> Painkillers and lens discussions on one page
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wanna get some peoples opinion on something.
> 
> Do you mind/allow your freinds to use your equipment ? I'm not talking about mates who just want to borrow an SLR to mess around with, but the ones who are interested in photography ?
> 
> Reason being, my freind needs to have a DSLR for college (photography module) thought it was odd that they didnt start with film but anyway. They asked me for advice, and spending the kind of money on even a cheaper second hand body + lens was out of the question (Cheap-ish Kit lens + camera will run around €350) for them so I told them they could borrow my gear.
> 
> Now while chatting to some of the people in my course, some say they wouldnt mind, and others have questioned my sanity.
> 
> Opinions ?


yes, ive have lent my main gear out to a friend that is interested in photography to use. but i made it crystal clear if there are damages shes paying for it. but i also borrow canon gear a lot from friends. and its rather clear if i break it i need to pay for it.


----------



## foothead

I only let people use my equipment if they prove they actually know how. Basically, I'll put it in full manual mode, screw up the settings, and make them take a picture. Most people don't even know how to switch the camera to auto.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead;15382456*
> I only let people use my equipment if they prove they actually know how. Basically, I'll put it in full manual mode, screw up the settings, and make them take a picture. Most people don't even know how to switch the camera to auto.


thats harsh....

i wouldnt know how to change say bracketing back on a nikon. which id be able to do on a canon/sony.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10;15382514*
> thats harsh....
> 
> i wouldnt know how to change say bracketing back on a nikon. which id be able to do on a canon/sony.


I don't mess up the advanced features, just the basic stuff like ISO, aperture, shutter speed. If they cannot figure out how to fix that, they're not going to be able to use the camera anyway.


----------



## MistaBernie

That's actually a really good idea foot! Then you can be like 'if you dont know this stuff you need to learn it before I consider letting you borrow this stuff'.


----------



## Shane1244

Thats a horrible idea. Knowing how to use a camera does not mean they wont drop it, or a accident won't happen. A pro will know more than you, and will most likely bash their cameras around lot.

When my sister wanted to borrow my camera, I told her that not even the smallest scratch on the body or lens is acceptable, and that I'd want it replaced. she kept saying "Oh, that'd never happen, so dont be all paranoid" I told her to write me a cheque for the total of my gear that I'd rip off after I got back. Friends are Friends, Family is Family, but accidents happen.


----------



## MistaBernie

Yeah, the whole 'here, if you can't figure out how to shoot with it, why would I let you borrow it?' thing isn't really supposed to be a 'oh, you know how to turn a dial? Cool, here's my gear' thing as much as a general deterrent I suppose.


----------



## dudemanppl

I lend out stuff like candy. Same goes for my friend. Currently I have his D3, 14-24, 70-200 II; and 400 2.8.


----------



## ljason8eg

I don't lend my gear to anyone. I'm not really that anal about scuffs and such, but I want to be the one to do it, not when someone else has my gear.


----------



## Deano12345

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


I lend out stuff like candy. Same goes for my friend. Currently I have his D3, 14-24, 70-200 II; and 400 2.8.


Can I be your freind too ?









Nice to see that there is a mix of opinions on this, and that I'm not alone with my views


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*


Thats a horrible idea. Knowing how to use a camera does not mean they wont drop it, or a accident won't happen. A pro will know more than you, and will most likely bash their cameras around lot.

When my sister wanted to borrow my camera, I told her that not even the smallest scratch on the body or lens is acceptable, and that I'd want it replaced. she kept saying "Oh, that'd never happen, so dont be all paranoid" I told her to write me a cheque for the total of my gear that I'd rip off after I got back. Friends are Friends, Family is Family, but accidents happen.


I'm not really worried about damage, I just don't want someone calling me every 15 minutes to tell me my camera is crap because they don't know how to use it.

Plus, people who know how to properly use a camera tend to appreciate it more and are less likely to do something stupid.


----------



## dudemanppl

Well obviously I don't just lend it out to ANYONE, but if they know how to use it. But I don't call my stuff gear until I drop it.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Well obviously I don't just lend it out to ANYONE, but if they know how to use it. But I don't call my stuff gear until I drop it.


Or you sit on it.


----------



## iandroo888

S> Nikkor 18-105mm f/3.5-5.6 Lens - Great, mint-like condition ! filter on since day one ! front element super clean ! no blemishes or scratches ! smoke free environment ! $225 Shipped US48

Link here for info and pictures

B> Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G - preferably mint-like condition with everything included...


----------



## dudemanppl

Gosh I loved the 24-70 on the D300s so much.


----------



## iandroo888

lol i loved it while i had it rented/borrowed.. such a nice lens... fast... great build quality... i have the cup too =3 LOL


----------



## foothead

Why is Nikon releasing $2000 lenses without an aperture ring? If I was going to spend that kind of money on a lens, I want to be able to use it on all my bodies, not just certain Nikon ones.

Also, http://www.adorama.com/SR4756SAXLC.h...e=rflAID021866


----------



## dudemanppl

Why did Canon release a 120,000 dollar lens without an aperture ring? ABSURD. FOR THAT PRICE IT SHOULD HAVE 60.

Next time I go on vacation I'm gonna buy some 645 camera because I have no idea where/how to get 4x5 developed.


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Why did Canon release a 120,000 dollar lens without an aperture ring? ABSURD. FOR THAT PRICE IT SHOULD HAVE 60.


LOL.

Canon released a $120,000 lens? Was it for the military or something?

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Next time I go on vacation I'm gonna buy some 645 camera because I have no idea where/how to get 4x5 developed.


You develop it yourself. I think there are a few labs that'll develop it by mail, though I've never tried any of them.


----------



## dudemanppl

1200 f/5.6?


----------



## foothead

Wow...


----------



## MistaBernie

He's compensating.


----------



## FlyingNugget

It takes 3 people to shoot that thing


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *foothead*


Wow...


I'll see your awkward looking guy with a 1200/5.6 and raise you Ken Rockwell with the same lens:










I read that it takes a year to grow the fluorite crystals used to make just one 1200/5.6.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *foothead*


You develop it yourself. I think there are a few labs that'll develop it by mail, though I've never tried any of them.


Hows that work? :3 Can you develop it in a tank like 35 and 120? Or do you need to do something else?


----------



## Shane1244

1200mm? Pfft.

Canon 5400mm f/14


----------



## Sean Webster

Pffft, I got 2, check the sig for validation.


----------



## MistaBernie

I drink out of those things.

I can't think of many practical applications for a lens like that. Is it even considered a lens at that point? How big are the aperture blades? Does it HAVE aperture blades?


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


I drink out of those things.

I can't think of many practical applications for a lens like that. Is it even considered a lens at that point? How big are the aperture blades? Does it HAVE aperture blades?


Not sure, Pretty sure it's a mirror lens.


----------



## dudemanppl

Mirror lens. Uses ND filters to "stop down" FD mount too so its basically useless.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;15385589*
> Hows that work? :3 Can you develop it in a tank like 35 and 120? Or do you need to do something else?


There are some tanks for 4x5 sheet film, but they tend to be very expensive and low quality. Most people just use developing trays. These are decent. Just don't use larger ones or it becomes difficult to keep the film in a stack.


----------



## MistaBernie

Who drills a straight hole through a swivel bracket for an umbrella? Srsly?

Dont buy the Cowboy Studios single stand, bracket, umbrella kit from Amazon. I'd return it but I'm lazy and will just buy a real swivel bracket when B&H reopens.


----------



## sub50hz

https://www.lytro.com/camera

So... they actually _made_ this, eh? Interesting.


----------



## MistaBernie

Is that the thing that you can mess w/ focus / dof /etc after the fact? Mac native at the moment.. figures.


----------



## ljason8eg

That looks like one giant gimmick.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg;15389265*
> That looks like one giant gimmick.


It's actually a very cool concept, keep in mind this is the first iteration of such a product -- DLSRs pretty much sucked a big one when they were introduced as well. Give it time, maybe it will turn into something worthwhile.

Note: I don't expect nor want this in the pro/prosumer market.


----------



## r34p3rex

5400mm.. I lol'd.

On another note, I really want a 70-200 2.8.. can't find any deals


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r34p3rex;15389620*
> 5400mm.. I lol'd.
> 
> On another note, I really want a 70-200 2.8.. can't find any deals


What's a deal to you? I think there's a 70-200 2.8L for $1000 OBO on POTN right now.


----------



## sub50hz

Sell that 24-105, buy 70-200.


----------



## r34p3rex

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg;15389668*
> What's a deal to you? I think there's a 70-200 2.8L for $1000 OBO on POTN right now.


Ohhh didn't see that one








I wonder how much lower I can get it for.. hmmm


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r34p3rex;15389714*
> Ohhh didn't see that one
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I wonder how much lower I can get it for.. hmmm












If you're searching for unreasonable deals, it might be best to just save a few more bucks and save yourself the hassle.


----------



## dudemanppl

Back when I started to get into photography, 70-200s were 800 bucks. But that was like 3 years ago.


----------



## Monocog007

Just ordered a T2i with the kit lens with the info from the CLP thread for $550 after tax. Anyone want to recommend me a great macro lens for under $200?









Oh, and will i need a class 10 SD card to record in full 1080p? I also plan on shooting in RAW format..


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Monocog007*


Just ordered a T2i with the kit lens with the info from the CLP thread for $550 after tax. Anyone want to recommend me a great macro lens for under $200?









Oh, and will i need a class 10 SD card to record in full 1080p? I also plan on shooting in RAW format..


You won't find a macro lens under $200. Extension tubes will be your best bet if you don't want to spend more than that, and quite possibly will serve your needs just fine.

Any Class 10 card should be fine, you don't need to drop the money on the really fast and expensive ones though. I like Sandisk personally.


----------



## Monocog007

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg;15390194*
> You won't find a macro lens under $200. Extension tubes will be your best bet if you don't want to spend more than that, and quite possibly will serve your needs just fine.
> 
> Any Class 10 card should be fine, you don't need to drop the money on the really fast and expensive ones though. I like Sandisk personally.


What is a decent macro lens gonna cost me?
And Wintec has a very highly rated class 10 16gb on newegg for $20 right now, thats why i asked.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote: 
   Originally Posted by *Monocog007*   What is a decent macro lens gonna cost me? 
And Wintec has a very highly rated class 10 16gb on newegg for $20 right now, thats why i asked.  
This is as cheap as I would go, though depending on what your subjects are, you may not have enough working distance.    Amazon.com: Canon EF-S 60mm f/2.8 Macro USM Digital SLR Lens for EOS Digital SLR Cameras: Camera & Photo
There's also a 50mm, but it doesn't go down to 1:1 magnification.    Amazon.com: Canon EF 50mm f/2.5 Compact Macro Lens: Camera & Photo


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Monocog007;15390101*
> Anyone want to recommend me a great macro lens for under $200?


You won't get a proper macro lens for $200, at least not for canon. Expect to pay $400-500 for a cheap one.

What I usually recommend for beginners is a M42 lens and extension tubes/bellows. It'll cost less than $50, and it's great for learning. IQ won't be as good as a proper macro lens, but it will definitely be decent.

Here's what you'd need:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/M42-Lens-Canon-EOS-EF-Adapter-550D-500D-60D-50D-7D-/320773000673?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item4aaf8f8de1#ht_2849wt_1396

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Macro-Extension-Tube-Ring-L8D-M42-42mm-screw-mount-/190489871340?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2c5a14c3ec#ht_500wt_1396

http://www.ebay.com/itm/M42-PENTAX-50mm-f2-VIVITAR-LENS-4-PS-PENTAX-CAMERA-/300609521251?pt=Camera_Lenses&hash=item45fdb94663#ht_585wt_1396

That lens is sold as is with light cleaning marks, but it should be just fine. A non-as-is one costs about twice as much.


----------



## Deano12345

Have my Vertex II back from RMA. So much quicker in Lightroom than than my spare drive. SSD's FTW


----------



## MistaBernie

I dont know how I would feel about using an SSD for regular use like that. I feel like there would be _alot_ more writes/reads in a situation like that (especially if the scratch file is on the SSD).

Of course, this is coming from the guy that uses it as his boot drive...


----------



## Deano12345

I only have Lightroom installed on it, all the files (ie the photos are imported and exported) onto my RAID array to keep the writes on the SSD down. I'm probably not getting all the speed advantage of the SSD but it makes it feel a lot snappier to use in general.


----------



## iandroo888

Sigh I feel like everytime I want to buy something, they all disappear from the used market ;(


----------



## MistaBernie

Every time I buy something used, the used price drops ~10% within a day.

I saw a gripped 5Dc in a local craigslist for $825 the other day. I was borderline supermad.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


https://www.lytro.com/camera
So... they actually _made_ this, eh? Interesting.


What an unwieldy looking thing. Were they inspired by a telescope? If this technology does make it to DSLRs, I can envisage how the future of shooting something like sports will be. The photog will just set the camera up with an intervalometer and a wide angle lens, since far in the future resolution will be so high that any amount of cropping will be possible, and focus won't be necessary, and software inside the camera will be so advanced that no one will need to PP anymore. And all DSLR's will have cellular antennas and/or WiFi so that they can upload shots directly to publishers. Bam! No more photographer.









Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


I dont know how I would feel about using an SSD for regular use like that. I feel like there would be _alot_ more writes/reads in a situation like that (especially if the scratch file is on the SSD).

Of course, this is coming from the guy that uses it as his boot drive...


Eh, how long does anyone go here on a single OS install anyway? I use the hell out my SSDs and they ROCK.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Deano12345*


I only have Lightroom installed on it, all the files (ie the photos are imported and exported) onto my RAID array to keep the writes on the SSD down. I'm probably not getting all the speed advantage of the SSD but it makes it feel a lot snappier to use in general.


I do the same thing. I use my RAID array (regular HDDs) as a scratch disk with PP software installed on the SSDs. Everything is backed up from the RAID HDD's onto a USB 3.0 external (automatically).


----------



## MistaBernie

I haven't reinstalled my OS since I got my SSD ~ 1 year ago.


----------



## Conspiracy

i dislike physics :|

class is kicking my butt more than spanish. and its in english...


----------



## iandroo888

lol physics isn't that bad


----------



## laboitenoire

So I saw a quarter-million dollar Leica on Tuesday


----------



## MistaBernie

Pics or it didnt happen.

Hey, if there's one forum where this would be acceptable, it should be the photography forum.


----------



## sub50hz

My hands are shaky today, haven't eaten anything since Wednesday night:


----------



## fastsite

I would like to join








Canon EOS 60D
Canon EF-S 18-55 f/3.5-5.6(non IS)
Canon EF-S 18-135 f/3.5-5.6 IS
Canon EF 70-300 f/4-5.6 IS USM

I'm an aviation photographer in Colorado by the way.


----------



## sub50hz

Looks like the great 220 hunt begins tomorrow, damn Columbia kids bought it all up from Central earlier this week.


----------



## dudemanppl

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/742304-USA/Kodak_8374290_220_Professional_Portra_400.html


----------



## sub50hz

I'm looking for some tonight, dufus.


----------



## dudemanppl

FLY THERE FLY BACK. No common sense around here.


----------



## sub50hz

/chan


----------



## foothead

Just run 120 through it. It should work fine, you'll just need to keep track of exposures since 120 is shorter. Plan for 15, since the last one may get cut off.


----------



## sub50hz

Well, there's no selector for the Bronica backs, they have specific 120 and 220 backs -- you think 120 would be ok? It's quite a bit thicker, don't really wanna wreck the plate in this back.


----------



## foothead

I googled it and found a number of people claiming it went through their cameras just fine.

I'd load some and see how it does. It'll usually be obvious if it'll damage something.

As far as 220 film, this is an awesome deal. Velvia 100F is great. It's like normal velvia, but without the oversaturation.


----------



## sub50hz

Hrm, might not have to worry about it, a friend of mine has a long-expired roll of Portra 800 that he can loan/give me. That gives me time to pro-pack it from B&H when they re-open.


----------



## Deano12345

@fastsite : Love your watermark/logo. Looks awesome









You guys see that Sony are doing the cash back offer again this christmas season ? I might finally buy the A77 that I've been procrastinating over for a while. The 77 is still gonna be 1G+ I'd imagine, and that's a lot on something that's just for hobby use. Decisions...could also get a rather nice telephoto for that kinda money and still have change.


----------



## robchaos

so, my grandfather gave me this box of old camera stuff he had. A broken Kodak Retina Reflex III with a few lenses. The camera is trash. I think it was dropped in the ocean. Shutter is gunked up and looks corroded inside the light sensor. The lenses however, are in great shape. Are they optically any good?
Would it be worth my $30-40 to grab a DKL to nikon adapter off ebay, or are these better off being sold to someone with the proper camera to use them?
Lenses in question are Scnheider-Kreuznach retina-xenar 50mm f2.8, Retina-Tele-Xenar 135mm f4, and a retina-curtagon 28mm f4. I spent some time looking for info on these lenses, and could not find much definitive in terms of quality and value. Most of them look like on a good day at ebay they could go for $50-100 a piece, or $10-20 on a bad day


----------



## dudemanppl

Remember that big pile of broken stuff I bought way back when (like two weeks ago lul) that was submerged in water? Well the 70-200 IS II AF works now. AFTER BEING SUBMERGED FOR A LONG WHILE. I cleaned residue out of a lot of elements and it's a lot less hazy now. Now all I need to do is fix the IS that I broke (holy eff I'm dumb) and somehow clean the rest of the gunk out. 2k investment, probably gonna get 6-7 out of it. :')

And thats basically how I fund my gearwhoreishness.


----------



## Shane1244

God I hate how B&H closes its online ordered on the weekends.


----------



## dudemanppl

Have a 35L for sale. Fixed the one that went underwater, so the one I bought originally is up. Boxed with everything. UX09! I'll list in on FM in a few days, but I know all y'all loves the 35L.


----------



## sub50hz

Loves but cannot afford.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Why do I always like the expensive hobbies? Anyways, mating knives with photography


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


https://www.lytro.com/camera

So... they actually _made_ this, eh? Interesting.


i want to get one after demoing it. maybe i'll write a mini review.


----------



## dudemanppl

I cleaned my keyboard and other than losing a key, it's so much nicer to type on. Anyway, that 35L is probably sold.


----------



## sub50hz

So I found an old roll of 120 HP5 that expired 7 years ago in this old tripod bag. Works fine in the 220 back, just a little bit stiffer winding action. Probably grab a 120 insert anyway sometime soon.


----------



## dudemanppl

God I still can't believe I got that 35L for basically 150 bucks.


----------



## sub50hz

Sell it to me for 175.


----------



## Conspiracy

it was a broken one you got a while back right? i recall you buying like a bulk collection of broken stuff or something of that nature not too long ago


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


Pics or it didnt happen.

Hey, if there's one forum where this would be acceptable, it should be the photography forum.


Never said it was a camera









Actually, it was one of their scanning electron microscopes. Zeiss was also there.


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*











Why do I always like the expensive hobbies? Anyways, mating knives with photography










That's cool. Does the blade stay black when you sharpen it?

Here's my knife/thing.





































Lol, overkill. It has a freaking altimeter built into it.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*











Why do I always like the expensive hobbies? Anyways, mating knives with photography










You want to try flying. It's even more expensive than photography. But they do go together well.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Deano12345*


Painkillers and lens discussions on one page
















Wanna get some peoples opinion on something.

Do you mind/allow your freinds to use your equipment ? I'm not talking about mates who just want to borrow an SLR to mess around with, but the ones who are interested in photography ?

Reason being, my freind needs to have a DSLR for college (photography module) thought it was odd that they didnt start with film but anyway. They asked me for advice, and spending the kind of money on even a cheaper second hand body + lens was out of the question (Cheap-ish Kit lens + camera will run around â‚¬350) for them so I told them they could borrow my gear.

Now while chatting to some of the people in my course, some say they wouldnt mind, and others have questioned my sanity.

Opinions ?


First time I lent something out, came back covered in scratches.

2nd time, they lost the lens cap.

There won't be a third unfortunately. As much as I'd love to be charitable and lend people my things, I can't do it if it keeps getting damaged


----------



## MistaBernie

Especially when you have a harder time replacing gear in AU (or at least I have to imagine).


----------



## Conspiracy

long day today doing a theater tech run-through :|

im running the sound effects i designed for this show. on a side note, i got the new breakfast at subway and it was pretty tasty for $3.20something


----------



## sub50hz

Dunkin Wake-Up Wraps are my bread and butter. 99 cents a piece, win. But their coffee blows ass.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;15401025*
> Why do I always like the expensive hobbies? Anyways, mating knives with photography


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Boyboyd;15405536*
> You want to try flying. It's even more expensive than photography. But they do go together well.


I have a penchant for the expensive hobby as well.









Old pic, most of that is still the same.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead;15405322*
> Here's my knife/thing.


Again, with the nail-painting. *WHAT ARE YOU HIDING FROM US?*


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;15407111*
> Dunkin Wake-Up Wraps are my bread and butter. 99 cents a piece, win. But their coffee blows ass.


thanks, i might try them. i normally make my own breakfast which is just eggs mostly but days like today i dont have time to cook so i have to get breakfast on the go


----------



## dudemanppl

Foothead is a ...crossdresser?


----------



## Shane1244

pfft nitro.


----------



## dudemanppl

My other real hobby (that isn't computering) isn't too expensive.


----------



## Shane1244

Which would be?


----------



## Thebreezybb

So, I was in Dubai this weekend and i found the A77 with the 16-50mm lens for 1800USD! I didn't think twice, Now, I'm a happy owner!


----------



## Shane1244

Not too shabby!


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;15415817*
> pfft nitro.


Relax, I still compete regionally in 1/10 electric TC.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead;15405322*
> That's cool. Does the blade stay black when you sharpen it?
> 
> Here's my knife/thing.
> 
> Lol, overkill. It has a freaking altimeter built into it.


After I get a Scallion, a multi-tool will probably be my next buy.

And unfortunately the black part of the blade is just a coating, and it does wear off with heavy use. That said, it's also not easy to strip the coating off.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Boyboyd;15405536*
> You want to try flying. It's even more expensive than photography. But they do go together well.


Won't lie; I've always wanted to but the pure monies involved makes me








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;15407147*
> Again, with the nail-painting. *WHAT ARE YOU HIDING FROM US?*


That foothead looks fabulous?









Anyways, one last one to show off my Shallot Black! Behind it is its bigger brother, the ZT 0350.


----------



## dudemanppl

Other sort of hobby is airsoft, I only have two guns though...


----------



## sub50hz

Sam Adams does not make a good Marzen. Didn't stop me from drinking 9 of them and winning 80 bucks on lottery scratch-offs, though. Had a pretty blah day of shooting, more riding/grillin/chillin. Was 65 today, so excellent.


----------



## iandroo888

bought 24-70 =]


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;15407111*
> Dunkin Wake-Up Wraps are my bread and butter. 99 cents a piece, win. But their coffee blows ass.


See that's wierd. I like their coffee. I buy the whole bean stuff and make it at home. As long as it's got caffiene that's all I care.

85mm F/1.2 is back from Canon, haven't had a chance to unbox it yet. Was in San Fran last week on business.


----------



## sub50hz

Their coffee always tastes dirty to me, too much acidity or something. I'm a big fan of Starbucks' Italian and French Roasts, they sell those whole bean in huge bags at Sam's, but ever since I got a Keurig I've shifted to this Dark Magic stuff -- real good.


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;15416827*
> Relax, I still compete regionally in 1/10 electric TC.


Pffft electric.









I just got into an RC drift team with my HPI Sprint 2. Now I can get in on the hookup.


----------



## sub50hz

Lol, HPI.


----------



## aksthem1

I still have my Tamiya TA-03 and TA TC4, but due to the lack of funds, fixing broken knuckles, suspension arms for both are expensive/haven't bothered.

The HPI has surprisingly taking a beating.


----------



## sub50hz

HPIs are made to be thrashed, most serious TCs are like glass. I don't do it as much anymore because it's become like a science -- so much practice time and adjustments... it's not as fun. 1/8 buggies are where it's at, although I heavily disagree with the number of people doing electric swaps nowadays.


----------



## Nemesis158

I didnt know photographers liked RC cars








I have a little cheapo Duratrax Evader that ive upgraded with the following:
Pro-line Dirt Works tires
Transmission re-build with Bearings and a metal idler Gear
HPI (i think) ESC
Some brushed AM Motor that i cant remember name/brand of right now
5000MaH 6-cell NimH pack VenomPower.
Thing is quick.......


----------



## sub50hz

I should probably get some pics of my hilariously illegal Robitronics Avid later. It's a fun one for big tracks and speed runs, but I can't compete with it (Mamba Max 7700kV). Actually, I sold my Novak setup, so I don't have anything to run next year.









Could be a sign, lol.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Thebreezybb;15416599*
> So, I was in Dubai this weekend and i found the A77 with the 16-50mm lens for 1800USD! I didn't think twice, Now, I'm a happy owner!


hows the kit lens?

there are lots of problem with the launch firmware, so make sure you upgrade the fw first.


----------



## dudemanppl

Crap picture of all the telephotos at my house right now. Half are broken (still take fine pictures though), one isn't mine.


----------



## xxrabid93

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;15423678*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Crap picture of all the telephotos at my house right now. Half are broken (still take fine pictures though), one isn't mine.


Wanna hook me up with that 300 2.8?







I was thinking of asking for all 3 Canon mount lenses, but i figured i shouldn't be greedy.


----------



## sub50hz

Thinking about combo trading my 135 and 70-200 for a 35L. Too much gear, not enough... something. I dunno, tired of shooting sports and pretty much telephotos in general.


----------



## dudemanppl

I'd take the 135 and cash. BUYING MY 135 BACK AGAIN WAT.


----------



## sub50hz

I'm not buying a salvaged 35L, sorry. Especially since, you know, you made it pretty well known in this very forum how much you paid for it.


----------



## dudemanppl

I'm selling the working version. It's super sex. The new one is for me to keep and needs MA adjust.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xxrabid93;15426733*
> Wanna hook me up with that 300 2.8?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I was thinking of asking for all 3 Canon mount lenses, but i figured i shouldn't be greedy.


http://www.ebay.com/itm/170713616598

But I already sold it.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;15402335*
> Anyway, that 35L is probably sold.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;15402984*
> God I still can't believe I got that 35L for basically 150 bucks.


So...???


----------



## xxrabid93

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;15427027*
> Thinking about combo trading my 135 and 70-200 for a 35L. Too much gear, not enough... something. I dunno, tired of shooting sports and pretty much telephotos in general.


That would leave you with nothing longer than a 50mm for your 50D/1NRS. Do you just not shoot telephoto at all?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;15427223*
> 
> http://www.ebay.com/itm/170713616598
> 
> But I already sold it.












And derp much? $2000 for a busted one? What are they gonna do with it?







Is it even fixable at this point?


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;15427255*
> So...???


I have 2 35Ls now... Both of them are being lent out at the moment.







Both on 5DIIs too...


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xxrabid93;15427346*
> That would leave you with nothing longer than a 50mm for your 50D/1NRS. Do you just not shoot telephoto at all?


I shot tele a lot for a while, and both lenses are fantastigood -- they just don't fit what I want to do. I have a WAY higher keeper rate from a single roll of film with the cheapest lens Canon makes than I do from 5GB worth of telephoto digital shots. Are they saleable prints? Sure, but I don't like the sports-shooter mentality, atmosphere or just generally that type of photography. I thought I did -- I was very wrong. In actuality, I'm considering just offloading all my digital gear on a whole, although I doubt that would happen since I still like to have that option to overshoot some things without emptying my wallet for film and processing.

Lacking a telephoto isn't a dealbreaker for me, I could get by with the 17-40, 35 and 50.


----------



## dudemanppl

85 is the longest I would ever personally shoot.


----------



## sub50hz

For what? You've been through more teles than anyone in this thread, possibly everyone else combined.


----------



## dudemanppl

17 2.8 long zooms/primes I've owned so far... But they're only to shoot for the newspaper. Don't really mind since the folks in it make it like a family.


----------



## laboitenoire

I've also been dissatisfied with tele shooting recently. Definitely preferring my 12-24 and 30 much more over my 70-300.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;15427367*
> I have 2 35Ls now... Both of them are being lent out at the moment.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Both on 5DIIs too...










They must be really good friends. I won't lie; I've wanted to play with that combo for a very long time.


----------



## dudemanppl

17, 24, 35, 50, 85, set for life.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;15427908*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They must be really good friends. I won't lie; I've wanted to play with that combo for a very long time.


One you try it, you can't really let go of it.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie;15407083*
> Especially when you have a harder time replacing gear in AU (or at least I have to imagine).


If it's any indication, I have been literally waiting months for a 2nd hand 11-16 for Nikon mount in my city.


----------



## dudemanppl

Gonna go out somewhere today with M6, 35 1.2, last roll of Ektar. Still don't know where I'm gonna go though...


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Gonna go out somewhere today with M6, 35 1.2, last roll of Ektar. Still don't know where I'm gonna go though...


didnt know there was a 35 1.2... just noticed its in your sig. dont pay too much attention to the stuff in people's sigs. and a 50 f1.1... i wonder how often people really need to shoot at f1.1, i have seen some cinema lenses that have apertures that wide but they were used back in the day when they lit scenes by candle light lol

totally post some scans once you get a chance. i bet that 35 has some pretty cool background blur when its wide open


----------



## Deano12345

Getting an A55 for €275 used. Thing is as new. Happy days


----------



## Prpntblr95

Shot part of the 24 hours of Lemons race yesterday.


----------



## Deano12345

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Prpntblr95*


Shot part of the 24 hours of Lemons race yesterday.


Some pretty fast lemons
















Seriously though, thats pretty sweet ! What track ?


----------



## ljason8eg

Goodness...I just realized that Canon has had my 50 1.4 since October 7th and I haven't received a single email about what's going on. I kind of forgot about it due to my trip. Two weeks seems to be a bit long without any response. Maybe its time for *sigh* another phone call.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;15433705*
> Gonna go out somewhere today with M6, 35 1.2, last roll of Ektar. Still don't know where I'm gonna go though...


Ektar? Gross.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;15436667*
> Ektar? Gross.


Haha. Ektar really isn't _that_ bad. It kinda resembles color photos from the 1970s.

Not my first choice though. That'd probably be Velvia 100F.


----------



## sub50hz

It's too modern-looking for my tastes -- crazy saturation, crazy contrast. Was it Provia that was kinda like that?


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;15436887*
> It's too modern-looking for my tastes -- crazy saturation, crazy contrast. Was it Provia that was kinda like that?


Not really. Ektar seems to be pretty normal for contrast and saturation, except for yellow. It doesn't look much like provia.

EDIT: Or were you talking about velvia? I agree with you about that, but the 100F is a lot more normal than the non-F. Velvia 50 is like completely out of control.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead;15437014*
> EDIT: Or were you talking about velvia? I agree with you about that, but the 100F is a lot more normal than the non-F. Velvia 50 is like completely out of control.


Yeah, that's what I was thinking of. I'm not really a big fan of Fuji color films -- they have some real good black and white, though. Hard to tear me away from Delta, nevertheless.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;15437066*
> Yeah, that's what I was thinking of. I'm not really a big fan of Fuji color films -- they have some real good black and white, though. Hard to tear me away from Delta, nevertheless.


Fuji's black and white films are great. I have about 15 rolls of neopan 100 acros in my fridge right now. It's better than T-Max, but it costs like half as much.

Delta? That's ilford, right? I've never used their film, except for infrared.


----------



## sub50hz

Delta is another tab grain b&w, but it's got so much exposure latitude that you can really control shadows and highlights better than, say, Tmax (IMO). Neopan is great stuff, maybe I will pick up a roll this weekend.


----------



## foothead

Have you ever tried the 3200 ISO version? That could be interesting with some push processing.

EDIT: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/688772-REG/Polaroid_PIF300_Instant_Film_300_10.html So Polaroid is making instant films again, but only for a new camera? What?


----------



## sub50hz

It's cleaner than you might think -- honestly though, for the price, pushing HP5 to 3200 is almost as good. Almost.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;15437427*
> It's cleaner than you might think -- honestly though, for the price, pushing HP5 to 3200 is almost as good. Almost.


I was actually thinking of pushing the 3200 to like 25,600 or something. It'd be pretty neat for night shots.


----------



## sub50hz

IIRC, you already push-process the 3200.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wikipedia*
> The 'Delta 3200' product is not actually rated at ISO 3200/36°. Its speed is only ISO 1000/31° but it has a very wide exposure latitude. Thus it can be successfully push processed to EI 3200 or even higher.


Yep, you're right. Darn.


----------



## sub50hz

I'm willing to bet you could at LEAST get 6400 out of it. Probably wouldn't plan on printing bigger than 4x6 though, lol.


----------



## foothead

Haha, yeah the grain'll probably be crazy. I was hoping for hand-holdable under a full moon though. I just think that'd be neat.


----------



## dudemanppl

Thats what the 1Dx is for. Anyway, I walked like 4 miles and with no real aim and I only shot half the roll... Oh well. Ektar isn't terrible, but it's too red sometimes.


----------



## BlankThis

http://montreal.kijiji.ca/c-buy-and-...AdIdZ324672245


----------



## sub50hz

Frenchie.


----------



## BlankThis

Oui.

EDIT: Still have a year old D90 with nifty 50, 4GB Class 10, Bag, Box and all accessories, plus extended warranty for sale... Hit me up because I'm jumping ship.


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Thats what the 1Dx is for


Yeah, because I just have $6000+ lying around.

Plus, I generally prefer shooting film. The only times I use digital nowadays are when I have to go very light or when I'm taking pictures of projects and such. Pretty much everything else is medium/large format (though mostly MF. LF is expensive.)


----------



## sub50hz

No kidding. I shoot digital now when.... I don't even know. I don't prefer it for anything. What an investment.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;15441458*
> No kidding. I shoot digital now when.... I don't even know. I don't prefer it for anything. What an investment.


I know that feeling. I still cannot decide if I should keep buying digital gear or switch entirely to film. The Olympus 50mm f2 macro is really tempting, I just don't know if it'll end up sitting on the shelf 99% of the time.


----------



## Dream Killer

my canon rebel xti refuses to go unused. that and the 18-55 IS makes it perfect for long distance hiking. i backpacked a good portion of the appalachian trail from the delaware water gap into new york just this past week and the xti+kit is such a perfect combo. i just took a short loop of nylon between the camera's strap points and hanged it on a carabiner to my bag's chest strap.

i can't even imagine bringing the d700 on that hike. it's also a humbling experience because i thought of how ansel adams had to haul up a large format cam up trails. he probably hired people to carry peices of it for him, however.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer;15441764*
> i can't even imagine bringing the d700 on that hike. it's also a humbling experience because i thought of how ansel adams had to haul up a large format cam up trails. he probably hired people to carry peices of it for him, however.


I have one of his books where he talks about that, but I left it in my mother's car, which is in the shop right now. IIRC, he carried all the gear at first, but when he got older, he had to have a helper. It's been a while since I read it though, so I may be wrong. I'll look it up for you when I get the book back.

I'm pretty sure he used a standard plate camera (8.5x6.5 inches) and later switched to 8x10.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead;15441903*
> I have one of his books where he talks about that, but I left it in my mother's car, which is in the shop right now. IIRC, he carried all the gear at first, but when he got older, he had to have a helper. It's been a while since I read it though, so I may be wrong. I'll look it up for you when I get the book back.
> 
> I'm pretty sure he used a standard plate camera (8.5x6.5 inches) and later switched to 8x10.


still would be a b**** to carry. would you know if he only did day-hikes or camped out a spot for a couple of days?


----------



## dudemanppl

BF3 has a freezing issue for me and I want to shoot people. Eh. I would shoot film only if I got another M6. 3200 + 400 SET FOR LIFE.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer;15442127*
> still would be a b**** to carry. would you know if he only did day-hikes or camped out a spot for a couple of days?


I'm pretty sure he usually did multi-day stuff. He said that he'd hike around until he found a good spot, then he'd just camp there until the lighting was right, then take the picture.

And yeah, it's pretty ridiculous to carry around LF gear and camping gear. Just the camera stuff can easily get to 15 kilos or more.

Does Kodak still make T-Max in glass plates? I tried googling, but I cannot find anything recent.


----------



## xxrabid93

So i've been thinking of picking up a bokeh monster, but i'm not sure. Bokeh monster= Meyer Trioplan 100mm 2.8 and/or Meyer Orestor 135mm 2.8. The Trioplan has just plain crazy bokeh, where as the Orestor has insanely creamy/smooth bokeh. The Trioplan i've seen go for an average of $200. The Orestor Seems to go for like $100 average.

A good pickup for some old school manual focus lenses for epic bokeh, or should i pass?

And if you haven't seen, here are examples. Trioplan is first one, Orestor is second.

http://www.4photos.de/test/Fr%C3%BChlingsgr%C3%BCn--.jpg

http://colormaniac.smugmug.com/Other/Campus-scenes-1/IMG1501/956613299_HK3nf-XL-1.jpg


----------



## sub50hz

That first image has gross outlining like whoa. The second... meh. Take any telephoto at MFD and you'll get background blur. I can still make out shapes and objects -- so it's no 135L.


----------



## foothead

Yeah, the first looked awful to me. The second was okay, but not the greatest.

Here's what good bokeh should look like.



















Both are google image results for "Olympus 50mm macro."


----------



## xxrabid93

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;15442615*
> That first image has gross outlining like whoa. The second... meh. Take any telephoto at MFD and you'll get background blur. I can still make out shapes and objects -- so it's no 135L.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead;15442685*
> Yeah, the first looked awful to me. The second was okay, but not the greatest.
> 
> Here's what good bokeh should look like.
> 
> *snip*
> 
> Both are google image results for "Olympus 50mm macro."


As for the first, the bokeh is very subjective. Some love it, some hate it. You two seem to be in the latter. I personally think it looks really interesting. The second, it may be no 135L, but for $100, it's not too bad.







I think i'll pass on them for now i guess. Probably still keep the idea of getting them tucked away some where though.









Also, i think "good" bokeh is very subjective. Like photography i guess.







It's mostly personal preference.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xxrabid93;15443139*
> As for the first, the bokeh is very subjective. Some love it, some hate it. You two seem to be in the latter. I personally think it looks really interesting. The second, it may be no 135L, but for $100, it's not too bad.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think i'll pass on them for now i guess. Probably still keep the idea of getting them tucked away some where though.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also, i think "good" bokeh is very subjective. Like photography i guess.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's mostly personal preference.


Yeah, it really is subjective. The general consensus seems to be that smoother blurring = better, because it draws attention to the subject, while complex bokeh distracts from it.

What do you shoot? There are probably better lenses available, depending on what you're willing to spend.


----------



## nuclearjock

So I had a chance to shoot some fall colors with my "new" 1dsmkIII/85 f/1.2 yesterday and noticed something strange but consistant. All my shots with red tones/hues in them have red channels that are blown to some degree. dialing back on sat to a point where red is on scale results in an otherwise flat image.

Fiddling with WB didn't seem to produce anything acceptable.

Is this a Canon "feature"?

Shots with my D3 and D300s don't exhibit this behavior.

I've googled Canon blown red channel and found some suggestions. Just wondered if anyone else has experienced this.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xxrabid93;15443139*
> As for the first, the bokeh is very subjective. Some love it, some hate it. You two seem to be in the latter. I personally think it looks really interesting. The second, it may be no 135L, but for $100, it's not too bad.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think i'll pass on them for now i guess. Probably still keep the idea of getting them tucked away some where though.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also, i think "good" bokeh is very subjective. Like photography i guess.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's mostly personal preference.


Bokeh is subjective when it comes down to it, but there are objective features. Outlining, as pointed out, is a big one. Outlining is ugly and distracting, which bokeh should never be. Other common gripes about bokeh are non-circular highlights (often happens when stopping down), substructures, "cats eyes" (ovular bokeh highlights), etc. For me outlining is a big pet peeve. It might look interesting at first, but it's ultimately distracting.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nuclearjock;15445296*
> So I had a chance to shoot some fall colors with my "new" 1dsmkIII/85 f/1.2 yesterday and noticed something strange but consistant. All my shots with red tones/hues in them have red channels that are blown to some degree. dialing back on sat to a point where red is on scale results in an otherwise flat image.
> 
> Fiddling with WB didn't seem to produce anything acceptable.
> 
> Is this a Canon "feature"?
> 
> Shots with my D3 and D300s don't exhibit this behavior.
> 
> I've googled Canon blown red channel and found some suggestions. Just wondered if anyone else has experienced this.


Hm, samples? I seem to recall something about this too once, but don't recall the particulars or which cameras specifically it occurred in.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xxrabid93;15442573*
> So i've been thinking of picking up a bokeh monster, but i'm not sure. Bokeh monster= Meyer Trioplan 100mm 2.8 and/or Meyer Orestor 135mm 2.8. The Trioplan has just plain crazy bokeh, where as the Orestor has insanely creamy/smooth bokeh. The Trioplan i've seen go for an average of $200. The Orestor Seems to go for like $100 average.
> 
> A good pickup for some old school manual focus lenses for epic bokeh, or should i pass?
> 
> And if you haven't seen, here are examples. Trioplan is first one, Orestor is second.
> 
> http://www.4photos.de/test/Fr%C3%BChlingsgr%C3%BCn--.jpg
> 
> http://colormaniac.smugmug.com/Other/Campus-scenes-1/IMG1501/956613299_HK3nf-XL-1.jpg


The first one reminds me of the type you get from leica noctilux f/0.95 and f/1s. I don't think it's for everyone.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Oh hey people are awake again









/Pulled an all nighter


----------



## ljason8eg

I was at the dentist this morning and while waiting I picked up an issue of Consumer Reports that happened to have DSLR reviews and ratings in it.

After reading it I think Consumer Reports should stick to testing toasters and washing machines. They claim the 60D takes better pictures and has a better pop up flash than the 7D, and the T2i (the body, no mention of lenses) has very good image stabilization compared to other cameras.


----------



## MistaBernie

Hahaha.

Hey, dont change the subject that I just now remembered to bring up -- have you called Canon and raged about their horrible service and your bad luck with 50s?


----------



## MistaBernie

Weird double post bug, entering a ticket.


----------



## Boyboyd

Woops










Went out in a lightning storm. Amazingly I was actually under an umbrella :S Didn't get any useful shots anyway.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*


So I had a chance to shoot some fall colors with my "new" 1dsmkIII/85 f/1.2 yesterday and noticed something strange but consistant. All my shots with red tones/hues in them have red channels that are blown to some degree. dialing back on sat to a point where red is on scale results in an otherwise flat image.

Fiddling with WB didn't seem to produce anything acceptable.

Is this a Canon "feature"?

Shots with my D3 and D300s don't exhibit this behavior.

I've googled Canon blown red channel and found some suggestions. Just wondered if anyone else has experienced this.


The 1DII had that issue, IIRC. Weird, neither the 1DIII nor 1DIV I was shooting had that issue, though -- is the FW up to date? Also, better check and see if the RGB histogram is sensitive to picture styles, as they are applied to the preview image in-camera, but not to the RAW file unless you process in DPP.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*


The first one reminds me of the type you get from leica noctilux f/0.95 and f/1s. I don't think it's for everyone.


The .95 is ASPH, Leica ASPHs have smooth ass bokeh. The 1 isn't even that terrible. Three lenses I can think of with funky ass bokeh are the 24/28mm f/2s and the 50 1.2 all from Nikon. Also the computers at school are so abused, who keeps breaking them, THEY ARE SO DUMB ARAGH.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


Hahaha.

Hey, dont change the subject that I just now remembered to bring up -- have you called Canon and raged about their horrible service and your bad luck with 50s?


No I have not actually. Now that I'm home for the day I think I have something to keep me busy before I hop into some BF3.


----------



## MistaBernie

if not outright pump you up and cause you to want to destroy people at BF3..


----------



## dudemanppl

Stayed up till 3:00 a.m. playing BF3. TERRIBLE IDEA.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


if not outright pump you up and cause you to want to destroy people at BF3..


Its too bad I'm pretty crappy at it. I'm good at iRacing but crappy at everything else when it comes to gaming lol.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg;15451096*
> Its too bad I'm pretty crappy at it. I'm good at iRacing but crappy at everything else when it comes to gaming lol.


Then fly jets. It's like racing, only in 3D


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg;15451096*
> Its too bad I'm pretty crappy at it. I'm good at iRacing but crappy at everything else when it comes to gaming lol.


How _is_ iRacing? I'm not a big wheel and pedals sorta guy, but I've got lots of time on actual tracks. I always have a hard time with racing sims because there isn't any real feedback (brake smell, tire hookup/understeer jump, etc.).


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


How _is_ iRacing? I'm not a big wheel and pedals sorta guy, but I've got lots of time on actual tracks. I always have a hard time with racing sims because there isn't any real feedback (brake smell, tire hookup/understeer jump, etc.).


Its hard to explain but the cars on iRacing (especially with the new tire model that has come out on some of them) feel "connected" to the road even though your ass isn't in the seat of an actual car. I don't know what games you have experience with so I'll just take the latest game other than iRacing I've played which is Forza 4. In Forza, there is no connection with the road. You can't feel anything. Feels like the car is on skates where as on iRacing you can feel the road even if you don't have force feedback turned on, just by the way the car behaves.

There still are some trouble points like brake lockup and correcting oversteer, both of which are obviously really easy to feel coming in a real car if you have experience but not so much on the sim, making sim racing more about muscle memory than real life in my opinion.

Oh and if you've been around any of the tracks that iRacing has, they will look and feel (track surface and landmark wise) EXACTLY THE SAME. The tracks are the best part of the game by far.

And I'll shut up now unless you have more questions.









Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


Then fly jets. It's like racing, only in 3D










Lol maybe I'll get a cheap flight stick and see what I can do.


----------



## sub50hz

Well, for tracks, I've done:

Gingerman
MAM
Road Atlanta
Road America
Autobahn Joliet
Texas Motor Speedway
Mid-Ohio
Blackhawk Farms
Watkins
Milwaukee Mile (infield)
MMC

and probably a few more back in the day. Countless Solo2 events, but those ALWAYS suck in video games.


----------



## ljason8eg

Road Atlanta, Road America, Texas, Watkins, Mid-Ohio, and Milwaukee (1 mile oval layout) are on there, along with many more. http://www.iracing.com/cars-and-tracks/tracks/


----------



## sub50hz

Mid-Ohio was so rad. I won't share the particulars of my pair of RA experiences, but as I'm sure you are aware, it's quite tough on brakes. And gravel traps can suck my balls.


----------



## dudemanppl

BF3 jets are so ridiculously bad. You can always have Humvee races though...


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Mid-Ohio was so rad. I won't share the particulars of my pair of RA experiences, but as I'm sure you are aware, it's quite tough on brakes. And gravel traps can suck my balls.


Yeah and if you were driving something that wasn't a race car...man I feel bad for those brakes lol. Gravel traps are nasty as well, but its a lot better than taking a header into the wall at high speed.


----------



## MistaBernie

Herp a derp story to tell about an Impact Umbrella Swivel Bracket (3117) from B&H, but going grocery shopping for now..


----------



## Shane1244

Snapped a picture of my new BB gun.. Any suggestions as to make it better? I used my monitors as my only light source.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*


Snapped a picture of my new BB gun.. Any suggestions as to make it better? I used my monitors as my only light source.











Haha, I actually had 2 real colt commanders at one point! XD

Looks good to me


----------



## iandroo888

the framing looks a little tight to me


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*


Yeah and if you were driving something that wasn't a race car...man I feel bad for those brakes lol. Gravel traps are nasty as well, but its a lot better than taking a header into the wall at high speed.










I was running Hawk blues on Powerslots -- boiled my fluid _twice_. Motul, too.


----------



## sub50hz

Where's my hockey people? I am debating this trade offer -- I am only considering it because I am too deep on Hawks players (Kane/Hossa/Seabrook/Toews) and need to diversify before they start playing 1 game a week and dicking me out of points.

Quote:



Trade Proposal

League Name: Mazdateam

To: Total Incompetence (DERR) - sub50hz

From: Black Chicagohawks (HWKS) - Dexter Rodman

DERR trades Patrick Kane, Chi F to Chicagohawks
DERR trades Nicklas Lidstrom, Det D to Chicagohawks
HWKS trades James Wisniewski, Cls D to Incompetence
HWKS trades Kris Versteeg, Fla F to Incompetence


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;15452868*
> Snapped a picture of my new BB gun.. Any suggestions as to make it better? I used my monitors as my only light source.


What a coincidence, I just got a 1911 myself. Ordered an Evike box of awesomeness expecting a GBBR. I was gonna sell it but it turns out my friend has tons of extra mags he didn't see from when he quit. Coming from a USP, two things I dislike are the grip safety and the mag release.

And, good light. Not much would make it better (you could add like .45 ACP rounds, but I don't know about Canadia).


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;15456477*
> What a coincidence, I just got a 1911 myself. Ordered an Evike box of awesomeness expecting a GBBR. I was gonna sell it but it turns out my friend has tons of extra mags he didn't see from when he quit. Coming from a USP, two things I dislike are the grip safety and the mag release.
> 
> And, good light. Not much would make it better (you could add like .45 ACP rounds, but I don't know about Canadia).


I've put in a lot of time behind a USPc on the range. Definitely one of my favorites









EDIT Just noticed we're talking about airsoft, nvm


----------



## dudemanppl

Being too young, not knowing anyone with firearms, and living in Kommiefornia means no gun fun for me. Sigh. Too bad H&K apparently has crap service or something like that. Plus the fact it is pretty pricey. I love the ergonomics of the USP, everything is well designed and such.


----------



## Boyboyd

I'd love to own a handgun, legally and safely. But in this country it just isn't going to happen.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;15457926*
> Being too young, not knowing anyone with firearms, and living in Kommiefornia means no gun fun for me. Sigh. Too bad H&K apparently has crap service or something like that. Plus the fact it is pretty pricey. I love the ergonomics of the USP, everything is well designed and such.


I live in California too, you know







There are some good ranges in LA as well. Been to here once myself; good place to check out.


----------



## foothead

Does anyone make shift adapters for using larger format lenses on smaller cameras? Like, say I wanted to use a 6x7 lens on my 645 camera, the adapter could have a shift mechanism so the extra coverage isn't wasted. The only thing I can find on google is a company called zork that used to make them, but it seems like they've gone out of business.

EDIT: I looked on eBay, and they have a few, but they're all 35mm to EVIL or MF to 35mm.


----------



## sub50hz

Lol, looking to stock up on the wealth of cheap RB lenses?


----------



## foothead

I just want a shift lens for my 645. Pentax never made one for some reason.


----------



## Conspiracy

so today this guy was at our school doing astronomy stuff and had telescopes set up looking at the sun to observe solar flares and whatnot. anyway he had these paper glasses with filters in them that let you stare right at the sun and all you saw was a yellow dot and everything was black. so i think these are cheap ND filters so i went later in the day while he was packing up and he gave me like 20 of them. so im going to attempt to make a cheap ND filter to mess around with


----------



## Boyboyd

Post results. I know a lot of people use welding glass and get similar effects.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*


I live in California too, you know







There are some good ranges in LA as well. Been to here once myself; good place to check out.


My parents are pretty anti-gun so I don't think they'll take me there.


----------



## sub50hz

You couldn't shoot anyway, too young. NEED YOUR FOID CARD, SON.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Being too young, not knowing anyone with firearms, and living in Kommiefornia means no gun fun for me. Sigh. Too bad H&K apparently has crap service or something like that. Plus the fact it is pretty pricey. I love the ergonomics of the USP, everything is well designed and such.


age/laws...pft...just come up to oakland or richmond with a wade of cash and im sure someone will sell you a gun (or rob you). you can find similar "entrepreneurs" in socal too if you dont want to travel.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


You couldn't shoot anyway, too young. NEED YOUR FOID CARD, SON.


There's a good reason for that too. Tbh I. Not sure why we let teenagers drive.

"are you hormonal, and make poor judgements? Here, have a machine that can kill you and others"


----------



## BlankThis

I honestly think that age is the biggest stereotype in our society. I hate how I'm bundled in with a group that cannot seem to get 2 years without wrapping their cars around trees. The insurance companies have no idea of my driving abilities. Statistics do lie in this sense.


----------



## MistaBernie

Abilities and experience are completely different. You may be an excellent driver for your amount of experience, but having more experience _*tends*_ to correlate with refining one's abilities in most situations in life, driving included.


----------



## iandroo888

woo my 24-70 is here =]


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *BlankThis*


I hate how I'm bundled in with a group that cannot seem to get 2 years without wrapping their cars around trees. The insurance companies have no idea of my driving abilities. Statistics do lie in this sense.


Please re-read this to yourself 20 times.

Kids are stupid and reckless. They do many regrettable things. I hate them.


----------



## dudemanppl

I'm pretty mature for 15 I'd say (but other people have said that too). I'm good with gun safety and everything.







And the website says kids can shoot if there's someone over 18. So cheap how they use reloaded ammo though. I'd only want to shoot a pistol though, if they have 30 rounders for rifles, I would burn through that quick.

And I remember getting my first pro lens. That 17-35 was amazing. I thought it was the sharpest thing ever.


----------



## xxrabid93

Quote:



Originally Posted by *BlankThis*


I honestly think that age is the biggest stereotype in our society. I hate how I'm bundled in with a group that cannot seem to get 2 years without wrapping their cars around trees. The insurance companies have no idea of my driving abilities. Statistics do lie in this sense.


+1000000000000000000000000000

I am 18, and i hate how many older people stereotype our age. Yes, i would agree the majority of teens are stupid, but there are some of us out there that are actually responsible. I'm 18, a good driver, have a FOID card and shot in a high-power rifle league for over a year (so i actually know how to handle a gun...), don't drink, party, etc., and try to be very respectful around my adults/superiors. I would consider myself very responsible, yet many people see me (and other responsible people my age) as "just another dumb teen." It gets really annoying...









/rant

Back on the subject of photography, anyone ever used a Nikonos? I've always thought having one would be cool.


----------



## robchaos

Soo, does anyone here have a good set of tools and the knowledge to open up a nikkor af 75-300 push pull zoom? I got one as part of a film slr package deal and it has some fungus in it. Only sells for an average of $200 on the bay, so it's not worth having it done by a pro, it's trashed otherwise, so if someone could do it cheap, I'd go for it, if not, I'm debating having a go at it myself.worst that can happen is the lens remains useless.


----------



## BlankThis

dudemanppl.

That kid takes everything apart.


----------



## robchaos

Lol so I've seen. I think I might try I it myself just for the experience. It was pretty much a freebie thrown in with a flash and film slr I bought. to anyone with experience, should I be expecting any surprise? I am a fairly meticulous guy and plan on documenting and keeping track of how this thing comes apart.


----------



## xxrabid93

Rob, wanna post pics of it? Both ends, and a few from the sides (rotate it and take a pic every 9 degrees).

It could be simple, it could be complicated. Like BlankThis said, dudemanppl would probably know.

But, i did try taking apart an old Nikkor 50mm 1.4 AI lens. Its focus ring is super stiff. I stopped after getting the back/mount off because i almost already f'd up. LOL. There was one screw on the mount arear that i didn't need to take off, but i didn't know that. It was attached to a spring mechanism, and it was a HUGE pita to get back on properly... Its focus ring is still stiff btw.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *xxrabid93*


I am 18, and i hate how many older people stereotype our age. Yes, i would agree the majority of teens are stupid, but there are some of us out there that are actually responsible. I'm 18, a good driver, have a FOID card and shot in a high-power rifle league for over a year (so i actually know how to handle a gun...), don't drink, party, etc., and try to be very respectful around my adults/superiors. I would consider myself very responsible, yet many people see me (and other responsible people my age) as "just another dumb teen." It gets really annoying...










When you hit 25, you'll understand. You're still full of angst and hormones, ride that train as long as you can.


----------



## robchaos

Quote:



Originally Posted by *xxrabid93*


Rob, wanna post pics of it? Both ends, and a few from the sides (rotate it and take a pic every 9 degrees).

It could be simple, it could be complicated. Like BlankThis said, dudemanppl would probably know.

But, i did try taking apart an old Nikkor 50mm 1.4 AI lens. Its focus ring is super stiff. I stopped after getting the back/mount off because i almost already f'd up. LOL. There was one screw on the mount arear that i didn't need to take off, but i didn't know that. It was attached to a spring mechanism, and it was a HUGE pita to get back on properly... Its focus ring is still stiff btw.










Def. Will do tonight when I get a chance. It looks like the front element and first group come out easily.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Please re-read this to yourself 20 times.

Kids are stupid and reckless. They do many regrettable things. I hate them.


As a 20 year old who's been driving for three years, I absolutely agree with this.

Back at my old high school, I swear _no one_ could drive properly, and usually when I spot a bad driver on the road, it's some teen/Y.A. texting on their phones.

I hate having to pay higher insurance rates (never had a ticket/accident), but I can't fault the companies here. People my age *suck* at driving.


----------



## ljason8eg

Canon support sucks. Now the only way they will proceed with my repair is after I send in both my bodies with sample images (good thing I've already taken some, kinda hard to take pictures when they're holding my lens) since the lens does the same crap on both of them. Wonderful. Probably won't see those again in a month at best.

I have a feeling I know what's going to happen. They're going to calibrate my bodies to that lens so it works and by doing so, **** up the calibration of any known good lens I try.

I'm very close to just throwing everything up on ebay.


----------



## BlankThis

BBB.

If not I would just demand they ship the lens back to you immediately and you pull a switcheroo at Best Buy.


----------



## sub50hz

I would tell tham that's an unacceptable solution, and ask for a body you can use in the meantime. Tell them you would rather throw the lens in the garbage than be without 2 bodies, since you'll be losing more cash than it's worth from the inability to shoot. Make them work _for_ you.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


*I would tell tham that's an unacceptable solution, and ask for a body you can use in the meantime.* Tell them you would rather throw the lens in the garbage than be without 2 bodies, since you'll be losing more cash than it's worth from the inability to shoot. Make them work _for_ you.


That's where I am right now. Holding....zzzzzzz

EDIT: Lol I guess that's reserved for CPS Gold and Platinum members.


----------



## MistaBernie

100% agree with Sub. You've already been without the lens for how long, now they want both bodies? Unacceptable. Respectfully request a new unit sent back to you. If the first person says no, ask to speak to their supervisor and move your way up the chain politely but firmly. You have the repair record on your side, and it's an unfair expectation to send in your bodies for this situation.

Try not to lose it with the person/people that say no initially, they're supposed to. Just keep working your way up till you get to the person that will say yes.


----------



## dudemanppl

You've had the lens for two-three months and have gotten no shooting time out of it. That is just ******ed. Also you'd need a lens opening tool for the 75-300, 20 bucks on ebay.


----------



## Monocog007

Hey guys, just finished shooting with my new Canon T2i w/ 70-300 f/4-5.6 III lens. I noticed some weird colors in my shots though:










To the upper right of the squirrel is some weird green and magenta around the branches? Just wondering if anybody here could help.


----------



## ljason8eg

Color fringing. Happens when you have a really high contrast area like that. You're going to have to stop the lens down to get rid of it.


----------



## biatchi

Or nuke it in pp


----------



## foothead

Wow, that's the worst I've ever seen. Any more CA and the picture would be viewable with 3D glasses.

You can remove it fairly easily in photoshop. It won't be 100% perfect, but it'll make it into a usable image.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Please re-read this to yourself 20 times.

Kids are stupid and reckless. They do many regrettable things. I hate them.


probably the best years of my life. sorry to those who missed out.


----------



## Monocog007

Quote:



Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*


Color fringing. Happens when you have a really high contrast area like that. You're going to have to stop the lens down to get rid of it.


I shot it with 800 ISO, 1/1000, f/5.6, [email protected]?









Quote:



Originally Posted by *foothead*


Wow, that's the worst I've ever seen. Any more CA and the picture would be viewable with 3D glasses.

You can remove it fairly easily in photoshop. It won't be 100% perfect, but it'll make it into a usable image.


Well i've been playing around with it, so far nothing looks very good yet.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Monocog007;15466051*
> I shot it with 800 ISO, 1/1000, f/5.6, [email protected]?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well i've been playing around with it, so far nothing looks very good yet.


f/5.6 is wide open at 300mm on that lens. cheap zooms are generally bad wide open. try something higher


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer;15466124*
> f/5.6 is wide open at 300mm on that lens. cheap zooms are generally bad wide open. try something higher


This, but don't go past f/8 or 11 on APS-C. Diffraction will be terrible.

Random project I'm working on today:










Basically, i'm adapting the back of an old polaroid land camera to my graphic view so I can use 3.25x4.25 polaroids for exposure testing. I basically have it finished, except I need to figure out a way to get a better seal against the camera body.

Sorry for the bad cell phone pic, it seems I left my E-410 on a few days ago, so I have it charging.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer;15465989*
> probably the best years of my life. sorry to those who missed out.


Being that age was fun, but I realize now how stupid some of the stuff we did was.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead;15466162*
> I basically have it finished, except I need to figure out a way to get a better seal against the camera body.


You can use a light oil on the body that will wipe clean, and run a bead of high-viscosity RTV along the polaroid back, and mount it. When it dries, pop the back off and wipe the oil clean. You'll have a light seal on the back and the body will remain as-is.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Monocog007;15465804*
> Hey guys, just finished shooting with my new Canon T2i w/ 70-300 f/4-5.6 III lens.


You mean 75-300? That lens belongs in the garbage, it is truly awful.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;15466569*
> You mean 75-300? That lens belongs in the garbage, it is truly awful.


It must be as there is no mkIII 70-300. And the 70-300 is a much better lens.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;15466560*
> You can use a light oil on the body that will wipe clean, and run a bead of high-viscosity RTV along the polaroid back, and mount it. When it dries, pop the back off and wipe the oil clean. You'll have a light seal on the back and the body will remain as-is.


Excellent idea. Would ordinary cooking oil work, or should I use something else? The last thing I want is for this to be permanently attached to my camera.


----------



## sub50hz

I would use something like Tri-Flow, as it's silicone-based and cleans easliy with some degreaser (we used it in the bike shop/machine shop for _everything_) on a rag. Plus, it smells like bananas and you can use it on anything that needs some oiling. Works on guns, bikes, door hinges.... use your imagination, the stuff is awesome.


----------



## foothead

I just googled it, and it looks like it comes as a liquid, and aerosol, and a gel. I guess the liquid is what I'd need?

the only "proper" lubricant I have right now is WD-40.


----------



## Monocog007

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;15466569*
> You mean 75-300? That lens belongs in the garbage, it is truly awful.


Yeah it's a 75-300. My bad. Is it truly that terrible? I bought the 75-300mm and a 50mm f/1.8 II combo on craigslist for $175.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Monocog007;15466922*
> Yeah it's a 75-300. My bad. Is it truly that terrible? I bought the 75-300mm and a 50mm f/1.8 II combo on craigslist for $175.


From the sample you posted and whatever I could find on the internet, it looks pretty bad. The 50 1.8 is a nice lens though.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead;15466776*
> I just googled it, and it looks like it comes as a liquid, and aerosol, and a gel. I guess the liquid is what I'd need?
> 
> the only "proper" lubricant I have right now is WD-40.


The liquid containers come with a drip pipe -- use that.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Monocog007;15466922*
> Yeah it's a 75-300. My bad. Is it truly that terrible? I bought the 75-300mm and a 50mm f/1.8 II combo on craigslist for $175.


The EF-S 55-250 is a much better choice.


----------



## Monocog007

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;15467170*
> The EF-S 55-250 is a much better choice.


Looks like there's another paycheck gone. So the only way to make this thing work better is a lower f-stop?


----------



## sub50hz

Even then.... it's just a soft lens with a truckload of CA (chromatic aberrations).


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Monocog007;15467278*
> Looks like there's another paycheck gone. So the only way to make this thing work better is a lower f-stop?


That won't help all that much. You can only go to f/8 or f/11 on APS-C before you start losing too much sharpness to diffraction.

Personally, I'd just try to avoid high contrast scenarios. It should help keep the CA under control. Other aspects of the lens really aren't _that_ bad, so you should get okay pictures then.


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:



Originally Posted by *foothead*


I just googled it, and it looks like it comes as a liquid, and aerosol, and a gel. I guess the liquid is what I'd need?

the only "proper" lubricant I have right now is WD-40.










WD-40 is NOT a lubricant.

Quote:



What does WD-40 stand for?
WD-40 literally stands for Water Displacement, 40th attempt. That's the name straight out of the lab book used by the chemist who developed WD-40 back in 1953. The chemist, Norm Larsen, was attempting to concoct a formula to *prevent corrosion*-a task which is done by displacing water. Norm's persistence paid off when he perfected the formula on his 40th try. Please see Our History for more information.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Sparhawk*









WD-40 is NOT a lubricant.


It would still likely work for the intended purpose. Thanks for stirring the pot for no reason, though.


----------



## Sparhawk

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


It would still likely work for the intended purpose. Thanks for stirring the pot for no reason, though.










Using WD-40 in situations when it isn't need could cause more harm than good.


----------



## Shane1244

I really don't know what you guys are refeering too, but if you're talking about putting lube on a lens, that seems like a really bad idea. Any dust or dirt that gets inside of the lens will stick to the lube and then will start to grind away at the lens every time it moves.


----------



## MistaBernie

70-200 f/2.8 en route..


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Sparhawk*









WD-40 is NOT a lubricant.


The headline on WD-40's website:

Quote:



WD-40 *Lubricates*, Cleans, Protects, Penetrates & Displaces Moisture



Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*


I really don't know what you guys are refeering too, but if you're talking about putting lube on a lens, that seems like a really bad idea. Any dust or dirt that gets inside of the lens will stick to the lube and then will start to grind away at the lens every time it moves.


We're talking about how to get a lightproof seal against the back of my camera.


----------



## MistaBernie

Where's Dudeman when you need him?

I might be able to score an older 70-200 f/2.8 for my current f/4. Has focus issues though. I'm thinking if I can get it straight up, even if I have to have the focus assembly looked at (or perhaps replaced) I could make more money on that lens than I would on my F/4L (or I return the good deal I got on mine).


----------



## dudemanppl

Focus motor is like 200 max, PCB for whole lens is like 50. BUT those are DIY prices (I'd be happy to do it for you). Go for it man.

Woah, cheaper than I thought. http://www.ebay.com/itm/330481675313


----------



## MistaBernie

WORD, if I get the lens I'll get in touch with you. Thanks!


----------



## Deano12345

Need some more practice with this EVF on the A55. Getting there though, its nice to use. Might be shooting a club night in a week or two. Should be fun if it comes off


----------



## MistaBernie

well, I'm a herp-a-derp. nothing wrong with the other lens, it's just a 200 f/2.8, not the 70-200. Still probably wouldn't be a _horrible_ trade, but probably not worth it..


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Deano12345;15477374*
> Need some more practice with this EVF on the A55. Getting there though, its nice to use. Might be shooting a club night in a week or two. Should be fun if it comes off


How is that? I tried the EVF on a couple of cameras at best buy, and was extremely disappointed. The lag made me feel nauseous, and the brightness levels were way off. I usually leave my other eye open when using a VF though, so that's probably why it seemed so weird.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie;15478154*
> well, I'm a herp-a-derp. nothing wrong with the other lens, it's just a 200 f/2.8, not the 70-200. Still probably wouldn't be a _horrible_ trade, but probably not worth it..


Redundant. Don't do it.


----------



## MistaBernie

Yeah that's what I ended up concluding too.


----------



## dudemanppl

70-200 with broken zoom or an actual 200 2.8?







If it was the 200 2.8 II, I'd trade and sell it for like 100 profit.


----------



## sub50hz

Still looking for a 35L. Holla.


----------



## dudemanppl

Lensrentals has some. My never-dropped-in-water one is too. <3 I'm thinking the 35L and 1NRS will make a super sexytime combo.


----------



## sub50hz

It's sexytime with anything I can mount on it. No mirror flip + steady hand = shoot nifty at 1/5 all day.


----------



## sub50hz

Oh, also the Canon hand strap is super win on it. Thinking I will put it on my 50D too, the ETRSi will have to remain strapless for a bit because, well, the lugs are in weird spots with the speedgrip mounted.


----------



## MistaBernie

Not a mark ii that I'm aware of.


----------



## robchaos

Well, I was able to partially disassemble the nikkor 75-300 I got. Since i did not have lens opener spanner wrench, I had to make do with what I could find in my toolbox at work...














I was able to use the inside measure parts on the back of the caliper as a spanner and remove the front element group, I was also able to easily disassemble the rear lens mount and aperture control ring to get to the rear element group. Unfortunately a little bit of the fungus appears to be on the inside of the groups, which I was not able to get open with my makeshift spanner wrench, however I did get the majority of the fungus out of the way. I am also left with some haze that is in between the last elements that I was not able to remove either.

sorry for the cellphone pics, I just did not feel like having to bust out the DSLR and import photos etc etc.
the lens









in the lower left of the lens you can see the fungus still. That was inside the group, I could not get to it, but this is much better then how it looked before.









I took a few test shots with this lens after the cleaning, and as it stands now, the fungus that it has does not effect IQ in any way. I just want to do what I can to ensure that the fungus will not spread further.

I read that sitting it in sunlight for a day or two will kill the remaining fungus and prevent the spread. Is there any truth to this?

I can get access to a food dehydrator that would be large enough to fit this lens into. The dehydrator would be able to keep the lens at a constant temperature in a 100% moisture free environment, do you think it would be beneficial to subject this thing to 150*F of dehydrating overnight?

Also should I be worried about sticking this lens in a camera bag with my other lenses? I have read that fungus supposedly can spread. I have never had a lens infected with fungus before so I do not know whether there is any truth in any of this. I would rather be safe then sorry though.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


Not a mark ii that I'm aware of.


200 2.8 II? Yeah, it exists... It was just a cosmetic update though.


----------



## biatchi

Quote:



Originally Posted by *robchaos*


Well, I was able to partially disassemble the nikkor 75-300 I got. Since i did not have lens opener spanner wrench, I had to make do with what I could find in my toolbox at work...














I was able to use the inside measure parts on the back of the caliper as a spanner and remove the front element group, I was also able to easily disassemble the rear lens mount and aperture control ring to get to the rear element group. Unfortunately a little bit of the fungus appears to be on the inside of the groups, which I was not able to get open with my makeshift spanner wrench, however I did get the majority of the fungus out of the way. I am also left with some haze that is in between the last elements that I was not able to remove either.

sorry for the cellphone pics, I just did not feel like having to bust out the DSLR and import photos etc etc.
the lens









in the lower left of the lens you can see the fungus still. That was inside the group, I could not get to it, but this is much better then how it looked before.









I took a few test shots with this lens after the cleaning, and as it stands now, the fungus that it has does not effect IQ in any way. I just want to do what I can to ensure that the fungus will not spread further.

I read that sitting it in sunlight for a day or two will kill the remaining fungus and prevent the spread. Is there any truth to this?

I can get access to a food dehydrator that would be large enough to fit this lens into. The dehydrator would be able to keep the lens at a constant temperature in a 100% moisture free environment, do you think it would be beneficial to subject this thing to 150*F of dehydrating overnight?

Also should I be worried about sticking this lens in a camera bag with my other lenses? I have read that fungus supposedly can spread. I have never had a lens infected with fungus before so I do not know whether there is any truth in any of this. I would rather be safe then sorry though.


I find white vinegar and a cotton bud are good at removing and killing fungus.


----------



## sub50hz

http://www.zeiss.de/C1256A770030BCE0...E?OpenDocument

I just came.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


200 2.8 II? Yeah, it exists... It was just a cosmetic update though.


I meant the one I could get was likely not a mark ii


----------



## robchaos

Quote:



Originally Posted by *biatchi*


I find white vinegar and a cotton bud are good at removing and killing fungus.


That's what I used. White vinegar and those 1 time use lens wiping papers. Then I took a shop vac and sucked as much dust out of the body of the lens as I could before putting it back together. My problem is that I could not separate the element groups. Luckily most of the fungus did happen to be on the outer surfaces though. Honestly this lens was thrown in for free with some other stuff I bought, so I am not to concerned with it. It takes clear pictures and all I want to do at this point is make sure the fungus does not grow any further. My concern is whether or not it can spread to other lenses as I have read. To me that idea seems improbable to happen unless I stored all my lenses in a moist warm place constantly, but I don't want to risk it if there is a chance it could happen. Also does anyone have any input on whether sticking the lens in a temperature controllable dehydrator could do any good? Temp can go from 100* to over 300* in 10* increments.


----------



## MistaBernie

Wouldn't high temps affect adhesives used on the lens?


----------



## robchaos

Yea, but the cabinet I can use can be set as low as 100 Â° F


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


http://www.zeiss.de/C1256A770030BCE0...E?OpenDocument

I just came.


i saw that on facebook earlier today. looks amazing!


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


http://www.zeiss.de/C1256A770030BCE0...E?OpenDocument

I just came.



Quote:



Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*


i saw that on facebook earlier today. looks amazing!


for that price you can buy a nikon 24mm 1.4g and it's probably a better performer.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:



Originally Posted by *robchaos*


Yea, but the cabinet I can use can be set as low as 100 Â° F


most people just leave it in the sun, the UV kills the fungus. you can also use a UV sanatizer....if you have one.

new "acra swiss" clamp i picked up today. pretty nice for 40 bucks.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Monocog007*


Yeah it's a 75-300. My bad. Is it truly that terrible? I bought the 75-300mm and a 50mm f/1.8 II combo on craigslist for $175.










That lens is notoriously bad I'm afraid. It debuted during the film era (not a good era for EF lenses). It does have some historical significance as the IS version was the first image stabilized lens. The plus side is that you didn't overpay for it and the 50/1.8 is a good lens.

The Canon 7*0*-300 is a much, much better lens, though it comes with a higher price tag. The 55-250, as sub suggests, is a good compromise. It's cheap, still has some reach, and produces fairly sharp images.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *robchaos*


Well, I was able to partially disassemble the nikkor 75-300 I got. Since i did not have lens opener spanner wrench, I had to make do with what I could find in my toolbox at work...














I was able to use the inside measure parts on the back of the caliper as a spanner and remove the front element group, I was also able to easily disassemble the rear lens mount and aperture control ring to get to the rear element group. Unfortunately a little bit of the fungus appears to be on the inside of the groups, which I was not able to get open with my makeshift spanner wrench, however I did get the majority of the fungus out of the way. I am also left with some haze that is in between the last elements that I was not able to remove either.

sorry for the cellphone pics, I just did not feel like having to bust out the DSLR and import photos etc etc.
the lens









in the lower left of the lens you can see the fungus still. That was inside the group, I could not get to it, but this is much better then how it looked before. 
I took a few test shots with this lens after the cleaning, and as it stands now, the fungus that it has does not effect IQ in any way. I just want to do what I can to ensure that the fungus will not spread further.

I read that sitting it in sunlight for a day or two will kill the remaining fungus and prevent the spread. Is there any truth to this?

I can get access to a food dehydrator that would be large enough to fit this lens into. The dehydrator would be able to keep the lens at a constant temperature in a 100% moisture free environment, do you think it would be beneficial to subject this thing to 150*F of dehydrating overnight?

Also should I be worried about sticking this lens in a camera bag with my other lenses? I have read that fungus supposedly can spread. I have never had a lens infected with fungus before so I do not know whether there is any truth in any of this. I would rather be safe then sorry though.


LOL, in a moment of haziness, I almost posted "Wow, great view you have out your window!"







I believe they call that a "trompe l'oeil".

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


http://www.zeiss.de/C1256A770030BCE0...E?OpenDocument

I just came.


Very nice (but pricey as usual), but I still want the Zeiss 21/2.8 instead.


----------



## robchaos

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


LOL, in a moment of haziness, I almost posted "Wow, great view you have out your window!"







I believe they call that a "trompe l'oeil".

Very nice (but pricey as usual), but I still want the Zeiss 21/2.8 instead.



Lol. Unfortunately to have that view out of my window would cost me multiple thousands more a month then where I am currently living.


----------



## Conspiracy

hey all with fancy calibrated monitors









this is my first major edit on a photo and wanted to see if it looked as close as i can get. it started out really rough because the exposure was not yet fully set up in the game and i snapped it while changing settings and so it was overexposed especially on the grass of course. everything was pretty good but off a little.

in LR3 i bumped exposure a tiny bit, increased blacks and contrast to remove haze, lower the lights, played with the color a little. and generally did my best to balance the photo so it was not so out of control between the player and background against the bright grass getting hit by hard sunlight


----------



## MistaBernie

Much better than the original. My only gripe was the overexposure.

Also, I'll be the first to say it, she has a giant ball on her forehead. Her parents must be _so_ proud.


----------



## nuclearjock

I agree with Bernie. See if you can deal with the field a bit. You should be able to select it and then play.


----------



## sub50hz

You grayed the skin too much. Looks really funky, like the recovery slider was just pushed to 100.


----------



## MistaBernie

Sub would be so proud, I'm watching Breaking Bad while waiting for my 70-200 F/2.8L (and some 5D stuff)


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie;15485610*
> Also, I'll be the first to say it, she has a giant ball on her forehead. Her parents must be _so_ proud.


her teammates on facebook are already giving her a hard time, but you are the first to make a comment of that nature lololololol. although one person did say she had a ball on her face (was lost in translation probably because her teammates speak some other language thats not english lol)

and thanks guys. i will work on the gray skin. i dont think i messed with the recovery slider but i will check and see how to fix her skin since i totally didnt see that. editing is a learning process







thanks for being patient and helping:glasses

so i didnt touch the recovery setting so im not sure why her skin was gray but i increased the red and orange sliders and it seemed to bring her skin back closer to normal


----------



## MistaBernie

70-200 F/2.8 is pretty frackin big in comparison to the f/4L..


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer;15482111*
> for that price you can buy a nikon 24mm 1.4g and it's probably a better performer.


I bet it's cheaper than the 24L II.... maybe. I am not a huge fan of Zeiss lenses for Canikons -- I think their IQ is pretty par, save for the 21mm. That being said, I can appreciate a really nicely made piece of metal and glass, working in a machine shop for a bit taught me that.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie;15486664*
> Sub would be so proud, I'm watching Breaking Bad while waiting for my 70-200 F/2.8L (and some 5D stuff)


----------



## foothead

Hey Sub, is your 1N RS able to flip the mirror when it's not in RS mode, or is it totally fixed?


----------



## sub50hz

It's fixed. In RS mode the lens stops down when you start AF and stays there during a sequence. It's a super great way to blow through 8 dollars worth of film.


----------



## MistaBernie

Hahaha, beamer just blew up. Classic.

Also, my 70-200 is here. Kinda sad that the cold weather is here now.. I'm paranoid about moisture and fungus in decent glass. I've been moving away from filters (except creative filters), but would it be bad if I put a quality uv filter on it?


----------



## sub50hz

I keep packets of silica get/dessicant in my bags, temp and humidity are a non-issue.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;15488093*
> It's fixed. In RS mode the lens stops down when you start AF and stays there during a sequence. It's a super great way to blow through 8 dollars worth of film.


What does it do to IQ? Seems like passing through a mirror would degrade it quite a bit, not to mention the dust.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie;15488110*
> Hahaha, beamer just blew up. Classic.
> 
> Also, my 70-200 is here. Kinda sad that the cold weather is here now.. I'm paranoid about moisture and fungus in decent glass. I've been moving away from filters (except creative filters), but would it be bad if I put a quality uv filter on it?


It's like 75% average humidity here, and I've never run into issues with fungus, even on old lenses that lived in the garage for years. Is it really that common?


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead;15488183*
> What does it do to IQ? Seems like passing through a mirror would degrade it quite a bit, not to mention the dust.


You lose 2/3 of a stop through the mirror, and the VF is a bit dim, but it's not really an issue in most cases. It's easy to blow the dust off the mirror, and I can't say it impacts IQ at all. I've run about 12 rolls through it, don't really notice any degradation in quality. The dark VF is probably what put most people off it, but it's fine. Not having a mirror flapping around is nice.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;15488221*
> You lose 2/3 of a stop through the mirror, and the VF is a bit dim, but it's not really an issue in most cases. It's easy to blow the dust off the mirror, and I can't say it impacts IQ at all. I've run about 12 rolls through it, don't really notice any degradation in quality. The dark VF is probably what put most people off it, but it's fine. Not having a mirror flapping around is nice.


That must be really nice for sports photography. No mirror blackout + 10 fps would just be epic.

I think this Pentax 35/3.5 sample just changed my mind about the Olympus 9-18. Wow.




























source.

Time to save even more money...


----------



## mz-n10

the pentax 35/3.5 is fairly cheap isnt it?


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10;15488377*
> the pentax 35/3.5 is fairly cheap isnt it?


If you consider $700 fairly cheap, then yes.


----------



## mz-n10

thought u were talking about the super taks 35/3.5


----------



## foothead

Woops, my bad. I should have specified. It's the 645 35/3.5.


----------



## mz-n10

lol np, i was actually thinking 700 bucks for a 3.5? thats redicluiously expensive but it makes sense for a 645


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10;15488753*
> lol np, i was actually thinking 700 bucks for a 3.5? thats redicluiously expensive but it makes sense for a 645


Speed isn't everything.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis;15488871*
> Speed isn't everything.


Sort of right. On 645, something like f/1.8 would be so hard to make without optical flaws, and the DoF would be so ridiculously thin that it would be almost unusable. Of course, don't tell that to Contax users, because they'll ram that 80 f/2 up your ass.

P.S. That Contax 80mm still goes for $1000 in good condition. That's more than you can find an entire Mamiya 645AF system for. Maize.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis;15488871*
> Speed isn't everything.


true but the faster the lens the more expensive.


----------



## dudemanppl

80 f/2 on that Contax = 50 0.9 on 35. The DOF falloff is very dramatic and the bokeh is smooooooth. So much want.


----------



## MistaBernie

Done with season one. Need to reconfigure my bag for holding the awesomeness that is my f/2.8L..


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;15489529*
> 80 f/2 on that Contax = 50 0.9 on 35. The DOF falloff is very dramatic and the bokeh is smooooooth. So much want.


It's an EXTREME BALLER lens -- but so is that whole Contax system. Too expensive for 645, but more important -- me.


----------



## MistaBernie

Gone, can you remove the Sigma 17-50, 70-200 F/4L and 60D and add my 5D, 17-40 and 70-200 F/2.8L to the front page? Thanks!


----------



## foothead

Mamiya 80/1.9. Optically, it's not up to par with the contax, but it does have a wider maximum aperture, not that it's worth using. Sells for practically nothing on ebay too.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *foothead*


Mamiya 80/1.9. Optically, it's not up to par with the contax, but it does have a wider maximum aperture, not that it's worth using. Sells for practically nothing on ebay too.


Well, that's the whole point. To do it right, it costs too much to be practical. I would literally trade every bit of equipment I own to get into the Contax system. Maybe.


----------



## dudemanppl

I mean it looks GREAT, but f/2 is slowish. I'd rather be able to shoot in lower light than have less DOF.


----------



## sub50hz

Larger formats aren't really targeted at hand-held low-light shooting, though.


----------



## dudemanppl

Yeah I know but that's not how I shoot so whatever.


----------



## Boyboyd

I almost exclusively shoot landscapes, so MF / LF would be pefect for me.

Sadly, i lack both the patience and the skill to use it. Maybe when i'm older.


----------



## BlankThis

Might be making a 8x10 pinhole for kicks over my Christmas break


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*


I almost exclusively shoot landscapes, so MF / LF would be pefect for me.

*Sadly, i lack both the patience and the skill to use it.* Maybe when i'm older.


Why do you think that? Just slow down your shots a bit -- when you have 9-15 shots on a roll, that's a good initial trigger for your brain to think harder before you shoot. You don't have to spend a ton to get into MF, and 6x4.5 bodies are very portable. Some even have built-in meters or metered prisms available, eliminating the need to carry a hand-held meter or another camera body.


----------



## BlankThis

Even 35mm with 36 exp. a roll does that. But I can see larger formats having an even more profound effect.

The fact that you just spent $5+ (35mm roll) and you're only getting maximum 36 frames really forces you to consider everything before finally snapping it. Buying my FTb was probably the best purchase I've ever made in terms of photography equipment.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *BlankThis*


Even 35mm with 36 exp. a roll does that. But I can see larger formats having an even more profound effect.

The fact that you just spent $5+ (35mm roll) and you're only getting maximum 36 frames really forces you to consider everything before finally snapping it. Buying my FTb was probably the best purchase I've ever made in terms of photography equipment.


36 frames is cheap enough to rifle off, though. Consider, that on a 120 roll, you get 15 shots on 6x4.5 and* 9* shots on 6x7. Double that for 220 -- you get a fair amount of shots from 220 on 645, but 220 is really scarce and B+W doesn't exist anymore.

120 is cheap, though, pretty readily available and easier to handle (sorta). The less available frames you have on a roll, the more you'll realize how many shots would be garbage or just mediocre.


----------



## BlankThis

I guess film isn't so expensive if you're not a starving student.


----------



## sub50hz

Just don't be so choose-y if you're low on funds. 120 is cheap, though. Quality shots:Amount paid ratio is likely going to be better.


----------



## BlankThis

I like HP5+ because I can develop it in my sleep practically, plus I love the look. I have maybe 20 rolls of colour and slide film that my dad has had for like 8 years in the bottom of various freezers that I would love to shoot. But labs are pretty pricey here in Montreal.


----------



## sub50hz

HP5 is good budget film, I shot it for a long time until Marin got me hooked on Delta. T-grain B+W looks much better, IMO.


----------



## BlankThis

I've seen it once at my local shop, only in 100 and 3200, both too slow and too fast for me. I'd probably have to venture downtown to score.


----------



## sub50hz

100 is super clean, 400 is a good balance -- and pushes very cleanly.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Why do you think that? *Just slow down your shots a bit -- when you have 9-15 shots on a roll*, that's a good initial trigger for your brain to think harder before you shoot. You don't have to spend a ton to get into MF, and 6x4.5 bodies are very portable. Some even have built-in meters or metered prisms available, eliminating the need to carry a hand-held meter or another camera body.


That's exactly what i've been doing with 35mm, thinking more. It can only be a good thing.

I'd say I get 10 useful shots out of a roll, which isn't too bad. But i'd have to completely re-invest to get into medium format. I think large format is a completely different type of photography


----------



## BlankThis

400 is my main jams


----------



## Boyboyd

I've never shot higher than 100. Going to get some monochrome over christmas though. Most of my best photos from last christmas were B&W conversions.


----------



## sub50hz

100 is painfully slow unless you're going to shoot explicitly in sunlight or use a tripod.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


100 is painfully slow unless you're going to shoot explicitly in sunlight or use a tripod.


Yeah, i had to. Took some early morning shots on a tripod and forgot to account for reciprocity, they were not keepers lol.

I'm going to order some Ilford Delta now, but there's still a roll of ektar in my camera that i can't see getting finished anytime soon.


----------



## BlankThis

I don't think I would trust my FTb for any serious slow shutter speed shooting. The thing is a gen and absolute tank but you can practically feel the whole body torque when that mirror slams around.


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


100 is super clean, 400 is a good balance -- and pushes very cleanly.


Stick to black and white or digital if you want 400. All the high ISO color films are pretty bleh.


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *BlankThis*


I don't think I would trust my FTb for any serious slow shutter speed shooting. The thing is a gen and absolute tank but you can practically feel the whole body torque when that mirror slams around.


No mirror lock?

EDIT: google says it has it.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *foothead*


All the high ISO color films are pretty bleh.


Disagree. Portra 400 and 800 look great IMO.


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:



Originally Posted by *foothead*


No mirror lock?

EDIT: google says it has it.


Yeah it should have it but it's finicky along with the timer. I only paid $50 for it with a 28 f/2.8 so I'm not too bothered.


----------



## sub50hz

135L needs a new home.

http://www.overclock.net/camera-equi...stem-film.html

I'm slowly moving back to film, help this chunk of glass find a home. I will entertain cash offers from OCN chaps as well, but I am looking for a very specific trade -- I will also entertain a trade for, say, an RZ system or potentially (not likely) Hasselblad.


----------



## foothead

Off topic, but here's what I've been working on the last few days.




























I'm out of ideas though.







Anyone?


----------



## sub50hz

Depends on how offensive you care to be.


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Depends on how offensive you care to be.


Haha, well I already have Hillary Clinton eating somebody. I think I can do a bit more.


----------



## MistaBernie

Dang, if I had the cash from my 70-200 + mount raking sale I would potentially be interested Sub...


----------



## sub50hz

I'm not in a huge hurry.


----------



## Marin

Level on the tripod leg.


----------



## sub50hz

Ok, pretty sure I just light-leaked this entire roll. FUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU.


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Level on the tripod leg.











Is that a tripod head mounted on top of another tripod head?


----------



## mz-n10

no its a pan head, i think i have that exact same head on my manfrotto


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *foothead*


Is that a tripod head mounted on top of another tripod head?


No.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...Tilt_Head.html


----------



## foothead

Wow, that looks complicated. I just move one of the legs a bit if I need to adjust tilt.


----------



## sub50hz

Have you... never used a pan head? I forgot how much I hated ball heads when I found this old Velbon. So much easier to work with, but not as small/sexy as a ballhead.


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Have you... never used a pan head? I forgot how much I hated ball heads when I found this old Velbon. So much easier to work with, but not as small/sexy as a ballhead.


Nothing like that. My tripod head looks like this:










It's basically part of the camera, so it wouldn't be easy to get a newer head for it. I'd have to make a custom clamp-thing to be able to attach it to the rail.

Perhaps it's time I got some gear that was made in this century. Lol.


----------



## Marin

I prefer having a pan head since I correct the perspective when shooting anything involving architecture. Hence the level.

I'd love to get a geared head though...

  
 You Tube


----------



## sub50hz

That looks rad. Kinda stubby knobs, though.


----------



## foothead

My camera has one of those round bubble levels on the rear standard. Does yours not?

That tripod head looks pretty neat, but I'd rather keep it simple. Less things to fail. That's just me though.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *foothead*


My camera has one of those round bubble levels on the rear standard. Does yours not?

That tripod head looks pretty neat, but I'd rather keep it simple. Less things to fail. That's just me though.


The levels aren't accurate unless they're calibrated.


----------



## foothead

 Really? I just checked mine against a plumb line and it was pretty much perfect. It's 60-70 years old too.


----------



## dudemanppl

I hate ballheads so much. Much harder to use. But it doesn't really matter cause I don't have a tripod anyway.


----------



## robchaos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;15505957*
> The levels aren't accurate unless they're calibrated.


?? Levels don't need to be calibrated, they are physics! an air bubble is going to seek out the highest point. Only when it is truly level will it be able to stay smack dab in the middle. No calibration necessary!


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *robchaos;15507778*
> ?? Levels don't need to be calibrated, they are physics! an air bubble is going to seek out the highest point. Only when it is truly level will it be able to stay smack dab in the middle. No calibration necessary!


Exactly what I was thinking. The only way it could be wrong would be if the level wasn't straight on the camera.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *robchaos;15507778*
> ?? Levels don't need to be calibrated, they are physics! an air bubble is going to seek out the highest point. Only when it is truly level will it be able to stay smack dab in the middle. No calibration necessary!


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead;15509615*
> Exactly what I was thinking. The only way it could be wrong would be *if the level wasn't straight on the camera.*


There's the answer. So yeah, needs to be calibrated.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;15509873*
> There's the answer. So yeah, needs to be calibrated.


It was put there by the factory though. Seems like they would've gotten it right.

How does one even go about calibrating a level? There's no way to adjust anything, and when I checked it last night, it was as perfect as it gets.










It's kinda hard to see against the camera, so follow the line up from the bottom. For reference, those grooves in the camera are ~1mm wide.

If this thing isn't perfect, it's well within the margin of error for reading the level. Having it calibrated to like 1/100th of a degree would really make no difference.


----------



## BlankThis

Photography is art, not science. There's more to a great shot than a perfectly level horizon.


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *foothead*


It was put there by the factory though. Seems like they would've gotten it right.

How does one even go about calibrating a level? There's no way to adjust anything, and when I checked it last night, it was as perfect as it gets.

*snip*

It's kinda hard to see against the camera, so follow the line up from the bottom. For reference, those grooves in the camera are ~1mm wide.

If this thing isn't perfect, it's well within the margin of error for reading the level. Having it calibrated to like 1/100th of a degree would really make no difference.


Anything can get knocked out of alignment and I'm surprised theres no way for the level that's built in to get calibrated. On all the Sinars there's screws that can be adjusted that allow the level to be moved.

And besides the rear standard (which would be the horizontal axis) does your camera have a level for the vertical axis?

Quote:



Originally Posted by *BlankThis*


Photography is art, not science. There's more to a great shot than a perfectly level horizon.


First of all photography started off as a science. Getting past that the levels aren't for getting a perfectly level horizon and I hope others don't think that too. It's for correcting the perspective of the shot which will be off if the horizontal and vertical axises are off.

Go look at some good architectural photography and you'll see what I mean.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julius_Shulman

http://www.getty.edu/art/exhibitions/shulman/


----------



## BlankThis

lol okay chief.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin;15510274*
> It's for correcting the perspective of the shot which will be off if the horizontal and vertical axises are off.


I find that for a lot of what I've been shooting, I would love a 20-foot tall tripod to get the correct perspective. I don't have the patience or budget for a view camera, although a grown man climbing trees does look a little odd to the casual observer.


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


Anything can get knocked out of alignment and I'm surprised theres no way for the level that's built in to get calibrated. On all the Sinars there's screws that can be adjusted that allow the level to be moved.

And besides the rear standard (which would be the horizontal axis) does your camera have a level for the vertical axis?


It's basically embedded in the metal. There's no way that could get knocked out of alignment without destroying it in the process.

Vertical axis? Why would I need that on a view camera? I'm not going to be stitching panoramas, so it should make no difference if the vertical axis is correct or not.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


I find that for a lot of what I've been shooting, I would love a 20-foot tall tripod to get the correct perspective. I don't have the patience or budget for a view camera, although a grown man climbing trees does look a little odd to the casual observer.


Shift lens?


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead;15510540*
> It's basically embedded in the metal. There's no way that could get knocked out of alignment without destroying it in the process.
> 
> Vertical axis? Why would I need that on a view camera? I'm not going to be stitching panoramas, so it should make no difference if the vertical axis is correct or not.


The vertical axis plays a huge role in the perspective since if it's not corrected objects can appear to be leaning forwards or backwards.

http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/tilt-shift-lenses1.htm


----------



## foothead

That's the horizontal axis. The vertical axis is the rotational axis on the tripod, used for panning along the horizon.

Makes sense now. Yes, my camera does have a level for that axis. It has one of those round spirit levels, where the bubble can move in any direction, not just along a line.

Is anyone else getting 500 server errors?


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead;15510653*
> Is anyone else getting 500 server errors?


All day so far.


----------



## sub50hz

Selective desat:










Stolen from POTN, pretty amazing.


----------



## Sean Webster

That is sick









I'm thinking of getting the sigma 30 1.4


----------



## sub50hz

Wanna buy a 70-200?

I'm liquidating.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Wanna buy a 70-200?

I'm liquidating.


Hmmmm, i would love too









PM me if the price is right lol, i'm cheap


----------



## sub50hz

600. Do it.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote: 
   Originally Posted by *sub50hz*   600. Do it.  
   Amazon.com: Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L USM Telephoto Zoom Lens for Canon SLR Cameras: Camera & Photo
that's only $75 off...I can get a betterdeal









*cough http://photography-on-the.net/forum/....php?t=1109732


----------



## sub50hz

Ok, so buy that, then.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Ok, so buy that, then.


Nah, i'm still thinkin sigma 30mm


----------



## MistaBernie

3 years older than mine, which includes receipt and about 4 months warranty. You'll think you got it right from B&H..

Well Supras, idk about Subs.

(see camera section fs ad)


----------



## sub50hz

I bought mine in April, used it MAYBE 5 times. It's packed up in my closet, and has been since September.


----------



## Marin

Want.


----------



## sub50hz

Marin, you should put a link to view cameras when you post them -- because I've only used one once, and I don't know jack else about them.


----------



## Marin

http://www.precisioncameraworks.com/Media/misura.pdf


----------



## sub50hz

Wow, so _tiny_. Very cool, quite portable-looking.


----------



## Conspiracy

that looks awesome. i have no clue how to use one even though i understand how it works


----------



## biatchi

Currently stripping down a Flek 35 2.8 to remove some fungus and fix the slightly slow aperture blades. It seemed like I could get at the fungus from the rear element but I've ended up having to go in through the front as well, bloody typical


----------



## sub50hz

Is everyone just buying up any old cheapo lens and cleaning it for "use"? Sure seems like it.


----------



## biatchi

The idea was to sell it. I paid Â£38 for it attached to a Chinon and selling it will probably double my money.


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*











Want.


That looks pretty awesome. I still think I'd prefer a Deardorff-style folding camera though.










It's lighter, has more extension, and looks nicer (IMO).


----------



## dudemanppl

God 85 on crop is so stupid long, don't have any full frame EF bodies currently. Should stop lending stuff out...


----------



## BlankThis

I like it. Everyone pushes 35mm's for walk around shooting on a DX but I'm all about the nifty 50.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


God 85 on crop is so stupid long, don't have any full frame EF bodies currently. Should stop lending stuff out...


Try using 100mm lol

Quote:



Originally Posted by *BlankThis*


I like it. Everyone pushes 35mm's for walk around shooting on a DX but I'm all about the nifty 50.


I had the 50 for a while, it was great, but I always did want the wider view of 30-35mm. :/


----------



## dudemanppl

50 equiv sucks huge balls. 35 + 85 is where its at.


----------



## BlankThis

nonono.

Well actually yeah I like the 35 on crop but i want more DoF









I'm buying a Sammy 35 f/1,4 next paycheck, Nikon mount.

I'm going to wait until the spring before picking a side and jumping to full frame.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


50 equiv sucks huge balls. 35 + 85 is where its at.


35 is too wide on FF/film as a walkaround. For me. Thank you.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


35 is too wide on FF/film as a walkaround. For me. Thank you.


i walk around with a 16-35mm or 24mm all day!

i agree that 50mm is too long even on FF for a walk around (i walk around a lot!) and i'm sorta getting bored with my 16-35mm f/4 and 24mm 1.4. nikon doesn't really have a good lens 35mm-50mm so i'm thinking about getting a 40mm f/2 voigtlander

any thoughts?


----------



## foothead

The Hexanon 40/1.8 on 35mm was probably my favorite walkaround. I tried it on four thirds, but it's way too long.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*


i walk around with a 16-35mm or 24mm all day!


Apples and oranges, though. 35 is a weird in-between focal length on film for me. That being said, a 42-45 would be ideal.


----------



## sub50hz

Hrm, guy on POTN has a super-mint 645 Pro TL setup with 3 lenses, 2 backs, tons of accessories. 135L is boss, but I think it's gone.


----------



## BlankThis

I hate Canon Rumors right now


----------



## dudemanppl

Ugh there was a 645 setup on FM I really REALLY wanted a while back. 35 3.5 and the 80 1.9. It was like 600 for all and I'm so sad I missed it.


----------



## foothead

http://new55project.blogspot.com/2011/10/sharpness-resolution-and-grain-of-new55.html

Nice. I wonder how long before they can release it.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;15525756*
> Ugh there was a 645 setup on FM I really REALLY wanted a while back. 35 3.5 and the 80 1.9. It was like 600 for all and I'm so sad I missed it.


This is body, back, 2 inserts, metered prism w/diopter, motor winder, film, batteries, 80 2.8, 45 2.8, 150 3.5, metal case, hoods, caps... tons. Real stoked right now.


----------



## dudemanppl

I want 120 stuff now, do the drug stores develop them?


----------



## sub50hz

Pretty sure they would just send it out to a lab anyway.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;15525878*
> This is body, back, 2 inserts, metered prism w/diopter, motor winder, film, batteries, 80 2.8, 45 2.8, 150 3.5, metal case, hoods, caps... tons. Real stoked right now.


Someone traded you all that for one lens?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;15525922*
> I want 120 stuff now, do the drug stores develop them?


No. I've tried at several, and they always refuse.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;15526064*
> Pretty sure they would just send it out to a lab anyway.


My local Walgreens still does 35mm C-41. Their prints are terrible though.


----------



## sub50hz

I guess one of the advantages to living in a big city is having plenty of photo labs around. I mean, _somebody_ has to take care of those skinny jean-wearing, Holga-toting dorks.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;15526107*
> I guess one of the advantages to living in a big city is having plenty of photo labs around. I mean, _somebody_ has to take care of those skinny jean-wearing, Holga-toting dorks.


Haha. My city has one "proper" photo lab left (afaik), but they're really expensive and send off everything except C-41 nowadays.

We used to have an awesome used camera store too, but they do nothing but digital print services now.


----------



## sub50hz

Some friends of friends just opened a lab in the city, I hear they will accept our beer (homebrew) in exhange for dip and dunk, which is super win.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead;15526081*
> Someone traded you all that for one lens?


Yes. I would take cash, I guess, but I would just turn around and buy a Mamiya anyway.


----------



## dudemanppl

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost-classifieds/showproduct.php/product/30996/title/minolta-cle26amp-3b-fuji-120-rf/cat/3

You get the 645, I call the 690 though. That is some really cheap stuff...


----------



## sub50hz

Those Fuji 6x9s are intense. No meter, though -- and not many shots on a roll. Fixed lens, also. Cool stuff, but not Mamiya 7 cool... or Mamiya expensive, for that matter.


----------



## foothead

If I ever go to 6x9, I'm definitely getting a view camera. I despise rangefinders.


----------



## biatchi

Just watched the first episode of Breaking bad after seeing you guys raving about it and I enjoyed it


----------



## sub50hz

Pfft, guy with the 645 kit just pulled a fast one -- last minute says he wants cash on top, I'm thinking he MIGHT have wanted to indicate that in a prior email.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;15526641*
> Pfft, guy with the 645 kit just pulled a fast one -- last minute says he wants cash on top, I'm thinking he MIGHT have wanted to indicate that in a prior email.


Don't do it. I just checked, and the whole kit is worth about the same as your 135L, according to eBay buy it now prices.


----------



## sub50hz

Yeha, I'm not going to. The search continues, I'm afraid.

edit: Maybe I'll just pop for a Sekonic if the 2 rolls I shot over the weekend with the Bronica look alright.


----------



## foothead

I'd just sell it for cash and get some lenses and possibly the TTL finder for your Bronica.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *biatchi;15526452*
> Just watched the first episode of Breaking bad after seeing you guys raving about it and I enjoyed it


damn right you did. best show on tv period


----------



## Deano12345

Get my new phone on friday with any luck !

On the downside, my school bag has become religious (ie. its ''hole-y"







). I'm thinking of buying a Manfrotto sachel so I can carry a body, lens + my school stuff around. Haven't decided yet though


----------



## sub50hz

Waiting for results from that Portra 800 that expired 05/2003. It's been frozen, so it might be ok -- the shop that has it is willing to let it go for a dollar a roll (of 220!), so if it's usable I'm probably going to buy all of it. Better than the 63 bucks I just paid for a propack of Portra 400 from B&H.


----------



## dudemanppl

Oh lawd how many rolls do they have, I'd loooove some dat. :3


----------



## sub50hz

I could count at least 12 boxes in the freezer from where I was standing.


----------



## dudemanppl

Find out if they have any other expired stuffs and me love you long time.


----------



## sub50hz

They have some expired Fuji 160 but it's 120 and it's only out of date by about a year, so it's like 2 bucks a roll.


----------



## dudemanppl

If it's C41 I'll have some too. I can meter pretty damn well with my eye thankfully.


----------



## sub50hz

You gonna pick up a MF system, then? You can get a Bronica for DIRT cheap. I dunno if I would recommend an RB or RZ for someone your size, they are absolute tanks, and nearly impossible to hand-hold.


----------



## dudemanppl

5'6" isn't THAT short.







I handhold 400 2.8s fine.


----------



## sub50hz

I don't just mean short. Don't expect to hand-hold many 6x7 cameras (if any, even the Pentax with the wood grip) because they don't have fast top shutter speeds, are awkward sizes and very heavy. Could you do it? Probably. Would you want to? Probably not.


----------



## dudemanppl

I hate people that ***** about the weight of 70-200 2.8s. Hopefully I'll be fine. A 6x9 RF shouldn't be too bad right?


----------



## sub50hz

You're in for a surprise, tiny hands.


----------



## dudemanppl

Holy crap thats big.


----------



## sub50hz

My gripe with 6x9 is that it's still too few shots on a roll. I mean, 6-7 shots on a 120 roll? Not worth it unless you're _very_ proficient and have lots of time. I keep the 35mm for snapping and street, the cost of MF film and dev (plus scan time, only 2 frames at a time on the V500) is simply too great to use as an everyday tote-around camera.


----------



## dudemanppl

6-7 shots, that sounds pretty good to me honestly. 375 for a camera, so cheap...


----------



## sub50hz

If you're not going to print big, there's very little point in getting into a larger format than 35mm.


----------



## Shane1244

5D*III* Tomorrow.
http://www.engadget.com/2011/11/02/the-canon-hollywood-event-is-tomorrow-get-your-liveblog-here/


----------



## Marin

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


If you're not going to print big, there's very little point in getting into a larger format than 35mm.


I disagree. Each format offers it's own unique look when used properly. Like 8x10 shots for example. Also theres different equipment offered for larger formats like view cameras which give a while new level of control in camera.


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Waiting for results from that Portra 800 that expired 05/2003. It's been frozen, so it might be ok -- the shop that has it is willing to let it go for a dollar a roll (of 220!), so if it's usable I'm probably going to buy all of it. Better than the 63 bucks I just paid for a propack of Portra 400 from B&H.


Whoah. Do you think you could send me some of that if it comes out well? I could paypal you the cost + shipping + whatever.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


You're in for a surprise, tiny hands.


Unless his hands are /really/ tiny, it won't be a big problem. I have smaller-than-average sized hands, and I have yet to have a problem with any cameras. It actually makes things easier with my 645 because I can easily slip my fingers into the space between the grip and camera body, so it takes no effort to hold onto it when I'm walking around. My dad cannot do that, and complains if I ask him to hold the camera for more than a couple minutes.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


If you're not going to print big, there's very little point in getting into a larger format than 35mm.


You also get typically better optics, and you can stop down more without having to worry about diffraction.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*


5D*III *Tomorrow. 
http://www.engadget.com/2011/11/02/t...liveblog-here/


Do we have any evidence it'll actually be a 5d mkIII, or is that just speculation? They keep saying it'll be something for the film industry, so I was thinking they might do something like Panasonic and make an interchangeable lens camcorder with a DSLR sensor.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


I hate people that ***** about the weight of 70-200 2.8s. Hopefully I'll be fine. A 6x9 RF shouldn't be too bad right?



My 70-200 2.8 is too heavy.

Only the first time though because my D60 doesn't fit my hand D: The 70-200 is much easier to hold even with something like the D90.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


I disagree. Each format offers it's own unique look when used properly. Like 8x10 shots for example. Also theres different equipment offered for larger formats like view cameras which give a while new level of control in camera.


Well, yeah, but you're not going to shoot 8x10 just to share on the internet -- that's kind of the point I was trying to make. I mean, I guess you could. Seems wasteful, though.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *foothead*


Whoah. Do you think you could send me some of that if it comes out well? I could paypal you the cost + shipping + whatever.


Sure, but that's still hinging on whether it comes out OK or not -- I only put some test shots on the roll with some differently-toned subjects to see if there's going to be any color shift or weirdness in shadows/highs.

Quote:



Unless his hands are /really/ tiny, it won't be a big problem. I have smaller-than-average sized hands, and I have yet to have a problem with any cameras. It actually makes things easier with my 645 because I can easily slip my fingers into the space between the grip and camera body, so it takes no effort to hold onto it when I'm walking around. My dad cannot do that, and complains if I ask him to hold the camera for more than a couple minutes.


Holding an RB/RZ is like holding a cinder block that weighs less. There's nothing ergonomic about them, nor does there need to be.

Quote:



You also get typically better optics, and you can stop down more without having to worry about diffraction.


While true, again, I wonder why move up in negative size unless you plan to enlarge on paper? There's lots to like about larger formats, but I don't think the cost of operation justifies shooting them just for sharing on Flickr. My opinion, of course.


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Sure, but that's still hinging on whether it comes out OK or not -- I only put some test shots on the roll with some differently-toned subjects to see if there's going to be any color shift or weirdness in shadows/highs.


Allrighty then. Did you ask the lab to develop it normal? I've heard of people shooting it as rated, then asking the lab to push 1/2 to 1 stop to compensate.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Holding an RB/RZ is like holding a cinder block that weighs less. There's nothing ergonomic about them, nor does there need to be.


Wow, you're right. That looks super awkward. I guess it's designed to be mainly used on a tripod?










Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


While true, again, I wonder why move up in negative size unless you plan to enlarge on paper? There's lots to like about larger formats, but I don't think the cost of operation justifies shooting them just for sharing on Flickr. My opinion, of course.


I typically don't do huge enlargements, but I much prefer medium format over 35mm. Even on an 8x10 enlargement, I just find it to have more detail and better look for some reason. This is obviously subjective though, so ymmv.

Okay, so I've probably asked about this before, but I don't really remember. I have a random copy of photoshop CS5 extended lying around. Full version, in box, with product key. I just checked, and it does not seem to be registered to my adobe account. What should I do with it? Adobe sent it to me after I applied for the "complimentary CS5.5" email they sent out, but it turned out that there was no photoshop CS5.5.


----------



## MistaBernie

Seriously, no 5D3 tomorrow. New video cameras; 5D3 would compete with 1Dx, doesnt make any sense.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *foothead*


Allrighty then. Did you ask the lab to develop it normal? I've heard of people shooting it as rated, then asking the lab to push 1/2 to 1 stop to compensate.


I just had them dev as normal, next to a 120 roll of Portra 800 that was fresh. At least this way, it should be a little easier to tell what kind of subtleties (or huge shifts) exist between the two.

Quote:



Wow, you're right. That looks super awkward. I guess it's designed to be used on a tripod?











RB/RZ is a camera you pretty much never shoot unless it's on a tripod made of _lead_. The mirror slap is hilariously intense in the RB, but the lenses are so awesome for that whole system. If you've got time to set up a shot, don't want to carry a 4x5 and like the rotating back, the RB is for you. Also, they are cheap as dirt, you can get a working body/lens/back for 300 bucks.

Quote:



I typically don't do huge enlargements, but I much prefer medium format over 35mm. Even on an 8x10 enlargement, I just find it to have more detail and better look for some reason. This is obviously subjective though, so ymmv.


Oh, for sure, but 35mm is ever so convenient to toss in a bag, use a built-in meter and shoot away. I print 8x10 from 35mm negs without issue, although the same shot on 645 would be infinitely cleaner. I don't print 8x10 from digital much, fwiw.


----------



## sub50hz

For some interesting perspective, an RZ, GSW690, 30D and 503C (and a Yashica D!) next to one another. Keep in mind what a 30D looks and feels like in your hand.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/2102841...310091/detail/


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


I just had them dev as normal, next to a 120 roll of Portra 800 that was fresh. At least this way, it should be a little easier to tell what kind of subtleties (or huge shifts) exist between the two.


Didn't Kodak completely redesign portra since 2003? Or was that just the lower ISO versions?

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


RB/RZ is a camera you pretty much never shoot unless it's on a tripod made of _lead_. The mirror slap is hilariously intense in the RB, but the lenses are so awesome for that whole system. If you've got time to set up a shot, don't want to carry a 4x5 and like the rotating back, the RB is for you. Also, they are cheap as dirt, you can get a working body/lens/back for 300 bucks.


Probably not for me then. I almost always carry a tripod, but I'm a cheaparse, so it's whatever tripod I can get for $20 or less. My Pentax has very little mirror shock until it flips back down, so I've never really had problems except that one time when I shot a roll of infrared film with all the tripod latches still broken.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Oh, for sure, but 35mm is ever so convenient to toss in a bag, use a built-in meter and shoot away. I print 8x10 from 35mm negs without issue, although the same shot on 645 would be infinitely cleaner. I don't print 8x10 from digital much, fwiw.


That's why I love my Pentax. It just works, no fiddling. It's easier to use than my 35mm cameras, but that's probably because I only have a Canon TL and an old manual vivitar.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *foothead*


Didn't Kodak completely redesign portra since 2003? Or was that just the lower ISO versions?


As far as I know, it was just the 160 and 400 -- they're now labeled as NEW PORTRA 400, etc.


----------



## Marin

And the new Portra sucks for wet printing.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Marin*


And the new Portra sucks for wet printing.


Well, shucks. Not many other options in 220 (I don't like Fuji's offerings), so i suppose we'll see what happens when I get something print-worthy out of this inbound pro pack.


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


For some interesting perspective, an RZ, GSW690, 30D and 503C (and a Yashica D!) next to one another. Keep in mind what a 30D looks and feels like in your hand.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/2102841...310091/detail/


Here's what it looks like next to a Hasselblad. Wow, this thing is huge.










Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


As far as I know, it was just the 160 and 400 -- they're now labeled as NEW PORTRA 400, etc.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kodak_Portra

Looks like you're right. There's no mention of the 800 being redesigned.


----------



## sub50hz

I'll have to see if my buddy will bring his this weekend, I can take a pic of it next to my ETRSi -- it will be comical.

edit: Not the greatest showing of its size, but here it is on a tripod next to someone my size:


----------



## foothead

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RZ67

Quote:



The RZ67 measures 104 mm (W) x 133.5 mm (H) x 211.5 mm (L) with the 110mm f/2.8 lens, and weighs approximately 2.4 kg



Lighter than I would've though. IIRC, my Pentax weighs ~1900 grams with the 45/2.8 lens. I don't think I've ever weighed it with the 75mm, which'd probably be a more accurate comparison. It's definitely lighter than the 45 though.

Edited this into one of my posts last page, but I don't think anyone noticed:

Quote:



Originally Posted by *foothead*


Okay, so I've probably asked about this before, but I don't really remember. I have a random copy of photoshop CS5 extended lying around. Full version, in box, with product key. I just checked, and it does not seem to be registered to my adobe account. What should I do with it? Adobe sent it to me after I applied for the "complimentary CS5.5" email they sent out, but it turned out that there was no photoshop CS5.5.



Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


I'll have to see if my buddy will bring his this weekend, I can take a pic of it next to my ETRSi -- it will be comical.


Please do. I still laugh every time I see a picture of a Pentax 67. It looks like a novelty-sized 35mm.


----------



## sub50hz

Those Pentax 67s are awesome.

P.S. If the copy of CS5 isn't bound to your account, why not trade it for something, or sell it outright? You could, alternately, hold some sort of raffle on OCN and donate the benefits to something photography-related.


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Those Pentax 67s are awesome.

P.S. If the copy of CS5 isn't bound to your account, why not trade it for something, or sell it outright? You could, alternately, hold some sort of raffle on OCN and donate the benefits to something photography-related.


Yeah, I'd like to try to sell/trade it. I'm not a member at any photography-related forums though, so I guess I'll have to try here. What would be a fair asking price?


----------



## sub50hz

Adorama has the UPGRADE for 299. FWIW.


----------



## foothead

P/N is 65049660, so it's a complete retail version, not an upgrade. It's Canadian French though, but that can apparently be changed to English by renaming one file. I really don't know why Adobe sent me a French version..


----------



## sub50hz

Maybe they figured that you were geographically close enough to the French Quarter. Lul.


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Maybe they figured that you were geographically close enough to the French Quarter. Lul.


Haha. It'd be funny if they sold software in Cajun French. It's basically a random mix of words from like 5 other languages. It's almost unrecognizable as French at this point.


----------



## dudemanppl

AUSTRALIANS ARE WEAK. BTW, I don't think it'll be a 5DIII.


----------



## foothead

I put up a for trade thread. I'll see if I get any decent offers before trying to sell outright.


----------



## dudemanppl

Wow I posted that really awkwardly late. Anyway, HOLY CRAP THE 690 IS HUGE. If I do indeed purchase it, I will take a picture of it next to the Leica with a huge lens on it (35 1.2).


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Wow I posted that really awkwardly late. Anyway, HOLY CRAP THE 690 IS HUGE. If I do indeed purchase it, I will take a picture of it next to the Leica with a huge lens on it (35 1.2).


You really should look at SLR-type cameras. The GW690 is just missing so many features.

I just checked eBay, there's a Mamiya 645 kit for under $200 shipped. That's what I'd get.


----------



## dudemanppl

I want ******edly big film size though.







645 is like half the area.


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


I want ******edly big film size though.







645 is like half the area.


Then go with a Pentax 67. Awesome system, and you get a few more shots per roll.

If you /really/ want ******edly big film sizes, large format is the way to go. 8x10 slides are like the most epic thing ever.

Or if you just want a stupidly big rangefinder camera, there's always this.


----------



## xlastshotx

Hey, do you guys think that my camera and lens is priced about rite? Here

I have had them up for about a week on Craigslist and 3 or 4 days here, but I haven't gotten any calls or emails at all. Just wondering if maybe I have them a bit to high, or maybe a bad time to sell, or maybe my camera is to old.. idk, what do you guys think?


----------



## dudemanppl

I want stuff I can develop with the tanks I already have though. I'm so choosy heh. And the Pentax 67s are even BIGGER. Now I'm thinking of getting an iPod Touch as a light meter or have my friend "obtain" one for me.

@lastshot - Lower both by 50, I don't really know the prices but I'd rather have money than have stuff lying around.


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


I want stuff I can develop with the tanks I already have though. I'm so choosy heh. And the Pentax 67s are even BIGGER.


http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...ay_White_.html No need for tanks.

The Pentax 67 is bigger, but you get a proper system, not just a camera with one non-removable lens.

EDIT: 
Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Now I'm thinking of getting an iPod Touch as a light meter or have my friend "obtain" one for me.


There is no way that works well enough to replace a proper meter.


----------



## dudemanppl

They work accurately to 1/3rd stop and its rare when they're off. I like tanks because I don't have a darkroom and my changing bag is way too small for 2/3 trays.


----------



## foothead

I develop in the bathtub. Never had any problems that way. You just need to make sure to stuff something into the door crack. I usually use a towel for the bottom, and an old bedsheet for the other sides.


----------



## Conspiracy

so Public Relations at my school has recently contacted me about doing some extra freelance work for them to help with photography hopefully they offer me a good deal.

also after a rather long time of waiting and saving money, i finally have made a decision about the wide angle i want to get. im going to shoot for getting the tokina 11-16 f2.8







(i think that the 2.8 would be very helpful under kind of poor lighting conditions as well as the focal length is great) i have heard great things about this lens so i think im going to buy it for myself as a present when i survive this semester


----------



## sub50hz

Just picked up my 220 negs, gonna get into the scans here in a bit. We'll see how the expired film raid will be going, if at all.


----------



## sub50hz

2 barely usable shots off the entire roll, lots of completely grayed frames. Bummer. I know it's not the camera, because the roll of 120 I put through it came out dandy.


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


2 barely usable shots off the entire roll, lots of completely grayed frames. Bummer. I know it's not the camera, because the roll of 120 I put through it came out dandy.










Guess I'll be ordering some film from B&H then. They have Provia 100F for $3.79/roll, so I'll give that a try.

I'm not sure if I should get ektachrome or velvia for my 4x5 camera. I prefer ektachrome for architecture, velvia for landscapes. Fuji no longer sells 10-packs of sheet film, so I cannot really afford both at the moment.


----------



## dudemanppl

But how would it just not expose like that... Weird. Anyway I'm at school and I just finished up a roll, do I shoot color or B/W next?


----------



## Shane1244

http://gizmodo.com/5856240/canon-c30...-hollywood-set


----------



## silvrr

After switching from my laptop to my sig rig I noticed a huge difference. I wanted to see what that actual impact was so I ran some tests. Same 50 RAW files from the same drive location.










I would be interested to see what a SSD or a 2600K would do to the times.


----------



## sub50hz

I think they are crappy scans -- none of the negs are totally gray, I just louped them over a lightbox. Here's a pair from that roll, the rest are mostly test shots to see if the camera worked correctly:


---_0100 by sub50hz, on Flickr


---_0111 by sub50hz, on Flickr

There's a slight blue cast in some of the shots, but it's not overbearing. I might grab a few more rolls and scan them myself.


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*










http://gizmodo.com/5856240/canon-c30...-hollywood-set


I called it!


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


I think they are crappy scans -- none of the negs are totally gray, I just louped them over a lightbox. Here's a pair from that roll, the rest are mostly test shots to see if the camera worked correctly:


---_0100 by sub50hz, on Flickr


---_0111 by sub50hz, on Flickr

There's a slight blue cast in some of the shots, but it's not overbearing. I might grab a few more rolls and scan them myself.


Doesn't look bad to me. What do the other photos look like?


----------



## sub50hz

Until I can get some scans that don't completely suck, I'm reserving judgement. 5 shots from the lab scans on that roll look fine, but they really botched about half of them. Real awful, at least they were mostly dust-free. Last time I use that place, freelz.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*










http://gizmodo.com/5856240/canon-c30...-hollywood-set


not sure yet whether i care about the camera since it does not look to really compete with what is already out there considering price doesnt matter that much since most wont buy but rent instead anyway. im curious to see the new cine lenses that canon makes and how they hold up against the best as well as the lower end of cinema lenses


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:



Originally Posted by *foothead*


I called it!


As did I.


----------



## dudemanppl

Funny looking 5DIII that.


----------



## Shane1244

http://www.engadget.com/2011/11/03/c...n-the-way-too/

THERES STILL HOPE?


----------



## sub50hz

Yeah, I'm gonna have to make sure I cut and rescan this one.


---_0093 by sub50hz, on Flickr


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*










http://www.engadget.com/2011/11/03/c...n-the-way-too/

THERES STILL HOPE?


Why are we still filming 24 FPS in 2011? It's like watching a freaking slideshow.

That camera looks awesome though.


----------



## sub50hz

Because 60FPS looks like a soap opera.


----------



## dudemanppl

So I put a roll of Portra 400 in and shot it at 800, almost done with it now. Just gotta get those two deved so I can scan them.


----------



## MistaBernie

It's the Concept Cinema DSLR.. neither the 7Dii/5Diii/Nikon Killer, but effectively an SLR geared towards cinematography (which will make excellent of the ~$47,000 EF lenses introduced).


----------



## Nemesis158

Quote:



Originally Posted by *foothead*


Why are we still filming 24 FPS in 2011? It's like watching a freaking slideshow.

That camera looks awesome though.


This. thats another reason why i went with the Nikon D5100 over the more expensive D7000. Despite them both having the same sensor, the D5100 can record @ 30FPS (29.997) instead of the D7000's 24.

And im not sure about the thing with 60FPs looking like a soap. I'm pretty sure shows like "Days of our Lives" use very specific camera and lighting equipment to get the effect you see on the screen. 60FPs definitely helps, but the only other thing anyone sees @ 60FPS or higher is video games, and they don't look like soaps. do we really know what a movie will look like at 40 or 60 FPS?


----------



## dudemanppl

Not technically EF cause EF means electronic focus and AFAIK these are MF only. 14.5-60 seems rreal neat though.


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Because 60FPS looks like a soap opera.


24 FPS does give a "cinematic" look, but it really seems to limit what can be done. Watch Planet Earth on Blu-ray and you'll get the idea. Every time that camera moves without having a clear, stationary subject, it just becomes painful. Even worse if you don't have a 120 Hz TV.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Nemesis158*


This. thats another reason why i went with the Nikon D5100 over the more expensive D7000. Despite them both having the same sensor, the D5100 can record @ 30FPS (29.997) instead of the D7000's 24.

And im not sure about the thing with 60FPs looking like a soap. I'm pretty sure shows like "Days of our Lives" use very specific camera and lighting equipment to get the effect you see on the screen. 60FPs definitely helps, but the only other thing anyone sees @ 60FPS or higher is video games, and they don't look like soaps. do we really know what a movie will look like at 40 or 60 FPS?


30 FPS is not really an improvement. I want _at least_ 48. It's already displayed at 48Hz, so it seems like that'd be a good starting point. Something like 120 would be epic for fast motion though.

I'm not really sure how a movie would look at a faster framerate. The first couple would probably seems weird because we're used to 24, but I imagine it'd be a dramatic improvement, especially with action movies.

EDIT: Looks like we may find out soon. http://insidemovies.ew.com/2011/04/1...peter-jackson/


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:



Originally Posted by *foothead*


EDIT: Looks like we may find out soon. http://insidemovies.ew.com/2011/04/1...peter-jackson/


thanks for sharing that. i had no clue that he was going to try that out.

people like 24fps because of the look and feel it gives and because people dont like change and want to keep it the way it is forever. just one of those things.

and @dude all those will be MF there is no auto focus cinema equipment that i know of because noone wants it because we are so used to shooting manual that it would be weird to change after these almost 100 years of cinema THAT and i dont know anyone that trusts autofocus when that much money is involved its all about precise focus on those lenses which is why you have to turn them so much to rack focus the whole way. amazing glass to play with if you ever get the chance, i promise it will even blow you away i think


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Shane1244*










http://gizmodo.com/5856240/canon-c30...-hollywood-set


Canon Rumors say prosumer HD camera coming with EF mount. Price tag? 10-15k.
20k

I know this is cheap in the professional world but really...


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis;15565654*
> Canon Rumors say prosumer HD camera coming with EF mount. Price tag? 10-15k.
> 20k
> 
> I know this is cheap in the professional world but really...


what they announced is not the prosumer. that is their cinema quality camera. they will have another camera that will fill the gap between cine and DSLR. they already have prosumer video cameras but they are yet to have a prosumer camera dedicated to video only that has interchangeable lenses which is what they will most likely announce later.

20k is very cheap in the professional world. that is like the expensive handycam in the professional world considering the much better cameras are closer to the 100k range. i do not think canon's cine line will compete very well against RED and ARRI and panavision


----------



## Conspiracy

i actually went out today and walked around and took pictures. A friend of mine is a painter and was commissioned to do a piece with a fall theme to it so i went out and took fall photos of leaves and stuff for her. got some pretty good keepers i hope.


----------



## ljason8eg

Well I ended up sending in just my 7D to be tested. Got both lens and body back today. There was nothing wrong with the body **shocker** and they replaced the circuit board in the lens. Now it front focuses from MFD to infinity. Whoops. On the bright side, it seems extremely consistent now so maybe some good ole MA will fix it lol.


----------



## MistaBernie

I like my 17-40 on my 5D, but I feel like I get weird distortion on my 7D. Like, weird angles if I'm not exactly squared off to my subject or not level. Like not flattering, rather annoying, want to punch it in the face angles.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


I like my 17-40 on my 5D, but I feel like I get weird distortion on my 7D. Like, weird angles if I'm not exactly squared off to my subject or not level. Like not flattering, rather annoying, want to punch it in the face angles.


lol


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


I like my 17-40 on my 5D, but I feel like I get weird distortion on my 7D. Like, weird angles if I'm not exactly squared off to my subject or not level. Like not flattering, rather annoying, want to punch it in the face angles.


all wide angle lenses are like that


----------



## sub50hz

I don't find the 17-40 to have disturbing levels of distortion when I use it on my 50D. A little bit here and there on film, but nothing terrible.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer;15574842*
> all wide angle lenses are like that


I'm actually worried that its asymmetrical.. my 10-20 had some distortion as expected. I'm probably just being paranoid though.


----------



## sub50hz

Photograph a piece of lined notebook paper. Graph paper if you're _extreme._ Then post it here. Chop chop, pal.


----------



## foothead

Open this and photograph your monitor, making sure the film/sensor plane is parallel with the screen.


----------



## robchaos

Gonetomorrow, Can you add a few things to my gear list?
I acquired an olympus om-1n MD film slr with zuiko 135mm f3.5 and zuiko 50mm
going to be out running a roll of film through it today to test it.


----------



## MistaBernie

I'll do that tomorrow, I'm on the road at the moment and have a card game to attend and crush tonite. Thanks guys


----------



## mz-n10

developing my first roll of plusx 125 put through the maxxum 7. but have to develope it at walmart.......


----------



## sub50hz

They're just gonna send it out to a lab anyway, might as well skip a step and just send it somewhere yourself.


----------



## dudemanppl

Have fun getting back a blank roll. They don't know what black and white is and will put it through C41.


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Have fun getting back a blank roll. They don't know what black and white is and will put it through C41.


This. Just get some Rodinal and do it yourself.

EDIT: If you don't have any of the supplies, here's what you should get to start:

http://www.freestylephoto.biz/12054-...rmula?sc=24100
http://www.freestylephoto.biz/5031-A...ls?cat_id=1603
http://www.freestylephoto.biz/16241-...lon?cat_id=303

That's really all you need for developing. Some people use a stop bath, but I find it unnecessary. Just rinse the film well.

For printing, you'll need some specialized equipment, mainly an enlarger. These are big and expensive to ship, so I suggest you look around in newspaper ads/craigslist/whatever. I have one lying around that I got at a thrift store for $15, so they're definitely available.

What's up with B&H's website always being closed at random times? I'm not able to order until 7:15.


----------



## Marin

Shabbat. Not random at all.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *foothead*


This. Just get some Rodinal and do it yourself.

EDIT: If you don't have any of the supplies, here's what you should get to start:

http://www.freestylephoto.biz/12054-...rmula?sc=24100
http://www.freestylephoto.biz/5031-A...ls?cat_id=1603
http://www.freestylephoto.biz/16241-...lon?cat_id=303

That's really all you need for developing. Some people use a stop bath, but I find it unnecessary. Just rinse the film well.

For printing, you'll need some specialized equipment, mainly an enlarger. These are big and expensive to ship, so I suggest you look around in newspaper ads/craigslist/whatever. I have one lying around that I got at a thrift store for $15, so they're definitely available.

What's up with B&H's website always being closed at random times? I'm not able to order until 7:15.


They close on all Jewish holidays.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


They close on all Jewish holidays.


And from sundown Friday to sundown Saturday. Every week. Jewish holidays are timed so improperly with goings-on in the jewelry industry, I will say that.


----------



## foothead

Bleh, digital. My mom's friend asked me for a photo of his company's new office building for their website, but he needs it by Monday. I'm completely out of color film, so I had to use the E-410. It keeps blowing out the sky, so I had to underexpose like two stops, then correct in photoshop. I think it came out okay though. At least it gave me a chance to get rid of all the water that spilled out of the fountains.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead;15583614*
> This. Just get some Rodinal and do it yourself.
> 
> EDIT: If you don't have any of the supplies, here's what you should get to start:
> 
> http://www.freestylephoto.biz/12054-Adox-Adonal-17-oz.-500-ml-Rodinal-Formula?sc=24100
> http://www.freestylephoto.biz/5031-Arista-Classic-Plastic-Developing-Tank-with-2-reels?cat_id=1603
> http://www.freestylephoto.biz/16241-Arista-Universal-Liquid-Fixer-to-Make-1-Gallon?cat_id=303
> 
> That's really all you need for developing. Some people use a stop bath, but I find it unnecessary. Just rinse the film well.
> 
> For printing, you'll need some specialized equipment, mainly an enlarger. These are big and expensive to ship, so I suggest you look around in newspaper ads/craigslist/whatever. I have one lying around that I got at a thrift store for $15, so they're definitely available.
> 
> What's up with B&H's website always being closed at random times? I'm not able to order until 7:15.


theres a really good wet dark room in berkeley, but saidly i dont have the time to do it (thelookingglass if anyone is interested)....

hopefully they dont mess it up, but i just really need to confirm that my maxxum7 doesnt have an issue.


----------



## mz-n10

actually now i think about it i can shoot crappy color something and just test off that


----------



## MistaBernie

Grid test seems pretty conclusive, just some moderate pincushion distortion. If I jack up the distortion correction in LR3, it almost looks perfectly straight. I have a feeling that if something were really wrong, jacking that correction could point it out fairly easily..


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


Grid test seems pretty conclusive, just some moderate pincushion distortion. If I jack up the distortion correction in LR3, it almost looks perfectly straight. I have a feeling that if something were really wrong, jacking that correction could point it out fairly easily..


I rarely use the lens correction tool. It has its place, but you need to look past the minimal distortion and just shoot.


----------



## MistaBernie

Minor distortion I dont even usually touch, but there are times where it's definitely less than minimal (not usually with people, just certain places/types of shots.. indoors, trying to take a picture of a smaller room, etc). I feel like the easiest fix would be to have my 5D for when I need to go wide, and my 7D for telephoto. 17-40 actually shooting 17-40, 70-200 shooting 112-320 effectively, and if I really need to get in the middle I can toss the 17-40 on the 7D.


----------



## sub50hz

I hope you realize how ridiculously impractical that is, lol.


----------



## foothead

Why not just use the 5D all the time and crop if you really need >200mm?


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:



Originally Posted by *foothead*


Bleh, digital. My mom's friend asked me for a photo of his company's new office building for their website, but he needs it by Monday. I'm completely out of color film, so I had to use the E-410. It keeps blowing out the sky, so I had to underexpose like two stops, then correct in photoshop. I think it came out okay though. At least it gave me a chance to get rid of all the water that spilled out of the fountains.











My D90 does the same thing. I don't trust the meter at all now.. What metering mode were you in?


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *foothead*


Why not just use the 5D all the time and crop if you really need >200mm?


I like the 7D's AF system, noise response and expandability, faster FFS for sports captures, etc. Also, batteries seem to last alot longer in the 7D (I just got a couple aftermarket with a BG-E4 that I charged once, didn't use for a week, put in the group and I got the empty battery warning. None too pleased about that, they were supposed to still hold a good charge).


----------



## dudemanppl

Haha, faster FFS.







Anyway, I can't stop loving the 35L. Also I tried out an 85L (some freshman's mom just GAVE it to him whiskey tango foxtrot...) and I'm addicted. MF ring is ******edly annoying so I'll have to gaffer that or something.


----------



## Dream Killer

er double post? - please delete -


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


I hope you realize how ridiculously impractical that is, lol.


walking around for yourself, yes.

however before i exited concert photograpy, i frequently saw people carry both with 70-200's on APS-C and wide zooms like 16-35's on FF. so from a professional standpoint, it's actually really practical.


----------



## dudemanppl

16-28 5DII, 120-300 5DII. It can do EVERYTHING.


----------



## foothead

Quote:



Originally Posted by *BlankThis*


My D90 does the same thing. I don't trust the meter at all now.. What metering mode were you in?


Matrix. The lighting conditions really weren't the best, so I see why it got messed up. I'm probably going to go back sometime later and redo it with the 4x5 camera. They haven't put up the sign yet, so this picture is just temporary.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead;15596093*
> Matrix. The lighting conditions really weren't the best, so I see why it got messed up. I'm probably going to go back sometime later and redo it with the 4x5 camera. They haven't put up the sign yet, so this picture is just temporary.


or take the lazy mans route and shoot a bracket of +-3ev then exposure stack in post.


----------



## nuclearjock

GT, add a D3S pls.


----------



## dudemanppl

GT, add jelly for NJ pls.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nuclearjock;15597801*
> GT, add a D3S pls.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;15598009*
> GT, add jelly for NJ pls.


Even worse, note that he didn't ask to remove the D3 he already has. Damn.


----------



## sub50hz

Considering unloading all my digital gear. What a time.


----------



## dudemanppl

Thats just two things though. I'd downgrade the 50D to something cheaper (or get like a S95 for digitalness) and sell the 10-20. DO ET.


----------



## BlankThis

Sub why not downgrade to a X100 or something?


----------



## sub50hz

Maybe. CLP has destroyed the resale value of the 50D, though. I'll likely hang onto it just for... something.

edit:
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis;15599225*
> Sub why not downgrade to a X100 or something?


No, I'm really just not that interested in digital is all. Actually, let me rephrase that. A D700 and a good 50mm is the only digital combo I'm really interested in actually using.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:



Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*


Even worse, note that he didn't ask to remove the D3 he already has. Damn.


The D3 is just getting broken in! D3s is for indoor sports.


----------



## MistaBernie

CLP shouldn't impact the 50D sales locally, only on POTN. And even though the CLP price is low, there have only been a handful in stock over the last few _months. _ You should still get ~$650-$700 for it.


----------



## ljason8eg

Finally, finally, FINALLY I think the saga of my 50 1.4 is going to come to an end. I called Canon USA's corporate building today and got into quite the brawl with a couple of people. It seems as if the repair center was trying to cover up not thoroughly testing my lens/body combo. (I understand times are tough but come on, really?) It ended up with me getting an email with a UPS label...BUT this one isn't to Irvine, its to the returns center in Illinois. I think I am finally getting somewhere. Only took three months lol.


----------



## MistaBernie

Here's hoping! Glad you're optimistic about a positive outcome..


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg;15607239*
> Finally, finally, FINALLY I think the saga of my 50 1.4 is going to come to an end. I called Canon USA's corporate building today and got into quite the brawl with a couple of people. It seems as if the repair center was trying to cover up not thoroughly testing my lens/body combo. (I understand times are tough but come on, really?) It ended up with me getting an email with a UPS label...BUT this one isn't to Irvine, its to the returns center in Illinois. I think I am finally getting somewhere. Only took three months lol.


good to hear, im surprised they didnt offer you something for your trouble....


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg;15607239*
> Finally, finally, FINALLY I think the saga of my 50 1.4 is going to come to an end. I called Canon USA's corporate building today and got into quite the brawl with a couple of people. It seems as if the repair center was trying to cover up not thoroughly testing my lens/body combo. (I understand times are tough but come on, really?) It ended up with me getting an email with a UPS label...BUT this one isn't to Irvine, its to the returns center in Illinois. I think I am finally getting somewhere. Only took three months lol.


So they are taking your current 50 1.4 back outright or are you getting a replacement?


----------



## dudemanppl

They should offer you a Sigma 50.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10;15607468*
> good to hear, im surprised they didnt offer you something for your trouble....


The person I talked to at corporate hasn't called me back yet like they said they would, but as of now, nope, nothing.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *silvrr;15607672*
> So they are taking your current 50 1.4 back outright or are you getting a replacement?


I'm guessing I'll be getting a replacement, though this is something to be discussed when they call me back because if I had the choice I'd just want my money back and spend it on some other lens.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg;15608234*
> The person I talked to at corporate hasn't called me back yet like they said they would, but as of now, nope, nothing.
> 
> I'm guessing I'll be getting a replacement, though this is something to be discussed when they call me back because if I had the choice I'd just want my money back and spend it on some other lens.


Time to give Sigma a try?


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;15609269*
> Time to give Sigma a try?


I think so. Now to decide between the 30 and 50.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg;15609320*
> I think so. Now to decide between the 30 and 50.


For track use I'd go with the 50. For general use, I'd go with the 30.

As you can tell, definitely love my own 30mm









And I'm sure you already know this yourself, but if you ever upgrade to FF, your 30mm can't be used as it's for cropped only.


----------



## ljason8eg

Might as well get both of them lol


----------



## dudemanppl

Sell the T2i, get 5D. You can be like bernie!


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg;15609357*
> Might as well get both of them lol


Do it!








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;15609389*
> Sell the T2i, get 5D. You can be like bernie!


But why would anyone want to be like bernie?

(Kidding







)


----------



## MistaBernie

Hey, its a great combination for the money. Hopefully the next DSLR that merges the 5&7D lines will drop the 5Dii or get it added back to the CLP..


----------



## sub50hz

This is how you do Sunday Night Football -- get a bunch of people to make great food, drink homebrew beers and class it up with a tablecloth.


----------



## dudemanppl

Paper plates, tablecloth. So much confuse.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


Paper plates, tablecloth. So much confuse.


Wait til college.


----------



## Shane1244

I have plates...

and isn't sub like 30?


----------



## dudemanppl

Got bored, took apart 100 USM macro down to the inner focus guide barrel and cleaned out all the glass. Fun stuff, now it's actually clean inside. I lubed it too but that just got rid of the funky squeaky noise it had when focusing.


----------



## robchaos

so, I'm looking for some input,
Since I've got my D90, my D40x has been sitting around unused. Does anyone have an opinion on the Fujifilm S3 pro?

I had always wanted one when they first came out, but couldn't afford it, now the bodies are going for around what used D40X's fetch. I've been thinking about selling the D40x and picking up a s3 Pro. It can use my screw type AF lenses, it has a good dynamic range, and a DOF preview button and threaded shutter release for a cable. The only downsides I see is the slow as balls processing and read/write speeds. This is not going to be much of an issue to me, as it is a spare body. I will play around with it, do some landscapes and portraits, and maybe bust it out for a few minutes if I'm photographing any parties or the likes, but the D90 is still going to be my main camera.

Any thoughts on whether I will be disappoint and miss the D40x, or whether that is just an outright stupid move?


----------



## dudemanppl

Sure, if you aren't using it what's the point in keeping it?

Don't really know but I think I just bought an 85L.


----------



## foothead

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/45326-REG/Rockland_TTP_Tintype_Parlor.html Anyone ever try this? Is it a wet- or dry-plate kit?


----------



## foothead

My Pentax is acting... weird. After about 30 seconds, the viewfinder readout just stops working. It doesn't matter if it's enabled or not, I can use it fine for those 30 seconds, then it stops. The only way to get it to come back is to take a picture. I just ran an entire roll of film through it, and it did it every time. Then I pulled out the film magazine and it works as usual when the shutter release is depressed halfway. ***?

EDIT: I put another roll of film in and it seems to be working correctly again. I'd heard this camera was quirky, but wow I wasn't expecting things to just stop working. Hopefully it won't happen again.

EDIT2: Is it okay to use 1.65V Nickel-zinc batteries in my camera? I've been using them for the last six months or so in it, but I was just thinking about it and they might not be the best idea. I just tested them with a multimeter, and the open circuit voltage is around 1.75V.


----------



## robchaos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl;15613595*
> Sure, if you aren't using it what's the point in keeping it?
> 
> Don't really know but I think I just bought an 85L.


Certainly true, I guess my main issue is, i'm torn between getting the finepix s3, or a d200.. I know both are old tech, but so is the d40x. Either will be within my budget if I can sell my d40x with kit lens and battery grip for over $400. The s3 pro has a cult following to this day among wedding and people photographers, and the d200 is a previous generation pro level body. D200 is faster, s3 has an incredible dynamic range and the touted film s simulation modes, but is slow as anything.


----------



## scottath

getting some of my images printed.
the top left is a little too dark for what i like - but its still *ok*

Top, bottom and 2 of the top left are sold


















EDIT: helps if i add the image :/


----------



## MistaBernie

I so wish I hadn't just put my 70-200 on my line of credit, I would have probably sank it into this instead --

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B001G5ZTMM]Amazon.com: Canon EOS 5D Mark II 21.1MP Full Frame CMOS Digital SLR Camera with EF 24-105mm f/4 L IS USM Lens: Camera & Photo[/URL]

5Dii + 24-105L for $2749, sold and shipped by Amazon.

In actuality, I think I'm glad that I did because I would have picked this up instead... and right now, I dont _need_ it. Hell, I wont need it in February when I have my annual bonus to spend either, but I dont need the 24-105, and I could go refurbed for (hopefully) cheaper at that point (much cheaper since I could then sell my 5D stuff).


----------



## r34p3rex

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie;15616504*
> I so wish I hadn't just put my 70-200 on my line of credit, I would have probably sank it into this instead --
> 
> Amazon.com: Canon EOS 5D Mark II 21.1MP Full Frame CMOS Digital SLR Camera with EF 24-105mm f/4 L IS USM Lens: Camera & Photo
> 
> 5Dii + 24-105L for $2749, sold and shipped by Amazon.
> 
> In actuality, I think I'm glad that I did because I would have picked this up instead... and right now, I dont _need_ it. Hell, I wont need it in February when I have my annual bonus to spend either, but I dont need the 24-105, and I could go refurbed for (hopefully) cheaper at that point (much cheaper since I could then sell my 5D stuff).


*drool*


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;15612899*
> and isn't sub like 30?


27. I'm the one at the end of the table in that pic. Just because we're older doesn't mean paper plates and beer aren't acceptable.


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;15617862*
> 27. I'm the one at the end of the table in that pic. Just because we're older doesn't mean paper plates and beer aren't acceptable.


Hahah no I know, I was implying that you probably weren't in college.


----------



## MistaBernie

I had something clever to add.. then I lost it. Meh.

I need to bust out the 70-200 sometime soon and do some fun shooting with it.. I was gonna shoot high school football last Friday night but it turned out to be a 'game of the week' and by the time I got there, there was no parking for like four blocks around the school. Maybe if the wife and I decide not to host Thanksgiving I'll try to go to our school's Thanksgiving Day game (especially if the weather keeps cooperating like it has been).


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;15618104*
> Hahah no I know, I was implying that you probably weren't in college.


Haha, I wish. Things were a lot less complicated then.


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz;15618432*
> Haha, I wish. Things were a lot less complicated then.


hahah I bet. Life couldn't be sweeter.

On topic, my camera hasn't been outside of my house since I moved to College.. I thought i'd be out allll the time. I think its because the 50 is to tight.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244;15618516*
> hahah I bet. Life couldn't be sweeter.
> 
> On topic, my camera hasn't been outside of my house since I moved to College.. I thought i'd be out allll the time. I think its because the 50 is to tight.


*Cough* 30mm










But same situation with me too. I find I'm much too busy to take photos now.


----------



## Boyboyd

I find that it's that really dull bit of the year between autumn (fall) and winter. Here it basically just rains and is foggy every day.


----------



## biatchi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Boyboyd;15618965*
> I find that it's that really dull bit of the year between autumn (fall) and winter. Here it basically just rains and is foggy every day.


It sucks. Most leaves have fallen off the trees but there's been no photo ops because it's rained pretty much constantly for the last few weeks


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Boyboyd;15618965*
> I find that it's that really dull bit of the year between autumn (fall) and winter. Here it basically just rains and is foggy every day.


Good weather for shooting.


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d;15618705*
> *Cough* 30mm
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But same situation with me too. I find I'm much too busy to take photos now.


I really did like the Nikon 35 1.8 but I'm still finding the desire to go super wide angle. Like >10mm


----------



## Kreeker

Hey guys,

I just found my unused Manfrotto 190xprob tripod in my closet, and it got me thinking I should try to get back into photography. I never bought a head for the tripod. What do you guys recommend? I have a d80 with the 18-55mm kit lens.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Kreeker*


Hey guys,

I just found my unused Manfrotto 190xprob tripod in my closet, and it got me thinking I should try to get back into photography. I never bought a head for the tripod. What do you guys recommend? I have a d80 with the 18-55mm kit lens.


Depends on what you prefer -- I'm not a big fan of ball heads, so I sold my 498RC2. Pan heads are much easier to use, albeit more bulky.


----------



## Kreeker

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


Depends on what you prefer -- I'm not a big fan of ball heads, so I sold my 498RC2. Pan heads are much easier to use, albeit more bulky.


Seems like a tough decision. As of right now it seems like I'd rather a ball or pistol grip head due to the fact that they are faster and easier to adjust. However, if I move along to heavier equipment (which I most certainly would if I started taking it seriously), a pan head would be probably be better.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Kreeker*


Seems like a tough decision. As of right now it seems like I'd rather a ball or pistol grip head due to the fact that they are faster and easier to adjust. However, if I move along to heavier equipment (which I most certainly would if I started taking it seriously), a pan head would be probably be better.


You can always get a new head when that happens.


----------



## sub50hz

Wow, there's some kind of mass 7D exodus going on on POTN right now. 5 of them on page 1... what's the deal?


----------



## MistaBernie

See ya old overclock.net, see you soon new overclock.net!

Wait what sub?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:



Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*


See ya old overclock.net, see you soon new overclock.net!

Wait what sub?


Yeah, the new Huddler interface looks cool indeed, but it's pretty different from the current. I'll miss the old OCN, but, from what exposure I've had with the new interface, I am looking forward to it.

And damn, no OCN till 9 AM tomorrow.


----------



## Boyboyd

People fear change, including me.

There's no question that the new version is better though, but it's going to take a lot of getting used to.


----------



## sub50hz

As long as every other click doesn't result in a DB error, I'm cool.


----------



## sub50hz

Hrm.


----------



## MistaBernie

It's back!


----------



## r34p3rex

Scored a almost new condition 70-200 2.8 on fleabay for $900 shipped xD


----------



## dudemanppl

OCN LOOKS WROOOOONG. I'm crying on the inside. Anyway I sold one of my 35Ls so I only have one now. #firstworldproblems Now I got over the 85L craze, realized it was dumb lens, gonna go ahead and buy that GW690, 20 rolls of 120 Portra 400, 5 of Portra 160, 5 of Ektar, and 10 of T-Max 400 120 plus some C41 dev stuff.


----------



## sub50hz

I want to see what that monster looks like in your tiny hands.

/shesaid


----------



## dudemanppl

Hehe weiner. Anyway, I do too cause I honestly don't really have anything to compare the size to.

/shesaid

Hey look, its me.


----------



## sub50hz

Lol, what a tiny person.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Lookin' a little skeletal there dude. I was much the same once (but not that bad







)


----------



## foothead

Wow, OCN looks weird.

Is astia 100f no longer available in 135? This is the only source I can find on the entire internet.

Dudemanppl, how the heck are you using that lens without a monopod? It looks like you're going to tip over forwards.


----------



## dudemanppl

Monopods hurt my soul and you get used to 18 pounds held up to your face. LOL SKELETAL, little people can handle big guns too! DON'T DISCRIMINATE.


----------



## foothead

18 Pounds!







I have trouble hand shooting my ~5 pound 500/8, and I'm really tall.

By the way, what lens is that? The only long tele you have listed in your sig is the sigma 120-300, and I'm pretty sure that's not it.


----------



## sub50hz

18 pounds, lol, get outta here. Why you would NOT use a monopod is beyond me.


----------



## dudemanppl

400 2.8 AF-I and D3. Monopods are so limiting, hate them.


----------



## sub50hz

How could a monopod be limiting? Pop a QR plate on there and just blast the camera off if you, for some reason, find that you need to shoot at an angle that you can't finagle the monopod combo into.


----------



## Conspiracy

lol angle that you cant finangle


----------



## dudemanppl

I found that clever too. I don't like using monopods cause they aren't fast enough. That and the fact that monopods cost money, I don't like buying 100 dollar sticks I use once a month max. Which is why I don't own a tripod either, I just borrow it from my friend.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> lol angle that you cant finangle


I'm a _wordsmith_.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> I found that clever too. I don't like using monopods cause they aren't fast enough. That and the fact that monopods cost money, I don't like buying 100 dollar sticks I use once a month max. Which is why I don't own a tripod either, I just borrow it from my friend.


You're complaining about spending $100 on a tripod, right after posting a picture of yourself shooting with an $8000 lens on a $5000 camera. Nice to know you have your priorities in order.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> You're complaining about spending $100 on a tripod, right after posting a picture of yourself shooting with an $8000 lens on a $5000 camera. Nice to know you have your priorities in order.


Yeah, I dont even....

Anyways, Always Sunny was good. Hawks killed it, time for The League. I love thursday nights.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> You're complaining about spending $100 on a tripod, right after posting a picture of yourself shooting with an $8000 lens on a $5000 camera. Nice to know you have your priorities in order.


It's like having a supercar, then using re-mould tyres.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Anyways, Always Sunny was good.


I just went to watch that, and it seems that my DVR skipped it to record Project Accessory. Yeah, time to fix the recording priorities.


----------



## sub50hz

What the hell is Project Accessory?


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> You're complaining about spending $100 on a tripod, right after posting a picture of yourself shooting with an $8000 lens on a $5000 camera. Nice to know you have your priorities in order.


If it ain't in the sig, it ain't mine. Also, my priority is not buying a tripod.


----------



## Dream Killer

psh, tripods. i havn't used/carried mine in forever.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> What the hell is Project Accessory?


Spinoff of Project Runway. My mom watches it. I tried. It's stupid.

So I figured out why I cannot find Astia in 135. Turns out fuji discontinued it in all formats, along with pretty much everything else.

Screenshots from Fuji's website in 2009 (wayback machine pull):

http://www.webpagescreenshot.info/img/354571-1111201154603am.png
http://www.webpagescreenshot.info/img/747830-1111201154201am.png

Screenshots from today:

http://www.webpagescreenshot.info/img/224850-1111201153927am.png
http://www.webpagescreenshot.info/img/869995-1111201154216am.png

This is rather depressing.


----------



## dudemanppl

Yeah, exactly that's why I don't really buy support. The slow death of film is rather depressing.


----------



## laboitenoire

Feels like I haven't posted in forever... Anyway, I've been in a huge slump recently for shooting. Took my camera to Chicago over fall break and got some nice shots, but I just haven't had a whole lot of inspiration.


----------



## sub50hz

Hey, great job letting me know about that trip to the Chi.


----------



## laboitenoire

Hahaha, I was there with my glee club. Doubt I would have had time for a meet up. I do love Chicago, though.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> psh, tripods. i havn't used/carried mine in forever.


I'll take it


----------



## sub50hz

Glee Club? For real?


----------



## laboitenoire

Don't be hatin'! Yeah, I'm our student director. We do a tour every fall break and this year was Chicago. All of our gigs fell through, though...

And for the record, we are nothing like the show Glee. We do lots of traditional men's choral work, barbershop, and stuff out of our school songbook, with the occasional more contemporary song thrown in.

If you want to hate on the rest of my life, I'm also an engineer, a French minor, and in a fraternity, so


----------



## dudemanppl

So thats basically what happened a week and 3 days ago.

And here are random pictures of people:





Sigma 85 is NIIICE.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> If you want to hate on the rest of my life, I'm also an engineer, a French minor, and in a fraternity, so


Lol, no hate. Just interesting to see how diverse OCN is sometimes. At least you're not a baton girl like dudeman.


----------



## laboitenoire

Hahahaha, just messing with ya. But nah, I've got an eclectic bunch of hobbies. Big fan of all things music as well as outdoorsy things like hiking and rock climbing.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> 
> So thats basically what happened a week and 3 days ago.


This happened to me a couple months ago. Picture taken out the window, so it's not great. I didn't wanna piss off people with guns.










I woke up to a loud explosion, then silence. About a minute later, I heard strange noises coming from outside, so I got up and looked out the window. Smoke everywhere. Turns out the DEA raided my next door neighbors' house.


----------



## dudemanppl

Its colorguard.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*
> 
> I'll take it


they hold up the rear speakers for my 5.1


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> This happened to me a couple months ago. Picture taken out the window, so it's not great. I didn't wanna piss off people with guns.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I woke up to a loud explosion, then silence. About a minute later, I heard strange noises coming from outside, so I got up and looked out the window. Smoke everywhere. Turns out the DEA raided my next door neighbors' house.


Was your neighbor a drug dealer or something?

They found a note that said "11/1/11 Good day to die" and something along the lines of "lotsa people will be dead at 2:00 p.m.".


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> They found a note that said "11/1/11 Good day to die" and something along the lines of "lotsa people will be dead at 2:00 p.m.".


Wow. Did they figure out who did it?


----------



## dudemanppl

Nope, just everyone had like a 4 hour long fourth period and then they let us out. The teacher I had was basically the one who found the note and she was sort of freaking out, but stayed pretty calm. Note my school has like 3,600 students.

I really need to go out somewhere and shoot but I don't understand public transport. I guess I could go on photowalks with some other film shooter on FM and seems like really cool guy, but that's sort of weird and creepy...


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> I really need to go out somewhere and shoot but I don't understand public transport. I guess I could go on photowalks with some other film shooter on FM and seems like really cool guy, but that's sort of weird and creepy...


How do you not understand public trans? Figure out where you want to go, pay and sit down.

Also, does this FM fellow know he's likely going to be Chris Hansen'd if you "meet up"? I am tired now.

-Thank you.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Nope, just everyone had like a 4 hour long fourth period and then they let us out. The teacher I had was basically the one who found the note and she was sort of freaking out, but stayed pretty calm. Note my school has like 3,600 students.
> I really need to go out somewhere and shoot but I don't understand public transport. I guess I could go on photowalks with some other film shooter on FM and seems like really cool guy, but that's sort of weird and creepy...


I wonder if whoever made the note planned on that happening, or if they were just being stupid. Older kids at one of my old schools would occasionally buy prepaid cell phones and call in a bomb threat or something similar just to see how the school/police/etc. react. It was their sick idea of entertainment.

Oh, and it looks like you edited your previous post. Yes, my neighbor was a drug dealer. It's kinda funny because we used to joke about it all the time because there were always different cars in the driveway, usually with huge ghetto rims. Like typically 5 or more cars would just appear and disappear throughout the day. Oh, and they were on government assistance, had an unknown number of people living there (there were at least five kids of various ages, two men, one woman, and idk who else because people were coming and going constantly.) and none of them had a proper job as far as we could tell. Anyway, after they got raided, the person who lived on the other side of the house told us that some random guy went and knocked on his door with a gallon sized ziploc bag full of prescription pill bottles, and he asked for the person next door to me by name. Idiot.


----------



## dudemanppl

BWAHAHA, you can tell these guys have a lot of mental capacity. And he doesn't know Chris is visiting, THATS THE POINT. Now shut up. Honestly, I haven't really talked to him before but he lives in Pasedena and seems like neat non-rapist guy.


----------



## foothead

Pasadena? I feel dumb now. This whole time, I was thinking you were in Arcadia, Canada.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> he lives in Pasedena and seems like neat non-rapist guy.


Well, he _has_ to seem "non-rapist", because he wouldn't be very approachable if the inverse was true. Tell him you think the Ford Econoline is the greatest vehicle ever made. If he agrees, Hansen. If he says ICE CREAM TRUCK, pack up and move.


----------



## foothead

Thanks, sub. I just laughed so hard, everyone in the general vicinity probably thinks I'm crazy.


----------



## dudemanppl

I facepalmed at Canada then I realized CA means Canada too. Then I facepalmed at myself. And I will NEVER miss an opportunity for ice cream sub.


----------



## foothead

I'm from Louisiana, so people reference Arcadia, New France (Now Canada) all the time. My family is actually descended from the Cajuns, who were kicked out of there.

I wasn't even aware there was a city in California called Arcadia.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> What the hell is Project Accessory?


Project Runway but stupid.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> I wasn't even aware there was a city in California called Arcadia.


It's where all the Asians are.


----------



## nuclearjock

400mm f/2.8 Nikkor is in the FS/camera equip. section. Selling to fund a Fuji GX617 system with three lenses.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Well, he _has_ to seem "non-rapist", because he wouldn't be very approachable if the inverse was true. Tell him you think the Ford Econoline is the greatest vehicle ever made. If he agrees, Hansen. If he says ICE CREAM TRUCK, pack up and move.


LMAO, reminds me of Demtry Martin: "When the van first came out, creeps must have been like, 'Okay! A room with no windows that moves? Yeah! Definitely!"


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> At least you're not a baton girl like dudeman.


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sigma 85 is NIIICE.


Jeeeezus. Very smooth.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> It's where all the Asians are.


75-80% Asian school wdup. And the Sigma 85 shots = no sharpening in post, sharpening turned off in cam.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/dudemanppl/


----------



## Shane1244

If only they implemented some kind of edit button.


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> 75-80% Asian school wdup. And the Sigma 85 shots = no sharpening in post, sharpening turned off in cam.
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/dudemanppl/


I was going to comment on the Asian Invasion









Yeah that Sigma looks sweet man. Love the feel.


----------



## dudemanppl

Honestly I'd expect the Rokinon/Samyang/etc. to do the same thing You really should get all their primes.


----------



## BlankThis

35 for sure. Then it's a toss up between the 14 or the 85. Actually you can get all 3 for like 1k so it's quite the deal.


----------



## foothead

The 14mm? I saw some samples from it a while back and they were awful, especially when you can get the vivitar 17/3.5 for even cheaper.


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> The 14mm? I saw some samples from it a while back and they were awful, especially when you can get the vivitar 17/3.5 for even cheaper.


Besides the fact that the Vivitar is not as wide, nor as fast, I'm happy with the photos I've seen the Samyang produce on both full frame and crop sensors. Photozone.de's numbers also paint a different story than what you've said. The Samyang also has electronic coupling so you don't have to stop-down meter on a Nikon.


----------



## foothead

The biggest problem with the samyang is the complex, off-center distortion. It's really distracting, and probably very difficult to correct in post.

Example:










The Vivitar is available in Nikon AI mount, so there shouldn't be any need for stop-down metering. I haven't used it, but the samples I've looked at seem really nice. There is some distortion, but it's not nearly as bad as the samyang.


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> The biggest problem with the samyang is the complex, off-center distortion. It's really distracting, and probably very difficult to correct in post.
> 
> The Vivitar is available in Nikon AI mount, so there shouldn't be any need for stop-down metering. I haven't used it, but the samples I've looked at seem really nice. There is some distortion, but it's not nearly as bad as the samyang.


The distortion is quite terrible on it, but there is a custom lens correction profile for it for PS. It's floating around somewhere and worked wonders.


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*


Wow. I think Ken got a bad copy because I haven't seen distortion that bad in any sample images I've looked at.


----------



## biatchi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> The biggest problem with the samyang is the complex, off-center distortion. It's really distracting, and probably very difficult to correct in post.
> Example:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Vivitar is available in Nikon AI mount, so there shouldn't be any need for stop-down metering. I haven't used it, but the samples I've looked at seem really nice. There is some distortion, but it's not nearly as bad as the samyang.


That looks funky as hell


----------



## foothead

I just looked through google images and they all seem to have it about the same. Here's another example.


----------



## BlankThis

Lol I must've been looking at corrected shots.

I don't generally take pictures of walls but yeah a before and after.





He corrected it using PTlens


----------



## Dream Killer

that's what you pay for in a higher end lens. less distortion/aberrations.


----------



## foothead

What type of heater do I need to regulate water at 100°F for E-6 developing? I've been looking at aquarium heaters, but they seem to be really hit-or-miss. Most don't go above 85-90°.


----------



## dudemanppl

Yeah, wouldn't you be starting to cook the fish at 100? Are you sure you need to keep it at 100? Cause for developing B/W I don't really care for the temp, I just assume its around 24 and dev for that. And for C41 just the dev needs to be warm, the rest is fine.


----------



## foothead

E-6 needs to be maintained to ±2° F IIRC. The color starts to get weird at different temperatures. Also, the exposure latitude is _really_ small on Velvia, so developing times needs to be fairly precise or it loses detail.


----------



## dudemanppl

Holy crap, yeah I'm NEVER gonna try to do E6 by myself.


----------



## foothead

It costs $3.50/frame for a lab to develop. Doing it myself is really the only reasonable option.


----------



## r34p3rex

BNIB 5DII's going for $2000 everywhere!! AHHHH


----------



## sub50hz

It's beautiful outside but I'm not out shooting because ???????????????

This is one of those days where I know I should have been up at 5am, napped, and then gone back out shooting.


----------



## MistaBernie

Ugh... is this just a price correction? Adjustment to meet Canadian prices? Or is something bigger coming down the line?


----------



## dudemanppl

Bad time to just hit 30k actuations on my 5DII then. I think I'll swap my sensor with my friends cause the lack of IR filtration is so goddamned annoying. Anyway, film ordered, camera paid for, random airsoft gun bought. http://www.evike.com/product_info.php?manufacturers_id=&products_id=35717


----------



## r34p3rex

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Ugh... is this just a price correction? Adjustment to meet Canadian prices? Or is something bigger coming down the line?


I'd like to think the 5DIII is coming within a year so they're trying to lower 5DII stock now









Wishful thinking!


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r34p3rex*
> 
> I'd like to think the 5DIII is coming within a year so they're trying to lower 5DII stock now
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wishful thinking!


We could see a 5DIII within a year, but I dont see it being announced till at least January, if not after 1Dx..
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Bad time to just hit 30k actuations on my 5DII then. I think I'll swap my sensor with my friends cause the lack of IR filtration is so goddamned annoying. Anyway, film ordered, camera paid for, random airsoft gun bought. http://www.evike.com/product_info.php?manufacturers_id=&products_id=35717


I'd probably buy it in a couple months if the price is right..

Also, would it be worth it for me to switch up to a 17-35 2.8 over the 17-40 4.0? I could probably do it and have it be about a wash..


----------



## dudemanppl

I had one, not that great. I wouldn't.


----------



## Sean Webster

You got an airsoft gun? Why? lol


----------



## BlankThis

Does anybody have any experience with nude shoots? Not pron but the naked body. This girl I know contacted me asking me if I would be willing to shoot her naked to help round our her modeling portfolio.

Not sure if I'm up for it...


----------



## foothead

Want.


----------



## biatchi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis*
> 
> Does anybody have any experience with nude shoots? Not pron but the naked body. This girl I know contacted me asking me if I would be willing to shoot her naked to help round our her modeling portfolio.
> Not sure if I'm up for it...


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis*
> 
> Does anybody have any experience with nude shoots? Not pron but the naked body. This girl I know contacted me asking me if I would be willing to shoot her naked to help round our her modeling portfolio.
> 
> Not sure if I'm up for it...


Never did that myself lol, but you may want to check out the top nude photos on 500px.com for some ideas. The main thing is getting the best skin tone and lighting for it though.


----------



## sub50hz

Nudes are tough. Besides what you want the image to look like, dealing with the model and making her comfortable are going to be much harder. Too much work for me -- I can appreciate a good nude photo, but I have no aspiration to shoot them.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> You got an airsoft gun? Why? lol


Got bored on the bus ride to Band competition. Plus I felt like I needed another GBBR.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> You got an airsoft gun? Why? lol
> 
> 
> 
> Got bored on the bus ride to Band competition. Plus I felt like I needed another GBBR.
Click to expand...

Nice, I am thinking of getting one, but then again I got these...lol


----------



## dudemanppl

30 ROUND MAGAZINES AND A PISTOL GRIP?! YOU MUST BE A MURDERER! Damn you, California.

EDIT: Unless those are airsoft too and you meant a gas rifle... If they're real I envy you.


----------



## Sean Webster

lol, I love Florida, we are getting a full auto Uzi next. We just need to make a living will first. Stupid laws and regulations










I got a few more too, just have them put away atm.

You envy me









They are definitely real.


----------



## dudemanppl

TBH, I'd much rather have a nice computer, nice camera gear, and a nice SKS or something cheap instead of paying like 10k+ (?) for an Uzi. That Krink in the foreground and that last AK (looks like something Chinese or Bulgarian or whatever) are super sexer cause I prefer wood furniture and hate underfolders.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> TBH, I'd much rather have a nice computer, nice camera gear, and a nice SKS or something cheap instead of paying like 10k+ (?) for an Uzi. That Krink in the foreground and that last AK (looks like something Chinese or Bulgarian or whatever) are super sexer cause I prefer wood furniture and hate underfolders.


LOL, I already have all that.









Uzi's are awesome, we had a semiauto one for a while and wanted to upgrade.

The total value of those six AKs is ~$10,000 lol

*Here are the AKs from first to last:*

Russian tula 1986 AKS-74u Paratrooper Krinkov - 5.45X39mm - 45 round mag
AK-105 Bulgarian w/ Ace folder buttstock - 5.45X39mm - 30 round mag
AK-105 Bulgarian w/ poly and steel metal folding buttstock - 5.45X39mm - 45 round mag
Arsenal SLR-106UR Krink Bulgarian - 5.56 NATO - 30 round mag
Yugoslavian (Yugo) M92 Krinkov - 7.62x39mm - 30 round mag
Egyptian MAADI (made with true Russian machinery, closest to original AK47's) - 7.62x39mm - 30 round mag


----------



## dudemanppl

No ARs or anything? Too much jelly bro.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> No ARs or anything? Too much jelly bro.


We sold them, we had 8 lol,

2 colts, 1 bushmaster, 3 rockriver, 1 remington, 1 alexander arms .50 beowulf (my favorite







)


----------



## foothead

Note to self: In case of zombie apocalypse, find Sean Webster.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> Note to self: In case of zombie apocalypse, find Sean Webster.


haha, I'm just south of you if you can get to me without being infected.


----------



## Kariz-Matik

Errrmm... So many guns.

You Americans are freaking crazy.

That is all.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kariz-Matik*
> 
> Errrmm... So many guns.
> 
> You Americans are freaking crazy.
> 
> That is all.


LOL, guns are cool, I love tinkering with mine.


----------



## dudemanppl

Yeee, when I come home from school tomorrow I'll put together the trigger group, FA sear, mag catch/release (hopefully) then head out to guard practice. Slow AF shipping from Hong Kong yay! Can't wait for the 690, don't even really know what I'm gonna shoot with the first roll.


----------



## ljason8eg

Well lo and behold, had a package held at FedEx while I was in Phoenix and it turns out to be a BNIB 50 1.4. Finally a resolution!

Also, Phoenix International Raceway is by far the worst track I've been to when it comes to photography without a photo credential. Everything is cramped, tight, and you're always in the way of someone or something. Whoever designed the infield layout needs their head examined. Hopefully Homestead-Miami Speedway is better.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> Well lo and behold, had a package held at FedEx while I was in Phoenix and it turns out to be a BNIB 50 1.4. Finally a resolution!
> Also, Phoenix International Raceway is by far the worst track I've been to when it comes to photography without a photo credential. Everything is cramped, tight, and you're always in the way of someone or something. Whoever designed the infield layout needs their head examined. Hopefully Homestead-Miami Speedway is better.


And so the saga ends, congrats. But here's the burning question: how is the BNIB 50mm? Wouldn't just be hilarious if it were just as bad?


----------



## MistaBernie

I dont know that it would be hilarious, per se... but if there continues to be an issue, then yeah, something's wrong.

Did you have to send back your 'bad' copy?


----------



## dudemanppl

Well I checked the news and there doesn't seem to be any shootings around Elk Grove so I guess its safe to assume the lens is fine.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*
> 
> And so the saga ends, congrats. But here's the burning question: how is the BNIB 50mm? Wouldn't just be hilarious if it were just as bad?


That would be funny. I dunno if I'm going to open it or not though. Might just sell it as BNIB and try something else.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> I dont know that it would be hilarious, per se... but if there continues to be an issue, then yeah, something's wrong.
> Did you have to send back your 'bad' copy?


Yeah they wanted the bad copy back and overnighted me this new copy.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> That would be funny. I dunno if I'm going to open it or not though. Might just sell it as BNIB and try something else.
> Yeah they wanted the bad copy back and overnighted me this new copy.


You should give it another shot. You were a victim of some nefariously incompetent Canon repair techs, so the lens can't be totally blamed. I think you owe it to yourself after all that you went through!

Or just say eff it and go for a Sigma 50.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis*
> 
> Does anybody have any experience with nude shoots? Not pron but the naked body. This girl I know contacted me asking me if I would be willing to shoot her naked to help round our her modeling portfolio.
> Not sure if I'm up for it...


I think Eek does some modeling, but not sure if he's dealt with nudes. Still, might be work asking.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*
> 
> You should give it another shot. You were a victim of some nefariously incompetent Canon repair techs, so the lens can't be totally blamed. I think you owe it to yourself after all that you went through!
> Or just say eff it and go for a Sigma 50.


This. Sell the Canon 50mm BNIB, buy a used Sigma. With any luck you won't lose any money.


----------



## sub50hz

Received a nice B&H package today -- 8 rolls of Delta 400 and a 220 pro pack of Portra 400. Donde esta Marin, I have a developer question.


----------



## BlankThis

I bailed on the shoot. She was willing to pay me $200 for a 2 hour session (I don't know if it's a good rate or not but I would've done it for free. No post work done, she had a touch-up guy who gives her a good rate on model mayhem) but I just didn't feel comfortable enough with doing it. I have no problems with modeling and I've working with her before, but I don't really know what I should be doing when posing a nude body. I went out and took a book out at the library today that has almost a whole chapter on shooting nudes. It's definitely something I want to try after I score a legit black backdrop and ditch this awful white sheet.

I also feel super limited with just my 50 after selling off my gear to jump ship... Which is going to have to wait.


----------



## sub50hz

Pick up a cheap film body. Never hurts to shoot a few rolls and experiment.


----------



## BlankThis

I shoot film, I have a FTb. I love it to death but right now I can't really justify spending the money on film (HP5), a new tank (Cracked my other one putting the lid on...) and developer/stop/photoflo.

I'm stuck in a bad situation right now. Recently I've been getting requests to shoot portraits, anniversaries/weddings, bar'mitzvahs and events but I don't have much a kit anymore so I have to rent which takes a huge chunk of my profit and at 18 I have a credit card limit of 2k, not leaving much room for security deposits.


----------



## sub50hz

Well, take care of your needs first. Cameras can wait.

P.S. Have you tried a lab for your development? Might be worth a shot, but don't starve yourself _too_ bad. Lol.


----------



## BlankThis

There are a few labs around but they either don't have a website or very little info. I forget where in the 'states (I think Cali) but they have a prepaid shoebox-ish box that they ship to you, you load it with your rolls, they develop and scan it, and ship the CDs back to you. I think Ken Rockwell recommended it. I think it was around $250 for as many rolls as you could stuff in the sucker.


----------



## sub50hz

Are you... not in the US? I don't always remember, and your Location info doesn't help.


----------



## BlankThis

The new layout messed up my Canadian flag...

I'm in Montreal (Quebec), Canada. It's an amazing city but sadly lacks a B&H and KEH


----------



## sub50hz

Well, thankfully, it lacks a Luongo as well.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Well, thankfully, it lacks a Luongo as well.


Us Bostonians are _very_ thankful for Luongo. Too soon?


----------



## BlankThis

The sad truth? I'm a Sens fan... Everyone hates me. You can't begin to imagine how serious hockey is taken here.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Us Bostonians are _very_ thankful for Luongo. Too soon?


It's alright, but it was real frustrating see the rest of the West collapse at the hands of Vigneault knowing that the hawks gave them their best run in the first round. I won't play the "could have" game though, I'm not a Cubs fan.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis*
> 
> The sad truth? I'm a Sens fan... Everyone hates me. You can't begin to imagine how serious hockey is taken here.


A _Sens_ fan? Yeesh, you're ballsy to state that publicly.

P.S. I just alerted your local authorities -- enjoy the next ten years in prison.

P.P.S. I found out how bitter Vancouver fans were after I went to one of our trade shows there last winter. I was, of course, wearing my 2010 Cup hat, and pretty much everyone I ran into was a total hard-on about it. Didn't wear it for the rest of the trip, didn't want to sully a few nice days in a beautiful city.


----------



## BlankThis

I can't deal with Habs fans... A majority of them are over aggressive about their team and hate on them when they start losing. Sens fans are awesome! Plus $28 tickets for students! Worth the hour drive.


----------



## sub50hz

Wow, 28 bucks. You can barely get standing room at the UC for 28 bucks. The price of having a team that's putting up almost 4 goals per game at home, I suppose.

Oh, and Bernie, I wanted _so_ bad to have Hawks/Bruins cup. Glad as hell your boys pulled it out, though, as I have a soft spot for Boston on a whole. Great place.


----------



## BlankThis

Sub I'm trying to set up a trip to Chicago this summer. There's a photographer named Nick Gerber there who has really been an inspiration to me (Met him through tumblr) and I want to try and meet him in person. If it works out and I'm in town lets not grab a drink, since I can't down there, and you can show me some great places to shoot in the city. Nick Gerber's work makes the city look absolutely bursting with character!


----------



## MistaBernie

Thanks Sub! I too was hoping for a Hab-free cup as well. Chicago is pretty cool too; I may try to get ny wife and I out there sometime soon (again)


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis*
> 
> If it works out and I'm in town lets not grab a drink.


That made me laugh too much... Gerber reminds me of baby food.
http://usps.ems-tracking.net/usps-tracking.php?number=+CP811888221HK DAMMIT GW690 SHIP FASTER.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis*
> 
> If it works out and I'm in town lets not grab a drink, since I can't down there


Never stopped anyone. How old are you?


----------



## scottath

Hey guys,

Just trying out a different thing and got these 2 images.
Manual focus - ISO100 - F/9.0 - Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 - Speedlight diffused
C&C please


















Thanks guys


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Never stopped anyone. How old are you?


18. 19 in July. Just a baby...


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis*
> 
> I bailed on the shoot. She was willing to pay me $200 for a 2 hour session (I don't know if it's a good rate or not but I would've done it for free. No post work done, she had a touch-up guy who gives her a good rate on model mayhem) but I just didn't feel comfortable enough with doing it. I have no problems with modeling and I've working with her before, but I don't really know what I should be doing when posing a nude body. I went out and took a book out at the library today that has almost a whole chapter on shooting nudes. It's definitely something I want to try after I score a legit black backdrop and ditch this awful white sheet.
> I also feel super limited with just my 50 after selling off my gear to jump ship... Which is going to have to wait.


Send her to Ottawa, I'll do it.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scottath*
> 
> Hey guys,
> Just trying out a different thing and got these 2 images.
> Manual focus - ISO100 - F/9.0 - Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 - Speedlight diffused
> C&C please
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks guys


The light looks a little too sharp, and Id go to like f/22. Composition looks great though!


----------



## r34p3rex

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scottath*
> 
> Hey guys,
> Just trying out a different thing and got these 2 images.
> Manual focus - ISO100 - F/9.0 - Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 - Speedlight diffused
> C&C please
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks guys


By diffused you mean you had a flash diffuser on your speedlight right?

I would try bouncing the light off a larger surface (i.e. wall) to give the flash an even more diffused look.


----------



## scottath

Yea a cap style diffuser.
this is taken on my desk - so it would be reflecting off my screens :/
was just playing around with it really.

Tried one shot with the lens reversed too - was cool:









then i noticed how dusty the face was - oh well.....was a fun experiment of something small aside from my usual landscapes


----------



## Kariz-Matik

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244*
> 
> Send her to Ottawa, I'll do it.
> The light looks a little too sharp, and Id go to like f/22. Composition looks great though!


Dear God, why on earth would you goto F/22 on something that is only 2 inches wide and a few inches away from the camera?!??!

Overkill, much?! Even F/9.0 is more than enough.


----------



## dudemanppl

http://www.ebay.com/itm/180755772588 I keep buying random crap. I'm betting most of that works.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kariz-Matik*
> 
> Dear God, why on earth would you goto F/22 on something that is only 2 inches wide and a few inches away from the camera?!??!
> Overkill, much?! Even F/9.0 is more than enough.


Depth of field + reduced sharpness. I agree that it'd probably look better stopped down more, though F/22 might be a bit overkill on APS-C.

Also, if your speedlight has a swivel head, turn it backwards and bounce off a slightly folded styrofoam plate. If not, use a PC sync cord and a cold shoe mount to get it facing backwards. It should diffuse the lighting much better, especially if you use that in addition to the diffuser cap.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> http://www.ebay.com/itm/180755772588 I keep buying random crap. I'm betting most of that works.


Wow, that's a lot of random junk. Why not buy something useful? That kodak vigilant will at least be fun to play with, assuming you can get the light leaks under control (and it will have many). If nothing, you can remove the lens and it'll cover 4x5. I have one lying around, but the shutter's frozen.


----------



## scottath

Will be looking into getting a cord sometime soon probably - atm though its stuck in the shoe if i want to use it.


----------



## dudemanppl

If you pay shipping, I'll send the Vigilant over to you. doesnotwant.jpg. F, F2, F3, FM2, FE for 160 yes. I don't see how an F or F2 could break in any way though.


----------



## foothead

If you have any old SLRs lying around, look through them. They tend to have this thing attached, which I find works perfectly for reversing a flash.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> If you pay shipping, I'll send the Vigilant over to you. doesnotwant.jpg. F, F2, F3, FM2, FE for 160 yes. I don't see how an F or F2 could break in any way though.


Awesome, thanks! Let me know when you get it, I'll definitely do that, as long as the lens/shutter isn't totally destroyed.

EDIT: Dammit, double post. For some reason, my last post had basically disappeared, so I couldn't edit it. Now it's back.


----------



## dudemanppl

If it's dead wat do?


----------



## Kariz-Matik

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> Depth of field + reduced sharpness. I agree that it'd probably look better stopped down more, though F/22 might be a bit overkill on APS-C.
> Also, if your speedlight has a swivel head, turn it backwards and bounce off a slightly folded styrofoam plate. If not, use a PC sync cord and a cold shoe mount to get it facing backwards. It should diffuse the lighting much better, especially if you use that in addition to the diffuser cap.
> Wow, that's a lot of random junk. Why not buy something useful? That kodak vigilant will at least be fun to play with, assuming you can get the light leaks under control (and it will have many). If nothing, you can remove the lens and it'll cover 4x5. I have one lying around, but the shutter's frozen.


I understand for a wider depth of field and sharper. But F/22 is beyond overkill and for that lens would probably start going bad again -- Sweet spot for most lenses is anywhere from F/4.0 to F/12. Even F/9.0 is slightly overkill for something that close / that small. Hell, F/4.0 would do the trick more than fine.


----------



## foothead

I'll probably want it, as long as the lens and shutter aren't both totally trashed. Judging by the picture, it looks like it was reasonably well taken care of, so I doubt that'll be the case.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kariz-Matik*
> 
> I understand for a wider depth of field and sharper. But F/22 is beyond overkill and for that lens would probably start going bad again -- Sweet spot for most lenses is anywhere from F/4.0 to F/12. Even F/9.0 is slightly overkill for something that close / that small. Hell, F/4.0 would do the trick more than fine.


The band is really out of focus in those pictures, especially the second one. It messes them up for me. Shane's original point was that it was too sharp, so stopping down more would help that as well.


----------



## scottath

im 20, uni student and have my 550D and mums old 35mm film slr - ill go for an ebay search when i save up
thanks for the tips guys - next time i get something else cool to shoot ill have a look with some of the other setting suggestions / flash positions


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> If it's dead wat do?


bury it?


----------



## r34p3rex

Just picked up a set of these badboys: http://www.amazon.com/OP-TECH-USA-9001142-Rainsleeve-Flash/dp/B002TI71HQ/ref=pd_bxgy_p_text_b










Time to go shooting in the rain!


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r34p3rex*
> 
> Just picked up a set of these badboys: http://www.amazon.com/OP-TECH-USA-9001142-Rainsleeve-Flash/dp/B002TI71HQ/ref=pd_bxgy_p_text_b
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Time to go shooting in the rain!


Camera condom!


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

I just use my 50D in the rain. The "partial weather sealing" seems to hold up just fine.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*
> 
> I just use my 50D in the rain. The "partial weather sealing" seems to hold up just fine.


Same with me, my 5DII seems to be able to take it like a champ.


----------



## r34p3rex

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*
> 
> I just use my 50D in the rain. The "partial weather sealing" seems to hold up just fine.


Yea, I'm more worried about the lens though. If your lens isn't weather sealed and moisture gets in, you risk getting a fungal infection :\


----------



## bl1nk

Just bought myself my first non-kit lense. It's just a nifty fifty but I'm still excited regardless so I felt I should share my excitement here.


----------



## r34p3rex

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bl1nk*
> 
> Just bought myself my first non-kit lense. It's just a nifty fifty but I'm still excited regardless so I felt I should share my excitement here.


Make sure your wallet is ready







Once you move past the kit lens.. you're going to want more and more.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r34p3rex*
> 
> Make sure your wallet is ready
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Once you move past the kit lens.. you're going to want more and more.


Ain't that the truth.


----------



## r34p3rex

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*
> 
> Ain't that the truth.


I spent a grand total of maybe a month after I got my nifty fifty before wanting more









I wish there were some local lens retnal places.. I'd love to try out a new lens every week but paying $40 shipping is a bit ridiculous.


----------



## Shane1244

http://gizmodo.com/5859645/vintage-cameras-as-nightlights-comforting-or-creepy


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r34p3rex*
> 
> I spent a grand total of maybe a month after I got my nifty fifty before wanting more
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I wish there were some local lens retnal places.. I'd love to try out a new lens every week but paying $40 shipping is a bit ridiculous.


I don't even want to think about how much I've invested. It must be north of $7k at this point, but thankfully I've reached "gear satiation," if I may coin a phrase. These days I just sort of want new lenses, but no lust is taking me over lately.

On that note, I'd love to hear what Marin or dude has invested up this point.


----------



## Infrabasse

I never knew about this thread.

It somehow showed up in my "Overclock.net Subscription Update" though, so I must have stumbled upon it at some point in the past. Anyways, I'm pretty excited today as I'm about to receive a Pentax K-5








Until recently I was exclusively shooting with a Powershot S95 but upped my game to a Pentax K-r about a month ago

I originally got a Pentax K-r with a bunch of lenses

I wasn't too happy with the extreme front focus issues I was experiencing indoors with the K-r and the 50 f/1.4. I feared I was gonna end up with a similarly faulty K-r if I sent it back so I bit the bullet and I'm getting an awesome K-5. I'm expecting it in the post tomorrow. It's coming with the 18-55mm WR and 50-200mm WR. I'm aware the K-5 has it's share of issues too but with the current rebates it was too tempting to pass.

Please add me to the club with the following gear:

Pentax K-5
Pentax 18-55mm WR
Pentax 50-200mm WR
Pentax 10-17mm fisheye zoom
Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6
Sigma 50mm f/1.4
Oh and I almost forgot an old Tokina SD 70-210mm f/4-5.6 I salvaged from my dad's old Ricoh film SLR


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scottath*
> 
> Hey guys,
> Just trying out a different thing and got these 2 images.
> Manual focus - ISO100 - F/9.0 - Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 - Speedlight diffused
> C&C please
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks guys


dont use speed lights, its probably easier to use constant lights and tripod. you probably need a few more lights cause it looks awfully dark.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kariz-Matik*
> 
> I understand for a wider depth of field and sharper. But F/22 is beyond overkill and for that lens would probably start going bad again -- Sweet spot for most lenses is anywhere from F/4.0 to F/12. Even F/9.0 is slightly overkill for something that close / that small. Hell, F/4.0 would do the trick more than fine.


considering how hes already at f9, dof is still rather thin, i would go up to maybe f16 to kill the remaining dof.

or focus stack.


----------



## dudemanppl

In TOTAL of EVERYTHING I've ever owned its around 60-70 grand, but my current stuff is around 9-10.


----------



## MistaBernie

Apparently it's 'time to sell your Canon 50 f/1.4' on POTN.. and in the midst of it, someone's selling a 1.2 and asking for a 1.4 in trade + ~$1050...


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Apparently it's 'time to sell your Canon 50 f/1.4' on POTN.. and in the midst of it, someone's selling a 1.2 and asking for a 1.4 in trade + ~$1050...


I saw that, and thought about it last night. Dunno if I want to spend that on gear right now though.


----------



## dudemanppl

50L is the worst lens I have ever owned (and still own cause I need to get it fixed, crap build quality). DO NOT GET IT.


----------



## MistaBernie

Yeah, I feel like if I'm gonna get an L prime, it's either going to be a focal length I dont have (24 ii or 35) or the 85 ii. Either way, it's wishful thinking though, unless I'm able to wrangle a decent price out of the shoot I have next week (that magically changed from a portraits / professional head shot into a 'family xmas card photo session)... something tells me I have a bit of work to do to get ready; I'm gonna order some test prints and consider upgrading e my Smugmug page to Pro so that he (or any of my customers) can order prints through my Smugmug page directly (at prices that I would set).


----------



## r34p3rex

85L all the way!! I played with one a while back and I've been wanting it pretty hardcore. Way too much to spend on one focal length for me though


----------



## Dream Killer

i just got my d700 back from repair. it's funny how they still call the left hand side the "rewind side".


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Apparently it's 'time to sell your Canon 50 f/1.4' on POTN.. and in the midst of it, someone's selling a 1.2 and asking for a 1.4 in trade + ~$1050...


LOL, that's the biggest trade plus cash I've seen. Why doesn't he just sell it and then buy a 50/1.4? I think I'll sell my 24-70 for a Canon 35-80 plus $1300.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> 50L is the worst lens I have ever owned (and still own cause I need to get it fixed, crap build quality). DO NOT GET IT.


Canon should update the 50L, mainly so that it can have a floating rear element. A bump up in the corner sharpness couldn't hurt either.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Yeah, I feel like if I'm gonna get an L prime, it's either going to be a focal length I dont have (24 ii or 35) or the 85 ii. Either way, it's wishful thinking though, unless I'm able to wrangle a decent price out of the shoot I have next week (that magically changed from a portraits / professional head shot into a 'family xmas card photo session)... something tells me I have a bit of work to do to get ready; I'm gonna order some test prints and consider upgrading e my Smugmug page to Pro so that he (or any of my customers) can order prints through my Smugmug page directly (at prices that I would set).


24 or 35 on the 5D, coupled with a good 50, many saix time.

Update: Still haven't shot with anything but the nifty since Labor Day weekend's riding extravaganza. I shouldn't say that, as I popped the 50D and 135L for a few, but it's still very much dormant in my bag.


----------



## r34p3rex

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*
> 
> LOL, that's the biggest trade plus cash I've seen. Why doesn't he just sell it and then buy a 50/1.4? I think I'll sell my 24-70 for a Canon 35-80 plus $1300.


I've actually seen a larger one

Craigslist.. a few months back.. "Trading my 70-200 IS II for 55-250 and $2100 cash"

He claims he bought the 70-200 II because it was the most expensive zoom available, but then said it was too heavy so he wanted something smaller and lighter..


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r34p3rex*
> 
> I've actually seen a larger one
> Craigslist.. a few months back.. "Trading my 70-200 IS II for 55-250 and $2100 cash"
> *He claims he bought the 70-200 II because it was the most expensive zoom available*, but then said it was too heavy so he wanted something smaller and lighter..


I just choked on my water...


----------



## Dream Killer

i'm surprised he didn't buy a 200-400mm


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*
> 
> I just choked on my water...


200-500 2.8


----------



## Dream Killer

i forgot about that sigma monstrosity. the photo of that guy hand holding it while aiming it up cracks me up every time.


----------



## scottath

Canon 1200mm anyone ?


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scottath*
> 
> Canon 1200mm anyone ?


lol


----------



## BlankThis

Giggity.

http://photorumors.com/2011/11/15/fuji-mirrorless-camera-leaked/

Way too cool.


----------



## sub50hz

*puts X100 purchase on hold*

Also, going to look at a Mamiya 7 tomorrow. I think if I had only one camera, that would be it.


----------



## BlankThis

*puts purchase of everything on hold*

*looks for places willing to purchase a kidney*


----------



## sub50hz

Donate plasma. You might be surprised.


----------



## Dream Killer

posted my 285HV in the F/S section. anyone want to cop it?


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> *puts X100 purchase on hold*
> Also, going to look at a Mamiya 7 tomorrow. I think if I had only one camera, that would be it.


Meh, too small. Fuji GX680. Do it.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> posted my 285HV in the F/S section. anyone want to cop it?


thats a pretty good price for a 285hv. usually ppl charge an arm and a leg since vivtar discontinued it.


----------



## foothead

Fomapan has ridiculous grain. I was just looking at some of my 4x5 negs with a 10x loupe, and the grain size is like five times bigger than TMAX 100.

Grain aside, it's actually a decent film as long as you stick to short exposures. I shot a couple pictures at f/64, like 2s exposure, and they were pretty much clear. It sells for virtually nothing rebranded as Arista EDU ultra (the non-ultra is fortepan).


----------



## Kariz-Matik

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> I'll probably want it, as long as the lens and shutter aren't both totally trashed. Judging by the picture, it looks like it was reasonably well taken care of, so I doubt that'll be the case.
> The band is really out of focus in those pictures, especially the second one. It messes them up for me. Shane's original point was that it was *too sharp*, so stopping down more would help that as well.


Stopping down would actually make it sharper.


----------



## Kariz-Matik

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> 50L is the worst lens I have ever owned (and still own cause I need to get it fixed, crap build quality). DO NOT GET IT.


You got a crap copy then, dude. I've dropped my 5DMKII and 50 L from shooting height (I'm 6'3") LOTS of times -- Onto concrete. In water. Everything. I've cracked / smashed UV filters plenty of times with it on. I throw it in the back of my cars boot (I live in the hinterland, the roads here wind more than something out of F1 tracks) and constantly hear it bouncing around.

Not a scratch.

Focus is perfect.

Get yours fixed dude.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Donate plasma. You might be surprised.


Yeah, you'll be surprised all right, at what a waste of time it is. I tried it once in college (admittedly several years ago at this point), and it takes bloody ages (pun) to get the plasma, then they compensate you with a whopping $30, depending on how much you weigh, not to mention the seedy, desperate characters who frequent plasma clinics. Frankly, donating a kidney would be a much more efficient method. Plasma = $15 per hour, donating a kidney = $100s per hour. Not that I would seriously consider doing either.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kariz-Matik*
> 
> Stopping down would actually make it sharper.


Not if it were f/22 as originally suggested. Diffraction would destroy sharpness at that point.


----------



## Kariz-Matik

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*
> 
> Yeah, you'll be surprised all right, at what a waste of time it is. I tried it once in college (admittedly several years ago at this point), and it takes bloody ages (pun) to get the plasma, then they compensate you with a whopping $30, depending on how much you weigh, not to mention the seedy, desperate characters who frequent plasma clinics. Frankly, donating a kidney would be a much more efficient method. Plasma = $15 per hour, donating a kidney = $100s per hour. Not that I would seriously consider doing either.
> Not if it were f/22 as originally suggested. Diffraction would destroy sharpness at that point.


At F/22, that's true. Which is why I said it was crazy. Why would you bother!


----------



## foothead

APS-C starts losing sharpness to diffraction around f/8-11 IIRC.


----------



## dudemanppl

This M4 terrible. I put on the delta ring the wrong way so I have to pry that c clip off oh my god.


----------



## Dunkler

Hey guys, my wife has been wanting a good camera to photograph our baby boy with as he grows up. After reading several reviews and what have you, I decided I could afford this for Christmas:



I hope she likes it!


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*
> 
> Yeah, you'll be surprised all right, at what a waste of time it is. I tried it once in college (admittedly several years ago at this point), and it takes bloody ages (pun) to get the plasma, then they compensate you with a whopping $30, depending on how much you weigh, not to mention the seedy, desperate characters who frequent plasma clinics. Frankly, donating a kidney would be a much more efficient method. Plasma = $15 per hour, donating a kidney = $100s per hour. Not that I would seriously consider doing either.


They would pay us 50-75 bucks a pop, and you could study while they were doing it. Pop headphones in, study, get paid. It was enough to eat (and sometimes drink) for a week, which was good enough for me at that point.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> This M4 terrible. I put on the delta ring the wrong way so I have to pry that c clip off oh my god.


I have no idea what any of this means. Translation please?


----------



## BlankThis

I was debating about doing clinical trials... Anybody done any before? They're offering $1400 or so.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> They would pay us 50-75 bucks a pop, and you could study while they were doing it. Pop headphones in, study, get paid. It was enough to eat (and sometimes drink) for a week, which was good enough for me at that point.


Hm, I guess they're paying a lot more these days. It was at the end of the nineties the last I donated plasma, and they paid by the donor's weight. Thankfully I was heavy enough (all of 170 lbs at the time) to be in the top paying bracket, but it was $30 for 2 to 2.5 hours of squeezing a ball.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dunkler*
> 
> Hey guys, my wife has been wanting a good camera to photograph our baby boy with as he grows up. After reading several reviews and what have you, I decided I could afford this for Christmas:


Sounds good!
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis*
> 
> I was debating about doing clinical trials... Anybody done any before? They're offering $1400 or so.


Clinical trials for what exactly? I had a friend in college who participated in a trial where all he had to do was smoke pot and watch TV, NO JOKE! (dude caps)


----------



## sub50hz

That's gotta be the best trial ever.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis*
> 
> I was debating about doing clinical trials... Anybody done any before? They're offering $1400 or so.


Depends on the types of trials. Clinical trials in my field tend to be the most work/most difficult, where patients have to adhere to a strict drug intake/check up schedule. Studies for the humanities on the other hand tend to be the easiest. If you want quick cash, check out the psych/socio departments at your local university.

And on an unrelated note: DayQuil and Coffee - Not even once.
Don't do it, kids.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> That's gotta be the best trial ever.


Yeah, I almost didn't believe it when he told me. This was a while ago, way before medical marijuana, so everyone was flabbergasted. I think the point of the trial was to see how marijuana affected TV viewing (they didn't actually tell him what they were testing for), because they put him in a room, in a comfy chair (NO! NOT THE COMFY CHAIR! Bonus points for anyone who knows where that's from) with a TV set, and they provided the cheeba.


----------



## MistaBernie

I've actually become accustomed to the taste of red Nyquil. Dare I say, I like it. People say they took the stuff out that makes you sleepy, but if I'm breathing better I can relax which leads to sleepiness.


----------



## ljason8eg

That trial sounds absolutely epic besides the fact that NASCAR would probably think that would be a good time to drug test me. Bye bye license and garage access.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> I've actually become accustomed to the taste of red Nyquil. Dare I say, I like it. People say they took the stuff out that makes you sleepy, but if I'm breathing better I can relax which leads to sleepiness.


As my uncharaceristically-asleep-before-3AM self can tell you, NyQuil still puts you to sleep.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*
> 
> NO! NOT THE COMFY CHAIR! Bonus points for anyone who knows where that's from


Clearly, The Spanish Inquisition.

*swish*


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*
> 
> And on an unrelated note: DayQuil and Coffee - Not even once.
> Don't do it, kids.


Lolwut. DayQuil is just acetaminophen and decongestants.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*
> 
> As my uncharaceristically-asleep-before-3AM self can tell you, NyQuil still puts you to sleep.


NyQuil sucks. It's like juice that tastes bad.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Fuji support*
> Thank you for contacting FUJIFILM North America Corporation. Please allow us to assist you.
> 
> *Please be advised that Astia 100F is available in 120 5pk and 4x5 20 sheet packs.* All other formats have been discontinued.
> 
> We sincerely hope this information has been beneficial to you. If you should have any further questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact us in the future. It would be our pleasure to assist you again.
> 
> Thank you for your interest in FUJIFILM products and services.


So I guess it hasn't been discontinued, they just removed it from their website?


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Lolwut. DayQuil is just acetaminophen and decongestants.


I think there is a bunch of caffeine in DayQuil and other stuff to make you "feel better"


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *silvrr*
> 
> I think there is a bunch of caffeine in DayQuil and other stuff to make you "feel better"


If there is, it's only there to accelerate the uptake of the medicine(s). I drink an unhealthy amount of coffee anyways (I can see at least 3 Starbucks locations from the sidewalk outside our building), so I would probably never notice it in there anyway, haha.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Clearly, The Spanish Inquisition.
> *swish*


Clearly, and no one expects them.


----------



## MistaBernie

Score. If my buddy ends up wanting a lens with more reach and liking the 55-250 I just got, then he gets a sweet deal and I get good karma.

If he doesn't want it, I sell it for ~80% more than I paid for it. Win/win.


----------



## dudemanppl

Gasp, how much was paid my good sir? 80% means its around 70 I assume? And to whoever asked about my random post about the M4 and delta ring, thats about a gun, I forgot Leica made M4s too.


----------



## MistaBernie

yeah, yeah, I know it's not buying broken expensive stuff, doing a cheap and easy repair myself and selling it for hundreds+ more than I bought it for, but anytime I can make a little extra money with little-no effort, I'm in. (and yeah, that's pretty close to right on the guess)


----------



## Boyboyd

I got a free roll of velvia 50 today. From a company i bought some from months ago, no explanation or charges or anything :S

Shame it's winter.


----------



## ljason8eg

After looking through the photos I took from Phoenix, I think Canon did just what I thought they might do; screwed up my 7D trying to get it to work with that broken 50 1.4. I have a bunch of nice backfocused shots. I know, I know, my fault for not testing it out thoroughly before the trip but Jesus Christ this is f-ing insane.

I also caved and tried the new 50 I was sent as well. Good on the T2i, and pretty good even wide open. Backfocuses like a bauss on the 7D. Thanks Canon, you rock. Guess I'll be rocking the T2i with the 300 f/4 at the track this weekend in Miami. Joy.


----------



## MistaBernie

Seriously? Unacceptable. Whatever was happening with your 50, they probably figured they could adjust the 7D to offset it. Call whoever you spoke to last and let them know that now since you got your 7D back, it back-focuses significantly and you have a race to cover this weekend. Ask them what they plan to do about it, and let them know that you're currently fielding offers to sell all your gear and switch over to Nikon.


----------



## ljason8eg

Its the same old story...highlights!!

Me: "I have race to cover this weekend. Without a working camera I can't cover it and could quite possibly be relieved of my duties."
Supervisor: "Well since you are not a CPS Gold or Platinum member we cannot give you loaner equipment no matter what the circumstances." (I'm a single point away from gold level FWIW)

The conversation continued with some arguing. Wasn't getting anywhere so I said that the poor quality of the product and customer support is making me seriously consider selling my gear and switching to Nikon. He didn't seem to concerned with that, pointing out that if my gear really is malfunctioning I probably shouldn't sell it as that would be dishonest. I responded "oh dishonest? Kind of like your repair techs at the service center??" Then he turned into a typical robot support agent and asked me if there was anything else he could help me with.

F them. I'm confident everything works fine except the 7D at this point. Pretty sure I'm going to sell everything but the 7D, which will be charged back instead. Tired of dealing with it. This will be the first time I will be trying out AmEx's supposedly world class customer service. Hopefully this works out.


----------



## MistaBernie

Sorry to hear that man.. my 7D has been awesome since I got it. I really wish you'd have better luck with your gear, you shoot some good stuff when it's working!


----------



## sub50hz

Did you try MA on the 7D? If it needs something like +/- 8 for every lens, at least it's correctable.


----------



## r34p3rex

2 more days until my 70-200!!! The wait is killing me


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r34p3rex*
> 
> 2 more days until my 70-200!!! The wait is killing me


which one did you get?


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Did you try MA on the 7D? If it needs something like +/- 8 for every lens, at least it's correctable.


I played with it a bit. Gets worse as distance from subject increases, like something is way out of calibration. I don't now how this stuff works on the technical level so its hard for me to understand and wrap my head around why it is behaving the way it is.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r34p3rex*
> 
> 2 more days until my 70-200!!! The wait is killing me


You will love it. Wouldn't surprise me if it becomes your favorite lens, depending on what you shoot.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> Its the same old story...highlights!!
> Me: "I have race to cover this weekend. Without a working camera I can't cover it and could quite possibly be relieved of my duties."
> Supervisor: "Well since you are not a CPS Gold or Platinum member we cannot give you loaner equipment no matter what the circumstances." (I'm a single point away from gold level FWIW)
> The conversation continued with some arguing. Wasn't getting anywhere so I said that the poor quality of the product and customer support is making me seriously consider selling my gear and switching to Nikon. He didn't seem to concerned with that, pointing out that if my gear really is malfunctioning I probably shouldn't sell it as that would be dishonest. I responded "oh dishonest? Kind of like your repair techs at the service center??" Then he turned into a typical robot support agent and asked me if there was anything else he could help me with.
> F them. I'm confident everything works fine except the 7D at this point. Pretty sure I'm going to sell everything but the 7D, which will be charged back instead. Tired of dealing with it. This will be the first time I will be trying out AmEx's supposedly world class customer service. Hopefully this works out.


From my experience with both NPS and CPS, CPS is better.


----------



## r34p3rex

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> You will love it. Wouldn't surprise me if it becomes your favorite lens, depending on what you shoot.


It became my favorite lens the day I got to play with my friend's copy







Bought mine the very next day
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> which one did you get?


2.8 non IS


----------



## dudemanppl

If you need a serial number for Gold, just tell me.


----------



## Dream Killer

boo, 2.8 non IS. f/4 IS is so much better.

ps: remember at PAX you asked me, "how do i look for you?". i replied, "look for the guy with the camera with the big giant white lens on it".

now you can use that line, too!


----------



## r34p3rex

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> boo, 2.8 non IS. f/4 IS is so much better.
> ps: remember at PAX you asked me, "how do i look for you?". i replied, "look for the guy with the camera with the big giant white lens on it".
> now you can use that line, too!


ahaha yea. I thought about the f4 IS but i tend to have my tripod everywhere I go









Though, I wouldn't mind if someone gave me a MKII


----------



## Dream Killer

when the hell are we gonna get together and fire up the slrs? i still haven't done a street shoot of boston.


----------



## r34p3rex

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> when the hell are we gonna get together and fire up the slrs? i still haven't done a street shoot of boston.


If you wanna come this weekend.. me and the roommate are planning to go take this grand tour on Saturday (starting early though)









http://maps.google.com/maps?saddr=beacon+st+and+park+drive&daddr=Randolph+Ave+to:Federal+Pond+Rd+to:Central+Ave+to:Moorland+Rd+to:Main+St&hl=en&ll=42.108411,-70.852203&spn=0.881265,2.113495&sll=42.102298,-71.144714&sspn=0.88135,2.113495&geocode=FbkohgIdUQfD-ymbSw9m8XnjiTH0fU2YLKeDCA%3BFcwnhAIdzI_D-w%3BFcblfgId3onJ-w%3BFVHfgAIdI0rK-w%3BFT1-gwIdxuzI-w%3BFcyDhQIdwN3F-w&vpsrc=0&mra=ls&t=m&z=10

you can crash at my place if you wanna stick around for more than the day


----------



## sub50hz

Hey guys, I'm coming to NYC next year for a trade show. I assume party times.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r34p3rex*
> 
> If you wanna come this weekend.. me and the roommate are planning to go take this grand tour on Saturday (starting early though)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://maps.google.com/maps?saddr=beacon+st+and+park+drive&daddr=Randolph+Ave+to:Federal+Pond+Rd+to:Central+Ave+to:Moorland+Rd+to:Main+St&hl=en&ll=42.108411,-70.852203&spn=0.881265,2.113495&sll=42.102298,-71.144714&sspn=0.88135,2.113495&geocode=FbkohgIdUQfD-ymbSw9m8XnjiTH0fU2YLKeDCA%3BFcwnhAIdzI_D-w%3BFcblfgId3onJ-w%3BFVHfgAIdI0rK-w%3BFT1-gwIdxuzI-w%3BFcyDhQIdwN3F-w&vpsrc=0&mra=ls&t=m&z=10
> you can crash at my place if you wanna stick around for more than the day


Dear lord, that is a grand tour. I haven't been to Plymouth since like 2nd grade (so... 1998?), and other than that I've never been to the South Shore. Been meaning to get to Hull at some point.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Hey guys, I'm coming to NYC next year for a trade show. I assume party times.


make sure you contact me!
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r34p3rex*
> 
> If you wanna come this weekend.. me and the roommate are planning to go take this grand tour on Saturday (starting early though)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://maps.google.com/maps?saddr=beacon+st+and+park+drive&daddr=Randolph+Ave+to:Federal+Pond+Rd+to:Central+Ave+to:Moorland+Rd+to:Main+St&hl=en&ll=42.108411,-70.852203&spn=0.881265,2.113495&sll=42.102298,-71.144714&sspn=0.88135,2.113495&geocode=FbkohgIdUQfD-ymbSw9m8XnjiTH0fU2YLKeDCA%3BFcwnhAIdzI_D-w%3BFcblfgId3onJ-w%3BFVHfgAIdI0rK-w%3BFT1-gwIdxuzI-w%3BFcyDhQIdwN3F-w&vpsrc=0&mra=ls&t=m&z=10
> you can crash at my place if you wanna stick around for more than the day


how early is early? i have to attend a mandatory b-day thing on friday night of which i'm sure there will be alcohol.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> make sure you contact me!
> how early is early? i have to attend a mandatory b-day thing on friday night of which i'm sure there will be alcohol.


I thought alcohol is mandatory at all Bday parties after 21, and before your physician says you're too old for these parties for the tenth time


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*
> 
> I thought alcohol is mandatory at all Bday parties after 21, and before your physician says you're too old for these parties for the tenth time


actually, at the graduation of fellows this last july, the head of gastroentorology, aka the field of specialty that deals with the liver, and i had a race of who can down the most martinis before the first toast. i'm sure something like that will happen this friday.

but i'm really contemplating ditching this party early just so i can take a train to boston lol.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> actually, at the graduation of fellows this last july, the head of gastroentorology, aka the field of specialty that deals with the liver, and i had a race of who can down the most martinis before the first toast. i'm sure something like that will happen this friday.
> but i'm really contemplating ditching this party early just so i can take a train to boston lol.


Haha, in my experience, scientists and doctors love their alcohol. I've had many drinks with my PI before, even when I was 19 (and yes, he knew). His rationale: Back in France (he's French), you'd be able to drink.

I really hope HR doesn't see this post.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> actually, at the graduation of fellows this last july, the head of gastroentorology, aka the field of specialty that deals with the liver, and i had a race of who can down the most martinis before the first toast. i'm sure something like that will happen this friday.
> but i'm really contemplating ditching this party early just so i can take a train to boston lol.


Dear. God. Nobody's a winner in a martini race.

People in medicine are usually pretty wild outside of work, _especially_ radiologists for some reason. Hell, I don't even want to repeat some of the things we did as medics.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Dear. God. Nobody's a winner in a martini race.
> *People in medicine are usually pretty wild outside of work,* _especially_ radiologists for some reason. Hell, I don't even want to repeat some of the things we did as medics.


AGREED (Assuming medical research counts there as well).


----------



## laboitenoire

Haha, I've heard the conferences held by the foundry industry are crazy. Supposedly, one of the companies bought out a bar in Pittsburgh for the night last year and had a $10,000 bar tab... And also, as long as you were with somebody from the industry they weren't carding.

There was also stories from some of my department's grad students who went drinking at MS&T last year in Houston who went out with some of the presenters. They started at like 8 pm and went on until 3 am, and the presenters still wanted to keep going despite having to present at 9 in the morning...


----------



## BlankThis

My classics teacher's office has a liquor license... Meetings with him over papers always involve brandy or scotch.


----------



## Dream Killer

i'm not really into getting drunk like crazy anymore. too many responsibilities now.


----------



## sub50hz

It's not even about responsibilities anymore, just... the body can't take that quantity of liquor at this age. I mean, it _can_, but then it just makes its way back out. What a time.


----------



## BlankThis

I cannot get a hangover. Unless I'm sick then maybe.


----------



## r34p3rex

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> actually, at the graduation of fellows this last july, the head of gastroentorology, aka the field of specialty that deals with the liver, and i had a race of who can down the most martinis before the first toast. i'm sure something like that will happen this friday.
> but i'm really contemplating ditching this party early just so i can take a train to boston lol.


lmao do it! take the bus.. cheaper and faster than train and you get wifi/power









Early.. prob head out around 8 haha


----------



## sub50hz

How the hell do you change your sig on here now? Maybe I am blind. Help computer.


----------



## bl1nk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> How the hell do you change your sig on here now? Maybe I am blind. Help computer.


Heh.. click "My Profile" and then it's down at the bottom.


----------



## r34p3rex

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=1105193

5D2 auto microadjust program









Shame the 7D version isn't out yet


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*
> 
> Haha, in my experience, scientists and doctors love their alcohol. I've had many drinks with my PI before, even when I was 19 (and yes, he knew). His rationale: Back in France (he's French), you'd be able to drink.
> I really hope HR doesn't see this post.


Wow, California is weird. In Louisiana, there no minimum drinking age as long as you're on private property. I thought most states had something similar.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> Wow, California is weird. In Louisiana, there no minimum drinking age as long as you're on private property. I thought most states had something similar.


It might have been at a sports bar, watching the France v Mexico FIFA match during the lab's lunch break, and not entirely in his apartment


----------



## dudemanppl

Photographers are all heavy drinkers apparantly? Turns out the only working stuff in that junk pile was the F (cause they don't break) and the two polaroid backed cameras. the F2 was broken then I fixed it then I broke it again. I THINK I cocked it while it was still taking a shot and it just isny cooperating anymore. The FE works in bulb and the M90 mode so I dunno what the problems is and yes I put batteries in it. So for free to you guys is an FE, F2, crappy random Oly P&S, the Vigilant, andthe Minolta whatever the hell it was which comes with a never ready case made of some probably leather. Its 10 bucks for a flat rate Priority.


----------



## foothead

Does the shutter on the vigilant work properly? What lens does it have?

Here is the manual if you are unsure how to properly work it. The cocking lever is the one on the top. AFAIK, the one on the side doesn't do anything.


----------



## dudemanppl

Thanks, for some reason I didn't even bother to google for a manual. I'll check later but its 126mm f/8.8.


----------



## foothead

f/8.8?!







They're normally 4.5 or 6.3. I think I'll be better off just buying a proper lens in that case. The fujinon 150/5.6 looks pretty good.

Anyone here ever use black and white reversal? I'm having trouble finding the appropriate chemicals.


----------



## r34p3rex

Do you guys think CPS is worth joining? I have 23 points of equipment so I'd be eligible for Gold status









How long do you get to keep the evaluation equipment for? I think that alone could be worth the $100 membership







The 2 free clean and checkup seems decent


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> It's not even about responsibilities anymore, just... the body can't take that quantity of liquor at this age. I mean, it _can_, but then it just makes its way back out. What a time.


Double-u tee eff sub, you're not even 30 you poseur. Check back with me in at least 3 years.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis*
> 
> I cannot get a hangover. Unless I'm sick then maybe.


That's what whelps who haven't drank much or at all say. Some of my former Marine and college buddies have a test for you, called "the post six-month deployment *re*tox."
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> Wow, California is weird. In Louisiana, there no minimum drinking age as long as you're on private property. I thought most states had something similar.


Louisiana is an oddball, as is Texas, with the leniency on open containers and whatnot. In most other states, there are laws permitting underage drinking, at some very young ages even, as long as the parents provide the alcohol and it's consumed at home. Stems from European (et al) cultural tidbits, where the whole family would drink at the table. This law was tested in recent years when some local parents gave their 16 year old son beer for his birthday, which was fine, but the problem was that it was also for all his buddies. Screwed.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Photographers are all heavy drinkers apparantly? Turns out the only working stuff in that junk pile was the F (cause they don't break) and the two polaroid backed cameras. the F2 was broken then I fixed it then I broke it again. I THINK I cocked it while it was still taking a shot and it just isny cooperating anymore. The FE works in bulb and the M90 mode so I dunno what the problems is and yes I put batteries in it. So for free to you guys is an FE, F2, crappy random Oly P&S, the Vigilant, andthe Minolta whatever the hell it was which comes with a never ready case made of some probably leather. Its 10 bucks for a flat rate Priority.


Everyone is a heavy drinker, according to recent posts. These days I've become unapologetically discriminating in my drink choice, usually powerful, double-digit Belgian brews or IPA's only. Makes up for the lack in quantity.


----------



## sub50hz

I may not be 30 yet, but my work schedule is.... less than friendly. I'm glad if I get 4 hours of sleep at night. That kind of wears on you over the years (fwiw, I leave at 4:30 to catch a train, get into the office at 6, work til 6ish on a normal day, get home around 7:45). I don't recommend that to anyone, haha.


----------



## MistaBernie

Whoa, that's freaky, you guys are going to Plymouth and Hull? On your way to Plymouth you'll pass my house. IF you're on Rt 3 South, wave at exit 14.

Also, I was born in Hull. Where are they taking you specifically? (In reality, Exit 14 also is the exit you'd take to get to Hull. Weird, huh?)

I wish I could join you guys on Saturday but I volunteer in Boston once a month on Saturday mornings, then I'm headed down to Foxwoods overnight. Gonna sit down at some Texas Hold'em tables and try to raise the money to return my 2.8 and get the IS Mk II.


----------



## r34p3rex

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Whoa, that's freaky, you guys are going to Plymouth and Hull? On your way to Plymouth you'll pass my house. IF you're on Rt 3 South, wave at exit 14.
> Also, I was born in Hull. Where are they taking you specifically? (In reality, Exit 14 also is the exit you'd take to get to Hull. Weird, huh?)
> I wish I could join you guys on Saturday but I volunteer in Boston once a month on Saturday mornings, then I'm headed down to Foxwoods overnight. Gonna sit down at some Texas Hold'em tables and try to raise the money to return my 2.8 and get the IS Mk II.


Just a tentative route with some spots picked out via Google maps







We'll probably end up improvising.. i feel like every time I have a planned route for a photo day.. it never works out. I always end up stopping at random places because a cool photo op comes up


----------



## MistaBernie

Gotcha. Plymouth should be OK, Hull's kind of eh. During the summer it's much more picturesque when it's warmer and there's lots of visitors.. kind of dreary when the boardwalk is mostly closed.


----------



## r34p3rex

Hmm I only picked Hull because I figured that's one of the few westward facing (for sunset) large bodies of water


----------



## MistaBernie

AH. if you're doing sunsets, then yeah, it's pretty cool.

Head to the yacht club; across the street is a sea wall. Over that seawall is Boston and the sunset. Amazing.

Another nice way to do it is at the beginning or middle of the alphabet streets on the bay (turning left if you're driving A-Z) and going to the end. Anything before L street should be ample room for people to move around and check out the various views; anything after that is more of a side street on the bay and it's cramped and not as asthetically pleasing. A street pier is open (and where I shot my sunset stuff around 10-6).


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Nice shots Bernie.

I wish you guys had planned this over the summer when I was in Mass! I guess you knew I was going to be there then. :/

So who wants to come to KY?


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*
> 
> Nice shots Bernie.
> I wish you guys had planned this over the summer when I was in Mass! I guess you knew I was going to be there then. :/
> So who wants to come to KY?


Only after they visit San Francisco


----------



## r34p3rex

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*
> 
> Nice shots Bernie.
> I wish you guys had planned this over the summer when I was in Mass! I guess you knew I was going to be there then. :/
> So who wants to come to KY?


You should come for PAX east







We could make a weekend out of it


----------



## ljason8eg

Miami for me this weekend.







In DFW right now actually waiting for my connecting flight. Spent last night screwing with MA and I think I've got something usable at least. We shall see.


----------



## dudemanppl

Jason, reincarnated, and me? SOMEDAY WE SHALL MEETUP maybe over the summer, but I have nowhere to stay. :3


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r34p3rex*
> 
> You should come for PAX east
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We could make a weekend out of it


Thanks, but not thanks; the drive from here to Boston is hellish for one weekend.


----------



## max302

Got a semi-functional lab set up in a friend's basement...



All we're missing is the chemistry. We're probably going for D76 since we have lots of Delta 400 that we want to push hard, but we also want to try out some low-iso panchromatic business so we're probably going to get some Diafine aswell.

I'm getting flashbacks from last year's chem classes.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Jason, reincarnated, and me? SOMEDAY WE SHALL MEETUP maybe over the summer, but I have nowhere to stay. :3


Indoor karting for the fans?


----------



## sub50hz

The last time I did indoor karts was, ironically, in Carlsbad.


----------



## MistaBernie

woah too many posts.

@GT -- I know, that sucks that we couldn't get together. I was legit mega-bummed. Still am.

@R31 -- I was in Oakland 2years ago and we spent some time in San Francisco. It was actually the weekend of the funeral for those four cops that got shot. Safest flight I've ever been on, we left on a Wednesday night with like 40 Boston cops. First time I'd flown in a while, so I liked it (but didn't realize why they were going out). Most were on the flight back with us too.

@ Jason -- we were in Orlando Mon-Tues-Weds of Halloween. It was pretty cool. If you wanna shoot things that go fast, go to a launch at the Kennedy Space Center. Next one I think is 11/25 for the next big launch in the Mars lineup.

@ Sub - indoor karts like go-carts? F-1 Boston in Braintree has them and they're cool.


----------



## sub50hz

Yeah, indoor karts. Except the ones we have here are badass, and gas-powered. Indoors. YEE HAW.


----------



## MistaBernie

Yeah, the ones here are gas powered Euro Karts. They make you wear a flame ******ant suit and helmet to drive them.


----------



## scottath

I just got featured in a local web publication:
http://beachandbay.com.au/realestateblog/spotlight-on-local-photographer-scott-atherton/


----------



## dudemanppl

Huge car guy but I have ironically never driven ANYTHING in my entire life. Just racing sims and not really cause I've only played GT4/GT5P at the max. Also, just deved my first two rolls of C41, I'm excite.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Yeah, the ones here are gas powered Euro Karts. They make you wear a flame ******ant suit and helmet to drive them.


I like driving the gas-powered ones because it reminds me of driving shifter karts as a kid.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Also, just deved my first two rolls of C41, I'm excite.


How'd it come out? I've been looking at C-41 kits, but they seem to be more expensive than having a lab do it for small quantities.

I have two rolls of exposed 120 C-41, and my mom has a drawer of at least thirty random 35mm films, so it'll be expensive as hell to bring them all in.


----------



## dudemanppl

Very easy, didn't make it very exact at all. Stupid me forgot I developed one roll at +2/3rds and I had the other normal so that roll of Ektar was sorta blown out.







Photos up Sunday cause I won't have any free time until then.

EDIT: AND I FINALLY GOT 39 SHOTS ON ONE ROLL WHOOOOOO! Frame 000 was half gone so that doesn't really count.


----------



## Synaps3

Hi. Can I join







? I have a Canon T3i and I'm still learning. This is a great hobby!


----------



## r34p3rex

10 hours until UPS is here!!!!!!


----------



## MistaBernie

wow UPS comes late for you., I've literally missed deliveries when working at home if I run down the street to pick up lunch.

Also, the 2.8 is frggen bomb. IS isn't necessary unless youredoingitwrong.jpg.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> wow UPS comes late for you., I've literally missed deliveries when working at home if I run down the street to pick up lunch.
> Also, the 2.8 is frggen bomb. IS isn't necessary unless youredoingitwrong.jpg.


I've had UPS deliver as late as 9 PM before, but that's rare. Typically, they park a few blocks away from your house and observe through binos until you leave the house, then they make the delivery.


----------



## MistaBernie

In reality, our townhouse is behind a sports facility. Two UPS trucks do actually park in teh back of it and take lunch there, so they could legitimately actually do that. My UPS guy is always confused because I _only_ answer the door when I know the package requires a signature.


----------



## Boyboyd

UPS are the worst over here. They're not only expensive, but slow. They're great for international stuff. We had a shipment from Canada that only took 36 hours, in the last week before christmas.

They delivered my monitor to my work address at half past 5, was just about to leave.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r34p3rex*
> 
> 10 hours until UPS is here!!!!!!


make sure you don't miss it for tomorrow! also, i won't be coming =(
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*
> 
> UPS are the worst over here. They're not only expensive, but slow. They're great for international stuff. We had a shipment from Canada that only took 36 hours, in the last week before christmas.
> They delivered my monitor to my work address at half past 5, was just about to leave.


i use USPS for everything domestic now. they're quick plus rates and insurance are cheap.


----------



## biatchi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*
> 
> I've had UPS deliver as late as 9 PM before, but that's rare. Typically, they park a few blocks away from your house and observe through binos until you leave the house, then they make the delivery.


Funny because it's true of all delivery companies








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*
> 
> UPS are the worst over here. They're not only expensive, but slow. They're great for international stuff. We had a shipment from Canada that only took 36 hours, in the last week before christmas.
> They delivered my monitor to my work address at half past 5, was just about to leave.


Don't think I've used them domestically but everything I order from NatSemi gets shipped via them from Singapore and they normally arrive in 24 hours of receiving the 'your order has been dispatched' email.


----------



## MistaBernie

If the USPS could improve their tracking skills I'd use them more. As it is though they're a sinking ship. 5 Billion dollars lost -- and that's just in misplaced mail!









In seriousness though, I'd kind of like to see one of the big national carriers buyout the post office. If the federal govt can bail us out, why cant corporations publicize something that is private and try to turn it into a viable business? Hm.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> In seriousness though, I'd kind of like to see one of the big national carriers buyout the post office. If the federal govt can bail us out, why cant corporations publicize something that is private and try to turn it into a viable business? Hm.


The USPS is a viable business. The problem is that congress regulates the hell out of them, and makes them waste tons of money. They're legally required to put aside large sums of money to pay pensions for employees they haven't even hired yet. It's ridiculous.


----------



## r34p3rex

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> wow UPS comes late for you., I've literally missed deliveries when working at home if I run down the street to pick up lunch.
> Also, the 2.8 is frggen bomb. IS isn't necessary unless youredoingitwrong.jpg.


Yea.. UPS always comes at around 6:30.. for both here in Boston and in New York. Fedex on the other hand, delivers around 12.. in both Boston and New York.

I still prefer USPS priority though







I guess I'm spoiled by Amazon Prime..


----------



## MistaBernie

I signed up for Amazon Prime so I'd get free two-day shipping on my backdrop kit. Then I cancelled it. I dont buy enough stuff on Amazon to make it worth it.


----------



## r34p3rex

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> I signed up for Amazon Prime so I'd get free two-day shipping on my backdrop kit. Then I cancelled it. I dont buy enough stuff on Amazon to make it worth it.


Ahh I get everything off Amazon.. hell, I get my toilet paper and paper towels automatically delivered every 3 months


----------



## foothead

Yumm... powerade.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r34p3rex*
> 
> Ahh I get everything off Amazon.. hell, I get my toilet paper and paper towels automatically delivered every 3 months


LOL, that's kind of weird, but a good idea I suppose.


----------



## foothead

Infrared is fun.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r34p3rex*
> 
> Ahh I get everything off Amazon.. hell, I get my toilet paper and paper towels automatically delivered every 3 months


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*
> 
> LOL, that's kind of weird, but a good idea I suppose.


I know a lot of people who do that (including myself). I have Amazon Student, and it's a lot more convenient to have stuff shipped to me for free via UPS 2-day than to get on the bus and do the two-hour round trip shopping excursion to Target or Walmart. If one of my fraternity brothers is driving somewhere, that's one thing, but I just hate having to ride the bus for so long to get stuff done. Plus, this way I can usually get stuff for just as cheap as Target but I don't have to pay the 7.75% sales tax in Cuyahoga County.


----------



## r34p3rex

IT'S HERE!!!!

I almost missed it.. I got back and they left me a missed delivery notice. I almost soiled my pants right there.. they came an hour early today.

Looked outside and the UPS guy was on the other side of the street about to drive away. Good thing I caught up to him


----------



## MistaBernie

NO offense, but after the day I've had, if you'd missed delivery, I would have laughed. _*HARD.*_

Very glad you got it though... deets! Where'd you get it from?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

All these recent gear acquisitions are making me fiend for some new gear myself. Oh 14L, why must you be so pricey?


----------



## MistaBernie

Yeah, I'm done buying gear to bonus time.


----------



## dudemanppl

Ugh Texas Leica came today, but nobody was here to sign for it. My creys.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Ugh Texas Leica came today, but nobody was here to sign for it. My creys.


Dude, I need a 14L II for like $500. Make it happen for me dawg.


----------



## r34p3rex

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> NO offense, but after the day I've had, if you'd missed delivery, I would have laughed. _*HARD.*_
> Very glad you got it though... deets! Where'd you get it from?


Fleabay







Didn't come with a hood though.. found one on POTN for $25 thou


----------



## bl1nk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*
> 
> All these recent gear acquisitions are making me fiend for some new gear myself. Oh 14L, why must you be so pricey?


Speaking of, USPS dropped off my nifty today. Loving it so far, can't believe the IQ for $80 (used).


----------



## Dream Killer

tonight i violated my sacred rule of bringing an extra battery.... ugh


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> tonight i violated my sacred rule of bringing an extra battery.... ugh


Yeah, the weather is getting cold, so an extra battery is a must.


----------



## ljason8eg

Miami is...questionable. I can see the draw but meh. Not feeling it. The security people at the track don't know what credential is what so I keep getting stopped by these people who can hardly speak English that seemed to have been hired yesterday. I'm like...um..this credential trumps all those, I'm going through now bye. Big headache.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> tonight i violated my sacred rule of bringing an extra battery.... ugh
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, the weather is getting cold, so an extra battery is a must.
Click to expand...

the wierd thing is i checked the battery and it was full at 7pm but by 10pm it was completely dead. the top lcd doesnt even give an estimated readout of shots i have left in the mem card. i wonder if something got screwed up when i had it repaired.

i usually carry my extra batt at all times. i mustve left the spare back at home on the charger.


----------



## foothead

Fomapan @ ISO 50. Nice.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> the wierd thing is i checked the battery and it was full at 7pm but by 10pm it was completely dead. the top lcd doesnt even give an estimated readout of shots i have left in the mem card. i wonder if something got screwed up when i had it repaired.
> i usually carry my extra batt at all times. i mustve left the spare back at home on the charger.


its teh cold. even in SF my battery dies really fast recently. i keep the spare in my inner pocket but once it goes into the camera it almost instantly loses all charge.....


----------



## Dream Killer

the cause is probably the cold but i've shot my d700 in subzero temps before and it never discharged as fast as this. i'm thinking i left the camera on when i put it my bag. another possibility is nikon messed up the battery indicator somehow (i'm told the dc to dc converter had to be replaced). both my batteries show as brand new, "level 0", in the battery life indicator and i know for a fact that one is at "level 2" and the other is a "level 1".

whatever, i had my canon g11 with my nikon sb700 on top in manual as backup


----------



## dudemanppl

The GW690 is VERY VERY large, but not uncomfortably. I'll do a mirror shot when I load my next roll which will be Portra 400 pushed two stops.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

I thought it being cold would get batteries to last longer, as the heat causes batteries to discharge faster?

/Not an engineer


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*
> 
> I thought it being cold would get batteries to last longer, as the heat causes batteries to discharge faster?
> /Not an engineer


No, it's a well known fact that Li-ion batteries discharge very quickly in cold weather. When I was backpacking last, it was really cold and my phone was dead in no time.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*
> 
> No, it's a well known fact that Li-ion batteries discharge very quickly in cold weather. When I was backpacking last, it was really cold and my phone was dead in no time.


Not exactly. Cold causes the chemical reaction to slow, hence a lower voltage and less available current. This makes the device read the battery as discharged, even if it really isn't (which is good because cameras are usually intended to use a fairly specific voltage). It actually discharges slower than at room temperature. If you warm the batteries back up, they will work fine.

I'm jealous of you all right now. It's still quite hot here. When I went to the swamp on Wednesday, I felt like I was going to die.


----------



## dudemanppl

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/270852158987
OH MY GOD PEOPLE ON EBAY ARE SUCH CHUMPS YESSS, I expected only 1100 max. So out of 2000 investment I made 6000. This is how I finance my gear.

http://www.ebay.com/csc/!geekpro/m.html?_clu=2&_dlg=1&LH_PrefLoc=0&_fsct=&LH_Complete=1


----------



## r34p3rex

You made $6000 on a $2000 investment? That's a pretty nasty ROI..


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r34p3rex*
> 
> You made $6000 on a $2000 investment? That's a pretty nasty ROI..


how was your grand tour?


----------



## sub50hz

Foothead, you cursed me.

IMG_20111119_155858.jpg 620k .jpg file


----------



## r34p3rex

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> how was your grand tour?


Good stuff.. didn't actually get to go everywhere though









Our car got stuck in sand for a while.. puny 2WD audi


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r34p3rex*
> 
> You made $6000 on a $2000 investment? That's a pretty nasty ROI..


Nasty as in good nasty or bad nasty. Holy effing balls 6x9 negatives are quite large to say the least, just developed the first roll. Also, I'm gonna be buying a D800 as soon as it comes out.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Foothead, you cursed me.
> 
> IMG_20111119_155858.jpg 620k .jpg file


Hahaha. You have to buy it now. It is your destiny.


----------



## dudemanppl

Just scanned the 120 stuff. Oh my GOD there is just so much detail everywhere.


----------



## r34p3rex

Used 5D2s for ~$1800 on POTN









http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=1116915
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=1116923
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=1115468
It's almost time to bite..


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Just scanned the 120 stuff. Oh my GOD there is just so much detail everywhere.


Are these the C-41 negs you developed? If so, post examples. I'd like to see how they came out.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Just scanned the 120 stuff. Oh my GOD there is just so much detail everywhere.


What res did you scan them at? I forgot to bring my recent stuff that I put up on flickr to my buddy's place to scan yesterday, quite upset about that,
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> Hahaha. You have to buy it now. It is your destiny.


Nah, I've got an RZ in my crosshairs, or at least I will if I decide to move to bigger negs.


----------



## dudemanppl

Teaser... That's a 20D sensor btw.


----------



## aksthem1

Going to do an IR filter mod?

Are sensor brushes any good compared to wet sensor swabs? I need to clean my sensor, but the local camera stores are closed today. So I can't buy swabs. I'm too impatient to wait till Tuesday too.


----------



## Kentech0023

aksthem1: If you have 2 Q-tips and a blower this method will work great.

http://nycaviation.com/forum/threads/37141-Dust-Spots-(Show-us-your-spots!!!)?highlight=clean+sensor


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aksthem1*
> 
> Going to do an IR filter mod?


Nope, free dead 20D. Sensor looks cool though. http://www.flickr.com/photos/dudemanppl/ So much sharp. 2400 DPI to sub. If a 15 year old can do C41, everyone can. And my method is:
1. Cleaning mode
2. Exhale on sensor
3. Q-tip the hell out of it
4. Blow Q-tip lint off
5. have a happy sensor


----------



## sub50hz

Those scans don't look right.


----------



## dudemanppl

Wat?


----------



## sub50hz

Well, beyond the dust, they don't really look _that sharp._ Something's not right, I just can't put my finger on it yet.


----------



## dudemanppl

Eh, I'm gonna try DICE, see how well that works. I have it turned off and just manually do it in PS.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Well, beyond the dust, they don't really look _that sharp._ Something's not right, I just can't put my finger on it yet.


Have to agree on this one. Dust motes everywhere and not as sharp as I expected dude.


----------



## foothead

Did you use two pass scanning? It almost looks like the software didn't line the images up correctly in a bunch of those. Example.

Either that or you didn't hold the camera steady.

EDIT: Also, lots of weird halos around brightly lit objects. Does that show up in C-prints, or is it a scanning artifact?


----------



## dudemanppl

I just shot that at 1/15th. I don't have any C-Prints.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> I just shot that at 1/15th.


And maybe now, you'll understand why tripods exist.


----------



## dudemanppl

I'd only use a tripod for something that requires a tripod, I'm not gonna lug around that crap walking around.


----------



## sub50hz

I would qualify shooting 1/15 as "needs a tripod" unless you can rest it on something, have unbelievable stability or some otherworldly talent in holding a huge camera with tiny hands steady for that long. I shoot 1/30 and sometimes even 1/60 off a tripod with MF, as each shot costs quite a bit more (time _and_ money) than 35mm.


----------



## dudemanppl

To me, 1/15th is the borderline. If the shot is under 1/15th I generally won't take it.
EDIT: Oh hey cool, 1/8th sharp and I guessed the exposure too.
another edit: Oh wait, not that sharp... Oh well I'm having fun with the camera and thats all that really matters to me. I still haven't stopped it down yet.


----------



## sub50hz

1/15 can be the borderline when you can take unlimited digital photos.

Or, I guess, for shooting pictures of your mom's minivan.


----------



## foothead

I use a tripod for almost everything now. The only exceptions are when I'm hiking and don't have time to stop, and when shooting wildlife. It helps loads with composition, and I generally end up wasting a lot less film on throwaway shots.


----------



## laboitenoire

So, odd question, but does anybody have experience shooting, um, _calendars_? I'm my fraternity's archivist/photographer, and we actually had the idea of making a chapter calendar as a PR item and fundraiser.


----------



## aksthem1

I'll shoot with 1/15 hand held at anything between 10-35mm. Up to 70mm if it has IS. I can have steady hands, but generally I won't use shots like those in full detail.

Went ahead and did the cotton swab cleaning. I'm pretty damn impressed. All at the price of free. Going to go ahead an do another run at it later to get a bit more of it off.

Before.



After.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aksthem1*
> 
> I'll shoot with 1/15 hand held at anything between 10-35mm.


Keepers are easy at 1/15 @ 10mm. Not so much using something that isn't as wide -- and why risk it on something that can only fit six to fifteen shots on a single roll?


----------



## r34p3rex

Loving this 70-200







I'd like to get the IS II some time though


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r34p3rex*
> 
> Loving this 70-200
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'd like to get the IS II some time though


it's inevitable that you'd want IS in a long lens. for $200 more, i would've found a used MK1 IS instead.

ps: you need to tone down your sig, it's hella big!


----------



## r34p3rex

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> it's inevitable that you'd want IS in a long lens. for $200 more, i would've found a used MK1 IS instead.
> ps: you need to tone down your sig, it's hella big!


Hah I be trolling all day long


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aksthem1*
> 
> I'll shoot with 1/15 hand held at anything between 10-35mm. Up to 70mm if it has IS. I can have steady hands, but generally I won't use shots like those in full detail.
> Went ahead and did the cotton swab cleaning. I'm pretty damn impressed. All at the price of free. Going to go ahead an do another run at it later to get a bit more of it off.


Protip, web browser, new tab (should be white), take picture of that, it's a lot more white.


----------



## foothead

Just had to take apart my photax 500/8 again. For whatever reason, the factory greased the screws before putting them in, so they keep coming loose. This time, I soaked it in acetone, and coated the threads in loctite. I'm gonna be mad if it starts flopping around again.


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *aksthem1*
> 
> I'll shoot with 1/15 hand held at anything between 10-35mm. Up to 70mm if it has IS. I can have steady hands, but generally I won't use shots like those in full detail.
> Went ahead and did the cotton swab cleaning. I'm pretty damn impressed. All at the price of free. Going to go ahead an do another run at it later to get a bit more of it off.
> 
> 
> 
> Protip, web browser, new tab (should be white), take picture of that, it's a lot more white.
Click to expand...

Damn, why didn't I think of that sooner. I was using a white sheet of paper.
I got most of it off now. There are a few spots left, but I won't be shooting at f22 all the time.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r34p3rex*
> 
> Hah I be trolling all day long


[Preferences]
Expand Featured Signature Item = "No"


----------



## scottath

C&C plz


----------



## ROM3000

Hey quick question. The Nikon 55-300mm f/4.5-5.6G is on sale for $250 on Amazon right. What do you guys think? It seems like a steal, but would I be better off investing in a 35mm f/1.8 first? Thoughts?


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ROM3000*
> 
> Hey quick question. The Nikon 55-300mm f/4.5-5.6G is on sale for $250 on Amazon right. What do you guys think? It seems like a steal, but would I be better off investing in a 35mm f/1.8 first? Thoughts?


Depends on what you shoot. The two lenses are meant for two completely different styles of photography. Some examples of shots you usually take would be a big help.


----------



## ROM3000

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*
> 
> Depends on what you shoot. The two lenses are meant for two completely different styles of photography. Some examples of shots you usually take would be a big help.


I normally shoot still life or animals, but I was thinking that the extra range would help me to get more involved with outdoor animals and sports. I rarely shoot portraits, where the 35mm would probably be better, but the f/1.8 would help in low light. I'm not really sure where to go here, but I'd rather not pass up a deal. Do these lenses usually go for that low?

Edit: You can view my photostream here.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ROM3000*
> 
> I normally shoot still life or animals, *but I was thinking that the extra range would help me to get more involved with outdoor animals and sports.* I rarely shoot portraits, where the 35mm would probably be better, but the f/1.8 would help in low light. I'm not really sure where to go here, but I'd rather not pass up a deal. Do these lenses usually go for that low?
> Edit: You can view my photostream here.


From your post, I'd say a telephoto is a better investment. I should also note that I prefer the IQ of the 55-200mm VR over the 55-300mm. I've seen a few 55-200mm VRs go for around $160-ish.

From your photostream though, with all the photos of cats and cars, if that's your point of interest I'd say the 35mm f/1.8 would be a better lens to buy. 35mm is a great focal length to work with indoors and in tight spaces, and f/1.8 for large aperture joy.

So for you, it really depends on if you want to expand into shooting outdoors and sports or if you want to emphasize your current shooting styles even more. Obviously this is something you need to figure out yourself and we can't answer for you.


----------



## robchaos

Gone, I need a gear update!
Get rid of:
D40x,
N70

Add:
D200, Fujifilm Finepix S2 Pro, AF Nikkor 75-300 4.5-5.6
Nikon N75
and an olympus OM-2S body as well.
The 50mm zuiko lens is an f1.8.
Thanks!


----------



## ROM3000

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*
> 
> From your post, I'd say a telephoto is a better investment. I should also note that I prefer the IQ of the 55-200mm VR over the 55-300mm. I've seen a few 55-200mm VRs go for around $160-ish.
> From your photostream though, with all the photos of cats and cars, if that's your point of interest I'd say the 35mm f/1.8 would be a better lens to buy. 35mm is a great focal length to work with indoors and in tight spaces, and f/1.8 for large aperture joy.
> So for you, it really depends on if you want to expand into shooting outdoors and sports or if you want to emphasize your current shooting styles even more. Obviously this is something you need to figure out yourself and we can't answer for you.


Thanks for the informative post. I think my best bet would be to try them out both. Hopefully I can get sometime to test them out in store this week.

By the way, when you say the IQ is better for the 55-200mm, in what aspects exactly? Sharpness? Thanks.


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*
> 
> From your post, I'd say a telephoto is a better investment. I should also note that I prefer the IQ of the 55-200mm VR over the 55-300mm. I've seen a few 55-200mm VRs go for around $160-ish.
> From your photostream though, with all the photos of cats and cars, if that's your point of interest I'd say the 35mm f/1.8 would be a better lens to buy. 35mm is a great focal length to work with indoors and in tight spaces, and f/1.8 for large aperture joy.
> So for you, it really depends on if you want to expand into shooting outdoors and sports or if you want to emphasize your current shooting styles even more. Obviously this is something you need to figure out yourself and we can't answer for you.


But on the same merit, it looks like whatever lens he is using now (probably 18-55) is working out great for him.


----------



## dudemanppl

So much mad, two rolls ruined so far because the goddamned stupid ass thing isn't winding it tightly so I'm getting crazy light leaks.
Edit: Hmm thats probably my fault....


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> So much mad, two rolls ruined so far because the goddamned stupid ass thing isn't winding it tightly so I'm getting crazy light leaks.
> Edit: Hmm thats probably my fault....


Lol. You'll get used to loading roll film, it's not too bad. Careful with 220, though, as it's significantly easier to botch when unloading if you're not familiar with it.


----------



## ROM3000

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244*
> 
> But on the same merit, it looks like whatever lens he is using now (probably 18-55) is working out great for him.


Yes you are correct. It has been working out great, I just wanted some more versatility or low light capability. I'm just not sure which one to get yet.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Lol. You'll get used to loading roll film, it's not too bad. Careful with 220, though, as it's significantly easier to botch when unloading if you're not familiar with it.


I figured out the rolls I didn't load tight were the bad one so now I'm winding them like extra tight


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ROM3000*
> 
> Yes you are correct. It has been working out great, I just wanted some more versatility or low light capability. I'm just not sure which one to get yet.


Any chance you have photog friends that'd let you borrow their lenses?


----------



## ljason8eg

I have returned from the final race of the season (pictures shall come soon)! Good to have some time off now, but man what a madhouse that place was yesterday. The First Lady was in attendance so there was a stupid amount of security in place which caused a ton of trouble. Normally walking into the garage area requires you to flash your credentials. Yesterday it consisted of walking through metal detectors and having your bags tore apart and searched. All that for one person who isn't even a NASCAR fan. ******ed and wasteful are about the only words I can think of.

On the bright side, the race was simply unbelievable and could quite possibly could go down as one of the all time classics.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> I have returned from the final race of the season (pictures shall come soon)! Good to have some time off now, but man what a madhouse that place was yesterday. The First Lady was in attendance so there was a stupid amount of security in place which caused a ton of trouble. Normally walking into the garage area requires you to flash your credentials. Yesterday it consisted of walking through metal detectors and having your bags tore apart and searched. All that for one person who isn't even a NASCAR fan. ******ed and wasteful are about the only words I can think of.
> On the bright side, the race was simply unbelievable and could quite possibly could go down as one of the all time classics.


So did they find the silencer you hid in your hollowed-out 300mm?


----------



## dudemanppl

http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6233/6381901757_aea9183228_o.jpg Scanning at 4800 DPI now, big difference. Original scan around 160 MP, resized them to 66 though.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*
> 
> So did they find the silencer you hid in your hollowed-out 300mm?


Lol shhh! No one is supposed to know about that







Speaking of security, I know a guy that got into the garage and pits on Sunday with no credentials at all. Right through secret service and everything. Gives me a lot of faith in them...


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6233/6381901757_aea9183228_o.jpg Scanning at 4800 DPI now, big difference. Original scan around 160 MP, resized them to 66 though.


That is just sexy. Only word that's appropriate.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> Lol shhh! No one is supposed to know about that
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Speaking of security, I know a guy that got into the garage and pits on Sunday with no credentials at all. Right through secret service and everything. Gives me a lot of faith in them...


Hm, if the consequences for failing weren't so dire (arrest, interrogation, being made some buff inmate's "play thing"), I'd want to try that out.


----------



## dudemanppl

http://www.flickr.com/photos/dudemanppl/
I have three others too, but they're basically all just snapshots. The lack of distortion of the lens is still mind boggling to me.


----------



## MistaBernie

So, I was leaving for work this morning and walked by the box on my desk for the 55-250 that I bought essentially on a whim to try to help out a friend. Well, he strung me along and dragged his feet and I'm done waiting on him. Amazon Gold Box had it on sale for $144 earlier in the week for a couple of hours; if you search the classifieds here though you just might find it cheaper than even that ($140 shipped for OCN members).


----------



## motorsportcfd

Add me to the list, please!

Bodies:
Canon 1DMkII
Canon 40D
Canon 350D

Lenses:
Canon 16-35 f/2.8L
Canon 24-70 f/2.8L
Tamron 28-75 f/2.8
Canon 60mm f/2.8 Macro
Canon 100mm f/2.8L Macro
Canon 70-200mm f/4L
Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II
Canon 100-400mm f/3.5-5.6L

Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/people/aperturev/

Thanks!


----------



## r34p3rex

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *motorsportcfd*
> 
> Add me to the list, please!
> Bodies:
> Canon 1DMkII
> Canon 40D
> Canon 350D
> Lenses:
> Canon 16-35 f/2.8L
> Canon 24-70 f/2.8L
> Tamron 28-75 f/2.8
> Canon 60mm f/2.8 Macro
> Canon 100mm f/2.8L Macro
> Canon 70-200mm f/4L
> Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L
> Canon 100-400mm f/3.5-5.6L
> Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/people/aperturev/
> Thanks!


What's up with the 2 70-200's?


----------



## motorsportcfd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r34p3rex*
> 
> What's up with the 2 70-200's?


The 70-200 f/2.8L isn't IS and is MUCH lighter than the 70-200 f/2.8: IS II. So I tend to use the f/4L when I'm going to be shooting in a well lit environment. While on the other hand, I use the f/2.8L for low lit environments, like pit garages, and night racing.


----------



## Dream Killer

70-200 F/2.8 VR I


Not to be outdone by the recent post however, I got mine for $1100


----------



## dudemanppl

I hate you so much. But I've gotten a 24-70 for 1100 which I sold for 1500, so not too bad.









http://blogs.reuters.com/fullfocus/2011/11/21/best-photos-of-the-year-2011/#a=1 Blarg, nothing really good until 16, but I'm not done with it yet.

34 is good too. 41. 46. 62. 68. 73 made me lol. 84 is WHAT THESE PICTURE ARE SUPPOSED TO BE. This year sucks so hard. 96. And I guess the last one is pretty interesting cause I didn't really know what that would have looked like.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> I hate you so much. But I've gotten a 24-70 for 1100 which I sold for 1500, so not too bad.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://blogs.reuters.com/fullfocus/2011/11/21/best-photos-of-the-year-2011/#a=1 Blarg, nothing really good until 16, but I'm not done with it yet.
> 34 is good too. 41.


i love these pics. but i found a photog who be trollin':


----------



## dudemanppl

If you look carefully, there are a bunch of "Mark IIIIs". Photographers are terrible at Roman numerals.








I'm seriously considering selling the Leica M stuff. Pays for more 120 film.


----------



## foothead

How is keh for returns/order cancellations? I ordered a 65/5.6 super angulon yesterday, then today I looked and there's a newer one in better condition listed for $50 less. I already sent an email asking about it, I'm just not really sure what to expect.


----------



## laboitenoire

I've had good experience with them.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KEH support*
> Due to the automated way in which orders are processed & fulfilled, once an order is submitted through KEH.com it can no longer be modified. Your order has already entered the shipping stage and cannot be changed or cancelled.
> 
> Any unwanted items may be returned within 14 days for a refund. Please send a copy of your sales invoice and the merchandise to:
> 
> KEH Returns
> 4900 Highlands Parkway
> Smyrna, GA 30082
> 
> Please note that all shipping & handling fees associated with refused shipments will be deducted from your refund.
> 
> Thank you,


Meh, looks like I'll be keeping this one then.


----------



## micro5797

I would like to join the camera club.

Canon Rebel XS (D1000)
Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/4-5.6 IS
Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS
Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II

The latter two lenses are in the mail, so i won't see them until next week.

EDIT:
Where is the code to post a link to this thread?
I am still new to coding, so i am having trouble making it my self.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *micro5797*
> 
> I would like to join the camera club.
> Canon Rebel XS (D1000)
> Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/4-5.6 IS
> Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS
> Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II
> The latter two lenses are in the mail, so i won't see them until next week.
> EDIT:
> Where is the code to post a link to this thread?
> I am still new to coding, so i am having trouble making it my self.


Post it where, in your sig? Just use the hyperlink icon in the editor when you make your signature, or use this:

Code:



Code:


[URL=http://www.overclock.net/art-graphics/312165-camera-thread.html][B]Official OCN Camera Club[/B][/URL]


----------



## micro5797

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*
> 
> Post it where, in your sig? Just use the hyperlink icon in the editor when you make your signature, or use this:
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> [URL=http://www.overclock.net/art-graphics/312165-camera-thread.html][B]Official OCN Camera Club[/B][/URL]


Thanks!


----------



## dudemanppl

M6 + Portra 400 + 35 1.2 (Yeah the exposure is sorta blown, but eh I used the same one for both cameras? weird):


5DII + 35L using my super duper flat Picture Style and SOOC (friend uploaded and didn't know you basically HAD to edit):


And I put pictures up! http://www.flickr.com/photos/dudemanppl
The ones I like more betterly: http://www.flickr.com/photos/dudemanppl/sets/72157628123816893/


----------



## MistaBernie

UGH. I think my 17-40 has either horrific lint-sized dust in it towards the rear element, or it has some sort of a knick on it that I somehow missed when I first got it. If that's the case, I'm seriously gonna be pissed (I went after it with the rocket blower, nothing happened). While shooting yesterday I felt like I got some strange flare when shooting towards like direction wise, but not at) the sun.. For the price, the thing should have been pretty damn nice, and it really wasnt... oh well, that's why I spend the extra money for new half the time.


----------



## dudemanppl

I'LL OPEN IT UP FOR YOU AND CLEAN IT!


----------



## MistaBernie

I may take you up on that, if I think I can confirm that its not a gouge


----------



## dudemanppl

Same day repair and its free (I will take baked good that WON'T easily perish unless you want to ship next day, I'm good with that too).


----------



## ljason8eg

Brand new Sigma 30 for $389? Yes?!


----------



## dudemanppl

Used is a better idea with Sigma, you might have a repeat of the 50 1.4 fiasco.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Used is a better idea with Sigma, you might have a repeat of the 50 1.4 fiasco.


Lol I guess I figured that since that happened to me I'm due for some good luck!


----------



## MistaBernie

AHMIGOD.. Reaper, where are you?

70-200 2.8 is soooo damn sharp on my 5D... like cut my finger open four hours ago and it's still bleeding sharp.

That is all.


----------



## r34p3rex

Yup.. probably the sharpest lens I've ever owned









On another note, my uncle just gave me a Sigma 180mm Macro today


----------



## laboitenoire

Ah man, I'm gonna have a tough time not trying to buy new gear next semester--I just got a job as a TA.


----------



## dudemanppl

Eh, I'm thinking about the Leica stuff going for an X100.


----------



## scottath

So - all you L glass touting people......

As some may remember i have a wedding upcoming (Dec 31st)
Current gear being taken:
550D gripped (if it gets replaced in time - grip is falling apart....)
550D
28-75 f/2.8 Tamron
11-18 f/4.5-5.6 Tamron
Hopefully 70-200 (f/2.8 IS OR f/4 IS - borrowed off one of 2 friends)
Yonguno Yn-565ex Flash
Will also have Grooms Sony Alpha something (mid range sony DSLR) and a 50 f/1.8

I got the flash probably 1.5 months ago and had some practice with it - still not 100% happy with my technique for it but im still learning it. Trying to do manual as much as i can atm.

Next on my purchase list is a prime lens. Limited budget. Thinking ~30mm probably. My total savings atm are ~$1200 but im not thinking of spending near that much.

Another thing is that a 5D has popped up on another site im on - and im keen to pick up a FF camera for my landscapes as i get a tonne of noise on my longer exposures with my 550D
Quote:


> Estimate shutter around 15,000. In good condition apart from some wear on the top (above the pentaprism) - see pics. Comes with box, charger, 5 batteries (3 genuine Canon & 2 aftermarket), accessories.
> Reserve: $775
> Instant: $850
> Damage: http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b337/myeewyee/IMG_4660Custom.jpg


An opinion on that would be appreciated too. Worth getting a 5Dc or waiting for a cheap 5Dii ?


----------



## Danylu

So went into a camera shop today, the EVF on the X100 and A77 are surprisingly bloody brilliant









D7000 also feels great, I think I'm gonna get one soon


----------



## dudemanppl

So many 7-900 meter headshots today. I got three on the same guy in a row, so much pity for him. Scott, just get a 50 1.8, great stuff and is great on a 5D (had one on my 5DII, no complaints whatsoever). Didn't realize X100s were like 950 used, but looking at some of the shots from the 35 1.2, meow so tasty.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scottath*
> 
> So - all you L glass touting people......
> As some may remember i have a wedding upcoming (Dec 31st)
> Current gear being taken:
> 550D gripped (if it gets replaced in time - grip is falling apart....)
> 550D
> 28-75 f/2.8 Tamron
> 11-18 f/4.5-5.6 Tamron
> Hopefully 70-200 (f/2.8 IS OR f/4 IS - borrowed off one of 2 friends)
> Yonguno Yn-565ex Flash
> Will also have Grooms Sony Alpha something (mid range sony DSLR) and a 50 f/1.8
> I got the flash probably 1.5 months ago and had some practice with it - still not 100% happy with my technique for it but im still learning it. Trying to do manual as much as i can atm.
> Next on my purchase list is a prime lens. Limited budget. Thinking ~30mm probably. My total savings atm are ~$1200 but im not thinking of spending near that much.
> Another thing is that a 5D has popped up on another site im on - and im keen to pick up a FF camera for my landscapes as i get a tonne of noise on my longer exposures with my 550D
> An opinion on that would be appreciated too. Worth getting a 5Dc or waiting for a cheap 5Dii ?


Grab the 5D and use it and your 550D together for the wedding. I shot my first few weddings with one body, then did the rest with two bodies and forehead slapped myself for not doing it to begin with! It makes things way easier with two bodies.


----------



## Conspiracy

anyone have this or a different size version? im going to buy myself one once i finish with exams next week. if there is possibly a better or more preferred gray card post some links









http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/429983-REG/Photovision_DT24011_24_One_Shot_Digital.html


----------



## dudemanppl

That's a rip. I find grey cards to be quite useless. Just find something white or manually adjust WB and such, theres not much to it.


----------



## silvrr

I haven't tried it but I hear that using grey paint sample cards from Home Depot can yield pretty good results.


----------



## Conspiracy

i found a bunch of cheaper ones. i might just get a normal collapsible white bounce that can be used to WB as well. that would be better for my overall kit of just stuff that i use for video and photos. i always seem to need a bounce on a video shoot when we casually think we just dont need it.

i am totally getting some paint samples at homedepot


----------



## Dream Killer

as long as it's 18% grey. i use a lens cloth that's neutral grey so i don't have to carry multiple things: http://www.alpineproducts.com/c-15-photography.aspx


----------



## Conspiracy

not a bad idea. i wouldnt mind the cheap 12" grey collapsible and white on the back that is like $20. i think its neat to have the black/grey/white card but for the price im not getting it unless a nice person bought it for me. i wouldnt complain if i didnt pay but its totally a rip as dudemanppl said.


----------



## mz-n10

A a4 sized grey days is only like 5 bucks and its useful to have one that big when you have a wide etc.


----------



## foothead

I think I finally nailed the DIY polaroid holder.




























I ended up using a hasselblad back with the mask removed. It was like $25 on eBay. The rest is some old ABS sheet I had lying around and an old 4x5 darkslide, cut down to fit.

Here's a test shot I took in my kitchen. (sorry for picture of picture, my scanner is broken.)


----------



## dudemanppl

AGAIN WITH THE NAIL POLISH. Are you secretly a cross dressing stripper photographer or something?


----------



## sub50hz

I think foothead may simply just be a female.


----------



## dudemanppl

How is that possible?


----------



## sub50hz

No Y chromosome, that's how.


----------



## dudemanppl

bt wt r chrmsn?!? But seriously I don't see how any woman would want to build ghettobook...


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> AGAIN WITH THE NAIL POLISH. Are you secretly a cross dressing stripper photographer or something?


Yeah, because that's obviously the most likely explanation...









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> bt wt r chrmsn?!? But seriously I don't see how any woman would want to build ghettobook...


Because I'm weird.


----------



## sub50hz

foothead, did you have to use any sealant on the body or anything?

edit: I got bored and started a tumblr .


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> bt wt r chrmsn?!? But seriously I don't see how any woman would want to build ghettobook...


You obviously don't know the women I know.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> foothead, did you have to use any sealant on the body or anything?


I did, then when I was totally finished, I went to load some film and it wouldn't fit. Turns out Polaroid made another 3.25x4.25 packfilm that was in a slightly smaller pack than the usual type 100.

I ended up starting over with a hasselblad back. All I had to do for that was cut down a sheet of plastic, drill some holes, and screw it into place. The darkslide just wedges into the space between the plastic mask and the holder itself. This one goes directly into the graflok back, so no sealant was needed.


----------



## sub50hz

Yeesh, I wish I still had that kind of drive for projects. Maybe one of these days I'll pick up the Dremel and some rogue material, lock my doors and slip into madness.


----------



## ljason8eg

Bleh I'm tired of this. I think I'm just going to put everything up for sale. I don't think photography is for me after all.

I got my 7D back today, supposedly fixed from those AF adjustments they did when they supposedly calibrated it to that broken 50 1.4. I try it out today and all my lenses, every single one of them report F00, the AF doesn't work, and it won't take a shot even on MF. Tried resetting the camera and cleaning the contacts on the body and neither fixed it. The contacts look ok comparing them to my T2i (which works fine btw). Time to call corporate again tomorrow morning I guess since the body is worth zero like this. Unacceptable. Not only do they not fix things, they make new problems for me to deal with.

All of this makes it not fun anymore, and if its not fun, then it seems silly having this gear that won't be getting used.

Sorry for the rant. Had to vent somewhere and I think I've finally reached my breaking point on all this.


----------



## sub50hz

You need a change of pace. Buy a Rebel film camera for like 20 bucks, slap on a lens and just go shoot something other than cars for a bit. Let Canon fix the 7D, but try to enjoy photography while you let someone else wrestle with the gear. You've got some good racing shots, so I wouldn't pack it in and call it a day just yet.

I know it's frustrating, but as long as you have an intact warranty on the body, don't sweat it.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Yeesh, I wish I still had that kind of drive for projects. Maybe one of these days I'll pick up the Dremel and some rogue material, lock my doors and slip into madness.


Haha. Well, the only reason I had to resort to DIY for this is because I simply couldn't afford the proper polaroid holder. It costs like $200 for a used one, which would be like several months' savings for me.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> You need a change of pace. Buy a Rebel film camera for like 20 bucks, slap on a lens and just go shoot something other than cars for a bit. Let Canon fix the 7D, but try to enjoy photography while you let someone else wrestle with the gear. You've got some good racing shots, so I wouldn't pack it in and call it a day just yet.
> I know it's frustrating, but as long as you have an intact warranty on the body, don't sweat it.


I concur. You really shouldn't give up just because you got some bad gear. The more advanced these things become, the more prone they are to failure. It's pretty much inevitable that something is going to fail at some point. You just got unlucky. I agree that a film camera would be a great escape. I'd go with something manual though. eBay had old 35mm cameras for next to nothing with a ~50mm lens.


----------



## sub50hz

I would also suggest a manual camera _normally_, but Rebels are so dirt cheap, there's no way you'll find any manual body and lens combo for 20-40 bucks that will be as good as the Rebel and EF 50.

Unless, of course, you know what antique malls and thrift stores are (Yashica D for 50 bucks? Yes, plz).


----------



## ljason8eg

That does sound like a nice idea. I'd just like a working AF system at this point lol.


----------



## foothead

I've seen Konica Autoreflex kits go for under $50 on eBay. You really won't get much better than that in 35mm.


----------



## ljason8eg

I guess the reason I'm considering dumping all my stuff is the simple fact that I never wish to give Canon another dime of my money unless they prove they actually, ya know, care about me since I'm a paying customer. I don't view the canned "oh we're so sorry that must be so frustrating. I'd be frustrated too don't you worry." bullcrap as caring. Especially after this much time and this many issues.

I do like the cheap film camera idea though. I've never shot film before (lol) so it would be something different and new for me as well.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> I guess the reason I'm considering dumping all my stuff is the simple fact that I never wish to give Canon another dime of my money unless they prove they actually, ya know, care about me since I'm a paying customer. I don't view the canned "oh we're so sorry that must be so frustrating. I'd be frustrated too don't you worry." bullcrap as caring. Especially after this much time and this many issues.
> I do like the cheap film camera idea though. I've never shot film before (lol) so it would be something different and new for me as well.


I care about you. Can I have camera gear now?


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*
> 
> I care about you. Can I have camera gear now?


In exchange for a donation of cash, yes







You don't want the 7D though. Its got the gremlins.

BTW, it totally slipped my mind at the time, but I was in San Francisco last Tuesday and Wednesday. Whoops. Should have met up.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> In exchange for a donation of cash, yes
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You don't want the 7D though. Its got the gremlins.
> BTW, it totally slipped my mind at the time, but I was in San Francisco last Tuesday and Wednesday. Whoops. Should have met up.


You've $5 inbound on PP?









And aha, no worries. You should definitely post some SF pics though if you have them. How was the fog that day?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> Bleh I'm tired of this. I think I'm just going to put everything up for sale. I don't think photography is for me after all.
> I got my 7D back today, supposedly fixed from those AF adjustments they did when they supposedly calibrated it to that broken 50 1.4. I try it out today and all my lenses, every single one of them report F00, the AF doesn't work, and it won't take a shot even on MF. Tried resetting the camera and cleaning the contacts on the body and neither fixed it. The contacts look ok comparing them to my T2i (which works fine btw). Time to call corporate again tomorrow morning I guess since the body is worth zero like this. Unacceptable. Not only do they not fix things, they make new problems for me to deal with.
> All of this makes it not fun anymore, and if its not fun, then it seems silly having this gear that won't be getting used.
> Sorry for the rant. Had to vent somewhere and I think I've finally reached my breaking point on all this.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> I guess the reason I'm considering dumping all my stuff is the simple fact that I never wish to give Canon another dime of my money unless they prove they actually, ya know, care about me since I'm a paying customer. I don't view the canned "oh we're so sorry that must be so frustrating. I'd be frustrated too don't you worry." bullcrap as caring. Especially after this much time and this many issues.
> I do like the cheap film camera idea though. I've never shot film before (lol) so it would be something different and new for me as well.


I can hardly blame you at this point. I think you have some sort of anti-Canon voodoo hex, because I've never heard such trouble with gear, even at POTN. Maybe it's a sign that you were meant for Nikon (or others).

But in all seriousness, I wouldn't let all of this lead you to bag it altogether with photography.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> I guess the reason I'm considering dumping all my stuff is the simple fact that I never wish to give *Canon* another dime of my money unless they prove they actually, ya know, care about me since I'm a paying customer. I don't view the canned "oh we're so sorry that must be so frustrating. I'd be frustrated too don't you worry." bullcrap as caring. Especially after this much time and this many issues.
> I do like the cheap film camera idea though. I've never shot film before (lol) so it would be something different and new for me as well.


Jump ship, but stay on the photography path.

Nikon/Pentax/Film/Anyone-but-Canon.

Really, my friend has had such troubles with Canon AF across several bodies as well, 30D, 5D 1. Don't let yourself be changed simply because one company out of many out there is failing you


----------



## MistaBernie

This is ridiculous. Canon, I am disappoint. Where are you sending stuff, Irvine?


----------



## ljason8eg

Yeah, Irvine. I've actually talked to them several times about letting me send it to the other repair center (NJ I think?) but I get shot down every time due to "shipping costs." Its like, how stupid are you? Surely once to NJ or wherever is cheaper than 4 times to Irvine.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

So there's a bomb threat on campus and I don't have my DSLR.

On top of that, I'm freezing my butt off waiting for my bus since the library is now closed


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*
> 
> So there's a bomb threat on campus and I don't have *a camera.*


Fixed for pointing out how much of a fail that is. Camera is by my side at all times, thank you 7MDH.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Fixed for pointing out how much of a fail that is. Camera is by my side at all times, thank you 7MDH.


Left my P&S back in my hometown


----------



## sub50hz

Take that Canonet! Perfect size for a coat pocket.


----------



## Shane1244

Cell phone?


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*
> 
> So there's a bomb threat on campus and I don't have my DSLR.
> On top of that, I'm freezing my butt off waiting for my bus since the library is now closed


upon discussion, we're officially kicking you out of this club for violating the first three rules of a photography club:

1) a club member must always have a usable camera somewhere in his/her clothing/bag at all times
2) a club member must always be within 0.5m of usable a camera at all times
3) shall a club member break the aforementioned rules this member will be:
a) shall be made fun of
b) shall be doused with photographic chemicals in the pelvic region
c) forever be banned from the club


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> upon discussion, we're officially kicking you out of this club for violating the first three rules of a photography club:
> 1) a club member must always have a usable camera somewhere in his/her clothing/bag at all times
> 2) a club member must always be within 0.5m of usable a camera at all times
> 3) shall a club member break the aforementioned rules this member will be:
> a) shall be made fun of
> b) shall be doused with photographic chemicals in the pelvic region
> c) forever be banned from the club


+1


----------



## MistaBernie

Sweet I get his canonet!


----------



## dudemanppl

So FootHead has two X chromosomes?!? Didn't see that coming at all. And jason, you seriously need to shoot a film rangefinder. It will change your view of photography especially if you self dev (cause if you send it out they won't use any lube on your wallet). Watching a strip of plastic come out of a reel with faint figures on it is so rewarding after like 15 minutes of shaking a plastic jug around.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Ken Rockwell was right; y'all are jerks









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> So FootHead has two X chromosomes?!? Didn't see that coming at all. And jason, you seriously need to shoot a film rangefinder. It will change your view of photography especially if you self dev (cause if you send it out they won't use any lube on your wallet). Watching a strip of plastic come out of a reel with faint figures on it is so rewarding after like 15 minutes of shaking a plastic jug around.


Even then I don't think a 16yo is on foot's radar


----------



## dudemanppl

Not interested in a long distance relationship guys...
http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2011/11/28/weekend-inspiration-part-2-the-children-and-medium-format-by-bjarke-ahlstrand/
http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2011/11/26/a-weekend-inspiration-by-bjarke-ahlstrand-part-1-the-children-the-m9-and-all-of-the-lenses/
How does such bad picture? Rich people are so dumb and silly. Pretty much most of these could have been done with an S90. For 225 bucks.

Just deved two rolls of TMax 400 at 100, lets see how crap the contrast is! But I guess 9001 stops of dynamic range is nice.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/dudemanppl/6430136087/sizes/o/in/photostream/
Don't mind the drying marks, I may or may not rewash ze feelms. But I'd say it turned out pretty nicely for guessing on the development time. (4:45 1:9 Ilfosol 3 at some sort of temperature)

Third real edit: How the hell do you insert a link with the crappy Huddler stuff? I tried the hyperlink button and then posting the URL directly, nothing works after first post?


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Not interested in a long distance relationship guys...
> http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2011/11/28/weekend-inspiration-part-2-the-children-and-medium-format-by-bjarke-ahlstrand/
> http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2011/11/26/a-weekend-inspiration-by-bjarke-ahlstrand-part-1-the-children-the-m9-and-all-of-the-lenses/
> How does such bad picture? Rich people are so dumb and silly. Pretty much most of these could have been done with an S90. For 225 bucks.
> 
> Just deved two rolls of TMax 400 at 100, lets see how crap the contrast is! But I guess 9001 stops of dynamic range is nice.
> 
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/dudemanppl/6430136087/sizes/o/in/photostream/
> Don't mind the drying marks, I may or may not rewash ze feelms. But I'd say it turned out pretty nicely for guessing on the development time. (4:45 1:9 Ilfosol 3 at some sort of temperature)
> 
> Third real edit: How the hell do you insert a link with the crappy Huddler stuff? I tried the hyperlink button and then posting the URL directly, nothing works after first post?


lol Rich people and using Leicas and Hasselblads for snapshots.

Also I can see your full post when I quote it, but not actually on the forum. Huddler, you have a long way to come in forum software. I want a forum not a broken social networking website.


----------



## foothead

So... anyway... I need some help locating a lensboard for my graphic view. I need a size 0 recessed. The only one I could find is on eBay, and it looks like this:










(from this auction)

The problem is that mine is like this:










It's been milled down further so the aperture tab doesn't hit the top of the board. The 65mm is mounted in the same shutter, so this board won't work.

If I absolutely have to, I can mount the 90mm in a flat board and the 65mm in the recessed one, but I lose almost all movements that way, and I have to clamp the rail behind the standards, so things start to get wobbly.


----------



## ljason8eg

Ok so I have some questions. Either I'm misinformed or this technician has no freaking idea how Canon products work.

I'm explaining my focusing problem. Sent him lots of shots with various lenses. He focuses on the wide open to near wide open shots on the 50 1.4. He states that the 7D has 19 cross points that work best at an aperture of 2.8. Which is correct. HOWEVER, he says that because i'm shooting these test shots at 1.4-2.2 that this means I will not get accurate focus because "the points are calibrated to f/2.8." Wait a minute now...that's not how it works, right? I thought that meant f/2.8 or faster lenses would achieve better focus due to more light entering the camera.

He then stated that my 50 1.4 would focus better if I set it to f/2.8!! Really? Lenses focus wide open so I don't know how that is possible. It might cover up some of the focus error due to a greater DOF but that's it. I countered by saying, well if that's the case who the hell would want to buy the 50 1.2? He countered that by telling me that lens is different because there's "less light falloff." What the ****. Is this guy completely ******ed or is it just me? I thought I knew how this stuff worked.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aksthem1*
> 
> lol Rich people and using Leicas and Hasselblads for snapshots.


Can't say that bothers me. Look at the "Rate the Photo Above You" thread here, there are plenty of shots of horrendously mundane crap shot with thousands of dollars worth of gear. Family is pretty important stuff, why settle for a P+S if you can use something that would easily make a large print and _still_ look better at web res?

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Not interested in a long distance relationship guys...


Be a little more mature, eh?


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> Canon is herp-derping me.


http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Photography-Tips/Canon-EOS-DSLR-Autofocus-Explained.aspx

Read some of that to this inept fool.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Photography-Tips/Canon-EOS-DSLR-Autofocus-Explained.aspx
> Read some of that to this inept fool.


I'm going to email this to him lol. I obviously didn't have any material in front of me explaining the AF system but what he was saying just sounded...wrong.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Photography-Tips/Canon-EOS-DSLR-Autofocus-Explained.aspx
> Read some of that to this inept fool.


That was a great read actually, and i'm not even a canon user :S

Oh well, back to work...


----------



## mokona99

Hey, I'd like to join the Camera Club.

Here's my current kit...

All Canon equipment pretty much

Canon 35mm SLR's (I still have a love for film because of my GF)

EOS RT
EOS 1

Canon 35mm DSLR's

EOS 5D MK II
EOS 7D
EOS 1D MK II N
EOS 1D MK IV

Canon "L" Series Lenses

EF 35 - 350mm f/3.5 - 5.6 L USM
EF 24 - 70mm f/2.8 L USM
EF 24 - 105mm f/4.0 L IS USM
EF 85mm f/1.2 L II USM
EF 70 - 200mm f/2.8 L IS USM
EF 135mm f/2.0 L USM
EF 35mm f/1.4 L USM
EF 300mm f/4 L IS USM

Canon Lenses

EF 24mm f/2.8
EF 15mm f/2.8 fisheye
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aksthem1*
> 
> lol Rich people and using Leicas and Hasselblads for snapshots.
> Also I can see your full post when I quote it, but not actually on the forum. Huddler, you have a long way to come in forum software. I want a forum not a broken social networking website.


Those aren't bad, but yeah... I know a few people who should have a Hasselblad in their hands.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> Ok so I have some questions. Either I'm misinformed or this technician has no freaking idea how Canon products work.
> I'm explaining my focusing problem. Sent him lots of shots with various lenses. He focuses on the wide open to near wide open shots on the 50 1.4. He states that the 7D has 19 cross points that work best at an aperture of 2.8. Which is correct. HOWEVER, he says that because i'm shooting these test shots at 1.4-2.2 that this means I will not get accurate focus because "the points are calibrated to f/2.8." Wait a minute now...that's not how it works, right? I thought that meant f/2.8 or faster lenses would achieve better focus due to more light entering the camera.
> He then stated that my 50 1.4 would focus better if I set it to f/2.8!! Really? Lenses focus wide open so I don't know how that is possible. It might cover up some of the focus error due to a greater DOF but that's it. I countered by saying, well if that's the case who the hell would want to buy the 50 1.2? He countered that by telling me that lens is different because there's "less light falloff." What the ****. Is this guy completely ******ed or is it just me? I thought I knew how this stuff worked.


it's true that extremely large aperture lenses slower focusing because af systems can't precisely determine phase at those depth of fields. i think what that guy is saying that below f/2.8, accuracy begins to fall-off an acceptable value set by canon.

this is just science, if i were to put it in an analogy, imagine a ruler (the af system) with divisions only at 2.8 and an object 1.4 long - with that particular ruler, you won't be able to measure below 2.8 so no matter how accurate you can estimate the distance, you won't be able to get a precise answer.

so no, i don't think that tech was trollin' you - that tech just couldn't explain it well enough.


----------



## dudemanppl

All the Sigma 50s I've only used on AI-Servo. The only time I ever use One Shot is with the 50L which doesn't seem to work on servo cause mine hates me. The Sigma 50s never let me down once and the only RARE OOF shots I would get would be because I'm completely dumb.


----------



## Conspiracy

hey can you guys with the fancy monitors. and just screens other than mine check this photo.

tell me how the WB looks. i have been having some WB trouble lately. for this game i WB off a piece of printer paper that was held center court. i used this photo for the custom WB setting in my camera and now in LR3 i have used the shot to apply the custom WB to all my shots. the jersey looks white to me and is pretty pure white. the gym really has yellow walls that are ugly with a pee yellow ceiling. i think this WB looks pretty accurate to what the gym really looks like. our gym was built in the 70's and has never been altered so all the colors reflect that time period and are slightly faded or w.e from being old. our gym was originally a roller skate ring for students before there was a sports program at my school lol

thanks guys in advance for the feed back.



this was taken with the 50 1.8


----------



## Dream Killer

i see sodium vapour lamps which is the most popular indoor gym lighting. it also wreaks havoc on white balance.


----------



## dudemanppl

Power out for the. next few days... Transformer blew other side of the street has power.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Power out for the. next few days... Transformer blew other side of the street has power.


that sucks


----------



## sub50hz

My mom won an ipad 2 in a raffle at work today. She stopped by to give me some cookies and a free ipad. THE DAY IS MINE.


----------



## xxrabid93

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Power out for the. next few days... Transformer blew other side of the street has power.


Time to break out the extension cords.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> My mom won an ipad 2 in a raffle at work today. She stopped by to give me some cookies and a free ipad. THE DAY IS MINE.


Wow, awesome. Let my jealousy ensue.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> My mom won an ipad 2 in a raffle at work today. She stopped by to give me some cookies and a free ipad. THE DAY IS MINE.


And by that, you mean: "Hey, OCN, if you had $400 and my gear list, what would you buy?"


----------



## sub50hz

Nah this thing is boss sauce.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> My mom won an ipad 2 in a raffle at work today. She stopped by to give me some cookies and a free ipad. THE DAY IS MINE.


LOL, indeed. My wife has the gen. 1 iPad and it's pretty nice I admit. I've used it a few times already to show shots to clients.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*
> 
> LOL, indeed. My wife has the gen. 1 iPad and it's pretty nice I admit. I've used it a few times already to show shots to clients.


Huh, did not know you did pro work, GT.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> My mom won an ipad 2 in a raffle at work today. She stopped by to give me some cookies and a free ipad. THE DAY IS MINE.


Congrats. You going to get a card reader for it?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*
> 
> Huh, did not know you did pro work, GT.


I would hardly call it "pro." I just respond the CL ads and word of mouth looking for photography work. When I deliver a DVD to a client, I bring the iPad with the shots on them so that they can review them before payment.

Oh, and I guess you can come back to the club.


----------



## Conspiracy

So i am currently testing out zenfolio as requested by my athletics director. he wants to start selling my shots to parents to bring in a little extra money. I am rather impressed with zenfolio and how easy it is to use and setup and will probably have them use that service.

Right now he is talking about selling my shots for somewhere between $5-10. I personally think this is a little too cheap even though I realize my shots are not professional quality. Should I try to help price my work or should i just leave it to them? I dont think they are going to price them so that they can make a decent profit off my work. And either way im told that he will slide me some extra compensation as a cut from profits they make.

Either way I wont lose because im already being compensated but I can miss out on making money but unfortunately because the photos are from NCAA events I can not sell them on my own because of the NCAA rules or something. So this is the only way that I can think of to help my school make a little money back on their investment in me considering they pretty much pay for my education and bought a 70-200 2.8mkII and a 1.4X mkII extender for me to use to get them their photos.


----------



## r34p3rex

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> So i am currently testing out zenfolio as requested by my athletics director. he wants to start selling my shots to parents to bring in a little extra money. I am rather impressed with zenfolio and how easy it is to use and setup and will probably have them use that service.
> Right now he is talking about selling my shots for somewhere between $5-10. I personally think this is a little too cheap even though I realize my shots are not professional quality. Should I try to help price my work or should i just leave it to them? I dont think they are going to price them so that they can make a decent profit off my work. And either way im told that he will slide me some extra compensation as a cut from profits they make.
> Either way I wont lose because im already being compensated but I can miss out on making money but unfortunately because the photos are from NCAA events I can not sell them on my own because of the NCAA rules or something. So this is the only way that I can think of to help my school make a little money back on their investment in me considering they pretty much pay for my education and bought a 70-200 2.8mkII and a 1.4X mkII extender for me to use to get them their photos.


Do it. Suggest to them that it might be a bit low and see what they say.


----------



## dudemanppl

Still no power... SAVE ME.


----------



## nuclearjock

Shot a 70-300 L on my 1dmk111 today. A popular FL with nice optics. VERY impressed. Need to wad up some more $$$.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Somebody triple posted


----------



## dudemanppl

I dunno why but I laughed at the "1dmk111". ONE D MARK ONE HUNDRED ELEVEEEEEEEN!!
I shall refrain from further stupidity. I want to shoot a lot of 120 until I realize each shot is more than half a fricken dollar. But the 150 megapixel scans and the fact that the sensor is about 9001 times bigger than APS-C are crazy. I'll bring 4 rolls out tomorrow... I have a hell of a lot of time to dev film...


----------



## sub50hz

Four of us bought that shop completely out of that expired Portra 800 220. $1 per roll, glory.


----------



## sub50hz

Sidenote: Tanqueray Ten and tonic is real good. Except when you cash the tab out for 8 of them HOO BOY. Goodnight, sweet OCN princes.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

I like how this fluctuates from "OCN Camera Club" to "OCN Drinking Club". I like it


----------



## sub50hz

I just discovered an ipad kaossilator app from Korg.

Sleep:not gonna happen tonight.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*
> 
> I like how this fluctuates from "OCN Camera Club" to "OCN Drinking Club". I like it


My close friend and photography buddy specializes in a certain kind of street photography - post-happy hour / saturday night after drinking street photography. Booze and Photography do mix together!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Sidenote: Tanqueray Ten and tonic is real good. Except when you cash the tab out for 8 of them HOO BOY. Goodnight, sweet OCN princes.


You must have an epic liver sub, at least for the time being.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*
> 
> I like how this fluctuates from "OCN Camera Club" to "OCN Drinking Club". I like it


...and to OCN Bicycle Club, and to OCN Breaking Bad Club, etc.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> My close friend and photography buddy specializes in a certain kind of street photography - post-happy hour / saturday night after drinking street photography. *Booze and Photography do mix together!*


I think some paparazzi might disagree, like that guy whose hip Tommy Lee broke outside of a nightclub.


----------



## dudemanppl

I love how this thread isn't really photography related. It's just a bunch of folks who have it as a hobby and just talk about other stuff.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> I love how this thread isn't really photography related. It's just a bunch of folks who have it as a hobby and just talk about other stuff.


I also love how compared to other clubs, this one has very few reports


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> I love how this thread isn't really photography related. It's just a bunch of folks who have it as a hobby and just talk about other stuff.


Well, consider that in real life it becomes quite mundane to always talk about the same thing, regardless if it's a real passion of everyone in the conversation. Plus, everyone in this thread is pretty familiar with the other posters, and we still _do_ talk about photography. Here and there.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Yeah, it's all good.


----------



## r34p3rex

I'm changing the subject.

Bacon.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r34p3rex*
> 
> I'm changing the subject.
> Bacon.


on that subject, i'm completely addicted to dunkin donut's big n' toasty. just something about that bacon, butter and egg.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> on that subject, i'm completely addicted to dunkin donut's big n' toasty. just something about that bacon, butter and egg.


Confirm/Deny: The bread is good. I want to try one, and ironically I have not despite DD being across the street from our office building.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Bacon is life.


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> I love how this thread isn't really photography related. It's just a bunch of folks who have it as a hobby and just talk about other stuff.
> 
> 
> 
> Well, consider that in real life it becomes quite mundane to always talk about the same thing, regardless if it's a real passion of everyone in the conversation. Plus, everyone in this thread is pretty familiar with the other posters, and we still _do_ talk about photography. Here and there.
Click to expand...

Exactly.

It gets to the point when you talk about the same subject for so long that you just complain about it.

Off topic; I forgot how good DJ Shadow's stuff was.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r34p3rex*
> 
> I'm changing the subject.
> Bacon.


Haha, I just dehydrated three pounds of bacon. That stuff is ridiculously good when hiking.


----------



## sub50hz

Is this guy for real?

http://www.overclock.net/t/1178776/at-what-aperture-is-a-canon-f1-8-55mm-sharpest#post_15857005

I'm so gone every time I read anything this guy has written, its such total BS _every time._


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Is this guy for real?
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1178776/at-what-aperture-is-a-canon-f1-8-55mm-sharpest#post_15857005
> 
> I'm so gone every time I read anything this guy has written, its such total BS _every time._


LOL


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Is this guy for real?
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1178776/at-what-aperture-is-a-canon-f1-8-55mm-sharpest#post_15857005
> I'm so gone every time I read anything this guy has written, its such total BS _every time._


Could be worse, like that one guy who _insisted_ that a G12 is just as good as a DSLR. He kept bringing up megapixels, aperture, and lens focal length


----------



## r34p3rex

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*
> 
> Could be worse, like that one guy who _insisted_ that a G12 is just as good as a DSLR. He kept bringing up megapixels, aperture, and lens focal length


Link?


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r34p3rex*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*
> 
> Could be worse, like that one guy who _insisted_ that a G12 is just as good as a DSLR. He kept bringing up megapixels, aperture, and lens focal length
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Link?
Click to expand...

This should be it I think lol

Second page

http://www.overclock.net/t/1175315/need-dslr-by-early-dec


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Is this guy for real?
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1178776/at-what-aperture-is-a-canon-f1-8-55mm-sharpest#post_15857005
> I'm so gone every time I read anything this guy has written, its such total BS _every time._


I'd be fine with his argument if he backed up his opinion by saying something along the lines of... Kelby is not a landscape photographer and asserts that he can make any landscape better by putting a person in front of it.

And if he didn't contradict himself in his 2nd and 3rd paragraphs.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Is this guy for real?
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1178776/at-what-aperture-is-a-canon-f1-8-55mm-sharpest#post_15857005
> I'm so gone every time I read anything this guy has written, its such total BS _every time._


I'd be fine with his argument if he backed up his opinion by saying something along the lines of... Kelby is not a landscape photographer and asserts that he can make any landscape better by putting a person in front of it.

And if he didn't contradict himself in his 2nd and 3rd paragraphs.


----------



## MistaBernie

So, I just got back from a weekend off the grid (unrelated: there was much discussion about bacon and other powers that be).

I get back and a friend of mine let us know she's getting married and asks for recommendations. I'm not shooting weddings (yet), so I recommended our wedding photographer. Other than shooting Nikon, he was the bees knees. HE went out of his way to come to us for an initial meeting/discussion and was very professional but at the same time very personable, etc. Up front, he was awesome.

The day of the wedding, he was even more. We got a second photog that came with the guys to get ready, etc. While I was putting on my tux, the button (it was a two button jacket so you only use one, the top) flew off while I was putting it on -- not because it was super tight, but because it was apparently practically hanging off. At that point, we noticed that me and one of my groomsmen were both missing A cufflink. Without skipping a beat, our 2nd photog was like 'hey, I have a small kit in my car, I can put that back on for you, be right back'. The five of us were kind of in shock and a few minutes later, the button was back on, I was wearing my groomsmen's single cufflink and we were on our way.

The images that were captured were simply awesome. We got a DVD with about ~1750 images (our images were being uploaded to his online gallery when we were getting off the plane from our honeymoon), we had our image selection back in and had our ridiculously cool albums in our hands in 9 weeks (and they were coming from Italy nonetheless).

Sorry, back to what I was ACTUALLY talking about.. anyways, she gets a couple of other recommendations, including a guy who recommends his niece, a 'great photographer, who went to RIT' for Photography. I checked out her stuff, and it was MAYBE a bit better than GWC (Guy with camera), but I dont think she was quite the quality I would be pushing for weddings. Should I msg her and tell her that the chick that got recommended wasn't exactly up to snuff? Should I just let them figure it out on their own? Should I ask this on POTN? lol.

It's good to be back


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> So, I just got back from a weekend off the grid (unrelated: there was much discussion about bacon and other powers that be).
> I get back and a friend of mine let us know she's getting married and asks for recommendations. I'm not shooting weddings (yet), so I recommended our wedding photographer. Other than shooting Nikon, he was the bees knees. HE went out of his way to come to us for an initial meeting/discussion and was very professional but at the same time very personable, etc. Up front, he was awesome.
> The day of the wedding, he was even more. We got a second photog that came with the guys to get ready, etc. While I was putting on my tux, the button (it was a two button jacket so you only use one, the top) flew off while I was putting it on -- not because it was super tight, but because it was apparently practically hanging off. At that point, we noticed that me and one of my groomsmen were both missing A cufflink. Without skipping a beat, our 2nd photog was like 'hey, I have a small kit in my car, I can put that back on for you, be right back'. The five of us were kind of in shock and a few minutes later, the button was back on, I was wearing my groomsmen's single cufflink and we were on our way.
> The images that were captured were simply awesome. We got a DVD with about ~1750 images (our images were being uploaded to his online gallery when we were getting off the plane from our honeymoon), we had our image selection back in and had our ridiculously cool albums in our hands in 9 weeks (and they were coming from Italy nonetheless).
> Sorry, back to what I was ACTUALLY talking about.. anyways, she gets a couple of other recommendations, including a guy who recommends his niece, a 'great photographer, who went to RIT' for Photography. I checked out her stuff, and it was MAYBE a bit better than GWC (Guy with camera), but I dont think she was quite the quality I would be pushing for weddings. Should I msg her and tell her that the chick that got recommended wasn't exactly up to snuff? Should I just let them figure it out on their own? Should I ask this on POTN? lol.
> It's good to be back


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> This should be it I think lol
> Second page
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1175315/need-dslr-by-early-dec


And here as well:
http://www.overclock.net/t/1175137/wtb-wttf-dslr-for-beginner


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*
> 
> And here as well:
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1175137/wtb-wttf-dslr-for-beginner


Ok, that was epic lol.


----------



## sub50hz

Lol, what a human.


----------



## iandroo888

got voluntoldminated to be photographer for a scholarship fundraising golf tournament...

got my d5k + 24-70.... and 12-24 if i really need a wide shot... if their budget allows, im hoping to rent a 70-200 f/2.8 vr II... good choice ? d5k crop would make it a 105 - 300 effective range lens..

should i consider the bigma 50-500 instead or 70-200 enough?


----------



## MistaBernie

I had no problems using my 70-200 for golf (on a crop sensor camera mind you), but I also had a golf cart on a course where everyone was walking, and I was one of the organizers so I basically went wherever I wanted, whenever I wanted. That included being far enough away to basically machine gun shots and get peoples' full back and front swings over 8-9 frames without being close enough for them to hear the shutter.


----------



## iandroo888

wonder if they will let me use a cart Lol =3


----------



## sub50hz

300/2.8 or 400/2.8 -- although you may want to PM nuclerajock or dudemanppl and see what they suggest.


----------



## iandroo888

low budget already... no way could rent a 300 or 400mm lol besides i dont have a tripod that can hold that **** up LOL


----------



## sub50hz

Do it anyway. Monopod them, they got dat VR son.


----------



## iandroo888

-.- dont have monopod. dont have budget. -.-


----------



## sub50hz

There's lots of lonely women out there with money. Just sayin.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> 300/2.8 or 400/2.8 -- although you may want to PM nuclerajock or dudemanppl and see what they suggest.


70-200 VRII and a 1.4 tc.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> 300/2.8 or 400/2.8 -- although you may want to PM nuclerajock or dudemanppl and see what they suggest.


70-200 VRII and a 1.4 tc.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*
> 
> 70-200 VRII and a 1.4 tc.


so 147-420  interesting


----------



## max302

Got the first darkroom prints out. We started off on the wrong foot by exposing Ilford MG4 RC paper for 2 minutes... needless to say, the paper was overexposed. We're getting the routine ironed out. Last time I had that much fun in a dark room it wasn't with paper and chemicals.


----------



## dudemanppl

300 on FF was WAYYY too shot for me for the one lone time I have shot golf.


----------



## ljason8eg

Well I'll be...Sigma 30 focuses _very nicely_ on the T2i at least, both with up-close things and at infinity.







Hopefully it does the same on my 7D when I get it back.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> Well I'll be...Sigma 30 focuses _very nicely_ on the T2i at least, both with up-close things and at infinity.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hopefully it does the same on my 7D when I get it back.


Told you!


----------



## BlankThis

Uhhhh hey guys... Long time no see. Am I still welcome? I have a valid excuse for my absence, the lady is back in my life.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*
> 
> Told you!


Haha yep, figured after all my bad luck I was due for some good luck for a change. Turned out to be a really good deal. Awesome deal too. New, good focusing copy with the new finish for $389.


----------



## dudemanppl

I have a feeling this will be a start of a long relationship with Sigma glass (which are too beast). 50 is ******ed good, 70 likewise, 85 even better, 150 is pretty win, 120-300 OS is too good.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis*
> 
> Uhhhh hey guys... Long time no see. Am I still welcome? I have a valid excuse for my absence, the lady is back in my life.


Please send $30 to [email protected] on PayPal and we will consider your application.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> Haha yep, figured after all my bad luck I was due for some good luck for a change. Turned out to be a really good deal. Awesome deal too. New, good focusing copy with the new finish for $389.


Oh man, that's cheaper than what I paid for mine, used! Jealous. Want to swap for the older finish?








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> I have a feeling this will be a start of a long relationship with Sigma glass (which are too beast). 50 is ******ed good, 70 likewise, 85 even better, 150 is pretty win, 120-300 OS is too good.


Yeaup; starting out with photography I heard that Sigma glass is "subpar" to Canon. Man, am I glad I didn't listen to them.


----------



## dudemanppl

Listen to me: never listen to other people.


----------



## foothead

I've had mixed results with Sigma. Their cheaper lenses seem to range anywhere from "very good" to "this belongs in the trash." From what I've seen, their higher-end stuff looks excellent though.

Random question: If I buy a lens with slow shutter speeds, will the speeds be consistent or will they wildly vary? I don't think I've ever used faster than 1/15 on my other lenses, but I do frequently want more than 1 second, so I'm thinking it'd be perfect for me. Plus, I can get them like 50% off.


----------



## dudemanppl

Probably pretty consistent, try timing it or something lol.


----------



## foothead

Yeah, that was the idea. It shouldn't be too difficult to set something up with a phototransistor.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Listen to me: never listen to other people.


hmm. i see what you did there lol


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*
> 
> *Please send $30 to [email protected] on PayPal and we will consider your application.*
> Oh man, that's cheaper than what I paid for mine, used! Jealous. Want to swap for the older finish?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yeaup; starting out with photography I heard that Sigma glass is "subpar" to Canon. Man, am I glad I didn't listen to them.


Only $30? And what's this "we"?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*
> 
> *Please send $30 to [email protected] on PayPal and we will consider your application.*
> Oh man, that's cheaper than what I paid for mine, used! Jealous. Want to swap for the older finish?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yeaup; starting out with photography I heard that Sigma glass is "subpar" to Canon. Man, am I glad I didn't listen to them.


Only $30? And what's this "we"?


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*
> 
> *Please send $30 to [email protected] on PayPal and we will consider your application.*
> Oh man, that's cheaper than what I paid for mine, used! Jealous. Want to swap for the older finish?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yeaup; starting out with photography I heard that Sigma glass is "subpar" to Canon. Man, am I glad I didn't listen to them.
> 
> 
> 
> Only $30? And what's this "we"?
Click to expand...

he's also been kicked out of the club.

ps: we still need to schedule when to douse him.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> he's also been kicked out of the club.
> ps: we still need to schedule when to douse him.


Current talks in the OCN Staff section has led to GT reinstating me


----------



## dudemanppl

LOL, you mods are interesting folks. Reincarnated, sell 50D and 30 for 5D and 50, you'll super love it.


----------



## foothead

Hmmm... I'm going on a short (~25 mile) backpacking trip at Chicot State Park on Thursday-Friday. I can't decide if I should bring the large format camera or just the medium format. Thoughts?

Also, I'm running out of black and white film. What should I try next? I've been using fomapan and Tri-X.


----------



## sub50hz

MF + 35mm. I know you like your slow film, Delta 100 is super clean. I wish I could go hiking -- don't you work, lol?


----------



## foothead

I was kinda thinking that as well, but it would be pretty fun to bring the LF.

I guess I'll try Delta. You're like the third person to recommend it to me this week. I wish it wasn't so expensive though.

No, I don't work. I'm in high school.

Speaking of slow film, what happened to it all? The slowest I can find is some 50 ISO Efke. What ever happened to the 6 ISO stuff?


----------



## dudemanppl

Wait so foothead is a girl in high school that shoots large format? Intriguing... Also, I shot my "whatever Kodak makes at ISO 400 that isn't Tri-X" at 100 and its quite nice, mucho sharpness and such so you can probably dev the Efke at ISO 12 (two stops).


----------



## laboitenoire

So I had the depressing realization that I didn't take a single photo for fun the entire month of November. This semester has really sucked... I did however film a video for a French class project on my D7000. Didn't turn out that badly.


----------



## Blizlake

Whoa! just found this club and I wanna join already! Got Nikon D90 with Nikkor 18-105 and Tamron 70-300mm. Could use a good macro lense but I honestly dont know where I'll find the money as I'm in a need of new pc and my bike (aka baby) becomes jelly if it doesn't get some love too


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> Hmmm... I'm going on a short (~25 mile) backpacking trip at Chicot State Park on Thursday-Friday. I can't decide if I should bring the large format camera or just the medium format. Thoughts?
> Also, I'm running out of black and white film. What should I try next? I've been using fomapan and Tri-X.


i brought my a900 on a hike once and it felt like a million lbs.....i could only imaging how it would be like to carry a LF......hats off to you good sir (madam)....


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> LOL, you mods are interesting folks. Reincarnated, sell 50D and 30 for 5D and 50, you'll super love it.


I'd be losing money though. Last time I checked, 5D is $1k and 50D is $600. 30mm and 50mm are around the same price, so excluding the lenses, I'd be out $400 + shipping my 50D just to make it happen. Money I don't have


----------



## dudemanppl

Sell a nut.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> i brought my a900 on a hike once and it felt like a million lbs.....i could only imaging how it would be like to carry a LF......hats off to you good sir (madam)....


Well, I'm planning on a longer hike during the christmas holidays, so I need to carry extra weight on this trip. Might as well be a camera.

EDIT: I only have like 15 sheets of B&W left for 4x5. Looks like I'll be taking the medium format instead.


----------



## MistaBernie

Somebody talk me out of a 35L please. ANYBODY.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Somebody talk me out of a 35L please. ANYBODY.


do what!? why? i say DO IT!!!!


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Somebody talk me out of a 35L please. ANYBODY.


Shoot more, buy a 35L later. You're borderline hoarding gear at this point, lol.


----------



## MistaBernie

yeah, I'm all about shooting more. I've actually been shooting alot, just havent been posting alot of what I've been shooting.

I have wanted to get a wider prime, but it doesn't have to be the 35L. I dont want to go Sigma 30 though, want something I can toss on the 5D too.


----------



## Conspiracy

sounds like you need a 35L lol









unless you think 14L suits your needs more lol i dont think you need that wide


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Somebody talk me out of a 35L please. ANYBODY.


Not going to be me! It's jizz-in-your pants good, so you should get it.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*
> 
> Not going to be me! *It's jizz-in-your pants good*, so you should get it.


So I take it you and your wife play "Mount the 35L on the 5DII" quite often?

In other news, logging into my employee email for the first time in three months = tons of spam + HIPAA reminders. No clue how I got so much spam either; I only use my employee email for intraoffice communication.


----------



## dudemanppl

THEY'RE USING YOU. Get an Ee-S screen fo yo 5D and a Samyang, sharper and cheaper, and MF is very very surprisingly easy with the S screens.

There was a fight at school, it was interesting .


----------



## dudemanppl

THEY'RE USING YOU. Get an Ee-S screen fo yo 5D and a Samyang, sharper and cheaper, and MF is very very surprisingly easy with the S screens.

There was a fight at school, it was interesting .


----------



## laboitenoire

So... Am I crazy for sorta vaguely kinda wanting a Holga? They're soooooooo crappy, but I'm always intrigued by their images. I figure that for $30 plus cheap film, I wouldn't be out a whole lot if I didn't like it.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> So... Am I crazy for sorta vaguely kinda wanting a Holga? They're soooooooo crappy, but I'm always intrigued by their images. I figure that for $30 plus cheap film, I wouldn't be out a whole lot if I didn't like it.


just set the iso to 6400 stop down to f22 and throw some vasoline on the lens. you will get the same effect


----------



## aksthem1

They even make lenses for DSLRs for like $20.


----------



## foothead

Wow, I am sooo glad I had that filter. I was loading my backpack, and I got up to grab something when it decided to roll off the sofa. My pentax with the 45mm lens ended up taking the full force of the impact. Besides the crushed filter and a screwed up lenscap, everything is fine.


----------



## dudemanppl

Oh and Pentax's new 25 f/4 covers full 645 and is equivalent to 15.5 on 35, very very interesting...


----------



## sub50hz

I'm sure that's a bargain.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Oh and Pentax's new 25 f/4 covers full 645 and is equivalent to 15.5 on 35, very very interesting...


They've had that lens for a couple years now. The CA is ridiculous. It makes the lens pretty much unusable on film.


----------



## Nemesis158

Finally just figured out that one of the things i want for x-mas is a good tripod.

Could you guys please recommend me a good tripod for under $150
(i have an el-cheapo $20 walmart one right now







)


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nemesis158*
> 
> Finally just figured out that one of the things i want for x-mas is a good tripod.
> Could you guys please recommend me a good tripod for under $150
> (i have an el-cheapo $20 walmart one right now
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )


What will you be supporting?

How much does weight matter to you? (will you be hiking or walking with this tripod alot?)

How tall are you (Do you mind bending over to setup your shots)?

Do you know what kinda of head you want? (pan/tilt, ball head ect)

Do you prefer twist or flip locks?


----------



## Nemesis158

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *silvrr*
> 
> What will you be supporting?
> How much does weight matter to you? (will you be hiking or walking with this tripod alot?)
> How tall are you (Do you mind bending over to setup your shots)?
> Do you know what kinda of head you want? (pan/tilt, ball head ect)
> Do you prefer twist or flip locks?


1. I have a D5100 and the heaviest lens is a 55-200 currently.
2. i would like to be able to carry it around without too much difficulty
3. about 5' 11"
4 and 5. i have no idea......


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*
> 
> So I take it you and your wife play "Mount the 35L on the 5DII" quite often?
> In other news, logging into my employee email for the first time in three months = tons of spam + HIPAA reminders. No clue how I got so much spam either; I only use my employee email for intraoffice communication.


at least your e-mail is not filled with BS CMEs offering like 1 credit for half a day.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> at least your e-mail is not filled with BS CMEs offering like 1 credit for half a day.


Oh I have those too, and I have absolutely no clue why or how. The strangest part is that some of these are addressed to "[My Name], M.D." or "Dr. [My Name]"

Maybe I've amnesia and lost four years of my life, but I do not recall getting a doctorate, or hell, graduating from undergrad yet


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nemesis158*
> 
> 1. I have a D5100 and the heaviest lens is a 55-200 currently.
> 2. i would like to be able to carry it around without too much difficulty
> 3. about 5' 11"
> 4 and 5. i have no idea......


Good tripods come separately, legs and head. So you shop for the legs you want, and a head that suits you. A ball head is simple, with no protruding handles; you simply unlock the ball and adjust position by grasping the camera itself. A pan/tilt head will have actual handles protuding, giving finer and more accurate control of movement. I prefer ball heads as they are more compact.

Twist or lever locks refer to the leg sections. Most tripods use lever locks, which are very quick and easy to use, but can often be accidentally unlocked if the lever is pulled by something, and they leave more gaps through which dirt and water can enter the legs. Twist locks are simply rubber or metal rings that twist to lock or unlock. They don't easily become unlocked and make a nice seal against dirt and water. The only drawback is that they are much slower to lock and unlock.

And just to add a few more options to Nemesis' list, I'll mention materials. Aluminum or carbon fiber are the two most common, but there's also basalt, wood, and magnesium alloy legs. Aluminum is cheapest, but not the lightest. Carbon fiber is lighter, but pricier.

And there are even more options, such as three or five section legs. Five section legs are more compact, but less sturdy and slower to open, whereas three-section legs are fast and sturdy, but less compact when folded.

If there's a pro camera shop in your area, go check some tripods in person to get an idea.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*
> 
> So I take it you and your wife play "Mount the 35L on the 5DII" quite often?
> In other news, logging into my employee email for the first time in three months = tons of spam + HIPAA reminders. No clue how I got so much spam either; I only use my employee email for intraoffice communication.


LOL, no, the 35L does it all by itself.









And about the spam, it's probably from all the left-handed web sites you visit.


----------



## Faraz

Add me, please. Made a little bit of an upgrade going from my cellphone camera to the D3100.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Faraz*
> 
> Add me, please. Made a little bit of an upgrade going from my cellphone camera to the D3100.


Eh, I don't know, feels more like a sidegrade to me


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> They've had that lens for a couple years now. The CA is ridiculous. It makes the lens pretty much unusable on film.


Oh few years... Thats awkward. Lets pretend none of that ever happened. Is the performance that bad even stopped down? I guess the only two options for a super high quality wide are like that 43mm or whatever on 8x10 and 14-24 on D800.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nemesis158*
> 
> Finally just figured out that one of the things i want for x-mas is a good tripod.
> Could you guys please recommend me a good tripod for under $150
> (i have an el-cheapo $20 walmart one right now
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )


could look into a decent sub 100 manfrotto and decent ball head or something


----------



## sub50hz

Hey guys. I've slept 9 hours in 5 days. Great job!


----------



## EditeD

Reporting in!

Cam 1: Nikon D50 + Sigma 18/200
Cam 2: Canon 350D
iPhone 3G








Yay!


----------



## Dream Killer

also, don't forget into looking into feisol carbon fiber tripods, they're cheap but built very well.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wow, I am sooo glad I had that filter. I was loading my backpack, and I got up to grab something when it decided to roll off the sofa. My pentax with the 45mm lens ended up taking the full force of the impact. Besides the crushed filter and a screwed up lenscap, everything is fine.


You were lucky. I had a UV "protective" filter on a Nikon 70-200 VRII crack and scratch the front element. No more "protective filters for me!! None of my big teles accomodate them anyway.


----------



## foothead

Yeah, I dont use protective filters. That was just the filter I happened to be using last, and I forgot to take it off.

I'm out camping, and it is freaking cold. I forgot to check into this, but should I shoot the film at a lower ISO to compensate for cold? It's almost always very warm here, so this has never come up before.


----------



## sub50hz

How cold are we talking?


----------



## theCanadian

My understanding is that temperature is only relevant for storage and processing. Typically the film will crack because it's brittle before you need to worry about temperature. ~25F and you'll need something to warm the film.

For more info:
http://www.kodak.com/global/en/service/tib/tib5202.shtml


----------



## Nemesis158

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*
> 
> Good tripods come separately, legs and head. So you shop for the legs you want, and a head that suits you. A ball head is simple, with no protruding handles; you simply unlock the ball and adjust position by grasping the camera itself. A pan/tilt head will have actual handles protuding, giving finer and more accurate control of movement. I prefer ball heads as they are more compact.
> Twist or lever locks refer to the leg sections. Most tripods use lever locks, which are very quick and easy to use, but can often be accidentally unlocked if the lever is pulled by something, and they leave more gaps through which dirt and water can enter the legs. Twist locks are simply rubber or metal rings that twist to lock or unlock. They don't easily become unlocked and make a nice seal against dirt and water. The only drawback is that they are much slower to lock and unlock.
> And just to add a few more options to Nemesis' list, I'll mention materials. Aluminum or carbon fiber are the two most common, but there's also basalt, wood, and magnesium alloy legs. Aluminum is cheapest, but not the lightest. Carbon fiber is lighter, but pricier.
> And there are even more options, such as three or five section legs. Five section legs are more compact, but less sturdy and slower to open, whereas three-section legs are fast and sturdy, but less compact when folded.
> If there's a pro camera shop in your area, go check some tripods in person to get an idea.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iandroo888*
> 
> could look into a decent sub 100 manfrotto and decent ball head or something


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> also, don't forget into looking into feisol carbon fiber tripods, they're cheap but built very well.


Yeah a friend told me to look into manfrotto, ill check out the fiesol too, thanks for the suggestions guys


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*
> 
> You were lucky. I had a UV "protective" filter on a Nikon 70-200 VRII crack and scratch the front element. No more "protective filters for me!! None of my big teles accomodate them anyway.


Weak, my friend has his VRII drop around 7 feet twice on to carpet (from the same place....) and only the hood broke. But his 24-70 fell a foot and the rearmost metal bit bent and made zooming hard, but its okay now cause he dropped it again. We kids are very very clumsy.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Hey guys. I've slept 9 hours in 5 days. Great job!


so the meth is good up there im guessing lol


----------



## Sean Webster

r31ncarnat3d Congrats!

http://www.overclock.net/t/1163732/articles-contest-1-500-in-prizes/20#post_15894578


----------



## Conspiracy

congrats!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> r31ncarnat3d Congrats!
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1163732/articles-contest-1-500-in-prizes/20#post_15894578


Congrats to you too, Sean!


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> r31ncarnat3d Congrats!
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1163732/articles-contest-1-500-in-prizes/20#post_15894578
> 
> 
> 
> Congrats to you too, Sean!
Click to expand...

Thanks


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> r31ncarnat3d Congrats!
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1163732/articles-contest-1-500-in-prizes/20#post_15894578


Haha, thanks, and congrats to you too! Will there be new equipment in your sig showing up soon?


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> r31ncarnat3d Congrats!
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1163732/articles-contest-1-500-in-prizes/20#post_15894578
> 
> 
> 
> Haha, thanks, and congrats to you too! Will there be new equipment in your sig showing up soon?
Click to expand...

Umm...I would love a 30mm1.4, but I need a laptop first.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Hey guys. I've slept 9 hours in 5 days. Great job!
> 
> 
> 
> so the meth is good up there im guessing lol
Click to expand...

ensure shake with a dash of coffee is good. i practically live on that m-f


----------



## sub50hz

THEY CALL ME HEISENBERG.

For real though, jewelry + xmas = no free time.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Umm...I would love a 30mm1.4, but I need a laptop first.


Wow that is a tough call D:
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> ensure shake with a dash of coffee is good. i practically live on that m-f


My life revolves around coffee.


----------



## foothead

Just got back home a couple hours ago. The hike was nice, though I did have tons of problems with gear.

Here are the few crappy digital pics I took. (all are heavily cropped, E-410 @ISO 400, Sigma 70-300 @300). The lighting was absolutely terrible, so I was pretty surprised they came out even somewhate recognizable.














































Anyway, I shot five rolls in the 645, so I'll upload some of them when they're developed. I can do the 3 B&W rolls tomorrow most likely, but I also have two rolls of astia that I may have to send off. Those photos should be of much higher quality than the above ones.


----------



## dudemanppl

People getting high, take pictures or not? I have lights setup, don't ask.


----------



## ljason8eg

Am I the only one here who feels bad about going to a local camera store to look at items, but not to necessarily purchase them? I really want a new tripod and I think I know which one I want after looking at the store today, but I can save $60 before tax by getting them online, yet I feel bad for basically using the store to demo them, yet not wanting to purchase it from them due to the massive price difference. I know I could try to negotiate with them but on the other hand I know they have more overhead than, say, Amazon so that's really not fair to the store either, nor will they be likely to match or even get close to it.

Maybe I care too much about others? Or maybe I'm not the only one who thinks this...


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> Am I the only one here who feels bad about going to a local camera store to look at items, but not to necessarily purchase them? I really want a new tripod and I think I know which one I want after looking at the store today, but I can save $60 before tax by getting them online, yet I feel bad for basically using the store to demo them, yet not wanting to purchase it from them due to the massive price difference. I know I could try to negotiate with them but on the other hand I know they have more overhead than, say, Amazon so that's really not fair to the store either, nor will they be likely to match or even get close to it.
> Maybe I care too much about others? Or maybe I'm not the only one who thinks this...


Eh, I do it plenty of times.


----------



## ljason8eg

Well that makes me feel a bit better, and I HAVE bought stuff from them before. Like when I was looking for bags, the one I settled on was the same price in the store as it was online (just had to pay tax obviously) and I got them to throw in a 77mm lens cap for free along with the purchase (kinda sat on the one that came with the 300mm f/4, whoops). In this case with the tripod though, the price difference is just too much I think.


----------



## r34p3rex

There's a 5D2 for $1800 locally.. hmmmm


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r34p3rex*
> 
> There's a 5D2 for $1800 locally.. hmmmm


Negotiate with the person and get it cheaper!


----------



## odin2free

can i get this guys email and location so i can just get it right now hah


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> Am I the only one here who feels bad about going to a local camera store to look at items, but not to necessarily purchase them? I really want a new tripod and I think I know which one I want after looking at the store today, but I can save $60 before tax by getting them online, yet I feel bad for basically using the store to demo them, yet not wanting to purchase it from them due to the massive price difference. I know I could try to negotiate with them but on the other hand I know they have more overhead than, say, Amazon so that's really not fair to the store either, nor will they be likely to match or even get close to it.
> Maybe I care too much about others? Or maybe I'm not the only one who thinks this...


Patronize small businesses if you would like them to be there in the future. Sometimes, it's not completely offensive to pay a tiny bit more knowing you're getting good service. Of course, if they are a bunch of jerks, just use 'em until they're gone. Customer service is _paramount_ in an era where online prices will almost surely be less than in-store.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> People getting high, take pictures or not? I have lights setup, don't ask.


Say what?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> Am I the only one here who feels bad about going to a local camera store to look at items, but not to necessarily purchase them? I really want a new tripod and I think I know which one I want after looking at the store today, but I can save $60 before tax by getting them online, yet I feel bad for basically using the store to demo them, yet not wanting to purchase it from them due to the massive price difference. I know I could try to negotiate with them but on the other hand I know they have more overhead than, say, Amazon so that's really not fair to the store either, nor will they be likely to match or even get close to it.
> Maybe I care too much about others? Or maybe I'm not the only one who thinks this...


No, I feel the same way, but it's not enough to make me spend the extra amount to buy from the shop. However, I do buy lesser items from my pro shop, such as bags, memory cards, paper, etc. We have a truly superb shop here that's staffed by actual photogs who know their stuff, so I try to buy what I can there, but no way would I ever buy say an L lens there.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r34p3rex*
> 
> There's a 5D2 for $1800 locally.. hmmmm


What are you waiting for?

Funny thing, Best Buy has 5D2's for sale now, and even have a demo out. Never seen a FF camera for sale there, but they do seem to occasionally get an odd selection of halfway decent gear there once in a blue moon. I've seen 17-40L's there, 17-55 f/2.8 (Canon and Nikon versions), Sony A900, lower end Manfrotto tripods, etc. But they only get such items very rarely, otherwise it's the usual entry level gear. Oh and their body only price for the 5D2 is $2399.


----------



## r34p3rex

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*
> 
> What are you waiting for?


Kinda sketchy.. he only has the body and battery.. nothing else


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r34p3rex*
> 
> Kinda sketchy.. he only has the body and battery.. nothing else


Well, when I said that, I meant why are you not going to check this camera out? Local sales have their benefits. Bring an EF lens and a CF card, snap some shots, test for general functionality, bring a squeeze LCD light to check the mirror, sensor and VF out. Then take the shots back home and find out the shutter count. oh, and check to see if the SN is still intact.


----------



## dudemanppl

I wouldn't go for that 5DII, you can find them on FM for that much boxed and without a shady history.







And I am making so many old people on POTN mad right now, so much fun.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> Am I the only one here who feels bad about going to a local camera store to look at items, but not to necessarily purchase them? I really want a new tripod and I think I know which one I want after looking at the store today, but I can save $60 before tax by getting them online, yet I feel bad for basically using the store to demo them, yet not wanting to purchase it from them due to the massive price difference. I know I could try to negotiate with them but on the other hand I know they have more overhead than, say, Amazon so that's really not fair to the store either, nor will they be likely to match or even get close to it.
> 
> Maybe I care too much about others? Or maybe I'm not the only one who thinks this...


same. i dont buy lenses or "gear" at local stores since not many stock sony stuff, but i do buy film, paper, grey cards, etc at a local shop.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> Am I the only one here who feels bad about going to a local camera store to look at items, but not to necessarily purchase them? I really want a new tripod and I think I know which one I want after looking at the store today, but I can save $60 before tax by getting them online, yet I feel bad for basically using the store to demo them, yet not wanting to purchase it from them due to the massive price difference. I know I could try to negotiate with them but on the other hand I know they have more overhead than, say, Amazon so that's really not fair to the store either, nor will they be likely to match or even get close to it.
> Maybe I care too much about others? Or maybe I'm not the only one who thinks this...
> 
> 
> 
> Eh, I do it plenty of times.
Click to expand...

you pay for service. i go to the store because i know that if i have a problem i'd be taken care of that day and not wait for an RMA or reply from a manufacturer for weeks.


----------



## dudemanppl

Y/N Sell 5DII for 1V and 100 rolls of film.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Y/N Sell 5DII for 1V and 100 rolls of film.


Nein. You can score a 1V for 450 bucks, and storing a hundred rolls of 35mm will probaly make your mom upset with the reduction in fridge space.

FWIW, I don't pursue a FF digital because film looks so much better to me. And it's financially within reach for even the most strapped photog.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Y/N Sell 5DII for 1V and 100 rolls of film.


Do it. Or better yet, get a Pentax 67II or similar medium format.

Or you could go super overkill. Graflex super D. I'd like to see pictures of you trying to hold that thing.


----------



## r34p3rex

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Y/N Sell 5DII for 1V and 100 rolls of film.


I might buy it off you


----------



## dudemanppl

Canon EOS 1v
Canon EOS Rebel T2i

Sigma 10-20mm f/4.5-5.6 EX DC
HSM
Sigma 24mm f/1.8 EX DG
Samyang 35mm f/1.4 or Sigma 35mm f/1.8 EX DG HSM
Sigma 50mm f/1.4 EX DG HSM
Samyang 85mm f/1.4
Canon EF 135mm f/2 USM L
Canon EF Extender 1.4x

Leica M6 .72

Voigtlander 21mm f/4
Voigtlander 35mm f/1.2 Nokton
Voigtlander 50mm f/1.1 Nokton

Fujifilm GW690

We already have a standalone freezer and because of the 5 day blackout, we had to throw a lot of food away so its perfect!

35:
10x Portra 160
15x Portra 400 (push to 3200, pull to 100)
100x Ektar (push to 400)
Plus very small existing stock of about 7 rolls of Portra 400, 4-5 rolls of B/W

120:
50x Ektar
Plus existing inventory of... a lot of Portra 400 and very little Ektar/TMax

And I realized I only shot B/W because the price of color was too much, now that the levels of shooting and developing are not complete dumb, shooting color is viable. I was thinking about getting a 5D instead of the T2i, but with the T2i I'll shoot a lot less digital. Plus I'm getting a proper scanner so I won't have to cry at the lack of detail in my scans.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r34p3rex*
> 
> I might buy it off you


Nyeh, my 5DII has no AA filter which also filters out the IR light so it is VERY sensitive to synthetic materials in sunlight.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> FWIW, I don't pursue a FF digital because film looks so much better to me.


Dude, I process my pictures to try and look like film... I'm just thinking, that is so damn stupid, just shoot film in the first place. Digital looks very placid OOC. Don't like the colors or anything, its just quite bland with no real feeling to it. Film is science, and really quite neat.

And the GW690 will remain (for a while) my only MF body. I quite like the 2x3 format. I'd only be interested in a Mamiya 6/7 for its 43mm which is beautiful wide.


----------



## sub50hz

Mamiya 7s are boss sauce. 645AF + 7 would be such a good combo.


----------



## dudemanppl

Contax 645 <3 <3 <3 Too bad they're ******edly overpriced. Same goes for Mamiyas, but what can you do about it eh? Is it me or did you have another line in your gear list, sub? I shall make a thread about a switch to film with a poll.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Contax 645 <3 <3 <3 Too bad they're ******edly overpriced. Same goes for Mamiyas, but what can you do about it eh? Is it me or did you have another line in your gear list, sub? I shall make a thread about a switch to film with a poll.


i had a chance to tinker with a Contax yesterday, and lemme tell ya, the AF sucks major ass compared to the Mamiya AF. Turrible. And yeah, I had a couple of other bodies listed in my sig, but it just looked too huge. It was just my AE-1 and K1000 anyhow,


----------



## foothead

Don't forget about Pentax. I love mine. It's a bit quirky at times, but the pictures are so good, it more than makes up for it. Also, the optics are excellent and quite reasonably priced (as long as you stick to the A*, not the FA*). I saw some lab tests a while back that showed that the pentax 35/3.5 was quite a bit sharper than the wide angle lenses for both hasselblad and mamiya. The 25 is not good though. Avoid it unless you want to photoshop every photo you take to remove CA.

EDIT: I just went to order more astia, and it's all gone. Looks like I'll have to use ektachrome from now on, though I have a feeling it isn't going to last long either.


----------



## dudemanppl

Lent 120-300 out for two weeks for free, get it back smells like old people. VERY VERY concentrated old people smell too. Guy is super pissed when I tell him I want him to get smell out (pay 80 for lenscoat), talk to mutual friend, apparently thats unreasonable. Need to vent somewhere. doesn't make any sense.


----------



## Shane1244

Thats what you get for being nice


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Lent 120-300 out for two weeks for free, get it back smells like old people. VERY VERY concentrated old people smell too. Guy is super pissed when I tell him I want him to get smell out (pay 80 for lenscoat), talk to mutual friend, apparently thats unreasonable. Need to vent somewhere. doesn't make any sense.


How does something even smell like that?

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244*
> 
> Thats what you get for being nice


What he said. There's only two or three people I'd ever let use my equipment, and that's because I'm 100% sure that something like ^that will never happen with them.


----------



## foothead

Just wash the lenscoat with laundry detergent. It gets rid of old people smell in my clothes every time I have to stay at relatives' houses.

You really should be more careful about who you loan stuff to though. It could've been a lot worse than a bad smell.


----------



## foothead

In other news, I just started designing my DIY field camera. Here's what I've come up with so far (this is just a first draft)





































Thoughts? I went with a triple extension design, but limited it to double extension so I can control the tripod location. It uses four inch lensboards so I can interchange them with my graphic view. I thought about doing a 5x7, but decided against it, because it would be expensive to buy all new film holders for such a small increase in size. If this works out well, I'll probably eventually do another one in 8x10 or larger.


----------



## MistaBernie

Adorama has a pretty nice deal on the 5D Mk II at the moment.. $1999 BNIB w/ bag, some random software, etc.. Yeah, the 15% off sale is still happening for refurbs, and I've never had a problem with refurbs, but I feel like I'd want to get a 5Dii NIB, mostly because they're (apparently) more rare refurbished units.

http://www.adorama.com/ICA5DM2C.html?emailprice=t&utm_term=Other&utm_medium=Others&utm_campaign=Other&utm_source=joelm

I'd actually consider this relatively quickly if I could find a buyer for my 5Dc/Grip/etc..


----------



## sub50hz

foothead, _you crazy._


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Aw, why y'all gotta delete Miley Cyrus' posts?


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*
> 
> Aw, why y'all gotta delete Miley Cyrus' posts?










You cereal?

...I reported all of them LOL I am nearly 100% sure that was a bot.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You cereal?
> ...I reported all of them LOL I am nearly 100% sure that was a bot.


Nah, it was, I just wanted to poke fun at you guys


----------



## dudemanppl

LOL dude you probably deleted them.







Anyway, I have Pentax 67 lust.










DAT DOF.


----------



## foothead

You should see some of the crazy large format lenses. IIRC, wollensak used to make some f/4-f/5 portrait lenses that covered 8x10. That would be ridiculous DOF.

I just got back some negatives from a hike a while back, and they all have this orange cast on the edges. Light bleeds? Or is it my "scanner?" I'm basically sandwiching the negatives between two pieces of glass above a laptop screen and photographing it with the E-410.


----------



## dudemanppl

That is the most ghetto "scanner" ever. My Epson V500 was only 150 or so and it scans medium format great, just don't do anything smaller cause it's not good enough.
EDIT: And don't you dev your own 4x5? Why would you send out your film? I'm thinking the issue probably isn't with the film and if it is complain to whoever developed it.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> That is the most ghetto "scanner" ever. My Epson V500 was only 150 or so and it scans medium format great, just don't do anything smaller cause it's not good enough.


I have a canoscan 9000f on the way. I just wanted to see how my pictures came out.

Also, lol @ the moire pattern in the sky in the first pic.

EDIT:
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> EDIT: And don't you dev your own 4x5? Why would you send out your film? I'm thinking the issue probably isn't with the film and if it is complain to whoever developed it.


I don't do C-41.


----------



## dudemanppl

I have a feeling these will look fantastic when scanned cause they're already pretty damn detailed from the ghettoscan. I'd love to visit where ever that second shot was taken with a wider lens maybe and wait for some good light to come along. Anyway I'm about to order all this crap: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/wl/44F7D6A49A


----------



## foothead

Do not use that spool for 120. I have several of them, and they are truly awful. About 90% of the time, they work, but that other 10%, they jam and crease up the film.

And, yeah that place was very nice. I plan to go back with the 65mm super angulon and some velvia/ektachrome after Christmas. That ought to get some great pictures. The ones above were taken with the 45mm Pentax, so it should be quite a bit wider.


----------



## dudemanppl

I've already been using them for a while, they always screw up the end of the roll for 35mm, but 120 has been smooth for me. I usually dev 2 rolls on one spool (which is a really bad idea).


----------



## foothead

Weird. 135 goes on no problem for me, but 120 likes to jam about 2/3 through the roll, then pop off the track and get all creased up.


----------



## dudemanppl

Hahaha, 135 goes the EXACT SAME for me, it just pops off and I just either leave it unspooled or do the whole roll over again. Film still comes out fine just with a little kink in it.


----------



## foothead

It wrecks several frames whenever that happens to 120.

It seems that Louisiana is within close proximity to Mordor.


----------



## ljason8eg

Omg the Canon Service Center fixed something! My 7D works again!! They also are very good at cleaning it.

Now for the lulz: That new 50mm I got. Yeah, they "tested" it with the 7D and found that it didn't focus right. A brand new lens, imagine that. Anyway they replaced the barrel assembly and the circuit board and its...poor and inconsistent at best on my 7D and REALLY REALLY AWFUL on the T2i. Like amazingly awful. The Sigma 30 works fine on both, so its the 50. Best part is, I love how they say they tested my lens and body together, but my body only had one shutter actuation from the time I shipped it until the today when I got it back. So they took one photo. Awesome.

In any case I'm very happy that my body works again. Not too thrilled with the lens though. I'm going to call tomorrow and demand a full refund for that POS. Inexcusable to have a BNiB lens needing that much service done to it, which failed to fix it anyway.


----------



## sub50hz

I don't know that testing a lens actually requires them to actuate the shutter, I am pretty sure Canon's AF diag machine works in realtme.

Also, I haven't been sleeping much lately. I hope everyone is doing well, havent been able to browse the forum much due to how crazy it is at work.


----------



## ljason8eg

Hm, never thought of that but it makes sense. They also remapped a few buttons which I thought was kind of strange.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> Omg the Canon Service Center fixed something! My 7D works again!! They also are very good at cleaning it.
> Now for the lulz: That new 50mm I got. Yeah, they "tested" it with the 7D and found that it didn't focus right. A brand new lens, imagine that. Anyway they replaced the barrel assembly and the circuit board and its...poor and inconsistent at best on my 7D and REALLY REALLY AWFUL on the T2i. Like amazingly awful. The Sigma 30 works fine on both, so its the 50. Best part is, I love how they say they tested my lens and body together, but my body only had one shutter actuation from the time I shipped it until the today when I got it back. So they took one photo. Awesome.
> In any case I'm very happy that my body works again. Not too thrilled with the lens though. I'm going to call tomorrow and demand a full refund for that POS. Inexcusable to have a BNiB lens needing that much service done to it, which failed to fix it anyway.


You and the 50mm FL just aren't meant to be.


----------



## ljason8eg

I bet the el cheapo 50 1.8 would work fine lol. I like the 30mm FL much better than 50 anyway so no great loss.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> I bet the el cheapo 50 1.8 would work fine lol. I like the 30mm FL much better than 50 anyway so no great loss.


Sell it to fund a 17-50 f/2.8 to replace your 18-55mm with constant large aperture!


----------



## ljason8eg

I was thinking about that. I've rented the Canon 17-55 and really liked it, though its a bit expensive.

I've got a gig coming up that involves doing some product photos, so I'll be needing a lightbox of some sort as well.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> I was thinking about that. I've rented the Canon 17-55 and really liked it, though its a bit expensive.
> I've got a gig coming up that involves doing some product photos, so I'll be needing a lightbox of some sort as well.


Quick search on POTN and it looks like your 50mm goes for the same price as a 17-50mm non-VC from Tamron (poss more if your 50mm is still new). Why not pull that trade off, then sell your 18-55mm for ~$80 towards a lightbox?


----------



## ljason8eg

The problem is, I can't sell the 50. It doesn't focus right lol. My best hope is to get Canon to refund me since they basically replaced it with another copy that had issues. I've tested a copy at a local store; there ARE good copies of that lens, I just haven't found one yet. If they did refund me, I'd have $369.99 plus a few bucks from selling the hood. I have a 58mm B+W UV Filter that I never use either.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> I was thinking about that. I've rented the Canon 17-55 and really liked it, though its a bit expensive.
> I've got a gig coming up that involves doing some product photos, so I'll be needing a lightbox of some sort as well.


Expensive but worth it. I use to own it with a 7D and it was a mind-blowing combo. If you use standard zoom lenses a lot, the Canon 17-55 is the one to have. The only bad thing about it (other than the price) is flare control. Without a hood, it's flare non-stop with that lens.


----------



## ljason8eg

Hilarious. First, the good news, after much shouting and arguing they're going to replace the 50 again. I'm just going to sell it this time BNiB.

Now, for the lulz. I talked to the rep who has been handling my case, told him of my issue. He told me that was odd, because he had personally seen a "couple dozen" shots taken with my 50 and 7D the last time it was in the repair center. That's funny, I told him, because I checked the shutter count with gphoto2 before I shipped it and after I got it back and there was only one more actuation. He said that's impossible and that I can't check shutter count on a 7D with any program available to me. Really? Well, and there's the fact that the last picture I took before i sent it in was file 3881, and the first one I took when I got it back was 3883. Kind of matches, doesn't it? He claims this is different for every memory card. Really? I have five CF cards and no matter which one I put in, that number never resets. So after all this, I politely asked him (if you can do such a thing politely) if he enjoyed BS'ing me so much for the past two months. He absolutely RAGED. Made my day.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> Hilarious. First, the good news, after much shouting and arguing they're going to replace the 50 again. I'm just going to sell it this time BNiB.
> Now, for the lulz. I talked to the rep who has been handling my case, told him of my issue. He told me that was odd, because he had personally seen a "couple dozen" shots taken with my 50 and 7D the last time it was in the repair center. That's funny, I told him, because I checked the shutter count with gphoto2 before I shipped it and after I got it back and there was only one more actuation. He said that's impossible and that I can't check shutter count on a 7D with any program available to me. Really? Well, and there's the fact that the last picture I took before i sent it in was file 3881, and the first one I took when I got it back was 3883. Kind of matches, doesn't it? He claims this is different for every memory card. Really? I have five CF cards and no matter which one I put in, that number never resets. So after all this, I politely asked him (if you can do such a thing politely) if he enjoyed BS'ing me so much for the past two months. He absolutely RAGED. Made my day.


Well, glad to hear you're getting a new lens out of this. Now sell it BNIB and wash your hands of all this. I think it's pretty clear now that you and Canon's 50mms just aren't meant to be. Sigma, however....









And you should grab that 17-55mm if you do use a normal zoom a lot. Else, hell, why not put the money towards some flavor of 70-200L for your NASCAR shots?


----------



## ljason8eg

I think I would get more use out of a 70-200. The f/4 IS wouldn't be too much more than a Canon 17-55 either.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> I think I would get more use out of a 70-200. The f/4 IS wouldn't be too much more than a Canon 17-55 either.


Not at all. The 70-200 f/2.8L also goes for that price, but I've no experience shooting cars like you so I've no clue if you'd benefit more from IS or larger aperture. Are you a part of Canon CPS Gold? You can usually get T&E lenses from them, so it wouldn't be a bad idea to try out different flavors of 70-200s before you buy (or get your hands on the 70-200 f/2.8 IS II for fun!).


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> I think I would get more use out of a 70-200. The f/4 IS wouldn't be too much more than a Canon 17-55 either.


A non IS 70-200 2.8 will be great for car pics! You won't need IS b/c you won't be shooting at extremely low shutter speeds. + the bokeh difference


----------



## MistaBernie

Yeah, I've had such good luck with my 70-200 f/2.8 - been doing head shots on my 5D with it hand held at slow shutter speeds and it's still sharp as a mofo. I didn't put any online because my client indicated he didn't want them online (I might still put a couple of the nicer ones up) but it truly is one sexy piece of glass.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> A non IS 70-200 2.8 will be great for car pics! You won't need IS b/c you won't be shooting at extremely low shutter speeds. + the bokeh difference


I think Sean's pants became tighter than usual at the idea of shooting with a 70-200 f/2.8


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*
> 
> Not at all. The 70-200 f/2.8L also goes for that price, but I've no experience shooting cars like you so I've no clue if you'd benefit more from IS or larger aperture. Are you a part of Canon CPS Gold? You can usually get T&E lenses from them, so it wouldn't be a bad idea to try out different flavors of 70-200s before you buy (or get your hands on the 70-200 f/2.8 IS II for fun!).


Actually, yes I am since I picked up that 580 EX II flash. I was one point short before.

Oh, and I've tried the 70-200 f/2.8 IS II before. I rented it and took it to Charlotte the first time I went. Its insanely awesome. As for IS, the Mode 2 does seem to make the VF steadier when panning, so it must be doing something productive. I think I could manage without it though.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> A non IS 70-200 2.8 will be great for car pics! You won't need IS b/c you won't be shooting at extremely low shutter speeds.


Even the 70-200/4L would be sufficient for daytime races, at half the cost (used).

edit: Come to think of it, you could by mine if you wish. I never use it.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Even the 70-200/4L would be sufficient for daytime races, at half the cost (used).
> edit: Come to think of it, you could by mine if you wish. I never use it.


Hmm that's tempting. After the holidays die down I'll consider that for sure.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> Hmm that's tempting. After the holidays die down I'll consider that for sure.


Translation: Let me see how much money I can milk from my relatives, and how much I can resell gifts for!


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*
> 
> I think Sean's pants became tighter than usual at the idea of shooting with a 70-200 f/2.8


LOL, that BOKEH!









Idk what it is, bet every time I see a pic taken with a 70-200 2.8 @ 2.8 it is just amazing!
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> edit: Come to think of it, you could by mine if you wish. I never use it.


That is not a bad idea...


----------



## mz-n10

my samyang 85's aperture started sticking...my maxxum 7 started throwing errors.....bad time for my camera gear...

on side note....my gf got a new toy


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*
> 
> Translation: Let me see how much money I can milk from my relatives, and how much I can resell gifts for!


Pretty much this. Except when the majority of gifts are cash it takes one step out of the equation.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> Pretty much this. Except when the majority of gifts are cash it takes one step out of the equation.


Aha, I'm debating between clothes and a 70-200 f/4L myself.

On one hand, very nice telephoto









On the other, topcoat + dress shirts + shoes + gloves + scarf.

Decisions...


----------



## dudemanppl

Trying to repair the R3a, the door opening bit fell out then the door closed. SWEET.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> on side note....my gf got a new toy


Dat Datsun.

Anybody want to buy my 5DII? Very specialized, great for manual focus stuff.

EDIT: Took two hours but I finally got the R3a rangefinder calibrated.
And this 40D is super cheap: http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1069302


----------



## iandroo888

if i were to take a film photography class... whats a good decently cheap nikon body? (i want an excuse to buy some lenses lol)


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iandroo888*
> 
> if i were to take a film photography class... whats a good decently cheap nikon body? (i want an excuse to buy some lenses lol)


F100. If you want to go really cheap, there's the N70, but the functions are a bit complicated to learn.

A film photography class might make you use a manual camera though. In that case, I'm not really sure as far as Nikon. I'm pretty sure they still make one, but idk if it's good or not.

If you're shooting film in any serious capacity, you're going to want something bigger than 35mm though. 6x6 is probably the most versatile, but 645 systems tend to be better for the money. Pretty much anything from Pentax, Hasselblad, mamiya, contax, bronica, or Fuji will be good.

EDIT: Nikon FM10 - http://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/filmcamera/slr/fm10/


----------



## iandroo888

F100.. see one for about $185 on FM.. could consider. what film?


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iandroo888*
> 
> what film?


That's up to you. I really like Neopan Acros for smaller formats, but T-MAX is great as well. I've tried some others with varying results, but those are the only two I really liked for 135/120.


----------



## Danylu

Add me a D7000
Tokina 11-16mm 2.8
MB-D11

Ty Gone









I still need to get the hang of the D7000's new features, and coming from what I used to own, I think I've found the right compromise in features, price and size


----------



## MistaBernie

I will never understand UPS.

I ordered another 430 EX ii last night (I had a decent credit at BH, they gave me a price adjustment on my 70-200 because it went on rebate on the 30th day after I bought it). Ordered it yesterday at about 3:15 pm. Free UPS ground had it here now. Technically, before 10am. UPS isn't usually here till early-mid afternoon. On an unrelated note though, sadly, the stand, umbrella and swivel mount I bought which should have shipped yesterday apparently didnt and I wont have them till Monday, but I can tripod mount this one for now. Now to figure out fun and exciting things to do with two speedlights!


----------



## dudemanppl

40D or T2i?

40D Pros:
Build
Price
Size
And for some reason I've always wanted to own a 40D

T2i Pros:
Video
Weight
Size
Plastic is less likely to crack if I drop it


----------



## aksthem1

wut

I've seen a bunch of cracked polycarbonate bodies. Never seen one magnesium alloy body that was cracked. Just dented.

Though plastic is more resilient to impact.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> I will never understand UPS.
> I ordered another 430 EX ii last night (I had a decent credit at BH, they gave me a price adjustment on my 70-200 because it went on rebate on the 30th day after I bought it). Ordered it yesterday at about 3:15 pm. Free UPS ground had it here now.


Ground from NYC to Boston should normally be a day, no surprise here.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aksthem1*
> 
> wut
> I've seen a bunch of cracked polycarbonate bodies. Never seen one magnesium alloy body that was cracked. Just dented.
> Though plastic is more resilient to impact.


Magnesium alloy doesn't ususally dent. It fractures. Plastic is much more resilient, at the expense of feeling mushy.


----------



## MistaBernie

The surprise is that it usually comes closer to 2pm, and it came before 10am. The suck was that the modifier stuff that I ordered at the same time (but in a different order) was ordered before the cutoff but didn't make it out.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> Pretty much this. Except when the majority of gifts are cash it takes one step out of the equation.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Aha, I'm debating between clothes and a 70-200 f/4L myself.
> 
> On one hand, very nice telephoto
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On the other, topcoat + dress shirts + shoes + gloves + scarf.
> 
> Decisions...
Click to expand...

I can't believe this is a hard decision for you; of course go for the lens. Personally, if I could get either a free L lens or clothes, I would sooner wear a trash bag.

And besides, it's high time you had a second lens for a change.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*
> 
> I can't believe this is a hard decision for you; of course go for the lens. *Personally, if I could get either a free L lens or clothes, I would sooner wear a trash bag.*
> And besides, it's high time you had a second lens for a change.


Great teachers lead by example!


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> The surprise is that it usually comes closer to 2pm, and it came before 10am. The suck was that the modifier stuff that I ordered at the same time (but in a different order) was ordered before the cutoff but didn't make it out.


They add routes during the holiday season because they get so many packages. FedEx normally comes at around 3pm here but they dropped my camera off a couple days ago at 11:30am.


----------



## dudemanppl

Not gonna lie I thinnk I've cracked about three magnesium bodies.


----------



## foothead

I still want to see what happens if you light one of those bodies on fire. It'll either do nothing, or it'll turn into a miniature sun.


----------



## dudemanppl

http://nikonrumors.com/2011/12/16/updated-nikon-d800-specs.aspx/
If I wasn't switching to a 1V...


----------



## dudemanppl

http://nikonrumors.com/2011/12/16/updated-nikon-d800-specs.aspx/
If I wasn't switching to a 1V...


----------



## MistaBernie

I just can't deal w/ Nikon's ergonomics. Sad part is, I didn't even start with Canon, I started with Sigma back in the day (and Minolta before that)...


----------



## sub50hz

Well, _somebody_ better buy it.


----------



## dudemanppl

So I got bored and went on flickr, now I really want to keep the 15mm.


----------



## foothead

Hmm... Omega 5x7 enlarger on craigslist. I hope the guy emails me back. I've been looking for one for a while.


----------



## Danylu

Looks like I'm returning the D7000. It gives me random memory card errors, sometimes refuses to turn off (and locks up). Not so good for Day 1 with the camera


----------



## robchaos

What brand memory card are you using in it? Have you tried to format it on your PC then pop it in your camera and format it there?
Is the camera still trying to write a file when you turn it off? That will keep it on, and possibly the locking up is due to a faulty memory card.


----------



## Danylu

Sandisk Ultras - 1 day old as well.
I format after each upload to computer (So three times now)
No, the camera isn't trying to write a file, I have sat there watching it for maybe 20 seconds before giving up. Just to test it, I quickly shot 10 raws and watched it happen. Took maybe 5-10 seconds max.

I am adamant something is wrong with the camera. Randomly, it will tell me "Folder contains no images", and when I look @ the top LCD, it'll say that memory card 1 isn't in the camera... and both are sitting in the camera.

Whether or not the memory cards are faulty, I am unsure :S

I'm also not entirely sure if this is a "new" camera or if it is a "demo" camera, Opanda EXIF says the camera has taken nearly 500 photos, whilst I have 300 in Lightroom. The maximum amount of photos that I could have taken = 375 (Subtract the file number from my first photo, from my latest photo,)


----------



## robchaos

if you've tried another known good memory card and get the same issue, I'd say its time for a replacement. Unless they were ebay memory cards of course...lots of low quality fakes floating around


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *robchaos*
> 
> if you've tried another memory card and get the same issue, I'd say its time for a replacement.


I had another memory card that was fine. Though, to be fair, I didn't use that memory card for very long. Maybe 10-20 shots max.

Also, something funny that I just noticed, there was a small hatch on the inside of the grip (where the tip of your ring finger would be), which directly opened to the battery. It had no connections or anything, so I'm not sure of its purpose. Anyone got any ideas?


----------



## sub50hz

External DC power routing.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> External DC power routing.


Hm that's good to know









Also forgot to mention with the D7000 staying on. The backlight for the top LCD also stays on, and using the power switch to switch to other modes does nothing. When I tried writing the 10 RAWs to the card, the backlight turned off as per normal.


----------



## sub50hz

Just go exchange it. Bring your card(s) with to see if you can replicate the issue on a new body first.


----------



## Danylu

I will in the morning, it's just 2:30am at the moment and I wanted to vent because I had time this weekend to try to master the controls before my Christmas trip. Well, if I can learn all the D60 controls on a plane I should be able to learn to D7000 in an evening... I hope


----------



## sub50hz

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-xIYVw3ZPJk

Feeling down? WATCH THAT.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-xIYVw3ZPJk
> Feeling down? WATCH THAT.


What the hell did I just watch?


----------



## Danylu

:|


----------



## Aeonus

I guess I'll join the club!

Current equipment:
Body: Canon EOS 7D + 3rd party battery grip
All-arounder: Tamron SP AF 17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di-II VC LD
Backup: Sigma 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3
"Tele": Canon 75-300mm (old non-HSM) + Kenko 2X Teleplus Pro300
Flash: Nissin Di866 Mark II
Remote: JJC TM-A

Incoming:
Bag: Tamrac 5606 System 6
Portraits: Samyang 85mm f/1.4
Tripod: Manfrotto 190XPROB + 804 RC2

Next year:
72mm filters (protector, CPL, ND)
Expansion tubes
AF chip for Samyang (if necessary)
Sandisk CF 16GB 60MB/s


----------



## ljason8eg

Finally got a tripod that isn't a flimsy old POS!


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> Finally got a tripod that isn't a flimsy old POS!












...pics or it didn't happen


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ...pics or it didn't happen


Well by got it I mean its shipped and on the way. Christmas gift so I'll have to wait a bit but ah well, it'll be worth it!


----------



## foothead

Just ordered a 150/5.6 Symmar-S in a slow copal 0 from KEH. We'll see how that goes. Even if the shutter isn't consistent, sending it off for repair will still be cheaper than the cost of one in a properly working shutter.


----------



## Danylu

Well I got it swapped, apparently the problems with my D7000 are common...

Hopefully this one is fine


----------



## Nemesis158

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Danylu*
> 
> Well I got it swapped, apparently the problems with my D7000 are common...
> Hopefully this one is fine


glad i got a D5100 and not a D7000 now


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nemesis158*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Danylu*
> 
> Well I got it swapped, apparently the problems with my D7000 are common...
> Hopefully this one is fine
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> glad i got a D5100 and not a D7000 now
Click to expand...

I think you're probably the only one.


----------



## Nemesis158

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*
> 
> I think you're probably the only one.


the other factor was cost. if i'd gone for the D7000 i would be completely broke now, and not mostly broke, and if i was completely broke, it would not be possible for me to get a 7970 for myself for my b-day
also the D5100 has the same sensor as the D7000 and records video at higher FPS............


----------



## ljason8eg

Yeah, but its pretty much like saying "I'm glad I got a T3i over a 7D." Sure the image quality is the same, but there's a lot more to a camera than image quality. Funds are a different story but if someone was like, here, trade, you would.


----------



## Shane1244

http://gizmodo.com/5869016/this-is-how-photographers-shop-for-groceries


----------



## laboitenoire

Interesting you've had those issues, Danylu. I've not had any issues with my D7000 so far...


----------



## dudemanppl

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1069973

Holy crap guys... These are some stupid prices. 135L mint for 625, 50L mint for 825. Gonna faint or something.

And if you miss that these prices are pretty good too:

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1069922


----------



## MistaBernie

First doesn't pass the smell test..

Second is mailing a check only. Call me paranoid but pass.


----------



## ljason8eg

That's first one seems so sketch. I'd totally like that 1.4x II though...


----------



## sub50hz

I stopped at Guitar Center on my way home from work today for some guitar and bass strings, and somehow got roped into buying a MIDI pad controller. I don't know the first thing about them or using them, but I thought it could be cool for something. HALP.


----------



## odin2free

sub50hz:
wat mpc you pick up









so fun to play with check this puppy out



thatll give ya some inspiration









What do you want to do with the mpc just have fun or?


----------



## sub50hz

I just got an MPD18, I didn't feel like an impulse purchase of an item I didn't even know what to do with warranted spending over 100 bucks. I got it to play samples in Ableton, but I can't get it set up to play individual notes or pieces of drum kit. Looks like I might need a midi KB as well. Hrm. Damn impulses.

edit: Wow, that video was... interesting. This is more my speed:


----------



## odin2free

are you using the Drum Rack ?


----------



## sub50hz

I have no idea how to do such a thing, I bought Ableton like 2 years ago and never used it. Great job, me! How to Drum Rack?


----------



## sub50hz

Oh, I found it. Now to PLAY.


----------



## G3RG

I'm going to europe in a week and a half.... should I buy this? I know Wolf Cameras is a pretty reputable place but what quality is refurbish? Do they replace the case or is it likely to have blemishes? What about scratched screens and lenses?

http://www.wolfcamera.com/product/RI541538918.htm?bct=%3Bcicameras-and-camcorders


----------



## ljason8eg

All the refurbished stuff I've seen looks like new.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Damnnn I accidentally dropped my camera today. Damn flash detached from my body and my camera hit the hardwood floor. Everything seems to be working fine, but the UV filter is completely shattered (Front optics are unscathed, thank god) and the focus ring seems much stiffer in general. Can't get the front UV filter off since the ring itself is dented and the threads are a no go.

Any ideas on how to take the UV ring off and what to do with my Sigma lens?


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*
> 
> Damnnn I accidentally dropped my camera today. Damn flash detached from my body and my camera hit the hardwood floor. Everything seems to be working fine, but the UV filter is completely shattered (Front optics are unscathed, thank god) and the focus ring seems much stiffer in general. Can't get the front UV filter off since the ring itself is dented and the threads are a no go.
> 
> Any ideas on how to take the UV ring off and what to do with my Sigma lens?


Suxx


















That's why you don't use UV filter!









Try getting it off with a pair of pliers...

or be super cool and use this: http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Lens-Filter-Wrench-Review.aspx



Or freeze it in the freezer...


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Suxx
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's why you don't use UV filter!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Try getting it off with a pair of pliers...
> or be super cool and use this: http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Lens-Filter-Wrench-Review.aspx
> 
> *Or freeze it in the freezer.*..


More on this please? I really don't want to put money out for something.

And I've tried pliers, but as the torque is perpendicular to the lens threads it's not doing much to help.


----------



## Sean Webster

Post a pic?

Try cutting it off if you can. Do you have wire cutters? That should be able to do it fine. If you can just snip on a few places around the filter ring and use the pliers to bend the filter in and get it out.

Just take your time and be careful and you should be good.

Oh and don't freeze it, I was just kidding with that one lol and the same goes for the weird grip thingys. Just do the above.

OH and maybe wrap the tip of the pliers in electrical tape or something in case you slip lol.


----------



## MistaBernie

Just an FYI..Amazon seems to have a one day sale going on -- 35L brand new, $1099 (as well as the 24-70).

Also, S95 is $229.95 (not a typo, I'm in for one I believe). The beauty part is, when I receive it, and the wife is like 'zomg why you buy more camera stuff' I can be like 'well, it was either that or the $1300 lens I've been ogling for the past month or so', and then happy times will be had again.

Good lenses appear to be sold out from Amazon direct (i.e. @ $1099 - 35L, 24-70L) but the S95 is still in-stock as of now (1150 edt)


----------



## dudemanppl

1099?! Thats insane. *goes on CR to check for rumors...*


----------



## MistaBernie

CR's been calling for an update on the 35L and 24-70L (I think..) announcement around 1/3/2012... CR is also claiming that a bunch of new updated patents were dug up on existing lenses like the 50 f/1.4, 85 f/1.8, etc... they're updating the mid level stuff too!







Maybe Jason can get a 50 that works on his 7D from HELL...

To be exact:

50 f/1.4
85 f/1.8
85 f/1.2
100 f/2
135 f/2
200 f/2

Patent literature, self-interpretation and summary

Patent Publication No. 2011-253050
Published 2011.12.15
Filing date 2010.6.2


----------



## ljason8eg

That would be nice lol.

Soooo now that I'm a member of CPS Gold I don't see any reason not to use the evaluation program. 2 lenses max at a time, so guess I'll need to think. I want to try a macro lens, so 100L for sure. What should the second lens be? 50L? 85L? 135L? Something else?


----------



## MistaBernie

Been thinking about joining that, I have the gear, just dont know if I want to spend the $100.

Question, what if something happens to a lens you have out on evaluation? Do you need to be insured, or will it be covered by CPS?


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Been thinking about joining that, I have the gear, just dont know if I want to spend the $100.
> Question, what if something happens to a lens you have out on evaluation? Do you need to be insured, or will it be covered by CPS?


You need to be insured, they don't cover any damage, other than they expect "normal wear and tear."

I think the $100 is more than worth it. I got the CPS strap, Lens Work book, body/lens caps, what I _think_ is a thing that holds a monopod, oh and the 2 free clean and checks are nice too. If you don't want the strap and book it seems like a lot of people will pay decent money for them. They threw in some other small stuff too like a CPS pin and a microfiber cloth. Few brochures too.

EDIT: Oh and 3 day turnaround on repairs, plus 30% off those repairs is nice if you ever needed that.


----------



## MistaBernie

Worth it, as long as CPS repairs stay the hell out of Irvine. See what I did there?

And actually.. if you do get a monopod cover and you wont use it, drop me a PM, I might be willing to buy it off of you, ha.


----------



## ljason8eg

Haha I'm sure since you're on the east coast, the labels they give you won't say Irvine on them. Mine do, but I don't see why I can't have them shipped to another center.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> Haha I'm sure since you're on the east coast, the labels they give you won't say Irvine on them. Mine do, but I don't see why I can't have them shipped to another center.


I had CPS ship stuff to California before and I had labels for New Jersey. I had to forfeit the 3-day turnaround though.


----------



## Shane1244

Hmmmmm eggnogg...


----------



## solsamurai

Love it.


----------



## Dream Killer

*** how3 is ddr3 memory is so cheap, i just bought 24gb (4 * 6) for $90. insanity. i remember in xmas 2008, when i built this i7 system, my 6gb kit cost me $250 - and that was the cheapest set!

time for photoshop madness !


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> *** how3 is ddr3 memory is so cheap, i just bought 24gb (4 * 6) for $90. insanity. i remember in xmas 2008, when i built this i7 system, my 6gb kit cost me $250 - and that was the cheapest set!
> 
> time for photoshop madness !


I want 24GB


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> I want 24GB


I want a disposable income


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> I want 24GB
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I want a disposable income
Click to expand...

Haha...don't we all?

I have to settle for 16GB atm


----------



## Dream Killer

i found a lot of money laying around after i broke up with my gf 6 months ago

ps: i owe approximately $180,000 in student loans


----------



## ljason8eg

I feel like I'm lacking with just 6GB


----------



## Dream Killer

i have a habit of leaving on photoshop often with 10+ multilayer 12mp images open, like 30 tabs open in chrome, skyrim minimized, and going of to play swtor.

6gb wasn't enough.


----------



## dudemanppl

Don't worry, I'm running four gigs since a stick died. This doesn't work well scanning 150 megapixel 6x9 negatives and working in Lightroom at the same time. it just freezes.


















Oh hey look 20 rolls of Ektar.


----------



## Marin

Back.


----------



## foothead




----------



## MistaBernie

Is that your new DIY medium format? (and was your DIY medium format or am I just a herp-a-derp)?


----------



## solsamurai

EDIT: Nvm.


----------



## sub50hz

I probably wouldn't recommend anything else, assuming your budget is ok with the MBP's price.


----------



## solsamurai

Yeah I did some more reading about the display which is the reason she wants a MBP. Seems like a good investment for her for the next several years. Personally I've never been happy with PC laptops and yes she has the funds and is ok with the price. Might even go with an SSD.


----------



## HardheadedMurphy

Mine and my wife's camera
I would like to join the club.... It's mosty point and shoot now, but when we realy go crazy we typicly use sports setting...
The Sony a200 was best camera we every bought


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> I feel like I'm lacking with just 6GB


Yeah, me too. 6 GB has always been enough for gaming for me, but once the battery of photo editing software comes out, my rig takes a dump. But I have 3x4GB of Ripjaws inbound.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Don't worry, I'm running four gigs since a stick died. This doesn't work well scanning 150 megapixel 6x9 negatives and working in Lightroom at the same time. it just freezes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh hey look 20 rolls of Ektar.


Damn, clean up your desk dude! I'd love to see the rest of your room/lair.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*
> 
> Damn, clean up your desk dude! I'd love to see the rest of your room/lair.


Heh, when I bother cleaning it looks exactly the same two days later so i don't bother.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*
> 
> Yeah, me too. 6 GB has always been enough for gaming for me, but once the battery of photo editing software comes out, my rig takes a dump. But I have 3x4GB of Ripjaws inbound.


Think I might have to do the same.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Is that your new DIY medium format? (and was your DIY medium format or am I just a herp-a-derp)?


That's my 4x5 graflex. I'm planning on building a fielf camera, but I haven't actually begun construction

It is like 95% humidity here. My Pentax got abaolutely soaked and decided to quit function properly. All the buttons are scrambled, and it's stuck at +3 stops. This is annoying. Hopefully it'll fix itself by tomorrow.

EDIT: Nope. I've had it sitting in a ziploc bag full of rice, but it still hasn't helped. I'm probably going to have to take this thing apart when I get home tomorrow.


----------



## ljason8eg

My 50mm 1.4 story gets more and more lol worthy each day.

So my replacement lens got here....sometime. I don't know when lol. I woke up this morning at about 6AM, and went out to get the paper. The box that had my lens in it was sitting out there on the porch! UPS came at 6PM ish yesterday, and there was nothing on the porch after I brought that stuff in, so I'm really confused. No signature required either obviously, which is strange.

Oh well, at least its here, and its up for sale if anyone wants it.


----------



## sub50hz

Does it.... work?


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Does it.... work?


Forget that.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Does it.... work?


I didn't take it out of the box lol. They assured me they picked it off the shelf and had it tested somewhere before they shipped it, for what its worth. Makes sense, because it did take awhile for them to get this one to me.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> I didn't take it out of the box lol. They assured me they picked it off the shelf and had it tested somewhere before they shipped it, for what its worth. Makes sense, because it did take awhile for them to get this one to me.


Time for you to trade it for a nice 70-200L f/4!


----------



## sub50hz

Whoever makes _that_ trade is a dum-dum. Although I would consider cash plus the 50, as long as it works. FWIW.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Whoever makes _that_ trade is a dum-dum. Although I would consider cash plus the 50, as long as it works. FWIW.


I as in "I personally" or I as in "If I was in the market?" Because if you're interested we could work something out.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> I as in "I personally" or I as in "If I was in the market?" Because if you're interested we could work something out.


Do it or you're banned.

I got your back, Jason


----------



## sub50hz

I'm actually more interested in a Sigma 30 at the moment -- my nifty does just fine on film, but it's a bit tight on digital, and I don't care fore the color rendition.


----------



## ljason8eg

Well, piss. I have one of those too but I like it too much to get rid of it.


----------



## sub50hz

Welp, _spaghetti_.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> I'm actually more interested in a Sigma 30 at the moment -- my nifty does just fine on film, but it's a bit tight on digital, and I don't care fore the color rendition.


I thought most of your work recently though has been with film?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> Well, piss. I have one of those too but I like it too much to get rid of it.


Right?! I told you it's a great lens!


----------



## sub50hz

It has, which is why I need a normal to slap on my 50D and just be done with it. I don't use it for anything anymore, what a shame.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> It has, which is why I need a normal to slap on my 50D and just be done with it. I don't use it for anything anymore, what a shame.


I could have sworn you had a 28mm f/2.8 or something. Or did you sell that?


----------



## sub50hz

I had a real good copy of the 35/2 that went to dudemanppl in a trade deal for the 135L.


----------



## Sean Webster

What you guys think of me getting the Sigma 30 1.4?


----------



## laboitenoire

Do it. You won't regret it.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> What you guys think of me getting the Sigma 30 1.4?


Do it!

You'll love the lens.


----------



## dudemanppl

Dude that 35 f/2 was REALLY damn good. Shame you have the 135L now which you like barely use.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> Do it. You won't regret it.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> What you guys think of me getting the Sigma 30 1.4?
> 
> 
> 
> Do it!
> 
> You'll love the lens.
Click to expand...

Damn looks like I'm not getting a laptop soon afterall haha. Hopefully i see a good deal on it!


----------



## ljason8eg

You missed $389 new a couple weeks ago.









There's always a used deal floating around somewhere though.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> You missed $389 new a couple weeks ago.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There's always a used deal floating around somewhere though.


Wow,









I can always wait









I'm buying my car soon anyways lol.


----------



## dudemanppl

Gonna go hop a fence at school tomorrow night to take some pictures. I think all my film RF gear is go and the S90 as meter. LEGGO. The light over there is really interesting and its all constructiony stuff.


----------



## iandroo888

i want a 30mm 1.4 again.. would have had one but the one i had gotten in the past had an annoying af motor squeek. sent back to seller and got money back. maybe ill pick one up again some day


----------



## ljason8eg

I sold the 50 1.4. Happy times.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> I sold the 50 1.4. Happy times.


And so ends the saga.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*
> 
> And so ends the saga.


Shame, now we need a new drama to keep us entertained.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> I sold the 50 1.4. Happy times.


30mm time?


----------



## ljason8eg

I already have a Sigma 30!









I'm thinking 70-200. The f/4 non IS is cheap, but the f/4 IS has better optics. But if I spend that, I could get the f/2.8 non IS for the same price. But then if I go that far, there's the f/2.8 IS II which is beyond epic.


----------



## Shane1244

It's almost as if they planned it like that... haha


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

In my opinion, why not just get what your budget allows; don't worry what's "beyond" the reach of your budget. Lenses hold their value pretty well, so when you save up enough money for the next "tier" of 70-200, you can easily recoup most of what you spent on your existing 70-200


----------



## dominique120

I now somewhat own a Canon PowerShot S2 IS, I use CHDK with it (I dont know if it is relevant to the topic). Here is one of the best pics I have taken with it


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> I'm thinking 70-200. The f/4 non IS is cheap, but the f/4 IS has better optics.


Unless you're printing ridiculous sizes, there's no reason to make that decision based on IQ -- they are so close it's really splitting hairs. Buy the IS if you _need_ IS, otherwise save your money. Either of them are sharper than the 2.8 non-IS, though, so consider that as well.

P.S. If you guys want some drama, consider owning your own business. I've been home for 8 hours since Monday.


----------



## MistaBernie

Got our first bonus rumors for this year - if my calculations are correct I could potentially pick up a 1Dx in March, but in reality I will probably sell my 5D and acquire a 5DII..


----------



## sub50hz

Holy hell, I just got home to see I had a 40-point fantasy hockey night courtesy of Jeff Carter, Matt Moulson and Shea Weber. DO WORK. Also, time for bed so I can get up in 6 hours to do this work crap one more time before a 3-day weeekend.


----------



## dudemanppl

The 5DII is honestly the best digital camera period (for my needs). Even if a Contax with a Phase One IQ180 back cost the same, I'd prefer the 5DII, especially without focus points and a perfectly shimmed S screen. Best fricken' body ever, shame to let it go.


----------



## foothead

So, it looks like adorama just screwed me over. On the 16th, I ordered some film for a trip, leaving December 26th. It arrived today, but all that was in the box were two packs of polaroid film. No packing slip or anything. I went on their website, and it's all listed as shipped, with the same tracking number as the box I received. My Pentax is still malfunctioning, so all I have for a week-long Colorado trip is 25 sheets of Delta, 10 sheets of Velvia, and some random scraps of Fomapan. &%*$!


----------



## dudemanppl

I remember Helen Oster posting on this board like once, make a thread on it on some big photo forum and she'll catch on and give you free stuff heh.


----------



## foothead

Meh, I'm not a member at any photography sites. All I really want is to get my film before christmas. Maybe I'll be able to get them to overnight it to me if I call early tomorrow morning. They were closed when I tried a couple hours ago.

I also got my order from KEH in today. I took the Symmar-S and ran the shutter about 100 times, and all the speeds are working more or less correctly now. I'll try rigging up something to measure the speeds after Christmas, but they seem fairly consistent as long as the shutter stays vertical.

EDIT: Got the Pentax working again. It was just moisture on the control board screwing things up. I have about 20 rolls of various types of 120 film, so this will work if adorama cannot get the 4x5 film here in time.


----------



## dudemanppl

HOP FENCE BAD IDEA. So I was happily shooting inside for about two hours until I decided to step out, apparently they have an automated system that tries to foil intruders. Basically its a voice that says "Yo get outa here bro you ain't supposed to be here" but less ghetto. First time I didn't really understand what was going on, second time I couldn't hear it, third I ignored, fourth... Well basically it turned into a car alarm so I figured "Oh (fecal matter) I should book it huh". So I sorta panic and do this very slow run with my backpack with all my gear and a tripod on it. Oh and I didn't have to jump a fence, I just went in through a gate that wasn't closed very tight. Anyway there were three ways to go and I picked the wrong way. :/ I guess some supervisor or something was alerted and he was in in the parking lot then shouted something to me, don't really know what. He didn't follow me so I dunno. Story time over? I got 6 shots of 120 (and I just RIGHT NOW realized I loaded that with Portra 400 and I shot it at 100) and like 16 on 35, so meh. Photography is _fun_.

And no adrenaline the entire time for whatever reason.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> HOP FENCE BAD IDEA. So I was happily shooting inside for about two hours until I decided to step out, apparently they have an automated system that tries to foil intruders. Basically its a voice that says "Yo get outa here bro you ain't supposed to be here" but less ghetto. First time I didn't really understand what was going on, second time I couldn't hear it, third I ignored, fourth... Well basically it turned into a car alarm so I figured "Oh (fecal matter) I should book it huh". So I sorta panic and do this very slow run with my backpack with all my gear and a tripod on it. Oh and I didn't have to jump a fence, I just went in through a gate that wasn't closed very tight. Anyway there were three ways to go and I picked the wrong way. :/ I guess some supervisor or something was alerted and he was in in the parking lot then shouted something to me, don't really know what. He didn't follow me so I dunno. Story time over? I got 6 shots of 120 (and I just RIGHT NOW realized I loaded that with Portra 400 and I shot it at 100) and like 16 on 35, so meh. Photography is _fun_.
> And no adrenaline the entire time for whatever reason.


Amateur







You always check out the security setup before you trespass. Hopping fences and getting shots that you normally wouldn't be allowed to take is a fun thing if you do it right.


----------



## dudemanppl

Learning from experience is a part of life, if I got caught I was gonna do a "Me no speak engresh" thing.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Unless you're printing ridiculous sizes, there's no reason to make that decision based on IQ -- they are so close it's really splitting hairs. Buy the IS if you _need_ IS, otherwise save your money. Either of them are sharper than the 2.8 non-IS, though, so consider that as well.
> P.S. If you guys want some drama, consider owning your own business. I've been home for 8 hours since Monday.


Yeah, I'm not sure I need the IS. It would be nice to have, but most of my use would be outdoors in daylight. f/4 non IS probably makes the most sense.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Learning from experience is a part of life, if I got caught I was gonna do a "Me no speak engresh" thing.


ahahahhaa

Anyways, what types of areas should I look for to take some photos of a jacked up truck? lol


----------



## dudemanppl

I say I got at least three killer shots on that roll of Ektar, so I'm a happy man. Developing the 120 when I wake up I feel like sub right now.


----------



## MistaBernie

@Foothead --

email [email protected] and explain the situation in detal. Be professional about it and she will be your best friend.


----------



## foothead

I'm actually on the phone with Adorama customer service right now. They agreed to ship it 3 day to the hotel I'm staying at. I just had to call them back with the room number, which is taking forever because I keep getting put on hold or the call drops.

Turns out this was actually UPS's fault. During the first call, they said that their packaging tape says "ADORAMA" all over it. The tape on this box doesn't. I went and looked at it again, and it seems that the mailing label has been torn off another box and taped into place on this one.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Developing the 120 when I wake up I feel like sub right now.


Are you hungover?


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*
> 
> Yeah, me too. 6 GB has always been enough for gaming for me, but once the battery of photo editing software comes out, my rig takes a dump. But I have 3x4GB of Ripjaws inbound.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Damn, clean up your desk dude! I'd love to see the rest of your room/lair.


it's a well known fact that cool people have messy desks:


we should start a take a photo of your desk thing


----------



## ljason8eg

Here's mine. I tend to keep it rather clean. Also shows that the Sigma 30 doesn't have very good corners/edges, even stopped down (not a big deal to me though).


Desk 12/13/2012 by JLofing, on Flickr


----------



## MistaBernie

Know what I'd like to see? A 35 f/1.8 USM. I dont like that there's a 35 f/2 (non-USM) and then a 35 f/1.4L. Show me THAT lens in the beginning of January and I'll buy that thing in just about a heartbeat.

Yeah, I know they make a 28mm f/1.8...

Also, I just ripped Best Buy a new one. My latest trip there will be my second to last; my last will be to return an item that I bought based on false information from an associate. Normally, a relatively small purchase wouldn't even be worth going back to return it, but I'm so far beyond done with Best Buy now, they will not get my (or my family's) business or money in the future.


----------



## foothead

Here's my desk. It alternates between clean and messy. Currently, it's in a mostly clean state.


----------



## Sean Webster

You guys have messy, tiny, hobbit desks lol

Here's mine:


IMG_8104.jpg by seanwebster1212, on Flickr


----------



## Shane1244

^Says the man with a tiny desk.

Here's my College Setup.


----------



## dudemanppl

My desk is literally a door turned sideways, my dad is so Asian...


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> My desk is literally a door turned sideways, my dad is so Asian...


Dude....

I was good friends with one Asian guy in high school and his desk was exactly what you described lol.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244*
> 
> ^Says the man with a tiny desk.
> 
> Here's my College Setup.


Hey! you have two desks! Mine is huge! 5' 6" x 30" You crazy


----------



## MistaBernie

Welp, another Photog forum regular wins a prize -- Grats ljason8eg on the Ducky Keyboard (check the giveaway thread for instructions).


----------



## sub50hz

Is it weird that I have a desk for my second (audio production) PC but not for my sig rig? I prop my monitor up in front of my TV in the rec room, throw the KB in my lap and put the mousepad, ironically, on top of my Xbox360 box, and sit in one of those sweet faux-racing rockers (AK Ratchet, discontinued but awesome).


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Welp, another Photog forum regular wins a prize -- Grats ljason8eg on the Ducky Keyboard (check the giveaway thread for instructions).


Awesome!









Guess I'll find out if I like Brown switches better than Blues.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> Dude....
> I was good friends with one Asian guy in high school and his desk was exactly what you described lol.


HAHAH, great minds think alike. Also I can do GREAT exposure math in my head. 32 seconds, ISO 100, f/16. Worked great. And add a little more for reciprocity failure and wheee. I also shot Portra 400 at 100 (cause I thought I had Ektar in there... :/) and developed at 30% less time than I usually do and they turned out perfect. I love screwing around with film.


----------



## BlankThis

Oh just me again... Checking in from the grave, again. How is everyone coping with the rush up to the holidays this year?


----------



## laboitenoire

Desk at home is clean because I don't live here for 8 months out of the year, lol. School one is a wreck because it has more stuff and like 2/3 the space.


----------



## Shane1244

Im the other way around. My College house is bigger than my home


----------



## Davidsen

Started uploading my shots on flickr:

Would post 2 pano's i made, but uploading speed is super slow -_-

First one so far

Full size: http://i42.tinypic.com/11juih0.jpg


----------



## foothead

Omega E5


----------



## BlankThis

Nice shot Davidsen! Have you done any post work to it? I would tweak it a little to get more "pop" from it personally, it looks a little flat for my tastes.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> [/CENTER]
> we should start a take a photo of your desk thing


Ever see that show on A&E called "Hoarders"?

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> Here's mine. I tend to keep it rather clean. Also shows that the Sigma 30 doesn't have very good corners/edges, even stopped down (not a big deal to me though).


It is clean, with a mysterious $2 bill representing.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> Here's my desk. It alternates between clean and messy. Currently, it's in a mostly clean state.


LOL, I like all the prescription drugs on standby, just in case.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> You guys have messy, tiny, hobbit desks lol
> Here's mine:


That's a real woody house you have there. Nice orcas.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244*
> 
> ^Says the man with a tiny desk.
> Here's my College Setup.


Now that's some desk real estate. Klispch ProMedia 2.1s? Nice. I have an original 5.1 set.

Here's my set up, which is always this clean. Note the fine brew I'm drinking.










My Desk - 12/23/11 by gonetomorrow00, on Flickr


----------



## Shane1244

WALLMOUNTS! WHERE. DID. YOU. FIND!

I've been looking for the official ones for quite some time, I'm not sure if 3rd party ones will work because the threading is recessed. Also, I'm jelly the 5.1


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244*
> 
> WALLMOUNTS! WHERE. DID. YOU. FIND!
> I've been looking for the official ones for quite some time, I'm not sure if 3rd party ones will work because the threading is recessed. Also, I'm jelly the 5.1


Weird, I got my brackets from klipsch.com about 6 months ago, but after a quick search, it seems they don't sell them anymore. Drag, because they work so well.







And I've had my 5.1 set since launch in '02. I had the amp custom repaired to fix the massive design flaws in the Klipsch BASH amp. I'll own this set until they crumble. They haven't sold the 5.1 set since 2003, but I see sets (or sometimes parts of sets) on ebay all the time. If you bought one, you would have to have the amp repaired or it's guaranteed to fail, but it's worth it.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*
> 
> It is clean, with a mysterious $2 bill representing.


Its a superstitious good luck thing. If its not somewhere on the desk I've found that I don't do well in iRacing lol. I've had it forever. Printed in 1976, the first year they reintroduced the bill. Still very minty.


----------



## sub50hz

http://community.the-digital-picture.com/showthread.php?t=5526

Video on 50D without tethering? Say goodbye to just about any reason to choose a 60D, folks.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*
> 
> Ever see that show on A&E called "Hoarders"?


I have - I don't think I'm quite there. The point of this desk was so I can have everything in one spot. Sure I can clean it but that means I'd have to look through containers to find a tool I need. This of my desk as your PC's RAM with superfetch enabled, lol. FYI: That desk isn't in my room, it's in an empty room (it's a 2-bed apartment) along with all my bikes and tools for them.

And these days, I'm only home on Sundays and I don't want to spend it cleaning my place.


----------



## Davidsen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis*
> 
> Nice shot Davidsen! Have you done any post work to it? I would tweak it a little to get more "pop" from it personally, it looks a little flat for my tastes.


I actually don't know how to do that.









Any software you'd recommend, for doing post work?


----------



## foothead

Photoshop, of course. If you cannot afford that, GIMP is also quite good.


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Davidsen*
> 
> I actually don't know how to do that.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Any software you'd recommend, for doing post work?


Light Room by Adobe is my personal favorite. Also there is Photoshop but it's more expensive and I don't find the work flow is anywhere close to as fluid as Light Room. As recommended GiMP is another good option. I also highly recommend Paint.NET, I used that before I got Light Room and it's very good in my opinion.

Edit: SWEET JESUS. I finally got my desktop up and stable and the different power draw that my new 560Ti is pulling is causing a terrible capacito whine on either my board or PSU. Ready to rip my ear drums out.


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> http://community.the-digital-picture.com/showthread.php?t=5526
> 
> Video on 50D without tethering? Say goodbye to just about any reason to choose a 60D, folks.


The video with ML has been out for a while, but the HDR video is pretty awesome. Now only if I can sell my 30D to get a 50D from CLP.

I like to keep my desk neat, kinda.


----------



## BlankThis

So jelly of your Swans...


----------



## aksthem1

I love them so much.

In other news, my friend just snagged a brand new 7D and 24-70L for $600 together. Worth the $50 in gas to get it.


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aksthem1*
> 
> I love them so much.
> In other news, my friend just snagged a brand new 7D and 24-70L for $600 together. Worth the $50 in gas to get it.


HOW?! I see B&H has 5D2s on-sale for 2k... Local mall has 7Ds on "massive sale" for 2k.


----------



## aksthem1

Some lady was selling it on Craigslist and she didn't need the 24-70L anymore. She sold off all her other gear including a D7000 kit for $600 as well.

He had to drive for three hours back in forth in the middle of the night, but worth it. She was just loaded and didn't really care about losing like $2,000. :| Rich people...


----------



## BlankThis

Some people...


----------



## dudemanppl




----------



## BlankThis

I love construction sites!


----------



## dudemanppl

For the wide angle shots on the Bessa L, I didn't have a cable release so I just put my finger on the shutter release, the second to last one I held my finger for four minutes... :/


----------



## BlankThis

The second to last is definitely my favorite. Well worth your finger's time.


----------



## dudemanppl

But the colors are REALLY funky...
Full res: http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7174/6565293067_7b4e7bdcc9_o.jpg
AIN'T EVEN SHARP.


----------



## BlankThis

It's not in the details man... It's the whole thing. I would buy a nice sized print of this off you if I could afford it.


----------



## Furious Porkchop

I was never a great photographer, and am getting back into now that football is over. Click on the pics for full size.








All of these were at 11pm in nearly complete dark for a few. Don't be harsh


----------



## foothead

Those photos are great, dudeman. The second to last one is neat. Is that Ektar? I'd heard it had reciprocity issues, but wow. Try provia 100f next time you need long exposures. I haven't used it much myself, but a lot of pinhole users swear by it.


----------



## Furious Porkchop

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> Those photos are great, dudeman. The second to last one is neat. Is that Ektar? I'd heard it had reciprocity issues, but wow. Try provia 100f next time you need long exposures. I haven't used it much myself, but a lot of pinhole users swear by it.


This is with my Canon Rebel XS









But thank you very much for the compliment!


----------



## foothead

You ninja'ed me. My post was in response to dudemanppl's post at the top of the page.

Your photos are neat as well. If you aren't already, start using a tripod. Half of them have noticeable camera shake, which is messing up otherwise decent pictures.


----------



## Shane1244

Merry Christmas Everyone!







Hopefully everyone will get some gear under their trees!


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis*
> 
> It's not in the details man... It's the whole thing. I would buy a nice sized print of this off you if I could afford it.


You can go print that out yourself, thats pretty much the biggest res it gets without looking like PURE CRAP. Yeah all Ektar except the unwide shots which was Portra 400 at I guess about 160. You seriously have to see the 6x9 ones at full res, it is honestly just mindblowing how much detail a negative contains.

Also, my favorite is the first, I need to print that but don't really know where I'd put it... Wish I had an enlarger and a darkroom to do that in OOH.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244*
> 
> Merry Christmas Everyone!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hopefully everyone will get some gear under their trees!


merry xmas. definitely dont ahve anything under my tree =/ but at least i have a tree... lol


----------



## Sean Webster

Anyone get anything good? My mom only got me an electric hair trimmer from CVS pharmacy...an effing hair trimmer! That's it, nothin else. -_-

And got my mom a $200 bracelet and my dad a $100 dremel.

Man my parents are awesome.










Merry Christmas? by seanwebster1212, on Flickr


----------



## ljason8eg

I got a Manfrotto 055XPROB tripod and 498RC2 head. Also got a Black Rapid RS-4 strap. Rest of my stuff was non photography related.

Got my dad a nifty fifty and my mom a nice pair of slippers and whole bunch of different scented candles (she absolutely loves candles, its crazy).

Now to wait for the rest of the family to get here.


----------



## BlankThis

I got a new (Lightly used) rear diff for my Subaru from my parents. My girlfriend and her mom got me a ton of clothes and Toms shoes. My dad also gave me a 1TB WD MyBook so I can throw my 60GB SSD in my macbook and not have to worry.


----------



## laboitenoire

I got a 2 TB drive for Christmas, and my Dad is giving me his old Nikon N2020. Also got a ton of cash, so probably picking up some sort of camera thing.


----------



## scottath

Got some eneloops for Christmas to go with the rest of my kit for the wedding im shooting in 5 days (my first one







)

borrowed the end 550D (dads work) and the 70-200 (friend)


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Anyone get anything good? My mom only got me an electric hair trimmer from CVS pharmacy...an effing hair trimmer! That's it, nothin else. -_-
> And got my mom a $200 bracelet and my dad a $100 dremel.
> Man my parents are awesome.


That's pretty ungrateful, considering all I have to do is look at things like your camera gear and sig rig and wonder what more you feel you're entitled to. I got a couple sweaters and an iTunes gift card from my parents, and I'm happy.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Anyone get anything good? My mom only got me an electric hair trimmer from CVS pharmacy...an effing hair trimmer! That's it, nothin else. -_-
> And got my mom a $200 bracelet and my dad a $100 dremel.
> Man my parents are awesome.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's pretty ungrateful, considering all I have to do is look at things like your camera gear and sig rig and wonder what more you feel you're entitled to. I got a couple sweaters and an iTunes gift card from my parents, and I'm happy.
Click to expand...

Not even going to go there with you. You have no idea what my family life is like atm. and I don't feel like explaining it all right now.

But I will say that I would have loved some shirts at least. And atm all my gear I paid for myself among other things.


----------



## sub50hz

I would say consider yourself lucky. There are plenty of people who get _nothing_ for Christmas, I simply ask that you consider that before complaining about not getting anything grand.

Getting to see my family and friends together in one place is certainly the best gift a guy like myself could receive, a belated Merry Christmas to all of you!


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> I would say consider yourself lucky. There are plenty of people who get _nothing_ for Christmas, I simply ask that you consider that before complaining about not getting anything grand.


Like I said you don't understand the situation, it isn't simply that. I could rather die than bare life sometimes b/c of the stuff that goes on around here. I almost did once. So I don't really consider myself lucky at all.

BTW. Sig stuff = my money.
Quote:


> Getting to see my family and friends together in one place is certainly the best gift a guy like myself could receive, a belated Merry Christmas to all of you!


hehe, thanks. You too!


----------



## Maian

My girlfriend bought me a lens for Christmas!

EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III

If a mod or the OP would be so kind to add it to my (very short) list of equipment


----------



## Hawk777th

Hey guys just got a T3i for Christmas with a couple lenses and 32GB Class 10 Sandisk! Happy to join the club!


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Maian*
> 
> My girlfriend bought me a lens for Christmas!
> 
> EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III
> 
> If a mod or the OP would be so kind to add it to my (very short) list of equipment


Nice!
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Hawk777th*
> 
> Hey guys just got a T3i for Christmas with a couple lenses and 32GB Class 10 Sandisk! Happy to join the club!












Now time to get a good flash and take some awesome pix!


----------



## Nemesis158

I got a Manfrotto 390 series MK394-PQ Tripod. that was about it, apart from a few $25 gift cards.....

This tripod is Definitely an improvement over the $20 targus one i bought at walmart..........


----------



## Danylu

Is it normal for a body to require a -15 AF adjust out of the box :<

I really cannot be bothered to return this 2nd D7k, but I am still in the "exchange" period of my warranty. I don't know how this body got past QC...


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nemesis158*
> 
> I got a Manfrotto 390 series MK394-PQ Tripod. that was about it, apart from a few $25 gift cards.....
> This tripod is Definitely an improvement over the $20 targus one i bought at walmart..........


Sweet! Cant wait to see more of your work!








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Danylu*
> 
> Is it normal for a body to require a -15 AF adjust out of the box :<
> I really cannot be bothered to return this 2nd D7k, but I am still in the "exchange" period of my warranty. I don't know how this body got past QC...


That would be more of an issue with the lens than the body. Try sending in the lens and body to Nikon and get them realigned (forgot the word)


----------



## Nemesis158

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Danylu*
> 
> Is it normal for a body to require a -15 AF adjust out of the box :<
> I really cannot be bothered to return this 2nd D7k, but I am still in the "exchange" period of my warranty. I don't know how this body got past QC...


Is the issue in the pictures or just the viewfinder?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Sweet! Cant wait to see more of your work!


thanks man


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Danylu*
> 
> Is it normal for a body to require a -15 AF adjust out of the box :<
> I really cannot be bothered to return this 2nd D7k, but I am still in the "exchange" period of my warranty. I don't know how this body got past QC...


Thats weird, I didn't know you bought a Canon 50 1.4...


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Thats weird, I didn't know you bought a Canon 50 1.4...


Lol


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Nemesis158*
> 
> I got a Manfrotto 390 series MK394-PQ Tripod. that was about it, apart from a few $25 gift cards.....
> This tripod is Definitely an improvement over the $20 targus one i bought at walmart..........
> 
> 
> 
> Sweet! Cant wait to see more of your work!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Danylu*
> 
> Is it normal for a body to require a -15 AF adjust out of the box :<
> I really cannot be bothered to return this 2nd D7k, but I am still in the "exchange" period of my warranty. I don't know how this body got past QC...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That would be more of an issue with the lens than the body. Try sending in the lens and body to Nikon and get them realigned (forgot the word)
Click to expand...

My Tokina 11-16, Nikon 17-55 AND Nikon 70-200 all need -15~, so I think it's the body.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nemesis158*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Danylu*
> 
> Is it normal for a body to require a -15 AF adjust out of the box :<
> I really cannot be bothered to return this 2nd D7k, but I am still in the "exchange" period of my warranty. I don't know how this body got past QC...
> 
> 
> 
> Is the issue in the pictures or just the viewfinder?
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Sweet! Cant wait to see more of your work!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> thanks man
Click to expand...

It looks perfectly sharp in the VF to my myopic eyes at least, but it's obvious that it's OOF in playback. Using contrast AF in Live view gives perfectly sharp photos.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Danylu*
> 
> Is it normal for a body to require a -15 AF adjust out of the box :<
> I really cannot be bothered to return this 2nd D7k, but I am still in the "exchange" period of my warranty. I don't know how this body got past QC...
> 
> 
> 
> Thats weird, I didn't know you bought a Canon 50 1.4...
Click to expand...

Son... game set AND match right here ladies and gentlemen.


----------



## laboitenoire

Definitely sounds like the body. I only ever had to use microadjust on one lens and that was the 50 f/1.4 I had for a week.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> I would say consider yourself lucky. There are plenty of people who get _nothing_ for Christmas, I simply ask that you consider that before complaining about not getting anything grand.
> Getting to see my family and friends together in one place is certainly the best gift a guy like myself could receive, a belated Merry Christmas to all of you!


Then this will make you rage:

http://twitter.com/fart

(Warning: Some of the retweet language is NSFW)

If I could hit every one of those kids in the head with a 2x4 and not go to prison, I would


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> CLeightx3 Cassie Leight
> If I don't get an iphone for christmas, I will kill myself.


_'murica._


----------



## BlankThis

I don't understand the whole notion of asking for something for Christmas. My parents in the past have helped me out with say paying for a portion of a trip, etc. as my Christmas gift, but we've never been a family who asks what the others want. I like the whole idea of having to really think to get something personal for them. I also enjoy the surprise of getting something that maybe you really wanted/needed but didn't think of it.


----------



## BlankThis

Sorry for the double post but it's necessary... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=thjh2c7b4KY&feature=player_embedded
I want her to come build me one too.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis*
> 
> I don't understand the whole notion of asking for something for Christmas. My parents in the past have helped me out with say paying for a portion of a trip, etc. as my Christmas gift, but we've never been a family who asks what the others want. I like the whole idea of having to really think to get something personal for them. I also enjoy the surprise of getting something that maybe you really wanted/needed but didn't think of it.


My family is the same way too. Xmas is actually a low key thing. Especially in this economy, I make sure they never try to get me anything anyways because I know they need the money for bills and such, and it's still T-minus ~9 years before I can get started on my career. The gifts I do get for people, they're usually cheap but personal gifts. I can't afford anything expensive anyways, and I think it's the thought of a gift that counts more than how much it's worth.

So people who complain about how they didn't get iPhones and are upset about it? /Hits with my Mag Alloy camera body.

Self-entitled kids these days


----------



## laboitenoire

My parents complain when I don't ask for a whole lot, lol... They both grew up in families where Christmas gifts were a very strong tradition, so we always go out of our way to get some nice things for each other.

On a photography note, I'm probably going to purchase a lens to use with my Dad's N2020 for my photography class next semester. Yes, it may be a bad camera in the grand scheme of things, but it's free, it has a lot of sentimental value, and Dad has taken a ton of great photos on it in the ~20 years he's had it.

None of my lenses will work (they're all G-type and/or AF-S), and currently Dad has a Sigma 28-70 f/3.5-4.5 and a 70-200 f/3.8 for it. The tele zoom is a pretty decent lens, but the 28-70 is horribly soft.

I'm debating between a fast normal zoom (maybe the old Tokina 28-70 f/2.8) or a fixed prime. If I go the fixed prime route, I'm not sure what to do.

I feel like I should get a lens that serves a dual-purpose and works on both of my cameras. So far my main thought is a 50 mm of some sort, whatever I can find for a reasonable price. However, thanks to my Tokina I've found that I rather like the 35 mm equivalent focal length, so I'm also thinking of selling my Sigma and then picking up a 35 f/2 AF-D. And then I'm also contemplating one of the 55 or 60 mm macro lenses, as I don't have a macro currently.

In any event, for it to work on my N2020, it'll have to be either AF, AF-D, AI, or AI-S, and it can't be gelded.


----------



## dudemanppl

I was gonna get home from guard practice and figure out somewhere to go shoot, I realize everywhere within an eight mile radius is boring. Why....







I need to get in to more construction sites or somethin.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> I was gonna get home from guard practice and figure out somewhere to go shoot, I realize everywhere within an eight mile radius is boring. Why....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I need to get in to more construction sites or somethin.


Do stalker photos or start shooting patterns or abstract things. Think creatively!


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> My parents complain when I don't ask for a whole lot, lol... They both grew up in families where Christmas gifts were a very strong tradition, so we always go out of our way to get some nice things for each other.
> On a photography note, I'm probably going to purchase a lens to use with my Dad's N2020 for my photography class next semester. Yes, it may be a bad camera in the grand scheme of things, but it's free, it has a lot of sentimental value, and Dad has taken a ton of great photos on it in the ~20 years he's had it.
> None of my lenses will work (they're all G-type and/or AF-S), and currently Dad has a Sigma 28-70 f/3.5-4.5 and a 70-200 f/3.8 for it. The tele zoom is a pretty decent lens, but the 28-70 is horribly soft.
> I'm debating between a fast normal zoom (maybe the old Tokina 28-70 f/2.8) or a fixed prime. If I go the fixed prime route, I'm not sure what to do.
> I feel like I should get a lens that serves a dual-purpose and works on both of my cameras. So far my main thought is a 50 mm of some sort, whatever I can find for a reasonable price. However, thanks to my Tokina I've found that I rather like the 35 mm equivalent focal length, so I'm also thinking of selling my Sigma and then picking up a 35 f/2 AF-D. And then I'm also contemplating one of the 55 or 60 mm macro lenses, as I don't have a macro currently.
> In any event, for it to work on my N2020, it'll have to be either AF, AF-D, AI, or AI-S, and it can't be gelded.


Get a Samyang 35mm f/1.4 with the chip?


----------



## sub50hz

I buy my own Xmas gifts.










That's right, 404oz of Three Floyds greatness.


----------



## jemping

Going out with my friend


----------



## laboitenoire

Eh... Too pricey. Sure, it's a great lens, but I was hoping to keep it below $200 for the lens. I'm currently looking at the 50 f/2.


----------



## ljason8eg

Ahhh wth there was a very nice looking 70-200 2.8 for $875 shipped and paypalled on POTN and the thread just got deleted. That's strange. I was thinking about jumping on that.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> Eh... Too pricey. Sure, it's a great lens, but I was hoping to keep it below $200 for the lens. I'm currently looking at the 50 f/2.


Perhaps the pancake 50mm?

50mm 1.8 AI-S/AI? I think that's what it's called. They go for higher than the AF-D ones in Aus lol. But definitely will be under $200


----------



## Danylu

Sorry for the double whammy but is there a reason why LR puts some of my videos one day "late"? IE, videos taken on the 25th end up in the folder for the 26th?

Edit: sighfaceomgIdidnotbuyaCanon50mm.jpeg time! It seems that my original D7k and its replacement aren't too friendly with these Sandisk Ultras. If I had gone through my usual procedure of import, format, clean, store I would have lost 2 handfuls of videos and photos and by coincidence, there would be a hole in the wall, the size of a fist.


----------



## dudemanppl

D700 is calling. CA-CAW-CA-CAW.


----------



## MistaBernie

D800 isn't too far off is it?


----------



## dudemanppl

D800 also calls. MOO.


----------



## r34p3rex

Canon.. where's that 5D3?!!


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r34p3rex*
> 
> Canon.. where's that 5D3?!!


I know! I need an upgrade! lol I have my $ I've been saving for it now when will it be out!


----------



## laboitenoire

Just pulled the trigger on a 50 f/1.4 AIS. KEH had one with caps for $94 in BGN condition.


----------



## dudemanppl

Relying on the dot to focus a lens is so... it just doesn't amount to any sort of fun. You turn into a slave for your camera, get a EG-S screen and some sand paper and file its way to get it fit in to your D7000, you might also need some shims, but when you get it just right you'll be in love. Also omg, R3a and the side grip is ergonomically the best camera I have ever used. Too bad the EBL is pure CRAP.

CHEAP ASIAN TIME, I'm going to try and get 9 shots out of a 120 roll on 6x9. This SHOULD work cause it wastes a huge amount at the beginning and end of the roll. Also I'll be able to get like 60 more shots with my supply of film which is 10 extra rolls free.


----------



## sub50hz

I hate getting violently ill at work. Oh well, I have like 5 shots I've been meaning to edit for like 3 weeks.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Relying on the dot to focus a lens is so... it just doesn't amount to any sort of fun. You turn into a slave for your camera, get a EG-S screen and some sand paper and file its way to get it fit in to your D7000, you might also need some shims, but when you get it just right you'll be in love.


I don't mind using the electronic rangefinder when I will be using it on my D7000... This lens is primarily for film use with my N2020. It comes with a B-type matter fresnel screen, but I'm thinking I might pick up a J-type screen so I can get the microprism center.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> D700 is calling. CA-CAW-CA-CAW.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> D800 isn't too far off is it?


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> D800 also calls. MOO.


get the d700 already!
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r34p3rex*
> 
> Canon.. where's that 5D3?!!


hanging out with half life 3 and d800


----------



## MistaBernie

CanonRumors is calling for a 5D3 announcement (CR2) by end of March/Beginning of April 2012. That sounds about right since the 5Dii is in my direct upgrade crosshairs. Availability is speculated to be pre-summer 2012.


----------



## r34p3rex

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> CanonRumors is calling for a 5D3 announcement (CR2) by end of March/Beginning of April 2012. That sounds about right since the 5Dii is in my direct upgrade crosshairs. Availability is speculated to be pre-summer 2012.


Looks like I know what graduation present I'll be getting myself









By the way, does anyone have a Singh-Ray Gold-N-Blue filter? Very tempted to get one but at $240.. it's a sizeable investment


----------



## dudemanppl




----------



## sub50hz

What the....

So close to pulling the trigger on an RB. Must... Resist....


----------



## sub50hz

I got got.


----------



## c0ld

Well I caved in.

I got the D7000 body w/ Nikkor 35mm 1.8F lens, extra battery, and a 16GB Sandisk Extreme Pro 95mb/s UHS-I memory to take advantage of the cameras burst rate


----------



## G3RG

How to make car museum pictures interesting? I cant upload any i took as I'm on a tablet for the next week, but I might be able to upload some in RAW tomorrow lol.

I'm using a nikon d3100 with the 18-55mm af-s lens, a 50mm nikor manual lens, and an 80-200mm manual. I also have no tripod


----------



## laboitenoire

Get interesting angles and try to capture unique bits of the car that are either innate to that model or instantly recognizable.

EDIT: So I'm gonna be in NYC this weekend for the New Year (not going to Time's Square--my friends and I thought about it but we've heard it's miserable), and I'm trying to think of fun things to do. Interested in going to B&H one day just to see what it's like in person. Worth it?


----------



## G3RG

Here are a few of the pictures I have taken so far (I'm on vacation in Belgium)

http://www.mediafire.com/?y3ddaqz7pc8zt8c,ruwgzigzr9gj2jy,k4c9piqd8luo44a


----------



## nderscore

@ G3RG: You have a slight tilt on your pictures.


----------



## foothead

I'm on a cell phone, so I cannot view your pictures, so I'll just give some general advice. As said before, look for interesting angles and unique car parts. I also find that lower angles almost always look better for cars, since it gives them a much more imposing look, and it doesn't feel like a cameraphone snapshot. Lenses between 20 and 30mm usually look great for just general shots, but I've also seen quite a few good ones taken with other focal lengths. If you run out of ideas, try some standard effects. Long exposures could look really cool if there's a crowd moving ariund. Just play around and see what you like.Photography is very much a subjective thing, so what looks good to me might not do it for you, or vice versa.

Yesterday, I was out in Breckenridge photographing a bridge over a frozen creek. Of course, stupid me decides to go place the tripod right in the middle of the creek, on top of the ice. It actually held until right before I was going to expose the film, then the entire ice sheet gave way, dumping me into freezeing water. I had to ride the bus for two hours, making three transfers just to get back to the hotel. That was probably the coldest I've ever been. I got some neat pictures though, but the people here are definitely making it very difficult for me. Every time I get the view camera out, a crowd has to form to watch, and moat of the time, they don't even think to get out of the frame. At one point, it took like an hour to get one picture because of this.


----------



## dudemanppl

Don't watch the Rose Parade cause I'm in it.


----------



## skwannabe

Trying to choose on a dslr.. Should I go for a T1i or T2i when I don't really care about videos? How about a T3, D3000, or D3100?


----------



## Shane1244

T2i.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244*
> 
> T2i.


Yep.


----------



## sub50hz

*sniff*

It's so _beautiful_.


----------



## laboitenoire

Not enough Nikon, lol.


----------



## BlankThis

1DsII for 1800 with two batteries and ~80k on it?

My GFs uncle is a professional and has one lying around. Just missing the charger. I don't have the cash right now but in a couple months maybehhh.


----------



## skwannabe

Thanks for the quick answers..
I plan on getting something refurbished from adorama, B&H, or cameta. If I do, can I buy this extended warranty for my body?

http://www.adorama.com/CAEWEOS39.html

Should I bother with an extended warranty?


----------



## ljason8eg

I wouldn't. If there's an issue it'll normally be there on arrival or very shortly after you get it. Well within the refurbished warranty period.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis*
> 
> 1DsII for 1800 with two batteries and ~80k on it?
> My GFs uncle is a professional and has one lying around. Just missing the charger. I don't have the cash right now but in a couple months maybehhh.


1450 yes, 1800 hell no.


----------



## skwannabe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> I wouldn't. If there's an issue it'll normally be there on arrival or very shortly after you get it. Well within the refurbished warranty period.


Sweet thanks. Praying for Adorama to have the T1i for $489 until next friday when I get paid...


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> 1450 yes, 1800 hell no.


Freelz, that's 1DIII money _plus_ a bit.


----------



## BlankThis

Good to know!


----------



## foothead

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Goerz-Hypergon-75mm-Historical-Wide-Angle-Ultra-Rare-Beautiful-/140671884190?pt=Camera_Lenses&hash=item20c0b29b9e








Wish I could afford it. I've seen these go for well over $1000 before.


----------



## Durdle Class A

Happy new year fellow photographer and overclockers










Happy New Year! by Daniel NOU, on Flickr

Shot I took of some fireworks nearby


----------



## sub50hz

The layering in that is awesome. Someone standing on the rooftop would _make_ that shot, though.

In other news, I can't wait for my 8-pound 6x7 behemoth to arrive. Probably need some NDs in 77mm, though. Damn, I _just_ realized that.


----------



## Davidsen

With new year coming up, thought i'd try and make a time lapse of the fireworks, since i can't directly film it cause it gives me some bullocks error about the object beeing too dark.

So, anyone got a software that they use to make time lapse stuff, preferably free, that they can recommend?

my camera is Nikon D3100 btw


----------



## Marin

Think I'm going to shoot 8x10 this term.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> Think I'm going to shoot 8x10 this term.


Do share some of that, I am a real sucker for a good 8x10 shot.


----------



## Marin

Will do. Just need to get some Anti Newton glass so I can scan it on a flat bed. Hasselblad scanners only go up to 4x5.


----------



## sub50hz

Do you own your own drum? I can't bring myself to pay for one, and I either have to settle for a V500 or pay a lab to do my MF negs. I could maybe.... work something out with you perhaps?


----------



## dudemanppl

V500 MF is perfectly fine, just 135 is crap.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> V500 MF is perfectly fine, just 135 is crap.


It's more a problem of accessibility, as the friend of mine with said V500 works stupid hours at Groupon and I can never find a good time to swing by his place and do my scanning.


----------



## dudemanppl

Buy one yourself, 150 refurbed is too cheap to pass up.


----------



## sub50hz

Eventually. I'm waiting for this other chump I know to sell me his V700, but he's being a tool lately and I'm getting tired of previewing all my MF stuff at 6MP from crappy lab scans.


----------



## dudemanppl

Scan using DSLR. GO. Also, so many DSLRs at Disneyland, why? Why doesn't everyone just buy a Leica? Also a lot of mirrorless bodies too, thats what I would bring. Fiddy fiddy split between NEX and m4/3 roughly with a few Nikon 1s thrown in.


----------



## BlankThis

My replacement nifty 50 seems a bit sharper wide-open than my old one. Her dad's got some stable hands.



What did everyone get up to last night?


----------



## dudemanppl

Disneyland and dats it.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Went out with friends all last night.

It's been a fun few days though. Went to Berkeley to see Vienna Teng perform and got to hug my musical idol. I consider this a life win for myself.

Oh, and I got pictures of the concert. I feel this part might be relevant to this subforum.


----------



## Kreeker

I want to start shooting video, specifically car related (in-car, meets, racing). I've read that the 5D Mark II is still king for dslr video.

I'm going to sell my d80 and go for the 5D Mark II. How much can I get for a barely used d80 with 18-55mm kit lens? How much could I pick up a used 5D Mark II?


----------



## aksthem1

Not a lot, sadly. You are looking at about $400+ depending on the condition. A used 5D mkII is about $1,800.

You could go for a T2i or a T3i if you need the swivel screen. With Magic Lantern it makes things a breeze as well.


----------



## Kreeker

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aksthem1*
> 
> Not a lot, sadly. You are looking at about $400+ depending on the condition. A used 5D mkII is about $1,800.
> You could go for a T2i or a T3i if you need the swivel screen. With Magic Lantern it makes things a breeze as well.


Hmm wonder if it would even be worth selling the d80...

If I'm going to buy a new camera I think I'd rather just spring for a full frame. I would be doing this transition in a few months so I still have time to research though.


----------



## iandroo888

friend got me a battery grip for my d5k. fits great. now my pinky doesnt go under the body ! and i dont look weird taking verticals/portraits xD


----------



## dudemanppl

Don't wanna do Rose Parade. :/


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Do you own your own drum? I can't bring myself to pay for one, and I either have to settle for a V500 or pay a lab to do my MF negs. I could maybe.... work something out with you perhaps?


Just a flat bed. Use the scanners at school most of the time and only use my V700 when I'm in a pinch.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> V500 MF is perfectly fine, just 135 is crap.


Too soft. Once I started scanning with the X5 and X1 it made my V700 look horrible. And to think drum scanning trumps the hasselblad scanners...


----------



## BlankThis

If I had money...

http://montreal.kijiji.ca/c-buy-and-sell-cameras-camcorders-bronica-6x6-sq-am-medium-format-body-back-2-lenses-W0QQAdIdZ339653838

http://montreal.kijiji.ca/c-buy-and-sell-cameras-camcorders-CANON-5D-MARK-1-LENS-CANON-GRIP-2-Chargers-6-Batteries-W0QQAdIdZ342013699


----------



## sub50hz

Better hope you can find a dark slide for that Bronica, and hoo boy does it look clean. I don't know about 535, though, especially since it's got a 220 back.


----------



## biatchi

http://www.thestar.com/news/article/1109339--photographer-michael-chrisman-s-year-long-exposure-of-toronto-s-skyline-produces-dreamy-image-of-city?bn=1#article


----------



## foothead

Back from Colorado.







It was so cold that I didn't get to take nearly as many pictures as I wanted. I think I got a few keepers though.

Also, ektar doesn't work in cold weather. I used a few rolls, and they all gave only 8-12 frames each. Turns out that the back of the paper is wax coated, which, combined with the stiffened film causes there to not be enough friction to flip the frame counter. Meh, guess I'll stick with fuji next time.


----------



## sub50hz

If you want, I can drop you a roll of that expired Portra 800 (220) in the mail, I have a ton of it..


----------



## foothead

How did that end up working? I remember you posted a few pictures a while back, but the scan quality wasn't very good.

220 insert is $7 + $10 shipping at KEH, so I'd need to get a few rolls to really make it worthwhile. Is there any left at the store, or did you buy it all?


----------



## sub50hz

A friend and I bought them totally out of it. It's usable if you shoot at 400 (maybe 200 depending on scene), shooting at 800 leaves most of them pretty thin. I'm waiting for my RB to arrive so I can load that up and fire out a roll to make sure everything's kosher with it.

If you _do_ get the 220 insert, you can shoot your Fuji 160, they still make it -- and half as many roll changes!


----------



## dudemanppl

I just realized all my shot and scanned 6x9 is just laying on my desk, wat do?


----------



## laboitenoire

Went to B&H yesterday. Holy crap was that an experience. Picked up some film though for my N2020.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> A friend and I bought them totally out of it. It's usable if you shoot at 400 (maybe 200 depending on scene), shooting at 800 leaves most of them pretty thin. I'm waiting for my RB to arrive so I can load that up and fire out a roll to make sure everything's kosher with it.
> If you _do_ get the 220 insert, you can shoot your Fuji 160, they still make it -- and half as many roll changes!


I almost always shoot reversal film if I want color. AFAIK, none of it is still produced in 220. :/
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> I just realized all my shot and scanned 6x9 is just laying on my desk, wat do?


You mean the negatives are just sitting there, unprotected? Put them in a preservers and start archiving them in a binder with contact prints for each sheet.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Don't wanna do Rose Parade. :/


my friend took pictures of the rose parade... and guess what came up when i was lookin thru em? "Arcadia" xD


----------



## dudemanppl

Theres probably a picture of me oh god. OH WELL.


----------



## Davidsen

So, how exactly do you do post work on images, with either gimp or photoshop?

I mean, what do you look for in a picture that you can change, and make it look somewhat better?


----------



## MistaBernie

All I do is color/exposure correction and cropping if necessary. If a picture I take requires more than that, it better A) serve a special purpose, B) be an excellent image that is made markedly better by fixing something (cloning something/someone out, etc) or C) I re-take the picture if I can. Some people take it further -- lots of work on skin, etc, for example, for portraits, etc. It really depends what you want out of your images but I'm kind of old school, I like to essentially work with what I have and tweak only as much as I need to.


----------



## xxrabid93

Guys, what are your personal favorites for specific types/brands of film for 35mm?

I am going to Calumet in Chicago to pick up a thing, probably tomorrow, and i figured i would grab some film while i'm there, since they seem to have a decent selection. I'd probably grab some iso 100, 400, probably a few 800, and maybe even a few 1600 or 3200. Obviously depends on what they have, but i don't have much now, so i will probably grab at least a few rolls while i'm there.


----------



## laboitenoire

Never hurts to experiment. All I shot when I was little was Kodak Gold... I'm now running some Delta 3200 and some Portra 800 through my camera.


----------



## foothead

Here's what I've been using lately.

For landscapes and sunsets: Fuji Velvia 100f
For Architecture: Kodak Ektachrome E100G
General purpose color film: Fuji Astia 100f (recently discontinued, may be hard to find)
Black and white: Fuji Neopan 100 Acros
Infrared sensitive: Ilford SFX 200

I've tried a few others, but those are what I keep using. But definitely experiment with it, your requirements are probably different than mine.

I cannot really help much with faster films. I've been using nothing but medium and large format lately, so there's really no need for anything fast. I recall TMAX 400 being pretty good, but it's been so long since I used any that I cannot really compare to anything.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xxrabid93*
> 
> Guys, what are your personal favorites for specific types/brands of film for 35mm?
> I am going to Calumet in Chicago to pick up a thing, probably tomorrow, and i figured i would grab some film while i'm there, since they seem to have a decent selection. I'd probably grab some iso 100, 400, probably a few 800, and maybe even a few 1600 or 3200. Obviously depends on what they have, but i don't have much now, so i will probably grab at least a few rolls while i'm there.


Calumet sucks balls for film stock, you should try Helix or Central. Helix is right over near UIC, and Central is at basically Jackson/Wabash. Both of them have good 35mm stock, and Helix is about the only place around that stocks a reasonable amount of medium and large format film.


----------



## sub50hz

Oh, hey there.


----------



## foothead

If it had movements, I'd buy one right now. I've been having problems with the Pentax and the larger negative size wouldn't hurt. The Pentax 67 and a 6x7 view camera are also options, but I'm currently leaning towards the rb. I guess I'll wait for your results before deciding.


----------



## xxrabid93

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> Never hurts to experiment. All I shot when I was little was Kodak Gold... I'm now running some Delta 3200 and some Portra 800 through my camera.


Ya, I've shot Kodak Gold a fair bit; no complaints, but then again, i haven't shot much else color. But since i have to go the the Chicago Calumet, i figured i could pick up some other stuff to try out.

How's the Delta 3200, in terms of grain and clarity? Think it would be much different than Kodak Tmax 3200?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> Here's what I've been using lately.
> For landscapes and sunsets: Fuji Velvia 100f
> For Architecture: Kodak Ektachrome E100G
> General purpose color film: Fuji Astia 100f (recently discontinued, may be hard to find)
> Black and white: Fuji Neopan 100 Acros
> Infrared sensitive: Ilford SFX 200
> I've tried a few others, but those are what I keep using. But definitely experiment with it, your requirements are probably different than mine.
> I cannot really help much with faster films. I've been using nothing but medium and large format lately, so there's really no need for anything fast. I recall TMAX 400 being pretty good, but it's been so long since I used any that I cannot really compare to anything.


Thanks for the input, i'll definitely try and check some of those out.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Calumet sucks balls for film stock, you should try Helix or Central. Helix is right over near UIC, and Central is at basically Jackson/Wabash. Both of them have good 35mm stock, and Helix is about the only place around that stocks a reasonable amount of medium and large format film.


Thanks for the heads up. I'll definitely have to try and stop by both Central and Helix since they are both pretty close to each other, and Calumet.

I also can't believe how lucky i am. What i have been trying to get is an EE-S screen for my 5Dc. I asked for it for Christmas, and my Aunt and Uncle got it for me, except they ordered it from Adorama, which even though it let you add to the cart and order, it didn't tell them it was backorder until checkout, so they told me i could try and find it somewhere else so i could get it. Practically everywhere is backorder; my Aunt and Uncle even said Amazon was backorder for some reason too. So i decided to call Calumet in Oak Brook, and they said the Chicago place had some in stock. I called Calumet in Chicago, and low and behold, they had one EE-S screen left. The guy i talked to on the phone put it on will call for me and i should be going to pick it up tomorrow.

Oh also, how do you guys feel about having your film processed at places? I would do it myself, except i live in a dorm at college so i couldn't really make a small darkroom anywhere, and i don't know if the dorm would let me keep chemicals in my room or anywhere else in the building. I did it all in high school in my photo classes, so i would love to keep doing it, but i don't see how i could in my dorm. Do you think places ever jack up the processing of film, or will it be pretty consistent if i send it the same place all the time?


----------



## foothead

Does your university not have any sort of photo lab? Many do.

I've had okay results with lab processing. It costs more and you have less control, but if you specify exactly what you want, it should be fine.

BTW, GT, can you update my gear list? I've recently acquired a Super Angulon 65/5.6, Symmar-S 150/5.6, Sigma 70-300/4-5.6, and Hexanon 40/1.8. The first two are for the graflex, while the latter two are for the Olympus.


----------



## ljason8eg

Oh hey the 50L actually focuses correctly on my cameras! Must explain the price premium over the 1.4.









Also, has anyone here have/used the 100L? It feels cheap as hell. Very very sharp, but the build quality doesn't seem worthy of the L name. Time to go look for bugs in the backyard.


----------



## xxrabid93

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> Does your university not have any sort of photo lab? Many do.
> I've had okay results with lab processing. It costs more and you have less control, but if you specify exactly what you want, it should be fine.
> BTW, GT, can you update my gear list? I've recently acquired a Super Angulon 65/5.6, Symmar-S 150/5.6, Sigma 70-300/4-5.6, and Hexanon 40/1.8. The first two are for the graflex, while the latter two are for the Olympus.


Unfortunately no, they don't have a lab. It's an engineering school so there are hardly any art related classes in general.









Btw, where have you sent your film to?


----------



## foothead

I've been bringing my color film to a local lab. They do the C41 in-house, and send off E-6. Not really sure where that goes. I've never used a lab for B&W though. I always do that myself.

Try Dwayne's Photo. Their prices are very reasonable, and they seem to really care about what they're doing.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If it had movements, I'd buy one right now. I've been having problems with the Pentax and the larger negative size wouldn't hurt. The Pentax 67 and a 6x7 view camera are also options, but I'm currently leaning towards the rb. I guess I'll wait for your results before deciding.


Haha, there are plenty of RB and RZ shots online that are FAR better than what I'm capable of. I'll hunt a few down that a friend of mine took with his, he's very good.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xxrabid93*
> 
> Ya, I've shot Kodak Gold a fair bit; no complaints, but then again, i haven't shot much else color. But since i have to go the the Chicago Calumet, i figured i could pick up some other stuff to try out.


Go to Helix. I'm tellin ya, Calumet is like the Best Buy of photo stores. Go there if you want to try lenses though, they're very well stocked in that regard (as is Helix).
Quote:


> How's the Delta 3200, in terms of grain and clarity? Think it would be much different than Kodak Tmax 3200?


Tmax and Delta look very similar, but I find that overall Delta is more predictable and typically has a better exposure latitude. Delta 400 is awesome for street photography, and the 100 speed is stupid clean for 100-speed film, big thanks to Marin for turning me on to it.
Quote:


> Oh also, how do you guys feel about having your film processed at places? I would do it myself, except i live in a dorm at college so i couldn't really make a small darkroom anywhere, and i don't know if the dorm would let me keep chemicals in my room or anywhere else in the building. I did it all in high school in my photo classes, so i would love to keep doing it, but i don't see how i could in my dorm. Do you think places ever jack up the processing of film, or will it be pretty consistent if i send it the same place all the time?


Central is great for C41 and E6, their dev/scan combo for C41 is like a 2-day lead time -- really good compared to other Chicago labs. I use Quality Plus Photo in Worth for my B+W, as they will do any kind of developing you specify and they are supremely courteous. Their scans are also quite good, albeit low-res (they will do excellent high res scans that you can pay an arm and a leg for, though).
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> Does your university not have any sort of photo lab? Many do.


I don't remember IIT having a lab, although that would be a good question for one of the architecture students there. At least I _assume_ IIT if it's a tech uni.

edit: foothead, you can browse some of this stuff, it's pretty easy to tell what's out of the RB. http://www.flickr.com/photos/vglielmi/


----------



## xxrabid93

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> I've been bringing my color film to a local lab. They do the C41 in-house, and send off E-6. Not really sure where that goes. I've never used a lab for B&W though. I always do that myself.
> Try Dwayne's Photo. Their prices are very reasonable, and they seem to really care about what they're doing.


Good to know, i'll check out Dwaynes.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Haha, there are plenty of RB and RZ shots online that are FAR better than what I'm capable of. I'll hunt a few down that a friend of mine took with his, he's very good.
> Central is great for C41 and E6, their dev/scan combo for C41 is like a 2-day lead time -- really good compared to other Chicago labs. I use Quality Plus Photo in Worth for my B+W, as they will do any kind of developing you specify and they are supremely courteous. Their scans are also quite good, albeit low-res (they will do excellent high res scans that you can pay an arm and a leg for, though).
> I don't remember IIT having a lab, although that would be a good question for one of the architecture students there. At least I _assume_ IIT if it's a tech uni.
> edit: foothead, you can browse some of this stuff, it's pretty easy to tell what's out of the RB. http://www.flickr.com/photos/vglielmi/


Sub, that RB,







Now lets see some shots.









Thanks for the suggestions on developing places too.

As for my school, actually i go to school at University of Missouri Science & Technology, formerly UM Rolla. So i'm actually gonna be in Missouri. I am just home right now for winter break.

So either i could send it out to a place, like Dwaynes, or i could ship it home and have my parents go to a local place, or i could just hold on to whatever i shoot until i come home on breaks. And actually speaking of that, if i shoot a roll and am not gonna develop it for a while, should i toss it in a fridge, like unexposed film, to keep it longer?


----------



## foothead

Fridge for short term, freezer for long term.

I just developed a bunch of sheet film from the trip. It's drying right now, but this Delta 100 looks super clean. It pushed will too. I accidentally left my meter at ISO 400 for a few shots.


----------



## sub50hz

For what it's worth, I don't bother putting film in the fridge or freezer after being exposed unless it's out of date. It's one of those things some people like to do, and some don't.


----------



## skwannabe

I'm going to buy a T1i by the end of this week. Should I get a refurbished one for $480 or a new one for $514 plus shipping?


----------



## sub50hz

Refurb T2i if you can afford it, check the Canon Loyalty Program sticky in this forum.


----------



## foothead

So I'm looking over negatives, and this $72 Symmar-S just totally amazes me. I've never seen anything so sharp. It beats both my super Angulons, as well as any 645 or 35mm lens I've ever tried. Definitely recommended if anyone here still uses 4x5.


----------



## skwannabe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Refurb T2i if you can afford it, check the Canon Loyalty Program sticky in this forum.


I'm not really into videoing and the external mic doesn't justify the extra cost to me.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *skwannabe*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Refurb T2i if you can afford it, check the Canon Loyalty Program sticky in this forum.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not really into videoing and the external mic doesn't justify the extra cost to me.
Click to expand...

The sensor is worth it.

Edit: maybe a refurb 50D is in your cards. Check it out.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xxrabid93*
> 
> Ya, I've shot Kodak Gold a fair bit; no complaints, but then again, i haven't shot much else color. But since i have to go the the Chicago Calumet, i figured i could pick up some other stuff to try out.
> How's the Delta 3200, in terms of grain and clarity? Think it would be much different than Kodak Tmax 3200?


Don't know yet. First roll of it that I've shot. I'm just getting back into film myself so I'm doing my own experimenting.


----------



## dudemanppl

You guys are making me want to get an RB, but the Pentax 67 looks so much easier to use.


----------



## foothead

I would probably go with the Pentax if I were just going to use things as-is, but the RB lenses have built-in leaf shutters, which means they could also be used on a view camera.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> The sensor is worth it.
> Edit: maybe a refurb 50D is in your cards. Check it out.


Refurb 50D is almost never in stock via Canon Direct. If it's there, grab it. Great camera.

In other news, I'm picking up _alot_ of chatter re: Canon and CES. I was all set to not expect any DSLR announcements but I've heard this may no longer be the case. Also, apparently the Canon 3D project is _still_ up and running. If I were a betting man, I would have to imagine it may become Canon's answer to the D800, but that's just conjecture at this point.


----------



## laboitenoire

Hey Gone, could you add the following for me?

Nikon N2020
Nikkor 50 f/1.4 AI-S

I definitely lucked out with this lens. I bought it in BGN condition from KEH and it's immaculate. No scratches on the lens elements (maybe a little dust to sweep off), aperture ring and focus are smooth, and it's actually one of the sharpest 50s I've seen wide open. I was just testing it on my D7000 and I wasn't seeing a whole lot of spherical aberration like I noticed with my AF-D. Only issue so far is that the bayonet grinds a tad when mounting.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> I would probably go with the Pentax if I were just going to use things as-is, but the RB lenses have built-in leaf shutters, which means they could also be used on a view camera.


Will they cover that much area though? (4x5)


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Will they cover that much area though? (4x5)


No, but they will cover 6x7, which would be great for times when I cannot lug around the huge 4x5 camera.


----------



## sub50hz

Or you can buy a roll film back and shoot 6x7 with movements, although I'm guessing the image circle size would be an issue. F it, just buy a GX680.


----------



## foothead

I like the GX680, but its wide angle lens selection sucks. It also weighs a ton.

I've looked at rollfilm backs for 4x5, but I don't really see the point. If I'm going to lug around that huge thing, there's no way I'm going to be shooting 6x7 on it. It just seems like such a waste. I would like a 6x12 back though.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> I like the GX680, but its wide angle lens selection sucks. It also weighs a ton.
> I've looked at rollfilm backs for 4x5, but I don't really see the point. If I'm going to lug around that huge thing, there's no way I'm going to be shooting 6x7 on it. It just seems like such a waste. I would like a 6x12 back though.


Yeah, I agree on pretty much all of that. I think if you're a wide-angle shooter the GX sucks because it has maximum of 9* (IIRC) shift on the 2 widest lenses because their image circlesa are so small.

And yeah, I would not probably want a roll back for 4x5, although if I really wanted the minimum carry weight for 6x7, I'd probably bank up to a Mamiya 7. So good.


----------



## xxrabid93

So, got my focusing screen at Calumet, and i stopped by Helix as well and ended up picking up some film to work with.

B&W
2x Fuji Neopan 100 Acros
1x Ilford Delta 400
1x Ilford Panf Plus 50

Color
1x Fuji Velvia 100F
1x Kodak Ektachrome 100
1x Fuji Pro 400H

I figure that'll be a good selection to work with.









EDIT: Holy crap, the EE-S screen makes a huge difference. Manual focusing just became a billion times easier.


----------



## sub50hz

If they still made Acros in 220, I'd be all over it.


----------



## sub50hz

Oh, _hey there_ 35/1.4 Fuji.


----------



## sub50hz

I'm gonna post again. I've been contemplating making a thread in this forum titled "Film/Sensor Formats Explained" and going through a whole bunch of crap that people who only know DSLRs (aka anyone born after 1995) can use as a way to understand more of what's talked about in here and other threads. But I need help on view/field camera stuff from, specifically, Marin and foothead. Maybe I can make some sort of wiki page or something. I don't know, I'm tired.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> I'm gonna post again. I've been contemplating making a thread in this forum titled "Film/Sensor Formats Explained" and going through a whole bunch of crap that people who only know DSLRs (aka anyone born after 1995) can use as a way to understand more of what's talked about in here and other threads. But I need help on view/field camera stuff from, specifically, Marin and foothead. Maybe I can make some sort of wiki page or something. I don't know, I'm tired.


Do it! I'd love to learn a little about film


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> If they still made Acros in 220, I'd be all over it.


It's totally worth it in 120 though. Adorama has it for $2.69/roll IIRC. Can't beat that.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> I'm gonna post again. I've been contemplating making a thread in this forum titled "Film/Sensor Formats Explained" and going through a whole bunch of crap that people who only know DSLRs (aka anyone born after 1995) can use as a way to understand more of what's talked about in here and other threads. But I need help on view/field camera stuff from, specifically, Marin and foothead. Maybe I can make some sort of wiki page or something. I don't know, I'm tired.


Sure, I'll help. Let me know what info you need.


----------



## dudemanppl

Hey, I shoot 85% film now.







Just no LF stuff cause I can't easily develop that.


----------



## foothead

?

LF is easier to develop than 35mm/MF. All you need is a set of cheap plastic trays. Like this: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/40342-REG/Paterson_PTP322R_5x7_Tray_Red.html

I shoot 100% film now. The only time my Olympus gets used is for snapshots on multi-day hikes. Oh, and I sometimes use it as a meter.


----------



## dudemanppl

No darkroom...


----------



## foothead

I use a bathroom with a towel shoved into the door crack. It doesn't need much space at all.


----------



## dudemanppl

Good point, but I don't think anything I regularly shoot requires LF, 6x9 is huge enough for me.

Oh my god the M6 meter is crap...The exposure was probably 1/80, but the meter said 1/15. That or I deved too long. I'm compensating quite a bit for exhausting the developer (which worked fine in the past) but me now confuse.


----------



## foothead

Good luck finding a reasonably priced 6x9 view camera though. The main reason I use LF is for the movements. Larger negative size/better lens quality is just a bonus.


----------



## dudemanppl

If I were old/had time and money to go places, I would shoot only large format and slides only and then just have them mounted on LIGHT TABLES ON THE WALL YEAH DON'T EVEN NEED TO PRINT EM. That was a bit overboard, but that would be so neat. Also scanning through the roll and the M6 meter is what is poopish. Oh well what can I do...


----------



## Danylu

Maybe I'm a delusional nutjob, but this replacement D7000 (The 3rd one) also has a backfocus problem. But thank god this only requires a -15 instead of -18/20/whatever-it-was adjustment.... I can't be bothered taking this one back now, probably the whole lot got contaminated. Feels bad having a camera that backfocuses, it's as if I'm out of sync with it and don't trust it. But I'm quite certain my technique to ascertain focusing issues is fine.

Tripod
Mirror Up
Remote Shutter
Stationary Subject
AF-S
Centre Point
Manual Metering
No movement
ISO 100
Consistent Lighting

(Feel free to tell me differently)

I'll probably get it fixed next year when I send it in for my annual free sensor clean. "Yay"

On a somewhat more jovial note, I recommended to my friend to purchase a 550D a few months ago on the basis that it was cheaper than the Nikon alternative and Canon stuff is cheaper in general. Now he tells me he likes the finer things about Nikon, like that all my lens caps are better than his Canon ones (We both have 17-55s) and that on my Nikon "green is green". But my instinct tells me that he blames me









On the film note, I would have liked to do some and I was going to buy a F3, but modern conveniences spoil me D:

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Oh, _hey there_ 35/1.4 Fuji.


If details like that had come out 3 weeks ago, I might have waited for it. Shame.


----------



## scottath

and now i have the money for a 5dII (new) - but also need to live off the money - grr......
*looks to second hand prices on local forums

edit - crap - i need a cf card again too then......hmm


----------



## skwannabe

Placed an order for a T2i and will be here on Monday. Very excited. Going to Denver for a wedding in March and will definitely take this with me then


----------



## MistaBernie

Bunch of stuff going on today in the world of Canon. Some from Canon Rumors, some from Adorama (still offering 70-200 F/2.8LIS MK II for < $1900 w/ Mr. Rebates 4% back). Link provided at the bottom.

G1x PowerShot has been announced. MSRP $799. 1/1.5 sensor (bigger than Nikon 1, but not quite 4/3). Lots of other cool stuff.

Two new ELPH PowerShots.

Also interesting of note to Canon - Nikon's D4 has been confirmed, and should be available in February. Sneaky sneaky!

Finally -- I found this somewhat interesting.. 60Ds are becoming hard to find. In some cases, really hard, as they apparently have been removed from inventory systems @ Best Buy (as well as other retailers reportedly). B&H has what appears to be Grey Market kits available, but no bodies, etc, and Adorama says they're on back order with no dates available. I wonder if CES will show us a new consumer DSLR from Canon (70D I would have to imagine, since Canon doesn't really want to announce pro level gear at a consumer show).

FYI, the Canon 70-200 F/2.8L IS MK II is back on sale at Adorama for $1974.. with Mr. Rebates 4% it's even cheaper ($1895). Awesome price. http://www.adorama.com/CA702002ISU.html?emailprice=t


----------



## Sean Webster

Gaahh....that 70-200....omg omg omg...soo tempting!


----------



## MistaBernie

Tell me about it. If I hadn't splurged (like a FRICKEN IDIOT) for the 2.8L non-IS a couple of months ago





















I would own this right now...


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Tell me about it. If I hadn't splurged (like a FRICKEN IDIOT) for the 2.8L non-IS a couple of months ago
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I would own this right now...


You're not making it any better


----------



## MistaBernie

Well, if that's out of your range I could sell you my non-IS for close to half of the IS cost...


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Well, if that's out of your range I could sell you my non-IS for close to half of the IS cost...


hehe, that is a good offer, I need to think about everything first.


----------



## aksthem1

I just sold my 30D. :| The lady I sold it too was hot though.









Now if only Canon ever had their 50D refurb in stock so I can cash in with CLP.


----------



## MistaBernie

I always hear to check on Fridays. I dont really see why it's of any consequence but the few times I've seen it in stock have been on Fridays.


----------



## dudemanppl

I have a 70-200 2.8 IS II non-IS. I have to say it is REALLY sharp, but not worth the price at all. The Sigma 120-300 works a lot better. Anyway, http://nikonrumors.com/2012/01/05/nikon-d4-leaked-in-french-magazine.aspx/ AND http://photorumors.com/2012/01/05/the-fuji-x-pro-1-mirrorless-camera-leaked-in-french-magazine/. Whoever made that X-Pro 1 rendering up there was really close to the real thing.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> I have a 70-200 2.8 IS II non-IS. I have to say it is REALLY sharp, but not worth the price at all. The Sigma 120-300 works a lot better. Anyway, http://nikonrumors.com/2012/01/05/nikon-d4-leaked-in-french-magazine.aspx/ AND http://photorumors.com/2012/01/05/the-fuji-x-pro-1-mirrorless-camera-leaked-in-french-magazine/. Whoever made that X-Pro 1 rendering up there was really close to the real thing.


So is it IS or not?







I thought there wasn't a MK II non-IS 70-200 f/2.8. I thought there was only an IS version, while the Mk I does have IS and non-IS variants (can't find a mk II non-IS on Canon's site).


----------



## MistaBernie

Yeah, IDK if there's a 70-200 f/2.8L MK ii non-IS... but I do know that it's by far the sharpest lens I own. I've done some head shots with it and I'm just amazed by the sharpness. At first I was concerned because of the size/weight and shooting on the 5Dc because you can't really tell how sharp a shot is (on newer LCDs, it's more obvious if you're out or not) but after the results I got from the shoot I did at the end of November, I don't hesitate to toss it on my 5Dc and go to town.


----------



## dudemanppl

The IS broke.







D4 looks very interesting and I also just realized I had a D3 in my camera drawer (out of batteries and my friend's so I never remembered).


----------



## Faraz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aksthem1*
> 
> I just sold my 30D. :| The lady I sold it too was hot though.


Pics or it didn't happen.

You had a camera in your hand, ffs.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> The IS broke.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> D4 looks very interesting and I also just realized I had a D3 in my camera drawer (out of batteries and my friend's so I never remembered).


You should do a weekly gear-give away drawing for us in the photog section. You've got the gear to spare, clearly!


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> If I were old/had time and money to go places, I would shoot only large format and slides only and then just have them mounted on LIGHT TABLES ON THE WALL YEAH DON'T EVEN NEED TO PRINT EM. That was a bit overboard, but that would be so neat. Also scanning through the roll and the M6 meter is what is poopish. Oh well what can I do...


Do it. Or at least get a 4x5 rail camera to play with. There's no reason not to when they're going for $200 or less on eBay.


----------



## MistaBernie

I'd been thinking about starting a 'Where's nifty?' kind of thing for our Canon shooters -- seems like it would be fun, but I dont know how many people would participate, unless we include an adapter for our Nikon friends... anyone think there would be any interest?


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> I'd been thinking about starting a 'Where's nifty?' kind of thing for our Canon shooters -- seems like it would be fun, but I dont know how many people would participate, unless we include an adapter for our Nikon friends... anyone think there would be any interest?


That sounds fun. Perhaps we should use a M42 lens though, since it can be adapted to anything.

Heck, I have a few M42 50-55mm lenses lying around. I'm sure I could spare one.

EDIT: Would a Chinon 55mm f/1.7 be okay? It's a pretty decent lens, but I didn't get much use out of it before replacing with a vivitar 50mm f/1.7 for compatibility with my stereo adapter.

What adapters would be needed? Canon and Nikon are the obvious. I already have a few 4/3 adapters and some extra macro rings, so I could throw those in. Does anyone here shoot Pentax?


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> That sounds fun. Perhaps we should use a M42 lens though, since it can be adapted to anything.
> Heck, I have a few M42 50-55mm lenses lying around. I'm sure I could spare one.
> EDIT: Would a Chinon 55mm f/1.7 be okay? It's a pretty decent lens, but I didn't get much use out of it before replacing with a vivitar 50mm f/1.7 for compatibility with my stereo adapter.
> What adapters would be needed? Canon and Nikon are the obvious. I already have a few 4/3 adapters and some extra macro rings, so I could throw those in. Does anyone here shoot Pentax?


That's not a bad idea actually.. I dont have any of the adapters though.


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Faraz*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *aksthem1*
> 
> I just sold my 30D. :| The lady I sold it too was hot though.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pics or it didn't happen.
> 
> You had a camera in your hand, ffs.
Click to expand...

:|
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> I'd been thinking about starting a 'Where's nifty?' kind of thing for our Canon shooters -- seems like it would be fun, but I dont know how many people would participate, unless we include an adapter for our Nikon friends... anyone think there would be any interest?


That would be pretty cool, but how many people would actually participate?


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> That's not a bad idea actually.. I dont have any of the adapters though.


I'll order them. They're like $4-5 each, so it's not a problem. I just need to know which ones to get.

EDIT: Got ninja'd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aksthem1*
> 
> That would be pretty cool, but how many people would actually participate?


I'm not really sure. I don't expect more than about 15 before the lens just disappears.


----------



## MistaBernie

Well.. Canon/Nikon obviously.. I know we have a couple of people that shoot Pentax and Sony, but idk who would participate.. Perhaps if we started up a poll asking people which mount they would shoot it with, and if we get more than 3-5 people for a particular mount other than Canikon then we buy that mount?

The disappearing glass is another thing to consider. I was thinking of keeping my eyes peeled for a 50 f/1.8 that I could snap up relatively cheaply.. the main problem is, a lens isn't the cheapest/easiest thing to ship either, so if you're participating you're responsible for shipping costs and making sure the lens (and perhaps adapters) would need to get sent along with it..

Well, it was a fun idea while it lasted.. maybe we can find some other arbitrary thing to use for the photog forum to send around, something that doesn't have alot of value but would be cool for us to send along / pass around. I'd suggest a lens mug or something like that but one of those are more likely to get taken than a regular lens (works regardless of lens mount, everyone drinks, lower value = less remorse for just keeping it, etc).


----------



## foothead

I'll make a thread for that in a few minutes. I need to work out the basic rules first though.

EDIT: Gah, you ninja edited me. The lens isn't really worth anything to me, so I'm fine with sending it off, never to return. As far as using something else, the point is for it to act as a sort of art project where the same lens is used to take pictures around the world. Shipping around a mug or something would be a lot less interesting.

USPS shipping is like $5-6 for a package of this size/weight. I'll make sure to mention that in the thread, and make people know they will have to pay postage to send it off.


----------



## foothead

Ok, thread created. Sign up here: http://www.overclock.net/t/1195383/ocn-wheres-nifty-signup#post_16115933


----------



## sub50hz

Lol, I don't mean to come off like a total chode, but the point is that if youre serious about image quality, you're going to have to make some compromises in the way of weight/size/weather+shock-proofedness. If you're more serious about the activity, maybe consider just popping your phone in a waterproof case and using that.

Photography equipment is _all about_ compromises, you can never have it all unless you're wealthy beyond our wildest dreams, and even then -- good luck carrying and being able to use everything. Evaluate your options by researching them, and decide what compromises are the easiest for you to make.


----------



## dudemanppl

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1072399/
God that is stupid cheap. I wish I had money right now, 1950 gripped and boxed 5DII anybody?


----------



## aksthem1

So the 50D refurb body is in stock, but not the kit.

I just want the kit so I can sell the lens, choices...


----------



## scottath

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1072399/
> God that is stupid cheap. I wish I had money right now, 1950 gripped and boxed 5DII anybody?


dammit - shipping to aus will negate that price a bit though


----------



## iandroo888

D4 gets announced :] along with the 85mm f/1.8


----------



## sub50hz

An AF-S 85/1.8 for 500 bucks? No thanks, that's about 100 dollars overpriced -- unless it's hella better than the AF-D variant, of course.


----------



## dudemanppl

300 more for Sigma 85, still more expensive than the Canon.


----------



## foothead

Crappy scan, but I really like how the sky came out in this picture. For some reason, it looks awesome in like every picture I took in Colorado, but all I get here in Louisiana is blown-out white. Weird. I used a yellow 12 filter if anyone's wondering.










Random fact: When trying to take that picture, I fell through the ice into the freezing water no less than four times before finding a spot that was strong enough.


----------



## MistaBernie

Must be nice to not outweigh a Mini Cooper Foothead. I usually have my seriously skinny buddy come along with me for dangerous stuff like this. I can pull him out with one hand and save the camera gear with the other, but there's no way I'm getting on anything that looks less than 1' thick of ice. I dont even ice skate anymore.

I've been trying to think of interesting things I can do to get back into shooting more. I almost want to start a 365 project, but then I feel like I'd have to post stuff through instagram, break out my chucks, buy a 645 and hate everybody, and I dont quite feel like doing that.


----------



## MistaBernie

This warrants a double post --

Sony is releasing their XQD memory cards. With an XQD compatible DSLR... 100+ RAWs in continuous shooting... spray and pray believers just hit the motherload. (From what I hear the Nikon D4 is XQD compatible)...


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Must be nice to not outweigh a Mini Cooper Foothead. I usually have my seriously skinny buddy come along with me for dangerous stuff like this. I can pull him out with one hand and save the camera gear with the other, but there's no way I'm getting on anything that looks less than 1' thick of ice. I dont even ice skate anymore.


Haha. For some reason, I kept falling through the ice everywhere I went, but my dad could walk around on it fine despite outweighing me by probably 50 pounds.


----------



## MistaBernie

if he's taller and heavier, I'll assume he has bigger feet and takes bigger strides. It's distribution of weight that makes movement on ice difficult (or easier). Hence why when people are trying to pull those that fall through the ice out of said ice, they usually do it on their hands and knees - it's because if the weight is distributed, there's less weight on any particular point, which reduces the likelihood of breaking the ice and falling in.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> Crappy scan, but I really like how the sky came out in this picture. For some reason, it looks awesome in like every picture I took in Colorado, but all I get here in Louisiana is blown-out white. Weird. I used a yellow 12 filter if anyone's wondering.
> 
> Random fact: When trying to take that picture, I fell through the ice into the freezing water no less than four times before finding a spot that was strong enough.


Cool, almost looks like an IR shot.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> if he's taller and heavier, I'll assume he has bigger feet and takes bigger strides. It's distribution of weight that makes movement on ice difficult (or easier). Hence why when people are trying to pull those that fall through the ice out of said ice, they usually do it on their hands and knees - it's because if the weight is distributed, there's less weight on any particular point, which reduces the likelihood of breaking the ice and falling in.


I'm actually as tall as he is, but my feet are smaller. Makes sense.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*
> 
> Cool, almost looks like an IR shot.


That's what I thought at first, but then I realized that I had forgotten the red 25 filter at home and I didn't have any 4x5 IR film to use the 091 filter.

I was just looking through my E-410 when I found this.










I took that to help meter a 4x5 picture on velvia. God, I hope that one came out. I didn't realize just how awesome it looked at the time.


----------



## dudemanppl

Heh, I just woke up and the first thing I thought about was "woah, our eyes have good white balance."


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> That's what I thought at first, but then I realized that I had forgotten the red 25 filter at home and I didn't have any 4x5 IR film to use the 091 filter.
> .


I have a pack of 4x5 IR film but haven't used it since I I've been too lazy to figure out how to focus with it.


----------



## foothead

Wow. All you have to do is rack the focus out a little bit. The amount needed varies by lens, so play around with it. The way I figure it out for my lenses is by cutting a sheet of film into a few chunks, then taping them into film holders and shooting something flat, like a brick wall, wide open with the focus varied a bit between each shot. Or if you're lazy, you could use the 75mm lens and just stop down to f/32.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Heh, I just woke up and the first thing I thought about was "woah, our eyes have good white balance."


That's caused by the Helmholtz-Kohlrausch effect. Basically, the visual cortex of the brain measures intensity of a color by comparing it against other visible colors. Since white is perceived as the brightest, it's automatically used as the reference, thus correcting for color shifts from differing light sources.

/geek.


----------



## dudemanppl

Holy jeebus... Learn something everyday!


----------



## foothead

Finally got around to fixing those Mordor scans from a while back. Now the only problem I have is dust everywhere.



















By the way, it's freaking hard to take a picture anywhere in Louisiana without having garbage somewhere in it. Even 10 miles out, off trail, there are water bottles, beer cans, and for some odd reason, tires all over the place. It's just sad. I hate the people here.


----------



## Dream Killer

drooling over the nikon d4. hopefully the tech from that trickles down to the d800. 91k pixel metering sensor -- whaattt


----------



## Galactipuss

Ran into this by accident but anyways i rock the nikon with a good variety of glass including the following
Nikon D700
24-70mm 2.8
70-200mm 2.8
prime 85mm 1.4
Flash SB-900

Check out my photos at flickr http://www.flickr.com/photos/dirtyal/


----------



## Conspiracy

so i got to mess with that new sony nex5 last night on a video shoot because someone misplaced the nikon that we normally use for social media photos. nex5 is a pretty solid little camera. kind strange to hold since im so used to my 7D. but was kind of fund to run around with a point and shoot. makes me want to get one but it just seems like once i get one a much better one with come out leaving mine a dinosaur lol

nex5 has a very awesome feature that is an alternative to cranking up your ISO where it rapid fires like 6 photos really fast and stitches them together into an HDR image that looks rather nice. only downfall to that approach of course is if your subjects are moving. i was able to take shots of people inside a dark theater (not during the show of course) that came out with very little motion blur compared to slowing the shutter speed considerably to avoid tooo much noise.

overall. nex5 is a fun little toy to have. i might buy myself a really nice P&S when i graduate from college. and if i win the lotto ill scratch that plan and buy a leica camera with that new leica 50 f.95









at dreamkillers drooling over the D4. im with you bud. but really im excited to see how it does with video because what i have read so far is great and can make people take nikon more serious for video.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> drooling over the nikon d4. hopefully the tech from that trickles down to the d800. 91k pixel metering sensor -- whaattt


Pre ordered mine yesterday, mid Feb delivery. LNIB D3 coming up FS once the D4 gets here.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> drooling over the nikon d4. hopefully the tech from that trickles down to the d800. 91k pixel metering sensor -- whaattt
> 
> 
> 
> Pre ordered mine yesterday, mid Feb delivery. LNIB D3 coming up FS once the D4 gets here.
Click to expand...

Hey nuclear, any chance you can do an unboxing and review of the D4? I think having that content on OCN would be amazing, as well as making most of the photog board jealous


----------



## foothead

Any chance there's going to be an F7 with the new tech from the D4?

Probably not, but that would be awesome.


----------



## MistaBernie

So.. with about 3 weeks left till bonus day, I'm trying to figure out _exactly_ what it is I want to do with some of the money. My original plan was sell my 5Dc and pick up a 5Dii with bonus money, and be good for a while on gear (hopefully)... but now, I'm kind of rethinking that a little bit.

Firstly, nobody has made me any reasonable offers on my 5D. I got one guy that wanted to offer me $925 for everything (including grip, extra batteries, extra charger, etc). I dont regret that at all, my 5D is in awesome condition,etc.

But beyond live view, higher ISO (which I can do in the camera if I really need to via exposure comp), and a couple of other things, I really dont have a need for it. If I want video or am shooting action, I have my 7D; else, for portraits and landscapes, etc, I feel like the 5Dc is perfect for me.

I am back on the 35L kick though. Adorama will have them for $1255 brand new (that's $2 cheaper than refurb + tax direct from Canon), and after shooting with my 85 a bit today, I really think that a 35L will be a good complement to it (better than the 50). I could actually get it for cheaper if I return the 430 EX ii I bought back in the middle of December (I had a credit from my 70-200 purchase) but I'd have to send that back soon, and I kind of want to keep the 430s in case of emergency (or in case I actually get to do any of the funky lighting stuff I wanna try this year).


----------



## dudemanppl

35 1.4 on full frame is just some sort of insanely good combo. You can NEVER go wrong with it. Also I have a working D70 I got for basically free, wonderful.


----------



## laboitenoire

Today was officially the first day I've used a Canon SLR and not griped about the ergonomics. I was at my local botanic garden shooting the N2020, and a lady asked me to take a picture for her. Canon 60D, 18-135 IS. Must say that was a very nice setup to hold, and the 60D felt surprisingly good in my hands...


----------



## sub50hz

I just bought new tripod legs and simultaneously butchered my pan head mount. Livid as hell.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> Today was officially the first day I've used a Canon SLR and not griped about the ergonomics. I was at my local botanic garden shooting the N2020, and a lady asked me to take a picture for her. Canon 60D, 18-135 IS. Must say that was a very nice setup to hold, and the 60D felt surprisingly good in my hands...


I really have to say the 60D is really quite comfortable in the hands.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*
> 
> Hey nuclear, any chance you can do an unboxing and review of the D4? I think having that content on OCN would be amazing, as well as making most of the photog board jealous


Seriously?? Dudeman already hates me. But I suppose I could post some pics if you like. Be forwarned, if it's not the high iso phenom it's supposed to be, it's going back. In that case I'll find a used LNIB D3s.


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*
> 
> Seriously?? Dudeman already hates me. But I suppose I could post some pics if you like. Be forwarned, if it's not the high iso phenom it's supposed to be, it's going back. In that case I'll find a used LNIB D3s.


The samples I've seen aren't any different, to my eye, than those of the D3S. That being said 12800 looks about the same as 800 on my D90









http://www.alinpopescu.eu/blog/lansare-nikon-d4-in-romania/


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*
> 
> Hey nuclear, any chance you can do an unboxing and review of the D4? I think having that content on OCN would be amazing, as well as making most of the photog board jealous
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Seriously?? Dudeman already hates me. But I suppose I could post some pics if you like. Be forwarned, if it's not the high iso phenom it's supposed to be, it's going back. In that case I'll find a used LNIB D3s.
Click to expand...

I won't be jelly, the D4 is super ugly as is the 1D X. And I hate square cameras, so I wouldn't get one but I'm fine salivating over your images.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*
> 
> Seriously?? Dudeman already hates me. But I suppose I could post some pics if you like. Be forwarned, if it's not the high iso phenom it's supposed to be, it's going back. In that case I'll find a used LNIB D3s.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> I won't be jelly, the D4 is super ugly as is the 1D X. And I hate square cameras, so I wouldn't get one but I'm fine salivating over your images.


He's lying.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis*
> 
> The samples I've seen aren't any different, to my eye, than those of the D3S. That being said 12800 looks about the same as 800 on my D90
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.alinpopescu.eu/blog/lansare-nikon-d4-in-romania/


They do look good, but I'm reserving judgement until I see how well it does with shadow noise. Those shots were very well lit to begin with, not a good test of high ISO noise. And I expect that it will be awesome, but just saying.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> I just bought new tripod legs and simultaneously butchered my pan head mount. Livid as hell.


Boom, new head.


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*
> 
> They do look good, but I'm reserving judgement until I see how well it does with shadow noise. Those shots were very well lit to begin with, not a good test of high ISO noise. And I expect that it will be awesome, but just saying.


Too true!


----------



## thatdutchguy

I'd like to join the list, this is what I'm shooting with.

*Body:*
_Nikon D90_

*Lenses:*
_Nikkor 18-105mm F3.5-5.6 AF-S
Nikkor 35mm F1.8 AF-S
Nikkor 70-200mm F2.8 VRII_

*Accessories:*
_MB-D80
Nikon SB-900
SanDisk Extreme Pro 8GB 2x
SanDisk Extreme III 8GB 2x
ThinkTank Retrospective 20
Black Rapid RS-7 strap_

*Tripod:*
_Manfrotto 055CXPRO3
Manfrotto MH054M0-Q5 Ballhead
Manfrotto MBAG80PM_

I'll get some pictures up later.


----------



## dudemanppl

I just transferred all the electronics of one 5DII to another simply because I'm selling it and it has less actuations. True story.

FFFFFFFFFFF ACTUATIONS ARE LINKED TO PCB. Fricken A.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> I just transferred all the electronics of one 5DII to another simply because I'm selling it and it has less actuations. True story.
> FFFFFFFFFFF ACTUATIONS ARE LINKED TO PCB. Fricken A.


Wait, so you tried to move the electronics from one camera into another so you could sell it as having less actuations than it actually does? I'm pretty sure that legally constitutes fraud. Don't sell it that way, or if you do, make sure that's clearly spelled out in the listing..


----------



## nderscore

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Boom, new head.


I don't like calumet very much. Only because they charged me 70 bucks to repair a monolight and put it back wrong.

Other than that, fun place to browse around.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> Wait, so you tried to move the electronics from one camera into another so you could sell it as having less actuations than it actually does? I'm pretty sure that legally constitutes fraud. Don't sell it that way, or if you do, make sure that's clearly spelled out in the listing..


What he says.


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> Wait, so you tried to move the electronics from one camera into another so you could sell it as having less actuations than it actually does? I'm pretty sure that legally constitutes fraud. Don't sell it that way, or if you do, make sure that's clearly spelled out in the listing..
> 
> 
> 
> What she says.
Click to expand...

Fixed.

I want a K-5 so bad, but then if I want to rent out equipment none of the local places have Pentax stuff.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nderscore*
> 
> I don't like calumet very much. Only because they charged me 70 bucks to repair a monolight and put it back wrong.
> Other than that, fun place to browse around.


Their tripods and heads are excellent deals, but for any repair work or even sensor cleaning I would use Chicago Camera Repair at 5 S. Wabash. Calumet is like a last-resort option for most equipment, good thing the Oak Brook one is so close, or I wouldn't have been able to shoot the RB at all today.

Again, I cannot stress how good their brand of tripods and heads are for the money. For a set of legs that's better than the Manfrotto 055X series and a ball head _with_ drag control that will hold was about 280 bucks out the door. It's also the reason both UIC and Columbia use them in their studios and for student rental.


----------



## dudemanppl

No I transferred the internals because that camera had less actuations AND the electronics were dead. My user has 33k and this one has under 10k.


----------



## foothead

Okay, that makes more sense. Where do you keep getting these dead cameras, by the way?


----------



## scottath

and got any live ones around....im looking for a 5dII - but im in Australia....


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> Okay, that makes more sense. Where do you keep getting these dead cameras, by the way?


Just a wanted ad on FM. Just took a bunch of shots of my stuff I have to sell, they're quite good.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *thatdutchguy*
> 
> I'd like to join the list, this is what I'm shooting with.
> *Body:*
> _Nikon D90_
> *Lenses:*
> _Nikkor 18-105mm F3.5-5.6 AF-S
> Nikkor 35mm F1.8 AF-S
> Nikkor 70-200mm F2.8 VRII_
> *Accessories:*
> _MB-D80
> Nikon SB-900
> SanDisk Extreme Pro 8GB 2x
> SanDisk Extreme III 8GB 2x
> ThinkTank Retrospective 20
> Black Rapid RS-7 strap_
> *Tripod:*
> _Manfrotto 055CXPRO3
> Manfrotto MH054M0-Q5 Ballhead
> Manfrotto MBAG80PM_
> I'll get some pictures up later.


Added.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*
> 
> Added.


While you're at it, can you update my gear? I need added:

For Olympus:
Hexanon 40mm f/1.8
Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6

For the Graflex:
Schneider Super Angulon 65mm f/5.6
Schneider Symmar-S 150mm f/5.6

Thanks.


----------



## MistaBernie

Ugghhhh, what the hell. I never closed my POTN FS thread for my 5Dc and now someone is interested. What to do...If I sell, I feel like I _have_ to go 5D2..


----------



## dudemanppl




----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Ugghhhh, what the hell. I never closed my POTN FS thread for my 5Dc and now someone is interested. What to do...If I sell, I feel like I _have_ to go 5D2..


It's a sign.


----------



## dudemanppl

My 5DII would love to visit you, and I would love a 5D to visit me. Trade?


----------



## foothead

Adorama has 4x5 and 120 Astia back in stock. I wonder if this'll be the last of it, or if fuji actually made more.


----------



## dudemanppl

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1074855/0#10226686
Buy my crap.


----------



## scottath

a guy just offered me a 5DII - about 14 months old, there is no more warranty left. Light use, mainly just used on holidays, about 12.5k shutter for $1900...... ($AUD)
proably going to inspect it tomorrow

does that sound reasonable - i offered 1800 but he knocked it back.....


----------



## dudemanppl

I dunno whats with the import fees and such in Australia but they're selling for about 1750ish here in about that condition.


----------



## scottath

cool - thanks.
my dad kinda convinced me out of buying it for now...but i will buy full frame soon.....


----------



## nderscore

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Their tripods and heads are excellent deals, but for any repair work or even sensor cleaning I would use Chicago Camera Repair at 5 S. Wabash. Calumet is like a last-resort option for most equipment, good thing the Oak Brook one is so close, or I wouldn't have been able to shoot the RB at all today.
> Again, I cannot stress how good their brand of tripods and heads are for the money. For a set of legs that's better than the Manfrotto 055X series and a ball head _with_ drag control that will hold was about 280 bucks out the door. It's also the reason both UIC and Columbia use them in their studios and for student rental.


What makes their tripods better than the 055x series? I have a 055xprob myself, and find the horizontal arm very useful in composing product photography. In terms of pricing, they're both comparable. From there, the only defining qualities are build quality and extra features. I never used calumet legs before, but I'm willing to consider them as options if they're indeed objectively superior.


----------



## MistaBernie

If it wasn't such a pain to ship to AUS, I'd cut you a decent deal on my 5Dc. Fantastic for landscapes and such.









Also, as much as I kind of like POTN for photography talk, sometimes there really can some mouth-breathers over there. The last couple of guys that expressed any interest in my 5D both offered less than I was asking (which is anticipated), but _both_ of them decided to pass, stating that they're worried about the actual mileage on the camera because the viewfinder isn't in 'fresh out of the box' condition (i.e a little dirty).

Now, I rate my stuff a bit harsh, but it's so that you can't turn around and say 'hey, you didn't mention this 1/64" of an inch nick inside this recessed piece of the body that you can't see with the naked eye, I want my money back' (that, and I was disappointed when the guy I bought the 5Dc from didn't mention that there were a couple of very small pieces of what appear to be dirt in the viewfinder, but it's not like it's a dusty mess or freckled like a friggen dalmation; in most peoples' minds (including the owner before me) it's apparently FINE not to mention something like that. Sorry, I dont work that way.

The last guy that pm'ed me last night asked me like 5 questions in the PM -- _*all*_ of which were answered in my thread -- and he too ultimately decided to pass -- because the viewfinder is a little dirty. READ THE DAMN LISTING, UGH.

Well, at least I save some cash. I also PM'ed you but never heard back Dudeman, I think I'll hold out for a deal on the 5Dii, I'm not in a real rush to get out of the classic at the moment, and I know that as soon as I settle on a deal I'll find something better (or someone will offer me what I'm asking).


----------



## scottath

i was concidering a 5dc for a while - till i noticed it was released on my b'day in 05.....getting on a little......
ill just keep saving for a while and get a 5dII sometime - march is likely.


----------



## MistaBernie

ok, now what.. last night, I couldn't post from my phone - now my edits aren't showing up on posts.

Edited to add -- cache issue w/ Huddler, it's been reported and is being looked into. I guess you guys can see my edits; if I can't, I wonder if I should just try logging out and logging back in (didn't work).

wonder if that has anything to do with the post(s) I made last night in this thread about my 5D sale and dudeman's offer of a trade.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scottath*
> 
> i was concidering a 5dc for a while - till i noticed it was released on my b'day in 05.....getting on a little......
> ill just keep saving for a while and get a 5dII sometime - march is likely.


I'm not sure how much shipping and duty fees are, but if you ever want to go the "Buy in US, ship over" route, shoot me a PM.


----------



## sub50hz

The only reason to avoid a 5Dc is if you're an ISO junkie. It's still a perfectly capable body, although the earlier Canon DSLR menu systems are deadful.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> The only reason to avoid a 5Dc is if you're an ISO junkie. It's still a perfectly capable body, although the earlier Canon DSLR menu systems are deadful.


Or if you're a chimper like me, the rear LCD screen resolution is way too low.


----------



## xxrabid93

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> The only reason to avoid a 5Dc is if you're an ISO junkie. It's still a perfectly capable body, although the earlier Canon DSLR menu systems are deadful.


Even the boost ISO of 3200 is very respectable though, at least in the situations i've used and/or tested it. I did wish in some situations though that it had ISO 6400.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*
> 
> Or if you're a chimper like me, the rear LCD screen resolution is way too low.


Oh gosh yes, the screen is horrible. That is my one main complaint with my 5Dc. The screen is practically worthless.


----------



## MistaBernie

I have one of the later 5Dc's (372 serial) and while the LCD isn't anywhere near as good as on the 7D, it's not all that bad. I think my only qualm is I can't accurately judge sharpness by it, but usually depending on what I have on it for glass, etc, I dont have to worry all that much.


----------



## sub50hz

If I had a 5Dc it would basically be an f/8 ISO100 machine. I would trade my 135L for one today.


----------



## dudemanppl

ISO 100 f/8? Explain... Also Bernie, I sent you two PMs, not sure if you got them. I sent the second cause I wasn't sure you got the first.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> ISO 100 f/8? Explain...


Sharp and big DoF.


----------



## foothead

f/8 is a bit much for 35mm. Even on my 645, I start to see diffraction effects beyond 5.6. It really shouldn't be needed if you're using decent quality lenses.


----------



## MistaBernie

Didn't get'em Dudeman

Also, 'F/8 and be there' is kind of a big thing in journalistic type photography -- kind of like a 'set it and forget it'. You'll always be close enough that if you're off it wont be bad

*HOLY G1X info, Batman!* Clicky...


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> f/8 is a bit much for 35mm. Even on my 645, I start to see diffraction effects beyond 5.6. It really shouldn't be needed if you're using decent quality lenses.


I shoot f/11 regularly on 645, and f/8 on 35mm. Getting the whole scene in focus is more important to me than a marginal decrease in sharpness. Sharpness is overrated to a point, getting the final product to look the way I desire is paramount to technicals.

edit:










Don't give a damn about that minor difference. The only people who should are those making reproductions or posting too much on the internet.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> *HOLY G1X info, Batman!* Clicky...


So it's basically a point-and-shoot with a four thirds-sized sensor?


----------



## MistaBernie

Hey man, I dont have to _like_ everything Canon puts out, I just like being able to bring the good word about one of my favorite camera companies to my fellow photog nerds.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> I shoot f/11 regularly on 645, and f/8 on 35mm. Getting the whole scene in focus is more important to me than a marginal decrease in sharpness. Sharpness is overrated to a point, getting the final product to look the way I desire is paramount to technicals.
> edit:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Don't give a damn about that minor difference. The only people who should are those making reproductions or posting too much on the internet.


Huh, that's less of a difference than I would've thought. Carry on then...


----------



## MistaBernie

Dudeman, email me @ [email protected]


----------



## skwannabe

Just received my T2i. Quick question~

Should I get a screen protector for the LCD?

Thanks


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *skwannabe*
> 
> Just received my T2i. Quick question~
> Should I get a screen protector for the LCD?
> Thanks


I don't use one, but it really depends on whether or not you expect your camera to get beat up. If you use live view or shoot video, one of these might be a good idea. I tried to get one for my E-410 a while back, but they don't make a specific one for it, and the universal one wouldn't fit.


----------



## skwannabe

When I was trying out my t2i, the lcd made contact with my greasy face. Just worried about my LCD getting all dirty and maybe scratched.


----------



## foothead

Grease is easily removed. Don't worry about that. If you're afraid of scratches, then by all means, use a protector. I generally prefer to risk it though, because standard screen protectors make it glare even worse in the sun, and the more severe scratches have a tendency to go right through them.

Looking at my E-410, there are two small scratches after four years of use, and I abuse the heck out of that thing at times.


----------



## ljason8eg

I'm pretty sure the T2i LCD has a protector on it already. It can be replaced quite cheaply and easily.


----------



## aksthem1

It has an anti-glare and water repellent coating, but not a screen protector.

I always buy one for all of my LCD screens.


----------



## sub50hz

Unless some company can make the most oleophobic coating known to man that won't degrade image quality, I'll continue to let my **** nose ruin my screen every time I put my eye to the finder.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> Huh, that's less of a difference than I would've thought. Carry on then...


Haha, I also tend to be biased towards faster film (looking at my pile of film I have 4 pro packs of Delta 400 and a single roll of Delta 3200 _just in case_), so minute differences in sharpness aren't really noticeable.


----------



## MistaBernie

RZ67 with 90/180mm Sekor lenses, 120 and 220 and Polaroid backs, $800.. looks clean, do I try to wrangle it or what?


----------



## foothead

Yeah, that makes sense. I tested my MF lenses using neopan at ISO 50, in 1+1 diluted D76 so I could get the maximum possible sharpness. Both lenses were sharpest at f/5.6, but f/8 was very close. I figured 35mm would be about 1/2-1 stop behind. Apparently not if that chart you posted is typical.

I haven't even bothered to test the LF lenses yet. Anything between f/11 and f/22 is so ridiculously sharp that it'll never matter for reasonable sized prints.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> RZ67 with 90/180mm Sekor lenses, 120 and 220 and Polaroid backs, $800.. looks clean, do I try to wrangle it or what?


I haven't researched the RZ a lot, but that sounds a bit high to me unless it comes with the metered prism. If it does, it's an excellent deal, assuming those are the lenses you want.

EDIT: KEH price is $862 for that package (minus the polaroid back) with the waistlevel finder, $1041 with the prism, everything EX condition. I'd say buy it if it has the prism, don't buy it if it doesn't.


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> I'm pretty sure the T2i LCD has a protector on it already. It can be replaced quite cheaply and easily.


You are correct. The LCD on most Canon cameras is actually under a plexi/glass cover which costs about as much to replace as you would spend on 'protectors'

Pretty easy to replace too:
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=922334


----------



## MistaBernie

yeah, comes with a prism, idk if it's metered or not. what I DO know is that if I buy this, can't buy the 35L too. decisions, decisions..

I would use the 35L for work, this would be for fun (and would cost me more money in the long run in film, etc). I hate to do it but I think I'll need to pass..


----------



## scorpiontsi

I own a Canon rebel XTI with a macro lense 100mm as well as the crappy lense that came with it. When I am not playing with computers I work with saltwater aquariums. I will eventually be upgrading to a newer Canon Dslr. Here is a example... hope nobody complains it's not computer related.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scorpiontsi*
> 
> I own a Canon rebel XTI with a macro lense 100mm as well as the crappy lense that came with it. When I am not playing with computers I work with saltwater aquariums. I will eventually be upgrading to a newer Canon Dslr. Here is a example... hope nobody complains it's not computer related.


Why would we complain? You would hardly find a shot of anything computer related here.









Shooting through aquarium glass rapes image quality, esp. sharpness and it causes chromatic aberration and weird distortion. You should look into either a DIY underwater housing or a manufactured one, though they are pretty pricey.


----------



## laboitenoire

Hmmm... I've been debating how I want to carry my N2020 around. I can fit both it and my D7000 in my Kata bag, but it's a tight fit and I have to unmount the lens every time. Plus, it makes the bag pretty darn heavy carrying around two bodies, four lenses, and a flash, plus accessories.

Just discovered that if I take the divider out of my old Lowepro Cirrus 100 that I can easily fit the N2020 with the 50 f/1.4 mounted, and I can still fit like four or five rolls of film plus a spare set of AAA batteries... Looks kinda silly, but I don't necessarily envision shooting with film often enough to justify upgrading to a larger messenger bag or backpack that can comfortably carry all of this gear. But I feel like all I need is a small light bag that I'll use to carry the N2020 when I'm out specifically shooting film.

EDIT: Also, Gone, you still haven't added my film gear to the front page. Could you please add:

Nikon N2020
Nikkor 50 f/1.4 AI-S

Thanks!


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> yeah, comes with a prism, idk if it's metered or not. what I DO know is that if I buy this, can't buy the 35L too.


Don't bother with an eyelevel prism for the RB/RZ, they are both far too heavy and awkward to hold to your eye and shoot. Buy one with a WLF and use your 7D as a meter until you can afford a hand-held. RZs are electronic, though, and mostly made of plastic, which means they 1) always need a battery and 2)are not nearly as durable as an RB. You can also get a full RB rig from Keh for around 300 bucks if you skip the lens hood and buy everything BGN (which is fine). Buy an RZ or RB if you need it, skip them if you don't. They are awesome cameras, but they are not everyday shooters by any means. You also only get 10 shots per roll of 120, so I hope you're confident in your ability and focus. I bought mine specifically for a single project, but it will likely be used for other things down the road as well.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Found a T2i for a great price for my brother. Which is good, because now I can mooch the camera off of him when I'm back in my hometown to play around with video a bit


----------



## dudemanppl

I just realized the Sigma 30 is the most amazing thing ever on a small crop body (D40/Rebel line).


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> I just realized the Sigma 30 is the most amazing thing ever on a small crop body (D40/Rebel line).


Does fit the Rebels nicely; been trying to convince my brother to get a 30mm instead of the Nifty. I mean, he has the money.


----------



## ljason8eg

Got a funny story.

In short, FedEx can suck a fat one. I evaluated a 400 2.8L IS through CPS and needed to ship it back today. Canon just puts the lens in its hard case and puts the case in a box with a little bit of padding around it. Seems fine to me, since there's plenty of padding in the case itself, not to mention those cases are sturdy.

Anyway, I go to FedEx to ship it today and since I'm insuring it for more than $1000, they have to open the package up, which is fine by me. The woman then says that the lens will "100% get broken in transit" and that the hard case "doesn't give enough protection." Really? She then asks me to take the lens out so she can examine it. I take the front cover off, as requested, which makes her exclaim "my with that much glass you need 6-8 inches of bubble wrap around every side or it will be shattered for sure! I've seen what happens to those movie projectors!"

FFS this isn't a glass sheet. Its a freakin camera lens, packed in a hard, rigid protective case. Biggest load of BS I've ever experienced from a shipping company.

Off to UPS. Maybe they'll be more understanding.

/rage.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*
> 
> Found a T2i for a great price for my brother. Which is good, because now I can mooch the camera off of him when I'm back in my hometown to play around with video a bit


Just MagicLantern the 50D, then you have video too.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*
> 
> Found a T2i for a great price for my brother. Which is good, because now I can mooch the camera off of him when I'm back in my hometown to play around with video a bit
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just MagicLantern the 50D, then you have video too.
Click to expand...

No audio, unfortunately. Didn't know the 50D was out though for Magic Lantern; thanks for the heads up.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> Got a funny story.
> In short, FedEx can suck a fat one. I evaluated a 400 2.8L IS through CPS and needed to ship it back today. Canon just puts the lens in its hard case and puts the case in a box with a little bit of padding around it. Seems fine to me, since there's plenty of padding in the case itself, not to mention those cases are sturdy.
> Anyway, I go to FedEx to ship it today and since I'm insuring it for more than $1000, they have to open the package up, which is fine by me. The woman then says that the lens will "100% get broken in transit" and that the hard case "doesn't give enough protection." Really? She then asks me to take the lens out so she can examine it. I take the front cover off, as requested, which makes her exclaim "my with that much glass you need 6-8 inches of bubble wrap around every side or it will be shattered for sure! I've seen what happens to those movie projectors!"
> FFS this isn't a glass sheet. Its a freakin camera lens, packed in a hard, rigid protective case. Biggest load of BS I've ever experienced from a shipping company.
> Off to UPS. Maybe they'll be more understanding.
> /rage.


Wow, seriously? You seriously have an odd understanding of the meaning of the word 'Funny'! Ask her how it got to you if it'll "100% for sure get broken in transit". Not so much "Understanding" you're looking for as much as "someone with a 1/4 of a brain".. remind me never to buy anything off of you, etc, you have the WORST luck with gear and shipping!

---

*Also, Lightroom 4 Beta is out. Clicky...*


----------



## ljason8eg

Lol I actually have great luck when I ship something that I've sold!

I told her that Canon sent the package to me just like this, and she said that is a "huge risk." Ha, I'm pretty sure Canon wouldn't package their lenses like that if it got broken in transit. She kept harping on the fact that there was a "huge pane of glass out in the open", (even though it was covered and inside this hard case) referring to the front element.

But yeah, I wasn't too pleased. I got the manager and he didn't want to take a side, so I called him out for not having a backbone, picked up my box, and left. Went to UPS, didn't have a problem at all. Was $10 and change more to ship, but whatever. The guy there wanted to see in the box, saw what it was, said "wow nice lens" and that was it.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*
> 
> No audio, unfortunately. Didn't know the 50D was out though for Magic Lantern; thanks for the heads up.


It's alright, you can record on a Zoom or something and mix it down in post. That's how _the REAL Gs_ do it.


----------



## dudemanppl

I wonder if the 400 2.8 IS and IS II count as two different lenses... One month of 400 2.8 for 100 bucks? Hell lets include all the big whites!


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> I wonder if the 400 2.8 IS and IS II count as two different lenses... One month of 400 2.8 for 100 bucks? Hell lets include all the big whites!


Guess we'll see. Right now none of the version II big whites are on the evaluation list. They don't offer the 70-200's in their non-IS flavors (yet the 75-300 is wth) so I'm guessing they'll retire the old versions when they get the II's in.


----------



## Dream Killer

Just got a new monitor. ASUS PA246 with those fancy P-IPS panels. Has a neat ruler around the bevel and trick grid overlays. Color accuracy is pretty darn good. I just wish the side side reader also had CF but whatever, firewire CF reader it is.

The monitor with 4x6 overlay active.


The bevel showing the ruler.


I wish it had CF =(


----------



## iandroo888

D4. amazing.

1DX. ... i like the D4 more. XD


----------



## dudemanppl

Damn CES is in Vegas, I forgot. Nobody likes you, stop manhandling that D4 and give it to me.


----------



## iandroo888

HEHEHE







i thought u didnt like big cameras... and prefer ones without built in grip. =]


----------



## makecoldplayhistory

Hi all. Posting to say 'I wanna join'









I have a Pentax W90 (for the beach / usually carried in my pocket) and, as of Christmas day;

Canon 500D
Canon EF 75-300mm
Canon EFS 18-55mm

As of last week, I understand the basics of aperture, ISO, DoF etc. I'm a super-n00b on a mission to learn!

Looking forwards to posting pics when I take a photo that I'm happy with. Still experimenting, learning every time I shoot and loving it!

First question, how do I include the EXIF data when uploading and posting a pic or is it automatically included? Thanks


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *makecoldplayhistory*
> 
> First question, how do I include the EXIF data when uploading and posting a pic or is it automatically included? Thanks


automatically included for people with EXIF readers if your software doesn't strip it.

Take note of how your exporting photos after any processing. Sometimes a 'save for web' or other reduced file size settings will strip the EXIF.


----------



## iandroo888

CES day 2. played with the D4 two more times. once for pictures.. once with a shoulder supporting camera rig that was damn heavy.

i wish i had 6k to buy this body :[


Nikon D4 with the new AF-S 85mm f/1.8G


on a heavy duty shoulder rig... heavy too X_x


another view... has a LCD eyecup attached for viewing with the rig on your shoulder... feels weird cuz it cups my left eye...


the D4 heavy duty shoulder rig has the AF-S 35mm f/1.4G attached










Another D4 on display with the 28mm f/2.8D attached... linked to a computer by ethernet


----------



## laboitenoire

Flew back to Cleveland today... Took security less time to hand-inspect all of my film than it did for them to x-ray my backpack with my clarinet in it...


----------



## MistaBernie

Is that a clarinet in your backpack, or are you just WICKED PSYCHED to be back in Cleveland??

(true story -- clarinet is where I started with music.. haven't played in years, but if it weren't for that I wouldn't have gone through thousands of dollars in gigs, gear and girls. Erm..)


----------



## sub50hz

Lol wicked psyched, THEM APPLES.


----------



## laboitenoire

I would make a certain probably hilarious comment involving the size and color of a clarinet, but I have a feeling it would get me an infraction...


----------



## sub50hz

God, I hate Cleveland. But I LOVE Ray's MTB. Go there one weekend, rent a bike if you have to. It's amazing. 100k sq ft of indoor awesome.


----------



## MistaBernie

The lady selling the RZ67 kit dropped the price to $700. I'm a bit more interested. Comes with a prism (but not metered), but comes with a waist level finder too I think... ugh, decisions.


----------



## foothead

Does it come with the lenses you'd want? If not, you'd be better off buying RB gear from KEH.

Consider the Pentax 67 as well. It's better for shooting handheld, but the mamiyas are generally better for studio and tripod-based work. The Pentax also has wider lenses available than the Mamiya (45mm vs. 50mm, also the 35mm fisheye)


----------



## sub50hz

Lol, handheld. That's a bit of a stretch, considering the mirror slap in that thing is like dropping a bag of bricks. The only 6x7 I would really think of handholdable would be a Mamiya 7, which is way too many dollars for Senor Bernius. The one thing the Pentax doesn't have is bellows focusing, which may or may not be a dealbreaker. Six and one, really, but I'm a big fan of the RB/RZ solely for the lenses and most especially, the revolving back.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

San Diego bound







Hopefully will have some nice cityscape shots!


----------



## sub50hz

Carlsbad Caverns, thank me later.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Lol, handheld. That's a bit of a stretch, considering the mirror slap in that thing is like dropping a bag of bricks. The only 6x7 I would really think of handholdable would be a Mamiya 7, which is way too many dollars for Senor Bernius. The one thing the Pentax doesn't have is bellows focusing, which may or may not be a dealbreaker. Six and one, really, but I'm a big fan of the RB/RZ solely for the lenses and most especially, the revolving back.


I've seen quite a few excellent handheld shots with the P67. It's definitely doable, but that wooden handle thing is probably necessary for most people.

It's kinda weird that the Pentax 67 has such extreme issues with mirror slap. The 645 has none whatsoever. I can use it on a $7 tripod at any shutter speed and there is no detectable loss of sharpness. It's better than any 35mm camera I've used in that respect.


----------



## sub50hz

Doable, sure, but... only kinda. Same with the RB, but to a different, lesser extent. I want a Mamiya 7, though, real bad.


----------



## rdr09

Anyone knows where I can have a Nikon DX lens fixed? I have a D70 and the lens does not function as it should.

Full spec is AF-S Nikkor 18-70mm.

Thanks.


----------



## foothead

The Mamiya 7 looks awesome. My first choice for MF would be a Linhof 23s with some of those Schneider digitar lenses. It's not hand-holdable at all, but the movements are a fair tradeoff for that imo.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rdr09*
> 
> Anyone knows where I can have a Nikon DX lens fixed? I have a D70 and the lens does not function as it should.
> Full spec is AF-S Nikkor 18-70mm.
> Thanks.


You'll probably have to send it back to Nikon for repair. Is it still under warranty? Their lenses are five years if bought from an authorized reseller iirc.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> The Mamiya 7 looks awesome. My first choice for MF would be a Linhof 23s with some of those Schneider digitar lenses. It's not hand-holdable at all, but the movements are a fair tradeoff for that imo.


7s are beast, the lenses are amazingly good and they're fairly light cameras with a size that belies the quality images they're capable of. The metering is a bit wonky, and you still have to deal with parallax error, but it would really make for a great street-shooter with B+W film.


----------



## rdr09

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> The Mamiya 7 looks awesome. My first choice for MF would be a Linhof 23s with some of those Schneider digitar lenses. It's not hand-holdable at all, but the movements are a fair tradeoff for that imo.
> You'll probably have to send it back to Nikon for repair. Is it still under warranty? Their lenses are five years if bought from an authorized reseller iirc.


Thanks for the info. I bought it at Ritz and it should still be under warranty. Thanks so much.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> 7s are beast, the lenses are amazingly good and they're fairly light cameras with a size that belies the quality images they're capable of. The metering is a bit wonky, and you still have to deal with parallax error, but it would really make for a great street-shooter with B+W film.


Yeah, I saw some sample pictures a while back that showed the lenses basically rivaling 4x5 lenses for overall image sharpness, but the film was holding it back somewhat. Imagine those lenses with one of the new 80 megapixel phase one sensors. That'd be incredible.


----------



## Shane1244

Thoughts on the Canon 20mm f/2.8? Looking to to WA/UWA

Considering both this lens, and the Sigma 10-20mm, but I'd definitely prefer a faster lens, as it'll be used indoors quite a bit.


----------



## sub50hz

Awful, awful piece of crap. Probably one of the worst, if not _the worst_ lens Canon makes. Soft, purple cast, pricey. 16-35L is what you're looking for if you need speed(ish), 17-40 if you don't.


----------



## Shane1244

College Student :/ hahah Anything worth while in the sub 500?


----------



## sub50hz

Sell something and get a used 17-40. Or just buy the Sigma, it's great too.


----------



## BlankThis

Samyang 35 f/1.4 or Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 used?

Both are about $500...


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244*
> 
> Thoughts on the Canon 20mm f/2.8? Looking to to WA/UWA
> Considering both this lens, and the Sigma 10-20mm, but I'd definitely prefer a faster lens, as it'll be used indoors quite a bit.


You'll be able to use slower shutter speeds than you think with the Sigma, especially at 10mm.


----------



## sub50hz

35 is too narrow if he wants 20mm, though.


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> 35 is too narrow if he wants 20mm, though.


Oh haha sorry that was my question...


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis*
> 
> You'll be able to use slower shutter speeds than you think with the Sigma, especially at 10mm.


QFT. I took some at 1/14th earlier at 10mm and they were sharp.


----------



## dudemanppl

SIgma is a great lens, almost too good.


----------



## MistaBernie

Sigma 17-50 2.8 doesn't often get down to the $500 price tag used but it's totally worth it if you can find one near that. The only reason I sold mine is because I want glass I can use on both bodies.


----------



## sub50hz

http://www.ebay.com/itm/380401029510#ht_5396wt_1189

_*Yes.*_


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> http://www.ebay.com/itm/380401029510#ht_5396wt_1189
> _*Yes.*_


Superb. Appears it could double as a bomb shelter as well.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Damn, I wish I had a 70-200 to bring with me to SD


----------



## sub50hz

Buy mine, I'll ship it ASAP.


----------



## MistaBernie

it's only $1 a pound!

But everything's untested..

and Id have no place to put it.

Oh yeah and my wife would decapitate me and shove my head on a pike and place it in front of our townhouse.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Buy mine, I'll ship it ASAP.


I'm leaving in five minutes








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> it's only $1 a pound!
> But everything's untested..
> and Id have no place to put it.
> Oh yeah and my wife would decapitate me and shove my head on a pike and place it in front of our townhouse.


Hey, good photo op! At least you'll die doing the rest of us a service.


----------



## Sean Webster

I have a photographer's block...what should I take pics of? lol


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> I have a photographer's block...what should I take pics of? lol


Start by looking at some sites like boooooom and HUH, along with some other recognizable art blogs. I look at Wallpaper* when I'm feeling flat, and tend to seek out structural weirdness, as there's plenty of it in these parts/


----------



## Sean Webster

Cool, lookin now, I like Booooooom


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> http://www.ebay.com/itm/380401029510#ht_5396wt_1189
> _*Yes.*_


Quote:


> Shipping Options: UPS / FEDEX / USPS (OUR CHOICE)


Oh wow. I hope they wrap it with at least 6-8 inches of bubble wrap on every side.


----------



## sub50hz

Probably cheaper to get a flatbed tow truck and haul it, although I'm assuming the shipping options are a joke of sorts.


----------



## MistaBernie

Yeah, the listing says local pickup only


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Shipping Options: UPS / FEDEX / USPS (OUR CHOICE)
> 
> 
> 
> Oh wow. I hope they wrap it with at least 6-8 inches of bubble wrap on every side.
Click to expand...

I see what you did there.


----------



## r34p3rex

Anyone play with a Sigma 50-500 non-OS before? My friend is looking to get one


----------



## dudemanppl

Bigmas are known to be epic. Pretty sharp and everything.


----------



## skwannabe

Anyone from Denver with any recommendations for places to take photos or places to visit? Going to Denver in March.

Thanks


----------



## sub50hz

http://www.jeffreyrich.com/watershed.html

So good. Here's some more inspiration for you, Sean.


----------



## Dream Killer

scrolling sideways is so annoying.


----------



## dudemanppl

I wish there was a "Page Right" button right now.


----------



## foothead

Ummm, right arrow key?


----------



## sub50hz

dealwithitdog.gif


----------



## MistaBernie

Page right button??


----------



## r34p3rex

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Bigmas are known to be epic. Pretty sharp and everything.


Even the first generation non stabilized ones?


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> http://www.jeffreyrich.com/watershed.html
> 
> So good. Here's some more inspiration for you, Sean.


Thanks.

Wow, this one is amazing! I wish there were woods like that in Florida, I guess I need to travel now huh? lol


----------



## sub50hz

Actually, the slow-shutter running water shots are the most blah to me, lol. The paper mill and reactor through the tree tunnel are amazing, though.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Actually, the slow-shutter running water shots are the most blah to me, lol. The paper mill and reactor through the tree tunnel are amazing, though.


lol, I love water shots









And I do agree that nuclear rector and paper mill did catch my eye for sure!


----------



## illum

This one caught my eye.



Its a superb picture. I wonder what all that smoke is from.


----------



## foothead

It's steam.

Looks to me like he did a long exposure on that one. I've never seen that much at any of the plants around here. It seems to be going up into a natural cloud as well, which also explains the fog in the foreground.


----------



## sub50hz

Paper mill in the mountains, early AM. I doubt that's a long exposure, however, there's too much definition in the rising exhaust.


----------



## dudemanppl

Thats what I was thinking too. Ugh I wish I could just get money and travel places with a bunch of 120 and 4x5 and 8x5. Damn everything.


----------



## dudemanppl

COMPUTERS AT SCHOOL ALWAYS DOUBLE POST.


----------



## Conspiracy

so any opinions on the new fuji xpro1 that is going to come out soon i think. looks like a neat camera. i think its supposed to compete with the m9 but i dont know much about these types of cameras. wish i had the money to be a leica owner. i have never used their stuff but i only hear its incredible. i wonder if this new fuji will be awesome too. just hearing lots of hype about it on the internet. too bad all i can do is ready about it and test it out in a store lol.


----------



## dudemanppl

Fuji doesn't make any small format rangefinders.


----------



## Conspiracy

idk anything about their cameras. i dont spend much time playing with gear or on the computer researching camera stuff. i just see lots of adds.


----------



## ljason8eg

I finally got an IPS panel (Dell U2312HM) and wow, what a difference. I don't think my T260 was very close on the colors after using the Dell, but I haven't calibrated it yet so I don't know for sure. In any case, this thing is awesome and I can't wait for the other two to get here!


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Fuji doesn't make any small format rangefinders.


People see the styling and associate the X100 and Xpro1 with the Leicas. Really just a m4/3 or smaller APS-C camera with some vintage styling.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

SD trip almost over; managed to get some sunrise and nighttime cityscape pics!


----------



## sub50hz

i think he was just pointing out that Fuji had never made a 35mm rangefinder, only 6x4.5 and up.


----------



## sub50hz

Edit: 2xpost=derrrrrrrr.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *silvrr*
> 
> People see the styling and associate the X100 and Xpro1 with the Leicas. Really just a m4/3 or smaller APS-C camera with some vintage styling.


saw those at CES. uses like a hybrid viewfinder, not an actual viewfinder... felt weird.. xD looks decent tho.. feels like it was built nice.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*
> 
> SD trip almost over; managed to get some sunrise and nighttime cityscape pics!


New pics thread or it didn't happen.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

I broke a piece of gear for the first time ever just now.







I knocked my camera with 430EXII attached off my shelf, which fell two feet, but it was enough to break to hot shoe mount of my flash. Plastic is fractured and wires are ripped out.







At least it wasn't a lens or the body itself.


----------



## nderscore

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*
> 
> I broke a piece of gear for the first time ever just now.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I knocked my camera with 430EXII attached off my shelf, which fell two feet, but it was enough to break to hot shoe mount of my flash. Plastic is fractured and wires are ripped out.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> At least it wasn't a lens or the body itself.


That sucks man.

I also broke a piece of gear for the first time yesterday.

Though I did it on purpose.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*
> 
> I broke a piece of gear for the first time ever just now.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I knocked my camera with 430EXII attached off my shelf, which fell two feet, but it was enough to break to hot shoe mount of my flash. Plastic is fractured and wires are ripped out.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> At least it wasn't a lens or the body itself.


That sucks. By the sounds of it, it should be easily fixable though.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nderscore*
> 
> That sucks man.
> I also broke a piece of gear for the first time yesterday.
> Though I did it on purpose.


LOL, I thankfully don't get that urge with my gear. With my computer, all the time though.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> That sucks. By the sounds of it, it should be easily fixable though.


If fixed it, it would be a glued together disaster. If Canon fixed it, they would probably replace the entire lower assembly as there was definitely some plastic that snapped right off the very bottom, as well as a ripped out spring, from the locking lever I assume.


----------



## foothead

You can buy parts for it on eBay. It'll probably be much cheaper than having Canon repair it for you.

Personally, I'd just get some JB weld and a soldering iron and go to town on it. If done properly, it'll look and function just fine.

EDIT Is this the part that's broken?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> You can buy parts for it on eBay. It'll probably be much cheaper than having Canon repair it for you.
> Personally, I'd just get some JB weld and a soldering iron and go to town on it. If done properly, it'll look and function just fine.
> EDIT Is this the part that's broken?


Yes, that part broke off. The thin plastic "ridge" or whatever, that inserts into the body of the flash, is completely broken. And the locking lever is no longer functional. I'd just rather take the hit on this one, since even if I repaired it myself, it wouldn't be as sturdy anymore and would probably break again.


----------



## sub50hz

135L + 70-200L for 24LII, I need to make this happen. Also, pretty sure i'm gonna sell my 50D. Oh well.


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *silvrr*
> 
> People see the styling and associate the X100 and Xpro1 with the Leicas. Really just a m4/3 or smaller APS-C camera with some vintage styling.


Evidently you haven't done any research on the X100 and it's low light capabilities. X100 with interchangeable lenses? Win. It's never going to be as such a polished product as the M9, but it also won't cost 9K.


----------



## dudemanppl

When I see pictures like this, it makes me feel like I'm not a real photographer.


----------



## sub50hz

Just buy old stuff in crappy condition, problem solved. Also, brassing like that can happen really quickly depending on the finish.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> New pics thread or it didn't happen.


Just be happy I even got out of our hotel room.


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis*
> 
> Evidently you haven't done any research on the X100 and it's low light capabilities. X100 with interchangeable lenses? Win. It's never going to be as such a polished product as the M9, but it also won't cost 9K.


I never mentioned low light capabilities or interchangeable lenses. m4/3 is a system yes but refers to the size of the sensor as does APS-C. I was simply stating that people see the styling of these cameras and associate them with the Leicas and often mislabel them as rangefinders.


----------



## Conspiracy

ill check all that out. i need a day where i can sit on the computer and research all this new stuff that is happening in photography.


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *silvrr*
> 
> I never mentioned low light capabilities or interchangeable lenses. m4/3 is a system yes but refers to the size of the sensor as does APS-C. I was simply stating that people see the styling of these cameras and associate them with the Leicas and often mislabel them as rangefinders.


But it's not a m4/3. And the interchangeable bigger brother is rumored to be possibly full frame. Assuming the bigger brother gets an optical viewfinder I would have no problems associating it with a Leica.


----------



## dudemanppl

http://www.lensrentals.com/buy/leica-m9-serial-number-3907586
Relatively cheap, wish I had the money...







Although you CAN get two D3s for the price...


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis*
> 
> But it's not a m4/3. And the interchangeable bigger brother is rumored to be possibly full frame. Assuming the bigger brother gets an optical viewfinder I would have no problems associating it with a Leica.


I was mistaken on the X100 as it is APS-C as is the Xpro1.

http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/01/10/FujifilmXPro1_Preview


----------



## BlankThis

Holy cow when did the Xpro get released/announced?


----------



## sub50hz

A week or so ago? During CES.


----------



## BlankThis

Well there goes my summer savings.


----------



## mz-n10

x pro is a gorgeous camera. still holding out till theres a review of it vs nex7


----------



## BlankThis

Rumored price of $1700 body-only... Hm.


----------



## dudemanppl

If it were full frame I'd pay $3,600 for it.


----------



## BlankThis

I can't wait to see how some reviews. The X100 was no slouch at high ISO and they claim this one will be even better. Add 35 1.4. Life complete for casual shooting.


----------



## MistaBernie

I need to work on my off camera flash technique. That being said, I did some fun stuff with my 580EX triggering one of my 430s gelled on Sunday. A friend of mine has been working at becoming a fitness buff and she's been cooling some cool stuff; she wanted some pics taken, and basically gave me the keys and said 'have fun'. Unfortunately, I dont think I did as much as I could.. but these two were definitely fun. Both with the same purple gel, but the 2nd one was set to a tungsten white balance. I thought it was a really cool effect, I could be wrong.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> I need to work on my off camera flash technique. That being said, I did some fun stuff with my 580EX triggering one of my 430s gelled on Sunday. A friend of mine has been working at becoming a fitness buff and she's been cooling some cool stuff; she wanted some pics taken, and basically gave me the keys and said 'have fun'. Unfortunately, I dont think I did as much as I could.. but these two were definitely fun. Both with the same purple gel, but the 2nd one was set to a tungsten white balance. I thought it was a really cool effect, I could be wrong.


I like it, just they seem "soft" and the purple needs some Photoshop in the bottom left.


----------



## dudemanppl

Oh god thats a girl? I scared.


----------



## Sean Webster

You think this was a good post? I hope I get the message though properly...I mean that is it mostly though...lol

http://www.overclock.net/t/1194855/what-is-better/160#post_16218592

Am I too patient?


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Serious point of curiosity: Do OCNers use their DSLRs in the bedroom?


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*
> 
> Serious point of curiosity: Do OCNers use their DSLRs in the bedroom?


Yes I do, why?


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> I need to work on my off camera flash technique. That being said, I did some fun stuff with my 580EX triggering one of my 430s gelled on Sunday. A friend of mine has been working at becoming a fitness buff and she's been cooling some cool stuff; she wanted some pics taken, and basically gave me the keys and said 'have fun'. Unfortunately, I dont think I did as much as I could.. but these two were definitely fun. Both with the same purple gel, but the 2nd one was set to a tungsten white balance. I thought it was a really cool effect, I could be wrong.


That's a neat effect. Bodybuilders terrify me though. Not really sure why.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*
> 
> Serious point of curiosity: Do OCNers use their DSLRs in the bedroom?


The only times I need a camera in the bedroom are when I'm taking pictures of things to post online. It's usually easier to just snap it with the cell phone, since it can upload straight to photobucket. I've been known to use the DSLR though.


----------



## dudemanppl

What do you mean "use it in the bedroom"? I've never tried to stick it in the lens mount if thats what you're asking... Man you guys are real kinky.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> What do you mean "use it in the bedroom"? I've never tried to stick it in the lens mount if thats what you're asking... Man you guys are real kinky.


Woah,...Woah,...Woah.

You don't?


----------



## scottath

Thought i should defuse this....lol



One from yesterday


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scottath*
> 
> Thought i should defuse this....lol
> 
> 
> 
> One from yesterday


Beautiful as always


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> The only times I need a camera in the bedroom are when I'm taking pictures of things to post online. It's usually easier to just snap it with the cell phone, since it can upload straight to photobucket. I've been known to use the DSLR though.


Too bad my Blackberry's camera sucks in low light. But a DSLR is just so darn cumbersome.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> The only times I need a camera in the bedroom are when I'm taking pictures of things to post online. It's usually easier to just snap it with the cell phone, since it can upload straight to photobucket. I've been known to use the DSLR though.
> 
> 
> 
> Too bad my Blackberry's camera sucks in low light. But a DSLR is just so darn cumbersome.
Click to expand...

My camera phone is 1 MP and doesn't even work in low light....let alone I can't even transfer pics to my PC from it.

Besides, go big or go home


----------



## foothead

My Dell Streak sucks in low light as well, but I usually end up just pointing a lamp at the subject, which fixes things. It works better than the built-in flash at least.

EDIT: Lol, I just noticed that my phone is actually bigger than my DSLR. Interesting.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*
> 
> Too bad my Blackberry's camera sucks in low light. But a DSLR is just so darn cumbersome.


evil ftw


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*
> 
> Too bad my Blackberry's camera sucks in low light. But a DSLR is just so darn cumbersome.
> 
> 
> 
> evil ftw
Click to expand...

Meh, I never really saw the point of EVIL cameras. It's like a DSLR, but suckier, and without any real advantage. Oh, and I get motion sickness from using them with the digital viewfinder.


----------



## mz-n10

its a nice point and shoot, thats how i see the purpose of a EVIL

and Sean, i gave up on that thread after OP demands to buy from digitalrev....


----------



## BlankThis

Yes. I use my DSLR in my bedroom. My girlfriend is a lovely and easy model to work with and I've been exploring some rather more exposing styles of portraiture with her help. Nothing kinky, just trying out some ideas that have been bouncing around in my head.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> its a nice point and shoot, thats how i see the purpose of a EVIL
> 
> and Sean, i gave up on that thread after OP demands to buy from digitalrev....


lol, I won't, you know why? I have all the time in the world...nothing has to be immediate or rushed, I am patient....for now.

I know I am like that sometimes myself, I get hung up on one idea, even though I know other info about it and others are telling me what i should do.It is just getting all the info you can and figuring out what you want and need yourself. Then if you get something you don't like or want, sell, move on and learn from the experience. You learn from your downfalls, not your victories.

Edit: Damn writing class got me writing all philosophically.


----------



## sub50hz

Go read the whole thread beginning to end, and then read the other ones that guy made. If you're not ready to abandon it after that, then you must be after rep or something.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> its a nice point and shoot, thats how i see the purpose of a EVIL


Why not something that can serve as both? There are some seriously small DSLRs out there.


Olympus E420 vs Olympus E-P1 PEN by olyigel, on Flickr
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis*
> 
> Yes. I use my DSLR in my bedroom. My girlfriend is a lovely and easy model to work with and I've been exploring some rather more exposing styles of portraiture with her help. Nothing kinky, just trying out some ideas that have been bouncing around in my head.


 Is that what was meant by that question? I sat there for a good minute thinking about how it seemed like such an odd thing to ask. /asexual

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Go read the whole thread beginning to end, and then read the other ones that guy made. If you're not ready to abandon it after that, then you must be after rep or something.


Or he's just OCD like me. I once went through like 20 pages on a different forum trying to convince some guy that upgrading the video card in his Pentium II computer would not be worthwhile.


----------



## sub50hz

Lol, asexual. This thread just went in a direction that makes me uncomfortable. But please, continue, all of you.

*wrings hands*


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Go read the whole thread beginning to end, and then read the other ones that guy made.


I have. I lol'ed when they got closed.









I'm forcing him to make a decision soon anyways. I got this...I hope lol.
Quote:


> If you're not ready to abandon it after that, then you must be after rep or something.


lol, he doesn't rep people









I'm a rep whore and can tell after all didn't you notice?









i think I'm just patient atm.


----------



## BlankThis

I explain my case. Maybe defend it a bit from their general stupidity. Then if no resolution, walk away.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Lol, asexual. This thread just went in a direction that makes me uncomfortable. But please, continue, all of you.
> 
> *wrings hands*


Lol. Everyone weirds out when I tell them, and I've never figured out why. Care to explain?


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> Lol. Everyone weirds out when I tell them, and I've never figured out why. Care to explain?


Must be awesome.

I love sex too much though...


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> Is that what was meant by that question? I sat there for a good minute thinking about how it seemed like such an odd thing to ask. /asexual


Pretty much, yea xD
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> Lol. Everyone weirds out when I tell them, and I've never figured out why. Care to explain?


No clue. Eh, I grew up in California about an hour from SF. I've friends that are pretty much every kind of -sexual and -amy under the sun.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> Why not something that can serve as both? There are some seriously small DSLRs out there.


i had a e430 for a little bit, wasnt small enough to keep on me all day everyday.

you would be surprised with recent EVIL bodies, they perform as well as many DSLRs.

I have used a EP1, before with a 20mm panasonic lens it is a lovely combo, but the i hate the 2x crop ratio....
I bought a nex5n, sensor is great (similar to the a55 and d7000) but the pancake is boo boo......so i returned it....

now if only both a good small AF pancake with an aps-c sensor EVIL was on the market at a reasonable price.....(maybe the x pro?)
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> lol, he doesn't rep people
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm a rep whore and can tell after all didn't you notice?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i think I'm just patient atm.


rep for your patience lol. carry on good sir.


----------



## mz-n10

i just bought a cheap 77mm ND fader....lets see how horrific it will be.....


----------



## dudemanppl

My Lightcraft one is wonderful, I was going to buy a million assorted ones until I realized it existed so I saved much monies. Only 125.

Also, I'm probably going to add a Pentax 6x7 to the collection ASAP, but I only have like 50 rolls of 120.


----------



## mz-n10

that was my original choice the LC mk2, but i decided to test a cheap one. if this cheap one is complete garbage ill get the LC mk2.


----------



## Marin

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/708385-REG/Fujifilm_16010332_RDP_III_8_x_10.html

Thinking about this since it's easier to scan. And 8x10 chromes look awesome.


----------



## foothead

See if you can find some Astia while you're at it. It's probably my favorite slide film now. Fuji can't decide if they've discontinued it or not though.


----------



## aksthem1

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0013DAPNU

lol'd at the reviews and pictures.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aksthem1*
> 
> http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0013DAPNU
> 
> lol'd at the reviews and pictures.


LOL


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aksthem1*
> 
> http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0013DAPNU
> lol'd at the reviews and pictures.


Quote:


> I know, carrying a 37lb lens around may seem like a chore, but the savings in gas to drive to photo shoots more than compensates for it


----------



## laboitenoire

The double-edge sword of my photography class: no textbook so I save money there, but I instead have to buy like $60 worth of consumables...


----------



## sub50hz

60 bucks isn't too bad.


----------



## Sean Webster

lol, and another thread gets closed


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> 60 bucks isn't too bad.


What he said. $60 for photography equipment feels like chump change









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> lol, and another thread gets closed


I'll re-open it in 24 hours for one last *final* try. If it still doesn't go well and he's still being antagonistic there, I'm done with his threads.


----------



## MistaBernie

I just checked the rules, there's nothing saying you _have to_ re-open the thread. Just sayin...


----------



## dudemanppl

And theres nothing that says you can't ban him also...







Also he doesn't check this thread for some reason, weird.


----------



## MistaBernie

I have something ultra-witty to say in response to that, but I'm being a good OCN'er for some reason.

Mostly because I'm distracted by the absolute stupidity of one of our supervisors that thinks it's absolutely fine to call me when I'm here an hour after my shift ended and listed as unavailable, asking me to take a look at something. Seriously? UGH. I dont know which is pissing me off more, Mr. 300 Threads or Miss 'I dont give a dang what your status is, I'mma call you and now you have to work on this issue'.


----------



## laboitenoire

Double-checked prices. More like $100. But I'll deal.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> I just checked the rules, there's nothing saying you _have to_ re-open the thread. Just sayin...


+1
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> And theres nothing that says you can't ban him also...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also he doesn't check this thread for some reason, weird.


+1 +1 +1! The mods in general are too soft here, need to dust off the ban hammer.







There's one member in particular whom I'm amazed hasn't been banned.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> I have something ultra-witty to say in response to that, but I'm being a good OCN'er for some reason.
> Mostly because I'm distracted by the absolute stupidity of one of our supervisors that thinks it's absolutely fine to call me when I'm here an hour after my shift ended and listed as unavailable, asking me to take a look at something. Seriously? UGH. I dont know which is pissing me off more, Mr. 300 Threads or Miss 'I dont give a dang what your status is, I'mma call you and now you have to work on this issue'.


When it's quittin' time, I don't read any work e-mail, nor would answer the phone if someone called.


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*
> 
> The mods in general are too soft here, need to dust off the ban hammer


That "softness" has saved me a few times, without a doubt.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> Double-checked prices. More like $100. But I'll deal.


What are you ordering?

And really, dunno if I would ban the guy, but a mod/admin _should_ IP check him, as I get the distinct feeling we're being trolled.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> And really, dunno if I would ban the guy, but a mod/admin _should_ IP check him, as I get the distinct feeling we're being trolled.


Nah, he isn't I'm actually chatting with him on skype. He just has a terrible ability in making decisions...

OMG, you guys should have posted this in his thread XD


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis*
> 
> That "softness" has saved me a few times, without a doubt.


Na, you're alright; I'm sure you haven't deserved a banning.







I'm referring to some seriously incorrigible members. One in particular (not the one whose thread was just closed. Bernie, you know who!







) starts an argument and flame war with nearly every thread and post hemakes and is entirely unapologetic.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> What are you ordering?
> And really, dunno if I would ban the guy, but a mod/admin _should_ IP check him, as I get the distinct feeling we're being trolled.


LOL, maybe, but it is entertaining at some level.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Nah, he isn't I'm actually chatting with him on skype. He just has a terrible ability in making decisions...
> OMG, you guys should have posted this in his thread XD


LO, are you giving him counseling?


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> What are you ordering?
> And really, dunno if I would ban the guy, but a mod/admin _should_ IP check him, as I get the distinct feeling we're being trolled.


10-15 rolls of film (he wants us to essentially shoot close to a roll a week for the whole semester)
1 25-sheet box of 8x10 glossy or pearl finish multigraded RC paper for proof sheets
1 100-sheet box of 5x7 of the same for prints
Matte board
Grey card

EDIT: He strongly recommends Ilford paper and either Ilford or Kodak film, although he says after the first few projects we can try stuff out that sounds interesting.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> 10-15 rolls of film (he wants us to essentially shoot close to a roll a week for the whole semester)
> 1 25-sheet box of 8x10 glossy or pearl finish multigraded RC paper for proof sheets
> 1 100-sheet box of 5x7 of the same for prints
> Matte board
> Grey card
> EDIT: He strongly recommends Ilford paper and either Ilford or Kodak film, although he says after the first few projects we can try stuff out that sounds interesting.


Jelly. Wish I had the wherewithal and time to take a photography class just for the hell of it.


----------



## laboitenoire

Yeah, seems like a nice course. We're learning how to dev and print our own B&W through various technical and creative exercises. I figure that I have ~9 or 10 courses to take before I graduate, so might as well take a few studio photography classes as open electives. Instructor is really chill, definitely an old hippy, but he seems to be a good guy as a lot of the work from his past students was pretty intriguing, actually.

Apparently we used to have a color darkroom course, but they discontinued it after a few students had a few nasty chemical burns. Kinda entertaining, actually, as this semester in my materials lab I'll be casting aluminum and steel and then etching them in hot concentrated solutions of nitric, hydrochloric, and acetic acid. Thankfully we're not allowed to use HF as undergrads. That stuff will ruin your day...


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> And really, dunno if I would ban the guy, but a mod/admin _should_ IP check him, as I get the distinct feeling we're being trolled.
> 
> 
> 
> Nah, he isn't I'm actually chatting with him on skype. He just has a terrible ability in making decisions...
> 
> OMG, you guys should have posted this in his thread XD
Click to expand...

Lol. I prefer this one:


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> LOL, are you giving him counseling?


You have no idea...
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> Lol. I prefer this one:


haha that's funny.


----------



## xxrabid93

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> 10-15 rolls of film (he wants us to essentially shoot close to a roll a week for the whole semester)
> 1 25-sheet box of 8x10 glossy or pearl finish multigraded RC paper for proof sheets
> 1 100-sheet box of 5x7 of the same for prints
> Matte board
> Grey card
> EDIT: He strongly recommends Ilford paper and either Ilford or Kodak film, although he says after the first few projects we can try stuff out that sounds interesting.


If your instructor is cool about it, see about getting a 50 sheet of 8x10 and only 50 sheet 5x7. I loved printing on 8x10; 5x7 seemed so small every time i printed on it. If you figure 20 contact sheets (dunno your experience level in printing; assuming you may mess up at least 1 or 2) that would only leave you 5 8x10 sheets for nice prints if you only got 25. And i guarantee you will print shots multiple times until you get it just how you want it. IMO, a 50 sheet of 8x10 is the way to go.

Definitely have a lot of matte board. It has tons of uses. Make sure it is black though. One great use in particular is that it can be very helpful for dodging and buring funny shapes. I had some photos i needed to dodge/burn that i used matte board to make shapes to match and it worked extremely well. Hopefully your instructor teaches you how to do it properly. Otherwise you can ask me; it's actually pretty simple.









Grey card, i never used one and did pretty well.









As for film; definitely experiment. Find what you like and go from there.

For paper, i used Ilford for black & white, and Kodak for color. I was very happy with my results i got from them respectively.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> And really, dunno if I would ban the guy, but a mod/admin _should_ IP check him, as I get the distinct feeling we're being trolled.


A moderator who is completely amazing yet shall not be named already received a report on this and has checked it out.


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> Double-checked prices. More like $100. But I'll deal.


Still pretty cheap. My friend had to get a like 4 100 pack of Ilford Multigrade IV Deluxe 8x10 and the local camera stores carries them for about $80 a pack. Then a ton of Ilford film.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xxrabid93*
> 
> If your instructor is cool about it, see about getting a 50 sheet of 8x10 and only 50 sheet 5x7. I loved printing on 8x10; 5x7 seemed so small every time i printed on it. If you figure 20 contact sheets (dunno your experience level in printing; assuming you may mess up at least 1 or 2) that would only leave you 5 8x10 sheets for nice prints if you only got 25. And i guarantee you will print shots multiple times until you get it just how you want it. IMO, a 50 sheet of 8x10 is the way to go.
> Definitely have a lot of matte board. It has tons of uses. Make sure it is black though. One great use in particular is that it can be very helpful for dodging and buring funny shapes. I had some photos i needed to dodge/burn that i used matte board to make shapes to match and it worked extremely well. Hopefully your instructor teaches you how to do it properly. Otherwise you can ask me; it's actually pretty simple.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Grey card, i never used one and did pretty well.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As for film; definitely experiment. Find what you like and go from there.
> For paper, i used Ilford for black & white, and Kodak for color. I was very happy with my results i got from them respectively.


Well, he says for this course we only need the 8x10 for contact sheets, and for our actual projects it has to be on 5x7. He also wants white matte board as we're doing dry mounts of our prints when we hand them in.

I've never developed my own film and prints before, so this will be a learning experience. In fact, none of the class has done it before.


----------



## BlankThis

Ilford Multigrade IV RC Deluxe Pearl is my main jams for 8x10s. You can get a box of 50 for about $65-70


----------



## laboitenoire

Just placed the order. $106 shipped from B&H. Aw yeah.

4 rolls Delta 100
4 rolls Tri-X 400
3 rolls HP5+ 400

And I got the Ilford Multigrade IV RC in pearl (didn't see your post Blank, lol), 25 sheets of 8x10 and 100 of 5x7.

And I still have one roll of Delta 3200. Maybe I'll try it on the "purely creative" (no guidelines/restrictions) assignment.


----------



## xxrabid93

Too bad that you have to print 5x7. 8x10 doesn't seem like that big of a size up, but it actually makes a big difference.

Good pick on getting pearl though for the paper. I forgot to mention that. I try to use pearl pretty much all the time. Perfect balance between matte and glossy IMO.

Class should be fun though, especially if it is anything like my photo classes were in high school.


----------



## foothead

Weird that you have to use Kodak and Ilford films. Fuji Neopan is the best general-purpose B&W film out there imo. It's stupid cheap too. $2.69/roll at Adorama.


----------



## Sean Webster

I like semi gloss HP paper.


----------



## dudemanppl

LOL, I don't think that work very well with an enlarger...

And I haven't shot B/W since I started developing my own C41, but the only B/W I have right now is 9 rolls of 120 TMax 400 which would be 60 cents a shot, so no thanks.


----------



## c0ld

Found my dad's Old Nikon N4004 with a 50mm F1.8 woohooo score it AFs on my D7000. But it sometimes it doesnt shoot because it is hunting for an AF point when I shoot scenery or wide open spaces. But for portraits the Bokeh is nice and focuses very fast.

Here is a pic. Still a noob in photography


----------



## iandroo888

GT can you update my list thx =3

Nikon D5000 + Zeikos ZE-NBG5000 Battery Grip

Nikkor 12-24mm f/4G AF-S DX
Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G AF-S

Nikon Speedlight SB-800
Nikon ML-L3 IR Remote
Sto-fen Omnibounce Diffuser
Gary Fong LightSphere II
12x Sanyo Eneloops NiMH Batteries
2x B+W F-Pro 77mm MRC UV Filter
B+W Kaesemann 77mm MRC Circular Polarizer
Timbuk2 Camera Snoop Medium Messenger Bag
Ancient aluminum tripod


----------



## illum

Wow i just noticed i never posted my name to this

Illum - Canon Rebel T2i - 18-55m kit lens, 50mm f1.8 prime,

Own but back at home(havent used yet) sigma 17-50mm f2.8 sigma.

Also have a borrowed 70-200 F4L for a few more weeks dont(i dont think this counts







)


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


> Danylu - Nikon D60
> 
> Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 AF-S G DX VR
> Nikkor 50mm f/1.4 AF-S G
> Nikkor 60mm f/2.8 AF-D + 55mm of Extension Tubes
> Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8 AF-S G VR
> 
> Nikon Speedlight SB-600
> Nikon Speedlight SB-400 with a swivel head adapter


While you're at it for Illum Gone, can you change that to

D7000 + MBD10
Tokina 11-16 2.8
Nikon 17-55 2.8
Nikon 70-200 2.8

D60
18-55
SB-600
SB-400

Ta


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> LOL, I don't think that work very well with an enlarger...
> 
> And I haven't shot B/W since I started developing my own C41, but the only B/W I have right now is 9 rolls of 120 TMax 400 which would be 60 cents a shot, so no thanks.


http://www.adorama.com/FJNA1001205.html

And $0.60/shot is nothing. When I use 4x5 ektachrome, it's $3.00/shot just for the film. Development run another $2.50-4.00 per sheet depending on how much I send off.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iandroo888*
> 
> GT can you update my list thx =3
> Nikon D5000 + Zeikos ZE-NBG5000 Battery Grip
> Nikkor 12-24mm f/4G AF-S DX
> Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G AF-S
> Nikon Speedlight SB-800
> Nikon ML-L3 IR Remote
> Sto-fen Omnibounce Diffuser
> Gary Fong LightSphere II
> 12x Sanyo Eneloops NiMH Batteries
> 2x B+W F-Pro 77mm MRC UV Filter
> B+W Kaesemann 77mm MRC Circular Polarizer
> Timbuk2 Camera Snoop Medium Messenger Bag
> Ancient aluminum tripod


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *illum*
> 
> Wow i just noticed i never posted my name to this
> Illum - Canon Rebel T2i - 18-55m kit lens, 50mm f1.8 prime,
> Own but back at home(havent used yet) sigma 17-50mm f2.8 sigma.
> Also have a borrowed 70-200 F4L for a few more weeks dont(i dont think this counts
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Danylu*
> 
> While you're at it for Illum Gone, can you change that to
> D7000 + MBD10
> Tokina 11-16 2.8
> Nikon 17-55 2.8
> Nikon 70-200 2.8
> D60
> 18-55
> SB-600
> SB-400
> Ta


Updated!


----------



## MistaBernie

Gone, we need something interesting to shoot for OCN as a community builder that isn't a shooting competition. Make it so.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xxrabid93*
> 
> Too bad that you have to print 5x7. 8x10 doesn't seem like that big of a size up, but it actually makes a big difference.
> Good pick on getting pearl though for the paper. I forgot to mention that. I try to use pearl pretty much all the time. Perfect balance between matte and glossy IMO.
> Class should be fun though, especially if it is anything like my photo classes were in high school.


I think it's primarily a space issue. He has four sections totaling about 50 students, so I imagine that if he had to store several hundred dry-mounted 8x10 photos for a decent chunk of time it would be a nightmare for storage space. Although I imagine it's still an issue with 5x7. Plus, he probably figures it saves money in the event we screw a couple of prints up.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> Weird that you have to use Kodak and Ilford films. Fuji Neopan is the best general-purpose B&W film out there imo. It's stupid cheap too. $2.69/roll at Adorama.


He says we can experiment with other films if we choose. He says some students have used Neopan and Arista.Edu (rebranded Fomapan), but he's not seen anyone use Agfa or Efke or any of the other less-common films. If we take B&W II, that's when we really start experimenting.


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Gone, we need something interesting to shoot for OCN as a community builder that isn't a shooting competition. Make it so.


Making tutorials on how to do shots can help other photographers grow and often then other members will try the shot and post results. I have seen it as a good community builder on other forums.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> Weird that you have to use Kodak and Ilford films. Fuji Neopan is the best general-purpose B&W film out there imo. It's stupid cheap too. $2.69/roll at Adorama.
> 
> 
> 
> He says we can experiment with other films if we choose. He says some students have used Neopan and Arista.Edu (rebranded Fomapan), but he's not seen anyone use Agfa or Efke or any of the other less-common films. If we take B&W II, that's when we really start experimenting.
Click to expand...

Definitely try the Neopan then. It's really great film. The Arista.EDU is actually fortepan though. It's the Arista.EDU Ultra that is rebranded fomapan. I use both, and they're quite good on larger formats, but the grain is just too intrusive for 35mm.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *silvrr*
> 
> Making tutorials on how to do shots can help other photographers grow and often then other members will try the shot and post results. I have seen it as a good community builder on other forums.


Hm.. that's not a bad idea.. And with two bodies, I can use one for BTS shots. Hm.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Gone, we need something interesting to shoot for OCN as a community builder that isn't a shooting competition. Make it so.


Hm, well, Citruspers (I think it was him) started a photo assignment thread, but it didn't seem to catch on. Perhaps we could revive that thread; otherwise I'm open to suggestions.

Currently I'm trying to space out the contests somewhat since there's been somewhat low participation. When we first started doing the contests, we would have 15-20 or more participants with a lot voting.


----------



## sub50hz

Just a stab in the dark, but it's possible the number of participants is so low because the topics are too broad. I would love to see it narrowed down with a specific intent, it would certainly be more of a challenge.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Just a stab in the dark, but it's possible the number of participants is so low because the topics are too broad. I would love to see it narrowed down with a specific intent, it would certainly be more of a challenge.


I agree, that actually makes it easier to go out and find something you are looking for. Though broad would be fine for contests, more specific ideas would be better for practice.


----------



## MistaBernie

Yeah, I had tried to get those 'assignment' shoots going again and fell on my face. It happens. The other thing is, if you tell me I have an 'assignment', I ask you for a 1099. We kind of need to think outside the box to keep people interested and active without putting them off with words like 'competition' and 'assignment'.


----------



## sub50hz

OCN Photo Club Monthly Non-Denominational Image Offering For Adults and Children


----------



## biatchi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> OCN Photo Club Monthly Non-Denominational Image Offering For Adults and Children


Catchy


----------



## MistaBernie

Glad _somebody_ liked it...

Also.. 35L or Sigma 30? Sigma 30 would save me a LOT of money, great quality. Cons: can't be used on my 5D, and would effectively be a 50 f/1.4 on my 7D, which is what my 50 f/1.4 is on my 5D...


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Yeah, I had tried to get those 'assignment' shoots going again and fell on my face. It happens.


I don't know abut you, but I watch where I walk and I haven't fallen on my face yet...

Quote:


> The other thing is, if you tell me I have an 'assignment', I ask you for a 1099. We kind of need to think outside the box to keep people interested and active without putting them off with words like 'competition' and 'assignment'.


Those words turn me on tho.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> OCN Photo Club Monthly Non-Denominational Image Offering For Adults and Children


Win
Quote:


> Glad somebody liked it...


Hating troll, you are blocked from the "OCN Photo Club Monthly Non-Denominational Image Offering For Adults and Children."


----------



## MistaBernie

Here, let me go open 30 threads about asking people about the title of the OCNMNDIOFAC.

Also, I ninja edited my post asking for advice about 35L vs Sigma 30..


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Here, let me go open 30 threads about asking people about the title of the OCNMNDIOFAC.


lol true, now he is thinking about the 70200 F2.8 or f4 IS I keep telling him the 2.8 is better.
Quote:


> Also, I ninja edited my post asking for advice about 35L vs Sigma 30..


Up to you on whether or not you want to use it in the Full frame or not... if not the 30mm Sigma is a great sharp lens, it matches the 35L, I am actually in the same deciding state as you b/c when the 5D mkiii comes out I am getting it and it would be worth it I think for the L.

Damn, I have to leave, bee back in a few hours lol.


----------



## sub50hz

f/4 IS all day, no question.


----------



## MistaBernie

That's half his budget, TURRIBLE idea. Fantastic lens though. I guess if he doesn't mind saving his budget, that would def be a better telephoto than he previously had selected.


----------



## sub50hz

I wish this guy would buy like 9 grand worth of gear and shoot pictures of cats for his blog, that's _real_ pro.


----------



## MistaBernie

I wish he was stateside and lived down the street from me, so after he bought $9000+ worth of gear and decided it wasn't for him, I could purchase it from him at bargain basement prices.

Also, I still dont quite call troll on the kid. I can understand being indecisive (but he's a bit more indecisive than I've _ever_ seen).


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> I wish this guy would buy like 9 grand worth of gear and shoot pictures of cats for his blog, that's _real_ pro.


I have a feeling that some version of that will happen. I also cannot wait for the thread asking why his shots do not look "professional" because he has pro gear.


----------



## MistaBernie

UGH, I'm seriously hope I dont regret the 35L that's on its way. It may be time to sell the 50 though.


----------



## Sean Webster

I'm back!







I see we like taking about "him" eh? lol
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> f/4 IS all day, no question.


I'd rather the extra stop of light. Though...can you show me a comparison of the bokeh b/w the two? I haven't really ever found any. Likea shot at 70 and one at 200 at the max aperture.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> That's half his budget, TURRIBLE idea. Fantastic lens though. I guess if he doesn't mind saving his budget, that would def be a better telephoto than he previously had selected.


lol, omg, you should see what he is looking at and planning on...I am just telling him yes or no to gear basically and giving him suggestions as alterantives....he still isn't convinced on anything but canon. Oh and it is so funny how he said Sigma are crap...he never even touched Sigma in his life...
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> I wish he was stateside and lived down the street from me, so after he bought $9000+ worth of gear and decided it wasn't for him, I could purchase it from him at bargain basement prices.
> 
> Also, I still dont quite call troll on the kid. I can understand being indecisive (but he's a bit more indecisive than I've _ever_ seen).


lol, he could actually do that and sell for a good profit in the Philippines. Everything is 2x as much, that is the whole reason he is going to HK and is so indecisive, he wants to make sure his choice is "perfect."

And he isn't a kid actually...
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> I wish this guy would buy like 9 grand worth of gear and shoot pictures of cats for his blog, that's _real_ pro.
> 
> 
> 
> I have a feeling that some version of that will happen. I also cannot wait for the thread asking why his shots do not look "professional" because he has pro gear.
Click to expand...

LOL, can't wait to see myself.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> UGH, I'm seriously hope I don't regret the 35L that's on its way. It may be time to sell the 50 though.


Wow you got it that fast?

Oh and if "he" starts to frustrate you ignore him and i'll deal with it lol


----------



## MistaBernie

I had to. A nice condition one came up used @ B&H, I had credit with them. Made.it.happen.

I'm playing nice again, but if he links digitalrev.com again I'm gonna fly to the Philippines and break his keyboard over his head







I'm trying to get him to realize that we can give him info / comparisons on what's better, etc but not if he keeps changing his budget, etc. I kid of course, I'm not really 100% where this animosity towards digitalrev is coming from, but I'm not gonna fight it, it makes me feel warm and fuzzy.

Side note, I like how secure we feel about his not venturing into this thread.

Ok, back on topic. Seriously though, dude needs to chill out (he may have already, I'm willing to try harder to be patient and lend a hand if I can), accept that Sigma _does make good lenses_ (ESPECIALLY the 30), give us his _actual_ budget, and be willing to take advice (which I see that he is apparently trying to do in Skyping with you Sean).


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> UGH, I'm seriously hope I dont regret the 35L that's on its way. It may be time to sell the 50 though.


Lol. You need a 135L. We can work something out.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> I'd rather the extra stop of light. Though...can you show me a comparison of the bokeh b/w the two? I haven't really ever found any. Likea shot at 70 and one at 200 at the max aperture.


If you shoot at or near MFD, it's very good. But that's also incredibly boring. If you need background blur, 85/135L combo wins every time.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> I had to. A nice condition one came up used @ B&H, I had credit with them. Made.it.happen.


Sweet, let me know how it is







Quote:


> I'm playing nice again, but if he links digitalrev.com again I'm gonna fly to the Philippines and break his keyboard over his head


lol
Quote:


> I'm trying to get him to realize that we can give him info / comparisons on what's better, etc but not if he keeps changing his budget, etc. I kid of course, I'm not really 100% where this animosity towards digitalrev is coming from, but I'm not gonna fight it, it makes me feel warm and fuzzy.


lol, do you watch digitalrev tv? it s cool lol.
Quote:


> Side note, I like how secure we feel about his not venturing into this thread.


Pfffft, never. We can talk smack all day...if anything just report his post and mark as hidden if he replies. Then a cool mod will delete it as if it never existed















Quote:


> Ok, back on topic. Seriously though, dude needs to chill out (he may have already, I'm willing to try harder to be patient and lend a hand if I can), accept that Sigma _does make good lenses_ (ESPECIALLY the 30), give us his _actual_ budget, and be willing to take advice (which I see that he is apparently trying to do in Skyping with you Sean).


Yea. He's getting there...slowly narrowing it down
Quote:


> If you shoot at or near MFD, it's very good. But that's also incredibly boring. If you need background blur, 85/135L combo wins every time.


I know XD, but i am going to get a 85 1.8 when i get a 5D, and I am going to get a 70-200 as well...and you know how much I like wide apertures. Is IS worth it? Is the blur that much different? lol


----------



## MistaBernie

Sub, if I buy your 135L my wife actually would kill me.

That being said, after I sell my 50 F/1.4, well see what's going on. Maybe I'll still actually have a tax return this year..


----------



## sub50hz

The IS is marginally better than the non-IS, but they are both excellent zooms, and you would have to be printing pretty damn large to notice any difference between the two. Buy the IS if you _need_ IS, et al.


----------



## dudemanppl

35L is too amazing.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> The IS is marginally better than the non-IS, but they are both excellent zooms, and you would have to be printing pretty damn large to notice any difference between the two. Buy the IS if you _need_ IS, et al.


Yea I think IS is not needed...I made a thread just now lol

http://www.overclock.net/t/1202696/want-more-gear-lens#post_16237711


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Just a stab in the dark, but it's possible the number of participants is so low because the topics are too broad. I would love to see it narrowed down with a specific intent, it would certainly be more of a challenge.


They've been very specific before and it didn't help. :/ I think I'm going to revamp how the themes are selected. Right now the winner picks the theme, but I think it would be better to start a thread and get a list going of future themes.


----------



## MistaBernie

that's a good idea GT.. we could keep the 'winner picks' but simplify it -- the winner picks from the top 5 or so on the list?


----------



## sub50hz

Maybe being specific isn't the greatest idea, then. That being said, maybe i'll put something together with a large timeframe that people can really think on and hopefully deliver something really inspired.


----------



## ljason8eg

This is interesting for anyone who hasn't already seen it. http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2012/01/lens-repair-data-2011

Especially this part:
Quote:


> It may just be us, but during the last year we've had an amazing increase in the number of repairs that went straight back to the Service Center because the repair wasn't made correctly. About one in 20 repairs had to be done over, far more than any previous year. If the problem was inadequate resolution it was one in 10 repairs. We had 8 lenses that required 4 or more trips to finally get repaired properly. Probably the most disappointing part was that 19 lenses were returned to us with a fingerprint or lubricant smear left on an inner element during the repair


That sounds strangely familiar. Now, of course Roger doesn't name which repair centers or even which companies' repair centers had this issue, but its still kind of shocking that it happens so often.

EDIT: Nvm in the comments section he mentions Canon having issues with repeat repairs. Not the Irvine center though. Interesting nonetheless.


----------



## nuclearjock

Dudeman on a boat????

http://i.imgur.com/riGMi.jpg


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*
> 
> Dudeman on a boat????
> http://i.imgur.com/riGMi.jpg


Haha! _What a human._


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*
> 
> Dudeman on a boat????
> 
> http://i.imgur.com/riGMi.jpg


OMG

Look at that scenery.


----------



## dudemanppl

Ha man I got old and white!

EDIT: Holy crap Gone/reincarnated/Marin, can we ban the kid already hes such a huge assface.


----------



## MistaBernie

Yeah, I think I've gone full circle and am back to giving up on him. It's too bad, I had hope again.

In other news, it really needs to be Monday like nao. Then, we need to fast forward a week and let it be next Tuesday, preferably immediately after. Actually, screw that, I kind of want to watch the Pats get revenge on the Ravens tomorrow.. that'll make waiting for Monday not entirely terrible.

Oh, insert random photography thing here - uh...


----------



## sub50hz

Prediction: Tom Brady throws for 800 yards and 14 TDs as Ravens die of shock while they marvel at T-Braid's awesomeness. Go Pats, bury those Baltimore Ravens Criminals.


----------



## MistaBernie

Sub, we're going for a beer. I dont know when, I dont know how, but we are.

But only one or two, as I'm actually tracking what I eat now.

*edited to add:* I just reviewed the S95. I hope my review doesn't suck!


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Sub, we're going for a beer. I dont know when, I dont know how, but we are.
> But only one or two, as I'm actually tracking what I eat now.
> *edited to add:* I just reviewed the S95. I hope my review doesn't suck!


Fine, who needs you cool kids anyways. We'll have fun without you


----------



## c0ld

Any advice for a zoom lens guys? I am looking at the 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 VR or VRII Nikkor used there is one for $400 at my local craigs, I got 2 primes listen on my sig.

Or the 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 VR would be more viable? I was a waterpolo game yesterday I was naggining on how I couldnt zoom in









Also looking at the Tamron's the 18-270mm F/3.5-6.3 Di II VC looks tempting for the price.

Also add me to teh list please


----------



## BlankThis

55-200 VR is like $250 new and if you can live without the wider end of the 18-200, optically superior to it according to reviews. You might be able to find a Sigma 70-200 2.8 (First gen.) for around $500ish.

http://www.photozone.de/nikon--nikkor-aps-c-lens-tests/246-nikkor-af-s-55-200mm-f4-56g-if-ed-dx-vr-review--test-report


----------



## Nemesis158

OK guys i seem to be having an issue with my D5100 Raw format And Photoshop.
I have both Photoshop AND the Camera Raw plugin Updated to their latest respective versions.
The issue i am having is that when Photoshop opens a Raw from my camera, it brings bright colors WAY OUT (mainly blues)
here is a comparison:
I use a program called Faststone Image viewer to go through the shots and pick out the good ones for editing in photoshop. this is what i see in faststone (what the pic should look like):

But if i open the raw up in Photoshop it brings the blue WAY out, and i get this:


----------



## laboitenoire

Every photo program has its own way of interpreting the RAW data from a camera. The normal Adobe Standard color space looks substantially different from the Nikon Standard, which you can select within Camera RAW if you're so inclined.


----------



## Nemesis158

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> Every photo program has its own way of interpreting the RAW data from a camera. The normal Adobe Standard color space looks substantially different from the Nikon Standard, which you can select within Camera RAW if you're so inclined.


No Nikon standard appears in the list of selectable color spaces. all i can see are these 4:
Quote:


> Adobe RGB (1998)
> Colormatch RGB
> ProPhoto RGB
> sRGB IEC61966-2.1


Does this mean i need to add it or is that even possible?

I realize that RAW/NEF is not standard between models but i never had this problem with my D3000 using Adobe RGB.


----------



## Nemesis158

Ok i just went through some settings in my camera and found that i can choose a color space on the camera itself. i tried having it set on Adobe RGB and photoshop still blew the colors way out when set on adobe RGB


----------



## Nemesis158

Ok i figured it out. i had to go into the camera calibration pane of camera raw and change the "Camera Profile" setting from "Adobe standard" to one of the others (none of the others blow the color way out)


----------



## c0ld

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis*
> 
> 55-200 VR is like $250 new and if you can live without the wider end of the 18-200, optically superior to it according to reviews. You might be able to find a Sigma 70-200 2.8 (First gen.) for around $500ish.
> http://www.photozone.de/nikon--nikkor-aps-c-lens-tests/246-nikkor-af-s-55-200mm-f4-56g-if-ed-dx-vr-review--test-report


Really the 55-200VR is superior? To the 18-200mm in the longer tele range?


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *c0ld*
> 
> Any advice for a zoom lens guys? I am looking at the 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 VR or VRII Nikkor used there is one for $400 at my local craigs, I got 2 primes listen on my sig.
> Or the 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 VR would be more viable? I was a waterpolo game yesterday I was naggining on how I couldnt zoom in
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also looking at the Tamron's the 18-270mm F/3.5-6.3 Di II VC looks tempting for the price.
> Also add me to teh list please


1. I'd stick with Nikon's glass.
2. The 18-200 is ~$850 new. Something's fishy. I owned one and sold it, poor IQ.
3. The 70-300 VR is a winner, but make sure it's the VR version. Better optics.
4. I wasn't really fond of my 28-300 Tammy, the 18-270 may be different. I'd try one at a camera store before you buy it or at least make sure you can return it if you're not happy with it.

I own the 70-300 VR and am very pleased with it. But as you can see from my gear list I'm sorta of a glass snob and wind up shooting pro glass 99.99% of the time. If I'm doing non-critical stuff though, the 70-300 is nice and light on my D300s and produces very nice images.

Best of luck.


----------



## nuclearjock

@GT,

My 1D mkIII got hit by a football and croaked. I was using a borrowed 300 2.8 and thankfully it wasn't harmed







. $635 later the mkIII is repaired and now lives with my daughter in Az. Please remove it from my list when you get a chance. Too bad. I had my eye on a 200 1.8 that was near mint. Such is life.


----------



## Nemesis158

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *c0ld*
> 
> Really the 55-200VR is superior? To the 18-200mm in the longer tele range?


it is Optically superior to the 18-200
better bet would be to get an 18-55 to complement the 55-200


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nemesis158*
> 
> Ok i figured it out. i had to go into the camera calibration pane of camera raw and change the "Camera Profile" setting from "Adobe standard" to one of the others (none of the others blow the color way out)


Yeah, that's the setting that I meant. Couldn't remember what it was called.


----------



## c0ld

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*
> 
> 1. I'd stick with Nikon's glass.
> 2. The 18-200 is ~$850 new. Something's fishy. I owned one and sold it, poor IQ.
> 3. The 70-300 VR is a winner, but make sure it's the VR version. Better optics.
> 4. I wasn't really fond of my 28-300 Tammy, the 18-270 may be different. I'd try one at a camera store before you buy it or at least make sure you can return it if you're not happy with it.
> I own the 70-300 VR and am very pleased with it. But as you can see from my gear list I'm sorta of a glass snob and wind up shooting pro glass 99.99% of the time. If I'm doing non-critical stuff though, the 70-300 is nice and light on my D300s and produces very nice images.
> Best of luck.


1. Thats what i was thinking about.
2. Yeah its pretty cheap, its listed on Nikon, SIGMA lenses. Price ranges from $400 next one is $500. I could check them out and test them what should I look or check for in a used lens?
3. Yeah I read it also focuses really fast too, its more of a pro lens.
4. Yeah I guess I'll hit a camera shop for the first time and see what they say.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nemesis158*
> 
> it is Optically superior to the 18-200
> better bet would be to get an 18-55 to complement the 55-200


Nah I dont want the kit lens, the 35mm and 50mm primes cover what the kit lens does and a can shoot at lower light. I cant decide though if I want a high tele or a walkaroud super-zoom and use my 35mm for low light and the 50mm for portrait.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nemesis158*
> 
> OK guys i seem to be having an issue with my D5100 Raw format And Photoshop.
> I have both Photoshop AND the Camera Raw plugin Updated to their latest respective versions.
> The issue i am having is that when Photoshop opens a Raw from my camera, it brings bright colors WAY OUT (mainly blues)
> here is a comparison:
> I use a program called Faststone Image viewer to go through the shots and pick out the good ones for editing in photoshop. this is what i see in faststone (what the pic should look like):


ACR is crap for RAW conversions, but can be finagled into producing something halfway decent, though it still renders bokeh crappily IMO (Adobe has to essentially reverse engineer various manufacturers' RAW formats, so they can't be totally blamed). The manufacturer's software is usually the best for RAW conversions. Canon's DPP does an awesome job. If only it had the features of PS/LR. Looks like you've figured out how to deal with it though. Find settings you like and set as the default.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*
> 
> @GT,
> My 1D mkIII got hit by a football and croaked. I was using a borrowed 300 2.8 and thankfully it wasn't harmed
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . $635 later the mkIII is repaired and now lives with my daughter in Az. Please remove it from my list when you get a chance. Too bad. I had my eye on a 200 1.8 that was near mint. Such is life.


Well, for a 200/1.8 I would hold on to the 1d3. And since you're Mr. Moneybags, why not get the 200 _and_ a 1DX and call it day?


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*
> 
> Well, for a 200/1.8 I would hold on to the 1d3. *And since you're Mr. Moneybags*, why not get the 200 _and_ a 1DX and call it day?


I was 28 when I finished my post doc, just living within my means for the last 20 years so I'm treating my self and my wife a bit. Retiring next June. Don't forget, lots of my camera dough comes from soccer/fast pitch parents so most of the camera money is from them. D4 is coming gonna need $$$ for that. My daughter really wanted the mkIII and what she says goes. She's a far better photog than me. I will sell my D3 when the D4 comes. The proceeds will go towards a 200 1.8. It's the only lens I lust for just cause it's so cool. I just want one in the house. Don't quite know what I'll put on the end yet and when.


----------



## spRICE

I would like to update my gear:
I have added a Nikkor 35mm 1.8G and I have obtained a Rolleiflex T Medium Format Camera with a 70mm f3.5 lens







. This thing takes some awesome pictures









Oh and could you maybe add my flickr(in my sig)? Thanks!


----------



## sub50hz

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1078573

Lul.

edit: Rolleiflex T? Awesome. Not a TLR fan, but still kinda jealous.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1078573
> Lul.
> edit: Rolleiflex T? Awesome. Not a TLR fan, but still kinda jealous.


the J1 or V1 is pretty cool actually. saw them on sale at target and they are tiny.

someoen did soemthing like this on the sony nex with a minolta 600/4. hilarious looking combo, but it doesnt have the same crop factor the j1/v1 has. that nikon combo has to be for tele lovers.


----------



## foothead

I managed to get the shutter un-jammed on my Pentax 645, fired it about ten times, and then it started doing that thing where it just continuously winds the film. Guess it's time for a new camera. I'm sick of this.


----------



## sub50hz

Wanna buy a Bronica? I think i'm buying my buddy's 645AF tomorrow.


----------



## foothead

It'd have to be really cheap. I'd rather go to at least 6x7 if I'm going to be changing systems.


----------



## dudemanppl

What are you gonna do with the 645 though?? :O


----------



## MistaBernie

Laces out! Laces out! Cundiff misses a 32 yard field goal to send the game to overtime, the Patriots are going to the Super Bowl!


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> What are you gonna do with the 645 though?? :O


No idea. If I can get it working again, I'd probably keep it as a backup. As of now, it's pretty much useless.

Are there any manual 645 systems that I can adapt the Pentax lenses to? That would be ideal.


----------



## sub50hz

How cheap is "really cheap?"


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> How cheap is "really cheap?"


Probably a whole lot less than you'd want for it. I just checked and the ETRSi is worth like 3 times as much as the earlier Bronica etr models, which would really be my first choice. So yeah, you'd probably be better off selling it on craigslist or ebay or something.


----------



## sub50hz

The ETR and ETRS don't have MLU, for what it's worth.


----------



## Sean Webster

Hey, since you guys are so helpful in my thread I'd thought I'd ask here.









For the Sigma 30mm 1.4

If I get new and it is miscalibrated I can just send in my 60D + Sigma 30 to Sigma. They look at the camera, look at the lens, tweak and adjustment things and then ship it back to me at the cost of just shipping.

If I buy used, will I have to pay them to calibrate it correctly since I am no the original owner? Or is the warranty transferable?


----------



## Shane1244

Chances are if it's used and miscalibrated, it would have been fixed already.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244*
> 
> Chances are if it's used and miscalibrated, it would have been fixed already.


...doesn't help. Just saying what if.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> ...doesn't help. Just saying what if.


How does that not help you? The reason people buy used in Canon mount on the aformentioned lens is because typically the first owner has taken care of any calibration issues, if any. If you're that worried about buying used, buy it new. This indecisive "do my research for me" attitude on OCN in general is getting to be real annoying.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> ...doesn't help. Just saying what if.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How does that not help you? The reason people buy used in Canon mount on the aformentioned lens is because typically the first owner has taken care of any calibration issues, if any. If you're that worried about buying used, buy it new. This indecisive "do my research for me" attitude on OCN in general is getting to be real annoying.
Click to expand...

Drama queen much?

No, I was just wondering about the warranty and all. I did do my research but since you guys seem to have been into photography way more than I and I haven't had much experience with companies I thought you could let me know relatively easily.

Yes I know that the previous owner most likely was to have the issues fixed, but what if I get that one guy who didn't? You know what I mean. I am not indecisive, I am just asking a question on if I am covered when I buy used or not. I tend to only buy used now since lenses are in pristine condition anyways and most people on POTN are very honest with their for sale threads.

So is the warranty coverage transferable from previous owner or not? i think it is as long as the original receipt is in my possession correct?

Because I know that some companies do not have transferable warranties for graphics cards and such.

Happy that I explained myself now? Can I get a helpful answer? I am currently doing a lot of school work so I can't Google for it.


----------



## sub50hz

http://warrantystatus.sigmaphoto.com/

Third Google search result for "Sigma warranty" -- read the last section on the page, the warranty is not transferrable.

Double edit: Nevermind.


----------



## mz-n10

buy local with a good return policy if you are worried


----------



## dudemanppl

Samyang 85 is so good and so tiiinnyyy. my friend thought it was gonna be a 24mm or something when he first saw it. Also, 175 bucks.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> http://warrantystatus.sigmaphoto.com/
> 
> Third Google search result for "Sigma warranty" -- read the last section on the page, the warranty is not transferrable.
> 
> Double edit: Nevermind.


Thanks Subz








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> buy local with a good return policy if you are worried


Nowhere to buy local, at least to my knowledge I live in a stupid area.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Samyang 85 is so good and so tiiinnyyy. my friend thought it was gonna be a 24mm or something when he first saw it. Also, 175 bucks.


Yea,i know I saw that the other day i may get one of those too lol, only 175 you say...used or new?

My brain hurts I just did two weeks worth of chem HW in 5 hours. I need to sleep or something.


----------



## dudemanppl

175 used, but you need a 40 dollar S screen and 40 dollar DK-17M for it to be of any use.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> 175 used, but you need a 40 dollar S screen and 40 dollar DK-17M for it to be of any use.


Sounds good to me maybe later on









Look what I found in my dad's closet!










Look what I found! by seanwebster1212, on Flickr

Edit: and I found this: http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showpost.php?p=13751253&postcount=1


----------



## dudemanppl

I wouldn't buy one over 330.


----------



## iandroo888

geez thats the smooth design and its lettering already wearing out? wow..


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> I wouldn't buy one over 330.


Havent seen them under $385
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iandroo888*
> 
> geez thats the smooth design and its lettering already wearing out? wow..


There are different ones?

What should I look for in one?


----------



## MistaBernie

Yeah, the going has been much closer to the $400 end. I saw a couple of $385'ers lately that I _almost_ pulled the trigger on. Would have been alot cheaper than the little box I have coming today (in hopefully just a couple of hours)


----------



## foothead

What should I expect if I buy an "UG" condition body from Keh?


----------



## dudemanppl

Well their return policy is great.







What are you looking to buy?


----------



## foothead

There's a 645 for $62. If it works properly, it'd be a great temporary camera until I can decide which system I want.


----------



## sub50hz

UG is pretty much a roll of the dice. BGN, by contrast, is usually excellent.


----------



## MistaBernie

Oh, _*hai..*_



Amazing condition given the date code (UU). I have a hap.


----------



## Shane1244

That picture just took me from a 6 to a 12.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Havent seen them under $385
> There are different ones?
> What should I look for in one?


before the japan tsunami, they were priced more closed to $300.. but after the japan tsunami, there was a huge shortage on the 35mm f/1.8mm AF-S which led people to the sigma 30mm, also jackin up the price.

as for the finish, there are two versions. the "older" version is the "rough" bumpy like finish that sigma was known for (prone to dust n stuff lol..). the "newer" version has a smooth finish... newer looks better imo and feels nicer but some like the older one too.. i dont think mechanically theres a difference except the look. lol i was just surprised cuz i believe the newer finish came out like mid spring last year


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Oh, _*hai..*_
> 
> 
> 
> Amazing condition given the date code (UU). I have a hap.


So beautiful.









Lets see some sample pics!
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iandroo888*
> 
> before the japan tsunami, they were priced more closed to $300.. but after the japan tsunami, there was a huge shortage on the 35mm f/1.8mm AF-S which led people to the sigma 30mm, also jackin up the price.
> as for the finish, there are two versions. the "older" version is the "rough" bumpy like finish that sigma was known for (prone to dust n stuff lol..). the "newer" version has a smooth finish... newer looks better imo and feels nicer but some like the older one too.. i dont think mechanically theres a difference except the look. lol i was just surprised cuz i believe the newer finish came out like mid spring last year


Ok, I think I am just going to wait for a sale or something then. IDK. Thanks for the help.


----------



## MistaBernie

I'm still trying to figure out which body I like it more on, the 5D or the 7D. I really shouldn't be surprised, I could have just set my 17-40 on the 35 marker and gotten a good idea..

The box they shipped it in was classic though; almost the size of a kit box, for a 35L, in the LP lens case, wrapped in bubble wrap and surrounded by styrofoam pellets. Now that I think of it, it KINDA looks like a UPS packing job from what I've seen.. all they'd need is the tape. The box wasn't really taped tight either, the top flaps had a bit of wiggle to them. Doesn't matter, the lens appears to be in like 9.5+/10 shape, which I am happy about.

Gone or whoever else has access, wanna add that to my gear list?


----------



## iandroo888

dont think ur gonna find much of a sale... anything like around 375 nowadays for that lens is almost a steal lol


----------



## MistaBernie

According to Canon Rumors... we may have found a 5D iii sighting..

http://www.canonrumors.com/2012/01/5d-mark-iii-sighting/


----------



## sub50hz

BALLS, Keh is temp out of 120 backs for the RB. I found a steal on a pro-pack of Provia 400, I guess I'll just run them in the 220 back for now.


----------



## dudemanppl

I sold my Sigma 30 for 325 and even then it took a few days... I'm confused. Anyway the 5DIII has locking dial.


----------



## MistaBernie

If this is in fact the new 5D iii, it also has a joystick on the grip. Weird.

Also, is it bad that I _really_ like the 35 on my 7D?

OH, goodie, our friend found his way over to POTN...


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> According to Canon Rumors... we may have found a 5D iii sighting..
> 
> http://www.canonrumors.com/2012/01/5d-mark-iii-sighting/












That thing is enormous. About 16-17cm wide if my estimate is correct.


----------



## MistaBernie

Yeah, it's apparently the not-yet-released 200-400 with built in 1.4x or 2x converter.. due out March/April methinks..

Also, I seriously can't believe I'm about to say this, but I think I could make use of a smaller camera bag.. something that will just hold one body, one or tow lenses, that isn't a Tamrac Rally4 sized... I mean, I could toss the Domke over my shoulder and go out and shoot (which is part of the reason I bought it) but my 70-200 doesn't really fit in any of the compartments that were included with it (but it will fit in one of the ends where I put my bodies).


----------



## foothead

I meant the camera. It's huge.


----------



## sub50hz

7DII, you heard it here first.

P.S. Grip joystick FTW, Nikon got on this train like 4 years ago and it's awesome on the D300/D700.


----------



## illum

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> If this is in fact the new 5D iii, it also has a joystick on the grip. Weird.
> Also, is it bad that I _really_ like the 35 on my 7D?
> OH, goodie, our friend found his way over to POTN...


Lol wow he has 55 posts and has started 7 threads in just over a week.

Im going to go look at what they are saying over at POTN lol.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*
> 
> I was 28 when I finished my post doc, just living within my means for the last 20 years so I'm treating my self and my wife a bit. Retiring next June. Don't forget, lots of my camera dough comes from soccer/fast pitch parents so most of the camera money is from them. D4 is coming gonna need $$$ for that. My daughter really wanted the mkIII and what she says goes. She's a far better photog than me. I will sell my D3 when the D4 comes. The proceeds will go towards a 200 1.8. It's the only lens I lust for just cause it's so cool. I just want one in the house. Don't quite know what I'll put on the end yet and when.


Oh I know, Nuke; I'm just jelly. I'm a teacher (high school), so I'll probably never have the wherewithal you do (unless the wife gets majorly promoted







)
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Oh, _*hai..*_
> 
> Amazing condition given the date code (UU). I have a hap.


Eff yeah! God how I love my 35L. I'd make sweet love to it if I could.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> If this is in fact the new 5D iii, it also has a joystick on the grip. Weird.
> Also, is it bad that I _really_ like the 35 on my 7D?
> OH, goodie, our friend found his way over to POTN...


Not at all; 35L on APS-C is heavenly. No corner defects whatsoever and a "normal" FL.

And POTN will rip that guy a new one. They don't play nice to begin with there.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *illum*
> 
> Lol wow he has 55 posts and has started 7 threads in just over a week.
> Im going to go look at what they are saying over at POTN lol.


Oh joy, some evening's enterntainment whilst I'm in the nation's capital!


----------



## illum

Lol enjoy GoneTommorow, there's flame wars going off everywhere


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*
> 
> I was 28 when I finished my post doc, just living within my means for the last 20 years so I'm treating my self and my wife a bit. Retiring next June. Don't forget, lots of my camera dough comes from soccer/fast pitch parents so most of the camera money is from them. D4 is coming gonna need $$$ for that. My daughter really wanted the mkIII and what she says goes. She's a far better photog than me. I will sell my D3 when the D4 comes. The proceeds will go towards a 200 1.8. It's the only lens I lust for just cause it's so cool. I just want one in the house. Don't quite know what I'll put on the end yet and when.


....









You got your PhD and finished postdoc within six years? Teach me how to be like you!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *illum*
> 
> Lol enjoy GoneTommorow, there's flame wars going off everywhere


I see sub has already accosted him there, LOL.


----------



## sub50hz

Hey, I simply linked him to a powerful search engine.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Hey, I simply linked him to a powerful search engine.


LOL, he had to know it was coming. I'd like to see him post about going pro over there. Hilarity would ensue.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Yeah, it's apparently the not-yet-released 200-400 with built in 1.4x or 2x converter.. due out March/April methinks..
> Also, I seriously can't believe I'm about to say this, but I think I could make use of a smaller camera bag.. something that will just hold one body, one or tow lenses, that isn't a Tamrac Rally4 sized... I mean, I could toss the Domke over my shoulder and go out and shoot (which is part of the reason I bought it) but my 70-200 doesn't really fit in any of the compartments that were included with it (but it will fit in one of the ends where I put my bodies).


Nothing weird about wanting a smaller camera bag. Check out the ThinkTank Urban Disguise UD30. I can put my 5DII plus the three lenses in my sig in it and it's fully half the size of a 7MDH.


----------



## foothead

http://www.ebay.com/itm/110812329773?ru=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ebay.com%3A80%2Fsch%2Fi.html%3F_from%3DR40%26_trksid%3Dp5197.m570.l1313%26_nkw%3D110812329773%26_sacat%3DSee-All-Categories%26_fvi%3D1&_rdc=1#ht_3182wt_1396

Sweet baby Jesus. 317mm f/1.5 with 8.5 inches of coverage. I think we've found the ultimate portrait lens.

EDIT: That would be the equivalent of a 100mm f/0.45 lens on 35mm.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*
> 
> ....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You got your PhD and finished postdoc within six years? Teach me how to be like you!


BS/chem = 3.5 yrs, Phd/physical chem = 4 yrs, postdoc = 2 yrs.

@GT, hit me with a Nikkor 105 f/1.8 Ais. Pics coming soon, love the bokeh and smooth mf. Set moneybags back $569 from KEH.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*
> 
> Nothing weird about wanting a smaller camera bag. Check out the ThinkTank Urban Disguise UD30. I can put my 5DII plus the three lenses in my sig in it and it's fully half the size of a 7MDH.


I don't think I would call the 7MDH a large bag, though, it's still smaller than my Banjo Brothers medium messenger bag I use when riding.


----------



## MistaBernie

If the 7DMH wasnt so rigid I probably would still own it. I have a feeling that as long as the Domke breaks in ok it might be my bag. I feel like its smaller than the 7MDH. Maybe I'll try a different insert or something instead of another bag.


----------



## Sean Webster

Well, I decided to wait for the 35mm, getting the 85 f/1.8 while it is on sale...maybe something else too.

I see the Mfr. Part # is different. What is the difference b/w the two?

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/12182-USA/Canon_2519A003_85mm_f_1_8_EF_USM.html

http://www.adorama.com/CA8518AFUA.html?utm_term=Other&utm_medium=Shopping%20Site&utm_campaign=Other&utm_source=gbase

I may order form Adorama.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> http://www.ebay.com/itm/110812329773?ru=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ebay.com%3A80%2Fsch%2Fi.html%3F_from%3DR40%26_trksid%3Dp5197.m570.l1313%26_nkw%3D110812329773%26_sacat%3DSee-All-Categories%26_fvi%3D1&_rdc=1#ht_3182wt_1396
> Sweet baby Jesus. 317mm f/1.5 with 8.5 inches of coverage. I think we've found the ultimate portrait lens.
> EDIT: That would be the equivalent of a 100mm f/0.45 lens on 35mm.


that is an insane lens......buy it

tenba insert

or you can just buy a insert and use random messenger bags.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Well, I decided to wait for the 35mm, getting the 85 f/1.8 while it is on sale...maybe something else too.
> I see the Mfr. Part # is different. What is the difference b/w the two?
> http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/12182-USA/Canon_2519A003_85mm_f_1_8_EF_USM.html
> http://www.adorama.com/CA8518AFUA.html?utm_term=Other&utm_medium=Shopping%20Site&utm_campaign=Other&utm_source=gbase
> I may order form Adorama.


Buy from whomever you please, both are good. I prefer B&H, for what it's worth.

P.S. Why are you buying the 85? It's so close to the 100 that it's almost not worth it, despite it being faster.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Buy from whomever you please, both are good. I prefer B&H, for what it's worth.
> 
> P.S. Why are you buying the 85? It's so close to the 100 that it's almost not worth it, despite it being faster.


I just got a check for $3k from my college a few minutes ago lol.

I was going to get it later on anyways and it is on sale now so I'm thinking I may as well. Plus the focus is way faster than my Macro.

Now what else to get...I'm starting to think the Sigma ain't worth it.

I may even get the 70-200 F/4 now too.


----------



## scottath

the 85 1.8 does focus quite fast....i love mine but it doesnt get a tonne of use atm - as im still using a crop body - when i get my FF body soon this year it should see some more use id think.
i want a cheque from uni for camera gear.....sigh


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scottath*
> 
> the 85 1.8 does focus quite fast....i love mine but it doesnt get a tonne of use atm - as im still using a crop body - when i get my FF body soon this year it should see some more use id think.


Yea, same here, I'm grabbing the 5DMKIII...I hope lol. I have the money saved so well see for sure when it is out.







Quote:


> i want a cheque from uni for camera gear.....sigh


----------



## sub50hz

Ask yourself: what will getting a 5D do for you that the 60D cannot?


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Ask yourself: what will getting a 5D do for you that the 60D cannot?


Thinner DOF and better ISO handling.


----------



## dudemanppl

This image made me quite giddy. BUT, 600, don't think I'll be getting one...


----------



## sub50hz

I've been anxiously awaiting that lens, paired with an EF-S screen for the fiddy dee. If it turns out to be good, that's probably the only lens i intend to use on it until it's dead.


----------



## scottath

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Ask yourself: what will getting a 5D do for you that the 60D cannot?


exactly as Sean said: Thinner DOF and better ISO handling.
I do 99% landscape work - and the full frame will also have reduced noise on my long exposures. once my 550D (same sensor as the 60D/7D/600D) hits ~5min exposures the noise seems to go up by a lot.

I have just enough for a 5DII atm - going to wait for the III to come out though - and get it if i have enough or i assume the 5DII prices will drop a fair bit at the same time......

Also - my 85mm becomes 85mm, not 136, as with my 28-75mm.....
looking to buy a 17-40L too around the same time - although i might buy that beforehand....hmm


----------



## dudemanppl

Get some sort of VF magnifier. SO WORTH. My 5DII VF is now bigger than the FM2, which is many magnitudes larger than the 1DsIII.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scottath*
> 
> exactly as Sean said: Thinner DOF and better ISO handling.
> I do 99% landscape work - and the full frame will also have reduced noise on my long exposures. once my 550D (same sensor as the 60D/7D/600D) hits ~5min exposures the noise seems to go up by a lot.
> I have just enough for a 5DII atm - going to wait for the III to come out though - and get it if i have enough or i assume the 5DII prices will drop a fair bit at the same time......
> Also - my 85mm becomes 85mm, not 136, as with my 28-75mm.....
> looking to buy a 17-40L too around the same time - although i might buy that beforehand....hmm


My comment was more along the lines of "will it make you a better photographer?". Maybe I'm being too subtle.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Get some sort of VF magnifier. SO WORTH. My 5DII VF is now bigger than the FM2, which is many magnitudes larger than the 1DsIII.


I bough a DK-17M and lost it. I should look for it now.


----------



## scottath

haha - no thats not the reason im getting it.








if i was getting a hasselblad (digital) or a PhaseOne then that question is probably justified....lol


----------



## sub50hz

Why not get a medium format film system for landscapes? The cost is comparatively minimal, and with good scans, you can get some really amazing results. MF is ideal for landscapes, although large format is really where it's at -- but at a huge cost and with a steep learning curve.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> My comment was more along the lines of "will it make you a better photographer?". Maybe I'm being too subtle.


Lots and lots of practice and learning. But I do it as a hobby and like to splurge on hobbies lol.


----------



## scottath

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Why not get a medium format film system for landscapes? The cost is comparatively minimal, and with good scans, you can get some really amazing results. MF is ideal for landscapes, although large format is really where it's at -- but at a huge cost and with a steep learning curve.


I have thought of that - but for now im going to keep with digital. whilst landscapes is what i mostly do - i do cover other things like my good friends wedding on the 31st of December.....took 1021 images on that day.
Will get the 5D*** + 17-40L and some grad filters then ill look into MF/LF film possibly.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Lots and lots of practice and learning. But I do it as a hobby and like to splurge on hobbies lol.


Same here - im gaining too many expencive hobbies though....
Computers , Photography, Sound engineering.....oh well - all my hobbies help others out too - so i dont mind (wallet does though)


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Lots and lots of practice and learning. But I do it as a hobby and like to splurge on hobbies lol.


My point is that you've already got a more-than-capable setup for learning and perfecting your shooting -- you're putting quite a cost on DoF and better noise handling. Have you ever made a print from any of your shots? How large?


----------



## scottath

Ive sold prints of mine - normally 1m*33cm framed








Sold one last week actually - got paid today for it


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Lots and lots of practice and learning. But I do it as a hobby and like to splurge on hobbies lol.
> 
> 
> 
> My point is that you've already got a more-than-capable setup for learning and perfecting your shooting -- you're putting quite a cost on DoF and better noise handling. Have you ever made a print from any of your shots? How large?
Click to expand...

Nah, i haven't really only a few in my room are on the wall. 8x10

And I sold a few to some fiends.

I think I need to focus on shooting more tho, you have a very valid point. I need some flashes more than the body or lens. I had the YN 565 for a few days but ended up selling it to a friend for a profit and I now I have no flash.

It sucks where I live there is nothing good t look at around here + i don't have a car so that inhibits me a ton from travel. I have been in a depressed state too so I haven't gone out of the house for the last 2 months and actually done anything.

IDK things look crappy to me right now and the thought of a cool new toy makes me feel a little better i guess.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scottath*
> 
> Ive sold prints of mine - normally 1m*33cm framed
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sold one last week actually - got paid today for it


When you're printing that large, those are composites of full frames, correct?


----------



## scottath

one ive sold was a stitch(of 23 images...lol) - but the rest are 3:1 crops from a single frame, even heavy crops still look rather reasonable from my 550D.

get a car if you can Sean - i love going for long drives to random places very early in the morning just to be quiet and take photos - nice and calming


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Nah, i haven't really only a few in my room are on the wall. 8x10
> And I sold a few to some fiends.
> I think I need to focus on shooting more tho, you have a very valid point. I need some flashes more than the body or lens. I had the YN 565 for a few days but ended up selling it to a friend for a profit and I now I have no flash.
> It sucks where I live there is nothing good t look at around here + i don't have a car so that inhibits me a ton from travel. I have been in a depressed state too so I haven't gone out of the house for the last 2 months and actually done anything.
> IDK things look crappy to me right now and the thought of a cool new toy makes me feel a little better i guess.


I'm just gonna reply to segments of this rather than splitting it into several quotes, as it's a total pain in the dick to do it on an ipad:

8x10 prints aren't going to show a huge difference if you move to full frame.

Shoot more, think about flashes less. You have everything you need to step out and shoot, do not trick yourself into thinking your ability is inhibited by a lack of equipment.

There is ALWAYS something interesting to shoot, you just have to be creative. Don't worry about a car, venture out on foot or on a bicycle and you might be surprised at what you find. Hell, DMP made a whole thread about how great it is doing that after I suggested it about a million times.

I won't inquire as to the source of your depression, but shooting can help what ails you, since your mind is free from the confines of structured life when you have a camera in your hand and an idea blossoming.

Don't use gear as a replacement for inspiration, it's a terrible path to walk down. Take a break from being online and go outside. Be glad you're not in the midwest, as the past few weekends I have had to bundle up like crazy just to last more than a couple hours.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scottath*
> 
> get a car if you can Sean - i love going for long drives to random places very early in the morning just to be quiet and take photos - nice and calming


I know, i am looking into a BMW e39 540i, but the problem is that we can't fit 3 cars in my driveway and the insurance...I am thinking of dropping out of college and getting a job.
Quote:


> I'm just gonna reply to segments of this rather than splitting it into several quotes, as it's a total pain in the dick to do it on an ipad:
> 
> 8x10 prints aren't going to show a huge difference if you move to full frame.
> 
> Shoot more, think about flashes less. You have everything you need to step out and shoot, do not trick yourself into thinking your ability is inhibited by a lack of equipment.
> 
> There is ALWAYS something interesting to shoot, you just have to be creative. Don't worry about a car, venture out on foot or on a bicycle and you might be surprised at what you find. Hell, DMP made a whole thread about how great it is doing that after I suggested it about a million times.
> 
> I won't inquire as to the source of your depression, but shooting can help what ails you, since your mind is free from the confines of structured life when you have a camera in your hand and an idea blossoming.
> 
> Don't use gear as a replacement for inspiration, it's a terrible path to walk down. Take a break from being online and go outside. Be glad you're not in the midwest, as the past few weekends I have had to bundle up like crazy just to last more than a couple hours.


Ok, will do, tomorrow I shall see what I can get at the beach. I think I just need to get out like you say. Thanks for the pep talk lol.


----------



## mz-n10

buy something cheaper or a hybrid.

got a 2010 fusion hybrid and i pay <900 a year for full coverage insurance.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> buy something cheaper or a hybrid.
> 
> got a 2010 fusion hybrid and i pay <900 a year for full coverage insurance.


The BMW is ~$10,000. Two of my friends have one, they are great cars. My dad just may wind up getting one and we can share it. He doesn't drive much b/c he is handicapped so I get priority.


----------



## mz-n10

when i say cheaper, im thinking <2000 lol


----------



## sub50hz

Honda Fit Sport. I may go trade in my SE-R this weekend for one. So much space, such awesome mileage. I don't really need a second car, but it would be nice to take on trips.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> when i say cheaper, im thinking <2000 lol


oh...lol, I'm more into luxury and power.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Honda Fit Sport. I may go trade in my SE-R this weekend for one. So much space, such awesome mileage. I don't really need a second car, but it would be nice to take on trips.


This what you have now?


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> There is ALWAYS something interesting to shoot, you just have to be creative. Don't worry about a car, venture out on foot or on a bicycle and you might be surprised at what you find. Hell, DMP made a whole thread about how great it is doing that after I suggested it about a million times.


Hey I did that before you ever suggested that.


----------



## sub50hz

I have the SE-R (2003 Spec-V, set up currently for Solo2), and I bought a 2011 Santa Fe last Labor Day as I needed a non-rattletrap/death machine for winter. My racing days are...probably over, so I might as well grab something else I can use. Or I can stay with one car, but I feel like i would miss having a small car that I could one day turn into a horribly stiff, noisy track car.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> oh...lol, I'm more into luxury and power.


i had a friend selling a e60 525 for <10k here in cali....couple low balls and he said screw it...keep it as a beater....
Quote:


> This what you have now?


sad part is its probably faster than the real spec


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> oh...lol, I'm more into luxury and power.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i had a friend selling a e60 525 for <10k here in cali....couple low balls and he said screw it...keep it as a beater....
Click to expand...

Still not anything comparable to the older V8 540i


----------



## sub50hz

Get that heavy, German gas-swilling 540 nonsense outta here.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Get that heavy, German gas-swilling 540 nonsense outta here.


Oh god you went there!

Get that ricer POS outta there!


----------



## sub50hz

Drag racing is for chumps. Road America makes men out of boys.

P.S. four wheels on the ground is no fun. Tire Rack Solo2 Regionals, 2007:


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Still not anything comparable to the older V8 540i


with gas at 4 dollars a gallon....i totally agree
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Get that heavy, German gas-swilling 540 nonsense outta here.


what tires you run?

those are teh ser still with the sr20 right?


----------



## sub50hz

I switch tires based on track and conditions, but for most dry fair weather days I'll use A6s, although some longer races require something a little more forgiving in the wear department, and Azenis still do really well for me, and don't fall apart when I get sloppy with the brakes on entry. They're also really damn cheap, although I still miss the old compound a bit.

Edit: The only B15 chassis Sentras with SR20s were the earlier SE models, all of the SE-R models have the gloriously terrible QR25.


----------



## scottath

im happy with my '97 Nissan Pulsar Q atm......1.6L is a little slow though :/
Dads BMW X5 is fun though. Upgrading my car soon too though.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

What the hell happened to this thread?


----------



## scottath

lol....nothing :/

just passing time till the 5DIII comes out


----------



## dudemanppl

Hey better than the random pictures thread in OT, that thing just died. Don't worry, you're still welcome here Marin.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> I switch tires based on track and conditions, but for most dry fair weather days I'll use A6s, although some longer races require something a little more forgiving in the wear department, and Azenis still do really well for me, and don't fall apart when I get sloppy with the brakes on entry. They're also really damn cheap, although I still miss the old compound a bit.
> Edit: The only B15 chassis Sentras with SR20s were the earlier SE models, all of the SE-R models have the gloriously terrible QR25.


damn straight slicks....i cant fit those (more important wont class)....
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*
> 
> What the hell happened to this thread?


what? we are talking about cameras......kinda


----------



## scottath

17-40L came up on another forum:
Includes B+W 77mm MRC UV 010 Filter
Excellent condition. Light scuff marks on lens hood.
Comes in original box with hood, front/rear caps, soft bag and manual.
$600 instant.
Postage im guessing will be $15 or so.....

snap it up or buy the 5d first...hmm
i could probably make the $600ish back before the 5dIII is launched.......

someone else decided for me


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scottath*
> 
> 17-40L came up on another forum:
> Includes B+W 77mm MRC UV 010 Filter
> Excellent condition. Light scuff marks on lens hood.
> Comes in original box with hood, front/rear caps, soft bag and manual.
> $600 instant.
> Postage im guessing will be $15 or so.....
> 
> snap it up or buy the 5d first...hmm
> i could probably make the $600ish back before the 5dIII is launched.......
> 
> someone else decided for me


do it


----------



## MistaBernie

I say do it. Decent price (especially with the filter). Get good, recent images of the lens (and taken with the lens) prior unless you know the person, that price is a little on the low side (but it doesn't quite scream 'Danger, Will Robinson').

Also, too many cars, not enough glass..



















The top one looked _much_ cooler at home. Stupid uncalibrated work monitors..


----------



## dudemanppl

17-40L used at 600 is very average.


----------



## MistaBernie

it's a pretty good deal in AU though (at least from everything I've seen).


----------



## mz-n10

interesting...i have no idea how to turn on movie mode on a 5d2.....


----------



## Dousand Thollars

Hi there everyone.

I'd just like to announce my recent purchase of a Canon 7D w/ 18-135mm Lens kit and also a 50mm f/1.8ii lens.

I'm damn new to photography so I thought I'd get some of the more general lenses prior to getting anything specific. Any advice to get me started would be much appreciated.

Nice to be here


----------



## mz-n10

17-55/2.8 or 17-50/2.8
70-200/2.8

those are the most common ranges.


----------



## foothead

I'd go for something on the wide end. 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5.


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Drag racing is for chumps. Road America makes men out of boys.
> P.S. four wheels on the ground is no fun. Tire Rack Solo2 Regionals, 2007:


Needs moar low.

On another note, my friend got to play with the C300 and 1DX. Canon came to his school for the video department.

So jelly.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aksthem1*
> 
> Needs moar low.


I was racing STX at the time, and that was only Prokits/Koni yellows. It's been sitting on JICs for the last 3 years, after I moved to DSP and then SM.


----------



## dudemanppl

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3dzoixR_fv4


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Honda Fit Sport. I may go trade in my SE-R this weekend for one. So much space, such awesome mileage. I don't really need a second car, but it would be nice to take on trips.


Definitely, my wife has a 2011 non-sport, very nice. She put 35k miles on it the first year and it didn't bat an eye.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> interesting...i have no idea how to turn on movie mode on a 5d2.....


Press the ok button in the center of the jog wheel.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dousand Thollars*
> 
> Hi there everyone.
> I'd just like to announce my recent purchase of a Canon 7D w/ 18-135mm Lens kit and also a 50mm f/1.8ii lens.
> I'm damn new to photography so I thought I'd get some of the more general lenses prior to getting anything specific. Any advice to get me started would be much appreciated.
> Nice to be here


I would start with what you have and learn the ropes before going gear crazy. You'll get a good idea of what you like to shoot and can then make a more informed decision about new lenses and othr gear.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*
> 
> Press the ok button in the center of the jog wheel.


video was off in the lv/video options....


----------



## dudemanppl

Lets get the thread goin' again! I'm interested in this: http://losangeles.craigslist.org/lac/pho/2800348130.html but I don't understand how its brassed, I thought it was plastic bodied?


----------



## Sean Webster

Any one know about this place? http://www.calumetphoto.com/

I can get like $20-40 off from there.


----------



## dudemanppl

Yup, they're legit.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Yup, they're legit.


Thanks!


----------



## MistaBernie

I tried to get out and get some pics of northern lights, but there's too much damn light pollution where I am, I'd never have seen it even if it did truly stretch as far south as Boston (especially with the cloud cover).


----------



## dudemanppl

6 rep in the last two days versus 45 in 3 years, what.


----------



## MistaBernie

yeah, whereas I've been helping people like crazy around here, doing the research for them that's oh so difficult to do and providing it to them and getting none. Not that I really care about rep, but it kind of makes me see for just a second about the people that claim it's hard to get rep, and that the 35 rep system is BS because you can be here forever and be friendly and useful to the community and never receive rep.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> 6 rep in the last two days versus 45 in 3 years, what.


I'm pretty sure that was mostly from me lol
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> yeah, whereas I've been helping people like crazy around here, doing the research for them that's oh so difficult to do and providing it to them and getting none. Not that I really care about rep, but it kind of makes me see for just a second about the people that claim it's hard to get rep, and that the 35 rep system is BS because you can be here forever and be friendly and useful to the community and never receive rep.


LOL, I got 35 rep in 1 day a few times. Took me 4 months to get 1200 rep, it isn't hard at all.

I have a 85 1.8 and a 70-200 f/4 non is in my cart right now im about to grab for $900 total...anything against it?









And I can't decide b/w the 50EXII and the 430EXII....


----------



## sub50hz

Calumet is legit, it's about the only place in Chicago that isn't unbelievably overpriced (Helix is better, but only one location and super inconvenient hours). They have good tripods and other Calumet-branded stuff that's pretty darn good as well. Their showroom is super bland and crazy organized, though, very blah feel.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Calumet is legit, it's about the only place in Chicago that isn't unbelievably overpriced (Helix is better, but only one location and super inconvenient hours). They have good tripods and other Calumet-branded stuff that's pretty darn good as well. Their showroom is super bland and crazy organized, though, very blah feel.


Cool, thanks.

Now ehh...get another YN 565 or a 430EXII? Like I said b4 I don't have the YN 565 anymore and only used it like 2 times.

I kinda would like the HSS...


----------



## foothead

I'm thinking of picking up a 4x5 rangefinder and just abandoning medium format altogether. Someone talk me out of this.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> I'm thinking of picking up a 4x5 rangefinder and just abandoning medium format altogether. Someone talk me out of this.


Pfft, get a Polaroid!


----------



## sub50hz

Don't do it. MF fulfills different usage scenarios... not to mention pretty much every MF camera is exponentially less of a pain in the ass to load, shoot and carry than a field camera. Start saving for an RZ or Fuji/Mamiya RF.


----------



## foothead

IDK, the more I think about it, the more it makes sense. I only ever use medium and large format for landscapes, more often than not with a tripod. It'd actually be lighter than a GX680, and I get better movements, significantly better optics, and larger film size. I'll get a couple grafmatic holders for when I need fast shooting or lighter weight.


----------



## dudemanppl

GW690? Also, I'm looking at getting a M8 again.


----------



## foothead

90mm fixed lens = bleh. I need wide angle.


----------



## sub50hz

65 f/5.6, do it.


----------



## foothead

I don't like the idea of being stuck to a single focal length, and the 2:3 aspect really doesn't seem right to me.

I'm looking on eBay, and some of the 4x5 rangefinders are going really cheap. I may be able to justify getting one and a new 645 body, though I doubt I'd use it much. In fact, I think I may do it that way. It'd still be cheaper than buying into a new MF system.


----------



## sub50hz

Pentax 67?


----------



## dudemanppl

Yeah, gets to like 21mm (35mm equiv) wideosity. Should I M8?


----------



## sub50hz

What about the M6?


----------



## dudemanppl

Keep that too, I have 100 rolls of film and I ain't sellin' that. But when I AM done, I might sell the M6 to fund an M9 or just buy more film.


----------



## sub50hz

Meh. I'm not a fan of the digital Leicas at all. I think they would be great if, uh..... no, nevermind. They're dumb. You should just go balls out and get a 645AFD and P45 back. Make us believe in the almighty dollar for once.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Pentax 67?


I've always wanted one, it's just that they're so expensive for what you get. I could get a RB67 or a GS-1 for like half the price, and either would probably be much better for my purposes.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Yeah, gets to like 21mm (35mm equiv) wideosity. Should I M8?


How much? If it's cheap, I say do it.


----------



## sub50hz

Then get an RB. 250 bucks for an incredibly good 6x7 body/back/lens/finder combo that never needs a battery and could kill a human being if swung at them -- and still work. If I had to get rid of everything I own except one camera, I would keep the RB, no question.


----------



## sub50hz

I have the sudden overwhelming desire after that above reply to dump everything I have except the RB, and pick up an RTS for my 35mm needs. Hrm.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Then get an RB. 250 bucks for an incredibly good 6x7 body/back/lens/finder combo that never needs a battery and could kill a human being if swung at them -- and still work. If I had to get rid of everything I own except one camera, I would keep the RB, no question.


I've been considering it. An RB67 is probably my first choice should I decide to switch to a new MF system. No way I could get away with it for $250 though. Last time I checked, it'd cost more like $6-700 for the kit I'd want (camera, AE finder, 50mm and 90mm lenses)


----------



## sub50hz

AE finder? Awful. Buy a meter. Eye-level finders on an RB are a hilarious prospect, I would only consider them useful for macro work where a WLF would be damn near impossible to use. I would buy a setup with a regular lens first, and pick up a wide later. If you find that it doesn't work for you, you can easily sell it for what you paid.


----------



## dudemanppl

Protip, Canon S90s make very very good meters. Also, its a camera.

OOOH, full res Samyang 24 1.4 sample wide open.

http://www.samyang.pl/download/Samyang_24_samples/Samyang_24_F1.4_ED_AS_UMC_6.jpg

Can't do 9 shots on a roll of 120, experiment failed.







Part two of experiment coming up (exposing Ektar at 800 and pushing three stops in development, 1600 then 3200 next maybe? >







).

edit 2
ISO 800 EKTAR IS SUCCESS. Its pretty contrasty, BUT it isn't honestly that bad. Shooting 9 frames on 120 and 6x9 ruins the first and last shot...

edit 3
Actually no this is SUPER contrasty, I guess if you were really desperate... It is really cheap film though, cheapest decent 36 exposure C41 film I know of.


----------



## nuclearjock

@GT,

Forgot to mention, my 85 F/1.2 went out to Az with my mkIII. Just picked up a mint Nikkor 105mm f/1.8 AI-S. When you get a chance...


----------



## Lazloisdavrock

Does anyone have the Kodak Max Z990? just wondering. its my new camera :3


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*
> 
> @GT,
> Forgot to mention, my 85 F/1.2 went out to Az with my mkIII. Just picked up a mint Nikkor 105mm f/1.8 AI-S. When you get a chance...


I need to get in your family somehow. Seriously.

Also, I think I might sell the 690, with my crap ass scanner I'm not getting that much more detail than 135 with the plustek which is really quite depressing.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Also, I think I might sell the 690, with my crap ass scanner I'm not getting that much more detail than 135 with the plustek which is really quite depressing.


Do you not have an enlarger?


----------



## dudemanppl

No room and none of my pictures are good enough to print anyway.


----------



## foothead

You don't have to get something huge. I have a little Bogen 6x6 enlarger that I can stick in the closet when I'm done using it. Weighs probably ten pounds at the most.

I print all my pictures. Staring at a low resolution screen isn't very satisfying.


----------



## dudemanppl

Eh, maybe someday, but I dunno... in 10 years I probably will have an enlarger and a darkroom, but my parents would be ***ing at it.

Haha, the Google demographics thing thinks I'm 25-34.

Question: What color do I paint the M6 top? Anything but black is okay.


----------



## MistaBernie

I might have stumbled across an opportunity to convince my wife that I should pick up a 5D2 (without selling anything else, either)... wish me luck!


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> I might have stumbled across an opportunity to convince my wife that I should pick up a 5D2 (without selling anything else, either)... wish me luck!


Good luck!









I still can't decide on a flash lol.

The order for 70-200 f/4 and the 85 f/1.8 are apparently still processing ugh...so slow.


----------



## MistaBernie

What's your budget? Mind shooting manual only? I keep hearing good things about the YN560/565, although my experience with the YNs is that you get what you pay for, and that it's better to invest in a 430EX ii or a 580EX ii if you need the power _consistently_, built with higher quality construction and with E-TTL


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> What's your budget? Mind shooting manual only? I keep hearing good things about the YN560/565, although my experience with the YNs is that you get what you pay for, and that it's better to invest in a 430EX ii or a 580EX ii if you need the power _consistently_, built with higher quality construction and with E-TTL


No budget, but I am not going for the expensive flashes so ~$200 or less since that is what the 430EXII goes for. Manuial or auto doesn't matter, but since I have teh wireless master built in the 60D I don't want to waste it.

I am really thinking of geting the YN again, but the HSS on the 430EXII makes me want it. I can definitly use HSS in the day for portraits and such. I think i'm going to get one used soon.

Have you used HSS yet? I know it cuts power, but is it that bad?


----------



## MistaBernie

HSS is pretty good. Yeah, it cuts down power (I believe worst case scenario is cutting it down to around 1/6th the power). That being said, it's definitely useful in the daytime to tame backlit sun shots. The only thing I'm not 100% sure of (haven't done it yet) is whether or not HSS works with the in-camera wireless master on the 60D or 7D.. I'll have to give that a shot though! I've really become an off camera flash / multiple strobes junkie in my thinking lately, and I have most of the tools to use it effectively (I think..)

Maybe I'll try to setup a shot of _all_ of my gear at some point. I'll even take it with my old A590IS so my S95 can be in the photo, heh.


----------



## sub50hz

DMP, hit me up if you're gonna sell that 690.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> HSS is pretty good. Yeah, it cuts down power (I believe worst case scenario is cutting it down to around 1/6th the power). That being said, it's definitely useful in the daytime to tame backlit sun shots.


Well, im sold, now to find a 430EXII used lol
Quote:


> The only thing I'm not 100% sure of (haven't done it yet) is whether or not HSS works with the in-camera wireless master on the 60D or 7D..


I've heard mixed things. IDK either.
Quote:


> I'll have to give that a shot though! I've really become an off camera flash / multiple strobes junkie in my thinking lately, and I have most of the tools to use it effectively (I think..) Maybe I'll try to setup a shot of _all_ of my gear at some point. I'll even take it with my old A590IS so my S95 can be in the photo, heh.


Lets see what you got.


----------



## MistaBernie

whoa, Adorama is out of 430 EX iis... after a rebate... I wonder if the new model is in the pipeline. I keep hearing that it is.. something also about color correction.

B&H appears to have new ones.. not bad, $254..

but man, even the used market is thinning out. Seems like they're suddenly a little harder to come by than normal. Maybe I should consider selling both of mine and picking up another 580..


----------



## sub50hz

Ok, photo thread regs, I have the wheels spinning on a project like the where's nifty but for this smaller group of people -- I'll elaborate more on lunch.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Ok, photo thread regs, I have the wheels spinning on a project like the where's nifty but for this smaller group of people -- I'll elaborate more on lunch.


Ooh, sounds fun.

Speed Graphic for $100 - yes or no?


----------



## sub50hz

100 bucks? Sounds... awfully low, no? Those aren't the 2x3, are they? I haven't done too much looking on field cameras, but they _are_ awesome.


----------



## foothead

It's a 4x5 press camera. The standard price seems to be $150-200, but this one doesn't have the original lens (not that I care- it's awful), and the focal plane shutter needs to be CLA'ed.


----------



## MistaBernie

Keep me in the loop Sub.

Also, I _almost_ pulled the trigger on a Gibson 50s Tribute LP yesterday, but now that wifey is OK'ing an additional body purchase, those funds are going straight to 5Dii.


----------



## sub50hz

Yeah, I figured 4x5, but I've seen some 2x3s going stupid cheap.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Keep me in the loop Sub.
> Also, I _almost_ pulled the trigger on a Gibson 50s Tribute LP yesterday, but now that wifey is OK'ing an additional body purchase, those funds are going straight to 5Dii.


Trade 5Dc for 135L? Me love you long time.

Also, can't wait for Brady to bury extra-chromosome Manning and the Giants next week. GLORY.


----------



## MistaBernie

I _may_ be willing to do that, but I couldn't do it till after the wedding I'm scheduled to shoot in May. I'd even through in all the extra batteries I've accumulated.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> whoa, Adorama is out of 430 EX iis... after a rebate... I wonder if the new model is in the pipeline. I keep hearing that it is.. something also about color correction.
> 
> B&H appears to have new ones.. not bad, $254..
> 
> but man, even the used market is thinning out. Seems like they're suddenly a little harder to come by than normal. *Maybe I should consider selling both of mine and picking up another 580*..


If you are wanting to part out for ~200 or less...


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> No budget, but I am not going for the expensive flashes so ~$200 or less since that is what the 430EXII goes for. Manuial or auto doesn't matter, but since I have teh wireless master built in the 60D I don't want to waste it.
> I am really thinking of geting the YN again, but the HSS on the 430EXII makes me want it. I can definitly use HSS in the day for portraits and such. I think i'm going to get one used soon.
> Have you used HSS yet? I know it cuts power, but is it that bad?


What really sets apart the Canon speed lights are their recycle times, which are very fast even on the 430EXII.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Ok, photo thread regs, I have the wheels spinning on a project like the where's nifty but for this smaller group of people -- I'll elaborate more on lunch.


Let's hear it.


----------



## MistaBernie

If I were to sell them, I would probably do it at that price ($200 ea). That being said, I'm not getting rid of _any_ gear at the moment (unless Tuesday rolls around and I am suddenly no longer shooting a wedding, at which point, yes, I would probably be willing to sell at least one 430 EX ii for $200, and trade my 5Dc for my 135L. Then, I buy my 5Dii.

THEN I tell my wife I'm no longer doing the May wedding..


----------



## mz-n10

ive recently have had a sudden urge to pick up a 4x5 view camera......if only film wasnt a dollar a sheet and i have a darkroom at my house.....


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> ive recently have had a sudden urge to pick up a 4x5 view camera......if only film wasnt a dollar a sheet and i have a darkroom at my house.....


Do it.

http://www.freestylephoto.biz/190145-Arista-EDU-Ultra-BandW-100-iso-4x5-50-sheets?cat_id=404 <- Actually pretty great film on large format. It's grainier than most 100 ISO films, but that hardly matters unless you're printing like 20x24.

As far as a darkroom, you really don't need one. I use a small bathroom, and never had any problems. I have an old sheet of plywood that I lay out on the sink to place the developer trays on, and the enlarger is on a cart, so I just wheel it in to use it, then put it away when I'm done.


----------



## dudemanppl

Gonna paint the M6 top white. Also looking back at the stuff I have owned before, I pooped. I've had 25 bodies, 4 of those APS-H, 9 of them FF, 3 of them 135mm, and the rest APS-C. Also, I've had 5 Nikon 24-70s lol.

Also I'm selling the GW690 to sub (?) and buying a Pentax 67 for 105 2.4 goodness.


----------



## sub50hz

B$M is a masterpiece of cinema. Rent it on YouTube for 10 bucks. Now.


----------



## dudemanppl

Damn if I led a more interesting life I would totally have a 4x5 camera.


----------



## foothead

Sell one of those leicas and you could get a really awesome 4x5 field camera kit. There's a Tachihara on eBay right now for $750 with a 150mm lens and 2 film holders.


----------



## nuclearjock

Now that I'm getting used to MF....http://www.keh.com/camera/Nikon-Manual-Focus-Fixed-Focal-Length-Lenses/1/sku-NK06009042239R?r=FE


----------



## foothead

That lens + 2x teleconverter + Olympus E-5. It'd be like a telescope. A very expensive, very awesome telescope.

EDIT: Anyone need a sports camera? http://www.ebay.com/itm/130634891409?ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1438.l2649#ht_689wt_1396 Lol, so awesome.


----------



## laboitenoire

Ahhhhh, finally got some sun today. I had to shoot an assignment for class, and since Wednesday it's been snowing or raining every day. Weather finally broke this afternoon.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> Ahhhhh, finally got some sun today. I had to shoot an assignment for class, and since Wednesday it's been snowing or raining every day. Weather finally broke this afternoon.


Any good pics?

Check this, it is my friends dad's Caddy CTS-V, I just took this last night.


----------



## sub50hz

Winter shooting is so frustrating sometimes -- 5 total hours of adventuring, and shot 4 frames, one of which will be hella overexposed because I derped and forgot to take the dome off my meter.


----------



## dudemanppl

Oh my god, hes planning to get a 7D now (you know who I'm talking about). lol he posted in a thread asking for 50 1.4 advice and three people go in saying get a Sigma but he just ignores that. Also 18-200 on his 7D I am CRINGING.
Quote:


> Considering buying the 7D. But i heard some copies have AF issues. How do i know if have AF Issues?


Wat. He hasn't even BOUGHT ANYTHING YET I WANT TO KILL PEOPLE NOW. I want my Oly 50 1.4 to come already so I can do some MF work. Also my friend has had my 50L for like a week and I don't really like him. BUT I like him more than the 50L, so whatever.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Oh my god, hes planning to get a 7D now (you know who I'm talking about). lol he posted in a thread asking for 50 1.4 advice and three people go in saying get a Sigma but he just ignores that. Also 18-200 on his 7D I am CRINGING.
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Considering buying the 7D. But i heard some copies have AF issues. How do i know if have AF Issues?
> 
> 
> 
> Wat. He hasn't even BOUGHT ANYTHING YET I WANT TO KILL PEOPLE NOW. I want my Oly 50 1.4 to come already so I can do some MF work. Also my friend has had my 50L for like a week and I don't really like him. BUT I like him more than the 50L, so whatever.
Click to expand...

No more replying to him...he found POTN, they can deal with the stupidity now.


----------



## dudemanppl

Yeah thats where I found him. Scarred for life.









5DIII looks interesting, but the only thing I'd really like from the 5DII better ISO performance because the ergonomics are excellent.

I feel like after buying an M8, the M6 won't be used at all, not sure wat do, I have about 1000 in filmy related stuff that isn't the camera (film, scanner, tanks, etc). Plus it might be hard to sell because it'll be fricken' white or something..


----------



## sub50hz

I have an on-again/off-again love affair with the 50L. I think I _might_ like one someday, at least I would probably use it more than the 135L.


----------



## dudemanppl

Well I have a bad copy and even good copies are only as good as the Sigma 50, ain't gonna bother with that. It has worse build quality too. The thing that holds the hood on sucks. Dropped mine and the whole thing just came apart, weaaaak.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=473&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=403&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=1&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

Not that I usually *** to sharpness tests, but in use I feel the Sigma is a whole crapton sharper. BECAUSE IT IS. Thats even his better copy (his other has crappier corners). And yeah the corners are worse but I don't look there anyway.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=403&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=636&CameraComp=614&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0
WAIT A MINUTE WHAT, THE NIKON 50 IS MADE OF PIXIE DUST?

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=741&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=458&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0
So much detail I'm gonna cry.


----------



## Sean Webster

Hmm, still deciding on a flash LOL, what do you guys think of ND filters with flashes for portriats? Isn't it hard to get focus? I mean there is a pitch black film shield over the lens....how does this work out? And if you focus first then move when putting it on the subject isn't sharp, I'm confused I guess. lol

*How do you guys clean your lenses?*
Rubbing alcohol and a tissue followed by a cotton cloth seems to work well enough for me.

*And what about the sensor? Any of you who dare use a wet method when the blower doesn't work?*
I've not needed to clean my sensor so far amazingly, thus 60D is more dust proof than my old T1i was I think lol. But when the time comes there is no way I am sending in my camera for so much $ just to get the dust off.


----------



## sub50hz

I would never use alcohol on a coated lens, ever. Straight microfiber does the trick for me, and for times where it will be _too_ dirty, I'll just use a cheapo filter and deal with it, then throw it away when I'm done (this is not very often anymore).


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Hmm, still deciding on a flash LOL, what do you guys think of ND filters with flashes for portriats? Isn't it hard to get focus? I mean there is a pitch black film shield over the lens....how does this work out? And if you focus first then move when putting it on the subject isn't sharp, I'm confused I guess. lol


Buy dees: http://www.ebay.com/itm/77mm-Fader-ND-Mark-2-Light-Craft-Workshop-/180720833375?pt=Camera_Filters&hash=item2a13cd135f#ht_500wt_1156
and some step up/down rings, I never remember what they're called. Best investment I eva made. Also, even at full ND and my S screen which makes everything dimmer anyway, still relatively easy to focus and compose.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> *How do you guys clean your lenses?*


Tshirt usually, but when I'm selling it, isopropyl. If its dusty and easy to get inside, I'll take the lens apart and isopropyl + qtips and then rocket blow the qtip particles away.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> *And what about the sensor? Any of you who dare use a wet method when the blower doesn't work?*


My 5DII didn't have sensor cleaning so I had to blow often. I don't usually set it to do it when I turn the camera on cause its annoying. Wet method for me is exhale on sensor, qtip, rocket blow. Repeat if necessary.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> I would never use alcohol on a coated lens, ever. Straight microfiber does the trick for me, and for times where it will be _too_ dirty, I'll just use a cheapo filter and deal with it, then throw it away when I'm done (this is not very often anymore).


What coating would be taken off tho?
Quote:


> Buy dees: http://www.ebay.com/itm/77mm-Fader-ND-Mark-2-Light-Craft-Workshop-/180720833375?pt=Camera_Filters&hash=item2a13cd135f#ht_500wt_1156
> and some step up/down rings, I never remember what they're called. Best investment I eva made. Also, even at full ND and my S screen which makes everything dimmer anyway, still relatively easy to focus and compose.


hmm, link to the step down rings?
Quote:


> Tshirt usually, but when I'm selling it, isopropyl. If its dusty and easy to get inside, I'll take the lens apart and isopropyl + qtips and then rocket blow the qtip particles away.


Cool.









Quote:


> My 5DII didn't have sensor cleaning so I had to blow often. I don't usually set it to do it when I turn the camera on cause its annoying. Wet method for me is exhale on sensor, qtip, rocket blow. Repeat if necessary.


lol, that sounds like a plan for me.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Hmm, still deciding on a flash LOL, what do you guys think of ND filters with flashes for portriats? Isn't it hard to get focus? I mean there is a pitch black film shield over the lens....how does this work out? And if you focus first then move when putting it on the subject isn't sharp, I'm confused I guess. lol
> 
> *How do you guys clean your lenses?*
> Rubbing alcohol and a tissue followed by a cotton cloth seems to work well enough for me.
> 
> *And what about the sensor? Any of you who dare use a wet method when the blower doesn't work?*
> I've not needed to clean my sensor so far amazingly, thus 60D is more dust proof than my old T1i was I think lol. But when the time comes there is no way I am sending in my camera for so much $ just to get the dust off.


1) portrait lenses usually have a wide aperture. depending on how many stops your filter cuts out, you may be able to AF. otherwise, you need to prefocus.

2) b+w mrc filter means i can use my shirt. i put them on as soon as i open a lens so i never have to clean the lens element itself. to clean the filter further, i use lens paper with some cleaning fluid. cleaning fluid + 200 pages of lens paper costs less than $10 at b&h and will last for about a year.

3) i rarely need to clean my sensor because i don't switch lenses often. i only carry _maybe_ an extra lens and i try to change them out in a clean situation (aka, when the wind is not blowing, not a lot of pollen outside...etc)


----------



## aksthem1

Personally I like to use about a 25/75 methanol to distilled water ratio to clean lenses.

As for the sensor cleaning, I've done what dudemanppl did. Worked well.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> hmm, link to the step down rings?


http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search?atclk=Brand_Quality+Brands&ci=420&Ns=p_PRICE_2%7C0&N=4277997907+4208108452+4208108431+4208108442+4208108438+4291432579+4183191556

And with a modern lens, no coating would be taken off, that crap is baked on. Filters are good too, but I'm too cheap Asian for them and a coating scratch will do basically nothing to an image.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> hmm, link to the step down rings?
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search?atclk=Brand_Quality+Brands&ci=420&Ns=p_PRICE_2%7C0&N=4277997907+4208108452+4208108431+4208108442+4208108438+4291432579+4183191556
Click to expand...

Thanks dude!
Quote:


> And with a modern lens, no coating would be taken off, that crap is baked on. Filters are good too, but I'm too cheap Asian for them and a coating scratch will do basically nothing to an image.


That's what I thought too. And I actually may get some cheap UV filters for when I do video anyways, can't have bugs hitting the lens @130mph now can we? lol

Now...I don't need a flash with HSS, think the YN 565 is the best bet? Or maybe get two of something cheaper that can work with my camera off camera without buying triggers? :/ decisions, decisions lol


----------



## dudemanppl

Dude you've repped me everyday for the past week, looks sort of sketch... Get cheap filters for that, I wasn't expecting you to be driving at 130 with the camera...







My YN460IIs work fine, they MIGHT get a little weak in daylight (never tried) but just get two and tape em together if you need, and get light modifiers, straight flash will look bad even if off camera most of the time. And learn to use rim light or people/things will look weird.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Dude you've repped me everyday for the past week, looks sort of sketch...


lol, well that's what happens when people help me, I rep them...isn't that what I'm supposed to do? :rolleyes
Quote:


> Get cheap filters for that, I wasn't expecting you to be driving at 130 with the camera...


Yea, I'm going most likely be doing some race videos.








Quote:


> My YN460IIs work fine, they MIGHT get a little weak in daylight (never tried) but just get two and tape em together if you need, and get light modifiers, straight flash will look bad even if off camera most of the time. And learn to use rim light or people/things will look weird.


*Hmm, I think I'm settling on:*

YN 560 or two...or 3 lol
77mm ND filter you linked
$5 77mm and 72mm UV filters for when I need them for video
2 step up adapters for the 85 f/1.8 and the 70-200 f/4

Ok, so now I need some stands, brackets, umbrellas...lol


----------



## dudemanppl

Oh and if you don't have one already, get a cheap monopod, if you're buff enough, camera in one hand flash on a stick on the other, you'll get awesome pictures. Or you can give it to an assistant/friend/voice activated lightstand and have that move it around, much lighter than a lightstand.

Woah, the 560 is like a powerful 460II! Neato. And I'd recommend getting just one E-TTL flash cause you never know when you'll need to use it. Maybe 1 560 and 1 whatever the TTL one is called?

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/425220-REG/Impact_DFUMK_Digital_Flash_Umbrella_Mount.html
+
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/755442-REG/Manfrotto_MMC3_01_Compact_Photo_Movie_Aluminum_4.html

And the ND filter is also good for video. I can shoot wide open at 1/50th to keep it sexytime even at high noon.


----------



## foothead

Am I crazy or did the price of like every Kodak film just go way up? Ektachrome is up to $3.50/sheet now.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Oh and if you don't have one already, get a cheap monopod, if you're buff enough, camera in one hand flash on a stick on the other, you'll get awesome pictures. Or you can give it to an assistant/friend/voice activated lightstand and have that move it around, much lighter than a lightstand.


I'm good on getting a monopod atm, I can use a broom stick and duck tape if I need to.








Quote:


> Woah, the 560 is like a powerful 460II! Neato. And I'd recommend getting just one E-TTL flash cause you never know when you'll need to use it. Maybe 1 560 and 1 whatever the TTL one is called?


The YN 565. I'm not sure tho, is the ETTL necessary? I like shooting everything in manual. lol

Now there is one thing that keeps nudging me b/c I keep forgetting...I will not need a wireless trigger or do I? I can just use the on camera as a master to set off the remotes right? B/c there was something I saw about the YN 565 a while ago that made me want it over the 560 and I can't remember if it was just the Wireless ETTL.
Quote:


> http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/425220-REG/Impact_DFUMK_Digital_Flash_Umbrella_Mount.html
> +
> http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/755442-REG/Manfrotto_MMC3_01_Compact_Photo_Movie_Aluminum_4.html
> 
> And the ND filter is also good for video. I can shoot wide open at 1/50th to keep it sexytime even at high noon.


That is the stand set I saw b4, thanks for the link.


----------



## dudemanppl

Well I'd get triggers, 50 bucks for a set on ebay. You can trigger with the pop up flash but it WILL add to exposure even at minimum power. Almost forgot about that. But if you're on a tripod you can block the forward light with your hand and there is usually enough light bouncing around to trigger the off camera strobes.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Well I'd get triggers, 50 bucks for a set on ebay. You can trigger with the pop up flash but it WILL add to exposure even at minimum power. Almost forgot about that. But if you're on a tripod you can block the forward light with your hand and there is usually enough light bouncing around to trigger the off camera strobes.


What are some good cheapies?


----------



## dudemanppl

First picture taken by some teenage girl's new DSLR? NOPE, D700 and Zeiss 50 1.4. I don't understand people sometimes. These people who shoot digital and have Zeiss have the worst pictures. People who shoot digital and Leica are usually bad on FM at least. Film Leica and Zeiss shooters have the best pictures ever for some reason. Almost like they're actually good photographers or something?

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Yongnuo-RF-603-2-4GHz-Radio-Wireless-Remote-Flash-Trigger-C3-CANON-rf603-/190621913152?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2c61f39040#ht_2564wt_1396
Just get four, single transceivers cost 24 dollars for some reason while two cost 5 bucks more? CHINA Y U NO MAKE SENSE?


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> First picture taken by some teenage girl's new DSLR? NOPE, D700 and Zeiss 50 1.4. I don't understand people sometimes. These people who shoot digital and have Zeiss have the worst pictures. People who shoot digital and Leica are usually bad on FM at least. Film Leica and Zeiss shooters have the best pictures ever for some reason. Almost like they're actually good photographers or something?


That's probably because you have to really care about what you're doing to shoot film nowadays. The lazy people who just want crappy snapshots have all migrated to digital.

People who have no idea what they're doing seem to think that better gear = better pictures, so they'll go blow $3000 on pro gear to take photos of their kids and dogs. Real photographers can get get excellent pictures with pretty much anything, so they tend to be a bit more discerning about what they spend money on.


----------



## Sean Webster

I see a pug, that is an automatic 10/10 right there.








Quote:


> http://www.ebay.com/itm/Yongnuo-RF-603-2-4GHz-Radio-Wireless-Remote-Flash-Trigger-C3-CANON-rf603-/190621913152?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2c61f39040#ht_2564wt_1396
> Just get four, single transceivers cost 24 dollars for some reason while two cost 5 bucks more? CHINA Y U NO MAKE SENSE?


Aren't these the same? http://www.amazon.com/Yongnuo-RF-603-C1-Wireless-Transceiver/dp/B0050E7OSM
So whats the diff b/w the c1 and C3? c1 is just an old revision?

http://www.amazon.com/Yongnuo-Wireless-Trigger-Shutter-Transceiver/dp/B004YTA15W


----------



## dudemanppl

Honestly no clue, google time?


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Honestly no clue, google time?










It's Google time









*Edit:* Google = Win like always: http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=1067465


----------



## foothead

Shutter release cord is different according to the descriptions. The transceivers are both listed with the same model number and they appear identical, so I think it's safe to assume they are the same.

EDIT:

C3:










C1:


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> Shutter release cord is different according to the descriptions. The transceivers are both listed with the same model number and they appear identical, so I think it's safe to assume they are the same.
> 
> EDIT:
> 
> C3:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> C1:


So I should get the C1 right? Since I have the 1/8 mono plug? ehh, what is the plug even for? do I even need it?


----------



## foothead

The cord lets you use the transceivers to fire the shutter, or at least that's what I gathered from the descriptions. As far as your camera, I'm not totally sure. The C1 is probably right, but it's a stereo plug, not a mono one, so you may want to check on that. Chances are that they just used the stereo cable because it's what they had easy access to.

EDIT: I just googled it, and it's definitely the C1 that you need. The canon-branded 60D shutter releases also use that 1/8 stereo plug. The only thing you may have to worry about is the AF release, which is what that second contact would typically be used for. On my Olympus, the shutter will not fire unless the focus switch is already depressed. Given that the C3 version has that mono cable, there's a chance that the transceivers won't have the circuitry to close the AF switch, rendering the shutter release unusable.


----------



## dudemanppl

Mono/stereo doesn't really matter I think, first picture shows mono? Also in other news I can eye meter for f/1.4 ISO 100 pretty damn well and using that can calculate other exposures. Very happy. Damn the RokiEllYanItar 85 is great on ground glass, just realized I bought it in Nikon mount and I have an F to use it on, BEAUTY.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> That's probably because you have to really care about what you're doing to shoot film nowadays. The lazy people who just want crappy snapshots have all migrated to digital.
> 
> People who have no idea what they're doing seem to think that better gear = better pictures, so they'll go blow $3000 on pro gear to take photos of their kids and dogs. Real photographers can get get excellent pictures with pretty much anything, so they tend to be a bit more discerning about what they spend money on.


Yeah but you don't know about Zeiss unless you know a bunch about photogear... I rarely put pictures up on my flickr because I don't find many of my pictures all that great.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Mono/stereo doesn't really matter I think, first picture shows mono?


See my previous post. It depends on whether or not the camera requires the AF switch to be depressed before it'll trigger the shutter. That is what the third contact would traditionally be used for. Really the only way to know is to test it or find someone else who has tested it. All the official Canon releases use the stereo plug.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> That's probably because you have to really care about what you're doing to shoot film nowadays. The lazy people who just want crappy snapshots have all migrated to digital.
> 
> People who have no idea what they're doing seem to think that better gear = better pictures, so they'll go blow $3000 on pro gear to take photos of their kids and dogs. Real photographers can get get excellent pictures with pretty much anything, so they tend to be a bit more discerning about what they spend money on.
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah but you don't know about Zeiss unless you know a bunch about photogear... I rarely put pictures up on my flickr because I don't find many of my pictures all that great.
Click to expand...

The wonders of the internet... All you have to do is google search and you can easily figure out what the pros are using. Also there's that thing where people automatically equate expensive with high quality.

Does anyone make a shutter release cable with a solenoid and either a timer or remote trigger? It'd be pretty neat to be able to use the view camera for group pictures and such when I go on hikes.


----------



## Sean Webster

*So I think this is all good to go right?*

Impact Digital Flash Umbrella Mount Kit
Yongnuo YN-560 Speedlight Flash for Canon
Yongnuo RF-603 C1 2.4GHz Wireless Flash Trigger/Wireless Shutter Release Transceiver Kit for Canon
77mm Fader ND Mark II
Quality Brands 67mm-77mm Step-Up Ring (Lens to Filter)
Quality Brands 58mm-77mm Step-Up Ring (Lens to Filter)
Zeikos ZE-UV77 77mm Multi-Coated UV Filter
Zeikos ZE-UV72 72mm Multi-Coated UV Filter
*Total:* ~$420

Anything else you can think of?


----------



## foothead

Looks good to me, but then again, I've never done any portraiture or studio work, so I'm definitely not an expert at these things.

I wouldn't be caught dead using one of those ND faders though. I've seen way too many shots ruined by them. Get a proper set of filters if you're going to be doing any critical work, especially if you're going to be using wide angle lenses.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> Looks good to me, but then again, I've never done any portraiture or studio work, so I'm definitely not an expert at these things.
> 
> I wouldn't be caught dead using one of those ND faders though. I've seen way too many shots ruined by them. Get a proper set of filters if you're going to be doing any critical work, especially if you're going to be using wide angle lenses.


It is only a little portrait stuff for friends, mostly it will be for experimenting with light and cars and...I got a ton of ideas now.

Can you show some examples?


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> These people who shoot digital and have Zeiss have the worst pictures. People who shoot digital and Leica are usually bad on FM at least. Film Leica and Zeiss shooters have the best pictures ever for some reason. Almost like they're actually good photographers or something?


hey...that hurts....u aint got to call me out like that...

nd faders are ok, if you plan to shoot crop. but once u go on FF wide they are worthless. i get maybe 4 stops with mine at 24mm anymore and i get the X pattern.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Can you show some examples?


I'll see if I can find some. Most of the time they don't even specify that one was used, but it's fairly apparent. The way they work is by stacking polarizers, so it's obviously going to do some weird things to lighting, color transmission, etc.

EDIT: Found a couple. These are more extreme cases, but they should give you an idea of what you're dealing with.



















So, yeah. Get some proper ND filters. I've had excellent luck with Tiffen. Avoid B+W for these though. I used to have one of theirs and it shifted the colors pretty severely.


----------



## dudemanppl

I love my fader though...









It WILL flare like a ***** pointed straight at the sun though, especially at higher ND levels (this was maxed out). I do have a feeling my lack of IR filter contributed to that looking funky too.
Full res wide open 35L, not much detail lost at all : http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5236/5852330074_7912113f2c_o.jpg

The above only happens when you go above the max ND, and you'll be able to see it in the VF, so just dial it down a tiny notch and it'll be all gone.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> hey...that hurts....u aint got to call me out like that...
> nd faders are ok, if you plan to shoot crop. but once u go on FF wide they are worthless. i get maybe 4 stops with mine at 24mm anymore and i get the X pattern.


Heh not you. I meant the stupid elitist MF Zeiss shooters who are like MICRO CONTRAST YEAH HOLY CRAP! Heres the post right after that image:
Quote:


> One would expect that shot above was from a macro lens! You bring up the issue of marked differences in resolving power and contrast at different f stops. The problem I have with deciding on lenses is that the numbers on rating sites do not necessarily correlate with their perceived quality. On Photozone's site, they state up front that they are unable to rate micro contrast (or total contrast for that matter) and quality of bokeh. The Zeiss 35 mm F2 actually doesn't have particularly high MTF values, but it has the Zeiss look. Technically the 50 mm MP has slightly lower resolution in the center compared with the lowly Nikon 50 mm F1.8 at medium f stops. However, some of the most beautiful photos I've seen on FM site were those of Lofoten done with a Zeiss 50 MP with almost total absence of atmospheric haze.


What. Theres more to photography than sharpness, and that picture isn't even any sharper than a kit lens. I don't get people. This guy even says that Zeiss lenses suck but they have a look, these photos look the same to me its so enraging.


----------



## foothead

Yikes, well there's another reason not to use one.

Do you have any photos taken with a wider lens with the sky in the frame? That's when things normally start getting screwed up. No matter what density it's set at, there are going to be the standard polarizer artifacts.


----------



## Sean Webster

What would be a good density to grab? Can you stack them? like get a .6+ a .9 to make a .15? and so on?

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search?atclk=Circular+Sizes_77mm&ci=114&N=4256189595+4291162308+4294955264


----------



## foothead

I'd probably go with a 4 stop and an 8 stop. I suppose you can stack them, but it's usually not a good idea to because you'll get all kinds of reflections, and any optical flaws will be magnified.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search?atclk=Brand_Quality+Brands&ci=420&Ns=p_PRICE_2%7C0&N=4277997907+4208108452+4208108431+4208108442+4208108438+4291432579+4183191556
> And with a modern lens, no coating would be taken off, that crap is baked on. Filters are good too, but I'm too cheap Asian for them and a coating scratch will do basically nothing to an image.


I wasn't implying the coatng would be removed or damaged, as I'm not qualified to make that claim. I just don't feel comfortable doing so.


----------



## dudemanppl

I'll try it with the Tok 17 when I get the filter back... TBH, I've never used it for anything other than flash work and 17 ain't that great for it. But now I want to do an environmental portrait with it now. When I do use the filter though, the lens its on is usually wide open or up to 2/3rds stop down, nothing more. I are DOF whore. I wanna take pictures and stuff with it now, NEED THAT VBML.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> I'd probably go with a 4 stop and an 8 stop. I suppose you can stack them, but it's usually not a good idea to because you'll get all kinds of reflections, and any optical flaws will be magnified.


Soooo, with tiffen, what the hell do the .x numbers mean? can't they just say the damn stop deduction? lol

And I just realized i need a camera bag now.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> When I do use the filter though, the lens its on is usually wide open or up to 2/3rds stop down, nothing more. I are DOF whore. I wanna take pictures and stuff with it now, NEED THAT VBML.


You should seriously get a view camera. Even with relatively small apertures, you can use scheimpflug to get some really neat DOF effects. I always use it to line the DOF up with the subject, but the opposite is cool too.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> I'd probably go with a 4 stop and an 8 stop. I suppose you can stack them, but it's usually not a good idea to because you'll get all kinds of reflections, and any optical flaws will be magnified.
> 
> 
> 
> Soooo, with tiffen, what the hell do the .x numbers mean? can't they just say the damn stop deduction? lol
> 
> And I just realized i need a camera bag now.
Click to expand...

0.1 = 1/3 stop reduction. so 1 stop = 0.3, 2 stops = 0.6, 3 stops = 0.9, etc.


----------



## sub50hz

Man, when I am sober I'm gonna hella rage at that Zeiss elitist nonsense. For now, I'm going to eat this BBQ Chicken enchilada and watch Netflix until I fall asleep. GOOD NETS.


----------



## dudemanppl

Sub sometimes I love you so much. No **** though... Unless you want it that way.


----------



## sub50hz

Welp.

Total number of chipped/lost teeth from hockey: 4

Total number of chipped/lost teeth from hockey and eating enchiladas at 2am: 5

Great job/what a human/etc.


----------



## foothead

What the...? How does one chip teeth eating an enchilada?


----------



## dudemanppl

How drunk are you? Is that really an enchilada? And I'm too dumb to use 4x5.


----------



## sub50hz

When your seemingly sleeping puppy jumps at the container of food while you've got a fork full of delicious food in your mouth, biting down and reflex pulling the food away means that metal > tooth. It hurts real bad and I would love to be inebriated to the point where I don't care, although the autocorrect on this ipad is making me look pretty good. If that doesn't make sense that's ok.

Ciffs: I BIT A METAL FORK.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> 0.1 = 1/3 stop reduction. so 1 stop = 0.3, 2 stops = 0.6, 3 stops = 0.9, etc.


So say i needed 1/8000 for a shot...
> 1/4000 = 1 stop less
> 1/2000 = 2 stops less
> 1/1000 = 3 stops less
> 1/500 = 4 stops less
> 1/250 = 5 stops less
> 1/125 = 6 stops less
> 1/60 = 7 stops less
> 1/30 = 8 stops less

That right?

So this is a 4 stop filter http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/808079-REG/Tiffen_77ND12_77mm_Neutral_Density_ND.html

And this is the most they have,well tiffen at least....7 stop: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/807647-REG/Tiffen_W77ND21_77mm_Solid_Neutral_Density.html

So grab both? So it really isn't hard to see though the lens like that and have the camera focus properly with a ND filter? lol


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> How drunk are you? Is that really an enchilada? And I'm too dumb to use 4x5.


GX680? Or you could always go with one of the medium format view cameras or a small press camera and a rollfilm back.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> How drunk are you?


Well, I'm pretty sure the girl I was just hitting on at El Gallo was like 19. If I wake up tomorrow and I remember differently, I'll just go right ahead and call Chris Hansen myself.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> 0.1 = 1/3 stop reduction. so 1 stop = 0.3, 2 stops = 0.6, 3 stops = 0.9, etc.
> 
> 
> 
> So say i needed 1/8000 for a shot...
> > 1/4000 = 1 stop less
> > 1/2000 = 2 stops less
> > 1/1000 = 3 stops less
> > 1/500 = 4 stops less
> > 1/250 = 5 stops less
> > 1/125 = 6 stops less
> > 1/60 = 7 stops less
> > 1/30 = 8 stops less
> 
> That right?
Click to expand...

Yes, that's right.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> So this is a 4 stop filter http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/808079-REG/Tiffen_77ND12_77mm_Neutral_Density_ND.html
> 
> And this is the most they have,well tiffen at least....7 stop: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/807647-REG/Tiffen_W77ND21_77mm_Solid_Neutral_Density.html
> 
> So grab both? So it really isn't hard to see though the lens like that and have the camera focus properly with a ND filter? lol


Yeah, I suppose that'd work just fine.

You'll have to prefocus the camera before putting the filter on. ND filters tend to screw the metering up.

Anyway, I'm off to bed. Night, everyone.


----------



## Sean Webster

Metering doesn't matter, I can just use the histogram and manual and adjust for the next pic as needed.

I'm starting to think about focusing issues now though. Like focusing, moving an inch or two when putting the filter on and the image gets soft. :/


----------



## dudemanppl

Yeah, thats why I use the fader.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Yeah, thats why I use the fader.


This is getting so annoying! lol

Well...I got to sleep, I have to think this over...I may just grab the flashes only with the stands @ first.


----------



## dudemanppl

Just get the fader, its really quite good.

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/viewprofile.php?Action=viewprofile&username=dudemanppl
This makes sense to you guys right? Decided I'm adding three MF Nikon lenses because its 175 for all three, can't pass that up.


----------



## foothead

I'd consider it to be more "usable" than "good." But then again, I'm a bit obsessive about image quality.

Finally got around to scanning those three rolls of ektar I shot in Colorado. A few of these photos are pretty interesting.























































And my personal favorite:


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Any good pics?


Don't know yet. We develop the rolls on Wednesday. I doubt it though, as this was just an exercise for us to see the effects of aperture and shutter speed on exposure.


----------



## sub50hz

If there's one thing I hate more than going to the mall, it's going to the mall while hungover. At least I found some cool Obey stuff on sale.

Oh also, I stopped at Ritz for lulz, and the location near me is no longer allowed to sell Canon. They are pricks.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Any good pics?
> 
> 
> 
> Don't know yet. We develop the rolls on Wednesday. I doubt it though, as this was just an exercise for us to see the effects of aperture and shutter speed on exposure.
Click to expand...

Ah, cool...you may get something good.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> If there's one thing I hate more than going to the mall, it's going to the mall while hungover. At least I found some cool Obey stuff on sale.
> 
> Oh also, I stopped at Ritz for lulz, and *the location near me is no longer allowed to sell Canon*. They are pricks.


i went to a place called Wolf Camera before and they were no longer allowed to sell canon either, what is up with that?


----------



## sub50hz

Wolf and Ritz are one in the same, I believe. They are terrible retailers who stock nothing but overpriced Sony and Nikon bodies and glass, and a pretty mediocre line of bags and accessories-- even though they had Manfrotto stuff in there now, which was kinda surprising until I remembered Best Buy carries their line too.


----------



## dudemanppl

Using spackle on the M6 top worked surprisingly well, lets see how it holds up though...


----------



## foothead

Why are you painting the leica? Seems like that would destrog resale value.

I just won an ebay auction for a big box of large format crap. Awesome.


----------



## dudemanppl

I'm thinking the value will stay about the same, but I'm not too sure. Its going to look pretty decent.

Took a few pictures then later went back and confirmed exposure with the 5DII, eye metered within a third stop...


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> If there's one thing I hate more than going to the mall, it's going to the mall while hungover. At least I found some cool Obey stuff on sale.


Funny you should say that, it's one of my favourite things to do when hungover. We generally just go, eat at the food court, then pointlessly amble round shops and never buy anything.


----------



## nuclearjock

If you see one of these at a garage sale or pawn shop buy it!!! Feels good to be back in MF land again. Very sharp @ 1.8, you start bleeding @ f/2.8. Paid $375 for mine, the 105 f/2.5 AI-S is just as sharp and can be had for ~$130.


----------



## foothead

Also won this earlier: http://www.ebay.com/itm/200702769389?ssPageName=STRK:MEWNX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1439.l2649#ht_500wt_1413


----------



## sub50hz

Cracked ground glass and speeds off? No thanks.


----------



## foothead

I'm going to remove the focal plane shutter entirely (it's pretty useless nowadays) and new ground glass costs about $20.


----------



## dudemanppl

Haha, me and my friend are gonna split a CPS Platinum account to try out all the lenses. Plus the 60% is useful for me, need to repair a few things.


----------



## MistaBernie

Yeah, I'm actually thinking of signing up too. I dont _think_ I qualify for Platinum, but I also dont NEED platinum.

HAHAHA, I have _exactly_ 50 points if I wanna go Platinum. Classic.


----------



## silvrr

I can't find the thread that I posted in awhile ago about insurance but this is why you have it.


----------



## Sean Webster




----------



## MistaBernie

omg, what happened?


----------



## silvrr

Long story short (since I accidentally hit the back button after typing the long version) left it on top of a car and it fell off and got ran over by a truck.


----------



## MistaBernie

that's gotta hurt.

---

I just made the call. $20,000 worth of gear coverage + $1 mil in liability coverage for $400/year. I think it's worth it. A dollar a day keeps the thieves away.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Yeah, I'm actually thinking of signing up too. I dont _think_ I qualify for Platinum, but I also dont NEED platinum.
> HAHAHA, I have _exactly_ 50 points if I wanna go Platinum. Classic.


Get gold, its worth it.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *silvrr*
> 
> I can't find the thread that I posted in awhile ago about insurance but this is why you have it.


Damn, nice one. What insurance are you using for this? My homeowner's insurance covers theft and fire damage of all my camera gear, but it doesn't cover accidental damage (caused by me). I recently broke my 430EXII when I dropped my camera and the flash hit the ground first (thankfully, better that than landing on the lens or body).


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*
> 
> Damn, nice one. What insurance are you using for this? My homeowner's insurance covers theft and fire damage of all my camera gear, but it doesn't cover accidental damage (caused by me). I recently broke my 430EXII when I dropped my camera and the flash hit the ground first (thankfully, better that than landing on the lens or body).


Its under my renters insurance with Allstate.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *silvrr*
> 
> Its under my renters insurance with Allstate.


So yours covers accidental damage? That was the one thing my USAA homeowner's doesn't cover (last I checked).


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*
> 
> So yours covers accidental damage? That was the one thing my USAA homeowner's doesn't cover (last I checked).


Yes, I double checked that prior to starting it.


----------



## MistaBernie

Yeah, homeowners only covers $250 worth of gear for me. I'm getting a BOP (Business Owners Policy) via Commerce (since State Farm wont sell insurance in MA). $400/yr but it includes $20k in gear coverage, and $1 million in liability insurance (which means I can _legally_ shoot portraits in state-managed parks, etc). And yes, you can 'take pictures' but if you're there for a job aka commercial purposes, you're supposed to carry $1 mil in liability insurance.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *silvrr*
> 
> Yes, I double checked that prior to starting it.


Well then, I need to re-check my coverage. Now that I think about it, I may be thinking of when I had State Farm.


----------



## Sean Webster

Should I go for this?

http://miami.craigslist.org/pbc/ele/2801622007.html

I think I may for $250 I can sell the lens and only pay like $120 for the flash. Or maybe just get the flash separate.


----------



## iandroo888

anyone with western mutual for homeowners insurance? i wanna see how their coverage on it would be. probably pick up one or two more lenses or at least upgraded body before i consider


----------



## dudemanppl

I am really tempted to get a 1DIV or at least a 1DIII, they're just too nice to shoot with.


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Should I go for this?
> http://miami.craigslist.org/pbc/ele/2801622007.html
> I think I may for $250 I can sell the lens and only pay like $120 for the flash. Or maybe just get the flash separate.


I'd do it.

Even if you sell the lens for $100, a $150 430EX II is a good deal.


----------



## dudemanppl

Ho crap, white M6 top looks way too beautiful, needs a LOT more coats though. Also the Filipino kid's budget is going up 1k every week, what the father?

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showpost.php?p=13796193&postcount=10
Oh my god I'm going to bash his head in.


----------



## ljason8eg

I've been following that a little lol. Kinda feel bad for him.


----------



## MistaBernie

Yeah, I seriously don't bother anymore, though he needs to be careful. He does certain things on that forum that are report worthy and could get him banned (at least two instances of cyber-begging and posting images that aren't his in the same thread).


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *silvrr*
> 
> I can't find the thread that I posted in awhile ago about insurance but this is why you have it.


That's going to hurt.

I'm really lucky in that my camera and lenses are covered under my home insurance, even when i'm out of the house. Quite a large excess (deductible) though.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Hey guys, need some suggestions!

So, Valentine's Day is in two weeks, and with exams that same week, I need to start working on a gift now. The last time I was in SD with my gf, we took some photos together with her borrowing my camera. I was thinking of getting prints of her favorites and framing them for her.

So, any chance anyone here has suggestions on where I can get prints online? I live in Merced so the only local places here are WalMart. And for that matter - any suggestions on good places to buy photo frames from online?

Much appreciated!

Here's to hoping she doesn't follow me on OCN. Derps.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*
> 
> Hey guys, need some suggestions!
> 
> So, Valentine's Day is in two weeks, and with exams that same week, I need to start working on a gift now. The last time I was in SD with my gf, we took some photos together with her borrowing my camera. I was thinking of getting prints of her favorites and framing them for her.
> 
> So, any chance anyone here has suggestions on where I can get prints online? I live in Merced so the only local places here are WalMart. And for that matter - any suggestions on good places to buy photo frames from online?
> 
> Much appreciated!
> 
> Here's to hoping she doesn't follow me on OCN. Derps.


For prints there are Mpix, Bayphoto, AdoramaPix, etc...got a costco near you? lol

As for framing IDK.


----------



## mz-n10

costco small prints are on fuji paper, dont remember what the big prints are (could be kodak).

if you have time i would suggest adorama photobooks. they look great and are fairly cheap (8x8 12 pages are like 30 bucks)

i usually just frame photos myself. pick up a frame + mat at ikea then cut the mat to fit the photo.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

I've a Costco near me but no membership







And I won't be heading back to my parents' anytime between then and now so I can't use their membership. Going to give those print services a good look.

And thanks for the Ikea idea, mz. Going to see if they have those in stock online.


----------



## makecoldplayhistory

Pretty new to photography having got my first 'proper' camera for Christmas (Canon 500D).

These are the first three pics I'm happy enough with to share. It's taken a while to simply begin to use F stops / ISO / exposure length etc let alone get a 'photographer's eye'.

Anyway, these were taken from my balcony with my post-Christmas present to myself. A WEIFENG WF-591 Ballhead tripod










Brutal thoughts / critiques please







It's the only way I'll get better!

Thanks

f6.3 15 secs ISO 100 18mm


----------



## dudemanppl

Reincarnated, when you mean printing you mean like a few small prints or like REALLY BIG HANG ON WALL printing? Also, I think I'll get a 1DIV if I can find a good deal on one. Yess.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Reincarnated, when you mean printing you mean like a few small prints or like REALLY BIG HANG ON WALL printing? Also, I think I'll get a 1DIV if I can find a good deal on one. Yess.


A few small prints. I'm thinking of a few 5x7s, maybe one 8x10 or 8x12.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *makecoldplayhistory*
> 
> Pretty new to photography having got my first 'proper' camera for Christmas (Canon 500D).
> These are the first three pics I'm happy enough with to share. It's taken a while to simply begin to use F stops / ISO / exposure length etc let alone get a 'photographer's eye'.
> Anyway, these were taken from my balcony with my post-Christmas present to myself. A WEIFENG WF-591 Ballhead tripod
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Brutal thoughts / critiques please
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's the only way I'll get better!
> Thanks
> f6.3 15 secs ISO 100 18mm
> [IM]http://i821.photobucket.com/albums/zz139/makecoldplayhistory/IMG_1023.jpg[IM]http://i821.photobucket.com/albums/zz139/makecoldplayhistory/IMG_1030.jpg[IMG][IM]http://i821.photobucket.com/albums/zz139/makecoldplayhistory/IMG_1031.jpg[IMG[/URL]][/QUOTE]
> 
> I like them, way better than the photos I took when I got my first DSLR. They could do with a bit of work in post processing though.
> 
> A wider angle lens should probably be your next major purchase though, if you're going to take photos like that a lot.


----------



## makecoldplayhistory

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*
> 
> I like them, way better than the photos I took when I got my first DSLR. They could do with a bit of work in post processing though.
> A wider angle lens should probably be your next major purchase though, if you're going to take photos like that a lot.


Thanks. I didn't want to photoshop them before posting them. I do too much of that kind of thing in my day job.

I would like a wide angle lens... broke though. Having a baby in a month or so and the DSLR for me and iPad for my wife at Christmas were the last big purchases for a while







(also desperately saving to buy our first mortgage free house in the next 5 years).

That kind of photography doesn't interest me specifically. As I said, I'm still trying out a bit of everything. I macro lens is on my wishlist but it'll be years before that purchase!


----------



## biatchi

Did you knock the tripod in the last shot?


----------



## makecoldplayhistory

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *biatchi*
> 
> Did you knock the tripod in the last shot?


possibly. I was playing poker all night and taking photos when we had a break. I was pretty hammered by the end. The lemonchello had been brought out


----------



## Boyboyd

Ahhh, i wondered why you got so high up. I figured you must be in an apartment.


----------



## MistaBernie

@R3i,

If you actually give BayPhotos a shot, let me know how things turn out. I'm thinking about ordering a handful of stuff from them for demo purposes anyways but if you give them a shot and they're terribad, I'll know to look elsewhere.

Also, 5Dii ordering is happening imminently. The question is, do I get the 24-105 kit or not. If I DONT use the lens I can still sell it as BNIB and make back ~$200 on the spot..


----------



## makecoldplayhistory

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*
> 
> Ahhh, i wondered why you got so high up. I figured you must be in an apartment.


Yeah - 41st floor. I'm waiting for one of those beautiful Asian orangey-pink sunsets to go up to the heli-pad and attempt a panorama.


----------



## MistaBernie

Hey dudeman..

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=1143899

you owe me if you buy it. lol


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *makecoldplayhistory*
> 
> I was playing poker all night and taking photos when we had a break.


_Good, good._
Quote:


> I was pretty hammered by the end. The lemonchello had been brought out


You're *fired.*


----------



## foothead

http://www.adorama.com/VOTPH.html Should I? It'd replace the stock head on my vanguard VT-126. The QR plate isn't held tightly enough, so the camera wobbles all over the place.

GoneTomorrow, can you add a 4x5 Anniversary Speed Graphic, a Graflex Grafmatic, and eight more 4x5 film holders to my gear list? Thanks.


----------



## sub50hz

Bah, tried to circumvent ordering a 120 back for the RB online, and both Helix and Central only have super rotten backs for way more than Keh has them on BGN. Bummer. At least these 25 rolls of 220 should last a couple months, although I've been shooting the Bronica a lot lately.


----------



## Sean Webster

Well, I need some film for my dad's SLR, where should I get it and what kind should I get? I have only used iso 400 Kodak stuff.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Well, I need some film for my dad's SLR, where should I get it and what kind should I get? I have only used iso 400 Kodak stuff.


Adorama usually has the best prices.

Try Neopan Acros, Delta 100, HP5+, and Tri-X. If you're into color, all of fuji's E-6 films are excellent, as is Kodak portra and ektachrome. Ektar isn't bad, but it's definitely not my favorite. I'd usually rather shoot velvia 100f if I want anything that saturated.

I think I need to make some sort of handle for this Speed Graphic. It's like trying to hold onto a cinderblock.


----------



## laboitenoire

I find B&H and Adorama very competitive on film prices, especially on the popular stuff.

I'm experimenting, but currently I'm shooting Delta 100, HP5+, and Tri-X 400. Also have some Delta 3200 lying around and a roll of Portra 800.

My dad used to shoot crap tons of Ektachrome back in the early 90s. Always loved the look of that stuff.

On another note, I just developed my first roll of film ever today. Delta 100 in T-Max for 7 minutes. Looks pretty good. It wasn't as hard/nerve-wracking as I thought it would be. Currently scanning the negs on my crappy HP scanner to see how they turned out and see if I need to redo the assignment.


----------



## foothead

If you don't already have one, pick up an enlarger. I see 35mm ones go for $25 or less occasionally on craigslist. It'll give you much better prints than an inkjet.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Well, I need some film for my dad's SLR, where should I get it and what kind should I get? I have only used iso 400 Kodak stuff.
> 
> 
> 
> Adorama usually has the best prices.
> 
> Try Neopan Acros, Delta 100, HP5+, and Tri-X. If you're into color, all of fuji's E-6 films are excellent, as is Kodak portra and ektachrome. Ektar isn't bad, but it's definitely not my favorite. I'd usually rather shoot velvia 100f if I want anything that saturated.
> 
> I think I need to make some sort of handle for this Speed Graphic. It's like trying to hold onto a cinderblock.
Click to expand...

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> I find B&H and Adorama very competitive on film prices, especially on the popular stuff.
> 
> I'm experimenting, but currently I'm shooting Delta 100, HP5+, and Tri-X 400. Also have some Delta 3200 lying around and a roll of Portra 800.
> 
> My dad used to shoot crap tons of Ektachrome back in the early 90s. Always loved the look of that stuff.
> 
> On another note, I just developed my first roll of film ever today. Delta 100 in T-Max for 7 minutes. Looks pretty good. It wasn't as hard/nerve-wracking as I thought it would be. Currently scanning the negs on my crappy HP scanner to see how they turned out and see if I need to redo the assignment.


Thanks, I'll check them out


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> If you don't already have one, pick up an enlarger. I see 35mm ones go for $25 or less occasionally on craigslist. It'll give you much better prints than an inkjet.


This is just for kicks. We have like ten Besler 4x5 enlargers in our studio.

EDIT: Here're the negs. I apologize for the crappy scan, but like I said this is just for the purposes of showing the world that I know how to develop film now... Looks much better in person.


Test scan by laboitenoire, on Flickr


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Well, I need some film for my dad's SLR, where should I get it and what kind should I get? I have only used iso 400 Kodak stuff.


I won't say I'm a loyalist, but I only really use 2 films consistently -- Portra 400 and Delta 400. Porta in the NC variant (good luck finding any) has that look that so many digital shooters chase. It's not for everyone, but as the name would suggest, it is, far and away, the best color film for portraiture. I'm not a fan of Fuji films, although Provia 400X is probably the exception to that. It's also very expensive to shoot in anything but 35mm, mostly because labs charge insane prices around here to mount chromes.


----------



## foothead

Sub, have you ever tried fuji astia? It look is quite similar to the old portra nc emulsions, but it's E6 process.


----------



## sub50hz

Astia looks a little bit more like the VC emulstion, a tad too saturated and overly contrasty, just like most other Fuji films. Provia is about as subdued as their line gets, which is why I sort of enjoy it.


----------



## dudemanppl

That 1DIV a few pages back, so ugly though... Need money... I think I'll stick with the 5DII and get it later.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Astia looks a little bit more like the VC emulstion, a tad too saturated and overly contrasty, just like most other Fuji films. Provia is about as subdued as their line gets, which is why I sort of enjoy it.


? Astia has lower saturation and less contrast than Provia. Maybe you're thinking of Velvia 100f?

EDIT:










Source


----------



## sub50hz

Maybe. In any case, all that picture did was remind me how much I hate FujiPro. So awful.


----------



## dudemanppl

When did bernie get a 5DII?


----------



## sub50hz

Why havent we seen that mammoth Pentax in your tiny hands? It amuses me.

Also, sort of stumbed upon a super mint Plaubel 6x7 rangefinder today. Pretty cool.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Maybe. In any case, all that picture did was remind me how much I hate FujiPro. So awful.


Oh gosh, yes. I shot some pro 400h a while back, and it felt like I was using cheap 1990s drug store film.

I would like to see a Pentax 67 mirror shot. Those always amuse me.


----------



## sub50hz

Funny you should mention cheapo film, some CVS in a super sketchy area here has Kodak Gold 200 for two(!) dollars per 5-pack. Maybe i will pay someone to go there for me in the daytime, because going after dark would most certainly require being a Latin King.


----------



## dudemanppl

Says it'll be here on the 6th. Gonna do some shootin'.


----------



## foothead

So... I guess I'm gonna need some fast films once I get this speed graphic back together. What do y'all recommend? I know HP5+ and Tmax 400 are good, but that's really all I've ever used above ISO 100.

EDIT: Looks like the only other options are fomapan 400 and Tri-X 320, and the only color film is portra 400. So which one of these pushes best?


----------



## dudemanppl

Film so big you can push to anything. Just might be too contrasty for you. And when I do my selfshot I'll try to pucker my lips like facebook wimmens.


----------



## foothead

I think you underestimate the size of this camera.


----------



## mz-n10

so i borrowed my friends 720nm IR filter....

took a few shot then realized that i have no clue how to post process a IR shot.....



flipped the red and blue channels, auto levels, messed with the saturation....is there something im missing or did i just take a NOT SO good IR shot?


----------



## dudemanppl

Could be worse. I can handhold 300 2.8s for a whole day, eh.

http://www.fedex.com/Tracking?language=english&cntry_code=us&tracknumbers=0588%201931%205239%20084
FRIDAAAAAAAAAAY.


----------



## MistaBernie

5D2 will be here in a couple of hours. I'll be doing unboxing photos with Nifty!


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> FRIDAAAAAAAAAAY.


My replacement gear is coming Friday too! It says by end of day but usually it gets here around noon. *Crosses Fingers*


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> 5D2 will be here in a couple of hours. I'll be doing unboxing photos with Nifty!


If my experience is anything, the time will go a lot quicker if you do something other than F5 the tracking page, lol.

Do post pics when it arrives though.


----------



## MistaBernie

haha, i'm working from home so I'm keeping plenty busy. I had the idea of cleaning up my office a bit (well, in reality, cleaning the closet in my office) but I feel bad that I stayed home from work to sign for a package that I didn't want to sit at UPS over the weekend in likely cold, unsecured warehouse.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

I really, really want a UWA for my camera, but I think the only way I can make that happen is sell my dear old 135L. I rarely use it, but when I do use it, I feel glad to own it. Oh well, it has to go!

I really want the 16-35 f/2.8 or the 14/2.8, but realistically it'll probably be the 17-40. I wish that FF had the same selection for UWA that crop has.


----------



## MistaBernie

I kind of want a decent quality fisheye for my kit, but I dont want to spend ridiculous Canon prices..


----------



## xxrabid93

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*
> 
> I really, really want a UWA for my camera, but I think the only way I can make that happen is sell my dear old 135L. I rarely use it, but when I do use it, I feel glad to own it. Oh well, it has to go!
> I really want the 16-35 f/2.8 or the 14/2.8, but realistically it'll probably be the 17-40. I wish that FF had the same selection for UWA that crop has.


What about the Samyang/Rokinon 14mm 2.8? Ya it's manual focus, but at that wide, does it really matter that much? And it does have that wonky distortion, but PTLens does have a profile for fixing it if you need it.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> I kind of want a decent quality fisheye for my kit, but I dont want to spend ridiculous Canon prices..


Samyang/Rokinon 8mm 3.5 fisheye? Manual, yes, but at 8mm do you even really have to focus if you stop down?









Oh, i just suggested both of you Samyang/Rokinon lenses. Now i look like i'm biased towards them probably.







But in all seriousness, even though they are manual focus, i have seen awesome shots with pretty much all Samyang/Rokinon lenses, and for the prices, you can't beat em.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *silvrr*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> FRIDAAAAAAAAAAY.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My replacement gear is coming Friday too! It says by end of day but usually it gets here around noon. *Crosses Fingers*
Click to expand...

Wow, my lenses and flash are coming Friday as well!


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Wow, my lenses and flash are coming Friday as well!


wow, big gear day for this group.


----------



## sub50hz

DMP, you still have the Fuji? I did some ninja sales last week and was thinking about maybe grabbing it for myself. Hit a brotha up.


----------



## dudemanppl

Yeah, course its still here. I was saving it for you babe.

EDIT: Oh my god that was the worst 2,000th post ever made by anyone ever...

And gone, I have a Tok 16-28 I'll let go for 700 shipped PP'ed. Its actually really damn great, but the 17 prime which took me a year to find is very small and... soft







. But its taken me a year so dealwithit.gif.

680 out of 760 pictures in LR are f/1.4 or below. Jesus. And this is only my Windows 7 drive, my Vista one has many more.










Dees mah film stash.

OH. MY. GOD.

http://www.ecn-2.com/vs/
http://www.ecn-2.com/vs/
http://www.ecn-2.com/vs/
http://www.ecn-2.com/vs/
http://www.ecn-2.com/vs/

ISO 12800 probably very feasable, that 3200 was with it developed at 400, so 12800 with noise like the D4 is possible. Also this is what Portra is based on, but this is like Portra on crack. The good crack too. 130 for a 400' roll, which is about 70 rolls of film. Add bulk loader and 25 cassettes for 40 bucks, and you're gold. But you do have to dev by yourself since it would screw up a C41 machine really bad, but its worth it for 2 dollar rolls of basically Portra 50-12800. I need money to try some of this...


----------



## foothead

Wow, that looks awesome. Do you develop it in C-41 chemicals, or is there a special process?

I spent the last three hours sawing up my new Speed Graphic. It's actually a usable camera now!


----------



## dudemanppl

Oh god, what? Everything you have is so ghetto.







You dev in C41, but you need to wash it in a bath of saltwater first to get the crap off the film since its mainly for video work. You can also rig it up for 120/220 if you have enough smarts which I wish I did.


----------



## foothead

Well, I did two things. First was to saw the tracks off the front standard so the camera would be able to have shift.










Second was to cut down the hole for the lensboard so the recessed Graphic View boards would fit.










How could it be used with medium format cameras? I just did a google search, and it seems that 7cm motion picture stock isn't normally produced by Kodak anymore. It'd have to be special ordered. The only thing that could be done with a medium format camera would be shooting 35mm for panoramas.

If you could actually get some, Pentax and Hasselblad both made backs for 70mm film. No rigging required.


----------



## swindle

Cool poster man. I love Pink Floyd.


----------



## MistaBernie

Just an FYI, Canon has dropped some of the prices on their refurbs (mostly Rebels, but you can now get a T1i with a kit lens for in the ballpark of $383 Plus tax and shipping).

Also, Gone, could you add a 5D Mark II to my gear list please? Thanks!


----------



## foothead

So I got my box of random large format crap. This Grafmatic holder is seriously awesome. I think I'm gonna have to get more like this. There are also some very old wooden film holders, some of which are loaded with exposed film. I think I'll try developing it next time I process B&W. Four sheets are Panatomic X and six are Kodak "enfred" safety film (it seriously says enfred on one of the holders). Exposed September 11, 1963 assuming they were all done on the same date.


----------



## MistaBernie

Man, how would you even go about developing those safely? I have to imagine things have changed a bit in the last 49 years..


----------



## foothead

I'll just soup it in D76 for a while. Black and white film really hasn't changed much since the late 1800s. The emulsions got better, yes, but the technology is still pretty much the same.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Man, how would you even go about developing those safely? I have to imagine things have changed a bit in the last 49 years..


Probably no danger. They just might be grainy and low-contrast as all hell if the emulsion has survived this long.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> I'll just soup it in D76 for a while. Black and white film really hasn't changed much since the late 1800s. The emulsions got better, yes, but the technology is still pretty much the same.


Ain't that the truth. My photo instructor says he still has boxes of Kodalith and Kodak Aerial Infrared in his deep freezer that date back the late 50s...


----------



## sub50hz

This makes me lol at my 10-year old stash of Portra 800, which I've discovered looks real good if shot and dev'd at 400.


----------



## Sean Webster

*Time to update my gear list!*

Canon 60D
Canon EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM
Canon EF 70-200mm f/4 L USM
Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM
Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro
Canon Speedlite 430EX II
Manfrotto 055XPROB
Manfrotto 498RC2
No more YN-565...and add a space in my name too lol.


IMG_8794.jpg by seanwebster1212, on Flickr


----------



## dudemanppl

Pentax is very large and also dun goofed, something is wrong and it not work. Very good condition for BGN though. Also filter damaged BGN lens means pretty good condition lens with no damage? WHAT IS UP WITH KEH?


----------



## foothead

I bought a Symmar-S in BGN condition with speeds off, and it ended up looking perfect with accurate speeds. My Speed Graphic was also in BGN condition, and it has a bit of wear but honestly a lot less than I would've expected for this type of camera.

What's wrong with the Pentax?


----------



## dudemanppl

Cocked once, worked, cocked second time, mirror locked up cocking lever at end of the travel locked up. Fffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff.


----------



## sub50hz

Hope you didn't take the back or lens off without a prism attached.

edit: Does it fire with a cable?


----------



## dudemanppl

Oh I fixed it, had to push the mirror down button and mirror lockup button THEN **** and it fixed itself?

What the hell you can't even load film in this thing.


----------



## Sean Webster

hmm, I think my batteries are just low, but my 430 EXII is not firing. The ready light is not lighting up. I need to find some batteries or buy some I think. :/

Bad batteries, tested them with my meter. I got some new ones and OMG, I need more flashes!









Seriously, the quality of light is sooooo good.


----------



## MistaBernie

Yep, flashes are good.

I think I'm going to do a little 'Flash for Dummies' FAQ some point soon (as we've discussed). Just some tidbits, tricks, things to know and us, etc. I probably wont call it Flash for Dummies, I'll probably make it like a 'DSLR Users: A slightly more advanced FAQ on Flashes' or something PC like that, just to appease Sub.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> What the hell you can't even load film in this thing.


That takes some serious getting used to. I used to take five minutes every time I'd load the 645. Then I swotched to fuji films and it takes just a few seconds. They have a hole in the end of the paper that hooks to the inside of the spool.


----------



## dudemanppl

Finally got the 120 loaded, 5 shots in and the camera stops working. Cocked, lever returned, no shot. Goddamn. Honestly.


----------



## foothead

Send it back and get another. Even of you can get the thing working properly, there's something wrong with it that may reoccur later.


----------



## dudemanppl

Damn shame since the body is nowhere near bargain condition at all.


----------



## MistaBernie

Send it back, but make sure it's in BGN condition when you do? After all, wouldn't want them to think you were returning one that didn't work after buying one that did. And take photos of whatever it is that you do to it. Then post them on instragram.


----------



## foothead

Keh's ratings are almost always ultra-conservative. The replacement will probably be excellent as well. They may even give you a higher graded one if there aren't any bargains left or if they look significantly worse.


----------



## sub50hz

Don't do any of that.


----------



## silvrr

Yay for having a camera back again (with a slight upgrade). Old 7D and 70-200 are at the camera repair shop now to see how much it will be to get them working again. I was surprised Allstate let me keep them.


----------



## MistaBernie

wait.. you put in a claim on your 70-200 f/4L IS and they let you get a 70-200 f/2.8L IS II?! And keep the old stuff?










All State really needs to let me get a personal articles policy here in MA..


----------



## dudemanppl

DAFUQ? PM incoming.


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> wait.. you put in a claim on your 70-200 f/4L IS and they let you get a 70-200 f/2.8L IS II?! And keep the old stuff?
> 
> All State really needs to let me get a personal articles policy here in MA..


I added $$ to get the 70-200 2.8. Deal was MSRP + Tax - Deductible (250) - depreciation (~180 I think). I was really surprised I was able to keep the old stuff, I figured they would take it. The adjuster said "dispose of it in a proper manner", which I will do....eventually.


----------



## dudemanppl

Other than the fact that it doesn't work, the 67 is amazing. Jeebus this camera puts out some sexy negatives. And scanning negatives negatively then flipping in PS seems to keep the images 9001 times sharper what.

25 MP scan, downsized from 120 original. Oh and ignore the dust, I wasn't very careful with the drying and didn't Photoflo it. Also ignore the funk in the lower right corner, never had that happen before... Wonder what it is.
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7014/6814518291_712cae05af_o.jpg


----------



## sub50hz

Is that wide open? Even though I don't ever shoot MF wide open, it would be nice to have f/2.8. I'm thinking about upgrading to an RZ, though, this RB is fairly cumbersome to carry along with 2 or 3 other bodies on a day trip.


----------



## Sean Webster

LOL, this comment from a guy on PTON: http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=1144788
Quote:


> no
> im not saying the 100L will not work fine on the crop
> it will work fine
> but its better on the 60D ,7D AND 5D
> for the image quality and for the AF
> shoot and see
> and you will know what i mean


I can't understand some people's complete stupidity. The t3i, 60D and 7D all have the same sensor...how in the hell is the image quality different?

You should see his reasoning for his statement it is hilarious.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Is that wide open? Even though I don't ever shoot MF wide open, it would be nice to have f/2.8. I'm thinking about upgrading to an RZ, though, this RB is fairly cumbersome to carry along with 2 or 3 other bodies on a day trip.


Yup, wide open. Its equivalent DOF to the Leica 50 0.95 Nocti. Whats the difference between the RB and RZ?


----------



## mz-n10

wow....i died laughing when he showed the photos on teh recommended lenses.....


----------



## sub50hz

The largest differences are the body weight/materials and the fact that the RZ takes a battery because the leaf shutter is electronically controlled. Notice on the RB, shutter speeds are selected on the lens, while on the RZ, you turn a knob on the body itself. The RZ will take RB lenses, and there is an "RB" shutter speed on the body dial. RZ also offers TTL-coupled exposure with the appropriate prism, while RB TTL prisms simply give you a readout in the finder, and leave the settings to you.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Yup, wide open. Its equivalent DOF to the Leica 50 0.95 Nocti. Whats the difference between the RB and RZ?


Oh and Molten is the basically the Speedster of POTN. His first DSLR he got two months ago. It was the 5DII kit. Then he sold it for a 60D. I don't understand him, don't think anybody ever will.

How the hell did I just quote myself? That wasn't the edit button...

So RB vs RZ is basically focal plane vs leaf?


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> wow....i died laughing when he showed the photos on teh recommended lenses.....


I know hahaha
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Yup, wide open. Its equivalent DOF to the Leica 50 0.95 Nocti. Whats the difference between the RB and RZ?
> 
> 
> 
> Oh and Molten is the basically the Speedster of POTN. His first DSLR he got two months ago. It was the 5DII kit. Then he sold it for a 60D. I don't understand him, don't think anybody ever will.
> 
> How the hell did I just quote myself? That wasn't the edit button...
> 
> So RB vs RZ is basically focal plane vs leaf?
Click to expand...

Oh wow, what a nub wub he is lol


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> So RB vs RZ is basically focal plane vs leaf?


Both use leaf shutters. The one in the RZ is electronically controlled by the body, the rb is manual.


----------



## dudemanppl

Oh so the AE makes sense. Neato, more you know.
Also molten is amazing. http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showpost.php?p=13820568&postcount=16


----------



## sub50hz

I think the only focal-plane-shutter SLR model Mamiya makes is the 645AF, which is the easiest MF body to shoot, ever. Looks like people just discovered them, though, as prices have gone skyward in the last 6 months.


----------



## dudemanppl

Hey, still not as high as Contaxes. Pentax takes an honest minute to load, damn this sucks. So worth it though. Can't wait till I get a working one so I can take pictures of people and crap.


----------



## sub50hz

I dry-fired a Contax at Helix, the AF was atrocious. My 1N in candlelight would have been better.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Oh so the AE makes sense. Neato, more you know.
> Also molten is amazing. http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showpost.php?p=13820568&postcount=16


O...M...G...lololol









Ok, he is officially a complete tard.


----------



## foothead

Pentax 645 is super easy to use as well. It handles exactly like a 35mm camera.


----------



## sub50hz

The Mamiya is so much more ergonomic, though. Hell, my Bronica handles like an SLR, it might even be lighter than the 1N.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> hmm, I think my batteries are just low, but my 430 EXII is not firing. The ready light is not lighting up. I need to find some batteries or buy some I think. :/
> Bad batteries, tested them with my meter. I got some new ones and OMG, I need more flashes!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Seriously, the quality of light is sooooo good.


Get some Eneloops.







I use a Fong Lightsphere with mine and have gotten great results.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Yep, flashes are good.
> I think I'm going to do a little 'Flash for Dummies' FAQ some point soon (as we've discussed). Just some tidbits, tricks, things to know and us, etc. I probably wont call it Flash for Dummies, I'll probably make it like a 'DSLR Users: A slightly more advanced FAQ on Flashes' or something PC like that, just to appease Sub.


That would be a most welcome addition!
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *silvrr*
> 
> Yay for having a camera back again (with a slight upgrade). Old 7D and 70-200 are at the camera repair shop now to see how much it will be to get them working again. I was surprised Allstate let me keep them.
> ]


Ok, someone at Allstate must have been asleep at the wheel. Even broken, that gear is pretty valuable. I hope they don't raise your premium.

Hmm, wonder if this will work with USAA.







My 5DII may meet with an accident on 5DIII launch day.


----------



## dudemanppl

D3 + 24-70 is pretty much 6x7 + 105 2.4. Except the 6x7 is ergonomically a bar of soap.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> hmm, I think my batteries are just low, but my 430 EXII is not firing. The ready light is not lighting up. I need to find some batteries or buy some I think. :/
> Bad batteries, tested them with my meter. I got some new ones and OMG, I need more flashes!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Seriously, the quality of light is sooooo good.
> 
> 
> 
> Get some Eneloops.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I use a Fong Lightsphere with mine and have gotten great results.
Click to expand...

I plan too, this is my diffuser for now...lol


IMG_9010.jpg by seanwebster1212, on Flickr

And thanks for updating the gear list


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> D3 + 24-70 is pretty much 6x7 + 105 2.4. Except the 6x7 is ergonomically a bar of soap.


Make an 18x24 from a D3 and then one from the Pentax. Get back to me on that theory, lol.


----------



## dudemanppl

Still gonna be a bar of soap LOL.


----------



## sub50hz

Marginally easier to hold than the 7 pounds of a fully-loaded RB.

That being said, there's some sort of raw appreciation you get from using an all-mechanical behemoth. Plus, you look _so pro_ when you're standing over it with the WLF up. I might do some kind of goofy social experiment regarding such a thing, sounds like it would be entertaining.


----------



## sub50hz

_Real talk._


----------



## dudemanppl

I can't do the waist level thing. Its all like backwards and my brain can't handle it.

Timed myself loading the GW690, 34 seconds so far. I can do a minute 20 seconds with the stupid Pentax.

I'll sell any of you 80 rolls of 135-36 Ektar for 320 shipped. 100 off for new freezed film expiring in in almost two years.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> I can't do the waist level thing. Its all like backwards and my brain can't handle it.


You get used to it pretty quickly. I don't even notice it anymore when using a view camera.

Sub: You look infinitely more pro with a darkcloth over your head and a tripoded view camera. I occasionally get people taking pictures of me taking pictures.


----------



## sub50hz

Well, you're also a woman, so you either look pro or they're creepin.


----------



## dudemanppl

I want to see a picture of foothead...


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> I want to see a picture of foothead...


Sounds sexy.









I just got some Sanyo Eneloops and a charger...so much $ lol.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Sounds sexy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I just got some Sanyo Eneloops and a charger...so much $ lol.


best money you'll ever spend


----------



## swindle

Whats so good about those Eneloops?


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *swindle*
> 
> Whats so good about those Eneloops?


Everything.


----------



## swindle

Now that is one hell of an informative reply.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *swindle*
> 
> Now that is one hell of an informative reply.


I know, thanks!


----------



## MistaBernie

Eneloops are one of the better rechargeable batteries. They have a good track record of performance and come pre-charged, as well as being low discharge (meaning they lose much less of a charge as time passes than normal rechargeable batteries).


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Eneloops are one of the better rechargeable batteries. They have a good track record of performance and come pre-charged, as well as being low discharge (meaning they lose much less of a charge as time passes than normal rechargeable batteries).


Eneloops are widely used among photographers for their flashes or battery grips. as said in quote, i believe they have the LOWEST discharge rate. i have 3 sets (4/set). love them


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> I want to see a picture of foothead...


Pretty low on the maturity scale, brolo.


----------



## dudemanppl

With the 4x5" I wanna see huge camera next to tiny (?) woman. Make DMP laugh.


----------



## foothead

4x5 view cameras don't exactly look huge. Maybe an 11x14 would, but definitely not 4x5. And I'm 5'8", so definitely not tiny.

Graflex SLRs are hilarious though. It's like an RB67 on steroids. Found this on google images.










source


----------



## dudemanppl

If you guys buy my Ektar, when I get the super duper 500T stuff I'll let you buy 40 exposure rolls for 6 bucks including development, but you pay for shipping and I'll scan good ones for like a dollar more.

Oh and where does our family go for vacation this year? Heres a map of where we've gone so far. About a week of time we have.

http://epgsoft.com/servlet/epgSoft.VisitedStatesMap.VisitedStatesMapServlet/VisitedStatesMap.jpg?states=AZ&states=CA&states=CO&states=ID&states=MT&states=NV&states=NM&states=OR&states=UT&states=WA&states=WY&height=250&format=jpg&Submit=Create+Map&country=US
Oh that picture doesn't work, lets turn it into a link...

Okay ignore that, but basically everything west of Colorado.

Also, just ordered another 6x7 because I want to use it so bad.


----------



## sub50hz

Shot some riding Photos last night in the most poorly-lit park we tend to frequent. I doubt i have a single keeper, real downer of a night. f/2, 1/250 @ 3200 ISO. Stupid. Would have helped if my dufus friend rembered to buy batteries for any of his flash gear, because -- ALERT THE PRESSES -- having four SB-800s, stands and an Rx for each one of them doesn't help when there's no batteries in anything. To top things off, I guess there was some UFC fight last night, which meant every bar/restaurant was packed to the doors with d-bags, so we had to eat at Chilis... which of course was OUT OF SAM ADAMS.

/firstworldproblems


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Shot some riding Photos last night in the most poorly-lit park we tend to frequent. I doubt i have a single keeper, real downer of a night. f/2, 1/250 @ 3200 ISO. Stupid. Would have helped if my dufus friend rembered to buy batteries for any of his flash gear, because -- ALERT THE PRESSES -- having four SB-800s, stands and an Rx for each one of them doesn't help when there's no batteries in anything. To top things off, I guess there was some UFC fight last night, which meant every bar/restaurant was packed to the doors with d-bags, so we had to eat at Chilis... which of course was OUT OF SAM ADAMS.
> /firstworldproblems


dude that sucks. you should try to post one or two anyway and just say the noise was added to make it artistic or something lol. sounds like some terrrrrrrible lighting. you should joing the "i get stuck shooting in terrrrible lighting club" with me. although that park has way worse light that my basketball gym lol


----------



## sub50hz

I actually resorted to using the pop-up flash a few times with the Sigma, as it was impossible to get a reasonable shutter speed without it (1/250-1/500 is usually the sweet spot depending on the setup for BMX). They had just recently moved the ramps around and added a 7-foot box jump in the worst spot _ever_, basically destroying any acceptable shooting position in the entire building. Not to mention, since the shutter speed had to be so high, without external flashes and the ability to stop down, I had to resort to using AI Servo with a ramp typically obscuring the run-up, resulting in a lot of OOF shots with the 135 and the 50. You don't always get an ideal setup, but this was nearly impossible to work around. I was all pumped to shoot the RB with some external flash, and that went to hell the minute we realized all we had was a single lithium cell for the Tx.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *swindle*
> 
> Whats so good about those Eneloops?


Just to add what's been said, they really are that good. Traditional NiMH batteries lose something like 50% of their charge in a month and aren't suitable for high-drain devices like a speed light (and can even damage them), whereas LSD NiMH like the Eneloops lose 50% of their charge _in a year_ and are fine for sudden high-discharge devices. They're as good as disposable alkaline batteries. I have eight myself for my 430EXII, but I'm going to get a bunch more for general usage around the house. If there were any drawback, it would be that they take forever to recharge.


----------



## MistaBernie

GT, here's an eneloop secret for ya; thomasdistributing.com - Maha C801D charger. Standard mode recharges eight in an hour; soft charge is two hours but is better for the batteries if you have the time (and has a reconditioning mode - 24 hours but it quick charges, completely discharges and then does a slow charge). Also has individual meters for each battery. Definitely worth the money.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> GT, here's an eneloop secret for ya; thomasdistributing.com - Maha C801D charger. Standard mode recharges eight in an hour; soft charge is two hours but is better for the batteries if you have the time (and has a reconditioning mode - 24 hours but it quick charges, completely discharges and then does a slow charge). Also has individual meters for each battery. Definitely worth the money.


Well, I don't mind waiting for the batteries. My solution is just to have more batteries.







And it would be nice to have a charger which holds more than just four, but I'd just assume not damage them just to charge them more quickly.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> GT, here's an eneloop secret for ya; thomasdistributing.com - Maha C801D charger. Standard mode recharges eight in an hour; soft charge is two hours but is better for the batteries if you have the time (and has a reconditioning mode - 24 hours but it quick charges, completely discharges and then does a slow charge). Also has individual meters for each battery. Definitely worth the money.
> 
> 
> 
> Well, I don't mind waiting for the batteries. My solution is just to have more batteries.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And it would be nice to have a charger which holds more than just four, but I'd just assume not damage them just to charge them more quickly.
Click to expand...

I just ordered that C801D charger and 16 Eneloops last night. lol


----------



## MistaBernie

I have never heard of reports of damage to batteries with the Maha charger, and I specifically went looking for instances of it before I pulled the trigger on it and my four sets if eneloops..


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> I have never heard of reports of damage to batteries with the Maha charger, and I specifically went looking for instances of it before I pulled the trigger on it and my four sets if eneloops..


Oh, ok. When you said that the soft charge mode was "better for the batteries," I just assumed that the standard mode damaged the batteries (by reducing the lifespan or something), but I see that it has to do with capacity. And damn, expensive for a charger. If I had the need it would be nice, but my slow charger is plenty fast for me.


----------



## sub50hz

4 bottles of Stone Vertical Epic later, I am finally prepped for Superb Owl.


----------



## dudemanppl

http://www.ebay.com/itm/CANON-EOS-1D-MARK-III-SLR-/220945856110?pt=Digital_Cameras&hash=item337166366e#ht_3006wt_1396
Sent em an offer for 1300, if they take it, no more 5DII and I shall add a T2i for video.


----------



## foothead

I'd keep the 5DII. APS-H sucks for wide angle lenses.


----------



## dudemanppl

EOS 3 + 17, M6 + 2, 6x7 + 45.


----------



## sub50hz

God, I love the EOS 3. So good, so underrated.


----------



## dudemanppl

Come on guys buy my film I want to start loading my own film and all that jazz. I'm gonna try developing the Ektar at ISO 12, and if that goes well thats what I'll do for outdoors flash photography with the 6x7. 1/30 sync speed yay.


----------



## foothead

165mm f/4 LS? EDIT: Looks like there's also a 90mm f/2.8 LS.

Has anyone tried foma/arista papers? $22.49 for 25 sheets of 11x14 is really tempting. Also, Ilfochrome is stupid expensive. Why did fuji/kodak have to discontinue their type R stuff?

EDIT: Last thing, I promise. The bulb in my enlarger is starting to go out. It's a FC12T10/CW circular fluorescent bulb. All I can find are FC12T9/CWs. Are they compatible? What's the difference?


----------



## dudemanppl

Yeah I know the LS lenses exist, but 165 f/4 is 85 f/2 basically.


----------



## Deano12345

Hopefully some American based members can help me out here, my uncle is going over to LA at the end of the month and said if I want anything, to let him know in advance. I'm thinking since the exchange rate is fairly good at the moment, and the fact that you guys get everything cheaper anyway, I'll use this opportunity to switch brands. Nothing bad about Sony, just limited lens choice and finding places who stock their stuff is tough over here.

So anyway, what I meant to ask before I rambled is that where is a good bricks and mortar store to buy camera equipment ?


----------



## dudemanppl

Well if you mean Los Angeles by LA, the tax is quite high. But its still half of VAT hah. I'd just have him order from B&H if he has the time.


----------



## Sean Webster

I will never buy another SD card other than ones made by SanDisk...This Lexar Class 10 keeps giving me the recording stop error when doing video. My class 4 SanDisk with less write speeds records just fine. LOL I'm returning this thing for a SanDisk asap.


----------



## MistaBernie

That's pretty odd. Probably a silly question, but you formatted the card _with the camera,_ not via PC/Card reader, right?


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> That's pretty odd. Probably a silly question, but you formatted the card _with the camera,_ not via PC/Card reader, right?


Yep, I've done both, i've formatted first in camera...2 times even low level, then formatted NTFS on the PC then reformatted in camera so it is FAT32 again, then I did it on the PC in FAT32 then ran it. I may try a secure erase if I am able to on this SD card next.

Actually, I just did the clean command on it, and rebuilt the MBR in diskpart and did a full format in windows and just recorded 5 min of video fine...i need to test it some more tonight....damn battery finally died lol.


----------



## dudemanppl

D800, 24-70L II, 24 2.8 USM IS, 28 2.8 USM IS on the same day? lawd yes. The D800 is everything I ever have wanted in a camera, but I'm still gonna wait for the 5DIII, very interested in the 24-70II too.


----------



## sub50hz

Yeah, pretty much want that 24 IS real bad. Not for the IS so much, but finally a USM-drive wide that doesn't cost a fortune.


----------



## mz-n10

now with 36mp i wonder what happens to the noise profile the d700 was known for.....


----------



## dudemanppl

I'm thinking with the four years since that sensor came out, noise will be relatively similar. Jesus... And Adorama accepted my offer of 1300, bad idea, don't have any money LOL FFFFFFFFFF.


----------



## Shane1244

How's the Tammy 17-50?


----------



## dudemanppl

Quite good if its anything like the 28-75 (which it is).


----------



## MistaBernie

Your offer on what Dudeman?


----------



## mz-n10

36mp is ALOT of mp. and IF the d800 sensor is sony, i wonder if we can look at how the d3x performs and guestimate how the d800 will.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Your offer on what Dudeman?


1d3 i think


----------



## Dream Killer

anyone wanna buy a d700? a little over 8k clicks


----------



## dudemanppl

All recent Nikon sensors have been Sony though. Not 100% about the D4 but I know the D3s had one, which is still the third best performing sensor.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> All recent Nikon sensors have been Sony though. Not 100% about the D4 but I know the D3s had one, which is still the third best performing sensor.


nikon designs the sensor and sony makes them. however, nikon has full-rights to it so sony can't use it on their own cameras. it's been this way for a decade.


----------



## dudemanppl

D300, D300s, D90, A700? D7000, NEX5n? Also, here is one of the sexiest PMs I've gotten in a while.
Quote:


> Sorry for the delay getting back to you. Wasn't sure I would find it.
> 
> I did get it out of storage this weekend. Have no idea of the going rate, but $150 sounds reasonable. Let me know if you still want it.
> 
> I also have the 5d II that drowned with it if interested.
> 
> Thanks.
> Ryan


Well theres 1500 bucks going straight in to my pocket.


----------



## Dream Killer

holy crap, if the 100% viewfinder on the d800's specs is real, then i'm _DEFINITELY_ getting one, i won't even question it.

ps: and the new af-mode lever/button, my d700's lever drives me crazy.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> All recent Nikon sensors have been Sony though. Not 100% about the D4 but I know the D3s had one, which is still the third best performing sensor.


i dont know about the d4 but i know the d3 and the d700 have non-sony sourced sensors.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> nikon designs the sensor and sony makes them. however, nikon has full-rights to it so sony can't use it on their own cameras. it's been this way for a decade.


not exactly true. its true that sony cannot use the exact nikon sensor, but the base sensor and sensor technology is sony.

for instance the d3x and a900 share the same 24mp sensor, but nikon has their own filter set on top of the sensor.

anyways the point i was trying to make is that it would be a shame if the d800 was a noisier camera then the d700. there are already 2 cameras in this price range (a900/a850, 5d2) with lots of mp but only the d700 was so noise free.


----------



## Dream Killer

noise wont be worse than any ither camera at the same px density like a 7d. plus the 7d is alrdy a couple of years old so it can only be better


----------



## Genzo

Just read up on the new D800 specs, and it's one amazing body, but that $4k price tag really questions yourself if you're willing to throw down that much for a FX-frame body.......ah screw it, it's gonna worth every penny and I might need to start saving up.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> i dont know about the d4 but i know the d3 and the d700 have non-sony sourced sensors.


http://nikonrumors.com/2011/01/26/the-sensors-of-the-d3-d3s-d700-and-d3100-are-made-by-nikon.aspx/








Close enough. Odd, I was pretty sure of it.

Oh and the D800 is only three grand. Ha, only...


----------



## iandroo888

pre-ordered... =X


----------



## swindle

Quote:


> Nikon gave the D800 slight ergonomic redesign as well


http://www.theverge.com/2012/2/6/2775737/nikon-d800-official-price-release-date

D800



Enter the 7D, a 3 year old camera











Just sayn' yo


----------



## dudemanppl

Dude thats going to be so sex time with the 24-70. If the Nikon 35 1.4 was better...

Huh, poll on FM shows 33 out of 49 people are buying the D800E.

Ergonomically, Nikon ALWAYS WINS. Not saying the 5DII sucks or anything, but I seriously miss my D3/D700s because of the fact you always have everything without menutime. Although Canon does have pretty menus.

Holy crap, the new Canon 24-70II announced. Price? NO ME GUSTA. 2299 means maybe 1700 used in a few months maybe? But the MTFs. Oh my god. Okay wide open, beats the 24L II, TS-E 24L II, 35L, 50L, I'll just stop there its better than any other Canon lens. At f/8 it is better than the 1999 supertelephotos and the 70-200 2.8 IS II at 70mm. I would say that is pretty impressive, but the lens is now a normal zoom design instead of the cool reversed of the older 24-70.


----------



## iandroo888

82 mm filter for the 24-70? ouch


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Dude thats going to be so sex time with the 24-70. If the Nikon 35 1.4 was better...
> Huh, poll on FM shows 33 out of 49 people are buying the D800E.
> Ergonomically, Nikon ALWAYS WINS. Not saying the 5DII sucks or anything, but I seriously miss my D3/D700s because of the fact you always have everything without menutime. Although Canon does have pretty menus.
> Holy crap, the new Canon 24-70II announced. Price? NO ME GUSTA. 2299 means maybe 1700 used in a few months maybe? But the MTFs. Oh my god. Okay wide open, beats the 24L II, TS-E 24L II, 35L, 50L, I'll just stop there its better than any other Canon lens. At f/8 it is better than the 1999 supertelephotos and the 70-200 2.8 IS II at 70mm. I would say that is pretty impressive, but the lens is now a normal zoom design instead of the cool reversed of the older 24-70.


Yeah, I won't be in a hurry to upgrade to the new 24-70, though it does look nice indeed.


----------



## MistaBernie

24 f/2.8 IS - $849.99
28 f/2.8 - $799.99

Yeah, I'd spend the extra $300 and buy a used 35L in a heartbeat.


----------



## mz-n10

wow look at that stabilized primes....








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *swindle*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Nikon gave the D800 slight ergonomic redesign as well
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.theverge.com/2012/2/6/2775737/nikon-d800-official-price-release-date
> D800
> Just sayn' yo
Click to expand...

what does this have to do with anything? all higher end dslr "look" the same.


----------



## dudemanppl

Maybe Technical and Aesthetics? Like most the shots here would get 8 technical and like 2 aesthetics lul.


----------



## silvrr

Hmm, either I forgot to hit submit or my post got deleted. Dudemanppl were you responding to my post about impoving the rate my photo thread?


----------



## xxrabid93

With all this talk and press releases for new lenses, i am actually very intrigued about the Tammy 24-70 2.8 with VC and USD. If it is sharp, priced competitively (under $1000), and Tamron's USD is near the speed of Canon's USM or Sigma's HSM, that would make it very tempting, seeing as the Canon 24-70 II is gonna be $2300.

http://www.canonrumors.com/2012/02/tamron-24-70-f2-8-vc-announced/


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *silvrr*
> 
> Hmm, either I forgot to hit submit or my post got deleted. Dudemanppl were you responding to my post about impoving the rate my photo thread?


Yeah what DID happen to your post? Mods are censoring like its China?


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> 24 f/2.8 IS - $849.99
> 28 f/2.8 - $799.99
> Yeah, I'd spend the extra $300 and buy a used 35L in a heartbeat.


Wow, 849? Maybe for an f/2, but for 2.8 that is absolutely disgustingly overpriced.

P.S. I dunno why you would buy a 35L if you wanted 28 or 24mm, that's a big difference in angle of view and perspective.


----------



## ljason8eg

Yeah what the heck happened to these prices? Those two primes are laughably overpriced. So is the 24-70 II unless its like the second coming or something. I can't believe Canon chose not to put IS on it.


----------



## sub50hz

Yeah, no IS on the lens that people probably wanted it on, and 2 _wide_ primes that probably don't even need it. At those price points, who the hell are they targeting?


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Wow, 849? Maybe for an f/2, but for 2.8 that is absolutely disgustingly overpriced.
> P.S. I dunno why you would buy a 35L if you wanted 28 or 24mm, that's a big difference in angle of view and perspective.


Don't poke holes in my logic young man!


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Yeah, no IS on the lens that people probably wanted it on, and 2 _wide_ primes that probably don't even need it. At those price points, who the hell are they targeting?


Videographers with more money than sense maybe? I honestly can't think of anyone else who'd seriously consider those two primes for anywhere close to those prices.

I know some of the non-L primes are a bit long in the tooth, but why not start with something that makes sense like an updated 50 1.4, maybe a 85 1.8/ 100 2 with IS. Or hmm...EF-S normal prime for a reasonable price? Nikon has one for their crop sensors IIRC.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iandroo888*
> 
> pre-ordered... =X


Pre-ordered through B&H. Daughter will get my D3 (when the D4 arrives) and the D300s after I get comfy with the D800.

Edit:

Sorry, got the D800E. Let the 200% crops begin


----------



## Shane1244

^


----------



## dudemanppl

I will state this again, does your family need an Asian kid?


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*
> 
> Pre-ordered through B&H. Daughter will get my D3 (when the D4 arrives) and the D300s after I get comfy with the D800.
> Edit:
> Sorry, got the D800E. Let the 200% crops begin


same. it said B&H wont charge until it ships right? i ordered the 800 tho. i couldnt see enough of a difference between the 800 and 800e to fork over another 300


----------



## sub50hz

Hey NJ, any chance you would sell the D300s locally?


----------



## Sean Webster

What is the difference b/w the D800 non - e and the e version besides $300? I didn't even know there were different ones lol.


----------



## laboitenoire

D800E has the anti-aliasing filter removed from the sensor. Potentially sharper, but also potential for moire in the picture.


----------



## Sean Webster

Oh ok, thanks


----------



## mz-n10

Aa filter


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> I will state this again, does your family need an Asian kid?


My son's 29, and my daughter's 27. Both live in Az. I could use someone to haul my gear on trips, how much can you carry?


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Hey NJ, any chance you would sell the D300s locally?


I promised it to my daughter sub, sorry. IF I hadn't promised it to her, I'd def hook up with you though. Got a mint 58mm Voigtlander MF that hasn't been posted yet though. Very sweet little lens, (Nikon mount).


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> D800E has the anti-aliasing filter removed from the sensor. Potentially sharper, but also potential for moire in the picture.


Supposedly the D800E will come with a moire correction tool for NX. I wonder how not including an AA filter makes it $300 more? (unless there are more features I'm unaware of).


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*
> 
> Pre-ordered through B&H. Daughter will get my D3 (when the D4 arrives) and the D300s after I get comfy with the D800.
> Edit:
> Sorry, got the D800E. Let the 200% crops begin


that makes three of us. d700 will become a backup rofl.


----------



## scottath

lol - if we take out this filter we can charge $300 more.....Nikon marketing is going well lol.....i guess if it sells its a success.......
Im still waiting for 5DIII


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> D800E has the anti-aliasing filter removed from the sensor. Potentially sharper, but also potential for moire in the picture.


Nikon's got moire removal coming as either an add on in NX2 or built in NX3 from what I hear. Regardless, if you downsize or upsize the image a bit, it goes away. I figured I'd give it a shot, if I don't like it I'll see if the AA filter can be retrofitted, or I'll sell it and buy a straight D800. When I look at the wildlife shots I take, there really are not many with micro repeating patterns though. So I'm really not worried about moire. The D800E will be a strictly wildlife/landscape body. D4 and D400 (when released) or D800E in DX mode will be for field sports. DX mode on the D800 is still 15 mp.


----------



## dudemanppl

The more I look at the D800, the more I want it. STAWP IT GUIZ. My AA filterless 5DII really didn't make any difference at all. Wouldn't recommend it.


----------



## sub50hz

I'm pretty blah on digital on a whole these days. 5Dc + nifty is pretty much the only kit I want or need. I am ready to have a gear exodus, convert my workshop into a darkroom and get back to what made me love photography in the first place.

DMP, you're a gear hound, help computer. I'll make it worth your while.


----------



## ilec

I'm going to take a wild guess and say this is the appropriate location for me to introduce myself into the OCN land of Photography - if not please don't shoot me it'll just make a mess. Apart from being relatively new here on OCN I am a fairly keen amateur photographer with a smattering of old and new kit.

This is my latest camera, less than 2 months old - and am having to find the money for the associated kit.

Canon EOS600D
- EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS
- EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM
- Polarising Filter

Up until then I was acustomed to using the following film SLR kit I have since returned to my father after ~ 7 years.
Pentax ME-Super
50mm Portrait
100mm Macro
150mm Telephoto

I rarely used the following and can't remember the sizes but I did have them.
Wide Angle
Fish-eye


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> DMP, you're a gear hound, help computer. I'll make it worth your while.


Help compooter? Explain... Ugh I wish 75 2.8s for the 6x7 were easier to find, its basically 35 1.4 BUT ON BIG TIME FILM. Damn so much want.

Sub, honestly I'd get 5D and 35L, you will learn to embrace the 35 focal length even though you prefer 50 right now. It's very relaxing.


----------



## sub50hz

50-75 is my jam, I can't get down on 35. Maybe if I could somehow finagle some mass trade or something. I dunno, help a brotha out.


----------



## dudemanppl

I ain't ever letting this 35L go. It fell in a river anyway lol. I do have this 50L still, but I don't recommend it. Also, all the B/W film I've ever developed I've been fixing for like 30 seconds (lol thats what it says on the bottle), but apparently its supposed to be like 3-4 minutes? Crap. Negatives always look fine though, so whaaat. Sub, go buy that movie film and reel and develop your own C41, so much nice.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> I ain't ever letting this 35L go. It fell in a river anyway lol. I do have this 50L still, but I don't recommend it. Also, all the B/W film I've ever developed I've been fixing for like 30 seconds (lol thats what it says on the bottle), but apparently its supposed to be like 3-4 minutes? Crap. Negatives always look fine though, so whaaat. Sub, go buy that movie film and reel and develop your own C41, so much nice.


Bascially you should plop your leader in the fixative and let the film fix until the leader is totally clear + another minute or two. The film may be fixed reasonably well after 30 seconds, but you run the risk that there is still some emulsion on the film that could darken over time.


----------



## swindle

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ilec*
> 
> I'm going to take a wild guess and say this is the appropriate location for me to introduce myself into the OCN land of Photography


Welcome









Post some pictures in the other thread?


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> I ain't ever letting this 35L go. It fell in a river anyway lol. I do have this 50L still, but I don't recommend it. Also, all the B/W film I've ever developed I've been fixing for like 30 seconds (lol thats what it says on the bottle), but apparently its supposed to be like 3-4 minutes? Crap. Negatives always look fine though, so whaaat. Sub, go buy that movie film and reel and develop your own C41, so much nice.


Haha, I'm not trying to get the 35L out of you, Pina Brolada. Just saying in general, 50D no make-a me happy. 5D probably won't either. Hrm.


----------



## ilec

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *swindle*
> 
> Welcome
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Post some pictures in the other thread?


Will do as soon as I get back to my home machine.


----------



## Dream Killer

http://www.overclock.net/t/1211995/nikon-d700-w-extra-battery-16gb-cf-card

One week only, otherwise it's off to the bay.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Help compooter? Explain... Ugh I wish 75 2.8s for the 6x7 were easier to find, its basically 35 1.4 BUT ON BIG TIME FILM. Damn so much want.


7 inch aero ektar. Google it. FOV/DOF on 4x5 are both basically the same as the Zeiss 50/0.7 on 35mm. It's probably going to be my next lens, I just need to run into some money first.

EDIT: http://www.ilfordphoto.com/products/product.asp?n=34 Anyone ever try this? Developing time is 40 seconds for Delta 100. Could be interesting for field processing.


----------



## dudemanppl

Yeah I've heard of it, I'm not shooting 4x5. I just sold DK's D700 on FM for 100 more than his asking price in about 20 minutes. At 6 in the morning?


----------



## mz-n10

this is not really even relevant to me, let alone the rest of you guys...

but sony released a 500/4 today in europe.

LINK

rumor as it pegged at 13,000 EUROS......

i cant imagine any pros even considering sony for telephoto (considering most are well entrenched in canikon) and now at 13k even serious amateurs wont be able to afford it....who exactly is this lens marketed to?

put into perspective i can buy a 500/4 mk2 with a 7d for less then just this lens......

/rant


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Yeah what DID happen to your post? Mods are censoring like its China?


Ok, so Im not going crazy, I wonder why it got removed. If the Mod that did it wants to let me know I would happily accept a PM.


----------



## laboitenoire

So I printed my first contact sheet and 5x7 today... Screwed up both my subject focus and my exposure times on the assignment, so I have to start from scratch. Print turned out decently, though.


----------



## laboitenoire

So I'm thinking I want to ditch the N2020 and upgrade to something a little nicer. The F3, FA, and FE all fit into my price range...

EDIT: As to why I'm thinking this, I've decided that I hate the stock B screen in the 2020. I can get a J screen for it, but I'd prefer to find a K screen. Also, no depth of field preview (something I'm starting to realize is very useful on film), and I have to spend money for one of the fancy 2-pin Nikon cable releases for hands-free shooting. For the price of a screen and shutter release, I'm halfway to the FE...


----------



## sub50hz

Buy more film and your own chems. Get gettin.


----------



## dudemanppl

The 6x7 sounds very vaguely like a gun.... Neato.

What the hell is up with *******s popping up in the rate my photo thread, first charismatic (I still love you if you see this) and now this Cadillac guy. Just pure dick. Even sub is nice when hes drunk.


----------



## nuclearjock

??? Somebody pick'n on my dude???


----------



## MistaBernie

He was drunk last night, I kind of reminded him 'hey, don't be a dick', it seemed to work, but certain people had to get their jabs in. His responses to others have been OK from what I've seen.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> So I'm thinking I want to ditch the N2020 and upgrade to something a little nicer. The F3, FA, and FE all fit into my price range...
> EDIT: As to why I'm thinking this, I've decided that I hate the stock B screen in the 2020. I can get a J screen for it, but I'd prefer to find a K screen. Also, no depth of field preview (something I'm starting to realize is very useful on film), and I have to spend money for one of the fancy 2-pin Nikon cable releases for hands-free shooting. For the price of a screen and shutter release, I'm halfway to the FE...


I'm not sure that the FE is an upgrade from the N2020. The F3 however... great camera.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> The 6x7 sounds very vaguely like a gun.... Neato.
> 
> What the hell is up with *******s popping up in the rate my photo thread, first charismatic (I still love you if you see this) and now this Cadillac guy. Just pure dick. Even sub is nice when hes drunk.


Caddy is cool, people are just trolling him.


----------



## sub50hz

I'm not a mean drunk, I'm probably more of a d-bag when I'm sober.


----------



## ZootCadillac

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> The 6x7 sounds very vaguely like a gun.... Neato.
> What the hell is up with *******s popping up in the rate my photo thread, first charismatic (I still love you if you see this) and now this Cadillac guy. Just pure dick. Even sub is nice when hes drunk.


If you take issue with anything i've said then perhaps you might contact me to discuss it rather than call me names elsewhere ( I doubt you'd call me names to my face, why do it on the internet? )

I explained my actions on the thread. I perceived that an individual was being extremely dismissive of someone else's work whilst not showing any merit in their own. I was hoping to remind people to be more considerate and objective.
I don't recall having any issue with you personally and after explaining my position I apologised.

As for 'popping up' I've been away a while but I'm registered here a while and reading much longer. The thread is open. I believe that I have as much right to post in there as any other.

If you have any concerns with my behaviour then please feel free to take it up with me personally. I'm a reasonable individual. Don't call me names, that's just childish and as I mentioned. I doubt you would do it to me in person.

regards.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*
> 
> I'm not sure that the FE is an upgrade from the N2020. The F3 however... great camera.


Yeah, did a little more looking, and came to the same conclusion. Now I'm thinking FE2, FM2, or FA. FE2 is most likely, as it's ridiculously cheap these days and is probably more likely to have the speeds working properly over the FM2.

F3 is definitely a sweet camera, but I'm thinking it's probably a little heavier than I'd want, plus the 1/60 X-sync is rather meh.


----------



## c0ld

Got a mint Nikkor 18-200mm first version for $500


----------



## dudemanppl

6x7 metered finder is really wonky, but its huge with the DK17M. I used it all day (sorta) and then went back to the 5DII for the OCN Fifty, I thought the 5DII was like broken.


----------



## Dream Killer

lol dk-17m with a 6x7


----------



## dudemanppl

The 6x7 has a surprisingly small viewfinder. Its smaller than an FM2n's.










I feel like I shouldn't crosspost, so I will leave this here.










Missed focus by a few cm and exposure by half a stop. Also I developed the Ektar too long, I guess 2:30 does ISO 50 though. I'll try 1:35 next time. Shooting at EI25.


----------



## laboitenoire

Holy crap it was sunny today in Cleveland... Had to shoot a bunch of rolls for my class, and in order to get (hopefully) a good range of exposures I was shooting my Delta 100 at ISO 50. I needed to get low depth of field for some shots and deep depth of field for others, so at ISO 100 I was maxing out at f/4.

On a good note, though, I finally understand the Sunny f/16 rule. It was really bright, I could see my shadow clearly, and at f/16 my meter was reading in between 1/30 and 1/60. This is so useful...


----------



## sub50hz

Buy some ND filters, ya turkey.

Fer yer health.


----------



## MistaBernie

Yeah, for sure. I have a relatively weak ND that I keep in my bag with a 72-77 step up ring so I can use it on my 35L, 70-200 2.8 and 17-40 without any issues. It's a life saver in really bright light, I hate stopping down past 11 (if I dont have to).


----------



## foothead

A 3-stop would be about perfect. Go with Tiffen, since other brands tend to have more severe color shifts (not that it really matters with B&W, but still...). Avoid the faders.

If you're shooting in that much light, you could also try some slower films. I hear good things about Efke 25 PL, though it's always out of stock when I try to order some.

EDIT: Looks like the 35mm version is called KB25, not 25 PL like the 4x5. Weird.


----------



## ZootCadillac

It's great to see so many people persevering with film. I don't have the patience for it any more ( nor the enlarger as it happens ) but I still get a bit misty-eyed remembering the arguments and tantrums caused by me turning the bathroom into a darkroom









So pleased people are keeping it up. I've started to sell off my film gear. My Pentax bodies and all but one lenses are gone. My Nikon bodies ( F2 & F4 ) have not seen daylight in over 15 years and ought to go on ebay soon. Never wanted to sell because their value now is so low in comparison to the value i put on them personally ( that's more emotional than monetary ) but if people are genuinely using them rather than sticking them on shelves as trophies I'll feel better about getting rid of them.

It's just....so much easier to take a digital pic and throw it through DX0 to get the same result. I'm old and lazy


----------



## Sean Webster

I'm about to get into video and need a nice video head. What you would guys suggest...if you have experience? Manfrotto 501HDV Pro or a 701HDV Pro Fluid Video Mini. Would the 501 be worth it over the 701?

And check this slider out! http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=1142286

I'm making one soon


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZootCadillac*
> 
> It's great to see so many people persevering with film. I don't have the patience for it any more ( nor the enlarger as it happens ) but I still get a bit misty-eyed remembering the arguments and tantrums caused by me turning the bathroom into a darkroom
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So pleased people are keeping it up. I've started to sell off my film gear. My Pentax bodies and all but one lenses are gone. My Nikon bodies ( F2 & F4 ) have not seen daylight in over 15 years and ought to go on ebay soon. Never wanted to sell because their value now is so low in comparison to the value i put on them personally ( that's more emotional than monetary ) but if people are genuinely using them rather than sticking them on shelves as trophies I'll feel better about getting rid of them.
> 
> It's just....so much easier to take a digital pic and throw it through DX0 to get the same result. I'm old and lazy


<3 film. I just find that my pictures come out so much better when I use it, especially the black-and-whites since I can actually get decent prints. Also, film gear has gotten so cheap lately that I can afford very good pro-level stuff on my miniscule budget. It'd cost probably $50k for the digital equivalent of my 4x5 kit, yet I've only sunk maybe $1000 into it. Plus, it's fun to experiment with all the various emulsions out there. I actually discovered fomapan by accident a while back and liked it so much that I've been using it for probably 50% of my large format work lately.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

The North Korea shot looks HDRish to me, but some nice shots otherwise:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/in-pictures-16979784


----------



## MistaBernie

Interesting stuff Gone..

Hey, how do I say "please update my gear list" in Latin?









(Add 5D2, 580 EX II, S95)

---

Also, I'm wondering if I should get a 24-70 from CPS on evaluation for the wedding I'm shooting in May.. seems like the most logical choice (though I may get a T/S 17 for some fun stuff for the time being)


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Interesting stuff Gone..
> Hey, how do I say "please update my gear list" in Latin?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (Add 5D2, 580 EX II, S95)
> ---
> Also, I'm wondering if I should get a 24-70 from CPS on evaluation for the wedding I'm shooting in May.. seems like the most logical choice (though I may get a T/S 17 for some fun stuff for the time being)


Quaeso, adde inventorio instrumentorum meo.









And definitely yes to the 24-70. I've shot a few weddings with that lens. Shooting a wedding without a fast standard zoom is unthinkable.


----------



## sub50hz

Hey DMP, how bad _is_ that 50L you've got?


----------



## MistaBernie

I've been thinking about picking one up to have anyway, but I'm thinking of waiting until the new one is officially released.

Here's my concern -- what happens if the new one is released and everyone that was waiting for it (that doesn't regular forums like this, etc) sees the price tag and says 'omg, what? No thanks!' and buys up the old versions? Demand goes up, so the price might not respond in kind.

On the other hand, I really dont want to charge any more gear. I have the money in savings, but wifey would remove my male bits with much prejudice if I touched that money..


----------



## xxrabid93

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> I've been thinking about picking one up to have anyway, but I'm thinking of waiting until the new one is officially released.
> Here's my concern -- what happens if the new one is released and everyone that was waiting for it (that doesn't regular forums like this, etc) sees the price tag and says 'omg, what? No thanks!' and buys up the old versions? Demand goes up, so the price might not respond in kind.
> On the other hand, I really dont want to charge any more gear. I have the money in savings, but wifey would remove my male bits with much prejudice if I touched that money..


What about the new Tamron 24-70? It is looking like it could be a really nice alternative. VC and USD (Tamron's USM). If the price is decent and the image quality is like the Canon 24-70 I (or better; Tamron lenses do actually seem to have pretty good IQ), it could be a killer lens.


----------



## MistaBernie

I totally forgot about that, thanks Rabid! Depending on the cost that could make it on my list of things to check out...


----------



## sub50hz

Bernie: _The newer, whiter DMP._


----------



## dudemanppl

My legacy continues! 50L is about 50 1.4 USM sharpness, so yeah, not the best at all.


----------



## sub50hz

Samples plz.


----------



## xxrabid93

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> I totally forgot about that, thanks Rabid! Depending on the cost that could make it on my list of things to check out...


No problem. It has my attention, so i figured i would mention it to you.







I really wanna see Tamron have a killer lens on thier hands with this one, and for a decent price.

Unrelated to the above, did KEH die or something? I am on there right now, and when i go to shop for gear, and any category/mount i click, there is no lens sub category.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Interesting stuff Gone..
> Hey, how do I say "please update my gear list" in Latin?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (Add 5D2, 580 EX II, S95)
> ---
> Also, I'm wondering if I should get a 24-70 from CPS on evaluation for the wedding I'm shooting in May.. seems like the most logical choice (though I may get a T/S 17 for some fun stuff for the time being)


Depending on your shooting style the 16-35 is also good for weddings


----------



## sub50hz

I've had a few too many adult beverages at this point and I'm making a photo forum. I hope you'll all come there. Link shortly.


----------



## sub50hz

Oh lord, talking to these support people on the phone is ludicrously hard. DAMN YOU LAGUNITAS!


----------



## Dream Killer

i hate how the whole concept of "internet" is hypocritical. you can get banned/removed from anywhere (games, forums, the software you're using) without representation or the right to defend yourself then at the same time the internet is supposed to be the model of "freedom".

*I'll Post A Random Photo Here to Keep My Post's Weight Towards "On-Topic"*


----------



## sub50hz

Eh, _spaghetti._

i've been meaning to re-edit this for a while now:


----------



## Dream Killer

i tried. i would have put less exposure in the sky (or a gnd).


----------



## sub50hz

Eh, I'll do a little dodging on the clouds maybe, but I really want to go back and shoot it snow-covered (Indiana Dunes, adjacent to the Michigan City Power Plant).


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Eh, I'll do a little dodging on the clouds maybe, but I really want to go back and shoot it snow-covered (Indiana Dunes, adjacent to the Michigan City Nuclear Power Plant).


That's not a nuclear power plant. Fossil plants with hyperbolic cooling towers are often mistaken for nuclear stations but Michigan City is a coal burning plant.


----------



## sub50hz

Wow, you learn something new every day. I can't say my specialty is identifying types of power plants, obviously.


----------



## Sean Webster

i'm on


----------



## dudemanppl

I way overdid the blue.


----------



## sub50hz

Awful.


----------



## spRICE

Here's my attempt:


----------



## MistaBernie

Do I want to splurge on Silver Efex Pro 2 or should I just work on my own B&W processing skills?


----------



## xlastshotx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Do I want to splurge on Silver Efex Pro 2 or should I just work on my own B&W processing skills?


Download the trial from their website, I just gave it a try for the first time today. After using it a bit I think its worth the money.


----------



## sub50hz

Buy black and white film.


----------



## scottath

I had some fun yesterday......
Who likes a F430 Ferrari?


----------



## Sean Webster

<3 that is my car! I want one so bad lol. I jello.


----------



## scottath

some more angles of it here:
http://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.383069641709851.109168.100000204552885&type=1


----------



## aksthem1

So Fry's had a T2i body on sale today for $400. Made me regret buying an E-PL1 for backup.


----------



## robchaos

Picked up an old Nikon AF 80-200 f2.8D today for $420, pretty good condition, real solid lens. Hopefully I will have fun with this one!


----------



## dudemanppl

Push pull or two ring? If its two ring me jel.


----------



## robchaos

just a push pull







. Its a definite step up from my previous telephoto lenses, 55-200 4-5.6 VR and 75-300 4-5.6. I've been shopping around for a few weeks, and I'm amazed that people on eBay are willing to pay $500-$600 for the push pull, even the non D. Adorama has it in e- condition for $460 shipped. I found one on Craigslist the guy was asking $500 and I haggled him down to $420.


----------



## Shane1244

What would be the chances of me getting a 17-40 f/4L for my 50mm f/1.4 + Cash? Also, how much cash would I have to add, assuming both lenses are in 8/10-10/10 condition.


----------



## sub50hz

Most people already own a 50, but you could sell it outright and then just pay for a 17-40. They pop up all the time on POTN.


----------



## Shane1244

How much would it go for? Not a single scratch on it.

Also. Does it seem like a good move what I'm doing? I want wide angle, and quality, but I don't want to totally lose that ~50mm range.


----------



## laboitenoire

I think you'll really miss having the extra 2 stops of light.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> I think you'll really miss having the extra 2 stops of light.


Three stops.

1.4/2.0/2.8/4.0/5.6/8.0/11.0/16.0 etc etc. The 17-40L isn't unreasonably slow, and it offers a much wider FL than the 50. Every lens is give and take.


----------



## Shane1244

I'll try shooting my 50 @ f/4 for the next week or so, and see if it bothers me. I don't remember having any problems with my 18-55..


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Three stops.
> 1.4/2.0/2.8/4.0/5.6/8.0/11.0/16.0 etc etc. The 17-40L isn't unreasonably slow, and it offers a much wider FL than the 50. Every lens is give and take.


Graah! I knew that!







Mind's been a little frazzled recently.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244*
> 
> I'll try shooting my 50 @ f/4 for the next week or so, and see if it bothers me. I don't remember having any problems with my 18-55..


Why bother? You won't have 50mm on the 17-40. Slower lenses are more challenging, because they force you to create a deeper composition -- if nothing else, you can learn a lot about shooting scenes stopped down, and if it doesn't work for you, sell it for what you paid. 17-40s are majestic, especially on film, which hides some of its flaws.


----------



## Dream Killer

50mm is also about 2 shutter stops faster than 17mm because wides exhibit less camera shake.


----------



## MistaBernie

Uuuuuugh. My 24-70 fund just evaporated, I need some dental work. Do.not.want.

Alas, that's okay. B&H was making me return and rebuy the 5D2 to get the double rebate anyways..


----------



## sub50hz

Like I said last night, just CPS it.


----------



## MistaBernie

yeah, that's what I'm gonna do. Damn dentists are expensive when you only go once every ~10 years.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> yeah, that's what I'm gonna do. Damn dentists are expensive when you only go once every ~10 years.


dude.... you dont need teeth. they are going to fall out when you are old anyway. just have the dentist pull them all and put fake ones in and get it over with so you have more money for photo gear!!!


----------



## MistaBernie

They're alot cheaper once you get into a point when you can go for regular (usually free) cleanings every six months. For me it's just getting to that point.

That being said, if it was feasible economically I would do that in a HEARTBEAT. I'd love it. Make my grill out of the same stuff my wedding band is please (tungsten, with an ivory white finish for teeth - wow, that's overclocking your grill right there!) Would make flying a pain in the ass though, stupid security.


----------



## KorbenD

Please add me to the SLR list.

Minolta Maxxum 700si (yes, still have a 35mm, but it's rarely used)
Konica Minolta 7D
Sony Alpha SLT-A77

Sony HVL-F56AM flash

Minolta AF DT 18-70 F3.5-5.6
Minolta AF 28-105 xi F3.5-4.5
Minolta AF 100-300 xi F4.5-5.6


----------



## juneau78

add me pls.

i used to shoot with Canon EOS 40D with EF 50 f/1.8 but already traded it last year with Canon EOS 7D with EF 24-70 f/2.8L

and here's my gallery which is longing to be updated









my deviantart

edit: im also kinda newbie in HDSLR videography, so here are few video works i have done

my vimeo


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Make my grill out of the same stuff my wedding band is please (tungsten, with an ivory white finish for teeth - wow, that's overclocking your grill right there!) Would make flying a pain in the ass though, stupid security.


I have a customer in Missouri that makes Platinum grills/teeth with diamonds. It's pretty weird.


----------



## silvrr

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/720705-REG/Adobe_65081059_Photoshop_Lightroom_3_Software.html

Just an FYI, Lightroom 3 for $69 today only at B&H. Fantastic deal, yes Lightroom 4 is coming out soon but if you don't have lightroom currently this deal + the upgrade would be super cheap compared to buying Lightroom 4 outright.


----------



## dudemanppl

69 more than I paid.


----------



## MistaBernie

Did I mention I found a copy of Silver Efex Pro boxed for like $79 (that included a free upgrade to SEP2?) And people think I'm crazy for keeping an eye out at local overpriced retailers..


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *silvrr*
> 
> http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/720705-REG/Adobe_65081059_Photoshop_Lightroom_3_Software.html
> 
> Just an FYI, Lightroom 3 for $69 today only at B&H. Fantastic deal, yes Lightroom 4 is coming out soon but if you don't have lightroom currently this deal + the upgrade would be super cheap compared to buying Lightroom 4 outright.


Where do you see $69? It's $270 with that link. Also, out of stock. Meh.


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> Where do you see $69? It's $270 with that link. Also, out of stock. Meh.


Looks like they made a new link:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/720705-REG/Adobe_65081059_Photoshop_Lightroom_3_Software.html

It was previously in stock and now its backordered. That link should give you the $69 price again. Although with a delayed delivery.


----------



## foothead

Lol. This happening for anyone else?


----------



## dudemanppl

Damn I HAVE to buy VSCO.


----------



## silvrr

They keep changing the link for some reason.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/720705-REG/Adobe_65081059_Photoshop_Lightroom_3_Software.html

If it doesn't work again try their facebook page and its down quite a few posts but the most up to date link should be there.

EDIT: *** I open the new link, post and then checked it and its back at $269.00.

EDIT 2: I appears to only give you that price from the link on their Facebook page. If I open it from their facebook link and then copy the address and paste it here it kills the price drop. Go to their facebook page and find the post on it and it should work.


----------



## silvrr

untitled.JPG 141k .JPG file


just to show that it was once at 69.00


----------



## aksthem1

That link works for me.


----------



## Nemesis158

link works for me and its on back order. thinking about buying it to go legit.....


----------



## dpalmer492

I would like to be added to this group. My equipment I use is a Nikon Coolpix sl3100 and a 8" tripod.


----------



## riko99

Well its been awhile since I've been on here.... 100+ pages of stuff (sorry guys not going to read it all). Just wanted to drop a comment and say that I recently bought the *Nikon SB 700* So if that could be added to my list that would be wonderful.


----------



## dudemanppl

Random rantings: I am very quite interested in purchasing a 35 Summilux-M ASPH.


----------



## MistaBernie

Found my old film stuff..

Minolta X-370
Minolta 50 f/1.7 (looks alot like nifty!)
Random 28 f/2.8
2x tele-converter
75-300 f/4-5.6
sunpak flash

red screw on filter

few rolls of Ilford PAN F 50


----------



## sub50hz

Reminds me -- I lost my 52mm red filter, need to go buy another one today.


----------



## Dream Killer

i woke up this morning and my brain just went, "why are people so fascinated with telephotos?" i've been trying to figure that out since this morning.


----------



## sub50hz

Some sort of phallic deficiency, probably.

*looks at gear*


----------



## aksthem1

Can't be climbing a mountain to get a close up of a bird or having a spare airplane to shoot some planes.

I think it's because people want to know they have that extra reach when they need it.

Using a 70-200 2.8L for video is also pretty nice.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aksthem1*
> 
> Can't be climbing a mountain to get a close up of a bird or having a spare airplane to shoot some planes.
> I think it's because people want to know they have that extra reach when they need it.
> Using a 70-200 2.8L for video is also pretty nice.


i mean normal people, not animal photographers (where the tool would be appropriate). i see people buy 75-300mm lenses at shops and i think to myself, "he'd probably use that maybe twice".


----------



## sub50hz

Portraits/sports. They have their uses. I use mine for sports and that's about it, really.


----------



## laboitenoire

Yeah, while I generally love my 70-300 VR, it doesn't get a whole lot of use. I generally only take it out for when I'm trying to shoot sports. I feel like I don't need it anymore for shooting far away landscapes, as with 16 MP I have a ton of room for cropping. I'm strongly considering selling it so that I can save up for either the 24-120 f/4 VR or the supposed replacement for the 16-85 VR. Or maybe I'll just get something like the new 85 f/1.8 AF-S. I dunno really, lol.

On a side note, can't tell if the following is a result of me screwing up the development, me screwing up the exposure, the characteristic of shooting Delta 3200, or just the really crappy scan quality.


The classy way to dispense silverwear by laboitenoire, on Flickr


----------



## foothead

What does the negative look like?


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> i woke up this morning and my brain just went, "why are people so fascinated with telephotos?" i've been trying to figure that out since this morning.


assuming telephoto you mean "telephoto zoom"

i actually asked something similar when shooting recently. "Wow thats a fancy camera, how much zoom does it have?" and when i reply with "About 3x (24-70mm)", he replied with a "Ooo this camera has a 32x zoom".

most people associate how much ZOOM with IQ...the more ZOOM the better.


----------



## laboitenoire

Pretty good density, maybe a tad bit underexposed. I think it's most likely my scanner as even the edge imprint looks terrible when I scan it.


----------



## dpalmer492

Here's what I got after my first shoot.

ARIIA (My first Rig build)


----------



## sub50hz

I think you could use some work on lighting and exposure (blown highs, underexposed dark areas, and be sure your subject is as clean as possible, as there is an egregious amount of visible dust.


----------



## sub50hz

Blackbox, did you dev on Ilford's times? 3200 is only by way of pushing, I believe Delta 3200 is rated officially at something like 1250.


----------



## dpalmer492

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> I think you could use some work on lighting and exposure (blown highs, underexposed dark areas, and be sure your subject is as clean as possible, as there is an egregious amount of visible dust.


Yeah, I'm a little broke until payday tomorrow so I haven't been able to get some compressed air to clean my case out. It's so hard to keep anything clean in my dorm. Thanks for the advice.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> assuming telephoto you mean "telephoto zoom"
> i actually asked something similar when shooting recently. "Wow thats a fancy camera, how much zoom does it have?" and when i reply with "About 3x (24-70mm)", he replied with a "Ooo this camera has a 32x zoom".
> most people associate how much ZOOM with IQ...the more ZOOM the better.


no, i mean long focal lengths in general.


----------



## dudemanppl

Yeah you're right. I just realized a normal person wouldn't need anything over 135. I'm normal enough right?


----------



## Dream Killer

its almost 4am here and i'm having serious dslr withdrawal issues. i miss my 1ds mk2, i miss my xti, and i miss my d700 most of all. i'm trying to shake it off by admiring the mechanical precision of the summilux 35 1.4. maybe i should get the M3 out of the tupperware and get it fixed and shoot some film.


----------



## Danylu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> i mean normal people, not animal photographers (where the tool would be appropriate). i see people buy 75-300mm lenses at shops and i think to myself, "he'd probably use that maybe twice".


Telephotos are probably the least used lenses. Either that or my macro. But the 70-200 is a godsend whenever I do end up going birding. Rarer than I would have liked however. People who buy 75-300 lenses in shops probably don't know too much about photography.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Blackbox, did you dev on Ilford's times? 3200 is only by way of pushing, I believe Delta 3200 is rated officially at something like 1250.


Yeah. The dev chart in the lab said that for ISO 3200 the development time was like 8.5 minutes in T-Max.

I realize it's dusty, but that's because my scanner is dusty. I'll probably go to the library and scan it on the Coolscan, and then I'll make sure it's cleaned off.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> its almost 4am here and i'm having serious dslr withdrawal issues. i miss my 1ds mk2, i miss my xti, and i miss my d700 most of all. i'm trying to shake it off by admiring the mechanical precision of the summilux 35 1.4. maybe i should get the M3 out of the tupperware and get it fixed and shoot some film.


YOU HAVE A 35 SUMMILUX SITTING AROUND? Or do you just mean they're neat? In any case, get the M3 fixed bro, its quite tasty.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> i mean normal people, not animal photographers (where the tool would be appropriate). i see people buy 75-300mm lenses at shops and i think to myself, "he'd probably use that maybe twice".


I use my 500 and 400 a majority of the time. The 500 (plus tc's) for birds, and the 400 naked on FX for field sports. Agreed, I may be in the minority but such people do exist. I also use my 200mm f/4 macro quite a bit as well.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Yeah you're right. I just realized a normal person wouldn't need anything over 135. I'm normal enough right?


definitely not.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dpalmer492*
> 
> Here's what I got after my first shoot.
> ARIIA (My first Rig build)


first thing i noticed was lighting xD and composition. no real focus anywhere. my eyes wander. 1 or 2 were actually out of focus too.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> YOU HAVE A 35 SUMMILUX SITTING AROUND? Or do you just mean they're neat? In any case, get the M3 fixed bro, its quite tasty.


yea, it's not the asph one. it's the only lens i have for leica m and i refuse to sell it.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*
> 
> I use my 500 and 400 a majority of the time. The 500 (plus tc's) for birds, and the 400 naked on FX for field sports. Agreed, I may be in the minority but such people do exist. I also use my 200mm f/4 macro quite a bit as well.


you actually need it. but be careful in forests with all the camo you guys got. i was once bombing down an mtb trail at 10-15mph when i finally found myself heading strait towards what seemed to register in my brain as a small tree that disturbingly looked like tripod a ~600m lens with a camera mounted on it. i hit both brakes hard, my friend hit both brakes hard. after a few feet of rocks being unrooted, voilent hammering of my cheap $4 schwinn bike bell and metal dics squeeling i was able to stop a couple of inches before the setup. my friend wasn't so lucky and endod strait into my rear tire (i keep telling him to not follow me so damn close).

back on topic: as an experiment, i presented my brother in law, who knows NOTHING about photograhy, two lenses and guess which one is "better". one was a cheap 75-300mm i borrowed from a friend to do this experiment, and the other was my 16-35mm f/4 vr. without thinking about it or asking me what each lens did, he pointed towards the 75-300mm.

i asked him why and he said because it had "more zoom". i promptly told him to get two beers fridge and proceeded to explain the differences.

he said that he intuitively went for the lens with the longer focal length because all the ads he'd seen from flyers and tv commercials never presented what a wide angle was. and from the rest of our four-hour long conversation about decision making and other things i can only conclude from this experiment (with a sample size of ONE







) that this is the fault of canon's marketing in every damn sport venue.

ps: i think this is all an obsession of how/why people think after reading this awesome book my co-worker lent me.


----------



## dudemanppl

You do know that 35 is worth 2000 dollars right? Also did the unmentionable site just get shut down by ****stains?


----------



## Sean Webster

What happened to it?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Did sub not pay the hosting bill?


----------



## Conspiracy

unmentionable site is down

it says suspended in the url


----------



## MistaBernie

I dont have any acetaminophen in the house, only aspirin. I has a pain. This not good.


----------



## dudemanppl

I just took out the sensor in my 5DII without taking the battery out. Jeez can I get any stupider? Good news: sensor that went underwater works for some reason. Bad news: NOTHING WHOOOOOO!

Also this 5DII is made out of the components of 4 different 5DIIs.dafunq?


----------



## sub50hz

Server overload, working on it.

edit: This host is terrible. It's overloading their _shared_ single Xeon server. If anybody has a good, inexpensive hosting solution, please let me know.


----------



## dudemanppl

Its back up BTW.


----------



## foothead

So I'm looking for a better enlarging lens for 4x5 negatives, since all I have right now is a componon 50 and a raptar 90. I emailed Harry at http://www.classic-enlargers.com/ to see what focus tracks he had in stock. Here's the list I got:
Quote:


> 1) 210
> 2) 210?
> 3) 210M
> 4) 190M Copy
> 5) 162 Raptar
> 6) 162 Raptar
> 7)
> 8) 150 Rogonar
> 9) 138M Raptar
> 10) 135M Componon
> 11) 105M Componon
> 12) 105 Comp
> 13) 100M Componon
> 14) 100
> 15) 102?
> 16 101 Raptar
> 17) 90M Omegaron
> 18) 90M Componon
> 19) 75M Omegaron
> 20) 50M Componon


I'm thinking 135mm Componon. I also have the track for a 190mm Ektanon, but I cannot really find any info on those, and that seems a bit long for 4x5.

EDIT: I found a source for the 190mm Ektanon. Should I try it first? I'm thinking yes, since the tracks cost $80/pop and I'd probably end up buying it at some point anyway for 5x7 or 6x17.


----------



## makecoldplayhistory

Can anyone tell me, if the objective is black and white images, is it better to shoot in colour and desaturate them or do you get better B&W images if you shoot them in B&W in the first place?

I've been told both.

Thanks,

Mike


----------



## foothead

With a digital camera? Shoot RAW and desat in photoshop. That way you can adjust color sensitivities for different effects. Sort of like using a color contrast filter on B&W film.


----------



## makecoldplayhistory

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> With a digital camera? Shoot RAW and desat in photoshop. That way you can adjust color sensitivities for different effects. Sort of like using a color contrast filter on B&W film.


thanks


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> You do know that 35 is worth 2000 dollars right? Also did the unmentionable site just get shut down by ****stains?


i know its value. mines pretty banged up but optically perfect.


----------



## sub50hz

What's better than 250 bucks worth of beer? 250 bucks worth of beer, clams casino and poutine. I forgot I had a camera in my pocket, whoops.


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> What's better than 250 bucks worth of beer? 250 bucks worth of beer, clams casino and poutine. I forgot I had a camera in my pocket, whoops.


Thought you Americans didn't have poutines..? haha. They're so amazing.


----------



## sub50hz

Thank god I didn't have to foot that entire bill, lol. Just looked at my checking account to make sure I didn't have a grievous error in judgement after a few too many Dreadnaughts.


----------



## iandroo888

gonna go to WPPI convention on monday.. wonder if nikon will have its d800 there =3


----------



## scottath

cannot remember whom it was i was talking to that didnt like all my wide crops......but anyhow.
Usually i do 3:1 for my panos......in light of the conversation i had to better it just for the conversation......so i give you a 9.2:1 image
41144x4456 native res










was a hazy day though - and sky was boring. this is 8:30am

EDIT - and one from the night before:


----------



## Danylu

The second one is very nice Scott









Anyone got anything to say about B+W filters?

Thinking about getting myself one of these.

http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/B-W-77mm-110-ND-1000X-Filter-NEW-F-PRO-/280811846355?pt=AU_Filters&hash=item4161b0bad3

My current 3 stop ND filter doesn't really cut it for long exposures during the day.


----------



## scottath

Thats the exact same filter that i have, and from the same place. Its great - youve seen my shots with it








can chat further on msn if youd like


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iandroo888*
> 
> gonna go to WPPI convention on monday.. wonder if nikon will have its d800 there =3


I know two of them recently got stolen along with a D4 and about 150K worth of gear. Im guessing they have more than two demo units though.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *silvrr*
> 
> I know two of them recently got stolen along with a D4 and about 150K worth of gear. Im guessing they have more than two demo units though.


oh yah i heard about that news.. all the roadtrip gear got stolen.. >< i played with a few of the d4's too


----------



## MistaBernie

New Pocketwizard Plus IIIs coming in March.. cheaper and better apparently ($139 ea). B&H already has them for presale..

plusiii.pocketwizard.com

Personally, I'm holding out for outside income or sale of some old gear (not sure what yet) to pick up ETTL wireless triggers... but if I wasn't, I might pick up a few of these.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Thank god I didn't have to foot that entire bill, lol. Just looked at my checking account to make sure I didn't have a grievous error in judgement after a few too many Dreadnaughts.


Dreadnaughts. Delirium does that me. Some one should release an epically potent and tasty beer and just call it "Lapse in Judgment." You heard it here first.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Danylu*
> 
> The second one is very nice Scott
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone got anything to say about B+W filters?
> Thinking about getting myself one of these.
> http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/B-W-77mm-110-ND-1000X-Filter-NEW-F-PRO-/280811846355?pt=AU_Filters&hash=item4161b0bad3
> My current 3 stop ND filter doesn't really cut it for long exposures during the day.


Nice, definitely a good choice in the 10-stop. I also used a 3-stop initially then switched to a B+W 1.8 (6-stop) and even with that I find myself dramatically stopping down. Oh if only I could justify the Singh-Ray.


----------



## dudemanppl

Wouldn't buy a PW ever. Way overpriced.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*
> 
> Dreadnaughts. Delirium does that me. Some one should release an epically potent and tasty beer and just call it "Lapse in Judgment." You heard it here first.


Delirium... oh man. I demolished a couple of the Delirium Noel bottles at our Friendsmas party, and somehow developed an alter ego known only as "Bobby Marscuponi". I won't divulge too much, as it really frames me as an even _bigger_ human wasteland.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Delirium... oh man. I demolished a couple of the Delirium Noel bottles at our Friendsmas party, and somehow developed an alter ego known only as "Bobby Marscuponi". I won't divulge too much, as it really frames me as an even _bigger_ human wasteland.


I prefer the original strong pale ale. Two 750 ml bottles will do you right.


----------



## sub50hz

Tremens?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Tremens?


Yeah. Possibly my favorite Belgian brew after Rochefort 6 and Corsendonk Brown.


----------



## sub50hz

Still a Karmeleit man myself.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Definitely a good one too. I'm glad we have good beer variety here.


----------



## sub50hz

Yeah, good ol' _Midwest._


----------



## MistaBernie

I wonder if UPS is a publicly traded company.. if they are, I should _seriously_ consider investing in them.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> I wonder if UPS is a publicly traded company.. if they are, I should _seriously_ consider investing in them.


Symbol UPS @ 76.80 a share


----------



## MistaBernie

Hm. Well, what with the imminent collapse of the USPS... I'll take over 9000!


----------



## foothead

So many blades... Why can't I get fast small/medium format lenses like this?

EDIT: Wow. That lens is definitely missing an element. How does this even happen?


----------



## mz-n10

List off a pentax forums

Isco-Gottingen Westron 35/2.8 - 13 blades
Jupiter-9 85/2 - 15 blades
Meyer Trioplan 100/2.8 - 15 blades

Opticam 135/2.8 - 10 blades
Hanimar Preset 135/3.5 - 13 blades
Enna Tele-Ennalyt 135/3.5 - 13 blades
Jupiter-11 135/4 - 13 blades

Meyer Telemegor 180/5.5 - 15 blades
Vivitar Tele 200/3.5 - 18 blades
Asahi Tele-Takumar 200/5.6 - 10 blades
Enna Tele-Ennalyt 240/4.5 - 10 blades
Spiratone Telephoto 400/6.3 - 13 blades


----------



## iandroo888

so.... the d800e... after playing with it... not THAT impressed... its good.. but iunoe if its worth the 3k price tag ... may consider cancelling my pre-order =[

on the side note, i played with a phase one 645 w/ 80mm lens.. first time using a camera like that... O.O <= reaction after pressing the shutter button...


----------



## Dream Killer

only when the 5dmk3 gets thoroughly reviewed and compared to the d800 will we know if the d800 is worth 3k. on the other hand, the d700's msrp was 3k and the d800 is much more at the same price-point.


----------



## ljason8eg

This was posted on POTN, but I figured I'd repost here since not everyone is a member over there. The first program (to my knowledge) that is able to check the 7D's shutter actuations without needing Linux. Worked with my T2i as well.

http://eoscount.com/


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> This was posted on POTN, but I figured I'd repost here since not everyone is a member over there. The first program (to my knowledge) that is able to check the 7D's shutter actuations without needing Linux. Worked with my T2i as well.
> http://eoscount.com/


Thanks! Ill have to give this a try tonight.


----------



## CarlosSpiceyWeiner

Is this:
Canon EOS Rebel XS 10.1MP SLR Digital Camera with 18-55mm IS Lens
$399.99

A good deal? It's the current w00t-off (www.woot.com)

My mom is looking for an entry level DSLR


----------



## aksthem1

Not really, considering you could get a refurb for less and the T3 sometimes will go on sale for $50. Staples will price match and with coupons it comes out to much less.

Edit: A refurbed T1i is also around $400, which would be much better value.


----------



## CarlosSpiceyWeiner

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aksthem1*
> 
> Not really, considering you could get a refurb for less and the T3 sometimes will go on sale for $50. Staples will price match and with coupons it comes out to much less.
> Edit: A refurbed T1i is also around $400, which would be much better value.


Awesome, thank you!


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iandroo888*
> 
> on the side note, i played with a phase one 645 w/ 80mm lens.. first time using a camera like that... O.O <= reaction after pressing the shutter button...


You can spend 300 bucks and get a complete medium format setup from Keh. If you really liked the way that body handled, you can buy a Mamiya 645AF, which is the exact same thing (although not digital-back ready, that's why you'll see 645 AF-Ds for much more) for somewhere around 1000.


----------



## MistaBernie

Apparently, Adobe has lost their freakin' minds.

Teacher and Student editions are now 80% off their already discounted prices. That is not a mistake.

For example..

CS5 Extended Full - Normally 999.99
Teacher and Student: $149.99
- 80% *Code: SAVE80EDU = $39.80*

For realsies. FYI, I accept gifts in any % of the money you would be saving. PM me for Paypal address..


----------



## Conspiracy

i dont have paypal. but later today i am going to see if there is anything i want to buy and I will mail you a check or something









i heard that there is a LR4 beta. when LR4 comes out if i can still get this discount I will be more than happy to send you a little money in thanks for the savings. it might not be much as i am a poor college student but i would try to send you like maybe $30 or so


----------



## aksthem1

Hmmm $180 for the whole Master Collection. Very tempting, though all I really need is PS, Illustrator, Premiere and After Effects.

I have another week to decide.


----------



## MistaBernie

I was obvs kidding about the $..









but I dont see these being active when LR4 comes out as it looks like it's due out towards the end of March and these end on 3/3 according to Adobe. (though you can just get LR3 now if you dont have it for $89.99 - 80%)


----------



## sub50hz

http://www.gottabemobile.com/2012/02/14/nikon-d800-pre-orders-from-amazon-com-slip-to-january-2013/

What a spaghetti.


----------



## dudemanppl

2/14 dude this is super old, they've changed it back to a non ****** date. In other news the D800 is 2/3rd to 1 stop better in high ISO than the D700 aka almost TWO stops better than the 5DII oh my god dude. I so much want nao.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Apparently, Adobe has lost their freakin' minds.
> 
> Teacher and Student editions are now 80% off their already discounted prices. That is not a mistake.
> 
> For example..
> 
> CS5 Extended Full - Normally 999.99
> Teacher and Student: $149.99
> - 80% *Code: SAVE80EDU = $39.80*
> 
> For realsies. FYI, I accept gifts in any % of the money you would be saving. PM me for Paypal address..


pfft, CS6 is where it is at.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> 2/14 dude this is super old


Sorry, I don't chase rumors relentlessly, this was just posted on my FB.

/kick TheDMP


----------



## dudemanppl

NO SUB stop doin that.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> pfft, CS6 is where it is at.


If you dont have it, CS5 for under $40 is WAY better than any deal you'd be paying for CS6. Also, if you buy CS5 with this steep of a discount, when it comes time that CS6 is released, T&S upgrade editions are about half the cost of T&S full editions, so you're saving money either way.

Example -- currently, full version = $199.99 with .edu;
Upgrade for .edu is 39.80

If the upgrade only version of CS6 is $99.99 Teacher and Student, then you're saving $100 by having 5. Obviously, if you already have 5, there's no value.


----------



## foothead




----------



## MistaBernie

Apparently, the 80% off coupon was a mistake. Shocker. I mean, honestly.. Slickeals, what a spaghetti.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Apparently, the 80% off coupon was a mistake. Shocker. I mean, honestly.. Slickeals, what a spaghetti.


Not a mistake, just placed my order today. The coupon worked for me.


----------



## MistaBernie

I'm getting 'promotion code not valid'.. what time did you buy? Perhaps it was already in your cart with the discount from earlier..?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> I'm getting 'promotion code not valid'.. what time did you buy? Perhaps it was already in your cart with the discount from earlier..?


Sorry, it was last night, not today.







I placed it 9 PM last night. It immediately showed the discount and I successfully paid, so I must've just got in on the deal. Sent my paystub and work ID in this morning to verify, so hopefully they don't dick around for too long. They use some terrible third-party site to do the teacher eligibility, and the confirmation e-mail said "If you have not heard from us within four business days after sending your identification, please contact Customer Service." So I'm guessing it'll take a minimum of four days.

Oh, and sorry Bernie for not being able to help. I should've just tried to buy two licenses right off, but I wanted to see if it even would go through first.


----------



## MistaBernie

No worries. There actually is fine print that basically says one license per product per calendar year for .edu purchases. Thanks anyways though!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Monkey's got talent:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/8615859/Monkey-steals-camera-to-snap-himself.html


----------



## dudemanppl

04 Jul 2011

But yeah, not bad. Better than Speedster.

I've been thinking for a long while about how I could shoehorn 5D internals in a FM2n with a motor drive. Can be done, if someone gave me money to fund this I'd be happy to accept.


----------



## Conspiracy

that monkey has skills. that guy needs to post a gallery of all the shots they took. and better give those monkeys credit lol


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*
> 
> Monkey's got talent:
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/8615859/Monkey-steals-camera-to-snap-himself.html


He was chimping.

Bad dum tshshh.


----------



## Conspiracy

lol


----------



## dudemanppl

This thread is so dead cause of sub.


----------



## sub50hz

I'm here, just real busy this weekend. I be back later.


----------



## laboitenoire

Saw my friend's 50 f/1.8 AF-S in action the other night (on the D5000 I sold him hahaha), and I must say it's a very impressive lens for the money. If I wasn't shooting my N2020, I'd be tempted to pick one up to replace my 50 f/1.4 AI-S.


----------



## dudemanppl

5DIII pictures leaked.... I don't know what to do now.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> 5DIII pictures leaked.... I don't know what to do now.


WaIt a few weeks after it is released and buy a few broken ones


----------



## dudemanppl

Wish I could source one cause that'll probably happen.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> This thread is so dead cause of sub.


Funny thing is that the unmentionable site just seems to be this thread plus profanity. Not that I don't have high hopes about it.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*
> 
> Funny thing is that the unmentionable site just seems to be this thread plus profanity. Not that I don't have high hopes about it.


lol true. need to advertise it more. obviously not here though lol. unless we make a hyperlink that says unmentionable site and when you click it takes you there


----------



## dudemanppl

I say we all make a thread about it.


----------



## iandroo888

*sigh* if only renting a 70-200 wasnt like 90 bux for 3 days with local pick up >< wish i knew someone i can borrow it from >_>


----------



## KorbenD

Lightroom 3 is the Amazon Gold Box deal today, $89.99 if anyone's interested.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Argh Adobe, why u take forever to check my educational status? I still have no CS5.


----------



## foothead

Weird, it only took like two days when I bought my copy. Did you get it during that price glitch/sale? That may have something to do with it, especially if a whole bunch of people bought it at once.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> Weird, it only took like two days when I bought my copy. Did you get it during that price glitch/sale? That may have something to do with it, especially if a whole bunch of people bought it at once.


Let's hope not. I had the 80% off code, which worked when I checked out (and still is reflected in my order). I'm actually waiting on Identit-e, the third party service that Adobe uses, to verify my proof.


----------



## MistaBernie

Take a look at this thread GT..

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=1152177&page=13

Some people were getting inpatient and doing something and getting their verification expedited (it was still in fact going through).

Also, for those of us not fortunate enough to have jumped on that bandwagon, SAVEONEDU now works to take a portion off. ($34 off CS5.5 extended, down from $199.95 to $165)


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Also, for those of us not fortunate enough to have jumped on that bandwagon, SAVEONEDU now works to take a portion off. ($34 off CS5.5 extended, down from $199.95 to $165)


Wish I was still in school, $165 sounds a lot better then $699. Maybe I should just have an affair with a teacher.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Take a look at this thread GT..
> http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=1152177&page=13
> Some people were getting inpatient and doing something and getting their verification expedited (it was still in fact going through).
> Also, for those of us not fortunate enough to have jumped on that bandwagon, SAVEONEDU now works to take a portion off. ($34 off CS5.5 extended, down from $199.95 to $165)


Good to know. I just hate this Identit-e site that Adobe uses. The day I ordered (Monday), the site wouldn't load and I got lots of internal server errors and so sort, which I assume was because of the massive influx of verifications they had to deal with. As long as I get my CS5, I'm not too worried if it takes some time (but I better get it!).
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *silvrr*
> 
> Wish I was still in school, $165 sounds a lot better then $699. Maybe I should just have an affair with a teacher.


ASL??


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*
> 
> ASL??


I think I rather pay the $$$ lol.


----------



## androidd505

XD Excited there is a thread like this !!! Hello to all ! Wanted to share some pics taken with a Nikon D5000

<---- Still newb so don't be too harsh















All these were taken at the Rio Grande Zoological Park in Albuquerque NM


----------



## laboitenoire

Just handed in my midterm portfolio for my photography class... Hopefully it's good enough for the A! It's annoying how the art department makes the cutoff for A a 93, whereas in my own department it's never higher than 90 and typically closer to 85 or 80.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *silvrr*
> 
> I think I rather pay the $$$ lol.


LOL, suit yourself.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> Just handed in my midterm portfolio for my photography class... Hopefully it's good enough for the A! It's annoying how the art department makes the cutoff for A a 93, whereas in my own department it's never higher than 90 and typically closer to 85 or 80.


That would be annoying. It was a 90 cutoff when I was in college and that was university policy. You might check to see if your department is permitted to even do that.


----------



## laboitenoire

University leaves it to each department to decide how they scale letter grades and curve and that sort of thing. In general, students don't mind the policy. We apparently made a big stink when they thought of moving to a +/- letter system that would have been fully defined by the university.


----------



## Shane1244

Letter grades are just stupid in general. It should always be in percentages. Exactly how you do is exactly what you get.


----------



## dudemanppl

Guys, 5DIII. If it wasn't 3,500 I totally would.


----------



## MistaBernie

I still have hope it might come out under $3500, but I doubt it's gonna happen. Kind of glad I have tomorrow off, I can sit here and blab with people in random corners of the globe about a camera that I'm not going to own for quite some time.


----------



## aksthem1

I really really hate that dial switch that was introduced with 60D and now it's on the 5DIII. On/off switch was so much better at the bottom for quick snaps and the mode selection dial is annoying when you have to press in the button.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*
> 
> Let's hope not. I had the 80% off code, which worked when I checked out (and still is reflected in my order). I'm actually waiting on Identit-e, the third party service that Adobe uses, to verify my proof.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Take a look at this thread GT..
> http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=1152177&page=13
> Some people were getting inpatient and doing something and getting their verification expedited (it was still in fact going through).
> Also, for those of us not fortunate enough to have jumped on that bandwagon, SAVEONEDU now works to take a portion off. ($34 off CS5.5 extended, down from $199.95 to $165)


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *silvrr*
> 
> Wish I was still in school, $165 sounds a lot better then $699. Maybe I should just have an affair with a teacher.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> Weird, it only took like two days when I bought my copy. Did you get it during that price glitch/sale? That may have something to do with it, especially if a whole bunch of people bought it at once.


Yes! My verification went through. $1000 program for $42.







Jelly?


----------



## Sean Webster

haha, I got CS5 for free through school! Jello?


----------



## MistaBernie

I'll take that commission now


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> haha, I got CS5 for free through school! Jello?


But did you get Extended?







I bought tons off hardware and software when I was in college. We had an actual student/prof only computer store with components, OS's, Macs, the works. They closed the store and now students just get crappy discounts through Mac and Dell directly.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> I'll take that commission now










There ya go.









Seriously though, thanks Bernie for telling me about it to begin with, and I'm sorry again I couldn't get you in on the deal. I will gladly whore out my teacher status in the future, should you need it.


----------



## MistaBernie

haha, no worries sir, I dont really have a need for the complete thing anyway (at this point at least). Clone stamp in LR3 is about as much editing as I normally need to do.


----------



## OverClocker55

Hi, I'm 14 and like photography. My parents are not Billionaires so when I asked for a camera I got this:

I love my camera dearly and it takes amazing photo's and video's. I spent alot of time getting my settings correct. I also use Adobe Lightroom for my editing software. Here is a sneak peak of my photo's.
The first photo is from Bush Gardens Florida. I don't really like roller coasters so I decided to take some pics of my friends on the coaster. You can't really see them but its a great photo. The second photo is from my cruise I went on last summer. My best friend cliff diving.


----------



## dudemanppl

If its 3k or under, my 1DIII... Is still not gonna be for sale. I don't think anything else really appeals to me.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> haha, no worries sir, I dont really have a need for the complete thing anyway (at this point at least). Clone stamp in LR3 is about as much editing as I normally need to do.


I just like the single-file opening scheme of PS. I get tired of the importing/exporting BS in LS (







). Don't get me wrong, LR has definitely been helpful when I've had a huge job to do, but I typically just do single edits at a time.

For that matter, I may not even need LR anymore. I never remember, but is it allowed to sell one's license, be it here at OCN or anywhere?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OverClocker55*
> 
> Hi, I'm 14 and like photography. My parents are not Billionaires so when I asked for a camera I got this:
> 
> I love my camera dearly and it takes amazing photo's and video's. I spent alot of time getting my settings correct. I also use Adobe Lightroom for my editing software. Here is a sneak peak of my photo's.
> The first photo is from Bush Gardens Florida. I don't really like roller coasters so I decided to take some pics of my friends on the coaster. You can't really see them but its a great photo. The second photo is from my cruise I went on last summer. My best friend cliff diving.


Check out the CHDK to unlock some extra functionality (RAW, video, etc).
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> If its 3k or under, my 1DIII... Is still not gonna be for sale. I don't think anything else really appeals to me.


I bet it won't be under $3K, but maybe right at. I don't think I like the integrated grip. Makes the camera too large, which was one of the points of the 5D line to begin with, to offer a smaller body than the 1D/1Ds line.


----------



## OverClocker55

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*
> 
> I just like the single-file opening scheme of PS. I get tired of the importing/exporting BS in LS (
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ). Don't get me wrong, LR has definitely been helpful when I've had a huge job to do, but I typically just do single edits at a time.
> For that matter, I may not even need LR anymore. I never remember, but is it allowed to sell one's license, be it here at OCN or anywhere?
> Check out the CHDK to unlock some extra functionality (RAW, video, etc).
> I bet it won't be under $3K, but maybe right at. I don't think I like the integrated grip. Makes the camera too large, which was one of the points of the 5D line to begin with, to offer a smaller body than the 1D/1Ds line.


Ok cool thanks


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> haha, I got CS5 for free through school! Jello?
> 
> 
> 
> But did you get Extended?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I bought tons off hardware and software when I was in college. We had an actual student/prof only computer store with components, OS's, Macs, the works. They closed the store and now students just get crappy discounts through Mac and Dell directly.
Click to expand...

Yea, I got the whole Mater Collection CS 5.5, I'm friends with a few of the graphic artists in my school and they hooked me up with the set from their class.


----------



## dudemanppl

There are other ways...


----------



## ljason8eg

Man, at the $3500 price point, I don't see a reason for the MKII prices to drop much, if at all either.


----------



## MistaBernie

well, according to CanonRumors, there _will_ be a price drop in a couple of days (coinciding with the original end of some of the current rebates) but I've heard a couple of times that the rebates have been extended (1st time for this set of rebates, but second consecutive time rebate programs were extended that I can recall). Also, I dont currently see updated expiration dates for the rebates on the Canon website itself...

That being said, I still think I got a decent deal when I got mine last month.


----------



## jemping

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> well, according to CanonRumors, there _will_ be a price drop in a couple of days (coinciding with the original end of some of the current rebates) but I've heard a couple of times that the rebates have been extended (1st time for this set of rebates, but second consecutive time rebate programs were extended that I can recall). Also, I dont currently see updated expiration dates for the rebates on the Canon website itself...
> That being said, I still think I got a decent deal when I got mine last month.


According to Photorumors, the price will drop $300.
http://photorumors.com/2012/03/01/canon-5d-mark-ii-price-will-drop-300-on-march-4th/


----------



## Castle Doc

Edit post. disregard


----------



## Dream Killer

does anyone know if the 5d3 can control flashes by itself (like the 7d)


----------



## swindle

One could assume so?

The embargo has dropped and now all the legit info is out...

What have you been doing for the past 3 hours?


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> does anyone know if the 5d3 can control flashes by itself (like the 7d)


I don't think so. The 5D MK III doesn't have a pop up flash, which is what the 7D uses to control flashes. I also didn't read anything about Canon adding another method of controlling flashes using the body.


----------



## swindle

Disregard.

I R STUPID.

EDIT EDIT:

Looks like wireless trans is the best you're gonna get...
Quote:


> Also available at launch, will be Canon's new $630 Speedlite 600EX-RT and its $470 Speedlite Transmitter ST-E3-RT (essentially all the tech of the former, minus the flash itself). Once April rolls around, you'll also be able to get your mitts on the $390 GP-E2 GPS receiver, *$850 WFT-E7A Wireless Transmitter,* and of course, the $490 BG-E11 Battery Grip (weather-resistant, with room for two batteries).


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *swindle*
> 
> Disregard.
> I R STUPID.
> EDIT EDIT:
> Looks like wireless trans is the best you're gonna get...
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Also available at launch, will be Canon's new $630 Speedlite 600EX-RT and its $470 Speedlite Transmitter ST-E3-RT (essentially all the tech of the former, minus the flash itself). Once April rolls around, you'll also be able to get your mitts on the $390 GP-E2 GPS receiver, *$850 WFT-E7A Wireless Transmitter,* and of course, the $490 BG-E11 Battery Grip (weather-resistant, with room for two batteries).
Click to expand...

The WFT-E7A is for file transfer from the camera, not for remotely triggering speed lights. The 580EX/EXII can remote trigger as can the existing Canon ST-E2, not to mention the new ones coming.


----------



## MistaBernie

DK, when you say "control" flashes, do you mean like adjust controls, or fire? If you mean adjust controls, the only way that's really done is with a 580EXii in the hotshoe (or on an ETTL cord); if you mean fire, then no, because (as mentioned above) it requires the pop up flash which it will not have.

Also, anyone else notice the GPS unit works for 1Dx, 5D3 and 7D?

Also..

Today's the last day I could return my 5D2 for full credit and pick up a 5D3. The question is, do I... Everything I'm reading is indicating that 5D2 is staying in the product line & production, which is pretty awesome for a now four year old camera. Yeah, I think I answered myself; I'd rather sell my 5Dc and put that money towards another 5D2. Good call.


----------



## Dream Killer

i mean FULLY control flash similar to how the d700 talks with the sb700. i really wanted this for the 5d3 (and i would have switched back!) but i guess i'm keeping my d800 reservation.


----------



## MistaBernie

I dont know enough about the D700 & SB700 communication to comment. I suppose I could go read it up but then I wouldn't be blabbing to everyone on the internet about the 5D3 release, etc.







I has a lazy..


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *swindle*
> 
> One could assume so?
> The embargo has dropped and now all the legit info is out...
> What have you been doing for the past 3 hours?


i was watching an open heart surgery - my idea of entertainment during my midnight lunch.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> I dont know enough about the D700 & SB700 communication to comment. I suppose I could go read it up but then I wouldn't be blabbing to everyone on the internet about the 5D3 release, etc.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I has a lazy..


it's probably similar to the 7d. the flash commanders on the 7d and d700 are fully featured. it's as if the 7d had a 580ex ii built in the camera just to control flash.


----------



## MistaBernie

gotcha. Yeah, 5D3 would require some sort of pop up flash to do it, does not have. Though, if you'd be willing to go 600-EX-RT and ST-E3-RT then you'd have a ridiculous flash system.

http://pixsylated.com/blog/canon-600ex-rt-first-impressions


----------



## Dream Killer

while reading that article this is how my brain processed as i was scrolling down

Okay, canon's trying to sell me stuff that a $3500 camera should have already -> ugly orange lcd glow ugh -> bigger lcd is nice -> what the hell are those bar graphs? -> *THERE'S A WOMAN IN THE FRIDGE!!!!!!* -> lol pepto bismol

PS: anyway, after correctly reading the article my final thought is there's no reason for canon not to have included a radio transmitter inside the 5d3 or 1dx other than pure profit.


----------



## MistaBernie

Not if my hair has to look like that.

In all seriousness though, Syl Arena knows his Canon.

Also, my insurance agent is pissing me off. Now they want to tack on an inland marine policy to cover my gear away from my house. For another $325 a year. Screw it, I'm joining PPA. For about that I get like $15k in gear coverage and coverage by the indemnity trust.


----------



## Dream Killer

i don't know what you mean but some new HIPAA rules kicked in this march and when i checked my e-mail today i found this funny:

Quote:


> Dear Doctor,
> 
> To further comply with HIPAA we have password protected our diagnostic imaging reports which are automatically emailed to you. The *default password is radiology*.
> 
> ...


one thing i've learned in the 8 months i've been a resident is that hospitals skate at the edge of medical compliance.


----------



## MistaBernie

haha, having worked in medical software for the last 4+ years, I see this _first hand_ (and from the inside out). It's pretty interesting.

Ok, it's noontime, I'm gonna put on some pants and go out and have an at least partially productive day.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Score, school called early today because of tornado warnings - and on a Friday!


----------



## MistaBernie

I'd rather be in class without imminent danger of death due to TORNADO.. call me crazy.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

The schools here are being extra cautious. As long as I've lived here, there's never been a serious tornado, so no one is seriously concerned. The geography here makes it difficult for a long tracker to take hold.


----------



## MistaBernie

what the...

They closed the Papa Johns down the street from my house... when?

Oh, gonna try out LensAlign2 tonite to see if my 50 f/1.4 is still wonky...


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Oh, gonna try out LensAlign2 tonite to see if my 50 f/1.4 is still wonky...


Oh why would that not surprise me.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> Oh why would that not surprise me.


DONT SAY THAT!









In reality I just wanna try the thing out..


----------



## sub50hz

Buy scanner, get to work.


untitled by sub50hz, on Flickr

More on the flickr, even more to come tomorrow.


----------



## dudemanppl

Not bad.


----------



## foothead

I just priced out all the supplies for Ilfochrome. Looks like I'll be switching to C-41. Is Kodak Portra the best I'll get as far as muted color?


----------



## dudemanppl

Most DR. But SO expensive in non 135 formats.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Most DR. But SO expensive in non 135 formats.


Eh, compared to ilfochrome, it's dirt cheap. Seriously, the chemistry is fourteen parts (including replenishers, obv) and each one has to be bought in large quantities, individually. There are smaller hobbyist kits, but it's like $90 and the capacity is fifteen 11x14 prints. I love the look of the prints, but that's just too much for me to afford.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> DONT SAY THAT!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In reality I just wanna try the thing out..


Make sure you follow the instructions to a "t". Go to the website and use the calculator to determine the lensalign focus chart to sensor distance (should be ~4ft for 50mm) and set it exactly. I have the pro version and check all my lenses every couple of months, f/1.4's sometimes more frequently.


----------



## dudemanppl

I'm gonna cry. I misloaded my Leica and lost 30 pictures...


----------



## Conspiracy

damn that sucks, how did you manage to do that?


----------



## dudemanppl

I'm dumb and didn't check for the rewind crank turning. So I got mad and shot most of a 20 pictures on some 500T. New rule for me, do not use fingers as squeegee. God these are the dustiest negatives ever.


----------



## laboitenoire

Water spots are driving me mad with developing... Our art studio has incredibly hard water and even with photoflo, half an hour of oven drying, and wiping with an alcohol-based cleaner (probs IPA or methanol) you'll still have a couple of water spots. So annoying.


----------



## dudemanppl

Eh, when I do get them, I just wipe em off.


----------



## KenjiS

Geez, its been forever since i shot film it seems..

Or been on here, Hey guys


----------



## foothead

The water here is so soft, water spots have never really been a problem. A couple drops of photo flo takes care of them. Perhaps try rinsing in some distilled water? Some people use it to mix all their chemicals, but idk if that's really necessary.


----------



## laboitenoire

If we had DI, I would try that. But our studio is old and the department is cheap, so that's not an option, lol.

It's only been a problem with a few negatives so far. Generally if I wipe it again with the cleaner it's not too bad.


----------



## Dream Killer

when i shot film, it was around the time i had my saltwater reef tank so i had pure water from a reverse osmosis filter for spotless negatives.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> If we had DI, I would try that. But our studio is old and the department is cheap, so that's not an option, lol.
> It's only been a problem with a few negatives so far. Generally if I wipe it again with the cleaner it's not too bad.


fyi, DI and distilled is 2 different things.

u can just buy a jug of distilled at Safeway for a dollar or two, i use to use it when i was into watercooling.

we have fairly hard water in SF and i never had trouble with spots after photoflo....


----------



## laboitenoire

I know they're different... Generally though if you just need to get the crap out to really soften the water DI is more than enough. But yeah, it's not really practical for me to carry a jug of water to class. Especially seeing as I'd probably go through over a gallon developing a single roll of film.


----------



## Conspiracy

why does keh not work... :|

it worked a little while ago and now it doesnt load again











i want to order my stuff.

now i have it loaded but its being slow.....


----------



## Sean Webster

LOL, people are so upset about my opinions in the Rate the photo above you thread. Like my opinion really should matter that much.


----------



## Conspiracy

its not an opinion its only a number lol i see that guy getting all mad about nothing


----------



## Conspiracy

just bought this and saved $1 ordering over the phone because i live locally to the warehouse. apparently there is an $11 pickup fee if i drove there lol.

http://www.keh.com/camera/Minolta-Manual-Focus-Camera-Bodies/1/sku-MI020000043120?r=FE

http://www.keh.com/camera/Minolta-Manual-Focus-Fixed-Focal-Length-Lenses/1/sku-MI060105009210?r=FE

and i bought a 49mm front lens cap

now i just need to order some film on B&H and im ready to go, and buy some batteries at walmart


----------



## KenjiS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> LOL, people are so upset about my opinions in the Rate the photo above you thread. Like my opinion really should matter that much.


Someone jelly i take it? Or just disagree...

Heck so long as theres some actual comments i dont care...if someone just goes 1/10 "I DONT LIKE IT" then yeah, i can see someone getting mad, i at least justify my rating


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> LOL, people are so upset about my opinions in the Rate the photo above you thread. Like my opinion really should matter that much.


seriously the rate the photo thread is a joke...just HDR then over saturate the image.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> just bought this and saved $1 ordering over the phone because i live locally to the warehouse. apparently there is an $11 pickup fee if i drove there lol.
> http://www.keh.com/camera/Minolta-Manual-Focus-Camera-Bodies/1/sku-MI020000043120?r=FE
> http://www.keh.com/camera/Minolta-Manual-Focus-Fixed-Focal-Length-Lenses/1/sku-MI060105009210?r=FE
> and i bought a 49mm front lens cap
> now i just need to order some film on B&H and im ready to go, and buy some batteries at walmart


i loved my old xe-1 and 50/1.4. wish it wasnt broken.....


----------



## KenjiS

I never got the experience of developing my own film...wanted to but just couldnt get the stuff set up...


----------



## Conspiracy

my first couple rolls ill have to pay to develop and get scanned/printed. once the semester is over and i move out of the dorms and back home ill buy all the equipment to develop my own film and then ill just pay someone to scan it for me or print it. its more expensive to pay to develop and scan and print than it is to give them the negatives and pay to print/scan from what i see on the price sheet where i would take my film

ordered 4 rolls of Tri-X 400 24 exposures. its a few bucks cheaper to get a 24 roll done than a 36. so the few pennies saved saves a few bucks right now since i am starting out.

i plan to buy 1 roll of crazy poopy quality film at walmart to go through my first roll just to get a feel for the camera and test it all out


----------



## KenjiS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> my first couple rolls ill have to pay to develop and get scanned/printed. once the semester is over and i move out of the dorms and back home ill buy all the equipment to develop my own film and then ill just pay someone to scan it for me or print it. its more expensive to pay to develop and scan and print than it is to give them the negatives and pay to print/scan from what i see on the price sheet where i would take my film
> ordered 4 rolls of Tri-X 400 24 exposures. its a few bucks cheaper to get a 24 roll done than a 36. so the few pennies saved saves a few bucks right now since i am starting out.
> i plan to buy 1 roll of crazy poopy quality film at walmart to go through my first roll just to get a feel for the camera and test it all out


Good idea..

I was never as into black and white films, Most of what I shot was color slide films... Velvia, Provia and E200 to be specific...

Now i look back and wonder how i managed to get anything that sharp when shooting ISO50...


----------



## scottath

Went with a friend last night to inspect a 5DII.....she bought it (with a 50 f1.4) for $1990......
If she didnt buy it and i had $400 more id have bought it.....
sigh. on the upside - i can borrow it whenever i want it with 24hrs notice


----------



## Conspiracy

cool. so give her 24 hours notice that you need to borrow it for like a year lol


----------



## KenjiS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scottath*
> 
> Went with a friend last night to inspect a 5DII.....she bought it (with a 50 f1.4) for $1990......
> If she didnt buy it and i had $400 more id have bought it.....
> sigh. on the upside - i can borrow it whenever i want it with 24hrs notice


Dont feel toooo bad mate, Rumor mill is saying the 5DII is going to get a good price cut when the 5D III starts to ship, supposedly a new one is going to be around $2000-2100....


----------



## MistaBernie

Price is already cut in the states to $2199 ($1759 refurbished directly from Canon). Used prices are already dropping.


----------



## laboitenoire

Question: who do you guys think is the best mail-order film lab? I have three rolls of color film so far that I need developed, but there are no photo labs nearby to me (at least that I can get to). I've always heard great things about Dwayne's, but I was just looking for other opinions.


----------



## iandroo888

at this point, i think buying a lens and using it and keeping it in good condition, and selling it is a better deal than renting lenses from borrowlenses D: ><


----------



## KenjiS

Agreed...


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iandroo888*
> 
> at this point, i think buying a lens and using it and keeping it in good condition, and selling it is a better deal than renting lenses from borrowlenses D: ><


It always has been if you have the ability to do so.


----------



## iandroo888

i guess >.>


----------



## ljason8eg

I think most people just don't have the money sitting around, or the time, to buy, then sell again. Its much easier to just use your CC and rent the lenses.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> Question: who do you guys think is the best mail-order film lab? I have three rolls of color film so far that I need developed, but there are no photo labs nearby to me (at least that I can get to). I've always heard great things about Dwayne's, but I was just looking for other opinions.


Go with Dwayne's or do it yourself. Tetenal sells home kits (assuming we're talking C41 here) but they don't store particularly well once mixed, so wait until you have 10-12 rolls before doing that.


----------



## r34p3rex

Does anyone have any experience with getting a lens's AF motor replaced? How much would you reckon a repair cost? I found a 50mm 1.2L that has a dead AF motor from some minor water damage. The lens was taken to a repair shop to be cleaned out and is pristine optic-wise.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r34p3rex*
> 
> Does anyone have any experience with getting a lens's AF motor replaced? How much would you reckon a repair cost? I found a 50mm 1.2L that has a dead AF motor from some minor water damage. The lens was taken to a repair shop to be cleaned out and is pristine optic-wise.


PM dudemanppl. He'd probably know.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/65428-REG/Arkay_603537_20D_Plastic_Developing_Hypo.html What the heck? It's $38.95 for a plastic tray.


----------



## dhughesuk

Hi All,

quite new to overclock.net but I've been a lurker here for years. I've accidently stumbled across this thread, nice to see so many people with similar interests in the same place.

I'd love to know what you guys think of my work;

http://www.dan-hughes.co.uk
http://www.dan-hughes.co.uk/blog
http://www.flickr.com/photos/daniel-hughes-photography/

I've just joined the OCN flickr group too


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> Go with Dwayne's or do it yourself. Tetenal sells home kits (assuming we're talking C41 here) but they don't store particularly well once mixed, so wait until you have 10-12 rolls before doing that.


I've looked at the Tetanal kits and while interesting I'm not sure it's worthwhile at the moment. Sure it's about half the cost of develop only at Dwayne's, but the initial outlay in equipment is pretty high.

Maybe I'll give it a try if I'm able to do independent study in photography. We used to do color darkroom photography, but they decided the safety just wasn't high enough.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> Go with Dwayne's or do it yourself. Tetenal sells home kits (assuming we're talking C41 here) but they don't store particularly well once mixed, so wait until you have 10-12 rolls before doing that.
> 
> 
> 
> I've looked at the Tetanal kits and while interesting I'm not sure it's worthwhile at the moment. Sure it's about half the cost of develop only at Dwayne's, but the initial outlay in equipment is pretty high.
> 
> Maybe I'll give it a try if I'm able to do independent study in photography. We used to do color darkroom photography, but they decided the safety just wasn't high enough.
Click to expand...

Equipment cost? You use the same tank/reels/etc. as black and white. The only other things you need are a rubbermaid container and an aquarium heater that'll go to 100f to maintain temperature. But yeah, $3.99 at Dwayne's is really a decent price if you don't have time or don't want to do it yourself.

I'm looking at a computerized Beseler 45S Dichro head on eBay. $115. Should I get it or spend an extra $60 for the Chromega Dichroic II? I'm currently leaning towards the Beseler, just because of cost, but the Chromega would require less modification to fit on my E5 enlarger chassis.

EDIT: Bought the Beseler. Turns out the non-computerized version retails for $1.9k, so I figured it was worth it. And they still sell the mixing chambers, so that's good too.


----------



## biatchi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> PM dudemanppl. He'd probably know.


He's probably done it too


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *biatchi*
> 
> He's probably done it too


hes probably ruined one for fun before too. not to mention the 5dmkii that he sunk in water last week to see if it could float lololol


----------



## r34p3rex

Just got a reply back from the seller.. he doesn't have any pictures taken with the lens after it was cleaned








Quote:


> I have not tried the lens since receiving it back from the repair shop - as soon as the water damage occurred (fresh water) I brought it into my tech who promptly took all of the elements apart to ensure that it was dry, he cleaned it and put it back together and told me that the optics were in great shape and the rest of the lense looked to be in good shape as well and that the rim motor that controls the auto focus was not working and could be replaced, but if not it could still be used as an auto focus lens.


http://www.ebay.com/itm/180832481276?ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1423.l2649#ht_500wt_898

If anyone is interested









~$510 with 4 hours left. If everything is indeed fine, someone could score a pretty good deal. Don't want to take the risk anymore


----------



## dudemanppl

Never buy a broken lens on ebay, thats where you SELL broken lenses for a profit.


----------



## xxrabid93

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Never buy a broken lens on ebay, thats where you SELL broken lenses for a profit.


Where do you get all your broken stuff then?


----------



## MistaBernie

Dang, there's _something_ on my essentially brand new 5D2's sensor that's only showing up at smaller apertures (prevalent at f/22 - yeah, I dont shoot there alot, but it was like in the form of the big dipper). Crap part is, there's nothing on it when I look inside. Canon better not want one of my clean and check things for a month old body..


----------



## Conspiracy

that sucks


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Dang, there's _something_ on my essentially brand new 5D2's sensor that's only showing up at smaller apertures (prevalent at f/22 - yeah, I dont shoot there alot, but it was like in the form of the big dipper). Crap part is, there's nothing on it when I look inside. Canon better not want one of my clean and check things for a month old body..


Sounds like dust, get a rocket blower and blow it out. You can rarely see the dust on a sensor, but it will show up at smaller apertures on screen. Don't use compressed air or blow at it with your mouth as both container moisture and you risk making things worse than they are. My old 7D never went for a cleaning and never showed dust, just regular blow outs with a rocket blower.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *silvrr*
> 
> Sounds like dust, get a rocket blower and blow it out. You can rarely see the dust on a sensor, but it will show up at smaller apertures on screen. Don't use compressed air or blow at it with your mouth as both container moisture and you risk making things worse than they are. My old 7D never went for a cleaning and never showed dust, just regular blow outs with a rocket blower.


Done that, and if you hold the sensor at the right angle you absolutely can see dust on the sensor. Granted, given the size of what's showing up, I might give it another shot, but the spots aren't large like the one spot that was on my 7D not too long ago.


----------



## dudemanppl

I can take out a 5DII sensor, clean it, and put it back in in under 15 minutes. quite easy. But that's a bit of an extreme, I've never had to do it but it is quite easy. 16 screws I think...


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> I can take out a 5DII sensor, clean it, and put it back in in under 15 minutes. quite easy. But that's a bit of an extreme, I've never had to do it but it is quite easy. 16 screws I think...


I think? Meaning it starts with 18 and you always end up only putting 16 back in?







Just kidding sir..

I'm gonna try to take a closer look to see if I can see anything, and give it one more good cleaning with the rocket blower to see if it gets any better. I remembered when I saw the dot on my 7D showing up in my long exposures and I was mortified, but when I opened it up I could physically see the speck of dust and blew it out.


----------



## mz-n10

I have dust blocks on my a900 I need to get rid of...tried rocket blowers and still there.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Dang, there's _something_ on my essentially brand new 5D2's sensor that's only showing up at smaller apertures (prevalent at f/22 - yeah, I dont shoot there alot, but it was like in the form of the big dipper). Crap part is, there's nothing on it when I look inside. Canon better not want one of my clean and check things for a month old body..


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> I have dust blocks on my a900 I need to get rid of...tried rocket blowers and still there.


Small amounts of moisture can make dust motes stick to the sensor. I bought one of these kits and it took care of the dust motes which wouldn't dislodge. Cheap and easy.


----------



## MistaBernie

Only available at the store apparently.. else I'd give it a shot. If moisture could be doing that, what if I left the body upside down on a silica packet for a bit to see if I can get whatever it is to dry out and then try to blow it out again?

*Edited to add:* Reaper, you selling a 50L on CL Boston for $600 at the moment? Because if you're not and it's legit I'm buying it..


----------



## foothead

Lol, I feel weird having never had a dust problem. Seems like Canon could come up with something comparable to Olympus's system, but apparently not.


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> Lol, I feel weird having never had a dust problem. Seems like Canon could come up with something comparable to Olympus's system, but apparently not.


Canon has the same thing, high frequency sensor shake, maybe Olympus shakes a bit harder.


----------



## r34p3rex

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Only available at the store apparently.. else I'd give it a shot. If moisture could be doing that, what if I left the body upside down on a silica packet for a bit to see if I can get whatever it is to dry out and then try to blow it out again?
> *Edited to add:* Reaper, you selling a 50L on CL Boston for $600 at the moment? Because if you're not and it's legit I'm buying it..


hah i saw that too.. it was flagged and removed


----------



## MistaBernie

dont get why people would flag it. I could see someone that's a pro photog that doesn't use the internet or buy alot that has a lens they bought three years ago and want to get half back on it.. I'm just hoping my email went through before the flagging, I know it's a super long shot but if it's for real I'd flip that thing for profit so fast, man...


----------



## Saancho

Hello Everyone!
I'm Saancho, and I am VERY new to photography. Today I traded my pistol for my dads Nikon D70 with a couple lenses. I wanted to show you guys first the camera, but also a photo i took today. I would like any tips or tricks to help my photography skills. please critique my photo and help me learn. Thanks!

Also, I have already been reading through the photography sticky threads. You know all the beginners threads.







...I guess my intent with this post is to introduce myself to the photography section of OCN and to also gauge how well i did for my first photo.

Special thanks to all the creaters of the great photography guides and beginners threads!....you're toils over these threads have helped me a ton!

First shot is of the camera taken from my sony point-n-shoot:


This was my best/fav shot of the day...please critique it







Taken with a Nikkor 50mm 1:1.8 lens


*Edit* Dang...not even a hello!...nor a critique?


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*
> 
> Small amounts of moisture can make dust motes stick to the sensor. I bought one of these kits and it took care of the dust motes which wouldn't dislodge. Cheap and easy.


ive had my 900 for 2 years, so i think i need to get it professionally lubed and cleaned (dont know if they lube dslrs) but i will look to pick up one of these kits.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> Lol, I feel weird having never had a dust problem. Seems like Canon could come up with something comparable to Olympus's system, but apparently not.


imo....the larger the sensor the more likely dust seems to stick to it.....


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Only available at the store apparently.. else I'd give it a shot. If moisture could be doing that, what if I left the body upside down on a silica packet for a bit to see if I can get whatever it is to dry out and then try to blow it out again?
> *Edited to add:* Reaper, you selling a 50L on CL Boston for $600 at the moment? Because if you're not and it's legit I'm buying it..


I bought mine at a local shop, but you can buy direct from the manufacturer or elsewhere online.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> ive had my 900 for 2 years, so i think i need to get it professionally lubed and cleaned (dont know if they lube dslrs) but i will look to pick up one of these kits.
> imo....the larger the sensor the more likely dust seems to stick to it.....


I think that must be true, because I get far more dust on my sensor than I ever did on the 40D or 7D (or XTi for that matter).


----------



## KenjiS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r34p3rex*
> 
> Does anyone have any experience with getting a lens's AF motor replaced? How much would you reckon a repair cost? I found a 50mm 1.2L that has a dead AF motor from some minor water damage. The lens was taken to a repair shop to be cleaned out and is pristine optic-wise.


Depends on the lens, on a 50mm f/1.2L id wager its in the $500-600 neighborhood

Depending on what you get it for, it could be a good deal...


----------



## dudemanppl

I could do it for 250...


----------



## Conspiracy

my camera just came!! XD-11 with 50 1.4









just waiting on film and need to go buy batteries today at walmart. the camera looks in great condition. the leather around it is old but no scratches or anything. the film advance crank wont turn all the way to activate the shutter but i dont have anything in it and i think i read that it does need batteries to engage everything









film should be here this afternoon i think


----------



## sub50hz

I don't remember ever running out of batteries, but I think the XD will fire without a battery at one speed... 1/100 or something. It's been a while since i used one, great camera.


----------



## Conspiracy

once i put the batteries in the film advance crank started working and the shutter works. everything in it seems pretty good. i bought 2 super cheap rolls of fuji film to screw around on until the good stuff gets here. i only bought 2 batteries since they were $3 at the store


----------



## sub50hz

I am contemplating buying another XD, although my desire for an OM-2S is overwhelming.


----------



## MistaBernie

Man, 70mm is wide on full frame.. should have brought my 70-200..


----------



## mz-n10

maybe im a little late but....holy crap mistabernie, think u have enough cameras?


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> I am contemplating buying another XD, although my desire for an OM-2S is overwhelming.


i havent got it all loaded up yet but im about to put this roll of cheap fuji to test it out to get me started before my Tri-X gets here like next week. i still need to get it back cranked or something so the film counter is at the beginning because i got it and it was at S but after testing everything its now at like 2 on the reader

if and when i get more film stuff i am going to look into that OM-2S possibly or something different, im just getting started so most likely any other purchases other than more film would be maybe either a wider lens like a 24 or a 135 f2.8

edit: sweet it reset when i opened the camera up


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> maybe im a little late but....holy crap mistabernie, think u have enough cameras?


I only have one more body than you (plus a point and shoot).

But yeah, I have a bit of gear. I thought I'd be shooting some inside today so I removed the 70-200 from my small bag and replaced it with my 580EX-ii... I loaded batteries, used the modeling flash once and put it away. Not a single picture. What a person.

Also, new iPad is out. Better camera, so it's camera related. Also, same price point. Kind of surprised they didn't cave and try to fight off the Kindle Fire a bit. Meh, that makes me glad, if it were cheaper it would immediately devalue my 2 and make me want a 3, things that don't work well together.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> I only have one more body than you (plus a point and shoot).
> But yeah, I have a bit of gear. I thought I'd be shooting some inside today so I removed the 70-200 from my small bag and replaced it with my 580EX-ii... I loaded batteries, used the modeling flash once and put it away. Not a single picture. What a person.
> Also, new iPad is out. Better camera, so it's camera related. Also, same price point. Kind of surprised they didn't cave and try to fight off the Kindle Fire a bit. Meh, that makes me glad, if it were cheaper it would immediately devalue my 2 and make me want a 3, things that don't work well together.


true, but the a200 is equal to a rebel, vs your 3 semi-pro bodies









the ipad2 is going to take a hit in the used market, ipad2 will be sold along side the THE NEW iPAD for 399....so used market is going to be under that.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> true, but the a200 is equal to a rebel, vs your 3 semi-pro bodies
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the ipad2 is going to take a hit in the used market, ipad2 will be sold along side the THE NEW iPAD for 399....so used market is going to be under that.


Well, the 5D2 came from my bonus. The 7D refurb came from the sale of my 60D and my 5D classic came from the sale of my Fender American 5 String Jazz Bass. I keep an eye open for deals and I jump on them (Like finding my 24-70L for $850, or my 35L for under $1000). Only a couple of things I've bought brand new. I look at most of the gear as an investment -- if I use it alot, I'll likely make the money back. If I dont and I want to get rid of it (or need cash), it's there for me to unload and have cash available.


----------



## sub50hz

Having so much gear must make it a huge pain in the ass to go shoot with, because that lot is heavy as balls and there's too many damn lenses to choose from.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Having so much gear must make it a huge pain in the ass to go shoot with, because that lot is heavy as balls and there's too many damn lenses to choose from.


Nah, it's not bad actually. I keep most of my gear in my Domke, but I almost never bring the bag out unless I know I"m going to be using most of my glass/bodies. When I'm traveling light, I'm just gonna bring 5D2, 35L and 24-70. I keep my 72-77mm step up ring and 77mm ND filter in my bag with a little cleaning kit. Relatively light and easy. If I know I'm shooting lots of moving subjects, I just bring the 7D instead.


----------



## sub50hz

I've become very barebones when shooting these days. RB, a meter, a 3-stop ND, an extra 120 back and the AE-1. I haven't left the house with more than that in over 2 months, is nice.


----------



## MistaBernie

Yeah, if I'm not getting paid (or hoping to have someone buy prints) I'm not carrying more than two lenses when I leave the house. Half the time I dont even bother changing lenses, unless it's something very specific. It's not that difficult, it's fairly easy to anticipate what I'm going to be shooting.


----------



## foothead

So... what film do you guys use for masking purposes? On the rare occasion that I do it, I've just been using Ilford Delta or Fomapan, but I'm sure there's something much better out there. Maybe Rollei 25 orthochromatic? I've heard it looks a lot like Tech pan, which would make it about perfect.


----------



## laboitenoire

Got back my midterm portfolio in photography, and thanks to me acing the incredibly basic first project, I managed to get an A for the midterm!


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> Got back my midterm portfolio in photography, and thanks to me acing the incredibly basic first project, I managed to get an A for the midterm!


nice!


----------



## Conspiracy

so my dad gave me a bunch of old film that is Kodak Royal Gold ISO 200. i have like 7 rolls. totally going to shoot this first to see if it develops weird since its develop date is 10 years expired lol. should i set my camera to a different speed maybe half and shoot at half or something? not sure if shooting expired film that I honestly do not know the storage conditions. or shoot it like any other film, which i doubt.


----------



## foothead

I'd expose 2/3 to 1 stop over then develop normal. Or better yet, photograph a chart, then do a clip test. Depending on how degraded it is, you may have a hard time printing, since the colors tend to decay at different rates. Expect there to be a bit of a cyan to green cast, but it probably won't be severe unless the film was stored in heat or something.

So I was just playing around and I found out that the flash sync on my 150mm actually does work. I just have to push the plug really hard. Awesome, I guess I ought to add a hotshoe to my Speed Graphic now. Would it be better to put it out on a handle like the original flashes, or should I just screw it on top in the middle?


----------



## Conspiracy

awesome. its daytime now







going to shoot some film on my new camera today before I leave for basketball regional in South Carolina. not sure how much film to take with me but im thinking just 2 rolls since they are 24 exp. guess ill shoot a little of my expired kodak gold since i dont have anything else to shoot and i have 7 rolls of the expired stuff. i dont think i will shoot 2 rolls while im there but im pretty sure i can easily shoot 24 shots at least.

i have a feeling either a scanner or developing material are in my near future this summer to save money on dev costs since if im reading it right is $15/roll for develop and high res scan. not sure how much of a deal that is

http://www.showcaseinc.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/Lab-brochure.pdf

shooting with the XD-11 so far is pretty fun and rather easy


----------



## foothead

Decent film scanners for 35mm are going to be pretty expensive. I think this is about the cheapest you can get that'll give you good, printable results.


----------



## sub50hz

I don't think he needs to spend that much on a scanner, that's borderline ridiculous. Spend 150 bucks on an Epson, when you feel you need more detail and enlargement, step up to medium format.


----------



## foothead

Dudemanppl posted some 35mm scans from the Epson a while back. They were awful. It's okay for medium format, but anything smaller comes out without a lot of detail. I suppose it depends on the user though, since image quality matters more to some people than others.

EDIT: http://www.epson.com/cgi-bin/Store/consumer/consDetail.jsp?oid=63076139&utm_source=google&utm_medium=shopping&utm_campaign=base&ref=googlebase $99 refurbed from Epson. For that cost, it's really not bad, but I'd say it's not worth the full 150 for 35mm only.


----------



## grassh0ppa

Hey guys,

I don't know anything about cameras, but I'm considering buying one for my gf since she is going to Europe, specifically Holland, next year on an exchange. I want to get her a decent camera, but she's no photographer either. Budget is pretty low since I'm a student, I'm thinking no more than $150, but I could get her brother to pitch in some so feel free to go a bit higher.

Didn't wanna make a whole thread for this, so if any of you guys could help me out that would be awesome.


----------



## dudemanppl

The 7600i is a wonderful scanner. Not just for the price, but like for 35mm PERIOD.


----------



## Conspiracy

im in South Carolina doing NCAA basketball again. this time regionals. i dont think ill miss out on any major deals until i get back. but i definitely should probably look into getting a film scanner to start since i have a good place to get my shots developed since its the only professional photo/video store in Georgia. I can take the negatives and scan them myself to save money.

that $99 epson might be a good starter, and it scans photos and negatives. for that price and what yall have said i think its a good starter. dont need to buy a fancy one since im still a beginner technically. down the road i can upgrade


----------



## Conspiracy

not sure why my edit doesnt show on the last post.

but yea that epson scans photos and negatives. for $99 i think it would make a good starter until i upgrade to something higher quality when i need it. this is all hobby and im not mega picky for quality.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *grassh0ppa*
> 
> Hey guys,
> 
> I don't know anything about cameras, but I'm considering buying one for my gf since she is going to Europe, specifically Holland, next year on an exchange. I want to get her a decent camera, but she's no photographer either. Budget is pretty low since I'm a student, I'm thinking no more than $150, but I could get her brother to pitch in some so feel free to go a bit higher.
> 
> Didn't wanna make a whole thread for this, so if any of you guys could help me out that would be awesome.


Are you okay with buying used? If so, you can get this camera and this lens for $204 shipped or this camera with this lens for $174 shipped.

If you must have new, the best you'll be able to get is a crappy point-and-shoot, which generally won't be as good as either of these cameras. They're both older cameras which is why they're so cheap, but the photos will still be excellent. The two main things they won't have that newer cameras have are improved low light performance (both only go to ISO 1600, and neither performs well at that) and megapixel count, which is largely irrelevant for most people's uses. Even the 6.3 megapixels on the Canon will be way more than enough for posting them on the web (a 1080p screen is only 2MP to give you an idea) and small-medium prints (up to 8x10 will look good). Regarding the low-light performance, it looks like most new point-and-shoots in that price range also max around 1600, but these SLRs perform better at that sensitivity (though I'd still say to keep it under 800 pretty much all the time). They're also going to have much better optics than a p&s, and she will be able to get new lenses and keep them when she upgrades to a new body. Having used both lenses, I can say for certain that the Olympus one is optically superior, but Olympus has ceased production of their SLR cameras, save the pro-level E-5, but that was only made to satisfy pros who had already put massive amounts of money into Olympus SLR lenses. In the future, she would have to switch to Micro four thirds (google it) if she wanted to continue using her lenses, but doing so would require an adapter that runs about $150. Canon still makes cameras and lenses on the same system, so this won't be a problem if you go with that.

The other thing to take into account is size/weight. Neither of the SLRs I linked are particularly big, but they're nowhere near as small as a standard p&s. A p&s could easily be slipped into a purse, while she'd have to either wear the SLR on a strap or carry a fairly large bag. Personally I'd much rather carry the larger camera for better image quality, but you should definitely ask her about this.

IMO, go with the Olympus if you can find a way to spend that much. I'm still using a very similar camera (E410) with the exact same lens for my digital work, and it's performed admirably and doesn't feel outdated at all. The Canon likely will feel dated and will probably be missing some features the Olympus has. Olympus's cameras also tend to feel much more well-constructed than Canon's consumer line.

You'll also have to get a CF card for either camera, but these are cheap. The Olympus can also take an xD, but I recommend against that, since CF is superior and generally costs less.


----------



## foothead

Double posting because I tried to edit in something in the last post, but it won't show up for some reason. What I said was:

You'll also have to get a CF card for either camera, but these are cheap. The Olympus can also take an xD, but I recommend against that, since CF is superior and generally costs less.

EDIT: One more thing I thought of: Make sure she has plug adapters or she won't be able to charge the batteries.


----------



## KenjiS

I'm thinking of posting up a little opinion piece on APS-C Standard Primes for Canon EOS.... Since I've owned I think every sub-$500 option...


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KenjiS*
> 
> I'm thinking of posting up a little opinion piece on APS-C Standard Primes for Canon EOS.... Since I've owned I think every sub-$500 option...


you should make a thread about it if you like.


----------



## KenjiS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> you should make a thread about it if you like.


Im thinking on it...There seem to be quite a few Canon folks here and stuff..

if i do it will also get posted up on POTN

Nikon and Sony folks have it easy! They have cheap 35mm f/1.8 Digital primes.. Canon doesnt...


----------



## Conspiracy

so i got one roll of the cheap walmart fujifilm 400 developed. shot most of it outside probably not the best idea but i was experimenting. every shot came out good, actually missed focus on one shot somehow. cant really tell since it was an experiment roll and obviously the quality of the prints are not that great. i dont plan on shooting in harsh daylight with 400 film anymore lol as a few were slightly overexposed looking. my next roll is going to be the 10 year expired iso 200 kodak gold.

now that i got my first roll out of the way i fell more comfortable with the camera even though its small to shoot with compared to the 7D+grip but ill get used to it. had a blast shooting film









definitely will buy some lower ISO B&W for the harsher daylight shooting in the future so im not shooting between f8-16 more in the f11-16 range.i dont mind stopping down but almost was stopping down all the way since i was at ISO 400 lol

i had a few pretty good shots that i liked. i might go back and shoot some with better film and better develop. once i get a scanner ill post some stuff. at the pro place they can scan the negs to a CD for a little extra. i might try to get my parents to get me that $99 epson scanner for my birthday if everything works out. i havent told them how much i spent on camera/lens and film yet lol


----------



## KenjiS

Dramatically Lit Rose by Kenjis9965, on Flickr

Boredom + messing around with flash...


----------



## grassh0ppa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> Are you okay with buying used? If so, you can get this camera and this lens for $204 shipped or this camera with this lens for $174 shipped.
> If you must have new, the best you'll be able to get is a crappy point-and-shoot, which generally won't be as good as either of these cameras. They're both older cameras which is why they're so cheap, but the photos will still be excellent. The two main things they won't have that newer cameras have are improved low light performance (both only go to ISO 1600, and neither performs well at that) and megapixel count, which is largely irrelevant for most people's uses. Even the 6.3 megapixels on the Canon will be way more than enough for posting them on the web (a 1080p screen is only 2MP to give you an idea) and small-medium prints (up to 8x10 will look good). Regarding the low-light performance, it looks like most new point-and-shoots in that price range also max around 1600, but these SLRs perform better at that sensitivity (though I'd still say to keep it under 800 pretty much all the time). They're also going to have much better optics than a p&s, and she will be able to get new lenses and keep them when she upgrades to a new body. Having used both lenses, I can say for certain that the Olympus one is optically superior, but Olympus has ceased production of their SLR cameras, save the pro-level E-5, but that was only made to satisfy pros who had already put massive amounts of money into Olympus SLR lenses. In the future, she would have to switch to Micro four thirds (google it) if she wanted to continue using her lenses, but doing so would require an adapter that runs about $150. Canon still makes cameras and lenses on the same system, so this won't be a problem if you go with that.
> The other thing to take into account is size/weight. Neither of the SLRs I linked are particularly big, but they're nowhere near as small as a standard p&s. A p&s could easily be slipped into a purse, while she'd have to either wear the SLR on a strap or carry a fairly large bag. Personally I'd much rather carry the larger camera for better image quality, but you should definitely ask her about this.
> IMO, go with the Olympus if you can find a way to spend that much. I'm still using a very similar camera (E410) with the exact same lens for my digital work, and it's performed admirably and doesn't feel outdated at all. The Canon likely will feel dated and will probably be missing some features the Olympus has. Olympus's cameras also tend to feel much more well-constructed than Canon's consumer line.
> You'll also have to get a CF card for either camera, but these are cheap. The Olympus can also take an xD, but I recommend against that, since CF is superior and generally costs less.


Is DSLR necessary though? The person I'm getting it for is not a photographer by anymeans.... I was thinking about getting the Sony HX9V, seems like a good camera, and there are some good auctions on ebay. Granted it's over budget, but I've been looking into cameras for 2 days now, and I may be getting some help.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *grassh0ppa*
> 
> Is DSLR necessary though? The person I'm getting it for is not a photographer by anymeans.... I was thinking about getting the Sony HX9V, seems like a good camera, and there are some good auctions on ebay. Granted it's over budget, but I've been looking into cameras for 2 days now, and I may be getting some help.


If you want a point and shoot, that one isn't bad. That Olympus would still be a much better camera though. Optics are better, larger sensor, more control, it has a proper viewfinder, it can actually go above ISO 200 without automatic noise reduction annihilating all detail, I could go on. I'd definitely go with the Olympus in this case. Even in auto mode, with a person who is totally clueless, the pictures will be better. Plus, this one would actually give her a chance to learn.


----------



## KenjiS

^- What he said, DSLRs are in general better than 90% of point and shoots.. Theres very very few exceptions to that...


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KenjiS*
> 
> ^- What she said, DSLRs are in general better than 90% of point and shoots.. Theres very very few exceptions to that...


Fixed that for you.


















Coming along well... I decided to call it a day after my screwdriver bit stripped to the point that it wouldn't work anymore. I'll probably finish the wood work tomorrow, then get some measurements and order the plastic. Only problem I've noticed so far is that it feels a little bit high (36 inches) but I think that'll work out since it makes it easier to reach all the way to the back without stooping over.


----------



## Conspiracy

not sure what you fixed in that quote. looks like your build is coming along nicely.

just got back from South Carolina after my team lost in the semi-finals for regionals. sadly their season is over and were not able to go for a second national championship win. looks like i have a little track, golf, and tennis to shoot now. not to mention some more film now that i have my Tri-X 400 to shoot


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> not sure what you fixed in that quote. looks like your build is coming along nicely.


Changed he to she.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KenjiS*
> 
> ^- What *he* said, DSLRs are in general better than 90% of point and shoots.. Theres very very few exceptions to that...


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *KenjiS*
> 
> ^- What *she* said, DSLRs are in general better than 90% of point and shoots.. Theres very very few exceptions to that...
> 
> 
> 
> Fixed that for you.
Click to expand...


----------



## Conspiracy

wow didnt even see that, i guess im tired. nice to be back at home. i have spent so much time on the road i miss my bed. the hotel i was at this weekend was super nice but had the most uncomfortable memory foam beds ever.

well im trying to scan some of my shots from my first roll i experimented with but my super cheapo HP scanner is being annoying

o wow these scans look awful. super old worn out dirty HP scanner doing Walmart prints lol

one of my poorly scanned shots from cheap fuji walmart film


----------



## KenjiS

^- looks a bit massively overexposed to me...also kinda blocky in the details...


----------



## Conspiracy

cheap print and a poor scan. quality is pretty much completely lost in that image. i am working towards getting a good scanner to scan my negatives


----------



## Sean Webster

Where is r31ncarnat3d, anyone know? Did he get hit by a pigeon and die?


----------



## Conspiracy

no one knows lol. are you waiting to get the 50?


----------



## sub50hz

Guy's probably busy, he rarely posts here anymore anyway. My guess is he'll turn up soon and ship it to nderscore.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> no one knows lol. are you waiting to get the 50?


Not really yet. Though I have to shoot soon I didn't do any over spring break :/


----------



## foothead

So now that I finally found a dichroic enlarging head and almost have a sink set up, I'm going to try printing RA-4. Right now, the question is should I get a color analyzer, or are they more trouble than they're worth? I've heard people on both sides, so I'm really unsure here. I can pick one up on eBay for around $50+ depending on model, but I'd rather not spend that if I'm going to try it once and decide I hate it.


----------



## r34p3rex

Found a 5Dii for $1500 on Craigslist.. waiting for them to get back to me with pictures and conditions







*fingerscrossed*


----------



## KenjiS

Good luck mate!









$1500 for a 5DII? Wow, Maybe it would be worth selling my 7D and 15-85 to get one


----------



## r34p3rex

I was too late QQ


----------



## KenjiS

Aw man...

Have a conciliatory flower?


Vibrant Yellow Rose 3 by Kenjis9965, on Flickr


----------



## iandroo888

Friend is lookin to FINALLY buy a L lens for his 5dmkII while sporting the 50mm f/1.8 up until now. He's got his eyes set on the 24-70 f/2.8 either new or used.. But since im a nikon user, dont know much about canon. What's a good price for the Canon 24-70mm f/2.8L IS used...? (did i get all terms right?) i believe the newly announced one is the 24-70mm f/2.8L IS II right...? according to B&H, IS is $1300 whereas the new IS II preorder is $2300 (is that right...?) has the two versions been compared yet ?


----------



## KenjiS

Theres no IS on any Canon 24-70 f/2.8L... IS is Canon's term for Image Stabilizer, or in Nikon terms, VR ...

As for pricing, the new one is $2300 and thats not going to change anytime soon, the old one is $1300 and that will likely change as the old one sells out and suddenly gets harder to get, The original one used is going to probubly stay at the same price (Around $1000-1200 depending on condition) until new copies of it are gone, then it will probubly go up to around $1400...

They havnt been formally compared yet, however from what I've heard and seen the new Mark II is a large improvement when it comes to sharpness and etc, and its probubly a good upgrade for many users...its also lighter than the original but loses the cool hood design...

I'd say to your friend to get the Mark I now, You wont be able to get the Mark II for a while anyways, when the Mark II comes out if it really is worth it to upgrade your friend can likely sell his Mark I for what he paid for it brand new and buy the Mark II, if its not, then he's had the lens to shoot with instead of waiting around on "what ifs"

Either way he wins...


----------



## iandroo888

oh so the first version has no IS and the new version has IS... well that explains the huge price difference as shown from the 70-200 >_> but thanks for the info. ill tell him!


----------



## ljason8eg

Neither one of them have IS.


----------



## iandroo888

now it doesnt make sense again... xD


----------



## KenjiS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iandroo888*
> 
> now it doesnt make sense again... xD


Canon has been raising their prices substantially when they bring out the replacements... see also the grossly overpriced 24mm f/2.8 and 28mm f/2.8 primes they just released that are about 3 times the price of the lenses they replaced...

One, because of events in Japan and Thailand they lost money and need to recover lost profits

Two, Canon as a corporation hit some setbacks from what I understand that has caused them to lose money in other parts of the company that they're trying to make up for in their imaging division...


----------



## MistaBernie

Let's not forget when the other primes came out. We're talking years ago. Everything you've mentioned above is accurate but doesn't even account for inflation and exchange rates changes over the last few years as well.


----------



## Conspiracy

zeiss announced they will release another UWA this may but didnt say what it is of course

http://blogs.zeiss.com/photo/en/?p=1520

not like i can afford it anyway but cool. i like zeiss even though i know they arent the best in the photography department they make some darn good cine lenses


----------



## KenjiS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Let's not forget when the other primes came out. We're talking years ago. Everything you've mentioned above is accurate but doesn't even account for inflation and exchange rates changes over the last few years as well.


Yep, forgot that...

Also note that prices arent falling the way they used to, about 5% at best over a few years (I used the 70-200 f/2.8L IS II and the 15-85 as examples) compared to how they used to fall a little more...so dont count on the old "wait a year and buy it when the price drops" thing..


----------



## MistaBernie

True, but the whole 'wait a year, it'll drop' thing was thrown off by circumstances out of our control (tsunami, etc). That being said, you could always just wait for the holidays when some of the retailers have some ridiculous deals (like me picking up my Canon S95 from Amazon for $239 just after the S100 came out), or the $1999/$2069 70-200 f/2.8L IS IIs or the $2069 5D Mark iis (when MSRP was $2499).


----------



## KenjiS

^- Yeah, thats possibly what I'll do... Hope for a nice rebate on the 5D Mark III with a lens or something









Or a 7D Mark II.. Still not sure which I'd buy...


----------



## MistaBernie

Dont hold your breath for a 7Dii; there's no real reason for Canon to make one -- based on what we just talked about, a 7Dii updated with the 1Dx focus system, etc, would easily run into the old 5Dii price range. I could easily see them scrapping the 7D and instead pushing a new higher megapixel option at the end of the year (as recently reported on CanonRumors, though it's a low-ranked rumor).


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Dont hold your breath for a 7Dii; there's no real reason for Canon to make one -- based on what we just talked about, a 7Dii updated with the 1Dx focus system, etc, would easily run into the old 5Dii price range. I could easily see them scrapping the 7D and instead pushing a new higher megapixel option at the end of the year (as recently reported on CanonRumors, though it's a low-ranked rumor).


People also thought the 5D would never get the 1D AF system as it would kill 1D and 1Ds sales but the 5D III killed that. I will be interested to see what is the next step for Canon in upgrading the 60D and 7D.


----------



## Conspiracy

i think canon will still keep a camera like the 7D around because its honestly pretty amazing for a crop camera. i think whatever next super crop canon we see might be either a little more expensive but not much or stripped or a few features because the 7D for the price has a lot going for it. i think the 60D and 7D will merge into a 7DmkII possibly but not very soon since both cameras are still rather new and still are not completely outdated. and i mean for someone like me doing sports the 7D makes for the best affordable sports camera which im not sure if canon had that in mind when doing the 7D, i think canon had more in mind with video than sports for the 7D. i think the maxed out crop camera has a strong place in canon and we will either see a whole new crop camera or a mark II of something.


----------



## MistaBernie

Everything I've seen indicates the 70D is going to come out, and it should be relatively soon; whether or not they amalgamate the 70D & 7D, I dont know. It wouldn't really make sense to if you think about it; the xxD line is the 'look at my epeen, I own a DSLR that's not a rebel' kind of camera. It's supposed to be targeted towards the enthusiasts that don't want to shell out $3500/$6000+ for 5D3/1Dx. The 7D was the sports shooters budget pro level camera. High FPS, advanced focusing system compared to the 5D/xxD lines, etc. I don't think it would be cost effective to update the 70D with features from the 7D, the price point will be too high to get people to say 'well, I want a nice camera, and I dont want a rebel so this will do'.

Sorry if I'm rambling a bit, I've been puking off and on for the last 10 hours. Starting to think I have Norovirus. I feel bad for my wife if that's the case.


----------



## KenjiS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Dont hold your breath for a 7Dii; there's no real reason for Canon to make one -- based on what we just talked about, a 7Dii updated with the 1Dx focus system, etc, would easily run into the old 5Dii price range. I could easily see them scrapping the 7D and instead pushing a new higher megapixel option at the end of the year (as recently reported on CanonRumors, though it's a low-ranked rumor).


Probubly...

The 5DIII really does look like what I want though... a digital version of my beloved EOS-3










Besides, despite what the people will say about IQ and that, its still going to be a huge jump over my 7D because its full frame.. Probubly a lot bigger of a jump than a 7DII could be...


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iandroo888*
> 
> Friend is lookin to FINALLY buy a L lens for his 5dmkII while sporting the 50mm f/1.8 up until now. He's got his eyes set on the 24-70 f/2.8 either new or used.. But since im a nikon user, dont know much about canon. What's a good price for the Canon 24-70mm f/2.8L IS used...? (did i get all terms right?) i believe the newly announced one is the 24-70mm f/2.8L IS II right...? according to B&H, IS is $1300 whereas the new IS II preorder is $2300 (is that right...?) has the two versions been compared yet ?


the mk1 is a very old lens, and it shows its age against the newer sony zeiss and nikon. personally i hate the 24-70mk1 so i would definitely pony up and get the mk2. friend got his 24-70L for <1k (900 i believe) last year so it should have dropped more then that.


----------



## r34p3rex

If there was a 7Dii...

My guess is

Slightly increase MP count (~20mp-ish) APS-C
Little brother version of the 1Dx/5Diii AF system (maybe 45AF points instead of 61)
9-10FPS shooting
Single DigicV
Swivel screen

It'd be a budget version of the 5Dii aimed towards sports shooters

70D..
Same sensor as the 7Dii above (~20mp)
19AF points
6FPS shooting
DigicV
Swivel Screen


----------



## MistaBernie

I doubt they'd put the swivel screen on the 7Dii if they made one. Also, I dont know if Canon would sink the money into developing, testing, and manufacturing a go-between focus system from the 7D to the 1Dx. Doesn't really seem logical - it would drive the price of the 7D up too high.

As far as Single Digic V, I forget off the top of my head, does the 1Dx or 5D3 use multiple DigicV's ? It's too much to speculate on across the board at this point...
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> the mk1 is a very old lens, and it shows its age against the newer sony zeiss and nikon. personally i hate the 24-70mk1 so i would definitely pony up and get the mk2. friend got his 24-70L for <1k (900 i believe) last year so it should have dropped more then that.


I'm willing to bet that was pre-tsunami. It shouldn't mean much, but it does. Canon's 24-70 covers a nice focal range with a decent aperture. It was (and is still) being made. Obviously the Mk 2 is going to be a better lens, but supply has gone down on the 24-70, which conversely raises the price (as long as people are still looking for them, which they are).


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> I doubt they'd put the swivel screen on the 7Dii if they made one.


I don't think well see a swivel screen on any weather sealed body. Canon was cited as saying that they left the swivel screen off the 5D mkIII for weather sealing reasons. Apparently its tough to seal a swivel screen.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *silvrr*
> 
> I don't think well see a swivel screen on any weather sealed body. Canon was cited as saying that they left the swivel screen off the 5D mkIII for weather sealing reasons. Apparently its tough to seal a swivel screen.


See, I thought it just looked unprofessional to be perfectly honest, but yeah, it's tough to weatherproof something like that if you think about it.


----------



## Conspiracy

im glad they left the swivel screen off the new 5diii. i think the swivel screen is more of a consumer feature that the average and hobby shooter would enjoy. it has no use for professional application since for photos you can use adapters to the viewfinder for strange angles and for video everyone is attaching a monitor anyway so the screen on the camera barely gets used except with the addition of a VF attachment. i think what reaper posted is a great guess especially for a 70D which i think is very likely. still feel even with what can be guessed for possible specs on a 7dii its just not profitable to make it and keep it within the price point for the people like myself that use the current 7D, a mark II would be much more expensive. i would be interested in upgrading to a 70D if it had something like guessed above. if i had the money of course lol


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> I'm willing to bet that was pre-tsunami. It shouldn't mean much, but it does. Canon's 24-70 covers a nice focal range with a decent aperture. It was (and is still) being made. Obviously the Mk 2 is going to be a better lens, but supply has gone down on the 24-70, which conversely raises the price (as long as people are still looking for them, which they are).


is it 2012 already? then it was 2 years ago (definitely pre-tsunami). the 24-70 is definitely a great focal length, i use my 24-70 for everything. Hell of the 7790 shots last year, 4121 are from my 24-70, 1234 are from the 24-70L.


----------



## Conspiracy

yup welcome to 2012 lol. i dont know about where you guys live but the weather is very messed up here as the high today was like 81 which isnt bad but its march... either way im waiting for the sun to move more so i can go out and shoot a little since i have nothing going on today


----------



## laboitenoire

Yeah it's in the 70s in central Illinois. About 20 degrees above average.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> Yeah it's in the 70s in central Illinois. About 20 degrees above average.


Same here in Chicago. Looking forward to another good ride when I get home, this is Linsanity.


----------



## mz-n10

raining like no tomorrow in napa....


----------



## Conspiracy

so amazing weather. walked a big loop around my campus and the lake with my girlfriend and took 10 shots with the minolta. got a shot of a guy fishing from kinda far away and a neat shot looking down a road of people fishing along a bank, if only there were a bunch of people fishing at once but i think its going to come out cool. just hope the low quality kodak gold 200 that is expired comes out nicely. i shot it set at ISO 133 to compensate for how old it is and the fact that it hasnt been stored in a freezer or refrigerator since it probably expired with the other kodak royal gold my dad gave me that has a date of 2001.


----------



## spRICE

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> raining like no tomorrow in napa....


Same here.


----------



## ljason8eg

Yup, rained all day here. Hopefully this isn't one of those storms that lingers around for a week and a half. Not in the mood to deal with rain at the race track.


----------



## mz-n10

suppose to rain till sunday....


----------



## Sean Webster

Florida - The Sunshine State


----------



## KenjiS

We had a really nice day the other day...

The flowers are starting to come in


Fleur de Lis by Kenjis9965, on Flickr


Sprouting Up by Kenjis9965, on Flickr


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Florida - The Sunshine State


until a hurricane hits


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Florida - The Sunshine State
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> until a hurricane hits
Click to expand...

Pfft, even then those are just heavy rain with awesome winds and the sun comes out in the eye of the storm too!


----------



## ljason8eg

When I was in Homestead/Miami last November it seemed like the weather changed every five minutes. It'd go from bright and sunny to a torrential downpour really, really fast.


----------



## Sean Webster

Yea happens a lot here and sun showers. Pretty cool. It is like a quick cool down then it is sunny again.


----------



## mz-n10

damn ive been looking to buy a 70-200/2.8....i dont even know why since i dont really even use my 70-210/4.....


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> damn ive been looking to buy a 70-200/2.8....i dont even know why since i dont really even use my 70-210/4.....


Get lighting?


----------



## dudemanppl




----------



## dudemanppl

That was only 500 worth of lighting, lol double post to screw with you.


----------



## KenjiS

Thats a lot of 5DIIs... Hows the Tokina 16-35 treating you?


----------



## mz-n10

im pretty sure those are eos3


----------



## KenjiS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> im pretty sure those are eos3


Nope, EOS-3s do not have a mode selector dial, they use buttons like the 1-series cameras... ;

-former EOS-3 owner-

http://www.kenrockwell.com/canon/film-bodies/images/eos-3/D3S_4531-top-1200.jpg


----------



## mz-n10

meh canon garbage


----------



## dudemanppl

lol, out of the nine lenses, four work. Out of the four Canon DSLRs, half work.

The 16-*28*mm is GREAT. Very sharp, great build. But I just don't use it. I got the 17mm prime to replace it. I just don't find myself using this FL often, and when I do its at the widest so I thought to myself, WHY NOT JUST PRIME? Working fine so far, I don't even use the 17, but 300 sitting around is better than 750ish. BTW I'll sell it to you. I have the box and everythang.


----------



## KenjiS

Nah, i have no need for it... and sorry i messed up the range >.<

what happened to all the lenses that dont work?


----------



## dudemanppl

I buy broken lenses.


----------



## KenjiS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> I buy broken lenses.


That explains why they're reproducing! you need to get them fixed!


----------



## r34p3rex

Got a nice bonus check today







I WILL be picking up a 5DII sometime in the next few days. No more if ands or buts!

Talking to someone over at POTN that's selling one for $1650









By the way, is the Canon grip really worth the extra $150 over a Zeikos grip? I figured if I broke a Zeikos some how.. I could replace it 3 more times before it would end up costing more than the BG-E6


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r34p3rex*
> 
> Got a nice bonus check today
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I WILL be picking up a 5DII sometime in the next few days. No more if ands or buts!
> Talking to someone over at POTN that's selling one for $1650
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> By the way, is the Canon grip really worth the extra $150 over a Zeikos grip? I figured if I broke a Zeikos some how.. I could replace it 3 more times before it would end up costing more than the BG-E6


Ill be intrested in hearing your thoughts coming from a 7D. When I had my insurance replacement I looked at getting a 5DII but decided to stay with the 7D. The 5DIII really seems like the best of both worlds for what I shoot but $$$$$$


----------



## MistaBernie

7D to 5D2 is weird. Full frame is awesome and everything, but for moving subjects, etc, I really do appreciate the advanced focus system of the 7D. For portraits/landscapes/etc, 5D2 is fantastic, but for sports etc, the 7D is where it's at of the two.

Now, in terms of Canon vs OEM grips.. I keep hearing horror stories of 3rd party grips causing issues to cameras.

I'm still toying with the idea of going 5D3.. I'm _really_ intrigued by the upgraded focus system, etc. I'm just pretty sure wifey would extrapolate my male bits with extreme vengeance if I turned around and dumped another $1700 into camera gear..


----------



## r34p3rex

Yea I agree with the whole AF thing. I mainly shoot still photos so it's not a big deal for me. I don't remember the last time I've actually shot a moving subject


----------



## MistaBernie

New Pocket Wizard Plus IIIs have been delayed, were initially slated for sale today @ B&H, now pushed back to 3/30 apparently.


----------



## OverClocker55




----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OverClocker55*


ok.....


----------



## biatchi

I thought it was pretty random too


----------



## MistaBernie

Meh, it happens.

I need some inspiration. I want to shoot this weekend, but I have no idea what.


----------



## OverClocker55

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Meh, it happens.
> I need some inspiration. I want to shoot this weekend, but I have no idea what.


Ikr


----------



## r34p3rex

5D2 IS MINE!! Just sent the payment









$1650.. perfect condition. Not too shabby


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Nice, how many clicks? It's a crying shame not to have a prime with the 5D2 BTW.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Meh, it happens.
> I need some inspiration. I want to shoot this weekend, but I have no idea what.


just walk around lol. ill be shooting outdoor track and field on saturday


----------



## MistaBernie

He had an 85mm, but I have it now. *taps fingers* How's that 10-20 gonna work out now?








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> just walk around lol. ill be shooting outdoor track and field on saturday


What do I look like some sort of hippie?? lol


----------



## dudemanppl

I still don't know what body to sell. Can all of you guys migrate to OCNphoto? I'm supa bored.


----------



## r34p3rex

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Meh, it happens.
> I need some inspiration. I want to shoot this weekend, but I have no idea what.


Have you shot Boston at night from the east? If you do go there, make sure you call the local police precinct and let them know that you're going to be there after hours. Me and the roommate got a talking to by a local cop for being there after the park closed







He said if you call them ahead, they could potentially send an officer to the area to escort you (something about muggings in the area)
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*
> 
> Nice, how many clicks? It's a crying shame not to have a prime with the 5D2 BTW.


18k, looks brand new though since it was a studio camera. Sigmalux and 135L are on my shopping list once I get rid of some other junk








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> He had an 85mm, but I have it now. *taps fingers* How's that 10-20 gonna work out now?


Selling the 10-20 since I'm probably not keeping the 7D.


----------



## dudemanppl

I'd get a 35L over the 135L. But I'd take the 35L over anything else, so moot point. BUT STILL, its too sex to ignore.


----------



## Conspiracy

im going to go ahead and suggest the 24L just because i know dudemanppl isnt a big fan of it lol. so buy the 24L mkII


----------



## dudemanppl

24L is too wide for me.


----------



## Conspiracy

yea. 35 is great as a walk around though. 24 more landscape ish shots


----------



## Shane1244

2560*1440 IPS goodness. Best $400 ever spent, I never realized how important a good monitor is for editing.


----------



## KenjiS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r34p3rex*
> 
> Got a nice bonus check today
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I WILL be picking up a 5DII sometime in the next few days. No more if ands or buts!
> Talking to someone over at POTN that's selling one for $1650
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> By the way, is the Canon grip really worth the extra $150 over a Zeikos grip? I figured if I broke a Zeikos some how.. I could replace it 3 more times before it would end up costing more than the BG-E6


YMMV, but i see people having issues with those Zeikos grips on POTN from time to time... Also after market batteries

When it comes to batteriesr/grips/etc, i stick to name branded stuff because i guess im a bit paranoid, Always afraid that one of the cheap ones could mess something up, burst into flames, etc... At least if its Canon branded Canon cant complain...


----------



## KenjiS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r34p3rex*
> 
> Yea I agree with the whole AF thing. I mainly shoot still photos so it's not a big deal for me. I don't remember the last time I've actually shot a moving subject


Even for stiller subjects Id rather the 7D's system cause it covers a wider area and gives more choice

But I'd rather the 5D Mark III's system over even that because it gives even more choice and the points appear to be optimized to work especially well with fast primes...


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KenjiS*
> 
> Even for stiller subjects Id rather the 7D's system cause it covers a wider area and gives more choice
> But I'd rather the 5D Mark III's system over even that because it gives even more choice and the points appear to be optimized to work especially well with fast primes...


That's not really the case; the 5D2s focus system is 9 point, one cross-type (center) with 6 assist points. The 7D is 19 point all cross type, with the center being dual cross type. In terms of AF, 7D wins flat out.


----------



## mz-n10

the AF on the 5d2 is complete trash compared to the 7d. but i still rather have fullframe then AF cause of what i shoot tho....


----------



## KenjiS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> That's not really the case; the 5D2s focus system is 9 point, one cross-type (center) with 6 assist points. The 7D is 19 point all cross type, with the center being dual cross type. In terms of AF, 7D wins flat out.


Not the ENTIRE point







it does cover more of an area and gives more "choice" in the sense that its more likely theres a focus point that will cover what i want in focus.. Guess im failing at articulating my point tonight









But yes, the 7Ds system is superior in every way to the system in the 5DII for the reasons you mentioned..which is what i was trying to communicate..just not effectively

Or did you confuse what i was saying about the 5D Mark III's AF system, ie, the new 61-point system, Which DOES seem specifically designed to be used with lenses f/2.8 and faster (IE, Fast primes) which is why it sacrifices the ability to focus at all at f/8...


----------



## G33K

Just starting out







Got my EOS Rebel T3 with a Canon EFS 18-55mm macro.


----------



## r34p3rex

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *G33K*
> 
> Just starting out
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Got my EOS Rebel T3 with a Canon EFS 18-55mm macro.


Make sure you have money to spend in the coming months because you're going to start getting "the itch"


----------



## dudemanppl

I'd take a 5DII with broken AF (somehow...) over a 7D ANY DAY.


----------



## G33K

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r34p3rex*
> 
> Make sure you have money to spend in the coming months because you're going to start getting "the itch"


Already having it @[email protected] Looking up all kinds of lenses and accessories everywhere, wondering where I can cut out expenses to fund my new hobby









Might return my bag though and get a replacement. Got it for like $30 and it's clearly made for smaller cameras (and this was the store's low end camera). I can stuff it in and zip it tight, but not something I want to risk with this baby. It did come with a screen protector and uv filter, though.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> I'd take a 5DII with broken AF (somehow...) over a 7D ANY DAY.


well yea because its FF


----------



## r34p3rex

So if I get the 35L, there really isn't any point of the sigmalux right?

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.. what kind of pricing should I be looking for?


----------



## mz-n10

what do u shoot most on ur aps-c?

some people like the 50mm more then the 35mm. i on the other hand like 24mm more then 35 or 50mm


----------



## Conspiracy

i like the 50mm on both my crop camera and FF. im weird though


----------



## dudemanppl

Get the 35L AND Siglux. The 35L is just a wider Siglux. I couldn't bring myself to sell it even though I don't use it often. Its just super good.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/290684599017

Mmmm, more cheap film.


----------



## r34p3rex

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> what do u shoot most on ur aps-c?
> some people like the 50mm more then the 35mm. i on the other hand like 24mm more then 35 or 50mm


Usually 24mm on my 24-105. The field of view of 22mm on a APS-C would be equivalent to the field of view of a 35mm on a FF right?


----------



## mz-n10

yes, so you would probably make more use of 35L thAn a sigmalux..


----------



## dudemanppl

Stopping down the 35L is dumb when you have a good copy.


----------



## swindle

Now begs the question, does one spend his money on the 24-105L f/4 or the 24-70L f/2.8?

Range, or speed?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *swindle*
> 
> Now begs the question, does one spend his money on the 24-105L f/4 or the 24-70L f/2.8?
> Range, or speed?


I think you can probably answer your own question on this one: which one do you need more?

I tend to shoot a lot indoors, so the faster aperture is a must for me.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Get the 35L AND Siglux. The 35L is just a wider Siglux. I couldn't bring myself to sell it even though I don't use it often. Its just super good.
> http://www.ebay.com/itm/290684599017
> Mmmm, more cheap film.


did you buy that can of kodak?


----------



## silvrr

I think there was some discussion about this a few pages back.





http://lenses.zeiss.com/photo/en_DE/products/slr/distagont2815.usage.html


----------



## MistaBernie

I'll take three, one for each body!

Put it on Gone's tab.

For the 35L, Used price is right around $1100 for a good copy, so head over to CanonPriceWatch and put in a price notification for new and used for like $1050. Then keep your eyes out on POTN for a copy in that range; if you want it and are willing to pay it, offer $1000. If they accept, be a bit wary; if they haggle you back up (even a bit), probably pick it up.


----------



## Conspiracy

yea i had mentioned the new zess. looks freaking awesome. im sure its a great lens but honestly they already have a 18 f3.5. i understand that when you start getting ultra wide there is a big different between like 18 and 12 but how big a difference will you really see going from 18 to 15? i mean yea it offers f2.8 and it will destroy your bank account. im new to full frame and have not yet explored wide angle lenses yet. either way im a zeiss fan but probably would never actually buy any of their stuff. id get a 50 1.4 ZE for my 7D if it was super cheap but thats about it


----------



## nuclearjock

Just received an email from NPS that my D4 is shipping to my local dealer. Should be fun!!


----------



## MistaBernie

Niiiiiiice. I may not shoot Nikon but that thing is gonna be a beast.


----------



## Conspiracy

awesome! i havent used much nikon gear either other than playing with a buddies D3 for basketball and that camera felt great to shoot with and had some great shot on his super old 24-70 that looked like it was the first one nikon every made lol. i can only imagine the D4 is a beast of a camera your totally going to have to give us some opinions on it once you get some time to play around with it


----------



## MistaBernie

Lovely. The last three Canon EF 50 f/1.4s to pop up on POTN have been $325, $340 and $360, respectively, none with the Canon hoods. Methinks Monday will be a good day to put mine up for sale if I dont absolutely feel the need to keep it after shooting with it this weekend.


----------



## mz-n10

blah zeiss....wheres the sony mount.....(not like it matters, cant afford one anyways)


----------



## Conspiracy

yea i noticed zeiss only made canon and nikon for this new lens instead of sony (not that i care but still weird)... they also offer it for their ikon rangefinders but dont actually mention it on the site. but it would be dumb not to at least offer a new lens for their cameras


----------



## mz-n10

there are no manual focus zeiss for sony....


----------



## Conspiracy

the 3 primes zeiss for sony arent manual focus?


----------



## mz-n10

nope, full auto focus with auto aperture. same with all the zeiss zooms.


----------



## Conspiracy

well thats lame. at least have the primes be manual


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> well thats lame. at least have the primes be manual


Im sure there is a switch on the side to take care of that.

Are the Sony Zeiss lenses really Zeiss lenses or is Zeiss just selling their name. I guess another way of wording it is do they produce the same imaging as actual zeiss lenses?


----------



## laboitenoire

I believe Zeiss helps with the design and Sony manufactures them on their own. The manual focus primes are manufactured by Cosina. I believe only their cinema lenses are actually made in-house, along with all of their special-purpose optics and imaging equipment.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> well thats lame. at least have the primes be manual


its like a L prime, only its bandaged as zeiss.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> I believe Zeiss helps with the design and Sony manufactures them on their own. The manual focus primes are manufactured by Cosina. I believe only their cinema lenses are actually made in-house, along with all of their special-purpose optics and imaging equipment.


this is correct. Zeiss does the engineering and sony does manufacturing. But regardless of inhouse or not, they all use schott glass with t* coatings.

Interestingly the optical manufacturing arm of sony was bought from minolta, which did manufacturing for lecia at one point.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> I'll take three, one for each body!
> *Put it on Gone's tab.*
> For the 35L, Used price is right around $1100 for a good copy, so head over to CanonPriceWatch and put in a price notification for new and used for like $1050. Then keep your eyes out on POTN for a copy in that range; if you want it and are willing to pay it, offer $1000. If they accept, be a bit wary; if they haggle you back up (even a bit), probably pick it up.


That would be a sad, sad mistake.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> yea i had mentioned the new zess. looks freaking awesome. im sure its a great lens but honestly they already have a 18 f3.5. i understand that when you start getting ultra wide there is a big different between like 18 and 12 but how big a difference will you really see going from 18 to 15? i mean yea it offers f2.8 and it will destroy your bank account. im new to full frame and have not yet explored wide angle lenses yet. either way im a zeiss fan but probably would never actually buy any of their stuff. id get a 50 1.4 ZE for my 7D if it was super cheap but thats about it


Check some reviews for the Zeiss 50 ZE. Not that impressive.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Lovely. The last three Canon EF 50 f/1.4s to pop up on POTN have been $325, $340 and $360, respectively, none with the Canon hoods. Methinks Monday will be a good day to put mine up for sale if I dont absolutely feel the need to keep it after shooting with it this weekend.


I sold my 50 in a matter of minutes at POTN a year ago; even had a small bidding war. Very popular used lens.


----------



## mz-n10

not sure how many people needs a gimbal....but amazon has a lighting deal for it right now

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B002SB58VU?t=slickdeals&tag=slickdeals&smid=ATVPDKIKX0DER

$360


----------



## foothead

Lol, don't think my camera would even fit on that.


----------



## mz-n10

well its a gimbal so you are suppose to put your telephoto on it and have hte body hang off the back.


----------



## mz-n10

just got my ipad(3)...deciding if i want to sell it or keep it.....


----------



## Conspiracy

didnt know the ipad3 was out


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Niiiiiiice. I may not shoot Nikon but that thing is gonna be a beast.


Truth be told, I'm actually more excited about the arrival of my D800E. Got some big plans for when that arrives.


----------



## r34p3rex

Man.. the wait for the 5D2 is killing me







Earliest I'll have it is Tuesday


----------



## Conspiracy

lol reaper how long how you been waiting?


----------



## r34p3rex

A day and a few hours







I'm very impatient


----------



## Conspiracy

lol







i think you're going to make it


----------



## r34p3rex

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> lol
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i think you're going to make it


If only USPS moved mail on Sunday too


----------



## Conspiracy

one day mail will go through tubes and be like instant


----------



## MistaBernie

Sha, right. They can barely afford their otherwise fruitful organizational setup as it is.

Also, that's one of the other reason I sometimes buy things knew. I click buy the day before I want something, I have it the next day for minimal to no charge. You guys and your crazy purchases.... see what I did there??


----------



## G33K

Yeah. Although I like saving money buying over the internet some times, there's a warm, fuzzy feeling you get when you can pick something off the shelf and buy it immediately (even if that is an impulse purchase)


----------



## Conspiracy

eh im a lot more patient i guess. although i get nervous if i dont have an order confirmation like when i order my camera on KEH and it got to me 2 days later i had no clue what the status of my order was the whole time


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> didnt know the ipad3 was out


Ok the new ipad


----------



## Conspiracy

idk what the new one is called or numbered. i can barely keep up technology stuff


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> eh im a lot more patient i guess. although i get nervous if i dont have an order confirmation like when i order my camera on KEH and it got to me 2 days later i had no clue what the status of my order was the whole time


Keh's tracking info is always dicked, but FedEx always has an exact location if you call them. That being said, I've never had a single issue with delivery from Keh, and their product is _always_ better than the rated condition.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> did you buy that can of kodak?


No, but I want it. Why is the thread suddenly alive, MIGRATE NAO.


----------



## Conspiracy

idk but OCN was semi active with the great entertainment that i seek that potn is not capable of delivering lolz









guess im late as i have migrated and noone is here

was gonna try to take photos during golden hour today but missed out because the review session i was attending took too long


----------



## KenjiS

It was foggy out, i got one or two nice images of that G8...again..in the fog...

Yeah im hurting for subjects at the moment


----------



## Conspiracy

post the pics


----------



## Durdle Class A

Yay, I got the MB-D11 Battery grip for my D7000!
Finally when I attach the 70-200, it doesn't look like a tiny camera hanging onto a huge lens


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Durdle Class A*
> 
> Yay, I got the MB-D11 Battery grip for my D7000!
> Finally when I attach the 70-200, it doesn't look like a tiny camera hanging onto a huge lens


I like the lighting, looks so sick!


----------



## Durdle Class A

Yea, it's just a simple bounce flash with a single flashgun pointed at the white ceiling.
I put white paper underneath so that it would reflect some light to the bottom of the lens so it won't be fully in shadow

Forgot to mention, it was shot with my brother's D90 so I could use the flash


----------



## dudemanppl

I have to say, vert grip for anything 70-200 or larger or its just awkward. Also, I now have 2 85Ls.


----------



## Shane1244

Just start a online camera repair shop already.


----------



## dudemanppl

Now half my 85Ls work!


----------



## r34p3rex

What's broken about the other half?


----------



## dudemanppl

Dead AF motor.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Durdle Class A*
> 
> Yay, I got the MB-D11 Battery grip for my D7000!
> Finally when I attach the 70-200, it doesn't look like a tiny camera hanging onto a huge lens


great combo. love the picture ! i want a 70-200 :| new body first tho.. (hopes for d400...) i cancelled d800 order >.>"

after using a vert grip on my d5k.. i cant use a camera without one now -.-" great >.>" i picked up the d3100 a few days ago.. i picked it up and used it with like 2 fingers pinched to hold the body and one for shutter.. =.= i was like.. damn now this body is more toy sized than ever =| then my friend gave me a blank death glare.. xD


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Dead AF motor.


lol if thats it who needs AF anyway. im pretty sure the 85L is a beast either way

and... its waaay to early to be up on a saturday morning. getting ready to go shoot track and field. weather report says rain all afternoon


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Durdle Class A*
> 
> Yay, I got the MB-D11 Battery grip for my D7000!
> Finally when I attach the 70-200, it doesn't look like a tiny camera hanging onto a huge lens


You mean like this?


----------



## Durdle Class A

I can't believe what happened today. I went out to take a walk in a park hoping to see some birds, etc. I was using my D7000 gripped with the 70-200 VR II, as you saw from the last picture. I was also using an RS-7 strap, with the www.blackrapid.com/product/hardware/fastenr3/ screw attached to the tripod foot of my 70-200 VR II.

Before I went out, I made sure that the screw was tightened correctly and everything was secure.

But only 5 mins later, when I was walking, the "fastenr3" seemed to have unscrewed itself from the lens, and as a result, my 3 kg, $3800 worth of gear came crashing down from waist level onto hard concrete pavement..

I was in shock as I picked up my gear, the lens hood was smashed into 3 pieces, but nothing else seemed to have been damaged.. but my battery grip seemed to have suffered a few scratches.

I could not think of how it would have undone itself, and someone could blame me for user error, but I was 100% positive that the screw was attached properly and tightly.

As comfortable as it may be, I am having doubts using the Black Rapid strap.


----------



## sub50hz

Not the first or last time that's happened to a Black Rapid user. Sorry to hear, that really blows, but at least take solace in the fact that it's a disturbingly common occurrence with those straps.


----------



## MistaBernie

Yeah, every once in a while I consider giving those straps a chance, and almost always within a day of thinking about it, I read a story like this that sets me straight. Sucks for the owner when it happens, but usually saves me a couple of G's..


----------



## r34p3rex

Yea I've been too scared to try a blackrapid strap.. it just doesn't seem all that secure. I'd much rather trust the metal hooks that are integrated into the camera body than some measly screw threads


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> lol if thats it who needs AF anyway. im pretty sure the 85L is a beast either way


Dead AF motor means dead AF motor. Learn more about 85L, you'll find out why thats such a big problem.









Also, I trust my BR straps a lot, I've only have three things fall.


----------



## biatchi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Durdle Class A*
> 
> I can't believe what happened today. I went out to take a walk in a park hoping to see some birds, etc. I was using my D7000 gripped with the 70-200 VR II, as you saw from the last picture. I was also using an RS-7 strap, with the www.blackrapid.com/product/hardware/fastenr3/ screw attached to the tripod foot of my 70-200 VR II.
> Before I went out, I made sure that the screw was tightened correctly and everything was secure.
> But only 5 mins later, when I was walking, the "fastenr3" seemed to have unscrewed itself from the lens, and as a result, my 3 kg, $3800 worth of gear came crashing down from waist level onto hard concrete pavement..
> I was in shock as I picked up my gear, the lens hood was smashed into 3 pieces, but nothing else seemed to have been damaged.. but my battery grip seemed to have suffered a few scratches.
> I could not think of how it would have undone itself, and someone could blame me for user error, but I was 100% positive that the screw was attached properly and tightly.
> As comfortable as it may be, I am having doubts using the Black Rapid strap.


Lucky you had a hood on.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Dead AF motor means dead AF motor. Learn more about 85L, you'll find out why thats such a big problem.


lol im too poor to even borrow a 85L

and i definitely wouldnt trust a strap that screws into a tripod mount. im with reaper on trusting the metal hooks on the camera


----------



## iandroo888

ouch thats an unfortunate story >< ive always wanted to get a RS strap... now i dont want to D: >_> think ill just stick with my current crumpler strap

damn as i took the SD card out of my camera and put it into my card reader.. i noticed something.. theres a hairline crack that runs along the top of the card on the other side of the contacts :[ how that happened, i have no idea. tho i dont think this is the first card for it to happen tho.. i wonder if its my camera slot or the reader slot thats doing that o.o didnt really care for the last one cuz it was a cheap brand (OCZ?) but this one is my sandisk card T_T


----------



## ljason8eg

I've never had an issue with my BR strap. I wonder if the threads on either the tripod mount or the screw itself got cross threaded in the past or something of that nature. I was kind of paranoid about drops after I got mine and read a lot of the stories but I've never even noticed it loosening up, let alone completely falling off.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> lol im too poor to even borrow a 85L


The 85L doesn't have manual focus. DUN DUN DUN. Also I trust the BR with all my shi- I'm so used to OCNphoto... Anyway, get a BR, good stuff. Dropping it is your fault.


----------



## G33K

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iandroo888*
> 
> damn as i took the SD card out of my camera and put it into my card reader.. i noticed something.. theres a hairline crack that runs along the top of the card on the other side of the contacts :[ how that happened, i have no idea. tho i dont think this is the first card for it to happen tho.. i wonder if its my camera slot or the reader slot thats doing that o.o didnt really care for the last one cuz it was a cheap brand (OCZ?) but this one is my sandisk card T_T


They're little pieces of plastic, repeated use will do that







Working walmart when they had kids get their pictures take with santa, I was the guy running memory cards to the photo lab and one of them was missing probably 1/3 of the plastic on one side


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> The 85L doesn't have manual focus.


Am I missing something? I see a manual focus switch and a focus ring. Or is it something like Olympus where the focus ring just drives the AF motor?


----------



## ljason8eg

The 85L is focus by wire, so without the AF motor working properly, there is no MF either.


----------



## r34p3rex

So dudemanppl.. when that 85L is fixed.. are you keeping it or selling it?


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *G33K*
> 
> They're little pieces of plastic, repeated use will do that
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Working walmart when they had kids get their pictures take with santa, I was the guy running memory cards to the photo lab and one of them was missing probably 1/3 of the plastic on one side


lol interesting. xD i guess


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r34p3rex*
> 
> So dudemanppl.. when that 85L is fixed.. are you keeping it or selling it?


I'd say 1250 boxed.







I'd rather sell the II though, more money. And when you repair the focus motor apparently they give you the same AF as the II cause its just a PCB, but I opened it up, NO PCBS ANYWHERE. I used it today, so good. It is just so good. So. Good. SO GOOD. And I wouldn't mind about the rounded blades on the II cause I'm not stopping this thing down.


----------



## swindle

It looks physically huge on the bodys.

So cool.


----------



## KenjiS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Durdle Class A*
> 
> I can't believe what happened today. I went out to take a walk in a park hoping to see some birds, etc. I was using my D7000 gripped with the 70-200 VR II, as you saw from the last picture. I was also using an RS-7 strap, with the www.blackrapid.com/product/hardware/fastenr3/ screw attached to the tripod foot of my 70-200 VR II.
> Before I went out, I made sure that the screw was tightened correctly and everything was secure.
> But only 5 mins later, when I was walking, the "fastenr3" seemed to have unscrewed itself from the lens, and as a result, my 3 kg, $3800 worth of gear came crashing down from waist level onto hard concrete pavement..
> I was in shock as I picked up my gear, the lens hood was smashed into 3 pieces, but nothing else seemed to have been damaged.. but my battery grip seemed to have suffered a few scratches.
> I could not think of how it would have undone itself, and someone could blame me for user error, but I was 100% positive that the screw was attached properly and tightly.
> As comfortable as it may be, I am having doubts using the Black Rapid strap.


Not the first time i've heard this mate

Sounds like the hood absorbed the impact thankfully, Thats why they're good things to have...

BTW might want to look into some insurance for your kit with that level of investment, A rider on your homeowners policy is a fairly affordable way to get that


----------



## swindle

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Durdle Class A*
> 
> I can't believe what happened today. I went out to take a walk in a park hoping to see some birds, etc. I was using my D7000 gripped with the 70-200 VR II, as you saw from the last picture. I was also using an RS-7 strap, with the www.blackrapid.com/product/hardware/fastenr3/ screw attached to the tripod foot of my 70-200 VR II.
> Before I went out, I made sure that the screw was tightened correctly and everything was secure.
> But only 5 mins later, when I was walking, the "fastenr3" seemed to have unscrewed itself from the lens, and as a result, my 3 kg, $3800 worth of gear came crashing down from waist level onto hard concrete pavement..
> I was in shock as I picked up my gear, the lens hood was smashed into 3 pieces, but nothing else seemed to have been damaged.. but my battery grip seemed to have suffered a few scratches.
> I could not think of how it would have undone itself, and someone could blame me for user error, but I was 100% positive that the screw was attached properly and tightly.
> As comfortable as it may be, I am having doubts using the Black Rapid strap.


Holy hell dude. I felt sick reading that







You have my sympathies.

I have the same strap, and also attach it to my tripod mount of my 70-200 2.8 sigma.

I don't think I'll ever use that strap again after reading that.


----------



## ljason8eg

Why would that make you stop using it? If the threads on the tripod mount and strap are in good shape and everything is tightened properly, there's pretty much no possible way its going to suddenly fail.


----------



## swindle

Yeah, but still, that dude had everything all tightened...

I normally always have one hand on the body when walking around with the 70-200 anyway. Stopping it from flailing around.


----------



## dudemanppl

lol I was thinking about what I had in my backpack and I realized it was about 5000. Two cameras, two lenses, whole bunch of funs.


----------



## swindle

Ah, body, 4 lenses, flash, grip, filters, bits and bobs...

Maybe 6000+ NZD....


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> Why would that make you stop using it? If the threads on the tripod mount and strap are in good shape and everything is tightened properly, there's pretty much no possible way its going to suddenly fail.


It's a screw. Screws can come loose. Even with the rubber base.

My friend had one on his 7D with a 24-70. Almost every time we would be out walking and shooting it would loosen up. The camera never fell of, but only because he was constantly need to tighten it.

It just needs a locking mechanism or a tool to screw it in tighter. In the end he started using an allen wrench to tighten it.


----------



## MistaBernie

My 5D2's sensor is like a dirt/dust/hair magnet. Easy to clean at least, but still.. in going back and forth with the 5D2 and the 7D this weekend, I can feel the differences.. the shutter feels and sounds way different between the two. The sensor on the 7D almost looks like a toy compared to the FF sensors on the 5Ds.. but Im still pleased with the image quality out of all of them.

/random


----------



## r34p3rex

Waiting for USPS to get here in the next hour or so







SO EXCITED

Such a nice day out too.. can't wait to shoot some after class


----------



## Conspiracy

im waiting for a camera strap that should come today hopefully. and my new cheapo sunglasses broke so i gotta go back to the mall and return them :| need to stop wasting money on cheap stuff


----------



## MistaBernie

Haha, too funny. I've always been a cheapo sunglasses kind of guy. Up until my most recent pair, my most expensive pair was some Fossil Sunglasses from Macys for like $30. Wore for like two years, they worked well. Finally, I decided I was a bit sick of them (ok, I technically lost them and was wearing a backup pair of awful aviators) and while in Orlando, decided on getting a pair of Oakleys at the Sunglass Hut... best $125 bucks I've spent in a while. They're durable, they look good, they clean up nice, no issues whatsoever.


----------



## Boyboyd

I bought some polarised oakley sunglasses for flying. They were a great investment except i couldn't read my phone screen with them on.


----------



## r34p3rex

USPS guy stopped by quickly but didn't leave anything T_T where is my package?!


----------



## iandroo888

i have maui jims.. not as nice as oakleys but still has a $150 price tag.. i have a big head so very few fits my head.. and these fit pretty well.. on my second pair because first pair broke in my sweater pocket when i squated down to pray at my grandfather's grave -______________- had to go to sports chalet to buy a new pair (was on vacation in bay area)

lol.. gotta love polarized lenses... except the fact u cant see ur screen vertically on anything (cell phone, camera, etc)

@r34p3rex - they stopped but didnt drop anything? why they stop?


----------



## r34p3rex

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iandroo888*
> 
> i have maui jims.. not as nice as oakleys but still has a $150 price tag.. i have a big head so very few fits my head.. and these fit pretty well.. on my second pair because first pair broke in my sweater pocket when i squated down to pray at my grandfather's grave -______________- had to go to sports chalet to buy a new pair (was on vacation in bay area)
> lol.. gotta love polarized lenses... except the fact u cant see ur screen vertically on anything (cell phone, camera, etc)
> @r34p3rex - they stopped but didnt drop anything? why they stop?


No idea what he was doing. He's across the street again


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Haha, too funny. I've always been a cheapo sunglasses kind of guy. Up until my most recent pair, my most expensive pair was some Fossil Sunglasses from Macys for like $30. Wore for like two years, they worked well. Finally, I decided I was a bit sick of them (ok, I technically lost them and was wearing a backup pair of awful aviators) and while in Orlando, decided on getting a pair of Oakleys at the Sunglass Hut... best $125 bucks I've spent in a while. They're durable, they look good, they clean up nice, no issues whatsoever.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iandroo888*
> 
> i have maui jims.. not as nice as oakleys but still has a $150 price tag.. i have a big head so very few fits my head.. and these fit pretty well.. on my second pair because first pair broke in my sweater pocket when i squated down to pray at my grandfather's grave -______________- had to go to sports chalet to buy a new pair (was on vacation in bay area)
> lol.. gotta love polarized lenses... except the fact u cant see ur screen vertically on anything (cell phone, camera, etc)
> @r34p3rex - they stopped but didnt drop anything? why they stop?


lol. yea my pair that broke today while putting them on were cheap $12 ray ban knockoffs from the ghetto mall near me. they were some crappy NYScollection brand that i have a pair of decent aviators that have lasted but i baby them because they are cheap lol. the pair that broke i bought 4 days ago and were tight when i wore them but thought nothing of it and then they broke.

before i bought cheap glasses i had a pair of oakley minutes for like 4 years and i used to keep them on my head or on top of my hat and eventually they wore out and broke.

I just bought a pair of knockaround sunglasses that i see tons of people talking about on the internet so i just ordered a pair of their fort knocks style which is their version of the ray ban wayfarers. the one thing i liked about the wayferers i had was how easy it was to use my camera while still wearing them when its bright out. my aviators make it tough to see through the VF because the lens is so curved on the shades. and these have the springy sides which i noticed today i kinda need since most glasses dont fit me well after trying on a real pair of aviators in the mall which felt nice but were worn out display model. so hopefully these $25 glasses will last at least a year. came out to $30 with shipping for UPS ground i think.

got this pair http://www.knockaround.com/item.php?item_id=254&category_id=48


----------



## r34p3rex

It's here!!!!!







Love the viewfinder.. damn thing is huge and bright..


----------



## Conspiracy

nice! you should post some pics you take with it


----------



## r34p3rex

Took a quick stroll outside to get some pictures of runners.. gonna have to learn the limitations of this AF system after using a 7D for so long


----------



## laboitenoire

I used to wear cheap sunglasses, then I splurged for my first pair of Oakleys, and now I'm on my second pair (the first got lost after three years). So much nicer than the cheapos.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> I used to wear cheap sunglasses, then I splurged for my first pair of Oakleys, and now I'm on my second pair (the first got lost after three years). So much nicer than the cheapos.


yea my first pair of oakleys was a splurge buy but right now as a college student with less than a year to graduation i just cant afford nice sunglasses right now. more important things to buy like camera stuff lol. im pretty sure this new pair i ordered will be pretty decent, strangely the company even mentioned me on twitter when i made a status about getting new sunglasses. they might do that to everyone probably was kinda weird but they apparently are confident their sunglasses will work for me lol


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> I used to wear cheap sunglasses, then I splurged for my first pair of Oakleys, and now I'm on my second pair (the first got lost after three years). So much nicer than the cheapos.


Yeah, they're real nice. I have a little collection of them that I've amassed the last few years. Thankfully, never lost a pair, that would really suck. I've had to replace the lenses on a couple pairs that were going on five years old. Cost a bit since they're polarized but they look good as new again.


----------



## G33K

I had a nice pair of Oakleys, loved them. So did my dog D:


----------



## iandroo888

is it cheaper to replace the lens vs the entire sunglasses? i would assume it not being too far off on price

oh damn i just went on maui jim's site.. lens 60 frame 40







that means i can replace my old frame







! and lens >_> xD


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iandroo888*
> 
> is it cheaper to replace the lens vs the entire sunglasses? i would assume it not being too far off on price


It's a little less than half the price, at least for the two pairs I bought lenses for.


----------



## sub50hz

I hate my Ray Bans, worst shades I ever owned. My Spy miniscoops lasted forever, but fell victim in a cycling race. Some of the new ones are pretty slick, but those Tron ones make me lol... except they look like they could make awesome glasses for riding in rain or snow.


----------



## KenjiS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Haha, too funny. I've always been a cheapo sunglasses kind of guy. Up until my most recent pair, my most expensive pair was some Fossil Sunglasses from Macys for like $30. Wore for like two years, they worked well. Finally, I decided I was a bit sick of them (ok, I technically lost them and was wearing a backup pair of awful aviators) and while in Orlando, decided on getting a pair of Oakleys at the Sunglass Hut... best $125 bucks I've spent in a while. They're durable, they look good, they clean up nice, no issues whatsoever.


I got prescription Oakleys...

Worth every bloody penny...


----------



## Conspiracy

screw buying real ray bans they are overpriced for what you really get. after holding a pair in the store today i honestly dont see the difference between the $120 ray bans and a $30 pair of discount wayferers


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> screw buying real ray bans they are overpriced for what you really get. after holding a pair in the store today i honestly dont see the difference between the $120 ray bans and a $30 pair of discount wayferers


I have Aviators, and after wearing them for like 3 years, I'm pretty sure you're right.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

This thread is so LOL. Two pages of discussion about sunglasses.









In other news, I haven't touched my camera in months. ***.


----------



## dudemanppl

Dude get on OCN.







Foot is always on but thats it.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*
> 
> This thread is so LOL. Two pages of discussion about sunglasses.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In other news, I haven't touched my camera in months. ***.


sunglasses are awesome and im pretty sure cameras are like that other saying if you dont use it you might lose it lol but dont use it too much or you might go blind. i think thats how it works lol


----------



## mz-n10

dpr posted sample images of the d800

link

similar noise profile as the 5d2......pretty impressive for a camera with 36mp.


----------



## biatchi

Lol at you guys with your sunny weather and need for sunglasses. The sun is allergic to NW England


----------



## Sean Webster

lol, what kind of cave dwelling creatures are you guys? o.0

I live in south Florida...the sunshine state and I never wear sun glasses. LOL


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*
> 
> This thread is so LOL. Two pages of discussion about sunglasses.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In other news, I haven't touched my camera in months. ***.


Sunglasses have lenses.

I'm the same. I used it to take some pictures for work but that was it. My memory card still has the pictures I took snowboarding back in January on it.

Camera is fully charged and ready to go though.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *biatchi*
> 
> Lol at you guys with your sunny weather and need for sunglasses. The sun is allergic to NW England


I've been to the UK three times and I _like_ the weather there, seriously! At least you have four seasons there. Here it's just fall and summer. And the summers here are so God awful that you don't want to go out at all!
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> lol, what kind of cave dwelling creatures are you guys? o.0
> I live in south Florida...the sunshine state and I never wear sun glasses. LOL


I've never worn them either. I don't like tinted windows in cars either.

BTW, what's up with the weird font in your badge? Looks like Showcard Gothic.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Boyboyd*
> 
> Sunglasses have lenses.
> I'm the same. I used it to take some pictures for work but that was it. My memory card still has the pictures I took snowboarding back in January on it.
> Camera is fully charged and ready to go though.


I just need summer to get here and this wretched semester to end. Hopefully then I'll be inspired.


----------



## ljason8eg

I must be real sensitive to glare when I'm driving, because when its sunny and I don't have sunglasses on, its hard to focus without squinting. Heck, even some overcast days can be pretty bad when it comes to the glare.


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*
> 
> BTW, what's up with the weird font in your badge? Looks like Showcard Gothic.


That's his avatar and it's Showcard Gothic.

I know because every time my friend would make something for school. Whether it was a short film, flyer, etc. He would use it. Kinda pisses me off actually.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*
> 
> I've never worn them either. I don't like tinted windows in cars either.
> 
> BTW, what's up with the weird font in your badge? Looks like Showcard Gothic.


Oh that "badge"...well, I made it myself and couldn't find matching font, what you see is my avatar, my badge is still in development.

-______________-


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aksthem1*
> 
> That's his avatar and it's Showcard Gothic.
> I know because every time my friend would make something for school. Whether it was a short film, flyer, etc. He would use it. Kinda pisses me off actually.


Well, it's not as ubiquitous as Papyrus, which more or less is the new Comic Sans. I saw a plumbing truck, of all things, with Papyrus font stenciled on it.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Oh that "badge"...well, I made it myself and couldn't find matching font, what you see is my avatar, my badge is still in development.
> -______________-


Ah clever, it totally had me fooled. It took several days to get my badge as well. Congrats!


----------



## r34p3rex

Thread successfully derailed for 4 pages by Conspiracy









This thread is now about sunglasses. Rename the title please.


----------



## iandroo888

my car side and rear windows are all tinted to 15%.. its hard for me to go outside without sunglasses... everything is overexposed







 sunglasses is like a neutral density filter for my eyes







i like being outside when its nice and sunny.. and warm (not hot cuz thats just stupid 120 degrees F hot here) UV A and UV B filter for my eyes so my astigmatism doesnt get worse >_> on the bright side, i still dont have to wear glasses to see.. not perfect. not bad enough to need glasses.. but astigmatism screws with me a little.. xD


----------



## KenjiS

For me the sunlight and most artificial lighting is incredibly painful, like someone driving nails through my eyeballs.. I wear mine 90% of the time out of necessity unless im trying to say, evaluate a screen or the real color of something...

Also it makes the annoying spots in my left eye not as apparent

-edit- and yes i've seen a doctor about it


----------



## SS_Patrick

Stupid rain, stupid fedex man thinks it will make him melt









My T3i was delayed by a day


----------



## MistaBernie

Someone on POTN wants to trade a 100-400 f/4L IS for a 70-200 F/2.8L. I'm borderline interested, but I'm thinking I might be crazy.

But the extra reach of the 100-400 and the IS tempt me so badly. Ugh. No.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Someone on POTN wants to trade a 100-400 f/4L IS for a 70-200 F/2.8L. I'm borderline interested, but I'm thinking I might be crazy.
> 
> But the extra reach of the 100-400 and the IS tempt me so badly. Ugh. No.


do it, you won't


----------



## MistaBernie

I have no real use for that much reach... I'm not into birding, etc, and if I really need the reach I have access to a 2x tele to slap on my 70-200 (or I can purchase one from KEH for like $200)


----------



## mz-n10

isnt 100-400 push pull?


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> isnt 100-400 push pull?


aka. The Dust Pump.


----------



## sub50hz

100-400 is godly for shooting air shows, dunno if i would have much use for it beyond that, but I did use it when I worked for the Trib and it was a really good lens. Heavyish, but pretty compact and the dust really isn't as bad an issue as the internet makes it out to be.


----------



## MistaBernie

I have to imagine it wouldn't be bad for sporting events too for tight crops, etc.. as long as there's adequate light, of course.


----------



## sub50hz

It could be, I guess. Pretty slow, though.


----------



## swindle

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> aka. The Dust Pump.


LOL Thats awesome.


----------



## r34p3rex

Refurb 35L for $1064+tax









Use coupon code MRN318


----------



## swindle

Cool.

Now if that was NZD...


----------



## sub50hz

135L gone this Saturday. Bernie, you took too damn long.


----------



## laboitenoire

So pissed. I was in the studio today developing two rolls of film from over break. In addition to the film not wanting to wind properly today, the lid fell off of the tank when I started agitating... Lost both of the rolls pretty much.


----------



## dudemanppl

Let me see your tank, mine has two lids.


----------



## MistaBernie

Damn you Sub!









That code can be used on anything so it seems... Hmm.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Let me see your tank, mine has two lids.


It's one of those round stainless steel tanks.

We have a billion tanks and lids in the lab. I just happened to grab the combo that didn't fit very tightly.


----------



## dudemanppl

Buy your own tank! They're pretty cheap. So worth it instead of wasting the 10 bucks in film.


----------



## ROM3000

Hey everyone. I realize that most people on here use Canon equipment, but maybe some of you could point me in the right direction. I'm looking for a Nikon 35mm f/1.8G lens. I realize this lens isn't particularly too expensive, but any savings would be nice. Do you know where I could buy used Nikon equipment? I have checked eBay, but I'm not sure how confident I feel buying there. Thanks.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ROM3000*
> 
> Hey everyone. I realize that most people on here use Canon equipment, but maybe some of you could point me in the right direction. I'm looking for a Nikon 35mm f/1.8G lens. I realize this lens isn't particularly too expensive, but any savings would be nice. Do you know where I could buy used Nikon equipment? I have checked eBay, but I'm not sure how confident I feel buying there. Thanks.


KEH, adorama, and B&H all sell used equipment. KEH usually has the best prices and largest selection, but the others are worth checking. You could also look on various photo-related froums, since most have a for sale section. Depending on the forum/seller, you may be required to have made a certain number of posts or been a member for a certain amount of time to buy things.


----------



## ROM3000

Thanks for the quick reply. I have checked the listed websites and unfortunately they don't have any used ones listed. I'll keep looking though. Thanks.

On a side note, I'm pretty set on getting the 35mm, but would anyone get the 50mm instead? I don't plan on going frame anytime soon if that makes a difference.


----------



## iandroo888

fredmiranda.com is a known photographer forum.. has a buy/sell section.

35mm is the normal for crop frame. 50 is the normal for full. some like a little extra reach in the 50, good for portraits when used with a crop. really up to your own preference.

if u dont know which one to get, and want to try them, hit up a local camera shop and try it out.. or maybe get it from borrowlenses.com for a few days and try em out

on the side note... i randomly had idea of maybe pickin up d700 instead.. i checked prices on FM, ... ?!?!?!?!? there were low actuation d700s going for like 1600!

just wondering... can i stick the 12-24 on a d700? i know it would probably vignette at the wide end but how wide do i get to go before vignetting begins?


----------



## ROM3000

Thanks for the borrowlens idea.


----------



## MistaBernie

Ugh, seriously, humans.

So, a friend of mine got some sort of digital Rebel for christmas last year. Emails me yesterday and he's like 'I think there's a problem with the USB port, I can't get photos off my camera'. He asked what to do about getting it fixed. My immediate response was 'get a card reader, or if you really want to get it checked out, contact Canon directly and they'll tell him what to do to get it checked out. He comes back saying 'I took it to Hunts, and I think I'm gonna send it in and get some money off a newer one'. I immediately stopped him and told him about the CLP, but he doesn't want to buy refurbished.

Then after reiterating that not only is refurbished directly from Canon the bomb but so is saving money, he's like 'oh, well why don't I just get a card reader instead of spending all that money?". Why didn't I think of that?







ANYways.. so he emails me today asking where he can get a card reader... after I told him yesterday. And then he's like 'well which one do I need?'. Ugh. I have enough stupid BS going on at work, seriously. I don't ask alot, all I want is for people to, you know, _*try?*_


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Ugh, seriously, humans.
> So, a friend of mine got some sort of digital Rebel for christmas last year. Emails me yesterday and he's like 'I think there's a problem with the USB port, I can't get photos off my camera'. He asked what to do about getting it fixed. My immediate response was 'get a card reader, or if you really want to get it checked out, contact Canon directly and they'll tell him what to do to get it checked out. He comes back saying 'I took it to Hunts, and I think I'm gonna send it in and get some money off a newer one'. I immediately stopped him and told him about the CLP, but he doesn't want to buy refurbished.
> Then after reiterating that not only is refurbished directly from Canon the bomb but so is saving money, he's like 'oh, well why don't I just get a card reader instead of spending all that money?". Why didn't I think of that?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ANYways.. so he emails me today asking where he can get a card reader... after I told him yesterday. And then he's like 'well which one do I need?'. Ugh. I have enough stupid BS going on at work, seriously. I don't ask alot, all I want is for people to, you know, _*try?*_


People no longer want to do their own research. Look at half the threads on this forum, asking something that is answered 2000 times either on this forum or on well known review sites. I think very few people read actual product specifications and compatibility anymore.

I would laugh if your friend has a SD card (I think the newer rebels are SD) built into his computer.


----------



## laboitenoire

People are stupid. Individuals can be smart, but as a whole... Don't expect too much.

So I decided to do a stats project comparing prices on compact cameras between Bestbuy and Adorama. My conclusion? With a sample size of 20, there is no evidence to say they have different prices on average. Of course, the range of differences that would give that conclusion is huuuuuuuuge.


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> People are stupid. Individuals can be smart, but as a whole... Don't expect too much.
> So I decided to do a stats project comparing prices on compact cameras between Bestbuy and Adorama. My conclusion? With a sample size of 20, there is no evidence to say they have different prices on average. Of course, the range of differences that would give that conclusion is huuuuuuuuge.


So about the same price? Does that include tax, or does bestbuy ship like adorama tax free?

I try to avoid tax like the plague here in Chicago 10% adds up really quick, I sent my fiancees ring to another state to avoid it, nervous couple of days.


----------



## laboitenoire

I didn't include tax, as that varies from state to state. This was purely a comparison of raw price _on average_. Obviously, differences will exist from model to model at times.


----------



## sub50hz

http://blog.crumpler.eu/camera/banana-bowl-the-photo-bag-for-the-bag/

Awesome.

P.S. Yeah, I know other inserts exist. Thank you ahead of time for the WHY WOULD YOU PAY SO MUCH comments.

-Thanks


----------



## Conspiracy

nice find sub


----------



## G33K

http://www.overclock.net/t/1232879/slow-internet-ye-be-warned-3d-picture-thread/0_40


----------



## MistaBernie

what the.. I dont even (to the Crumpler bag, not the 3D, I'll try to check that out when I get home with my 3D stuff.. hope it all still works haha)


----------



## Conspiracy

not a big fan of the 3D photos or the animated photo of the wobbling. not very easy on the eyes personally


----------



## G33K

Plus I messed up both shots >.< I just wanted to test it out for the novelty of making 3d.


----------



## sub50hz

What you mean, Bernskis? Put a bag inside yo bag, etc. etc.


----------



## G33K

Yo dawg, I herd you lieked bags...


----------



## Conspiracy

heads up for those interested because i know at least a few are. i was surfing KEH on what they have coming soon in the next shipment because they are low on wide angle glass and i saw some 35mm f2.8 coming soon. but more important for those that can afford it I saw 2 that is two 58mm f1.2 coming soon to their warehouse and the website. if one of those 58 1.2's are even in ugly condition and under $100 i would buy just because its a pretty epic lens although not the most epic of them all of course


----------



## sub50hz

There's plenty of other great Minolta glass, and don't bet on getting your hands on those 58s. Go to ebay or FM.


----------



## Conspiracy

oh im too poor. i was just letting yall know i saw them. i have my eyes on either a 28mm f2.8 or 35mm f2.8 and a 135 f2.8 just because its so darn affordable. and that is it for my minolta unless i go crazy and buy different 50's or slower 58s or a 40mm which i doubt i would do since im not that obsessed to have multiple of the same focal length at that point i would buy another camera from a different brand and do something different with it most likely


----------



## foothead

I love KEH. For $300, I just got a Minolta Spotmeter F, a 215mm f/5.6 Caltar-S, and a new 645 (finally). Also, I'm going to pick up the PVC sheets later so I can finish putting together the sink.


----------



## Conspiracy

nice! what camera did you get?


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> nice! what camera did you get?


Me? Pentax 645. My old one died on me a while back, and I've been rather indecisive on whether I should get another or switch to a different system. Ended up deciding to stick with the 645 for now, probably go Pentax 67 later.


----------



## Conspiracy

cool. wasnt sure if you were buying a whole new system to have. didnt know your old one died lol.

i did see some eckatchrome on craigslist today and im thinking about calling and asking about it

$30 100ft roll. http://atlanta.craigslist.org/atl/pho/2913678670.html

not sure if thats a deal or not. would have to buy cartridges and a way to load the film so probably one of those dark bags i guess or a bulk loader


----------



## foothead

Tungsten-balanced film for slide reproduction. Don't buy it, it'll be pretty horrid in daylight. The Ektachrome you want is E100G or E100VS. The 100G is the best imo. VS is too saturated.


----------



## MistaBernie

@Sub -
oh.. so it's like a mini dslr bag that can go inside some other bag... that seems useful I suppose but Crumpler stuff can get expensive. I'm pretty happy using my Lowepro Exchange Messenger as a daily bag without the inserts.. Has all my essentials - iPad2, S95, a deck of high quality playing cards, The Zombie Survival Guide, and a USB flash drive that can help me take over fix computers.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> Tungsten-balanced film for slide reproduction. Don't buy it, it'll be pretty horrid in daylight. The Ektachrome you want is E100G or E100VS. The 100G is the best imo. VS is too saturated.


lol didnt even see the tungsten part. just saw ektachrome and was like COOL! ill keep my eyes open. there some decent stuff on craigslist near me. nothing worthwhile right now other than old movie film but its super old and not the vision3


----------



## sub50hz

I NEED TUNGSTEN TO LIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIVE


----------



## Conspiracy

lol.

well i just finished my first roll of the cheapo expired kodak gold 200 shot at ISO 125. my friend is the photo manager person at walgreens and said he will develop it for me on the cheap and scan it but i have to pay regular price for prints. sounds like a decent deal to me









once i see that they come out ok ill have 2 rolls shot that came out ok lol and ill be loading up some Tri-X finally









darn i just remembered i wanted to mess around and do a double exposure of something with the last frame


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> lol.
> well i just finished my first roll of the cheapo expired kodak gold 200 shot at ISO 125. my friend is the photo manager person at walgreens and said he will develop it for me on the cheap and scan it but i have to pay regular price for prints. sounds like a decent deal to me
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> once i see that they come out ok ill have 2 rolls shot that came out ok lol and ill be loading up some Tri-X finally
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> darn i just remembered i wanted to mess around and do a double exposure of something with the last frame


Kodak Gold 200 + the crappiest p+s you can find with a flash = PARTY CAM.


----------



## Conspiracy

lol i dont have very high hopes for any of the shots coming off that roll my dad gave it to me thinking it good and didnt know its expired but ill show him how bad it looks and maybe i can convince him to buy me more film. when it comes out looking awful then i can even more easily justify buying more film that is better than just leaving it for screwing around


----------



## Durdle Class A

http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Publications/DxOMark-Reviews/Nikon-D800-Review/Sensor-performance

O shiz...


----------



## Conspiracy

looks amazing


----------



## Sean Webster

anyone able to see the 5DMKIII results on that site? I heard the 5D has cleaner high ISO.


----------



## r34p3rex

Picked up a 5DIII last night!







I was so excited

too bad it was in my dream..


----------



## Sean Webster

lolz poor r34p3rex


----------



## Conspiracy

lol r34p its ok its only a nightmare i think in your dreams you really want the d800 lol

got bored and made an avatar lol







BOKEH!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## r34p3rex

Kai is bloody awesome


----------



## iandroo888

*sigh* why'd a d4 become my main body in my dream last night ;_; i was wondering IN my dream HOW i got a d4 xDD


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> lol r34p its ok its only a nightmare i think in your dreams you really want the d800 lol
> 
> got bored and made an avatar lol
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BOKEH!!!!!!!!!!!


Bloody Bokehlicious!


----------



## G33K

Dat bokeh


----------



## G33K

First of my new accessories :3


----------



## swindle

Nice.

I need some decent screw filters.

Colkin are pretty average tbh.


----------



## G33K

I'm a bit poor (especially after my camera), so this $35 Polaroid is just barely in my budget







Have a backup UV (I keep one on just in case to protect my lens), FLD and CPL coming, along with a bigger bag and some misc. stuff.


----------



## swindle

What camera did you end up getting?


----------



## G33K

EOS Rebel T3, love it so far, even though it's their "bargain" camera









Wait, New Zealand, I think in that market it's called the 1100d


----------



## swindle

Dude, my best picture I have ever taken was on 1000D









This is my personal all time favorite picture.



In over a year of having a 7D and various glass I have still yet to take a picture I like as much as this one I got with the 1000D.


----------



## G33K

Awesome shot







The sepia makes it even better

I guess it's just like anything, like snowboarding. You could give Terje Haakonsen your $100 board and go ride a $600 stick and he'd still smoke you; it's all down to skill and finding the perfect shot at the perfect time.


----------



## r34p3rex

This guy followed me around for a while









I think I might need to play with the microadjust.. alot of the pictures I took today with the 24-105 seemed to be front focused


----------



## MistaBernie

Dat bokeh!


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *G33K*
> 
> First of my new accessories :3


I had one of those for my sony. It's pretty good but was only about 4 stops at 24mm on full frame. Make sure to check for color fringing cause of those had a problem with that.


----------



## swindle

Hey man, what program did you use for the boarder and info along the bottom?

Please don't say Photoshop...


----------



## r34p3rex

More squirrels?










Quote:


> Originally Posted by *swindle*
> 
> Hey man, what program did you use for the boarder and info along the bottom?
> Please don't say Photoshop...


Photoshop







I haven't really figured out how to use Lightroom properly yet so I edit pictures one at a time


----------



## swindle

DAMN!


----------



## G33K

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> I had one of those for my sony. It's pretty good but was only about 4 stops at 24mm on full frame. Make sure to check for color fringing cause of those had a problem with that.


I did a test shot on my shed and it seemed alright, but I had it set to minimum because it was overcast and rainy all day, and was too late for any sun anyway. At the max setting, it almost completely blocks out the lamp above my dinner table save for a few dim points of light at f/3.5


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> I NEED TUNGSTEN TO LIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIVE


I NEED TUNGESTEN TO LIIIIIIIIIIVE. DON'T MAKE FUN OF ME.


----------



## Durdle Class A

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r34p3rex*
> 
> More squirrels?



Squirrel by nou Daniel, on Flickr


----------



## r34p3rex




----------



## Sean Webster

looks crooked...lol

Here is something I took recently....ish


IMG_0136.jpg by seanwebster, on Flickr


----------



## sub50hz

I no longer own any L glass -- internet gear whores, pour one out for your dead homie.


----------



## scottath

I played with a 5DIII at a local shop on Friday.....changing the AF was a little fiddly, but other than that it was a fun 5min.....and a 50 f1.2L and a 17mm TS-E.
And yesterday played most of the day with a 5DII and my lenses and got some quite nice shots at a shoot i was assisting at. Dam i want a 5DII/III.....dam student income levels......zzzz


----------



## xxrabid93

Hey so you guys remember me mentioning the Voigtlander Bessa II my family found at my grandma's place and gave it to me? Ya so i'm home for spring break now and got a roll of 120 film to run through it. I looked up how to load MF film, doesn't seem too terribly complicated. The issue though that i realized i have, is the camera has no light meter.

Would it be possible for me to meter a scene with my 5Dc, and use the settings on the Bessa II? The Bessa II has a 105mm lens on it, and for a 6x9 camera, the 35mm equivalent is 45mm. Could i just slap on my 50mm lens on my 5Dc and be fine metering like that?


----------



## BillOhio

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Better hope you can find a dark slide for that Bronica, and hoo boy does it look clean. I don't know about 535, though, especially since it's got a 220 back.


I have Absolutely NO idea what any of this means. I hang out in the computer forums and I know that none of my friends know their 3930k's from their 680's... it's kind of fun to see some new lingo and not know what anyone is talking about.


----------



## swindle

He's talking film, and not digital.

Only a handful of guys here know what the hell he is talking about









I am not one. But then again, I have no desire to learn film - At least in an in depth sense. Still getting my head around digital.


----------



## sub50hz

Bronica -- Medium-format camera manufacturer

535 -- Purchase price

220 -- film format, same 6cm wide film as 120 but without backing paper and twice as many shots. Nearly obsolete, which is a damn shame.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xxrabid93*
> 
> Would it be possible for me to meter a scene with my 5Dc, and use the settings on the Bessa II? The Bessa II has a 105mm lens on it, and for a 6x9 camera, the 35mm equivalent is 45mm. Could i just slap on my 50mm lens on my 5Dc and be fine metering like that?


Yes, absolutely, but it's sort of impractical because carrying another camera is a lot of lost bag space and weight. If you're going to use the 5Dc to meter, you can chimp the exposure if you want, but you'll become more proficient if you don't after a roll or two, and then you can think about buying a hand-held meter.

edit: I should mention, though, that using spot metering instead of evaluative will be more accurate since the frame area will be slightly different. Use spot, hit your highs lows and mids in the frame, do a little math and test it.


----------



## xxrabid93

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Yes, absolutely, but it's sort of impractical because carrying another camera is a lot of lost bag space and weight. If you're going to use the 5Dc to meter, you can chimp the exposure if you want, but you'll become more proficient if you don't after a roll or two, and then you can think about buying a hand-held meter.
> edit: I should mention, though, that using spot metering instead of evaluative will be more accurate since the frame area will be slightly different. Use spot, hit your highs lows and mids in the frame, do a little math and test it.


Sounds good. And ya, i am figuring to buy a proper meter soon anyways. I would just use my 5Dc for now to test out the Bessa II and see how it's shots come out. So can i just transfer over the exposure setting exactly? Say it is at ISO 400. The 5Dc is at f/8 and 1/200s and meters "correctly." Can i just use those exact settings in the Bessa II?

Also, say i spot meter the highlights at 1/400s, the shadows at 1/100s, and the mids at 1/200s. Should i just average them and shoot 1/200s?


----------



## sub50hz

Depends on what you want the image to look like. That's a pretty narrow range of contrast, and if you're shooting print film you could probably shoot at any of those speeds in a situation like that and get a usable exposure. You'll have to try and learn Zone or just guestimate based on how much detail you want in shadows or highlights.


----------



## xxrabid93

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Depends on what you want the image to look like. That's a pretty narrow range of contrast, and if you're shooting print film you could probably shoot at any of those speeds in a situation like that and get a usable exposure. You'll have to try and learn Zone or just guestimate based on how much detail you want in shadows or highlights.


Ya, only a stop apart (highlights-mids-darks each) would be a narrow range of contrast. That was just for example though.

Oh gosh, zone. I was looking into that more earlier. Seems pretty complicated/confusing and like it would take a while to actually use/setup for scenes. I bet i could eventually get the hang of it, but it might take a while...

I'm just putting a roll of 120 Ilford XP2 Super 400 through the Bessa II to see how the shots come out.


----------



## G33K

Decided to test my Variable ND filter for clarity, because people complained about blurriness with the filter. Canon EOS Rebel T3 w/ kit lens @ 55mm, f/5.6, 1/200th shutter (I think) (because I couldn't hold it steady to save my life), $2 dollah bill

No filter:


ND set to low (minimum starts to get darker







):


High, because "max" could block out the sun from 50 feet away:


Conclusion: Haven't tested any landscape shots or anything, but I'm thinking darker > sharp lines more indistinguishable, darker > AF has a harder time. So reviewers got a defective one or don't know what they're talking about


----------



## foothead

Test it in the sun. These variable ND filters work by sandwiching two parallel polarizers. When they are aligned, the light will be filtered by the first then relatively unaffected by the second filter since it's already been filtered. As you rotate towards 90 degrees out of phase, the incoming light gets filtered by the first, then again, in a different orientation by the second, which causes very little light to be allowed through. If this doesn't make sense to you, think of it this way: you have two discs, each with an identical long rectangular slot in it. If you place them on top of each other so the slots are parallel, the hole will be the size of the rectangle. If you start rotating them, the effective size of the hole will get smaller and smaller until they are perpendicular to each other.

Anyway, on to my original point. The biggest problem with these is that sunlight is polarized, which can cause unwanted effects, especially if you use wider lenses. Also, the stacking of (usually poor quality) filters can cause glare/reflections, which will usually be apparent as reduced contrast, but in more extreme cases, visible reflections can be seen.

These are just things specific to that type of filter. The normal problems like poor-quality glass/coatings, flare, mechanical vignetting, etc. still apply, especially given that this is basically two filters stacked on each other.


----------



## Conspiracy

so i got my roll of expired kodak gold developed by my friend at walgreens. The scans are decent, not spectacular, but the shots came out a lot better than i expected. i figured they would look terrible but they actually look a few levels above terrible lol. i got to look at them on the scanner before he burned them and they looked better on the machine then when i pull them up on my computer which is expected for low res scans.

ill try to share a few later on when i have more time.

going to load up an expired roll of kodak gold 400 next i think


----------



## r34p3rex

Almost 20k posts


----------



## Sean Webster

almost...who will have the 20,000th post?


----------



## sub50hz

Whoever is the biggest post/rep whore in this thread, most likely.


----------



## Sean Webster

I see what you did there...


----------



## sub50hz

Seen above: some of the lowest quality GIFs the internet has to offer, lol.


----------



## Sean Webster

lol, I think it is OCN cutting down the quality once uploaded. They are better from the the original sites.


----------



## x_HackMan

Got Handed a

DOI Mc Auto Tele Converter For OM

From my Granddad Last night

I have no idea what to do with it As i do not have anything to mount it to

Any ideas Guys ?


----------



## sub50hz

If you don't have anything to mount it to, get rid of it or buy an OM body you can use it with. Do you want to use it? Probably not.


----------



## sub50hz

Boom.


----------



## G33K

Code:



Code:


[IMG]<original gif location>[/IMG]

Works like a charm, did that in my 3d thread.

Also!



Got here today. I'm on an accessory spree D:


----------



## mz-n10

Please tell me you bought the rebel and not the tripod.....


----------



## x_HackMan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> If you don't have anything to mount it to, get rid of it or buy an OM body you can use it with. Do you want to use it? Probably not.


OK

OffTopic

Was the Second post really needed :/


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> Please tell me you bought the rebel and not the tripod.....


lolz


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *x_HackMan*
> 
> Was the Second post really needed :/


What second post?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> Please tell me you bought the rebel and not the tripod.....


Lol, that was the first thing I thought when I saw that.


----------



## x_HackMan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> What second post?


The One that just say

Boom !

Or was that a double Post ?

Anyway Way to far OffTopic


----------



## sub50hz

It was the 20,000th post in this thread, and I was claiming it. Welcome to the internet, follow along please.


----------



## BillOhio

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *x_HackMan*
> 
> The One that just say
> Boom !
> Or was that a double Post ?
> Anyway Way to far OffTopic


He was commemorating the 20,000th post in this thread.


----------



## x_HackMan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> It was the 20,000th post in this thread, and I was claiming it. Welcome to the internet, follow along please.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BillOhio*
> 
> He was commemorating the 20,000th post in this thread.


I could Tell that I was just saying was it really needed


----------



## sub50hz

Yes, I was contractually obligated to claim the 20,000th post using a method I jestingly criticized less than 10 posts earlier. The irony is astounding, I.... can't believe that forcing it down your eye throat didn't work.


----------



## x_HackMan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Yes, I was contractually obligated to claim the 20,000th post using a method I jestingly criticized less than 10 posts earlier. The irony is astounding, I.... can't believe that forcing it down your eye throat didn't work.


Ok you win :|


----------



## sub50hz

I'm so confused right now.


----------



## x_HackMan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> I'm so confused right now.


Thats the internet for you









Anyway Lets just put that behind us now


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *G33K*
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> [IMG]<original gif location>[/IMG]
> 
> Works like a charm, did that in my 3d thread.
> Also!
> 
> Got here today. I'm on an accessory spree D:


Get out.


----------



## G33K

Well, was a gift, better than nothing. I can't hold my camera still to save my life xD

Besides, all my money was put into my camera. I couldn't afford a tripod, let alone a Manfrotto or something nice.

If I had a 5D II strapped to a Targus tripod, then I would understand any criticism, but I have Canon's lowest end DSLR and a college student budget. Don't like it? Send me money.


----------



## dudemanppl

I broke a tripod like that by putting a 400 2.8 on it.


----------



## G33K

I have the kit lens, going to ditch this when I get the 50mm or the telephoto I want.


----------



## Conspiracy

i +rep'd the 20,000th post for its insightful awesomeness


----------



## Kreeker

What would you buy, a used or refurbished 5d mark II? Canon has a promo code for 15% off refurbished DSLRs, which puts the 5D at $1,637.88 with tax and shipping. I don't exactly know what you can get a fairly mint used 5D for?

I don't really need the camera at this moment so keep that in mind. Although I would like one before summer.


----------



## r34p3rex

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kreeker*
> 
> What would you buy, a used or refurbished 5d mark II? Canon has a promo code for 15% off refurbished DSLRs, which puts the 5D at $1,637.88 with tax and shipping. I don't exactly know what you can get a fairly mint used 5D for?
> I don't really need the camera at this moment so keep that in mind. Although I would like one before summer.


Refurb for sure. Alot of refurbs come with <1000 shutter clicks (although it's really luck of the draw).And also, bloody hell, I just got my 5D2 for $1650 used (18k clicks).


----------



## Kreeker

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r34p3rex*
> 
> Refurb for sure. Alot of refurbs come with <1000 shutter clicks (although it's really luck of the draw).And also, bloody hell, I just got my 5D2 for $1650 used (18k clicks).


Damn you!!! I was hoping you would say go with used. With that being said, do you think we'll be seeing mint 5Ds for $1200-1400 in the coming months?


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kreeker*
> 
> Damn you!!! I was hoping you would say go with used. With that being said, do you think we'll be seeing mint 5Ds for $1200-1400 in the coming months?


Not no, but hell no. Don't expect good used 5D2s for $1200-$1400 average for at least a year. 5D3 is out of the average enthusiasts budgets and will be for quite a while. Used prices on 5Diis are already recovering from the initial rush of sales for the people that pre-ordered the 5D3.

The next set significant price drops can be expected when the 5DII officially stops being produced..


----------



## foothead

Are Sirui tripods any good? I'm looking for something lightweight for hiking, and the N-2004 came up. According to the specs, it weighs 3.5 pounds, supports 33 pounds, is 54.7 inches high w/o column, folds to 21 inches, and has retractable spikes. Seems pretty much perfect, I just haven't heard of the brand before.

EDIT: Even better, there's a version available on eBay that is identical, but lacks the tall center column, Weight is 1500 grams.


----------



## silvrr

Don't know if anyone uses Mpix but they are offering free shipping for a couple of days.
Quote:


> Place an order of $10.00 or more and enjoy free USPS shipping! This promotion is happening now through 11:59 pm (Central) on Wednesday, March 28, 2012. Just enter promo code MAILEDFREE12 at checkout and your USPS shipping is on us!


Sub, do you know of any good printing shops in Chicago?


----------



## sub50hz

What size/media? And does it have to be in the city or is a suburban location alright?


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> What size/media? And does it have to be in the city or is a suburban location alright?


For normal stuff I don't generally go larger than 11x14. Suburbs could be fine, city is preferred. Digital shots.


----------



## MistaBernie

Rumor Mill is heating up over at Canon Rumors (CR2); new entry level full frame offering, and a mirrorless announcement in the 2nd half of the year (Photokina, September?)

The new full frame is going to be geared towards the 'entry-level' end of the spectrum according to CanonRumors. As this is the first official 'rumor' we've heard about it, there isn't much in terms of specs available, but it would _appear_ to be the actual successor to the 5D Mark II (i.e. not the professional level of the 5D3) - makes me wonder if this could include a high megapixel sensor.

Could it be the 3D? I dont know. I personally think they could have called the 5D3 the 3D, and marketed the upcoming camera as the Canon 5D3. With the 3D name, people wouldn't have been focusing on the fact that it came out at nearly $1000 more MSRP than the 5D2 and more focusing on the great things the 5D3 has brought us (the noise handling is freaking ridiculous, let's be serious).

Thoughts?


----------



## Conspiracy

film aside would this be the first consumer and affordable FF camera


----------



## MistaBernie

Could be.. may be priced down towards 7D price (total speculation of course, as we have no other info regarding specs. Etc)


----------



## Shane1244

A full frame 60D/7D would be sick.


----------



## MistaBernie

The only potential downfall I see is that people like me that have a 5Dc and a 5D2 would see an inherent drop in value in these two bodies (moreso than we already have what with the release of the 5D3, though the 5D2 is on the rebound back up to more than the refurb price on avg for used sales, settling closer to the $1850 mark again from what I can see).


----------



## dudemanppl

Just get a 5DII.


----------



## MistaBernie

Nah, if the new offering is an upgrade on the 5D2 (full frame, not ancient auto focus, etc) and is between the 7D and 5Dii price, it's a no brainer.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *silvrr*
> 
> For normal stuff I don't generally go larger than 11x14. Suburbs could be fine, city is preferred. Digital shots.


http://phoenixchicago.com/

Great lab, this is where I take all my film for dev, their prints are really good as well. Helps if you dump your ICC on the drive/disc you're gonna give them, like any other lab. If you're in the suburbs, Quality Plus Photo in Worth is also very good, and they do all the bizarre media like vinyl and aluminum (which can look very cool with the right b+w shot, albeit pretty kitchy). I would offer to do them myself, but I simply don't have the time these days.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> The only potential downfall I see is that people like me that have a 5Dc and a 5D2 would see an inherent drop in value in these two bodies (moreso than we already have what with the release of the 5D3, though the 5D2 is on the rebound back up to more than the refurb price on avg for used sales, settling closer to the $1850 mark again from what I can see).


Not a problem unless you are only into photography to make money by flipping gear. If you're worried about resale value, you probably don't need 'x' item as bad as you think you might.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Not a problem unless you are only into photography to make money by flipping gear. If you're worried about resale value, you probably don't need 'x' item as bad as you think you might.


I'm not in it just to make money flipping gear (If I am, I'm doing it wrong







) but I understand where you're coming from.

It just sucks to pick up a body, and like two weeks later have its successor (after four years of nothing) get announced, and basically tank the value of what you _just_ purchased. I had half a mind to return my bnib 5D2 and pick up a refurb since the price dropped to $1750, but I didn't because I'm not specifically doing this to make money. Alas, that will always have a chance at happening.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> I'm not in it just to make money flipping gear (If I am, I'm doing it wrong
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ) but I understand where you're coming from.
> It just sucks to pick up a body, and like two weeks later have its successor (after four years of nothing) get announced, and basically tank the value of what you _just_ purchased. I had half a mind to return my bnib 5D2 and pick up a refurb since the price dropped to $1750, but I didn't because I'm not specifically doing this to make money. Alas, that will always have a chance at happening.


Economics, bro. At least it's not like the instant automobile depreciation when it leaves the lot.

The 5DII is fine for you. If you start making "the big bucks", then score a III and fuhgeddaboudit.


----------



## MistaBernie

Yeah, I'm not disagreeing..

I am daydreaming about selling my 5Dc and 5D2 after May 19th to pick up a 5D3, but I don't _have_ to do it.


----------



## dudemanppl

Totally not worth it. I'd sell the 5D for another 5DII, or just buy another 5D altogether, but not a 5DIII.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Totally not worth it. I'd sell the 5D for another 5DII, or just buy another 5D altogether, but not a 5DIII.


What? Why? I don't understand why it's necessary to have more than one of the same camera.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> What? Why? I don't understand why it's necessary to have more than one of the same camera.


i guess it depends on what you shoot. most of the sports guys have 3 of the same camera and shoot with 2 at a time. i think the 3rd is backup majority of the time. because depending on the sport they will have either a 400 2.8 + 70-200 or 70-200 + 24-70.

but i dont know any other type of photog other than a wedding photog which technically could be the same as sports minus the 400 2.8 that needs more than 2 of the same camera much less use both at the same time


----------



## aksthem1

Well for hobbyists I don't see the point of having two of the same camera. At least not a $2,000+ camera.
Professional use is different though.


----------



## dudemanppl

Oh yeah I was assuming he was gonna shoot more paid work. I'd take 5 5Ds over a 5DIII day of the week, also HOLY CRAP YOU CAN BUY 5 5DS FOR THE PRICE OF A 5DIII. THEN FRANKENSTEIN THE SENSORS FOR 6X7? Nah I'm stupid.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Oh yeah I was assuming he was gonna shoot more paid work. I'd take 5 5Ds over a 5DIII day of the week, also HOLY CRAP YOU CAN BUY 5 5DS FOR THE PRICE OF A 5DIII. THEN FRANKENSTEIN THE SENSORS FOR 6X7? Nah I'm stupid.




Do it


----------



## MistaBernie

Anyone else noticed that Canon appears to be thinning the herd on their line of refurbished lenses and speedlites (offered directly by CanonUSA at least)?

Up until recently, there were five pages of entries. Now, there's 18 total lenses & speedlites offered. Is Canon getting out of the practice of doing this? Are they not getting enough supply back to keep this up?


----------



## Conspiracy

idk dont really follow what canon refurbs has because i cant afford to buy refurb lenses for my camera. pretty much only money im spending on photos is film now because its a lot more affordable and its just more rewarding shooting film even though im just getting started. i will down grade my 7D if i stop doing sports


----------



## foothead

Cell phone pic. The white balance is waaaaaay off, it's actually white. I left the E410's battery in the charger at home, lol.

Got a few packages today. Minolta spotmeter F, Caltar-S 215/5.6, and a Gitzo rational 2 pan head for non-hiking work. The Caltar-S looks pretty awesome, especially for the price, but it's crazy heavy. I'll probably have to pick up a smaller aperture lens around 210mm for backpacking trips. Can't test it right now, since it doesn't fit what I had previously thought was a Copal 1 lensboard. I'm gonna have to order a new one to match it.


----------



## MistaBernie

Nicely done Foot! Looks awesome (even with bad cell phone pics)

Also, I'm moving away from the idea(s) of picking up a 5D3 and instead (at least for now) picking up a couple of new lenses.. I _think_ I want to replace my 70-200 f/2.8 with a 70-200 f/2.8 IS II... and I think I want a decent fisheye. I like the looks of Canon's new 8-15 f/4L, but not at that price. I'm leaning towards the Sigma 15 or the Rokinon (though I don't like the idea of it being MF only, I feel like my vision isn't what it used to be).


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Nicely done Foot! Looks awesome (even with bad cell phone pics)
> Also, I'm moving away from the idea(s) of picking up a 5D3 and instead (at least for now) picking up a couple of new lenses.. I _think_ I want to replace my 70-200 f/2.8 with a 70-200 f/2.8 IS II... and I think I want a decent fisheye. I like the looks of Canon's new 8-15 f/4L, but not at that price. I'm leaning towards the Sigma 15 or the Rokinon (though I don't like the idea of it being MF only, I feel like my vision isn't what it used to be).


Keep in mind that the DOF on a 15mm fisheye even at 2.8 is pretty big. I don't think it requires a fine touch or eye.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *silvrr*
> 
> Keep in mind that the DOF on a 15mm fisheye even at 2.8 is pretty big. I don't think it requires a fine touch or eye.


That's a pretty good point - even on full frame though? If that's the case then the Rokinon probably isn't a horrible investment if I want to shoot with it a bit.


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> That's a pretty good point - even on full frame though? If that's the case then the Rokinon probably isn't a horrible investment if I want to shoot with it a bit.


Yes, even on full frame, plug some values in a DOF calculator and see for yourself. DOF is a whole different ballgame when you go this wide.


----------



## MistaBernie

Yeah, once you get ~3 feet away+, it's pretty insane, but inside that first foot or two, it gets pretty tight. 1 ft only gives .22 feet depth of field, or 2.64". 2 feet gives better results (.94 feet, still pretty small, but definitely better). Move to 8+ feet, and DOF is 88 ft +.


----------



## sub50hz

Fisheye? f/8, infinity and forget about it.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Fisheye? f/8, infinity and forget about it.


I was gonna say. The hyperfocal distance for that would be several centimetres


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Needs more Gorilla Pods:


----------



## dudemanppl

The 1v is a fantastically good shoot.
In other news, I cannot find a single fricken' lens cap. But thats okay since the only time I use them is when. Never.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> In other news, I cannot find a single fricken' lens cap. But thats okay since the only time I use them is when. Never.


I have this problem as well. I keep buying cheap lenses and none of them come with caps, and now I have no idea which sizes to buy. Guess I should just get some calipers and check.


----------



## Conspiracy

yay so unexcited its my birthday. bout to leave for class fun fun fun.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> yay so unexcited its my birthday. bout to leave for class fun fun fun.


Happy B-Day, hopefully your teachers give you a bunch of assignments for presents.


----------



## sub50hz

Happy bday brodega!


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> yay so unexcited its my birthday. bout to leave for class fun fun fun.


Happy birth-canal ejection day!


----------



## Sean Webster

Way to make is sound disturbing....


----------



## Conspiracy

lol so way too many people at my school were screaming happy birthday from across the quad or university center... should have just stayed home and relaxed. idk what im doing for dinner tonight but i know beer will be complementing it


----------



## Sean Webster

lol, I don't get how people like beer. It is nasty to me. I've tried a bunch of different ones and idk, I just can't acquire a taste for it.


----------



## Conspiracy

i like almost all beer and liquor although prefer drinks with some sort of pleasing taste and not just straight up alcohol. and ill even say that i enjoy having a drink with some good flavor mainly margaritas


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> lol, I don't get how people like beer. It is nasty to me. I've tried a bunch of different ones and idk, I just can't acquire a taste for it.


Well, it was pretty evident already that you had bad taste.

:trollface.png:


----------



## Conspiracy

haha burned


----------



## Conspiracy

new tenacious D http://youtu.be/ls0vZ9WsAK4


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> lol, I don't get how people like beer. It is nasty to me. I've tried a bunch of different ones and idk, I just can't acquire a taste for it.


Maybe try stout. I'm not a beer's biggest but I love stout.


----------



## sub50hz

There are lots of varations of stouts. Russian Imperials are the bestest. You guys are walking a fine line here, once GT shows up the two of us will smother you in beer snobbery *until you submit*.


----------



## MistaBernie

Fisheye en route, hopefully here Monday (but may not be here till Tuesday? Weird. BH usually has stuff here next business day if ordered early).


----------



## sub50hz

Out of any possible piece of gear, a fisheye is the _last_ thing I would buy new. Unless you're planning on submitting to Thrasher or something, lol.


----------



## MistaBernie

There was a decent one on fleabay for like $450 shipped (decided to go Sigma instead of Rokinon) but I had some BH gift cards from a trade so I wanted to use those to save some coin..


----------



## sub50hz

Is the Sigma circular?


----------



## MistaBernie

nope, diagonal


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> There are lots of varations of stouts. Russian Imperials are the bestest. You guys are walking a fine line here, once GT shows up the two of us will smother you in beer snobbery *until you submit*.


LOL, be warned ye beer heathens. Belgians make the best beer in the universe. Give me a nice tripel or quadrupel abbey ale and I'm a happy imbiber.

And of course Russian Imperials are often considered to be the beer's connoisseur's beer, but I prefer a good wee heavy or porter.

That reminds me; I have a bottle of Dogfish 120 Minute IPA sitting in the fridge, need to drink immediately after work to celebrate the coming of Spring Break.


----------



## MistaBernie

haha, /like.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*
> 
> And of course Russian Imperials are often considered to be the beer's connoisseur's beer, but I prefer a good wee heavy or porter.


Three words:

Dark
Lord
Day.

Come to Indiana, wait in stupid lines with me.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Three words:
> Dark
> Lord
> Day.
> Come to Indiana, wait in stupid lines with me.


I wish! Too bad it's in April, when I'm booked every damned weekend.


----------



## MistaBernie

Welp... 50 f/1.4 is up on the chopping block. I simply don't use it and can no longer justify keeping it. I have seen myself reaching for the 85 f/1.8 lately so I decided to keep that.

There was someone in our midst that was looking for one but was initially offering something like $200. I think he's come up to $250; I sent him pics and he never got back to me.


----------



## hyp36rmax

Canon 7D Shooter here









Lots of Action photography from motorsports to hip hop bboy events









Plan to invest in a:
Tokina 11-16mm
Canon f4L17-40mm
Canon 1.4 50mm
Canon 1.8 85mm
Canon f4L 70-200mm


----------



## MistaBernie

Welcome!


----------



## hyp36rmax

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Welcome!


HI! I recently ventured into photography and love it!







Thanks for the warm welcome


----------



## swindle

New toy

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Sigma-30mm-f-1.4-EX-DC-HSM-Lens-Review.aspx

Have had to do some microadjustment (+15 lol) to get the lens right, but not bad. RAW to JPEP, alright results so far.

All at f/2.8 - 1/1600 - ISO400







Got this while out with it today,


----------



## Sean Webster

The bike is sick!


----------



## darkphantom

Completely forgot about this thread.
From vacation:









Another from C&C:


----------



## Conspiracy

yay more track and field today







nice to shoot something other than basketball









wish i had a 11-16 to do some creative stuff to mess around


----------



## foothead

Decided to do a bit of weight reduction on the Speed Graphic. I may have gone overboard a little.


----------



## dudemanppl

So now lens shutter only then?


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> So now lens shutter only then?


Yep. All my lenses are mounted in leaf shutters, and I really can't see myself buying any that aren't. The vast majority of large format cameras don't even have the focal plane shutter, so it's not like it's a big deal.

I'm sanding the glue off this thing, and it's actually quite beautiful. I have no idea why Graflex built a camera out of nice furniture-grade hardwood and brass, then decided "let's cover it with paint and fake leather."

EDIT: Here's a photo.


----------



## dudemanppl

Wow thats actually quite pretty. Do you have a better view?


----------



## foothead

I don't have a card reader with me, so all I can upload are cell phone photos for now. Here's another angle. It's not put back together as of now, so there are a lot of random holes and such.










Not really sure what I'm going to do with that bed. I may get some thin wood and cover it.


----------



## MistaBernie

Interesting thing about Sigma 15 FE -- comes with a hood-like adapter for a snap-on lens cap. Taking photos with it creates the illusion of a circular fisheye (looks cooler if you expose it to completely dark so you can't see light reflecting off the inside, but you get the idea). Exhibit A:










It's kind of funny to watch Lightroom try to adjust / correct the distortion on full frame. Funny in a 'don't do that' kind of way. I still dont get how Gene Ho shoots weddings with a Sigma 10 and a Sigma 15 on two different bodies..


----------



## mz-n10

doesnt look very FE....looks more like heavy vignetting.....


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> doesnt look very FE....looks more like heavy vignetting.....


was about to post the same thing lol


----------



## Nemesis158

just got a 64GB SDXC card for my d5100 to go along with the 2 16GB SDHC cards i had already.
newegg had it for $65 with free shipping. couldnt say no.


----------



## sub50hz

Lol, 64GB. It makes me laugh when the card capacity is so high that you're likely to run out of battery before the card is filled.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Lol, 64GB. It makes me laugh when the card capacity is so high that you're likely to run out of battery before the card is filled.


Yeah, especially if you're not shooting RAW... I dont get the appeal of a 64gb card. That's something I'd get for my wife's parents so that instead of calling us to 'upload their pictures because the card is full', they'd just take pictures till the camera died (or they did I suppose)..


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Yeah, especially if you're not shooting RAW... I dont get the appeal of a 64gb card. That's something I'd get for my wife's parents so that instead of calling us to 'upload their pictures because the card is full', they'd just take pictures till the camera died (or they did I suppose)..


wow...


----------



## MistaBernie

It's true, I have no clue what kind of camera they have (I imagine some sort of Kodak Easy something or other) and they just shoot till it's full, then they call my wife and literally say 'hey, come over, the camera's full'. She loves it oh so much when they do that...


----------



## sub50hz

They... _do_ know Walgreens exists, right?


----------



## MistaBernie

It's not a disposable, they literally just dont know how to get the photos off the camera.. or how to do anything with them after the fact. Besides, that would cost them money. Or, they just call wifey, and she grumbles and goes over. Trust me, I'd rather have to do that than head to my mother's place (~30 minute drive vs 6 minute drive for her folks) every time she has a computer problem..luckily, she doesn't really have many of them, as she actually uses computers at work, etc.


----------



## sub50hz

It doesn't need to be disposable. They can just walk the camera in, some burnt out high school ****** at the counter will dump the files and make them 4x6s for cheap. You save time, they get instaprints, everybody wins.


----------



## MistaBernie

They want to upload pictures online and stuff, and even if they went to Walgreens and did that, they'd just end up calling and asking us to come over and do that for them anyways. She's got a brain in her head (even though she married me) so she can handle it no problem..


----------



## sub50hz

Take my advice, _dad._ Walgreens has a service which posts to Picasa IIRC, I think my mother uses it. I'll have to ask her so I can post it for you to *ignore*.


----------



## MistaBernie

Meh, my wife doesn't mind nearly as much as I usually do. Dont worry, I'll give it a once or twice over before I ignore it.

Also is this fishy enough?










wait.. fisheye makes me SMALLER??? sweet!


----------



## Conspiracy

yea that looks fishy now/ leave that hood off the vignette ruins it lol


----------



## MistaBernie

I think I will find decent creative uses for the adapter ring but yeah I wasn't planning on shooting with it normally


----------



## mz-n10

still doesn't look that fishy. that's not a circular fish is it


----------



## MistaBernie

No, its diagonal. Circular would have the image in a circle in the frame more like the last one.


----------



## mz-n10

yea, and its only 15mm...so it actually really isnt that wide to begin with.

look at the 8mm peleng, i wanted that fisheye back in the day.


----------



## MistaBernie

15 is plenty wide on full frame. I have a couple of shots with it that don't look like fisheye at all. I think that it'll look even normal on the 7D..


----------



## sub50hz

It's not gonna fix your face, though.


----------



## MistaBernie

Cant fix perfection broseph


----------



## Sean Webster

LOL

Anyways i took some pics at the beach!









Imma make a thread cause I see that is what people seem to do lately...lol


----------



## Nemesis158

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Yeah, especially if you're not shooting RAW... I dont get the appeal of a 64gb card.


then i guess its a good thing i shoot in raw and have a second battery


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nemesis158*
> 
> then i guess its a good thing i shoot in raw and have a second battery


Just sayin'... it's slightly overkill. For half the price you could have gotten plenty of storage and saved the rest of the money towards anything else. If I go out shooting randomly (unless working a job) I rarely come close to filling 16gb CF card, and if I'm shooting high ISO large raws, the files get big (~25 meg+ somewhat consistently).


----------



## Conspiracy

so i doubt any of yall care and the video section is dead and i feel like the only video nerd on OCN but this is pretty cool and a big deal. not sure why they went with a CMOS sensor even if it is sony's exmor. i have never worked with one but i hope its good







this is a big deal for people that need to shoot in lossless quality so TV and film people. although i am yet to hear of a feature movie shot on XDCAM HD422 maybe a documentary. a good lens on a XDCAM can give some pretty amazing video but with glass costing so much even the low end cheapo lenses like the ones i use at my station still start at like $30k and are not so sharp that your eyes bleed and under the right conditions the color fringing makes you cringe lol

http://www.sony.co.uk/biz/press/id/1237485083583?SM=FB03_0412


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Just sayin'... it's slightly overkill. For half the price you could have gotten plenty of storage and saved the rest of the money towards anything else. If I go out shooting randomly (unless working a job) I rarely come close to filling 16gb CF card, and if I'm shooting high ISO large raws, the files get big (~25 meg+ somewhat consistently).


The reason i'd never use more than 16 is fear. I'm afraid of corruption, or downright loss.


----------



## KenjiS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Just sayin'... it's slightly overkill. For half the price you could have gotten plenty of storage and saved the rest of the money towards anything else. If I go out shooting randomly (unless working a job) I rarely come close to filling 16gb CF card, and if I'm shooting high ISO large raws, the files get big (~25 meg+ somewhat consistently).


Depends on what you shoot

I definitely hit 50% on my 32gb card frequently but i abuse my burst mode a lot... if im shooting action or insects or something im usually doing a LOT of burst mode to ensure i get a good percentage of keepers and such...

And I shoot RAW


----------



## MistaBernie

The likelihood of corruption is relatively low, though dust is almost worse for CF cards than water. Losing/breaking cards is more likely, and if you break a 64gb card, you lose _alot_ (potentially) of data, vs only a portion of your data.

In terms of people that spray and pray, etc, that has nothing really to do with 'what' you're shooting, it's more 'how' you're shooting. As your skills improve, people tend to move away from this (or refine their "sprays" ) to be shorter controlled bursts (three frames at the top of a pitchers' release, instead of gripping and ripping the shutter as soon as he starts his wind-up, for example). Obviously in certain cases, you want more detail, etc, but again, it's really more of a 'how' you shoot than a 'what' you shoot.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> so i doubt any of yall care and the video section is dead and i feel like the only video nerd on OCN but this is pretty cool and a big deal. not sure why they went with a CMOS sensor even if it is sony's exmor. i have never worked with one but i hope its good
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> this is a big deal for people that need to shoot in lossless quality so TV and film people. although i am yet to hear of a feature movie shot on XDCAM HD422 maybe a documentary. a good lens on a XDCAM can give some pretty amazing video but with glass costing so much even the low end cheapo lenses like the ones i use at my station still start at like $30k and are not so sharp that your eyes bleed and under the right conditions the color fringing makes you cringe lol
> http://www.sony.co.uk/biz/press/id/1237485083583?SM=FB03_0412


you see the super 35 that was also released?

fs700


----------



## MistaBernie

New $1500 Canon 60Da announced. Supposed to be great for Astrophotography (hence the A in the name). The difference? IR Cut filter has been modified (apparently all but removed).

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/853491-REG/Canon_6596B002_EOS_60Da_DSLR_Camera.html


----------



## dudemanppl

A 16 GB memory card lasts me a few months.


----------



## foothead

I'm going to replace the bed with some wood next. Should I do the front standard as well? Also, what's the best way to get that brass nice and shiny? Right now it's just been sanded at 80 grit to remove paint.


----------



## mz-n10

with 80 paper you might have scratched up the surface to teh brass, try passing it through a 200 grit and maybe a 1000 grit before polishing it up.

if you need to clean any oxidation off of it use ketchup and salt. the vinegar in ketchup cleans the oxidation while the salt is used as an abrasive, i use it on my waterblocks when they oxidize.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> with 80 paper you might have scratched up the surface to teh brass, try passing it through a 200 grit and maybe a 1000 grit before polishing it up.


Yep, it's quite scratched at the moment. I bought some 200 and 400 grit paper the other day, since home depot didn't have anything finer. I'll probably go to a local hardware store for that. What's the best way to polish it btw?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> if you need to clean any oxidation off of it use ketchup and salt. the vinegar in ketchup cleans the oxidation while the salt is used as an abrasive, i use it on my waterblocks when they oxidize.


Cool, I'll keep that in mind. There's not any oxidation currently, since it was covered in thick paint before.


----------



## laboitenoire

Metals are best polished using wet paper, and only sand in one direction until all scratches are the same size.


----------



## aksthem1

If you have a Harbor Freight near you then just pick up some of their rubbing compound. There is a kit that includes two different compounds for metals and buffs. Works great too.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aksthem1*
> 
> If you have a Harbor Freight near you then just pick up some of their rubbing compound. There is a kit that includes two different compounds for metals and buffs. Works great too.


There is. I'll be sure to give that a try.

Does customs X-ray packages coming from out of the country? There's some NC portra on eBay, but it's in France.

EDIT: Ooh, there's some pretty neat stuff in the photo section of eBay. I keep finding these machines that basically use a CRT to create images on slide film. Anyone here ever use one? It could be quite useful for getting prints from digital.


----------



## dennyb

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm going to replace the bed with some wood next. Should I do the front standard as well? Also, what's the best way to get that brass nice and shiny? Right now it's just been sanded at 80 grit to remove paint.


Use super fine steel wool by itself first then use it with a polishing compound. It will also conform the odd surfaces better:thumb: you can find it in any paint dept


----------



## foothead

UPS just came!










This is going to be a challenge.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> UPS just came!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is going to be a challenge.


lol awesome!


----------



## foothead

Three of the roller module things work. The other two have the exit rollers dried up, which means they won't be usable unless I can get parts. Two motors are definitely working, one with a heater, one without. There's another one with a heater that is probably working, but the plug has been switched to something else. The original is in the box of parts, so I can probably get that swapped back. The other two motors are non-heated, and completely taken apart, so I don't know if they work or even if the parts are all there. Pretty much exactly like I expected. It'll work pretty well for my needs.

By the way, I've already gotten my hair stuck in the rollers. That hurt.


----------



## mz-n10

friend let me borrow this....figured some of you film heads would know how to work it....


----------



## swindle

Have you inserted the XQD card?


----------



## mz-n10

not yet tried a SD card but no luck. it just rattled around and didnt save any pictures and the rear screen stayed blank.....


----------



## laboitenoire

Having trouble coming up with ideas for my final photography portfolio...

Working on my free project right now. Thinking of creating a "figure" illustrating different stress states on an object. Only instead of grips and stress elements, it'll be human hands and my head.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> By the way, I've already gotten my hair stuck in the rollers. That hurt.


LOL.

so you are a bad influence on me lol. I spent a good chunk of my day yesterday thinking about shooting medium format instead of paying attention in my film history class and we watched a jean luc godard film who is my favorite new wave director...


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> friend let me borrow this....figured some of you film heads would know how to work it....


Here's the manual. Give it a read. http://www.butkus.org/chinon/yashica/yashica_24/yashica_24.htm

You have to use 220 film, apparently. That might be a bit hard to find locally.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> By the way, I've already gotten my hair stuck in the rollers. That hurt.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LOL.
> 
> so you are a bad influence on me lol. I spent a good chunk of my day yesterday thinking about shooting medium format instead of paying attention in my film history class and we watched a jean luc godard film who is my favorite new wave director...
Click to expand...

Haha, well you should shoot medium format. It's awesome.

Does Germany use 50 Hz power? The manual for the printo says to use Gear setting 2 for RA-4, but the front of the manual has a big warning to use 3 with 60 Hz mains.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> Does Germany use 50 Hz power? The manual for the printo says to use Gear setting 2 for RA-4, but the front of the manual has a big warning to use 3 with 60 Hz mains.


germany does have 50Hz if you referring to their electrical outlets


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> Does Germany use 50 Hz power? The manual for the printo says to use Gear setting 2 for RA-4, but the front of the manual has a big warning to use 3 with 60 Hz mains.
> 
> 
> 
> germany does have 50Hz if you referring to their electrical outlets
Click to expand...

Yep. Thanks, that clears it up for me. I regeared it to setting 3 and it seems to be about the right timing.

Btw, I applied power to that motor with the modified plugs, and it seems to be working fine. I'm gonna put the original plug back on later, I just need to go to radioshack and get some more solder first.


----------



## MistaBernie

Hey Jason, wanna buy my 50 f/1.4? I so funny..

In seriousness though, I've decided to part with a couple of things I"m just not using and that's one.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm going to replace the bed with some wood next. Should I do the front standard as well? Also, what's the best way to get that brass nice and shiny? Right now it's just been sanded at 80 grit to remove paint.


For polish, try Brasso, does a pretty good job.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm going to replace the bed with some wood next. Should I do the front standard as well? Also, what's the best way to get that brass nice and shiny? Right now it's just been sanded at 80 grit to remove paint.
> 
> 
> 
> For polish, try Brasso, does a pretty good job.
Click to expand...

Okay. Should I do that instead of the Harbor freight stuff, or both, or ?


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Hey Jason, wanna buy my 50 f/1.4? I so funny..
> In seriousness though, I've decided to part with a couple of things I"m just not using and that's one.


¿? Lol I think I'll pass. I sold my replacement in like 10 mins on POTN though. Seems like a lot of people want one.


----------



## MistaBernie

Dude, seriously, I know. I literally had two people PM me in 9 minutes. If the first one was local I'd be selling next Tuesday during lunch, but it's almost easier for me to just ship it out tomorrow and have the cash in my account in a couple of days.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> Okay. Should I do that instead of the Harbor freight stuff, or both, or ?


Don't know about the Harbor Freight stuff. Depends on how scratched and stained the brass is. Brasso is best for for brass that's in reasonably good shape to begin with, as it's mildly abrasive. It's cheap, so maybe try the Brasso first and see how it looks. Buy the stuff in the can with the wads of cotton; I find that works better than just the liquid.


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> Okay. Should I do that instead of the Harbor freight stuff, or both, or ?


Liquid metal polishes work well too, but it depends on the condition of the metal. If it has coarse scratches then a rubbing compound or lower grit sandpaper will speed up the process.

Then you can finish it off with metal polish to have a good shiny luster. Some of the finer rubbing compounds might not even need polish.


----------



## Conspiracy

is the unmentionable website down? i miss having chat lol


----------



## dudemanppl

I was wondering why chat had noone in it. I left the window up overnight. Seems like it stopped working at 5:01 p.m. PST.


----------



## Dream Killer

we should just host it on someone's server.


----------



## Conspiracy

i know nothing about internet stuff and hosting but im sure someone will be able to figure something out. are there not like free places to host it or do we have to pay


----------



## dudemanppl

Yeah sub's provider is complete crap.


----------



## foothead

Perhaps we could just create a chatroom somewhere? There are tons of websites that let you do it for free. The chat was the only thing that got used anyway. No need for a full forum really.


----------



## Sean Webster

*cough* Skype *cough*

*cough* Steam *cough*

*cough* MSN messenger *cough*

*cough* Facebook *cough*


----------



## foothead

IMO, google talk, since it works with just a gmail account. Is that agreeable with everyone else?

EDIT: Not sure if the chatrooms stay open permanently when everyone leaves though. Anyone used one like that before?


----------



## Dream Killer

if i create a vm on my server at home, who do i give the credentials to? sub?


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> IMO, google talk, since it works with just a gmail account. Is that agreeable with everyone else?
> 
> EDIT: Not sure if the chatrooms stay open permanently when everyone leaves though. Anyone used one like that before?


Skype is way better cause you can have parties and it basically will be always on in the background and we can have a infinite chat log.
Personally I am never on my google account and I am always on skype, msn, and steam lol.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> if i create a vm on my server at home, who do i give the credentials to? sub?


everyone you want to give access to it? lol


----------



## foothead

Okay, I set something up, at least for now. paste [email protected] into the chat box on google then invite to chat. It'll pop up in your contacts list, then you can send a message and you'll be added.

EDIT: sean, you beat me by like four seconds, lol. I've never used Skype for chat before. Wanna set it up and post a link here?


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> Okay, I set something up, at least for now. paste [email protected] into the chat box on google then invite to chat. It'll pop up in your contacts list, then you can send a message and you'll be added.
> 
> EDIT: sean, you beat me by like four seconds, lol. I've never used Skype for chat before. Wanna set it up and post a link here?


http://www.skype.com/intl/en-us/home

download and install, make an account and all.

My skype ID is *SeanWebsterHD* add me NAOW!

I'll we'll just add each other and be a uber group


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> Okay, I set something up, at least for now. paste [email protected] into the chat box on google then invite to chat. It'll pop up in your contacts list, then you can send a message and you'll be added.
> 
> EDIT: sean, you beat me by like four seconds, lol. I've never used Skype for chat before. Wanna set it up and post a link here?
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.skype.com/intl/en-us/home
> 
> download and install, make an account and all.
> 
> My skype ID is *SeanWebsterHD* add me NAOW!
> 
> I'll we'll just add each other and be a uber group
Click to expand...

Done!


----------



## Sean Webster

Come on guys...where are you all? We have a group set up and everything.


----------



## dudemanppl

Are you guys still here?
Also, 40 feet of film = this much remjet:


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Are you guys still here?


Yes.


----------



## Conspiracy

well i just set up a skype even though im late. never done much chatting on anything other than facebook,

my skype name is mrbrianroberts









al the variations of my name were taken...


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> well i just set up a skype even though im late. never done much chatting on anything other than facebook,
> 
> my skype name is mrbrianroberts
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> al the variations of my name were taken...


sounds like a creeper, no lie.


----------



## laboitenoire

So I'm asking for a new bag for hiking/traveling/trekking for my 21st... I really like the Lowepro Photo Sport 200 AW, but there's part of me that wonders if I might be better served getting a technical pack and an insert... I doubt I really need the capacity (or price) of F.Stop's bags, but damn they look nice.


----------



## Dream Killer

camera bags are heavy, go with a real hiking pack. i use six-moon design's 15 oz pack.


----------



## MistaBernie

I think I'm gonna do a flash FAQ soon. Given that I'm wicked busy starting tonite through Sunday (though I may have some time on Saturday) look for it (likely) around Monday. While I only shoot Canon, I'll do what I can to keep things generalized.


----------



## sub50hz

Yes, the site is down, and the host is being a total boner about it. I don't know if I have too much inclination to bring the forum back up since nobody was using it except for the chat, which kinda sucks.


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> So I'm asking for a new bag for hiking/traveling/trekking for my 21st... I really like the Lowepro Photo Sport 200 AW, but there's part of me that wonders if I might be better served getting a technical pack and an insert... I doubt I really need the capacity (or price) of F.Stop's bags, but damn they look nice.


I would go with a nice general purpose bag and add some insert options. This will leave you with more flexibility for non-camera uses.

http://www.google.com/products/catalog?q=mountainsmith+camera+bag&hl=en&prmd=imvns&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.,cf.osb&biw=1680&bih=907&um=1&ie=UTF-8&tbm=shop&cid=4404918240930527141&sa=X&ei=9tt9T_zpIoGg8QS28_2ADQ&ved=0CIoCEPICMA4

http://www.google.com/products/catalog?hl=en&q=lens+case&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.,cf.osb&biw=1680&bih=907&um=1&ie=UTF-8&tbm=shop&cid=9602623388893742195&sa=X&ei=UNx9T9XLPMPV0QGQvPiMDA&ved=0CH0Q8wIwAA


----------



## laboitenoire

The reason I'm considering the LowePro is that I'm rarely on a hike or traveling without my camera, and people say it's lightweight enough to actually be comfortable on a typical hike. Plus it still has a ridiculous amount of normal pack space on top.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> I think I'm gonna do a flash FAQ soon. Given that I'm wicked busy starting tonite through Sunday (though I may have some time on Saturday) look for it (likely) around Monday. While I only shoot Canon, I'll do what I can to keep things generalized.


i can help add a few things. i started doing the project to augment my sticky but there's just so much to cover and it's hard to do a comparison of flash vs no flash in stuff i do.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> i can help add a few things. i started doing the project to augment my sticky but there's just so much to cover and it's hard to do a comparison of flash vs no flash in stuff i do.


Word, sounds like a plan. I think I'm gonna focus a bit more on the theory of flash, modifiers, etc.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Yes, the site is down, and the host is being a total boner about it. I don't know if I have too much inclination to bring the forum back up since nobody was using it except for the chat, which kinda sucks.


shame too. i kinda wanted to see the site grow into something. maybe just bad timing


----------



## ljason8eg

Ok here's a good one, my 7D takes totally black photos if the shutter speed is over 1/2000. What could cause this? I tried resetting the camera and no dice.


----------



## MistaBernie

We needed more active members, more _actual content.._ I dropped off on posting up on the rumors section just because half the stuff I was getting (or alot more) was already available on CR... it seemed like with the exception of a few people throwing tons of pictures in the 'post a picture' thread, we only had a few truly active members.. sucks, but maybe it's for the best. Sub shouldn't be stuck with the bill for forums so that a few of us can chat, there's plenty of ways for us to do that for free.


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> Ok here's a good one, my 7D takes totally black photos if the shutter speed is over 1/2000. What could cause this? I tried resetting the camera and no dice.


Im assuming your not using flash for lighting and there is enough ambient light for the shutter speed?

What happens at the next SS increment down? I think its 1/1600 or something close? Basically is it just 1/2000 or is it everything above a certain value?

Ive heard, but never confirmed, that after a certain speed the shutter controls only the start of the exposure while the stopping of the exposure is handled electronically. Possibly try pulling both batteries, main and small coin battery and let it set for a bit. Very low tech option but sometimes it just needs a good reset.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *silvrr*
> 
> Ive heard, but never confirmed, that after a certain speed the shutter controls only the start of the exposure while the stopping of the exposure is handled electronically.


On live-view equipped Canons, you can select first- or second-curtain electronic shutter.


----------



## Dream Killer

setting up a fully fledged irc server with an ajax web interface, brb


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> Ok here's a good one, my 7D takes totally black photos if the shutter speed is over 1/2000. What could cause this? I tried resetting the camera and no dice.


I suspect it's a shutter or mirror problem.

More than likely a shutter problem. Might not be in sync. I guess that means another piece gear will take a trip to Canon.


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> On live-view equipped Canons, you can select first- or second-curtain electronic shutter.


Can't you set the curtain sync on all DLSRs? Or are you not talking about a flash function? I think my 40D allowed me to choose the curtain sync for flash use, could be wrong though.

Looking into the electronic shutter more it seems to be a function of the original 1D as it had a CCD sensor not a CMOS sensor. The sensor exposure could be controlled electronically which is what allowed the 1/16,000 shutter speed which isn't seen in the current 1D series as they use CMOS sensors.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *silvrr*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> On live-view equipped Canons, you can select first- or second-curtain electronic shutter.
> 
> 
> 
> Can't you set the curtain sync on all DLSRs? Or are you not talking about a flash function? I think my 40D allowed me to choose the curtain sync for flash use, could be wrong though.
> 
> Looking into the electronic shutter more it seems to be a function of the original 1D as it had a CCD sensor not a CMOS sensor. The sensor exposure could be controlled electronically which is what allowed the 1/16,000 shutter speed which isn't seen in the current 1D series as they use CMOS sensors.
Click to expand...

Sorry, I should have clarified. It is in fact something relegated to live view. I'm hoping the ML guys figure out a way to set a silent shooting mode using that ability, although slowing the mirror would probably be the main obstacle for that.


----------



## ljason8eg

Well, talked to a CPS rep for about 30 mins on the phone and no dice. We tried all sorts of stuff and he was as perplexed as I am. They did agree to service it for free though since it was in for service not too long ago. Gotta say, the CPS service is way, way better than the normal support I've gotten in the past. Now let's see if the problem is fixed.


----------



## Dream Killer

too lazy to make the web interface. irc server resolves to *gserver.game-host.org* just use something like _xchat_. it runs a nickserv and a simple _phenny_ bot called "ocnbot" runs on the #ocn channel.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> Well, talked to a CPS rep for about 30 mins on the phone and no dice. We tried all sorts of stuff and he was as perplexed as I am. They did agree to service it for free though since it was in for service not too long ago. Gotta say, the CPS service is way, way better than the normal support I've gotten in the past. Now let's see if the problem is fixed.


This may seem so strange, but I seem to remember hearing about something similar to this relatively recently. Glad to hear CPS is gonna take care of it on the donut though -- and you have some Rush labels too, right?


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> too lazy to make the web interface. irc server resolves to *gserver.game-host.org* just use something like _xchat_. it runs a nickserv and a simple _phenny_ bot called "ocnbot" runs on the #ocn channel.


i havent used irc in soooooooo many years. didnt know it still existed lol. we are currently rather content with out skype channel i think lol. but im willing to try out irc again


----------



## MistaBernie

Canon brought back their full refurb lens/speedlite offerings.. and 24L, 50L and 85L II are all in stock. Thinking about picking up the 135L to be 2/3 of the way done with my version of the trinity... would just need to decide what to put in the middle. I think I'd be leaning towards 85L II..


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> too lazy to make the web interface. irc server resolves to *gserver.game-host.org* just use something like _xchat_. it runs a nickserv and a simple _phenny_ bot called "ocnbot" runs on the #ocn channel.
> 
> 
> 
> i havent used irc in soooooooo many years. didnt know it still existed lol. we are currently rather content with out skype channel i think lol. but im willing to try out irc again
Click to expand...

Man, I would SO much rather use IRC than skype.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> Well, talked to a CPS rep for about 30 mins on the phone and no dice. We tried all sorts of stuff and he was as perplexed as I am. They did agree to service it for free though since it was in for service not too long ago. Gotta say, the CPS service is way, way better than the normal support I've gotten in the past. Now let's see if the problem is fixed.
> 
> 
> 
> This may seem so strange, but I seem to remember hearing about something similar to this relatively recently. Glad to hear CPS is gonna take care of it on the donut though -- and you have some Rush labels too, right?
Click to expand...

Yeah I do. The only thing they need which I can't seem to find is the camera's invoice.


----------



## MistaBernie

You shouldn't need the invoice if it's a recent repair, they should have all the data they need from their recent repair on file..


----------



## MistaBernie

Double post, but it's worth it.

Apparently, if you purchase a refurb body via CLP and you want to buy a refurb lens, they carry the 20% over onto that order as well. I'm waiting for confirmation from the person that's reporting it, and I might try to call and see if that's really the case; if it is, it would be worth it to pick up a refurb just for the 20% off on some of the more expensive lenses.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Man, I would SO much rather use IRC than skype.


okay, i put up a super barebones (but fully functional) web interface. you guys can just use *http://gserver.game-host.org*


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> okay, i put up a super barebones (but fully functional) web interface. you guys can just use *http://gserver.game-host.org*


neat. im in it now and just slapped the bot with a fish


----------



## Dream Killer

fixed an issue where the server only allowed one connection, should be okay now.


----------



## Conspiracy

yay


----------



## spRICE

Hey GoneTomorrow, I want to update my gear. For my DSLR gear, I now have a:
Nikon D5100
Nikkor 35mm f1.8G
Nikkor 18-55mm f3.5-5.6 VR
Nikkor 55-300mm f4-5.6 VR

Found a great deal at costco. I got the d5100, kit lens, and 55-300 VR for $950. Also came with a bag and an SD card


----------



## Conspiracy

so just used LR4 to process tennish shots from yesterday and im not sure how i feel about the new LR. maybe im just tired but my shots look different after going through them all. i know i blew most of the highlights thanks to the harsh sunlight. i might switch back to LR3. i post a few tennis shots today. but yea bad lighting at the game but good action


----------



## Durdle Class A

So. much. dust..

Should I sent it to Nikon/Camera store for it to be cleaned, or attempt it myself?

The dust is really becoming a problem when I shoot landscapes with smaller apertures. I dont want to spend that much time on Lightroom cloning it.


----------



## Triangle

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Durdle Class A*
> 
> -pic-
> So. much. dust..
> Should I sent it to Nikon/Camera store for it to be cleaned, or attempt it myself?
> The dust is really becoming a problem when I shoot landscapes with smaller apertures. I dont want to spend that much time on Lightroom cloning it.


lol

Just blow it out.


----------



## aksthem1

Most of it will just blow out with a blower anyway.


----------



## MistaBernie

Ok, this is gonna sound crazy, but if anyone ever wanted a BNIB 50D, Adorama apparently has a couple in stock.

http://www.adorama.com/ICA50DK1.html


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Ok, this is gonna sound crazy, but if anyone ever wanted a BNIB 50D, Adorama apparently has a couple in stock.
> 
> http://www.adorama.com/ICA50DK1.html


For only $1,299.00! What a steal!


----------



## MistaBernie

Well, it includes an 18-200... but yeah, it's a pretty high price.


----------



## spRICE

Wow the 60d with the same lens is the same price...


----------



## MistaBernie

Some people really don't like video?


----------



## Sean Webster

Nah, everyone loves video and better sensors and swivel screens.


----------



## Shane1244

SWIVEL SCREEEEEEEN!

Havn't touched my camera in ages... I need WA/UWA


----------



## Conspiracy

only got to shoot half a day of golf today. should have drove on my own so i wouldnt get screwed over by the person im shooting for. not my fault if i didnt get enough shots they should have let me stay longer


----------



## sub50hz

Swivel screens are for chumps.


----------



## MistaBernie

Random, but 2x Teleconverters (II and III) are now in the refurbished lens store for Canon Direct..


----------



## Durdle Class A

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Are you durmb? Open shutter, blow air. Done. For a little bit I thought that was film.


why so agressive...
I just did mirror flip up and squeezed the Giottos air blower onto the sensor, and I did not see any decrease in amount of dust. I suspect their statically charged onto the sensor?


----------



## MistaBernie

There are certain swabs you can use.. GoneTomorrow linked them recently for me, but I won't use them unless my sensor ends up looking like yours did. I dont know why though, when I google the swabs and your body, I dont come up with many hits (whereas if I google Canon + sensor cleaning swabs) I get the ones that GT listed, and quite a few more).

Maybe try something like this? http://www.amazon.com/LensPEN-LP-1-Lens-Cleaning-System/dp/B000KO0GY6/ref=pd_rhf_dp_shvl1 -- JUST MAKE SURE you get the sensor version. Do you actually physically see the dust on the sensor?

Also, sorry for the ignorance, but does the D7000 have a self-cleaning sensor? I feel like it's kind of unlikely that much movable dust (i.e. cleanable with a blower) would accumulate, unless you're shooting neck deep in top soil and changing your lenses with no hands (not a dig on you, just an observation. Also, use of the word dig = happy coincidence).

See also..

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Photography-Tips/Sensor-Cleaning.aspx


----------



## dudemanppl

Sorry, I love you. I'm Taiwanese too. Breathe on to the sensor then qtip it and then blow it.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Durdle Class A*
> 
> why so agressive...
> I just did mirror flip up and squeezed the Giottos air blower onto the sensor, and I did not see any decrease in amount of dust. I suspect their statically charged onto the sensor?


This is what Bernie is referring to:
http://www.amazon.com/Digital-Survival-KIT-Sensor-Eclipse/dp/B000PNGM18
(also available directly http://www.photosol.com/store/pc/home.asp but it's pricier than Amazon)

I have the same kit, but a type 3 since I have a full frame camera. For your D7000, you'll want the kit with type 2 swabs, which is what I've linked. It does a pretty good job IMO and should get most if not all the dust off your sensor.

As for your dust situation, you must have allowed moisture inside. Some particles, pollen especially, will stick like glue to your sensor with moisture present.

If all else fails, you can send it off to Nikon to be cleaned, or try the Copperhill kits (haven't used them, but they're another big name in sensor cleaning; they're also more expensive).


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Sorry, I love you. I'm Taiwanese too. Breathe on to the sensor then qtip it and then blow it.


This.

It's what I did and it worked great. No need to buy expensive sensor swabs.


----------



## mz-n10

dont use mirror lock up with a blower, you potentially risk shocking the sensor, there should be a cleaning mode where u will keep the shutter open. then flip teh camera upside down and blast it with a rocket blower a couple of times.

Ive had some dust problems on my a900 and it took a few blast of air to clear out a little but i still have some of the larger chunks on there. if you really cant stand the dust then get your sensor cleaned. should cost about 60 bucks if you take it to a camera shop.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aksthem1*
> 
> This.
> It's what I did and it worked great. No need to buy expensive sensor swabs.


for 20 bucks, you might as well just buy what GT linked instead of breathing on it + Qtip....


----------



## Kreeker

I'm looking to purchase 5dmII in the coming months primarily for its video capabilities. I currently have a d80 with the 18-55mm kits lens with only a 1888 shutter count. Would there be a reason for me to keep this nikon if I'm going to be getting a full-frame canon? How much do you think I could get for it? Where should I sell it?


----------



## Conspiracy

1) do you plan to record professional quality video for the purpose of commercial usage or feature length cinema or do you just want video to have and dont need cinema quality and arent a professional videographer
2) if the answer to question #1 is "no, i am not doing paid video work" then get a nikon with video instead unless you just have no preference.

nikon is just as good for general purpose video. while a 5DmkII is great and is also full frame when it comes to strictly video the effect you see from having FF over crop sensor honestly is just the FOV from lenses. for general use you will not see an improvement in quality of the 5DmkII video over say a T3i assuming you are using lower end consumer priced lenses. and even with Canon L lenses honestly most people can not tell the difference in video between the 2 especially when viewed on youtube. the video quality itself is about the same all around. i do say the 5DmkII is a much nicer camera than a t2i or T3i or 7D and will be much more pleasant to work with if you also plan on shooting stills as well. as far as video goes if you dont specifically need a full frame camera and just want it because everyone says full frame is better than i suggest something cheaper since the quality of the video itself will be about the same honestly.

and by about the same i mean having joe shmo try and tell the difference between FF and crop as well as video between 5DmkII and T2i

also on a side not my Epson V500 has been delivered and i am picking it up at my parents house while on the way to see red hot chilli peppers. im sure its been sitting in the sun since 10am but at least its a scanner and not something that is sensitive to heat


----------



## sub50hz

5DII has DoF and noise advantages over the crop-sensor bodies. If he's got the money, there isn't a Nikon in existence that will do better video. Hell, by and large the only professional-level video that Nikon spits out is from the newly-released D800, even the D300s sucked at it.


----------



## Kreeker

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> 1) do you plan to record professional quality video for the purpose of commercial usage or feature length cinema or do you just want video to have and dont need cinema quality and arent a professional videographer
> 2) if the answer to question #1 is "no, i am not doing paid video work" then get a nikon with video instead unless you just have no preference.
> nikon is just as good for general purpose video. while a 5DmkII is great and is also full frame when it comes to strictly video the effect you see from having FF over crop sensor honestly is just the FOV from lenses. for general use you will not see an improvement in quality of the 5DmkII video over say a T3i assuming you are using lower end consumer priced lenses. and even with Canon L lenses honestly most people can not tell the difference in video between the 2 especially when viewed on youtube. the video quality itself is about the same all around. i do say the 5DmkII is a much nicer camera than a t2i or T3i or 7D and will be much more pleasant to work with if you also plan on shooting stills as well. as far as video goes if you dont specifically need a full frame camera and just want it because everyone says full frame is better than i suggest something cheaper since the quality of the video itself will be about the same honestly.
> and by about the same i mean having joe shmo try and tell the difference between FF and crop as well as video between 5DmkII and T2i
> also on a side not my Epson V500 has been delivered and i am picking it up at my parents house while on the way to see red hot chilli peppers. im sure its been sitting in the sun since 10am but at least its a scanner and not something that is sensitive to heat


No, I am an engineer and don't see myself using the camera for commercial usage or cinema work. Other than setting up a partnership with youtube, the camera will be for my own satisfaction. The main use of the video function will be for automotive related content (in-car, shows, races), and I will only be using L lenses. I really should have been more clear. I won't be only using the camera for video, but it's my main reason for choosing the 5D. I'm the kind of individual who likes to have the best of the best, and I think spending "a little more" on a nice body is fine.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> 5DII has DoF and noise advantages over the crop-sensor bodies. If he's got the money, there isn't a Nikon in existence that will do better video. Hell, by and large the only professional-level video that Nikon spits out is from the newly-released D800, even the D300s sucked at it.


I'm honestly not even considering the D800 (I don't need 36MP) or the 5DMIII (not worth the extra money over the II). I'm pretty much only considering Canon at this point.


----------



## sub50hz

Well, you'll have to decide how much a stop or two of noise, improved dynamic range and depth of field capabilities are worth to you. A prosumer body like the 7D or even a Rebel will satiate the video needs of most users, but the 5DII is the proverbial extra mile if you're looking to go commercial or simply have a full-frame body. Also, you might consider a camcorder for video if your D80 is sufficient for stills, but there's a size issue there. Lots of different points you will need to address before making such a major purchase.


----------



## Kreeker

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Well, you'll have to decide how much a stop or two of noise, improved dynamic range and depth of field capabilities are worth to you. A prosumer body like the 7D or even a Rebel will satiate the video needs of most users, but the 5DII is the proverbial extra mile if you're looking to go commercial or simply have a full-frame body. Also, you might consider a camcorder for video if your D80 is sufficient for stills, but there's a size issue there. Lots of different points you will need to address before making such a major purchase.


I'm definitely considering the 7D as well. But even though I'm not a professional, I can't get over the idea that everyone says the 5D is amazing and the way to go if you want to do video. I know what really matters is the glass you are using, but is it also worth it to spend the extra $500 on a 5D? Is 7D's superior FPS and AF points much better capturing racing photographs?

When you say "but there's a size issue there", are you referring to the "larger" size of a camcorder or the small size of the d80? Because I have more a problem with the small d80 body than a larger camcorder body.

Keep in mind, that I am planning as going as far as buying a Glidecam 2000 or 4000, so I will be taking the video aspect seriously.


----------



## ljason8eg

If you really are taking video seriously, the 5D would be my choice for the IQ and more DOF control.

Shooting racing, normally does not require a camera with huge FPS or the best AF tracking, simply because most of the action is very predicable. The only time a high FPS is nice is to get a nice crash sequence. There are a couple situations which fast AF tracking is helpful, but by and large it will not be needed, especially if you are shooting from spectator areas. The 5D would keep up just fine.

That being said, the problem with the 5D as far as racing goes, is you are going to need to have some really expensive glass to equal the "reach" you'll get when using a crop body.


----------



## sub50hz

There's seriously a ton of stuff to touch on here.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kreeker*
> 
> I'm definitely considering the 7D as well. But even though I'm not a professional, I can't get over the idea that everyone says the 5D is amazing and the way to go if you want to do video.


It's better for video for reasons I've already mentioned.
Quote:


> I know what really matters is the glass you are using, but is it also worth it to spend the extra $500 on a 5D? Is 7D's superior FPS and AF points much better capturing racing photographs?


Now... that's a totally different subject. The 7D is a better choice if you want better AF, a reduced field of view with a given lens, higher burst rate and arguably a better control layout. Many 5DII owners will tell you that their continuous (AI Servo) AF perfomance using the center focal point is "good enough" for motion tracking. Rent one and find out if it works for you.
Quote:


> When you say "but there's a size issue there", are you referring to the "larger" size of a camcorder or the small size of the d80? Because I have more a problem with the small d80 body than a larger camcorder body.


The camcorders are larger, which may pose an issue for some people.
Quote:


> Keep in mind, that I am planning as going as far as buying a Glidecam 2000 or 4000, so I will be taking the video aspect seriously.


You're gonna have to use both bodies for a bit and see which one suits your needs.


----------



## mz-n10

in all seriousness if you have only shot 2k frames on your d80 and that is all you have shot behind a SLR. i really think you should shoot some more instead of thinking about going fullframe.

the 5d2 is a great camera but it doesnt offer as much as you think when compared to even the d80. i think sub and jason already gave you all the reason what the 5d2 (7d also) offers as a camera. But what does that really mean to you the photographer.

unless the d80 is limiting you in some way (you only have the kit lens so i doubt this), you can get video with a dedicated camcorder or a d7000. with the money you saved with a camcorder/d7000 you can get yourself a nice piece of glass (17-55/2.8 or 24-70/2.8 etc) and still have money left over compared to a 5d2 and the cheapest L lens (17-40).


----------



## Sean Webster

Camera makes the photographer. Lenses don't matter, experience and skill don't matter, even the subject or composition don't matter. All that matters is the camera that you are using. In that case I believe a 1DX would suite you perfect.


----------



## Kortwa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Camera makes the photographer. Lenses don't matter, experience and skill don't matter, even the subject or composition don't matter. All that matters is the camera that you are using. In that case I believe a 1DX would suite you perfect.


You forgot to add a Red Scarlet for the video when you dont use your 1DX for stills


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Camera makes the photographer. Lenses don't matter, experience and skill don't matter, even the subject or composition don't matter. All that matters is the camera that you are using. In that case I believe a 1DX would suite you perfect.


O....kay?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kortwa*
> 
> You forgot to add a Red Scarlet for the video when you dont use your 1DX for stills


Too bad you can't mount your nine thousand dollar 400/2.8 on it.

A 5DII doesn't cost much more than a 7D or D7000 anymore if purchased used or refurbished, and if someone is looking for low-noise, full-frame HDSLR capability, I don't see why it's such an absurd consideration. Get over yourselves.


----------



## Kreeker

I appreciate your comments, but I already made it clear that I wasn't some professional and know that a body plays a very small part in a picture. However, like sub50hz already stated a used/refurbished 5d is not that much more than 7d.

I'm also aware that my shutter count is extremely low. I received the camera as a gift before college, and didn't have the cash or time during school to keep up with this very expensive hobby. Now I have more money and can afford it.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> A 5DII doesn't cost much more than a 7D or D7000 anymore if purchased used or refurbished, and if someone is looking for low-noise, full-frame HDSLR capability, I don't see why it's such an absurd consideration. Get over yourselves.


considering:
refurbish 5d2 (1759) + 24-70L (1329) = 3118
refurbish 7d (1359) + new 17-55 (1179) = 2538

you are looking at a difference of about 600 dollars.

or a refurbished d7000 (1079) and 17-55 (1445) = 2524

once again about 600 bucks.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kreeker*
> 
> I appreciate your comments, but I already made it clear that I wasn't some professional and know that a body plays a very small part in a picture. However, like sub50hz already stated a used/refurbished 5d is not that much more than 7d.
> I'm also aware that my shutter count is extremely low. I received the camera as a gift before college, and didn't have the cash or time during school to keep up with this very expensive hobby. Now I have more money and can afford it.


photography isnt about how much money you have to throw at your camera. it is about going out and actually shooting your gear.

i have never seen any of your photos so you could prove me wrong, but if you only shot 2000 frames a 5d2 or 7d is not going to make your photos any better.

so heres my question to you, is video the only reason why you are considering canon? if so, video is not as easy as you think on a DSLR. in a nutshell video requires a lot of gear to a smooth focusing shot and even then you still have problems like rolling shutter or just the ergonomics of the system.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> considering:
> refurbish 5d2 (1759) + 24-70L (1329) = 3118
> refurbish 7d (1359) + new 17-55 (1179) = 2538
> you are looking at a difference of about 600 dollars.


Firstly, it's an unfair comparison using different lenses. I get what you're trying to do there, but it's skewing the result in the favor of making the price discrepancy look... unfavorable. I don't think most people getting serious about HDSLR are going to buy f/2.8 zooms.

That being said, the price difference there between bodies is only 400 dollars. I would consider 400 dollars to get from 7D to 5DII a smaller gap than you're making it appear to be. It's basically the cost of a 50mm lens, which likely isn't a make or break dollar window for someone that's ok spending close to 2000 dollars on a body.

edit: Spelling fail, _me sleepy._


----------



## Kreeker

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> considering:
> refurbish 5d2 (1759) + 24-70L (1329) = 3118
> refurbish 7d (1359) + new 17-55 (1179) = 2538
> you are looking at a difference of about 600 dollars.
> or a refurbished d7000 (1079) and 17-55 (1445) = 2524
> once again about 600 bucks.
> photography isnt about how much money you have to throw at your camera. it is about going out and actually shooting your gear.
> i have never seen any of your photos so you could prove me wrong, but if you only shot 2000 frames a 5d2 or 7d is not going to make your photos any better.
> so heres my question to you, is video the only reason why you are considering canon? if so, video is not as easy as you think on a DSLR. in a nutshell video requires a lot of gear to a smooth focusing shot and even then you still have problems like rolling shutter or just the ergonomics of the system.


You definitely make a valid point, and I am still considering the 7d. Video is not the only reason I am considering Canon, but it is a big reason. I am pretty deadset on going with Canon though.

I'm aware the photography is not about who can spend the most money, but if I'm going to get serious about it, I refuse to do it with the d80 platform. Here are some pictures from a few years ago. No where close to amazing, and please ignore the borders....


----------



## mz-n10

why the hatred for the d80? its a pretty good camera if you just want to take photos.

anyways if you must shoot canon and have your mind set on a 7d then do it. there really isnt a better camera for the price from canon. just keep in mind that there MAYBE a 7d2 coming out soon (next year?) cause the 7d sensor is almost 3 years old.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Well, you'll have to decide how much a stop or two of noise, improved dynamic range and depth of field capabilities are worth to you. A prosumer body like the 7D or even a Rebel will satiate the video needs of most users, but the 5DII is the proverbial extra mile if you're looking to go commercial or simply have a full-frame body. Also, you might consider a camcorder for video if your D80 is sufficient for stills, but there's a size issue there. Lots of different points you will need to address before making such a major purchase.


this exactly right here. the D800 is also an excellent choice although i have no clue how much it costs and might be more than user seeking advice is looking to spend.

also i have my scanner but im shooting and editing interviews and cant set it up until tonight


----------



## Conspiracy

so im stuck here editing video interviews. just finished 1 of 3. then i get to test this scanner out


----------



## MistaBernie

Someone pick one of the lenses in my line up for my next review. No, seriously.


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Someone pick one of the lenses in my line up for my next review. No, seriously.


Canon 6.0-22.5mm f/2.0-4.9 IS


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *silvrr*
> 
> Canon 6.0-22.5mm f/2.0-4.9 IS


Funny, that doesn't show up _*in my lens lineup in my sig...*_


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *silvrr*
> 
> Canon 6.0-22.5mm f/2.0-4.9 IS


nice because canon totally makes that lens in EF mount. that is the focal range and aperture stats for a P&S in his sig. i think he was requesting to chose a lens to review not a camera.


----------



## ljason8eg

85mm 1.8.


----------



## Conspiracy

personally i would like you to have canon custom make you something along the lines of a 16-200 f1.4 and have them make it so somehow it is small enough to walk around with and do a review on that









with that lens you dont need anything else


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Funny, that doesn't show up _*in my lens lineup in my sig...*_


-- I need to shoot more!


----------



## Conspiracy

so testing out my scanner with negatives from my last roll of Kodak Gold 200. so far the scans look a lot nicer than the ones walgreens did for free. im getting like fibers or something on them not sure if its on the negs or the scanner but im pretty sure its tough to get perfectly clean scans since most seem to have at least a minute something in it.

currently playing with settings because i have no clue what to scan at. right now im scanning 8 frames at a time at 24bit color 3200 dpi and it only takes about 7 mins. thinking about going up in dpi and trying out 48 bit color to see what happens. obviously not scanning high quality film that was developed by hand rather than an automatic machine but so far the scans already look at least cleaner and sharper when i dont pixel peep









so after checking the info on the walgreens scans which i never looked at before they scanned at 72 dpi and 24bit color


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> personally i would like you to have canon custom make you something along the lines of a *16-200 f1.4* and have them make it so somehow it is small enough to walk around with and do a review on that
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> with that lens you dont need anything else


Neither your arms nor your wallet could handle such a lens.


----------



## Conspiracy

dont deny that it would be kinda cool nonetheless lolz


----------



## xxrabid93

Conspiracy, what scanner?


----------



## Conspiracy

Epson V500.

i figured it out for the most part. there were fibers and stuff on the negatives thanks to walgreens not being super professional. even though my friend was careful and made sure he did carelessly develop my film he still uses a machine that does it automatically and has no control over how crappy of a job it does i guess. but yea i wiped the negatives with a glasses cloth and the looked better

i decided to scan at 48 bit color just because i guess unless im suggested otherwise. and at like 3200 dpi. so it takes about 3-4 mins per frame which isnt terrible. they are looking pretty solid in my book. i know they arent perfect and i iknow 35mm doesn scan very well anyway. but they look pretty decent and im pretty sure i didnt nail focus nearly as well as my 7D does but not too shabby i think.

i have unsharpen set to medium and the digital ICE thingy that cleans up scratches and dust on as well and it looks pretty good. i dont know if most of the scratches are my camera doing it or the machine at walgreens. ill be glad when i develop myself in a few weeks









also there are goofy looking colored marks on the scans that i am not sure what i did wrong with the settings thats making it happen lol.

ill post some samples so i can get suggestions on how to do it better


----------



## MistaBernie

Ok Jason, I'll do a review of the 85 next!


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Ok Jason, I'll do a review of the 85 next!


Make sure you talk about the uber color fringing in high contrast lighting! lol


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Ok Jason, I'll do a review of the 85 next!
> 
> 
> 
> Make sure you talk about the uber color fringing in high contrast lighting! lol
Click to expand...

It has SOME purple fringing in intense lighting, wide open. It's a great lens for the money, review over.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Ok Jason, I'll do a review of the 85 next!
> 
> 
> 
> Make sure you talk about the uber color fringing in high contrast lighting! lol
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It has SOME purple fringing in intense lighting, wide open. It's a great lens for the money, review over.
Click to expand...

done!









Time for the 35L next? Or the fishy!


----------



## MistaBernie

85 review's done. I'll do the 35L and the fisheye (separately, of course) next. I'm limiting myself to one review a day for now (except on the weekends, maybe on Saturday I'll just break down and do the rest of my kit, haha).


----------



## dudemanppl

35L, best lens EVER. 15 fish, average fish, which means its pretty sharp.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Make sure you talk about the uber color fringing in high contrast lighting! lol


That's a weakness of any ultra wide aperture prime, even the best ones (some are worse than others of course).
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> 35L, best lens EVER. 15 fish, average fish, which means its pretty sharp.


Indeed; I've considered selling my other lenses and just keeping the 35L.


----------



## MistaBernie

Well, if you ever decide to sell the 135, let me know. Sub couldn't wait to complete our deal we had lined up for the end of May (5Dc for 135L).

Also, while there's _some_ fringing on the 35L, compare it against the 35 f/2 (no UD/low dispersion glass) and you should see a glaring difference.


----------



## sub50hz

The 35/2 doesn't get enough credit -- it's a pretty damn good lens for the money. It's too bad Nikon's 35 DX is so much better.


----------



## MistaBernie

Yeah, for the price the 35 f/2 is a great lens, but I can't help but feel like it should be priced a bit closer to the nifty fifty than the 50 f/1.4 for build quality, etc..


----------



## sub50hz

It's DEFINITELY built better than the nifty -- sure, it lacks USM and internal focusing, but it's priced alongside the 24/2.8 and 28/2.8 that have similar build quality. that being said, Nikon managed to pack both of the aforementioned features into a crop-only prime for 50% less money. Canon users don't typically know what they're missing, sadly.


----------



## sub50hz

Second thought: Anybody interested in a brown 7MDH? I'm contemplating selling mine and just nabbing a timbuk2 insert for my messenger bag.


----------



## MistaBernie

You make a good point about the 35 f/2's build quality.

Is the 7MDH V1 or V2 (1 buckle or 2)? And what ugly color is the interior?


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> The 35/2 doesn't get enough credit -- it's a pretty damn good lens for the money. It's too bad Nikon's 35 DX is so much better.


Nikon's 35 1.8? It's ok. Good value but not very impressive. I haven't used the 35 f/2 though.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Well, if you ever decide to sell the 135, let me know. Sub couldn't wait to complete our deal we had lined up for the end of May (5Dc for 135L).
> Also, while there's _some_ fringing on the 35L, compare it against the 35 f/2 (no UD/low dispersion glass) and you should see a glaring difference.


Yeah, I'm torn about it. Such a great lens, but I don't use it much.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> The 35/2 doesn't get enough credit -- it's a pretty damn good lens for the money. *It's too bad Nikon's 35 DX is so much better.*


I'm still scratching my head as to why Canon hasn't followed suit on this one.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Second thought: Anybody interested in a brown 7MDH? I'm contemplating selling mine and just nabbing a timbuk2 insert for my messenger bag.


Want to trade for my red 7MDH?







I think I'd like brown better.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> You make a good point about the 35 f/2's build quality.
> Is the 7MDH V1 or V2 (1 buckle or 2)? And what ugly color is the interior?


LOL, mine is hungover urine yellow inside.







(red exterior).


----------



## MistaBernie

Gone, yours is The Flash(!)'s colors. If it's V2 I might have to buy it on principal alone.


----------



## MistaBernie

According to CanonRumors (and this post @ POTN) there may be a 5D3 recall going on... wonder if it has to do with the supposed 'light leak' problem..

According to CPS and this post, the rumors are BS. No actual 'recall' that they're aware of, but there is a firmware update _coming_ for the 800mm focusing 'issue'.

Now CanonRumors is thinking that it has to do with the DPP Software issue (and its apparent inability to work with 5D3 raws (???) and Canon wanting to get updated versions of the software into the box). Makes sense, not everyone has access to high speed internet nowadays, only the vast majority of people (though if you're spending $3500 on a camera, I would hope you would have access to high speed internet- otherwise, how else would you know that the 5D3 even existed???)


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Gone, yours is The Flash(!)'s colors. If it's V2 I might have to buy it on principal alone.


It does indeed have two buckles, but I'm not selling it. Would trade it for a different color though.


----------



## MistaBernie

No worries. Shame, I had the black/snot green one a while back, I would have traded it to ya if you were interested.. the only thing about a bag like that is that it's best benefit is also it's biggest weakness. It's easy to lose someone in a crowd making off with a bright red and yellow bag, but it's also easy for knowledgeable people to pick you out if necessary...


----------



## Conspiracy

Canon announced the 1D-C today finally im not crazy and cant be accused my various people (noone here) that canon was going to make a cinema DSLR that shoots 4K


----------



## mz-n10

meh...for 15k might as well buy a dedicated camcorder...


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> meh...for 15k might as well buy a dedicated camcorder...


agreed 100% the 1D-C is geared mainly towards feature films that need a very compact 4K camera that can go places that you cant fit a RED scarlet which is also small but still limited by its size after extra accessories needed to operate it.

im just happy that people can quit hating on canon for not putting uncompressed HDMI out on an DSLR, the 5DmkIII which seriously does not need it at that price point anyway. i understand why people want it but cmon you cant have everything for under $5k. but yea canon although not the most competative company was not going to let nikon be the only camera with great video and uncompressed hdmi out

on a different note sorta. i was just recently hired by public relations at my university to shoot a promotional video that consists of interviews with selected faculty and professors as well as random students that will present the new brand and image of my school







this is my first freelance job that is not television related ^_^


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Gone, yours is The Flash(!)'s colors. If it's V2 I might have to buy it on principal alone.
> 
> 
> 
> It does indeed have two buckles, but I'm not selling it. Would trade it for a different color though.
Click to expand...

I don't think I've seen the red one before, but it would match my Metropolis and both of my bikes. You got any le pics?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> I don't think I've seen the red one before, but it would match my Metropolis and both of my bikes. You got any le pics?


LOL, sub the color coordinating metrosexual.









Show me yours and I'll show you mine. These pictures are a couple of years old, but the bag still looks like new. Crumpler makes 'em sturdy.


IMG_2044 by gonetomorrow00, on Flickr


IMG_2045 by gonetomorrow00, on Flickr


----------



## Conspiracy

getting a camera bag because it matches your bikes lol

my domke bag totally doesnt match the fact that i wear khakis everyday and all my shoes are brown.


----------



## sub50hz

Hey, when you look good, you feel good.




























And yeah, stuff matches. I am OCD about things like this for some reason.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Hey, when you look good, you feel good.


very true


----------



## Conspiracy

yay its 6:00am and i have been up for the past 45 mins :/

going on a video shoot today to middle of no where GA to shoot off road vehicles on a dirt track. will be riding ATVs and dirt buggys and dirt bikes, and skeet shooting. and theres a lunch break in there somewhere too ^_^

yall have a good one


----------



## ljason8eg

Canon refurb bodies seem to have a longer warranty than 90 days. I sent in my 7D that I got in August of last year for that issue it is having, and I got the email this morning saying it is an in warranty repair and it will not cost me anything. I was expecting it to state that it was an out of warranty courtesy repair, per the conversation I had with the rep.


----------



## MistaBernie

Huh, nice. Wait.. did you send it in with your 50 f/1.4? I _believe_ they extend your warranty by 6 months if you have to send it in during the warranty period.


----------



## ljason8eg

Yeah I sent it in once with it because they requested me to. They didn't have to repair or change anything on it though. Maybe just sending it in for any reason extends the warranty by six months? I could have swore I read the terms on the six month warranty extension and it is only good on the work done previously, and not the whole camera.


----------



## MistaBernie

Maybe they saw the saga of the 50mm and tossed you one?


----------



## ljason8eg

That's a nice thought. We'll go with that.


----------



## Conspiracy

lol wishful thinking never hurts but can lead to disappointment


----------



## biatchi

This is pretty sweet http://www.petapixel.com/2012/04/12/dark-time-lapse-journey-into-an-abandoned-asylum-created-with-35000-photos/


----------



## Conspiracy

wow that is awesome!


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *biatchi*
> 
> This is pretty sweet http://www.petapixel.com/2012/04/12/dark-time-lapse-journey-into-an-abandoned-asylum-created-with-35000-photos/


That is sick.


----------



## Conspiracy

so im bored and have decided i want to try and make a cool custom profile for video mode on my 7D as well as to shoot around for fun to get interesting effects. anyone happen to know about anywhere to find what paint chips at homedepot to buy in order to make a poormans color chart since i dont want to pay for a chart just to goof around.

nevermind. looks like a ton of people have already made a bunch of custom profiles that i didnt know about. guess i need to surf the internet more because there are like 10 or so different profiles that mimic certain cameras, cinestyle, cine, technicolor, etc...


----------



## MistaBernie

The actual Cinestyle downloadable from Technicolor.com is pretty nice; if I had good video editing software (and I shot video), that's what I would use (i went to the trouble of downloading the style just in case).


----------



## Conspiracy

i will try that one out as i like the sample videos. i dont work on many professional DSLR shoots so i never find out about this stuff unless i look around on the internet.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Hey, when you look good, you feel good.


Hm, the powder blue interior doesn't do it for me. I had hoped it was a green interior or something. I guess I'll hang on to my McDonald's bag for now.


----------



## sub50hz

Actually, the baby blue interior is my favorite part about the bag, because it's way more discreet than the yellow interior of my Kata. I'll probably sell this one and buy a black one.


----------



## Conspiracy

and i get screwed over at school again. now i have to beg to be added to classes that are full so i can graduate this december. i have to work my butt off to graduate with a degree that i need to get a good job in an industry i am already working in and constantly getting freelance offers that i have to pass on to go to class :/ . how did i end up in such a backwards situation where i have more production experience than my teachers and cant even manage to graduate with ease so that i can get on to working with no interference...


----------



## MistaBernie

Ah, college ...


----------



## nuclearjock

GT, hit me with a D4 and D800. Came last Friday via NPS/Calumet and I'm just now charging the batteries. I think my D3 is gonna be up 4 sale. 30k clicks, spotless LNIB.


----------



## Rowey

First time buyer here, looking for some wise words from some photographers and camera enthusiasts.

So, it will be My first dslr and I'm torn between choosing either the Nikon D3100 or the Canon 600D/550D/500D.

Instead off typing up mind numbing babble i'll just lay my pro's and con's on the table.

Canon

PRO

Tilt out LCD screen
The video capabilities are far better than the D3100
I have a friend with a 5D, lens sharing (maybe)
CON

*PRICE!!*
Nikon

PRO

*PRICE!!* (It's perfect for my budget)
Seems to take a good picture with the kit lens
CON

No lens sharing
Lacks in build quality compared to the Canon
I personally would be much more happier with a 600D/550D than the D3100, however the Canon is quite a LOT out of my budget and i'd have to wait a while longer before i could even get one. The biggest worry is the lacking build quality of the D3100.

If some of you guys could help me out a little, id very much appreciate it. I don't want to buy a camera and regret it and wish id got the other.

Rowey


----------



## darkphantom

^500D has the ML custom firmware on it, so alot of features if you know what you're doing. (even has bulb ramping for timelapses!)


----------



## Rowey

Are those features i would use as an entry level dslr user?


----------



## MistaBernie

haha, 12 out of 19 of the 'F/S (sorted by most recent) threads on POTN are 5D Mark IIs.. lowest price I see without clicking on any of the links appears to be $1595. Well, herp my derp. Looks like a compromised account. User name cuongducnguyen, posted the same reply in 15x 5D Mark II threads, then posted 'Wow, nice one!' in like 11 different random threads. Avoid or potentially lose your hard earned $$$.

Also, I might have a line on a 300 f/4L IS for $600...


----------



## Conspiracy

thats a solid deal bernie buy that 300 f4 and give it to me and ill test it out for you to make sure it works properly. generally tests take from about 1 year to 10 years but i promise its worth it to let me hold on to it to ensure you got a good deal


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rowey*
> 
> First time buyer here, looking for some wise words from some photographers and camera enthusiasts.
> 
> So, it will be My first dslr and I'm torn between choosing either the Nikon D3100 or the Canon 600D/550D/500D.
> 
> Instead off typing up mind numbing babble i'll just lay my pro's and con's on the table.
> 
> Canon
> 
> PRO
> 
> Tilt out LCD screen
> The video capabilities are far better than the D3100
> I have a friend with a 5D, lens sharing (maybe)
> CON
> 
> *PRICE!!*
> Nikon
> 
> PRO
> 
> *PRICE!!* (It's perfect for my budget)
> Seems to take a good picture with the kit lens
> CON
> 
> No lens sharing
> Lacks in build quality compared to the Canon
> I personally would be much more happier with a 600D/550D than the D3100, however the Canon is quite a LOT out of my budget and i'd have to wait a while longer before i could even get one. The biggest worry is the lacking build quality of the D3100.
> 
> If some of you guys could help me out a little, id very much appreciate it. I don't want to buy a camera and regret it and wish id got the other.
> 
> Rowey


The Canon bodies you listed are a step above the D3100. A fair comparison would be the Canon T3/1100D. Those are both the entry level offerings from Canon and Nikon.


----------



## Rowey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aksthem1*
> 
> The Canon bodies you listed are a step above the D3100. A fair comparison would be the Canon T3/1100D. Those are both the entry level offerings from Canon and Nikon.


I thought the T3i was a 600D?


----------



## Conspiracy

he mentioned the T3. not the same camera


----------



## Rowey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> he mentioned the T3. not the same camera


Oh


----------



## MistaBernie

I missed it by about two hours at that price... I'm still going to try to work my magic. You'd be surprised what you can talk a company into once they realize that the 20% that they'd be losing on ebay fees, etc, could easily turn into additional revenue instead.


----------



## ljason8eg

My 7D arrived this morning and its fixed. I shipped it Tuesday so I'd say that's pretty awesome turnaround when you include the weekend. +1 for CPS.


----------



## solsamurai

I have a question for you all about lens cleaning practices. Do you prefer to clean them yourself or use a local service? Thanks!


----------



## MistaBernie

Depends. When you say cleaning, are we talking getting rid of a bit of dust, or like powerwashing? Get a microfiber cloth and some sort of air blower, have at it. If anything, the rear element is more important to be careful on; the front element can have minor imperfections on it and still take plenty fine images, but scratch that rear element during cleaning and you could have an expensive paperweight on your hands.

The glass used in most lenses is pretty high quality; you definitely dont want to use solutions, etc. Try your best not to use the microfiber cloth at all if you don't need to.

Also, I was about two paragraphs from being done with what I was hoping would be a decent primer on lighting and photography, but I think I hate it. I might be willing to talk a bit more specifically about lighting (flashes, Canon's wireless system, etc) than a general overall thing, but I dont know..


----------



## biatchi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *solsamurai*
> 
> I have a question for you all about lens cleaning practices. Do you prefer to clean them yourself or use a local service? Thanks!


Rocket blower for dust, lenspen for fingerprints and cottonbud + white vinegar for old lenses with fungus.


----------



## solsamurai

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Depends. When you say cleaning, are we talking getting rid of a bit of dust, or like powerwashing? Get a microfiber cloth and some sort of air blower, have at it. If anything, the rear element is more important to be careful on; the front element can have minor imperfections on it and still take plenty fine images, but scratch that rear element during cleaning and you could have an expensive paperweight on your hands.
> The glass used in most lenses is pretty high quality; you definitely dont want to use solutions, etc. Try your best not to use the microfiber cloth at all if you don't need to.
> 
> Also, I was about two paragraphs from being done with what I was hoping would be a decent primer on lighting and photography, but I think I hate it. I might be willing to talk a bit more specifically about lighting (flashes, Canon's wireless system, etc) than a general overall thing, but I dont know..


Specks on the front element is what I'm looking at. So far nothing that has effected any recent images.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *biatchi*
> 
> Rocket blower for dust, lenspen for fingerprints and cottonbud + white vinegar for old lenses with fungus.


I actually have a rocket blower.







Will check out lenspen. Sounds like I'm still ok atm. Thanks guys.


----------



## ljason8eg

Lol so someone on ebay has stolen some of my NASCAR photos off my Flickr and is selling them.


----------



## dudemanppl

I guess thats a good sign though isn't it?







Anyway, I tried some 5219 at EI 6400 and it doesn't work at all. Maybe because of the high ass shutter speeds?


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> Lol so someone on ebay has stolen some of my NASCAR photos off my Flickr and is selling them.


link?


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> link?


Its this guy. http://feedback.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewFeedback2&userid=photo*impressions*21&ftab=AllFeedback&myworld=true

Here's a few of my shots he is trying to sell. He's got like seven or eight of mine up.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/DALE-EARNHARDT-JR-2012-88-7-ELEVEN-CHEVY-8X10-GLOSSY-PHOTO-/251041158966?pt=US_Racing_Fan_Shop&hash=item3a73381736

http://www.ebay.com/itm/DAVID-RAGAN-6-UPS-FORD-8X10-GLOSSY-PHOTO-/261001518748?pt=US_Racing_Fan_Shop&hash=item3cc4e71e9c

http://www.ebay.com/itm/LANDON-CASSILL-09-THANKS-TEACHER-TODAY-8X10-GLOSSY-PHOTO-/251041974416?pt=US_Racing_Fan_Shop&hash=item3a73448890

I'm not quite sure what I should do about it, if anything. I did call eBay. They told me they'd investigate, but who knows what that really means.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> I tried some 5219 at EI 6400 and it doesn't work at all. Maybe because of the high ass shutter speeds?


That's weird, I've seen some decent pictures from that film at 6400 and higher. Did you try pre-flashing it? Could help bring out shadow detail.

Just got an Autoknips II from an eBay auction. This thing is very cool. It's a little device that attaches to the cable release to do timed exposures. It does 1/2 to 10 seconds by using the Bulb setting on the shutter, and it can also function as a normal timer for up to 25 seconds by setting the shutter to a time. Works pretty well, though the times aren't 100% accurate. Not that it matters that much if a five second exposure is off by 1/2 second. It's still better than standing there and counting.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> Its this guy. http://feedback.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewFeedback2&userid=photo*impressions*21&ftab=AllFeedback&myworld=true
> Here's a few of my shots he is trying to sell. He's got like seven or eight of mine up.
> http://www.ebay.com/itm/DALE-EARNHARDT-JR-2012-88-7-ELEVEN-CHEVY-8X10-GLOSSY-PHOTO-/251041158966?pt=US_Racing_Fan_Shop&hash=item3a73381736
> http://www.ebay.com/itm/DAVID-RAGAN-6-UPS-FORD-8X10-GLOSSY-PHOTO-/261001518748?pt=US_Racing_Fan_Shop&hash=item3cc4e71e9c
> http://www.ebay.com/itm/LANDON-CASSILL-09-THANKS-TEACHER-TODAY-8X10-GLOSSY-PHOTO-/251041974416?pt=US_Racing_Fan_Shop&hash=item3a73448890
> I'm not quite sure what I should do about it, if anything. I did call eBay. They told me they'd investigate, but who knows what that really means.


LOL, $5 shipping for one 8x10. Don't let this guy get away with it. Make a big stink to eBay.


----------



## MistaBernie

Hells yeah. If he doesn't have the right to those images, report it to eBay that he's illegally selling copyrighted materials. Ask eBay for a history of sales for any items like that, you should legally be entitled to every cent he's made off of them.

Wait, even better. Create a fake eBay account and buy one, and get his information that way. Then contact him directly and let him know that what he's doing is _very_ illegal, that you've contacted eBay and will be contacting NASCAR to conduct an investigation.

Also, check out http://www.photoattorney.com/?p=515 - she's a pretty well regarded attorney specializing in copyright law (lots of people on POTN recommend her).

Don't take this sitting down. As soon as you hit the shutter, you own the copyright (unless you're being paid to shoot, and your employment agreement constitutes transfer of control of the images to the person who hired you).


----------



## ljason8eg

Thanks for the info guys. I contacted ebay last night about it and they told me they'd investigate. I gave them the item number of every one of my photos he is selling, so I guess I'll give it a few days and see if they can sort it out. Buying one does sound like it could be useful though if I had to escalate it farther.


----------



## solsamurai

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> Thanks for the info guys. I contacted ebay last night about it and they told me they'd investigate. I gave them the item number of every one of my photos he is selling, so I guess I'll give it a few days and see if they can sort it out. Buying one does sound like it could be useful though if I had to escalate it farther.


Wow, that really blows. Don't give up and take that guy down!


----------



## foothead

Omg, I love developing film. There's another box to go, as well as a roll of 120 when I'm done taking a break.










I seriously need a phone with a better camera. This one is horrid. Maybe the galaxy note when the price comes down.

Lol, Jason. I'd almost be flattered if someone considered my work good enough to steal. Congratulations, I guess? Is the seller selling a whole bunch of stolen photos, or just yours? I'm on a cell phone atm, so I can't go look around.


----------



## sub50hz

Where's my hockey fans? Agree/disagree: Andrew Shaw getting three games for incidental contact on Mike Smith in game 2, first time offender and no reported injury from PHX team docs. But zero games to Shea Weber after smashing Zetterberg's face into the glass repeatedly.

I want to punch Shanahan in the throat, what an *idiot.*


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> Lol, Jason. I'd almost be flattered if someone considered my work good enough to steal. Congratulations, I guess? Is the seller selling a whole bunch of stolen photos, or just yours? I'm on a cell phone atm, so I can't go look around.


They're selling a whole bunch of photos, some of which I've seen other places such as Yahoo and NASCAR.com, so I'm guessing all of them he's listing are stolen.


----------



## MistaBernie

Lucic drew a double minor when he got jumped by two guys. No third man in for Washington, can't be unpatriotic in DC.

Also, cameras can sometimes be used for shooting hockey.


----------



## sub50hz

Yeah, and what about that shameful Pit/Phi game Sunday? That was a god damn circus, and what of it? Everyone involved better be banned from the NHL for the rest of the season if the Shaw ruling is anything to guide us on. Jesus, such a load.


----------



## MistaBernie

Yeah, it's a mess for sure.

I wonder if I can get a press pass to shoot me some Bruins post-season hockey.. my buddy got creds to shoot the New England Revolution in New York. With his XTI and his 55-250....


----------



## sub50hz

Try and see if you can do it for an NBC game, maybe they can put you where Pierre normally is, and send Pierre to... somewhere else in the world.


----------



## MistaBernie

<---- This guy likes this.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Try and see if you can do it for an NBC game, maybe they can put you where Pierre normally is, and send Pierre to... somewhere else in the world.


----------



## dudemanppl

Hey guys, what's the url for the IRC again?


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Hey guys, what's the url for the IRC again?


http://gserver.game-host.org/

Tried C41 today. The stupid heater decided to just give up and completely fill with water, so I ended up regulating temperature by moving trays around between two baths, one hot and one cold. Results appear to be pretty good on the two sheets I used to test, though one of them turned out to have a hair in the film holder, right on top of the film. Ugh. I stil haven't scanned or printed though, so it's a bit hard to tell if colors are right and such.


----------



## Conspiracy

got my schedule fixed and i am currently registered for the classes i need so hopefully i am still on track to graduate this december. submitting my graduation application by this friday after i double check again


----------



## sub50hz

Well, I hope Shanahan sends Torres to the public hanging he deserves. Also, I want an X100. Help.


----------



## dudemanppl

Help? You mean like look on FM for you?







Wanting an X100 can only be cured with the purchase of a small camera, mine was solved with the Leica, and further with the Ricoh.


----------



## MistaBernie

I've actually been toying with the idea of selling my 5Dc and picking up an X10 after May. Im starting to think that's a dumb idea though.

Also, I might have a line on a Mamiya 7 body for $650.. it looks to be in pretty good condition, but idk if I can justify it (read: I know I cant).


----------



## sub50hz

Wow, 650? If you're not gonna get it, fill me in.


----------



## MistaBernie

It'd be a local thing.. I'll shoot the guy an email. Only issue is, I'd have no glass to test with.


----------



## sub50hz

Does he have any lenses?


----------



## MistaBernie

Yeah, but he seems to be legit; he bought from KEH last year I'll PM you with a link to his site for stuff he took with it.


----------



## Conspiracy

buying some kodak Vision3 50D 5203 on friday. 400feet for $80 and hes throwing in a SLR cartridge of 250D as well.


----------



## mz-n10

grabbed a new old stock 285hv for 50 bucks at the hayward camera show. cant wait to do some strobing.


----------



## MistaBernie

Nice.

New plan. I'm getting a new 50mm... Zeiss Planar T* 1.4. Think I should get the matte screen for the 5D2 for it?


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Nice.
> New plan. I'm getting a new 50mm... Zeiss Planar T* 1.4. Think I should get the matte screen for the 5D2 for it?


almost bought that lens


----------



## MistaBernie

You shoot sports, etc. Wouldn't a MF lens be a bit of a pain?


----------



## sub50hz

At one time, that's how it was DONE.

P.S. I refuse to buy a MF lens for an EOS body -- even the matte screens suck. DMP will disagree, but once you've used a microprism or split-image (or even a real fine matte screen in a medium format body), they all suck by comparison. Buy a Contax RTS and Planar T* for less money than the EOS version, get some film in your life.


----------



## MistaBernie

If I had the time, dedicated space, and tools to do my own film without a major investment, I would probably be buying that Mamiya 7 instead of figuring out a way to raise funds for the Zeiss, and probably be working on a setup to do my own negatives/prints/etc. Unfortunately, I just don't have the time to dedicate to it.

If I were getting _paid exclusively_ for photography (i.e. if it were my career), I'd justify it in a heartbeat and would invest in a great setup, but for now, I'm staying digital.


----------



## mz-n10

u can always get a katzeye split screen

if memory serves me correctly.... 50 zeiss isnt even that good....


----------



## Conspiracy

zeiss 50 1.4 isnt that good by pretty much all reviews and lens comparisons. you are just paying for the zeiss name and not top notch quality compared to the zeiss 50 f2 on the other hand is a very nice lens apparently but also a lot more normal price for zeiss


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> If I had the time, dedicated space, and tools to do my own film without a major investment, I would probably be buying that Mamiya 7 instead of figuring out a way to raise funds for the Zeiss, and probably be working on a setup to do my own negatives/prints/etc. Unfortunately, I just don't have the time to dedicate to it.
> If I were getting _paid exclusively_ for photography (i.e. if it were my career), I'd justify it in a heartbeat and would invest in a great setup, but for now, I'm staying digital.


You're insane, look at that gear list! Sell off some of that junk and buy a Mamiya 7.


----------



## MistaBernie

The money is only part of it. Space, time and drive to do my own film. Do not have.

Also, the reviews I'm reading on the Z 50 f/1.4 are mostly good.


----------



## Conspiracy

film isnt very expensive to do. although it definitely can get expensive if you go overboard buying stuff. it takes little space and time would probably average maybe 15mins total to develop yourself.

most of the feedback on the ZE 50 1.4 puts it as a subpar lens considering you are putting a MF lens on a newer digital body. the zeiss lenses are amazing but it seems like most average people are disappointed with ZE 50 1.4 when compared to the other 50 1.4's you can get like the sigma or canon. although each lens is different and zeiss just has a look to its images that the other 2 just dont get and if you desire that look then its probably worth it. but as a general lens i doubt it


----------



## sub50hz

B&H to buy film, local lab to dev or mailers, flatbed to scan. Do it, it's not hard and you will really enjoy it, I promise.


----------



## MistaBernie

I'm done with film for now. Maybe I'll make that my project next year instead of getting a 5D3, unless I'm getting enough work to justify it. I hate mailers for film, and there are (to my knowledge) no decent labs south of Boston (immediate to where I am at least)..

The only exception I'd make to that is throwing some rolls through my X370. My only fear is I'll do that and end up jumping on a Mamiya 7 kit or something. Then the wife will hit me with stuff.


----------



## dudemanppl

DEVELOP IT YOURSELF, WEAKLING.
Also l o l. Zeiss makes the ****TIEST lenses. Don't even consider any of that crap that isn't the 15 f/2.8, the 25 f/2, 100 f/2. Also MF on EOS is so boring. If you're going to buy a Zeiss lens, put it on a damn Nikon FM2n or something.


----------



## sub50hz

Zeiss makes unbelievably good lenses for other systems though, ala Hasselblad and Contax G.


----------



## MistaBernie

Dudeman, I was developing black and white film when you were in diapers. Ok, not quite that long ago, but not too far off. ZOMG I could develop my own film, but I don't have decent workspace. Our bathrooms are too small to make lightproof _and_ workable. The money I'd be spending on the stuff I need (including an entire new body/glass system), I can save for other things (like a bigger house that could accommodate a studio _and_ darkroom.

The Zeiss was just a thought. In thinking about it some more, I agree that it's dumb.

Alright, I'm gonna go get stuff ready for Friday night, wedding in western MA (kinda) and I'm going out after work tomorrow. Kinda crazy to see everything out and lined up, ready to go. What I'm thinking is:
7D Gripped w/ 70-200 in a Think Tank Digital Holster 40 v2, 5Dii gripped with 35L, 17-40L, 24-70L and 85 f/1.8 in my Domke F2 (as kind of a transport bag), then use my Tamrac Rally to carry a couple of lenses and a 580 EX ii + mods & batteries. I'd have on me the 7D/70-200 2.8 (holstered) and the 5Dii / 35L or 24-70 with flash and mods in my Rally. 85, 17-40, Domke itself stays in the car. I feel like that's enough stuff to have at the ready without weighing me down..


----------



## dudemanppl

Don't overthink gear. NEVER. I'd say ungripped 5DII + 35L and ungripped 5D + 85 1.8. And then 17-40 in some pocket or something. All you need to develop film is a changing bag BTW. A room is just for prints if you're foot.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> The money I'd be spending on the stuff I need (including an entire new body/glass system)


You can buy a prosumer EOS film body for like 70 dollars.


----------



## MistaBernie

that's different. When you say get into film, I'm thinking medium format, etc. I have a 35mm outfit that I can shoot with for fun, and I plan on doing it, but I dont want to spend money to get negs scanned all the time (or dump money into a scanner I'll use like thrice). UGH. Stop taunting me.

Also, good advice Dudeman, but I'm still thinking 70-200 on the 7D for ceremony stuff.


----------



## sub50hz

Your gear list most certainly makes me question your balking at $150 worth of scanner, lol.

P.S. You can shoot medium format for like 250 bucks.


----------



## MistaBernie

Stop making sense! Grrr...

I'll probably get into it after the wedding in May. I have another gig in July to be thinking about too, but I think what I just set myself up with for my light kit will work out perfectly.


----------



## sub50hz

http://www.keh.com/camera/Bronica-ETRS-Camera-Outfits/1/sku-ET019990522870?r=FE

300 bucks, and comes with an AE prism so you don't even NEED a handheld meter.


----------



## MistaBernie

DAMNIT go watch hockey or something.

(after the wedding in May I can sell off some gear and get some stuff, I'll be looking for your recommendation then).


----------



## dudemanppl

Zeiss 50 is just bad, stop looking at it. Sigma is the only real winner in the 50 competition.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Zeiss 50 is just bad, stop looking at it. Sigma is the only real winner in the 50 competition.


Sigma, really? I thought the canon one was really good. Also, Olympus. Their 50 is amazing, though idk if it counts, since it's for 2x crop.

I've been using way too many random films. I just went through my film holders and the fridge, and it turns out I have: Ektachrome E100G, Velvia 100f, Fomapan 100, Delta 100, Neopan 100 Acros, New Portra 160, Portra 160NC, Ilford SFX 200, Efke IR820, New Portra 400, Portra 400NC, and HP5+ 400. Lol, wow. Time to consolidate. The only ones I've been using recently are delta, fomapan, and portra.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> Sigma, really? I thought the canon one was really good. Also, Olympus. Their 50 is amazing, though idk if it counts, since it's for 2x crop.
> I've been using way too many random films. I just went through my film holders and the fridge, and it turns out I have: Ektachrome E100G, Velvia 100f, Fomapan 100, Delta 100, Neopan 100 Acros, New Portra 160, Portra 160NC, Ilford SFX 200, Efke IR820, New Portra 400, Portra 400NC, and HP5+ 400. Lol, wow. Time to consolidate. The only ones I've been using recently are delta, fomapan, and portra.


the sigma 50 is unbelievably good if you can get a good copy. the canon 1.4 is good but there are a few people with the "usm" micro motor dying on them. plus it doesnt use a 77mm filter like the sigma so it doesnt look as cool.


----------



## dudemanppl

Canon 50 1.4, good? You should become a comedian, foot.

Sig vs 50L:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=473&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=403&CameraComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

And obviously the Canon 1.4 is worse. And trust me, even if it was sharper, the rendering of the Sigma is so much better than the L. The L is a piece of crap. Worst lens Canon has. I honestly would rather shoot with an original 18-55 kit lens on the 5DII. Hell even a 35-80 Power-*******-Zoom. The Sigma is just smoooth, also a bit wider than what 50 actually is.

I have a bunch of random film I'll probably not get around to touching after that lot I got from FM. Portra 100T, Portra 400B/W (which you say is crap), some other weird kinky films.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Canon 50 1.4, good? You should become a comedian, foot.
> 
> Sig vs 50L:
> http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=473&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=403&CameraComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0
> 
> And obviously the Canon 1.4 is worse. And trust me, even if it was sharper, the rendering of the Sigma is so much better than the L. The L is a piece of crap. Worst lens Canon has. I honestly would rather shoot with an original 18-55 kit lens on the 5DII. Hell even a 35-80 Power-*******-Zoom. The Sigma is just smoooth, also a bit wider than what 50 actually is.


I'm not a 35mm person, so I've never actually used any of these. I was just going by what I've heard. Btw, that site also has the canon 50/1.4, and it really doesn't do too badly. It actually seems to be sharper than the Sigma wide open, especially towards the edges of the frame. Some weird CA effects going on there though

EDIT: Actually, the canon looks significantly better stopped down too. Try it yourself and see. Maybe they just had a bad copy of the sigma?


----------



## mz-n10

the 50/1.4 isnt bad but the sigma is just better.


----------



## Chroma

Hello! I would like to join the OCN Camera Club!

My current equipment is: (minus random goodies)

Canon EOS 5D
Canon EOS 20D
Canon EF 85mm f/1.2 L USM
Canon EF 24-105mm f/4 L IS USM
Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L IS USM
Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro
Canon Powershot SD1100 IS
EFI Nova Nanolab SEM/FIB

Giottos MM 8660 Monopod
Manfrotto 394 Quick Release

:thumb:Anything else I should include?


----------



## MistaBernie

Welcome !
In order to add you to the list, please send me that 85L and accept my 85 f/1.8 I'm return.







I kid of course.


----------



## scottath

i second ^^^ but i dont kid








ill even cover shipping









After a discussion with my parents - i decided that a 5dII is a bad decision money wise - so now im thinking of a 70-200 2.8L non-IS second hand as i can sell it again for roughly the same price and have fun with it in the mean time.......
Thoughts ?


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> I have a bunch of random film I'll probably not get around to touching after that lot I got from FM. Portra 100T, Portra 400B/W (which you say is crap), some other weird kinky films.


mmm weird kinky films lol

once i get this 50D 5203 and i make sure its legit in a week or so when i get home and do a clip test. ill trade you a few rolls 50D for a few rolls 5219 if your are interested in really slow film that happens to be vision3.

this is assuming i dont get robbed or ripped off since we are meeting in a very public area but rather ghetto shopping mall


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> I have a bunch of random film I'll probably not get around to touching after that lot I got from FM. Portra 100T, Portra 400B/W (which you say is crap), some other weird kinky films.
> 
> 
> 
> mmm weird kinky films lol
> 
> once i get this 50D 5203 and i make sure its legit in a week or so when i get home and do a clip test. ill trade you a few rolls 50D for a few rolls 5219 if your are interested in really slow film that happens to be vision3.
> 
> this is assuming i dont get robbed or ripped off since we are meeting in a very public area but rather ghetto shopping mall
Click to expand...

Ooh, I wouldn't mind trying some as well. Let me know when you get it and we can work something out.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scottath*
> 
> i second ^^^ but i dont kid
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ill even cover shipping
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> After a discussion with my parents - i decided that a 5dII is a bad decision money wise - so now im thinking of a 70-200 2.8L non-IS second hand as i can sell it again for roughly the same price and have fun with it in the mean time.......
> Thoughts ?


dont get the non-is....unless you get it really cheap because since the mk2 is out it will only go down in price. the IS seems to hold its price better.


----------



## MistaBernie

Agreed, I quasi-regret getting mine w/o IS. Current cost is ~$1400 BNIB, and they resell for ~$1000. IS retails for $2500, resells for $2000-$2200. That being said, I have strong man-hands and don't usually have a problem hand holding it down to ~1/30


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chroma*
> 
> EFI Nova Nanolab SEM/FIB


I'm pretty sure a quarter million dollar SEM and FIB does not count as a camera for the purposes of this thread


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> I'm pretty sure a quarter million dollar SEM and FIB does not count as a camera for the purposes of this thread


But does it shoot 1:1?


----------



## skwannabe

Picked up a Asahi Pentax Spotmatic SP. I recently got into photography and know nothing about film. What kind of film do I use with this camera?


----------



## sub50hz

35mm.


----------



## skwannabe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> 35mm.


How do I go about picking the right 35mm film?


----------



## sub50hz

Personal preference, really. The three main categories of film are:

1. Black and White negative
2. Color negative
3. Color slide

Slide film develops as a _positive_, but it's more difficult to shoot because it doesn't have as much exposure latitude as print (negative) films. 400-speed color and b&w films are very general-purpose, and are easiest to start with. Personally, I prefer Portra 400 for color print film, and either Tmax400 or Delta 400 for black and white. On the off chance I'm shooting slide film, Provia 400X would be my choice.


----------



## skwannabe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Personal preference, really. The three main categories of film are:
> 1. Black and White negative
> 2. Color negative
> 3. Color slide
> Slide film develops as a _positive_, but it's more difficult to shoot because it doesn't have as much exposure latitude as print (negative) films. 400-speed color and b&w films are very general-purpose, and are easiest to start with. Personally, I prefer Portra 400 for color print film, and either Tmax400 or Delta 400 for black and white. On the off chance I'm shooting slide film, Provia 400X would be my choice.


Thanks.


----------



## nuclearjock

I am very very very extremely impressed by this body. pics to come.


----------



## MistaBernie

Man, that's a strange looking 5D3...

(I kid, everything I've heard about the D800 is that it's all that, and a $500 less expensive bag of chips).


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*
> 
> I am very very very extremely impressed by this body. pics to come.


worst camera i have ever seen. you should throw it away but tell me where you throw it away so i can go pick it up lol


----------



## spRICE

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*
> 
> I am very very very extremely impressed by this body. pics to come.


Wow that's terrible noise performance. Guess what they were saying about pixel density is true


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spRICE*
> 
> Wow that's terrible noise performance. Guess what they were saying about pixel density is true


It's ISO 6400 so what did you expect? It could use some NR TLC though.


----------



## spRICE

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*
> 
> It's ISO 6400 so what did you expect? It could use some NR TLC though.


Just making a joke about the D800's nonexistent bad noise performance.


----------



## Durdle Class A

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*
> 
> I am very very very extremely impressed by this body. pics to come.


Lol what did you do to get the D3 as noisy as that?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Durdle Class A*
> 
> Lol what did you do to get the D3 as noisy as that?


ISO 6400

hint.


----------



## nuclearjock

Also moderate crop, sooc, high iso NR = off, no PP.Guess you guys really are "connisewers" (accent on the sewers).


----------



## foothead

So it seems my 90mm super angulon is developing fungus. The inside of the rear cell has some haze all the way around the edges, and there are a some small spots that look kind of like mold. Of course, this happens right after I broke my spanner wrench, so I won't be able to take care of it right away. 50/50 peroxide/ammonia to clean it, right?


----------



## sub50hz

Fungus? In the past, I've used white vinegar, diluted 2:1.


----------



## foothead

Hm, okay. I guess I'll try that first. Now I need to locate a spanner wrench. There's a huge hardware store right next to the darkroom, so I guess I'll check there. If not, eBay.


----------



## MistaBernie

Foot, I'll see if I have one around.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Foot, I'll see if I have one around.


Thanks, but you don't have to do that. If I can't find one locally, I can order a new one quite cheap. The shipping alone would be like half the cost of buying a new one. I'd just prefer to get it asap so my lens isn't out of commission next time I want to go shoot something.

EDIT: Here's what it looks like.










I'm still not 100% sure this even is fungus. There aren't any of the normal "branching" patterns, and the way the little spots look make me think it may be some sort of mold. Also, there are some rather strange streaks that make it look almost as if it's been cleaned up before.


----------



## mz-n10

mold == fungus.

since u cant rip it apart to clean, leave the lens in the sun for a couple of hours. the UV in sunlight should at least stop the growth, but make sure the lens does not over heat.


----------



## Boyboyd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> mold == fungus.
> since u cant rip it apart to clean, leave the lens in the sun for a couple of hours. the UV in sunlight should at least stop the growth, but make sure the lens does not over heat.


Make sure you remove your UV filter first.


----------



## Conspiracy

bought a little bit of film today









guy also gave me one cartridge of 250D 5246


----------



## dudemanppl

Dude that guy got that film for free...


----------



## biatchi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Fungus? In the past, I've used white vinegar, diluted 2:1.


This is pretty much what I do.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Dude that guy got that film for free...


i know... he didnt say it was test film. its whatever though im not mad but i feel it should have been cheaper. i dont expect someone to give it away for free but he got it for free and hes got a ton of other cans of all the other Vision3 stocks as well. he was very cool and said if i was interested in any more film he would help me out. hes currently about to start shooting his new movie that is going to be about the life of a suicide bomber.

oh yea he has a local kodak representative that he works with which explains why he has a crazy amount of free film hes selling on craiglist


----------



## sub50hz

You're very near to being in over your head. Sure, spooling your own cans can be cheaper, but you don't even have a changing bag yet, right? Shoot some damn film and worry about bulk film later.


----------



## Conspiracy

i am shooting lol. i have one more week of school left and when i get home i can start developing my shots









i plan on ordering all the stuff on sunday probably so it will be waiting for me when i get home

actually right now im catching up on homework. and just finished filling out my graduation application this morning but i need to double check it with my adviser before i turn it in


----------



## sub50hz

Speaking of gear and film, I thikn that Fuji GA645 is gonna get me. Waiting for my Obabo tax rebate, then I will have a compact medium format option. Wondrous.


----------



## Conspiracy

yea that fuji ga645 looks pretty nice. DMP was going on about how amazing the GW690 is but im guessing that camera is not as compact as the ga645. never looked too deeply into it as i have no plan to do any medium format although i am just interested in it.


----------



## sub50hz

GW690s are HUGE. Look on youtube.


----------



## Conspiracy

holy cow thats pretty big camera. idk why i never look cameras up on youtube better than looking them up on google lol


----------



## dudemanppl

GW690s are still 1.5 kilos. Heavy as hell but IQ omg. I think I might sell it for a 645 though. Also, I've shot like a hundred feet of the 200T.


----------



## Conspiracy

only think i never understood exactly was how some medium format cameras shoot less or more frames on a 120 roll. like some cameras only get 8 and i think some get 15. i dont really want to look for an answer right now only because i know i will end up blowing a few hours looking at camera stuff on the internet instead of writing this boring assignment


----------



## xxrabid93

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> only think i never understood exactly was how some medium format cameras shoot less or more frames on a 120 roll. like some cameras only get 8 and i think some get 15. i dont really want to look for an answer right now only because i know i will end up blowing a few hours looking at camera stuff on the internet instead of writing this boring assignment


It depends on the "format" of the medium format. 6x4.5 will get the most shots, 6x6 less, 6x7 even less, 6x9 even less, etc. All of them shoot the same height film, 6cm; the width of the frame is what differs. So like this: 6x4.5 [~] 6x6 [~~] 6x7 [~~~] 6x9 [~~~~~] where the roll is like [~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~]. Hopefully that explains it well enough.


----------



## Conspiracy

lol didnt even think about it. yea i know what you are saying. i really only know 35mm and like 3 perf vs 4 perf. but i understand now


----------



## sub50hz

6x6 and 6x9 are awkward though, and if you're printing you'll end up cropping to the usable area of 645 or 6x7 negatives anyway. Of course, you can always print square or 3:2 if you want, but it's uncommon for a reason.


----------



## Conspiracy

interesting. i dont think i will ever run out of stuff to learn about photography lol

and halfway done with one paper







then i can take a break


----------



## sub50hz

Actually, let me rephrase that. 6x6 is good if you WANT to print square. 6x9 is good for.... i dunno. People used to 35mm i guess.


----------



## Conspiracy

well i have finished another paper today. i feel like i have a million more left and 2 of the ones i need to do require me to go to the library where there are these things called books. i have never seen a real book before so im scared lolz


----------



## Nemesis158

ok so my dad recently bought a 1969 mercury cougar, and i finally got a chance to take some pictures of it. i would have liked a better location but time constraints and all that......... anyways, tell me what you think:


----------



## Conspiracy

looks pretty good. ill take the car when he gets tired of it


----------



## scottath

For those of you on Google+, i just updated a heap of my albums - and they look a tonne better than facebook.....
I just topped 2k followers on Google+ so im ecstatic at that - take a look if you want guys:

https://plus.google.com/photos/106745276976268173888/albums?hl=en-GB


----------



## Nemesis158

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> looks pretty good. ill take the car when he gets tired of it


good luck with that......


----------



## Boyboyd

I don't think that car would even fit on the road in Britain.

That's not to say I don't want one though.


----------



## sub50hz

Flea market, 25 bucks, rigged a 28PX in there and it's ALIVE. It's missing a couple screws on the top plate, but it's in great shape regardless.


----------



## Rowey

Quote:


> Just wondering if you guys can help me choose the best one. Money is a big factor, if i can save money on certain things and get the other camera for example for basically the same performance. That's what I'm looking for.
> 
> 500D with 2 lenses (I think)
> 500D T1i with18-135mm IS
> 550D T2i with kit lens
> 600D with kit lens
> 
> I really dont know which one to go for, i know there isnt much in terms of difference between the 500/550/600D. But which is the best for what i get, what i will need and the price.
> 
> Thanks


Link


----------



## sub50hz

Found 2 screws in my never-use-it K1000 that fit the Yashica top plate. Ready to roll, although I am 99% certain the back seals are shot and this roll will be complete garbage.


----------



## dudemanppl

GAFFER.


----------



## sub50hz

Maybe.


----------



## Conspiracy

finally submitted my graduation application to get the heck outa this school this december


----------



## foothead

so um, I got a 62-67mm stepping ring for that Caltar-S and tried to install it. Turns out the freaking thing has no filter threads. The barrel extends past the front element by few mm, just like every other lens I have, it's just that there is nothing there. Just smooth. Has anybody encountered this before? I'm thinking about dremeling the rear threads off that stepping ring and just gluing on.

EDIT: Photo.










In other news, ghetto enlarger is nearing completion. I just need to make the new bellows now. I found some thin vinyl at the fabric store yesterday that I think would be about perfect.


----------



## MistaBernie

I would say /jealous, but in my company, slash is a temporary structure and would not be applicable in this case.


----------



## dudemanppl

broke down, gonna buy a Nikon 50 1.2 instead of the Sigma and I'll live with that for a little while.


----------



## MistaBernie

Canon 5D Mark II has been added back to the Canon Loyalty Program (apparently a month ago to the person I spoke to). $1407.


----------



## Kreeker

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Canon 5D Mark II has been added back to the Canon Loyalty Program (apparently a month ago to the person I spoke to). $1407.


All I need to do is buy a cheap old Canon camera to qualify right? So I will obtain a EOS 5D Mark II Body Refurbished for $1407?


----------



## MistaBernie

$1407 + applicable taxes, + about $12 shipping. About 1/3 off of retail.


----------



## BlankThis

Hey guys. Long time no seeee

Looking into either a 5D2 or 1D3 this summer







Not really interested in the 10 fps or the video but I would love a camera that can take a beating and can track should I ever need it in my shooting.


----------



## swindle

Well the 5D2 is terrible at tracking (AI Servo) so I might suggest the 7D, as it is also weather sealed, can take a beating and track very well.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *swindle*
> 
> Well the 5D2 is terrible at tracking (AI Servo) so I might suggest the 7D, as it is also weather sealed, can take a beating and track very well.


How much experience do you have shooting servo on a 5D2?


----------



## swindle

Not much.

I'm not the only person who will tell you the ancient AF system in the 5D2 sucks at tracking also.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *swindle*
> 
> Not much.
> I'm not the only person who will tell you the ancient AF system in the 5D2 sucks at tracking also.


it sucks at tracking professional athletes at high speeds and thats about it. just about everything else it has no trouble with. im yet to hear anyone other than a sports shooter say that the 5D2 doesnt do the job. its AF system may be old but it works for everyone that is using it









7D is great at tracking but being a crop camera is its downfall. if you care about quality and want a great affordable FF camera the 5D2 is by far a better choice


----------



## sub50hz

The center point is usable for servo tracking. Would I pick it for sports? Probably not -- and if you're mainly shooting daytime sports or at night with good lighting, the 1DIII is a better choice than the 7D, by a long shot.

Anyway, OBABO sent me my tax refund today, so the Fuji is en route. Now, to order a stupid amount of 120/220 for vacation.


----------



## aksthem1

The 5DII doesn't too bad at the track actually, but you have to get a feel for it. For other sports it doesn't fair as well.


----------



## MistaBernie

Coincidentally there's some rumors that indicate the 7D may be getting a major firmware update long before it gets a refresh / update. The buzz is video updates primarily. I wonder if they're going to incorporate some features from Magic Lantern.


----------



## dudemanppl

5DII has no flaws. Only people who say it sucks shouldn't be taking pictures.


----------



## r34p3rex

QQ well my 5D2 resale value has been officially murdered









Can't wait til I start my job after graduation







Might sell the 5D2 and use the sign-on bonus for a 5D3


----------



## dudemanppl

Yeah I stopped caring about the condition of the 5DII a while back and now I'm on a mission to make it ugly through use. Paint missing near the delete button, DON'T EVEN KNOW WHERE FROM.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *swindle*
> 
> Well the 5D2 is terrible at tracking (AI Servo) so I might suggest the 7D, as it is also weather sealed, can take a beating and track very well.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> How much experience do you have shooting servo on a 5D2?


I've owned and used both cameras for sports/birding/etc and the 5D II does ok with center AF and a f/2.8 lens. The 7D is very capable for sports in the right hands if you customize the AF modes effectively (which is ridiculously complicated).


----------



## BlankThis

How terrible is the 1D3's high ISO in comparison to the 5D2?

Has anyone been tempted by the xPro1? I know there aren't any X100 shooters here but the xpro with a M-mount adapter, voigtlander glass (cause its cheap, duh) and an update with peaking would be fun. Albeit overpriced.


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> 7D is great at tracking but being a crop camera is its downfall. if you care about quality and want a great affordable FF camera the 5D2 is by far a better choice


Why do people put down crop cameras so much? A 7D can take sports shots on par with a 5DII any day unless you want to start printing big. I would think most sports shots would usually max out at about 8x10 if purchased by someone and so many shots these days end up living their life online at 800x600 or 1024x768.

I shot a race recently where we were alll asked to take our file size down a notch. The proofs were posted online and he only offered up to 8x10, said he never sold anything bigger. The number one seller was a "Facebook special" digital image that was 800x600 or whatever Facebook is at now.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *silvrr*
> 
> Why do people put down crop cameras so much? A 7D can take sports shots on par with a 5DII any day unless you want to start printing big. I would think most sports shots would usually max out at about 8x10 if purchased by someone and so many shots these days end up living their life online at 800x600 or 1024x768.
> I shot a race recently where we were alll asked to take our file size down a notch. The proofs were posted online and he only offered up to 8x10, said he never sold anything bigger. The number one seller was a "Facebook special" digital image that was 800x600 or whatever Facebook is at now.


He's probably referring to the 7D's insanely dense pixel count, which results in visible noise even at low ISOs, although I recall it's high ISO noise being fairly decent. Anyone shooting sports using Canon in all likelihood does use crop as the 1D series are APS-H (unlike the 1Ds and 1DX), not to mention the fact that many use xxD series cameras as backups.


----------



## MistaBernie

I've been considering doing some extensive testing with medium and small size raw files out of the 7D to see if noise is handled better or worse. My initial (real world) test indicates no visible benefit in shooting smaller raw files (other than getting more files on a card). I may put that off, I need to work on my posing, three weeks till my first wedding as a primary.

Oh, damn. I've been neglecting my reviews. I think I was asked to do the 35L next...


----------



## r34p3rex

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> I've been considering doing some extensive testing with medium and small size raw files out of the 7D to see if noise is handled better or worse. My initial (real world) test indicates no visible benefit in shooting smaller raw files (other than getting more files on a card). I may put that off, I need to work on my posing, three weeks till my first wedding as a primary.
> Oh, damn. I've been neglecting my reviews. I think I was asked to do the 35L next...


You could always pass that 35L this way and I'll ghost write the review for you







You know, so you can focus on more important things


----------



## MistaBernie

Nah, my reviews are bad enough, I dont want to trust someone else to produce the lack of quality I can output, I have a reputation to uphold after all!

Also, dont fret too much about loss of value. It's about on par with things like the 70-200 f/2.8L non-IS ($1450 out the door BNIB, resale is usually under $1000). While CLP has them for $1407 (the 5D2 that is), they actually have to have them in stock to sell for that price. Used will still be worth more than refurb merely because they're actually available (until the point where the market gets so saturated that the price adjusts downwards).


----------



## sub50hz

GA645i en route, ME SO EXCITE.


----------



## Conspiracy

awesome!


----------



## MistaBernie

New plan! (This changes by the minute, try to keep up).

Step 1: Put 5Dc up for sale on 5/20.
Step 2: Use proceeds to purchase RZ67 kit from KEH
Step 3: ???
Step 4: Profit.


----------



## sub50hz

RZ is a big step into medium format. It's still relatively costly to put together a complete camera, albeit still cheaper than some of the electronic 6x4.5 systems. You would be wise to go hold one in your hand and dry-fire it a bit to see if the size and heft is liveable for you. It's also a pretty steep curve in terms of film usage, as you're essentially going from unlimited shots to a very conservative 10 or 20 shots per roll of 120 or 220, respectively. Maybe consider a cheaper 645 setup to find out what film you prefer and get used to having a limited number of shots again. Trust me, you will feel like a real jackass everytime you see a poor 6x7 negative or burn a shot unintentionally. 645 is almost the same cost to shoot as 35mm, so you won't feel too bad in those instances.


----------



## MistaBernie

I can get everything I need for a RZ67 kit for under $600 from KEH, and it would let me shoot 6x4.5 and 6x7. Worst case scenario, I can actually just send them my 5Dc as a trade (as of last check I can still get $600 for it). I'll carry something to meter so I'm close negative-wise, and I"m not overly worried about heft.

All that being said, you've brought up some good points pretty much as always Sub. I'll definitely take them into consideration. Like I've said previously, I'm not bursting at the seams to get into a decent film system; in reality, if/when the time comes to shuffle some gear around, the likelihood is that I'll invest in EF glass (better primes?) but I'm definitely still considering getting into a decent film system.


----------



## laboitenoire

I keep debating whether I want to stick with 35mm for my film setup or if I want to move to 645 or 6x6... On one hand I've already got two lenses I can use on 35mm, but I feel like I might as well go whole hog and enjoy the larger negatives. Although 35mm print film is really fricken cheap...


----------



## mz-n10

since were talking about film...

just bought another maxxum 7....first one crapped out on me a month into getting it.


----------



## MistaBernie

I have a Minolta Maxxum QTsi lying around somewhere.. that and my X370.. maybe I'll go shoot the 400 roll of T-Max I have lying around.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> I can get everything I need for a RZ67 kit for under $600 from KEH, and it would let me shoot 6x4.5 and 6x7. Worst case scenario, I can actually just send them my 5Dc as a trade (as of last check I can still get $600 for it). I'll carry something to meter so I'm close negative-wise, and I"m not overly worried about heft.
> All that being said, you've brought up some good points pretty much as always Sub. I'll definitely take them into consideration. Like I've said previously, I'm not bursting at the seams to get into a decent film system; in reality, if/when the time comes to shuffle some gear around, the likelihood is that I'll invest in EF glass (better primes?) but I'm definitely still considering getting into a decent film system.


Sure, you... _could_ get the 645 back and finder mask, but it's very cumbersome to use and it means you have to carry another separate back _just_ for 6x4.5. I have three backs for the RB, and they start taking up space pretty quickly. IMO, 2 backs is the minimum you should own, but that's me. I would rather have a separate 645 setup (and I do -- 2 of them) that's more portable and user friendly than the RB/RZ. You can shoot them without a tripod, but it's considerably easier to do so *with* one.

P.S. 6x7 has big WOW factor for wedding photos.


----------



## MistaBernie

That's part of the reason I'm thinking of going RZ67. I could get some awesome stuff with it for formal portraits..

Also, Impossible Project polaroid stuff is mad expensive and so borderline not worth it.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> I have a Minolta Maxxum QTsi lying around somewhere.. that and my X370.. maybe I'll go shoot the 400 roll of T-Max I have lying around.


do it, i was shooting some plus-x with the 1st maxxum and loved it. nothing beats film in BW.

i wish i could pick up the QTsi or one of the cheaper maxxum bodies but i cant use SSM lenses with anything older then the maxxum 9 (chipped) or maxxum 7.


----------



## MistaBernie

Is the QTsi older than the 7 or 9? I just meant shooting the 400 through my X370, I miss that thing. Yeah, screw it, I'm totally carrying that thing around with me this weekend and going to town.


----------



## mz-n10

yes the 9/7/5 are the newest full generation film body from minolta.

i had a xe7 which has its mirror locked up







.....i love old SR mount minoltas.


----------



## sub50hz

xd-11 or bust, I say.

Anyway, Fuji makes great cameras but the manual for the GA645 is terrible. I think someone with dyslexia was hired to compile it, putting 4 straight pages of diagrams at the beginning and then referencing them 25 pages later.


----------



## sub50hz

Pretty clean.


----------



## Conspiracy

nice


----------



## sub50hz

I'll have to get a couple of comparison shots when I get home of this thing next to the other behemoths I tote around.


----------



## nderscore

^^ Ah ha! By enhancing your previous photo. I now know where you work subby. Now PM me your address to confirm my suspicion.


----------



## sub50hz

I already told you where I work, numbnuts.

Also, where have you been?


----------



## MistaBernie

The Zoo, obviously.


----------



## swindle




----------



## MistaBernie

I have a line on a Pentax 645 with a 75 f 2.8, 80-160 f4, 120 and 220 backs. I offered $300 because the 75 apparently has an issue where it won't switch out of leaf shutter... Am I nuts or is it worth it?


----------



## sub50hz

Come to OCN chat, jerkface. WE CAN HELP YOU THERE.


----------



## MistaBernie

Cant, on the road


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> I have a line on a Pentax 645 with a 75 f 2.8, 80-160 f4, 120 and 220 backs. I offered $300 because the 75 apparently has an issue where it won't switch out of leaf shutter... Am I nuts or is it worth it?


Depends. If that 75 is fixable, definitely go for it. If it isn't, you may be better off buying from KEH. The bodies run around $100 in bgn condition, which was pretty much perfect when I bought mine from them. I'd look for a 75mm or 55mm lens. The zooms are pretty meh except for the 33-44.

EDIT: the 75mm on KEH is the autofocus version, hence why it's so expensive. You can probably find a manual one on the bay or elsewhere for a reasonable cost.


----------



## MistaBernie

Hmmm. I'll give it some thought, thanks Foot


----------



## nuclearjock

GT, D3s shipped to daughter, plz remove.


----------



## MistaBernie

GT retired, we are in limbo at the moment.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> GT retired, we are in limbo at the moment.


Thx MB


----------



## KenjiS

http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/car_problems.png

This made me laugh.. xD Too true sometimes


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KenjiS*
> 
> http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/car_problems.png
> This made me laugh.. xD Too true sometimes


lol


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*
> 
> GT, D3s shipped to daughter, plz remove.


Done.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> GT retired, we are in limbo at the moment.


Retired yes, but not as OP of this thread.


----------



## MistaBernie

Yeah, that's true..


----------



## MistaBernie

After reviewing finances, I think I'm gonna hold off on medium format for now since it'll just become a money sink at a time when I need the opposite to happen.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> After reviewing finances, I think I'm gonna hold off on medium format for now since it'll just become a money sink at a time when I need the opposite to happen.


With a new house and kid on the way, I think I've bought my last piece of camera gear for the foreseeable future.


----------



## Conspiracy

what did you get?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> what did you get?


Nothing, just saying that my gear acquisition days are over (for now)







. Last thing I bought was the 35L, and that was a while ago.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> After reviewing finances, I think I'm gonna hold off on medium format for now since it'll just become a money sink at a time when I need the opposite to happen.


It's only a money pit if you purposely make it that way. Lebs/body/back/finder and you're good to go. RZs still cost a good bit, so you can likely resell for the same or more than you might buy one for.


----------



## KenjiS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*
> 
> Nothing, just saying that my gear acquisition days are over (for now)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . Last thing I bought was the 35L, and that was a while ago.


you've got a good well rounded system though, Nothing to complain about mate


----------



## Conspiracy

he totally needs another DSLR and more L primes and zooms







lolz


----------



## MistaBernie

it's a money pit because I'll start shooting lots of film, not because of initial gear investment. Then I'll probably send it away for processing and scans. more money.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KenjiS*
> 
> you've got a good well rounded system though, Nothing to complain about mate


Definitely. I do miss having a 70-200 though.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> he totally needs another DSLR and more L primes and zooms
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> lolz


Doesn't everybody?


----------



## Conspiracy

im going to miss not having the 70-200 i borrow from school over the summer. its fun to shoot with


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> it's a money pit because I'll start shooting lots of film, not because of initial gear investment. Then I'll probably send it away for processing and scans. more money.


You gotta exercise restraint, then. You don't go out and rifle off 6x7 shots like you do with a DSLR, _dad_.

edit: BUY A SCANNER if you know you'll be posting to web or making digital prints.


----------



## Conspiracy

so yea... cleaning off my desk while i am working on last minute homework due next week and just dayum there is a lot of stuff cluttered everywhere lol. the rest of the room not so much


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> so yea... cleaning off my desk while i am working on last minute homework due next week and just dayum there is a lot of stuff cluttered everywhere lol. the rest of the room not so much


lol, same here.

I just finished an insane online chem final. Google, <3.


----------



## Conspiracy

i finally got a confirmed time to check out of the dorms for next thursday. so much stuff to do other than exams i dont know where to start :|


----------



## Sean Webster

Start scheduling your time and study an hour a day in the morning for each class you need, then you have the rest of the day off to do what ever you need as dorns and such goes.

I'm off to the drag strip.









later.


----------



## sub50hz

Guns and drag strips, _what a Florida_.


----------



## Conspiracy

lol i wish it was that easy to schedule my time


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Guns and drag strips, _what a Florida_.


U jelly brah?







Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> lol i wish it was that easy to schedule my time












I'm still waiting for my ride...I need a car.


----------



## foothead

It seems everybody is online here, yet the chat is empty. :/

Completely screwed up making new bellows for my enlarger today. Guess I'm gonna have to try again. It's really hard to get the taper right without them being lopsided.


----------



## sub50hz

Jealous? No, I think i would rather be burned alive in Iraq than do _anything_ in Florida.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Jealous? No, I think i would rather be burned alive in Iraq than do _anything_ in Florida.


definitely agree on that one except the burning alive part, thats not very fun but neither is florida.


----------



## Sean Webster

I think Florida is plenty fun...especially cruising in the inlets here and fishing and such. Disney world and stuff like that is stupid.

Also...LS7 BMW drift car.









Soooo smexy.










Canon 60D IMG_1310.jpg by Sean W. Webster, on Flickr


Canon 60D IMG_1318.jpg by Sean W. Webster, on Flickr


Canon 60D IMG_1314.jpg by Sean W. Webster, on Flickr


Canon 60D IMG_1322.jpg by Sean W. Webster, on Flickr

Yea...12,800 ISO lol, need 5DMKIII


----------



## laboitenoire

What a waste of an E36...


----------



## Conspiracy

pretty much a bunch of old guys and ********. and then a car that is the result of someones midlife crisis that should have just been left alone lol


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> What a waste of an E36...


Nope, wait till I post a video of him drifting, the car is only 1800lbs. btw. lol
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> pretty much a bunch of old guys and ********. and then a car that is the result of someones midlife crisis that should have just been left alone lol


haha, he was actually from Germany lol.


----------



## laboitenoire

Still a waste. The E36 is one of the most beautiful BMW bodies ever, and they just went and turned it into yet another ricer toy.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> Still a waste. The E36 is one of the most beautiful BMW bodies ever, and they just went and turned it into yet another ricer toy.


Furthest thing from ricer...


----------



## mz-n10

meh could have picked a far cheaper car to swap a LS7 in....

are you sure that car is 1800lbs and not 1800kg....even full race miata or exiges struggle to get down to 1800lbs.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> meh could have picked a far cheaper car to swap a LS7 in....


do it then.









3-6K is not a lot to spend on a car in the first place, plus everything is basically gutted from it and many things are replaced with light weight replacements such as carbon fiber for the body.

Price doesn't apply when it is a drift car b/c you will be swapping clutches, trannies, tires, body parts, suspension, engines, etc all the time. plus have you seen the price of a LS7?
Quote:


> are you sure that car is 1800lbs and not 1800kg....even full race miata or exiges struggle to get down to 1800lbs.


Official weigh in at 1800lbs without driver.


----------



## mz-n10

im still doubtful that its 1800lbs but if it is...thats some insane weight lost they put that m3 on......

most e36 are happy with 2200 wihtout cage and stripped....thats 400lbs less...with a ls7. damn......


----------



## aksthem1

It may not be rice, but it's butt ugly.

Edit: I wonder how he got it to 1,800 lbs though. I know when it's a dedicated track car you can just rip everything out that's not necessary. The LS7 is an all aluminum small block so it doesn't weight too much.

It weighs less than the I6 cast iron S50 block on the M3 actually.


----------



## sub50hz

TOYS, NEW FUJI TOYS.


New Kicks by sub50hz, on Flickr










Polar opposites, but kindred spirits.


----------



## MistaBernie

Nice.

I found an old AE-1 with a 28 f/2.8 for $40, I think I'm gonna jump on it. They have a 50 f/1.4 but they want like $75 for it..


----------



## sub50hz

Don't you already have a 35mm slr, though?

edit: Also, I am the last person on this forum that should argue against having redundancy. :trollface:


----------



## MistaBernie

Yeah... yeah, I do.

Maybe they'll take my Minolta stuff in trade







I feel like it's going to be a bit easier to find FD lenses if I want to than Minolta mount..


----------



## Conspiracy

nice new toys sub.

bernie its not hard finding minolta glass unless you want a 50 1.2, 58 1.2, or 85. those are semi hard to find and generally more expensive than the rest of the glass. and good luck finding a 35 1.8. im yet to see one actually for sale


----------



## Conspiracy

just ordered all my develop stuff. tank, extra reel, changing bag, c-41 kit, and empty cartridges, and archive pages for negatives


----------



## sub50hz

Nice. Now you get to destroy rolls of film you really want results from until you learn how to work everything smoothly!


----------



## dudemanppl

Honestly, its so hard to screw up. I already taught him how to load them and developing is so straightforward. My first roll I developed was perfect, both B/W and color.


----------



## sub50hz

I'm certain you yourself have talked about botching stuff just recently. Nobody is infallible, shart happens.


----------



## laboitenoire

Yeah, I'm always biting my nails when I develop film... I've had the lid come off of the tank during agitation and I always have to rewind at least part of the reel. I still have never been able to get perfect results on rolls of 36.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Nice. Now you get to destroy rolls of film you really want results from until you learn how to work everything smoothly!


lol yea. im trying to shoot a bunch of junk to start out so i dont have any pictures that i dont want to lose while im learning everything. i think 2 rolls might be pretty good to learn on before i develop the 50D


----------



## laboitenoire

So the more I shoot with it, the more I'm thinking that my 50 f/1.4 is a "golden sample." Wide open at f/1.4, I'm not seeing any spherical aberration, and the contrast is really quite high. Much sharper than the AF-D 50 f/1.4 I had last fall. Only thing is that it's a pain in the ass focusing it on my D7000...


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> Wide open at f/1.4, I'm not seeing any spherical aberration


Did you mean _chromatic_ aberrations?


----------



## laboitenoire

Nah, I meant spherical aberration. There's still plenty of CA in this lens and plenty of spherochromatism, but you don't see the haze and loss of contrast that tends to come from spherical aberration.


----------



## sub50hz

If you say so.


----------



## swindle

This is so cool...

http://www.trademe.co.nz/Browse/Listing.aspx?id=470967229

If only I had the money...


----------



## dudemanppl

Swindle, potato. Honestly, just potato.


----------



## swindle

Sorry? I am unfamiliar with the way you are using the word and what you are implying by it?


----------



## Conspiracy

how do you have the money to try and buy a hasselblad but dont have money for an M3

did you give up on the hasselblad? the thread looks like it got deleted

and its pronounced potAto not potato


----------



## scottath

Got a sigma 70-200 f2.8 II non-OS today - and got a big hardcase last week for it all








Looks the part at least


----------



## Conspiracy

nice. i tried the sigma 70-200 II but it suffered from really bad color fringing wide open when shooting sports under harsh sunlight. its a great performing lens other than that one problem which didnt seem to be as bad when testing under other conditions


----------



## scottath

Yet to try it outdoors as i only got it at 7pm, now 1205am. But will be playing with it tomorrow outdoors @ uni.
I borrowed one during the weekend at a conference i was at mounted on a pentax K5 and was impressed by it a fair bit - even thought i was having to shoot at iso3200 for everything - and then found out how cheap it was compared to the Canon mkI IS that i was looking at getting.

Shots from that weekend:
https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.442116999138448.121335.100000204552885&type=1

Nothing was planned - just happy shooting and enjoying the music really.


----------



## Conspiracy

looks nice. youre going to be pretty happy with that lens without a doubt.


----------



## dudemanppl

BTW swindle, never buy a dual stroke. Especially not for that much. 600 maybe.


----------



## Conspiracy

he might not even know what that means lol. i dont think i would want a camera that is dual stroke as i would probably forget and end up actually not taking most shots and just firing the shutter a bunch on the same frame lolz might look cool once but would suck after realizing that you messed up


----------



## Marin

Hai.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> Hai.


Whoa. _Sup bro_.


----------



## r34p3rex

Anyone shoot a 5D3 on an extended basis yet? What are your thoughts over the 5D2?









I'm either going to upgrade to a 5D3, or get a 7D as a second body for action shots and the extra reach.


----------



## sub50hz

Anybody want a brown 7MDH for cheap? I gotta dump it to fund something else.

Something else: http://goincase.com/products/detail/ari-marcopoulos-camera-bag-cl58033#img1


----------



## Conspiracy

wow that bag looks awesome.

i would but i have no need for another bag or anything bigger than my domke


----------



## sub50hz

It's a pretty good _looking_ bag, but it apparently holds quite a bit and has that grayscale checker (!) on the side. Pretty neat.


----------



## r34p3rex

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Anybody want a brown 7MDH for cheap? I gotta dump it to fund something else.
> Something else: http://goincase.com/products/detail/ari-marcopoulos-camera-bag-cl58033#img1


How much?


----------



## sub50hz

I dunno, 100?


----------



## MistaBernie

New Plan #43135

Trade S95 for Nikon AW100. Specialized uses (underwater photography, etc). I can't use the underwater housing on the S95 unless I remove my Franiec grip, and I dont want to spend $200 on an underwater housing for something I might use like three times if that.

Or I dont, and be fine with it.


----------



## r34p3rex

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> I dunno, 100?


Hmm let me think about it







I've been saving up for a 35L


----------



## MistaBernie

Too bad you didn't get it back in Jan/Feb, the prices were really low compared to now.


----------



## Conspiracy

our hipster overlord returns!!!! and with an important message








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> Hai.


----------



## dudemanppl

Oh hey I didn't even see that. Herro.


----------



## Ruined

Hey well just noticed this club, would like to join up with my DSLR Pentax K-7/Pentax 18-55mm lens.


----------



## dudemanppl

Hard drive failure, why me?


----------



## sub50hz

_Because you touch yourself at night._


----------



## foothead

RA-4 attempt 1










I really suck at this.


----------



## Conspiracy

taking 5 rolls of the 50D with me on this short vacation next week.

and my develop stuff


----------



## foothead

Tried RA-4 again today. This time, i managed to get something that at least resembles the original image. This paper is really terrible though. Next to no contrast and it's off-yellow instead of white. Guess i'll have to order some kodak endura once i get the hang of this.


----------



## Marin

What paper are you using?


----------



## foothead

fuji crystal archive type II matte


----------



## Marin

Weird. How old is it?


----------



## foothead

Just got it a couple weeks ago. So it shouldn't be very old.


----------



## Marin

White box?


----------



## foothead

White box with a fuji label on it. Got it from B&H.


----------



## Marin

Weird.


----------



## sloppyjoe123

Hmm, I think it is time for me to get into the photography part of OCN. Will post some pics of my Fuji X100 (My secret favourite







), Leica M6, D700, Hasselblad 500C verrry soon.


----------



## Boyboyd

I've thought about selling my DSLR and non-fx lenses for a X100.


----------



## lifeskills

new gear! Didn't get this all right now but I guess it should be added to the list

Lowepro DSLR Fastpack 350
2x Induro AT214 Tripod legs
2x Induro BHD1 ballheads
Sigma 50mm 2.8 macro (manual 35mm)
Fotodiox Nikon F- Eos adapter
Canon 5d Mk II
Transcend 64GB 90MB/sec CF card
Little Bramper


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lifeskills*
> 
> 2x Induro AT214 Tripod legs


How do you like them? I was seriously considering the AT313, but ended up deciding against it because I'd still need a backup tripod for hiking. The 214 is still a possibility though, if I can find a good deal on one. I'm just worried about the 10kg load limit when using the speed graphic.


----------



## lifeskills

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> How do you like them? I was seriously considering the AT313, but ended up deciding against it because I'd still need a backup tripod for hiking. The 214 is still a possibility though, if I can find a good deal on one. I'm just worried about the 10kg load limit when using the speed graphic.


I like them a lot, they are really sturdy. I use them with my timelapse dolly and when everything is locked down you cant move the thing. I think you will have no problem with the speed graphic, as long as you have a nice head. THe BDH1 that I have is rated for 12 KG and feels really sturdy too. Also, the legs come with a nice bag.

I picked them up at B&H with the education discount. 110 for the legs and 120 for the head


----------



## scottath

played with a hasselblad H4D-40 on Sunday in a studio with some friends - was awesome.....but for the $30k price tag id get different things.....
should have upped the shutter speed a tad further on the outdoor shots with it though......

3 shots were with my 550D + Sigma 70-200 f2.8....see if you can pick them









https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.270832199679475.60239.134282906667739&type=1


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scottath*
> 
> played with a hasselblad H4D-40 on Sunday in a studio with some friends - was awesome.....but for the $30k price tag id get different things.....
> should have upped the shutter speed a tad further on the outdoor shots with it though......
> 3 shots were with my 550D + Sigma 70-200 f2.8....see if you can pick them
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.270832199679475.60239.134282906667739&type=1


Different things as in? The main reason I'd get a MF digital, and I imagine it would be equally important for you, would be for the insane dynamic range, which is typically 12 stops+ for MF.


----------



## scottath

Id get a new 5dIII and a nice range of primes - and add the rest left over to my savings with a bit of interest for a deposit on a place
amazing camera though - and the whole thing shudders when you hit the shutter - its just cool.....


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scottath*
> 
> Id get a new 5dIII and a nice range of primes - and add the rest left over to my savings with a bit of interest for a deposit on a place
> amazing camera though - and the whole thing shudders when you hit the shutter - its just cool.....


I read that Canon's "fix" for the light leak on the 5DIII was just a piece of electrical tape. lawl.


----------



## scottath

yea - ever taken a recent camera apart? there is alot of tape
even laptops are full of it.......

The rule of thumb on stage shows: "Gaff it" - Gaff tape fixes all things - they just applied it lol....


----------



## dudemanppl

ngl none of the cameras I've opened up recently have had much tape.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lifeskills*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> How do you like them? I was seriously considering the AT313, but ended up deciding against it because I'd still need a backup tripod for hiking. The 214 is still a possibility though, if I can find a good deal on one. I'm just worried about the 10kg load limit when using the speed graphic.
> 
> 
> 
> I like them a lot, they are really sturdy. I use them with my timelapse dolly and when everything is locked down you cant move the thing. I think you will have no problem with the speed graphic, as long as you have a nice head. THe BDH1 that I have is rated for 12 KG and feels really sturdy too. Also, the legs come with a nice bag.
> 
> I picked them up at B&H with the education discount. 110 for the legs and 120 for the head
Click to expand...

Hrm, guess I have to think about it some more. I was pretty set on the Sirui T2004X, but it'd be nice to have a bit more height for when I'm on uneven surfaces.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scottath*
> 
> amazing camera though - and the whole thing shudders when you hit the shutter - its just cool.....


If that gets you hard, don't ever try a Pentax 67, it will probably make your head explode.


----------



## c0ld

Just got a like new 50mm 1.8G with everything for $160 it was a steal, bokeh is superior to the 1.8D I am loving it









Now to sell the 50mm 1.8D.

Waiting on the SB-700 to arrive, this will be my first flash any tips?


----------



## foothead

so, I just got a couple filters from KEH, and they are absolutely filthy. Took me some fifteen minutes of polishing with a microfiber cloth just to get them to the point that I'd even consider using them. What gives? Last time I got filters from them, they were cleaned very well and put in individual plastic boxes. These were just in sealed bags.


----------



## sub50hz

I've always got everything bagged and/or bubble wrapped from Keh, only in a box if LN- or better.


----------



## sub50hz

MacBook Pro en route. Meh.


----------



## dudemanppl

I see you have received Obama money?


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> so, I just got a couple filters from KEH, and they are absolutely filthy. Took me some fifteen minutes of polishing with a microfiber cloth just to get them to the point that I'd even consider using them. What gives? Last time I got filters from them, they were cleaned very well and put in individual plastic boxes. These were just in sealed bags.


What condition were they rated at?


----------



## Conspiracy

so im back from short vacation and will go home later today. on the way im going to walmart to buy cheap 1 liter bottles of some chemicals to dump out and clean to use for storage. thinking about getting cheap bottles of peroxide and some distilled water to mix the powder with. and then i will be ready to start developing

hopefully i have internet at home. have not yet figured out where to setup my computer and scanner to check out my negatives


----------



## MistaBernie

UGH. Protip - when asking for recommendations for gear, don't just ask if what you're going to buy is 'good'. Of course what you're buying is 'good'. A company has likely invested hundreds of thousands of dollars in design, production, advertising, shipping etc, whatever it is that you're looking at. Ask us more useful things like 'I plan on shooting X, and I want to keep my budget around Y. I've checked out products 1, 2, and 3, and I like (1, 2 or 3) the best because (reason). What do you guys think?'.


----------



## sub50hz

50D gone.


----------



## SS_Patrick

I just pulled the trigger on a Mark II with the 24-105mm f4 lens kit and a canon speedlight









Now to decide if I want to sell the t3i or keep it for other stuffs

<3 amazon prime


----------



## mz-n10

u sure thats not a 24-105/4?


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SS_Patrick*
> 
> I just pulled the trigger on a Mark II with the 24-70mm f4 lens kit and a canon speedlight
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now to decide if I want to sell the t3i or keep it for other stuffs
> <3 amazon prime


Didn't you just get your T3i a couple months ago? Moving up quickly.


----------



## SS_Patrick

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> Didn't you just get your T3i a couple months ago? Moving up quickly.


I did just pick it up yes









I got a chunk of change back in my name and I'm getting worn out on spending it all on computers. I figured I might as well get a new camera. I was already looking to get that lens so it's a win win








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> u sure thats not a 24-105/4?


My bad. I had that lens on my mind









Yes it's the 24-105


----------



## sub50hz

Any of you fine folks in the market for an EF-mount Sigma 10-20? 50D is sold, now I have no use for this. First dibs to anybody in this thread, unless it's claimed by someone in the SUPER DOUBLE SECRET CHAT.


----------



## Conspiracy

welp got everything i need now so i am mixing my chems and going to develop some film tomorrow and hopefully ill be able to scan it too


----------



## MistaBernie

WELP, _he's back..._ And no, sadly, I'm not talking about R31..


----------



## Conspiracy

lol









---

so yea.. hooked up my computer at home now. i can surf the internet soo much faster now. my dads computer is soo slow you have to wait for it to load a webpage rather than waiting for the internet to load lol


----------



## Conspiracy

and i just finished developing my first roll of film, some kodak gold 400 shot at 200 as my test before i start developing my 50D. good news is i see pictures on the negatives























it is currently hung up and drying in my bathroom and will take it down in about 2 hours when its nice and dry and ill carefully cut it up and scan it


----------



## Ferling Design

Sign me up









I got a pen elp1. with a 4/3 micro adapter to fit m42 lens.



My new lens, sears ee auto "sleeper lens" old but sharp lens made by a reputable Japanese manufacture, sears just slapped there name on it.


----------



## dudemanppl

PEE SEAT ANYBODY?


----------



## sub50hz




----------



## Conspiracy

just developed my last roll of kodak gold and there are pictures on the negatives so im happy again although i knew it was going to come out unless i completely messed up with developing.

i am going to develop a roll of my 50D later this afternoon or tonight. i hope it comes out good cant wait to see how it goes lol


----------



## SS_Patrick

Love my new camera

Really like this 50mm 1.8

Tempted to say screw it and get the 50mm 1.2L


----------



## Rian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SS_Patrick*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Love my new camera
> Really like this 50mm 1.8
> Tempted to say screw it and get the 50mm 1.2L
> ]


Went straight to the 50mm f/1.4 and it's amazing, there was simply too much of a price difference to go for the f/1.2, I have heard excellent things about the f/1.8 however, Looks good


----------



## SS_Patrick

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rian*
> 
> Went straight to the 50mm f/1.4 and it's amazing, there was simply too much of a price difference to go for the f/1.2, I have heard excellent things about the f/1.8 however, Looks good


The only reason I got the 1.8 is because I could get it prime next day. I'm impatient


----------



## Conspiracy

just hung the test roll of 50D up to dry. the negatives look good. the remjet was very messy to remove but i got it lol.

will be scanning it and the other roll of Kodak Gold later on at normal double secret hidden chat room time


----------



## nuclearjock

GT, hit me for a MB-D12 for my D800.


----------



## dudemanppl

Can I hit you harder and get a D800?


----------



## Conspiracy

if i hit you harder than DMP can i get a D4?


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SS_Patrick*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Love my new camera
> 
> Really like this 50mm 1.8
> 
> Tempted to say screw it and get the 50mm 1.2L


Nah, you have to go all the way. 50mm f/1.0L. Do it.


----------



## c0ld

Soo tempted to get the Nikkor 17-55mm got the funds for it. Is the Nikkor 17-55mm really worth it? Get that and drop the 18-200mm and just get a long tele?

http://sandiego.craigslist.org/csd/pho/2975805213.html


----------



## mz-n10

Yes 17-55/2.8 is a great range on crop


----------



## c0ld

Thing is that If I get it I'll start neglecting my primes, I love my 50mm 1.8G. Already sent an e-mail on the ad.


----------



## sub50hz

I'm gonna be rollin into Lake of the Ozarks on Friday morning for 10 days -- anybody semi-local? Get at me, bros.


----------



## Conspiracy

Dont forget to take awesome analogue photos while your there


----------



## Conspiracy

KEH is doing a giveaway for a free Nikon D800!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

http://bit.ly/IRauI2
http://bit.ly/IRauI2
http://bit.ly/IRauI2
http://bit.ly/IRauI2


----------



## iTurn

Add me to the mix

iTurn - Nikon D5100
Nikkor 35mm f1.8G
Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 VR
Nikkor 55-200mm f/4-5.6 VR
Nikkor 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5
Nikon SB-700 / Nikon ML-L3
Canon EG10


----------



## MistaBernie

If I win that D800 I'll completely switch systems. I'll learn to love teh Nikon ergonomics.


----------



## Conspiracy

if i win the D800 im switching. i already know how to use nikons just unfamiliar with their lenses and which ones are good and not so much.

---

and.... apparently the plumbing in the new house has stopped up :/ sounds like we are getting a hotel room i guess. sooo i cant develop the last 3 rolls but i can load up some more film to shoot so its not tooo bad. still sucks though. also almost got tempted in urban outfitters at the mall today to buy one of those plastic toy cameras. they had a 35mm fisheye that looked pretty fun. i resisted thankfully. Hipster R Us is very expensive.


----------



## Marin

If you buy a Holga I'll come out of retirement just to ban you.


----------



## dudemanppl

GONNA BUY A 10 PACK FROM FREESTYLE.


----------



## Marin

10 pack of what.


----------



## dudemanppl

http://freestylephoto.biz/holga.php?pg=holgawood&cat_id=&pid=1000003172
YOLO.


----------



## laboitenoire

Dear God... So today (yesterday) was my 21st birthday. This whole concept of being able to legally buy alcohol is so strange...

On a side note, when I get home tomorrow, mayhaps my parents got me some awesome photo gear. We shall find out.

Anyway, night y'all. I'm not that drunk, but I can still taste that four horsemen...


----------



## swindle

Are the images from those any good? The Holgas?


----------



## Conspiracy

lol 10 pack of holgas.

dont fear marin im not going to buy a holga. i would rather have a fisheye for my camera over a plastic cheap POS. although if i buy a fisheye idk how much use it will get so im just going to stick with trying to get a wide and a tele for my xd11 over the summer. just waiting for KEH to get something in stock that i want once i have the money to spend.

my next actual important purchase is some photoflo which will be a lot easier than buying 1 gallon jugs of distilled water for my final rinse.

on a side note i have 3 different cameras that my mom brought home from work. a P&S canikon (cant remember which), a canon digital camcorder, and a flip HD camera all new in box. once i get back home ill check it all out and if there are any interested parties here i am willing to make them available before posting on facebook and craigslist and if those dont work ill try to sell them to KEH


----------



## foothead

I've never really understood why photographers buy fisheyes. They were designed for scientific use, and that's really how they should remain imo. I've never seen a photo from one that I liked.

Swindle: No, the images are terrible. That's the whole point of the camera really. It's built so crapilly that there are almost always light leaks, film flatness problems, etc. I saw a "review" a while back where the back kept falling off and they had to tape it on to make the thing stay together.

Conspiracy, can you log into the secret chat? I'm bored.


----------



## Conspiracy

i think fisheyes are more of a novelty lens personally. most fisheye shots i see are taken by sports photogs or the occasional city shot for the crazy perspective. they are more a once in a while creative shot and not really very useful. but they look fun lol

i saw one awesome fisheye sports shot where they guy built this rig to put his camera low on the ground with a speedlight pointed down to bounce off the floor and put the rig in the center of a basketball huddle and it looked soooo awesome. also they occasionally will put a fisheye on the back board for basketball for cool dunk shots but more often a 16-35 is used

i would not object to a cheap free fisheye but i would not pay for it. i would have much more fun with a normal wide lens as that is much more useful.


----------



## MistaBernie

Gene Ho is a somewhat well known wedding photographer whose calling card is the use of fisheyes.

www.undergroundgeneho.com/fisheye


----------



## Conspiracy

i forgot about wedding photogs some of them have some amazingly creative shots


----------



## sub50hz

Shooting bmx and skateboarding are probably the two biggest uses of fisheyes that I have seen. Some of the results are pretty good -- but it gets overused like crazy.


----------



## Conspiracy

yea i never understood why with bmx and skateboarding they only use fisheye. if it sells magazines and videos then stick with what works i guess


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> Dear God... So today (yesterday) was my 21st birthday. This whole concept of being able to legally buy alcohol is so strange...
> On a side note, when I get home tomorrow, mayhaps my parents got me some awesome photo gear. We shall find out.
> Anyway, night y'all. I'm not that drunk, but I can still taste that four horsemen...


Damn, my 21st is a distant memory now. The irony is that when I turned 21, I was in Spain on deployment, where the drinking age was 18.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> I've never really understood why photographers buy fisheyes. They were designed for scientific use, and that's really how they should remain imo. I've never seen a photo from one that I liked.
> Swindle: No, the images are terrible. That's the whole point of the camera really. It's built so crapilly that there are almost always light leaks, film flatness problems, etc. I saw a "review" a while back where the back kept falling off and they had to tape it on to make the thing stay together.
> Conspiracy, can you log into the secret chat? I'm bored.


I'm not that fond of them either, but I have seen some great landscape shots taken with fishies, where natural curves (of a bay, etc) are accentuated quite nicely.

And I need to go back and find that chat info...


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*
> 
> And I need to go back and find that chat info...


http://gserver.game-host.org/

channel is #ocn

EDIT: Woops, messed up the quote


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *swindle*
> 
> Are the images from those any good? The Holgas?


I WANNA POOP.


----------



## Conspiracy

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=what+is+a+holga+camera%3F










and if your too lazy for that. holgas are intended to not take stellar photos. they have intentional light leaks and are poorly designed are are liked by people that enjoy lomo photography that are basically really strange photos taken with altered film and cameras.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=what+is+lomo+photography%3F


----------



## sub50hz

Scanning test roll from GA645i now -- looks amazing with a loupe, GOTTA GET ME THEM NEGS TO COMPUTER.


----------



## dudemanppl

Temp trade for M6/GR1? I serious want try.


----------



## sub50hz

Meh. maybe, but I'm leaving Friday and plan to use it as my main jam during vaca.


----------



## laboitenoire

My parents got me a Lowepro Photo Sport 200 AW and an AMC Massachusetts Trail Guide. Nature photography hikes, here I come.


----------



## sub50hz

untitled by sub50hz, on Flickr

Still working on some more.


----------



## laboitenoire

Does anybody have experience with either the F-Stop ICU units or any other sort of removable camera bag/insert? I'm in love with my new bag, but seeing as the camera compartment is tiny I think it might pair well with another internal unit that I can use to transport lenses when I'm going between home and school or when I just need to carry more gear. Then when I'm out and about I would just take my telephoto and either my Tokina or Sigma.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> untitled by sub50hz, on Flickr
> Still working on some more.


Bit too much magenta.


----------



## sub50hz

Yeah, it does look that way on my Macbook now that I'm looking at it on here (edited quickly on dekstop), will have to fix color balance at another time. Just wanted to throw a quick edit up, but looks like I've got a little work to do on it. Not sure how I missed that, maybe just working too quickly. Thanks for pointing it out, though.


----------



## makecoldplayhistory

Hi all.

I've posted before in this thread but don't have much to contribute; learning a lot by lurking though.

Quick question: I'm trying to get a pic of my rig that will do justice to the glow of the blue LEDs from the keyboard, mouse and tower. I'm sure I could fake it with photoshop but I'm trying to get a good image with just the camera.

Any hints?

Thanks


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *makecoldplayhistory*
> 
> Hi all.
> I've posted before in this thread but don't have much to contribute; learning a lot by lurking though.
> Quick question: I'm trying to get a pic of my rig that will do justice to the glow of the blue LEDs from the keyboard, mouse and tower. I'm sure I could fake it with photoshop but I'm trying to get a good image with just the camera.
> Any hints?
> Thanks


Long shutter speed, tripod mounted. The longer the shutter speed, the more "twinkly" the lights will be. Experiment with different shutter speeds.

You could also try a selective desaturation, leaving just the blue lights.


----------



## MistaBernie

So... Gordon Ramsey is in my hometown right now working with a restaurant about 5 minutes from my parents' house. Do I take a half day and head down and try to snap some pics?


----------



## biatchi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> So... Gordon Ramsey is in my hometown right now working with a restaurant about 5 minutes from my parents' house. Do I take a half day and head down and try to snap some pics?


Of ballbag face?


----------



## MistaBernie

No, I figured I'd just take some snaps of his RV, maybe the owner of the crappy restaurant, you know, things I could get any other day, you know, without having to leave work, etc.









In a complete turn of events.. Canonrumors is calling for two announcements in June - the 650D/T4i, and Canon's mirrorless offering. Now that's interesting..


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> So... Gordon Ramsey is in my hometown right now working with a restaurant about 5 minutes from my parents' house. Do I take a half day and head down and try to snap some pics?


Be sure to shoot some video so we can hear the barrage of f-bombs and tirades that will inevitably be said.


----------



## MistaBernie

I dont think I'd get that close.. meh, doesn't interest me enough I dont think.


----------



## swindle

Because its not?


----------



## Conspiracy

sounds boring although i am curious to see what canon will be cranking out with the t4i. they need to step their game up before i switch to nikon for my video needs lol


----------



## swindle

Better low end sensor ISO improvements would be nice.


----------



## MistaBernie

This is over a day late, sorry about that, but if you have some clock cycles to spare (and unless you're video/photo editing 24/7+ or gaming then you likely do) then click on the monkey above and join in the for the Chimp Challenge folding competition. We're in a closely contested battle for first and anything we can do to help would be awesome!


----------



## ivr56

I should get in on this









DSLR:
Nikon D3100

SLR:
Minolta 7000


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ivr56*
> 
> I should get in on this
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DSLR:
> Nikon D3100
> SLR:
> Minolta 7000


post some of your photos. im sure someone will add you to the list. right now all the photo mods have retired so noone is really in charge i think. but when GoneTomorrow gets back on he might see your post and add you


----------



## MistaBernie

We have no editor at the moment but GT is in charge of the club list still.. I think someone's going to have to pry it out of his cold, dead hands.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> We have no editor at the moment but GT is in charge of the club list still.. I think someone's going to have to pry it out of his cold, dead hands.


Hopefully that will change in the near future. Still adding anyone to the OP who wants in.


----------



## MistaBernie

The club list or the editor thing?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> The club list or the editor thing?


I meant editor. I'll hang on to this thread for a while.


----------



## MistaBernie

:fistacuffs:


----------



## MistaBernie

Quick sidetrack: as I mentioned in another thread, got handed a free Pocketwizard TT1 yesterday. Not sure what I want to do with it -- sink $200 into a TT5 and give wireless TTL a shot or sell the TT1 as is.. OR, trade it for a 2x Tele! Hm, brb...


----------



## Conspiracy

if you dont do much work with lights i say sell it for something you would use more often

last roll is almost done drying and i can go home and scan all this and try to edit them a tiny bit


----------



## foothead

So I was trying to do some RA-4 contact prints yesterday before I had to dispose of the chems, and I noticed they were actually coming out decent. So I tried making a couple prints, and they were far better than last time. Thing is, I absolutely cannot think of what I did different. The chemicals have been sitting around for like two weeks now, but that can't have improved quality, can it?

example:










Left is new print, right is old.

Also, the paper base is now light cyan instead of the color of a manila folder. I'm so confused.


----------



## Conspiracy

im just going to leave this here


----------



## dudemanppl

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=1186976
That made me mad.


----------



## Sean Webster

Why?


----------



## ljason8eg

pkilla would not approve.


----------



## dudemanppl

Why is this guy *****ing about his gear? Please go shoot **** goddamn. That isn't even wear he should rub it with his finger and saliva. Also it smells like pkilla's favorite herb right now for some reason... Funky.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Why is this guy *****ing about his gear? Please go shoot **** goddamn. That isn't even wear he should rub it with his finger and saliva. Also it smells like pkilla's favorite herb right now for some reason... Funky.


So someone who paid for something new, but gets something seemingly used and/or returned and posts it on a forum because it is not what he purchased makes you mad?

Wow, just wow.


----------



## dudemanppl

Doesn't look used to me.


----------



## Sean Webster

Definitely not NIB from the pics posted, thus used. lol


----------



## Conspiracy

it looks like it was opened once and put back in box. that tiny scratch is nothing. i can understand the worry if you buy a new camera that has been out for a while and might have the chance of supassing its shutter life but this camera is not even 6 months old. people complain about every little thing...

adorama should just tell this person to suck it up and shoot


----------



## laboitenoire

This is intriguing.
http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/05/18/WTO-looking-at-moves-to-remove-30-minute-limit-from-digital-cameras


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> So someone who paid for something new, but gets something seemingly used and/or returned and posts it on a forum because it is not what he purchased makes you mad?
> Wow, just wow.


Yeah, I have to agree. Sadly, a phone call to Adorama would have been the most adult way to handle the situation, and instead that guy has created a senseless thread full of JUST USE IT morons that will likely be deleted in the long run anyway. If you pay for a new product you deserve a NEW PRODUCT, not a demo or refurb -- both of which would abolutely cost less.


----------



## Conspiracy

its highly unlikely but i would not rule out that its possible that was the condition the camera left canon factory as. in which case its not adorama at fault. this possibility while likely is not all that common though


----------



## MistaBernie

I was under the impression that if a company accepted a return that they weren't supposed to sell it as new... could have simply been a mistake (something was supposed to be put in demo pile and got put in new pile) but yeah.. if you pay for new, you should get brand new.

I'd be interested in what the shutter count is. If it reads zero, then it's pretty strange.. but if it's anything other than zero, it's not new and yeah, the guy should call Adorama instead of doing what everyone seems to do nowadays and immediately move to opening a thread about it on a popular photo forum like POTN. It's like giving someone negative feedback on eBay before you even contact the buyer (unless you're in a situation like I was last week when I got a counterfeit product and reported and left negative feedback immediately) - what my seller did was _intentional_, whereas what Adorama did may not have been.

People really need to learn that you get better customer service if you contact the retailer with the problem before you go telling the world that the company sucks because they made a mistake. Guess what? Everybody makes mistakes..


----------



## Marin

And that's why I don't use POTN anymore, lol. Too much caring about the wrong things.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> And that's why I don't use POTN anymore, lol. Too much caring about the wrong things.


Yes. Like that, and the box fetish some people seem to have. That one always makes me chuckle too.


----------



## dudemanppl

I have one because it raises the resale price of things at least 5%.


----------



## ljason8eg

Oh I understand that; I just think its silly that someone will pay 5% more for the original box.


----------



## Marin

I've got to agree. It makes complete sense to want the box if you're a collector but for an actual photographer there's really no reason for it.


----------



## sub50hz

Do people collect DSLRs? Seems that by their very nature of rapid obsolescence, they'll likely be even more worthless in 10 years than most film SLRs.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Do people collect DSLRs? Seems that by their very nature of rapid obsolescence, they'll likely be even more worthless in 10 years than most film SLRs.


It's probably limited to the special edition versions of the camera's.


----------



## foothead

I've seen a few people who collect DSLRs, but it's usually the very old/rare ones like Kodak DCS systems. More recent mass-production bodies will almost definitely be become worthless very quickly unless they have some very unique feature that hasn't been implemented in anything newer. It also kinda depends on the manufacturer's release cycle. If they rarely release anything, their older cameras will retain more value, even if you can get a better camera on a different system for less. Think Olympus.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> Yes. Like that, and the box fetish some people seem to have. That one always makes me chuckle too.


what about their battery and ruler fetish for checking to make sure every single lens is perfectly calibrated or else they return it lol


----------



## sub50hz

I'm beginning to think bringing the RB on this trip was a mistake, as it is a total pain in the ass to carry around. Maybe once I can get out exploring a little I'll feel better about it, but the Fuji pair is pretty perfect.


----------



## Conspiracy

well the RB isnt much of a walk around camera like the GA645i lol


----------



## sub50hz

I shot the RB some today. I don't regret bringing it now.

-Thank you.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> I shot the RB some today. I don't regret bringing it now.
> -Thank you.


I doubt you will ever fully regret bringing it anywhere. You just thought you did lol


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> I shot the RB some today. I don't regret bringing it now.
> -Thank you.
> 
> 
> 
> I doubt you will ever fully regret bringing it anywhere. You just thought you did lol
Click to expand...

Unless he brings it on a hike. I know I'd start regretting it after mile five or so.


----------



## lordj

A Canon EOS 350D with a 24-70mm lens (w/ IS), and a Canon PowerShot SX20 IS.


----------



## MistaBernie

For the box thing, I like having the box too - not because I collect DSLRs or gear (ignore my gear list!), but because if I decide that something isn't working for me, it's easier to sell and ship if I have an original box.


----------



## Gled

Hi, I recently bought my first DSLR Sony SLT-A65 and I want buy 18-250 lense for everyday use. So, simple question - which one to get? I found some on this site - http://lenshero.com/lenses/sony-slt-a65-wide-18mm-telephoto-200mm-lens

Budget £400.


----------



## laboitenoire

Superzooms are full of compromise... Really the only ones that are even remotely good are the Nikon 18-200 VR and 28-300 VR. All of the options for Sony are frankly terrible. If you insist on getting one, the Tamron 18-270 is probably the only one even worth considering because at least it's pretty cheap. Resolution and distortion are terrible, it's very slow at the long end, and manual focus is a pain in the ass because the focus path is so short.

Honestly, I wouldn't get it.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> Superzooms are full of compromise... Really the only ones that are even remotely good are the Nikon 18-200 VR and 28-300 VR. All of the options for Sony are frankly terrible. If you insist on getting one, the Tamron 18-270 is probably the only one even worth considering because at least it's pretty cheap. Resolution and distortion are terrible, it's very slow at the long end, and manual focus is a pain in the ass because the focus path is so short.
> Honestly, I wouldn't get it.


this.

and the lens is the same as the tamron 18-250mm.


----------



## Conspiracy

series finale for House just started on Fox. in case anyone cares or watches it


----------



## mz-n10

in more camera related news panasonic just "released" the 12-35/2.8. so you m43 users can rejoice at finally a decent constant aperture normal zoom.


----------



## scottath

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> series finale for House just started on Fox. in case anyone cares or watches it


Wooo - means i can download it in an hour or so.....


----------



## laboitenoire

I must say, DP Review's preview of the Panasonic 12-35 on the OM-D seems like a niiice combo.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> I must say, DP Review's preview of the Panasonic 12-35 on the OM-D seems like a niiice combo.


Except it's 4/3rd's so it's lame.


----------



## laboitenoire

Eh, small size is tempting. Sensors have finally gotten to the point where I don't think APS-C has a huge advantage anymore over 4/3 in the noise and DR department.


----------



## sub50hz

I would like an OM-D, but i would LOVE an OM-3. I am very drunk. Thank you.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> Eh, small size is tempting. Sensors have finally gotten to the point where I don't think APS-C has a huge advantage anymore over 4/3 in the noise and DR department.


There are many benefits from increasing sensor sizes that can't be achieved through the progression of technology.


----------



## dudemanppl

135 + 35mm f/1.2/1.4. Magic.
6x7 + 105mm f/2.4. Magicer.

Also, Sean get on chat. I am le bored and want to talk about firearms. Marin, you're invited too but you are probably too cool hipster to talk to me.


----------



## Marin

The only chat I use is OCN chat.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> The only chat I use is OCN chat.


For shame.


----------



## boogschd

i wonder what you guys think of this


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boogschd*
> 
> i wonder what you guys think of this


Everybody loves to hate him. Admittedly, he does have some good info on his site, but I can never get over some of the incredibly dumb things he says. And his shots are usually awful.


----------



## laboitenoire

Agreed. For purely objective info, he's not bad, and his reviews on older film gear are also pretty helpful. It's just his opinions that bother me hahaha.


----------



## aksthem1

So I walked into Target yesterday and I saw the T2i kit selling for $500. Pretty good price considering you can buy a used one for around that price.


----------



## Conspiracy

just ordered my first lens wider than a 50mm technically, siggy 30 doesnt count, but just ordered a minolta 28mm f2.8 MD Rokkor-X. almost went for a 35mm f2.8 MC but after asking on flickr and researching it was a pretty clear consensus that while the 35mm focal length is great at 28mm you start to noticeably see that the lens is actually a wide angle and get that kinda distorted perspective that i think is really cool when taking pictures of some stuff kinda up close. and other than that obviously the MD rokkor-x will be slightly sharper and better image quality which isnt super important being that both are not super amazing lenses anyway but i just wanted to have a wide angle so i bought one







i still plan to try a 35mm lens as i have a pretty good feeling i would also like that as well as sometimes a 50 just is a tiny bit too long but majority of the time it is a great focal length for everything except most sports and maybe headshots/portraits which i dont do anyway.

http://www.keh.com/camera/Minolta-Manual-Focus-Fixed-Focal-Length-Lenses/1/sku-MI060090134600?r=FE

and i got my like $1 discount for ordering by phone and being local and should get it by next week i think but i live within 20mins of KEH so i might even see it by Friday. also my photoflo will be at the house soon too! YAY!


----------



## MistaBernie

Canon EF 40 f/2.8 pancake to be announced in June. Sub-$300 price point according to Canon Rumors. Makes a great stocking stuffer.


----------



## sub50hz

Now where's the EF-mount mirrorless body to follow? Pancake lenses are useless if the only bodies that can accept them are far from compact.


----------



## MistaBernie

I dont know that a mirrorless would be EF... though I guess it would be sweet to toss a Pancake on a mirrorless canon, and then if I really wanted to, swap it out for a 70-200. I think that would mess with people (especially if it has some of the capabilities of the Nikon J1 or whatever crazy contraption it is that shoots something like 600 frames per second 600x400 slow-motion video).

But yeah, a relatively new source of mine is starting to throw the word Mirrorless around alot, and it appears to be coinciding with some of the information that CR reported -- except that I heard it from him about two weeks before Craig mentioned it.


----------



## sub50hz

I don't think a Canon mirrorless would be EF unless it was very deep, keeping the flange distance the same as on the SLR bodies. Regardless, even if they come out with something it'll likely be too little and too late unless they blow every other MILC out of the water with a great sensor/lens lineup -- and based on the 5DIII and still non-existant 1DX, things don't look great.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Thinking about selling the 135L to fund some computer upgrades, but I'm having a tough time letting it go. I don't use it very much, but when I do use it, I'm so glad to have it. Argh.


----------



## sub50hz

I got rid of mine and I don't regret it. Great lens, especially on film, but I didn't use it enough to justify keeping it.


----------



## laboitenoire

Don't do it!


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> I got rid of mine and I don't regret it. Great lens, especially on film, but I didn't use it enough to justify keeping it.


Yeah, similar thought process for me, but I'm always comforted in knowing that the lens will maintain or increase in value. PC parts not so much. But with a baby on the way, this may be my last chance to upgrade for a while.

SO, someone PM me quick with an offer before I change my mind.


----------



## MistaBernie

why does everyone look at me when 135Ls come up for sale???

UGH, _fine.._


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> why does everyone look at me when 135Ls come up for sale???
> UGH, _fine.._


Well I don't know about everyone, but I have my eye on you.


----------



## MistaBernie

Forgot my checkbook, I'm gonna have to pay you in change.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> why does everyone look at me when 135Ls come up for sale???
> UGH, _fine.._


its cause you have a 5D2, 7D, 5D, 35L, 17-40 f/4L, 24-70 f/2.8L, 70-200 f/2.8L, 85mm f/1.8, Sigma 15 f/2.8.

its rather obvious you have G.A.S.


----------



## MistaBernie

It's called I have gear for my second shooter when I'm out shooting jobs (if necessary) or I have a full frame backup. Also, I've been considering picking up a 135L for a while now, it really excels in low light and is a heck of a lens from what I've seen with it (and both Sub and Gone have known this).


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> its cause you have a 5D2, 7D, 5D, 35L, 17-40 f/4L, 24-70 f/2.8L, 70-200 f/2.8L, 85mm f/1.8, Sigma 15 f/2.8.
> its rather obvious you have G.A.S.


Shutup mz!


----------



## laboitenoire

Beano should make a product that goes beyond treating just gas and treats G.A.S. as well.


----------



## Conspiracy

lol


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Also, I've been considering picking up a 135L for a while now, it really excels in low light and is a heck of a lens from what I've seen with it (and both Sub and Gone have known this).


And since Sub HAD my copy, he knows how sexybeautiful it is. I had a 135L with my first 5DII, sold it to get Nikon back when I had gear ADD, had to get it again. Fricken wonderful thing. So light too.


----------



## sub50hz

Yeah, great lens. Would re-buy if I was staying with Canon in the future most likely, but I'm quite happy wielding the Fuji/RB tandem these days.


----------



## r34p3rex

Got a spanking new 17-40 this weekend


----------



## dudemanppl

17-200 covered, notbad.jpg.


----------



## laboitenoire

Got a water bladder for my new bag. All set for some serious day hikes now.


----------



## Deano12345

Just looking back on my posts and its been a looooooonnnnngggg time since I posted on OCN. Hows everyone doing ?

Completely different set-up for me now, D7K, 24-75 Tamron and Nikon 70-200 (only the VR 1 model, nothing too fancy







) . Ergonomically, the D7000 is leaps and bounds better than the A55 I had, and the selection of glass is nice too !


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*
> 
> Shutup mz!











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r34p3rex*
> 
> Got a spanking new 17-40 this weekend


return it and buy a 135L best focal length ive ever used.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> Got a water bladder for my new bag. All set for some serious day hikes now.


Awesome! I seriously hate those things though. I've had a couple of them puncture and leak all over my gear before, and it takes quite a while before you can drink anything out of them without it tasting of plastic.


----------



## Conspiracy

do not feel like going to class today and its only the 2nd one of the summer semester. physics is sooo boring. but my photoflo will be delivered this afternoon even though i dont have anything to develop and hopefully my 28mm will be here by the end of the week so i can go out and shoot it this weekend.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Deano12345*
> 
> Just looking back on my posts and its been a looooooonnnnngggg time since I posted on OCN. Hows everyone doing ?
> Completely different set-up for me now, D7K, 24-75 Tamron and Nikon 70-200 (only the VR 1 model, nothing too fancy
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ) . Ergonomically, the D7000 is leaps and bounds better than the A55 I had, and the selection of glass is nice too !


How do you like the 70-200 VR on the D7000? I've been contemplating selling my 70-300 VR and picking up either a 70-200 VR or 80-200.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> Awesome! I seriously hate those things though. I've had a couple of them puncture and leak all over my gear before, and it takes quite a while before you can drink anything out of them without it tasting of plastic.


Yeah, I'm sure it'll take a while, but at least the stuff that makes it taste like plastic won't kill you anymore... Trust me, I worked with the engineers who make Camelbak's tubing. Plus, I figured it's way more convenient and less likely to leak than stuffing a couple water bottles into my bag. The bladder compartment in my bag is completely separate from the rest, so I don't think it'll be an issue.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> do not feel like going to class today and its only the 2nd one of the summer semester. physics is sooo boring. but my photoflo will be delivered this afternoon even though i dont have anything to develop and hopefully my 28mm will be here by the end of the week so i can go out and shoot it this weekend.


Don't be hatin' on physics now! Without physics you don't have chemistry, and without physics and chemistry you have no photography!


----------



## Conspiracy

Without smart people we dont have photography lol


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> Got a water bladder for my new bag. All set for some serious day hikes now.


Nalgene bottles plus MSR water filter are all I ever use. One Nalgene bottle plus the filter will last indefinitely without the need to haul a lot of water around.


----------



## Deano12345

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> How do you like the 70-200 VR on the D7000? I've been contemplating selling my 70-300 VR and picking up either a 70-200 VR or 80-200.


I've only had it a week or so now , and with exams (done now !







) I haven't shot with it out and about. Its nice though, very nice. Sharp (well, for me) at any aperture, focus is dead on, VR does what its supposed to once you give it half a second to engage. I've only used the 70-300 VR a little myself, depends on how much you can pick up the 70-200 for. Its a better piece of glass IMO than the 70-300 but its a big, heavy lens, that being said, it balances okay on a D7000 ( would be 10x better with a grip though). I'm shooting some drifting at the weekend though, I'll post some shots up here if you'd like.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*
> 
> Nalgene bottles plus MSR water filter are all I ever use. One Nalgene bottle plus the filter will last indefinitely without the need to haul a lot of water around.


I usually don't go on hikes where I need to refill my water bottles before the end of the trip, so I've never been able to justify buying a filtration kit for use in the field. I do sweat profusely, so I typically drink close to two liters on a typical hike, so the Camelbak should be perfect for me. And with the bag, 2L of water is only about 4.5 pounds, which isn't so bad to carry. Plus it gets magically lighter as the day goes on!


----------



## Conspiracy

my 28 f2.8 has shipped. KEH is super fast


----------



## MistaBernie

sell it, buy a 135. Just not GTs, that one will be mine..


----------



## Conspiracy

lol ill sell it if you find a 135L that is in any condition better than being used for parts that is $40


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> Got a water bladder for my new bag. All set for some serious day hikes now.
> 
> 
> 
> Nalgene bottles plus MSR water filter are all I ever use. One Nalgene bottle plus the filter will last indefinitely without the need to haul a lot of water around.
Click to expand...

Just one bottle? I usually fill two to four liters at a time, depending on how long it'll be until I can refill. But then again, my medication makes me drink a ton of water. Sucks for hiking.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> Just one bottle? I usually fill two to four liters at a time, depending on how long it'll be until I can refill. But then again, my medication makes me drink a ton of water. Sucks for hiking.


For a short day hike, yeah. If it's really hot out, I'll take one of big silo bottles out. For backpacking, I take 4 bottles at least.


----------



## Conspiracy

its here







checked it all out and i needed to clean the glass but other than that the focus and aperture rings turn smooth and there is hardly any damage to the filter thread although KEH knocked the price down because of it. it has a small metallic rattle in it when you shake it the right way but everything looks good and its definitely wider than my 50 lol


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> sell it, buy a 135. Just not GTs, that one will be mine..


I hope so. My Newegg cart is full...


----------



## mz-n10

should have gotten the 24/2.8 VFC


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> should have gotten the 24/2.8 VFC


lol i wish. totally over the $40 budget i spent on a wide


----------



## Conspiracy

this forum has been quiet today


----------



## dudemanppl

Stop leaving chat without saying anything dammit. I will respond. Eventually.


----------



## sub50hz

Nobody wants to hear about your lens "fixing" methods.

P.S. I will be to chatters soonish, out to eat.


----------



## Zantrill

Hey. Anyone here no a good cheap camera that will take good pics for my computer log? A lot of you have great photos in your build logs, mine look like crap. Please help. Thanks!


----------



## aksthem1

How cheap? Equipment only matters so much. It still depends on the skill of the photographer.


----------



## sub50hz

100 dollars worth of Canon P+S and CHDK would probably do it.


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> 100 dollars worth of Canon P+S and CHDK would probably do it.


never new hacks existed for canon powershots








trying this on my brothers g11 now ..

...

oh man... i dont have a card reader :|


----------



## MistaBernie

The 'double the focal length' argument usually goes for DSLRs where hand-holding the camera and trying to keep it still to avoid motion blur becomes an issue due to size and weight. It's a guide line, not a rule (I've gotten shots down to 1/10 of a second on a full sized DSLR with 70-200 hand held to come out sharp, but it's not normal and isn't to be expected). Usually it doesn't quite apply to smaller cameras, but I know people that still like to use it just to be safe, and again, it only should be referred to when hand holding (if you set the camera down on a tripod or on a level surface, for example, don't worry about it).

As far as your question about f/2.8 vs f/8... you need to read up about aperture and depth of field. The FAQs we have here will get you started very well on it, but in short, re-check your f/2.8 photo for what you actually focused on (looks like this might have been the power button) - that appears sharper than the corner that you chose to highlight in the photo. That's because you're using a very large aperture, which creates a small depth of field (area of the image which is in focus, most easily put). The F/8 image is a smaller aperture, and much more of the image is going to be sharp, at the sacrifice of amount of light that got let in. At larger (smaller numbers, like f/2.8) apertures, you can run into different optical issues too like chromatic aberration (most evident along the far edge of the top screen of the DS - looks blueish in the above shot). This too gets corrected as you close down your aperture and is most common when you reach the largest apertures of the lens you're shooting with.

Your last couple of statements (specifically, the one about what happen when you're not in optimal lighting and have to leave ISO 100-400 and f/8) really indicates that you need to actually learn the basics of shutter speed, aperture and ISO, and how they all pertain to exposure and image quality. Again, the faqs here will get you started, and we can answer any more specific questions once you have a better understanding.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Stop leaving chat without saying anything dammit. I will respond. Eventually.


my dad kept turning the computer off every time i walked away for a few minutes...


----------



## Conspiracy

i see no major chromatic aberrations. only think i see is blown out highlights in the white parts of each picture.

i see slight purple fringing on the top photo after staring at it for a while and looking for it. nothing that seriously ruins these images that seem not quite properly exposed on my screen.

what m42 lenses are you shooting with that are producing results that you are not happy with. i think that your disappointment is more from user error than equipment error


----------



## laboitenoire

D7000 automatically corrects CA, which is probably why you never noticed it before.


----------



## Conspiracy

well the city of atlanta is currently working on a fixing the sewer line at my house which means we can move back home soon


----------



## aksthem1

It looks more like spherical aberration than CA.


----------



## Conspiracy

pretty sure both of those lenses are lower quality than the minolta brand newer equivalent. such as the minolta MD 28mm f2.8 and the minolta MD 200mm f2.8 versus the f3.5. so some flaws are to be expected as they are not nearly as nice as newer high quality lenses you see today with different lens construction and coating.

not 100% sure but that is my theory as to why your expectations for those 2 lenses might be too high


----------



## Unknownm

Can you guys recommend a good lens for this camera. Maybe canon or Nikon with adapters?
Something that doesn't break the bank!!!!

I'll stick these lens back on my 35mm, because they only seem to work best with it.


----------



## Conspiracy

what is your main subject that you are shooting? Its tough to suggest lenses with no knowledge of what you need. Do you want older manual focus lenses or would do you want newer autofocus lenses? What focal lengths do you need? Prime or zoom? Do they need to be faster lenses with wide apertures? Whats your budget?

and on that note we should make a sticky about how to request camera advice.


----------



## Unknownm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> what is your main subject that you are shooting? Its tough to suggest lenses with no knowledge of what you need. Do you want older manual focus lenses or would do you want newer autofocus lenses? What focal lengths do you need? Prime or zoom? Do they need to be faster lenses with wide apertures? Whats your budget?
> and on that note we should make a sticky about how to request camera advice.


Cheap to expensive, AF to MF, Zoom - Non Zoom, 8mm - 400mm, f1.8-5.6.

I just want to see what's my options.

edit: Am I asking the wrong way about camera advice, I thought you just post and wait for a reply?


----------



## Conspiracy

well first of all you need to be a lot more specific than that lol

and normally most people start a thread asking for advice.

dont say cheap to expensive or 8mm-400mm because noone will want to help you because that describes everything. and you need to chose between manual focus and auto focus otherwise again its not specific enough.

but in response to that in the cheap category anything made by tamron or vivitar. and for expensive you can look at lenses offered by the companies that make your cameras olympus and nikon. if you want super expensive look at zeiss to keep it simple. and thats the type of vague answer you will most likely get from others when you arent specific lol

i can tell you this anything wider than 28 starts getting expensive and anything longer than 200 is also expensive depending on the quality of the lens but generally no matter what ultra wide angle lenses wider than 24mm are going to be expensive.

btw your definition and my definition of cheap-expensive are probably different as well


----------



## Unknownm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> well first of all you need to be a lot more specific than that lol
> and normally most people start a thread asking for advice.
> dont say cheap to expensive or 8mm-400mm because noone will want to help you because that describes everything. and you need to chose between manual focus and auto focus otherwise again its not specific enough.
> but in response to that in the cheap category anything made by tamron or vivitar. and for expensive you can look at lenses offered by the companies that make your cameras olympus and nikon. if you want super expensive look at zeiss to keep it simple. and thats the type of vague answer you will most likely get from others when you arent specific lol
> i can tell you this anything wider than 28 starts getting expensive and anything longer than 200 is also expensive depending on the quality of the lens but generally no matter what ultra wide angle lenses wider than 24mm are going to be expensive. and a lot of the nicer quality micro4/3 lenses for your olympus will also be expensive


fair enough, it's been awhile since I've posted on this forum. Next questions I have will be in a thread & not posted here









You answered my question though. I'll look around, thanks


----------



## Conspiracy

we are here to help answer questions







just helps when you have a better idea of what you want or what you are looking for


----------



## Conspiracy

soooo... its friday night and im stuck waiting to be able to move back home :/ and the forum is super quiet lol

---

what a crazy past week and a half going from place to place waiting for the sewer line to be fixed at the new house. its finally fixed and we get to move back tomorrow and if weather and everything permits ill finally be able to go out and shoot with my 28 without being bothered by my parents and all the craziness that has occurred from not being at our new house for so long.


----------



## Conspiracy

ok officially moving out of this hotel and going back home this morning


----------



## foothead

Just realized that some of my trays that I thought were 11x14 are actually 11x13, and they won't fit an 11x14 print without folding the corners in. Guess I'm gonna be stuck with 8x10 for the next few days...


----------



## Marin

My friends selling off some nice camera gear. Just thought I'd throw that out there.


----------



## dudemanppl

Le list?


----------



## sub50hz

I got reqal drunk, swam with a couple girlss in a random pool and then rode 20 miles. Happy memorial day.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> My friends selling off some nice camera gear. Just thought I'd throw that out there.


list us








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I got reqal drunk, swam with a couple girlss in a random pool and then rode 20 miles. Happy memorial day.


niiiiice


----------



## r34p3rex

35L or 135L next?









I know dudemanppl will be here in about 5 min to convince me how awesome the 35L is


----------



## Conspiracy

Sell 24-105 and get both


----------



## foothead

Eh, that'd leave quite a large gap. He'd need to get something inbetween too. I'd get the 35L, but chances are you're shooting very different things than I am.

What is the best way to flatten fiber paper if I don't have a press? I left one under the enlarger baseboard the other day and it's still pretty curly. Nowhere near how it was before, but it definitely isn't flat.


----------



## Marin

- Zeiss 85/1.4 (ZE)
- Hasselblad H1 w/ 80mm & 16-32 back
- RZ67 150mm f/3.5
- RZ67 Polaroid Back


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> What is the best way to flatten fiber paper if I don't have a press? I left one under the enlarger baseboard the other day and it's still pretty curly. Nowhere near how it was before, but it definitely isn't flat.


How big of a piece of paper? You could easily get two panes of glass from Home Despot and then weigh it down with a bag of rice or something.


----------



## Jon A. Silvers

I have Nikon D5100 with 18-105 lens.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> - Zeiss 85/1.4 (ZE)
> - Hasselblad H1 w/ 80mm & 16-32 back
> - RZ67 150mm f/3.5
> - RZ67 Polaroid Back


H1 is probably gonna cost money. How much for that?


----------



## Marin

2700. Under 4k actuations.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> What is the best way to flatten fiber paper if I don't have a press? I left one under the enlarger baseboard the other day and it's still pretty curly. Nowhere near how it was before, but it definitely isn't flat.
> 
> 
> 
> How big of a piece of paper? You could easily get two panes of glass from Home Despot and then weigh it down with a bag of rice or something.
Click to expand...

biggest I've been doing is 11x14. just pressing it flat isn't working though. The presses normally used for this heat up, so I was thinking of maybe heating something up in the oven, then pressing it to it.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> What is the best way to flatten fiber paper if I don't have a press? I left one under the enlarger baseboard the other day and it's still pretty curly. Nowhere near how it was before, but it definitely isn't flat.
> 
> 
> 
> How big of a piece of paper? You could easily get two panes of glass from Home Despot and then weigh it down with a bag of rice or something.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> biggest I've been doing is 11x14. just pressing it flat isn't working though. The presses normally used for this heat up, so I was thinking of maybe heating something up in the oven, then pressing it to it.
Click to expand...

Get a small propane torch and torch the glass with the paper in between.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> 2700. Under 4k actuations.


Woah that sounds really high and drugs are bad.

Wow for some reason, I thought Mamiya and Hasselblad was the same thing for a minute. 645AFDs are so much cheaper wow.


----------



## Sporadic E

See below for my quiver of photog/vid gear for entrance to the group.

DSLR:
Canon T2i Body
Glass:
Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II
Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM
Canon EF-S 18-55 f/3.5-5.6
Canon EF-S 55-250 f/4.0-5.6 IS
Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L USM

P&S:
Canon PowerShot SD790 IS

Video:
Canon VIXIA HF M500


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Get a small propane torch and torch the glass with the paper in between.


Or place them in the oven on its lowest setting with some bricks on top of it.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> Or place them in the oven on its lowest setting with some bricks on top of it.


But that is not fun!


----------



## laboitenoire

It will be when you don't introduce critical thermal gradients in the glass causing it to shatter.


----------



## makecoldplayhistory

Hi all.

Thoughts / opinions on these kind of things... I know that they're cheap so won't be AMAZING but, will they be work $15 and a little bit of fun?

Will they work on a 500D and 18-55mm Canon lens? From what I understand, they simply screw on like a filter and give macro(-ish) shots. Correct?

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Neewer-Macro-Close-Up-Canon-1000D/dp/B0040IU1SO/ref=sr_1_35?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1338255113&sr=1-35










Alternatively, what about one of these?

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Angle-0-45X-Canon-Rebel-18-55mm/dp/B003M55YLU/ref=sr_1_38?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1338255113&sr=1-38










Thanks


----------



## foothead

Terrible. Get a manual focus 50mm and macro extension tubes/bellows or an enlarging lens and a set of bellows (or make bellows if you're the diy type)


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> What is the best way to flatten fiber paper if I don't have a press? I left one under the enlarger baseboard the other day and it's still pretty curly. Nowhere near how it was before, but it definitely isn't flat.


Getting a press, lol.

What I currently do, to get them flatter before pressing them, is leaving them in box emulsion to emulsion so they flattened over time from weight. But you'll never get it completely flat unless you use a press.


----------



## makecoldplayhistory

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> Terrible. Get a manual focus 50mm and macro extension tubes/bellows or an enlarging lens and a set of bellows (or make bellows if you're the diy type)


Thanks, but isn't a new lens going to be MUCH more than £10?


----------



## biatchi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> Terrible. Get a manual focus 50mm and macro extension tubes/bellows or an enlarging lens and a set of bellows (or make bellows if you're the diy type)


+1 for using enlarging lenses.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *makecoldplayhistory*
> 
> Thanks, but isn't a new lens going to be MUCH more than £10?


i dont do macro work but pretty much every good macro lens i know of is prime which means that more than likely if you are doing macro work you probably are wanting a prime. therefore it has been suggested to you to look into a 50 1.8 which is canons cheapest and very quality for its price prime lens. i also suggest looking for a used one to save money. noone is going to tell you that the 50 1.8 is better quality than the 18-55 but i will tell you that you will be very amazed by the quality it has to offer.

what foothead has suggested is a very good idea if you want to get into and try out macro photography and if you find that you really like it then invest in a macro lens


----------



## biatchi

I use some M42 bellows with a M39 to M42 adapter inside of a M42 to PK adapter with a Rodagon 50mm enlarging lens which gives pleasing results and didn't cost much.


Stink bug by Flickr BOCer Glory, on Flickr


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> biggest I've been doing is 11x14. just pressing it flat isn't working though. The presses normally used for this heat up, so I was thinking of maybe heating something up in the oven, then pressing it to it.


place the paper between something flat and a aluminium baking sheet (thick ones). then heat up some dry beans or rice and just pour it on the baking sheet.

i remember doing this to straighten something but dont remember what.....


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> biggest I've been doing is 11x14. just pressing it flat isn't working though. The presses normally used for this heat up, so I was thinking of maybe heating something up in the oven, then pressing it to it.
> 
> 
> 
> place the paper between something flat and a aluminium baking sheet (thick ones). then heat up some dry beans or rice and just pour it on the baking sheet.
> 
> i remember doing this to straighten something but dont remember what.....
Click to expand...

I like this idea. I was thinking about maybe trying to put the paper in the oven also, but our oven is filthy and I don't want to get food residue on the prints.

I'm looking into getting a press, they're just kinda hard to find. There's a couple on ebay, but both are like 14x17 max, and I'd rather have the possibility of doing 16x20 in the future.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *makecoldplayhistory*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> Terrible. Get a manual focus 50mm and macro extension tubes/bellows or an enlarging lens and a set of bellows (or make bellows if you're the diy type)
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks, but isn't a new lens going to be MUCH more than £10?
Click to expand...

Doesn't have to be new. Actually an old lens would be better for this. Go on ebay and start looking for an old enlarging lens somewhere around 50mm. The best ones are going to be the componons, rodagons, and el-nikkors, though I've seen some from other brands that were still pretty decent. The other option that I mentioned was an old ~50mm prime lens. I've gotten these for $1 at garage sales before, and they're almost always good quality. Look for something on M42 (pentax screwmount) since it can be adapted to pretty much anything for just a couple dollars. Yes, it's going to be more than £10, but it's very doable for well under 50, and you will get far better results than with those close-up filter things.


----------



## Conspiracy

for anyone that used to play it back in the day sorta. You Don't Know Jack now has a free game you can play on facebook as well as the recent release for all consoles and an iphone version of the game as well that recently came out


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> I like this idea. I was thinking about maybe trying to put the paper in the oven also, but our oven is filthy and I don't want to get food residue on the prints.
> I'm looking into getting a press, they're just kinda hard to find. There's a couple on ebay, but both are like 14x17 max, and I'd rather have the possibility of doing 16x20 in the future.


the problem i see with sticking the paper directly in the oven is that you might burn the paper cause kitchen ovens are not all that accurate and without weights to hold it flat the paper might curl in the oven.

more importantly.....

call me old fashion, but i dont like putting paper which have been soaked in chemicals in the same over i cook in....


----------



## biatchi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> I like this idea. I was thinking about maybe trying to put the paper in the oven also, but our oven is filthy and I don't want to get food residue on the prints.
> I'm looking into getting a press, they're just kinda hard to find. There's a couple on ebay, but both are like 14x17 max, and I'd rather have the possibility of doing 16x20 in the future.
> Doesn't have to be new. Actually an old lens would be better for this. Go on ebay and start looking for an old enlarging lens somewhere around 50mm. The best ones are going to be the componons, rodagons, and el-nikkors, though I've seen some from other brands that were still pretty decent. The other option that I mentioned was an old ~50mm prime lens. I've gotten these for $1 at garage sales before, and they're almost always good quality. Look for something on M42 (pentax screwmount) since it can be adapted to pretty much anything for just a couple dollars. Yes, it's going to be more than £10, but it's very doable for well under 50, and you will get far better results than with those close-up filter things.


I've got an E Rokkor 75 that is pretty good.

This
This

A Rodagon/Componon/El Nikkor and a M42 to you lens mount adapter will do the trick.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> I like this idea. I was thinking about maybe trying to put the paper in the oven also, but our oven is filthy and I don't want to get food residue on the prints.
> I'm looking into getting a press, they're just kinda hard to find. There's a couple on ebay, but both are like 14x17 max, and I'd rather have the possibility of doing 16x20 in the future.
> 
> 
> 
> the problem i see with sticking the paper directly in the oven is that you might burn the paper cause kitchen ovens are not all that accurate and without weights to hold it flat the paper might curl in the oven.
> 
> more importantly.....
> 
> call me old fashion, but i dont like putting paper which have been soaked in chemicals in the same over i cook in....
Click to expand...

The paper definitely won't burn. I put paper towels in the oven all the time, often at much higher temperatures than I'd be using. That's a good point about the chemicals though. I highly doubt it'd give off anything toxic, but better safe than sorry on this. I'll bring some throwaway prints home tomorrow and see what I can do.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *biatchi*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> I like this idea. I was thinking about maybe trying to put the paper in the oven also, but our oven is filthy and I don't want to get food residue on the prints.
> I'm looking into getting a press, they're just kinda hard to find. There's a couple on ebay, but both are like 14x17 max, and I'd rather have the possibility of doing 16x20 in the future.
> Doesn't have to be new. Actually an old lens would be better for this. Go on ebay and start looking for an old enlarging lens somewhere around 50mm. The best ones are going to be the componons, rodagons, and el-nikkors, though I've seen some from other brands that were still pretty decent. The other option that I mentioned was an old ~50mm prime lens. I've gotten these for $1 at garage sales before, and they're almost always good quality. Look for something on M42 (pentax screwmount) since it can be adapted to pretty much anything for just a couple dollars. Yes, it's going to be more than £10, but it's very doable for well under 50, and you will get far better results than with those close-up filter things.
> 
> 
> 
> I've got an E Rokkor 75 that is pretty good.
> 
> This
> This
> 
> A Rodagon/Componon/El Nikkor and a M42 to you lens mount adapter will do the trick.
Click to expand...

The E-Rokkors were okay, but not the greatest lenses. The E Rokkor-Xs were quite good, but they're fairly uncommon and only available in some weird focal lengths iirc.

The lenses I've tried in that general range are a 50mm componon ( great), an 80mm componon (also great) and a 90mm wollensak (terrible.) I've also used an enlarging ektanon 8 1/2" (good) and a componon-s 135mm (very good, but slightly soft in the extreme corners.)


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boogschd*


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> The sensor, it's so tiny.


src









...


----------



## sub50hz

Well, looks like I'm gonna be here in the hospital for a bit. Took your advice, foot.


----------



## makecoldplayhistory

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> I like this idea. I was thinking about maybe trying to put the paper in the oven also, but our oven is filthy and I don't want to get food residue on the prints.
> I'm looking into getting a press, they're just kinda hard to find. There's a couple on ebay, but both are like 14x17 max, and I'd rather have the possibility of doing 16x20 in the future.
> Doesn't have to be new. Actually an old lens would be better for this. Go on ebay and start looking for an old enlarging lens somewhere around 50mm. The best ones are going to be the componons, rodagons, and el-nikkors, though I've seen some from other brands that were still pretty decent. The other option that I mentioned was an old ~50mm prime lens. I've gotten these for $1 at garage sales before, and they're almost always good quality. Look for something on M42 (pentax screwmount) since it can be adapted to pretty much anything for just a couple dollars. Yes, it's going to be more than £10, but it's very doable for well under 50, and you will get far better results than with those close-up filter things.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *biatchi*
> 
> I've got an E Rokkor 75 that is pretty good.
> This
> This
> A Rodagon/Componon/El Nikkor and a M42 to you lens mount adapter will do the trick.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> I like this idea. I was thinking about maybe trying to put the paper in the oven also, but our oven is filthy and I don't want to get food residue on the prints.
> I'm looking into getting a press, they're just kinda hard to find. There's a couple on ebay, but both are like 14x17 max, and I'd rather have the possibility of doing 16x20 in the future.
> Doesn't have to be new. Actually an old lens would be better for this. Go on ebay and start looking for an old enlarging lens somewhere around 50mm. The best ones are going to be the componons, rodagons, and el-nikkors, though I've seen some from other brands that were still pretty decent. The other option that I mentioned was an old ~50mm prime lens. I've gotten these for $1 at garage sales before, and they're almost always good quality. Look for something on M42 (pentax screwmount) since it can be adapted to pretty much anything for just a couple dollars. Yes, it's going to be more than £10, but it's very doable for well under 50, and you will get far better results than with those close-up filter things.


Thanks for the replies.

Unfortunately, it kind of looks like the first reply to a computer question did when I posted 5 years ago i.e. gobbledy-****!









So, I assume a prime lens just needs the correct adapter - a reversal ring? Something like this?

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/M42-SCREW-MOUNT-HELIOS-44-2-f-2-58mm-2-58-PRIME-LENS-SERIAL-NUMBER-7790252-/261033115493?pt=UK_Lenses_Filters_Lenses&hash=item3cc6c93f65#ht_587wt_1397

How, what, where does the enlarger lens go? Does it attach to my current lens or the camera?

If I'm getting the cheap prime lens, what size, fitting etc do I need?

I'm a real camera n00b and just looking for a cheap toy to play with with my camera.

Thanks a lot.

Mike

edit:

How about something like this or do you have a similar opinion to the ring-type-things I linked to in my first post?

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Macro-Closeup-Lens-Canon-550D-500D-450D-400D-350D-1000D-/130556279108?pt=UK_Lenses_Filters_Lenses&hash=item1e65c2b944#ht_2544wt_1163


----------



## dudemanppl

If Fuji comes out with a 23/24mm f/1.4 (f/1 preferably to equal 35L) I am buying one, along with an X-Pro 1 obviously. FINAL DECISION. Don't know where I'd get the money from though.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> If Fuji comes out with a 23/24mm f/1.4 (f/1 preferably to equal 35L) I am buying one, along with an X-Pro 1 obviously. FINAL DECISION. Don't know where I'd get the money from though.


lol flip some gear or sell stuff thats laying around that you would never use anyway


----------



## MistaBernie

wait, why is Sub in the hospital?


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> wait, why is Sub in the hospital?


Another back injury, although this time I'm having some neuro issues alongside it, so I've been blasted on Dilaudid, valium and a bunch of other stuff since yesterday afternoon.


----------



## MistaBernie

Nice. Yeah, I doubt I have long left before I'm going to need some sort of corrective surgery. Think Scloreosis but on the opposite axis.. (instead of being off to one side, when you look at my spine from the side the lower part actually looks like an S.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boogschd*
> 
> src
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ...


He was just making a snide reference to full frame and medium format sensors. The sensor in the D7000 is APS-C like Canon, Sony and Pentax, and it's a quantum leap over the truly tiny sensors found in point-and-shoot cameras and phones.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> If Fuji comes out with a 23/24mm f/1.4 (f/1 preferably to equal 35L) I am buying one, along with an X-Pro 1 obviously. FINAL DECISION. Don't know where I'd get the money from though.


I've been thinking about this as well lately. I could sell all my current gear and get the body plus the three lenses Fuji currently has. Need to try out first...


----------



## dudemanppl

I feel like I wanna sell me M6 for the X100, but just temporarily cause I really want to try it.


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*
> 
> He was just making a snide reference to full frame and medium format sensors. The sensor in the D7000 is APS-C like Canon, Sony and Pentax, and it's a quantum leap over the truly tiny sensors found in point-and-shoot cameras and phones.


whys he being mean :/ ..

lol j/k

im cool with that









im just stoked that ive finally upgraded








had a D60 as my first camera


----------



## iandroo888

anyone know if the rubber ring for the zoom on the 24-70 is replacable? i think mine is startin to get loose.. might be due to heat or something that made the adhesive or something come loose...


----------



## dudemanppl

Like 15 bucks.


----------



## iandroo888

from nikon? how to order/buy?


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boogschd*
> 
> whys he being mean :/ ..
> lol j/k
> im cool with that
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> im just stoked that ive finally upgraded
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> had a D60 as my first camera


Hes just stating the truth


----------



## MistaBernie

Boogschd, when you say D60.. do you mean the Nikon or the Canon?

And anyone seen my flames? I appear to have lost them..


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Boogschd, when you say D60.. do you mean the Nikon or the Canon?
> And anyone seen my flames? I appear to have lost them..


LOL, pretty unlikely that anyone is still sporting a Canon D60.







It might as well be an artifact by now.

And CONGRATS on the promotion! No more flames or rep for you!


----------



## MistaBernie

In fairness, he said his first camera.. so it could have been a few years ago. That being said, logic dictates that it's likely the Nikon.

And thanks! Although I know there used to be ninja ways to rep moderators (not that I care obviously)...


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> And anyone seen my flames? I appear to have lost them..


it appears as though you are now technically the only moderator of the photo section on OCN now.

congrats


----------



## MistaBernie

SmokinWafffle and MegaOption count too I would think...

Thanks for the congrats though!


----------



## laboitenoire

Thoughts on lens stacking? I'm interested in dicking around with it as a cheap way to get into macro photography, and I think my 70-300 VR and my 50 f/1.4 should make some nice images together.


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> Thoughts on lens stacking? I'm interested in dicking around with it as a cheap way to get into macro photography, and I think my 70-300 VR and my 50 f/1.4 should make some nice images together.


I never liked the results from stacking, never seemed as crisp as they should be to me. Your starting to looking through a lot of glass with two lenses. That being said I have seen some amazing images from a stacked set of lenses. That 50 and a setup of extension tubes works very well, ask should your 70-300. The 50 and a full set of tubes will push you past 1:1 IIRC.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> Thoughts on lens stacking? I'm interested in dicking around with it as a cheap way to get into macro photography, and I think my 70-300 VR and my 50 f/1.4 should make some nice images together.


I tried it out of curiosity once. It got me massive magnification, but the images weren't the greatest. Just get some cheap extension tubes, or better yet, bellows and an enlarging lens.


----------



## mz-n10

just flip the 50 around.


----------



## laboitenoire

I have just been flipping the 50 and holding it, but I like the idea of having a little better control of focus and composition. I figure the filter ring will be cheaper than any other option, and I feel that the lenses are high enough quality to get decent results.


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Boogschd, when you say D60.. do you mean the Nikon or the Canon?


the Nikon

lol forgot that Canon also had a "D60"









'gratz on the promotion


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Boogschd, when you say D60.. do you mean the Nikon or the Canon?
> 
> And anyone seen my flames? I appear to have lost them..


lol, and gained the uber Staff Member flame!

Which I oddly still do not have after 2 or so months...


----------



## Conspiracy

found out i made the deans list last semester for having a GPA of 3.60 or higher. complete surprise for me because i have never made that list before mainly because i generally put more time into work rather than school, but lately with my last semester coming up and graduation in december i am all about making sure i get that diploma


----------



## MistaBernie

What a time to get it though, grats!


----------



## Sean Webster

Nice job!

I just got some "new" rims for mi carro.


New RS4 Rims by Sean Webster Photo, on Flickr

Need to install the coilovers to lower it and work on the engine soon.


----------



## r34p3rex

Got my Yamasaki Catleap in today.. now I see what the rage with IPS is all about


----------



## Sean Webster

Damn, that reminds me that I want a IPS! Congrats.


----------



## Conspiracy

congrats on the new monitor. honestly i would rather have more lenses to cover focal lengths which you already have and i dont as well as more film stuff. i hope to not need a fancy monitor because i hope to shoot more and edit less especially with video. dislike editing


----------



## MistaBernie

OMG, tell me about it, I'm STILL going through images from a wedding I shot two weeks ago. I only have a hundred or so to go at this point, but still..

And I could take or leave IPS... what I DO need to do is calibrate my monitor so I can get consistent stuff out of my Pixma 9000 II, courtesy of Craigslist, $50..


----------



## r34p3rex

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> OMG, tell me about it, I'm STILL going through images from a wedding I shot two weeks ago. I only have a hundred or so to go at this point, but still..
> And I could take or leave IPS... what I DO need to do is calibrate my monitor so I can get consistent stuff out of my Pixma 9000 II, courtesy of Craigslist, $50..


Take the plunge







This thing looks glorious.. even without calibration


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Nice job!
> I just got some "new" rims for mi carro.
> 
> New RS4 Rims by Sean Webster Photo, on Flickr
> Need to install the coilovers to lower it and work on the engine soon.


definitely needs to be lower. looks like a 4x4

and whats with the two tone......


----------



## MistaBernie

Cant, wife will kill me. 'OMG Why do you need _another_ monitor, you have my 19" hooked up next to your 24"!?!?'.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Nice job!
> I just got some "new" rims for mi carro.
> 
> New RS4 Rims by Sean Webster Photo, on Flickr
> Need to install the coilovers to lower it and work on the engine soon.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> definitely needs to be lower. looks like a 4x4
> 
> and whats with the two tone......
Click to expand...

lol, yep, it will be slammed in a week









And for the white crap. Long story, but the previous owner (my friend) painted it white (and the trunk) to disguise the car.









I'm painting the car and doing all the body work next year. I may do a temp paint job on the hood and trunk and possibly roof in black tho. And the rims need to be sanded, buffed, and painted...possibly will do them lime green or matte black again and lime green accented.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> lol, yep, it will be slammed in a week
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And for the white crap. Long story, but the previous owner (my friend) painted it white (and the trunk) to disguise the car.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm painting the car and doing all the body work next year. I may do a temp paint job on the hood and trunk and possibly roof in black tho. And the rims need to be sanded, buffed, and painted...possibly will do them lime green or lime green accented.


u kids and your fatlace,illest and hellaflush......

also ur brakes look tiny, time for a bbk swap.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> 
> 
> u kids and your fatlace,illest and hellaflush......
Click to expand...

I don't think I'm goin to go that far, I am going to be building the engine and need to be able to run on the track here. I'm just going for a clean lower stance.








Quote:


> also ur brakes look tiny, time for a bbk swap.


I know! they are sooo crappy. I am thinking of getting S4 calipers and bigger rotors in the rear and a big break conversion for the front and new break lines. It will be kinda cheap, but work great.

Here is my build thread: http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthread.php?5689181-Sean-s-B5-A4-1.8T-Quattro-Timeline&p=77388611#post77388611

Currently can't decide on a turbo.


----------



## sub50hz

Well, just got outta surgery and all is well.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Well, just got outta surgery and all is well.


good to hear. rest up and enjoy not feeling any pain and the meds


----------



## MistaBernie

I've been wanting to catch some tstorms, but every time they call for them around here it's turned into nothing.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> I've been wanting to catch some tstorms, but every time they call for them around here it's turned into nothing.


lol thats lame. i blame the weatherman for not being good at his job


----------



## MistaBernie

Meh, worse things have happened. Kind of sucks that it's going to be rainy for the next few days, but it's no big deal I suppose.


----------



## Sean Webster

I finally got the Giottos rocket air. The thing is weak lol.


----------



## dudemanppl

Mine blows so much. PUN.


----------



## Sean Webster

haha, you're punny.


----------



## Conspiracy

developing another roll today that was shot at usual 50. next roll is being pushed to 100. then will be sending some negatives to foothead to try printing movie film developed in c41 at different EI 50, 100, 200, and maybe 400 (not sure how well this film will hold up at 400 but will do a clip test)


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Well, just got outta surgery and all is well.


Good to know; enjoy some drugs. Two surgeries in my life, hope to have no more.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> lol, yep, it will be slammed in a week
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And for the white crap. Long story, but the previous owner (my friend) painted it white (and the trunk) to disguise the car.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm painting the car and doing all the body work next year. I may do a temp paint job on the hood and trunk and possibly roof in black tho. And the rims need to be sanded, buffed, and painted...possibly will do them lime green or matte black again and lime green accented.


This is one hobby I'm glad I have no interest in. Looks expensive.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> I finally got the Giottos rocket air. The thing is weak lol.


That would be the point. It's meant to be safer for use on delicate components (viz., sensor) in place of canned air.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*
> 
> Good to know; enjoy some drugs. Two surgeries in my life, hope to have no more.


This is my 2nd back surgery, double microdisketomy. Pretty sore still, might be headin home tonight though -- already been here for almost a week.


----------



## MistaBernie

Canned air is usually frowned upon more because of the potential to create and basically shoot moisture at your sensor, lenses, etc.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> I'm painting the car and doing all the body work next year. I may do a temp paint job on the hood and trunk and possibly roof in black tho. And the rims need to be sanded, buffed, and painted...possibly will do them lime green or matte black again and lime green accented.


flat black vinyl wrap, looks good on a wagon and lime green is so ricer......
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Here is my build thread: http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthread.php?5689181-Sean-s-B5-A4-1.8T-Quattro-Timeline&p=77388611#post77388611
> Currently can't decide on a turbo.


glanced at your build and the GT3071 would be my choice for 400whp....still sounds like too much internal work for what its worth.

my personal goal is 200whp on my 1.6 miata, cheap, easy and still highly reliable. right now im doing about140whp @ 7psi, go standalone and larger injectors and i should be able to hit 12psi 200whp.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> This is my 2nd back surgery, double microdisketomy. Pretty sore still, might be headin home tonight though -- already been here for almost a week.


able to go home is always a good sign.


----------



## Conspiracy

so after changing the final wash this morning by doing no stabilizer and doing sink water and photoflo my negatives are pretty much completely clean with no noticeable water spots like in the past. i think it might be safe to say that my stabilizer was the cause of my water spots problem so once this new roll gets scanned i might not use stabilizer anymore.


----------



## dudemanppl

I TOLDED YOU.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> lol, yep, it will be slammed in a week
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And for the white crap. Long story, but the previous owner (my friend) painted it white (and the trunk) to disguise the car.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm painting the car and doing all the body work next year. I may do a temp paint job on the hood and trunk and possibly roof in black tho. And the rims need to be sanded, buffed, and painted...possibly will do them lime green or matte black again and lime green accented.
> 
> 
> 
> This is one hobby I'm glad I have no interest in. Looks expensive.
Click to expand...

Not really so far...
Quote:


> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> I finally got the Giottos rocket air. The thing is weak lol.
> 
> 
> 
> That would be the point. It's meant to be safer for use on delicate components (viz., sensor) in place of canned air.
Click to expand...

I think I need a wet solution...or just breath on it and use q-tips right? lol
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> I'm painting the car and doing all the body work next year. I may do a temp paint job on the hood and trunk and possibly roof in black tho. And the rims need to be sanded, buffed, and painted...possibly will do them lime green or matte black again and lime green accented.
> 
> 
> 
> flat black vinyl wrap, looks good on a wagon and lime green is so ricer......
Click to expand...

Actually, I am going to see a guy about vinyling the hood, roof, and trunk tomorrow and order a new audio system.

Don't be calling that ricer...though I am just going to be painting them matte black this week lol.
Quote:


> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Here is my build thread: http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthread.php?5689181-Sean-s-B5-A4-1.8T-Quattro-Timeline&p=77388611#post77388611
> Currently can't decide on a turbo.
> 
> 
> 
> glanced at your build and the GT3071 would be my choice for 400whp....still sounds like too much internal work for what its worth.
Click to expand...

I'm thinking the 3071r or the 3076r...I'm ordering everything in a few months.

How is it too much internal work? All I need to do is replace the rods...

I am doing the valve springs and retainers b/c I want to rev to 8k or so and get cams to boost torque. No stroking, crank, or pistons needed...yet. Oh and my best friend is a mechanic he builds engines all the time, he just finished a 800HP BMW M5 last week and we had a fun drive in it.








Quote:


> my personal goal is 200whp on my 1.6 miata, cheap, easy and still highly reliable. right now im doing about140whp @ 7psi, go standalone and larger injectors and i should be able to hit 12psi 200whp.


Damn, that is mighty rice smelling to me...









I'm at 12-13psi right now and should be around 180-200whp, I have no idea honestly lol. I just beat a Mazda 3 in a race the other day and a Honda accord tonight.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Canned air is usually frowned upon more because of the potential to create and basically shoot moisture at your sensor, lenses, etc.


That and the fact that it can dislodge components internally because of the pressure, not to mention that it also can force dust deeper in.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> This is my 2nd back surgery, double microdisketomy. Pretty sore still, might be headin home tonight though -- already been here for almost a week.


Discectomy huh? I knew a few people in the Marines who needed that done. Sucks. Mine probably wasn't as painful, but the surgery I had to repair an inguinal hernia was mega ouch.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Not really so far...
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> That would be the point. It's meant to be safer for use on delicate components (viz., sensor) in place of canned air.
> 
> 
> 
> I think I need a wet solution...or just breath on it and use q-tips right? lol
Click to expand...

I use Photographic Solutions swabs and fluid, works very well, and isn't drastically expensive like Copperhill. Give it a try. And frankly, I don't mind using my breath on the front element, but I would never breath my coffee breath on my sensor.


----------



## foothead

Random off topic question, but I decided to repaint the back of my phone since the old paint was in terrible shape. Thing is I'm bored of black and want to try another color. When I got the phone, I had really been wanting the purple one, but Dell never did release it, so I had to go with a black one. I found an old promotional photo, and the pink is really looking good to me as well. My netbook is also pink, so it'd be kinda neat for them to match, but I think the purple may look less bad when it gets scratched through. Opinions? We were talking about this in chat yesterday, but I'm still indecisive.


----------



## Conspiracy

go pink to match your new laptop


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*
> 
> I use Photographic Solutions swabs and fluid, works very well, and isn't drastically expensive like Copperhill. Give it a try. And frankly, I don't mind using my breath on the front element, but I would never breath my coffee breath on my sensor.


Thanks.


----------



## MistaBernie

Nokia Lumia 900, yay or nay? I'm thinking I might leave my decision up to whether or not the store I go to tonite has a white one in..

To keep it photo-related, it has a Carl Zeiss (designed) lens..


----------



## Conspiracy

The commercial for that phone looks cool so i would check it out


----------



## MistaBernie

So as not to encroach on someone's request for info about a new camera..

If the T4i does actually have Continuous AF in LiveView and Video Recording, Touch screen LCD, then I think it makes it a more interesting entry-level DSLR for sure.

I'm more interested in the 70D. 19 Point AF, 6FPS, Digic 5. I'd consider selling my 5Dc for it if I didn't have my 7D. Does make me wonder if they will actually come out with the 7D Mark II.. just about every rumor I hear one way comes countered with one the other.

Also, rumors about the 3D are re-surfacing, but it's such a mess. 30+ megapixel, dual Digic V processors, in a 1D style body. 61 point autofocus, most of the features of the 1Dx... with a speedlite transmitter or flash built in. Doesn't designate whether it's APS or APS-C but I'd HOPE it'd be APS. In reality, I'd only be interested if it (somehow) came out cheaper than the 5D3, which it wont.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Damn, that is mighty rice smelling to me...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm at 12-13psi right now and should be around 180-200whp, I have no idea honestly lol. I just beat a Mazda 3 in a race the other day and a Honda accord tonight.


it really is rice, but for 2500 with a smog legal turbo i cant complain.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*
> 
> That and the fact that it can dislodge components internally because of the pressure, not to mention that it also can force dust deeper in.
> Discectomy huh? I knew a few people in the Marines who needed that done. Sucks. Mine probably wasn't as painful, but the surgery I had to repair an inguinal hernia was mega ouch.
> I use Photographic Solutions swabs and fluid, works very well, and isn't drastically expensive like Copperhill. Give it a try. And frankly, I don't mind using my breath on the front element, but I would never breath my coffee breath on my sensor.


i have two huge chunks of dust on my a900 sensor, been looking into swab kits a while ago. but decided it was faster and easier to just bring it to a shop and pay 60 to have them do it.


----------



## Conspiracy

buying these this weekend http://www.knockaround.com/item.php?item_id=381&category_id=64

also i am $100 closer to my goal with a total of $100 saved towards buying subs bronica ^_^ yay!! and on a side note that goes with this a local indie rap label has contacted me about some video work which means i might have money to buy the bronny sooner


----------



## MistaBernie

Very nice, great success!

:Borat:


----------



## Conspiracy

lava lava







:borat:


----------



## Conspiracy

just posted a new Canon P&S SD3500IS in the OCN marketplace and about to post the video camcorder as well shortly. i posted here first but these items are also going to be posted on potn and craiglist

http://www.overclock.net/t/1267457/nib-canon-powershot-sd3500-is

http://www.overclock.net/t/1267458/nib-canon-vixia-hf-r20


----------



## Marin

http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/06/06/Sony-DSC-RX100-preview-with-sample-images

Okay, this is pretty neat. Now if we can just get something that is the successor to the Contax T's and has a 35mm sensor, I'll be happy.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Nokia Lumia 900, yay or nay? I'm thinking I might leave my decision up to whether or not the store I go to tonite has a white one in..
> To keep it photo-related, it has a Carl Zeiss (designed) lens..


I got some hands on with it, and it's a pretty sleek phone. Nicest Windows phone I've used (haven't encountered many admittedly).

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> it really is rice, but for 2500 with a smog legal turbo i cant complain.
> i have two huge chunks of dust on my a900 sensor, been looking into swab kits a while ago. but decided it was faster and easier to just bring it to a shop and pay 60 to have them do it.


You should've tried the swabs first yourself, because the shop you paid probably just used the same thing to clean your sensor.


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/06/06/Sony-DSC-RX100-preview-with-sample-images
> Okay, this is pretty neat. Now if we can just get something that is the successor to the Contax T's and has a 35mm sensor, I'll be happy.


The Pentax Q is tiny, but I honestly don't know where they were headed with that.

A small P&S sensor with interchangeable lenses at an absurd price.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aksthem1*
> 
> The Pentax Q is tiny, but I honestly don't know where they were headed with that.
> A small P&S sensor with interchangeable lenses at an absurd price.


I just ignore Pentax.


----------



## foothead

I really can't figure out what pentax has been doing lately. They won't release full frame anything, they have mirrorless cameras on two different systems, and their lenses seem overpriced for the quality you get. Their medium format stuff is really nice though. That 25mm f/4 is amazing now that they've done something about the CA issues. Too bad it doesn't work on the film bodies anymore.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> Now if we can just get something that is the successor to the Contax T's and has a 35mm sensor, I'll be happy.


One of these days I'm going to break down and just buy a T2, because I don't think that scenario is very likely.


----------



## dudemanppl

They need a digital GR1. Too good.


----------



## sub50hz

That sort of already exists in the form of the GXR and M-mount module, but the price is insane. Also not full frame.


----------



## dudemanppl

Its like four times the size and weight. They have a GRD, but thats tiny sensor party. No quiero.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> I really can't figure out what pentax has been doing lately. They won't release full frame anything, they have mirrorless cameras on two different systems, and their lenses seem overpriced for the quality you get. Their medium format stuff is really nice though. That 25mm f/4 is amazing now that they've done something about the CA issues. Too bad it doesn't work on the film bodies anymore.


Pentax is run by morons.


----------



## strych9

Getting a D5100, opinions?


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> Pentax is run by morons.


They need more Ashton, clearly.


----------



## Conspiracy

Video camera sold on craigslist and now i have the money to buy sub50's bronica
















Canon powershot still for sale


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *strych9*
> 
> Getting a D5100, opinions?


beginner in photography?

its a good entry level camera with decent high iso performance and 1080p video recording








i believe it shares the same sensor with the D7000
stereo mic input and swivel screen too, if your in that lolz


----------



## dudemanppl

Nice, developed more than two rolls for the first time. Combined the developer I accidentally poured in the first bath and my good dev, added water to make a liter. And then I put my half liter with the other half liter to make a liter of blix. Since I wanted to push everything a stop (+1 min) and it was hella diluted, I did a 6 minute dev, but I didn't factor in the fact it takes 30 seconds to drain.







Oh well negs look fine. Blix went fine I still think its a little dark, I don't really know if I should do less or more. But I have four rolls of film drying right now. I think the focus screen was off for one of the rolls somehow, they seem pretty OOF.


----------



## strych9

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boogschd*
> 
> beginner in photography?
> its a good entry level camera with decent high iso performance and 1080p video recording
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i believe it shares the same sensor with the D7000
> stereo mic input and swivel screen too, if your in that lolz


Thanks. Yeah I've never had a DSLR before.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Nice, developed more than two rolls for the first time. Combined the developer I accidentally poured in the first bath and my good dev, added water to make a liter. And then I put my half liter with the other half liter to make a liter of blix. Since I wanted to push everything a stop (+1 min) and it was hella diluted, I did a 6 minute dev, but I didn't factor in the fact it takes 30 seconds to drain.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh well negs look fine. Blix went fine I still think its a little dark, I don't really know if I should do less or more. But I have four rolls of film drying right now. I think the focus screen was off for one of the rolls somehow, they seem pretty OOF.


lol really how exhausted are you chems at this point


----------



## dudemanppl

Not too exhausted actually.


----------



## Conspiracy

just got a hit on the Canon powershot for $150. might be selling it to a OCN user if they respond back


----------



## MistaBernie

Nice.

Too bad Sub already sold me his Bronica bro.

I kid of course.


----------



## Conspiracy

lol i would just buy another one if that was the case now that i have the money







although subs is a much better deal than KEH

point and shoot sold! YAY shipping it tomorrow


----------



## dudemanppl

Since nobody is in chat, here:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/vore_kul_om/6136005154/
Quality.


----------



## Conspiracy

Pretty sure i just passed my physics test


----------



## MistaBernie

CanonRumors has posted MTF data on the Shorty Forty (40mm f/2.8 pancake). Appears to be better than both current fifties. I'm toying with the idea of picking one up (with the super duper hidden motive of not so secretly hoping Canon at least announces a mirrorless EF mount camera soon).


----------



## foothead

I'm kinda halfway considering picking up a lightweight 35mm rebel and one of those for hiking and less serious work. It'd be a better focal length than the 25 pancake on the olympus, but idk if i want to completely abandon digital. I'll wait for a proper review before making any decisions.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> I'm kinda halfway considering picking up a lightweight 35mm rebel and one of those for hiking and less serious work. It'd be a better focal length than the 25 pancake on the olympus, but idk if i want to completely abandon digital. I'll wait for a proper review before making any decisions.


Just get a Contax T series.


----------



## dudemanppl

I dunno foot is insane and would probably prefer the VF. I'd get a Nikon and a Voigtlander 40mm f/2, but that is so much more expensive.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> I'm kinda halfway considering picking up a lightweight 35mm rebel and one of those for hiking and less serious work. It'd be a better focal length than the 25 pancake on the olympus, but idk if i want to completely abandon digital. I'll wait for a proper review before making any decisions.
> 
> 
> 
> Just get a Contax T series.
Click to expand...

I've looked at those, but I really prefer an slr. If I'm hiking and can bring a little extra weight, i like to throw in a long tele lens for birding when i take a break. Though four thirds is way better for that, since i can use smaller lenses. Idk what I'm gonna do.


----------



## Marin

I'd just get a 4x5 field camera but that's just me.


----------



## dudemanppl

lol she has like two.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> I'd just get a 4x5 field camera but that's just me.


Have one already. Well, sort of. I turned an old beat up anniversary speed graphic into one. Now has full front movements and the 30 degree bed drop thing, and i managed to remove a pretty significant amount of unneeded weight. Still, with the tripod, lenses, film holders, meter, etc. it's too much to carry on multi-day hikes when i'm as out of shape as i currently am

EDIT: old photo. I still need to get that brass polished better.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> Just get a Contax T series.


Listen buddy, _you're not helping my wallet here_ -- I passed on a T2 three times already, dunno if I can pass a fourth. Almost picked up a Yashica T4 Super D instead but lamented the lack of exposure comp dial.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> Just get a Contax T series.


If only contax wasnt so expensive i would have one too


----------



## MistaBernie

Per Canon Rumors - four new cameras likely coming this year:

entry level full frame (direct 5D2 replacement
prosumer aps-c (think 70D)
high megapixel offering in a 1D body form (3D)
potentially a mirrorless.
In addition, 7D firmware update coming that looks to be pretty sweet.


----------



## aksthem1

So I bought a 50D. Caved in because I needed something for an upcoming drift event. Got it for a decent price too.


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aksthem1*
> 
> So I bought a 50D. Caved in because I needed something for an upcoming drift event. Got it for a decent price too.


DORIFTO!!!!!!!!!!!111111111111111111111

dont forget to share some snaps


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aksthem1*
> 
> So I bought a 50D. Caved in because I needed something for an upcoming drift event. Got it for a decent price too.


This must be new camera day: my Yashica ate a dick so in a fit of rage I purchased an F100.

FOR SALE: CANON 1N RS AND 50/1.8 GET AT ME BROS.


----------



## dudemanppl

lol jesus, F? I guess if you'd want to get some MF primes you should buy a Canon EG-S screen then sand the edges. Worth.


----------



## MistaBernie

You know.. that 1n might actually make me shoot film again. I mean, the Minolta is nice, but being able to use my glass with it? I'll think about it.


----------



## Conspiracy

Go for it bern







shoot film and you dont have to invest in more glass









Also missed out yesturday being new cd release day but cant wait to get out of class today to buy the new Constellations cd 'do it for free'


----------



## sub50hz

The RS is a great body, I wouldn't be ridding myself of it if my need to carry smaller and lighter cameras wasn't such a priority. Dimensionally, it's smaller than my 50D and grip combo were, but certainly heavier. I'll miss it for sure, it's one hell of a camera.


----------



## sub50hz

Also, I am bored. Someone come to chat.


----------



## MistaBernie

I'm going off the grid tomorrow, back to civilization around the 23rd. That means seniors are going to be watching the section for me.

*DONT MAKE ME LOOK BAD.







*


----------



## sub50hz

I am currently using the "ten foot pole" method with a lot of the shenanigans going on in this section, so that eliminates most of your potential issues right there.


----------



## mz-n10

a mod free week?

wheres the sony fanbois at?


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> I'm going off the grid tomorrow, back to civilization around the 23rd. That means seniors are going to be watching the section for me.
> *DONT MAKE ME LOOK BAD.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *


----------



## Conspiracy

We will behave bernie. We are usually pretty tame i think.

Also did pretty good headshot shoot today perfect overcast and with some extra shade i got some nice fill light for some spots. Also got to use the 70-200 and got some really pro stuff will post some samples after i edit later


----------



## aksthem1

Well I wasted some more money and bought a T2i, 430EX II, 18-135mm, 50 1.8 and came with a 8GB class 10 Sandisk for $600. Damn good deal if I say so myself.

Now I don't know if I should keep the T2i or the 50D. I only want the T2i for video purposes. I know you can do video with ML on the 50D, but that means I have to buy a sound system and a mic. While with the T2i I can just get a new mic.


----------



## sub50hz

Unless you plan to do a ton of video, resell everything you just bought for considerably more money and put it back in your pocket. The T2i has the sensor and video advantage, but that's where it stops, as the 50D is a better body in every way. Except size and weight, I suppose, but I don't know if that's a dealbreaker for you. I liked my 50D to an extent, and if I were to buy another Canon DSLR I can assure you it wouldn't be a plasticky Rebel.

Alternately, sell 50D as well and think about a 5DII. Or a D700. You have options.


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Unless you plan to do a ton of video, resell everything you just bought for considerably more money and put it back in your pocket. The T2i has the sensor and video advantage, but that's where it stops, as the 50D is a better body in every way. Except size and weight, I suppose, but I don't know if that's a dealbreaker for you. I liked my 50D to an extent, and if I were to buy another Canon DSLR I can assure you it wouldn't be a plasticky Rebel.
> Alternately, sell 50D as well and think about a 5DII. Or a D700. You have options.


First thing that came into my head was to resell everything for a profit, but I could use the flash.

Those are the only two main advantages of the T2i that I saw. The ergonomics and feel of the XXD series were always better for me anyways. I don't mind the extra size and weight, I prefer it.

Video would have been great, because my friend was going to start a photo and video production LLC and wanted me to be a part of it. I still would have purchased a double sound system for the T2i down the road.

Then I thought about selling both for a 7D or D7000. 5D MKII would be out of my price range.


----------



## Conspiracy

7D is not worth it if you just doing video. For video either just keep t2i or go t3i unless you feel the camera is too small then go 60D or a used 5d2. Honestly 5d2 would be my choice with rokinon primes.


----------



## sub50hz

Assuming you sell everything, what's your budget look like? D700 prices have dropped like _whoa_ lately, so it might still be a real option.


----------



## Conspiracy

also if you plan on going nikon and want video i dont suggest anything nikon for video other than a d800 or something newer that might come out soon. just my 2cents on DSLR video.


----------



## sub50hz

http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/06/14/Schneider-Kreuznach-plans-lenses-for-mirrorless-including-14mm-F2-0-for-Micro-Four-Thirds

...the hell?


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/06/14/Schneider-Kreuznach-plans-lenses-for-mirrorless-including-14mm-F2-0-for-Micro-Four-Thirds
> ...the hell?


0_0


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/06/14/Schneider-Kreuznach-plans-lenses-for-mirrorless-including-14mm-F2-0-for-Micro-Four-Thirds
> ...the hell?


mother of god...


----------



## dudemanppl

BTW, sell crop, get 5DII, get cheapo manual flash and triggers if you absolutely need them. 35L + 5DII. I've never used fill flash.


----------



## aksthem1

I think I'm just going to stick with the 50D for now. Since I don't want to be out of a camera before the event.


----------



## MistaBernie

Sub I brought 5D2, 35L and 24-70. Won't bring to beach though. Got the S95 for beach day


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Sub I brought 5D2, 35L and 24-70. Won't bring to beach though. Got the S95 for beach day


Not bad.

In other news:


----------



## Conspiracy

lol about time it showed up. how bad was the wait


----------



## sub50hz

Hah, it wasn't bad, but FedEx showed as soon as I decided to nap.


----------



## Conspiracy

Ugh early morning camera problems. 2 camera shoot is now a 1 camera shoot :/


----------



## MKHunt

Mt K5 came a couple days back.



Here's what happened on my first "real" one-shot outing with it and my B+W 10-stop ND.


----------



## laboitenoire

Very nice! Enjoy your purchase!


----------



## Conspiracy

went ahead and said screw it and order 2 pairs of shades lol. now i have some nice cheap kinda sturdy glasses that i dont have to worry about when i go to work unless they for some reason tell me to not wear my sunglasses during a crazy bright outdoor video shoot for PBS lol. the blue ones might be distracting but i like blue so what of it









http://knockaround.com/shop/sunglasses/premium/clear-smoke-1

http://knockaround.com/shop/sunglasses/bio-based/cornflower-blue-amber


----------



## PathOfTheRighteousMan

Here's my basic cameras. A Konica Minolta DiMAGE Z20 and a Samsung ST65.


EXIF


Taken with a Microsoft HD-6000


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> went ahead and said screw it and order 2 pairs of shades lol. now i have some nice cheap kinda sturdy glasses that i dont have to worry about when i go to work unless they for some reason tell me to not wear my sunglasses during a crazy bright outdoor video shoot for PBS lol. the blue ones might be distracting but i like blue so what of it
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://knockaround.com/shop/sunglasses/premium/clear-smoke-1
> http://knockaround.com/shop/sunglasses/bio-based/cornflower-blue-amber


Ick, cheap sunglasses. I used to be able to wear cheap sunglasses but after wearing Oakleys for a few years now I immediately notice how much cheap ones suck optically.


----------



## dudemanppl

Way overkill, going on vacation and:

5DII
Nikon 14-24 2.8
35L
50 1.2 AI
Nikon 70-200 2.8 VR II
FM2n
M6 +35 1.2
Bessa + 15 4.5
67 + 105 2.4
GR1
GW690

Watch me not even shoot the FM2n.


----------



## Conspiracy

watch you only shoot 5d2 + 35L lol and maybe a little bessa or m6


----------



## Marin

Copy pasta.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> Oh, food photography. No stylists in the class so we learn more.


Still think the lemons are way too bright...


----------



## dudemanppl

Should have exploded them then.


----------



## Conspiracy

lol. They look good ok on my screen. It wouldnt hurt if they were darker


----------



## adanmtxt1

I've been using my D800 recently and what's interesting is, in addition to minutely reducing noise, down-sampled shots also appear to be a bit sharper / have better definition. I just like how they're rendered over SOOC. Recent example, from, like, 20 minutes ago.


G9300GY (almost) Straight Outta D800 by Lunitic, on Flickr


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *adanmtxt1*
> 
> I've been using my D800 recently and what's interesting is, in addition to minutely reducing noise, down-sampled shots also appear to be a bit sharper / have better definition. I just like how they're rendered over SOOC. Recent example, from, like, 20 minutes ago.
> 
> G9300GY (almost) Straight Outta D800 by Lunitic, on Flickr


I messed around with mRAW on my 7D a few times and found the same thing. They have different properties than a full RAW and often appear sharper.


----------



## boogschd

hi guys .. im thinking of buying a used sigma 18-50 2.8 ex dc, nikon mount

thoughts on this lens?








will check it out tomorrow
ill probably get it used for around 200 usd (hopefully lolz)


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boogschd*
> 
> hi guys .. im thinking of buying a used sigma 18-50 2.8 ex dc, nikon mount
> thoughts on this lens?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> will check it out tomorrow
> ill probably get it used for around 200 usd (hopefully lolz)


http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=401

Looks to be a decent lens for crop bodies.


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=401
> Looks to be a decent lens for crop bodies.


i was hoping some guys here have some experience with it lolz
but i did read some reviews and its sort of the same with the tammy 17-50 in terms of IQ

anyway.. thanks sub50hz!

hopefully itll go well tomorrow


----------



## Conspiracy

so my girlfriend showed me a picture of a camera on facebook. its a nikon f3 with 50 1.4 and speedlight that was bought by her friend at a pawn shop and she is wanting to go check it out because i love cameras and told her that basically nikon F_whatever_ cameras are pretty solid and nice. i have a good feeling that unless they are selling for pawn shop prices no way i can afford it and also dont need to have multiple 35mm SLR's nor need to bring attention to the fact that i have multiple cameras as to not upset my parents. but if they sell this thing for like $20 or something crazy i might have to buy assuming it looks good lol

but either way i dont need another 35mm slr. cant wait to get dolla dolla billz on my pay pal to buy my bronica from sub. dolla dolla billz yall *bling *bling gangster gangster


----------



## sub50hz

You would be a fool to buy another manual-focus SLR with a 50. If your XD was broken, I would say go for it, but it's just more redundancy you simply don't need.

That being said, still ask about price. And tell me about it.


----------



## Conspiracy

Oh no if i got it super cheap i would sell it online for a little profit not to keep


----------



## Conspiracy

soon to be the happy owner of sub50hz bronica ETRSI


----------



## Conspiracy

New futurama was not too bad. Not nearly as funny as it used to be but still a good watch.

Now to sleep so i can help insulate my house at 6am :/


----------



## boogschd

sigma 18-50 seller backed out on the last minute


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> New futurama was not too bad. Not nearly as funny as it used to be but still a good watch.
> Now to sleep so i can help insulate my house at 6am :/


Which episode did you watch?


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> Which episode did you watch?


I watched both new ones last night. Bender having a baby was better than the second one that i wont spoil for others


----------



## blackhand

Hey guys would anyone mind recommending me a camera? My max budget is $150 but i really dont want to throw that much down but i guess if its really worth it compared to a $100 camera or so. I was looking at the GE Power Pro X500 as it looked pretty nice but im not sure how it compares to others in the price range. What ill be taking pictures of for the most part is pc parts.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *blackhand*
> 
> Hey guys would anyone mind recommending me a camera? My max budget is $150 but i really dont want to throw that much down but i guess if its really worth it compared to a $100 camera or so. I was looking at the GE Power Pro X500 as it looked pretty nice but im not sure how it compares to others in the price range. What ill be taking pictures of for the most part is pc parts.


what type of phone do you have?

also i would suggest looking at buying a used P&S camera in your price range as something more name brand will produce slightly better quality images. just guessing as i have never met anyone that actually owns a camera made by GE

reason i ask about phone is because there is a decent chance it might take better shots than a camera made by a company that doesnt specialize in cameras


----------



## MKHunt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> what type of phone do you have?
> also i would suggest looking at buying a used P&S camera in your price range as something more name brand will produce slightly better quality images. just guessing as i have never met anyone that actually owns a camera made by GE
> reason i ask about phone is because there is a decent chance it might take better shots than a camera made by a company that doesnt specialize in cameras


I'm not sure how to feel about your avatar.


----------



## Conspiracy

is it because he doesnt have a mustache like your avatar?


----------



## blackhand

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> what type of phone do you have?
> also i would suggest looking at buying a used P&S camera in your price range as something more name brand will produce slightly better quality images. just guessing as i have never met anyone that actually owns a camera made by GE
> reason i ask about phone is because there is a decent chance it might take better shots than a camera made by a company that doesnt specialize in cameras


I have a HTC EVO 4g and the camera is honestly pretty crappy. It NEVER focuses and when i try sending them it reduces quality a lot i have no clue why. but when i looked up best 15 cameras for under $150 those were one of them and i like that its one of the more bulky ones as i think they look nicer then the thin slim ones.


----------



## MKHunt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> is it because he doesnt have a mustache like your avatar?


Mostly, yes.


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *blackhand*
> 
> I have a HTC EVO 4g and the camera is honestly pretty crappy. *It NEVER focuses* and when i try sending them it reduces quality a lot i have no clue why.


your probably not doing it right? (autofocusing)

*i dont own an EVO 4G nor do i have any experience with it but im guessing its that
its probably configured to resize images to low quality when sending.

check your manual ?

i bet the EVO 4g will be suffice for taking photos of pc components, you just need better lighting is all


----------



## Faraz

Hey guys, I didn't think a quick little question like this deserved a thread of its own but I'm looking for a general purpose "kit-ish" lens. I recently sold my D3100 kit. I was sort of set on getting the Nikon 16-85mm (even though it was a bit pricier than I'd have liked) but apparently that's been discontinued. I've read there's going to be a 16-85mm f/4 out but I don't want to wait longer or spend too much money on that.

How is the Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4? I want to avoid plastic mount if possible, so the Nikon 18-105mm doesn't seem like a good option. Any personal experience with that Sigma or other recommendations within that budget?

Thanks.


----------



## MKHunt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Faraz*
> 
> Hey guys, I didn't think a quick little question like this deserved a thread of its own but I'm looking for a general purpose "kit-ish" lens. I recently sold my D3100 kit. I was sort of set on getting the Nikon 16-85mm (even though it was a bit pricier than I'd have liked) but apparently that's been discontinued. I've read there's going to be a 16-85mm f/4 out but I don't want to wait longer or spend too much money on that.
> How is the Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4? I want to avoid plastic mount if possible, so the Nikon 18-105mm doesn't seem like a good option. Any personal experience with that Sigma or other recommendations within that budget?
> Thanks.


I cannot speak from experience, but I have heard almost nothing but good about the Tamron 17-50


----------



## blackhand

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boogschd*
> 
> your probably not doing it right? (autofocusing)
> *i dont own an EVO 4G nor do i have any experience with it but im guessing its that
> its probably configured to resize images to low quality when sending.
> check your manual ?
> i bet the EVO 4g will be suffice for taking photos of pc components, you just need better lighting is all


nah autofocusing is off. and on my other evo it never did it. but on this one it resizes to terrible quality. but so you dont recommend a camera at all?


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *blackhand*
> 
> nah autofocusing is off. and on my other evo it never did it. but on this one it resizes to terrible quality. but so you dont recommend a camera at all?


oh, err.. find a cheap canon powershot then load CHDK on it?








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MKHunt*
> 
> I cannot speak from experience, but I have heard almost nothing but good about the Tamron 17-50


some say it kinda struggles with AF though . i notice that its almost the same case with any tamron lens, slow focusing.

had the same problem with my first tammy lens, though, it was an 18-200 ... cant really expect much from that lens







)


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Faraz*
> 
> Hey guys, I didn't think a quick little question like this deserved a thread of its own but I'm looking for a general purpose "kit-ish" lens. I recently sold my D3100 kit. I was sort of set on getting the Nikon 16-85mm (even though it was a bit pricier than I'd have liked) but apparently that's been discontinued. I've read there's going to be a 16-85mm f/4 out but I don't want to wait longer or spend too much money on that.
> How is the Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4? I want to avoid plastic mount if possible, so the Nikon 18-105mm doesn't seem like a good option. Any personal experience with that Sigma or other recommendations within that budget?
> Thanks.


You can still get a 16-85 at Keh.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *blackhand*
> 
> nah autofocusing is off. and on my other evo it never did it. but on this one it resizes to terrible quality. but so you dont recommend a camera at all?


It resizes it because carriers impose a limit on MMS filesize. If you email it, it will be fine.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Faraz*
> 
> Hey guys, I didn't think a quick little question like this deserved a thread of its own but I'm looking for a general purpose "kit-ish" lens. I recently sold my D3100 kit. I was sort of set on getting the Nikon 16-85mm (even though it was a bit pricier than I'd have liked) but apparently that's been discontinued. I've read there's going to be a 16-85mm f/4 out but I don't want to wait longer or spend too much money on that.
> How is the Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4? I want to avoid plastic mount if possible, so the Nikon 18-105mm doesn't seem like a good option. Any personal experience with that Sigma or other recommendations within that budget?
> Thanks.


The 16-85 VR is still a fantastic lens, even used. As Sub said, you can find them pretty easily... If you have to buy new, the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 is great. The non-VC is a tad sharper, but the VC obviously gives you a little more capability to hand-hold.

If you want metal mount and reasonable speed, the 18-70 f/3.5-4.5 is practically free these days, and it's a pretty sharp lens overall!


----------



## Conspiracy

Apparently a box has been delivered to my girlfriends house. Wonder what it is


----------



## dudemanppl

No idea whats going on, but I guess the 67 shutter sometimes decides to not work? Sweet.
NEGATIVOS SON MAL. Still have two more rolls of 120 to develop which I'm going to develop with fresh dev and blix. I know one of the rolls are perfect fo sho though because it was shot through the GW690 which never goofs.

And the roll I shot in San Fran that was REALLY DAMN GOOD? Turns out. It. It wasn't. Loaded. Correct. Ly. Why I am so calm about this, I do not know, but I do have much angers about this. No idea how though, I swore I saw the crank turn? Still very very confused.


----------



## Conspiracy

Damn that sucks dude


----------



## laboitenoire

Developing is so nail-biting at times...


----------



## Conspiracy

dang so i forgot to edit and encode this short 2min informational piece that i shot of the new director of athletics at my school and not only was he 1.5 hours late because he forgot and went to lunch but he was super rushed to get it done so i shot the whole thing in 10 total mins including camera and light setup. wish i had more than 1 single light. just not perfect lighting for a person sitting and talking. looks good enough for my school but not for me :/


----------



## laboitenoire

Well I just decided to get some film developed at Walgreens... Bad decision. All the negs are scratched.


----------



## MKHunt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> Well I just decided to get some film developed at Walgreens... Bad decision. All the negs are scratched.


Ouch. Soz bro. I use costco because I've had safe negs back from them errytime.

Also, happy World Pentax Day.


----------



## laboitenoire

I would use Costco, but the nearest one is in the Boston area... By the time I pay for gas it would be cheaper to send them to Dwayne's.


----------



## Conspiracy

Time to up the iron. Iron maiden tonight with alice cooper and coheed opening!!!!! OMG \m/ 0_0 \m/


----------



## Shane1244

I was thinking about downgrading my 60D to something smaller. I don't use it very often, and I want to buy a new bike.

I was thinking about going Nikon as they seem to have better budget lenses. What would be a good downgrade path? I need to have $500 to buy a used 2010 Specialized P2.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244*
> 
> I was thinking about downgrading my 60D to something smaller. I don't use it very often, and I want to buy a new bike.
> I was thinking about going Nikon as they seem to have better budget lenses. What would be a good downgrade path? I need to have $500 to buy a used 2010 Specialized P2.


Depends on how much you want to lose/gain in image quality, I suppose. A D5100 would probably be the most acceptable "downgrade" from a 60D, although a D3100 will certainly be cheaper. Beyond that pair, I'm not sure I could recommend anything else, as both the D5000 and D3000 are major step-downs. Remember that you'll also need an AF-S lens with those bodies, as they have no screw-drive to operate older AF and AF-D lenses.


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Depends on how much you want to lose/gain in image quality, I suppose. A D5100 would probably be the most acceptable "downgrade" from a 60D, although a D3100 will certainly be cheaper. Beyond that pair, I'm not sure I could recommend anything else, as both the D5000 and D3000 are major step-downs. Remember that you'll also need an AF-S lens with those bodies, as they have no screw-drive to operate older AF and AF-D lenses.


Thats what I was thinking too. First lens I'd be buying would be the 35 f/1.8, I used to have it, and I loved it.

How much do you think my Like new Canon 60D, 50 1/4 would go for separately


----------



## laboitenoire

Why not drop to a 50D or 40D and stick with Canon? If you really don't care, I'd say get D5100 and 35 f/1.8 or D90 and 35 f/1.8.


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> Why not drop to a 50D or 40D and stick with Canon? If you really don't care, I'd say get D5100 and 35 f/1.8 or D90 and 35 f/1.8.


I was thinking that, but I don't really like my 50 1.4, so I've got no reason to stick with Canon.


----------



## laboitenoire

Fair enough, then


----------



## mz-n10

40/50d are bigger bodies than a 60d.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244*
> 
> Thats what I was thinking too. First lens I'd be buying would be the 35 f/1.8, I used to have it, and I loved it.


That 35 is special, and every Nikon DX owner should have one.
Quote:


> How much do you think my Like new Canon 60D, 50 1/4 would go for separately


I would suggest checking POTN for a reasonably accurate number for both of those. The 60D has come WAY down in price recently, so you may not be too happy with the hit you'll likely take on it, but the 50/1.4 is still in high demand and holds its value pretty well.


----------



## Marin

I would charge people a cheaper rate here to get them developed at my school but they'd probably kick me out or something, lol.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> I would charge people a cheaper rate here to get them developed at my school but they'd probably kick me out or something, lol.


I'm still down to pay for drum scans, FWIW.


----------



## MKHunt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> I would charge people a cheaper rate here to get them developed at my school but they'd probably kick me out or something, lol.


Do it and find out. Then when they get angry at you, yell, "I did it FOR SCIENCE!" as they drag you out of the photo lab.


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> I would suggest checking POTN for a reasonably accurate number for both of those. The 60D has come WAY down in price recently, so you may not be too happy with the hit you'll likely take on it, but the 50/1.4 is still in high demand and holds its value pretty well.


Checked POTN prices, and priced the Lens at $320 and the Body at $750 with two batteries. (Got it for $850, so not bad at all)

I might just pick up a G12 for a S100... Used.


----------



## sub50hz

Eh... S95. But really, a P bike? I haven't seen one of those in years -- are you just looking for a dirt jumper?


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Eh... S95. But really, a P bike? I haven't seen one of those in years -- are you just looking for a dirt jumper?


Yeah, I'm looking for a DJ bike to replace my 2002 Specialized Hardrock. I'm looking for used, and he's offering it to me in mint condition for $450.

I've been out of biking for a while, well at least the market side of things, see anything else I should be interested in?
http://www.pinkbike.com/buysell/list/?region=3&category=3&countryid=35&cityid=50&provid=9

MIGHT be getting this one actually.. :
http://ottawa.kijiji.ca/c-buy-and-sell-bikes-mountain-Specialized-P1-CroMo-W0QQAdIdZ390465318


----------



## xxrabid93

So i'm getting the 17-40 f/4L soon. I currently have a 70-200 f/2.8L, 28-105 f/3.5-4.5 (kinda crappy), and old manual Nikkor 50 f/1.4. I've been looking to get another new lens soon too; been split between a 28-70 f/2.8L and a Sigma 50 f/1.4. The 28-70 i could get for $600 used (+tax), the Sigma $450 new. I am going tomorrow to check out the 28-70. A couple questions though.

Would the 50 or 28-70 compliment the 17-40 and 70-200 better?

I love my Nikkor, but have been eyeing getting an AF 50. I don't really have any specific reason for getting an AF 50, just i would like it. Worth it?

How much would the Sigma 50 be used? I have been trying to figure it out, but i'm not sure as i've only seen a few, and for $400. (thinking of picking up the Sigma used)

So essentially it comes down to two setups.

17-40, 50, 70-200 or
17-40, 28-70, 70-200

The Sigma 50 would be $200ish cheaper than the Canon 28-70. Is having the small gaps in focal lengths and paying less (Sigma 50) a better way to go than having some overlap and paying more (Canon 28-70)?

This all of course depends too on if i decide i like the 28-70 or not after i try it.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xxrabid93*
> 
> So i'm getting the 17-40 f/4L soon...


If you don't own a full frame body to put these on, none of those setups make any sense.

Shane, the CrMo P1 is heavy as balls, when I worked at a bike shop our manager has one with Maxxis Hookworms and it was just about the heaviest bike I ever rode.


----------



## xxrabid93

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> If you don't own a full frame body to put these on, none of those setups make any sense.


5Dc foo







and film, EOS 1N (though it's beat to hell and i'm thinking of getting an EOS 3 to replace it)


----------



## sub50hz

Buy my 1N-RS instead. GOOD PRICE.

In any case, I think you might be making a mistake by trying to cover EVERY focal length possible. What do you use most? Check your favorite shots' EXIF and look at the focal length, this will tell you a bit about your shooting habits.


----------



## xxrabid93

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Buy my 1N-RS instead. GOOD PRICE.
> In any case, I think you might be making a mistake by trying to cover EVERY focal length possible. What do you use most? Check your favorite shots' EXIF and look at the focal length, this will tell you a bit about your shooting habits.


Well i love shooting at 50 with my old manual Nikkor. I shoot a fair bit with my 70-200 at a variety of focal lengths, but if i had to pick a majority i think it would be at 200mm, then 70mm, then the 100-135mm range. And my crappy 28-105 i definitely shoot with mostly at the wide end.


----------



## dudemanppl

What sub said. I would never touch the... Oh wait, any of that. I'd just have a 35 and be done.
Oh and sub, I'm back. I went to eat and never announced my absence and I am greatly sorry for it.


----------



## sub50hz

You might be selling that 28-105 short, if in fact you're referring to an adapted 28-105 AF-D. Sounds like the 17-40 and your choice of 50mm is the way to go. The 28-70 doesn't seem to fit in anywhere, and it's considerably heavier than any 50 I can think of.


----------



## xxrabid93

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> What sub said. I would never touch the... Oh wait, any of that. I'd just have a 35 and be done.
> Oh and sub, I'm back. I went to eat and never announced my absence and I am greatly sorry for it.


We all know you have a 35mm focal length fetish DMP.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> You might be selling that 28-105 short, if in fact you're referring to an adapted 28-105 AF-D. Sounds like the 17-40 and your choice of 50mm is the way to go. The 28-70 doesn't seem to fit in anywhere, and it's considerably heavier than any 50 I can think of.


Nah it's an old Canon one, the original version, as there was also a version II. Apparently has USM but focuses pretty dang slow for apparently having it. It also is very well used; i got it and the 1N from my backdoor neighbor who is a professional photographer, so back in it's day he was using it all the time, so it's pretty well used. The zoom ring is super stiff, the plastic cover for the focus distance display is missing, the red mounting dot is missing; it still takes decent shots, but it sure as heck has seen better days.


----------



## Conspiracy

No coheed tonight but alice cooper and iron maiden ROCKED!


----------



## Conspiracy

Just opened up my new bronica. Waaaay smaller than what i was expecting which is a good thing









playing around with it for a while to get used to how it works before a load up some film


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> If you don't own a full frame body to put these on, none of those setups make any sense.
> Shane, the CrMo P1 is heavy as balls, when I worked at a bike shop our manager has one with Maxxis Hookworms and it was just about the heaviest bike I ever rode.


Yeah, I've herd it's heavy, but I just looked it up, and it'll still be a few pounds lighter than my current Aluminium Specialized. I've herd they can take a hell of a beating. So I don't think I'll rule it out for that reason.


----------



## sub50hz

Jeez, I don't remember Hardrocks being so heavy.


----------



## Shane1244

I've never thought it was heavy, It's only 30 pounds. The P1 is like ~27


----------



## sub50hz

Just called the shop to see if they had an old catalog laying around -- the 2008 P1 CrMo is spec'd at 34 pounds -- that's beastly. If you're not a sloppy rider and don't case or bail very often, I would say maybe skip the chromoly-framed P bike.


----------



## laboitenoire

Good God... Mountain bikes have gotten heavy. My Trek 850 is all double-butted CroMo and is only like a 15 pound bike at most. Of course I haven't ever done anything beyond singletrack and doubletrack.

EDIT: 4000th post!


----------



## sub50hz

If your Trek 850 is 15 pounds, I would crap my own pants and post it here -- not possible. It may feel light, but I can say with 99% certainty that it's over at least 20 pounds.


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> If your Trek 850 is 15 pounds, I would crap my own pants and post it here -- not possible. It may feel light, but I can say with 99% certainty that it's over at least 20 pounds.


My thoughts. It's probably 25-30


----------



## laboitenoire

I've done a lot of weight reduction on it... I have it setup more as a commuter bike that can occasionally do some off-road stuff. I rebuilt it a few years ago after I took a spill on it--new tires, chainrings, cassette, seat, pedals, brakes, cables. It wasn't that heavy to being with because it's a pretty slender frame. I'll weigh it, but I doubt it's over 20.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> I've done a lot of weight reduction on it... I have it setup more as a commuter bike that can occasionally do some off-road stuff. I rebuilt it a few years ago after I took a spill on it--new tires, chainrings, cassette, seat, pedals, brakes, cables. It wasn't that heavy to being with because it's a pretty slender frame. I'll weigh it, but I doubt it's over 20.


Neither my aluminum, single-braked Langster nor my carbon Defy Advanced are 15 pounds. The Defy is close, but it's still not 15 without a lot more money being spent.


----------



## laboitenoire

I'll weigh it eventually... Too tired to walk out to the garage with my scale hahaha.


----------



## ljason8eg

Grip hax


IMG_5344.jpg by JLofing, on Flickr


----------



## sub50hz

Pfft, I've been tripod-ing for the last 12 years.


----------



## ljason8eg

I just did what your avatar is doing. Probably due to lack of sleep.


----------



## sub50hz

Lol. For real though, I don't know that I've seen that much front wheel lift since I was at a late-model race.


----------



## halcyon-twin

Hey everyone, halcyon-twin here, photo nut since birth and computer geek as well.

I've got a Nikon D300S with extended grip, assortment of lenses, combination of purchased and DIY studio setup as well as various tripods (Bogen, Manfrotto) as well as flash setups. Generally used Canon throughout highschool and into college, but changed over to Nikon at the end of 1999. Started my own side business doing family and portraiture on my spare time about a year ago after kicking around the idea for a while. Customer base is generally senior photo shoots, family portraits, and nature/wildlife. Enjoy travel photography when given the chance.

Would like to be added to the Photography list. My website (domain name reserved but not developed) forwards to my facebook site for the business: www.brianhoberg.com

Cheers


----------



## Conspiracy

welcome halcyon. you have some nice shots on your facebook page. feel free to share some of your work with us in the OCN photo section. we may not have a bunch of users but we have a nice group of regulars. always great to see new people sharing their work


----------



## xxrabid93

Seems like Sigma 50 1.4 used go for $400; Worth it or not when it is only $450 new?


----------



## Conspiracy

the whole thing about the sigma lenses used is that because everyone is sooooo scared of getting a lens that is not calibrated properly there appears to be a higher demand for used sigmas because your odds are much better that the previous owner went ahead and dealt with mailing the lens off to get it calibrated. im not sure why its such a big issue unless your camera does not have micro adjust in which case you would still probably need to mail the lens and camera back to them for re-calibration.

its still worth it either way to try and save any money you can when possible in my opinion. the $50 saved could be not all but some of what you would save having to pay for tax and shipping vs the 3% paypal fee buying used online or from KEH which has some great deals as well

honestly i think the stigma with sigma lenses never being calibrated new in box is no where nearly as bad as the past and as a company they are a lot better than horror stories i have heard about them like 10 years ago when apparently the overall quality of their lenses was no where near what it is today.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Lol. For real though, I don't know that I've seen that much front wheel lift since I was at a late-model race.


Yeah its pretty wild. A couple of the cars were doing it even more than that one, I just noticed that shot first when going through them. Its a combo of soft rear springs, 900 HP, front shocks with a lot of rebound and about a 3" front sway bar.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> If your Trek 850 is 15 pounds, I would crap my own pants and post it here -- not possible. It may feel light, but I can say with 99% certainty that it's over at least 20 pounds.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244*
> 
> My thoughts. It's probably 25-30


Wow, my sense of mass is way off... I weigh 145, me + bike on the bathroom scale is 166, so about 21 pounds then.


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> Wow, my sense of mass is way off... I weigh 145, me + bike on the bathroom scale is 166, so about 21 pounds then.


That's still super light! But for a full sized bike, 15 pounds is like near impossible with any kind of metal frame


----------



## laboitenoire

Just have to make the frame out of magnesium or beryllium...


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> Wow, my sense of mass is way off... I weigh 145, me + bike on the bathroom scale is 166, so about 21 pounds then.


you have a photo of this bike? i really doubt that a steel 26" rigid mtb is going to be anywhere near 21lbs.


----------



## laboitenoire

I lied, it's a Trek 950. This is an old photo (taken when I rebuilt it), but it's the current setup.

DSCF0009.JPG 317k .JPG file


----------



## iandroo888

does anyone have a recommendation on video stabilizers? for use with dslr? cheapest possible...


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iandroo888*
> 
> does anyone have a recommendation on video stabilizers? for use with dslr? cheapest possible...


Budget?

Also if you wanna go super cheap assuming you are handy with a few simple tools i can send you the schematics to build your own from stuff bought at home depot or lowes


----------



## MistaBernie

Huh, those would be interesting to see - wanna send those to me? [email protected]


----------



## Conspiracy

Yea will do. Im on an all day video shoot doing a food tour in athens, ga so ill get back to yall later


----------



## MistaBernie

No rush, my velcro straps seem to be holding fine.









I think I'm itching to do another review. Not sure what I'd do next, but it would probably be the 24-70 since I've been shooting it so much lately.


----------



## captainchair

Hey guys! New to this section of the forum, long time camera fan here. Off to get my MFA in Photography this August







. Large format user.







Nice to meet you all. williamkoone.tumblr.com


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iandroo888*
> 
> does anyone have a recommendation on video stabilizers? for use with dslr? cheapest possible...


http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/579906-REG/Glidecam_GLHD1_HD1000_Stabilizer_System.html

That's what a friend of ours uses for weddings and BMX videos. Pretty dialed for not a ton of doll hairs.


----------



## Shane1244

There are tons of video and text instructions to making your own. You'll pretty much get what you pay for though.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *captainchair*
> 
> Hey guys! New to this section of the forum, long time camera fan here. Off to get my MFA in Photography this August
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . Large format user.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nice to meet you all. williamkoone.tumblr.com


Hey, another large format user. What gear do you use?


----------



## sub50hz

Alright folks, Sigma 10-20 in EF mount is gonna hit Craigslist this weekend if nobody in this thread is interested. Holla with some dollas if you want it. If you have any doubts concerning my legitimacy as a seller, you can PM dudemanppl or Conspiracy, as I've dealt with both of those guys in the past. I need this gone, I have no more croppy DSLRs to mount it on.


----------



## iandroo888

low budget so send me the schematics for one and ill consider ([email protected])


----------



## dudemanppl

Sub is not a legit buyer, he sold my virginity to an unknown European businessman.


----------



## sub50hz

Lies and slander!


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Sub is not a legit buyer, he sold my virginity to an unknown European businessman.


charity for you....


----------



## MKHunt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Sub is not a legit buyer, he sold my virginity to an unknown European businessman.


... did he deliver? If he did, that's the most legit kind of seller is it not?


----------



## captainchair

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> Hey, another large format user. What gear do you use?


A Toyo 4x5 Field camera with some Caltar copies







, thinking about selling though.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *captainchair*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> Hey, another large format user. What gear do you use?
> 
> 
> 
> A Toyo 4x5 Field camera with some Caltar copies
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> , thinking about selling though.
Click to expand...

Ooh, nice. I looked at some toyo cameras a while back, but they're far too expensive for me. I've been using a ghetto rigged speed graphic as a field camera lately. Works pretty well, but movements are a bit more limited than most newer cameras.


----------



## captainchair

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> Ooh, nice. I looked at some toyo cameras a while back, but they're far too expensive for me. I've been using a ghetto rigged speed graphic as a field camera lately. Works pretty well, but movements are a bit more limited than most newer cameras.


Shoot any color? I just recently got into developing my own but sadly I might give it up (and just have a bunch of chemicals go to waste sadly). There is nothing more enjoyable then seeing a 4x5 color neg


----------



## Marin

You should just give me the Toyo for free.


----------



## Conspiracy

Holy moley i sooo tired. Worked an all day video shoot doin a walking tour of the food i a small town in GA


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> Holy moley i sooo tired. Worked an all day video shoot doin a walking tour of the food i a small town in GA


Boolseye. Decent Futurama tonight.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *captainchair*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> Ooh, nice. I looked at some toyo cameras a while back, but they're far too expensive for me. I've been using a ghetto rigged speed graphic as a field camera lately. Works pretty well, but movements are a bit more limited than most newer cameras.
> 
> 
> 
> Shoot any color? I just recently got into developing my own but sadly I might give it up (and just have a bunch of chemicals go to waste sadly). There is nothing more enjoyable then seeing a 4x5 color neg
Click to expand...

I've done a bit of C41, but I'm having trouble getting acceptable RA4 prints from it. I used to shoot E6, but i recently quit when i heard that fuji was discontinuing astia. I still have a bunch of that lying around, waiting to be processed. Probably 95% of what I do is black and white though. Mostly landscapes, and a bit of architecture. How about you?


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Boolseye. Decent Futurama tonight.


yup.

also we shot with the big guns yesterday on the video shoot. not like we dont always use the biggest camera at the station but never remember to stop and take a social media facebook picture lol. so now i have some proof for my parents that i actually do work. not like having TV credits isnt enough but a photo is easier to show than IMDB credits


----------



## silvrr

New 7D firmware, download to be available on August 7th.

Quote:


> Canon EOS 7D firmware v2 - new features:
> 
> Improved maximum burst for RAW images (up to 25)
> In-camera RAW image editing
> In-camera Image Rating
> In-camera JPEG resizing
> Maximum Auto ISO setting (ISO 400-6400)
> Manual audio level adjustment in movie recording
> GPS compatibility
> File name customisation
> Time zone settings
> Faster scrolling of magnified images
> Quick control screen during playback


Canon significantly improves EOS 7D with firmware v2: Digital Photography Review


Canon U.S.A. : EOS 7D Firmware Upgrade Overview


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *silvrr*
> 
> New 7D firmware, download to be available on August 7th.
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Canon EOS 7D firmware v2 - new features:
> Improved maximum burst for RAW images (up to 25)
> In-camera RAW image editing
> In-camera Image Rating
> In-camera JPEG resizing
> Maximum Auto ISO setting (ISO 400-6400)
> *Manual audio level adjustment in movie recording*
> GPS compatibility
> File name customisation
> Time zone settings
> Faster scrolling of magnified images
> Quick control screen during playback
> 
> 
> 
> Canon significantly improves EOS 7D with firmware v2: Digital Photography Review
> 
> Canon U.S.A. : EOS 7D Firmware Upgrade Overview
Click to expand...

























can they make firmware where it adds a headphone jack magically? because that would just be the beez knees lololol


----------



## ljason8eg

Well that is superb. I figured it was one of those rumors which would never materialize.


----------



## MistaBernie

This probably means the 7Dii or its successor is that much further off. Nice.


----------



## Conspiracy

Meh no need for 7DmkII, this firmware update has been way overdue lol


----------



## laboitenoire

I have the ultimate test for the tripod this weekend. Probably climbing Mount Washington.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> I have the ultimate test for the tripod this weekend. Probably climbing Mount Washington.


yeah... hope the heat there isnt nearly as bad as what it is here otherwise youll be testing the max temperature for tripod operation haha


----------



## laboitenoire

Ha, high heat is never a concern in the White Mountains. The highest temperature ever recorded at the summit of Washington is 72 degrees... Coldest in June was like 4... It's supposed to be 80ish at the base and 59-60 at the top.


----------



## MistaBernie

Dudeman, do you have family on the east coast? I'm at a wedding and there are like 30 people here with DSLRs.. Even a guy walking around with a Rolicore around his neck... And me with my S95... My family would be so ashamed...


----------



## dudemanppl

Rolicore, wot? S95 is the best camera ever.


----------



## MistaBernie

Cheap version of a Roliflex. Twin lens reflex 120. So many cameras. It was legit like paparazzi when the b&g came in. Open(ish) bar though so no complaints.. I wouldn't say I'm drunk but I may have been the only person dancing to the song that Travolta and Uma Thurman did the twist to in Pulp Fiction.. Oh lawd...


----------



## Conspiracy

what is open(ish) bar? they cut you off after a certain number?


----------



## MistaBernie

The reception is at an art museum - they have coolers of beer and such behind a table. I'm not paying for booze, I just don't know how long it will last.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Rolicore, wot?


Rolleicord.


----------



## MistaBernie

Yup that one.


----------



## Conspiracy

alright internet bout to go to grocery store before it gets crazy hot.

this whole heat thing has gone far enough im ok with anything 90-99 but triple digit temperatures is unacceptable

http://www.weather.com/weather/today/Atlanta+GA+USGA0028:1:US


----------



## laboitenoire

My day was the opposite. Successfully summitted Washington, where it was 55 degrees with sustained winds over 50 mph...


----------



## Conspiracy

cool. post pics or it didnt happen hahaha

after your done editing/processing lol


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> cool. post pics or it didnt happen hahaha
> 
> after your done editing/processing lol


No! We need pics NAOW!


----------



## laboitenoire

Don't have pics illustrating the crazy wind, but they are being edited right now. I'll post them tomorrow when I'm back in a semi-conscious state of mind.


----------



## MistaBernie

You didn't plant an OCN flag at the top of Washington? Son, I am disappoint.

(not really of course.. I get tired _looking_ at Mt Washington, let alone even thinking about getting to the top).


----------



## laboitenoire

Yeah, it was pretty intense. Dad and I bagged Monroe and Washington today. We thought about Clay as well, but fighting the rocks in these winds was just killer and we were absolutely pooped when we got to the top of Washington.


----------



## MistaBernie

With your dad nonetheless. That's really cool.

Yeah, I got winded walking a mile and a half to sit down and watch fireworks. Granted, I was holding a heavy duty folding chair in a bag.. thing weighed like 9 lbs. It was intense...


----------



## Marin

Don't like FF, want to switch to Phase One already.


----------



## dudemanppl

Just shoot more LF. MFDBs blown up huge still bow down to 8x10".


----------



## Marin

Not viable commercially.


----------



## dudemanppl

Ah, well you can get used like P45 for... Wow nevermind still expensive. GLHF.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> Don't like FF, want to switch to Phase One already.


banks have lots of money and sometimes give it to you for free is your extremely forceful







i dont suggest that though


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> With your dad nonetheless. That's really cool.
> Yeah, I got winded walking a mile and a half to sit down and watch fireworks. Granted, I was holding a heavy duty folding chair in a bag.. thing weighed like 9 lbs. It was intense...


Hahaha, it's perfectly alright that not everybody enjoys a nice long hike. Our server at the restaurant we stopped at near Loon thought we were crazy for climbing Washington.

Yeah, it's the second time Dad climbed Washington. First time was like, 35 years ago.

Photos are uploading now. I'll probably post a new thread as I'll probably use it to post my thoughts on the bag and tripod I took for the hike.


----------



## foothead

Did a bit more weight reduction on my camera earlier. I may have gone overboard a bit.


----------



## MistaBernie

@foothead -- why do I have a feeling you just turned this into a large format pinhole camera?

FYI Canon S100 shooters --

Canon S100 has a service advisory about a part disconnecting internally which is causing a lens error. See here:

http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/professional/products/professional_cameras/pro_ps_digital_cameras/powershot_s100?pageKeyCode=prdAdvDetail&docId=0901e024805ab992&fb_source=message

There is a range of affected serials - any starting between 29 and 41 can be impacted. Click on the link for more info.


----------



## Conspiracy

So the temperature is only getting up to 97 today


----------



## MistaBernie

I'm hearing information from scattered sources that the Canon Loyalty Program was dropped to 10%. If that's the case, it's not really worth it for some people (Californians come to mind).

Also.. apparently the 35L II patent was released on 6/28/2012.
http://www.canonrumors.com/2012/07/patent-canon-ef-35-f1-4l/

Queue grumbling.... now?


----------



## Conspiracy

What could they possibly improve on the 35L?


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> What could they possibly improve on the 35L?


They could give it IS, but it seems they have not.


----------



## MistaBernie

I dont know if the current 35L has any UD glass in it, but the patent indicates there will be a couple of UD elements. Also, apparently an update to the focus system (though I'm not sure if that's true or not from what I've read). If it can get to the quality of the 24L Mk II though, I know that people are going to consider it (if it's not like $2000 of course, which it likely will be).

As for IS, I feel like it would be wasted on the 35L. I don't feel like the 35L is used (in general) as a walk around or for capturing fast action that would benefit from image stabilization. My







of course... if people think they'd use IS on it, then so be it, but not adding IS would keep it cheaper too (hypothetically).


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> They could give it IS, but it seems they have not.


IS would be pointless on a lens that short and it would make it crazy expensive too


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> They could give it IS, but it seems they have not.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IS would be pointless on a lens that short and it would make it crazy expensive too
Click to expand...

Pfft, night time shooting! Help keep ISO down when I don't have a tripod.







(I've been a vampire lately)

I still don't understand why they didn't give the 24-70 IS.


----------



## MistaBernie

Yeah, I can agree with that, it would be nice to have IS in the brick. Of course, if if the new version is $2300 _without it_ , imagine how much it would cost _with it..







_


----------



## Sean Webster

yea, I was so shocked! I thought it was going to be soo much cheaper too, like just replace the previous one at the same $.

And a 18-55 that has IS is only like 150...So it would be like $50-$100 more for IS.


----------



## Conspiracy

Lol yeah. But we are talking red ring here. Everything is more expensive haha


----------



## sub50hz

Canon is pricing themselves out of 35mm.


----------



## mz-n10

you guys are lying to yourself if you dont think IS is useful on something like a 35mm. it might be expensive as but it is useful.....
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> *snip*...... for capturing fast action that would benefit from image stabilization.


you wouldnt use IS for fast action (at least not this wide) you would be using it to shoot 1/10 hand held and keep the iso down.


----------



## Marin

IS is useless for me.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> you guys are lying to yourself if you dont think IS is useful on something like a 35mm. it might be expensive as but it is useful.....
> you wouldnt use IS for fast action (at least not this wide) you would be using it to shoot 1/10 hand held and keep the iso down.


Yeah, I had four conversations going on at the same time. Granted, with a decent body, cranking ISO isn't bad, and with such a large aperture there aren't going to be alot of applications where you _need_ to drop the iso and slow down the shutter.

It definitely would have its applications though, don't get me wrong.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> IS is useless for me.


thats only if you shoot on a tripod....but im sure you have shot something handheld where IS could be useful.

plus, its a feature you can turn off. so technically it wont harm IQ either.

it will harm you wallet tho








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Yeah, I had four conversations going on at the same time. Granted, with a decent body, cranking ISO isn't bad, and with such a large aperture there aren't going to be alot of applications where you _need_ to drop the iso and slow down the shutter.
> It definitely would have its applications though, don't get me wrong.


np. just saying it would be useful.


----------



## Conspiracy

A little late start to the morning but about to leave to go on a short hike today with my newly aquired bronica with roughly 27 shots in it and my xd11 with 3 rolls and the 28mm. Good thing i wasnt trying to get there early for the sunrise lol


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> A little late start to the morning but about to leave to go on a short hike today with my newly aquired bronica with roughly 27 shots in it and my xd11 with 3 rolls and the 28mm. Good thing i wasnt trying to get there early for the sunrise lol


Nice. It's too damn humid here to do anything of the sort, not to mention my still-hampered walking ability. I would love to shoot at sunrise one of these days since I don't sleep and can't work.


----------



## foothead

Just went and shot that collapsing house I was talking about on IRC earlier. Got there right before sunrise, took a couple shots, then I noticed the door was open. Wow, it's neat in there. Looked like it hadn't been touched since 1970. Only managed to get one photo though, since all I had left was fomapan, which would not work at all with the multi-second exposures I needed.

Also took a couple polaroids while I was there, though they're pretty bad. I'll post in a bit when i can get my scanner working.

EDIT:





































Note to self: Polaroid is not SLR.


----------



## MistaBernie

What are you using for Polaroid film? Please dont say Impossible Project.. soo spansive.

Other than that though, this was very cool... I've kind of been on an UbrEx kick lately for abandoned buildings, etc, and the stuff that people end up with is nothing short of amazing.


----------



## foothead

Fuji FP-100C. It's like $7.50 for ten shots. quite reasonable imo.


----------



## MistaBernie

Uh, yeah, just alot. Impossible Project is ridiculous -- something like $60 for 20 shots..


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Uh, yeah, just alot. Impossible Project is ridiculous -- something like $60 for 20 shots..


Yeah. The results aren't that great either. They're getting better though. Maybe they'll perfect it at some point.

There's also a couple projects trying to duplicate the old B&W P/N film. That is way more interesting than the integral stuff imo. Should be simpler to make too, though they're starting from scratch unlike impossible.


----------



## Conspiracy

cool shots foot.

had a pretty good first hike and outing with the bronica. there were several paths to chose from to walk and after talking with the park ranger person chose to take the paths around the lake because of the super old country club houses from the golf course that used to be at this mountain park place that isnt there anymore of course. shot half the roll of portra on the bronica and a little over 40 shots on 35mm and a few cell phone shots. should have taken more with the bronica but i know i will be happy with the ones i got. i saw other stuff i wanted to stop and shoot on the way home but was so wiped out from the heat i didnt stop lol

need to finish off this roll of 35mm so i can develop and keep working on the roll of portra









i hope my shots come out


----------



## MistaBernie

I did a little more digging on the CLP -- it looks like (thus far) that the 10% thing may only apply to the 5Dii. From what I've seen the 7D is still ~$1087.20 USD refurbished, which is representative of the 20% off refurbished prices previously seen.


----------



## ljason8eg

I wonder if Canon is noticing 5D II refurbs being resold at a high rate again. I know I've seen a couple myself.


----------



## MistaBernie

I think they noticed that they're selling faster than they can stock them. The problem is, at 10% off refurbished price (plus tax) I don't see them selling quite like they were.


----------



## ljason8eg

Yeah that's not a great deal anymore, especially when I'd be paying 7.75% sales tax.


----------



## MistaBernie

Yeah, and some places are even worse than that. In Cali it would be cheaper to get BH or Adorama to price match Canon's refurb price. No tax.


----------



## Conspiracy

So i cant figure out how to share some of the shots i took on my phone from my phone so i guess ill just develop and scan instead since that will be better anyway. Also dont know the password to the computer here to hop on chat so im stuck on my phone.

Also i think ima pass out soon because the heat practically killed me doing a short hike today :/


----------



## MKHunt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> So i cant figure out how to share some of the shots i took on my phone from my phone so i guess ill just develop and scan instead since that will be better anyway. Also dont know the password to the computer here to hop on chat so im stuck on my phone.
> Also i think ima pass out soon because *the heat practically killed me doing a short hike* today :/


On Thursday I head to southern UT for 4 days of hiking in the sun all day. XD

Also if on your phone.... just email them to yourself.


----------



## sub50hz

Use Dropbox, ya dufus.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Use Dropbox, ya dufus.


qftw


----------



## Conspiracy

so after recovering from what was apparently heat exhaustion and i didnt realize until feeling not that great yesterday i have hopefully decided a project to work on this weekend other than developing and scanning.

going to make my own reflector since i lost mine and a stand from a el cheapo tripod laying around my girlfriends house. also have possibly scheduled to do a fun portrait shoot on film with someone so i will be able to test it out and test out shooting some portraits on movie film with the xd11 and the bronica as well

in case anyone is interested in making one too









http://www.inventgeek.com/2009-Projects/DIY-40Inch-Silver-Reflector/OverView.aspx

hopefully will be something fun to keep me busy


----------



## Conspiracy

So um instead of making my own reflector i think i might attempt to use the windshield thingy in my car because i am cheap. I also have an el cheapo tripod to clamp it to with adjustable legs and crank to raise the head. Going to be epic portrait lighting for da low low prices


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> So um instead of making my own reflector i think i might attempt to use the windshield thingy in my car because i am cheap. I also have an el cheapo tripod to clamp it to with adjustable legs and crank to raise the head. Going to be epic portrait lighting for da low low prices


I should have thought of that lol. I just got two westscott 40" 5 in 1 reflectors for $40 a week ago. Haven't been able to use them much yet, but with the gold side my mom turned orange during sunset when I was testing them out. XD


----------



## Conspiracy

Gold reflector is great but not ideal for everyone. I see gold used too mich on tv and it makes people look bronze rather than adding subtle warm fill like iys normally used. When i use reflectors its usually the silver and dos equis tehe... Couldnt resist. Dos equis isnt very good beer though but clever commercials


----------



## mz-n10

golden hour + gold reflect + chinese skin tones = propaganda yellow......learned the hard way when i only brought a gold reflector to a shoot....


----------



## MistaBernie

You can fix that if you have your target hold a white balance/gray card, reflect the light towards them and take a white balance shot under that lighting.. you still get the light, and your subjects don't look ridiculously golden.


----------



## Conspiracy

AWB? or just fix in post lol

jk


----------



## captainchair

or just stop taking photographs forever.


----------



## sub50hz

Finally parted ways with AMD in the CPU arena. Ivy Bridge, you _so fine_.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Finally parted ways with AMD in the CPU arena. Ivy Bridge, you _so fine_.


I recently went from amd to sandy bridge and I was thinking the same.


----------



## sub50hz

PS runs like 80000000x better now. Great. _Job._


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> PS runs like 80000000x better now. *Great. Job.*


----------



## sub50hz

Marin, that's the best T&E gif I've seen in a while.


----------



## MistaBernie

Huh, the 'Rate the photo above you' thread has ~1/3 the replies but it just (relatively recently) hit 500,000+ hits (whereas this thread is in the mid 350s...). Fascinating.


----------



## sub50hz

That thread is just full of snappers, so no loss.


----------



## dennyb

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> That thread is just full of snappers, so no loss.


Ouch....that hurt


----------



## Sean Webster

And they skip people and rate pics that are like 10 pages back in that thread. -__-


----------



## dennyb

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> And they skip people and rate pics that are like 10 pages back in that thread. -__-


well, that part didn't hurt so much....but it was surprising


----------



## Conspiracy

that happens all the time. not a big deal honestly. do what everyone else does when you get skipped over. repost lol


----------



## dennyb

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> that happens all the time. not a big deal honestly. do what everyone else does when you get skipped over. repost lol


Getting skipped over was not the problem. The pic got rated at the time and the problems that I had with it were discussed and solved. This was a chap re- rating from a pic I posted quite awhile ago. i thought it was gone to the great beyond ...or the dead photo house


----------



## Conspiracy

Sorry bro. Not much anyone can do, most people that randomly post in that thread dont know what it is or the rules


----------



## ljason8eg

That thread never fails to bring some lulz, so I enjoy it.


----------



## Sean Webster

Anyone else up? I think I'm about to go to the beach. What should I try shooting for (besides girls)?


----------



## dudemanppl

Girls are not the only things in life...


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Girls are not the only things in life...


Really?


----------



## Conspiracy

Get a girlfriend so you dont have to be a creeper lol


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> Get a girlfriend so you dont have to be a creeper lol


I'd creep her away.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> Get a girlfriend so you dont have to be a creeper lol
> 
> 
> 
> I'd creep her away.
Click to expand...

Haha. After talking with you on chat before, I have to agree with this assessment.


----------



## Sean Webster




----------



## MKHunt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Really?


Do you not have an avy to save on server storage?

Guise I luv my K5. I know it's not super snazzy like most of your cameras but I love it nonetheless.


----------



## Conspiracy

dont need a fancy camera to take pictures. just need a camera lol


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Anyone else up? I think I'm about to go to the beach. What should I try shooting for (besides girls)?


More girls?


----------



## Sean Webster

LOL, well i didn't shoot anyone, but I found this weird thingy:


What is this goo? by Sean Webster Photo, on Flickr


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Slug/snail slime? You should try tasting it.


----------



## Conspiracy

Yea definitely should have tasted it lol


----------



## MKHunt

Taste would have told you. You should check to see if it's still there for tasting.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MKHunt*
> 
> Taste would have told you. You should check to see if it's still there for tasting.


agreed return to said location for further photographing and tasting


----------



## ljason8eg

I think its jellyfish remains after they get washed ashore.


----------



## laboitenoire

Yeah, looks like a jellyfish...

Anyway, just got back from visiting my girlfriend out in Ohio. It was hot as _balls_ out there (over 95 every day!) so we didn't go hiking down in Hocking Hills like we had planned to...


----------



## Sean Webster

I went back today and it was a jello fish. I DID NOT TASTE IT.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> I went back today and it was a jello fish. I DID NOT TASTE IT.












Beer = jellyfish.


----------



## MKHunt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> I went back today and it was a jello fish. I DID NOT TASTE IT.


How sure are you though?

There is only one way to be completely sure....


----------



## Sean Webster

Peanut butter jellofish sammy?


----------



## Conspiracy

if it was jello fish how do you know what flavor it was without tasting lol


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Peanut butter jellofish sammy?


Yes. Take many pictures before you eat it.


----------



## xxrabid93

Hey do any of you know if i buy a Sigma 50 1.4 second hand and need to send it and my body to Sigma to be calibrated, does Sigma charge anything?


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xxrabid93*
> 
> Hey do any of you know if i buy a Sigma 50 1.4 second hand and need to send it and my body to Sigma to be calibrated, does Sigma charge anything?


I'm pretty sure they would charge you. I think the free calibration service is only if the lens is under warranty, which doesn't transfer. If you have the invoice from the original owner you probably can get around it though.


----------



## xxrabid93

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> I'm pretty sure they would charge you. I think the free calibration service is only if the lens is under warranty, which doesn't transfer. If you have the invoice from the original owner you probably can get around it though.


Ok cool thanks for the info.


----------



## dudemanppl

Once a month, I think long and hard (heh) about a Leica M8.


----------



## Marin

And you realize it sucks.


----------



## dudemanppl

Pretty much. I'd still like to try it though?


----------



## sub50hz

Nah, Dave.


----------



## Marin

Too many flaws and it's not FF. Since everyone's probably read it by now there's no real reason to link the war photographers experience with the M8.


----------



## dudemanppl

Yeah I think I've read what you're talking about. Goal for me: finish all of my 135 film before I sell the Leica and FM2.


----------



## Conspiracy

Still dont understand why your getting rid of all your 35mm. I mean i do understand but i would still keep like one small body and lens with a little film in case you need a party cam lol


----------



## dudemanppl

X100.


----------



## registered99

Someone buy mine


----------



## dudemanppl

Sooner or later, but only if fruit snacks are included.


----------



## Marin

I wouldn't get rid of a Leica. One of the few bodies I'd hold onto.


----------



## captainchair

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> I wouldn't get rid of a Leica. One of the few bodies I'd hold onto.


Because it would make a nice decoration?


----------



## Marin

I just like the heft/ergonomics they have and the method of loading film. Also I dig rangefinders a lot, that's why I have a GF670.


----------



## Conspiracy

I painted a red dot on my minolta. Now it takes pro pictures









Red dot > red ring ?

Maybe ill paint both for supreme image quality


----------



## mz-n10

the leica slr were meh btw....

also technically speaking the xd11 is the basis for the leica r3....


----------



## dudemanppl

Loading a Leica past the M2, VERY nice.


----------



## registered99

Yeah any kind of fruit food or package of stuff + X100


----------



## WIGILOCO

What do you guys say, should I trade my t2i/550D to EOS 40D , 30k shot, and get 50€ too? In mint shape, from pictures and from the seller's text.


----------



## pravius

Hey guys just joining this thread and the photography community. Recently picked up a Nikon D3100 as a beginner camera, because I am very new to photography. It came with a lens and I purchased a separate zoom lens I forgot the exact mm range on them, however. Been learning the basics so I have been playing with different lighting scenarios, some macro photography even though I don't have a macro lens







My wife likes it when I take real close up pics of the flowers. I have also been messing around with different aperture settings to blur backgrounds, etc.

Anyway looking forward to seeing and sharing some photos here on my favorite site. See you all around









-Prav


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *WIGILOCO*
> 
> What do you guys say, should I trade my t2i/550D to EOS 40D , 30k shot, and get 50€ too? In mint shape, from pictures and from the seller's text.


I wouldn't. What do you expect to gain by switching?


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *WIGILOCO*
> 
> What do you guys say, should I trade my t2i/550D to EOS 40D , 30k shot, and get 50€ too? In mint shape, from pictures and from the seller's text.


Nope.


----------



## WIGILOCO

I want higher FPS + better ergonomics.. I don't care about video, I've used my t2i for 2 years and very rarely been recording video.


----------



## MistaBernie

I personally wouldnt, it's a pretty big step back when all you're gaining functionally is faster FPS. Granted, the ergonomics on the xxD line are better than the rebel, but not enough to give up some of the other benefits of the T2i.


----------



## sub50hz

Do you make prints or just shoot for web display? If the latter, get whatever the hell you want, it doesn't even matter at that point.


----------



## captainchair

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Do you make prints or just shoot for web display? If the latter, get whatever the hell you want, it doesn't even matter at that point.


Agreed


----------



## Face76

D3100, but eying either a great deal on a D700 or saving up for a D800.

Sent from my DROID3 using Tapatalk 2


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Face76*
> 
> D3100, but eying either a great deal on a D700 or saving up for a D800.
> Sent from my DROID3 using Tapatalk 2


ill take the d700 over the d3100


----------



## xxrabid93

Got me a Canon 17-40L, can someone update my gear in the first post?

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4L USM


----------



## sub50hz

I think the only thing more boring than watching paint dry is checking up on my desktop every once in a while to check whether P95 has failed or not. YAWN.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> I think the only thing more boring than watching paint dry is checking up on my desktop every once in a while to check whether P95 has failed or not. YAWN.


I remember those days. Not fun.


----------



## sub50hz

It's more boring because I haven't errored out yet without upping voltage or LLC, and I'm at 4.3GHz. At least my AMD required maximum dicking-around-with to even get 4.0 stable.


----------



## ljason8eg

The new Intel stuff is super easy now. Pretty much overclocks itself. I like my generation. Only like 47890 settings to change. I'm feeling good if I know what 5 or 6 of them do.


----------



## iandroo888

i havent even started to overclock mine yet


----------



## sub50hz

I had to wait a week because STUPID ME threw away the H50 intel brackets last year thinking I was going to stcik with AMD. How wrong I was.


----------



## dudemanppl

Why do you all hate me?


----------



## sub50hz

Lol.


----------



## Conspiracy

scanning some negatives yup yup yup


----------



## semajha

Just trying to get some ideas but if you guys were traveling abroad, what lenses would you bring along? I'm leaving for Brazil next week and i'm trying to decide which lens to bring or possibly rent for the trip.

The only lenses I have are:
Nikon 24mm 2.8 AIS
NIkon 50mm 1.4 AIS
Tokina 11-16mm

Camera:
Canon T2i

My thoughts are to rent a canon 24-70L and let that be my only lens. Although, i'm a bit worried about bringing an expensive lens after hearing the horror stories of tourist being robbed frequently.


----------



## sub50hz

Rent an EF-S 17-55.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Rent an EF-S 17-55.


15-85
















Or more range a 18-200 lol


----------



## sub50hz

Both of those are too slow.


----------



## Sean Webster

For night time, but that is when he can whip out the 50 1.4.

I'd just bring the 50 1.4 myself, possibly the 11-16 as well for landscape and such.


----------



## sub50hz

50 and 11-16, what an awful vacation combo.

edit: Not to mention, a *manual focus* 50 with likely the stock focusing screen.


----------



## dudemanppl

17-55 it bro. And have insurance on it.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> 50 and 11-16, what an awful vacation combo.
> 
> edit: Not to mention, a *manual focus* 50 with likely the stock focusing screen.


How? The 50 1.4 would be a perfect lens for almost anything (just not tele)and the 11-16 would be great for wide angle landscape and close quarter place...

Edit: i didn't realize it was only manual focus lol.


----------



## Marin

Relaxing shoot.


----------



## dudemanppl

Shooting what even are you?


----------



## Marin

Some people needed some stuff shot. They styled, I shot it.


----------



## mz-n10

bring the 11-16, rent a 17-55.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> Some people needed some stuff shot. They styled, I shot it.


Paid work?


----------



## mz-n10

gut feeling says it is for purina....


----------



## Conspiracy

After last night. I cant wait to start shooting 120 lol. 220 + plastic paterson auto reel = nightmare of 2 hours trying to load film for developing


----------



## MistaBernie

In Philly unexpectedly till tomorrow - anything I should try to do/see?


----------



## Dream Killer

cheesesteak?


----------



## MistaBernie

Doing that shortly - apparently I just won tickets to see Mistallica... The question is do I try to go or not? I can get like 6 tickets but I'm hanging out with (legit) 15 people..

Also, I've been drinking Yuengling since like 11am. .


----------



## sub50hz

Yuengling sucks. Don't get shot in Philly.


----------



## Conspiracy

agreed on yuengling sucking

take tickets pick a few people to take with you and sell extras for profit


----------



## theturbofd

Definitely get a cheesesteak







and a great hoagie







It's the norm for me


----------



## laboitenoire

Even though Yuengling is rather meh, it's still better than the ~90% of the beer market controlled by Anheuser-Busch/Miller/Coors.

I agree with not getting shot!


----------



## MistaBernie

So far so good. Passed on tix to Mistallica, found Danger Mouse at the Field House. Apparently I'm 22 for the night


----------



## Marin

Knocked this shot out pretty quickly. Rough edit in Lightroom.


----------



## Conspiracy

a little too RAW for my taste.

haha hurpderp


----------



## dudemanppl

Why is your saturation and clarity at 0? Its supposed to be at 100 for a real photography.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Why is your saturation and clarity at 0? Its supposed to be at 100 for a real photography.


this^


----------



## laboitenoire

Is that... Liver?


----------



## Marin

Yes.


----------



## laboitenoire

You crazy art students...


----------



## Marin

Just fixed the white balance since it was too warm. Shot was done for my "Is it edible?" assignment in food.


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> You crazy art students...


Paying tons of money to probably end up being poor. lmao


----------



## Marin

If you don't shoot commercially, sure. But if you're actually good and build up a huge client base you can be successful. Harder than the past? Yes. But still possible to do.

http://tobypederson.com/

Missed out on his studio tour with my class last term but iirc he's raking in 2 mil yearly. So yeah.

Kind of annoys me when people don't understand the design world and sum it up as "hur dur starving artists."


----------



## Shane1244

You can make millions doing anything,


----------



## Marin

Anyways...

Done for now.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Looks too blue on the meat...


----------



## registered99

Depending on the liver, it can be even bluer. Blues seem OK there.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> Looks too blue on the meat...


Where did this guy come from? Quit trollin this thread, GUY.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Where did this guy come from? Quit trollin this thread, GUY.


I came from out of the blue.


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244*
> 
> Paying tons of money to probably end up being poor. lmao


You have to make sure you get connections and clients before you graduate too. A good internship helps as well.

My friend hasn't been able to get a job. Yet one of his classmates is getting paid 28 an hour working at a TV studio, or something along those lines, for Southwest Airlines.


----------



## spRICE

First night sky photo. Edited in lightroom:


Starry Night by Sam.B.Price, on Flickr

This was taken with my D5100 and the kit lens. The kit lens is terrible. The focus calibration is all off. When focused at infinity, the picture was terribly out of focus so I had to manually calibrate until I got the best results









Any suggestions about the picture? Exposure, editing, etc?


----------



## Conspiracy

Looks awesome to me. Nice job


----------



## laboitenoire

Sure it was out of focus? If your early results were anything like the one you posted, I'd say it's because you need a tracking rig.


----------



## spRICE

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> Sure it was out of focus? If your early results were anything like the one you posted, I'd say it's because you need a tracking rig.


Nah I'm sure it was the focus. This shot was after about 30min of tinkering with the focus ring. Every shot I took was a 30sec exposure at 18mm so tracking was never really a problem.


----------



## spRICE

Sorry for the double post but here is a photo for comparison:


Focus Test by Sam.B.Price, on Flickr

First photo is one of the first shots at "infinity" focus. As you can see, it is considerably out of focus


----------



## ljason8eg

The Nikon kit lens doesn't have a distance scale so you might have been focusing past infinity.


----------



## spRICE

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> The Nikon kit lens doesn't have a distance scale so you might have been focusing past infinity.


You can focus past infinity? I always thought that the far end of the focus was supposed to be infinity







What would be the point of focusing past infinity?


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spRICE*
> 
> You can focus past infinity? I always thought that the far end of the focus was supposed to be infinity
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What would be the point of focusing past infinity?


So the AF doesn't jolt when it hits infinity.


----------



## laboitenoire

Light changes, quite simply. Depending on temperature, weather, etc., infinity might shift around a tad. Plus, it allows for looser tolerances in manufacturing...


----------



## spRICE

I see. Does this happen in nicer (pro) lenses too?


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spRICE*
> 
> I see. Does this happen in nicer (pro) lenses too?


Yeah, all AF lenses can be focused past infinity. The difference is, on higher end lenses there's a distance scale with a marker for infinity.


----------



## Marin

Yes. All my L lenses do it.


----------



## spRICE

Thanks for the info guys!








Now I know that something isn't wrong with my lens.


----------



## MistaBernie

Rumor going around that a Canon EF 50 F/1.4 II may be in the works, but the price is ridiculous (if the rumor is true) - $849..


----------



## Conspiracy

interesting. will not be happy if that is the price though. would like to have a better 50mm for my 7D that has AF but for that price the f1.8 is still an amazing performer


----------



## MistaBernie

Yeah, I really think it's a bonehead maneuver. For not a whole lot more you could go out and get the f/1.2..


----------



## sub50hz

Once again, I'll reiterate how badly Canon is pricing themselves out of 35mm.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Yeah, I really think it's a bonehead maneuver. For not a whole lot more you could go out and get the f/1.2..


i find teh 50L bokeh amazingly distracting.....but 850 for a 1.4 is dumb.....


----------



## Conspiracy

honestly at that price point for a 50 1.4 it would have to be professional quality. they might as well make it a 50 f1.4L and make sure it kicks butt otherwise its a waste of money to have that huge of a gap between the f1.8 and 1.4. currently where the 50 1.4 is priced its a good upgrade for those that really need/want a little bit better but to price it that high they better improve the 50 1.8 to compensate on the low end i guess. will be interesting to see what canon does


----------



## dudemanppl

Hahaha, Sigma. Honestly. No better 50 than that, if you get a good copy.


----------



## Conspiracy

Im curious to see if canons new 50 can even compete with the siggy 50.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> Im curious to see if canons new 50 can even compete with the siggy 50.


Their *old* 50 is better -- perhaps not wide open, but it's certainly sharper around the frame at any normal aperture.


----------



## tycoonbob

*Sony Nex-5n DSLR*
Sony SEL16F28 (16mm f/2.8) Lens
Sony SEL1855 (18-55mm f/3.5-5.6) Lens
Sony SEL55210 (55-210mm, f/4.5-6.3) Lens
Sony AL C-SH112 Lens Hood
Sony ALC-SH115 Lens Hood
Sony RMT-DSLR1 Remote
Sony HVL-F20S External Flash

Tiffin 49mm +1 Filter
Tiffin 49mm +2 Filter
Tiffin 49mm +4 Filter
Tiffin 49mm Haze-1 Filter
Tiffin 49mm Sky 1-A Filter
Tiffin 49mm Circular Polarizer Filter
Hoya 49mm Polarizer Filter
Hoya 49mm UV Filter
Quantaray 49mm 6X-Cross Filter

Tamrac Mdel 3444 Bag

*Nikon FM10 FSLR*
Some 18-55 Lens


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tycoonbob*
> 
> *Nikon FM10 FSLR*
> Some 18-55 Lens


Lol. Great Job.


----------



## Sean Webster

Hopefully I'll be doing a poolside photo shoot or something this weekend for this MMA ring girl. Any suggestions or ideas for the shoot?


----------



## sub50hz

Suggestion: stop using those presets in Lightroom -- they are _terrible_.


----------



## Sean Webster

You obviously don't know what you are talking about.


----------



## sub50hz

Saturation: +100
Contrast: +100
Auto levels
Fake vignette

GET PAID.


----------



## Marin

I found 200 sheets of FP4+ in my locker. Awesome.


----------



## sub50hz

How is it in 120? Delta 100 has been my go-to slow B&W film for some time now, but I'm always open to suggestion.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Saturation: +100
> Contrast: +100
> Auto levels
> Fake vignette
> 
> GET PAID.


Dear god.









Seriously tho. Presets can help speed up productivity a lot. For example I made a default preset that applies lens correction, sharpening, and EXIF data to, and renames all my images upon import..._not terrible._


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Dear god.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Seriously tho. Presets can help speed up productivity a lot. For example I made a default preset that applies lens correction, sharpening, and EXIF data to, and renames all my images upon import..._not terrible._


clearly a joke since only ken rockwell actually uses that preset lol


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> How is it in 120? Delta 100 has been my go-to slow B&W film for some time now, but I'm always open to suggestion.


I've tried both in 120. The Delta was somewhat sharper, but I preferred the tones of the FP4. I developed in rodinal though, so ymmv. For 4x5, my film of choice is actually fompan 100. I just use delta for exposures over 1/4 second when the reciprocity would cause issues with the foma.


----------



## sub50hz

Dark Knight Rises was awesome. The first 45 minutes or so only had a single good scene -- but it was all setup. Think I will go and see it in IMAX this weekend so I can catch all the little things I may or may not have missed.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Dark Knight Rises was awesome. The first 45 minutes or so only had a single good scene -- but it was all setup. Think I will go and see it in IMAX this weekend so I can catch all the little things I may or may not have missed.


only about half the movie was shot on 70mm film. the rest was 35mm. still worth seeing in imax though just dont be too picky because you will be able to tell the difference when it cuts between the two. the good news is that the whole movie was shot on kodak vision3 stock so the only differences are technically the size of the negatives and the fine details in them









ill be seeing it this afternoon in regular theater. not a batman fan but i like christopher nolan and anything shot on film. and he is commited to only shooting on film so i really like him


----------



## Dream Killer

agreed sub. and no, i didnt sleep through it. i was presented with two cans of redbull for just showing up.


----------



## Shane1244

http://www.canonrumors.com/2012/07/new-canon-eos-m-with-ef-m-mount/


----------



## Marin

Not FF thus it sucks.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> agreed sub. and no, i didnt sleep through it. i was presented with two cans of redbull for just showing up.


Boolseye. We went to see it in the city, and ended up parking on the top level of a parking garage with a single-lane exit. I got home at 5 a.m.


----------



## sub50hz

10-20: GONE.

Free DDR3: ACQUIRED

Drunk: VERY

*SUCCESS*


----------



## iandroo888

http://www.ebay.com/itm/NIKON-AF-S-NIKKOR-24-70MM-1-2-8-G-ED-ZOOM-GRIP-RUBBER-RING-GENUINE-REPAIR-PART-/390427516634?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item5ae74b1eda#ht_1517wt_834

is $22 for a new zoom ring a good price? my zoom ring got loose lately due to the heat outside heating up the lens and body during use...


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> 10-20: GONE.
> Free DDR3: ACQUIRED
> Drunk: VERY
> *SUCCESS*












Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iandroo888*
> 
> http://www.ebay.com/itm/NIKON-AF-S-NIKKOR-24-70MM-1-2-8-G-ED-ZOOM-GRIP-RUBBER-RING-GENUINE-REPAIR-PART-/390427516634?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item5ae74b1eda#ht_1517wt_834
> is $22 for a new zoom ring a good price? my zoom ring got loose lately due to the heat outside heating up the lens and body during use...


probably ok for the price (since its an expensive lens)


----------



## Sean Webster

I'm about to finally order myself a camera bag. lol

Is this site good to buy from?

http://www.loweprobackpacks.com/lowepro-flipside-400-aw-camera-black-backpack-p-43.html


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> I'm about to finally order myself a camera bag. lol
> Is this site good to buy from?
> http://www.loweprobackpacks.com/lowepro-flipside-400-aw-camera-black-backpack-p-43.html


C'mon Sean. That site has a red wot rating.


----------



## ljason8eg

Eh, I dunno about that site. Their contact email is a hotmail address and even though they claim to be an authorized dealer, I don't see them on the list.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> C'mon Sean. That site has a red wot rating.


And I am supposed to know that how? lol
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> Eh, I dunno about that site. Their contact email is a hotmail address and even though they claim to be an authorized dealer, I don't see them on the list.


Ok, b&h photo it is.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

http://www.mywot.com/ Can't live without it personally.


----------



## Sean Webster

Cool, thanks.

Just ordered it too, can't wait to ditch my school backpack haha.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boogschd*
> 
> probably ok for the price (since its an expensive lens)


i wanted to order part from nikon directly through this number dudemanppl gave me but they told me they no longer sell parts







have to send thru a local authorized dealer to get repaired...









any one know anywhere else besides ebay to find parts?


----------



## Marin

Surprised you didn't know.







Nikon made an announcement about it awhile ago and everyone freaked the hell out (well, mainly Nikon users, everyone else was just laughing).


----------



## iandroo888




----------



## rdr09

i need help in picking a good lens for a d70. my budget is $200 - $250 but i can only buy from the egg. Thank you.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rdr09*
> 
> i need help in picking a good lens for a d70. my budget is $200 - $250 but i can only buy from the egg. Thank you.


Why only the egg? What length are you looking to shoot for.

I'd suggest one of these for a nice walk around lens, but Newegg is crap and doesn't have them.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/606792-USA/Nikon_2183_AF_S_Nikkor_35mm_f_1_8G.html

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/766516-USA/Nikon_2199_AF_S_Nikkor_50mm_f_1_8G.html


----------



## rdr09

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Why only the egg? What length are you looking to shoot for.
> I'd suggest one of these for a nice walk around lens, but Newegg is crap and doesn't have them.
> http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/606792-USA/Nikon_2183_AF_S_Nikkor_35mm_f_1_8G.html
> http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/766516-USA/Nikon_2199_AF_S_Nikkor_50mm_f_1_8G.html


i have a gift card that i was suppose to use for a gpu. change my mind. normal lenght would 8 to 12 ft. short distance i guess.

thanks, Sean. i'll check newegg if they have those lenses or their equivalent.


----------



## sub50hz

35 is a MUCH better choice for a D70. Every Nikon crop-body owner should have one.


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rdr09*
> 
> i have a gift card that i was suppose to use for a gpu. change my mind. normal lenght would 8 to 12 ft. short distance i guess.
> thanks, Sean. i'll check newegg if they have those lenses or their equivalent.


i dont see them in newegg :/

but yeah.. cant go wrong with the 35mm









(id like a 50mm still though







)


----------



## Conspiracy

Just saw a preview for this. Definitely will not miss it coming from Ridley and Tony Scott

http://www.aetv.com/coma/


----------



## Face76

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Why only the egg? What length are you looking to shoot for.
> I'd suggest one of these for a nice walk around lens, but Newegg is crap and doesn't have them.
> http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/606792-USA/Nikon_2183_AF_S_Nikkor_35mm_f_1_8G.html


That's a nice little lens.


----------



## Sean Webster

grr, the dang wide panel diffuser on my 430EXII broke off.









Now I don't know whether it will cost a lot for canon to repair it or if I should do it myself or even bother doing it at all.


----------



## sub50hz

Buy a Stofen.


----------



## Sean Webster

Does it even matter having it at all? lol. I just looked up it would be about $22 to fix it: http://www.uscamera.com/cy2-4265.htm

I mean, I was freaking out that the zoom was stuck at 14mm, now that I pushed in the whole holder part it works fine for the normal zoom ranges. And I nomrally just shoot into the ceiling or off something rather than direct flash on camera. Would it matter off camera? I don't think it does right?

I am over reacting to a stupid piece of plastic aren't I? lol


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Buy a Stofen.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Buy a Stofen.
Click to expand...

You are a god.


----------



## sub50hz

After about 10 beers, I tend to think the same thing.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> After about 10 beers, I tend to think the same thing.


Then what happens after 15 beers lol.... Oh wait.... Domt answer that.... Hangover hahahahahahahhahahahahaha


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Buy a Stofen.


how will the camera automatically know that you activated diffuser mode?


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Buy a Stofen.
> 
> 
> 
> how will the camera automatically know that you activated diffuser mode?
Click to expand...

Doesn't. Lowest it will go is 24mm for the 430EX II. 14mm zoom is lost, lost forever.


----------



## rdr09

will this work for the d70?

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=9SIA04D01D3837

and is it a good one?

thanks, again.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> how will the camera automatically know that you activated diffuser mode?


Just take a photo of the receipt.


----------



## spRICE

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rdr09*
> 
> will this work for the d70?
> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=9SIA04D01D3837
> and is it a good one?
> thanks, again.


Get this lens:
Nikkor 55-200mm AF-S DX VR
You will be much more satisfied. The VR helps you hand hold the lens at higher focal lengths. On the Sigma lens, the average photographer would have to have a shutter speed of at least 1/300s. With the VR at 200mm, you could probably get away with 1/40s. Also, the nikon has better image quality. You will have less aberrations and maybe a sharper image. It is really worth the extra money.


----------



## Conspiracy

in researching fluorescent lights today at home depot i originally was looking at using a 4foot 2bulb T8 light panel and now I have discovered T5 bulbs that put out twice out much light per bulb over T8. now i dont need to build a 4bulb T8 panel because its the same as a 2bulb T5 pretty much. now i can just hook up 2X 2bulb T5 panels for super bright key light


----------



## Face76

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spRICE*
> 
> Get this lens:
> Nikkor 55-200mm AF-S DX VR
> You will be much more satisfied. The VR helps you hand hold the lens at higher focal lengths. On the Sigma lens, the average photographer would have to have a shutter speed of at least 1/300s. With the VR at 200mm, you could probably get away with 1/40s. Also, the nikon has better image quality. You will have less aberrations and maybe a sharper image. It is really worth the extra money.


You can find that lens much cheaper elsewhere. They're also pretty common on Craigslist, etc...


----------



## spRICE

But he needs to buy it at newegg


----------



## Face76

Maybe he should actually buy some computer parts and wait on a lens.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Face76*
> 
> Maybe he should actually buy some computer parts and wait on a lens.


BIG SSD.


----------



## Conspiracy

Yall should consider just being his financial planner that way he never has to worry about future purchases


----------



## rdr09

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Face76*
> 
> Maybe he should actually buy some computer parts and wait on a lens.


Thanks, spRICE. I think Face76 has a point. i may have to find funds elsewhere for the nikkor lens or just send my old one back to nikon to be fixed. might still be under warranty.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> BIG SSD.


my 96 is sufficient thanks to your tips/guide.


----------



## biatchi

Sell the Newegg gift card and use the cash to buy from elsewhere?


----------



## Face76

Tomorrow my D800 should be arriving, I'm psyched!


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Face76*
> 
> Tomorrow my D800 should be arriving, I'm psyched!


Better take awesome pix!


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Face76*
> 
> Tomorrow my D800 should be arriving, I'm psyched!


----------



## Marin

Cranking out a bunch of 4x5 shots when my break hits in the next few weeks. So once that's done you guys will be able to finally see some of my work (well, just the fine art stuff. I need to sort out my commercial work).









Also got another project going down, I'll leave it as a surprise though since I don't want to jinx it. But if it works out there should be a ton of great stuff.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Face76*
> 
> Tomorrow my D800 should be arriving, I'm psyched!


And well you should be. Mine completely blows my D3 out of the water in terms of AF, DR, and of course resolution. However beware of the dreaded left AF point issue. It took three trips to Nikon to finally get mine right. The first two trips occured before they had a proper fix in place. However that fix is in place now. Check out bythom.com for some interesting discourse on this topic. Either way, it's an extremely exciting camera.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> Cranking out a bunch of 4x5 shots when my break hits in the next few weeks. So once that's done you guys will be able to finally see some of my work (well, just the fine art stuff. I need to sort out my commercial work).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also got another project going down, I'll leave it as a surprise though since I don't want to jinx it. But if it works out there should be a ton of great stuff.


awesome


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> Cranking out a bunch of 4x5 shots when my break hits in the next few weeks. So once that's done you guys will be able to finally see some of my work (well, just the fine art stuff. I need to sort out my commercial work).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also got another project going down, I'll leave it as a surprise though since I don't want to jinx it. But if it works out there should be a ton of great stuff.


Sweet!


----------



## sub50hz

Marin, are you shooting anything _but_ 4x5 for fine art these days?


----------



## Face76

Having a hard time getting him to sit still today.


----------



## sub50hz

Stop down, MOAR ISO.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Marin, are you shooting anything _but_ 4x5 for fine art these days?


4x5 and MF. Some 8x10 but at $15 a sheet plus a bulky monorail camera I only break it out when necessary.


----------



## sub50hz

Shame it costs so much -- the 8x10 look is so incredible.


----------



## Marin

Yeah. I'm probably going to start shooting it again next term but limited to just studio use. 8x10 Sinar P2's are a pain.


----------



## sub50hz

Oh, I can imagine. I look at Burtynsky's stuff and wonder how much of a pain in the ass it would have been to carry that stuff to some of those wild locations.


----------



## randomnerd865

Just got my first DSLR camera. It's a brand new Nikon d3000 I got off of Craigslist for 300 bucks! So tell me photography people is that a good buy for a first real camera, how can I use it better, and what lenses should I be looking at? I mostly shoot cars and scenery.


----------



## spRICE

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *randomnerd865*
> 
> Just got my first DSLR camera. It's a brand new Nikon d3000 I got off of Craigslist for 300 bucks! So tell me photography people is that a good buy for a first real camera, how can I use it better, and what lenses should I be looking at? I mostly shoot cars and scenery.


That's a decent camera for the money. It's honestly pretty out of date (I had that camera before I upgraded to a d5100). It's a great camera to learn on though cause it's kinds stripped down to the essentials. Happy shooting








As far as lenses, get the 35mm 1.8g lens. It is the best purchase you can make for a nikon camera. I got mine and it is pretty much the only lens I use.









And as far as using it, I recommend putting it in full manual mode and learning which settings do what. It's kind of an unforgiving way to learn photography.


----------



## ljason8eg

Anyone want to buy my Sigma 30?

There's a good chance I'll be doing NASCAR stuff on a much more regular basis and there's simply no need for a prime of that focal length at the track.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> Anyone want to buy my Sigma 30?
> 
> There's a good chance I'll be doing NASCAR stuff on a much more regular basis and there's simply no need for a prime of that focal length at the track.


How much?


----------



## sub50hz

More than *you* can afford, _pal._ *Ferrari.*


----------



## Sean Webster

You're a cool kid there.


----------



## TinDaDragon

I have a Fujifilm F30 I got from Intel









Learning how to photograph stuff


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> You're a cool kid there.


You missed the joke.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> More than *you* can afford, _pal._ *Ferrari.*


----------



## Conspiracy

why does hardly anyone ever get any of the jokes we do here.... kinda sad


----------



## Sean Webster

Sorry I don't get old people jokes. XD


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Sorry I don't get old people jokes. XD


Anyone who says they like cars but didn't get that joke is a poser.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Sorry I don't get old people jokes. XD
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone who says they like cars but didn't get that joke is a poser.
Click to expand...

Not really, it is just most of the time when you post the replies are arrogant and caustic and I don't seem to look for a sense of humor in the post.


----------



## sub50hz

You gotta lighten up, bro.


----------



## randomnerd865

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spRICE*
> 
> That's a decent camera for the money. It's honestly pretty out of date (I had that camera before I upgraded to a d5100). It's a great camera to learn on though cause it's kinds stripped down to the essentials. Happy shooting
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As far as lenses, get the 35mm 1.8g lens. It is the best purchase you can make for a nikon camera. I got mine and it is pretty much the only lens I use.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And as far as using it, I recommend putting it in full manual mode and learning which settings do what. It's kind of an unforgiving way to learn photography.


Im kinda new at this of course what can you tell me about the number on the lenses, I'm currently using the one its came with: Nikon DX 18-55mm 1:3.5-5.6G


----------



## spRICE

http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-35mm-1-8G-Digital-Cameras/dp/B001S2PPT0/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1343358944&sr=8-1&keywords=nikon+35mm

This one. Great lens for the money.


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> More than *you* can afford, _pal._ *Ferrari.*


lolz








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *randomnerd865*
> 
> Im kinda new at this of course what can you tell me about the number on the lenses, I'm currently using the one its came with: Nikon DX 18-55mm 1:3.5-5.6G


nikon - brand
DX - means its for crop-body models (the other is FX-meaning for full-frame bodies)
18 - widest focal length
55- longest (when @ full zoom)
3.5 - max aperture @ 18mm
5.6 - max aperture @ 55mm
G - The lens has no aperture control ring and is designed to be used with cameras that allow setting the aperture from the camera body. G lenses also provide Distance information to the camera.

http://support.nikonusa.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/9919/~/glossary-of-nikkor-lens-terms
http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/nikortek.htm


----------



## Face76

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spRICE*
> 
> http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-35mm-1-8G-Digital-Cameras/dp/B001S2PPT0/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1343358944&sr=8-1&keywords=nikon+35mm
> This one. Great lens for the money.


That is a very sharp lens for the price.


----------



## randomnerd865

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boogschd*
> 
> nikon - brand
> DX - means its for crop-body models (the other is FX-meaning for full-frame bodies)
> 18 - widest focal length
> 55- longest (when @ full zoom)
> 3.5 - max aperture @ 18mm
> 5.6 - max aperture @ 55mm
> G - The lens has no aperture control ring and is designed to be used with cameras that allow setting the aperture from the camera body. G lenses also provide Distance information to the camera.
> http://support.nikonusa.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/9919/~/glossary-of-nikkor-lens-terms
> http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/nikortek.htm


Wow, very helpful +1 and what are the advantages/disadvantages of my lens like strong and week points i guess also vs. the other lens that was also suggested?


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *randomnerd865*
> 
> Wow, very helpful +1 and what are the advantages/disadvantages of my lens like strong and week points i guess also vs. the other lens that was also suggested?


errr

i guess the variable aperture is the weak point of this lens? max is only 3.5 on the wide end (18mm, & 5.6 on the tele end, 55mm) compared to the 35mm which goes up to 1.8

i suggest you read up on aperture shutter & ISO basics first so youd understand the differences









but dont underestimate the kit lens, its great for starters









best you could do is explore and learn with it first before you start spending on more lenses and other accessories








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Face76*
> 
> That is a very sharp lens for the price.


i love my 35mm :3


----------



## randomnerd865

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boogschd*
> 
> errr
> i guess the variable aperture is the weak point of this lens? max is only 3.5 on the wide end (18mm, & 5.6 on the tele end, 55mm) compared to the 35mm which goes up to 1.8
> i suggest you read up on aperture shutter & ISO basics first so youd understand the differences
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> but dont underestimate the kit lens, its great for starters
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> best you could do is explore and learn with it first before you start spending on more lenses and other accessories
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i love my 35mm :3


Ive got a lot of reading to do because I have no idea what you just said lol And I still have much to learn before I start upgrading lenses and such.


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *randomnerd865*
> 
> Ive got a lot of reading to do because I have no idea what you just said lol And I still have much to learn before I start upgrading lenses and such.


goodluck


----------



## randomnerd865

I'll learn quick, I have an addictive personality and once I get started on something I get.. well addicted, so this should be a fun new hobby to learn about.


----------



## rdr09

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spRICE*
> 
> http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-35mm-1-8G-Digital-Cameras/dp/B001S2PPT0/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1343358944&sr=8-1&keywords=nikon+35mm
> This one. Great lens for the money.


i found a Nikon af nikkor 35-80mm for $50 in cl. seems to work fine and will do for now. thanks.


----------



## Marin

Did this in the studio. So built the set and used strobe. iPhone pic doesn't do it justice but whatever.


----------



## sub50hz

This is an amusing combination.


----------



## Conspiracy

Lol interesting indeed


----------



## MistaBernie

how's it working for you?


----------



## sub50hz

It syncs to 1/1000, so it's fun to play around with. I've also got an SB600 here, trying to get some flash technique in so that I can do some riding photos with the RB -- which would be too expensive to experiment on, lol.


----------



## nuclearjock

A "visitor at the feeder. D800, 400 F/2.8 VR + 1.7 TC
(kicked up the colors a bit).:


----------



## sub50hz

Jesus, that looks great.


----------



## laboitenoire

Hot damn...


----------



## sub50hz

Anybody have a spare PSU laying around? I could trade you some film.... or if it's a nice PSU, I still have that 1N-RS and 50.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Anybody have a spare PSU laying around? I could trade you some film.... or if it's a nice PSU, I still have that 1N-RS and 50.


I have an old one from a prebuilt emachine that is just sitting in my closet. Keyword: Old.


----------



## sub50hz

Eh, it needs to be able to power an X6 and 9800 GTX+ for folding 24/7.


----------



## Conspiracy

now have working internet. new modem what what









also bought half of the materials for the first light of my kit. i have the fluorescent fixture, 2 bulbs, and a 4x2 foot egg crate for a grid to direct the light. still need tripod, mounts, and plastic shell


----------



## MistaBernie

You could do that with a decent 450 psu.. which I happen to have.


----------



## sub50hz

I'm listening. Also, I'm in chat if you want to discuss there.


----------



## Marin

Got some Canson paper for the port I'm making and it's so nice. Super thick stock and it's similar to the look of a darkroom print. Printed without the ICC profile for it and winged it. Basically all of the prints came out completely correct besides one, so I need to tweak that one some more.


----------



## sub50hz

I have three 13x19s on Baryta, it's really good. Maybe I will buy some again sometime.


----------



## dudemanppl

Marin you ******* why won't you post any of your work anymore. I need masturbation material.


----------



## Marin

Just deleted my Flickr.


----------



## dudemanppl

:'o( I think I was the last one on it. I posted a link to chat.


----------



## Marin

The work in it was horrendous.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> The work in it was horrendous.


----------



## Marin

Compared to my current stuff it looks like a joke.


----------



## dudemanppl

Shut up just post more work or I will just go over to wherever the hell you live.


----------



## Marin

Here.

Rough edit of a drink shot. Need to fix the window and stuff.



Shot in studio, strobe, etc...


----------



## sub50hz

Do you _enjoy_ shooting food/drink?


----------



## Marin

It's fun.


----------



## sub50hz

I just wasn't sure if this is what you were aspiring to do, i.e. commercial food photo as a career -- or just school stuff. I never really got too into food, but I do miss seeing some of your fine art shots. Do you have a website/portfolio yet?


----------



## Conspiracy

agreed. would like to see you posting more instead of not sharing. sharing is caring. also like that recent drink shot. very cool shot


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> I just wasn't sure if this is what you were aspiring to do, i.e. commercial food photo as a career -- or just school stuff. I never really got too into food, but I do miss seeing some of your fine art shots. Do you have a website/portfolio yet?


School stuff at the moment. Websites coming soon.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> agreed. would like to see you posting more instead of not sharing. sharing is caring. also like that recent drink shot. very cool shot


Thanks.


----------



## MistaBernie

Ugh... I'm holding a Hasselblad 500C/M with planar 80 f/2.8.. So close to saying fudge it and bringing it home


----------



## Marin

Which version of the lens is it?


----------



## MistaBernie

T* Planar f/2.8 (not sure how to tell other version etc)


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> T* Planar f/2.8 (not sure how to tell other version etc)


http://www.antiquecameras.net/hasselbladclenses.html


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



Quote:


> "C" Lenses are single coated Carl Zeiss lenses with 1/500 to 1 sec Synchro-Compur shutters. Chrome finished lenses were produced from the 1957 to the early 1970's. The switch to black finish lenses starts about 1972.
> 
> "C" T* Optically & mechinically identical to the "C" lenses however, the lenses now feature the famous T* Mutlicoated surfaces. A red lettered T* is printed on the lens. Most users feel resolution results are similiar to "C" versions, but flare is much better controlled with T* coatings. Some Chrome finished lenses feature "T*" coatings, but otherwise all are black finished lenses.
> 
> "CF" Similiar to the C T* lenses, but shutter change to Prontor, and other improvements including handling/design changes. Lenses do not have self timers. FLE versions exist ( floating lens element ) for 40mm and 50mm.
> 
> "CFE" Basically CF lenses with an electronic databus connection with the Hassy 200 series cameras and the lens improvements listed unnder the CFI version.
> 
> "CFI" Basically CF lenses that are "I"mproved. Flare reduction improvements, design, shutter and other small improvements that were to "increase image quality, reliability and convenience."
> 
> "CB" Budget version lenses. Only 60, 80, and 160 lenses made. 80mm lens had one less element than the CF and less performance.






I have a CF on my 201F.


----------



## MistaBernie

Yep, it's a T*.. Waist level finder and 120 back, but 900 seems a little steep when I can get a BGN for 373.xx.

The only reason I was considering was because I almost got it for $300... Stupid honest me.


----------



## Marin

T* is the coating, lol. The designations are C, CF, CB, CFE, CFI, F, FE and FCC.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> T* is the coating, lol. The designations are C, CF, CB, CFE, CFI, F, FE and FCC.


you left out the rest of the alphabet lolz


----------



## kzim9

Anyone have personal thoughts on the Canon EF-S 60mm 2.8 macro? I was thinking of adding one of these to my bag.


----------



## MistaBernie

I'm not seeing any markings denoting the coating type


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> 900 seems a little steep when I can get a BGN for 373.xx.


Sub-400 for a body/lens/back/finder? I'll believe it when I see it. If you could have gotten that thing for 300 and you blabbed about it being underpriced, you're dumb.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> I'm not seeing any markings denoting the coating type




T* is the coating. All the designations I posted are for the lens, not the coating.


----------



## MistaBernie

Nah I didn't blab, coworker noticed that the Hasselblad in my hand absolutely was not a Leica V-Lux 1.
.

And 373 is body only on KEH...


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Nah I didn't blab, coworker noticed that the Hasselblad in my hand absolutely was not a Leica V-Lux 1.


I would have allowed that mistake to be made.
Quote:


> And 373 is body only on KEH...


So what was with the comparison then? You still won't be able to touch a 500C or 500CM in good condition for less than seven or eight hundred dollars.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> And 373 is body only on KEH...


that being said there are a lot of other parts needed to make it a working camera lol. lens, viewfinder, back and insert, advance crank/grip, and potentially focus screen if thats not included as well. all that will add up very quickly.


----------



## sub50hz

I'm considering writing a "Do's and Dont's" of buying lenses and other equipment for this forum, as it seems a lot of people are way too eager to just spend money because they read something was good.

P.S. Bernie, this is unrelated to your Blad posts. You should have bought it so I could have traded you something useful for it. Jerk.


----------



## TinDaDragon

How are these for a noob?


----------



## sub50hz

In a word, mundane.


----------



## TinDaDragon

How do I make it more lively? Add people?


----------



## Face76

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TinDaDragon*
> 
> How do I make it more lively? Add people?


Add fire.


----------



## sub50hz

Maybe just shoot something other then the logos on electronic devices and a wallet. That would be a start.


----------



## TinDaDragon

I don't know what to shoot

Lol


----------



## sub50hz

Why did you buy a camera?


----------



## TinDaDragon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Why did you buy a camera?


Intel gave it to me 4 years ago

Never found a use


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TinDaDragon*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Why did you buy a camera?
> 
> 
> 
> Intel gave it to me 4 years ago
> 
> Never found a use
Click to expand...

Walk around outside and look for things to take pictures of. Just shoot everything that looks interesting.


----------



## kzim9

Add me to the list.....

Canon T1i w/ Grip and Eye Piece Extender

Canon 430ex w/ soft cover

Sigma OS 70-200mm f/2.8 EX DG HSM - SIGMA OS 17-50MM EX DC F2.8 HSM - Canon 50mm f/1.8 - Canon EF-S 55-250mm IS - Canon EF-S 18-55mm IS - Hoods and Hoya filters

Studio Backdrop and Umbrella's w/ 5000k Daylight 105w CFL/ 250w Blue tungsten Floods

Neewer Tripod / Manfrotto 390 monopod


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Walk around outside and look for things to take pictures of. Just shoot everything that looks interesting.


Which is the opposite of what you want to do if you are interested in photography as a hobby.

If not, go trigger happy.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aksthem1*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Walk around outside and look for things to take pictures of. Just shoot everything that looks interesting.
> 
> 
> 
> Which is the opposite of what you want to do if you are interested in photography as a hobby.
> 
> If not, go trigger happy.
Click to expand...

How? He has no idea of what to shoot right?

What he needs to do is go around shooting new things and exploring the area till he finds things that he likes to shoot. Then he can start to get into the hobby more.

What's your advise? Shoot pictures of item logos in your house all day?

Herp derp.


----------



## Marin

Be born awesome. Best solution.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> What he needs to do is go around shooting new things and exploring the area till he finds things that he likes to shoot. Then he can start to get into the hobby more.


That's how you end up a snapper, with no meaningful (or even GOOD) photos. _You_ know.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> What he needs to do is go around shooting new things and exploring the area till he finds things that he likes to shoot. Then he can start to get into the hobby more.
> 
> 
> 
> That's how you end up a snapper, with no meaningful (or even GOOD) photos. _You_ know.
Click to expand...

No, that's how you end up not using your camera or think creatively at all, _you_ know.

How can you get into something when you barely do it? How can you get into photography if you don't get out and shoot anything?


----------



## Marin

Honestly, when you start at anything you'll suck and everything you do will suck. Basically you need to screw around and suck before you hopefully stop sucking (but I find that to be a minority







).

suck


----------



## iCrap

I just got a nikkor 55-300mm recently... it seems like its not very sharp honestly. Also its really really slow to foccus.. maybe i'm doing it wrong, i don't know. Does anybody have this lens and can comment on it?


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> Honestly, when you start at anything you'll suck and everything you do will suck. Basically you need to screw around and suck before you hopefully stop sucking (but I find that to be a minority
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ).
> 
> suck


Exactly!


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> How can you get into photography if you don't get out and shoot anything?


Shooting _everything_ is a surefire way to end up with a handful of crap. I feel this debate is destined for a dead end, because while you seem to be ok with shooting the most mundane garbage around, I am not.


----------



## Marin

Topic change.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> Honestly, when you start at anything you'll suck and everything you do will suck. Basically you need to screw around and suck before you hopefully stop sucking.


While true, it's a good idea to become acclimated with the work of those who are, historically and currently, some of the most prolific photographers. Shooting without a care in the world or the knowledge of how to translate your idea from brain to print is just a terrible method, one that is employed by many internet fauxtographers. Sure, you'll learn how to operate the camera, but that's not what photography is about, is it? There's a reason people go to school for it -- very few people are naturals, as you clearly agree.


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iCrap*
> 
> I just got a nikkor 55-300mm recently... it seems like its not very sharp honestly. Also its really really slow to foccus.. maybe i'm doing it wrong, i don't know. Does anybody have this lens and can comment on it?


i thought it performed well :
http://www.overclock.net/t/1264254/kenji-gets-his-hands-on-a-d3100-55-300-heres-his-impressions/0_20
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> I'm considering writing a "Do's and Dont's" of buying lenses and other equipment for this forum, as it seems a lot of people are way too eager to just spend money because they read something was good.


do it!


----------



## Marin

That's why there'a huge deviation between mediocrity and talent in photography and probably just about any field of art. But at the same time people need to start somewhere and that's usually screwing around. In no way am I saying that one should dwell on such things as over time it doesn't encourage development but really quite the opposite yet there is a period of time one should familiarize themselves with what they're doing.
Like with illustration it all starts with doodling and soon develops from there. But if you keep doodling you'll always have doodles and nothing more. Sure there might be some growth, just like in photography there can be growth with snapshots, but nothing to brag about.
What I'm getting at is there is a period of time one is basically going to have to screw around to start to grasp what they're doing.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> How can you get into photography if you don't get out and shoot anything?
> 
> 
> 
> Shooting _everything_ is a surefire way to end up with a handful of crap. I feel this debate is destined for a dead end, because while you seem to be ok with shooting the most mundane garbage around, I am not.
Click to expand...

Ok, so basically don't shoot anything and you will get better at photography? Don't practice something and you will end up being great right? Apparently that is what you are saying.

Gotcha.


----------



## dudemanppl

All this talk of sucking. I am strangely aroused.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> What I'm getting at is there is a period of time one is basically going to have to screw around to start to grasp what they're doing.


Right, I don't dispute any of that. But telling someone to "shoot anything you find interesting" is just a segway into bad photography. Maybe not, I suppose, but shooting truly awful stuff can be reduced by looking at great work and taking inspiration and interpretation from it.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> All this talk of sucking. I am strangely aroused.



Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Right, I don't dispute any of that. But telling someone to "shoot anything you find interesting" is just a segway into bad photography. Maybe not, I suppose, but shooting truly awful stuff can be reduced by looking at great work and taking inspiration and interpretation from it.


That's why it needs to be a short lived period and not something that one dwells on.


----------



## dudemanppl

Where did you get all these reaction images. I'm not going in to this conversation, but shooting can be both beneficial and disadvantageous. For example, if you fall off a cliff while shooting, that is generally not going to lead to better photography


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> For example, if you fall off a cliff while shooting, that is generally not going to lead to better photography


Would be some pretty unique shots, at least.


----------



## spRICE

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iCrap*
> 
> I just got a nikkor 55-300mm recently... it seems like its not very sharp honestly. Also its really really slow to foccus.. maybe i'm doing it wrong, i don't know. Does anybody have this lens and can comment on it?


I have that lens. On mine, the focus is about the speed (maybe a bit faster) of the kit lens. My only comparison is the Tamron 70-300 lens and the Nikkor is MUCH sharper than that one. I also understand that it is a bit sharper than the 55-200mm vr. My 55-300 is very decent for the little amount that I use it.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Where did you get all these reaction images. I'm not going in to this conversation, but shooting can be both beneficial and disadvantageous. For example, if you fall off a cliff while shooting, that is generally not going to lead to better photography


I breed them.



Anyways, what I've noticed is missing from the masses is...

- Unique work
- Unique style or just a style in general
- Work that's actually good


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> I'm not going in to this conversation, but shooting can be both beneficial and disadvantageous. For example, if you fall off a cliff while shooting, that is generally not going to lead to better photography


you could PROBABLY get some interesting shots still ?








(provided you survive)


----------



## Sean Webster

You realize I said to "shoot anything you find interesting," because he doesn't know what he want's to shoot or likes to shoot yet right?

How can you know what you want to shoot if you never shot as a hobby before?

How do you expect a person completely new to such a wide varied hobby to know what he/she wants to achieve in it if they never spent the time messing around and looking at stuff differently?

Of course a persona will be "bad" in the beginning (sometimes not, but rare), but that is why they need to practice and have fun with what they are doing or else they will not advance.


----------



## Marin

Art History. That's what everyone should start with.


----------



## dudemanppl

Nobody I know in person would be able to operate my 5DII correctly.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> - Unique work


More and more difficult with the increasing number of places to see photos in general -- mostly the fault of the internet.
Quote:


> - Unique style or just a style in general


Style takes a long time to develop, though. And it has to change somewhat over time, or you become typecast like Terry Richardson.

Quote:


> - Work that's actually good


See my first point. There's so much bad work because now photography is accessible to more people. Most people that shoot awful crap don't even know they're doing it, because their photographic hubris is so intense from carrying around four thousand dollars worth of gear, that there's no way good equipment could mean bad photos.

Typically, I stick to good blogs like triangletriangle because I know there's always gonna be something good posted. I'm disappointed that I don't have more time to work on my own stuff, especially being laid up the past 2.5 months from surgery (all of my vacation stuff still needs developing). I had really great plans for traveling and working on a specific theme this summer, but it's all been tossed. Sadly, I'm not good enough or motivated enough to make photography my career.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> You realize I said to "shoot anything you find interesting," because he doesn't know what he want's to shoot or likes to shoot yet right?
> How can you know what you want to shoot if you never shot as a hobby before?
> How do you expect a person completely new to such a wide varied hobby to know what he/she wants to achieve in it if they never spent the time messing around and looking at stuff differently?


Because it's better to learn about what you like by absorbing the awesomeness of classic, timeless work by photographers who produce incredible results. See Marin's post re: Art History.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> Art History. That's what everyone should start with.


yup yup


----------



## mz-n10

i dont know what you guys are talking about...art history and not sucking...

there are literally 2 rules in photography

Photography
1) use the widest lens you have 10-20 sigma is a good place to start.
2) tilt the camera at an angle for every shot

additionally there are 4 rules for post.

Post
1) post huge amounts of vignetting
2) +100 contrast in LR
3) +100 vibrance in LR
4) +100 saturation in LR

just following these simple rules you will get so many likes on facebook for your l337 images.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> i dont know what you guys are talking about...art history and not sucking...
> there are literally 2 rules in photography
> Photography
> 1) use the widest lens you have 10-20 sigma is a good place to start.
> 2) tilt the camera at an angle for every shot
> additionally there are 4 rules for post.
> Post
> 1) post huge amounts of vignetting
> 2) +100 contrast in LR
> 3) +100 vibrance in LR
> 4) +100 saturation in LR
> just following these simple rules you will get so many likes on facebook for your l337 images.


Lol, i'm pretty gone at this.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> i dont know what you guys are talking about...art history and not sucking...
> there are literally 2 rules in photography
> Photography
> 1) use the widest lens you have 10-20 sigma is a good place to start.
> 2) tilt the camera at an angle for every shot
> additionally there are 4 rules for post.
> Post
> 1) post huge amounts of vignetting
> 2) +100 contrast in LR
> 3) +100 vibrance in LR
> 4) +100 saturation in LR
> just following these simple rules you will get so many likes on facebook for your l337 images.


----------



## sub50hz

Did you just get a Wacom or something?


----------



## Marin

Over a year now.


----------



## sub50hz

How well can you draw a T-Rex?


----------



## myocbettar

Wat camera do u guys suggest for HD recorning?


----------



## mz-n10

tell me im wrong for those rules....








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *myocbettar*
> 
> Wat camera do u guys suggest for HD recorning?


define HD....

theres 720i, 720p, 1080i, 1080p and now theres 4k....

theres also 24,30,60,120,240,etc frame rates....


----------



## myocbettar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> tell me im wrong for those rules....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> define HD....


high defenition like 1180P


----------



## dudemanppl

Why don't you want a 1181p camera?


----------



## myocbettar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Why don't you want a 1181p camera?


idk thats too much $$$


----------



## Conspiracy

LOL!

1080p camera too much? You can record 1080p for as little as $100....

Also there is now 2k, 3k.......and 8k if im not mistaken as the japonese have of course doubled the highest resolution to something that is not yet even projectable hahahah

There is no 1180p or 1181p dudemanppl was making fun of your typo most likely.

Start a new thread asking for advice and explain your level of camera knowledge which im guessing is begginer


----------



## Face76

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iCrap*
> 
> I just got a nikkor 55-300mm recently... it seems like its not very sharp honestly. Also its really really slow to foccus.. maybe i'm doing it wrong, i don't know. Does anybody have this lens and can comment on it?


Taken with the same combo.










The lens isn't bad, but it's no 300mm f/2.8 either.


----------



## Onex

Hmm trying to get into photography as a hobby, do you guys think a t3i + 18 - 55mm for $500 a good deal?


----------



## aksthem1

That's a good deal actually. A used T2i kit goes for around the same now.


----------



## Sean Webster

Yea I'd say so too, maybe try haggling some as well!


----------



## Onex

thanks I think its time to get me a camera


----------



## sub50hz

Well, more bad news -- might have to have another back surgery. Kinda sucks, I've lost an entire summer of traveling and shooting to being laid up in a hospital or in bed at home. Very depresso, and it's made me quite salty lately.


----------



## MistaBernie

What great news, Sub§

Ive decided to officially pass on the 'Blad. I had a convoluted plan that basically involved me unloading my 15 FE, getting a T3i kit in trade (BNIB), selling that for a loss but quickly, and using those monies to get it. I was talking to the kid that wants my fisheye (kinda) and he was like 'seems like an awful lot of work for something you're probably not going to use a whole lot'. Little did he know, he talked himself out of a pretty cheap (but otherwise BNIB) 3 month old Sigma 15 F/2.8 FE, but I'm not too upset about it. At least now I can still shoot BMX... because, you know, that's what I shoot here in Bawston.


----------



## sub50hz

Well, that sounds complicated, haha. I still say you should look into getting an ETR/ETRSi if you want to dabble in medium format. They're very inexpensive, good quality, and can easily be sold for what you invest in it.


----------



## MistaBernie

Yeah, that's probably what I'll do.


----------



## SS_Patrick

Thinking about selling my T3i

I want it gone quick, debating between here, ebay or potn. Looking to invest in my next lens


----------



## sub50hz

Did you buy a 5DII or something?


----------



## Conspiracy

just ordered my first microphone lolz. no more borrowing gear from people lol. well unless i need a boom pole or lavaliere. but now i have less need for a wireless lavaliere for the type of video that i shoot anyway. either way ordered before this potential internet sales tax garbage goes down.

external audio recorder + cheap stand to keep it close to subject = perfect audio









if this gets passed GA will no doubt do internet sales tax as we are sooo horribly in debt with zero budget we just recently renewed the toll roads for the millionth time after it already passed its goal and then some over and over again


----------



## foothead

Wow, Keh has so much cheap large format stuff lately. Wish I had some spare money. That 47mm XL would be nice to have, though I'd probably never get any use out of it.

I need to find a source for a smallish piece of hardwood for my camera. I think it's mahogany, but not sure about that. I already tried the guitar repair place, but the stoner guy that worked there never got back to me, even after two visits. Where else should I try?


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> Sorry about the horrendous pictures. Quickly snapped them.


----------



## Conspiracy

nice


----------



## spRICE




----------



## mz-n10

thought that was the retina mbp


----------



## Marin

Is a Retina MBP.


----------



## sub50hz

Pilin' up those school loans, eh?


----------



## Marin

I'm gonna' fake my own death.


----------



## sub50hz

Let me know how that works out, _Rutherford_ (wink).


----------



## SS_Patrick

T3i with 18-55mm lens and a couple batteries. What should I list it at and what should I list it at to have it gone tomorrow? Think the shutter count is 15k or so

Thanks guys









and yes sub I picked up a 5DMll


----------



## sub50hz

Yeesh, you need it gone in a day? Hell, I'll do some looking, but you're probably gonna have to take a hit.


----------



## SS_Patrick

I don't need it gone today, I price things to have them move. No haggle, take it or leave it.

I was thinking $500 + shipping/insurance


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> Is a Retina MBP.


well then...shows how much i know about MBPs









i thought all MBP had disc drives?


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> well then...shows how much i know about MBPs
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i thought all MBP had disc drives?


They slimmed the rMBP down, so no more disc drive and no more GbE, and none of the new MBPs have a lan port anymore either -- though you can buy a Tbolt to GbE adapter.


----------



## Marin

Thoughts so far...

- Awesome screen
- Nice having a thinner and lighter MBP.
- A lot faster thanks to the SSD and Ivy Bridge.
- External drives are actually useful now for working off of. Got spoiled from having USB 3.0 on my desktop so it's nice having it on my laptop finally.
- Battery life is way better.
- 16gb's of RAM is sweeeeet.


----------



## SS_Patrick

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> Thoughts so far...
> - Awesome screen
> - Nice having a thinner and lighter MBP.
> - A lot faster thanks to the SSD and Ivy Bridge.
> - External drives are actually useful now for working off of. Got spoiled from having USB 3.0 on my desktop so it's nice having it on my laptop finally.
> - Battery life is way better.
> - 16gb's of RAM is sweeeeet.


How's your wallet?


----------



## sub50hz

I wish they would make a 13" rMBP. I would sell this one and buy it in a heartbeat.


----------



## mz-n10

I use a Mac at work mostly just word processing. But I can't seem to understand whats better then a win7 rig. Ps5 and lr4 seem basically exactly the same as windows and I hate how osx groups windows that I minimize....

But mpb are definitely some of the nicest laptops you can get, slim and great battery life which is something I really enjoy in a laptop.


----------



## Domino

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SS_Patrick*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> Thoughts so far...
> - Awesome screen
> - Nice having a thinner and lighter MBP.
> - A lot faster thanks to the SSD and Ivy Bridge.
> - External drives are actually useful now for working off of. Got spoiled from having USB 3.0 on my desktop so it's nice having it on my laptop finally.
> - Battery life is way better.
> - 16gb's of RAM is sweeeeet.
> 
> 
> 
> How's your wallet?
Click to expand...

Doesn't the screen produce far less colours then their previous? Or is that just the iPad3?


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Domino*
> 
> Doesn't the screen produce far less colours then their previous? Or is that just the iPad3?


Please keep your anti-Apple sentiment in the news section, we like this thread to remain trash-free.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> I use a Mac at work mostly just word processing. But I can't seem to understand whats better then a win7 rig. Ps5 and lr4 seem basically exactly the same as windows and I hate how osx groups windows that I minimize....


Using the trackpad is a huge boon to productivity. Beyond that, OSX is like using a really polished Linux distro -- either you like it or you don't.


----------



## Marin

Also it makes sense to have a laptop running OS X when you're constantly around other computers running the same OS.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Using the trackpad is a huge boon to productivity. Beyond that, OSX is like using a really polished Linux distro -- either you like it or you don't.


yea, i can see the appeal. but for what i do (at work at least) i don't see it being anything special. actually if you work with office it turns out being a bit of a handicap (office 11 is garbage).

on the new equipment/gear note, I recently picked up a panasonic gx1 non power zoom kit and a 20/1.7 pancake.



not quite as exciting as a rentina mbp....but it is a hell of a lot cheaper.

could whoever now takes care of the gear list add:
Panasonic GX1

Panasonic 14-42/3.5-5.6
Panasonic 20/1.7


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> Also it makes sense to have a laptop running OS X when you're constantly around other computers running the same OS.


Aside from that, in just about any business nowadays, presenting anything on a Macbook or iPad is a plus -- because for some reason, owning one seems to be some sort of status symbol, or proof that you're successful since many people don't have the money to buy such things. But yes, definitely smart if you're in a situation where the dominant or only OS within a given network (read: almost every School of the Arts at U.S. Universities) is OS X.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Aside from that, in just about any business nowadays, presenting anything on a Macbook or iPad is a plus -- because for some reason, owning one seems to be some sort of status symbol, or proof that you're successful since many people don't have the money to buy such things. But yes, definitely smart if you're in a situation where the dominant or only OS within a given network (read: almost every School of the Arts at U.S. Universities) is OS X.


using an apple product makes you look creative or think outside of the box and know how "technology" work.

i actually bought a ipad3 to use when i have to go out to meet up with clients...its the trendy thing to do


----------



## sub50hz

Oh. Muh. Gah.

http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/07/30/Gariz-leather-half-case-for-Sony-RX100

Please make one of these for the x10, this is _soooOOoOoOo good!_









edit: They _do_ make one! With an opening for battery/card, even!










Me so happy, but so broke as well. Sad.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> using an apple product makes you look creative or think outside of the box and know how "technology" work.
> i actually bought a ipad3 to use when i have to go out to meet up with clients...its the trendy thing to do


So if i buy a MBP not only will people think im creative but that im not actually technology ******ed... Sold


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> So if i buy a MBP not only will people think im creative but that im not actually technology ******ed... Sold


apparently so.....


----------



## Conspiracy

So totally buying like 5 MBP to compensate for my creativity problem haha


----------



## Onex

I think Im gonna restart photoshopping after getting my t3i


----------



## MistaBernie

I'm borderline stagnant with photography at the moment. I need some ideas. Perhaps I need to find a muse. Not sure how the wife would feel about that though...


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> I'm borderline stagnant with photography at the moment. I need some ideas. Perhaps I need to find a muse. Not sure how the wife would feel about that though...


Get into macro? Work on lighting? Start doing some abstract?


----------



## MistaBernie

I've been meaning to do some sort of abstract brenzier method shot... but that seriously seems like alot of work, and I'd probably just muck it up.


----------



## Sean Webster

It shouldn't be too hard, just take a bunch of shots and stitch them in Photoshop.

http://blog.buiphotos.com/2009/07/the-brenizer-method-explained-with-directions/

I'm going to try it now myself actually. I've been wanting to try it too.


----------



## Sean Webster

Well, ummm, this first attempt is a fail. XD


Brenizer Method fail by Sean Webster Photo, on Flickr

i think I need to track my movements better...


----------



## silvrr

Microsoft ICE works pretty well for those shots. Free program, auto arranges your shots and stitches them, corrects for vignette issues distortion ect. If you give it the wrong shots though it comes up with stuff that could be considered modern art.


----------



## Sean Webster

Sounds good silvrr.

I think I did it, somewhat. Ignore the obviously crappy auto content aware fill lol.


Brenizer Method Not Fail by Sean Webster Photo, on Flickr


----------



## Conspiracy

thats actually really good for a first try


----------



## sub50hz

The Brenizer Method, or "Fake Medium Format". I'm not really a fan of how artificial it looks, but I suppose some people might.


----------



## foothead

Yeah, I'm not really a fan either. I've seen like three examples that didn't look terrible. The only time it really works properly is when you have a subject that is well isolated from the background. This way all you get is the in-focus area and the oof background without having the weird looking transition between them.

If you're really serious about it, pick up an old 178mm aero ektar and a speed graphic (for the focal plane shutter.) You end up with a "normal" lens that does this (not my photo obv.) when shot wide open. Here's another example.


----------



## MistaBernie

How many shots did you use for each Sean?


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> thats actually really good for a first try


thanks.







Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> How many shots did you use for each Sean?


The first one I went overboard and used 100...in RAW lol. It took forever to process.









The second I took about 30 in medium jpeg.

Make sure you get lots of overlap in the shots and keep your lines straight when you move the camera around. A tripod may help with that, however, it was easier for me without one than with it.


----------



## MistaBernie

Yeah, I read about that, you don't really need tons of resolution. Just make sure you do a manual white balance and exposure, lock the focus and put it on manual, and move about.


----------



## mz-n10

i would expect you to have to use a nodal so you keep the sensor plane centered. how did you deal with the distortions?


----------



## Conspiracy

yay my microphone came in the mail today. now i own a zoom H1. gotta test it out tomorrow









so last night worked on my first professional freelance video shoot doing a short TV spot about a theater in a small city outside of atlanta for the sports show that is done at the station. they called me because they wanted it to be like the travel show i work on which isnt a challenge unless its scheduled short notice with not much preparation for interviews and actual content desired. also used the sports package of gear which is not the same as the travel gear i normally use which means that everything was normal except lighting and a smaller camera but its same sensor just 1/2" instead of 2/3. the fun part was super low lighting and having the choice between 2 camera mounted lights, a battery powered tungsten light or a LED panel powered by AA batteries that is stuck at 5600K with no orange gel to change its color for indoor shooting. after getting a helpful tip before the shoot that the 3 camera batteries i have while super nice dont last very long. so i chose to go with the LED light stuck at 5600K to make sure my camera lasted all night since i wouldnt have time to charge batteries as i went since it was a short shoot and at a theatre. needlesstosay was very interesting as i had no technical difficulties other than the host not really experienced in this type of production since she normally does sports reporting. only thing i wish i had was a gel for the light so it wouldnt cast a soft blue fill on what i was shooting but its better than having a light thats the right color temp but works like a spot light and drains camera battery. either way, win/lose no matter what i think. i hope i can get more small simple shoots as a videographer to get my name out there







just hope they are happy with what i was able to give them under short notice scheduling and with equipment.


----------



## Conspiracy

Ugh dad hogging the internet :/

Tired of surfing on my phone


----------



## iandroo888

yay XD now need a new body and upgrade 12-24 to 14-24


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iandroo888*
> 
> yay XD *now need a new body* and upgrade 12-24 to 14-24


indeed









'grats on the lens upgrade


----------



## mz-n10

one of my friends found out that his nikon is weather sealed, not water proof.....


----------



## silvrr

Can't tell from the picture but is there even an o-ring on the back of that lens? Did the shutter box on the camera get the same result?


----------



## Conspiracy

lol what a winner


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *silvrr*
> 
> Can't tell from the picture but is there even an o-ring on the back of that lens? Did the shutter box on the camera get the same result?


i think only canon lenses have the little weather stripping on the back of lens...but it wouldnt have helped since it took a swim.

camera and lens are both dead


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> i think only canon lenses have the little weather stripping on the back of lens...but it wouldnt have helped since it took a swim.
> camera and lens are both dead


Nikon has it too.


----------



## dudemanppl

And Sony and Pentax and Oly and I think everyone else. Tokina glass has it too even.


----------



## Conspiracy

forum is super quiet same with chat too


----------



## mz-n10

im pretty certain sony does not have any current lenses with a rubber "ass gasket", unless its the 300/2.8 or the 500/4....


----------



## dudemanppl

Oh damn I thought they had ass gaskets.


----------



## Conspiracy

just updated the firmware on my 7D. its niiiiice

although was long overdue. im happier now with audio control and other added things that should not have been missing anyway like adjusting what max iso is for shooting in auto iso modes which isnt helpful all that much when i usually am shooting shutter priority for sports and manual in video mode

still need to test and confirm how well the manual audio control works. it appears from watching the levels to disable the AGC which is a big deal in my book


----------



## MistaBernie

I knew I was going to try to do something last night, completely forgot about this.


----------



## SS_Patrick

*cough* www.overclock.net/t/1291950/canon-t3i-w-18-55mm-and-more-400/0_30


----------



## aksthem1

You sir have got a PM.


----------



## Conspiracy

why most pros dont care about lens caps and generally lose them? because noone wants to do this LOL http://youtu.be/4hk4axMAYjk


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> why most pros dont care about lens caps and generally lose them? because noone wants to do this LOL http://youtu.be/4hk4axMAYjk


it happens to most of us


----------



## SS_Patrick

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aksthem1*
> 
> You sir have got a PM.


It'd be great to have it packaged up to ship tomorrow


----------



## iandroo888

aw is it sold already? i have a friend or two who has been lookin to buy a DSLR D:


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iandroo888*
> 
> aw is it sold already? i have a friend or two who has been lookin to buy a DSLR D:


Yes, it's sold.









That's the reason I bought it. It's going to be a gift for a friend of mine.


----------



## Conspiracy

Moving back to school today. Come this december i will be an edumacated college grad


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> why most pros dont care about lens caps and generally lose them? because noone wants to do this LOL http://youtu.be/4hk4axMAYjk


i like how long he fumbled around in LV before realizing the lens cap is on....


----------



## SS_Patrick

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> Moving back to school today. Come this december i will be an edumacated college grad


With enough debt to fill the Empire State Building?


----------



## sub50hz

What a day.

-Dropped 4 rolls of film off for dev

-Internet outage AGAIN (AT&T has 12 hours to fix before I switch to Comcast)

-Finished reinstalling Windows on my music production PC in the basement studio

-Remembered RocketDock exists










-Changed strings on 3 guitars and my 5-string bass

-Bathed both dogs

...and it's not even 1pm. BALLS.


----------



## Conspiracy

dorm room internet.

eat it


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> dorm room internet.
> eat it


You're a dick.

Anyway, turns out the lab near my house will dev my film in an hour as long as I bring them 2 x 220 or 4 x 120. Saucy. Also, only 2.99 a roll for 120 and 4.29 a roll for 220. Success!


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> dorm room internet.
> eat it


19 ms sucks though


----------



## Conspiracy

lol you just jelly


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> lol you just jelly










i am


----------



## MistaBernie

ugh, something's up with my 35L...

Live view focus is fine...
viewfinder, not so much, and it's not close.

More testing and photos depicting the differences later.


----------



## sub50hz

Live View should pretty much _always_ be close to perfect. How many of your 800 bodies does it miss focus on?


----------



## Conspiracy

check your diopter


----------



## MistaBernie

Viewfinder:


Live View x10


Dio's fine. So far only the 7D (testing the 5D2 next). I'm uploading my first examples now.. I took the firmware update today, but I highly doubt this has anything to do with it.


----------



## MistaBernie

Light shines on marble head...

5D2 MFA of ~+6 fixed it there. 7D required a little more I think.


----------



## dudemanppl

You aren't going to get anything done in the VF if you're MFing.


----------



## sub50hz

What did you call me?


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> What did you call me?


Spagett!!!! I surprised you didnt i. I bet i did lol.

Also video shoot at local brewery was hands down my favorite shoot i have ever been on. It just confirmed that i am still a big fan of sweetwater beer even if i didnt drink any while working which would have been an awful idea with how hot it was and being dehydrated from running around with the camera


----------



## sub50hz

Drinking craft beer is _always_ a good idea. I thought I knew you. :'(


----------



## Conspiracy

lol im saying the shoot confirmed that of all the beers to chose from in ATL, sweetwater is hands down the best. i was not aware of all the awards they have won as well. was a very incredible experience visiting the place where my beer comes from.


----------



## sub50hz

Go there more often, I bet they serve good food, too. Seems like most of the good breweries emply awesome chefs, at least here around Chi-Town.


----------



## laboitenoire

My local grocery store is sampling 100 craft brews and a lot of cheese today, _fo free._ This is good.


----------



## sub50hz

100 beer samples? Give me driving directions from Chicago, and a list of local hotels.


----------



## Conspiracy

i sleep in my car. gimme address and i leave now


----------



## laboitenoire

Hahaha, it ends at 4 pm eastern time, but if you can make it to the Wegman's on US 20 in Northboro, MA, go right ahead!


----------



## sub50hz

I'm still workin on that teleporter thing.


----------



## mz-n10

perseid meteor shower tonight, anyone going to watch/shoot?


----------



## laboitenoire

I thought it peaked on the 14th?


----------



## mz-n10

Peaks 8/11 to 8/12 this year


----------



## Shane1244

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> dorm room internet.
> eat it


BUT! Can you torrent with it?


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shane1244*
> 
> BUT! Can you torrent with it?


why torrent when i can just get stuff from various ftps that are owned by my e-friends haha


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> perseid meteor shower tonight, anyone going to watch/shoot?


Will it end like RAGE?


----------



## Conspiracy

first day of class of my last semester as an undergraduate


----------



## sub50hz

Bool sigh.


----------



## Conspiracy

i lol'd


----------



## sub50hz

Finally got internet service restored, just in time for Comcast to come out and eriadicate my slow-as-balls DSL. F U, AT&T.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Finally got internet service restored, just in time for Comcast to come out and eriadicate my slow-as-balls DSL. F U, AT&T.


----------



## sub50hz

GREAT SUCCESS.


----------



## sub50hz

If any of you other Mac users have upgraded to ML and wish Notification Center handled iTunes and Spotify "Now Playing" notifications like Growl used to (before it became a crashy piece of trash), BOOM:

http://osxdaily.com/2012/08/13/show-now-playing-itunes-alert-notification-center-mac-os-x/


----------



## ikem

been using my d3200 with the kit lens for about a month now. getting a 50 1.8g and some cheaper accessories. Dont have a load of money to throw at this hobby yet, but im getting there. Im not doing any pro work. I'm still trying to decide on what I want for a tele. Save up for a 70-200 or go with a 70-300 or even lower a 55-300. idk.... still debating.

Have:

Nikon D3200

Crumbler 3 Million Dollar Home

Amazon Basics 32gb Class 10 SD Card

Dolica 67 inch Monopod

On Order:

Amazon Basics IR Remote

Dolica 62 inch Proline Tripod

Nikon Nikkor 50mm 1.8g


----------



## Dream Killer

why do you need a tripod along with your monopod? that money can be better spent elsewhere like a flash or a more comfortable strap.


----------



## mz-n10

that tripod btw is horrible, i have it and i wouldnt even use it on the mirrorless......


----------



## laboitenoire

I have to agree with mz, a tripod that cheap is not going to be even remotely worth it. Having used cheap tripods and higher quality ones, you're much better off just spending the $250 or so right now on a tripod that'll last you a few years.


----------



## Dream Killer

Found a photo in an old memory card:









other than the old OCN being on screen, just ignore the terrible photo because i was probably testing flash fill and just didn't delete the file.


----------



## mz-n10

the biggest problem with that set of legs is that the buckles are non-adjustable, so after a year of use they start to become loose and that wont matter if you are using a d3200 or a d800....

but for a larger camera the legs bow, the heads dont hold and just the mirror slap cause the whole tripod to vibrate pretty badly


----------



## Marin

The TV... what is that...


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> The TV... what is that...


Well, I don't see any tissue boxes nearby, so we can rule _that_ out.


----------



## Face76

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Well, I don't see any tissue boxes nearby, so we can rule _that_ out.


There is a large amount of toilet paper in the corner...


----------



## Dream Killer

tv came with the house when we rented it for that weekend. whatever


----------



## Marin

What's on the TV...


----------



## Dream Killer

yugioh, saturday morning cartoons


----------



## Marin




----------



## Dream Killer

in other news one of my friends is messing with javascript and came up with this: http://www.staggeringbeauty.com/


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> in other news one of my friends is messing with javascript and came up with this: http://www.staggeringbeauty.com/


I almost had a seizure.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> I almost had a seizure.


theres a seizure warning on the bottom of the screen....what there isnt is a EXTREMELY LOUD warning.....


----------



## Sean Webster

Yea that noise scared me as well. LOL


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*


Birdman! Get in here!


----------



## sub50hz

15minstagram


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> 15minstagram


Ok thats really awesome


----------



## dudemanppl

http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1022605159/quikdraw-an-innovative-lens-holster
Brilliant!


----------



## dudemanppl

Dude, best thing since sliced cheese.


----------



## sub50hz

YEAH, TOTALLY.


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1022605159/quikdraw-an-innovative-lens-holster
> Brilliant!


now why didnt they think of this before


----------



## mz-n10

best pro of the whole list.....
Quote:


> Show your glass off! Camera envy now gives way to lens envy.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boogschd*
> 
> now why didnt they think of this before


because they make lens case which not only serve the purpose of holding a lens around your waist, it also protects your expensive L from smashing into things as you run around shooting.....


----------



## dudemanppl

I'd be fine with that.
FLAMESUIT ON, ESPECIALLY FROM SUB.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> because they make lens case which not only serve the purpose of holding a lens around your waist, it also protects your expensive L from smashing into things as you run around shooting.....


Cases also protect your lenses from being 1/4 turn away from stolen.


----------



## Conspiracy

test shot using my DIY vidya lights.

setup was the large 4bulb panel at 45 degrees and 3 feet away with all 4 bulbs on. and the 2 bulb panel about 2 feet away from her pointed at the wall that which is 1 foot away camera right. so camera right the light is basically just bouncing slightly off an off white wall

shot on 50 1.8 at f5.6


----------



## Awk34

Add me!

Canon 550D/t2i
18-55mm IS
70-300mm III
28-80mm USM
Lowepro Photo Trekker II bag


----------



## Mongol

Add me too!


















Have a 35DX on the way along with a T adapter to mount on an Orion refractor.


----------



## xxrabid93

So guys, recently i went on a trip to California, and it made me realize something. I want a smaller photo bag for day trips. I currently have a Kata 3n1-33, and it is an awesome bag that holds most of my gear, but in some situations it is just too big and cumbersome. The only place that it actually was helpful having was in Yosemite. In all the other places i went, a smaller bag would have worked better. So i come to you guys for suggestions. I would want something that holds a body (5Dc) with a lens mounted (think either 17-40L or 50 1.4), and probably either a second lens, or a flash. Also would probably want it to have a small pouch for an extra battery or something.

Any suggestions?


----------



## MistaBernie

Shoulder, sling or backpack?

Also, GoneTomorrow is technically in charge of the club. That said, I'll reach out to him to see if he minds if I update the list for him.


----------



## Conspiracy

i like shoulder bag. like messenger bag

depends on how much gear you put in it i think


----------



## xxrabid93

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Shoulder, sling or backpack?


Not backpack. What's the difference between shoulder and sling? Shoulder is like a messenger bag, right? Is sling like a one strap backpack that the strap goes diagonal across your chest?

I know i do want to have easy access to getting things in and out of the bag though.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> i like shoulder bag. like messenger bag
> depends on how much gear you put in it i think


I said in my above post that i was looking at using a body and two lenses or a body, a lens, and a flash. Those would probably be my most common setups.


----------



## MistaBernie

Probably too much stuff for a sling bag. I liked my Tamrac Rally 4. Its great for body with two additional lenses or one additional lens and a flash. Also, they're not too expensive.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Probably too much stuff for a sling bag.


Nah. I carry the GA, x10, F100, an ipad and a bunch of other small stuff in that Incase sling. It would be fine for a body, 2 lenses and a flash.


----------



## MistaBernie

Well it obviously depends on the bag, but most sling style bags I've seen are smaller than an Incase sling.


----------



## mz-n10

i know there are a bunch of beer lovers here.....theres an abomination for you all, i rather enjoy my cobra......


----------



## ljason8eg

Who's in charge of the list again? In any case, I've re-organized and sold off some stuff I'm no longer using. List is now:

7D w/ BG-E7 grip
17-55 f/2.8 IS
70-200 f/2.8 L
300 f/4 L IS
580EX II
AB 800
Lowepro Flipside 400 AW
And some light stands, backdrop stand and modifiers


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Well it obviously depends on the bag, but most sling style bags I've seen are smaller than an Incase sling.


It's not big, I assume you're looking at something else:

http://goincase.com/products/detail/dslr-sling-pack-cl58058
*9.4" x 15.6" x 4.9"
24cm x 40cm x 12.5cm
Volume: 488 cubic inches / 8 L*

Compared to even the _smallest_ LowePro Slingshot, which is:

*8.3W x 8.7D x 15.9H in.
21 x 22 x 40.5 cm*, and quoted as accomodating a "_DSLR (without grip) up to Nikon® D90 or Canon® 5D with attached standard zoom lens; 1-2 lenses or flash units and accessories; compact tripod; personal items._"

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> i know there are a bunch of beer lovers here.....theres an abomination for you all, i rather enjoy my cobra......


Watch your back.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> i know there are a bunch of beer lovers here.....theres an abomination for you all, i rather enjoy my cobra......


----------



## sub50hz

Well, I think it might be time to upgrade my desktop at work, but space is at a premium and I would prefer to use most of it for the display.










edit: Probably going to switch the mobo for an H77 since I don't intend on OCing my depend-on-this-to-make-money work PC.


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> edit: Probably going to switch the mobo for an H77 since I don't intend on OCing my depend-on-this-to-make-money work PC.


and a non -K 3770

but you already know that of course







)
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> Who's in charge of the list again? In any case, I've re-organized and sold off some stuff I'm no longer using.


me too

D7000
35mm f/1.8G
YN 565 EX
YN 560
YN CTR 301P
WFC-596 Carbon Fibre Tripod

few stands a softbox and a 3in1 umbrella


----------



## sub50hz

Oh wow, what a mistake -- that should be a 3770-S, I would much rather the 65W part in this case.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> i like shoulder bag. like messenger bag
> depends on how much gear you put in it i think


Depends. I like messenger bags that are legitimate messenger bags. Not satchels that are branded as messenger bags.


----------



## sub50hz

Agreed. I love my Chrome and Banjo Bros. bags, they fit all my riding gear plus macbook and beer. Success!


----------



## Dream Killer

been rocking my barney rustle blanket since they came out. such a good everyday bag.


----------



## laboitenoire

My problem is that I don't like really large bags, so I don't think I'll ever have something that I'll use for everyday use as well as camera gear. That being said, I just got a new Timbuk2 Swig backpack to replace the Swissgear that I've had the past few years. This thing is niiiice.


----------



## sub50hz

The new iPhone 5, complete with new camera.


----------



## laboitenoire

Lulz


----------



## ljason8eg

That is superb.


----------



## ikem

my 70-300 is waiting for me at home. and my crumpler 6mdh should be here tomorrow.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ikem*
> 
> my 70-300 is waiting for me at home. and my crumpler 6mdh should be here tomorrow.


nice


----------



## scottath

So today (22nd) was my birthday - my 21st.
Parents gave me a watch (that i chose out) and i recently got some wireless triggers and borrowed a second flash:

So i took this tonight:
ISO400 (ill bump the flashes harder next time), 75mm, f16, 1/125
2x Yongnuo flash (YN-565, YN-560)(1/32nd power) bounced off roof equal distance to either side.
Background is my Galaxy Tab 7.7's screen

Keen for feedback/advice for such "product" shots.










larger version here:
http://i.imgur.com/2dNKT.jpg


----------



## Conspiracy

looks nice. the dark background works very nicely as the shadows arent very noticeable right away.

i agree that you might want to bump the flashes up higher next time. nice job though very cool watch


----------



## mz-n10

looks good

FYI for watches or clocks set the time to 10:10, this is generally accepted standard.


----------



## Conspiracy

Installed new graphics card, HD7770 OC version from saphire. Re-rendered animation in after effects that took my 9800gt 5 mins last night, the 7770 did it in 52 seconds with openGL turned on in after effects. Just need to get this working with adobe premier cs5


----------



## UKTomcatFAN

Hi

Can I join, here is my gearlist:

Bodies:
Canon 50D (Gripped)
Canon 400D (Gripped)

Lenses
Canon 100-400 L IS
Canon 50mm 1.8 MkII (nifty Fifty)
Canon EF-S 18-55 (kit lens) X2
Canon 28 - 80 USM
Canon 28 - 135 USM
Sigma 170-500
Sigma 10-20

Flash
Canon Speedlite 580EX MkII

Bag / Accessories
Lowepro Computrekker II AW
Lowepro Vertex 300
plus the usual tripods / monopods / cards / batteries / cables / loose change floating around in there


----------



## KaHuNaZ

Count me in

Sony a300/a57
Sony 18-70mm 3.5-5.6
Minolta 50mm 1.7
Minolta 35-105mm 3.5-4.5


----------



## spRICE

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scottath*
> 
> So today (22nd) was my birthday - my 21st.
> Parents gave me a watch (that i chose out) and i recently got some wireless triggers and borrowed a second flash:
> So i took this tonight:
> ISO400 (ill bump the flashes harder next time), 75mm, f16, 1/125
> 2x Yongnuo flash (YN-565, YN-560)(1/32nd power) bounced off roof equal distance to either side.
> Background is my Galaxy Tab 7.7's screen
> Keen for feedback/advice for such "product" shots.
> *snip*
> larger version here:
> http://i.imgur.com/2dNKT.jpg


It seems like there is a bit of glare coming from the watch face (seems brighter than the rest of the image). Maybe if you angled the flashes differently or something it would be fixed. A circular polarizer filter might fix it.
Admittedly I have very little experience with product photography and I am being super nit-picky








Great shot!


----------



## foothead

Wow, awesome night. I biked up the river into downtown baton rouge (21 miles each way) then took an hour or so to just relax by this awesome fountain thing. I'm getting better at this, don't feel worn out or sore, even after riding ~45 miles last night as well.

sorry for cell phone photo. I think I'll bring a real camera next time.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> Wow, awesome night. I biked up the river into downtown baton rouge (21 miles each way) then took an hour or so to just relax by this awesome fountain thing. I'm getting better at this, don't feel worn out or sore, even after riding ~45 miles last night as well.
> sorry for cell phone photo. I think I'll bring a real camera next time.


that look, YOUR THOUGHTS MUST BE SO DEEP!


----------



## registered99

Did you bring a tripod?


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> that look, YOUR THOUGHTS MUST BE SO DEEP!


I lol'd.


----------



## laboitenoire

So Kodak is discontinuing all of its consumer film... Maybe I should stock up on Tri-X and Portra while I have the chance...


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> So Kodak is discontinuing all of its consumer film... Maybe I should stock up on Tri-X and Portra while I have the chance...












guess i need to cash my last check from a video job and buy some 120 color negative film before all i have is fuji to shoot


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> So Kodak is discontinuing all of its consumer film... Maybe I should stock up on Tri-X and Portra while I have the chance...


Have a source for this? All I could find was that they're going to try to sell off the film division. I really hope portra doesn't go away. It's really the only color film I like now that fuji quit making astia.

R99: no i didn't bring a tripod to use with my 8 year old cameraphone. It was propped up with some random things I had.


----------



## laboitenoire

http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/08/24/Kodak-to-exit-consumer-facing-photography-tech-and-electronic-giants-form-consortium-to-bid-for-pate

I dunno, maybe they are just gonna sell it. Doubt they'll get many buyers, though.


----------



## Prpntblr95

I have a Canon 40D and I'm looking too upgrade, what are your guy's opinions on the Canon 1D and the 1D MK II?


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/08/24/Kodak-to-exit-consumer-facing-photography-tech-and-electronic-giants-form-consortium-to-bid-for-pate
> I dunno, maybe they are just gonna sell it. Doubt they'll get many buyers, though.


well they are planning to sell because they need the liquidity to finance their reorganization....so unless there is a buyer they wont just stop making film. at least that was it seems like they are doing.


----------



## Marin

I'm crossing my fingers and hoping it goes the route of Ilford. Miracles can happen.


----------



## Conspiracy

yea i cant find any source directly saying the consumer films are going to stop production in the near future


----------



## foothead

I think no matter what happens, Kodak is going to completely go under in the next few years. Their management seems to be completely incompetent. I don't know what they're asking for the film division, but I'm sure it's so high the only company that could realistically take over is Fuji. It'd be pretty awesome if Ilford or one of the other smaller companies took over, but I can't see that actually happening. I'm just hoping they try selling the rights to some of their products later on. Fuji making portra would be pretty awesome. They might even be able to keep the prices reasonable. I doubt that would happen unless there's another bidder though. With kodak gone, fuji would have a monopoly on color film.

Anyway, let's hope this doesn't mean they're going to raise film prices yet again. It's already expensive enough as it is.


----------



## Marin

That's why it needs to go the same route as Ilford.


----------



## nuclearjock

Was shooting a soccer match when this "fellow?" showed up.

D800, 400 VR naked. ~50% crop on both. Didn't have much time to set these up. He was there and gone in a few seconds.


----------



## Prpntblr95

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*
> 
> Was shooting a soccer match when this "fellow?" showed up.
> D800, 400 VR naked. ~50% crop on both. Didn't have much time to set these up. He was there and gone in a few seconds.


Great shots


----------



## Conspiracy

crazy long video shoot today in north GA mountains. we were behind schedule the entire shoot. showed up on location at 10am and were asked to shoot people on a porch eating breakfast but make it look like it was 8am. and the sun just wouldnt work. to sum it all up we were consistently behind schedule by 2-3 hours for the second half of the day. i was pretty sure our producer was going to have a heart attack or something we were all going crazy trying to catch up :| what made it worse was being sick all day saturday and friday night


----------



## Marin

And that's why you use lights.


----------



## foothead

Ooh, how exciting. Baton Rouge is right in the middle of that cone. It's been so long since we had a hurricane here.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> And that's why you use lights.


oh we had lights. we ended up using an excessive number of lights to make it work actually. had to wait half the day for it to go overcast because of where we were shooting if the talent was in hard noon sunlight not only was she silhouetted because of being very dark skinned but the exposure would be wildly uneven as our producer did not want us to shoot it without being able to have the background view of the mountains perfectly in the shot. they were technically having breakfast at 8am and by 10am when we showed up the sun was so high in the sky it looked like lunch time and would have killed the look of the shot anyway with harsh shadows under their eyes. also noting that we were supposed to be there at 10am to start working an actually arrived at 9:45. we should have been there at 8am to shoot a scene that was supposed to look like 8am. we had 3 total light kits. one of which was a kit with 2 very powerful LED panel lights. but yea trying to get a nice exposure on a professional broadcast video camera with only so much dynamic range of a scene with a crazy range from the background video of mountains, a very pale white guy in direct sunlight and a dark skin black woman with the sun to her back was very tough. we could not switch their seats because it would not match what was shot when we first arrived and we were not able to reshoot that part which made us stuck with that setup. i personally would have thrown out that shot to make the other part easier to shoot but we had to keep it because it set the scene up.


----------



## Dream Killer

GUI IS TOO MAINSTREAM. It's like, the images man, messes with your head. GUI is not minimalistic enough. /HIPSTER


----------



## Conspiracy

Blah blah mainstream. Make life more difficult to do the same simple task lol


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> GUI IS TOO MAINSTREAM. It's like, the images man, messes with your head. GUI is not minimalistic enough. /HIPSTER


Is that Windows? Amateur.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Is that pictures of the smilies? Amateur.


----------



## Dream Killer

i'm not the one who wiped out her whole disk, noob










NETSURF /w X! IN YOUR FACE.
Now if i can only fix xorg.conf =(


----------



## MistaBernie

Oh Beach Camera, why you have to make 5D3s available for $2799 on fleabay?


----------



## sub50hz

I needed a new scratch disk.


----------



## Conspiracy

and by need you needed the newest fanciest way to store stuff on your computer


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Prpntblr95*
> 
> I have a Canon 40D and I'm looking too upgrade, what are your guy's opinions on the Canon 1D and the 1D MK II?


What is your 40D lacking? The 1D classic and Mkii although higher in the canon ranks may not be an upgrade depending on what you do. Whats your budget and what other gear do you have?


----------



## ljason8eg

That idiot is selling my NASCAR photos on eBay again lol. I almost want to contact one of my sources at NASCAR about it, but the guy would probably be paying off that debt for the rest of his life.


----------



## MistaBernie

Do it. He obviously has no regards for holders of copyright, he needs to be taught a lesson. Did you address him previously about it? He deserves it.

What is he doing anyway? Is he taking the images from your website? Is he removing a watermark? If he's circumventing a watermark, then I'd absolutely go after him.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Do it. He obviously has no regards for holders of copyright, he needs to be taught a lesson. Did you address him previously about it? He deserves it.
> What is he doing anyway? Is he taking the images from your website? Is he removing a watermark? If he's circumventing a watermark, then I'd absolutely go after him.


Yeah this is the second time. He's taking them from my flickr, but I'm sure its the low res because I have it to where only my contacts can access the full res. Probably looks like crap in 8x10. I don't watermark the NASCAR stuff on flickr since all of those shots were taken at races that I wasn't working for anyone, so no media creds, and no way to legally make money on the shots.


----------



## sub50hz

Have a C+D drafted and send it to him. If he doesn't reply, contact NASCAR and let their legal monkeys go to bat for you.


----------



## Prpntblr95

I'm just wanting a better body, I'd upgrade my 70-200 f/4 to the 2.8 but I don't have $1,100+ sitting around to just drop on a lens. I planned on buying a 1DMK II or the MK II N and then selling my 40D and the 70-200f/4 or trade for a 2.8 but I don't have the money right now for a body. I can't sell what I have because I'm in yearbook for my school and shooting 2-4 days a week depending on the sports schedule.


----------



## Conspiracy

Keep the 70-200 f4 and just upgrade the body. Going to the 2.8 version will only give you 1extra stop. What are your setting for the worst lighting sport you are shooting


----------



## Prpntblr95

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> Keep the 70-200 f4 and just upgrade the body. Going to the 2.8 version will only give you 1extra stop. What are your setting for the worst lighting sport you are shooting


High School stadium lit football. The ISO I change throughout the game just to keep the motion blur to a minimum but the max is 1600 unless I'm missing something to get it past that.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Prpntblr95*
> 
> I'm just wanting a better body, I'd upgrade my 70-200 f/4 to the 2.8 but I don't have $1,100+ sitting around to just drop on a lens. I planned on buying a 1DMK II or the MK II N and then selling my 40D and the 70-200f/4 or trade for a 2.8 but I don't have the money right now for a body. I can't sell what I have because I'm in yearbook for my school and shooting 2-4 days a week depending on the sports schedule.


If you want a better body and shoot at 1600 ISO, you don't want a 1D2.


----------



## Prpntblr95

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> If you want a better body and shoot at 1600 ISO, you don't want a 1D2.


What would be more in my range than? And don't bother mentioning anything over $800 cause I'm a broke high school kid.


----------



## sub50hz

A broke high school kid should be lucky to have the 40D. I don't know what you think you're missing, the only legitimate improvements you'll get would be a 7D or 1DIV, neither of which fit your budget.


----------



## dudemanppl

I'd almost say 5D, but thats a silly thing to say.


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Prpntblr95*
> 
> I'm just wanting a better body, I'd upgrade my 70-200 f/4 to the 2.8 but I don't have $1,100+ sitting around to just drop on a lens. I planned on buying a 1DMK II or the MK II N and then selling my 40D and the 70-200f/4 or trade for a 2.8 but I don't have the money right now for a body. I can't sell what I have because I'm in yearbook for my school and shooting 2-4 days a week depending on the sports schedule.


Sounds like you just have the upgrade bug.

Anytime I get it I ask what is my current camera/lens not doing for me and generally it is either not lacking or I don't actually need it for what I do. The 40D is a great body, I got some amazing photos when I had mine.


----------



## Prpntblr95

I've gotten a few pretty good photo's I just need something... idk I guess I just need to get the 2.8 70-200 for better football photo's since they're all night games.


----------



## Conspiracy

Look at this sexy computer that i built today

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8447/7940291638_7d4400496d.jpg


----------



## Sean Webster

What happened to cable management?


----------



## Conspiracy

Still working on that lol


----------



## Prpntblr95

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> Look at this sexy computer that i built today
> http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8447/7940291638_7d4400496d.jpg


Good start


----------



## Onex

Got my first dslr.


Any tips or tricks to teach a noob?


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Onex*
> 
> Got my first dslr.
> 
> Any tips or tricks to teach a noob?


If you have not read the manual, please do so.

My biggest advice to new slr users is to view the image _in_ the viewfinder, not _through_ the viewfinder. Our brains have a way of subtracting stuff from our vision for focus. You need to force yourself be conscientiously be aware that there are borders and you are framing an image. If you do not do this, you'll have problems like not strait horizons, weird camera angles and not filling the frame with your subject.


----------



## dudemanppl

One thing I do is unfocus my eyes before a photo to check for composition. I don't know why but it pretty much works for me.


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> Look at this sexy computer that i built today
> http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8447/7940291638_7d4400496d.jpg


noice


----------



## Conspiracy

so i got a 7.4 on this windows experience thing which i guess is good since 7.9 is the highest it goes. i dont understand their choice in the significance of 7.9... they should at least make it go up to 11 so then the average people will score like a 8 or 9, really good is a 10. and then of course if youre just epic on the level of Kenny Powers and Spinal Tap you get an eleven


----------



## Mongol

7.9 across the board is tough as it is.

SSD Raid will will handle the HDD 7.9
GTX680 SLI 7.8-7.9
3930k/x ABOVE 4.5ghz may net you 7.9
Ram...likewise.

it's silly tbh.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Prpntblr95*
> 
> High School stadium lit football. The ISO I change throughout the game just to keep the motion blur to a minimum but the max is 1600 unless I'm missing something to get it past that.


You seem to forget that you can have funds available from the sale of your 70-200 f/4L, so you can factor that into your budget.

If you _really_ need the extra stop in light, why not sell that and get an older Sigma 70-200 F/2.8? The difference in cost between what you'll get for your 70-200 F/4L (if you're patient and it's in great condition, you might be able to get back as much as $600 for it) is only a couple hundred bucks, if that (someone's selling one on POTN with a TC for $755, sounds like a decent deal to me).
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Onex*
> 
> Got my first dslr.
> Any tips or tricks to teach a noob?


Read the FAQs that are sticked here, there's _lots_ of useful information. If you have any experience at all, you can probably go straight to Dream Killer's FAQ.. otherwise, start with the other one.


----------



## sub50hz

Time to start blad shoppin.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> so i got a 7.4 on this windows experience thing which i guess is good since 7.9 is the highest it goes. i dont understand their choice in the significance of 7.9... they should at least make it go up to 11 so then the average people will score like a 8 or 9, really good is a 10. and then of course if youre just epic on the level of Kenny Powers and Spinal Tap you get an eleven


Quote:


> Originally Posted by ***********
> 
> 7.9 across the board is tough as it is.
> SSD Raid will will handle the HDD 7.9
> GTX680 SLI 7.8-7.9
> 3930k/x ABOVE 4.5ghz may net you 7.9
> Ram...likewise.
> it's silly tbh.


SSD alone will get u 7.9
my 3930k at 4.4 is at 7.8 =[
ram is stock 7.9
graphics... sigh lol 4 gen old 7.2 XD








just cleaned it up last night. first actual w/c system. trying to figure out temps. ordered dye to get some blood red water goin







yeah i know the picture is accented blue... that blue light is just the power LED too D:


----------



## sub50hz

WEI is stupid.


----------



## mz-n10

watercooling? people still do that?

dont use dyes, just run ptnuke (if they still make it







) in distilled and call it a day. dyes causes nothing but headaches since they dye your tubing (even tygon) and some of the cheaper crap gunk up.....

ive been running my setup for a good 2 - 3 years like that and havent had any growth or reactions.


----------



## Onex

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Onex*
> 
> Got my first dslr.
> 
> Any tips or tricks to teach a noob?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If you have not read the manual, please do so.
> 
> My biggest advice to new slr users is to view the image _in_ the viewfinder, not _through_ the viewfinder. Our brains have a way of subtracting stuff from our vision for focus. You need to force yourself be conscientiously be aware that there are borders and you are framing an image. If you do not do this, you'll have problems like not strait horizons, weird camera angles and not filling the frame with your subject.
Click to expand...

Will keep that in mind.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Onex*
> 
> Got my first dslr.
> Any tips or tricks to teach a noob?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Read the FAQs that are sticked here, there's _lots_ of useful information. If you have any experience at all, you can probably go straight to Dream Killer's FAQ.. otherwise, start with the other one.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the info gonna give it a read.


----------



## Mongol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iandroo888*
> 
> SSD alone will get u 7.9


Not true. I've had ssd's that only netted me 7.6...the first gen agility was one example.

All aside: wei is pointless.


----------



## iandroo888

Oops forgot the different speeds of ssd... LOL just woke up when i posted that but anyway... disregard that part AHHAHA

i have a silver kill coil in the res. eh lemme have my dye fun... ill go for more practical after XD im pretty sure my interest will "dye" out fast like my interest in LEDs ..


----------



## Mongol

I just hope it doesn't gunk up your blocks and cause a drop in flow rate.

Best of luck.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iandroo888*
> 
> im pretty sure my interest will "dye" out fast like my interest in LEDs ..


omg that was lame lol


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iandroo888*
> 
> Oops forgot the different speeds of ssd... LOL just woke up when i posted that but anyway... disregard that part AHHAHA
> i have a silver kill coil in the res. eh lemme have my dye fun... ill go for more practical after XD im pretty sure my interest will "dye" out fast like my interest in LEDs ..


maybe im too old...but its so much work to bleed the loop.....


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> maybe im too old...but its so much work to bleed the loop.....


yah







getting my first experiences with that


----------



## MistaBernie

I've been running the same water in my system for a year and a half. No PT Nuke, no kill coil, and what looks like absolutely no issues with the water (except for the level going down slightly).

OH, that's right... silver fittings. It works, keeps my i7/920 at 4.2 cool enough... no complaints.


----------



## Onex

So I read dream killers guide. And tried out some of the stuff he suggested.


Actually didnt looks so bad. Suggestions?


----------



## sub50hz

Get more lights, don't shoot at such a wide focal length, don't crop so close that you cut off parts of the toy in the frame.

etc etc


----------



## Dream Killer

man i gotta update that guide


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> man i gotta update that guide


Lol just a little bit


----------



## Onex

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> man i gotta update that guide


Its still a nice guide though.


----------



## Prpntblr95

Well first home Varsity football game was tonight, not too thrilled with the out come of the pictures. I'll post what I am most fond of in a few.


----------



## scottath

So i went for a drive last night, and got this among other things:
http://i.imgur.com/0Jlgu.jpg









Finally got FF !


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scottath*
> 
> So i went for a drive last night, and got this among other things:
> http://i.imgur.com/0Jlgu.jpg
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Finally got FF !


very nice









cables now managed (a little better. needs those grommet things so you cant see through the holes lol)

BEFORE:



AFTER:


----------



## VaiFanatic

I'd like to join!

Canon EOS 60D

Canon EF 400mm f/5.6L USM
Canon EF 2x III Extender
Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II (nifty fifty)
Canon EF 40mm f/2.8 STF (sporty forty)
Canon EFS 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6
MD-EOS Adapter
Minolta MD Rokkor-X 50mm f/1.4
Minolta MD Rokkor-X 28mm f/2.8
Minolta MD Rokkor-X 135mm f/3.5


----------



## Marin

http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/09/07/Carl-Zeiss-preparing-Distagon-55mm-F1-4-for-Canon-Nikon-lenses-for-mirrorless-system-cameras

I really want this but I already have a 50/1.2L. What to do...


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> very nice
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> cables now managed (a little better. needs those grommet things so you cant see through the holes lol)
> BEFORE:
> ...
> AFTER:
> ...


who rocks stock a heatsink on a custom build? seriously.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> Cables now managed (a little better. needs those grommet things so you cant see through the holes lol)
> 
> BEFORE:
> 
> -snip-
> 
> AFTER:
> 
> -snip-


Keep the cables straight and at right angles. It looks way less messy that way.


----------



## MistaBernie

Samyang is coming out with a 24mm f/3.5 T/S... I wonder if it will be worth whatever price they put on it.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Samyang is coming out with a 24mm f/3.5 T/S... I wonder if it will be worth whatever price they put on it.


If its priced like their other stuff and awesome quality i would totally try and get it just to mess around with, assuming i won the lottery to buy it lol


----------



## sub50hz

From the Samyang stuff I've held, I wouldn't exactly call it "awesome" quality. That 24/1.4 is pretty chintzy.


----------



## Conspiracy

awesome for the price haha. and looks different for video because of the resolution. but yea the resolving power of the samyang stuff for a large MP image probably isnt fantastic. but on 2MP 1080p its nice


----------



## MistaBernie

Ok, seriously, Newegg needs to get out of my head.

Me, last night: 'Oh, I want to pick up a couple of externals for backups.. I wonder how the prices are.'

Newegg, today: Shell Shocker, 500gb Passports, $59.99 (regularly $100+)


----------



## jackofhearts495

Hey guys, I'm looking into buying an entry-leveld DSLR -- specifically, the Nikon D3100. Any thoughts? I'm Trying to keep costs as low as possible, nothing higher than $550. Just for some basic photography (mainly for an upcoming build log). Thanks!


----------



## Davidsen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jackofhearts495*
> 
> Hey guys, I'm looking into buying an entry-leveld DSLR -- specifically, the Nikon D3100. Any thoughts? I'm Trying to keep costs as low as possible, nothing higher than $550. Just for some basic photography (mainly for an upcoming build log). Thanks!


I've been using a D3100 for awhile, and its quite nice, although the 18-55mm im using is kind of limiting, but good start nonetheless.


----------



## MistaBernie

D3100 is plenty of camera for starting out, especially on a budget. There are those that would say 'if you can stretch your budget, go for the D3200', but if you're really just starting out, the D3100 should be plenty fine.


----------



## jackofhearts495

Thanks guys









Just wanted to run the purchase by people who know their stuff before dropping $500 on a camera.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Ok, seriously, Newegg needs to get out of my head.
> Me, last night: 'Oh, I want to pick up a couple of externals for backups.. I wonder how the prices are.'
> Newegg, today: Shell Shocker, 500gb Passports, $59.99 (regularly $100+)


lol that happened the other day. was looking at buying a better heatsink for my new pc was suggested the CM 212+. the next day... "shell shocker 212+ $19 with rebate" i resisted later that night and decided to save up and get a really nice one instead.

they also put a few SSD's on sale and i need one for a scratch disc but dont have the money to get another SSD and a 2TB storage drive for all my videos


----------



## MistaBernie

I'm thinking of doing a minor overhaul of my storage at the moment. My current data drive has a broken SATA connector (ok, the plastic part under the pins on the drive broke, so I can just leave that end perpetually attached). It's worked since the day I installed it without fail (somehow), but I'm down to about 30% of that TB.

What I'm thinking is two phase replacement:
1) invest in quality 2TB drive and clone my current data drive onto it. Then, maybe try to use that drive in an external enclosure if necessary.
2) buy larger SSD for OS drive (I'm not quite sure how I slowly keep running out of space on my SSD, I'm currently down to about 5.8 gb free...). More of a peace of mind thing.

Then simply use Passports for moving all my paid work onto (leave the catalogs intact on my HDD, just repoint to the externals). That should keep me from running out of space anytime soon.

Also, with the recent Smugmug increase, I'm considering dropping down to Portfolio and shutting off printing completely for my customers and just having them email me orders if they want stuff. I lose teh ability to have instant prices available for people, but I'm not giving Smugmug another $100/year based on my current income from prints, etc.


----------



## funfortehfun

Apparently my dad was an avid photographer or something sometime in his life. I found this camera and lens:



It's a Nikon D90 with a Nikon AF-D Micro-Nikkor 60mm f/2.8 lens.

From what I know, old Nikon lenses were mostly made of metal. No wonder this camera feels so heavy. Also, I think this is a macro-photography lens. Any tips and tricks as to how to get started?


----------



## dennyb

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> 2) buy larger SSD for OS drive (I'm not quite sure how I slowly keep running out of space on my SSD, I'm currently down to about 5.8 gb free...). More of a peace of mind thing. .


MistaBernie. I have a 64gb SSD and only install "have to" apps along with W7 on it. I made a folder "SSD Installs" on another drive and install normal everyday apps into that folder. It saves me close to 5gbs. The usable space on a 64 gb is 59 gbs and I have 29+ free

I also used Sean Websters SSD guide to move some folders and to decrease/shrink the OS hibernation file in order to free up more space on the SSD....hope this helps

oh ...C cleaner once/week keeps it slimmed down or it will mysteriously grow


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> I'm thinking of doing a minor overhaul of my storage at the moment. My current data drive has a broken SATA connector (ok, the plastic part under the pins on the drive broke, so I can just leave that end perpetually attached). It's worked since the day I installed it without fail (somehow), but I'm down to about 30% of that TB.
> What I'm thinking is two phase replacement:
> 1) invest in quality 2TB drive and clone my current data drive onto it. Then, maybe try to use that drive in an external enclosure if necessary.
> 2) buy larger SSD for OS drive (I'm not quite sure how I slowly keep running out of space on my SSD, I'm currently down to about 5.8 gb free...). More of a peace of mind thing.
> Then simply use Passports for moving all my paid work onto (leave the catalogs intact on my HDD, just repoint to the externals). That should keep me from running out of space anytime soon.
> Also, with the recent Smugmug increase, I'm considering dropping down to Portfolio and shutting off printing completely for my customers and just having them email me orders if they want stuff. I lose teh ability to have instant prices available for people, but I'm not giving Smugmug another $100/year based on my current income from prints, etc.


build an awesome sauce fileserver with cloud backup. problem solved.


----------



## Conspiracy

**********************(*$#&()#$*+)(#@^%^@#$_()&!+)(&$(#*^%_#@&$+)@#(&$(*#^%#)[email protected](&_#@%^#(%^#$&[email protected]#$#()*%^#+)($&_#@*^&%()#&[email protected]#













































so i developed 2 rolls of film this morning

totally forgot they were turning the water off. they turned that water off 30 mins later than they said sooooooo i noticed this right after pouring the developer in when i got a little on my hands and tried to wash it off with no water :/ which has resulted in me doing my final rinse to get chems off with 11 bottles of water and a kitchen pot to swirl film around to get remjet off using my fingers as squeegee. the fact that i still see frames on my negs must be a miracle because during the development i was standing there thinking to myself... that im an idiot... so pretty sure i didnt invert for a little over 1.5mins and just agitated it for the solid first minute lol

and now i dont have any water to wash out the tank and reels soo they will just have to get scrubbed with some soap later and washed thoroughly i guess

cant believe i forgot the water was going to be off and felt like this morning was the best morning to develop.

miracles will occur if the negatives are totally clean of all remjet and have no scratches on them at all and actually come out normal since its hard to tell looking at negs if they are normal other than to see at least that there is something there that is balanced between black and see thru


----------



## sub50hz

Between that and DMP's always-crappy-looking negs, do you wonder why I use a lab?


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Between that and DMP's always-crappy-looking negs, do you wonder why I use a lab?


Truth


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dennyb*
> 
> MistaBernie. I have a 64gb SSD and only install "have to" apps along with W7 on it. I made a folder "SSD Installs" on another drive and install normal everyday apps into that folder. It saves me close to 5gbs. The usable space on a 64 gb is 59 gbs and I have 29+ free
> I also used Sean Websters SSD guide to move some folders and to decrease/shrink the OS hibernation file in order to free up more space on the SSD....hope this helps
> oh ...C cleaner once/week keeps it slimmed down or it will mysteriously grow


I've done most of the slimming down via SW's guides; I only have a ~40gb SSD I think; I forget what I put on it that is making it so big, but windows was taking up about half of it at last check. I'll have to do some CCleaning, I keep forgetting to do that. Thanks for the tip!


----------



## mz-n10

just wanted to share i bought up my first gun this weekend (fn p9).

finally i am excited to shoot again.....


----------



## VaiFanatic

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> just wanted to share i bought up my first gun this weekend (fn p9).
> finally i am excited to shoot again.....


I just finished up my Saiga rifle conversion, after nearly a year of neglecting to do it.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *VaiFanatic*
> 
> I just finished up my Saiga rifle conversion, after nearly a year of neglecting to do it.


im just happy to have a pistol in commiefornia


----------



## VaiFanatic

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> im just happy to have a pistol in commiefornia


Oh, ouch :c


----------



## legoman786

I've decided to clean the dust off of my dad's old Pentax.

Body: Pentax SF-1 (still have the original receipt from 03/1989!!)

Glass: Sigma Zoom Master (I think) Auto Focus. Lost the UV filter when I was a kid.

Also, how does one clean all the internal glass? What solution to use and a take apart manual? 23 years of dust really does show. :\


----------



## Mongol

One should have it cleaned professionally tbh.


----------



## funfortehfun

Any advice as to beginning macrophotography?


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *funfortehfun*
> 
> Any advice as to beginning macrophotography?


Shoot anything and practice. lol

Make sure you have lots of light and make sure you have a large enough DoF and make sure your shutter is fast enough.

Check this maybe: http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=807056


----------



## funfortehfun

I think my old lens (AF-D Micro-Nikkor 60mm f/2.8) isn't compatible with my D90 in any setting except for when the aperture is max (32 on the lens). It always gives me an error "fEE" in every other case.

Thanks for the link, really helped.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *funfortehfun*
> 
> Any advice as to beginning macrophotography?


1.) Have fun!

Macro photography is easy to do indoors when the outdoors won't cooperate. I am not huge on shooting macro myself, but I do occasionally shoot close-up stuff with the RB since it has bellows focusing.


----------



## funfortehfun

I just haven't any other lenses that are good for a particular area of photography, that's why. The lens on my D90 is a 1:1 60mm lens.


----------



## sub50hz

You can still use that 60mm normally, it just happens to focus down to 1:1, so don't be afraid to go outside or wander around with it.


----------



## legoman786

More details;

Pentax SF1 body with a Sigma Zoom Master 52mm 1:3.5~4.5 f=35~70mm.

Currently using Fujifilm Superia X-tra 800 iso film.


----------



## Marin

Sony RX1 looks good.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> Sony RX1 looks good.


----------



## legoman786

Took this photo with the same Fujifilm, but 200 ISO;



Also, where does one get the camera professionally cleaned? Don't make me go to another forum to find the answers I want. :\


----------



## mz-n10

just looked at the preview for the sony a99 and i must say im fairly impressed. sure it still plays 2nd fiddle when compared to the d800/5d3 but its a nice to see some actual innovation like cdaf+ pdaf. imma hang on to my a900 for now but if this thing drops under 2k i might have to pick one up (come on "6d" and "d600" at <2000 price point)


----------



## dudemanppl

GUYS. GUYS. GUUUUUUUUYS.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> 
> GUYS. GUYS. GUUUUUUUUYS.


yup yup. sony wins!


----------



## registered99

What's up with the Gserver?


----------



## Conspiracy

gangsters only sorry

G G G G gggggggg SEEEER VER!

its down


----------



## Dream Killer

new router's being a hoe.

http://img809.imageshack.us/img809/4899/65230711.png

look at the voltages!

anyway i shoved the laptop in there for now. i'll probably recap the psu on the shuttle and bring it back up to speed.


----------



## registered99

What should those be at? They seem kinda weird

Also: i meant to buy a helmet and instead got 2 free at school today


----------



## Dream Killer

12v shouldnt read as 11.19v - way off spec. however, i stuck a dmm in there just now with a video card in the agp slot (it runs headless otherwise) and 2 extra hdds just to load the psu up - all voltages read fine.


----------



## biatchi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> 12v shouldnt read as 11.19v - way off spec. however, i stuck a dmm in there just now with a video card in the agp slot (it runs headless otherwise) and 2 extra hdds just to load the psu up - all voltages read fine.


I was going to say how accurate are the sensors anyway?


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *biatchi*
> 
> I was going to say how accurate are the sensors anyway?


Terrible.

but lets go back on topic: http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/09/13/Nikon-D600-preview

with the rx1, large scale full frame proliferation is finally happening


----------



## iandroo888

woo d600 is out but dang was hoping it be 600 lower XD


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iandroo888*
> 
> woo d600 is out but dang was hoping it be 600 lower XD


ouch!

that is a lot more than what i was hoping they would price it at









i was really hoping for it to be like $1500 or under. guess ill have to stay canon just a little longer. uncompressed HDMI out and full frame isnt enough to make me want to shell out $2100 to switch to nikon as much as i want to


----------



## sub50hz

I told you guys it would be $2000. If it was 1500, how do they replace the D300 and D7000?


----------



## Conspiracy

interesting point. i think nikon should just make 3 cameras D600, D800, and D4


----------



## MistaBernie

The price in Japan was even higher (closer to $2700). I knew it wouldn't stay that high though, absolutely no reason to release it in the states at that price with the D800 at $2999.


----------



## iandroo888

even under 2k would have been better ;_;


----------



## MistaBernie

No, under $2k would have been a horrible idea for Nikon (as outlined above). No separation in the market, which is bad. Even for Canon shooters, it's *not a bad thing* for a direct competitor to stay up and running well. If Nikon (or Canon for that matter) starts falling far behind and grasping at straws to stay afloat, we're in real trouble (especially those that rely on Canon for gear, etc, but even Nikon shooters would be in trouble because of, pretty much, a monopoly situation that would be generated.

Granted, I dont think Nikon _needs_ every camera in their lineup. Hell, none of the major makers do. The biggest thing is that you dont need an entry level DSLR every year, period. From a Canon perspective, the T4i should last two years, period. If they simplified their lines and streamlined a bit, they could dump money back into R&D, reduce issues with things being released (7D's new firmware is already up to 2.0.3), etc. Instead of taking forever, the 24-70 II could already be out and subject to a price drop to get it down closer to $2000...

Example:
Canon's current DSLR lineup:
T4i/T3/T3i/60D/7D/5Dii/5Diii/1Div/1Ds3/5D3/1Dx

Canon's _ideal_ DSLR lineup:
T4i/70D (Merge xxD and 7D)/5D3/1Dx

Now, granted, some of the first line are being phased out (T3i/T3/5D2 which could be done as soon as this month)/ 1Div/1Ds3), but we don't need to replace all of them next year.

There's room for a more affordable full frame offering in there, sure, but at what expense? Seriously, Canon should merge the xxD/7D lines into the 6D(since it doesn't already exist), then release the 3D as their large megapixel FF offering.

... wow, where did _that_ come from?


----------



## iandroo888

lol =X

i was only dreaming. i know its not a good thing to put it under 2k. i was just being hopeful for my wallet and lack of money XD if i decided to go FF, id have to save up enough for both body and lens (14-24) cuz i need the UWA for work. So will be a while before i can upgrade =[ $2100 for D600 + ~$1500 for 14-24 = need to save at least $3600 ;_;


----------



## MistaBernie

Sell all your Nikon stuff, buy my 5Dc from the marketplace for less than half the D600. Problem solved!


----------



## iandroo888

NOH ! ;D i like the feel of nikon cameras over canon.. >< i had friends 50D for a while, couldnt get used to the feel and button orientation


----------



## MistaBernie

Yeah, just like I couldn't shoot a D800 if you slapped a red ring on the lens and called it a 3D. No big deal, was just messing with ya..


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iandroo888*
> 
> lol =X
> i was only dreaming. i know its not a good thing to put it under 2k. i was just being hopeful for my wallet and lack of money XD if i decided to go FF, id have to save up enough for both body and lens (14-24) cuz i need the UWA for work. So will be a while before i can upgrade =[ $2100 for D600 + ~$1500 for 14-24 = need to save at least $3600 ;_;


Shoulda skipped that 24-70, so awkward on crop.


----------



## iandroo888

all personal preference. i do suggest the 5dc route for canon people who think about a cheaper alternative for upgrade


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iandroo888*
> 
> all personal preference.


I guess.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> Terrible.
> but lets go back on topic: http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/09/13/Nikon-D600-preview
> with the rx1, large scale full frame proliferation is finally happening


Good, I hope all the smaller formats die out.


----------



## Mongol

Wow...that 600 looks impressive.


----------



## Conspiracy

going through my iphone shots i took on my most recent video shoot at the worlds largest antique car junkyard. if anyone lives somewhat near GA and you like old cars, rusted stuff, old rusted cars, cars with trees coming out of them, etc... you need to visit this place.

http://www.oldcarcity.com/


----------



## sub50hz

Why use the camera around your neck when you can just hold up your ipad like a dumbass?


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Why use the camera around your neck when you can just hold up your ipad like a dumbass?
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


i see that ALL the time
even my aunts do that


----------



## registered99

iPad has a bigger screen. DSLRs have inferior liveview to tablets, duh


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *registered99*
> 
> iPad has a bigger screen. DSLRs have inferior liveview to tablets, duh


oh no wonder. herp derp. gotta sell my DSLR for ipad now


----------



## Azefore

^ This, must be able to see more with a bigger screen, much more easier to get what I want


----------



## laboitenoire

Also, they _could_ be video chatting with someone. Just sayin'.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> Also, they _could_ be video chatting with someone. Just sayin'.


Well, it _was_ taken at a Cubs game, and their fans are notorious for doing dumb crap like video chatting instead of watching their team approach 100 losses.

Go Sox.


----------



## Conspiracy

LOL


----------



## odin2free

http://www.canonrumors.com/category/photography/canon-6d/

Thought id share this prob all of you seen this one..


----------



## scottath

Just bought myself a 5D2 and sold my crop sensor uwa lens (Tamron 11-18mm) that had served me well.
Now im looking at buying a new lens for my land/seascape work.
Im torn in a few directions:
1) Tilt shift lens - stitching 3 images
2) 50mm prime - stitching tonnes of images
3) UWA (17-40 f4L) - single image

Looking at:
17-40L
Samyang T-S 24mm 1:3.5 ED AS UMC - soon to be released
Zeiss 50mm f2 macro / other 50mm

Ive just ordered some grad filters second hand (Cokin P sized - 85mm) so thats a consideration for the UWA too.

I enjoy using my 10 stop ND often, so that probably wont work for the stitched images much - as the light will change too much between exposures.
Happy to hear opinions for all - as i said, im torn!


----------



## xxrabid93

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Well, it _was_ taken at a Cubs game, and their fans are notorious for doing dumb crap like video chatting instead of watching their team approach 100 losses.
> Go Sox.


GO SOX!!!
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *odin2free*
> 
> http://www.canonrumors.com/category/photography/canon-6d/
> Thought id share this prob all of you seen this one..


Looks like the 5Dc with more megapixels and video. If priced decently, it should be pretty nice.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scottath*
> 
> Just bought myself a 5D2 and sold my crop sensor uwa lens (Tamron 11-18mm) that had served me well.
> Now im looking at buying a new lens for my land/seascape work.
> Im torn in a few directions:
> 1) Tilt shift lens - stitching 3 images
> 2) 50mm prime - stitching tonnes of images
> 3) UWA (17-40 f4L) - single image
> Looking at:
> 17-40L
> Samyang T-S 24mm 1:3.5 ED AS UMC - soon to be released
> Zeiss 50mm f2 macro / other 50mm
> Ive just ordered some grad filters second hand (Cokin P sized - 85mm) so thats a consideration for the UWA too.
> I enjoy using my 10 stop ND often, so that probably wont work for the stitched images much - as the light will change too much between exposures.
> Happy to hear opinions for all - as i said, im torn!


I have the 17-40 and love it, personally. Corners are a bit soft wide open, but if you do a lot of landscape you would be stopping down anyways. Distortion is hardly noticeable, imo. Out of your 3 options, it would be the most simple as well, not having to stitch anything. But depending on your needs, one of those other options may suit you better.

And if i get around and stop being lazy, i'll finally finish editing my photos from a recent trip to California and will post some of the images up here (most are with the 17-40). That's a big if though.


----------



## Conspiracy

if they price the 6D reasonably i would be interested in switching my 7D for one. but honestly if it doesnt offer clean HDMI out its not worth it for professional applications. if canon does it right, the 6D could be a major comeback for them in DSLR video because right now the D800 is hands down the best camera on the market (we are not talking about sharpness here because its not important unless you are presenting the footage in a feature film at a movie theater)


----------



## silvrr

Never mind, missed the link above.


----------



## MistaBernie

$2099 for entry level full frame w/ worse sensor than 5D2... pass.

11 point AF system, *oooooooooooohhhhhhhhhhhh....* Ugh. Canon, why you make me sell all my stuff and buy D800?

Alright, let me revisit this for a minute.

They offered a few features that weren't expected (built in wireless, control via phone app (iApp/Droid only, ugh).. 11 points are technically better than 9 points... bigger ISO range than the 5D2, okay... but if it doesn't handle high ISO well, then basically, they took their remaining stock of 5D2s, made the sensor slightly _worse_, added a couple of AF points and some okay wireless (oh, and built in GPS, see the above oooooohhhhhhhh....) and slapped the almost identical price tag on it as the 5D2.

If this camera were closer to $1500, then yeah, I might give it a shot... let's hope the rumors about another couple of DSLRs being announced this year aren't false because if they are, this was a big swing and a miss IMHO.


----------



## sub50hz

No AF joystick -- didn't the all the 60D reviews and user input panning that stupid d-pad mean _anything_? Whatever, this shows Canon is way more out of touch than I thought.


----------



## silvrr

How is the sensor worse? Because it has 2 less mega pixels? No one has seen actual shots from it yet and yet it is worse. I would bet that 90% of photographers work lives in a digital world where 10mp would suffice and those that actually print can do so pretty large with 20 mp.

I would rather have a sensor that performs better at 10-15 than one at a bajililion that keeps the status quo.


----------



## MistaBernie

Yeah, that's true.. and there are some images out there from Canon (take that with a grain of salt of course). That being said, I tend to agree. Saves room on cards, etc too for the most part. ISO ranges up to 25,600 native, and H1/H2, so 51,200 and 102,400. I guess if it performs anywhere near as well as the 5D3 in image quality all may not be lost.. but the AF system is a bummer. Even the 7D system would be nice compared to an 11 point AF system.

YAY, and it's SD cards. Things just keep getting bettter! (in fairness, we're probably going to see a migration away from CF cards over the next year or two anyway)


----------



## ljason8eg

Well, so much for that being a nice, more affordable compliment to the 7D.


----------



## MistaBernie

There are rumors of a couple more announcements this year (but they've quieted down a bit lately so I take anything I hear like that with a grain of salt at this point). A body to complement the 7D would have a different feature set, I would think (higher FPS, similar AF system, etc). This truly is supposed to be the 'inexpensive' Canon DSLR Full Frame camera.


----------



## iandroo888

Nikons D600 vs Canons 6D. for some reason i think i like the d600 better? the built in gps n wireless was unexpected but i think the d600 seems pretty promising since if u are a videographer, i believe it does uncompressed hdmi out? tho the d600 is a little under than what people had expected after the d800's release of wanting a higher fps rate in comparison to the d700 but iunoe maybe im just a nikon fanboy XD MP wise, both seem in a decent range. nothin too extravagant (cough d800 -.-") iso range i believe the 6d has a wider range on the high side but will see the comparisons in the future =] the d600 may very well be the body ill upgrade to but for now, will save some money till then and maybe the d400 will be announced too XD


----------



## MistaBernie

It's probably better than the 6D. To be honest, I haven't spent alot of time researching/comparing things against the D600 at this point. Sub nailed it earlier though, it really seems like Canon is starting to lose touch with its customer base. Losing the joystick, pretty much the same old AF system with two additional points.. it sort of seems like they took a 60D, dropped the zero and the APS-C sensor, added a couple of focus points, added the built-in wireless and GPS and silent shooting and hoped that would satisfy full-frame enthusiasts.

All of that said.. if it produces images even remotely close to that of the 5D3 (given its large ISO range, I would say there could be a relative chance), then it may be worth it for me to sell my 5Dc (and maybe my 5D2) and pick one up.. or, I'll just wait for someone to buy it, hate it and offer them my 5D2 and a bit of cash in trade. I think I like that a bit better.


----------



## iandroo888

lol im just basing on what ive read on both of them so far. probably be a while before there are full tests between the two comparing as well as to its predecessor. the only thing i can see in terms of the 6D over the D600 is the wider ISO range but in most cases, i dont think we'd use one that high? (tho i could be wrong, ive never used a FF body) XD

but on the bright side, both are utilizing dual SD's which is nice. was getting scared id see CF in the future for my when i jump to FF. XD

ooooh 6000 posts =3


----------



## laboitenoire

Yeah, I think Canon missed out big-time with 6D... Although they basically did follow Nikon's strategy for the D600. It appears the D600 is basically a D7000 with an updated D3X sensor and slightly improved AF, and the 6D seems to be a 60D with a new full-frame sensor and slightly improved AF.

I'm actually very tempted by the D600. Depending on the extent of my tax refund next year I might jump to full-frame.


----------



## sub50hz

God, does Leica even sell half the stuff they make to anyone but people who will just toss it aside into a display case?


----------



## laboitenoire

Doubtful.


----------



## Conspiracy

leica should sell display cases for their cameras as well. would make so much extra money doing that. make the display case cost the same as camera LOL


----------



## MistaBernie

Anyone else like the (external) look of the new Sigma lenses? 35 f/1.4 and the telephoto kind of look like Zeiss glass without the blue ring.


----------



## Deano12345

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Anyone else like the (external) look of the new Sigma lenses? 35 f/1.4 and the telephoto kind of look like Zeiss glass without the blue ring.


After looking at them again, I've noticed this too. Especially the 35 ! Speaking of that 35, it looks decent, its nearly putting me off buying the 50 1.4 I was gonna pick up in about a month


----------



## Azefore

Hasselblad mirrorless....hmmmm


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Azefore*
> 
> Hasselblad mirrorless....hmmmm


meh just a sony nex7


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Deano12345*
> 
> After looking at them again, I've noticed this too. Especially the 35 ! Speaking of that 35, it looks decent, its nearly putting me off buying the 50 1.4 I was gonna pick up in about a month


Depending on the price and performance, I might sell my 35L and pick one up.

Also, _oh, snap!_ Looks like they _finally_ got MagicLantern to work on the 7D...

http://www.canonrumors.com/2012/09/hacked-the-magic-lantern-team-cracks-the-eos-7d/


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Depending on the price and performance, I might sell my 35L and pick one up.
> Also, _oh, snap!_ Looks like they _finally_ got MagicLantern to work on the 7D...
> http://www.canonrumors.com/2012/09/hacked-the-magic-lantern-team-cracks-the-eos-7d/


----------



## MistaBernie

Yeah, kind of shocked that after three years of trying they gave it to some newbie that basically figured it out in ~3 days (if I'm reading that right).


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Yeah, kind of shocked that after three years of trying they gave it to some newbie that basically figured it out in ~3 days (if I'm reading that right).


its kinda right. not sure if that guy is a newbie or not. but hes not part of the ML team officially so makes it kinda awesome and embarrassing for them lol


----------



## MistaBernie

I dont know that there was a huge demand for it on the 7D, especially with firmware 2.x being released..


----------



## Conspiracy

yea there still is a huge demand for ML because even with the new firmware we are missing out on all the other ML stuff.

7D is still remaining a very popular DSLR for video among professionals because of the way it handles highlights and midtones. shadows not so much though but thats where the 5DmkII takes over. they make a superb combo on a video set


----------



## iandroo888

does anyone know if using a workstation card like a Quaddro 5000 would be useful for programs like Lightroom, Photoshop, Premiere, After Effects? Wont be in a dual xeon computer but a i7 990x hexa-core computer..


----------



## silvrr

Light room never touches my GPU.

Looks like a quadro will for premier:
http://www.adobe.com/products/aftereffects/tech-specs.html

Also some info from Nvidia.
http://www.nvidia.com/object/adobe-cs6.html


----------



## aksthem1

Lightroom doesn't use GPU acceleration.

There was an article a while back on how some guy thought because he bought a high end Nvidia card Lightroom became twice as fast.

PS, Premiere Pro and After Effects do though.


----------



## iandroo888

ok Lightroom doesnt touch GPU. so it wouldnt be worse if i had a workstation vs a normal GPU. how about photoshop? according to the link, doesnt seem too much help except a little acceleration in speed in processing of some effects.

hmm thx


----------



## Conspiracy

if you are building a workstation buy one of the nvidia cards on this list if you want to take advantage of the mercury engine that uses the CUDA thingies to process stuff. honestly i am running CS6 and my GPU is not supported but everything runs super fast on my new pc. the video card really seems to only help with previewing material and not with the actual encoding of the final product that is all done by CPU and plenty of RAM.

the quadro will work very nicely

this is adobe's list of currently supported GPUs for CS6:

Supported NVIDIA graphics cards for GPU acceleration

GeForce GTX 285 (Windows and Mac OS)
GeForce GTX 470 (Windows)
GeForce GTX 570 (Windows)
GeForce GTX 580 (Windows)
NVIDIA® Tesla C2075 card (Windows) when paired with a Quadro card as part of an NVIDIA Maximus™ configuration
Quadro FX 3700M (Windows)
Quadro FX 3800 (Windows)
Quadro FX 3800M (Windows)
Quadro FX 4800 (Windows and Mac OS)
Quadro FX 5800 (Windows)
Quadro 2000 (Windows)
Quadro 2000D (Windows)
Quadro 2000M (Windows)
Quadro 3000M (Windows)
Quadro 4000 (Windows and Mac OS)
Quadro 4000M (Windows)
Quadro 5000 (Windows)
Quadro 5000M (Windows)
Quadro 5010M (Windows)
Quadro 6000 (Windows)
Quadro CX (Windows)
Tesla C2075** (Windows)


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iandroo888*
> 
> does anyone know if using a workstation card like a Quaddro 5000 would be useful for programs like Lightroom, Photoshop, Premiere, After Effects? Wont be in a dual xeon computer but a i7 990x hexa-core computer..


Depends on what you expect from it and how leveraged your workload is to GPU compute (Photoshop has the least benefit of all, in my experience, unless you are using the ray tracer -- which is a waste of time since there are other programs which are better suited to it). I must ask though, why you would be interested in shelling out for a mid-range Quadro unless you are doing paid work that's reliant on delivery timing.


----------



## Conspiracy

unless your doing heavy duty video editing with resolutions over HD or CAD work you really need nothing more than a nice gaming video card.

a really good CPU and plenty of RAM and SSD will get you much further than a mid range workstation card

like i said computer i have in my sig except get 3770k and overclock it and you are looking super good for any type of work with CS6.

i can encode in premiere a 5 min long video interview with heavy filters in DNxHD avid format and encode to high bit rate H.264 in roughly 45mins. that is honestly pretty fast, even the computers at my TV station i work at are only doing something like that by about 15 minutes faster because they are work station computers designed for video editing


----------



## iandroo888

well i never said i was buying the card... lol cousin might have an extra one he can let me use. just wondering if the programs listed would benefit from having a workstation card. would be nice if it helps a lot over like a GTX260 or HD4850 (best two cards i got - yeh i know they are old). probably turn my 2nd system with the 990x into a semi-workstation to edit photos, work on videos, etc.

the computer in question is a i7 990x hexa core with 12gb ram and a 128gb samsung 830 ssd. currently has a hd4850. but my main rig, shown in sig, is an i7 3930k hexa core with 32 gb ram and a 128 gb crucial m4 ssd with a gtx260.


----------



## sub50hz

A Quadro is worth it if you need the driver support, better CUDA execution or the ECC for things like large renders or video encode. If you don't, just buy a consumer card.


----------



## ljason8eg

Went and saw Space Shuttle Endeavour fly over the state capitol this morning. It was a pretty amazing sight.


Space Shuttle Endeavour flyover 1 by JLofing, on Flickr


Space Shuttle Endeavour flyover 2 by JLofing, on Flickr


----------



## MistaBernie

Did it have an escort? Sweet.

Also.. for all you Canon video enthusiasts out there.... it's Pop-Quiz time!

Besides $6000 US and the ability to record 4k Video, what is the only difference between the Canon 1Dx and the Canon 1Dc?

The answer -- _*firmware.*_









http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=9620.msg173698;topicseen#new


----------



## Conspiracy

lol pretty much. also that the 1Dc also can be purchased with PLmount instead of EF mount. well eventually im told. obviously not right now and if they back out on that at least other canon cine models will have PL

im actually pretty excited to see how the C100 comes out. just seems interesting that they made it. even though it fills a much needed gap in their lineup


----------



## foothead

Aren't PL lenses designed for cinema 35mm, which actually has dimensions closer to APS-C? Seems kinda counter-intuitive to use them on a full frame camera.


----------



## Conspiracy

the overall quality of the lens is considerably higher quality over what canon makes. thats what makes it worth using. its about the look and feel of the image not sensor size


----------



## dennyb

@ Jason

Wow...just wow. Those are some awesome photography skills you have . Kudos to you sir and a rep as well


----------



## scottath

Yea long post.....but i have stuff to show









Hey guys,

So here is some of my more recent work - C&C is most welcome!



Canon 550D + Tamron 11-18mm | F9, 298 sec, ISO100, 14mm



Borrowed 7D + Canon 10-22mm | F13, 20 sec, ISO100, 10mm



Canon 550D + Tamron 11-18mm | F9, 1/320, ISO100, 13mm

Borrowed a 5D2 from a friend for a while:



Borrowed 5D2, Tamron 28-75 | F4, 1/400, ISO400, 28mm



Borrowed 5D2, Tamron 28-75 | F4, 1/125, ISO500, 28mm

I recently bought my own 5D2 finally - been saving for about 18 months for it - so Happy











5D2, Canon 85 f1.8 | F5.6, 1/80, ISO250, 85mm

Then i bought some Grad ND filters - from the first outing:



5D2, Tamron 28-75 | F11, 189sec, ISO160, 28mm



5D2, Tamron 28-75 | F16, 10sec, ISO160, 75mm



5D2, Tamron 28-75 | F16, 20sec, ISO50, 28mm



5D2, Sigma 70-200 F2.8 | F16, 321sec, ISO50, 76mm



5D2, Sigma 70-200 F2.8 | F16, 125sec, ISO50, 70mm

BTS from the last few:









Thanks for looking, C&C is most welcome too!
Click through for much larger versions.

scottath


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Really liked this one: http://imgur.com/0XfAf


----------



## sub50hz

Definitely improving, a few of those shots are pretty great. The one down the... stairs(?) is great, I would print that.


----------



## scottath

Is the only good thing to ever come out of an Apple store







(Stairs leading from Lvl2 > 3 in the Sydney store)


----------



## ljason8eg

I went to a race that had nothing to do with NASCAR!










IMG_6944.jpg by JLofing, on Flickr


----------



## aksthem1

Those are some superb shots scottath. Keep it up.


----------



## sub50hz

Oh hey, I picked up a like-new XA with instruction manuals, box and A16 flash for 40 bucks on saturday. Forgot about that.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scottath*
> 
> *Is the only good thing to ever come out of an Apple store*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (Stairs leading from Lvl2 > 3 in the Sydney store)












Tell that to marin.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tell that to marin.


It doesn't really matter what you use when it comes down to it, keep Apple trolling out of this thread.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> It doesn't really matter what you use when it comes down to it, keep Apple trolling out of this thread.


Bah, lighten up, all I ever see is negativity out of you.


----------



## Conspiracy

no comment. i have seen no negativity from him. just honest criticism


----------



## MistaBernie

Apparently, Canon's big megapixel offering (potentially the Canon 3D, coming in at 46mp (what?!)), may be making an appearance at PhotoPlus 2012 in NY.

I'm going on Saturday (in reality, I'll be in town for the Syl Arena Tour on Sunday the 28th), but in reality I'll probably just be hanging out at the Canon stuff. I'll see what I can do about getting information.


----------



## Eggs and bacon

read through the last few pages of this thread, I'm pretty impressed. I'll post some of my pics taken with a k1000, if I can find a way to scan them without destroying the quality. I am preferring film at the moment over digital, as I cant afford a good digital =(.
I have access to a Nikon D50, what's that like as an dlsr?


----------



## iandroo888

5 generations old? d3200, d3100, d3000, d40, d50?


----------



## Azefore

I used my D40 all last year, I'm sure you can do good with a D50, resolution will be lacking but that's about it


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Eggs and bacon*
> 
> read through the last few pages of this thread, I'm pretty impressed. I'll post some of my pics taken with a k1000, if I can find a way to scan them without destroying the quality. I am preferring film at the moment over digital, as I cant afford a good digital =(.
> I have access to a Nikon D50, what's that like as an dlsr?


Just keep shooting film.


----------



## Eggs and bacon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Azefore*
> 
> I used my D40 all last year, I'm sure you can do good with a D50, resolution will be lacking but that's about it


that's my only issue with it, I like to print on A3.


----------



## sub50hz

Medium format. Do it.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Medium format. Do it.


i second that motion


----------



## xxrabid93

I took a trip to California with my family a while ago. I think i mentioned it a few pages back to someone talking about the Canon 17-40. Anyways, San Fransicso, New Melones Resevoir, Big Tree State Park, Yosemite. Finally got around to finishing the photo editing. Whole set - http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/sets/72157631608716807/

Now for some of my favorite shots.

Harsh critiques please.







(but if you tell me a photo is garbage, at least tell me why







)


IMG_2904 by xxrabid93, on Flickr


IMG_2909 by xxrabid93, on Flickr


pano 1 b&w crop by xxrabid93, on Flickr


IMG_3049 by xxrabid93, on Flickr


IMG_3147 by xxrabid93, on Flickr


IMG_3156 by xxrabid93, on Flickr


IMG_3247 by xxrabid93, on Flickr


IMG_3390 by xxrabid93, on Flickr


IMG_3418 by xxrabid93, on Flickr


pano 11-2 cropped contrast +15 by xxrabid93, on Flickr


IMG_3492 by xxrabid93, on Flickr


----------



## Eggs and bacon

I like all of those except 3156, it just doesn't appeal to me. it's something about the colours.


----------



## spRICE

Those are really strong photos IMO. A couple things.
The photo of the Golden Gate Bridge is a bit crooked. That would be really easy to fix and straightening it out would make the photo that much better.
Also, this is really nitpicky, but I feel that IMG 3492 would look better if you got more hills and less sky (maybe like 50/50).
But great set


----------



## Conspiracy

so i woke up this morning kind of wanting to sell my sigma 30 and get a 17-40 f4L in its replacement as i rarely do anything under light conditions in video that push me over ISO 800. i usually record at ISO 400 f2.8 with my current setup anyway and have been using a 70-200 instead of my siggy 30 because of the better quality overall that shows in the videos.

good idea/bad idea? anyone interested in a siggy 30 to potentially fund me getting a used 17-40?

nevermind. im just going to spend the next 50 years saving up for this camera for video instead http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/884602-REG/Sony_PMW_200_XDCAM_HD422_Camcorder.html

on a side note its not as bad as i thought being on the cover of the school magazine. wish i actually benefited from it. like financially. like i think i should get paid at least like $50billion for the rights to use my image lolz

picture makes me look goofy or something idk. i dont see myself very often because im so busy so i dont know how i look


----------



## scottath

Hey guys, can i ask a favor please:

Ive entered a competition to potentially win some time in a photography studio for the day, and it would be awesome if i got to win it.
Ill be posting examples of what i do on the day online for all - will have probably one of my model friends, professional make up etc etc

Please click through and like my image, and if you could share it around a little it would be mega appreciated









https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=426079430786244&set=a.419021584825362.96964.188966581164198&type=1&theater

My FB page is here if you'd like to view my other work and like that too:
https://www.facebook.com/ScottAthertonPhotography

Thanks alot guys!


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scottath*
> 
> Hey guys, can i ask a favor please:
> Ive entered a competition to potentially win some time in a photography studio for the day, and it would be awesome if i got to win it.
> Ill be posting examples of what i do on the day online for all - will have probably one of my model friends, professional make up etc etc
> Please click through and like my image, and if you could share it around a little it would be mega appreciated
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=426079430786244&set=a.419021584825362.96964.188966581164198&type=1&theater
> My FB page is here if you'd like to view my other work and like that too:
> https://www.facebook.com/ScottAthertonPhotography
> Thanks alot guys!


liked and shared on my feed to hopefully get you maybe 10 more likes. i have like 650 friends on facebook (idk if thats a lot or a little) but maybe a few will hopefully click on it









nice shot


----------



## scottath

I only have 563 friends....although i know in person probably 90% of them.
and have 246 that like my page too.

Thanks


----------



## iandroo888

liked with personal and my photography page XD


----------



## boogschd

liked and shared!


----------



## Azefore

Just bought http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0051TVQWQ/ref=oh_details_o00_s00_i00

Here's to hoping it's up to the job. Currently use a pair of Slik 700DX sta legs and a Vanguard SBH-300 ballhead. They weigh in at 7.5lbs roughly and that's fine, can usually do 4-5 hour hikes with it but found out in concert setting and urban exploration that I need something portable. I'm shocked at the 1.8lb it comes in at, gonna be a great travel tripod hopefully.


----------



## Deano12345

Got my 50mm today







Its not got Sigma's usual EX finish though, feels more like a Sony lens (smooth plastic). No front/back/mis focusing problems either. Expect photos when I have time


----------



## sub50hz

My friends Tim and Stephanie have been doing a double exposure project that's blowin up the internet.

http://gizmodo.com/5947401/the-miracle-of-serendipity-captured-in-a-single-image

Check it.

edit: Here's the blog: http://peoplevsplaces.tumblr.com/


----------



## biatchi

Ouch, those comments on Gizmodo are brutal.


----------



## Azefore

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *biatchi*
> 
> Ouch, those comments on Gizmodo are brutal.


Gizmodo is a stress relief for the commenters I'm guessing lol


----------



## Squeeker The Cat

so while driving down the road today i see that my local Wolf Camera is going out of business? i stop, get a good deal on some SD cards. anyway if anyone is near one may wanna stop buy, or look at their website for some good deals??


----------



## Conspiracy

Some are going out of business some are just changing names

Chuck Wolf sold Wolf Camera to a family member so now its called Ritz Camera.

store originated in ATL only reason i know


----------



## aksthem1

Nope. Except for five stores they are all being closed.


----------



## Squeeker The Cat

we have ritz camera and wolf camera here the guy said they were all closing.


----------



## Conspiracy

hmm that stinks


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> hmm that stinks


yea it does...now i have to spend more money.....


----------



## aksthem1

I personally don't care they are closing. Their customer support is terrible, overpriced, pushy salesman and quarter of the time they didn't know what they were talking about.

Once there was this lady asking why her D50 wasn't working anymore. One of the salesman said the Japanese build those cameras to breakdown in 2-3 years so you have to buy another one. Then he was telling her to buy a D5100 instead. The best part was that she had a 50mm 1.8D mounted. For those who know about the Nikon system you will get this.


----------



## Azefore

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aksthem1*
> 
> I personally don't care they are closing. Their customer support is terrible, overpriced, pushy salesman and quarter of the time they didn't know what they were talking about.
> Once there was this lady asking why her D50 wasn't working anymore. One of the salesman said the Japanese build those cameras to breakdown in 2-3 years so you have to buy another one. Then he was telling her to buy a D5100 instead. The best part was that she had a 50mm 1.8D mounted. For those who know about the Nikon system you will get this.


When going to get my first DSLR/camera in 2006, was from Ritz, the salesman kept pushing the D50 because the DX format lenses "will be more expensive, not as many of them etc". I knew what I went there for, my D40 lol. I didn't know much but even not knowing much I knew he was spewing bs. I had no knowledge of the D50 but to find out later its the precursor of the D40, mind you I was 14, pieced together he was wanting to get rid of leftover stock.


----------



## scottath

Hey guys that didnt yet vote on my pic - im tied atm with 1hr, 48min to go
If you could vote for it it would be mega appreciated (and ill reciprocate too)

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=426079430786244&set=a.419021584825362.96964.188966581164198&type=3&src=https%3A%2F%2Ffbcdn-sphotos-a-a.akamaihd.net%2Fhphotos-ak-snc6%2F183232_426079430786244_1037279539_n.jpg&size=960%2C480

Thanks


----------



## Doc_Gonzo

Hey all








I've found some great threads here on photography and as a newbie, I have some days of reading ahead of me








I graduated from a Sony Cybershot, point and shoot this Summer and got myself a Fuji finepix S2980. I was looking for a hobby to get me outdoors more and away from the computer for some of the time, so I'm hoping to learn as much as possible. I never enjoyed taking photo's with the sony camera because it only had the screen at the back and no real viewfinder, which made taking pics at the beach, or outdoors very frustrating. That was what attracted me to the S2980.

I am now looking to step into the world of DSLR Cameras, so maybe you could help with some advice?
I have a budget of around £500 and mainly take landscape photographs. I live in a very scenic part of North Wales and I'd like to be able to take decent shots of the coast, sea, beaches and sunsets. I have adobe Lightroom and have realized that I am limited in my use of that by not being able to shoot in the RAW format. I would also like to take some street scenes and maybe the occasional, general family type shots. I will probably never use the video recording capabilities of a camera and so that is least important. I would also prefer to gain knowledge from a book or online and so a camera with an emphasis on 'on screen guides' is not a priority. It would be a bonus, but I'd rather the camera take better quality pictures than be 'beginner friendly'. I realize that it's the photographer and not the camera that takes good pics, but I would like to start with a reasonable camera, so I can't blame my kit









I have been looking at the Canon 600D and the Nikon D3200.
The higher MP count on the Nikon originally swung me in that direction. . . . until after some reading I came to understand that it isn't so much about the MP's. As the Nikon lacks IS, I'm currently leaning more towards the Canon, but I would like to hear your thoughts. In particular, anyone who owns either (or both) of the two cameras. Also, if anyone has any other suggestions, I'd greatly appreciate them, along with any general advice.
Thanks in advance!


----------



## Deano12345

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Doc_Gonzo*
> 
> Hey all
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have been looking at the Canon 600D and the Nikon D3200.
> The higher MP count on the Nikon originally swung me in that direction. . . . until after some reading I came to understand that it isn't so much about the MP's. As the Nikon lacks IS, I'm currently leaning more towards the Canon, but I would like to hear your thoughts. In particular, anyone who owns either (or both) of the two cameras. Also, if anyone has any other suggestions, I'd greatly appreciate them, along with any general advice.
> Thanks in advance!


I haven't used a D3200 but I've heard good things, and the 600D is a good camera too. The IS shouldnt be a big deciding factor as both have it (IS is done in-lens on Nikon/Canon DSLRS) with their kit lenses. If you can go to a shop and try them both and see which feels better in your hands. Once you pick one up, I'd stay with the kit lens for a while and then buy a 50mm 1.8 lens, on a crop body, its perfect for portrait/family pictures. Nikons version is about £200 and Canons is around £130/140 If I remember rightly. If you wanted something wider than the kit lens, Sigma make a 10-20mm lens than runs about £400

(My prices could be a tiny bit off since I'm going off the top of my head and I only would know the euro price for that gear)


----------



## Mongol

Using one (D3200) as a back-up and for times that I have light-bulb moments...there are good things and bad things.

The good: it's really light weight, expeed 3 processor, most controls are easily accessible, it's speedy (4fps) for entry level and you get a large amount of MP. The lcd is clear and vivid and a major improvement over the 3100.

The bad: mediocre battery life, slow kit lens, noisy at high iso (the drawback of having all those smaller pixels crammed on a crop sensor...great until you go past 800) and obviously no in camera focusing motor...which at entry level is expected.

While your average consumer will never take the 18-55 kit lens off, it leaves alot to be desired. You really need decent glass for the camera to truly shine. For right around $650, it isn't a terrible investment, though for someone jumping in to a dslr for the first time, the d3100 is nothing to thumb your nose at, and at the same price of a 3200 or less, while a yr older, the d5100 is a great 'entry level' camera too.

Don't get me wrong...I consider it a great camera and dig it lots.


----------



## Mongol

I also forgot to mention: they definitely improved video recording quality on the D3200 so if you're also considering that, it's another plus for that camera.

As I stated earlier though, if you do purchase a 3200, do yourself a favor and pick up a 35DX and a decent telephoto and use the 18-55 as a paperweight or something.


----------



## Doc_Gonzo

Thank you for the replies! My bad, It wasn't the lack of IS on the Nikon that put me off but the lack of an in camera focusing motor (AF?), which I believe the Canon has? There's so many new terms to learn that I'm getting confused







That and the Nikon lenses being more expensive.

I will have to make do with the kit lens of whatever I buy for a while as I will be pushing my budget but one thing I find confusing and will need, is a lens with a larger zoom. . . or focal length?
The S2980 has a 18X zoom and I quite like it. I understand that you can't get that kind of Zoom on a DSLR lens without spending a lot of money but I would like a lens with a larger zoom than the kit lens.
Money is an issue there, so I'd be leaning towards the camera with the cheaper lens options. . . . but I would have to balance that up against quality. For example, if the canon lens was cheaper but produced lesser quality pics than the Nikon that was slightly more expensive - I'd have to consider the Nikon. If there is no gain in image quality, then the camera with the cheaper lens system is what I'd go for.

Actually going to a shop that sells cameras so that I could see how they feel is a problem for me as I live in a rural area. it would involve a 200 mile round trip, so I'm having to do all me research online and will probably spend another couple of weeks reading various forums and review sites before making a final decision.
I haven't looked in to the D5100, thanks - I'll look that one up now


----------



## Deano12345

Ah yeah, the 600D does have in body AF, but in my expeirence of screw drive AF (I shot with sony for 5 years) its fairly slow and quite noisy compared to a decent AF motor in a lens. As far as a zoom on the cheaper end of things, on Nikon you'd have the Nikkor 55-200 with VR (Nikon's name for AF) or the 70-300 from Sigma. Sigma doesnt have IF on its cheaper 70-300 though. Both can be found for around £200-220, I'd probably be inclined to go for the Nikkor since I actually had the Sigma on my old Sony, and its nothing great, plus I've heard the Nikon version focuses quite slowly. I'm no help at all on the Canon side of things unforunatly !


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Deano12345*
> 
> Ah yeah, the 600D does have in body AF, but in my expeirence of screw drive AF (I shot with sony for 5 years) its fairly slow and quite noisy compared to a decent AF motor in a lens.


All Canon lenses have in-lens motors and are operated electronically. There is no screw-drive to speak of in the EOS system.


----------



## BlankThis

Hi guys! Now rocking a 5D and some Samyang love


----------



## Azefore

My new Sirui T-025X next to Slik 700DX/ Vangaurd SBH-300, weighs as much as the sbh-300, loving it so far.


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis*
> 
> Hi guys! Now rocking a 5D and some Samyang love


'grats!

which samyang?

ive always wanted the 8mm 3.5


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boogschd*
> 
> 'grats!
> which samyang?
> ive always wanted the 8mm 3.5


35mm f1.4 and 14mm f2.8. Both are spectacular if you can get past the manual focus, if you see that as a negative.


----------



## mz-n10

look at some unedited samples of the 14/2.8 cause it has some weird lens distortion where it looks like a mustache. some of my friends cant stand it, but i dont mind it that much.


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> look at some unedited samples of the 14/2.8 cause it has some weird lens distortion where it looks like a mustache. some of my friends cant stand it, but i dont mind it that much.


It's quite annoying, but someone had made a good lens correction profile for PS a while back.


----------



## mz-n10

you got a link to the profile? ive been manually correcting it in some pictures.


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> look at some unedited samples of the 14/2.8 cause it has some weird lens distortion where it looks like a mustache. some of my friends cant stand it, but i dont mind it that much.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aksthem1*
> 
> It's quite annoying, but someone had made a good lens correction profile for PS a while back.


Yeah the mustache is pretty apparent. My copy doesn't seem to produce it as badly as some of the reviews but yeah, it's there. I found that as long as I'm not shooting anything that strong horizontal lines, it's hard to spot.


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> you got a link to the profile? ive been manually correcting it in some pictures.


I'll try and find it. It was from a website.

PT Lens does a better job at correcting it, but you have to pay $25 for it.


----------



## Prpntblr95

Trying to pick up a Canon 1DMKII N so i have 2 bodies to shoot with since I am on almost every sports page for my schools yearbook.
Seeing alot go for $500-650, I LOL at the ads on Craigslist for $1,300+


----------



## sub50hz

Fine for daytime shooting, high ISO is pretty blah compared to even today's Rebels and entry-level Nikons.


----------



## dudemanppl

Doesn't go up that high even with boosted ISO, but other than that its greeeeat.


----------



## Conspiracy

for the riders in this thread. yall hipsters know who im talking about

http://www.cnn.com/2011/09/24/tech/revolights-bike-safety-system/index.html


----------



## Prpntblr95

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Doesn't go up th
> 
> at high even with boosted ISO, but other than that its greeeeat.


I shoot nothing but sports.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Prpntblr95*
> 
> I shoot nothing but sports.


yea but what sports. indoor/outdoors. night/day. highschool/college. (schools with money for good light vs bad light)

i used to shoot DII sports at my school. most of our teams are ranked nationally in the top10 *except for track&cross country and golf. our womens team won the national championship for basketball a few years back. our lighting is just awful. i was shooting basketball at iso4000 to get a shutter speed of 1/320 f2.8. same with soccer iso4000 with a shutter speed of 1/500 at night. i dont think you are going to want to expect a 1DIIn to perform fantastically at night field sports without professional stadium lights honestly. the photos will be fine for web and newspaper but might be a little noisey for nice prints. i have never shot with that camera before but i know its a solid performer. but honestly even these new rebel cameras are starting to get some nice high ISO performance compared to what photogs had in the past


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> for the riders in this thread. yall hipsters know who im talking about
> http://www.cnn.com/2011/09/24/tech/revolights-bike-safety-system/index.html


Super OFN.


----------



## Conspiracy

lol


----------



## sub50hz

Seriously, the bike light craze on kickstarter is getting annoying.


----------



## Conspiracy

you know what we still need.

sunglasses made from ND filters hahahaha


----------



## sub50hz

Of all the things I do with my time, doing CAD mockups and ABS prototypes for the dumbest idea on Earth is very low on my priority list.


----------



## Conspiracy

also randoms things that are 18% grey just because. like clothes, spraypaint, cars, idk just weird stuff


----------



## mz-n10

one day imma get my car sprayed in 18% grey.


----------



## Conspiracy

yes. im not the only one that thinks our world lacks stuff that is exactly 18% grey


----------



## aksthem1

So I came across a Tamron 28-75 2.8 for $200. I really want to pick it up at that price. Is there anything I should look at in person?


----------



## scottath

Its a great lens - loved it on my 550D, still fairly good on my new 5D2.
Look for scratches, excessive dust inside, scratches on the mount etc.
Take your camera, take some test shots (f2.8 and something else too)
Check the rubber on the zoom too, mines starting to come away (after alot of use)


----------



## aksthem1

I was already going to check for any excessive dust, fungus, haze. Making sure the aperture blades weren't sticking, any focusing and zoom issues as well.


----------



## Prpntblr95

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> yea but what sports. indoor/outdoors. night/day. highschool/college. (schools with money for good light vs bad light)
> i used to shoot DII sports at my school. most of our teams are ranked nationally in the top10 *except for track&cross country and golf. our womens team won the national championship for basketball a few years back. our lighting is just awful. i was shooting basketball at iso4000 to get a shutter speed of 1/320 f2.8. same with soccer iso4000 with a shutter speed of 1/500 at night. i dont think you are going to want to expect a 1DIIn to perform fantastically at night field sports without professional stadium lights honestly. the photos will be fine for web and newspaper but might be a little noisey for nice prints. i have never shot with that camera before but i know its a solid performer. but honestly even these new rebel cameras are starting to get some nice high ISO performance compared to what photogs had in the past


Tennis during the day, football we have professional stadium lighting and results are pretty goof at iso 1600 at f/4. Volleyball and basketball are both inside 1/100th-1/250th sec depending where in the gym you are.

School was built in 2008, our district is the 5th largest in the US, I forget how many schools but there's a ton.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Prpntblr95*
> 
> Tennis during the day, football we have professional stadium lighting and results are pretty goof at iso 1600 at f/4. Volleyball and basketball are both inside 1/100th-1/250th sec depending where in the gym you are.
> School was built in 2008, our district is the 5th largest in the US, I forget how many schools but there's a ton.


1/100-1/250 isn't enough shutter speed for volleyball or basketball.


----------



## Prpntblr95

It's given me pretty good results.


----------



## Conspiracy

can you post samples? we can always help you make your shots better through critique. you dont have to share if you dont want


----------



## sub50hz

Of what? People standing around during timeouts? You're lying to yourself if you think 1/100 is fast enough for any sport besides maybe poker.


----------



## Conspiracy

even poker is slow with how fast they throw those chips in the middle sometimes


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> even poker is slow with how fast they throw those chips in the middle sometimes


but the motion blur gives a sense of excitement vs just people sitting around holding cards


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> but the motion blur gives a sense of excitement vs just people sitting around holding cards


thats where using a fisheye lens and laying on the table in front of the chip pile so they throw it towards the camera. thats the super exciting shot right there boy i tell you what. cameras and camera accessories


----------



## sub50hz

I tell you what, Bobby.


----------



## dudemanppl




----------



## Prpntblr95

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> can you post samples? we can always help you make your shots better through critique. you dont have to share if you dont want


Can't really make pictures better unless you brighten the gym lights









Let me find one.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Of what? People standing around during timeouts? You're lying to yourself if you think 1/100 is fast enough for any sport besides maybe poker.


Ignorance.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Prpntblr95*
> 
> Ignorance.


You're right, I don't know anything about shooting indoor sports! Oh, how foolish I was to assume that such slow shutter speeds were perfect for indoor sports! Who needs strobes or ISO? You might want to share your secrets with the rest of the working sports photography world, they are *missing out!*


----------



## BlankThis

Poop is getting real in here.

5D guys what lenses would you guys recommend in terms of autofocus speed on the 5D. I know the 135L autofocuses really well, what are some other good ones?


----------



## ljason8eg

The 85 1.8 comes to mind. Any of the Canon 70-200 versions are speedy as well.


----------



## dudemanppl

35L.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Prpntblr95*
> 
> Can't really make pictures better unless you brighten the gym lights
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .


really? i never though of paying to replace all the lights at my school gym lol

thankfully they took my advice and did it instead of making me pay for it.

but besides the fact that brighter lights will not make your shot better. it will just be at a lower ISO. knowing the sport and how to capture great action is what makes for a good photograph


----------



## xxrabid93

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis*
> 
> Poop is getting real in here.
> 5D guys what lenses would you guys recommend in terms of autofocus speed on the 5D. I know the 135L autofocuses really well, what are some other good ones?


70-200 2.8. Really fast on my 5Dc (well, with as fast as a 5Dc can be







).


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> 35L.


But I already have a Samyang 35


----------



## Prpntblr95

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> really? i never though of paying to replace all the lights at my school gym lol
> thankfully they took my advice and did it instead of making me pay for it.
> but besides the fact that brighter lights will not make your shot better. it will just be at a lower ISO. knowing the sport and how to capture great action is what makes for a good photograph


High iso's can ruin picture quality, therefore better lighting can help by requiring a lower iso therefore making the photo quality better.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis*
> 
> But I already have a Samyang 35


And an Ee-S/Eg-S screen? If not, GET ON THAT.


----------



## BlankThis

Yes yes yes. Got the EE-S. Looking into a magnifying eyepiece, any suggestions.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis*
> 
> Yes yes yes. Got the EE-S. Looking into a magnifying eyepiece, any suggestions.


I'll check when home, but I have one of the rectangular Nikon magnifiying eyepieces (DK-17M, IIRC) that works on Canon bodies. If I still have it, just paypal me 10 bucks and it's yours.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Prpntblr95*
> 
> High iso's can ruin picture quality, therefore better lighting can help by requiring a lower iso therefore making the photo quality better.


Now a days, the definition of high ISO is somewhat subjective. I have a feeling you're not going to be printing 20x30s of high school sports, so most of what you're going to be doing is going to be web based/etc. In those cases, shooting at 1600 isn't a problem at all (especially with post processing, if grain really does actually affect your images).

The thing you're forgetting is, lowering your ISO so you don't have grain doesn't mean anything if you shooting indoor sports at 1/60-1/125th of a second... you're still going to get motion in your images (which sometimes people want, but alot of times people prefer stopping the action). The original point was, you need a faster shutter speed to freeze action, and bumping your ISO to catch it is plenty fine. Catching a somewhat useable image is infinitely better than not bothering to try or missing it because you're trying to get the ideal exposure, because in most cases you can usually fix it after the fact.


----------



## Conspiracy

^ that and the fact that a properly exposed high ISO shot will generally have less noticeable noise in it versus a poorly exposed lower iso shot. i would rather have a solid exposure at ISO 4000 than be 2 or more stops under exposed because i want my iso at a lower value. but sacrificing shutter speed because you dont want to shoot high ISO is the killer in most usable sports photos. its ok if the ball has motion blur because it gives the photo the sense of action and excitement. but if the player in your photo is moving so fast their their arms and legs are blurred from motion then you have a not so professional looking shot


----------



## sub50hz

I can't believe this is even a conversation in this thread.


----------



## Prpntblr95

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> I can't believe this is even a conversation in this thread.


Pipe down, this is useful information he is saying.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Prpntblr95*
> 
> Pipe down, this is useful information he is saying.


huh? useful information?

this is common knowledge lol

pick up a copy of sports illustrated and take notes


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Prpntblr95*
> 
> Pipe down, this is useful information he is saying.


Useful for who? The regulars in this thread are experienced enough to the point where this is a redundant conversation, sparked only by your ridiculous assertion that such slow shutter speeds are acceptable for sports shooting.


----------



## BlankThis

Just picked up one of these today http://www.prophotographygear.com/pixel-tw282-wireless-timer-remote-control-fr-canon-5d-30d-20d-p-145.html

Awesome product. So much cheaper than the Canon equivalent and the wireless is freaking powerful. I was almost 100 feet away and on the other side of a concrete wall with no problems.


----------



## xxrabid93

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis*
> 
> Just picked up one of these today http://www.prophotographygear.com/pixel-tw282-wireless-timer-remote-control-fr-canon-5d-30d-20d-p-145.html
> Awesome product. So much cheaper than the Canon equivalent and the wireless is freaking powerful. I was almost 100 feet away and on the other side of a concrete wall with no problems.


How's the build quality?


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> I can't believe this is even a conversation in this thread.












this is why silence is golden....


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> this is why silence is golden....


yea but duct tape is silver.

saw that on a tshirt once lol


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xxrabid93*
> 
> How's the build quality?


Quite good! All the plastics feel very good and there's no flexing. It comes with some garbage Chinese batteries that will need replacing quickly.


----------



## soymilk

keep spare batteries in your camera bag. Both the cr-2 and AAA. I've heard from multiple sources that similar products still drain batteries even when the unit is powered off. This goes for the wired version, im not sure about the wireless version.

Have yall guys seen the triggertrap? (similar device, but uses your iphone as the intervelometer)
https://vimeo.com/triggertrap/mobile


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *soymilk*
> 
> keep spare batteries in your camera bag. Both the cr-2 and AAA. I've heard from multiple sources that similar products still drain batteries even when the unit is powered off. This goes for the wired version, im not sure about the wireless version.
> Have yall guys seen the triggertrap? (similar device, but uses your iphone as the intervelometer)https://vimeo.com/triggertrap/mobile


That looks like a higher end version of what I have.

http://www.dslrbot.com/

Works well and has come in handy. I keep the little dongle I made in my bag all the time as it is so small.


----------



## Conspiracy

the fact that we can control out camera with a phone is just pretty darn incredible.

just watched that video about triggertrap and just wow. some of those features are amazing. if i did timelapse work that would be a life saver over having to manually calculate all the factors to make the video work. not to mention using a stop watch and having to stay with the camera and manually shoot it lol.


----------



## Prpntblr95

Calling all haters, no editing or post processing done besides the text.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Prpntblr95*
> 
> Calling all haters, no editing or post processing done besides the text.


rule of 3rds







center framed subject are usually boring unless you are a hipster









other than that not bad. the angle is boring to me. i think if you were laying on your stomach while you took this to get even lower it would be more dramatic, would give you a foreground element on broken paintballs on the ground


----------



## MistaBernie

pretty much. Too tight of a crop, creates a lack of context.


----------



## Prpntblr95

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> rule of 3rds
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> center framed subject are usually boring unless you are a hipster
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> other than that not bad. the angle is boring to me. i think if you were laying on your stomach while you took this to get even lower it would be more dramatic, would give you a foreground element on broken paintballs on the ground


Too close for rule of 3rds :/ I was literally 7 feet from him so if I tried the 3rds it would of cut off his body unfortunently. I do agree the angle is boring, If I was further back down the field the way he is looking it would make him look tighter in the bunker and the angle would look better,

Thank you for the pointers


----------



## dudemanppl

OR you coulda zoomed in to 200mm up in his face.


----------



## Prpntblr95

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> OR you coulda zoomed in to 200mm up in his face.


What about this? Also no post processing or editing done


----------



## ljason8eg

I'd like to see more action or creative angles. Get someone sliding/diving behind cover, paint splattering around them or a player actually getting shot (yeah, the last one is a lot of luck too). Camping in the middle of the field also will give you great angles, just be careful of giving away players' positions. Only drawback is you and your equipment are in the line of fire.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Prpntblr95*
> 
> Too close for rule of 3rds :/ I was literally 7 feet from him so if I tried the 3rds it would of cut off his body unfortunently. I do agree the angle is boring, If I was further back down the field the way he is looking it would make him look tighter in the bunker and the angle would look better,
> Thank you for the pointers


what lens were you shooting with? and all you would have done is pan the camera right a little bit and *bam your subject is now in the left third of the frame facing towards the empty space, rule of thirds still would have worked







and that would isolate your subject even more making for a nice clean image on that frame. not saying it needs to be that way for all photos of paintball. but this current image as it is wouldnt be a keeper in my book if i shot it. just my opinion, i bet you got way more better shots from this event









that second shot you posted is much much more interesting than the first


----------



## Prpntblr95

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> I'd like to see more action or creative angles. Get someone sliding/diving behind cover, paint splattering around them or a player actually getting shot (yeah, the last one is a lot of luck too). Camping in the middle of the field also will give you great angles, just be careful of giving away players' positions. Only drawback is you and your equipment are in the line of fire.


At breakouts I was at 30 dorito and 30 snake, never really stayed at the 50.

You're in the line of fire almost everywhere you go whether it's direct or bouncing off a bunker.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> what lens were you shooting with? and all you would have done is pan the camera right a little bit and *bam your subject is now in the left third of the frame facing towards the empty space, rule of thirds still would have worked
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and that would isolate your subject even more making for a nice clean image on that frame. not saying it needs to be that way for all photos of paintball. but this current image as it is wouldnt be a keeper in my book if i shot it. just my opinion, i bet you got way more better shots from this event
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> that second shot you posted is much much more interesting than the first


I was using a 70-200 f/4,

I'll be using my schools 300 f/4 for part of today just to change things up and make things a bit tighter across field.

Thank you guys.

I still have 1100 or so I haven't gone threw but I'm about to go back out to the field for the finals.


----------



## Conspiracy

honestly i think a 300 would be too long for paintball unless you are only going for closeups or standing way in the back which limits what you can get from that angle versus being closer to the middle. a 70-200 at 70mm would give you the opportunity to stay a little further back from the line of fire and be able to get interesting framed shots that show more of the surroundings around the players. its nice having tight action shots but usually some of the best paintball shots i have seen is at the final 1v1 moment where one player rushes another and the shot shows the surrounding field empty with 2 players left close together, granted not every match ends with a 1v1 or even one player rushing the other at the end. other good shots are of players just moving up in general especially off the break when you get people jumping over or sliding to cover

it also depends on what the officials say as far as photography. usually as long as you do not interfere with the match im sure they would be ok with what you are doing. obviously if you are at a spot that a player needs to get to in order to move that would cause a problem lol


----------



## johnko1

Here's mine,old but it does the job quite good!


----------



## dudemanppl

300 isn't too long, but 480mm is. Damn you APS-C!


----------



## Conspiracy

lol


----------



## BlankThis

Only 3k for a Leinon 5D2

http://72.32.6.157/~rbensonarch/blog/?page_id=247


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis*
> 
> Only 3k for a Leinon 5D2
> http://72.32.6.157/~rbensonarch/blog/?page_id=247


ill take 2


----------



## BlankThis

If I had any screw mount glass or could afford Leica glass, that's not a bad price in my mind. There's a heck a lot of work involve in this I would imagine.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Prpntblr95*
> 
> Also no post processing or editing done


Why do people think this is some benchmark for a good photo? 99.99999% of the time, even great photos need some sort of adjustments, especially if you shoot RAW.

P.S. Fix that watermark, it sucks. And by fix, I mean remove it.


----------



## Prpntblr95

1DMKII came today, sorry for poopy cell phone picture.


----------



## sub50hz

Lol, against all advice you got it anyway. Amazing.


----------



## Prpntblr95

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Lol, against all advice you got it anyway. Amazing.


I bought it before I posted in this thread.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Prpntblr95*
> 
> I bought it before I posted in this thread.


Coulda fooled me.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Prpntblr95*
> 
> Trying to pick up a Canon 1DMKII N so i have 2 bodies to shoot with since I am on almost every sports page for my schools yearbook.


I hope you have realistic expectations.


----------



## BlankThis

Wait, why do you need a 1D2?


----------



## Azefore

Got in my Sigma 50-150mm OS today, pretty satisfied with what I've been able to do in the past 8 hours with it. Focal range is a lot more comfortable than 70-300 on a crop sensor. Will have to do some decent daylight shooting tomorrow but the OS is great so far for low lights indoors.


----------



## sub50hz

I think I am ready to sell my RB and buy a Blad. Anybody interested in a 6x7 beast?


----------



## BlankThis

Anyone have any Lightroom presets that can give my B&Ws more punch?


George by Will F-T, on Flickr


----------



## johnko1

What is good lens that can replace the kit one?I currently use the 50mm f2.8 and 70-200mm usm L f4.0 because the stock isn't that good.I really like the 18-xx range so I would like to have somthing similar

PS.I have Canon EOS 350d
Waiting for sugestions


----------



## Azefore

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *johnko1*
> 
> What is good lens that can replace the kit one?I currently use the 50mm f2.8 and 70-200mm usm L f4.0 because the stock isn't that good.I really like the 18-xx range so I would like to have somthing similar
> PS.I have Canon EOS 350d
> Waiting for sugestions


Tamron 17-50mm F2.8 might suit your needs


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis*
> 
> Anyone have any Lightroom presets that can give my B&Ws more punch?
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> George by Will F-T, on Flickr


Why not make your own? Set more contrast, increase highlights and blacks, lighten up shadow and possibly the white slider, and increase clarity. Adjust the color temp and tint a little too. You can adjust the color saturations and hues as well.

Here is a quick edit i did.



Here is the preset:

B&W punch.zip 1k .zip file


----------



## Prpntblr95

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> I hope you have realistic expectations.


Just wait.


----------



## Conspiracy

truth


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Why not make your own?


If you do, don't pump it full of fake vignette. I don't understand why anyone would think that looks good.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Prpntblr95*
> 
> Just wait.


For what?


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Why not make your own?
> 
> 
> 
> If you do, don't pump it full of fake vignette. I don't understand why anyone would think that looks good.
Click to expand...

I know! Took me a while to learn that lol.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> I think I am ready to sell my RB and buy a Blad. Anybody interested in a 6x7 beast?


Depends. How much were you looking for it?


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> Depends. How much were you looking for it?


I'll PM you when I get home. In the meantime, if you would like to look at it, it's a Pro-S body, WLF, 127K/L lens (I think I have the SD flange somewhere as well), and a pair of Pro-S backs with the double exposure prevention (one 220 and one 120). I also have the strap with the CORRECT 3-position lugs that are hard as hell to find.


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> If you do, don't pump it full of fake vignette. I don't understand why anyone would think that looks good.


I vignetted that shot a little just because the framing was garbage and I didn't want to crop... Pretty much the first shot I took with my 5D and Samyang 35


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Why not make your own? Set more contrast, increase highlights and blacks, lighten up shadow and possibly the white slider, and increase clarity. Adjust the color temp and tint a little too. You can adjust the color saturations and hues as well.
> Here is a quick edit i did.
> 
> Here is the preset:
> 
> B&W punch.zip 1k .zip file


Thanks a lot Sean!

Maybe a bit too punchy for me but I'm going to tweak it a little







I appreciate it!


----------



## sub50hz

Can we make this thread fun again? Blackbox, I didn't forget about you, but I did fall into a megasleep last night so I forgot to PM you.


----------



## laboitenoire

It's alright. I'll wait patiently.


----------



## Floy

I am going to my best friends wedding next week and the only camera I have is the one on my blackberry. I was thinking about getting a camera for myself, but I am really unsure on what to get. Ideally I am looking for a point and shoot camera, with a maximum budget of 100 GBP / 150 USD. I would like to obviously take good pictures and having good audio would be a plus.

Any ideas or suggestions? What are the best in terms of price/quality etc?


----------



## laboitenoire

Honestly, just enjoy the wedding. Even with a nice DSLR, shooting a wedding is tricky. Church lighting often sucks, and plus unless you're right in front you'll probably have no clear view of what's going on.


----------



## sub50hz

If you're just shooting for fun, use whatever. You'll be hammered anyway.


----------



## MistaBernie

Did somebody say 'bring the fun back' to this thread? Mmkay!

I've decided two years of service is enough for my i7/920 rig. Gonna build Ivy Bridge. At first I was all sorts of ready to shell out lots of cash for an Asus Sabertooth Z77 board, but I now realize I don't need that much board.

Things I'd like:

ATX (this could be up for debate, I may be willing to put a mini-ATX in my Antec 300 for this). It would be nice to have a little desk space back too... albeit not a whole lot.)
at least two 6.0gb/s SATA ports
at least two USB 3.0 ports
I prefer Asus but would be willing to consider others...

I'm trying to keep this to a decent budget; I'm going to be reusing my Corsair 620HX (I think) power supply and my GTX 470. I'll reuse my optical drives (I have a decent LG Blue Ray drive). I'm removing water cooling from the case and going with a decent quality air cooler. I just bought 12gb of Corasair Vengeance on the cheap so I'm buying an additional stick for ~$20 and will be running 16gb DDR3-1600

I'm picking up a Sandisk Extreme SSD for a boot drive, CS6 and Lightroom 4 because it's down to an acceptable price point for me to invest.

So, recommend me some decent value motherboards. Don't want to go ROG/Maximus, I have no need for it. I also dont want to go ASrock,


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> I also dont want to go ASrock,


Why? They're a hell of a lot better than they used to be -- and cheap.


----------



## MistaBernie

I accidentally edited your response Sub, very sorry about that sir.

But effectively, you said it yourself -- better than they used to be, and _cheap_... I have had bad luck with ASrock in the past. Doesn't mean they don't deserve another shot, but I dont want it to be with this build I guess.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Did somebody say 'bring the fun back' to this thread? Mmkay!
> 
> I've decided two years of service is enough for my i7/920 rig. Gonna build Ivy Bridge. At first I was all sorts of ready to shell out lots of cash for an Asus Sabertooth Z77 board, but I now realize I don't need that much board.
> 
> Things I'd like:
> 
> ATX (this could be up for debate, I may be willing to put a mini-ATX in my Antec 300 for this). It would be nice to have a little desk space back too... albeit not a whole lot.)
> at least two 6.0gb/s SATA ports
> at least two USB 3.0 ports
> I prefer Asus but would be willing to consider others...
> 
> I'm trying to keep this to a decent budget; I'm going to be reusing my Corsair 620HX (I think) power supply and my GTX 470. I'll reuse my optical drives (I have a decent LG Blue Ray drive). I'm removing water cooling from the case and going with a decent quality air cooler. I just bought 12gb of Corasair Vengeance on the cheap so I'm buying an additional stick for ~$20 and will be running 16gb DDR3-1600
> 
> I'm picking up a Sandisk Extreme SSD for a boot drive, CS6 and Lightroom 4 because it's down to an acceptable price point for me to invest.
> 
> So, recommend me some decent value motherboards. Don't want to go ROG/Maximus, I have no need for it. I also dont want to go ASrock,


What's so bad about ASRock? They usually offer the same/more features at a lower price than Asus and are similar in quality.
Also, if you get a board with more than 2 SATA 6Gb/s ports just know that only 2 of them are the native intel ports and the others are from third party chip set, with Asus they are ASMedia. Make sure the SSD is on the Intel port.

Mobo: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813131820

Or to save some $ this ASRock







: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813157293

For SSD get this: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=&sku=845680&Q=&is=REG&A=details


----------



## MistaBernie

Have you really heard good things about that SSD? One of the things I find kind of funny about it is 'boots up in as little as 15 seconds'. I like the read speed, I guess for an OS drive write speed isn't all that paramount, but if I decided to put programs on it, I think I'd like the write speeds closer to the read speeds..


----------



## sub50hz

Spend more money, then. I boot off an M4 and it's plenty fast for an OS, and I also run CS6 and other misc programs off of there, but I use my Revodrive for scratch space and working area for scanning and music recording. It's pretty much as fast as you're gonna get until you start getting in way over your head with money.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Have you really heard good things about that SSD?


It is actually one of the best valued SSDs out right now. I have one, I got one for a friend in Thailand a few weeks ago, I've had a few others for friends builds. It is a very very reliable drive. Have you seen the total write abuse one of the 256GB models is taking 24/7? http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?271063-SSD-Write-Endurance-25nm-Vs-34nm&p=5143056&viewfull=1#post5143056

5PB! It is ridiculous. lol
Quote:


> One of the things I find kind of funny about it is 'boots up in as little as 15 seconds'. I like the read speed, I guess for an OS drive write speed isn't all that paramount, but if I decided to put programs on it, I think I'd like the write speeds closer to the read speeds..


Almost all current SSDs will boot an OS within 1-2 seconds of each other. Usually the BIOS/UEFI POST takes longer than the OS loading...which annoys with my system. You will not notice a difference b/w SSDs in the OS anyways. Usually it is best to go with reliable and what is on sale at the time.


----------



## MistaBernie

Definitely good points gentlemen. I'll probably pick up the SSD while it's on sale. The mobo discussion may wait a bit now though, wifey wants a laptop for Christmas so I think we're going to get each other computers... I think it's actually fair (and probably one of the better xmas gifts she has gotten me, ha!)


----------



## sub50hz

Get a retina MBP. For yourself.


----------



## MistaBernie

Hahaha, no. Not downplaying the value of MBP w/ Retina displays here, just saying that I don't need a mobile computer that fast, I just want to upgrade mine from ~2010.


----------



## sub50hz

So buy a couple SSDs and be done with it. Nehalem is still plenty fast.


----------



## BlankThis

I'm going to rage if the iMac refresh doesn't come this month...


----------



## laboitenoire

Diverting this back to another topic frequently discussed in this thread:

Got home at 11:05. Cracked open a Southern Tier Unearthly Imperial IPA at 11:20. Done by 12:30. Holy crap this is hitting me hard. Delicious? Yes. Worth the $8 I had to pay at our slightly overpriced grocery store on campus? Not sure yet. While the grocery store has great selection, it costs on average $1 or $2 more for the same beers as the other store in town or the Wegman's back home. But damn, that was a hoppy beer.


----------



## Mongol

Southern Tier isn't bad, but after I discovered (some time ago) Stone Ruination and Dogfish Head 90min IPA, everything else has been pretty meh.

...and I usually drink Belgians.


----------



## sub50hz

My current fridge stash:

- 3floyds Zombie Dust
- 3floyds/Mikkeler Risgoop
- Abita Pecan Harvest
- Rogue Mocha Porter
- Rogue Double Chocolate Stout
- Breckenridge Vanilla Porter
- Breckenridge Agave Wheat
- homebrew Chocolate cherry Stout
- homebrew DIPA

And probably something else. Some jerk (me) brought some Bourbon County Stout home last night.


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Some jerk (me) brought some Bourbon County Stout home last night.


Where did you find one? I tried the day after release and both places I stopped said they lasted about an hour before they were sold out.


----------



## sub50hz

Some hole in the wall place in Crestwood/Midlothian (not sure officially what town it is at that point) called B.J. Liquor. It was 22.99 for the 4-pack and they had two left after I grabbed this one.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/dlg57n6bger4u3x/2012-10-12%2022.45.18.jpg

It's around, I want to say, like 138th and Cicero, maybe a little bit further south, and on the east side. Fair selection for such a seemingly crappy place -- and anything they don't have can be had at Binny's in Orland (my go-to since it's close to home). Except Three Floyds, you gotta just go to the brewery now if you want anything. We usually go a couple times a month, that's how I acquired the Risgoop -- and one of the new Zombie Dust shirts.


----------



## sub50hz

I bought a 7970 today because I am stupid. Also, Microcenter stopped their amazing CPU deals. Oup!


----------



## Conspiracy

successful 7D magic lantern. no complains at all


----------



## MistaBernie

Meh, 3770k + Asus P8Z77 V-LGA is still $100 cheaper @ MC than it is Newegg, that's good enough for me..


----------



## Mongol

I envy Baumgartner.


----------



## Azefore

Quote:


> Originally Posted by ***********
> 
> I envy Baumgartner.


Photographer was first on the scene of his landing lol


----------



## Mongol

Wasn't that awesome? Lmao.


----------



## MistaBernie

Unrelated news to the above awesomeness...

I almost traded away my 17-40 today. Instead.. I traded away my TT1/TT5x2 + short money for a 135L that looks like it just came off the shelf. Total cash investment (money I spent on the TT5s since I got the TT1 for free, + money I contributed to the trade): $490. Result. 135L.


----------



## Conspiracy

everyone should totally sign up for this and list me as a referrer and also fold. because then you can be added for a random drawing of one of those OCN ducky keyboards.

it starts in 2 days so get your computers going lol

http://www.overclock.net/t/1312065/october-2012-foldathon-17th-19th-raising-awareness-of-malaria

or just use this link to take you straight to sign up spreadsheet https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/viewform?hl=en_GB&formkey=dEphemVsV2ljelFUdFV3SnBqWWluU2c6MA#gid=0


----------



## sub50hz

Which one of you guys wants to part with your 35DX for a launch 6970 (reference, black pcb with digi VRMs)?


----------



## Conspiracy

OR

you can just donate to my paypal to help fund me purchasing a small camera mount battery powered LED panel light for my video stuff









pretty sure ill be trying to get this one http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/616394-REG/Litepanels_LP_MICROPRO_MicroPro_LED_On_Camera_Light.html

oh yea and on a side note. I CAN SHOOT VIDYA OUTDURS NOW ^_^

yes my mic has some gray hairs. but not only does that come from age (pfft only 2 months old) but from experience haha


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> OR
> you can just donate to my paypal to help fund me purchasing a small camera mount battery powered LED panel light for my video stuff
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pretty sure ill be trying to get this one http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/616394-REG/Litepanels_LP_MICROPRO_MicroPro_LED_On_Camera_Light.html
> oh yea and on a side note. I CAN SHOOT VIDYA OUTDURS NOW ^_^
> yes my mic has some gray hairs. but not only does that come from age (pfft only 2 months old) but from experience haha


ooh hows the h1 ? vs like a rode videomic?


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> OR
> you can just donate to my paypal to help fund me purchasing a small camera mount battery powered LED panel light for my video stuff
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pretty sure ill be trying to get this one http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/616394-REG/Litepanels_LP_MICROPRO_MicroPro_LED_On_Camera_Light.html
> oh yea and on a side note. I CAN SHOOT VIDYA OUTDURS NOW ^_^
> yes my mic has some gray hairs. but not only does that come from age (pfft only 2 months old) but from experience haha


gotta love dead cats


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iandroo888*
> 
> ooh hows the h1 ? vs like a rode videomic?


ill take a H1 over a videomic any day of the week. i strongly dislike being limited to recording sound in my camera, unless its a professional camera that records a higher quality audio. DSLR in specific crush audio from AGC and not having control over audio (manual levels isnt good enough but better than not having at least)

externally recorded audio will almost always provide the best possible quality. and the H1 has better quality mic but its a different type of mic than the video mic.


----------



## Azefore

If you wanted to, combine both an H1 and Rodemic for a good, small interview setup, or any half decent shotgun mic.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Azefore*
> 
> If you wanted to, combine both an H1 and Rodemic for a good, small interview setup, or any half decent shotgun mic.


assuming thats what you need. the rode videomic is great but not the best mic for every situation since its a supercardiod microphone and the H1 is a unidirectional stereo condenser mic in X/Y. every mic has a different use so just like no one video camera can do everything, no one mic can do it all either.

im not going to get too deep into the technicals for sound. but a rode video mic is not best for an interview unless you put it on a boom pole


----------



## Azefore

True enough but it'll work a bit better than an H1 stand alone since field recorders tend to be best used for ambient sound, however booms yah, then we're getting into stuff I can't comment on personally. Slap it on a nearby tripod or flash pole with its shock mount too.


----------



## mz-n10

just get a h4n and throw on whatever xlr mic you want.


----------



## Azefore

Was eyeballing the Tascam Dr-40 myself


----------



## iandroo888

hmmm good to know ! ill probably consider the H1 since my body cant use a mic anyway. i had gotten the rode videomic with boompole for friend's bday. was just curious. XD


----------



## Conspiracy

Personally the h1 crushes the videomic in overall quality. Field recorders are not limited to only in the field. I prefer to sync sound and keep it separate from video unless its totally inconvenient like in run and gun ENG work


----------



## soymilk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Azefore*
> 
> Was eyeballing the Tascam Dr-40 myself


i picked up the dr-40, so far I like it. I picked it up on amazon a while back when it was on sale for about $130-140. Im surprised to see it at $200 again.


----------



## Kreeker

I know there is no way anyone to know, but do you think the prices of 5d mk2s will drop much more before Christmas? I'm thinking about jumping on the deal for the body + 24-105mm f/4L for $2200 after rebate.


----------



## Marin

Haven't posted in here in awhile. Got a Toyo 45CF to replace my Sinar F. It's lighter than my Hasselblad and from the look of things the Caltar II-N 135mm/5.6 is small enough to be folded up with the camera.

Went with a Caltar since it's just a rebranded Rodenstock.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> Haven't posted in here in awhile. Got a Toyo 45CF to replace my Sinar F. It's lighter than my Hasselblad and from the look of things the Caltar II-N 135mm/5.6 is small enough to be folded up with the camera.
> Went with a Caltar since it's just a rebranded Rodenstock.


youre so addicted to borderlands 2 you forgot about us down here lol


----------



## Azefore

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *soymilk*
> 
> i picked up the dr-40, so far I like it. I picked it up on amazon a while back when it was on sale for about $130-140. Im surprised to see it at $200 again.


Yah the price is all over, I added it to wishlist at $165 through amazon, hit 175, then 185, now $200. I'll wait for it to drop again. And yah the features for the price point are great, the duplicate track recording at -12db was what won me over between that, the H2/n and the DR-07 MkII.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kreeker*
> 
> I know there is no way anyone to know, but do you think the prices of 5d mk2s will drop much more before Christmas? I'm thinking about jumping on the deal for the body + 24-105mm f/4L for $2200 after rebate.


Maybe $150 being ultra optimistic, after will most likely see that easily but that's a good ways away


----------



## soymilk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kreeker*
> 
> I know there is no way anyone to know, but do you think the prices of 5d mk2s will drop much more before Christmas? I'm thinking about jumping on the deal for the body + 24-105mm f/4L for $2200 after rebate.


B & H has it for 2200 with the pixma 9000 pro mkii printer.

Sell the printer for 100-200 and that'll bring the 5dmkii down to about $1250 if you're lucky


----------



## Azefore

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *soymilk*
> 
> B & H has it for 2200 with the pixma 9000 pro mkii printer.
> Sell the printer for 100-200 and that'll bring the 5dmkii down to about $1250 if you're lucky


Price is roughly $350 new but how do you reckon 2200-200=1250?


----------



## sub50hz

New Nikon toys for me today.


----------



## MistaBernie

share with the class...


----------



## sub50hz

Come to chat and you can find out.


----------



## Conspiracy

yeah. sub is giving a full review of nikon D7000 in chat. in depth analysis of its awesomeness


----------



## sub50hz

Good crop camera. It's my gateway drug to a D800 which may or may not be ordered in a week.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Cameras are one hellava drug.


-Sub50hz, 10-18-12... nikon D7000 review 9.99999999999999999/10 Gold Star of approval

next weeks review D800 - predicted score........ 11.0/10.0


----------



## sub50hz

First impressions:

Easy to use, good custom function mapping ability for the two available buttons (though, losing stop-down ability seems kind of abnormal, I'll chalk that up to a "if you don't really care about aperture preview feel free to map it to something else"). Kinda small in hand, but this is coming from a man who can and does single-handedly wield an RB67. Will hopefully get out this weekend to do some low-light shooting, which is pretty much the only reason I bought it. Pretty tought to get medium format (or really, any film) down in to the super-dim range without egregious pushing or borderline bankrupting super-fast lenses (see: Noctilux). The light weight and size is, overall, a blessing, and it's pretty easy to slip into a small bag. I'll talk more about it when I'm not falling asleep.


----------



## soymilk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Azefore*
> 
> Price is roughly $350 new but how do you reckon 2200-200=1250?


If you sell the 24-105mm kit lens. Which goes for about $700-800.

2200 - 200 (rough estimate sale of printer) = $2000
2050 - 750 (rough estimate of sale of kit lens) = about $1250

There's a b&h sale for the camera, kit lens, and printer right now. I can post the link if you want. But to get the 5dmkii at that price you're gonna have to go through some tough huddles. Rebates, reselling printer and lens....


----------



## soymilk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> First impressions:
> Easy to use, good custom function mapping ability for the two available buttons (though, losing stop-down ability seems kind of abnormal, I'll chalk that up to a "if you don't really care about aperture preview feel free to map it to something else"). Kinda small in hand, but this is coming from a man who can and does single-handedly wield an RB67. Will hopefully get out this weekend to do some low-light shooting, which is pretty much the only reason I bought it. Pretty tought to get medium format (or really, any film) down in to the super-dim range without egregious pushing or borderline bankrupting super-fast lenses (see: Noctilux). The light weight and size is, overall, a blessing, and it's pretty easy to slip into a small bag. I'll talk more about it when I'm not falling asleep.


You gotta try the quiet shooting mode. It really liked using it, made taking candids a lot more discrete.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *soymilk*
> 
> You gotta try the quiet shooting mode. It really liked using it, made taking candids a lot more discrete.


That is, believe it or not, one of the first things I tried and was pretty excited to have -- discretion is useful here in Chicago, especially when shooting in some... "unsavory" areas. It's semi-quiet, surely, but not as much so compared single-frame mode. That's already pretty tame, but having a little extra ability to control the mirror descent and resulting noise might be nice. I don't shoot events or in churches or the like anymore, so really it's just a bonus feature for me.


----------



## MistaBernie

Sub, why don't you do an actual review of the D7000 when you get a chance?

And why am I also pretty sure you'll have a D800 by the end of 2012?


----------



## sub50hz

I might, but it won't, likely, be styled like the thousands of other reviews that already exist out there. I'm pretty sure by this point most people know exactly what they're getting into with a body that's almost a couple years old, but perhaps some perspective from someone that's been all over the place trying to find the perfect gear (and ending up shooting larger formats) might be useful to some.

Perhaps this weekend.


----------



## BlankThis

Loving the ML for 5Dc that finally seems to be stable


----------



## savagebunny

Just got a Nikon D5100 for a good price from a buddy of mine. Obviously came with the kit lens, but plan on getting a 50mm f/1.8G


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *savagebunny*
> 
> Just got a Nikon D5100 for a good price from a buddy of mine. Obviously came with the kit lens, but plan on getting a 50mm f/1.8G


congrats







enjoy the new camera


----------



## Conspiracy

Yay







on my way to shoot cross country conference championship. This is the first time my conference has done a championship for this sport. Yay running! I much rather just walking at a brisk pace but whatevs lol









Ill be in Montevallo, Alabama if anyone actually lives out there lolz

Got my trusty 7D +70-200 mkII & 1.4X extender


----------



## sub50hz

Lockouts? Psh.

http://deadspin.com/5953422/columbus-blue-jackets-fans-gathered-at-a-bar-for-an-xbox-simulation-last-night-and-the-blue-jackets-radio-announcers-showed-up-to-call-it


----------



## Conspiracy

so i sold my HD 7770 and now i have no video card in my pc. im not advertising anything in the marketplace buuuuut. take a gander at my sig slightly below this post.









also thanks to bernie my LED battery powered mini camera mounted light panel should be here wednesday. since i never attach lights to a camera for video i need a light stand.. so who wants to move to ATL and be a portable self adjusting light stand for me, ill even let you take breaks when your arms get tired because i care


----------



## 222Panther222

Tried my 30mm sigma with reverse 18-55mm xti kit lens, both non is and i didn't had a tripod nor reverse ring, i used a micro-fiber cloth to press them together without damaging the lens. So anyway it was fun and i had time to kill, the subject is an old geforce fx6200 agp.


----------



## Conspiracy

instagram goodness of this beast of a annotated bibliography that i spent the past few days and last 2 consecutive all nighters working on. finished it 20 minutes before class started with the final touches of labeling all the dividers and 3 hole punching the last few parts

this is a 2" binder


----------



## laboitenoire

All that for a senior thesis? Christ, mine will only have to be about 20 pages, and we don't even need an annotated bib.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> All that for a senior thesis? Christ, mine will only have to be about 20 pages, and we don't even need an annotated bib.


i hate you. mine has to be about that plus all the extra work and excessive number of research sources


----------



## dudemanppl

Well then. Best friend died. But it was all his fault. He was on his Super Pista with 808 Firecrests.


----------



## sub50hz

Your friends have more money than sense.


----------



## MistaBernie

Sorry to hear that Dudeman, it still sucks.

I may be picking up a Mamiya 645 ProTL and 80mm+ cash for my very not used 17-40. Thoughts?


----------



## sub50hz

I feel bad for the guy who will be upset when you eventually back out of the trade.


----------



## MistaBernie

Guess I shouldn't mention the 135L I effectively got for like $450 then...


----------



## sub50hz

I already saw it, mine's long gone anyway.


----------



## sub50hz

Couple from the first day of D7000:


Wayner//Westmont by sub50hz, on Flickr


Tam//Westmont by sub50hz, on Flickr


----------



## Conspiracy

safe to say d7000 is a winner? shots look good to me. would be good to move that giant pole next time. totally ruins the background. shouldnt take more than 3 guys to move it over lol


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Probably gonna be getting into dslr photography soon. Complete noob at it. Think of the Canon Rebel T2i. Thoughts?


----------



## sub50hz

I wanted to strobe both of those shots, but we were only there for like 40 minutes, and nobody rode for like 30 minutes because we were meeting people from out of town. Then, like good boys, we went for pizza and beer instead of being outside riding bikes in 38 degree weather.


----------



## laboitenoire

I know I'd rather drink and eat pizza than be outside in the cold... But damn, very clean! Did you use any additional lighting because that looks way too well exposed for 9 pm at ISO 1600?


----------



## sub50hz

No, that park is lit by halides on-demand (push button by the "guard" shack). It's not active until about 7pm, which made shooting impossible for a bit since, as you can see, almost everything was backlit or in gross shadows. Luckily, those halides fill the place out pretty well, and I could very well have shot that at ISO 800, but I was just getting used to having my hands in the right places to use the body proficiently. It's a little different than the D300 I had been using on and off, so the ISO button being on the left of the LCD kept throwing me for a loop -- that is, when I wasn't thumbing my nose while trying to adjust it with my eye to the finder.

One or two more outings and I'll be good, it's less of a shift from Canon controls than most people might think, though I find Nikon does a better job placing crucial controls where they need to be (at least for my shooting habits).


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> Probably gonna be getting into dslr photography soon. Complete noob at it. Think of the Canon Rebel T2i. Thoughts?


Its what I started out with. Great little camera.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> One or two more outings and I'll be good, it's less of a shift from Canon controls than most people might think, though I find Nikon does a better job placing crucial controls where they need to be (at least for my shooting habits).


yea, i first thought shooting nikon would be a huge pain in the butt cause im so use to canon. but it turns out it actually isnt that big of a shift. i mean once you get over the fact that the left dial doesnt have AV/TV/M/P, the ergonomics is very intuitive to use.


----------



## sub50hz

I think the biggest thing for me to overcome is the EV comp direction on the front dial -- I can switch that, but it also reverses the rear dial, which is no bueno.


----------



## BlankThis

Sub do you ride as well? Only BMX?


----------



## sub50hz

I did until I exploded my back and had surgery in June, which is why my shooting habits have gone to hell. I sold my BMX to a friend (Terrible One Barcode, sad to see it go), so now I'm sticking to my fixed (2007 Langster) and road (2011 Defy Advanced 3). Actually, since it's gonna be balls cold out again soon, I need to buy a new trainer for winter, as the likelihood of re-injury from falling off rollers is probably pretty high.

As far as BMX goes though, I still like to be a part of it in any way I can, whether it be building wheels, shooting photos or whatever. I think I'll have some chances this winter to shoot indoor parks, so it's probably time to think about getting some flashes or making sure I at least have some radio gear to use if I'm borrowing someone else's.


----------



## laboitenoire

I'm strongly considering dumping all of my Nikon gear for an OM-D and 12 f/2 or an XE-1 with the 18 f/2... Somebody tell me this is a bad idea.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> I'm strongly considering dumping all of my Nikon gear for an OM-D and 12 f/2 or an XE-1 with the 18 f/2... Somebody tell me this is a bad idea.


dont do it. also dont ask foothead for advice on this because you will just get pressured into buying the OM-D, which isnt a bad thing lol

why do you want to switch? just because you want something new? bored with nikon? downgrading to something smaller?

i think it would be a fun little camera to have. im not sure i would dump my entire kit to switch but then again im not sure how often you shoot and what you do/need

i think it would be a bad idea to dump all your nikon stuff. i say sell of what you absolutely dont need and havent used in forever and put that towards getting another system like that. i think if you get one of those smaller cameras get whatever is the easiest and most affordable to adapt some of your lenses to if thats an option that way you can still use you nikon glass if you want. but if you are just bored with what you have then adapting your lenses to another camera isnt as exciting as having a totally new system that you have never used before.

on that note: dont do it

no do it

no dont

do what you want. its all about having fun doing photography unless photo work is your primary income in which case i would say gear first, toys later.


----------



## laboitenoire

It's mostly that I only really shoot wide-angle these days (the only lens i really use anymore is my 12-24), and so carrying around a lighter and more compact kit would be a lot more convenient, I feel like. With the lack of super-fast primes for DX that have an equivalent FOV of 35 or wider, I'm still limited by the amount of available light when shooting. I almost never shoot telephoto or normal focal lengths, so honestly if I got an OM-D I would get an adapter so I could use my 50 f/1.4 as my tele and then call it a day.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> I'm still limited by the amount of available light when shooting.


Well, you're gonna hate that EVF in that case.


----------



## laboitenoire

I've actually heard decent things about the EVF on it...


----------



## scottath

My last 3 outings:
Loving my new 5D2, 17-40L and my grads. Improved my work to a huge extent!


Kiama Boneyards by scottath, on Flickr


Beaconing by scottath, on Flickr


Morning Ritual by scottath, on Flickr


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> It's mostly that I only really shoot wide-angle these days (the only lens i really use anymore is my 12-24), and so carrying around a lighter and more compact kit would be a lot more convenient, I feel like. With the lack of super-fast primes for DX that have an equivalent FOV of 35 or wider, I'm still limited by the amount of available light when shooting. I almost never shoot telephoto or normal focal lengths, so honestly if I got an OM-D I would get an adapter so I could use my 50 f/1.4 as my tele and then call it a day.


you are going to have fun getting a wide UWA on m43....remember its a 2x crop factor.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scottath*
> 
> My last 3 outings:
> Loving my new 5D2, 17-40L and my grads. Improved my work to a huge extent!
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kiama Boneyards by scottath, on Flickr
> 
> Beaconing by scottath, on Flickr
> 
> Morning Ritual by scottath, on Flick
> 
> 
> r


nice job dude!


----------



## laboitenoire

See, while UWA is enjoyable, I feel like I wouldn't miss much if I only had some like the 12 f/2... Still a 24 mm FOV.


----------



## sub50hz

All I will say is make _sure_ you test the EVF in low light. I was pretty disappointed with that aspect of it, but in good light it was admittedly pretty decent. That being said, if 24mm is the right focal length for you, that 12mm is supposed to be pretty solid. It's no 24G or 24L II, but it's also 800 dollars ($900 if you include the purchased-separately hood). Still, that's a total ~$2000 investment for shooting a wide focal length that's still attainable on DX (though not in that speed). If you're trying to downsize to a smaller body, I get it -- but you have to make some sacrifices even coming from DX, though you also gain a few things like lens choice (Nikon and Canon have terrible lineups for crop bodies, save for the holy 35DX -- unless you like zooms, which I do not), lower carry weight and more bag space. If you're just looking to spice things up a bit, maybe you would be better off checking into a used D700 -- just a thought.


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> I did until I exploded my back and had surgery in June, which is why my shooting habits have gone to hell. I sold my BMX to a friend (Terrible One Barcode, sad to see it go), so now I'm sticking to my fixed (2007 Langster) and road (2011 Defy Advanced 3). Actually, since it's gonna be balls cold out again soon, I need to buy a new trainer for winter, as the likelihood of re-injury from falling off rollers is probably pretty high.
> As far as BMX goes though, I still like to be a part of it in any way I can, whether it be building wheels, shooting photos or whatever. I think I'll have some chances this winter to shoot indoor parks, so it's probably time to think about getting some flashes or making sure I at least have some radio gear to use if I'm borrowing someone else's.


Cool man! And sorry to hear about your back.

I've never been into BMXing just because of the weight and lack of gearing. I ride quite a bit of urban and some light single track on my beat-as-hell 2009 STP2 and more recently my project bike, a 2011 Brass 2. I really want to start documenting it, but I feel that I won't be able to do it justice with stills.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis*
> 
> Cool man! And sorry to hear about your back.
> I've never been into BMXing just because of the weight and lack of gearing. I ride quite a bit of urban and some light single track on my beat-as-hell 2009 STP2 and more recently my project bike, a 2011 Brass 2. I really want to start documenting it, but I feel that I won't be able to do it justice with stills.


Well, if you ever find yourself in Chicago, we can show you the good spots and do some photo/filming. Right now a couple of friends are working on shooting a couple guys who ride for Hoffman and DK, so when that stuff pops up online I'll be sure to PM you the links for it. Good to know more and more people on here seem to be into cycling in one fashion or another, too.


----------



## MistaBernie

So, I got to check out a few things this weekend at PhotoPlus 2012

1) 200-400 f/4L IS w/ 1.4x prototype - What a lens. Thing's large and in charge, so monopod is almost definitely required, but I _could_ hand hold it while testing it on a 5D3. Focus was about as fast as a 135L (?!?) and looked good in the LCD.. I neglected to ask what the 3rd IS mode was for (1st is usually on both axises, second is just L to R for panning; it has a 3rd). Someone asked if you could slap a tele-converter on it. Facepalm? I don't know. I couldn't get any other info out of them other than it was a prototype, but they had enough of them there that I'm thinking it's a good indication that it was the iteration of the lens that will get released to the public. They had no info about pricing but the consensus was that it was probably at least $11k.

2) 6D. Meh. I wasn't all that impressed. The things I wanted to really check out where how they were going to do 11 AF points, and I wasn't all that impressed with them (basically a grid of nine (3x3) and one to the left and right of the box on the middle row). Couldn't check out the detail of the shots since the card slot was taped over and there was no card in the camera. Menu was slightly different (I couldn't immediately find ISO expansion for example). The pluses are that since it's a 2012 body it will handle groups for the Canon Flash System (which essentially consists of 600EX-RTs at the moment). Should be released by the time I get back to NY at the end of December, but I don't foresee myself trying to get into one, I'm leaning more towards updating my flash system to 600EX-RTs (Mostly because I spent all of yesterday with Syl Arena at the Speedliter's Intensive workshop).

That was all I really wanted to check out while I was there (well, all that was on my checklist of things to check out while I was there). I was hoping to head down to the CPS Members Lounge, but apparently it was only open on Thurs and Friday (Saturday was pick up only, I read that wrong. Was not happy). So, I just surfed the floor and checked out the exhibits. I ran into Zach Arias on the floor so that was pretty cool. Unique Photo had some body-painted ladies all day on Sunday. Wasn't bad, I snapped a few pics, nothing I can post here unfortunately. I might be able to post a couple of pics from the chick on the Harley at the Panasonic booth (who coincidentally is coming up to Boston next weekend... figures, I have a wedding, if I didn't, I'd get some of the POTN Boston guys together and have her over for a shoot). I won't post any of those (likely) since it wasn't the best lighting but I'll take a peek through and see if anything came out okay.

Then I spent all day on Sunday with Syl Arena for his Speedliter's Intensive workshop. If you want to learn about Canon's Speedlite system (from any level of knowledge), he's the guy to check out. If you don't already have it, grab a copy of the Speedliter's Handbook. I know I've said that before, but the guy is good. Looks like Carrot Top, wrangles light like Ansel Adams.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> So, I got to check out a few things this weekend at PhotoPlus 2012
> 1) 200-400 f/4L IS w/ 1.4x prototype - What a lens. Thing's large and in charge, so monopod is almost definitely required, but I _could_ hand hold it while testing it on a 5D3. Focus was about as fast as a 135L (?!?) and looked good in the LCD.. I neglected to ask what the 3rd IS mode was for (1st is usually on both axises, second is just L to R for panning; it has a 3rd). Someone asked if you could slap a tele-converter on it. Facepalm? I don't know. I couldn't get any other info out of them other than it was a prototype, but they had enough of them there that I'm thinking it's a good indication that it was the iteration of the lens that will get released to the public. They had no info about pricing but the consensus was that it was probably at least $11k.
> 2) 6D. Meh. I wasn't all that impressed. The things I wanted to really check out where how they were going to do 11 AF points, and I wasn't all that impressed with them (basically a grid of nine (3x3) and one to the left and right of the box on the middle row). Couldn't check out the detail of the shots since the card slot was taped over and there was no card in the camera. Menu was slightly different (I couldn't immediately find ISO expansion for example). The pluses are that since it's a 2012 body it will handle groups for the Canon Flash System (which essentially consists of 600EX-RTs at the moment). Should be released by the time I get back to NY at the end of December, but I don't foresee myself trying to get into one, I'm leaning more towards updating my flash system to 600EX-RTs (Mostly because I spent all of yesterday with Syl Arena at the Speedliter's Intensive workshop).
> That was all I really wanted to check out while I was there (well, all that was on my checklist of things to check out while I was there). I was hoping to head down to the CPS Members Lounge, but apparently it was only open on Thurs and Friday (Saturday was pick up only, I read that wrong. Was not happy). So, I just surfed the floor and checked out the exhibits. I ran into Zach Arias on the floor so that was pretty cool. Unique Photo had some body-painted ladies all day on Sunday. Wasn't bad, I snapped a few pics, nothing I can post here unfortunately. I might be able to post a couple of pics from the chick on the Harley at the Panasonic booth (who coincidentally is coming up to Boston next weekend... figures, I have a wedding, if I didn't, I'd get some of the POTN Boston guys together and have her over for a shoot). I won't post any of those (likely) since it wasn't the best lighting but I'll take a peek through and see if anything came out okay.
> Then I spent all day on Sunday with Syl Arena for his Speedliter's Intensive workshop. If you want to learn about Canon's Speedlite system (from any level of knowledge), he's the guy to check out. If you don't already have it, grab a copy of the Speedliter's Handbook. I know I've said that before, but the guy is good. Looks like Carrot Top, wrangles light like Ansel Adams.


cool! wonder if there will be a little bit of stuff like that in ATL. my friend is the webmaster of the ATL photojournalism seminar that is being hosted or sponsored by presswire or everyone there are big journalist people for presswire, cant remember. but hes pushing me to go and attend some of the panels and discussions. he said they are having a video panel for the first time which should be cool


----------



## MistaBernie

Nice.

yeah, so they had a Harley made for Panasonic (had a Lumix-G gas cap). Wasn't nearly as nice as the model they had on it though..










Oh, and Brian.. this is predominantly lit with (what I figure to be) a 12" 1x1 LED Panel, to my left (facing her)


----------



## UberN00B

Hey Folks,

I was hoping you guys could help me.. I know almost next to nothing about photography, buying it for a significant other.
Looking to buy a point and shoot camera to replace a broken Canon SD960IS. She has a Nikon D90 DSLR, but needs a portable point and shoot for events.

Could anyone suggest any camera's (portable, takes great pics/vids) for less than $300 Canadian? I'm pretty determined on a Canon, but welcome any other suggestions.

Thanks!


----------



## MistaBernie

Hm. Canon P&S under $300 Canadian, eh?

If you 're looking for something relatively small just to have on you and for shooting that doesn't break teh bank, I feel like the ELPH 320 HS is a pretty good deal (and Henrys has a decent deal on them at the moment, I think they're normally closer to $260 and they have them at $209 I think). Available in silver too.

http://www.henrys.com/69195-CANON-POWERSHOT-ELPH-320-HS-BLACK-W-CASE-WIFI.aspx

I've played around with these a bit, and without getting into like the S95/S100 range (closer to the top end of your budget) I feel like it hangs pretty well and has some nice features for the price point.


----------



## Azefore

Picking up D600 in next week or so, friend got one a couple days ago and it's iso handling is too clean to pass up, D800 looks tempting as well but not seeing the extra $900 worthiness in it though I wouldn't mind it


----------



## MistaBernie

Damn, son.

If anyone's looking to get into a Canon G1X, Adorama currently has a pretty sweet deal. G1X, Pixma Pro 9000 Mark II and Photoshop and Premiere Elements 10 for $799 _*before*_ $400 rebate (meaning your price comes down to $399). Not bad for a camera that retails for close to $600 on its own.

Guess it helps if I tell you where it is..

http://www.adorama.com/ICAG1X.html

(no affiliate links, just info).


----------



## Azefore

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Damn, son.
> If anyone's looking to get into a Canon G1X, Adorama currently has a pretty sweet deal. G1X, Pixma Pro 9000 Mark II and Photoshop and Premiere Elements 10 for $799 _*before*_ $400 rebate (meaning your price comes down to $399). Not bad for a camera that retails for close to $600 on its own.
> Guess it helps if I tell you where it is..
> http://www.adorama.com/ICAG1X.html
> (no affiliate links, just info).


Considering the awesome printer is $360 off amazon its an extremely great deal


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Azefore*
> 
> Picking up D600 in next week or so, friend got one a couple days ago and it's iso handling is too clean to pass up, D800 looks tempting as well but not seeing the extra $900 worthiness in it though I wouldn't mind it


Wait, but then you won't have any lenses...


----------



## Azefore

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Wait, but then you won't have any lenses...


Got a buddy selling 85mm 1.4g that I'd try to get or buy a 85mm 1.8g to save a bit. Looking then to wait a couple months for 70-200 VRII, then just keep D7000, return 50-150 while window is open, and sell the 70-300, big change but should work out alright


----------



## dudemanppl

85 is such a dumb FL for an only lens, don't do that...


----------



## Azefore

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> 85 is such a dumb FL for an only lens, don't do that...


Taking like 80% portraits with it so I'm not over concerned by the first FF lens I get with it, 2 months is a short wait if I wanted anything different imo


----------



## MistaBernie

Dear Canon,
please update all of your Flash-control capable bodies (40D and later) to make use of the Groups feature found in most 2012 bodies. This is (from what I can tell) a firmware update - make it so, and I will like you long time.

XOXO,
Bernie


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Dear Canon,
> please update all of your Flash-control capable bodies (40D and later) to make use of the Groups feature found in most 2012 bodies. This is (from what I can tell) a firmware update - make it so, and I will like you long time.
> XOXO,
> Bernie


gotta say "p.s. or ill switch to nikon"

LOL


----------



## MistaBernie

Meh, it's not a deal breaker, and if I have Group control from the back of the flash, I'll settle for that for now.


----------



## Conspiracy

finally watched the premiere episode of the new season of the travel show i work on. they upgraded my TV credit from production assistant to camera operator which is awesome









shame that the segment i helped shoot in this first episode was the sunday morning shoot after i was crazy sick for 2 days before that and the whole night leading up to leaving for that shoot, which resulted in probably less than average quality for my camera work but also knowing that if i had called in sick that shoot would have never been able to be completed is nice to know lol

http://www.gpb.org/georgia-traveler/season-6/episode/episode-601

i worked on the lucilles mountain bed and breakfast


----------



## BlankThis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> 85 is such a dumb FL for an only lens, don't do that...


Thisssss. Get a 35 or a 50. But more so the 35.

hint: rokinon 35 f/1.4


----------



## scottath

Now that my Sigma 70-200 is sold im looking at further options.
~$1k to spend (happy with second hand)
70-200 f2.8L (maybe IS) OR
a pair of primes - 135L and 50 1.4 (might be breaking the 1k there though)

Used my 70-200 for sports (brothers soccer games), stage shows/live music, occasional landscapes and occasional portraits.
Will be doing more of the same, and the idea behind the 50 was for stitched panos (when i buy a pano head), but 40mm on the L should work fine for that also....

Have a wedding im second shooting on the 17th, so buying before then.

Current kit (main bits):
5D2 | 550D
17-40L
28-75 f2.8
85 f1.8

Open to suggestions







| Leaning towards the better 70-200 though atm


----------



## Azefore

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlankThis*
> 
> Thisssss. Get a 35 or a 50. But more so the 35.
> hint: rokinon 35 f/1.4


Was thinking of just trading my 10-20 for some cash to get either the 24 or 35 prime for wide angle usage, leaning towards the wider since I'm usually shooting 10-12mm on DX so 15-20mm is what I'm looking for, that or my first big lens will be the 14-24mm F2.8


----------



## dudemanppl

Don't get a 14-24. Its probably the best lens you will ever use, but don't buy one. I'd actually just keep the 10-20 and use it at 15mm+.


----------



## Conspiracy

A somewhat small review of my new light. I will add more after it gets more use so this is really just a first impression so far. Also includes a short 2 minute test video i shot after out soccer game last night. If i had a tripod i would have held the light off camera rather than mounting it on top but its just impossible to hold a dslr shooting video with one hand and a light in the other. but overall for a fill light im happy









http://www.overclock.net/products/ikan-corporation-144-bulb-on-camera-bi-color-led-light-black-iled144/reviews/5449


----------



## Azefore

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Don't get a 14-24. Its probably the best lens you will ever use, but don't buy one. I'd actually just keep the 10-20 and use it at 15mm+.


Distortion on the 10-20 on DX is significant enough for it to be possibly warranted but the range to be able to use the 10-20 on FF seems to be dependent on settings and scene, will check it out on the body when I get it though


----------



## Face76

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Azefore*
> 
> Distortion on the 10-20 on DX is significant enough for it to be possibly warranted but the range to be able to use the 10-20 on FF seems to be dependent on settings and scene, will check it out on the body when I get it though


Besides price, there is a substantial difference between the Sigma 10-20 and Nikon 14-24 in size and PQ.


----------



## sub50hz

Why do you need a D600? Or a 14-24?


----------



## Azefore

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Face76*
> 
> Besides price, there is a substantial difference between the Sigma 10-20 and Nikon 14-24 in size and PQ.


That's a given, heard nothing but praise for it, even able to be sharp in corners wide open
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Why do you need a D600? Or a 14-24?


ISO handling and want to get my foot in the door of FX, at the decent price it's not overly expensive and I enjoy shooting wide on my own time. I do paid portraits, etc and would just like a lasting platform for maybe 2.5 years to 3 or more. Also want to dabble in video ever since I played around with some of the gear at two of my friends' colleges, just waiting for Nikon to release a firmware update for the lining around the output to the Atomos Ninja 2 and I'll try to pick one up next year.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Azefore*
> 
> That's a given, heard nothing but praise for it, even able to be sharp in corners wide open
> ISO handling and want to get my foot in the door of FX, at the decent price it's not overly expensive and I enjoy shooting wide on my own time. I do paid portraits, etc and would just like a lasting platform for maybe 2.5 years to 3 or more. Also want to dabble in video ever since I played around with some of the gear at two of my friends' colleges, just waiting for Nikon to release a firmware update for the lining around the output to the Atomos Ninja 2 and I'll try to pick one up next year.


You dont need a ninja 2 to do video. And i dont suggest dropping $1000 on a external video recorder if you are new to video. Also the ninja 2 isnt the only one out there if you are dying to burn money on something that you wont use to its full potential. My 2 cents


----------



## Azefore

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> You dont need a ninja 2 to do video. And i dont suggest dropping $1000 on a external video recorder if you are new to video. Also the ninja 2 isnt the only one out there if you are dying to burn money on something that you wont use to its full potential. My 2 cents


True enough, I've been mulling it over truly for a few hours and going to stick with the D7k, D600 would just be luxury features in the end but going to invest just in FX glass and some accessories, also just remembering how much I disliked D600 AF cluster (my main gripe if there were to be any)

Thinking of getting rid of some of my DX glass, got around $3200 to spend on glass so looking at options, trying to stay on Nikon for it as well, all three sigma lenses have been good to me but would rather have glass that'll stay in my bag for years

Edit: Video wise, I'll probably drop the money on FX body and external recorder after college, so 2 years or so, field recorder will be this December though


----------



## sub50hz

If you've got that kind of money to burn, you might consider a used 645D and a P1 back.


----------



## Azefore

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> If you've got that kind of money to burn, you might consider a used 645D and a P1 back.


I probably wouldn't be using financial aid to pay tuition if I could actually afford medium format, but it's money I have in liquidatable assets I can play with. Not touching savings for this so whatever I get is what I can pay with the money at hand.

Currently thinking of just starting with the 80-200 2.8D and a small-medium tripod for use on travel and hikes and possibly a 50mm 1.8 or 1.4


----------



## soymilk

Just my 2cents, but I think selling all your gear just to move to fx is a waste. Consider upgrading your current lens lineup and replacing them with fx lenses then add the camera later on.

The way I see it now is, you have a well balanced kit right now. Selling everything to start fx means you start over. Instead just start buyin fx lenses and replace the dx lenses. You still have an overall rounded kit and then later upgrade to the d600 in 6months or a year when the price drops to $1500-1700. That way you're never without and you still get the camera cheaper after demand dies down.

If you're just starting off messing with video, I don't really think you need a $1k video recorder. That 1k is better spent on lights, external monitor, microphones, tripods, support rigs, etc etc or heck even a gh3.


----------



## Azefore

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *soymilk*
> 
> Just my 2cents, but I think selling all your gear just to move to fx is a waste. Consider upgrading your current lens lineup and replacing them with fx lenses then add the camera later on.
> The way I see it now is, you have a well balanced kit right now. Selling everything to start fx means you start over. Instead just start buyin fx lenses and replace the dx lenses. You still have an overall rounded kit and then later upgrade to the d600 in 6months or a year when the price drops to $1500-1700. That way you're never without and you still get the camera cheaper after demand dies down.
> If you're just starting off messing with video, I don't really think you need a $1k video recorder. That 1k is better spent on lights, external monitor, microphones, tripods, support rigs, etc etc or heck even a gh3.


Like I said, going for FX lenses instead, 80-200D and a used 24-70 F2.8 are looking good to me, however video gear is a resource I have available to me thanks to friends,etc, the recorder would just be for my own use if I did get the D600 in time. Thanks for the advice as its what I'm planning to do


----------



## soymilk

Haha my bad then. I must've missed a few pages. Also consider the 24-120mm f4 and the older 28-70mm f2.8

I had the 24-120mm and it was a surprising useful lens. I personally didn't mind the 1 stop loss, the 2-3 stop gain in the vr made up for it. I switched over to Canon about a year ago because of the better support for video on the canon side. Just throwing it out there, have you considered the switch as well?


----------



## dudemanppl

Heres a thought: medium format ANALOG. Fantastic fun and a hell of a lot cheaper than whatever FX stuff you'd get. Especially the Pentax 6x7 system.


----------



## Azefore

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *soymilk*
> 
> Haha my bad then. I must've missed a few pages. Also consider the 24-120mm f4 and the older 28-70mm f2.8
> I had the 24-120mm and it was a surprising useful lens. I personally didn't mind the 1 stop loss, the 2-3 stop gain in the vr made up for it. I switched over to Canon about a year ago because of the better support for video on the canon side. Just throwing it out there, have you considered the switch as well?


Yah the 24-120 F4 I considered, might be best bet for video lens and a good walkaround, would get after the 2.8s, and yah the 28-70 F2.8 might be my first purchase as there's some decent used ones on sale atm, the 80-200 can be bought whenever since its still produced. As for the switch, nah not so much, primarily a photo guy with a little bit of interest in video when time allows for it, prefer the ergonomics and features of Nikon over Canon after I handled a T3i, 60D and 7D for a little bit.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Heres a thought: medium format ANALOG. Fantastic fun and a hell of a lot cheaper than whatever FX stuff you'd get. Especially the Pentax 6x7 system.


My friend just bought a Mamiya Rz67 Pro II, the older style of shooting and the controls are charming but would want video option and smaller form (dare I say it) for daily use.


----------



## Conspiracy

its your money but again i strongly advise you to steer clear of buying an external HD recorder. you will see no benefit from it nor actually gain anything significant unless you start shooting professional corporate or commercial videos with a full crew and not doing solo video production. just looking out for you, the money is better off invested in a lens that is of the same value or even getting something better like the new 70-200


----------



## MistaBernie

Listen to this man, he has many lbs of brain power when it comes to video.

Also, Canon has begun enforcing MAP (minimum advertised price). The 5D3 went from $2899 to $3199 overnight at B&H; 5D2 is back up to $1799 after rebate, and even the 600EX-RTs went up about $20. I has a bit of a sad. That's okay though, I think I found someone selling some 600EX-RTs for $500, might be taking a couple of those.


----------



## Conspiracy

yeah sadly some of canons gear is way too expensive


----------



## Azefore

The 5D III looked appealing but a price jump even by that margin looks like a bad move on canons part and yah external recorder wouldn't be nessecary, doubles as an external monitor though if I remember correctly. Pretty much settled on a used 28-70, new 80-200, better tripod and bag and a different strap, should have my bases covered with that stuff, 14-24 would be next lens but sometime later next year and then a body to follow in time. Should have the kit I want by the end of college


----------



## MistaBernie

If I were still in the market I'd pay the increased price for the 5D3, it is pretty amazing. Luckily I'm fine with my 5D2 for now .

I've decided I don't use my Sigma 15 FE at all, so I'm shopping it to see if there's any interest in picking it up. I'd rather flashes that I will use than a lens that has been used a grand total of like 2-3 times.


----------



## Azefore

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> I've decided I don't use my Sigma 15 FE at all, so I'm shopping it to see if there's any interest in picking it up. I'd rather flashes that I will use than a lens that has been used and grand total of like 2-3 times.


Should be able to get most if not all your money back on it then hopefully


----------



## Conspiracy

i say try and see if some bmx or skateboard people would buy it. that might be the fastest way to sell it


----------



## MistaBernie

Yeah, I have a feeling the thing should sell in a day. Reminds me, gotta list it on CL.. ugh. hate CL.


----------



## Azefore

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Yeah, I have a feeling the thing should sell in a day. Reminds me, gotta list it on CL.. ugh. hate CL.


Better than an ebay listing just more annoying >.>

Bought a gitzo tripod and a manfrotto head, was thinking the smallest RRS head but compatibility with BR RS-7 system was a deciding factor. Just waiting for 50-150 refund and I'll get one of the 3 28-70mms I've found


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Azefore*
> 
> I probably wouldn't be using financial aid to pay tuition if I could actually afford medium format


You might be surprised what some of the older PhaseOne systems go for. There was a Chicago Craigslist listing for a 645AFD and P20 back for 4500 bucks. If you're shooting portraits, I'm not sure why your emphasis is on high ISO and "getting your foot in the door" with a full-frame body. Buy the 85/1.4 and go to town, maybe put some of the leftover money into hot lights and battery packs or strobes and packs so you can do some light modification when shooting portraits outdoors.


----------



## Azefore

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> You might be surprised what some of the older PhaseOne systems go for. There was a Chicago Craigslist listing for a 645AFD and P20 back for 4500 bucks. If you're shooting portraits, I'm not sure why your emphasis is on high ISO and "getting your foot in the door" with a full-frame body. Buy the 85/1.4 and go to town, maybe put some of the leftover money into hot lights and battery packs or strobes and packs so you can do some light modification when shooting portraits outdoors.


Dang, pretty good price I'll admit. Studio lighting is accounted for but I'm branching into engagement sessions and senior portraits outside and the hobby shots I do more than 50% of the time end with myself using iso 1600 or more @ 2.8. D7000 @ 1600/3200 isn't the cleanest thing in the world, it suffices but wouldn't mind avoiding the color noise in the shadows. The 85 1.4g was a consideration but the 1.8g would do just as good since I wouldn't use the 1.4 wide open, probably stopped down to 1.8 or 2.0 and in that regard the AF is faster on the 1.8g and the focus ring should be the same. A pair of SB-700s may be in order though. As I said though, passing up on D600 and getting the 28-70 F2.8 first, then a fast tele, then a faster wide if my usage warrants it, by then I should be able to step into FX no problem


----------



## laboitenoire

Alright, so I'm shooting my fraternity's philanthropy event tomorrow, and I'm debating what to bring with me. We're having a symposium in one of the auditoriums on campus. It's reasonably bright as far as lecture halls go, and I should have fairly good sight lines. Just so I don't have to switch between lenses, I'm borrowing one of my brothers' D80 as well as his 24-85 f/2.8-4.

Currently I'm planning on bringing both my D7000 and the D80, with the 24-85 on the D80 and my 30 f/1.4 on the D7000. I also have my 70-300 VR, my 12-24 f/3, and my 50 f/1.4 AI-S. I will probably put my external flash on the D80 and call it a day. Thoughts? I can't see myself needing the range of the 70-300, and the 12-24 will likely be too wide.


----------



## Conspiracy

take the 2 bodies and 30 1.4, 50, 70-300

call it a day.

take flash if you want


----------



## wanako

Hey guys, if anyone is interested, I'm selling my Canon 28-135mm lens. I'm very flexible with the price so if anyone wants it, let me know.


----------



## laboitenoire

Discovery of the weekend: my 50 f/1.4's hard infinity stop is actually slightly past infinity... Explains why some of my photos from last semester seemed out of focus.

Fffffffffff...


----------



## dudemanppl




----------



## Dream Killer

*Creepy*


----------



## Marin

My new 4x5 is a success. More updates later.


----------



## Conspiracy

http://www.engadget.com/2012/11/05/sony-action-cam-review/

its about time sony reinforced their strength in the video market. still confused as to why they are yet to make anything significant in the realm of DSLR video and how canikon even pulled it off when neither are really in the video world at all except canon making HD broadcast lenses


----------



## MistaBernie

Canon revolutionizes the way you protect your lenses!

http://www.canonrumors.com/2012/11/canon-announces-new-lens-caps/


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Canon revolutionizes the way you protect your lenses!
> http://www.canonrumors.com/2012/11/canon-announces-new-lens-caps/


Ha, I wonder how many people will go out and buy these like they are something new when you could get aftermarket versions all along.


----------



## silvrr

BTW since there is no Photography team for the FFW you guys should all join team inlet.

http://www.overclock.net/t/1321570/2012-forum-folding-wars-the-intel-team


----------



## MistaBernie

Did we need to register a team? I could have tried to pull one together.. photographers usually have powerful rigs for photo/video editing that could probably do okay in the FFW, we just wouldn't have as many members as some of the other forums.


----------



## silvrr

there was a team last year, they came in last by ~130,000 points.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Canon revolutionizes the way you protect your lenses!
> http://www.canonrumors.com/2012/11/canon-announces-new-lens-caps/


lol so old. canon and others have been using those for their pro video lenses and i guess they felt bad for photographers and finally decided to share this style lens cap haha









and arent all nikon lens caps like that and have been that design for like a long time right?


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> and arent all nikon lens caps like that and have been that design for like a long time right?


Yep.


----------



## Azefore

Sigma has the same style too


----------



## GoneTomorrow

How's it goin' everyone?


----------



## sub50hz

VERY ADEQUATE.


----------



## Conspiracy

TOO MUCH SCHOOL WORK GAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH


----------



## MistaBernie

Oh I'm about ready to smash faces in, but thanks for asking.


----------



## Conspiracy

this is for the hipsters in the house. and foothead too who rarely gets on OCN anymore

http://shop.usbtypewriter.com/


----------



## wanako

Sold my 28-135mm and may get a 50mm f/1.4 to join my 10-22mm

SOON.


----------



## Dream Killer

can't talk. halo 4


----------



## dudemanppl

Can't Halo 4. Talk.


----------



## r34p3rex

Guess who's back?


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r34p3rex*
> 
> Guess who's back?


Shady's back. back again


----------



## r34p3rex

It's a *ahem* Conspiracy "


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> My new 4x5 is a success. More updates later.


Awesome. My most recent rebuild of mine also seemed pretty successful. I have some negs drying right now from a hiking trip i just took. Also, I tried removing the tripod head entirely to save weight. Didn't miss it at all.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> this is for the hipsters in the house. and foothead too who rarely gets on OCN anymore
> 
> http://shop.usbtypewriter.com/


That is awesome. I considered making one like that a while back, but also with solenoids on each key so it could type back to me. Never got around to actually doing it though.


----------



## Dream Killer

down to my last green tea / pumpkin kit kats. i will cry both from happiness and sadness at the same time when i eat them.


----------



## Conspiracy

OMG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

im still mad i missed halloween kitkats this year. soooooooooooo amazing


----------



## Conspiracy

just finished submitting my application for a videographer/photographer job opening at a new college that started near here. i hope they consider me


----------



## OverClocker55

Lights,Camera Action !


----------



## Conspiracy

thought this was pretty interesting. not sure if anyone cares or understands how insane this is but this is a celebration photo from the DP and cast/crew of The Walking Dead celebrating a milestone of 1,000,000 feet of kodak film shot. thats one million feet of film shot. the show is primarily shot on 16mm Kodak Vision3 7219 500T with some shots done on 35mm. thats a lot of film not to mention shooting on kodak's new vision3 stock is not exactly cheap.


----------



## MistaBernie

That's a lot of film.

Also, I began the upgrade process yesterday. Tore apart the water loop, picked up a 3770K and a Gigabyte Z77 board and went to town. so nice to have a fresh, clean install, new OS drive (Samsung 830), etc. I left moving my imaging stuff over while I'm at work, so when I get home and install LR4, etc, the catalog should open right up and everything should be in the same location. Hoping to be mostly operational tonite. Here's hoping the 470 is still kicking (was giving me occasional freezes / grey screen / etc on startup, if that's gone I might need to bite the bullet and upgrade that..)


----------



## sub50hz

You can buy my 6970.


----------



## MistaBernie

I want to stay green for Mercury engine stuff, but I know someone that may be interested, I'll get in touch with them.

Also, I find it odd that the Gigabyte 'ATX' board I have is actually a couple of inches shorter than my Asus P6T. Doesn't even reach the last row of standoffs, and only has seven holes for standoffs on the board as is. Six out of seven isn't bad, right?


----------



## sub50hz

I think MPE is only in Premiere, no?


----------



## wanako

OOOHHHH!!! Look what I found in my freezer! I forgot about these!



Time to get the old AE-1 out and start shooting something!


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> I think MPE is only in Premiere, no?


yup premiere only for right now and the time being. there is no announced intention to use MPE for much else. After effects takes advantage of both AMD and Nvidia GPUs


----------



## scottath

New toy









Got it in time for the wedding, now.....i wonder how tonights study for tomorrows exam will go.....


----------



## OverClocker55

OH MY GAWD


----------



## scottath

hahaha


----------



## wanako

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scottath*
> 
> New toy
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Got it in time for the wedding, now.....i wonder how tonights study for tomorrows exam will go.....


WHATTHEFFUUUUUUU???

ERMEHGERD!


----------



## scottath

Yea - since my birthday my upgrades have done well.....

Prior birthday:
550D
11-18mm f4.5-5.6 Tamron
28-75mm f2.8 Tamron
Canon 85mm f1.8
70-200 f2.8 Sigma
Free tripod
10 stop ND
Flash

Post Birthday:
5D2 + 550D
17-40 F4L
28-75mm f2.8 Tamron
Canon 85mm f1.8
Canon 70-200 f2.8L IS II
Proper tripod
10 stop ND + 4 grad NDs
flash

Birthday money + tax money + alot of saving.....been saving for the 5d2 for about 18 months


----------



## Prpntblr95

I forget who told me I'd be an idiot for getting a 1DMKII when I don't need it... traded my 70-200 f/4 and $450 cash for a 2.8 non IS



Photo taken from earlier today. Unedited


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Prpntblr95*
> 
> I forget who told me I'd be an idiot for getting a 1DMKII when I don't need it... traded my 70-200 f/4 and $450 cash for a 2.8 non IS
> 
> Photo taken from earlier today. Unedited


i can get those exact same shots on any relatively new canon camera and a 70-200. going out of your way to get a 1DmkII really probably wasnt worth it unless you are printing. for the purpose of digital copies and the web having a 1D camera doesnt make your image any better.

2nd image would be 100X better if you took it while laying on your stomach. more interesting perspectives make for better shots in my opinion not what camera was used


----------



## nvidiaftw12

I don't understand. Why does "printing" need such a good camera?


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> I don't understand. Why does "printing" need such a good camera?


not my area of expertise. but finer details and stuff and whatnot.

if you have a video question i can answer those







but not about printing lol


----------



## Azefore

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> I don't understand. Why does "printing" need such a good camera?


Not my cup of tea either I'm afraid so take my words with caution, however,you just need to know how far the viewing length of the print will be and you can base your needs off that.

A 6mp dslr can give you good 30"x20" prints when your viewing further away say 5 feet or more. The closer you want to view the more detail you expect and thus a need for a higher mp count for a higher overall dpi count on the print itself so you don't lose the detail with close viewing.

You can use 12mp for a billboard as well if you really wanted to, generally for most people anything between 6mp and 24mp will do the job no doubt, just don't go crop crazy in post process (if you have to crop) and your prints should do just fine.

Lastly i'll debunk needing a good camera for printing and say, you need a good printer or printing provider for good prints. Hope this helps


----------



## scottath

Just put up a few shots from a few things ive done in the last week but due to uni exam havent had a chance to edit till today/yesterday - would love comments/feedback:
https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.350202548409106.83062.134282906667739&type=1

https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.350203098409051.83063.134282906667739&type=1

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=350206505075377&set=a.138242526271777.28874.134282906667739&type=1&theater

Thanks guys


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scottath*
> 
> Just put up a few shots from a few things ive done in the last week but due to uni exam havent had a chance to edit till today/yesterday - would love comments/feedback:
> https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.350202548409106.83062.134282906667739&type=1
> https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.350203098409051.83063.134282906667739&type=1
> https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=350206505075377&set=a.138242526271777.28874.134282906667739&type=1&theater
> Thanks guys


nice stuff dude.

really like this one https://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/617287_350202741742420_1376341914_o.jpg


----------



## Dream Killer

i'm in a country with an active nuclear weapons program yet there are children streets starving and in dire need of medical care. this is gonna be great.

on the flip side, a lubricated brass helicoid sliding, a "twack" of a mirrorless shutter release and an even tension in the film advance lever makes me orgasm.


----------



## dudemanppl

I see you are enjoying the M3. Also thats the case in many countries.


----------



## ivr56

Finally got around to building this last night. Cost about 20.50 from Home Depot in Materials + some black Electric Tape I had.


Was using it for 4 hours filming with my D3100 and my friends Cannon 5D. Works great.
Stable paltform, really mobile, camera is fully secure on the 1/4" Bolt


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ivr56*
> 
> Finally got around to building this last night. Cost about 20.50 from Home Depot in Materials + some black Electric Tape I had.
> 
> Was using it for 4 hours filming with my D3100 and my friends Cannon 5D. Works great.
> Stable paltform, really mobile, camera is fully secure on the 1/4" Bolt


dude very nice build









i would include one of those um like circle washers with threads that when you attach the camera you screw it up to the camera to keep it snug so it doesnt twist.

i think i might have to use that photo and build myself one as well and figure out how to attach rails for larger lenses


----------



## ivr56

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> i would include one of those um like circle washers with threads that when you attach the camera you screw it up to the camera to keep it snug so it doesnt twist.


Yup
On mine I have 2 1/4" nuts (one inside and one outside) and 1 Butterfly nut and one washer to hold the bolt and camera securely to the body of the mount


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ivr56*
> 
> Yup
> On mine I have 2 1/4" nuts (one inside and one outside) and 1 Butterfly nut and one washer to hold the bolt and camera securely to the body of the mount


lol thats what i meant. i dont know why i couldnt think of just saying some nuts haha









when you get some stuff done. always love seeing footage from DIY rigs


----------



## MistaBernie

Fascinating, I'd love to see some shots / a clip of that rig in use..


----------



## dudemanppl




----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


NICE


----------



## sub50hz

Couple from this weekend:


Stanek // Northbrook by sub50hz, on Flickr


Tam // Northbrook by sub50hz, on Flickr


----------



## bomberjun

just upgraded my body from d7000 to d3s...


----------



## Conspiracy

ooooh

D3S is verrrry niiiice


----------



## bomberjun

this is at 12800 iso.


----------



## spRICE

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bomberjun*
> 
> this is at 12800 iso.


----------



## Prpntblr95

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> i can get those exact same shots on any relatively new canon camera and a 70-200. going out of your way to get a 1DmkII really probably wasnt worth it unless you are printing. for the purpose of digital copies and the web having a 1D camera doesnt make your image any better.
> 2nd image would be 100X better if you took it while laying on your stomach. more interesting perspectives make for better shots in my opinion not what camera was used


Thank you!

I got the 1dmkii for $380 which is almost cheaper than a t2i if I'm not mistaking.


----------



## dudemanppl

Meh I don't like how these guys are bagging on you for the 1DII, its so damn good at what it does for the price.


----------



## Prpntblr95

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Meh I don't like how these guys are bagging on you for the 1DII, its so damn good at what it does for the price.


Honestly it's immature of them. It's a great body and takes good photos, so what if there is a better camera out there. I know a guy who picked up 3 1D X's, why? because he wanted to. Did he waste 12+ grand? Most would say yes, few would say no.

I'm happy with my $380 purchase and honestly that's the only opinion that matters to me.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

What do you guys think for a beginning camera: t2i vs d3200?


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Prpntblr95*
> 
> Honestly it's immature of them. It's a great body and takes good photos, so what if there is a better camera out there. I know a guy who picked up 3 1D X's, why? because he wanted to. Did he waste 12+ grand? Most would say yes, few would say no.
> I'm happy with my $380 purchase and honestly that's the only opinion that matters to me.


i recall when you first asked for advice on getting the 1DII it was not because of the price but because you felt like you needed a 1D series camera. which is why some of us felt you got it for the wrong reason. i just remember you saying you wouldnt go with anything but a 1DII and you were just set on that one single camera.

im not knocking the camera at all. its a great camera. just saying it seems like you have had a change in feelings on why you got it which is a good thing. i dont care about it because it doesnt have video anyway. just saying dont let price or model number of something change you attitude or expectations.

my previous post was not saying that a T2i is better than a 1DII. when it comes to photography having good gear is great. but now that you have a really capable camera, just focus on technique is all i was getting at. sorry you took it the wrong way. i phrased it wrong. but i stand by my point. i suggest studying other paintball photos' work and if you know anyone talk to them and learn how to get the good angles so you can get some more creative shots. the profile shot of a player from the side just isnt that exciting. but getting a shot of two players rushing each other or an over the shoulder shot of a player shooting down the line is just more visually interesting. all im saying.

if you feel like im being rude or my opinion is bad thats fine







just trying to be helpful so when you load your shots up on your computer you can be like wow i took that photo rather than oh cool i have 20 shots of this guy from the side that are all the same and nothing is going on in the photo


----------



## Prpntblr95

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> i recall when you first asked for advice on getting the 1DII it was not because of the price but because you felt like you needed a 1D series camera. which is why some of us felt you got it for the wrong reason. i just remember you saying you wouldnt go with anything but a 1DII and you were just set on that one single camera.
> im not knocking the camera at all. its a great camera. just saying it seems like you have had a change in feelings on why you got it which is a good thing. i dont care about it because it doesnt have video anyway. just saying dont let price or model number of something change you attitude or expectations.
> my previous post was not saying that a T2i is better than a 1DII. when it comes to photography having good gear is great. but now that you have a really capable camera, just focus on technique is all i was getting at. sorry you took it the wrong way. i phrased it wrong. but i stand by my point. i suggest studying other paintball photos' work and if you know anyone talk to them and learn how to get the good angles so you can get some more creative shots. the profile shot of a player from the side just isnt that exciting. but getting a shot of two players rushing each other or an over the shoulder shot of a player shooting down the line is just more visually interesting. all im saying.
> if you feel like im being rude or my opinion is bad thats fine
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> just trying to be helpful so when you load your shots up on your computer you can be like wow i took that photo rather than oh cool i have 20 shots of this guy from the side that are all the same and nothing is going on in the photo


I didn't take it too wrong lol, All the guys in the PhotoMob which is a club on PbNaition.com all shoot 1D's that I've seen. I've talked to a few of them and they all recommended this camera so that's the main reason why I went for it because of there recomendation.

I was only camparing the t2i and the 1dii price wise, the t2i is newer and more expensive but for paintball photos I've seen better results with the 1dii.

The 5D wasn't much of an option just due to it being a little more expensive and not having video where as the 5dII does but that's roughtly a grand for the body. Didn't really look into the 7D and the 60D would be a good choice if I were to go video/ photo but I'm hapy with the 1D.


----------



## spRICE

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> What do you guys think for a beginning camera: t2i vs d3200?


I personally would go for the D3200. It has better better noise performance and it has arguably better video. It has full time autofocus in video (which I consider terrible) and it has a higher megapixel count. The t2i isn't bad though. Both cameras will produce a good image. I suggest going somewhere that sells both of these cameras and trying them out. How they feel in your hand should really be the deciding factor


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spRICE*
> 
> I personally would go for the D3200. It has better better noise performance and it has arguably better video. It has full time autofocus in video (which I consider terrible) and it has a higher megapixel count. The t2i isn't bad though. Both cameras will produce a good image. I suggest going somewhere that sells both of these cameras and trying them out. How they feel in your hand should really be the deciding factor


Cool, thanks for the help. Really hard to get answers in this thread as a noob, so I appreciate just about any response lol.


----------



## Azefore

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> What do you guys think for a beginning camera: t2i vs d3200?


What Sprice said, however played with D3200 at walley world. It's pretty cheesy cheapo plastic feeling even next to a D3100 and years behind the D40 if I should go that far. Am I being picky? Yes but if you could feel both the D3100 and D3200 next to each other youll notice even the buttons feel and seem hollow. Other than the ergos and feel it's an all arounder better shooter than the T2i and the extra mp can be fun to crop with or just have for decent prints. Won't be dissatisfied either way but the T2i is already replaced, and D3200 is recent. Did you find a good deal to sway you from your T2i interest?


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Azefore*
> 
> What Sprice said, however played with D3200 at walley world. It's pretty cheesy cheapo plastic feeling even next to a D3100 and years behind the D40 if I should go that far. Am I being picky? Yes but if you could feel both the D3100 and D3200 next to each other youll notice even the buttons feel and seem hollow. Other than the ergos and feel it's an all arounder better shooter than the T2i and the extra mp can be fun to crop with or just have for decent prints. Won't be dissatisfied either way but the T2i is already replaced, and D3200 is recent. Did you find a good deal to sway you from your T2i interest?


No, just saw that it seemed to be a better camera for a close price, still trying to get a t2i for around 450 though, 600 for the d3200 is just too much for me.


----------



## Eggs and bacon

I was about to ask about t2i vs 3200 as well. I think i am going to get the 3200 after reading the above comments, what lens would you guys suggest? I was thinking of a sigma 30mm, which would by approximately like a 50mm on a film camera right?

EDIT I also have some old Super-takumar lenses, can someone recommend me an infinity focus adapter?


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Eggs and bacon*
> 
> I was about to ask about t2i vs 3200 as well. I think i am going to get the 3200 after reading the above comments, what lens would you guys suggest? I was thinking of a sigma 30mm, which would by approximately like a 50mm on a film camera right?
> EDIT I also have some old Super-takumar lenses, can someone recommend me an infinity focus adapter?


i do not believe m42 on f mount can focus to infinity without optics, which means you need to purchase a high quality (read EXPENSIVE) adapter. so it may not be worth getting an adapter.

also lower end nikon bodies are crippled to not meter when a non-chipped lens is attached.


----------



## Eggs and bacon

No metering kinda sucks, and is it the same story on a t2i?


----------



## Conspiracy

you should be able to meter with an old takumar on a t2i and get infinity focus. different camera bodies work different


----------



## MistaBernie

Not quite related (okay at all) but apparently MA is pressing Amazon to start remitting sales tax for orders sent to us. Brick and mortar stores will probably appreciate it, but in terms of having an impact on local shops I think it's mostly too little, too late..


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> What do you guys think for a beginning camera: t2i vs d3200?


D3200 definitely.

Nikon created a real winner in the entry level category.


----------



## spRICE

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Eggs and bacon*
> 
> I was about to ask about t2i vs 3200 as well. I think i am going to get the 3200 after reading the above comments, what lens would you guys suggest? I was thinking of a sigma 30mm, which would by approximately like a 50mm on a film camera right?
> EDIT I also have some old Super-takumar lenses, can someone recommend me an infinity focus adapter?


You really can't go wrong with the Nikkor 1.8g 35mm. It's a really solid performer for the price. Image quality is really good and the focal length is very usable. I also have the Nikkor 55-300mm lens and I would recommend that if you want a less expensive telephoto. It is much better than the 55-200mm and is worth paying twice the price.


----------



## spRICE

Also to those guys looking at the D3200, please consider the D5100. It is a great camera. The video is good and it has the same sensor as the D7000. It can be had on Amazon with kit lens for about $550.
Sorry about double post


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spRICE*
> 
> Also to those guys looking at the D3200, please consider the D5100. It is a great camera. The video is good and it has the same sensor as the D7000. It can be had on Amazon with kit lens for about $550.
> Sorry about repost


You can get a refurb for about $100 less too.


----------



## 32oz

I'm still using the Canon 1D MK II I bought back in 2004, perhaps a bit out of date but it still takes great images.

An older image taken with the 1D MK II + Canon EF 100-400mm F4.5-5.6L IS USM + 1.4 TC (full frame crop):


----------



## MistaBernie

Happy Thanksgiving all!

Try not to be a bunch of turkeys while I'm getting my noms on with the fams.


----------



## foothead

Ugh, don't remind me. I'm basically looking forward to sitting at home alone all day because my entire family has rejected me. Yaaaaaaay, Bible belt. :/


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Happy Thanksgiving all!
> 
> Try not to be a bunch of turkeys while I'm getting my noms on with the fams.


At least you get to have turkey and be with family.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> Ugh, don't remind me. I'm basically looking forward to sitting at home alone all day because my entire family has rejected me. Yaaaaaaay, Bible belt. :/


This is a photo of me cheering you up:


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Try not to be a bunch of turkeys


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*


omg i laughed so damn hard scrolling down to that after the quote


----------



## nvidiaftw12

This a good deal?

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Nikon-D3200-Digital-SLR-Camera-18-55mm-3-5-5-6G-VRAF-S-DX-NIKKOR-Lens-NEW-/150953209020?pt=Digital_Cameras&hash=item2325832cbc


----------



## Conspiracy

90% sure that isnt a deal and thats just the regualr retail price


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Well I saw this one for 590 with 30 bucks shipping that had been bid up that high, so that sure looked like a deal.


----------



## Conspiracy

i dont think you will find many actual deals on ebay. if you are trying to save less than $100 just buy new from where ever, if you wanna save like a $100 as mentioned by a few others refurb is honestly the way to go. thats the best deal you can get on a camera next to shopping on KEH.com i think

you will occasionally find a good deal used. but i rarely see anything that i would consider a significant deal online. occasionally you will see nikon and canon run deals for $100-200 off a kit bundle. but those deals run throughout the year so its never a 1 time thing.


----------



## aksthem1

That's the cheapest I have seen a new D3200 kit. It's $700 retail and many places are offering $100 off right now.


----------



## Conspiracy

Turned in my research paper!!!! So done


----------



## Conspiracy

So i had a job interview earlier this morning and just agreed to a contract as the location and field videographer for a show called Lawmakers at my local PBS affiliate. Will be covering the Georgia Legislature from January-April.

first professional videographer TV contract. went in to the interview thinking i was applying for a production assistant job ended being told they want me to shoot interviews in the field for them


----------



## biatchi

Nice, well done


----------



## ljason8eg

Yeah great job man! Sounds like a fun job.


----------



## MistaBernie

UGH, I must have some sort of mental deficiency, I'm _still_ considering picking up a 6D when it comes out (Monday @ B&H it looks like).

Why do I consider this a bad thing? Well I'm glad you asked.

I have something like 8 good quality 16gb CF cards to my (currently) single 16gb SD card (in my S95).

It's the initial release of the camera, it's going to have problems, especially with the inclusion of GPS and WIFI.

The focus system isn't much of a change from the 5D2 (in ways, it's actually worse).

All of that said, if I sell my 5D2 stuff... it's minimal investment for decent image quality improvement (and probably less minimal if I include a handful of Sandisk Extremes with the 5D2). It's a 2012 camera so I'll get actual group control and officially supported HSS with the 600EX-RTs. I just can't help this feeling of dread that come Feb 1 when bonus money is in I'll be kicking myself over not waiting on getting a 5D3.

To further add insult to injury, I'm probably going to check out a couple of the higher level Nikons today for the hell of it. Don't get me wrong, I still love me some Canon, but right now Nikon has them up against the ropes; if I were able to get rid of most of my stuff at a decent price, I could probably get into a sweet Nikon system with similar glass and have money left over.


----------



## Conspiracy

you so silly


----------



## gerickjohn

I would like to join, Camera currently is a Nikon D40 with using 18-135mm lens.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> UGH, I must have some sort of mental deficiency, I'm _still_ considering picking up a 6D when it comes out (Monday @ B&H it looks like).
> Why do I consider this a bad thing? Well I'm glad you asked.
> I have something like 8 good quality 16gb CF cards to my (currently) single 16gb SD card (in my S95).
> It's the initial release of the camera, it's going to have problems, especially with the inclusion of GPS and WIFI.
> The focus system isn't much of a change from the 5D2 (in ways, it's actually worse).
> All of that said, if I sell my 5D2 stuff... it's minimal investment for decent image quality improvement (and probably less minimal if I include a handful of Sandisk Extremes with the 5D2). It's a 2012 camera so I'll get actual group control and officially supported HSS with the 600EX-RTs. I just can't help this feeling of dread that come Feb 1 when bonus money is in I'll be kicking myself over not waiting on getting a 5D3.
> To further add insult to injury, I'm probably going to check out a couple of the higher level Nikons today for the hell of it. Don't get me wrong, I still love me some Canon, but right now Nikon has them up against the ropes; if I were able to get rid of most of my stuff at a decent price, I could probably get into a sweet Nikon system with similar glass and have money left over.


Stop buying so much crap.


----------



## dudemanppl

You're worse than me...


----------



## Eggs and bacon

I'll be joining soon, picked up I D3200 with kit lens (soon to be replaced) for $509.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Eggs and bacon*
> 
> I'll be joining soon, picked up I D3200 with kit lens (soon to be replaced) for $509.


Used or new? The best new deal I saw was $550.


----------



## Sean Webster

Finally started to take more pix...and my camera got soaked in salt water last night. So worth it tho lol.

Took some nice long exposure night shots and forgot my tripod.









Here's a link if interested: http://www.flickr.com/photos/seanwebsterhd/


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Finally started to take more pix...and my camera got soaked in salt water last night. So worth it tho lol.
> 
> Took some nice long exposure night shots and forgot my tripod.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here's a link if interested: http://www.flickr.com/photos/seanwebsterhd/


cool stuff!

wheres there shot of the camera mid getting soaked in salt water lol. or was it raining and your camera didnt fall during a long exposure









i like this one. but next time swim out there and move the sign just a little more to make it perfectly framed and closer haha











nice job though, i wanna go do long exposure stuff now.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> cool stuff!
> 
> wheres there shot of the camera mid getting soaked in salt water lol. or was it raining and your camera didnt fall during a long exposure


Thanks









A big wave it the rocks and splashed it after I set it down and went into my bag for a granola bar. Luckily it didn't slide in or get any water inside. My friend slipped on one of the rocks and she fell in 2 feet tho. haha
Quote:


> i like this one. but next time swim out there and move the sign just a little more to make it perfectly framed and closer haha


Will do, just for you! Or I could just photoshop...hmmm.
Quote:


> nice job though, i wanna go do long exposure stuff now.


Do it! Bring a friend too, it is great fun. We walked about 12 miles last night taking random pix.


----------



## Eggs and bacon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> Used or new? The best new deal I saw was $550.


new but grey market
http://www.kogan.com/au/search/?keywords=d3200
it dropped 10 dollars since i ordered it, the most surprising thing is that this is an Australian company (but the grey market stuff is fulfilled by the HK branch).


----------



## kabj06

What do you guys think about the Canon 1D Mark II? I found one at a garage sale in good condition with a good battery and the charger for $200.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kabj06*
> 
> What do you guys think about the Canon 1D Mark II? I found one at a garage sale in good condition with a good battery and the charger for $200.


I'd absolutely buy for that price. If you don't like it you can sell it for a profit. Canon doesn't service them anymore, though.


----------



## kabj06

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> I'd absolutely buy for that price. If you don't like it you can sell it for a profit. Canon doesn't service them anymore, though.


What's the quality like for printing (how large can I get it)?


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kabj06*
> 
> What's the quality like for printing (how large can I get it)?


Printing isn't exactly an area of expertise for me, but I'd think you could get away with 11x14 or so if you're not cropping much. The 8MP sensor will limit your cropping quite a bit, especially if you're printing large.

Someone like Sub would probably give you a better answer than me, however.


----------



## 47 Knucklehead

Well, I guess I will be joining the OCN Camera Club too.









Well, Christmas came early at the Knucklehead house. I went out and ran in to "Santa" and he told me that this was a gift for BOTH me and the wife and that we shouldn't buy each other gifts this year. I was so excited by what Santa said that I raced home and told the wife and asked her if she wanted to wrap it and wait for the 25th or wrap the empty boxes and use the gift during the holiday. Well, to my shock and surprise, she picked the latter.











Canon Rebel T3i
Canon EFS 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS II
Canon EF 75-300mm f/4.5-5.6 III

This will replace my Canon PowerShot SD900 10MP pocket camera, which I will most likely still use a fair amount because it is small and does a pretty good job.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *47 Knucklehead*
> 
> Well, I guess I will be joining the OCN Camera Club too.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well, Christmas came early at the Knucklehead house. I went out and ran in to "Santa" and he told me that this was a gift for BOTH me and the wife and that we shouldn't buy each other gifts this year. I was so excited by what Santa said that I raced home and told the wife and asked her if she wanted to wrap it and wait for the 25th or wrap the empty boxes and use the gift during the holiday. Well, to my shock and surprise, she picked the latter.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Canon Rebel T3i
> Canon EFS 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS II
> Canon EF 75-300mm f/4.5-5.6 III
> 
> This will replace my Canon PowerShot SD900 10MP pocket camera, which I will most likely still use a fair amount because it is small and does a pretty good job.


awesome! congrats on the new camera


----------



## MistaBernie

Nice gifts! Waiting for the wife to realize what a good value a refurbed 5D3 through Canon is... even though it's not.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kabj06*
> 
> What's the quality like for printing (how large can I get it)?


The question you need to ask when buying a camera is "how large do I _want_ to print, and how far away will people be when viewing it?"

But for 200 dollars, buy it and ask questions later.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> The question you need to ask when buying a camera is "how large do I _want_ to print, and how far away will people be when viewing it?"
> But for 200 dollars, buy it and ask questions later.


Pretty much, this. For $200 it's a steal, and if there's nothing really wrong with it and it doesn't suit your needs, you can sit on it and make money, even if you take less than market for it.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kabj06*
> 
> What do you guys think about the Canon 1D Mark II? I found one at a garage sale in good condition with a good battery and the charger for $200.


that is a good price for 200 bucks.....but it is a huge camera to lug around.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Nice gifts! Waiting for the wife to realize what a good value a refurbed 5D3 through Canon is... even though it's not.


you have too much crap....


----------



## MistaBernie

My 7D legitimately has dust on it. I has a sad.

I have a couple things that aren't even listed in my sig, but I'm probably going to start liquidating a bit soon. Get rid of a few things I don't use, etc.


----------



## 47 Knucklehead

Anyone have any recommendations for a portable (the more compact the better), photography umbrella and light setup?

It doesn't have to be professional grade, but I don't want it to fall apart and tear after 3 uses either.

I found this for $60, but just concerned about the quality, but the reviews seem ok.

Cowboystudio Photography/Video Portrait Umbrella Continuous Triple Lighting Kit with Three Day Light CFL Bulbs, Umbrellas, Stands, and Carrying Case For Product, Portrait, and Video Shoots

The only "negative" thing I really read about it is how the storage bag is only for the stand and umbrella, not the bulbs or other parts. It would be good if there was an all-in-one version from somewhere else.


----------



## MistaBernie

For a (very) cheap continuous light solution, you probably won't do a whole lot better. It would be better (opinion, of course) if you could adapt the light stands to hold a hot shoe so you can use the system for flashes down the road if you decide to go that route (this obviously means nothing if you have no plans of purchasing speedlite style flashes).

That said, you get what you pay for, and there's a somewhat realistic possibility that if you don't use a little bit of caution with that stuff, incidental damage could be more detrimental for that gear than if you spent a little more for higher quality materials/construction. Just make sure the stands are secure, etc -- tape them down or use sandbags or something and they shouldn't accidentally tip.


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *47 Knucklehead*
> 
> Anyone have any recommendations for a portable (the more compact the better), photography umbrella and light setup?
> It doesn't have to be professional grade, but I don't want it to fall apart and tear after 3 uses either.
> I found this for $60, but just concerned about the quality, but the reviews seem ok.
> Cowboystudio Photography/Video Portrait Umbrella Continuous Triple Lighting Kit with Three Day Light CFL Bulbs, Umbrellas, Stands, and Carrying Case For Product, Portrait, and Video Shoots
> The only "negative" thing I really read about it is how the storage bag is only for the stand and umbrella, not the bulbs or other parts. It would be good if there was an all-in-one version from somewhere else.


How big are the objects you will be shooting?

For parts take a look at something like this:

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=281524&highlight=lightbox

specifically:
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showpost.php?p=13054041&postcount=4189

Which will give you nice even lighting of smaller parts on the cheap. I think these were done with a sheet (black) or lightbox and either shop lights or a single flash and shop lights.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/adammrugacz/3575285007/
GSXR 1000 Case Covers 2 by ArMPhotography, on Flickr

http://www.flickr.com/photos/adammrugacz/3215168713/
12W6v2small by ArMPhotography, on Flickr

For larger objects placing the light behind or bouncing off a white sheet will give the effect of a larger (and therefore softer) light source. You can do quite a bit with just some shop lights, posterboard and white cloth.

If your going to be doing a lot of stuff or want to sink some money into it stands, umbrellas/softboxes and flashes are very versatile.


----------



## 47 Knucklehead

For right now, computers, and such (a little larger than that setup, but not by a whole lot) but I know that once word gets out in the family that I have once again picked up photography (I used to be big time into film photography about 30 years ago in HS and college), I will once again be pressed into service doing portraits, etc. Not to mention for some of my companies stuff, which can get upwards of 4' by 6' for some things.


----------



## BlankThis

Selling my Nikon D90 with 50mm f/1.8D + accessories like a bag, NC filter, wireless remote, and 16GB 10x SD card.

Literally make me a reasonable offer and it's yours!


----------



## iandroo888

mine xD maybe i should get another one for top.. :3


----------



## kabj06

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> The question you need to ask when buying a camera is "how large do I _want_ to print, and how far away will people be when viewing it?"
> But for 200 dollars, buy it and ask questions later.


11x17. People will probably be 2-3 feet away at minimum.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kabj06*
> 
> 11x17. People will probably be 2-3 feet away at minimum.


you will be fine


----------



## Conspiracy

yea. just go buy it before you miss out


----------



## kabj06

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> yea. just go buy it before you miss out


I bought it last night!


----------



## Conspiracy

awesome!


----------



## dudemanppl

Anybody want to buy Red Exogram cranks? 172.5 and Standard BCD.


----------



## 32oz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kabj06*
> 
> What do you guys think about the Canon 1D Mark II? I found one at a garage sale in good condition with a good battery and the charger for $200.


$200? Are you kidding me?! I bought mine for just under $5000, although that was back when it was new. Even though it's been around for awhile it still takes wonderful images. $200 is a steal!


----------



## MistaBernie

If you've been in the market for a Sigma 30 F/1.4 for Canon, B&H has some for a good price apparently! ($349, down from $489)

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/381615-REG/Sigma_300101_30mm_f_1_4_EX_DC.html


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> If you've been in the market for a Sigma 30 F/1.4 for Canon, B&H has some for a good price apparently! ($349, down from $489)
> 
> http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/381615-REG/Sigma_300101_30mm_f_1_4_EX_DC.html


Thanks.


----------



## MistaBernie

Heck of a deal, hate to see someone that's been waiting to pick one up miss out on it.


----------



## Conspiracy

id sell mine off if i wasnt using it for video. such a perfect focal length for the stuff i have been doing lately. the 50 1.8 is just too long









still wish i had like a wide zoom instead some times. i never shoot wider than like f3.5 on the siggy 30. usually shoot it around f4


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Just bought a t2i kit with bag, memory card and waist strap for $400. 

Pretty damn good for a first ever camera.

E: it had a filter as well.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> Just bought a t2i kit with bag, memory card and waist strap for $400.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pretty damn good for a first ever camera.
> 
> E: it had a filter as well.


nice


----------



## laboitenoire

Seeing pictures from both the Nikon 70-200 f/4 VR and the Sigma 50-150 f/2.8 OS makes my wallet uneasy...


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> Seeing pictures from both the Nikon 70-200 f/4 VR and the Sigma 50-150 f/2.8 OS makes my wallet uneasy...


lol







what were you expecting? for them to be bad so you wouldnt be interested anymore


----------



## Azefore

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> Seeing pictures from both the Nikon 70-200 f/4 VR and the Sigma 50-150 f/2.8 OS makes my wallet uneasy...


The 50-150 2.8 OS was just perfect when I had it, tack sharp in corners and center, and being my first OS lens was just overwhelming









If your going to stick DX I'd jump on either one


----------



## laboitenoire

Both are unbelievably tempting... Just gotta keep telling myself I'll need money in grad school, hahaha.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> If you've been in the market for a Sigma 30 F/1.4 for Canon, B&H has some for a good price apparently! ($349, down from $489)
> http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/381615-REG/Sigma_300101_30mm_f_1_4_EX_DC.html


same price for the nikon, sony, sigma, and pentax too


----------



## Eggs and bacon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> If you've been in the market for a Sigma 30 F/1.4 for Canon, B&H has some for a good price apparently! ($349, down from $489)
> http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/381615-REG/Sigma_300101_30mm_f_1_4_EX_DC.html


Would you guys recommend this as a good lens to learn on with a d3200? or should I get the nikon 35 1.8?
I am going to be in NYC in a few days and will be to go lens shopping in person.


----------



## iandroo888

the 35 is great for a budget prime lens. id prefer the sigma 30 1.4 over the nikon 35. ive had both. the nikon is great. sharp. but slow AF. sigma 30 had a fast AF, silent.. and creamier bokeh. but a little soft in comparison to 35 iirc

wish i can get the 30 again... had to send back to seller cuz there was a squeeking sound for AF on his copy







i liked that lens >< too bad cant afford it right now


----------



## Eggs and bacon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iandroo888*
> 
> the 35 is great for a budget prime lens. id prefer the sigma 30 1.4 over the nikon 35. ive had both. the nikon is great. sharp. but slow AF. sigma 30 had a fast AF, silent.. and creamier bokeh. but a little soft in comparison to 35 iirc
> wish i can get the 30 again... had to send back to seller cuz there was a squeeking sound for AF on his copy
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i liked that lens >< too bad cant afford it right now


I think I will go for the 35 as my "recommended Christmas gift"
Any recommendations on a telephoto zoom? like 70-300ish or their abouts


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> If you've been in the market for a Sigma 30 F/1.4 for Canon, B&H has some for a good price apparently! ($349, down from $489)
> http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/381615-REG/Sigma_300101_30mm_f_1_4_EX_DC.html


damn thats a smoking good deal....lucky for me that lens vignettes like crazy on my main dslr








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Eggs and bacon*
> 
> I think I will go for the 35 as my "recommended Christmas gift"
> Any recommendations on a telephoto zoom? like 70-300ish or their abouts


whats your budget and purpose of the 70-300?


----------



## iandroo888

what lenses do u have already? if u only have the kit 18-55, then probably the 55-200?


----------



## Conspiracy

They had a D600 on display at the costco near me. Felt pretty good holding it and messing around. Hard to tell if i liked it when its hard to test it more than pushing the buttons since its chained to the display lol was also in some demo mode that was annoying to mess with


----------



## sub50hz

I wouldn't call the Sigma 30 AF fast by any means.


----------



## Azefore

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> They had a D600 on display at the costco near me. Felt pretty good holding it and messing around. Hard to tell if i liked it when its hard to test it more than pushing the buttons since its chained to the display lol was also in some demo mode that was annoying to mess with


Hit up BestBuy, they'll take them off the security chains for you. Played around with 5D MkIII (ungodly awesome grip), D800 and D600 for 50 minutes the other day lol, also brought my 28-70 2.8 to test on D800 since the MkIII and D800 didnt have lenses, AF is significantly more accurate and quicker than the D7000.


----------



## Eggs and bacon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> damn thats a smoking good deal....lucky for me that lens vignettes like crazy on my main dslr
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> whats your budget and purpose of the 70-300?


My budget is sub 400$, I wanted to get a 70-300 for sports shorts (for school), and wild life, mostly birds.


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> I wouldn't call the Sigma 30 AF fast by any means.


faster in comparison to the 35 nikon f/1.8G. the nikon AF was as fast as a kit lens D: so to me, the sigma 30 was considerably faster and quieter.


----------



## sub50hz

I don't find my 35 to be very slow. It's not lightning fast, but it's good enough.


----------



## Prpntblr95

What do you guys think?
Full res


----------



## spRICE

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Eggs and bacon*
> 
> My budget is sub 400$, I wanted to get a 70-300 for sports shorts (for school), and wild life, mostly birds.


I recommend the Nikon 55-300mm. It has decent sharpness, decent af, and not a lot of chromatic aberration. For your budget you can't really beat it. It also feels solid unlike the 55-200mm.








Oh and I don't really like 70-300mm lenses on crop bodies. 70mm just feels too narrow. That 15mm difference means you can stand a little close or get that much more into the image


----------



## Conspiracy

Graduating with my bachelors today









This is when having one of those little fujis would be awesome. Like the X10









Or just any partycam as well haha


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> Graduating with my bachelors today
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is when having one of those little fujis would be awesome. Like the X10
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Or just any partycam as well haha


Congratulations! I bet it feels awesome to finally be done with school. Unless you are going to go to grad school.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aksthem1*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> Graduating with my bachelors today
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is when having one of those little fujis would be awesome. Like the X10
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Or just any partycam as well haha
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Congratulations! I bet it feels awesome to finally be done with school. Unless you are going to go to grad school.
Click to expand...

not right away. im going to do work hopefully. my first TV contract starts in January covering the GA legislature, hopefully i can get a steady stream of video work to get my career started off right


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> not right away. im going to do work hopefully. my first TV contract starts in January covering the GA legislature, hopefully i can get a steady stream of video work to get my career started off right


You'll be the lucky one then. My friend graduated in May and could never get hired. He's been doing music videos for local artists, but it's not a steady stream of work. He even applied to Red Rock Micro.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aksthem1*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> not right away. im going to do work hopefully. my first TV contract starts in January covering the GA legislature, hopefully i can get a steady stream of video work to get my career started off right
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You'll be the lucky one then. My friend graduated in May and could never get hired. He's been doing music videos for local artists, but it's not a steady stream of work. He even applied to Red Rock Micro.
Click to expand...

yea most companies are probably not going to hire kids out of college. its really all about networking and starting at the bottom. if you try and skip a step you will get lost lol. i dont know if i have the best deal in the world but i busted my butt pretty hard for the past 3 years to get to this contract which i originally applied for an open production assistant position and was put in as a videographer/editor by the executive producer. so i am extremely thankful that he is willing to give me a chance instead of going with someone that has 15+ years experience.

i also work for less and do almost the same quality as someone slightly more experienced thats also considerably older as well


----------



## Eggs and bacon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spRICE*
> 
> I recommend the Nikon 55-300mm. It has decent sharpness, decent af, and not a lot of chromatic aberration. For your budget you can't really beat it. It also feels solid unlike the 55-200mm.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh and I don't really like 70-300mm lenses on crop bodies. 70mm just feels too narrow. That 15mm difference means you can stand a little close or get that much more into the image


thanks


----------



## Conspiracy

browsing the interwebs looking at lightmeters and possibly another back for the bronica so i have to change film slightly less often since ill be shooting 120 instead of 220. after my wonderful experience trying to develop 220, i decided i should save myself the frustration of trying to load it on those plastic patterson auto load reels that refused to take the entire roll of 220 lol.

cant wait to go back out and shoot. first planned visit is a return to the antique car junkyard i worked a video shoot at


----------



## dudemanppl

220 either goes REALLY well, or you will make you want to murder everybody within a 50 mile radius.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> 220 either goes REALLY well, or you will make you want to murder everybody within a 50 mile radius.


Yup yup


----------



## last-

Just picked up a t3i kit. I have been wanting to get a DSLR for quite some time and the other day I just decided to do it. Can anyone recommend some good books on photography?


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *last-*
> 
> Just picked up a t3i kit. I have been wanting to get a DSLR for quite some time and the other day I just decided to do it. Can anyone recommend some good books on photography?


When I was starting out I picked up this book: http://www.amazon.com/Understanding-Exposure-3rd-Edition-Photographs/dp/0817439390/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1355076726&sr=8-1&keywords=understanding+exposure

It explains the basics pretty well.

I also picked this one up when I got my first flash: http://www.amazon.com/Speedliters-Handbook-Learning-Craft-Speedlites/dp/032171105X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1355076758&sr=8-1&keywords=speedlight+handbook


----------



## last-

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> When I was starting out I picked up this book: http://www.amazon.com/Understanding-Exposure-3rd-Edition-Photographs/dp/0817439390/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1355076726&sr=8-1&keywords=understanding+exposure
> It explains the basics pretty well.
> I also picked this one up when I got my first flash: http://www.amazon.com/Speedliters-Handbook-Learning-Craft-Speedlites/dp/032171105X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1355076758&sr=8-1&keywords=speedlight+handbook


Thanks, I'll be sure to check those out.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> 220 either goes REALLY well, or you will make you want to murder everybody within a 50 mile radius.


Oh god, yes. I've ruined so much film on those stupid plastic reels. They're terrible for anything without sprocket holes. I ended up giving up and getting some of the older style stainless steel ones.

By the way, did end up getting that shen hao?


----------



## dudemanppl

Working on that. I do have 400 sheets of E6 in the freezer though.


----------



## foothead

I see. Still looking at the PTB? You should look at the Chamonix 45N-2. The design is really similar, but it seems to have carbon fiber instead of wood for the bed. Personally I'd prefer the wood, but idk about you.

I really don't see why you were wanting one of the ultralight cameras. You're not hiking. They're going to be far more finnicky than a slightly heavier one.


----------



## Sean Webster

Got my sigma 30mm f/1.4 today!









It is freaking tac sharp at f/1.4, I can't believe I didn't get this beast of a lens sooner.

Time to play with it at f/1.4 and take some pointless shots around the house. Here is what I have so far: (link)


----------



## Eggs and bacon

Today was a good day, I picked up a nikon 35 1.8g, and the nikon 55-300 and a nice camera bag.
I decided to get the nikon 35 over the sigma 30 1.4 because its cheaper, so I had money left in the budget for the 55-300.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Eggs and bacon*
> 
> Today was a good day, I picked up a nikon 35 1.8g, and the nikon 55-300 and a nice camera bag.
> I decided to get the nikon 35 over the sigma 30 1.4 because its cheaper, so I had money left in the budget for the 55-300.


cool







have fun. and share some of your photos


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Got my t2i. Unimaginable how much better it is in just the first couple photos over point and shoots I had used before.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> Got my t2i. Unimaginable how much better it is in just the first couple photos over point and shoots I had used before.


Yeah night and day doesn't really begin to describe it. Pretty awesome.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

I also didn't think I was going to get it for a bit.

I paid $400 buy it now for it, but after checking the completed listings on ebay the exact same camera from the same seller sold for $495 from a bid. No clue why he re-listed it at $400, but it all works so I'm happy.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Canon-EOS-Rebel-T2i-550D-18-0-MP-Digital-SLR-Camera-Black-Kit-w-EF-S-IS-18-/121034551164?pt=Digital_Cameras&hash=item1c2e38af7c

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Canon-EOS-Rebel-T2i-550D-18-0-MP-Digital-SLR-Camera-Black-Kit-w-EF-S-IS-18-/121030343729?pt=Digital_Cameras&hash=item1c2df87c31


----------



## Azefore

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> Got my t2i. Unimaginable how much better it is in just the first couple photos over point and shoots I had used before.


----------



## Marin

Hate shooting 35 and medium format digital. Yeah it's way more convenient and has an insanely faster workflow but large format looks epic.


----------



## MistaBernie

Apparently, someone just got a 7D back from CPS with an odd firmware version.. (7.7.7) -

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=11573.0

Appears to be the 'Factory menu' / maintenance firmware. I'd _love_ to see someone be able to extract the firmware from the camera and distribute it to see what lies in that menu..


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Apparently, someone just got a 7D back from CPS with an odd firmware version.. (7.7.7) -
> 
> http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=11573.0
> 
> Appears to be the 'Factory menu' / maintenance firmware. I'd _love_ to see someone be able to extract the firmware from the camera and distribute it to see what lies in that menu..


Watch that do insane stuff like turn on uncompressed hdmi out, and everything you use ML for and canon has been just screwing with us the whole time lol


----------



## MistaBernie

I'm dying to get more info about what the menu actually includes. There's got to be a way to get that firmware onto a CF card or extract the files from the camera..


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> I'm dying to get more info about what the menu actually includes. There's got to be a way to get that firmware onto a CF card or extract the files from the camera..


Just do what Zoolander did.... The files are *inside* the camera... Smash on floor... Huh!? Where are they? I dont see the files anywhere


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> Hate shooting 35 and medium format digital. Yeah it's way more convenient and has an insanely faster workflow but large format looks epic.


Have you ever messed with digital large format? The samples here are pretty crazy. Exposures take a long time though, and everything has to be completely static.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> Have you ever messed with digital large format? The samples here are pretty crazy. Exposures take a long time though, and everything has to be completely static.


Doubt I'll ever get my hands on one since they're by no means abundant and I don't really have the desire to screw with a scanning back.


----------



## Azefore

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> Hate shooting 35 and medium format digital. Yeah it's way more convenient and has an insanely faster workflow but large format looks epic.


Phase one IQ180 back perhaps?


----------



## Marin

Not 4x5.


----------



## Azefore

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> Not 4x5.


Hard to tell what you were looking for within the comment lol


----------



## Marin

Thought it was pretty straight forward. 35mm and MF are meh, LF is miles better.


----------



## Azefore

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> Thought it was pretty straight forward. 35mm and MF are meh, LF is miles better.


http://www.electronista.com/articles/11/08/25/custom.job.said.to.cost.over.100k/

Subjective imo


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Apparently, someone just got a 7D back from CPS with an odd firmware version.. (7.7.7) -
> http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=11573.0
> Appears to be the 'Factory menu' / maintenance firmware. I'd _love_ to see someone be able to extract the firmware from the camera and distribute it to see what lies in that menu..


Sadly mine did not return with that firmware.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> Have you ever messed with digital large format? The samples here are pretty crazy. Exposures take a long time though, and everything has to be completely static.
> 
> 
> 
> Doubt I'll ever get my hands on one since they're by no means abundant and I don't really have the desire to screw with a scanning back.
Click to expand...

I see. What medium format back do you have now?

I ordered an Olympus XA on eBay a while back to pretty much be a purse camera/backup. Got it in the mail today and it doesn't work. The shutter won't fire. Why do people sell stuff that's obviously broken as working? I've run into this kind of thing before.


----------



## sub50hz

Put a battery in it, dummy.


----------



## Conspiracy

lol omg if that fixes it then


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Put a battery in it, dummy.


It has new batteries in it. The check says they're good. It refuses to fire though, and if i put it on self-timer, it just keeps beeping and flashing the led forever.

Also, the rewind button is stuck pushed in, preventing it from winding the film. I have a feeling this is what's causing the shutter to not work.


----------



## sub50hz

Good ol' eBay.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Had the battery on the charger now for quite a few hours and it still shows orange/yellow. Hmm.


----------



## MistaBernie

does it blink at all? if so, how many blinks? In some chargers, its' two colors: yellow and green. Yellow/orange blinks once when the battery is 25% charged, twice when it's 50% charged, 3x at 75% charged and green when it's fully charged (with my battery at least). Can you take the battery of the charger, put it in the camera and check the battery level there (usually in the menus under battery information)


----------



## nvidiaftw12

No just sits at yellow. If it does blink I don't see it. I put it in the camera a while few hours and it said two bars, but it wasn't fully charged. I don't think the battery is bad, and I'm pretty sure it's authentic, but guess I'll find out.


----------



## MistaBernie

Okay, so the top LCD reports two bars... so it's not 100% charged. It's possible it's an older battery, may be slower to charge, or may simply not hold a complete charge anymore. It can happen.

Try shooting with it for a while and seeing how long the battery lasts; luckily, batteries can be relatively cheap to replace (some knockoff batteries work fine and are a fraction of the cost of an authentic Canon battery). I'm sure someone here can recommend safe brands to stick with (I'm personally paranoid and only shoot OEM batteries/grips) but I could probably think of a couple too if it turns up that it's poor battery performance.


----------



## Azefore

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> No just sits at yellow. If it does blink I don't see it. I put it in the camera a while few hours and it said two bars, but it wasn't fully charged. I don't think the battery is bad, and I'm pretty sure it's authentic, but guess I'll find out.


$40 for a new LP-E8 from Canon on Amazon, not the worst bullet to bite, Photive LP-E8 is $15, good reviews, still wouldn't attempt it as I'm like MistaBernie, they can work but if your one of the ones who has problems well then your SOL.

On a related note my D40's original EN-EL9 finally stopped holding a charge 2 months ago, purchased it in late 06 or early 07.


----------



## iandroo888

anyone got any ideas where to get nikon replacement parts ? can u still get them through nikon's part dept?


----------



## nvidiaftw12

I let the battery charge overnight and sit in the camera all day and it still says three bars after shooting about 30 or so shots, so I guess it's just slow to charge. I say two nock-off batteries for $8 with good reviews; might get those.


----------



## MistaBernie

30 shots won't do anything to the battery; I can get 1000+ shots out of a half of an LP-E6 when I'm not chimping (aka reviewing the LCD alot). Personally, i'd give it a bit more testing, but it seems like it's fine for your needs, and that's all that is really important, right?


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Didn't really have time for any more shots.


----------



## Conspiracy

yay for a loooong day of meeting and talking about video but nothing actually exciting.

shooting a commercial for my school for $400 during the first week of January


----------



## MistaBernie

WOW, the Nikon Prices they are a fallin'...

Refurb D800 - $2399 at Adorama
http://www.adorama.com/INKD800R.html

D600 w/ Free 24-85 @ $1999
(cant find a link, but NikonRumors indicates it's gonna happen).

That's some nasty pricing from Nikon. For Canon to follow suit, we'd need to see a 6D + 24-105 for $2199 (which I would buy to resell the lens and get the body for ~$1200)

Also, BH/Amazon are selling the 5D3 for something crazy like $2975 (add to car to see price)


----------



## iTurn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> WOW, the Nikon Prices they are a fallin'...
> Refurb D800 - $2399 at Adorama
> http://www.adorama.com/INKD800R.html
> D600 w/ Free 24-85 @ $1999
> (cant find a link, but NikonRumors indicates it's gonna happen).
> That's some nasty pricing from Nikon. For Canon to follow suit, we'd need to see a 6D + 24-105 for $2199 (which I would buy to resell the lens and get the body for ~$1200)
> Also, BH/Amazon are selling the 5D3 for something crazy like $2975 (add to car to see price)


Here's a link to Amazon D600 sale http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-FX-Format-Digital-24-85mm-3-5-4-5G/dp/B0099XHB4M/ref=sr_1_2?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1355587417&sr=1-2&keywords=D600

Hoping to grab a D600 sometime early next year.


----------



## iandroo888

really wanted to be able to buy it. was tryin to figure out the best deal after selling lens and like cash backs from credit cards/etc.. nope still cant afford :| even tho its a hell of a deal atm


----------



## Conspiracy

booo. why does B&H have sales but not on any film stuff. the only thing they have on sale that i want right now is a light meter but they only have a deal going on 2 sekonic meters that are both retail like $400









good thing KEH is here to the day lol


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Need to get a hood. Don't like having to use my hand.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> Need to get a hood. Don't like having to use my hand.


get a hat with a longer bill. profit LOLOLOL


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> get a hat with a longer bill. profit LOLOLOL


----------



## Marin

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Linhof-Select-Schneider-Technika-Xenotar-150mm-f-2-8-4x5-Lens-Excellent-/290830309173?pt=Camera_Lenses&hash=item43b6d65735

Someone get this for me.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> http://www.ebay.com/itm/Linhof-Select-Schneider-Technika-Xenotar-150mm-f-2-8-4x5-Lens-Excellent-/290830309173?pt=Camera_Lenses&hash=item43b6d65735
> 
> Someone get this for me.


ill get right on that since i already just spent a bunch of money at B&H and KEH

ordered a propack of 120 portra 400, c-41 chems, new storage bottles, archive pages, new blower brush to replace lost one, sekonic studio deluxe II ambient light meter, and another back for the bronica































whats your favorite color and ill find some festive wrapping paper LOLOLOL


----------



## ikem

just got my 17-55 2.8. wow... this lens is epic.


----------



## Mwarren

How do you like it compared to the Tamron/Sigma alternatives (if you tried them) and can you post some sample pics? Thanks







.


----------



## ikem

will do. i didnt try the tamron/sigma. but i got this lens for a great deal so it was worth it. it is supposed to snow on wedn here so im probably going to shoot them. still have work this week lol.


----------



## mz-n10

its been a while since ive posted images on here so here is something i took with a d800/14-24



so for anyone of you guys that have been eyeing the d800 do it...DO IT NOW.....
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mwarren*
> 
> How do you like it compared to the Tamron/Sigma alternatives (if you tried them) and can you post some sample pics? Thanks
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .


the samples i have shot, the canon is better then the tamron in sharpness and contrast and also AF speed mounted on a 7d.... never tried the sigma nor the nikon version.


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ikem*
> 
> just got my 17-55 2.8. wow... this lens is epic.


Canon version? If so what do you like so much about it?

Also, if anyone is interested in a 7D, 70-200 or 24-105 let me know. Looking to switch up my gear. Going to simplify.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *silvrr*
> 
> Canon version? If so what do you like so much about it?
> Also, if anyone is interested in a 7D, 70-200 or 24-105 let me know. Looking to switch up my gear. Going to simplify.


I'll take it off your hands for free.


----------



## Mwarren

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> its been a while since ive posted images on here so here is something i took with a d800/14-24
> 
> so for anyone of you guys that have been eyeing the d800 do it...DO IT NOW.....
> the samples i have shot, the canon is better then the tamron in sharpness and contrast and also AF speed mounted on a 7d.... never tried the sigma nor the nikon version.


Hows the Canon 17-55 compared to the 50 1.8 II? I'd imagine that the 50 1.8 is sharper and has better micro contrast. I'm going to give up my zoom for a trio of primes. Tired of the lackluster quality of zooms. My old 50 1.8 was way way better than my Tamron 17-50 2.8.


----------



## ikem

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *silvrr*
> 
> Canon version? If so what do you like so much about it?
> Also, if anyone is interested in a 7D, 70-200 or 24-105 let me know. Looking to switch up my gear. Going to simplify.


no the nikon 17-55 2.8.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Has anyone used the Canon GP-E2 GPS receiver with an older EOS camera? My 5DII isn't on the compatibility list for it, but according to the manual, it works for all EOS digital bodies, but with limited function (doesn't auto log while shooting, logging is done manually in post-process or something like that).

I really would like geotagging, but can't find a solution.


----------



## laboitenoire

Not sure if you want a one-step solution, but I found this:

http://rwbakerphoto.com/geotagging/geotagging-with-canon-5d-mark-ii/


----------



## MistaBernie

Oh, _Hai GoneTomorrow..._


----------



## Conspiracy

finally got my light meter and extra back for the bronica from KEH today. just waiting on everything to get here from B&H







soo slow. only took KEH 1 day to get me my order after placing it online


----------



## Marin

Bronica's are like disposable MF cameras.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mwarren*
> 
> Hows the Canon 17-55 compared to the 50 1.8 II? I'd imagine that the 50 1.8 is sharper and has better micro contrast. I'm going to give up my zoom for a trio of primes. Tired of the lackluster quality of zooms. My old 50 1.8 was way way better than my Tamron 17-50 2.8.


i like the 17-55 more than the 50/1.8 (dont know if it was mk2 or not). but to tell you the truth the difference between the tamron and canon isnt mind blowingly different. just the set i took with the canon always seem sharper and with better color/contrast before i post process.


----------



## Mwarren

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> i like the 17-55 more than the 50/1.8 (dont know if it was mk2 or not). but to tell you the truth the difference between the tamron and canon isnt mind blowingly different. just the set i took with the canon always seem sharper and with better color/contrast before i post process.


Yea, glad you're happy with your purchase. I hate the Tamron 17-50 2.8. It lacks the contrast, sharpness, detail, and bokeh that my 50 1.8 II had and I always find myself using the 50mm end of it and I still find that too short for my purposes (outdoor portraiture on a crop body). I'm selling it and am going to pick up another 50 1.8 mkII and an 85 1.8.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mwarren*
> 
> Yea, glad you're happy with your purchase. I hate the Tamron 17-50 2.8. It lacks the contrast, sharpness, detail, and bokeh that my 50 1.8 II had and I always find myself using the 50mm end of it and I still find that too short for my purposes (outdoor portraiture on a crop body). I'm selling it and am going to pick up another 50 1.8 mkII and an 85 1.8.


yea primes are generally better then zooms in every way so i dont blame you for going with the prime route. i havent used the 85/1.8 but the 85/1.2 is magnificent.....


----------



## Conspiracy

Just get 135L if you are doing outdoor portraits. It is a lot more impressive than the 85 1.8, i tested out the 135L last night and compared it to a 85 1.8 on a 5D3 and the 85 just doesnt keep up


----------



## MistaBernie

Actually, if you're gonna spend some money on a 85mm or higher macro, I'm inclined to agree. I can't honestly remember the last time I actually shot with my 85 f/1.8 (probably around the time that I picked it up from Reaper to be honest).

135L is so nice, but if it's too long then I'd probably go Sigma 85 f/1.4 > Canon 85 f/1.8..


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> Bronica's are like disposable MF cameras.


Ha. I have the original Pentax 645, and it's the same way. Mine broke a while back and I just bought another for like $90. The lenses are good at least. Wish I could say the same for the bodies. What were they thinking making a medium format slr without switchable backs? And everything is electronic. Gahhh....


----------



## sub50hz




----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> Bronica's are like disposable MF cameras.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ha. I have the original Pentax 645, and it's the same way. Mine broke a while back and I just bought another for like $90. The lenses are good at least. Wish I could say the same for the bodies. What were they thinking making a medium format slr without switchable backs? And everything is electronic. Gahhh....
Click to expand...

lol. thats what i think i like about this bronica. if something breaks i dont have to replace the entire thing. unless the whole thing breaks, which is doubtful because i am pretty careful and dont drop or throw my stuff around. granted its not the fanciest of MF cameras, im still happy with it


----------



## Mwarren

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> Just get 135L if you are doing outdoor portraits. It is a lot more impressive than the 85 1.8, i tested out the 135L last night and compared it to a 85 1.8 on a 5D3 and the 85 just doesn't keep up


The 135L is 3X the cost of the 85 2.8. I'd actually rather have the 200 2.8 than the 135F2L just because it has a longer focal length and I could use it on a bipod (wouldn't need IS). 85mm will be easier to shoot on crop too due to it not being as long and there may be cases where 135mm or longer is not possible.

85 1.8 is significantly better than 50 1.8/1.4 and in general for portraiture use from what I've seen/read so I'm going to go with that and when I eventually have the money get the 200mm 2.8 and use that when I have the room as I love the compression you can get at 200mm.

Trust me I'd love to have the 135F2L and someday I'm sure I'll have it but right now it's out of my price league.

I think that I can probably shoot everything that I need to shoot now with a trio of 35mm f2, 50 1.8, 85 1.8, and the kit lens when needed for ultra wide stuff from say 18-24mm. Eventually I really want to get the 200 f2.8L prime though.


----------



## Conspiracy

lol you really should test stuff instead of basing your decision on a lens from stuff you read and see online. thats a great way to at least find out what your options are. I would never spend that kind of money without actually testing a lens under my normal shooting conditions. other peoples experiences are not the same as your own. you may see and read the 200 2.8 as a great lens but until you test it out you really dont know how it works for you. you only know how it works for everyone else.

also 200 f1.8L or go home







(aka go big or go home in case you cant tell...)


----------



## Mwarren

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> lol you really should test stuff instead of basing your decision on a lens from stuff you read and see online. thats a great way to at least find out what your options are. I would never spend that kind of money without actually testing a lens under my normal shooting conditions. other peoples experiences are not the same as your own. you may see and read the 200 2.8 as a great lens but until you test it out you really dont know how it works for you. you only know how it works for everyone else.
> also 200 f1.8L or go home
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (aka go big or go home in case you cant tell...)










I understand I just can't afford to put out the money to test out these lenses. I'm thinking about taking a trip up to BHPhoto when I have the money to go FF though. But for now I'm just going to have to go with the well regarded primes and my common sense. I loved my 50 1.8 II so I already know that I'll love that lens and I don't see the point in spending $300 on the 1.4 version.

85mm would be nice just because it compresses more than the 50 and has better bokeh/quality and works as a medium telephoto on crop.

When I have the money to get a 200mm f 2.8/full frame I'm going to take a trip up to BH photo and test out lenses and body's.


----------



## Eggs and bacon

i was looking to try and get into medium format photography, on a budget. can anyone recommend a goodish (ie not absolutely horrible) camera?

tldr
what is the cheapest medium format camera (and lens) that wont fall apart after its second use?


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Eggs and bacon*
> 
> i was looking to try and get into medium format photography, on a budget. can anyone recommend a goodish (ie not absolutely horrible) camera?
> tldr
> what is the cheapest medium format camera (and lens) that wont fall apart after its second use?


Well cheapest, that don't suck, would be Bronica, Mamiya 645 and Pentax 6x7. Anything cheaper is garbage and you'll get better results in terms of IQ with good 35mm gear.


----------



## MistaBernie

Wait... people talking? No reports? It's a festivus miracle!

Also, apparently I just won Kohl's Dream Receipt contest for today at our local store. Nice lady with a clipboard stopped me on my way out, took my receipt and refunded the money I spent on xmas gifts.. moar money to spend on camera stuff! (not really, unfortunately I didn't spend alot)


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mwarren*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I understand I just can't afford to put out the money to test out these lenses. I'm thinking about taking a trip up to BHPhoto when I have the money to go FF though. But for now I'm just going to have to go with the well regarded primes and my common sense. I loved my 50 1.8 II so I already know that I'll love that lens and I don't see the point in spending $300 on the 1.4 version.
> 85mm would be nice just because it compresses more than the 50 and has better bokeh/quality and works as a medium telephoto on crop.
> When I have the money to get a 200mm f 2.8/full frame I'm going to take a trip up to BH photo and test out lenses and body's.


since you shoot canon you can always rent the lens. even then a 85/1.2 is about 100 bucks for 5 days.

also take a look at the samyang 85/1.4. its not a prefect lens but its fairly good for its price.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mwarren*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> lol you really should test stuff instead of basing your decision on a lens from stuff you read and see online. thats a great way to at least find out what your options are. I would never spend that kind of money without actually testing a lens under my normal shooting conditions. other peoples experiences are not the same as your own. you may see and read the 200 2.8 as a great lens but until you test it out you really dont know how it works for you. you only know how it works for everyone else.
> also 200 f1.8L or go home
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (aka go big or go home in case you cant tell...)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I understand I just can't afford to put out the money to test out these lenses. I'm thinking about taking a trip up to BHPhoto when I have the money to go FF though. But for now I'm just going to have to go with the well regarded primes and my common sense. I loved my 50 1.8 II so I already know that I'll love that lens and I don't see the point in spending $300 on the 1.4 version.
> 
> 85mm would be nice just because it compresses more than the 50 and has better bokeh/quality and works as a medium telephoto on crop.
> 
> When I have the money to get a 200mm f 2.8/full frame I'm going to take a trip up to BH photo and test out lenses and body's.
Click to expand...

For someone that does so much reading about camera stuff online im shocked you dont know how cheap and easy it is to rent lenses.

Borrowlenses.com

So easy to test everything. I have rented quite a bit from them. Whenever new camera bodies come out i split rental fees with friends and rent canon, nikon, sony, panasonic, etc. for 3 days at a time. Everything i post about video cameras is from my experiences renting that gear. Thats the only way to learn about something









You can rent 135L and 200 2.8 for under $30 each for 3days. Slighly less than a special trip to NY where you can only test inside the B&H store


----------



## dudemanppl

PENTAX 67 YES.


----------



## Mwarren

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> For someone that does so much reading about camera stuff online im shocked you dont know how cheap and easy it is to rent lenses.
> Borrowlenses.com
> So easy to test everything. I have rented quite a bit from them. Whenever new camera bodies come out i split rental fees with friends and rent canon, nikon, sony, panasonic, etc. for 3 days at a time. Everything i post about video cameras is from my experiences renting that gear. Thats the only way to learn about something
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You can rent 135L and 200 2.8 for under $30 each for 3days. Slighly less than a special trip to NY where you can only test inside the B&H store


I know about the lens rental websites but $60 to rent two lenses is still kinda pricey....I'm going up to NY in January on a photo shoot so I'll stop at BHPhoto and try out the two lenses and kill two birds in one stone.

All of the lenses that are worth renting cost $30-60 to rent for 3 days lol.

You forgot to add in shipping by the way. To try out both the 85 1.8 and 135L would cost a total of $77 including shipping......







.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Eggs and bacon*
> 
> i was looking to try and get into medium format photography, on a budget. can anyone recommend a goodish (ie not absolutely horrible) camera?
> tldr
> what is the cheapest medium format camera (and lens) that wont fall apart after its second use?


What's your budget / negative size preference / size and carry preference?


----------



## MistaBernie

I'll be in NY this weekend. I bet B&H will be closed..

(nope, just Saturday, which is fine..)


----------



## Conspiracy

lol if you arent willing to spend $30 to test a lens out then i dont know what to say. that is a killer deal to be able to test a lens out for 3 days any way that you want. honestly that is an amazing deal that beats online opinions from random people any day of the week.

if you are willing to invest that much in a lens, $30 is nothing. you dont have to rent both at the same time either lol. being stubborn isnt worth making a blind purchase on something you havent thoroughly tested considering you say you do portrait photography among other types. for someone that shoots and knows as much as you do, there is nothing better than being able to test a piece of gear the way you would be actually using it. especially if you are trying to do professional work, you cant afford to risk investing in something that isnt a sure thing.


----------



## Mwarren

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> lol if you arent willing to spend $30 to test a lens out then i dont know what to say. that is a killer deal to be able to test a lens out for 3 days any way that you want. honestly that is an amazing deal that beats online opinions from random people any day of the week.
> if you are willing to invest that much in a lens, $30 is nothing. you dont have to rent both at the same time either lol. being stubborn isnt worth making a blind purchase on something you havent thoroughly tested considering you say you do portrait photography among other types. for someone that shoots and knows as much as you do, there is nothing better than being able to test a piece of gear the way you would be actually using it. especially if you are trying to do professional work, you cant afford to risk investing in something that isnt a sure thing.


I understand that but to rent even the 85 1.8 alone including shipping would cost me about $50......that's about 1/7th the price of the lens itself brand new. If I buy the Canon 85 1.8 and I'm not happy with it I can return it or resell it and only be at a loss by about $30-$40 if I decide to resell it within about a 6 month period as Canon lenses retain their value very very well.

So I can buy which ever lens that I want and if I'm not happy I can just resell it and not be at much of a loss. An example is the Tamron 17-50 that I currently have. I have been using it for a little over a month now and I paid $390 for it. I just sold it for $350 so I lost $40 on it. If I rented the lens from lensrentals I would have spent $51 to rent the lens including shipping. So for me it makes more sense to buy the lens that is highly regarded that I will more than likely like and if I'm not happy with it I can resell it for maybe a $30-40 loss.

The only reason why I got rid of my Tamron is because it doesn't even hold a candle to my old 50 1.8 II optically, is slower, and has terrible bokeh, and I love primes (I just wanted to see if I would like a constant aperture zoom which I found out I don't like, no biggie though)

Now if they had a shipping option that wasn't 2 day that costed $20+ and their rentals were slightly cheaper I would definitely consider it.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mwarren*
> 
> I understand that but to rent even the 85 1.8 alone including shipping would cost me about $50......that's about 1/7th the price of the lens itself brand new. If I buy the Canon 85 1.8 and I'm not happy with it I can return it or resell it and only be at a loss by about $30-$40 if I decide to resell it within about a 6 month period as Canon lenses retain their value very very well.
> So I can buy which ever lens that I want and if I'm not happy I can just resell it and not be at much of a loss. An example is the Tamron 17-50 that I currently have. I have been using it for a little over a month now and I paid $390 for it. I just sold it for $350 so I lost $40 on it. If I rented the lens from lensrentals I would have spent $51 to rent the lens including shipping. So for me it makes more sense to buy the lens that is highly regarded that I will more than likely like and if I'm not happy with it I can resell it for maybe a $30-40 loss.
> The only reason why I got rid of my Tamron is because it doesn't even hold a candle to my old 50 1.8 II optically, is slower, and has terrible bokeh, and I love primes (I just wanted to see if I would like a constant aperture zoom which I found out I don't like, no biggie though)
> Now if they had a shipping option that wasn't 2 day that costed $20+ and their rentals were slightly cheaper I would definitely consider it.


makes sense. you can try looking at local places that rent.

but i think many of us just do not have the time or want to deal with reselling a lens. thats why we dont mind spending a bit of money to rent a lens.


----------



## Conspiracy

lol waste of money to test lenses that way. you dont want to spend money to rent so you just buy it new anyway. obviously your bank account can handle burning money when you buy something and realize its not what you thought


----------



## Mwarren

Obviously you just deny that Canon lenses have a high resale value and I would be better off buying a lens and selling it right away if I don't like it.......do you work for lensrentals? You must as you don't seem to see that you save more money going my route. $50 to rent a $400 lens is crazy. I'd rather just buy the lens try it for a month and resell it for a $30 loss saving myself $20 vs renting it.

How much would it cost me to rent a lens for a whole month from lensrentals? In the case of the Tamron 17-50 that I currently have it would of cost me around $120 including shipping.....would you rather be out a $30-40 loss or $120? Renting for 3 days is not long enough for me to fully see if I like a lens or not either.

I need at least a month with a lens and get a feel for it's handing, auto focus, how well it performs in available lighting, using off camera lighting, shooting at different lengths, and this can take up to a month.

I know it took me around 3 weeks before I decided that I really would prefer my old 50 1.8 II over it and that I prefer primes over zooms as I found out I was almost exclusively using the 50mm end of the lens and it took me about 3 weeks of shooting to see this after shooting at many different locations and taking a look at my light room data for the lens as it showed me that I was using 50mm almost exclusively and even that I find short on crop body for portrature.

I noticed that I didn't like the bokeh, contrast. and detail the Tamron pulls out at 50mm when comparing it to my old 50 1.8, and that the only other focal length that I would use is 35mm and that was rare and in situations where the 50mm would work I would just have to back up more......

I can't find this stuff out in a 3 day time period like I said I need about 2-4 weeks.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mwarren*
> 
> Obviously you just deny that Canon lenses have a high resale value and I would be better off buying a lens and selling it right away if I don't like it.......do you work for lensrentals? You must as you don't seem to see that you save more money going my route. $50 to rent a $400 lens is crazy. I'd rather just buy the lens try it for a month and resell it for a $30 loss saving myself $20 vs renting it.
> How much would it cost me to rent a lens for a whole month from lensrentals? In the case of the Tamron 17-50 that I currently have it would of cost me around $120 including shipping.....would you rather be out a $30-40 loss or $120? Renting for 3 days is not long enough for me to fully see if I like a lens or not either.
> I need at least a month with a lens and get a feel for it's handing, auto focus, how well it performs in available lighting, using off camera lighting, shooting at different lengths, and this can take up to a month.
> I know it took me around 3 weeks before I decided that I really would prefer my old 50 1.8 II over it and that I prefer primes over zooms as I found out I was almost exclusively using the 50mm end of the lens and it took me about 3 weeks of shooting to see this after shooting at many different locations and taking a look at my light room data for the lens as it showed me that I was using 50mm almost exclusively and even that I find short on crop body for portrature.
> I noticed that I didn't like the bokeh, contrast. and detail the Tamron pulls out at 50mm when comparing it to my old 50 1.8, and that the only other focal length that I would use is 35mm and that was rare and in situations where the 50mm would work I would just have to back up more......
> I can't find this stuff out in a 3 day time period like I said I need about 2-4 weeks.


well you first need enough money to dump into a lens instead of say food or gas or rent.


----------



## Mwarren

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> well you first need enough money to dump into a lens instead of say food or gas or rent.


Well I put my Tamron up for sale today, sold it. Purchased the 85 1.8. All of this occurred within the span of 12 hours lol. I'm very excited about getting the 85 1.8 in the mail. I've heard many great things about it and I know that I'll love the quality/bokeh it produces at least as much if not more than I did my old 50 1.8 II.


----------



## Conspiracy

there is more to a lens than bokeh. yes i know you have listed everything you search for, but your last few posts have narrowed your main search in a lens to the quality of its bokeh. until you either buy vintage lenses and adapt or spend more than $500 you will struggle to find that bokeh that most photographers over emphasize. its more important that a lens produces that look and feel to an image that you are trying to create than to buy a lens just because you hope it will give you nice bokeh.

this really goes back to discussions like over a year ago about how you can appreciate photography more if you dont shoot wide open all the time and blast your backgrounds out of focus

i admit i used to be like 'oh cool bokeh i wish i had that lens' but i never actually wasted money on a lens because i thought it would give my images better bokeh


----------



## Mwarren

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> there is more to a lens than bokeh. yes i know you have listed everything you search for, but your last few posts have narrowed your main search in a lens to the quality of its bokeh. until you either buy vintage lenses and adapt or spend more than $500 you will struggle to find that bokeh that most photographers over emphasize. its more important that a lens produces that look and feel to an image that you are trying to create than to buy a lens just because you hope it will give you nice bokeh.
> this really goes back to discussions like over a year ago about how you can appreciate photography more if you dont shoot wide open all the time and blast your backgrounds out of focus
> i admit i used to be like 'oh cool bokeh i wish i had that lens' but i never actually wasted money on a lens because i thought it would give my images better bokeh


You're wrong. The main reason why I prefer primes and am getting the 85 1.8 followed up with other primes is because they have superior optical quality, you gain an eye for that specific focal length, they are smaller and lighter, better low light ability, better build quality for what you pay, and can be used on FF or crop. Bokeh is just icing on the cake and I only like to isolate my subjects in certain situations. There is a clear optical difference between primes and zooms though, primes are vastly superior to zooms when it comes to image quality, low light ability, speed, and bokeh.

You can check out my flickr I don't have a ton of photos that have blown out bokeh.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/

Lenses are all about compromises. A zoom lens like the 24-70 can zoom but is slow at being only 2.8 and has inferior optical quality to that of a prime, add in IS and you lose some IQ due to their being even more glass in the optics, add zoom and you lose optically quality due to their being more glass and the price of the lens also skyrockets because it's harder to produce, etc etc. I just don;t like zoom lenses.

I shoot portraiture and for me I'd rather have a $300 50 1.4 vs even a $1,000 Canon 17-55 2.8. I don't need zoom and zoom for me is a major compromise.


----------



## SmokinWaffle

*Thread cleaned.*

If you have nothing helpful or constructive to post, do not post at all.


----------



## Eggs and bacon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> What's your budget / negative size preference / size and carry preference?


Budget, under $600 but lower is better, 6x6 or 6x4.5, and it would be nice if I could use it without a tripod.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Eggs and bacon*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> What's your budget / negative size preference / size and carry preference?
> 
> 
> 
> Budget, under $600 but lower is better, 6x6 or 6x4.5, and it would be nice if I could use it without a tripod.
Click to expand...

what about 6x7? or not interested? honestly i havent tested out any other medium format cameras but the bronica is very lightweight. from what i have been told the mamiya and pentax bodies are a little heavier. i think mainly the pentax 67 is the heavy one, i dont recall anyone saying the pentax 645 is considerably heavy.

do you want to have metering in your viewfinder or are you ok saving some money and using an external light meter? and getting exposure by ways of either carrying another digital body, cell phone app, or actual cheap light meter? i just picked up a used lighter meter on KEH for $60. you can find them cheaper and more expensive than that, i got a middle of the road one


----------



## Eggs and bacon

I will have to take a look at 6x7. What is the quality of a phone light meter?

Sent from my GT-N7105 using Tapatalk 2


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Eggs and bacon*
> 
> I will have to take a look at 6x7. What is the quality of a phone light meter?
> 
> Sent from my GT-N7105 using Tapatalk 2


i used this one on my iphone http://www.pocketlightmeter.com/

it looks like its only available for iphones, but im pretty sure there are free ones in the android market. i tested it with my 7D set to center weight metering as the app seems to have the same similar type of metering except you can tap on the screen to change where you meter from. i could not find anywhere to confirm how much area within the red square the app actually reads from. BUT i was pretty impressed for something that is free. i have not tried any light meter apps that cost money. I will say from testing in various indoor and outdoor against every thing i could meter off of i was impressed. when metering off of something black it does trip the app up just like any meter i would think. at the most it was off by 2/3 of a stop which when taking into account common sense on what you meter off of isnt much of an issue if you compensate properly. i did also test it by taking readings off of a grey card and comparing it to the 7D and it was pretty much right on most of the time. a few times when metering off a grey card it would jump back and forth between the same reading as the 7D and something 1/3 a stop slower as though it was second guessing itself whereas in the 7D VF it wouldnt jump up and down between a readings of a 1/3 stop difference. so if anything its a good cheap way to get started but i think it would be highly suggested to eventually upgrade to something more reliable, not saying the APP is bad but i just have more faith in a dedicated light meter or just using my 7D which isnt fun to drag around as a meter while im shooting, just another thing to carry. thats why i got a $60 ambient light meter to simplify everything since i plan on shooting a lot more now that im done with school.


----------



## Marin

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/460371-REG/Sekonic_401_758_L_758DR_DigitalMaster_Flash_Meter.html

This is what I role with, thank goodness for student discounts.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/460371-REG/Sekonic_401_758_L_758DR_DigitalMaster_Flash_Meter.html
> 
> This is what I role with, thank goodness for student discounts.


Wait B&H does student discounts? When i went to film school we only got student discounts at kodak and sony from what my teachers told us.

nevermind. i just found my expired EDU advantage card


----------



## Eggs and bacon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/460371-REG/Sekonic_401_758_L_758DR_DigitalMaster_Flash_Meter.html
> This is what I role with, thank goodness for student discounts.


I too wish I had gotten a student discount on my lenses.


----------



## Mwarren

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/460371-REG/Sekonic_401_758_L_758DR_DigitalMaster_Flash_Meter.html
> This is what I role with, thank goodness for student discounts.


God Damn.

I'm guessing you use complicated lighting set ups and need to be fast with getting your exposures right.


----------



## Marin

Used to, at this point I can light without needing to meter (unless I'm shooting film). So basically the meter is for film now, lol.


----------



## Mwarren

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> Used to, at this point I can light without needing to meter (unless I'm shooting film). So basically the meter is for film now, lol.


Yea, I know what you're talking about. Using strictly manual flash myself I can normally nail my flash exposure within 2 shots. You start to get a feel for how much power you need from your flash and how much each adjustment affects it's output.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> ] i dont recall anyone saying the pentax 645 is considerably heavy.


It is. Mine weighs some 1950g with the 45mm f/2.8. The 75mm is smaller and lighter, but it's still something like 1600g if I had to estimate.

The lenses are great, but the original body is terrible. Backs are not interchangeable unless you finish the roll, all input is with buttons instead of dials, everything is electronic without any hint of weather sealing. I've had it crap out on me because the humidity was high. That said, I've always been happy with the picture quality.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *foothead*
> 
> It is. Mine weighs some 1950g with the 45mm f/2.8. The 75mm is smaller and lighter, but it's still something like 1600g if I had to estimate.


thats not actually too bad for a MF. my dslr is 1850g with a 24-70.


----------



## Conspiracy

must be the pentax 67 that is stupid heavy then. i remember reading someone say their wrist would get sore from shooting with it


----------



## Mwarren

Would that be heavier than say shooting with a 5dMKii and a 70-200 2.8 IS II all day?


----------



## Conspiracy

i have shot with my 7D and a 70-200 2.8 mkII with a 1.4X teleconverter mkII on several occasions for about 10 hours at a time, not a heavy lens or combo.

you can look up the specs for the weight of the 5D2 and 70-200 on canon's website


----------



## Mwarren

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> i have shot with my 7D and a 70-200 2.8 mkII with a 1.4X teleconverter mkII on several occasions for about 10 hours at a time, not a heavy lens or combo.


Do you know how much that it weighs?


----------



## Conspiracy

no. its not very heavy. feels like less than 2 Lbs.

canon.com has the specs


----------



## Marin

It's like dragging a palette of cinder blocks around. I had to bolt some wheels onto one since it was too heavy to even roll around in a pelican. Would snap the handle right off.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> It's like dragging a palette of cinder blocks around. I had to bolt some wheels onto one since it was too heavy to even roll around in a pelican. Would snap the handle right off.


thats why you get the pelican that has wheels already:thumb:


----------



## Marin

Nah, as soon as you'd go and roll it the handle would snap right off.


----------



## amateurbuilder

Finally set up with my Sony NEX 5R, so far proving to be quite the hybrid DSLR/compact. I originally got it with the kit lens and the kit telephoto, just added the Sony NEX 50mm lens which arrived today. Can't wait to get some time set aside to get better at taking photos and understanding all the different tools I have at my disposal now. After a quick few shots with the new 50mm lens it does have great bokeh (spelling? lol). With a new baby on the way I'll be able to do our own portraits instead of shelling out tons of $$ to a studio.


----------



## Mwarren

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> no. its not very heavy. feels like less than 2 Lbs.
> canon.com has the specs


According to Canon.com the 7D with a 70-200 2.8 IS II mounted to it would weigh 4.7 pounds without a battery grip. The camera that the user on the last page that was talking about is heavy weighs 4.2 pounds with the lens according to him.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mwarren*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> no. its not very heavy. feels like less than 2 Lbs.
> canon.com has the specs
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> According to Canon.com the 7D with a 70-200 2.8 IS II mounted to it would weigh 4.7 pounds without a battery grip. The camera that the user on the last page that was talking about is heavy weighs 4.2 pounds with the lens according to him.
Click to expand...

i dont think thats heavy, i also work with an average of about 35 Lbs or so worth of camera and gear on my shoulder shooting video on 12 hour long field shoots. so 4.7Lbs is nice in comparison lol


----------



## Mwarren

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> i dont think thats heavy, i also work with an average of about 35 Lbs or so worth of camera and gear on my shoulder shooting video on 12 hour long field shoots. so 4.7Lbs is nice in comparison lol


True but like you said a camcorder is shoulder mounted, much easier than having something strapped around your neck and using two hands all day even though I find 5lbs pretty light myself.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> Nah, as soon as you'd go and roll it the handle would snap right off.


i dont know how heavy your gear is, but my fully loaded pelican (1510 i think) hasnt broke yet. but the roughest terrain ive taken it on is the escalator at the airport.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *amateurbuilder*
> 
> Finally set up with my Sony NEX 5R, so far proving to be quite the hybrid DSLR/compact. I originally got it with the kit lens and the kit telephoto, just added the Sony NEX 50mm lens which arrived today. Can't wait to get some time set aside to get better at taking photos and understanding all the different tools I have at my disposal now. After a quick few shots with the new 50mm lens it does have great bokeh (spelling? lol). With a new baby on the way I'll be able to do our own portraits instead of shelling out tons of $$ to a studio.


i heard the emount 50mm is magnificent. you should also look into the emount 35mm, heard that is a nice lens.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> i dont know how heavy your gear is, but my fully loaded pelican (1510 i think) hasnt broke yet. but the roughest terrain ive taken it on is the escalator at the airport.


Wooooosh.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mwarren*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> i dont think thats heavy, i also work with an average of about 35 Lbs or so worth of camera and gear on my shoulder shooting video on 12 hour long field shoots. so 4.7Lbs is nice in comparison lol
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> True but like you said a camcorder is shoulder mounted, much easier than having something strapped around your neck and using two hands all day even though I find 5lbs pretty light myself.
Click to expand...

you still use both hands to balance a should mounted camera especially when it has a lot of weight. its not like it just sits on your shoulder no effort lol. not to mention picking it up and putting it down every time you are changing shots and its not like you can change shoulders if you get tired, you just have to drop it down and carry it by the handle. id take a 5 Lb DSLR handheld any day of the week if it was actually easy for field video shooting lol

carrying a 5Lb kit around your neck doesnt compare to how exhausting broadcast video equipment is. photographers honestly have it easier than video guys. smaller gear but lots of little stuff. video gear is less in number but larger in size and much heavier. _unless you are doing field photography and are carrying portable prophoto battery packs. those are stupid crazy heavy if you have a pelican case full of them_


----------



## Mwarren

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> you still use both hands to balance a should mounted camera especially when it has a lot of weight. its not like it just sits on your shoulder no effort lol. not to mention picking it up and putting it down every time you are changing shots and its not like you can change shoulders if you get tired, you just have to drop it down and carry it by the handle. id take a 5 Lb DSLR handheld any day of the week if it was actually easy for field video shooting lol
> carrying a 5Lb kit around your neck doesnt compare to how exhausting broadcast video equipment is. photographers honestly have it easier than video guys. smaller gear but lots of little stuff. video gear is less in number but larger in size and much heavier. _unless you are doing field photography and are carrying portable prophoto battery packs. those are stupid crazy heavy if you have a pelican case full of them_


Oh I agree with you, a lot of photographers complain about weight but I used to hike with Prosumer level camcorders and lenses and shoot with them with one hand while rolling on a skateboard haha. Cameras even with the heaviest of lenses on them are extremely light compared to a decent camcorder.


----------



## Conspiracy

im talking professional broadcast cameras, prosumer cameras are nice and light, great for running around action stuff









I shoot with a Sony PDW-700 and sometimes on good days i get to use a pdw-335 if they need me to cover a lot of creative stuff in tight spaces


----------



## Mwarren

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> im talking professional broadcast cameras, prosumer cameras are nice and light, great for running around action stuff
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I shoot with a Sony PDW-700 and sometimes on good days i get to use a pdw-335 if they need me to cover a lot of creative stuff in tight spaces


I know that but still rolling around with a 3CCD camcorder in one hand and a century optics fisheye lens mounted to it is still a lot heavier than a professional camera with a heavy lens on it.


----------



## amateurbuilder

mz- yeah it was a toss up for mmy budget at the moment... 35mm will be nice to have but my wife flipped at the 50mm (sticker shock at a PC build + adobe + camera lol). I am hoping to get good enough I can commercialize myself to gain another small income source. Mainly via portraits for family/friends. 50mm was key for that.

Anyone have thoughts on those entry level muslin stand/light kits they sell on amazon? Are they flimsy and cheap?

Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Tapatalk 2


----------



## nvidiaftw12

So, I need a new sd card so I can shoot video on my t2i. I am currently trying the deside between: the cheap slow one http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820208567 , which some people say stops recording after a while, the expensive fast one http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820171566 , and maybe even the cheap supposedly fast one: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820313250 .

Thoughts?


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> So, I need a new sd card so I can shoot video on my t2i. I am currently trying the deside between: the cheap slow one http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820208567 , which some people say stops recording after a while, the expensive fast one http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820171566 , and maybe even the cheap supposedly fast one: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820313250 .
> 
> Thoughts?


im not familiar with 'Team'

but transcend and Sandisk are good. i usually go for sandisk, idk why just what my friends and I have always used

---

and amateurbuilder: while im not totally against cheap lighting i will say that cheap light stands make me generally uneasy. i have had to borrow cheap light stands before once and the stand collapsed during shooting. didnt have a heavy light source on it, was using the lights that the stand came with but it just gave out from the weight or something and just went from fully extended to all the way down :/ was not cool. so since then even when using cheap lights, i try to at least use some mid range stands.


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> So, I need a new sd card so I can shoot video on my t2i. I am currently trying the deside between: the cheap slow one http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820208567 , which some people say stops recording after a while, the expensive fast one http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820171566 , and maybe even the cheap supposedly fast one: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820313250 .
> 
> Thoughts?


I wouldn't cheap out on storage. I have heard to many horror stories about losing a bunch of data on cheap cards. Also depending on your interface the faster card will load to your computer faster which I always appreciate. I say go with the sandisk.


----------



## Marin

I've always stuck with Sandisk. While there's plenty of other good manufacturers out there I'd rather not risk it.

Or just tether and don't even worry about it.


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> So, I need a new sd card so I can shoot video on my t2i. I am currently trying the deside between: the cheap slow one http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820208567 , which some people say stops recording after a while, the expensive fast one http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820171566 , and maybe even the cheap supposedly fast one: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820313250 .
> 
> Thoughts?


Sandisk's quality isn't what it used to be. They still make good high end cards, but now a lot of people just buy it because it's a well known name in flash storage.

Funny enough I've had all three cards. I say had because I sold them when I sold my T2i. The Team was the fastest at writing and Sandisk for read. Team does make RAM for our PCs as well.

As for flash memory going bad I've only ever had one issue and that was with a cheap 2GB microSD that came with a phone. I still have an old 256MB Lexar SD card from 2005 that is still kicking.


----------



## Mwarren

I personally never had an issue with Sandisk. I've even washed/dried (left it in my pants pocket) one of their cheaper 1GB SD cards and it still works perfectly, another one got thrown off of a car while in the camera and still works, and I use the extreme ones in my xsi and they work perfectly and are fast.

I just got in my Canon 85 1.8 today and I'm in love. A lot of people were saying that this lens is long on crop but I find it just perfect. It focuses exactly where I want it to every time even at f1.8 and the color, saturation, compression, and AF blows away the Tamron 17-50 2.8 that I sold.

You need to be about 14-16 feet away to do full length portraits with it but after doing a few test full length portraits inside I find the length to be just right as in you can still tell your model how to pose or give instructions without having to yell.

It's funny because shooting with this lens at iso 1600 produces way less noise than my Tamron did at iso 1600. At iso 1600 it looks better than my Tamron did at iso 100. I'll post pics later.

Next up is a 300mm f2.8 (I wish :0).


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Thanks for the answers guys, mostly along the lines of what I was thinking. The sandisk is ok if it's got a deal on it, otherwise it's kinda expensive. I frequently save my pictures, not too worried about losing a couple, especially since I'm a noob, and don't really have any valuable shots yet. Think I'll get the team. Thanks all.


----------



## laboitenoire

I have to +1 what's been said about not cheaping out on memory. I've owned a lot of memory cards over the years, from PNY, Rosewill, Kingston, Lexar, and Sandisk. Only the Lexar and Sandisk cards have held up, so those are the only brands I recommend buying. The rest have all corrupted a few photos. Lexar isn't even all that expensive. A class 6 Platinum II is only like $10 for 16 gigs... UHS-I is maybe $20 for the same capacity.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mwarren*
> 
> I personally never had an issue with Sandisk. I've even washed/dried (left it in my pants pocket) one of their cheaper 1GB SD cards and it still works perfectly, another one got thrown off of a car while in the camera and still works, and I use the extreme ones in my xsi and they work perfectly and are fast.
> I just got in my Canon 85 1.8 today and I'm in love. A lot of people were saying that this lens is long on crop but I find it just perfect. It focuses exactly where I want it to every time even at f1.8 and the color, saturation, compression, and AF blows away the Tamron 17-50 2.8 that I sold.
> You need to be about 14-16 feet away to do full length portraits with it but after doing a few test full length portraits inside I find the length to be just right as in you can still tell your model how to pose or give instructions without having to yell.
> It's funny because shooting with this lens at iso 1600 produces way less noise than my Tamron did at iso 1600. At iso 1600 it looks better than my Tamron did at iso 100. I'll post pics later.
> Next up is a 300mm f2.8 (I wish :0).


That does not even make any sense that a lens can affect ISO performance. ISO performance is essentially determined by sensor and processing technology. Unless you were extremely underexposing or shooting a lots of shadows with the tamron the noise profile should be identical at identical iso ranges....
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> Thanks for the answers guys, mostly along the lines of what I was thinking. The sandisk is ok if it's got a deal on it, otherwise it's kinda expensive. I frequently save my pictures, not too worried about losing a couple, especially since I'm a noob, and don't really have any valuable shots yet. Think I'll get the team. Thanks all.


there is absolutely no point to pick the team over the transcend since it is a 1 dollar difference...especially since your t2i cant make use of UHS-1 and its increase in speed. you never know when you will get THE PICTURE and end up losing it cause you saved 1 dollar on a defective card.


----------



## Mwarren

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> That does not even make any sense that a lens can affect ISO performance. ISO performance is essentially determined by sensor and processing technology. Unless you were extremely underexposing or shooting a lots of shadows with the tamron the noise profile should be identical at identical iso ranges....
> there is absolutely no point to pick the team over the transcend since it is a 1 dollar difference...especially since your t2i cant make use of UHS-1 and its increase in speed. you never know when you will get THE PICTURE and end up losing it cause you saved 1 dollar on a defective card.


Well to be fair the reason why I get less noise is because I'm able to correctly expose at 1.8 iso 1600 indoors with no lights on whereas with my Tamron I was slightly underexposing so I was getting more shadow noise. None the less I get less noise with this lens because the optics are superior anyways. My Tamron was very grain almost film like even at iso 100.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> there is absolutely no point to pick the team over the transcend since it is a 1 dollar difference...especially since your t2i cant make use of UHS-1 and its increase in speed. you never know when you will get THE PICTURE and end up losing it cause you saved 1 dollar on a defective card.


Team is not necessarily bad. I did not know that the t2i can make use of the uhs-1, so that might change things. However; I have heard of the transend card stopping during video, and the is unacceptable for me. If it won't stop, I'd rather have it, but if it does, it's junk.


----------



## Azefore

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> Team is not necessarily bad. I did not know that the t2i can make use of the uhs-1, so that might change things. However; I have heard of the transend card stopping during video, and the is unacceptable for me. If it won't stop, I'd rather have it, but if it does, it's junk.


Got 4 x Sandisk 32gb 30mb/s class 10s for $17 each, should be on amazon for $24, work well with my D7000, obv faster cards would be better, for budget however good nontheless, if not got with 45mb/s sandisk for 16gb for $18 and it's UHS-1 but non-applicable to you. Don't want to think of buying Lexer 1000x CF yet although I'm going to have to with D800 coming soonish.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mwarren*
> 
> Well to be fair the reason why I get less noise is because I'm able to correctly expose at 1.8 iso 1600 indoors with no lights on whereas with my Tamron I was slightly underexposing so I was getting more shadow noise. None the less I get less noise with this lens because the optics are superior anyways. My Tamron was very grain almost film like even at iso 100.


that makes sense that you are underexposing with the tamron cause its almost 2 stops slower and therefore creating more "noise" since its underexposed (thats why i expose to the right when i can).

but optically the lens should not introduce any noise, it might introduce CA or lacks sharpness or lack contrast or busy bokeh but noise shouldnt be something lenses introduce. anyways im glad you are happy with the 85/1.8, wait till you get some facetime with the 85L








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> Team is not necessarily bad. I did not know that the t2i can make use of the uhs-1, so that might change things. However; I have heard of the transend card stopping during video, and the is unacceptable for me. If it won't stop, I'd rather have it, but if it does, it's junk.


i dont know anything about transend pausing in video, but if its true then its wise for you to avoid them.


----------



## Mwarren

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> that makes sense that you are underexposing with the tamron cause its almost 2 stops slower and therefore creating more "noise" since its underexposed (thats why i expose to the right when i can).
> but optically the lens should not introduce any noise, it might introduce CA or lacks sharpness or lack contrast or busy bokeh but noise shouldnt be something lenses introduce. anyways im glad you are happy with the 85/1.8, wait till you get some facetime with the 85L
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i dont know anything about transend pausing in video, but if its true then its wise for you to avoid them.


Haha thanks, 85 1.2L is wayyyy out of my league right now. The next telephoto lens that I look forward to buying is the the 200mm f2.8 prime which probably won't be for a long time as I really need a 50mm, 35mm f2 and a wide angle to complete my trio (excluding wide angle) of primes to use.


----------



## Conspiracy

loading 120 film onto the reel to develop

...

not as difficult as 220.

the end of the world... is not tonight


----------



## MistaBernie

Played with a D600 today at B&H. So much camera for the money ($1999 for body and 24-85)...


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Played with a D600 today at B&H. So much camera for the money ($1999 for body and 24-85)...


i went back and played with a D600 and for some reason i dont understand why there is no option to have metering while in movie mode. i have read a lot of complaints that people want at least a histogram for movie mode but honestly that will just clutter up the LCD while you record. nikon dropped the ball on the movie mode on the D600 i think. i went through the manual and found nothing. so unless they add it with a firmware update im not interested in D600 anymore. still havent tested out a D800 yet. i want to test that thing with out without movie mode, camera is a beast









and... after glancing at a review the D800 also lacks metering in movie mode... guess i should take more time to read reviews one of these days


----------



## xILukasIx

Just got a Sigma 70-200m f2.8 APO EX DG OS for christmas 
Using it on my Canon 450D makes my camera look like a toy...

AND I got a Manfrotto 055XPROB + 496RC2 Ball Head + Manfrotto Tripod Bag (MBAG80PN) too!


----------



## MistaBernie

BH Photo's Facebook indicates that the D600 deal I spoke of earlier now includes a Rode Videomic in the package. Seriously? They are giving this thing away..


----------



## Conspiracy

hmm that makes me a little worried if they are just giving it away like that. i think i need to rent a D600 and find out if this thing is any good with video. its nothing to give away the videomic, but if they are packaging it with a DSLR to try and give them away i think they are trying to trick newcomers into buying a camera they have too many of lol


----------



## Shane1244

Either that, or they are going for max revenue at the end of the year like every other business at this time...?


----------



## ikem

just got a nikon em with 50 1.8. Going to have fun with this little thing.


----------



## Conspiracy

nice


----------



## laboitenoire

So my grandfather passed away after Thanksgiving, and when we were cleaning out his apartment my dad found his old film cameras, a Praktica Nova IB and a Praktica LLC. I can't find out much about them, other than the Nova IB is completely mechanical and has an uncoupled meter that needs no battery, the LLC is all mechanical and needs a PX21 battery for the TTL meter, and that they're both M42 mount. Any thoughts/tips/knowledge about them? I was thinking this could be a good excuse for me to actually enroll in photography II next semester now that I have both a solid manual camera and a sentimental reason...


----------



## MistaBernie

Dang, sorry to hear about your loss LBN... but yeah, that seems like a nice reason to take a photography course if I've ever heard of one.. As for the cameras themselves, I've never (that I'm aware of) personally encountered them, unless they are knockoffs of another style, etc..


----------



## Conspiracy

Sorry for your loss man.

Send a message to marin, dreamkiller, or sub50hz. If those three cant help you try dudemanppl and foothead (they dont check ocn often so i didnt lost them first)

If any of them cant help you then honest you might have to learn as you go









Ill look what you have up later today. Unless they are way different than any other slr out there i can help you as well. Cool thing about m42 is you have a wide range of glass to chose from as screw mount is easy to find glass for


----------



## laboitenoire

Yeah, I've done a little bit of searching for them, but not too much is coming up. They're East German (no clue how my grandfather got them here in the US...) and it looks like the dedicated Praktica lens for the LLC is missing, so I won't be able to get full-aperture metering.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> Yeah, I've done a little bit of searching for them, but not too much is coming up. They're East German (no clue how my grandfather got them here in the US...) and it looks like the dedicated Praktica lens for the LLC is missing, so I won't be able to get full-aperture metering.


scenarios for metering is: drag your D7000 around to meter, smart phone light meter app, or buy a cheap used light meter on KEH/ebay/wherever

the most convenient is to have a meter built into the camera you are using and i can say while it doesnt compare because i dont know the cameras you have but the meter built into my XD11 is pretty decent. it is like sort of center weight average metering on my 7D except less intuitive. if i know im metering something that is bright or dark in color i have to tell my camera by means of exposure compensation. whereas sometimes it seems like my 7D knows at times when i am metering with it although i have used exposure compensation on my DSLR many times. now that i have my own light meter even though its missing its high slide







i used it much more than the xd11 meter on my last photo trip and my shots came out nicely exposed for the most part









ALSO

this website is the most amazing website on the internet. they have the manuals to almost everything it seems like. before i bought my XD11 i was reading through the manuals on several cameras i was interested in to learn a little about them. and also helped me when i first got my bronica as well.

http://www.butkus.org/chinon/praktica/praktica_llc/praktica_llc-splash.htm

http://www.butkus.org/chinon/


----------



## sub50hz

Prakticas are rad -- I found one at an estate sale a few years back, I should check what model it is later on tonight.


----------



## foothead

So I was given a promaster XC525 tripod for Christmas. It seems pretty okay until I put the graphic view on it. then it gets all wobbly. It's reasonably sturdy with the field camera or 645 though. I guess this will be my new hiking tripod. It folds up small and one of the legs comes off to be a monopod (or for me, hiking stick).


----------



## dudemanppl

I am also alive.


----------



## sub50hz

Two copies of the Sigma 24/1.8, and neither one work on the D7k. Both work on my F100, a D300 and two D800s. Heinous.


----------



## Chunky_Chimp

Guess I'll join the fun, got a D5100 with the Nikkor 35mm 1.8 AF-S prime and a Tiffen UV filter. Great so far, but my starlight test shots aren't coming out very well. I fiddled with the settings and got enough light to the sensor, but it's so damn hard to get it in focus when manually focusing in moonlight away from the moon, I just can't see well enough through the viewfinder to do it... pointers? I obviously have it switched to full manual since there's nothing for the AF system to catch (I tried it for giggles, it refused to fire) and I'd rather not keep refocusing unless I have to. I would have spent at least a few hours tinkering with it but it's well below freezing each night for the next week so I can't stay outside very long. It is reasonably clear out right now but it won't stay that way for very long (mild shortwave moving in, will spread somewhat thick clouds over the area), but I will get a few consistently clear nights starting Monday night to mess with it.

Edit; this is probably better suited for the astro-photography thread but I'd rather be in there with actual work done.


----------



## ljason8eg

Since that lens lacks a distance window, the best advice I can give is to go into live view and magnify the image as much as possible. The brightest stars should be visible. Now, manually focus until you have sharp stars and shoot.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Two copies of the Sigma 24/1.8, and neither one work on the D7k. Both work on my F100, a D300 and two D800s. Heinous.


I don't buy third party lenses for that very reason.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Team card seems to work well. Shoots 1080p 30fps just fine.


----------



## Eggs and bacon

I have been looking at grabbing a medium format camera for a while now, what is the Bronica etrs like? is it a solid camera if found for 300$?


----------



## Conspiracy

from what i understand and have been told. bronica is great value bang for your buck. and as you work your way up in price to other brands you get much higher quality. thats not to say bronica is low quality because my etrsi produces some pretty awesome images and i really love shooting with it. that being said the film you put in your camera is slightly more important than the camera itself. for film cameras the camera body isnt that crucial, its the film you use and the lenses as well.

i cant remember how much i gave sub50hz for the bronica i bought from him. but i think it was at the most $300 for camera body, viewfinder, lens, grip, winding crank, and 2 rolls of expired 220 portra 800.

im pretty sure mamiya and hasselblad are like the top tier for Medium format with pentax and fuji just below them with equally high quality. i dont know much about other brands as all i know from anything other than bronica is stuff i have learned talking with sub50hz, foothead, dudemanppl, and dreamkiller


----------



## sub50hz

Bronicas are the red-headed stepchildren of the MF world, in part due to their market positioning (read: not over-the-top expensive) and perceivably subpar lenses. The truth is that the bodies are not as well-made as some of its peers but the lenses are still very good (although not Pentax/Zeiss/Mamiya level), especially for a beginner. The ETR series is a great way to dip your feet into medium format, and I shot a lot of great, printed photos with my ETRSi before selling it to Conspiracy. For a little more money you can pick up an RB67, but unless you like to carry a tripod and an 8 pound behemoth of a camera everywhere you go (and a meter), 6x4.5 is a more sensible solution. Both 6x7 and 645 match paper sizes well, so you worry less about cropping than you do with 35mm, APS-C or even 6x9. For your 300 dollars, I would look into a Bronica -- though if you have some time to save money and are very serious about shooting film, the Mamiya 645 Pro/TL is an excellent bang for your buck, and in my eyes, a more durable system with some super lenses (80/1.9 is a semi-rarity, but a great lens).


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> I don't buy third party lenses for that very reason.


Looks like my 50/1.8D stopped working, same fEE error. The feeler must be broken, looks like it's gonna need repair. Good news is, though, that I should be able to use this lens once it's repaired.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> I don't buy third party lenses for that very reason.
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like my 50/1.8D stopped working, same fEE error. The feeler must be broken, looks like it's gonna need repair. Good news is, though, that I should be able to use this lens once it's repaired.
Click to expand...

Use the aperture ring like a real pro.


----------



## sub50hz

I can't, the internal chip for the indexing ring is fubar so I only get a false f/4 or a real f/22. Still under warranty so not a huge problem. Used the 24 last night on D800, super steal of a lens -- works great, and the close-focusing ability is awesome.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Eggs and bacon*
> 
> I have been looking at grabbing a medium format camera for a while now, what is the Bronica etrs like? is it a solid camera if found for 300$?


The bronica body is good, but the lenses are subpar compared to other 645 systems. It'll still be very good for a beginner. Personally I have a pentax 645, which has the opposite problem. The lenses are extremely high quality, but the body itself sucks. For 300, those will probably be your only real options for slr. You could also pick up a 6x6 TLR, but it all depends on what you shoot.


----------



## biatchi

Where abouts would the Hasslebladski rank? Not that I'm after buying one just curious.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *biatchi*
> 
> Where abouts would the Hasslebladski rank? Not that I'm after buying one just curious.


It kinda depends on what qualities you're looking far. As far as optical quality, hasselblad, mamiya, and pentax are all about on par for paper spec at least. Hasselblad tends to have a very unique look that is considered desirable. The bodies are also really well designed, but rather fragile from what I hear. If you're going to abuse it, it'd probably be better to go with a mamiya. I've never actually used one though, so this is all based on what I've heard from the internet. Sub would probably know more than me.


----------



## dudemanppl

Consider the Fuji GS645S, very compact, but no meter. OR the GA645, its the same thing with autofocus and fancy shmancy stuff. Sub has one still I think.

Also, sub, the 24 1.8 is so fantastic on FF, but I sold it cause I never got any use out of it... Maybe you are different.


----------



## Eggs and bacon

Also what is the quality of a bargain item on keh? for a camera outfit would it still be usable just cosmetically damaged?
Judging from the above comments a etrs would be a solid start in medium format.


----------



## laboitenoire

It depends. I've ordered a BGN lens and the only issue was that the focus ring was gritty in one spot. I've ordered another lens that had a cracked lens tube behind the filter ring. Usually, though, the lenses are in very good shape. Definitely worth the savings, usually.


----------



## Eggs and bacon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> It depends. I've ordered a BGN lens and the only issue was that the focus ring was gritty in one spot. I've ordered another lens that had a cracked lens tube behind the filter ring. Usually, though, the lenses are in very good shape. Definitely worth the savings, usually.


any experience with BGN bodies?


----------



## iandroo888

man so not used to primes... XD been tryin to use the 24 1.4 for things.. either not long enough or not wide enough. such a weird length for crop. wonder how it is on FF...


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Eggs and bacon*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> It depends. I've ordered a BGN lens and the only issue was that the focus ring was gritty in one spot. I've ordered another lens that had a cracked lens tube behind the filter ring. Usually, though, the lenses are in very good shape. Definitely worth the savings, usually.
> 
> 
> 
> any experience with BGN bodies?
Click to expand...

I bought a replacement 645 a while back when my old one crapped out. It was bgn condition, but you wouldn't know from looking at it. It's pretty much perfect. I've also bought a couple bgn lenses and they were near perfect as well.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iandroo888*
> 
> man so not used to primes... XD been tryin to use the 24 1.4 for things.. either not long enough or not wide enough. such a weird length for crop. wonder how it is on FF...


SHUN THE NON BELIEVER, SHUUUUUN. THATS EQUIV ON FF. How could you even say such a thing... To have differing preferences than me... The nerve of some people.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iandroo888*
> 
> man so not used to primes... XD been tryin to use the 24 1.4 for things.. either not long enough or not wide enough. such a weird length for crop. wonder how it is on FF...


GLORIOUS LENGTH ON FULLFRAME.....i wish sony made a 24/1.4 AND i had the money to buy one....


----------



## sub50hz

It's actually a good length for crop (35mm equiv) _and_ on 35mm. I'm gonna do a few rolls with this Sigma on the F100 while my D7k is out for service.


----------



## ljason8eg

Hmmm late night sort of drunk Craigslist browsing; Pocketwizard deal of a lifetime??? 3x TT5, TT1 and AC3 for $400. Maybe this person is drunk as well. I shall see if my text garners a reply.


----------



## Eggs and bacon

I am back, this time with lots of questions about a MF set up.
1. is the prism in this http://www.keh.com/camera/Bronica-ETRS-Camera-Outfits/1/sku-ET019990522630?r=FE system metered? I assume not, but i really have no idea

2. A basic system would be
body eg http://www.keh.com/camera/Bronica-ETRS-Camera-Bodies/1/sku-ET020016000020?r=FE
back, like the one that comes with the body
viewfinder of some kind, like this http://www.keh.com/camera/Bronica-ETRS-Prisms-and-Viewfinders/1/sku-ET130016000300?r=FE
lens +cap, like this http://www.keh.com/camera/Bronica-ETRS-Fixed-Focal-Length-Lenses/1/sku-ET060016001130?r=FE
A grip, not necessary but nice, http://www.keh.com/camera/Bronica-ETRS-Grips/1/sku-ET180016000410?r=FE

anything critical missing?

3. does the prism or body come with a focusing screen?

4. does anyone know how much keh charges for international shipping?

thanks in advance.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Eggs and bacon*
> 
> I am back, this time with lots of questions about a MF set up.
> 1. is the prism in this http://www.keh.com/camera/Bronica-ETRS-Camera-Outfits/1/sku-ET019990522630?r=FE system metered? I assume not, but i really have no idea


It is not metered, which means you will have to purchase a meter or use a second camera for metering and/or chimping exposure. In time, when you find an emulsion you like, you'll become proficient without a meter in most conditions, but you'll definitely need something to start.

Quote:


> 2. A basic system would be
> body eg http://www.keh.com/camera/Bronica-ETRS-Camera-Bodies/1/sku-ET020016000020?r=FE
> back, like the one that comes with the body
> viewfinder of some kind, like this http://www.keh.com/camera/Bronica-ETRS-Prisms-and-Viewfinders/1/sku-ET130016000300?r=FE
> lens +cap, like this http://www.keh.com/camera/Bronica-ETRS-Fixed-Focal-Length-Lenses/1/sku-ET060016001130?r=FE
> A grip, not necessary but nice, http://www.keh.com/camera/Bronica-ETRS-Grips/1/sku-ET180016000410?r=FE
> anything critical missing?


The grip is almost essential on 645, though others may disagree. It makes shooting in portrait much easier, and it handles more like the DSLR you are used to. It also makes winding much simpler, and IMO the speedgrip for the ETR series is excellent ergonomically.
Quote:


> 3. does the prism or body come with a focusing screen?


It is mounted in the body.
Quote:


> 4. does anyone know how much keh charges for international shipping?
> thanks in advance.


I don't, but they are very reasonable and very accomodating. Good luck.


----------



## Eggs and bacon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> It is not metered, which means you will have to purchase a meter or use a second camera for metering and/or chimping exposure. In time, when you find an emulsion you like, you'll become proficient without a meter in most conditions, but you'll definitely need something to start.
> The grip is almost essential on 645, though others may disagree. It makes shooting in portrait much easier, and it handles more like the DSLR you are used to. It also makes winding much simpler, and IMO the speedgrip for the ETR series is excellent ergonomically.
> It is mounted in the body.
> I don't, but they are very reasonable and very accomodating. Good luck.


Thank you. +rep
how accurate would my phone's camera be with a a light metre app?

I sent an email to keh inquiring about shipping.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Eggs and bacon*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> It is not metered, which means you will have to purchase a meter or use a second camera for metering and/or chimping exposure. In time, when you find an emulsion you like, you'll become proficient without a meter in most conditions, but you'll definitely need something to start.
> The grip is almost essential on 645, though others may disagree. It makes shooting in portrait much easier, and it handles more like the DSLR you are used to. It also makes winding much simpler, and IMO the speedgrip for the ETR series is excellent ergonomically.
> It is mounted in the body.
> I don't, but they are very reasonable and very accomodating. Good luck.
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you. +rep
> how accurate would my phone's camera be with a a light metre app?
> 
> I sent an email to keh inquiring about shipping.
Click to expand...

its a good temporary solution but not the most ideal. the phone app will get you close but you will still need to use your best judgement as when i tested the iphone light meter app it is usually off by 2/3 to a full stop depending on what you point it at. honestly using my DSLR is much more reliable than my iphone. i have shot a roll on my iphone and got crazy exposures all over the place that were way off lol


----------



## Eggs and bacon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> its a good temporary solution but not the most ideal. the phone app will get you close but you will still need to use your best judgement as when i tested the iphone light meter app it is usually off by 2/3 to a full stop depending on what you point it at. honestly using my DSLR is much more reliable than my iphone. i have shot a roll on my iphone and got crazy exposures all over the place that were way off lol


looks like I am dragging my d3200 around with me then.
Is there a way for it to show the ev?


----------



## Conspiracy

use the meter in the VF when the line is lined up in the middle at zero thats a proper exposure in most cases. then translate those numbers to film camera









obviously set the D3200 to the same ISO as your film


----------



## Eggs and bacon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> use the meter in the VF when the line is lined up in the middle at zero thats a proper exposure in most cases. then translate those numbers to film camera
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> obviously set the D3200 to the same ISO as your film


thanks

also some good news, I found my moms old spotmatic in excellent condition, with a a 50mm f/1.4 .


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> GLORIOUS LENGTH ON FULLFRAME.....i wish sony made a 24/1.4 AND i had the money to buy one....


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> It's actually a good length for crop (35mm equiv) _and_ on 35mm.


yeah i figured it be better on a FF. just saying from usage on a crop =3 lol


----------



## sub50hz

I still question why you have a D5000 when it looks like you're swimming in D800 cash.


----------



## Conspiracy

For reasons i dont fully understand... I kinda want one of those lomo sproket rocket cameras. Its looks like fun to mess with, not $80 worth of fun though plus more since iso 50 would be tough to expose in something with an aperture of f10 lolz. But it does look like fun


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> I still question why you have a D5000 when it looks like you're swimming in D800 cash.


temp have the 24 1.4 till cousin picks it up. he sent it to me to save on tax but will be coming in a few weeks to get it. so playing with it as much as i can now XD

really want the d600 but too much issues with the oil/dust for now ..


----------



## Chunky_Chimp

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> Since that lens lacks a distance window, the best advice I can give is to go into live view and magnify the image as much as possible. The brightest stars should be visible. Now, manually focus until you have sharp stars and shoot.


Rep time, this worked wonders. Now if I could just pull off a landscape shot in moonlight... too many things to focus on at once.


----------



## Eggs and bacon

Any one have experience with light meters? I am trying to pick one up for cheap.
is the sekonic l-248 any good?


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Eggs and bacon*
> 
> Any one have experience with light meters? I am trying to pick one up for cheap.
> is the sekonic l-248 any good?


How cheap?


----------



## Eggs and bacon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> How cheap?


sub 60$ used.


----------



## sub50hz

Save more money, that's the best advice I can give you. You might be able to find an older working Minolta meter for _close_ to that, but you're really gonna have to hunt for it.


----------



## Eggs and bacon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Save more money, that's the best advice I can give you. You might be able to find an older working Minolta meter for _close_ to that, but you're really gonna have to hunt for it.


any specific Minoltas? or are they all decent?


----------



## laboitenoire

Got a new laptop while I was home on break, and damn does Photoshop fly.


----------



## Unknownm

My new Setup. Love the low shooting compared to the D600 (which was my first choice).

Canon 6D + 24-105mm f/4 = 1920.99 + Tax (open box, only 10 shutters used)
Lexar Platinum II 32GB SDHC 200x
Extra Battery
Canon 40mm f/2.8


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Unknownm*
> 
> My new Setup. Love the low shooting compared to the D600 (which was my first choice).
> 
> Canon 6D + 24-105mm f/4 = 1920.99 + Tax (open box, only 10 shutters used)
> Lexar Platinum II 32GB SDHC 200x
> Extra Battery
> Canon 40mm f/2.8


very nice


----------



## Jerald

6D for low light shooting? Isn't the D600 better in terms of high ISOs (in RAW)? And doesn't the D600 have more focus points to help in low light? Not to mention it also has a flash.

Sorry for the questions. I'm just curious about your decision.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jerald*
> 
> 6D for low light shooting? Isn't the D600 better in terms of high ISOs (in RAW)? And doesn't the D600 have more focus points to help in low light? Not to mention it also has a flash.
> Sorry for the questions. I'm just curious about your decision.


From what I've physically seen, the high ISO performance on the 6D is nearly identical to the 5D3, which most people would contend is better than the D600. In terms of the 'built in flash', it's good for fill and that's about it. I'm not going to say the 6D competes in terms of # of auto focus points or AF system, but from the testing I did just before release with the 6D, the AF was still accurate, even in low light.


----------



## iTurn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jerald*
> 
> 6D for low light shooting? Isn't the D600 better in terms of high ISOs (in RAW)? And doesn't the D600 have more focus points to help in low light? Not to mention it also has a flash.
> Sorry for the questions. I'm just curious about your decision.


They're dead even in terms of quality, until you have to pull shadows then the D600 wins due to Dynamic range, the D600 has an AF assist light for low light where as the 6D doesn't need one, the center focus point is that good (great).


----------



## MistaBernie

Unfortunately, _only_ the center point is that good on the 6D (only cross-type point in the 11) but that's enough for most people. The outer points still work though, just not quite as well.


----------



## legoman786

How's the T3i Rebel?

I'm looking at one of those kits on Amazon, that comes with a handful of filters and a telephoto lens.

Not looking for X is better. Looking for opinions on the T3i Rebel.

Thanks, guys.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *legoman786*
> 
> How's the T3i Rebel?
> 
> I'm looking at one of those kits on Amazon, that comes with a handful of filters and a telephoto lens.
> 
> Not looking for X is better. Looking for opinions on the T3i Rebel.
> 
> Thanks, guys.


its good


----------



## MistaBernie

It's a capable DSLR for the price. Without wanting to know specifics though, it's tough to talk about the qualities of the camera without points of comparison, etc.


----------



## legoman786

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> It's a capable DSLR for the price. Without wanting to know specifics though, it's tough to talk about the qualities of the camera without points of comparison, etc.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> its good


Thank you. My wife is looking to get one for her photography class at the local college.


----------



## MistaBernie

It should be fine for a photo class. In reality though, bring your wife to a brick and mortar store and have her check out the T3i vs the D3200 and see what feels better to her. If there's no real difference to her, then it doesn't really matter, but I know people that pick up Nikons and can't shoot with them at all, as is the same with a few people I know who shoot Nikon and can't handle Canons for some reason. The ergonomics are that different, so you want something that's comfortable to the user.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> It should be fine for a photo class. In reality though, bring your wife to a brick and mortar store and have her check out the T3i vs the D3200 and see what feels better to her. If there's no real difference to her, then it doesn't really matter, but I know people that pick up Nikons and can't shoot with them at all, as is the same with a few people I know who shoot Nikon and can't handle Canons for some reason. The ergonomics are that different, so you want something that's comfortable to the user.


Agreed. I went to best buy the other day to check the D800 and the 5DMKIII and all I can say is WOW, what a difference there was for me. My fingers and brain were confused by the Nikon and it didn't feel good in my hands as the 5DMKIII did, it just felt peculiar and like it wanted to fall out.

Also, some classes may have you shoot only film so make sure you read the course syllabus first and make sure a DSLR is fine!


----------



## MistaBernie

Speaking of which... if all goes well tonite, I'm probably going to be in a position to either pick up a 6D or 5D3..


----------



## Sean Webster

5DMKIII! I just fell in love with it when I was playing around. I liked the 6D, however it was too small feeling in my hands for me. And the autofocus is just like







on the 5D compared to the 6D.

I need to save up lol. However, the 6D has WIFI and GPS.

Also, on another note. I'm helping shoot a wedding this Saturday and will be the 4th shooter. I plan on using my 60D with the sigma 30 mostly. Any suggestions on this? I'm nervous already lol.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Also, on another note. I'm helping shoot a wedding this Saturday and will be the 4th shooter. I plan on using my 60D with the sigma 30 mostly. Any suggestions on this? I'm nervous already lol.


nothing to be nervous about lol. just shoot









i would take more than a 30. but thats me


----------



## MistaBernie

Fourth shooter?! Uh... yeah, find something else to do that day.

Do you know the other shooters? Get in touch with them if you don't (well do so either way) and find out _exactly_ what your assignments will be for that day (if that's how it's working). I showed up to help out a friend shooting as a second, and ended up being a 3rd, and basically told 'okay, you go shoot the guys, etc'. Now go shoot the room while me and the other do formals, etc.' I basically got to do nothing I wanted to really do and get practice with and it kind of sucked.

If you're basically free to do what you want to do though, then just figure out what you want to focus on. A little pre-planning goes a long way. Pack your bag the night before -- bring 2x as many batteries/cards/etc as you think you're going to need. Bring another lens just in case (and if you have one a backup body). Even though you're a fourth, it's best to build good practices early.

Finally, keep an eye on where the other photogs are; if you like some of what they're doing feel free, but use them as a reference of where they _aren't_ and get creative. Different angles, etc. It's okay to think outside the box if you don't have specific 'assignments' / duties as a 4th..

Really finally though, if you have access to some long glass, bring it. 70-200 of some sort should be fine (no need to go trying to find a 500 f/4L or something ludicrous like that).

okay, _really_ really finally though.. yeah, if the sale of my 5D2 goes through tonight as planned, I'm going 5D3. I don't know why I considered the 6D - I remember messing around with it and being like 'that's cute, where's the _real_ 6D?' and messing around with the 5D3 and getting tackled by security trying to run out of the store with it.

(note: the last part was an embellishment. I'm hard to tackle.)


----------



## Sean Webster

Thanks! My aunt is one of the photographers and she just called me up and asked if I could help out. I'll definitely discuss what my assignment is and how the day will go the night before. All I know as of now is that she said I'll be photographing the men while she'll be doing the women. I think I'll just be like a ninja behind the scene, but i'm not sure. I'm just lost on the kinds of shots I should get of them I think. This just seems to be so much different than what I am used to....maybe it's just me over thinking it lol. I'll probably have my 85 and 70-200 ready too.


----------



## MistaBernie

so you'll be doing the guys getting ready and maybe some formals of the guys alone after they're ready? Cool, good to know.

The idea is to try to keep things natural. Introduce yourself when you show up, let them know that you're gonna snap some shots while they're getting ready (basically, tell them they can be dressed, but not to have vests/jewelry/ties on before you get there). If they have younger guys (little kids) that require help getting ready those shots are usually gold -- one of my fav's my second shooter took at a wedding we shot this summer was a 9 y/o straightening a 7 y/o's bowtie. Don't be super snap happy but try not to miss a whole lot.

Focus a little on the groom / best man / anyone that's family of the group of guys (father is sometimes there, etc). The 85 should get you close without too much issue, but if you're shooting on a crop the 30 might actually be okay for this too. You don't really want to be in the way.

After the group is ready, find someplace nice to do some formals of just the guys. Make sure to get groom / best man and any combinations of the above (singles with the groom, whole group, etc).

It seems like a lot to think about, but if you have a plan and are confident, you'll stay grounded. The time flies, so having that plan is definitely helpful too. Just be sure to keep an eye on your time, etc.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> so you'll be doing the guys getting ready and maybe some formals of the guys alone after they're ready? Cool, good to know.
> The idea is to try to keep things natural. Introduce yourself when you show up, let them know that you're gonna snap some shots while they're getting ready (basically, tell them they can be dressed, but not to have vests/jewelry/ties on before you get there). If they have younger guys (little kids) that require help getting ready those shots are usually gold -- one of my fav's my second shooter took at a wedding we shot this summer was a 9 y/o straightening a 7 y/o's bowtie. Don't be super snap happy but try not to miss a whole lot.
> Focus a little on the groom / best man / anyone that's family of the group of guys (father is sometimes there, etc). The 85 should get you close without too much issue, but if you're shooting on a crop the 30 might actually be okay for this too. You don't really want to be in the way.
> After the group is ready, find someplace nice to do some formals of just the guys. Make sure to get groom / best man and any combinations of the above (singles with the groom, whole group, etc).
> It seems like a lot to think about, but if you have a plan and are confident, you'll stay grounded. The time flies, so having that plan is definitely helpful too. Just be sure to keep an eye on your time, etc.


what he said.....

but if you are going to shoot prep i think 85 and 70-200 are too long. During my last weddings I mostly used a 16-35 and 24-70 (i shot mostly long end so the 85 would work) on FF while shooting prep. while the actual ceremony i shot 16-35 and 70-200 on FF. I was shooting primary so it might not matter to you but having two strobed bodies with a wide/tele attached definitely helped since you dont want to fumble around changing lenses.

if you are the 3rd you really want to be as far away from the front as possible because there is so many people up close to the bride/groom during the ceremony (2 photogs, 2 videographers, etc).

and finally *GO TO THE LOCATION* the day/week before at around the same time as the shoot, you will get huge insights on how the lighting is and ideas on how you might shoot the actual event.


----------



## sub50hz

A friend got an interview for Dig BMX magazine and BMX Union, capped by a photo of mine shot in 2011 at a Rockford skatepark.

http://www.bmxunion.com/blog/interview/photos-timothy-burkhart/

This is the same guy whose People vs. Places double exposure project has popped up on a ton of art blogs as well as Gizmodo and Wired.


----------



## Conspiracy

NIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIICE


----------



## Jerald

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> From what I've physically seen, the high ISO performance on the 6D is nearly identical to the 5D3, which most people would contend is better than the D600. In terms of the 'built in flash', it's good for fill and that's about it. I'm not going to say the 6D competes in terms of # of auto focus points or AF system, but from the testing I did just before release with the 6D, the AF was still accurate, even in low light.


The pop-up flash does commander mode too for wireless control (not just trigger, but full control even of power output) of external flashes.


----------



## Chunky_Chimp

Hmm, so the D5200 was announced for North America a couple days ago, and I'm kinda glad I didn't wait for it. $800 body-only, $900 w/18-55 kit lens, that's bordering on absurd. I expected it to be $100 less than that...


----------



## Unknownm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jerald*
> 
> 6D for low light shooting? Isn't the D600 better in terms of high ISOs (in RAW)? And doesn't the D600 have more focus points to help in low light? Not to mention it also has a flash.
> Sorry for the questions. I'm just curious about your decision.


Honestly, I bought the D600 before the 6D and wasn't impressed with the low light shooting.... Hell all my cameras before this were all Nikons to!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> From what I've physically seen, the high ISO performance on the 6D is nearly identical to the 5D3, which most people would contend is better than the D600. In terms of the 'built in flash', it's good for fill and that's about it. I'm not going to say the 6D competes in terms of # of auto focus points or AF system, but from the testing I did just before release with the 6D, the AF was still accurate, even in low light.


I got external flash with a diffusion flash! that came with my old film camera that what? cost me 10 dollars on craigslist. So even with no built in flash a cheap one works great!

A.F focus is a hit and miss in low light. Sometimes it will focus great, other times it will just turn blurry and miss the target I'm trying to focus. However, that's why we have manual option available. So even if I don't have lots of A.F points or amazing A.F system, I can still use good old eyes to focus (use to shoot in film with manual focus)


----------



## laboitenoire

And... I've officially inherited Gramps' Praktica LLC with the Oreston 50 f/1.8. It's a sweet little camera. I'm looking forward to using it for my film class this semester.

Now that I've moved to M42 for my film setup, what are generally considered nice lenses to have for M42? I would love to get the original Pancolar Electric lenses for this camera, but they're very hard to find and are more expensive than they're probably actually worth. I'll just have to live with stop-down metering.


----------



## MistaBernie

5D Mark II is off Christmas sale, back up to $1800 retail. Bodes well for resell value, especially since it's apparently been discontinued (even though B&H doens't list it as such)...


----------



## foothead

So it seems Adobe has CS2 free on their website. I'm downloading to my laptop since it isn't powerful enough for CS5. Link in case anyone else wants to check it out.


----------



## laboitenoire

Is it worth it though? I feel like CS2 is so old at this point that the myriad freeware applications are so much better now.


----------



## foothead

Worth what? It's free. Just download and see if you like it.

I used to use photoshop CS2 on an old mac and found it better than GIMP for photo editing. Not sure about the other programs though.


----------



## Sean Webster

Well, I finished shooting my first weeding and it wasn't too bad. However, I can't say that about the pix yet tho lol. We have a little over 1500 photos to go through now! O___O

I realize now why people like use the 70-200 2.8 IS and FF bodies...it is the perfect wedding lens/setup. I am want my 5DMK3 and one of those lenses now.







lol


----------



## MistaBernie

Yep, hoping I get my 5D2 sold this week and can buy my 5D3 soon. While I don't have the IS version of the 70-200 2.8, I don't _really_ need it at the moment..


----------



## Conspiracy

70-200 is a workhorse lens. great for a lot of types of photography


----------



## funfortehfun

My birthday is coming up, and I'd really like to get some camera lenses as a gift. I've browsed through some cheap lenses (that are good, of course) for my dad's D90 that I use: the AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D and the AF-S DX Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G VR lenses. The AF 50mm I'm virtually sold on buying, but does anybody else use the latter lens?


----------



## Eggs and bacon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *funfortehfun*
> 
> My birthday is coming up, and I'd really like to get some camera lenses as a gift. I've browsed through some cheap lenses (that are good, of course) for my dad's D90 that I use: the AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D and the AF-S DX Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G VR lenses. The AF 50mm I'm virtually sold on buying, but does anybody else use the latter lens?


The latter is your bog standard kit lens. What other lenses do you/family currently own?
also remember that the d90 has a crop sensor so 50mm is about 80mm equivilant FOV on a full frame camera.


----------



## Jerald

^
I believe the 50mm will be 75mm (as he has a D90). Nikon crop sensors have a 1.5x factor, Canon ones have a 1.6x.


----------



## funfortehfun

I currently have a AF micro-Nikkor 60mm f/2.8. Not the best lens for all things, certainly.
Also I took a look at the newer AF-S Nikkor 50mm f/1.8G. The sharpness and especially the bokeh look amazing on the lens compared to its AF 1.8D counterpart. Is it worth the extra 100?
The AF-S DX Nikkor 55-200mm f5/5.6G VR looks attractive as well.


----------



## Eggs and bacon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *funfortehfun*
> 
> I currently have a AF micro-Nikkor 60mm f/2.8. Not the best lens for all things, certainly.
> Also I took a look at the newer AF-S Nikkor 50mm f/1.8G. The sharpness and especially the bokeh look amazing on the lens compared to its AF 1.8D counterpart. Is it worth the extra 100?
> The AF-S DX Nikkor 55-200mm f5/5.6G VR looks attractive as well.


How do you find the focal length of the 60, and the 50 if you have tried it. A 'normal' lens on Nikon crop is about 30 or 35mm.


----------



## funfortehfun

The 60mm is OK, but I find myself having to go quite some lengths away to get some good macro shots (esp. because I don't have a tripod right now...cry)

I saw an AF-S 50mm 1.8G review and it said that 50mm will be quite like from your eyesight's point of view.


----------



## Eggs and bacon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *funfortehfun*
> 
> I saw an AF-S 50mm 1.8G review and it said that 50mm will be quite like from your eyesight's point of view.


On a full frame camera it will be, a rough equivalent would be the 35mm 1.8g, which I think is roughly equivalent to 52mm. Almost the same FOV as a 50mm on full frame.


----------



## funfortehfun

I'll probably buy the AF-S Nikkor 50mm f/1.8G then. I don't think I would need a zoom lens anytime soon as with the AF-S DX Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G VR.


----------



## sub50hz

You would be wise to buy the 35DX instead.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *funfortehfun*
> 
> The 60mm is OK, but I find myself having to go quite some lengths away to get some good macro shots (esp. because I don't have a tripod right now...cry)
> I saw an AF-S 50mm 1.8G review and it said that 50mm will be quite like from your eyesight's point of view.


uh....a 60mm macro should be fairly close focusing.....
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> You would be wise to buy the 35DX instead.


word


----------



## funfortehfun

Alright, good that I asked in the first place on this forum. Why the 35mm DX?


----------



## mz-n10

35mm is a better range on aps-c for most users. plus the lens is sharp and still cheap.

what focal length do you use the most?


----------



## funfortehfun

I actually only use 60mm at the moment with my 60mm micro-Nikkor. Which is why I'm asking for a new lens.

The bokeh looks a bit...poor...with the 35DX.


----------



## Eggs and bacon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *funfortehfun*
> 
> I actually only use 60mm at the moment with my 60mm micro-Nikkor. Which is why I'm asking for a new lens.
> The bokeh looks a bit...poor...with the 35DX.


Its not bad, but if you have the big(er) bucks get the sigma 30mm f/1.4.


----------



## funfortehfun

Hmm... the 50mm f/1.8G is equally as sharp as the 35mm f/1.8G. Bokeh is very good on the 50/1.8G vs the 35/1.8G which isn't so good. The bokeh is the only point I can see that is different about these two lenses in terms of image quality.


----------



## mz-n10

makes sense that the bokeh will better on the 50mm since its a longer lens. but the 35mm range is a better range on aps-c.


----------



## funfortehfun

Alright then, I'll buy the 35mm DX. I'll probably use an aperture of 1.8 to get the best bokeh as it isn't too good with other apertures. Other than that it seems identical to the 50mm f/1.8G. Thanks guys!


----------



## sub50hz

The 35DX is good at every aperture, and especially good stopped down. It's futile to compare it to a 50mm, since they're two different lenses entirely. Lens speed isn't always just for using it wide open to blur backgrounds, it's equally useful for shooting action when light isn't being your friend.

See here:


Tam//Westmont by sub50hz, on Flickr


----------



## mz-n10

if you are really after bokeh, then i think your money is better spend on the 50/1.8g (from your post) or sigmalux (sigma 50/1.4) or a even longer lens (samyang 85/1.4).

since we really dont know your shooting style, you really need to know if the 35DX is worth it for your $ but i think most of us here will agree that 35mm is a much better range on aps-c.


----------



## mz-n10

heres a random picture since i messed up double posting


panasonic gx1 30s exposure


----------



## boogschd

+1 on the 35mm DX
yes, bokeh will be better with a 50mm though

nice shot mz-n10! O.O


----------



## Jerald

mz-n10, was the camera mounted to the car? Nice shot!


----------



## mz-n10

yea it was with a Cinesquid with a nodal rail.


----------



## biatchi

looks cool, kinda like it's been rendered


----------



## funfortehfun

Another quick question: how useful are filters (grads, polarizers, UV/haze filters)? Some say they're critical in outdoor situations, but some say they're little more than a lens protector.


----------



## Dream Killer

Nothing replaces what a polarizer can do and it does work as advertised but grads and uv/haze filters is more of a personal preference thing.


----------



## funfortehfun

Ok, thanks. Thinking about buying a 77mm polarizer, though the multi-coat ones are expensive.


----------



## iandroo888

better to buy a good one from the start than to regret and having to spend more. lower quality filters will hinder the quality of the resulting picture due to the cheaper glass it uses..

B+W F Pro MRC Kaesemann 77mm is what i have.


----------



## funfortehfun

Yeah, that's what I've seen too. I'll probably buy a filter at a later time as I don't have the most money to spend now.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Love snow days.


----------



## laboitenoire

God... I must say the one downside to taking photography is the cost. I just dropped $140 to get my supplies, and I'll still need to get matte board and dry mount tissue. Biggest source of this cost compared to last spring is the fact that we're moving to 8x10 and fiber paper.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Love snow days.


nice! apparently we should be getting some of that snow coming our way. doesnt feel the same when its a snow day and you already have the day off haha. its like getting snowed in during winter break so nothing really gets cancelled lol


----------



## funfortehfun

Hah, my friends were buzzing about having snow so they could miss school today XD


----------



## scottath

you guys have snow - whereas me in Sydney had the hottest day on record.....45.8C in the city center, hotter out west.


----------



## spRICE




----------



## Conspiracy

are you a real friend?


----------



## Eggs and bacon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> are you a real friend?


----------



## Sean Webster

But HDR has some good uses!

It's just the re-tards, who over do all the settings which make the images look terribad, give it a bad name.


----------



## Eggs and bacon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> But HDR has some good uses!
> 
> It's just the re-tards, who over do all the settings which make the images look terribad, give it a bad name.


I will agree it is useful in high contrast scenes, but if you google hdr none of the images (in my brief look) to my eye were using hdr to retain detail, giving it its bad rep.


----------



## Marin

My domain's being a butt and not forwarding right.

http://samhaligman.4ormat.com/

Slowly putting it together. So still adding a bunch of stufffffff...


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Perhaps consider a custom scroll bar, instead of the browser'?


----------



## Marin

I dun know how, rofl. I probably can do that if I do some HTML editing but I have as much experience in that as an elementary student has in trigonometry.


----------



## Conspiracy

Im sure there is someone on ocn that is good at html that can help







not me though, i dont speak computer languages


----------



## mz-n10

its a java script hack to get scroll bars.


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> Perhaps consider a custom scroll bar, instead of the browser'?


Custom scrollbars require jQuery (JavaScript library) plugins and they don't work with all browsers. Though any modern browser will have support for it.

As long as it doesn't look like an iframe it will look great on it.


----------



## Conspiracy

im just going to leave this here


----------



## Chunky_Chimp

I don't think this is the place for that... but it fits your user name somehow.


----------



## Conspiracy

it fits because it involves digital images and motion photography in the form of video and film









i post here because the video section is on life support since im the only person that every posts answers there or shoots video on a regular basis


----------



## boogschd

good watch









even though i got lost with all the film talk


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boogschd*
> 
> good watch
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> even though i got lost with all the film talk


yea. its kinda simple to understand the process but the amount of work and people required to take something from film to video as described is hard to comprehend unless you have been down that road.


----------



## Simca

I'm about to buy a Nikon D80 with an 18-55mm lens for $250. That sound like a good deal or no?


----------



## scottath

That was a great video Conspiracy - seemed incredibly well researched/alot of knowledge went into it.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Simca*
> 
> I'm about to buy a Nikon D80 with an 18-55mm lens for $250. That sound like a good deal or no?


That is a reasonably good deal. Is the lens the VR version or no?


----------



## Simca

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Simca*
> 
> I'm about to buy a Nikon D80 with an 18-55mm lens for $250. That sound like a good deal or no?
> 
> 
> 
> That is a reasonably good deal. Is the lens the VR version or no?
Click to expand...

Wish I had an answer, but it's being sold on CL and the guy probably doesn't know what he has.


----------



## funfortehfun

It's a kit lens, and EDIT: depends if the owner bought the lens after 2007 or not. As noted by sub50hz, the lens has a VR version, but if the D80 was bought before 2007 then the lens won't include VR. That doesn't mean it's bad in any way though, because it's amazingly sharp for a kit lens.

I'd buy that in a flash.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *funfortehfun*
> 
> It's a kit lens, and not a VR. That doesn't mean it's bad in any way though, because it's amazingly sharp for a kit lens.
> I'd buy that in a flash.


Newer versions of the kit lens have VR.


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Simca*
> 
> Wish I had an answer, but it's being sold on CL and the guy probably doesn't know what he has.


I thought you had a D90? I'd still ask if it's VR or not.

At that price though it's a decent deal for what they are currently worth.


----------



## laboitenoire

Well shoot... The counter on my Praktica is broken, so I have no clue how many frames I've shot on a roll of film. Aaaaand I need my first roll shot by Monday.


----------



## MistaBernie

Shoot till it won't crank anymore...? If you're unsure if something happened, unload it in a dark room.

Also, the 5D3 shouldn't come with a green box mode. Just sayin'.


----------



## laboitenoire

Yeah, I'm assuming Fuji winds their rolls with three extra frames, so I loaded the camera, burned the first three, and now I'll just count manually using my exposure log. Minor inconvenience, but it should work for now.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Also, the 5D3 shouldn't come with a green box mode. Just sayin'.


makes you wonder which demographic Canon targets =P


----------



## MistaBernie

I'm fascinated by the focus system. On primes w/o any adjustments I feel like I get more sharp wide open shots (in just messing around at least) than I did with the 5D2. I did notice that it can be slow to focus when using flash (might be an assist issue).. trying to remember where I saw that.


----------



## Conspiracy

all i hear is blah blah blah my camera is awesome it takes 6 fps

pfft my video camera shoots 30 fps beat that lol







spec sheets are the best way to compare cameras. insert other troll comments









im bored waiting for my replacement high slide to get here for my light meter so i can go shoot more and not have to worry about if its too bright haha


----------



## MistaBernie

I'll probably be putting it through the courses on Satuday, we have another POTN-Boston meet up happening.. should be fun. Hopefully not snowing Sat night (or done by then).


----------



## Simca

Ended up getting the D80 for a total of $229 dollars. Came with a Nikkor AF-S DX - ED 18-55mm 1:3.5 - 5.6GII lens. (Stock probably?)

Had to buy the charger for the battery on my own, but that's 4 bucks on ebay so no prob. Should come with some other stuff on the 28th or so..

Took some quick pictures just to see if it worked. Obviously I didn't put any time or care into these shots..

Err..I was going to share them, but I can't seem to drag them out of the SD card now..and now my camera won't let me access the menu...or take further pictures...what did I do to it!! lol


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Did you accidentally turn on write protection on the card? Gratz on the camera btw, you will enjoy it much more than and p&s.


----------



## Simca

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> Did you accidentally turn on write protection on the card? Gratz on the camera btw, you will enjoy it much more than and p&s.


I think somehow I did. The SD Card is completely not responding. I'm like 90% sure it's the SD card that is the problem as I was messing with the SD card when the camera stopped responding. I also plugged the SD card into an SD card reader and plugged it in my computer and it's not coming up.

There goes an 8GB SD card..ordered another one online..hopefully that should come in same time as charger so everything will work properly there.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Look at the little switch on the side:









Which position is it in? If it's in the upward position you might have a dead card. If it is, luckily they are cheap.


----------



## boogschd

sucks about the SD card :/

but congratulations on the new camera


----------



## foothead

So I've had a few chances to try out that new tripod I was given for Christmas. Turns out I hate it. It just feels so ridiculously overcomplicated compared to the surveyor's tripod I was using before. I tried it headless, which was a bit better but it still felt like more trouble than it's worth. I'll probably keep it around for medium format though, since I usually use that when I can't carry around a ton of massive gear.


----------



## Simca

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> Look at the little switch on the side:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Which position is it in? If it's in the upward position you might have a dead card. If it is, luckily they are cheap.


Unfortunately it's in the up position. Not sure why it died. I was trying to drag pictures from the camera onto my computer and it wouldn't drag... I was like what the heck is going on. I unplug the camera, try to take a picture and no go..try to view pictures, no go. It responded exactly like it did when there was no sd card in it originally.

What made me 90% sure it was the SD Card was that I used an SD Card reader and it wouldn't get recognized. I ordered an A-data 16GB Class 10 card for 13.50 off amazon. That should fix the problem at a low expense.

Only issue with camera so far other than this is it smells like cigarettes :S


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Simca*
> 
> Unfortunately it's in the up position. Not sure why it died. I was trying to drag pictures from the camera onto my computer and it wouldn't drag... I was like what the heck is going on. I unplug the camera, try to take a picture and no go..try to view pictures, no go. It responded exactly like it did when there was no sd card in it originally.
> 
> What made me 90% sure it was the SD Card was that I used an SD Card reader and it wouldn't get recognized. I ordered an A-data 16GB Class 10 card for 13.50 off amazon. That should fix the problem at a low expense.
> 
> Only issue with camera so far other than this is it smells like cigarettes :S


Hmm. Mine can take photos with no sd card, guess nikons can't.

Also, my camera smelled very slightly like cigarette smoke as well. Makes you wonder about demographics...


----------



## Sean Webster

I had that cigarette smell issue after my dad smeared chewing tobacco all over my grip lol. After a few months it went away.


----------



## foothead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> Also, my camera smelled very slightly like cigarette smoke as well. Makes you wonder about demographics...


A few years back I got an old yellow/brownish box camera at a flea market. I got it home, and noticed the inside was actually white. Turns out the camera was originally all white, and it just got horribly stained from being exposed to cigarette smoke 40+ years.


----------



## Unknownm

testing out my 24-105mm f/4 lens. Not that bad of a bokeh


----------



## MistaBernie

ISO 50 isn't all that it's cracked up to be (results in a loss of dynamic range). On the 6D and 5D3, expansion isn't really required at all (100-25600 should be fine)..


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Simca*
> 
> Unfortunately it's in the up position. Not sure why it died. I was trying to drag pictures from the camera onto my computer and it wouldn't drag... I was like what the heck is going on. I unplug the camera, try to take a picture and no go..try to view pictures, no go. It responded exactly like it did when there was no sd card in it originally.
> 
> What made me 90% sure it was the SD Card was that I used an SD Card reader and it wouldn't get recognized. I ordered an A-data 16GB Class 10 card for 13.50 off amazon. That should fix the problem at a low expense.
> 
> Only issue with camera so far other than this is it smells like cigarettes :S


Make a bootable version of gParted and see if you can repair the SD card from there.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> Hmm. Mine can take photos with no sd card, guess nikons can't.
> 
> Also, my camera smelled very slightly like cigarette smoke as well. Makes you wonder about demographics...


They can. It's just in the settings like many other cameras. It's a good way to prevent unneeded actuations when your friend who wants to borrow your camera to take pictures of every useless thing, or thinking he is a model photographer by using continuous shot mode.


----------



## Simca

Well, I can't be bothered to save an 8GB SD card after purchasing a better one. If the new one breaks, then I'll try that..but if the new one breaks, there's a larger issue at hand. I don't think I'm going to connect the cable to the camera anymore to transfer files. I'll probably use the SD card reader.


----------



## MistaBernie

It's probably for the best anyway, card readers tend to be faster than going direct from the camera (at least in my experience) -- used to take something like 45 minutes to unload photos from a 16gb CF card direct from my Canon 5D Classic.. takes a minute or two with a USB3 CF Card reader..


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> It's probably for the best anyway, card readers tend to be faster than going direct from the camera (at least in my experience) -- used to take something like 45 minutes to unload photos from a 16gb CF card direct from my Canon 5D Classic.. takes a minute or two with a USB3 CF Card reader..


It's not fair to compare transfer speeds from a USB 2.0 device to a USB 3, now is it?









I've actually had quite the opposite happen. Usually the transfer rate on most of my cameras have been faster than my USB card reader. I know newer cameras are definitely much faster than conventional card readers. But I've been waiting for USB 3.0 card readers to be more common to work out some of the kinks and be a bit cheaper. My old Firewire CF reader needs to retire.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aksthem1*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> It's probably for the best anyway, card readers tend to be faster than going direct from the camera (at least in my experience) -- used to take something like 45 minutes to unload photos from a 16gb CF card direct from my Canon 5D Classic.. takes a minute or two with a USB3 CF Card reader..
> 
> 
> 
> It's not fair to compare transfer speeds from a USB 2.0 device to a USB 3, now is it?
Click to expand...

that


----------



## MistaBernie

Yeah, I skipped a step. before I upgraded my system, it was still way faster to use the CF reader (which was USB 3.0) on a regular 2.0 port than it was to use either of my 5Ds (5Dc/5D2) direct.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aksthem1*
> 
> They can. It's just in the settings like many other cameras. It's a good way to prevent unneeded actuations when your friend who wants to borrow your camera to take pictures of every useless thing, or thinking he is a model photographer by using continuous shot mode.


Gotcha.


----------



## sub50hz

5Dc was only USB1.1, FYI.


----------



## Conspiracy

one of my moms friends sent her an email about this. i doubt i could afford it even if i managed to get accepted. Duke University has a new Master of Arts degree in experimental and documentary arts. this is not limited to movies and motion pictures but a mixture of all art forms. thought i would share. im still studying my butt off for the GRE but i doubt i would be able to get into that degree program even with my fairly decent current level of experience on my resume









http://mfaeda.duke.edu/


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> one of my moms friends sent her an email about this. i doubt i could afford it even if i managed to get accepted. Duke University has a new Master of Arts degree in experimental and documentary arts. this is not limited to movies and motion pictures but a mixture of all art forms. thought i would share. im still studying my butt off for the GRE but i doubt i would be able to get into that degree program even with my fairly decent current level of experience on my resume
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://mfaeda.duke.edu/


Don't sell yourself short. Ace the GRE (it was way easier than I expected) and find a way to get your tuition covered. Between TA'ships, RA'ships, fellowships, grants, scholarships etc., it's easier the get grad school paid for than undergrad IMO (at least when I was in school, the has-a-sad economy might have made it harder).


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*
> 
> Don't sell yourself short. Ace the GRE (it was way easier than I expected) and find a way to get your tuition covered. Between TA'ships, RA'ships, fellowships, grants, scholarships etc., it's easier the get grad school paid for than undergrad IMO (at least when I was in school, the has-a-sad economy might have made it harder).


how the heck you study for the vocabulary ? D:


----------



## dudemanppl

Once I sell my Stinger 6/9 wheelset, I shall purchase a Shen Hao and sum glassss.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iandroo888*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*
> 
> Don't sell yourself short. Ace the GRE (it was way easier than I expected) and find a way to get your tuition covered. Between TA'ships, RA'ships, fellowships, grants, scholarships etc., it's easier the get grad school paid for than undergrad IMO (at least when I was in school, the has-a-sad economy might have made it harder).
> 
> 
> 
> how the heck you study for the vocabulary ? D:
Click to expand...

read dictionary


----------



## scottath

Hey guys,

Slowely upgrading my pano kit.
Having just bought a Zeiss 50 f2, im looking now for a nodal slide + rotator + (in time) Lee's

Can someone give me some products to look up for the slide/rotator? Preferably ones that are cheaper than Nodal Ninja / Really Right Stuff

Thanks guys

scottath


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scottath*
> 
> Hey guys,
> 
> Slowely upgrading my pano kit.
> Having just bought a Zeiss 50 f2, im looking now for a nodal slide + rotator + (in time) Lee's
> 
> Can someone give me some products to look up for the slide/rotator? Preferably ones that are cheaper than Nodal Ninja / Really Right Stuff
> 
> Thanks guys
> 
> scottath


are you just doing horizontal pans or doing vertical too? i dont think anyone offers a kit other then nodal ninja/rrs that i trust hanging my camera off vertically.

if you are just going horizontal pans, check ebay for a side rail, ive used arca swiss clamps and QR plates from a company called SUNWAYFOTO which is every bit as nice as my RRS stuff. But as a full disclaimer i have not used their slide so i cant comment on that specific product.

as for the panning base i would only trust something like manfrotto, rrs, kirk, etc...cheap knock offs seems to have centering issues it doesnt seem to rotate flat...

right now i am using a cheap macro rail i bought in hong kong as a nodal and its working fairly well, that could also be another option for you (dont pick up a cheap macro rail, the gearing isnt fine enough thats why its on nodal duty....







)


----------



## scottath

Was going to do panos both ways, with the camera in whatever orientation as needed (using an L-Plate)
More likely horizontal pans - but verticals are also frequent.


----------



## mz-n10

we might not be on the same page with the vertical pans (multi-stage is what RRS calls it). im assuming all your gear are on arca swiss dovetails....

anyways i did a quick amazon search and the horizontal slide rail is called DMP-200 while the 90 vertical is the DMC-200. the leveler/pan base i would buy from a more well known company like rrs or manfrotto, etc.

and apparently they also have a full kit link


----------



## scottath

Ah - those are multi-row pano kits.

Horizontal panos is as normal, verticle you just turn the ball head 90 degrees and do the same thing vertically.
I cannot justify the expense for a multi-row pano kit atm.

With the price of the SUNWAYFOTO, i might as well go for RRS for not much more too :/


----------



## mz-n10

you cannot just turn the ball head to 90 and pan vertically cause you lose your horizontal nodal point, you have to pick either you are going pan vertically or horizontally.

yea once you go multi-row it gets expensive fast, like i said just the rails are fairly cheap. all you really need to start panning is a pan base (leveler) and a slide if you are on a single row. hell if you actually take the time to level your tripod before you shoot you dont even need a pan base, just a nodal slide is enough.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iandroo888*
> 
> how the heck you study for the vocabulary ? D:


Good question. I would recommend picking up a GRE study guide specifically for vocabulary. One good habit is to make yourself look up any word that you don't know every time you encounter one, no matter when and what you're reading - be it for school or forum posts (install a dictionary app on your phone for when you're out and about).

The math portion was the only section I studied for, with the verbal and written portion being not too difficult (strong language background, liberal arts degrees).


----------



## scottath

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> you cannot just turn the ball head to 90 and pan vertically cause you lose your horizontal nodal point, you have to pick either you are going pan vertically or horizontally.
> 
> yea once you go multi-row it gets expensive fast, like i said just the rails are fairly cheap. all you really need to start panning is a pan base (leveler) and a slide if you are on a single row. hell if you actually take the time to level your tripod before you shoot you dont even need a pan base, just a nodal slide is enough.


Couldnt you put the ball head to the side - and line up its plate horizontally/vertically.
then do the vertical using the pan base ontop of the ball heads plate.
As in the same setup just rotated 90 degrees?

Anyhow - horizontal/landscape is by far the priority.


----------



## laboitenoire

Fuji Neopan 400 is officially my new favorite B&W film.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scottath*
> 
> Couldnt you put the ball head to the side - and line up its plate horizontally/vertically.
> then do the vertical using the pan base ontop of the ball heads plate.
> As in the same setup just rotated 90 degrees?
> 
> Anyhow - horizontal/landscape is by far the priority.


no the x axis isnt centered on the ball head. it will work but it isnt ideal (like panning without a nodal point set up correctly)


----------



## iandroo888

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*
> 
> Good question. I would recommend picking up a GRE study guide specifically for vocabulary. One good habit is to make yourself look up any word that you don't know every time you encounter one, no matter when and what you're reading - be it for school or forum posts (install a dictionary app on your phone for when you're out and about).
> 
> The math portion was the only section I studied for, with the verbal and written portion being not too difficult (strong language background, liberal arts degrees).


math portion is the only section i barely touched (when studying). XD got a great score there. sucked at the other part. sucks the GRE uses a lot of words that you never use or have a simpler word thats used normally


----------



## Simca

I think I messed up my camera. Got the new MicroSD with SD Card adapter in today and camera still borked. Not sure what to do..tried looking it up online and others seem to have the same problem, but I've seen no clear solution..

Basically I have a Nikon D80..the Play button that normally brings your photos up on screen and takes u to the menu etc isn't working..I can't take pictures with the camera and when I press the button to take a picture it says "r05" in there.

I tried reseting, but that didn't do anything. I'm out of ideas.

Speaking to a friend. We both think it may be that the battery is low, but I'll have to wait for my charger to come in to verify that.


----------



## zoidbergslo

Are you sure you bought camera in perfectly working condition. That r05 that comes on screen just means you can store another 5 photos in camera buffer that is not an error message.
I never had those kinds of problems with my camera when battery was low.

BTW I own D80 too.


----------



## laboitenoire

Also, why are you screwing around with a MicroSD adapter in the camera itself? That's probably the most likely culprit... You should have just bought an actual SD card from Lexar or Sandisk.


----------



## laboitenoire

Lots of cool new lenses coming out... I'm really intrigued to see how the new Sigma 30 f/1.4 performs, as well as the new lenses from Tokina.

EDIT: I just got an email. If any of you are members at The Clymb (it's free to join) they have a huge sale on Crumpler bags today. The 5 Million Dollar Home is $47.98, the 7 MDH is $79.98, and the 8 MDH is $89.98. Crazy deal considering they're normally $100+ most other places.


----------



## mz-n10

i did a rolling car shot like a week ago and im not quite happy with it cause that is as far as i can get on my rig (200mm nodal on a cinesquid). below is the shot again



i dont really want to spend like 500 bucks on a suction cup rig, so i was thinking about using a camera car to shoot. anyone have any experience with this? i did a bit of reading and it sounds like i should be at 1/40 to 1/60. any other pointers/experiences/non-horror stories about shooting in a camera car?


----------



## Simca

So yeah, it was the battery. Got it charged, good to go. This camera really gives a lot more light to the world than there actually is for outside night shots. Not that that's a terrible thing. Shooting at 320 ISO atm. P mode.

Anyway, what's the benefit of NEF over JPEG? I feel JPEG has richer colors, but NEF does different things with lighting sources.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Simca*
> 
> So yeah, it was the battery. Got it charged, good to go. This camera really gives a lot more light to the world than there actually is for outside night shots. Not that that's a terrible thing. Shooting at 320 ISO atm. P mode.


You can adjust the exposure who you like. learn how to shoot manual.








Quote:


> Anyway, what's the benefit of NEF over JPEG? I feel JPEG has richer colors, but NEF does different things with lighting sources.


NEF is the RAW file, akak unedited, no midifications, uncompressed image data. The jpeg is the imaged compressed with default edit style applied. Thus, why you notice there is more color with jpeg. However, once you edit you can have more leeway with the NEF file than the compressed jpeg. If you don't care to edit your pix a whole lot then leave in jpeg.


----------



## silvrr

NEF is raw data of the image what the sensor sees, no processing. JPEG is a compression of that data viewable on a variety of platforms.

The JPEG looks like it has richer colors as there is most likely a camera setting applied for more saturation/contrast ect. The RAW will look exactly the same if you apply the same settings to it. RAW has its benefits, JPEG has benefits too. People go round and round on which is better. Do some research and decide for yourself.


----------



## Simca

how do you change the aperture in P mode? I'm spinning the dial on the front, but it's not changing the F/stop. Seems to work fine in A mode (Aperture mode?)

Lowered ISO to 200. Could try 100, but will try 200 for now.


----------



## Marin

You can't, Program automatically selects the aperture and shutter.

Anyways, ordering a new tripod and stuff. Getting a Manfrotto geared head and Gitzo legs.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

I was not excited about having to fork out a fair bit for a tripod, but I learned my dad had a nice old metal one. Very nice fluid movements, no jumping. Also, Simca, generally the lower iso the better.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Simca*
> 
> how do you change the aperture in P mode? I'm spinning the dial on the front, but it's not changing the F/stop. Seems to work fine in A mode (Aperture mode?)
> 
> Lowered ISO to 200. Could try 100, but will try 200 for now.


What Marin said, P automatically selects the aperture and shutter.

Change to A mode or manual (M) and go from there. Don't bother with P.

A mode you can set the aperture and it will automatically select the shutter speed.

You can set to manual and select the aperture and shutter speed how you like.


----------



## Simca

I think if I want to take night shots, I'll need a tripod which sucks..but it seems the sensor needs slower shutter speeds to capture enough light for a good night photo.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Simca*
> 
> I think if I want to take night shots, *I'll need a tripod which sucks*..but it seems the sensor needs slower shutter speeds to capture enough light for a good night photo.


I beg to differ.

You simply need something which will support your camera still in a position for the time of your shutter. I have used ledges, my backpack, rocks, books, signs, chairs, garbage cans, etc to hold my camera while doing a long exposure. You don't need a tripod, it is just a convenience to have one.


----------



## Marin

Get used tripods, way cheaper. I got my CF Gitzo legs used since I'm not paying full price for them and they last forever anyways.

Learned my lesson with Benro. Affordable and ready to break. Better to drop a ton of dough on good ones that'll never need replacement.


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Simca*
> 
> but it seems the sensor needs slower shutter speeds to capture enough light for a good night photo.


Totally depends on what you want to do with night shots.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Speaking of tripods, have you guys ever heard of this one?


----------



## Simca

Went outside and took a few pictures of my house, neighbors, the lake in the back and Wawas after picking up some drinks.

Practiced Night Mode, Program mode, ISO Auto On and ISO 200 Auto Off. Some were taken in hand, some were taken rested on my car.

They're all really bad. Either grainy, blurry (this was the most common problem because of having to hold it) or the lighting was batty.

The pictures by the lake almost look like it was day time..but it was really dark out there, lol.

I like RAW now...You can edit the values in Photoshop when you put them in there. Change the temperature of the photo etc. Really nice feature. Gonna go with RAW over JPEG.


----------



## Chunky_Chimp

Are you leaving it to try to auto-focus or are those manual shots? Those all look out of focus.


----------



## Simca

Those are all on manual. Yes, they're very out of focus. Not sure why..I suppose because it's not on a tripod..idk..maybe I don't have a setting right,


----------



## iandroo888

yeah about about to say they are all out of focus. bump up the iso a bit so the exposure time doesnt have to be so long. but considering you are saying its rested on something, exposure time shouldnt matter. try not to shake the camera when u press the button


----------



## Simca

Maybe instead of auto ISO I should have just bumped ISO up manually slightly...I think the auto ISO shots put it to 1600...

I probably should have stopped car too, pretty sure there was some vibration.


----------



## aksthem1

They just look out of focus. Motion blur doesn't really look like the problem here.

Shooting with manual focus at night on a DSLR takes a lot of practice. Even then the dim viewfinder and slow lenses makes it harder. It's easier with certain focus screens though.

I'd probably wouldn't shoot that low of an ISO with the kit lens.


----------



## Simca

Do you think I need to adjust the zoom or do I simply need a better lens?


----------



## aksthem1

You're only going to need to adjust the zoom depending on the perspective and framing you want for your photo. If you have to adjust the zoom to get the shot in focus, then you need to get some practice with the focus ring.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Simca*
> 
> Maybe instead of auto ISO I should have just bumped ISO up manually slightly...I think the auto ISO shots put it to 1600...
> 
> I probably should have stopped car too, pretty sure there was some vibration.


Take your time with the shots...

First thing to do is compose what you want in the shot. Try to sure your horizon is level, unless you purposely don't want it to be.

Next is to simply make sure you set the focus on your subject. It is hard at night especially, however with a few tries you will learn to focus manually.

Once your comp and focus are set then worry about your settings. Expose is a triangle with ISO at one point, shutter on another, and aperture on the last. All = your proper exposure. There should be a meter in your view finder at the bottom and a line that will tell you if you are over or underexposing a shot based on your current settings. You will need to adjust your settings to get it lined up in the middle.

Start with your aperture, what aperture do you want for your shots? Usually I do f/8-f/11 for landscape at night.

Then set your iso and shutter.

Your ISO will probably have to be around 640-1600 depending on the light and your shutter from 10 seconds to 30 seconds based on those shots and being at a f/8-f/11 aperture.

Then take your pic!

Once you take a pic check and see what it looks like in your camera screen. if it is not bright enough or too dark adjust the iso or shutter to compensate. If it is out of focus adjust. Then take another pic and try again until you get what you want.

And yes, a non moving object would be best to use as a support for your camera during long exposure lol.


----------



## Simca

I think my shutter speed was like 1/8 or something? I'll try again tomorrow.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Simca*
> 
> I think my shutter speed was like 1/8 or something? I'll try again tomorrow.


For hand held shooting you want a shutter speed of at least the focal length of your lens. So say you are zoomed at 30mm you want a shutter of at least 1/30th to prevent motion blur. However, if your lens has stabilization you can go a few stops slower on the shutter.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> For hand held shooting you want a shutter speed of at least the focal length of your lens. *So say you are zoomed at 30mm you want a shutter of at least 1/30th to prevent motion blur.* However, if your lens has stabilization you can go a few stops slower on the shutter.


Cool, didn't know that.


----------



## Simca

OMG, I'm so dumb. Not really, but first time using camera. I just learned that there's two dials to turn. One focuses..the other zooms. I did NOT use the focus lens, I was only turning the ZOOM LENS LOL.

I'm so taking better pictures tomorrow.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> For hand held shooting you want a shutter speed of at least the focal length of your lens. *So say you are zoomed at 30mm you want a shutter of at least 1/30th to prevent motion blur.* However, if your lens has stabilization you can go a few stops slower on the shutter.
> 
> 
> 
> Cool, didn't know that.
Click to expand...











I usually stick to 2x the minimum at least when i have no lens stabilization.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Simca*
> 
> OMG, I'm so dumb. Not really, but first time using camera. I just learned that there's two dials to turn. One focuses..the other zooms. I did NOT use the focus lens, I was only turning the ZOOM LENS LOL.
> 
> I'm so taking better pictures tomorrow.


Hahaha! Well, that is what learning is all about. You should be getting the hang of it soon enough.


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Simca*
> 
> OMG, I'm so dumb. Not really, but first time using camera. I just learned that there's two dials to turn. One focuses..the other zooms. I did NOT use the focus lens, I was only turning the ZOOM LENS LOL.
> 
> I'm so taking better pictures tomorrow.


I had a feeling that was the case. lol

I would read up some articles about the basics of photography. Adorama has great ones. Some of the tips they gave while minor will make a major difference in the outcome of your photos.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

The stickies are also good reads.


----------



## Dream Killer

Amazing ishhhhh: http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap130130.html


----------



## Simca

My camera supports 2000, 2500, and 3200 ISO with ISO Boosts called H0.3, H0.7, and H1.0. There's also a camera setting that reduces high ISO noise and another that reduces noise from long exposures. I'll try both of these settings tomorrow night along with my new found skill of focusing. I hope these tactic churn out better results. May end up buying a wide angle lens as well.

Gonna try raising shutter speed to 1/30 and 1/60. See how that changes things..


----------



## Unknownm

Question about HDR shooting in Canon 6D. After I enable HDR with 3 ev, I still don't get that HDR look... what am I doing wrong


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Unknownm*
> 
> Question about HDR shooting in Canon 6D. After I enable HDR with 3 ev, I still don't get that HDR look... what am I doing wrong


do you have it set to shoot RAW / RAW+JPEG ? , set it to JPEG only and itll shoot HDR

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showpost.php?s=48d8f757a4cde420fa4634f1002a2546&p=15372986&postcount=7

sample photo ?


----------



## Unknownm

I have JEPG enabled only. I just don't see anything happening to the photos. I'll upload a few later


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Unknownm*
> 
> I have JEPG enabled only. I just don't see anything happening to the photos. I'll upload a few later


okay cool

(i sure hope youre not expecting them to be like those over processed looking photos)


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Simca*
> 
> My camera supports 2000, 2500, and 3200 ISO with ISO Boosts called H0.3, H0.7, and H1.0. There's also a camera setting that reduces high ISO noise and another that reduces noise from long exposures. I'll try both of these settings tomorrow night along with my new found skill of focusing. I hope these tactic churn out better results. May end up buying a wide angle lens as well.
> 
> Gonna try raising shutter speed to 1/30 and 1/60. See how that changes things..


For night shooting use a tripod or as Sean said a bench, trash can, whatever you can find. I have used a lot of things in my day as a makeshift tripod with good results. Use the timer if you don't have a remote to let the camera settle after you push the button. If you can use mirror lockup to provide further vibration prevention.

Set ISO to 100, no need to introduce unneeded noise.

Use AV mode and set aperture to between f/8 and f/10.

Let the camera figure shutter speed. Compose and focus.

For focusing let the camera do the work. If you want to manual focus use liveview and zoom way in on the screen, manual focus though the viewfinder is really hard in good light much less at night. I prefer to use liveview auto focus when shooting like this as its a bit more accurate, although slower.

From there review your shot afterwards. Check focus and exposure. I often take a shot and then will take a shot or two with brighter exposures. Often the meter doesn't get where I want and my post processing usually requires a brighter shot to start with.

You can also shoot in full manual if you have a solid understanding of the relationships of each setting. It is sometimes easier as I often am compensating for the cameras meter.


----------



## iPodge

Hello guys!

I currently work as a Digital Imaging promoter for Sony and after the training and what not really gained a strong like for Sony products in this field!

However after starting work its become clear to me that photography enthusiasts are not so keen at all (generally). I was just wondering what you guys thought about the current Alpha series with the translucent mirror technology and if you dislike it or like it possibly why. Or your general opinions on Sony imaging products

thanks


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Unknownm*
> 
> Question about HDR shooting in Canon 6D. After I enable HDR with 3 ev, I still don't get that HDR look... what am I doing wrong


That mode is more of an assistance in getting an HDR. What it probably does is take multiple photos in rapid succession with varying degrees of exposure. The resulting photos need to be merged in software.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *silvrr*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Simca*
> 
> My camera supports 2000, 2500, and 3200 ISO with ISO Boosts called H0.3, H0.7, and H1.0. There's also a camera setting that reduces high ISO noise and another that reduces noise from long exposures. I'll try both of these settings tomorrow night along with my new found skill of focusing. I hope these tactic churn out better results. May end up buying a wide angle lens as well.
> 
> Gonna try raising shutter speed to 1/30 and 1/60. See how that changes things..
> 
> 
> 
> For night shooting use a tripod or as Sean said a bench, trash can, whatever you can find. I have used a lot of things in my day as a makeshift tripod with good results. Use the timer if you don't have a remote to let the camera settle after you push the button. If you can use mirror lockup to provide further vibration prevention.
> *
> Set ISO to 100, no need to introduce unneeded noise.*
> 
> Use AV mode and set aperture to between f/8 and f/10.
> 
> Let the camera figure shutter speed. Compose and focus.
> 
> For focusing let the camera do the work. If you want to manual focus use liveview and zoom way in on the screen, manual focus though the viewfinder is really hard in good light much less at night. I prefer to use liveview auto focus when shooting like this as its a bit more accurate, although slower.
> 
> From there review your shot afterwards. Check focus and exposure. I often take a shot and then will take a shot or two with brighter exposures. Often the meter doesn't get where I want and my post processing usually requires a brighter shot to start with.
> 
> You can also shoot in full manual if you have a solid understanding of the relationships of each setting. It is sometimes easier as I often am compensating for the cameras meter.
Click to expand...

Just be aware that ISO 100 doesn't always mean base ISO. Some cameras will have a base ISO of 200 and label ISO 100 as "low". This is because it's uncalibrated to the actual ISO standard and is actually an attenuation of signal rather than the nominal level.


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> Just be aware that ISO 100 doesn't always mean base ISO. Some cameras will have a base ISO of 200 and label ISO 100 as "low". This is because it's uncalibrated to the actual ISO standard and is actually an attenuation of signal rather than the nominal level.


True, thanks. Im just used to Canons.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iPodge*
> 
> Hello guys!
> 
> I currently work as a Digital Imaging promoter for Sony and after the training and what not really gained a strong like for Sony products in this field!
> 
> However after starting work its become clear to me that photography enthusiasts are not so keen at all (generally). I was just wondering what you guys thought about the current Alpha series with the translucent mirror technology and if you dislike it or like it possibly why. Or your general opinions on Sony imaging products
> 
> thanks


The perception that photogs don't like Sony DLSR's is because Canikon dominates the market. Sony is a newcomer to DSLR's, and although their initial line had their flaws (small lens selection, ISO noise problems), they've carved a shar of the market out for themselves. Their current lineup is pretty good, and more and more Alpha lenses are being released (not to mention all the old Minolta lenses out there).


----------



## Marin

Sony should release a MF camera.


----------



## dmanstasiu

I still have a lot of research to do, but I was wondering if you guys could throw up a few names of good starter DSLRs? I'm looking at a budget of about $300 with body and starter lense (used)

So far my beginner path is going down the D80 / D3100 route


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iPodge*
> 
> Hello guys!
> 
> I currently work as a Digital Imaging promoter for Sony and after the training and what not really gained a strong like for Sony products in this field!
> 
> However after starting work its become clear to me that photography enthusiasts are not so keen at all (generally). I was just wondering what you guys thought about the current Alpha series with the translucent mirror technology and if you dislike it or like it possibly why. Or your general opinions on Sony imaging products
> 
> thanks


bodies:
i like EVF its different and it has its advantages.....
BUT i like my OVF even more because i lose 1/3 of a stop to the damn hot mirror, wish you guys would implement some kind of lock up for the translucent mirror so i dont have to always shoot through it. if you guys do mirror lockup on SLT, im sold on it....

Why are the AF points so close together on the a99, it looks like the same pattern as the one on the a77 which is perfect on aps-c but way way too narrow on fullframe.

lens
a good cheap fullframe wide zoom (like teh 17-40L or 18-35 nikon)
primes that arent rebranded minoltas from the 80s (20/2.8, 35/1.4, 50/1.4,etc)
a tilt shift?

how about releasing the SDK so we can tether from lightroom natively instead of using a hacked usb controller from a 3rd party (3rd party to adobe).


----------



## iPodge

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*
> 
> The perception that photogs don't like Sony DLSR's is because Canikon dominates the market. Sony is a newcomer to DSLR's, and although their initial line had their flaws (small lens selection, ISO noise problems), they've carved a shar of the market out for themselves. Their current lineup is pretty good, and more and more Alpha lenses are being released (not to mention all the old Minolta lenses out there).


Well yea I agree I think it is exactly that. Normally the people I speak to know a lot from research about Canikon as they are the beasts of the market, but never thought to and/or stumbled across the Sony products. I for one love the feel of the SLT's after using them more and like you say with the Minolta lenses being a winner. (and have recently rocketed back up in price!)

And as for a compact system its my honest opinion that the NEX range DESTROY anything in the category!


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Thoughts?

I kinda need a telephoto lens for the long range shot which I would have like to have taken, but did not have the lens.

Either that or Canon's 50mm 1.8, both of which would be nice.

Can't afford to spend much more.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> Thoughts?


KILL IT WITH FIRE!


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> Thoughts?
> 
> I kinda need a telephoto lens for the long range shot which I would have like to have taken, but did not have the lens.
> 
> Either that or Canon's 50mm 1.8, both of which would be nice.
> 
> Can't afford to spend much more.


It needs to be said three times. KILL IT WITH FIRE.

Save about $40 more and you can get a 55-250mm. It will be much better than that 75-300.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

That bad huh?


----------



## MistaBernie

Yup, that bad.


----------



## Simca

Not gonna' lie, I spent like 3 minutes outside because it was freezing especially with the wind chill factor. I used 800 ISO. Turned on High ISO NR and other NR settings. Really would need a tripod to take better pictures. Holding the camera steady is difficult.

By the way, is there anyway to make the shutter speed very fast for inside shots? Like force fast shutter speed option? I have being inside where I can control the light and yet the camera still takes a long time with shutter speed.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Simca*
> 
> Not gonna' lie, I spent like 3 minutes outside because it was freezing especially with the wind chill factor. I used 800 ISO. Turned on High ISO NR and other NR settings. Really would need a tripod to take better pictures. Holding the camera steady is difficult.


Getting better!

I leave high ISO NR disabled and long exposure noise reduction disabled. And then apply noise reduction during post processing. I think I read they can actually make noise worse for long exposures. I don't know if it makes a difference for RAW or jpeg images only.
Quote:


> By the way, is there anyway to make the shutter speed very fast for inside shots? Like force fast shutter speed option? I have being inside where I can control the light and yet the camera still takes a long time with shutter speed.


Shoot manual.









Or shutter priority mode, which is "S" mode. Manual is better!


----------



## Simca

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Shoot manual.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Or shutter priority mode, which is "S" mode. Manual is better!


Priority is cool and all, but I already feel restricted by it and am considering jumping immediately to manual and learning to use the camera completely on my own and control everything I want with it. Seems the better way to shoot?


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Simca*
> 
> Priority is cool and all, but I already feel restricted by it and am considering jumping immediately to manual and learning to use the camera completely on my own and control everything I want with it. Seems the better way to shoot?


It is for the most part. The only time I use a priority, shutter priority for me, is when I'm doing panning shots. Helps keep my shutter speed where I want it and keep things exposed properly if lighting conditions change.


----------



## Simca

Gonna' talk with my friend Matt over the weekend. He owns a Canon D600. He's gonna help teach me more about my camera, the settings, what lens' I should look into etc. Once I've fully learned this camera I'll look into upgrading cameras. I wanted the D90 originally, but this worked out better for me for now..especially as a starter camera.


----------



## Sean Webster

So...I just cleaned my sensor with a sensor swab for the first time...

It worked wonderfully! And it actually fixed a dark corner issue with my sensor as well. I'm happy.









Rocket blower sucks bad in comparison lol.


----------



## Marin

I just hold my camera under the sink.


----------



## scottath

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> So...I just cleaned my sensor with a sensor swab for the first time...
> 
> It worked wonderfully! And it actually fixed a dark corner issue with my sensor as well. I'm happy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rocket blower sucks bad in comparison lol.


He was wetting himself beforehand....he said so on FB


----------



## MistaBernie

The various priorities definitely have their uses. If you have plenty of light and you want a certain aperture/look, it's easier to shoot in Aperture Priority for example. It's not always possible (sometimes priority tries to lower, or in some cases, raise) but it can be useful.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scottath*
> 
> He was wetting himself beforehand....he said so on FB


Sssh, you weren't supposed to tell anyone!


----------



## scottath

hehehe.
Well i think im about to pull the trigger on a RSS 192 FAS Package and PCL-1 panning clamp.
Another expensive day :/
At least i found the L-bracket on ebay a touch cheaper.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scottath*
> 
> hehehe.
> Well i think im about to pull the trigger on a RSS 192 FAS Package and PCL-1 panning clamp.
> Another expensive day :/
> At least i found the L-bracket on ebay a touch cheaper.


nice

quick heads up on the arca swiss FAS clamp, if you have different plates from different manufacturers you MIGHT need to readjust the clamp for each of your plates which gets annoying.


----------



## Simca

Already looking to sell Nikon D80 and move to the Nikon d5100.

I don't seem to use the auto focus on my D80...think I'll miss it on the d5100 that doesn't have the auto focus motor?


----------



## Chunky_Chimp

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Simca*
> 
> Already looking to sell Nikon D80 and move to the Nikon d5100.
> 
> I don't seem to use the auto focus on my D80...think I'll miss it on the d5100 that doesn't have the auto focus motor?


Most lenses people use with the D5100 have their own AF motors, though you need AF-I or AF-S lenses for those to actually work for autofocus (manual is fine, though). If you can save up for a D7000 instead, try that. It has a focus motor AND an aperture ring feeler (your D80 doesn't have the latter), so you get compatibility with full functionality with a whole ton of older manual focus lenses, too, if you become interested in those. If you'd rather stick to modern lenses and keep it simple then the D5100 will suit you fine.


----------



## kzone75




----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Simca*
> 
> Already looking to sell Nikon D80 and move to the Nikon d5100.
> 
> I don't seem to use the auto focus on my D80...think I'll miss it on the d5100 that doesn't have the auto focus motor?


I would stick with the D80 for a bit. I think you have had it less than a week and you don't even have the basics down. After shooting for a bit you will find what you like and dislike about a camera. With that you can make a more informed decision.

I look back to when I had my XTi and if you gave me the gear I have now I still would have taken ****ty pictures. Learning about settings and light will take you much farther than any equipment.

That being said, I have had a lot of gear in my day. Buy used and be smart on pricing and it isn't to expensive to change things up now and then.


----------



## Simca

Well, if I sell the D80 for the price I'm aiming, the upgrade to the d5100 will be at 100 dollar cost to me which IMO for a better camera better sensor is worth it. Not so much that I'm "disappointed" with the d80..just..if it's not too much more expensive for a better camera why not?

Not interested in the d7k tbh. Same sensor as the d5100, why pay more for a built in AF motor? IDK..I think I'm sitll interested in upgrading to d5100 despite everyone's advise that I should continue to get the basics down with the d80. I'm not disappointed with the d80, don't get me wrong..I'm not upgrading because "this camera sucks", but rather because it's cheap to upgrade and will last me longer.

Thinking about heading out and snapping some pictures now that I have time to do so in the day, but it's still freezing outside.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Have you looked into the d3200, Simca?


----------



## Simca

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> Have you looked into the d3200, Simca?


Yeah, the d5100 is still better, especially for me. d5100 works in low light situations better, more advanced, and a lot cheaper than the d3200 in the used market.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Simca*
> 
> Not interested in the d7k tbh. Same sensor as the d5100, why pay more for a built in AF motor?


The D7000 offers a _lot_ more than simply an AF motor.


----------



## Simca

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Simca*
> 
> Not interested in the d7k tbh. Same sensor as the d5100, why pay more for a built in AF motor?
> 
> 
> 
> The D7000 offers a _lot_ more than simply an AF motor.
Click to expand...

Well, I would hope so.

Already bought the d5100 for $400 with lens. Going to pick it up now.


----------



## dmanstasiu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Simca*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Simca*
> 
> Not interested in the d7k tbh. Same sensor as the d5100, why pay more for a built in AF motor?
> 
> 
> 
> The D7000 offers a _lot_ more than simply an AF motor.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well, I would hope so.
> 
> Already bought the d5100 for $400 with lens. Going to pick it up now.
Click to expand...

You're so stubborn









Have you found a buyer for the D80?


----------



## Chunky_Chimp

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Simca*
> 
> Well, I would hope so.
> 
> Already bought the d5100 for $400 with lens. Going to pick it up now.


Is the lens the 18-55 kit unit or did you find a used/cheap prime?


----------



## Simca

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chunky_Chimp*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Simca*
> 
> Well, I would hope so.
> 
> Already bought the d5100 for $400 with lens. Going to pick it up now.
> 
> 
> 
> Is the lens the 18-55 kit unit or did you find a used/cheap prime?
Click to expand...

It's the 18-55mm lens kit with auto-focus.

This d5100 is a few months old. Has warranty with it, the box, all accessories, charger, strap everything. My D80 came with camera, lens, battery. Nothing else. Not even charger. Had to buy my own.

Haven't found a buyer yet, but the price was too good on this to pass up now.

He also happened to be a very famous head-fi reviewer and that in and of itself was a great honor and privilege as he's offered to let me come over and audition his gear any time.


----------



## zoidbergslo

Good price. But just wait till you hold D5100 in your hands you will be disappointed on ergonomics at least I was.


----------



## Simca

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *zoidbergslo*
> 
> Good price. But just wait till you hold D5100 in your hands you will be disappointed on ergonomics at least I was.


I'm already holding it and IMO, if I had used the D80 longer, I would have really disliked holding the D5100. I only had the D80 for a week and it definitely goes in the hand better, but for all the benefits of the d5100 over the D80, I think I can handle it.

That was literally a like-new d5100. Has everything including dust caps.


----------



## Unknownm

My first Fisheye lens!!! VERY sharp at f/8 ZOMG


----------



## funfortehfun

Cool lens









What are fisheyes used for?


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Unknownm*
> 
> My first Fisheye lens!!! VERY sharp at f/8 ZOMG


i would be worried if a lens wasnt sharp at f8 lol


----------



## Unknownm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> i would be worried if a lens wasnt sharp at f8 lol


Oh you mean Pentax? lulz
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *funfortehfun*
> 
> Cool lens
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What are fisheyes used for?


Just for forking around. I doubt i could paid to shoot with this lens but who knows. Makes my 6D more enjoyable though


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Unknownm*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> i would be worried if a lens wasnt sharp at f8 lol
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh you mean Pentax? lulz
Click to expand...

? you obviously have never used pentax before


----------



## Simca

Oh, you had a 6D, I thought you had a 600D.


----------



## Unknownm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> ? you obviously have never used pentax before


just the crappy lens








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Simca*
> 
> Oh, you had a 6D, I thought you had a 600D.


----------



## Simca

You need to use adblock, lol. I can see the ads in Tinychat on your screen.


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Simca*
> 
> I'm already holding it and IMO, if I had used the D80 longer, I would have really disliked holding the D5100. I only had the D80 for a week and it definitely goes in the hand better, but for all the benefits of the d5100 over the D80, I think I can handle it.


oh well.. congratulations with the new camera








if you find yourself wanting more grip .. i suppose you could get a 3rd party battery grip for it








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Unknownm*
> 
> My first Fisheye lens!!! VERY sharp at f/8 ZOMG
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [s/poiler]


samyang/rokinon 8mm?

i sooooo want one of those :/


----------



## Unknownm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boogschd*
> 
> oh well.. congratulations with the new camera
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> if you find yourself wanting more grip .. i suppose you could get a 3rd party battery grip for it
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> samyang/rokinon 8mm?
> 
> i sooooo want one of those :/


it's Canon EF 15mm f2.8

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-15mm-f-2.8-Fisheye-Lens-Review.aspx


----------



## Simca

Off the bat, I'm noticing with this viewfinder that I can't get as clear of an image as I could on my D80. Anyone have any comments on this?

I read the D80 has .95x magnification and the d5100 has .75x (one of the smallest they've made) magnification. Think that's the reason?

Possibly the Penta-Prism vs Penta-Mirror as well.


----------



## Azefore

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Simca*
> 
> Off the bat, I'm noticing with this viewfinder/lens that I can't get as clear of an image as I could on my D80. Anyone have any comments on this?


Have you played with the built in diopter to adjust it to your eyes?


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Simca*
> 
> Off the bat, I'm noticing with this viewfinder that I can't get as clear of an image as I could on my D80. Anyone have any comments on this?
> 
> I read the D80 has .95x magnification and the d5100 has .75x (one of the smallest they've made) magnification. Think that's the reason?
> 
> Possibly the Penta-Prism vs Penta-Mirror as well.


Pentaprisms are much brighter and at .95x it makes things larger.

So yeah there is a slight difference.


----------



## Chunky_Chimp

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Simca*
> 
> I'm already holding it and IMO, if I had used the D80 longer, I would have really disliked holding the D5100. I only had the D80 for a week and it definitely goes in the hand better, but for all the benefits of the d5100 over the D80, I think I can handle it.


Yeah, the D5100 looked bigger in photos, then when I got mine I wondered if it's for people with hands about a third as big as mine. If I hold it by the grip in a way that's comfortable, my thumb goes far enough across the back to cover the Nikon logo on the back of the screen, and then a bit past that. If I try to angle my hand so I'm gripping properly and putting my thumb on the rear grip pad (which isn't nearly big enough IMO) then my hand cramps. I've never had my hands cramp for any reason before, yet it'll do that under those circumstances. Makes me wish Nikon (and other camera makers) would do a version of their popular cameras where the grips are the size of soda cans, and group most of the buttons up top for single-hand operation of any function, sparing standard controls for the back for the same reason. Could fit huge batteries in there, too, if they did that.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

It isn't that much smaller than the t2i. If my hands can fit comfortably on a t2i, the majority of people should have no problems with a d5100.


----------



## Simca

Size wise, I don't mind it. I have small hands anyway.

OMG, THERE'S THIS LITTLE CIRCLE THINGY NEAR THE VIEWFINDER WHERE IF I PUSH IT ALL THE WAY TO THE LEFT EVERYTHING IS CRYSTAL CLEAR.

I am happy with this camera completely now.


----------



## dudemanppl

I am fred to the ultimate.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Simca*
> 
> Size wise, I don't mind it. I have small hands anyway.
> 
> OMG, THERE'S THIS LITTLE CIRCLE THINGY NEAR THE VIEWFINDER WHERE IF I PUSH IT ALL THE WAY TO THE LEFT EVERYTHING IS CRYSTAL CLEAR.
> 
> I am happy with this camera completely now.


Diopter.


----------



## Simca

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Simca*
> 
> Size wise, I don't mind it. I have small hands anyway.
> 
> OMG, THERE'S THIS LITTLE CIRCLE THINGY NEAR THE VIEWFINDER WHERE IF I PUSH IT ALL THE WAY TO THE LEFT EVERYTHING IS CRYSTAL CLEAR.
> 
> I am happy with this camera completely now.
> 
> 
> 
> Diopter.
Click to expand...

CIRCLE THINGY >:O


----------



## funfortehfun

I was messing around with color settings. Here's what I got:



D90, AF-D micro-Nikkor 60mm f/2.8, Vivid, Saturation +2

How do I get rid of those white reflections on the matryoshka dolls?


----------



## Simca

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *funfortehfun*
> 
> I was messing around with color settings. Here's what I got:
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/content/type/61/id/1270722/
> D90, AF-D micro-Nikkor 60mm f/2.8, Vivid, Saturation +2
> 
> How do I get rid of those white reflections on the matryoshka dolls?


By not being near a window.


----------



## funfortehfun

Well then...it gets all dark D:

Dem matryoshka dolls are super-reflective in the first place.


----------



## laboitenoire

You could try a more diffuse light (softbox, or even just by covering the windows with wax paper or something similar), or if that's not an option then give a polarizing filter a try. It should cut out most if not all of the reflection.


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Simca*
> 
> Size wise, I don't mind it. I have small hands anyway.
> 
> OMG, THERE'S THIS LITTLE CIRCLE THINGY NEAR THE VIEWFINDER WHERE IF I PUSH IT ALL THE WAY TO THE LEFT EVERYTHING IS CRYSTAL CLEAR.
> 
> I am happy with this camera completely now.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Azefore*
> 
> Have you played with the built in diopter to adjust it to your eyes?


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> Diopter.


Simca you should really read the manual.


----------



## Conspiracy

debating on getting a YN-560II to play around with since i dont own a speed light. are there any other cheap 3rd party speedlights or is yongnuo the only one worth going with? i havent found any other brands with lots of hype online. dont want to buy canon flashes because im shooting for fun and wont use even half the features lol. just need a device that emits an adjustable flash of light that also has pc sync port for goofing around with off camera flash. im not interested in spending extra money on wireless triggers. i have a masters degree in macgyver light modification so wont be purchasing any speedlight accessories


----------



## ikem

well yongnuos are great, i just grabed a sb-700 and thinking of getting a yongnuo as a second. Played around with a friends and the build quality and features greatly succeed the price.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ikem*
> 
> well yongnuos are great, i just grabed a sb-700 and thinking of getting a yongnuo as a second. Played around with a friends and the build quality and features greatly succeed the price.


thats what i have been reading from tons of people saying that they are very surprised by the quality. not like i abuse my gear a ton but some stuff is fragile enough just to get damaged sitting in a bad sometimes haha


----------



## Simca

All right, all right, I'll read the manual!


----------



## Azefore

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Simca*
> 
> Size wise, I don't mind it. I have small hands anyway.
> 
> OMG, THERE'S THIS LITTLE CIRCLE THINGY NEAR THE VIEWFINDER WHERE IF I PUSH IT ALL THE WAY TO THE LEFT EVERYTHING IS CRYSTAL CLEAR.
> 
> I am happy with this camera completely now.


Diopter like I said lol
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> thats what i have been reading from tons of people saying that they are very surprised by the quality. not like i abuse my gear a ton but some stuff is fragile enough just to get damaged sitting in a bad sometimes haha


Believe I have the YN560 Ver.I, I don't use a strobe a lot but when I do the 560 hasn't given me any result I'm not satisfied with. Build quality wise it's beefy and battery time with standard AAs isn't half bad either.


----------



## aksthem1

Yongnuo makes some cheap and good flashes. There is Neewer, Nissin, Metz and Sigma which are cheaper than Canon's gear. But Yongnuo is still bang for the buck flash.


----------



## Conspiracy

yea im just trying to find a reliable place to order from thats in the US that takes paypal so i dont have to wait like 3 weeks to get it lol.

im going to go with the yn-560ii


----------



## laboitenoire

Some of the cheap Bower units aren't too bad, either. I've got one and it's worked well for the couple years I've had it.

Of course you can always go classic and get a Vivitar 285HV...


----------



## Azefore

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> yea im just trying to find a reliable place to order from thats in the US that takes paypal so i dont have to wait like 3 weeks to get it lol.


Could get paypal debit card and use amazon that way or go with a pretty decent ebay seller


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Azefore*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> yea im just trying to find a reliable place to order from thats in the US that takes paypal so i dont have to wait like 3 weeks to get it lol.
> 
> 
> 
> Could get paypal debit card and use amazon that way or go with a pretty decent ebay seller
Click to expand...

went ahead and did amazon from a fulfilled seller, i think thats what its called, either way just put it on my card. figured amazon would be easier in the rare event i get a dud. doubtful it will happen


----------



## Azefore

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> went ahead and did amazon from a fulfilled seller, i think thats what its called, either way just put it on my card. figured amazon would be easier in the rare event i get a dud. doubtful it will happen


Yah you'll be all set with amazon verified sellers, haven't had a problem in the nearing hundreds of purchases through their site.


----------



## Conspiracy

yea and i signed up for a free month of prime. and marked my calendar to cancel it haha. got one day shipping for $3.99.


----------



## dmanstasiu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> yea and i signed up for a free month of prime. and marked my calendar to cancel it haha. got one day shipping for $3.99.


You can change the auto-upgrade in your settings


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dmanstasiu*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> yea and i signed up for a free month of prime. and marked my calendar to cancel it haha. got one day shipping for $3.99.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You can change the auto-upgrade in your settings
Click to expand...

Thanks ill do that now actually


----------



## Marin

Getting this tomorrow. Ball heads are such garbage.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/124665-REG/Manfrotto_410_410_Junior_Geared_Head.html


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> Getting this tomorrow. Ball heads are such garbage.
> 
> http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/124665-REG/Manfrotto_410_410_Junior_Geared_Head.html


haha nice. i used an old geared head tripod at work the other day because the teleprompter on the fluid head broke so we had to use the 10billion ton backup tripod that has a geared head and CRT teleprompter haha


----------



## funfortehfun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> Getting this tomorrow. Ball heads are such garbage.
> 
> http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/124665-REG/Manfrotto_410_410_Junior_Geared_Head.html


Man, if I could only confidently say, "Oh, I'm just getting this tomorrow. No big deal, just a $___ thing." XD


----------



## Dream Killer

GoPro just released their new 4k helmet cam:


----------



## Unknownm

Working hard in the kitchen LOL. With two of my good mates (angelo / Spencer)


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> GoPro just released their new 4k helmet cam:


now they have made it too small. that thing is going to be soo easy to lose


----------



## MistaBernie

Nevermind, wrong forum...

Also, I really need to get out and shoot some more...

Also... did anyone else know this? If you print out a page from K e n R o c k w e l l 's page and use it for reference for some reason you're supposed to pay a 'usage fee' of $5 (one-time personal rights granting). I could be wrong, but if it's on the internet and it's publicly available (i.e. no membership/protection, etc) and you're using it for reference (i.e. bringing a spec sheet / review he wrote with you to look at gear), do you actually _have to_ pay for personal usage?


----------



## laboitenoire

I've barely shot so far this year... In fact I think I've only shot my one roll of film for class so far and that's it.


----------



## scottath

Hey guys that do panos often:
http://www.overclock.net/t/1357315/new-lens-toying-zeiss-50mm-f2-makro-landscapes/0_50
Some advice would be awesome


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scottath*
> 
> Hey guys that do panos often:
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1357315/new-lens-toying-zeiss-50mm-f2-makro-landscapes/0_50
> Some advice would be awesome


complete garbage. you should just give me that lens haha









on a serious note those are awesome!









really like this one http://www.flickr.com/photos/scottath/8433718671/


----------



## scottath

hmm, people keep saying they are awesome, yet i know the setup should be able to do better.....
Friend of mine - does very similar (minimal) editing to me - D800 + same lens + lee filters:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/damo89/

Im just going to play with some other filters i think, maybe its just the singh-ray, its been fogging up the last few outings, i clean it before each pano though so shouldnt be an issue......sigh


----------



## silvrr

Try adjusting your exposure to the right a bit with each shot and when combined adjust the colors individually lighter/darker to get the look you want. Not sure if you have lightroom but I find it an amazing tool for this.

For example this pano I bumped the blues a bit and then brought the yellows down alot. The blues helped but the yellow adjustment made it really pop.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/adammrugacz/8072798285/
Northside Skyline Pano {EXPLORED} by ArMPhotography, on Flickr


----------



## sub50hz

Blasted a few old shots I've been holding out on for a long time onto my flickr yesterday. Link in sig if anybody wants to peep em.


----------



## xxrabid93

Hey guys, haven't been here in a while. Awesome stuff you guys have posted recently that i've surfed through.









So i'm looking to scan my negatives and slides, 35mm and MF. I remember a while back in here yall were talking about the Epson v500. It's been a while so i'd thought i'd ask, is there anything better that has come out for around that price? The v500 is on Amazon for like $150.


----------



## sub50hz

I like my v500 for web posts, but prints deserve drum scans. It's also very mediocre for 35mm, but I got mine for 75 bucks open box at TigerDirect, so I don't have any room to complain.


----------



## Conspiracy

yea v500 is good to see what you have. any shot i have that i know i want printed i would have scanned in something better to print. it scans MF much better than 35mm just because of size. but im pretty happy with the results i get

i got my V500 on epson's website for $99 refurb.

also got my yongnuo speedlight tonight. pretty fun to play with. have a friend that enjoys having her picture taken so maybe ill test it out with her before i go off to shoot whatever i find that needs some more light


----------



## Marin

Rebuilding my work from the ground up, which is why my sites so barren. Rofl. Was shooting some 4x5 portraits on the street today to see if my new personal project is viable. So far it is.



Also got my new legs today. I love KEH, EX condition means a slight scuff on the label. Otherwise it looks brand new. Half price Gitzo w/ CF legs!


----------



## Unknownm

I wanna take night shots with long exposure. example would be a street/sky with light trails from cars/stars. Obviously the light meter in my Canon 6D is not going to tell me how to get that perfect long exposure, my question what guide lines should I follow and tips (shutter/iso/f-stop/camera settings/etc)

Shooting with Canon 6D w/ Canon ef 15mm 2.8 (fisheye) & Canon EF 40mm 2.8 stm. I own a cheap tripod & 6D comes with WiFi control (which I use on my Android phone) so no need for external shutter button ...

Thanks


----------



## scottath

Push your iso - alot. Get your shot right, then drop iso and shutter speed accordingly.
EG - iso12800 for 6 seconds is the right exposure, is the same as iso100 for 6 minutes.
Thats how i work with my 10 stop ND filter often.


----------



## boogschd

what i would do:

make sure its leveled, and secure (if its a "cheap" tripod .. you may want to double check this)
set your focus to infinity then put it on manual focus,
lowest iso you can set it to ,
mirror lock up?
set your aperture to f/8-f/16
shutter will depend on how much light there is in the scene , or would depend on your taste


----------



## MistaBernie

Ugh, this is such good news. 'may take slightly longer'? Try almost a full second, if not more, before focus even appears to be attempted. Hopefully this is well ahead of the April firmware that's already planned.

http://www.canonrumors.com/2013/02/canon-to-update-firmware-for-5d-mk-iii-and-1d-x-af-with-speedlight-assist-lamp/


----------



## sub50hz

x100 arrived today. Thanks, tax rebate!


----------



## MistaBernie

Nice. I almost just traded for one on POTN. After setting up the deal and him saying he'd wait for photos of my 17-40L tonite, he messages me back saying 'sorry, just sold the lens'. Not too happy.


----------



## sub50hz

It's part of my quest to have a really versatile, lightweight travel setup. I'm taking 2 weeks in April to go to Moab/Badlands/Vancouver, so I don't want to lug a ton of gear.


----------



## MistaBernie

Don't you already have an X10? Why do you need both, out of curiosity?


----------



## sub50hz

x10 is a tiny sensor compact zoom that's fun for parties and dicking around. I'm selling it, most likely -- but it's a great camera, so maybe I wont.


----------



## Marin

So if anyone's looking at tripods save yourself the pain and just get a Gitzo.


----------



## sub50hz

I would, but I hardly use one these days -- only when I take the RB out, which is becoming a hindrance for anything but studio work. I'm pleased with 645 nine times out of ten, so I think I'll be selling this behemoth. Shame about its beastliness, because it is such a good camera to work with.


----------



## dmanstasiu

Come say hi when you're in Vancouver


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> So if anyone's looking at tripods save yourself the pain and just get a Gitzo.


I have had a Manfrotto setup that I was quite pleased with and currently have a Benro travel angel that is great for my setup. Given the price of Gitzo's stuff I think it would have to do something far beyond what the two tripods I have already owned to make it worth the money.

That being said I received a cheap tripod as a gift once and despised the thing. I would have to imagine there is a diminishing return on tripods, once you get a reasonably stable one that you don't mind lugging about I fail to see what the $1000 setups offer.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *silvrr*
> 
> I have had a Manfrotto setup that I was quite pleased with and currently have a Benro travel angel that is great for my setup. Given the price of Gitzo's stuff I think it would have to do something far beyond what the two tripods I have already owned to make it worth the money.
> 
> That being said I received a cheap tripod as a gift once and despised the thing. I would have to imagine there is a diminishing return on tripods, once you get a reasonably stable one that you don't mind lugging about I fail to see what the $1000 setups offer.


It's not the features, it's how long they last. Manfrottos are built well thus the reason why I got the geared head from them, just their plates suck. Benro's terrible. I've seen a bunch of them break over time and my Travel Angel bit the dust. The ballheads beyond broken and same with the legs (messed up center column).


----------



## MistaBernie

Yeah, I'll admit, the Manfrotto Ballhead I have, the plate-holder comes loose and I have to tighten it every couple of months. That's kind of annoying. Otherwise, no complaints though.


----------



## Simca

My aperture was too high f/5.6 when I was taking those pictures. Should have used a lower aperture, probably led to some fuzziness. Will keep that in mind for my shots.

Half way through manual, learning some things.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Aperture my it's self doesn't lead to fuzziness or grain. However, to compensate the ISO had to be raised.


----------



## Simca

But if you have a higher aperture, it keeps the object focused clear while it blurs the background/non-focused target out, doesn't it?


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Simca*
> 
> But if you have a higher aperture, it keeps the object focused clear while it blurs the background/non-focused target out, doesn't it?


Lower. The background being blurred is refereed to as bokeh. For example with a F/1.2 lens the background will be very blurry, but at F/8 it will be much more in focus.


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> Lower. The background being blurred is refereed to as bokeh. For example with a F/1.2 lens the background will be very blurry, but at F/8 it will be much more in focus.


While bokeh is the blurred background it's not just that. A blurred background is just referred to as depth of field. Bokeh is more of the aesthetic quality of the blur.

But yeah the lower the f-stop the more blur you will have in your background and also more light being let in. There is also less area that will be in focus though.

Focal length plays a part too. For example at 85mm at F8 you will have more blur than at 17mm at f2.8. How close you are to your subject has a role as well. Since the background will be farther away.

Wider lenses will have more of the foreground in focus.


----------



## MistaBernie

I have a timelapse going in the bedroom capturing the blizzard... I'm thinking a frame every 30 seconds should make for interesting video for as long as the batteries last. Not shooting Raw so I should get like ~3700 images on the card.. I'm just wondering if this will be A) too much, B) too little, or C) ??? in terms of number of images, etc..


----------



## Azefore

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> I have a timelapse going in the bedroom capturing the blizzard... I'm thinking a frame every 30 seconds should make for interesting video for as long as the batteries last. Not shooting Raw so I should get like ~3700 images on the card.. I'm just wondering if this will be A) too much, B) too little, or C) ??? in terms of number of images, etc..


I needed like 83 images to make a smooth 4.5 second time lapse video of clouds/dusk on the ocean front so 3700 should be a nice length when finished (2-3 minutes)


----------



## MistaBernie

well.. every 30 seconds, even if shot for 12 hours, is only.. 1440 images. At a playback of 24 frames per second, it's a minute. I can probably get away with 12-15 frames per second though... I hate to ramp it up now though (I've made that mistake before, I hate the inconsistency). One thing I could do is change my perspective though, that might make it interesting (and possible to change the rate without much noticeable difference). Hm.


----------



## dmanstasiu

Get a 20ft USB cable and save directly to your computer? Idk if that's possible but it would be damn helpful


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dmanstasiu*
> 
> Get a 20ft USB cable and save directly to your computer? Idk if that's possible but it would be damn helpful


You mean tethering?


----------



## dmanstasiu

Yes. That. There isn't a way to do it for free?


----------



## nvidiaftw12

It seems to me like there should be a special card, which is really just an adapter and adapts straight to usb.

Also, on linux it seems you can shoot and access the card while plugged in on canon. Doesn't work on windows. I wonder if that would make it possible.


----------



## dmanstasiu

That's what I was thinking.

Worst case, VM + Ubuntu


----------



## Marin

Or just use Capture One since that's what all the studio shooters use in the industry.


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dmanstasiu*
> 
> Yes. That. There isn't a way to do it for free?


For Canon shooters EOS utility has a timer function and allows the files to be saved to any location on the local machine.

http://cpn.canon-europe.com/content/product/canon_software/eos_utility.do (See page 3)


----------



## MistaBernie

Oh i wasn't worried about running out of card space, I have ~10 16gb cards and at 30 seconds between frames it's relatively easy to time a swap if necessary. The issue was the variables.. like.. snow getting stuck on the window.

Or my lovely wife turning on the hallway light and creating a beautiful reflection in the middle of my last 80 or so shots. (In fairness my only request was not to turn on the light in the bedroom..).

Regardless... I have something to start with.. it's still a 50 second video at 15 fps..

Not terrible, but not quite what I was hoping for, I guess.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hz23tBrTvUA


----------



## Sean Webster

any suggestions on software to put together a timelapse? I just took 400 images and want to turn it to video now. I haven't looked into it much yet.

I have adobe master collection so if photoshop or adobe premeire pro or after affects can do this or you have any experience let me know.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Oh i wasn't worried about running out of card space, I have ~10 16gb cards and at 30 seconds between frames it's relatively easy to time a swap if necessary. The issue was the variables.. like.. snow getting stuck on the window.
> 
> Or my lovely wife turning on the hallway light and creating a beautiful reflection in the middle of my last 80 or so shots. (In fairness my only request was not to turn on the light in the bedroom..).
> 
> Regardless... I have something to start with.. it's still a 50 second video at 15 fps..
> 
> Not terrible, but not quite what I was hoping for, I guess.
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hz23tBrTvUA


should have made it 16x9!


----------



## nvidiaftw12

You could probably lower the frame rate and still have it look good. I found some went a bit fast.


----------



## Azefore

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> any suggestions on software to put together a timelapse? I just took 400 images and want to turn it to video now. I haven't looked into it much yet.
> 
> I have adobe master collection so if photoshop or adobe premeire pro or after affects can do this or you have any experience let me know.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> should have made it 16x9!


Using Premiere Pro, put all images in a folder and numbered sequentially. After opening up a new project with whatever your settings are go to File->Import->Click on first image in folder one time->Click right above file name "image sequence"->Shift and click all the images in explorer window->Click Open->Now have a default speed clip of your images, adjust speed/duration as desired.

For aspect ratio I'd mass crop the images in lightroom for ease if not just scale the clip accordingly once it's made by premiere


----------



## sub50hz

Had a good first day with the x100.


Untitled by sub50hz, on Flickr

Few more up on flickr, check sig, etc.


----------



## raptorxrx

For the headphones and speakers, there is a thread for the most recommended audio products. Is there anything like that for camera equipment?


----------



## dudemanppl

Just make a new thread, there are not nearly as many people looking for camera advice on OCN. You''ll be sure to have almost too many responses.


----------



## Simca

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *raptorxrx*
> 
> For the headphones and speakers, there is a thread for the most recommended audio products. Is there anything like that for camera equipment?


Don't worry, when I become a pro, I'll create one for photography too.

LOL.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *raptorxrx*
> 
> For the headphones and speakers, there is a thread for the most recommended audio products. Is there anything like that for camera equipment?


Photographic equipment is not as easy to recommend as audio equipment, because there are varying degrees of skill, style and tons of other things that are hard to quantify. If you need a question answered, one of the more experienced posters in this thread can help you.


----------



## Simca

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *raptorxrx*
> 
> For the headphones and speakers, there is a thread for the most recommended audio products. Is there anything like that for camera equipment?
> 
> 
> 
> Photographic equipment is not as easy to recommend as audio equipment, because there are varying degrees of skill, style and tons of other things that are hard to quantify. If you need a question answered, one of the more experienced posters in this thread can help you.
Click to expand...

Well, that's not a great reason as there's varying degrees of quality, use, equipment and audio perception skill.


----------



## sub50hz

Listening to audio is much more straightforward than _creating_ art, whether it be pictorial, cinematic or musical. And this is coming from someone who has been a musician for over 15 years, both playing and recording/mastering. Someone like yourself who has just been throwing cash around at various cameras is not really in any position to say tha you will be able to create an all-encompassing thread about photographic equipment when you "become pro", because such a thing does not and can not exist.


----------



## dmanstasiu

I know this is off-topic but what's this 3x wheel you're talking about?

On-topic: The audio equipment and photo equipment we're discussing are two different things; cameras create, while headphones simply _re_create. Thus, audio equipment is easier to suggest than photographic equipment. (Though the headphones can be used in music creation, this is not the case for most people; inversely, most people don't buy cameras as screens to view other peoples' photos)


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dmanstasiu*
> 
> I know this is off-topic but what's this 3x wheel you're talking about?


3x, or simply, three-cross, is a wheel lacing technique that's common on BMX and some XC wheels.


----------



## Simca

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Listening to audio is much more straightforward than _creating_ art, whether it be pictorial, cinematic or musical. And this is coming from someone who has been a musician for over 15 years, both playing and recording/mastering. Someone like yourself who has just been throwing cash around at various cameras is not really in any position to say tha you will be able to create an all-encompassing thread about photographic equipment when you "become pro", because such a thing does not and can not exist.


Ooo, angsty.

On another note.."creating art" has very little to with the knowing the abilities of a camera or lenses. What you do with a camera is completely different from knowing what a camera is capable. To that extent, it seems fairly straight forward and "easy" to create a thread regarding cameras and accessories.


----------



## sub50hz

Hardly.


----------



## dudemanppl

No matter how much you hate sub, he always has the right idea 70% of the time.


----------



## sub50hz

70% of the time, 100% of the time. For your health.

P.S. Come to irc.


----------



## raptorxrx

I was just curious, I don't really need a camera at this point in my life, nor do I have the money for one. I've got like $250 of free cash right now, not really camera budget material


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Azefore*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> any suggestions on software to put together a timelapse? I just took 400 images and want to turn it to video now. I haven't looked into it much yet.
> 
> I have adobe master collection so if photoshop or adobe premeire pro or after affects can do this or you have any experience let me know.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> should have made it 16x9!
> 
> 
> 
> Using Premiere Pro, put all images in a folder and numbered sequentially. After opening up a new project with whatever your settings are go to File->Import->Click on first image in folder one time->Click right above file name "image sequence"->Shift and click all the images in explorer window->Click Open->Now have a default speed clip of your images, adjust speed/duration as desired.
> 
> For aspect ratio I'd mass crop the images in lightroom for ease if not just scale the clip accordingly once it's made by premiere
Click to expand...

Thanks, I did it, however I found out I forgot to set my focus to manual!









Time to go to the beach tomorrow and see what I can do there!









Also, this calculator helped me with the timing: http://tech.beret.cz/p/timelapse-calculator.html


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *raptorxrx*
> 
> I was just curious, I don't really need a camera at this point in my life, nor do I have the money for one. I've got like $250 of free cash right now, not really camera budget material


Shoot some 35mm film. Learn how to expose properly, and how to operate a camera efficiently. Once you have some expendable income, you can start thinking about digital, or maybe even larger format film.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Simca*
> 
> On another note.."creating art" has very little to with the knowing the abilities of a camera or lenses. What you do with a camera is completely different from knowing what a camera is capable. To that extent, it seems fairly straight forward and "easy" to create a thread regarding cameras and accessories.


A camera is only as capable as the person using it. You can spend all the money in the world and turn out frame after frame of garbage unless you have the experience to make it worthwhile. If creating such a thread would be as easy as you say, have a stab at it. I await the result.


----------



## Simca

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Simca*
> 
> On another note.."creating art" has very little to with the knowing the abilities of a camera or lenses. What you do with a camera is completely different from knowing what a camera is capable. To that extent, it seems fairly straight forward and "easy" to create a thread regarding cameras and accessories.
> 
> 
> 
> A camera is only as capable as the person using it. You can spend all the money in the world and turn out frame after frame of garbage unless you have the experience to make it worthwhile. If creating such a thread would be as easy as you say, have a stab at it. I await the result.
Click to expand...

I actually agree with what you're saying, but there are people that want simple guidance as to what would be the best camera for their budget. Some people just want to know what camera's they should be looking at for their budget. If I have an $xxx budget, the following are some cameras I should consider and here's why. Here are there pros, here are there cons.

Don't you agree that's possible? Sure you can obviously put in a nice paragraph about "Of course skill is based on experience and knowledge and skill with a camera as well as an eye for art, yadda yadda yadda"

I still think you can create an all purpose thread for quality cameras and lenses that are sort of the go to equipment under a certain price range.

For the more intimate and personally customized equipment needs additional threads can always be created to tailor choices to the person.

I think someone that owns a camera store and has a lot of experience with multiple cameras and lenses and is experience in photography could easily create a thread like that.

Now I doubt you caught on, but I made that comment in jest and you seem to have taken it seriously..I doubt I will ever get to any form of experience with cameras as I have with audio. Cameras are nice, but I'm not really into them as others are. I'm sure there are others that are very into the hobby though and could create an all purpose thread for cameras stacking up the best cameras in a certain price range etc etc with the same mold that I've done in other sections.


----------



## dmanstasiu

Sooooooooooooooooooooooooo

I have a Polaroid 635CL from the thrift store (Hi Marin).

The MFR film is EOL, but I found another store ; The Impossible Project.

I was thinking of buying some film, in black and white (it doesn't actually matter but ... I guess b&W will be more artsy)

Anyways, a disclaimer says:
"As the camera ejects the picture, do IMMEDIATELY shield it from light (e.g. with your hand, a darkslide, shoot into a box, etc...) - the first half second is crucial! See also this tutorial video box type cameras / tutorial video folding cameras"

What tips do you guys have to retain the best quality?


----------



## dudemanppl

Get a Pentax 67 system. So cheap, so good.


----------



## Sean Webster

Camera buyers guide would be easy. It would just take a lot of careful organization and time. lol


----------



## dmanstasiu

Are you talking to me?
I already have the 635CL, and specifically want the look of the instant-developping photos

Also, this seems like it will work:










Now i'm kind of confused by silver shade ... they're only B&W right? The sample gallery seems to show a bit of sepia tone


Spoiler: sepia?


----------



## Simca

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Camera buyers guide would be easy. It would just take a lot of careful organization and time. lol


That's exactly what I'm thinking.


----------



## dmanstasiu

OK some more general questions










What are tips for proper lighting ? Any easy ways to setup a lightbox?

a few ideas ...

A) Wax paper over a lamp
B) ????

The subject will be a two-dimensional image


----------



## Marin

Buy strobes.

There, proper lighting.


----------



## dmanstasiu

How about proper lighting for under $30?


----------



## Marin

Rent strobes for an hour.


----------



## dmanstasiu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> Rent strobes for an hour.


Proper lighting under $30 that I can use for over a year


----------



## Marin

Steal them. $30 covers the lock picking tools and gas.

Um... you can get some cheapo hotlights from home depot or something. Or you can try to find a studio that's closing down and see if they're selling off (real) hotlights. I know people who have done that but then again I'm in LA.


----------



## Simca

Harness the power of the sun.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dmanstasiu*
> 
> Are you talking to me?
> I already have the 635CL, and specifically want the look of the instant-developping photos
> 
> Also, this seems like it will work:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now i'm kind of confused by silver shade ... they're only B&W right? The sample gallery seems to show a bit of sepia tone
> 
> 
> Spoiler: sepia?


I used to just take the pic and put it on a table quick, worked fine for me. Polaroids are awesome.


----------



## dmanstasiu

Thanks for not trolling









(I'm looking at you Marin / Simca)


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dmanstasiu*
> 
> Thanks for not trolling
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (I'm looking at you Marin / Simca)


lol!









anyway:
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> Um... you can get some cheapo hotlights from home depot or something.


this

also:

http://blip.tv/learn-my-shot/basic-photo-studio-lighting-and-grip-equipment-learnmyshot-com-3508033 ?


----------



## Simca

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dmanstasiu*
> 
> Thanks for not trolling
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (I'm looking at you Marin / Simca)


I never troll even when I troll.


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Simca*
> 
> I actually agree with what you're saying, but there are people that want simple guidance as to what would be the best camera for their budget. Some people just want to know what camera's they should be looking at for their budget. If I have an $xxx budget, the following are some cameras I should consider and here's why. Here are there pros, here are there cons.
> 
> Don't you agree that's possible? Sure you can obviously put in a nice paragraph about "Of course skill is based on experience and knowledge and skill with a camera as well as an eye for art, yadda yadda yadda"
> 
> I still think you can create an all purpose thread for quality cameras and lenses that are sort of the go to equipment under a certain price range.
> 
> For the more intimate and personally customized equipment needs additional threads can always be created to tailor choices to the person.
> 
> I think someone that owns a camera store and has a lot of experience with multiple cameras and lenses and is experience in photography could easily create a thread like that.
> 
> Now I doubt you caught on, but I made that comment in jest and you seem to have taken it seriously..I doubt I will ever get to any form of experience with cameras as I have with audio. Cameras are nice, but I'm not really into them as others are. I'm sure there are others that are very into the hobby though and could create an all purpose thread for cameras stacking up the best cameras in a certain price range etc etc with the same mold that I've done in other sections.


I have had so much camera equipment that it's absurd. And more recently prices for DSLRs have been falling. Canon and Nikon release an entry level DSLR every year. So it's an ever changing list. It's really tough to recommend camera bodies and lenses.

But basically most people asking for equipment recommendation would beginners and many of them won't be dropping $2,000 on a body. Plus I would never recommend one to a beginner. Once you know what you want to shoot and have experience with your system then it's relatively easy to make your own decisions about the equipment you want to make.

What the list would basically come down to is, "Oh you're just learning how to shoot. Get this, this and this."

Even then with audio it would be a list of the general consensus. Which I think is stupid, because there is so much out there to try.


----------



## Simca

In part, there's a lot out there, but the more thoughts and experiences are congregated the more you know what can be removed from the list as useful. If such and such headphone does not meet such and such requirements that other headphones of such and such price meet then it can be removed from said list. There's no reason to choose this headphone over this headphone at this price range because this headphone does it better. If there's some sort of shining pro to that other headphone, you make mention of it, but otherwise, never mention it again as there is a better headphone out there for your needs at that price range..

Likewise, you should consider Nikon XXX and Canon XXX for your needs, disregard Nikon YYY because ZZZ. however if you really like AAA then you should consider Nikon YYY especially at a cheaper price to XXX.

Then let them decide whether that feature Nikon YYY has is worth sacrificing the pros of Nikon XXX.


----------



## Dream Killer

You can not compare headphones, a passive device used for consumption, to an instrument for production like a camera.

A camera is a tool. Get one that fits your hand and doesn't require you to think about how to use it. Interface and the implementation are more important than any other attributes of the camera.


----------



## Simca

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> You can not compare headphones, a passive device used for consumption, to an instrument for production like a camera.
> 
> A camera is a tool. Get one that fits your hand and doesn't require you to think about how to use it. Interface and the implementation are more important than any other attributes of the camera.


Other than the fact that you could take that into consideration, how would you go about helping someone select a camera normally? Do you ask them for their hand size? Lol.

Headphones come in all sizes, weights and clamps as well, so I'm not sure how they're really that different.


----------



## funfortehfun

scottath, how do you do them panoramas!?


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Simca*
> 
> Other than the fact that you could take that into consideration, how would you go about helping someone select a camera normally? Do you ask them for their hand size? Lol.
> 
> Headphones come in all sizes, weights and clamps as well, so I'm not sure how they're really that different.


Go somewhere that sells cameras and try them out. For some people a Nikon's ergonomics just make sense, to others it may be a Sony, or whatever. If you aren't comfortable using the camera then getting the shot you want may feel a bit more difficult than it should be.

Specs are only icing on the cake. As an art form you don't need to have 12 FPS, 25MP, dual processors, etc. I'm always dumbfounded when someone is asking whether or not they should upgrade their T2i to a 7D just because it takes better quality pictures of their cats, when they only post the images online at web sizes. It's how you use the camera.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Simca*
> 
> I'm not sure how they're really that different.


And that's why fauxtographers have no place doling out recommendations.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> And that's why fauxtographers have no place doling out recommendations.


Exactly.

Photography is a serious art form that requires more than just empirical data on camera performance to make a great picture. If your subject is boring and the light sucks, no camera will make a good photo of it. Hell, I'm mostly shooting film these days, and all I've got is a 50 f/1.4 for my lens and Nikon's cheapest AF body. Only center-weighted metering, shutter speeds only between 1/2000 and 1, and I don't even have multi exposure or DOF preview, but I'll still probably never maximize my camera's potential at my current skill level.

Plus, at the end of the day, there's no accounting for personal preference. You could tell me that Canon undeniably has the best SLR ever and that to not use it should be a war crime, but I'm not going to switch from Nikon anytime soon. i feel instantly at home with every Nikon I've ever shot (film or digital) and it just makes sense for me.


----------



## raptorxrx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> Exactly.
> 
> Photography is a serious art form that requires more than just empirical data on camera performance to make a great picture. If your subject is boring and the light sucks, no camera will make a good photo of it. Hell, I'm mostly shooting film these days, and all I've got is a 50 f/1.4 for my lens and Nikon's cheapest AF body. Only center-weighted metering, shutter speeds only between 1/2000 and 1, and I don't even have multi exposure or DOF preview, but I'll still probably never maximize my camera's potential at my current skill level.
> 
> Plus, at the end of the day, there's no accounting for personal preference. You could tell me that Canon undeniably has the best SLR ever and that to not use it should be a war crime, but I'm not going to switch from Nikon anytime soon. i feel instantly at home with every Nikon I've ever shot (film or digital) and it just makes sense for me.


Expensive cameras don't make you a photographer. Expensive headphones don't make you an audiophile. It takes time to appreciate both the creation of art and the consumption of it. IE-You can't find a "best" product in either category but you can create solid recommendations for different price points.


----------



## laboitenoire

That was my whole point... Honestly, that's why my recommendation usually is go to the store, try the entry level cameras on display, and buy the one that feels the best. If you're just starting off, you don't need anything more. If you're already a photographer, you buy what you think you need.

On a side note, I forgot to mention that I got to see a talk by Emmett Gowin last weekend at the Cleveland Museum of Art. Very awe inspiring, and they currently have an exhibit of his and Frank Gohlke's work shooting on Mt. Saint Helens after the eruption.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *raptorxrx*
> 
> but you can create solid recommendations for different price points.


The problem is that sort of thing already exists on hundreds of websites.


----------



## raptorxrx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> The problem is that sort of thing already exists on hundreds of websites.


That's true-which one of those sites do you recommend


----------



## Simca

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *raptorxrx*
> 
> but you can create solid recommendations for different price points.
> 
> 
> 
> The problem is that sort of thing already exists on hundreds of websites.
Click to expand...

So because the information can be found on other sites it's pointless to have here is what you're saying? Then we should absolve this entire website as I'm sure the information is already elsewhere...according to your logic that is.

I think we've already established that it's very possible to do...also just having a recommendation thread doesn't mean people won't go out and test cameras for themselves, but it gives them options when they go to a store to try it out for themselves.

I'm not sure why everyone's getting all elitist here. Some people like to take the clearest nicest pictures of things they like. It's NOT about art to them. Why does you picking up an expensive camera automatically mean you have to create art? What kind of garbage thinking is that? Can you take pictures on a lower quality camera? Sure, but some people like to have the best they can afford...who cares what use they have for it?


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Simca*
> 
> So because the information can be found on other sites it's pointless to have here is what you're saying? Then we should absolve this entire website as I'm sure the information is already elsewhere...according to your logic that is.
> 
> I think we've already established that it's very possible to do...also just having a recommendation thread doesn't mean people won't go out and test cameras for themselves, but it gives them options when they go to a store to try it out for themselves.
> 
> I'm not sure why everyone's getting all elitist here. Some people like to take the clearest nicest pictures of things they like. It's NOT about art to them. Why does you picking up an expensive camera automatically mean you have to create art? What kind of garbage thinking is that? Can you take pictures on a lower quality camera? Sure, but some people like to have the best they can afford...who cares what use they have for it?


The thing is that this isn't a photography website.

Just like with audio you learn to appreciate your equipment even if you aren't shooting professionally. A cheap DSLR is still leaps and bounds better than point and shoots. I know some people want the best they can afford, but if someones buy something like a 1DX or D4. Then only to ask why their pictures are coming overexposed or complaining because it doesn't have a built in flash.

More often that not people will be perfectly content with something like a D3100, D3200, D5100, T2i, T3i, T3, A37, A57, K-X, K-R, K-30. You don't need spend too much to have quality, even if you're just shooting for events, family moments, etc . Though your photos will come a long way by learning some simple photo tips, when using auto of course. Try not shoot against the sun, move subject away from distracting objects, fill the frame of your subject if your doing portraits. Oh his or her face looks a little fatter, back up, zoom in.


----------



## Sean Webster

I don't see how any of the points raised have any weight to prove that it would be pointless to make a camera buyers guide. To the contrary, most of the points you guys made actually qualified the making of one. lol Most of your statements could easily be integrated in such a guide...

This isn't a SSD site yet I have a SSD buyers guide, this isn't an audio site, yet there is an audio buyers guide, this isn't a keyboard site, yet there is a guide on that...this is an overclocking forum for info on overclocking your PC. Yet, these other product buyers guides exist.

Cameras are just another product. Yes they create something, but what does that have to do with whether or not to make a buyers guide? You can state current products from the mainstream market, divide it into sections based on company, price, type, use, etc. Give info related to each choice. State to actually test the equipment before you buy. The thread could be a main camera recommendation thread to help newbies who want anything from a basic point and shoot for taking pix of cats to recommendations on equipment for people who want something that will deliver better quality or better features than they have now. Yes, it will mainly be for novice people. That is the point. Most of us here would not need it, yes we could recommend products for peoples needs based on what they ask. But having a guide will allow them to have a little more guidance.

Also, it can bring more traffic to OCN!









The only real issue is getting someone to bother making such a guide and keeping it up to date and properly maintained.


----------



## MistaBernie

Check the history of recently started threads - at least half of them have been 'which camera should I buy' or 'is so and so a good deal', tic.

If someone wanted to create a guide like this I think it could be an asset.

Seems like something an editor could coordinate...


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Check the history of recently started threads - at least half of them have been 'which camera should I buy' or 'is so and so a good deal', tic.
> 
> If someone wanted to create a guide like this I think it could be an asset.
> 
> Seems like something an editor could coordinate...


Oh yeah I've noticed that. All of them have been budget oriented. A guide like that is easy to create and not too difficult to keep up with it. Once you introduce cheap point and shoots, then that's where it gets tricky.


----------



## Simca

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aksthem1*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Simca*
> 
> So because the information can be found on other sites it's pointless to have here is what you're saying? Then we should absolve this entire website as I'm sure the information is already elsewhere...according to your logic that is.
> 
> I think we've already established that it's very possible to do...also just having a recommendation thread doesn't mean people won't go out and test cameras for themselves, but it gives them options when they go to a store to try it out for themselves.
> 
> I'm not sure why everyone's getting all elitist here. Some people like to take the clearest nicest pictures of things they like. It's NOT about art to them. Why does you picking up an expensive camera automatically mean you have to create art? What kind of garbage thinking is that? Can you take pictures on a lower quality camera? Sure, but some people like to have the best they can afford...who cares what use they have for it?
> 
> 
> 
> The thing is that this isn't a photography website.
> 
> Just like with audio you learn to appreciate your equipment even if you aren't shooting professionally. A cheap DSLR is still leaps and bounds better than point and shoots. I know some people want the best they can afford, but if someones buy something like a 1DX or D4. Then only to ask why their pictures are coming overexposed or complaining because it doesn't have a built in flash.
> 
> More often that not people will be perfectly content with something like a D3100, D3200, D5100, T2i, T3i, T3, A37, A57, K-X, K-R, K-30. You don't need spend too much to have quality, even if you're just shooting for events, family moments, etc . Though your photos will come a long way by learning some simple photo tips, when using auto of course. Try not shoot against the sun, move subject away from distracting objects, fill the frame of your subject if your doing portraits. Oh his or her face looks a little fatter, back up, zoom in.
Click to expand...

But you see, even giving them those few cameras as advice and telling them how they're different from each other and what their pros and cons are would greatly help them. To novices those are all just numbers. Believe it or not, most people aren't so apt to look up reviews, youtube videos or go to camera stores. They want people they can trust. People they "know" that have used the products or have more experience than some random on youtube. You trust people on OCN more than you do other websites. It's what makes this community useful..
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> I don't see how any of the points raised have any weight to prove that it would be pointless to make a camera buyers guide. To the contrary, most of the points you guys made actually qualified the making of one. lol Most of your statements could easily be integrated in such a guide...
> 
> This isn't a SSD site yet I have a SSD buyers guide, this isn't an audio site, yet there is an audio buyers guide, this isn't a keyboard site, yet there is a guide on that...this is an overclocking forum for info on overclocking your PC. Yet, these other product buyers guides exist.
> 
> Cameras are just another product. Yes they create something, but what does that have to do with whether or not to make a buyers guide? You can state current products from the mainstream market, divide it into sections based on company, price, type, use, etc. Give info related to each choice. State to actually test the equipment before you buy. The thread could be a main camera recommendation thread to help newbies who want anything from a basic point and shoot for taking pix of cats to recommendations on equipment for people who want something that will deliver better quality or better features than they have now. Yes, it will mainly be for novice people. That is the point. Most of us here would not need it, yes we could recommend products for peoples needs based on what they ask. But having a guide will allow them to have a little more guidance.
> 
> Also, it can bring more traffic to OCN!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The only real issue is getting someone to bother making such a guide and keeping it up to date and properly maintained.


Finally!! Someone realizes what I've been trying to say for the last few pages.

The guide isn't meant for high end camera ARTISTS. The guide would be for introducing novice users to photography. As they play with their camera and get used to it, they'll grow with experience. They'll join this thread, ask questions, get better..and maybe they'll become artists..but even if they don't and they just want to take pictures of lolcats, what's the problem with that? Why is that an issue? It shouldn't be. The purpose of SSD guide, audio guides, keyboard guides etc is to get people interested in the hobby, give them options that they can consider, give them the pros and cons so they can make an educated decision on which products would be best for them....THEN..they go and try it out themselves and see for themselves which is best. While it's harder to do with audio and much more so with SSDs, people still do so. People go to HIFI Stores or audio meet ups and try other gear. They test the headphones themselves or the speakers and get an idea of how they perform so that they can then buy. Likewise, people can try out cameras themselves and see what's best for them among a MUCH SHORTER and precise list of cameras due to that compiled buyer's guide.

You can put in all your opinions about trying out the camera, put in tons of tips on how to take better pictures, you can inform them that it's not so much the camera, but the person behind it that is what can make a picture shine or fail. You can do all of this while still making the decision easier for novices and buyers...
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> *Check the history of recently started threads - at least half of them have been 'which camera should I buy' or 'is so and so a good deal'*, tic.
> 
> If someone wanted to create a guide like this I think it could be an asset.
> 
> Seems like something an editor could coordinate...


Yeah, exactly!

Anyway, I've said everything I needed to on this matter. I think it's obvious you can do with with photography as you can in any other section of OCN.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

I can mostly agree. Use painting for example. Paint in no way makes the artist. However, certain paints are clearly better. And some paints are better for some things. So you could make a thread about it. Same with cameras.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Simca*
> 
> *The purpose of SSD guide, audio guides, keyboard guides etc is to get people interested in the hobby*, give them options that they can consider, give them the pros and cons so they can make an educated decision on which products would be best for them....THEN..they go and try it out themselves and see for themselves which is best.


I humbly direct you to this thread:

http://www.overclock.net/t/898709/for-new-dslr-users-a-beginner-s-guide


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Simca*
> 
> *The purpose of SSD guide, audio guides, keyboard guides etc is to get people interested in the hobby*, give them options that they can consider, give them the pros and cons so they can make an educated decision on which products would be best for them....THEN..they go and try it out themselves and see for themselves which is best.
> 
> 
> 
> I humbly direct you to this thread:
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/898709/for-new-dslr-users-a-beginner-s-guide
Click to expand...

The issue with that thread is that it is out of date and only pertains to a small amount of DSLR cameras. Nothing on P&S, film, medium and large format, etc.

One could make a thread to info on all systems to get people started.


----------



## M4ng03z

in other news... I would like to be added to the members list









DSLR
*Nikon D5100*
AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-55mm f/3.5 VR
AF-S DX NIKKOR 55-300mm f/4.5 ED VR

35mm Film
*Konica TC-X*
Konica Hexanon AR 50mm f/1.7
Tokina RMC 28mm f/2.8
SIGMA ZOOM 75-250mm f/4-5


----------



## Dream Killer

I do in fact ask them what size their hand size is. Being comfortable with the camera should be the absolute first priority. It's very hard in becoming proficient in anything if the tool being used gets in the way.


----------



## Conspiracy

I shot with a d800 this weekend.

I cant shoot on any other dslr anymore. My 7D just doesnt fulfill my needs anymore. I think we are going to have to break up now lol. Back in the closet with it


----------



## raptorxrx

If I had say $600 USD, and I wanted a camera to film a bit and take photos, what would I be looking at buying? I've been eyeing the Nikon 5100 kit.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> The issue with that thread is that it is out of date and only pertains to a small amount of DSLR cameras. Nothing on P&S, film, medium and large format, etc.
> 
> One could make a thread to info on all systems to get people started.


Problem is, it would require contribution from a number of members if you include point-and-shoots. Most of the people in this forum aren't budget-tiny-sensor-compact-toting individuals, and there are a butt-ton of models on the market. Medium and large format are very niche areas as well, and used prices (let's be honest, if someone is looking to drop 50k on DMF, they aren't looking here) fluctuate very often. You will also run into the problem of recommendations being slanted on certain products because the writer in question may use such equipment. As a purely objective user, I can do my best to *start* a guide, but it will be extremely difficult to make it all-encompassing to the point where it's a one-stop solution for any forum user looking for a camera.


----------



## Simca

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> The issue with that thread is that it is out of date and only pertains to a small amount of DSLR cameras. Nothing on P&S, film, medium and large format, etc.
> 
> One could make a thread to info on all systems to get people started.
> 
> 
> 
> Problem is, it would require contribution from a number of members if you include point-and-shoots. Most of the people in this forum aren't budget-tiny-sensor-compact-toting individuals, and there are a butt-ton of models on the market. Medium and large format are very niche areas as well, and used prices (let's be honest, if someone is looking to drop 50k on DMF, they aren't looking here) fluctuate very often. You will also run into the problem of recommendations being slanted on certain products because the writer in question may use such equipment. As a purely objective user, I can do my best to *start* a guide, but it will be extremely difficult to make it all-encompassing to the point where it's a one-stop solution for any forum user looking for a camera.
Click to expand...

You completely miss out on the point. It's not a be all end all guide. It just encompasses a handful of cameras at certain price ranged. $50 dollar range, $100 dollar range, $200, $300, $400, $500, $600,$700, $800, $1000, $1500, $2000, $2,500.

Anything beyond that they can create their own thread. 3 Cameras per price range unless you feel there are several stand out cameras.

Then you do the same for lenses.

It's not difficult. You're not being asked to include every camera in production. There's a general concensus of what the top 3 cameras are in each category, one would assume. If their hands are too big for said cameras, they can create a new thread or type in the thread created for advice....because it's NOT all encompassing nor is it meant to be.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Oh Lawd.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Simca*
> 
> lmao, now you want to start it.


Nope. I can only offer my opinion based on my own experience, which is something very few users here can amount to. And if you can find someone with a more objective view on equipment than maybe myself, Marin or a few others that's willing to write a guide for the people who are more interested in buying than _using_ photographic equipment, good luck to you. The only people who could stand to benefit from _my_ input don't really need it, as their skill level and demand for different cameras are already fulfilled by their experience.

As much as I hate to admit it, DPReview.com does a pretty good job of covering value and visualizing ergonomics and catching flaws. Their forum is full of trolls and idiots, but their reviews are pretty good for people who need to compare items within their budget -- but they are a paid staff of writers. People in this thread/forum already know who they can go to for an opinion on equipment, so I still stand by my "pointless" assessment.

Can't help but feel that maybe you feel a little burned about your recent puchases/failures in acquiring a camera to take snapshots with.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Simca*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> The issue with that thread is that it is out of date and only pertains to a small amount of DSLR cameras. Nothing on P&S, film, medium and large format, etc.
> 
> One could make a thread to info on all systems to get people started.
> 
> 
> 
> Problem is, it would require contribution from a number of members if you include point-and-shoots. Most of the people in this forum aren't budget-tiny-sensor-compact-toting individuals, and there are a butt-ton of models on the market. Medium and large format are very niche areas as well, and used prices (let's be honest, if someone is looking to drop 50k on DMF, they aren't looking here) fluctuate very often. You will also run into the problem of recommendations being slanted on certain products because the writer in question may use such equipment. As a purely objective user, I can do my best to *start* a guide, but it will be extremely difficult to make it all-encompassing to the point where it's a one-stop solution for any forum user looking for a camera.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> lmao, now you want to start it. That's a real plot twist coming from it being completely pointless and useless.
> 
> It's good though that you're the only objective user on this forum though, so clearly only you can take up this task as anyone else's opinions would be weighted poorly. You're the perfect candidate for this job.
> 
> You completely miss out on the point. It's not a be all end all guide. It just encompasses a handful of cameras at certain price ranged. $50 dollar range, $100 dollar range, $200, $300, $400, $500, $600,$700, $800, $1000, $1500, $2000, $2,500.
> 
> Anything beyond that they can create their own thread. 3 Cameras per price range unless you feel there are several stand out cameras.
> 
> Then you do the same for lenses.
> 
> It's not difficult. You're not being asked to include every camera in production. There's a general concensus of what the top 3 cameras are in each category, one would assume. If their hands are too big for said cameras, they can create a new thread or type in the thread created for advice....because it's NOT all encompassing nor is it meant to be.
Click to expand...

youre sarcasm is obnoxious and you blatantly dont understand the point of a guide. i would say you completely miss the point but that would make the false assumption you even understand how complicated it is to make a camera buying guide that is actually useful. yea you can pick up a magazine that has a "camera buying guide" that just simply suggests one camera in each price range that is simple to use for any normal consumer and compare them based on the spec sheets.

same goes for lenses. lens selection is way more complicated than focal length and aperture. but if YOU want to make these guides then we will all get a great laugh because it will probably just end up comparing lenses based on how shallow the DOF can get and how the bokeh compares between each lens haha









seriously though. either sit down and chill or move on. if you support a buying guide and are brave enough to try and do it then go ahead. i promise that it will get ripped apart by minute details by several of the people here


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> youre sarcasm is obnoxious and you blatantly dont understand the point of a guide. i would say you completely miss the point but that would make the false assumption you even understand how complicated it is to make a camera buying guide that is actually useful. yea you can pick up a magazine that has a "camera buying guide" that just simply suggests one camera in each price range that is simple to use for any normal consumer and compare them based on the spec sheets.
> 
> same goes for lenses. lens selection is way more complicated than focal length and aperture. but if YOU want to make these guides then we will all get a great laugh because it will probably just end up comparing lenses based on how shallow the DOF can get and how the bokeh compares between each lens haha
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> seriously though. either sit down and chill or move on. if you support a buying guide and are brave enough to try and do it then go ahead. i promise that it will get ripped apart by minute details by several of the people here


I think the guide that you guys are wanting would be way overly complex. You have to make it for the noobs. When I first read any of the "simple" literature on this site that pertained to cameras I was about as lost as one could be. So, if you make it super complex to them, they wont go out buying a camera know which one has what they want, they will go out buying one based on what you said was the best for x, xx, and y things, while they may not even understand what those things are.


----------



## Simca

As I've said, I have no interest in creating such a guide. It seems that YOU do not understand the point of the guide in question. It has been explained several times throughout this thread, so I recommend you go back and read over the ideas expressed as I don't have the time to repeat myself again.

As for Sub, why am I feeling burned? What does this have to do with creating a buyer's guide? Nothing at all. I'm happy with my D5100. My next step is getting a 35mm prime lens.

You've already stated you can't help anyone that doesn't need your help, so don't bother. You obviously don't get the purpose of the thread.

Marin would be much better suited to creating the guide if he felt up to it.


----------



## MistaBernie

Folks, I've said this before, I'll say it again. Disagreement is fine, but please keep it civil. Deletions and (temporary) thread bans are the next step.

That said, Simca, I do have to say something about one of your initial responses (the various price ranges, only offering three options per price range) -- the fact is, so many point and shoot or entry level cameras are introduced on an annual basis (at various price points, amongst various systems) that a 'only link two or three from each price range' is borderline impossible.

Even if you broaden the price range (Under $100, $100-$200, $200-$400, $400+) you run into enough variables and situations that there are simply too many viable options to make it worthwhile to create and maintain such a thread. The only option would be to have one for each system, and there are so many decent systems that it's unreasonable to expect any one person (or any group of people) to consistently and fairly create a guide that is far enough encompassing to truly cover the range of options available. I know that sounds like a bit of horse-hockey (secret phrase of the day, thanks Col. Potter), but I assure you, it isn't.


----------



## Azefore

Jumping in quickly, if the guide was to be made, it could start with a guide to select which camera form factor to buy/look at, film, DSLR, bridge cameras, P&S, mirroless, micro 4/3s, novelty/interesting (Thinking galaxy camera would be latest addition to the group to give an idea). Then keep up on the selections and then there would be comprehensive enough guide while keeping the camera groups separated entirely. That, though, is a huge task to do it right.


----------



## funfortehfun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *raptorxrx*
> 
> If I had say $600 USD, and I wanted a camera to film a bit and take photos, what would I be looking at buying? I've been eyeing the Nikon 5100 kit.


Yes, that's probably your best bet. The 18-55mm DX VR is actually quite a sharp lens, and the D5100 is a nifty camera.


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *raptorxrx*
> 
> If I had say $600 USD, and I wanted a camera to film a bit and take photos, what would I be looking at buying? I've been eyeing the Nikon 5100 kit.


His question was completely ignored due to this discussion. Fairly ironic as well.

Depends what type of filming you are considering. Autofocus on DSLRs is still rather weak, but for filming I'd go with Canon on this one. So T2i or T3i if you need the swivel screen. Comes in handy for certain angles.


----------



## funfortehfun

I guess if he wants Canon, the T3i with a 18-55mm is $600 right now on Amazon. So he could choose between the two.

My P&S:



Canon Powershot G11


----------



## Azefore

Yup I concur, T3i, D5100 is nice but for video T3i has better flexibility. Id go 5100 for ergonomics myself, not a fan of the smaller grip on the Canon.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *funfortehfun*
> 
> I guess if he wants Canon, the T3i with a 18-55mm is $600 right now on Amazon. So he could choose between the two.


Or if he wants to go used he can find a t2i kit for as low as about $400.


----------



## Faraz

The only somewhat meaningful way to make a buying guide for DSLRs is going to be a sort of budget-based breakdown. But then you'll just be listing what cameras can be found at what price point.

You can't really make a guide saying if you like to take long exposures buy this over that, if you're looking for portraiture get this camera and not that one. Once you're in the realm of SLRs, the quality of your work will depend almost entirely on you. A lens buying guide would make a bit more sense, but still hard to do and won't be very helpful. I think people asking for individual advice is really the best way to go about it.


----------



## MistaBernie

I think Azefore's idea was closest to what would probably be the most useful -- a guide to help identify what _kind of_ camera to pick up, and then offer typical suggestions in a couple of ranges of budgets.

For example, do you want a regular point and shoot? Do you want a point and shoot with an optical viewfinder? Do you want a m4/3? DSLR? Is video important? Weatherproofing, etc.

Something along the lines of 'what kind of camera is right for me?', even if it's relatively short, might be a good starting point. Then, if people want to contribute a guide for their particular systems, we could probably work something out.


----------



## Simca

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> I think Azefore's idea was closest to what would probably be the most useful -- a guide to help identify what _kind of_ camera to pick up, and then offer typical suggestions in a couple of ranges of budgets.
> 
> For example, do you want a regular point and shoot? Do you want a point and shoot with an optical viewfinder? Do you want a m4/3? DSLR? Is video important? Weatherproofing, etc.
> 
> Something along the lines of 'what kind of camera is right for me?', even if it's relatively short, might be a good starting point. Then, if people want to contribute a guide for their particular systems, we could probably work something out.


I also had that in mind.


----------



## raptorxrx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> Or if he wants to go used he can find a t2i kit for as low as about $400.


I'm thinking I'll pick up a used D5100, and save the extra dough+some for when I get to the point I want new glass.


----------



## Simca

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *raptorxrx*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> Or if he wants to go used he can find a t2i kit for as low as about $400.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm thinking I'll pick up a used D5100, and save the extra dough+some for when I get to the point I want new glass.
Click to expand...

Which will be relatively quickly.


----------



## funfortehfun

NAS/CAS will hit you (Nikon/Canon Acquisition Syndrome). It's like PC parts.


----------



## raptorxrx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *funfortehfun*
> 
> NAS/CAS will hit you (Nikon/Canon Acquisition Syndrome). It's like PC parts.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Simca*
> 
> Which will be relatively quickly.


Hehe... I haven't bought the camera yet, and I'm already looking at either the 35mm or 50mm Nikon Prime lens...

Where do you guys buy your camera gear? New? Used? Refurbished?


----------



## sub50hz

www.keh.com

And buy the 35, it's the best DX lens money can buy.


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *raptorxrx*
> 
> Where do you guys buy your camera gear? New? Used? Refurbished?


Go used, you save a lot of money and the way people baby their gear you get like new stuff.


----------



## funfortehfun

Quick question - Because of APS-C, is a 60mm micro-Nikkor (the one in my sig) the equivalent of a "90mm micro-Nikkor" on the D90?


----------



## Azefore

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *funfortehfun*
> 
> Quick question - Because of APS-C, is a 60mm micro-Nikkor (the one in my sig) the equivalent of a "90mm micro-Nikkor" on the D90?


The focal range is 90mm equivalent yes, same lens/optical performance not so much.


----------



## raptorxrx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *silvrr*
> 
> Go used, you save a lot of money and the way people baby their gear you get like new stuff.


Where would you recommend buying used gear?


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *raptorxrx*
> 
> Where would you recommend buying used gear?


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> www.keh.com


----------



## Azefore

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *raptorxrx*
> 
> Where would you recommend buying used gear?


I also enjoy Adorama and BH Photo Video for their used departments. Got my 28-70mm from BH and they gave a 90 day warranty on it.


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Azefore*
> 
> I also enjoy Adorama and BH Photo Video for their used departments. Got my 28-70mm from BH and they gave a 90 day warranty on it.


B&H does have some good deals on used equipment every so often. Usually they are still higher than most other places. But I did get my T1i for about $100 less than any other place selling it used.

KEH has a 6 month warranty policy. Which is nice and generally their BGN (bargain) grade stuff is in good shape.


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *raptorxrx*
> 
> Where would you recommend buying used gear?


I have had luck at POTN and on craigslist.


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *silvrr*
> 
> I have had luck at POTN and on craigslist.


POTN is Canon oriented. So Nikon gear is a bit more scarce. Fred Miranda is a good forum to buy used gear from.


----------



## MistaBernie

The Fred Miranda (fredmiranda.com) forum's buy and sell boards aren't all that bad either, and their feedback system actually allows for negative/fair feedbacks (Unlike POTN, but this may change in the future since Pekka is in the process of a complete re-write away from VB). I've had good luck at both POTN & FM for Canon gear. Craigslist, you need to be a little careful, but good deals can be found if you're patient (like my effectively $250 135mm f/2 L trade I pulled off a couple of months ago)


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> The Fred Miranda (fredmiranda.com) forum's buy and sell boards aren't all that bad either, and their feedback system actually allows for negative/fair feedbacks (Unlike POTN, but this may change in the future since Pekka is in the process of a complete re-write away from VB). I've had good luck at both POTN & FM for Canon gear. Craigslist, you need to be a little careful, but good deals can be found if you're patient (like my effectively $250 135mm f/2 L trade I pulled off a couple of months ago)


Yeah with CL you have to be patient, but astonishing deals will come around. Though you have to be lurking it constantly.

My friend was going to snag a D7000 kit for $700 (still an amazing deal at the time), but since the lady that had already sold it she made a deal with him instead. A brand new 7D with new 24-70L for the same price. This was over a year ago.
I did get a like new, with less than a thousand clicks, T2i with grip, 50mm f1.8, 18-135mm, 430EX and a few extra goodies for $500.


----------



## dudemanppl

I think I'm going to go back to Nikon.


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aksthem1*
> 
> My friend was going to snag a D7000 kit for $700 (still an amazing deal at the time), but since the lady that had already sold it she made a deal with him instead. A brand new 7D with new 24-70L for the same price. This was over a year ago.
> I did get a like new, with less than a thousand clicks, T2i with grip, 50mm f1.8, 18-135mm, 430EX and a few extra goodies for $500.


those are pretty awesome deals O_O


----------



## ljason8eg

Yeah I've sadly never seen anything like that on my local CL that's ended up being legit. Most of the photography postings on mine are overpriced Rebel/kit lens combos.

I found a 1D III on there a couple weeks ago but the guy wouldn't move from $1400, which is way too high. :/


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> I think I'm going to go back to Nikon.


Whoa that came out of no where. Be careful of the D800. I finally tested one. Its that good


----------



## MistaBernie

Jason, you really in the market for a 1D3? They seem to be cropping up all over the place sub-$1200 (there was one locally with like 11000 actuations for like $1100, looked box mint, I almost got it and considered selling my 7D)... I can keep an eye out and let you know what I find if you want.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Jason, you really in the market for a 1D3? They seem to be cropping up all over the place sub-$1200 (there was one locally with like 11000 actuations for like $1100, looked box mint, I almost got it and considered selling my 7D)... I can keep an eye out and let you know what I find if you want.


Yeah I'm considering swapping my 7D for one to see how I like it. $1100 is more my range since I would probably be out only $200 or so after selling my 7D.


----------



## MistaBernie

I'll keep an eye out for you and shoot you a PM if I find anything that you might be interested in. Even if the list is slightly higher, you never know, there may be wiggle room.


----------



## sub50hz

I'm shaving my beard today. Pour one out for me, guys.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> Whoa that came out of no where. Be careful of the D800. I finally tested one. Its that good


Meh I don't feel the need for a D800. Its 2200 is pretty steep. Actually, damn. Now that I think about it, 2200 is nothing, but 1600 is still cheaper.

Yay, I mathed it and can spring for a D800. Now to buy hard drives...


----------



## MistaBernie

I've been noticing people cropping up (pun intended. Also, not heard it so much around here) saying how the IQ of full frame is just so much better than a crop camera that it's not worth shooting one. I'm thinking of doing lots of shooting over the next month or so with the 7D just to be like 'yeah, damn, too bad I didn't have a _real_ camera with me, huh...' Or not. Not might work too.


----------



## Conspiracy

lol yea i just hate how my 7D takes good pictures. Such a waste of a camera


----------



## sub50hz

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Huge-lot-of-old-cameras-collection-for-Sale-1-000-Pieces-of-SLR-RF-Medium-/190796013023?afsrc=1

As far as full frame is concerned, I am fine with APS image quality for digital use, and for big enlargements I'm shooting 6x7 anyway. I value the smaller size, lighter weight and lower cost of APS as a whole.


----------



## MistaBernie

Listed via eBay mobile. What a spaghetti..

But seriously... 1000s of cameras, maybe 2000 (never counted though). Lists brands which are included, lots of pictures of cameras but doesn't specifically say what's included.. wouldn't touch this with Dudeman's Nikon loving hands.


----------



## aksthem1

Managed to snag 40D with 10,000 clicks, Canon grip and lens for $300. Looks pristine too.


----------



## MistaBernie

Not too shabby. Which lens came with it?


----------



## aksthem1

28-80mm USM MKI, the metal mount one. I'm really liking this lens so far. It's cheap to buy, but it's well built. IQ is better than the 18-55 from what I can tell.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Lists brands which are included, lots of pictures of cameras but doesn't specifically say what's included.. wouldn't touch this with Dudeman's Nikon loving hands.


I have no idea if that was an insult or not LOL.


----------



## Conspiracy

goofing around shot some 35mm in a Holga 120 for fun. going to shoot higher ISO film next time, this is from the kodak 50D movie film i have


----------



## MistaBernie

Nah Dudeman, not an insult, just me staying up with the times. I almost picked up a D600 when they were dirt cheap. Then I realized I was being really dumb about it. Love dat 5D3 though..


----------



## dudemanppl

Sell everything, buy a potato.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Sell everything, buy a potato.


Eat potato? Or convert into biodegradable camera? Hmmm... Doesnt get more hipster than a disposable camera that decomposes


----------



## dudemanppl




----------



## Simca

Picking up 35mm f/1.8G prime lens on Monday.

Buying Bogen 3236 Pro/Manfrotto 475B legs as well. 40 bucks for the legs O_O.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Does a broken front ring really matter that much? Will this prevent me from putting hoods or such on?

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Canon-EF-S-55-250mm-F-4-0-5-6-IS-Lens-/321073136939?pt=Camera_Lenses&hash=item4ac173452b


----------



## laboitenoire

The posting is hard to read on my phone, but I wouldn't do it. Without knowing how the ring broke, there could be anything wrong with the lens.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> Does a broken front ring really matter that much? Will this prevent me from putting hoods or such on?
> 
> http://www.ebay.com/itm/Canon-EF-S-55-250mm-F-4-0-5-6-IS-Lens-/321073136939?pt=Camera_Lenses&hash=item4ac173452b


By the looks of it, you could have trouble getting a hood on. Maybe a filter as well. I'd be more worried about how that damage happened.


----------



## ikem

I have a d3200 that has already been in the shop for a "Metering malfunction error" showing up on the info screen and not allowing it to meter. But now, it is not metering at all. After turning it on it will display "subject is to dark" and over expose everything. But while in live view, it will show correct (or close by experience) meterings but still shoot at the very over exposed settings. In a regular lighted room, at ISO 6400 it is giving me a 5 sec exp, but the Camera works perfectly if I run it in manual.

Is this another time for the shop? This will be the second time in 3 months, having a metering error of some kind.

Thanks for the help in advance, Mike.


----------



## raptorxrx

I really wouldn't care about the damaged ring itself that much. I would be way more concerned about how it happened in the first place...


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Well, Ive seen multiple like that, so I'm guessing it was set on ledge or something and tipped and fell.

Likely to the floor which wouldn't be good.


----------



## funfortehfun

Heads up to Nikon owners: if you were planning to buy some Nikon glass lately, see to some of these deals:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/promotion/10324/deep-discounts-on-nikon-lenses.html

List:

$350 off


AF-D Zoom-Nikkor 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6 ED VR

$300 off


AF-S Nikkor 18-300mm f/3.5-5.6G DX ED VR
AF-S Zoom-Nikkor 24-120mm f/4G ED VR
AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II

$250 off


AF-S Nikkor 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G DX ED VR II // IMO, best deal on the page

$200 off


AF-S Nikkor 24mm f/1.4G ED
AF-S Nikkor 35mm f/1.4G
AF-S Nikkor 85mm f/1.4G
AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED

$150 off


AF-S Nikkor 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR

$100 off


AF-S Nikkor 28mm f/1.8G
AF-S Nikkor 85mm f/1.8G
AF-S Nikkor 24-85mm f/2.5-4.5G ED VR
AF-S Nikkor 50mm f/1.4G
AF-S micro-Nikkor 60mm f/2.8G ED
AF-S Nikkor 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6G DX ED
AF-S micro-Nikkor 85mm f/3.5G DX ED VR

$20 off


AF-S Nikkor 50mm f/1.8G // Price now on par with the 35mm DX

Deals expire March 2nd.


----------



## Conspiracy

looking to sell off my sigma 30 f1.4 officially now. it gets barely any use and was mainly used for shooting video indoors. it has only been posted on facebook so far


----------



## Squeeker The Cat

went looking at camera straps today...........found what i wanted, but also found a tripod.....ive always wanted one BUT always wanted a monopod too.

THIS PROMASTER TRIPOD has both...... anyone have any promaster tripods? pros....cons? how are they?


----------



## funfortehfun

At the $200 range I think a Manfrotto 055XPROB Tripod Legs and Manfrotto 498RC2 Ball Head would work better. Though, I'm not any expert on tripods, and it's not like I own one.


----------



## Marin

I ruv u 50L.


----------



## funfortehfun

so expensiiiifffff D:


----------



## Azefore

^ Saw a wedding photog with a 50mm 1.0L and I was like "oh, that's nice.....*staring*"


----------



## Eggs and bacon

Just developed my first roll of film in about 8 months, as I finally got access to a darkroom again.


----------



## sub50hz

Boolseye.


----------



## Conspiracy




----------



## Squeeker The Cat

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Squeeker The Cat*
> 
> went looking at camera straps today...........found what i wanted, but also found a tripod.....ive always wanted one BUT always wanted a monopod too.
> 
> THIS PROMASTER TRIPOD has both...... anyone have any promaster tripods? pros....cons? how are they?


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *funfortehfun*
> 
> At the $200 range I think a Manfrotto 055XPROB Tripod Legs and Manfrotto 498RC2 Ball Head would work better. Though, I'm not any expert on tripods, and it's not like I own one.


well technically its sub $200.00 at mikes camera today i saw it for less than $250.00 LOL


----------



## funfortehfun

Found some President's Day deals for Nikon owners on bootic.com. Relatively new website. All items with "PROMO" listed by their name are 30% off.

http://www.bootic.com/nikon


----------



## MistaBernie

For ~$200 if you can get the 055XPROB legs and 496B head, they're an awesome combo, love mine. They're not the lightest things in the world to walk around with but I'm a pretty big guy so I can sling it like nothing.

As for shooting with the 50 f/1.0L, I wouldn't use it on assignment or for outside the studio work, and if I had one I'd probably sell it. Canon doesn't even service them anymore.


----------



## laboitenoire

For around &200, I'd look into Sirui. They make nice stuff, it's lightweight compared to the comparable Manfrotto stuff, and they're really sturdy. I think I have the N1004 and the G-20 ball head.


----------



## Wasd.alltheway

Got My Nikon D3100 with 18-55 And loving it compared to my old powershot a530


----------



## funfortehfun

Nikon unveiled the D7100 today.

http://www.dpreview.com/news/2013/02/21/Nikon-launches-D7100-24MP-mid-range-DSLR-with-51-point-af-and-no-optical-low-pass-filter


----------



## Chunky_Chimp

If they left in the AF motor and aperture ring feeler, then that's one hell of a body for $1,200 (if you skip the kit lens). I thought it'd go up for a lot more than that, well done, Nikon. Looking at the resolution spec on the sensor, I'm assuming they borrowed the one from the D5200? Either way, about all it's missing is a flip-screen, it comes in handy.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Nice. Really like the viewfinder, 100% coverage, .94x.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chunky_Chimp*
> 
> If they left in the AF motor and aperture ring feeler, then that's one hell of a body for $1,200 (if you skip the kit lens). I thought it'd go up for a lot more than that, well done, Nikon. *Looking at the resolution spec on the sensor, I'm assuming they borrowed the one from the D5200?* Either way, about all it's missing is a flip-screen, it comes in handy.


No, new one. Read the preview linked at the top of the post.


----------



## Chunky_Chimp

Hmm, interesting. Wonder how it'll do without the low-pass filter...


----------



## laboitenoire

This looks like a very interesting camera... Too bad I barely have time to shoot anymore! Also, I love my D7000...


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chunky_Chimp*
> 
> If they left in the AF motor and aperture ring feeler, then that's one hell of a body for $1,200 (if you skip the kit lens).


the AF motor is still there i think, not sure about the aperture ring thingymajig

the 1.3x crop mode sounds interesting too

but im good with my d7k








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chunky_Chimp*
> 
> Hmm, interesting. Wonder how it'll do without the low-pass filter...


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S02txq5jXIg

polin said that according to nikon , pairing it with nikon glass will make the photos "explode" , as sharper, better color and contrast

around 2:00 in the video


----------



## Azefore

D7100 looks like a fine upgrade to a D7000 if you really needed it but doesn't touch the expectations of people who were waiting for a D400. Looks like a D800 is still in the cards for me.


----------



## sub50hz

D7100 seems like a long-overdue but mostly half-assed attempt at refreshing the D7000. Not impressed.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> D7100 seems like a long-overdue *but mostly half-assed attempt* at refreshing the D7000. Not impressed.


Care to explain why?


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> D7100 seems like a long-overdue but mostly half-assed attempt at refreshing the D7000. Not impressed.


Yeah I'm not sure what you mean either? It's got a new sensor, upgraded AF, bigger screen, and better movie mode. Seems like a pretty standard refresh?

And @Azefore, this likely _is_ what people were expecting the D400 to be. Yeah, it's missing a lot of the direct control levers for metering and AF mode, but it's weather sealed just as well as the D300S and the 1.3x crop makes it pretty damn fast for sports shooting.


----------



## Azefore

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> Yeah I'm not sure what you mean either? It's got a new sensor, upgraded AF, bigger screen, and better movie mode. Seems like a pretty standard refresh?
> 
> And @Azefore, this likely _is_ what people were expecting the D400 to be. Yeah, it's missing a lot of the direct control levers for metering and AF mode, but it's weather sealed just as well as the D300S and the 1.3x crop makes it pretty damn fast for sports shooting.


People just wanted the size/feel of a D300s with its full magnesium body and better low light iso capabilities. There's still room for a $1,600 DX body with those specs + better body, I know my D7000 is too small for my hands and using my friends D600 I also had the same problem.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> Care to explain why?


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> Yeah I'm not sure what you mean either? It's got a new sensor, upgraded AF, bigger screen, and better movie mode. Seems like a pretty standard refresh?


It's a mediocre upgrade in regards to the AF, the screen is only slightly larger, and they've lumped the control layout of the D600 on it without putting it in a D600-like chassis (see: D300/700). The lack of AA filter is the only real noteworthy feature, unless the sensor turns out to be some amazing improvement over the similar ones in the A77/D3200/D5100/etc, which is probably pretty unlikely.


----------



## Chunky_Chimp

To be fair, though, there's not a whole lot TO upgrade in the first place with the D7000; it just needed an updated sensor (and it got one), a better viewfinder (and it got one), an updated AF system (and it got one, though the usefulness of those extra AF points is debatable), updated video capabilities (I'm not sure what the appeal is of using a DSLR for movies... but a welcome update, I suppose), a better screen that flips out and articulates (didn't get one), and a better control layout (didn't get one, looks slightly worse, actually). The pros outweigh the cons, though, and for $1,200, again, it's a fantastic camera. I could easily see myself selling my D5100 down the line, getting a D7100, and not bothering with anything else ever again, except obviously a new lens every now and then.


----------



## sub50hz

The D7100 should have been inside a D600 chassis, _that_ is the main issue here. Lots of sports and wildlife shooters are still hunting for a D400 -- the specs on the D7100 are plenty to fill the needs.


----------



## Conspiracy

D7100 looks interesting but as mentioned, i am concerned about the body itself. Totally interested in either switching to nikon or roughin it with my 7D till it dies lol. Still wishing to replace my 30 1.4 for a wide zoom :|


----------



## gian84

Hi! I'd like to join the club! I own a Sony Alpha a57. Currently just making do with a kit lens


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Azefore*
> 
> D7100 looks like a fine upgrade to a D7000 if you really needed it but doesn't touch the expectations of people who were waiting for a D400. Looks like a D800 is still in the cards for me.


You won't be sorry. I love mine. Best IQ and dynamic range of any DSLR I've shot to date.


----------



## Azefore

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*
> 
> You won't be sorry. I love mine. Best IQ and dynamic range of any DSLR I've shot to date.


That's what I'm expecting, looking to get a 85mm 1.8g with it and then buy/try the tamron 70-200 vc on it very interested in if the D800 shows any flaws of the lens that a 5D MkIII might've missed in the few reviews so far.


----------



## S3ason

Hoppin' on the d7100 wagon next weekend. Can wait to ditch my Rebel XTi!


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Azefore*
> 
> That's what I'm expecting, looking to get a 85mm 1.8g with it and then buy/try the tamron 70-200 vc on it very interested in if the D800 shows any flaws of the lens that a 5D MkIII might've missed in the few reviews so far.


I just ordered the 85/1.8G the other day. I already have the 85/1.4d but with the $100 off I figured what the heck. Should arrive next Tuesday, I'll post some bokeh pics. We'll see what effect the 7 blade diaphragm has.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Is there enough difference between the Canon ef-s 55-250mm version 2 vs version 1, to warren $10 more?


----------



## Azefore

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> Is there enough difference between the Canon ef-s 55-250mm version 2 vs version 1, to warren $10 more?


As far as most forums I read the only difference is cosmetics between the two (IE color scheme, a few bits and bobs), optical setup is completely the same but it's up to entirely.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nuclearjock*
> 
> I just ordered the 85/1.8G the other day. I already have the 85/1.4d but with the $100 off I figured what the heck. Should arrive next Tuesday, I'll post some bokeh pics. We'll see what effect the 7 blade diaphragm has.


May just go ahead and order one from BH tomorrow myself while the lens deal is going, amazon says 1-4 *months* for shipping one.


----------



## Conspiracy

went ahead and started listing my Sigma 30 for sale. Im currently asking $225 since they are going for $290. Currently planning on going with a 17-40 f4. cant afford and dont totally need a 16-35 f2.8 mkI even though i can find one for a good price i dont want to spend $900+


----------



## dmanstasiu

Nikon D5100 with 18-55mm + 50mm f/1.8 Lens - $500

Nikon D5100 + Nikkor 18-55 + Nikkor 55-200 - $600

Nikon D5100 Body only - $375

Good deal or no? I'm looking for a DSLR to make good pictures, I don't plan on moving up. I just want a simple starter camera that will permit me to learn, but also give me headroom for more advanced photos ( + skills)


----------



## funfortehfun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dmanstasiu*
> 
> Nikon D5100 with 18-55mm + 50mm f/1.8 Lens - $500
> 
> Nikon D5100 + Nikkor 18-55 + Nikkor 55-200 - $600
> 
> Nikon D5100 Body only - $375
> 
> Good deal or no? I'm looking for a DSLR to make good pictures, I don't plan on moving up. I just want a simple starter camera that will permit me to learn, but also give me headroom for more advanced photos ( + skills)


IMO get the bare D5100 and a 50mm f/1.8 or 35mm f/1.8. Best way to learn photography is to have a single focal length lens; it'll teach you how to frame your subject properly and get those legs moving!

Also, those aforementioned lenses are great.


----------



## laboitenoire

Is this the 50 f/1.8 AF-S or AF-D? It's a fairly meh deal if it's the AF-D version as that's a cheap lens, and also you'd have to use manual focus for it.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Azefore*
> 
> As far as most forums I read the only difference is cosmetics between the two (IE color scheme, a few bits and bobs), optical setup is completely the same but it's up to entirely.
> May just go ahead and order one from BH tomorrow myself while the lens deal is going, amazon says 1-4 *months* for shipping one.


Make sure you get the $100 off. I know Calumet has a few in stock if you want one right away. B&H is BO'd. I found mine new @ KEH but they're out of stock now as well. Everyone jumping on the -$100 bandwagon.


----------



## scottath

According to FB - one of my most popular ever images.
Sunset time over the city of Sydney last night - alot of very low fast moving cloud though









Sorry for the FB compression :/ My flickr account wont sign in atm


----------



## koulaid

Anyone interested in a sigma 85 for canon? Pm me if you do.


----------



## Chunky_Chimp

Just create an FS thread, koulaid.







Scottath, you could alternatively get a Dropbox, if you just share single pics and not albums then it's really not bad at all.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Dropbox sucks IMO. I like minus, but they too, are turning to crap.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> Dropbox sucks IMO. I like minus, but they too, are turning to crap.


How does dropbox suck?


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> How does dropbox suck?


Many ways. Have to jump through a thousand hoops if you want to see a picture larger than the default. Just like flikr.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> How does dropbox suck?
> 
> 
> 
> Many ways.
Click to expand...

Explain the "many ways?"
Quote:


> Have to jump through a thousand hoops if you want to see a picture larger than the default. Just like flikr.


How? You just click view original when on the sites...


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Explain the "many ways?"
> How? You just click view original when on the sites...


After clicking on more clicking on the + button, then view all sises, then original, yeah.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Explain the "many ways?"
> 
> How? You just click view original when on the sites...
> 
> 
> 
> After clicking on more clicking on the + button, then view all sises, then original, yeah.
Click to expand...

That's it?

I thought there was more to be concerned about. I've been using dropbox and it works great for me. Share folders are awesome. Also, you can restore deleted folders and data in case something deleted was important.


----------



## Chunky_Chimp

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> After clicking on more clicking on the + button, then view all sises, then original, yeah.


Where are you doing that? I just go to the folder on the web page, click the Share Link button for the file, right-click the Download button, copy the link info, and remove the token hash and "&dl=1" from the link. That link gives me the original file/pic in full size, and I've done that each time I link to one of my pics. It's a few steps more than I'd like but it's not like it's hard.


----------



## dmanstasiu

http://davidhunt.ie/?p=2641

Camera Pi - DSLR Camera with Embedded Computer

Possibilities include:

Wireless tethered shooting - attach a Wifi dongle to the USB port, so I can transmit pictures to a PC or tablet PC as I'm shooting.
Attach a USB memory key or hard drive so I can back up the images on the camera.
Remote control the camera using a PC, tablet PC or smartphone (from anywhere in the world).
Intervalometer - take a picture every few seconds for those high-speed sunset sequences, including exposure adjustment as you go.
On-the-fly image conversion for faster previews on remote display device (iPad, etc).
Add a small LCD display to give status, allow user input via buttons, etc.
Trigger camera via shutter release port, also allows waking up of sleeping camera, which cant be done via USB.


----------



## scottath

Ok - got flickr working again:
So here is the city one again:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/scottath/8509955368/
Moody Sydney by scottath, on Flickr

And one from this morning with my new Lee Filters









http://www.flickr.com/photos/scottath/8509954644/
Forgotten by scottath, on Flickr


----------



## Eggs and bacon

^ the color in those shots is amazing.

I just won my self a Bronica ETRSi off ebay, can't wait to use it.








Unfortunately for me since it was in the us i have to use a round about way of getting it too me, which means i have to wait almost a month and a half.


----------



## MistaBernie

so pumped, getting my Nokia Lumia 900 up to 7.8 early. I was having some sort of issue with it last night not being able to connect back to my PC during the update process... I think a service was blocking it unknowingly so I just started killing stuff that was running that I didn't need and voila, 2/3 of the way done with my update to 7.8!

And yes, this is camera related, my phone has a camera in it.


----------



## mz-n10

so a 50/1.4 will cost me as much as a 50/1.2......


----------



## dmanstasiu

Does anyone have a guide explaining the different terms for lens' ? This is the one thing that confuses me most







I've done my own research, I was just wondering what your guys' favourite beginner guides were


----------



## Azefore

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dmanstasiu*
> 
> Does anyone have a guide explaining the different terms for lens' ? This is the one thing that confuses me most
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I've done my own research, I was just wondering what your guys' favourite beginner guides were


I watched Digitalrev and Froknowsfoto on youtube, did some googling when needed and went from there, still an amateur at best but I think guides are a tad constricting.


----------



## dmanstasiu

I'm a very technical / theory person ... I just want to understand what the F/4 and 18-55mm stuff means ... which I'm slowly learning


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dmanstasiu*
> 
> F/4


Aperture value
Quote:


> 18-55mm


Focal length

I found this link, maybe you can learn some more: http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/camera-lenses.htm


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dmanstasiu*
> 
> I'm a very technical / theory person ... I just want to understand what the F/4 and 18-55mm stuff means ... which I'm slowly learning


18-55mm is the focal length. basically where the rear element of the lens is compared to the sensor/film plane (while at infinity focus). so on any format a 18mm lens is 18mm away from the sensor/film plane.

f/4 is the aperture pupil size in respect to the focal length of the lens itself. so a lens which is 300mm will have a much larger aperture pupil area at f/1 then a 14mm lens at f/1.


----------



## dmanstasiu

Thanks for answering my questions guys, I already knew the answers though







I'm just on the lookout for a noob-friendly guide that you guys would recommend for similar questions


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dmanstasiu*
> 
> Thanks for answering my questions guys, I already knew the answers though
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm just on the lookout for a noob-friendly guide that you guys would recommend for similar questions


There are multiple things in the Stickies...http://www.overclock.net/f/266/photography

Take a look and you should figure out most of what you want to know.


----------



## dmanstasiu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *dmanstasiu*
> 
> Thanks for answering my questions guys, I already knew the answers though
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm just on the lookout for a noob-friendly guide that you guys would recommend for similar questions
> 
> 
> 
> There are multiple things in the Stickies...http://www.overclock.net/f/266/photography
> 
> Take a look and you should figure out most of what you want to know.
Click to expand...









why are you so damn helpful


----------



## Eggs and bacon

For keh / MF people
if i order thishttp://www.keh.com/camera/Bronica-ETRS-Backs-and-Magazines/1/sku-ET110016000180?r=FE back, does that come with a dark slide and insert?

also is a 150mm lens a good portrait focal lenght for MF?


----------



## sub50hz

It should, otherwise it would indicate shell only or no darkslide.


----------



## MistaBernie

100L en route. Early birthday present.


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> 100L en route. Early birthday present.


Nice, youll love it, amazing IQ and the IS has worked down to 1/10 for me handheld.


----------



## MistaBernie

Yeah, I'm looking forward to it. Will be good to have in the bag for macro shots (yeah, I know you can do macro with the 24-70 or just about any lens with tubes, but this is just easier). Helps too since I'm helping out a friend tomorrow by taking some shots of some minis for him.


----------



## sub50hz

I wanted a 100L for shooting product at work when we dumped our Phase One setup, but I never was able to get my hands on one for some reason. Not availability per se, just always came after other things.


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> I wanted a 100L for shooting product at work when we dumped our Phase One setup, but I never was able to get my hands on one for some reason. Not availability per se, just always came after other things.


Cost of equipment aside, did you prefer shooting MF digital or film more?


----------



## sub50hz

Depends on what for. For my personal stuff, film. For work, digital by _far_.


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Depends on what for. For my personal stuff, film. For work, digital by _far_.


Pretty much the answer I expected.


----------



## sub50hz

Digital is just way too expensive for anything but product or studio work to make it worthwhile. We sold our work setup because we were able to contract the work out for cheaper -- plus, it pulled me away from all the other stuff i have to do on a daily basis, so it was the right choice to make.


----------



## Cmdr.Shephard

Anyone used the Nikon D5200 ? I think I might buy it for my upcoming school projects.


----------



## S3ason

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Cmdr.Shephard*
> 
> Anyone used the Nikon D5200 ? I think I might buy it for my upcoming school projects.


If its in your budget, id move up to the D7000. Much better camera, only $750 for the body on b&h.
D5200 is still a great camera though. It feels dinky in my hands though, so I skipped it. I am 6'4" though so that could be it.


----------



## ljason8eg

First track action of the new year:


IMG_9504.jpg by JLofing, on Flickr


IMG_9571.jpg by JLofing, on Flickr


IMG_9396.jpg by JLofing, on Flickr


IMG_9297.jpg by JLofing, on Flickr


IMG_9575.jpg by JLofing, on Flickr


----------



## MistaBernie

Are these all with the 300? I've been thinking of picking one up myself.. I like these, but do you ever get shots of multiple cars in a pack? I feel like there would be interest for shots with a bit more context. These could be qualifying laps and not an active race (for example)..


----------



## revro

hello,

what software would you recommend for hobby beginner photographer to edit nef files? I mean there are milion different photoshops when i look into shops.
also how big a 24Mpix nef file is usually?

thank you
revro


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Are these all with the 300? I've been thinking of picking one up myself.. I like these, but do you ever get shots of multiple cars in a pack? I feel like there would be interest for shots with a bit more context. These could be qualifying laps and not an active race (for example)..


All but #4 were with the 300. Sadly this was just testing and most teams will tell their drivers to avoid other cars like the plauge.


----------



## Cmdr.Shephard

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *S3ason*
> 
> If its in your budget, id move up to the D7000. Much better camera, only $750 for the body on b&h.
> D5200 is still a great camera though. It feels dinky in my hands though, so I skipped it. I am 6'4" though so that could be it.


I went to the store today to test those 2 camera's out. The d5200 felt better in my hands and I liked the flip screen very much. The d7000 felt more professional, heavy and big and haves fixed screen. It had more buttons then the d5200 also.

I can get the d5200 for €550, the d7000 is available for €899. Don't know if the d7000 is worth the €349 difference, and because this will be my first dslr camera I think it might be a good idea to purchase the d5200 for experimenting etc.


----------



## dmanstasiu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Cmdr.Shephard*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *S3ason*
> 
> If its in your budget, id move up to the D7000. Much better camera, only $750 for the body on b&h.
> D5200 is still a great camera though. It feels dinky in my hands though, so I skipped it. I am 6'4" though so that could be it.
> 
> 
> 
> *It had more buttons then the d5200 also.*
Click to expand...

Well. You answered your own question.


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *revro*
> 
> hello,
> 
> what software would you recommend for hobby beginner photographer to edit nef files? I mean there are milion different photoshops when i look into shops.
> also how big a 24Mpix nef file is usually?
> 
> thank you
> revro


probably around 30mb +/- each

get photoshop lightroom 4








or maybe photoshop elements (?)
or you could try something thats free like gimp


----------



## scottath

Pano head complete finally - now to get onto more shooting - go away rain!


----------



## Eggs and bacon

Has anyone tried Opteka filters? I am guessing they are not as great quality as Hoya and B+W, just judging by the prices.
The specific filter I was looking at getting http://www.amazon.com/Opteka-720nm-Infrared-X-Ray-Filter/dp/B000MD8ZEI/ref=sr_1_2?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1362217467&sr=1-2&keywords=optical+r72 just to play around with ir photography.


----------



## Cmdr.Shephard

Ok need some fast advice,

The D5200 is sold out and it's pricebumped, costs now €650+ , D7000 on the other hand is now on sale for €760.
D7000 vs D5200 ! I'm going nuts here!


----------



## Azefore

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Cmdr.Shephard*
> 
> Ok need some fast advice,
> 
> The D5200 is sold out and it's pricebumped, costs now €650+ , D7000 on the other hand is now on sale for €760.
> D7000 vs D5200 ! I'm going nuts here!


D7000, you'd grow into it more and it has a better ui (played with a D5200 yesterday for a little bit) and despised the ui appearance and feel strongly. Thats my vote


----------



## Cmdr.Shephard

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Azefore*
> 
> D7000, you'd grow into it more and it has a better ui (played with a D5200 yesterday for a little bit) and despised the ui appearance and feel strongly. Thats my vote


Going to the store right now to check it for last time! Who knows I'll be back with the D7000


----------



## revro

where in europe you live?







i mean in eastern europe d5200 body goes for 750eur, d7000 900eur, tough i must say d7100 seems to have the same pricing as in rest of europe 1100eur








d5200 is good if you want that articulated lcd display. anyway with d7100 i will take my take with purchase who knows it could have the flaws of d600 and d800 with their dust sensor issues

best
revro


----------



## Conspiracy

So ive decided with my next paycheck to grab the 17-40L ive been wanting for a while. I have one guy in ATL that said he might let his go but didnt say how much. If i dont find a decent deal on a used copy i may just buy new since the money saved will be $100 or less it seems like :/ maybe KEH will get some cheaper copies. They have one thats cheap but missing caps i think :|

Also been eyeballing getting a used 70-200 down the road to give me a more complete kit for video and doing portraits for fun. 17-40 might even see occasional portrait use for goofy perspectives









I really need to stop procrastinating on a tripod for video... Such an expensive investment because im so damn spoiled from pro work i only know satchler, frotto, vinten, and gitzo. Frotto being the only brand i can even come close to buying legs but no head lolz


----------



## Cmdr.Shephard

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *revro*
> 
> where in europe you live?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i mean in eastern europe d5200 body goes for 750eur, d7000 900eur, tough i must say d7100 seems to have the same pricing as in rest of europe 1100eur
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> d5200 is good if you want that articulated lcd display. anyway with d7100 i will take my take with purchase who knows it could have the flaws of d600 and d800 with their dust sensor issues
> 
> best
> revro


Hey,

I'm living in The Netherlands, I have to order the D7000, it was out of stock in the store. It must be a sign to wait with my purchase.


----------



## revro

when i first started to study DSLRs at first i was astonished that the progress is so slow. i mean imagine if new graphic cards were released only every 3-4 years. well amd is going this way kind of







but to really have to wait years to get basic features one would await in this time and age, wau.

but now i found d7100 and i guess it has everything that i would expect from a dslr. i wanted originally canon but i kind of see prolonged stagnation in canons releases while there is progress albeit slow in nikon. why does it take so much time in dslr to release in a new generation with new features









best
revro


----------



## S3ason

We're D7100 buddies! Longest 20 days everrrr








I'm excited because if you compare the d600 and the d7100 on snap sort, the only advantages it gives the d600 is iso performance and sensor size. I almost always shoot in good light and do some macro work, so the d7100 is the better choice. The crop mode will be awesome for macro work. Also, with the cash I'll save I'll be able to afford some nice glass


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *S3ason*
> 
> We're D7100 buddies! Longest 20 days everrrr
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm excited because *if you compare the d600 and the d7100 on snap sort, the only advantages it gives the d600 is iso performance and sensor size*. I almost always shoot in good light and do some macro work, so the d7100 is the better choice. The crop mode will be awesome for macro work. Also, with the cash I'll save I'll be able to afford some nice glass


thats a good enough reason for most people .. if i had the budget for fx lenses and an fx body like a d600 , i wouldnt hesitate to get it instead of a d7100

pity about the sensor dust issue though .. i believe they still havent fixed it yet ?


----------



## revro

well apparently from whats being said on internet there will also be d400 introduced in autumn, but that would be for me too much. but there are people waiting for d400. d7100 will suffice me.
after how many shots does one start to experience sensor dust problems? or is it enviroment issue?

re dust issues, i guess they should start coupling their cameras with cleaning tickets







no i havent heard anything about a solution and just hope d7100 will avoid it. thats why i will wait few months before purchasing

according to ken rockwell this is great universal DX lense, so i plan to buy d7100 body and this lense in addition
http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/18-55mm-vr.htm

best
revro


----------



## Azefore

Well Nikon refurbed 85mm 1.8g ordered last night for $350, another month and a D800 will be in my bag.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boogschd*
> 
> pity about the sensor dust issue though .. i believe they still havent fixed it yet ?


Nope, Nikon only made an announcement addressing it and saying to clean the sensor and if it doesn't resolve the issue contact them.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *revro*
> 
> after how many shots does one start to experience sensor dust problems? or is it enviroment issue?
> 
> according to ken rockwell this is great universal DX lense, so i plan to buy d7100 body and this lense in addition
> http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/18-55mm-vr.htm
> 
> best
> revro


My friend's D600 got major dust/oil specks after only 250 shots, he sent it back after first 2 weeks. Also 18-55mm is a great choice, I'd actually go for a 35mm 1.8g or 50mm 1.8g/d to start with myself but that's just my opinion (helps better with thought of composing and not relying on zoom as much to frame your picture)


----------



## Conspiracy

so i found out some friends of mine that i give occasional photo tips to have a EF-S 10-22. They mostly take photos of vintage clothes they sell in an online store and dont use it because its too wide for their needs.

They bought a Canon 20D 18-55 and 10-22 for $300....

erhmahgerd









i would totally buy that 10-22 from them but its way too wide for my needs. still sticking with my 17-40 decision


----------



## aksthem1

I'll buy it off of them.


----------



## sub50hz

Buy that 10-22, you dolt. Then pick up an 18-55 because the 17-40 blows sack on crop bodies.


----------



## sub50hz

Oh also, this is why my photo output has been kinda low lately:










Photo walks have turned into 7 mile runs with an XA in my pocket.


----------



## Conspiracy

17-40 covers the focal lengths i want and i plan on borrowing/renting based on availability a 5D3 for my next video as well as starting to use higher quality video cameras that have EF mount like the black magic cinema camera that i can borrow for short jobs. the 5D3 would be borrowed from a sports shooter whos shortest lens is a 70-200, which i personally dont understand why he wouldnt have a wider zoom like a 24-70 or just any wide prime. he pretty much shoots only baseball and nascar. and the people i would borrow higher quality video cameras from only own the body and rent their glass because noone can afford to own cine zooms much less an entire zeiss prime kit lol

i also used a borrowed 18-55 on my last video and it was a pain to shoot with a f3.5-5.6 lens as well as just the overall feel of the video was not impressive in my opinion and i lack hollywood level video processing to grade the image lol


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Photo walks have turned into 7 mile runs with an XA in my pocket.


Wait, you have multiple cycles, but you prefer to run? BLASPHEMY. WHO DOES THAT?


----------



## scottath

More photos









This is the second image ive released from the Taren Point outing - my first with Lee filters.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/scottath/8526992687/
Difference of Longitude by scottath, on Flickr


----------



## funfortehfun

^Awesome panos, keep doing more! They're great 

I was bored yesterday, so I played around with some CS2. Here's what I got:



BOKEH BALLZ ASDFSDFZFSDKLF


----------



## Conspiracy

BOKEH!


----------



## S3ason

Bought a 35mm f1.8g and 50mm f1.8g for the D7100. Thursday is the big day!


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Wait, you have multiple cycles, but you prefer to run? BLASPHEMY. WHO DOES THAT?


How many feet of snow are in _your_ streets?


----------



## dudemanppl

Get a fatbike or something lul. We have like negative 20 feet of snow here.


----------



## funfortehfun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *S3ason*
> 
> Bought a 35mm f1.8g and 50mm f1.8g for the D7100. Thursday is the big day!


Awesome lenses. Bokehlicious!


----------



## laboitenoire

Ugh... I hate dry mounting.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> Ugh... I hate dry mounting.


dont we all


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Last thoughts before purchase?

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Canon-EF-S-55-250mm-F-4-0-5-6-IS-Lens-/160984281931?pt=Camera_Lenses&hash=item257b69334b


----------



## MistaBernie

I feel like you can do better, but I could be wrong..


----------



## nvidiaftw12

A little bit. Let some go for less on accident, but I'm really getting tired of waiting and missing shots by now.


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> I feel like you can do better, but I could be wrong..


I can't really see him do better for the price. A 70-200 F4 non-IS is an affordable L lens though.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Went with one I liked better for $142. 

And a 70-200 f/4 is still far from affordable for me.


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> Went with one I liked better for $142.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And a 70-200 f/4 is still far from affordable for me.


In comparison to all the other L lenses.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aksthem1*
> 
> I can't really see him do better for the price. A 70-200 F4 non-IS is an affordable L lens though.


kinda like the 17-40L or 24-70 mk1, the non-IS 70-200/4 really shows its age.

the 55-250 is not a bad lens, if you need a cheap/light tele its the perfect lens.


----------



## MistaBernie

I think the 24-70 2.8 Mk I has a bad rep and I'm not 100% sure why. Yeah, it's a little odd to extend when zooming out, but you don't ever notice it with the hood on, and it's a very capable lens.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

I'd love a stronger tele, but as said, I could never afford one.


----------



## dmanstasiu

I love stalking this thread and absorbing all the information but never saying anything


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> I'd love a stronger tele, but as said, I could never afford one.


tamron 17-50 2.8 ?








not exactly an L but i hear good things about it

wanted to get one myself but other expenses keep turning up

(and my only lens got broken recently so meh.. more setbacks!)
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dmanstasiu*
> 
> I love stalking this thread and absorbing all the information but never saying anything


hi dman


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boogschd*
> 
> tamron 17-50 2.8 ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> not exactly an L but i hear good things about it
> 
> wanted to get one myself but other expenses keep turning up
> 
> (and my only lens got broken recently so meh.. more setbacks!)
> hi dman


Well it's not really a telephoto, but it is a damn good crop lens. I was going to buy one with the student rebates, but never got around to it.


----------



## Azefore

Well my refurbed 85mm got here 3 days early, was spotless and build quality is better than expected, gotta find some time to have fun with it now lol


----------



## S3ason

Let me know how that 85mm is on DX, I'm debating making it my next kens.
Must complete the 35 / 50/ 85mm f1.8 kit!


----------



## cookiesowns

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aksthem1*
> 
> In comparison to all the other L lenses.


Do people still even get the 70-200 f/4L? It's a great lens, but with the size an all, IS is really, really necessary if you're shooting hand held on a crop.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cookiesowns*
> 
> Do people still even get the 70-200 f/4L? It's a great lens, but with the size an all, IS is really, really necessary if you're shooting hand held on a crop.


It depends what you're shooting with it. If its used for sports IS probably isn't needed. Its also not that large of a lens; handholding isn't that challenging with good technique.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> I think the 24-70 2.8 Mk I has a bad rep and I'm not 100% sure why. Yeah, it's a little odd to extend when zooming out, but you don't ever notice it with the hood on, and it's a very capable lens.


i actually think the design is genius for the 24-70L mk1, you get a deep hood when you are at 70mm and a shallow petal hood when wide. but that isnt what i am talking about. i have used 3 copies of the L, 2 nikon 24-70/2.8 and a single zeiss 24-70/2.8. all 3 L just dont give the sharpness or contrast the nikon or the zeiss does. of course im pixel peeping.


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *S3ason*
> 
> Let me know how that 85mm is on DX, I'm debating making it my next kens.
> Must complete the 35 / 50/ 85mm f1.8 kit!


well if you say its a must, why not get it ?









a friend of mine bought one recently ,, tis a really nice lens :3
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aksthem1*
> 
> Well it's not really a telephoto, but it is a damn good crop lens. I was going to buy one with the student rebates, but never got around to it.


well get it , one day


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *S3ason*
> 
> Let me know how that 85mm is on DX, I'm debating making it my next kens.
> Must complete the 35 / 50/ 85mm f1.8 kit!


35/50/85 on crop is a goofy combo. What you're looking for is 24/35/50, and that's the exact trio I roll. Usually the 24 or 35, the 50 almost never comes out these days unless I'm shooting film.


----------



## S3ason

Is there any way to get a 24mm that doesn't cost 1800 bucks? Is a zoom like 18-55 or something like 10-24 more suitable?


----------



## sub50hz

I bought a Sigma 24/1.8 -- it's not bad on crop, a little soft in the corners on FX and film, but a nice alternative to the 24G which costs 4 times as much.


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *S3ason*
> 
> Is there any way to get a 24mm that doesn't cost 1800 bucks? Is a zoom like 18-55 or something like 10-24 more suitable?


What are you trying to shoot? The Rokinon 24mm F1.4 is around $500, but manual focusing only.


----------



## sub50hz

The Samyang isn't bad, but the hindrance of manual-focusing on bodies that weren't meant to be accurate (forgoing viewfinder accuracy for brightness) is a dealbreaker for some, including myself. I also really dig the close-focusing ability of the Sigma.


----------



## Azefore

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *S3ason*
> 
> Let me know how that 85mm is on DX, I'm debating making it my next kens.
> Must complete the 35 / 50/ 85mm f1.8 kit!


Will do, shot some quick portraits with friends today, the 85mm isnt bad on DX so far, definitely a usable cropped length (~122.5mm) and it's as tack sharp wide open as you can hope for for the price. I'll have a more thorough analysis later on. Once the D800e arrives I'm sure I'll have it on 75% of the time and the 28-70 the rest.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Got my 55-250 today. Very pleased. Hunts for focus in low light, but that is to be expected of course. Nice to really see that image stabilization actually do something.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Played with my new lens some more and I am pretty pleased. Little bit soft at 250 5.6, but still not bad. Chromatic aberration is a bit bad at 5.6 though.



Nothing more interesting to shoot.


----------



## dmanstasiu

Alabama... shooting chickens


----------



## Conspiracy

will be meeting up with someone about the possible purchase of a used 17-40 f4 for $500. hope this lens is in good shape. i was able to look at shots taken with it on flickr but thats not the best judge of condition. the shots did look nice and clean on flickr at least lol

was going to have the guy send me photos of the lens but figured he is driving by me on his way to photograph and event in downtown ATL anyway so he agreed to meetup on his way down to show me the lens instead of trying to find time when both our schedules actually line up lol

also borrowed a 10-22 to go hiking the other day. was fun to mess with but waaaay to wide for my needs. really have little need for wider than 17 and to have a lens that covers 17-40 is a nice range to keep me from needing to swap to anything else unless i need something longer which i am yet to need anyway thankfully


----------



## S3ason

17-40 sounds like a nice range. If he's a professional photographer, his lenses are probably in good shape.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *S3ason*
> 
> 17-40 sounds like a nice range. If he's a professional photographer, his lenses are probably in good shape.


idk ive seen some pro gear in extremely worn out shape lol

but most pros do take care of their gear


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Got lucky with my 55-250. I swear it hasn't even been used. No dust in the zoom ring, and dust always gets there and is impossible to get out.


----------



## scottath

http://www.flickr.com/photos/scottath/8542624961/
Wattamolla #2 by scottath, on Flickr

Almost binned this image, Learnt a neat trick in photoshop tonight. The lens i use mostly for my panoramas is a Zeiss 50mm Makro, this lens has a fairly consistent flare pattern, so i managed to remove all the nasty parts of the flare from this image, rescuing it from the trash bin.
Glad i did! And yes, the colour was actually there!


----------



## Sean Webster

what trick did you learn?


----------



## scottath

just did a selective desaturate of that hue of orange that the flare was, then masked the colour (except for the flared part) back in - makes the flare alot more subtle at the least.
Original flare size for example:


^ Thats the complete raw - only stitched.


----------



## Eggs and bacon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scottath*
> 
> just did a selective desaturate of that hue of orange that the flare was, then masked the colour (except for the flared part) back in - makes the flare alot more subtle at the least.
> Original flare size for example:
> [URL=http://www.overclock.net/content/type/61/id/1340711/img]http://www.overclock.net/content/type/61/id/1340711/img[/URL]] ^ Thats the complete raw - only stitched.[/QUOTE]
> 
> Nice trick


----------



## Conspiracy

Bought a used 17-40 for $500. Its in KEH BGN condition which is pretty much like new and barely used haha. Looked it over pretty extensively and didnt find a single thing wrong. Even came with a uv filter lol. So anyone want a used 77mm UV haze filter lol


----------



## sub50hz

If it's a decent filter in good shape, I could use it -- I've bee putting off getting a few 77s for my 24, 11-18 and the 127 on the RB.


----------



## Conspiracy

yea its dirty but looks to be in nice shape. no damage or even smudges on the filter on either side. it pretty much looks like it lived on this lens and the lens itself didnt get much use.

the filter is a B+W 77 010 UV Haze 1X MRC F- PRO

ill test it out with the video i shoot later this week. i honestly rarely use any filters mainly because im cheap and dont use my cameras THAT much since most video cameras have built in ND filters.


----------



## sub50hz

See if you can clean it up, sounds like exactly what I need.


----------



## nvidiaftw12




----------



## Conspiracy

i like #2 more because of the background elements. center framed not so much but its not always a bad thing


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> i like #2 more because of the background elements. center framed not so much but its not always a bad thing


I tried to take another using my rule of thirds, but lost the part I was focusing on and couldn't get it again lol.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> i like #2 more because of the background elements. center framed not so much but its not always a bad thing
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I tried to take another using my rule of thirds, but lost the part I was focusing on and couldn't get it again lol.
Click to expand...

haha yea that happens when your DOF is super thin


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> haha yea that happens when your DOF is super thin


Being at 250mm with a good breeze didn't help either.


----------



## Delta6326

Hey guys I have a Canon T2i and I just got done hacking the firmware with Magic Lantern. I was wondering whats some good settings to take pic's of the stars? I'm looking to make arc's with a object up front.
I have the following:
Canon T2i ML Firmware
Canon EF-S 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS Standard Zoom Lens
Carbon Fiber tripod.

This pic is my first attempt


----------



## Delta6326

Hey guys I have a Canon T2i and I just got done hacking the firmware with Magic Lantern. I was wondering whats some good settings to take pic's of the stars? I'm looking to make arc's with a object up front.
I have the following:
Canon T2i ML Firmware
Canon EF-S 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS Standard Zoom Lens
Carbon Fiber tripod.

This pic is my first attempt


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Delta6326*
> 
> Hey guys I have a Canon T2i and I just got done hacking the firmware with Magic Lantern. I was wondering whats some good settings to take pic's of the stars? I'm looking to make arc's with a object up front.
> I have the following:
> Canon T2i ML Firmware
> Canon EF-S 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS Standard Zoom Lens
> Carbon Fiber tripod.
> 
> This pic is my first attempt


star trails

youd want to take a lot of 30sec(?) exposures then stack them up in photoshop or something to make a startrail photo afaik
or use a remote then have it take a photo for 30-120 mins

http://lifehacker.com/5808341/how-to-photograph-star-trails
http://www.jamesvernacotola.com/Resources/How-To-Photograph-Star-Trails/12233655_V7cX4D


----------



## Delta6326

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boogschd*
> 
> star trails
> 
> youd want to take a lot of 30sec(?) exposures then stack them up in photoshop or something to make a startrail photo afaik
> or use a remote then have it take a photo for 30-120 mins
> 
> http://lifehacker.com/5808341/how-to-photograph-star-trails
> http://www.jamesvernacotola.com/Resources/How-To-Photograph-Star-Trails/12233655_V7cX4D


Ok thanks, does GIMP work for this?

Once it gets above 30f here and stops snowing, I will try it out look like ISO 100-200 and F/wide as she gets.

I'm going to try out ML Intervalometer, Settings (in submenu):

Duration between two shots.
Start delay (up to 8 hours).
Stop after X pictures.
This should make it pretty easy.


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Delta6326*
> 
> Ok thanks, does GIMP work for this?


im not sure :/
havent used gimp before


----------



## scottath

Oh a great day - just borrowed a friends 85 f1.2L and been playing with it at uni for most of the day, then at uni also (was a clubs expo day) one of the photography club members brought in his 400 F2.8 L IS - was a great shooting day


----------



## silvrr

assuming that you want to make star trails? You will need to make multiple long excuses and stack them together. You can run hours on a single exposure but the noise would get pretty bad.

Turn off any in camera noise reduction as generally for a 30 sec exposure it can take up to 30 sec for the camera to process for noise. You don't want those gaps.


----------



## theturbofd

Hey guys I'm new to photography but always wanted to do it for a hobby. I made my first purchase, the T4i and I really love it. I was recording video with it but for some reason I'm not satisfied with the quality. I feel like it could come out way better. I provided a link to it for those who wouldn't mind checking it. Another question is can other lenses increase video quality?

video
https://mega.co.nz/#!1BhAwDzT!E00X9xPWI64VqgxPoi8_R0TZG19RcIBFXMGaOZzKQ_Y


----------



## revro

a colleague told me that if i will use only one lense permanently, that the dust/oil issue should not happen in nikon dslr. is he right?

thank you
revro


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Wood duck and a Red-shouldered hawk. Not the sharpest, but not bad for a full crop on a $142 lens on a crop sensor. 2nd is at about 400 feet.


----------



## sub50hz

Not bad? Low standards, man.


----------



## S3ason

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> Wood duck and a Red-shouldered hawk. Not the sharpest, but not bad for a full crop on a $142 lens on a crop sensor. 2nd is at about 400 feet.


Not bad, you need a longer lens









What are you shooting these with?

@Revro:
The oil issue is caused by an internal flaw in the camera, I believe, so leaving the lens on will not help you with oil. Using only one lens will be a pain and isnt worth the reduced risk of dust. But the less time you spend with the lens off the camera (without a body cap), the less likely you are to expose it to dust. Always take the lens off with the camera body pointing sensor down and change the lens quickly, youll be fine for quite a while.

Oil may not even effect your camera. If the problem does arise, I recall hearing that Nikon was doing free servicing for the cameras to fix the problem if you take it to your local dealer.

Good luck


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Not bad? Low standards, man.


Low money, man.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *S3ason*
> 
> Not bad, you need a longer lens
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What are you shooting these with?


Indeed.

Canon 55-250mm f/4.0-5.6.


----------



## S3ason

400 feet at 250mm with a 1.5x crop? Something doesn't add up there, unless you werent shooting at full zoom.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

I was. It could be more than 400 feet, just an estimate.


----------



## theturbofd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *theturbofd*
> 
> Hey guys I'm new to photography but always wanted to do it for a hobby. I made my first purchase, the T4i and I really love it. I was recording video with it but for some reason I'm not satisfied with the quality. I feel like it could come out way better. I provided a link to it for those who wouldn't mind checking it. Another question is can other lenses increase video quality?


Meh I decided to upload it to youtube
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J9Uabf5DoBw&feature=youtu.be


----------



## S3ason

Looks pretty good to me.
What doesn't look good to you? Framerates, focus, etc.


----------



## theturbofd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *S3ason*
> 
> Looks pretty good to me.
> What doesn't look good to you? Framerates, focus, etc.


It just seems blurry to me. Maybe I'm over looking it? But i was thinking it might be a bit more crisp.


----------



## Faraz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> I was. It could be more than 400 feet, just an estimate.


I'm not able to see the EXIF. What shutter speed were you at? That picture quality doesn't really make sense.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> Low money, man.


This has nothing to do with money, it's about your base for adequacy -- if these pictures are "not bad" to you, you should have saved a few bucks and bought the crappiest mega-zoom bridge camera that exists. Learn how to use your gear appropriately, and don't settle for garbage like what you posted.


----------



## Azefore

Considering the size of the crops on a 18mp T2i file at 250mm, yah that's what I'd expect of it, even more so in a corner on even at F9............................


----------



## Dream Killer

sub was talking about the content and composition of the image not the technical iq of the image.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Wait, you have multiple cycles, but you prefer to run? BLASPHEMY. WHO DOES THAT?
> 
> 
> 
> How many feet of snow are in _your_ streets?
Click to expand...

http://surlybikes.com/bikes/moonlander


----------



## sub50hz

It's less a matter of the snow than the probability of eating it and having another back surgery. Nevertheless, it rained hard this week and cleared the streets, and I finally got leg warmers so I can ride tomorrow morning.


----------



## Dream Killer

i keed.

i find that regular leg warmers - the ones that's like a sleeve - are inadequate for riding. they tend to creep down your leg specially if you use them at a high cadence. once in a while i have to stop and pull them up like socks. that got annoying after about a week so i got a legit thermal bib tight with ankle loops and never looked back since. it's also much more comfortable.

edit, these are similar to the ones i have: http://www.pearlizumi.com/publish/content/pi_2010/us/en/index/products/men/ride/apparel/0.-productCode-11111233.html


----------



## sub50hz

They're really just some UnderArmour pants that I've been running in and just recently realized I could probably ride with them under my bib shorts. Riding hasn't been too much of a priority lately, but I am gettin the itch to get off the trainer/rollers and hit the pavement.


----------



## dmanstasiu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> They're really just some UnderArmour pants that I've been running in and just recently realized I could probably ride with them under my bib shorts. Riding hasn't been too much of a priority lately, but I am gettin the itch to get off the trainer/rollers and hit the pavement.


Last sunday when I was skiing it was super sunny ... I can't wait to start biking again


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Faraz*
> 
> I'm not able to see the EXIF. What shutter speed were you at? That picture quality doesn't really make sense.


I think 160. I don't think anyone can expect sharpness on a full crop with such a lens.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Azefore*
> 
> Considering the size of the crops on a 18mp T2i file at 250mm, yah that's what I'd expect of it, even more so in a corner on even at F9............................


It was center at f9.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> sub was talking about the content and composition of the image not the technical iq of the image.


I have some artsy, what I would consider good, shots. I don't really see how I can do that at 400 feet with a 250mm though. Sure, those shots were awful, but it's not everyday that people get pictures of hawks.


----------



## ljason8eg

The 55-250 is pretty sharp in the center when stopped down. The corners suck, but that might not matter depending on your subject matter. Of course, no lens is going to resolve a lot of detail if the subject isn't taking up much of the frame.


----------



## dmanstasiu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Faraz*
> 
> I'm not able to see the EXIF. What shutter speed were you at? That picture quality doesn't really make sense.
> 
> 
> 
> I think 160. I don't think anyone can expect sharpness on a full crop with such a lens.
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Azefore*
> 
> Considering the size of the crops on a 18mp T2i file at 250mm, yah that's what I'd expect of it, even more so in a corner on even at F9............................
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It was center at f9.
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> sub was talking about the content and composition of the image not the technical iq of the image.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I have some artsy, what I would consider good, shots. I don't really see how I can do that at 400 feet with a 250mm though. Sure, those shots were awful, but it's not everyday that people get pictures of hawks.
Click to expand...

Move to Vancouver







Red-tailed hawk and bald eagles are everywhere

During my summers on the sunshine coast, there was a man who, every day at 12, fed about 5-6 eagles with steaks. This man was retired, and the eagles were 1km + away, watching him, waiting for him to waive the steak and signal. It was amazing. When we were there, even though we were hidden inside, the eagles knew. This man just stood outside, and at precisely noon the eagles started coming 1 by 1, to have their steaks. In total I'd say there were about 6-7 and they all waited, with about 3-4 minutes in between.


----------



## Azefore

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> The 55-250 is pretty sharp in the center when stopped down. The corners suck, but that might not matter depending on your subject matter. Of course, no lens is going to resolve a lot of detail if the subject isn't taking up much of the frame.


+1, indeed what I was trying to get at


----------



## S3ason

Just some real quick sample shots from the D7100 with a 30 or 50mm f1.8, in case anyone was looking at this camera.

















So far moire isn't a problem. On the bag you could see it from some angles but it's easy enough to avoid.


----------



## sub50hz

Would be interested in a high-contrast scene at base ISO, f/8. Work that DR.


----------



## Delta6326

Here are a few I took, it's been a long time since I've been out.

Testing out my Hacked T2i, can now do more ISO range and Shutter speeds.




This ones a little bright, I was testing that day how fast I could do Manual on the fly.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *S3ason*
> 
> So far moire isn't a problem. On the bag you could see it from some angles but it's easy enough to avoid.


Moire really is hard to avoid under more extreme situations. These newer cameras do handle it very well but honestly its generally been a much larger issue for video than stills. I personally feel as though most people are overly critical as the human eye experiences the annoying effects of moire with certain patters lol. Honestly, i wouldnt concern myself with the silly concerns that the masses on the internet share because in reality if someone becomes critical of a shot because of a flaw due to the camera and something that naturally exists, then it quickly becomes very difficult to to appreciate and improve as a photographer when they are more concerned about something technical rather than the aesthetics of a visually compelling image that tells a story with a single frame or even at 24/30 frames per second


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Redemption for my shots the other day?


----------



## GoneTomorrow




----------



## zoidbergslo

Oh dear who would do something like that to a camera


----------



## scottath

At least it wont get stolen.....

Yesterdays Sunrise:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/scottath/8561044281/
Cathedral Rocks by scottath, on Flickr

Was different - played around with some things - panos at F4, F2 and this one at F22. Even a stitched pano with the big stopper on.....
Others are here: https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.403178456444848.1073741826.134282906667739&type=3


----------



## MistaBernie

the 28-135, I can understand, but why the 7D?!


----------



## sub50hz

Found this gem of a spot last night whilst "out on the town". Need to go back with something other than my phone.


----------



## raptorxrx

I don't get it, do the boxes all have candles? lol


----------



## sub50hz

It's an old bank that got converted into a Walgreen's.


----------



## MistaBernie

I've taken more unique photos in the last two days than I have in the last two months (I don't count the time lapse I did of the Blizzard of 2013 (February version) since the files all look so similar)... and one of my favorites from this weekend happened to be a candid I grabbed while I was taking photos of my best friend's new born baby.

And no, you can't see it. It's my precious.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> I've taken more unique photos in the last two days than I have in the last two months (I don't count the time lapse I did of the Blizzard of 2013 (February version) since the files all look so similar)... and one of my favorites from this weekend happened to be a candid I grabbed while I was taking photos of my best friend's new born baby.
> 
> And no, you can't see it. It's my precious.


lol well despite you not sharing, its good to hear youre pleased with your recent captures


----------



## funfortehfun

Ordered a 35mm DX for my recent birthday, can't wait to get it in the mail!


----------



## S3ason

I'm using it right now, along with a 50mm 1.8, and I really like it. Awesome bokeh and its fast









Thinking about trading the 50 + cash for a 18-200 or macro lens, not sure which yet.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *S3ason*
> 
> I'm using it right now, along with a 50mm 1.8, and I really like it. Awesome bokeh and its fast
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thinking about trading the 50 + cash for a 18-200 or macro lens, not sure which yet.


get the macro

hyper zooms are full of compromises.....


----------



## funfortehfun

105mm f/2.8 is a great macro. Wonderful creamy bokeh and vivid colors.


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> get the macro
> 
> hyper zooms are full of compromises.....












had an 18-200 before, sure you get the versatility but i always find something lacking from it
ended up selling it and sticking with my 35mm..

that 105 VR is one of my dream lenses .. plus it can double as a portrait lens!


----------



## S3ason

Any thoughts on the Tokina 100mm AT-X f2.8?

Ken Rockwell seems to like it very much, though I don't worship his word like most. I've never used a off brand lens and I really don't know how I feel about them, but I am open to using them if the performance is there. Price on the Tokina is very friendly


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *S3ason*
> 
> Any thoughts on the Tokina 100mm AT-X f2.8?
> 
> Ken Rockwell seems to like it very much, though I don't worship his word like most. I've never used a off brand lens and I really don't know how I feel about them, but I am open to using them if the performance is there. Price on the Tokina is very friendly


Please don't say you are getting recommendations based on his site. Apart from his reviews to get specs of a camera, everything else he says is just stupid.

The Sigma 105mm is a good budget choice too. The Sigma 150 or Nikon 105 would be better but a bit more expensive.


----------



## S3ason

Trust me, Rockwell is not my primary source. The fact that he leaves all his nice glass at home and uses his 18-200 90% of the time becuase they're "too heavy" shows how dedicated he is.

I'll take a look at the Sigma, but build quality is rather important to me and I know the Sigma is a bit shoddy.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *S3ason*
> 
> The fact that he leaves all his nice glass at home and uses his 18-200 90% of the time becuase they're "too heavy" shows how dedicated he is.


Dedication is not directly related to how much you can or are willing to carry.


----------



## MistaBernie

quality of a particular lens is only relevant if it's useful for what you're shooting.

EX) The new Sigma 35 or the Canon 35L are fantastic lenses and relatively lightweight. It's not always the best choice though - bring that 35mm prime to a wildlife habitat, and enjoy all your shots looking like you're standing behind a fence.


----------



## mz-n10

all 1:1 marcos are good lenses.

personally i find 100mm too short for a macro so I would just pony up the extra cash for a 150mm. But if you want something good in the 100mm range the tamron 90mm is one of the more popular lens.


----------



## cookiesowns

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *S3ason*
> 
> I'll take a look at the Sigma, but build quality is rather important to me and I know the Sigma is a bit shoddy.


I'm not exactly sure what lens you're referring to, but the 50 EX I own has fantastic build quality. I guess you could say that sigma has a history of poor Q/A and focus accuracy, but newer batches have shown improvements.


----------



## theturbofd

Hey guys I'm looking to do a little time lapse of some traffic on the high way at night. Do you guys have any tips? I'm new at this stuff but I'm starting to get the hang of certain things. Here's some questions I have

-How long would my time lapse be? I have a 32gb sandisk SD card and I guess I would have to shoot in RAW correct?

-What would be good settings for pictures at night in a well lit area? ISO,Aperature, F/s etc... ( I will be using the 18-55mm macro lense my T4i came with)

- I know I will need a tripod( Any recommendations for good cheap one for now?) but what other equipment shall I need?

thanks :]


----------



## boogschd

*im no expert *

just shoot jpeg since youll be rendering them into a movie anyway

settings.. probably f/8-10?, shutter .. maybe 5-10sec ?
base iso

best to use a remote/intervalometer .. im not sure if the t4i has an intervalometer function in camera (or maybe magic lantern ?)

you could download a timelapse calculator app on your smartphone to find out how much photos you will take for a given time or determine how long a timelapse will be
with *X* number of photos with your desired framerate

android - https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.explorerdc.timelapse.calculator&feature=search_result#?t=W251bGwsMSwxLDEsImNvbS5leHBsb3JlcmRjLnRpbWVsYXBzZS5jYWxjdWxhdG9yIl0.


----------



## cookiesowns

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *theturbofd*
> 
> Hey guys I'm looking to do a little time lapse of some traffic on the high way at night. Do you guys have any tips? I'm new at this stuff but I'm starting to get the hang of certain things. Here's some questions I have
> 
> -How long would my time lapse be? I have a 32gb sandisk SD card and I guess I would have to shoot in RAW correct?
> 
> -What would be good settings for pictures at night in a well lit area? ISO,Aperature, F/s etc... ( I will be using the 18-55mm macro lense my T4i came with)
> 
> - I know I will need a tripod( Any recommendations for good cheap one for now?) but what other equipment shall I need?
> 
> thanks :]


-I would do around 2.5-10 seconds depending on the amount of traffic flowing through.

-Night well lit area, it really depends. I'd highly suggest picking up a 50 f/1.8 for use during night, f/1.8 lets quite a bit more light in compared to f/3.5.

-Can't help you on this


----------



## biatchi

If you're shooting street stuff at night in jpeg you might be best changing the white balance to tungsten or custom.


----------



## theturbofd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *biatchi*
> 
> If you're shooting street stuff at night in jpeg you might be best changing the white balance to tungsten or custom.


Was really plan to shoot in RAW


----------



## S3ason

RAW is the way to go. I'm confused, are you doing time lapse or long exposures?


----------



## Sean Webster

People usually do timelapses in jepg to save space. You can use RAW all you like. I'd suggest sRAW (small raw, if you have it) to save space on the card depending on how many shots you take


----------



## Dream Killer

My camera refuses to advance. I will now proceed towards the nearest corner and cry 'till November.


----------



## sub50hz

Leica quality bro.


----------



## Dream Killer

It's weird tracing the seven stages of grief on myself. I still haven't reach the last one yet.


----------



## dudemanppl

Developing my first roll of E6!

Oops, developed it a stop over... Maybe even two. Poopy.


----------



## ivr56

Kit for event documenting tomorrow.

Nikon 3100 w/ 15-55mm Lens
Cannon T3i w/ 15-55mm Lens
Sigma 8-16mm Wide Angle lens
Sigma fish eye filter
Sunpack 6000PG Tripod
DIY Stabiity Rig


----------



## jlhawn

Oh Boy, I didn't know this thread was here, count me in.

Canon 40D DSLR
Canon EF28-135mm F3.5-5.6 IS USM
Canon EF100-400mm F4.5-5.6L IS USM
Canon 50mm Macro
Canon RS-80N3 Remote Switch
Tamron-F AF Tele-Converter
Canon SpeedLite 420EX
Dolica ProLine Tri-pod
Studio Lighting Kit.
I mostly do landscape photography
but just started with portraits as I was given the gift
of a grand daughter 2 years ago.


----------



## jlhawn

Mt Rainier Washington State.
this photo has not been edited by any type of photo shop software.


----------



## revro

thinking about this backpack
http://www.caselogic.com/en-US/US/Products/Camera-Cases/View-All/SLRC_-_206_-_BLACK_-__-_SLRCameraLaptopBackpack
but question arises, how to protect camera from being stolen. or is it hard to open it without wearer to realize it? or do you guys put a lock on it?
also i think i will buy 2x 32gb sd cards for my d7100 i plan to purchase in autumn. is it enough for occasional photographer?

thank you
revro


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *revro*
> 
> thinking about this backpack
> http://www.caselogic.com/en-US/US/Products/Camera-Cases/View-All/SLRC_-_206_-_BLACK_-__-_SLRCameraLaptopBackpack
> but question arises, how to protect camera from being stolen. or is it hard to open it without wearer to realize it? or do you guys put a lock on it?
> also i think i will buy 2x 32gb sd cards for my d7100 i plan to purchase in autumn. is it enough for occasional photographer?
> 
> thank you
> revro


using a small lock would probably be a good idea ?

or maybe get something that has side access instead of a toploading one ?
kata 3n1-25pl

i use something like this but its an older model (3n1-22)

or a shoulder bag instead of a back pack








lowepro stealth reporter d650aw

i use 2x16GB cards on my D7k, never ran out space
youd probably want 32GB cards if you do a lot of video work, otherwise, 16GB cards will do


----------



## ivr56

Picked up a Lowepro CopmuDay Photo 150 bag the other day.
Great messenger bag. Fit my 13" laptop, 2 DLSRs and 3 lens's just fine


----------



## ROM3000

Hey everyone. I picked up a used Nikon 35mm f/1.8g yesterday and I'm loving the lens. The bokeh seems to be so creamy in comparison with my kit lens. Here a sample photo. Tell me what you guys think.


----------



## laboitenoire

Is it weird that all my prints on RC paper have the exact same exposure? It seems like no matter what print I'm working on, I always seem to like 7.5 s at f/11 the most on the test strip...


----------



## dmanstasiu

My first camera


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dmanstasiu*
> 
> My first camera
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


i have that wallpaper on my phone. lolz


----------



## scottath

Nice handwriting dmanstasiu - if i was to write anything you would struggle to understand.


----------



## dmanstasiu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scottath*
> 
> Nice handwriting dmanstasiu - if i was to write anything you would struggle to understand.


I just started practising haha, I got my new pen in







I still feel like it's really sloppy but meh. it'll come with time


----------



## MistaBernie

you named a polaroid Joffrey? That's just mean.


----------



## dmanstasiu

I didn't name him that. He had that name when I got him from the Thrift store.


----------



## MistaBernie

Oh. That's perfectly acceptable then.


----------



## MistaBernie

Random observation: seems like an uptic of 35L's for sale on Fred Miranda at the moment. An indicator that the Sigma 35 is as good as the reviews, or people growing out of an awesome lens (??)


----------



## Conspiracy

i would hope people are not growing tired of such a great lens. that would be a sad day


----------



## MistaBernie

used it alot at PAX East last week. Worked out great.


----------



## sub50hz

Today is a good day.


----------



## silvrr

Anyone looking for a Canon 10-22? I may or may not have one for sale.


----------



## MistaBernie

Nice Sub.

No big purchases for me anytime soon (well besides the house we came to an agreement on, on Monday night)


----------



## sub50hz

I actually traded a friend for my GA645i -- both of us wanted what the other had, but wanted to spend some time shooting with each to be sure. So it's a trade if it works out for the both of us, and if not I'll be happy to fall back to the super-portable GA.


----------



## sub50hz

I think I'll be doing a bunch of mini-reviews tonight or tomorrow. Stay tuned.


----------



## Plutonium10

I'd like to join the club. There's some awesome pictures on here!









My gear:
Canon EOS 7D
Canon EF-S 15-85 IS USM
Canon EF 70-300L IS USM
Canon EF 100L IS USM Macro
Arca-Swiss Z1 ballhead
Gitzo GT2531 carbon tripod.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

How close were you for the 3rd and 4th shot?


----------



## Plutonium10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> How close were you for the 3rd and 4th shot?


Fairly close, actually. Probably about 10 feet away for the 4th one. EF 70-300 L + super sneaky ninja skills.


----------



## boogschd

third shot is nice

welcome !


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Plutonium10*
> 
> Fairly close, actually. Probably about 10 feet away for the 4th one. EF 70-300 L + super sneaky ninja skills.


That's about what I was thinking. Nice.


----------



## S3ason

That is one pissed off owl.

Very nice pictures


----------



## WhiteZetsu

I have a Sony NEX-7 with an 18-55mm F/3.5-5.6 garbage kit lens, and a 50mm F/1.8 prime lens. I've had no classes on photography but I just tried to figure it out I guess lol.

http://store.sony.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ProductDisplay?catalogId=10551&storeId=10151&langId=-1&productId=8198552921666375219



There's how small this thing is in my hand. Technically it's not a DSLR but it has the same exact APS-C CMOS sensor that the Sony a77 has. You can get a $400 adapter for it to give it the same exact translucent mirror technology that the high end Sony DSLR's have now with phase detect auto focus and it becomes an alpha mount adapter as well to use any high end Sony lens fully compatible.





Here's two asain girls holding it next to the a Sony full frame DSLR. Look how small it is compared to the average DSLR lol

But people say that the NEX camera's suck so I might get flamed for it :/



Here's a pic of the sky I took, in the city near DC, and that is actually a borealus effect in the corner. It was on ISO 100 with a 30 second shutter time


----------



## jlhawn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *WhiteZetsu*
> 
> I have a Sony NEX-7 with an 18-55mm F/3.5-5.6 garbage kit lens, and a 50mm F/1.8 prime lens. I've had no classes on photography but I just tried to figure it out I guess lol.
> 
> http://store.sony.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ProductDisplay?catalogId=10551&storeId=10151&langId=-1&productId=8198552921666375219
> 
> 
> 
> There's how small this thing is in my hand. Technically it's not a DSLR but it has the same exact APS-C CMOS sensor that the Sony a77 has. You can get a $400 adapter for it to give it the same exact translucent mirror technology that the high end Sony DSLR's have now with phase detect auto focus and it becomes an alpha mount adapter as well to use any high end Sony lens fully compatible.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here's two asain girls holding it next to the a Sony full frame DSLR. Look how small it is compared to the average DSLR lol
> 
> But people say that the NEX camera's suck so I might get flamed for it :/
> 
> 
> 
> Here's a pic of the sky I took, in the city near DC, and that is actually a borealus effect in the corner. It was on ISO 100 with a 30 second shutter time


I won't say it sucks as it's your camera and if you like it then that's cool with me, also that pic you took is kinda cool looking.


----------



## WhiteZetsu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jlhawn*
> 
> I won't say it sucks as it's your camera and if you like it then that's cool with me, also that pic you took is kinda cool looking.


Thanks lol









This camera gets bad reviews though


----------



## jlhawn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *WhiteZetsu*
> 
> Thanks lol
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This camera gets bad reviews though


I have owned lots of things in my lifetime that had bad reviews but the product was good too me.


----------



## WhiteZetsu

haha yeah me too. products that come to mind are my NEX-7, my Alienware Tactx, Vmoda crossfade LP (best headphones Iv'e ever heard and beat my old HD595's hands down, but they hav e well over 600 hours of burn in and I use a good USB DAC) my old gateway 24 inch S-IPS monitor got a few bad reviews, list goes on lol









But I usually have very specific needs when looking for a product. with a keyboard it's all about key spacing layout and the ergonomics of how the keys click, how solid it feels but I don't like mechanical switch keyboard at all, the sound itself matters how it sounds when I type, durability matters too. backlighting is nice for night time, but meh. my G15 rev 2.0 has survived being chewed up my dog, Iv'e refabricated the USB cord re-soldering it into the circuit board half a dozen times so far, it's been through over a dozen spills, Iv'e put it in the dishwasher without the pcb to clean it several times, it's survived countless cigarette cherries followed by me cursing... Thing just won't die, and it gets more comfortable to type on year by year, yet many keyboard elitists hate it. I can't even type on a Dell OEM keyboard anymore without looking like a 4 year old typed on it lol.

With my camera, it was portability, versatility, straight up sensor quality and lenses available, video was nice but meh. World's first OLED viewfinder is much more wonderful to use than a standard mirror viewfinder. It's basically an infinite contrast ratio mini live view display as a viewfinder. That and the form factor with that sensor alone without half the features would've sold me on my camera, but things like the tri navi selection system, mini pop up flash when you need it, endless lens attachments available without being full framed, almost any lens adapter ever made is produced cheap for it. it's durable magnesium frame, solid metal mounting surfaces, nice flipable LCD live view, 1080P blu ray bitrate quality and format video with the successor to the $2000 Sony handycam's sensor is very good quality, simple alpha mount with translucent mirror tech literally turns it into a high end alpha DSLR. It's more ergonomic and easier to use than any DSLR iv'e used. I used to have a NEX 5 which I started on and they pretty much fixed anything bad about that camera. The only thing that could possibly be better about the NEX-7 is NFC, WiFi, and an android system, advanced fring field display touchscreen and maybe a little better performance above 3200 ISO, but that's just a limitation to current CMOS sensor technology being 24+ mp IMO.

not the best camera ever made, perhaps overpriced at a grand for the body alone, but for my uses it more than pays for itself. I'd still be using my old NEX-5 if someone didn't break in my old home and steal it though


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *WhiteZetsu*
> 
> It's basically an infinite contrast ratio mini live view display as a viewfinder.


Lol. No.


----------



## Eggs and bacon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Lol. No.


^

I really have no idea how a digital view finder can be better then optical.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Eggs and bacon*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Lol. No.
> 
> 
> 
> ^
> 
> I really have no idea how a digital view finder can be better then optical.
Click to expand...

it has its uses. more for video than still photography in my opinion


----------



## Eggs and bacon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> it has its uses. more for video than still photography in my opinion


good point, wasn't thinking of video as I very rarely use it myself.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> it has its uses. more for video than still photography in my opinion


It still isn't "infinite contrast".


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> it has its uses. more for video than still photography in my opinion
> 
> 
> 
> It still isn't "infinite contrast".
Click to expand...

lol wut. pretty sure thats not possible


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> lol wut. pretty sure thats not possible


Turn off the digital LCD viewfinder and turn it back on. INFINITE CONTRAST RATIO.


----------



## sub50hz

Think I'm gonna sell my D7k. Tired of enormous SLRs.


----------



## registered99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Think I'm gonna sell my D7k. Tired of enormous SLRs.


What then?


----------



## sub50hz

Probably just gonna stick to the X100 and Hasselblad. It's a good two-camera kit for me.


----------



## scottath

Many of you will have already seen a number of the images ive posted in this thread below - but im keen to get some criticing on my work - as hard as you want.
I tend to learn best by listening to others opinions - then reasoning that opinion/changing my style slightly to improve it - so the harder your comments the better.

Any and all comments would be appreciated.
Ill be posting a walkthrough of my methods in the thread/another thread soon too.

Thanks guys:

http://www.overclock.net/t/1377788/critic-please-few-landscapes-18/0_50


----------



## Plutonium10

I really can't find much to critique. They are all fantastic and I can only hope that one day I'll be able to take pictures that good.


----------



## scottath

And thats my problem - there is always ways to improve - just no-one speaks up about it








Oh well - someone will hopefully find some things in the end.

Ill be posting a walkthrough of my methods in the thread/another thread soon too. Your 15-85 will work fine, as would the 70-300L. I shoot @ 70-100mm on my 70-200L from time to time, else most of the shots are 50mm stitched.
Grad filters help reduce the work ALOT! but the same results can be done in PS with some bracketing (not that ive done that really though)


----------



## Plutonium10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scottath*
> 
> And thats my problem - there is always ways to improve - just no-one speaks up about it
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh well - someone will hopefully find some things in the end.
> 
> Ill be posting a walkthrough of my methods in the thread/another thread soon too. Your 15-85 will work fine, as would the 70-300L. I shoot @ 70-100mm on my 70-200L from time to time, else most of the shots are 50mm stitched.
> Grad filters help reduce the work ALOT! but the same results can be done in PS with some bracketing (not that ive done that really though)


Yeah, I've got the equipment, just not the know-how (yet). I just started working with Photoshop Elements recently when I got a nice IPS monitor for college, but previous to that I didn't edit anything and just took pictures for fun.


----------



## S3ason

Does anyone have suggestions on places to print based on price /quality? I'm looking for a 20 x 30 canvas or maybe even alumynized.


----------



## Unknownm

bought it used for 250 CAD. Unit works great, lens is decent shape but. However if I'm around 80-130mm pointing down, the lens moves all the way out to 200mm. I'm not sure if that's fixable but only annoying when pointing down.


----------



## S3ason

The zooming is called lens creep. There's not really any good solutions for lens creep, but you can use one of those 'livestrong' type bands to help. You put half of the band over the zoom ring and half on the lens body and it should stay when you hold the camera upside down. It may be more trouble than its worth though, most people learn to live with it. You may wanna search for other solutions too :thumbsup:


----------



## Unknownm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *S3ason*
> 
> The zooming is called lens creep. There's not really any good solutions for lens creep, but you can use one of those 'livestrong' type bands to help. You put half of the band over the zoom ring and half on the lens body and it should stay when you hold the camera upside down. It may be more trouble than its worth though, most people learn to live with it. You may wanna search for other solutions too :thumbsup:


I got a few options:

A) Grow 3rd arm (or make my current 3rd arm bigger and use it to hold the lens. Although this would be awkward in public areas and unsanitary)
B) Don't grow 3rd arm, use second and suck it up
C) New lens


----------



## ljason8eg

Even many the nicer zoom lenses with extending barrels will creep due to the weight of the front element.


----------



## Plutonium10

My 15-85 does it somewhere in the middle of the zoom range. It annoyed me at first, but I quickly got in the habit of putting the zoom ring back to 15mm after every shot and it hasn't bothered me since.


----------



## S3ason

Not using the lens hood or any filter could help :shrug:


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *S3ason*
> 
> Does anyone have suggestions on places to print based on price /quality? I'm looking for a 20 x 30 canvas or maybe even alumynized.


20x30? Lol.


----------



## S3ason

Whats wrong with 20 x 30?

Also, why are you so pretentious? Lol.


----------



## sub50hz

The DPI on a 20x30 print from _any_ DSLR would be atrociously bad.


----------



## S3ason

Then why not say that instead of laughing at my question? I've never had anything printed before so I had no clue, no reason to be a tool.


----------



## S3ason

http://daystarvisions.com/Docs/Tuts/HowLarge/pg1.html
This says an ideal print for a 12mp camera is about 10 x 15...why wouldnt a 20 x 30 from a 24mp camera work?

20 x 30 with 24mp is 200dpi. Not great, not horrible.


----------



## sub50hz

Check your methods.

http://www.bythom.com/printsizes.htm


----------



## S3ason

My methods are fine.

Formula: Pixels / DPI = Length

Width: (6000 pixels) / 200ppi = 30 Inches
Height: (4000 pixels) / 200ppi = 20 Inches

You can use this chart if you're still having trouble. http://www.foto-biz.com/Lightroom/Megapixels-vs-print-size

200ppi isn't great, but it's far from "atrociously bad"...


----------



## Dream Killer

i want that carlton shirt


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *S3ason*
> 
> My methods are fine.
> 
> Formula: Pixels / DPI = Length
> 
> Width: (6000 pixels) / 200ppi = 30 Inches
> Height: (4000 pixels) / 200ppi = 20 Inches
> 
> You can use this chart if you're still having trouble. http://www.foto-biz.com/Lightroom/Megapixels-vs-print-size
> 
> 200ppi isn't great, but it's far from "atrociously bad"...


Depends on how a 20x30 is being used.

If it's in a place where people can get up close and personal with it? It's not that great. If it's going to be something that must be viewed at a distance (For practical purposes, let's say 3ft +) then it's usable (but strictly usable, neither good nor terrible).


----------



## S3ason

The pictures are going up above my tv, so usually no closer then 4 feet or so, so it should be good enough. These are more for decoration then to showcase my work (I'm a pretty lousy photographer), so the quality was never a huge concern.


----------



## ClickJacker

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *S3ason*
> 
> The pictures are going up above my tv, so usually no closer then 4 feet or so, so it should be good enough. These are more for decoration then to showcase my work (I'm a pretty lousy photographer), so the quality was never a huge concern.


I was looking into getting some canvas prints a few months ago but never pulled the trigger due to price, but I found people really like *canvas on demand* . There is also http://www.easycanvasprints.com/ a bit cheaper and if you go to their facebook page you can get a free 8x10 by referring friends.


----------



## scottath

I've been published!!!! Magazine is (ATM) iPad only, but soon on other places too or so I'm told. Magazine is called InFocus Australia. Just started reading some of the other articles on a friends iPad too and its awesome!

https://itunes.apple.com/au/app/infocus-australasia/id627335324?mt=8

now to wait for android/web version.....

Slightly ecstatic atm......


----------



## revro

i have a question about d7000/d7100. liveview shows just the aps-c image not the entire frame from which final image will be cut?

thank you
revro


----------



## jlhawn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> 
> 
> i want that carlton shirt


go too this site, they have a couple Carlton shirts.

http://www.noisebot.com/?gclid=CMnolLvW4bUCFch7QgodoG8A2Q


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *revro*
> 
> i have a question about d7000/d7100. liveview shows just the aps-c image not the entire frame from which final image will be cut?
> 
> thank you
> revro


D7000 and D7100 are APS-C cameras, so the Live View image is exactly what you'll see in the final image. They also have 100% viewfinder coverage, so you'll see the entire image through there as well.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scottath*
> 
> I've been published!!!! Magazine is (ATM) iPad only, but soon on other places too or so I'm told. Magazine is called InFocus Australia. Just started reading some of the other articles on a friends iPad too and its awesome!
> 
> https://itunes.apple.com/au/app/infocus-australasia/id627335324?mt=8
> 
> now to wait for android/web version.....
> 
> Slightly ecstatic atm......


Do they include contact information for you or at least enough identification info to be able to find you? Also.. do you have a website set up? If you dont, I'd do that now and get cracking so that you jump to the head of the class in search engines (SEO, etc)


----------



## revro

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> D7000 and D7100 are APS-C cameras, so the Live View image is exactly what you'll see in the final image. They also have 100% viewfinder coverage, so you'll see the entire image through there as well.


if viewfinder shows everything that i see, whats the difference against fullframe in picture quality? i mean d7100 is 24mpixel so compared to 36mpixel of d800 they might actually be same in pixel per mm

then d7100 looks better and better, compared to d600

thank you
revro


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *S3ason*
> 
> The pictures are going up above my tv, so usually no closer then 4 feet or so, so it should be good enough. These are more for decoration then to showcase my work (I'm a pretty lousy photographer), so the quality was never a huge concern.


If you have a decent source image a 20x30 image from crop camera can be done and with decent results. They won't be museum quality prints or meet some peoples standards but I am happy with mine. I have two 24x36 canvas prints done, one from the 18mp 7D and one from a 15mp 50D. Both look fine to me and everyone else that has viewed them. Again I stress the importance of a good quality, sharp source file that is primarily un-cropped. See this post with some large prints from a 8MP camera (30D) that will meet most people quality standards.

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=736714

I wonder too if canvas is a bit more forgiving than a glossy print. I have been tempted to get one of my canvas shots printed via normal means to 24x36 and see how they compare.

Now, all that being said, go to your local museum, photography gallery ect. and search out a few images printed to this size that were shot with a medium format or large format camera and you will see the quality Sub50 is talking about. Even smaller prints from these larger cameras are amazing. A gallery of yousuf Karsh's work came through Chicago awhile back and they are pretty amazing prints. Now there is also the film aspect, and some darkroom magic at play but if I had the time and money I would love to be able to produce B&Ws like that.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *revro*
> 
> if viewfinder shows everything that i see, whats the difference against fullframe in picture quality? i mean d7100 is 24mpixel so compared to 36mpixel of d800 they might actually be same in pixel per mm
> 
> then d7100 looks better and better, compared to d600
> 
> thank you
> revro


24 MP on Nikon's APS-C sensor would equal 54 MP on a full frame with equal pixel density. The D600 is still going to produce better files, have cleaner high ISO and have better DOF control due to the larger sensor. The viewfinder has nothing to do with any of this.


----------



## S3ason

I love my d7100, but its definitely not a full frame camera. I'd recommend it if you don't care for things like iso performance and focal length cropping.

That's said, this camera is incredible. It sits at the top in this odd "pro feature in crop body" lineup. It's fantastically sharp, but you're gunna need good glass to see it. ISO is usable up to 3200, not horrible not great.


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *revro*
> 
> i have a question about d7000/d7100. liveview shows just the aps-c image not the entire frame from which final image will be cut?
> 
> thank you
> revro


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *revro*
> 
> if viewfinder shows everything that i see, whats the difference against fullframe in picture quality? i mean d7100 is 24mpixel so compared to 36mpixel of d800 they might actually be same in pixel per mm
> 
> then d7100 looks better and better, compared to d600
> 
> thank you
> revro


I think your confusing 'full frame" and 100% viewfinder coverage.

Full Frame is a commonly used term to mean a camera with a sensor equal to that of 35mm film (36×24 mm). Below is a comparison of sensor sizes.


The viewfinder coverage states what percentage of the image the sensor sees is projected into the viewfinder by the sensor and pentaprism.

For example here is a shot showing 85% viewfinder coverage. The red line represents what was seen in the viewfinder. It has no impact on image quality, simply composition. Most modern DSLRs are in the 95-100% coverage range. You will simply need to be aware if your camera doesn't have 100% coverage that your final shot will have a bit more to the image than what you see in the viewfinder. Live view will show 100% of the coverage of the sensor, what you see is what you get.


----------



## Conspiracy

2/3" sensors FTW just saying
















but in all seriousness. really love shooting broadcast quality 2/3" cameras


----------



## S3ason

Also note that if you're using a camera like the d7100, live view should be avoided. I really only use it when I'm getting low with a tripod, and that's only when I can't get a little dirty. Also, any aperture changes do not show up in liveview. You can change the aperture of the shot, but your screen won't show it.


----------



## MistaBernie

There's nothing inherently wrong with using liveview. Also, to preview what depth of field will look like on Canon cameras in viewfinders, just use the DOF Preview button..


----------



## Plutonium10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> There's nothing inherently wrong with using liveview. Also, to preview what depth of field will look like on Canon cameras in viewfinders, just use the DOF Preview button..


Yes. It's really, really nice when doing 1:1 macro work. Now if only they would put the DOF preview button in a better location! It's my biggest gripe about Canon ergonomics.


----------



## S3ason

My old XTi even had the funky preview button. I don't know why they still use that location...


----------



## scottath

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Do they include contact information for you or at least enough identification info to be able to find you? Also.. do you have a website set up? If you dont, I'd do that now and get cracking so that you jump to the head of the class in search engines (SEO, etc)


I didnt see a link at all in the article, but i wasnt looking for one (and dont own an ipad to check), but used my Full name so shouldnt be too hard to find.
My website exists but sucks so much, so i dont link anyone to it anyhow.
Search my name and photography and my facebook page comes up first.
Search it without photography and i have no hope even with SEO - the other "Scott Atherton" is the President and CEO at American Le Mans Series. No way ill beat the seo of that.


----------



## silvrr

Something I put together to show what different magnifications look like on the same subject.


Magnification Example v.2 by ArMPhotography, on Flickr


----------



## sub50hz

silvrr, do you work in the Loop?


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> silvrr, do you work in the Loop?


Yeah. Wabash and Monroe.


----------



## sub50hz

I'm a block away -- hit me up if you wanna get down on a lunchtime photo walk.


----------



## Dream Killer

bam chika wow wow


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> bam chika wow wow


----------



## nvidiaftw12

What would you all recommend for a free panorama maker?


----------



## laboitenoire

Hugin. Completely free, works pretty well.


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> What would you all recommend for a free panorama maker?


microsoft ICE, free, and works well IMO.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

I'll check them out. Thanks.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Hugin was a bit complex for me, but ICE worked very well. Thanks.


----------



## dmanstasiu

I finally got my Polaroid to give out a nice picture







Played with the darkness setting and tried a different method to protect it from the light. Super happy with the result, newfound confidence since I know my camera isn't broken


----------



## boogschd




----------



## grazz1984

Hiya people im looking for a cheep but good dslr camera im only a beginner so I don't really know what im looking for at the moment. Thanks


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *grazz1984*
> 
> Hiya people im looking for a cheep but good dslr camera im only a beginner so I don't really know what im looking for at the moment. Thanks


Why do you want a DSLR? What do you want to shoot? What is your budget?


----------



## grazz1984

by budget is about £200 and I want it for pictures of my kids, cars, scenery ive been looking at the sony alpha a100k


----------



## nvidiaftw12

I would buy used at that budget.


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> I would buy used at that budget.


I think that's what he is going for. Since the Alpha a100 is rather old. For just regular snapshots any DSLR would do fine. A Nikon D3100 would be a good choice.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aksthem1*
> 
> I think that's what he is going for. Since the Alpha a100 is rather old. For just regular snapshots any DSLR would do fine. A Nikon D3100 would be a good choice.


What I was thinking as well. Or what about maybe something older and larger, like the d60?

E: deal on a Canon 24-105 if anyone is looking for one. http://www.ebay.com/itm/Canon-EF-24-105mm-f-4L-USM-Autofocus-Lens-/230959863841


----------



## Chunky_Chimp

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Think I'm gonna sell my D7k. Tired of enormous SLRs.


Late reply, but enormous just compared to your other cameras? Our Best Buy finally put a D7000 on display (usually they have nothing good out of any market on display) and I checked it out, and it's just BARELY comfortable for me. I said before that my D5100 is very small in my hands, and I thought the 7000 would be a lot better, but it's not. The taller grip did fit my fingers better, but despite being quite a bit bigger than the 5100 it still doesn't quite fit my whole hand right. I wonder if they'll ever make a non-full-frame camera for people with bear-paw hands...


----------



## S3ason

Nikon does seem to gear there grips towards smaller hands. I've got big hands and the D7100 is just barely useable for me. Love the camera, but Nikon needs to work on their ergonomics.

I believe the upper level Canon crop body dslr's have better grips (60d), but still not as comfortable as their full frame options.


----------



## sub50hz

It's much easier for me to carry other cameras that I own, resulting in more time shooting and less time worrying about what else I need to fit in my bag. It's a decently small SLR on its own, but with the grip and a larger lens it becomes too cumbersome to take as a daily driver. I don't need two digital cameras in my bag every day, and the X100 is such a joy to shoot that it renders my D7000 unnecessary for everything but BMX and the occasional portrait (which I prefer to do with the RB anyway). Between the Hassy and the Fuji, i can have two very different but very complementary cameras in a small bag every single day and still have room for other important things I need for work. The D7000 is a good camera, but I'm not that enthusiastic about using it after having it for a half-year -- I feel the same way about most DSLRs these days. They certainly have their place, but I don't believe outside of a few specialized scenarios that I have any need for it anymore.


----------



## Chunky_Chimp

Yeah, I see what you mean, but I think I'll be in that phase for quite a while.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *S3ason*
> 
> Nikon does seem to gear there grips towards smaller hands. I've got big hands and the D7100 is just barely useable for me. Love the camera, but Nikon needs to work on their ergonomics.


The shape Nikon usually grafts onto their cameras is fine, it's the size that's a problem for me. If I had the resources I'd gut a D7100 and put it in a similarly shaped body with a grip as big around as the bottom third of a wine bottle. That might do it for me.


----------



## S3ason

Someone needs to make replacement grips for cameras...not battery grips but actual replacements for the cameras grip. Its just a piece of rubber on my camera.
Something I hadn't though about, a battery grip can help you with your problem. It gives you a larger area to hold onto?


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *S3ason*
> 
> Someone needs to make replacement grips for cameras...not battery grips but actual replacements for the cameras grip. Its just a piece of rubber on my camera.
> Something I hadn't though about, a battery grip can help you with your problem. It gives you a larger area to hold onto?


they do. you can either requisition them from canon/nikon and try to diy or you an send it to them for cleaning. cleaning involves sensor, replacing the mirror box's anti-reflection foam, inside the viewfinder assembly and replacement of the grips. the d700 i had costs somewhere around $90-120 to clean so it's not that bad.


----------



## Chunky_Chimp

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *S3ason*
> 
> Someone needs to make replacement grips for cameras...not battery grips but actual replacements for the cameras grip. Its just a piece of rubber on my camera.
> Something I hadn't though about, a battery grip can help you with your problem. It gives you a larger area to hold onto?


Hmm, that would be a good idea, actually. In fact, a large enough replacement grip could hold a second battery, to sweeten the deal.


----------



## S3ason

And improves continuous shutter speeds on some models! D7100 gets bumped to 8 fps with a grip


----------



## Conspiracy

i havent shared anything in a long time, but a recent short walk around a lake with my girlfriend gave me the chance to snap a few shots as the sun set. Honestly have been trying to get into landscape photography by traveling to state parks around GA more to get outside and hike as taking photos is something extra to enjoy while taking short mini-vacations







but yea... snapped this shot which i think is the best landscape shot i have taken so far in my past few months of attempted landscape photography







but yea im pretty happy with this one







also really enjoying my 17-40


----------



## MistaBernie

Nice stuff sir.. My two nit picks would be 1) cutting off half a tree on the right and 2) cutting off the reflection on the bottom. Other than that though, I like this alot.


----------



## Azefore

Talking about grips I played with 6D (with 24-105), 5DIII, D600 and D800 at my local bestbuy some more. All I got to say is that I'd kill for the 5D's grip on D800. 6D is plenty enough but the 5D is just heaven for medium-large hands and my hats off to Canon for their MKI-III grip ergos. The D800 doesn't feel that far away from my D7000 but it certainly is better and the D600 isn't as good feeling as it should be for the price.


----------



## Conspiracy

got bored and built one of those DIY cardboard lightboxes for product photography. looking for random interesting things around the house to take photos of. still tweaking and playing with the position of stuff since i am new to this lol

this was my first test shots


----------



## scottath

Nicely done! - Do you have a wide pic of the setup? Looks like the diy is working rather well there.


----------



## dmanstasiu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scottath*
> 
> Nicely done! - Do you have a wide pic of the setup? Looks like the diy is working rather well there.


my thoughts exactly


----------



## MistaBernie

Is it just me or is one of your lights in a weird spot - shadow straight to the left of the lens? You should get a tiny reflector in the front to get the front / underneath of the lens..


----------



## silvrr

When I had my llght box I found it helpful to shine all the lights/strobes on the walls which helps reduce shadows. Requires a bit more light or more exposure though.


----------



## Conspiracy

needs a seconds light so to compensate i narrowed the light to be at 70mm and used it at 1/4 power and did my best to hold my breath and let it bounce of the ghetto white paper from the side as a bounce lol







these are all taken with the 17-40 at f16. probably not the ideal lens if i did this professionally but its my only lens that has a close MFD



still trying to get it finely tuned with settings and position of everything. definitely a fun way to kill time and experiment

















ideally i think if i had 3 total lights for 2 on each side and one above that is diffused more than the 2 side lights that would make for the idea setup but also take more learning and tweaking to get it all set just right


----------



## sub50hz

Get new leather for that XD, you chump.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Get new leather for that XD, you chump.


i know i know lol. i totally forgot and planned on it a long time ago but got caught up with school :/


----------



## boogschd

interesting stuff

http://www.dpreview.com/news/2013/04/10/hyperlapse-converts-google-street-view-to-a-virtual-journey


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boogschd*
> 
> interesting stuff
> 
> http://www.dpreview.com/news/2013/04/10/hyperlapse-converts-google-street-view-to-a-virtual-journey


thats awesome!


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*


I'd get so many weird looks if I used this with company...


----------



## Conspiracy

mmm tapes... definitely a love hate relationship lol. Love that once its on the tape its not going anywhere but hate to capture and edit with them and swap them out every 60-80 minutes while recording


----------



## Conspiracy

This is more magical than Magnets... and you can ask ICP how magical magnets are LOLOLOL



*

http://www.lomography.com/magazine/tipster/2013/02/18/stratskis-knutselhoekje-de-janus-camera*


----------



## Eggs and bacon

For anyone shooting film, what is your favorite emulsion?


----------



## Engin

i am using olympus e-pl2. can someone tell me if going panasonic 20mm f1.7 + olympus vf-2 or save more for olympus om-d?
my mind is blowing...


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Eggs and bacon*
> 
> For anyone shooting film, what is your favorite emulsion?


Depends on format and subject for me. In 35mm I stick with Portra 400NC/Delta 400/Tmax 3200, but I prefer Tmax 400 and Portra 400 (new emulsion) for 6x4.5 and 6x6 -- and Delta 100 and Portra 160 are most often loaded in my 6x7 backs.


----------



## Conspiracy

FYI to people that work in the field or just need external HDD

Costco has 3TB seagate 'backup plus' drives that are pc and mac compatible with USB3.0 for $120

Was going to buy a cheap 1.5TB drive for backing up for upcoming field work but decided to get this instead. Now i just need to find cheap CF cards in bulk lol


----------



## MistaBernie

That's a pretty sweet deal if you're a member..


----------



## Conspiracy

Yea. My parents are which is nice. Just wish they had awesome deals on camera stuff. They have great deals on SD cards but dont sell CF :/ they also sell beginner kits for d3200, d5200, t3i, 60d, and 7d.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Engin*
> 
> i am using olympus e-pl2. can someone tell me if going panasonic 20mm f1.7 + olympus vf-2 or save more for olympus om-d?
> my mind is blowing...


what can the OMD do that the epl2 cannot?

the OMD is a better body hands down, but you will be limited to the kit lens it offers (assuming you dont have anything else) which isnt a bad lens but isnt the same league as the 20/1.8. OMD is also a larget body which may not fit into your shooting style/purpose.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> Yea. My parents are which is nice. Just wish they had awesome deals on camera stuff. They have great deals on SD cards but dont sell CF :/ they also sell beginner kits for d3200, d5200, t3i, 60d, and 7d.


costco in the bay area has d600 kits in a few stores also


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> Yea. My parents are which is nice. Just wish they had awesome deals on camera stuff. They have great deals on SD cards but dont sell CF :/ they also sell beginner kits for d3200, d5200, t3i, 60d, and 7d.


costco in the bay area has d600 kits in a few stores also[/quote]

yea. we had a D600 kit at my costco. i tried it out and kinda liked it but would prefer more testing of a non-display model. definitely felt nice to hold and test though. cant justify switching to nikon right now though :/


----------



## sub50hz

I think I am going to D800 this week. Bah.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> I think I am going to D800 this week. Bah.


BAH. such a drag shooting with that camera. its just too nice


----------



## sub50hz

D7000 is just... par. DX is like an afterthought to Nikon these days.


----------



## mz-n10

the d600 feels like a d7000 to me...and the AF feels slow.


----------



## sub50hz

That's why I'm gonna go with the D800.


----------



## mz-n10

the d800 is super nice, seriously the only reasonable camera i have envy for (havent played with a mk3 yet)

i thought you were done with large dslrs?


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> the d800 is super nice, seriously the only reasonable camera i have envy for (havent played with a mk3 yet)
> 
> i thought you were done with large dslrs?


D800 is no ordinary DSLR







its magical. i had one in my hands i was using as a secondary shooter to photograph an event. i really wanted to just walk away with it but i couldnt do that to my friend. was a D800 with an old nikon 50 1.4 that had an aperture ring. idk if that means its old or new, im used to canon digital lenses with no aperture ring on the lens


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> i thought you were done with large dslrs?


Yeah, so did I. Then I did some contract work Saturday with one, and I've gotta say -- it's really incredible.


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> That's why I'm gonna go with the D800.


I have 2 now. You won't be sorry..


----------



## revro

why now d800e, its like d7100 with full frame







at 36MPixel moire should not be an issue

best
revro


----------



## sub50hz

The lack of AA filter makes very little difference, and certainly would not be of use to me -- especially for the 10% price difference. If I was shooting models or portraiture on a budget, I would consider the D800e, but that's not my style.


----------



## sub50hz

Ok, D800 idea scrapped. I've been putting off buying a Mamiya 7 for almost 3 years, I think it's time.


----------



## Conspiracy

So just remembered we did it a loong time ago...

Whos interested in trying to start back up the photo projects where each week or time period there is a theme and everyone contributes to that themes thread.

Trying to think of stuff todo during the boredom of unemployment while seeking employment :/


----------



## sub50hz

I wish the f/11 challenge would have taken off.


----------



## Eggs and bacon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> The lack of AA filter makes very little difference, and certainly would not be of use to me -- especially for the 10% price difference. If I was shooting models or portraiture on a budget, I would consider the D800e, but that's not my style.


if the D800e is budget, is a hasselblad the full thing?


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Eggs and bacon*
> 
> if the D800e is budget, is a hasselblad the full thing?


or a pentax 645d or a mamiya or leica s2


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> I wish the f/11 challenge would have taken off.


agreed. that would be an excellent challenge that had tons of potential as well.

i think if we can get enough people interested in participating in challenges that the f11 should be the first challenge and then after a certain period of time we then begin the next challenge and rotate through themes to challenge people to leave their comfort zones when possible


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Eggs and bacon*
> 
> if the D800e is budget, is a hasselblad the full thing?


Digital Medium Format is incredible for studio work. It's also 10-20 times the cost of a D800. Budget is relative, I suppose -- but someone who is interested in doing serious studio work without a trust fund lining their pockets would be well off with the D800e as a "budget" option. Obviously, there are many, _many_ differences and it's not fair to compare DMF to FX, but I'm sure you see my point.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Digital Medium Format is incredible for studio work. It's also 10-20 times the cost of a D800. Budget is relative, I suppose -- but someone who is interested in doing serious studio work without a trust fund lining their pockets would be well off with the D800e as a "budget" option. Obviously, there are many, _many_ differences and it's not fair to compare DMF to FX, but I'm sure you see my point.


Is Marin still around? I remember him working with MF a lot for his school assignments. They looked great!


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Digital Medium Format is incredible for studio work. It's also 10-20 times the cost of a D800. Budget is relative, I suppose -- but someone who is interested in doing serious studio work without a trust fund lining their pockets would be well off with the D800e as a "budget" option. Obviously, there are many, _many_ differences and it's not fair to compare DMF to FX, but I'm sure you see my point.
> 
> 
> 
> Is Marin still around? I remember him working with MF a lot for his school assignments. They looked great!
Click to expand...

he only randomly shows when his name is mentioned lol. so he might pop back in soonish


----------



## sub50hz

Alright. So.

I'm not going to buy anything. Me so indecisive.


----------



## Conspiracy

Just stock up on more film or maybe a new lens so you have something new and different


----------



## sub50hz

I don't need anything different, I'm just being a consumer whore. I shot my 24 on the D800 over the weekend and it was magical. I get sucked in too easily.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> I get sucked in too easily, it was magical. .


did the D800 give you a kiss when it was over? youre a whore lol

must buy stuff. must spend money. i am a zombie mmmmmmmmm must spenddddddddd


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Sigma Confirms Rumors: The 18-35mm f/1.8 is the Real Deal


Quote:


> You might have heard the rumors about a new wide angle zoom lens with a crazy open aperture of f/1.8. Those rumors have just been confirmed to us by Sigma: it's real and it's the first zoom lens to maintain an f/1.8 aperture over the entire length of the zoom range. Now that is exciting. Meet the 18-35mm F1.8 DC HSM Art lens.


http://fstoppers.com/sigma-confirms-rumors-the-18-35mm-f1-8-is-the-real-deal










edit:
Quote:


> This revolutionary, wide aperture, standard zoom lens is created for DSLR cameras with *APS-C size sensors*, which translates to a focal range of 27-52.5mm on a 35mm camera.


i bet a lot of people wont be too thrilled by that.


----------



## ljason8eg

Interesting. Wonder how much that costs?


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> Interesting. Wonder how much that costs?


no word on the price yet :/

hopefully, its within reason


----------



## Eggs and bacon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boogschd*
> 
> http://fstoppers.com/sigma-confirms-rumors-the-18-35mm-f1-8-is-the-real-deal
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> edit:
> i bet a lot of people wont be too thrilled by that.


It would by a very nice standard zoom for aps-c, if the price is right i might get one. (of course assuming it's iq is decent)


----------



## ClickJacker

I have been thinking about replacing my 17-40 with a faster lens.


----------



## Conspiracy

... Really sigma... Make a fast zoom lens and its for crop cameras only. No wonder so many people are fed up with them.

Making that lens f1.8 is just mean to FF users. Also a zoom lens that fast is either going to be crazy expensive or they will make it super cheap and it will be the zoom verion of the 50 1.8.

Time will tell

If this lens turns out to kill everything and have better IQ than all of canons wide glass i am going to be pissed. Im really loving my 17-40, best lens i have ever owned


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> ... Really sigma... Make a fast zoom lens and its for crop cameras only. No wonder so many people are fed up with them.
> 
> Making that lens f1.8 is just mean to FF users. Also a zoom lens that fast is either going to be crazy expensive or they will make it super cheap and it will be the zoom verion of the 50 1.8.
> 
> Time will tell
> 
> If this lens turns out to kill everything and have better IQ than all of canons wide glass i am going to be pissed. Im really loving my 17-40, best lens i have ever owned


I wonder if its a technical issue that makes it crop only lens? i.e. its either to costly or impossible to make a FF version.


----------



## revro

or they believe they will make more money by selling it to dx crowd, you know make more money on volume

best
revro


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *revro*
> 
> or they believe they will make more money by selling it to dx crowd, you know make more money on volume
> 
> best
> revro


More money on volume would be making it available to FF and croppers. Croppers can use any lens whether designed for FF or APS-C. Plus Im guessing this is going to cost more than the average soccer mom with a APS-C camera is going to shell out for a lens.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *silvrr*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *revro*
> 
> or they believe they will make more money by selling it to dx crowd, you know make more money on volume
> 
> best
> revro
> 
> 
> 
> More money on volume would be making it available to FF and croppers. Croppers can use any lens whether designed for FF or APS-C. Plus Im guessing this is going to cost more than the average soccer mom with a APS-C camera is going to shell out for a lens.
Click to expand...

yea something like this is costly to make which is why pretty much all zoom lenses are widest at f2.8. its costly to make really fast lenses which is why primes are usually the fastest because its a single focal length. add in the zoom and boom price gets jacked up lol


----------



## MistaBernie

this looks like a sweet piece of glass.. if it's not a ridiculous price it might be a nice addition to the 7D..


----------



## S3ason

I wouldn't expect this lens to be under $2k. It's a fancy, fancy lens. It will be one of if not the fastest zoom lens on the market (Olympus makes a f2.0 lens for four thirds).

The reason for making it aps-c only had something to do with Signa not believing the notion that you need a ff camera to enjoy low light and that aps-c sensors are getting so advanced that they need the glass to support it. I think this was on the sigma website, can't remember the source.

It look like sigma is making some good changes. I love the look of the new lenses, much more professional without that crappy plastics finish.


----------



## Sean Webster

the lens should have been 15-35 mm, not 18-35.


----------



## laboitenoire

The main reason there are no zooms faster than f/2.8 for full frame is practicality. If you look at the specs on this lens, it already weighs nearly two pounds (pretty hefty). If you were to scale it up to work on full frame, it would be a humongous lens.


----------



## mz-n10

i like all the crazy theories about why this is not a fullframe lens.


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> The main reason there are no zooms faster than f/2.8 for full frame is practicality. If you look at the specs on this lens, it already weighs nearly two pounds (pretty hefty). If you were to scale it up to work on full frame, it would be a humongous lens.


Yeah that's what I was thinking. 810 grams for this lens while Canon's 16-35mm is 640g. I'm sure they needed to work on it quite a bit so it wouldn't vignette horribly and on FF it would just be a circular image without adding some extra elements and or groups.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> i like all the crazy theories about why this is not a fullframe lens.


----------



## bomberjun

My gear


----------



## sub50hz

That gross showcase must be the hardest way to carry all that gear.


----------



## Conspiracy

Ag
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> That gross showcase must be the hardest way to carry all that gear.


Agreed lol. Id buy a smaller glass box. You dont need to keep the boxes the gear comes in


----------



## laboitenoire

Damn, the new 18-35 f/1.8 looks pretty impressive!

http://lcap.tistory.com/entry/Sigma-ART-18-35mm-f18-Preview

Yes, it's in Korean, but they show the shot info so you don't really need it.


----------



## sub50hz

Wow, impressive. Let's wait for the hefty price tag, though.


----------



## laboitenoire

Yeah... My guess is around $1200.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> Yeah... My guess is around $1200.


closer to $2000. there are 16 elements 5 of them SLD glass , 4 of them apsherical...


----------



## laboitenoire

But it's a crop lens from Sigma... Yes it's unique but I doubt most people would shell out much more than $1200 for a Sigma lens.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

So I don't really understand why this is a crop sensor only lens. What would happen if you tried to put it on a FF?


----------



## bomberjun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> So I don't really understand why this is a crop sensor only lens. What would happen if you tried to put it on a FF?


this happens.. massive vignetting.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bomberjun*
> 
> this happens.. massive vignetting.


Ok, that's what I thought, but I wasn't sure. Thanks.


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> Ok, that's what I thought, but I wasn't sure. Thanks.


That site even has samples on the 5D II. That's what I had explained in one of my earlier posts. For it to be a FF lens it would be massive and even more expensive than it's going to be.


----------



## sub50hz

Well, I scrapped the Mamiya 7 and D800 ideas and picked up an X-Pro 1 and the 35/1.4 -- pics in a bit.


----------



## sub50hz




----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> IMG


beige walls. what are you, italian?


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> But it's a crop lens from Sigma... Yes it's unique but I doubt most people would shell out much more than $1200 for a Sigma lens.


true, but since it is the only 1.8 zoom ever i think sigma will and can milk every last penny....

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aksthem1*
> 
> That site even has samples on the 5D II. That's what I had explained in one of my earlier posts. For it to be a FF lens it would be massive and even more expensive than it's going to be.


16-35/2.8mk2 is already a 82mm filter. now imagine a 18-35/1.8 fullframe....

that hunk of glass in front would be like 120mm or something.


----------



## S3ason

Not only the fact that the lens is only for crop body, but those who are willing to shell out even 1200 for a lens are going to want to be able to use it on their full frame upgrade.

As awesome as this lens looks, I don't see it being very popular.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *S3ason*
> 
> Not only the fact that the lens is only for crop body, but those who are willing to shell out even 1200 for a lens are going to want to be able to use it on their full frame upgrade.
> 
> As awesome as this lens looks, I don't see it being very popular.


resell values on lenses are pretty good. i can usually get 80%-100% of my money back


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> beige walls. what are you, italian?


Hey. _Hey._


----------



## Conspiracy

what you think just because you have a mustache you can speak i-talian now!?


----------



## sub50hz

For sale:

Nikon D7000 with all accessories
MB-D11 Grip + extra battery
Sigma 24mm f/1.8
Nikon 50mm f/1.8D
Nikon 35mm f/1.8
Promaster (Tamron) 11-18mm

PM if interested, I am pricing this stuff to sell, not sit in my house.


----------



## sub50hz

Well, first day shooting the X-Pro was great. I'll see if I can't get a couple shots up before I fall asleep.


----------



## sub50hz

Untitled by Phil Innocenti, on Flickr

More at the flickrrrrrrrr. I sleep now.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Nice.


----------



## Eggs and bacon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/sub50hz/8671084934/ on Flickr
> 
> More at the flickrrrrrrrr. I sleep now.


^ +1
i think you own every camera that I dream of, minus the d7000.


----------



## sub50hz

Haha, I'll get a group shot of them tonight just to give you some GAS fodder.


----------



## Conspiracy

finally finished editing all my photos from track and field this past weekend.

used my 7D + 17-40 and a 70-200 f2.8 mkii

had lots of good photos. but these are a few of my favorites


----------



## Sean Webster

Nice shots.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Ditto.

Most recent thing I've tried was a super huge stitch, but I forgot to turn off IS for the first row of images so it kinda sucked.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> Ditto.
> 
> Most recent thing I've tried was a super huge stitch, but I forgot to turn off IS for the first row of images so it kinda sucked.


dang that stinks. at least your next attempt will go much more smoothly im sure. dont forget to share it with us









also thanks for the nice comments on my recent shots from both of yall above. the recent sports shoot has made me wish i shot sports more often and had my own gear for shooting sports on a regular. its a lot of fun but also soo much easier when you are shooting focused on one team rather than the entire event/game. sports with 2 teams are much easier to shoot than track and field


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> dang that stinks. at least your next attempt will go much more smoothly im sure. dont forget to share it with us
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> also thanks for the nice comments on my recent shots from both of yall above. the recent sports shoot has made me wish i shot sports more often. its a lot of fun but also soo much easier when you are shooting focused on one team rather than the entire event/game. sports with 2 teams are much easier to shoot than track and field


It's uploaded but it's 180mb. (lol)

I had to zip it otherwise mega wouldn't accept it. https://mega.co.nz/#!8RtF0Daa!Q8cvHFVX425_tbY2BdY73De9jGVOMUgGXqONwBjwIFs


----------



## sub50hz

Why not just resize it?


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Why not just resize it?


What's the point in making a super huge image and resizing it?


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> What's the point in making a super huge image and resizing it?


For web viewing...

If you have ever designed websites then you should know these are one of the key rules to follow.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

I guess. But if I was going down that route I might as well have only taken one shot.


----------



## Sean Webster

Large for printing large or working with etc

small for sharing


----------



## sub50hz

Another few up for my "Stevenson" project:


Untitled by Phil Innocenti, on Flickr


----------



## registered99

The big tree's okay, but it's hard to tell what's going on. The big tree blends in with the ones behind it.


----------



## dudemanppl

MAXIMUM FRED.


----------



## Dream Killer

looking at the headtube that looks like an alu frame, weak


----------



## dmanstasiu

neeeds more carbon. or at least alloy


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *registered99*
> 
> The big tree's okay, but it's hard to tell what's going on. The big tree blends in with the ones behind it.


Yeah. The focus was locked, and I can't get it any faster than 5.6, so the only way I could blur it would be with software.


----------



## Dream Killer

a tight pagari


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dmanstasiu*
> 
> neeeds more carbon. or at least alloy


All aluminum frames are alloyed.


----------



## dmanstasiu

oh. i've been misinformed then


----------



## laboitenoire

Yeah, very few metals are used in their pure state for structural purposes. Aluminum bikes are typically 6061 or 7005 series alloys, which have significant additions of silicon and magnesium (and zinc for 7005). In the case of 6061 this allows you to form precipitates in the matrix that prevent dislocations from easily moving through the matrix. If you look at the properties, pure aluminum has a tensile strength of up to 84 MPa, whereas 6061 can get up to 320 MPa depending on how you age and temper it.

FYI, I'm a materials science major, so I get a little geeky about this stuff hahaha.


----------



## dmanstasiu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> Yeah, very few metals are used in their pure state for structural purposes. Aluminum bikes are typically 6061 or 7005 series alloys, which have significant additions of silicon and magnesium (and zinc for 7005). In the case of 6061 this allows you to form precipitates in the matrix that prevent dislocations from easily moving through the matrix. If you look at the properties, pure aluminum has a tensile strength of up to 84 MPa, whereas 6061 can get up to 320 MPa depending on how you age and temper it.
> 
> FYI, I'm a materials science major, so I get a little geeky about this stuff hahaha.


Don't stop :3

I knew it wasn't pure aluminium, but at the same time I thought "alloy" referred to composites without aluminium. Idk ...


----------



## laboitenoire

Yeah, an alloy is just any (relatively) homogeneous solid mixture of elements. For example, you can have alloys of different metals (6061 aluminum being an example), metals with non-metals (steel, which is an alloy of iron and carbon, is an example) or non-metals and non-metals( compound semiconductors such as SiC, GaAs, or ceramic alloys such as Al2O3 with Cr2O3).

Most jewelry is alloyed for durability and cost. Sterling silver and 14K gold are both alloyed with significant amounts of copper.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> Most jewelry is alloyed for durability and cost. Sterling silver and 14K gold are both alloyed with significant amounts of copper.


Depends on who you're buying the alloy from.









Now you're in MY house.


----------



## laboitenoire

I'm talking in general, here.


----------



## sub50hz

Shut up and buy my 24 and grip.


----------



## laboitenoire

I really want to! Unfortunately I probably can't afford that right now :-/

If somebody buys my 30 f/1.4 I'd probably be able to swing it.


----------



## Conspiracy

finally developed an ooooold roll of expired Kodak Royal Gold 400 that i shot through a Holga i bought on ebay









results were kinda neat but omg its not easy getting stuff in focus on that thing lol. the lens has a picture of a face and mountains










img183 by brian_roberts, on Flickr


img177 by brian_roberts, on Flickr


----------



## dmanstasiu

Pretty neat. It's a nice feeling dealing entirely in analog cameras







Shooting with my polaroid is super fun, I've gotten a bunch of questions and compliments on it ... great conversation starter


----------



## Conspiracy

totally agree. im thinking about running another roll of cheapo 35mm color through this holga before i make the switch to black and white


----------



## Conspiracy

might be shooting some natural light portraits for someone i went to school with that randomly asked if i would do photos on sunday.

debating between renting 35L or 50L or 85L. 85 is a little long on a crop camera some im really just considering either 35 or 50 since its a mutual photoshoot for both parties to gain portfolio material even though im not trying to be a pro portrait photog. though it would be something new to do.

i asked if they wanted to use any lights and they said no because i told them if they wanted me to use lights they would have to cover rental fee which would be just over $100 for a strobist rental package.

should be fun either way. i havent got a chance to thoroughly test a 35L or a 50L yet


----------



## scottath

I played with a 35L all weekend that i borrowed from a friend - it didnt leave my 5D2 all weekend (70-200 on 7D - was a church conference event)
I did however find it at times a little too long/a little too short - on full frame that is.


----------



## mz-n10

I really dislike the bokeh of the 50L. Personally the 85 on crop is ok for head shots and a sigmalux or regular 50/1.4 is good enough for 1/2 to full body.

You can also try a tamron 60/2 which is a pretty good range on crop.


----------



## sub50hz

I think you should just borrow that 70-200L from school and call it a day.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> I think you should just borrow that 70-200L from school and call it a day.


would cost more in gas both ways plus to return it than a 3 day rental that is $51.30 total for a 50L. would cost $75 to rent a 70-200 mkII which is a very trusty lens that i know very well. one day i think ill be investing in a 70-200 f2.8 mkI, probably IS

was thinking about the 50L stopped down might have somewhat pleasing bokeh. im not looking to blast backgrounds out of focus. i want soft backgrounds and a nice portrait focal length. i think im leaning more towards the 50L and possibly the 85. i would be shooting mostly full body and some half body so the 50 might be the better choice. if i was doing half body and headshots only then 85 is a no brainer. but the 85L is epic


----------



## sub50hz

50L? Meh.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> 50L? Meh.


it seems to do nicely with that unique look its images have. i care little about sharpness and bokeh since its easy to blast stuff out of focus with any lens







just looking for a cool unique look that different lenses offer


----------



## MistaBernie

35l is the bees knees. My default on the 5D3 now..


----------



## dudemanppl

YES I SHALL CONVERT YOU ALL. MUAHAHAHA!


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> YES I SHALL CONVERT YOU ALL. MUAHAHAHA!


lol ill be renting it to try eventually. Ill probably take the 35L hiking and walkin around ATL


----------



## scottath

my poor back will be a bit ruined after my NZ trip in july.....
5D2 + l bracket
7D
70-200 L II
17-40L
Zeiss 50 F2 Makro
pano head on tripod (rather solid one)
laptop
Lee filters.....
Cleaning gear

Oh and some clothes
(7D may stay at home, but id rather take it than the 550D if the 5D had issues....)

Could probably make do with the 5D + a 35L and the 50 Zeiss + filters/tripod....would need a 35L to do that though.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scottath*
> 
> my poor back will be a bit ruined after my NZ trip in july.....
> 5D2 + l bracket
> 7D
> 70-200 L II
> 17-40L
> Zeiss 50 F2 Makro
> pano head on tripod (rather solid one)
> laptop
> Lee filters.....
> Cleaning gear
> 
> Oh and some clothes
> (7D may stay at home, but id rather take it than the 550D if the 5D had issues....)
> 
> Could probably make do with the 5D + a 35L and the 50 Zeiss + filters/tripod....would need a 35L to do that though.


thats it. i feel like you could take more haha







sounds like a good kit to take. cant wait to see what images you come back with


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> 50L? Meh.


Got one as a gift. Sold it. Bought a 70-200 f/4L instead. No regrets.

Wanted the f/2.8 instead but I'd rather put the excess money towards loan repayments. $500 down, $19,500 to go!
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scottath*
> 
> my poor back will be a bit ruined after my NZ trip in july.....
> 5D2 + l bracket
> 7D
> 70-200 L II
> 17-40L
> Zeiss 50 F2 Makro
> pano head on tripod (rather solid one)
> laptop
> Lee filters.....
> Cleaning gear
> 
> Oh and some clothes
> (7D may stay at home, but id rather take it than the 550D if the 5D had issues....)
> 
> Could probably make do with the 5D + a 35L and the 50 Zeiss + filters/tripod....would need a 35L to do that though.


You should bring the 550D instead. Not a big fan of the rebels, but they are great if you want to bring a nice DSLR without the weight or the "professional" look. Personally I always leave my own DSLR at home and take my brother's 550D to concerts. Lighter and less likely to get flagged as a "professional" camera.

Also: You should include a back brace in your gear list. Or a porter


----------



## MistaBernie

or a 'gear donkey'.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> or a 'gear donkey'.


You know, I wouldn't mind either the job or the job title if I were to get paid with that 70-200 II...


----------



## scottath

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*
> 
> Got one as a gift. Sold it. Bought a 70-200 f/4L instead. No regrets.
> 
> Wanted the f/2.8 instead but I'd rather put the excess money towards loan repayments. $500 down, $19,500 to go!
> You should bring the 550D instead. Not a big fan of the rebels, but they are great if you want to bring a nice DSLR without the weight or the "professional" look. Personally I always leave my own DSLR at home and take my brother's 550D to concerts. Lighter and less likely to get flagged as a "professional" camera.
> 
> Also: You should include a back brace in your gear list. Or a porter


Well if i hadnt ruined the 550D i would. Long exposures have taken its toll on mine.
ISO400 on it is about the same as ISO4000 on the 5D2.....


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

This 70-200mm is some sexy stuff. Oh man I wish I had the money for the f/2.8 version though


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

This 70-200mm is some sexy stuff. Oh man I wish I had the money for the f/2.8 version though


----------



## Eggs and bacon

New camera, Bronica etrsi








I am going to use a roll this weekend and develop next week, I am just hoping it all works properly.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Eggs and bacon*
> 
> New camera, Bronica etrsi
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I am going to use a roll this weekend and develop next week, I am just hoping it all works properly.


fun camera to have. you wont be disappointed


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Eggs and bacon*
> 
> New camera, Bronica etrsi
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I am going to use a roll this weekend and develop next week, I am just hoping it all works properly.


The only thing I sort-of-didn't-like about my ETRSi was the erratic frame spacing. At times, it was nice, since it made the film super easy to cut. Other times it made putting them in archival pages a pain in the ass. Enjoy the camera, it's highly underrated by camera snobs.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Eggs and bacon*
> 
> New camera, Bronica etrsi
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I am going to use a roll this weekend and develop next week, I am just hoping it all works properly.
> 
> 
> 
> the erratic frame spacing. At times, it was nice, since it made the film super easy to cut. Other times it made putting them in archival pages a pain in the ass. .
Click to expand...

ive been dealing with that lately and its definitely bittersweet as sub said. but by no means anything that has a major impact on the images themselves


----------



## sub50hz

Never stopped me from taking photos, I can tell you that much.


----------



## Conspiracy

i thought this was DLC but its not. i need $15 to play this amazing piece of WIN!!!!!

http://youtu.be/av5pqJaIeCk

that trailer is pure unadulterated awesome

and im glad i have a credit card because after watching some game play from a review. this game is gettin bought. about time they made a video game paying homage to the amazing period of time everyone wishes lasted longer..... the 80's \m/


----------



## Eggs and bacon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Enjoy the camera, it's highly underrated by camera snobs.


I hope it stays this way, so I can buy spare parts and lenses for cheap.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Eggs and bacon*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Enjoy the camera, it's highly underrated by camera snobs.
> 
> 
> 
> I hope it stays this way, so I can buy spare parts and lenses for cheap.
Click to expand...

it will kinda. extra backs can get pricey sometimes. but accessories stay reasonably priced on KEH. the easiest way to go unless you already have it is to get just a plain viewfinder and focus screen and a grip is also extremely handy and nice to have. lenses are very affordable. PE is the newer version of the lenses which offer aperture in half stop clicks.


----------



## Eggs and bacon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> it will kinda. extra backs can get pricey sometimes. but accessories stay reasonably priced on KEH. the easiest way to go unless you already have it is to get just a plain viewfinder and focus screen and a grip is also extremely handy and nice to have. lenses are very affordable. PE is the newer version of the lenses which offer aperture in half stop clicks.


Yep, I have 45 degree split image, prism, grip and 75 2.8 eii. I just use a Gossen pilot to meter. Down the road i might get a 50 or a 150.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Eggs and bacon*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> it will kinda. extra backs can get pricey sometimes. but accessories stay reasonably priced on KEH. the easiest way to go unless you already have it is to get just a plain viewfinder and focus screen and a grip is also extremely handy and nice to have. lenses are very affordable. PE is the newer version of the lenses which offer aperture in half stop clicks.
> 
> 
> 
> Yep, I have 45 degree split image, prism, grip and 75 2.8 eii. I just use a Gossen pilot to meter. Down the road i might get a 50 or a 150.
Click to expand...

ive been debating both of those lenses as well. once i finish shoot color and start doing black and white ill see how much shooting i still have time to do before i get any other lenses ^_^


----------



## sub50hz

I think I can confidently say that after using the Xpro for a couple weeks, I am done shooting 35mm film. I'll either shoot the rest of what I have or sell it with the F100. Godspeed, tiny negatives.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> I think I can confidently say that after using the Xpro for a couple weeks, I am done shooting 35mm film. I'll either shoot the rest of what I have or sell it with the F100. Godspeed, tiny negatives.


dang that must be one heck of a camera. i dont think i would ever give up on my tiny negatives just because i enjoy developing. im sure eventually i will if i ever got a similar camera to the xpro. i do find myself really only wanting to shoot MF film more than 35mm. but i shoot my 35mm just because i enjoy carrying a light film camera around for goofing around.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> I think I can confidently say that after using the Xpro for a couple weeks, I am done shooting 35mm film. I'll either shoot the rest of what I have or sell it with the F100. Godspeed, tiny negatives.


welcome to the dark side!


----------



## sub50hz

Ermahgerd, Raspi dorkery.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ermahgerd, Raspi dorkery.










what happened!?

there aint no color in that there photo-graph


----------



## nvidiaftw12

It looks...

*instagrammed*.


----------



## laboitenoire

It does...









But on another note, what are you planning to do with your Raspberry Pi?


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Have fun I assume. Not too much else you can do.


----------



## boogschd

Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



http://imgur.com/X0lugO1



its not the best, not a full 360 even, but im open to everyone's input/opinion/tips


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> It looks...
> 
> _*instagrammed*_.


'twas.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> But on another note, what are you planning to do with your Raspberry Pi?


I've already got a few SD cards loaded with different distros (Raspbian, Occidentalis, Arch, Xbian), so between a media center and run-of-the-mill electronics projects, quite a bit.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> Not too much else you can do.


Ignorance is bliss, isn't it?


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> 'twas.
> I've already got a few SD cards loaded with different distros (Raspbian, Occidentalis, Arch, Xbian), so between a media center and run-of-the-mill electronics projects, quite a bit.
> Ignorance is bliss, isn't it?


You can do a lot, but how much practical stuff can you do.


----------



## sub50hz

Define "practical". I'm currently using this one as a media center using XBMC and libspotify (and using a breakout board with LEDs for my Gmail inbox status), and placed an order for another today to control a self-watering, self-lit indoor garden. If you have no imagination, it'll just rot somewhere, but if you think outside the box a little bit you can automate a lot of things and have some fun doing it.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Define "practical". I'm currently using this one as a media center using XBMC and libspotify (and using a breakout board with LEDs for my Gmail inbox status), and placed an order for another today to control a self-watering, self-lit indoor garden. If you have no imagination, it'll just rot somewhere, but if you think outside the box a little bit you can automate a lot of things and have some fun doing it.


I like the self watering idea, but I would rather just get an old dell or something that's a bit stronger for an htpc. What's the lifetime on these running 24/7?


----------



## sub50hz

I stream all my content from my other HTPC/media server, so there's no need for crazier, power-sucking hardware. Read their wiki, the pi is more versatile than you think.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> You can do a lot, but how much practical stuff can you do.


As a scientist and hardware/software hacker (note: This definition, not this one), practicality is overrated. Tinkering with stuff simply because you can is one of the best reasons ever.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*
> 
> As a scientist and hardware/software hacker (note: This definition, not this one), practicality is overrated. Tinkering with stuff simply because you can is one of the best reasons ever.


Oh agreed. I would love to have one to play around with. I still don't think that it's all that practical to have one to use. (Maybe it is, haven't messed with tiny computers much at all.)


----------



## dmanstasiu

They're good for lots of little projects


----------



## Marin

Long time no see. Recently got a Profoto Acute2 w/ two D4 heads just to start off with their system (got almost $1000 off the price). Went with them over Broncolor since every rental house carries them.

Anyways, the 1200w Acute2 is really tiny. Smaller than the Bron stuff I'm used to using just took some getting used to for controlling the power. Also the all metal build is awesome but it's like that across the board for high end strobes. And I'm really digging the zoom reflector on the D4 over Brons reflectors on the Litos Lampheads. Both have reflectors that are meant to be portable solutions but Brons is extremely tiny and most of the time a larger reflector needs to be substituted in. Profotos zoom reflector retracts and then can be extended outwards to achieve different angles of light.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> Long time no see. Recently got a Profoto Acute2 w/ two D4 heads just to start off with their system (got almost $1000 off the price). Went with them over Broncolor since every rental house carries them.
> 
> Anyways, the 1200w Acute2 is really tiny. Smaller than the Bron stuff I'm used to using just took some getting used to for controlling the power. Also the all metal build is awesome but it's like that across the board for high end strobes. And I'm really digging the zoom reflector on the D4 over Brons reflectors on the Litos Lampheads. Both have reflectors that are meant to be portable solutions but Brons is extremely tiny and most of the time a larger reflector needs to be substituted in. Profotos zoom reflector retracts and then can be extended outwards to achieve different angles of light.


Those profotos are amazing! I helped set some up to shoot basketball and assisted with a corporate portrait shoot where we used them too. Really great to work with. My only other experience with strobes are alienbee and einsteins


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> I still don't think that it's all that practical to have one to use. (Maybe it is, haven't messed with tiny computers much at all.)


I'm not even sure what that means. People don't just buy Arduinos and Raspis to make blinky lights and probe them with voltmeters and eat cheetos.

Then again, you're probably young and loaded with hormones, so anything I say here will be met with dismay. I'm never having kids.


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> I'm not even sure what that means. People don't just buy Arduinos and Raspis to make blinky lights and probe them with voltmeters and eat cheetos.
> 
> Then again, you're probably young and loaded with hormones, so anything I say here will be met with dismay. I'm never having kids.


WHOAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> I still don't think that it's all that practical to have one to use. (Maybe it is, haven't messed with tiny computers much at all.)
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not even sure what that means. People don't just buy Arduinos and Raspis to make blinky lights and probe them with voltmeters and eat cheetos.
> 
> Then again, you're probably young and loaded with hormones, so anything I say here will be met with dismay. I'm never having kids.
Click to expand...

what you got against cheetos. I mean other than cheeze its are better but yeah


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aksthem1*
> 
> WHOAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA


You know who _else_ likes Raspberry Pis?


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *aksthem1*
> 
> WHOAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
> 
> 
> 
> You know who _else_ likes Raspberry Pis?
Click to expand...

hipsters and hungry people. they sound delicious... why name a piece of electronics after food. sooo deceiving


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> You know who _else_ likes Raspberry Pis?


----------



## sub50hz

I love you.


----------



## aksthem1

STAAARLAAA


----------



## dmanstasiu

nsfocn


----------



## sub50hz

TV-PG, brah.


----------



## TwirlyWhirly555

Pic of my mini VTTC , Taken with Samsung PL81


----------



## revro

are sony slt a77 now being sold with the latest firmware that increases responsivness? i am starting to really think about it instead of d7100. then again somehow in eu it has only 50 instead of 60 1080p video recording and i kind of think that since it was released 18 months ago there might be a new version coming out in another 18 months. decisions decisions







even tough it has only 19/11 focus points i guess it should be sufficient and it can make 12photos per second and has variable lcd

EDIT: just reading rumor sites that there will be new successor for a77 in first half of 2014.

thank you
revro


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *revro*
> 
> are sony slt a77 now being sold with the latest firmware that increases responsivness? i am starting to really think about it instead of d7100. then again somehow in eu it has only 50 instead of 60 1080p video recording and i kind of think that since it was released 18 months ago there might be a new version coming out in another 18 months. decisions decisions
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> even tough it has only 19/11 focus points i guess it should be sufficient and it can make 12photos per second and has variable lcd
> 
> EDIT: just reading rumor sites that there will be new successor for a77 in first half of 2014.
> 
> thank you
> revro


In EU they record in PAL which is why that version is 50 fps. NTSC which is the standard in the US is 60fps. The difference is none as far as the final image is concerned


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> I'm not even sure what that means. People don't just buy Arduinos and Raspis to make blinky lights and probe them with voltmeters and eat cheetos.
> 
> Then again, you're probably young and loaded with hormones, so anything I say here will be met with dismay. I'm never having kids.


Yo. Overreact much?


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> Yo. Overreact much?


You don't understand the game, brosephus. THE GAME.


----------



## newone757

Can I join?

Canon 5d (original) - 135mm 2.0l - 85mm 1.8 - 40mm 2.8 - SIgma 35mm 1.4 - 430ex II


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> Yo. Overreact much?
> 
> 
> 
> You don't understand the game, brosephus. THE GAME.
Click to expand...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PH34kMOjmQk ?


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> Yo. Overreact much?
> 
> 
> 
> You don't understand the game, brosephus. THE GAME.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PH34kMOjmQk ?
Click to expand...

i liked that song a lot when it came out. totally forgot about till now


----------



## MistaBernie

Big news for 5D3 and video -- ML has unlocked raw video recording.

http://www.eoshd.com/content/10324/big-news-hands-on-with-continuous-raw-recording-on-canon-5d-mark-iii


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Big news for 5D3 and video -- ML has unlocked raw video recording.
> 
> http://www.eoshd.com/content/10324/big-news-hands-on-with-continuous-raw-recording-on-canon-5d-mark-iii


i saw and i am very excited to see that. this is where having high speed cards is a MUST. in the past many have wondered why i have always suggested just buying high speed cards for video anyway even though 30MB/s was the minimum to record DSLR footage as the bitrate of the footage is roughly 30MB/s







but now if you know what you are doing and shoot high bitrate video because its needed thats when the investment in faster cards pays off







and offering 2.5K and slightly bigger is pretty cool and would be very fun to play with and see what other people do with that new feature







i think i may have to save a little cash and rent a 5D3 for a week and test this out when its released









waiting for GH2 fanboys to chime in with their "sharper" looking images with less dynamic range and similar resolution that appears better when viewed online on youtube when not in full screen


----------



## choLOL

Hey guys, which of these 2 lenses do you think is a better upgrade from the stock lens of a Nikon D3100?
AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G VR
AF-S NIKKOR 50mm f/1.8G

If those 2 are bad choices, what can you guys suggest? Thanks. +rep

edit: My budget is up to $250


----------



## sub50hz

Neither.

35/1.8 DX.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Neither.
> 
> 35/1.8 DX.


word


----------



## dudemanppl

50-equiv is DUMB. Get a 28 1.8.







)


----------



## sub50hz

Yeah, a 700 dollar lens for a $250 budget. Great job.


----------



## newone757

Not a Nikon guy but my friend has the 35mm 1.8 and its pretty good. Depends on what focal length you are going for/typically shoot at. Dont get that zoom


----------



## S3ason

I have both the 35mm and 50mm f1.8g, as well as the 18-55 f3.5-5.6. Don't ask me why I have both the 35mm and 50mm, I wasn't thinking when I was buying. I use and like the 35mm f1.8, but if I were you I would get the 50mm... reason being I can use it on an FX camera when I upgrade. Something to consider as the 35mm is DX only.

Stay away from that zoom, its junk. My mothers came with the front element lightly scratched and we never bothered to return it as the shipping cost half as much as the lens.


----------



## frickfrock999

Decided to try an experiment today.
Here's a picture taken with an $80 Sony camera and with a $1200 Panasonic camera.

*$80.
*










*$1200*


----------



## S3ason

Thank you for making me second guess last months $1600


----------



## newone757

dat $80 noise


----------



## ljason8eg

So what's the point of the experiment?


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Big news for 5D3 and video -- ML has unlocked raw video recording.
> 
> http://www.eoshd.com/content/10324/big-news-hands-on-with-continuous-raw-recording-on-canon-5d-mark-iii


E: nvm, article answered my question. That's really awesome though.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *S3ason*
> 
> Something to consider as the 35mm is DX only.


It's also a much more useful lens on DX than a 50, unless you enjoy using the equivalent of a short telephoto all the time.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *S3ason*
> 
> Stay away from that zoom, its junk. My mothers came with the front element lightly scratched and we never bothered to return it as the shipping cost half as much as the lens.


Scratches on the front element have almost zero impact on image quality unless you point the lens directly at a light source and even then it takes a nice crack in the glass to get flares. Even lenses with cracked front elements still can take a decent image. That being said its not smart to just totally abuse your lens lol


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *frickfrock99*
> 
> Decided to try an experiment today.
> Here's a picture taken with an $80 Sony camera and with a $1200 Panasonic camera.
> ]


Was the experiment to see how crappy of a picture you could take? Comparisons like these for cameras are like seeing how fast a i3 vs a 3930K opens a excel file.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *silvrr*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *frickfrock99*
> 
> Decided to try an experiment today.
> Here's a picture taken with an $80 Sony camera and with a $1200 Panasonic camera.
> ]
> 
> 
> 
> Was the experiment to see how crappy of a picture you could take? Comparisons like these for cameras are like seeing how fast a i3 vs a 3930K opens a excel file.
Click to expand...

Nice comparison lol


----------



## frickfrock999

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *silvrr*
> 
> Was the experiment to see how crappy of a picture you could take? Comparisons like these for cameras are like seeing how fast a i3 vs a 3930K opens a excel file.


How was the picture crappy?

If you're going to sling mud, at least back up your statements.


----------



## sub50hz

It's a picture of a tape roller.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> It's a picture of a tape roller.


^ that is all that needs to be stated.


----------



## S3ason

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> Scratches on the front element have almost zero impact on image quality unless you point the lens directly at a light source and even then it takes a nice crack in the glass to get flares. Even lenses with cracked front elements still can take a decent image. That being said its not smart to just totally abuse your lens lol


I was telling that story more to demonstrate how little we care for that lens









@sub50hz: You're right that the 35mm is more useful on DX. Me, I'd rather back a few feet back to fill the frame and later be able to swap it on to a FX camera. I often just slap on the 18-55 if I need to go wider then my 50mm and I'm not worried about sharpness.


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *frickfrock99*
> 
> How was the picture crappy?
> 
> If you're going to sling mud, at least back up your statements.


Not trying to sling mud.

Since you asked, its underexposed badly and the white balance is way off for starters.

You don't have anything in the right side of the histogram, well there's something but not much.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *S3ason*
> 
> Me, I'd rather back a few feet back to fill the frame


It doesn't work that way. Given the same framing, the _perspective_ will not be the same as what the 35 "sees". Lenses are about perspective, and primes have somehow led the internet to believe that "foot-zooming" is the solution to using wider or longer focal lengths, which is not at all the case.


----------



## S3ason

You're absolutely right about that, but the difference in perspective is not really that perceptible when comparing 35 vs 50mm. If you were to compare the 35mm to something like a 100mm, the perspective would be completely different. There is definitely a difference in perspective, but not enough to justify buying one over the other in my opinion.

http://www.btobey.com/nikon/images/35mm-18-vs-50mm-18-g-3.jpg

Anyways, this is all my opinion on the difference. He might find he prefers the 35mm like most people. I just wanted him to see that there is more to consider than different focal lengths.

Edit: not sure if that photo was shot with full frame or not so I'm not sure if it actually helps my argument...


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *S3ason*
> 
> You're absolutely right about that, but the difference in perspective is not really that perceptible when comparing 35 vs 50mm. If you were to compare the 35mm to something like a 100mm, the perspective would be completely different. There is definitely a difference in perspective, but not enough to justify buying one over the other in my opinion.
> 
> http://www.btobey.com/nikon/images/35mm-18-vs-50mm-18-g-3.jpg
> 
> Anyways, this is all my opinion on the difference. He might find he prefers the 35mm like most people. I just wanted him to see that there is more to consider than different focal lengths.
> 
> Edit: not sure if that photo was shot with full frame or not so I'm not sure if it actually helps my argument...


there is a pretty good different between 35mm and 50mm. not sure how you are comparing them. i personally have used both focal lengths on FF and crop cameras and can tell the difference on both types of sensor.

35mm on crop gives a very pleasing FOV. 35mm on FF is nice and semi wide without being really wide. 35mm on crop is similar in FOV to 50mm on FF. 50mm on FF is one of the most popular general use focal lengths and has been for years.

also comparing the two focal lengths on something close up like that such as a flower is pointless unless you take pictures of flowers on a table only and you photograph nothing else but that


----------



## S3ason

Not sure if this is posted here yet, but for you Nikon guys:

http://digicamcontrol.com/

Free, open-source, allows control of most camera settings and functions. Canon already had this kind of software, but this does one better by integrating focus stacking and motion detection. Some Canon cameras are partially supported as well.

@Conspiracy: I'm not saying there is no difference, the science is pretty clear there. My last post was just considering the case where you back up to get similar framing.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *S3ason*
> 
> Not sure if this is posted here yet, but for you Nikon guys:
> 
> http://digicamcontrol.com/
> 
> Free, open-source, allows control of most camera settings and functions. Canon already had this kind of software, but this does one better by integrating focus stacking and motion detection. Some Canon cameras are partially supported as well.
> 
> @Conspiracy: I'm not saying there is no difference, the science is pretty clear there. My last post was just considering the case where you back up to get similar framing.


how comfortable are you when using the 50/1.8 on apc? if you can just pick up the camera and know exactly what the frame looks like then the 50/1.8 is perfect for you.

but most people picks up a 50 on apsc and have to take a few steps back before shooting....


----------



## S3ason

There was a learning curve to it for sure, the 35mm is definitely a more natural field of view. In fact, I use the 35mm more often then I do the 50mm, which I realize goes against my argument. But, if I had to go back and only buy one lens, I would get the 50mm because I could use it when I upgrade to full frame in a year or two. I don't do a lot of "decisive moment" shooting and having to back up further hasn't really caused a problem for me either.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *S3ason*
> 
> There was a learning curve to it for sure, the 35mm is definitely a more natural field of view. In fact, I use the 35mm more often then I do the 50mm, which I realize goes against my argument. But, if I had to go back and only buy one lens, I would get the 50mm because I could use it when I upgrade to full frame in a year or two. I don't do a lot of "decisive moment" shooting and having to back up further hasn't really caused a problem for me either.


well if fullframe is your upgrade path than the 35/1.4 is the lens to get....

or alternatively, buy the 35/1.8 now. when you move too full frame splurge and spend extra 100 dollar for a 50/1.8. assuming you are using nikon (which you should be since only sony and nikon have a 35/1.8 and fullframe), you can turn off DX mode and shoot the 35/1.8, crop some of the corners.


----------



## scottath

I really should stop spending money.
Anyhow - kit for NZ is now complete, now to wait till July 1st.
0.6 Soft
0.9 Soft
1.2 Soft
Big Stopper


----------



## Eggs and bacon

How much did the big stopper cost you? / where did you buy it from in Australia?


----------



## choLOL

Alright, thanks for the help guys! +rep


----------



## Eggs and bacon

just developed my first roll of 120, and it looks like my camera and light meter must be mostly defect free, as every frame has a well exposed image. I'll wonder what my manual focusing will look like once I contact print them.


----------



## scottath

Got it from Mediavision - Gladesville in NSW. Was about $180, not sure if the price is the same (i didnt ask at the shop today)


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *S3ason*
> 
> the difference in perspective is not really that perceptible when comparing 35 vs 50mm.


Except we're talking about mounting these lenses with a 1.5x crop factor. The difference in perspective in those shots you linked is pretty evident to me, it's most obvious in the size of the wine glass (or whatever the hell that is in the background.).


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Eggs and bacon*
> 
> just developed my first roll of 120, and it looks like my camera and light meter must be mostly defect free, as every frame has a well exposed image. I'll wonder what my manual focusing will look like once I contact print them.


What film? Most modern print films have ridiculous exposure latitude.


----------



## dudemanppl

E6 is... interesting?


----------



## Marin

Now fix the colors.


----------



## Eggs and bacon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> What film? Most modern print films have ridiculous exposure latitude.


fp4 +, Its within a stop either side of perfect, which is good enough for me considering I spent 16 dollars on my light meter.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> Now fix the colors.


I tried sir, but it simply didn't happen. You give it a shot?


----------



## Marin

Colors are still off, this is just 5 seconds of photoshop.


----------



## dmanstasiu

the sky is less red.

what else changed


----------



## Marin

Less red and magenta everywhere.


----------



## dudemanppl

All my slides looked stupid color anyway. I think something is up with the color dev.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> All my slides looked stupid color anyway. I think something is up with the color dev.


If you're shooting daytime balanced film at night it should be pretty obvious why your colors are off. Like really obvious.


----------



## dudemanppl

Or I'm just stupid as noted above. C41 for night time I see.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Or I'm just stupid as noted above. C41 for night time I see.


Just get filters lol. Youve got all that gear anyway might as well have color filters


----------



## silvrr

Or convert to black and white, that solves a lot of color issues. Lol


----------



## Conspiracy

getting to ride to alabama to work camera for their high school softball state championship







should be an interesting friday and saturday trip. taking the bronica with me because i see myself having some downtime where i can possibly explore when im not working







would be fun to photograph since i havent shot softball/baseball before but this company is paying me to do video so thats what ill be doing


----------



## Marin

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/817840-REG/Fujifilm_16190089_X10_Digital_Camera_Black.html

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/910168-REG/fujifilm_finepix_x20_digital_camera.html

One of you shall be mine in the future unless Fuji updates again.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> getting to ride to alabama to work camera for their high school softball state championship
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> should be an interesting friday and saturday trip. taking the bronica with me because i see myself having some downtime where i can possibly explore when im not working
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> would be fun to photograph since i havent shot softball/baseball before but this company is paying me to do video so thats what ill be doing


Where in Bama? Montgomery?


----------



## dudemanppl

Fuji X9001, get one.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> getting to ride to alabama to work camera for their high school softball state championship
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> should be an interesting friday and saturday trip. taking the bronica with me because i see myself having some downtime where i can possibly explore when im not working
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> would be fun to photograph since i havent shot softball/baseball before but this company is paying me to do video so thats what ill be doing
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Where in Bama? Montgomery?
Click to expand...

Yup. What part of alabammer is you in?


----------



## jetboy623

Hi, would like to join.

Canon 600D
50mm f/1.8
70-300mm f/4-5.6
24-105mm f/4L
70-200mm f/2.8L II
430EX II speedlite
LR4

Thanks!

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> Yup. What part of alabammer is you in?


Huntsville.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> Yup. What part of alabammer is you in?
> 
> 
> 
> Huntsville.
Click to expand...

Ewww not very close lol. Well if things continue to go well with PlayOn! sports i should be traveling a little bit with them and if im near your side of town ill try and swing by. Bama has some nice sights. Im hoping to sneak away to downtown Montgomery and snap a few photos. The downtown area here looks soooo cool!! There is a baseball field built around an olde train station that looks awesome


----------



## sub50hz

Lol, _the South._


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> Ewww not very close lol. Well if things continue to go well with PlayOn! sports i should be traveling a little bit with them and if im near your side of town ill try and swing by. Bama has some nice sights. Im hoping to sneak away to downtown Montgomery and snap a few photos. The downtown area here looks soooo cool!! There is a baseball field built around an olde train station that looks awesome


I'm pretty young so it would seem kinda weird having some random guy from the internet swing by, although it wouldn't bother me... 

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Lol, _the South._


Pretty much.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> Ewww not very close lol. Well if things continue to go well with PlayOn! sports i should be traveling a little bit with them and if im near your side of town ill try and swing by. Bama has some nice sights. Im hoping to sneak away to downtown Montgomery and snap a few photos. The downtown area here looks soooo cool!! There is a baseball field built around an olde train station that looks awesome
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm pretty young so it would seem kinda weird having some random guy from the internet swing by, although it wouldn't bother me...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Lol, _the South._
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Pretty much.
Click to expand...

Eh im young too. Im only 25 lol. And our crew thats doing sports with me is pretty young for broadcast people


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> Eh im young too. Im only 25 lol. And our crew thats doing sports with me is pretty young for broadcast people


In that case, you still have 10 years on me.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> Eh im young too. Im only 25 lol. And our crew thats doing sports with me is pretty young for broadcast people
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In that case, you still have 10 years on me.
Click to expand...

Ah well if you have any interest in broadcasting this company does all highschool sports for tons of states so if you want to build some resume exp i could get you on the crew or at least get you networked in one direction


----------



## frickfrock999

What's a decent photo tripod for a GH2?


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *frickfrock99*
> 
> What's a decent photo tripod for a GH2?


gitzo series 1


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *frickfrock99*
> 
> What's a decent photo tripod for a GH2?
> 
> 
> 
> gitzo series 1
Click to expand...


----------



## S3ason

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> gitzo series 1


I think you skipped the "decent" and went straight to "amazing".


----------



## ikem

my 700dx is awesome. Super Stable, but has some heft to it. they are not that bad on the pocket book too.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *S3ason*
> 
> I think you skipped the "decent" and went straight to "amazing".


its decent...series 5 is amazing


----------



## Azefore

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ikem*
> 
> my 700dx is awesome. Super Stable, but has some heft to it. they are not that bad on the pocket book too.


This.

I use my 700DX legs for time lapses and long exposures in easy to get to areas, for everything else I use my Gitzo 1 traveler


----------



## Marin

700DX looks terrible.


----------



## ikem

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> 700DX looks terrible.


i was surprised on how it was after getting it. great build quality and affordability.


----------



## revro

i have VELBON EX-640:

it looks great

waiting to pull trigger either on d7100 or a77 or maybe waiting for a77 successor. decisions, decisions









best
revro


----------



## Azefore

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> 700DX looks terrible.


Cheap and stable

Heavy and big

Depends on your needs, I paired mined with a large format vanguard ballhead.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *revro*
> 
> i have VELBON EX-640:
> 
> it looks great
> 
> waiting to pull trigger either on d7100 or a77 or maybe waiting for a77 successor. decisions, decisions
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> best
> revro


KILL IT KILL IT WITH FIRE!!!

seriously that tripod is a disaster waiting to happen....
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Azefore*
> 
> Cheap and stable
> 
> Heavy and big
> 
> Depends on your needs, I paired mined with a large format vanguard ballhead.


15lbs load isnt really that much.....


----------



## Marin

This is how I roll.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/180916-REG/Gitzo_G1228_G1228_MK2_Reporter_Carbon.html

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/124665-REG/Manfrotto_410_410_Junior_Geared_Head.html


----------



## Azefore

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> 15lbs load isnt really that much.....


Mine states 22lb, titanium alloy version, I'd be confident to put 35lb on it in gear.
However I'm doubting most of us can achieve 15lb let alone 22lb between a lens, body, and mounting plate using a DSLR. Video rigs perhaps but then again you more than likely wouldn't be using a tripod that's less than $120.


----------



## Marin

I can.


----------



## Azefore

Keyword "most"and "dslr" with film or a heavy video rig I have no doubt

But like I said depends on your needs, reason I have 700DX, the gitzo traveler, and then the GT0531 for actual travel


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Azefore*
> 
> Mine states 22lb, titanium alloy version, I'd be confident to put 35lb on it in gear.
> However I'm doubting most of us can achieve 15lb let alone 22lb between a lens, body, and mounting plate using a DSLR. Video rigs perhaps but then again you more than likely wouldn't be using a tripod that's less than $120.


http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/131427-REG/Slik_615_315_Pro_700DX_Tripod_with.html

just quoting bh

http://www.adorama.com/SL700DXLT.html?gclid=CPrR6eeGprcCFdF_Qgodcm8AqQ

same thing on adorama


----------



## Azefore

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/131427-REG/Slik_615_315_Pro_700DX_Tripod_with.html
> 
> just quoting bh
> 
> http://www.adorama.com/SL700DXLT.html?gclid=CPrR6eeGprcCFdF_Qgodcm8AqQ
> 
> same thing on adorama


http://www.amazon.com/Slik-700DX-Super-Titanium-Tripod/dp/B001GIOKPQ/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1369106679&sr=8-3&keywords=700dx

Not sure where they got 22lbs then, still would put 35lbs on it. I assume they mean the pan head itself can hold 15lbs and have blanketed it over to legs only.


----------



## Conspiracy

First of all yall. Heavy video gear takes a totally different type of tripod mount plate that is setup for a rail system to support extra weight. A pro video rig can easily be well over 35lbs. Not to mention studio rigs where the lens itself is soo heavy it takes 3 people to lift it up by over 1" thick metal handles built onto the lens. By estimate studio lenses are probably close to being about 100 lbs before everything else gets attached. Once you add teleconverters to extend the focal length it gets scary heavy where you dont want to pick it up from fear of dropping a lens that costs more than some peoples houses lol

Also snapped this on my phone near the video job im working this week


----------



## Conspiracy

Anyone that needs a good entertaining read check out the comments on a recent post by borrowlenses on facebook about the yahoo ceo. Sooo many "pros" are, in the words of workaholics, bum hurt haha. Sooo much ignorance commenting on an ignorant out of context ignorant statement


----------



## ljason8eg

You'd think statements like that would be caught by the PR department.


----------



## Conspiracy

I think its funny and if considered from her perspective and in the proper context has some shred of innocent semi kinda truth lol.

I was entertained by how many outraged professionals commented and when you look at their website their photography is pretty cookie cutter and bland. So glad i dont try and pretend to be a professional photographer. Video is a part time job and photography is an obsession/passion that im always trying to master. I am definitely a professional at BSing on the internet haha









Also i think PR cleans that stuff up more than actually trying to prevent it lol. Hard to prevent statements being made unless you keep people from speaking in the first place


----------



## Conspiracy

Saw this bad boy at vallue village. Check iut that turbo button. Some seriously hardcore computer power right here. Was only $6. I passed on the deal


----------



## Curleyyy

I would like to get added please ~

Camera: Canon EOS 1100D Twin IS Kit

I'm yet to buy equipment.

Photo Page: http://nathanseeryphotography.tumblr.com
Photo Page: www.facebook.com/nathanseeryphotography


----------



## Conspiracy

man ive been so busy this week shooting video that will take me all of next week to edit.

i want to go partake in some photographering







the weather is soo perfect down here









i may be doing engagement photos for an old friend of mine that cant afford a photog. im trying to find him someone local that i can get him a good deal with because as much as i would love to give it a shot i also want to make sure my friend has the best quality photos. if it comes to it ill rent some fancy lenses and give it a go as i know my friend came to me because he knows ill take slightly better images than someone that bought their first camera at best buy last week and would also do it for the mega supra cheap. supra as in a whole nother level above super for my tenacious d amigos


----------



## frickfrock999

Are there such things as 37mm to 77mm step up rings?
I ordered one (The only one I could find on the net) and got something odd. On the inner ring it says "37mm to 58mm" and on the outer ring it says "58mm to 72mm".

Does this sound right or should I send it back? I haven't gotten my new lense to test it on yet.


----------



## sub50hz

Why on earth would you opt for such a large filter size when you're starting so small (read: cheap)?


----------



## mz-n10

its a 37mm to 58mm ring, then a 58mm to 72mm ring....

if you have a 77mm filter you still need a 72mm to 77mm ring


----------



## frickfrock999

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> its a 37mm to 58mm ring, then a 58mm to 72mm ring....
> 
> if you have a 77mm filter you still need a 72mm to 77mm ring


So, this listing was false advertising?

http://www.amazon.com/UltraPro-Step-Up-Adapter-Ring-Filter/dp/B009992AV0

They didn't mention any of that in their ad.


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *frickfrock99*
> 
> So, this listing was false advertising?
> 
> http://www.amazon.com/UltraPro-Step-Up-Adapter-Ring-Filter/dp/B009992AV0
> 
> They didn't mention any of that in their ad.


i dont think its false advertising..
afaik there are no 37-77 rings . so yeah

you need to stack a 37 - 58, 58 - 72 then a 72 - 77

it would look something like this :


itll probably result to some vignetting i guess . ?

edit :

found this : http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/673453-REG/Redrock_Micro_1_13_0333_37_72mm_Step_Up_Ring.html
paired with this : http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/809646-REG/Sensei_sur7277_72_77mm_Step_Up_Ring.html

viola 37-77 ... for $25 though :/


----------



## Eggs and bacon

test.jpg 619k .jpg file


Just looking for some opinions/help here, this was my attempt at scanning color negatives, (Ektar 100 to be precise), does this seem color correctish to any one?


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Eggs and bacon*
> 
> test.jpg 619k .jpg file
> 
> 
> Just looking for some opinions/help here, this was my attempt at scanning color negatives, (Ektar 100 to be precise), does this seem color correctish to any one?


unless that photo has a kodak color chart in the composition, only you would know if the colors are correct, buddy.


----------



## Eggs and bacon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> unless that photo has a kodak color chart in the composition, only you would know if the colors are correct, buddy.


Maybe I should get a chart, I don't shoot much color and don't really know what I am doing in photo shop when it comes to color. Would be much easier if I could afford to shoot slides


----------



## Conspiracy

Shoot color negative instead lol. Its much more affordable and forgiving. If you look it up online you can make your own color chart from paint samples at home depot. Just have to get the right colors


----------



## revro

hello,

i am thinking about buying later this week nikon d7100 with kit lense 18-105 af-s dx vr. i red that this lense uses 67mm filters, so i am now deciding between 63eur hoya with coating and 16eur tiffen uv filter without the coating (i assume). can you recommend with which one should i go?

PS: 63eur hoya is rippoff, i found it in other store for 44eur, yet question remains

thank you
revro


----------



## laboitenoire

Personally, I don't use UV filters on my lenses, as they serve little purpose besides protecting the front from the occasional nick. However, they do so at the cost of image quality (the Hoya one _might_ not have that big of an effect, but the Tiffen would be crap), which I find to be unacceptable.

My advice is just use a lens hood to protect the front from flying objects and falls and just be careful with your stuff. However, this is a very divisive topic amongst photographers.


----------



## Dream Killer

all my lenses has a uv filter on it (b+w mrc) only because i'm crazy and i go out in hurricanes to take photos. i also use my shirt to wipe my "front element" clean because it's much easier to clean a flat surface vs an expensive aspheric one.


----------



## sub50hz

I have B+W clears on all three Fujis, and since two of them have non-interchangeable lenses, a filter could be the difference between an expensive repair or threading on a new filter.


----------



## Conspiracy

new QOTSA album streaming on itunes for free leading up to the debut of their new album.

needlesstosay it sounds goood and wont be leaving the cd player in my car for a while


----------



## revro

ok please add me into the club, i just bought nikon d7100 with kit lense nikkor 18-105 af-s dx vr
and now off to study all the manuals







looks like books from university









now i have to order hoya uv filter pro1 digital 67mm and 2x sandisk pro 32gb 95mb read 90mb write

thank you
revro


----------



## Conspiracy

idk if anyone has been updating this page. might have to talk to bernie about updating it


----------



## MkO611

Ended up buying a refurb Nikon D5100 with kit lens for my Photo class i'm going to be taking in fall. I really wanted the Pentax K30 caz the images look much more crisp but couldn't find any around my price range








Oh well, I'm sure this will be a great first started camera


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MkO611*
> 
> Ended up buying a refurb Nikon D5100 with kit lens for my Photo class i'm going to be taking in fall. I really wanted the Pentax K30 caz the images look much more crisp but couldn't find any around my price range
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh well, I'm sure this will be a great first started camera


You will still enjoy it.

A used K30 is about $500, you can buy a new one for less than $550.


----------



## MkO611

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aksthem1*
> 
> You will still enjoy it.
> 
> A used K30 is about $500, you can buy a new one for less than $550.


Yea would have been nice If i had the cash for it :/. Couldn't even find any refurb K-30s either..

Oh well, you buy what you can get


----------



## boogschd

slap on a 35mm f/1.8G on the D5100 and youre golden









though the kit lens is also a good lens for starters, dont underestimate it too much


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boogschd*
> 
> slap on a 35mm f/1.8G on the D5100 and youre golden
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> though the kit lens is also a good lens for starters, dont underestimate it too much


word


----------



## MkO611

Got the camera! Had only 301 shutter count










Messed around with it for a while and this is what I have to say


I'm not sure what settings I should put on this so I'm using Auto (i know, boo I suck) till I figure everything out....
I updated the firmware and seeing if anything is off about the camera. I might go to Adorama and have them check it out for me since I'm new to all this and couldn't tell if there were messed up parts.

Took a couple of pics and they look to seem normal. If you guys have any recommended settings for this camera, please let me know!

Gonna lay off that 35mm till I figure out what the hell i'm doing


----------



## mz-n10

shoot in P instead of greenbox auto. this way you dont look like a complete noob with your flash popping up shooting at night.


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> shoot in P instead of greenbox auto. this way you dont look like a complete noob with your flash popping up shooting at night.


yes that, or Aperture priority







(A)

also, you could check out some articles here:

http://www.nikonusa.com/en/Learn-And-Explore/index.page

http://www.nikonusa.com/en/Learn-And-Explore/Article/g9mqnyb1/understanding-iso-sensitivity.html
http://www.nikonusa.com/en/Learn-And-Explore/Article/g3cu6o1r/understanding-maximum-aperture.html


----------



## S3ason

Found a Sigma 50mm f1.4 EX DG on Craigslist for 220, thinking about jumping on it to replace my 50mm f1.8G. This is a good deal correct?


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *S3ason*
> 
> Found a Sigma 50mm f1.4 EX DG on Craigslist for 220, thinking about jumping on it to replace my 50mm f1.8G. This is a good deal correct?


depends on condition of the lens


----------



## S3ason

Haven't gone to look at it, but from the photos it looks good. Listing says UV filter always used


----------



## Conspiracy

i say check it out. youre not required to buy just because you meet up with the seller. check out the rear element, test out the focus ring. test it on your camera make sure it doesnt make any weird noises when used with AF. if it doesnt check out dont buy it. but dont buy it just because it may seem like a good deal







if it all checks out i would get it. would be a solid upgrade for a decent price it looks like


----------



## S3ason

Thanks, I'll e meeting up with him Sunday if its still available, he seems like a nice guys. He said he didn't mind if I used it around a bit just to check it out and if all works I'll be buying. I here it's a great lens so I'm pretty excited


----------



## Ribozyme

Hello everyone, I am looking for a decent point and shoot camera at a preferably sub 100 euro price point. I have an older phone and no camera at all so I would like to have a dedicated camera to make some nice hardware shots for showing off my stuff at this forum or whenever I'm selling something.

I don't know anything about photography by the way. So if anyone wants to point me in the right direction, feel free too








Thanks in advance!

edit: is this any good? I can get it for 100 euro http://www.photographyblog.com/reviews/canon_powershot_a1300_review/


----------



## mz-n10

if anyone is looking for a good <1000USD dslr, sony a77 with a grip is on sale for 900usd.

linkj

if u flip the grip for 200, you are looking at a 700 dollar dslr...


----------



## golfergolfer

Hey everyone! So this is my first time posting here









I am looking at picking up a new camera and was looking at the Canon T4i. I would love to get a 5D Mark III but I dont have that kind of money. So in the Tx series is the T4i the best one? I currently have a T3 from a friend with the kit lens and a EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM. Any answers would be greatly appreciated


----------



## Azefore

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *golfergolfer*
> 
> Hey everyone! So this is my first time posting here
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I am looking at picking up a new camera and was looking at the Canon T4i. I would love to get a 5D Mark III but I dont have that kind of money. So in the Tx series is the T4i the best one? I currently have a T3 from a friend with the kit lens and a EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM. Any answers would be greatly appreciated


There's almost no real significant differences between the T2i, T3i, T4i, and the T5i outside and inside (to a degree, pop out screen, touch screen, some slightly better iso and features/controls in menus/etc).

The T4i is the best buy out of them all if you know you'll be using the features and make it worth the buy price. This is unless you get a great deal on a gently used T3i then I'd hop on that.

I'd stick in the used market and make the budget stretch drum tight.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Azefore*
> 
> There's almost no real significant differences between the T2i, T3i, T4i, and the T5i outside and inside (to a degree, pop out screen, touch screen, some slightly better iso and features/controls in menus/etc).
> 
> The T4i is the best buy out of them all if you know you'll be using the features and make it worth the buy price. This is unless you get a great deal on a gently used T3i then I'd hop on that.
> 
> I'd stick in the used market and make the budget stretch drum tight.


Agreed. I went with a used t2i, as I saw no real difference between it and the others.


----------



## golfergolfer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Azefore*
> 
> There's almost no real significant differences between the T2i, T3i, T4i, and the T5i outside and inside (to a degree, pop out screen, touch screen, some slightly better iso and features/controls in menus/etc).
> 
> The T4i is the best buy out of them all if you know you'll be using the features and make it worth the buy price. This is unless you get a great deal on a gently used T3i then I'd hop on that.
> 
> I'd stick in the used market and make the budget stretch drum tight.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> Agreed. I went with a used t2i, as I saw no real difference between it and the others.


hmm to my knowledge the biggest difference between them is that the t4i has 9 cross type focus points? I have a t3 like I said and want to upgrade from that however I dont really want to go full frame body due to the size of the body it self. I would like to be able to take it in my back pack and go.


----------



## ljason8eg

Yes, the T4i has a better AF system than its predecessors. Any of the 5D series cameras really aren't all that much larger than a Rebel. I really think you should look at a 5D, especially since you have the 85L. Seems like a waste to use that lens on a Rebel, or any crop body for that matter.


----------



## golfergolfer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> Yes, the T4i has a better AF system than its predecessors. Any of the 5D series cameras really aren't all that much larger than a Rebel. I really think you should look at a 5D, especially since you have the 85L. Seems like a waste to use that lens on a Rebel, or any crop body for that matter.


We talking like 5D Mark III or Mark II ? they are both about 20% larger and twice as heavy :/ Also not to mention the price lol. The 85L is being wasted on the camera a little but as much as I want to take the jump to full frame I just dont see me even needing it :/ I dont take professional stuff just some portraits and things like this.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *golfergolfer*
> 
> We talking like 5D Mark III or Mark II ? they are both about 20% larger and twice as heavy :/ Also not to mention the price lol. The 85L is being wasted on the camera a little but as much as I want to take the jump to full frame I just dont see me even needing it :/ I dont take professional stuff just some portraits and things like this.


If portraits are your thing and you don't want to spend much, try to find a 5D classic in nice condition.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> Any of the 5D series cameras really aren't all that much larger than a Rebel.


http://camerasize.com/compare/#192,99

There's an appreciable difference there.
Quote:


> Canon EOS 5D Mark II is 14% (18.9 mm) wider and 14% (14 mm) taller than Canon EOS Rebel T3i.
> Canon EOS 5D Mark II is 6% (4.7 mm) thinner than Canon EOS Rebel T3i.
> Canon EOS 5D Mark II [938 g] weights 65% (368 grams) more than Canon EOS Rebel T3i [570 g] (*inc. batteries and memory card).


----------



## golfergolfer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> http://camerasize.com/compare/#192,99
> 
> There's an appreciable difference there.


Ohh this is a cool site! I have the T3 currently so it is even a slight bit smaller according to what they show. But it is pretty clear the size difference between the two when you show it like this and I have used a multiple Mark III's and just find them so big. Rep+ for finding this site going to be really useful for me, also to ljason8eg for the help


----------



## Conspiracy

transcoding HD video for DVDs through adobe encore slows my PC down so hard. if only encore also used mercury GPU acceleration


----------



## laboitenoire

Just got myself an IPS monitor from BestBuy today for $160... We'll see how much this improves things.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> Just got myself an IPS monitor from BestBuy today for $160... We'll see how much this improves things.


unless you are printing it wont make any difference. most people will still view your pictures on TN panels...


----------



## laboitenoire

True, but it's mainly nice not having to deal with the wacky viewing angles of the TN panel in my laptop.

So far I'm enjoying the monitor. I just used the Windows calibration tool to try to make the colors a bit better. Doesn't quite match my laptop (which has pretty good color it seems) but I can probably futz it a bit more to get it close.

Overall, for $160 I can't complain.


----------



## MistaBernie

BB had an AOC / (Ensign?) 23" IPS for $139 at my local store so I picked one up. Nice to have a pair of 23+" monitors when working on stuff.


----------



## laboitenoire

Hmm... They didn't have that one at mine. They had a 21" AOC for $120, but it was only 1600x900 and I don't trust AOC as a brand.


----------



## Conspiracy

New addition to my collection. 80cents at vallue village thrift store. Works like a charm just very dirty. Will be running a roll of tha cheapo kodak gold. Debating between iso 200 or 400. dang cell phone aint so smart







upsidedown photo fail


----------



## Curleyyy

To the knowledgeable people; what is the difference between all of the sub $1000 Canon EOS cameras?

What makes them stand out from each other?

They all have the same pixels, same sensor size, same ISO except 700D/100D, same shutter max speed except 60D/7D, similar FPS (not important), all shoot in RAW.

Another question that came to mind; why the EOS series? Why not another camera brand?

To focus the type of camera on it's usage; the main focus is - low light, high shutter speed, high iso to combat low light, low grain, (ie: concerts/gigs) but to also shoot vivid land/cityscapes.



Spoiler: Cameras



EOS 700D
18 MP // 22.3 x 14.9mm // 100-12800 // 1/4000 sec // 5 fps

EOS 650D
18 MP // 22.3 x 14.9mm // 100-6400 // 1/4000 sec // 5 fps

EOS 600D
18 MP // 22.3 x 14.9mm // 100-6400 // 1/4000 sec // 3.7 fps

EOS 100D
18 MP // 22.3 x 14.9mm // 100-12800 // 1/4000 sec // 4 fps

EOS 60D
18 MP // 22.3 x 14.9mm // 100 - 6400 // 1/8000 sec // 5.3 fps

EOS 7D
18 MP // 22.3 x 14.9mm // 100 - 6400 // 1/8000 sec // 8 fps


----------



## Conspiracy

the main differences arent that significant. some have a newer image processor and improved aesthetics and ergonomics. overall the image quality itself will be pretty much the same for all until you shoot at high ISO ranges as you mentioned.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Curleyyy*
> 
> To the knowledgeable people; what is the difference between all of the sub $1000 Canon EOS cameras?
> 
> What makes them stand out from each other?
> 
> They all have the same pixels, same sensor size, same ISO except 700D/100D, same shutter max speed except 60D/7D, similar FPS (not important), all shoot in RAW.
> 
> Another question that came to mind; why the EOS series? Why not another camera brand?
> 
> To focus the type of camera on it's usage; the main focus is - low light, high shutter speed, high iso to combat low light, low grain, (ie: concerts/gigs) but to also shoot vivid land/cityscapes.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Cameras
> 
> 
> 
> EOS 700D
> 18 MP // 22.3 x 14.9mm // 100-12800 // 1/4000 sec // 5 fps
> 
> EOS 650D
> 18 MP // 22.3 x 14.9mm // 100-6400 // 1/4000 sec // 5 fps
> 
> EOS 600D
> 18 MP // 22.3 x 14.9mm // 100-6400 // 1/4000 sec // 3.7 fps
> 
> EOS 100D
> 18 MP // 22.3 x 14.9mm // 100-12800 // 1/4000 sec // 4 fps
> 
> EOS 60D
> 18 MP // 22.3 x 14.9mm // 100 - 6400 // 1/8000 sec // 5.3 fps
> 
> EOS 7D
> 18 MP // 22.3 x 14.9mm // 100 - 6400 // 1/8000 sec // 8 fps


you have only listed sensor and shutter specs.

AF, body, ergonomics, viewfinder, size and weight all play a role in the camera.

thats a good question.....why eos? i don't know why you've only listed canons but every other camera manufacturer makes good bodies and good lenses. the real question is which camera fits best in your hand and feels most comfortable to use.


----------



## johnvosh

Would like to join the club. Just bought my first DSLR. I picked up a Nikon D5100 w/ AF-S 18-55mm VR lens for $549.95 @ staples. Also picked up a camera bag, class 10 memory card, UV filter, & tripod. Upgrading from a Canon PowerShot SX130 IS which I think I'm going to keep for now, but not quite sure.


----------



## Conspiracy

Decided to sell off my minolta XD11 and lenses because i kinda need money right now and i rarely shoot it since i bought the bronica which gets way more attention









start paying back student loans in the next 30 days. if interested make an offer. im currently trying to decide on a price as i type this.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Curleyyy*
> 
> To the knowledgeable people; what is the difference between all of the sub $1000 Canon EOS cameras?
> 
> What makes them stand out from each other?
> 
> They all have the same pixels, same sensor size, same ISO except 700D/100D, same shutter max speed except 60D/7D, similar FPS (not important), all shoot in RAW.
> 
> Another question that came to mind; why the EOS series? Why not another camera brand?
> 
> To focus the type of camera on it's usage; the main focus is - low light, high shutter speed, high iso to combat low light, low grain, (ie: concerts/gigs) but to also shoot vivid land/cityscapes.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Cameras
> 
> 
> 
> EOS 700D
> 18 MP // 22.3 x 14.9mm // 100-12800 // 1/4000 sec // 5 fps
> 
> EOS 650D
> 18 MP // 22.3 x 14.9mm // 100-6400 // 1/4000 sec // 5 fps
> 
> EOS 600D
> 18 MP // 22.3 x 14.9mm // 100-6400 // 1/4000 sec // 3.7 fps
> 
> EOS 100D
> 18 MP // 22.3 x 14.9mm // 100-12800 // 1/4000 sec // 4 fps
> 
> EOS 60D
> 18 MP // 22.3 x 14.9mm // 100 - 6400 // 1/8000 sec // 5.3 fps
> 
> EOS 7D
> 
> 18 MP // 22.3 x 14.9mm // 100 - 6400 // 1/8000 sec // 8 fps


mostly build quality, viewfinder accuracy and clarity and how fast it can shoot . they're all gonna be the same iq-wise.


----------



## PCBuilder94

May I join? Just getting into photography as a hobby here is my gear:
Sony Cybershot not sure exact model ill post later..


----------



## Conspiracy

rented a 50L this weekend. doing a photoshoot for fun for a friend but mainly shooting some video for a concept video that may turn into a project i plan to start. played around with it today a little bit and it definitely feels solid and on the back of the camera the images definitely look unique. not sure i would ever want to pay for this lens but for $50 for 4 days should be fun


----------



## sub50hz

Special Report: Game 1 causes loss of sleep for millions in Chicago and Boston, June 13th likely to be least-productive day in either citys' history.


----------



## dmanstasiu

I've been looking around for a while and I think I'm ready to pull the trigger.

(Note: used)
D5100 w/ 35mm 1.8 prime lens. $500
18-200mm VRII $450

http://vancouver.en.craigslist.ca/bnc/ele/3864202890.html
http://vancouver.en.craigslist.ca/van/ele/3809312355.html

Criticisms / queries / concerns / comments / unwanted pregnancies ?


----------



## nvidiaftw12

So no more potato? No more making fun of you for God-awful pictures?


----------



## dmanstasiu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> So no more potato? No more making fun of you for God-awful pictures?


1- I'm not giving up the potato. It will still be with me at all times

2- Given my impeccable ability to suck at photography, I wouldn't be surprised if the D5100 shots turned out just as bad


----------



## laboitenoire

SLR Gear posted a review of the Sigma 18-35 f/1.8... Looks pretty good.

http://slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=1609


----------



## golfergolfer

Hi again guys! I asked a little bit ago what the thoughts were on the T4i but I have now come to the conclusion of not getting it and just saving my money and not worrying about size. So I have put together my dream list









How would the following sound?

Canon 5D Mark III

Canon EF 17-40 f/4L USM
Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM

Lowepro Flipside Sport 15L AW

This basically covers everything for me as I already have a EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM.

Comments?


----------



## ljason8eg

That's nice gear, no question, but it seems like a huge amount of money to spend all at once unless you're making money from using the gear or have a very large disposable income.


----------



## golfergolfer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> That's nice gear, no question, but it seems like a huge amount of money to spend all at once unless you're making money from using the gear or have a very large disposable income.


More like spending it over a extended period of time and using it forever


----------



## Eggs and bacon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *golfergolfer*
> 
> More like spending it over a extended period of time and using it forever


lenses last digital cameras don't, i would factor in an upgrade every 5-7 years at the very most. (depends if camera technology advancement slows down or speeds up drastically etc.)


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Eggs and bacon*
> 
> lenses last digital cameras don't, i would factor in an upgrade every 5-7 years at the very most. (depends if camera technology advancement slows down or speeds up drastically etc.)


The lifecycle of a pro DSLR is typically longer than that of an entry-level or prosumer body. The lastest-and-greatest bug doesnt hit everyone, there are still professionals cranking away on 5Dcs and 1D2s and 3s.

If you plan to use it "forever", MAKE SURE it's really what you want. I went through a lot of gear before settling on a trio of Fujis that fit my every need. I also still have a lot of crap I need to sell.


----------



## golfergolfer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Eggs and bacon*
> 
> lenses last digital cameras don't, i would factor in an upgrade every 5-7 years at the very most. (depends if camera technology advancement slows down or speeds up drastically etc.)


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> The lifecycle of a pro DSLR is typically longer than that of an entry-level or prosumer body. The lastest-and-greatest bug doesnt hit everyone, there are still professionals cranking away on 5Dcs and 1D2s and 3s.
> 
> If you plan to use it "forever", MAKE SURE it's really what you want. I went through a lot of gear before settling on a trio of Fujis that fit my every need. I also still have a lot of crap I need to sell.


Yea I know that lenses last quite a long time and cameras dont as they continue to get better and better. I will without a doubt use the camera for a very long time perhaps longer than 5-7 years as it offers more than I need currently so I will grow into it







I do think this is what I want as I will have a nice wide angle lens and then I will have a nice zoom one as well, and to top it all off I will have one for just portraits. I am still trying to figure out how important the 40-70 range will be (this is basically the standard range?) I wont have any of that length but I dont know if it will make a big difference or not. Might just have to stand a little bit closer or farther I guess


----------



## golfergolfer

EDIT: How important is IS for a lens like the 70-200mm? I have heard that basically if you can keep your hands steady then it is useless. While I can most of the time keep my hands still if I was shooting inside at a lower shutter speed at 200mm I would have to be very very still is it worth the extra $500-$600?

EDIT: Whoops this was supposed to be an edit of my above post not a new one :/ Sorry on my phone...


----------



## MistaBernie

Image Stabilization is worth the money (Didnt' want to say IS is). I have the (very soon to be discontinued) 70-200 f/2.8L non-IS and while I love it and it does what I need it to do, there were times previously when I couldn't bump my ISO too high to make my shutter speed faster. This isn't really the case anymore with the 5D3 (thankfully)..


----------



## mz-n10

double post


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *golfergolfer*
> 
> Hi again guys! I asked a little bit ago what the thoughts were on the T4i but I have now come to the conclusion of not getting it and just saving my money and not worrying about size. So I have put together my dream list
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How would the following sound?
> 
> Canon 5D Mark III
> 
> Canon EF 17-40 f/4L USM
> Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM
> 
> Lowepro Flipside Sport 15L AW
> 
> This basically covers everything for me as I already have a EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM.
> 
> Comments?


i would splurge (since its a dream list) and pick up a 24-70/2.8 also, i personally love the 24-70 range on fullframe and the speed is useful.

also the 70-200/4 NON-IS is a older less sharp lens when compared to the 70-200/4IS.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Image Stabilization is worth the money (Didnt' want to say IS is). I have the (very soon to be discontinued) 70-200 f/2.8L non-IS and while I love it and it does what I need it to do, there were times previously when I couldn't bump my ISO too high to make my shutter speed faster. This isn't really the case anymore with the 5D3 (thankfully)..


with IS you can easily shoot 200mm at 1/60.


----------



## golfergolfer

Hmm so I will without a doubt get the image stabilization on the 70-200 now I just need to see if I can get a deal on the f/2.8 version instead of the f/4









I was thinking about the 24-70 f/2.8 but then that would make the 17-40 almost pointless. Is there a noticeable difference between 17-24?


----------



## mz-n10

yes, there is a huge difference between 17mm and 24mm.

if you arent against buying 3rd party lenses, tamron has a 17-35/2.8-4 and tokina has a 16-28/2.8 which are both fairly good.


----------



## golfergolfer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> yes, there is a huge difference between 17mm and 24mm.
> 
> if you arent against buying 3rd party lenses, tamron has a 17-35/2.8-4 and tokina has a 16-28/2.8 which are both fairly good.


Hmm I am not fully against it but wouldnt mind keeping it in the Canon range. Thought for a SECOND get a 14mm prime, 24-70, 70-200 then realized the price of the 14mm prime and decided against it instantly lol. Still looking around but dont think I am going to have that 50ish range :/ too bad there isnt a 14-70mm


----------



## Eggs and bacon

you could get the 17-40 and 70-200 and then get a cheaper fast 50 mm prime for really low light stuff


----------



## revro

hmm where will the future go? i mean i have an olympus compact 3Mpixel from 2003 with 10 optical zoom and it can shoot great photos. i took it out recently and it did great job.
i mean i bought d7100 which makes huge perfect pictures but i dont see a point in future going beyond it as 100Mpixel would be plain insane







only thing that ticks me on d7100 is the [email protected] and not 60p ... but i had to buy it now, could not wait another 2-3 years for d7200 with 60p. all in all i am pretty happy with it and using CaseLogic SLRC 206 bag, where i can pack everything and also a notebook


Please add me to the Club. I am using NIKON D7100 and kit lense Nikkor AF-S 18-105 DX VR

thank you
revro


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *golfergolfer*
> 
> Hmm I am not fully against it but wouldnt mind keeping it in the Canon range. Thought for a SECOND get a 14mm prime, 24-70, 70-200 then realized the price of the 14mm prime and decided against it instantly lol. Still looking around but dont think I am going to have that 50ish range :/ too bad there isnt a 14-70mm


Buy a 50, and rent a few lenses until you find what you want. No sense in blowing your cash wad only to be underwhelmed and let a pricey lens sit in a bag/box going unused.


----------



## golfergolfer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Buy a 50, and rent a few lenses until you find what you want. No sense in blowing your cash wad only to be underwhelmed and let a pricey lens sit in a bag/box going unused.


True, I think without a doubt I want the 70-200mm. The only thing is I would be interested in doing some landscape photography stuff with ND filters and what not and basically am stuck on the fact of would I be needing that extra few mm (17-24) to make that shot. I would prefer the 24-70 as it is a solid all around lens but will I regret that 7mm? hmm I wonder if there is a cheap wide angle lens out there







THE SEARCH CONTINUES!

EDIT: I think I am liking the 24-70 more and more I would have alot more use for that as it covers much more of a range and I just found out it can also do macro? This would be fun too


----------



## AHW214

I just discovered this thread, it's nice to see such a large photography community here. Sign me up please!

I use a Canon 60D with the 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 kit lens and for macro shots I use a 60mm f/2.8 macro lens. I also have an old Speedlight 420EX which I use as my external flash.

Macro shot of a locust:



Eiffel Tower (traveled to Paris recently):



A stream in Telluride, Colorado:


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *golfergolfer*
> 
> True, I think without a doubt I want the 70-200mm. The only thing is I would be interested in doing some landscape photography stuff with ND filters and what not and basically am stuck on the fact of would I be needing that extra few mm (17-24) to make that shot. I would prefer the 24-70 as it is a solid all around lens but will I regret that 7mm? hmm I wonder if there is a cheap wide angle lens out there
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> THE SEARCH CONTINUES!
> 
> EDIT: I think I am liking the 24-70 more and more I would have alot more use for that as it covers much more of a range and I just found out it can also do macro? This would be fun too


7mm on the wide end is a HUGE difference. 17-40Ls can be had super cheap used, and they're a really capable ultrawide -- it's arguably not as good as the 16-35, but at a fraction of the cost, I'm sure you could work it into your budget. Don't forget about the 24-105L either, as it's also a great lens with IS that comes as a kit with the 5DIII.

That being said, you're too focused on what lens is good "on paper" without understanding the enormous difference in perspective/angle-of-view. Rent to find out what's right _for you_, otherwise you will likely find you've invested a ton of money into something that doesn't match your approach -- don't get caught up in the "wider is better for landscape shots" thing, that is most definitely untrue.


----------



## S3ason

Save you money and skip on the super wide. If the 24mm isn't wide enough you can always stitch multiple photos together. Not the easiest way to do it but its doable.

Revro: nice to see another d7100 user


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *golfergolfer*
> 
> True, I think without a doubt I want the 70-200mm. The only thing is I would be interested in doing some landscape photography stuff with ND filters and what not and basically am stuck on the fact of would I be needing that extra few mm (17-24) to make that shot. I would prefer the 24-70 as it is a solid all around lens but will I regret that 7mm? hmm I wonder if there is a cheap wide angle lens out there
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> THE SEARCH CONTINUES!
> 
> EDIT: I think I am liking the 24-70 more and more I would have alot more use for that as it covers much more of a range and I just found out it can also do macro? This would be fun too


if you expect to use the 24-70 a lot, you can always get a cheaper tamron/tokina option, or buy the 17-40L used. you are already spending 5k+ so whats another 300-700?

the difference between 40 and 70 isnt that much so you can always just pick up a 50 if you need something for low light.

the macro feature on the 24-70 just means you can get close to your object, it isnt a true macro (1:1).


----------



## golfergolfer

Well I think what I will end up doing is eventually picking up the 5D Mark III kit so that it comes with the 24-105mm f/4l, and then get the 70-200mm f/4L IS. There is a little bit of overlap but I dont think it should be too much of a problem. This route saves me about $500-$1000 or maybe even more.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *golfergolfer*
> 
> Well I think what I will end up doing is eventually picking up the 5D Mark III kit so that it comes with the 24-105mm f/4l, and then get the 70-200mm f/4L IS. There is a little bit of overlap but I dont think it should be too much of a problem. This route saves me about $500-$1000 or maybe even more.


thats not a bad idea

or you can just shoot the 5d3 with kit lens for a bit, then figure out if you like shooting longer or wider.


----------



## MistaBernie

Well, arguably the kit lens with the 5D3 is the 24-105 or the 24-70 F/4L IS (soon if not already out), both which are pretty high quality lenses in their own right.


----------



## Sean Webster

Doing a photoshoot today!


----------



## Conspiracy

nice


----------



## Sean Webster

Dang, no photoshoot today, my neighbor forgot about it LOL.

I'll be doing it later this week tho...hopefully I'll use the nifty fifty for it too!

Well, time to practice with it.


----------



## Conspiracy

it happens. almost something to generally be expected. models are the flakiest people on earth i think


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> it happens. almost something to generally be expected. models are the flakiest people on earth i think


unless they are paid


----------



## golfergolfer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> thats not a bad idea
> 
> or you can just shoot the 5d3 with kit lens for a bit, then figure out if you like shooting longer or wider.


This is what I planned on doing. Makes the most sense to me








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Well, arguably the kit lens with the 5D3 is the 24-105 or the 24-70 F/4L IS (soon if not already out), both which are pretty high quality lenses in their own right.


I only really see it with the 24-105 So I would get it with that. I like that range too get that extra bit out of the lens









I did buy the bag today though the Lowepro Flipside Sport 15L AW. It was 20% off and I got a little bit more off due to some friends







Quite happy with it


----------



## ikem

shot a wedding over the last weekend!


----------



## dmanstasiu

I saw last post by Ikem and I knew I was in for a treat







did not disappoint

I'm about to buy a D5100 + Battery from a guy for $380 ... and he offered to throw in a Nikon Lens AF-S VR Nikkor 24-120mm 1:35-5.6 G ED, for a total of $650. Should I do it? I was originally planning on a 35mm prime + 18-200mm VRII lens ...


----------



## ikem

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dmanstasiu*
> 
> I saw last post by Ikem and I knew I was in for a treat
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> did not disappoint
> 
> I'm about to buy a D5100 + Battery from a guy for $380 ... and he offered to throw in a Nikon Lens AF-S VR Nikkor 24-120mm 1:35-5.6 G ED, for a total of $650. Should I do it? I was originally planning on a 35mm prime + 18-200mm VRII lens ...


go for it, i have my d3200 and 17-55 2.8, but i used the kit lens for a long time and still got good pictures. The 24-120 is better than that, so you are set.


----------



## laboitenoire

Nooooo do not get that 24-120... The f/3.5-5.6 variant is notoriously bad. Soft images, bad distortion... Only saving grace is the VR. The f/4 version is fantastic, but it's also a $900 lens.


----------



## Conspiracy

girlfriend modeled at a photo event last night. i think she did pretty good for her first time









http://www.flickr.com/photos/br1an_r/9083704467/
IMG_0311 by brian_roberts, on Flickr

this dude was cool. got tired of the lack of space and waiting to borrow the transmitter that fired a single strobe into a beauty dish camera left. natural light kills this shot but maybe next time lol

http://www.flickr.com/photos/br1an_r/9085918976/
IMG_0341 by brian_roberts, on Flickr


----------



## Faraz

Is that by any chance at the railway museum in Duluth?


----------



## Conspiracy

nope this is at the goat farm performing arts center in downtown off of 17th and howell mill area


----------



## ikem

man... i need to find a photography club around here...


----------



## revro

i made this 9 years ago on my compact olympus








i am a terrible photographer, with 2 left hands xD, do you know how it could have happened?


best
revro


----------



## dmanstasiu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ikem*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *dmanstasiu*
> 
> I saw last post by Ikem and I knew I was in for a treat
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> did not disappoint
> 
> I'm about to buy a D5100 + Battery from a guy for $380 ... and he offered to throw in a Nikon Lens AF-S VR Nikkor 24-120mm 1:35-5.6 G ED, for a total of $650. Should I do it? I was originally planning on a 35mm prime + 18-200mm VRII lens ...
> 
> 
> 
> go for it, i have my d3200 and 17-55 2.8, but i used the kit lens for a long time and still got good pictures. The 24-120 is better than that, so you are set.
Click to expand...

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> Nooooo do not get that 24-120... The f/3.5-5.6 variant is notoriously bad. Soft images, bad distortion... Only saving grace is the VR. The f/4 version is fantastic, but it's also a $900 lens.


Hmmmm mixed opinions. I think I'll stick to the 35mm prime + 18-200mm VRII combo. Any objections?


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ikem*
> 
> man... i need to find a photography club around here...


they are somewhat hard to find here. The current one i am part of has a lot of drama revolving around one of the admins who recently was very disrespectful to my girlfriend and I. Plan on looking for a better group as well as just avoid the individual that claims to be professional but conducts business in a manner that is far from it.


----------



## johnvosh

Just won a Nikon AF DX Fisheye NIKKOR 10.5mm f/2.8G ED Lens on eBay for my D5100. Was only $450 plus S/H, which is quite a bit cheaper than I can find around Edmonton area. Has anyone on here used one? What do you think of it? I wanted one just to take some cool looking photo's.


----------



## ikem

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *johnvosh*
> 
> Just won a Nikon AF DX Fisheye NIKKOR 10.5mm f/2.8G ED Lens on eBay for my D5100. Was only $450 plus S/H, which is quite a bit cheaper than I can find around Edmonton area. Has anyone on here used one? What do you think of it? I wanted one just to take some cool looking photo's.


i dont think it will auto focus on the d5100, but i was looking at that same ebay listing







(trying to figure out what to get for my next lens)

I borrowed the nikon fisheye from a friend for a night and played around with it. Fun little lens and has a lot of uses.


----------



## MistaBernie

While fisheyes are fun, unless you shoot alot of BMX or you're Gene Ho (if you don't know him, use the googles) I feel like they have far too specific uses to get alot of use. If I used them more, I probably would have picked up the Adorama deal from not too long ago for the EF 8-15mm f/4L for like $1089 (sweet price for that lens given that it's back up to $1349 now, thanks stupid MAP)


----------



## dmanstasiu

I would love to pick one up for rockclimbing, slacklining and longboarding


----------



## Chunky_Chimp

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dmanstasiu*
> 
> Hmmmm mixed opinions. I think I'll stick to the 35mm prime + 18-200mm VRII combo. Any objections?


That's probably the better plan, yeah. The 18-200 should be great for general use, with the 35 prime assigned to low light stuff where you don't want to use the flash or AF assist light.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dmanstasiu*
> 
> Hmmmm mixed opinions.


There shouldn't be -- it's the worst Nikon lens in the modern era. Simply terrible.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dmanstasiu*
> 
> Hmmmm mixed opinions. I think I'll stick to the 35mm prime + 18-200mm VRII combo. Any objections?


is there a reason you want a hyper zoom other than pure convenience?


----------



## S3ason

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> is there a reason you want a hyper zoom other than pure convenience?


Is there a reason to have one other than pure convenience?


----------



## ikem

woot! just got a 55 1.2!


----------



## sub50hz

I am getting a butthole-tightening workout watching this Stanely Cup series.


----------



## golfergolfer

lol ^^^

Ah quick thing here I am sure it is right but for the Nikon Lenses/Cameras if you use a

FX Lens such as:

AF-S NIKKOR 85mm f/1.4G
AF-S NIKKOR 24-120mm f/4G ED VR
AF-S NIKKOR 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II
AF-S NIKKOR 14-24mm f/2.8G ED
AF-S NIKKOR 24-70mm f/2.8G ED

On a camera lie the:

D7100

You will still have the crop factor of 1.5x or so? so the 24-70 would be more like a 36-105 or something? Or is there a special mode on the lens/camera to fix this difference?


----------



## ikem

Yes you are correct. My 17-55 2.8 is really a 25-74.

Sent from my ADR6410LVW using Tapatalk 2


----------



## ikem

Double post... But is has a 1.5 because the sensor is smaller so it has a small field of view, I.e. longer focal length

Sent from my ADR6410LVW using Tapatalk 2


----------



## dmanstasiu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chunky_Chimp*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *dmanstasiu*
> 
> Hmmmm mixed opinions. I think I'll stick to the 35mm prime + 18-200mm VRII combo. Any objections?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's probably the better plan, yeah. The 18-200 should be great for general use, with the 35 prime assigned to low light stuff where you don't want to use the flash or AF assist light.
Click to expand...

That's the plan








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *dmanstasiu*
> 
> Hmmmm mixed opinions.
> 
> 
> 
> There shouldn't be -- it's the worst Nikon lens in the modern era. Simply terrible.
Click to expand...

Glad to have an expert opinion








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *dmanstasiu*
> 
> Hmmmm mixed opinions. I think I'll stick to the 35mm prime + 18-200mm VRII combo. Any objections?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> is there a reason you want a hyper zoom other than pure convenience?
Click to expand...

I was told to buy it


----------



## aksthem1

Hyper zooms/all-in-one zooms are a terrible investment if you are serious about photography. Not only are they generally bad IQ, but they suffer from different types of distortions at different ranges. As well as terrible CA. Not saying that you can't get good shots with it, but it's one of those lenses made to cater snapshooters.


----------



## dmanstasiu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aksthem1*
> 
> Hyper zooms/all-in-one zooms are a terrible investment if you are serious about photography. Not only are they generally bad IQ, but they suffer from different types of distortions at different ranges. As well as terrible CA. Not saying that you can't get good shots with it, but it's one of those lenses made to cater snapshooters.


It'll be my first dslr







what suggestions would you have for a good lens / combo of all-around starter lens' ?


----------



## biatchi

The kit lens, note the focal lengths you find yourself shooting at then look into other lenses.


----------



## golfergolfer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dmanstasiu*
> 
> It'll be my first dslr
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> what suggestions would you have for a good lens / combo of all-around starter lens' ?


Well my







? What is your budget like? The thing I find about shooting is what lengths are you going to be using the most? Landscape? Portraits? Macro? Zoom things perhaps animals, people from a far? It is things like this that you go off of then decide. For me personally I have really really thought about it and a 10-24mm like this one HERE, is money for me as I enjoy taking landscape and can use this as a overall fun lens. When I need a little more power for longer distance and portraits I like to use a 85mm but will be switching over from Canon to Nikon my self and plan on investing in the 70-200mm f/2.8 (or the f/4 depends on where the budget is at the time of buying) While I am missing out on all the standard lengths I never really find I would use them much, I rather take a step or two back or forward to get my shot. That said if you need a more standard length then you could always pick up a cheaper prime lens









NOTE: This would take you beyond starter so if you really just want to learn the basics then pick up the camera with the starter and shoot with that for a while then decide


----------



## dmanstasiu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *biatchi*
> 
> The kit lens, note the focal lenghs you find yourself shooting at then look into other lenses.


I was considering this, because it makes sense. But I also kind of wanted to just ... "know" what I needed ,and skip the kit lens investment. Alas ...
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *golfergolfer*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *dmanstasiu*
> 
> It'll be my first dslr
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> what suggestions would you have for a good lens / combo of all-around starter lens' ?
> 
> 
> 
> Well my
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ? What is your budget like? The thing I find about shooting is what lengths are you going to be using the most? Landscape? Portraits? Macro? Zoom things perhaps animals, people from a far? It is things like this that you go off of then decide. For me personally I have really really thought about it and a 10-24mm like this one HERE, is money for me as I enjoy taking landscape and can use this as a overall fun lens. When I need a little more power for longer distance and portraits I like to use a 85mm but will be switching over from Canon to Nikon my self and plan on investing in the 70-200mm f/2.8 (or the f/4 depends on where the budget is at the time of buying) While I am missing out on all the standard lengths I never really find I would use them much, I rather take a step or two back or forward to get my shot. That said if you need a more standard length then you could always pick up a cheaper prime lens
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NOTE: This would take you beyond starter so if you really just want to learn the basics then pick up the camera with the starter and shoot with that for a while then decide
Click to expand...

Yeah I think I'll have to stick with the kit lens then







I really don't see myself shooting portraits but yes to just about everything else ... that's the problem. I don't have any specialization, it's just going to be playing around, trying around different styles, different distances, etc. It's a learning tool more than anything else.

I have a lot of research to do since I still don't understand why a 70-200 is more expensive than a 18-200


----------



## golfergolfer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dmanstasiu*
> 
> Yeah I think I'll have to stick with the kit lens then
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I really don't see myself shooting portraits but yes to just about everything else ... that's the problem. I don't have any specialization, it's just going to be playing around, trying around different styles, different distances, etc. It's a learning tool more than anything else.
> 
> I have a lot of research to do since *I still don't understand why a 70-200 is more expensive than a 18-200*


Chances are it will have to do with the aperture and how fast of a lens it is the:

70-200mm f2.8G = $2099.99

while the

70-200mm f4G = $1379.99

It is all about how fast of a lens you want. The more expensive one will be much brighter allowing you to shoot in lower light conditions and control your blur effects more than the f4 lens

EDIT: Taking a look at the nikon 18-200, it is f.3.5 which isnt to bad, and it has IF and VR (IF is internal focusing? I dont know still learning nikon, and VR is like a image stabilization) That said this is one of the lower end lenses as there is no gold ring at the end of it. This means it would be made out of more plastic than metal or a weather sealed material. The build quality may not be as high. (Anyone can correct me here if I am wrong I am still learning too







)


----------



## dmanstasiu

*sigh* so much information. Focal lengths, apertures, fixed / zoom ...

Kit lens it is (for now)


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *golfergolfer*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *dmanstasiu*
> 
> Yeah I think I'll have to stick with the kit lens then
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I really don't see myself shooting portraits but yes to just about everything else ... that's the problem. I don't have any specialization, it's just going to be playing around, trying around different styles, different distances, etc. It's a learning tool more than anything else.
> 
> I have a lot of research to do since *I still don't understand why a 70-200 is more expensive than a 18-200*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Chances are it will have to do with the aperture and how fast of a lens it is the:
> 
> 70-200mm f2.8G = $2099.99
> 
> while the
> 
> 70-200mm f4G = $1379.99
> 
> It is all about how fast of a lens you want. The more expensive one will be much brighter allowing you to shoot in lower light conditions and control your blur effects more than the f4 lens
> 
> EDIT: Taking a look at the nikon 18-200, it is f.3.5 which isnt to bad, and it has IF and VR (IF is internal focusing? I dont know still learning nikon, and VR is like a image stabilization) That said this is one of the lower end lenses as there is no gold ring at the end of it. This means it would be made out of more plastic than metal or a weather sealed material. The build quality may not be as high. (Anyone can correct me here if I am wrong I am still learning too
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )
Click to expand...

all Nikon 70-200s have IS/VR. most of the expense comes from the constant aperture. also, all Nikon G lenses are more plastic than metal. this is because plastic is a better material when it comes to shock protection and thermal protection.

anecdote: i got a used 70-200 f2.8 vr1 before the f4g came out. if i was to do it again i would get the f4g because weight is important to me.

ps: please get rid of the idea that metal = better quality. when designed and executed properly, plastic is a superior material when it comes to portable things. try touching a metal lens after you leave it out on the sun.


----------



## golfergolfer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> all Nikon 70-200s have IS/VR. most of the expense comes from the constant aperture. also, all Nikon G lenses are more plastic than metal. this is because plastic is a better material when it comes to shock protection and thermal protection.
> 
> anecdote: i got a used 70-200 f2.8 vr1 before the f4g came out. if i was to do it again i would get the f4g because weight is important to me.
> 
> ps: please get rid of the idea that metal = better quality. when designed and executed properly, plastic is a superior material when it comes to portable things. try touching a metal lens after you leave it out on the sun.


hmm yes the price is from the constant aperture for sure, Are all nikon G lenses plastic? or just the majority? I took a look at the 24-70 and I think that could be an exception as I think it is metal. And I guess plastic could be better for some portable things I have just always liked the feel of the metal in my hands vs the plastic feels more solid to me, but what is more important is the weather sealing as where I live we get ALOT of rain :/ and as long as either material does a good job it doesnt bother me which one I use.


----------



## Dream Killer

that plastic feel that people associate with cheap lenses usually comes from that kit-lens feel. that doesn't come from the actual material but the fit of the pieces together. the lower end lenses have a much larger tolerance in manufacturing than the nicer-built lenses with much tighter tolerances. nikon's weather sealing is good and is available in most new G lenses where as you can only get this from L's in Canon. it's easy to tell if you have weather sealing via the presence of the rubber ring on the lens mount.

my 70-200 f2.8 vr1 definately has a plastic barrel, but my 24 1.4g i think is magnesium. i don't really pay attention to this anymore since both are very good as long as the fit is precise.

btw, note that weather sealing isn't complete on most lenses unless a filter is threaded on the front. i have uv/clear filters on all lenses because of this and i like to go out in foul weather. only large teles with the sacrificial front element are fully weather sealed out of the box.


----------



## golfergolfer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> that plastic feel that people associate with cheap lenses usually comes from that kit-lens feel. that doesn't come from the actual material but the fit of the pieces together. the lower end lenses have a much larger tolerance in manufacturing than the nicer-built lenses with much tighter tolerances. nikon's weather sealing is good and is available in most new G lenses where as you can only get this from L's in Canon. it's easy to tell if you have weather sealing via the presence of the rubber ring on the lens mount.
> 
> my 70-200 f2.8 vr1 definately has a plastic barrel, but my 24 1.4g i think is magnesium. i don't really pay attention to this anymore since both are very good as long as the fit is precise.
> 
> btw, note that weather sealing isn't complete on most lenses unless a filter is threaded on the front. i have uv/clear filters on all lenses because of this and i like to go out in foul weather. only large teles with the sacrificial front element are fully weather sealed out of the box.


I think you hit the plastic feeling right on the head here. I know my kit lens that came with my camera feels quite poorly made while the nicer lenses just feel solid. I plan on getting the 70-200 f/2.5 VR II with a filter of course but I dont know if it has that rubber ring on the mount (im sure it does). I will also pick up the DX 10-24mm f/3.5-4.5 but I dont think that this one is weathersealed :/


----------



## Faraz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dmanstasiu*
> 
> I don't have any specialization, it's just going to be playing around, trying around different styles, different distances, etc. It's a learning tool more than anything else.


Kit lenses are great for that. Look up pictures people have taken with your kit lens (pixel-peeper is a good source) to get an idea of all the possibilities. The key is to develop an eye for images and experiment with light and composition. That makes the whole process of teaching yourself photography very enjoyable.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> it's easy to tell if you have weather sealing via the presence of the rubber ring on the lens mount.


EH MAH GERD, my 35DX must be sealed!

Seriously though, It's been soaked and it's fine. I don't really care either way, my D7000 and the few lenses I have for it are basically my bad-weather gear.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> it's easy to tell if you have weather sealing via the presence of the rubber ring on the lens mount.
> 
> 
> 
> EH MAH GERD, my 35DX must be sealed!
> 
> Seriously though, It's been soaked and it's fine. I don't really care either way, my D7000 and the few lenses I have for it are basically my bad-weather gear.
Click to expand...

Nikon officially calls it a dust seal so you don't send them to NPS if you go out in a hurricane with it, but yeah, I've used a 35dx during a thunderstorm before and it worked well.

Plug for Sub: http://imaginate.redbull.com/videos/riding_film
@2:18 - are you f'n kiddng me!?


----------



## golfergolfer

Oh that video I have watched the entire thing before it is so sick. Damn I wish I could ride like that lol. It looks so perfect but you can see just how hard some of the tricks are at the end of the video when it shows him falling a few times


----------



## dmanstasiu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *golfergolfer*
> 
> ^^^^ text not showing up -.-
> Oh that video I have watched the entire thing before it is so sick. Damn I wish I could ride like that lol. It looks so perfect but you can see just how hard some of the tricks are at the end of the video when it shows him falling a few times


can't use those


----------



## golfergolfer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dmanstasiu*
> 
> can't use those


Wait. what. how. did you ?


----------



## dmanstasiu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *golfergolfer*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *dmanstasiu*
> 
> can't use those
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wait. what. how. did you ?
Click to expand...

You cant use

Code:



Code:


< or >

Your editor is in HTML and that makes all your text disappear


----------



## dmanstasiu

So I'm gona pick up a D5100 + 18-55mm VR kit lens in a week. For $400 (with a 16GB SD, not that it matters)


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> Plug for Sub: http://imaginate.redbull.com/videos/riding_film
> @2:18 - are you f'n kiddng me!?


Dude, WHAT. MacAskill is far and away the sickest trials rider out there, and that setup is only something ReBull's deep pockets could have put together. Unbelievable.


----------



## Marin

wats a good dslr for case pics?


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> wats a good dslr for case pics?


oh totally the one with the lenses that make the clicky noises when you push the button


----------



## dmanstasiu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> wats a good dslr for case pics?


D3100 + kit lens

Then again people make really nice case photos with point & shoots


----------



## Marin

only has 14mp, my phone has more


----------



## dmanstasiu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> only has 14mp, my phone has more


It's not about MP, champ


----------



## Pr0xy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> only has 14mp, my phone has more


lol!


----------



## Conspiracy

trolololol


----------



## laboitenoire

And you wonder why people hate hipsters...


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> only has 14mp, my phone has more


D3200 for sure man. 24mp. It will have ultra good quality because of it.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aksthem1*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> only has 14mp, my phone has more
> 
> 
> 
> D3200 for sure man. 24mp. It will have ultra good quality because of it.
Click to expand...

does it have built in hdr?


----------



## kingsnake2

Trolls trolling trolls....


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Large format.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> Large format.


too small


----------



## Marin

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/846208-REG/Sigma_C26900_SD1_Merrill_Digital_SLR.html

best of teh best 46mps for extra sharp


----------



## ikem

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/846208-REG/Sigma_C26900_SD1_Merrill_Digital_SLR.html
> 
> best of teh best 46mps for extra sharp


macro lens on a d800, 1 inch away from the case, 1000 pics, stitched all together


----------



## golfergolfer

*yawn* 46mp try something like 80mp?

http://www.phaseone.com/en/Camera-Systems/Camera-Bodies.aspx

I personally would use my phone as a camera before this but thats just me lol


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *golfergolfer*
> 
> *yawn* 46mp try something like 80mp?
> 
> http://www.phaseone.com/en/Camera-Systems/Camera-Bodies.aspx
> 
> I personally would use my phone as a camera before this but thats just me lol


whats that some sort of video camera


----------



## golfergolfer

no no just a massive camera, im sure it can do video too but it is for pictures lol (I think at least have taken a few looks at the pics it takes quite some detail in them by all means)


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *golfergolfer*
> 
> no no just a massive camera, im sure it can do video too but it is for pictures lol (I think at least have taken a few looks at the pics it takes quite some detail in them by all means)


No, no, definetetly a video camera. Way insuperior to this as well.


----------



## sub50hz

Marin, haven't you had your fill?

P.S. If you're drunk, by all means -- _carry on._


----------



## Faraz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dmanstasiu*
> 
> D3100 + kit lens
> 
> Then again people make really nice case photos with point & shoots


Joined: Jan 2010

Hmm.


----------



## golfergolfer

Just out of curiosity does any one here shoot with a X8 Neutral Density filter? It drops the light by 3 stops but from what I have heard this isn't enough for long exposure stuff during midday?


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *golfergolfer*
> 
> Just out of curiosity does any one here shoot with a X8 Neutral Density filter? It drops the light by 3 stops but from what I have heard this isn't enough for long exposure stuff during midday?


3 stops wouldnt be long enough for extremely long exposures during mid day. 3 stop ND filter would generally be something i think most would use just to be able to shoot fast lenses wide open during midday. a lot of long exposures are taken with 10 stop or more filters, this is not exclusively as everyone uses something different. but that is a kind of starting point


----------



## golfergolfer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> 3 stops wouldnt be long enough for extremely long exposures during mid day. 3 stop ND filter would generally be something i think most would use just to be able to shoot fast lenses wide open during midday. a lot of long exposures are taken with 10 stop or more filters, this is not exclusively as everyone uses something different. but that is a kind of starting point


Hmm okay reading into it more lots of people use 10 stop but lots of them also have a 6 stop that they saythey use more. I think I will see if I can pick up a 6stop ffilter and use that


----------



## ikem

this thing is ridiculous... 1.2 has insane dof, which is expected, but at f2 the softness is gone and still has great dof.


----------



## golfergolfer

F1.2 is so much fun to shoot at though







I always find my self getting carried away with it though and never getting off of 1.2 lol


----------



## ikem

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *golfergolfer*
> 
> F1.2 is so much fun to shoot at though
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I always find my self getting carried away with it though and never getting off of 1.2 lol


yea i think im going to have some fun with this lens. There are a few problems with it, a little stiff focusing, but i got it for under $300. im happy with it. but 55mm on a DX makes this a 82.5mm 1.2









I should be able to get some nice portraits out of it.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Marin, haven't you had your fill?
> 
> P.S. If you're drunk, by all means -- _carry on._


You're no fun.









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *golfergolfer*
> 
> no no just a massive camera, im sure it can do video too but it is for pictures lol (I think at least have taken a few looks at the pics it takes quite some detail in them by all means)


Getting back to being serious. It doesn't shoot video or have any random features added to it like DSLR's. MF cameras just have larger sensors which in turn allow a higher MP count while keeping the density low. The larger sensor size also resolves way more detail, has a larger dynamic range and a larger tonal range. Also the compression is different than 35mm and usually gives off it's own aesthetic (this applies to every format).

And while you'll also see some people shoot them just like any other camera they're mainly meant to be used while tethered and most people tether since it's way more accurate to do on a set. So Phase One's get paired with Capture One (top notch software) for shooting.

Also since you can buy just the back you can mount it to view cameras if you need movements for whatever you're shooting.

And of course there's also a bunch of other features which are useful for professional shoots like leaf shutters, rotating backs, high sync speeds, etc...

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ikem*
> 
> this thing is ridiculous... 1.2 has insane dof, which is expected, but at f2 the softness is gone and still has great dof.


55mm is okay but as you pointed out it's extremely soft. Just the downside of that optical design. The Nikon 50/1.2 is sharper but still doesn't compare to newer lenses like the 50/1.2L. 58mm f/1.2 Noct is where it's at for sharpness on older Nikon lenses.


----------



## ikem

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> 55mm is okay but as you pointed out it's extremely soft. Just the downside of that optical design. The Nikon 50/1.2 is sharper but still doesn't compare to newer lenses like the 50/1.2L. 58mm f/1.2 Noct is where it's at for sharpness on older Nikon lenses.


when at 1.2 the focal plane is so small everything is basically out of focus. it isnt really soft right on the focus plane, but yes, the 58 and canons are optically better, but what hell.. it is a 1967 lens


----------



## frickfrock999

And then, the Voigtlander 0.95 appeared...


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *frickfrock999*
> 
> And then, the Voigtlander 0.95 appeared...


throws master pokeball. its extremely effective


----------



## Marin

Sensor for it is too tiny.


----------



## mz-n10

just throw a gaussian blur in PS, now you can have all your creamy bokeh from a iphone


----------



## ikem

some sample pics just played around with it while camping. all shot at 1.2


----------



## GTR Mclaren

behold...this....thing... I found in The Verge...

http://www.theverge.com/2013/6/20/4377290/post-process-why-the-smartphone-camera-changed-photography-forever?login=1371957414

and the ice of the cake....look at this comment by an user:

"Interchangable lenses is a [pain]. As soon as you own 2 lenses, the wrong one is always on the camera.
I own about 15 cameras and love all of them, and love photography. But the best all rounder, every day camera iv ever had is the iphone 5."

Polygon and The Verge are dying slowly...


----------



## Chunky_Chimp

Didn't Ken Rockwell say something similar about his iPhone 5?


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chunky_Chimp*
> 
> Didn't Ken Rockwell say something similar about his iPhone 5?


His opinion is never valid.


----------



## Chunky_Chimp

Not really my point, but oh well. Regardless, the point in the article is there, that skill matters more than equipment, and we've known this, but pretending that the equipment used is irrelevant because of that is damaging to the industry. Just because you can't tell the difference between what was used to make pics on social media sites doesn't mean you shouldn't show off the full-resolution photos and compare techniques, lenses, system settings, and points of view. That's what comes together to represent skill; a better camera and lens just make it all more apparent.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chunky_Chimp*
> 
> pretending that the equipment used is irrelevant because of that is damaging to the industry.


Lol.

Comparing technical details like camera settings is for gadget hounds, not photographers.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Chunky_Chimp*
> 
> pretending that the equipment used is irrelevant because of that is damaging to the industry.
> 
> 
> 
> Lol.
> 
> Comparing technical details like camera settings is for gadget hounds, not photographers.
Click to expand...

exactly this


----------



## GTR Mclaren

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Lol.
> 
> Comparing technical details like camera settings is for gadget hounds, not photographers.


WTH...

so you are in a wedding....at night...interior....you will not care about "settings" ???


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GTR Mclaren*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Lol.
> 
> Comparing technical details like camera settings is for gadget hounds, not photographers.
> 
> 
> 
> WTH...
> 
> so you are in a wedding....at night...interior....you will not care about "settings" ???
Click to expand...

go back and read what he said closer. you are thinking too hard









hes basically saying that comparing the settings and specs on the back of the box is for gadget hounds. almost every camera offers three basic settings: ISO, aperture, shutter speed. of course you will adjust those when shooting under difficult light but you would also more than likely rely on a speedlight to help unless the venue says no speed lights in which case you tell the bride sorry you will have dark photos and then the bride complains and then boom now you get to use speedlights haha


----------



## sub50hz

What I'm saying is that discussing equipment "capabilities" and your shot-to-shot settings with others is stupid.

HEY THIS WAS AT ISO 1250, ISNT THAT GREAT.

Dumb.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> What I'm saying is that discussing equipment "capabilities" and your shot-to-shot settings with others is stupid.
> 
> HEY THIS WAS AT ISO 1250, ISNT THAT GREAT.
> 
> Dumb.


yeah thats also dumb haha

hey look at this shot SOOC at ISO 102,000 and it still got an exposure of something in pitch black.... oh wait lol lens cap was on







look at that! not a single bit of noise. my camera rulez


----------



## laboitenoire

Yeah, the point I got out of the article is basically the old adage: the best camera is the one you're carrying.

I see exactly where the author is coming from. Yes, I love my D7000 but it's heavy and I don't always want to carry a camera with me and then when I do I'm always debating which lens I want to use and so I find that for my style of photography (namely street photography and snapshots of daily life) that my iPhone is far more convenient to use. Yes, it's still not a great camera and I need to have better light than with my SLR, but in bright light it turns out perfectly serviceable photos with good colors, and it's less conspicuous!

I only really carry my D7000 when I'm going on long trips or hikes now.


----------



## Chunky_Chimp

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Lol.
> 
> Comparing technical details like camera settings is for gadget hounds, not photographers.


I have no idea if you replied to that in context with the entire post or just what you quoted (which doesn't make sense)... re-read the last part of my post as that's the real point of it. If you're the sort of person that wants to reproduce others' results, as well, then what you're referring to would gain relevance.


----------



## sub50hz

It sounds like you're more interested in what gear, settings, etc. others are using to get their results that _you_ like, rather than going out and experimenting and being creative.


----------



## Chunky_Chimp

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> It sounds like you're more interested in what gear, settings, etc. others are using to get their results that _you_ like, rather than going out and experimenting and being creative.


Again it appears what I said was taken out of context. I'm referring to having the concept open for *others* that do that, there was no intended implication that I did/do that.


----------



## Eggs and bacon

I just won a 50mm wide angle for my etrsi, for about a third of the going price on keh.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Eggs and bacon*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I just won a 50mm wide angle for my etrsi, for about a third of the going price on keh.


Baller.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Eggs and bacon*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I just won a 50mm wide angle for my etrsi, for about a third of the going price on keh.


jealous
















enjoy that ish bro


----------



## mironccr345

I picked up a Pentax P3n with a 28-70mm f/3.5-4.5 Tokina lens and a Pentax AF-200s flash. Also came with two filters and an old cam bag. All for 50.00 on CL.







I'm a noob when it comes to DSLR/SLR's, but this cam will be fun to play/learn with. Just reading how to manually adjust the Tokina lens was a learning process. Sorry for the crappy phone pic.


----------



## dmanstasiu

Dat flash.


----------



## PCModderMike

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mironccr345*
> 
> I picked up a Pentax P3n with a 28-70mm f/3.5-4.5 Tokina lens and a Pentax AF-200s flash. Also came with two filters and an old cam bag. All for 50.00 on CL.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm a noob when it comes to DSLR/SLR's, but this cam will be fun to play/learn with. Just reading how to manually adjust the Tokina lens was a learning process. Sorry for the crappy phone pic.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


Wow looks like it would be fun to play around with. Good find.


----------



## Conspiracy

Sexxxy Long exposure on 35mm Kodak Royal Gold 200 shot with a Holga 120G. Film is 10 years expired and i forgot to compensate and push it a little. Didnt expect much quality in the first place though haha









http://www.flickr.com/photos/br1an_r/9127230747/
img258 by brian_roberts, on Flickr


----------



## sub50hz

Get outta here with that Holga garbage.


----------



## Conspiracy

so bored waiting for one of those DIY camera to get in the mail. not a fan of the holga. its a PITA to use. also im poor as hell man trying to entertain myself shooting however i can lol.


----------



## sub50hz

Buy any one of my premium film cameras. BUY.


----------



## Conspiracy

just pulled the trigger on b/w chems and 35mm and 120 film. making the switch to a simpler life of not maintaining temps during dev


----------



## laboitenoire

Eh, you can't be too far off. Ideally you're at 78F +/- 5 degrees or you risk damaging the emulsion.


----------



## Marin

Make sure the waters boiling. Instant development.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> Make sure the waters boiling. Instant development.


breathe deep too


----------



## sub50hz

I love coming in to work still kinda drunk. Hawks!


----------



## ProjectZero

Hi guys,

Mind if i join as well, I recently got my very first DSLR camera (Canon 7D). As its really my first camera, I'm kinda a newbie at this so I do apologise if i ask any stupid questions!

Equipment:

Canon 7D
Canon 15-85mm f/3.5 - 5.6 IS USM

Manfrotto 055CXPRO4
Manfrotto MH054M0-Q2

Planning:

Canon 50mm f/1.4
Canon 600EX-RT

Cheers


----------



## DustDevil

I am glad I found this thread I am a lifelong Pentax user. I want to post a macro soap bubble picture I took but unsure. I know how to link them just don't want to make it too big. Lots of awesome info in this forum section.


----------



## dmanstasiu

use tags

Code:



Code:


[spoiler][/spoiler]


----------



## DustDevil

Will try this out so please forgive me if its incorrect.


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/842/fbri.jpg/

Uploaded with [/URL]


----------



## Eggs and bacon

^ perfect, looks "trippy"


----------



## ProjectZero

Thats nice mate, LSD effect!!!! Kinda reminds me of a peacock.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DustDevil*
> 
> Will try this out so please forgive me if its incorrect.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/842/fbri.jpg/
> 
> Uploaded with [/URL]


thats pretty cool, oil + dish soap?


----------



## mironccr345

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DustDevil*
> 
> Will try this out so please forgive me if its incorrect.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/842/fbri.jpg/
> 
> Uploaded with [/URL]


That's an awesome pic.


----------



## DustDevil

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> thats pretty cool, oil + dish soap?


Just Dawn detergent and water.


----------



## biatchi

What level are magnification are we talking here? What did you use? I might give it a try with bellows and a Rodagon 50, looks awesome


----------



## MistaBernie

I want to try this with my 100L... and my extension tubes. _All of them._


----------



## DustDevil

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *biatchi*
> 
> What level are magnification are we talking here? What did you use? I might give it a try with bellows and a Rodagon 50, looks awesome


I used a Sigma 105mm Macro f 2.8 with a reversed Pentax 50mm f 1.4. I left the 50mm f stop alone and set it to auto. I shot the K5 Pentax with 1/80 sec f22 iso 6400 I had a very shallow DOF hence the loss of focus at the top and bottom.


----------



## werds

Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



Quote:


> Originally Posted by *revro*
> CaseLogic SLRC 206 bag






That bag looks sexy, thanks for giving me yet another thing to add to my buying spree


----------



## revro

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *werds*
> 
> 
> That bag looks sexy, thanks for giving me yet another thing to add to my buying spree


hehe i just came back from czech republic from long weekend and have some really nice photos on my d7100, have to play with them but then i will post the few photos here








and the bag was awesome it held all my things even mobile phones and so many other things









best
revro


----------



## werds

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *revro*
> hehe i just came back from czech republic from long weekend and have some really nice photos on my d7100, have to play with them but then i will post the few photos here
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and the bag was awesome it held all my things even mobile phones and so many other things
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> best
> revro


Nice, I am just now getting into the DSLR game moving up from a point and shoot. Even with how little I know it is AMAZING the difference in IQ. Hell I barely understand how the camera functions and even in dope mode I am wowed. Can't wait to get a better grasp of the camera as time progresses. Although I am now mad for not purchasing a bundle with a second zoom lens and am moving up my time table on getting a good camera backpack.

The bundle I had purchased came with a free camera bag http://www.amazon.com/Ruggard-Hunter-DSLR-Holster-Bag/dp/B00D49VZJO

After some use I am not sure it is up to snuff long term so am looking at the case logic you pointed. My main concern is would the Case Logic be able to fit a camera with a 55-200mm lens attached in the hammock area or would that be too big? (Since after playing with the camera I was interested in a larger Zoom lens now as well lol)


----------



## PCModderMike

Hey I bought that same backpack recently, it's been great.


@werds I started out the same way....when I bought my D3200 bundle it came with a fairly nice Nikon bag and I used that for awhile. But as you said, and from what I've experienced personally, it won't be "up to snuff" for long term use.
You said you were concerned with how this Case Logic bag would handle a camera with a 55-200mm lens attached? Well I can tell you looking at it right now, it would handle it no issues. The little dividers that you see inside the main area can all be re-positioned or removed if necessary. They are attached with velcro.


----------



## werds

Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PCModderMike*
> 
> Hey I bought that same backpack recently, it's been great.
> 
> 
> @werds I started out the same way....when I bought my D3200 bundle it came with a fairly nice Nikon bag and I used that for awhile. But as you said, and from what I've experienced personally, it won't be "up to snuff" for long term use.
> You said you were concerned with how this Case Logic bag would handle a camera with a 55-200mm lens attached? Well I can tell you looking at it right now, it would handle it no issues. The little dividers that you see inside the main area can all be re-positioned or removed if necessary. They are attached with velcro.






Saw your post and ran to Amazon to place my order. I can see from your picture the hammock opens into the main compartment, this backpack looks to be awesome! +rep to both of you!


----------



## revro

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *werds*
> 
> Nice, I am just now getting into the DSLR game moving up from a point and shoot. Even with how little I know it is AMAZING the difference in IQ. Hell I barely understand how the camera functions and even in dope mode I am wowed. Can't wait to get a better grasp of the camera as time progresses. Although I am now mad for not purchasing a bundle with a second zoom lens and am moving up my time table on getting a good camera backpack.
> 
> The bundle I had purchased came with a free camera bag http://www.amazon.com/Ruggard-Hunter-DSLR-Holster-Bag/dp/B00D49VZJO
> After some use I am not sure it is up to snuff long term so am looking at the case logic you pointed. My main concern is would the Case Logic be able to fit a camera with a 55-200mm lens attached in the hammock area or would that be too big? (Since after playing with the camera I was interested in a larger Zoom lens now as well lol)


yes as above stated you can move around or even remove the little dividers. also i dont know, you can setup so many things on these dslrs but if you need to shoot you must use auto otherwise you lose shots if you were setting it up. but i am just amateur









best
revro


----------



## werds

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *revro*
> yes as above stated you can move around or even remove the little dividers. also i dont know, you can setup so many things on these dslrs but if you need to shoot you must use auto otherwise you lose shots if you were setting it up. but i am just amateur
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> best
> revro


Yea, I am noticing the same thing, but I really want to learn how to set certain settings for specific type of shots like this coming week I want to take some decent fireworks shots and with my old point and shoot it used to be point click and pray. Now with the DSLR I have me a little cheap tripod and from reading people seem to say, frame the shot, set ISO to somewhere around 400-800, and slow the shutter speed down for a longer exposure, and for the most part leave all the other stuff on auto. I just hope that autofucus doesnt get jumpy on me in the process as I have noticed several missed shots because AF jumped two or three times because it had difficulty finding what was being focused on. (That is also something else I want to get a better handle on)


----------



## funfortehfun

Photographylife.com is great for learning the basics!


----------



## revro

ok here are the promissed vacation photos from czech republic made with d7100 in auto mode. its a small fairy tale like castle on artificial lake in Cervena Lhuta






best
revro


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *revro*
> 
> ok here are the promissed vacation photos from czech republic made with d7100 in auto mode. its a small fairy tale like castle on artificial lake in Cervena Lhuta
> 
> 
> 
> best
> revro


this one is my fav. it would be even better if you were able to get closer down to the water level and get really low i think and tilted down to capture more of the full reflection rather than the sky. just how i would have shot it and is by no means the only way of course







nice job on the shots


----------



## revro

I have made such shot i came back with 450 photos







but somehow i cant now upload pictures anymore, i think i broke OCN







well i guess after a day or so i can upload again
ou and i still wasnt taken into the club







i asked for it some time ago. My equipment is
Nikon D7100
Nikkor DX AF-S 18-105 3,5-5,6
Stativ Velbon EX-640
Bag CaseLogic SLRC 206

best
revro


----------



## Conspiracy

currently no one is maintaining the club page as GT (gonetomorrow) has retired as ocn staff and keeps rather busy only posting every so often. mistabernie is the new OCN staff guy in charge so maybe he can add you or change ownership to someone new to keep it going. but overall this area of OCN gets a decent amount of traffic for not being at all really computer related but mainly there are only a few of us that stay actively in this section of the forum. i rarely venture outside of OCN photo/video except to read video game news


----------



## ljason8eg

Well, curiosity finally got the best of me and I purchased a 1D Mark III to compare with my 7D.


----------



## S3ason

Nice to see so many D7100 users, now everyone needs to get the grip









http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/9131449486/
D7100 w/ MB-D15 by FlamingChalupa, on Flickr


----------



## johnvosh

Took and got a vintage Polaroid camera today at a garage sale! Also got a Nikon lens, but it doesn't work with my camera. Can anyone please give me some info on it. Thanks!

*edit, figure out how to get it to work with the camera!*


----------



## werds

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *revro*
> 
> ok here are the promissed vacation photos from czech republic made with d7100 in auto mode. its a small fairy tale like castle on artificial lake in Cervena Lhuta
> 
> 
> 
> best
> revro
> 
> 
> 
> this one is my fav. it would be even better if you were able to get closer down to the water level and get really low i think and tilted down to capture more of the full reflection rather than the sky. just how i would have shot it and is by no means the only way of course
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nice job on the shots
Click to expand...

I must say this one was my favorite as well!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *funfortehfun*
> 
> Photographylife.com is great for learning the basics!


There is some really good reading on there! Thanks.

Now can anyone share how I set focus to infinity on a Canon? Will likely be using the 18-135mm lens that came with the camera or a 55-250mm lens if it shows up soon enough. But I am a little confused as to how to set the focus to infinity on these manually. I know there are several tricks like using autofocus on a distanced object, focusing on the horizon etc. But is there a way to manually set it?

Thanks!


----------



## ljason8eg

You can't reliably set infinity focus on lenses without a distance window. The focus will go past infinity, so without the distance window its pretty hard to get it right. That being said, if you're using a wide angle lens and stopping down, there will be plenty of DOF so you don't have to be that accurate.


----------



## revro

as requested here are the pictures with entire castle being mirrored in the lake











best
revro


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *revro*
> 
> as requested here are the pictures with entire castle being mirrored in the lake
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> best
> revro


keep practicing framing. this one is great but it would also be better if you panned to the right and didnt cut off the other building. good stuff dude


----------



## ikem

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *johnvosh*
> 
> Took and got a vintage Polaroid camera today at a garage sale! Also got a Nikon lens, but it doesn't work with my camera. Can anyone please give me some info on it. Thanks!
> 
> *edit, figure out how to get it to work with the camera!*
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


It is a gen after AIS, called the series E. They mainly go with the Nikon EM

I have that lens and an EM here, i also use that lens on my D3200 a bit. It should fit on every nikon dslr


----------



## werds

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> You can't reliably set infinity focus on lenses without a distance window. The focus will go past infinity, so without the distance window its pretty hard to get it right. That being said, if you're using a wide angle lens and stopping down, there will be plenty of DOF so you don't have to be that accurate.


Cool, thought I was on the crazy train and just was missing where in the manual the info was.

Now for the crowd in general... is it worthwhile setting my camera to RAW+Jpeg while I still learn the basics or just move up to RAW when I get my feet underneath me? I ask mainly because the wife claims to have an interest in learning how to use Lightroom etc... but I am not sure if she is truly up for it, and I know there is a performance hit in shooting RAW+Jpeg...but that RAW provides a much better file for postprocessing.


----------



## johnvosh

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ikem*
> 
> It is a gen after AIS, called the series E. They mainly go with the Nikon EM
> 
> I have that lens and an EM here, i also use that lens on my D3200 a bit. It should fit on every nikon dslr


Thanks for the info!


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *werds*
> 
> Cool, thought I was on the crazy train and just was missing where in the manual the info was.
> 
> Now for the crowd in general... is it worthwhile setting my camera to RAW+Jpeg while I still learn the basics or just move up to RAW when I get my feet underneath me? I ask mainly because the wife claims to have an interest in learning how to use Lightroom etc... but I am not sure if she is truly up for it, and I know there is a performance hit in shooting RAW+Jpeg...but that RAW provides a much better file for postprocessing.


No reason to do both raw and jpeg unless you need to have a copy readily available and have a copy to work on. I'd shoot in one or the other, not both, even if just to save some card space.

Shooting in raw gives you the best files to work with in LR (compared to jpegs). The amount and types of corrections that can be made makes it worth it.


----------



## PCModderMike

^This. I personally would just shoot in RAW...especially if you're going to be playing with LR a lot. I'm still learning a lot, but even as a newbie I started shooting in RAW from the beginning the first day I got my camera.


----------



## sub50hz

JPGs are good if you use Fujis. Canon does a decent job as well, but Nikon's are terrible. I've owned/own all of them -- shoot RAW if you're comfortable editing each shot, if not, try and dial in some JPG settings that appeal to you.


----------



## Conspiracy

just developed an very old roll of b/w that i shot almost 2 years ago maybe i think and yeah i have come a long way in photography since first buying my film camera lol. not even sure if i developed it right as they look so blah due to poor lighting and 35mm doesnt scan super well on my V500 compared to MF scans









http://www.flickr.com/photos/br1an_r/9182772349/
img308 by brian_roberts, on Flickr

http://www.flickr.com/photos/br1an_r/9184987968/
img300 by brian_roberts, on Flickr


----------



## MistaBernie

Given that tee shot, those are probably the only birdies you saw all day.

Also, in the interest of staying on topic, you certainly took those photos with some sort of film camera.


----------



## PCModderMike

^^ They look pretty good to me. Better than what I just developed.








I found this old Pentax at a local Goodwill for 9 bucks

Took is home, cleaned it up, bought a new battery for the light sensor (the original was mercury this thing is so old)
Been having fun with it, the pics look better in person IMO...they have to be scanned into the computer of course.


----------



## Conspiracy

Canon 70D announced. No hints to what sensor size. Id love to see aps-h 1.3X crop like the 1d4. Id totally upgrade to this


----------



## Raise

New to OCN, was excited to see you had a photography forum. I've been a hobbyist for a couple of years now. I'd like to join the club







gear is listed in my signature. Thanks!


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> Canon 70D announced. No hints to what sensor size. Id love to see aps-h 1.3X crop like the 1d4. Id totally upgrade to this


The xxD line is the high end "affordable" camera on canon's lineup ever since the 7D became the "pro" 1.6x canon camera. Also, canon compartmentalizes each line with almost no feature overlap and ef-s is only 1.6 so it's really really really doubtful.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> JPGs are good if you use Fujis. Canon does a decent job as well, but *Nikon's are terrible.* I've owned/own all of them -- shoot RAW if you're comfortable editing each shot, if not, try and dial in some JPG settings that appeal to you.


For me, I like Nikon's colors in JPEG =(

Protip: If using Canon and shooting in RAW, use DPP to process the RAW and export to Photoshop. ACR's color translation is terrible unless you have one of the cameras that uses an open format RAW.


----------



## werds

UV filters... I got one in the bundle I purchased, put it on the camera and immediately noticed lens flare... (it is a Tiffen 67UVP) Can someone point me to a UV filter that would NOT have this lens flare issue? I would hate to damage my lens when a simple filter could easily protect it, but I also would hate to lose a good shot just because of bad lens flare or ridiculous reflections on the UV filter (as I looked around at a few reviews and seems this is an issue)

Just was hoping someone could point me towards a better option if any exists...

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> Protip: If using Canon and shooting in RAW, use DPP to process the RAW and export to Photoshop. ACR's color translation is terrible unless you have one of the cameras that uses an open format RAW.


DPP stands for? ACR =? Sorry new to the hobby so lost on some acronyms


----------



## ljason8eg

What kind of conditions are you shooting in? I own clear protective filters for my lenses but I don't use them unless I'm shooting somewhere like the beach, where there's salt spray. I'd put it on if I was shooting in really dusty conditions as well. Other than that, I'd use a lens hood and leave the filter off.

If you do want a filter, you can't go wrong with a Hoya or B+W, just make sure its multicoated.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *werds*
> 
> DPP stands for? ACR =? Sorry new to the hobby so lost on some acronyms


Digital Photo Pro - the raw processing software that comes with Canon cameras.


----------



## Conspiracy

man after reading more about the 70D and for its price point its hard to resist selling off my 7D and swapping out for something newer that will easily have improved video and photos. i think canon finally killed the 7D


----------



## MistaBernie

I'm interested in seeing this thing when it's released. I might be unloading my 7D to switch up myself for the improved video and group compatibility with OCF... that said, initial price tag seems a little high.

On top of that... I'm starting to hear more rumors about the 7D2. Not enough to actually share with the class (too little consistency with the rumors; seems like these are just getting thrown about because of the 70D announcement) but if I start to hear anything that has potential to be true I'll post here.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *werds*
> 
> UV filters... I got one in the bundle I purchased, put it on the camera and immediately noticed lens flare... (it is a Tiffen 67UVP) Can someone point me to a UV filter that would NOT have this lens flare issue? I would hate to damage my lens when a simple filter could easily protect it, but I also would hate to lose a good shot just because of bad lens flare or ridiculous reflections on the UV filter (as I looked around at a few reviews and seems this is an issue)


all filters flare, even the highend ones. buy the best you can afford and take off the filter if you notice flaring.

B+W f-pro, hoya pro1, zeiss t* are the filters i buy.

looks like they did a better job of differentiating the 70D from the rebels....


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> I'm interested in seeing this thing when it's released. I might be unloading my 7D to switch up myself for the improved video and group compatibility with OCF... that said, initial price tag seems a little high.
> 
> On top of that... I'm starting to hear more rumors about the 7D2. Not enough to actually share with the class (too little consistency with the rumors; seems like these are just getting thrown about because of the 70D announcement) but if I start to hear anything that has potential to be true I'll post here.


yeah same here. as soon as this was announced its like the 7DmkII rumors came back out of hiding.


----------



## aksthem1

It's kind of a shame that the 70D didn't have a magnesium body and size of the old XXDs. It's a big jump from the 60D at least, but a CF slot and SD would have been nice.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aksthem1*
> 
> It's kind of a shame that the 70D didn't have a magnesium body and size of the old XXDs. It's a big jump from the 60D at least, but a CF slot and SD would have been nice.


totally agree. its going to be very tempting to swap to a newer camera body but in the end my 7D is not preventing me from getting any shots so i will continue to use it until it prevents me from doing what i want


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aksthem1*
> 
> It's kind of a shame that the 70D didn't have a magnesium body and size of the old XXDs. It's a big jump from the 60D at least, but a CF slot and SD would have been nice.


that is cause they split the xxD line into the upper end 7d and the lower end 70d. just wait for the 7d2 if you want magnesium/weather seals.


----------



## Conspiracy

i dont like waiting patiently. i want new cameras and i want them NOW.

CALL JG WENTWORTH 877 CAMERAS-NOWWWWWW


----------



## revro

i thought 70d is weather sealed isnt it? then again compared to my d7100 it has plus of the variable lcd.
tough the nikon seems to look better, i mean it has sharper lines









best
revro


----------



## MistaBernie

Random question, but why on Earth would anyone need a 41mp camera phone? (See Nokia 808)..


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Random question, but why on Earth would anyone need a 41mp camera phone? (See Nokia 808)..


why do you want anything less than 41MP. i have actually attached my iphone to my bronica effectively making it whatever you get from a 12,800 DPI scan of 6x4.5 lol


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Random question, but why on Earth would anyone need a 41mp camera phone? (See Nokia 808)..


808 uses the 41 as zoom. its another approach to keeping a compact/fast camera phone with zoom.


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aksthem1*
> 
> It's kind of a shame that the 70D didn't have a magnesium body


The magnesium body vs. plastic is blown out of proportion IMO. Plastics have come a long way and I have yet to see one account where a rebel/60D gave up with a large lens attached or under normal wear and tear. From what I have seen when the body fails its usually under outstanding circumstances where either body type would have failed and without failure, tolerances and alignment would be compromised.

I can attest to the fact that a magnesium body will not withstand a truck driving over it. lol.


----------



## Marin

Polycarbonate feels like poop though.


----------



## laboitenoire

If your poop feels like polycarbonate, you might want to see a doctor...


----------



## S3ason

70d for $1200? That seems a bit high to me for a plastic body, single sd...looks to be a sweet camera for video though.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *S3ason*
> 
> 70d for $1200? That seems a bit high to me for a plastic body, single sd...looks to be a sweet camera for video though.


x2, overpriced

I still want fullframe


----------



## Raise

Anyone know of a good hand grip? I had a customer come in today with one on his D90 and I held it and LOVED it. Sadly, I didn't get to ask him what type it was or where he got it from.

Some google-fu led me to good reviews across several brands. Anyone know anything about this Hakuba?

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00004ZCPH/ref=oh_details_o00_s00_i00?ie=UTF8&psc=1

Edit: Do these work well with battery grips?


----------



## werds

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> What kind of conditions are you shooting in? I own clear protective filters for my lenses but I don't use them unless I'm shooting somewhere like the beach, where there's salt spray. I'd put it on if I was shooting in really dusty conditions as well. Other than that, I'd use a lens hood and leave the filter off.
> 
> If you do want a filter, you can't go wrong with a Hoya or B+W, just make sure its multicoated.


Well the camera is being used by me and my wife. My wife is much less attentive to detail than I (aka less anal retentive about tech things). So from reading around it seems many people say put a UV lens filter on it as protection and call it a day. As for what we will be shooting, the majority of it will be our children and the things they are doing, we live near the beach so I know the beach and pool are going to be regular things we are around. I know to keep my distance from the splash zones and get in close with the zoom lens.. my wife not so much... was hoping that just leaving it on full time would solve my concerns of her possibly damaging the lens without realizing it.

Thanks now I know to look for multi coat

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *werds*
> 
> DPP stands for? ACR =? Sorry new to the hobby so lost on some acronyms
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Digital Photo Pro - the raw processing software that comes with Canon cameras.
Click to expand...

Aaaah, I haven't even bothered with the software cd that was in the box, just went straight to installing Adobe Lightroom 5 instead. Would there be any reason to install DPP? is it simpler and easier to use for any big purpose? My main goal is to get my wife to learn LR, but if DPP is a simpler alternative for basic functions I might just install that instead...

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *werds*
> 
> UV filters... I got one in the bundle I purchased, put it on the camera and immediately noticed lens flare... (it is a Tiffen 67UVP) Can someone point me to a UV filter that would NOT have this lens flare issue? I would hate to damage my lens when a simple filter could easily protect it, but I also would hate to lose a good shot just because of bad lens flare or ridiculous reflections on the UV filter (as I looked around at a few reviews and seems this is an issue)
> 
> 
> 
> all filters flare, even the highend ones. buy the best you can afford and take off the filter if you notice flaring.
> 
> B+W f-pro, hoya pro1, zeiss t* are the filters i buy.
> 
> looks like they did a better job of differentiating the 70D from the rebels....
Click to expand...

Thanks for the info, well at least I know to be careful with the use of UV filters then!

Also as an added note - just got a non STM lens (55-250mm) and WOW the thing is such a night and day in terms of noise from the AF... the STM seems dead quiet in comparison!

My Case Logic SLR-206 arrived, it looks quality and I like the way it holds the camera. Even with my large zoom lens it fits nicely, I actually like how thick the separators are (unlike some reviewers on amazon that poo pood that). I actually was looking at it and was kind of sad that I didn't have MORE dividers that I could use lol. Will spend some time with it tomorrow for 4th of July so will see how well it holds up to expectations. Only major drawback I see atm is that the velcro straps for the tripod BARELY get around the whole tripod...or am I suppose to take the tripod I have out of it's case and strap it on instead? (a cheap Dolica WT3770 that I got free in a bundle purchase 6 or so years ago)


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *werds*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *werds*
> 
> DPP stands for? ACR =? Sorry new to the hobby so lost on some acronyms
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Digital Photo Pro - the raw processing software that comes with Canon cameras.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Aaaah, I haven't even bothered with the software cd that was in the box, just went straight to installing Adobe Lightroom 5 instead. Would there be any reason to install DPP? is it simpler and easier to use for any big purpose? My main goal is to get my wife to learn LR, but if DPP is a simpler alternative for basic functions I might just install that instead...
Click to expand...

Most manufacturer's RAW file are proprietary, this includes Canon and Nikon. This means that any third party software used to process the raw other than Canon's Digital Photo Pro or Nikon's NX2 will essentially be reverse engineered.

The biggest advantage is that DPP and NX2 are regularly updated with all the lens' profiles for correcting aberration using the manufacturer's actual calculations based on lens designs instead of the trial and error method used by third party software. I find that lens correction using NX2 and DPP are very accurate compared to ACR's.

The RAW file is also encoded with the camera's unique metadata according to how you set up your camera. This saves you trouble of shooting RAW+JPEG since the DPP and NX2 can both generate JPEG files from the RAW according to how it was shot giving you the full advantage of RAW+JPEG without the space constraints. Also, DPP and NX2 can both produce industry-standard files like PSD and TIFF so the integration to any image processor is seamless.


----------



## ljason8eg

Finally got a 1D III after thinking about it for a long time. I really like it so far and I can see why people say once you use a 1D, you won't want to go back to the other models. Seems to track better than my 7D out of the box without messing with many CFn settings and thankfully its a very late model one so no worries about those AF issues.

Of course, I do lose video, some "reach" and cropping ability and the LCD on the 1D III is awful in comparison, but I like the overall package so far.

Miley always enjoys her fake stick, so here's a sample:


9R1V0004.jpg by JLofing, on Flickr


----------



## cavallino

Anyone have an EOS-M?

I wasn't in the market for a new camera but B & H photo is selling the 22mm lens and body for $300. Seems like a good deal.

I already have a 60D, but I was thinking it might be a better on the go camera due to its smaller size. Even without the battery grip and with the 40mm pancake lens I have the 60D is still a little bulky. I go to museums now and then that allow photography and it would be nice to have something smaller. I would still use the big 60D for major events like car shows.

My concern is that 22mm might be a little wide for the kind of photos I would use a small camera for most. It would be perfect for car shows I go to but I think I'd probably use my 60D for that. The 18-55mm M lens adds a lot of bulk to it and I don't want to pay another $160 for an adapter to use something like my 40mm pancake. Plus I kind of prefer using a viewfinder though I'd probably get used top using the screen.


----------



## laboitenoire

Ahhh... Mountains









http://www.flickr.com/photos/alchadw/9224598073/
DSC_0277 by laboitenoire, on Flickr


----------



## legoman786

Bought the wife a Canon PowerShot SX160 IS. Totally spaced the lack of rechargeable batteries.


----------



## revro

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> Ahhh... Mountains
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/alchadw/9224598073/
> DSC_0277 by laboitenoire, on Flickr


really? posting pictures from far cry 3 as your own







just kidding

best
revro


----------



## choLOL

Hey guys, I am looking for a nice macro lens that is not so expensive. Can you help me out? Budget is $250.







I'm a newbie, still studying photography.

Cam: Nikon D3100
Current lens: Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm f/1.8G


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *choLOL*
> 
> Hey guys, I am looking for a nice macro lens that is not so expensive. Can you help me out? Budget is $250.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm a newbie, still studying photography.
> 
> Cam: Nikon D3100
> Current lens: Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm f/1.8G


might be worth checking out reverse lens macro photography. Would link, but tricky on on my phone. A quick Google search should yield some results.


----------



## Faraz

You can give extension tubes a try. They can be found fairly cheap, but most of them wouldn't work with G lenses like yours. Kenko tubes would work with that lens but won't save you too much money versus a cheap macro lens. The 40mm f/2.8 should be around your budget price point. It'll give you short minimum focusing distance though and that could make it tough to photograph things like insects and get good lighting to your subject when filling the frame. The Sigma 50mm f/2.8 is a pretty good one too but costs a bit more.

You can always look around for used lenses too.


----------



## boogschd

edit: nvm


----------



## junhawng

Took this a few months ago with my s3

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 4 Beta


----------



## choLOL

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie*
> 
> might be worth checking out reverse lens macro photography. Would link, but tricky on on my phone. A quick Google search should yield some results.


Googling, thanks!








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Faraz*
> 
> You can give extension tubes a try. They can be found fairly cheap, but most of them wouldn't work with G lenses like yours. Kenko tubes would work with that lens but won't save you too much money versus a cheap macro lens. The 40mm f/2.8 should be around your budget price point. It'll give you short minimum focusing distance though and that could make it tough to photograph things like insects and get good lighting to your subject when filling the frame. The Sigma 50mm f/2.8 is a pretty good one too but costs a bit more.
> 
> You can always look around for used lenses too.


Okay, thanks for the suggestions! Gonna search what extension tubes are.


----------



## biatchi

Bellows and enlarger lenses work well too.


----------



## choLOL

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *biatchi*
> 
> Bellows and enlarger lenses work well too.


googling..

Anyway, I read this guide on reverse lenses and extension tubes. Will this reverse ring fit my D3100 and my current lens (or the kit lens)? Or will these extension tubes do a better job if they fit?

Hey, Boogschd! I see you're from PH too. Where do you buy your stuff?


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *choLOL*
> 
> Hey, Boogschd! I see you're from PH too. Where do you buy your stuff?


hey man!
got my D7k & 17-50 from dbgadgets.net
cheap shipping fees and good prices (almost same as hidalgo/quiapo prices afaik)

never had a problem from them yet


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *choLOL*
> 
> googling..
> 
> Anyway, I read this guide on reverse lenses and extension tubes. Will this reverse ring fit my D3100 and my current lens (or the kit lens)? Or will these extension tubes do a better job if they fit?
> 
> Hey, Boogschd! I see you're from PH too. Where do you buy your stuff?


if you are using reverse rings, you need to know what the front filter size is, and if your kit lens has any NON electronic aperture control (you need a fellow nikonian to tell you this)...

personally i find it much easier to shoot with a real macro. of course if you are only playing around with marcos then a 1:1 macro might not make financial sense.


----------



## biatchi

There are a few older Vivitar macro lenses that apparently perform excellently you could look into too.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *biatchi*
> 
> There are a few older Vivitar macro lenses that apparently perform excellently you could look into too.


o yea, forgot about that one. its branded under multiple companies actually.

you are looking for a prime 100mm f3.5 with with a included closeup filter and the noisiest AF and most plastic build. should be around 100usd (for sony mount, shouldnt be much off for canon)


----------



## biatchi

I was thinking the older manual focus ones http://www.pentaxforums.com/userreviews/vivitar-90mm-f2-8-macro.html
http://www.pentaxforums.com/userreviews/vivitar-series-1-90mm-2-5-macro.html
http://www.pentaxforums.com/userreviews/vivitar-55mm-f2-8-1-1-macro.html
http://www.pentaxforums.com/userreviews/vivitar-series-1-105mm-f2-5-macro.html

I'd imagine the are available in Nikon mount as well.


----------



## ljason8eg

So, I've decided to keep the 1D III over the 7D, which means the 7D and the 17-55 2.8 have to go.

Anyone here interested? Figured I'd ask here first before taking the photos and listing them other places. It'd be nice to keep them in the family, so to speak.


----------



## MistaBernie

if I could convince my boneheaded friend that buying used isn't going to give him sort sort of disease or that he won't be buying crap in a box I'd be all over this. Sadly I haven't even touched my 7D lately. Maybe I'll dust it off for the pool shoot I want to do today for my new Facebook cover image.. that way if I dump something in the pool I can just buy yours.


----------



## sub50hz

What do used 7Ds even go for these days?


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> What do used 7Ds even go for these days?


I think around $800-850 for a nice looking, low mileage one with all accessories.


----------



## sub50hz

Is that including grip?


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Is that including grip?


Nah, the grip bumps the price up around $100. I'd be thrilled to get $900 for my body/grip.


----------



## sub50hz

Did the 70D release have any impact on the 7D market? I haven't been paying much attention to gear since I got the X-Pro -- between it and the X100, I rarely use anything else unless I'm on a strict film mission.


----------



## ljason8eg

Maybe slightly, but not much from what I'm seeing. I'd expect it to affect resale value more once the 70D is released and full reviews are out.


----------



## MistaBernie

Man, the kid that I've been talking to won't stop asking me about the 70D. I think he thinks I work for Canon or something (even though we work together ...). He's been wanting to get a 7D to shoot soccer but wants to know if he should wait for the 70D. I've basically told him three times that either camera will treat him better than the freaking XSi he's shooting with, and I've told him that since B&H is selling refurbs which now carry a 1 year warranty at the CLP price ($959.20) that this is the way to go if he's truly scared about buying used.

I think Jason's evaluation might be a little low. $900 for a nice used 7D all day, $1000 with a grip. $800-$850 is (in my opinion, of course) the 'I need to sell this now because I need the money / I need to recoup from an expenditure' price.


----------



## Conspiracy

i think the 70D will have some impact on 7D prices but at the end of the day the 7D is a workhorse of a cameras especially for sports photogs. Curious to see how the two compare. i think despite its age the 7D will hold its own pretty well in everything except high ISO which the 7D never excelled at anyway


----------



## mz-n10

i find the 7d to ahve a better noise profile then the 5d2.....


----------



## ljason8eg

Dear potential buyers on Craigslist,

No, the Canon 17-55 f/2.8 will not work on your 5D. You'd think someone with a 5D would know that....


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> Dear potential buyers on Craigslist,
> 
> No, the Canon 17-55 f/2.8 will not work on your 5D. You'd think someone with a 5D would know that....


You'd think that. I've hung around with some guy using a 5D MKII. I was using a friend's 10-22 at the time and he asked if I could use it. I told him it wouldn't fit.

He said, but it's the same mount. I said yes and no, since it's physically the same shape and what not. But the mirror interferes with the rear of the lens. He was really adamant on trying to use it. Finally gave in so he could see what I was talking about.


----------



## Conspiracy

lol i quit attending a photo group here in the city because of camera owners like that.

tons of gear and have no clue how to use any of it. i literally had to show one guy how to change the metering modes because he had no clue that was even possible


----------



## Faraz

Anyone here use the Canon PIXMA PRO-100?

It was $342 on Amazon yesterday with a $300 rebate if you buy it together with photo paper ($38). So $80 for the printer and paper. Seems too good to be true.


----------



## Chunky_Chimp

Friendly reminder, any appraisals or item offers (sale/trade) need to go in the marketplace, not here.


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> lol i quit attending a photo group here in the city because of camera owners like that.
> 
> tons of gear and have no clue how to use any of it. i literally had to show one guy how to change the metering modes because he had no clue that was even possible


I've met people that are proficient with the gear they use but know nothing outside of it and take great photos at that. Then you meet the older gentlemen carrying a ton of expensive gear and not having a clue how to use it.

In my downtown, while skating, I saw this older fellow with a 5D MKII, 24-70, 16-35 and 70-200. Probably reading into the zoom trinity or the local camera shop made a killing off of this guy. I asked if I could try out the 16-35 on his camera and it was on auto. Then he asked me where the flash was on the camera and how come some of his photos don't have the background blur. I'm a patient person so I basically taught what everything on his camera meant, the basics and that the 5D doesn't have a built in flash.


----------



## El-Fuego

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> lol i quit attending a photo group here in the city because of camera owners like that.
> 
> tons of gear and have no clue how to use any of it. i literally had to show one guy how to change the metering modes because he had no clue that was even possible


that makes me think back, this what happened to me once,
I was invited by a charity organization I always volunteer at here in the west suburbs of chicago to come to their zombie crawl last Halloween to help setting everything and what's not, I went there and took my camera with me,
now that was right after i bought my 18-55mm lens (i got my 60D body only then got 50 1.8), so I took the 18-55 with stock 60D, Canon red strap and no flash, looking just like a typical amateur which is not true but I'm not a professional either.
when i got there, there was another lady photographer at the set taking pictures of us setting everything and of the make up etc. I said hi, she replied and she was very nice, I said i'm sorry i didnt know there will be someone there with a camera so I can just go back to the car and leave it there, she said no, she works for a local newspaper and she's just taking some pictures and she will leave soon, we talked bit and she left.
couple hours later, a guy came in, with 7D, don't remember the lens but it wasn't something special if i recall, a flash set and 3rd party strap, now me being onset before him, i said hi when he came in, he didn't answer, is said ok maybe he didn't notice, I tried to be friendly and went to him and said hi again and he just made a noise like yeah i acknowledge your existing but refuse to deal with you!

now is it really that some people when see you are using equipment that is better than yours see you as you are beneath them?
I'm part of POTN and when that happened i posted there and many other members commented there and saying that something very similar happened to them too!

anything similar happened to you guys ?


I'm the guy next to the reaper


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aksthem1*
> 
> You'd think that. I've hung around with some guy using a 5D MKII. I was using a friend's 10-22 at the time and he asked if I could use it. I told him it wouldn't fit.
> 
> He said, but it's the same mount. I said yes and no, since it's physically the same shape and what not. But the mirror interferes with the rear of the lens. He was really adamant on trying to use it. Finally gave in so he could see what I was talking about.


actually the mount is physically different, its EF vs EF-S, so it is not technically the "same".


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *El-Fuego*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> lol i quit attending a photo group here in the city because of camera owners like that.
> 
> tons of gear and have no clue how to use any of it. i literally had to show one guy how to change the metering modes because he had no clue that was even possible
> 
> 
> 
> that makes me think back, this what happened to me once,
> I was invited by a charity organization I always volunteer at here in the west suburbs of chicago to come to their zombie crawl last Halloween to help setting everything and what's not, I went there and took my camera with me,
> now that was right after i bought my 18-55mm lens (i got my 60D body only then got 50 1.8), so I took the 18-55 with stock 60D, Canon red strap and no flash, looking just like a typical amateur which is not true but I'm not a professional either.
> when i got there, there was another lady photographer at the set taking pictures of us setting everything and of the make up etc. I said hi, she replied and she was very nice, I said i'm sorry i didnt know there will be someone there with a camera so I can just go back to the car and leave it there, she said no, she works for a local newspaper and she's just taking some pictures and she will leave soon, we talked bit and she left.
> couple hours later, a guy came in, with 7D, don't remember the lens but it wasn't something special if i recall, a flash set and 3rd party strap, now me being onset before him, i said hi when he came in, he didn't answer, is said ok maybe he didn't notice, I tried to be friendly and went to him and said hi again and he just made a noise like yeah i acknowledge your existing but refuse to deal with you!
> 
> now is it really that some people when see you are using equipment that is better than yours see you as you are beneath them?
> I'm part of POTN and when that happened i posted there and many other members commented there and saying that something very similar happened to them too!
> 
> anything similar happened to you guys ?
> 
> 
> I'm the guy next to the reaper
Click to expand...

happens all the time. photographers tend to be really cady and snobbish. thats when i whip out a cheap plastic film camera and make the comment "thank god this 80cent goodwill film camera takes almost as good as photos as their FF DSLR lol" that really upsets them


----------



## MistaBernie

Faraz, they do this from time to time, but not till the printers have been out for a while (they almost always had something similar going on for the Pixma Pro 9000 II / 9500 Mark II when they were towards end of life). In fact they had some sweet deals on the 6D/24-105/Pixma Pro 100 for something like $1990 at B&H / Adorama last week after bundle savings and MIRs..


----------



## Conspiracy

Do want!

http://mpex.com/lumopro-lp180-quad-sync-manual-flash.html


----------



## mz-n10

what sets this apart form a yongnuo?


----------



## ikem

And I was looking for something that would distinguish this from yonguos and nissans but couldn't.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> what sets this apart form a yongnuo?


the name and quality. it is apparently a much higher quality than the top of the line canikon speedlights.

although i cant confirm yet i have been promised that i would be allowed to test one out from a friend that is getting one to also test


----------



## mz-n10

ive always liked teh lp160 but since ived used a yongnuo i really cant justify spending the additional $$ on lumopro...since both are basically dumbflashes

with that said, ive read horror stories about the yongnuos dying randomly, but luck me, the ones ive used are all running great...


----------



## xNovax

Could anyone tell me if this Camera is worth it. Samsung NX1000


----------



## Conspiracy

ive heard the same horror stories but im glad i bought a yongnuo as my first flash to get my feet wet. the day it dies ill either buy them again or go lumopro. i hear lumopros are really reliable


----------



## S3ason

I have three yn-560's, 1 of the second edition and 2 of the new edition with the built in receiver. Only problem so far is me breaking the diffuser on the older one, but then again a 6 foot drop off the top of the car will do that.

High quality flashes are great, but if you need multiple flashes and aren't paid to shoot, yongnuos are where it's at.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *S3ason*
> 
> I have three yn-560's, 1 of the second edition and 2 of the new edition with the built in receiver. Only problem so far is me breaking the diffuser on the older one, but then again a 6 foot drop off the top of the car will do that.
> 
> High quality flashes are great, but if you need multiple flashes and aren't paid to shoot, yongnuos are where it's at.


cant argue with that one bit









for the price and what you get i cant imagine much being better than yongnuo. maybe ill try some of the other competition that YN has one day


----------



## xNovax

Some how my post got deleted. I will post it again. "Do you think this camera is any good. Samsung NX1000"


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xNovax*
> 
> Some how my post got deleted. I will post it again. "Do you think this camera is any good. Samsung NX1000"


good is subjective.

it is good at taking pictures


----------



## xNovax

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> good is subjective.
> 
> it is good at taking pictures


Is it a good camera for its price for beginners to take pictures in low light, high light, and some videos?


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xNovax*
> 
> Is it a good camera for its price for beginners to take pictures in low light, high light, and some videos?


how much are you paying for it?

problem with the samsung NX is that lenses are hard to come buy AND its flange distance is greater then M mount so you cannot mount Leica M.....


----------



## xNovax

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> how much are you paying for it?
> 
> problem with the samsung NX is that lenses are hard to come buy AND its flange distance is greater then M mount so you cannot mount Leica M.....


$350


----------



## xNovax

Is it a good deal?


----------



## mz-n10

assuming its with a lens, it isnt a horrible deal. realistically the camera is just as good as every other camera in its price point. but if can get soemthing a little more popular for around the same price get something else.

look into the panasonic gx1, sony nex3 or olympus epl-3 and see if you can find out that falls in your budget.


----------



## xNovax

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> assuming its with a lens, it isnt a horrible deal. realistically the camera is just as good as every other camera in its price point. but if can get soemthing a little more popular for around the same price get something else.
> 
> look into the panasonic gx1, sony nex3 or olympus epl-3 and see if you can find out that falls in your budget.


Its normally $700. So are you saying it is about as good as most other $350 cameras?


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xNovax*
> 
> Its normally $700. So are you saying it is about as good as most other $350 cameras?


http://www.amazon.com/Samsung-NX1000-20-3MP-Digital-20-50mm/dp/B007XJG4F6

its a 300 dollar camera.....they just "retail" at 700.

a camera is a complete system, which includes lenses and accessories.....when u lack accessories and lenses the complete system is compromised. im not saying that camera isnt capable to produce good pictures.


----------



## MistaBernie

Novax, my apologies. Missed a single word which changed the whole context of your post. Restored.

xNovax, your post got deleted because you were directly asking for an appraisal of whether or not the camera was worth X amount of dollars, which has to be done in the appraisal forums (especially since CC (Chunky Chimp, Senior Mod) has given us a friendly reminder about this, in this very thread, yesterday).


----------



## mikeseth

*Would like to update my records.*

mikeseth - Canon 60D + BG-E9 Grip
Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 DCII VC
Canon EF-S 18-200mm IS f/3.5-5.6 Kit
Canon 75-300mm IS f/4-5.6 III
Canon Speedlight 430EX II
Rode Video Mic with Mount
2x Patriot LX 32GB Class 10 SDHC
2x Transcend 8GB Class 6 SDHC
LowePro Fastpack 350 Bag

*Thanks!*


----------



## PCModderMike

Welp, decided to pick up a Yongnuo YN-560, especially after seeing you guys talk about it a few pages ago. Looking to get my feet wet, and I hope it will be a great start.


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PCModderMike*
> 
> Welp, decided to pick up a Yongnuo YN-560, especially after seeing you guys talk about it a few pages ago. Looking to get my feet wet, and I hope it will be a great start.


great dumbflash for the price!









i have one myself


----------



## S3ason

Spend the extra to get the 560-III, the built in receiver is great. All you have to do is have a cheap rf-603 on camera and the flashes do the rest. No fiddling with receiver batteries!


----------



## PCModderMike

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *S3ason*
> 
> Spend the extra to get the 560-III, the built in receiver is great. All you have to do is have a cheap rf-603 on camera and the flashes do the rest. No fiddling with receiver batteries!


Good idea.


----------



## choLOL

Thanks boogschd.


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *choLOL*
> 
> Thanks boogschd.


shoot me a pm anytime if you need help


----------



## golfergolfer

I am just wondering can the Nikon SB-910 be used with the Nikon D7100 as a wireless slave? (so I could put the flash somewhere and then be somewhere else and take the picture?) I think it is called slave but not sure still learning flash stuff


----------



## Faraz

Yes, it can.


----------



## golfergolfer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Faraz*
> 
> Yes, it can.


Great! That is what I thought, it doesn't need any extra equipment to do it either right?


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *golfergolfer*
> 
> Great! That is what I thought, it doesn't need any extra equipment to do it either right?


no . you can set the 910 as a wireless slave then use your D7100's on cam flash as a commander mode

make sure both are on the same group and channel

or just set the 910 on optical slave mode . then use the on cam flash , probably for fill light?

eitherway.. itll work without having to buy anymore stuff


----------



## golfergolfer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boogschd*
> 
> no . you can set the 910 as a wireless slave then use your D7100's on cam flash as a commander mode
> 
> make sure both are on the same group and channel
> 
> or just set the 910 on optical slave mode . then use the on cam flash , probably for fill light?
> 
> eitherway.. itll work without having to buy anymore stuff


Great! I was planning on using it for some fill on various things just wanted to make sure that it would infact work! Thanks


----------



## boogschd

no problem!


----------



## Marin




----------



## Eggs and bacon

Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*






niceeeee


----------



## Marin

Nice and compact.


----------



## Eggs and bacon

I want one now =(


----------



## sub50hz

Had some good time fun shootin BMXies yesterday. Pics tomorrow.


----------



## dudemanppl

Whos photo camera is that on the right? Anyway, seems neato.


----------



## revro

lol they kind of look like a transformer









best
revro


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Whos photo camera is that on the right? Anyway, seems neato.


http://timothyburkhart.com/portfolio/two-wheeled/


----------



## nvidiaftw12

So I got a 35mm film camera from my grandma who has dementia and probably hasn't used it it 30 years, and was wondering if it's even worth fooling with or not. I have very little interest in getting into film.



I was also wondering if it would be possible to use the flash with my t2i.


----------



## Conspiracy

yes on flash. it should work. and yes its worth fooling with. olympus makes excellent film cameras. its not hard to learn just goto walmart buy a cheap pack of fuji film and try it. its super cheap to buy cheap film and take it to like walgreens to develop or something


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> yes on flash. it should work. and yes its worth fooling with. olympus makes excellent film cameras. its not hard to learn just goto walmart buy a cheap pack of fuji film and try it. its super cheap to buy cheap film and take it to like walgreens to develop or something


Thanks. Next question:

http://www.overclock.net/t/1409982/appraisal-olympus-om-2-with-t-20-flash-and-accessories/0_30


----------



## PCModderMike

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> So I got a 35mm film camera from my grandma who has dementia and probably hasn't used it it 30 years, and was wondering if it's even worth fooling with or not. I have very little interest in getting into film.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I was also wondering if it would be possible to use the flash with my t2i.


I would say definitely mess with it. I was in a similar situation, found this at a Goodwill for 9 dollars. Been playing with it ever since and it's a lot of fun.

The photos it takes have a cool vintage look to them.

The camera is from the '60's.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> yes on flash. it should work. and yes its worth fooling with. olympus makes excellent film cameras. its not hard to learn just goto walmart buy a cheap pack of fuji film and try it. its super cheap to buy cheap film and take it to like walgreens to develop or something
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks. Next question:
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1409982/appraisal-olympus-om-2-with-t-20-flash-and-accessories/0_30
Click to expand...

look it up on KEH.com for a rough estimate


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> look it up on KEH.com for a rough estimate


Eh, didn't seem to find anything helpful.

I tried the flash out, and it did work, but holy was it bright. First time using a real flash.

But there doesn't seem to be much control. There is a little slider, and in the middle it seems to be about half as bright as to the left or to the right. I dunno. Might still get a Yongnuo 560.


----------



## biatchi

Have you checked the voltage the flash runs at?


----------



## Conspiracy

http://www.keh.com/camera/Olympus--Camera-Bodies/1/sku-OM02000005750L?r=FE

Olympus OM2n


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Musta missed that. Regardless, I don't think anyone would buy what I have for $60. I don't even know if it works.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> Eh, didn't seem to find anything helpful.
> 
> I tried the flash out, and it did work, but holy was it bright. First time using a real flash.
> 
> But there doesn't seem to be much control. There is a little slider, and in the middle it seems to be about half as bright as to the left or to the right. I dunno. Might still get a Yongnuo 560.


you can kill your modern camera if its a 12v flash......


----------



## nvidiaftw12

It's got 2 AA's so I would assume it's a 3 volt.


----------



## biatchi

That would be unwise to assume, the batteries charge a capacitor which can be upto a couple of hundred vlts on older flashes. See if it's on this list or better yet measure it with a multimeter www.botzilla.com/photo/strobeVolts.html


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> It's got 2 AA's so I would assume it's a 3 volt.


Doesn't really work like that and biatchi has a good link.

Older flashes can go up to like 250v.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

8.08 was the highest I got, took a bit to get there.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> 8.08 was the highest I got, took a bit to get there.


6v i believe is the limit for all modern cameras.....


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Hmm. Guess I'll keep it with the 35mm or sell it with the 35mm. xD


----------



## Marin

I'd just keep it since OM's have good VF's.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Yeah, I love the focusing circle. Why can't new cameras have that?


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> Yeah, I love the focusing circle. Why can't new cameras have that?


You can get different focusing screens on certain cameras.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Ok, sorry to clog up this thread with all my questions but, there is a little plate missing from the bottom. Any thing to worry about, or should I just cover it up with some tape and call it a day?


----------



## Marin

It's for the motor drive.


----------



## MistaBernie

This premise is fascinating -- improving the dynamic range of the 5D3 and 7D by 3 stops via Magic Lantern..

http://www.canonrumors.com/2013/07/magic-lantern-improves-5d-mark-iii-dynamic-range-to-14-stops/


----------



## PCModderMike

I only got to play with it for a couple of hours last night....but using a flash like this is more difficult than I thought. Probably throwing myself under the bus admitting that....but oh well. We all had to start somewhere?
Found the best results working in manual though...but still new to that entirely.

Just want to confirm...there's a zoom setting on the flash itself. Match that to whatever my lens is at?


----------



## sub50hz

Match it to the FOV a full frame camera would see -- I.E. if you have a 35mm mounted, set the zoom to 50. You don't HAVE to do that though, as different settings can be used for effect, but if you just want on-camera appropriate coverage, remember to use the full-frame equivalent focal length.


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PCModderMike*
> 
> I only got to play with it for a couple of hours last night....but using a flash like this is more difficult than I thought. Probably throwing myself under the bus admitting that....but oh well. We all had to start somewhere?
> Found the best results working in manual though...but still new to that entirely.
> 
> Just want to confirm...*there's a zoom setting on the flash itself. Match that to whatever my lens is at?*


Assuming you have the flash mounted to the camera. If you are using it as a remote trigger I don't think it is that straightforward.
Wait for input from others, i could very easily be mistaken!


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PCModderMike*
> 
> I only got to play with it for a couple of hours last night....but using a flash like this is more difficult than I thought. Probably throwing myself under the bus admitting that....but oh well. We all had to start somewhere?
> Found the best results working in manual though...but still new to that entirely.
> 
> Just want to confirm...there's a zoom setting on the flash itself. Match that to whatever my lens is at?


not trying to sound rude but this is an excellent place to start. there are some parts you can skip over if you feel you already understand what hes saying and some parts just simply may not interest you. but in the end this is an excellent resource to learning how to work with a speedlight









http://strobist.blogspot.com/2006/03/lighting-101-start-here.html


----------



## PCModderMike

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Match it to the FOV a full frame camera would see -- I.E. if you have a 35mm mounted, set the zoom to 50. You don't HAVE to do that though, as different settings can be used for effect, but if you just want on-camera appropriate coverage, remember to use the full-frame equivalent focal length.


Ah OK, makes sense. That example is perfect, because that's exactly the lens I was using. Thanks.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie*
> 
> Assuming you have the flash mounted to the camera. If you are using it as a remote trigger I don't think it is that straightforward.
> Wait for input from others, i could very easily be mistaken!


Thanks for your input.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> not trying to sound rude but this is an excellent place to start. there are some parts you can skip over if you feel you already understand what hes saying and some parts just simply may not interest you. but in the end this is an excellent resource to learning how to work with a speedlight
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://strobist.blogspot.com/2006/03/lighting-101-start-here.html


Not sounding rude at all! Thanks for the link, looks like a great resource.









+rep guys......well except for you Schubie


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Just checked out that link Conspiracy, looks like a great source, will have to do some reading when I get a chance








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PCModderMike*
> 
> +rep guys......well except for you Schubie


----------



## Conspiracy

Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PCModderMike*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Match it to the FOV a full frame camera would see -- I.E. if you have a 35mm mounted, set the zoom to 50. You don't HAVE to do that though, as different settings can be used for effect, but if you just want on-camera appropriate coverage, remember to use the full-frame equivalent focal length.
> 
> 
> 
> Ah OK, makes sense. That example is perfect, because that's exactly the lens I was using. Thanks.
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie*
> 
> Assuming you have the flash mounted to the camera. If you are using it as a remote trigger I don't think it is that straightforward.
> Wait for input from others, i could very easily be mistaken!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Thanks for your input.
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> not trying to sound rude but this is an excellent place to start. there are some parts you can skip over if you feel you already understand what hes saying and some parts just simply may not interest you. but in the end this is an excellent resource to learning how to work with a speedlight
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://strobist.blogspot.com/2006/03/lighting-101-start-here.html
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not sounding rude at all! Thanks for the link, looks like a great resource.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> +rep guys......well except for you Schubie
Click to expand...

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie*
> 
> Just checked out that link Conspiracy, looks like a great source, will have to do some reading when I get a chance
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *PCModderMike*
> 
> +rep guys......well except for you Schubie
Click to expand...





dont forget to share the photos you take after reading stuff on strobist. that website really makes a huge difference in the way you look at exposure and lighting for photos


----------



## PCModderMike

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *[PWN]Schubie*


Imaginary +rep?








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> 
> dont forget to share the photos you take after reading stuff on strobist. that website really makes a huge difference in the way you look at exposure and lighting for photos


Will do. If I can get them looking alright.


----------



## mz-n10

on power levels,

1/1 means full power 1/2 means half and so on.....which sounds simple.

but that also corresponds perfectly to stops (1 stop less light is half the light). so if an picture looks to be 1 stop too bright with a flash, without moving the flash you can stop down 1 stop in camera OR set the power down 1 stop (so from 1/1 to 1/2) would in theory it should produce the same picture.

once you start messing with multiple different lights it might end up being a problem. cause 1/1 on a 580ex and 430ex is no tthe same power.

on zoom level
assuming you are using teh flash off camera, you can use the zoom level to adjust the amount of light being thrown at the subject and the "kind" of light. So say you wanted a more narrow beam of light for just a models face, you can do 105mm and you will get a more narrow beam. personally i just leave the light at 50 and move the light back and forth to adjust the beam pattern (or use a light modifier, softbox, snoot/grid, etc)


----------



## Marin

Buy Profoto, problem solved.


----------



## PCModderMike

^This guy and Profoto








Marin treats Mike with Profoto equipment as a welcome gesture, problem solved.


----------



## Marin




----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*


perfect gif


----------



## PCModderMike

It was perfect though.


----------



## Conspiracy




----------



## The Marv Dog

Hey, can I join the club?

Have a Nikon D5200, standard 18-55mm f3.5-5.6 G VR Lens and a 50mm 1.4 G.

Only got into photography a month back after being fed up of the amount of noise in the pictures that my little bomb-proof Fuji XP30 put out even in daylight. Great compact camera though and have gone swimming with it, dropped it onto the floor etc. Anyway, my D5200.


I don't have any website or anywhere I upload my pictures to, but here are some random ones I took in Canada.


----------



## theturbofd

Anyone know a good site to buy used photography gear? Lenses, bodies, etc?


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *theturbofd*
> 
> Anyone know a good site to buy used photography gear? Lenses, bodies, etc?


http://www.keh.com/

I buy all my used stuff from them.


----------



## PCModderMike

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/browse/Used-Equipment/ci/2870/N/4294247188


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> http://www.keh.com/
> 
> I buy all my used stuff from them.


This. Keh under-grades everything, so even "BGN" condition items are typically in pretty awesome condition. Their customer service is awesome, they ship quickly and they have a huge rotating inventory. Adorama and B&H's used departments are thin and overpriced. Very rarely is there anything worth going to them for over Keh.


----------



## sub50hz

Churched up my mobile-editing machine a bit last night.


----------



## Conspiracy

so steam summer sale finally got me. was trying to not spend any money and ended up getting the Skyrim legendary edition for $36. downloading HD texture mods and whathaveyou


----------



## The Marv Dog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> so steam summer sale finally got me. was trying to not spend any money and ended up getting the Skyrim legendary edition for $36. downloading HD texture mods and whathaveyou


I am one of not many people that hasn't played Skyrim. On my to-do list. I was planning on saving but then Starforge and the Left4Dead collection was out. Wow, Just Cause 2 for £2 for the next 8 hours. That is just insanity for such a great game.


----------



## theturbofd

Grabbed a canon 50mm 1.8 lens on amazon for 80$. Well worth the investment! I'm loving this lens.


----------



## Marin

50/1.2L's distance scale is cracked. Looks like it's on the underside though so the sealing is still fine, not that it matters for me.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> 50/1.2L's distance scale is cracked. Looks like it's on the underside though so the sealing is still fine, not that it matters for me.


those kind of things always bother me so i send them in to CPL and suck up the fees.


----------



## Conspiracy

after seeing this new commercial i am dumping B&W film for black or white film lol

art in its purist, simplest, most elegant form. such incredible composition and exposure lol

http://youtu.be/-sEyDdg5Ac4?t=9s


----------



## aksthem1

So I need to a speech for one of my classes. Since I decided to take the easy way out I did it on how to take better photos. Now I'm doing it basically it on auto modes, because I'm sure I can go over 5 minutes trying to explain to people who are photography illiterate.
Since it's three main topics I decided on framing & composition, lighting, but I haven't decided on what the third should be. So I need a bit of input on that. Probably getting to know your camera would be good one.


----------



## Marin

Talk about how to do collodion.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> Talk about how to do collodion.


THIS.

i gave a speech once on the process of shooting a movie on film instead of video. made it soo technical the teacher just told me to stop and gave me an A


----------



## MistaBernie

Your third topic could be depth of field (framing/composition, lighting/exposure, depth of field). Heck, your entire speech could be on taking better photos via proper exposure and discuss the three parts of the exposure (ISO/Shutter Speed/Aperture). Slightly more specific, but since you probably have a working knowledge of how they work, it shouldn't take much to extrapolate on the differences in the three and the results based on those changes.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> i gave a speech once on the process of shooting a movie on film instead of video. made it soo technical the teacher just told me to stop and gave me an A


Man I can just imagine what the teacher was thinking, "Holy crap when will this kid shut up?"


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> i gave a speech once on the process of shooting a movie on film instead of video. made it soo technical the teacher just told me to stop and gave me an A
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Man I can just imagine what the teacher was thinking, "Holy crap when will this kid shut up?"
Click to expand...

you know it lol. did that on purpose because i didnt want to have to actually write a speech and you know like do work haha


----------



## Dream Killer

Or the effects of taking the same photo outside at different times of the day. It's not camera specific and results are very apparent.


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> Talk about how to do collodion.


I'd shut myself up.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Your third topic could be depth of field (framing/composition, lighting/exposure, depth of field). Heck, your entire speech could be on taking better photos via proper exposure and discuss the three parts of the exposure (ISO/Shutter Speed/Aperture). Slightly more specific, but since you probably have a working knowledge of how they work, it shouldn't take much to extrapolate on the differences in the three and the results based on those changes.


That's a good one. The parts of exposure was the first thing I thought of, but it's a max of 5 minutes. I need to talk to them as they know nothing about photography. So I'd have to backtrack a bit and the whole class needs to "learn" from it.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> Or the effects of taking the same photo outside at different times of the day. It's not camera specific and results are very apparent.


That's going to be part of lighting and exposure actually.

The time limit is the bothersome part, because with those 5 minutes I have to talk about all that, an intro and conclusion. So I just have to touch base on each part.


----------



## Dream Killer

Then talk about how photography is a deconstructive art vs a constructive art like painting.


----------



## MistaBernie

You can do the exposure triangle in 5 minutes. Talk about 'Improving the quality of your photos with the proper understanding of the major parts of exposure on a camera'. Your main point: proper exposure and lighting tends to make for better photographs. Discuss briefly the three parts of exposure (ISO/Shutter/Aperture). Clearly indicate that they're all related and talk about their relationship. Do eet.


----------



## Conspiracy

Code:



Code:


1. go to Google Translate

2. type "pv zk bschk pv zk pv bschk zk pv zk bschk pv zk pv bschk zk bschk pv bschk bschk pv kkkkkkkkkk bschk bschk bschk pv zk bschk pv zk pv bschk zk pv zk bschk pv zk pv bschk zk bschk pv bschk bschk pv kkkkkkkkkk bschk bschk bschk pv zk bschk pv zk pv bschk zk pv zk bschk pv zk pv bschk zk bschk pv bschk bschk pv kkkkkkkkkk bschk bschk bschk pv zk bschk pv zk pv bschk zk pv zk bschk pv zk pv bschk zk bschk pv bschk bschk pv kkkkkkkkkk bschk bschk bschk pv zk bschk pv zk pv bschk zk pv zk bschk pv zk pv bschk zk bschk pv bschk bschk pv kkkkkkkkkk bschk bschk bschk"

3. pick the german language

4. click on listen

5. thank me later

HEHE


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Old news is old.


----------



## Conspiracy

dang didnt know that was old lol


----------



## PCModderMike

That was news to me...LoL


----------



## Conspiracy

ok what the heck canon. while 75MP is cool i dont see a 35mm sensor doing well with that. i havent tested anything producing larger sizes than the D800 on a FF camera but cmon. i think they are pushing it a little far.

http://www.photographybay.com/2013/07/21/canon-testing-a-75mp-pro-dslr/


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> ok what the heck canon. while 75MP is cool i dont see a 35mm sensor doing well with that. i havent tested anything producing larger sizes than the D800 on a FF camera but cmon. i think they are pushing it a little far.
> 
> http://www.photographybay.com/2013/07/21/canon-testing-a-75mp-pro-dslr/


apparently 3 25 mp sensors on top of one another. One blue, green, red. Similar to what others have done in the past. It will be interesting to see how it does.


----------



## funfortehfun

Meh. Nikon, give me D400.


----------



## laboitenoire

So I'm going through another phase where I have to resist the urge to sell all of my Nikon gear and pick up an OM-D... The only thing stopping me right now is a lack of cash due to this whole grad school thing coming up.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *silvrr*
> 
> apparently 3 25 mp sensors on top of one another. One blue, green, red. Similar to what others have done in the past. It will be interesting to see how it does.


So they're going to do what Sigma's been doing but actually make money at it.









EDIT: That means it's only going to be 25mp so no reason to upgrade at all. Blech.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> So I'm going through another phase where I have to resist the urge to sell all of my Nikon gear and pick up an OM-D... The only thing stopping me right now is a lack of cash due to this whole grad school thing coming up.


Why would you want 4/3rds? Such a lame sensor size.


----------



## Conspiracy

im with marin. bigger = better. not smaller


----------



## laboitenoire

It's not necessarily about sensor size... I think it's just I want to be able to shoot fast primes that don't have some weird field of view because Nikon doesn't seem to care about making DX primes anymore. The fact that Olympus has some very high quality primes is a big attraction.


----------



## MistaBernie

Yeah, it's basically a Foveon sensor, right? Sigma's been doing that for 10 years. I used to own one, used it during college - Sigma SD-9, that's right.. 10.x megapixel (but in reality only a 3.3~ because it was the three colors per pixel). I seem to recall it having great dynamic range for the time though, so if they were to get this working and market it in the "75" megapixel body and provide a marked improvement in dynamic range, I'd be willing to check one out.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> It's not necessarily about sensor size... I think it's just I want to be able to shoot fast primes that don't have some weird field of view because Nikon doesn't seem to care about making DX primes anymore. The fact that Olympus has some very high quality primes is a big attraction.


Fuji.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> It's not necessarily about sensor size... I think it's just I want to be able to shoot fast primes that don't have some weird field of view because Nikon doesn't seem to care about making DX primes anymore. The fact that Olympus has some very high quality primes is a big attraction.


no reason to go m43 unless you want a smaller overall system.

with that said, the oly primes are fairly gorgeous, ive used the 12mm, 45mm and the 75mm a few times and was impressed by them. they are expensive tho for something that has to cover a m43 image circle.


----------



## groundzero9

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> It's not necessarily about sensor size... I think it's just I want to be able to shoot fast primes that don't have some weird field of view because Nikon doesn't seem to care about making DX primes anymore. The fact that Olympus has some very high quality primes is a big attraction.


I have to second the suggestion to look at Fuji. I have an X-E1 and can't believe the level of performance that is packed into such a small camera. High ISO performance is especially impressive. Everything is well made and feels very solid. They have a nice lens lineup already and seem to be adding new ones constantly.


----------



## The Marv Dog

Hey guys, quick question. Is there any point on shooting RAW if you're not using any scene/adjustments etc? Like, just using the Camera in Manual I can't see any difference between the RAW that the camera takes and the JPEG that it takes of the same picture so is there no point unless I'm using room correction/sunset settings etc?


----------



## Eggs and bacon

If you ever want to edit your photo ever, you want to shoot in raw. You may not want to do any edits now but you will regret it, if in the future you change your mind.


----------



## MistaBernie

Let's put it this way -- if you are asking this question, the answer is largely irrelevant. I'm not trying to sound elitist or anything like that, but if you're asking raw vs jpg, you're probably not shooting for your job or for pay. That said, in this case, shooting in .jpg allows you certain other freedoms (many more images per card, smaller image files which results in faster transfers etc, larger buffers so you can take more photos at once). If you want the ability to capture lots more images in a shorter amount of time, shooting .jpg is fine.

If you're trying to maximize the quality of the images you're capturing, then raw is the way to go. If it's color/tonality corrections, then it's beneficial to have the data from raw files, but it's not absolutely imperative. Raw files will provide you the most data to work with, so you can maximize the quality of your images by shooting in raw. Just remember -- you're not sharing (I would hope obviously) these files in raw -- I have to assume the super-majority of photographers share their images in .jpeg, with a small subsection of them using other formats like .tiffs, etc) images in raw format.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Eggs and bacon*
> 
> If you ever want to edit your photo ever, you want to shoot in raw. You may not want to do any edits now but you will regret it, if in the future you change your mind.


you can edit jpg images. just less information in the file so you cant get away with as much editing.

jpg does not mean it cant be edited at all







raw makes life easy but at the risk of storage space for some


----------



## The Marv Dog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Eggs and bacon*
> 
> If you ever want to edit your photo ever, you want to shoot in raw. You may not want to do any edits now but you will regret it, if in the future you change your mind.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Let's put it this way -- if you are asking this question, the answer is largely irrelevant. I'm not trying to sound elitist or anything like that, but if you're asking raw vs jpg, you're probably not shooting for your job or for pay. That said, in this case, shooting in .jpg allows you certain other freedoms (many more images per card, smaller image files which results in faster transfers etc, larger buffers so you can take more photos at once). If you want the ability to capture lots more images in a shorter amount of time, shooting .jpg is fine.
> 
> If you're trying to maximize the quality of the images you're capturing, then raw is the way to go. If it's color/tonality corrections, then it's beneficial to have the data from raw files, but it's not absolutely imperative. Raw files will provide you the most data to work with, so you can maximize the quality of your images by shooting in raw. Just remember -- you're not sharing (I would hope obviously) these files in raw -- I have to assume the super-majority of photographers share their images in .jpeg, with a small subsection of them using other formats like .tiffs, etc) images in raw format.


Thanks guys. Elitist :L, yeah just taking photos because I well, like taking photos of just about anything. I still can't see the difference between the RAW and JPEGs that I take; I know that say putting the 'Shooting Indoors' preset on will cause a noticeable difference between them but in Manual I can't tell the difference even zoomed right in using Faststone. But, I'm no pro and will take your word for it; i currently take 1 RAW and 1 fine JPEG each photo and discard the RAWs.

Anyway, picture of my GTX 690 I took earlier. Definitely need to deal with that dustiness!


----------



## mav451

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> So I'm going through another phase where I have to resist the urge to sell all of my Nikon gear and pick up an OM-D... The only thing stopping me right now is a lack of cash due to this whole grad school thing coming up.


You may want to wait for the Fall refresh if you want to get an OM-D.
I personally wouldn't buy the new models (assuming rumors correct, entry level OM-D with only 2-axis), but it's just to see if there's further price reductions on new or refurb OM-Ds.

With the GX7 appearing to match the E-P5 in price ($1k body only), I won't be moving on from my E-PL5 for a while








At least until there's some factory model/refurbs available haha.

@groundzero - Yeah I initially didn't consider Fuji b/c of the AF performance, but seems that the firmware (released 1 week ago I think) should have some improvements.


----------



## Marin

Jpegs to Polaroid as RAW is to negatives. No further explanation needed.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mav451*
> 
> @groundzero - Yeah I initially didn't consider Fuji b/c of the AF performance, but seems that the firmware (released 1 week ago I think) should have some improvements.


Never had an issue with AF speed on the X-Pro -- expecting it to perform like PDAF is foolish, but luckily Fuji's plethora of useful firmware enhancements have made AF quicker and, surprisingly, MF is now very usable if you choose to show the distance indicator in the finder.


----------



## Eggs and bacon

My wratten filters arrived. 20 bucks for 20 filters seemed like a nice deal, a few nd filters, all the B&W contrast filters I could ever need and a #87 ir filter =). I will try and post a few IR photos soonish, once i figure out an easier way to focus.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Eggs and bacon*
> 
> once i figure out an easier way to focus.


Use manual-focus lenses with IR distance indicators. BAM.


----------



## Eggs and bacon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Use manual-focus lenses with IR distance indicators. BAM.


money =(
but seriously i would pay 20 bucks more on my cheaper lenses for a focus scale any day, only my film gear has the ir dot.


----------



## johnvosh

Here's a couple photo's I took on Friday. Please let me know how I did. The first one is with a Nikon AF Fisheye 10.5mm 1:2.8 G ED lens. I should have focused a little better. It was done on auto w/out flash as I forgot my tripod.



This one was taken with the 18-55mm kit lens...


----------



## sub50hz

Never thought how much of an upgrade a rMBP would be over my 2012 13", but this thing is awesome.


----------



## Conspiracy

Just started my new job at best buy yesterday. They hired me in the camera department to specifically help sell dslr cameras. Sold a t3i and d7100 with insurance and 4 video camcorders and a bunch of p&s cameras and a sony nex-3. Pretty sure they were happy with that since our quota is usually $3k a day in cameras and i made half of it my first day lolol


----------



## Marin

pew


----------



## The Marv Dog

I was talking to a friend that has a Diploma in photography and has for years been a professional photographer and while he was explaining the ins-and-outs of Photoshop and Lightroom he said that JPEGs lose quality every single time they are opened because It's just how they work compared to other file types and converting to TIFF or this other file type I can't remember the name of would be best when not keeping the RAWs to edit.

JPEGs are everywhere and just thought I'd ask you guys what you think/know about it? I like just browsing through my images but RAWs take way longer than JPEGs to load up and if they are so lossy they don't seem very good have as a sort of permanent digital photo album.

>Picture Unrelated


----------



## Jixr

Hey everyone, I'm looking some input here.

I recently went online camera shopping, and noticed that Canons new Mirrorless DSLR's have a 22mm prime, which on a crop senor comes out to a perfect 35mm
Unless i'm going out where I know i'll be okay dragging around my kit, most of my photos are me just playing around in my apartment, and aside from the kit lens and a fisheye, the shallowest lens I have is a 40mm pancake ( which I highly recomend ) but even that equates to a 65mm, and I really would like a shallow prime, that can be purchased with a ( single ) shoestring budget.

Any ideas tips, suggestions are welcome.


----------



## Marin

I still want to buy this. What doooooooo?!?!?!!?!?1


----------



## Gabkicks

I just grabbed a used canon S100 off of amazon







How do i tell how many photos have been taken with it by the previous owner?


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gabkicks*
> 
> I just grabbed a used canon S100 off of amazon
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How do i tell how many photos have been taken with it by the previous owner?


do point-and-shoots even register shutter actuations in the EXIF?

but anyway . heres what i use

http://opanda.com/en/iexif/


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *The Marv Dog*
> 
> I was talking to a friend that has a Diploma in photography and has for years been a professional photographer and while he was explaining the ins-and-outs of Photoshop and Lightroom he said that JPEGs lose quality every single time they are opened because It's just how they work compared to other file types and converting to TIFF or this other file type I can't remember the name of would be best when not keeping the RAWs to edit.
> 
> JPEGs are everywhere and just thought I'd ask you guys what you think/know about it? I like just browsing through my images but RAWs take way longer than JPEGs to load up and if they are so lossy they don't seem very good have as a sort of permanent digital photo album.
> 
> >Picture Unrelated


The issues with JPEGS comes when you save a new version. Each time the compression for JPEG is done and over time it can show. However, assuming you are saving at a good quality setting it takes quite a few saves before anything even becomes noticeable.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gabkicks*
> 
> I just grabbed a used canon S100 off of amazon
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How do i tell how many photos have been taken with it by the previous owner?


Are people worried about actuation counts on point and shoots now, lol?


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> I still want to buy this. What doooooooo?!?!?!!?!?1


DOOOOOOOOOOOOD

buy it man


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> I still want to buy this. What doooooooo?!?!?!!?!?1


I liked my X10... but as dumb as it may sound, once I got the X100 I stopped using the X10 since I was shooting at 28 or 35mm most of the time anyway.


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> I still want to buy this. What doooooooo?!?!?!!?!?1


They were $200 at Best Buy on clearance. Doubt you could get one now for that price. I would have picked it up, but none of the local stores even carried them in the first place.


----------



## max302

What is that exactly? The body looks like an X100 but the viewfinder is much smaller.

EDIT: Nvm, reverse image searched it, it's an X10. No prime no care.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *max302*
> 
> No prime no care.


It's a small-sensor point-and-shoot, and the lens is quite fast. I had a lot of fun using mine.


----------



## Marin

And it has a really good dynamic range.


----------



## sub50hz

And the pop-up flash is great for party photos, because Fuji probably makes the greatest metering systems available today.


----------



## golfergolfer

Hi again everyone !







So can anyone here suggest a decent travel tripod? I know the pros and cons to them but just want to see what the commonly used ones are. I was looking at the Manfrotto Befree but it might not be strong enough?

I will be using a :

Nikon D7100

Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8
Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8
Nikkor 50mm f/1.8

SB-910

What would be the strongest and most compact tripod I could use? I know these are two things that dont go together lol


----------



## sub50hz

Probably some Gitzo variant.


----------



## golfergolfer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Probably some Gitzo variant.


hmm gitzo is nice but their cheapest one is $479.99







I was looking for something a little bit less lol. How about Giottos? Do they make good stuff? If I was spending in the range of $400 I would get Giottos YTL8384 Carbon Fibre Tripod. But I heard a few bad reviews about them?


----------



## Marin

I feel like a moron. I didn't realize you could remove the plate on a Gitzo and flip the threading. Ended up stripping the bottom of my geared head because of the lack of threading. No biggy though, flipped it and it mounted fine.

Also knocked out another nude shoot.


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> Also knocked out another nude shoot.


Next time a friend tells me to help them out with a nude art assignment or nude shoot for a modeling agency. I'm going to shoot myself. It's fine when it's someone I don't know, but I don't want to see my friends in that light. :|


----------



## Marin

Clothes, no clothes, all the same to me.


----------



## Jixr

Hey peeps, anyone have any input on the Joby Gorillapod tripods? i'm thinking of getting the slr-zoom version $80 or so, i'm crazy low budget and my cheapo $10 mini tripod just does not do it for me, and I was thinking that I could make some good use out of the pod ( I really have never found myself in need of a full sized tripod, often when i'm out, I just stick my mini pod on my motorcycle seat.


----------



## S3ason

Golfergolfer:

Look into the mefoto backpacker and roadtrip. They fold down pretty small, have decent build quality, arca-Swiss plates so they work with l brackets and the like, and have twist locks. The backpacker folds down to just over a foot I think.

The head that comes with then is pretty solid, has a pano base and friction adjust. Only problem is that you may have trouble with larger lenses.

With most travel tripods that aren't horribly expensive, you're going to get a little wobble and it won't be super stable. These tripods are a good compromise for the price.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *golfergolfer*
> 
> hmm gitzo is nice but their cheapest one is $479.99
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I was looking for something a little bit less lol. How about Giottos? Do they make good stuff? If I was spending in the range of $400 I would get Giottos YTL8384 Carbon Fibre Tripod. But I heard a few bad reviews about them?


I like Giottos. I mentioned Gitzo because based on the lenses you had listed there, I assumed the price wouldn't be a deterrent.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> Hey peeps, anyone have any input on the Joby Gorillapod tripods? i'm thinking of getting the slr-zoom version $80 or so, i'm crazy low budget and my cheapo $10 mini tripod just does not do it for me, and I was thinking that I could make some good use out of the pod ( I really have never found myself in need of a full sized tripod, often when i'm out, I just stick my mini pod on my motorcycle seat.


not worth it spend the money on a 055xpro


----------



## golfergolfer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *S3ason*
> 
> Golfergolfer:
> 
> Look into the mefoto backpacker and roadtrip. They fold down pretty small, have decent build quality, arca-Swiss plates so they work with l brackets and the like, and have twist locks. The backpacker folds down to just over a foot I think.
> 
> The head that comes with then is pretty solid, has a pano base and friction adjust. Only problem is that you may have trouble with larger lenses.
> 
> With most travel tripods that aren't horribly expensive, you're going to get a little wobble and it won't be super stable. These tripods are a good compromise for the price.


hmm I will have to take a look at these! Have you used them yourself? I wonder if I would have a problem using the 70-200mm lens. I wont be shooting with it on tripod too often but from time to time I might. I get that there will be a little wobble but if it can be stable enough to take some longer exposure shots then I am happy








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> I like Giottos. I mentioned Gitzo because based on the lenses you had listed there, I assumed the price wouldn't be a deterrent.


Sadly price is a bit of a deterrent due to the fact that all the money has been spent on the lenses.... I had a 4K budget or so and got all three lens, flash, and body. But now I dont have much and need a tripod. Thanks for your help though


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *golfergolfer*
> 
> hmm I will have to take a look at these! Have you used them yourself? I wonder if I would have a problem using the 70-200mm lens. I wont be shooting with it on tripod too often but from time to time I might. I get that there will be a little wobble but if it can be stable enough to take some longer exposure shots then I am happy


i have a similar styled sirui for travel which works fine in a windless environment.

even a series 0 gitzo isnt going to be as good as a cheaper larger set of legs for pure stability. i dont remember where this was from but with tripods you can only pick 2 of the 3 options. Light, sturdy or cheap.....


----------



## golfergolfer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *S3ason*
> 
> Golfergolfer:
> 
> Look into the mefoto backpacker and roadtrip. They fold down pretty small, have decent build quality, arca-Swiss plates so they work with l brackets and the like, and have twist locks. The backpacker folds down to just over a foot I think.
> 
> The head that comes with then is pretty solid, has a pano base and friction adjust. Only problem is that you may have trouble with larger lenses.
> 
> With most travel tripods that aren't horribly expensive, you're going to get a little wobble and it won't be super stable. These tripods are a good compromise for the price.


Taking a good look at the Mefoto Roadtrip and I am really really interested in it now. The only thing I dont like about it is the fact it uses twist legs. I really really really wanted flip lock legs and it is almost to the point it might even be a deal breaker. That said it has alot of good options to it so I am starting to enjoy it more. If I got this tripod what plates do I use for my camera? I would get two Quick Release Plates, one for my D7100 and the other for the 70-200mm. But I have no idea what to get... Can anyone help?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> i have a similar styled sirui for travel which works fine in a windless environment.
> 
> even a series 0 gitzo isnt going to be as good as a cheaper larger set of legs for pure stability. i dont remember where this was from but with tripods you can only pick 2 of the 3 options. Light, sturdy or cheap.....


hmm this would be used not only for travel but overall shooting. I have heard something similar to the 2 of 3 options. I would love to pick light and sturdy but at this rate I am going with cheap, light, and still quite sturdy


----------



## S3ason

I haven't used these tripod for more then 5 minutes in a store, but my initial impression was very good. The build quality isn't the best, I'll admit, but for the price it packs so many useful features it's insane. They make me wonder why I bought an 055xprob. Sure the big tripod is sturdier and built like a tank, but if I never feel like lugging it around whats the point?

The head uses any arca-swiss style quick release plate. I currently use a head with the Manfrotto RC2 which is great, but it cant touch the arca-swiss clamps in terms of accessory compatibility. You can buy a nice one from a brand name or get them dirt cheap off ebay, they work the same for the most part. If you're into panoramics, get an l-bracket for the d7100 and use that one the body and just keep a generic arca plate on the tele.

It should support a longer lens, it's rated at 17.6 lbs but this probably doesn't mean much in the real world. While it will physically hold 17 pounds of gear, give the camera a bump and it gets enough momentum for the ballhead to twist and send the whole thing tipping. If you're cautious and don't use the bigger lenses in a strong wind, I don't see it being a problem.

Why don't you like twist locks? I think they're so much more convenient, personally. You can grab all the locks and twist them at once for super quick deployment









Bonus: the tripod turns into a moderately useful monopod


----------



## Marin

There's a reason why they're cheaper while offering the same thing as higher end tripods. Also when it comes to gear, K.I.S.S.

Benro, never again.


----------



## golfergolfer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *S3ason*
> 
> I haven't used these tripod for more then 5 minutes in a store, but my initial impression was very good. The build quality isn't the best, I'll admit, but for the price it packs so many useful features it's insane. They make me wonder why I bought an 055xprob. Sure the big tripod is sturdier and built like a tank, but if I never feel like lugging it around whats the point?
> 
> The head uses any arca-swiss style quick release plate. I currently use a head with the Manfrotto RC2 which is great, but it cant touch the arca-swiss clamps in terms of accessory compatibility. You can buy a nice one from a brand name or get them dirt cheap off ebay, they work the same for the most part. If you're into panoramics, get an l-bracket for the d7100 and use that one the body and just keep a generic arca plate on the tele.
> 
> It should support a longer lens, it's rated at 17.6 lbs but this probably doesn't mean much in the real world. While it will physically hold 17 pounds of gear, give the camera a bump and it gets enough momentum for the ballhead to twist and send the whole thing tipping. If you're cautious and don't use the bigger lenses in a strong wind, I don't see it being a problem.
> 
> Why don't you like twist locks? I think they're so much more convenient, personally. You can grab all the locks and twist them at once for super quick deployment
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bonus: the tripod turns into a moderately useful monopod


hmm I dont really know how to do panoramics but would be interested in it and would like to keep options open so I guess I would have to get an I-Bracket of some sorts. Is there anything you recommend like a specific plate or is there just one type of I-Bracket (same idea with arca plate? anything special or just standard? Name?). I dont think I would trust the tripod with 17 pounds of gear myself as once you tap the tripod everything would go for a flight but most of the time I would be shooting with the 14-24mm lens anyways so it shouldnt be a problem.







And I dont really know I just always found flip locks faster no need to spin things and tighten things just flip open flip close. And I have only used a monopod a little bit so it could be fun to try that out too








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> There's a reason why they're cheaper while offering the same thing as higher end tripods. Also when it comes to gear, K.I.S.S.
> 
> Benro, never again.


? K.I.S.S. I think I'm missing something...


----------



## Marin

Keep it simple, stupid.









Get gear that does its intended function well instead of having one trying to jam in everything under the sun.


----------



## golfergolfer

Ah I see







I guess at the end of the day I want a decently steady travel style tripod that won't break the bank. I think either the manfrotto or the mefoto tripods would be good.


----------



## Marin

Used is always an option.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *golfergolfer*
> 
> hmm this would be used not only for travel but overall shooting. I have heard something similar to the 2 of 3 options. I would love to pick light and sturdy but at this rate I am going with cheap, light, and still quite sturdy


im speaking specifically about a tripod similar to the mefoto backpacker, i dont have any experience with the other one.

the legs lower 4th section bends slightly when i put my a900+2470 on. it isnt unstable but i wouldnt hope for it to hold for a 30s exposure wiht a 70-200/2.8.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> There's a reason why they're cheaper while offering the same thing as higher end tripods. Also when it comes to gear, K.I.S.S.
> 
> Benro, never again.


my benro has yet to loosen or fail on me, but given i dont hard use my gear....


----------



## S3ason

Kirk and really right stuff make a really nice l bracket, the rrs one is pretty slick. Some brands make generic ones that have adjustable plates, but those two are the best options.


----------



## ikem

got my camera back from nikon, and they reset my shutter count...

had a metering error (second time it has been in for this same problem)


----------



## Jixr

I've a question, what are everyones ideas on carrying around a dslr wherever you go? I like the idea of carrying around a camera, t3i with my 40mm pancake is fairly small, but obviously won't fit in a pocket, and my camera backpack looks like i'm going on a 3 day hike, any ideas on bags or whatever to carry it around in?

People with bags and backpacks are pretty common in my town due to the stupid plastic-bag ban in stores and such.

OFC I have a cell phone, but compared to a slr, the camera is crap.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> I've a question, what are everyones ideas on carrying around a dslr wherever you go? I like the idea of carrying around a camera, t3i with my 40mm pancake is fairly small, but obviously won't fit in a pocket, and my camera backpack looks like i'm going on a 3 day hike, any ideas on bags or whatever to carry it around in?
> 
> People with bags and backpacks are pretty common in my town due to the stupid plastic-bag ban in stores and such.
> 
> OFC I have a cell phone, but compared to a slr, the camera is crap.


Cameras are meant to be used, not left at home -- I carry at _least_ one camera everywhere I go, every day. Get a smaller bag or something.


----------



## S3ason

Manfrotto Veloce v.
It isn't the best storage as far as camera bags go, but it looks like a normal backpack which is big for me.


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> I've a question, what are everyones ideas on carrying around a dslr wherever you go? I like the idea of carrying around a camera, t3i with my 40mm pancake is fairly small, but obviously won't fit in a pocket, and my camera backpack looks like i'm going on a 3 day hike, any ideas on bags or whatever to carry it around in?
> 
> People with bags and backpacks are pretty common in my town due to the stupid plastic-bag ban in stores and such.
> 
> OFC I have a cell phone, but compared to a slr, the camera is crap.


I carry my camera with me every day to work. Ill often bring it to a lot of places and setups and its nice to have most of the time. Learn to carry your camera and a single lens and its a small kit to carry. Ive thought of grabbing a 40 pancake to really have a small kit but haven't gotten around to testing one.

I wrap my camera and lens in one of theses
http://www.amazon.com/camera-photo/dp/B00009R88H

And stick it in my messenger bag for work. On trips I do the same or pack it in my suit case with the same wrap or a t-shirt around it.


----------



## Sean Webster

I never use a bag and usually carry my camera with a random lens in hand along with my aluminum water bottle in the other wherever I go. It might be weird but that is the habit I follow.


----------



## dmanstasiu

I also got into the habit of bringing my d5100 everywhere.


----------



## Jixr

I suppose I just need to find me a good messanger style bag, I have a really good backpack that I usually have on me when I ride my motorcycle, but i'm still recovering from a massive highside and working on getting the bike fixed up, but till at least september or so i'll be off the bike. ( basically took up photography since i've been off the bike )

I think it would be easier to pull up a side bag/man purse whatever vs digging in a backpack. I figure I could carry either my 40 or 50mm on it since those are small comact and if I scratch them to hell its only $100 out of my pocket to replace one.

I'm also thinking about making a sling style strap out of some parachord ( too low budget to afford a real strap )


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> I suppose I just need to find me a good messanger style bag, I have a really good backpack that I usually have on me when I ride my motorcycle, but i'm still recovering from a massive highside and working on getting the bike fixed up, but till at least september or so i'll be off the bike. ( basically took up photography since i've been off the bike )
> 
> I think it would be easier to pull up a side bag/man purse whatever vs digging in a backpack. I figure I could carry either my 40 or 50mm on it since those are small comact and if I scratch them to hell its only $100 out of my pocket to replace one.
> 
> I'm also thinking about making a sling style strap out of some parachord ( too low budget to afford a real strap )


I have a bunch of spare bags, if you're interested. PM me if you want a list.


----------



## max302

Listen to this guy.

Used gear is crazy cheap. Call around. Pro photographers usually are gear whores and have stuff laying around and will take anything to get rid of it.

I once got Manfrotto legs and a fluid head for something like 60$ off some guy who did corporate / school / mass shoot stuff who had updated his gear.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *max302*
> 
> Listen to this guy.
> 
> Used gear is crazy cheap. Call around. Pro photographers usually are gear whores and have stuff laying around and will take anything to get rid of it.
> 
> I once got Manfrotto legs and a fluid head for something like 60$ off some guy who did corporate / school / mass shoot stuff who had updated his gear.


true. used gear can be found for crazy cheap but not always.

also, most pros use their gear until it breaks or they have no use for it. some pros have stuff laying around but i doubt they will take just anything for it in order to get rid of it lol. that statement is a little bit of a stretch honestly


----------



## sub50hz

I wouldn't call myself a gear whore, but I struggled for a long time to find a bag that's a good compromise of carry ability, comfort and accessibility for every-day life -- which leaves me with a host of like-new bags sitting in a closet.


----------



## boogschd

i used to bring my camera with me almost everyday back in college, but not so much nowadays









i always have my camera phone with me but i dont take as much street photos with it compared to when i have my D60 around


----------



## max302

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> true. used gear can be found for crazy cheap but not always.
> 
> also, most pros use their gear until it breaks or they have no use for it. some pros have stuff laying around but i doubt they will take just anything for it in order to get rid of it lol. that statement is a little bit of a stretch honestly


I wouldn't dare generalize off my anecdotal experience. However, in my case, all it took was finding this one guy. Bought 5 pro film SLR bodies off him, a flash setup, and all sorts of random crap and made something like around a thousand bucks off his back reselling.

I guess that the moral of my story is the following: look around.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *max302*
> 
> I guess that the moral of my story is the following: look around.


Probably some of the best advice in this thread in a while.

_ASK AROUND._

You may be surprised to find what people have laying around -- one man's trash, etc...


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *max302*
> 
> Listen to this guy.
> 
> Used gear is crazy cheap. Call around. Pro photographers usually are gear whores and have stuff laying around and will take anything to get rid of it.
> 
> I once got Manfrotto legs and a fluid head for something like 60$ off some guy who did corporate / school / mass shoot stuff who had updated his gear.
> 
> 
> 
> true. used gear can be found for crazy cheap but not always.
> 
> also, *most pros use their gear until it breaks* or they have no use for it. some pros have stuff laying around but i doubt they will take just anything for it in order to get rid of it lol. that statement is a little bit of a stretch honestly
Click to expand...

insurance.


----------



## Conspiracy

true. everyone is different but yeah there are plenty of opportunities where if you just ask pros will sell uneeded gear.

was talking to a couple that shoots weddings together and they mentioned they have 2 hassy's and a nice array of glass, i inquired if they still shot them and of course they offered to sell both to me cheap although still out of my price range even for a good steal. will talk to them about working out some sort of deal maybe although would be tough to get my hands on two bodies and multiple lenses for a price i can legit afford lol. the part that struck me more was that they had a 50mm, 80mm, and 150mm. which would be a nice collection to have


----------



## groundzero9

Do you guys have a preferred circular polarizer brand? I'm going on a trip to Germany next month and need to pick one up. I'm thinking about this one but I'm not sure I want to spend that much.


----------



## bigredishott

I still use a Canon Rebel XT 8MP camera. It's ooolllddd but still works great. The body and stock lens cost me $1000.







Now you can pick one up dirt cheap.


----------



## S3ason

B+W makes good filters. It may seem like a lot of money, but I think it's well worth it. My dad found me a cheapo quantaray cpl and it's just awful. Its soft, flares like crazy, and has this horrible blue-green color cast. You can get away with buying some filters cheap, but I don't think cpl's are ones you want to skimp on.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *groundzero9*
> 
> Do you guys have a preferred circular polarizer brand? I'm going on a trip to Germany next month and need to pick one up. I'm thinking about this one but I'm not sure I want to spend that much.


Give me $60 and I'll send this to you.


----------



## golfergolfer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> Give me $60 and I'll send this to you.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


Are you in India?


----------



## Dream Killer

I'm back in NYC.


----------



## golfergolfer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> I'm back in NYC.


ahh interesting I just went off of the long and lat you had under your name I see you changed it now lol. I might be interested just wondering of your location if the other guy doesn't pick it up.


----------



## johnvosh

Just picked up this Canon T70 w/ lens & carrying case @ goodwill for $15. Are these film cameras any good?


----------



## sub50hz

If it works, shoot a couple rolls and make that decision yourself.


----------



## groundzero9

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> Give me $60 and I'll send this to you.


I appreciate the offer but I prefer to buy new after a few bad experiences.

I'm wondering if you all in here can help me out a little more with the Germany trip. It's an all expenses paid tour that I'm tagging along on as the photographer. The organizers know I'm not a professional and aren't paying me, but I'll be acting as the dedicated person in charge of getting photos of the other group members and the scenery. Aka, a go-to guy for "Hey, can you get a picture of my wife and I in front of this?" I'm bringing my D600 and 16-35mm VR, but feel a bit apprehensive. I love wide angle and normally shoot landscapes, nature, and objects; not people, and almost never indoors. I figured it would be good to pick up a 50mm f/1.8 to get a little more reach and low-light ability, but honestly don't know what to expect in terms of lighting. It's a mix of castle tours, factory tours, and sight seeing. I'm trying to figure out how to cover all the bases without going overboard. Any suggestions?


----------



## Dream Killer

the 50mm is a fine lens but it would be about equal with a 16-35mm vr in low light but the 16-35 edges it indoors because the VR on that thing is incredible. i often spend the day with only the 16-35. it can work.


----------



## Jixr

Hey everyone, I have an odd question, I own a t3i, and I recently went to get some prints done, and they came back looking pretty nice and sharp, but I honestly want something looking a bit more 'classic' I suppose. something more akin to a cheap film camera dropping the rolls off at a drug store to be processed rather than taking my multi-megapixel shot and printing it on a top of the line bajillion DPI printer blah blah blah.

Is there a way I can get that type of affect from a local camera shop that also does prints or its it something I'm going to have to do before hand by editing my photos.

I've been interested in picking up an old film cam if I could find one, but I honestly don't know the first thing about film cameras, and would probably waste a few rolls of costly film and developing before I could figure it out.


----------



## Conspiracy

the best way to get that effect is to pick up a cheap film cam.

pentax k1000 is a very capable and easy to use camera that is fairly easy to find.

KEH.com is your best friend lol


----------



## Jixr

i think I may just be better off buying a cheap photo printer to get a lower quality print i'm wanting vs buying a new cam, that way I can print my old shots.


----------



## sub50hz

Learn to edit them.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Learn to edit them.


boring









shoot film


----------



## Jixr

talking to a guy who's shutter release is a headphone cable and an old flash light hacked together, I have less than a single shoe-string budget.\

and actually film cameras are in high demand in my town thanks to all the hipsters who gotta have them to match their pant shorts, v-neck tee's and handlebar moustashes. Damn hipsters.

Though I am wanting to trade/sell my fisheye for a gopro, since I have a motorcycle, and have thought of way to many cool ideas to use one ( like tying it to a balloon with a really long string and letting it float around concerts and such )

though I would only want the black version, which retails for $400


----------



## golfergolfer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *johnvosh*
> 
> Just picked up this Canon T70 w/ lens & carrying case @ goodwill for $15. Are these film cameras any good?
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


:O This reminds me someone in my family has one of these cameras! I gotta go find it







I will post some pics as soon as I get it lol, I have wanted to shoot film just to try it out but never had the camera but thanks for reminding me that I can actually get my hands on one! Hmm now where to find the film


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> talking to a guy who's shutter release is a headphone cable and an old flash light hacked together, I have less than a single shoe-string budget.\
> 
> and actually film cameras are in high demand in my town thanks to all the hipsters who gotta have them to match their pant shorts, v-neck tee's and handlebar moustashes. Damn hipsters.
> 
> Though I am wanting to trade/sell my fisheye for a gopro, since I have a motorcycle, and have thought of way to many cool ideas to use one ( like tying it to a balloon with a really long string and letting it float around concerts and such )
> 
> though I would only want the black version, which retails for $400


hey now sir. i like my v-neck tees


----------



## Conspiracy

ordered a new lens for my bronica. got the 135mm f4 PE. i keep a close eye on KEH and this popped up like a week ago and i havent ever seen this lens for sale since i bought the ETRSi several months ago.


----------



## Eggs and bacon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> ordered a new lens for my bronica. got the 135mm f4 PE. i keep a close eye on KEH and this popped up like a week ago and i havent ever seen this lens for sale since i bought the ETRSi several months ago.


is that like an 80mm in 135?


----------



## golfergolfer

So this is what I found!

The entire "Kit"


The Body:


3 Lenses:


24mm f/2.8 Prime :3


Extender:


70-210mm f/4 with Extender (Makes it 420?):


RAWR!


So Long.... The ruler is actually flush with the front of the camera lol:


I got a little picture happy


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Eggs and bacon*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> ordered a new lens for my bronica. got the 135mm f4 PE. i keep a close eye on KEH and this popped up like a week ago and i havent ever seen this lens for sale since i bought the ETRSi several months ago.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> is that like an 80mm in 135?
Click to expand...

yea. to my understanding its very close and in the maybe like 85-95mm range. not sure what the exact conversion is but all i wanted was something in that general range to play with


----------



## PCModderMike

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *golfergolfer*
> 
> So this is what I found!
> 
> The entire "Kit"
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Body:
> 
> 
> 3 Lenses:
> 
> 
> 24mm f/2.8 Prime :3
> 
> 
> Extender:
> 
> 
> 70-210mm f/4 with Extender (Makes it 420?):
> 
> 
> RAWR!
> 
> 
> So Long.... The ruler is actually flush with the front of the camera lol:
> 
> 
> 
> I got a little picture happy


Wow!


----------



## Marin

,,,


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> *,,,*


dont spoiler their fun haha. you once shot 35mm and was excited about smaller film sizes once haha. well maybe unless you have always shot LF. this idk


----------



## PCModderMike

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> ,,,












Yea...don't spoil the fun.


----------



## golfergolfer

Not sure whats going on but its no fun now







I thought it was like opening a treasure chest when I opened that camera bag lol was like WOW! So much.


----------



## PCModderMike

Marin is just being a hipster....it's not hip how I said "wow" to your post. But oh well, I think it's a nice score.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PCModderMike*
> 
> Marin is just being a hipster....it's not hip how I said "wow" to your post. But oh well, I think it's a nice score.


hipsters are not able to show excitement or other positive emotions lol


----------



## golfergolfer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PCModderMike*
> 
> Marin is just being a hipster....it's not hip how I said "wow" to your post. But oh well, I think it's a nice score.


Ah I see... To tell the truth I was so excited to see that you actually said something about it I love your rig and your pictures so much I was like "YES I HAVE BEEN ACKNOWLEDGED! MY DAY IS COMPLETED!"


----------



## PCModderMike

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> hipsters are not able to show excitement or other positive emotions lol










Quote:


> Originally Posted by *golfergolfer*
> 
> Ah I see... To tell the truth I was so excited to see that you actually said something about it I love your rig and your pictures so much I was like "YES I HAVE BEEN ACKNOWLEDGED! MY DAY IS COMPLETED!"


Haha I know that feels. In fact...I don't think my stuff is really that great...and hope to be acknowledged by some of the others around here sometimes. But...at the end of the day, just enjoy what you're doing, and if you're having fun with it that's what really matters.


----------



## Marin

All I did was edit out a post. You guys are dumb.


----------



## Conspiracy

Just having fun yo


----------



## Humafold

I took this on my recent vacation at Alligator Adventure in North Myrtle Beach, SC. It's one of my first 100 photos with my new Canon T3.


----------



## PCModderMike

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> All I did was edit out a post. You guys are dumb.


Ahh come on. It's all in good fun.








Hipsters don't get hurt...man up.


----------



## Marin

Why would I be hurt?


----------



## PCModderMike

You're not.


----------



## golfergolfer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Humafold*
> 
> I took this on my recent vacation at Alligator Adventure in North Myrtle Beach, SC. It's one of my first 100 photos with my new Canon T3.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


hehe turtle :3 looking right at you too

I finally get Marin's Hipstersaurus Rex thing :FacePalm:


----------



## Marin

Correct.

But you guys are still dumb. =p


----------



## PCModderMike

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> Correct.
> 
> But you guys are still dumb. =p


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PCModderMike*


still hilarious. love that character


----------



## Sean Webster

im confused, whats with all the feelers?

LESS FEELS AND MORE CAMERA STUFF!


----------



## golfergolfer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> im confused, whats with all the feelers?
> 
> LESS FEELS AND MORE CAMERA STUFF!


lol if you wanna see camera stuff mine was 22 posts ago







So much talk since then


----------



## Humafold

Dbl Post


----------



## Conspiracy

adorama posted on facebook saying they just finished testing out the 70D and a hands on review is coming soon. not holding my breathe but pretty sure this camera will be at least good. has a lot of potential from the hype so i hope it doesnt disappoint.


----------



## golfergolfer

Are there any good camera bags out there can are urban and kinda stealthy that can fit a body with attached 70-200 and still have room for at least one more lens, able to put a laptop in (14 inch) and some books (for work and what not? This way I can take my camera and a lens everywhere I go and still have enough room for work stuff)


----------



## Marin

http://www.selectism.com/2013/08/06/a-look-at-the-hex-gear-bag-perfect-for-cameras/

http://www.chromeindustries.com/bags/camera-bags/niko-pack


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> http://www.selectism.com/2013/08/06/a-look-at-the-hex-gear-bag-perfect-for-cameras/
> 
> http://www.chromeindustries.com/bags/camera-bags/niko-pack


while i have no need for those. wow thanks for sharing them. good stuff


----------



## sub50hz

God, do I hate that Niko pack. I stopped in the Chrome store last weekend to scope it, and it's just super awkward. That being said, I should have my incase Ari bag next week at a cost of free dollars. Then I'll have to sell two other incase bags, my kata, a crumpler 7mdh and a lowepro AW. Cest la vie.


----------



## groundzero9

Personally I've been looking at this Lowepro. Bottom half with side access for camera gear, top half for personal stuff, and a laptop pocket.


----------



## PCModderMike

Even though I just bought this Case Logic bag not very long ago....I really like the looks of that Hex bag...







Maybe pick up as an alternative..


----------



## golfergolfer

Hmm all these bags are quite nice but they just seem too big? I don't need something to store my entire kit just need my camera and one lens or so. I wish I could design my own bag lol I know exactly how it would be. Has any one used shoulder bags?


----------



## PCModderMike

I used a small Nikon bag like this when I first got my camera.

Good little shoulder bag IMO. But definitely not going to be holding a laptop or any books like you had asked about in your 1st post.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PCModderMike*
> 
> I used a small Nikon bag like this when I first got my camera.
> 
> Good little should bag IMO. But definitely not going to be holding a laptop or any books like you had asked about in your 1st post.


As you indicated in your own response, not only does it not hold everything he wants to hold, but it's basically the opposite of stealthy -- it has the name of a major camera manufacturer on the outside of the bag.


----------



## PCModderMike




----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *golfergolfer*
> 
> Hmm all these bags are quite nice but they just seem too big? I don't need something to store my entire kit just need my camera and one lens or so. I wish I could design my own bag lol I know exactly how it would be. Has any one used shoulder bags?


The problem is that if you want to leave a 70-200 attached, it really narrows down how small and discrete the bag can be.


----------



## mz-n10

Tenba Insert

use some random shoulder bag....but it does get heavy.


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> Tenba Insert
> 
> use some random shoulder bag....but it does get heavy.


This and the camera wraps I linked awhile back. Carry my camera everywhere and havent had any issue. Just a camera and lens I use the wrap, if I carry more stuff I throw in the tenba insert and it keeps things organized and protected. There are a few providers that make them.


----------



## golfergolfer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PCModderMike*
> 
> I used a small Nikon bag like this when I first got my camera.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Good little shoulder bag IMO. But definitely not going to be holding a laptop or any books like you had asked about in your 1st post.


hmm it looks like a good little shoulder bag but sadly (below)
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> As you indicated in your own response, not only does it not hold everything he wants to hold, but it's basically the opposite of stealthy -- it has the name of a major camera manufacturer on the outside of the bag.


This
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> The problem is that if you want to leave a 70-200 attached, it really narrows down how small and discrete the bag can be.


I guess this is true. I am just being really really picky with it







Too Picky? I guess I would need something at least big enough for 3.8 in. (98 mm) x 5.2 in. (131.5 mm) (nikon 14-24mm) attached then perhaps hold the 70-200. Does that make it any easier though?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> Tenba Insert
> 
> use some random shoulder bag....but it does get heavy.


Hmm This could work out really well. I am going to see if there are any other models









Thanks for the help everyone I am going to take a look at the Tenba Inserts and would it be easier to find a bag that can house an attached Nikon 14-24mm (3.8 in. (98 mm) x 5.2 in. (131.5 mm)) and a 70-200mm?


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Sorry, not sure if you said you were looking for a shoulder bag or a backpack. But I have the Flipside Sport 10L and it works very well with my 7100 and 70-200mm attached. The Flipside 200 is pretty much the same thing as well.

Cheers


----------



## sub50hz

The thing I've learned from owning a butt ton of camera bags is that you REALLY have to know what your everyday carry will be -- don't be afraid to have 2 bags, something you can take as a daily driver and something else large enough for trips. If you buy too big for a daily bag, you'll regret it very quickly. I am pretty minimalist as far as what I carry around (usually just the Xpro and 35/1.4 plus the X100 if I'm working on a specific project that requires it) so medium-sized sling bags are an awesome mix of space and functionality for me. They're also way more comfortable than shoulder bags, and I really like Incase bags because their strap system is super fast and secure, and the smaller DSLR sling _can and will_ fit both Fujis and my D7000 with grip and 11-18 attached, with room for a tablet (the 13" rMBP is a really tight fit when loaded to the max like that). It's got tripod straps I never use, and the color is so neutral that it never catches anyone's eye.

http://goincase.com/shop/incase-dslr-pro-sling-pack

I also own the larger Incase sling, and have the Ari sling on the way. I have too many bags.


----------



## PCModderMike

Out of the few bags posted over the last several pages. ^That's a sling I could use for sure. Ordering that right now...+rep .


----------



## golfergolfer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> The thing I've learned from owning a butt ton of camera bags is that you REALLY have to know what your everyday carry will be -- don't be afraid to have 2 bags, something you can take as a daily driver and something else large enough for trips. If you buy too big for a daily bag, you'll regret it very quickly. I am pretty minimalist as far as what I carry around (usually just the Xpro and 35/1.4 plus the X100 if I'm working on a specific project that requires it) so medium-sized sling bags are an awesome mix of space and functionality for me. They're also way more comfortable than shoulder bags, and I really like Incase bags because their strap system is super fast and secure, and the smaller DSLR sling _can and will_ fit both Fujis and my D7000 with grip and 11-18 attached, with room for a tablet (the 13" rMBP is a really tight fit when loaded to the max like that). It's got tripod straps I never use, and the color is so neutral that it never catches anyone's eye.
> 
> http://goincase.com/shop/incase-dslr-pro-sling-pack
> 
> I also own the larger Incase sling, and have the Ari sling on the way. I have too many bags.


I hear what you mean bout knowing what you carry everyday. For me when I go out I would want to be able to carry at least my D7100 with 14-24mm and 70-200mm. And then have an extra pocket for some small things. I dont want something too big but just big enough for that. It would be nice if it had room for a laptop of 14 inches so that if I travel I can carry my camera, laptop and maybe a book. I am taking a look at the larger sling bag from them the DSLR Pro Sling but is it REALLY big? You mentioned you have it? (Maybe wanna sell it







) That said the Ari bag looks really nice if it was small enough I could see laying down the camera with the 70-200 attached and sliding the 14-24 in at the end of it. When you get it drop a word here to let us know what you think of it








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PCModderMike*
> 
> Out of the few bags posted over the last several pages. ^That's a sling I could use for sure. Ordering that right now...+rep .


This, So far I am most interested in this bag!

Thanks so much for the help everyone! I really really appreciate it! Rep+ Given to some helpers


----------



## sub50hz

The larger sling isnt gigantic by any means, but it holds a LOT of gear, plus it has room for a 15" laptop. It easily fits the Xpro, X100, the GA645i, film, the gripped D7k and 4 lenses, with room to spare. Its a really efficient use of space, in my opinion.


----------



## Conspiracy

Yay new lens


----------



## Dream Killer

i'm confused. you either don't know how to rotate a photo or left it as is because it's readable anyway.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *golfergolfer*
> 
> Thanks for the help everyone I am going to take a look at the Tenba Inserts and would it be easier to find a bag that can house an attached Nikon 14-24mm (3.8 in. (98 mm) x 5.2 in. (131.5 mm)) and a 70-200mm?


you can fit both those lenses in the insert.

i carry a 24-70, 70-200 and a prime in mine all the time. the 70-200 does makes the body rest above the sleeve, so i dont know if you are worried about that.


----------



## golfergolfer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> you can fit both those lenses in the insert.
> 
> i carry a 24-70, 70-200 and a prime in mine all the time. the 70-200 does makes the body rest above the sleeve, so i dont know if you are worried about that.


hmm that is good then I really like the idea of the sleeve I have a backpack at home that might be able to fit it in then I could carry it all around. On another note I made the following (should be to scale) of the DSLR Sling Pack and Ari Marcopoulos Bag from Incase. These are both the ideal layouts for me and my gear. I dont know if the scales are right or not but I gave it my best shot. If anyone could confirm the fit of the below pictures that would be great!





EDIT: Just relized the second one must be off. Unless the Ari uses MASSIVE zippers it is wrong lol

SECOND EDIT: Nope it should be right just guess it has massive zippers


----------



## sub50hz

I PM'd you regarding the size. The Ari isn't that much larger.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> i'm confused. you either don't know how to rotate a photo or left it as is because it's readable anyway.


My smart phone be dumb as heck yo. Even if i rotate in phone it posts sideways


----------



## Marin

DSLR is a 5DMKII for comparison.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> DSLR is a 5DMKII for comparison.


looks sexy.

not you... the cameras lol


----------



## [PWN]Schubie

Really?
I don't know, Marin is a pretty attractive dude


----------



## nuclearjock

So size really matters?


----------



## Conspiracy

if it was a super deep hipster v-neck then i would be in total agreement hahahahahahaha


----------



## nvidiaftw12

When it comes to sensors, yeah.


----------



## dudemanppl

Why is everybody suddenly back...


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Why is everybody suddenly back...


Half naked sensors.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Why is everybody suddenly back...
> 
> 
> 
> Half naked sensors.
Click to expand...

THIS









lol


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Half naked sensors.


thats full frontal nudity....


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Half naked sensors.
> 
> 
> 
> thats full frontal nudity....
Click to expand...

Front, but no back side.


----------



## Conspiracy

in 8 hours i will be watching the final return of Breaking Bad. This day needs to speed up... i have popcorn to pop and beer and junk food to eat at 9pm tonight!


----------



## Squeeker The Cat

in no way can i compare my photo to that sexxxy sensor sizing in the last few posts, however here are a few for your viewing pleasure................

i was drinking tea in the kitchen.......when one of my cats starts going INSANE in the window..

i look over and see this huge a$$ grasshopper on the glass.

ill admit, NOT the best photos.......but its all i got before he flew off. the pics also show my dirty glass too LOL

what do you guys think?


----------



## Jixr

Over the weekend I bought a cheap green screen ( muslin fabric ) and there are stains on it ( water spots or something? ) any ideas on what I can try to clean it? everything i've read says to not put them in the wash.


----------



## groundzero9

Just sent back the Lowepro Transit 350 bag. It's a really nice bag in terms of quality and layout, but it's too big for my purposes. The pictures online don't really show quite how deep the pack is. I'm going to try the 250 instead to see if it's a more snug fit. Seems hard to find a backpack with side access that'll fit a full-size DSLR, a couple lenses, filters, and that has a separate compartment for non-camera stuff.


----------



## Squeeker The Cat

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *groundzero9*
> 
> Just sent back the Lowepro Transit 350 bag. It's a really nice bag in terms of quality and layout, but it's too big for my purposes. The pictures online don't really show quite how deep the pack is. I'm going to try the 250 instead to see if it's a more snug fit. Seems hard to find a backpack with side access that'll fit a full-size DSLR, a couple lenses, filters, and that has a separate compartment for non-camera stuff.


might wanna look into some of these bags...................they have a few that are side access, with ipad/netbook pockets on top or some that are even on the "back" part of the pack

http://www.kata-bags.us/multipro-120-pl-backpack?tab=presentation


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> Over the weekend I bought a cheap green screen ( muslin fabric ) and there are stains on it ( water spots or something? ) any ideas on what I can try to clean it? everything i've read says to not put them in the wash.


Muslin is washable, it's just that it might not be durable enough for machine washing. Just get some Woolite or Dr Bronner's and handwash it. Hang it to dry and it should be fine.


----------



## Jixr

Thats good. Its only a 5'x7' section ( that rolls up in a projector screen like housing ) so I gotta figure out how to take it apart first.

Maybe I'll just get some oxyclean and fill the washer and let is soak, then let it air dry?


----------



## groundzero9

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Squeeker The Cat*
> 
> might wanna look into some of these bags...................they have a few that are side access, with ipad/netbook pockets on top or some that are even on the "back" part of the pack
> 
> http://www.kata-bags.us/multipro-120-pl-backpack?tab=presentation


Those aren't quite what I'm looking for, but I did find the DL-3N1-20. It seems a bit bigger than I need though. Problem is I can't really find any user photos or videos of the smaller DL-3N1-10 for comparison. Mainly what I'm trying to fit is a D600, 16-35mm, 200mm macro, 50mm, charger, plus filters (polarizer, ND, and a rectangular grad ND + mount).


----------



## theturbofd

Hey guys my best friend has came to me and ask if I can take some portrait photos of his child for her first B-day. He knows I'm really new to photography so he asked me to do it at a park since he knows I don't have anything like lights and all that stuff for indoor photography. I tried to turn him down but he said he doesn't mind how they come out as long as I just try. I've never done portrait photography so I have no clue on where to begin. Help would be greatly appreciated!
My equipment
Canon T4i
18-55mm lens
50mm f/ 1.8 lens A cheap polaroid tripod


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *theturbofd*
> 
> Hey guys my best friend has came to me and ask if I can take some portrait photos of his child for her first B-day. He knows I'm really new to photography so he asked me to do it at a park since he knows I don't have anything like lights and all that stuff for indoor photography. I tried to turn him down but he said he doesn't mind how they come out as long as I just try. I've never done portrait photography so I have no clue on where to begin. Help would be greatly appreciated!
> My equipment
> Canon T4i
> 18-55mm lens
> 50mm f/ 1.8 lens A cheap polaroid tripod


http://digital-photography-school.com/how-to-photograph-children

Use the 50mm or the 18-55 @ 55mm.
Set aperture to f/4-f/5.6
Keep ISO setting under 800
Make your shutter is at least 1/125th of a second, faster the better.
Change the metering mode to spot metering
Focus on the eyes (I usually do counterpoint focus on an eyeball and adjust the framing a little for better composition)

You should be good to go from there. Just a headshot is easy.


----------



## Jixr

use the 50mm f2.8 and don't worry about using Auto mode, take as many photos as you can and if youre lucky a few of them will turn out decently.


----------



## theturbofd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> http://digital-photography-school.com/how-to-photograph-children
> 
> Use the 50mm or the 18-55 @ 55mm.
> Set aperture to f/4-f/5.6
> Keep ISO setting under 800
> Make your shutter is at least 1/125th of a second, faster the better.
> Change the metering mode to spot metering
> Focus on the eyes (I usually do counterpoint focus on an eyeball and adjust the framing a little for better composition)
> 
> You should be good to go from there. Just a headshot is easy.


Great info! but I have no idea how to do any post processing :/ Should I just give them the stock photo? I really don't know how to touch up photos but since it will be a hot summer day I was thinking of maybe giving a warm look to it?


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *theturbofd*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> http://digital-photography-school.com/how-to-photograph-children
> 
> Use the 50mm or the 18-55 @ 55mm.
> Set aperture to f/4-f/5.6
> Keep ISO setting under 800
> Make your shutter is at least 1/125th of a second, faster the better.
> Change the metering mode to spot metering
> Focus on the eyes (I usually do counterpoint focus on an eyeball and adjust the framing a little for better composition)
> 
> You should be good to go from there. Just a headshot is easy.
> 
> 
> 
> Great info! but I have no idea how to do any post processing :/ Should I just give them the stock photo? I really don't know how to touch up photos but since it will be a hot summer day I was thinking of maybe giving a warm look to it?
Click to expand...

Check out adobe lightroom. You can get a 30day free trial. Easy to use and fast for lots of edits.


----------



## Blaze0303

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Check out adobe lightroom. You can get a 30day free trial. Easy to use and fast for lots of edits.


I second this, lightroom is awesome.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> Thats good. Its only a 5'x7' section ( that rolls up in a projector screen like housing ) so I gotta figure out how to take it apart first.
> 
> Maybe I'll just get some oxyclean and fill the washer and let is soak, then let it air dry?


I wouldn't use OxyClean--it's a bit too aggressive especially if you're just trying to get rid of water spots and other light stains. Also, it's best if you wash it in a clean basin/utility sink or in your bathtub, actually. Make sure whatever you use is clean, though!


----------



## Jixr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> I wouldn't use OxyClean--it's a bit too aggressive especially if you're just trying to get rid of water spots and other light stains. Also, it's best if you wash it in a clean basin/utility sink or in your bathtub, actually. Make sure whatever you use is clean, though!


well, I ended up washing it and it looks nice, but now I cant get it back in the roll up stand. Oh well, I'll just pin the cloth to a wall or something. Only paid $30 for it anyway.


----------



## Curleyyy

I'm kinda new to the field of photography, and I'm looking at purchasing some equipment as I am wanting to expand - the priorities are land and cityscapes, and local concerts/gigs. If you go to my photo page, you'll notice that I have to use a high ISO to combat for a faster shutter speed, which results in grainy images, so I'm wanting to get a f1.8 or something, I'm not sure which number would actually be good, and if possible a wider lens, as 18mm doesn't seem to practical for gigs at times.

Also looking for a tripod and flash, which I have no idea about either - I'll be shooting my friends formal in November.
My current camera is a Canon 1100D (entry level I know)
I'd like to spend as little as possible, and any help is appreciated <33


----------



## Blaze0303

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Curleyyy*
> 
> I'm kinda new to the field of photography, and I'm looking at purchasing some equipment as I am wanting to expand - the priorities are land and cityscapes, and local concerts/gigs. If you go to my photo page, you'll notice that I have to use a high ISO to combat for a faster shutter speed, which results in grainy images, so I'm wanting to get a f1.8 or something, I'm not sure which number would actually be good, and if possible a wider lens, as 18mm doesn't seem to practical for gigs at times.
> 
> Also looking for a tripod and flash, which I have no idea about either - I'll be shooting my friends formal in November.
> My current camera is a Canon 1100D (entry level I know)
> I'd like to spend as little as possible, and any help is appreciated <33


Canon nifty fifty?

http://www.amazon.com/Canon-50mm-1-8-Camera-Lens/dp/B00007E7JU/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1376918718&sr=8-1&keywords=canon+50mm+1.8


----------



## theturbofd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Blaze0303*
> 
> Canon nifty fifty?
> 
> http://www.amazon.com/Canon-50mm-1-8-Camera-Lens/dp/B00007E7JU/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1376918718&sr=8-1&keywords=canon+50mm+1.8


This^ just got this a couple of weeks ago and I fell in love with it. Especially at that price.


----------



## dmanstasiu

I read every post but i find myself lost most of the time.


----------



## laboitenoire

Looking at your work (which I kinda dig, by the way), I'd say your best bets would be the Canon 35 f/2 or the Sigma 30 f/1.4. You seem to really like the 35 mm focal length on your zoom lens for your concert photography, so that'd probably be perfect. Plus, I'd recommend setting your camera to shutter priority for your concert work. Turn on auto ISO, and then set whatever shutter speed you need in order to keep everything steady.

While it is grainy, ISO 6400 definitely looks usable on your camera.


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Curleyyy*
> 
> I'm kinda new to the field of photography, and I'm looking at purchasing some equipment as I am wanting to expand - the priorities are land and cityscapes, and local concerts/gigs. If you go to my photo page, you'll notice that I have to use a high ISO to combat for a faster shutter speed, which results in grainy images, so I'm wanting to get a f1.8 or something, I'm not sure which number would actually be good, and if possible a wider lens, as 18mm doesn't seem to practical for gigs at times.
> 
> Also looking for a tripod and flash, which I have no idea about either - I'll be shooting my friends formal in November.
> My current camera is a Canon 1100D (entry level I know)
> I'd like to spend as little as possible, and any help is appreciated <33


a tripod will definitely help for those cityscape shots

like the others said .. the nifty fifty should be a good upgrade
for the flash .. have a look at yongnuo's .. chinese brand but its good enough , cheapest 3rd party flash with iTTL afaik

check the YN468 or the YN565ex
YN568 supports high speed sync


----------



## PCModderMike

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dmanstasiu*
> 
> I read every post but i find myself lost most of the time.











Right there with ya


----------



## funfortehfun

I'm looking at a $150 Nikon 300mm f/4 AF (not AF-S or f/4D) for my D90. Thoughts?


----------



## golfergolfer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *groundzero9*
> 
> Just sent back the Lowepro Transit 350 bag. It's a really nice bag in terms of quality and layout, but it's too big for my purposes. The pictures online don't really show quite how deep the pack is. I'm going to try the 250 instead to see if it's a more snug fit. Seems hard to find a backpack with side access that'll fit a full-size DSLR, a couple lenses, filters, and that has a separate compartment for non-camera stuff.


Not sure if you have bought that bag yet but I picked one up thinking it would be what I wanted as it turns out I really did not like using it lol. I dont know if anyone remembers bout about two weeks ago now or so I was in a big search for the perfect bag for myself. I tried using the Transit Sling and while it is a good bag if you plan on using it with a 70-200mm f2.8 attached like I did, it becomes very hard to take in and out of the bag and that little holder piece is too small for the lens making it really hard to pull in and out. It is still possible but it is so snug it changes my switches on the lens almost every time and if you wanted to leave your hood attached to the lens you can forget that too lol. If you use it with a shorter lens and use the quick access pocket then it is not a bad bag. I just didnt like the fact of the way I had to pull the camera out and it was quite hard to change lenses too unless you had some help from someone.

It isnt what your looking for but this is kind of to conclude my search if anyone cares







if you dont, you dont have to read any of this lol.

I ended up getting the Lowepro Event Messenger 150. I like this bag because it is small and quite low profile, also it doesnt really look much like a camera bag rather it just looks like a sling as it has minimal branding and what not. I just got this bag so havent been able to take it out shooting but so far it seems quite nice. I would have preferred to find a sling bag that I could fit a 70-200 f2.8 attached but then it would have been too big for my liking. So I settled for this and it stores my 70-200, D7100 with attached 14-24, and then my speedlight in the side of it. It is a comfortable yet snug fit. but so far I would highly recommend it if anyone is looking for a bag









@funfortehfun - I dont know really anything about that lens


----------



## groundzero9

Thanks for the input. I actually went with a Kata DL-3N1-20. I was able to find a local place that carries Kata and looked at the 3N1-10 there, the smaller version. I liked the layout but had to go with the slightly bigger version so my D600 could fit with 16-35 attached.

@Curleyyy: Careful with a 50mm on a 1.6x body. I found myself always trying to back up with a 50mm on a crop body. A 35mm lens might be a better choice, unless you want the zoom.


----------



## sub50hz

My Kata 3n1-30 is my road trip bag -- it's awesome. I can even fit my RB in the top section, which is pretty awesome.

edit: 2 x awesome =


----------



## Jixr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *groundzero9*
> 
> @Curleyyy: Careful with a 50mm on a 1.6x body. I found myself always trying to back up with a 50mm on a crop body. A 35mm lens might be a better choice, unless you want the zoom.


Though a cheap 35mm prime is still a bit more than the 50, I would recomend the 40mm pancake, only $150 new and is sharper than the 50 ( which i personally find useless wider than 2.8 ) and is useable indoors. Unless i'm in low light or trying to capture a fast object without caring about it being sharp, i'll always grab my 40 before the 50

i REALLY want the 22mm prime, which puts a crop body right at 35mm, but its an expensive lens









Needless to say, i'm still looking for a cheap >35mm prime, as I hate zooms.


----------



## DarthBaggins

I have a Canon XSi (450D)
Thrifty 50mm (50mm f/1.8)
28-90mm f/3.5

Also have my good old reliable:
Canon AE-1 (circa 1980)
28mm
50mm


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *groundzero9*
> 
> Thanks for the input. I actually went with a Kata DL-3N1-20. I was able to find a local place that carries Kata and looked at the 3N1-10 there, the smaller version. I liked the layout but had to go with the slightly bigger version so my D600 could fit with 16-35 attached.


good choice!
i have the 3n1-22, i dont have a netbook, but the extra compartment is useful for random stuff like power cords & an extra shirt


----------



## Raf Leung

Hey guys, im new to camera and all these kind of stuff, but i want to buy a camera for mainly recording videos for youtube, i record videos mostly like unboxing videos and maybe some worklog videos, I only have around 500 AUD budget, i also want it to be able to have a mic in put so that i can put it a better quality mic, do you guys think i should get a camera? or a video camera?
thanks guys


----------



## S3ason

I'm not a video guy, but a cheap DSLR should do the job. Anything that does 1080p at 30 or so fps will be fine. I could be totally be wrong there, but like i said im not a video guy.

External mic hookup is a must, I've herd rode makes decent mics at good prices. A cheap prime lens should be in your budget as well. A tripod is important for unboxing as well, unless you like stacking boxes and trying to get your camera angle just right with a tshirt or pillow.


----------



## PCModderMike

I was going to say something similar..."I'm not a video guy" etc etc....but I was going to go the other way and say if you're mainly going to be recording video, you should buy an actual video camera. Beyond that, as in which brand or model, not very familiar with it at all.

Also, picked up a new lens to play with.


----------



## golfergolfer

Sadly I cannot help at all with video I dont know the first thing about it









@ PCModderMike - That looks like quite a nice lens :3

@ anyone else - What kind of SD cards do you use? I am kinda in the market for a new one as I have a 16 GB class 10 of sorts but I am finding with the new camera I am running out of space sometimes lol. Is there any kind that you would recommend? I heard that the Hoodman RAW Steel were good but they seem pricey? I am looking for a 32 GB card.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

I got a $20 32gb team UH1 one. Worked fine so far.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *golfergolfer*
> 
> Sadly I cannot help at all with video I dont know the first thing about it
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> @ PCModderMike - That looks like quite a nice lens :3
> 
> @ anyone else - What kind of SD cards do you use? I am kinda in the market for a new one as I have a 16 GB class 10 of sorts but I am finding with the new camera I am running out of space sometimes lol. Is there any kind that you would recommend? I heard that the Hoodman RAW Steel were good but they seem pricey? I am looking for a 32 GB card.


http://www.amazon.com/dp/B007M54E1M


----------



## groundzero9

I use the same ones that Sean linked. I once shelled out the extra money for the Extreme Pro 95/90 but can't notice any difference between the two.


----------



## golfergolfer

hmm well looking at Bestbuy (most likely where I would buy due to convenience) they have a:

Lexar Professional 32GB Class 10 SDHC Memory Card on sale for $39.99

VS

Sandisk Extreme 32GB Class 10 SDHC Memory Card for $59.99

While the amazon one is $29 I am in Canada and it would cost me $42 (so stupid that way -.- )

Any thoughts on the Lexar? It says its faster but is it a good card too?


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Probably fine. Like said, I got this cheap $20 one and it works great. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820313167

E: Actually, that is the class 10, I guess they removed the class uhs-1?


----------



## Sean Webster

those lexar are crap. I had two 32GB versions of them and they were slow as balls.

Why not just buy via amazon and wait a few days? Save $.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Raf Leung*
> 
> Hey guys, im new to camera and all these kind of stuff, but i want to buy a camera for mainly recording videos for youtube, i record videos mostly like unboxing videos and maybe some worklog videos, I only have around 500 AUD budget, i also want it to be able to have a mic in put so that i can put it a better quality mic, do you guys think i should get a camera? or a video camera?
> thanks guys


im a video guy. in my opinion you should buy a cheap camcorder and tripod and call it a day.

sony and canon make the best camcorders honestly. i wouldnt consider any other brand for that purpose. both companies make them with 1/8" stereo audio input and headphone outputs. depending on the mic you may need adapters. I highly suggest just recording audio externally for the highest quality possible although that doesnt always work best for every job


----------



## Curleyyy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *groundzero9*
> 
> @Curleyyy: Careful with a 50mm on a 1.6x body. I found myself always trying to back up with a 50mm on a crop body. A 35mm lens might be a better choice, unless you want the zoom.


Even when I use 18mm I'm finding that I back up a little as well, rather annoying tbh and I've come across a few lenses that have taken my eye, but unsure as of yet. For the flash, (at this point) I'm deciding between the Canon 430ex ii, or the Sigma ef-610 (open to ideas on others though)


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *golfergolfer*
> 
> hmm well looking at Bestbuy (most likely where I would buy due to convenience) they have a:
> 
> Lexar Professional 32GB Class 10 SDHC Memory Card on sale for $39.99
> 
> VS
> 
> Sandisk Extreme 32GB Class 10 SDHC Memory Card for $59.99
> 
> While the amazon one is $29 I am in Canada and it would cost me $42 (so stupid that way -.- )
> 
> Any thoughts on the Lexar? It says its faster but is it a good card too?


I've been using Lexar for some time now and I've had a good experience. They're the only other brand besides Sandisk I'll buy...

Also, and this is more personal preference, but I tend to stick to 16 gig cards. Reason being if you get a bad card it's much less devastating if it's only a 16 versus a 32...


----------



## PCModderMike

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> those lexar are crap. I had two 32GB versions of them and they *were slow as balls.*
> 
> Why not just buy via amazon and wait a few days? Save $.


That's a good way to describe it. I'm still using the original 16GB card that came with my camera, been itching for something else. That SanDisk card is where it's at.


----------



## Azefore

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PCModderMike*
> 
> I was going to say something similar..."I'm not a video guy" etc etc....but I was going to go the other way and say if you're mainly going to be recording video, you should buy an actual video camera. Beyond that, as in which brand or model, not very familiar with it at all.
> 
> Also, picked up a new lens to play with.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


Excellent pick for the price, I got the APO version for my first after market lens. Only downfall is the minimum focusing distance in macro mode but other than that you can't go wrong. Should enjoy









+1 for SanDisk SDHCs, I went for the 16/32gbs extreme models and never looked back. I do however use 2x32gb Lexar 1000x CF cards for the D800 and love those a tad more but nowhere near the same price point.


----------



## Conspiracy

adorama says they started shipping the 70D. wonder how they managed to be allowed to do that when the camera isnt supposed to be available until next month according to canon


----------



## S3ason

Digitalrev shows them as 'in stock' as well. Don't know if that means they are shipping or if it just means their taking preorders...


----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> adorama says they started shipping the 70D. wonder how they managed to be allowed to do that when the camera isnt supposed to be available until next month according to canon


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *S3ason*
> 
> Digitalrev shows them as 'in stock' as well. Don't know if that means they are shipping or if it just means their taking preorders...


This reminds me of the Windows 8 computers that started shipping too early at some stores


----------



## Conspiracy

researching cars to replace my olde 95 ford taurus. looking at IIHS stuff and whatnot but looking for places to do other research.

im looking at moderately priced 4door cars. considering VW jetta, nissan altima, toyota camry, honda, ford, etc. nothing extravagant just a safe reliable car to drive where i need to go

with the exception of sub50hz and dreamkiller what do the rest of yall drive since these two hipsters ride bikes everywhere







and my job is too far away for a bike ride


----------



## sub50hz

Focus SVT 5-door. Done.


----------



## MistaBernie

I know this flies in the face of everything I've ever said about 'don't go by bad reviews on the internet, they're usually louder and more opinionated than people who had no problems at all', but I've had problems with both of my 16gb Lexar Platinum II (200x) cards. Both cards I own in the last month have at one point become corrupted and I had to format them and try to rescue via RescuePro (successfully except for one image out of ~350). Never had it happen with the Sandisks, so I've stopped using the Lexars for paid gigs.


----------



## sub50hz

I use cheapo Microcenter-branded cards, and have NEVER run into a single issue with them. They're just rebrands of something else, obviously, but they're like 7 bucks for 16GB, so if I misplace one or corrupt one it's not a huge deal -- I shoot with redundancy in the D7000 and I pull shots from both Fujis regularly, so I'm not too worried.


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> researching cars to replace my olde 95 ford taurus. looking at IIHS stuff and whatnot but looking for places to do other research.
> 
> im looking at moderately priced 4door cars. considering VW jetta, nissan altima, toyota camry, honda, ford, etc. nothing extravagant just a safe reliable car to drive where i need to go
> 
> with the exception of sub50hz and dreamkiller what do the rest of yall drive since these two hipsters ride bikes everywhere
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and my job is too far away for a bike ride


Nissan S13 for mad doritos.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> researching cars to replace my olde 95 ford taurus. looking at IIHS stuff and whatnot but looking for places to do other research.
> 
> im looking at moderately priced 4door cars. considering VW jetta, nissan altima, toyota camry, honda, ford, etc. nothing extravagant just a safe reliable car to drive where i need to go
> 
> with the exception of sub50hz and dreamkiller what do the rest of yall drive since these two hipsters ride bikes everywhere
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and my job is too far away for a bike ride


if u just need a commuter, honda fit ev. 259 lease includes collusion insurance, charging station, maintence and road side assistance.

down side is you get only about 80 miles on a charge and its a lease, and its in select markets....
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aksthem1*
> 
> Nissan S13 for mad doritos.


that is not a 4 door, safe or reliable.....


----------



## sub50hz

A Honda Element might be a good choice, too -- lots of room for hauling stuff, drives like a car and they run forever. Kinda pricey in some markets, but they are AWESOME.


----------



## DarthBaggins

Element is crap, from a mechanics perspective. Commuter I would go w/ the Fit, Civic, Corolla, Golf/GTI (in TDi model), Jetta TDi also (average hwy is around 45-50mpgs and around town is 30+.


----------



## Jixr

Cant go wrong with a VW, according to passatworld.com, I have the most miles on my car of any user there 376k and climbing!


----------



## PCModderMike

I'm having the hardest time remembering...and my Google skills are failing me. But someone posted a site a few months ago, in response to a question I had about speedlights, how to use them, different methods for syncing them, etc...do you guys recall what site that was again?


----------



## Marin

Cause OCN has a no boobies rule even if it's art hit my up on Steam to see what I've been working on.









http://steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561197993153831/

PS - I won't add you if I don't recognize your username.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DarthBaggins*
> 
> Element is crap, from a mechanics perspective. Commuter I would go w/ the Fit, Civic, Corolla, Golf/GTI (in TDi model), Jetta TDi also (average hwy is around 45-50mpgs and around town is 30+.


im a bit interested on why you say the element is crap mechanically....its basically a lifted, stretched civic with an iron block....

ive had nothing but bad experiences with VW (electrical), but they were the old 80s 90s hatch backs....so things might have changed


----------



## golfergolfer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> I know this flies in the face of everything I've ever said about 'don't go by bad reviews on the internet, they're usually louder and more opinionated than people who had no problems at all', but I've had problems with both of my 16gb Lexar Platinum II (200x) cards. Both cards I own in the last month have at one point become corrupted and I had to format them and try to rescue via RescuePro (successfully except for one image out of ~350). Never had it happen with the Sandisks, so I've stopped using the Lexars for paid gigs.


I think I am going to try and pick up a Sandisk my self there are quite a few people who like them by the sounds of it and other are saying lexar are no good lol.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PCModderMike*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm having the hardest time remembering...and my Google skills are failing me. But someone posted a site a few months ago, in response to a question I had about speedlights, how to use them, different methods for syncing them, etc...do you guys recall what site that was again?


Is this it?
Strobist: Lighting 101

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> Cause OCN has a no boobies rule even if it's art hit my up on Steam to see what I've been working on.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561197993153831/
> 
> PS - I won't add you if I don't recognize your username.


Your steam username is awesome


----------



## PCModderMike

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *golfergolfer*
> 
> Is this it?
> Strobist: Lighting 101


That's it! Thanks. +rep


----------



## DarthBaggins

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> im a bit interested on why you say the element is crap mechanically....its basically a lifted, stretched civic with an iron block....
> 
> ive had nothing but bad experiences with VW (electrical), but they were the old 80s 90s hatch backs....so things might have changed


Alot has changed w/ VW/Audi especially when it comes to their Diesel Line-up. Element is not a commuter vehicle as the motor is underpowered to pull the chassis it's been dropped into, sure if it had the K23 from the RDX then it would be a better vehicle over-all. But if anything goes out, starter/alternator/ etc., plan on spending quite a bit of money to get them fixed. Pretty much the only 4cyl I've worked on the intake manifold has to be removed to swap the starter. Also seen issues w/ the EVAP systems due to debris hitting the main canister since Honda didn't shield it properly (need it to pass state inspections). Being an Automotive tech isn't a hobby for me it's my career so I see alot. i can tell you really to stay away from any US domestic manufacturer unless you're buying a truck even then I'd recommend Toyota on that end.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DarthBaggins*
> 
> Alot has changed w/ VW/Audi especially when it comes to their Diesel Line-up. Element is not a commuter vehicle as the motor is underpowered to pull the chassis it's been dropped into, sure if it had the K23 from the RDX then it would be a better vehicle over-all. But if anything goes out, starter/alternator/ etc., plan on spending quite a bit of money to get them fixed. Pretty much the only 4cyl I've worked on the intake manifold has to be removed to swap the starter. Also seen issues w/ the EVAP systems due to debris hitting the main canister since Honda didn't shield it properly (need it to pass state inspections). Being an Automotive tech isn't a hobby for me it's my career so I see alot. i can tell you really to stay away from any US domestic manufacturer unless you're buying a truck even then I'd recommend Toyota on that end.


good to know.


----------



## Jixr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DarthBaggins*
> 
> stay away from any US domestic manufacturer unless you're buying a truck even then I'd recommend Toyota on that end.


Sad times indeed. If i were going car shopping today, there is not a single american brand car I would even consider.


----------



## Marin

Tesla S.


----------



## Sean Webster

BMW 335i w/ performance tune. Best commuter ever.

Sadly, I drive a 99 civic hatchback atm...







Getting a motorcycle soon tho.


----------



## cavallino

I've actually been leaving my DSLR at home when going to car shows and using my Samsung S4 GPE. Although it's sometimes a little narrow for cars I think it is helping to create a better composition by seeing it on a large screen. Although I have had a couple DSLR's I don't think my photo abilities were quite good enough to really take advantage of it yet.


----------



## DarthBaggins

Unless I'm processing photos or charging the batteries my camera stays in my truck, but most of the time its faster to use my phone's camera (HTC 8x)


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Jetta tdi all the way. Love turbo diesels.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DarthBaggins*
> 
> Fit, Civic, Corolla, Golf/GTI (in TDi model), Jetta TDi


thanks for all the suggestions yall. these are pretty much my main cars im looking at right now. ill probably go test them out on an off day and narrow it down based on how i like them. im pretty big on making sure there are no major blind spots, i like my current car because when i drive alone nothing blocks my view from any angle


----------



## Azefore

350z here, but the Fit and Golf/GTI will probably be your best buy out of the ones you've listed. Nothing like a good decent hatchback.


----------



## Marin

Some of you have now seen boobies.


----------



## PCModderMike




----------



## Marin

Samys has Lunar in stock and I finally got around to trying out the H5D. Lunars super lightweight and just like Leica's Panasonic rebrands the Hasselblads exactly the same with Sony. Just they put more effort into it and redesigned the exterior instead of putting a badge on it.

Also the H5D is neat but you have to buy extra like the tripod mount. If they want to lose more marketshare that's fine though, there's a reason everyone uses Phase One.


----------



## PCModderMike

English?


Although Google did help somewhat....where in the world did you get your hands on an H5D?


----------



## Marin

Samy's.


----------



## PCModderMike

Samy's?


----------



## Marin

Yes.


----------



## mz-n10

hasselblad should have at least bundled a better lens for the lunar......for 5000 you get the exact same kit lens as a 300 dollar nex3, at least match the colors between the lens and the body.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> hasselblad should have at least bundled a better lens for the lunar......for 5000 you get the exact same kit lens as a 300 dollar nex3.


You get nice wooden handles though.


----------



## scottath

So i invaded NZ in July as some of you know. Here is the final set on Flickr.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/scottath/sets/72157635267084822/


----------



## laboitenoire

Very pretty! Now you're making me jealous as I've always wanted to go to NZ...


----------



## Conspiracy

new addition to my collection that was previously owned by my grandfather

35mm Argus rangefinder

http://www.flickr.com/photos/br1an_r/9612891558/
Argus 35mm rangefinder by brian_roberts, on Flickr


----------



## groundzero9

When it comes to Graduated ND, Cokin or Lee? I know Lee's product is higher quality but the $100 Cokin set is hard to resist when Lee comes out to $256. Anyone have first hand experience with them?


----------



## scottath

Owned Cokin P sized, Singh-Ray filters and most recently Lee's.
If your serious about it - buy the Lee's - do it right the first time.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scottath*
> 
> So i invaded NZ in July as some of you know. Here is the final set on Flickr.
> 
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/scottath/sets/72157635267084822/


You're a *****.



Crop the right side off plz.


----------



## DarthBaggins

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> You're a *****.
> 
> 
> 
> Crop the right side off plz.


Actually it works the way it is. The subject of the lighthouse is just off center for it to work.


----------



## scottath

Both ways works.
Ill be cropping it likely for versions i end up printing though, as its a bit too wide for a nice print (and thus too expensive)


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Those are some fantastic shots, scottath.


----------



## golfergolfer

Hi again everyone I have yet another question lol, this time from a friend of mine.

He is doing alot of off camera flash stuff and was wondering about wireless triggers and what not. He uses nikon and doesnt like how the on camera flash triggers the slave flashes. Any recommendations?


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *golfergolfer*
> 
> Hi again everyone I have yet another question lol, this time from a friend of mine.
> 
> He is doing alot of off camera flash stuff and was wondering about wireless triggers and what not. He uses nikon and doesnt like how the on camera flash triggers the slave flashes. Any recommendations?


well asking about wireless triggers is a step in one ideal situation. what is his budget? there are cheap and expensive triggers


----------



## golfergolfer

it isnt too high but basically what he is looking for is something that isnt too big and bulky will work at a decent range. But other than that very basic needs for off camera flash work. i would say rough budget $300 but that could possibly go either way, more or less.


----------



## PCModderMike

$300 for a speedlight and a trigger? That's plenty. But it sounds like you're just asking about a trigger?
I literally just received this yesterday, I was on a budget and I'm just starting out...it was only $30 off Amazon.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B005IQRMN4/ref=oh_details_o00_s00_i00?ie=UTF8&psc=1
Played with it yesterday, works great so far.


----------



## TheN00bBuilder

Just paid for a Fujifilm Finepix F505EXR on eBay; count me into the club!


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheN00bBuilder*
> 
> Just paid for a Fujifilm Finepix F505EXR on eBay; count me into the club!


sounds good

dont forget to share some of the shots you get


----------



## golfergolfer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PCModderMike*
> 
> $300 for a speedlight and a trigger? That's plenty. But it sounds like you're just asking about a trigger?
> I literally just received this yesterday, I was on a budget and I'm just starting out...it was only $30 off Amazon.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B005IQRMN4/ref=oh_details_o00_s00_i00?ie=UTF8&psc=1
> Played with it yesterday, works great so far.


Ohhh This might be perfect! I guess the price tag was so high because we both only really knew about pocket wizards and they are like $200 a piece or something. I will take a look into this for sure









Thanks


----------



## ikem

actually i would go with the yongnuos.

I just recently got a YN-560III to go with my 603n radios. The 560III has a built in radio that works with the 603n3's and allowed me to work with a 2 light setup with only 2 triggers. The reliability and range of these (along with the build quality) are very good for the price.

Here are my SB-700, YN-560III, and RF-603N3 kit


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ikem*
> 
> actually i would go with the yongnuos.
> 
> I just recently got a YN-560III to go with my 603n radios. The 560III has a built in radio that works with the 603n3's and allowed me to work with a 2 light setup with only 2 triggers. The reliability and range of these (along with the build quality) are very good for the price.
> 
> Here are my SB-700, YN-560III, and RF-603N3 kit


i second this especially for adding extra lights. having lights with built-in transceiver, or at least a receiver cant remember what the 560iii has. but yeah makes life easier. my next light purchase is a yn-560iii without a doubt


----------



## PCModderMike

I bought the the YN-560 II - that's why I just decided to try out the CowboyStudio NPT-04.
Probably should have ponied up the extra $$ though when originally shopping for a speedlight and got the YN-560 III because of it's built in radio...but even though someone mentioned it, I didn't listen.








Still a great solution though IMO.

EDIT: Now that's got me thinking, if I buy a 2nd speedlight should I just get another YN-560 II since the trigger I bought comes with a 2nd receiver already....or does anyone think it would be best to get a YN-560 III?


----------



## S3ason

Less receivers = less time and hassle setting up and fumbling with batteries

I'm so glad I got the 560iii, it's a lot less of a heacache.


----------



## PCModderMike

Cool. It's really that much of a hassle for you though? Personally it seemed like a fairly simple process the day I received it and tested it out with my 560II....attach the trigger to my camera, attached the receiver to the speedlight, done.
I'm not trying to downplay your experiences in anyway, they of course are your personal experiences with it...but just sounds like a slight exaggeration saying it was a headache.


----------



## Conspiracy

its personal preference. less receivers saves time if you are working a job though


----------



## PCModderMike

Ah yes absolutely...as a professional, whatever saves times and is more efficient is definitely the best route.


----------



## S3ason

Here's a runthrough without the built-in reciever:
1. remember to charge batteries for receivers
2. remember to bring the batteries
3. remember to put the batteries in the receiver before attaching the flash (cannot access batteries with flash attached)
4. remember to flip the switch on the receiver (cannot access switch with flash attached)
5. done

Here's a runthrough with the built-in reciever:
1. Turn on flash
2. done.

Am I being dramatic? Yes. Am I lazy? Yes. For me, the $20 difference is worth the reduced confusion, hassle, and reduced chance of errors. For instance, if I forget a AAA battery or the reciever, I'm screwed. No flash.

It also comes in handy when using a softbox. I can only use my 560iii on my softbox because the speedring sits too low on the flash mount. If I had to shove a receiver in the mount as well, it would not fit.


----------



## PCModderMike

Well that's a thorough run down...sounds like you've had that happen way too many times...also sounds like you probably wouldn't remember your head if it wasn't attached to your body?
Haha I'm teasing...couldn't help it though with all of the "remembering" you had to do in your steps. But hey, valid points for sure. Next time, I'm throwing down the extra $ for version III.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *S3ason*
> 
> Here's a runthrough without the built-in reciever:
> 1. remember to charge batteries for receivers
> 2. remember to bring the batteries
> 3. remember to put the batteries in the receiver before attaching the flash (cannot access batteries with flash attached)
> 4. remember to flip the switch on the receiver (cannot access switch with flash attached)
> 5. done
> 
> Here's a runthrough with the built-in reciever:
> 1. Turn on flash
> 2. done.
> 
> Am I being dramatic? Yes. Am I lazy? Yes. For me, the $20 difference is worth the reduced confusion, hassle, and reduced chance of errors. For instance, if I forget a AAA battery or the reciever, I'm screwed. No flash.
> 
> It also comes in handy when using a softbox. I can only use my 560iii on my softbox because the speedring sits too low on the flash mount. If I had to shove a receiver in the mount as well, it would not fit.


excellent points. especially about the softbox


----------



## golfergolfer

hmm Okay the Yongnuo seem quite nice is there a difference between these two? Besides the price?

Yongnuo RF-603N Wireless Flash Trigger / Transciever for Nikon - N3 version - D90/D3100/D5000/D7000 Series

or

Yongnuo RF-603 N3 2.4GHz Wireless Flash Trigger/Wireless Shutter Release Transceiver Kit for Nikon D90/D3100/D5000/D7000

This will in fact work with the D7100 and SB-910?

Also does anyone here use Screen Protectors for the LCD on you camera?


----------



## S3ason

They work great with the D7100, I use those myself. The price on those seems about $10 too high, I got them for $30 a few months ago. Maybe try eBay. They'll work with the sb-910 in slave mode, no TTL which I assume you know.

I don't use a screen protector on my 7100 and it's my baby. I haven't had any issues at all, it seems pretty durable for a plastic cover.

Edit: If you want TTL on the SB-910, get the Yongnuo YN-622N. It's a lot more, but it's the cheapest ttl wireless trigger out there.


----------



## laboitenoire

I only use the hard plastic cover that Nikon included in the box with my D7000, and that's not gotten any damage in the two years I've had it. Just a couple minor scuffs.


----------



## golfergolfer

hmm If I recall I dont think that my D7100 came with one of those :/ I will have to take another look


----------



## S3ason

The D7100 doesn't come with a screen protector, nor do I think they offer one as an accessory. The soft flexible ones are easy to find on eBay and the like.


----------



## golfergolfer

yea there are quite a few variants of soft films that can be bought, I also found these on amazon:

deep-deal LARMOR GGS Self-Adhesive Optical Glass LCD Screen Protector for NIKON D7100

deep-deal GGS III LCD Screen Protector glass for Nikon D7100

They are a little bit more expensive but they might be nicer? perhaps a little more durable


----------



## Blaze0303

Picked up a Sigma 50mm F1.4!!! Woot!


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Blaze0303*
> 
> Picked up a Sigma 50mm F1.4!!! Woot!


great lens. you wont be disappointed


----------



## Tillmander

I would love to join this club.
As of now my gear is: Sony a57
Sony 18-55mm f3.5-5.6 kit lens (Bad i know)
Sony 50mm f1.8
And a lowepro Slingshot 102AW


----------



## DarthBaggins

I love my Canon 50mm (Thrifty 50). but lately have gone back to using my 28-90mm again (no longer in production)


----------



## JKuhn

I'd just like a few opinions on an idea that I got:

My mother has an old Pentax MG with a 50mm f1.2 lens. Would it be worth it to buy an adapter for my Canon EOS 1100D so I can sometimes use that lens (for low light use, I already have a Canon 50mm f1.8)? I'm not sure if I'll be able to do that yet, but I do know the adapter will probably cost me over R500 (so it's more than $50).


----------



## aksthem1

Definitely worth it, but the adapter seems pretty costly for you guys.


----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aksthem1*
> 
> Definitely worth it, but the adapter seems pretty costly for you guys.


That's quite a problem here. It's almost impossible to find any specialized stuff, so I'll probably have to settle for this. And that price doesn't include delivery.


----------



## JKuhn

It seems I made a mistake with that Pentax lens. It's f2 and not f1.2.

Before I go and order the adapter, I'd like to know about another lens. My mother also has a Sun 85-300mm f5 Macro. Does anybody know how it compares to a Sigma 70-300mm f4-5.6 Macro DG (non APO)?

EDIT: I use manual focus and usually Aperture Priority so that's not an issue.

EDIT 2: I can get 20% off if I order the adapter today or tomorrow. So any opinions concerning the aperture (I shoot a lot of live shows with ambient light) will also be appreciated. Will the larger aperture at the long side make a decent difference? And can I expect better sharpness from a lens that has the same max aperture throughout?


----------



## JKuhn

Regarding my question about the Sun lens, I noticed that Sun Optical changed their name and were later absorbed by a different company. Here are photos of the front and the cap if it helps:


----------



## groundzero9

I have a quick question before taking the plunge on the Lee GND setup. Which stop reduction to go with? I was originally thinking 0.6 because it's in the middle, but it seems 0.9 is really popular too? I'm not sure which one is more useful on average for the widest range of scenes.


----------



## scottath

0.9 and 1.2 are my most used. Australia has rather harsh sunlight so the 1.2 is often used, 0.9 was my most used before i bought my 1.2


----------



## wilykat

I have 2 digital camera that I use regularly. if I needed quick and portable or I am in where the camera runs a risk of getting smashed, I use a cheaper point and shoot camera (currently Canon A3300 that I got on sale for $70). If I could and it wouldn't be an issue, I use my Canon T2i with 3 different lenses: 18-50mm Sigma, 50-250mm Canon, and 200-500mm Sigma. When I was at my brother's wedding a couple months ago as his best man, having my good camera wouldn't look good so I took the smaller A3300 to take pictures before and after the ceremony.

During this weekend my family and my brother's new wife's family got together to look at the wedding pictures taken at the start of July. Many thought my pictures were far better than the professional photographer's picture.

What is sad, the professional had a Nikon camera with 24Mpix and a huge flash attachment while my $70 camera tops at 16Mpix and a tiny flash bulb. Yet a lot of my pictures were great with excellent framing and more spontaneous while the pro's picture frequently were off center, poorly framed, and often with top of the heads cut off.

The moral: a good camera doesn't make the person a good photographer.

An experienced person can make anything look good with cheap stuff. I got 12 years of experience with digital camera (my first was Apple Quicktake 150) and another 15 years with wet film before digital camera.

I do know who is NOT coming back in my sight. Awful photography, like she just bought the camera without any practice.


----------



## Jixr

thats why you don't hire cheap wedding photographers


----------



## Conspiracy

Sad story bout the wedding photog. Happens way too often here as well


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *groundzero9*
> 
> I have a quick question before taking the plunge on the Lee GND setup. Which stop reduction to go with? I was originally thinking 0.6 because it's in the middle, but it seems 0.9 is really popular too? I'm not sure which one is more useful on average for the widest range of scenes.


.6 is probably the middle of the road, you can push and pull in post processing to get to .3 or .9.

have you thought about the cokin p set? u get all .3 .6 .9 GND for about <100 bucks...its a bit small for UWA or fullframe WA


----------



## TheN00bBuilder

I'd I bet I could take better photos with my new camera then that stupid wedding photographer.


----------



## Curleyyy

Where's the cheapest place in Australia to reliably purchase equipment from?
I live around Gold Coast/Brisbane.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Any quick tips for shooting fireworks?


----------



## Conspiracy

cant decide if i want to get the 70-200 f2.8 IS on keh in BGN condition or a 70-200 f2.8 non-IS for much cheaper. or if i even want BGN condit. never had a problem with BGN on KEH before with film gear


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> Any quick tips for shooting fireworks?


High ISO.

Or just long exposure if you want it to blur.

Done.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> Any quick tips for shooting fireworks?
> 
> 
> 
> High ISO.
> 
> Or just long exposure if you want it to blur.
> 
> Done.
Click to expand...

also rack focus during long exposure for a touch of weirdness lol


----------



## sub50hz

Playing with flash and the X-Pro:


Wayne // Northbrook by Phil Innocenti, on Flickr


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> also rack focus during long exposure for a touch of weirdness lol


Couldn't, I forgot my tripod.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> also rack focus during long exposure for a touch of weirdness lol
> 
> 
> 
> Couldn't, I forgot my tripod.
Click to expand...

shame on you lol


----------



## Conspiracy

YAYS! http://motion.kodak.com/motion/About/The_Storyboard/4294971822/index.htm
Quote:


> This week, Kodak announced its emergence from Chapter 11 restructuring. The new company has emerged a more focused enterprise, one that is strongly positioned to serve your needs well into the future.
> 
> I want to first and foremost extend my sincerest gratitude to our loyal customers and partners in the motion picture industry for standing by Kodak throughout this process. We could not have achieved such a successful outcome without your ongoing support and faith in the Kodak brand.
> 
> Our motion picture film business will continue to be part of the company's future. We are manufacturing film, we've inked contracts with six studios, labs around the world are dedicated to quality service, and, most importantly, filmmakers are choosing film.
> 
> Just look at what's on the horizon: Transcendence, The Amazing Spider-Man 2, Noah, Interstellar, Inherent Vice, and many, many more! These new productions are all using silver halide technology to bring their stories to the screen.
> 
> At its heart, Kodak is a materials science company with decades of experience and expertise to make the world's finest film products. This core capability is the foundation of the emerging company, and this is what enables Kodak's current focus in packaging, commercial printing and functional printing.
> 
> Our motion picture film business represents a stable and profitable division of the company. Moving forward, I am confident in our ongoing ability to provide value to the motion picture and television industry, which has been our honor to serve for so many years.
> 
> Thank you again for choosing Kodak film. We are proud to be a part of the unforgettable images you create.
> 
> Read more: http://motion.kodak.com/motion/About/The_Storyboard/4294971822/index.htm#ixzz2dwFQCez3


----------



## Marin

Good, now don't be morons again and ignore emerging markets.


----------



## PCModderMike

Good.


----------



## JKuhn

I just got a new toy (second-hand though):




Apart from a busted zip on the bag, it's spotless.


----------



## groundzero9

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scottath*
> 
> 0.9 and 1.2 are my most used. Australia has rather harsh sunlight so the 1.2 is often used, 0.9 was my most used before i bought my 1.2


Thanks for all the input. I went with the Lee kit, 0.9 GND, and wide angle adapter ring. Can't wait for it to get here


----------



## wilykat

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JKuhn*
> 
> I just got a new toy (second-hand though):
> 
> Apart from a busted zip on the bag, it's spotless.


Sigma? I have a 150-500mm for canon and it takes great picture.


The cat was about 500 feet away and I was still able to count her whiskers in the original image.

One of these day I'd do a side by side compassion. I also have 17-50mm Sigma lens, I could take one of my cat at 17mm (with T2i and it's APS-C sized image sensor resulting in 1.6x crop, it'd be like 27mm on a standard 35mm camera), another at 150mm (240mm) and at 500mm (800mm) I tried with 2x teleconverter but AF fails hard at higher range so 1000mm equivalency (lens at about 320mm mark + 2x + 1.6x crop) is probably my limit without losing AF or quality.


----------



## Jixr

from what I understand, unless you are a brand-whore, most modern sigmas are on par with the canon counterpart ( except the higher end L series )

Question for you guys, I would love a wide angle prime, or possibly a decent zoom that goes from 30ishmm-75ish mm, and even the cheaper ones are still pretty expensive, but also i've been thinking of getting a smaller ( but nicer ) point-n-shoot, something that is much easier to stuff into my pocket ( and most of those can do pretty wide shots )

( current lens's 8mm fisheye, 40mm 2.8, 50mm 1.8, crap-kit lens, 70-300mm tamron that i've used about 4 times )

Just not sure if I want to get something thats more portable ( yet worse qualtiy pictures ) or just get a lens that will produce nice shots but on a non-pocketable camera.
( my current compact setup is my t3i without the battery grip and my 40mm pancake ) easily stuffs in a bag or I just have it dangeling on my sling strap )

i've been really intersted in the canon mirrorless cameras, but not sure about it.
( basically I want a beater cam, minimal functions, don't care for fancy features, just a fast point and shoot )

any ideas on what I might should do?


----------



## freitz

Well pulled a trigger on a Canon 6D with a 24-105mm Lens... Time to upgrade my t3i and 18-105mm...


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *freitz*
> 
> Well pulled a trigger on a Canon 6D with a 24-105mm Lens... Time to upgrade my t3i and 18-105mm...


Did you get it yet? If so how do you like it?


----------



## wilykat

Had to be an improvement. I remember a lot of people on camera forum turning their nose up at T3i. It was a major downgrade from T2i.


----------



## Marin

Hood for my folder is coming in. No more dark clothes.


----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wilykat*
> 
> *Sigma? I have a 150-500mm for canon and it takes great picture.*
> 
> 
> The cat was about 500 feet away and I was still able to count her whiskers in the original image.
> 
> One of these day I'd do a side by side compassion. I also have 17-50mm Sigma lens, I could take one of my cat at 17mm (with T2i and it's APS-C sized image sensor resulting in 1.6x crop, it'd be like 27mm on a standard 35mm camera), another at 150mm (240mm) and at 500mm (800mm) I tried with 2x teleconverter but AF fails hard at higher range so 1000mm equivalency (lens at about 320mm mark + 2x + 1.6x crop) is probably my limit without losing AF or quality.


Yes, it is a Sigma. But it's 170-500mm and it doesn't have a stabilizer. I bought it mainly for birds (as well as other wildlife though not often) and the moon.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wilykat*
> 
> Had to be an improvement. I remember a lot of people on camera forum turning their nose up at T3i. It was a major downgrade from T2i.


How was the T3i a downgrade?


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wilykat*
> 
> Had to be an improvement. I remember a lot of people on camera forum turning their nose up at T3i. It was a major downgrade from T2i.
> 
> 
> 
> How was the T3i a downgrade?
Click to expand...

x2


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> How was the T3i a downgrade?


Because 100% comparisons said so.


----------



## freitz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Did you get it yet? If so how do you like it?


Sean,

Its coming today! I should have it about mid day. I played with it in the store a couple of times. Feels great in the hand. If your interested in it I did a lot of research and eventually chose this over the 5d Mark III and D600.


----------



## MistaBernie

Sean, you considering a 6D? There are some deals to be got for sure (if you dig enough you can find them for less than $1400).


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wilykat*
> 
> Had to be an improvement. I remember a lot of people on camera forum turning their nose up at T3i. It was a major downgrade from T2i.
> 
> 
> 
> How was the T3i a downgrade?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> x2
Click to expand...

X3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> How was the T3i a downgrade?
> 
> 
> 
> Because 100% comparisons said so.
Click to expand...

lol'd


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *freitz*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Did you get it yet? If so how do you like it?
> 
> 
> 
> Sean,
> 
> Its coming today! I should have it about mid day. I played with it in the store a couple of times. Feels great in the hand. If your interested in it I did a lot of research and eventually chose this over the 5d Mark III and D600.
Click to expand...

Sweet, I've been eying up the 5D MKIII, D800, and 6D. I've only played with the 5D at best buy once, and it felt amazing in my hand and the shutter was pretty quiet.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Sean, you considering a 6D? There are some deals to be got for sure (if you dig enough you can find them for less than $1400).


That or a 5DMKIII or D800/600. I'm really looking for better ISO performance during long exposures and more dynamic range. This 60D is nice and all but the sensor is limited. And then there is the auto focus systems. 6D has a similar one to my current camera and the 5DMKIII is supposed to be soo much better, I use large F stops a lot and am thinking that the 5D would pull ahead during a portrait shoot and also during fast moving subjects like my pugs lol. However, I see the dynamic range of the D600 and 800 are a lot better. I'm just not sure what matters more for long exposures, dynamic range or ISO performance or color depth.

Or a motorcycle lol. Trying to figure out what to do.

Also, looking for a tripod/head. Why did the Manfrotto 055XPROB price increase? Used to be ~120-140 now it is like 200. -______-


----------



## freitz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Sweet, I've been eying up the 5D MKIII, D800, and 6D. I've only played with the 5D at best buy once, and it felt amazing in my hand and the shutter was pretty quiet.
> That or a 5DMKIII or D800/600. I'm really looking for better ISO performance during long exposures and more dynamic range. This 60D is nice and all but the sensor is limited. And then there is the auto focus systems. 6D has a similar one to my current camera and the 5DMKIII is supposed to be soo much better, I use large F stops a lot and am thinking that the 5D would pull ahead during a portrait shoot and also during fast moving subjects like my pugs lol. However, I see the dynamic range of the D600 and 800 are a lot better. I'm just not sure what matters more for long exposures, dynamic range or ISO performance or color depth.
> 
> Or a motorcycle lol. Trying to figure out what to do.
> 
> Also, looking for a tripod/head. Why did the Manfrotto 055XPROB price increase? Used to be ~120-140 now it is like 200. -______-


The best deal out right now is the 6D from B and H with a 24-105mm L glass, memory card, PX100 Canon printer with paper... All for 2199.00 There is a 400$ rebate.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/994116-REG/canon_eos_6d_dslr_camera.html

Thats what I picked up. Even for just the lens and the camera 2199 is a steal thats a 1200$ lens. Plus a 300$ printer...


----------



## DarthBaggins

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *freitz*
> 
> The best deal out right now is the 6D from B and H with a 24-105mm L glass, memory card, PX100 Canon printer with paper... All for 2199.00 There is a 400$ rebate.
> 
> http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/994116-REG/canon_eos_6d_dslr_camera.html
> 
> Thats what I picked up. Even for just the lens and the camera 2199 is a steal thats a 1200$ lens. Plus a 300$ printer...


Not a bad deal at all, but B&H is my preference when I order anything photo wise if Showcase in Atlanta doesn't have it


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DarthBaggins*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *freitz*
> 
> The best deal out right now is the 6D from B and H with a 24-105mm L glass, memory card, PX100 Canon printer with paper... All for 2199.00 There is a 400$ rebate.
> 
> http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/994116-REG/canon_eos_6d_dslr_camera.html
> 
> Thats what I picked up. Even for just the lens and the camera 2199 is a steal thats a 1200$ lens. Plus a 300$ printer...
> 
> 
> 
> Not a bad deal at all, but B&H is my preference when I order anything photo wise if Showcase in Atlanta doesn't have it
Click to expand...

i hate showcase man. their prices are outrageous sometimes. not to mention some of their employees are way too snooty. you get treated like royalty if you are a heavy regular spender but the average customer doesnt get the best service. i have actually been pushed aside during a sale because of another customer. they have a good inventory but i will never go there and im cousins with the owner as well which pissed me off even more. and i told them ill never shop there again because of the rude sales people. i work for best buy now as a camera consultant so i get a decent discount on stuff and practically free protection plans on gear i purchase and we have pretty much everything that showcase although our inventory is in a warehouse but at least i get treated nicely


----------



## PCModderMike

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *freitz*
> 
> The best deal out right now is the 6D from B and H with a 24-105mm L glass, memory card, PX100 Canon printer with paper... All for 2199.00 There is a 400$ rebate.
> 
> http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/994116-REG/canon_eos_6d_dslr_camera.html
> 
> Thats what I picked up. Even for just the lens and the camera 2199 is a steal thats a 1200$ lens. Plus a 300$ printer...


Nice upgrade man....and nice deal. Wish I could move up to a full frame camera. Just not in my cards right now...


----------



## freitz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PCModderMike*
> 
> Nice upgrade man....and nice deal. Wish I could move up to a full frame camera. Just not in my cards right now...


Thanks, It just showed up.

Boxes - This printer is huge!

6D, 24-105 L, Pxima Pro 100, and Ultra SD 16GB

Canon 6D with 24-105 L lens.


----------



## PCModderMike




----------



## mironccr345

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *freitz*
> 
> Thanks, It just showed up.
> 
> Boxes - This printer is huge!
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 6D, 24-105 L, Pxima Pro 100, and Ultra SD 16GB
> 
> Canon 6D with 24-105 L lens.


Sweet deal.


----------



## aksthem1

Bought a 40D recently for cheap and the lady threw in a 17-85 f4 for $25 more. I knew something was wrong with it because they tend to have that ERR01 on them. Decided to buy it anyway. It did and only works at 35mm and already ordered the ribbon cable to repair it.

Kind of scared to mess up the lens, but if I do. I'll only be out $30, $5 for the ribbon cable.


----------



## Jixr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aksthem1*
> 
> Bought a 40D recently for cheap and the lady threw in a 17-85 f4 for $25 more. I knew something was wrong with it because they tend to have that ERR01 on them. Decided to buy it anyway. It did and only works at 35mm and already ordered the ribbon cable to repair it.
> 
> Kind of scared to mess up the lens, but if I do. I'll only be out $30, $5 for the ribbon cable.


I've taken a few lens's apart, if you are tech savy ( which if you are on OCN you should be ) its not that difficult just put on some rubber gloves and don't touch the inner glass.
( which reminds me i need to pop my 50mm apart for another cleaning )


----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> I've taken a few lens's apart, if you are tech savy ( which if you are on OCN you should be ) its not that difficult just put on some rubber gloves and don't touch the inner glass.
> ( which reminds me i need to pop my 50mm apart for another cleaning )


I once read about people who take lenses apart to paint them. Apparently you have to be careful because some lenses have parts that you can't align yourself.


----------



## Jixr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JKuhn*
> 
> I once read about people who take lenses apart to paint them. Apparently you have to be careful because some lenses have parts that you can't align yourself.


I've been on the fence about painting my 50 myself. its an easy lens to take apart though.


----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> I've been on the fence about painting my 50 myself. its an easy lens to take apart though.


Here's the page that I saw. There's a link in it to another page where the painting is demonstrated, but you'll have to use Google Translate for that.

http://petapixel.com/2012/02/17/camera-lenses-with-custom-paint-jobs/


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> I've taken a few lens's apart, if you are tech savy ( which if you are on OCN you should be ) its not that difficult just put on some rubber gloves and don't touch the inner glass.
> ( which reminds me i need to pop my 50mm apart for another cleaning )


I've done my fair share of dismantling and repairing things. Fixed my original Digital Rebel with a broken mirror.

It's not so much that I'm scared of getting dust on it, it's more that about the alignment process. My friend took apart his Rokinon 8mm fisheye due to a focusing issue it has. I told him I would help him out, but he's impatient. Now the aperture ring doesn't do anything. He has to open it up and set the aperture.


----------



## Jixr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aksthem1*
> 
> I've done my fair share of dismantling and repairing things. Fixed my original Digital Rebel with a broken mirror.
> 
> It's not so much that I'm scared of getting dust on it, it's more that about the alignment process. My friend took apart his Rokinon 8mm fisheye due to a focusing issue it has. I told him I would help him out, but he's impatient. Now the aperture ring doesn't do anything. He has to open it up and set the aperture.


focusing issue?

I have the same lens ( well a bower branded one ) but i've not heard of a focusing issue problem with it?


----------



## aksthem1

It's just always out of focus. It was perfectly fine when he bought it, but it got gradually worse.


----------



## Jixr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aksthem1*
> 
> It's just always out of focus. It was perfectly fine when he bought it, but it got gradually worse.


Hm... i'll have to keep note of it. he had the manual focusing one right?
( i for the life of me can't figure out the focusing trick with this lens )
somewhere I read to set it at F8 and infinite zoom but you pretty much have to be outdoors at noon to use it at that apature without going crazy with the iso


----------



## TheN00bBuilder

My camera came Tuesday, but I now am starting to brag about it. 80FPS at 720 looks great for RC. I'll take some pictures of a street and upload them later.


----------



## OmarCCX

I got a great deal on a Canon 40D with a Speedlite 580EX and a Tamron 17-50mm f2.8. Kinda want to sell it and get a refurb D7000 with a 50mm f.18G to start. I don't use my camera often enough to warrant the upgrade, but the upgraditis is present.


----------



## Jixr

Hi ya peeps

So i've been looking at getting a new lens ( or maybe a new camera )

and I really want a wide angle lens somewhere 15-35 for indoor shots, aside from my kit and fisheye lens, the widest thing I have is a 40mm
( on a crop body )

I've been thinking of a 20mm, but for the price of one of those, several zooms are in the same price range.

Ever since I started towards photography i've bought primes except for my telephoto, and In general like them since they are so fast.

So, what do you guys think, should I go for a wide prime, or go for a zoom that allows for the flexibility, and it would be the first decent zoom for my colection.

My most used lens is my 40mm, but for most indoor shots, its still too narrow. I'm kinda on the idea that the wider I can get the better, but 35mm's seem to be the cheapest wide, the wider out you go the higher in price.

Ideas, tips, suggestions?
( and I'm not on an L lens budget, so the ultrasonic or a 3rd party will be the best I go )


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OmarCCX*
> 
> I got a great deal on a Canon 40D with a Speedlite 580EX and a Tamron 17-50mm f2.8. Kinda want to sell it and get a refurb D7000 with a 50mm f.18G to start. I don't use my camera often enough to warrant the upgrade, but the upgraditis is present.


why not stay with canon ? :/


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> Hi ya peeps
> 
> So i've been looking at getting a new lens ( or maybe a new camera )
> 
> and I really want a wide angle lens somewhere 15-35 for indoor shots, aside from my kit and fisheye lens, the widest thing I have is a 40mm
> ( on a crop body )
> 
> I've been thinking of a 20mm, but for the price of one of those, several zooms are in the same price range.
> 
> Ever since I started towards photography i've bought primes except for my telephoto, and In general like them since they are so fast.
> 
> So, what do you guys think, should I go for a wide prime, or go for a zoom that allows for the flexibility, and it would be the first decent zoom for my colection.
> 
> My most used lens is my 40mm, but for most indoor shots, its still too narrow. I'm kinda on the idea that the wider I can get the better, but 35mm's seem to be the cheapest wide, the wider out you go the higher in price.
> 
> Ideas, tips, suggestions?
> ( and I'm not on an L lens budget, so the ultrasonic or a 3rd party will be the best I go )


why not use the kit for those wide indoor shots a 35 wouldnt be wider, but still wont be wide enough methinks
or maybe get a flash instead? (im assuming youre shooting lowlight indoors)

or yeah ,, maybe get a zoom instead (if you really need it) since you have 3 lenses capable of wide shots


----------



## Jixr

I'm not a huge fan of the kit lens, 18-20mm or so gives you some barrel distortion, so the zoom I want to use it at is kinda useless, not to mention is too slow to be a low light lens. I'm also thinking of maybe picking up a Caonon EOS-M camera, with the 20mm 2.0 prime.

About the same price as a full lens, and its nearly the same quality as my T3i, and much more portable, but there are some iffy reviews, and supposively a new version is supposed to be out before years end.


----------



## iTurn

Picked up a D600 (upgrade from a D5100) sold most of my lens but kept my Nikon 28-105 and Sigma 70-200 f2.8 (newest version) loving the camera so far, best of all no dusty sensor! *knocks on wood*
All these buttons!! I found my D5100 easier to setup but it could just be a familiarity thing.

I think my next lens will be a 85mm 1.4D http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00005LE76/ref=wl_it_dp_o_pC_nS_ttl?_encoding=UTF8&colid=28MJ6LW4K3CSU&coliid=I1UW2PDCUXP5IN... thoughts/objections?


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iTurn*
> 
> Picked up a D600 (upgrade from a D5100) sold most of my lens but kept my Nikon 28-105 and Sigma 70-200 f2.8 (newest version) loving the camera so far, best of all no dusty sensor! *knocks on wood*
> All these buttons!! I found my D5100 easier to setup but it could just be a familiarity thing.
> 
> I think my next lens will be a 85mm 1.4D http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00005LE76/ref=wl_it_dp_o_pC_nS_ttl?_encoding=UTF8&colid=28MJ6LW4K3CSU&coliid=I1UW2PDCUXP5IN... thoughts/objections?


awesome upgrade!


----------



## groundzero9

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> Ideas, tips, suggestions?
> ( and I'm not on an L lens budget, so the ultrasonic or a 3rd party will be the best I go )


Check out Tokina. They have a 17-35 that falls right into the range you're looking for.


----------



## Jixr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *groundzero9*
> 
> Check out Tokina. They have a 17-35 that falls right into the range you're looking for.


Just got back from the camera shop, I think i'm gonna just go with a second camera and get a Nikon S1, much more portable than my T3i and still decent picture quality and only $350

( now to pull a digital rev and put a canon strap on it )


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> Just got back from the camera shop, I think i'm gonna just go with a second camera and get a Nikon S1, much more portable than my T3i and still decent picture quality and only $350
> 
> ( now to pull a digital rev and put a canon strap on it )


The Nikon S1 has a tiny sensor. EOS-M is the same price and has a much larger sensor than the S1.


----------



## Jixr

I do agree a larger senor would be nice, but the EOS-M ( according to the camera shop guy ) was a failure, they only sold 3 in the last year, and ended up returning the rest back to canon. ( so I can't buy one from them if I wanted to )

He said even the updated AF is still terrible, lens selection ( 2 if you are in the US, 3 elsewhere ), how it was pretty much DOA.

I'd rather go with a smaller sensor if it overall means a better camera. ( and I don't care for a touchscreen, hot shoe, etc )

Basically he just confirmed all the negative reviews you can read online.

Though If I can still score a deal on the local craigslist I wouldn't mind going with a different system.
( i'm not too picky at this camera performance level and price range )


----------



## Marin

Bigger sensor > smaller sensor whenever possible. Even 35mm is tiny.


----------



## Jixr

yeah, but if the AF and tracking issues are as bad as he and everyone else says, then its not really worth it. as I will be using it in busy areas with people walking around and such.


----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> yeah, but if the AF and tracking issues are as bad as he and everyone else says, then its not really worth it. as I will be using it in busy areas with people walking around and such.


I guess it depends what you use it for, but I find manual focus tends to work better for me. I hardly ever set it to auto.


----------



## groundzero9

@Jixr: What's your price range? I'm trying to sell my Fuji X-E1 w/ 18-55 but haven't had any luck locally.


----------



## Jixr

probably $400 max


----------



## OmarCCX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boogschd*
> 
> why not stay with canon ? :/


None of the Canon bodies interest me (apart from the 5D). I've used the 7D a few times, and I ddn't really like it that much.


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OmarCCX*
> 
> None of the Canon bodies interest me (apart from the 5D). I've used the 7D a few times, and I ddn't really like it that much.


cool


----------



## Unknownm

Lets burn some paper eh


----------



## S3ason

Saw that video before, couldn't do it myself. Though my yn-560s probably aren't as powerful as a 580ex.


----------



## ljason8eg

I just tried it, definitely worked once I set the CFn to give me a full powered test flash. Your YN-560s have anything like that?


----------



## S3ason

Yup, tried max power and playing with a few settings. No visible smoke but you can smell the burn if you put your nose to it. Pretty cool still, I love that smell haha


----------



## laboitenoire

Very bizarre hahahaha. It's all an issue of flux, I guess.


----------



## Conspiracy

ordered another speedlight and octobox. idk what my plans are but i wanted a second and now i have one. grabbed a yongnuo 560iii


----------



## ikem

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> ordered another speedlight and octobox. idk what my plans are but i wanted a second and now i have one. grabbed a yongnuo 560iii


you will love the 560iii.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> ordered another speedlight and octobox. idk what my plans are but i wanted a second and now i have one. grabbed a yongnuo 560iii


nice. I want to get a beauty dish myself. Maybe a third flash.


----------



## Conspiracy

ill probably try and make a beauty dish. dont want to pay for a nice one when i barely do much photo work. mainly just photographering for my own enjoyment


----------



## Jixr

I added a gopro to my camera bag this weekend, until my motorcycle gets fixed, I'm looking for some cool ideas.

I'm not a hard core sky-diving, snowboarding, super special awesome action movie start, so I can't do anything too cool, but still looking for some interesting ideas.

( sounds crazy, but i bought it more for photography than video work )

I really thought about tying it to some balloons and take it to the park, but it turns out you need 60+ balloons to get these things airborn, and helium isnt cheap.


----------



## Unknownm

to any owners of Pentax K-X. Any tips?

For the longest time I couldn't select 100 ISO even though 12.800 was there. The default is 200-6400 and 100/12,800 can be enabled in the options menu but I could not find it (even checking review sites, my option isn't even there). Now just yesterday at random (without messing with the settings) ISO 100 finally is pops up. Weird....


----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Unknownm*
> 
> to any owners of Pentax K-X. Any tips?
> 
> For the longest time I couldn't select 100 ISO even though 12.800 was there. The default is 200-6400 and 100/12,800 can be enabled in the options menu but I could not find it (even checking review sites, my option isn't even there). Now just yesterday at random (without messing with the settings) ISO 100 finally is pops up. Weird....


Are you using auto-ISO? I have a Canon, but I find it usually works better (here in South Africa, and we have lots of sunshine) to use it fixed on 200 so that it's easier to get to the aperture sweet spot. Unless you have a fast lens and shoot in very bright light, or if you use slow shutter speeds.


----------



## laboitenoire

I wouldn't even bother with 100--because it's an expanded ISO setting, most likely the dynamic range isn't as good as ISO 200.


----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> I wouldn't even bother with 100--because it's an expanded ISO setting, most likely the dynamic range isn't as good as ISO 200.


Is this meant for me, Unknownm or both of us? I don't know about Pentax, but on the Canon crop bodies the base ISO is 100 so it's not expanded.


----------



## laboitenoire

Should have clarified--it's for Unknownm


----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> Should have clarified--it's for Unknownm


No problem.

I guess that explains why some of the ISO settings weren't there. The expanded ISO must have been disabled.


----------



## ikem

Got a bigger bag, finally... Stayed with Crumpler, and now i have

3 Million Dollar Home
6 Million Dollar Home
Whickey and Cox

and the new one,

Gourmet Extravaganza


----------



## Jixr

I'm excited about my new GoPro, I really bought it to have a tiny compact camera, and it works quite well, and I today i'm going to go to a toy store to buy a giant foam glider, mcgyver the gopro in it, and try my had at some cheap birds eye shots. with its wireless remote i'm excited to see what I can do with it.


----------



## freitz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> I'm excited about my new GoPro, I really bought it to have a tiny compact camera, and it works quite well, and I today i'm going to go to a toy store to buy a giant foam glider, mcgyver the gopro in it, and try my had at some cheap birds eye shots. with its wireless remote i'm excited to see what I can do with it.


I took the go pro to thailand with me. I was attach it to a Tuk Tuk (Their version of a moped taxi) as I traveled through the city. Also I took it up a waterfall and dropped it down.. Awesome little company camera / video recorder. It really helped when I could buy the attachments and stick it somewhere, it would capture where the DSLR would not.


----------



## Conspiracy

gopros are the best toys man. sooooo much fun and possibility


----------



## Jixr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *freitz*
> 
> I took the go pro to thailand with me. I was attach it to a Tuk Tuk (Their version of a moped taxi) as I traveled through the city. Also I took it up a waterfall and dropped it down.. Awesome little company camera / video recorder. It really helped when I could buy the attachments and stick it somewhere, it would capture where the DSLR would not.


Yeah ( I also have a motorcycle )

its perfect for what i need, something i can easily toss in a bag/pocket, portable, waterproof, durable, its basically my beater camera when i'm too afraid to bring out my dslr, though with my DSLR with its fisheye lens I can kind of fake some go-pro style shots, but had always been careful with it, now I don't have to worry about breaking it as they are so cheap. Go-Pro + a Joby is a sweet combo. The picture quality is better than I expected really ( though low light both video and photos are poor )

there is a park in town that is right next to a river, and if it flys well, I may just launch it off a pedestrian bridge and over and into the river ( and maybe atatch a fishing pole to it or rent a kayak so I can get it back )

Unless i've not seen it yet, i'm surprsied no one has made an LED light waterproof housing that you attatch to the case mount, with its own mount to attatch to a normal accessory mount.


----------



## Jixr

Apparently no one sells those foam gliders anymore, must be a summer only toy, and not sure if I wanna order one online as it would probably arrive broken.


----------



## freitz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> Apparently no one sells those foam gliders anymore, must be a summer only toy, and not sure if I wanna order one online as it would probably arrive broken.


Get a remote helicopter


----------



## Jixr

yeah, a foam plane is $10, a remote chopper that is big enough to carry a gopro is probably a lot more than that. And I know a guy who will sell me pro-grade quad choppers at cost, i'd probably crash it though


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> Apparently no one sells those foam gliders anymore, must be a summer only toy, and not sure if I wanna order one online as it would probably arrive broken.


I know Hobby Lobby or Michael's should still carry them all year round.


----------



## Jixr

hobby lobby has some, but I need a big one, i figure the more wing surface area the longer flights i could have. Still maybe worth a shot though.


----------



## freitz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> hobby lobby has some, but I need a big one, i figure the more wing surface area the longer flights i could have. Still maybe worth a shot though.


Can find a quad copter for 40$ strap the go pro to it should take off.
http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss_1?url=search-alias%3Dtoys-and-games&field-keywords=quadcopter&sprefix=quadcopter%2Ctoys-and-games&rh=i%3Atoys-and-games%2Ck%3Aquadcopter


----------



## Dream Killer

i want an iphone 5s just for the dual-led flash. gonna go check em out at the apple store tomorrow.


----------



## Conspiracy

Buy me one while youre there DK.

My 4S is being slow


----------



## Unknownm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JKuhn*
> 
> Are you using auto-ISO? I have a Canon, but I find it usually works better (here in South Africa, and we have lots of sunshine) to use it fixed on 200 so that it's easier to get to the aperture sweet spot. Unless you have a fast lens and shoot in very bright light, or if you use slow shutter speeds.


Nope, I always shoot manual. UNless that option isn't available , in which I put down the Point and shoot and go back to DSLR.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> I wouldn't even bother with 100--because it's an expanded ISO setting, most likely the dynamic range isn't as good as ISO 200.


it helps only becuase my external flash can't be controled how bright it goes. 100 iso works well but once I bump it up to 200, it over exposures. I could always add more aperture but sometimes I like shooting lowest


----------



## Dream Killer

how cheap does a flash have to be to not have adjustable power settings? even my vivitar from the '80s has an auto-thryristor.


----------



## Unknownm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> how cheap does a flash have to be to not have adjustable power settings? even my vivitar from the '80s has an auto-thryristor.


I 'm not sure, I got the flash from a old 35mm and gives more light than the stock flash my pentax K-X provides.

Here is the model., with this overtop


----------



## Dream Killer

ohh, it's one of those flashes that controls power through aperture with distance guides. you will learn nothing using that flash since it's made to be used in full auto all the time.

my suggestion is to ditch it with a proper flash that has manual power adjustments.


----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> how cheap does a flash have to be to not have adjustable power settings? even my vivitar from the '80s has an auto-thryristor.


283? I have one, I'm just waiting for the volt mod to be finished (the diagram I downloaded didn't work, so I sent it to an electronics store).


----------



## Dream Killer

yup. i modified it to trigger at a lower voltage like the HVs do so it wont fry transistors.


----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> yup. i modified it to trigger at a lower voltage like the HVs do so it wont fry transistors.


It's amazing how popular that flash still is. My mother bought mine in the early 1980s, and used it until recently on her old Pentax MG. Now the flash is mine.


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> hobby lobby has some, but I need a big one, i figure the more wing surface area the longer flights i could have. Still maybe worth a shot though.


Have you tried any hobby stores around you? I think I've seen them at Hobbytown USA before.


----------



## Jixr

We have a hobby town, but according to their site they are OOS on the bigger ones ( and i don't want to pay $50+ for some of the more pro-level models )

There is an old fashioned toy store in town though that has alot of classic toys, I'll give them a call and see if they have any.
If I can't find one I'll try a kite or something.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JKuhn*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> yup. i modified it to trigger at a lower voltage like the HVs do so it wont fry transistors.
> 
> 
> 
> It's amazing how popular that flash still is. My mother bought mine in the early 1980s, and used it until recently on her old Pentax MG. Now the flash is mine.
Click to expand...

the newer lower-voltage 285-hv was recommended at strobist.com so a bunch of people bought it to try out flash. It's a good learning tool since it's fully manual down but the great thing about it is its consistency. These days I use my SB-700 for everything though.


----------



## golfergolfer

Okay so I know I was talking about this before but just to confirm things can I have a few more clarifications/votes?

Which SD card?

Sandisk Extreme 32GB

OR

Sandisk Extreme Pro 32GB

Basically what I am asking here is this, Is there a actual noticeable difference between the two cards? One writes at 45MB/s and the other one is 95MB/s. I am starting to get into alot of sport photography and shoot alot at 6-7 FPS in large bursts. The last thing I want is my SD card slowing me down.

Thanks everyone


----------



## Dream Killer

depends on which camera youre going to use them in and depends on price difference between the two.


----------



## silvrr

Download speed to the computer is where I notice faster cards the most.

Be sure to check what both the read and write speeds are, sometimes the write doesn't speed increase with the read.


----------



## golfergolfer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> depends on which camera youre going to use them in and depends on price difference between the two.


Going to be using it with a D7100 the the difference between the two cards is about $30. That said I can get a Sandisk Extreme 64GB for the same price as the Sandisk Extreme Pro 32GB. But is that a good idea getting such a large card?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *silvrr*
> 
> Download speed to the computer is where I notice faster cards the most.
> 
> Be sure to check what both the read and write speeds are, sometimes the write doesn't speed increase with the read.


the read/write speeds are about 60MB/sec faster on the Pro version than the not pro version. And currently for the SD card reader I just use this thingy below.

Kingston Mobilelite G3


----------



## Marin

5DMKII's USB port broke off so it's completely useless until I get it fixed. Checking out one from school at the moment.



Rough shot to check the layout.


----------



## Conspiracy

cool stuff marin.


----------



## dudemanppl

Remember that one time I found some guy that stole your pictures? Good times.


----------



## Marin

If you steal my pics I'll kill you. Also those pics were terrible.


----------



## Conspiracy

so someone stole your pics but actually stole badly done photos.

lolz level over 9000


----------



## aksthem1

What pictures were they?

Reminds me of the time they stole ljason8eg photos and they tried to sell them on eBay.


----------



## ljason8eg

That guy is still selling photos on eBay that aren't his, thankfully none of them are mine anymore since I scared him that one time.


----------



## Unknownm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> ohh, it's one of those flashes that controls power through aperture with distance guides. you will learn nothing using that flash since it's made to be used in full auto all the time.
> 
> my suggestion is to ditch it with a proper flash that has manual power adjustments.


if I had the money, i wouldn't own a pentax K-x and that flash. I will have to make due with my current setup for now


----------



## Dream Killer

the pentax is very good and is no way at a disadvantage over the other dslrs and i drool over the limiteds all the time. what i'm saying is, if you want to learn how to use flash, don't use an automatic one.


----------



## Unknownm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> the pentax is very good and is no way at a disadvantage over the other dslrs and i drool over the limiteds all the time. what i'm saying is, if you want to learn how to use flash, don't use an automatic one.


Thanks







. The only downside is the MP, use to own Canon 6D and cutting part of the picture was a joke in photoshop. Now with my pentax I really have to think about taking a close up photo of something because it will become to pixel or blurry if I was to cut it in photoshop.


----------



## Dream Killer

that's not a bad thing. the more you do at the time of the shooting, like framing through the viewfinder, the better your photography skills are going to get.

when i changed my whole system to nikon a few years ago i went from 16mp dslr to a 10mp dslr. i only then realized that going to a lower mp count had the advantage of faster post processing and files using less storage space.


----------



## Marin

I need more MP.


----------



## dudemanppl




----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> I need more MP.


I know, right? At the rate MP is increasing we'll never be able to cast Holy in the later boss battles.

...Okay, time to stop making bad Final Fantasy references when I'm super tired and loopy.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Unknownm*
> 
> Thanks
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . The only downside is the MP, use to own Canon 6D and cutting part of the picture was a joke in photoshop. Now with my pentax I really have to think about taking a close up photo of something because it will become to pixel or blurry if I was to cut it in photoshop.


But really, Pentax makes some pretty solid stuff, and as others have said I would love to have a set of their Limited series primes. Things are sweet. And really, how often are you printing? If you're mostly just keeping photos on your computer (like probably 90% of the world these days), just stop pixel peeping









Over time though, you'll start to get used to framing the scene well for your particular setup.


----------



## Marin

Back from Canon Irvine. 5DMKII's mobo is getting replaced along with getting cleaned. Also getting the 50L calibrated.


----------



## funfortehfun

Gargh, Nikon is making me frustrated. I was hoping for an improved D600 (not the D610 as the rumors currently exist right now) with more AF points/faster AF speed and integrated WiFi/GPS functionality (OK, WiFi not so much... but yes GPS) with upped flash sync speed to 1/250s and upped maximum shutter speed to 1/8000s. NR says otherwise.

I was thinking of switching to Canon, but a 5DMIII is a bit way too out of my range... and the 6D fails to impress me.

I guess my dreams of an upped D600 wouldn't happen anyway because if those were to happen, the D800 would have no buyers.


----------



## freitz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *funfortehfun*
> 
> Gargh, Nikon is making me frustrated. I was hoping for an improved D600 (not the D610 as the rumors currently exist right now) with more AF points/faster AF speed and integrated WiFi/GPS functionality (OK, WiFi not so much... but yes GPS) with upped flash sync speed to 1/250s and upped maximum shutter speed to 1/8000s. NR says otherwise.
> I was thinking of switching to Canon, but a 5DMIII is a bit way too out of my range... and the 6D fails to impress me.
> I guess my dreams of an upped D600 wouldn't happen anyway because if those were to happen, the D800 would have no buyers.


I went for the 6D over the D600 for many of reasons. Ken Rockwell has a great review as to why he picked the 6d

he Says
Quote:


> If you're considering the Nikon D600, don't bother. The 6D is superior for its far better ergonomics. I own both of these, and the 6D is much more fun, smooth and easy to shoot, while the D600 is a pain, and the D600's colors often have a green/magenta shift problem. The D600 is the best camera made by Nikon, but nowhere near as good in actual shooting as the 6D.


http://www.kenrockwell.com/canon/6d.htm
Check it out.


----------



## Marin

Kens an idiot.

But that's just what I think.


----------



## freitz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> Kens an idiot.
> 
> But that's just what I think.


I didn't say he was a genius but I think its a fair review.


----------



## Marin




----------



## freitz

http://www.digitalrev.com/article/canon-eos-6d-vs-nikon/NDIzMjQ4Njc_A

Another area I read through when I was choosing.


----------



## freitz

To the OP question. Just google it and watch some videos.. if you already have a D600 I dont' know if its worth selling everything to switch camps. However I picked the 6d because it was a better camera for me.

Nikon might have a ton more focal points, but they are group so tightly that it almost doesn't make sense... the D7100 has a way better focal system. Wifi is in the 6D gps is in the 6D not really a selling point for me just a bonus feature. I prefer the 6D ergonomics, menu system, and I prefer the Canon Lenses. My opinion is that they are better lenses.

But to be honest if I already had a D600 not sure if I would switch its a tough choice... However if its between keeping you D600 and going to 5d mk III....
I would choose a 5D MKIII over the D600 any day of the week even over the D800 for sure.

Good luck.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> Kens an idiot.
> 
> But that's just what I think.


lololololol this


----------



## Marin

Someone find me something like this so I don't destroy my camera tethering.



RRS's option is bulky and expensive.


----------



## golfergolfer

Hey everyone, So I just found out this talk about a D610, How often does Nikon roll out updates for cameras? Is there a somewhat reliable time period between releases?


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> Someone find me something like this so I don't destroy my camera tethering.
> 
> 
> 
> RRS's option is bulky and expensive.


What about the JerkStopper or LockPort USB?


----------



## Marin

The first one won't stop any damage at the connector and the second one might work, not sure.


----------



## aksthem1

Well the first one would be used as a preemptive measure on a new camera. I know the Lockport USB is probably the best one out there. Since you won't need to keep reinserting your USB cable.

The CoolProtector USB is a little cumbersome. Then the Small HD port protector is a bit easier to work with.


----------



## teh_HyDr0iD

I'd like to join if that's alright with you folk.







I just have a starter Point and Shoot at the moment, but would like to get a DSLR when I feel as though I've outgrown the point and shoot. The camera I have is a Canon IXUS 220 HS which I have been really impressed by for the price. It has a lot of manual options for a point and shoot and it shoots fairly decent HD video with enough light. And to top it all off, the camera weighs about as much as a smartphone and is smaller than my wallet so it pockets really nicely. I went back to South Africa in March for a whole month to visit family and walked around every day with the camera in my pocket and it didn't bother me at all.

I will post up a couple of my photos when I get home from work.


----------



## golfergolfer

hmm so I just found out I can get my hands on a Canon 7D and a Sigma 50-500mm f/4.5-6.3 (school owns it). But how would this lens fair for some sport (soccer) photography? at the 500mm end it is 6.3 so it would need to be bright but still?


----------



## Unknownm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> I know, right? At the rate MP is increasing we'll never be able to cast Holy in the later boss battles.
> 
> ...Okay, time to stop making bad Final Fantasy references when I'm super tired and loopy.
> But really, Pentax makes some pretty solid stuff, and as others have said I would love to have a set of their Limited series primes. Things are sweet. And really, how often are you printing? If you're mostly just keeping photos on your computer (like probably 90% of the world these days), just stop pixel peeping
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Over time though, you'll start to get used to framing the scene well for your particular setup.


Coming from a 6D to K-x that's what I thought to. It's only 13mp? ISO is standard but the options this thing has is just awesome for a low budget camera (cost me 200$ for body/lens). The downside is it only uses AA battery's, but whatever!

The lens on my K-x is 18-200mm 3.5/6.3, which is why I should take advantage of doing close up shots, since it's a standard macro lens aswell.


----------



## teh_HyDr0iD

Here are a couple of pictures I've taken over the past year or so. I know they aren't that impressive, but I'm still learning.







None of them have gone under any form of post processing whatsoever.

http://min.us/mbf5GYSsM0ExvU


----------



## PCModderMike

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *freitz*
> 
> I went for the 6D over the D600 for many of reasons. Ken Rockwell has a great review as to why he picked the 6d
> 
> he Says
> http://www.kenrockwell.com/canon/6d.htm
> Check it out.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *freitz*
> 
> I didn't say he was a genius but I think its a fair review.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *freitz*
> 
> http://www.digitalrev.com/article/canon-eos-6d-vs-nikon/NDIzMjQ4Njc_A
> 
> Another area I read through when I was choosing.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *freitz*
> 
> To the OP question. Just google it and watch some videos.. if you already have a D600 I dont' know if its worth selling everything to switch camps. However I picked the 6d because it was a better camera for me.
> 
> Nikon might have a ton more focal points, but they are group so tightly that it almost doesn't make sense... the D7100 has a way better focal system. Wifi is in the 6D gps is in the 6D not really a selling point for me just a bonus feature. I prefer the 6D ergonomics, menu system, and I prefer the Canon Lenses. My opinion is that they are better lenses.
> 
> But to be honest if I already had a D600 not sure if I would switch its a tough choice... However if its between keeping you D600 and going to 5d mk III....
> I would choose a 5D MKIII over the D600 any day of the week even over the D800 for sure.
> 
> Good luck.


----------



## mironccr345

Freitz lovin his 6D's!


----------



## Dream Killer

Jesus Christ, the UN General Assembly is totally ruining my life right now. It took me 4 hours to get from downtown to upper east side.


----------



## dmanstasiu

damn world politics, im late


----------



## funfortehfun

Don't like the 6D. I just don't like the feel of Canon cameras. I tried it out at a Costco and it just feels... too Canon-y for my tastes. We'll see - I might just splurge on D800 if the D610 turns out to be a slump. Right now it appears the only improvement is a 6FPS fire rate (OMG 0.5FPS!).


----------



## freitz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *funfortehfun*
> 
> Don't like the 6D. I just don't like the feel of Canon cameras. I tried it out at a Costco and it just feels... too Canon-y for my tastes. We'll see - I might just splurge on D800 if the D610 turns out to be a slump. Right now it appears the only improvement is a 6FPS fire rate (OMG 0.5FPS!).


Sounds like you should just suck it up and buy the D800...









Sell your D600 and grab it.










JK


----------



## Sean Webster

I was really close to getting a D800 myself, but it just didn't feel good in my hands...I just don't find Nikon camera's to fit comfortably. Their grips are too small. I'm still waiting for the next 5D to be released lol. Or at least a price drop/better reason for me to upgrade.


----------



## freitz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> I was really close to getting a D800 myself, but it just didn't feel good in my hands...I just don't find Nikon camera's to fit comfortably. Their grips are too small. I'm still waiting for the next 5D to be released lol. Or at least a price drop/better reason for me to upgrade.


I have to agree with you, I didn't like the ergonomics of the Nikon either... The Crop sensor ones are fine just the D600 or D800 didn't seem to fit well in the hand. That might sound stupid but its important when you are carrying your camera around all day and constantly grabbing it to take a quick shot.


----------



## funfortehfun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *freitz*
> 
> Sounds like you should just suck it up and buy the D800...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sell your D600 and grab it.
> 
> *S&G*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JK


LOL, I'm stuck with crop-sensor right now. Yearning for FF :>

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> I was really close to getting a D800 myself, but it just didn't feel good in my hands...I just don't find Nikon camera's to fit comfortably. Their grips are too small. I'm still waiting for the next 5D to be released lol. Or at least a price drop/better reason for me to upgrade.


Heh, I don't like the Canon grips. The indents for the fingers and the moved shoot button seem weird to me


----------



## freitz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *funfortehfun*
> 
> LOL, I'm stuck with crop-sensor right now. Yearning for FF :>
> 
> Heh, I don't like the Canon grips. The indents for the fingers and the moved shoot button seem weird to me


Im confused I thought you had a D600 unless I am thinking of another post by mistake?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *funfortehfun*
> 
> Gargh, Nikon is making me frustrated. I was hoping for an improved D600 (not the D610 as the rumors currently exist right now) with more AF points/faster AF speed and integrated WiFi/GPS functionality (OK, WiFi not so much... but yes GPS) with upped flash sync speed to 1/250s and upped maximum shutter speed to 1/8000s. NR says otherwise.
> I was thinking of switching to Canon, but a 5DMIII is a bit way too out of my range... and the 6D fails to impress me.
> I guess my dreams of an upped D600 wouldn't happen anyway because if those were to happen, the D800 would have no buyers.


Maybe I didn't read your post as it was intended and just assumed.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> Jesus Christ, the UN General Assembly is totally ruining my life right now. It took me 4 hours to get from downtown to upper east side.


BIG CITY LIVIN YO


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *funfortehfun*
> 
> Heh, I don't like the Canon grips. The indents for the fingers and the moved shoot button seem weird to me


lol, I have big hands tho. I even find the 5DMKIII's grip a little small for me. I wish there were extended front grips for cameras. The tips of my fingers always hit the body and I have to have them bent a little.


----------



## freitz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> lol, I have big hands tho. I even find the 5DMKIII's grip a little small for me. I wish there were extended front grips for cameras. The tips of my fingers always hit the body and I have to have them bent a little.


----------



## Sean Webster

LOL


----------



## ikem

just got my Manfrotto 500ah today. Really like it. I knew going into it that lenses on the D3200 were going to hit the longer plate, so I just got a RC2 set. Then it can just use that and work well with my other Manfrotto 322rc2. Perfect size for my setup.




also got my Crumpler Gourmet Extravaganza, holds a lot.


----------



## Conspiracy

Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ikem*
> 
> just got my Manfrotto 500ah today. Really like it. I knew going into it that lenses on the D3200 were going to hit the longer plate, so I just got a RC2 set. Then it can just use that and work well with my other Manfrotto 322rc2. Perfect size for my setup.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> also got my Crumpler Gourmet Extravaganza, holds a lot.






NICE!


----------



## cookiesowns

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *freitz*
> 
> I have to agree with you, I didn't like the ergonomics of the Nikon either... The Crop sensor ones are fine just the D600 or D800 didn't seem to fit well in the hand. That might sound stupid but its important when you are carrying your camera around all day and constantly grabbing it to take a quick shot.


Heh, I shoot heavily 5D II over the 7D nowadays, and the 5D II ergonomics is surely much worse than any Nikon... There's no thumb support at all. Hate the AF on the 5D II though, debating selling both the 5D II, 7D and a lens to get 5D III and 24-70 mark II


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cookiesowns*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *freitz*
> 
> I have to agree with you, I didn't like the ergonomics of the Nikon either... The Crop sensor ones are fine just the D600 or D800 didn't seem to fit well in the hand. That might sound stupid but its important when you are carrying your camera around all day and constantly grabbing it to take a quick shot.
> 
> 
> 
> Heh, I shoot heavily 5D II over the 7D nowadays, and the 5D II ergonomics is surely much worse than any Nikon... There's no thumb support at all. Hate the AF on the 5D II though, debating selling both the 5D II, 7D and a lens to get 5D III and 24-70 mark II
Click to expand...

yea, the 5D MKII feels like a brick in your hand. The 5DMKIII is sooo much better.


----------



## freitz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> yea, the 5D MKII feels like a brick in your hand. The 5DMKIII is sooo much better.


5d Mark III is on sale right now at B and H with 400$ rebate... so it works out to 3k for the body... not bad.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/986049-REG/canon_eos_5d_mark_iii.html


----------



## Marin

Holding a camera, lol.


----------



## funfortehfun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> Holding a camera, lol.


Marin's got supernatural abilities to levitate cameras in perfect framing.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *freitz*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> yea, the 5D MKII feels like a brick in your hand. The 5DMKIII is sooo much better.
> 
> 
> 
> 5d Mark III is on sale right now at B and H with 400$ rebate... so it works out to 3k for the body... not bad.
> 
> http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/986049-REG/canon_eos_5d_mark_iii.html
Click to expand...

hmmm, if my neighbor buys my 60D it may be a done deal lol.


----------



## freitz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> hmmm, if my neighbor buys my 60D it may be a done deal lol.


I got a similar deal for the 6d ended up about 2k for the 24-105 L and the 6d


----------



## Conspiracy

100mm f2.8 macro en route. should be fun to play with. planning a return trip to old car city (antique car junkyard)


----------



## ikem

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> 100mm f2.8 macro en route. should be fun to play with. planning a return trip to old car city (antique car junkyard)


nice. i need to get out and shoot...


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ikem*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> 100mm f2.8 macro en route. should be fun to play with. planning a return trip to old car city (antique car junkyard)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nice. i need to get out and shoot...
Click to expand...

same here man. been busy being lazy with my job at best buy. i plan to take more time experimenting with areas of photography i havent tried before. macro as well as just having access to a nice tele that is mine will be nice. having constant access to a 70-200 mkII was nice but didnt help that the lens didnt belong to me so i rarely used it for fun out of fear something would happen and i would have to replace it


----------



## Sean Webster

You will like shooting macro with the 100 2.8. It is an awesome lens.


----------



## ikem

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> same here man. been busy being lazy with my job at best buy. i plan to take more time experimenting with areas of photography i havent tried before. macro as well as just having access to a nice tele that is mine will be nice. having constant access to a 70-200 mkII was nice but didnt help that the lens didnt belong to me so i rarely used it for fun out of fear something would happen and i would have to replace it


yea... i need a fast telephoto...

last good pic i took last weekend... came to town, got invited to the after party and had a good talk with him, really down to earth.


----------



## PCModderMike

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ikem*
> 
> yea... i need a fast telephoto...
> 
> last good pic i took last weekend... came to town, got invited to the after party and had a good talk with him, really down to earth.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


That's a cool experience.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> Someone find me something like this so I don't destroy my camera tethering.
> 
> 
> 
> RRS's option is bulky and expensive.


Got my Canon back from repair and they included that protector. Woot.

Also my 50L's focus is on point now.
Quote:


> Your product has been examined and it was found that the adjustment of the lens assembly was incorrect. Best and lens center focus (5d mk11) adjustments were carried out on the lens assembly. Further it was that the product performed according to specifications. The unit was cleaned and checked. Product functions were confirmed.


Quote:


> Your product has been examined and it was found that the circuit board was broken signal could not be input/output via the usb port. The circuit board was replaced. Product functions were confirmed. Other electrical adjustments and inspection, cleaning and image sensor cleaning were carried out.


----------



## Conspiracy

nice!


----------



## PCModderMike

very nice!


----------



## Conspiracy

tehe


----------



## Sean Webster

Why are beauty dishes so much money? It's really making me mad.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Why are beauty dishes so much money? It's really making me mad.


salad bowl bro


----------



## sub50hz

Hello, I am still alive.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Why are beauty dishes so much money? It's really making me mad.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> salad bowl bro
Click to expand...

i know, but still. It is ******ed that they charge soo much for salad bowls. XD I just ordered a mount and I'm gonna make a salad bowl BD later this week.

Here is what i got so far:


----------



## Dream Killer

_hey_, i have the same alarm clock:


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Hello, I am still alive.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> _hey_, i have the same alarm clock:
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


omg, were like brothers!


----------



## Jixr

Hey guys, I'm looking to bring my camera with me more often, Pretty much I'd like to have my DSLR with me everywhere I go. But i'm having some trouble doing so. My camera bag is too bulky to bring everywhere, and screams "Hey look I have lots of camera equipment, i'm so hipster!"

And i've been looking for some tips or ideas and such about good ways to carry your camera with you.

I have a T3i loaded up with a battery pack and my len's, but I can also break it down to a pretty small package with just the body and my 40mm 2.8

any ideas or tips that might make carrying around a camera every day easier?

Or should I just upgrade my phone to one that has a better camera?


----------



## Yoneda

Imminent join'ee.
Does anyone in here have any experiences with the Canon 600D? Any lens recommendations? Literally about to bite the bullet on one.


----------



## Jixr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Yoneda*
> 
> Imminent join'ee.
> Does anyone in here have any experiences with the Canon 600D? Any lens recommendations? Literally about to bite the bullet on one.


Its a great camera, its not the newest, but really the differences between it and the newest verson T5i/700d are very minor, though depending on your budget you may can find a newer model for not that much more.

Depending on pricing though, you can probably get yourself a 600d as well as a 50mm 1.8 or 40mm 2.8 ($120/$150 USD new ) and still come out cheaper than the price of a 700d and get better quality photos compared to the kit lens

the only diffence is a few minor things, the biggest being the touchscreen, which I don't understand why you would want a touch screen on a camera view finder.


----------



## ljason8eg

The 650D has all cross-type AF points (same AF as 60D). That's a large upgrade from previous models and is a reason to choose it over the 600D, especially since they are rather close in price.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Hello, I am still alive.


good, i had thought you died from a heart attack from having too much fun in your new job.


----------



## dudemanppl

Wat, sub has new job?


----------



## golfergolfer

Sean Webster where you at? I'm calling you out for one of the best posts I have seen in a long time here on OCN.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Yes
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: HAHA!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: :P!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: LOL!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: ROFL!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: muhaha
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: hehe
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: :D!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Closer!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Or not!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Or are you?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Keep clicking!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Just keep clicking
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Don't stop
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Keep going!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Almost there
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Or are you?!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Possibly...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Okay
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Just a few more clicks
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: I swear this is the last one!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Or not!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: HAHA!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Keep going!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: You won't!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Or did you?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Do it
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Now you really want to see what's next?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Soo close!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Almost there!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: You worked for this!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: You can do it!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Here you go!


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> good, i had thought you died from a heart attack from having too much fun in your new job.


Not yet, but I do have a wicked tan from being outside every day.


----------



## Jixr

god damn it...

Buy GoPro Black edt.

3 days after return policy is up

"Hey look at the new gopro"

its not much of an improvement, but still, if i could still return it I would...


----------



## Conspiracy

yeah they are making the new black and silver with improved performance. its not supposed to be available for another 2 weeks


----------



## Jixr

You can order it now from GoPro.

But after thinking about it, i'm okay with my black, its is $80 cheaper and I got a free micro sd card with it.

According to the email i got from gopro it made it sounds like the camera itself was smaller, but really its just a smaller case, new glass, better battery and wi-fi.

I never use the wifi unless i'm using the remote, which I also rarely use.

Though the smaller case makes me think that it may not be as durable.

Oh well, at least I will have an easier desision upgrading to the GP4 when it comes out.


----------



## Conspiracy

hmm cool. it wasnt on their site early yesterday they must have just put it up or something.


----------



## Jixr

Yeah I got an email about it early this morning.


----------



## Conspiracy

very cool. i should check my email then hahahaha. thanks for the heads up. i was expecting a newsletter of some sort much sooner but i wasnt allowed to mention it since we have had the new gopros at our store for a while waiting to be put on the shelf.

the improvements arent worth the upgrade as you said. you are totally fine with the normal black edition


----------



## Jixr

Didn't I read somewhere taht you work(ed) at best buy?

I'm 3 days out of return policy and was thinking about calling them to see if they would let me exchange for the new one.

I feel really dumb. If I knew there was new version 2 weeks away I would have waited.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> Didn't I read somewhere taht you work(ed) at best buy?
> 
> I'm 3 days out of return policy and was thinking about calling them to see if they would let me exchange for the new one.
> 
> I feel really dumb. If I knew there was new version 2 weeks away I would have waited.


yeah i work there. it depends on why you talk to. most of my customers that spend a lot get a little extra treatment because they buy a lot from me. only reason they shop at best buy is because i give them good advice which they have never received at another store before. so if you try to return you may get a nice person that will let you do a return exchange since the new hero3+ is the same price as the hero3 regular


----------



## Jixr

well i got it on sale for $320 + free micro sd card, so to upgrade would cost me $100 or so.


----------



## Conspiracy

ah yeah. that was a good deal we ran.


----------



## Jixr

I guess its not really worth it for me, since most of my video and photography work is for my own amusement. I just hope the blk version is not abandoned support wise.

I just feel a bit duped is all. I should just be happy with my now outdated camera lol.

( though I am currious about drop test and such, ) the new case is smaller sure, but it does not seem as shock absorbent compared to the older style case. )

Though I imagine most people don't go deep sea diving or in situations where the camera might get banged up.


----------



## Mongol

Marin got a jerkstopper? Didn't work. Trololol

jk...I<3U Marin.


----------



## laboitenoire

Technology happens.

If it was going to work for you before the new one came out, chances are it will still work









Not trying to be facetious, but just go out and enjoy your purchase! You still got a good deal it sounds like, and it's not like the camera is suddenly useless. Plus, don't forget your time is also worth money. By the time you take it back and exchange it, not only will you spent more but you'll have lost time that you could be out using the camera!


----------



## laboitenoire

So, does anybody know which of the mail order film labs does the best job with B&W?

Yes, I know it's better to just dev my own. However, I no longer have darkroom access and need to dev just one roll of film (I don't foresee myself shooting B&W seriously for some time now) and have it scanned.


----------



## Jake Weary

Is the club still open?

Here is one from a job a while back.


----------



## Sean Webster

nice^

Made my beauty dish! Gonna make a bigger one next.









Parts:
1x Fotodiox Pro Studio Solutions Flash-S-Insert
1x 15" salad bowl (from publix)
1x 3.75" convex mirror (from advanced auto) mounted under the CD.
1x CD
1x can of matte white spray paint
3x 1/4″x 3″ screws
4x 1/4″ x 3/4″ screw
13x 1/4″ nuts

*Note: I had to dremel the holes in the mount so the screws could fit into/through it.


Canon 60D IMG_5573.jpg by Sean Webster Photo, on Flickr

Canon 60D IMG_5575.jpg by Sean Webster Photo, on Flickr

Canon 60D IMG_5523.jpg by Sean Webster Photo, on Flickr

*Sample pics:*


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!




Canon 60D IMG_5537.jpg by Sean Webster Photo, on Flickr

Canon 60D IMG_5570.jpg by Sean Webster Photo, on Flickr

Canon 60D IMG_5544.jpg by Sean Webster Photo, on Flickr


----------



## Conspiracy

DUDE!

nice job sean!


----------



## PCModderMike

Yea.....I was checking out all of the pics on Flickr earlier....really cool stuff.


----------



## dmanstasiu

i love that teacup


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> DUDE!
> 
> nice job sean!


thanks. I can't wait to actually use it in a session and see what I can do. Hopefully tomorrow I'll have something.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PCModderMike*
> 
> Yea.....I was checking out all of the pics on Flickr earlier....really cool stuff.











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dmanstasiu*
> 
> i love that teacup


thanks, its my mumzy's


----------



## funfortehfun

D610 announcement in 48 hrs!


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *funfortehfun*
> 
> D610 announcement in 48 hrs!


cool. although i dont share as much of your excitement lolol


----------



## funfortehfun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> cool. although i dont share as much of your excitement lolol


._.

Not sure if I'm going to upgrade. Current rumors say it has same full metal body as D800 and a 6FPS fire rate.


----------



## Conspiracy

the D610 just seems less exciting now after the whole D600 thing. The D800 is still an awesome camera and all. Nikon just doesnt excite me as much. i havent played with a D4 yet but nothing really does it for me since the last time i shot with a D3s, really love that camera


----------



## funfortehfun

Tru dat. I'm in a hinky-pinky between Nikon and Canon right now - someone's selling an (edit: mint) 5D Mark II locally near me for $1300.


----------



## OmarCCX

Me too, I've got a 40D and these past few weeks I've used a 7D extensively, but I just can't seem to fall in love with it.


----------



## ljason8eg

I always had a love/hate relationship with my 7D. What do you find about it that is unappealing?


----------



## freitz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> nice^
> 
> Made my beauty dish! Gonna make a bigger one next.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Parts:
> 1x Fotodiox Pro Studio Solutions Flash-S-Insert
> 1x 15" salad bowl (from publix)
> 1x 3.75" convex mirror (from advanced auto) mounted under the CD.
> 1x CD
> 1x can of matte white spray paint
> 3x 1/4″x 3″ screws
> 4x 1/4″ x 3/4″ screw
> 13x 1/4″ nuts
> 
> *Note: I had to dremel the holes in the mount so the screws could fit into/through it.
> 
> 
> Canon 60D IMG_5573.jpg by Sean Webster Photo, on Flickr
> 
> Canon 60D IMG_5575.jpg by Sean Webster Photo, on Flickr
> 
> Canon 60D IMG_5523.jpg by Sean Webster Photo, on Flickr
> 
> 
> *Sample pics:*
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Canon 60D IMG_5537.jpg by Sean Webster Photo, on Flickr
> 
> Canon 60D IMG_5570.jpg by Sean Webster Photo, on Flickr
> 
> Canon 60D IMG_5544.jpg by Sean Webster Photo, on Flickr


Stealing This Idea NICE!


----------



## Dream Killer

use an old hard drive platter for better reflectivity.


----------



## Marin

Buy a real beauty dish and strobe head for best results.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*


----------



## OmarCCX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> I always had a love/hate relationship with my 7D. What do you find about it that is unappealing?


Nothing in particular, really. I like the speed and how fast it autofocuses, but I can't feel at home with it.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> Buy a real beauty dish and strobe head for best results.


Sounds like a plan, now where's the money you're giving me to do so?
















I would love some AlienBees B1600 strobes.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> I would love some AlienBees B1600 strobes.




Broncolor or Profoto. Pick one.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> I would love some AlienBees B1600 strobes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Broncolor or Profoto. Pick one.
Click to expand...

Ok then, what is your CC info? lol Dat pricetag.


----------



## Jake Weary

Last year, it was time to buy my own lights for the studio instead of renting space every week. I rented 6 different brands not going to mention them all but I picked up some Paul c Buff Einsteins, bronocolor pulso's and some profoto d1 airs " i think they where D1 airs" oh and some hensel lights. After using and testing the equipment for 3 days straight i decided the einsteins where more for me not just because of the price but the consistency. for my 3 Einsteins and lithium power packs that last a lot longer at a quarter of the cost you cant beat it. my setup 1600.00$ if i where to get any of the others it would have costed me 7k+. I started to regret my purchase a month in because the people i work around all had hensel or profoto kits. The thing that made feel OK about my purchase was seeing a Photographer with contracts I couldn't even imagine having using six 580ex II's haha.

Moral of the story. You don't need 10,000.00 lights.

http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/407/7pti.jpg/

shot with two Einsteins.

http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/845/31gt.jpg/

Used one Einstein and a high output reflector.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> I would love some AlienBees B1600 strobes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Broncolor or Profoto. Pick one.
Click to expand...

BRO

pick BROncolor

dey the best and have BRO in the name so you know its good. but yeah get em









i wish i have had a chance to use broncolor lights. but im not complaining that i have at least had the pleasure of being a lighting assistant on a corporate portrait shoot where we had 5 profotos but those battery packs for profotos... zomg car battery


----------



## MistaBernie

That's odd.. price on 7Ds are dropping like flies. Last two I saw for sale on POTN were under $900 (one was under $800 I think)... I mean I get that it's nearly five year old tech at this point, but it's still quite a bit of camera.


----------



## freitz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> That's odd.. price on 7Ds are dropping like flies. Last two I saw for sale on POTN were under $900 (one was under $800 I think)... I mean I get that it's nearly five year old tech at this point, but it's still quite a bit of camera.


Canon Event Middle of October. Check out Canon Rumors. Talks about a Canon Eos M2 and 7d Mark II.

Here's hoping for the Canon Eos M2 would be great secondary and wife camera if they get it right. I would hope something close to the 70D AF and little better IQ.


----------



## MistaBernie

They've been talking about the 7DII _forever_, and even if they did have an announcement in October it's likely only a development announcement for anything other than the M2


----------



## Jixr

Hey guys, I need some advice, I'm a hobby shooter and recently i've been thinking of selling/trading some of my budget len's for a decent zoom or something.

Currently I have ( Canon T3i )
40mm 2.8 ( what i use most )
50mm 1.8 ( only when in low light or Bokeeeahhh )
Kit lens 17-55 or whatever it is ( only when my 40mm is not wide enough )
cheap tamron 75-300mm ( i've only used maybe 4 times since I've had it )
a rokinon 8mm fisheye ( which is fun to play with, but unless its a moving subject I can get almost equal fisheye shots using my gopro and sadly, at $250 is the most expensive lens I own )

Basically the cheapest of the cheap lens's.

the one I use the most is the 40mm pancake. ( don't know why, I just like it more than the 50mm )

I have a big backpack style bag that carries all my stuff, and I recently bought a military syled sling bag thing thats alot smaller, and is great and allows me to easily have access to my camera ( as opposed to stopping, unzipping a bag, etc ) But its too small to carry all my lens's around.

I was really thinking of getting maybe 1 decent zoom, as much as I like my fast primes its such a pain to constantly swap lens's to get the shot I want.

But i'm just wondering if you guys think i should try to trade some of my gear, and if so, what lens should I look at ( shoestring budget though )
I really like wide angles, I find often i'm shooting indoors or landscapes, etc.

Ideas or suggestions?


----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> Hey guys, I need some advice, I'm a hobby shooter and recently i've been thinking of selling/trading some of my budget len's for a decent zoom or something.
> 
> Currently I have ( Canon T3i )
> 40mm 2.8 ( what i use most )
> 50mm 1.8 ( only when in low light or Bokeeeahhh )
> Kit lens 17-55 or whatever it is ( only when my 40mm is not wide enough )
> cheap tamron 75-300mm ( i've only used maybe 4 times since I've had it )
> a rokinon 8mm fisheye ( which is fun to play with, but unless its a moving subject I can get almost equal fisheye shots using my gopro and sadly, at $250 is the most expensive lens I own )
> 
> Basically the cheapest of the cheap lens's.
> 
> the one I use the most is the 40mm pancake. ( don't know why, I just like it more than the 50mm )
> 
> I have a big backpack style bag that carries all my stuff, and I recently bought a military syled sling bag thing thats alot smaller, and is great and allows me to easily have access to my camera ( as opposed to stopping, unzipping a bag, etc ) But its too small to carry all my lens's around.
> 
> I was really thinking of getting maybe 1 decent zoom, as much as I like my fast primes its such a pain to constantly swap lens's to get the shot I want.
> 
> But i'm just wondering if you guys think i should try to trade some of my gear, and if so, what lens should I look at ( shoestring budget though )
> I really like wide angles, I find often i'm shooting indoors or landscapes, etc.
> 
> Ideas or suggestions?


I can't say whether you need to get a zoom lens, but I can tell you that superzooms don't have the optical quality of primes, and the better zooms are a lot more expensive than primes. I do understand that part about switching lenses from a backpack though, as I have the same problem so I know it's a pain.

On a different note, I'd like to officially join the club, but I noticed that GoneTomorrow isn't active in the thread anymore. I assume I can just put a link in my sig?


----------



## Jake Weary

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> Hey guys, I need some advice, I'm a hobby shooter and recently i've been thinking of selling/trading some of my budget len's for a decent zoom or something.
> 
> Currently I have ( Canon T3i )
> 40mm 2.8 ( what i use most )
> 50mm 1.8 ( only when in low light or Bokeeeahhh )
> Kit lens 17-55 or whatever it is ( only when my 40mm is not wide enough )
> cheap tamron 75-300mm ( i've only used maybe 4 times since I've had it )
> a rokinon 8mm fisheye ( which is fun to play with, but unless its a moving subject I can get almost equal fisheye shots using my gopro and sadly, at $250 is the most expensive lens I own )
> 
> Basically the cheapest of the cheap lens's.
> 
> the one I use the most is the 40mm pancake. ( don't know why, I just like it more than the 50mm )
> 
> I have a big backpack style bag that carries all my stuff, and I recently bought a military syled sling bag thing thats alot smaller, and is great and allows me to easily have access to my camera ( as opposed to stopping, unzipping a bag, etc ) But its too small to carry all my lens's around.
> 
> I was really thinking of getting maybe 1 decent zoom, as much as I like my fast primes its such a pain to constantly swap lens's to get the shot I want.
> 
> But i'm just wondering if you guys think i should try to trade some of my gear, and if so, what lens should I look at ( shoestring budget though )
> I really like wide angles, I find often i'm shooting indoors or landscapes, etc.
> 
> Ideas or suggestions?


I would recommend looking the canon 24-105 or maybe a 70-200 is not the second gens. They're both really nice. If you're planning to upgrade your camera then I would go with the 70-200 but if you're not going to switch for a while take your sensor size into account with the lenses. For instance the 70-200 on your camera would be a 120-320 because of the 1.6 crop and the 24-105 F.4 would be 38.4-168 f4. Just Take 1.6 x the focal length. A 24-105 is f4 would be a good all-around lens.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nicof909*
> 
> I would recommend looking the canon 24-105 or maybe a 70-200 is not the second gens. They're both really nice. If you're planning to upgrade your camera then I would go with the 70-200 but if you're not going to switch for a while take your sensor size into account with the lenses. For instance the 70-200 on your camera would be a 120-320 because of the 1.6 crop and the 24-105 F.4 would be 38.4-168 f4. Just Take 1.6 x the focal length. A 24-105 is f4 would be a good all-around lens.


Neither of those would fit in a shoestring budget.


----------



## freitz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> Hey guys, I need some advice, I'm a hobby shooter and recently i've been thinking of selling/trading some of my budget len's for a decent zoom or something.
> 
> Currently I have ( Canon T3i )
> 40mm 2.8 ( what i use most )
> 50mm 1.8 ( only when in low light or Bokeeeahhh )
> Kit lens 17-55 or whatever it is ( only when my 40mm is not wide enough )
> cheap tamron 75-300mm ( i've only used maybe 4 times since I've had it )
> a rokinon 8mm fisheye ( which is fun to play with, but unless its a moving subject I can get almost equal fisheye shots using my gopro and sadly, at $250 is the most expensive lens I own )
> 
> Basically the cheapest of the cheap lens's.
> 
> the one I use the most is the 40mm pancake. ( don't know why, I just like it more than the 50mm )
> 
> I have a big backpack style bag that carries all my stuff, and I recently bought a military syled sling bag thing thats alot smaller, and is great and allows me to easily have access to my camera ( as opposed to stopping, unzipping a bag, etc ) But its too small to carry all my lens's around.
> 
> I was really thinking of getting maybe 1 decent zoom, as much as I like my fast primes its such a pain to constantly swap lens's to get the shot I want.
> 
> But i'm just wondering if you guys think i should try to trade some of my gear, and if so, what lens should I look at ( shoestring budget though )
> I really like wide angles, I find often i'm shooting indoors or landscapes, etc.
> 
> Ideas or suggestions?


Since you like the 40mm focal length. I honestly love having a fixed focal length when shooting and shoot my 40mm pancake almost all the time. I would go for this if it was me. http://www.amazon.com/Sigma-340101-35mm-Canon-Black/dp/B00A35X6NU/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1381170508&sr=8-1&keywords=sigma+35mm+1.4+art

Sigma Art 1.4 35mm. That will give you 52mm focal length on a crop which will be wider then you 40 and almost a standard 50 on a FF.

Just noticed the shoe string budget. I would go for a 18-135, decently sharp on the wide in not to much. Grab a Canon Refurb.

What is a shoe string budget for you? To be honest I would prefer 1 awesome lens over 3 ok lenses


----------



## Jixr

yeah, I've also noticed there is a Canon 24-85 that can be had within my budget, I've used one once before but thats before I really knew what I was doing with cameras. its an old lens design, and don't think they are in production any more.

I've looked at some 35mm's, but I don't think the aprox 7mm difference will make it that noticeable of a difference compared to the 40. not to mention most 35's are 2x the price of the 40.

Maybe i'll get lucky and find something on my local CL and maybe can trade my fisheye or super zoom for.


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> Hey guys, I need some advice, I'm a hobby shooter and recently i've been thinking of selling/trading some of my budget len's for a decent zoom or something.
> 
> Currently I have ( Canon T3i )
> 40mm 2.8 ( what i use most )
> 50mm 1.8 ( only when in low light or Bokeeeahhh )
> Kit lens 17-55 or whatever it is ( only when my 40mm is not wide enough )
> cheap tamron 75-300mm ( i've only used maybe 4 times since I've had it )
> a rokinon 8mm fisheye ( which is fun to play with, but unless its a moving subject I can get almost equal fisheye shots using my gopro and sadly, at $250 is the most expensive lens I own )
> 
> Basically the cheapest of the cheap lens's.
> 
> the one I use the most is the 40mm pancake. ( don't know why, I just like it more than the 50mm )
> 
> I have a big backpack style bag that carries all my stuff, and I recently bought a military syled sling bag thing thats alot smaller, and is great and allows me to easily have access to my camera ( as opposed to stopping, unzipping a bag, etc ) But its too small to carry all my lens's around.
> 
> I was really thinking of getting maybe 1 decent zoom, as much as I like my fast primes its such a pain to constantly swap lens's to get the shot I want.
> 
> But i'm just wondering if you guys think i should try to trade some of my gear, and if so, what lens should I look at ( shoestring budget though )
> I really like wide angles, I find often i'm shooting indoors or landscapes, etc.
> 
> Ideas or suggestions?


How much of a shoe string budget are we talking about?

28-135mm can had fairly cheap and it's not a bad lens.

Like Jkuhn said I wouldn't recommend AIO zooms. They all tend to suffer from the problems.


----------



## Jixr

pretty much whatever I can sell my other lens's for and maybe $100 cash lol


----------



## Jake Weary

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> Neither of those would fit in a shoestring budget.


the 24-105 and a 700-200 could be gotten from KEH or craigslist for very reasonable price. look on the canon forums for sales and such.


----------



## Jixr

resonable price is very subjective.

talking to a guy who eats ramen about 4 days out of the week.

and its hard for me to justify a grand for something thats pretty hobby level to me.


----------



## freitz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> resonable price is very subjective.
> 
> talking to a guy who eats ramen about 4 days out of the week.
> 
> and its hard for me to justify a grand for something thats pretty hobby level to me.


Whats your price point? That would help. Give us a range.


----------



## Marin

I forgot Fuji discontinued 4x5 instant film. Going to have to use my expired stuff for the rest of my series.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> I forgot Fuji discontinued 4x5 instant film. Going to have to use my expired stuff for the rest of my series.


you still buying and using brand name film????

i thought at this point you would be making your own emulsion lolol. not a true hipstersaurus until you make your own film


----------



## Unknownm

maybe you guys can help me out. Before when I owned 6D with 15mm fisheye lens, I really enjoyed taking pictures. Kinda wanna find one for my Pentax K-x, you guys recommend any?


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Unknownm*
> 
> maybe you guys can help me out. Before when I owned 6D with 15mm fisheye lens, I really enjoyed taking pictures. Kinda wanna find one for my Pentax K-x, you guys recommend any?


rokinon/samyang 8mm ?

http://www.amazon.com/Rokinon-FE8M-P-Fisheye-Pentax-Black/dp/B002LTWIB2


----------



## Conspiracy

helped setup some lights for the WNBA finals taking place here in Gwinnett, GA., just outside of ATL. We installed 8 Elinchroms and ran roughly 500 feet of sync cord. We took a bunch of light meter readings around the court and averaged about 1/250 f6.3 iso160









http://www.flickr.com/photos/br1an_r/10186567554/
Untitled by brian_roberts, on Flickr

in the left corner you can see another grey reflector. so for anyone wondering we doubled up and put 2 lights in each corner.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/br1an_r/10186721996/
Untitled by brian_roberts, on Flickr


----------



## Dream Killer

i was looking at a photo book of the NHL a couple of years ago and wondered how the photos were so bright. i learned sometime after that that stadiums are wired with flash systems. that's probably the tightest thing i've ever learned photography wise.


----------



## Sean Webster

awesome, I had no idea about that being set up like so.


----------



## ikem

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> awesome, I had no idea about that being set up like so.


same,

500 ft of sync, are there any issues with the long runs?


----------



## laboitenoire

Shouldn't be, as far as the speed of light is concerned.


----------



## Conspiracy

nope no issues with the line. nothing more than a long wire with strobes piggy backed off of it with a pocket wizard at one end, they all fire at the same time.

now most stadiums and arenas usually have different strobe setups but basically its one in every corner with a big reflector and some cinefoil to guide the light so it falls off right at the side lines.

but yeah arena lighting is pretty intense but really awesome


----------



## boogschd

wow, never knew they use strobes in games

ive always thought the arena lights+fast lenses were enough









TIL


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boogschd*
> 
> wow, never knew they use strobes in games
> 
> ive always thought the arena lights+fast lenses were enough
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TIL


haha well the burst of light is soo fast on some strobes that most people dont notice it. thats how they freeze the action while also getting really dramatic shots. ambient arena lighting + fast lenses result in good action shots with boring lighting. sadly i dont have any samples i can quickly post to show the difference. but if you look at shots on SI and USA today there is a nice mix between ambient arena lighting and strobed sports. i have not had the luxury of shooting sports on strobes, i only get paid to help set them up more as a lighting/photo assistant. after the WNBA finals ill link to some of the images that will be shot under these lights so yall can have a comparison


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> after the WNBA finals ill link to some of the images that will be shot under these lights so yall can have a comparison


thatd be nice


----------



## MistaBernie

@Conspiracy thanks for the impending links!

(dont mind me, just showing off new functionality)


----------



## Dream Killer

don't tell me huddler is gonna add pound/number signs too


----------



## PCModderMike

Can't wait to see some of those shots myself.


----------



## MistaBernie

No clue @Dream Killer.. I didn't even know about this till I saw some post about how we were supposed to promote it. You can shut off notification emails about being mentioned, but I do plan on using it when I mention members..


----------



## Marin

@Dream Killer


----------



## nvidiaftw12

@Marin


----------



## Marin

Can you not follow me around, it's weird. Thx.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Just reading through my subscriptions,

thx


----------



## Marin

I know a creeper when I see one.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Psh. If I were to creep, I'd creep on someone worth creeping on.


----------



## Marin

So you're a creeper then.


----------



## Sean Webster

first time shooting star trails...and I learned A LOT. I'll post up a few pics soon.


----------



## Jixr

i'm kinda conflicted, i'm thinking of trying to sell off my cheap lens collection and find my self a 24-X L lens... i feel like life would be so much easier with just 1 good lens vs several crap ones. Ideas?


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> i'm kinda conflicted, i'm thinking of trying to sell off my cheap lens collection and find my self a 24-X L lens... i feel like life would be so much easier with just 1 good lens vs several crap ones. Ideas?


What about renting out the lens and seeing for yourself if that's what you may want. I'm not saying to no get the lens, but they are a big investment especially if you are on the fence about it.


----------



## Jixr

yeah, thats a good idea, I just feel like all my pictures are lacking a bit, and i've not found anything that makes it pop. basically, that range would replace everything I currently use ( i mainly use a 40mm 2.8 )


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> yeah, thats a good idea, *I just feel like all my pictures are lacking a bit, and i've not found anything that makes it pop.* basically, that range would replace everything I currently use ( i mainly use a 40mm 2.8 )


That's from your own composition and editing skill. A lens won't fix that.


----------



## Eggs and bacon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> That's from your own composition and editing skill. A lens won't fix that.


This gave me an idea, can you post a mini guide on your editing process? I always love the photos you post here.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Eggs and bacon*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> That's from your own composition and editing skill. A lens won't fix that.
> 
> 
> 
> This gave me an idea, can you post a mini guide on your editing process? I always love the photos you post here.
Click to expand...

Ok, i'll post up something when I get enough free time. Maybe we can start a mini "how to edit thread" where people can post their process from before to after.

Here are my star shots btw: http://www.overclock.net/t/1433548/went-for-a-ride-yesterday-and-shot-the-stars


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> No clue @Dream Killer.. I didn't even know about this till I saw some post about how we were supposed to promote it. You can shut off notification emails about being mentioned, but I do plan on using it when I mention members..


so when i click my name i get this:


so i went, hmmmmmm DIAGNOSIS MODE....the mySql or PHP guys probably messed up something so i added a %20 in my name instead of a - :


*fail*. tell your php engineers to use urlencode() bro!
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> @Dream Killer


----------



## Marin

@Dream Killer

@Dream Killer

@Dream Killer

@Dream Killer

@Dream Killer

@Dream Killer

@Dream Killer

@Dream Killer

@Dream Killer

@Dream Killer

@Dream Killer

@Dream Killer

@Dream Killer

@Dream Killer

@Dream Killer

@Dream Killer

@Dream Killer

@Dream Killer


----------



## Dream Killer




----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> @Dream Killer
> 
> @Dream Killer
> 
> @Dream Killer
> 
> @Dream Killer
> 
> @Dream Killer
> 
> @Dream Killer
> 
> @Dream Killer
> 
> @Dream Killer
> 
> @Dream Killer
> 
> @Dream Killer
> 
> @Dream Killer
> 
> @Dream Killer
> 
> @Dream Killer
> 
> @Dream Killer
> 
> @Dream Killer
> 
> @Dream Killer
> 
> @Dream Killer
> 
> @Dream Killer


New toy?


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*


roflmao ya think??


----------



## Marin

Wish there was digital 4x5.


----------



## Eggs and bacon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> Wish there was digital 4x5.


They exist, in the 10k+ price range.
http://www.betterlight.com/products4X5.html


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Eggs and bacon*
> 
> They exist, in the 10k+ price range.
> http://www.betterlight.com/products4X5.html


Scanning backs are an abomination.


----------



## Jixr

hey guys, i'm thinking of ditching my cheaper lens's for a canon 17-40mm f4 L for my t3i. I used it at the store and loved the focal range on a crop body.

I'm looking at a used one, and the money is a bit tight, but since it would be replacing my kit lens, my 40mm pancake, and my fisheye, and would be one nice walk around lens, it seems like it would be worth it for me. ( i know the 17-55 2.8 is a better way to go, but teh used L will cost me $500 and a used 17-55 will be around 7-800. and then I could sell off some of my cheaper lens's and take less of a hit in my pocket.

ideas?


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> hey guys, i'm thinking of ditching my cheaper lens's for a canon 17-40mm f4 L for my t3i. I used it at the store and loved the focal range on a crop body.
> 
> I'm looking at a used one, and the money is a bit tight, but since it would be replacing my kit lens, my 40mm pancake, and my fisheye, and would be one nice walk around lens, it seems like it would be worth it for me. ( i know the 17-55 2.8 is a better way to go, but teh used L will cost me $500 and a used 17-55 will be around 7-800. and then I could sell off some of my cheaper lens's and take less of a hit in my pocket.
> 
> ideas?


as long as you dont care about it being f4. i love my 17-40. bought it for $500 with a B+W UV filter on facebook


----------



## Jixr

The one i'm looking at is trading my 40mm pancake and $500 cash for, a bit steep it seems, but its only 4 months old and in good shape.

If i picked it up I would sell off some of my ohter lens's and it would only cost me 2-300 out of pocket.

though the f4 thing worries me, but I'll always have my 50 1.8 for fast action stuff. But recently i've become a victim of having a wide apature, i often find myself not getting the entire subject in focus and other focus errors ( like in group shots, where everyone isnt lined up ) I suppose thats just more my fault for the improper settings.

But I love the wider end of the lens, and there are not that many options that would not cost me more than this lens. the 17-55 2.8 is probably the way to go, but I love the fact that the 17-40 does not physically get any longer when you zoom in. Though used ones are a bit more expensive than the L.

Is there any formula to determine how much iso I would have to bump up to shoot the same at f4 as f2.8 for example?

if I sold off my fisheye and my gopro I could probably come close to breaking even, and would probably sell off my 70-300 cheapo zoom that I never use.

Also, is an L zoom still optically better than a cheap prime?


----------



## PCModderMike

I'm sure this has been asked before, many times...but trying to quickly get some options, so sorry....but what's a good place to pick up used gear? Specifically used lenses?


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PCModderMike*
> 
> I'm sure this has been asked before, many times...but trying to quickly get some options, so sorry....but what's a good place to pick up used gear? Specifically used lenses?


Forums like POTN or Keh.com


----------



## PCModderMike

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Forums like POTN or Keh.com


I stumbled upon KEH before coming back in here. I like what I'm seeing.
I'll check out the forum. Thanks Sean.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> The one i'm looking at is trading my 40mm pancake and $500 cash for, a bit steep it seems, but its only 4 months old and in good shape.
> 
> If i picked it up I would sell off some of my ohter lens's and it would only cost me 2-300 out of pocket.
> 
> though the f4 thing worries me, but I'll always have my 50 1.8 for fast action stuff. But recently i've become a victim of having a wide apature, i often find myself not getting the entire subject in focus and other focus errors ( like in group shots, where everyone isnt lined up ) I suppose thats just more my fault for the improper settings.
> 
> But I love the wider end of the lens, and there are not that many options that would not cost me more than this lens. the 17-55 2.8 is probably the way to go, but I love the fact that the 17-40 does not physically get any longer when you zoom in. Though used ones are a bit more expensive than the L.
> 
> Is there any formula to determine how much iso I would have to bump up to shoot the same at f4 as f2.8 for example?
> 
> if I sold off my fisheye and my gopro I could probably come close to breaking even, and would probably sell off my 70-300 cheapo zoom that I never use.
> 
> Also, is an L zoom still optically better than a cheap prime?


well its 1 stop slower. so if you are accustomed to shooting at iso 400 f2.8 you will now be shooting iso 800 f4 or you can adjust shutter speed to keep the iso the same. being 1 stop slower isnt bad especially if you have a speedlight for indoor stuff


----------



## aksthem1

KEH is probably the best place to go for used gear. BGN/Bargain grade gear is still in relatively good condition. They are conservative with their ratings. Sometimes it's just dusty or dirty.

Adorama and B&H has used gear, but it's fairly more expensive. Sometimes you'll get lucky and get it cheap. Then their rating system flip flops too.

Fredmiranda is another good forum.


----------



## Jixr

okay, that makes sense ( this is all just a fun hobby thing so i'm not sure what determines a stop difference and all that ) I understand what the iso, stops and all that do, just not sure what they mean lol.

Though I was thinking of trading or selling my gopro ( turns out i never use it ) to buy a 430ex speedlight.

I know there is no perfect do everything lens, but Ideally I would like a nice wide zoom ( like the 17-40 ) and a 70-200mm f4 and the plastic fantastic 50 and i pretty much have everything covered.

Most of what I do would be considered nature/street photography, and am working on a photo-a-day project and if I can ditch a bag with 5 lens's for just carrying around my body, a lens or two, and a flash when I get one, then I would be pretty good to go. Yesterday while out shooting a waterfall from all the recent rain, I found myself swapping between my 40 and my kit lens because it was the only thing I had that was wide enough for the shot, and even between the kit and the cheap 40, I can tell a huge difference in quality.

Though me buying it used, as long as I keep it in good shape, I'm sure I could get close to my money back if I decide I don't like it and want something different.


----------



## Dream Killer

swapping lenses, aint nobody got time for dat.

the thing i've been doing these past few years is just walking out with one lens and leave the rest at home. this way i never have to worry about swapping lenses. it's also a good way of learning what kind of FOV your lens is going to translate in the view finder and final image. for example, at this point i can pretty much look at anything and imagine it being framed on a 24mm lens on 35mm film.


----------



## Conspiracy

if you are having trouble with swapping lenses then you need more camera bodies trololol

but yeah i do the same thing DK does. only take one lens with me when im out and about as i always know what ill generally be shooting. on the rare occasion i go hiking/adventuring then ill take everything with me


----------



## Jixr

yeah, thats why I'm really looking at the 17-40, nearly everything I shoot daily is with my 40 or my kit lens if I cant move back any further.

I only use the 50 when its dark ( and the FOV is so tight that its not that useful to me )

It really does seem perfect for what I want, its just i'm not sure if I want to drop the cash ( as $500 is a good bit of money to me ) but its a craigslist deal so the guy could always flake out anyway.


----------



## PCModderMike

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> if you are having trouble with swapping lenses then _*you need more camera bodies trololol*_
> 
> but yeah i do the same thing DK does. only take one lens with me when im out and about as i always know what ill generally be shooting. on the rare occasion i go hiking/adventuring then ill take everything with me


Now that's a solid solution. lol


----------



## MistaBernie

I'll usually bring a couple of extra lenses with me when I go to shoot, but I rarely change lenses unless I'm trying to accomplish something really specific on a whim.


----------



## Jixr

Maybe one day when I upgrade i'll hold on to my T3i ( i love the little guy )
I like lens's, but it just does not make sense to me to carry all the ones I have.

usually when I see something that i need to change lens to shoot, its already past, so thats no bueno there.

Also, i'll be wanting to get a flash soon, do bulbs go bad on flahes, are they rated for X amount of use before they go bad or can I buy a used one and expect to be good to go?


----------



## ljason8eg

Flash bulbs shouldn't go bad for a long, long time if they are not abused. I have a flash for my Pentax SF1 that was made in the 80s and it still works fine.


----------



## Conspiracy

yeah flashes last a long while. i would check out yongnuo. they are solid and great beginners flashes that wont break the bank


----------



## Jixr

i suppose what it comes down to is i'm looking to pretty much giving up a 40mm 2.8, 70-300mm tamron, 8mm fisheye, and a gopro for a 17-40mm L and a 430ex speedlight.

just not if its worth it or not.


----------



## Dream Killer

http://www.dpreview.com/news/2013/10/16/sony-announces-first-full-frame-mirrorless-ilc-cameras-a7-and-a7r?utm_campaign=internal-link&utm_source=news-list&utm_medium=text&ref=title_0_2

way whaaaaaaaaaaaa

edit: wait, the flange distance is still the same as their slr counterparts, that defeats the purpose!


----------



## Marin

Oh look, Sony did what every other companies too stupid to do.


----------



## PCModderMike

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> yeah flashes last a long while. i would check out yongnuo. they are solid and great beginners flashes that wont break the bank


QFT. They're great, I've got two so far.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> edit: wait, the flange distance is still the same as their slr counterparts, that defeats the purpose!


Where does it say that.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> http://www.dpreview.com/news/2013/10/16/sony-announces-first-full-frame-mirrorless-ilc-cameras-a7-and-a7r?utm_campaign=internal-link&utm_source=news-list&utm_medium=text&ref=title_0_2
> 
> way whaaaaaaaaaaaa
> 
> edit: wait, the flange distance is still the same as their slr counterparts, that defeats the purpose!


ive been reading about the new sony all day. it intrigues me and makes me









i dont need FF digital that badly where i would switch to sony when all my friends shoot canon which allows me to borrow canon glass and bodies. if i can mount canon glass on the new sony and retain AF then id consider it but honestly digital is digital i have no need to upgrade until my 7D breaks. i barely ever shoot anymore anyway so at my pace of shooting the bronica meets almost all of my photo needs to be able to shoot for fun


----------



## Marin

APS-C =/= FF. So digital's not digital.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> i suppose what it comes down to is i'm looking to pretty much giving up a 40mm 2.8, 70-300mm tamron, 8mm fisheye, and a gopro for a 17-40mm L and a 430ex speedlight.
> 
> just not if its worth it or not.


If that's your budget I'd strongly consider the Sigma 17-50. You'll get one stop more light, better IQ and IS for the same amount of money. Yes, it extends when it zooms and isn't weather sealed but I'm not sure I'd let that be a deal breaker since you're using a T3i.

The 17-40 was designed for the less pixel-dense full frame sensors and it really doesn't come into its own until its stopped down.


----------



## Jixr

well, truely my budget is more around $500 vs the $800+ of a new 40L


----------



## Sean Webster

don't those sonys have the same sensors as the D600 and D800?


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> i suppose what it comes down to is i'm looking to pretty much giving up a 40mm 2.8, 70-300mm tamron, 8mm fisheye, and a gopro for a 17-40mm L and a 430ex speedlight.
> 
> just not if its worth it or not.
> 
> 
> 
> If that's your budget I'd strongly consider the Sigma 17-50. You'll get one stop more light, better IQ and IS for the same amount of money. Yes, it extends when it zooms and isn't weather sealed but I'm not sure I'd let that be a deal breaker since you're using a T3i.
> 
> *The 17-40 was designed for the less pixel-dense full frame sensors and it really doesn't come into its own until its stopped down.*
Click to expand...

pretty much that. its nice and all but its really nice on APS-H and FF sensors. i loved using it on a 1DmkIV for a very brief basketball gig


----------



## MistaBernie

Loved my 17-50, only got rid of it because I started shooting 5D's and wasn't shooting my 7D enough to justify keeping it.

In other news.. 7D & 135L might be getting brought into Fenway this weekend if the ALCS comes back to Boston. I used to bring a 70-200 in my bag and just wear my camera in and have never had issues but I have a feeling security is raised a bit around playoff games..

*WHOA..* upper bleacher _FACE VALUE_ tickets are $125? Normally a whopping.. $13 dollars I believe. No thanks.


----------



## Marin




----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*


yummy profoto. post more!


----------



## Jixr

well, the guy ended up taking a slightly less cash offer for the 17-40L

I tried the tamron at the camera store, and i'm sure its a better bang for the buck, but since i'm looking for a good all arounder, I figured I might as well go with the L

The AF is night and day difference, build quality cant compare to the tamron, and the stabilized version was more than the L would have cost me.

Its in great shape, nearly flawless, Guy who sold it is moving up to one of the 2.8 L's, and I can't wait to take this thing outisde tomorrow and run it through its paces.

the AF is amazing even in the dark, though I did find it hunting a little bit indoors, but the lighting was really weird in the room so thats fine.

Now I gotta sell all my other junk and get some cash back and grab a flash.

Though I may repost it on Craigslist and see if I can trade it for a canon 18-55 2.8 IS, even used, those were going for more than the L, and i only have about $600 into the L and might can trade up in a way.
Thanks for the help guys.


----------



## Jake Weary

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*


What exactly are you doing? shooting through what looks to be acrylic.


----------



## JKuhn

For those who are looking at buying second-hand glass:

DPS used lens tips


----------



## silvrr

Anyone looking for a Sigma 50mm 1.4 in Canon mount? I may or may not have one for sale.

Not that im selling outsides the buy/sell forum.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *silvrr*
> 
> Anyone looking for a Sigma 50mm 1.4 in Canon mount? I may or may not have one for sale.
> 
> Not that im selling outsides the buy/sell forum.


make that a zeiss opus 55mm f1.4 and ill sell you my soul


----------



## sub50hz

Yall be crazy.


----------



## OmarCCX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *silvrr*
> 
> Anyone looking for a Sigma 50mm 1.4 in Canon mount? I may or may not have one for sale.
> 
> Not that im selling outsides the buy/sell forum.


I may or may not want to trade you my Tamron 17-50 2.8 for it.


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OmarCCX*
> 
> I may or may not want to trade you my Tamron 17-50 2.8 for it.


Sorry its gone, off to a new home in the south.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *silvrr*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *OmarCCX*
> 
> I may or may not want to trade you my Tamron 17-50 2.8 for it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry its gone, *off to a new home in the south*.
Click to expand...

which is the best place to live btw


----------



## Marin

Websites being updated but there's nudes. Message me here or on Steam if you're curious.


----------



## sub50hz

PM me that steez.


----------



## Conspiracy

i am curious


----------



## PCModderMike




----------



## Jixr

Hey guys, So I have my fist real photo shoot today and was packing up all my gear and inspecting everything when I noticed a faily big black speck inside my 50mm 1.8, which is fine, because this lens is simple enough to pop open and clean, then looked at my 17-40mm f4 L that I just got, i noticed a "fuzzy" from some kind of cotton something.

Anyway, I know it won't affect picture quality, but was wondering if there was anything I can do to get it out?

I know zooms can suck in dust if you are not careful, and I try to be, but would like it if I could keep it as clean as possible.


----------



## funfortehfun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> Hey guys, So I have my fist real photo shoot today and was packing up all my gear and inspecting everything when I noticed a faily big black speck inside my 50mm 1.8, which is fine, because this lens is simple enough to pop open and clean, then looked at my 17-40mm f4 L that I just got, i noticed a "fuzzy" from some kind of cotton something.
> 
> Anyway, I know it won't affect picture quality, but was wondering if there was anything I can do to get it out?
> 
> I know zooms can suck in dust if you are not careful, and I try to be, but would like it if I could keep it as clean as possible.


"Fuzzeh" could mean fungus - what you're seeing might be hyphae. That's just my mind jumping to conclusions too quickly though.

Any pictures with a flashlight shone through the lens? That might give us a better picture.


----------



## Jixr

it does not look like fungus, it really looks like some sort of synthetic string from some kinda cloth.

its really tiny, but it bothers me a bit. I suppose I'll try to get one of those rocket blowers and try to blow it out.

it looks like its in the middle of the lens, and i've watched videos how to take the front element off, but its hard to tell where its at.
( i wont be able to upload any pics till late tonight )


----------



## aksthem1

If it's not fungus and it looks like it's more towards the middle elements then don't bother taking apart. It won't show up or degrade IQ.


----------



## Jixr

Yeah, i'll just pick up one of those rocket blowers ( I should have one anyway ) and see if it helps.

though its easy to pop this lens semi-apart and that may help me blow it out.


----------



## ljason8eg

I'd be careful about popping lenses apart to clean out dust bunnies out. There's no way it'll ever show up in a photo and some lenses can easily be knocked out of calibration if certain parts are disassembled.


----------



## Conspiracy

theres a fungus among us. be careful with your lenses trololol


----------



## Conspiracy

looking for suggestions on where to start looking for a new camera bag. i really want to upgrade to something backpack style that can fit everything in my sig except the minolta and have space for future stuff. at some point in the future ill be purchasing a 70-200 f2.8 so would love for that to fit as well

dont know who to start looking at for a nice backpack that can fit a lot of gear but isnt absurdly large. would love something discrete thats in the style of domke or crumpler but is a camera bag on the inside and doesnt actually look like it on the outside.

idk if im even looking for something that exists honestly. i hope it does and id love to keep cost below $250 but really $150 would be ideal


----------



## renekluitenberg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> looking for suggestions on where to start looking for a new camera bag. i really want to upgrade to something backpack style that can fit everything in my sig except the minolta and have space for future stuff. at some point in the future ill be purchasing a 70-200 f2.8 so would love for that to fit as well
> 
> dont know who to start looking at for a nice backpack that can fit a lot of gear but isnt absurdly large. would love something discrete thats in the style of domke or crumpler but is a camera bag on the inside and doesnt actually look like it on the outside.
> 
> idk if im even looking for something that exists honestly. i hope it does and id love to keep cost below $250 but really $150 would be ideal


You could take a look at the ThinkTank Streetwalker HardDrive. Not sure if it's the look you want or if it fits all the gear you want, but might be interesting to have a look at.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *renekluitenberg*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> looking for suggestions on where to start looking for a new camera bag. i really want to upgrade to something backpack style that can fit everything in my sig except the minolta and have space for future stuff. at some point in the future ill be purchasing a 70-200 f2.8 so would love for that to fit as well
> 
> dont know who to start looking at for a nice backpack that can fit a lot of gear but isnt absurdly large. would love something discrete thats in the style of domke or crumpler but is a camera bag on the inside and doesnt actually look like it on the outside.
> 
> idk if im even looking for something that exists honestly. i hope it does and id love to keep cost below $250 but really $150 would be ideal
> 
> 
> 
> You could take a look at the ThinkTank Streetwalker HardDrive. Not sure if it's the look you want or if it fits all the gear you want, but might be interesting to have a look at.
Click to expand...

ooh thanks. that looks very interesting. i think that would easily fit most of my stuff. the pro size looks appealing


----------



## Jixr

horray, while out shooting yesterday the little fuzzy I had in my lens must have got knocked loose and the glass is now all clean again.

Though a question, the date code on my lens says its from 04, but is in pretty much like new condition and the seller swears he bough it new about 6 months ago. is it possible that this lens has sat on a shelf for nearly 10 years?

is a US0500 date code


----------



## freitz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> horray, while out shooting yesterday the little fuzzy I had in my lens must have got knocked loose and the glass is now all clean again.
> 
> Though a question, the date code on my lens says its from 04, but is in pretty much like new condition and the seller swears he bough it new about 6 months ago. is it possible that this lens has sat on a shelf for nearly 10 years?
> 
> is a US0500 date code


Have you seen some of these older camera shops. I think its possible that the lens could have sat for sometime.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> horray, while out shooting yesterday the little fuzzy I had in my lens must have got knocked loose and the glass is now all clean again.
> 
> Though a question, the date code on my lens says its from 04, but is in pretty much like new condition and the seller swears he bough it new about 6 months ago. is it possible that this lens has sat on a shelf for nearly 10 years?
> 
> is a US0500 date code


Yep, if it's on the lens mount, that's the date code. He might have bought it six months ago, but that date code does sound like an '04.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> horray, while out shooting yesterday the little fuzzy I had in my lens must have got knocked loose and the glass is now all clean again.
> 
> Though a question, the date code on my lens says its from 04, but is in pretty much like new condition and the seller swears he bough it new about 6 months ago. is it possible that this lens has sat on a shelf for nearly 10 years?
> 
> is a US0500 date code


Stop worrying about it and just go shoot, gat dang.


----------



## freitz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Stop worrying about it and just go shoot, gat dang.


----------



## Jixr

well the reason I asked is I've been working with a guy who may trade me his 17-55 2.8 for it, but got turned away when he found out the date.


----------



## sub50hz

That's stupid. The optical design of the 17-40 hasn't ever changed, so it makes no difference what year it was made in, whether it be 2004 or 2012. The 17-40 blows on APS-C anyway, I had one for film and it was a great UWA but it was a dumb lens to mount on the 50D.


----------



## Jixr

yeah, oh well. I like it on my crop, but after being outdoors i'm starting to regret not picking up the 55 instead. I had "L eyes"
its still a nice lens though.

Currently working out a deal to trade it for a 17-55, I tried the 55 at teh store, and the build quality kinda sucks compared to the L, pointing up the lens started to creep back in, but the 2.8 and IS really would be a big help for me.


----------



## freitz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> yeah, oh well. I like it on my crop, but after being outdoors i'm starting to regret not picking up the 55 instead. I had "L eyes"
> its still a nice lens though.
> 
> Currently working out a deal to trade it for a 17-55, I tried the 55 at teh store, and the build quality kinda sucks compared to the L, pointing up the lens started to creep back in, but the 2.8 and IS really would be a big help for me.


Why not go for the sigma art 24-105 f4. That's a nice do everything lens and in the 800$ price point you are at with the 17-55, better build quality. Or find a used L 24-105 for about the same price.


----------



## Marin

By the time you get a lens we'll be moving onto the next frontier after digital.


----------



## freitz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> By the time you get a lens we'll be moving onto the next frontier after digital.


Yeah he has been asking for lens advice for some time.


----------



## Sean Webster

Did a "fashion shoot" with my Uni's photo club for our fashion club. Spoke with a pro and got some good advice on having photography as a part time career too. Learned a lot about using my flashes in bight noon sunlight and got to play around with some ideas. . Finally got to use my ghetto beauty dish....and broke it after the shoot.







Oh well, time for a v2!









One thing I need to improve on is posing the models. Today I was completely drawing blanks for ideas.

Here are the shots if you want to check it out: https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.760637220618550.1073741840.472462492769359&type=1&l=f59f0b7b88


----------



## Conspiracy

cool stuff man. liked your page


----------



## Sean Webster

thanks mate!









Ooh, here is a BTS!


----------



## PCModderMike

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *freitz*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> By the time you get a lens we'll be moving onto the next frontier after digital.
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah he has been asking for lens advise for some time.
Click to expand...

Some people just need a lot of *advice.*








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> thanks mate!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ooh, here is a BTS!


----------



## Conspiracy

http://www.flickr.com/photos/br1an_r/sets/72157637053971073/

results of my recent trip to old car city to shoot some stuff and test out a bunch of different rolls of b/w film. was not impressed with the results from the Fuji Acros and was very very happy with Fomapan. Realized once i got there that ISO 100 film was a little too slow for shooting in the shade surrounded by tons of trees lol. Some shots came out cleaner than others. Was a fun trip but next time ill either push it or shoot iso 400 film in the shade and 100 in the outside areas with less tree cover


----------



## Jixr

Yeah sorry guys, I just want to get something i'm happy with.

I did end up trading the 40 L for the 17-55, but I think mine is either super dirty or a bad copy or something.
all my pictures just look a little fuzzy to me and kinda cloudy.

Guess the PO knew it and wanted to ditch it quick.

Gonna see what I can do with it, and will probably just go buy a new lens so I don't have any of these problems.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/br1an_r/sets/72157637053971073/
> 
> results of my recent trip to old car city to shoot some stuff and test out a bunch of different rolls of b/w film. was not impressed with the results from the Fuji Acros and was very very happy with Fomapan. Realized once i got there that ISO 100 film was a little too slow for shooting in the shade surrounded by tons of trees lol. Some shots came out cleaner than others. Was a fun trip but next time ill either push it or shoot iso 400 film in the shade and 100 in the outside areas with less tree cover


I love the tones and contrast of your shots. That is a a awesome looking place,


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> Yeah sorry guys, I just want to get something i'm happy with.
> 
> I did end up trading the 40 L for the 17-55, but I think mine is either super dirty or a bad copy or something.
> all my pictures just look a little fuzzy to me and kinda cloudy.
> 
> Guess the PO knew it and wanted to ditch it quick.
> 
> Gonna see what I can do with it, and will probably just go buy a new lens so I don't have any of these problems.


Samples? And what are you comparing the sharpness to?


----------



## Jixr

I'll upload some tonight. you guys can tell me what you think.


----------



## Sean Webster

I found this amusing:


----------



## freitz

Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> I found this amusing:


----------



## Jixr

here are some RAW uploads from my T3i with my lens.

Maybe its me, but it just seems ever so slightly fuzzy.


f2.8 iso 1600 1/60 47mm


f3.2 iso 100 1/500

I can upload more if needed.

It just doesn't seem right to me. and my other lens's don't look like this.

and if the lens seems to be okay, then i'm not a big fan of it.









I'm kinda thinking of tearing it apart and giving the elements a good cleaning with a lens pen. just seems a bit greasy to me.


----------



## Sean Webster

idk, i think you are seeing things. lol


----------



## ljason8eg

I don't think they look bad. The first one is at 1600 ISO. That's going to affect the sharpness. The second one is backlit, which explains the lower contrast and lack of sharpness on the railing.

In any case, I don't think opening up the lens and cleaning elements is going to fix the problem. There would need to be a colossal amount of dust inside for images to have any visible degradation.


----------



## Jixr

well, i just called the local camera store and they said they can test the lens for free if it needs any servicing or anything.

either that the IQ is just less than I was expecting or something.


----------



## freitz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> well, i just called the local camera store and they said they can test the lens for free if it needs any servicing or anything.
> 
> either that the IQ is just less than I was expecting or something.


What lens are you shooting?

I am trying to spot what you are talking about.


----------



## freitz

You said you ditched the 40 L (not sure what lens that is...) for a 17-55 I am assuming you are talking about this (http://www.amazon.com/Canon-EF-S-17-55mm-Lens-Cameras/dp/B000EW8074/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1383006027&sr=8-1&keywords=canon+17-55+f+2.8)


----------



## laboitenoire

Yeah, those shots look fine to me...


----------



## Jixr

yes, I had a canon 17-40mm f4 L, but based on most peoples recomendations i traded it for a canon 17-55 f2.8 IS

Just something about it i don't like about it.

Maybe its just all in my head. Oh well.

It could very well be that before both these lens's i've only used primes so a zoom would obviously be not as crisp and sharp compared to a zoom.


----------



## freitz

If I remember your on a crop?

I would say the 17-40 is sharper then the 17-55. Hard to tell really I have never shot a 17-55 no but from what you are saying you notice in the pictures that would be my guess. Shoot the 17-55 at f4 and let us know what you think


----------



## ljason8eg

Assuming both lenses are working as designed, the 17-40 is not sharper than the 17-55, especially on the long end of the zoom.


----------



## Jixr

iso 100 at f5 and is still looks hazey to me.
( you may have to click on the photo or something to enlarge )

http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/10544835846/sizes/o/in/photostream/
full size

( and i'm viewing this on a 1440 monitor and my eyesight is fine )

Maybe the L just has better colors or something.


----------



## freitz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> 
> 
> iso 100 at f5 and is still looks hazey to me.
> ( you may have to click on the photo or something to enlarge )
> 
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/10544835846/sizes/o/in/photostream/
> full size
> 
> ( and i'm viewing this on a 1440 monitor and my eyesight is fine )
> 
> Maybe the L just has better colors or something.


Hard to tell on this ipad, looks like the exposure is off. L glass is suppose to be of the best quality so it could be you have been accustomed to the style of shooting and shots you where getting with your 17-40.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> iso 100 at f5 and is still looks hazey to me.
> ( you may have to click on the photo or something to enlarge )
> 
> full size
> 
> ( and i'm viewing this on a 1440 monitor and my eyesight is fine )
> 
> Maybe the L just has better colors or something.


It's hard to really tell because there's an assload of compression artifacts. Still doesn't look that bad.


----------



## Marin

Those pictures look absolutely terrible. It's just a sea of noise and softness. It's clear your cameras beyond broken and that you should just give it a viking funeral at this point.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> Those pictures look absolutely terrible. It's just a sea of noise and softness. It's clear your cameras beyond broken and that you should just give it a viking funeral at this point.


VALHALLA FOR YOU


----------



## Sean Webster

ur lens is sharp...all i see is that your images are not processed yet and the colors are neutral...like any other RAW image....just process the pic and it will look better.

what raw viewer/converter are you using? Do you have the lens correction and the color calibration profile set right?


----------



## Jixr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> ur lens is sharp...all i see is that your images are not processed yet and the colors are neutral...like any other RAW image....just process the pic and it will look better.
> 
> what raw viewer/converter are you using? Do you have the lens correction and the color calibration profile set right?


i use LightRoom5, and depending on the shot i'll use the built in lens correction tools.


----------



## JKuhn

If you don't do extensive post-processing, isn't it better to use jpeg? I know jpeg is very lossy, but I've heard that it's very easy to mess your photos up more than jpeg does.


----------



## Marin

What you achieve with JPEG you can achieve with RAW and more. There's no downsides besides the files being larger and you having to process them. With how idiot proof programs are now like Lightroom where you can spam auto everything while batch processing and get the same result there's no reason not to use it unless what you're shooting absolutely demands JPEG.


----------



## Mongol

Dat feel when someone's shooting jpegs on a cellphone...

Blah blah blah...there's an old new sheriff in Benchmade town:



Maybe it's the color...I know it's the same mediocre 300-1, but I'm digging it.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> What you achieve with JPEG you can achieve with RAW and more. There's no downsides besides the files being larger and you having to process them. With how idiot proof programs are now like Lightroom where you can spam auto everything while batch processing and get the same result there's no reason not to use it unless what you're shooting absolutely demands JPEG.


Or you don't have lightroom.


----------



## Sean Webster

Nope, there are plenty of softwares that edit raw.


----------



## Dream Killer

Canon DPP is free.

How I miss that program so much. Nikon's editor is absolute garbage.


----------



## laboitenoire

I've started using Raw Therapee, mainly because Photoshop (and most Adobe products) have just become resource pigs. If I could live running Linux 24/7 I would be using Dark Table. Plenty of power to edit with, doesn't hide an ass ton of files on your computer, and completely for free!


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Maybe it's not the program, just me.  I've tried both darktable, and RawTherapee, with neither I make a raw look as good as my camera does with the jpg.


----------



## Marin

Get better.


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> Get better.


Nah. It's the program's fault.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> Canon DPP is free.
> 
> How I miss that program so much. *Nikon's editor is absolute garbage.*


SOOOOOOOOOO TRUE!!!!


----------



## funfortehfun

It's in my hands again.

http://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/microsite/purephotography/


----------



## longroadtrip

Hi everybody! I would like to join if possible...

My equipment is as follows:

5DmkII gripped
T3i gripped

EF-S 55-250mm f/4.0-5.6 IS II
EF-S 18-55 f/3.5-5.6 IS STM
EF 35mm f/2
EF 50mm f/1.4
EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro
EF 70-200mm f/4 L IS

Yongnuo YN-568EX x3

Plus battery packs, cards, chargers, lighting, etc...

Kata KT D-3N1-22 backpack
Kata KT PL-3N1-35 backpack


----------



## Mongol

Given a choice...mainly for getting in peoples faces and some landscaping, would you guys go 35 1.4L or 24 1.4L ii? If neither, may I ask what route you'd take?


----------



## Eggs and bacon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mongol*
> 
> Given a choice...mainly for getting in peoples faces and some landscaping, would you guys go 35 1.4L or 24 1.4L ii? If neither, may I ask what route you'd take?


Depends what you mean by getting in peoples faces.


----------



## Marin

35mm.


----------



## OmarCCX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Eggs and bacon*
> 
> Depends what you mean by getting in peoples faces.


Macro shots of people's nostrils, mostly.


----------



## Mongol

Yeah, 35L seems like a winner.

Not in their faces per se...up close and personal with more background thrown in. I've seen some pretty awesome candid shots with the 24L...I think its minimum focus distance is around 10".


----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mongol*
> 
> Given a choice...mainly for getting in peoples faces and some landscaping, would you guys go 35 1.4L or 24 1.4L ii? If neither, may I ask what route you'd take?


I'm not a pro, but I'd go for the 35mm, because the 24mm will have more distortion in the perspective, and you normally don't want that when photographing people.


----------



## Mongol

I'm no pro either, but DxO can correct that pretty easily.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mongol*
> 
> I'm no pro either, but DxO can correct that pretty easily.


Perspective distortion is relative to focal length, not lens design. DxO won't correct that.


----------



## groundzero9

Why not just get the 16-35 2.8L? After rebate it's $1499 + 4% rewards.


----------



## Mongol

Perspective distortion...it exists in telephoto lenses as well, no?

I understand DxO will not correct that.


----------



## Conspiracy

perspective distortion is the result of focal length. doesnt matter if its a zoom or prime


----------



## Mongol

...

guess I'll stick to the 35mm.


----------



## Dream Killer

"Wider is better." ~ Pontiac


----------



## Jixr

Here is my attempt at recreating one of the posters from breaking bad.

For trying to re-create the scene and only spending maybe 5mins editing it I think it came out pretty good.
basically used some bed sheets for curtains and some regular lamps and had the tv turned on for lighting.


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> "Wider is better." ~ Pontiac


Ha, I wonder how many on this forum are to young to get that reference.


----------



## Mongol

Stupid wide track grand prix...that commercial and car are both ass.


----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mongol*
> 
> *Perspective distortion...it exists in telephoto lenses as well, no?*
> 
> I understand DxO will not correct that.


Correct. Wide lenses stretch the perspective, while long lenses compress it.


----------



## Marin

More work on site, message me to see them. Dumb rules.


----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> More work on site, message me to see them. Dumb rules.


What do you have on the site?


----------



## Marin

Product and nudes.


----------



## Sean Webster

After some research I'll stay away from the alien bee's and I'm gonna grab a Einstein E640 with the 22" beauty dish soon and see how it is.









Can I use it with my speedlights too? Or only with other monolights?


----------



## scottath

stick the speedlights on optical trigger / use wireless triggers, they will work fine. (as with the monoblocks)


----------



## Marin

Do you ever sketch out your photos?

1. Yes
2. No
3. Derp, why would I do that?

Or

Do you make a mood board?

1. Yes
2. No
3. Derp, why would I do that?


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> Do you ever sketch out your photos?
> 
> 1. Yes
> 2. No
> 3. Derp, why would I do that?
> 
> Or
> 
> Do you make a mood board?
> 
> 1. Yes
> 2. No
> 3. Derp, why would I do that?


3 and 3


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Hypothetical Marin-esque question time:

How do you feel about setting your desktop wallpaper as a photo you shot?


----------



## Jixr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> Hypothetical Marin-esque question time:
> 
> How do you feel about setting your desktop wallpaper as a photo you shot?


I do it quite a bit, espc at work, my screen saver shuffles thorugh some of them, and co-workers see them and usually ask about them and its nice to show others my pretty private hobby.


----------



## dudemanppl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> Do you ever sketch out your photos?
> 
> 1. Yes
> 2. No
> 3. Derp, why would I do that?
> 
> Or
> 
> Do you make a mood board?
> 
> 1. Yes
> 2. No
> 3. Derp, why would I do that?


1 and wot.

Anyway, hows about the Nikon DF?


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> Do you ever sketch out your photos?
> 
> 1. Yes
> 2. No
> 3. Derp, why would I do that?
> 
> Or
> 
> Do you make a mood board?
> 
> 1. Yes
> 2. No
> 3. Derp, why would I do that?


2 & 2, that stuff sounds too girly.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> Hypothetical Marin-esque question time:
> 
> How do you feel about setting your desktop wallpaper as a photo you shot?


I do et all duh timez


----------



## Marin

Interesting seeing the disconnect between the hobbyist and commercial world.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> Interesting seeing the disconnect between the hobbyist and commercial world.


Well that's probably because hobbyists don't shoot for a living.

Seems pretty simple to me.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> Interesting seeing the disconnect between the hobbyist and commercial world.


post on potn or fredmiranda


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> post on potn or fredmiranda


I used to, forever ago. POTN is dumb. Majority would probably feel the same though.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> Well that's probably because hobbyists don't shoot for a living.
> 
> Seems pretty simple to me.


Which I'm aware of, just curious not condescending.


----------



## Sean Webster

where do you browse now? any forums at all? I'm starting to frequent model mayhem.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> where do you browse now? any forums at all? I'm starting to frequent model mayhem.


Basically none. I just check out what new camera stuffs out.


----------



## dudemanppl

http://www.dpreview.com/previews/nikon-df/

Hmmm, only reason I'd get it is for D4 sensor hmmm.


----------



## funfortehfun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> http://www.dpreview.com/previews/nikon-df/
> 
> Hmmm, only reason I'd get it is for D4 sensor hmmm.


:/ It's expensive though for the specs. Nikon is going cuckoo - even though this offers D4 sensor for half the price, it's only got one SD card slot, not a full magnesium-alloy body, etc.









The pricing is off as well IMO. 2750!?


----------



## dudemanppl

Magnesium is sorta crap, I exploded a 5DII once. Not fun. Plastic woulda been way better.


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Magnesium is sorta crap, I exploded a 5DII once. Not fun. Plastic woulda been way better.


howd you manage that? :/

yeah, 2750 for the DF is way too much


----------



## Sean Webster

Making a new legit business card, what do you guys think of it?

-snip-


----------



## Marin

Besides spelling photographer wrong there's a lot of redundancy. You already listed photo so there's no reason to list freelance photographer as that's implied. I've never been a fan of listing what I shoot as it's not necessary, I'm handing out my business card if they're already interested thus no reason for it. But then again different audiences and markets so mileage can vary due to the difference in people being dealt with.

I'd prefer all the contact information being on the back to remove the clutter. If they're interested they'll take the extra to seconds to flip the card to get your contact.


----------



## funfortehfun

Looks good - I think the font is slightly too condensed in some parts (notably the info part at the top), but other than that, looks good as a photographger business card.


----------



## Sean Webster

-snip-


----------



## Jixr

alright guys, you know the drill, prank call time.


----------



## Sean Webster

stahp it


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> alright guys, you know the drill, prank call time.


THIS!


----------



## Jixr

Hey guys, so i've been thinking of maybe getting a flash, to use with my t3i, I was thinking the 430ex, but didn't know if there were any other off brand versions that are a better bang for the buck.
I've never used a flash before so any help is welcome.


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> Hey guys, so i've been thinking of maybe getting a flash, to use with my t3i, I was thinking the 430ex, but didn't know if there were any other off brand versions that are a better bang for the buck.
> I've never used a flash before so any help is welcome.


YN568EX ?

supports HSS & wireless E-TTL

or

YN500EX


----------



## dudemanppl

I AM POTATO.


----------



## Marin

Final step is getting a graphic designer.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> Final step is getting a graphic designer.


Or just paying real close attention to the business card scene in American Psycho. Whatever, your call bro.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> Final step is getting a graphic designer.
> 
> 
> 
> Or just paying real close attention to the business card scene in American Psycho. Whatever, your call bro.
Click to expand...

haha


----------



## Jixr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> I dunno, for some reason it just doesn't really like... look good. Just looks amateur.


Needs more Comic Sans


----------



## TheReciever

Hey guys

Is there a point and shoot camera with a small body, but interchangeable lens?

I saw someone while on vacation that had this type of camera and loved the form factor of it. Maybe a guide I can look through? Thanks


----------



## laboitenoire

You're thinking of a mirrorless interchangeable lens camera--they've been around for a while now and are getting popular. The Olympus PEN series is by far the most mature in this segment, but the Sony NEX series and Nikon 1 series also offer good image quality in a small size.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheReciever*
> 
> Maybe a guide I can look through? Thanks


http://www.sansmirror.com/newsviews/


----------



## TheReciever

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> You're thinking of a mirrorless interchangeable lens camera--they've been around for a while now and are getting popular. The Olympus PEN series is by far the most mature in this segment, but the Sony NEX series and Nikon 1 series also offer good image quality in a small size.


I forgot that my brother in law was quite familiar with Camera hardware so I asked him and he said the same thing, Nikon 1 got pretty good praises but lacks the megapixel count as others in the same form factor. I dont really care for super large mega pixels though, anything larger than what I could display on my monitor would be useless for me anyways. Would you guys recommend the Nikon 1? I used to use Nikon while I worked for a photography company in high school so Im a little more secure with the brand for only that reason.

Just looking for better picture quality than my HTC One, Would the Nikon 1 give me superior image quality? Thanks!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> http://www.sansmirror.com/newsviews/


Thank you for this link! I'll give it a look over when I get the chance!


----------



## sub50hz

The Nikon 1-series is a failure in pretty much every direction. Olympus makes excellent cameras and the m4/3 (micro four-thirds) system is STACKED with lens options. Depending on your entry budget, I would consider a PEN or possibly something from Fuji (pardon that suggestion as I have an unhealthy relationship with the three Fujis I own







).


----------



## TheReciever

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> The Nikon 1-series is a failure in pretty much every direction. Olympus makes excellent cameras and the m4/3 (micro four-thirds) system is STACKED with lens options. Depending on your entry budget, I would consider a PEN or possibly something from Fuji (pardon that suggestion as I have an unhealthy relationship with the three Fujis I own
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ).


Are they available at 225? Im not really needing a ton of lens options, just really the basic's I would think. Why is the Nikon 1 not a good option?


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheReciever*
> 
> Are they available at 225? Im not really needing a ton of lens options, just really the basic's I would think.


http://www.microcenter.com/product/373899/E-PM1_123_Megapixel_ILC_Digital_Camera_-_Black

$199 and in-stock at the Dallas Metroplex location. The Nikon 1-series cameras have much smaller sensors and the lenses are.... meh. Even the kit lens on this older model PEN is pretty beastly.


----------



## Jixr

I've been wanting to get a mirrorless cam, but the prices for the half decent ones are on par with most entry level DSLR's, kinda poopy.

Hate on a hipster, but some of those mirrorless in silver with a black faux leater grip tape added to them look pretty cool.


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheReciever*
> 
> Are they available at 225? Im not really needing a ton of lens options, just really the basic's I would think. Why is the Nikon 1 not a good option?


Cameta.com has a bunch of cheap Olympus refurbs. I've bought one from them before and apart from the lens mount on the lens I couldn't tell they were used.

But I was surprised at the amount of options the E-PL1 had. For $215, when I bought it, I was thoroughly impressed.

The Nikon ones are kind of meh. Granted the sensor is still larger than pretty much every point and shoot, not counting the various Leica, Sony, Fuji, Sigma, fixed lens ones. It's still not bad, but when you can get an Olympus or Panasonic M4/3 for $200 then they don't seem as great.


----------



## TheReciever

http://www.cameta.com/Olympus-PEN-Mini-E-PM1-Micro-Digital-Camera-14-42mm-II-Lens-Silver-Factory-Demo-65960.cfm

So this would be what sub50hz posted?

They have another model for 119 as well

http://www.cameta.com/Olympus-PEN-Mini-E-PM1-Micro-Digital-Camera-Black-Factory-Demo-69474.cfm

Without the lens though, I wonder how much those go for?

Anyways, came across this quote
Quote:


> It matches the rest of the crowd--except the significantly more expensive Nikon 1 J1--with 0.3 second shot lag in good light and 0.6 second in dim.


What does this translate to? Right now I can find both the Olympus model and the Nikon 1 J1 for about the same price at 180 and 189 respectively


----------



## aksthem1

I think it's translating to how fast the autofocus may be. From the button press to when it takes a picture. The AF isn't the fastest on that lens, but some of the other lenses, especially their primes are faster with AF. Plus you can also use M4/3 lenses from Panasonic's line.

You're better off buying the kit though. The kit lens will usually be around $100 or under.

KEH.com is a good place to buy used gear too and their BGN grade stuff is still in great condition. Their lenient on their rating.


----------



## TheReciever

Ok cool, thanks for the suggestion.

Im leaning back and forth between Nikon J1 and the E-PM1, upon looking at multiple reviews it seems both have their own issues (a given, at this price point). Not sure which one to pick up, the m4/3 is pretty nice though, being that you can have the option to have more lens


----------



## Marin

4/3rds has a larger sensor so go with that. End of discussion.

Nikon 1 is their failed attempt at releasing a crippled EVIL system that wouldn't cannibalize their DSLR sales.


----------



## TheReciever

So for camera's its just a matter of sensor size? 4/3 seems to have more options available to it anyways


----------



## Marin

Sensor size dictates IQ, dynamic range, appearance, DoF, etc... If two different sensor sizes are equivalents in tech the larger one's going to have the advantage for the most part (DoF can be argued since it depends on what you're shooting and that brings in a whole bunch of other gear).


----------



## TheReciever

Ok thanks, I hate walking into a club like this as ignorant as I am lol. Looks like the Olympus model should be for me then

Thanks again guys!


----------



## aksthem1

We all have to start somewhere. It's no problem to us and ask questions.


----------



## TheReciever

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aksthem1*
> 
> We all have to start somewhere. It's no problem to us and ask questions.


Im used to most things in tech, but I always never have luck walking into something new...thats usually when I work the courage to try Linux lol


----------



## Chunky_Chimp

Sean; you should probably edit your number out of the business card pic... you never know who might be lurking that's bored enough to want that. Can't have personally identifying info here, either.







Quote:


> Originally Posted by *funfortehfun*
> 
> :/ It's expensive though for the specs. Nikon is going cuckoo - even though this offers D4 sensor for half the price, it's only got one SD card slot, not a full magnesium-alloy body, etc.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The pricing is off as well IMO. 2750!?


You want them to cannibalize sales of the D4 and D800?







It IS more than that though, on closer look you can tell that EVERY external control is metal and ALL labels are engraved, with possible exception to the bottom Nikon label next to the rubber around the tripod mount. The sheer amount of external controls looks awesome, too, though I did expect U1/U2/etc. on the MASP dial. I do find it odd they left out the AF assist light... no flash makes sense, and the D4 doesn't have the AF assist light, either, but I don't get why they'd also leave it off of the Df. It'll be interesting to see how Canon responds, if they do.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chunky_Chimp*
> 
> Sean; you should probably edit your number out of the business card pic... you never know who might be lurking that's bored enough to want that. Can't have personally identifying info here, either.


Yeah, like his name. Sean would never post his name.


----------



## Chunky_Chimp

That's his prerogative to leave it like that, though, and it's easy to make a fake name so we don't REALLY know that that's real.







Of course, if he says it's real, I don't think we can have that, either. I'm sure the managers are aware of it already so I won't really drag myself into that one.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chunky_Chimp*
> 
> That's his prerogative to leave it like that, though, and it's easy to make a fake name so we don't REALLY know that that's real.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Of course, if he says it's real, I don't think we can have that, either. I'm sure the managers are aware of it already so I won't really drag myself into that one.


Why anyone would have a fake account name, and then post that fake account name on a business card with his real phone #, I dunno, but hey, whatever he wants. I don't have a problem with it.


----------



## Chunky_Chimp

I wouldn't know, I only posted about the number as it's a more immediate issue.


----------



## Sean Webster

deleted and asked dude to delete the quote of my post.









And Sean Webster may or may not be my name, the world will never know! (Unless you are on my facebook as a friend lol)

My Einstein, beauty dish, and vagabond mini will be here tomorrow! Can't wait!









I may sell my pixel king triggers and 430exii's soon and upgrade if I like it enough.

Any suggestions on variable ND filters?


----------



## funfortehfun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chunky_Chimp*
> 
> Sean; you should probably edit your number out of the business card pic... you never know who might be lurking that's bored enough to want that. Can't have personally identifying info here, either.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You want them to cannibalize sales of the D4 and D800?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It IS more than that though, on closer look you can tell that EVERY external control is metal and ALL labels are engraved, with possible exception to the bottom Nikon label next to the rubber around the tripod mount. The sheer amount of external controls looks awesome, too, though I did expect U1/U2/etc. on the MASP dial. I do find it odd they left out the AF assist light... no flash makes sense, and the D4 doesn't have the AF assist light, either, but I don't get why they'd also leave it off of the Df. It'll be interesting to see how Canon responds, if they do.


 I guess it is a work of craftmanship that is catered towards a specific mindset. I wish it was slightly wider so that it is even more resemblant of the F3.

It was good when the D700 cannabalized D3 sales


----------



## Chunky_Chimp

I dunno, I think it looks closer to the FM2. Of course, a certain someone thinks it looks more like the FE...


----------



## Marin

They should have modeled it after the F3.


----------



## TheReciever

Is the E-PL1 a better choice?

http://dallas.craigslist.org/sdf/pho/4108752951.html

EDIT: Nevermind it seems I should stick with the E-PM1


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheReciever*
> 
> Is the E-PL1 a better choice?
> 
> http://dallas.craigslist.org/sdf/pho/4108752951.html
> 
> EDIT: Nevermind it seems I should stick with the E-PM1


The E-PL1 isn't bad, but for a few dollars more the E-PM1 is a better choice. The only benefit of the E-PL1 is the built in flash. It's really handy, because the way it pops up you can fold it back and use it as bounce flash on the ceiling.


----------



## TheReciever

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aksthem1*
> 
> The E-PL1 isn't bad, but for a few dollars more the E-PM1 is a better choice. The only benefit of the E-PL1 is the built in flash. It's really handy, because the way it pops up you can fold it back and use it as bounce flash on the ceiling.


Never thought of that. However this listing has the EPL-1, Camera bag, 3 batteries, lens cap etc for 175.

Is the image quality lacking in any way compared to the E-PM1? I know I am asking a lot of questions about an entry level ILC but I'll likely be taking thousands of pictures in the next couple of months and just would like better pictures than my HTC One


----------



## aksthem1

The difference in IQ is negligible. Especially for your purpose. The E-PM1 is the still better choice, even with the lack of flash.


----------



## TheReciever

OK I'll probably just go for a refurb from the site you mentioned for 200, reading around a lot it seems the picture quality is the same but with the pm1 having much better auto focus capability I'll lean towards that.

I have seen a couple of listings on Craigslist for the pl1 for 115 though so it makes for a difficult choice lol

Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk


----------



## sub50hz

Let's say that you had a hypothetical MAXIMUM budget. What would that be? With a horde of photos on the horizon, how much is a camera going to be worth to you?


----------



## Sean Webster

It came!


----------



## sub50hz

TWSS?


----------



## Sean Webster

lol


----------



## TheReciever

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Let's say that you had a hypothetical MAXIMUM budget. What would that be? With a horde of photos on the horizon, how much is a camera going to be worth to you?


I would have to say 200 is my theoretical maximum unless there was something for a little more that was really worth springing the extra cash for.

Since I'm pretty ignorant, it's hard to settle on one camera since when I'm reading around I hear about low light issues or bad algorithms making the auto focus slower on one model or the other.

I also read that the pm1 resolved the auto focus issues of the pl1 but with the pl1 the issue was in the lens I believe if I read correctly lol

Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk


----------



## Marin

If this money was just handed to me... $40,000 min.


----------



## Conspiracy

nice sean. i have enjoyed working with those lights in the past. especially with pocketwizards since i has a little thumb drive receiver that can go in the top to make them work


----------



## TheReciever

So you guys think the epm1 is the best buy for my budget? Or is there something else out there? My brother in law uses dslr from Nikon so when ever I ask him about it it's always the 1 series

Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk


----------



## aksthem1

For what you're looking for, yes. A little higher and you would be looking at the NEX series and possibly EOS-M. But they are also a bit larger.


----------



## Marin

Well your brother in law is wrong.


----------



## TheReciever

Thanks guys, ill snag up the epm1 when the time is right +REP


----------



## groundzero9

I'm thinking about getting my GF a macro lens for her Canon this xmas. However, as I have only used Nikons, I know next to nothing about which lens to choose. My budget is <$200. I was thinking a 100mm f/4 manual focus? They're on keh.com for ~$110 in excellent condition. I don't know if that's the best route, or possibly looking for a used 3rd party lens?


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *groundzero9*
> 
> I'm thinking about getting my GF a macro lens for her Canon this xmas. However, as I have only used Nikons, I know next to nothing about which lens to choose. My budget is <$200. I was thinking a 100mm f/4 manual focus? They're on keh.com for ~$110 in excellent condition. I don't know if that's the best route, or possibly looking for a used 3rd party lens?


That 100 f/4 is likely a FD lens. Her camera is likley an EOS model which has an EF/EF-s mount. You can buy very cheap adapters to make FD lenses work on EOS cameras. However, you loose the ability to focus at farther distances, it would be strictly a macro or very close up lens.


----------



## groundzero9

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *silvrr*
> 
> That 100 f/4 is likely a FD lens. Her camera is likley an EOS model which has an EF/EF-s mount. You can buy very cheap adapters to make FD lenses work on EOS cameras. However, you loose the ability to focus at farther distances, it would be strictly a macro or very close up lens.


Could you suggest a different lens then? Limiting the capability of a lens doesn't sound appealing.


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *groundzero9*
> 
> Could you suggest a different lens then? Limiting the capability of a lens doesn't sound appealing.


What lenses does she have now? What camera body?


----------



## Conspiracy

so got back late last night from alabama assisting on a sports illustrated shoot. all i did was help with lighting and equipment. have to say dynalights are pretty nice and very compact and light. was pretty nice using them. we only used 2 heads for the shoot but had a 70" elinchrom octobox and just the other light on a grid. was pretty cool. if i remember ill post the shot i helped make as it is possible that it may be the cover of the next magazine


----------



## groundzero9

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *silvrr*
> 
> What lenses does she have now? What camera body?


It's a Rebel XS with 18-55 and 75-300. She really wants a dedicated macro lens that mostly importantly can focus close.


----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *groundzero9*
> 
> It's a Rebel XS with 18-55 and 75-300. She really wants a dedicated macro lens that mostly importantly can focus close.


If you don't know what to buy and you want something for in the meantime while you look for a dedicated macro lens, I shoot with a reversed lens and it gets you very close. But since it's so difficult to focus and get enough light at that distance, I'd suggest not getting a normal reversing ring but rather a coupling ring so she can put her 18-55 on the 75-300 like a very strong close-up filter. Then she just has to be careful with the rear element.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *groundzero9*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *silvrr*
> 
> What lenses does she have now? What camera body?
> 
> 
> 
> It's a Rebel XS with 18-55 and 75-300. She really wants a dedicated macro lens that mostly importantly can focus close.
Click to expand...

Just get extension tubes.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> so got back late last night from alabama assisting on a sports illustrated shoot. all i did was help with lighting and equipment. have to say dynalights are pretty nice and very compact and light. was pretty nice using them. we only used 2 heads for the shoot but had a 70" elinchrom octobox and just the other light on a grid. was pretty cool. if i remember ill post the shot i helped make as it is possible that it may be the cover of the next magazine


awesome! Cant wait to see.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> It came!


the vagabonds are worth every penny.....


----------



## Sean Webster

yea, now I need to put them to good use so they pay themselves off!

oh and here is my first shot with the Einstein, i couldn't use any light modifiers because there were 30mph gusts, but i just made a composite of ~20 shots walking around the car


Mohammed's Lexas IS by Sean Webster Photo, on Flickr


----------



## Dream Killer

@sub50hz : http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/wed-november-13-2013/tower-record
Boomshakalaka!


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> yea, now I need to put them to good use so they pay themselves off!
> 
> oh and here is my first shot with the Einstein, i couldn't use any light modifiers because there were 30mph gusts, but i just made a composite of ~20 shots walking around the car
> 
> 
> Mohammed's Lexas IS by Sean Webster Photo, on Flickr


that looks great!








how'd you do it ?


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boogschd*
> 
> that looks great!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> how'd you do it ?


Thanks.







"i just made a composite of ~20 shots walking around the car"









lol. Really now, I just set the camera on a tripod and used a remote trigger to set off the shutter. For the first shot I set the to expose to ISO 400, F/8, 10 seconds. The for the car lighting shots I had my Einstein set to ~80-100 watts I think, with no modifier. Exposure = ISO 100, F/8, 1/30th of a sec. Took a shot of the car from all around, I just walked around and every few steps I had my friend take another shot. And then I took a shot of the car with the lights on, exposing for the lights.

BTS:


Then in post when I got home I just stacked 36 shots into photoshop (deleted 15-16 of them), layer masked them and proceeded to reveal or hide parts as needed for the car lighting. Then I did a few touch ups with the cloning and spot healing tools and some dodging and burning. Then final touch ups in lightroom.

This is the compsite without the base photo: (colored parts are when the base shows through)


Honestly, I did it the dumb way and took too many shots...(the shoot only was 2 minutes), but it was cold, waaaay too windy, and i was tired...and forgot to take some shots I needed like a roof light and a hoot light shot. lol next time I'm just gonna need like 7 shots or so with my beauty dish or a umbrella. I also want to try using a light stick.


----------



## JAM3S121

Hello, I am consindering buying a "good" point & shoot because my cell phone sucks, has no options for iso adjust or shutter speed and I need something to photograph my rig, my dads big hobby is also selling salt water reef corals on ebay and he sucks with technology and has me take the photos.

I was considering a used Canon S100 from a recommendation from another forum, is this a pretty good used camera if I can get it from $100 to $150 which seems possible on ebay? Portable is prefered


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> @sub50hz : http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/wed-november-13-2013/tower-record
> Boomshakalaka!


NOPE. Bow to the thickness of our pizza!


----------



## Mongol

Eat at Lombardi's. They're the Gozer of all pizza.


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "i just made a composite of ~20 shots walking around the car"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Honestly, I did it the dumb way and took too many shots...(the shoot only was 2 minutes), but it was cold, waaaay too windy, and i was tired...and forgot to take some shots I needed like a roof light and a hoot light shot. lol next time I'm just gonna need like 7 shots or so with my beauty dish or a umbrella. I also want to try using a light stick.


thats a lot of work . haha
but i really like how the lighting turned out









light stick? .. something like this: http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/bitbangerlabs/pixelstick-light-painting-evolved ?


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boogschd*
> 
> thats a lot of work . haha
> but i really like how the lighting turned out
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> light stick? .. something like this: http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/bitbangerlabs/pixelstick-light-painting-evolved ?


Kinda, well just a flouresnt or LED light really.


----------



## Sean Webster

Canon 7D for $400 on Craigslist...should I get it?


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Canon 7D for $400 on Craigslist...should I get it?


Sounds to good to be true unless I'm way off on used prices now. Can't hurt to check it out. I went from a 7D to a 60D and can honestly say I don't miss the 7D. I didn't need the 7Ds advanced AF and put the difference in price into glass and have been happy.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Canon 7D for $400 on Craigslist...should I get it?


sounds super low. they normally are going for like 800 on the low end here. id still check it out although it may be someones camera that got stolen


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> sounds super low. they normally are going for like 800 on the low end here. id still check it out although it may be someones camera that got stolen


Usually too good to be true, but I'd still check it out. I've gotten some killer deal and my friend got a brand new 7D with a new 24-70L for $700. Bitter ex-wife.
Just ask the person some more technical photography questions.


----------



## Sean Webster

Hopefully it is legit. I emailed them and am waiting for a reply now. In the listing it said that the company is upgrading to FF. If I'm able to get it I'll probably be selling the 60D or maybe have it as a backup.


----------



## aksthem1

Ah. So it was a studio workhorse probably. That's going to have a high shutter count.


----------



## Jixr

So yesterday I snagged some free F1 tickets for the Austin GP and rented a 70-200mm F4L

The place I rented it from is a new start up shop, and i've never rented a lens before, and it was $50 for the weekend with a $200 cash deposit.

I have zero intention of doing so, but what prevents people from walking off with the lens's, I didn't sign anything, just made the transacion and left.
Is this normally how lens rentals work?

I was expecting to fill out paperwork and such.
The other camera shop in town only had a 200mm 2.8 left, and wanted an $800 deposit and required renters insurance.

It just seems to me like a dishonest person could rent a lens from the small shop, pay cash, and walk away.


----------



## Marin

You pay with a CC. Steal the lens and they'll charge the rest to your card plus probably contact the police.

When I rent locally I never have to put down a deposit. I just fill out some stuff and pay with a CC. I've only had to get insurance involved for some prop houses, not rental houses for the gear I need which falls into and goes beyond what a hobbyist has their eyes on.


----------



## Jixr

But tahts the thing, I pad cash, no name, phone nubmer anything.


----------



## Marin

Then they're dumb.


----------



## Mongol

The lens has an embedded tracking device. When you don't return it on time, Pauly Shore ties you to a chair, tapes your eyelids open and does stand up for 72 hours.


----------



## Sean Webster

You should go get me a 24-70 2.8 and a 70-200 2.8 IS from that place


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> Then they're dumb.


extremely


----------



## aksthem1

That's pretty stupid on their part. So they're just renting out lenses based on some sort of honor code. Every place that I've rented out lenses you needed a CC, but no deposit was required. Plus you have to sign a form or two. Usually stating that you're responsible to return it on time, any damages that occur to it while in your possession will be charged to your CC and stuff like that. Though some of the local places have "insurance" for gear rentals.


----------



## Mongol

Something foul is afoot.


----------



## Jixr

yeah its weird, I have every intention on returning it on time on monday, just seemed kinda odd.

( though the place just opened up and what I really think happened was they rented out their used one to me, the store really is more of a print shop than a camera store ) But in all fairness I explained to them the other camera shop in town was out of all the rentals and I'm all for spreading the word of new businesses that go out of their way to help out customers. ( I think this may have been the first time they rented out a lens )

If i were a complete as hat I could easily walk with it, and there would be nothing for them to go off of if I walked.


----------



## szeged

grabbed a new camera today

http://www.amazon.com/Fujifilm-FinePix-S8200-16-2MP-Digital/dp/B00ATM1NAU

hopefully i like it, i dont know much about cameras, so what do you people with more knowledge than i (which is any knowledge) think about the one i got?


----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> yeah its weird, I have every intention on returning it on time on monday, just seemed kinda odd.
> 
> ( though the place just opened up and what I really think happened was they rented out their used one to me, the store really is more of a print shop than a camera store ) But in all fairness I explained to them the other camera shop in town was out of all the rentals and I'm all for spreading the word of new businesses that go out of their way to help out customers. ( I think this may have been the first time they rented out a lens )
> 
> If i were a complete as hat I could easily walk with it, and there would be nothing for them to go off of if I walked.


That definitely won't work here in ZA. I've come across situations where a shop allows me to borrow something small and inexpensive, but then it's only in shops that I visit regularly. Renting out an expensive lens without any way to get it back except for honesty doesn't seem very wise to me.


----------



## JKuhn

I have a bit of an issue with my Sigma 170-500mm. I don't know why, but I'm struggling to get a high shutter speed even when it's wide open and at ISO 800-1600. I don't have that issue with my Sigma 70-300mm, even at a higher f-stop. Aren't different lenses supposed to let the same amount of light through at the same aperture? I don't normally need to stick to the 1/focal length rule as I can hold my camera steady even at 300mm and 1/60th (with the shorter lens) but the 170-500mm is a bit to heavy for hand-held shots at a low speed.


----------



## dudemanppl




----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JKuhn*
> 
> I have a bit of an issue with my Sigma 170-500mm. I don't know why, but I'm struggling to get a high shutter speed even when it's wide open and at ISO 800-1600. I don't have that issue with my Sigma 70-300mm, even at a higher f-stop. Aren't different lenses supposed to let the same amount of light through at the same aperture? I don't normally need to stick to the 1/focal length rule as I can hold my camera steady even at 300mm and 1/60th (with the shorter lens) but the 170-500mm is a bit to heavy for hand-held shots at a low speed.


shoot manual or shutter priority mode and compensate the rest for proper exposure.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*


lul


----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> shoot manual or shutter priority mode and compensate the rest for proper exposure.


That's what I do. It's just a bit of a pain because I can usually only get a decent shutter speed (1/500 or in extreme cases 1/800) if I shoot midday in direct sunlight. And I don't have a monopod at this stage so I usually shoot handheld.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JKuhn*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> shoot manual or shutter priority mode and compensate the rest for proper exposure.
> 
> 
> 
> That's what I do. It's just a bit of a pain because I can usually only get a decent shutter speed (1/500 or in extreme cases 1/800) if I shoot midday in direct sunlight. And I don't have a monopod at this stage so I usually shoot handheld.
Click to expand...

what Fstop and ISO? What kind of available light do you shoot in normally?

You can get any shutter speed you want, there is nothing stopping you, just set it and open your aperture and crank up your ISO...


----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> what Fstop and ISO? What kind of available light do you shoot in normally?
> 
> You can get any shutter speed you want, there is nothing stopping you, just set it and open your aperture and crank up your ISO...


With that lens I shoot ISO 800 or if required 1600, I avoid any more than that as the images get too noisy with ISO 3200 and 6400. The aperture is often wide-open (it's f5.6-6.3), and sometimes f7.1.

With my Sigma 70-300 I can get 1/1000 at ISO 800 and f7.1.


----------



## Conspiracy

satirical and cynical definitions of photography terms http://petapixel.com/2013/11/22/devils-photography-dictionary/


----------



## Jixr

alright, i have a question for you guys, and hope we can make a little discussion about it.

Often when i'm out, I don't have my dslr with me, but like everyone else, I have my phone with me ( iphone5s )
So i'll pop it out, make a quick snap, and go on about my way.

With the holidays coming up, i've been thinking of buying a point and shoot or a mirrorless.

Every camera i've found that is small enough for everyday carrying has been way too expensive for me to justify, really, i'd like to spend no more than $300 on one, though I could see myself paying up to $500 if it fit my needs. ( the only one that really screams at me is a canon g15/16 ) as I'd rather look through a viewfinder since most live views are slower to focus and use.

( my ideal pocket cam ) view finder, shoots raw, fixed lens, and under $400

My iphone5s cost me under $400 to replace my iph5, and most smartphones ( in america with contracts ) cost $200 or less. So you can see why its hard to justify the cost of some of the nicer portable cameras.

But really is there anything out there that is as pocketable as a smartphone and as quick to turn on, snap a pic, and go on your way compared to a smart phone? It takes all of 2 seconds to open up my camera on my phone from out of my pocket.

I've not used a point and shoot in years, and the ones i did use were awful.

And with some basic photography understanding, you can get some really good photos with most modern smartphones. Though ( at least with my iphone ) the way the image is processed, its very hard to adjust anything in LR, and is usually better left as is from the phone.

So what do you think? do modern point and shoots still have their place? or should I just stick with my smartphone?


----------



## aksthem1

http://www.cameta.com/Olympus-PEN-Mini-E-PM1-Micro-Digital-Camera-Black-Factory-Demo-69474.cfm

http://www.getolympus.com/us/en/outlet/zuiko-lens-25mm-f2-8-reconditioned.html


----------



## Conspiracy

it depends on what you are using the photos for. cameras still have their place in the world as smart phones have not yet passed them


----------



## choLOL

Hey guys, is _Nikon's Nikkor AF-S DX 55-300mm f/4.5-5.6G ED VR_ a good telephoto lens for the price? Or is there a better one for a similar price?
My budget is around the price of it.


----------



## laboitenoire

Honestly, I'd pass on it. It's cheaply made, image quality is only okay, and the AF on it is pretty slow. Either save up a bit more and buy the 70-300 VR, or save some cash and buy the 55-200 VR, which is probably more than sufficient for most of your needs.


----------



## OmarCCX

I second the 55-200 VR. You can get it used for $100ish, and at that price, who would say no?


----------



## szeged

what are your guys thoughts on the fujifilm finepix s8200? i got one for roughly $175 locally, brand new never been used. So far im loving it, and would have some quality rig pics done already except my cats decided my lightbox was a wonderful place to sleep and get hair all over.









just looking for other opinions on it, thanks


----------



## choLOL

Thanks for the suggestion!









By "55-200 VR", do you mean AF-S DX VR Zoom-Nikkor 55-200mm f/4-5.6G IF-ED?


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *choLOL*
> 
> Thanks for the suggestion!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> By "55-200 VR", do you mean AF-S DX VR Zoom-Nikkor 55-200mm f/4-5.6G IF-ED?


Yes.


----------



## Jixr

Looks like android is going to be getting RAW capability. can iphone haz plox?


----------



## Nitrogannex

Hey guys, haven't been too serious about photography until now, however, I've grown to like it enough for it to be my only minor in Uni

Now for my Gear

Casual Stuff
-Nokia Lumia 928
-Canon Powershot SX150IS

And my Newest Acquisition, I sold my Nikon J1 as I wasn't as happy with it as I thought I'd be, and after much research and fretting I have a Canon 60D coming in the Next few days.

Now, it has the one Kit lens and a Tamaron Zoom , but I'm already looking for a replacement. I've been looking at the Sigma 17-50 or the Sigma 17-70. Would those be a worthwhile Upgrade to the Kit? I don't have a ton right now, and I can maybe spend $200, or does anyone have any better suggestions


----------



## Jixr

the sigma 17-50 is a good bang for the buck, though when I was looking at it the auto focus was too slow for my likes ( and noisey )

Really, with that $200 i'd get a canon 50mm 1.8 ( used $75, new can be had for $100 ) or a 40mm 2.8 ( $150 new )

both of those are prime lens's, ( no adjustable zoom ) but they both give really sharp images, and if you wanting nice images on a budget, thats the way to go. its pretty much a must have in every kit.


----------



## Fanboy88

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> the sigma 17-50 is a good bang for the buck, though when I was looking at it the auto focus was too slow for my likes ( and noisey )
> 
> Really, with that $200 i'd get a canon 50mm 1.8 ( used $75, new can be had for $100 ) or a 40mm 2.8 ( $150 new )
> 
> both of those are prime lens's, ( no adjustable zoom ) but they both give really sharp images, and if you wanting nice images on a budget, thats the way to go. its pretty much a must have in every kit.


I was about to suggest the 50mm 1.8 but you beat me to it so I'll second that suggestion lol


----------



## Nitrogannex

What about a Zeiss 1Q Tessar for a 50mm prime?


----------



## OmarCCX

I can't recommend the 50mm 1.8. Yes it's good optically, but it feels like **** and the AF is horribly noisy / slow. The 40mm is better overall.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OmarCCX*
> 
> I can't recommend the 50mm 1.8. Yes it's good optically, but it feels like **** and the AF is horribly noisy / slow. The 40mm is better overall.


It works though. Manual focus if you want. Also, if would be great if Canon had a 35mm that is 1.8 and cheap, sadly they don't. Would have much rather had that than a 50mm.


----------



## Jixr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> It works though. Manual focus if you want. Also, if would be great if Canon had a 35mm that is 1.8 and cheap, sadly they don't. Would have much rather had that than a 50mm.


yeah, i like the 40 better too, but yeah, no good cheap 35mm's sad day for poor people.


----------



## Sean Webster

id recommend a sigma 30mm f/1.4, sooooo nice, I love mine. They go for ~280-290 new. Used ~200 or so i think. HIGHLY suggest you get one.

50 f/1.8 is a toy, ok optically, but that is it. Autofocus on it sucks and is loud. Lots of CA wide open.

Also, have any of you tried this?

http://www.neatologie.com/make-hazy-photo-sandwich-bag-trick/

Looks cool, gonna try it soon.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> id recommend a sigma 30mm f/1.4, sooooo nice, I love mine. They go for ~280-290 new. Used ~200 or so i think. HIGHLY suggest you get one.
> 
> 50 f/1.8 is a toy, ok optically, but that is it. Autofocus on it sucks and is loud. Lots of CA wide open.
> 
> Also, have any of you tried this?
> 
> http://www.neatologie.com/make-hazy-photo-sandwich-bag-trick/
> 
> Looks cool, gonna try it soon.


Super sharp an fast when all else you have is a 18-55 3.5-5.6.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *OmarCCX*
> 
> I can't recommend the 50mm 1.8. Yes it's good optically, but it feels like **** and the AF is horribly noisy / slow. The 40mm is better overall.
> 
> 
> 
> It works though. Manual focus if you want. Also, if would be great if Canon had a 35mm that is 1.8 and cheap, sadly they don't. Would have much rather had that than a 50mm.
Click to expand...

28 1.8 is a pretty impressive lens. its not 35 but its wide and sharp and offers 1.8


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> Also, if would be great if Canon had a 35mm that is 1.8 and cheap, sadly they don't.


They have the 35 f/2 which is not only inexpensive but also quite good on crop cameras. What do you think that extra 1/3 stop would be giving you?


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> 28 1.8 is a pretty impressive lens. its not 35 but its wide and sharp and offers 1.8


I would have to disagree, it's probably one of Canon's worst primes in terms of sharpness and CA. Between it and the 20/2.8, they're probably the top two on my "to avoid" list of Canon primes.


----------



## Conspiracy

never had those problems but i did test indoors and not for very long. the new one with IS didnt seem all that bad though


----------



## sub50hz

Probably shouldn't for what it costs. I'm referring to the older, more affordable model.


----------



## Conspiracy

ah yeah true


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> 28 1.8 is a pretty impressive lens. its not 35 but its wide and sharp and offers 1.8


Can't afford.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> They have the 35 f/2 which is not only inexpensive but also quite good on crop cameras. What do you think that extra 1/3 stop would be giving you?


A 1/3 stop more light. Also, it's a lot higher priced than the 50mm, and while the quality of the lens itself might be higher, all I'm worried about is the glass. The 50mm isn't too bad in that regard. It can feel as plasticy as it wants, if it takes good pictures.


----------



## freitz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> Can't afford.
> 
> A 1/3 stop more light. Also, it's a lot higher priced than the 50mm, and while the quality of the lens itself might be higher, all I'm worried about is the glass. The 50mm isn't too bad in that regard. It can feel as plasticy as it wants, if it takes good pictures.


I would go with a 40mm f2.8 pancake. You should be able to get it from the canon refurb site for under 150 right now. Solid metal build to, sharper then the plastic fantastic.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

I guess I didn't make it clear that I already got the 50mm 1.8. No need for that now.  Sorry.


----------



## Dream Killer

i haven't bought anything camera related in a while. any suggestions?


----------



## freitz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> i haven't bought anything camera related in a while. any suggestions?


What are you looking for? What is your budget?


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> i haven't bought anything camera related in a while. any suggestions?


A new 24G. So I can have the old one.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> i haven't bought anything camera related in a while. any suggestions?


nikkor 58mm f1.4

dont say you cant afford it because i know youre Oprah rich


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> i haven't bought anything camera related in a while. any suggestions?


variable ND filter?


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *freitz*
> 
> What are you looking for? What is your budget?


i dunno, i was happy with my setup until now and i'm feeling the itch for something new. i'm thinking a new lens since it will have the most impact. to give some people an idea, my current gear consists of: d800, 16-35mm f4 vr, 24mm 1.4g, 70-200 2.8 vr ver.1, sb700, tripod, 72mm cpl. i shoot mostly street, portraits and candid portraits. i suck with landscapes and still-life.

as for budget, i buy things if it has very good value irrelevant on how much it costs.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> A new 24G. So I can have the old one.


lawl. you know i love my 24G sub! if it didn't lower value, my 24g will have "'till death do us part" engraved on it.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> nikkor 58mm f1.4
> 
> dont say you cant afford it because i know youre Oprah rich


i feel iffy about normal lenses so instead, maybe ill get the 85G ive been drooling over the past two years. also, i'm not oprah rich, i'm mike tyson broke!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> variable ND filter?


i'm not the person that likes to drag shutters wide open in sunlight - i don't even like using my CPL.

here's what i've been thinking so far: 85g, sell d800 and get the retro nikon, or both


----------



## boogschd

85 1.4!


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> i'm not oprah rich, i'm mike tyson broke!


LOL


----------



## dudemanppl

But Sigma 85 1.4 is cheaper and sharper...

Here, have some TDP.

Sharpness:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=732&Camera=614&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=756&CameraComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

Vignetting (actually pretty crap though...):
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Lens-Vignetting-Test-Results.aspx?Lens=732&Camera=614&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0&LensComp=756&CameraComp=453&FLI=0&API=0

Flaring:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Lens-Flare.aspx?FLI=0&API=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0&Lens=732&Camera=614&LensComp=756

Distortion:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Lens-Distortion.aspx?FLI=0&FLIComp=0&LensComp=756&CameraComp=453&Lens=732


----------



## Dream Killer

i dont use third party lenses =\


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Why not?


----------



## dudemanppl

YOU'RE A CHUMP. Come on, DK, you know how much gear I've been through, and even I trust third party lenses. Dey da bomb.


----------



## Dream Killer

You're still young =P

They've never worked right for me. 4 failed AF motors and 2 error codes on mounts permanently shunned me away from them. A modern lens has much more than optics and the only guaranteed way that I know it will work 10-15 years down the line with a new Nikon body is not to buy third party lenses.

Besides, TDP used different bodies (d3x and 5mkii) for the test charts. That isn't a valid comparison for me.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> You're still young =P
> 
> They've never worked right for me. 4 failed AF motors and 2 error codes on mounts permanently shunned me away from them. A modern lens has much more than optics and the only guaranteed way that I know it will work 10-15 years down the line with a new Nikon body is not to buy third party lenses.
> 
> Besides, TDP used different bodies (d3x and 5mkii) for the test charts. That isn't a valid comparison for me.


so you are going to post here and tell me you would turn down epic zeiss glass like the 50mm f0.7 if you were given the change trolololololol







some third party isnt that bad. i have nothing against cine glass other than being totally unpractical for photography use


----------



## Dream Killer

that rule does not count manual lenses since they do not contain electronics that get in the way of compatibility.

also i got dat leica ( >zeiss ) to play with lololoool


----------



## golfergolfer

Can anyone suggest a strong but compact travel style tripod for around $300? Currently the closest I have found is the

Giottos VGRN9225-M3 + MH5400-652

It has been a long search for tripods and I still cannot find one


----------



## MistaBernie

Check out the MEFOTO line by Benro.. I picked up an A1350Q1A for a trip to Vegas / Red Rock / Hoover Dam / etc. Fit in my carry on with no probs, sturdy, quick to setup / break down, and about $100 less than what you're looking at currently.


----------



## Conspiracy

gitzo or go home

lol jk







i really like them though. amazing


----------



## Jixr

horray! i did my first paid photo shoot yesterday.

Really starting to make me consider upgrading my 50 1.8 to the 1.4, more so for the build quality than the extra stop ( as I rarely shoot at 1.8 anyway )

unless anyone can recomend a 35mm prime in the same price range.

( my camera shop like to play a game called "lets show you the things we have that even a pro would need to budget to afford"


----------



## freitz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> horray! i did my first paid photo shoot yesterday.
> 
> Really starting to make me consider upgrading my 50 1.8 to the 1.4, more so for the build quality than the extra stop ( as I rarely shoot at 1.8 anyway )
> 
> unless anyone can recomend a 35mm prime in the same price range.
> 
> ( my camera shop like to play a game called "lets show you the things we have that even a pro would need to budget to afford"


Canon 1.4 on sale right now 50mm.. 270 something. That is a steal!


----------



## Jixr

that is a good price, amazon? canon sale? where can I find it?

( and I can also gift my old 50 to my brother, he dropped his camera and broke the 50 beyond repair ( I put it back together but the AF constantly hunts and is basically a MF now )

or sell it and only be out $200 out of pocket.


----------



## golfergolfer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Check out the MEFOTO line by Benro.. I picked up an A1350Q1A for a trip to Vegas / Red Rock / Hoover Dam / etc. Fit in my carry on with no probs, sturdy, quick to setup / break down, and about $100 less than what you're looking at currently.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> gitzo or go home
> 
> lol jk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i really like them though. amazing


----------



## Pimphare

Hi guys, where is a good place to buy quality cameras? I'm in the market to buy one for my wife as a Christmas gift. My budget is about $400. I don't even know where to start being there's so much to choose from. I'm hoping to find something that'll take crisp photos that she can get developed and framed. What would you suggest?

Edit: I'm in the U.S. btw. Any online or in-store places is fine. I am willing to go up to $500 if I can find a good package deal.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pimphare*
> 
> Hi guys, where is a good place to buy quality cameras? I'm in the market to buy one for my wife as a Christmas gift. My budget is about $400. I don't even know where to start being there's so much to choose from. I'm hoping to find something that'll take crisp photos that she can get developed and framed. What would you suggest?
> 
> Edit: I'm in the U.S. btw. Any online or in-store places is fine. I am willing to go up to $500 if I can find a good package deal.


bhphotovideo.com

adorama.com

bestbuy.com

amazon.com

the usuals. these are just places to buy. while i work at best buy i highly suggest you not ask sales associates at best buy for camera advice unless you want to come to the store that i work at lol. i work at the smyrna location on cobb parkway btw. if you want to swing by ask me my schedule first as im part time and not there every day


----------



## Pimphare

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> bhphotovideo.com
> 
> adorama.com
> 
> bestbuy.com
> 
> amazon.com
> 
> the usuals. these are just places to buy. while i work at best buy i highly suggest you not ask sales associates at best buy for camera advice unless you want to come to the store that i work at lol. i work at the smyrna location on cobb parkway btw. if you want to swing by ask me my schedule first as im part time and not there every day


Thanks! Do you know if the Canon T3 or Canon T3i are any good?


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pimphare*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> bhphotovideo.com
> 
> adorama.com
> 
> bestbuy.com
> 
> amazon.com
> 
> the usuals. these are just places to buy. while i work at best buy i highly suggest you not ask sales associates at best buy for camera advice unless you want to come to the store that i work at lol. i work at the smyrna location on cobb parkway btw. if you want to swing by ask me my schedule first as im part time and not there every day
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks! Do you know if the Canon T3 or Canon T3i are any good?
Click to expand...

if you want canon and dslr then i would personally go with the T3i over the T3 just for the resolution and flip out screen. both cameras feel plasticy but the T3 is especially cheap feeling


----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pimphare*
> 
> Thanks! Do you know if the Canon T3 or Canon T3i are any good?


I have the EOS 1100D (T3), and I like it. Just keep in mind that it starts to show slight amounts of noise at ISO800, so it's not ideal for low-light ambient shots.


----------



## MistaBernie

T3i is a great camera, if you can get a kit for a good deal via bhphoto or Adamora, go for it.

Visible noise at 800 iso is going to happen on just about any camera.. it's the amount of visible noise you get (and what you deem as acceptable) that matters. If you get a better quality exposure, it can have an impact on the amount of visible noise.

Jkuhn, try this - Set up an indoor shot (tripod if you have it, or just find a place to set your camera), set yourself up at iso 800 and whatever other settings you want to get a proper exposure, and grab three shots -- one underexposed by a stop, one at the 'correct' exposure, and one overexposed by one stop. Then repeat the process at iso 1600 and check out the images.

If there's one thing I've learned over the last year, it's that noise is pretty inconsequential. I'd rather shoot at iso 1600 with flash indoors in a well lit area to preserve flash batteries and be able to bump my shutter speed than worry about a bit of noise that 99% of the people that view my photos won't even notice is there.


----------



## hokiealumnus

I have the T3 and wish for a better camera; if the T3i can be found for the right price, it's a better option. This one came to me in trade for some components (a deal that I couldn't pass up) and started me on the photography obsession. The T3 is capable of half-way decent high-ISO performance, but only under good circumstances. I shot this photo with ISO 3200 in case the butterfly moved, and there is relatively little noise. Shot in a house with bad lighting, noise would be much more of a problem. Everything is relative. Anyway, even lower-end cameras like the T3 are capable of good images (click around after looking at the butterfly pic for more examples).

Speaking very broadly, these days, while a good camera is great (I'm saving for a Canon 70D body), it's more about ease of use, very low light (high ISO) performance and easier access to functions than it is about actual image quality. Most decent cameras on the market (the T3 included) can take great images. What matters most is how you use it, and how good you are at recognizing/capturing a good photo, rather than the camera itself.

This is a pretty good deal at Adorama for a T3i with kit lens (18-55mm), bag, extra battery & SD card for $549.
You can get a used T4i with kit lens for $589 at Adorama.
If you're willing to spend a bit more, Canon has a refurbished T5i w/ kit lens for $679.


----------



## Jixr

t3i is great, i chose it over the t4/t5i, the added features didnt' really justify the cost.

and t3i kit bundles can be had for $500 and under all day long, and i'm sure there will be some holiday sales.

pair it with a canon 50mm 1.8 ( $100 ) and you can get some really sharp and nice images with it.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hokiealumnus*
> 
> Shot in a house with bad lighting, noise would be much more of a problem.


That's because white-balancing for tungsten lights boosts the blue channel, resulting in quite obvious noise. There are filters to correct that.


----------



## Jixr

Hm... amazon is selling an olympus pen e-pm2 with the kit lens and a telephoto for $350.
Deals over, only lasted about 3 hours apparently.

Really tempted to jump on this.

I'd love a smaller camera to bring around, but the prices of them make me think that I should just buy another lens for my canon and i'd have much better pictures.


----------



## JKuhn

For those that commented on the amount of noise on the 1100D, I'd just add that I tend to shoot at music shows (without a flash), and even with the 50mm f1.8 I still get a lot of noise. So when I said it's not ideal for low light I actually meant that it's a problem in very dark places at ISO 1600, 3200 and 6400. Noise at 800 isn't a problem for me and 1600 is still ok under the right circumstances, I just wanted to mention it. I don't know how it holds up against other low-end cameras in that regard but overall I like it.


----------



## Pimphare

Thanks for the feedback guys. I've been leaning towards the T3i. I found a bundle deal on Amazon.com for $550 that comes with a 18-55MM lens and a bunch of other goodies. I'll keep looking around before I make my final decision.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JKuhn*
> 
> For those that commented on the amount of noise on the 1100D, I'd just add that I tend to shoot at music shows (without a flash), and even with the 50mm f1.8 I still get a lot of noise. So when I said it's not ideal for low light I actually meant that it's a problem in very dark places at ISO 1600, 3200 and 6400. Noise at 800 isn't a problem for me and 1600 is still ok under the right circumstances, I just wanted to mention it. I don't know how it holds up against other low-end cameras in that regard but overall I like it.


music shows are more along the lines of pretty extreme low light. i think most define low light as just dark indoors rather than the pitch black areas you will find in spots on stage shooting concerts haha









but yeah all cameras will struggle at a certain point in extreme low light when its hard to find focus in the first place


----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> music shows are more along the lines of pretty extreme low light. i think most define low light as just dark indoors rather than the pitch black areas you will find in spots on stage shooting concerts haha
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> but yeah all cameras will struggle at a certain point in extreme low light when its hard to find focus in the first place


Autofocus in my experience doesn't work at all in tha amount of light. For that the only way is manual.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JKuhn*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> music shows are more along the lines of pretty extreme low light. i think most define low light as just dark indoors rather than the pitch black areas you will find in spots on stage shooting concerts haha
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> but yeah all cameras will struggle at a certain point in extreme low light when its hard to find focus in the first place
> 
> 
> 
> Autofocus in my experience doesn't work at all in tha amount of light. For that the only way is manual.
Click to expand...

pretty much what i said haha but i recognize a slight language barrier. no biggie lol


----------



## sub50hz

New toys for today.


----------



## MistaBernie

Nice. I've been considering trying to pick up a '57 LP Gold Top but I can't find any reissues for a reasonable price.


----------



## sub50hz

"Gibson" and "reasonable price" don't really go together. Almost caved on a Custom Shop Tele, but the price was just too much (3800).


----------



## Jixr

I hate to say I have a 71 tele just sitting in its case. Was my dads guitar, and still smells like the last bar he played in. I'm always too afraid to play it, and too broke to afford a nice wall hanging display case for it. its pretty sweet.


----------



## sub50hz

Pics.


----------



## Jixr

i'll be sure to grab some next time i'm at my parents house. Its nothing fancy, pretty beat up and worn, my dad collects guitars, nothing fancy, but we have some old ovations, ( an ovation preacher that i love ) an acoustic electric gretsch that is pretty sweet, and my bass ( fender aerodyne, an early model, before they cheaped out on their construction ) as well as a few others, but most of them are nothing special.

his tele is pretty sweet though, last time we had it apprasied it was valued at about $2500. Its not a top of the line model, ( sorry i don't know much about it ) but its still nice. Blonde with a black pickguard ( the original white cracked and he replaced it in the early 80's with a black one )


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> New toys for today.


Very nice, what year?

I'm a bass player and when it comes to guitars, I'm more of a Strat and Tele guy, but whenever I'm home I love playing my dad's guitars. He's got a '72 SG, an '80 Martin D-35, and my personal favorite (and last he checked, the most valuable of the lot), his '83 ES-175.


----------



## sub50hz

As a bass guy, you may be sad to find out I dumped my Spector and GK rig about a month ago because I hadn't been playing bass. I still have an 80s NS-2 that I'm restoring (well, it's been 7 years and there's still some laquer on it), but I found my desire to play bass dwindling over the past few years. I started on guitar some 17 years ago, and I've been enjoying playing it more lately. I also have a '67 Strat, a Les Paul Studio, a Breedlove Acoustic and a Taylor Big Baby. Too many choices when I come down here to play, though no matter what it is or how loud I crank it, the dog comes down here and falls asleep. Weirdo.


----------



## laboitenoire

Hahahaha I'm not too sad. Never been a big Spector fan (the necks feel weird), and the GK sound is very hit or miss, I find. That NS-2 sounds pretty sweet, though.

I know what you mean about interests changing over time. I used to have one of the last made in the USA Peavey Milleniums (5 string) when I was in high school, and then when I was in my senior year I got tired of the 5th string and started playing a cheap knock off fretless Precision. Then in college I decided to get rid of the Peavey and now I'm just noodling around on a Schecter Diamond P. Cheap, but has a fantastic neck and decent electronics. Sounds nice through the TC Electronic combo I'm playing these days.

For guitar, these days I'm playing on an Epiphone Hummingbird and a Kramer Strat clone (bought it from a friend whose father had just gotten it refretted and had put graphite saddles on it before he passed away).

As you can tell, I get by with the cheap instruments that sound more expensive than they are


----------



## MistaBernie

haha, more bass players? Nice.

I dumped my 5 string American Jazz a couple of years ago now on CL to put towards photo stuff. I just wasn't playing it. I went down to a Schecter 004.. was kind of shocked, but I actually really love the thing. Lightweight, versatile, feels nice in my hands, get lots of great tone out of it and a Fender 400 Pro 2x10 Combo.. pretty much perfect for whatever I want to do.


----------



## sub50hz

Think I might make a return trip to GC to check out a new amp today, still rocking my 12-year old Peavey Delta Blues and my Palomino V8 -- some of those new Fender Hot Rods sound fantastic, though I'm not sure about the 6V6 power sections, I've always been an EL84 kinda guy.


----------



## Jixr

thats why I love my aerodyne, the profile is super slim with a fast neck, does not feel anything like a traditional fender bass ( the newer versions are crap though )
and its pretty light ( i'm a little guy with t-rex arms so its nice to have a fast neck.


----------



## Jixr

back to cameras

I currently use a canon 17-40 f4 L, its not sharp, has ( dont know the technical name for it ) issues where egdges have red/blue colors on them when wide open, but I love it.

I also love my 50mm 1.8, though I've been wanting a wider prime, but everything I'm looking at is easily a few hundered bucks, the cheapest option is a canon 30mm f2 or a sigma 28mm 1.8

i'm really wanting to buy myself some gear for christmas, but i cant decide between a wide prime or a cheap mirrorless, or just try to make due with my f4l and try my best to get low light photos with it ( and no i dont want the 17-55 2.8 is, call me weird, but I don't like it )


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> back to cameras
> 
> I currently use a canon 17-40 f4 L, its not sharp, has ( dont know the technical name for it ) issues where egdges have red/blue colors on them when wide open, but I love it.
> 
> I also love my 50mm 1.8, though I've been wanting a wider prime, but everything I'm looking at is easily a few hundered bucks, the cheapest option is a canon 30mm f2 or a sigma 28mm 1.8
> 
> i'm really wanting to buy myself some gear for christmas, but i cant decide between a wide prime or a cheap mirrorless, or just try to make due with my f4l and try my best to get low light photos with it ( and no i dont want the 17-55 2.8 is, call me weird, but I don't like it )


sigma 30 f/1.4...I love mine and you can pick them up for about 250.


----------



## Conspiracy

i dont have any of those issues with my 17-40L

maybe your expectations are too high for it.


----------



## Jixr

yeah, my issues is I really really want a mirrorless but have not found anything that I love that isnt below the price of a nice lens, and all the cheaper ones I just think "might as well use my iphone"

dunno what to do


----------



## sub50hz

Used X100.


----------



## Jixr

well, i'm using it on a crop body and often wide open. Maybe i can get some screen shots of it.

It probably is me though, before this zoom i exclusively used primes, either 40mm or 50mm.


----------



## laboitenoire

I think you're a bit confused...

The Sigma 30 f/1.4 is a lens for crop body DSLRS. It's not a mirrorless camera lens.

It is a pretty fantastic lens, and many people have been very happy with it.


----------



## sub50hz

Shame they have so many focusing issues on Canons, though.


----------



## Jixr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> I think you're a bit confused..


No sorry, I should have been more clear, I Have a T3i and want a ~35mm prime for it, but I also want a mirrorless

Though I just got back from the camera shop, and fell in love with the little pentax q7 with a little prime on it. Only bad thing is the camera cost more than I paid for my t3i







, and the prime is an extra $200, but I can easily carry it with me


----------



## aksthem1

The Q7 is a turd painted silver. Not even gold.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Shame they have so many focusing issues on Canons, though.


They've gotten better as of late, from what I've heard. That's one benefit of buying used, as generally they've been calibrated if they had the issue.

Stupid thing though is that, like many other Sigma lenses, they don't always like newer Nikon bodies. My 30 worked perfectly on my D5000, but on my D7000 it won't focus in live view. Not a huge issue, but an issue none the less.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aksthem1*
> 
> The Q7 is a turd painted silver. Not even gold.


haha pretty well said


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> They've gotten better as of late, from what I've heard. That's one benefit of buying used, as generally they've been calibrated if they had the issue.
> 
> Stupid thing though is that, like many other Sigma lenses, they don't always like newer Nikon bodies. My 30 worked perfectly on my D5000, but on my D7000 it won't focus in live view. Not a huge issue, but an issue none the less.


I've grown to hate my D7000 something fierce.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> They've gotten better as of late, from what I've heard. That's one benefit of buying used, as generally they've been calibrated if they had the issue.
> 
> Stupid thing though is that, like many other Sigma lenses, they don't always like newer Nikon bodies. My 30 worked perfectly on my D5000, but on my D7000 it won't focus in live view. Not a huge issue, but an issue none the less.
> 
> 
> 
> I've grown to hate my D7000 something fierce.
Click to expand...

how why?

its a very solid camera minus the whole small sensor thing


----------



## golfergolfer

Do any of you use light modifiers? Soft box, ring flash, etc? Something small that doesnt have to be mounted on a light stand?


----------



## Dream Killer

my sb700 comes with cto, ctg, and a sto-fen like thing. they're awesome.


----------



## dudemanppl

Do voice-activated light stands count? When I shoot things I just have a friend hold up the light lol.


----------



## golfergolfer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> my sb700 comes with cto, ctg, and a sto-fen like thing. they're awesome.


Hmm they are fun I have used mine as well with my flash








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dudemanppl*
> 
> Do voice-activated light stands count? When I shoot things I just have a friend hold up the light lol.


Yea kinda... I do agree that voice activated light stands are the best though









That said I was thinking more along the lines of Ring Flash adapters like Orbis ones or different kind of spheres like gary fong or something?


----------



## Nitrogannex

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> No sorry, I should have been more clear, I Have a T3i and want a ~35mm prime for it, but I also want a mirrorless
> 
> Though I just got back from the camera shop, and fell in love with the little pentax q7 with a little prime on it. Only bad thing is the camera cost more than I paid for my t3i
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> , and the prime is an extra $200, but I can easily carry it with me


I may not have a ton of Experience with the bigger DSLR's, but I've done quite a bit of Experimenting with Mirrorless systems. The best image Quality is going to come out of Either the Sony NEX (5 series or above), or a Fujifilm. The EOS M is also Nice (same sensor as a T4I) but it's near EOL and doesn't have that big of a lens range

Now if you want ease of Use, the Nikon 1 series wins hands down.

Also, Canceled my 60D. It just wasn't in the budget, however, with my tax refund and school refund, I should have enough to plunk down on a Decent 6D with a lens in a few months. As of Now, I've been using a D7000 borrowed from a friend, not sure how I feel about it yet, I've been taking some pictures, but I'm not particularly used to the controls so they've come out a little sub-par.

Examples


----------



## Jixr

yeah, i guess i'm just not the typical consumer the market is aimed at.
the few ilc's that fit me are just too expensive.

Maybe one day we will be lucky and we could shoot raw files on our iphones.


----------



## Radmanhs

i will hopfully get a canon t4i or t5i soon. i want to get the best tripod that is under $150(unless it is worth getting one that is a bit more)

also i want to get 2 different stabilizers, a shoulder one and the other needs to just be a vertical bar with a weight to balance it out and i prefer these be under $100(again, a bit more if great quality jump)


----------



## Pimphare

Well fellas, I pulled the trigger and bought my wife a Canon T3i as a Xmas gift. It will be her first DSLR camera so I think she'll be pleased.


----------



## Jixr

horray! they are still pretty relevant, and great little cams. I love mine.


----------



## Pimphare

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> horray! they are still pretty relevant, and great little cams. I love mine.


The one I ordered comes with a 18-55mm lens. I'll buy some accessories for it later. Maybe she'll let me use it to take some shots of my PC when I get it how I want it.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nitrogannex*


Is that the C&O by the Potomac?


----------



## Nitrogannex

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> Is that the C&O by the Potomac?


Nope, the Muskingum almost where it merges into the Ohio


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nitrogannex*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> Is that the C&O by the Potomac?
> 
> 
> 
> Nope, the Muskingum almost where it merges into the Ohio
Click to expand...

no wonder it looks similar.

anyway
@sub50hz - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HhabgvIIXik


----------



## sub50hz

Man, that beginning section with the skateboard is so cash.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

That poor roadbike...


----------



## Jixr

You guys have any opinions on buying cameras off ebay?

People often buy the kits wholesale, then part them out , I can get a pentax q7 body for about $350 shipped, and then go buy the prime lens I want for it for $200 bringing it to 550, vs buying a kit here for 500, then another 200 for the lens I want for 700, which to me is too much money for a second camera system. ( thats the price of a 70-400 f4l or another nice lens for my canon )

Obviously i'm without a warranty or anything like that, and $500 is about what I wanna spend for a second small fixed lens camera to tote around everyday ( the pentax is so small i'll just clip a lanyard on to it and bring it everywhere )

or I could go with the older q10 and the lens ( both would be new ) and I would be at $500


----------



## groundzero9

In my experience authorized sellers and returns/warranties are always worth the extra money.


----------



## Jixr

Probaby so, but thats nearly $300 extra of 'worth it' for what I want.

I guess I'll just see about the cheaper one.









I really want the cam to use at a concert festival i'm going to at the end of this year, removable lens cameras are banned, but the q7 is smaller than nicer point and shoots, and the prime would be perfect.


----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> Probaby so, but thats nearly $300 extra of 'worth it' for what I want.
> 
> I guess I'll just see about the cheaper one.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I really want the cam to use at a concert festival i'm going to at the end of this year, *removable lens cameras are banned*, but the q7 is smaller than nicer point and shoots, and the prime would be perfect.


Let me guess, they feel it's a "security risk" due to the Boston terror attack some time ago? Because that was apparrently their excuse at a horse-racing event earlier. I still don't understand how those two things are linked.


----------



## MistaBernie

Removable Lens camera bans were happening well before the Boston Marathon bombings. While it has to do with security, sometimes it just has to do with the fact that if you walk in with a 35mm on your body but a 70-200 (or something bigger) in a bag around your neck and you swap it out, you're suddenly taking up more space in a relatively crowded area. Hell, Fenway Park in Boston lets you in with removable lens cameras (and small bags). I got some nice shots w/ a 7D and 70-200 last year because I had the 70-200 lying down in my bag and a smaller lens on the body.

It really varies from venue to venue and depending on the organization/sport. The TD Garden has never let SLRs in (as far as I'm aware). It looked like I could have brought a camera in with me to Gillette for the Patriots game last week, but I couldn't bring a bag (and if I did bring a bag, it was a small clear bag that would have been pretty much useless to put any sort of useful glass in it.


----------



## Jixr

well, the venue I am going to at the end of the year is a 2 night indoor music festival, and they will have protogs there, media, etc.

mainly it comes to this.
1. the event does not want you profiting off images taken at their venues
2. security risk
3. probably an insuracne/liability risk
4. 30,000 people mashed up at an electronic music festival is INSANE if you've ever been on the rail of an event like that, if I had a bag on me it would get smashed/stolen/puked on in the first 5 mins there. Even if I were allowed, I wouldn't bring my DSLR there, I'll probably end up putting my sim card in my iphone4 so I don't get my iph5s smashed, broken, drenched in unkown liquieds, covered in cake (yes caking is a thing ) etc.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Received my yongnuo yn 560 II today.

Marin's advice to not get a speedlight was trash.

This thing is great.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> Received my yongnuo yn 560 II today.
> 
> Marin's advice to not get a speedlight was trash.
> 
> This thing is great.


should have gotten a studio strobe.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

That's what he was telling me. I would have never used it so nope.


----------



## kingsnake2

Marin has no concept of "good enough."


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kingsnake2*
> 
> Marin has no concept of "good enough."


*THIS*


----------



## Nitrogannex

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> Probaby so, but thats nearly $300 extra of 'worth it' for what I want.
> 
> I guess I'll just see about the cheaper one.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I really want the cam to use at a concert festival i'm going to at the end of this year, removable lens cameras are banned, but the q7 is smaller than nicer point and shoots, and the prime would be perfect.


Every Camera I've bought has come off Ebay, you just need to make sure you read the description well. Ebay has come a long way, and if you use paypal, It's really almost as safe as Amazon. The two times I didn't get what I paid for (both no-shows) it took maybe 2 weeks tops to get a full refund, which I don't think was bad at all.


----------



## Jixr

yeah, i have paypal, and the seller ( from japan ) is one of those people who buys kits cheap and parts the body with the lens's

I could awlays buy the kit at the cam shop, and turn around and sell the kit lens back, but I have zero idea what I would get for it.


----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Removable Lens camera bans were happening well before the Boston Marathon bombings. While it has to do with security, sometimes it just has to do with the fact that if you walk in with a 35mm on your body but a 70-200 (or something bigger) in a bag around your neck and you swap it out, you're suddenly taking up more space in a relatively crowded area. Hell, Fenway Park in Boston lets you in with removable lens cameras (and small bags). I got some nice shots w/ a 7D and 70-200 last year because I had the 70-200 lying down in my bag and a smaller lens on the body.
> 
> It really varies from venue to venue and depending on the organization/sport. The TD Garden has never let SLRs in (as far as I'm aware). It looked like I could have brought a camera in with me to Gillette for the Patriots game last week, but I couldn't bring a bag (and if I did bring a bag, it was a small clear bag that would have been pretty much useless to put any sort of useful glass in it.


At least that makes sense to some degree. But I've read about a horse race earlier where they used the Boston attack as an excuse. Like someone said in an article, you could take a top-end compact or bridge in as long as the lens was less than 6", but a MILC with one pancake lens or a cheap DSLR was not allowed.


----------



## jellybeans69

After all the suggestions decided to order Nikon D3200 as my first dslr ever, probably going to be looking to buy 35mm F1.8 lens after my next pay-check, at start going to be used for mostly indoor pictures of my cat / rig / kid sis etc...

As far as lens bans go - around here they simply say "no pro" photo stuff doesn't matter if it's 200-400$ camera with crappy 18-55 or , some huge lens your having with you, they don't let enter the venues either way and it's been so for quite a while around here.


----------



## Conspiracy

the no lens ban has been in effect for quite a long time. it varies from venue to venue and city to city. another partial reason venues dont want you bringing nice camera gear is because they dont want you to be able to shoot for free for a profit. they dont know what you are using the images for but if you want to make money off your photos then get a press pass like everyone else. i recently shot two places where there are 2 photo rules. rule 1, if you are shooting for profit then pay this extra fee on top of the normal entrance fee to enjoy said festivities. rule 2, no lenses past a certain size and you cant share the photos online anywhere... if you want to share here is the number for PR to talk about rights. the rule 2 is heavily based on the honor system which almost everyone obeys out of respect.


----------



## Eggs and bacon

@Conspiracy

Just noticed in your sig that you have the 135 f4, how do you find that focal length? Do you use it for portraits or what?

Also do you use the yongnuos with the etrsi?


----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jellybeans69*
> 
> After all the suggestions decided to order Nikon D3200 as my first dslr ever, probably going to be looking to buy 35mm F1.8 lens after my next pay-check, at start going to be used for mostly indoor pictures of my cat / rig / kid sis etc...
> 
> As far as lens bans go - around here they simply say "no pro" photo stuff doesn't matter if it's 200-400$ camera with crappy 18-55 or , some huge lens your having with you, they don't let enter the venues either way and it's been so for quite a while around here.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> the no lens ban has been in effect for quite a long time. it varies from venue to venue and city to city. another partial reason venues dont want you bringing nice camera gear is because they dont want you to be able to shoot for free for a profit. they dont know what you are using the images for but if you want to make money off your photos then get a press pass like everyone else. i recently shot two places where there are 2 photo rules. rule 1, if you are shooting for profit then pay this extra fee on top of the normal entrance fee to enjoy said festivities. rule 2, no lenses past a certain size and you cant share the photos online anywhere... if you want to share here is the number for PR to talk about rights. the rule 2 is heavily based on the honor system which almost everyone obeys out of respect.


The closest to that I've encountered so far was one of the organisers at a music show requesting me to not stand in front of everyone because it might bother the other people. Although I probably wouldn't have had issues if I didn't approach him myself to ask specifically about that. Still I prefer to get permission first.


----------



## jellybeans69

Some of my first shots with D3200, so much stuff to get used to as i've never used dslr


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!









Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## Nitrogannex

Use your Flash and/or step up the shutter speed, it looks like the D3200 isn't fond of shadows, a lot of Noise especially in the seccond photo


----------



## jellybeans69

Actually second photo was taken with flash, it's probably my own shadow falling strangely on it


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Eggs and bacon*
> 
> @Conspiracy
> 
> Just noticed in your sig that you have the 135 f4, how do you find that focal length? Do you use it for portraits or what?
> 
> Also do you use the yongnuos with the etrsi?


i love the focal length. its nice to use. i havent used it for portraits yet. mainly just walking around and attempted landscapes lol

i have tried to use the yongnuos on the ETRSi but so far with no luck. the triggers dont fit on my grip so i got a sync cord but might have a bad cord and gave up. and i tried it both ways to make sure it wasnt a polarity issue


----------



## jellybeans69

A question if i may, in not perfect conditions , what would be good shutter speed/aperture to use in trying to capture semi moving cat?
For pictures like these (all taken with auto), though auto tries to use 3200 iso here is it really needed? (Also flash isn't option cause she closes her eyes if use flash) and couldn't get anything close to these if i try through M/A


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## aksthem1

Ok first off you may want to read up on some photography guides to help you out and secondly don't use auto. You want to use the other creative modes to ease you into manual mode. Like aperture or shutter priority mode. For moving objects you would probably be good at 1/250 maybe a little less.

The fun part is experimenting.


----------



## kingsnake2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aksthem1*
> 
> Ok first off you may want to read up on some photography guides to help you out and secondly don't use auto. You want to use the other creative modes to ease you into manual mode. Like aperture or shutter priority mode. For moving objects you would probably be good at 1/250 maybe a little less.
> 
> *The fun part is experimenting.*


I pretty much learned to use a camera by experimenting. Still a noob but you can learn a ton by just trying stuff.


----------



## Tman5293

I guess it's about time I join the club. I got my first DSLR a couple weeks ago and I love it. Here's my gear to be added to the members list:

*Camera:* Nikon D3200
*Lenses:* AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G VR, AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 55-200mm f/4-5.6G ED

This is one of my best shots yet, critiques welcome:










EDIT: Is there any rule against posting photos here? If so please let me know because I will do it otherwise.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jellybeans69*
> 
> A question if i may, in not perfect conditions , what would be good shutter speed/aperture to use in trying to capture semi moving cat?
> For pictures like these (all taken with auto), though auto tries to use 3200 iso here is it really needed? (Also flash isn't option cause she closes her eyes if use flash) and couldn't get anything close to these if i try through M/A
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


Do you have only on camera flash or do you have a separate speedlite? You can always bounce flash.

Otherwise you will have to open the aperture as big as possible. Use 1/160th-1/250th of a second depending on movement usually. And let auto ISO adjust for the ambient.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Tman5293*
> 
> I guess it's about time I join the club. I got my first DSLR a couple weeks ago and I love it. Here's my gear to be added to the members list:
> 
> *Camera:* Nikon D3200
> *Lenses:* AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G VR, AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 55-200mm f/4-5.6G ED
> 
> This is one of my best shots yet, critiques welcome:
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EDIT: Is there any rule against posting photos here? If so please let me know because I will do it otherwise.


There is a critique the pic above you thread: http://www.overclock.net/t/493575/critique-the-photo-above-you
But I would say it is blurry and just looks like a snapshot. I don't like the half and half background. Would be better if you captured the bottom of the neck/base of the guitar.


----------



## jellybeans69

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Do you have only on camera flash or do you have a separate speedlite? You can always bounce flash.
> 
> Otherwise you will have to open the aperture as big as possible. Use 1/160th-1/250th of a second depending on movement usually. And let auto ISO adjust for the ambient.


New camera so only 18-55 default lens and default flash it has


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Get a real flash and bounce it off the ceiling. Or a fast lens.

....And didn't notice there was 6 posts before. Yeah, what sean said.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> Get a real flash and bounce it off the ceiling. Or a fast lens.
> 
> ....And didn't notice there was 6 posts before. Yeah, what sean said.


x2, get a cheap flash like a youngno. Do you have canon? Get this: http://www.amazon.com/Yongnuo-YN-560-Speedlight-Flash-Nikon/dp/B0079M711S/ref=pd_cp_p_1

or this: http://www.amazon.com/Yongnuo-Professional-Speedlight-Flashlight-Olympus/dp/B00BXA7N6A

There are nikon variants as well.


----------



## jellybeans69

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> x2, get a cheap flash like a youngno. Do you have canon? Get this: http://www.amazon.com/Yongnuo-Speedlite-YN560-Flash-Cameras/dp/B004GZLCTI
> 
> or this: http://www.amazon.com/Yongnuo-Professional-Speedlight-Flashlight-Olympus/dp/B00BXA7N6A
> 
> There are nikon variants as well.


D3200 + 18-55 VR , from next paycheck i was thinking of getting a 35/55 1.8 , but if flash would help greatly i guess i could get that too.


----------



## Sean Webster

Yea, get a flash before the lens. Shooting indoors you will still need a flash, even at like f/1.4.

Also, for a lens I'd recommend the 35mm prime over 50mm on your body.

I have the canon version of this and love it: http://www.amazon.com/Sigma-30mm-Nikon-Digital-Cameras/dp/B0007U0H06


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> x2, get a cheap flash like a youngno. Do you have canon? Get this: http://www.amazon.com/Yongnuo-Speedlite-YN560-Flash-Cameras/dp/B004GZLCTI
> 
> or this: http://www.amazon.com/Yongnuo-Professional-Speedlight-Flashlight-Olympus/dp/B00BXA7N6A
> 
> There are nikon variants as well.


Wouldn't it be better to get the cheaper, newer 560-II? http://www.amazon.com/Yongnuo-YN-560-Speedlight-Flash-Nikon/dp/B0079M711S/ref=pd_cp_p_1

Also, I has a slip in my flash saying not to use lithium ion battery. I presume this doesn't apply to ultimate lithium type batteries?


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> 
> 
> Wouldn't it be better to get the cheaper, faster 560-II? http://www.amazon.com/Yongnuo-YN-560-Speedlight-Flash-Nikon/dp/B0079M711S/ref=pd_cp_p_1
Click to expand...

Yea, I thought I posted the version 2.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Definetly a 35 over a 50. I only got the 50 on my crop sensor because I'm not paying $100 extra for a slower lens.


----------



## Tman5293

My camera took a selfie.


----------



## jellybeans69

Built in flash is nice, but doesn't work at all for cat as i already mentioned earlier she closes damn eyes everytime i use flash, i've already decided to get 35mm/1.8 from next paycheck, but i have an offer of Metz 48 AF-1 flash - 100$ any good for that price, going by pictures it looks huge


----------



## aksthem1

Try this, but you can use aluminum foil wrapped around too.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/tina_t/5692851093/


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jellybeans69*
> 
> Built in flash is nice, but doesn't work at all for cat as i already mentioned earlier she closes damn eyes everytime i use flash, i've already decided to get 35mm/1.8 from next paycheck, but i have an offer of Metz 48 AF-1 flash - 100$ any good for that price, going by pictures it looks huge


I assume you cat closes her eyes from the focus flashes, no? Because I've vever once taken a photo of anything, and I've shot plenty of cats that closed it's eyes before the photo was taken.


----------



## sub50hz

Built-in flashes emit pre-flash to determine metering, which is why you end up with Deadcat every time.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Built-in flashes emit pre-flash to determine metering, which is why you end up with Deadcat every time.


Which can be solved with manual focus. (At least on my camera)


----------



## Dream Killer

pre flashes determines flash exposure (e-ttl), not the normal exposure. some animals and humans react faster than the pre flashes so you get blinkers.

of course some auto focus systems also emit long pre flashes but that should never be turned on anyway since the photo is going to be likely crap.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> Which can be solved with manual focus.


Focus pre-flash != metering pre-flash.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Don't get metering flashes then I guess...


----------



## Jixr

hey guys, so as you know i've been looking for a good cam under $500, and just ran across the fuji x20, went to the store to play with it, and I really like it.

I don't know anything about fuji, but i do know most companies refresh cameras every year, and seeing how the x20 came out last january or so, and it being $100 off right now, seems like a new one could be right around the corner.

Should I bite now or bide my time?


----------



## kingsnake2

I have the x10 and I love it. Great versatility for every day use and can still do everything manual.


----------



## Jixr

it fits nearly everything I want for a smaller companion to my DSLR. And after playing with it and the x100s, I can start to see why people ditch there DSLR's for these things.

@kingsnake do you have any idea what the fuji line refresh rate is? id hate to buy it to see another one come out soon ( since the x20 is almost a year old now )


----------



## sub50hz

There won't be an X20 or X100s replacement any time soon, the only model "due" for an upgrade is the X-Pro 1.


----------



## Jixr

good to know. I bit on some previous camera gear before on sales just to have something new announced 2 days after my return policy was up.

If I get a bonus tomorrow at my xmas party i'll deff pick one up. ( sale ends on the 21st )


----------



## Nitrogannex

Like I said Earlier, I've played with the majority of Mirrorless systems and Fuji was in the top 3 for me.

Also, what is everyone's opinion on Sony DSLR's , based on what I've read, the A77 Knocks the 60D out of the park


----------



## Jixr

yeah, its more of a crazy fancy point and shoot, but I think it will work for me. and I don't have to worry about buying different lens's or anything like that.


----------



## kingsnake2

Though I'd love to see an x10 (or an x30 I suppose?) with a larger sensor and such, I doubt there will be any new ones in that line at least in the next year or so.


----------



## Jixr

Well it looks like there is about a year and a half to two years between the x10 and x20, so If i pick one up I shouldn't have to worry about a replacement soon.

I'm going to go back to the store today with a memory card and snap some pics and check them out at home.

I'm still not 100% sure if I wanna shell out for a second camera, but out of all the ones i've tested so far i like the fuji the best.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kingsnake2*
> 
> Though I'd love to see an x10 (or an x30 I suppose?) with a larger sensor and such, I doubt there will be any new ones in that line at least in the next year or so.


X100s.


----------



## kingsnake2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> X100s.


Ya, I like that one a lot. I only wish it wasn't a 23mm fixed focal length. Sometimes you just cant get close to stuff, in which case its really nice to have at least a little zoom.


----------



## sub50hz

Have you tried just walking around with a single lens or shooting at a single focal length all day?


----------



## Jixr

and on topic, the x100 and x100s both have fixed non removable lens's right?


----------



## kingsnake2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Have you tried just walking around with a single lens or shooting at a single focal length all day?


I've tried with my 50mm once but just not as versatile as I'd like.


----------



## sub50hz

I assume you have a crop-sensor body, then -- 50mm is a terrible walk-around lens, (for most people) in that case.


----------



## Jixr

damn it, all set on going and buying the x20 tomorrow, and will play with it over the weekend and see if i'm going to keep it or not.

The macro mode is amazing, and the test shots were pretty good.

if this camera is as good as it seems, I could really see myself selling my canon 17-40f4 L since the x20 covers the same range, but with a faster lens.

I'll pick one up, check out my favorite park, then wonder downtown over the weekend.

Though I did find a mint x100s for $850... what to do what to do.


----------



## kingsnake2

Ya, it was a crop sensor and was horrible. Would still like to ge able to zoom in a bit for stuff more thsn 10ft away.


----------



## Jixr

crappy thing is there are no cheap 35mm lens's for crop bodies. the cheapest ones start at 3x the price of the cheap 50's from nikon and canon.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> crappy thing is there are no cheap 35mm lens's for crop bodies. the cheapest ones start at 3x the price of the cheap 50's from nikon and canon.


Nikon's 35/1.8 DX is like 200 bucks. Canon's older 35/2 was in the same price bracket and is quite good on crop-sensor cameras.

You don't buy a lens based on prce, you buy it based on how you work -- what perspective, what framing, etc. -- if you buy lenses because they're simply affordable (I'm looking at you, Jixr, with your 40mm/50mm debacle), you may never actually be able to get the results you want.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> crappy thing is there are no cheap 35mm lens's for crop bodies. the cheapest ones start at 3x the price of the cheap 50's from nikon and canon.


Exactly. I went with the 50 when I really wanted a 35, but I wasn't about to pay twice the price.


----------



## Jixr

Quote:


> You don't buy a lens based on price, you buy it based on how you work


my wallet dictates how I work lol.


----------



## jellybeans69

35 and 55mm / 1.8 DX difference seem's to be about 50e here, 170e for 35mm or 135 euros for 50mm. Though seems like i might be able to get used Nikkor 35mm 1.8 by next paycheck for ~120 euros


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> crappy thing is there are no cheap 35mm lens's for crop bodies. the cheapest ones start at 3x the price of the cheap 50's from nikon and canon.
> 
> 
> 
> *You don't buy a lens based on prce, you buy it based on how you work -- what perspective, what framing, etc.* -- if you buy lenses because they're simply affordable (I'm looking at you, Jixr, with your 40mm/50mm debacle), you may never actually be able to get the results you want.
Click to expand...

THIS


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> my wallet dictates how I work lol.


Then Sub's advice is even _more_ relevant. Figure out how you shoot and what you need your lens to do, determine the lens that is closest to your budget that hits all your check marks, save up and buy said lens once. Going back and forth between multiple lenses is just going to cost you money, especially if you buy new (even deals) and then sell what you have used.


----------



## Jixr

yeah, I never buy new, most of my gear is craigslisted, and I only buy If its a good deal. the x20 i'm going to pick up today will be the most expensive new camera thing i've ever bought.

EDIT: wa-hoo! got my x20, going to be real careful with it for the weekend, I'm always afraid of buying something expensive that I won't like it and want to end up returning it ( but I don't see why I would ) I can't rent one from the store, and taking pictures in a store isn't really that great for real world performance. it's an exensive buy for me, but i'm excited about it.

Going to the park after work, and tonight i'll try some indoor/lowlight shots and this weekend maybe try it downtown or something.


----------



## Jixr

Picked up the x20, i'm kinda conflicted about it. Here is why, shot in a shady area of the park trails, one is the iphone5s, one is the x20 ( in automode for now )

Can you tell which one is which?




not sure If i think its a $500 difference between the two. I'll keep playing with it over the weekend and see what happens.
Worst case senario I have to pay a 15% restocking fee if the cam isn't in pefect shape if I return it. ( only opened the camera and the battery, everything else is still sealed )

Love the body, the build and the design, but the sensor isn't really that big, and the thing isn't useable past 800 iso


----------



## Sean Webster

the pic on the top is the x20 and the pic bottom the iphone?

Today was a good day. Did a beach shoot with a NHL lady panther.


----------



## Jixr

:thumb:winner winner chicken dinner.
Those shots were in a tree covered area at around 5:30pm in a valley, so the light was pretty poor. So its not the best comparison just yet.

I'll keep on playing with it, I'll make a desision on sunday night.
I paid for it with my christmas bonus money, so don't feel like its paid for out of pocket, but $500 is a good bit of change for me.
and it bothers me a bit for the same price I could get a cam with a larger sensor.

Thought I should be able to run it through its paces this weekend, going out saturday, have my friends family in town to help them with computer stuff.

Meanwhile, here are some more pics from it.
pretty good for general use.

Man the cam looks nice though. Could be a bit small for some people though, I typically wear S/M sized gloves


Probably my best pic I've taken with it so far.
( shot in RAW, edited in LR )


----------



## nvidiaftw12

The canon 50mm 1.8 has a bit more vignetting wide open than I thought. :/


----------



## aksthem1

Jixr why don't you stop worrying about your gear so much and just shoot?


----------



## Jixr

I shoot often, I just want to make sure on what i'm buying is worth it.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> I shoot often, I just want to make sure on what i'm buying is worth it.


imo any gear that's worth investing into is going to be expensive.

on the flip side, camera gear usually holds value well so even if your interest in a particular lens/accessory disappears, you should be able to sell it back near the price you paid for it.

lesson here is: stop worrying about what value an accessory has and worry about how you can improve your photography skills - something you can never buy or get taken away from you.


----------



## Jixr

yeah, i ended up taking the camera back. i'll just keep an eye out for some used gear.
the battery life on the thing was horrible, and in some modes you couldn't shoot RAW, so that was kind of a deal breaker for me.
I don't see the point in a small carry camera if you're also going to be need to bring along an extra battery or two.


----------



## MistaBernie

I haven't heard of any issues with the X20 battery life. Of course, you're talking to the guy that's charged his S95 battery four times since he got it a year ago this past Friday..


----------



## Jixr

well, i'm sure it was because i was playing with everything in the menu and all the settings, but even when doing so I got maybe 100 shots before it died. most people say the cam is good for 200-250. but I guess it really depends on how long you leave it on. The LCD sucks down the battery.


----------



## kingsnake2

My x10 lasts a day for me generally but you could run out. I keep a second in my wallet because they're small.


----------



## Jixr

yeah, hard to believe with the size of the body they couldn't pack in either a bigger battery or a bigger sensor. Same size battery as the tiny pentax q series and a slightly bigger sensor.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

I've been trying to shoot some stuff for my dad to throw up on ebay, and I'm trying to get the that true white background, but I can't seem to get it without blowing out the subject too much. I know you're supposed to light the background more than the subject but that is hard when I the subject is sitting on the background. The only way I can see to do it would be to have a my background be translucent and light it from underneath. But is there any quick editing way I could get true white? Like for this photo. I Don't have photoshop or lightroom, but I can get it if I must.


----------



## Tman5293

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> I've been trying to shoot some stuff for my dad to throw up on ebay, and I'm trying to get the that true white background, but I can't seem to get it without blowing out the subject too much. I know you're supposed to light the background more than the subject but that is hard when I the subject is sitting on the background. The only way I can see to do it would be to have a my background be translucent and light it from underneath. But is there any quick editing way I could get true white? Like for this photo. I Don't have photoshop or lightroom, but I can get it if I must.


Merry Christmas!


----------



## nvidiaftw12

You're awesome! But, I've got a bunch, and I will have more later so teaching me how would be a bit more effective than doing it for me.


----------



## Tman5293

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> You're awesome! But, I've got a bunch, and I will have more later so teaching me how would be a bit more effective than doing it for me.


I did that in less than 5 minutes in Photoshop. However, there is a free program that can do the exact same thing. It's called GIMP. Check it out here: http://www.gimp.org/.

GIMP has a tool that allows you to select areas based on color. Use that to select the background and then use the bucket fill tool to make it white. After that you just need to zoom in on the area around the object in the picture and touch it up with the paint brush tool.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Yeah, I've got gimp. I'm just not good at using it.


----------



## Tman5293

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> Yeah, I've got gimp. I'm just not good at using it.


I just edited my last post with instructions.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Thanks. 4 our of a billion done. Guess next time I shouldn't shoot on a white surface when I'm shooting stuff that might reflect white light. Lesson learned.


----------



## JAM3S121

I just got a what I would consider a "good" point & shoot.. nothing special. I asked for it mainly to take pics for a build log and to bring to concerts, Its a canon SX280HS




I took both pictures by putting the camera in manual mode, turning macro mode on with AF and adjusting the white balance to tungsten and lowered the ISO to 200. Thats basically all I knew how to do.. apparently this camera has manual adjust aperture although its sensor isn't amazing or anything. I couldn't figure out to use it didn't realize the user manual was on my software disc until just now. Any tips for using my point & shoot better?


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Aperture as low as it can go, keep the shutter speed no slower than your zoom distance (i.e. 50mm = 1/50) Iso as low as you can get it.


----------



## Nitrogannex

Asking again about Sony DSLR's. Worth their salt?

That A77 is tempting

(also bumping this in my feed)


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JAM3S121*
> 
> I just got a what I would consider a "good" point & shoot.. nothing special. I asked for it mainly to take pics for a build log and to bring to concerts, Its a canon SX280HS
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I took both pictures by putting the camera in manual mode, turning macro mode on with AF and adjusting the white balance to tungsten and lowered the ISO to 200. Thats basically all I knew how to do.. apparently this camera has manual adjust aperture although its sensor isn't amazing or anything. I couldn't figure out to use it didn't realize the user manual was on my software disc until just now. Any tips for using my point & shoot better?


you got a nice P&S. its not top of the line and by no means bottom of the line either. you will totally love it


----------



## jellybeans69

As we were given our bonuses at work i decided to get that 35/1.8 , test shot above. Focus is definitely much faster than on stock 18-55 lens


----------



## Tman5293

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jellybeans69*
> 
> 
> 
> As we were given our bonuses at work i decided to get that 35/1.8 , test shot above. Focus is definitely much faster than on stock 18-55 lens


That looks fantastic! My 50mm/1.8 is coming tomorrow and I'm hoping to take similarly good shots with it.


----------



## jellybeans69

35mm already feels kind of zoomed in, for things in my apartement/parents apartement i would be too zoomed in to be usable in 10square meter rooms so opted for 35 instead of 50


----------



## Tman5293

So I just dropped my camera off the tripod. I almost had a heart attack when it hit the floor. I pulled the lock open that holds it on the tripod without holding on to the camera and off it went right onto the floor. Thankfully it landed on carpet which absorbed the impact very well and nothing is broken. No dents or scratches and everything works fine. The flash did pop open but the latch that holds it down didn't break. The lens is fine too. That sure did scare the crap out of me though. Everyone feel free to virtually slap me.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Tman5293*
> 
> So I just dropped my camera off the tripod. I almost had a heart attack when it hit the floor. I pulled the lock open that holds it on the tripod without holding on to the camera and off it went right onto the floor. Thankfully it landed on carpet which absorbed the impact very well and nothing is broken. No dents or scratches and everything works fine. The flash did pop open but the latch that holds it down didn't break. The lens is fine too. That sure did scare the crap out of me though. Everyone feel free to virtually slap me.


lol. Ive dropped, kicked, and knocked over my camera a bunch of times. They are pretty durable.


----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Tman5293*
> 
> So I just dropped my camera off the tripod. I almost had a heart attack when it hit the floor. I pulled the lock open that holds it on the tripod without holding on to the camera and off it went right onto the floor. Thankfully it landed on carpet which absorbed the impact very well and nothing is broken. No dents or scratches and everything works fine. The flash did pop open but the latch that holds it down didn't break. The lens is fine too. That sure did scare the crap out of me though. Everyone feel free to virtually slap me.


That's why you should use the camera's strap.

I recently attended a photo rally (I don't know what it's called in other countries), while we weren't busy shooting I heard of someone who once walked with his camera on the tripod, with the legs fully extended and folded in. Then he tripped over something, and smashed his lens into the camera body.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Tman5293*
> 
> So I just dropped my camera off the tripod. I almost had a heart attack when it hit the floor. I pulled the lock open that holds it on the tripod without holding on to the camera and off it went right onto the floor. Thankfully it landed on carpet which absorbed the impact very well and nothing is broken. No dents or scratches and everything works fine. The flash did pop open but the latch that holds it down didn't break. The lens is fine too. That sure did scare the crap out of me though. Everyone feel free to virtually slap me.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> lol. *Ive dropped, kicked, and knocked over my camera a bunch of times. They are pretty durable.*
Click to expand...

this.

dont worry so much lol


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Now I see why everywhere is so concerned about build quality and doesn't like lenses like the canon 50mm 1.8. I about cringe if I set mine down to fast.


----------



## Jixr

Somehow my camera is the only thing I own that I've never yet dropped.


----------



## Tman5293

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> Somehow my camera is the only thing I own that I've never yet dropped.


You shouldn't have said anything. Now you have no choice but to drop it.


----------



## jellybeans69

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Tman5293*
> 
> You shouldn't have said anything. Now you have no choice but to drop it.


So did you get your 50mm/1.8 today?


----------



## Tman5293

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jellybeans69*
> 
> So did you get your 50mm/1.8 today?


I did. It's fantastic.









Here's my first decent shot with it:


----------



## jellybeans69

I still find it bit difficult to focus on stuff that isn't on same plane with 35mm, though some photos are looking out to be great, so far i like it









http://imgur.com/a/1ZhRh
Few more shots, any comments on what to improve/look at would be appreciated as i'm still doing most of stuff by simply experimenting.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jellybeans69*
> 
> I still find it bit difficult to focus on stuff that isn't on same plane with 35mm, though some photos are looking out to be great, so far i like it
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://imgur.com/a/1ZhRh
> Few more shots, any comments on what to improve/look at would be appreciated as i'm still doing most of stuff by simply experimenting.


Find better subjects?







Also, idk if you edited the pix much, but the colors seem a little bland.


----------



## jellybeans69

Auto white balance sometimes seems to be really off , i still need to learn to properly edit raws in terms of colors. As far that imgur album last photo is almost un-edited in terms of colors.


----------



## Deano12345

Picked up an X20 today, hoping its the shot in the arm I need to get back shooting !


----------



## Jixr

let us know what you think of it, i had one, and quickly returned it.


----------



## Deano12345

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> let us know what you think of it, i had one, and quickly returned it.


Just in from what was supposed to be drinks with a friend, turned into me having to get some shots at a gig for another friend, only having the X20, was wayyyyyy above my expectations once I got shooting with it. Only real issue was me being not too sure where every option on the camera was since this was the first time it was out


----------



## gtsteviiee

Well, I just got my Canon 6D with kit... I'm in love.


----------



## hokiealumnus

I bet you are; congratulations! Totally jealous of the full frame folks. It won't be in my budget for a long time, but I love the images they are capable of producing.


----------



## kingsnake2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gtsteviiee*
> 
> Well, I just got my Canon 6D with kit... I'm in love.


Congrats! I've been thinking about one of those too.


----------



## Sempre

@jellybeans truly amazing shots you got with the 35mm









I want to get one for my d3100, my priorities are: street photography> indoor objects> portraits.
would the 35mm suit me?


----------



## scottath

Secret Life of Walter Mitty - Great movie - now i really want to go to Iceland for my landscape photography hobby - already wanted to, now i really really want to go.....
One day. NZ has been done on the list.....wonder where is next....


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sempre*
> 
> @jellybeans truly amazing shots you got with the 35mm
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I want to get one for my d3100, my priorities are: street photography> indoor objects> portraits.
> would the 35mm suit me?


My Nikon DX rule of thumb is that everyone should own the 35/1.8 -- most new shooters jump right to the 50/1.8 since it's only 125 bucks, but the FOV is terrible with a DX camera for everyday walkabouts.


----------



## funfortehfun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scottath*
> Secret Life of Walter Mitty - Great movie - now i really want to go to Iceland for my landscape photography hobby - already wanted to, now i really really want to go.....
> One day. NZ has been done on the list.....wonder where is next....


Iceland is a photography dream (for all photographers except street photographers maybe). It's amazing how pristine it is - the landscape, fauna, flora, etc.

http://nikonrumors.com/2013/09/21/guest-post-nikon-d800e-does-iceland.aspx/


----------



## Tman5293

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> My Nikon DX rule of thumb is that everyone should own the 35/1.8 -- most new shooters jump right to the 50/1.8 since it's only 125 bucks, but the FOV is terrible with a DX camera for everyday walkabouts.


Where do you see the 50mm/1.8G for $125? It's $217 on both Nikon's website and Amazon.


----------



## Sempre

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> My Nikon DX rule of thumb is that everyone should own the 35/1.8 -- most new shooters jump right to the 50/1.8 since it's only 125 bucks, but the FOV is terrible with a DX camera for everyday walkabouts.


Yes, that's what i thought. Since FOV of 35 for DX is equivalent to 50 for FX.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Tman5293*
> 
> Where do you see the 50mm/1.8G for $125? It's $217 on both Nikon's website and Amazon.


I don't. I was referring to the 1.8D, I thought mentioning its price made that pretty clear.


----------



## hokiealumnus

Well, it seems I might have, maybe kinda-sorta ordered a 70D today...


----------



## laboitenoire

That's a very conditional order...


----------



## Conspiracy

the 70D is rather impressive. you will be very pleased


----------



## hokiealumnus

Thanks, I'm stoked. Can't wait to get my hands on it. Of course, I also want to review it because that's what I like to do, so I'll have to photograph it before I can use it.


----------



## Conspiracy

what is nikon doing. they just came out with the D3200, 5200, and D4 and now this year they bring out a 5300 and then this week at CES announce the 3300 and D4s.

While the D4s sounds amazing how can it possibly improve on the already awesome D4. on that note i still love the D3s over the D4 for some reason. although i dont own either camera body ive shot with both and if i was paying id take the D3s


----------



## funfortehfun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> *what is nikon doing.* they just came out with the D3200, 5200, and D4 and now this year they bring out a 5300 and then this week at CES announce the 3300 and D4s.
> 
> While the D4s sounds amazing how can it possibly improve on the already awesome D4. on that note i still love the D3s over the D4 for some reason. although i dont own either camera body ive shot with both and if i was paying id take the D3s


Nothing in particular recently.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *funfortehfun*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> *what is nikon doing.* they just came out with the D3200, 5200, and D4 and now this year they bring out a 5300 and then this week at CES announce the 3300 and D4s.
> 
> While the D4s sounds amazing how can it possibly improve on the already awesome D4. on that note i still love the D3s over the D4 for some reason. although i dont own either camera body ive shot with both and if i was paying id take the D3s
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nothing in particular recently.
Click to expand...

lol right


----------



## Sean Webster

Finally broke down and I now got a 6D on the way. lol

FF bokeh here I come!


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Finally broke down and I now got a 6D on the way. lol
> 
> FF bokeh here I come!


cool!


----------



## Eggs and bacon

I am considering moving to the fuji x system, I can get a used xe1 for $450 and a m42 adapter for $20 which means I can use all of my m42 glass. Does anyone here have experience with mf in the evf on recent firmware?


----------



## hokiealumnus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> the 70D is rather impressive. you will be very pleased


It's here and you're right, it is quite impressive! Thread's here in case anybody missed it.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Finally broke down and I now got a 6D on the way. lol
> 
> FF bokeh here I come!


Congrats! I can't wait to see what you do with it. Full frame just isn't something I can justify right now, but I absolutely appreciate its appeal ...and its images.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Eggs and bacon*
> 
> I am considering moving to the fuji x system, I can get a used xe1 for $450 and a m42 adapter for $20 which means I can use all of my m42 glass. Does anyone here have experience with mf in the evf on recent firmware?


The focus peaking is an odd implementation, but Fuji says there's another FW update coming this month to address it (the "peaking" color is white, for whatever reason). I'm not sure I would be too keen to use M42 lenses unless you have some really great ones, though I'm aware the cost of XF lenses is quite high -- but worth it. The 35 and 14 are spectacular, but at a combined cost of something like 1400 USD.... you really have to consider that kind of investment. I get along fine with the 35, it's an amazing lens on the X-Pro, and the 14 is equally good. One day I will buy one, I suppose.

If you get the XE-1, buy a spare battery, as charge times are painfully long, and the EVF (obviously) is a battery-drainer. I don't ever really use it on the X-Pro, so my battery life is generally pretty good.


----------



## Eggs and bacon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> The focus peaking is an odd implementation, but Fuji says there's another FW update coming this month to address it (the "peaking" color is white, for whatever reason). I'm not sure I would be too keen to use M42 lenses unless you have some really great ones, though I'm aware the cost of XF lenses is quite high -- but worth it. The 35 and 14 are spectacular, but at a combined cost of something like 1400 USD.... you really have to consider that kind of investment. I get along fine with the 35, it's an amazing lens on the X-Pro, and the 14 is equally good. One day I will buy one, I suppose.
> 
> If you get the XE-1, buy a spare battery, as charge times are painfully long, and the EVF (obviously) is a battery-drainer. I don't ever really use it on the X-Pro, so my battery life is generally pretty good.


Awesome information +rep , I found a deal on my local craigslist equivalent for the xe1 and 35 1.4 for only $750. The main m42 lens i wanted to use was an inherited 50mm f1.4 super takumar. (the yellow thorium one.)


----------



## sub50hz

I would buy that combo, but INSPECT CLOSELY. You can also buy an m42 adapter for pretty much dirt cheap, and since the XF flange is so short, you can buy adapters for virtually every lens out there.


----------



## Conspiracy

finally upgraded my car and bought a used 2010 Honda Fit Sport today. ill post pics eventually









upgraded from a 1995 Ford Taurus


----------



## hokiealumnus

Congrats, that is a heck of an upgrade! My wife wants a fit, which I'm fine with as long as she let's me drive it too.


----------



## ablearcher

[I'm sorry for butting into this conversation]
Fit's pretty fun, I have one, too - a 2013 base model. Steering is a wee bit faster than I was used to, but it was the only car I could fit in the front seat of (and still afford new), so that's that.

They are launching a new version on Monday, so... you may want to wait and see what they do to it.

As for Cameras, I only have a slew of low-mid range Sony video cameras and one Nikon D3100 with the kit lens. I'm eyeing a D800, but I'm pretty happy with the D3100's current form factor, and don't see the D7xxx line as enough of an upgrade (except for auto-bracketing).


----------



## Eggs and bacon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> I would buy that combo, but INSPECT CLOSELY. You can also buy an m42 adapter for pretty much dirt cheap, and since the XF flange is so short, you can buy adapters for virtually every lens out there.


What kind of things should i be looking at in a used camera? for a lens I know the flashlight trick etc, but i haven't bought a used digital camera before.


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Eggs and bacon*
> 
> What kind of things should i be looking at in a used camera? for a lens I know the flashlight trick etc, but i haven't bought a used digital camera before.


make sure the buttons/controls work as they should
anything cosmetic
check for any dirt in the sensor ?
autofocus

flash


----------



## sub50hz

Ask the seller why he's getting rid of it. Chances are, it's someone who bought one and never figured out that firmware updates exist. Check the lens mount for any damage, make sure he has the eyepiece, and check the FW version (hold back button while powering on, see the Fuji site for the most recent lens and body firmware numbers and just remember them). Do all the things listed above, except I wouldn't worry about the AF unless the lens is unusually noisy (beware, the 35 has a buzzy DC motor so don't think it's jacked up). You can also check for hot pixels, but it's pretty rare on the X-Trans unless you're doing long exposures at ridiculous ISO levels (this extends to all CMOS sensors, though). Shoot a couple images at 6400 ISO in a dark area and let that wonderful X-Trans noise suppression work its way into your brain.


----------



## Eggs and bacon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Ask the seller why he's getting rid of it. Chances are, it's someone who bought one and never figured out that firmware updates exist. Check the lens mount for any damage, make sure he has the eyepiece, and check the FW version (hold back button while powering on, see the Fuji site for the most recent lens and body firmware numbers and just remember them). Do all the things listed above, except I wouldn't worry about the AF unless the lens is unusually noisy (beware, the 35 has a buzzy DC motor so don't think it's jacked up). You can also check for hot pixels, but it's pretty rare on the X-Trans unless you're doing long exposures at ridiculous ISO levels (this extends to all CMOS sensors, though). Shoot a couple images at 6400 ISO in a dark area and let that wonderful X-Trans noise suppression work its way into your brain.


Again many thanks for the advice.


----------



## Tman5293

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> finally upgraded my car and bought a used 2010 Honda Fit Sport today. ill post pics eventually
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> upgraded from a 1995 Ford Taurus


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hokiealumnus*
> 
> Congrats, that is a heck of an upgrade! My wife wants a fit, which I'm fine with as long as she let's me drive it too.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ablearcher*
> 
> [I'm sorry for butting into this conversation]
> Fit's pretty fun, I have one, too - a 2013 base model. Steering is a wee bit faster than I was used to, but it was the only car I could fit in the front seat of (and still afford new), so that's that.
> 
> They are launching a new version on Monday, so... you may want to wait and see what they do to it.
> 
> As for Cameras, I only have a slew of low-mid range Sony video cameras and one Nikon D3100 with the kit lens. I'm eyeing a D800, but I'm pretty happy with the D3100's current form factor, and don't see the D7xxx line as enough of an upgrade (except for auto-bracketing).


I hope you guys never need to get out of the way of something quickly because those little Fits aren't going anywhere fast.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Tman5293*
> 
> I hope you guys never need to get out of the of something quickly because those little Fits aren't going anywhere fast.


Take your "wisdom" elsewhere.


----------



## sub50hz

Buh, been busy all morning getting all this crap stuffed in here.


----------



## Cmoney

I just wanted to drop in and say hi; I picked up a Canon T3i last month as my first DSLR and I have quickly began to fall in love with photography.

Instead of the kit lens I went with the Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM (as recommended by a photographer I know)... and then just last week and purchased the 50mm f/1.8 II.

Anyways, I am sure I will be back with plenty of questions because I am learning so much still.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Tman5293*
> 
> I hope you guys never need to get out of the of something quickly because those little Fits aren't going anywhere fast.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Take your "wisdom" elsewhere.
Click to expand...

haha was thinking the same thing because my new car is soooooooooo slow

































































i totally bought this car to race against rice rockets and exotics


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> haha was thinking the same thing because my new car is soooooooooo slow
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i totally bought this car to race against rice rockets and exotics


my civic does 0-60 in 12.5 seconds. Your fit does it in like 8-9. You got yourself a race car in my eyes. lol


----------



## Tman5293

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> *my civic does 0-60 in 12.5 seconds.* Your fit does it in like 8-9. You got yourself a race car in my eyes. lol


Bro.......................that's bad.........................









I thought my Mustang was slow at 6.5 seconds..................


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> my civic does 0-60 in 12.5 seconds. Your fit does it in like 8-9. You got yourself a race car in my eyes. lol


sounds like a late 80s early 90s civic
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Tman5293*
> 
> Bro.......................that's bad.........................
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I thought my Mustang was slow at 6.5 seconds..................


no your mustang is slow....a 2012 camry does 0-60 in 6.5s


----------



## Tman5293

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> sounds like a late 80s early 90s civic
> no your mustang is slow....a 2012 camry does 0-60 in 6.5s


But that's a 2012 vehicle. My Mustang is a 2004 V6. The new Mustangs all do 0-60 in 5 seconds or less.


----------



## Conspiracy

who cares about 0-60 when the 1DX does 14 frames in 1 second


----------



## Jixr

itch please.

My car is ready to die any day now.


And fyi.

its a 2002 VW passat 1.8t with

*376,000 Miles.*
Though I have every intention on getting it to 400k before I trade it in.
( along with selling my 2 wheeled death machine )

I think its about due for an upgrade.

But thankfully recently the check engine light turned off. ( Because I snipped the wire to the bulb







)


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> my civic does 0-60 in 12.5 seconds. Your fit does it in like 8-9. You got yourself a race car in my eyes. lol
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sounds like a late 80s early 90s civic
Click to expand...

its a 1999 hatch 1.6 liter lol. 104HP spec from factory...maybe like 80WHP...and it is an auto.







Only has 51,000 miles on it tho.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Tman5293*
> 
> But that's a 2012 vehicle. My Mustang is a 2004 V6. The new Mustangs all do 0-60 in 5 seconds or less.


My mom has a 04 mustang v6 as well. lol It is slow as bawls and feels like a whale on the road.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> itch please.
> 
> My car is ready to die any day now.
> 
> 
> And fyi.
> 
> its a 2002 VW passat 1.8t with
> 
> *376,000 Miles.*
> Though I have every intention on getting it to 400k before I trade it in.
> ( along with selling my 2 wheeled death machine )
> 
> I think its about due for an upgrade.
> 
> But thankfully recently the check engine light turned off. ( Because I snipped the wire to the bulb
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )


lol, we used to have one of those, an '03. it was nice until the sunroof drains got clogged, flooded, and totaled the car.


----------



## scottath

Need some more images around here i think. From Saturday morning:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/scottath/11903553376/
Clovelly by scottath, on Flickr

79MP of pano goodness


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Tman5293*
> 
> But that's a 2012 vehicle. My Mustang is a 2004 V6. The new Mustangs all do 0-60 in 5 seconds or less.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> My mom has a 04 mustang v6 as well.


Tman, take note: suggesting that fuel-economy-centric cars are slower than something middle-aged women drive is not only obvious, it just makes you look like, well, you might be hitting menopause.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> its a 2002 VW passat 1.8t with
> 
> *376,000 Miles.*


Holy hell, that is impressive. Of course, being a VW, I assume repair bills during those 376k amounted to 70% of the car's initial cost..


----------



## Jixr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Holy hell, that is impressive. Of course, being a VW, I assume repair bills during those 376k amounted to 70% of the car's initial cost..


I don't think its ever been to a dealer in its entire life.

I'm pretty mechanical and pretty much the only time I've taken it in since I've owned it has been for a headgasket replacement. Everything else I've done myself. But I have learned i'm never buying another german car again unless my salary tripples lol.


----------



## sub50hz

I looked at a TDI Golf back in August when I bought my new car, and the only thing that turned me off was the piss-poor warranty. Eventually I figured I would just stick with gasoline, but to my surprise, buying a slow, lightweight car has really paid off in the MPG department.


----------



## Cmoney

I thought this was the camera thread.. not the brag about our cars thread?!?


----------



## sub50hz

It goes OT quite often. If you don't like it, nobody's forcing you to post here.


----------



## Cmoney

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> It goes OT quite often. If you don't like it, nobody's forcing you to post here.


Not a problem... thought I would come here and possibly learn something about photography; it is clear I came to the wrong place.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Cmoney*
> 
> Not a problem... thought I would come here and possibly learn something about photography; it is clear I came to the wrong place.


Answers to questions only come if you _ask them_. There's also a bunch of stickies right at the top of this forum with a TON of information.


----------



## Cmoney

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Cmoney*
> 
> Not a problem... thought I would come here and possibly learn something about photography; it is clear I came to the wrong place.
> 
> 
> 
> Answers to questions only come if you _ask them_. There's also a bunch of stickies right at the top of this forum with a TON of information.
Click to expand...

If I had a specific question I would ask it. I came here to read and absorb about cameras/photography and since I subscribed it has been nothing but car banter. Like I said before, it is not a problem.


----------



## Jixr

to help get back OT I have an idea I'm wanting to do, but not sure if its the right way to go about it.

So basically I wanna do some lightpainting by having a little light up toy thing I have by spinning it on a string in a circle, but then I also want to fire a flash so the person spinning the toys can been seen as well in a nice clean shot.

I know its going to be some trial and error, but as far as my gear goes, basically set up on a tipod, play around to get the exposure time set up, and with my flash ( canon 430ex 2 ) is this where I would want to use the shutter curtain thing to fire at the last second?

I think thats what I want to do but am not quite sure if I was approaching it right.


----------



## aksthem1

I'm sorta confused at you want to try. I kinda get what you're trying to do, but you're only going to use one light source and one shot?


----------



## Jixr

Well I only have one flash, and have not even though about the idea of double exposure.
( i suck at photoshop )

basically I want a picture of a person with a circle of light behind them ( from spinning the toy light )


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> Well I only have one flash, and have not even though about the idea of double exposure.
> ( i suck at photoshop )
> 
> basically I want a picture of a person with a circle of light behind them ( from spinning the toy light )


That isn't hard.









Just have a 3-10 second expose of the person spinning the light toy. Use second curtain/rear curtain flash setting on your camera to light the person up at the end of the exposure.


----------



## aksthem1

I missed the toy light part, but yeah Sean is right. It's going to be a trial and error in the exposure length and flash strength, but it's not difficult. Light painting can be pretty easy.


----------



## Jixr

yeah, I just have never used the shutter curtain thing before and I gotta read up on how to set it up.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Cmoney*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Cmoney*
> 
> Not a problem... thought I would come here and possibly learn something about photography; it is clear I came to the wrong place.
> 
> 
> 
> Answers to questions only come if you _ask them_. There's also a bunch of stickies right at the top of this forum with a TON of information.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> If I had a specific question I would ask it. I came here to read and absorb about cameras/photography and since I subscribed it has been nothing but car banter. Like I said before, it is not a problem.
Click to expand...

this is the camera section. feel free to ask here or even start a thread. there are almost 2500 pages in this thread now not to mention individual threads. you will find more useful stuff outside of this specific thread as we go OT often here. best way to learn is shoot and ask. reading and absorbing will only get you so far









on that note another car question about playing music in my car. i have a lot of music. bought a 128GB usb drive and was testing it in my car to realize that its not as efficient as i thought. it doesnt recognize any file structure other than folders for each album. how do yall listen to music in your car? i think i will be returning the thumb drive at work tomorrow and save up for a 160GB ipod instead as i can at least control what plays via the ipod. i just want to avoid have crazy clutter of multiple cds in my car. my last car was over run with excessive CDs everywhere because all i had was a CD player and no other inputs. now i have USB and AUX


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Tman, take note: suggesting that fuel-economy-centric cars are slower than something middle-aged women drive is not only obvious, it just makes you look like, well, you might be hitting menopause.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Holy hell, that is impressive. Of course, being a VW, I assume repair bills during those 376k amounted to 70% of the car's initial cost..


Heh, yeah, my Dad bought a Jetta TDI that had crapped its turbo and shot oil all down the exhaust pipe, and even after repairing it, it has been fairly troublesome. It drives well and he put some serious miles on it, but it's had one little thing break after another.


----------



## Jixr

duct tape and zip ties and you're golden. I think since i've owned it, the biggest repair bill I had was about $1300 for a turbo, timing belt, and head gasket. The guy did crap work but it was enough to get me back on the road, and I patched up his lazy work as best as I could.

In all seriousness, my engine bay looks like a rainbow, I color-code zipties with repairs so I know what i've done.

my entire bumper is held on by zip ties, solid as a rock, but some clever engineering and its going to keep going.

Also in its 375k life, its never been in an accident. ( except for a parking lot hit and run which resulted in the zip tie bumper. )

but i'm to the point where I don't bother with fixing the little things anymore. It leaks oil, coolant, and powersteering fluid like crazy, on cold mornings a cylinder will misfire until it warms up, the headlight housing shiney parts are so coroded i have to drive with my brights on all the time at night, but it gets me from A to B. I've only had it break down on me while driving once.

I've accepted the fact that pretty much every time I get gas I add oil and PS fluid. Not going to bother with tearing the front end off to replace a steering rack, or worry about hunting down the leaking gaskets to repair the oil leaks.

I'm currently trying to save up a grand or two to add in on top of trading the car in. ( I'm still young so cash is hard to come by ) so Sometime this year I'm just going to bite the bullet of debt that I've managed to avoid so far in my life. ( dodging student loans was hard enough ) and once I have the money saved up i'm just going to hoon the crap out of the car till I trade it in. I'll get pennies for it, so I might as well have some fun with it before I do.


----------



## funfortehfun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scottath*
> 
> Need some more images around here i think. From Saturday morning:
> 
> 
> Clovelly by scottath, on Flickr
> 
> 79MP of pano goodness


So cool









I gotta move somewhere else. I'm stuck in a winter wasteland.


----------



## Sean Webster

I'm in love with my Canon 6D.


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> Well I only have one flash, and have not even though about the idea of double exposure.
> ( i suck at photoshop )
> 
> basically I want a picture of a person with a circle of light behind them ( from spinning the toy light )


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> That isn't hard.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just have a 3-10 second expose of the person spinning the light toy. Use second curtain/rear curtain flash setting on your camera to light the person up at the end of the exposure.


rear sync or fire your flash manually from different angles

heres my sample :


src

21-sec
f/8
ISO-100

560-ii @ full power fired from camera left, center, rear, behind subject ... all over the place really..
its not perfect.. but i guess this is what your trying to achieve


----------



## funfortehfun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> I'm in love with my Canon 6D.


How is the autofocus system? I've been tossing between that and the D610 (I'm in the pickle where going with Canon or Nikon doesn't really matter - plus, Canon lenses are really cheap) and that's the only factor holding me back from it. Is 11 AF points really enough? It doesn't serve my D90 particularly well.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *funfortehfun*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> I'm in love with my Canon 6D.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How is the autofocus system? I've been tossing between that and the D610 (I'm in the pickle where going with Canon or Nikon doesn't really matter - plus, Canon lenses are really cheap) and that's the only factor holding me back from it. Is 11 AF points really enough? It doesn't serve my D90 particularly well.
Click to expand...

It depends on your use, the focus system will be fine for most people. I only had it for 6 hours, out of which I actually used it for about 3. lol I've taken ~300 shots so far, out of which all images have been in focus or acceptable. Maybe a little better than my 60D. There sure are a lot more focus settings I can tweak tho! I've not had much time with any nikon systems other than my friend's D7000.

Also, you may want to see if you can use the cameras a little first before buying, or buy both and return the one you dont like. Here is a good compare vid: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q9HlxWqcG5Y

Here are some shots so far with it: http://www.flickr.com/photos/seanwebsterhd/ Pics from the 6D have names that start with Canon 6D IMG_

I also bought mine used for only $1200 and it only had 2k photos taken with it previously, which is the main reason I got it besides me really wanting a FF camera.


----------



## Eggs and bacon

from a few pages back: the seller of the xe1 never came back to me. I think I will buy one in bgn condition from keh, comes out to about $410 shipped to Australia. I would just use it with m42 glass to see if I liked the camera enough to keep it. Then get a Fuji prime. So, what are the used digital bodies like from keh?


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *funfortehfun*
> 
> How is the autofocus system? I've been tossing between that and the D610 (I'm in the pickle where going with Canon or Nikon doesn't really matter - plus, Canon lenses are really cheap) and that's the only factor holding me back from it. Is 11 AF points really enough? It doesn't serve my D90 particularly well.


ive used both the d600 and 6d for about a day and i personally like the d600. BUT i would buy the 6d cause i am more use to canon egronomics.

there really is no reason to pick either other than personal taste.


----------



## PCModderMike

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> I'm in love with my Canon 6D.


Dat FF love.


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PCModderMike*
> 
> Dat FF love.


holy**** PCModderMike youre in my country!







(saw it on your flckr page)


----------



## PCModderMike

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boogschd*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *PCModderMike*
> 
> Dat FF love.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> holy**** PCModderMike youre in my country!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (saw it on your flckr page)
Click to expand...

Haha yea I was for around 3 weeks. Mostly in Las Pinas, but also was in Boracay for a week. Back in the states now though, back to reality :|


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PCModderMike*
> 
> Haha yea I was for around 3 weeks. Mostly in Las Pinas, but also was in Boracay for a week. Back in the states now though, back to reality :|


cool, hope you had a great time during your stay


----------



## JAM3S121

So,, can anyone recommend a good mirrorless camera under $600. I've been eyeing the sony nex 5t but want to make sure its a good buy first, mainly will be used for car, computer and portrait photography with portraits and computers being the main thing. I really want whatever has a decent kit lens for beginners, tiltable lcd and good auto focus (although i want to learn manual focus with manual lens eventually).

I like the lumix cameras but they seem out of reach for this price atm.


----------



## aksthem1

If you're going to be doing portraits then I wouldn't recommend using the NEX series. Due to their lens selections for portraits. A bit on the expensive side unless you go for some 3rd party manual lenses (Rokinon/Samyang/Bower), or older lenses with an adapter.


----------



## JAM3S121

Ideally I want good bokeh which i understand means i might need to buy a different lens then the stock kit one, what about the e-pl5?


----------



## Eggs and bacon

Incoming xe1 and 35mm 1.4


----------



## Mongol

Gotta love cats: buy them a kitty tower for two hundred bucks and they'd rather lay around in a fifty cent shipping carton.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Eggs and bacon*
> 
> Incoming xe1 and 35mm 1.4


Nice! Update the firmware if it's out of date -- but if it _is_ old FW, try it first to see the difference. Depending on how old the FW is, it might be pretty dramatic.


----------



## Tman5293

So I found this:










My Dad used it to do his photography work in the 80s. Unfortunately it is not in working order and I have no film for it.


----------



## PCModderMike

Ahhh bummer would have been fun to play with.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aksthem1*
> 
> If you're going to be doing portraits then I wouldn't recommend using the NEX series. Due to their lens selections for portraits. A bit on the expensive side unless you go for some 3rd party manual lenses (Rokinon/Samyang/Bower), or older lenses with an adapter.


you have to pay to play my friend.....
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JAM3S121*
> 
> Ideally I want good bokeh which i understand means i might need to buy a different lens then the stock kit one, what about the e-pl5?


simplistically bokeh is shallow depth of field, and lens selection is just part of what thin DOF is. If you want the shallowest DOF, the nex (or any aps-c mirrorless) will have m43 beat because the sensor is much larger.


----------



## JAM3S121

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> simplistically bokeh is shallow depth of field, and lens selection is just part of what thin DOF is. If you want the shallowest DOF, the nex (or any aps-c mirrorless) will have m43 beat because the sensor is much larger.


Thanks, i am considering the nex 5t or the similiar option Olympus has right now.


----------



## sccr64472

Is that using a panoramic setting? I'm hoping that's using what my Sony NEX 3N has! It comes today!


----------



## Sean Webster

So I used my crop body sigma 30mm f/1.4 on my FF 6D today to shoot two school events. I kinda like the vignette it makes lol And I love how I can take usable pics up to such high ISOs now.









Also, now looking into where I can get a tablet/iPad or something of the sort for cheap so I can people's names, majors, and years down more easily and legible for when I shoot more school events. Anyone got any suggestions?


----------



## Jixr

ipad and the camera connection kit is the shizz for out and about photo shooting


----------



## OmarCCX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> So I used my crop body sigma 30mm f/1.4 on my FF 6D today to shoot two school events. I kinda like the vignette it makes lol And I love how I can take usable pics up to such high ISOs now.


Show us some samples!


----------



## golfergolfer

Hey so I am doing a photo shoot this weekend of a friends car, he wants it to look like this:

Couldnt get direct link but it is of the Black Golf GTI

Going to try and acheieve that but are there any suggestions? I know there are a few people who shoot cars in here Sean Webster


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> ipad and the camera connection kit is the shizz for out and about photo shooting


How much can I get an ipad for? I'm also thinking of just upgrading my POS phone to a Samsung Note 3 instead and could probably just use that.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OmarCCX*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> So I used my crop body sigma 30mm f/1.4 on my FF 6D today to shoot two school events. I kinda like the vignette it makes lol And I love how I can take usable pics up to such high ISOs now.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Show us some samples!
Click to expand...

Here are some: http://www.flickr.com/photos/seanwebsterhd/sets/72157639848671046/


Canon 6D IMG_5889.jpg by Sean Webster Photo, on Flickr
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *golfergolfer*
> 
> Hey so I am doing a photo shoot this weekend of a friends car, he wants it to look like this:
> 
> Couldnt get direct link but it is of the Black Golf GTI
> 
> Going to try and acheieve that but are there any suggestions? I know there are a few people who shoot cars in here Sean Webster


That just looks like some HDR or uber high clarity and noise reduction added to it. Taken at about golden hour


----------



## Mongol

That's some neat bokeh!







as well as the DOF....that mic just pops.


----------



## Jixr

ipad minis start at $300, and the camera kit is $30.

But its a good way to review some photos when you won't be able to get near a computer anytime soon.

I used mine to review some shots when I was on vacation.

I always hate missing shots because they look fine on the cameras screen but on a larger screen they look like crap.

But i wouldn't buy one for general note taking, i have tons of other reasons why I wanted one, and I still carry around a small note book and pens in my camera bag for quick note taking.

also, noob question, is the DOF larger the further away the subject is?


----------



## hokiealumnus

I have a 2012 Nexus 7 and the WiFi app works fine on it. You can get the 16GB for $170 on Newegg. The 32GB is only ten bucks more; I'd go for that with only that difference. Of course, the new ones can be had for about $50 more if you're looking for the newest.

Granted, I don't think I'd use it to take notes on as a rule; palm rejection isn't really there, you have to hover your hand as you right. The Galaxy Note is really the only tablet I know of that has good palm rejection. So, truthfully, +1 to note taking. If you really want to go full pro, sell the 6D and get a 1DX. They have a little button that you can use to append a .wav file to your photo...as you take the photo, press a button and just talk to your camera. 'course, it only costs $6800 for the body.

However, even if you don't use it for notes, the Nexus would work great to show people photos when you feel like it in a larger size than on-camera. It can also be used as a remote control for hands-free shooting.

That lens plus your FF sensor sure make for some bokehlicious photos! Nice, paper thin depth of field. Just don't mis-focus.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> also, noob question, is the DOF larger the further away the subject is?


Yes, your DOF does get bigger as you get further away. In my experience, it's more noticeable on full frame.


----------



## Jixr

i thought so, I couldn't understand why all my photos had razor thin DOF when shooting wide open compared to some photos i've seen online. mainly because most of my photos i get pretty up close with my 50mm

I think sometime soon I need to buy myself a 70-200 f4L I rented one for the USGP F1 race and loved it, and am going back out to the track for MotoGP in April. Maybe an early birthday present to myself.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mongol*
> 
> That's some neat bokeh!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> as well as the DOF....that mic just pops.


Yea, same as in other pics too.









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> ipad minis start at $300, and the camera kit is $30.
> 
> But its a good way to review some photos when you won't be able to get near a computer anytime soon.
> 
> I used mine to review some shots when I was on vacation.
> 
> I always hate missing shots because they look fine on the cameras screen but on a larger screen they look like crap.
> 
> But i wouldn't buy one for general note taking, i have tons of other reasons why I wanted one, and I still carry around a small note book and pens in my camera bag for quick note taking.


Yea, I just saw on ebay I can get a 1st gen for ~$100 and my 6D has wifi for remote shoooting and I can hook it up to the ipad that way. But I'm also looking into just upgrading my phone to a Note 3 now which should be enough for people to type their info on...hmmm, tho a ipad would be larger and easier to type on.

Quote:


> also, noob question, is the DOF larger the further away the subject is?


yes. Here is an example:

Here is a shot at f/2:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/seanwebsterhd/11992428553/
Canon 6D IMG_5949.jpg by Sean Webster Photo, on Flickr

Here is one at an even larger one, F/1.8
http://www.flickr.com/photos/seanwebsterhd/11990760635/
Canon 6D IMG_5961.jpg by Sean Webster Photo, on Flickr

As you can see even tho the second pic has a larger aperture used, the DOF is much larger as the focused subject is so much farther away.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hokiealumnus*
> 
> I have a 2012 Nexus 7 and the WiFi app works fine on it. You can get the 16GB for $170 on Newegg. The 32GB is only ten bucks more; I'd go for that with only that difference. Of course, the new ones can be had for about $50 more if you're looking for the newest.
> 
> Granted, I don't think I'd use it to take notes on as a rule; palm rejection isn't really there, you have to hover your hand as you right. The Galaxy Note is really the only tablet I know of that has good palm rejection. So, truthfully, +1 to note taking.


That does look good too, I had totally forgot about those. Thanks.
Quote:


> If you really want to go full pro, sell the 6D and get a 1DX. They have a little button that you can use to append a .wav file to your photo...as you take the photo, press a button and just talk to your camera. 'course, it only costs $6800 for the body.


LOL, I don't think many pros with a 1DX actually use that feature lol
Quote:


> However, even if you don't use it for notes, the Nexus would work great to show people photos when you feel like it in a larger size than on-camera. It can also be used as a remote control for hands-free shooting.
> 
> That lens plus your FF sensor sure make for some bokehlicious photos! Nice, paper thin depth of field. Just don't mis-focus.


Haha, yea, gone are the days of mis-focus....for the most part.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> i thought so, I couldn't understand why all my photos had razor thin DOF when shooting wide open compared to some photos i've seen online. mainly because most of my photos i get pretty up close with my 50mm
> 
> I think sometime soon I need to buy myself a 70-200 f4L I rented one for the USGP F1 race and loved it, and am going back out to the track for MotoGP in April. Maybe an early birthday present to myself.


I may be selling my 70-200 f4L soon if you are interested.


----------



## Jixr

Sure, just send me a PM if you decide to do so. Though I live in a big town and they are on CL pretty often, so its not hard for me to find a used one at a good price.


----------



## ljason8eg

Wouldn't a 70-200 be really limiting at CoTA, especially shooting from spectator areas?


----------



## Jixr

It worked well enough for me in the T15 grandstands ( top of the stands too )


( shot at 200mm ) only slightly cropped.

though i'm on a crop body so its not as bad as a FF

sure a longer lens would probably be better, but i don't have the cash for one. I suppose I could get a 70-300 with the IS, but I like the 70-200 better.

EDIT: come to think of it, my brother has a 70-300 that I could borrow if I ever needed the extra 100mm


----------



## OmarCCX

F1 is boring, take pictures of MotoGP!


----------



## hokiealumnus

The Tamron 150-600 looks like a great choice for the price (only $1069!).


----------



## Jixr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OmarCCX*
> 
> F1 is boring, take pictures of MotoGP!


I was there last year for MotoGP, I only had an 85mm zoom at the time though. I live in austin so i'm at the track often.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OmarCCX*
> 
> F1 is boring, take pictures of MotoGP!


I might rent a telephoto for this year's MGP at Road America, or I'll just get real drunk. Probably the latter.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *OmarCCX*
> 
> F1 is boring, take pictures of MotoGP!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I might rent a telephoto for this year's MGP at Road America, or *I'll just get real drunk*. Probably the latter.
Click to expand...

that sounds more exciting


----------



## Jixr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> I might rent a telephoto for this year's MGP at Road America, or I'll just get real drunk. Probably the latter.


uhm... MotoGP is not coming to Road america? its only Austin or Indy


----------



## OmarCCX

Don't forget Laguna Seca


----------



## Jixr

Not this year, they canned it.

Laguna has been loosing money on MotoGp for the last few years, and with COTA now up and running 3 US events is too many ( according to Dorna ) They thought they were going to drop Indy, but the city gave the track 100m to fix its track, and COTA is basically paid for by Texas tax payers, and so they both have money out the butt where Laguna is pretty privately owned compared to the other two.

And since Moto2 and 3 can't run at Laguna its kinda lame.


----------



## OmarCCX

Oh, didn't know that. Yeah, Laguna was pretty lame without the more entertaining Moto 2 / 3 classes.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> uhm... MotoGP is not coming to Road america? its only Austin or Indy


Ah yeah, I was thinking of AMA Super. Me so stupid sometimes.


----------



## Conspiracy

dropping my 7D off at KEH to get a sensor cleaning and then will probably buy something cheap to use for stills and keep the 7D for video only. has anyone sent cameras to KEH for cleaning before?

im leaning towards grabbing a 1Dmkii since i had fun shooting one a long time ago and it would only be $400 and would probably still be more reliable and fun than buying something new and cheap that is canon


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> dropping my 7D off at KEH to get a sensor cleaning and then will probably buy something cheap to use for stills and keep the 7D for video only. has anyone sent cameras to KEH for cleaning before?
> 
> im leaning towards grabbing a 1Dmkii since i had fun shooting one a long time ago and it would only be $400 and would probably still be more reliable and fun than buying something new and cheap that is canon


why not just buy a few sensor swabs and do it yourself? It takes like 2 minutes to do. lol


----------



## Conspiracy

its crazy dirty and i want to get it done proper. otherwise i normally just use compressed air cans to take care of the dirt but it doesnt help with the spots


----------



## Sean Webster

A compressed can of air is a waste and an air blaster does crap, almost a complete waste of money from my perspective. You can actually spread oils around onto the sensor with compressed air. The swabs take everything away and leave my sensor spotless.


----------



## ljason8eg

Yeah the swabs work very well but I don't blame someone for not wanting to do that themselves.


----------



## PCModderMike

I spent 3 weeks in the Philippines over the holidays, most of it at the beach. While I do most of my sensor cleaning myself, I'm considering sending mine in for a professional cleaning as well because of how much abuse it got. $55 for sensor cleaning from KEH isn't bad at all and worth it IMO.


----------



## MistaBernie

The last few times I've found dust on my sensor my rocket blower has worked perfectly fine. Also, I hope this goes without saying, but I hope nobody here really thinks it's a wise idea to use compressed air to clean their sensors...?


----------



## PCModderMike

I never have used compressed air, just a rocket blower. I had briefly thought about using compressed air...but seeing that the consensus in here seems to be it's a *bad* thing to do, not going to try it now.


----------



## MistaBernie

Compressed air from a can is bad mostly because if you have any sort of tilt/variation in delivery, you run the risk of shooting condensation directly onto the sensor. There are people that claim that forced air (not from a can) is less likely to cause harm, but effectively, if a rocket blower won't loosen something for me, then it probably needs to be cleaned.

Granted, I've been extraordinarily lucky. I've never had to clean my sensors. Could be the fact that I'm borderline neurotic about my lens changes (rarely change outside unless absolutely necessary, always change with the body facing down, etc). Of course, that being said, I'll go home and pop open my 5D3 and find a mouse in it or something.


----------



## sub50hz

I keep a black rubberband around the lens mount on the Xpro to keep dust out. It works well since I never remove the lens aside from body FW updates.


----------



## PCModderMike

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Compressed air from a can is bad mostly because if you have any sort of tilt/variation in delivery, you run the risk of shooting condensation directly onto the sensor. There are people that claim that forced air (not from a can) is less likely to cause harm, but effectively, if a rocket blower won't loosen something for me, then it probably needs to be cleaned.
> 
> Granted, I've been extraordinarily lucky. I've never had to clean my sensors. Could be the fact that I'm borderline neurotic about my lens changes (rarely change outside unless absolutely necessary, always change with the body facing down, etc). Of course, that being said, I'll go home and pop open my 5D3 and find a mouse in it or something.


I derped. I like you, am usually pretty anal about my lens changes...usually just sticking to my 35 for everything. But while out of the country, doing the whole sight seeing tourist thing, I found myself frequently trying to huddle over my bag and quickly change a lens out..but sure enough I got some kind speck on the sensor and it will not budge with the rocket blower.


----------



## MistaBernie

Eh, we can prepare and prepare, but stuff's bound to happen. Makes me wonder what kind of crud I got stuck on whichever camera it was that I brought to Aruba when I was out and about 4x4'ing across the island. Don't know though, because whichever camera it was I have since sold.

If you are fairly steady-handed, there are simple swab kits that aren't all that expensive and are basically the same thing that most places that do their own cleanings probably use anyways. As long as you're careful, you should be fine. If you don't feel up to it, then either bring it some place locally or send it to someone to do for the $65 or whatever it is.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

How evident would dust be in your pictures? I've always been careful about changing lenses and my pictures don't seem to have any dust, but I'd figure that I'd get at least a speck in the course of the ~3000 shots I've taken with it.

More importantly, how do you get dust off the rear element of a lens? I seem to have some some from on my tele.


----------



## MistaBernie

It really depends on a couple of factors - the size and location of whatever is on your sensor, and the aperture of the shot.

I had a few images with specs on them. I cloned them out. Sometimes it can come across as a very faint grey circle that you might not even notice. Others, it can be pretty obvious.

Here's a link with some more background. The image examples are pretty good.

Also, for foreign matter on the rear element of your lens, you should be a lot more careful than you would be with foreign matter on the front of your lens. If forced air doesn't dislodge the matter, then you'll probably want to have it checked out /cleaned by someone that knows what they're doing. The rear element should be treated almost as sensitive as the sensor.


----------



## Jixr

i should probably open my sensor and at least blow it out.

I have not been able to tell of any specks in photos, but i'm at about 8k shots on the cam body and i've never even blown it out.


----------



## ljason8eg

I wouldn't do anything to the sensor unless there's an annoying amount of dust showing up in your photos.


----------



## MistaBernie

Agreed. You're more likely to cause issues, you shouldn't blow out your sensor, etc, unless there's evidence that it's necessary.


----------



## Conspiracy

i just put it in bulb mode. spit. wipe with shirt and move on

no but seriously im just going to drop it off at KEH tomorrow and let them clean my 7D. and potentially grab a 1Dmkii while im there. that way i have an excessively heavy but reliable digital stills cam and a video cam and the ETRSi as a walkaround lol







hopefully that will help my 7D last a little longer since i dont shoot that much but would like it to be dedicated to video only now


----------



## Eggs and bacon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> i just put it in bulb mode. spit. wipe with shirt and move on
> 
> no but seriously im just going to drop it off at KEH tomorrow and let them clean my 7D. and potentially grab a 1Dmkii while im there. that way i have an excessively heavy but reliable digital stills cam and a video cam and the ETRSi as a walkaround lol
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> hopefully that will help my 7D last a little longer since i dont shoot that much but would like it to be dedicated to video only now


etrsi walk around =) , it may be a light for a MF camera but it is still pretty heavy.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Eggs and bacon*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> i just put it in bulb mode. spit. wipe with shirt and move on
> 
> no but seriously im just going to drop it off at KEH tomorrow and let them clean my 7D. and potentially grab a 1Dmkii while im there. that way i have an excessively heavy but reliable digital stills cam and a video cam and the ETRSi as a walkaround lol
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> hopefully that will help my 7D last a little longer since i dont shoot that much but would like it to be dedicated to video only now
> 
> 
> 
> etrsi walk around =) , it may be a light for a MF camera but its till pretty heavy.
Click to expand...

tis true but damn its so much fun to shoot. not going to lie ill just randomly look around through the VF just because its so nice to see a completely clean VF that is bright and feels like you see so much more than these wimpy 35mm cameras


----------



## Eggs and bacon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> tis true but damn its so much fun to shoot. not going to lie ill just randomly look around through the VF just because its so nice to see a completely clean VF that is bright and feels like you see so much more than these wimpy 35mm cameras


The viewfinder almost looks better then real life, compared to a d3200 its about 10x the area.


----------



## laboitenoire

So in about a month I'll finally have an awesome excuse to go shoot a lot of photos again. I'm spending my spring break visiting my sister in Taiwan, which is going to be pretty damn awesome.


----------



## PCModderMike

Wow, that is awesome. Have fun.








I was in the Philippines and Singapore for 3 weeks over the holidays. Loved it, and of course took a ton of photos.


----------



## Sean Webster

Nice! I would really like to travel myself. Can't wait to see some of the pics!

On another note, my 6D poo-poos all over my 60D in IQ and focusing. I Shot a basket ball game tonight and now I'm gonna sell my 60D and lenses for it and look into getting a 70-200 F/2.8 IS II.


----------



## hokiealumnus

Great to hear you like the 6D so much! Have you looked at the new Tamron 150-600 yet? You might give it a look if you want some extra reach over the 200. Assuming you need that much length of course.


----------



## Jixr

rando question, So i've been looking to upgrade my tripod from my crazy cheap one, and just looking around, why are some tripods in the $1000+ range?

I'm sure there is obvious things like build quality, supporting weight, and a nice head that derives the cost, but I don't understand the reasoning behind some.

I get that photography is not a poor mans hobby ( is there such a thing? ) but whats with the obviously highly overpriced stuff like that?


----------



## sub50hz

Materials used/brand name/quality/weight.

I rarely tripod so I don't have a problem lugging around 800 pounds of Calumet steel goodness.


----------



## Jixr

brand naming I guess. Seems kinda crazy.


----------



## JAM3S121

So I bought a olypmus e pl5 and I really like it.. but I want to get some new lenses can anyone recommend me some?

I was thinking of getting the prime sigma f2.8 but I don't know if f2.8 is going to give me enough shallow DOF at wide open? Buying the f1.8 17mm oly lens is out of the question.. little expensive for my first lens but there is a oly f2.8 17mm i think the oly doesn't come with a lens hood though.. or caps? I believe I want the shorter focal length lens like 17mm because that with the sensor makes it a 35mm film equivalent photo which is more natural to the eye I believe.

Also what about a wide angle lens..? I am open to anything really legacy or m43 newer style lens.

So far I bought 2x sandisk 16gb extreme sd cards and thats it for the camera. I might get a viewfinder since my camera has a hotshoe for it but right now I've only shot in doors


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hokiealumnus*
> 
> Great to hear you like the 6D so much! Have you looked at the new Tamron 150-600 yet? You might give it a look if you want some extra reach over the 200. Assuming you need that much length of course.


I haven't I have no need for such a tele. For my usage I need a versatile portrait lens and that is what the 70-200 f/2.8 IS will do for me.









Plus, f/5.6-6.3 =







I need more light! lol


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> brand naming I guess. Seems kinda crazy.


Not always just the brand name. There's still R&D costs on the product itself.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> rando question, So i've been looking to upgrade my tripod from my crazy cheap one, and just looking around, why are some tripods in the $1000+ range?
> 
> I'm sure there is obvious things like build quality, supporting weight, and a nice head that derives the cost, but I don't understand the reasoning behind some.
> 
> I get that photography is not a poor mans hobby ( is there such a thing? ) but whats with the obviously highly overpriced stuff like that?


you are paying for tighter tolerances between parts. a $1000 gitzo ocean for example will be fitted together much tighter than a $500 manfrotto. assuming the load weight is the same, this will give you a lighter (probably in grams) and more durable tripod (eg. less crap getting inbetween the locks).

ballheads on the other hand will directly affect the feel of operation. generally speaking the higherend ballheads will be smoother and hold a little tighter.

i would suggest you cheap out a bit on the legs (not saying to buy 100 dollar legs) but spend more on teh ballhead since you will be tightening and loosing it all the time. also try to buy arca swiss compatible stuff, it will give you teh ability later to buy L brackets and nodals without much hassle.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> I haven't I have no need for such a tele. For my usage I need a versatile portrait lens and that is what the 70-200 f/2.8 IS will do for me.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Plus, f/5.6-6.3 =
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I need more light! lol


Not with the 6D, just crank dat ISO.









Also.. for those that shoot Canon DSLRs and are wanting a relatively cheap upgrade from any sort of kit lens, it seems like the price of the 24-105L has tanked recently. POTN has them dropping down towards $600 and I can get one right now for $500 locally on CL. Just something to think about. I've toyed with the idea of selling my 24-70 and replacing it with the 24-105; if I want bokeh, I'm probably not reaching for the 24 -70 and it would put some money in my pocket.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> I haven't I have no need for such a tele. For my usage I need a versatile portrait lens and that is what the 70-200 f/2.8 IS will do for me.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Plus, f/5.6-6.3 =
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I need more light! lol
> 
> 
> 
> Not with the 6D, just crank dat ISO.
Click to expand...

hehe, for sports and portraits I'd rather larger aperture low ISO.







Quote:


> Also.. for those that shoot Canon DSLRs and are wanting a relatively cheap upgrade from any sort of kit lens, it seems like the price of the 24-105L has tanked recently. POTN has them dropping down towards $600 and I can get one right now for $500 locally on CL. Just something to think about. I've toyed with the idea of selling my 24-70 and replacing it with the 24-105; if I want bokeh, I'm probably not reaching for the 24 -70 and it would put some money in my pocket.


I kinda need one now actually lol. Once my 60D is gone, the widest lens I will have for my 6D will be the 85mm. I want a 35mm f/1.4, but it is so expensive right now. Some guy recently sold a 24-105 for a little over $500 on POTN!







I'm gonna start looking for deals now myself. If I get one for about $550 or less I'll be happy.


----------



## hokiealumnus

The 24-105 has been on my radar for a while. Even though I can't afford it right now, it is affordable for L glass because it's a 'kit' lens for FF. I've seen them go for $600 and below for a while from FM forums and Ebay. The photo retailers haven't caught up to the used market yet. Adorama still wants $700-740, depending on condition and a refurb is only $775. B&H is even higher on their used models.

EDIT - There are a couple on FM right now.
$625
$600
$675 (new)
$635

Anyway, you get the point.


----------



## Eggs and bacon

Got my xe-1 today, I am very happy with it. I don't think i can go back to a DSLR with out physical shutter and aperture dials.


----------



## golfergolfer

Hey so quick question I just did a photoshoot today in RAW but I am not getting ready to do some editing; however, Lightroom is not reading the files for some reason. JPEG works but RAW doesn't. Is there a program that I can use to convert my RAW files to JPEG while retaining as much data as possible? I would really appreciate a quick answer


----------



## JAM3S121

i think you converting raw to jpeg inheritly means you lose the ability to edit like raw does.. check to see if you can change the extension of the raw file? my camera its a.dng which opens in LR5


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *golfergolfer*
> 
> Hey so quick question I just did a photoshoot today in RAW but I am not getting ready to do some editing; however, Lightroom is not reading the files for some reason. JPEG works but RAW doesn't. Is there a program that I can use to convert my RAW files to JPEG while retaining as much data as possible? I would really appreciate a quick answer


what camera and version of Lightroom? Try updating?


----------



## hokiealumnus

If your camera is new with an older version of LR, you may need to grab Adobe's RAW to DNG converter. Any version of LR should read a DNG file.


----------



## The Marv Dog

Hi guys. I've been travelling the world on a ship for the past year for my studies (taking lots of pictures with my 'Nikon D5200' along the way, of course!) and have come to the conclusion that I need and all-in-one lens that covers everything from wide-angle to telephoto so I don't have to keep changing lenses. One time I wanted to take great landscape shots across a bay, then a low-flying fighter jet would pass overhead, after I would pass a kind of waterfall down a river, then want to take pictures of the ship I just got off at anchor a mile away and some awesome looking supercars would drive by, all in the space of a couple of hours In Saguenay, Canada.

I know the concessions regarding image quality are quite high due to vignetting , distortions at the extreme ends and softness at larger apertures but at least I won't miss the shot completely during the time I spend getting into my camera-bag and switching lenses.

I've looked at about a dozen reviews of the '18-300mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR' for DX (APS-C) Cameras and of the '28-300mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR' for Full frame cameras

Is it just me or do Nikon not have any Full Frame DSLRs with Variable-angle screens? I can't imagine using a camera without the screen that allows me to shoot holding the camera at an angle near the floor/well above my head/around corners, and since I already have a Nikon D5200 I'd like to go for the 28-300mm 3.5-5.6 FX for when I switch to FX in the near future... but only if there will be an FX Nikon with a vari-angle screen.

If there aren't any FX Nikons with Vari-angle screens and won't be at any point in the near future then I'll just go for the 18-300mm 3.5-5.6 for DX because the 28-300 would give me an effective range of 42-450 which while way better on the telephoto side, would leave me no choice if I wanted any shots of landscapes, group photos indoors or anything wide.

Pic related, my first attempts at panning were of a steamroller flattening some tarmac on the quay. Oyah!


----------



## Conspiracy

Nice pano shot marv dog.

also test shot from when i bought my 1d2. its a nice little camera and very impressive so far. this was just a super fast setup and shot. i didnt feel like tweaking the lights to make a test shot perfect


----------



## Sean Webster

Nice detail. ^

I'm getting a 24-105 Thursday hopefully.







Now to auction off all my crop gear.


----------



## Conspiracy

big fan of the 24-105. such a great lens for the price


----------



## dmanstasiu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hokiealumnus*
> 
> Great to hear you like the 6D so much! Have you looked at the new Tamron 150-600 yet? You might give it a look if you want some extra reach over the 200. Assuming you need that much length of course.


This sounds amazing tbh.

So many things to buy but I can't wait to get a proper telephoto lens (I think that's the correct name? The high-quality zoom lens as opposed to the less well designed albeit cheaper version) for shooting sports at long distances (100+ ft away)


----------



## nvidiaftw12

What length are you looking to get dman?


----------



## Sean Webster

http://www.flickr.com/photos/seanwebsterhd/12228993056/
Canon 6D IMG_1106.jpg by Sean Webster Photo, on Flickr

Got my new toy today.









The previous owner says it is used...looks freaking BNIB!


----------



## ljason8eg

Looking good!







I like mine, though it cost a bit more than yours.


----------



## hokiealumnus

Congrats Sean, I'm totally jealous. Been wanting one of those for a long time now. Even if I could afford it though, I'd be worried about starting at 24mm on crop. At least that's what I keep telling myself to feel better until I can afford one.









Out of curiosity, is there any lens creep?


----------



## Sean Webster

No lens creep, the zoom ring is pretty stiff compared to my 15-85.


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> No lens creep, the zoom ring is pretty stiff compared to my 15-85.


The zoom ring will loosen up a bit with use.

No creep here either. I don't obsess about it like a lot do though, never understood why its such a big deal. If it does creep I have never noticed it.


----------



## dmanstasiu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> What length are you looking to get dman?


ugh

i have no idea really.

i'll get back to you on that. up to 300 ideally


----------



## nvidiaftw12

I know the canon 55-250 is pretty good for the price, I'd imagine nikon has something similar. I'd really like to have something a bit longer but the price goes up steeply from there.


----------



## OmarCCX

Nikon has the 55-200 and the 70-300. The 300 has a metal mount, the other one doesn't but it's $150+ cheaper.


----------



## PCModderMike

I also had a new toy delivered.








Bought it used from KEH and it's an excellent condition. Loving it so far.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PCModderMike*
> 
> I also had a new toy delivered.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bought it used from KEH and it's an excellent condition. Loving it so far.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


Nice


----------



## JKuhn

How does a Pentax 50mm f2 (manual, early 80's) compare to a Canon 50mm f1.8 II? If I order it quickly, I can get free delivery on this adapter. Also, will the hair in the picture cause issues? It's wedged between the aperture blades.


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JKuhn*
> 
> How does a Pentax 50mm f2 (manual, early 80's) compare to a Canon 50mm f1.8 II? If I order it quickly, I can get free delivery on this adapter. Also, will the hair in the picture cause issues? It's wedged between the aperture blades.


The lens itself isn't all that great. My friend has one from his 35mm Pentax K1000 and uses it on his T2i. Fringes badly. Really soft wide open. There are better alternatives if you want to go with a fast full manual 50mm. Just as cheap too.


----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aksthem1*
> 
> The lens itself isn't all that great. My friend has one from his 35mm Pentax K1000 and uses it on his T2i. Fringes badly. Really soft wide open. There are better alternatives if you want to go with a fast full manual 50mm. Just as cheap too.


So you think it would be better to stick with my Canon lens?

My mother also has a Sun 85-300mm f5 Macro lens (I asked about it some time ago but I didn't get an answer). It has internal zoom, but still has to extend for focusing. Would it be worth it to buy an adapter and try it, considering I already have a Sigma 70-300mm f4-5.6? Here's a picture I posted last time in case it helps:



EDIT: I doubt the other manual lenses will be as cheap, unless it fits directly on my camera. Both lenses belong to my mother, and she said I can use them if I buy the adapter.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aksthem1*
> 
> The lens itself isn't all that great. My friend has one from his 35mm Pentax K1000 and uses it on his T2i. Fringes badly. Really soft wide open. There are better alternatives if you want to go with a fast full manual 50mm. Just as cheap too.


It's not like the 50mm 1.8 doesn't fringe bad.


----------



## Dream Killer

you really don't want to use cheap lenses wide open anyway...


----------



## PCModderMike

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *PCModderMike*
> 
> I also had a new toy delivered.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bought it used from KEH and it's an excellent condition. Loving it so far.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nice
Click to expand...

Thanks


----------



## Sean Webster

I have just discovered and mastered back button focusing and how to use AI Servo....what have I been doing my whole life without these things?







Also, I have some decisions to make.

Here is my gear atm:

*Camera:*
- Canon 6D
- Canon 60D

*Lenses:*
- Canon EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM
- Canon EF 24-105 mm f/4 L IS USM
- Canon EF 70-200mm f/4 L USM

- Sigma EF 30mm f/1.4 EX DC HSM

- Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM
- Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro

*Lights:*

- 2x Canon 430EX II

- Einstein 640
- Pixel King E-TTL II Wireless Flash Trigger and Receivers

Any of these worth doing?


Sell the 15-85 since I have the 24-105?
Sell the Sigma 30mm and get a 35 f/2 or f/1.4 L so I can use on both bodies....If I get a f/2 I will miss that f/1.4 life. :'( Or keep the sigma and deal with the vignetting on my 6D?
Sell the 70-200 and get the 70-200 f/2.8 non-IS or IS V1...reasoning because AF is kinda slow, I wonder if the 2.8 would be faster focusing, and more light and bokeh is a plus.
Sell the 430's and Pixel kings to get a bunch of Yongnuo flashes and cheap triggers...or another Einstein. I have a variable ND filter and HSS isn't needed...well I can't think of a use for it anyways now. I have never really liked TTL either, idk why, but I always just shoot with my flashes set to power manually. But, I use the Pixel kings to adjust the power settings, would I lose this ability with cheaper triggers?


----------



## golfergolfer

Replying to Sean Webster here:

1) I would sell the 15-85 the 24-105 is so nice
2) buy a new lense with the money made from the sell of your 15-85
3) Im biased to this one I love my nikon 70-200 f/2.8
4) You understand light well enough to do that so there is no problem with that!

How is back button focusing ? I have heard great things about it just havent tried it yet. Does it really make a difference?


----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> It's not like the 50mm 1.8 doesn't fringe bad.


Ok. And what about the hair in the picture? Is it likely to cause issues?


----------



## Scott1541

Hey peoples









Don't think I've posted in this thread before, so I'm just stopping by to say hi









(Is it bad that I thought about replacing "stopping by" with "stopping down" in the last sentence?)


----------



## dmanstasiu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OmarCCX*
> 
> Nikon has the 55-200 and the 70-300. The 300 has a metal mount, the other one doesn't but it's $150+ cheaper.


The fact that it's metal doesn't change much for me, the fact that it's 70-300mm does 

Are these zoom lenses or telephoto/


----------



## Conspiracy

they are both.

the nikon 70-300 is an awesome lens for the price


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dmanstasiu*
> 
> The fact that it's metal doesn't change much for me, the fact that it's 70-300mm does
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are these zoom lenses or telephoto/


Pretty sure they would be classed as telephoto zoom









Depending on what you're looking for you may want to consider the AF 70-300mm and AF-S 55-300mm VR too


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:
Originally Posted by *golfergolfer* 

Replying to Sean Webster here:

1) I would sell the 15-85 the 24-105 is so nice
2) buy a new lense with the money made from the sell of your 15-85
3) Im biased to this one I love my nikon 70-200 f/2.8
4) You understand light well enough to do that so there is no problem with that!


Yea, the 15-85 is gonna go...
I may sell the sigma and get the larger 35 f/1.4 version for FF. Seems like it is better than the Canon L.
Got any nice shots to share with your 70-200 f/2.8? 
Yea, I can get like 6-7 flashes for the price of my two 430s lol...or maybe another einstein. hmm

Quote:


> How is back button focusing ? I have heard great things about it just havent tried it yet. Does it really make a difference?


Great, less delay in getting the shot, the camera is more responsive in sports photos. Focus and recompose is a little nicer to do with it. It takes a little to get used to, but once you do, you may like it.


----------



## Deano12345

Good thing about working in a camera shop is that you get great deals on lenses. Bad thing is that you have money to spend on those lenses









Picking up a 17-55 to replace the Tamron 28-75. Looking forward to adding another piece to the collection


----------



## Jixr

I'm thinking about picking up another month of a photo a day log, thoguh it being winter and I like outdoor shooting, everything is dead and ugly.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> I'm thinking about picking up another month of a photo a day log, thoguh it being winter and I like outdoor shooting, everything is dead and ugly.


I'll take dead and ugly over the 60" of snow we've had since the end of November. And 12-16 more inches on the way tomorrow. Yay.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> I'm thinking about picking up another month of a photo a day log, thoguh it being winter and I like outdoor shooting, everything is dead and ugly.
> 
> 
> 
> I'll take dead and ugly over the 60" of snow we've had since the end of November. And 12-16 more inches on the way tomorrow. Yay.
Click to expand...

just keep that stuff to yourself. we dont want none of that snow down here ya hear


----------



## Jixr

I've never seen real snow...


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> I'll take dead and ugly over the 60" of snow we've had since the end of November. And 12-16 more inches on the way tomorrow. Yay.


You guys are below 50 according to the Golden Snow Globe









Meanwhile, up here we're just shy of 60.


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> I've never seen real snow...


It either sleets, freezing rain or snows every year here. But almost every time there's a layer of ice underneath or on top.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> You guys are below 50 according to the Golden Snow Globe


According to the National Weather Service, our area (south of the city) has gotten 58.5" as of 8 hours ago.


----------



## Sean Webster

It was like 80F out today here in SoFlo, 76F atm. lol


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> It was like 80F out today here in SoFlo, 76F atm. lol


I can't remember a day where it wasn't high 70s low 80s when I've been down there. Clear skies? 80. Cloudy and windy? 80. Thunderstorms? 80.


----------



## OmarCCX

It's close to 90º here. Feels like 115º. Goddamn tropic.


----------



## Scott1541

As much as I dislike using imperial units, it's 46°F here







It's windy too


----------



## sub50hz

We're on a hot streak as well -- the high today is 19F!

/s


----------



## Jixr

Hey guys, i'm going to strike up some controversy here and hopefully something for discussion.

On my daily cycle of websites I visit, a few of them are photo sites, and I've read about 3 different articles today that talk about the worn out argument about protogophers should be paid well for their services, how its insulting to work for free or low pay, how its reasonable to charge thousands for a wedding shoot, and why you should pay me ( the article author ) $6000 instead of someone else $600 for a wedding. And at least once a week, there is a post on those sites slamming how people ask photographers to work for free or little pay, or are upset about being charged thousands of dollars for a wedding shoot.

While I (personal opinion ) think that sometimes its okay to work for free, and its okay to work for a low paying job, there is a huge problem with the photography industry, and the problem is entitlement.

Everyone these days talks about not being paid on a livable wage, from fast food workers, to retail jobs, to what most photographers are, self employed/small business's.
I get that gear cost alot. I get that you paid quite a bit for that art degree, I get that people have bills. But I don't get why photogs get so butthurt when people don't want to pay what they charge, or ask for their services for low or little pay.

I just always get an over powering attitute of entitlement with people aspiring to be or claim to be a pro photog. I do understand that there are tons of people that are worth the big prices they charge, and there are people who have the means to pay for high charging photogs. Which for those people, great! But most people these days get their photos, and publish them on Facebook, and maybe print out a few. I've seen downright terrible terrible photos from 'pro' photographers, but the client liked them, and didn't pay much for them, and were happy with them. I'm sure they would have been happier with higher end photos, but some people can't afford higher end services or don't know enough about photography to tell good from bad. Though there are always people who charge pro prices, and give out amature quality, and those have ruined the market a bit.

Another thing that Irks me is when photogs charge for the photo shoot, then charge on top of that for the photos themselves, and only releasing watermarked jpgs out until they pay for the images they want.

( I myself am NOT a pro, I have no desire to do so, and at best I would like to work enough jobs to cover my expenses for running my own website, all in all with Creative cloud I spend about $30 a month to run everything )

Just wanted to get the views of others on this topic.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:
Originally Posted by *Jixr* 

Hey guys, i'm going to strike up some controversy here and hopefully something for discussion.

On my daily cycle of websites I visit, a few of them are photo sites, and I've read about 3 different articles today that talk about the worn out argument about protogophers should be paid well for their services, how its insulting to work for free or low pay, how its reasonable to charge thousands for a wedding shoot, and why you should pay me ( the article author ) $6000 instead of someone else $600 for a wedding. And at least once a week, there is a post on those sites slamming how people ask photographers to work for free or little pay, or are upset about being charged thousands of dollars for a wedding shoot.

While I (personal opinion ) think that sometimes its okay to work for free, and its okay to work for a low paying job, there is a huge problem with the photography industry, and the problem is entitlement.

Everyone these days talks about not being paid on a livable wage, from fast food workers, to retail jobs, to what most photographers are, self employed/small business's.
I get that gear cost alot. I get that you paid quite a bit for that art degree, I get that people have bills. But I don't get why photogs get so butthurt when people don't want to pay what they charge, or ask for their services for low or little pay.
Photography isn't like a normal wage/salary job...unless you have or work for a large studio. People don't feel as entitled to pay for a service and product with photography as they do with other services such as electrical and plumbing. Really, the butt hurt ones are the ones who suck at business honestly. There needs to be contracts and agreements made before shoots and things such as pricing and what they are going to be delivering to the client need to be known to both sides, on paper.
Quote:


> I just always get an over powering attitute of entitlement with people aspiring to be or claim to be a pro photog. I do understand that there are tons of people that are worth the big prices they charge, and there are people who have the means to pay for high charging photogs. Which for those people, great! But most people these days get their photos, and publish them on Facebook, and maybe print out a few. I've seen downright terrible terrible photos from 'pro' photographers, but the client liked them, and didn't pay much for them, and were happy with them. I'm sure they would have been happier with higher end photos, but some people can't afford higher end services or don't know enough about photography to tell good from bad. Though there are always people who charge pro prices, and give out amature quality, and those have ruined the market a bit.


Well, there are idiots out there who pay high prices for amateur work, oh well, they get what they deserve because they didn't research and hire a real photographer. They hire people who call themselves pros...not actual pros. There is a difference b/w a person with a camera, a hobbiest, and a pro. Person with camera just can snap pics and throw them on a CD. A hobbiest can usually take good pics, but usually won't get the best shots, don't know how to sell their work, and aren't into the business aspects of being a pro, they undercut pros and give out their work for nothing essentially. And at the end of the day, they have another job they make $ from. Pros have to take great shots and know how to run a business correctly.

There are portfolios for a reason, to let clients see their quality of work. If they seen an amateur portfolio and liked it and hired the "pro" and when their pics turned out like the rest of the work they do, they have no reason to complain. There are lots of resaonable priced pro photographers out there. You just have to look around and speak to them on a personal level.

Quote:


> Another thing that Irks me is when photogs charge for the photo shoot, then charge on top of that for the photos themselves, and only releasing watermarked jpgs out until they pay for the images they want.


That depends on the job, client, and pricing. With photography there is the service and the product. You charge the service fee for the time you take the pics and travel and such. Then the products are the end result printed/non-printed photographs.

When doing say a portrait session you may have in a contract that you are going to charge them say $150 for the 1hr shoot. With that comes like 10 final edited pics, jpegs they can share on fb and what not and then maybe say 5-10 prints, ex: 2-8x10's 3-5x7's and 5-4x6's.

If they offer only watermarked pics, it was because that is what was agreed on before the shoot...

If the client wants more photos, you have an extra charge for extra edits and extra prints, a CD/DVD, printing rights release since it is copyrighted automatically...you have power over your photos. Shooting, editing, and printing pics takes time, experience, and $...

Quote:


> ( I myself am NOT a pro, I have no desire to do so, and at best I would like to work enough jobs to cover my expenses for running my own website, all in all with Creative cloud I spend about $30 a month to run everything )
> 
> Just wanted to get the views of others on this topic.


I like this. I want to hear more sides to this too.


----------



## Jixr

Photography comes in the same as being a musician to me. Tons of people can play guitar/take pictures, some can do it really well, but its rare that people can actually make a living doing what millions of people do as a hobby.

And just to be clear, I'm not trying to sound like a cheapskate or anything, But there is a reason why many people take up photography as a hobby and will work for little to nothing. With wedding season just around the corner I keep on seeing these types of articles and things pop up on photo sites. There are tons of things I would go shoot for free even if I didn't get to keep ownership of the photos.


----------



## Conspiracy

every year these types of articles pop up like clockwork. nothing new. same old same ole


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> Photography comes in the same as being a musician to me. Tons of people can play guitar/take pictures, some can do it really well, but its rare that people can actually make a living doing what millions of people do as a hobby.
> 
> And just to be clear, I'm not trying to sound like a cheapskate or anything, But there is a reason why many people take up photography as a hobby and will work for little to nothing. With wedding season just around the corner I keep on seeing these types of articles and things pop up on photo sites. There are tons of things I would go shoot for free even if I didn't get to keep ownership of the photos.


But the thing is there are hobbiests and professionals. You wouldn't pay a someone to work on your $100,000 mercedes (if you had/have one) because they are a car guy or have a tool set would you? Of course not. You would go to a professional mechanic.

There is nothing stopping people from shooting for free or cheap. But, just because they do, it doesn't mean they are professional and clients shouldn't expect professional results from hobbiests and noobs.

Nothing is stopping you from shooting what you want if you want to shoot for free, that is on you. Talk to friends and family, maybe talk to local professionals and see if you can assist them.


----------



## Jixr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> But the thing is there are hobbiests and professionals. You wouldn't pay a someone to work on your $100,000 mercedes (if you had/have one) because they are a car guy or have a tool set would you? Of course not. You would go to a professional mechanic.


Invalid argument, If I had a $100,000 car, it would not be a merc, and I work on my own cars with my own tools lol.

But I get your point.

Every article I see on the subject is basically "wah wah I don't make enough money and I'm special and everyone should hire me"


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> But the thing is there are hobbiests and professionals. You wouldn't pay a someone to work on your $100,000 mercedes (if you had/have one) because they are a car guy or have a tool set would you? Of course not. You would go to a professional mechanic.
> 
> 
> 
> Invalid argument, If I had a $100,000 car, it would not be a merc, and I work on my own cars with my own tools lol.
> 
> But I get your point.
> 
> Every article I see on the subject is basically "wah wah I don't make enough money and I'm special and everyone should hire me"
Click to expand...

Neither would I lol. Same here on working on my own cars, I'm actually going to be co-owning a mechanic shop in a few years. 

And they complain because they don't know how to run a profitable business. lol They suck, thus they complain. XD


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> But the thing is there are hobbiests and professionals. You wouldn't pay a someone to work on your $100,000 mercedes (if you had/have one) because they are a car guy or have a tool set would you? Of course not. You would go to a professional mechanic.
> 
> 
> 
> Invalid argument, If I had a $100,000 car, it would not be a merc, and I work on my own cars with my own tools lol.
> 
> But I get your point.
> 
> *Every article I see on the subject is basically "wah wah I don't make enough money and I'm special and everyone should hire me*"
Click to expand...

this is pretty much summing up all the crying. or "wah wah i have all this gear therefore im pro... why wont anyone pay me to shoot???"


----------



## Scott1541

I only know one pro photographer, and although he's very good, he still has a day job. He's got all the gear (over £30,000 worth) and he only works as a photographer and offers training in the evenings or at weekends. In contrast there's a local photographer with a lot less gear, and who IMO isn't as good but this guy works solely as a photographer for the local media, nightclubs, events, etc..

In other related news I was out last night and the nightclub I was in had hired two hobbyist photographers. I'll be very interested to see the pictures as they were using oldish (could tell by the lens) entry level DSLRs with the standard kit lenses and without a flash gun. If they are paying these people maybe I've got a chance


----------



## MistaBernie

Incoming wall of text..

Even in relatively small areas, breaking in as a photographer to venues where you don't have connections usually isn't easy.

Those 'hobby photogs' that are using entry level gear probably cost the club next to nothing (or less if they they're getting paid for stuff that they use, which by the sounds of it, might not be much at all). Businesses are very unlikely to let someone walk in off the street and make a pitch to do anything for their business - sometimes, even for free.

This kind of ties in with the whole conversation put forth about 'professional photographers'. There's something that people are potentially glossing over, and that something could easily be the difference between getting hired and getting looked over - _perceived value._

If you walk into that club and tell the owner you just want to shoot to get experience (i.e. shoot for free), one of two things will happen. They will either say 'no thanks, we have our needs covered' since they likely don't know you and you haven't mentioned bringing anything to show as a portfolio/example, etc, or they'll say 'sure, come shoot such and such a day.' If you get the no thanks, it's _not_ the end of the story, because now not only does the club owner know your name, but you've effectively shown the club owner that when he gets tired of paying these guys, he can wait for someone to walk in and offer to shoot for free. By offering to shoot for free, you've delivered a very low (read: next to none) perceived value.

If they have you come in and shoot? Then it's _possible_ you can make a connection with the owner (if, of course, you do a good job). Here's the question though - are you just going to let them use the images for whatever purpose they want? Then you're back to the first issue - no perceived value. It's a total catch-22. If you do well, they get a good product for free -- which has, once again, lost value -- because the next time you go back and say 'so, how about paying me to do this?' You _know_ their likely response is going to be 'well, you gave us some great products and thanks for that, but we're not really interested in 'paying' for something we've already gotten (and potentially could continue to) get for free, so thanks but no thanks'.

Don't get me wrong - everyone starts somewhere. The best place to start though is to be active locally in your area and seek out the people that are working / have studios / always seem photographically 'busy' (if possible, of course). Granted, that sounds easier than it likely is, but this kind of networking is very important if you actually want to start shooting in any sort of professional means.

I'm going to throw in one caveat here -- does this mean you can _never_ shoot for free? The obvious answer here is no. I'll take a page out of Syl Arena's book here (not literally, but..) and basically say that if you are going to shoot for free, do it for an organization or event that you actually want to support, or something that can help you out in the future somehow. For example, for the last couple of years, I've provided free* services to an organization that runs a huge event in December every year, basically opening up the Providence Convention Center and feeding (and clothing, and then some) as many people as possible (Their goal is usually to 'Feed 1000' people, last year, well over 1000 people were fed/helped and this year, that number was much closer to 2000). They have lots of families with small children come through, so they get a good quality Santa Claus and set up a place for photos. I come in, shoot, edit and print on scene (usually I just set up the tripod and a single light because it's all that they need for good quality images, and have an assistant on the remote taking pictures while another volunteer runs cards back and forth to me where I'm printing off of my Pixma Pro 9000 Mark II free 4x6's for everyone).

See the * above? The services are free. The charity pays me for paper and ink -- to the tune of around $200 a year (I usually have some paper left over so I don't charge them if that's the case, but I usually buy two CLI-8 8 packs of ink and I usually go through at least one full one). What do I get out of this? Well, it feels really nice to do something that's relatively simple (even though it's rapid-fire editing and printing for ~4 hours on a Saturday in December), but I've networked with the owner of the property management company and we're on good terms, and I've had some business referred to me because of this (I'm actually working on seeing if they will designate me as a sponsor for the event, which would probably be really good for my business on the side). The organizers though know what they're getting. They know what I normally charge for event photography, and they know what they are saving by paying for stuff themselves and me donating my time, and to them, that indicates value.

Who knows, someone could be lobbying internally over at that company to be like 'oh, I want to take photos this year!'. When the president of the company turns to them and says 'oh, okay - what kind of gear are you bringing, and how quickly can you shoot, edit and print ~400 different 4x6 photos?' though, and the person looks back at them with a 'oh, uh..' response, they somewhat quickly realize how much work we (I always bring an assistant, whom I usually pay with dinner) get done for them.


----------



## Jixr

yeah, I hate to sound like a gear snob ( and I have basic gear myself ) but it just irks me when people work jobs with Best Buy Camera Kits

Though since I live in one of the major hipster commues of the US, EVERYONE has a dslr and a very snobbish attitude to photography. Its pretty much expected that everyone my age around here calls themselves photographers, DJ's, musicians, or something trendy like that.


----------



## Mongol

What irks me more is the jerk at the museum/show/tour that cuts in front of you while you're shooting because you have a 5DMKIII and he's rocking that 1D-X. (not necessarily those bodies, but you know what I mean.) That "my camera is superior therefore I am" mentality makes me want to bludgeon people like that with a tripod.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> I only know one pro photographer, and although he's very good, he still has a day job. He's got all the gear (over £30,000 worth) and he only works as a photographer and offers training in the evenings or at weekends. In contrast there's a local photographer with a lot less gear, and who IMO isn't as good but this guy works solely as a photographer for the local media, nightclubs, events, etc..
> 
> In other related news I was out last night and the nightclub I was in had hired two hobbyist photographers. I'll be very interested to see the pictures as they were using oldish (could tell by the lens) entry level DSLRs with the standard kit lenses and without a flash gun. If they are paying these people maybe I've got a chance


Yeah. I know what you're saying. I don't know how I ever got by without my flashgun. Especially for dark shots.

On topic: we had a guy come shoot a few photos for a school event a while back, had mid range gear, something like a d5000 with a fairly good lens and flashgun, but took THE WORST photos. It was dark, grainy, off-centered, and not even straight. Just miserable. A good photog could have taken a better photo with today's cell phones. I hope he wasn't being paid much, as I'm sure I could have done better and for free, and there is a few other hobbyists at my school that I'm sure would have as well.


----------



## Deano12345

I guess I can chime in with a slightly different view, with that I actually work in a camera shop and have done the paid photographer for a while too. Being a Pro (Pro in this sense being someone who gets paid for the work, regardless of gear) is tough, like running your own business in any way really, and even if your good at it, its tough (especially over here) to get work because people for the most part see $ signs (or £/€) and will go for the cheapest option more often than not. I actually see this when I have people come in to get prints done (we have a lab) and you can so easily tell the difference between a photographer who think he is a pro, and one who actually knows what they're doing.

In any case, you could give a bad photographer all the awesome kit in the world, they'll still take poor photos. I think over here too, unless you've got a guaranteed contract with a company, you cant make a living off photography alone, I'm lucky my work and hobby are one in the same, the feeling of going to work knowing you will work X hours and get paid Y amount is something I would find hard to give up.

Off topic : Got the D3300 in tonight, going to have a look tomorrow, has quite a bit of potential I think. New kit lens will be interesting too , even if it has that silly lock from the J/V Mirrorless series


----------



## Conspiracy

interesting

http://petapixel.com/2014/02/08/sample-footage-shooting-impressions-panasonics-4k-capable-gh4/


----------



## laboitenoire

So, I'm debating which lenses to pack for my trip to Taiwan at the end of the month... I'm trying to decide if I want to pack one or two, as I'm trying to travel lightly (fitting everything into my Patagonia backpack). Of my lenses, which would you take if you had to take either one lens or two lenses? My personal pick would normally be the 12-24 and the 70-300, but because they're both on the slower side I'm wondering if I should pack my 30 f/1.4?


----------



## Eggs and bacon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> So, I'm debating which lenses to pack for my trip to Taiwan at the end of the month... I'm trying to decide if I want to pack one or two, as I'm trying to travel lightly (fitting everything into my Patagonia backpack). Of my lenses, which would you take if you had to take either one lens or two lenses? My personal pick would normally be the 12-24 and the 70-300, but because they're both on the slower side I'm wondering if I should pack my 30 f/1.4?


Depending what your planning to shoot I would drop the 70-300 and bring the 30. When I travel I personally tend to shoot wider,


----------



## dudemanppl

Hello ladies. Visiting for the first time in a while, seems like Bernie has a **** load of gear still.


----------



## Sean Webster

It's alive!


----------



## Scott1541

So it does









It's sunny today (at least for now), I might head out and shoot some stuff in a bit


----------



## iTurn

Just looking for some insight from the more experienced, I feel the detail on the car is fine but the upper half is over exposed... any in camera tricks to help with this?

Gear used:
D600 / Sigma 70-200mm 2.8

Settings:
*Focal @ 160mm
f/10
1/160
ISO-200
exp -0.3
spot metering*

Thanks.


----------



## MistaBernie

*It's time for mega super ultra string of quotes!*

Hey, my gear hasn't changed much at all in the last year (probably the least since I got back involved with photography). I think the only addition last year was the 5D3 and the 100L. Oh and the 600 EX-RTs. And the Lee Filters. And a new tripod. And Photoshop CS. And a card reader.

Man, maybe I do have a problem..
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iTurn*
> 
> Just looking for some insight from the more experienced, I feel the detail on the car is fine but the upper half is over exposed... any in camera tricks to help with this?
> 
> Gear used:
> D600 / Sigma 70-200mm 2.8
> 
> Settings:
> *Focal @ 160mm
> f/10
> 1/160
> ISO-200
> exp -0.3
> spot metering*
> 
> Thanks.


Are you talking about the sky above the stands being blown out? In camera, there isn't really a lot you can do. One thing you could try is a variable ND filter, but that's really only useful for stuff where you have a chance to line up very close to that line where you need the extra light. In a case where you are panning with a car, while it wouldn't be _impossible_, it's mostly improbably to yield decent results.

@laboitenoire
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> So, I'm debating which lenses to pack for my trip to Taiwan at the end of the month... I'm trying to decide if I want to pack one or two, as I'm trying to travel lightly (fitting everything into my Patagonia backpack). Of my lenses, which would you take if you had to take either one lens or two lenses? My personal pick would normally be the 12-24 and the 70-300, but because they're both on the slower side I'm wondering if I should pack my 30 f/1.4?


12-24 and 70-300 seems like a pretty good call to me. If you're really wanting to have something available to shoot wide open or in serious low light, then bring the 30 f/1.4 as well. Better to pack it and have it if you need it than wish you'd brought it. I find if I'm travelling, I usually bring my 24-70, my 35 and my 70-200, and that trio has served me very well. I've gone as far as to omit the 70-200 simply because I don't feel like lugging it around, but there's definitely been times where I wish I did have it on me.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iTurn*
> 
> Just looking for some insight from the more experienced, I feel the detail on the car is fine but the upper half is over exposed... any in camera tricks to help with this?
> 
> Gear used:
> D600 / Sigma 70-200mm 2.8
> 
> Settings:
> *Focal @ 160mm
> f/10
> 1/160
> ISO-200
> exp -0.3
> spot metering*
> 
> Thanks.


Your issue is caused by shooting the side of the car that isn't lit by the sun. The easiest way to fix that is to move to a location that allows you to shoot with the sun behind you. Of course, that's not always possible. If you must shoot with the sun in front of you, expose for the bright parts of the car so you don't clip the highlights and bring the shadows up in post. Not ideal, but it shouldn't look too bad.


----------



## MistaBernie

Oh, sure, give him the _easy_ fix..


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Oh, sure, give him the easy fix..


I say Graduated filter + polarizer + god like panning skills will work best.









Oh and I am now an owner of a 70-200 f/2.8.









Time to sell my 70-200 f/4 and 15-85mm...my sigma 30 is already gone.


----------



## MistaBernie

@Sean Webster IS or non-IS?


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> @Sean Webster IS or non-IS?


Non IS.







I don't have a need for IS for what I am shooting atm. (basketball, football, swimming, etc @1/400th-1/1000th shutters)

Also, if anyone is interested...http://slickdeals.net/permadeal/113842/buydig---canon-ef-50mm-f1.8-ii-standard-auto-focus-lens-hoya-uv-multi-coated-filter-3-pc-lens-cleaning-kit

I may have to buy one again just because I dont have a 50 prime atm..


----------



## MistaBernie

Nothing wrong with the non-IS - I love mine. I hope you got it used and for a decent deal though.


----------



## Jixr

I want a 70-200 f4l.. just saying...


----------



## MistaBernie

OH yeah. My name is dark green now. So, that's a thing..


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> OH yeah. My name is dark green now. So, that's a thing..


huh. how is that a thing. still the same bernie lol


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Nothing wrong with the non-IS - I love mine. I hope you got it used and for a decent deal though.


For sure! I always get the best deals. It's part of being a boss. 

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> I want a 70-200 f4l.. just saying...


PM'd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> OH yeah. My name is dark green now. So, that's a thing..


Like a Sir!


----------



## Sean Webster

Well to today i got my 70-200, it is great and all, but I have an issue. I popped my SD card in my 6D and it wound up breaking one of the little pins in the slot. IDK how, but it did. I tried to bend it back but it still isn't registering my cards. Now my 6D is out of commission. I have read that the cost is anywhere from $200-$400 to replace the card slot. It is making me cry right now, this is such bull.


----------



## iTurn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Are you talking about the sky above the stands being blown out? In camera, there isn't really a lot you can do. One thing you could try is a variable ND filter, but that's really only useful for stuff where you have a chance to line up very close to that line where you need the extra light. In a case where you are panning with a car, while it wouldn't be _impossible_, it's mostly improbably to yield decent results.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> Your issue is caused by shooting the side of the car that isn't lit by the sun. The easiest way to fix that is to move to a location that allows you to shoot with the sun behind you. Of course, that's not always possible. If you must shoot with the sun in front of you, expose for the bright parts of the car so you don't clip the highlights and bring the shadows up in post. Not ideal, but it shouldn't look too bad.


Thanks, I will try both suggestions when I shoot a race again (more than likely when ever I make a trip to the US).

I have a ND filter somewhere too...


----------



## hokiealumnus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Well to today i got my 70-200, it is great and all, but I have an issue. I popped my SD card in my 6D and it wound up breaking one of the little pins in the slot. IDK how, but it did. I tried to bend it back but it still isn't registering my cards. Now my 6D is out of commission. I have read that the cost is anywhere from $200-$400 to replace the card slot. It is making me cry right now, this is such bull.


That really sucks, sorry to hear about your new 6D. If you cant't get it working, hope they get it fixed and back quickly!


----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Well to today i got my 70-200, it is great and all, but I have an issue. I popped my SD card in my 6D and it wound up breaking one of the little pins in the slot. IDK how, but it did. I tried to bend it back but it still isn't registering my cards. Now my 6D is out of commission. I have read that the cost is anywhere from $200-$400 to replace the card slot. It is making me cry right now, this is such bull.


That sucks.


----------



## PCModderMike

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Well to today i got my 70-200, it is great and all, but I have an issue. I popped my SD card in my 6D and it wound up breaking one of the little pins in the slot. IDK how, but it did. I tried to bend it back but it still isn't registering my cards. Now my 6D is out of commission. I have read that the cost is anywhere from $200-$400 to replace the card slot. It is making me cry right now, this is such bull.










Ahh man I would be so bummed, sorry to hear that Sean. Is that not something that could be covered under warranty repair?


----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PCModderMike*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ahh man I would be so bummed, sorry to hear that Sean. Is that not something that could be covered under warranty repair?


I don't know about where you are, but here they'll just say it's "physical damage" or "user abuse" or something like that. Manufacturers and suppliers don't like paying for repairs. Not that something like that should happen though and I'd be very upset if it happens to my camera.


----------



## MistaBernie

Actually Sean, if you bought it BNIB, give Canon USA a call and ask about a possible warranty repair. As long as there's no physical evidence of mistreatment, putting in or taking out a memory card shouldn't damage those pins, so you _may_ be covered. The worst thing they can do is say no, but I'd rather get a no and try with a chance at a yes then just assume that it wont be covered, you know?


----------



## PCModderMike

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JKuhn*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *PCModderMike*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ahh man I would be so bummed, sorry to hear that Sean. Is that not something that could be covered under warranty repair?
> 
> 
> 
> I don't know about where you are, but here they'll just say it's "physical damage" or "user abuse" or something like that. Manufacturers and suppliers don't like paying for repairs. Not that something like that should happen though and I'd be very upset if it happens to my camera.
Click to expand...

Where I'm from, even if the damage is partly the users fault, because it's a fairly recent purchase and most companies do like keeping their customers happy there is a good chance they would eat the cost and repair the damages themselves.


----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PCModderMike*
> 
> Where I'm from, even if the damage is partly the users fault, because it's a fairly recent purchase and most companies do like keeping their customers happy there is a good chance they would eat the cost and repair the damages themselves.


You didn't need to post that screenshot, I actually meant that I didn't know how things work where you are.









Some places here will consider their reputation, but it's very common for suppliers to blame it on user abuse, lightning, etc.


----------



## PCModderMike

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JKuhn*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *PCModderMike*
> 
> Where I'm from, even if the damage is partly the users fault, because it's a fairly recent purchase and most companies do like keeping their customers happy there is a good chance they would eat the cost and repair the damages themselves.
> 
> 
> 
> You didn't need to post that screenshot, I actually meant that I didn't know how things work where you are.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Some places here will consider their reputation, but it's very common for suppliers to blame it on user abuse, lightning, etc.
Click to expand...

I originally read your post as *"I don't know where you are"* not *"I don't know about where you are"*...so that's why I thought it was necessary to post the screenshot with my location.


----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PCModderMike*
> 
> I originally read your post as *"I don't know where you are"* not *"I don't know about where you are"*...so that's why I thought it was necessary to post the screenshot with my location.


No problem. I assumed that might be the case.


----------



## Sean Webster

I bought it used and don't have the receipt and they don't typically honor warranty without a receipt. The seller said it still has warranty, but he isn't too active on pton ATM and I'm waiting to see if I can get the receipt off him. Or else I may be screwed, unless I find someone else's receipt I think lol.


----------



## MistaBernie

They should be able to tell how old it is by the serial (is the 6D even a year old yet?)


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> They should be able to tell how old it is by the serial (is the 6D even a year old yet?)


Yea, the 6D was released 1yr and a few months ago. I read they usually don't honor warranty without a receipt. Now all I have left to do is just wait for a reply.

I shot BBall last night and it was terrible without my baby. My 60D is so crap in comparison...It sucks, at least in shooting bball. Center point wasn't even nearly as accurate as my 6D's, less responsive, and focuses was slower...and such crappy IQ at 2500-3200 ISO. lol


----------



## Jixr

sounds like your 60d is broken, send it to me and i'll inspect it for you, meanwhile, you can use my t3i as a loaner.


----------



## kbros

I have some first world problems here. I was cleaning off the body of my d70 today. I've had it for three days. I cleaned it with isopropyl alcohol and now the grip on the right side is slightly sticky. It's driving me insane. Anybody have any solutions?


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> sounds like your 60d is broken, send it to me and i'll inspect it for you, meanwhile, you can use my t3i as a loaner.


lol, sounds like you want to upgrade. 

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> I have some first world problems here. I was cleaning off the body of my d70 today. I've had it for three days. I cleaned it with isopropyl alcohol and now the grip on the right side is slightly sticky. It's driving me insane. Anybody have any solutions?


Get a bucket of water and a rag and wipe it more?


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> I have some first world problems here. I was cleaning off the body of my d70 today. I've had it for three days. I cleaned it with isopropyl alcohol and now the grip on the right side is slightly sticky. It's driving me insane. Anybody have any solutions?


That's just all the nice non-polar plasticizers being pulled out of the rubber by the nice non-polar alcohol. Wipe it down with soapy water and it should dry off in a few days.


----------



## werds

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> But the thing is there are hobbiests and professionals. You wouldn't pay a someone to work on your $100,000 mercedes (if you had/have one) because they are a car guy or have a tool set would you? Of course not. You would go to a professional mechanic.
> 
> There is nothing stopping people from shooting for free or cheap. But, just because they do, it doesn't mean they are professional and clients shouldn't expect professional results from hobbiests and noobs.
> 
> Nothing is stopping you from shooting what you want if you want to shoot for free, that is on you. Talk to friends and family, maybe talk to local professionals and see if you can assist them.


I wholly agree! I am a pure amateur. Yes I spend a little bit of money on nice gear and occasionally have had a good set of pictures but for ALL our special events I break out the wallet to have someone who actually does it for a living take those pictures. And I have no shortage of people I know who are amateur photographers or recently started their own photography business (one of those things that I noticed a lot of teachers in my area take it up as a sidejob/hustle etc.) Not to say they can't or aren't good... but I don't want to risk losing out on great memories from being cheap and I wish more people would realize this! The difference in product between someone just starting there business or who does it as a living is ASTOUNDING to me, both in shot selection, setup, understanding of what we want and are looking for as well as creativity... and let me not get into post processing! That part alone is worth the money I pay out. (Yearly pictures, special holidays etc) Lord I couldn't imagine my wedding pictures if I had not paid a professional!

Oh btw @Sean Webster did you ever get yourself a tablet?

Also - sensor swabs, can someone explain to me the difference between types? I see them listed as type 1, 2 etc on Amazon...


----------



## sub50hz

Hello. I am here again. It's snowing again. Maybe I'll post a picture of the snow on the side of my driveway, which is considerably higher than the side windows on my car (*turns to window and filps double bird).


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Hello. I am here again. It's snowing again. Maybe I'll post a picture of the snow on the side of my driveway, which is considerably higher than the side windows on my car (*turns to window and filps double bird).


Its snowing downtown? Dry in the suburbs right now where im working for the week. I actually had to knock down the piles at the end of my driveway as they were over my head and causing some issues. Now I just have a wider pile that is getting back to the same height. Ready for this thaw and for some of it to melt.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *silvrr*
> 
> Its snowing downtown? Dry in the suburbs right now where im working for the week. I actually had to knock down the piles at the end of my driveway as they were over my head and causing some issues. Now I just have a wider pile that is getting back to the same height. Ready for this thaw and for some of it to melt.


It was snowing here in Orland a while ago. Now it's just cloudy.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *werds*
> 
> Oh btw @Sean Webster did you ever get yourself a tablet?


Yes, got a 32GB a Nexas 7 for $100. Works fine for all my needs and more. Battery life is ok, but could be better.

Quote:


> Also - sensor swabs, can someone explain to me the difference between types? I see them listed as type 1, 2 etc on Amazon...


The sizes. Check the descriptions for which one is for your type of camera.

1. http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/572769-REG/Photographic_Solutions_PE1C_Sensor_Swab_Plus_with.html

2. http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/242758-REG/Photographic_Solutions_SS2BOX_Sensor_Swab_Type_2.html
3. http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=&sku=308405&Q=&is=REG&A=details


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Yes, got a 32GB a Nexas 7 for $100. Works fine for all my needs and more. Battery life is ok, but could be better.


2012 model I take it? I got myself a 32GB 2012 model about a month ago for £99







I think the battery life on mine is great, it's way better than my Nexus 4, which is the only thing I've really got to compare it to.


----------



## Nemesis158

If anyone is in the market for some Nikon gear, Ive got a listing for some in the marketplace (its in my sig).

After repeated financial troubles and hardly using the gear anyways Ive made the tough decision to let some of it go


----------



## werds

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Also - sensor swabs, can someone explain to me the difference between types? I see them listed as type 1, 2 etc on Amazon...
> 
> 
> 
> The sizes. Check the descriptions for which one is for your type of camera.
> 
> 1. http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/572769-REG/Photographic_Solutions_PE1C_Sensor_Swab_Plus_with.html
> 
> 2. http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/242758-REG/Photographic_Solutions_SS2BOX_Sensor_Swab_Type_2.html
> 3. http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=&sku=308405&Q=&is=REG&A=details
Click to expand...

Hmmm well my wife has a T5i and I have a 70D arriving soon - is it safe to assume that the Sensor Swab Type 2 would be the correct ones? Assuming since the Description just says Rebel and 60D in it... Thanks for the help and quick links!


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Yes, got a 32GB a Nexas 7 for $100. Works fine for all my needs and more. Battery life is ok, but could be better.
> 
> 
> 
> 2012 model I take it? I got myself a 32GB 2012 model about a month ago for £99
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think the battery life on mine is great, it's way better than my Nexus 4, which is the only thing I've really got to compare it to.
Click to expand...

Yep, I'm probably going to upgrade to the 2013 model and sell mine off to my G-ma lol.

Battery life is fine, but an ipad is better...but also much more $ and not android.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *werds*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Also - sensor swabs, can someone explain to me the difference between types? I see them listed as type 1, 2 etc on Amazon...
> 
> 
> 
> The sizes. Check the descriptions for which one is for your type of camera.
> 
> 1. http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/572769-REG/Photographic_Solutions_PE1C_Sensor_Swab_Plus_with.html
> 
> 2. http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/242758-REG/Photographic_Solutions_SS2BOX_Sensor_Swab_Type_2.html
> 3. http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=&sku=308405&Q=&is=REG&A=details
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Hmmm well my wife has a T5i and I have a 70D arriving soon - is it safe to assume that the Sensor Swab Type 2 would be the correct ones? Assuming since the Description just says Rebel and 60D in it... Thanks for the help and quick links!
Click to expand...

yep. Also, there is a new product out that looks interesting as well.

http://photographylife.com/product/sensor-gel-stick


----------



## Sean Webster

Hey guys, what is your take on this: http://fstoppers.com/the-color-run-counter-sues-college-photographer-after-he-asks-for-compensation-for-image

Believe it or not, Max is actually my buddy from my photoclub in this predicament.


----------



## werds

I view it as a for profit business trying to get away with not properly compensating someone. Then when caught and called out trying to get away with it by flexing their muscle. Then when called out by social media trying to take the wrong tact. Again MY OPINION ONLY, the demands that were made after the fact are reasonable if you take into account that the photographs appear to have been initially misused and appropriated with what appears to be an intent to circumvent copyright and a lack of good faith. I am more annoyed by the manner in which the response was written, by stating facts that don't directly impact the compensation portion but try to make it appear as if it does...

PURELY my opinion. I wish Max the best in his legal endeavors on this one. (I originally caught wind of this story on PetaPixel.com)


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *werds*
> 
> I view it as a for profit business trying to get away with not properly compensating someone. Then when caught and called out trying to get away with it by flexing their muscle. Then when called out by social media trying to take the wrong tact. Again MY OPINION ONLY, the demands that were made after the fact are reasonable if you take into account that the photographs appear to have been initially misused and appropriated with what appears to be an intent to circumvent copyright and a lack of good faith. I am more annoyed by the manner in which the response was written, by stating facts that don't directly impact the compensation portion but try to make it appear as if it does...
> 
> PURELY my opinion. I wish Max the best in his legal endeavors on this one. (I originally caught wind of this story on PetaPixel.com)


Yea, I agree. Wow, it was on there too, cool.  And from the court filings they are trying to sue him for $75,000+ for "all the extra business got has gotten" by advertising on facebook the shots he took during the event. So stupid.

edit: up to 3x that 75,000. Thus why he upped his initial asking price to 300k from 100k. Link: http://thecolorrunsuedme.wordpress.com/

Also, here is a pic of what ISO 102,400 looks like from my 6D if interested. For what it is, i have to say that that is pretty good. And i'm still waiting to get a reply from the seller on a receipt. Gaww, why cant he check his email?!?


----------



## 4LC4PON3

I just picked up my very first DSLR its a Nikon D3100. It came with an 18-55mm lense for $374. Then I noticed that bestbuy had a Nikon D3100 KIT that came with the Cam, A 18-55mm lense & a 55-200mm lense for $400 so I picked up the kit. Anyways im still learning the ins and outs of the cam & the best image qualities for me personal use with is my childrem, outdoor shots & pics of my rig



One pic of my rig


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *4LC4PON3*
> 
> I just picked up my very first DSLR its a Nikon D3100. It came with an 18-55mm lense for $374. Then I noticed that bestbuy had a Nikon D3100 KIT that came with the Cam, A 18-55mm lense & a 55-200mm lense for $400 so I picked up the kit. Anyways im still learning the ins and outs of the cam & the best image qualities for me personal use with is my childrem, outdoor shots & pics of my rig


Welcome to the Nikon army


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Yea, I agree. Wow, it was on there too, cool.  And from the court filings they are trying to sue him for $75,000+ for "all the extra business got has gotten" by advertising on facebook the shots he took during the event. So stupid.
> 
> edit: up to 3x that 75,000. Thus why he upped his initial asking price to 300k from 100k. Link: http://thecolorrunsuedme.wordpress.com/
> 
> Also, here is a pic of what ISO 102,400 looks like from my 6D if interested. For what it is, i have to say that that is pretty good. And i'm still waiting to get a reply from the seller on a receipt. Gaww, why cant he check his email?!?


I have got to get lightroom sometime soon. :/


----------



## 4LC4PON3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> Welcome to the Nikon army


Thanks. I have always wanted to step into DSLR but have always had decent phones with good quality cams so I never did. I felt it was time because in order to get quality images on my newest phone I had to have good room lighting. i have not put it down since i got it.


----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *4LC4PON3*
> 
> Thanks. I have always wanted to step into DSLR but have always had decent phones with good quality cams so I never did. I felt it was time because in order to get quality images on my newest phone I had to have good room lighting. i have not put it down since i got it.


Just a warning, you'll soon end up spending insane amounts on accessories.


----------



## mikeseth

*Update:*

mikeseth - Canon 60D + BG-E9 Grip
Tamron SP AF17-50mm F/2.8 XR Di II VC LD
Canon EF-S 18-200mm IS f/3.5-5.6 Kit
Canon 75-300mm IS f/4-5.6 III
Canon EF 24-80mm Modified MACRO
Hoya M42 HMC Zoom & Macro 100-300mm f/5
Canon Speedlight 430EX II
Rode Video Mic with Mount
VariZoom Shoulder Mount System for Video
2x Patriot LX 32GB Class 10 SDHC
2x Transcend 16gb Class 6 SDHC
LowePro Fastpack 350 Bag


----------



## werds

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> Yea, I agree. Wow, it was on there too, cool.  And from the court filings they are trying to sue him for $75,000+ for "all the extra business got has gotten" by advertising on facebook the shots he took during the event. So stupid.
> 
> edit: up to 3x that 75,000. Thus why he upped his initial asking price to 300k from 100k. Link: http://thecolorrunsuedme.wordpress.com/


PetaPixel says the saga has ended and they came to an agreement. http://petapixel.com/2014/02/14/color-run-sues-photog-demanding-payment-widely-distributed-photo/

Looks like social media helped take this one to the mat!

http://www.gofundme.com/thecolorrunsuedme

Also is updated saying a settlement was reached.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *werds*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> Yea, I agree. Wow, it was on there too, cool.  And from the court filings they are trying to sue him for $75,000+ for "all the extra business got has gotten" by advertising on facebook the shots he took during the event. So stupid.
> 
> edit: up to 3x that 75,000. Thus why he upped his initial asking price to 300k from 100k. Link: http://thecolorrunsuedme.wordpress.com/
> 
> 
> 
> PetaPixel says the saga has ended and they came to an agreement. http://petapixel.com/2014/02/14/color-run-sues-photog-demanding-payment-widely-distributed-photo/
> 
> Looks like social media helped take this one to the mat!
> 
> http://www.gofundme.com/thecolorrunsuedme
> 
> Also is updated saying a settlement was reached.
Click to expand...

yep, he told me today. Apparently there will be some donations to our photoclub and I get to choose what to buy us.


----------



## PCModderMike

Welp, sold my D3200....picking up a D7100.








Still sticking with DX just because I have so many lenses made for it.


----------



## golfergolfer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PCModderMike*
> 
> Welp, sold my D3200....picking up a D7100.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Still sticking with DX just because I have so many lenses made for it.


This is a decision you will not regret! The D7100 is so so amazing! Dont know if you bought it yet but is there rumors of a D7200 coming out?


----------



## PCModderMike

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *golfergolfer*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *PCModderMike*
> 
> Welp, sold my D3200....picking up a D7100.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Still sticking with DX just because I have so many lenses made for it.
> 
> 
> 
> This is a decision you will not regret! The D7100 is so so amazing! Dont know if you bought it yet but is there rumors of a D7200 coming out?
Click to expand...

I have been curious about that. With Nikon releasing the D3300 recently, and now even the D5300, I figured surely there must be something around the corner to replace the D7100. But I'm buying the D7100 used anyway...so even if the D7200 finally hit, it would be out of my budget.


----------



## golfergolfer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PCModderMike*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *golfergolfer*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *PCModderMike*
> 
> Welp, sold my D3200....picking up a D7100.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Still sticking with DX just because I have so many lenses made for it.
> 
> 
> 
> This is a decision you will not regret! The D7100 is so so amazing! Dont know if you bought it yet but is there rumors of a D7200 coming out?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I have been curious about that. With Nikon releasing the D3300 recently, and now even the D5300, I figured surely there must be something around the corner to replace the D7100. But I'm buying the D7100 used anyway...so even if the D7200 finally hit, it would be out of my budget.
Click to expand...

Did some digging found very little on it but there is going to be one coming, that said I would assume the only improvements are minor and not worth stressing out over. Im sure you will love the D7100 I know I love mine


----------



## Jixr

don't bother playing with the 'XXX will be out soon, they are always working on the next thing, buy what you can and go use it.


----------



## Sean Webster

You should wait for a D8000.


----------



## PCModderMike

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *golfergolfer*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *PCModderMike*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *golfergolfer*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *PCModderMike*
> 
> Welp, sold my D3200....picking up a D7100.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Still sticking with DX just because I have so many lenses made for it.
> 
> 
> 
> This is a decision you will not regret! The D7100 is so so amazing! Dont know if you bought it yet but is there rumors of a D7200 coming out?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I have been curious about that. With Nikon releasing the D3300 recently, and now even the D5300, I figured surely there must be something around the corner to replace the D7100. But I'm buying the D7100 used anyway...so even if the D7200 finally hit, it would be out of my budget.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Did some digging found very little on it but there is going to be one coming, that said I would assume the only improvements are minor and not worth stressing out over. Im sure you will love the D7100 I know I love mine
Click to expand...

Cool! I'm looking forward to it!
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> don't bother playing with the 'XXX will be out soon, they are always working on the next thing, buy what you can and go use it.


Agreed.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> You should wait for a D8000.


lolol


----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> don't bother playing with the 'XXX will be out soon, they are always working on the next thing, buy what you can and go use it.


That, and new releases are normally over-priced.


----------



## Jixr

Yeah, until i can either afford a full frame ( which will be never ) I'm just sticking with my t3i till I break it or canon finally releases a decent rebel model that isn't just a slight spec bump.


----------



## Conspiracy

when your t3i breaks just upgrade to an xxD model


----------



## Jixr

Pardon my ignorance here, but from what I can understand, there is not really any need for me to upgrade from lets say my t3i to a 60d.
( and the only reason I want a full frame is because I love wide angle, and don't want to spend $500 for a canon 10-20mm lens.

I don't need an fps increase, with decent light my AF is good enough on the t3i, I don't need a more durable body as my t3i has held up well and I take very good care to not drop it.

arn't the sensors nearly identical comparing a rebel with an XXD of the same generation?

Sure the fit and finish is better, but as far as IQ, is there much difference to warrant choosing the more expensive one over the other?

and the price of the 7d I'd just rather find a used 6d/5dmk2


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> Pardon my ignorance here, but from what I can understand, there is not really any need for me to upgrade from lets say my t3i to a 60d.
> ( and the only reason I want a full frame is because I love wide angle, and don't want to spend $500 for a canon 10-20mm lens.
> 
> I don't need an fps increase, with decent light my AF is good enough on the t3i, I don't need a more durable body as my t3i has held up well and I take very good care to not drop it.
> 
> arn't the sensors nearly identical comparing a rebel with an XXD of the same generation?
> 
> Sure the fit and finish is better, but as far as IQ, is there much difference to warrant choosing the more expensive one over the other?
> 
> and the price of the 7d I'd just rather find a used 6d/5dmk2


pretty much spot on i think. stick with your T3i


----------



## kbros

Canon Rebel XS for ~$100 locally, is it worth it? Also is it on par or better than my D70?


----------



## Jixr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> Canon Rebel XS for ~$100 locally, is it worth it? Also is it on par or better than my D70?


Cant hurt, the d70 is circa 2003 or so...


----------



## kbros

Lol well guess I'm not getting anything, some girl from my school wanted to buy my D50. I suspected it was the usual hipster type that just wanted better quality pictures of their lattes. But turns out she wanted video so that's a no go. I'd love to just sell the d50 and d70 with 18-70 and 50 manual for like 4-$500. Then grab something nice..


----------



## Scott1541

I'd like an 18-70


----------



## kbros

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> I'd like an 18-70


It's a DX AF-S. It has some dust though.


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> It's a DX AF-S. It has some dust though.


I've noticed that's a problem with quite a few of these lenses since they haven't been made for several years. If I could get a decent one for cheaps I probably would though. I don't like using the kit lens because you end up looking like every hipster (as mentioned above







) that's got a DSLR just because it's a DSLR.

Regardless I'll probably end up sticking with the 18-55 for a while yet, and then maybe getting a 16-85 or maybe 18-105, probably not an 18-70.


----------



## kbros

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> I've noticed that's a problem with quite a few of these lenses since they haven't been made for several years. If I could get a decent one for cheaps I probably would though. I don't like using the kit lens because you end up looking like every hipster (as mentioned above
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ) that's got a DSLR just because it's a DSLR.
> 
> Regardless I'll probably end up sticking with the 18-55 for a while yet, and then maybe getting a 16-85 or maybe 18-105, probably not an 18-70.


Yeah my cousin came over for dinner and he's interested in the D70 and kit lens. $200 sounds good to me. I'm surprised the 50 only has 1600 actuations!


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> Yeah my cousin came over for dinner and he's interested in the D70 and kit lens. $200 sounds good to me. I'm surprised the 50 only has 1600 actuations!


Wow, that isn't a lot for a camera that's probably about 8 years old







A D50 was the first DSLR I ever used, back in about 2006/7


----------



## kbros

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> Wow, that isn't a lot for a camera that's probably about 8 years old
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A D50 was the first DSLR I ever used, back in about 2006/7


Yeah I was so surprised, the d70 only has like 15k too.


----------



## Sean Webster

Just felt to share, here are some pics from my 6D at ISO 102,400. Noisey, but not really all that bad considering the sensitivity.


----------



## sub50hz

Holy noise.


----------



## golfergolfer

Its really noisy but imo it is actually a nice effect if you were going for a shot like that would have to be taken somewhere darker and not like the second picture but still nice I think !


----------



## Sean Webster

lol, yea...well at least there is almost no noise in images up to 3200 ISO. 6400 is usually even good. 

Anyone else a CPS member? I just got silver membership and I haven't sent in my 6D yet for repair, i seen I have some shipping labels...idk what to do with them lol. Are they prepaid labels?


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Anyone else a CPS member? I just got silver membership and I haven't sent in my 6D yet for repair, i seen I have some shipping labels...idk what to do with them lol. Are they prepaid labels?


The labels aren't prepaid. Only Platinum level gets prepaid shipping.

I think the labels are just to let the people receiving the shipments know what membership level you are for sorting purposes.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Anyone else a CPS member? I just got silver membership and I haven't sent in my 6D yet for repair, i seen I have some shipping labels...idk what to do with them lol. Are they prepaid labels?
> 
> 
> 
> The labels aren't prepaid. Only Platinum level gets prepaid shipping.
> 
> I think the labels are just to let the people receiving the shipments know what membership level you are for sorting purposes.
Click to expand...

thanks!


----------



## Mongol

I like the noise...lol. It has that "printed on an inkjet" look to it.


----------



## hokiealumnus

+1 to Mongol; it's noisy but it's 'clean' noise, for lack of a better word. It almost looks intentional, which for noise is a good thing. Color rendition doesn't look like it's affected and it gives a cool grainy texture.


----------



## PCModderMike

I think they look kinda cool....looks kind of like the pictures I take with my old film camera.


----------



## JKuhn

I'm looking for some advice buying an old film camera.

A socond-hand store has two Canon FTb cameras for R300 each, one has a Vivitar FD 28mm f/2.5 (I think it's 2.5), and the other has a Canon FD 50mm f/1.8. If I buy the one with the 50mm, would it be easy enough to open the lens and fix the aperture, and what would a reasonable price be?

I might also consider the other one if it has 58mm threads because the aperture ring would be handy for reversed lens macro, and there's also a bellows set (Pentax) with a bunch of filters. If there are a few that I won't use I might even make a coupling ring.

And Sean, I like those pictures you posted. The noise seems to fit well in the darker ones. Noise can sometimes be a great thing as long as it's clean.


----------



## Scott1541

Anyone have any experience using old M39/M42 lenses with a modern DSLR? I was just thinking about it yesterday as they may be a source of cheap(er) lenses (only really thinking about primes). I know I'd have to use them in fully manual mode without any metering, which I don't think would be too much of a problem since I don't really rely on metering wholly anyway.

I was just wondering other than this how well do they work, how is image quality compared to modern lenses?


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> Anyone have any experience using old M39/M42 lenses with a modern DSLR? I was just thinking about it yesterday as they may be a source of cheap(er) lenses (only really thinking about primes). I know I'd have to use them in fully manual mode without any metering, which I don't think would be too much of a problem since I don't really rely on metering wholly anyway.
> 
> I was just wondering other than this how well do they work, how is image quality compared to modern lenses?


How can you shoot without metering? Shoot, chimp, adjust, repeat? Somewhere along the line unless your doing the aforementioned process your using the meter.

You still have metering, you put the camera in AV mode, set your aperture and shoot away. One downside is that the lens is stopped down before you shoot. So shooting at narrow apertures can look very dim through the viewfinder.

Manual focus on some bodies can be tough. Some bodies have interchangeable focus screens that make manual focusing a lot easier.

As for quality it really depends. There are some gems but there are also a lot of duds. I had a few old lenses along the way and stopped down they were razor sharp. Wide open left something to be desired. Even using live view to focus there was never really a 'crisp' point like you see with modern lenses. That being said there are some very nice lenses out there and some are great wide open, you have to do some research and find what works.


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *silvrr*
> 
> How can you shoot without metering? Shoot, chimp, adjust, repeat? Somewhere along the line unless your doing the aforementioned process your using the meter.


I do a bit of both, it really depends on what I'm doing. If I was just walking around I'd just be lazy and use aperture priority. If I was out on photoshoot or at night I'd usually go fully manual, ignore the metering, have a guess at settings and adjust if they aren't right.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> I do a bit of both, it really depends on what I'm doing. If I was just walking around I'd just be lazy and use aperture priority. If I was out on photoshoot or at night I'd usually go fully manual, ignore the metering, have a guess at settings and adjust if they aren't right.


Buy a meter.


----------



## Eggs and bacon

Not a dlsr but I use a few older Pentax lenses on my xe1, some of them are fantastic and not too hard to use. You just have to do a little research on each lens you buy, some are truly terrible and some are brilliant.


----------



## JKuhn

I bought those Canons that I asked about, they were a lot cheaper than when I asked (R170 and R220 for the cameras, R350 for the bellows). Like I said, the 50mm f/1.8 has oil on the aperture (works though, I thought it didn't because I didn't know that the FD lock ring has to be rotated), and the camera on it has a small scratch on the mirror. Apart from that, they both seem to work fine. I also used the one with the 50/1.8 today so I'll soon see how the pictures are.

The bellows is a Pentax Bellows II, but it's adapted for Canon FD. Now I just need a few parts so I can adapt it for EF.









I'll also post some pictures of the stuff soon.


----------



## hokiealumnus

I have a nifty fifty on the way! Should be here Monday. I can't wait to play with my first prime, and with f/1.8.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

They're fun. I don't recommend using that lens at anything bleow f/4 outside.


----------



## Scott1541

I'm on the hunt for a 35mm f/1.8G now







Going to try and sell a couple of tele-zooms I don't use and a graphics card to get the monies then get one.


----------



## mikeseth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> Anyone have any experience using old M39/M42 lenses with a modern DSLR? I was just thinking about it yesterday as they may be a source of cheap(er) lenses (only really thinking about primes). I know I'd have to use them in fully manual mode without any metering, which I don't think would be too much of a problem since I don't really rely on metering wholly anyway.
> 
> I was just wondering other than this how well do they work, how is image quality compared to modern lenses?


I've got a Hoya M42 HMC Zoom & Macro 100-300mm f/5 connected up to a Canon 60D with a EOS-M42 Mount from eBay.

The lens is fully manual so you have to adjust focus and aperture manually. It definitely isn't a prime that you're looking for but, gives a general sense of usability for screw mount M42 lenses on modern DSLRs.

Still waiting on doing some real testing with the lens outside once the weather is nice. Might also pick up more M42 lenses from eBay as they go quite cheap compared to FD or even EOS mount.


----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> They're fun. I don't recommend using that lens at anything bleow f/4 outside.


Is it due to lighting that you don't recommend large apertures outside?


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JKuhn*
> 
> Is it due to lighting that you don't recommend large apertures outside?


You get a lot of purple fringing if you do. It's also sharper at f/4. Also, I run near my max shutter speed if I use f/1.8


----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> You get a lot of purple fringing if you do. It's also sharper at f/4. Also, I run near my max shutter speed if I use f/1.8


I just wondered because you specifically said outside. Makes sense though.


----------



## hokiealumnus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> You get a lot of purple fringing if you do. It's also sharper at f/4. Also, I run near my max shutter speed if I use f/1.8


Thanks for the tips. In theory the camera can compensate for fringing via the lens profile. The 70D's max shutter speed is 1/8000, so I should be OK. Part of the reason I wanted to try it was the thin DoF. Hopefully it won't disappoint.


----------



## Sean Webster

it can hard to edit out all the friging without it impacting your image some times in harsh contrast. play wit it at f/1.8 and f/2.0. you will learn how to use it easy enough.


----------



## werds

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> it can hard to edit out all the friging without it impacting your image some times in harsh contrast. play wit it at f/1.8 and f/2.0. you will learn how to use it easy enough.


I just finished spending my weekend playing with a Canon 50mm f/1.8 mk1 paired with a 70D and I am in LOVE with prime lenses now. Yea there are is an inherent change in how I go about composing and selecting shots because of the fixed focal length but I love the results. Most of the shots were taken in the f/2.0 to f/2.8 range with usually no flash needed (indoor birthday shots) I loved the results for the most part and am wondering why I waited a full year to purchase a prime lens, and am now really wondering why the hell Canon doesn't have more wide angle prime lenses at reasonable prices for those getting into their APS-C DSLR's. I would really love something around 20mm and 35mm specifically since the effective focal length seems magnified.


----------



## Jixr

so browsing around craigslist today and I found a 70-200 f4 L

I've rented one before and loved it, and I'm not really in the place to spend a bunch of cash right now, but I talked the owner down to $400 and picked it up, and its in flawless condition, got a lens hood too ( no bag or box, but thats fine )

The guy selling it got it as a gift, and he rarely used it and its been in a pelican case its whole life, and its in perfect condition, no wear at all, and I think I got a really good deal on it. Date code is 2012, so its pretty dang new in my book.

Really excited to try it out this week, and next weekend I got 2 paid shoots to do, so i'm looking forward to that.
( big deal for me )

What do you guys think? I Feel like I got a really good deal on the price.
http://s1329.photobucket.com/user/ClaytonGFinley/media/IMG_9213_zps3a2a06b8.jpg.html
( sorry for such a crap photo in a photo thread )

I have a 17-40, a 50mm 1.8, and 70-200, so I'm pretty much set for focal lengths. I'd eventually like to upgrade my 50 1.8 for a mk1 or a 50 1.4.

Though now I do need to get a bigger bag, something that can carry my stuff and my ipad and keyboard would be pretty sweet.

and can someone smarter than me explain how the macro switch thing works? and is there any reason why I wouldn't want to leave it in the close up mode?


----------



## Jixr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *werds*
> 
> wondering why the hell Canon doesn't have more wide angle prime lenses at reasonable prices for those getting into their APS-C DSLR's


yeah, as far as cost goes, the 50mm is about $100, the 40mm is $150, and the next cheapest prime is in the $300+ range.

I would love a wide prime, but I'm not dropping $500 or so for one of the 24( twenty something anyway ) primes.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Totally agree. Kinda makes me want an FF.


----------



## Mwarren

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> so browsing around craigslist today and I found a 70-200 f4 L
> 
> I've rented one before and loved it, and I'm not really in the place to spend a bunch of cash right now, but I talked the owner down to $400 and picked it up, and its in flawless condition, got a lens hood too ( no bag or box, but thats fine )
> 
> The guy selling it got it as a gift, and he rarely used it and its been in a pelican case its whole life, and its in perfect condition, no wear at all, and I think I got a really good deal on it. Date code is 2012, so its pretty dang new in my book.
> 
> Really excited to try it out this week, and next weekend I got 2 paid shoots to do, so i'm looking forward to that.
> ( big deal for me )
> 
> What do you guys think? I Feel like I got a really good deal on the price.
> http://s1329.photobucket.com/user/ClaytonGFinley/media/IMG_9213_zps3a2a06b8.jpg.html
> ( sorry for such a crap photo in a photo thread )
> 
> I have a 17-40, a 50mm 1.8, and 70-200, so I'm pretty much set for focal lengths. I'd eventually like to upgrade my 50 1.8 for a mk1 or a 50 1.4.
> 
> Though now I do need to get a bigger bag, something that can carry my stuff and my ipad and keyboard would be pretty sweet.
> 
> and can someone smarter than me explain how the macro switch thing works? and is there any reason why I wouldn't want to leave it in the close up mode?


I would have saved up for the IS version or the Sigma F2.8 version. I'm not trying to downplay your purchase but it's only a stop faster than the 55-250 and the 55-250 has IS and is only $120 or so.

70-200 is a long focal length range to play with without the use of IS with the lens being F4 (only a stop faster than the 55-250 IS). If I were you I would resell it for a higher price and save up for a 2.8 70-200 zoom with or without IS. 2.8 to 5.6 is a big jump in speed and the ability to isolate your subject. (gives you more creative control.)

I found the 50 1.8 to be a joke of a lens personally. I used it on my 40D and the AF on that lens was horrendous so I had to use it as a MF lens in which I had success using it.

I had 2 copies of the lens as well and an 85 1.8 to compare it's AF with.


----------



## Mwarren

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> yeah, as far as cost goes, the 50mm is about $100, the 40mm is $150, and the next cheapest prime is in the $300+ range.
> 
> I would love a wide prime, but I'm not dropping $500 or so for one of the 24( twenty something anyway ) primes.


The Rokinon 14mm 2.8 is only $300 and is a hell of a lens from what I've seen/heard.

It's MF only but MF is way better than letting the camera take control in my experience unless you're shooting very fast paced events.


----------



## Conspiracy

the wider and the longer you go expect lenses to get more expensive unless you go 3rd party brands


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mwarren*
> 
> I would have saved up for the IS version or the Sigma F2.8 version. I'm not trying to downplay your purchase but it's only a stop faster than the 55-250 and the 55-250 has IS and is only $120 or so.
> 
> 70-200 is a long focal length range to play with without the use of IS with the lens being F4 (only a stop faster than the 55-250 IS). If I were you I would resell it for a higher price and save up for a 2.8 70-200 zoom with or without IS. 2.8 to 5.6 is a big jump in speed and the ability to isolate your subject. (gives you more creative control.)
> 
> I found the 50 1.8 to be a joke of a lens personally. I used it on my 40D and the AF on that lens was horrendous so I had to use it as a MF lens in which I had success using it.
> 
> I had 2 copies of the lens as well and an 85 1.8 to compare it's AF with.


The image quality on the 70-200 vs the 55-250 IS is pretty significant though, and for $400 I'd say he got a pretty good deal. In terms of flipping it to move up to the 2.8, I don't see it being worth the effort. If anything, I don't see him clearing more than $50-$100 on the flip, and finding a reasonably priced 70-200 f/2.8 non-IS is becoming harder due to the fact that they were discontinued. Plus, the amount of isolation he'd get for the one stop increase from f/4 to f/2.8 isn't really worth the effort (I actually needed the extra stop of light because of indoor event shooting with the occasional restriction of no flash).


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mwarren*
> 
> I would have saved up for the IS version or the Sigma F2.8 version. I'm not trying to downplay your purchase but it's only a stop faster than the 55-250 and the 55-250 has IS and is only $120 or so.
> 
> 70-200 is a long focal length range to play with without the use of IS with the lens being F4 (only a stop faster than the 55-250 IS). If I were you I would resell it for a higher price and save up for a 2.8 70-200 zoom with or without IS. 2.8 to 5.6 is a big jump in speed and the ability to isolate your subject. (gives you more creative control.)


I don't see how anyone can give a recommendation on a lens, much less on someone just bought, without knowing how and where they will be shooting it. The f2.8/f4 and IS choice is really dependent on available light or light source for the task.

As someone who has owned all but one of the 70-200 variants and rented the other twice I can say that each has an application. If I currently owned each I would without a doubt use one over the other depending on the task I was going to shoot.


----------



## Jixr

nah, the 70-200 f4 is just fine for me for several reasons

Primarily this lens will be used for daytime activites, with the local racetrack, all the kids in my family's sports stuff, I don't really think i'll ever be at a point that I would NEED 2.8 instead of 4. Though I do see them semi-often on the local CL, but I don't think I'd find one in as good of shape as mine is. ( and indoors, i've learned to use my 17-40 f4 just fine, so it should be fine for me )

and as far as stability issues, I managed pretty well with it when I was watching the F1 race out here in November, in proper daylight I just cranked up the shutter speed and I got really nice images even at 200mm, and was handheld the whole time because I was unsure if the track would allow monopods or not.

IS would be nice, but the price of that lens isn't there for me, i'm pretty low budget, and $400 is a lot for me to drop on a lens, for the price of a 2.8 or f4 IS, its a bit too much for me, and the cost to use would be pretty unbalanced.

And for what I paid, if I ever sold it I probably could get my money back pretty easily I think, in my area I've not seen one sell so low for one being in such good shape. typically people ask $500+ for them, as photography is big in my area and used items hold their value pretty well here.

and as far as the 50 1.8, its a great cheapo lens, one that i'm not afraid to pop open and clean when it needs it, and eventually i'll get a 50 1.4.

And while the 55-250 is pretty cheap, the IS on it is pretty poor, the AF speed is terrible, and picture quality can be poor as well. build quality is important to me. Id rather have something that will last as long as I take care of it.

I also really was considering the 70(75?)-300 IS as well, I've used it before, but I don't think I'd ever need the 2-300mm range, and the used prices are about what I paid for the 70-200.

Pretty much the same reasoning why I went with my 17-40 f4L instead of the sigma 17-50 2.8 VC at the same price. ( and while the sigma is arguably better IQ ) AF speeds, Build quality, and fit and finish of the lens is very important to me, as well as potentially stepping up to a FF later on.

Also, as i'm no pro, re sell value isa good thing to keep in mind, people find that red ring very desireable when looking at lens's, after all its what the pro's use.









Today after work I'm going to hike up to the highest point of the city, and set p for some skyline shots of Downtown off in the distance. Its a bit cloudy and 'meh' outside, but I'm excited to run it through its paces.
I need a new bag too, so maybe swing by the camera shop on my lunch break. ( its great to live in a city where one of the largest camera shops in the state, frys, and sporting events are all 10mins away from my house )


----------



## JKuhn

I don't really consider IS to be that important at medium telephoto lengths. I know different people will have different results, but I find it easy enough to get sharp photos at 300mm and 1/120 (or even slower). It is a light lens though and I'm sure I won't have the same results with heavy glass.


----------



## JKuhn

I said I'll post some pictures of the Canon FTb's, so here they are. Sorry about the poor quality pictures, I don't have great lighting at the moment.







EDIT: I suspected that the two cameras are different revisions, and a quick lookup on Wikipedia confirmed the one with the 50mm f/1.8 is a FTb-N.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

I don't ever recall the AF being slow on my 55-250 in good light.


----------



## Jixr

what are you guy's thoughts on camera bags, I want a backpack style that can fit all my gear, as well as an ipad slot, but it seems every camera bag is $100+ and they look cheaper than bags I had while in school, and probably didn't cost more than $20 to make.

Currently I just use a military surplus messenger bag thing, but it doesn't hold all my stuff and minimal protection, but its cheap, its lasted forever, and up until recently, its held all my stuff. ( but now i've got flashes, lens's, my ipad, and keyboard and chargers, filters, etc. )

I'd really like a bag that carried my cam and ipad without looking like a photographers bag, but even lowpro and bower branded bags are expensive.

are there any good sites for knock off bags or anthing like that?


----------



## Sean Webster

U can get foam inserts for our current bag


----------



## werds

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *werds*
> 
> wondering why the hell Canon doesn't have more wide angle prime lenses at reasonable prices for those getting into their APS-C DSLR's
> 
> 
> 
> yeah, as far as cost goes, the 50mm is about $100, the 40mm is $150, and the next cheapest prime is in the $300+ range.
> 
> I would love a wide prime, but I'm not dropping $500 or so for one of the 24( twenty something anyway ) primes.
Click to expand...

Did some looking and found a Quantaray24mm f2.8 TECH-10 EF lens for $80, google seems to say it is a rebranded Sigma 24mm f/2.8 Super-Wide. I hope it doesn't have any problems with my Canon 70D but figured for the price I could take a leap on it. If it pans out as decent at least I can have a budget wide angle until I have more money - and more importantly it can also mount on a full frame. Aslo was looking at some old Canon 135mm prime lenses... at the price points I am tempted to snag one and test it out when the circus comes to town next month or at my daughters dance recitals where it is pitch black in the audience... might be decent low budget lens to fill out my primes... then if these work out the next thing I'll be looking for are 35mm and 85mm cheap primes too lol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> what are you guy's thoughts on camera bags, I want a backpack style that can fit all my gear, as well as an ipad slot, but it seems every camera bag is $100+ and they look cheaper than bags I had while in school, and probably didn't cost more than $20 to make.
> 
> Currently I just use a military surplus messenger bag thing, but it doesn't hold all my stuff and minimal protection, but its cheap, its lasted forever, and up until recently, its held all my stuff. ( but now i've got flashes, lens's, my ipad, and keyboard and chargers, filters, etc. )
> 
> I'd really like a bag that carried my cam and ipad without looking like a photographers bag, but even lowpro and bower branded bags are expensive.
> 
> are there any good sites for knock off bags or anthing like that?


I know this may be higher up in price range than you want... but I think Amazon Basics sells similar style knockoffs. Case Logic SLRC-206 SLR Camera and 15.4-Inch Laptop Backpack Also note - the current price is not what I paid for it, I bought mines last year at $49. I love it, it is comfortable and not necessarily looking like a camera bag itself. very well padded too, although some people prefer single arm sling backpacks I like this one in general and it only has minor nitpicks. I took some shots of mines with most of the gear it has in it with a little point and shoot just to show it's utility.

http://1drv.ms/1dqUWcc

Pictures in order

1. Backside showing the padding and if you notice the straps have little velcro things on them so they stay rolled up neatly

2. The bag has a giant padded laptop zipper compartment

3. Frontside of bag - in reality it doesnt look so pregnant it's just the angle of the shot, but notice that it doesnt scream camera bag, and also the little velcro strips halfway down the zipper so that you can open it half flap real easily

4. One of the side zippers, I keep a little flashlight, the shutter remote, lens cloth, and spare usb cable here.

5. Front pocket has a good bit of space and bumps out a little from the body of the bag.

6. another shot of the little halfway velcro strips that allow you to easily reach a camera in the top compartment without opening the whole bag accidentally.

7. Up top is my wifes T5i with 18-135mm stm lens mounted. This compartment is very well padded, the sling is nice but tears up too easily... or at least my wife tore it up easily so who knows, either way the padding is THICK up there.

8. The main compartment opened all the way notice it has roojm for several lenses a second camera and many other accessories. The padded dividers have velcro on the sides and are easily movable.

9 small compartments in the main area flap and again showing the padding there.

10. The bottom of the bag is a solid plastic piece, makes it less likely for moisture to seep in when it is set down and also makes it easy to stand the bag up without it falling.


----------



## hokiealumnus

A new tool to use with the 70D arrived today! It's used and has obviously been well loved, but it works and that's what counts.










The nifty fifty is my first fast prime lens. Already, I love, love, love the bokehlicious backgrounds. Can't wait to have time to play with it more!










The depth of field flexibility is crazy. Here's a (very) quick test:

f/6.3










f/1.8










What fun lies ahead!


----------



## Jixr

real easy to pop open and clean if it gets dusty.

Pretty much before every paid shoot that i know i'm going to use it I pop it open and clean it.


----------



## Mwarren

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> nah, the 70-200 f4 is just fine for me for several reasons
> 
> Primarily this lens will be used for daytime activites, with the local racetrack, all the kids in my family's sports stuff, I don't really think i'll ever be at a point that I would NEED 2.8 instead of 4. Though I do see them semi-often on the local CL, but I don't think I'd find one in as good of shape as mine is. ( and indoors, i've learned to use my 17-40 f4 just fine, so it should be fine for me )
> 
> and as far as stability issues, I managed pretty well with it when I was watching the F1 race out here in November, in proper daylight I just cranked up the shutter speed and I got really nice images even at 200mm, and was handheld the whole time because I was unsure if the track would allow monopods or not.
> 
> IS would be nice, but the price of that lens isn't there for me, i'm pretty low budget, and $400 is a lot for me to drop on a lens, for the price of a 2.8 or f4 IS, its a bit too much for me, and the cost to use would be pretty unbalanced.
> 
> And for what I paid, if I ever sold it I probably could get my money back pretty easily I think, in my area I've not seen one sell so low for one being in such good shape. typically people ask $500+ for them, as photography is big in my area and used items hold their value pretty well here.
> 
> and as far as the 50 1.8, its a great cheapo lens, one that i'm not afraid to pop open and clean when it needs it, and eventually i'll get a 50 1.4.
> 
> And while the 55-250 is pretty cheap, the IS on it is pretty poor, the AF speed is terrible, and picture quality can be poor as well. build quality is important to me. Id rather have something that will last as long as I take care of it.
> 
> I also really was considering the 70(75?)-300 IS as well, I've used it before, but I don't think I'd ever need the 2-300mm range, and the used prices are about what I paid for the 70-200.
> 
> Pretty much the same reasoning why I went with my 17-40 f4L instead of the sigma 17-50 2.8 VC at the same price. ( and while the sigma is arguably better IQ ) AF speeds, Build quality, and fit and finish of the lens is very important to me, as well as potentially stepping up to a FF later on.
> 
> Also, as i'm no pro, re sell value isa good thing to keep in mind, people find that red ring very desireable when looking at lens's, after all its what the pro's use.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Today after work I'm going to hike up to the highest point of the city, and set p for some skyline shots of Downtown off in the distance. Its a bit cloudy and 'meh' outside, but I'm excited to run it through its paces.
> I need a new bag too, so maybe swing by the camera shop on my lunch break. ( its great to live in a city where one of the largest camera shops in the state, frys, and sporting events are all 10mins away from my house )


Believe it or not the 55-250 has a better IS system than the 70-200 series lenses. The 55-250 has 4 stop IS vs the 3 stop IS found in 55-250.

55-250 image quality is fine for a zoom lens.

The 70-200 F4 would make a lot more sense on Full Frame though.

70-200 F4 without IS on crop body just seems like a waste to me I guess because the lens right below it is the 55-250 which can be bought for $120.

I'd rather get the Tamron 70-200 2.8 or Sigma 70-200 2.8 OS used instead.

70-200 F4 no IS makes even less sense to me on crop body as you will need to use very high shutter speeds to account for not having IS and the lens being F4.

If I was shooting outdoor sports on crop body I'd probably go with the 85 1.8 or 100 2.0. You'd gain two stops of speed which means a lower iso of 2 stops can be used which can be a drastic difference on crop body (like iso 400 vs iso 1600).

To each their own though have fun with your lens!


----------



## Sean Webster

I can tell you that you IS is not needed when shooting sports. You usually need at least 1/400th of a second minimum. And depending on which sport, a 85 or a 100 isn't going to cut it on crop. I got a 70-200 f/2.8 for sports and portraits.

Here are some conclusions on ranges for crop body lens lengths and apertures need for sports while I've shot at my uni over the last year.

Basketball: 40-50mm @ f/2.0-f/2.8 - 1/500th - @ISO 2000 & f/2.0 @4000 & f/2.8

Baseball: 70-400mm @f/2.8-f/4 - 1/500th - Can need up to ISO 6400 at dusk/night @f/4

Football: 150-400mm @f/2.8-f/4 - 1/500th - Can need up to ISO 6400 at dusk/night @f/4

Swimming: 70-300mm @f/2.8-f/4 - 1/500th - Can need up to ISO 6400 at dusk/night @f/4

I haven't shot track and field or volleyball yet tho.

On another note, i just went back through my images from a few years ago to see what i did with my 50 f/1.8...I now remember why I sold it. CA and focus issues for days lol.


----------



## werds

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> I can tell you that you IS is not needed when shooting sports. You usually need at least 1/400th of a second minimum. And depending on which sport, a 85 or a 100 isn't going to cut it on crop. I got a 70-200 f/2.8 for sports and portraits.
> 
> Here are some conclusions on ranges for crop body lens lengths and apertures need for sports while I've shot at my uni over the last year.
> 
> Basketball: 40-50mm @ f/2.0-f/2.8 - 1/500th - @ISO 2000 & f/2.0 @4000 & f/2.8
> 
> Baseball: 70-400mm @f/2.8-f/4 - 1/500th - Can need up to ISO 6400 at dusk/night @f/4
> 
> Football: 150-400mm @f/2.8-f/4 - 1/500th - Can need up to ISO 6400 at dusk/night @f/4
> 
> Swimming: 70-300mm @f/2.8-f/4 - 1/500th - Can need up to ISO 6400 at dusk/night @f/4
> 
> I haven't shot track and field or volleyball yet tho.


As a beginner I am just now starting to see what you mean about IS not being needed. I have noticed that at longer focal lengths I am either shooting on a tripod already anyways or if shooting action the shutter speed is pretty high, plus I am slowly strengthening those muscles and notice I get less shake than I used to and can hold the camera still longer over time. BTW I see you mention using a 70-200mm f/2.8 for sports but list longer focal lengths for the specific sports. Are you stating effective length based on what it acts like on APS-C or are you stating that you tend to use a different lens with that added length? I am also assuming (without looking at reviews) that for these focal lengths Canon is your preferred glass or have you seen results on 3rd party that you think fair favorably? Also is your choice of ISO on the recent camera that you love the ISO results in low light or is this a rule of thumb you have been applying even prior to your latest body?


----------



## hokiealumnus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> real easy to pop open and clean if it gets dusty.
> 
> Pretty much before every paid shoot that i know i'm going to use it I pop it open and clean it.


This one is currently on loan (with option to buy), so I'm not comfortable trying that. It's encouraging that such a thing is possible though, in the event I keep it. There is indeed some dust in the inner elements. I tried a quick search (real quick) and didn't get very far, do you have a link showing how to do that by chance?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> On another note, i just went back through my images from a few years ago to see what i did with my 50 f/1.8...I now remember why I sold it. CA and focus issues for days lol.


That's the beauty of it...try before I buy.


----------



## Scott1541

I'm hoping to buy my 35mm 1.8 some time either this week or next week









Need to get a phone sold first though, then I'll see what kind of part ex I can get for my old lenses I want to get rid of. If the price isn't good enough I'll have to resort to ebay


----------



## PCModderMike

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> I'm hoping to buy my 35mm 1.8 some time either this week or next week
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Need to get a phone sold first though, then I'll see what kind of part ex I can get for my old lenses I want to get rid of. If the price isn't good enough I'll have to resort to ebay


The 35 1.8 is still my favorite go to lens. It's the only lens I've used so far since I got my D7100 Saturday...loving the combo.


----------



## JKuhn

I finally got the CD with the photos from my film camera (first they had issues with the scanner, and then they burned the wrong photos), but now I have a problem. The photos are extremely noisy (I'd say equivalent to around ISO 3200 on my EOS 1100D), even though the film was ISO 200. Can it be the camera, or is it likely the fact that the film expired in 2007? The shop said it might come out a bit dull and that it shouldn't be a problem though. I suppose I can pop one of my new films in and test it, but film is a bit expensive to develop. For what it's worth, I shot it with the FTb-N, a 50mm f/1.8 SC (6 aperture blades), and a polarizing filter.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *werds*
> 
> As a beginner I am just now starting to see what you mean about IS not being needed. I have noticed that at longer focal lengths I am either shooting on a tripod already anyways or if shooting action the shutter speed is pretty high, plus I am slowly strengthening those muscles and notice I get less shake than I used to and can hold the camera still longer over time. BTW I see you mention using a 70-200mm f/2.8 for sports but list longer focal lengths for the specific sports. Are you stating effective length based on what it acts like on APS-C or are you stating that you tend to use a different lens with that added length?


I'm saying when I use a crop body camera, those are the mm lens lengths that are applicable to the sport. More so, what I like using and would suggest someone use. I use a 100-300mm sigma f/4 sometimes when my friend doesn't.

if I used a ff you would want even longer lengths.
Quote:


> I am also assuming (without looking at reviews) that for these focal lengths Canon is your preferred glass or have you seen results on 3rd party that you think fair favorably?


I like having canon, but if other brands are better then I'd go to them. It just depends on what the best bang for the $ is for me.
Quote:


> Also is your choice of ISO on the recent camera that you love the ISO results in low light or is this a rule of thumb you have been applying even prior to your latest body?


I use my 6D for basketball and 60D for everything else. Those isos are just the ones that you can get to using when shooting sports at night with the stadium and field light at the respective shutter and f-stop. Personally I don't like over Iso 640 on my 60D and I don't like over 6400 for my 6D.


----------



## MistaBernie

Yeah, it is pretty freakin sweet to be able to shoot 3200+ iso without having to do noise reduction for sports/event coverage (though I still do it because, well, derp.)


----------



## MistaBernie

Interesting tidbit about a potential business change for Canon (potentially dropping the $200 & under point and shoot market).

Personally, I've been saying they should do this for about the last two years (and that they don't need the toned down versions of their Rebel lines like T5 vs T5i, etc).

http://www.canonrumors.com/2014/02/canon-to-leave-the-entry-level-point-shoot-market/


----------



## Jixr

Arnt most of their cheap-o's just rebranded sonys anyway?

Its a good move, smartphones own the market, and its really not until you get in the entry dslr or high end compact market do yo start to see better results than you get from most new high end phones.

Though its interesting they released the T5 ( non-i ) which is basically a t3i senor in a t3 body.

Sadly, there is no reason to jump from my t3i anytime soon, as I am starting to get into the realm where I would like a little more features, but the t5i is money out the window, and the X0d's are money I don't yet have.


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> real easy to pop open and clean if it gets dusty.
> 
> Pretty much before every paid shoot that i know i'm going to use it I pop it open and clean it.


It really isn't necessary do that. Dust won't show up or affect IQ. Unless you have a huge speck near the rear elements. At the front elements it won't even matter.

There was an article showing how they smashed up the front element and while there was some IQ degradation and lowered contrast you could still shoot with it.

Also, IS isn't really necessary for sports. Motorsports it can come in handy, but it comes down how good your are with panning. A monopod always helps as well. lol


----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JKuhn*
> 
> I finally got the CD with the photos from my film camera (first they had issues with the scanner, and then they burned the wrong photos), but now I have a problem. The photos are extremely noisy (I'd say equivalent to around ISO 3200 on my EOS 1100D), even though the film was ISO 200. Can it be the camera, or is it likely the fact that the film expired in 2007? The shop said it might come out a bit dull and that it shouldn't be a problem though. I suppose I can pop one of my new films in and test it, but film is a bit expensive to develop. For what it's worth, I shot it with the FTb-N, a 50mm f/1.8 SC (6 aperture blades), and a polarizing filter.


Update:

I did some reading, and while I couldn't find an answer to the problem, I did find something that I think might be relevant. The film I used is Kodak ColorPlus (the new ones I have here are labelled as C-41 and it seems they don't last very long). I also saw a few comments about C-41 having noise issues but it wasn't specific enough.


----------



## Jixr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aksthem1*
> 
> It really isn't necessary do that.


it make me feel special okay, leave me alone... ( and I like taking things apart )


----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> it make me feel special okay, leave me alone... ( and *I like taking things apart* )


Who doesn't?


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> and I like taking things apart


Me too.
I have a torn apart 17-85 sitting on my desk with a broken flex cable. Just waiting for the whole shutter assembly to arrive. Soldering iron slipped when removing the old flex cable and got a really small amount of solder on the aperture blades.


----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aksthem1*
> 
> Me too.
> I have a torn apart 17-85 sitting on my desk with a broken flex cable. Just waiting for the whole shutter assembly to arrive. Soldering iron slipped when removing the old flex cable and *got a really small amount of solder on the aperture blades*.


That sucks. Is it possible to remove it with a solder sucker? Or will it still be unusable?


----------



## aksthem1

It singed one of the blades after removing it with curved tweezers. I really didn't want to bother with it after that. The pins pulled up too when desoldering. I read that it's normal, but it makes me feel like I won't be making proper contact.


----------



## JKuhn

Since you people obviously like tearing lenses apart, should I open a Canon FD lens at the front or back to clean the aperture blades? My 50mm SC has a bit of oil on the blades. It doesn't seem to affect the performance though but I'd prefer to get it clean anyway.


----------



## Jixr

no one here said its a good idea, I just wanna see what the insides look like is all.

I once attempted to take apart a 17-55 2.8, that had a blob of grease from the zoom slide fall on the IS lens...

didn't go too well....


----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> no one here said its a good idea, I just wanna see what the insides look like is all.
> 
> I once attempted to take apart a 17-55 2.8, that had a blob of grease from the zoom slide fall on the IS lens...
> 
> didn't go too well....


So it would be better to just leave the lens as it is?


----------



## Jixr

probably, unless you're doing it for the lulz

and you'd want to take it apart from the back i'd imagine.


----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> probably, unless you're doing it for the lulz
> 
> and you'd want to take it apart from the back i'd imagine.


Ok. Thanks.


----------



## mz-n10

unless the aperture isnt closing dont bother ripping it apart.

but if u had to, the 50 is easy to rip apart, the only "hard" part is putting all the blades back together in the iris assembly and dropping the whole thing back into the lens.


----------



## hokiealumnus

Yea, I think I'll not rip it apart.









Thought I'd post this here too. Most of the guys that post in here already know it, but for those that don't maybe it can be useful in some small way. I was doing some testing today (unrelated center-point supposed 'issue' on the 70D with lenses faster than f/2.8 -see here- that doesn't really exist) and decided to actually make an example collage of what aperture really does to depth of field. f/1.8 is paper thin, especially at 50 mm (and above); in the example below it doesn't even get the full center crayon in focus. Most 'kit' lenses get to ~f/5.0-f/5.6 at 50 mm, so that was my next stop (heh, stop...get it?). Then I went to f/8 and f/11.

Remember though, everything is a trade-off when it comes to aperture, shutter speed & ISO. Larger apertures have thinner DoF, but let in a LOT more light. To show this as well, I set ISO manually and let the camera choose shutter speed. You can see just how much of a difference the apertures make without letting the camera raise the ISO.









Here is a full size version (warning, it's ~3MB).


----------



## Scott1541

Got it











It cost me a little more than I wanted to pay though since the lenses I was trying to part ex had problems (which I did know, they didn't make it up) and ended up knocking the value down. I didn't want the hassle of selling them on ebay so I just accepted it and paid a little more.


----------



## kbros

After about a week of "drying" my d70 is still very tacky. I understand now that it was a horrible idea to try to clean a rubber grip with alcohol, are there any other solutions to restore it to its original condition? The stickiness drives me so crazy that I'm about to just buy a replacement grip.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

.


----------



## jameyscott

Just got my lens today to for my T3i that I just picked up! I honestly have no clue what I'm doing but I saw a great deal on ebay and couldn't pass it up. Still learning the ins and outs of it, but I think I've got some of the basics down. My cat decided to strike a pose for me.


----------



## Curleyyy

Was messing around earlier and found something that I can't seem to figure out, or find information on the web about. When manually focusing to the left, I get purple fringing, and when manually focusing to the right, I get green fringing. I only see this fringing when I'm either over/under focused. Using the Canon 50mm f/1.8. Just wondering if there's a reason for this, and if it's common.


----------



## Jixr

Quote:


> Was messing around earlier and found something that I can't seem to figure out, or find information on the web about. When manually focusing to the left, I get purple fringing, and when manually focusing to the right, I get green fringing. I only see this fringing when I'm either over/under focused. Using the Canon 50mm f/1.8. Just wondering if there's a reason for this, and if it's common.


if your avatar is relevant, stop taking selfies and dye your hair a normal color?









jk, isn't it something to do with the waves of light, red is a faster color and blue is a slower, things coming at you have a very slight red color while things traveling away from you look blue. ( think of how some stars look red and some look blue )


----------



## MistaBernie

It's chromatic abberation, info found here.


----------



## Sean Webster

its normal, you can get mad CA with the nifty fifty.


----------



## Jixr

boo! i've had my 70-200 for a few days and i've not properly used it yet. its been cold, rainy and its always dark when I get home from work. Cant wait till the stupid time changes, and I'm gonna change my schedule from 8-5 to 7-4, lots of daylight to go play!

Though this weekend I'm gong to put it to use, got some baby photos and one of my familys little people's basket ball games, though he's 3, so action shots will be limited lol.


----------



## funfortehfun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> jk, isn't it something to do with the waves of light, red is a faster color and blue is a slower, things coming at you have a very slight red color while things traveling away from you look blue. ( think of how some stars look red and some look blue )


The effect you're describing is the Doppler Effect, especially when applied at astronomical distances between stars and the like.

Also, is $1K for a used D600 a good deal? Nikon made a statement recently about replacing all D600 shutters (whether under warranty or not) for free, so I'm thinking about doing just that.


----------



## Jixr

yeah, I just couldn't remember the correct name, but basically isn't it the same effect as abrasion? ( light wavelenghts and what not )


----------



## Eggs and bacon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> yeah, I just couldn't remember the correct name, but basically isn't it the same effect as abrasion? ( light wavelenghts and what not )


One relates the the relative speeds of different objects over huge distances, and the other refers to the failure of a lens to focus all wavelengths of color on the same point.


----------



## Mwarren

Used a friends 5Dc for the first time today.

I don't know how I can go back to crop body after using it........it's so silky smooth, it's the difference between wearing silk vs cotton (crop body).

Even iso 3200 looked excellent and doesn't have that digital noise look.


----------



## Jixr

the original 5d? i've been wondering if those are still relevant, and would be worth using over a entry rebel. I see them all the time for sale.


----------



## Mwarren

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> the original 5d? i've been wondering if those are still relevant, and would be worth using over a entry rebel. I see them all the time for sale.


Once you go Full Frame you can't go back.

The original 5D is called classic for a reason. A lot of people prefer it over the newer 5D's because in my opinion it has the perfect amount of Megapixels and is a photographers camera (no video, audio, or long winded menus).

It's a very simple barebones camera that is capable of creating amazing pieces of art in the right hands.

I currently use a 40D which is a step up from the rebel and I can say that the 5D blows it away even when both are at iso 100.

The fact that you can use cheap legacy lenses on it that are on par if not better than today's Canon L lenses makes it even sweeter.


----------



## PCModderMike

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *funfortehfun*
> 
> The effect you're describing is the Doppler Effect, especially when applied at astronomical distances between stars and the like.
> 
> Also, is $1K for a used D600 a good deal? Nikon made a statement recently about replacing all D600 shutters (whether under warranty or not) for free, so I'm thinking about doing just that.


That sounds like a heck of a deal to me. The D600 still goes for around $1500 brand new. I would go for it, and just as you're planning, send it into Nikon for that free shutter replacement.


----------



## sub50hz

I have totally lost faith in Nikon as a company with the whole D600 debacle. All my Nikon gear will be in the classifieds this weekend.


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> All my Nikon gear will be in the classifieds this weekend.


aww


----------



## JKuhn

It seems I have yet another question for you people (I solved the previous one, it seems to have been the film).

While I won't be able to afford it for a few months, I can get a new Sigma 150-500mm f/5-6.3 OS HSM APO or a second-hand Canon 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L for around R12 500. Assuming one of them is a reasonable upgrade from my Sigma 170-500mm f/5-6.3 APO, which one would be the best option? I like the idea of buying L glass instead, but I'm not sure if the reduced focal length (640mm instead of 800mm effective length) will be too much of a problem. I also know the Canon sucks air and therefore dust in when you zoom, but will it be a serious problem?


----------



## Jixr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mwarren*
> 
> Once you go Full Frame you can't go back.
> 
> The original 5D is called classic for a reason. A lot of people prefer it over the newer 5D's because in my opinion it has the perfect amount of Megapixels and is a photographers camera (no video, audio, or long winded menus).
> 
> It's a very simple barebones camera that is capable of creating amazing pieces of art in the right hands.
> 
> I currently use a 40D which is a step up from the rebel and I can say that the 5D blows it away even when both are at iso 100.
> 
> The fact that you can use cheap legacy lenses on it that are on par if not better than today's Canon L lenses makes it even sweeter.


hmm... I love wide angle, and i'm sure my 17-40 would look sweet on a FF, and not have to spend $500+ for a canon 10-20mm lens.
I've been playing on the idea of getting one eventually. I see 5Dc's all day for around 500, but a mk2 is still 1k+


----------



## MistaBernie

Some more potentially interesting new coming out in the Canon camp - Could dual pixel focus technology (a la 70D) be added to the 5D Mark III soon?

http://www.canonrumors.com/2014/02/is-dual-pixel-tech-coming-to-the-eos-5d-mark-iii/


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> I have totally lost faith in Nikon as a company with the whole D600 debacle. All my Nikon gear will be in the classifieds this weekend.


im hearing a lot of people say that over the past few months. they did an awful job handling that situation. they arent big enough of a company to just not care about their customers. and they lost a huge portion of their pro market over the past year from poor decision making all together including the D600 debacle


----------



## Jixr

so I've been dragging my gear in a little pouch bag thing, not meant for cameras at all, but every camera bag I like is in the $100+ range.

I've found one that is perfect, should hold everything I need, ( mainly my cam, ipad, keyboard, my 70-200, flash, and chargers, batterys and all that, and it does not scream camera gear, looks just like a regular backpack, but $120 is something I can't see spending on a bag, all bags i've looked at the shoulder straps look kinda weak and construction the same as a wal-mart backpack. its crazy.

Should I just #yolo and get it at my local cammy shop, or just try stuffing my gear into a normal backpack I already have.

this is what i'm looking at.
http://www.tamrac.com/products/zuma7/

I'm going up to see my family this weekend, and I don't really have any decent bag to carry my gear around, and I'm going to be running around doing some of the kids sports games, and baby pictures and other stuff.

I'm tempted to buy it, and try it out, and if I does not work out for me i'll return it.

EDIT: Ahh! the best buy up the street is supposed to have them in stock and they are one sale for $90 still crazy expensive for me, but BB has a good return policy and saving money is always good.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Some more potentially interesting new coming out in the Canon camp - Could dual pixel focus technology (a la 70D) be added to the 5D Mark III soon?
> 
> http://www.canonrumors.com/2014/02/is-dual-pixel-tech-coming-to-the-eos-5d-mark-iii/


more like are they going to pull a nikon and add it to the 5Dmkiii mkii

when it gets added though ill be scared of the price but will want it pretty bad im sure. been a long while since i shot DSLR video but i would want it


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> so I've been dragging my gear in a little pouch bag thing, not meant for cameras at all, but every camera bag I like is in the $100+ range.
> 
> I've found one that is perfect, should hold everything I need, ( mainly my cam, ipad, keyboard, my 70-200, flash, and chargers, batterys and all that, and it does not scream camera gear, looks just like a regular backpack, but $120 is something I can't see spending on a bag, all bags i've looked at the shoulder straps look kinda weak and construction the same as a wal-mart backpack. its crazy.
> 
> Should I just #yolo and get it at my local cammy shop, or just try stuffing my gear into a normal backpack I already have.
> 
> this is what i'm looking at.
> http://www.tamrac.com/products/zuma7/
> 
> I'm going up to see my family this weekend, and I don't really have any decent bag to carry my gear around, and I'm going to be running around doing some of the kids sports games, and baby pictures and other stuff.
> 
> I'm tempted to buy it, and try it out, and if I does not work out for me i'll return it.
> 
> EDIT: Ahh! the best buy up the street is supposed to have them in stock and they are one sale for $90 still crazy expensive for me, but BB has a good return policy and saving money is always good.


If you already have a bag you like take a look at camera inserts and wraps. Its how I carry most of my stuff around now in a variety of bags.

http://www.tenba.com/Products/Messenger-Removable-Photo-Insert.aspx?gclid=COSp0d3i77wCFbFaMgodxBcAfg

http://www.tenba.com/Products/Messenger-Wrap-10-inch-Black.aspx

They both come in various sizes, colors, ect. and from a number of mfgs.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Some more potentially interesting new coming out in the Canon camp - Could dual pixel focus technology (a la 70D) be added to the 5D Mark III soon?
> 
> http://www.canonrumors.com/2014/02/is-dual-pixel-tech-coming-to-the-eos-5d-mark-iii/


ooo, hopefully the 6D too  lol

I got my repair estimate finally. $233.00 for the SD card slot repair.  Oh well, at least my baby will be back home soon.


----------



## Jixr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *silvrr*
> 
> If you already have a bag you like take a look at camera inserts and wraps. Its how I carry most of my stuff around now in a variety of bags.
> 
> http://www.tenba.com/Products/Messenger-Removable-Photo-Insert.aspx?gclid=COSp0d3i77wCFbFaMgodxBcAfg
> 
> http://www.tenba.com/Products/Messenger-Wrap-10-inch-Black.aspx
> 
> They both come in various sizes, colors, ect. and from a number of mfgs.


well, my little pouch bag is so small that It cant fit my ipad and my flash goes in the water bottle mesh thing. I think I'll just bite on a bag. :/


----------



## Scott1541

How good are those cheapish Cokin P style ND filters that they sell in sets on ebay? Alright? Bad? Worse than bad? I want some ND and graduated ND filters but I understand that they can't be great quality for £15, where pro ones are several times that just for a single filter.


----------



## Jixr

every cheap filter I get i've gotten pretty bad flares when just about any type of light source is in the shot. I typically don't use them, but I keep a set in my bag for when I don't want to dirty up my nice lens's.


----------



## Sean Webster

I have a tiffen 8 stop variable ND filter that works as needed. Here is the link: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?sku=821128&Q=&O=&is=REG&A=details

the 77mm and smaller sizes are cheaper. I plan on getting a 82mm lens in the future so I just got 82mm and some step up rings for my lenses


----------



## Scott1541

I haven't got that kind of money to spend on several filters, never mind a single one (student life eh), so thought I'd just take a gamble and buy the cheapo filters for £12 and see what they turn out like. I'm not expecting miracles for that price but I'm hoping they won't be too bad.

If they turn out to be complete crap at least I've got a filter holder so I could just buy some better filters


----------



## Sean Webster

I'm a student too lol. Time to start getting paid for your photography.


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> I'm a student too lol. Time to start getting paid for your photography.


I'm not good enough for that yet, at least not in my opinion







There's not a lot of photography work around here anyway, especially at the uni since most of the time they use a photog that graduated a last year, and he does a lot of other local work too.

A friend has said she may offer me some money to shoot for her in the future, but at the minute I'm just doing a few small unpaid shoots for her here and there.

Still got to build up my selection of kit too







I think a flashgun is next on my list


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> I'm a student too lol. Time to start getting paid for your photography.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not good enough for that yet, at least not in my opinion
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There's not a lot of photography work around here anyway, especially at the uni since most of the time they use a photog that graduated a last year, and he does a lot of other local work too.
> 
> A friend has said she may offer me some money to shoot for her in the future, but at the minute I'm just doing a few small unpaid shoots for her here and there.
> 
> Still got to build up my selection of kit too
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think a flashgun is next on my list
Click to expand...

work on mastering and building your kit and when you are comfortable get in touch with your friend again about being a second shooter for that one person. second shooters are like backups, you dont need to be super pro. if you were pro then you wouldnt be a second shooter. thats where you learn and gain experience shooting to eventually make your way up to shooting freelance on your own


----------



## Jixr

So I've finally got to put my new 70-200 f4 L to use, and holy bawlz, I love this lens. Best $400 I've spent in a long long time.

Hands down a billion times better IQ than my 17-40 f4 L.

Also, my 50 1.8 fell apart when It was in my pocket, I'll snap it together, but a 50mm 1.4 is in my future for sure.

Did my first big shoot today, High School Sr Photos for a family, and super happy with the results, several locations, a few hours, and I managed to fill up a 16gig mem card. ( had extras of course ) i've never done that in a day lol.

Also, happy story time. Down by the river, there was a family who had their first child, he was about 6months old, and he sat up by himself for the first time. The mom was excited, and yelled for her husband, which got my attention, and luckly I swung around and managed to get an awesome shot before the baby tumbled over, got their information and sent them a photo when I got home. Love moments like that.


I wish I wasn't set at 1.8, but rather 2.8 f-stop, but the family loved it and were super thankful. Lucky the cheap 50 hit is focus that time, the very next frame the baby is falling over, it was pretty cute.


----------



## mz-n10

havent posted here in a while. figured ill drop by to say hi.


a900 24mm f4 1/160


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> So I've finally got to put my new 70-200 f4 L to use, and holy bawlz, I love this lens. Best $400 I've spent in a long long time.
> 
> Hands down a billion times better IQ than my 17-40 f4 L.
> 
> Also, my 50 1.8 fell apart when It was in my pocket, I'll snap it together, but a 50mm 1.4 is in my future for sure.
> 
> Did my first big shoot today, High School Sr Photos for a family, and super happy with the results, several locations, a few hours, and I managed to fill up a 16gig mem card. ( had extras of course ) i've never done that in a day lol.
> 
> Also, happy story time. Down by the river, there was a family who had their first child, he was about 6months old, and he sat up by himself for the first time. The mom was excited, and yelled for her husband, which got my attention, and luckly I swung around and managed to get an awesome shot before the baby tumbled over, got their information and sent them a photo when I got home. Love moments like that.
> 
> 
> I wish I wasn't set at 1.8, but rather 2.8 f-stop, but the family loved it and were super thankful. Lucky the cheap 50 hit is focus that time, the very next frame the baby is falling over, it was pretty cute.


Nice by chance moment! I love random encounters like that too. I had one a little while ago with a lady and made her night by taking a shot of her and a lighthouse in the background.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> havent posted here in a while. figured ill drop by to say hi.
> 
> 
> a900 24mm f4 1/160


Hi


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> Also, happy story time. Down by the river, there was a family who had their first child, he was about 6months old, and he sat up by himself for the first time. The mom was excited, and yelled for her husband, which got my attention, and luckly I swung around and managed to get an awesome shot before the baby tumbled over, got their information and sent them a photo when I got home. Love moments like that.


If you did that in this country you'd be branded a paedophile


----------



## Jixr

probably would have been here too if I didn't already have like 4 other little kids with me that I was doing photos for as well.

Also, photoshop question.

is there a way to make brush strokes not stack?

I have my brush set to lets say 40% opaque, and if i let up on the mouse and go back over that area, they will stack. is there a way to prevent that?

also, is there a way to resize a brush without having to right click and drag the slider ( I really like the way it works in lightroom with the scroll wheel )


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> probably would have been here too if I didn't already have like 4 other little kids with me that I was doing photos for as well.
> 
> Also, photoshop question.
> 
> is there a way to make brush strokes not stack?
> 
> I have my brush set to lets say 40% opaque, and if i let up on the mouse and go back over that area, they will stack. is there a way to prevent that?
> 
> also, is there a way to resize a brush without having to right click and drag the slider ( I really like the way it works in lightroom with the scroll wheel )


Not sure on the stacking, just use a lower opacity?

As for increase brush use the bracket keys. ---> [ ]


----------



## Jixr

thanks, I guess I should print out a keyboard shortcut guide, I hardly ever use photoshop except for the spot removal brush since it works better than in light room.


----------



## Jixr

some results from this weekends shoot.

I know its nothing compared to you guys, but I'm very proud of the results.
http://s1329.photobucket.com/user/ClaytonGFinley/media/IMG_0031_zpsbde20d42.jpg.html

http://s1329.photobucket.com/user/ClaytonGFinley/media/IMG_0003-Edit_zpse6864f31.jpg.html

http://s1329.photobucket.com/user/ClaytonGFinley/media/IMG_9926-Edit_zps02ac8178.jpg.html

some are kinda cheesy, but its what the client wanted.

Also, my 50mm 1.8 fell apart, and looks to be un-fixable. I snapped it together but it fell apart again.









Should I get another or try to jump for a 1.4?


----------



## Scott1541

Been out on my second (ever) cosplay photoshoot today. I really need to get some more experience working with models because I don't really know what to do with them and just let them do their own thing, which admittedly does seem to work. I could do with more practice with this lens too because some of the shots were a bit blurry. Most of the shots that aren't blurred look great though, better than last time when I shot with the 55-200, although that was a bit more consistent since the min aperture is f/4.

Overall a fairly decent shoot IMO, even though it was short


----------



## Furad

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> So I've finally got to put my new 70-200 f4 L to use, and holy bawlz, I love this lens. Best $400 I've spent in a long long time.
> 
> Hands down a billion times better IQ than my 17-40 f4 L.
> 
> Also, my 50 1.8 fell apart when It was in my pocket, I'll snap it together, but a 50mm 1.4 is in my future for sure.
> 
> Did my first big shoot today, High School Sr Photos for a family, and super happy with the results, several locations, a few hours, and I managed to fill up a 16gig mem card. ( had extras of course ) i've never done that in a day lol.
> 
> Also, happy story time. Down by the river, there was a family who had their first child, he was about 6months old, and he sat up by himself for the first time. The mom was excited, and yelled for her husband, which got my attention, and luckly I swung around and managed to get an awesome shot before the baby tumbled over, got their information and sent them a photo when I got home. Love moments like that.
> 
> 
> I wish I wasn't set at 1.8, but rather 2.8 f-stop, but the family loved it and were super thankful. Lucky the cheap 50 hit is focus that time, the very next frame the baby is falling over, it was pretty cute.


Man that bit about the baby is awesome... Seriously, that's like helping old ladies across the street kind of cool. Being a parent I know the great appreciation those folks have that you were able to capture that for them.


----------



## Jixr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Furad*
> 
> Man that bit about the baby is awesome... Seriously, that's like helping old ladies across the street kind of cool. Being a parent I know the great appreciation those folks have that you were able to capture that for them.


Thanks, one of my main reasons for getting into photography was because I only have about 10 photos of myself from when I was about 14-18.
About that time consumer digital products were becoming affordable, so cell phone cameras were not really a thing then, and no such thing as keeping photos online or on facebook or whatever.

Eventually our familys computer Hard drive died and I lost every photo I had during that time, high school photos, first Girlfriends, Prom, State football game, vacations, all gone. My highschool girlfriend who I later asked to marry me ended up cheating on me and running off, she may still have a few photos as her older sister was a photographer, but I'm sure all the ones she has are of both of us and thats kind of a sensitive topic for me, so I've not bothered to ask her if she could send me them.

Ever since then I've been made sure to take as many photos of myself, friends, and family as I could. And about a year ago I finally had some money to buy myself a new DSLR, and started learning. And for the baby, the very next frame he is starting to tumble over, its pretty cute.



The reason why I got hired to do the job this weekend was because the kid I was doing the photos for dad lost his job, so they couldn't really afford to hire a typical photog. ( which for $100 gets you 30mins and about 15 edited photos ) But I had a blast and they were very happy with the results. Didn't know I could make a person cry from a photo I took. I only got paid $100 for several hours worth of shooting and driving around town all day, but it was well worth it to me, got them nearly 100 edited photos and sent them all the others as well.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by Scott1541 View Post
> 
> Been out on my second (ever) cosplay photoshoot today. I really need to get some more experience working with models because I don't really know what to do with them and just let them do their own thing, which admittedly does seem to work. I could do with more practice with this lens too because some of the shots were a bit blurry. Most of the shots that aren't blurred look great though, better than last time when I shot with the 55-200, although that was a bit more consistent since the min aperture is f/4.
> 
> Overall a fairly decent shoot IMO, even though it was short


Pix or it didn't happen^


----------



## Jixr

as a storage editor I don't think you'd apreciate me eating up OCN storage with my awful picture uploads


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> as a storage editor I don't think you'd apreciate me eating up OCN storage with my awful picture uploads


That's where you're wrong, i like it! >


----------



## Jixr

Well, here is a cool one I liked

I still want to try to play with the shadows a little bit more with this one.

http://s1329.photobucket.com/user/ClaytonGFinley/media/IMG_9926-Edit_zps02ac8178.jpg.html


----------



## kbros

Just bought a $10 eBay tripod, it's coming straight from Hong Kong. Let's see how this works out..


----------



## Conspiracy

didnt know ebay made tripods trololololol


----------



## kbros

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> didnt know ebay made tripods trololololol


I'd rate that troll 7.5/10


----------



## Furad

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> Thanks, one of my main reasons for getting into photography was because I only have about 10 photos of myself from when I was about 14-18.
> About that time consumer digital products were becoming affordable, so cell phone cameras were not really a thing then, and no such thing as keeping photos online or on facebook or whatever.
> 
> Eventually our familys computer Hard drive died and I lost every photo I had during that time, high school photos, first Girlfriends, Prom, State football game, vacations, all gone. My highschool girlfriend who I later asked to marry me ended up cheating on me and running off, she may still have a few photos as her older sister was a photographer, but I'm sure all the ones she has are of both of us and thats kind of a sensitive topic for me, so I've not bothered to ask her if she could send me them.
> 
> Ever since then I've been made sure to take as many photos of myself, friends, and family as I could. And about a year ago I finally had some money to buy myself a new DSLR, and started learning. And for the baby, the very next frame he is starting to tumble over, its pretty cute.
> 
> 
> 
> The reason why I got hired to do the job this weekend was because the kid I was doing the photos for dad lost his job, so they couldn't really afford to hire a typical photog. ( which for $100 gets you 30mins and about 15 edited photos ) But I had a blast and they were very happy with the results. Didn't know I could make a person cry from a photo I took. I only got paid $100 for several hours worth of shooting and driving around town all day, but it was well worth it to me, got them nearly 100 edited photos and sent them all the others as well.


----------



## PCModderMike

Pretty bummed. I've only had my D7100 for a couple of weeks, and already there's a spec of something on the sensor and it's definitely noticeable in my pics.

I've only changed the lenses like three times, yet something made it in there.








I've tried to blow it off with one of those rocket blowers but it won't budge. I found this cleaning guide on YouTube and it looks promising. Any other suggestions?


----------



## MistaBernie

I'm on a crappy work monitor at the moment, but I don't see it (if that's any solice).

In terms of sensor cleaning, you can do it yourself via the methods in the video if you want. Most local shops will do a sensor cleaning for like $50-60 if you don't feel comfortable. Is it actually visible when you look at the sensor? I saw that I have a couple of tiny specs on my 5D3, but I can't see them till I'm stopped way down, and I couldn't see anything on the sensor itself when I checked.


----------



## PCModderMike

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> I'm on a crappy work monitor at the moment, but I don't see it (if that's any solice).
> 
> In terms of sensor cleaning, you can do it yourself via the methods in the video if you want. Most local shops will do a sensor cleaning for like $50-60 if you don't feel comfortable. Is it actually visible when you look at the sensor? I saw that I have a couple of tiny specs on my 5D3, but I can't see them till I'm stopped way down, and I couldn't see anything on the sensor itself when I checked.


Yea I also didn't notice the spec in the picture at first last night when I was on my laptop, but I see it today on my Mac at work.
I circled it here.

I would like to find a local shop, I wouldn't mind paying 50 bucks to have someone else do it for me...my Google skills are failing me though, and there just doesn't seem to be much of anything for a real camera/photography shop in my area. I guess I could send it in to KEH for around 50.
Oh and yes, if I lock up the mirror, I can clearly see there's something on the sensor and it won't budge like I said with air.


----------



## Jaydev16

It can't be dust or anything in your immediate environment.All newer DSLRs(D7100 included) have sensor shift cleaning in which the filter in front of the sensor vibrates at high frequency to shake off dust.It happens every time the camera is turned on/off automatically.I think it was there from the time you bought the camera.
Do you only use one lens?Seems to look like oil on the lens elements.


----------



## PCModderMike

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jaydev16*
> 
> It can't be dust or anything in your immediate environment.All newer DSLRs(D7100 included) have sensor shift cleaning in which the filter in front of the sensor vibrates at high frequency to shake off dust.It happens every time the camera is turned on/off automatically.I think it was there from the time you bought the camera.
> Do you only use one lens?Seems to look like oil on the lens elements.


It was not there when I first bought the camera. I have multiple lens, and the spec appears on every one I use. I'm also thinking it's not dust, that's why I've been saying it's a spec of some sort. I hope it's not oil. But I'm thinking of trying a wet cleaning, with these.
http://www.amazon.com/Visible-Sensor-Cleaning-Liquid-Cleaner/dp/B002XJ3JL8/ref=sr_1_10?ie=UTF8&qid=1393949105&sr=8-10&keywords=visible+dust+swabs


----------



## Jaydev16

Then it must be something on the AA filter that the DRS can't shake off.But I don't think its on there because of changing lenses.I'm not sure what it is though...............
There are some cleaning solutions out there as well.I believe some solvet and microfibre cloth or something?


----------



## PCModderMike

I can try to get a picture of it later when I'm back at home...if it appears to be oil, should I just send the camera back since it's only like 2 weeks old?


----------



## Jaydev16

You should consult a friend who really knows this.Maybe someone here can help.I would be glad to but I only own a bridge camera(not registered here) and my knowledge comes entirely from reading photography magazines.


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PCModderMike*
> 
> Pretty bummed. I've only had my D7100 for a couple of weeks, and already there's a spec of something on the sensor and it's definitely noticeable in my pics.
> I've only changed the lenses like three times, yet something made it in there.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I've tried to blow it off with one of those rocket blowers but it won't budge. I found this cleaning guide on YouTube and it looks promising. Any other suggestions?


That's an awful lot of work in that video only to not come out clean. Not to mention all of that stuff is fairly expensive. Sensor pen is probably the cheapest.

But at F4 dust shouldn't really be that visible. Wet cleaning is probably your best option, usually I would recommend just using a q-tip (yes, it actually does work), but if it's oil then it's just going to smear it.

Any local camera shop should have sensor cleaning as a service they offer. One of my local ones will not only clean your sensor for the cost of the cleaning kits, but will teach you too. Comes in packs of three and give you the other two.

Edit: Get it checked out a shop. They should have a loupe and see if it's dust or oil. If it is oil, get an exchange since it's still fairly new.


----------



## PCModderMike

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aksthem1*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *PCModderMike*
> 
> Pretty bummed. I've only had my D7100 for a couple of weeks, and already there's a spec of something on the sensor and it's definitely noticeable in my pics.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I've only changed the lenses like three times, yet something made it in there.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I've tried to blow it off with one of those rocket blowers but it won't budge. I found this cleaning guide on YouTube and it looks promising. Any other suggestions?
> 
> 
> 
> That's an awful lot of work in that video only to not come out clean. Not to mention all of that stuff is fairly expensive. Sensor pen is probably the cheapest.
> 
> But at F4 dust shouldn't really be that visible. Wet cleaning is probably your best option, usually I would recommend just using a q-tip (yes, it actually does work), but if it's oil then it's just going to smear it.
> 
> Any local camera shop should have sensor cleaning as a service they offer. One of my local ones will not only clean your sensor for the cost of the cleaning kits, but will teach you too. Comes in packs of three and give you the other two.
Click to expand...

That's awesome, I would love to find a place like that around here. I live right outside downtown Charleston, gotta be something around so I'll just keep looking.
lol Yea after the video I went searching for the tools he was using, that arctic brush or whatever it's called is really pricey. If I do try a q-tip, is there a solution I can use with it? Back when I first bought my D3200, it came with one of those cheap all in one DSLR cleaning kits and there's a bottle of lens cleaner included. Is that safe to use on a sensor?


----------



## aksthem1

I wouldn't use any fluid that isn't specifically for sensors. There's a guide on POTN. I'll look for it really quick.


----------



## Jixr

also check around for local pro photograhers, they might can inspect it and clean it for you.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PCModderMike*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Jaydev16*
> 
> It can't be dust or anything in your immediate environment.All newer DSLRs(D7100 included) have sensor shift cleaning in which the filter in front of the sensor vibrates at high frequency to shake off dust.It happens every time the camera is turned on/off automatically.I think it was there from the time you bought the camera.
> Do you only use one lens?Seems to look like oil on the lens elements.
> 
> 
> 
> It was not there when I first bought the camera. I have multiple lens, and the spec appears on every one I use. I'm also thinking it's not dust, that's why I've been saying it's a spec of some sort. I hope it's not oil. But I'm thinking of trying a wet cleaning, with these.
> http://www.amazon.com/Visible-Sensor-Cleaning-Liquid-Cleaner/dp/B002XJ3JL8/ref=sr_1_10?ie=UTF8&qid=1393949105&sr=8-10&keywords=visible+dust+swabs
Click to expand...

That whole sensor shift cleaning does very little...

I recommend this: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/242758-REG/Photographic_Solutions_SS2BOX_Sensor_Swab_Type_2.html

Use them myself, works like a charm. Sensor cleaning is just another part of typical camera maintenance. I'd recommend getting a sensor loupe too, but I have done a few cleanings without one fine.

And before you use a sensor swab, use a Giottos Rocket Air BlasterGiottos Rocket *Blaster*Giottos Rocket *Blaster* to try to get any excess dust out of the chamber.


----------



## PCModderMike

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *PCModderMike*
> 
> 
> 
> That whole sensor shift cleaning does very little...
> 
> I recommend this: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/242758-REG/Photographic_Solutions_SS2BOX_Sensor_Swab_Type_2.html
> 
> Use them myself, works like a charm. Sensor cleaning is just another part of typical camera maintenance. I'd recommend getting a sensor loupe too, but I have done a few cleanings without one fine.
> 
> And before you use a sensor swab, use a Giottos Rocket Air BlasterGiottos Rocket *Blaster*Giottos Rocket *Blaster* to try to get any excess dust out of the chamber.
Click to expand...

Those look promising. Thanks for that. Do you use any kind of solution with them?


----------



## Sean Webster

Solution is preapplied to them. Just open one and it is ready to go.

You can order in bulk like 100 replacement cloth pieces and a bottle of eclipse sensor fluid.

oooo, there is this too: http://petapixel.com/2014/02/03/sensor-gel-stick-safely-clean-sensor-like-service-center/
I kinda want to try that out^


----------



## PCModderMike

Oooh yea...I remember you posted a video about that...I would like to try that myself.


----------



## xDuBz201

can i join?
i have A Canon Eos Rebel T3i


----------



## PCModderMike

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xDuBz201*
> 
> can i join?
> i have A Canon Eos Rebel T3i


Welcome









Just checked their site Sean - http://photographylife.com/product/sensor-gel-stick Looks like they're sold out, but stock is expected to hit right about now.


----------



## Sean Webster

Yea I noticed too. I still have a few sensor swabs i need to use up before I get one anyhow. Maybe just get the sensor swabs now and get a stick later on? lol


----------



## Jixr

gonna try to fix my 50 1.8 today, went to the cammy shop, and basically the guy said the only thing worth getting is the sigma 50mm 1.4, which is currently out of stock and probably out of production since the new art model is coming out, and that I may look at the 30mm sigma art.

I think i'm just going to try to glue my 1.8 back together. ( probably use hot glue since it would still be removable ) There are little plastic clips that hold it together, and all but two broke off. I could buy one of the better lens's, but its music festival season.

Though I'm also thinking about eating my words and buying an EOS-M, its basically the only cheap pocketable camera that has a decent sensor that can be had for under $300. there is one on the local CL, but I reall want one with the 22mm prime.


----------



## PCModderMike

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Yea I noticed too. I still have a few sensor swabs i need to use up before I get one anyhow. Maybe just get the sensor swabs now and get a stick later on? lol


Yep, I think that's my plan


----------



## MistaBernie

Avoid the EOS-M, aka Canon's epic failure attempt at mirrorless. I used a friend's for about 15 minutes and handed it back to him. Slow to focus, touch screen was sub-par (which is problematic since it handles the vast majority of the control of the camera) - not worth it, even at $300..

Also.. I can pick up a used X100 for $500 (might be able to talk down closer to $450), but I'm having a _real_ hard time justifying it. I messed around with it a bit and it's definitely cool...


----------



## Jixr

Yeah, I still find myself wanting a pocket cam thats better than my phone ( if the iph5s shot raw it would be perfect ) but still under the $400 price poinit. But everything in that area sucks.


----------



## Scott1541

I should probably shove my P5100 in my uni bag in case I need it when I'm walking around since the camera on my Nexus 4 isn't great. (I'm sure the camera on my old iPhone 4 was better)

Although saying that normally the furthest I go with my uni bag is about 200m away (definitely no more than 300m) from my accommodation


----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> I should probably shove my P5100 in my uni bag in case I need it when I'm walking around since the camera on my Nexus 4 isn't great. (I'm sure the camera on my old iPhone 4 was better)
> 
> Although saying that normally the furthest I go with my uni bag is about 200m away (definitely no more than 300m) from my accommodation


When I did short courses at a college I at one point started taking my DSLR with all 4 lenses with me every day. And I used it a lot since I like photographing birds.


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JKuhn*
> 
> When I did short courses at a college I at one point started taking my DSLR with all 4 lenses with me every day. And I used it a lot since I like photographing birds.


I'm a computer science student, so I don't need any kind of camera for my course, and most of the time there wouldn't be space for my DSLR in my bag because my laptop is in there and it has a big hi-cap battery







Anyway, in an average day nothing really happens around the campus that an 'advanced' point and shoot wouldn't be able to deal with


----------



## Sean Webster

Here is a pretty cool photoproject: http://imgur.com/a/tmwc3


----------



## PCModderMike

^lol I posted that first pic in OMPT earlier.

@aksthem1 So when I got home from work, figured I would go ahead and give a q-tip a try since I'm waiting on swabs to be delivered anyway. Whatever was there cleaned up right away, and now the the spec is gone from my pics.


----------



## golfergolfer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Here is a pretty cool photoproject: http://imgur.com/a/tmwc3


I could see that going down real well lol "I ah need some one to throw things at!" lol its a really cool idea though I like it









This was my most recent project type single picture thing lol:


----------



## Jaydev16

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> Yeah, I still find myself wanting a pocket cam thats better than my phone ( if the iph5s shot raw it would be perfect ) but still under the $400 price poinit. But everything in that area sucks.


What about pro compacts like the full frame Sony RX(?,sorry if I got the name wrong).


----------



## Eggs and bacon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jaydev16*
> 
> What about pro compacts like the full frame Sony RX(?,sorry if I got the name wrong).


They are a little (very) pricey, and fixed lens cameras as a whole tend to have lower resale value, as you cant sell the lens (which holds its price well) by itself.


----------



## Aussiejuggalo

Gotta say you guys take some amazing photos







I'm jelly









Now for a question







, is there any cameras that arnt SLR and wont cost an arm and a leg that have manual focus? auto focus and my crappy camera phone are the bane of my existence









Thanks


----------



## Jaydev16

Just go for an advanced compact camera like the new bridge cameras.Cannon fixed lens ones from the SX(don't remember which exactly),Nikon P-series advanced cameras,or the Fujifilm ones.Then again there are Panasonic,Olympus and a lot more.


----------



## Scott1541

Anything mirrorless? Older models must be getting pretty cheap now


----------



## Jaydev16

If it is a mirrorless,it'll have to change and buy lenses but some budget mirrorless cameras are out there.But they're pretty primitive for and interchangable lens camera.They don't have proper handgrips or hot shoes for attaching flashes.And they look all pink and kiddy and P&S-ey which is bad for the price you spend on them.
But if you must,check out the Panasonic Lumix GF-series.


----------



## Jixr

yeah, thats something I would be interested in. the sony 100x or whatever is pretty good, but $700 for a pocket cam is crazy

I think for replacing my 50, i'm going to go with a 40mm pancake, except buy one of the white ones from south korea


----------



## PCModderMike

Playing with my speedlight last night. It's a cheap Yongnuo, but I think these things are great to learn on.


----------



## Conspiracy

finally getting tired of renting a 70-200 for shoots. shooting an awards ceremony presentation thing that involves art from children all over the state. will be grabbing shots of people looking at the art and presentation of awards as well

i think its time i attempt to save up for my own 70-200. probably the f2.8 mki IS


----------



## MistaBernie

Grab a Sigma, it's like $1249 bnib (about what you'd spend on a beat used Mk1). Does Big Blue sell Sigma?


----------



## JKuhn

I just sold my Sigma 170-500, and bought that Canon I asked about since the reviews I saw indicated it's better than the 150-500. After selling the old lens, I only ended up paying R6 000.







Not that I could truly afford it, but I couldn't let it pass.




I haven't had time to truly test it yet because it's been raining for days now and it was also a bit late, but from the few shots I took I'm certainly impressed.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Grab a Sigma, it's like $1249 bnib (about what you'd spend on a beat used Mk1). Does Big Blue sell Sigma?


we do sell sigma but not that i have had a bad experience with sigma as a brand im not impressed with their 70-200. ill spend the extra cash on canon. yall know im not diehard fanboy or anything but its hard to beat the craftsmanship and durability of canon

also its hard to not drool over the fact that for just shy of $2k i can grab a used EF 70-200 mkII. i have always loved that lens but its hard to justify the price

on some other ish just applied for a new job as a videographer for my old college. i have had pretty much everyone put in a good word for me so fingers crossed im the top candidate


----------



## MistaBernie

Yeah, don't get me wrong, the Canon is the bees' knees. I checked out a Sigma 150-500 the other day, and while the reach was nice, the focus was _so slow.._


----------



## Aussiejuggalo

Thanks for the suggestions, I had a look round and most were way out of my price range $600 AUD but I did find these 2, Sony NEX-3N $549 & Olympus PEN E-pm2 $479 which one would be a good choice out of them? Anything more expensive and I may as well just get the Canon 1100D $449

I didnt want to go down the SLR road as I know its completely over the top for my needs which is really just general usage but with manual focus damn auto focus

Thanks


----------



## werds

Too bad you aren't stateside... brand new Nikon J1 for $229 and a reburbished for $159 (if affordable is the goal lol)

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/823585-REG/Nikon_27565_1_J1_Mirrorless_Digital.html

http://www.rakuten.com/prod/nikon-j1-10-1-megapixel-mirrorless-camera-body-with-lens-kit-10-mm-30/224642287.html?sellerid=26227071


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PCModderMike*
> 
> Playing with my speedlight last night. It's a cheap Yongnuo, but I think these things are great to learn on.


I literally don't think I can take an indoor shot without mine now. I don't know how I ever shot without one.

Marin's bad advice strikes again I guess.


----------



## Aussiejuggalo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *werds*
> 
> Too bad you aren't stateside... brand new Nikon J1 for $229 and a reburbished for $159 (if affordable is the goal lol)
> 
> http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/823585-REG/Nikon_27565_1_J1_Mirrorless_Digital.html
> 
> http://www.rakuten.com/prod/nikon-j1-10-1-megapixel-mirrorless-camera-body-with-lens-kit-10-mm-30/224642287.html?sellerid=26227071


Yeah







we get ripped off here pretty bad







, cheapest I can get lol Nikon J1

Im thinking of just getting the Olympus, it seems pretty cheap and easy to use. Im a camera n00b


----------



## Jaydev16

The Olympus will probably be noisier at higher ISOs because of the higher pixel pitch(higher # of pixels per square unit).


----------



## Aussiejuggalo

What one would you guys recommend that does a good job all round without having to sell a kidney to afford?

I did find the Sony one on eBay for under $400 which is very tempting


----------



## Scott1541

My el cheapo ND filter set came today. First impressions: they're cheap







It's cloudy and a bit rainy today so I can't be bothered to go out and test them, so I'll just have to take a few pics out the window









Edit:

Doesn't seem too bad, this is with the ND2,4 and 8 all in the holder at the same time. IMO it looks a little soft in areas but it's not too bad for a few cheap pieces of plastic.


----------



## hokiealumnus

Scott, what kit did you get? If I can scrape the funds together I'd like to have an ND filter to take with me to the beach this summer.


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hokiealumnus*
> 
> Scott, what kit did you get? If I can scrape the funds together I'd like to have an ND filter to take with me to the beach this summer.


I'm fairly sure they're unbranded







They're the really cheap ones you see on amazon and ebay at about £14 for a set with ND 2,4 & 8, GND 2,4 & 8

Edit: Just looked at the pic I posted but a bit more closely and I can see quite a bit of CA. I guess this could be because I was using 3 filters in the holder and was shooting through a double glazed window at an angle


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> I'm a computer science student, so I don't need any kind of camera for my course, and most of the time there wouldn't be space for my DSLR in my bag because my laptop is in there and it has a big hi-cap battery
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Anyway, in an average day nothing really happens around the campus that an 'advanced' point and shoot wouldn't be able to deal with


And this is the biggest problem with SLRs -- if it's too big or you're afraid to take it anywhere, you'll miss 100% of the opportunities you might have with a camera on you.


----------



## MistaBernie

Yup.

In other news, I was in talks to sell my 24-70 Mk I to take advantage of rebates and local price matching, but I got cold feet and tried to call it off, but apparently the guy is still interested..? Don't need to dump $1000+ into the Mk 2. While it's a nicer lens, it's not $1000 nicer.


----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> And this is the biggest problem with SLRs -- if it's too big or you're afraid to take it anywhere, you'll miss 100% of the opportunities you might have with a camera on you.


And if you're in a country with lots of crime you still miss a lot of opportunities even if you have your camera with you because you're constantly too afraid to take it out of the cheap no-name bag.


----------



## Jixr

eh, embrace your hispter, and just bring it with you in a bag.

That being said, i've gotten really good at takiing photos with my camera phone, I've kinda never really bothered trying to take decent shots with it, but assuming the light is good, its not that bad.


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> eh, embrace your hispter, and just bring it with you in a bag.


Hipster's don't bring them in bags, hipsters wear them around their necks









I was in the uni library a couple of weeks ago and there was some asian dude in there with a Canon DSLR around his neck. He was in there studying, not taking pictures, and he just left it around his neck the whole time.


----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> *Hipster's don't bring them in bags, hipsters wear them around their necks
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *
> 
> I was in the uni library a couple of weeks ago and there was some asian dude in there with a Canon DSLR around his neck. He was in there studying, not taking pictures, and he just left it around his neck the whole time.


That's how it should be. But some countries aren't known for being crime-free and not all hipsters can afford to replace all their gear.


----------



## Scott1541

I normally carry mine over my shoulder if I'm just taking one lens, or in a normal bag if I'm taking more than one lens or my tripod. If I might need all my lenses but not the tripod I'd take my Nikon bag.


----------



## Jixr

I guess i'm weird, I don't use straps, though I have a buckle attached to my cam so I can just snapp it on my bags solder strap and still have it easily accessable


----------



## Sean Webster

I just use a blackrapid strap everywhere I go. I'm in a safe enough area here in South FL and even then, i'm big enough were people usually wouldn't want to mess with me.

On another note, photoshop in the fashion and modeling industry has gone too far:

http://www.collegehumor.com/video/6956694/photoshop-has-gone-too-far


----------



## Jixr

I probably should get a decent strap though, I'll probablly just rig my bass guitar strap to make work, its super comfortable.

I know come MotoGP time my gear gets heavy quick, carrying around a gripped t3i and 70-200 all day on the stock strap sucked during the F1 races


----------



## Sean Webster

The stock strap makes you want to kill yourself lol. Anything is better than the stock strap! I could not imagine carrying around my 70-200 on it...I would die from the pain it would cause lol.


----------



## werds

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> The stock strap makes you want to kill yourself lol. Anything is better than the stock strap! I could not imagine carrying around my 70-200 on it...I would die from the pain it would cause lol.


Agreed! After a few days out with my wifes T5i using the stock strap I ended up purchasing one of these http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B003T0EYVE/ref=oh_details_o03_s00_i00?ie=UTF8&psc=1

Wife and I are MUCH happier now whenever we use our cameras (I purchased one for my 70D as soon as I knew I was getting it!)


----------



## Jixr

Yeah, and no way am I paying $50 for a stupid aftermarket strap they sell at the camera stores.

that was my first time using a 70-200 ( rented ) and It wore me out quick.

the track is nearly 4 miles long and its a long walk around that place. in mostly dirt because the track is trashy as crap.

I REALLY want to get a pit pass for motoGP and one of the practice days, since thats your best bet to get up and personal with the crew and potentially meet a rider. I got a pit pass in Birmingham for AMA superbikes, and that was pretty cool.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JKuhn*
> 
> And *if you're in a country with lots of crime* you still miss a lot of opportunities even if you have your camera with you because you're constantly too afraid to take it out of the cheap no-name bag.


I assume you've never been to Chicago.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> eh, embrace your hispter, and just bring it with you in a bag.


I carry mine in a bag. Does that somehow make me a "hipster"?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> Hipster's don't bring them in bags, hipsters wear them around their necks


I do laugh at how you both manage to not only put a label on a group of people who dress or look a certain way, but also manage to underhandedly insult them at the same time. Bravo, gents.


----------



## Jixr

well in all fairness, my bag has my ipad, a game boy ( don't hate ), and stuff for work, so its with me pretty often. Since my last photoshoot my website has blown up, so i'm trying to add a bit more content to it and keep it updated often.


----------



## PCModderMike

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0062W02C6/ref=oh_details_o08_s00_i00?ie=UTF8&psc=1

This is the strap I use. Works great, and it wasn't expensive. I've also used it for extended periods of time, walking around doing the tourist thing recently in the Philippines and Singapore, it was very comfortable.


----------



## Sean Webster

My baby is finally home safe and sound and back to 100%!


----------



## Jixr

you need to up your keyboard game. And that didn't take too long to get fixed.


----------



## kbros

Flickr is dropping Google sign-in. Guess I'm finding another site. Suggestions?


----------



## aksthem1

500px


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> Flickr is dropping Google sign-in. Guess I'm finding another site. Suggestions?


was thinking the same thing earlier


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> you need to up your keyboard game. And that didn't take too long to get fixed.


Why? I just got this last year for $25, its is way nicer than my logitech k120 i had lol.

Yea, under 2 weeks turn around is pretty good. 

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> Flickr is dropping Google sign-in. Guess I'm finding another site. Suggestions?


What does that mean to users? Why not just continue with flickr? lol

500px is another large photoshare site


----------



## Scott1541

I really could do with stopping playing with my camera when I'm tired. Falling asleep with it on my bed is definitely not a good idea


----------



## Aussiejuggalo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Why? I just got this last year for $25, its is way nicer than my logitech k120 i had lol.


Mechanical's nicer again








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> I really could do with stopping playing with my camera when I'm tired. Falling asleep with it on my bed is definitely not a good idea


So... its not your new gf?


----------



## kbros

Well I like the idea of using one email account for everything. I don't like how they're taking that away just to get more people to use their crappy security-less email.


----------



## OmarCCX

500px is a great website.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> I really could do with stopping playing with my camera when I'm tired. Falling asleep with it on my bed is definitely not a good idea


I did that with a laptop once...next morning it was on the floor with a dehinged screen and motherboard hanging out lol.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Aussiejuggalo*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Why? I just got this last year for $25, its is way nicer than my logitech k120 i had lol.
> 
> 
> 
> Mechanical's nicer again
Click to expand...

Can you get me one? lol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> Well I like the idea of using one email account for everything. I don't like how they're taking that away just to get more people to use their crappy security-less email.


Hey, don't hate on their email.  I like yahoo mail much more than gmail personally.


----------



## Aussiejuggalo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Can you get me one? lol


How about...


----------



## Jixr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Can you get me one? lol


I do have a few extra....


----------



## Jaydev16

What brand are they?They don't seem to be available here in India.


----------



## Scott1541

Got to go and shoot on a small film set on sunday







They were originally asking for photographers to shoot in the studio for them today, which I responded too but said I wasn't the most experienced person so I'd do it if they couldn't find anyone else. They found someone else to do the studio work so they asked if I wanted to do a bit of work on their set on sunday.

It's not paid but I guess this kind of stuff is where most photogs would have started out. Studio work would have been better for experience, but I've only shot portraiture under 10 times total and only been in the studio once before. The people were looking for decent photos, not there for someone to practice on.


----------



## MistaBernie

Well, that's a first. Just had a guy buy my 24-70 and pay (partially) in singles. Bad time to be having second thoughts about its replacement ideas...


----------



## sub50hz

Make it rain on an x100.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Well, that's a first. Just had a guy buy my 24-70 and pay (partially) in singles. Bad time to be having second thoughts about its replacement ideas...


sweaty wad of stripper money?


----------



## werds

Hmmm looks like my earlier post was removed? Anyways on topic. Funny you had mentioned selling your 24-70 looks like there is a sale on the most recent version of the 24-70mm-f4l-is-usm http://slickdeals.net/permadeal/115474/adorama---canon-ef-24-70mm-f4l-is-usm-zoom-lens


----------



## jameyscott

That's an awesome deal. Wish I could go ahead and get it but I'm not investing too much into my camera right now.


----------



## Jixr

I've managed to fix my 50 that popped apart, the AF is crazy loud now, one of the little gears got bent and I tried to straighten it as best I could, but it seems to work.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *werds*
> 
> Hmmm looks like my earlier post was removed? Anyways on topic. Funny you had mentioned selling your 24-70 looks like there is a sale on the most recent version of the 24-70mm-f4l-is-usm http://slickdeals.net/permadeal/115474/adorama---canon-ef-24-70mm-f4l-is-usm-zoom-lens


better off with the 24-105 f/4 for $500-$600 used or a 24-70 f/2.8 version 1 or the Tamron SP 24-70mm f/2.8 DI VC USD imo


----------



## Aussiejuggalo

I got a camera related question for you guys, Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7, Panasonic Lumix G6 & Sony NEX-6 any thoughts on them for a kinda all in one camera?

I'm considering the G6 as it seems to be the best out of the lot for price, features and more or less performance, would this be a good choice?

Thanks









I know you guys are mostly SLR guys, but come on help a n00b out


----------



## Jaydev16

The DMC will not have to change lenses(dmc=p&s right?).I'm not an SLR guy but I say go for the G6 because it'll handle nicely(better than the oversized lens-body combo of the NEX IMO).Also,the very act of using the viewfinder will enable you to get steadier shots.Have you checked their respective reviews on dpreview?I just said what I think but you should make the final decesicion.


----------



## Aussiejuggalo

I've been checking reviews everywhere on all the cameras, the G6 and GX7 are more or less the same with the GX7 being slightly better in some areas but the G6 only has image stabilization in the lens where as the GX7 has in body

I just thought I'd ask you guys what you thought would be a better option seeing you all seem to know a hell of a lot about cameras and stuff


----------



## laboitenoire

Got back from Taiwan yesterday. If anybody is ever looking for cheap, cheap camera gear, check out Camera Street in Taipei (don't know the street name in Chinese, but I remember it was fairly close to Taipei 101, but I might be wrong about that). In true Taiwanese fashion, there's a zillion shops all selling the same stuff and if you speak Chinese you can barter for some pretty significant deals. My sister had picked up a Canon G15 with case and extra memory cards for like $150 under the cost of what it would have been here in the US.

Anyway, started processing my photos in RawTherapee, and the process went as follows:

1. Import my RAW files
2. Queue up the first few files that look fine as is
3. Realize that opening the editor at all produces severely undersaturated and crappy looking photos
4. Tweak settings, photos still look like crap
5. Give up and finally buy Lightroom...


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> Got back from Taiwan yesterday. If anybody is ever looking for cheap, cheap camera gear, check out Camera Street in Taipei (don't know the street name in Chinese, but I remember it was fairly close to Taipei 101, but I might be wrong about that). In true Taiwanese fashion, there's a zillion shops all selling the same stuff and if you speak Chinese you can barter for some pretty significant deals. My sister had picked up a Canon G15 with case and extra memory cards for like $150 under the cost of what it would have been here in the US.
> 
> Anyway, started processing my photos in RawTherapee, and the process went as follows:
> 
> 1. Import my RAW files
> 2. Queue up the first few files that look fine as is
> 3. Realize that opening the editor at all produces severely undersaturated and crappy looking photos
> 4. Tweak settings, photos still look like crap
> 5. Give up and finally buy Lightroom...


Basically my experience with rawtherapee.


----------



## Jixr

$10 a month, or however much for stand alone LR is totally worth it.


----------



## Sean Webster

Lightroom is great.

Man, photoshoot at the beach this morning...I love my 6D a and 70-200 f/2.8 combo.


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> Got back from Taiwan yesterday. If anybody is ever looking for cheap, cheap camera gear, check out Camera Street in Taipei (don't know the street name in Chinese, but I remember it was fairly close to Taipei 101, but I might be wrong about that). In true Taiwanese fashion, there's a zillion shops all selling the same stuff and if you speak Chinese you can barter for some pretty significant deals. My sister had picked up a Canon G15 with case and extra memory cards for like $150 under the cost of what it would have been here in the US.
> 
> Anyway, started processing my photos in RawTherapee, and the process went as follows:
> 
> 1. Import my RAW files
> 2. Queue up the first few files that look fine as is
> 3. Realize that opening the editor at all produces severely undersaturated and crappy looking photos
> 4. Tweak settings, photos still look like crap
> 5. Give up and finally buy Lightroom...


And VSCO for LR or PS is pretty awesome.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> $10 a month, or however much for stand alone LR is totally worth it.


$80 for the Student and Teacher edition


----------



## Jixr

yeah, its worth it. the $10 a month for Photoshop and LR has made me come out of pirating it.

Good thing with software, its becomeing so cheap and easy to get, its not really worth pirating stuff anymore.


----------



## Jaydev16

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Aussiejuggalo*
> 
> I've been checking reviews everywhere on all the cameras, the G6 and GX7 are more or less the same with the GX7 being slightly better in some areas but the G6 only has image stabilization in the lens where as the GX7 has in body
> 
> I just thought I'd ask you guys what you thought would be a better option seeing you all seem to know a hell of a lot about cameras and stuff


Sorry,need to keep track of the news.I thought the GX7 was a compact point and shoot!Ok,image stabilization(IS) in the body will be better since if you buy a non IS lens in the future,you can still get good image quality at lower shutterspeeds.I'd go with the GX7.Heres my opinion:

1.If you want to use a heavier body for stability and you don't mind the bigger body without IS,go for the G6
2.If you want smaller body(easier concelable) with good in body IS,go for the GX


----------



## MistaBernie

Moved 95% of my expensive cardboard this weekend... spent the proceeds on a 24-70 2.8L Mk II and a Titanfall Edition Xbox One (which is basically an Xbox One with a free copy of Titanfall and a wireless controller). The one thing I like about Daylight Savings is that hour passed instantly. In just over 24 hours, it will be mine. Oh yes.


----------



## Sean Webster

daylight savings made my 3hours of sleep into 2hours last night. it is evil.


----------



## Jixr

but think! so much more daylight to take photos after work!


----------



## boogschd

@sean - love the color treatment on your alexis album on FB
















(idk why i said it here instead of commenting on the album. hahahaa)


----------



## nvidiaftw12

So I found this guy on youtube named Tony Northrup and he's pretty awesome. Very knowledgeable about all sorts of types of photography from studio to bird, and gives very well laid out tutorials that are nice and concise. He's not at all elitist, and often recommends reasonable priced gear. I've noticed he replies to a lot of comments as well. If you're a noob, you might try checking his channel out.

https://www.youtube.com/user/VistaClues


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> but think! so much more daylight to take photos after work!


Not on my schedule. I'm free whenever I want. 

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boogschd*
> 
> @sean - love the color treatment on your alexis album on FB
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (idk why i said it here instead of commenting on the album. hahahaa)


oooo, im guessing you are boogie yu?

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> So I found this guy on youtube named Tony Northrup and he's pretty awesome. Very knowledgeable about all sorts of types of photography from studio to bird, and gives very well laid out tutorials that are nice and concise. He's not at all elitist, and often recommends reasonable priced gear. I've noticed he replies to a lot of comments as well. If you're a noob, you might try checking his channel out.
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/user/VistaClues


yea, he is good. I like watching some of his vids just for entertainment.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Moved 95% of my expensive cardboard this weekend... spent the proceeds on a 24-70 2.8L Mk II and a Titanfall Edition Xbox One (which is basically an Xbox One with a free copy of Titanfall and a wireless controller). The one thing I like about Daylight Savings is that hour passed instantly. In just over 24 hours, it will be mine. Oh yes.


I'll probably be grabbing Titanfall next week, add me on XBL you turd. GUESS WHAT MY HANDLE IS.


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> oooo, im guessing you are boogie yu?


yes


----------



## PCModderMike

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> daylight savings made my 3hours of sleep into 2hours last night. it is evil.


It made me stay up a lot later than expected Saturday night into Sunday morning...all of the sudden it was 5am and I was thinking I gotta get some sleep!


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Moved 95% of my expensive cardboard this weekend... spent the proceeds on a 24-70 2.8L Mk II and a Titanfall Edition Xbox One (which is basically an Xbox One with a free copy of Titanfall and a wireless controller). The one thing I like about Daylight Savings is that hour passed instantly. In just over 24 hours, it will be mine. Oh yes.
> 
> 
> 
> I'll probably be grabbing Titanfall next week, add me on XBL you turd. GUESS WHAT MY HANDLE IS.
Click to expand...

broham

PC ftw. cmon now


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> I'll probably be grabbing Titanfall next week, add me on XBL you turd. GUESS WHAT MY HANDLE IS.


As far as I know, Titanfall isn't cross-platform. I'm toying with the idea of returning the XBone and just getting Titanfall for the 360, but then I'd have to return the other game(s) I picked up for XBone ahead of time.


----------



## sub50hz

I've had a XBONE since I got the Brack Friday Bunduru, chump.


----------



## MistaBernie

So basically you're paying for Titanfall while I'm getting it for free tonite. Seems reasonable...


----------



## jameyscott

Titanfall is on PC. I'll be playing it tonight.


----------



## Conspiracy

same ill be playing on PC as well


----------



## Sean Webster

Idk weather to get it on PC or xbox one myself. Lol I lovers the beta on PC.


----------



## Jixr

Hate to go OT, but i'm not sure if i'm going to get it. the xbox demo was pretty COD ish.Seems like it would get old quick.

I think i would get it for xbox than pc, simply because it looks quick and easy to pick up and play.

( though i'm getting it on PC, because not owning anything between an xbox original and the one, I can't accurately use a controller to shoot to save my life )


----------



## Sean Webster

I play fps better with a Xbox controller than I do KB and mouse myself, it just feels so natural...though I have used it a lot longer


----------



## MistaBernie

Talking about the PC version is off topic. Unless your computer has a webcam like the Kinect (which serves as a camera), which means this discussion is totally on topic. Change approved!


----------



## Sean Webster

Of course I has webcam!


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> So basically you're paying for Titanfall while I'm getting it for free tonite. Seems reasonable...


Uh, I've had the console since November. And I got Forza 5 for free -- which is pretty much the only reason I bought it in the first place.


----------



## Jixr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Talking about the PC version is off topic. Unless your computer has a webcam like the Kinect (which serves as a camera), which means this discussion is totally on topic. Change approved!


uhm, uhm, i just use games to test the rendering power of photoshop and to make sure it can handle large grahical loads?


----------



## Jixr

So, I'm finally being a bit responceable and backing up my photos.
( good thing my roomie has an 8tb NAS server )

Also, my camera is about a year old this month.

Started out with a kit t3i I paid $500 for, and a year later I end up with this. lol.


Never would thought I would have wound up with all this.
T3i
50mm 1.8
17-40 f4 L
70-200 f4 L
ex430 flash
several mem cards
ipad
several other little accessoreis, and my own website and I've gotten a few paid jobs, and have more in the future. ( a few prom photo shoots, a family shoot, a 50th wedding anniversary party, and high school graduation photos )

I also love this bag, the shoulder straps are kinda weak, It would be nice if they were more padded, but overall, holds all my stuff perfectly, and It was nice that it has a dedicated ipad slot instead of a laptop slot so my ipad does not get too beat up.

Also, I looked up MotoGP tickets today, and all the good seats that were left are in the $200 price range per ticket, so it looks like i'm going to be camping general admission this year. Shots won't be as good, but hopefully I'll run around and get some. Really thinking of getting qualifying tickets just so I can use that day for photos, and spend the race day actually watching the race not through a view finder.


----------



## boogschd

nice kit


----------



## jameyscott

What suggestions would you guys have for a lens that is somewhat comparable in image quality to the canon 70-200 f2.8 that wouldn't require me selling my second rig or my son?

Edit: similar zoom as well. Sometimes I can't get up close and personal as I'd like with my 17-55 kit lens.


----------



## freitz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jameyscott*
> 
> What suggestions would you guys have for a lens that is somewhat comparable in image quality to the canon 70-200 f2.8 that wouldn't require me selling my second rig or my son?
> 
> Edit: similar zoom as well. Sometimes I can't get up close and personal as I'd like with my 17-55 kit lens.


As of similar zoom range and budget 70-200 F4 L would give you what you need. Can you give us more of a define budget? Also what Camera are you shooting with?


----------



## Jixr

yeah, i got my 70-200 f4 L for $400 (used) and love it. New it retails about $700

Alternatively, there is a 75-300 IS that is good (not L quality, but still good and more zoom ) and a cheaper option would be the 55-250 that can be found bundled in some kits.


----------



## jameyscott

I'm shooting with a t3i. I don't have a budget per say, I just don't want to go crazy expensive. 70-200 f4 seems like a great option.


----------



## Jixr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jameyscott*
> 
> I'm shooting with a t3i. I don't have a budget per say, I just don't want to go crazy expensive. 70-200 f4 seems like a great option.


I've the same body, the 70-200 f4l works amazing with it.
It can be hard to steady in the long end, but I don't have the extra $400 so spend for the IS version.

Its one of the cheapest L glass you can buy, and along with the optics you get a closed body, exelent contruction, and even on the t3i, super fast AF.

the only bad thing is the f4, which can be a bit limiting indoors. ( but you can make up for it once you learn the feel of the lens )

I think self-plugging websites is against TOS, but if you want i'll PM you my website that has full size photos I dd with it last weekend on a shoot.
( and I can't link the image URL as I have anti-downloading stuff on my website. )

Not sure how great of quality you're going to get on OCN, but here ya go.
http://s1329.photobucket.com/user/ClaytonGFinley/media/IMG_0003-Edit_zpse6864f31.jpg.html
shot at f4 100iso on my t3i and I'm pretty sure of the 70mm length.


----------



## Sean Webster

I'd recommend the 70-200 f/2.8 rather than the f/4....f/2.8 is sooo much better imo 

I'm actually tempted to sell my 85 f/1.8 and get a 135 f/2 soon...now if only someone would by my 15-85.


----------



## Mongol

But the difference in cost isn't exactly marginal...plus if you walk around with that 2.8 all day, you'll be built like quasimodo in no time.


----------



## jameyscott

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> I'd recommend the 70-200 f/2.8 rather than the f/4....f/2.8 is sooo much better imo
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm actually tempted to sell my 85 f/1.8 and get a 135 f/2 soon...now if only someone would by my 15-85.


But is the difference really worth that amount of money to someone who takes pictures of his son, gear for build logs, and occasional scenery shots? performance/price ratio is what I'm looking for now. I might get the upgrade itch later if I end up getting asked to take photos semi-professionally, until then...

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mongol*
> 
> But the difference in cost isn't exactly marginal...plus if you walk around with that 2.8 all day, you'll be built like quasimodo in no time.


I've already got a hunch from the typical nerd sitting at his desk, so probably not a good option for me.







I think I'll get the 70-200 f4 and then get the f2.8 coffee mug as well.


----------



## MistaBernie

On a lower quality body, the extra stop of light is actually a pretty worthwhile investment. Obviously, how worthwhile is up to you.

@Sean Webster, have you had a chance to mess around with a 135L? It's so sweet on full frame, and having been a previous owner of the 85 f/1.8, I'd pick the 135 any day. So pumped I got mine so cheap last year..


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mongol*
> 
> But the difference in cost isn't exactly marginal...plus if you walk around with that 2.8 all day, you'll be built like quasimodo in no time.


lol, usually they go for about double the price of a f/4.0. But to me, since I have had mine, it is sooooooooooooo worth it. The images are awesome. Images are sharper wide open too. For me the weight isnt a problem. I always carry my camera around with a prime all day. I was at the beach for 6 hours the other day with my 70-200 f/2.8, while it is significantly heavier than the f/4, I had no issue...tho i do work out lot lol.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jameyscott*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> I'd recommend the 70-200 f/2.8 rather than the f/4....f/2.8 is sooo much better imo
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm actually tempted to sell my 85 f/1.8 and get a 135 f/2 soon...now if only someone would by my 15-85.
> 
> 
> 
> But is the difference really worth that amount of money to someone who takes pictures of his son, gear for build logs, and occasional scenery shots? performance/price ratio is what I'm looking for now. I might get the upgrade itch later if I end up getting asked to take photos semi-professionally, until then...
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Mongol*
> 
> But the difference in cost isn't exactly marginal...plus if you walk around with that 2.8 all day, you'll be built like quasimodo in no time.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I've already got a hunch from the typical nerd sitting at his desk, so probably not a good option for me.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think I'll get the 70-200 f4 and then get the f2.8 coffee mug as well.
Click to expand...

Start off with the f/4. See how you like it. Buy it used so you can always resell it without a loss of $.

When I had mine I noticed one thing with the auto-focus. It would just stop searching if it missed and not adjust through the whole focus range to find it sometimes. I had to manually move the focus ring to get it started searching again. It didn't happen all the time, but enough to be noticeable. And I had the correct autofocus settings in camera to have it continuously search for focus and not stop if it couldn't find it. It may have just been my copy tho. My f/2.8 doesn't do that.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> On a lower quality body, the extra stop of light is actually a pretty worthwhile investment. Obviously, how worthwhile is up to you.
> 
> @Sean Webster, have you had a chance to mess around with a 135L? It's so sweet on full frame, and having been a previous owner of the 85 f/1.8, I'd pick the 135 any day. So pumped I got mine so cheap last year..


No I haven't, but I have seen example images with the swirly bokeh it produces and I really love that effect. Plus, it would be a little longer which is perfect for shooting people around campus from a distance. 

Now looking at my 85 f/1.8 images, I may just have to keep it too. And I want a sigma 35mm f/1.4. Why are primes so nice? Why am I a lens addict?  haha


----------



## aksthem1

So my friend got an A7R with a 35mm 2.8 delivered to my house (at work during the day and didn't want to leave it outside his house) and I've been dying to play with it. It's sitting in the box just staring at me.

I know he wouldn't mind though...


----------



## Sean Webster

Open the box and take a bunch of selfies. The pack it back as if you never touched it and leave the memory card in it. Have him re-open it and power it up to see all your pics lol


----------



## Jixr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> selfies selfies selfies


----------



## funfortehfun

Hey guys, need your help again. I'm contemplating between two telephotos: a 300mm f/4 AF (non AF-S/VR) and 70-300 VR.



^300mm f/4 AF



70-300 VR

Thoughts? Opinions? I've only a 35mm f/1.8 DX in my bag (the 60mm f/2.8 AF-D's somewhere else right now). The cost of them is the same.


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *funfortehfun*
> 
> Hey guys, need your help again. I'm contemplating between two telephotos: a 300mm f/4 AF (non AF-S/VR) and 70-300 VR.
> 
> Thoughts? Opinions? I've only a 35mm f/1.8 DX in my bag (the 60mm f/2.8 AF-D's somewhere else right now).


The 70-300 is going to be a hell of a lot more useful is it not? 60mm straight to 300mm is quite a jump









70-300 is what I'd go for


----------



## scottath

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> No I haven't, but I have seen example images with the swirly bokeh it produces and I really love that effect. Plus, it would be a little longer which is perfect for shooting people around campus from a distance.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now looking at my 85 f/1.8 images, I may just have to keep it too. And I want a sigma 35mm f/1.4. Why are primes so nice? Why am I a lens addict?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> haha


Im selling my 85 1.8 atm, looking at the Sigma 35 1.4 to compliment my 50mm Zeiss for my landscape shots (stitched panos), and for party/walk-a-round lens.
135L would be nice too, but my 70-200L II is too dam nice.....135L one day maybe


----------



## PCModderMike

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Open the box and take a bunch of selfies. The pack it back as if you never touched it and leave the memory card in it. Have him re-open it and power it up to see all your pics lol


----------



## hokiealumnus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> The 70-300 is going to be a hell of a lot more useful is it not? 60mm straight to 300mm is quite a jump
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 70-300 is what I'd go for


+1.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *funfortehfun*
> 
> Hey guys, need your help again. I'm contemplating between two telephotos: a 300mm f/4 AF (non AF-S/VR) and 70-300 VR.
> 
> 
> ^300mm f/4 AF
> 
> 
> 70-300 VR
> 
> Thoughts? Opinions? I've only a 35mm f/1.8 DX in my bag (the 60mm f/2.8 AF-D's somewhere else right now). The cost of them is the same.


what are you shooting?


----------



## ace8uk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> lol, usually they go for about double the price of a f/4.0. But to me, since I have had mine, it is sooooooooooooo worth it. The images are awesome. Images are sharper wide open too. For me the weight isnt a problem. I always carry my camera around with a prime all day. I was at the beach for 6 hours the other day with my 70-200 f/2.8, while it is significantly heavier than the f/4, I had no issue...tho i do work out lot lol.
> Start off with the f/4. See how you like it. Buy it used so you can always resell it without a loss of $.


Agreed, I carry around a 70-200 f2.8 all the time and it's not a problem at all, don't know what people are talking about!
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *funfortehfun*
> 
> Hey guys, need your help again. I'm contemplating between two telephotos: a 300mm f/4 AF (non AF-S/VR) and 70-300 VR.
> 
> ^300mm f/4 AF
> 
> 70-300 VR
> 
> Thoughts? Opinions? I've only a 35mm f/1.8 DX in my bag (the 60mm f/2.8 AF-D's somewhere else right now). The cost of them is the same.


Depends what you're shooting. I see the 70-300 VR being much more convenient in most cases, and it's a decent lens. Even though it's the older version, that 300 f4 is a very sharp lens and, at the same price, it would probably be my choice.


----------



## funfortehfun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> what are you shooting?


I'd like to shoot birds and other wildlife and pretty much anything on the longer side - I haven't been able to do so with a 35mm and 60mm on DX. No sports though.


----------



## laboitenoire

Being an owner of the 70-300 VR, I'll give you my perspective. I mostly shoot landscapes with the occasional bird or what have you, and the 70-300 is good for things that are fairly close or fairly big. Why? It's not the sharpest at the long end (it's okay at f/8 but wide open is a bit mushy) and is a bit prone to CA. However, if you're only zooming out to 135 or so, it is very sharp wide open (I love it for doing head shots). The focus is also very quick, something the old 300 f/4 wasn't really known for.

That said, I did like it more on my D5000 than on my D7000. Seeing as the D5000 and D90 share a sensor, it'd probably look fine for you. Would I buy one if I was starting over? Probably not, but that's mostly because I don't need that long of a focal length most of the time. However, considering how cheap it is used or refurbished, it's hard to go wrong if it's your only tele.

If you want an idea of the pics, crawl around my Flickr page.


----------



## ace8uk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *funfortehfun*
> 
> I'd like to shoot birds and other wildlife and pretty much anything on the longer side - I haven't been able to do so with a 35mm and 60mm on DX. No sports though.


Then definitely go for the 300 f4, seen some great bird shots with it and it takes a teleconverter well, too.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *funfortehfun*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> what are you shooting?
> 
> 
> 
> I'd like to shoot birds and other wildlife and pretty much anything on the longer side - I haven't been able to do so with a 35mm and 60mm on DX. No sports though.
Click to expand...

id go with the 300 f4. thats just me though. it will be a lot nicer for what you want on the long end


----------



## Jixr

is there any good reason to buy a printer for printing photos at home?

I've been thinking about the idea and was wondering if in the long run it would be worth it.


----------



## sub50hz

The best reason is to... make prints (gasp!). Buy a good printer if you want good prints. Luckily I have access to a large-format printer so I have no need for a home printer.


----------



## MistaBernie

Canon has (or had, very recently) some rebates that basically made the printer free (without other purchases I think). Aw, dangit, I keep forgetting to submit the rebate for my 24-70 II..

Also, apparently Calumet Photo abruptly filed Chapter 7 Bankruptcy this morning and appears to be closing all US based stores. I read in an article that employees were basically emailed by management and told not to come in (working on finding a copy of this email). Kind of concerning to come out of the blue like that. Seems like the number of brick-and-mortar photography stores (dedicated, not stores like Best Buy) are seriously dwindling.

PetaPixel link to the story seems to offer a pretty good synopsis.

http://petapixel.com/2014/03/13/calumetphoto-us-declared-bankruptcy-gave-employees-zero-notice/


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> selfies selfies selfies
Click to expand...

My friends and I were blasting that at our table at uni the other day while taking selfies with our cameras haha.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scottath*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> No I haven't, but I have seen example images with the swirly bokeh it produces and I really love that effect. Plus, it would be a little longer which is perfect for shooting people around campus from a distance.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now looking at my 85 f/1.8 images, I may just have to keep it too. And I want a sigma 35mm f/1.4. Why are primes so nice? Why am I a lens addict?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> haha
> 
> 
> 
> Im selling my 85 1.8 atm, looking at the Sigma 35 1.4 to compliment my 50mm Zeiss for my landscape shots (stitched panos), and for party/walk-a-round lens.
> 135L would be nice too, but my 70-200L II is too dam nice.....135L one day maybe
Click to expand...

i just saw a sigma for $750 on PTON...im thinking of being cheap first tho and just getting a canon 35 f/2 or a sigma 50 f/1.4. You lucky bugger with your 70-200L II 

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PCModderMike*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Open the box and take a bunch of selfies. The pack it back as if you never touched it and leave the memory card in it. Have him re-open it and power it up to see all your pics lol
Click to expand...

haha omg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ace8uk*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> lol, usually they go for about double the price of a f/4.0. But to me, since I have had mine, it is sooooooooooooo worth it. The images are awesome. Images are sharper wide open too. For me the weight isnt a problem. I always carry my camera around with a prime all day. I was at the beach for 6 hours the other day with my 70-200 f/2.8, while it is significantly heavier than the f/4, I had no issue...tho i do work out lot lol.
> Start off with the f/4. See how you like it. Buy it used so you can always resell it without a loss of $.
> 
> 
> 
> Agreed, I carry around a 70-200 f2.8 all the time and it's not a problem at all, don't know what people are talking about!
Click to expand...


----------



## scottath

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> i just saw a sigma for $750 on PTON...im thinking of being cheap first tho and just getting a canon 35 f/2 or a sigma 50 f/1.4. You lucky bugger with your 70-200L II


There is one on a local forum in Australia for $650...so tempting but I tend to inspect anything I buy over $300, and this is on the other side if the country :/
70-200L II is my third most used lens unfortunately. 50mm Zeiss for landscapes, 17-40L for events, the 70-200L.
My other lenses pretty much don't get used now, so selling them soon. 85 1.8 and tamron 28-75 2.8


----------



## Sean Webster

Dang, if that were here I'd probably pull the trigger lol.


----------



## Jixr

So I just got some prints back from the shop, and put them on all 4x6's, and they look great on my computer, but kinda fussy and bland on the paper.

I'm not familiar with printing at all, but i'm assuming scaling down a 18mp picture to a 4x6" image does not work out well? ( some of my early prints look better because they were so cropped, but now that i'm trying to crop as minimally as possible and get it right in the camera, i'm killing my print quality )

anything I can do to keep some of the detail in my photos on small prints?

Also, my last client wants an image printed on canvas, and I don't know anything about that, is there any special settings or anything I need to do to my images to make them look good on the canvas print?


----------



## hokiealumnus

Newsflash! 6D + 24-105L is on B&H right now for $1999.


----------



## MistaBernie

That is a pretty sweet deal.


----------



## Jixr

spanking of sweet deals, since my 50 1.8 fell apart, I found a 50 1.4 in decent shape for $150 at a pawn shop. It was a little dusty from sitting in the back ( since I think they have to be held for 60 days before they can be re-sold ) but i'd rate its condition an 8/10. havent been able to figure out the date when it was made, but it also came with a felt lined canon lens hood.

On my local CL they still go for about 2-250 used.

Sell my 1.8 for about $75 and I'm hardly out anything. I'd still rather have the sigma 50 or the 30 art, but I couldn't pass up the price.

Good Day!

The shop also had some really good prices on some other lens's, a sigma 10-20mm, and a 100mm macro that was really cool to play with. I also helped them out a little bit, the guy thought I was a pro ( sure i'll play along ) and I showed them how to use the 100mm macro for close ups of their jewlery.

I'm also thinking of getting some extention tubes, there is a cheap promaster set that cost $100, and I'm thinking about picking one of those up. I've always been interested in macro photography, but didn't want to drop the cash for a dedicated macro lens.

Super happy with the lens, and that I got it at an amazing price. And really, I think I have the major lens's covered.
normal zoom 17-40 f4l
prime 50 1.4
zoom 70-200 f4l

Now to start saving for a nicer camera body.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

I was trying to record something today, forgot to fix the auto shutoff, and the camera turned off right before I did what I was trying to capture.


----------



## funfortehfun

Thanks for the replies, guys - really appreciate it. I was also looking into lenses on the other side of the spectrum - wide angle lenses. Something for shots like these:









I was thinking that something like the 16-35 f/4 VR would be good for these types of shots?


----------



## ace8uk

The 16-35 is a great lens, but I wouldn't bother unless you were planning to go full frame sometime soon. 16mm isn't all that wide on DX, the Tokina 11-16 f2.8 would be better for your camera if you wanted a fixed aperture ultra wide angle.


----------



## laboitenoire

If you don't need the extra stop, the Tokina 12-24 f/4 is also fantastic (I love mine). Plus, seeing as you have a D90 you can get the original screw-drive version for under $300, which is a steal these days.


----------



## ace8uk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> If you don't need the extra stop, the Tokina 12-24 f/4 is also fantastic (I love mine). Plus, seeing as you have a D90 you can get the original screw-drive version for under $300, which is a steal these days.


Also a great lens! I've considered selling my Sigma 10-20 for the Tokina many times, it'd be nice to have the constant f4.


----------



## funfortehfun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> If you don't need the extra stop, the Tokina 12-24 f/4 is also fantastic (I love mine). Plus, seeing as you have a D90 you can get the original screw-drive version for under $300, which is a steal these days.


Yup, I'm looking between the Tokina 12-28 f/4 and 11-16 f/2.8. What are the pros and cons between the two? Is the extra stop worth it on the 11-16 in exchange for less focal length?


----------



## ace8uk

They're both awesome lenses. Obviously the 11-16 allows for the extra stop of light, which could prove useful in low light, and likewise the 12-24 has the extra bit of reach, which could be equally useful. I think you'd be happy with either, but I'd recommend getting your hands on both and seeing what you think.


----------



## Conspiracy

rent both and see what works. i personally never sacrifice the proper focal length for fstops. if it comes to it ill shoot high iso to make sure i get the shot that i actually want. the 11-16 is nice but it doesnt offer as nice of a range as the 12-24. that little extra reach can go a long ways


----------



## Jaydev16

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *funfortehfun*
> 
> Hey guys, need your help again. I'm contemplating between two telephotos: a 300mm f/4 AF (non AF-S/VR) and 70-300 VR.
> 
> 
> ^300mm f/4 AF
> 
> 
> 70-300 VR
> 
> Thoughts? Opinions? I've only a 35mm f/1.8 DX in my bag (the 60mm f/2.8 AF-D's somewhere else right now). The cost of them is the same.


The 300mm F/4 will most probably have higher image quality but I also recommend the 70-300 since you can get very creative with that zoom range.If you're only going to shoot far away subjects,then the 300 won't be bad but the zoom will be better on most occasions.


----------



## Conspiracy

so i saw this in my neighbors yard and grabbed a quick pick.

i think they are doing it wrong... how do you chair?


----------



## Mongol

Ahh, a homage to King Edward VIII


----------



## Furad

So I had my a77 at a motorcycle meet and greet this weekend. Snapped over 100 quick portraits of people. I'm amazed the the AF is spot on 99% of the time. Aside from product photography I'm not sure how much I'll be using manual focus anymore. At least with the 16-50 lens.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *funfortehfun*
> 
> Yup, I'm looking between the Tokina 12-28 f/4 and 11-16 f/2.8. What are the pros and cons between the two? Is the extra stop worth it on the 11-16 in exchange for less focal length?


The pros and cons are numerous for both lenses... The suggestions to rent them and see which you like are spot on, but in all honesty you can't go wrong with the original 12-24 f/4 AT-X Pro. The AT-X Pro II changed the coatings to reduce flare (I haven't had much of an issue with flare on the original) and also added a built in AF motor so it would work on Nikon's cheap bodies, but I've heard it's noisier and slower than the screw drive on the original. The 12-28 obviously adds the extra 4 mm of reach, and is supposedly a skosh sharper... It's also $200 more than a used copy of the original. These lenses are built like tanks, and the original has fewer parts to break seeing as it doesn't have the motor. The 11-16 is a completely different animal. From what I've heard it's noticeably sharper than the 12-24/28 and of course has the extra stop of light gathering, which of course means it's significantly more expensive.


----------



## kbros

Just sold my D70 for $100.


----------



## Jixr

really thinking of selling my 50 1.4 for a sigma 30mm 1.4 art.

its expensive ( for me ) but I could sell my 50 for at least $50 more than I paid for it, and sell my 50 1.8 as well, and that would put me most of the way there. I just love wide wide wide, and want a fast wide lens. Typically, most of my shots are between 17-35mm range on my 17-40. I would get a 10-20 but the price is high and I don't think I would use it THAT much to justify the price.


----------



## laboitenoire

30 mm isn't that wide on crop... Roughly the same FOV as 50 mm on full frame or film.


----------



## Curleyyy

Just watched this guys video, from what I can see the 'Tamron 70-200 f/2.8' outperforms the 'Canon 70-200 f/2.8' in image quality?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P80BpSQIIto


----------



## Jixr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> 30 mm isn't that wide on crop... Roughly the same FOV as 50 mm on full frame or film.


yeah, my problem with the 50 is I feel its too tight. epsc in my tiny little apartment, I like to tun it into a mini studio, and quite often the camera is backed up against the wall or I just use my 17-40, but its f4 and limits me on some of the more arty shots I try to take.


----------



## Scott1541

I'm looking out for a cheap Helios 44 on ebay again for something a little longer to play with







I was doing this about a month ago and ended up buying my 35mm, now I'm at it again


----------



## biatchi

Buy a Zenit with one attached







You can get them for 99p/£1.04 + postage


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *biatchi*
> 
> Buy a Zenit with one attached
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You can get them for 99p/£1.04 + postage


That's a good point actually, I'd like another film camera like my old FED 4, so I could kill two birds with one stone here


----------



## Sean Webster

My friend and I combined most of our gear in a quick pic while we ate pizza:



Over $20k in gear sitting there lol New D4S


----------



## Jixr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> pic


yes please.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> pic
> 
> 
> 
> yes please.
Click to expand...

Dang auto correct lol.


----------



## Jixr

really thinking of picking up an EOS-M tomorrow, good price on it, and it may just be the little pocket cam I'm wanting. I can get it with both lens's, or just one and $100 off, I'll probably just get the 22mm, and I can crop when needed. the 18-55 kinda kills the pocketability.


----------



## Sean Webster

I currently have an Einstein and two 430EXIIs. I have a 22" beauty dish for the Einstein and some 43" shoot through umbrellas. I have some cheap Westcott 8" stands that are extremely sketchy if I have my Einstein up above 3ft in the air.

Now, I'm gonna get another Einstein. Maybe two, not sure yet. It would be nice to have a 3 strobe setup for car shots. I also want to get some nice modifiers and stands for the Einsteins.

I'm also looking to get:
Einstein: http://www.paulcbuff.com/e640.php
Cyber commander: http://www.paulcbuff.com/cc.php

Transceivers: http://www.paulcbuff.com/csxcv.php
32"x40" Softbox: http://www.paulcbuff.com/fsb.php
10"x36" Stripbox: http://www.paulcbuff.com/fsb1036.php
8.5" Reflectors: http://www.paulcbuff.com/85hor.php
Maybe a parabolic umbrella?
2 of these stands atm: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/644444-REG/Manfrotto_1004BAC_Alu_Master_3_Riser.html

Any suggestions?


----------



## Scott1541

Got outbid by 5p on a Helios 44M and then the stupidly slow university internet made me miss out on bidding on a Zenit with a Helios 44-2









Update: Won one now







The description on ebay was a bit lacking so I couldn't tell the exact model, but it looked like a 44-2 to me. I think the poor description also helped me get it for a good price as the seller listed it as 55mm, when you could clearly see it was a 58 from the pictures.

The lens and adapter should both be here by wednesday, so I'll report back when they come


----------



## Jixr

New toy. ( also playing around with 'product photography' just a white posterboard and my home made trash bag soft box )
$400 for the kit, like new. A little more than I wanted to spend, but eh... I may sell the 18-55 lens for it. It adds too much to the size, and I might as well just bring my Big cam then.

http://s1329.photobucket.com/user/ClaytonGFinley/media/IMG_9482_zps81515a57.jpg.html

http://s1329.photobucket.com/user/ClaytonGFinley/media/IMG_9473_zpsd2e24fac.jpg.html

I'm kinda surprised by it.

In general, it seems most camera sites and stores LOVE to hate on this camera, but its not AS bad as they say.
( the AF is slow, and occasionally hunts, but I akin it to using a 50mm 1.8, depending on the subject and light, it can be pretty quick, or slow )
But in low light you can just use manual focus, so its not that Big of a deal I think. Also, since I've already invested into the canon system, I can use my other lens's ( with an adaptor ) my flash, my wireless shutter, and other accessories.

I generally do landscape and more general photography, and it really is small. easily jacket pocketable ( with the 22mm prime ). Hope to test it out at concerts and venues where generally DSLR's are not allowed. Same sensor as the canon t4i, so I should be able to get decent shots out of it compared to some other compact mirrorless cams I've used in the past.

the 18-55 is okay, its supposed to have IS, but since there is no view finder you can see it activate like you can on a DSLR when looking through the VF.
Build quality on this thing is fantastic, magnizium body, and weighs a ton for such a little camera.

I hear the batteries run out quick, but I just ordered 2 no-name batteries off amazon for $13.

I think its suffice to say I have GAS. I need help.

I'm going to spend the week exclusivly shooting with it, and see how it does.

http://s1329.photobucket.com/user/ClaytonGFinley/media/IMG_1078_zpsfd8370de.jpg.html


----------



## Sean Webster

I have GAS too atm lol


----------



## Jixr

not pictured, bag, flash, battery grips, cables, mem cards, etc.

But i'm really happy with the M so far. Even though its slow and I hate not having viewfinders. There are some ones that are tons faster and have all the features I want, but the IQ of the M is pretty good.

Using the prime against my 50 1.4 at the same appature gets pretty close results, the M having a little bit more CA than my 50.

I have a car and motorcycle that need a little bit of work, So I gotta cut down on my camera spending lol.


----------



## PCModderMike

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> New toy. ( also playing around with 'product photography' just a white posterboard and my home made trash bag soft box )
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> $400 for the kit, like new. A little more than I wanted to spend, but eh... I may sell the 18-55 lens for it. It adds too much to the size, and I might as well just bring my Big cam then.
> 
> http://s1329.photobucket.com/user/ClaytonGFinley/media/IMG_9482_zps81515a57.jpg.html
> 
> http://s1329.photobucket.com/user/ClaytonGFinley/media/IMG_9473_zpsd2e24fac.jpg.html
> 
> I'm kinda surprised by it.
> 
> In general, it seems most camera sites and stores LOVE to hate on this camera, but its not AS bad as they say.
> ( the AF is slow, and occasionally hunts, but I akin it to using a 50mm 1.8, depending on the subject and light, it can be pretty quick, or slow )
> But in low light you can just use manual focus, so its not that Big of a deal I think. Also, since I've already invested into the canon system, I can use my other lens's ( with an adaptor ) my flash, my wireless shutter, and other accessories.
> 
> I generally do landscape and more general photography, and it really is small. easily jacket pocketable ( with the 22mm prime ). Hope to test it out at concerts and venues where generally DSLR's are not allowed. Same sensor as the canon t4i, so I should be able to get decent shots out of it compared to some other compact mirrorless cams I've used in the past.
> 
> the 18-55 is okay, its supposed to have IS, but since there is no view finder you can see it activate like you can on a DSLR when looking through the VF.
> Build quality on this thing is fantastic, magnizium body, and weighs a ton for such a little camera.
> 
> I hear the batteries run out quick, but I just ordered 2 no-name batteries off amazon for $13.
> 
> I think its suffice to say I have GAS. I need help.
> 
> I'm going to spend the week exclusivly shooting with it, and see how it does.
> 
> http://s1329.photobucket.com/user/ClaytonGFinley/media/IMG_1078_zpsfd8370de.jpg.html


Did someone say product photography??







I love playing around with just a poster board and my two speedlights trying to take nice product shots.


----------



## Jixr

I don't even go as far as using my speedlight, I just tape a posterboard square in a corner and toss a white trashbag over a lamp as a softbox. ( note take precautions to not melt the trashbag )

I prefer to go the DIY yourself approach, and I really enjoy taking good and unique photos with little DIY hacks and stuff. While pro level expensive gear, its pretty easy to get good shots with cheap gear and a little creativity.

I just started a photo a day project again ( 30 days straight ) and I'm going to do 1 full week of using nothing but my iphone and house hold materials. Should be interesting to see what I can come up with. My sister-in-law has two kids and has been asking me for camera recomendations and has a limited budget, and my personal opinion is unless you're willing to spend over $300, just use your phone. ( and if you watch DrTV I love their cheap camera challenges )

I even made a shutter release out of an old pair of headphones and a flashlight, and buy using a free app and $5 at radioshack I make a wireless shutter that activates by my phone.


----------



## PCModderMike

Should try a speedlight, fun stuff.








Speedlight or trash bag over a lamp, both can be considered DIY.


----------



## Jixr

I have one, a 430ex2. ( havent even ran through a set of batteries for it )

Generally though I'm not a big fan of using it. Probably because I'm using it improperly, but my home made cardboard trashbag and walmart lamp soft box works pretty well when I can use it. I'd really like a flash stand an umbrella, as my soft box is pretty big and not very portable, but those are expensive.


my poor mans soft box. Old photo, before my days of mechanical keyboards, my new speakers, and everything else. desk looks so empty lol.

Though I'm going to need to figure it out, I have a shoot in May that I know I'm going to be needing it. ( evening/night shots for a highschool prom )
As well as graduation photos later on that month.


----------



## PCModderMike

That's awesome....I think I've seen you post pics in the past using that same setup, they were very nice.


----------



## Jixr

yeah, it works really well, and I use it quite a bit in my apartment. The most expensive thing was buying the lightbulb. The biggest and most powerful one I could find at the store, and it does not get that hot.

Here is one of my favorites from using it. ( crap photo, but my kitty looks cute ) ( in an otherwise dark room )


and here is the little halo guy ( that I mysteriously found on the balcony of my 3rd floor apartment ) from the first pic of my box.



and i feel terrible about my crappy desk that I had to post a more current one.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PCModderMike*
> 
> Did someone say product photography??
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I love playing around with just a poster board and my two speedlights trying to take nice product shots.


Teach me your secrets! I can't ever get a true white background without blowing out the product.


----------



## Jixr

probably just the direction of your lighting I would guess. I never had problems blowing out the products.

I've also been wanting to mod my softbox to make it a bit more compact and collapseable. Its really heavy and tobbles over my microphoen stand that I use to hold it up quite often. I just haven't had time to do so. EDIT: just saw amazon has cheap-o flash stands. I wonder if their any good. ( only $30 )


----------



## nvidiaftw12

I've been using straight down bounce flash off the ceiling. I need to get a remote receiver and transmitter.


----------



## Jixr

can you not use wireless flash? my t3i has it, and its kind of an older and cheaper camera body.

or since its not moving, just a longer exposure maybe?


----------



## MistaBernie

For small objects, White poster board taped to the open flap of a cardboard box = insta white background - and cheap as heck. (~.99 cents?)


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> can you not use wireless flash? my t3i has it, and its kind of an older and cheaper camera body.
> 
> or since its not moving, just a longer exposure maybe?


I don't think my yongnuo supports that.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> For small objects, White poster board taped to the open flap of a cardboard box = insta white background - and cheap as heck. (~.99 cents?)


I'm just using poster board on the floor. Still comes out slightly greyish.


----------



## MistaBernie

Slightly grey as in not illuminated, or slightly grey as in color balance issue? (Though I guess a color balance issue would cause it to have a color cast and not be darker..)


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Not illuminated. If I want it to be fully blinking I have to have the object way blown out. I don't need it that white, but close would be preferable.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> Not illuminated. If I want it to be fully blinking I have to have the object way blown out. I don't need it that white, but close would be preferable.


Did you just recently post your setup on how you're lighting? One trick is to move the a light source to the side of your subject pointed towards just the background. The light reflecting back can be useful too.


----------



## Sean Webster

You can always select the subject and cut it out and drop it on a white layer in Photoshop, then make shadows as needed.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> You can always select the subject and cut it out and drop it on a white layer in Photoshop, then make shadows as needed.


Lightroom or the full photoshop? I still have to learn lightroom, I can't do much of anything but make a gallery.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> You can always select the subject and cut it out and drop it on a white layer in Photoshop, then make shadows as needed.
> 
> 
> 
> Lightroom or the full photoshop? I still have to learn lightroom, I can't do much of anything but make a gallery.
Click to expand...

I did write Photoshop. lol

I don't even know how to make a gallery with Lightroom. 0_o

Photoshop is easy tho once you start playing with it and looking up tutorials. Lightroom is like a no brainer program where you just move sliders to adjust your pic.


----------



## hokiealumnus

Wow. In case anyone is interested in a body, a refurb Canon 60D (body only) is currently 20% off, selling for $460.79 (plus taxes & shipping). That's insanely cheap for that caliber of camera. I'd buy that before any rebel at that price or above on the market.


----------



## Scott1541

Almost had an orgasm. After fiddling with my newly acquired Helios 44-2, I went into the kitchen and took a shot, then looked at it...

Look at those nice smooth 'balls'


I think I'm going to have some fun with this lens


----------



## kbros

Nikon 50mm 1.8D is in the mail. Anyone know any good photography forums?


----------



## nuclearjock

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> Nikon 50mm 1.8D is in the mail. Anyone know any good photography forums?


http://www.nikoncafe.com


----------



## Jixr

Deal Alert!

Frys is having a huge sale on Vanguard tripods and other vanguard products.

The one I got retails for $220, but I got it for $58 with tax.

Its weird though, I couldn't find the model anywhere except on frys website, and amazon only had one posting for it.

I'm guessing frys must have bought a ton of them and they are now discontinued?

Anyway, $58 for a carbon fiber tripod, with a really nice ball head, Can't pass that up.

( they have a few versions, but when I saw the discount I grabbed the one that had the highest MSRP as they were kicking me out since they were closing )

Anyone know anything about the brand?

its a Vanguard Alta+253CB

I think i"m going to use it to smash my cheap allum kit tripod.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

I found it pretty easily.

http://www.vanguardworld.com/index.php/en/pv/products/photo-video/detail-1-4-225-620.html

http://www.adorama.com/VGT253CB50.html


----------



## Jixr

thats the pro, the one i have says its the + model.

I'm guessing its just a really old version.

I don't know jack about tripods except the one I have is one of those free ones you get in 'dslr kits'

I just saw it was $50 and the msrp under the sale tag said $220 so I snatched it up.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Send one to me. xD


----------



## Jixr

I actaully may go back tomorrow and get another. I'm super super broke right now, and have already spent $400 on a camera earlier this month, but I couln't pass it up. The only difference between teh ones you posted and mine is that mine does not have the pivoting neck part. ( same ball head and everything )


----------



## Sean Webster

I just got my cyber commander, second Einstein and softboxes and nice air cushioned stands today.  I really like the built in light meter feature of the cyber commander! I kinda want another light and now i need a backdrop... :/


----------



## Conspiracy

the world is your backdrop mannnnnnn


----------



## Sean Webster

Haha, yes I know, but for business headshots and fashion images for selling apparel and selling products on say amazon you need some plain backgrounds.









Plus, I got a fashion shoot coming up next sunday so we my have to set something up in a big room at FAU and IDK if my friend has an extra backdrop.


----------



## Jixr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> the world is your backdrop mannnnnnn


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> the world is your backdrop mannnnnnn
Click to expand...


----------



## kbros

Any cheap flashes that are worth it? Or should I save for an ~$500 one?


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Yongnuo YN-560II.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> Yongnuo YN-560II.


This^


----------



## kbros

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> Yongnuo YN-560II.


kden


----------



## Scott1541

I was thinking about getting either a YN-560 II or YN-560 III, but as of yet I haven't.


----------



## aksthem1

My friend bought a Neewer TT850/Godox Ving 850 and it's a damn awesome flash. Dat recycle time and dat battery life. He let me borrow it and about 1/4 to 1/2 power with about a 600 shots, it's yet to go down a bar on it. A ton of nice features and for $100 it's hard to beat. It's supposed to last 650 pops at full power.

For the Yongnuo 560 II just make sure to get some high quality batteries, like Eneloops, and a good charger. Nitecore i4 is a great basic charger. More of a set it and forget it charger. Smart chargers may be a bit more, but you do get more features.


----------



## Sean Webster

Pffft, get Einsteins!


----------



## hokiealumnus

I've been looking into the Yongnuo YN-500EX as my first flash b/c it has TTL, can be triggered off-camera by my 70D and has high speed sync up to 1/8000, which is the 70D's top shutter speed. It's roughly equivalent to the 430EX as far as size & power. For $110 it seems pretty tough to beat.

As far as Einsteins... $$$$$ vs. $. I want to play with a flash, not break the bank on one.


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hokiealumnus*
> 
> I've been looking into the Yongnuo YN-500EX as my first flash b/c it has TTL, can be triggered off-camera by my 70D and has high speed sync up to 1/8000, which is the 70D's top shutter speed. It's roughly equivalent to the 430EX as far as size & power.


afaik this one has wireless ETTL but is only manual ON-CAM

check the YN 568EX IIfor on cam ETTL & HSS

or the 565EX for about the same price of the 500EX


----------



## Jixr

hey guys, I have an odd request.

So basically, I got into photography as a hobby with no intentions of doing a side-biz with it, but I did some work for some really well-connected people a while back, and I've been getting emails and calls left and right for photo work. ( mostly highschool sr photos, pre-prom photos, and graduation stuff )

Before all this, the only work I did was for friends, co-workers, family, and people I generally knew.

But now its people I've never seen or met before, and the first question always seems to be "what do you charge" with people I know, I would tell them "I work for free, but donations are accepted" as most of it was for family, and family friends. Doing that, payment would mean anything from cash, beer, or keys to their nice car to play around in for a bit.

First off, I don't like the way I see alot of people in the area going about it that charge '$XX for a 30-min session, and 15 fully edited photos' with additional photos, edits, and time chargnig more. ( i get the idea and reasoning behind it, but its not for me )

I'd much prefer to say for $X amount, we will do all the shots you want, wheverever location, no dumb charges for changing outfits, props, or whatever. You get all the photos from the day, and I'll pick and choose the best ones and edit them for you, and if there are any you think I missed, just let me know.

But the thing is, I don't know what to charge.

I'm no pro, I don't plan on quitting my 8-5 to do this. Just basically helping people out who couldn't afford a dedicated pro opened a flood gate of work for me. And i'd like to bill my self as simple and affordable.

Basically, I want to be affordable and help people out, but don't want to end up screwing myself over.

Any ideas, tips, or suggestions from some of you more seasoned guys out there?


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> hey guys, I have an odd request.
> 
> So basically, I got into photography as a hobby with no intentions of doing a side-biz with it, but I did some work for some really well-connected people a while back, and I've been getting emails and calls left and right for photo work. ( mostly highschool sr photos, pre-prom photos, and graduation stuff )
> 
> Before all this, the only work I did was for friends, co-workers, family, and people I generally knew.
> 
> But now its people I've never seen or met before, and the first question always seems to be "what do you charge" with people I know, I would tell them "I work for free, but donations are accepted" as most of it was for family, and family friends. Doing that, payment would mean anything from cash, beer, or keys to their nice car to play around in for a bit.
> 
> First off, I don't like the way I see alot of people in the area going about it that charge '$XX for a 30-min session, and 15 fully edited photos' with additional photos, edits, and time chargnig more. ( i get the idea and reasoning behind it, but its not for me )
> 
> I'd much prefer to say for $X amount, we will do all the shots you want, wheverever location, no dumb charges for changing outfits, props, or whatever. You get all the photos from the day, and I'll pick and choose the best ones and edit them for you, and if there are any you think I missed, just let me know.
> 
> But the thing is, I don't know what to charge.
> 
> I'm no pro, I don't plan on quitting my 8-5 to do this. Just basically helping people out who couldn't afford a dedicated pro opened a flood gate of work for me. And i'd like to bill my self as simple and affordable.
> 
> Basically, I want to be affordable and help people out, but don't want to end up screwing myself over.
> 
> Any ideas, tips, or suggestions from some of you more seasoned guys out there?


What is the length of a typical shoot and how long do you spend on editing? I say $50 an hour minimum for the shooting. That includes your prep and travel time. Not editing time tho. Remember you are still paying for your gear, your gas, your time, and experience. They are asking you, not someone else, to shoot them. They are happy to pay for your time and the images.

I charge about $100-$150 per 1-2hr shoot. $40-60 for a half hour session for FAU students. With that they get at least 10 well edited watermarked images (2048px long edge sized) for sharing on social media and family on the web...I usually end up giving them 20-40 images anyways lol. I charge extra for the print releases and prints of course.


----------



## Jixr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> What is the length of a typical shoot and how long do you spend on editing? I say $50 an hour minimum for the shooting. That includes your prep and travel time. Not editing time tho. Remember you are still paying for your gear, your gas, your time, and experience. They are asking you, not someone else, to shoot them. They are happy to pay for your time and the images.
> 
> I charge about $100-$150 per 1-2hr shoot. $40-60 for a half hour session for FAU students. With that they get at least 10 well edited watermarked images (2048px long edge sized) for sharing on social media and family on the web...I usually end up giving them 20-40 images anyways lol. I charge extra for the print releases and prints of course.


well travel isn't important, as the shoot is at my home town,and its over easter weekend and i'll be there for family, so that does not count in my book ( its a tiny cow town )
Set up isn't much for me etiher, since nearly everything fits into my bag, and at most I'll be carrying a flash stand if I buy one before then and a tripod if I need it ) Basically just make sure I have fresh batteries, clean memory cards, and everything is clean and packed up.

The way I would like to work is one fixed price for everything, travel, unlimted shoots and edits, a dedicated page on my website for access anywhere, basically every shot I think is good i'll edit, and they get copies of all the shots from the day good or bad ( along with the edited ones ) for them to do as they please. No watermarks, no pay for more edits, no release fee's etc. I don't like feeling like I am pressuring people to spend more for more, or having to limit what they get baised on their financial situation.

I'm no where as skilled as you are, and it seems criminal for me charging what people who are way above me charge.


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> well travel isn't important, as the shoot is at my home town,and its over easter weekend and i'll be there for family, so that does not count in my book ( its a tiny cow town ) Set up isn't much for me etiher, since nearly everything fits into my bag, and at most I'll be carrying a flash stand if I buy one before then and a tripod if I need it ) Basically just make sure I have fresh batteries, clean memory cards, and everything is clean and packed up.
> 
> The way I would like to work is one fixed price for everything, travel, unlimted shoots and edits, a dedicated page on my website for access anywhere, basically every shot I think is good i'll edit, and they get copies of all the shots from the day good or bad ( along with the edited ones ) for them to do as they please. I don't like feeling like I am pressuring people to spend more for more, or having to limit what they get baised on their financial situation.
> 
> I'm no where as skilled as you are, but can manage stuff like this.


Be sure to setup, at least, a simple contract. What they are providing, what you are providing. I see to many times where people are getting into arguments with 'clients' over what was or was not provided. If you google around you can probably find some good examples or things to include.


----------



## Jixr

yeah, thats a good idea. I'm sure there are some basic contract type stuff. Never hurts to be safe.

With family I never bothered, but with people I've never met I'm a little nervous.


----------



## Sean Webster

One thing I like to do is under promise and over deliver with my clients. Usually things end up way better that way rather than vice versa. 

Quote:


> well travel isn't important, as the shoot is at my home town,and its over easter weekend and i'll be there for family, so that does not count in my book ( its a tiny cow town )Set up isn't much for me etiher, since nearly everything fits into my bag, and at most I'll be carrying a flash stand if I buy one before then and a tripod if I need it ) Basically just make sure I have fresh batteries, clean memory cards, and everything is clean and packed up.


I's still figure in like $10 towards your fixed price for that. You don't want to just be doing it at a loss. You want to maintain some sort of small profit or at least have the work help pay for your gear.

Quote:


> The way I would like to work is one fixed price for everything, travel, unlimted shoots and edits, a dedicated page on my website for access anywhere,


Well, you seem to know what you need to add up what expenses you have.

I'd say do this minimum for a shoot:

$10 for prep and travel and gear cost

$10 for your website expenses

$50 an hour shooting on location and edit time

So say a $70 for a 1hr -1.5hr shoot

$120 for a 2hr-3hr

etc

That is for personal shoots with clients, not business/schools

For business/school do a $75-$100 an hour charge.

Trust me, these are cheap prices. Pro's charge more. Typically a pro goes of a day rate (at least here). Usually in my area that is anywhere from $1200-$2000 for an 8hr day.

Quote:


> basically every shot I think is good i'll edit, and they get copies of all the shots from the day good or bad ( along with the edited ones ) for them to do as they please. No watermarks, no pay for more edits, no release fee's etc.


I do that sometimes myself.  I just make sure i do a guarantee of a minimum of 10 so they clearly know what they are getting at the least. Client/Photographer clarity is a must. You should make a small contact too. I still havent made one myself, but the shoots I do arent that expensive or important to the point where I need one yet. I just make sure I get them to sign a model release tho so I can publish the images from the shoot as I please.

Quote:


> I don't like feeling like I am pressuring people to spend more for more, or having to limit what they get baised on their financial situation.


I agree. But, you should still clearly state what you are going to provide them as a base so they know what to expect. Then feel free to offer up the rest of the work to go along with that minimum base of service free.

Quote:


> I'm no where as skilled as you are, and it seems criminal for me charging what people who are way above me charge.


Eh, you're pretty good yourself. Better than some of the "pro's" around here lol.


----------



## Jixr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Eh, you're pretty good yourself. Better than some of the "pro's" around here lol.


i don't like tooting my own horn, but I kinda agree lol.

There are a million people I see claiming to be pro's when clearly, they are as good as your average soccer mom with a dslr

I don't knock having cheap gear ( as my budget for gear its pretty small, and all my gear is craigslist seconds ) but when you're rocking a kit lens and your only online publishing is facebook and instagram, then I don't see you as one, even if you can pay your bills doing so. ( That being said, I've seen some AMAZING shots with cheap gear)

( or even worse, seeing photos of people I know who hired a 'pro' and the photos look like absolute crap, when I would have done the job for less than half of what they paid )

But your idea of having a base+time is a good idea. I'm not a business type of person at all, and I'm just getting slammed with requests for photos and its all knda daunting.

And for both parties it would be a good idea to edit a contract online about expectations, agreed upon payment, and details about me providing the images via email, or whatever delviery method of their choice. ( as well as me being able to use the photos on my website for marketing reasons )

I just got a call today, but I'll talk with the people later about what all they want and i'll narrow it down from there.


----------



## kbros

Got my 50 1.8d today, quite a jump from the kit lens. The DOF is great but the crop is gonna kill me at car shows this year.


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> Got my 50 1.8d today, quite a jump from the kit lens. The DOF is great but the crop is gonna kill me at car shows this year.


Sounds like you need a 35mm 1.8G









I would have gone for a 50 but IMO it's too tight to be practical on a cropped sensor body. The 50 certainly still has it's place though.


----------



## kbros

I would've grabbed the 35, but this is the 1.8D so it was only $114. Price to performance ratio is through the roof.


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> I would've grabbed the 35, but this is the 1.8D so it was only $114. Price to performance ratio is through the roof.


I guess there is quite a difference in price









The 50 1.8D wasn't an option for me though, only the G, which is a lot closer in price to the 35.


----------



## kbros

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> I guess there is quite a difference in price
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The 50 1.8D wasn't an option for me though, only the G, which is a lot closer in price to the 35.


Yeah, I'm lucky my 9 year old D50 has a motor in it.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> I would've grabbed the 35, but this is the 1.8D so it was only $114. Price to performance ratio is through the roof.


the 35mm is only $195 tho. Not really that big of a diff...


----------



## Jixr

why cant canon have cheap primes like nikon has?


----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> why cant canon have cheap primes like nikon has?


It depends on where you go. Here in ZA Nikon accessories are absurdly expensive because they're a bit less common that Canon. And Pentax is almost impossible to find.

Speaking of Pentax, I might buy a second hand MZ50, I just have to test it and get the price down because of that gear issue. I like my FTb-n but full manual without a flash isn't really for me.


----------



## kbros

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> the 35mm is only $195 tho. Not really that big of a diff...


It is for a poor hs student! Lol I'm in such a small town that all the grocery store and lumber yard jobs are taken. I have summer work tho.


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> why cant canon have cheap primes like nikon has?


The 50mm 1.8 is pretty cheap and can be had used for under $100. The 40 2.8 is really good and can be had for about $125 used.


----------



## PCModderMike

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> why cant canon have cheap primes like nikon has?


Ya they are pretty cheap, so cheap I bought both the 50 1.8 and the 35 1.8. Love using both back and forth.


----------



## hokiealumnus

Just wanted to say thanks to Sean for sharing the pricing tips & info. That helps a lot for future reference if I ever get good enough that people ask for that kind of thing. Definitely _NOT_ there yet, though I am shooting a charity golf tournament in May (for free, I'm a board member at the organization; people have seen my photos and asked me to shoot it).

I fear not having a HSS flash for fill though. Probable visors + mid-afternoon golf = shadowed faces. Using the on-camera flash a) won't go very far and b) stops at 1/250, so all shots with it will be blown out. Unfortunately I'm not sure where I'll find $125 before mid-may.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> One thing I like to do is under promise and over deliver with my clients. Usually things end up way better that way rather than vice versa.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> well travel isn't important, as the shoot is at my home town,and its over easter weekend and i'll be there for family, so that does not count in my book ( its a tiny cow town )Set up isn't much for me etiher, since nearly everything fits into my bag, and at most I'll be carrying a flash stand if I buy one before then and a tripod if I need it ) Basically just make sure I have fresh batteries, clean memory cards, and everything is clean and packed up.
> 
> 
> 
> I's still figure in like $10 towards your fixed price for that. You don't want to just be doing it at a loss. You want to maintain some sort of small profit or at least have the work help pay for your gear.
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> The way I would like to work is one fixed price for everything, travel, unlimted shoots and edits, a dedicated page on my website for access anywhere,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well, you seem to know what you need to add up what expenses you have.
> 
> I'd say do this minimum for a shoot:
> $10 for prep and travel and gear cost
> $10 for your website expenses
> $50 an hour shooting on location and edit time
> 
> So say a $70 for a 1hr -1.5hr shoot
> $120 for a 2hr-3hr
> etc
> 
> That is for personal shoots with clients, not business/schools
> 
> For business/school do a $75-$100 an hour charge.
> 
> Trust me, these are cheap prices. Pro's charge more. Typically a pro goes of a day rate (at least here). Usually in my area that is anywhere from $1200-$2000 for an 8hr day.
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> basically every shot I think is good i'll edit, and they get copies of all the shots from the day good or bad ( along with the edited ones ) for them to do as they please. No watermarks, no pay for more edits, no release fee's etc.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I do that sometimes myself.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I just make sure i do a guarantee of a minimum of 10 so they clearly know what they are getting at the least. Client/Photographer clarity is a must. You should make a small contact too. I still havent made one myself, but the shoots I do arent that expensive or important to the point where I need one yet. I just make sure I get them to sign a model release tho so I can publish the images from the shoot as I please.
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't like feeling like I am pressuring people to spend more for more, or having to limit what they get baised on their financial situation.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I agree. But, you should still clearly state what you are going to provide them as a base so they know what to expect. Then feel free to offer up the rest of the work to go along with that minimum base of service free.
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm no where as skilled as you are, and it seems criminal for me charging what people who are way above me charge.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Eh, you're pretty good yourself. Better than some of the "pro's" around here lol.
Click to expand...

This is pretty solid.

I usually do lots of shoot for friends and I do those for free for fun. Regular people i meet or get referred to me get charged about $50/hour depending on how intense the shoot it as well as reimbursement for any gear that might be rented. My business/corporate clients are charged a minimum $250/day depending on how intense the shoot is but usually never goes much higher than $750/day including rental fees. On occasion a business shoot will invoice out to $200 if its a really short notice and easy shoot


----------



## hokiealumnus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boogschd*
> 
> afaik this one has wireless ETTL but is only manual ON-CAM
> 
> check the YN 568EX IIfor on cam ETTL & HSS
> 
> or the 565EX for about the same price of the 500EX


Sorry, missed this post previously. I'm relatively certain that is incorrect. TTL is a feature-add, but does not take away the ability for manual controls off-camera. That wouldn't make any sense and would require the flash to intentionally disable the controls on the back when operated off-camera.


----------



## Sean Webster

Product shoot tonight!


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hokiealumnus*
> 
> Sorry, missed this post previously. I'm relatively certain that is incorrect. TTL is a feature-add, but does not take away the ability for manual controls off-camera. That wouldn't make any sense and would require the flash to intentionally disable the controls on the back when operated off-camera.


nope, didnt say you would lose manual control when its off-cam,
im mistaken anyway .. i was thinking of the 560 EX when i said no TTL functions when on-cam xD

500ex is similar to the 568ex but is smaller and has a lower GN (53 vs 58)

so yeah, the 500EX looks alright









goodluck!









*** my 565EX is dead now so i might get a 500EX too . or a 568 .. depends if i have the funds for either one . LOL


----------



## kbros

Fungus?
If I look through the other end I can see little hair/worm like shapes.


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> Fungus?
> If I look through the other end I can see little hair/worm like shapes.


I'd say that looks like fungus, providing you haven't been throwing that lens around in the dirt







What lens is it on?


----------



## Sean Webster

jeeeze, did you find that in a swamp? 0_o


----------



## kbros

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> I'd say that looks like fungus, providing you haven't been throwing that lens around in the dirt
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What lens is it on?


9 y/o 18-70 kit lens. This explains why there's so much flare around windows and low contrast.

Example photo: I don't see any real spots or imperfections. But then again it's only 6MP so they might not show up because of lowish res. (This is when I first got my camera so photography skill level equaled zero.)


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> 9 y/o 18-70 kit lens. This explains why there's so much flare around windows and low contrast.


Wow, that is a lot of fungus for a lens that's only 9 years old. I've got several lenses that are older than that and they're all spotless, but I guess humidity and the environment have a lot to do with it.

If it's a lens you use fairly regularly I'd look out for a cheap original 18-55 (standard D50 kit lens) or even a kit lens from a later model film camera since you have the AF motor.


----------



## kbros

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> Wow, that is a lot of fungus for a lens that's only 9 years old. I've got several lenses that are older than that and they're all spotless, but I guess humidity and the environment have a lot to do with it.
> 
> If it's a lens you use fairly regularly I'd look out for a cheap original 18-55 (standard D50 kit lens) or even a kit lens from a later model film camera since you have the AF motor.


Well it's the kit from a d70 which I got in a trade for a d50 body and a d70 w/ kit. The d70 had about 16k on it and has since been sold. The cameras were spotless, but clearly the lens wasn't taken care of as well as the bodies. I have a 50 1.8d and my next move is something wide angle for cars and landscapes.


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> Well it's the kit from a d70 which I got in a trade for a d50 body and a d70 w/ kit. The d70 had about 16k on it and has since been sold. The cameras were spotless, but clearly the lens wasn't taken care of as well as the bodies. I have a 50 1.8d and my next move is something wide angle for cars and landscapes.


In that case you're probably better off continuing to use the lens and saving for a wide angle then. There's not much point replacing it and then replacing the replacement with a wide angle, especially since you're a student


----------



## kbros

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> In that case you're probably better off continuing to use the lens and saving for a wide angle then. There's not much point replacing it and then replacing the replacement with a wide angle, especially since you're a student


That's the plan! I was looking at This One earlier.


----------



## Jixr

so I'm thinking of either getting some cheap studio lights or a cheap flash stand.

I'm not sure which would be the best route to go.

ideas or suggestions?

( either way I'll be going with something off amazon )

from what I can tell, the flash stand can be wireless, and the lamps basically you can see what you're going to get.

I just want a softbox type thing on a stand. My home made one isn't very portable or easy to set up.


----------



## MistaBernie

Wanna go real cheap? Head over to Home Depot and pick up a $40 set of work lights. They throw tons of light, and if you really need to, you can jury rig a shoot-through umbrella over them to soften the light (and those umbrellas can be cheap, just pick up an Impact branded one at B&H or something).


----------



## aksthem1

Or go even cheaper and get a set of 500w work lights for like $25 with a coupon at Harbor Freight.


----------



## Jixr

I'm all about cheap, I love cheap.

I just don't know which one is best for me.

Is there any reason why you would use on over the other?

The thing with studio lights is the need for electrical outlets, and the heat.

Amazon is littered with cheap flash stands with white umbrellas, under $50 there are lots of options ( I know they are crap quality, but thats okay for me )

Also I hate the harsh shadows from non soft box'ed lights. and work lamps can do that.

I like the idea of a portable flash stand, as I could take it anywhere. I just don't know what pro's and cons it offers vs a lamp.

( i've been playing around with my flash alot lately, and I know I'm going to be needing to use it for a job in late may ( night prom photos ) Currently with my flash I just have it on a joby tripod and hook it on to whatever I can and bounce it off the walls so I don't blow out the picture )

I really like photos often taken in the evening with the sun behind them but using flash to light them from the front to give their body a glow effect.


----------



## Jixr

I love my EOS-M, once you figure out you can't shoot moving objects, it really is a monster little camera.

a 2.0 I like the bokeh better in it than my 50 1.4. Even to the point where I'm really considering selling the 50. ( and it CF's like a mo-fo )

http://s1329.photobucket.com/user/ClaytonGFinley/media/IMG_9833_zpscef5dd97.jpg.html

I really should do some test shots and compare the two. the M is totally worth it for the 22mm prime alone.

a storm front blew through, and I tried to catch some lightning, and unfortunately I didn't get any.

I also wish I didn't have a motorcycle to fix. I've been jones'n for a 70d. Also SUPER excited for MotoGP this weekend. Since I litterally bought my t3i the morning of the race last year, I'll be very excited to compare what I can do this year.

( though it looks like rain, they will still race as long as riders aren't crashing out left and right, or if its lightning )


----------



## Sean Webster

Here's some shots from a car shoot the other day after a fashion shoot I did. I'm starting to really develop a passion for photography now. I love improving on my work every time I shoot and trying new things.


----------



## Scott1541

What do you do to your pics Sean? They always seem to be slightly desaturated, that's not to say they aren't good though, because they are









ION my 35mm film just came about 30 minutes ago so I can use my F60 now








It's only going to be an occasional nice weather toy since shooting any kind of film is bloody expensive (for poor student me anyway







)


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> What do you do to your pics Sean? They always seem to be slightly desaturated, that's not to say they aren't good though, because they are


Mainly a slight tone curve may be what it is? It gets adjusted a bit here and there, but that is probably what you are referring to.



Most of the colors and saturation I try to match to how it was when I saw it.


----------



## Scott1541

That's probably it then, or a combination of that and my crappy laptop screen


----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> What do you do to your pics Sean? They always seem to be slightly desaturated, that's not to say they aren't good though, because they are
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ION my 35mm film just came about 30 minutes ago so I can use my F60 now
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's only going to be an occasional nice weather toy since *shooting any kind of film is bloody expensive* (for poor student me anyway
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )


You got that right. Here it's R39 for a 24 exposure film (ISO200 Fujifilm Superia), R30 to develop it, and R40 to scan it (I have a scanner but I can't get the images to come out right). Developing and printing a 24 exposure film is well over R100, and the only local place that still does film told me they're going to get rid of their equipment some time soon because it's running at a loss.


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JKuhn*
> 
> You got that right. Here it's R39 for a 24 exposure film (ISO200 Fujifilm Superia), R30 to develop it, and R40 to scan it (I have a scanner but I can't get the images to come out right). Developing and printing a 24 exposure film is well over R100, and the only local place that still does film told me they're going to get rid of their equipment some time soon because it's running at a loss.


This is going to be the first time I've shot film in years since my family were pretty early adopters of digital, even my grandad has been using a DSLR since around 2007. So far these rolls have cost me £3 each (Superia 200 36ex) and I've discovered a mail order type developing place that will develop and scan for £5 per roll. I can't do any developing or scanning myself since I don't have the kit, and even if my uni had any they probably wouldn't let a CS student use it


----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> This is going to be the first time I've shot film in years since my family were pretty early adopters of digital, even my grandad has been using a DSLR since around 2007. So far these rolls have cost me £3 each (Superia 200 36ex) and I've discovered a mail order type developing place that will develop and scan for £5 per roll. I can't do any developing or scanning myself since I don't have the kit, and even if my uni had any they probably wouldn't let a CS student use it


I guess I can also hand my films in at another shop but I don't like the idea of paying them, the courier, and a lab and then waiting 4 weeks for it.

The shop that I go to also told me that Fuji is planning to stop manufacturing film somewhere in the near future.


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JKuhn*
> 
> I guess I can also hand my films in at another shop but I don't like the idea of paying them, the courier, and a lab and then waiting 4 weeks for it.
> 
> The shop that I go to also told me that Fuji is planning to stop manufacturing film somewhere in the near future.


I don't know about the shop telling you that, could just be an attempt to get you buying more. I don't see why fuji would stop making film as long as there's still profit in it. If there's one particular type of film that's not profitable, they'll stop making it like they have done to some recently. As long as there's enough sales to turn a profit I don't think they would stop now that there is so little competition.


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Here's some shots from a car shoot the other day after a fashion shoot I did. I'm starting to really develop a passion for photography now. I love improving on my work every time I shoot and trying new things.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


those look soo awesome, how do you get to shine to show like that? ..


----------



## Eggs and bacon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JKuhn*
> 
> I guess I can also hand my films in at another shop but I don't like the idea of paying them, the courier, and a lab and then waiting 4 weeks for it.
> 
> The shop that I go to also told me that Fuji is planning to stop manufacturing film somewhere in the near future.


It is very unlikely Fuji will stop selling film. Velvia is still a very popular ( and bloody expensive) choice for landscapes. If you want to shoot film cheaply set up a dark room, you can develop c41 for a dollar or 2 worth of chemicals, you just need good temperature control, and black and white is also cheaper and easier. The only hard part is scanning, which is either expensive to get someone else to do it, or expensive and time consuming to do it yourself, but a good scan of 120 film is very rewarding to look at.


----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Eggs and bacon*
> 
> It is very unlikely Fuji will stop selling film. Velvia is still a very popular ( and bloody expensive) choice for landscapes. If you want to shoot film cheaply set up a dark room, you can develop c41 for a dollar or 2 worth of chemicals, you just need good temperature control, and black and white is also cheaper and easier. The only hard part is scanning, which is either expensive to get someone else to do it, or expensive and time consuming to do it yourself, but a good scan of 120 film is very rewarding to look at.


Maybe they just meant the Superia. That and Kodak ColorPlus are all I can get though.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boogschd*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Here's some shots from a car shoot the other day after a fashion shoot I did. I'm starting to really develop a passion for photography now. I love improving on my work every time I shoot and trying new things.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> those look soo awesome, how do you get to shine to show like that? ..
Click to expand...

On pic 2 and 4 I used flashes to shine the silver and cut down reflections. Really cool and easy thing to do on lighter colored cars. Otherwise i just used the brush tool and used a lot of clarity selectively.


----------



## kbros

Tried the stock Nikon neck strap, didn't like it. Tried the cheap back-of-hand strap, hated it. This is my solution, a wrist strap made from 550 paracord with a lanyard knot.


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> Tried the stock Nikon neck strap, didn't like it. Tried the cheap back-of-hand strap, hated it. This is my solution, a wrist strap made from 550 paracord with a lanyard knot.


This is what I did to, love it.


----------



## kbros

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *silvrr*
> 
> This is what I did to, love it.


I spent about a half hour adjusting the size of the loop until I got it so it just barely holds the bottom of my palm. I can reach all the buttons, and if the camera gets knocked there's no way it's getting dropped. With $4 of paracord I still have enough to make 4 more. Sweet deal


----------



## Scott1541

I could do with something like this. When I'm shooting I usually have my camera in my hand with the strap wrapped around my wrist a couple of times. When I'm not using it I'll normally have it slung over my shoulder though, which that wouldn't be able to do


----------



## Jixr

Can anyone recomend a cheap camera sling off amazon? ( preferably under $20 )

I'm going to be carrying around a gripped t3i with a 70-200 f4 around all day at the race track, and could use a comfortable strap. ( or I may just rig my gel bass guitar strap to work )

Also, I'm trying to decide if I should bring a tripod.

I got great shots going handheld at the F1 race, but unsure if I should bring it or not ( trying to bring a minimal amount of gear )


----------



## PCModderMike

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> Can anyone recomend a cheap camera sling off amazon? ( preferably under $20 )
> 
> I'm going to be carrying around a gripped t3i with a 70-200 f4 around all day at the race track, and could use a comfortable strap. ( or I may just rig my gel bass guitar strap to work )
> 
> Also, I'm trying to decide if I should bring a tripod.
> 
> I got great shots going handheld at the F1 race, but unsure if I should bring it or not ( trying to bring a minimal amount of gear )


This is what I use.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B0062W02C6


----------



## Jixr

cool, I saw it earlier, but the cheaper prices could mean that some are better than others. Just ordered, be here friday in time for the race day.

I'm also thinking about not gripping my camera, and instead just bringing another battery in my pocket. Not sure though.


----------



## freitz

What kind of setup is everyone using to take pictures of their rig? I am looking a table top studio setup to fit a full tower.


----------



## Sean Webster

I just aim my camera at my PC on my desk lol I should do a setup shot one day....


----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> I just aim my camera at my PC on my desk lol I should do a setup shot one day....


Same here. I play with different angles, focal lengths, etc. but my rig stays where it is.


----------



## Jixr

Whoo! just snagged an awesome seat for the MotoGP race tomorrow.

( if anyone happens to be there lets meet up )

I'm excited, as a year ago just before the race I bought my camera, currious to see how well i've improved and how well some of the gear I accuired helps.

Last time I went to the track I was an idiot and brought tons of crap I didn't need. This year its just my t3i, 70-200, and my EOS-M with the 18-55 for some wide shots.

Only bringing my camera backpack to load it up with waters.


----------



## laboitenoire

Speaking of simplifying one's kit, I've finally posted my Taiwan photos to Flickr. The only lens I carried for my D7000 was my 30 f/1.4, and for casual snapshots (which I didn't upload) I just carried my iPhone. Forgot how much I enjoy shooting with my 30.

Here are some of my favorites from the trip.

https://flic.kr/p/n3owMb
DSC_0353 by laboitenoire, on Flickr

https://flic.kr/p/n3ozzL
DSC_0364 by laboitenoire, on Flickr

https://flic.kr/p/n3n8dP
DSC_0385 by laboitenoire, on Flickr

https://flic.kr/p/n3n3Ni
DSC_0397 by laboitenoire, on Flickr

https://flic.kr/p/n3naDc
DSC_0419 by laboitenoire, on Flickr

https://flic.kr/p/n3nooD
DSC_0445 by laboitenoire, on Flickr

https://flic.kr/p/n3nhma
DSC_0448 by laboitenoire, on Flickr

https://flic.kr/p/n3oi8Y
DSC_0671 by laboitenoire, on Flickr

Carrying such minimal kit made the trip much more enjoyable (I did the entire week out of a 35 L Patagonia backpack which was great in the night markets and staying in hostels, as well as dashing around airports). However, it's definitely made me notice how cumbersome a DSLR can be... By the end I was seriously GAS'ing for something small with a fast wide angle.


----------



## Scott1541

The time has come, I'm looking for a flashgun, but I'm on a budget so I'm looking at Yongnuo's offerings. I like the price of the YN-560 II/III and everything else about it but I'm not sure if the lack of TTL metering ability would be a problem for me, even though I probably wouldn't be using a flashgun all that often. I've seen for a similar price there's the YN-468 II but I don't like the look of it, and it isn't as powerful which I think may be a disadvantage if I'm using it to light stuff up creatively.

The thing I'm most concerned about not having TTL for is use as a fill in flash, is this fairly easily done manually? Also I assume with a manual flash it's only the flash that works in manual mode, as in you can still use the camera in all of the program modes and just need to adjust the flash power, etc...

So what would you guys recommend? 560, 468, or burn a humongous hole in my pocket with the 565EX?


----------



## nvidiaftw12

I think that you'll find after a few shots you'll be able to pick the right settings with out many or any test shots. At least that was the case for me. Bit annoying to change all the time if you're moving around, but it works.

Hmm. I don't think I had seen that 486 before. I might go with that actually. Full power on the 560 is way bright, you're not going to find yourself using it all that much I don't think.


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> I think that you'll find after a few shots you'll be able to pick the right settings with out many or any test shots. At least that was the case for me. Bit annoying to change all the time if you're moving around, but it works.
> 
> Hmm. I don't think I had seen that 486 before. I might go with that actually. Full power on the 560 is way bright, you're not going to find yourself using it all that much I don't think.


Just gone and ordered a YN-560 II. It was the cheapest option for my tight student budget, at £41 (vs £50 for the 560 III and £55 for the 468 II) and for the amount it's going to get used the lack of TTL shouldn't be too much of a problem. The lack of the wireless features of the 560 III won't be a problem either


----------



## Mwarren

The YN560II is a really good choice, I've been using the same one for almost two years.

I'm looking to pair it up with 3 more YN560III's for two more stops of power though as a single YN560II doesn't cut it in some situations when shooting on location through a modifier.


----------



## Jixr

got some awesome photos from the race.

While I was out I spent a few laps trying to get the motorsport motion blur shots, Its really hard to do when you're far away and the bikes are moving quick. Most didn't come out, but I did get a few keepers.
http://s1329.photobucket.com/user/ClaytonGFinley/media/IMG_0263_zps4fbe06c6.jpg.html

Also.
Motorcycles.
You're doing it wrong.
http://s1329.photobucket.com/user/ClaytonGFinley/media/IMG_0195_zps88f3e9ce.jpg.html
( stupid camera was having focusing problems all day with my 70-200, I'm not sure why, Sport mode kept on missing it, so I just switched modes later on.

I'm still editing a bit of them, and I'll upload some of the better ones, and link in the rest.


----------



## Mwarren

Yea I can't use and don't use AF anymore. I gave it up as I find Manual Focus much easier and when using AF your limited to "the af box" and having to recompose.

Maybe in 10 years or so an AF system will be released that is as good as the human eye but I doubt it.


----------



## aksthem1

One thing to note you will have a ton of out of focus shots. Don't worry about that. Use AF Servo and shutter priority. You're going to have to play around with that depending on their speed and focal length. 1/60th is probably the lowest I would go for a handheld shot at 200mm. A monopod would help with that of course.
Select your focus point. Usually center is the best and lenses with a fast focus motor is highly recommended. Yours is USM of course. So no worries there. But even ljason8eg has taken some great shots when he had his T2i and 55-250mm.

On some slower focusing lenses I won't even bother using AF. The amount of out of focus shots just quadruple.


----------



## Jixr

here are some of the shots from the GP


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



http://s1329.photobucket.com/user/ClaytonGFinley/media/IMG_0305_zps3c5460fa.jpg.html

http://s1329.photobucket.com/user/ClaytonGFinley/media/IMG_0304_zps5cf075f0.jpg.html

http://s1329.photobucket.com/user/ClaytonGFinley/media/IMG_0300_zps26bec807.jpg.html

http://s1329.photobucket.com/user/ClaytonGFinley/media/IMG_0245_zpsbc2a36ed.jpg.html

http://s1329.photobucket.com/user/ClaytonGFinley/media/IMG_9953-2_zpsf827bf1d.jpg.html

http://s1329.photobucket.com/user/ClaytonGFinley/media/IMG_0170_zps1e3c7085.jpg.html

http://s1329.photobucket.com/user/ClaytonGFinley/media/IMG_0098_zps17bb41c5.jpg.html

http://s1329.photobucket.com/user/ClaytonGFinley/media/IMG_0048_zps31019804.jpg.html
dat lean angle, the 64* lean





more can be seen at jixrphoto.com/motogp14


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> On pic 2 and 4 I used flashes to shine the silver and cut down reflections. Really cool and easy thing to do on lighter colored cars. Otherwise i just used the brush tool and used a lot of clarity selectively.


thanks @Sean Webster ! ^_^
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> Just gone and ordered a YN-560 II. It was the cheapest option for my tight student budget, at £41 (vs £50 for the 560 III and £55 for the 468 II) and for the amount it's going to get used the lack of TTL shouldn't be too much of a problem. The lack of the wireless features of the 560 III won't be a problem either


ive got a 565EX and a 560-ii
the 565EX died on me so i was forced to use the 560-ii, manual mode
i just used a flash bender to bounce the flash, worked flawlessly for the whole event ^_^

what do you guys recommend for a AA battery charger , so far ive got the sanyo chargers that came with the eneloops and the eneloops pro

looking to replace em with a fast charger with at least 8 bays ?


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boogschd*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> On pic 2 and 4 I used flashes to shine the silver and cut down reflections. Really cool and easy thing to do on lighter colored cars. Otherwise i just used the brush tool and used a lot of clarity selectively.
> 
> 
> 
> thanks @Sean Webster ! ^_^
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> Just gone and ordered a YN-560 II. It was the cheapest option for my tight student budget, at £41 (vs £50 for the 560 III and £55 for the 468 II) and for the amount it's going to get used the lack of TTL shouldn't be too much of a problem. The lack of the wireless features of the 560 III won't be a problem either
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> ive got a 565EX and a 560-ii
> the 565EX died on me so i was forced to use the 560-ii, manual mode
> i just used a flash bender to bounce the flash, worked flawlessly for the whole event ^_^
> 
> what do you guys recommend for a AA battery charger , so far ive got the sanyo chargers that came with the eneloops and the eneloops pro
> 
> looking to replace em with a fast charger with at least 8 bays ?
Click to expand...

http://www.slrlounge.com/best-charger-ever-the-titanium-16-bay-battery-charger-review

This?^

I personally use this: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=&sku=883786&gclid=CN-SgcLz3r0CFUNo7AodJSsA0w&Q=&is=REG&A=details


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Be warned though. Quick charges are not all good. The faster the charge the shorter the batteries eventual lifespan.


----------



## Mwarren

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> http://www.slrlounge.com/best-charger-ever-the-titanium-16-bay-battery-charger-review
> 
> This?^
> 
> I personally use this: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=&sku=883786&gclid=CN-SgcLz3r0CFUNo7AodJSsA0w&Q=&is=REG&A=details


$50 for a battery charger seems over priced. You can buy 16 AA Eneloop's for that much and the Eneloop charger. I'd only see something like that being useful if you shoot 30-40 hours a week.

I'd just suggest charging using the stock Sanyo/Eneloop charger that comes with the 4 pack. I know that 4 AA's take about 6 hours to fully charge after being fully used with that charger so in 12 hours with two Sanyo/Eneloop chargers and two outlets you can charge 16 batteries no problem.


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> http://www.slrlounge.com/best-charger-ever-the-titanium-16-bay-battery-charger-review
> 
> This?^
> 
> I personally use this: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=&sku=883786&gclid=CN-SgcLz3r0CFUNo7AodJSsA0w&Q=&is=REG&A=details


thats exactly what i was looking at before . lolz
yeah, id probably go with the powerex as well.. i read good reviews about it

thanks


----------



## kingsnake2

So my Fuji x10 keeps giving me a "Focus Error"

Everything I can find online says either "turn it off and one" (done that lots of times) and take it to a repair shop. Any other ideas? I don't think it will be worth it for me to take it to a repair shop....

EDIT:
Well, I tried the hit it hard approach and it seems to be working for the first few on and off cycles....


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mwarren*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> http://www.slrlounge.com/best-charger-ever-the-titanium-16-bay-battery-charger-review
> 
> This?^
> 
> I personally use this: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=&sku=883786&gclid=CN-SgcLz3r0CFUNo7AodJSsA0w&Q=&is=REG&A=details
> 
> 
> 
> $50 for a battery charger seems over priced. You can buy 16 AA Eneloop's for that much and the Eneloop charger. I'd only see something like that being useful if you shoot 30-40 hours a week.
> 
> I'd just suggest charging using the stock Sanyo/Eneloop charger that comes with the 4 pack. I know that 4 AA's take about 6 hours to fully charge after being fully used with that charger so in 12 hours with two Sanyo/Eneloop chargers and two outlets you can charge 16 batteries no problem.
Click to expand...

haha, I would not dare to wait that long for my batteries to charge.

if you think that is expensive, look up RC car battery chargers...I got a 4 battery charger that costs $100 and that is on the cheap side.


----------



## Mwarren

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> haha, I would not dare to wait that long for my batteries to charge.
> 
> if you think that is expensive, look up RC car battery chargers...I got a 4 battery charger that costs $100 and that is on the cheap side.


6 hours isn't that bad considering how long Eneloop's hold a charge for. If you don't push them that hard you can easily get 4-6 hours+ of shooting with a set of 4 in a Speedlite.

I tend to push my flash's though and shoot at 1/2 to full power and one set will still last a whole photo session (normally 2 hours of shooting) which is really good for AA's.

Now if I were shooting everyday or using say 3 or more speedlights at a time than one of those chargers would be a wise investment.


----------



## Scott1541

Just loaded up the F60 and took my first ever shot with it









Now I'm off out around the nature reserve near me house with it


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> Just loaded up the F60 and took my first ever shot with it
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now I'm off out around the nature reserve near me house with it


nice!







... i have an old F60 here somewhere with a broken shutter button xD


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boogschd*
> 
> nice!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ... i have an old F60 here somewhere with a broken shutter button xD


It works quite well apart from the autofocus being a little violent and having to press the shutter button a little harder than my D5100. I've noticed there's a scratch on the mirror too and it's a little dirty but that's what you can expect from an SLR that's a minimum of 13 years old. I'm not going to bother trying to clean it, experience has taught me that the cleaning of delicate components usually ends in me either damaging them, them being dirtier than when I started cleaning, or in the case of my D5100, both.


----------



## MistaBernie

For recharging my AAs, I use a Maha MH-C801D. ~$69 on Amazon, charges 8 at once (individual circuits), does a full rapid charge in 1 hour (but I use the 2 hour setting that's available) and has a reconditioning setting that will drain the set and recharge them. Works awesome with my Eneloops.


----------



## kingsnake2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kingsnake2*
> 
> So my Fuji x10 keeps giving me a "Focus Error"
> 
> Everything I can find online says either "turn it off and one" (done that lots of times) and take it to a repair shop. Any other ideas? I don't think it will be worth it for me to take it to a repair shop....
> 
> EDIT:
> Well, I tried the hit it hard approach and it seems to be working for the first few on and off cycles....


So I guess this wasn't a fluke. It is doing it again.

It give me a "Focus Error" and the focus doesn't work at all (manual or auto) sometimes and others it will try to focus but can't do anything but very close macro.

Anyone know how much it typically costs to get a camera repaired? Should I try to take it apart myself?


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kingsnake2*
> 
> So I guess this wasn't a fluke. It is doing it again.
> 
> It give me a "Focus Error" and the focus doesn't work at all (manual or auto) sometimes and others it will try to focus but can't do anything but very close macro.
> 
> Anyone know how much it typically costs to get a camera repaired? Should I try to take it apart myself?


Send it in to fuji and see how much it'll cost. I assume they send you a quote first and you then have to authorise the work just like you do with Nikon. This probably isn't something that you can fix easily yourself so I'd send it in for repair first, and if it's too expensive maybe try local repairers.


----------



## Jixr

So.. question.

I've been really wanting to learn how to make a photo have that 'photoshopped' look, I'm not sure what to call it, but there is something they do that makes the photos look obviously photoshopped, and I want to give some of my shots a more 'retouched' look.

I'm not sure what it is that makes some of them stand out, but basically I'm wanting to up my photoshop skills, basically I only use it for adding text, creating double exposure shots, the blemish tool, and super basic stuff like that.

I've been considering maybe signing up for some classes in the fall at the local CC, (just a PS class and maybe a advance photog class )

But was wondering if there were any online tools, books, or things that would be good to check out before shelling out for a school class.

Something that shows how to take an existing photo, and gives you a step by step to get a final result would be awesome.


----------



## Scott1541

I could do with expanding my photoshop skills. I'm alright at adjusting contrast, exposure, sharpness sliders, etc... but beyond that I'm fairly hopeless


----------



## kbros

Camera Raw in CS6 does all the work for me 80% of the time. I have a decent understanding of all the PS tools from digital imaging freshman year of high school . Now I'm in a full on PS class where we remove wrinkles/blemishes and remove an object from a picture and things of that nature.


----------



## hokiealumnus

I'm quite n00bish at post processing and have never tried myself, but recall vaguely reading something to the effect of - reduce sharpness, drop saturation and drop contrast. Then play with the exposure curve to give it the color cast you're going for.

Thus ends my n00bish advice on something I've never done.


----------



## Jixr

yeah, I have some photos I like that would look really good in the hands of someone good at photoshop, and I like the 'fake' look of lots of commercial type photos.

I'm sure its not ALL photoshop, lighting and such plays a big factor, but there has to be some good online refernces or books?


----------



## aksthem1

Any samples of what you're talking about?

If you haven't taken any photo or digital art type classes at your local CC, they may require you to have a class prerequisite. So you may need to start from the beginning. While it may be fun and informative, it can still be a huge drag.
There should be courses or workshops around you offered by camera stores, pro photographers or photo clubs that cater to that specific subject.

What it really comes down to is knowing what each tool can do and is capable of. Then it's just putting it to proper use.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

I think that Sean's car photos the other day would be a good example of what he is talking about.


----------



## Jixr

Yeah. The largest camera store in Texas is down the street from where I work and they have classes and things, but I don't have a laptop so I'm kinda sol there.


----------



## Sean Webster

What are you trying to learn? Youtube has everything. Show some examples and I'll look for tuts.


----------



## kbros

We want to know how to do all that fancy stuff you do, with the curves and junk.


----------



## Scott1541

+1


----------



## Conspiracy

just got 10 rolls of fomapan in the mail

5 rolls iso200
5rolls iso400


----------



## Jixr

like the banners on the home page with the guy drinking the wine, stuff like that.


and like this


----------



## kingsnake2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> Send it in to fuji and see how much it'll cost. I assume they send you a quote first and you then have to authorise the work just like you do with Nikon. This probably isn't something that you can fix easily yourself so I'd send it in for repair first, and if it's too expensive maybe try local repairers.


Thanks, I guess I'll send it in to a repair station first and get a quote.


----------



## Sean Webster

My secret is magic. 

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> We want to know how to do all that fancy stuff you do, with the curves and junk.


You play with lightroom/photoshop curves until you get what you like lol I'm not sure what else there is I do besides that in lightroom and the other basic adjustments. If you want I can upload presets from images.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> like the banners on the home page with the guy drinking the wine, stuff like that.
> 
> 
> and like this


1. Learn how to dodge and burn in photoshop
2. Learn how to blend layers and textures together in photoshop
3. Learn how to manipulate the tonal adjustments in photoshop

/done?

Here is a video:


----------



## aksthem1

Snagged a Sony Nex-3N from Best Buy for $100. Don't really have a need for it, but it was cheap.


----------



## Jixr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> My secret is magic


----------



## PCModderMike

^lol

I think YouTube is one of the biggest and best resources out there for learning Photoshop. For learning anything really. I did "download" a whole Lynda.com video series on CS6 but I haven't had a lot of time to go through it.


----------



## Jixr

yeah, I'm just not that good at following videos, ( online college classes killed me ) I like to pause and ask questions and stuff, epsc when it comes to software.

So I did some photos last night for a co-worker, my boss saw them, and he has a daughter my age who went to school for this stuff and owns a 6d. Boss says "wow you must have a really nice camera, my daughters stuff doesn't look that good and hers is pretty high end"

I have a t3i.

winning?


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> So I did some photos last night for a co-worker, my boss saw them, and he has a daughter my age who went to school for this stuff and owns a 6d. Boss says "wow you must have a really nice camera, my daughters stuff doesn't look that good and hers is pretty high end"
> 
> I have a t3i.
> 
> winning?


I have a friend who's a cosplayer, I will shoot for her occasionally and other times she will get another friend who is also a cosplayer to do it. Her friend uses a 5D Mk II and 50mm f/1.4 and the pictures I take on my D5100 end up looking way better


----------



## Jixr

Speaking of 50 1.4, I'm thinking of trading/selling mine. I never really use it, and have been thinking of seeing what I could get for it. I think I've used it 2 or 3 times since I bought it.


----------



## JKuhn

It's like when I uploaded photos from a local country music festival on Facebook. People tended to comment on what a great camera I have, but all I used was my 1100D (T3) and 100-400mm L. I think though the reason is partly because the other photographer that I know probably didn't do post-processing (I know he doesn't use RAW) and he posted all his photos while I only posted the ones I thought were good.


----------



## kbros

The new Flickr app for iOS and Android absolutely sucks! The only reason I used it is to download my flickr photos to my phone. With this new update, my photos which usually download full size 3000x2000 are now 640 by something. So done with this! And now I need a yahoo account to use it, you know, the mail client where they keep all their users' passwords in plain text! In white girl words, I can't even, I'm so done. Recommend me a new photo sharing/hosting website please.


----------



## PCModderMike

I'm in the same boat, it is pretty upsetting. The Yahoo thing is killing it for me. I know a lot of guys around here who just use imgur for hosting their pics and posting them here. I've heard some good things about smugmug though for something similar to flickr.


----------



## kbros

My main issue is getting the photos onto my phone, I want to be able to wirelessly get my full size photos onto my phone from flickr. The new app isn't letting me do that.


----------



## jameyscott

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> My main issue is getting the photos onto my phone, I want to be able to wirelessly get my full size photos onto my phone from flickr. The new app isn't letting me do that.


There is always google drive.


----------



## PCModderMike

Darn. I was about to say, "what are you talking about??" in regards to not being able to download full size copies of your photos anymore...because it was working for me. Then I noticed in my status bar at the top, 2 updates needed approval. One of them was flickr. Damn I shouldn't have updated.


----------



## Scott1541

I decided to make a 500px account earlier, not because I was leaving flickr, just because I use flickr as more of a photo backup site rather than for showcasing my photos.

I hope yahoo don't completely remove the google sign in feature any time soon. I can't sign in with my yahoo ID because I don't know what it is, (auto assigned one) and when I go through the recovery steps it always says an error occurred.


----------



## Jixr

this is why i have my own domain and server.


----------



## kbros

This is how my new workflow goes after yahoo ruined everything. From camera to PS, from PS to a folder. Then I have to upload the photos from that folder to flickr, and then go BACK and drag those into the google drive folder. Well now that I think about it I can just make my "Final" folder inside the google docs folder, pretty much halving the time back into what it was pre- yahoo screwup. You all have just witnessed a lightbulb mid-sentence.


----------



## Sean Webster

eh, flickr works fine for me no issue.


----------



## PCModderMike

Technically still works fine for me too. I just didn't like being forced to create a Yahoo account.


----------



## Jixr

So I'm thinking of trading my Canon 50 1.4 for a sigma 30 1.4

I don't like my 50, it gives CA's like crazy, and just does not seem that sharp to me.

Any suggestions?

I've fallen in love with using my 70-200 for portrait work, and my little M has its 22mm 2.0 for when I wanna do narrow DOF stuff.

ideas?


----------



## hokiealumnus

Sorry if it's in your sig (I'm mobile), but are you on full frame or crop? If crop, I'd go with the 30 probably. If FF and you've got some extra budget. I'd look into that new Art 50 f/1.4. It looks very promising.


----------



## Scott1541

I'd agree with going for the 30 if it is a crop body.

ION I had a nice laugh yesterday. One of my facebook 'friends' (I say that because he's only a friend of a friend) has made a weebly site and called it *hisnamephotography*. I wouldn't mind but he's not even a good photographer, and everything he posts is always taken with instagram and has either black and white filters or filters to give it a film grain effect applied. He's been to some nice locations but other than that all of his work is crap IMO. I also find it quite funny that on his weebly site he says he goes everywhere with a camera glued to his hand and he wants to be a pro, well, he's got a long way to go


----------



## kbros

Same as all the 16 y/o girls on instagram that write "Camera emoji" *Photographer* in their bio's, when all they have is an iphone 4 with a 5mp camera..


----------



## Jixr

whats worse, the craigslist photographers or the people who make post on CL bashing them.

And yes I'm on a Crop Body.

I could also sell it and double my money, I only paid $150 for it in like new condition.


----------



## kbros

Check out this crap.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> So I'm thinking of trading my Canon 50 1.4 for a sigma 30 1.4
> 
> I don't like my 50, it gives CA's like crazy, and just does not seem that sharp to me.
> 
> Any suggestions?
> 
> I've fallen in love with using my 70-200 for portrait work, and my little M has its 22mm 2.0 for when I wanna do narrow DOF stuff.
> 
> ideas?


Do it, the sigma is amazing on crop. I miss mine.


----------



## Jixr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Do it, the sigma is amazing on crop. I miss mine.


its the non art version, here is the link
http://austin.craigslist.org/pho/4427876002.html


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Do it, the sigma is amazing on crop. I miss mine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> its the non art version, here is the link
> http://austin.craigslist.org/pho/4427876002.html
Click to expand...

that's the one I had.

The art version is 35mm. Not 30mm.


----------



## Jixr

they make a 30mm art, its a little cheaper than the 35 ( and not as good )

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/918894-REG/sigma_30mm_f_1_4_dc_hsm.html

could easily be the same internals and just a new shell to match their newer product line
EDIT: apparently its a whole new lens, and replaced the older 30mm

( it seems like sigma is basically only having its 'art' line up, I would love the older sigma 50 1.4 over my canon 50, but they don't make it anymore )


----------



## Sean Webster

I'd get that one for 300 or look on potn for cheaper. One of my favorite lenses I've used. I don't think it would really be worth it for the art version


----------



## laboitenoire

Just get the old EX version. It's a great lens.


----------



## Jixr

well now I have a question for you guys.

I did a photo awhile back of a co-workers son playing baseball, ( before I had a simple photo contract )
Did the photos, gave her the .jgps, and she sent one off to the leagues website, which they are now using as a banner on their site.

Part of me thinks its cool that a photo of mine is out there being shared, but the other part thinks its not that cool that It was posted without any of my concent, credit, or anything like that.

( I don't even have the photo up on my own website yet )

From what I've understood, I own the copywrite to the photo, and I should have control over it.

The kicker is its a youth little league program, which I support, but I'm not sure if I should contact the site or do anything or let it be.


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> well now I have a question for you guys.
> 
> I did a photo awhile back of a co-workers son playing baseball, ( before I had a simple photo contract )
> Did the photos, gave her the .jgps, and she sent one off to the leagues website, which they are now using as a banner on their site.
> 
> Part of me thinks its cool that a photo of mine is out there being shared, but the other part thinks its not that cool that It was posted without any of my concent, credit, or anything like that.
> 
> ( I don't even have the photo up on my own website yet )
> 
> From what I've understood, I own the copywrite to the photo, and I should have control over it.
> 
> The kicker is its a youth little league program, which I support, but I'm not sure if I should contact the site or do anything or let it be.


I don't know a lot about this but as far as I'm aware you still own the photo unless it was specifically signed over to her in writing. To be honest I'd probably just let it be though, as long as they aren't using the photo for commercial purposes.


----------



## Jixr

Yeah, I was at least thinking of emailing the admin of the site and letting them know that I am the photographer and leave my website and contect info incase anyone was asking where the photo originated. And stating that in no way do I authorize the useage of my photo for commercial or advertizement usage outside of where the photo is now being used on their site.


----------



## MistaBernie

_*Important disclaimer!*_ First and foremost, I am not a lawyer, nor am I an 'expert' in copyright or legal matters regarding copyright. The information I'm providing below is information I've learned to be true from information shared by copyright lawyers in the United States, which is where this information is pertinent. I know your location is listed as Texas so you should basically be covered, but if you are reading this and asking questions about copyright for your country, it is absolutely best to do your own research and check for the differences as there will be some.

There are a number of factors that come into consideration here. First is the issue of copyright. This is a very simple breakdown and it's not all encompassing, but I think it will answer your questions. If you take a photo and you are not doing so as a requirement of your employment, you own the copyright to the image (ex: the Boston Marathon bombing police sgt that took photos as part of his job - he did not own the copyright to the images he leaked to the press because he took them as part of his job duties) You have the right to share them and use them for almost all purposes, with the exception that even you cannot use them in a commercial setting without a model release if there is an identifiable person in the image. Obviously there are other rules/regulations, but this is the simplest way to describe this situation (I feel). One other thing to remember though is that for any claims for copyright, you have to have to submit the images in order to copyright them, so that's the first thing you would want to do. This is a relatively simple process and can be done digitally but it isn't free (but it's relatively cheap, $35 I believe for electronic submission).

Just giving copies to your friend (was she a client? Did she pay you? Did you have any sort of contract) does not necessarily grant her any particular rights, but by not having a contract, all the friend would need to say is that you had a verbal contract (which may not stand up). It could simply be that your friend posted the images to Facebook or something, and someone from the league saw the image, and used it.

In absolute terms of black and white, you technically could request that the league take down the image to which you hold copyright as they are _technically_ using the image without permission. If you were to ask them to take down the image, and they failed to, you could request a DMCA take down via their ISP. Obviously, this is drastic and should be avoided, because word gets around quick with parents that feel they've been 'wronged', and the last thing you want is a bad rap (or worse).

The question is, what do you have to gain from doing so (or from their using your image without permission)? It's pretty much a no-win situation. Asking them to take it down is basically going to make you look like a bad guy, but if you feel strongly about the image being used, what you may want to do is get in touch with who's in charge of the website and make a comment along the lines of 'hey, I noticed you used this shot for your website. I'd be happy to provide more images for you if you'd like, but in the future it would really be best if we had an agreement so that you could continue to use the images and protect all involved parties in the long run.' Make them feel like you're doing it to protect them as well, but try to do so without making it sound like you'll go after them if they keep using your images.

Also, there isn't much to be had in terms of value if you go after them. You would need to basically demonstrate financial loss (meaning you'd have to demonstrate that you have sold images or rights to images in the past) in order to get any sort of meaningful monetary value out of a suit, and suing for any sort of damages definitely requires a copyright on file (within a certain number of days of the image being available in the public domain for maximum value). The exception to this rule is the watermark removal rule, as editing an image to remove a watermark specifically for the purpose of reusing the image is actually a big no-no (and fines can get pretty quick per instance).

There, clear as mud.


----------



## Jixr

I don't mind that the image is being used, as I do support the local youth sports and things, but it just irks me that I was not informed that it was being used. ( as the client I worked with sent it in )
( no paper contract between us either )

I just don't want it being used for commercial reasons, and would like to be credited or at least have the admin for the site have my contact information. I'm sure the admin s probably just a mom or dad of one of the kids in the league and probably has no idea about useage and things. Probably thought the kids mom took it with their point and shoot for all they know.

The photo itself isnt great, just kinda pretty I guess. ( i don't like it much myself )

I figred the best starting point would be to just email the admin and politely let them know that I was the photographer and to have my contact information incase anyone was wanting to contact the photographer ( unlikely )

and that if they would like a photo for any other use than is what is current on their site, I'll be happy to emali them a watermarked photo for use elsewhere.

TL;DR
I don't want to soudn like a pecker head, but I would at least like some credit or somethinig.


----------



## Sean Webster

+1 to all MistaBernie said.

Quote:



> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> I don't mind that the image is being used, as I do support the local youth sports and things, but it just irks me that I was not informed that it was being used. ( as the client I worked with sent it in )
> ( no paper contract between us either )
> 
> I just don't want it being used for commercial reasons, and would like to be credited or at least have the admin for the site have my contact information. I'm sure the admin s probably just a mom or dad of one of the kids in the league and probably has no idea about useage and things. Probably thought the kids mom took it with their point and shoot for all they know.
> 
> The photo itself isnt great, just kinda pretty I guess. ( i don't like it much myself )
> 
> I figred the best starting point would be to just email the admin and politely let them know that I was the photographer and to have my contact information incase anyone was wanting to contact the photographer ( unlikely )
> 
> and that if they would like a photo for any other use than is what is current on their site, I'll be happy to emali them a watermarked photo for use elsewhere.
> 
> TL;DR
> I don't want to soudn like a pecker head, but I would at least like some credit or somethinig.


Best thing to do is that, just message them politely for photocredit to be added. Like a caption under the pic or something stating "Photograph by: Your Name Here." Or compensation with no photocredit. Or both.

You never gave them permission to use the photo, you gave your friend permission, not copyright. You can either ask them to simply just add your credit because you support youth sports, pay you and have a contract of universal use or something, or have them take it down because you simply didn't give them usage rights to the photo and they don't want to make a deal with you.

You're not going to sound like a pecker head. You are going to sound like a professional.


----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> I don't mind that the image is being used, as I do support the local youth sports and things, but it just irks me that I was not informed that it was being used. ( as the client I worked with sent it in )
> ( no paper contract between us either )
> 
> I just don't want it being used for commercial reasons, and would like to be credited or at least have the admin for the site have my contact information. I'm sure the admin s probably just a mom or dad of one of the kids in the league and probably has no idea about useage and things. Probably thought the kids mom took it with their point and shoot for all they know.
> 
> The photo itself isnt great, just kinda pretty I guess. ( i don't like it much myself )
> 
> I figred the best starting point would be to just email the admin and politely let them know that I was the photographer and to have my contact information incase anyone was wanting to contact the photographer ( unlikely )
> 
> and that if they would like a photo for any other use than is what is current on their site, I'll be happy to emali them a watermarked photo for use elsewhere.
> 
> TL;DR
> I don't want to soudn like a pecker head, but I would at least like some credit or somethinig.


Obviously you'll have to decide what to do, but since you're not really against them using it I'd politely ask them to dicuss it with you if they plan to use your photos and give credit where credit is due. It's your photo, and it doesn't take much to ask permission.

I recently had a similar encounter with a local pub & dance, so even though I let it go I know it's not a great feeling.


----------



## hokiealumnus

This popped up on FB and it's relevant to the conversation: http://www.popphoto.com/how-to/2013/07/my-photo-being-used-without-permission-now-what


----------



## Jixr

yeah, I'm not too bothered with it all, but since things have been blowing up for me lately as far as photo work and its an area I have zero expertise in as far as running a business, its just stuff I'm trying to cover before it gets too out of hand. Seems like all my time after my real job is at home editing photos, updating my website, or whatever. Never thought it would be so much work. Mainly running the website, as its gone from a personal site just as an easy way to view my photos anywhere to basically my gallery for client presentations. So its less and less my stuff and more and more client photos for them to view anywhere.

I think most of most of my photos are crap, but it seems some people think otherwise. either way, I'll take the ride while its here.


----------



## kbros

Tried out my friends d3100 today, tbh it felt small and fragile. The lack of a settings screen on the top was kind of weird too. It just didn't feel as solid as my d50. So instead of grabbing one of those for my next body, I might go for a d200 or something like that. I don't need the 24fps video and I'd rather have an in body focus motor and weather sealing. Also, every setting you could want is an external button on the d200, while I couldn't even find any sort of iso button on the d3100. So yeah, that's that.


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> Tried out my friends d3100 today, tbh it felt small and fragile. The lack of a settings screen on the top was kind of weird too. It just didn't feel as solid as my d50. So instead of grabbing one of those for my next body, I might go for a d200 or something like that. I don't need the 24fps video and I'd rather have an in body focus motor and weather sealing. Also, every setting you could want is an external button on the d200, while I couldn't even find any sort of iso button on the d3100. So yeah, that's that.


I know what you mean, my D5100 feels very small, even my dad's D5200 feels a little bigger. Both feel a bit like toys compared to my F60 though, that isn't all that ergonomic but it's a nice hefty chunk of hardware thanks to it's metal chassis.


----------



## biatchi

And the fact it has to house a roll of film


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *biatchi*
> 
> And the fact it has to house a roll of film


Yeah, and that


----------



## nvidiaftw12

If you guys were to want to do gopro style filming (wide angle) in a non-impact/damage environment, would you get this or just an actual gopro?


----------



## Eggs and bacon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> I know what you mean, my D5100 feels very small, even my dad's D5200 feels a little bigger. Both feel a bit like toys compared to my F60 though, that isn't all that ergonomic but it's a nice hefty chunk of hardware thanks to it's metal chassis.


I feel entry level DSLRs are in between small compact system cameras, fuji sony etc, and larger heaver D/SLRs like the D600 and F60 etc. In my hands they just feel kind of weird.


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Eggs and bacon*
> 
> I feel entry level DSLRs are in between small compact system cameras, fuji sony etc, and larger heaver D/SLRs like the D600 and F60 etc. In my hands they just feel kind of weird.


I guess there's a lot of competition in the entry level DSLR market that canikon (I really love that term) have got to keep up with. They are competing against the compact system/mirrorless cameras like you mentioned and also to some extent phones as well. I would think half of the people buying these sort of cameras may be put off buying an entry level DSLR if it was massive and weighed a tonne like the more advanced/pro bodies.

By making the entry level cameras smaller the people that want a small DSLR will buy them, the people that don't really mind will buy them, and the people who want a larger body will just have to pay more for something higher end


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> If you guys were to want to do gopro style filming (wide angle) in a non-impact/damage environment, would you get this or just an actual gopro?


id get a go pro and save a few bucks honestly. but if you have no go pro accessories or access to mounting solutions then the lens is cheaper. go pro makes more money on mounts than the cameras.


----------



## Jixr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> If you guys were to want to do gopro style filming (wide angle) in a non-impact/damage environment, would you get this or just an actual gopro?


I've actually had both ( at the same time ) I ended up selling the wide angle lens, because in normal lighting the go pro stills and video looked just as good, and in a much smaller package.

EDIT: i'm thinking of getting a cheap flash stand and yongo-whatevers wireless triggers, under $75 on amazon. cheap gear but I rarely use my flash and want to learn how to use it more outdoors and stuff.
ideas?


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Gotcha. I was leaning more towards gopro too. I haven't had much luck with long record times on my dslr and it's ruined some otherwise good films. About how much wider was either or were they both pretty close?


----------



## Jixr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> Gotcha. I was leaning more towards gopro too. I haven't had much luck with long record times on my dslr and it's ruined some otherwise good films. About how much wider was either or were they both pretty close?


they were pretty darn close in as far as the FOV. ( I can get you some sample pics later tonight If I still have them, as I did some pretty good comparision shots to see which one I would keep ) I say the IQ is about the same as well, as any wide angle lens will have obvious distortioins, not be very sharp, and subject to flaring problems. But its a very fun lens to use and I've gotten some really neat shots with it. The lens is built pretty dang solid, ( it goes by several brands, so find the cheapest and buy that one ) manual focus, but for the price one of the most solid lens's I've had.

Video with a dslr can give you a little bit more control, and you get your viewfinder and screen to see whats in the frame, and a bit better quality. But the GP is waterproof, pocketable, easy to use.

If audio quality and stability are important, the GP sucks in that department, unless you want high FPS, I would suggest shooting in 1440 and use IS software and crop it at 1080. Audio is smart phone quality at best, and even worse in the underwater housing.

Though some GoPro4 rumors, is that the specs for the new sensor in the next gopro are out, 4k video, 1080 @ 120fps, 720 @ 240, etc. I would expect the GP4 to be out this holiday season if you can wait that long, and if not, try to find a deal on a gopro3 (non-plus) since they are basically the same and could save you a hundred bucks or so.

( also note I had the gopro3 black ed )

Also note on the gopro you can change the FOV ( i'm not sure if its optically or digially ) to make it a bit more narrow if you want.

most DSLR's can only do about 15' of video before it cuts off, and they are sensitive to heat too ( last summer while filming I kept on getting temp errors which was a pain )

Also if you're using a Canon magic lantern will help a bunch for film.


----------



## Scott1541

Yeah..... just because I can


----------



## ace8uk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> Yeah..... just because I can










I put my 70-200 on my NEX3N the other day because I could. It kind of reminded me of those old ugly guys that drive around in Aston Martins.


----------



## kbros

Can anyone say, "camera bottlenecking?"


----------



## Jixr

yup, I wish i had the adaptor where I could put my 70-200 on it.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

So I edited some photos, and they look totally different in windows photo viewer, vs picasa photo viewer. However, everything except execpt facebook seems to agree with picasa.


----------



## Curleyyy

I believe that's due to colour profiles handled in each application.


----------



## Scott1541

Which is the best to view photos? I'm still using WPV but should probably stop


----------



## kbros

I'm also still using wpv.


----------



## JKuhn

Same here.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

So, how can I know that my photos won't look like crap to the end viewers? It's not like it was some small difference, it was a viewable photo vs an unviewable photo. All I was doing was editing in the develop section of lightroom and then exporting them.


----------



## Jixr

its an internet thing, some browsers interperate colors different, there is a setting in LR/PS to export them so web browsers read the colors porperly, its been awhile since i read the article, but it bothered me for awhile too until i figured it out

http://forums.adobe.com/thread/1309333


----------



## nvidiaftw12

I know it's not the best kit lens, but holy crap. http://www.ebay.com/itm/USA-Canon-EF-24-105mm-f-4L-IS-USM-Lens-for-Canon-EOS-SLR-Cameras-0344B002-NEW-/151289526881?pt=Camera_Lenses&hash=item23398efa61

You guys believe this would be worth it over the 18-55?

Fishy being a 0 rep seller though.


----------



## Sean Webster

Picasa is ewwy.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> I know it's not the best kit lens, but holy crap. http://www.ebay.com/itm/USA-Canon-EF-24-105mm-f-4L-IS-USM-Lens-for-Canon-EOS-SLR-Cameras-0344B002-NEW-/151289526881?pt=Camera_Lenses&hash=item23398efa61
> 
> You guys believe this would be worth it over the 18-55?
> 
> Fishy being a 0 rep seller though.


such a scam lol.

You can get that lens for ~500-600 used/like new. I like mine on FF, on crop it isn't wide enough for me. I wish I had a f/2.8 tho.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Picasa may be ewwy, but it's photo viewer is pretty nice. And it at least agrees with lightroom.


----------



## Scott1541

Just picked up a used Sigma 10-20mm HSM







Off out to give it a quick try


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> I know it's not the best kit lens, but holy crap. http://www.ebay.com/itm/USA-Canon-EF-24-105mm-f-4L-IS-USM-Lens-for-Canon-EOS-SLR-Cameras-0344B002-NEW-/151289526881?pt=Camera_Lenses&hash=item23398efa61
> 
> You guys believe this would be worth it over the 18-55?
> 
> Fishy being a 0 rep seller though.


its a kit lens for FF bodies. its a nice lens, the term kit lens seems so demeaning. i wouldnt call it a kit lens by any means as its very nice in quality for the price


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Whooped by the equivalent sigma pretty bad though.


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> Whooped by the equivalent sigma pretty bad though.


Not sure its "equivalent". To compare a 9 year old lens to a newly designed lens which goes for nearly twice the price isn't equivalent in my mind. . Ive shot with one for about 5 years now across quite a few bodies and have to say its a really good all around lens. The range is good on a crop body but with my 6D I really like it now.

Are there better lenses out there? Yes. However, pick up a brand new one for 500-600 bucks and its one hell of a walk around lens.


----------



## Jixr

I think today I'm going to go play around in the golden hour, but i don't have anyone to stand in for photos so doing selfies is always hard, ( click, run up chimp the photo, run back out )

Living in the city there is only a small patch of grass next to my apartments, but i'll look like an idiot running around out there. :/


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *silvrr*
> 
> Not sure its "equivalent". To compare a 9 year old lens to a newly designed lens which goes for nearly twice the price isn't equivalent in my mind. . Ive shot with one for about 5 years now across quite a few bodies and have to say its a really good all around lens. The range is good on a crop body but with my 6D I really like it now.
> 
> Are there better lenses out there? Yes. However, pick up a brand new one for 500-600 bucks and its one hell of a walk around lens.


Same focal range, aperture, both with stabilization, etc, seem pretty equivalent to me.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> I think today I'm going to go play around in the golden hour, but i don't have anyone to stand in for photos so doing selfies is always hard, ( click, run up chimp the photo, run back out )
> 
> Living in the city there is only a small patch of grass next to my apartments, but i'll look like an idiot running around out there. :/


I'm about to do the same as I study for my last final exam.


----------



## Jixr

I also want to test out a theory about two of my lens's.

From what I've seen so far, my 22mm f2 on my EOS-M seems to have a more plesant bokeh than on my 50 1.4.
But i've not done a side by side shot with them.
( it basically has the same sensor as my t3i )

Also I get to play with my new flash triggers, than can also used as a regular remote. ( works tons better than my home made trigger that works with my iphone )


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> Same focal range, aperture, both with stabilization, etc, seem pretty equivalent to me.


Never mind they were released a decade apart and have a $400 price difference.

Would you consider the 24-70 and 24-70 II to be equivalent. Or the 70-200 2.8 and 70-200 2.8II to be equivalent? Both examples have the same FL, aperture and both have IS. Yet I wouldn't call them equivalent. And again vast difference in price.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *silvrr*
> 
> Not sure its "equivalent". To compare a 9 year old lens to a newly designed lens which goes for nearly twice the price isn't equivalent in my mind. . Ive shot with one for about 5 years now across quite a few bodies and have to say its a really good all around lens. The range is good on a crop body but with my 6D I really like it now.
> 
> Are there better lenses out there? Yes. However, pick up a brand new one for 500-600 bucks and its one hell of a walk around lens.
> 
> 
> 
> Same focal range, aperture, both with stabilization, etc, seem pretty equivalent to me.
Click to expand...

equivalent on paper when comparing specs. not equivalent when actually used. comparing specs is never a complete comparison lol


----------



## Jixr

since I'm a dumb dumb and can't figure it out, I need help.

In photoshop, I quite often accidently grab a corner of whatever photo and pull it out, taking it out of a tab and into a new window.

I don't know how to put it back in a new tab without closing the photo, and going to change it in the settings back to tabbed mode.

Halp?


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> since I'm a dumb dumb and can't figure it out, I need help.
> 
> In photoshop, I quite often accidently grab a corner of whatever photo and pull it out, taking it out of a tab and into a new window.
> 
> I don't know how to put it back in a new tab without closing the photo, and going to change it in the settings back to tabbed mode.
> 
> Halp?


you just drag the tab/title bar to the bottom of the options bar, in PS CC, the box will go translucent and a blue line will show ,, if you release the mouse button, it will "dock" itself

(gaah i hope i explained that right)


----------



## Scott1541

Do you guys think it's alright to have a gap from 20mm to 35mm in a sort of general purpose lens combo? I'm thinking about completely leaving the 18-55 out of my bag and just using the 10-20 and 35 for walkabout purposes but I'm not sure if it will work.

I know the only real way to find out is get out and try it but I can't right now, got assignments and stuff to do


----------



## Eggs and bacon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> Do you guys think it's alright to have a gap from 20mm to 35mm in a sort of general purpose lens combo? I'm thinking about completely leaving the 18-55 out of my bag and just using the 10-20 and 35 for walkabout purposes but I'm not sure if it will work.
> 
> I know the only real way to find out is get out and try it but I can't right now, got assignments and stuff to do


Like to the answer to all questions. It depends. For me, on any format, I like to have the traditional 3 focal lengths covered, a 24/28mm, a 50mm and an 70-90ish mm all 35mm equivalents. On crop the 10-20 (15-30) covers wide very well, and the 35 (50ish) covers normal very well. If you are not in a huge rush and don't mind changing lenses to get the shot you should be fine.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> Do you guys think it's alright to have a gap from 20mm to 35mm in a sort of general purpose lens combo? I'm thinking about completely leaving the 18-55 out of my bag and just using the 10-20 and 35 for walkabout purposes but I'm not sure if it will work.
> 
> I know the only real way to find out is get out and try it but I can't right now, got assignments and stuff to do


there is nothing wrong with a gap in focal length in your kit. the 24/35/50 or 35/50/85 prime kits are just the most common ones. there is no one kit you MUST have. make your kit based on what you shoot. if you have no need for anything from 20mm-34mm in your kit no point in covering that range with a lens


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> there is nothing wrong with a gap in focal length in your kit. the 24/35/50 or 35/50/85 prime kits are just the most common ones. there is no one kit you MUST have. make your kit based on what you shoot. if you have no need for anything from 20mm-34mm in your kit no point in covering that range with a lens


I don't think I really use that range. I've looked back through my pictures before when the kit lens was my only one and IIRC I mostly either shot at around 35mm, or as wide as possible.

Part of the problem is that what I shoot at the minute isn't everything that I intend to shoot. Being at uni in a smallish city with flat fields surrounding it for miles means there's not a whole lot to shoot. Sure I can get trains to other cities, etc... but transport to anywhere else is pretty limited. Over the summer I should be able to get to more places though


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> Do you guys think it's alright to have a gap from 20mm to 35mm in a sort of general purpose lens combo? I'm thinking about completely leaving the 18-55 out of my bag and just using the 10-20 and 35 for walkabout purposes but I'm not sure if it will work.
> 
> I know the only real way to find out is get out and try it but I can't right now, got assignments and stuff to do


if you dont use that range there is absolutely nothing wrong.

to me the range 20-35 really all feels the same, i shoot mostly 24mm (cause that the widest on my walk around) and up till around 40-50mm i really dont sense a difference in range. dont get me wrong, its there but it really isnt too apparent to me.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

I'm editing some photos I took impromptu backdrop, and it wasn't really tall enough for some people. Since it looks really bad, I'm wondering if it would be possible to cut the people out of the photo and drop them on another backdrop without it looking totally unnatural.


----------



## kbros

Thinking about trying to land a job as an automotive photog for one of the localish companies like "beastcoast" or something. I would love to make a career out of this.
https://flic.kr/p/ndWuc3Staggered 2014 by Noah Blalock, on Flickr


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> Thinking about trying to land a job as an automotive photog for one of the localish companies like "beastcoast" or something. I would love to make a career out of this.


Good luck with that. Not trying to put you down or anything, but many of those blogs you don't really get paid for it. You're just part of their team and other people will hire you to get their photos of their cars taken.

If you've ever noticed at some of the photographers from stance/hellaflush/fitted blogs and lurk through their flickrs. Then you will see a lot of them will also photograph a bunch other stuff for clients. I'm sure every site will differ though and I'm sure the bigger websites hire photographers for their shoot. Ad revenue, meets and merchandise can rack up a quite a bit of money with a huge following.


----------



## Jixr

from what I've read, they get a cut of the ad revs, most goes to the publication, some goes to the article author, and if its a photo heavy site, then the photographer will get a cut.

I'm sure everyone is different though. ( I'm working on trying to find a blog I can ghost write articles for )


----------



## iTurn

onOne Perfect Effects Premium edition for free http://www.dpreview.com/news/2014/05/05/onone-software-s-perfect-effects-8-available-for-free?utm_campaign=internal-link&utm_source=news-list&utm_medium=text&ref=title_0_2


----------



## Scott1541

Downloading now, even though there's an extremely high probability that I won't use it at all


----------



## Jixr

I think I've found a solution to help my problems with my EOS-M, my little camera I love and hate so much.

I hate the touch screen controls, and you can't disable them, which means if you have it on a neck strap and its turned on, it will take a picture and change settings every time something touches it.

I typically keep it on Appature Priority mode, and everything else set to auto.

So I'm going to a concert tonight ( whoo! free concert! ) and I'm bringing my M along with me for its first time outing for concerts and stuff. ( one of the main reasons I bought the cam was because local venues used to be pretty DSLR friendly, but now they are cracking down on them. ) smaller size, but same IQ as my t3i

But basically, I'm going to get some clear shipping tape, and cut out a little screen protector for it, and cut out little notches for the few on screen menus so I can still access the important stuff and leave everything else on auto.

Should help protect the screen and help causing the several accidental settings changes and shutter clicks.

EDIT: tape is too thin, and same as well as clear sheets that you print on for projectors and things.


----------



## Jixr

awww yeah!

I love my little M, awesome pocket cam with its 22mm 2.0 lens

Free Show ( sponsored by budwiser )
All the free beers you could want, free food, and free music, The Bright Light Social Hour, and Tritonal.

Little cam did well.

( I was about 3 rows of people back and still got good shots )
http://s1329.photobucket.com/user/ClaytonGFinley/media/IMG_9746-Edit_zpsdcd74cd7.jpg.html

Stupid real photographer got in the way of my photo lol. And I'm even on the jumbo tron!


----------



## Scott1541

With free beer I doubt I'd be in a fit state to take pictures







Although saying that I have actually gone out shooting after getting back from a nightclub at about 4am once (it was foggy)


----------



## Jixr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> With free beer I doubt I'd be in a fit state to take pictures
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Although saying that I have actually gone out shooting after getting back from a nightclub at about 4am once (it was foggy)


yeah, I had 2 beers stacked in each hand, and I think I went back and got more. I didn't want to lose my spot in the front though.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aksthem1*
> 
> Good luck with that. Not trying to put you down or anything, but many of those blogs you don't really get paid for it. You're just part of their team and other people will hire you to get their photos of their cars taken.
> 
> If you've ever noticed at some of the photographers from stance/hellaflush/fitted blogs and lurk through their flickrs. Then you will see a lot of them will also photograph a bunch other stuff for clients. I'm sure every site will differ though and I'm sure the bigger websites hire photographers for their shoot. Ad revenue, meets and merchandise can rack up a quite a bit of money with a huge following.


i can tell you that fatlace (hellaflush) has their own in house photographer for their clothing and product lines. They moved to their new pad a while ago and they have a little photo studio in there (this was a good 3-4 years back).

if you want to break into the aftermarket automotive field, you better be good at networking. Cause the scene is based on who you know.....i have a few friends who are fairly deep in the scene and everyone knows and uses the same people.

and keep in mind most these guys running the show has been in the scene for 10-15+ years so theyve seen it all....and to get their attention you need to do something extremely cool....


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> i can tell you that fatlace (hellaflush) has their own in house photographer for their clothing and product lines. They moved to their new pad a while ago and they have a little photo studio in there (this was a good 3-4 years back).
> 
> if you want to break into the aftermarket automotive field, you better be good at networking. Cause the scene is based on who you know.....i have a few friends who are fairly deep in the scene and everyone knows and uses the same people.


Yup. I was at a meet talking to a photographer for a lot of those blogs. I know his stuff has been featured on Stance Nation or Stance Works, I forget which, SpeedHunters, and another one that escapes my mind. But he'll also do for Mayday Garage. Met him and the Mayday Garage crew at meet in Austin years back.


----------



## kbros

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> i can tell you that fatlace (hellaflush) has their own in house photographer for their clothing and product lines. They moved to their new pad a while ago and they have a little photo studio in there (this was a good 3-4 years back).
> 
> if you want to break into the aftermarket automotive field, you better be good at networking. Cause the scene is based on who you know.....i have a few friends who are fairly deep in the scene and everyone knows and uses the same people.
> 
> and keep in mind most these guys running the show has been in the scene for 10-15+ years so theyve seen it all....and to get their attention you need to do something extremely cool....


I've noticed over the past few days, on instagram mostly, that in the northeast car scene everybody knows everybody. I've been posting a few of the show photos every day and the feedback is great, the owners of the cars will repost my photos and their friends will come follow me. I'm gonna just keep going to car shows and hopefully get intertwined into the car scene up here. It's already looking good. Next show is Wicked Big Meet and then fieldwerks in fall, heard they're canceling h20 this year though. And SOWO is in like a few weeks and I'm still in school so that's a no go. I'm just going to keep improving my photography, I'm getting more and more into it each day.


----------



## Curleyyy

Pickd up this little beauty, it's no $400 manfrotto pod, but it's extremely versatile, and only $39.95 AUD.

http://www.teds.com.au/velbon-ex-430-tripod


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Curleyyy*
> 
> Pickd up this little beauty, it's no $400 manfrotto pod, but it's extremely versatile, and only $39.95 AUD.
> 
> http://www.teds.com.au/velbon-ex-430-tripod


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> I've noticed over the past few days, on instagram mostly, that in the northeast car scene everybody knows everybody. I've been posting a few of the show photos every day and the feedback is great, the owners of the cars will repost my photos and their friends will come follow me. I'm gonna just keep going to car shows and hopefully get intertwined into the car scene up here. It's already looking good. Next show is Wicked Big Meet and then fieldwerks in fall, heard they're canceling h20 this year though. And SOWO is in like a few weeks and I'm still in school so that's a no go. I'm just going to keep improving my photography, I'm getting more and more into it each day.


It's like that in every region I think.

The people at H20i always act like idiots in the streets. TX2K isn't any better though.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> I've noticed over the past few days, on instagram mostly, that in the northeast car scene everybody knows everybody. I've been posting a few of the show photos every day and the feedback is great, the owners of the cars will repost my photos and their friends will come follow me. I'm gonna just keep going to car shows and hopefully get intertwined into the car scene up here. It's already looking good. Next show is Wicked Big Meet and then fieldwerks in fall, heard they're canceling h20 this year though. And SOWO is in like a few weeks and I'm still in school so that's a no go. I'm just going to keep improving my photography, I'm getting more and more into it each day.


Good to hear you are getting the publicity, keep working at it.

I would suggest you shoot the more well known crews to gain exposure and try to build a portfolio by recreating shots from speed hunters or watch top gear uk.

I've had a car back in the day shot for speed hunters and back then they only had a 40d and a 10-20 sigma, so don't get discouraged with gear(I have no idea what gear you are using btw).

Good luck


----------



## kbros

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> Good to hear you are getting the publicity, keep working at it.
> 
> I would suggest you shoot the more well known crews to gain exposure and try to build a portfolio by recreating shots from speed hunters or watch top gear uk.
> 
> I've had a car back in the day shot for speed hunters and back then they only had a 40d and a 10-20 sigma, so don't get discouraged with gear(I have no idea what gear you are using btw).
> 
> Good luck


Thanks man! Top gear UK is actually my favourite show lol. My gear is in my sig. I'd like to try to get some rollers and more interesting shots. I'll look into some of speed hunters work.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> Same focal range, aperture, both with stabilization, etc, seem pretty equivalent to me.


I only come to this thread these days to see what ridiculous things are being said, and it never fails to disappoint. Well done, fellas.


----------



## Jixr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> I only come to this thread these days to see what ridiculous things are being said, and it never fails to disappoint. Well done, fellas.


Guess none of us realized that you're the final authority on everything photo related.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> Guess none of us realized that you're the final authority on everything photo related.


I'm the authority on recognizing when this thread devolved into a bunch of gear-hording amateurs who think they should go professional after investing gobs of money on unncessary equipment rather than honing their skill. Aside from @Sean Webster, who has clearly developed a certain style and no longer spends money just for the hell of it.


----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> I'm the authority on recognizing when this thread devolved into a bunch of gear-hording amateurs who think they should go professional after investing gobs of money on unncessary equipment rather than honing their skill. Aside from @Sean Webster, who has clearly developed a certain style and no longer spends money just for the hell of it.


But what about those megapixels?


----------



## Jixr

Everyone needs a hobby man, no need to knock people down, and some people like to spend their money. Unless you're their financial accountant, maybe hold your tongue and let others be happy without your unnecessary banter?


----------



## JKuhn

I'm curious, if I upload pictures to another site and embed them here will it still mean giving ownership to OCN? If not, what site(s) would you people recommend for that?

EDIT: Jixr, I don't know if you directed that at me, but I didn't mean to knock someone down. I'm merely pointing out how people (including me) tend to buy stuff they don't really need. I realise it's still their money.


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> I'm the authority on recognizing when this thread devolved into a bunch of *gear-hording amateurs* who think they should go professional after investing gobs of money on unncessary equipment rather than honing their skill. Aside from @Sean Webster, who has clearly developed a certain style and no longer spends money just for the hell of it.


What do you expect? This is a computer forum not the professional photog association


----------



## Jixr

No that was at sub, you just ninja'd me when I was typing it out.
( and i got your joke )


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JKuhn*
> 
> But what about those megapixels?


I lol'd.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> Everyone needs a hobby man


Usually hobbies involve, you know, _getting better_ and applying yourself rather than just mindless spending. Obviously, if someone has disposable income, they can buy whatever they want -- but the endless "should I get 'x' focal length to complete my kit" crap is annoying. It shows that someone is, rather than interested in making art, buying expensive shiny toys without knowing how to use them.

Enjoying that EOS-M yet?


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> What do you expect? This is a computer forum


Does that mean the users here should only be talking about computers and overclocking? I mean, we _are_ in the *Photography* sub-forum. Realize the emphasis on "gear-hording" as well. Being an amateur is nothing to complain about or be ashamed of.


----------



## Jixr

But on that topic, thats one thing I wish I knew before getting into cameras, was how snobby people can be and the huge feeling of self-entitlement. I've never met such hostility out of a group of people over a subject. Seems almost every other posting on photosite sell elitism and knocking on little guys for ad clicks.

Sure, you cringe when you see someone on craigslist or facebook trying to get someone to hire them when they obviously don't know much about composition, always use the pop-up flash, and are rocking a $300 dslr kit, or worse, you see the results from someone who paid someone a bunch of money for sub-quality work, but we've all been new.

Just because someone has a lesser skill in any subject, that doesn't give you any merit to knock them down, espc. if you're calling yourself a 'professional'.

and yes, despite the billion faults with the M, I do like it. the 22mm lens on the thing is probably my most favorite lens I have next to the 70-200, but I rarely get to use it since I don't need the reach that often.


----------



## Conspiracy

the word professional holds no merit anymore. any random joe shmoe that buys a camera online can be a self proclaimed professional. its the real world experience that gives one the ability to separate the BS from the truth. i have sold cameras to people at my best buy and have had people walk into my store that are self proclaimed day 1 pros that dont even know how to properly charge for work. dont know what M, AV, and TV modes are on their cameras, think that pretending to master natural light makes them an expert, etc. i can list bologna for days lol. ive been shooting for almost 6 years. i never go out of my way to say im a professional, i have been called a professional or been told i was very professional by people i have worked with and for. truly its the difference between those that think they are "good" and those that are truly seasoned and well rounded shooters.

i occasionally take photos for money but mainly find work with video cameras shooting a lot of educational and corporate work. i usually consider myself an extreme hobyist









last edit lol
----

sub50hz, seanwebster, dudemanppl, Dreamkiller, and a few others are truly the only ones in this thread that when they say something or correct someone its not because they are "pros" its because they know their ish


----------



## Jixr

age old saying, you're not what you call yourself, you're what others call you.


----------



## Conspiracy

i prefer to think of it in the world of photos as not being what others call you or what you call yourself but how you present yourself and carry yourself as an artist.

totally my opinion as the world of photography is very strange with very caddy people. photographers are strange creatures to say the least


----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> age old saying, you're not what you call yourself, you're what others call you.


While that's usually a good indicator, others can sometimes jump to conclusions. I've recently been considered a "pro" and they even decided that my pictures must be great just because of "that huge white lens". True, I consider some of my images to be better than those of the other photographer there, but I'm far from a "pro".


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> age old saying, you're not what you call yourself, you're what others call you.


Oh, I'm a dick. I won't make any excuses. I don't have a problem telling someone exactly like it is, which probably comes off rather dickish. Get to know me, and I promise you, I'm only 90% of the dick you think I am. Ask @Conspiracy.


----------



## Conspiracy

naw hes a total dick 100%

JK though. hes easily one of the most knowledgeable people ive every spoken with. a lot of the stuff i know about photography i learned from sub50hz. i started in this subforum as a videographer with zero understanding of photography thinking why would you take one picture when you can shoot 30 pictures per second lolol. but in all seriousness just when you think hes being mean and a dick look back when its over and in reality all hes doing is trying to correct misinformation and prevent someone from getting bad advice that might lurk this forum. i do the same thing in the video sub forum. i spend more time correcting people to make sure that advice and suggestions are as solid as possible that way people can get and learn exactly what they came looking for. if sub didnt do it then there would be a lot of misinformed confused people shooting digital when they need to be shooting film... i kid i kid. film is more fun but not always better


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> I only come to this thread these days to see what ridiculous things are being said, and it never fails to disappoint. Well done, fellas.


First of all, if you are referring to me perhaps you should know I haven't spent any more than $140 on any one lens, and only have 3. Not exactly what I'm call gear hoarding. Second of all, if you can't compare two lenses by their apertures, focal lengths, and features, I dunno what you can use.

Just talking about a lens I saw a review of, not like I had any motivation to buy one. A car comes long before that.


----------



## Sean Webster

Does anyone have any ideas on where to have a photo calendar made? A client of mine wants to make a sexy calendar for her BF's birthday. I've not made a print like that before so I have no idea where to go. Any suggestions?

I also have a confession to make, I'm a...a...GEAR HOARDER! lol I actually have around $10K worth of gear...I had no idea until I finally added it up. 0_o


----------



## jameyscott

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Does anyone have any ideas on where to have a photo calendar made? A client of mine wants to make a sexy calendar for her BF's birthday. I've not made a print like that before so I have no idea where to go. Any suggestions?
> 
> I also have a confession to make, I'm a...a...GEAR HOARDER! lol I actually have around $10K worth of gear...I had no idea until I finally added it up. 0_o


Let me ask my mom. She had one made of photos of my son as a present for my wife and I for Christmas.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Does anyone have any ideas on where to have a photo calendar made? A client of mine wants to make a sexy calendar for her BF's birthday. I've not made a print like that before so I have no idea where to go. Any suggestions?
> 
> I also have a confession to make, I'm a...a...GEAR HOARDER! lol I actually have around $10K worth of gear...I had no idea until I finally added it up. 0_o


there was a company that had a booth setup at photoshop world that did that. gotta dig through my goodie bag and see if i can find a coupon for you


----------



## Scott1541

I guess I'm a little bit of a gear hoarder







I know loads of people in a similar sort of position as me that only use the kit lens, or maybe 1 other at the most, where I've got 6 in total, but 1 is the F60's kit lens and the other is my 'toy' helios 44. I do actually use pretty much all of my kit though.

ION I've just been out taking some more night shots around the old part of Lincoln with my 10-20, which I've discovered is very flare resistant, even with a UV filter on. Also while I was out I had a conversation with a water company worker on the job and we were talking about water stuff, etc...


----------



## boogschd

i love this thread


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boogschd*
> 
> i love this thread


me too


----------



## Jixr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> I guess I'm a little bit of a gear hoarder
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I know loads of people in a similar sort of position as me that only use the kit lens, or maybe 1 other at the most, where I've got 6 in total, but 1 is the F60's kit lens and the other is my 'toy' helios 44. I do actually use pretty much all of my kit though.
> 
> ION I've just been out taking some more night shots around the old part of Lincoln with my 10-20, which I've discovered is very flare resistant, even with a UV filter on. Also while I was out I had a conversation with a water company worker on the job and we were talking about water stuff, etc...


Wouldn't a lens filter give you more flare?


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> Wouldn't a lens filter give you more flare?


Yes, yes it would. With the filter on flare was handled very well, better than the kit lens without a filter. Without a filter I guess it must be almost flare free, but I'm going to keep a filter on it because I almost hit the front element with my tripod the first time I went out with it at night


----------



## iTurn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> Thanks man! Top gear UK is actually my favourite show lol. My gear is in my sig. I'd like to try to get some rollers and more interesting shots. I'll look into some of speed hunters work.


Meant to respond to this...

Speed hunters, focus on the 2012-early 2013 era... they've fallen off lately.
Check out http://forums.dieselstation.com/index.php?s=9dfc86a56ac40858e00cafe484756772&showforum=11&prune_day=100&sort_by=Z-A&sort_key=last_post&topicfilter=all&st=0

2 of my favourite PhotoGs to follow: 1013mm, Sean Klingelhoefer.


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Does anyone have any ideas on where to have a photo calendar made? A client of mine wants to make a sexy calendar for her BF's birthday. I've not made a print like that before so I have no idea where to go. Any suggestions?
> 
> I also have a confession to make, I'm a...a...GEAR HOARDER! lol I actually have around $10K worth of gear...I had no idea until I finally added it up. 0_o


Blurb?

As for pro photographer or w/e: if you are filling taxes on income you've made through photography, I am counting you as a pro photographer.

This doesn't have any impact on the quality of your photos - just like there are crappy professional builders/contractors/mechanics/architects/web designers etc - but if in practice of anything you are earning part of all of your living through it, so you are a professional by my and most legal definitions


----------



## Conspiracy

i dont agree with the law. i also hate paying taxes on all my photo/video work. i didnt know you could pay quarterly taxes as last year i paid almost $1500 at one time for all my untaxed income from last year









i also try to occasionally do shoots that are paid in cash to avoid this but rarely do i get away with it


----------



## kbros

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iTurn*
> 
> Meant to respond to this...
> 
> Speed hunters, focus on the 2012-early 2013 era... they've fallen off lately.
> Check out http://forums.dieselstation.com/index.php?s=9dfc86a56ac40858e00cafe484756772&showforum=11&prune_day=100&sort_by=Z-A&sort_key=last_post&topicfilter=all&st=0
> 
> 2 of my favourite PhotoGs to follow: 1013mm, Sean Klingelhoefer.


Will do, thanks.


----------



## PCModderMike

Been days since I last dropped in here, nice show.


----------



## Sean Webster

Seems like its been days since anyone else has dropped in here too lol


----------



## Jixr

man, I got the downs. I have good gear, but all my pictures come out to be crap.

Kinda sucks learning all this from nothing but youtube videos and reading online.


----------



## sub50hz

Shoot more, buy less.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Shoot more, buy less.


x2,

You need to take a lot of shots and learn from them to get better. Maybe take more time when you plan out and take your shots too.


----------



## Jixr

yeah, i've been trying to get some good shots of a keyboard I just built, but this is the best I can do.

I don't know if its just a lack of good lighting or what.


I still don't like my canon 50mm 1.4, it shot at f22 and it still does not seem very sharp to me.
I'm not sure if its just a bad copy or if i'm just not using it properly or its just not as good as I expected.


----------



## Sean Webster

Try shooting at f/8-f/11. That is usually the best range for sharpness. I love my Canon 50mm f/1.4 lol. A little slow to focus compared to my 85, but I like the IQ i get form it. I'd rather the sigma, but they do basically the same thing in the end.


----------



## sub50hz

f/22? Why?


----------



## aksthem1

F22 isn't the sharpest for any lens. It's usually in between like Sean said.

Edit: You're manual focusing and using live view right? Even though your camera may report it being in focus when autofocusing it can still be off. 50D and up allowed for micro AF adjustment which helps so much with fast lenses.


----------



## Jixr

see, these are the things I don't know. Maybe i should take a class or something lol.


----------



## aksthem1

I think many people confuse that just because more of your frame is in focus that it will be sharper.

Nah. A photo class doesn't really teach you all the technical aspects of it. Especially not intro classes.


----------



## Jixr

that really wasnt my idea, I always thought that wider = softer and closed = sharper.


----------



## sub50hz

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/understanding-series/u-diffraction.shtml


----------



## sub50hz

Also, I just want to add how awesome that KB is. I would buy that in a heartbeat.


----------



## aksthem1

I've heard that one before too.

Diffraction becomes a big problem at higher f stops and one of the reasons for softness wide open is due to aberrations in the lens. Stopping down helps with that, but then you start having a problem with diffraction.


----------



## Jixr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Also, I just want to add how awesome that KB is. I would buy that in a heartbeat.


Pretty much the only threads I visit on OCN is the photography and keyboard section.

( If you haven't noticed the Keyboard of the Month contest on the home page wheel, I won it in April )

its one of 5 mechanicals I currently have. Built it specifically to be used with my ipad.
( since its the only 60% keyboard that is plug and play friendly )

and since people like it, here are some of my others I've built over the past year or so.

http://s1329.photobucket.com/user/ClaytonGFinley/media/IMG_9733_zps93a71099.jpg.html
custom Quickfire XT ( note the awesome 'Jixr' spacebar, this one won KOTM in April )

My Custom Poker 2
http://s1329.photobucket.com/user/ClaytonGFinley/media/IMG_8846_zpsd272f8d4.jpg.html

Custom Red QFR


A glow in the dark one I did for teh lulz
http://s1329.photobucket.com/user/ClaytonGFinley/media/IMG_5780_zps8dac1f9f.jpg.html

http://s1329.photobucket.com/user/ClaytonGFinley/media/IMG_4893_zpsba8a1eb7.jpg.html
another QFR

And I also had yellow and white ones as well. ( all painted and customized by myself )

I have another poker that I need to put together when I have the time.


----------



## sub50hz

I have a QFR in my closet that I should rip up. Nice work, man!


----------



## Jixr

why is it in your closet? mod that bad boy up!


----------



## Sean Webster

How do you build a KB? And how come you have so many? lol I only have a Steel Series stealth or something...just because i needed something with lights to replace my logitech k120 haha.

Doing a review of my 70-200 f/2.8, what do you think of the product shots of it?

https://www.flickr.com/photos/seanwebsterhd/sets/72157644251168250/


----------



## sub50hz

Because I missed having a numpad. Plus I wish it had reds, no idea why I bought blues.


----------



## Jixr

do what I do, buy one in every switch, green, blue, brown, clear, black, red and in all sizes. 60%, TLK, and 100%


----------



## sub50hz

I have a corsair k70 now that I like very much. Blues are awful when you have open back headphones.


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> I have a corsair k70 now that I like very much. Blues are awful when you have open back headphones.


That they are. I love blues, but they're much too loud. I only use headphones at night, but I can still hear them a bit.


----------



## Jixr

you mean glorious. But if you want quiet, go with blacks or clears over reds.


----------



## sub50hz

Blacks are too stiff for me, and if I need quiet I'll boot OSX and use my Apple BT keyboard. Both my Grados and every pair of Sennheisers I own leak in noise like sieves. Plus I love Audurvsna. I should mention I am half asleep and posting from my phone with 60 pounds of dog compressing my left arm.


----------



## sub50hz

That tennis ball is very much oversized, like a 12" softball. How could you say no to that face?

edit: Ignore the terrible decor in my grandmother's house.


----------



## Curleyyy

I was watching a guy talking about EOS C100's, and a few other cinema cameras from Canon. One of the things that interested me with what he was saying, was that the cinema cameras have a larger dynamic range at a certain ISO, I think he said it was about 840. Would this also apply to the photography DSLR's? Perhaps a different value? I've always leaned towards 200 ISO when shooting. What are your thoughts on this?


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Curleyyy*
> 
> I was watching a guy talking about EOS C100's, and a few other cinema cameras from Canon. One of the things that interested me with what he was saying, was that the cinema cameras have a larger dynamic range at a certain ISO, I think he said it was about 840. Would this also apply to the photography DSLR's? Perhaps a different value? I've always leaned towards 200 ISO when shooting. What are your thoughts on this?


You can't compared their cinema offerings with their photography DLSRs. 850 ISO is their base ISO. Reaches its maximum dynamic range, especially at the highlights. The lower ISOs will have more dynamic range for shadows.

Now for their photo stuff you will have more dynamic range and less noise at ISO 100. Their was speculation that ISO 160 was the native ISO due to lower noise, but there was also less dynamic range. Instead it's said that it's just pulling ISO 200 1/3 of a stop resulting less noise but also less DR.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Curleyyy*
> 
> I was watching a guy talking about EOS C100's, and a few other cinema cameras from Canon. One of the things that interested me with what he was saying, was that the cinema cameras have a larger dynamic range at a certain ISO, I think he said it was about 840. Would this also apply to the photography DSLR's? Perhaps a different value? I've always leaned towards 200 ISO when shooting. What are your thoughts on this?


definitely does not apply. also dont limit yourself to a specific iso that you prefer shooting. not only do you limit yourself but you also limit the image youre capturing


----------



## mz-n10

Well this thread got lively...
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Curleyyy*
> 
> I was watching a guy talking about EOS C100's, and a few other cinema cameras from Canon. One of the things that interested me with what he was saying, was that the cinema cameras have a larger dynamic range at a certain ISO, I think he said it was about 840. Would this also apply to the photography DSLR's? Perhaps a different value? I've always leaned towards 200 ISO when shooting. What are your thoughts on this?


You want to shoot your base iOS but expose for 1/3 brighter. This is a old film trick which I find still works on digital.


----------



## Curleyyy

Cheers guys.


----------



## Sean Webster

I was playing around today and learned how to make a black background product shot. 



Behind the scenes. IS0 100, F/11, 1/25 Shutter. Einsteins @~70 watts with softboxes and grids attached. Product set on top of two 12'x12" pieces of black granite...i want to find some better 24"x36" piece of absolute black glossy granite/tile now.


----------



## scottath

Very nice Sean, looks awesome, and your making those lights look great too


----------



## PCModderMike

Image is unavailable...did you take it down Sean? I wanted to check it out.

I shoot at similar settings for white background product shots...now you've got me wanting to try out a black background of some kind.


----------



## SLOWION

what's up fellas...just picked up a Nikon D5300









I had been using my gfs Nikon D90 for the longest time and finally decided to pick up a body of my own. I do miss some of the prosumer features but it's a neat little camera overall.

Just thought I'd post some pics also. Nothing special, I was just experimenting with auto focus at the park with my dog

https://flic.kr/p/nwPSnh

https://flic.kr/p/nyzBPa

https://flic.kr/p/nhojb8


----------



## Conspiracy

returning to old car city again tomorrow since the weather has been interesting. should make for some cool photos now that the seasons are changing and its been raining. yall are missing out. if youre ever in GA check it out


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scottath*
> 
> Very nice Sean, looks awesome, and your making those lights look great too


Thanks! 

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PCModderMike*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Image is unavailable...did you take it down Sean? I wanted to check it out.
> 
> I shoot at similar settings for white background product shots...now you've got me wanting to try out a black background of some kind.


Fixed it, LR must have updated the stream after minor change. Black is really nice. Setting it up I really learned a lot about how changing light angles can really affect an image and how flagging can help with adding or killing off light for accenting. For example, in another image i took after this one (#2), I used a white poster board in front of the camera to get the 60D logo to shine more, see below

#1  #2 
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> returning to old car city again tomorrow since the weather has been interesting. should make for some cool photos now that the seasons are changing and its been raining. yall are missing out. if youre ever in GA check it out


Oh nice, I liked your older photos from there.


----------



## Conspiracy

word. i guess my newer photos arent good since you only like the old ones. i kid i kid.

on a serious note has anyone tried the meFOTO backpacker tripods. im debating on trying it but cant seem to find one to borrow. im insanely picky on tripods due to being spoiled with previous tripod work from the past getting to use gitzo, satchler, and really nice froto sticks


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> i want to find some better 24"x36" piece of absolute black glossy granite/tile now.


No experience with the difference in the "reflection qualiity", but I would try to find an appropriately sized gloss-black acrylic sheet.

Yes, it is far easier to scratch than granite, but if it "works" and it costs something like $25 for a 48x24in (also available to far larger sizes), weighing far less and 3/16" or so thicknesses being enough for the task etc....the list of advantages I guess is far higher (in my mind)


----------



## Sean Webster

haha

I was gonna get one of those tripods, but then it just felt too flimsy for me.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> i want to find some better 24"x36" piece of absolute black glossy granite/tile now.
> 
> 
> 
> No experience with the difference in the "reflection qualiity", but I would try to find an appropriately sized gloss-black acrylic sheet.
> 
> Yes, it is far easier to scratch than granite, but if it "works" and it costs something like $25 for a 48x24in (also available to far larger sizes), weighing far less and 3/16" or so thicknesses being enough for the task etc....the list of advantages I guess is far higher (in my mind)
Click to expand...

I was actually going to pic one up, but they only had bronzed acrylic at my home depot. But, I can also go searching around buildings and maybe find some slabs too, my dad used to know a few places I can check as buildings always have extra pieces to replace when they break. Worse comes to worse I can see what local prices would be for a slab, i mean i paid $8 for two tiles, I think I can get a nice sized slab for around $50 or less.


----------



## Jixr

Another reason why I love my EOS-M

went to a concert venue last night, one of those places where they won't let anyone in with a DSLR, but I had no problems getting my M in.
Security asked if the lens came off, and of course I said no. and the lady in front of me got turned away because she had a T3i

Same sensor, just smaller size and apperance. ( not I also have mine covered in a bit of painters tape to give it a beater camera appearance )
sucks that i had the 22mm on it, but I can still crop and get a decent shot, I was kinda back in the crowd though )

( don't have the pics ready to post, but i'll do so later )

EDIT:
and for the tiles and stuff, A friend of mine made a product shot set up with using some granite he got for practically free from a custom countertop store.
he paid like$5 for a giant slab because it broke off a large piece and was still too small for them to use for a countertop.

Question, is there any advantage/disadvantage to using an umbrella with a continuous light source vs a softbox with a cont light source?


----------



## sub50hz

Another reason to like small cameras.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> and for the tiles and stuff, A friend of mine made a product shot set up with using some granite he got for practically free from a custom countertop store.
> he paid like$5 for a giant slab because it broke off a large piece and was still too small for them to use for a countertop.
> 
> Question, is there any advantage/disadvantage to using an umbrella with a continuous light source vs a softbox with a cont light source?


Oooo nice, Definitely need to go to local stores now.

Umbrella will show as a circle/octagon in reflections and may show the umbrella ribs while a softbox will defuse the light a bit softer and reflections from one will be more flat and straight lined, basically more cleaner/professional. If there isnt a reflective surface on the product that shows the light source, it shouldn't matter much in which you use.


----------



## Jixr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Oooo nice, Definitely need to go to local stores now.
> 
> Umbrella will show as a circle/octagon in reflections and may show the umbrella ribs while a softbox will defuse the light a bit softer and reflections from one will be more flat and straight lined, basically more cleaner/professional. If there isnt a reflective surface on the product that shows the light source, it shouldn't matter much in which you use.


Okay, I was asking because I have cheap-o flash unbrealla kit, and my cardboard, walmart lamp, trash bag and duct tape home made softbox, and I saw amazon has a thingy that you can use two light bulbs that mounts on a flash stand and has an umbrella shoe for like $12.


Figured that would be easier to use than my home made box that has no stand or anything, and would be collapsible. I was thinking of tossing my softbox out since it takes up so much space and is difficult to work with.


----------



## pcfoo

Flash gives you more control and is usually much more powerful as concentrated light sources than your average incandescent source.

You can get very decent setups with Yongnuo clone speedlites and cheap accessories. Portable too









Granite can be cheap, hard to scratch but also very heavy, can crack, give you a bad cut if edges are not treated and in general a pain to handle etc. Also it usually has some grain that might not be homogenous/desirable.

Hunt for acrylic sheets online, or ask a local signage guy for their supplier information or any cheap leftovers (why not freebies?).
I get them from local plastics warehouse in far east LA County. For modeling & laser cutting. A visit to your local equivalent might inspire your photographic but also case modding interest.

// EOS M
I was really excited for this camera as my gripped SLRs with 2.8 zooms are horrible to drag around, and after living a week with an EPL-1 I bought for a friend back in the day was waiting for a large sensor mirrorless. But I am reading that is slow focusing and in general not that intuitive as any of the current mirroreless competitors.
Atm I believe I would rather go for a used RX100 if portability was the priority. Just as big sensor, a tad disengaged shooting exp but very good all around, for the price of a mediocre EF/STM lens.

That said , experienced shooters do ok with iphones...any apsc sensor should do much better with some patience!


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> No experience with the difference in the "reflection qualiity", but I would try to find an appropriately sized gloss-black acrylic sheet.
> 
> Yes, it is far easier to scratch than granite, but if it "works" and it costs something like $25 for a 48x24in (also available to far larger sizes), weighing far less and 3/16" or so thicknesses being enough for the task etc....the list of advantages I guess is far higher (in my mind)


it is probably easier to just post process the reflection if you are shooting for a project.

if you are learning how to get the reflection, check your local acrylic suppliers i got a sheet of 24"x24" black acrylic for free cause it was just scrap to them.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> word. i guess my newer photos arent good since you only like the old ones. i kid i kid.
> 
> on a serious note has anyone tried the meFOTO backpacker tripods. im debating on trying it but cant seem to find one to borrow. im insanely picky on tripods due to being spoiled with previous tripod work from the past getting to use gitzo, satchler, and really nice froto sticks


i have the sirui t-025 which looks to be similar in size to the meFoto. its nice as a travel tripod, ive thrown my fullframe on there with a bag hanging and did some long exposure, but i would not leave my camera on there and walk away.....
ive also broken the little plastic shims inside the legs in about 2 years of moderate use (i dont baby my gear tho), but they sent me new ones shims next day.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> word. i guess my newer photos arent good since you only like the old ones. i kid i kid.
> 
> on a serious note has anyone tried the meFOTO backpacker tripods. im debating on trying it but cant seem to find one to borrow. im insanely picky on tripods due to being spoiled with previous tripod work from the past getting to use gitzo, satchler, and really nice froto sticks


i have the sirui t-025 which looks to be similar in size to the meFoto. its nice as a travel tripod, ive thrown my fullframe on there with a bag hanging and did some long exposure, but i would not leave my camera on there and walk away.....
ive also broken the little plastic shims inside the legs in about 2 years of moderate use (i dont baby my gear tho), but they sent me new ones shims next day.[/quote]

cool! ill check it out


----------



## Scott1541

Just picked up a Fujica st605n this morning with a Fujinon 55mm f/2.2. Now I notice that the aperture blades seem to be sticking a little, which is less than ideal on a non-preset lens, but I might be able to sort it out.


----------



## Conspiracy

pretty sure i got at least a few keepers yesterday on top my allergies and sinuses being a PITA

random digital shot from the 1D and 17-40 because this place is awesome so yes be jealous that your state/country doesnt have HUGE antique car junkyard


----------



## Scott1541

Just took a pic of all of my gear for somewhere else, so I thought I'd post it in here too











Taken with my phone for obvious reasons


----------



## ace8uk

Looks like an interesting place to explore, Conspiracy, I love looking around places like that. I remember I went to this reclamation yard back when I lived in Somerset, I found it once whilst looking for a garden centre, and it was full of the strangest things. It was a weird and wonderful place, for sure. I can't for the life of me remember what it's called, but I'd love to back one day with my camera.


----------



## Conspiracy

not knocking on the brand but it took them a while to realize they need to do something different http://nikonrumors.com/2014/05/17/nikon-misses-financial-forecast-stock-down-at-3-years-low-company-restructuring-announced.aspx/

ALSO

please let this be true http://petapixel.com/2014/05/19/fuji-rumored-working-medium-format-mirrorless-camera/#more-136324


----------



## sub50hz

I will murder a hobo for a GF670-like fixed-lens MF camera from Fuji. They can even recycle the lens design from the GA -- why are my pants getting tight?


----------



## aksthem1

So much hnnng and the new Pentax 645z is a beast.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> pretty sure i got at least a few keepers yesterday on top my allergies and sinuses being a PITA
> 
> random digital shot from the 1D and 17-40 because this place is awesome so yes be jealous that your state/country doesnt have HUGE antique car junkyard


MOAR!


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> pretty sure i got at least a few keepers yesterday on top my allergies and sinuses being a PITA
> 
> random digital shot from the 1D and 17-40 because this place is awesome so yes be jealous that your state/country doesnt have HUGE antique car junkyard
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MOAR!
Click to expand...

somehow since friday where there were lots of weeds and stuff bothering my allergies to friday nights excessive drinking at a friends graduation/birthday party i got sick and im still sick







( once im better ill be developing the 3 rolls i shot


----------



## Jixr

So, I have a 1tb hard drive split into 2 partitions, one for OSX and one for Windows

I've run out of space on my 500gigs for OSX and photos, and was wondering if I should go through and delete bad and poor photos.

I have TONS of crap photos, but didn't know how you guys handled that.

( I'll be buying a 2+tb drive soon )


----------



## jameyscott

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> So, I have a 1tb hard drive split into 2 partitions, one for OSX and one for Windows
> 
> I've run out of space on my 500gigs for OSX and photos, and was wondering if I should go through and delete bad and poor photos.
> 
> I have TONS of crap photos, but didn't know how you guys handled that.
> 
> ( I'll be buying a 2+tb drive soon )


Can't answer that question directly, but I can suggest a drive to you. Seagate Barracuda 3TB. 105-115 bucks on Amazon depending on the day, and fairly zippy to boot. File transfers are around 135-150MBps for all of mine.

I actually need to go through my photos and delete the crappy ones as well.


----------



## MistaBernie

For any of my paid work, I keep just about everything I shoot. For anything I do for fun, alot of times I chimp out the stuff that I don't want to keep, so I don't end up with nearly as many images as I used to, but I have gone back occasionally and deleted tons of files that were just gathering dust.


----------



## mz-n10

i keep everything i shoot, unless its a black frame or it is completely unusable.

i flag the shots i like in LR and keep local copies of those picture, everything else gets archived in externals and eventually pushed up to amazon aws.


----------



## Jixr

got some awesome shots from my epic birthday weekend

Jimmy Eat World
http://s1329.photobucket.com/user/ClaytonGFinley/media/IMG_0291_zps83812359.jpg.html

http://s1329.photobucket.com/user/ClaytonGFinley/media/IMG_0287_zpsed803ab8.jpg.html

One More Time ( A daft punk tribute show )
http://s1329.photobucket.com/user/ClaytonGFinley/media/IMG_0125_zpsce78d6b5.jpg.html

http://s1329.photobucket.com/user/ClaytonGFinley/media/IMG_0072_zpsd4f75725.jpg.html
(love shots like these )

http://s1329.photobucket.com/user/ClaytonGFinley/media/IMG_0073_zps0cdfcd68.jpg.html


----------



## Conspiracy

nice stuff man

heres one more digital old car shot ill probably share before i wait to develop and share the b/w stuff. this was a test shot to see if i liked it enough to walk back again later in the day. i ended up returning to this car and shooting it on film


----------



## Jixr

Yeah, i'm super glad I bought my EOS-M,

generally its a crap camera that I wouldn't recommend, but once you learn to work around its many bad points, you can do some good stuff with it.


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> Yeah, i'm super glad I bought my EOS-M,
> 
> generally its a crap camera that I wouldn't recommend, but once you learn to work around its many bad points, you can do some good stuff with it.


As long as you can have full control of the camera you can take some great shots. Hell even just learning to frame and have good composition you can still have good stuff.

I know what you mean about the EOS-M though. I've had a few ILCs and some of them are a bit cumbersome to work with. I currently have a NEX-3N and a Samsung NX2000 for my ILCs. The Samsung I have to go through the menu to change anything. When trying to shoot with the Samsung if I want to change shutter speed I can't use the dial wheel. I have to press the function key, choose what I want to change then use the wheel. At least with the NEX I can still use the wheel for on the fly shutter speed changes or aperture depending on the mode.


----------



## DizZz

Went to the beach today and it was stormy!


----------



## ace8uk

Hnnnnnnnnggggggg, Nikon to release D800 replacement next month. Wallet, stay in my pocket!


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ace8uk*
> 
> Hnnnnnnnnggggggg, Nikon to release D800 replacement next month. Wallet, stay in my pocket!


Jeeze, it seems like only recently they released the D800 to me lol. Where have these last 2 years gone. 0_o


----------



## ace8uk

I know, right? Seems like it's not been out that long; life goes so quickly. I'll be genuinely interested in seeing how it compares though. If it drives down used D610/D800 prices, that'd be pretty epic, but I don't see that happening.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Jeeze, it seems like only recently they released the D800 to me lol. Where have these last 2 years gone. 0_o


I haven't kept up with photography news. The D700 in my mind is still brand new...


----------



## ace8uk

I'm quite surprised how much used D700's and D3's hold their value in the used market, at least here in the UK.


----------



## PCModderMike

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ace8uk*
> 
> I know, right? Seems like it's not been out that long; life goes so quickly. I'll be genuinely interested in seeing how it compares though. If it drives down used D610/D800 prices, that'd be pretty epic, but I don't see that happening.


I would love to pick up a D800 for a good used price. Make that jump into FF.


----------



## ace8uk

Let's hope there aren't any of those D600 shenanigans with the new full frame body.


----------



## PCModderMike

Yeaaaa let's hope not.


----------



## Sean Webster

Just got my second lens review published. Here is the link if anyone is interested. Hopefully I can start getting some free lenses for review soon enough after i review the rest of my collection.

http://www.technologyx.com/featured/canon-ef-70-200mm-f2-8l-usm-telephoto-zoom-lens-review/

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> nice stuff man
> 
> heres one more digital old car shot ill probably share before i wait to develop and share the b/w stuff. this was a test shot to see if i liked it enough to walk back again later in the day. i ended up returning to this car and shooting it on film


----------



## ace8uk

Good work, I used to always want to go into copywriting. Your product shots really complete the article, too.


----------



## DizZz

Can you pros help me out? Thanks!

http://www.overclock.net/t/1490833/in-the-market-for-a-new-camera-help


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ace8uk*
> 
> Good work, I used to always want to go into copywriting. Your product shots really complete the article, too.


Thanks, I actually never thought i'd be doing writing for fun myself. I always hated it lol. It is actually pretty easy to do, especially when you have a decent grasp of everything about the products.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DizZz*
> 
> Can you pros help me out? Thanks!
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1490833/in-the-market-for-a-new-camera-help


Get a Phase One 645DF+.


----------



## ace8uk

I enjoy writing, and I've done some reviewing in the past, I just didn't see it as a career for me. I do realise that it isn't your job, but still, I was merely pondering.


----------



## DrockinWV

Add please!! Canon 70D, Kit lens 18-55, 40 2.8 pancake lens, Benro Tripod, Tiffen 58mm Variable ND Filter, Vello Shutterboss Remote, Lowepro Backpack!!!


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Thanks, I actually never thought i'd be doing writing for fun myself. I always hated it lol. It is actually pretty easy to do, especially when you have a decent grasp of everything about the products.
> 
> Get a Phase One 645DF+.


you might want to add/use MFD (Minimum Focus Distance) instead of Closest Focusing Distance. It is usually the term used on press releases...

Nice copy and photos


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> you might want to add/use MFD (Minimum Focus Distance) instead of Closest Focusing Distance. It is usually the term used on press releases...
> 
> Nice copy and photos


Thanks, I used closest instead of minimum because that is what canon states under specs on the web page for their lenses. I think it is usually easier for newbies to understand too lol.


----------



## Eggs and bacon

Anyone have experience with crumpler bags? I was looking at the cobram outpost. I need to get a bag to travel with, and I plan to bring a bronica etrs and 3 lenses, Fuji xe1 with 35 maybe an adapted 50 as well and a d3200 for video. Are there any recommended bags with somewhat quick access that do not scream "rob me I have cameras inside"?


----------



## iTurn

Anyone get a 4k monitor yet? how is it for editing?

@Sean checked out the review







some of the best review pictures I've ever seen.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Eggs and bacon*
> 
> Anyone have experience with crumpler bags? I was looking at the cobram outpost. I need to get a bag to travel with, and I plan to bring a bronica etrs and 3 lenses, Fuji xe1 with 35 maybe an adapted 50 as well and a d3200 for video. Are there any recommended bags with somewhat quick access that do not scream "rob me I have cameras inside"?


Well, I gave my 7MDH to my sister if that tells you anything. I've been using the Incase Ari bag for quite some time now, and it's perfect for my needs. I can fit the Xpro, X100 and GA645i in the same bag along with my 13" rMBP and a bunch of other random crap in the front pocket. It's got a nice rain cover and doesn't look like a camera bag, and I was comfortable walking through some seedy areas of Chicago with it (but I would never have taken the Crumpler). It's expensive, yes, but luckily a friend of mine works for Groupon and is able to get all Incase stuff for 50% off. If memory serves right, you're down under, aren't you?


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Thanks, I used closest instead of minimum because that is what canon states under specs on the web page for their lenses. I think it is usually easier for newbies to understand too lol.


I would use MFD, and if you're worried about people not understanding terms, you can build a glossary or a wiki. That would look considerably more professional, and not pidgeonhole newcomers at the same time.


----------



## Conspiracy

finally developing that smelly celluloid stuff from old car city.


----------



## hokiealumnus

Rokinon (under the name Bell+Howell) 85mm f/1.4 manual focus, manual aperture lens that has excellent optics for only $219: http://www.ebay.com/itm/321408269443?item=321408269443&lgeo=1&vectorid=229466

Image samples: http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=781777


----------



## ace8uk

Bah, you guys always get cheap goodies in the states!







I'd be a whole lot more jealous if it was the 24 f1.4 though.


----------



## Eggs and bacon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Well, I gave my 7MDH to my sister if that tells you anything. I've been using the Incase Ari bag for quite some time now, and it's perfect for my needs. I can fit the Xpro, X100 and GA645i in the same bag along with my 13" rMBP and a bunch of other random crap in the front pocket. It's got a nice rain cover and doesn't look like a camera bag, and I was comfortable walking through some seedy areas of Chicago with it (but I would never have taken the Crumpler). It's expensive, yes, but luckily a friend of mine works for Groupon and is able to get all Incase stuff for 50% off. If memory serves right, you're down under, aren't you?


I am indeed down under, that bag looks awesome. I'll see if I can find an Australian retailer for it.

Also has anyone seen this http://www.thephoblographer.com/2014/05/22/fujifilm-may-launch-x100s-like-50mp-medium-format-camera-summer/#.U36Jv_mSyvw, if this were true that would be my dream camera.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Eggs and bacon*
> 
> Anyone have experience with crumpler bags? I was looking at the cobram outpost. I need to get a bag to travel with, and I plan to bring a bronica etrs and 3 lenses, Fuji xe1 with 35 maybe an adapted 50 as well and a d3200 for video. Are there any recommended bags with somewhat quick access that do not scream "rob me I have cameras inside"?
> 
> 
> 
> Well, I gave my 7MDH to my sister if that tells you anything.
Click to expand...

why would you do that? isnt your sister notorious for destroying stuff or am i thinking of someone else


----------



## golfergolfer

So I am in the market for a camera like the Fuji X100s, Is there anything else I should be looking at in this style of camera? Is the X100s due for an update? Eggs and bacon is talking bout the medium format stuff is that a reality?

EDIT: kinda figured it out potential for Full Frame X200 coming out


----------



## sub50hz

Don't play the waiting game with Fuji, if you need an X100/X100s, buy one. The X100 is still my favorite digital camera, and I don't go anywhere without it.


----------



## golfergolfer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Don't play the waiting game with Fuji, if you need an X100/X100s, buy one. The X100 is still my favorite digital camera, and I don't go anywhere without it.


I have never ever dealt with Fuji, do they have a poor reputation in the waiting game? I dont quite NEED a X100/X100s but I am going to be having enough money come my way in the next little while where I can afford one. Dont want to get one and have a full frame X200 come out though. On a side note you love your X100?


----------



## Conspiracy

the point he is making is that waiting for something better to come out is not worth the wait when they already have incredible quality options that you can enjoy now.

playing the waiting game in photography generally does not always leave you benefiting from the amount of time wasted without gear that you want to enjoy. if there is something you want and you know you will enjoy owning it just buy it. the likelihood of something newer replacing it and being leaps and bounds better is unlikely


----------



## golfergolfer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> the point he is making is that waiting for something better to come out is not worth the wait when they already have incredible quality options that you can enjoy now.
> 
> playing the waiting game in photography generally does not always leave you benefiting from the amount of time wasted without gear that you want to enjoy. if there is something you want and you know you will enjoy owning it just buy it. the likelihood of something newer replacing it and being leaps and bounds better is unlikely


This is true I guess summer is almost here and it might be out summer time ish perhaps if I can get a good deal that will sway my choice


----------



## DizZz

So I just bought a 70D with the 18-135 kit lens (I know not great, but it'll do until I build up the funds to buy better glass) and I was wondering what the preferred photo organization/editing software is. I have a Mac so from what I've read, it comes down to either Aperture or Lightroom. Which do people prefer and what are the advantages of one over the other? Thanks


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DizZz*
> 
> So I just bought a 70D with the 18-135 kit lens (I know not great, but it'll do until I build up the funds to buy better glass) and I was wondering what the preferred photo organization/editing software is. I have a Mac so from what I've read, it comes down to either Aperture or Lightroom. Which do people prefer and what are the advantages of one over the other? Thanks


Lightroom/photoshop for me.


----------



## Eggs and bacon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *golfergolfer*
> 
> So I am in the market for a camera like the Fuji X100s, Is there anything else I should be looking at in this style of camera? Is the X100s due for an update? Eggs and bacon is talking bout the medium format stuff is that a reality?
> 
> EDIT: kinda figured it out potential for Full Frame X200 coming out


Take the rumor of a digital medium format fuji with truck loads of salt. As much as I would love to own one I doubt they would ever make one.


----------



## hokiealumnus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DizZz*
> 
> So I just bought a 70D with the 18-135 kit lens (I know not great, but it'll do until I build up the funds to buy better glass) and I was wondering what the preferred photo organization/editing software is. I have a Mac so from what I've read, it comes down to either Aperture or Lightroom. Which do people prefer and what are the advantages of one over the other? Thanks


I've never used Aperture, but Lightroom is an amazing piece of software. It doesn't do pixel level edits, but it does ~98% of what I need. If there isn't something in the photo you need to clone out, LR can pretty much do it all. It's fast and powerful, plus it has a solid organization component.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> why would you do that? isnt your sister notorious for destroying stuff or am i thinking of someone else


Ha! I just saw this. Yeah, she is notorious for ruining anything with electronics -- she killed the first SD card I gave her within a week. The bag, however, still looks brand new, presumably because it is not made of silicon and copper.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *golfergolfer*
> 
> I have never ever dealt with Fuji, do they have a poor reputation in the waiting game? I dont quite NEED a X100/X100s but I am going to be having enough money come my way in the next little while where I can afford one. Dont want to get one and have a full frame X200 come out though. On a side note you love your X100?


I very seriously doubt Fuji will do full frame. Buy an X100s.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Eggs and bacon*
> 
> Take the rumor of a digital medium format fuji with truck loads of salt. As much as I would love to own one I doubt they would ever make one.


While loads of salt is probably the best measure, it's probably more reasonable for Fuji to do a fixed-lens MF camera, as they have pretty considerable experience in doing so with film.


----------



## ace8uk

I mainly use Lightroom, although sometimes Photoshop comes in handy as well for things like stitching panoramas.

Going to rent Nikon's new 80-400G this weekend, as well as a 2x teleconverter for my 70-200. I'd like some more reach for wildlife shots, so looking to see how the two compare. I'm fully expecting the performance of the 80-400G to be much better, as I've seen numerous pixel peeping comparisons, but I'd like to try it for myself in real world shooting. Hopefully the teleconverter works pretty well, because it'll be a hell of a lot cheaper!


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hokiealumnus*
> 
> I've never used Aperture, but Lightroom is an amazing piece of software. It doesn't do pixel level edits, but it does ~98% of what I need. If there isn't something in the photo you need to clone out, LR can pretty much do it all. It's fast and powerful, plus it has a solid organization component.


Lightroom can do a bit of cloning but not to the level that Photoshop can.


----------



## Mongol

Does anyone else that owns a 6D have a problem with a load of dust getting inside the eyepiece?

How about sensor dust? I know the 28-105L pumps air through it but sheesh!


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mongol*
> 
> Does anyone else that owns a 6D have a problem with a load of dust getting inside the eyepiece?
> 
> How about sensor dust? I know the 28-105L pumps air through it but sheesh!


No on both accounts but I haven't had mine for that long.

For the eye piece, is it in the prism or on the focusing screen or just on the outside? Just wipe the eyepeice after you remove the rubber/plastic item that goes around it.

For the sensor you will likely need to clean it regularly. I used a rocket blower pretty regularly on my other cameras and never had to get them cleaned.


----------



## Jixr

i know the focusing screens collect dust like crazy. I've replaced two because they bothered me, but pretty much learned to just deal with it and ignore it since it does not affect the image quality.


----------



## Scott1541

I've learnt just to ignore dust in the viewfinder on my D5100 too







I'm on my second focusing screen and I've only had the camera 6 months, although I actually damaged the first one trying to clean it rather than replaced it because it was dirty. I also scratched up the screen inbetween the pentamirror and focusing screen in the process so now I'm just going to leave that well alone.


----------



## Mongol

It's actually inside the viewfinder...I can see it there if I glance at the viewfinder from a slight distance.

I keep my cameras pristine. (at least I thought I did) Guess I'll just give it a blast with the rocket while holding it facing down.


----------



## Jixr

yeah i did the same thing, I touched the focusing screen which got it all kinds of messed up, and in the process of putting in the new one I got dust on the inside part of it. Luckly my local camera shop sells them for $10 for my camera, so I should probably fix it eventually.

I think after the summer I'm going to send it in for a cleaning since by then it will be a year and half old and I probably have 15k shots on it.


----------



## Sean Webster

I dont see any dust in my 6D...and I change lenses a lot lol. I think im due for a sensor cleaning sometime soon...I've not done it yet and its been quite a few thousand pics ive taken with it.


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> I dont see any dust in my 6D...and I change lenses a lot lol. I think im due for a sensor cleaning sometime soon...I've not done it yet and its been quite a few thousand pics ive taken with it.


Stop your camera down to f/16+ and take a picture of blue sky or a solid white object and you will see every bit of dust.

Take it into LR or PS and tweak it a bit and it really makes it easy to see. Increasing the black levels, dropping the shadows usually works.


----------



## Jixr

anyone know any good guides to using your DSLR for video?

video is something I would like to get into, just would like to see what all the benifits of using a dslr vs a regular video camera and things before I get too into it.

Thanks


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> anyone know any good guides to using your DSLR for video?
> 
> video is something I would like to get into, just would like to see what all the benifits of using a dslr vs a regular video camera and things before I get too into it.
> 
> Thanks


what do you want to know about. DSLR video is not a simple thing to learn lol. ive been working with it for almost 4 years now and while its convenient it does have some limitations and weird things you have to learn to work with


----------



## Jixr

I don't see myself doing any youtube videos or anything like that, just since I have the option of doing it I'd figure I should at least mess around with it.

One thing I do know is the onboard mics suck, so I'm not sure if it would be worth picking up a mic. ( I have a traditonal microphone I could plug into it, but its not very portable or anything )


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> I don't see myself doing any youtube videos or anything like that, just since I have the option of doing it I'd figure I should at least mess around with it.
> 
> One thing I do know is the onboard mics suck, so I'm not sure if it would be worth picking up a mic. ( I have a traditonal microphone I could plug into it, but its not very portable or anything )


it depends on what you want to do. there are sooo many different types of microphone and pieces of video gear out there


----------



## kbros

Jixr: Totally OT, but the dye thread seems dead. You're into keyboards, so will THIS work for dying keycaps?

Back OT, I really want a fuji X100/ X100s. Like bad.


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> anyone know any good guides to using your DSLR for video?
> 
> video is something I would like to get into, just would like to see what all the benifits of using a dslr vs a regular video camera and things before I get too into it.
> 
> Thanks


Watch this and then parts 2 & 3. I haven't tried everything mentioned in the videos out properly but most of it seems pretty logical.




( I







DRTV







)


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> Back OT, I really want a fuji X100/ X100s. Like bad.


Buy one. Problem solved.


----------



## kbros

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Buy one. Problem solved.


Car first, goodies later.


----------



## Jixr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> Jixr: Totally OT, but the dye thread seems dead. You're into keyboards, so will THIS work for dying keycaps?
> 
> Back OT, I really want a fuji X100/ X100s. Like bad.


Yes, but you need to start with white caps, and there is a risk of ruining and warping your caps, and its really hard to get uniform colors. ( i've never tried dyes ) There are tons of pre-dyed sets you can buy online if you are looking for a certain color.


one of my more recent builds, I have a nice aluminum CNC'd case coming for it in the mail right now.
Also played around with my 50mm and different lighting set ups, and came out with a way to take really good shots with what I have on hand.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> Watch this and then parts 2 & 3. I haven't tried everything mentioned in the videos out properly but most of it seems pretty logical.
> 
> ( I
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DRTV
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )


DRTV is great, but I saw that this video was there, but most of their tutorrials are not really helpful at all, just entertaining. Though I suppose I'll give it a watch.


----------



## sub50hz

Eh, I've been there. Thousands of dollars in tires, suspension, club memberships and the like have trickled their way down my priority list over the past five years or so.


----------



## kbros

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> Yes, but you need to start with white caps, and there is a risk of ruining and warping your caps, and its really hard to get uniform colors. ( i've never tried dyes ) There are tons of pre-dyed sets you can buy online if you are looking for a certain color.


Kthanks, yeah I just bought a Cherry G84-4100 for like $25 and I want to mess with it. I think beige body with teal keys would look sw8. I'll either make the kb look great, or make it look horrible. We'll see.
NVM, after reading some horror stories and seeing how bad most of them look I canceled my dye order. I'd rather keep the classic beige than have something that looks like THIS.


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> DRTV is great, but I saw that this video was there, but most of their tutorrials are not really helpful at all, just entertaining. Though I suppose I'll give it a watch.


I usually only ever watch their videos for entertainment but these ones with just Lok in seem to be a bit more informative that usual.


----------



## golfergolfer

So according to Mirrorless Rumors X200 will be announced in September....

"Hybrid viewfinder lovers will be happy to hear that Fuji is likely going to announce a new X-PRO2 and X200 camera at Photokina in September. Both will feature a new APS-C X-Trans sensor. No guys, these will not be organic sensors (they will come in two years from now)."

I know you all said dont play the waiting game but September is not that far away for some new tech? Of course dont know how reliable but it makes sense


----------



## sub50hz

Can you time travel forward? Buy an X100/X100s.


----------



## kbros

^You really are the preacher of the X100 aren't ya? Watch out fuji might hire you as a promoter.UNLESS YOU ALREADY ARE


----------



## Conspiracy

started scanning. been on the look out for empty out of place chairs to contribute to projects/groups that share this theme. i find it to be a fun interesting subject to be on the look out for


----------



## Sean Webster

Got a 1998 BMW 328is that has been converted into a M3 by the previous owner...only $4k 

Mods include and not limited to:



Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!




S52 motor from an M Coupe w/ instrument cluster
S50 intake
Full race headers and exhaust...and boy does she scream!!!
Oil cooler
Aluminum radiator
Euro E36M3 coolant reservoir
Electric fan
Stage 4 clutch and lightweight flywheel
AEM intake
M3 Diff...I think? 
Active Autowerke BMW Diff Support
Coilovers and some other suspension work
M Contour Rims
M3 Brakes
M3 body kit parts
Vader seats
And some other things I have yet to find on the car lol




Things to do:



Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!




Short Shifter
Headlights
Body work and paint
FIX OBC Display
Fix door locks button




It's nice to finally own a project car for joy rides and track racing.  My civic has been annoying me lately with its fail wheel drive all its slowness lol.

Here is a photo of it to stay on topic:



More sexier photos as I get free time and I'm able to clean it up.


----------



## kbros

Oooh nice. That's a sweet deal for an m3


----------



## hokiealumnus

Well, bit the (cheaper) bullet and ordered a Neewer grip plus a Vivitar LP-E6. Total: $39.48.



I've never had a gripped camera before; this is exciting. Hopefully they both work well...being cheap worries me, but for my uses it's not worth the investment for a $175 Canon grip and $40 Canon battery. I get along just fine as-is, this will just be a bonus as long as they work.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Got a 1998 BMW 328is that has been converted into a M3 by the previous owner...only $4k
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mods include and not limited to:
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> S52 motor from an M Coupe w/ instrument cluster
> S50 intake
> Full race headers and exhaust...and boy does she scream!!!
> Oil cooler
> Aluminum radiator
> Euro E36M3 coolant reservoir
> Electric fan
> Stage 4 clutch and lightweight flywheel
> AEM intake
> M3 Diff...I think?
> Active Autowerke BMW Diff Support
> Coilovers and some other suspension work
> M Contour Rims
> M3 Brakes
> M3 body kit parts
> Vader seats
> And some other things I have yet to find on the car lol
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Things to do:
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Short Shifter
> Headlights
> Body work and paint
> FIX OBC Display
> Fix door locks button
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's nice to finally own a project car for joy rides and track racing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My civic has been annoying me lately with its fail wheel drive all its slowness lol.
> 
> Here is a photo of it to stay on topic:
> 
> 
> 
> More sexier photos as I get free time and I'm able to clean it up.


4k is a pretty good price if everything works. I picked up a e36 for a daily but ended up selling it cause I drove my SUV as the daily.

Definitely a fun car to get sideways in...


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> You really are the preacher of the X100 aren't ya?


Nope. I'm simply not a fan of playing the waiting game while I could be out shooting.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Nope. I'm simply not a fan of playing the waiting game while I could be out shooting.


Amazes me that people are sometimes quick to put a monetary value on their time, but then think nothing of 'waiting' for something that is 'scheduled' to come out in the future and don't even give it a second thought. Just about the only reason I would wait to make a purchase at this point is to let news of the new versions sink in just a little bit more and try to catch someone unloading their older versions for cheap.


----------



## Jixr

yeah, unless there is a solid annoucnement or scheduled release date, I don't bother waiting. if its what you want, go for it.

Just because there is a new one coming out does not make the current one bad or any worse.
if its what you want and the price is right, get it.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> Just because there is a new one coming out does not make the current one bad or any worse.


This. The problem is that in the age of digital, too many people are obsessed with specifications. If you can't get on with 12MP, what would 24MP do, et al.


----------



## Jixr

yeah, one thing I ask myself is it worth all the money when 99.9% of people who look at my stuff will be looking at a compressed version on their phone? or at best, a computer screen at 1080p?


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> Just because there is a new one coming out does not make the current one bad or any worse.
> 
> 
> 
> This. The problem is that in the age of digital, too many people are obsessed with specifications. If you can't get on with 12MP, what would 24MP do, et al.
Click to expand...

more than i need. im very happy with my 8MP right now. i rarely use the 7D anymore


----------



## kbros

For right now, everybody that's going to see my stuff will most likely see it on a screen of some sort. I would love to have higher resolution for cropping and what not. But ATM I don't NEED anything more than 6MP.


----------



## MistaBernie

I don't bother with anything over medium size for file sizes anymore unless it's a paid gig and there's a chance that something might get printed big (weddings, but even then, the majority of the times that I've sold large prints from weddings have been from either formals or something to do with the ceremony)..


----------



## Conspiracy

im somewhat impressed with pushing foma 400 to 800. i was expecting a lot more grain because of other people, foothead, who are anti anything past ISO 100 LOLOL

i may have overdone the contrast









img617 by brian_roberts, on Flickr

img623 by brian_roberts, on Flickr


----------



## MistaBernie

haha, I knew someone in high school that drove that very model of Galaxie.. looks right around the same year too.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Talking about cars now, eh?

We've got an old Lincoln Zepher we are trying to sell in a Barn up in Tennessee, but it's seen some better days.



Couldn't really get any good shots because of the space and lighting.

So peaceful and serene out in the country.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> Oooh nice. That's a sweet deal for an m3


Thanks, I'm really happy with it.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> 4k is a pretty good price if everything works. I picked up a e36 for a daily but ended up selling it cause I drove my SUV as the daily.
> 
> Definitely a fun car to get sideways in...


Yea it is! I already drifted it today a little...and I got pulled over lol. Got away with a warning and said i was still getting used to driving manual. 

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> im somewhat impressed with pushing foma 400 to 800. i was expecting a lot more grain because of other people, foothead, who are anti anything past ISO 100 LOLOL
> 
> i may have overdone the contrast
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> img617 by brian_roberts, on Flickr
> 
> img623 by brian_roberts, on Flickr


I dont think you over did the contrast, I really like that first image.


----------



## kbros

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Thanks, I'm really happy with it.
> Yea it is! I already drifted it today a little...and I got pulled over lol. Got away with a warning and said i was still getting used to driving manual.


Ahaha great excuse. "The gas pedal is a little touchy."


----------



## Eggs and bacon

I have a serious case of GAS, I saw the new digital(analogue)rev video, and an xpan/fuji tx1 looks amazing, if only it were cheaper or I wasn't a student. It is definitely a camera I want to own or at the very least rent someday. Can anyone recommend a small 35mm fixed lens camera with a a nice lens? I looked at the olympus xa but I'm not sure about its lens.

EDIT just realized I could get a panoramic back for the etrs, although they cost more than the camera itself, it would be a good runner up to an tx1.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> haha, I knew someone in high school that drove that very model of Galaxie.. looks right around the same year too.


youre old lol

that car has to be like from the late 1800's or something trolololololol


----------



## MistaBernie

It looks like a '64-'65, which is what my friend's older sister had. And I'm not _that_ old, this was back in 1999..

oh crap, I _am_ old.

Also, I now have Fios, and cancelling Comcast wasn't nearly as bad as I thought it would be. Less of an upsell than Abes of Maine.


----------



## ace8uk

Dayummmm, so very impressed with the new 80-400G.


----------



## Conspiracy

finally finished scanning the 3 rolls i shot at old car city. felt like it took forwever to get it done. been busy this past week. now all i have to do is go through them and edit and then make a thread and share

one for the night

img631 by brian_roberts, on Flickr


----------



## Sean Webster

nice, let us know when you post. 

also, tonight i learned first hand that drifting in the rain can be dangerous...nearly pooped myself lol. I need to fix my traction control and keep calm on the street with this thing, it can kick my booty if im not careful.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> also, tonight i learned first hand that *drifting in the rain can be dangerous*...nearly pooped myself lol. I need to fix my traction control and keep calm on the street with this thing, it can kick my booty if im not careful.


no duh lol


----------



## CasP3r

Hi,

I decided to drop by and ask for some advice. I'm considering buying my first dslr, mainly for my upcoming build log but for other general photgraphy as well. I don't want to drop a huge amount of cash for a camera right now because I don't know yet if this going to become a hobby for me or if it's going to be just an occasional thing I do. So that's why I have my eyes on used cameras. I visited my local photography store today to see if they had anything worth my attention. They had this Canon 500D with kit 18-55mm lens, battery grip and two batteries, shutter count 30k and a couple of scratches on the screen. They were asking 220 euros for it. Would that be a decent dslr to start with and how is the price? I'm thinking of picking a little bit better prime lens up to go with it if photography turns out to be something I enjoy.


----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CasP3r*
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I decided to drop by and ask for some advice. I'm considering buying my first dslr, mainly for my upcoming build log but for other general photgraphy as well. I don't want to drop a huge amount of cash for a camera right now because I don't know yet if this going to become a hobby for me or if it's going to be just an occasional thing I do. So that's why I have my eyes on used cameras. I visited my local photography store today to see if they had anything worth my attention. They had this Canon 500D with kit 18-55mm lens, battery grip and two batteries, shutter count 30k and a couple of scratches on the screen. They were asking 220 euros for it. Would that be a decent dslr to start with and how is the price? I'm thinking of picking a little bit better prime lens up to go with it if photography turns out to be something I enjoy.


I don't know how good the 500D is, but keep in mind that it's a bit old. The ISO only goes to 3200 (it can be extended but I don't think that'll work well), so I think that body might not be a great option for very low light. Other than that, it looks fairly similar to the 1100D, so that might also be an option.

If you buy the 1100D (it's currently quite cheap), you'll get a 18-55mm f3.5-5.6 IS II lens (I'm not sure what version the 500D has), from what I've read it has fairly good noise handling in low light at the lower price range, and one battery can give you around 700-800 shots without the flash. Keep in mind though the 1100D has a lower resolution (12MP, but most people don't need more), the burst speed is very slow in RAW, and it's very hard to get a grip that doesn't use an external cable for the shutter release. Ultimately it's up to you if that body is worth the cash or if you'd rather spend more for something newer.


----------



## Mongol

Someone say old?

Red Leader Old, standing by.


----------



## CasP3r

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JKuhn*
> 
> I don't know how good the 500D is, but keep in mind that it's a bit old. The ISO only goes to 3200 (it can be extended but I don't think that'll work well), so I think that body might not be a great option for very low light. Other than that, it looks fairly similar to the 1100D, so that might also be an option.
> 
> If you buy the 1100D (it's currently quite cheap), you'll get a 18-55mm f3.5-5.6 IS II lens (I'm not sure what version the 500D has), from what I've read it has fairly good noise handling in low light at the lower price range, and one battery can give you around 700-800 shots without the flash. Keep in mind though the 1100D has a lower resolution (12MP, but most people don't need more), the burst speed is very slow in RAW, and it's very hard to get a grip that doesn't use an external cable for the shutter release. Ultimately it's up to you if that body is worth the cash or if you'd rather spend more for something newer.


Thank you for your response JKuhn!

I'm aware of not being able to get the latest and greatest with such a tight budget. My rationales for getting a cheap, used body were mainly the possibility to get into photography without spending the arm and leg and the importance of lenses compared to the body. A newer body can take better pictures for sure, but for a beginner like me whose pictures won't most likely find their way further than an online forum or a print on my wall the difference wouldn't probably be worth the price premium. The little knowledge that I've gathered about cameras tells me that lenses have so much greater effect on image quality than the body itself that I would rather get a cheap body and spend the rest of my budget on a decent lens. Should I find myself wanting better features later down the road, I could then upgrade the body and keep on using my decent lens with it.

Please correct me if I'm way off here.


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CasP3r*
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I decided to drop by and ask for some advice. I'm considering buying my first dslr, mainly for my upcoming build log but for other general photgraphy as well. I don't want to drop a huge amount of cash for a camera right now because I don't know yet if this going to become a hobby for me or if it's going to be just an occasional thing I do. So that's why I have my eyes on used cameras. I visited my local photography store today to see if they had anything worth my attention. They had this Canon 500D with kit 18-55mm lens, battery grip and two batteries, shutter count 30k and a couple of scratches on the screen. They were asking 220 euros for it. Would that be a decent dslr to start with and how is the price? I'm thinking of picking a little bit better prime lens up to go with it if photography turns out to be something I enjoy.


Since you will likely only be posting photos on the web you can get away with a rather small overall pixel count on the camera. In addition since you will be shooting stills
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JKuhn*
> 
> I don't know how good the 500D is, but keep in mind that it's a bit old. The ISO only goes to 3200 (it can be extended but I don't think that'll work well), so I think that body might not be a great option for very low light. Other than that, it looks fairly similar to the 1100D, so that might also be an option.
> 
> If you buy the 1100D (it's currently quite cheap), you'll get a 18-55mm f3.5-5.6 IS II lens (I'm not sure what version the 500D has), from what I've read it has fairly good noise handling in low light at the lower price range, and one battery can give you around 700-800 shots without the flash. Keep in mind though the 1100D has a lower resolution (12MP, but most people don't need more), the burst speed is very slow in RAW, and it's very hard to get a grip that doesn't use an external cable for the shutter release. Ultimately it's up to you if that body is worth the cash or if you'd rather spend more for something newer.


Speaking just to the rig shots for the build log but just about any camera with some manual controls will do. Get some decent light blubs, some posterboard and a white sheet (iron it) and you can do wonders. Use the sheet/posterboard to create a white backdrop if that is the look you are going for or use them to reflect/soften the light if you want a more natural looking shot.

This shot was taken with a 10MP rebel xti, about 4 bulbs in something like this. The sub is sitting inside a box made of posterboard with the lights pointed to each side and the top.
12W6v2small by Adam.Mrugacz, on Flickr

Learn to control shadow and light and for rig shots it really won't matter the camera you have. If you have nice window light pop the camera on a tripod and fire away. Keep it at ISO 100 and you won't have to worry about noise and stop it down to f/5.6 or f/8 and you will have plenty of sharpness from most lenses.

Found another example:
This was done with the parts on a black sheet, same light as above but instead pointed at the white ceiling above to provide very diffuse light. The EXIF shows the flash fired so Im guessing I used it for a bit for front fill light or bounced it up to the ceiling also with a note card. Might have been a bit of window light on this one also, it was taken a long time ago so I can't remember 100%

GSXR 1000 Case Covers 2 by Adam.Mrugacz, on Flickr


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CasP3r*
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I decided to drop by and ask for some advice. I'm considering buying my first dslr, mainly for my upcoming build log but for other general photgraphy as well. I don't want to drop a huge amount of cash for a camera right now because I don't know yet if this going to become a hobby for me or if it's going to be just an occasional thing I do. So that's why I have my eyes on used cameras. I visited my local photography store today to see if they had anything worth my attention. They had this Canon 500D with kit 18-55mm lens, battery grip and two batteries, shutter count 30k and a couple of scratches on the screen. They were asking 220 euros for it. Would that be a decent dslr to start with and how is the price? I'm thinking of picking a little bit better prime lens up to go with it if photography turns out to be something I enjoy.


The 500D (T1i) is an excellent starter camera. The price is "normal" for this kind of kit, not amazing, but fair.
The 18-55 (don't know if it is IS, if so, even better) is an ok "normal-zoom" that can take great pictures. Ppl are happy with phone pictures ffs, the 18-55 is amazing by comparison. Really.

As far as ISO performance goes, the 500D is nowhere near the current generation, but even so, ISO 1600 images are fine if you are not pixel-peeping @ 100% zoom. ISO can be pumped to 12800, but that's too much imho...3200 is usable tho.
I had the 50D with the same sensor for a few years, and I was pretty happy with it - being a cropped body and such. 7D/60D were not really better in this area (noise).
Newer cameras like the 70D are, but cest la vie - the 500D is a 2009 camera, the 70D is a 2013 one.

imho the 1100D is an inferior camera in most ways: smaller, not to be really pocketable but enough to penalize handling, less options & worse /buffer/AF speed etc.
Yes, the 1100D it is a tad better @ high ISO (1600 or so) than the 500D, but worse in lower ISOs.
Viewfinder with the 1100D is horrible, and the TFT is smaller and with 1/4th the resolution.

As far as cheap primes go, you cannot go wrong with the Canon 50mm 1.8 II...it is dirt cheap, has great bokeh and contrast characteristics, while it focuses "relatively" close for PC build shoots (not a great macro lens - like all non-macro 50s pretty much - but cropping will help!). Fine for those shallow DOF shots tho


----------



## jameyscott

I still need to pick up the nifty fifty... I just really need a new tripod first. Mine is held together by hot glue and paper clips...


----------



## hokiealumnus

S'ok, go ahead and get the nifty. It, too, will be held together with glue & paper clips at some point. Mine has broken in half and been put back together already. Still works like new.


----------



## Jixr

I eventually got tired of having to glue mine back together after every shoot that I got a 50 1.4 for the same price as a new 50 1.8

Also, deal alert!
http://www.easycanvasprints.com/single-canvas?pcode=64415A4742334974426A6F6B6F70467A6435616544413D3D&esource=sas&esource=sas&extcid=1036&afcid=1001

16"x20" canvas prints for $27 shipped.

A client of mine got a photo done through them. Took 2 weeks, but came out really good.
( related )


----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> The 500D (T1i) is an excellent starter camera. The price is "normal" for this kind of kit, not amazing, but fair.
> The 18-55 (don't know if it is IS, if so, even better) is an ok "normal-zoom" that can take great pictures. Ppl are happy with phone pictures ffs, the 18-55 is amazing by comparison. Really.
> 
> As far as ISO performance goes, the 500D is nowhere near the current generation, but even so, ISO 1600 images are fine if you are not pixel-peeping @ 100% zoom. ISO can be pumped to 12800, but that's too much imho...3200 is usable tho.
> I had the 50D with the same sensor for a few years, and I was pretty happy with it - being a cropped body and such. 7D/60D were not really better in this area (noise).
> Newer cameras like the 70D are, but cest la vie - the 500D is a 2009 camera, the 70D is a 2013 one.
> 
> imho the 1100D is an inferior camera in most ways: smaller, not to be really pocketable but enough to penalize handling, less options & worse /buffer/AF speed etc.
> Yes, the 1100D it is a tad better @ high ISO (1600 or so) than the 500D, but worse in lower ISOs.
> Viewfinder with the 1100D is horrible, and the TFT is smaller and with 1/4th the resolution.
> 
> As far as cheap primes go, you cannot go wrong with the Canon 50mm 1.8 II...it is dirt cheap, has great bokeh and contrast characteristics, while it focuses "relatively" close for PC build shoots (not a great macro lens - like all non-macro 50s pretty much - but cropping will help!). Fine for those shallow DOF shots tho


I guess I have to admit that I don't know better than the 1100D.







What I said about the noise handling was based off of comparison sites (1100D vs 700D). According to those sites, the 1100D handles noise slightly better, and I believe that given the large jump in megapixels. Although the newer technology certainly helps to reduce that difference. Yes, I'm against high megapixel counts.









EDIT: For PC photos I prefer the 18-55 IS II, because I like to play with the perspective and don't like switching lenses a lot (plus my only wide prime is an old FD).


----------



## CasP3r

Thanks for a helping me out guys, I appreciate it a lot!

I probably wasn't clear enough about my planned usage for the camera. The rig pictures are definitely not the only thing I would be using it for, that was more of a kicker that made me seriously consider getting one. But the majority of my pictures will most likely end up being close range ones (no shooting birds or anything like that for now), so I guess it kind of falls under similar category than the rig shots.

I think I'll visit the store again tomorrow, check the lens, sensor and the overall appearance thoroughly and buy it if everything is okay. Are there any other important things I should check out before buying a used camera?


----------



## Jixr

if its coming from a camera store, they likely are pretty picky about what gear they will take in on trade/buys. Generally, if I buy anything used from my local camera shop I know its been looked over, tested, and cleaned if needed. ( but DO ask about their return policy/warranty on their used gear )

I've seen them turn away buying used gear because an item was either not working properly or damaged or something like that.


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> if its coming from a camera store, they likely are pretty picky about what gear they will take in on trade/buys. Generally, if I buy anything used from my local camera shop I know its been looked over, tested, and cleaned if needed. ( but DO ask about their return policy/warranty on their used gear )
> 
> I've seen them turn away buying used gear because an item was either not working properly or damaged or something like that.


The camera shop (part of a chain) in my uni's city don't even clean stuff. They say if something is so dirty that it would need to be cleaned before selling they won't take it at all. I guess this gives you an idea how the previous owner has treated the item. I concluded that the person that had my 10-20 before me didn't have a clue how to clean a lens


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CasP3r*
> 
> Thanks for a helping me out guys, I appreciate it a lot!
> 
> I probably wasn't clear enough about my planned usage for the camera. The rig pictures are definitely not the only thing I would be using it for, that was more of a kicker that made me seriously consider getting one. But the majority of my pictures will most likely end up being close range ones (no shooting birds or anything like that for now), so I guess it kind of falls under similar category than the rig shots.
> 
> I think I'll visit the store again tomorrow, check the lens, sensor and the overall appearance thoroughly and buy it if everything is okay. Are there any other important things I should check out before buying a used camera?


* Excessive wear or signs of abuse. Wear around the hot-shoe, tripod mount and strap mounting points are ofc normal and logical to happen.
* Dings or heavy deformations = signs of equipment being dropped should be noted and explained for.
* Too much dirt in the viewfinder / mirror / focusing screen area (visible through the viewfinder and/or during close inspection with the lens off)
* Shot of bright sky / white background @ f16~f22 for excessive sensor dust (you can ask to have it cleaned @ the store possibly if found to be excessive)
* No loose parts / buttons. No weird sounds coming out of the body when you are shaking it (other than the orientation pins in some Canon bodies that do sound like something is loose)
* Focusing action should be positive with the camera, so should be the lens AF motor (no grinding noises) and lens mounting/release mechanism should be smooth.
* Lenses shouldn't have too loose zooming action or excessive dust / fungus etc between the elements. Some dust is understandable tho, and even expected in many zooms.


----------



## Jixr

another tip, ALWAYS haggle when buying used gear. Maybe they can toss in a free class, or some free photo printing or something like that.


----------



## CasP3r

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> if its coming from a camera store, they likely are pretty picky about what gear they will take in on trade/buys. Generally, if I buy anything used from my local camera shop I know its been looked over, tested, and cleaned if needed. ( but DO ask about their return policy/warranty on their used gear )
> 
> I've seen them turn away buying used gear because an item was either not working properly or damaged or something like that.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> another tip, ALWAYS haggle when buying used gear. Maybe they can toss in a free class, or some free photo printing or something like that.


Yeah, I guess that's most likely the case and the way it should be, but you can never know for sure. That's why I'm a little paranoid when buying used stuff, be it from a store or from a private person. I have never been disappointed with the stuff I've bought, though.









That was my intention and what I always do. I'll try get them throw in some additional accessories or something like that.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> The camera shop (part of a chain) in my uni's city don't even clean stuff. They say if something is so dirty that it would need to be cleaned before selling they won't take it at all. I guess this gives you an idea how the previous owner has treated the item. I concluded that the person that had my 10-20 before me didn't have a clue how to clean a lens


Haha, I see.







The dslr in question had definitely been cleaned or it was in pretty nice shape to begin with, but I guess it's better to be safe than sorry.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> * Excessive wear or signs of abuse. Wear around the hot-shoe, tripod mount and strap mounting points are ofc normal and logical to happen.
> * Dings or heavy deformations = signs of equipment being dropped should be noted and explained for.
> * Too much dirt in the viewfinder / mirror / focusing screen area (visible through the viewfinder and/or during close inspection with the lens off)
> * Shot of bright sky / white background @ f16~f22 for excessive sensor dust (you can ask to have it cleaned @ the store possibly if found to be excessive)
> * No loose parts / buttons. No weird sounds coming out of the body when you are shaking it (other than the orientation pins in some Canon bodies that do sound like something is loose)
> * Focusing action should be positive with the camera, so should be the lens AF motor (no grinding noises) and lens mounting/release mechanism should be smooth.
> * Lenses shouldn't have too loose zooming action or excessive dust / fungus etc between the elements. Some dust is understandable tho, and even expected in many zooms.


That seems to be a pretty comprehensive list. I'll definitely take that with me to the store tomorrow and check those things out. Thanks!

*Edited for additional quotes.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> another tip, ALWAYS haggle when buying.


FTFY, at least the way I learned it. xD


----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CasP3r*
> 
> Yeah, I guess that's most likely the case and the way it should be, but you can never know for sure. That's why I'm a little paranoid when buying used stuff, be it from a store or from a private person. I have never been disappointed with the stuff I've bought, though.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That was my intention and what I always do. I'll try get them throw in some additional accessories or something like that.
> Haha, I see.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The dslr in question had definitely been cleaned or it was in pretty nice shape to begin with, but I guess it's better to be safe than sorry.
> That seems to be a pretty comprehensive list. I'll definitely take that with me to the store tomorrow and check those things out. Thanks!
> 
> *Edited for additional quotes.


I know pcfoo mentioned it, but inspect it very well for fungus, especially if you're in a humid area (I assume it's not that bad there but I can't be sure). If there's fungus in the body or lens, it can spread and ruin all your photo equipment beyond repair. So if there's fungus, don't even consider bringing it near other equipment.


----------



## CasP3r

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JKuhn*
> 
> I know pcfoo mentioned it, but inspect it very well for fungus, especially if you're in a humid area (I assume it's not that bad there but I can't be sure). If there's fungus in the body or lens, it can spread and ruin all your photo equipment beyond repair. So if there's fungus, don't even consider bringing it near other equipment.


Fungus can be a serious problem with cameras?







Wow, I would never have thought about that. You are correct, it's not that humid in here but it's still a thing worth checking out.


----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CasP3r*
> 
> Fungus can be a serious problem with cameras?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wow, I would never have thought about that. You are correct, it's not that humid in here but it's still a thing worth checking out.


Link

For more pictures, you can search Google Images for "lens fungus".


----------



## CasP3r

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JKuhn*
> 
> Link
> 
> For more pictures, you can search Google Images for "lens fungus".


Thank you again!


----------



## JKuhn

No problem.







Nobody wants to lose a bunch of expensive glass.


----------



## ace8uk

Here's a link to an album of photos from this weekend where I rented the 80-400G and the TC-20E III for my 70-200, for anyone interested. I was very impressed with both, sharpness wide open using the TC wasn't bad at all, but the autofocus performance took a huge hit. The 80-400 was flawless throughout. Exceptional VR and AF performance.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/ace8uk/sets/72157644949659635/


----------



## kbros

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ace8uk*
> 
> Here's a link to an album of photos from this weekend where I rented the 80-400G and the TC-20E III for my 70-200, for anyone interested. I was very impressed with both, sharpness wide open using the TC wasn't bad at all, but the autofocus performance took a huge hit. The 80-400 was flawless throughout. Exceptional VR and AF performance.
> 
> https://www.flickr.com/photos/ace8uk/sets/72157644949659635/


I saw those on my flickr feed, excellent.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ace8uk*
> 
> Here's a link to an album of photos from this weekend where I rented the 80-400G and the TC-20E III for my 70-200, for anyone interested. I was very impressed with both, sharpness wide open using the TC wasn't bad at all, but the autofocus performance took a huge hit. The 80-400 was flawless throughout. Exceptional VR and AF performance.
> 
> https://www.flickr.com/photos/ace8uk/sets/72157644949659635/


Wow, that is quite a super zoom! Nice shots.


----------



## CasP3r

I went to the photography store today and checked out all the things mentioned here. Except some dust on the sensor (I asked them to clean it) everything was looking fine and dandy so I decided to buy it.







They also had one used Benro tripod (or they actually got it in while I was examining the camera). It's probably not the most rock solid piece of equipment ever, but it had full metal construction (plastic is a no no when talking about stands), felt nice and sturdy and I managed to haggle the price down to 50 euros, so I decided to get it as well. I think it will do its job more than fine for quite a while. Now I'm just waiting for my SD card to show up in mail and then I can start shooting.


----------



## ace8uk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> I saw those on my flickr feed, excellent.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Wow, that is quite a super zoom! Nice shots.


Cheers, guys. It was sad packing it up to send back!








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CasP3r*
> 
> I went to the photography store today and checked out all the things mentioned here. Except some dust on the sensor (I asked them to clean it) everything was looking fine and dandy so I decided to buy it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They also had one used Benro tripod (or they actually got it in while I was examining the camera). It's probably not the most rock solid piece of equipment ever, but it had full metal construction (plastic is a no no when talking about stands), felt nice and sturdy and I managed to haggle the price down to 50 euros, so I decided to get it as well. I think it will do its job more than fine for quite a while. Now I'm just waiting for my SD card to show up in mail and then I can start shooting.


Nice, and you're in Finland so I'm fully expecting to see some magnificent landscape photos!


----------



## CasP3r

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ace8uk*
> 
> Nice, and you're in Finland so I'm fully expecting to see some magnificent landscape photos!


If only one could capture all of the glory of the magnificent landscape in question...







So don't have your expectations too high or you will most likely be disappointed.


----------



## Conspiracy

benro isnt too shabby youll get good use from it


----------



## CasP3r

Cool.







The exact model seems to be A350F and the rotating camera mount thingy, whatever it's called, is an N1.


----------



## Sean Webster

Ugh, I feel as tho i'm stuck in a certain style of editing. I need diversity and needs to start up my levitation and surreal projects...LIKE NAOW. lol

Ooooh, and I may be getting a job at a Prestige Portraits studio here in West Palm Beach. Going to talk to the owner more today, she is my aunts friend. I should finally be able to get a lot of studio time in! :3


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Ooooh, and I may be getting a job at a Prestige Portraits studio here in West Palm Beach. Going to talk to the owner more today, she is my aunts friend. I should finally be able to get a lot of studio time in! :3


Schweeeeeeeeeeeeeeet


----------



## ace8uk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Ugh, I feel as tho i'm stuck in a certain style of editing. I need diversity and needs to start up my levitation and surreal projects...LIKE NAOW. lol
> 
> Ooooh, and I may be getting a job at a Prestige Portraits studio here in West Palm Beach. Going to talk to the owner more today, she is my aunts friend. I should finally be able to get a lot of studio time in! :3


Nice one, here's hoping it works out for you!


----------



## hokiealumnus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Ooooh, and I may be getting a job at a Prestige Portraits studio here in West Palm Beach. Going to talk to the owner more today, she is my aunts friend. I should finally be able to get a lot of studio time in! :3


Congratulations!


----------



## DizZz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Ugh, I feel as tho i'm stuck in a certain style of editing. I need diversity and needs to start up my levitation and surreal projects...LIKE NAOW. lol
> 
> Ooooh, and I may be getting a job at a Prestige Portraits studio here in West Palm Beach. Going to talk to the owner more today, she is my aunts friend. I should finally be able to get a lot of studio time in! :3


That's awesome! Congrats Sean


----------



## Sean Webster

Thanks all, I got an interview Tuesday









I think I'm going to go shoot some nightscapes tonight, I have a 14mm f/2.8 from my friend to play with still


----------



## DizZz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Thanks all, I got an interview Tuesday
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think I'm going to go shoot some nightscapes tonight, I have a 14mm f/2.8 from my friend to play with still


Post some if/when you do!


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DizZz*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Thanks all, I got an interview Tuesday
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think I'm going to go shoot some nightscapes tonight, I have a 14mm f/2.8 from my friend to play with still
> 
> 
> 
> Post some if/when you do!
Click to expand...









Here are some: https://www.flickr.com/photos/seanwebsterhd


----------



## DizZz

Amazing as always









I especially like the viewpoint of the third one.


----------



## ace8uk

Nice set, Sean. Is that with the Samyang 14mm?

Making me jealous over here with that coast line, the coast on the East side of the UK sucks.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ace8uk*
> 
> Nice set, Sean. Is that with the Samyang 14mm?
> 
> Making me jealous over here with that coast line, the coast on the East side of the UK sucks.


Have you ever _been_ to Florida? Don't be jealous of the largest nursing home on the planet (with guns!).


----------



## boogschd

awesome share sean!


----------



## ace8uk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Have you ever _been_ to Florida? Don't be jealous of the largest nursing home on the planet (with guns!).


Haha, I actually have, but it was just to do all the general touristy things. Old people with guns is better than chavs with knives!


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ace8uk*
> 
> Haha, I actually have, but it was just to do all the general touristy things. Old people with guns is better than chavs with knives!


No they have worse things than guns, they have cars.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> No they have worse things than guns, they have cars.


So off topic, but so incredibly true. Change approved!


----------



## pcfoo

Oceanic seascapes are often dull...you have to go for more dramatic compositions / add other elements.
California 1 / PCH - Canon 50D + EF-S 17-55 2.8 IS


----------



## ace8uk

Don't get me wrong, I love photographing the coast here, I just mean it isn't the sort of place you go for a nice swim!


----------



## Jixr

Sad day.

My car broke, don't have cash to fix, can't make a photo job this weekend ( 1hr 1/2 way, not risking the drive even if I manage to fix it today ) and the only expendable things I have to sell that are of value is my camera gear.

Unless its a miracle and I can fix it for what I have in my pocket, looks like my 50mm 1.4 and my Canon EOS-M kit is going up for sale.


----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> Sad day.
> 
> My car broke, don't have cash to fix, can't make a photo job this weekend ( 1hr 1/2 way, not risking the drive even if I manage to fix it today ) and the only expendable things I have to sell that are of value is my camera gear.
> 
> Unless its a miracle and I can fix it for what I have in my pocket, looks like my 50mm 1.4 and my Canon EOS-M kit is going up for sale.


Sad day indeed. Good luck getting those issues sorted out.


----------



## Jixr

Yeah, I'm thinking of selling my gear, ditching my car and seeing if I can gather 2 grand to put down on a car.

I easily can re-sell my len's for $1-1300, and my M for another $300, and maybe 3 for my body. and whatever I have in savings for a decent down payment.

I'd hate to do it, but I need reliable transportation. My car breaks down constantly. I have a motorcycle, but its broken as well. ( i've intentionally not gotten it fixed after I had a very serious accident a year ago )


----------



## JKuhn

I don't know how bad your situation is, but personally I don't like selling stuff I use because it's expensive to re-buy. But as you said, you need transportation. Just think it through before you do something, there might be another option.


----------



## Jixr

yeah, side note, my car has 362k miles, so even if I can fix it for the small budget it have, i'm still gonna need something newer sometime soon. My camera gear is the last stuff I would want to sell, but its also one of the easiest things I can use for quick cash.


----------



## Jixr

So I've been thinking about taking my camera in to get it cleaned.

I've owned it for a year now, and doing the sensor dust test shots, I've noticed specs, which I've not been able to remove via blower.

so, should I?

1. not worry about it and continue on?

2. Take the cam to the shop, and wait a week or two to get it serviced.

3. Attempt to clean it myself with OTC sensor cleaning tools?


----------



## Sean Webster

I use sensor swabs myself, 1-2 usually do the trick. There is a new gel stick thingy for sensor cleaning that seems really good too.

http://photographylife.com/product/sensor-gel-stick


----------



## ace8uk

I've used the sensor swabs as well and always had decent results.


----------



## Jixr

how expensive are they? my local shop charges I think $60 to clean crop bodies, and turn around is a few days.


----------



## Sean Webster

they cost like $5 each: http://www.amazon.com/Sensor-Swab-Plus-Type-Eclipse/dp/B001BCFF2E

and instead of a few days you can be done in a few minutes lol.

I want to try that gel stick out myself one day tho...


----------



## kbros

Does anyone have any knowledge on how to improve car photos. I really don't know what to do. It seems to me that most people darken the asphault(if there is any) and make the sky "pop." Any tips? Say if I started with this, what could I do to improve it more.
https://flic.kr/p/nUtubhTo be replaced by Noah Blalock, on Flickr


----------



## ace8uk

Talk to the driver and try to arrange a proper shoot. There's nothing more boring or mundane than a photo of a car in a car park, regardless of the editing.

Shoot the car in action, get some movement in there, or put it in a flattering setting. On my phone at the moment but tomorrow I will send you a link to a guy who takes amazing car photographs. They're stunning, portrait like.


----------



## kbros

Thanks. This guy is one of my inspirations. Everything he does look straight from a movie.


----------



## ace8uk

Ok, this was the guy I was trying to find. His stuff of recent is a little over processed for my liking, but his older stuff is great.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> Does anyone have any knowledge on how to improve car photos. I really don't know what to do. It seems to me that most people darken the asphault(if there is any) and make the sky "pop." Any tips? Say if I started with this, what could I do to improve it more.
> To be replaced by Noah Blalock, on Flickr


To not shoot cars in meets lined up like that would be one suggestion.

2 would be to check out these guys' work:



Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!




https://www.facebook.com/fredericschlosserphotography?ref=profile
https://www.facebook.com/NotBland?ref=profile
https://www.facebook.com/1013mm?ref=profile
https://www.facebook.com/williamsternphotos?ref=profile
https://www.facebook.com/arunmnairphotography?ref=profile
https://www.facebook.com/jeremycliff?ref=profile
https://www.facebook.com/GSAutomotiveArt?ref=profile
https://www.facebook.com/MarcelLechPhotography?ref=profile
https://www.facebook.com/pages/Automotive-Photography-by-Damian-Hock/300567240010231?ref=profile
https://www.facebook.com/eastonchangphotography?ref=profile
https://www.facebook.com/richard.thompson.photo?ref=profile
https://www.facebook.com/pepperyandell?ref=profile
https://www.facebook.com/GFWilliamsPhotography?ref=profile
https://www.facebook.com/oskarbakkephotography?ref=profile
https://www.facebook.com/ThomasVanRooijPhotography?ref=profile
https://www.facebook.com/seagrampearcephoto?ref=profile
https://www.facebook.com/GeorgeBucurPhotography?ref=profile
https://www.facebook.com/shutterlit?ref=profile
https://www.facebook.com/JordanShiraki?ref=profile
https://www.facebook.com/CiprianMihaiPhotography?ref=profile
https://www.facebook.com/MHemmingPhotography?ref=profile
https://www.facebook.com/HarnimanPhotographer?ref=profile
https://www.facebook.com/DanieleFontaninPhotography?ref=profile
https://www.facebook.com/DocFluty?ref=profile
https://www.facebook.com/VisualEchos?ref=profile
https://www.facebook.com/GarrettWadePhoto?ref=profile
https://www.facebook.com/NueVuePhotography?ref=profile
https://www.facebook.com/NateHasslerPhoto?ref=profile
https://www.facebook.com/AndrewLinkPhotography?ref=profile
https://www.facebook.com/Linhbergh?ref=profile
https://www.facebook.com/bradsillarsphotography?ref=profile
https://www.facebook.com/dejanphotography?ref=profile
https://www.facebook.com/dalemartinphoto?ref=profile
https://www.facebook.com/AlCaptures?ref=profile
https://www.facebook.com/bischii.photography?ref=profile
https://www.facebook.com/pages/Seandshoots/309610445748288?ref=profile


----------



## Jixr

I just bought my first plane ticket, and I'm assuimg the best way to transport camera gear is put it in your carry on bag?
( I don't have a hard case or anything, just a camera backpack )
Gotta make sure it fits the size requirements though.

Also, Got a sad story from a friend of mine, was at a park with a client, and got wrapped up talking and accidently left a bag in the park, which had his 70-200 2.8 and some other lens's in it.
Use lenstag and write down your serials people.


----------



## ace8uk

I always take my gear on a carry on. Can get my d7000 and lenses in my billingham Hadley large, still more than enough room for iPad and travel documents.


----------



## Jixr

okay, I'm going on a weekend trip to see a friend, and she wants me to do some photo work for her while I'm up,

I my bag is pretty small, I just don't want to get hassled, I've not flown in years, and thats when I was dating a girl who's dad was a Sr. Captain of an Airline company, so we always got to skip TSA and all that and just walk right on the plane and it didn't matter what we had with us.

I'm just going to have my camera bag and a bag of clothes, so I'll toss my clothes bag under the plane. I just didnt know if there was anything against bringing a ton of camera equipment on as your carry on item. ( 2 cameras, 4 lens's, flash, batteries, chargers, etc )


----------



## ace8uk

I've never had any hassle, been all over the world. Some places might ask you to take it out of the bag when going through scanning, but that's about it.


----------



## Jixr

its a small flight, only an hour and a half in the air. so it shouldn't be that big of a deal. My car is just a huge pile of crap that probably wouldn't make the 6 hour drive there without breaking down. ( and i'd much rather fly and hour than be in a car for 6 and it only cost me $100 more )


----------



## pcfoo

I have been taking my Lowepro Mini Trekker AW up in the cabins last 12-13 years (boy, this bag is old!) + additional carry on luggage for some time now.
No one tried to stop me. But this is not a huge photo-backpack - it carries 1-2 bodies, and 3-4 lenses.

There are the occasional "take out all the lenses please" or "fire up your camera's flash for me please" etc requests before boarding, but they just go through a very typical inspection - technically they are required to treat all electronic equipment this way - much like they do with laptops.

Back in the film days, I also had a plastic encapsulated lead bag full of the film rolls - that was supposingly impervious to scanners. They never complained checking it by hand / just taking a look inside for a couple of seconds.


----------



## JKuhn

What free software can I use to process RAW (CR2) files? I recently re-installed Windoze 8 and now DPP keeps crashing.


----------



## jameyscott

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JKuhn*
> 
> What free software can I use to process RAW (CR2) files? I recently re-installed Windoze 8 and now DPP keeps crashing.


I believe GIMP can with a plugin.


----------



## hokiealumnus

You can use Adobe Camera Raw to convert them into DNG (digital negative), which can be more open than CR2 and might be able to read by more programs.


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hokiealumnus*
> 
> You can use Adobe Camera Raw to convert them into DNG (digital negative), which can be more open than CR2 and might be able to read by more programs.


That would require access to ACR, and if you have access to it why would you be using a free alternative?


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *hokiealumnus*
> 
> You can use Adobe Camera Raw to convert them into DNG (digital negative), which can be more open than CR2 and might be able to read by more programs.
> 
> 
> 
> That would require access to ACR, and if you have access to it why would you be using a free alternative?
Click to expand...

It is not "free", just bundled with your camera









Not all ACR & LR versions get to support the latest crop of cameras after one point, so you have to be more specific on which camera you have, and which version of which image processing software you have access to.


----------



## JKuhn

My camera is an EOS 1100D (T3), and I currently have the utilities that came with it, and also Photo Studio 6 (from our scanner) installed.

The installed stuff that I know of are:

EDIT: DPP, Zoombrowzer EX, Adobe RGB, Picture Style Editor and a few other stuff (sample music, etc).

Oh, and I don't know if it might help, but when DPP crashes (it works on JPEG after a clean install, and as soon as I try to open a RAW file it crashes with both), it shows ntdll.dll as the fault module.

Another edit: The version of DPP is 3.1, I also tried the updater from the Canon site.


----------



## hokiealumnus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> That would require access to ACR, and if you have access to it why would you be using a free alternative?


ACR can be downloaded free to convert otherwise unreadable RAW files to DNG. It's useful if you have older versions of Photoshop, etc that don't work with your new camera, but you still want RAW processing capabilities.


----------



## Jixr

While we are on topic, amature question here, whats the difference between raw and dng? why must lightroom adn photoshop convert one to the other? or why does the camera shoot in raw if everything uses DNG's or whatever.


----------



## JKuhn

Just a quick update: I booted Windoze in safemode, and DPP worked. I'm guessing that the culprit is the NV driver as that's the only one I updated after refreshing, I'll roll back tomorrow and post the results.


----------



## hokiealumnus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> While we are on topic, amature question here, whats the difference between raw and dng? why must lightroom adn photoshop convert one to the other? or why does the camera shoot in raw if everything uses DNG's or whatever.


ACR doesn't convert to DNG unless you make it do so.

ACR is what reads RAW files. It can be installed/upgraded in the newest, current versions of Lightroom, Photoshop and, of course, CC. However, once Adobe updates software (for instance, Photoshop CS 5 to CS 6), they do not update ACR past the last version current at the time of that update. So if you have a new camera (i.e. my 70D), but an old version of Photoshop (i.e. CS 5.5), you cannot upgrade ACR to work with your camera and your older version of Photoshop. So, if you don't want to get a new version of Photoshop, you must use the new version of ACR to convert your RAW files to DNG files, which any version of Photoshop/Lightroom can read.

It's adobe's way of either a) forcing you to upgrade software when you buy a new camera or b) annoying you enough with forced RAW-to-DNG conversion that you'll decide to upgrade so you can read RAW files.

If you have the newest version of LR or PS, it can read any current camera's RAW files on the market -directly, without converting- except for JUST released cameras, and Adobe is pretty good about updating ACR as necessary to make it read new cameras' RAW files, but only for the current versions of LR/PS.

On the flip side, if you get new software that doesn't read your old camera's RAW files, in theory, DNG will still be readable by any software, past, present or future. In theory.


----------



## Jixr

sigh... my friend is doing it wrong.

He is a pro ( in the sense he pays his bills doing nothing but photography ) but now is making an indygogo page to pay for new gear...

i'm usually not one to hate like this, but man... facepalm...


----------



## JKuhn

Update:

I rolled back my NV driver to 335.23, and DPP works now.


----------



## hokiealumnus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> sigh... my friend is doing it wrong.
> 
> He is a pro ( in the sense he pays his bills doing nothing but photography ) but now is making an indygogo page to pay for new gear...
> 
> i'm usually not one to hate like this, but man... facepalm...


Wow, definitely doing it wrong. If he were a hobbyist I'd be amazed the gear wasn't insured (my policy is $25/*year*), but as a pro I'm astounded. ...and then to ask for money from strangers to fund recovery of something you should have had insured in the first place... Yea, you said it - doing it wrong.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JKuhn*
> 
> Update:
> 
> I rolled back my NV driver to 335.23, and DPP works now.


Great!


----------



## Jixr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hokiealumnus*
> 
> Wow, definitely doing it wrong. If he were a hobbyist I'd be amazed the gear wasn't insured (my policy is $25/*year*), but as a pro I'm astounded. ...and then to ask for money from strangers to fund recovery of something you should have had insured in the first place... Yea, you said it - doing it wrong.


Well, turns out someone found his gear and turned it in, but he is still asking for money for gear?

He messaged me about my stuff since I've been thinking of selling off my gear, and my first question was "is your gear insured?" nope... lenstag? nope... did you file a missing/stolen item report or a craigslist ad with the serial numbers incase someone tries to sell them? nope...

I don't know, he is a cool and talented guy, and his work is amazing, but It just seems like asking people to give you money so you can buy more gear seems a bit off moral. Note his collection includes a 5dmk2, 2 t3is, a 70-200 2.8, sigma 35mm art, and some other high end glass, tons of lighting gear, and money in other audio and video equipment.

Dudes asking for $5000, and really, no young person is going to dip into their shallow pockets to let someone else buy cool stuff that they themselves can't afford.

I don't like to rant, but sometimes I just cant hold things in. ( hooray for being part of the 'gimmie' generation )


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *hokiealumnus*
> 
> Wow, definitely doing it wrong. If he were a hobbyist I'd be amazed the gear wasn't insured (my policy is $25/*year*), but as a pro I'm astounded. ...and then to ask for money from strangers to fund recovery of something you should have had insured in the first place... Yea, you said it - doing it wrong.
> 
> 
> 
> Well, turns out someone found his gear and turned it in, but he is still asking for money for gear?
> 
> He messaged me about my stuff since I've been thinking of selling off my gear, and my first question was "is your gear insured?" nope... lenstag? nope... did you file a missing/stolen item report or a craigslist ad with the serial numbers incase someone tries to sell them? nope...
> 
> I don't know, he is a cool and talented guy, and his work is amazing, but It just seems like asking people to give you money so you can buy more gear seems a bit off moral. Note his collection includes a 5dmk2, 2 t3is, a 70-200 2.8, sigma 35mm art, and some other high end glass, tons of lighting gear, and money in other audio and video equipment.
> 
> Dudes asking for $5000, and really, no young person is going to dip into their shallow pockets to let someone else buy cool stuff that they themselves can't afford.
> 
> I don't like to rant, but sometimes I just cant hold things in. ( hooray for being part of the 'gimmie' generation )
Click to expand...

its sad to see photogs begging for money to buy gear they cant afford. if you cant afford it then rent it. people need to stop begging to donations. photography is expensive if you want to be a pro but cant afford the gear then improvise. expensive equipment doesnt guarantee your work will be better


----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hokiealumnus*
> 
> Great!


I'm afraid not. I can now open and edit RAW files, but I just noticed that I can't save. When I try to export a photo, it just says "an error occured". I just took photos, now I had to edit them on my main rig (for accuracy), write each change down for every picture, edit them on my laptop, and then export them as JPEG.


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> its sad to see photogs begging for money to buy gear they cant afford. if you cant afford it then rent it. people need to stop begging to donations. photography is expensive if you want to be a pro but cant afford the gear then improvise. expensive equipment doesnt guarantee your work will be better


Agreed.
Photography is an expensive hobby, but at least some investments in it (usually glass, tripods, lighting etc) can last quite a few years - unlike PC hardware which usually gets outdated much faster.

But lets face it: it is expensive cause we are gearheads, not cause we are "pros" or we want "pro results" even.

You can achieve professional looking images with good gear choices that definitely don't have to break the bank.
Doesn't need to be the most expensive, doesn't need to be cutting edge (i.e. "the newest").
After one point, it is just "wants" and no needs...like getting a 2600K or equiv. processor 3-4 years ago: yeah, it is "2.5" generations behind...so what?

We just won't settle for lesser equipment - like blaming the mouse or the lack of a 120Hz screen for not being a world class "pro" gamer









A pro player will beat you/me down using nearly any machine, and a good photographer will "deliver" using the most basic of equipment.


----------



## kbros

Anybody have any tips on calibrating monitors? I have THIS. Yes I know it's TN but I wasn't at all interested in photography, IPS is in my future. So do I have to buy one of those calibration tools or is there something I can do software wise/ with the settings on the monitor itself?


----------



## iTurn

Got a problem with lightroom that I've never had before, wondering if anyone has an experience with the issue or any tips to help me out.

What I see and edit on the screen is gone after I convert the pictures from RAW to .jpeg, the pictures are oversharpened and flaws that weren't visible become visible. It's especially visible when I place the pictures on my phone (S4 if that matters)


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iTurn*
> 
> Got a problem with lightroom that I've never had before, wondering if anyone has an experience with the issue or any tips to help me out.
> 
> What I see and edit on the screen is gone after I convert the pictures from RAW to .jpeg, the pictures are oversharpened and flaws that weren't visible become visible. It's especially visible when I place the pictures on my phone (S4 if that matters)


In the export dialogue, there is an option to apply additional sharpening to your image over what you see in the develop tab.
This is very useful if you are exporting a downsized from the original image, but might be problematic if your settings where already in the "verge of over-sharpening".
Make sure this option is turned off, or adjusted to your liking.


----------



## iTurn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> In the export dialogue, there is an option to apply additional sharpening to your image over what you see in the develop tab.
> This is very useful if you are exporting a downsized from the original image, but might be problematic if your settings where already in the "verge of over-sharpening".
> Make sure this option is turned off, or adjusted to your liking.


Will try that thanks!


----------



## jellybeans69

Given how rare i see clear skies in evening random snap of moon out of 6th story balcony
, could have been a better picture of not for wires going over buildings
D3200 35mm/1.8 @ F6.3


----------



## pcfoo

Well, it is not a bad shot - and I don't want to be harsh - but:

To put things into perspective: your 35mm on a cropped body is around FOV of a 50mm 47 deg diagonal or say about 50 (actually yours is around 45).
The moon is less than 1.5 degree wide in the night's sky.
Shooting the moon through anything less than the equiv. FOV of a 500mm lens, is...not really shooting the moon...in your case you covered 3% of your horizontal FOV or about 2% of your image's area with the moon...the rest is...

...night sky and cables. These could / should be used to create dynamic shapes and/or interest, as that's what is dominating your frame.
Even better if you had moon-lit dramatic clouds.

What you think is a "weakness", should be turned on its head and become your main approach.


----------



## jameyscott

I missed an amazing shot of the moon last night. The clouds made a perfect circle around it and there was an orange hue circle around it. Look amazing but by the time I brought my camera outside it was gone. :/


----------



## Jixr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jameyscott*
> 
> I missed an amazing shot of the moon last night. The clouds made a perfect circle around it and there was an orange hue circle around it. Look amazing but by the time I brought my camera outside it was gone. :/


a lunar halo? those are always fun. Bright moon + moisture in the upper atmosphere.


----------



## jameyscott

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> a lunar halo? those are always fun. Bright moon + moisture in the upper atmosphere.


A lot like that except the clouds formed a perfect circle around the moon. It was really beautiful.


----------



## Scott1541

Just watched this, some people might find it interesting.




(Yes I'm the biritsh person who watches american car shows on youtube, call the police







)


----------



## Jixr

I've ether done something kinda fun, or really dumb.

A friend of mine called me up to ask if I was interested in shooting a wedding, and I said that I would look into it.

I've never done a wedding, but my friend told me that they didn't have a ton of money to afford a photographer, and they would rather pay someone what they can vs having a family member do the shots.

I know weddings are crazy, as I've worked in non-photography wedding jobs before.

But, it could be a good way to get some good hands on exp, while not feeling guilty of charging like crazy for photos, and getting my name out a bit.

should I jump on the opportunity, or let it pass.


----------



## jameyscott

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> I've ether done something kinda fun, or really dumb.
> 
> A friend of mine called me up to ask if I was interested in shooting a wedding, and I said that I would look into it.
> 
> I've never done a wedding, but my friend told me that they didn't have a ton of money to afford a photographer, and they would rather pay someone what they can vs having a family member do the shots.
> 
> I know weddings are crazy, as I've worked in non-photography wedding jobs before.
> 
> But, it could be a good way to get some good hands on exp, while not feeling guilty of charging like crazy for photos, and getting my name out a bit.
> 
> should I jump on the opportunity, or let it pass.


I say go for it. Not only will they get better quality shots than family members using their smart phones, you get the experience and the exposure. I think it is a win win.


----------



## Sean Webster

Yea, I'd do it. I got paid $250 to assist my first wedding shoot. So there is something to have an idea of what you may want to charge since it is for your first time and as a friend. Normally low end photogs charge like 500-800.


----------



## Jixr

yeah, I just gotta make sure i'm free that weekend. but i figure its a go.

Only downside is its going to be in a dark church, and the only fast lens I have for indoor stuff is my 50 1.4


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> yeah, I just gotta make sure i'm free that weekend. but i figure its a go.
> 
> Only downside is its going to be in a dark church, and the only fast lens I have for indoor stuff is my 50 1.4


Honestly, just try some bounce flash off the ceiling. I was suprised how much power my 430EX II can pack when I was in a high arched church. Or maybe that flash fong cover light sphere


----------



## kbros

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> Just watched this, some people might find it interesting.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (Yes I'm the biritsh person who watches american car shows on youtube, call the police
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )


Yes I did enjoy that, thanks.


----------



## Eggs and bacon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> yeah, I just gotta make sure i'm free that weekend. but i figure its a go.
> 
> Only downside is its going to be in a dark church, and the only fast lens I have for indoor stuff is my 50 1.4


Rent something for the weekend if you think you might need it.


----------



## Jixr

well, it turns out, its going to be in an outdoor atrium church kinda thing ( basically all outdoors with pillars and a roof on top, and will be in the morning, so I think I'll be okay with using my 70-200 F4 ( my fav lens )


----------



## pcfoo

Bring something wider too...
Weddings are heavily about "look what wore".

The "70-200" and even the shallow DOF 50 1.4 closeups are great, but trust me, they will "miss" not seeing the shoes the mother-in-law or bridesmade had on (cause she will ask about it) more than this romantic eye-contact closeup.
Some weddings are good for artistic interpretation / coverage, most of them are not - or should have the "artistic" reportage supplementing the fashion "look-at-me" aspect of it.

My


----------



## Jixr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Bring something wider too...
> Weddings are heavily about "look what wore".
> 
> The "70-200" and even the shallow DOF 50 1.4 closeups are great, but trust me, they will "miss" not seeing the shoes the mother-in-law or bridesmade had on (cause she will ask about it) more than this romantic eye-contact closeup.
> Some weddings are good for artistic interpretation / coverage, most of them are not - or should have the "artistic" reportage supplementing the fashion "look-at-me" aspect of it.
> 
> My


Yeah, I've done some events, just never a wedding before.
and I have a pretty well covered lens line up
17-40 f4L
50mm 1.4
70-200 f4 L

and I recently got a really good raise at work, and i've found a 5d mk2 for sale for a good price and was not used by a pro, so i'm thinking of going to check it out later today.


----------



## kbros

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> Yeah, I've done some events, just never a wedding before.
> and I have a pretty well covered lens line up
> 17-40 f4L
> 50mm 1.4
> 70-200 f4 L
> 
> and I recently got a really good raise at work, and i've found a 5d mk2 for sale for a good price and was not used by a pro, so i'm thinking of going to check it out later today.


Nice, hope you can snag it. What are you using now btw?


----------



## Jixr

I have a canon T3i, and I found a 5d mk2 for $1100, some soccer dad bought it and hasn't used it in awhile. Basically every used full frame camera you see is going to be one that a pro used for awhile before they could afford to buy something better.

( also comes with the older and better canon 50mm 1.8 )

Its a ton of money for me, but it has low shutter count, and looks to be in good shape. a 6d is better, but also $600 more.

I figured if I got it I could sell my t3i with the 50mm lens for about $300 or so, and it wouldn't cost me much to upgrade.

I'm on the fence about it, I'm going to go take a look at it tonight and see, I'll mess with it, and if it looks to be okay I'll sleep on it and then pick it up in the morning if I want it.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> I have a canon T3i, and I found a 5d mk2 for $1100, some soccer dad bought it and hasn't used it in awhile. Basically every used full frame camera you see is going to be one that a pro used for awhile before they could afford to buy something better.
> 
> ( also comes with the older and better canon 50mm 1.8 )
> 
> Its a ton of money for me, but it has low shutter count, and looks to be in good shape. a 6d is better, but also $600 more.
> 
> I figured if I got it I could sell my t3i with the 50mm lens for about $300 or so, and it wouldn't cost me much to upgrade.
> 
> I'm on the fence about it, I'm going to go take a look at it tonight and see, I'll mess with it, and if it looks to be okay I'll sleep on it and then pick it up in the morning if I want it.


I bought my 6D for 1200 shipped with 2k shutter count. Did you take a look on POTN for people selling gear?


----------



## pcfoo

The 5D II is a good camera. Kinda dated already for its class, but good nonetheless.
I don't know how much better it will be for you really. The T3i (600D for the world) is still a fine camera to have.

All in all, it is a good deal, but I would refrain from getting it if you are tight with money. Photographers are notorious gearheads, and we tend to spend more than we should on stuff we don't really take advantage of. The question is, what would 5D II bring to the table that you need.

Not what it has better than the T3, but what you really need.

The 5D will bring you better handling (the only thing I really miss with my 6D is the control layout in the back, there in the 5D line still, but I could not justify a Mk III).
The viewfinder will be "huge" and ofc brighter. You will have to start from scratch as far as storage goes, with good CF cards being twice or more as expensive per GB than comparable SD cards.
Accessories will be more expensive too, but with excellent compatible batteries and grips etc readily available through amazon and other sources, I don't worry much about it.

You are covered as far as lenses go - tho I would not sell that 50...you will soon be looking for something like it if you do.

But it boils down to what those $1100 or so add to the table for you. Other than the "I always wanted that pro/semi-pro FF and omg I can have it for $1100"...

If you start earning money through your hobby, and not only cover expenses but "Save" for equipment upgrades (those are not expenses, rent, car insurance, food etc are), or if you have a good day job that does it, then sure. Treat yourself. But if you are not treating those $1100 as "Disposable" (and i mean it), don't make that "investment". Doesn't worth it.


----------



## Jixr

yeah, thats a pretty good way to look at it.

I'm gonna pass on it.

I checked it out, and its in decent shape.

nearly had a heart attack when I saw it wasn't in RAW mode


----------



## pcfoo

More and more deals like this will come along...don't worry









Stealth edit:
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> nearly had a heart attack when I saw it wasn't in RAW mode


The most 5D II + 24-105 L's I've seen in a single outing, was in Disneyland "Park" (aka "the" Disneyland), 4 and something years ago - you know, when the 5D II was actually "not a $1000~1100 body" ...
Was ofc dads taking pictures of toddlers and youngsters holding them, and I would bet only a handful of them was shooting RAW...get real









btw, seen a couple gripped 5D IIs in good condition in this price range since you've posted it (FM & POTN forums) tho usually $1200-1250 is the norm for those. I was hunting for one too, but decided to go for a factory refurbished 6D (1y factory warranty as-if new) for a tad more during their sale / appreciation month and whatnot. I do believe I would feel better with the control layout on the back of the 5D II that is closer to that of my oldy 50D, but 5D III and 6D are moving along a different path...will get used to it.


----------



## ace8uk

I was going to say; you were posting the other day saying you're already going to have to sell some gear to fund car repairs, doesn't sound like you can justify over a grand on new camera gear right now. You have some good glass, so leave it at that for now. The time for a better body will come in the future, save some cash and make do with your current gear, I highly doubt it's holding you back with anything right now and it sounds like saving cash for a rainy day will see you better in the long run.


----------



## hokiealumnus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ace8uk*
> 
> I was going to say; you were posting the other day saying you're already going to have to sell some gear to fund car repairs, doesn't sound like you can justify over a grand on new camera gear right now. You have some good glass, so leave it at that for now. The time for a better body will come in the future, save some cash and make do with your current gear, I highly doubt it's holding you back with anything right now and it sounds like saving cash for a rainy day will see you better in the long run.


Bingo. Deals will come and go - more often coming than going with photography. When you are ready, with a budget dedicated to what you want at the time, then look for deals. If what you want isn't there at the time, it will be soon enough. Right now though it doesn't sound like this is the time for this equipment for you.

To go in a completely different direction, I'm back from a few days at the beach and had a lot of fun taking my first long exposure photos, which I'll share whenever I get them processed. It was a lot of fun. I definitely need a new tripod though. This plastic POS is not good enough to hold a gripped camera stable vertically. Heck, I had to drop one of the tripod legs just to level the camera. Sigh...it's always something.









Speaking of something, I received my first flash for father's day! I was expecting it for my birthday later this month, but father's day is cool too, and sooner. It's a Yongnuo YN-500EX, which exchanges some guide number for features like TTL and HSS (high speed sync) to keep it affordable. I can't wait to get to know it and use it, especially with the 70D's external flash firing capability. Good times (and a review'ish thread, of course) ahead!


----------



## Jixr

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YtxzJlpvqQM&list=UUuw8B6Uv0cMWtV5vbNpeH_A

as generally a professional hater, I love everything about this video.


----------



## hokiealumnus

Haha, love those guys.

Which brings me to a question - Who does and doesn't put a watermark on your photos? I've done it, then not done it, then done it again and can't decide. If I do it, I do it with a small, semi-transparent watermark in the corner that's hopefully not distracting, i.e. -

Honey Moon by hokiealumnus, on Flickr

(That one stands out more b/c it's on black.)

I've been torn on that for a while now and have done both with and without. What do you guys do, and think?


----------



## Jixr

I don't bother unless its something I intend to do for advert reasons, and only then if its my own photo, and never watermark client work.

no one is going to steal a crap photo off facebook and sell it off as their own lol.

And no one buys prints anymore, so there is no reason to go about the business model of watermarking photos with intentions to sell prints.

Thats why when I work jobs, I edit all the photos I think are edit worthy, send them those, and send them the rest of the photos from the day as well if they want them ( generally a few days after I send them the edited ones ) I think the idea of paying per photo is dumb. The photos are already taken, what good is it going to do me if you don't see them? I keep it simple, you pay me this much, and you get all the photos. done and done.


----------



## pcfoo

You don't have to do it, but if it is a nice image, doing so you protect it. Even if it is the smallest / unontrousive as the one above, the law directly specifies that it is illegal for anyone to crop, cover or alter an image containing a watermark in order to remove it.

Section 1202 of the U.S. Copyright Act makes it illegal for someone to remove the watermark from your photo so that it can disguise the infringement when used. The fines start at $2500 and go to $25,000 in addition to attorneys' fees and any damages for the infringement.
Quote:


> Section 1202. Integrity of copyright management information . . .
> 
> (b) REMOVAL OR ALTERATION OF COPYRIGHT MANAGEMENT INFORMATION.
> 
> No person shall, without the authority of the copyright owner or the law:
> (1) intentionally remove or alter any copyright management information . . .
> (3) distribute . . . copies of works . . . knowing that copyright management information has been removed or altered without authority of the copyright owner . . . knowing . . . that it will . . . conceal an infringement of any right under this title.
> 
> (c) DEFINITION. . . . "[C]opyright management information" means any of the following information conveyed in connection with copies . . . of a work . . . or displays of a work, including in digital form . . . :
> (2) The name of, and other identifying information about, the author of a work.
> (3) The name of, and other identifying information about, the copyright owner of the work, including the information set forth in a notice of copyright. . . .


You don't have to have registered your photo in advance to recover under this statute. The $2500 minimum fine is for the act of "removing the watermark / signature" alone, and doesn't include other damages from unlicensed usage - i.e. you can get much more than that if your image is indeed used by a large organization to in any short of advertisement etc.

Yes, some people "abuse" the watermarking thingy and put it on any crappy image they publish online...well, more power to them.
I totally disagree with our Hong Kong friend bashing that.
He should be saying "stop publishing each frikkin frame that comes out of your camera", but "hell yeah sign all those that you do".


----------



## Jixr

but really.. I would guess that 99% of people who watermark photos do not have photogrophy as thier sole source of income ( and you rarely see someone good watermark their stuff ) and probably another 50% of water markers have never sold a photo online.


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> but really.. I would guess that 99% of people who watermark photos do not have photogrophy as thier sole source of income ( and you rarely see someone good watermark their stuff ) and probably another 50% of water markers have never sold a photo online.


Make that 99.9% across the board and then some.
Doesn't matter. You can make it small and at low opacity, and there is nothing to lose.
Make it a contact email, or the url of your portfolio/blog/site, and who knows? You might even get some traffic, if not money, coming your way.

Taking pride in your stuff is one thing, being a self-important big head, another.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> but really.. I would guess that 99% of people who watermark photos do not have photogrophy as thier sole source of income ( and you rarely see someone good watermark their stuff ) and probably another 50% of water markers have never sold a photo online.
> 
> 
> 
> Make that 99.9% across the board and then some.
> Doesn't matter. You can make it small and at low opacity, and there is nothing to lose.
> Make it a contact email, or the url of your portfolio/blog/site, and who knows? You might even get some traffic, if not money, coming your way.
> 
> Taking pride in your stuff is one thing, being a self-important big head, another.
Click to expand...

yup


----------



## jackeyjoe

So, I have a friend from uni who is going to model for me... I haven't ever done this(I do a heap of photography for the school I work at), any pointers? I think I might have a play around with my speedlight off camera, and do some shots with natural light, but otherwise I have no idea. What do you guys do?


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jackeyjoe*
> 
> So, I have a friend from uni who is going to model for me... I haven't ever done this(I do a heap of photography for the school I work at), any pointers? I think I might have a play around with my speedlight off camera, and do some shots with natural light, but otherwise I have no idea. What do you guys do?


just experiment. have fun


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jackeyjoe*
> 
> So, I have a friend from uni who is going to model for me... I haven't ever done this(I do a heap of photography for the school I work at), any pointers? I think I might have a play around with my speedlight off camera, and do some shots with natural light, but otherwise I have no idea. What do you guys do?


nudes, do nudes.


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jackeyjoe*
> 
> So, I have a friend from uni who is going to model for me... I haven't ever done this(I do a heap of photography for the school I work at), any pointers? I think I might have a play around with my speedlight off camera, and do some shots with natural light, but otherwise I have no idea. What do you guys do?


Skin complexion? Male/Female?

You could use some reflectors for proper available light bouncing 1 speedlight or daylight, or an off-camera speedlight filling in the sun etc.

If no reflectors / multiple light sources are available, consider all your shots being B&W - single light sources produce harsh shadows, and that suits B&W while at the same time usually "kills" color shots.


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> nudes, do nudes.


i approve of this suggestion








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> You could use some reflectors for proper available light bouncing 1 speedlight or daylight, or an off-camera speedlight filling in the sun etc.


this too .. a simple reflector can do wonders.

shoot during midday or just before sundown ? .. good luck! ^_^


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boogschd*
> 
> i approve of this suggestion


Who doesn't?


----------



## Jixr

Gave in and had to order a 3tb hard drive for my computer, I filled mine up with photos already.

120gig ssd for OSX
60gig ssd for Win7
and a 1tb WD black split into 500gig partitions ( one for win, one for osx )

So... whats the best way to move photos ( lightroom catalog ) from one hard drive to another?


----------



## DizZz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> Gave in and had to order a 3tb hard drive for my computer, I filled mine up with photos already.
> 
> 120gig ssd for OSX
> 60gig ssd for Win7
> and a 1tb WD black split into 500gig partitions ( one for win, one for osx )
> 
> *So... whats the best way to move photos ( lightroom catalog ) from one hard drive to another?*


Also interested in this


----------



## Jixr

where is shean, the photo/storage guru?

ended up getting a 3tb wd Red drive.


----------



## jackeyjoe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> just experiment. have fun


Honestly, I'm just thinking this... going in with what I know, get the best shots I can and see what I can make happen in lightroom








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> nudes, do nudes.


You do some first








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Skin complexion? Male/Female?
> 
> You could use some reflectors for proper available light bouncing 1 speedlight or daylight, or an off-camera speedlight filling in the sun etc.
> 
> If no reflectors / multiple light sources are available, consider all your shots being B&W - single light sources produce harsh shadows, and that suits B&W while at the same time usually "kills" color shots.


I need to buy some reflectors(going to a camera shop this afternoon, getting a canvas print done), but I'll probably try to keep it indoors/out of direct sunlight as the sun is really harsh here during the day(will be shooting during the day, neither of us have mornings or afternoons free). I do like the sound of B&W, will see what I can do








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boogschd*
> 
> i approve of this suggestion
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> this too .. a simple reflector can do wonders.
> 
> shoot during midday or just before sundown ? .. good luck! ^_^


I'd like to do before sundown, but not possible right now... maybe next time?


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> Gave in and had to order a 3tb hard drive for my computer, I filled mine up with photos already.
> 
> 120gig ssd for OSX
> 60gig ssd for Win7
> and a 1tb WD black split into 500gig partitions ( one for win, one for osx )
> 
> So... whats the best way to move photos ( lightroom catalog ) from one hard drive to another?


If you move it within Lightroom (it's fairly simple if memory serves) then you don't have to do anything else, it will just move it for you (although it may be slower than moving the files manually and fixing the association in Lightroom).

That said, if you move the files _outside_ of Lightroom, it's actually not all that difficult, usually all you need to do is locate a file at the top level and the rest _should_ follow suit.

You can test this fairly simply. Take a single folder and move its location outside of Lightroom. Then, go into Lightroom and look for that folder. It should have a ? next to the folder and all the files in the folder. If you click on the ? next to one of the files in the folder,, it should either tell you it doesn't know where the file is or give you the option to locate the file manually (probably both). Explore to the file location manually, select the file name, and the system should automatically 'update' the rest of the files with the new location.


----------



## Conspiracy

im heavily debating on grabbing a best buy credit card and financing new glass. ive been wanting to grab my own 70-200 for a while and eyeballin the 70-200 f4 IS. i would also be taking advantage of my discount on the glass and geek squad accidental protection. i wouldnt normally be looking at new glass though unless KEH offers financing as well


----------



## MistaBernie

KEH might not offer direct financing, but something to consider may be applying for Bill Me Later via Paypal. If the KEH price is way better than your discount, then it's something to consider (plus they offer six month free financing at a relatively low $ amount - something like $99+, but it may be closer to $249).

That said, my relatively new crusade lately has been to try to get people to avoid using credit to purchase glass. If you will _definitely_ get use out of it and can pay it off without interest, something like the Bill Me Later route is one thing. Another thing to consider is that some camera stores might offer inhouse financing with a good deal (like 1 year interest free).

If you're going to go down that path, look for interest free offerings, and only do the deal if you're sure you can pay it off in the interest free period (as not doing so adds a lot of interest the moment you leave that period, backdated to the date and amount of the original purchase).


----------



## Jixr

yeah, thats probably how I'm going to go about buying a 6d when the time comes. Save up like $1000, and then buy it on a card, put whatever I have in hand to pay for it, and then bill out the rest. I've been trying to build up some credit, only things I have on my history are apartment renting and regular bills. And with me buying a car in the next 12 months, I need to look as good as I can for a low interest rate on a car loan.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> KEH might not offer direct financing, but something to consider may be applying for Bill Me Later via Paypal. If the KEH price is way better than your discount, then it's something to consider (plus they offer six month free financing at a relatively low $ amount - something like $99+, but it may be closer to $249).
> 
> That said, my relatively new crusade lately has been to try to get people to avoid using credit to purchase glass. If you will _definitely_ get use out of it and can pay it off without interest, something like the Bill Me Later route is one thing. Another thing to consider is that some camera stores might offer inhouse financing with a good deal (like 1 year interest free).
> 
> If you're going to go down that path, look for interest free offerings, and only do the deal if you're sure you can pay it off in the interest free period (as not doing so adds a lot of interest the moment you leave that period, backdated to the date and amount of the original purchase).


yeah thats why im kinda leaning towards the best buy card because we offer 12 month 0% financing so its basically like same as cash. ive been researching different credit cards and benefits but honestly cant find anything i would benefit from. i have a very basic credit card that i have had for the past 7 years with wells fargo which is my first and only card.

i have the money to buy glass right now but it sucks buying it straight up since i dont have as much money in the bank as i used to since i recently bought a new car. so the ability to do financing with 0% interest on glass and only paying like $120 a month doesnt seem all that bad and since i work at best buy its pretty easy to deal with since i just got promoted to full time and transferred to a better store.

im going to keep doing research on cards out there. my dad used to be a banker so hes wanting me to find one that has benefits that i can use but i dont spend much money every month so its hard finding a card that i can benefit from as far as perks and whathaveyou are concerned


----------



## MistaBernie

Good call. A bank / financial institution card would be the better route since you can use it everywhere and hopefully earn cash rewards, etc, while (hopefully) giving you an initial interest rate at zero.


----------



## Jixr

unless you're like me and get denied every credit card I've applied for. Credit score is fine, just a low credit history. ( sorry for liking to pay for everything upfront







)


----------



## Conspiracy

yeah i just cant figure out which one to go with. because technically i can buy glass on even my current credit card (no benefits though) and just make payments each month until the card is paid off. i never make the min payments and on my current card thats used to gas, food, etc. i always pay in full every month anyway.

i just dont want to put a lens on a card and end up paying an interest rate to pay it off. idk ill have to speak with my father more about it because while the best buy credit card is good for financing stuff there are no benefits and its only good at best buy

my credit score is decent. idk what it is buy ive been paying student loans for over a year now, even paid off some loans in full and have had a credit card with wells fargo for going on 7 years now. so i dont think getting another card will be difficult. the hard part is chosing the right card for someone that doesnt spend much money other than buying one lens a year pretty much


----------



## hokiealumnus

Flashy goodness!


----------



## Jixr

I feel dumb. I should have bought one of those vs my canon flash.


----------



## Scott1541

I still haven't really used my YN-560 II properly yet, I've only played about with it


----------



## Jixr

I'm starting to use my flash more and more, but it really just depends on what i'm shooting.


----------



## hokiealumnus

I should have mentioned that's a new'ish YN-500EX. It's cheaper than the big dogs, but trades some guide number for extras like HSS & TTL. I'm hoping to play with it off-camera some just to have some fun. When I'll actually be able to do that is anybody's guess.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

I now wish I had of gotten the 568. TTL would be nice...


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> Gave in and had to order a 3tb hard drive for my computer, I filled mine up with photos already.
> 
> 120gig ssd for OSX
> 60gig ssd for Win7
> and a 1tb WD black split into 500gig partitions ( one for win, one for osx )
> 
> So... whats the best way to move photos ( lightroom catalog ) from one hard drive to another?


Basically what MistaBernie said. I just usually move my lightroom folder with my library and all my photos over to a new location with FreeFileSync and then reopen the library and link the highest level photo folder.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> where is shean, the photo/storage guru?
> 
> ended up getting a 3tb wd Red drive.


WD reds are slow 

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jackeyjoe*
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> nudes, do nudes.
> 
> 
> 
> You do some first
Click to expand...

I already have lol. It isn't that hard.









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> im heavily debating on grabbing a best buy credit card and financing new glass. ive been wanting to grab my own 70-200 for a while and eyeballin the 70-200 f4 IS. i would also be taking advantage of my discount on the glass and geek squad accidental protection. i wouldnt normally be looking at new glass though unless KEH offers financing as well


I but its all about that f/2.8 life! f/4 i sooooo boring lol


----------



## Jixr

wd red is prefect for a media drive though and it was on sale, and has a nice long warranty.

Though its gonna take about 16 hours to copy everything over lol.


----------



## jackeyjoe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> I already have lol. It isn't that hard.


Well I guess I'll hold off on it until I am comfortable doing it









It went well, ended up doing some shots for her boyfriend as well which was fun, wanted photos for a website. Got a little bit of money and the shots turned out okay so I think it worked out well


----------



## werds

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> I feel dumb. I should have bought one of those vs my canon flash.


Yea, I bought a 270ex ii when I bought my 70D and for a while felt stupid for having purchased it, lately have been getting more and more into using it and bouncing light figuring out how far the light throws how it scatters etc... really wishing I would have spent the same money on a Yongnuo with more capability now lol


----------



## boogschd

my photos got featured .hihi

http://loweredlifestyle.com/one-bad-forester/


----------



## Conspiracy

awesome Boog!


----------



## aksthem1

Congrats!

Too bad that Forester isn't static.


----------



## sub50hz

It breaks my heart to see a Forester ruined in that manner.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Eh, if you're gonna ruin a car like that, might as well do it to an suv. Leave the good ones for the rest of us that like being able to cross railroad tracks.


----------



## kbros

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> It breaks my heart to see a Forester ruined in that manner.


It's on airride, not ruined at all.

Congrats dude! So jelly! That fozzy is sick too.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boogschd*
> 
> my photos got featured .hihi
> 
> http://loweredlifestyle.com/one-bad-forester/


Sick!


----------



## boogschd

thanks guys









owners a really cool guy








was lucky too, there was an event on the nearby track that day so we got to take photos on it









all taken with a D7000 + Sigma 70-200
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aksthem1*
> 
> Too bad that Forester isn't static.


static?

edit: heres a video of it made by the shop that installed the air suspension stuff


----------



## jameyscott

Please tell me it's just the video that makes the wheels look cambered...


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Nope. Less traction and extreme tire wear due to stretched tires is all the rage nowadays.


----------



## kbros

But you get moar scene points.


----------



## Jixr

I never really understood the low rider thing, espc when they chamber the wheels like that. if you're going to drop a car down, at least do it right where it sits flush and not make it look like the car crapped its pants when its driving down the road.

major cringe.

But then again I'm from the part of the country where the cool thing is jacking up your dads old trucks and hanging plastic balls off the rear axle.


----------



## Scott1541

I don't get the whole negative camber crap either. Pretty much every VW Lupo on the road here has that and stretched tyres now, they look absolutely ridiculous


----------



## Jixr

yeah, I get cars that are built for shows, and I get cars that are built for the track, but everyday cars that try to mix both often just look terrible.


----------



## hokiealumnus

With that equipment list, I can't imagine it's what they did, but that kind of erroneous toe in my limited experience is caused by compressing or cutting springs without adjusting the toe alignment to save a few bucks. It's the poor/lazy man's lowered car. They look ridiculous to me too.

That said, your photos were good and congrats on getting them featured.


----------



## Jixr

hopefully this weekend i'm going to be sealing the deal on my first wedding gig.

Should be fun, Though I won't be making much, but still should be neat.

I may be worried that I overcharged them a bit, I've never done a wedding before, but a few paid shoots. I may cut my price a little as it always irks me when I see people pay a few hundro for photos and the images they get back are just pure crap. I originally quoted them $400, but they didn't want me for the reception so I'm thinking of cutting my price a little bit. I know for the family the budget is tight and I'd rather them feel like I over delivered than me charging too much for what they feel are sub par images for the price.

A friend of mine asked me the other day how I do paid gigs, and mainly they just kinda fall in my lap, she's the kind that ( i hate to sound snobby here ) that has her facebook page and is asking to charge $35 sessions but has zero images of her work or anything.

And for sure i'm getting one of those free online photog contracts written up.


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> I never really understood the low rider thing, espc when they chamber the wheels like that. if you're going to drop a car down, at least do it right where it sits flush and not make it look like the car crapped its pants when its driving down the road.
> 
> major cringe.
> 
> But then again I'm from the part of the country where the cool thing is jacking up your dads old trucks and hanging plastic balls off the rear axle.


Well, the wheel camber is a "must" for the hugely oversized wheels not to scrap the well. Plus the tire comes to full contact when cornering hard @ 200mph - when mostly needed - , it's all science guys!









Ppl think overkill is cool in many weird ways and really dig it.
I actually think there is no way to make it look acceptable (forget great) with "cheap tricks" and without modding the drivetrain, but that's me, just an opinion. What is not an "opinion" is that unless you are building an extreme machine, there is no way you can use all this rubber.

And I did not realize that you were from SoCal Jixr. Thought it was Tx


----------



## kbros

What he said.^ The main thing is to get the lip of the wheel as close to the top of the fender as you can, without rubbing the inner well. So they camber the wheels out so they can get better "fitment" if you will. Although I would never drive a car with a contact patch the size of a quarter, they're still pretty rad. We can all agree that today's import scene is way better than it was in the early 2000's, although some honda drivers are still living in 2001.


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*


good god... O_O


----------



## mz-n10

why is his air setup so high in the car? also why does he need 6 gallon of air?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hokiealumnus*
> 
> With that equipment list, I can't imagine it's what they did, but that kind of erroneous toe in my limited experience is caused by compressing or cutting springs without adjusting the toe alignment to save a few bucks. It's the poor/lazy man's lowered car. They look ridiculous to me too.
> 
> That said, your photos were good and congrats on getting them featured.


it isnt toe that they are doing, its chamber.

the rims wont fit if they had correct chamber.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> What he said.^ The main thing is to get the lip of the wheel as close to the top of the fender as you can, without rubbing the inner well. So they camber the wheels out so they can get better "fitment" if you will. Although I would never drive a car with a contact patch the size of a quarter, they're still pretty rad. We can all agree that today's import scene is way better than it was in the early 2000's, although some honda drivers are still living in 2001.


yep.....the terminology we use here in the west coast is "flush", which is basically JDM VIP style cars.

i see so many em1/dc2/na6/etc rocking -6 or more chamber with 15x8 0 offset with stretched 185s.....


----------



## kbros

Yeah it seems you guys get more japanese influence than we do on the east coast. I do love big old VIP style Lexus's. And really, camber only does a huge toll on tires if it's in the front, because they always take the most wear from bumps and turning etc. Everyone should just look at old bugs for how to do it right.

And that's not even intentional^


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> why is his air setup so high in the car? also why does he need 6 gallon of air?
> it isnt toe that they are doing, its chamber.
> 
> the rims wont fit if they had correct chamber.
> yep.....the terminology we use here in the west coast is "flush", which is basically JDM VIP style cars.


Whoa now. VIP cars are a thing of their own and not all of them will have tons of a camber.


----------



## Conspiracy

so i applied for a best buy credit card today. my co-worker put $5,000 as the initial sale amount instead of $1400 which is what i told him. so i was approved for a crazy bigger limit. not sure if this is a good thing or a bad thing lol. i have no intention of ever financing a lens that costs more than $1500....


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aksthem1*
> 
> Whoa now. VIP cars are a thing of their own and not all of them will have tons of a camber.


you are right not all VIP cars have negative chamber, but most will run negative chamber to fit the low offset rims. but both flush and vip focuses on fitment and "clean" and not really performance.

while we are on the topic of cars, went to a nascar practice session at sonoma and caught a glimpse of the dogecoin car....


7d / 70-200mk2


----------



## kbros

HAHA^ the legend is real.


----------



## sub50hz

Finally got rid of my D7000. Now I have an 11-18 that isn't doing me any good.


----------



## kbros

I'm looking for a wide angle^


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> so i applied for a best buy credit card today. my co-worker put $5,000 as the initial sale amount instead of $1400 which is what i told him. so i was approved for a crazy bigger limit. not sure if this is a good thing or a bad thing lol. i have no intention of ever financing a lens that costs more than $1500....


Afaik:

1) Each application for an additional credit card "costs" you credit points off your score.
2) Each time you get close to depleeting your credit on a card with a buy, even if you pay on time you might hurt your credit score. e.g. buying a $1,300 lens with a $1,500 limit card is not that good.

So, in general, it is better for your "image" vs. your next big lender that you have a $5,000 limit card you never used for anything more than a $1,500 bill, than a $1,500 credit line you come close to crossing now and then.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> so i applied for a best buy credit card today. my co-worker put $5,000 as the initial sale amount instead of $1400 which is what i told him. so i was approved for a crazy bigger limit. not sure if this is a good thing or a bad thing lol. i have no intention of ever financing a lens that costs more than $1500....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Afaik:
> 
> 1) Each application for an additional credit card "costs" you credit points off your score.
> 2) Each time you get close to depleeting your credit on a card with a buy, even if you pay on time you might hurt your credit score. e.g. buying a $1,300 lens with a $1,500 limit card is not that good.
> 
> So, in general, it is better for your "image" vs. your next big lender that you have a $5,000 limit card you never used for anything more than a $1,500 bill, than a $1,500 credit line you come close to crossing now and then.
Click to expand...

yeah thats what quite a few other people told me as well. so it looks like it will work out nicely since there are no lenses i really need or want that cost more than like $1600


----------



## Jixr

I've been so tempted to do something like this to get a 6d.

Pay $1000 down and pay off the other $800 with a card that has zero intrest for the first 12 months.


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> I've been so tempted to do something like this to get a 6d.
> 
> Pay $1000 down and pay off the other $800 with a card that has zero intrest for the first 12 months.


Someone with decent credit can apply for an Amazon Store Card and get 12m financing with $0 down for it.

But...again, I thought you were on a tight budget, yet if you are posting once a week about getting a new camera, i cannot imagine how much you are thinking about it in real life!

My 2cents ? Being in debt to get a "toy" is not a wise move.

If you want to get started as a "pro" photographer, weddings and whatnot, you can always start easy and rent gear for pretty decent prices - yes, ofc it gets expensive if you are doing it all the time, but guess what?
If it is a business and you are good at it, you charge money for it. Decent money, that allow you to recuperate your costs and then some. Then you buy gear if you have to.

My little anecdotal example: I am into Architecture and Architectural Visualizations. I like shiny PC part toys, I pay dearly for them.
At the end, I have a high-end machine, that is 20 times better than what 3D artists used to make what I consider my "benchmark" works, 5-6 and even10 years ago on machines that weren't even high end back then...

You camera gear today, that "meh" Rebel, is better than what professionals were using 4-5 years ago to get themselves into magazines and large format prints with AMAZING shots.

Long story short: it is not the gear that makes the thing fly. It helps, of course, but it is insulting to the hard working artist to believe that it is much more than that.
Getting a better camera or lens makes noone a better photographer. I cannot stretch that enough.

Just get off your behind and shoot more!


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> I've been so tempted to do something like this to get a 6d.
> 
> Pay $1000 down and pay off the other $800 with a card that has zero intrest for the first 12 months.
> 
> 
> 
> Someone with decent credit can apply for an Amazon Store Card and get 12m financing with $0 down for it.
> 
> But...again, I thought you were on a tight budget, yet if you are posting once a week about getting a new camera, i cannot imagine how much you are thinking about it in real life!
> 
> My 2cents ? Being in debt to get a "toy" is not a wise move.
> 
> If you want to get started as a "pro" photographer, weddings and whatnot, you can always start easy and rent gear for pretty decent prices - yes, ofc it gets expensive if you are doing it all the time, but guess what?
> If it is a business and you are good at it, you charge money for it. Decent money, that allow you to recuperate your costs and then some. Then you buy gear if you have to.
> 
> My little anecdotal example: I am into Architecture and Architectural Visualizations. I like shiny PC part toys, I pay dearly for them.
> At the end, I have a high-end machine, that is 20 times better than what 3D artists used to make what I consider my "benchmark" works, 5-6 and even10 years ago on machines that weren't even high end back then...
> 
> You camera gear today, that "meh" Rebel, is better than what professionals were using 4-5 years ago to get themselves into magazines and large format prints with AMAZING shots.
> 
> Long story short: it is not the gear that makes the thing fly. It helps, of course, but it is insulting to the hard working artist to believe that it is much more than that.
> Getting a better camera or lens makes noone a better photographer. I cannot stretch that enough.
> 
> Just get off your behind and shoot more!
Click to expand...

this is great advice.

my reason behind doing the Best Buy card is because i used to have 24/7 access to a 70-200mm but had to give it back to the owner, over the past 2 years i have grown tired of renting it when i need it so im trying to own my own finally. granted buying an f4 lens isnt ideal with 2 cameras that have BLAH high ISO performance but i rarely shoot past 1600 at f2.8 anyway so ill be ok losing a stop


----------



## pcfoo

There are great 70-200mm 2.8 by sigma and Tamron that are expensive ofc, but hugely cheaper than Nikon / Canon equivalents.
Especially for cropped bodies, where edge to edge performance is not as important, but even @ FF, since one of the wants shooting wide open is shallow DOF, razor sharp edges are often working against that.

I agree that a 70-200 f/4 L (the one I have) is not good enough for low light indoor weddings (especially in certain dim-lit churches I used to see in Europe) but for a travel photographer (what my schedule and occupation renders me) is a life saver...you don't need to be older than your late 20s to swear after a couple of miles hiking with a 70-200 2.8 (especially when the chances getting it out of the bag for more than a couple of shots is slim).

For studio shots, weddings etc, 2.8 zooms are great, but those professionals make a decent living using them.

Another piece of advice?
If you are serious about going pro, this is a good time to intern with a professional wedding photographer - you might make some change, and most likely learn a lot on how to properly (or improperly) use gear. Even if you are not a second shooter, but just an assistant, this can be a great school - for some people it is far preferable than trying to re-invent the wheel and make all the mistakes in the book all-over again trying to figure out the proper way.

Wise are those that learn from other people's mistakes


----------



## Conspiracy

you talking to me lol?

i already know what i am doing







ive been shooting for quite a while now. i am pretty much uninterested in 3rd party equivalents other than the sigma 50mm art lens. i dont do weddings, my main photography work is sports and corporate events. my last gig was shooting a fitness video that was featured on the Dr. Oz show. We shot it on 3x D800 and some gopros, was a kickass shoot because money was no option so they let me rent everything i wanted


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> you talking to me lol?
> 
> i already know what i am doing
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ive been shooting for quite a while now. i am pretty much uninterested in 3rd party equivalents other than the sigma 50mm art lens. i dont do weddings, my main photography work is sports and corporate events. my last gig was shooting a fitness video that was featured on the Dr. Oz show. We shot it on 3x D800 and some gopros, was a kickass shoot because money was no option so they let me rent everything i wanted


that sounds pretty awesome!









sucks that we dont have camera lens rentals around here .. :/


----------



## MistaBernie

16-35 F/4L IS should be out and about now. Been thinking about cashing out the 17-40 and switching up. Little wider (which I like on the 5D) but Canon's optics lately have been amazing.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> 16-35 F/4L IS should be out and about now. Been thinking about cashing out the 17-40 and switching up. Little wider (which I like on the 5D) but Canon's optics lately have been amazing.


im going to rent it first before i pull the trigger. im very impressed with the 17-40 so i can only imagine that the new 16-35 f4 is a nice refresh. im not sure i need the IS but its cool that its there.


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> you talking to me lol?


No, it was part of the general "big brother" advice towards @Jixr's "have to have it" equipment rant - that perhaps 99% of the enthusiast photographers are guilty of (sure you had/have a run with it too, I know I am).

Its a totally different thing doing something professionally or for competitions etc, and just "collecting gear" for the shake of it or just for personal satisfaction.
The latter is "priceless", but it needs to be funded by a surplus.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> 16-35 F/4L IS should be out and about now. Been thinking about cashing out the 17-40 and switching up. Little wider (which I like on the 5D) but Canon's optics lately have been amazing.
> 
> 
> 
> im going to rent it first before i pull the trigger. im very impressed with the 17-40 so i can only imagine that the new 16-35 f4 is a nice refresh. im not sure i need the IS but its cool that its there.
Click to expand...

The 17-40L was my 1st L glass, back in 2004 along with my 20D...









Ended up selling it after I've got my EF-S 17-55 IS 2.8 a couple of years later, and I new there was no merit in keeping it for shooting my film EOS - was doing all my film work on a AE-1 just fine. I could borrow a Sigma 10-20 for UW (getting into a local photography club and making friends that share the bug is great, I made close friends this way sharing more stuff than lenses).

Now I miss it (the 17-40, but also the friends I've left 10 time zones away) so much









That 16-35 f4 is said to be a "dream", but I thing I need some $450+ of an investment in a Lee filter system to do decent UW landscaping, so I will probably go for a sharp used copy of the 17-40L again, to allow room for it









But there is another lens that's kicking me - totally into equipment mastur-you know the rest...24 TS-E.
The 1st gen is a piece of crap vs. the II (the TS-E 24 L II is another "new-gen" canon lens that makes you wonder how the heck they could improve so much over what was thought to be "the best in class" already - along with 100 L macro, 70-200 II, 24-70 II etc), but at least it is not as expensive and can be a pretty good landscape lens (with great photo-stitching post ofc).
Been doing some Architectural shots due to my RL occupation, and perhaps this would be a better choice over the wider zooms.


----------



## Conspiracy

whoever gets the new 16-35 f4 IS first is required to post shots and first impressions or you will be shunned


----------



## Jixr

everyone thinks i'm crazy for having traded my 17-55 2.8 IS for a 17-40, but I don't regret changing it at all.


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> everyone thinks i'm crazy for having traded my 17-55 2.8 IS for a 17-40, but I don't regret changing it at all.


It's all part of the "getting into the FF master race" plan...I get you...









But yeah, I have to agree that for aps-c work, the 17-55 IS is simply a better all around lens.
Faster glass, Faster to focus, better range, slightly worse wide distortion if I remember correctly but "ok" with LR presets kicking in, and ofc IS... <3 that lens.

Did "as much" as my 24-70 L mk1 does now, for half the weight...
Sure, the 24-70L has better micro contrast (FF sensor helps too) and much better flare control but ... the 17-55 was my "workhorse" lens that would rarely leave my camera.





EF-S 17-55 IS @ 2.8 on EOS 50D


----------



## Jixr

no, the FF factor didn't influence my pick at all.

the 17-55 copy i had was extremely soft wide open, the IS isn't that great on it, and has been known to fail ( and I think mine was starting to go )
the distortion was pretty bad, and mine would creep when pointed up. quite possibly I just had a bad copy.

and in comparison, the 17-40 is much more solid, I didn't notice any difference in focus times, and I generally shoot wide landscape type stuff vs low light action stuff so narrow DOF and IS isn't that important to me. Build quality is a huge deal to me, and that the 17-40 does not extend out is a huge plus for me.

and I also have a 22mm f2 and 50 1.4 at my disposal for any wide aperture stuff I wanna shoot.

It wasn't bad, I just didn't like it for what I do.

Same thing with my canon 50 1.4, there is just something I don't like about it.

( though I do know a guy whos ditching all his canon gear and is letting his go for $400 that I've thought about picking up, to either keep or flip )


----------



## pcfoo

Well, I don't know...
I had my 17-55 since 2006 and took it everywhere...was doing pretty good.
Had it cleaned before I sold it (it is a dust sucker that one) and made it even worse saying goodbye









I always thought IS was doing a good job (it is not magic, but it indeed brought it inline to a 30 1.4 DC for "keepers" from personal experience).
Focusing in dim-lit spaces is a definite improvement over the 17-40L, but again, that was from personal experience and it is known that YMMV like with most photo gear.

You have a 22 f2 ? You mean the EF-M 22 2? The one I just got myself along a used M?
Lovely lil bugger!


----------



## Jixr

yeah, the 22mm for the M is magic. Its probably my 2nd favorite lens I have. if only it were not M mount.


----------



## hokiealumnus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> whoever gets the new 16-35 f4 IS first is required to post shots and first impressions or you will be shunned


+1, that's looking like a heckuva lens.

I'm very tempted to try and figure out a way to get the EF-S 10-18 IS STM. It's so cheap, relatively speaking. IQ looks good as long as you move to keep it from flaring weirdly. I want ultra wide and even if I could afford it, 16mm isn't THAT much wider than 18mm. I also can't afford it (nor can I afford FF).


----------



## Jixr

yeah, depending on how it goes, I may pick one up as well, I LOVE wide angle.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> whoever gets the new 16-35 f4 IS first is required to post shots and first impressions or you will be shunned


Pshh, I've had that lens on Nikon for like...5 years. Where you been, brough?


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> whoever gets the new 16-35 f4 IS first is required to post shots and first impressions or you will be shunned
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pshh, I've had that lens on Nikon for like...5 years. Where you been, brough?
Click to expand...

old glass is old grandpa we want that new new


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> Pshh, I've had that lens on Nikon for like...5 years. Where you been, brough?


Psshh, a Nikon user bragging about quality F4 ED lenses...Rly?

If there were 70-200 f/4 Ls, 17-40 f/4 Ls etc etc in the Nikkor line (plus competitive D-SLR bodies outside exceptions before 2009-10 or so), I might had switched myself...


----------



## Dream Killer

No reason to have a 17-40mm along with a 16-35mm. Waste of money.

I'm more of a 24mm f/1.4G guy tho....


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> No reason to have a 17-40mm along with a 16-35mm. Waste of money.
> 
> I'm more of a 24mm f/1.4G guy tho....


Yes, ofc, IF you have monies for $1200-1500 or $2000 + lenses (i.e. f2.8 zooms) you don't need cheap yet good f/4s - that's exactly the point









It was (and still is in most ways) the case tho - for quite some time - that amateurs / entry pro's could not get that kind of quality lenses glass/construction/weather sealing with Nikkors - even if you would double what budget f/4 Ls are asking.


----------



## JKuhn

I finally managed to get DPP working. I had to set some of the executables to run with admin privilege, and I can't use the 337.88 NV driver (or the latest beta). I'm not sure if 335.23 works right, but I got it working on 334.89 so I'm not going to mess with it now.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> No reason to have a 17-40mm along with a 16-35mm. Waste of money.
> 
> I'm more of a 24mm f/1.4G guy tho....
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, ofc, IF you have monies for $1200-1500 or $2000 + lenses (i.e. f2.8 zooms) you don't need cheap yet good f/4s - that's exactly the point
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It was (and still is in most ways) the case tho - for quite some time - that amateurs / entry pro's could not get that kind of quality lenses glass/construction/weather sealing with Nikkors - even if you would double what budget f/4 Ls are asking.
Click to expand...

As a person who had a pretty deep investment in Canon and made the switch, I think Nikon stuff has a better value. Each lens / accessory I bought came with everything. All lenses came with hoods / pouches, and all the flashes I bought came with CTG, CTO, sto-fen-like diffuser, built in wireless trigger and carrying case.

FYI: Even the $250 50mm 1.4G from Nikon came with weather sealing and the 16-35mm f/4 from both camps cost the same.


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> As a person who had a pretty deep investment in Canon and made the switch, I think Nikon stuff has a better value. Each lens / accessory I bought came with everything. All lenses came with hoods / pouches, and all the flashes I bought came with CTG, CTO, sto-fen-like diffuser, built in wireless trigger and carrying case.
> 
> FYI: Even the $250 50mm 1.4G from Nikon came with weather sealing and the 16-35mm f/4 from both camps cost the same.


Don't get me wrong, there is nothing wrong with Nikon gear. They've peaked up the game seriously, and it is not like it was back in 2004-2008, that Nikon remained expensive but reliant on 3rd party development could not really compete with the advances in electronics/sensor tech Canon was developing in-house.

Nikkor glass is excellent, yet all around it is more expensive, and I doubt you recuperate as much of the cost with accessories.

I don't know about the 1.4G @ $250 - the AF-S model I am aware of is much more expensive. If cheap primes is what you need, sure, Nikon F mount on bodies with AF-motor offers easily better value, as you can tap into older designs that are compatible and work great.

Now, for professionals and gearheads, specs and weather sealing and this and that are all nice to have - even if you rarely need, but things are not clearly leaning towards Nikon as far as value goes. The contrary.

For someone starting out and having zero investment, Nikon is more expensive:

EF-S 17-55 IS vs DX 17-55 VR - huge price difference. Sure, it is not the same thing build-wise, but optically wise it is a toss pretty much for considerably less.
What if the 17-55 IS doesn't have a hood...something that you can get for sub $10 from ebay you don't really care? It's like $600 cheaper, you can accommodate a hood!

17-40 f4 L - un-answered by Nikon.
70-200 f4 L - un-answered by Nikon.

Grips and accessories are also as a rule of thumb more expensive.

Sure, expensive f4 L IS models are a toss in price, and the 16-35 2.8 models have Nikkor's coming ahead. No clue on the 16-35 4 L IS yet...

But as you start dropping serious cash on gear, Canon lenses are a tad to quite a bit better:

Canon 24-70 L f2.8 Mk II & 70-200 L f2.8 Mk II stand out.
Yes, those are pricey, but the Nikkor equivalents were priced where "Mk IIs" are now for quite a few years, again being comparable with the cheaper Mk I Ls, and 3rd party lenses are pressing harder the Nikkor side than they do the Canon.

What makes the Nikon system are the great bodies / sensors (if you have the glass to follow as far MPs go, and better DR) and the superior TTL flash system, but again, assuming that each system was apples to apples (which never is, some wins here, some wins there) you would pay more for Nikon to get the same performance, and I doubt you can get a quantitative (i.e. objective) resolution. Each company has certain niches where it excels.


----------



## Dream Killer

17-40mm - no point with a 16-35mm, and nikon has a 70-200 f4 vr.

accessories, at the time, the sb700 offered level of functionality beyond what even the 580ex 2 could offer and the sb700 sat cheaper than a 430ex. never mind the lack of viewfinder options on canons - ever peeked through a full frame with a dk-19 and dk-17m?

once i start start dropping money on canon lenses? i've had em all. 35mm L, 50mm L, 85mm L, efs 10-22mm, efs 17-55mm, 70-200 f4 is L, even a 200 f/2 L at one point. I switched em all out for Nikon and been happier with it.

but all of this is moot anyway since the resale value of lenses are so good that switching systems is pretty easy.


----------



## Conspiracy

dont get me wrong but nikon is for dirty hippies lol


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> dont get me wrong but nikon is for dirty hippies lol


yea, nikon is for those who like green tint on all their photos lol.


----------



## ace8uk




----------



## sub50hz

As someone who shot both Canon and Nikon for quite some time, I would buy another Nikon if I needed an SLR. Canon's new lens gouging pricing is terrible, and it's clear they've moved heavily toward "acceptable" stills quality and better HDSLR capability. That said, their service is _miles_ better than Nikon's.


----------



## Jixr

I kinda wish I would have gone nikon, mainly because they have more budget glass options compared to canon, and I'm a budget kinda guy. and I never use the video mode on my canon, so that triumph over nikon is mute for me.

Though I got an amazing deal on my T3i, new in box for $500 ( right after they came out ) and have been lucky in snagging some deals with used lens's on craigslist. ( mainly my 70-200 f4L i got for $400, a canon 50 1.4 for $150, and a 17-40 f4 L that I think I paid like $500 for )


----------



## pcfoo

I really don't see the how you would do better with nikkor glass in the value department. Really.


----------



## Jixr

well, compared to canon, they have cheaper wide primes, which outside of the 50 1.8 and 40 2.8, its pretty pricey

value, maybe not, but price, yeah


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> dont get me wrong but nikon is for dirty hippies lol


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> yea, nikon is for those who like green tint on all their photos lol.


meanies ..









.. :heh:

j/k


----------



## Chunky_Chimp

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> yea, nikon is for those who like green tint on all their photos lol.


You're ragging on the brand for the faults of just a couple models (which isn't consistent or even permanent). Not very fair.


----------



## Sean Webster

haha

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chunky_Chimp*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> yea, nikon is for those who like green tint on all their photos lol.
> 
> 
> 
> You're ragging on the brand for the faults of just a couple models (which isn't consistent or even permanent). Not very fair.
Click to expand...

Hey, I've edited D4S and D600 files and seen the back screens of a bunch of others. I don't like their green/yellow tinted colors. lol

Plus, as sub said, Canon's service is leaps and bounds better than Nikon's.


----------



## Scott1541

Today I saw an old man using a 5D Mk3 with a cheap Tamron superzoom


----------



## pcfoo

Potato / potatho.

Photographers come up with all these theories about equipment, as they try to emulate products of experience and hard work with what is used.
Most fields of human achievement that are to an extend relaying on technology, have that:

* The theme is identical in Intel vs. AMD or nVidia vs. AMD/ATI talks, as if the choice of a certain brand is guaranteed superiority in real life application.
* Racing - people strongly relate success of the racing team funded by a brand to bear their name, with the cars sold in dealerships. X race-car driver used a Mercedes, so I am just like him driving the same etc.

Kind of hard to do the same with art - sure, with music there are the "oh, you can only do that with a Stratocaster", or "you cannot emulate the sound of the Stradivarius" etc - memes and rumors than don't hold much water outside personal believes. Rory Gallagher did not need his Strato to be who he was. Even the best musicians cannot really tell Stradivarius vs. other quality violins in a double blind test.

In the same manner, if it wasn't for EXIFs I doubt you could tell really if a shot was from a Canon or Nikon or whichever of the other contenders. This has a cast here, that gets better skin tones there, leica is teh sex etc - ok, "bS" : the photographer that pulled that shot with brand X, could most likely do it with brand Y if challenged, and probably most "masters" would do better with a D3200 than what you and I can do with a D4, much like a pro driver can pull more thrill (and perhaps better time too!) in the "Ring" driving a 150PS Alfa 75 than you can in your new Porsche.

To an extend it is almost hubristic to try so hard to emulate creativity, persistence, hard work and even talent (I think of talent as the icing over the last 3, talent by itself goes nowhere, and to an extend doesn't even "exist" by itself in my mind) with equipment and materials.
Why nobody asks what kind of paintbrushes Rembrandt was using? Why would the maker of the violin Mozart was first using to give birth to his compositions or the tool-maker Pheidias used to sculpt?

Does it really matter?


----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Potato / potatho.
> 
> Photographers come up with all these theories about equipment, as they try to emulate products of experience and hard work with what is used.
> Most fields of human achievement that are to an extend relaying on technology, have that:
> 
> * The theme is identical in Intel vs. AMD or nVidia vs. AMD/ATI talks, as if the choice of a certain brand is guaranteed superiority in real life application.
> * Racing - people strongly relate success of the racing team funded by a brand to bear their name, with the cars sold in dealerships. X race-car driver used a Mercedes, so I am just like him driving the same etc.
> 
> Kind of hard to do the same with art - sure, with music there are the "oh, you can only do that with a Stratocaster", or "you cannot emulate the sound of the Stradivarius" etc - memes and rumors than don't hold much water outside personal believes. Rory Gallagher did not need his Strato to be who he was. *Even the best musicians cannot really tell Stradivarius vs. other quality violins in a double blind test.*
> 
> In the same manner, if it wasn't for EXIFs I doubt you could tell really if a shot was from a Canon or Nikon or whichever of the other contenders. This has a cast here, that gets better skin tones there, leica is teh sex etc - ok, "bS" : the photographer that pulled that shot with brand X, could most likely do it with brand Y if challenged, and probably most "masters" would do better with a D3200 than what you and I can do with a D4, much like a pro driver can pull more thrill (and perhaps better time too!) in the "Ring" driving a 150PS Alfa 75 than you can in your new Porsche.
> 
> To an extend it is almost hubristic to try so hard to emulate creativity, persistence, hard work and even talent (I think of talent as the icing over the last 3, talent by itself goes nowhere, and to an extend doesn't even "exist" by itself in my mind) with equipment and materials.
> Why nobody asks what kind of paintbrushes Rembrandt was using? Why would the maker of the violin Mozart was first using to give birth to his compositions or the tool-maker Pheidias used to sculpt?
> 
> Does it really matter?


That's becaue that instrument is from a time when it was very difficult to make quality stuff. It used to be far ahead of other violins, but these days it's not. People just stick to that "it's the best" because it used to be the case.

I also feel that each brand has its strengths, but I still prefer Canon simply because the accessories are slightly more common and therefore a lot cheaper.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> I really don't see the how you would do better with nikkor glass in the value department. Really.


I'm sorry, which manufacturer recently released an 800 dollar 35/2?


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JKuhn*
> 
> That's becaue that instrument is from a time when it was very difficult to make quality stuff. It used to be far ahead of other violins, but these days it's not. People just stick to that "it's the best" because it used to be the case.
> 
> I also feel that each brand has its strengths, but I still prefer Canon simply because the accessories are slightly more common and therefore a lot cheaper.


Unfortunately, people "hold believes" that they have no real validity - we treat rumors as knowledge.
How popular a belief is, doesn't give it merit: the Stradivarius case, is very popular, simply because of the monetary implications and the rarity of those instruments hit the frontpages too many times. Everyone and his mom with any remote interest in violins (or not), heard about Strads, and how honored musicians felt just to hold one, not even play it - or that collectors and donors would justify spending millions on one etc.

We never "knew" that it was the best of its time, we just believed into the opinion of those that were/are considered authorities in the field.

We don't really "investigate" whether those where the best of their time or not, and there was little merit in replacing one rare over-hyped instrument brand with another- perhaps even more rare - or to degrade the importance of those experts that claimed Strads being the best: the merit was into proving that a readily available instrument built today, can actually be just as good - if not better.

In popular believe, Strads will remain overhyped - and based on rarity alone, those should. There isn't a need to mystify and exaggerate their qualities tho - not in the past, not in the present or future.

Same as with Macs, Nikon, Canon, Hasselblad etc: if it makes you (speaking in general) feel better using either, more power to you.
We should not misrepresent personal preference, as a one-way choice.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> I really don't see the how you would do better with nikkor glass in the value department. Really.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm sorry, which manufacturer recently released an 800 dollar 35/2?
Click to expand...

you must be talking about zeiss lol because canon's 35 f2 is only $799.99. clearly not $800 trolololololol


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> I really don't see the how you would do better with nikkor glass in the value department. Really.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm sorry, which manufacturer recently released an 800 dollar 35/2?
Click to expand...

Are you referring to the 35/2 IS USM that sells for $550 and optically rocks and rolls all over, from edge to edge in FF offering a package of features / IQ / size and AF performance that is kinda unique?

Cause what's the competition from Nikkor?

The 35mm DX 1.8? (now, that's a lens I was jealous of as a Canon APS-C user)
The circa 1989 35mm f/2 D that won't AF in cheap Nikon bodies?

Or the 1.4 beasts (great beasts, but bigger, bulkier and slower to focus) from Canon/Nikkor/Sigma, that also have a saltier pricetag?

The only competition for the 35mm f2 IS USM, was canon's own 35 f2.
The MSRP on the new IS is nuts - yes - but it is a supply/demand thing that bloats prices. It will settle. You can find it for $550 tho - new.

So, imho, - we are comparing apples to oranges here.

Stealth edit: btw, the 35 f2 IS is supposingly better than the Zeiss 35 f2 T* in everything but very slight vignetting wide open: sharpness, CA control and distortion are better with the Canon.


----------



## Dream Killer

Tldr. Dunno what the analogies were but me and sub have made deep investments into both systems at some point and we're in agreement here - and we don't agree in a lot of things.

At the time I went to nikon, the d7000 costed $1200 vs the 7d's $1600 and the d700 costed $1950 (thanks dmp!) while the 5dmk2 was $2200. Nikon is a better value because they include everything in the box vs nickle and diming people like canon.

Im not even going to get into basic things like programmable multi function buttons and the irrational placement of the dof button on canons.

Anyway, you were the one slamming nikon cause they dont make a lens equivalent to the 70-200 f4 (they do) and the 17-40mm f4 L (they do)...

Besides, the 17-40L is not that great. The efs 10-22mm is so much better.


----------



## hokiealumnus

Originally seen @ POTN.
Quote:


> Nice 70D deal here: http://www.the-digital-picture.com/News/News-Post.aspx?News=9930
> 
> 70D body
> Adobe Lightroom 5
> Canon PIXMA PRO-100 Professional Inkjet Printer
> Paper
> 
> $896.99 after $400 mail-in Printer Rebate


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> Tldr. Anyway, you were the one slamming nikon cause they dont make a lens equivalent to the 70-200 f4 (they do) and the 17-40mm f4 L (they do)...
> 
> Besides, the 17-40L is not that great. The efs 10-22mm is so much better.


OH MY STABBORNESS!

PRICE IS ONE OF THE BIGGEST FACTORS IN BUYING STUFF!

Moar apples to oranges and $1400 lenses vs. $6-700 lenses.

The non-IS 70-200L, which was also vastly cheaper pre-2010, has no competition in its price point.
The same for the 17-40L - which is full frame btw. Small difference vs. EF-S 10-22 or 17-55 IS, or even DC Sigmas that can be sharper (if that's what in question).

If price (or FF capability) is not in your context of thinking, sorry, afaik you are wrong.
I never "slammed" anything.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> At the time I went to nikon, the d7000 costed $1200 vs the 7d's $1600 and the d700 costed $1950 (thanks dmp!) while the 5dmk2 was $2200. Nikon is a better value because they include everything in the box vs nickle and diming people like canon..


Again you are comparing apples to oranges:
7D and D7000 are pretty much the reverse of EF-S 17-55 IS vs. DX 17-55 VR = one is newer, and better, the other one has its niche here and there, but is metal, weather sealed etc. Its not the same product.

Do I think the D7xxx is better? Yes. All in. But it is not the same.
The 60D/70D were/are the competitor of the D7xxx series pricewise.

The D700 is a 12MP FF, the 5DII is...more than that. Of course it was more expensive, as it is a different class of camera.

Again, I like D800 more than 5D3 etc, but that is irrelevant to the talk about lenses.

As for nickle and diming, all you are complaining for really is hoods in non-L lenses.
I agree. Its a same. But prices for accessories in Nikon's case, more than cover that:

eg:
D7100 battery grip = $260
7D? = $160
70D = $175 (much newer, will drop).

There, $100 for hoods.


----------



## Conspiracy

i slammed nikon... all day with my canon troll


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> i slammed nikon... all day with my canon troll


tl;dr for you too!


----------



## Sean Webster

Yea, I like how Nikon are usually cheaper bodies and are packed with a good bit of features making them a good value sometimes over Canon, but they have their drawbacks still.

For *me*, their ergonomics suck...sorry to all the people who like them, but for me, I don't like them. Even a D4S isn't too great in my hand and I shot one for a few hours before. And I'm not saying my Canon is perfect, but still it is a lot better.

Also, I notice that a few friends of mine and I are in agreement that the Nikon camera menus are too complicated/confusing. Even the owner of my studio i'm now working at said that to me the other day lol.

I know the color thing is easy to remedy in a workflow, i just like ragging on it since i like most of my out of camera canon colors better.

Oh and again, their professional service is far behind Canon's.


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> For *me*, their ergonomics suck...sorry to all the people who like them, but for me, I don't like them. Even a D4S isn't too great in my hand and I shot one for a few hours before. And I'm not saying my Canon is perfect, but still it is a lot better


Nothing beats habitus









Unless ofc there is some other disposition, in which case even the oldest of dogs learn new tricks and forget what they were preaching a moment ago.
C'est la vie.


----------



## Jixr

Though If I wern't so invested in canon glass, I would deffinately consider a nikon when I move up camera bodies.


----------



## sub50hz

As far as I'm concerned, arguing about lens _quality_ for SLR systems is pointless. There's something available in each of the "big two" systems that's comparable, and very little differentiates between them. Pick what you like and stick with it. Featuresets and overall quality are immeasurably close in 2014, so the only differentiating factor when buying into a system will be ergonomics (more or less). It's funny to see everyone defend their point of view, despite the fact that it's qualitative and has no bearing on any other individual.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> For *me*, their ergonomics suck...sorry to all the people who like them, but for me, I don't like them. Even a D4S isn't too great in my hand and I shot one for a few hours before. And I'm not saying my Canon is perfect, but still it is a lot better
> 
> 
> 
> Nothing beats habitus
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unless ofc there is some other disposition, in which case even the oldest of dogs learn new tricks and forget what they were preaching a moment ago.
> C'est la vie.
Click to expand...

dannnggg, mixing ppl up yo. you all over the place.


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> As far as I'm concerned, arguing about lens _quality_ for SLR systems is pointless. There's something available in each of the "big two" systems that's comparable, and very little differentiates between them. Pick what you like and stick with it. Featuresets and overall quality are immeasurably close in 2014, so the only differentiating factor when buying into a system will be ergonomics (more or less). It's funny to see everyone defend their point of view, despite the fact that it's qualitative and has no bearing on any other individual.


It is era & genre sensitive.
Today, yes, the gap is much smaller, with Canon/Nikon trading blows. We have this, we have that.

VERY few years ago, Canon was so far ahead in both lens features (built in USM/FTM techs, IS) and D-SLR tech (image processors / sensors) that there was no debate.
Well, there was - as always - but it was more about brand loyalty than essence. Noone would pick Nikon over Canon starting fresh for anything that required high-fps / fast AF etc, and to an extend this is true today for certain organizations: e.g. Reuter's is shooting with Canon.

The above makes it even more impressive looking at the current state of the two systems: Nikon managed not only to catch up, but to surpass Canon in quite a few fields. Lenses are revised and modernized, bodies are feature packed and very solid performers, processors can extract more DR out of sensors.

Honest users, will find and report weaknesses in every brand. There is no perfect system.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> dannnggg, mixing ppl up yo. you all over the place.


Sorry.


----------



## Dream Killer

sooo, in the back of your mind you also think canon was better "back in the day"...


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> sooo, in the back of your mind you also think canon was better "back in the day"...


In "the back of my mind" I believe I know Canon was better 2004~201x (w/e).
Today Nikon might have the upper head in certain models (D800 / D7xxx), but tech has progressed in both brands enough to make some differences irrelevant for the average serious user. Sure, some ppl claim and few of them do pump more out of a D800 than a 5D3, but it is a much of a deal-breaker in real life as it is certain Nikon models having a color cast or failing their weather sealing promises. <- i.e. not a deal-breaker.

So, something being better as in "my Ferrari is better than your Lambo", when I can barely drive my Toyota to the limit, is pointless.
Both can make amazing cameras, and both do. If Nikon - for my style of shooting - has atm a better camera for the $ that what I could get in Canon, doesn't really limit me in a meaningful way. Its nothing like having to go for a D2H vs. a 1D II back in the day.

My whole beachin was about disagreeing in Nikon having as cheap/good mid range lenses as Canon does, or that as far as accessories go Canon's politics is ripping you off, while Nikon gives great value - and I hold by it.
I definitely went through the math trying to do the switch when I decided to go FF, and I simply could not do it spending even twice as much as I did now staying with Canon.
Lens assortment in question is: 17-40L / 24-70L I / 70-200 f4 L / 100 2.8 Macro / Sigma 50 1.4 EX.

Money was and is the hardest hitting deal breaker in almost every RL situation.


----------



## Sean Webster

What is funny is that in the end it is just a tool and what matters more is the skill the person has in using it to achieve the end result which is just a picture. lol


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> What is funny is that in the end it is just a tool and what matters more is the skill the person has in using it to achieve the end result which is just a picture. lol


unless you shoot leica. those cameras actually make you a better photog haha









just ordered my 70-200mm f4 IS today

on a totally unrelated note. oh wait maybe not since we are having a brand war LOL http://photographylife.com/nikon-d810-release-tonight


----------



## jackeyjoe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> What is funny is that in the end it is just a tool and what matters more is the skill the person has in using it to achieve the end result which is just a picture. lol


Exactly, I have been using Nikon cameras since I started taking photos(my mother was a photographer), it is what I am familiar with. Switching to canon would force me to relearn lots of stuff, which admittedly probably wouldn't take too long but I wouldn't be able to use all these older lenses I have inherited


----------



## JKuhn

Just a quick question:

I can get a Canon EOS 350D (Rebel XT) for R1300, and would like to know if you people think it's worth it. It's only the body, kit lens, UV filter, and USB cable, so I'll need a charger and although it's not that important also a cap for the lens. (I checked it with Lenstag, no hits). For what it's worth, a new 1100D kit (body, 1 lens, bag, 8GB SD card) is around R3800 to R4000. I can't afford to pay that, and I can't find the cheaper cameras without the extras.


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JKuhn*
> 
> Just a quick question:
> 
> I can get a Canon EOS 350D (Rebel XT) for R1300, and would like to know if you people think it's worth it. It's only the body, kit lens, UV filter, and USB cable, so I'll need a charger and although it's not that important also a cap for the lens. (I checked it with Lenstag, no hits). For what it's worth, a new 1100D kit (body, 1 lens, bag, 8GB SD card) is around R3800 to R4000. I can't afford to pay that, and I can't find the cheaper cameras without the extras.


(had to Google the currency type for South Africa)

I don't know how prices are in your part of the World, but for this price range ($120-125) you can find EOS 20D/30D cameras easily in the US. Body only, and Rebel XT + kit lens are also attainable.

The 350D is a similar gen sensor/processor with the 20D/30D which is underwhelming vs. a 1100D, but with a kit lens included, perhaps is not such a bad deal. Still miles ahead of anything but equally or more expensive than the 1100D compacts.

Remember, the 350D did come with a 18-55 non-IS 3.5-5.6 lens - not that expensive in the used market by itself.
EF-S 18-55 IS is about $55-65 shipped in ebay.com, non-IS is average $10 less, but I would say the IS version worth's more than $10 more.


----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> (had to Google the currency type for South Africa)
> 
> I don't know how prices are in your part of the World, but for this price range ($120-125) you can find EOS 20D/30D cameras easily in the US. Body only, and Rebel XT + kit lens are also attainable.
> 
> The 350D is a similar gen sensor/processor with the 20D/30D which is underwhelming vs. a 1100D, but with a kit lens included, perhaps is not such a bad deal. Still miles ahead of anything but equally or more expensive than the 1100D compacts.
> 
> Remember, the 350D did come with a 18-55 non-IS 3.5-5.6 lens - not that expensive in the used market by itself.
> EF-S 18-55 IS is about $55-65 shipped in ebay.com, non-IS is average $10 less, but I would say the IS version worth's more than $10 more.


So you feel it's not a bad deal?

I'm considering it as a second body, as I already have the 1100D. It has a standard 18-55mm lens, but no cap or charger. I'm thinking of trying my luck for R1000 because of that and the fact that it's very old and probably dirty. The problem is that it's not that easy to find used DSLRs here, and I don't like buying online if I can help it.

Speaking of which, that very store recently had a *used* 1100D + 18-55 f/3.5-5.6 IS for *R4000*. Their excuse was "it's as good as new". Oh, and it didn't include the bag and 8 GB SD that comes with the R3800 kits.


----------



## pcfoo

I don't know really...it is not a bad deal, but it is not a "good" deal ... just "fair" @ R1300.

Old body, no vibrating sensor cleaning mechanism, yada yada...the 8MP are not bad, its the old tech that holts it back.
If you could get it without the lens - if you arealdy have one and you want a second body - getting it for much less, it would be a more preferable choice. R1000 are like $95, so that's def. better than R1300.

Do you need a backup body, or a 2nd "free-standing" camera?

Lens/body caps, knock-off chargers & batteries are pretty cheap in eBay, and certain battery brands are pretty reliable = have little to ask for vs. the OEM.


----------



## JKuhn

What do you mean with a "free standing" camera? I basically want to put one lens on the 1100D, and another (probably the 50mm f/1.8 to reduce the ISO) on the 350D so I don't have to switch lenses the whole time. That, and my 1100D is very dirty and the local shop refuses to go anywhere near the sensor. They send all cameras including their own to Johannesburg so I need a camera to use when that one goes in.


----------



## pcfoo

Bad English: meant I did not know what's your setup and whether you actually needed an second camera to use independently of your current setup (i.e. with its own standard zoom) or you wanted it as a secondary camera behind your prime (in your example) or a tele-zoom lens.


----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Bad English: meant I did not know what's your setup and whether you actually needed an second camera to use independently of your current setup (i.e. with its own standard zoom) or you wanted it as a secondary camera behind your prime (in your example) or a tele-zoom lens.


Ok. Thanks for you opinion.

I'll take my current camera, glass and laptop to the shop tomorrow to see how it compares, and if there are any deal-breakers. Although I don't really like the idea of having SD for one body and CF for the other. And I shoot a lot in low light, but like I said I can't afford another 1100D.


----------



## JKuhn

I wonder if this is true...


----------



## silvrr

That would be over 1000 shots a day since the camera was new.


----------



## JKuhn

I didn't think of it that way. But who knows, maybe he put it on burst mode, taped the shutter button in, and kept draining/charging the batterry until the shutter died.









EDIT:

There are a few others as well that reported getting a few million shots.


----------



## pcfoo

I don't know how accurate the shutter will be after a few 100,000 actuations, but yeah, why not ...


----------



## werds

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> As far as I'm concerned, arguing about lens quality for SLR systems is pointless. There's something available in each of the "big two" systems that's comparable, and very little differentiates between them. Pick what you like and stick with it. Featuresets and overall quality are immeasurably close in 2014, so the only differentiating factor when buying into a system will be ergonomics (more or less). It's funny to see everyone defend their point of view, despite the fact that it's qualitative and has no bearing on any other individual.


Yep, this was what my choice hinged on - ergonomics for the most part. Most of the people I know personally use Canon systems although some use Nikon. So for me in terms of if I had questions or wanted to borrow lenses Canon made more sense. Most of my point and shoots have been Canon so I was already familiar with the general menu systems so was another bonus to me. In the end when I played with equivalent Nikon and Canon in store the feel was just more comfortable for me in the Canon camp. I still drool and lust after some lenses and bodies from different companies (Sony's new stuff, Nikon etc) but in the end I have found Canon was what fit me best for the time being and I would never knock anyone for their choice in company as long as it was based on understanding why not just blind fanboyism (being a huge RPG fan growing up for me it is always function over looks or even loyalty to brand...)


----------



## Whyifide

So I was put on here a few years ago, mind if we do a little update?

I'm running a Nikon D7000, a Rokinon 85mm f/1.4, and a Sigma 35mm F/1.4 ART lens.

It'd be cool if you could keep the other stuff listed as historical, though ;P

Between then and now I've gone through a D90 and a lot of other lenses.


----------



## JKuhn

Update:

I got a quote from a local photography studio/shop, the charger for the 350D is over R800, and I din't even try to negotiate the rediculously low price I had in mind (due to that charger) after seeing this for R1500:



Now I just have to test it properly for the next 7 days as the second-hand shop only offers a 7 day warranty on cameras.


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JKuhn*
> 
> Update:
> 
> I got a quote from a local photography studio/shop, the charger for the 350D is over R800, and I din't even try to negotiate the rediculously low price I had in mind (due to that charger) after seeing this for R1500:
> 
> 
> 
> Now I just have to test it properly for the next 7 days as the seco-hand shop only offers a 7 day warranty on cameras.


Ebay and Amazon.com have very good deals on Wasabi "compatible" battery packs + chargers.
The much more complicated LP-E6 Battery pack clones I have, work just fine with my EOS 6D and 7D.

Charger + NB-2LH sets for the Rebel XT/350D are like $17 / R180, and 2 batteries + charge are like $23 / R250.
Chargers are 120/220V auto sensing, and have US plug + EU 2-prong adapter included, so not that much to worry about (true, I don't' know the proper type of plugs in South Africa)


----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Ebay and Amazon.com have very good deals on Wasabi "compatible" battery packs + chargers.
> The much more complicated LP-E6 Battery pack clones I have, work just fine with my EOS 6D and 7D.
> 
> Charger + NB-2LH sets for the Rebel XT/350D are like $17 / R180, and 2 batteries + charge are like $23 / R250.
> Chargers are 120/220V auto sensing, and have US plug + EU 2-prong adapter included, so not that much to worry about (true, I don't' know the proper type of plugs in South Africa)


You also have to factor in the import costs, plus even at that price the R1500 400D (includes 2 lenses, 8GB Lexar CF, charger and bag) was a better deal to me.

It doesn't really matter that much, but we use the folowing:

link The left one

link Both these, but usually the right


----------



## Scott1541

I think I'm going to start doing more wide angle photography. Recently I've been looking into it and seeing how it's done 'properly', now I just need to get out and try stuff myself


----------



## kbros

I need a wide angle, real bad


----------



## Conspiracy

just got my 70-200 in the mail today and i cant play with it till next week because im working as the DP on a film shoot for the 48 hour film competition in ATL


----------



## KenjiS

Barely touched my camera lately, Been busy working on my kitchen and such... I finally got around to processing and uploading a few shots I squeezed in here or there:

https://flic.kr/p/o8YgivCandlelit Old Fashioned by Kenjis9965, on Flickr

https://flic.kr/p/o8QPLSKorean Shrimp Sliders by Kenjis9965, on Flickr

https://flic.kr/p/o8ETWcAhi Tartare With Avocado 2 by Kenjis9965, on Flickr

https://flic.kr/p/nRu48JAhi Tartare With Avocado 1 by Kenjis9965, on Flickr

https://flic.kr/p/o8ToeSOolong Marinated Sea Bass by Kenjis9965, on Flickr

https://flic.kr/p/nRtSP8Blood Orange Margarita by Kenjis9965, on Flickr

https://flic.kr/p/o6VSJuLivingston Cellars Burgundy by Kenjis9965, on Flickr


----------



## JKuhn

THose pictures aren't bad, but personally I couldn't help but notice the grain. Not that it's that obvious though.


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JKuhn*
> 
> THose pictures aren't bad, but personally I couldn't help but notice the grain. Not that it's that obvious though.


underlit / underexposed images will be grainy, practically using any medium.
But that's also a personal preference - I personally like grain in some genres - adds to the mood.









In this particular occasion, I think the drink/glass shots are far better than those of the food.
Food needs to be properly lit for textures and colors to show up nicely. Nobody likes a "dark", indistinguishable/identifiable mass of "food"


----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> underlit / underexposed images will be grainy, practically using any medium.
> But that's also a personal preference - I personally like grain in some genres - adds to the mood.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In this particular occasion, I think the drink/glass shots are far better than those of the food.
> Food needs to be properly lit for textures and colors to show up nicely. Nobody likes a "dark", indistinguishable/identifiable mass of "food"


You're right. small amounts of grain can add character. I guess it's just that I'm programmed to see that. The photo club I'm in is always quick to point out any signs of grain.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JKuhn*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> underlit / underexposed images will be grainy, practically using any medium.
> But that's also a personal preference - I personally like grain in some genres - adds to the mood.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In this particular occasion, I think the drink/glass shots are far better than those of the food.
> Food needs to be properly lit for textures and colors to show up nicely. Nobody likes a "dark", indistinguishable/identifiable mass of "food"
> 
> 
> 
> You're right. small amounts of grain can add character. I guess it's just that I'm programmed to see that. The photo club I'm in is always quick to point out any signs of grain.
Click to expand...

personally i would leave that club. digital noise is unavoidable and if they are quick to critique on something that can only be controlled based on how expensive your camera is then they are a terrible club to join lol. they should focus on technique and mastery of capturing a compelling image with light and how to help people improve their knowledge and skills


----------



## pcfoo

It is always easier to comment on what you don't like than what you do like.
"Authority" figures in forums/clubs/etc will "teach" others how to shoot "down" with comments, the hard part is to provide creative critique <-not that it is practical to do that for all pictures posted.

Lifestyle photography (i.e. what most ppl do in instagram & facebook) e.g. where I've been, what I've done, what I've eaten is a pretty hard subject to excel in.
Studying relative streams in flickr, instagram etc will give you enough hints to educate and inform your style.


----------



## Sean Webster

I got myself into a for free photoshoot somehow...dang it....it just happened lol.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> I got myself into a for free photoshoot somehow...dang it....it just happened lol.


i actually do my best to make sure i do a couple of those every so often. its really good to pay it forward. unless the person youre working for free for has plenty of money then they should pay like a normal customer. whenever i hear about someone that is say a struggling actor i will always offer free headshots, and by free i mean 3-5 photos with different looks in a whambam quickie setup so nothing fancy. i dont believe in karma or any of that and i dont think it would apply here but the idea of paying it forward for me working in telelvision and film means to me that not only are you helping someone in the family but just helping others is nice









but just to clarify working as a photog and surviving on that income is freaking tough so dont do it often


----------



## Sean Webster

yea i know. But I had already done a shoot with him without pay and now im going to be driving like 100 miles round trip in ft. lauderdale at 9pm to do the next shoot....i'm gonna ask him for gas....its the least he could do right? Hopefully the shots come out good enough for my portfolio, i have some already that are nice from our previous shoot. I'll just think of it like that, just more portfolio examples.

I think I remember why I am doing it for free...it was a while ago we originally spoke, I think he said he had like 4 other friends who need head shots in the fall that he was going to have me shoot if he liked my work with him. And from the previous shoot he really liked the shots. Hopefully that was the case. lol


----------



## KenjiS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> underlit / underexposed images will be grainy, practically using any medium.
> But that's also a personal preference - I personally like grain in some genres - adds to the mood.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In this particular occasion, I think the drink/glass shots are far better than those of the food.
> Food needs to be properly lit for textures and colors to show up nicely. Nobody likes a "dark", indistinguishable/identifiable mass of "food"


Re looking at them it appears my monitor calibration was turned off when I edited those XD Which explains why they're a hair darker. Sorry. Everytime I disable SLI I forget it turns off my calibrations.... I reedited this one because its probubly the one I like the best of the food... Pushed the midtones out a bit and generally made it a bit brighter.

https://flic.kr/p/o8ETWcAhi Tartare With Avocado 2 by Kenjis9965, on Flickr

I also adjusted the sharpening a hair to get rid of some of the noise. But I prefer detail + noise to no noise and no detail either... Im a bit out of practice ATM, Barely been shooting lately..

As for the noise. its an EOS 7D at ISO3200. The Noise isnt even that bad, But not as good as "newer" cameras or good enough for people more obsessed with DxOMark than shooting... My camera is practically an antique at 5 years old..


----------



## kbros

Someone please explain how to calibrate monitors, a lot of my photos seem to come out underexposed.


----------



## Jaydev16

Out of the camera?


----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> Someone please explain how to calibrate monitors, a lot of my photos seem to come out underexposed.


I can look in our local club's newsletter and give you the PSSA calibration stuff (it's online) if you want it.

I also need to calibrate mine, but I'm too lazy.


----------



## Jaydev16

A cheap trick (but great, IMO) I've read about is to take your camera's LCD and your screen and adjust the brightness till both match. That way, you see in the camera as you'll see it on the screen.


----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jaydev16*
> 
> A cheap trick (but great, IMO) I've read about is to take your camera's LCD and your screen and adjust the brightness till both match. That way, you see in the camera as you'll see it on the screen.


That's not going to give reliable results. I feel it's bettr to use official calibration tools. If, for example, you give a photo that's been edited with your calibration method, it's probably not going to be properly exposed for their projector, or for prints.

For those who want it:

PSSA LCD calibration (Win/Mac)


----------



## MistaBernie

too bad this conversation wasn't happening last Monday, B&H just had a blowout on the Xrite i1display pro color calibrator for $139 (regularly $224). One day sale on Friday I believe...


----------



## Conspiracy

obligatory box shot

https://flic.kr/p/nSCSJqLL1S4605 by brian_roberts, on Flickr


----------



## kbros

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> too bad this conversation wasn't happening last Monday, B&H just had a blowout on the Xrite i1display pro color calibrator for $139 (regularly $224). One day sale on Friday I believe...


Well I should probably grab an IPS before I get a calibrator that costs as much as my current monitor, lol.


----------



## ljason8eg

Nice to be back at the track. Still waiting on that Tamron 150-600 though. Sonoma would have been a very good test.

9R1V9193.jpg by JLofing, on Flickr

9R1V8894.jpg by JLofing, on Flickr

9R1V8840.jpg by JLofing, on Flickr

9R1V8872.jpg by JLofing, on Flickr

9R1V8585.jpg by JLofing, on Flickr

9R1V8731.jpg by JLofing, on Flickr


----------



## Conspiracy

beautiful shots as always jason. im starting to wish i snagged a 1d3 when i had the chance but im still blown away by the performance i get from the even older 1d2 lol


----------



## KenjiS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> obligatory box shot
> 
> https://flic.kr/p/nSCSJqLL1S4605 by brian_roberts, on Flickr


Awesome lens. Love mine a lot, Takes a Kenko 1.4x TC quite well too.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> Well I should probably grab an IPS before I get a calibrator that costs as much as my current monitor, lol.


Probubly a good idea, a bad screen with calibration is still better than no calibration, but might not be able to correctly reproduce some color ranges. Good news is 100% sRGB coverage IPS displays are common and fairly inexpensive these days.

Awesome shots Jason.


----------



## Jixr

are there any good tips to make the brushes and things in lightroom smoohther instead of a bit laggy?


----------



## DizZz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> are there any good tips to make the brushes and things in lightroom smoohther instead of a bit laggy?


A faster computer


----------



## Jixr

so.. with a 5ghz 2600k paintbrush lag is normal?


----------



## kbros

lel^


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> are there any good tips to make the brushes and things in lightroom smoohther instead of a bit laggy?


You're pretty much out of luck. Lighroom doesn't have GPU acceleration.


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> so.. with a 5ghz 2600k paintbrush lag is normal?


How much RAM do you have and how much are you allowing lightroom to have? Keep an eye on your resources when your editing on a separate screen and see where things are getting overburdened. The brush you are using may be single threaded or not able to use all the cores you have available.


----------



## Jixr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *silvrr*
> 
> How much RAM do you have and how much are you allowing lightroom to have? Keep an eye on your resources when your editing on a separate screen and see where things are getting overburdened. The brush you are using may be single threaded or not able to use all the cores you have available.


16 giggers, I suppose I should go into settings and let it have more ( its whatever the default is now )


----------



## hokiealumnus

FWIW, I have 32G of RAM (in conjunction with both a 3960X & subsequently a 4960X) and have never had LR lag on me. I'd say your CPU at 5GHz is at least equivalent to the stock CPUs I've got, so that leaves RAM.


----------



## Jixr

well, in LR and PS with the brushes, the mouse is smooth, but the brush strokes on the screen are a bit laggy which bothers me sometimes and makes it hard to do fine detail stuff.


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hokiealumnus*
> 
> FWIW, I have 32G of RAM (in conjunction with both a 3960X & subsequently a 4960X) and have never had LR lag on me. I'd say your CPU at 5GHz is at least equivalent to the stock CPUs I've got, so that leaves RAM.


LR doesn't come near utilizing 16GB of RAM using brushes.

LR doesn't come near utilizing all 8 threads of a 2600K, when editing - actually has a bad time utilizing more than 5 threads. I actually do 2x export jobs simultaneously on my 3930K to see more than 50-60% utilization (and is a common practice for photographers exporting lots of pics on machines with many cores).

A 5GHz 2600K should actually be faster than a stock 39xx / 49xx with brushes etc in both PS and LR, as I doubt those are multithreaded operations, and even if those where lightly threaded, it would not come close to utilizing 8 threads.

For all the above, I pity those photographers buying 10-12C MacPros or 2P PCs to "speed up" their PS/LR workflow - again, those apps are not heavily threaded to benefit from a multitude of cores enough to outweigh having slower core clocks.

My


----------



## hokiealumnus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> LR doesn't come near utilizing 16GB of RAM using brushes.
> 
> LR doesn't come near utilizing all 8 threads of a 2600K, when editing - actually has a bad time utilizing more than 5 threads. I actually do 2x export jobs simultaneously on my 3930K to see more than 50-60% utilization (and is a common practice for photographers exporting lots of pics on machines with many cores).
> 
> A 5GHz 2600K should actually be faster than a stock 39xx / 49xx with brushes etc in both PS and LR, as I doubt those are multithreaded operations, and even if those where lightly threaded, it would not come close to utilizing 8 threads.
> 
> For all the above, I pity those photographers buying 10-12C MacPros or 2P PCs to "speed up" their PS/LR workflow - again, those apps are not heavily threaded to benefit from a multitude of cores enough to outweigh having slower core clocks.
> 
> My


Just to be clear, I had the PC equipment before I even had my first DSLR; the computer was not built for photo editing. I just installed LR on it after the fact.


----------



## Jixr

hm... maybe its something with my system thats either bogging it down or something.

But I'm using OSX for my LR and PS work, so i'm not too familiar with optimizing it for those apps than I am with windows and changing its settings..


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> hm... maybe its something with my system thats either bogging it down or something.
> 
> But I'm using OSX for my LR and PS work, so i'm not too familiar with optimizing it for those apps than I am with windows and changing its settings..


Is this a Hackintosh system?
Maybe there are issues with your OS built & LR/PS and not some hardware inefficiency involved with the lack of performance.


----------



## Sean Webster

i have the same thing with brushes and spot healing thingies slowing down my LR too. And going from a i7 2600k to a new i5 4670k didn't help any either lol. And my LR and library are on SSDs. And I have 32GB of 1866MHz RAM


----------



## Jixr

my OS build is pretty solid, and LR/PS are running off SSD's.

I suppose I'll try it in windows and see if that makes any difference in performance, then at least I would know if its OS related or just how LR/PS act in general with a computer of my specs.


----------



## Sean Webster

They should definitely add open cl and or cuda/support in lr


----------



## laboitenoire

Eh, I doubt Adobe would ever spend the time or money to do that. LR is supposed to be everything from Photoshop you need to process photos, and nothing more. GPGPU support is a fairly time consuming feature to implement efficiently (believe me, I know from experience), so I doubt they'd want to sink a lot of resources coding that into LR specifically. And yes, they could just add in the GPGPU features from Photoshop, but then there'd be even less incentive to purchase Photoshop (in their minds), plus the GPGPU features in Photoshop are mainly limited to aftermarket plugins, blur filters, and focus masks.

And seeing as Photoshop/Illustrator already use CUDA, I doubt OpenCL would get a fair shake.


----------



## OmarCCX

People pay for Lightroom, they should get off their lazy arse.


----------



## jameyscott

Or you know... don't have your program crash every fifteen seconds.









When I'm editing video, I always feel like I have to save after every change because premiere crashes All. The. Dang. Time.

Do you guys experience semi-frequent crashes with Adobe products?


----------



## Jixr

I rarely ( if ever ) have a crash with PS/LR


----------



## Jixr

What are your guys's thoughts on drawing tablets for photo-editing?

I've really been thinking about getting one since I'm getting more into finer photo editing work.

I'm pretty good with a mouse, but not sure what people think about tablets. Never have used one before.


----------



## aksthem1

They're quite helpful actually. I would definitely recommend one. You think you're good with a mouse then you use a tablet and everything changes.


----------



## pcfoo

I am pretty good with the mouse too...I do have a wacom that I rarely reach for...doesn't really worth the hassle cleaning my desk to "dig it out"









Regarding crashes with Adobe products...it happens, but very rarely. Usually the issues are with older, 32bit versions of Illustrator that sometimes manages to run out of memory out of the blue.
PS has been amazingly stable for me for a long time - don't know if I had it crash on me like...forever?
LR the same. Never had it crash really - maybe I was lucky.
PR - maybe once or twice, back in CS3 or 5 era? Not using it much so I don't really know.
AE - never, but I don't use it for advanced stuff - mostly editing stills.
ID - Don't remember.

In general I think Adobe has pretty stable programs. Autodesk is far far worse!


----------



## Jixr

yeah, Wacom has their cheapest model for $75 on amazon.

I had a very impromptu shoot from the other night, and the backgrounds are just absolute crap, so i've been playing with editing out background and replaceing them, and its kinda lots of back and forth of erasing and undoing when using a mouse.


----------



## aksthem1

You could probably get a cheap tablet from Monoprice or Amazon and it'll be just fine for photo editing jobs.


----------



## kbros

I can stand by Wacom tablets. I have an original 'bamboo' that's lasted me 5 or 6 years. Everything is super accurate, and I remember only paying like $60 for it.


----------



## Jixr

Also, anyone keep any portfolios?

I'm trying to find a little nice binder/folder that can hold 8x12's but it seems everything is letter sized ( 8.5x11" ) or larger.


----------



## Scott1541

Physical portfolios, what is this madness







Hell, I've only ever had 24 prints done and they were from a 24 ex film


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> Physical portfolios, what is this madness
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hell, I've only ever had 24 prints done and they were from a 24 ex film


Sad truth is, photographs lose lots of value when not printed on a physical medium








And I am guilty of that heresy


----------



## Jixr

I like printing out my photos, not to sound all hipster, but Its nice having a physical print to look at, and I always print out my photos even before I got into photography.

As a techno-nerd as I am, It will still be a hard time getting me to stop printing photos and buying hard backed books. Everything else, full digital.

And the wedding I have to shoot this weekend wants prints made. ( doing 10 4x6's and 5 8x12's ) and I'm going to get some of my own prints made while I'm at it. would like something better to carry them in than the paper envelopes they come in from the camera shop.


----------



## Scott1541

I know it'll sound a bit hypocritical but I've actually been meaning to get some more stuff printed but as of yet haven't. I think I'll wait until I get back to uni in september because there's an actual photo shop there rather than those crap machines with a touch screen monitor you find in supermarkets, etc...


----------



## Jixr

Yeah, it just so happens the largest camera shop in texas is about a mile down the road from my office and has 24 hour turn around.

they are a bit expensive ( 30 cents for a 4x6 and about $3 for a 8x12 ) but they always use nice paper and its easier for me to just upload the files to their website and pick them up on my way home from work the next day.

Also, whats more standard, 8x12 or 8x10? I've always used 8x12 since its 2x 4x6 which is pretty standard


----------



## Scott1541

I haven't actually used this shop for prints from digital before, and I've only used it for film dev a couple of times but from my limited experience they seem to do a good job and know what they're doing.

The only comparable shop my home city seems to be a bit of a micky mouse place, and I don't think they do film dev/prints. My grandma went in there to get prints that she'd taken of my cousin a few weeks ago and the SD card wouldn't read in the kodak machine. So the woman in there put the SD card in the iMac and printed from there, for almost double the price of the kodak machine and the same quality print. Why she didn't transfer the images to another card/USB drive and print from the machine is beyond me. I think prey on people who don't know about photography/technology.


----------



## Jixr

Yeah, on photos I want to print I already crop them to the size I want, export to JPG, and scale them for the resolution size for the best image I can get.

I also gotta scrub down my camera gear today. Doing long exposures during a dusty field was not fun.


----------



## Sean Webster

I use costco for my prints, but then again they are like 5 min away...4x6's are 13 cents and 8x10s are $1.25 each....I actually do need to make a printed portfolio soon now that you mention it.

Remember that photoshoot I thought I was doing free? Well he paid me $250!  I guess I forgot that we did discuss a price and he was to pay upon the ending of the second photoshoot. lol


----------



## Jixr

there is a costco near me, but I don't have a membership, and I live alone so buying items in bulk isnt worth paying the money for the membership.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> there is a costco near me, but I don't have a membership, and I live alone so buying items in bulk isnt worth paying the money for the membership.


Does it have a gas station? You'd probably come out ahead on the membership dues just on the gas prices.


----------



## Jixr

probably so... except my car blew a head gasket, and i'm not spending the $1500+ to replace one on a car with 375,000 miles, so I'm without a car at the moment.







and banks are not too excited to loan me money it seems.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> probably so... except my car blew a head gasket, and i'm not spending the $1500+ to replace one on a car with 375,000 miles, so I'm without a car at the moment.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and banks are not too excited to loan me money it seems.


Head gasket jobs arent too bad to do yourself. There are tons of people who post guides on it usually. Parts cost is usually around 100-200. The job is usually around 6-10 hours to do.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Head gasket jobs arent too bad to do yourself. There are tons of people who post guides on it usually. Parts cost is usually around 100-200. The job is usually around 6-10 hours to do.


I think he should just be lucky that thing went 375k miles. Generally when things are that old you can't repair one thing without breaking 10 others.


----------



## Jixr

yeah, thats where its at now. Yeah I could replace the headgasket, and hope and pray the heads not warped ( 2 head gaskets in a year probably means it is ) and its a VW, so take the normal cost of a japanese car, and triple it for parts. ( the $1500 repair job is paying an illegal mexican I know to fix it, any shop will quote $3k+ for the job )

and in the last month i've already dropped nearly 1500 on it, due to the assumed HG problem, the coolants been boiling over and blowing out coolant pipes left and right.

I could fix it myself, but it would cost me an easy $1000+ to do it properly, and thats assuming the heads not warped, no valves got bent, the water and oil pump is still good, and tons of other stuff.
and then i'm still left with a car that has 375k miles and tons of other problems that it has thats not motor related.

I have a motorcycle, but it has problems as well, and had been saving to put it in the shop, but the car started to go downhill quick and I had hoped my dad would help me find a new car, but he left me out dry and the car ate up all my savings in trying to keep it running while he was leading me on about trading it in for something else.

( sorry for the ranty rant )
Really thinking of just taking my next paycheck and buying a used scooter. its only 7 miles to work from home, and just live off that until I can either get my big bike fixed or hopefully get approved for a car loan.


----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> yeah, thats where its at now. Yeah I could replace the headgasket, and hope and pray the heads not warped ( 2 head gaskets in a year probably means it is ) and its a VW, so take the normal cost of a japanese car, and triple it for parts. ( the $1500 repair job is paying an illegal mexican I know to fix it, any shop will quote $3k+ for the job )
> 
> and in the last month i've already dropped nearly 1500 on it, due to the assumed HG problem, the coolants been boiling over and blowing out coolant pipes left and right.
> 
> I could fix it myself, but it would cost me an easy $1000+ to do it properly, and thats assuming the heads not warped, no valves got bent, the water and oil pump is still good, and tons of other stuff.
> and then i'm still left with a car that has 375k miles and tons of other problems that it has thats not motor related.
> 
> I have a motorcycle, but it has problems as well, and had been saving to put it in the shop, but the car started to go downhill quick and I had hoped my dad would help me find a new car, but he left me out dry and the car ate up all my savings in trying to keep it running while he was leading me on about trading it in for something else.
> 
> ( sorry for the ranty rant )
> Really thinking of just taking my next paycheck and buying a used scooter. its only 7 miles to work from home, and just live off that until I can either get my big bike fixed or hopefully get approved for a car loan.


I guess things are a bit different there. Here Golfs (I don't know which VW you have) are one of the most affordable cars to own. I assume it's also the case for other VWs.


----------



## sub50hz

Seven miles? Ride a bicycle, you hack. :hugs:


----------



## kbros

If I lived in a flat area, I wouldn't even need a car.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> If I lived in a flat area, I wouldn't even need a car.


Chicago is flat -- that said, the incompetence of most motorists makes it a pretty 'exciting' experience to ride a bike in the city and some surrounding suburbs.


----------



## Jixr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Seven miles? Ride a bicycle, you hack. :hugs:


I've thought about it, cycling is huge in my town, but my office doesn't have any shower facilities and the ride in 100 degree weather would not be a pleasant one. some of the roads home have bicycle lanes, but most don't, and I kinda live in the area where people on bicycles are usually homeless, not the sporty cyclist on 2k bikes like near my office.


----------



## pcfoo

Ofc - no 2K bike and no car = homeless









"But guys, I have $10K worth of photo gear in the backpack" = thief too!


----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Ofc - no 2K bike and no car = homeless
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "But guys, I have $10K worth of photo gear in the backpack" = thief too!


Get the thief!


----------



## JKuhn

It's actually a bit ironic.

I bought the 400D as a second body so I won't have to switch lenses, but now I don't want to use my 1100D anymore. That old museum artefact just hadles so much better. And it can shoot faster for longer (in RAW).


----------



## Jixr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Ofc - no 2K bike and no car = homeless


old worn out clothes, mis matched shoes, gross beards, riding bicycles... cant tell if hipster or homeless....


----------



## pcfoo

We call it vintage, ok?








As for mismatched shoes.... that's the latest trend too (look at those $ millionaires in the World Cup doing it).


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> I've thought about it, cycling is huge in my town, but my office doesn't have any shower facilities and the ride in 100 degree weather would not be a pleasant one. some of the roads home have bicycle lanes, but most don't, and I kinda live in the area where people on bicycles are usually homeless, not the sporty cyclist on 2k bikes like near my office.


ATX has always been unique for cycling (the six or seven times I've visited -- exclusively to ride bikes or shoot photos of other grown men riding BMX bikes) because when you're on the road people are actually aware that you _exist_.

You don't need a $2000 bike to ride to work -- go on CL and look for something used. I've ridden the same fixed-gear around town for _seven years_. Good bikes last.


----------



## Jixr

yeah, I ( like everyone else who lives here ) moved here, so bike riding in a city is new to me.

I'm just a bit worried about riding in traffic with cars, and you're not supposed to ride on the sidewalks and stuff.
( hell even my motorcycle in austin traffic is scary enough )

Though, if I didn't have to buy a car, I'd have 6d right now. local camera shop is running a special on them, and I have the money, but... need car...


----------



## sub50hz

Riding on the road is _way_ more safe than sidewalks -- consider that on a sidewalk you're typically out of a motorist's line of sight. So when they hastily turn into a driveway, the cyclist on the sidewalk becomes a hood ornament (and the rider is legally responsible for damage caused).

Don't buy a 6D, that's foolish. Fix your bike or buy a car, don't let wants get in the way of needs.


----------



## Jixr

yeah, I'm not going to get one, at least not right now. I'm kinda telling myself If I make about $1500 in photo jobs this year i'll get myself one for christmas or something.

So far this year ( including the job I have this weekend ) I'll be at around $700 or so, and have more jobs on the horizon.

But I have a 3 day weekend, so I'll pull the cover off the bike and get it going.
My main issue is the headlights don't work, and the registration and inspection are out of date, which I can't do anything about till its properly fixed, but hopefully I can get it running to where I can at least go to work and back. and if not, I'll just buy a scooter and use that until I can get a car and sell off the scooter. ( or give it to a shop to fix my big bike )


----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> yeah, I ( like everyone else who lives here ) moved here, so bike riding in a city is new to me.
> 
> I'm just a bit worried about riding in traffic with cars, and you're not supposed to ride on the sidewalks and stuff.
> ( hell even my motorcycle in austin traffic is scary enough )
> 
> Though, if I didn't have to buy a car, I'd have 6d right now. local camera shop is running a special on them, and I have the money, but... need car...


I don't know what traffic is like there, but riding a bicycle in traffic isn't that bad, as long as you're looking out for those idiots who don't know that in an intersection bikes that continue straight come before cars (and taxis if you're here in ZA) that want to turn. I've had several encounters where I had to slam brakes when I'm about 1m from the intersection with the light green for me, but I'm still here.









We're getting a bit off-topic though.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> My main issue is the headlights don't work


I have a feeling you can fix that in less than an hour.


----------



## Jixr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> I have a feeling you can fix that in less than an hour.


bulbs, relays, entire front wiring harness, switch in handlebars, etc were all replaced.

and yeah, sorry for getting so OT

something something appature, something something.

Also.. check out my sweet updated sig!


----------



## kbros

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> Also.. check out my sweet updated sig!


Wow, it's so clean! So _minimalist._


----------



## derickwm

Any tips on how to get started doing small photo jobs? I don't have time to do anything full time or constantly but I wouldn't mind bringing in a little extra cash for small jobs here and there when there's time.


----------



## Jixr

way I did it was not by advertising myself for jobs, but by just posting my work online and letting people see it. I started shooting stuff for family, then friends of family, and now I have other photographers giving me work that they can't do. All word of mouth type stuff.

Don't be one of those people who spams facebook with post about $20 mini sessions when they have zero examples of their work.

I didn't buy a camera to make money, but it just kinda happened for me.


----------



## Sean Webster

I get half of my work from friends and family telling people I shoot and the other half from people seeing my work on Facebook and messaging me for a session.


----------



## Jixr

the way i see it, if you advertize yourself with a price being the main thing, then people who use you are just because you're cheap.

if you don't advertize, and people want to use you, its because you take good photos.

I'm gearing up for my frist wedding tomorrow morning,

I really wish I had two bodies for something like this, so I don't have to swap lens's so often.

Probably stick to my 70-200, that way I don't have to get up crazy close and interrupt the wedding.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> the way i see it, if you advertize yourself with a price being the main thing, then people who use you are just because you're cheap.
> 
> if you don't advertize, and people want to use you, its because you take good photos.
> 
> I'm gearing up for my frist wedding tomorrow morning,
> 
> I really wish I had two bodies for something like this, so I don't have to swap lens's so often.
> 
> *Probably stick to my 70-200, that way I don't have to get up crazy close and interrupt the wedding*.


what other glass do you have? while thats a great safe way to shoot a wedding i would still try and get within range for a wide angle for some dramatic/creative shots as well. the 70-200 at a wedding is how you get those safety shots but dont limit yourself to shooting from the back


----------



## Jixr

current lens line up.

17-40 f4l
50 1.4
70-200 f4l

The 17-40 is nice and wide, but for portrait work its not that great unless I can get up close.

and I absolutely love my 70-200 ( can't wait till I get a FF to use it with, its a bit long on a crop body )

I've never done a wedding before, and I"m not to fond of doing this job since I've never shot one before, but the client knows that I'm not a wedding guy. But they couldn't afford a wedding photographer and I'm doing the job cheap enough where they can afford someone to take the photos ( even though I'm no wedding photographer ) and I still can make a little cash on a Sunday morning.

But I also have to give out prints and CD's, so I'm not making much, but here's to hoping they spread the word and I can get more jobs in the future.


----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> current lens line up.
> 
> 17-40 f4l
> 50 1.4
> 70-200 f4l
> 
> The 17-40 is nice and wide, but for portrait work its not that great unless I can get up close.
> 
> and I absolutely love my 70-200 ( *can't wait till I get a FF to use it with, its a bit long on a crop body* )
> 
> I've never done a wedding before, and I"m not to fond of doing this job since I've never shot one before, but the client knows that I'm not a wedding guy. But they couldn't afford a wedding photographer and I'm doing the job cheap enough where they can afford someone to take the photos ( even though I'm no wedding photographer ) and I still can make a little cash on a Sunday morning.
> 
> But I also have to give out prints and CD's, so I'm not making much, but here's to hoping they spread the word and I can get more jobs in the future.


Nah, I'd like a 70-200 for more general use. Currently I'm stuck with a 50 f/1.8 (nice but usually too short for me), and then my next decent lens is a 100-400 L. I'd say somewhere around 70mm should be great for me.


----------



## Conspiracy

jixr that is a good simple kit for a wedding. youre good to go honestly. just do the best job that you can. i suggest getting there early and walking the venue get a feel for where you want to stand and what backgrounds look best. that 50 1.4 will be handy for some portraits after the ceremony and you will need that 17-40 for group shots with the bridesmaids and groomsmen. dont forget to have fun while you shoot as well


----------



## Jixr

yeah, it should be a pretty good time. Its a super small wedding and I'm only doing the ceremony, so it should be a good starter one. My only worry is its an outdoor venue and the wedding is at 10:30, so there is going to be some harsh shadows to have to play with. ( but then again, I'd rather have that than a dark church with horrible lighting )

I'll be sure to upload some pics once I get them going.

I've still been trying to trade my 50 1.4 for a 30 1.4, but haven't found anyone yet.


----------



## jackeyjoe

So I brought out my D7000 yesterday, and found out that my command dial buttons are stuck! I can't go right or up, which is really annoying when trying to navigate anything. I guess it's time to get it serviced, the top screen is cracked as well so it isn't the only thing that could get fixed while it's away


----------



## Scott1541

Finally got around to ordering the foam to replace the almost non existent light seals and mirror cushion in the fujica. The foam in there now is so bad that I pushed a bit of the mirror cushion down and it stayed the same shape


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jackeyjoe*
> 
> So I brought out my D7000 yesterday, and found out that my command dial buttons are stuck! I can't go right or up, which is really annoying when trying to navigate anything. I guess it's time to get it serviced, the top screen is cracked as well so it isn't the only thing that could get fixed while it's away


and i thought the loose rubber close to the front dial on my 7000 was bad....

hope you get yours fixed!


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Hey guys I just bought a Canon 1100D with a 18-55mm IS II lens as my first DSLR, £199 from the Canon refurb ebay store - bargain!

Hopefully it'll be delivered in the next few days and I will share my first few shots with you all!


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> Hey guys I just bought a Canon 1100D with a 18-55mm IS II lens as my first DSLR, £199 from the Canon refurb ebay store - bargain!
> 
> Hopefully it'll be delivered in the next few days and I will share my first few shots with you all!


Not bad









ION I'm now cleaning the old foam off the fujica and doing a couple of other bits of 'maintenance'. The foam, if you can still call it that now is a nightmare to get off, even with solvents. I've also looked at the mechanism and I must say it's pretty impressive, don't think it needs any adjusting since last time I ran a roll though it everything seemed alright. Now I've just got to wait for the foam to come in a few days time, then I get using it again.


----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> Hey guys I just bought a Canon 1100D with a 18-55mm IS II lens as my first DSLR, £199 from the Canon refurb ebay store - bargain!
> 
> Hopefully it'll be delivered in the next few days and I will share my first few shots with you all!


That's a pretty nice camera to start with. I don't think you'll be dissapointed. Just keep in mind it's *very* slow when you shoot RAW, and the buffer also gets filled very easily even if you don't keep the shutter button in. Apart from that though, I like that camera.

While I'm posting here, I'd also like to know something. As you all should know, ocn claims ownership of all content you post here (therefore also pictures). What do you people think of, for example, uploading to DeviantArt and embedding the image here? I'm of course also open to suggestions about which site to use.


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JKuhn*
> 
> That's a pretty nice camera to start with. I don't think you'll be dissapointed. Just keep in mind it's *very* slow when you shoot RAW, and the buffer also gets filled very easily even if you don't keep the shutter button in. Apart from that though, I like that camera.
> 
> While I'm posting here, I'd also like to know something. As you all should know, ocn claims ownership of all content you post here (therefore also pictures). What do you people think of, for example, uploading to DeviantArt and embedding the image here? I'm of course also open to suggestions about which site to use.


Yeah I'm quite excited







I think I read the buffer is faster than the others in the price range, I'm sure it'll be fine for me!

I upload my pictures to Flickr and link them to here.


----------



## Conspiracy

soooo i was playing with the Sony A7 that i have at work yesterday. we have 2 on display, one thats locked to the table for customers and another that we can walk around with and show people.

have to say its a pretty awesome little camera. i really want to see how it feels with the EF adapter.


----------



## Jixr

I got another photo job! and its the kind of photo work I like ( architectural ) except... its to teach my boss's daughter how to do the job I want, and she's even asking to borrow my len's.

Sigh...


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> I got another photo job! and its the kind of photo work I like ( architectural ) except... its to teach my boss's daughter how to do the job I want, and she's even asking to borrow my len's.
> 
> Sigh...


That doesn't sound like a "job" and I bed it won't pay directly .









Just came back from my extended weekend in Seattle....kinda pissed I did not buy that monopod to bring along...but at the same time, my better half has only so much patience waiting for me snapping around









Thinking about getting this: Manfrotto 685B Neotec - lots of issues, but a niche tool. ur thoughts ?


----------



## Jixr

Nope, just my normal hourly pay at my office, but at least I'll be out of the office for a few hours.

part of me like it cuz I never get to talk cameras to people, and the other part of me is "its my stuff, go get your own" But its the boss mans baby daughter, so as long as shes around I have no chance of doing any photo work for our company.

if they start wanting me to borrow my gear often, I'll send my boss an invoice for rental gear.

But my first wedding job I did this weekend wen't pretty well I think, and pictures came out decent.


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> Nope, just my normal hourly pay at my office, but at least I'll be out of the office for a few hours.
> 
> part of me like it cuz I never get to talk cameras to people, and the other part of me is "its my stuff, go get your own" But its the boss mans baby daughter, so as long as shes around I have no chance of doing any photo work for our company.
> 
> if they start wanting me to borrow my gear often, I'll send my boss an invoice for rental gear.
> 
> But my first wedding job I did this weekend wen't pretty well I think, and pictures came out decent.


Well, I don't know what kind of relationship you have with your boss (or what it is you are doing), but I would take the initiative to discuss it with him: I really like/enjoy doing this kind of photo work for your(our) company, I am totally willing to have your daughter around and teach her what I know, but having her displace me afterwards feels weird, and using my equipment at that, even worse" - or something along these lines molded to fit your boss/employee relationship.


----------



## kbros

Let's see some.


----------



## Jixr

Yeah, I don't want to get into the habit of loaning out my gear if I'm not there with it. espc. if other people are profiting off using it.


----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> Yeah I'm quite excited
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think I read the buffer is faster than the others in the price range, I'm sure it'll be fine for me!
> 
> I upload my pictures to Flickr and link them to here.


I don't know about other cameras in that price range, all I know is that the 1100D stuggles to keep up with RAW (and don't even think about RAW + jpeg). If you shoot jpeg it's fine (at 3 fps), but set it to RAW and the speed drops to around 2 fps for only a few shots. I've had countless instances where I shoot regularly (not even keeping the shutter button depressed), and then after a few shots it refuses to shoot for a few seconds. So if burst mode is important, don't even think about RAW. Still, that body is pretty capable if you consider how cheap it is.


----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> Yeah, I don't want to get into the habit of loaning out my gear if I'm not there with it. espc. if other people are profiting off using it.


I don't think I'll ever be able to let someone use my gear without keeping a very close eye on it.


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JKuhn*
> 
> I don't think I'll ever be able to let someone use my gear without keeping a very close eye on it.


Me too. My gear isn't that expensive but if someone breaks it, loses it or gets it stolen It's still money out of my (small student) pocket to replace it.

I'm even reluctant to let my grandad borrow stuff since I'd have to go around there and specifically ask for it back. At least he'd give it back though, unlike my uncle, who has a history of never giving things back and sometimes even claiming stuff as his own.


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JKuhn*
> 
> I don't know about other cameras in that price range, all I know is that the 1100D stuggles to keep up with RAW (and don't even think about RAW + jpeg). If you shoot jpeg it's fine (at 3 fps), but set it to RAW and the speed drops to around 2 fps for only a few shots. I've had countless instances where I shoot regularly (not even keeping the shutter button depressed), and then after a few shots it refuses to shoot for a few seconds. So if burst mode is important, don't even think about RAW. Still, that body is pretty capable if you consider how cheap it is.


Ah that's cool, I doubt it'll be an issue for a beginner like me








Thanks for the info.

Can't wait for my camera!


----------



## Jixr

yeah, thats something that sucks about my t3i, i'm starting to hit the wall with the buffer.Hit it alot this weekend at the wedding I was shooting.


----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> Me too. My gear isn't that expensive but if someone breaks it, loses it or gets it stolen It's still money out of my (small student) pocket to replace it.
> 
> I'm even reluctant to let my grandad borrow stuff since I'd have to go around there and specifically ask for it back. At least he'd give it back though, unlike my uncle, who has a history of never giving things back and sometimes even claiming stuff as his own.


At least where you live it's relatively cheap to replace stuff. I don't know how our prices compare with prices in England, but I regularly have to pay a lot more than what the yanks pay (for example my PC case was R2190 (around $243) over the counter while the US price for that same case was $170)


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JKuhn*
> 
> I don't think I'll ever be able to let someone use my gear without keeping a very close eye on it.


It depends on the person asking.
I had good friends / photo buddies that I've borrowed 300 L & 70-200L IS grade lenses from for a couple of months, and returned the favor with giving 17-55 IS / 50D & 7D kits as backup etc for jobs - or even vacation trips.
With a particular bud, I had a couple kit pieces practically "in common" - i.e. no need to get a Sigma 10-20 or Canon 11-22, just hold onto mine till I ask for it etc.
When I moved in the US, I ended up giving my whole lighting gear (nothing crazy, some $1000 worth of tripods and backdrops) to him, Manfrotto ballheads, monopods, flashes etc.

If [email protected] happens? Well, at least there is a common understanding: "I know you did your best to try to prevent it".

Camera gear, like racing or even commuting cars, like overclocking CPUs etc are all "tools".
After one point, you know that those should be considered expendable to an extend.
You walk out, you trip, you fall on it, it breaks.
Someone texts behind you, you brake hard, your car is trashed.

[email protected] happens. Not telling anyone what to do or that he should trust his dishonest friend/uncle etc.
Just pick those you trust with your stuff better, and favors will be returned one way or the other


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JKuhn*
> 
> At least where you live it's relatively cheap to replace stuff. I don't know how our prices compare with prices in England, but I regularly have to pay a lot more than what the yanks pay (for example my PC case was R2190 (around $243) over the counter while the US price for that same case was $170)


We pay more than those damn americans too







Our prices probably aren't quite as high as yours but we're still getting ripped off.


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Look what arrived!


----------



## JKuhn

What are you waiting for? Go use it!


----------



## Magical Eskimo

I had to wait to finish work and now I'm going to the pub so I've got no time to use it this evening!

I've taken a few pictures of random stuff while working out how to use it properly lol

Hopefully next few days I'll get some decent shots.


----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> I had to wait to finish work and now I'm going to the pub so I've got no time to use it this evening!
> 
> I've taken a few pictures of random stuff while working out how to use it properly lol
> 
> Hopefully next few days I'll get some decent shots.


How familiar are you with photography? I know this is your first DSLR, so if you're sew to it you might want to check DPS. They have a bunch of tutorials, and also give weekly newsletters.

On another note, is linking to a FB album or a specific picture for critique allowed? If I do so, I'll make sure to double check my privacy settings.


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JKuhn*
> 
> How familiar are you with photography? I know this is your first DSLR, so if you're sew to it you might want to check DPS. They have a bunch of tutorials, and also give weekly newsletters.
> 
> On another note, is linking to a FB album or a specific picture for critique allowed? If I do so, I'll make sure to double check my privacy settings.


Thanks for the link









afaik there's no problems with linking fb content as long as you don't have a problem with putting your fb profile on here


----------



## Scott1541

I've just discovered the existence of the Zeiss Ikon Nettar... I was thinking maybe medium format on a budget? Are they worth it or should I just get saving for a hassy/mamiya/bronica/etc... and stick to 35mm for a while.


----------



## Sean Webster

Spent my first day at the studio im working at...a lot of information slapped in my face lol. Such a different and faster workflow than what I am used to. It usually takes me a while to warm up to someone during a shoot, but now, every few minutes we have a new face to pose, light, then shoot.

All the lights are premetered, we use Fuji bodies, we use short loop lighting 95% of the time, and all I need to do is focus on posing and positioning the viewfinder correctly on the person. It makes things easy, now I just need to work on remembering posing....which I am terrible at and get nervous doing. O_O Editing software is old and very basic as well, so everything has to be done right in camera no matter what.

At least there are cute girls there to work with and help me.  I have a feeling this is going to help me out a lot.


----------



## DizZz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Spent my first day at the studio im working at...a lot of information slapped in my face lol. Such a different and faster workflow than what I am used to. It usually takes me a while to warm up to someone during a shoot, but now, every few minutes we have a new face to pose, light, then shoot.
> 
> All the lights are premetered, we use Fuji bodies, we use short loop lighting 95% of the time, and all I need to do is focus on posing and positioning the viewfinder correctly on the person. It makes things easy, now I just need to work on remembering posing....which I am terrible at and get nervous doing. O_O Editing software is old and very basic as well, so everything has to be done right in camera no matter what.
> 
> At least there are cute girls there to work with and help me.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have a feeling this is going to help me out a lot.


That's awesome! Can you post any of your work from the studio?


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DizZz*
> 
> That's awesome! Can you post any of your work from the studio?


Nah, it is a prestige portraits studio doing senior portraits. All the photos in studio are to stay in the studio. :/ I'm not sure on outside, but I'd think the same. I will try to get some of my friends in there and do some private shoots tho. 

Also, one of the photographers I was getting help from showed me her portfolio and I fell in love lol. I really want to shoot with her now and see how she does her own private sessions!


----------



## Scott1541

Anyone here know of any good free tone mapping software, or whatever you need for HDR? I'd like to do some experimenting with it but don't want to use the in-camera HDR function, I'd much rather take a few bracketed shots and do it all on my computer.


----------



## Eggs and bacon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Spent my first day at the studio im working at...a lot of information slapped in my face lol. Such a different and faster workflow than what I am used to. It usually takes me a while to warm up to someone during a shoot, but now, every few minutes we have a new face to pose, light, then shoot.
> 
> All the lights are premetered, we use Fuji bodies, we use short loop lighting 95% of the time, and all I need to do is focus on posing and positioning the viewfinder correctly on the person. It makes things easy, now I just need to work on remembering posing....which I am terrible at and get nervous doing. O_O Editing software is old and very basic as well, so everything has to be done right in camera no matter what.
> 
> At least there are cute girls there to work with and help me.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have a feeling this is going to help me out a lot.


As a Fuji enthusiast, which Fujis are you using? and which lens, I'm guessing the 56mm?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> I've just discovered the existence of the Zeiss Ikon Nettar... I was thinking maybe medium format on a budget? Are they worth it or should I just get saving for a hassy/mamiya/bronica/etc... and stick to 35mm for a while.


I have not used many medium format cameras, bu the bronicas are a much cheaper alternative to the more expensive hassy and mamiya brands. As for folders vs slrs, folders are a more fun walk around cameras (kind of half way between holga's and the real SLR's), but the slrs are the slower paced cameras. They are very different styles of shooting, I would definitely try both of them before making a purchase, you may even end up buying one of each type, or even a tlr.

My initial reason for going medium format was that I could use top of the line professional gear from last decade for dirt cheap. As well as the beautiful tones of B&W film and portra 400/ekatar


----------



## Jixr

Anyone thinking of getting the new canon 10-18mm?

I'm really thinking of getting one since I LOVE wide angle stuff, but at the same time that $300 for that lens could go to saving towards a FF where my 17-40 would have equal range and give me much better images.


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> Anyone thinking of getting the new canon 10-18mm?
> 
> I'm really thinking of getting one since I LOVE wide angle stuff, but at the same time that $300 for that lens could go to saving towards a FF where my 17-40 would have equal range and give me much better images.


Save your money. If you want to shoot really wide. Shoot 4 frames to make a square with your 17-40 and stitch them together with Microsoft ICE (free).


----------



## Jixr

Yeah, thats something I haven't really done, stitching frames together for a panoramic. I really want the wide angle for my Canon EOS-M, but they don't sell them in the states, and can be expensive to import.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Eggs and bacon*
> As a Fuji enthusiast, which Fujis are you using? and which lens, I'm guessing the 56mm?


Fuji S5 Pro. Lenses are a variable aperture zoom Nikon. Not sure what mm range tho. Kinda like a 15-85mm ish lens...I think.

After another day there I really do not like the equipment we have. I'm so spoiled with my newer gear. lol


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> Yeah, thats something I haven't really done, stitching frames together for a panoramic. I really want the wide angle for my Canon EOS-M, but they don't sell them in the states, and can be expensive to import.


EOS-M...
Love mine...been trying to zone focus it lately as I use it for street photography, but It is not as easy as it is with Fuji's "slow focusing" alternatives (less manual control options).
The EF-M 22 is a lil gem(the only lens I own for it).

The EF-S 10-18 appears to be a great lens for the price - people like the IS, and find it to be pretty sharp. But vignetting is notable in the wide settings - something perhaps easily correctable with an updated LR that contains that lens' profile.
For $300, is a safe bet over the much more expensive 10-22, or even the Sigma 10-20 (the latter was he UW I had for my 20D/50D and I was extremely pleased color and sharpness wise).

I don't know what kind of UW photography you are after.
If it is landscapes, I would suggest taking a step back from "just lenses", and looking into accessories that make landscape photography shine:

good tripod
square filter holders for grad NDs
good C-PL filter
9/10 stop ND for long exposures and atmospheric cloud and/or water
And ofc time and money to travel around and spot those sceneries worth capturing









UW is fan and can give some dramatic perspectives, but your 17-40 is "wide enough" and can produce some amazing pictures - given the right accessories and ofc subject.
Talked about it before, you have to GAS-off a bit.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Fuji S5 Pro. Lenses are a variable aperture zoom Nikon. Not sure what mm range tho. Kinda like a 15-85mm ish lens...I think.
> 
> After another day there I really do not like the equipment we have. I'm so spoiled with my newer gear. lol


See, the exact opposite of enthusiast amateurs: we are always "oh, my equipment is holding my grand talent back", business owners are "I have happy as long as it is "good enough" and doesn't require more money".


----------



## Jixr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> EOS-M...
> Love mine...been trying to zone focus it lately as I use it for street photography, but It is not as easy as it is with Fuji's "slow focusing" alternatives (less manual control options).
> The EF-M 22 is a lil gem(the only lens I own for it).
> 
> The EF-S 10-18 appears to be a great lens for the price - people like the IS, and find it to be pretty sharp. But vignetting is notable in the wide settings - something perhaps easily correctable with an updated LR that contains that lens' profile.
> For $300, is a save bet over the much more expensive 10-22, or even the Sigma 10-20 (the latter was he UW I had for my 20D/50D and I was extremely pleased color and sharpness wise).


I love mine too, some days its amazing, some days it sucks ( depends on the subject ) I have the 22 and the 18-55 for it, I so wish i could get the 22mm on my big canon. Mine is out on loan, but I get it back tonight, I wanted to use it at the wedding I did last weekend.

I'm really thinking of "renting" one from my local best buy ( with their 30 day return policy )
I know it will go on sale eventually ( the last cheap lens was the canon 40mm, and it was originally $200(250?), but can be found on sale all the time for 150. I'm hoping I get a bonus from work this summer ( we usually do ) and if so I'll pick one up. There is also the bower 8mm fisheye's, but those are a bit too fishy for my liking. I havent found anyone who has many negatives to say about the lens ( keeping the price in mind )


----------



## Scott1541

I'm fairly sure I have GAS







One day I think "I want one of those", then a few days later "I could do with one of those..."

My last purchase was a new tripod, and while I didn't necessarily need it it's a lot better than my old one which wasn't really adequate for a DSLR and moderately heavy lens. Next I think I'm thinking about getting a C-PL for my 10-20 but I may hold off on that for a while.


----------



## Jixr

I generally only get stuff when its on sale, my local frys had a $250 carbon fiber tripod on sale for $50, so I couldn't pass that up. ( and it was well worth buying ) and I'm pretty set on gear, only big thing left for me would be a newer camera body. I could easily go ahead and get a 60 or 70d body, but I really wanna save up for a 6d.


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Talked about it before, you have to GAS-off a bit.


I did number 4. awhile back (one camera and one lens). Shot with nothing but my 85mm and my crop body for awhile. Tried to use it outside its stereotypical uses and really enjoyed it. Funny thing was people commented that they really liked my 'new stuff' and that said it was refreshing to see different viewpoints of the downtown area.

maybe I should do that again.....


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> Yeah, thats something I haven't really done, stitching frames together for a panoramic. I really want the wide angle for my Canon EOS-M, but they don't sell them in the states, and can be expensive to import.


It's really quite easy. ICE makes it pretty idiot proof.


----------



## Jixr

Yeah, I'll need to givie it a shot, but the downfall is you only get to do static subjects
( bleh, its only for windows, need an OSX solution )

I'm also going to try some really neat ideas that require two cameras, but I gotta wait till I get my M back off loan.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Fuji S5 Pro. Lenses are a variable aperture zoom Nikon. Not sure what mm range tho. Kinda like a 15-85mm ish lens...I think.
> 
> After another day there I really do not like the equipment we have. I'm so spoiled with my newer gear. lol
> 
> 
> 
> See, the exact opposite of enthusiast amateurs: we are always "oh, my equipment is holding my grand talent back", business owners are "I have happy as long as it is "good enough" and doesn't require more money".
Click to expand...

For me its more about the actual camera handling/ergonomics. IQ is fine. It is just hard to get used to these old half fallen apart fuji cameras when I'm so used to my 6D. Like literally half of them the rubber grips are falling off. That and the zooming is backwards for me with the Nikon lens vs my Canon lenses lol

Does anyone know if the S5 has manual focus point selection? Because I forgot to ask that at work and just started doing focus recompose...we are shooting at like f/8 anyways lol.


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Does anyone know if the S5 has manual focus point selection? Because I forgot to ask that at work and just started doing focus recompose...we are shooting at like f/8 anyways lol.


S5 Pro Manual in PDF

p55-57

AF-area mode (right of screen @ the back) in Single area AF (lowest setting) + multi-selector to shuffle through focus points.

The S5 I believe was based on the F80 film body - was between that and the EOS 30 I ended up getting back in the days - summer after I've finished highschool it was.
Oh, memories.









The F80 was a mid-range film body F80->F100->F5, and already "dated" by the time Fuji started using it for its Sx Pro bodies.
The S5 was a "dream" in ergonomics by comparison to the S2 and S3 regardless!

If you think zooming is weird with Nikkors being "backwards", try manual focusing!









As for aperture: afaik most formal portraits in front of backdrops are taken @ F8 or 11, at least with short tele primes and 70-200 zooms, to ensure that most of the head is in focus. Selective focusing and shallow DOF might be utilized in more modern, environmental portraits shoot on-location, but I think that's too "artsy" for studios that just want to get clients in and out, utilizing preset lighting and backdrops.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *silvrr*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Talked about it before, you have to GAS-off a bit.
> 
> 
> 
> I did number 4. awhile back (one camera and one lens). Shot with nothing but my 85mm and my crop body for awhile. Tried to use it outside its stereotypical uses and really enjoyed it. Funny thing was people commented that they really liked my 'new stuff' and that said it was refreshing to see different viewpoints of the downtown area.
> 
> maybe I should do that again.....
Click to expand...

Yeah, I'm trying to do it myself, tho we are so spoiled with zooms these days...the guy @ the blog uses RF cameras, so primes are a given.

I have been "out" using just my 50 1.4 on a FF, or 35 f2/ Sigma 30 1.4 on cropped SLRs before. Lasts a week or two









When I got the EOS-M to carry with me (not that I end up using it as productively as I should), I intentionally got it with just the 22mm - added perk, it is much smaller with it than with the 18-55, which imho nearly beats the purpose of such a small body - might as well go for a SL1 at that point, tho the 22mm is notably slower to focus (the Achilles' heel of the M system is slow AF).

The perk is that it remains virtually pocketable with the 22, so I insist keeping it on...the best camera for the job is the one you are holding, and IQ is stunning for the size and price (got it used, bundled with EF adapter and 2 extra OEM batteries for 300ish). I don't know if the "35 equiv" suits me as much as a 50 atm, but I will keep trying.


----------



## Jixr

whoo, just delivered photos from my first wedding job, got over 100 edited photos, 15 prints, and banked just under $300 after expenses. Go me.

And thats a good price for the M, I paid 400 for mine ( got both lens's though ) and there is a kit local for 400 with both lens's and the flash that my lady friend is thinking about buying.

The M with the 22 is a perfect concert cam for when you can't bring in a DSLR, never had security turn it away ( and have been to some strict venues )


----------



## sub50hz

I thought the S5 was using the D300 chassis -- I could be wrong, and I'm far too lazy to look.


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> I thought the S5 was using the D300 chassis -- I could be wrong, and I'm far too lazy to look.


It's based on the D200 according to the 'pedia, the S3 is based on the F80.


----------



## sub50hz

Sounds about right.


----------



## boogschd

upgraded








https://flic.kr/p/okxZUi
DSC_5263 by boogschd, on Flickr

more here


----------



## Pandora51

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boogschd*
> 
> upgraded
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://flic.kr/p/okxZUi
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DSC_5263 by boogschd, on Flickr
> more here


Impressive shots. Which lens do you use for this. 50mm f1,8?

Can you say how the depth of field with F1,8 is compared to F2,8? I bought yesterday the Nikon 40mm F2,8 and Im just wondering hows the difference.


----------



## kbros

Can anybody recommend a cheaper wide-angle nikon mount? If there isn't any decent ones I might just grab an 18-55 VR II.


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> Can anybody recommend a cheaper wide-angle nikon mount? If there isn't any decent ones I might just grab an 18-55 VR II.


How wide do you want to go? Sigma 10-20 is a good lens if it's not too wide for you.


----------



## pcfoo

Sigma 10-20 DC is pretty good (at least on 8-15MP cameras i've used it with).
Third party 18-50 2.8s like the Tamron are good all-around standard zooms, but ofc either is much pricier than "kit" lenses


----------



## laboitenoire

Yeah, how cheap is cheap? And how wide? Tokina 12-24 f/4 might fit the bill... Seeing as you have a D50 you can buy the first generation too, which is optically almost the same as the second gen, but cheaper because it's screw drive.


----------



## kbros

I'd like to get something that I can transition over to FF. My plan is to use the d50 until I can afford a FF, because any other crop body isn't going to be THAT much of an improvement over what I got, and I don't like how small the grips are compared to this tank. lol. Right now is a weird time for me to buy a lens because I'm going for my license test in less than 2 weeks and I'll need to buy a car, but I'll most likely have funds for some new glass in a few months.


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pandora51*
> 
> Impressive shots. Which lens do you use for this. 50mm f1,8?
> 
> Can you say how the depth of field with F1,8 is compared to F2,8? I bought yesterday the Nikon 40mm F2,8 and Im just wondering hows the difference.


yep, 50mm









im not sure how to answer the depth of field bit but heres some comparison shots

https://www.flickr.com/photos/jaredpolin/sets/72157626753574489/

hope it helps


----------



## Pandora51

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boogschd*
> 
> yep, 50mm
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> im not sure how to answer the depth of field bit but heres some comparison shots
> 
> https://www.flickr.com/photos/jaredpolin/sets/72157626753574489/
> 
> hope it helps


yup this helps. Thanks.

1,8 makes more difference than I thought it would make.. hm I guess I will buy the 50mm f1,8 in the future aswell.
The 40mm f2,8 is also pretty great for daily photography but to play around with the depth of field interests me alot.


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> I'd like to get something that I can transition over to FF. My plan is to use the d50 until I can afford a FF, because any other crop body isn't going to be THAT much of an improvement over what I got, and I don't like how small the grips are compared to this tank. lol. Right now is a weird time for me to buy a lens because I'm going for my license test in less than 2 weeks and I'll need to buy a car, but I'll most likely have funds for some new glass in a few months.


Why do you want to go full frame? I don't see what something like a D6XX would give you over your D50 that a D7XXX wouldn't, other than the larger sensor of course. I'd like to have an FX body next but I'm also perfectly happy to consider a higher end DX body.


----------



## Jixr

yeah, I was messing with a 70d the other day, its kinda tempting to save some cash and get one of those vs spending $800 more for an older FF camera. ( but I love the wide end, so I'll probably still go for a FF eventually )

This week I'm also going to put my canon 50 1.4 up for sale/trade. I just constantly find it too narrow on a crop body.


----------



## ace8uk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> I'd like to get something that I can transition over to FF. My plan is to use the d50 until I can afford a FF, because any other crop body isn't going to be THAT much of an improvement over what I got, and I don't like how small the grips are compared to this tank. lol. Right now is a weird time for me to buy a lens because I'm going for my license test in less than 2 weeks and I'll need to buy a car, but I'll most likely have funds for some new glass in a few months.


If it helps, I used a D70 for many years before getting my D7000 and it was a huge step up in terms of dynamic range, high ISO noise handling and, of course, resolution. I wouldn't knock a higher end DX body off your list too quickly, especially seeing as you're only relatively new to photography. Jumping into full frame so quickly seems rather unnecessary at the moment.


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> ( but I love the wide end, so I'll probably still go for a FF eventually )


You can go just as wide with crop as FF. With lenses like the 10-XX lenses and sigmas 8-16mm you can go really wide on crop.


----------



## Jixr

yeah, but the thing is all my glass is already FF friendly, and every lens I have I feel is too long, and a new body plus a wide angle crop lens would be nearly as much as a FF anyway, and I wouldn't have to buy any new lens's either. ( considering a 70d is $1100, plus at least another $300 for a wide angle lens, may as well save up the extra $400 and get the 6d )

I did check out the new canon 10-18mm at the store the other day, and at $300, it seems like a pretty good deal, build quality identical to a kit lens, and super slow, but its not bad really.


----------



## Sean Webster

Just use what you have now and wait till you have enough for FF. Its worth it imo, the FF bodies just feel so much better than crop.


----------



## kbros

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Just use what you have now and wait till you have enough for FF. Its worth it imo, the FF bodies just feel so much better than crop.


^this. I do know that the higher end DX's have better iso and such, but it still isn't as good as 35mm. I'm a poor high school student so I'm no where near close to going out and buying an FF, but I'd like to have a few FF friendly lenses for when I do transition. My d50 has a relatively low shutter count and I'm thinking about using it until it dies, then jumping right into FF(considering that hopefully I'll have the money by then). My 50mm is great but not very versatile, and I want to do more car shows and 'rollers' and what not. Imagine me trying to shoot rollers on the highway with my 50mm, I'd have to be 4 lanes away from the guy I'm shooting, and it'd be hard with a semi-long lens to keep it sharp at such low shutter speeds, lol. I'm searching eBay for an 18-55 VR so I can do some wider things, and fill the gap between wide and my 50. Hopefully I can find one used or refurb for <$100 as to not put too much of a dent in the car fund. And it's no big deal that it's a DX lens, because if I have the money for FF, I'll for sure have enough for something better than a kit.


----------



## pcfoo

You have to factor in generations tho...

A D7xxx is a MASSIVE upgrade over the D50...just massive. I totally respect the FF "aspirations", but don't be mistaken: decent glass and a DX/APS-C sensor can work wonders...
Remember that ppl work wonders with m43 too, and the relationship of DX vs. m43 is equivalent to FF vs DX (roughly double the sensor area in each case).

Unless you are willing to limit yourself to some relatively cheap primes, a FF body ontop of the initial investment, will need a $2-3000 for a couple of lenses alone - to make it worth it...people using FF bodies with cheap zooms are "killing" most of the advantages: a modern DX/EF-S lens designed with the circle of confusion "distinguishable" by high pixel density cropped sensors, is vastly better in micro contrast than "mediocre" lenses (i.e. what cheap FF zooms and even primes are usually) that were initially designed for use with film. This is what "saves" the m43 line too - finely tuned lenses.

This is ofc true for FF lenses too, and that is the reason that modern redesigns of lenses, especially complex zooms, are improving old benchmarks to the point that people wonder how it is possible: the 24-70 2.8 L was already the best mainstream standard zoom, yet the mark II version blows it away. The 70-200 2.8 L IS was already a "benchmark" lens in its class, yet the 70-200 2.8 L II IS is "the sharpest zoom ever", a title that the 70-200 f4 L IS was awarded by some when it came out etc etc.
Glass adapts to sensor densities too - it is a slow process, but it does, and ofc when we start comparing apples to apples, FF wins easily - but at a serious cost (and weight) disadvantage.

At this rate, the "FF friendly" lenses, those that will have a D8xx or 5D3 shine, are also getting more and more expensive.
Sure, I can easily see the improvement in a 6D + 24-70 2.8 L (mark I) vs. my 50D/7D + EF-S 17-55 2.8 IS, but we are talking seriously better bodies than a D50/70 era body, and quite pricey glass.

By the point FF bodies get "cheap" as used options, tech has outpaced them here and there to the point that cropped bodies are competing in multiple levels. eg, a 5DC is now dirt-cheap - not as cheap as many cropped bodies much newer to that, but cheap.
Unless absolute DOF control and ISO performance is what you need, there won't be a clear win of a dated FF vs. a modern crop body.

As far as handling goes: for example with canon, both the 50D and the 7D have better control layout and larger grips than the 6D, which is already "bigger" than the D610...so betting that a FF body will be a "manlier" choice, is not that safe.
The 6D's handling, paired with the massive, all-metal 24-70 L is a big let-down vs. the larger 7D + lighter EF-S 17-55 IS. I actually don't feel comfortable hand-holding the 6D unless gripped - with the grip and a E1 strap, I feel much more secure.


----------



## OmarCCX

If you like the hobby enough, you'll end up on FF sooner or later, might as well make it sooner since you already have good glass.


----------



## Conspiracy

if you have a working camera whats the point of buying another one. FF is great dont get me wrong but photography is expensive. if you can afford it do it. if not save a little extra so you dont break the bank too bad


----------



## LaBestiaHumana

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> if you have a working camera whats the point of buying another one. FF is great dont get me wrong but photography is expensive. if you can afford it do it. if not save a little extra so you dont break the bank too bad


I bought a Nikon D3300 a few months ago, and 2 weeks ago I bought a GoPro Hero 3. Different purposes I guess, but I need 2 more GoPro's to simultaneously record different angles.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LaBestiaHumana*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> if you have a working camera whats the point of buying another one. FF is great dont get me wrong but photography is expensive. if you can afford it do it. if not save a little extra so you dont break the bank too bad
> 
> 
> 
> I bought a Nikon D3300 a few months ago, and 2 weeks ago I bought a GoPro Hero 3. Different purposes I guess, but I need 2 more GoPro's to simultaneously record different angles.
Click to expand...

apples and oranges. totally different uses and purpose behind the purchase


----------



## Eggs and bacon

I was thinking of going full frame around January this year, I was thinking of getting a used d600, a 24/28 a 50 and an 80, (if you can't tell I'm a prime purist). However I decided it was not worth it, as the gear would be too bulky/heavy to carry around for general use. I ended up getting a used fuji xe1, with the seriously fantastic 35. I all ready have bigger than full frame in the form of an etrs, which is great for portraits/landscapes/cityscapes.

On a completely different note, Keh has a new website. A new broken website =(, which refuses to acknowledge my credit card or Paypal account.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Eggs and bacon*
> 
> I was thinking of going full frame around January this year, I was thinking of getting a used d600, a 24/28 a 50 and an 80, (if you can't tell I'm a prime purist). However I decided it was not worth it, as the gear would be too bulky/heavy to carry around for general use. I ended up getting a used fuji xe1, with the seriously fantastic 35. I all ready have bigger than full frame in the form of an etrs, which is great for portraits/landscapes/cityscapes.
> 
> On a completely different note, Keh has a new website. A new broken website =(, which refuses to acknowledge my credit card or Paypal account.


oh you poor baby. KEH's website is pretty nice though i will say that. you know whats even nicer? since its broken ill just drive down the street and visit them in person haha


----------



## Jixr

If i didn't have to buy a new car right now I'd be on the way to the store to pick up a 6d. stupid blown motor...


----------



## kbros

Was it a VR or a 1.8?


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Hey guys, my t2i battery is about 5 years old or so I can best guess and is getting a bit on the fritz. I'm looking for a replacement, maybe even get a couple more. Any recommendations?


----------



## Sean Webster

So, I am going to discontinue working as a high school senior portrait photographer...I am soooo bored of it and can't shoot/edit with my own style as I want. So, out with that and in with being a delivery boy for a mechanic shop possibly lol. I may take up doing high school sports shots when school starts up for them tho.

Quote:



> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> Hey guys, my t2i battery is about 5 years old or so I can best guess and is getting a bit on the fritz. I'm looking for a replacement, maybe even get a couple more. Any recommendations?


i've not really had issues with third party batteries. Just get a reputable one and you will be good. The more mAh, the better. Just make sure the voltage matches right.


----------



## Jixr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> Hey guys, my t2i battery is about 5 years old or so I can best guess and is getting a bit on the fritz. I'm looking for a replacement, maybe even get a couple more. Any recommendations?


my el cheapo amazon prime batteries were like $15 for 2, and they last longer than my stock canon battery.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> So, I am going to discontinue working as a high school senior portrait photographer...I am soooo bored of it and can't shoot/edit with my own style as I want. So, out with that and in with being a delivery boy for a mechanic shop possibly lol. I may take up doing high school sports shots when school starts up for them tho.
> 
> Quote:
> 
> i've not really had issues with third party batteries. Just get a reputable one and you will be good. The more mAh, the better. Just make sure the voltage matches right.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> my el cheapo amazon prime batteries were like $15 for 2, and they last longer than my stock canon battery.


Cool. I was afraid you guys were going to tell me I was going to have to go with OEM if I wanted anything good, but I wasn't about to pay $45. Current battery lasts for a fair while, just for some reason takes about a week to charge.


----------



## jackeyjoe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> So, I am going to discontinue working as a high school senior portrait photographer...I am soooo bored of it and can't shoot/edit with my own style as I want. So, out with that and in with being a delivery boy for a mechanic shop possibly lol. I may take up doing high school sports shots when school starts up for them tho.


That sounds like fun, I am surprised to hear you are wanting to work as something other than a photographer











In other news, Found a place that sells and develops film, am going to give this old camera a run... probably hasn't had film in it for over a decade


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jackeyjoe*
> 
> That sounds like fun, I am surprised to hear you are wanting to work as something other than a photographer
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In other news, Found a place that sells and develops film, am going to give this old camera a run... probably hasn't had film in it for over a decade


FM2...what a beauty...not that my 2nd hand AE-1 wasn't enough, but...
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> Hey guys, my t2i battery is about 5 years old or so I can best guess and is getting a bit on the fritz. I'm looking for a replacement, maybe even get a couple more. Any recommendations?


I never had issues with 3rd party either.
I use "Wasabi" with my 6D/7D and work just fine (register with the camera too) - tho for some reason, 1/3 of them don't want to charge with the OEM charger (the other 2 do!)...thus the bundled wasabi charger comes handy. Older / simpler battery packs like the BP511 never had issues with that. but LP-E6 is more picky...weird that the charger doesn't like it, but the cameras do!


----------



## Eggs and bacon

Keh had a problem with international orders that they fixed last night (my time). Now a 150mm is on its way to a new home on my etrs.

That FM2 is beautiful. The only real 35mm camera I have is a k1000 that was passed down to me through family.


----------



## Scott1541

I'd like to get something like an FM2 at some point to replace my Fujica. Can't be buying any more gear at the minute though, I need a new laptop.


----------



## jackeyjoe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> FM2...what a beauty...not that my 2nd hand AE-1 wasn't enough, but...


It was my mothers from when she worked for a newspaper, which was almost every day for about two years. Still doesn't have a scratch, they made them tough








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Eggs and bacon*
> 
> That FM2 is beautiful. The only real 35mm camera I have is a k1000 that was passed down to me through family.


I love it, it's just short of a dollar a photo though so I am going to use it in moderation








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> I'd like to get something like an FM2 at some point to replace my Fujica. Can't be buying any more gear at the minute though, I need a new laptop.


Priorities


----------



## Eggs and bacon

I was going to say that a dollar a shot in 35mm is ridiculous, then I saw that you lived in Australia like me. I'm not sure if you are in Melbourne, but stay away from Michaels camera shop. A few tips for shooting film on the cheap in Australia: if you have photography oriented friends do a group buy from B&H and stock up and try this place for developing 12 dollars a roll scanned with return postage, the website may seem crappy but they have a good turnaround and my film came back scratch and dust free.

I can shoot 645 for about a dollar a shot and 35mm (36 shots) for about 50 cents a shot with ektar/superia. Wheres a place like Michaels in Melbourne wanted *17 dollars* for a roll and another *30 dollars* to develop and scan it.

The one of the bad things about Australia is the price of any imported good generally being up to 75% more expensive than buying it in the USA, but we have nice beaches so its a trade off.


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jackeyjoe*
> 
> Priorities


I don't need any more film cameras, 2 is enough







I can only use the F60 right now though because the light seal replacement foam for the other still hasn't come yet. I don't like using the F60 as much since I don't have any full frame f mount primes







I just have to put up with the slow kit lens.


----------



## jackeyjoe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Eggs and bacon*
> 
> I was going to say that a dollar a shot in 35mm is ridiculous, then I saw that you lived in Australia like me. I'm not sure if you are in Melbourne, but stay away from Michaels camera shop. A few tips for shooting film on the cheap in Australia: if you have photography oriented friends do a group buy from B&H and stock up and try this place for developing 12 dollars a roll scanned with return postage, the website may seem crappy but they have a good turnaround and my film came back scratch and dust free.
> 
> I can shoot 645 for about a dollar a shot and 35mm (36 shots) for about 50 cents a shot with ektar/superia. Wheres a place like Michaels in Melbourne wanted *17 dollars* for a roll and another *30 dollars* to develop and scan it.
> 
> The one of the bad things about Australia is the price of any imported good generally being up to 75% more expensive than buying it in the USA, but we have nice beaches so its a trade off.


It is a local place, I am talking total including film, scanning(have to have those digital copies) and printing if need be. The cost of film is +75% of it... and I messed up my maths, it is a bit over 50c a shot, which is much more expensive than my DSLR... but still not too bad.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> I don't need any more film cameras, 2 is enough
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I can only use the F60 right now though because the light seal replacement foam for the other still hasn't come yet. I don't like using the F60 as much since I don't have any full frame f mount primes
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I just have to put up with the slow kit lens.


My mother only had primes for the FM2, 20mm, 50mm and an 85mm... the last of which has gone walkabout, I really wanted to use it


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jackeyjoe*
> 
> It is a local place, I am talking total including film, scanning(have to have those digital copies) and printing if need be. The cost of film is +75% of it... and I messed up my maths, it is a bit over 50c a shot, which is much more expensive than my DSLR... but still not too bad.
> 
> My mother only had primes for the FM2, 20mm, 50mm and an 85mm... the last of which has gone walkabout, I really wanted to use it


I think it costs me about £0.30 per shot, as long as I'm not using anything too expensive like Ektar/Portra.

I'd like to get a 50mm but it would need to be an AF lens, which are selling around £60 used on ebay here. My D5100 wouldn't be able to focus one of these and I'm not sure how much I'd use it over the 35mm, so I can't really justify getting one.


----------



## ace8uk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> I think it costs me about £0.30 per shot, as long as I'm not using anything too expensive like Ektar/Portra.
> 
> I'd like to get a 50mm but it would need to be an AF lens, which are selling around £60 used on ebay here. My D5100 wouldn't be able to focus one of these and I'm not sure how much I'd use it over the 35mm, so I can't really justify getting one.


I might be selling my 85 1.8D soon, it won't AF on your D5100 but I'll bear you in mind if I do sell it and maybe we can agree on a mates rates price!


----------



## Jixr

I'd want to get a film camera, but I've never used one and don't know the first thing about film, and its expensive to experiment on getting it right.


----------



## jackeyjoe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> I think it costs me about £0.30 per shot, as long as I'm not using anything too expensive like Ektar/Portra.
> 
> I'd like to get a 50mm but it would need to be an AF lens, which are selling around £60 used on ebay here. My D5100 wouldn't be able to focus one of these and I'm not sure how much I'd use it over the 35mm, so I can't really justify getting one.


I wanted some B&W to start off with, they had a heap of B&W kodak 400 ISO so I thought it'd be good enough to start with








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> I'd want to get a film camera, but I've never used one and don't know the first thing about film, and its expensive to experiment on getting it right.


I haven't shot with it, but the only huge difference I can see is the ISO being fixed to the film you buy, otherwise you are doing the same as with a DSLR, juggling aperture and shutter speed to get the right exposure.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Eggs and bacon*
> 
> Keh had a problem with international orders that they fixed last night (my time). Now a 150mm is on its way to a new home on my etrs.
> 
> That FM2 is beautiful. The only real 35mm camera I have is a k1000 that was passed down to me through family.


NICE!

i bought the 105mm f4 for my ETRSi not too long ago and really havent taken it off the camera since.


----------



## pcfoo

I had a Nikon 4000 ED film scanner "accessible", so I was shooting film for quite some time after I've got my EOS 20D...still the hassle was too big after one time.
I've almost abandoned completely color slides that I was shooting before it (Velvia - it is jaw dropping @ 5x4, but [135] is nice to see too!) and kept shooting B&W with my AE-1...

I was into fast film (didn't mind the grain, the contrary) and small DOFs, but during the day the AE-1 was falling too short for the latter - that's why the FM2 with 1/4000s shutter was "the apple of discord" - low f/stops are out of the question with the AE-1...at least FD mount system / decent lenses were dirt cheap back then - much more than it is now I think (thank mirrorless camera adapters and edmika). Still a AE-1 with a 50 1.8 or 28/35 etc f/2.8 lenses is dirt cheap - ppl go for the SSC versions (I have the 50 / 35 & 135 SSCs, acquired either through ebay or flea markets).

Living as a student in Greece 10 y ago, it would be close to €17-20 to buy roll, develop and print 35mm negatives, and around the same for buying and developing a velvia roll. That was (is) a lot of money when you are lucky to be making that in 3 work hours or more.
The 20D returned its investment in a relatively short time period!
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> I'd want to get a film camera, but I've never used one and don't know the first thing about film, and its expensive to experiment on getting it right.


It is not that expensive - really.
It is actually good that it "slows you down", forces you to make clicks "count" more.
Of course depending on what you are shooting, it might get expensive- but again, how much a good shot worths? Surely more than $.5 or even $1.

And a used film body is very very easy to get...you could get an EOS 30 (elan 7) for pretty much "nothing" these days, and use it as a perfectly capable body with all your EF lenses. It was my 1st AF SLR, and I still have it in a drawer - simply doesn't worth to sell!
The only thing that ruins it for me is not film + developing costs, but proper scanning hassle / time involved.

With DSLRs getting better, I think I would only get back to film if it was for a medium format system - perhaps a Bronica, like the one @Conspiracy has. Doesn't have to be a Hassy 500xx to count









"Limited cut" tools, like the Mamiya 7 I really like, are too expensive - but getting back in the mail a developed positive roll from that thing is so gratifying!


----------



## Conspiracy

yeah when it comes to film cameras the camera really isnt that important compared to the film you use. granted glass is still important as cheap glass has cheap quality.

Bronica is a good affordable brand for medium format. definitely wont break the bank and has very impressive quality. 35mm film is still fun because of the size of the cameras. easier to walk around with but honestly shooting medium format, even 6x4.5 is a lot more fun than digital or 35mm


----------



## kbros

Grabbed an 18-55 VR for $79
NVM, ended up having seller issues so I grabbed a Manufacturer Refurb for $95, now I can do so many more things.


----------



## Eggs and bacon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> NICE!
> 
> i bought the 105mm f4 for my ETRSi not too long ago and really havent taken it off the camera since.


I can't wait to do some head and shoulder type shots. I want to see what the depth of field is like at 3.5.


----------



## Sean Webster

ugh, i think i got water damage. none of my buttons work but my dials still do...wasn't from water either, just hand sweat. :/

Hopefully it will dry out enough for me to use it tomorrow, im on vacation now...


----------



## nvidiaftw12

... rubber gloves?


----------



## Sean Webster

or actual weather sealing in a $1000+ body would be nice...


----------



## hokiealumnus

Ugh, that sucks Sean; I'm sorry.









In happy news here, cheap extension tubes came in! I don't do much macro, but now at least I can have some fun with it when the mood strikes.



























So close...no crop!


----------



## pcfoo

Extension tubes are primarily for macro, but I would like to try a short one in combination with portrait lenses that don't focus very closely

- e.g..

Rokinon 84mm 1.4 = 39.4" (100cm), tested @ 113cm

Sigma 85mm 1.4 = 33.1" (85 cm)

Canon 135 2 L = 36" (92cm)

These are all great for general headshots / shoulders+up portraits, but if you want to go closer for tight crops, you cannot really.

A 12mm tube can let you focus much closer, ofc with some resolution loss in the process. Don't think the longer extension tubes are usable for portraiture tho...


----------



## Sean Webster

ok camera working again after letting it sit a little while in front of a fan, thank god! Gonna let it sit all night covered in desiccant gel packs. Hopefully it will be all good by morning as well. 

Cool extension tubes, how much were they? I may get some for the fun of it...use it with my macro lens for even closer focus on pcb shots.


----------



## pcfoo

Which macro lens? Cause the magnification tubes add is relevant to the original focal length. A 1:1 50 or 60mm Macro, can become almost 2:1 with all of those.
The 100mm or longer get much less of the effect (but maintain a more comfortable working distance regardless).

Longer lenses see better magnification increases adding a 500D or equivalent closeup lens filter, than adding extension tubes.


----------



## hokiealumnus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Cool extension tubes, how much were they? I may get some for the fun of it...use it with my macro lens for even closer focus on pcb shots.


They are only ~$45. These were given to me, but I think this is the kit on eBay. I'm told this set can be finnicky with heavier lenses and using all three stacked, loosing connection. I didn't have a problem with the nifty, which is light as a feather.

Glad your camera seems OK!


----------



## mz-n10

so ive run into a good problem. i have ~2k to spend on either a laptop or a new camera.....

i use my laptop lots but it is still running spectacularly (upgrade would be a macbook retina).....

ive been thinking about replacing my dated fullframe (probably a7r), but i dont shoot much anymore....


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> so ive run into a good problem. i have ~2k to spend on either a laptop or a new camera.....
> 
> i use my laptop lots but it is still running spectacularly (upgrade would be a macbook retina).....
> 
> ive been thinking about replacing my dated fullframe (probably a7r), but i dont shoot much anymore....


you need either the A7r or A7s (low light king of the universe!)

or grab that new a77mkII


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Which macro lens? Cause the magnification tubes add is relevant to the original focal length. A 1:1 50 or 60mm Macro, can become almost 2:1 with all of those.
> The 100mm or longer get much less of the effect (but maintain a more comfortable working distance regardless).
> 
> Longer lenses see better magnification increases adding a 500D or equivalent closeup lens filter, than adding extension tubes.


I have a canon100mm f/2.8. I could always get a little bit closer on some shots and don't feel to crop.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hokiealumnus*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Cool extension tubes, how much were they? I may get some for the fun of it...use it with my macro lens for even closer focus on pcb shots.
> 
> 
> 
> They are only ~$45. These were given to me, but I think this is the kit on eBay. I'm told this set can be finnicky with heavier lenses and using all three stacked, loosing connection. I didn't have a problem with the nifty, which is light as a feather.
> 
> Glad your camera seems OK!
Click to expand...

thanks!


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> so ive run into a good problem. i have ~2k to spend on either a laptop or a new camera.....
> 
> i use my laptop lots but it is still running spectacularly (upgrade would be a macbook retina).....
> 
> ive been thinking about replacing my dated fullframe (probably a7r), but i dont shoot much anymore....


Just keep the $2K - if possible ?









Or book a trip for you and your camera, workout some excuse to get together...










Or leave the camera behind, and go with your better half


----------



## kbros

*People who like being photographed in natural light..*

..should be taken outside and shot.


----------



## Scott1541

Yay, the light seal replacement foam has finally arrived, 2 weeks after I ordered and 1 missing package later


----------



## Conspiracy

sooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

got a new job offer today. still waiting for the paper work but in a few weeks i will start my new job working as the full time videographer at my alma mater, Clayton State University.

on another note i should be sending nifty to angry butcher tomorrow and will eventually process my photos and share them


----------



## Jixr

Congrats on the new job.

From my last wedding job, the pastor ( he does deaf weddings ) for the wedding wanted my information, since there is not a whole lot of photographers that know sign language, so I kinda found a neat little niche to fall into. He says often times someone has to translate for the photographer, and since they can't read sign language they often miss the shots and the bride and groom come out unhappy.

Already getting a few calls for jobs this fall which is exciting!

Also, I know some of you here are car guys, and I'm hoping to buy myself a car this week. 1 month without a car sucks, and I can finally go out and finish a photo journal project i've been working on for awhile.


----------



## kbros

Ooooh buy something cool.


----------



## OmarCCX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> Ooooh buy something cool.


Drugs!

Finally decided what camera to buy after selling my 40D + 17-50 2.8 early this year. I'm going for a NEX 6, with a Sigma 30 ƒ2.8 and lots of manual glass (Rokinon 85 ƒ1.4 and maybe 12mm ƒ2.0).
Want a camera that I can leave in my car and just carry all the time without having to use a bag.


----------



## Jixr

Is a mazda3 cool, cooler than my old VW anyway.

I'm turning into an old man, I'd rather have the eco model than the speed3.

( still never giving up my clutch though )

and @Omar drug er bad em'kay?


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> sooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
> 
> got a new job offer today. still waiting for the paper work but in a few weeks i will start my new job working as the full time videographer at my alma mater, Clayton State University.
> 
> on another note i should be sending nifty to angry butcher tomorrow and will eventually process my photos and share them


Nice! Good luck. I just got a new job today too! haha

And I am discussing a BIG product photography project with a client now for fishing tackle sales. Gonna make some nice $ now. 

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> Congrats on the new job.
> 
> From my last wedding job, the pastor ( he does deaf weddings ) for the wedding wanted my information, since there is not a whole lot of photographers that know sign language, so I kinda found a neat little niche to fall into. He says often times someone has to translate for the photographer, and since they can't read sign language they often miss the shots and the bride and groom come out unhappy.
> 
> Already getting a few calls for jobs this fall which is exciting!
> 
> Also, I know some of you here are car guys, and I'm hoping to buy myself a car this week. 1 month without a car sucks, and I can finally go out and finish a photo journal project i've been working on for awhile.


Cool, hope you luck on a new car. My mom's old civic I got off of her has treated us very well over the last 15 years and is still going strong. I am a honda fan when it comes to low maintenance and reliability.


----------



## jameyscott

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> Is a mazda3 cool, cooler than my old VW anyway.
> 
> I'm turning into an old man, I'd rather have the eco model than the speed3.
> 
> ( still never giving up my clutch though )
> 
> and @Omar drug er bad em'kay?


----------



## OmarCCX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> Is a mazda3 cool, cooler than my old VW anyway.
> 
> I'm turning into an old man, I'd rather have the eco model than the speed3.
> 
> ( still never giving up my clutch though )
> 
> and @Omar drug er bad em'kay?


I owned an '05 Mazda 3 2.3 and hated it to death. 70% of the problems I had with it were the autotragic gearbox though.


----------



## Jixr

i'm looking at an '11, 6-speed 2.5L. Its the same gearbox they used on the older speeds, so its built for a bigger engine than it has, so it should last me a good while. ( the shift throws in the thing are super tiny, i'm used to driving manual trucks )

so its not too terribly off topic, pic of my old car.

by looking at it you'd never guess it has over 375k miles on it.

I had to get it towed off to the giant parking lot in the sky this weekend, kinda sad to see it go.

But if things go to plan, I'll have a car either tomorrow or wednesday.


----------



## kbros

So sadness, another b5 with 300k + though, still good in my book. They're tanks.
And yes the mazdaspeed 3 is kewl. They got those cute lil mazda faces.
This is a miata but same idea.


----------



## kbros

Also, I bought this tripod yesterday, it's supposed to be really good for the money. Although there's no level, I'll have to glue one on or something. lol


----------



## Jixr

Yeah I didn't get the speed3, they are fun little cars, but I don't want to have to get back in the habit of having to rebuild the turbos every 40-60k miles and deal with all that.

But this is my new set of wheels instead!
2011, with the 2.5 and 6 speed stick.
Overall in pretty good condition. Wasn't a fan of the white when I was looking at some other 3's, but its starting to grow on me.

lazy pic, but I'm so tired, and sometime this week I'll get some proper shots.
http://s112.photobucket.com/user/clayfinley/media/IMG_2268_zps3e781166.jpg.html


----------



## jameyscott

Looks nice! I'd really like a new set of wheels, but meh. I really don't drive at all and there is really no reason for me to get something when mine runs "fine".


----------



## teh_HyDr0iD

Seeing as we are posting pictures of our new cars. Here's mine, I picked it up last week. It's very dirty in the pictures, but a detail is happening on the first available weekend. So here it is my 2003 Opel Astra SRi Turbo in Arden Blue! I have named her Ahyoka.


----------



## Eggs and bacon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> Congrats on the new job.
> 
> From my last wedding job, the pastor ( he does deaf weddings ) for the wedding wanted my information, since there is not a whole lot of photographers that know sign language, so I kinda found a neat little niche to fall into. He says often times someone has to translate for the photographer, and since they can't read sign language they often miss the shots and the bride and groom come out unhappy.
> 
> Already getting a few calls for jobs this fall which is exciting!
> 
> Also, I know some of you here are car guys, and I'm hoping to buy myself a car this week. 1 month without a car sucks, and I can finally go out and finish a photo journal project i've been working on for awhile.


That is literally the definition of niche. Congrats on the new car and the possibility of recurring camera work.


----------



## Jixr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jameyscott*
> 
> Looks nice! I'd really like a new set of wheels, but meh. I really don't drive at all and there is really no reason for me to get something when mine runs "fine".


Thanks, I'm excited about it, its lot of fun and in really good shape.

The only thing It needs is some basic maintenance type stuff and I need to replace the belt ASAP, and apparently you have to take the AC compressor off this car to do that? Never had to do that before.


----------



## hokiealumnus

Broke out the extension tubes last night for a few minutes of fun. Tubes plus external flash = good times.









The setup:










The result:

70D, EF 50mm f/1.8 @ f/3.2, 1/250 sec, ISO 2500

Green Stone I by hokiealumnus, on Flickr

I'll post the better version in the rate photos thread.


----------



## dmanstasiu

At first I thought you took a close-up of an old piece of gum


----------



## LaBestiaHumana

I love my GoPro, haven't really got much time to work on my projects but here is a tour of Chicago.


Spoiler: GoPro: Chicago on 2 Wheels!


----------



## Scott1541

That video makes me want a harley







Can't have one though because I don't have a motorcycle licence, and to get those there's a couple more hoops you have to jump through compared to car licences. I already have a car licence so I can't justify spending money getting a bike one while I'm still a student, might be something for the future...


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Hey guys looking for some help please, I want to find out my 1100D's shutter count - who knows of a decent piece of free/downloadable software that will find out my shutter count? I was searching all of my lunch break and still not found anything


----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> Hey guys looking for some help please, I want to find out my 1100D's shutter count - who knows of a decent piece of free/downloadable software that will find out my shutter count? I was searching all of my lunch break and still not found anything


Magic Lantern.


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JKuhn*
> 
> Magic Lantern.


I thought there was a warning on magic lantern with 1100Ds because it wasn't fully tested and might ruin the camera?


----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> I thought there was a warning on magic lantern with 1100Ds because it wasn't fully tested and might ruin the camera?


I wouldn't worry too much. Basically they're saying it because th 1100D version isn't finished, so it's considered an unstable build. Just update your firmware to the latest version, and install one of the nightly builds. I've been runnign it on my 1100D for a few months now.


----------



## hokiealumnus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> Hey guys looking for some help please, I want to find out my 1100D's shutter count - who knows of a decent piece of free/downloadable software that will find out my shutter count? I was searching all of my lunch break and still not found anything


http://www.overclock.net/t/1460738/whats-your-shutter-count/0_20

There is a download link in the first post. If it doesn't work we can try to find it again. I have a copy too somewhere I think.

I wouldn't go with a potentially unstable version of magic lantern just to find your shutter count. There are plenty of reasons TO use magic lantern, but if this is all you're after that's probably not the best solution.


----------



## Scott1541

Can't you just upload an image to a website to check shutter count with canon cameras?


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JKuhn*
> 
> I wouldn't worry too much. Basically they're saying it because th 1100D version isn't finished, so it's considered an unstable build. Just update your firmware to the latest version, and install one of the nightly builds. I've been runnign it on my 1100D for a few months now.


I only got the camera probably about a month ago with my GF, I don't really wanna mess around with firmware and stuff. If it was just mine then I'd probably do it but it's not so I won't.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> Can't you just upload an image to a website to check shutter count with canon cameras?


Not the 1100D, I tried
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hokiealumnus*
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1460738/whats-your-shutter-count/0_20
> 
> There is a download link in the first post. If it doesn't work we can try to find it again. I have a copy too somewhere I think.
> 
> I wouldn't go with a potentially unstable version of magic lantern just to find your shutter count. There are plenty of reasons TO use magic lantern, but if this is all you're after that's probably not the best solution.


the link in there doesn't work unfortunately. If you have it that would be great, otherwise I could PM SeanWebster and see if he still has it.


----------



## Jixr

there are a few other ways too, connect your camera to your comptuer and some free software can tell you.

Also, I put my canon 50 1.4 up for sale, and I got an offer for trading it for a sigma30 1.4, which is the lens I was going to buy once I sold the 50, so I'll be getting that if I can. the guy who wants to trade won't be back in town till the middle of next month, so meh.


----------



## jjsoviet

Oh hey there's actually a club for photography here, go figure









Camera:
Sony NEX-5T

Lenses:
Minolta MD 35-70mm f/3.5 Macro
Minolta AF Maxxum 50mm f/1.4
Minolta AF Maxxum 100-200mm f/4.5
Sigma DN Art 30mm f/2.8

Accessories:
Sony LA-EA2 A-Mount Adapter

Bags:
Lowepro Event Messenger 150
Tenba DNA 15



Spoiler: Gear Pics












I'm in dire need of a decent tripod though. Any advice on a sub-$200 one that would be sturdy enough to handle my hear? Can't seem to decide on which specific model because there are so many across various brands.


----------



## mz-n10

i am pretty sure there is no hard firmware flash on ML. It uses the stock canon "firmware update" as an exploit to run extra code from the SD card, nothing is actually installed or modified to your camera. So if you pull the memory card you essentially remove ML.

If you are worried, then use a spare SD card find out what you need to do (i dont know if ML gives shutter count) then reformat that card.


----------



## Jixr

keep an eye out for sales at fry's, I got a carbon fiber vanguard tripod that retails for over $250 for about $60 on sale. epic deal.


----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> i am pretty sure there is no hard firmware flash on ML. It uses the stock canon "firmware update" as an exploit to run extra code from the SD card, nothing is actually installed or modified to your camera. So if you pull the memory card you essentially remove ML.
> 
> If you are worried, then use a spare SD card find out what you need to do (i dont know if ML gives shutter count) then reformat that card.


You're right on the first part, but just formatting the card can give issues if I'm not mistaken.


----------



## jjsoviet

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> keep an eye out for sales at fry's, I got a carbon fiber vanguard tripod that retails for over $250 for about $60 on sale. epic deal.


Nice, I should look out for those steals.


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> I only got the camera probably about a month ago with my GF, I don't really wanna mess around with firmware and stuff. If it was just mine then I'd probably do it but it's not so I won't.
> Not the 1100D, I tried
> the link in there doesn't work unfortunately. If you have it that would be great, otherwise I could PM SeanWebster and see if he still has it.


EOSinfo should work and EOScount, but you need IE for that. I think EOScount charges you now, but not sure.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *JKuhn*
> 
> I wouldn't worry too much. Basically they're saying it because th 1100D version isn't finished, so it's considered an unstable build. Just update your firmware to the latest version, and install one of the nightly builds. I've been runnign it on my 1100D for a few months now.
> 
> 
> 
> I only got the camera probably about a month ago with my GF, I don't really wanna mess around with firmware and stuff. If it was just mine then I'd probably do it but it's not so I won't.
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> Can't you just upload an image to a website to check shutter count with canon cameras?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not the 1100D, I tried
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *hokiealumnus*
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1460738/whats-your-shutter-count/0_20
> 
> There is a download link in the first post. If it doesn't work we can try to find it again. I have a copy too somewhere I think.
> 
> I wouldn't go with a potentially unstable version of magic lantern just to find your shutter count. There are plenty of reasons TO use magic lantern, but if this is all you're after that's probably not the best solution.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> the link in there doesn't work unfortunately. If you have it that would be great, otherwise I could PM SeanWebster and see if he still has it.
Click to expand...

I fixed the link for you.


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> I fixed the link for you.


Oh great thanks!


----------



## Scott1541

Film camera number 2 is now operable again


----------



## kbros

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> there are a few other ways too, connect your camera to your comptuer and some free software can tell you.
> 
> Also, I put my canon 50 1.4 up for sale, and I got an offer for trading it for a sigma30 1.4, which is the lens I was going to buy once I sold the 50, so I'll be getting that if I can. the guy who wants to trade won't be back in town till the middle of next month, so meh.


Sweet. I want one of those sigma 30s, is it the "art" version?


----------



## Jixr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> Sweet. I want one of those sigma 30s, is it the "art" version?


no, just the regular, but its still a nice lens. ( the dude is supposed to email me again later )

I need to get back on my camera, dealing with no car for a month and trying to get a loan for a new one has been eating up all my time. I can only take so many photos from the inside of my apartment.


----------



## r34p3rex

I'm back!!!!









Just picked up a 400mm f/5.6L for a steal


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r34p3rex*
> 
> I'm back!!!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just picked up a 400mm f/5.6L for a steal


Omg, just came home after renting one for the weekend (and what I hope to be a successful whale watching trip).

What's a steal - of you don't mind?
Renting it for $22 over the weekend (single day) is also pretty good for something my current lifestyle won't allow me to use more than a day or two a month....


----------



## Eggs and bacon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Omg, just came home after renting one for the weekend (and what I hope to be a successful whale watching trip).
> 
> What's a steal - of you don't mind?
> Renting it for $22 over the weekend (single day) is also pretty good for something my current lifestyle won't allow me to use more than a day or two a month....


$22 a day, that is a really good price compared to Australia. Not really comparable, but when I was looking at renting a 4x5 it as was about 100$ for 2 days.


----------



## Aussiejuggalo

Any love for micro four thirds?









Camera:

Olympus PEN EP-5

Lenses:

Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 40-150mm f4.0-5.6 R

Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 17mm f1.8 Wide Prime

Should have the 17mm this week, thank god trying to take any decent pics with the 40mm was a bad idea I'm a photography n00b

I wont disgrace this thread with my horrible pics


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Eggs and bacon*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Omg, just came home after renting one for the weekend (and what I hope to be a successful whale watching trip).
> 
> What's a steal - of you don't mind?
> Renting it for $22 over the weekend (single day) is also pretty good for something my current lifestyle won't allow me to use more than a day or two a month....
> 
> 
> 
> $22 a day, that is a really good price compared to Australia. Not really comparable, but when I was looking at renting a 4x5 it as was about 100$ for 2 days.
Click to expand...

Bodies / cameras are far more expensive. Mind you I live in Los Angeles, were there is lots of demand for professional grade equipment, so you can find pretty much everything relatively competitively priced (although quite a few local brick & mortar shops died over the last few years).

As a comparison: a 5D III is $200 a day, a 6D & 5D II are $150. 1Ds IIIs, despite being dated and not really competitive vs the newer 6D/5D3 sensors, is $300.

For LF, a Sinar P2 will be around $150 with lens and accessories, but a Toyo A or G can be as low as $55 with lens and if you want to play with film MF a Mamiya 7II goes for $40 and a Hassy 503CW + 80mm 2.8 will be $45 - guess nobody goes for UW MF, as a 903SWC w/ 38mm biogon is just $35 a day.

Lenses are a steal by comparison, with pretty much any zoom or cream of short primes rentable below $40-50. From Canon Ls to Leica M.
You have to go to something in the class of the 400 2.8 L II, 300 II 2.8 IS or 200mm 1.8 L to drop more than $50 a day.
And getting a $7,300 MSRP 300 2.8 IS for $55 a day is not that bad - actually its good when you need $40 to get a $2,200 24mm TSE II L









At any rate, you have to have good insurance to get those, or get ready to charge your CC for the full amount, to be refunded when you return the equipment...









If you are lucky and you can reserve some of those lenses whenever you want, you technically don't need to buy them ever...I mean, really, even if you use a 300 2.8 L IS every other weekend, you would need 5+ years to cover buying it new. Getting a long 400 or 500 for the random air-show or birding excursion / vacation trip, is also pretty competitive.


----------



## r34p3rex

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Omg, just came home after renting one for the weekend (and what I hope to be a successful whale watching trip).
> 
> What's a steal - of you don't mind?
> Renting it for $22 over the weekend (single day) is also pretty good for something my current lifestyle won't allow me to use more than a day or two a month....


Got it off a friend for $500







They usually go for $900 or so used


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r34p3rex*
> 
> Got it off a friend for $500
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They usually go for $900 or so used


Yep...that's 70-200 4 L non IS pricing there...good friend


----------



## JKuhn

Ok, I'm once again in need of advice.

Today someone I met during a recent music festival approached me about shooting his wedding. Since I'm not a pro and also have no experience (even simple portraiture), I told him I'll think about it, so he'll contact me again soon.

What do you people think of it? Also, what gear will I need, and what can be considered "nice to have"?

Also, some people clearly have too much money:

What I saw today


----------



## r34p3rex

Pick up an 85mm 1.8.. makes a great portrait lens.


----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r34p3rex*
> 
> Pick up an 85mm 1.8.. makes a great portrait lens.


Ok, and what about flashes, etc? Sorry for peppering you with questions, abut as I said I'm pretty clueless as to what I'll need. Anyway, I'll also talk to a local shop/studio. Hopefully they can give me some info as this person evidently wants to avoid paying pro prices, and I'm therefor not really a threat to them.

EDIT: I had a look at the 85 f/1.8, and I must say I expected a higher price.









Link

It's in Pretoria though, so there's also transport to take into consideration. I don't know what it'll cost locally.


----------



## r34p3rex

Yah it's a very good lens.. of course the 85mm 1.2L is super amazing.. but for the price, the 1.8 is a sweet deal. Get a speedlite or two for lighting. You can also look into getting a tripod and a softbox for your secondary lighting (mount the extra speedlites on the tripod).

I'd suggest checking out the forums at photography-on-the.net.. great resource and you can find alot of used gear there!


----------



## JKuhn

Speaking of a second flash, I assume I'll need some sort of add-on for that? As stated in my sig, I have a Canon 400D and 1100D.

I have a cheap tripod, am I right in assuming I'll need more than one? I don't know what wedding photographers charge here, but it's clear that if I agree it won't be cheap.

So currently my list is:

Canon 85mm f/1.8 R4400 +
1 or 2 Speedlites R2900 each according to a quick search (430EX)
Extra tripod (?) R350 if I go cheap
Softbox R?
Insurance R?


----------



## Jixr

just get the guys info, and tell him that you've never shot a wedding before, and let him know that you're not a professional. My first wedding job went the same way, but the clients were understandable and we worked together so I could deliver images they were happy with, adn still be in their budget.


----------



## kbros

Took about 360 shots today at a euro show up in Burlington,VT. Haven't even looked at any of em because 4 hour ride.


----------



## jjsoviet

By the way, do I need to PM the OP to update the list of members?


----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> just get the guys info, and tell him that you've never shot a wedding before, and let him know that you're not a professional. My first wedding job went the same way, but the clients were understandable and we worked together so I could deliver images they were happy with, adn still be in their budget.


OK, thanks. I'm just a bit hesitant seeing how DPS described wedding photography as a highly specialised field that not everyone can do. But I'll talk to him about it, and see.


----------



## Scott1541

Anyone can do it, but it's whether or not they're any good at it that matters. I've seen a very mediocre photog posting on local Facebook pages offering his wedding services for just short of £300. Little portfolio work on show other than the last wedding job he did, which compared to a real pro left a lot to be desired.


----------



## Conspiracy

anyone can shoot a wedding. but experienced photogs really can shoot it proper. its more than just grabbing a few shots. there are key moments you HAVE to capture and you want to capture them in special ways that are meaningful. shots of the back of peoples heads arent keepers.

i view weddings like sports. you have to know what is happening before it happens so you can set yourself up to get the moment otherwise you will miss it and there is no going back and trying again. this one tip i give to most sports photogs first starting out, general rule of thumb is if i cant see the persons face and the shot doesnt tell some form of story about what is going on then its not a meaningful shot


----------



## r34p3rex

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> Took about 360 shots today at a euro show up in Burlington,VT. Haven't even looked at any of em because 4 hour ride.


Wolfsgart? Have a few friends attending haha


----------



## Sean Webster

Forgot how much I like candid/street photos. Gotta make some time to do some before my trip to the flash memory summit next week.


----------



## ace8uk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Forgot how much I like candid/street photos. Gotta make some time to do some before my trip to the flash memory summit next week.


I am a huge fan of candid photography. When I was in Paris a few weeks back I did some with a friend, we got speaking to some interesting people. I think it's great to try and talk to some of your subjects at least, the engagement has been somewhat lost on street photography these days, everyone just buys a telephoto and snaps a shot witout saying a word, and the story is somewhat lost. I'm guilty of it myself quite often.

I went to see the new documentary, finding Vivian Maier, when I was over there too, very interesting film and an amazing candid photographer. Waiting for her exhibition to come back to London.


----------



## jackeyjoe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ace8uk*
> 
> I am a huge fan of candid photography. When I was in Paris a few weeks back I did some with a friend, we got speaking to some interesting people. I think it's great to try and talk to some of your subjects at least, the engagement has been somewhat lost on street photography these days, everyone just buys a telephoto and snaps a shot witout saying a word, and the story is somewhat lost. I'm guilty of it myself quite often.
> 
> I went to see the new documentary, finding Vivian Maier, when I was over there too, very interesting film and an amazing candid photographer. Waiting for her exhibition to come back to London.


I would love to give it a go, maybe when I go back to Canada... town here isn't big enough


----------



## Jixr

Well the guy who wanted to trade a sigma 30 for my canon 50 bailed, but I ended up picking up another photojob this weekend. Didn't really make any money though, took what I made and paid a guy to instal some speakers in my new car, but hey it works out. Had to take pictures of the worlds most stubborn 3 year old. Not easy lol.


----------



## kbros

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r34p3rex*
> 
> Wolfsgart? Have a few friends attending haha


Yup, haha it was sweet.


----------



## ace8uk




----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ace8uk*


zack arias is a funny dude. had the pleasure of having a very very similar conversation about the silliness of sensor size and even brought TV video into the discussion with 1/3" and 2/3" sensors.

but i definitely do this every time someone at best buy tries to argue about FF vs crop


----------



## Sean Webster




----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*


Someone in our club bought a 1DIV with lenses (he said it was worth around R150 000 if I remember right), aparrently the old owner moved to Nikon because Canon's best camerra wasn't good enough. The problem was though, when this guy looked at the camera, it was set in such a way that "a Brownie Box would work better". You'd think if someone spent that much money, he'd at least know how to set his camera.


----------



## Conspiracy

that happens a lot lol.

ive met people in photo groups with 1DIV and 1DX's with the cameras set in basically almost full auto which i didnt think was possible until i saw them setting them to Aperture priority at the lowest value and then auto ISO lol


----------



## Scott1541

Aperture priority is as close as I go to auto, and even then I always use manual ISO


----------



## jameyscott

As a photo newb, I occasionally use auto to get some okay quality sgots, but if I have time to mess around with settings I always do. The again, I'm only using a t3i with a t4i kit lens so... yeah.


----------



## r34p3rex

I shoot aperture priority for the most part (candid shots).. but full manual when shooting a fixed object/scene


----------



## Aussiejuggalo

Wait so your not ment to use full auto mode with expensive camera?









I'm a total n00b but even I know if your spending money on a camera with all these controls the least you can do is learn how to use it...


----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Aussiejuggalo*
> 
> Wait so your not ment to use full auto mode with expensive camera?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm a total n00b but even I know if your spending money on a camera with all these controls the least you can do is learn how to use it...


You should've seen the us when he told us about that.

And I don't normally use full manual (unless it's for something like the moon), but I never set it to Auto. I use Aperture or Shutter priority, and manual ISO.


----------



## jjsoviet

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r34p3rex*
> 
> I shoot aperture priority for the most part (candid shots).. but full manual when shooting a fixed object/scene


I go full manual (even the lens!) on my shots except when subjects are too fast or the lighting conditions aren't favorable. It's not as intuitive as setting it on Aperture priority but I do like the granular control over convenience.

Of course this also leads to me forgetting to reset all my settings the day before so one day I forgot to put the ISO down from 800 on a sunny trip to Central Texas. :v


----------



## jameyscott

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Aussiejuggalo*
> 
> Wait so your not ment to use full auto mode with expensive camera?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm a total n00b but even I know if your spending money on a camera with all these controls the least you can do is learn how to use it...


-snip- read that wrong.


----------



## Aussiejuggalo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JKuhn*
> 
> And I don't normally use full manual (unless it's for something like the moon), but I never set it to Auto. I use Aperture or Shutter priority, and manual ISO.


I'm a total n00b when it comes to cameras but with my E-P5 I mostly sit in aperture priority, I do leave my ISO at 200 as much as I can and just play with the aperture, white balance and sometimes manual focus









Kinda shameful tho I bought this awesome camera and lens to just take pics of my computers


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ace8uk*


Well, he is not wrong per se, but he is comparing apples to oranges in so many levels, it is not even funny. It would take hours to write down a proper response, but in a nutshell he is using a double standard in his argument (APS-C vs FF, cause the bigger camera systems he is referring to are massively different from SLRs - even a 6x7 SLR).

But so are companies that abuse tech specs in every possible way: e.g. a 50ish mm 1.2 for APS-C is not equivalent to a 85 1.2 in anything but FOV. Period.

APS-C sensors are 1/2 in area those of FF. It is significant enough. You don't get that when you are looking at sensor / film sizes side by side, but it is true.
Much like you don't get that a 27" 1080p has roughly 1/2 the pixels of a 27" 1440p. Yes, I know, a 27" class 4K would have 4x the pixels of any 1080p, but the step from 1080p to 1440p is more significant - due to visual aquity limitations - than that of 1440p -> 4K.

In a similar way, the FF brings a significant enough boost over a APS-C sensor, where the jump to a 645 class D-SLR from FF is not as massive, despite the fact that APS-C -> 645D is probably massive.

What you lose with bigger systems, is portability, fast lenses, fast shutter speeds
Btw, true shutter speed of the "amazing" in ergonomics and shape and everything X-T1 he so dearly promotes - not 100% for free I presume - aka the Xsync speed is 1/180s...that's kinda pathetic for such an expensive and "professional" APS-C camera, don't you think? EOS M is 1/200s ffs, EOS 7D & D7xxx is 1/250s.

Also lenses for either APS-C & m43 systems are HEDIUSLY EXPENSIVE. IT IS EN EMBARASHMENT to have lenses that need 1/2~1/4 the glass for the same FOV / Aperture, being marketed at comparable prices with FF/35mm lenses.

I really like APS-C and m43 - yes, you can get pro-like results from them, but not comparing apples to apples.
Also, you cannot compare apples to apples with non SLR or mirrorless systems - i.e. good luck finding fast lenses or shooting handheld with a LF camera - even a 6x7 SLR...plus those are massively bigger than 35mm SLRs, much bigger than the latter are from APS-C mirrorless designs. And he also conveniently forgets that there are FF/35mm equiv. mirrorless & RF cameras too so much for size differences @ that point - at least as far as the body goes.

That leaves the lenses, but, again, its not apples to apples. If you are satisfied with a 55 1.2 @ APS-C wide open for sharpness and DOF, you are technically satisfied with a 85 1.8~2.8 stopped down 1~1.2 of additional stops on FF. ISO can be increased at least the same % of stops to compensate. Guess which system will be sharper, more detailed and having better DR - APPLES TO APPLES?

Cause f/stop @ lenses with massively different circles of coverage are not comparable, and ISOs on sensors with massively different areas are not comparable.
At any rate, he is making his argument from an authority position, but not be fooled: yes, holding a diamond tipped scalpel won't make you a sergeant, yes, a sergeant can operate on your eye with an X-Acto if that's all that's left, but in the end, for the really critical stuff (not your random snapshots) we all want to get the best tool for the job.
And apples to apples, FF is notably better than APS-C of similar generations, and massively more practical than almost anything bearing a bigger sensor/capturing area device.


----------



## ace8uk

Ah, don't worry I know all the details. I just thought it was somewhat funny. I also agreed that too many people worry about their camera and the technical side than the composition side.


----------



## jackeyjoe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r34p3rex*
> 
> I shoot aperture priority for the most part (candid shots).. but full manual when shooting a fixed object/scene


I have been shooting manual(with autoISO) lately, pumping up the shutter speed and changing the aperture as needed... it is hard to take photos of kids, they move too much and too quickly for aperture priority to be effective








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ace8uk*
> 
> Ah, don't worry I know all the details. I just thought it was somewhat funny. I also agreed that too many people worry about their camera and the technical side than the composition side.


I mean everybody lusts over better gear, so there would always be that factor... but outside of extreme conditions(very low light) the person behind the camera matters much more


----------



## pcfoo

There are millions of ways to "justify" getting better equipment - being GAS or not actually "fueling" the decision, and I strongly believe that a camera with bigger sensor & more features will make you a better photographer as much as a more powerful car makes you a better driver (i.e. not that much, and could even work against you).

That said, "dismissing" an expensive piece of kit, for another pretty darn expensive piece of kit, requires better justification.
Compromises are made in one area, to sow benefits in another, we have to be honest about it and not just say "small sensors got better" - as if larger sensors stood still.
Sure, there are diminishing returns after one point, but we are not there yet - if anything there is more headroom for improvement on larger sensors, given the physical limitations of glass tech and the maximum resolving power attainable.

Sure, if money is not an issue, I would love to have 2, 3 and why not 4 different systems to mess with, but that would be me toying - I am Greek, but in this case, it is not the "Greek you should beware of bearing gifts" and evangelizing with foobar examples - you know, like "I cannot get my FF through customs, but I will be passing my lights"...talking about camels through the eye's of the needle and non sequitur fallacies, or comparing tools that being used beyond f/8 are taking severe hit in resolving power and are optimized for f2.8 or brighter apertures, with those that were used & optimized for f/64 shots.

This is a site 100% about GAS, but at least lets get some facts right. Even if we don't go to Vegas for shoots.


----------



## Conspiracy

zack arias' video was directed more towards the community as a whole and less towards strictly calling out real professionals that preach FF over crop. the issue of FF vs crop is a widespread misunderstanding and even more so i see worse among non-pros and extreme hobyists or enthusiasts that have some understanding but not complete understanding of the differences.

i find humor with people i encounter around atlanta that preach FF vs crop but when you do a side by side comparison they cant see the difference


----------



## pcfoo

After a point you cannot tell. You can "rig" a myriad of situations where a APS-C and even a m43 or smaller sensor camera is very hard to tell apart. It is more likely all about light: properly lit scenes will be captured nicely on most mediums. Sure, you can pixel peep high contrast areas etc, but it is hard to tell apart when very low ISO is used in the smaller sensors etc.

Heck, ppl have lots of videos showing you what you can "trick" people taking "pro" grade pics with smartphones that are hard to tell apart - at least in interwebs sizes.






Also, the engagement of a person with photography, means nothing to his education around the technical portion of photography. There are many professional photographers that understand little to nothing about FF vs. APS-C etc - just happen to be "shooting the best" - either the best according to their personal biases (eg. the best Nikon, cause Nikon was always the best, right? - countless "pros" don't think further than that) or the most expensive they could find on the shelf.

Much of the FF vs crop discussion is valid, but most people can only tell differences cause pictures are compared straight out of the camera (i.e. no proper development / editing) and are viewed on large resolutions and 100% (i.e. pixel peeping). If you really want to "sensor-block them", just hand them quality prints - well prepped files, printed on high quality machines.

Where I disagree - again - with dedpxl's oversimplification, is that his comparison is:

1) not apples to apples
2) involves machines in the high to very high end of the expense spectrum for most amateurs.

FF vs. crop debate is not a real issue for those that can afford a high-end system on either side...
As I've said above, if I had that kind of disposable income, I would love to have both a high end SLR and a mirrorless system for walk arounds and looking hip - and why not throwing in the mix a MF digital system to toy around.

Ofc then, I would be nice and cool, selling my epeen on the forums and writing about benefits on either system...why not making a video on my youtube channel smacking those that "don't know what they talk about".

I would not choke on the fact that 50ish mm 1.2 lenses for the XT1 are more expensive than a Sigma 50 ART, despite the latter being a far more expensive lens to design and produce - forget about real life resolving power on a D810 or A7x etc body.

Meh...too much ink spilled already.
Fact is, sensor size matters. What you do with it is more important, but please. Horses for courses.


----------



## Jixr

I know some of you guys are car guys, and this weekend I'm going to detail out my new mazda and get some cool shots of it.

I'm generally not a fan of car shots, as basically its
step1: take picture
step 2: crank up the clarity
step 3: ?????
step 4: profit.

but... my first new car, so I gotta get some pics of it.
( after I put in the new fog lights and change the belts and oil on it anyway )


----------



## hokiealumnus

I'd follow Sean's guide: http://www.overclock.net/t/1449193/guide-automotive-photography-lighting/0_20


----------



## JKuhn

Last weekend while I was at a local festival (the one with the Lambo), I spilled a soft drink on my 1100D (I only noticed it a bit later, and immediately got something to wipe it off). I didn't think much of it, but now I noticed that the back focus, focus point and Display buttons aren't as smooth as they should be. Is there a way I can fix this, or will I have to live with it?


----------



## Jixr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JKuhn*
> 
> Last weekend while I was at a local festival (the one with the Lambo), I spilled a soft drink on my 1100D (I only noticed it a bit later, and immediately got something to wipe it off). I didn't think much of it, but now I noticed that the back focus, focus point and Display buttons aren't as smooth as they should be. Is there a way I can fix this, or will I have to live with it?


the only thing i would do is add a drop of rubbing alcohol on the buttons to try to clean them out a bit.

( i'm obviously not responsible for the outcome )


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> I know some of you guys are car guys, and this weekend I'm going to detail out my new mazda and get some cool shots of it.
> 
> I'm generally not a fan of car shots, as basically its
> step1: take picture
> step 2: crank up the clarity
> step 3: ?????
> step 4: profit.
> 
> but... my first new car, so I gotta get some pics of it.
> ( after I put in the new fog lights and change the belts and oil on it anyway )


1. Find cool location

2. Go to location during golden hour

3. Take photos at different angles at said time and place

4. Go home and edit (Look at this guy: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HMUpjozJO1c and this one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mVMihL4vFxY)

5. Cry a little after finding out your photos aren't as good as commercial photographers' work

6. ?????

7. Profit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hokiealumnus*
> 
> I'd follow Sean's guide: http://www.overclock.net/t/1449193/guide-automotive-photography-lighting/0_20


I forgot about that...I should do a new update on other techniques and information on composing and editing I have seen by the pros. There really isn't that much out there on it...plus I can probably get some cool shots during the making of it. Like one guy I follow does a lot of multi exposure work for his shots, another mainly uses a light stick, etc. There are tools like virtual rig to edit the background to make it look like the car is moving and lens flare brushes you can use to make cool effects.


----------



## pcfoo

false
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JKuhn*
> 
> Last weekend while I was at a local festival (the one with the Lambo), I spilled a soft drink on my 1100D (I only noticed it a bit later, and immediately got something to wipe it off). I didn't think much of it, but now I noticed that the back focus, focus point and Display buttons aren't as smooth as they should be. Is there a way I can fix this, or will I have to live with it?


There are always options!

Take battery off, use alcohol (doesn't have to be uber clean, just to dissolve the sugars - does it better than distilled water and whatnot) -> use a cotton swab to locally "rinse" the button and hope to dissolve enough of the gum. Do @ your own risk.
Crack the body open, at least the buttons on the back are usually easier to reach than those on the top (where you often have to take everything apart). Do the above more carefully. Do @ your own risk.
Sent to CPS for professional cleaning - will probably cost you an arm and a leg if you explain what happened exactly, but maybe not?
Have a local camera shop do it for you
Live with it


----------



## hokiealumnus

Here's some more fun with the macro tubes and off-camera flash.

The setup (apologies for the phone pic...the stone is under the lens there).










The photo:
70D, EF-S 18-135 IS @ 135mm, f/20, 1/5 sec, ISO 1000, off-camera flash fired










...and 100% crop.


----------



## JKuhn

You're making me want to use my reversing ring again. The only problems are that I don't have an external flash and I have to focus by moving the camera, so no tripod.


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JKuhn*
> 
> You're making me want to use my reversing ring again. The only problems are that I don't have an external flash and I have to focus by moving the camera, so no tripod.


Or a tripod with a focusing rail which is how its done









Doesn't need to be expensive.


----------



## ljason8eg

Well I finally tracked down a Tamron 150-600! Was up in Roseville taking care of a few things and Action Camera just happened to have one in stock. Lucky me.


----------



## ljason8eg

Of course today is the one overcast day in California during the summer, but I'm still pleasantly surprised with the first shots I've taken especially for the lighting conditions and ISO that was used. Now to find some birds or race cars.

https://flic.kr/s/aHsk1soFVt


----------



## ace8uk

Interesting, I'm keeping my eye on this lens myself. I want something with longer reach than my 70-200 for birding, and the new 150-600 would be ideal. I think I'd have to rent one and see how it compares to the 80-400. Keep us updated though, I'm particularly interested in the AF speed for BIF shots; I see you have a 70-200 as well so any comparisons would be very much appreciated!


----------



## werds

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> Of course today is the one overcast day in California during the summer, but I'm still pleasantly surprised with the first shots I've taken especially for the lighting conditions and ISO that was used. Now to find some birds or race cars.
> 
> https://flic.kr/s/aHsk1soFVt


Looks good! I am jealous.. I want to add this to my list of lenses to acquire...but I will have a tough time justifying it just yet. Especially since I don't get a chance to do wildlife and not sure how people would react to that bazooka at a 4 year old's soccer game lol.


----------



## kbros

I'm super impressed with how well this VR actually works, this was taken at 1/15th holding the camera slightly above my head, so the only stabilization was from my hands. And the crazy thing is, all 5 or 6 of the shots I took were sharp, not just the one.
https://flic.kr/p/ozPRfC080114_1 by Noah Blalock, on Flickr


----------



## Aussiejuggalo

Question about grey cards, are they really worth it or is it bs? They seem overly expensive like a lot of photography things


----------



## Conspiracy

so my new job is awesome.

Going through all my gear i have a ton of extra canon stuff at my disposal now









I have 2 more 7D bodies, 50 1.4, 2X 70-200 f2.8 non-IS, 100mm macro, 24-70 f2.8, plus the gear in athletics i used to use which is another 70-200 mkii + 1.4X tele

i don't think i need to hoard gear for a really long time although i still really want a 1DmkIV and a 35L and 135L


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> i don't think i need to hoard gear for a really long time although i still really want a 1DmkIV and a 35L and 135L


So, before that you actually "needed" to hoard on gear ?








We never need - WE JUST WANT TO! MOAR!

It's fine, you are humble, you don't want an EOS 1X.

Btw, 35L ? 35L II maybe if ever, but imho Sigma 35 Art "killed" the 35L.
And the EF 35 f/2 IS made it even harder for the L to bear the red ring with pride anymore.
Its performance is so dated in my eyes now.

But I don't know about 35s in general....have my FD 35 f2 SSC, had the original EF 35 f2 (sold) now the "equiv" EF-M 22mm f2 STM for the M...don't know if I dig the 35 FOV equiv enough...

I think I am more of a 28-50-135 guy...35 is decent, but always to wide or always too short in my eyes - don't seem to grow in me.

I wish there was a new generation plastic 50, with IS or not ala new 35 2 IS from canon to retire my Sigma 50 1.4 EX...
I find that to be big and heavy, and as much as I would love a 50 ART's kind of performance, I am willing to compromise: those things are just too heavy to haul around and too big to aim @ people. I have a 24-70 2.8 L mk1 to break my back or a 70-200 to intimidate, I don't need another beast.


----------



## Conspiracy

I'm really hoping for an update to the 35L, it was a champ for a very long time until recently.

i already know when i make another purchase it will probably be the 135L for sure just because that lens epicness is yet to be challenged. other than that I'm starting to save for a 1dmk4 by the time i have roughly $3k set aside the 5D4 will also be out as well as the 1Dx replacement so ill have some options although I'm really a big fan of the APS-H sensors right now. love the 1.3X crop factor


----------



## pcfoo

false
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> I'm really hoping for an update to the 35L, it was a champ for a very long time until recently.
> 
> i already know when i make another purchase it will probably be the 135L for sure just because that lens epicness is yet to be challenged. other than that I'm starting to save for a 1dmk4 by the time i have roughly $3k set aside the 5D4 will also be out as well as the 1Dx replacement so ill have some options although I'm really a big fan of the APS-H sensors right now. love the 1.3X crop factor


/ranting on

The 35L was never really a champ...just perceived to be, i.e. there was nothing really good @ 1.4, so, this on being bearable, was "as good as it gets" in our perception.
Other, 35s were better, but didn't have AF & were slower (Zeiss), or were ridiculously expensive (Leica) etc.

Now that "2nd decade 21st century" designs surface, with amazing results (examples ranging from 24-70L II, 70-200 2.8 IS II to TSE 24mm L II, Sigma ART primes etc) many of the old "kings" show their age and call for revisions. It's hard to justify the pricetag otherwise.

The 135 L is a great lens in my mind too...but it is dated.
It is relatively honest if found used @ good price, and doesn't suffer from fatal weaknesses (eg. the 85 1.2 that is optically amazing but focuses slower than a pig) but other than the niche of being f2, doesn't really hold a candle vs. a 70-200 2.8 II - at least as far as resolution goes. At least it costs half than either the 85 1.2 II or 70-200 2.8 II.

Unless you go "prime-only" for a specific reason I don' see many strengths in the 135: DOF @ f/2 is razor thin, yes, but it is attainable in longer settings with the 70-200 @ 2.8.
Bokeh is creamier than the zoom's & 2.0 and 2.8 , but I don't know If it is "creamier" enough, with the 70-200 II appearing to be catching up and maybe being better @ f/4 and on, while being a tad sharper in the edges and allowing you for more creative freedom in composition...

Lets face it: f/2 is not something you can constantly use, especially if you are using strobes + the keeper rate at that shallow DOF settings is usually low. And once you start being "forced" to f/4 or less, than even the 70-200 f4 L IS is providing very comparable results, and right there with the weight, size & price of the 135.

FM B&S forums are swarmed with deals on the 135 2 L, but I've chosen to stay away...it is much cheaper than the 70-200 II, but also much more of a niche lens for me.
I think I would wait for the right time to bite the bullet on the bigger white beast, till then holding on my 70-200 f4 that I can hike with and then having more questions: keep the f4 too?









Again, I believe we will see a gradual rehaul of the L prime lineup - I don't believe that they will stay back and watch Sigma or even their own zooms phasing them out.
But pricing will be salty, you can count on that! Pretty much any new Canon L lens is falling in either the $1,800 or 2,xxx + range...my body is NOT ready for that violation!


----------



## ace8uk

Wow. I lust after new gear as much as the next person, and I understand people get carried away with the technicalities (especially on a site such as OCN), but if I thought about it all that much it would completely suck the fun out of photography for me...


----------



## Duality92

I came to this thread with much interest, but after looking at my T1i with 18-55 and 50 1.8, it makes me feel tiny. I'm just glad I know how to use my camera properly and have taken many, many good pictures with it







It's only a hobby though and I only paid 250$ for this body, 2 batteries and both lenses (body only had 300-400 clicks, 50mm lense was new, 18-55 was on the camera for those clicks). I still have a lot to learn, but so far I'm happy with my results.

The only lense I actually really, really want is a fish eye, realistically the 8mm rokinon, wishing for 10-17 tokina, drooling for 8-15 canon.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ace8uk*
> 
> Interesting, I'm keeping my eye on this lens myself. I want something with longer reach than my 70-200 for birding, and the new 150-600 would be ideal. I think I'd have to rent one and see how it compares to the 80-400. Keep us updated though, I'm particularly interested in the AF speed for BIF shots; I see you have a 70-200 as well so any comparisons would be very much appreciated!


Thought I'd add to this..

I haven't gone out and done any BIF yet, but did compare how fast the AF racks, though I'm not sure this is a fair comparison because 200mm is way too short for birds.

At 600mm its much, much slower than my 70-200 but that's to be expected. The 1D does move the focus noticeably faster than my T2i though, found that interesting.

That being said, it can track my dog running toward me just fine, but I'm not sure how much that has to do with the 1D vs. the lens. I'll try to get out within the next few days and do some BIF. I expect it to do fine, especially since the distances would be large enough I could use the focus limiter switch which really speeds up the focus.


----------



## pcfoo

As I am fortunate enough to already own gear that is "good enough" and pretty expensive to well into the "you are nuts" for most people, anything notably better is doomed to be found in tiny details and technicalities. And also doomed to cost an arm and a leg ABOVE the "normal" f/4 L's and Mk1 24-70 2.8 of mine.

So far I prefer to "invest" the joke of disposable income that is left from what I spend on PC crap, to travel, but you (I) still get to read and drool over gear - even if I don't plan on getting it anytime soon, or realizing I will never get to use it properly - mainly due to time restrictions. (like all those super-teles).
But that's why specialized press exists: for you to drool over supercars, audiophile equipment (pun), quad-SLI titans and custom machined WC loop parts.

Most people (boys) spend more time reading about supercars and might know more details on the car(s) they've actually bought, but this knowledge is used as a benchmark that informs the actual buying decisions. Same goes for "exotic" pieces of glass you get to read and drool over, that inform the way you think about your real gear, and there are tons of resources that can inform the way you rank them. It's not all useless.

You also get to "play down" amazing pieces of glass - like the 135 L - and have people agree with you


----------



## Wishmaker

My website. My gear is listed here.

For those who do not want to click :

- Nikon D4, D4s (need to update the site)
- Nikon D3
- Nikon D300 w/MB-D10 VG

Lenses:
Nikon 12-24G; 14-24G; 24-70G; 70-200G; 35 1.8G; 50 1.4D; 85 1.4D; 105 2.8D micro; 18-200;

Lights:
- 2x SB-900
- 2x SB-800
- Helios stands, umbrellas, soft boxes


----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ace8uk*
> 
> Wow. I lust after new gear as much as the next person, and I understand people get carried away with the technicalities (especially on a site such as OCN), but if I thought about it all that much it would completely suck the fun out of photography for me...


True. I mean, having a 1 series would be nice, but if you keep worrying about it then you probably won't go and use what you have.

EDIT: I didn't see that there's another page, so I just added a quote.


----------



## ace8uk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> Thought I'd add to this..
> 
> I haven't gone out and done any BIF yet, but did compare how fast the AF racks, though I'm not sure this is a fair comparison because 200mm is way too short for birds.
> 
> At 600mm its much, much slower than my 70-200 but that's to be expected. The 1D does move the focus noticeably faster than my T2i though, found that interesting.
> 
> That being said, it can track my dog running toward me just fine, but I'm not sure how much that has to do with the 1D vs. the lens. I'll try to get out within the next few days and do some BIF. I expect it to do fine, especially since the distances would be large enough I could use the focus limiter switch which really speeds up the focus.


Thanks, I already followed you on Flickr so I'll take a gander at the results when I can. The general consensus at the moment seems to be that it's perfectly usable wide open on the long end, and the AF isn't by any means unusable or slow.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> As I am fortunate enough to already own gear that is "good enough" and pretty expensive to well into the "you are nuts" for most people, anything notably better is doomed to be found in tiny details and technicalities. And also doomed to cost an arm and a leg ABOVE the "normal" f/4 L's and Mk1 24-70 2.8 of mine.
> 
> So far I prefer to "invest" the joke of disposable income that is left from what I spend on PC crap, to travel, but you (I) still get to read and drool over gear - even if I don't plan on getting it anytime soon, or realizing I will never get to use it properly - mainly due to time restrictions. (like all those super-teles).
> But that's why specialized press exists: for you to drool over supercars, audiophile equipment (pun), quad-SLI titans and custom machined WC loop parts.
> 
> Most people (boys) spend more time reading about supercars and might know more details on the car(s) they've actually bought, but this knowledge is used as a benchmark that informs the actual buying decisions. Same goes for "exotic" pieces of glass you get to read and drool over, that inform the way you think about your real gear, and there are tons of resources that can inform the way you rank them. It's not all useless.
> 
> You also get to "play down" amazing pieces of glass - like the 135 L - and have people agree with you


Sorry, I found that really difficult to read, and I'm not sure I understand your point.


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ace8uk*
> 
> Sorry, I found that really difficult to read, and I'm not sure I understand your point.


A rant is a rant...sorry.

The point is, how can u - being an audiophile - can distill why X or Y speaker / headphone is "better" to a layman person without what would appear to be long winded technicalities?

Wouldn't you just "take the enjoyment of just listening to music" he/she already does with "vanilla" equipment already?

Unless $15,00-2,000 is nothing to you, getting such expensive "toys" needs some internal battle to rationalize & justify, further than "feeling good" and enjoying to have.


----------



## Sean Webster

Here are a few quick pics from a flight I just got off. In Las Vegas now. On my way to Flash Memory Summit in Santa Clara in a half hour.

Gosh, in the first photo I look like crap lol.


----------



## ace8uk

false
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> A rant is a rant...sorry.
> 
> The point is, how can u - being an audiophile - can distill why X or Y speaker / headphone is "better" to a layman person without what would appear to be long winded technicalities?
> 
> Wouldn't you just "take the enjoyment of just listening to music" he/she already does with "vanilla" equipment already?
> 
> Unless $15,00-2,000 is nothing to you, getting such expensive "toys" needs some internal battle to rationalize & justify, further than "feeling good" and enjoying to have.


I'm not going to lie, I do have fancy speakers and headphones







, but again I don't really see your point. Yes, better speaker/headphone setups reproduce sound better, but it doesn't make a musician a better artist. Much like better lenses don't make someone a better photographer. I'm not disagreeing with you entirely, I'm just not one for dissecting it all so much, but then that's where we'll just agree to disagree. I also wouldn't really explain in layman's terms why X speaker sounds better than Y speaker. I don't like using graphs and charts and other 'quantifiable data' to differentiate between speakers and headphones. I'd rather test things out myself.

I wish that some of money was nothing to me! I agree with you there, justification is definitely needed, and I'm as guilty as you for putting in the extensive research into anything I buy.

Anyway, this is all getting really heavy!







I kind of wanted to avoid this!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Here are a few quick pics from a flight I just got off. In Las Vegas now. On my way to Flash Memory Summit in Santa Clara in a half hour.
> 
> Gosh, in the first photo I look like crap lol.


Awesome. I love plane shots, one of my good friends on a photo society I'm part of takes incredible plane window shots. Here's a link if you're interested.


----------



## jjsoviet

I'm not really that into portrait photography but my experimentation with post-processing resulted in pretty good shots.

 

More comfortable taking pictures of people from a distance or from behind.

See all my stuff here: https://secure.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/


----------



## Duality92

Here a shot of a shoot I did with my girlfriend and one of the new Corsair SP140's. (taken raw, tiny bit of color adjustement on lightroom and that's it)


----------



## kbros

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jjsoviet*
> 
> I'm not really that into portrait photography but my experimentation with post-processing resulted in pretty good shots.
> 
> 
> 
> More comfortable taking pictures of people from a distance or from behind.
> 
> See all my stuff here: https://secure.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/


Nice photos! Can I ask what 50 1.4 lens you were using for this shot?
https://flic.kr/p/o51Kx6DSC08905 by jjsoviet, on Flickr


----------



## jjsoviet

Ah, that would be my Minolta 50mm f/1.4 lens. Got mine around $190 used on Adorama, though they're also sold on eBay.

The specific one I have is the older "Beercan" style Maxxum lens, not the plasticky RS version.


----------



## Jixr

I have a question/statement/rant for you guys.

I used to love photography, it was something new and exciting to me. At first I was just playing around with my cameras, but then I wanted to get better, so I started reading more, watching videos, testing and experimenting with things, and then It got to the point where everything is commercialised.

Everyone I meet who I talk cameras with is too focused on the tech, or spouts off about their website/facebookpage/pintrest, hey go follow me blah blah sales pitch blah blah. Its nothing but 100% commercialism. Adding photographer friends on social medias, everyone is asking for likes, asking them to donate to their go fund me so they can buy new gear for their bizz ( seriously? ) and just post and post of watermark plastered photos. Seems everyone wants to be a rockstar photographer.

I'm really thinking about ditching all of my gear, picking up a nice compact like a fuji x100 or something, and leaving it at that.


----------



## hokiealumnus

Just stop paying attention to what everyone else wants and focus on your art. I'm happy when people like something I post on a forum enough to follow/like photos on flickr/500px, but I would never just go up and ask somebody to do so. If they ask for my URL/profile I'll give it to them, but again I'd never just spout it off, and asking for money for business equipment is too low even to dignify with a dig. That's lower than low.

Anyway, focus on your photos. Forget about everybody else and what they have/want/talk about. Go forth and photograph!

Side note - I found a link to this post on G.A.S. and it really resonated with me. Maybe it can help others too. I'm just going to try and improve my photography with the equipment I have and not worry about trying to get anything else. Definitely not worried about keeping up with the Jones'...can't afford that! I'll keep my APS-C camera with its EF-S lenses (except for my beloved nifty) and just learn to shoot better.

...except for the 35mm f/2 IS. _*Really*_ want that lens at some point.


----------



## ace8uk

Somewhat agreed. I'm a member of a photo society and the vibe is pretty relaxed; people shoot on all sorts of equipment, from film SLR's to point and shoot compact cameras. Most of our outings have involved taking photos for the enjoyment of being out and taking photos, but then we'll also do more technical sessions where people pass on knowledge and teach others. We've done studio work, astrophotography, and candid street photography etc.. Flickr meets are also a lot of fun if there are ever any in your area.

A lot of people do seem to care too much about gear and technicalities than actual photography skill and going out and taking photos, it would seem. I know a fair few people who have down sized their gear to an X100 or the like for that very reason, so they use the camera more. It's not a bad idea, but if you think you'll just end up re-buying DSLR gear again, you'll potentially lose a lot of money.

All I can suggest is trying to associate yourselves with those who enjoy taking photographs for arts sake, or for fun. It can be easier said than done, though.


----------



## Duality92

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ace8uk*
> 
> Somewhat agreed. I'm a member of a photo society and the vibe is pretty relaxed; people shoot on all sorts of equipment, from film SLR's to point and shoot compact cameras. Most of our outings have involved taking photos for the enjoyment of being out and taking photos, but then we'll also do more technical sessions where people pass on knowledge and teach others. We've done studio work, astrophotography, and candid street photography etc.. Flickr meets are also a lot of fun if there are ever any in your area.
> 
> A lot of people do seem to care too much about gear and technicalities than actual photography skill and going out and taking photos, it would seem. I know a fair few people who have down sized their gear to an X100 or the like for that very reason, so they use the camera more. It's not a bad idea, but if you think you'll just end up re-buying DSLR gear again, you'll potentially lose a lot of money.
> 
> All I can suggest is trying to associate yourselves with those who enjoy taking photographs for arts sake, or for fun. It can be easier said than done, though.


This is exactly why I'm most likely never going to upgrade to a higher level than a T1i, I'll possibly stay in the same series (T5i, SL1 or the likes). It also all depends if people do it as a career or if it's a hobby.


----------



## Jixr

yeah, it started as a hobby for me, but then people started wanting me to do their photos, and it became a side job for me. So now I have all this gear and other stuff, I rarely use half of it, and I actually use my EOS-M more than my dslr for how much more compact it is.

Outside of paid shoots, I rarely use my DSLR anymore. My 70-200 lens rocks, but on a crop body, is so long its hard to use. I hate my 50 1.4, and my 17-40 is a little slow. I may be a little happier with my gear if I didn't spend so much on everything.


----------



## Duality92

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> yeah, it started as a hobby for me, but then people started wanting me to do their photos, and it became a side job for me. So now I have all this gear and other stuff, I rarely use half of it, and I actually use my EOS-M more than my dslr for how much more compact it is.
> 
> Outside of paid shoots, I rarely use my DSLR anymore. My 70-200 lens rocks, but on a crop body, is so long its hard to use. *I hate my 50 1.4, and my 17-40 is a little slow*. I may be a little happier with my gear if I didn't spend so much on everything.


I tried both of these and I loved them both! I'll be happy to take them off your hands if you don't like em


----------



## Jixr

I think something is wrong with my 50 1.4 either i don't know what i'm doing or its broken, and the CA is horrible on it, makes most white things purple. If I ever sold off my lens's, I would at least make money on all of them, got my 50 1.4 for less than a 1.8, my 70-200 for $400 and would break even on my 17-40 for what I paid for it.


----------



## jjsoviet

My 50 1.4 is fine, even if it's got a small patch of (dead) fungus tendrils on the extreme corner. Love it.

Speaking of lenses, has anyone else been a fan of Minolta's glass? The Rokkor/MD and Maxxum (esp. Beercan-era ones) lenses are so good in terms of color rendition and microcontrast, photos taken with them are known to exhibit the famous "Minolta Color".

IIRC some of Sony's modern Alpha lenses have the same optical formula - not sure about the coatings though - as the older Maxxum ones; though, you'll be shocked to see the high price and plasticky build quality compared to the more robust Minoltas of old.


----------



## Sean Webster

Just remember, the camera gear makes the picture, not the artist/photographer...


----------



## jjsoviet

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Just remember, the camera gear makes the picture, not the artist/photographer...


I see what you did there









Not really gonna argue about that - it is the one behind the camera that's the most important.

I'm just interested in finding good lenses for cheap, so all but my Sigma 30mm is vintage glass. The max I spent on a lens is the Minolta 100mm 2.8 Macro for $320, while most of you folk may have bought thousand-dollar Canon L gear or something. There's just so much good glass in the old days so bargain hunting for good condition ones has become a hobby of mine.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

So I was trying to do a review for some work lights I had bought and installed on our backhoe. I though sitting the camera on the fops would be an interesting angle, but it was kinda shaky. So, I attempted to solve it by adjusting the throttle. In doing so I managed to make it shake so bad that the camera, sitting on a 1.5ft tripod, on an 11 or so foot backhoe, came tumbling to the ground.

Good thing DSLRs are tough, not to mention it landed on grass and the tripod took most of the hit. Not a scratch on it.


----------



## hokiealumnus

Interesting....someone from a production company doing work for National Geographic was interested in one of my photos for a montage in a documentary. Sounds great right??

Not great. Not at all. Not only are they not paying, they want the full resolution photo, complete rights to use it as they please and...wait for it...they aren't even going to credit it. Sorry Nat Geo (it was legit, they sent a contact between the photog & National Geographic), you can send someone out there to take that photo; the location is available on any clear night. Not interested.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hokiealumnus*
> 
> Interesting....someone from a production company doing work for National Geographic was interested in one of my photos for a montage in a documentary. Sounds great right??
> 
> Not great. Not at all. Not only are they not paying, they want the full resolution photo, complete rights to use it as they please and...wait for it...they aren't even going to credit it. Sorry Nat Geo (it was legit, they sent a contact between the photog & National Geographic), you can send someone out there to take that photo; the location is available on any clear night. Not interested.


wow that is dumb lol


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Hey all, PM me if you need gear added or update on the OP. I'm likely to miss posts.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hokiealumnus*
> 
> Interesting....someone from a production company doing work for National Geographic was interested in one of my photos for a montage in a documentary. Sounds great right??
> 
> Not great. Not at all. Not only are they not paying, they want the full resolution photo, complete rights to use it as they please and...wait for it...they aren't even going to credit it. Sorry Nat Geo (it was legit, they sent a contact between the photog & National Geographic), you can send someone out there to take that photo; the location is available on any clear night. Not interested.


Sad thing is they'll get hundreds of people willing give it up for nothing.


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jjsoviet*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Just remember, the camera gear makes the picture, not the artist/photographer...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I see what you did there
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not really gonna argue about that - it is the one behind the camera that's the most important.
> 
> I'm just interested in finding good lenses for cheap, so all but my Sigma 30mm is vintage glass. The max I spent on a lens is the Minolta 100mm 2.8 Macro for $320, while most of you folk may have bought thousand-dollar Canon L gear or something. There's just so much good glass in the old days so bargain hunting for good condition ones has become a hobby of mine.
Click to expand...

Depends on what kind of lenses you are after.
If you are after the best zooms, atm Canon is offering easily the best in most classes for SLRs. Maybe the Nikkor 12-24 is the sole exception?
Kiddin, there are lots of great lenses in every system, but trust me, most of the "great" ones are usually very expensive.

For older, manual focus / manual aperture lenses, there are quite a few "gems" you can get dirt cheap, but utility is vastly reduced vs. modern AF lenses.
Many of the cheaper / older ones are also pretty bad as far as glare control etc goes, as the medium phasing them now is a "taking it too literal" digital sensor with a highly polished glass filter in front of it, instead of a semi-gloss emulsion coated film.

All in all, getting a few cheap MF lenses to "play with" is one thing, thinking you can do all kinds of stuff with them, is different - taking into account that you have to independently focus and/or close down aperture or living with a horribly dark viewfinder & prefocusing / using hyperfocal techniques.

The best lens is the same with the best camera: the one that is in your hand the right time.
As our kits get bigger & heavier, smaller % of them lenses and accessories is really used. Investing into lots - even dirt cheap - lenses that are cumbersome to use, is not in good odds with them being used after the initial curiosity wears out. Thus most of the "commercial" fast paced photography ends up being done with expensive yet "as good as it gets atm" zooms, seasoned amateurs just casually shoot with light kits & primes etc etc.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> ... the camera, sitting on a 1.5ft tripod, on an 11 or so foot backhoe, came tumbling to the ground.
> 
> Good thing DSLRs are tough, not to mention it landed on grass and the tripod took most of the hit. Not a scratch on it.


Ohh, but you got to have your heart stopped for a few seconds there, didn't you?
The thrills of photography.


----------



## jjsoviet

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> false
> Depends on what kind of lenses you are after.
> If you are after the best zooms, atm Canon is offering easily the best in most classes for SLRs. Maybe the Nikkor 12-24 is the sole exception?
> Kiddin, there are lots of great lenses in every system, but trust me, most of the "great" ones are usually very expensive.
> 
> For older, manual focus / manual aperture lenses, there are quite a few "gems" you can get dirt cheap, but utility is vastly reduced vs. modern AF lenses.
> Many of the cheaper / older ones are also pretty bad as far as glare control etc goes, as the medium phasing them now is a "taking it too literal" digital sensor with a highly polished glass filter in front of it, instead of a semi-gloss emulsion coated film.
> 
> All in all, getting a few cheap MF lenses to "play with" is one thing, thinking you can do all kinds of stuff with them, is different - taking into account that you have to independently focus and/or close down aperture or living with a horribly dark viewfinder & prefocusing / using hyperfocal techniques.
> 
> The best lens is the same with the best camera: the one that is in your hand the right time.
> As our kits get bigger & heavier, smaller % of them lenses and accessories is really used. Investing into lots - even dirt cheap - lenses that are cumbersome to use, is not in good odds with them being used after the initial curiosity wears out. Thus most of the "commercial" fast paced photography ends up being done with expensive yet "as good as it gets atm" zooms, seasoned amateurs just casually shoot with light kits & primes etc etc.


I'm using a Sony NEX-5T, which is a mirrorless. Also have an LA-EA2 adapter which allows me to use Sony's A-Mount lenses.

Most of my collection (it's just 5 at the moment) is the first-generation Minolta AF Maxxum lenses, which were popular for Konica Minolta and eventually Sony Alpha SLT cameras. I'm aware of how dated the coatings are in these, though I find it interesting how Minolta renders colors so I became a fan of the brand. Flare and ghosting issues aside when shooting very wide, all in all I am happy with my setup right now. Photos almost always come in sharp and vibrant, so I don't need to fiddle much in post.

The only MF lens I have is the Minolta MD 35-70mm f/3.5 Macro, which I remember is the cheaper version of Leica's Vario Elmar 35-70mm. Leica contracted Minolta to make some lenses because the latter became so good in emulating the former's style, apparently. I don't use it very often recently, but when I did it really did very well. Very sharp and consistent corner-to-corner and the color again is to die for.

All of my lenses aren't large, though in relation to the camera body - which is very small - they look horribly unbalanced. When fitted to a standard SLR/SLT body though they're of the right size.


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jjsoviet*
> 
> I'm using a Sony NEX-5T, which is a mirrorless. Also have an LA-EA2 adapter which allows me to use Sony's A-Mount lenses.
> 
> Most of my collection (it's just 5 at the moment) is the first-generation Minolta AF Maxxum lenses, which were popular for Konica Minolta and eventually Sony Alpha SLT cameras. I'm aware of how dated the coatings are in these, though I find it interesting how Minolta renders colors so I became a fan of the brand. Flare and ghosting issues aside when shooting very wide, all in all I am happy with my setup right now. Photos almost always come in sharp and vibrant, so I don't need to fiddle much in post.
> 
> The only MF lens I have is the Minolta MD 35-70mm f/3.5 Macro, which I remember is the cheaper version of Leica's Vario Elmar 35-70mm. Leica contracted Minolta to make some lenses because the latter became so good in emulating the former's style, apparently. I don't use it very often recently, but when I did it really did very well. Very sharp and consistent corner-to-corner and the color again is to die for.
> 
> All of my lenses aren't large, though in relation to the camera body - which is very small - they look horribly unbalanced. When fitted to a standard SLR/SLT body though they're of the right size.


Yeah, my EOS M is exactly the same way using the EF->EF-M adapter...and I have some 2.8 zooms or even primes that look ridiculous.

In case of Sony, that's 100% back to the "roots" & the circa 1999 Sony DSC-F505









Again: there are great bargains in high-end-to-mainstream glass of older, abandoned/semi dated systems.


----------



## jjsoviet

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Yeah, my EOS M is exactly the same way using the EF->EF-M adapter...and I have some 2.8 zooms or even primes that look ridiculous.
> 
> In case of Sony, that's 100% back to the "roots" & the circa 1999 Sony DSC-F505
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Again: there are great bargains in high-end-to-mainstream glass of older, abandoned/semi dated systems.


Oh yes, some of the lenses I've tried look hilariously big when fitted to my NEX.









I remember putting on a Rokinon 85mm f/1.4, it's so huge it's not even funny. The famous Minolta 70-210mm f/4 Beercan also looked ridiculous, which was why I opted for the smaller 100-200mm f/4.5 pictured there.


----------



## ace8uk

For anyone in the UK, there's another Vivian Maier documentary currently available on iPlayer. Having already seen Maloof's _Finding Vivian Maier_ in Paris, it was interesting to see how this one depicted her story differently. Poor woman's work is entirely split between two halves, those who want to conserve it for arts' sake, and those who want to make money from it. Perhaps the biggest tragedy is that she never intended anyone to see the work.

Here's the link for those interested: http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b0366jd5/imagine-summer-2013-1-vivian-maier-who-took-nannys-pictures


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jjsoviet*
> 
> My 50 1.4 is fine, even if it's got a small patch of (dead) fungus tendrils on the extreme corner. Love it.
> 
> Speaking of lenses, has anyone else been a fan of Minolta's glass? The Rokkor/MD and Maxxum (esp. Beercan-era ones) lenses are so good in terms of color rendition and microcontrast, photos taken with them are known to exhibit the famous "Minolta Color".
> 
> IIRC some of Sony's modern Alpha lenses have the same optical formula - not sure about the coatings though - as the older Maxxum ones; though, you'll be shocked to see the high price and plasticky build quality compared to the more robust Minoltas of old.


I have 3 pre rs Minolta lenses. 70-210/4, 50/1.4 cross x and a 28-135/4-4.5.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> false
> Depends on what kind of lenses you are after.
> If you are after the best zooms, atm Canon is offering easily the best in most classes for SLRs. Maybe the Nikkor 12-24 is the sole exception?
> Kiddin, there are lots of great lenses in every system, but trust me, most of the "great" ones are usually very expensive.


Canon is usually known to have an edge in primes because they are the only ones with 1.2 glass.


----------



## jjsoviet

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> I have 3 pre rs Minolta lenses. 70-210/4, 50/1.4 cross x and a 28-135/4-4.5.
> Canon is usually known to have an edge in primes because they are the only ones with 1.2 glass.


Nice. So you have the Beercan, the MaXXum 50 1.4, and the Secret Handshake/Hidden G

Is the 28-135 worth it as an all-around zoom? Looks terribly big for an NEX system.


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Depends on what kind of lenses you are after.
> If you are after the best zooms, atm Canon is offering easily the best in most classes for SLRs. Maybe the Nikkor 12-24 is the sole exception?
> Kiddin, there are lots of great lenses in every system, but trust me, most of the "great" ones are usually very expensive.
> 
> 
> 
> Canon is usually known to have an edge in primes because they are the only ones with 1.2 glass.
Click to expand...

Apples and oranges.

There are certain "eras" in mainstream lens designs, one of which apparently we are going through now - main examples are the Canon zoom "Mark II" redesigns.
Starting with the 70-200 f/4 L IS, and nailing the coffiin with the 70-200 f/2.8 L IS II and 24-70 f/2.8 L II lenses, canon actually challenges primes - including those in its own line - in pretty much everything but distortions and of course maximum aperture. You will hard pressed to find primes that notably out-do those zooms at similar apertures in contrast and sharpness, which of course is unprecedented.

Canon has produced some impressively fast glass, including f/0.95, f/1.0 and f/1.2 50s, and the great 85mm f1.2.
Unlike the latter, the 50s were not that great - like, ever. All of them were fast and w creamy creamy bokeh, but nowhere as sharp as slower 50s are.
The 50 1.0 was very low production, so it is extraordinary expensive, inline with Leica 50 f/1.4 & APO f/2s that are also insanely expensive - but overall beat @ss against either Canon 1.0 and 1.2

So making a fast piece of glass is one thing, making an affordable fast piece of glass that is usable as something more than a self-fulfilling prophecy is another
- the 50 1.2 L is 1/3 the price of a Leica Summilux, and also a tad better than some praised sub $1500 Zeiss glass - so not everything was bad with it.
Only after Sigma 50 Art came into play, things got changed - at last, an almost "amazing" 50, costing less than $1K & comparable with $5K Leica and $4K Zeiss glass. Yes, it is not 1.2, but apparently 1.2s are not meant or cannot be better - just faster than 1.4!

Almost all faster than f/1.4 lenses - mostly 50s - are just...conversation pieces. Nice to have and show off, but not really good optics.


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jjsoviet*
> 
> Nice. So you have the Beercan, the MaXXum 50 1.4, and the Secret Handshake/Hidden G
> 
> Is the 28-135 worth it as an all-around zoom? Looks terribly big for an NEX system.


I paid 160 after haggling at a camera show . pretty good lens for a walk around, fairly sharp and has the typical Minolta color rendering.

It looks about right on my 900 but would look ridiculously awkward on a nex.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Apples and oranges.
> 
> There are certain "eras" in mainstream lens designs, one of which apparently we are going through now - main examples are the Canon zoom "Mark II" redesigns.
> Starting with the 70-200 f/4 L IS, and nailing the coffiin with the 70-200 f/2.8 L IS II and 24-70 f/2.8 L II lenses, canon actually challenges primes - including those in its own line - in pretty much everything but distortions and of course maximum aperture. You will hard pressed to find primes that notably out-do those zooms at similar apertures in contrast and sharpness, which of course is unprecedented.
> 
> Canon has produced some impressively fast glass, including f/0.95, f/1.0 and f/1.2 50s, and the great 85mm f1.2.
> Unlike the latter, the 50s were not that great - like, ever. All of them were fast and w creamy creamy bokeh, but nowhere as sharp as slower 50s are.
> The 50 1.0 was very low production, so it is extraordinary expensive, inline with Leica 50 f/1.4 & APO f/2s that are also insanely expensive - but overall beat @ss against either Canon 1.0 and 1.2
> 
> So making a fast piece of glass is one thing, making an affordable fast piece of glass that is usable as something more than a self-fulfilling prophecy is another
> - the 50 1.2 L is 1/3 the price of a Leica Summilux, and also a tad better than some praised sub $1500 Zeiss glass - so not everything was bad with it.
> Only after Sigma 50 Art came into play, things got changed - at last, an almost "amazing" 50, costing less than $1K & comparable with $5K Leica and $4K Zeiss glass. Yes, it is not 1.2, but apparently 1.2s are not meant or cannot be better - just faster than 1.4!
> 
> Almost all faster than f/1.4 lenses - mostly 50s - are just...conversation pieces. Nice to have and show off, but not really good optics.


I have access to both systems and when I choose which system I shoot it depends if I want fast 1.2 primes or better AF (I don't have access to a mk3)


----------



## jjsoviet

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> I paid 160 after haggling at a camera show . pretty good lens for a walk around, fairly sharp and has the typical Minolta color rendering.
> 
> It looks about right on my 900 but would look ridiculously awkward on a nex.


I figured. The 70-210 alone was super unbalanced when I tried it out at a store, so with something with comparable length and a larger filter size it would be worse.

Thinking of either the 28-85 f/3.5-4.5 or the 35-105 f/3.5-4.5, one is a bit wider while the other has a longer reach and should pair up nicely with the 100-200 I have. Hmm...


----------



## kbros

While we're on lenses, what do you guys think of the Nikkor 85 1.8 g or d?


----------



## ace8uk

I have the d (giggidy), it's OK, I rarely use it though. Little disappointed with the sharpness wide open, but I was given the lens for free.


----------



## Conspiracy

i was impressed with it. i borrowed an 85D from a friend and tested it on his D3 and it produced very impressive images


----------



## Aussiejuggalo

So seeing as I have a decent camera now (Olympus E-P5 with 17mm f1.8 lens) I thought I should buy some decent lighting (had literally no spare lights what so ever) so I ended up buying on of these light tent kit things from evil bay







*(I bought the last one for $100 not $600)*

Got it today and it seems like a damn good kit for the price, the backdrops for the tent feel a little cheap (fabric with plastic backing) but everything else seems nice, the light stands are painted aluminum same with the reflectors and the globes are the biggest I've ever seen







, the softbox seems pretty well made in regards to the material, the tripods just a cheapo desktop thing but thats ok it'll do for now

Weird thing is I got 3 125w globes instead of the 2 55w and single 125w so I may end up buying a couple of 55w ones as well just in case 3 are to bright

I'll test it out next week when I get the rest of the parts for my Beast Linux Box but what do you guys think, was it a good buy for a n00b?


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jjsoviet*
> 
> I figured. The 70-210 alone was super unbalanced when I tried it out at a store, so with something with comparable length and a larger filter size it would be worse.
> 
> Thinking of either the 28-85 f/3.5-4.5 or the 35-105 f/3.5-4.5, one is a bit wider while the other has a longer reach and should pair up nicely with the 100-200 I have. Hmm...


i would go wider rather than longer.....

personally i only use the 17-70 range (possible because my walk around was the 24-70). my beercan is mostly is a paper weight.......

the 28-135 is a pretty hefty lens, but it is still 1/2 the weight of the zeiss which makes it nice as a walk around.

with a nex-5 i would recommend you stay with aps-c e mount glass. modern aps-c glass is typically going to be smaller/lighter and generally a better glass than the old minolta. you can also "recreate" the minolta color in photoshop.


----------



## jameyscott

Does anyone have experience with the Tamron AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di LD Lens? I've read some pretty good things about it. I'd be using it as a kit lens replacement. It seems like a great price to performance lens compared to the completion. If anyone has recommendations for other lenses I'm all ears. This will be primary used for video, but will be used for photography as well.

I'm sure @Conspiracy will be able to set me right..


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jameyscott*
> 
> Does anyone have experience with the Tamron AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di LD Lens? I've read some pretty good things about it. I'd be using it as a kit lens replacement. It seems like a great price to performance lens compared to the completion. If anyone has recommendations for other lenses I'm all ears. This will be primary used for video, but will be used for photography as well.
> 
> I'm sure @Conspiracy will be able to set me right..


awesome bang for the buck. at that price its hard to beat what is essentially a 24-70 f2.8. its the ideal focal range for just about everything especially video. the nice thing about shooting video is you can get away with more budget friendly glass because the full quality doesnt show at 2MP HD compared to a full resolution still.

id say go for it you can beat the price for the aperture and focal range. if youre willing to spend a little bit more the sigma 24-70 f2.8 is slightly more impressive in image quality but honestly if youre trying to get the perfect zoom lens with good aperture without breaking the bank then go tamron. it will definitely do a nice job replacing your kit lens.


----------



## jjsoviet

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> i would go wider rather than longer.....
> 
> personally i only use the 17-70 range (possible because my walk around was the 24-70). my beercan is mostly is a paper weight.......
> 
> the 28-135 is a pretty hefty lens, but it is still 1/2 the weight of the zeiss which makes it nice as a walk around.
> 
> with a nex-5 i would recommend you stay with aps-c e mount glass. modern aps-c glass is typically going to be smaller/lighter and generally a better glass than the old minolta. you can also "recreate" the minolta color in photoshop.


I'm planning to upgrade to FF in the future (A7R or its successor) and buying APS-C glass right now would render them useless, so I' buying vintage Minolta glass at the moment. At least those are full-frame compatible and can be had for much cheaper than Sony's native lenses.

That said, I agree that I should get a wider lens. The widest I have is the 30mm Sigma DN Art, my only E-Mount glass.


----------



## Jixr

frys has some vanguard tripods on sale again.
http://www.frys.com/product/7409385?site=sr:SEARCH:MAIN_RSLT_PG

they tend to run a sale on them often, I once got mine from them for 75% off, nice carbon fiber one too. it was originally $200+ paid $50 for it.


----------



## jjsoviet

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> frys has some vanguard tripods on sale again.
> 
> Got mine from them for 75% off, nice carbon fiber one too. it was originally $200+ paid $50 for it.


Link please!


----------



## Jixr

sorry!

http://www.frys.com/product/7409385?site=sr:SEARCH:MAIN_RSLT_PG

this is the one they have on sale this week.

1/2 off.


----------



## jjsoviet

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> sorry!
> 
> http://www.frys.com/product/7409385?site=sr:SEARCH:MAIN_RSLT_PG
> 
> this is the one they have on sale this week.


Thanks!


----------



## ljason8eg

Be careful of the 4.4 lb. load capacity of that tripod. Of course, depending on what gear you have it might not matter.


----------



## Jixr

on mine, i've had a batterypack and a 70-200 with no issues, but yeah, always be mindful of the weight.


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jameyscott*
> 
> Does anyone have experience with the Tamron AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di LD Lens? I've read some pretty good things about it. I'd be using it as a kit lens replacement. It seems like a great price to performance lens compared to the completion. If anyone has recommendations for other lenses I'm all ears. This will be primary used for video, but will be used for photography as well.
> 
> I'm sure @Conspiracy will be able to set me right..


I agree with Conspiracy that this lens is amazing value for money. For 1080p video most lenses do well, as have to resolve "just" 2MP of information.

I actually had the 28-75 Di XR for a couple of years, back when I was still shooting film, then transitioned 100% to the 20D and ended up longing for wider lenses.

I got mine used from a photo forum after testing it vs. the replaced a Sigma EX 28-70 f/2.8 (not the later 24-70 DG model, this is early 2000s) that was my workhorse lens, and I've found the Tamron to be all around better - a tad faster focusing, a tad sharper wide open, much lighter etc.

The latter is a big plus for pretty much anything but the initial feel & bragging rights - I have the 24-70 2.8 L now, which is nicely built & arguably notably better optically, but its weight is a hindrance in pretty much any situation.

I will be hiking trails around Sequoia this weekend, I will be bringing the 17-40L & 70-200 f/4L with me. 2.8s can stay in the car.


----------



## OmarCCX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jjsoviet*
> 
> I'm planning to upgrade to FF in the future (A7R or its successor) and buying APS-C glass right now would render them useless, so I' buying vintage Minolta glass at the moment. At least those are full-frame compatible and can be had for much cheaper than Sony's native lenses.
> 
> That said, I agree that I should get a wider lens. The widest I have is the 30mm Sigma DN Art, my only E-Mount glass.


If you're going wider, you should try a Rokinon wide-angle. They're quite cheap and FF.


----------



## jjsoviet

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OmarCCX*
> 
> If you're going wider, you should try a Rokinon wide-angle. They're quite cheap and FF.


Yep, I am interested in Rokinon's 8mm fisheye or 16mm ultra-wide-angle actually. The lack of AF isn't really a problem because I'm used to shooting manual glass anyway, and without those extra features these lenses are being sold very cheaply.

I've noticed though that Rokinon offers both photo and cine lenses. Any actual difference besides their operation? I remember cine lenses have a much smoother focus/aperture control for video, plus they're made to be consistent design and optical-wise.


----------



## pcfoo

Cine & "photo" Rokinon/Samyangs are the same optically.
Cine have de-clicked aperture rings and are have focus rings already geared for DSLR video rigs.


----------



## jjsoviet

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Cine & "photo" Rokinon/Samyangs are the same optically.
> Cine have de-clicked aperture rings and are have focus rings already geared for DSLR video rigs.


That confirms it then. I should shop around at the Camera Exchange again to get a feel for either type of Rokinon lens.


----------



## jameyscott

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> awesome bang for the buck. at that price its hard to beat what is essentially a 24-70 f2.8. its the ideal focal range for just about everything especially video. the nice thing about shooting video is you can get away with more budget friendly glass because the full quality doesnt show at 2MP HD compared to a full resolution still.
> 
> id say go for it you can beat the price for the aperture and focal range. if youre willing to spend a little bit more the sigma 24-70 f2.8 is slightly more impressive in image quality but honestly if youre trying to get the perfect zoom lens with good aperture without breaking the bank then go tamron. it will definitely do a nice job replacing your kit lens.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> I agree with Conspiracy that this lens is amazing value for money. For 1080p video most lenses do well, as have to resolve "just" 2MP of information.
> 
> I actually had the 28-75 Di XR for a couple of years, back when I was still shooting film, then transitioned 100% to the 20D and ended up longing for wider lenses.
> 
> I got mine used from a photo forum after testing it vs. the replaced a Sigma EX 28-70 f/2.8 (not the later 24-70 DG model, this is early 2000s) that was my workhorse lens, and I've found the Tamron to be all around better - a tad faster focusing, a tad sharper wide open, much lighter etc.
> 
> The latter is a big plus for pretty much anything but the initial feel & bragging rights - I have the 24-70 2.8 L now, which is nicely built & arguably notably better optically, but its weight is a hindrance in pretty much any situation.
> 
> I will be hiking trails around Sequoia this weekend, I will be bringing the 17-40L & 70-200 f/4L with me. 2.8s can stay in the car.


Thanks guys! I think it will do well, especially since I'm on a crop sensor so I don't have to worry as much about the softening at the edges.







that seems to be the only complaint about the lens.


----------



## mz-n10

the tamron is also quite a bit smaller and lighter than any 24-70 counterpart.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jjsoviet*
> 
> I'm planning to upgrade to FF in the future (A7R or its successor) and buying APS-C glass right now would render them useless, so I' buying vintage Minolta glass at the moment. At least those are full-frame compatible and can be had for much cheaper than Sony's native lenses.
> 
> That said, I agree that I should get a wider lens. The widest I have is the 30mm Sigma DN Art, my only E-Mount glass.


the minolta glass is nice, but its going to show its flaws at 36mp+. even at 24mp fullframe im starting to see the limits of the old coating and glass.


----------



## kbros

So I put my d50 and 50 1.8d up for sale, I really need some more megapixels and better iso.


----------



## Conspiracy

im going to start saving up for a new camera









im staying with canon

my closest friend from working at best buy wants to learn photography, im going to donate my 1Dmkii, spare battery, and the 50mm, maybe my sigma 30 if im feeling overly generous.

my biggest issue is whether i want to save up and buy an actual new camera or just buy something that is really solid but older like a 1dmk3 which can be found for like $1000ish or just say screw it and save give or take like $3,000ish and buy either a 5D3 or a used 1D4 if i find a really nice price. im making really good money at my new job so saving $3000 wouldnt take but a few months.


----------



## ace8uk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> So I put my d50 and 50 1.8d up for sale, I really need some more megapixels and better iso.


What you considering moving to?


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> im going to start saving up for a new camera
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> im staying with canon
> 
> my closest friend from working at best buy wants to learn photography, im going to donate my 1Dmkii, spare battery, and the 50mm, maybe my sigma 30 if im feeling overly generous.
> 
> my biggest issue is whether i want to save up and buy an actual new camera or just buy something that is really solid but older like a 1dmk3 which can be found for like $1000ish or just say screw it and save give or take like $3,000ish and buy either a 5D3 or a used 1D4 if i find a really nice price. im making really good money at my new job so saving $3000 wouldnt take but a few months.


New and Shiny! New and Shiny! Make that wallet scream!


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> im going to start saving up for a new camera
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> im staying with canon
> 
> my closest friend from working at best buy wants to learn photography, im going to donate my 1Dmkii, spare battery, and the 50mm, maybe my sigma 30 if im feeling overly generous.
> 
> my biggest issue is whether i want to save up and buy an actual new camera or just buy something that is really solid but older like a 1dmk3 which can be found for like $1000ish or just say screw it and save give or take like $3,000ish and buy either a 5D3 or a used 1D4 if i find a really nice price. im making really good money at my new job so saving $3000 wouldnt take but a few months.
> 
> 
> 
> New and Shiny! New and Shiny! Make that wallet scream!
Click to expand...

also its his birthday in october. thats why i want to do this


----------



## kbros

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ace8uk*
> 
> What you considering moving to?


I'm thinking d3200, it'll be a downgrade in controls and ergonomics but a huge boost in IQ and iso performance. And let's not forget 24mp, that's 4x what I have now. Only issue is if I don't end up selling my 50 1.8d I won't be able to af on the new body. But live view focusing on a 3 inch screen compared to no live view and a 1.8" screen will be pretty decent. Body is $319 so I might just grab it and keep the d50 for a friend who wants to buy it but doesn't have the money. Because I've been working all summer to save up for a car but plans changed when I got one of my dream cars for only $150, and all it needs so far is brake lines after I put in the new fuel pump. So $300 on a camera isn't that bad.


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> I'm thinking d3200, it'll be a downgrade in controls and ergonomics but a huge boost in IQ and iso performance. And let's not forget 24mp, that's 4x what I have now. Only issue is if I don't end up selling my 50 1.8d I won't be able to af on the new body. But live view focusing on a 3 inch screen compared to no live view and a 1.8" screen will be pretty decent. Body is $319 so I might just grab it and keep the d50 for a friend who wants to buy it but doesn't have the money.


I only noticed it recently but there's a rangefinder feature that really helps with manually focusing. It's like the exposure meter in the viewfinder but instead it shows you where the lens is focused in relation to your selected focus point. You just look at that and twist the focus ring in the opposite direction to the arrow (at least that's what I have to do) and stop when it reaches the middle of the 'meter'. This has made me think about getting a 50 f/1.8D again, but at the minute I still can't justfiy spending £50 on one.

Also physical buttons are so overrated


----------



## kbros

Lol, good to know!


----------



## Sean Webster

My DOF preview button is stuck on my camera... It wount unstick either. Stupid camera.


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> My DOF preview button is stuck on my camera... It wount unstick either. Stupid camera.


I'd normally suggest using 99% isopropyl alcohol or contact cleaner, but considering how close it is to the sensor. I'd advise against it.

If you do decide to I'd just use the alcohol and do not blow it out at all. Just let it dry overnight.


----------



## Conspiracy

random question.

has anyone here had any experience shooting the Canon 1DsmkIII?

local photog caught wind i want to upgrade and hes upgrading to a 1DX. ive never shot a FF 1series much less even the 1DmkIII. curious if anyone has an opinion on them because he said he will hold it for me and offer a pretty solid price.

scratch that. not looking at the 1Ds mkIII anymore. ill look into either the regular 1DmkIII for a cheap old body or maybe save up a ton and have enough to buy either a used 1DmkIV or a new 5D3 around the holiday time. not so sure about the 5D3, have to play with it more


----------



## MistaBernie

True story, I missed out on a 1Ds3 on Friday for $500 by about 2 minutes... still waiting to hear from the buyer whether or not it was legit.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> True story, I missed out on a 1Ds3 on Friday for $500 by about 2 minutes... still waiting to hear from the buyer whether or not it was legit.


Was that posted for sale on FM or POTN? I swear I remember one offered for that price and figured it was a hacked account or something.


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> True story, I missed out on a 1Ds3 on Friday for $500 by about 2 minutes... still waiting to hear from the buyer whether or not it was legit.


Yeah, well, I would doubt it being legit - would be an insane deal @ $1000 - even with broken shutter.
Not abused ones are usually in the $2K range, well used one with more than a few dings are in the $1500-1800.


----------



## Sean Webster

Well, my 6D is off to get serviced. Man, that button got wreaked somehow. Nothing I tried could fix it, I even took the whole camera apart lol. It just needs to be replaced.

Now I have to shoot an evening quinceanera event with my 60D...noise is going to be ridiculous and my lenses will be soo much more zoomed in than im used to. :/


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Well, my 6D is off to get serviced. Man, that button got wreaked somehow. Nothing I tried could fix it, I even took the whole camera apart lol. It just needs to be replaced.
> 
> Now I have to shoot an evening quinceanera event with my 60D...noise is going to be ridiculous and my lenses will be soo much more zoomed in than im used to. :/


im going to call the camera control. you better stop abusing that camera or sarah mclachlan will get you TROLOLOLOL


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Well, my 6D is off to get serviced. Man, that button got wreaked somehow. Nothing I tried could fix it, I even took the whole camera apart lol. It just needs to be replaced.
> 
> Now I have to shoot an evening quinceanera event with my 60D...noise is going to be ridiculous and my lenses will be soo much more zoomed in than im used to. :/
> 
> 
> 
> im going to call the camera control. you better stop abusing that camera or sarah mclachlan will get you TROLOLOLOL
Click to expand...

Noo! Oh and I forgot to mention the mode dial broke a day before the DOF preview button broke. A little super glue fixed that tho lol.

Maybe Canon should start building stronger entry level cameras eh?


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Well, my 6D is off to get serviced. Man, that button got wreaked somehow. Nothing I tried could fix it, I even took the whole camera apart lol. It just needs to be replaced.
> 
> Now I have to shoot an evening quinceanera event with my 60D...noise is going to be ridiculous and my lenses will be soo much more zoomed in than im used to. :/
> 
> 
> 
> im going to call the camera control. you better stop abusing that camera or sarah mclachlan will get you TROLOLOLOL
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Noo! Oh and I forgot to mention the mode dial broke a day before the DOF preview button broke. A little super glue fixed that tho lol.
> 
> Maybe Canon should start building stronger entry level cameras eh?
Click to expand...

would be nice. thats why i do my best to avoid entry level and semi-pro gear. the 6D is a promising camera but from your experience and the same from others the build quality is meh but image quality is niiiice


----------



## Aussiejuggalo

So got to play with my lighting tent kit thingy today a little bit







, photos look a million times better then before but still not great









I only have the softbox on the top, there are 2 other light stands ment to go with it but I kinda blew both globes due to a faulty light holder







good news tho I contacted the seller on eBay and there sending me 2 new globes and a new light holder for no extra cost







should be here in the next few days and hopefully I'll take even less potato photos



Spoiler: Warning: Potato photos



There all unedited, taken straight from camera to lightroom, found the best ones then exported

Olympus E-P5, 17mm @ f11, ISO 200, hand held, aperture priority

The photos:











These 2 came out really bad















Setup:




Yeah... dont have much room to set up and room light is crap, thank god all this stuff collapses











Feel free to tell me how crap they are


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> would be nice. thats why i do my best to avoid entry level and semi-pro gear. the 6D is a promising camera but from your experience and the same from others the build quality is meh but image quality is niiiice


Yea, I think a 1Dx will be my next camera one day...

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Aussiejuggalo*
> 
> So got to play with my lighting tent kit thingy today a little bit
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> , photos look a million times better then before but still not great
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I only have the softbox on the top, there are 2 other light stands ment to go with it but I kinda blew both globes due to a faulty light holder
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> good news tho I contacted the seller on eBay and there sending me 2 new globes and a new light holder for no extra cost
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> should be here in the next few days and hopefully I'll take even less potato photos
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Potato photos
> 
> 
> 
> There all unedited, taken straight from camera to lightroom, found the best ones then exported
> 
> Olympus E-P5, 17mm @ f11, ISO 200, hand held, aperture priority
> 
> The photos:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> These 2 came out really bad
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Setup:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah... dont have much room to set up and room light is crap, thank god all this stuff collapses
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Feel free to tell me how crap they are


Um, hmmmm, umm....All look under exposed. The only decent one I'd say is the 750TI image. Try getting some large sheets of white posterboard. Works great.

These pics: https://www.flickr.com/photos/seanwebsterhd/sets/72157644251168250/

Made with this setup:


----------



## Aussiejuggalo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Um, hmmmm, umm....All look under exposed. The only decent one I'd say is the 750TI image. Try getting some large sheets of white posterboard. Works great.
> 
> These pics: https://www.flickr.com/photos/seanwebsterhd/sets/72157644251168250/
> 
> Made with this setup:
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


I'll have to play around more, I did only have the one light tho







, I'll take some more pics when I get the replacement globes, there all 125w 5400k so should be bright enough when I got 3 of them going









You seem to have less room then me







thanks for the pic of your setup tho, thats kinda how mine should look.. I hope

What lens is "recommended" for these kinds of shots, I only have my 17mm and a kit 40-150mm but I most people have told me that a 200mm (full frame terms) is best... thats a big lens for something so close up


----------



## Sean Webster

Yea, more lights will help a lot, otherwise you need a tripod for longer exposure on the shots.

5400k is just the light color temperature rating, not their intensity. That is what the wattage rating is for. More watts = more brightness.

Your 40-150 should be fine. You are shooting at f/5.6-f/11 usually for products shots anyways so lens choice doesn't matter that much, unless you can not focus close enough. I think ive done product shots with all my current lenses so far. 50mm f/1.4, 100mm f/2.8 macro, 85mm f/1.8, 24-105mm f/4, 70-200mm f/2.8. I like around 100mm on full frame for most of the time.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> would be nice. thats why i do my best to avoid entry level and semi-pro gear. the 6D is a promising camera but from your experience and the same from others the build quality is meh but image quality is niiiice
> 
> 
> 
> Yea, I think a 1Dx will be my next camera one day...
Click to expand...

oh ill likely own a 1DX eventually at some point I'm sure within the next 4 years ish. for now my next camera will be a 1DmkIII as i don't require anything ultra fancy to shoot sports. within the next year or so i see a 1DmkIV becoming my primary with a 1D3 as my secondary. at this point I'm pretty much set on glass


----------



## Scott1541

Got lightroom all set up on my new macbook pro, now I need to get shooting again. I do have some exploring of an old farm with lots of vehicles planned for the near future but no definite date, I should probably get on it with my friend









ION now I can start saving for my GAS again


----------



## hokiealumnus

I don't even like having my 70D gripped; can't see how you guys stand all the weight of a 1D series (unless you need it for pro work like sports and....well, and sports).

Unless your name is Sean Webster and you torture your poor 6D. Then you should get a 1D series camera to protect it from yourself.


----------



## ljason8eg

A 1D feels a lot different than a gripped xxD body. Its a lot more solid and the case with myself, the 1D III weighs less than the gripped 7D I was used to.


----------



## MunneY

I'm not sure how I never stopped by here and said hello, but I'm here now.

Now, I need to learn how to properly use my D5100







LOL





A couple photos I took from my honeymoon in Jamaica and had a friend touch up.


----------



## ace8uk

Well, now I want to be on holiday... I hope you're happy.


----------



## MunneY

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ace8uk*
> 
> Well, now I want to be on holiday... I hope you're happy.


You aren't the only one! I'm getting ready to go to NYC in OCT for our anny and I'd like to get better with my camera before then.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> oh ill likely own a 1DX eventually at some point I'm sure within the next 4 years ish. for now my next camera will be a 1DmkIII as i don't require anything ultra fancy to shoot sports. within the next year or so i see a 1DmkIV becoming my primary with a 1D3 as my secondary. at this point I'm pretty much set on glass


Yea, same plan here, maybe 3-4 years it will be at a good price for me.

I'm actually thinking of trading my 60D out for a 7D since sports season is about to begin at uni. Only about a $200 difference if I buy/sell right. Plus the 7D is a lot more durable right? haha

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hokiealumnus*
> 
> I don't even like having my 70D gripped; can't see how you guys stand all the weight of a 1D series (unless you need it for pro work like sports and....well, and sports).
> 
> Unless your name is Sean Webster and you torture your poor 6D. Then you should get a 1D series camera to protect it from yourself.


Haters gonna hate


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hokiealumnus*
> 
> I don't even like having my 70D gripped; can't see how you guys stand all the weight of a 1D series (unless you need it for pro work like sports and....well, and sports).
> 
> Unless your name is Sean Webster and you torture your poor 6D. Then you should get a 1D series camera to protect it from yourself.


gripped cameras dont feel or weigh the same as a 1 series. in a lot of cases the one series is not only more solid because its an actually solid piece of metal but it balanced. the 1DX is actually insanely light and small compared to older 1 series cameras. they truly did an incredible job on that camera


----------



## jameyscott

I actually bought a grip for my t3i when I purchased it. XD

Only reason I bought it was ease of use for swapping out batteries. Load two in the tray and push it back in. Bam. Easy to do while mounted on a tripod.


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Aussiejuggalo*
> 
> So got to play with my lighting tent kit thingy today a little bit
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> , photos look a million times better then before but still not great
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I only have the softbox on the top, there are 2 other light stands ment to go with it but I kinda blew both globes due to a faulty light holder
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> good news tho I contacted the seller on eBay and there sending me 2 new globes and a new light holder for no extra cost
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> should be here in the next few days and hopefully I'll take even less potato photos
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Potato photos
> 
> 
> 
> There all unedited, taken straight from camera to lightroom, found the best ones then exported
> 
> Olympus E-P5, 17mm @ f11, ISO 200, hand held, aperture priority
> 
> The photos:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> These 2 came out really bad
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Setup:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah... dont have much room to set up and room light is crap, thank god all this stuff collapses
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Feel free to tell me how crap they are


Actually single "overhead" softbox is pretty common for product photography
It is important to remember that relative size to the object is very important - the bigger the light/closer it is relative to the subject, the more it wraps around it.

Like this:



Or this:



Also remember that your in-camera metering is silly, and when overwhelmed with a white background (be it snow, seamless tabletop etc) it underexposes the image to average the scene to 18% gray...
It is safe to "start" with dialing in +1.5 EV over-exposure and tweaking up or down depending on your subject / situation.

///

Grips: I actually like gripped bodies more - I have average sized hands (to the small size for a 6+ ft tall 200lbs man), but I like the more secure grip that extra half-inch a grip gives me - even If I am not using the vertical shutter / dials etc. I also enjoy the extra battery life, and the comfort of a E-1 strap with my Canon's. Had a grip since my EOS 30 film camera, and I honestly miss it when i am taking it off when trying to play it lite and less intimidating.

Yes, it makes the thing bulkier and heavier, but also balances it better with large lenses - either my 24-70 2.8 or even big 1.4-1.4 primes & all tele-zooms balance better with it.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Yea, same plan here, maybe 3-4 years it will be at a good price for me.
> 
> I'm actually thinking of trading my 60D out for a 7D since sports season is about to begin at uni. Only about a $200 difference if I buy/sell right. Plus the 7D is a lot more durable right? haha


I'd go for the 1D III instead, just make sure its a serial number after the whole AF debacle. Not much more money and a better camera for that purpose.

The 7D annoyingly slows down its burst in low light and its AF was less than stellar for me.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Yea, same plan here, maybe 3-4 years it will be at a good price for me.
> 
> I'm actually thinking of trading my 60D out for a 7D since sports season is about to begin at uni. Only about a $200 difference if I buy/sell right. Plus the 7D is a lot more durable right? haha
> 
> 
> 
> I'd go for the 1D III instead, just make sure its a serial number after the whole AF debacle. Not much more money and a better camera for that purpose.
> 
> The 7D annoyingly slows down its burst in low light and its AF was less than stellar for me.
Click to expand...

Wow, I didnt realize how cheap it was. I think I'll go that route instead now. 

How do you like that 300 f/4 IS?


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Wow, I didnt realize how cheap it was. I think I'll go that route instead now.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How do you like that 300 f/4 IS?


The 300 f/4 IS is nice; very lightweight, takes the 1.4x TC pretty well too.. If there's one thing I don't like its the purple fringe it can get in certain conditions but that's removed easily enough.

I'm actually considering selling it since I have the Tamron now. Kind of redundant for what I do, especially since I use it with the 1.4x more often than not.


----------



## hokiealumnus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Haters gonna hate











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> gripped cameras dont feel or weigh the same as a 1 series. in a lot of cases the one series is not only more solid because its an actually solid piece of metal but it balanced. the 1DX is actually insanely light and small compared to older 1 series cameras. they truly did an incredible job on that camera


Interesting. Now I must hold one. But then I might sell my car for a scooter so I can afford one. ...Ok, best I don't do that. Good to know though.


----------



## Conspiracy

i found my 1DmkII for $400 on KEH. they aren't that expensive if you don't mind an older camera

also on a side note:

got my new work computer in the mail. its sexy as hell

Mac Pro
Intel Xeon E5 Hex Core 3.5GHz
32GB RAM
AMD FirePro D500 3GB

and a Dell Ultrasharp U2413

my other computer is an older Dell workstation also running Intel Xeons. don't remember which chip and 32GB ram with an older Dell ultrasharp 24"


----------



## kbros

give me the ultrasharp kthxbai


----------



## MunneY

Anyone recommend a good place to learn how to use my D5100...

that and my Canon G20


----------



## Magical Eskimo

I got one of these for 0.99p on a lightning sale, does anyone know if an 1100D will fit in it?

I'm not particularly bothered if it doesnt lol


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MunneY*
> 
> Anyone recommend a good place to learn how to use my D5100...
> 
> that and my Canon G20


Hello fellow D5100 owner








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> I got one of these for 0.99p on a lightning sale, does anyone know if an 1100D will fit in it?
> 
> I'm not particularly bothered if it doesnt lol


Damn, I could do with one of those for storing my film cameras







I'd like a seperate bag for them but don't want to spend a lot.


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> Damn, I could do with one of those for storing my film cameras
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'd like a seperate bag for them but don't want to spend a lot.


Keep an eye out on HUKD for another lightning sale, if not £8 isn't gonna break the bank!


----------



## Scott1541

I don't know, it might


----------



## jjsoviet

I'm still debating on what tripod to get, and so far I've narrowed it down to three choices: Benro Travel Angel II, Manfrotto BeFree, and Vanguard Alta+ 264AP. I need something that's small and compact enough for me to carry without much effort, while still capable enough for multiple uses e.g. macro photography. My camera outfit isn't really that heavy; it's just a mirrorless plus some medium-weight lenses and not the standard DSLR fare.

I could also go for a used tripod and separate head (ballhead or pan head, doesn't matter) if that's possible, though I usually get lost in the model numbers in no time. Any help will be appreciated.


----------



## pcfoo

The benro is more "Serious" than the Manfrotto. Bigger, heavier too, but will support pretty much any kind of kit. Also includes an arca swiss quick release mechanism that is compatible with RRS plates for lenses and cameras - useful if you were to go "bigger".

Perhaps the center column is not as versatile as the BeFree, but you can still get it pretty low to the ground for macro + you can convert it to a monopod - something that you will probably be doing more often than mounting the center column horizontally imho.

I kinda don't like pan heads as much as ballheads tbh...for my uses I recently got a Manfrotto 410 "Geared" head that weighs as much as the complete befree (or just seems like it) but allows for very precise and surprisingly quick adjustments. For architectural work it is almost irreplaceable. The quick release plate is horrible to put on and off the camera, and did I mention it is heavy? An arca swiss mounting adaptor/plate is $100 and adds more weight...great.

My tripod is a 10yo classic aluminum Manfrotto 190Pro...heavy, but pretty stable and cannot really be replaced by anything bearing a sane pricetag (e.g. something as big, but of good CF construction = an arm, a leg and two legs ontop = tripod of a ding in your wallet)...I also have a 496RC2 ballhead for versatility + monopod use, that can end up on the 190Pro when needed. Either way not a "travel" tripod, i.e. won't fit in a carry-on in the plane


----------



## kbros

Woo! Sold my D50 + 18-55 VR to one of my friends for $190. Sad to see it go because I learned the hobby with it. But, now a d3200 body is in the mail. Now I get to manual focus with my 50 1.8. Next step is to sell the 50 and get a 30-35. Super excited for better ISO and 4x the MP.


----------



## Aussiejuggalo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> Yea, more lights will help a lot, otherwise you need a tripod for longer exposure on the shots.
> 
> 5400k is just the light color temperature rating, not their intensity. That is what the wattage rating is for. More watts = more brightness.
> 
> Your 40-150 should be fine. You are shooting at f/5.6-f/11 usually for products shots anyways so lens choice doesn't matter that much, unless you can not focus close enough. I think ive done product shots with all my current lenses so far. 50mm f/1.4, 100mm f/2.8 macro, 85mm f/1.8, 24-105mm f/4, 70-200mm f/2.8. I like around 100mm on full frame for most of the time.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> Actually single "overhead" softbox is pretty common for product photography
> It is important to remember that relative size to the object is very important - the bigger the light/closer it is relative to the subject, the more it wraps around it.
> 
> Like this:
> 
> 
> 
> Or this:
> 
> 
> 
> Also remember that your in-camera metering is silly, and when overwhelmed with a white background (be it snow, seamless tabletop etc) it underexposes the image to average the scene to 18% gray...
> It is safe to "start" with dialing in +1.5 EV over-exposure and tweaking up or down depending on your subject / situation.
> 
> ///
> 
> Grips: I actually like gripped bodies more - I have average sized hands (to the small size for a 6+ ft tall 200lbs man), but I like the more secure grip that extra half-inch a grip gives me - even If I am not using the vertical shutter / dials etc. I also enjoy the extra battery life, and the comfort of a E-1 strap with my Canon's. Had a grip since my EOS 30 film camera, and I honestly miss it when i am taking it off when trying to play it lite and less intimidating.
> 
> Yes, it makes the thing bulkier and heavier, but also balances it better with large lenses - either my 24-70 2.8 or even big 1.4-1.4 primes & all tele-zooms balance better with it.


Thanks guys, I think I really need to use a tripod or mono pod, hands arnt that steady







luckily my 17mm is a damn good lens

May look into getting Olympus's new 45mm f1.8 Telephoto Prime, my 40-150 isnt bad but at the same time it isnt great (was a quick impulsive buy







)

I highly doubt my photos will ever get to good levels but so far with my new lights I'm gonna say there better...ish..

As always a real professional pic of the setup







(my LG G2 camera doesnt actually do to bad a job considering the bad lighting)





Spoiler: Now the pics



Just like last time these are straight out of camera with no editing

Hand held, E-P5, 17mm, in aperture priority (shut up I'm a n00b







) @ f11, ISO 200 & used different levels of exposure compensation think at most it was +1.7 and min -0.7?

White balance was on auto not 5400k (which my lights are "ment" to be)







pics still turned out pretty good

Taken with my 40-150mm @ 150mm


All the rest are taken with my 17mm












^ That damn this is the biggest pita to photograph, think a macro lens would do better






























More lights are a god send but the Artisan mousepad is a little tight in the 60x60cm tent









Whatcha think now


----------



## jjsoviet

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> The benro is more "Serious" than the Manfrotto. Bigger, heavier too, but will support pretty much any kind of kit. Also includes an arca swiss quick release mechanism that is compatible with RRS plates for lenses and cameras - useful if you were to go "bigger".
> 
> Perhaps the center column is not as versatile as the BeFree, but you can still get it pretty low to the ground for macro + you can convert it to a monopod - something that you will probably be doing more often than mounting the center column horizontally imho.
> 
> I kinda don't like pan heads as much as ballheads tbh...for my uses I recently got a Manfrotto 410 "Geared" head that weighs as much as the complete befree (or just seems like it) but allows for very precise and surprisingly quick adjustments. For architectural work it is almost irreplaceable. The quick release plate is horrible to put on and off the camera, and did I mention it is heavy? An arca swiss mounting adaptor/plate is $100 and adds more weight...great.
> 
> My tripod is a 10yo classic aluminum Manfrotto 190Pro...heavy, but pretty stable and cannot really be replaced by anything bearing a sane pricetag (e.g. something as big, but of good CF construction = an arm, a leg and two legs ontop = tripod of a ding in your wallet)...I also have a 496RC2 ballhead for versatility + monopod use, that can end up on the 190Pro when needed. Either way not a "travel" tripod, i.e. won't fit in a carry-on in the plane


I really appreciate the help. I'm actually leaning towards the Benro more, since I didn't feel like the BeFree's unique leg angle locking mechanism is more efficient than standard ones despite its cool looks. It's also shorter by around 5 inches compared to the Travel Angel; not too keen on leaning down to take photos all the time.

I've also read that Benro makes the MeFoto line of tripods, and the Roadtrip in particular is similar to the Travel Angel but at a more friendly price. Any comparisons between the two?


----------



## hokiealumnus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Aussiejuggalo*
> 
> Whatcha think now


Unfortunately they are almost all underexposed. The PSU, SSD and GPU are much better than the WiFi adapter though. Use a box or something to let you put the camera down and allow for longer exposures. Without more light than you have, longer exposures are what you'll need, unless you want to open up the aperture more, which would lead to smaller depth of field of course.

Your white balance seems to be all over the place too, especially with the GPU. Either set it manually in the camera or adjust in post to get consistent white balance. With your constant lighting and surrounding lightbox, the camera shouldn't be changing as much as it seems to be, but never-the-less it is.

You're getting there. With some more adjustments they'll get even better!


----------



## mav451

Heh don't see too many fellow Oly users here. The 17mm is ok, but wasn't my favorite FL.

For the smaller stuff, you'll need a lens with a smaller focus distance or obv a macro. Both the 12-35 or 12-40 can work in a pinch, but esp the 12-40 (.17 vs .30).

The 45 is much sharper than the 17 - you'd love it.


----------



## MunneY

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> Woo! Sold my D50 + 18-55 VR to one of my friends for $190. Sad to see it go because I learned the hobby with it. But, now a d3200 body is in the mail. Now I get to manual focus with my 50 1.8. Next step is to sell the 50 and get a 30-35. Super excited for better ISO and 4x the MP.


I have a 50 1.8 as well and wish I had bought a 35mm.. 50 is just a lil tuff to shoot with indoors for products.


----------



## Jixr

I wish canon had a 30/35 as cheap as some of the nikons.


----------



## jjsoviet

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> I wish canon had a 30/35 as cheap as some of the nikons.


I wish Sony had cheap lenses at all, A-Mount or E-Mount :v


----------



## DizZz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> I wish canon had a 30/35 as cheap as some of the nikons.


What's wrong with the Sigma 30 1.4?


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jjsoviet*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> I wish canon had a 30/35 as cheap as some of the nikons.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I wish Sony had cheap lenses at all, A-Mount or E-Mount :v
Click to expand...

hahaha the words of every sony shooter pretty much. nothing wrong with sony but those lenses are like whoa sometimes


----------



## DizZz

Just picked up a BNIB Canon 24-70 2.8 mkII for $1200 from a friend


----------



## jjsoviet

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> hahaha the words of every sony shooter pretty much. nothing wrong with sony but those lenses are like whoa sometimes


That is exactly why I opted for the LA-EA2 adapter and shoot with older Minolta lenses instead

For the price of its 50mm f/1.8 I've got used copies of the Maxxum 50mm f/1.4 and MD 35-70mm f/3.5 Macro


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DizZz*
> 
> Just picked up a BNIB Canon 24-70 2.8 for $1200 from a friend


nice. its a wonderful lens! i have a 24-70 f2.8 mkII sitting on my desk at work but havent even tested it out yet







( i will probably slap it on my 1D2 next week when college starts and take some shots around campus


----------



## DizZz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> nice. its a wonderful lens! i have a 24-70 f2.8 mkII sitting on my desk at work but havent even tested it out yet
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ( i will probably slap it on my 1D2 next week when college starts and take some shots around campus


Yeah I can't wait to _really_ start using it. The only drawback I've found in the last couple of hours has been the lack of IS for slightly longer exposure shots (~1/50) but I guess that's what a tripod is for


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DizZz*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> nice. its a wonderful lens! i have a 24-70 f2.8 mkII sitting on my desk at work but havent even tested it out yet
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ( i will probably slap it on my 1D2 next week when college starts and take some shots around campus
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah I can't wait to _really_ start using it. The only drawback I've found in the last couple of hours has been the lack of IS for slightly longer exposure shots (~1/50) but I guess that's what a tripod is for
Click to expand...

yeah and tripods dont have to be expensive









i keep saying im going to buy the MeFOTO tripod but i still havent grabbed one yet and its only like $140 or less i think


----------



## Jixr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DizZz*
> 
> What's wrong with the Sigma 30 1.4?


Nothing, I would love one, but they cost $500 and I got my canon 50 1.4 for $150, and the canon 40 1.8 is $150, and the 50 1.8 is $125.

basically any prime wider than that is $500


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *DizZz*
> 
> What's wrong with the Sigma 30 1.4?
> 
> 
> 
> Nothing, I would love one, but they cost $500 and I got my canon 50 1.4 for $150, and the canon 40 1.8 is $150, and the 50 1.8 is $125.
> 
> basically any prime wider than that is $500
Click to expand...

do you need a wide prime? i have a sigma 30 f1.4 id be willing to sell. havent decided if im going to give it to my friend on his birthday with the 1D2 + 50mm combo.

the sigma 30 isnt even worth half what i paid for it when i got it which is why im almost tempted to just give it to my buddy and donate a full camera kit since we are really close friends


----------



## kbros

Yeah I was looking at sigma 30 1.4 art.


----------



## DizZz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> Nothing, I would love one, but they cost $500 and I got my canon 50 1.4 for $150, and the canon 40 1.8 is $150, and the 50 1.8 is $125.
> 
> basically any prime wider than that is $500


http://www.ebay.com/itm/Sigma-30mm-F1-4-EX-DC-HSM-Lens-for-Canon-/331202164385


----------



## kbros

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DizZz*
> 
> http://www.ebay.com/itm/Sigma-30mm-F1-4-EX-DC-HSM-Lens-for-Canon-/331202164385


Yeah that's the non art, supposedly it's pretty "meh."


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *DizZz*
> 
> http://www.ebay.com/itm/Sigma-30mm-F1-4-EX-DC-HSM-Lens-for-Canon-/331202164385
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah that's the non art, supposedly it's pretty "meh."
Click to expand...

have you used it? for the price when they first rolled it out the price was great now they go for super cheap used. you can find one under $300 now. for the price its a good value.


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DizZz*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> I wish canon had a 30/35 as cheap as some of the nikons.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What's wrong with the Sigma 30 1.4?
Click to expand...

The Sigma is brighter and better, but still much more expensive than the 35 DX 1.8.
But perhaps that's a rare exception in Nikkor/Canon primes.
The new Nikkor 35mm 1.8 (full frame) is just as expensive as the EF 35mm f/2 IS. Older / cheaper 35mm Nikkors are optically less capable and ofc lack AFS / VR / IS etc.

Believe it or not, lenses that were designed in the 80s - especially the cheaper ones - don't have the coatings to keep up with DSLR sensors








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *DizZz*
> 
> http://www.ebay.com/itm/Sigma-30mm-F1-4-EX-DC-HSM-Lens-for-Canon-/331202164385
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah that's the non art, supposedly it's pretty "meh."
Click to expand...

All-around the optical, AF & body construction have been improved with the A/Art version of the lens, but the "vanilla" 2005 design 30 1.4 EX was already the best APS-C "standard" lens. It's actually pretty good / better than most other options - eg. it was / is better than mounting a 35mm 1.4 L or the equivalent Nikkor wide open, and focuses faster (tho adjustment might be needed) than either (even if it is slower than the "A" at it) so...define "meh"...









1.4 lenses - at least FF / APS-C ones are tricky business: hard to get them right - at least in the fast aperture settings - and that's why there is so much fuzz around Sigma's 35 & 50 Art - cause they blow away what was thought to be the "benchmark" for affordable SLR short zooms (i.e. I don't count $3-6K Leica & Zeiss) from Canon/Nikon.

But this "revolution", with Sigma hitting the big boys and stop being the underdog, was actually started gradually with the 30 1.4 DC EX being a big hit & probably the first Sigma to be more expensive yet notably better than "factory" options, scaled up with the 50 1.4 EX - that was also better than either "classic" EF 50 1.4 USM & Nikkor 50 1.4s and honestly asking more money than those, then topped with the 85mm 1.4 EX that is also an amazing performer - far from cheap, but for a change cheaper than the factory Nikkor, and obviously the monstrous 85 1.2L.

Sigma is a well-established "power" in fast primes these days, and the 30 1.4 EX was the 1st brick in getting them above and beyond being just a "cheap lens manufacturer" with "OK" lenses for those that could not afford the "real thing". They had some nice macro's and OK 2.8 zooms, but nothing "really good" a decade ago.
I've owned both 30 1.4 DC EX and Sigma 50 1.4 EX (along with other good, "OK" and bad Sigma's in the past - had a 100-300 f/4 EX that was a horrendous lemon) and I would highly recommend them - especially used @ a good price.

Also, my perception of the 30 1.4 being "expensive" has rapidly changed since I've seen the stupendous amounts of money Fujifilm asks for equivalent (or worse) APS-C "fast primes" + all the creative "stretching" to direct misrepresentation (i.e. lying) of what equivalent FOV/aperture/DOF control all smaller-sensor systems bring to the table


----------



## Conspiracy

meh is usually defined by stuff read on POTN from others that have only read and not used it LOL

just my guess haha


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *DizZz*
> 
> http://www.ebay.com/itm/Sigma-30mm-F1-4-EX-DC-HSM-Lens-for-Canon-/331202164385
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah that's the non art, supposedly it's pretty "meh."
Click to expand...

Just because it isn't the new art version, it doesn't mean it is meh by any means. The non art is still an amazing lens. Never had a single issue with it in my use. Super sharp and fast & accurate autofocus. I miss mine.


----------



## kbros

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> meh is usually defined by stuff read on POTN from others that have only read and not used it LOL
> 
> just my guess haha


Exactly though. I haven't ever used the lens, I just remember people saying not so nice things about it when I was lens hunting a few months ago. So you caught me there.


----------



## kbros

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Just because it isn't the new art version, it doesn't mean it is meh by any means. The non art is still an amazing lens. Never had a single issue with it in my use. Super sharp and fast & accurate autofocus. I miss mine.


Maybe I'll actually buy one now over the 35 1.8G lol.


----------



## Jixr

oh I don't care for the art/non art ( though the art feels nicer )

My issue with the 50 is its just too narrow for what I like to do. I rarely use it, if I'm doing portrait stuff i'll generally stick to my 70-200 at 70mm if I have the room, otherwise I'll try to use my 17-40 if its family type stuff

I have a 22mm on my EOS-M that I love, and I think having a 30( or something between a 20-35 ) would be much more fitting for me. ( if I could get that lens on my Big canon, I would be in love )


----------



## MunneY

What you guys think about my Awesome camera collection!



LOLZ

In all seriousness, I think I'm gonna sell this 50 1.8 and get a 35 1.8


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> meh is usually defined by stuff read on POTN from others that have only read and not used it LOL
> 
> just my guess haha
> 
> 
> 
> Exactly though. I haven't ever used the lens, I just remember people saying not so nice things about it when I was lens hunting a few months ago. So you caught me there.
Click to expand...

There are so many factors that can screw up your experience with a lens & skew perception of people reading about it:


Foremost are unrealistic expectations / luck of experience with similar products. OMG-the-best f/1.4 etc, means little if the overall class is mediocre. The best of mediocre doesn't mean stellar or OMG-amazing-unbelievable-perfection.
Lack of experience with handling: especially with lenses faster than f/2, you will see that most ppl are really complaining about AF issues, simply because they don't understand that the AF system doesn't "know" which exactly eyelash you had in mind to be sharp / cannot compensate for the subject moving the 2mm the DOF achieves critical sharpness, or you shaking your ass being excited with your new toy. Truth is, without matte focusing screens it is hard to really judge critical focus with your eye on that fast lenses and close to the subject (i.e. really small DOF). Not that lenses don't get incocistent results, but user error is always far more probable than not.
People and most "wannabe" photographers buy expensive gear thinking its an I-win button that will help their "career/creativity" takeoff. A person thiking like that is just as easy to blame the tool if the latter doesn't happen. Then after 20 system changes over 10 years, you're experience allows you to do better, and your current system will take the praise:
- "oh, I should have had that "x" body/lenses all these years"!
- "or you could could be 10 years more experienced with few thousand shots under your belt all these years - just few thousand $ richer too?"
And a zillion of other shortfalls - remember, that the "squeaky wheel gets the oil" = people with bad experiences are usually more vocal and complains get traction easier than praises.


----------



## Magical Eskimo

So I got my £0.99p Amazon camcorder bag and my 1100D fits in it perfectly! Any bigger and it wouldn't though so if I ever get a larger lens I wouldn't be able to use it.




Late night low light potato phone pics


----------



## Aussiejuggalo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hokiealumnus*
> 
> Unfortunately they are almost all underexposed. The PSU, SSD and GPU are much better than the WiFi adapter though. Use a box or something to let you put the camera down and allow for longer exposures. Without more light than you have, longer exposures are what you'll need, unless you want to open up the aperture more, which would lead to smaller depth of field of course.
> 
> Your white balance seems to be all over the place too, especially with the GPU. Either set it manually in the camera or adjust in post to get consistent white balance. With your constant lighting and surrounding lightbox, the camera shouldn't be changing as much as it seems to be, but never-the-less it is.
> 
> You're getting there. With some more adjustments they'll get even better!


Yeah I figured they would be under exposed, least I didnt share the over exposed ones







, the WiFi one was a massive pain I couldnt get the light right plus its so small







. I might pull out this spazzy Gorillapod next time I shoot and give it another go

Yeah I realized after I packed everything away that my white balance was on auto





















, I do have a 5400k setting which is what my lights are "rated at" and I did use it last time but I forgot to change it back

These pics are better then the ones I posted earlier with just the softbox (blew the globes for the other lights due to a faulty light holder)








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mav451*
> 
> Heh don't see too many fellow Oly users here. The 17mm is ok, but wasn't my favorite FL.
> 
> For the smaller stuff, you'll need a lens with a smaller focus distance or obv a macro. Both the 12-35 or 12-40 can work in a pinch, but esp the 12-40 (.17 vs .30).
> 
> The 45 is much sharper than the 17 - you'd love it.


I know







even Lightroom doesnt have Olympus in the lens correction (or at least mine doesnt lol), Yeah I know the 17mm isnt the best out but for the price it was a goodish buy and does the job most of the time

I did want to get a macro lens but there so expensive







and I cant really justify it atm (can probably tell I'm a n00b, this is the first actual camera I've ever owned), thanks I'll have a look at them

Yeah and the 45 looks nice, much better then my current 40-150 which I'll be keeping until I can afford a better zoom


----------



## mz-n10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> Maybe I'll actually buy one now over the 35 1.8G lol.


Get the 35/1.8. It's a few hundred cheaper and is just as capable of a lens.

Reason canon shooters get the sigma is because they didn't have a cheap 30ish prime.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mz-n10*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> Maybe I'll actually buy one now over the 35 1.8G lol.
> 
> 
> 
> Get the 35/1.8. It's a few hundred cheaper and is just as capable of a lens.
> 
> Reason canon shooters get the sigma is because they didn't have a cheap 30ish prime.
Click to expand...

YOU NEED F/1.4, f/1.8 is for newbs.


----------



## pcfoo

I'm with mz-n10 on this one tho...few 3rds of a stop, it's fine. Doesn't worth it that much.
You can find a 35 1.8 DX used for $150ish, will do the job just fine for half the price of a used 30 1.4.
Less to cry about after you move to FF a few years from now









Unless you go "ALL IN" and get a Sigma 35 1.4 Art !


----------



## Sean Webster

Dang canon, why do you have to give me a standard out of warranty charge of 219.00 for every freaking repair you do for me? ugh. Now there goes most this weeks check. I should have just spent the $100 on gold membership by now with canon. I would have already used up $72 of the $100 membership cost on free shipping and the 20% cost reduction on repairs alone. And I would have some free maintenance cleanings...I think I'm gonna upgrade next time i break something lol.if you guys are photographing a lot of stuff with canon gear, I suggest you become a cps gold member too.


----------



## kbros

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> I'm with mz-n10 on this one tho...few 3rds of a stop, it's fine. Doesn't worth it that much.
> You can find a 35 1.8 DX used for $150ish, will do the job just fine for half the price of a used 30 1.4.
> Less to cry about after you move to FF a few years from now
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unless you go "ALL IN" and get a Sigma 35 1.4 Art !


lel


----------



## JKuhn

I'm curious what you people do for weather sealing on a cheap body. I shot a primary school soccer match this weekend, and here's what I did:

I took a plastic bag (large enough to get the body in), made a small hole which I stretched over the viewfinder before replacing the cup, and used a rubber band to seal it around my Canon 100-400L (between the body and tripod collar). I also made small holes for the camera strap as I didn't want to drop it. This forced me to shoot only with my 400D (higher burst rate in RAW) and 100-400L for most of the day, but it got the job done. Oh, and for those who might consider doing this, it was only in light rain so I can't say if it'll work in a storm.


----------



## kbros

That's almost exactly what I do. It works pretty well as long as it's not a full on downpour.


----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> That's almost exactly what I do. It works pretty well as long as it's not a full on downpour.


I won't take that lens out in a "full on downpour", even though it's sealed. Those lenses are far too expensive if something goes wrong with the seal.


----------



## Jixr

LOL, that lens on that tiny body looks like my 70-200 on my eos-m


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JKuhn*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> That's almost exactly what I do. It works pretty well as long as it's not a full on downpour.
> 
> 
> 
> I won't take that lens out in a "full on downpour", even though it's sealed. Those lenses are far too expensive if something goes wrong with the seal.
Click to expand...

If you treat the lens in a similar way, e.g. bag that fully encloses it (with room for push/pull if it is the 100-400 or other extending zooms + slack to rotate rings), UV filter to weather proof the front element area etc, you are pretty safe - could be the same bag really - that's how professional raincoats are made and sold.

You don't have to be nuts about it getting a droplet here and there - it's fine. I've been shooting under rain a hanful of occasions with non-weather sealed bodies and never had a single issue. It's not like you are submerging it (I even had a leak in a Fuji C5050 underwater housing that did not kill the camera - the first two times, died eventually but not in my hands







)
Even a piece of clothing can do "ok", just protecting it from direct exposure.

But if you want to be shooting in areas were spontaneous showers occur often, you could always invest in a raincoat - usually you can find pretty decent ones for $50 or less - that's a good investment.

BTW, I had rented that 400L for a weekend, and forgot to take a pic of it with the EOS M mounted @ the back (it's not the other way around).
The M did take some decent pics with the lens tho


----------



## Jixr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> the EOS M mounted @ the back (it's not the other way around).


Pretty much, I'm still trying to find a decent way to add a belt clip to mine.


----------



## pcfoo

Belt clip? On the EOS M ?

I don't know about belt clip, but the M + 22mm works great with a small shoulder strap (ala Black Rapid). Used mine with it over or under an unzipped sweater, worked great - goes out of the way so easily and you don't even fill it being so light (the strap is actually "bigger" than the camera!).

Lenses with tripod colars also balance decently under a shoulder strap - usually when a mid-sized body is on the other end, not the M necessarily.


----------



## Jixr

Its too big to fit into my pants pocket, and I don't want to put it in a case or use a strap to carry it around ( its my beater cam after all )
If I could just clip it on a back belt loop I would be good to go.


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> Its too big to fit into my pants pocket, and I don't want to put it in a case or use a strap to carry it around ( its my beater cam after all )
> If I could just clip it on a back belt loop I would be good to go.


You could get a Fotasy (Black Rapid copy) 1/4" eye-screw, and use a small diameter carabiner to mount in on w/e you want.

Or get the Fotasy shoulder strap for $10 more and use it either way (along with other equipment).


----------



## Scott1541

pcfoo is clearly a Fotasy salesman


----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> If you treat the lens in a similar way, e.g. bag that fully encloses it (with room for push/pull if it is the 100-400 or other extending zooms + slack to rotate rings), UV filter to weather proof the front element area etc, you are pretty safe - could be the same bag really - that's how professional raincoats are made and sold.
> 
> You don't have to be nuts about it getting a droplet here and there - it's fine. I've been shooting under rain a hanful of occasions with non-weather sealed bodies and never had a single issue. It's not like you are submerging it (I even had a leak in a Fuji C5050 underwater housing that did not kill the camera - the first two times, died eventually but not in my hands
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )
> Even a piece of clothing can do "ok", just protecting it from direct exposure.
> 
> But if you want to be shooting in areas were spontaneous showers occur often, you could always invest in a raincoat - usually you can find pretty decent ones for $50 or less - that's a good investment.
> 
> BTW, I had rented that 400L for a weekend, and forgot to take a pic of it with the EOS M mounted @ the back (it's not the other way around).
> The M did take some decent pics with the lens tho


I just looked at a picture of en EOS M and 100-400L, and it was quite funny to see.

But how do you operate that combo?


----------



## Jixr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JKuhn*
> 
> I just looked at a picture of en EOS M and 100-400L, and it was quite funny to see.
> 
> But how do you operate that combo?


Hold the lens, and tap the screen with your nose to take the picture lol.

I have that forstay strap. I like it, but yeah, I probably should get a little eye bolt to use with it or something.
The idea using a big strap with the M seems kinda goofy.


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JKuhn*
> 
> I just looked at a picture of en EOS M and 100-400L, and it was quite funny to see.
> 
> But how do you operate that combo?


I was using it with the 400L 5.6 which has a constant length. Much like with my 70-200, you are really holding & balance the combo through the lens with the left hand, and your right hand "aims" and operates shutter release and/or AF button if your body allows and your style prefers them separated.

Don't think that "tapping" the screen of the M would work that well for getting steady shots with a 400









Much like with most heavy lenses, you cannot really shoot holding just the camera with one hand after one point. With the M just happens with pretty much anything bigger than the kit 18-55









Especially for really long lenses, don't believe that you can hand-hold them @ 1/focal length as the rule of thumb suggests - 1/600~800 is recommended, 1/1500-2000 is a must for birds in flight etc.
Yes, you can do better, but it stops being consistent, and in my book it is far better pumping ISO up and ending up with a noisy sharp image than a blurry/shaken one that has zero noise









IS does help a lot, but I did not have any with the 400 5.6. I could get a 100-400 L IS for the same price (rental over the weekend) but I wanted to get the sharpest of the 2, and I know I would be shooting @ daytime. The 400 5.6 is far sharper than the 100-400 @ 5.6, so I opted for quality since I would be shooting daytime with good light & pretty much stuck @ 400 regardless (whale watching).

The 100-400 is weird as it is pretty much the last "modern" push-pull lens still in production. I guess you can still "pull/push" on it through the M and zoom. It won't be that much weirder than it already is.
Will require some balancing with the fingers of the left hand instead of the palm, but that's common with all lenses with zoom rings too: you either juggle a bit on the fly, or you preset the focal length and shoot with that.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> pcfoo is clearly a Fotasy salesman


I actually have a Black Rapid Sport, but that's a $60-70 strap that many would roll eyes and don't give a chance.
The Fotasy is almost a mirror copy of the Black Rapid RS-7 for less than $20, so it is easier to suggest


----------



## JKuhn

To me it sucks that they don't make other lenses in that push/pull design. I actually like it, despite having read about dust issues.

And regarding the EOS M / long lens thing, I prefer to at least have something to hold on to behind the lens.


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JKuhn*
> 
> To me it sucks that they don't make other lenses in that push/pull design. I actually like it, despite having read about dust issues.
> 
> And regarding the EOS M / long lens thing, I prefer to at least have something to hold on to behind the lens.


Well, I don't have another cropped camera anymore, the M is the only one, and if the noisy 18MP Canon sensor is "OK" for pro wildlife shooters all these years after its launch with the 7D, it is fine with me too!









That said, I just used the M in my backyard shooting birds and squirrels. Did not even get it on my whale watching & mountain hikes.
It's my street shooter. But I got the EF adapter with it when I bought it used, so what the heck, you have to toy with it!


----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> I was using it with the 400L 5.6 which has a constant length. Much like with my 70-200, you are really holding & balance the combo through the lens with the left hand, and your right hand "aims" and operates shutter release and/or AF button if your body allows and your style prefers them separated.
> 
> Don't think that "tapping" the screen of the M would work that well for getting steady shots with a 400
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Much like with most heavy lenses, you cannot really shoot holding just the camera with one hand after one point. With the M just happens with pretty much anything bigger than the kit 18-55
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Especially for really long lenses, don't believe that you can hand-hold them @ 1/focal length as the rule of thumb suggests - 1/600~800 is recommended, 1/1500-2000 is a must for birds in flight etc.
> Yes, you can do better, but it stops being consistent, and in my book it is far better pumping ISO up and ending up with a noisy sharp image than a blurry/shaken one that has zero noise
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *
> 
> IS does help a lot, but I did not have any with the 400 5.6. I could get a 100-400 L IS for the same price (rental over the weekend) but I wanted to get the sharpest of the 2, and I know I would be shooting @ daytime. The 400 5.6 is far sharper than the 100-400 @ 5.6, so I opted for quality since I would be shooting daytime with good light & pretty much stuck @ 400 regardless (whale watching).
> 
> The 100-400 is weird as it is pretty much the last "modern" push-pull lens still in production. I guess you can still "pull/push" on it through the M and zoom. It won't be that much weirder than it already is.
> Will require some balancing with the fingers of the left hand instead of the palm, but that's common with all lenses with zoom rings too: you either juggle a bit on the fly, or you preset the focal length and shoot with that.
> I actually have a Black Rapid Sport, but that's a $60-70 strap that many would roll eyes and don't give a chance.
> The Fotasy is almost a mirror copy of the Black Rapid RS-7 for less than $20, so it is easier to suggest


I just noticed that part, and it acually varies a lot. Before I got a longer lens, I regularly hand-held my Sigma 70-300 at 1/120, and although I know the IS helps, I can also easily hand-hold my 100-400L at the same speed. I try to go a bit faster though, but I also don't like high ISO because of my cheap (and also old in the case of the 400D) bodies.

I actually use that 100-400L in a dark pub/dance to shoot live shows @ 1/120, ISO 1600, pop-up flash (I don't have anything better yet), and normally wide-open.


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JKuhn*
> 
> I just noticed that part, and it acually varies a lot. Before I got a longer lens, I regularly hand-held my Sigma 70-300 at 1/120, and although I know the IS helps, I can also easily hand-hold my 100-400L at the same speed. I try to go a bit faster though, but I also don't like high ISO because of my cheap (and also old in the case of the 400D) bodies.
> 
> I actually use that 100-400L in a dark pub/dance to shoot live shows @ 1/120, ISO 1600, pop-up flash (I don't have anything better yet), and normally wide-open.


It is doable, yes, but again, it depends on the subject, skill and style.

In wild life, you might be shooting an animal standing, or one flying / running.
With people, it might be a casual env. portrait, candit in the streets, sports etc.

Can you shoot 1/100s with a 300-400mm? Well, yes, but keeper rate will be low to very low. Thus almost all event photographers use monopods when "nearly handheld" versatility is required, and long focal lengths mandated. Even with IS being used, you might need to pump up ISO, as any short of movement is exaggerated when you are focusing through such a small FOV.

Add even the slightest panning on your side, ontop of the involuntary shaking = trouble.

Flash is a different story, as the more prominent the flash is as a light source, the more irrelevant it renders camera shake: flash duration is fractions of a second, safe to assume 1/500th in a "bad" scenario of a low quality speedlight to 1/1000 or less for better speedlights @ full power. That's effectively your exposure time, if pretty much anything really illuminated, is being so by the flash.

At any rate, skills vary - but what varies more is what qualifies as acceptable. The vast majority of people think the iPhone is the best camera they've held in their hands. Scrutinizing and downplaying the 100-400L is ridiculous under this perspective.


----------



## MistaBernie

I was hand holding my 24-70 around a campfire on Saturday... ISO 6400, 1/15th of a second or slower.. got some decent keepers.


----------



## jackeyjoe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JKuhn*
> 
> I'm curious what you people do for weather sealing on a cheap body. I shot a primary school soccer match this weekend, and here's what I did:
> 
> I took a plastic bag (large enough to get the body in), made a small hole which I stretched over the viewfinder before replacing the cup, and used a rubber band to seal it around my Canon 100-400L (between the body and tripod collar). I also made small holes for the camera strap as I didn't want to drop it. This forced me to shoot only with my 400D (higher burst rate in RAW) and 100-400L for most of the day, but it got the job done. Oh, and for those who might consider doing this, it was only in light rain so I can't say if it'll work in a storm.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


Huh, I don't do anything at all aside from keeping it under my arm if I am not using it. Mind you I only have a D7000 and 50mm f/1.8, which apparently is all weather sealed. Haven't had any issues yet, although I wouldn't risk it with a really expensive lens








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> I was hand holding my 24-70 around a campfire on Saturday... ISO 6400, 1/15th of a second or slower.. got some decent keepers.


of the fire or people around it? Either way, show!


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> I was hand holding my 24-70 around a campfire on Saturday... ISO 6400, 1/15th of a second or slower.. got some decent keepers.


wait you actually used your gear recently lol!?


----------



## MistaBernie

That's part of the reason I haven't been around as much lately... moar jobs, promotion @ work, etc..

part of the reason I can't post any of the fire pics at the moment, they're part of the wedding I shot this weekend (well kinda.. the venue asked me to take some photos by the fire)...


----------



## Conspiracy

thats good to hear man


----------



## kbros

First couple shots with the new d3200, manual focusing a 50 1.8. I'm happy with the much improved detail and sharpness compared to the 6mp D50 lol.
https://flic.kr/p/oNYs2FNike Solarsoft Moccasin by Noah Blalock, on Flickr
https://flic.kr/p/oNYs5MNike Solarsoft Moccasin by Noah Blalock, on Flickr


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> First couple shots with the new d3200, manual focusing a 50 1.8. I'm happy with the much improved detail and sharpness compared to the 6mp D50 lol.


You using that rangefinder thing I mentioned last week?


----------



## kbros

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> You using that rangefinder thing I mentioned last week?


Yessir, it works great!


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> Yessir, it works great!


Good good









I haven't used it beyond playing around inside the house. I should take my 28-80 out some time and give it a proper test


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> First couple shots with the new d3200, manual focusing a 50 1.8. I'm happy with the much improved detail and sharpness compared to the 6mp D50 lol.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> https://flic.kr/p/oNYs2FNike Solarsoft Moccasin by Noah Blalock, on Flickr
> https://flic.kr/p/oNYs5MNike Solarsoft Moccasin by Noah Blalock, on Flickr


Cool shots. Color, composition etc - and yes, the sharpness of this 50 1.8 is well known - wide open and all the way to f4-5.6 is better than Nikkor 1.4G/D but, boy, it produces a busy bokeh! - easily illustrated in the above images

So does the 35 1.8 DX, and more or less the Canon 50 1.8 ...one of the subtle areas the Sigma 30 1.4 easily sits a class above those lenses . Some nit-pick on the fact that Sigma does a tad worse with out of focus lights against the camera, but I think it is easily better with natural occurring highlights like this from the foliage in our example scenario.

Remember, still judging bokeh creaminess here - which is subjective to an extend - and the reasons people opt out of lenses despite them being sharper, or cheaper than "alternatives" that might have other advantages.


----------



## ace8uk

Well, don't you just suck the fun out of everything?


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ace8uk*
> 
> Well, don't you just suck the fun out of everything?


Well, depends on how you want to see it - still opened saying those are great shots, and did not mean to ruin his excitement having new toys and putting them to good use.
But I don't think it is just me getting a tad dizzy looking at those out of focus highlights, am I wrong?

And I did not want to throw a "one-liner" ruining the fun, saying "meh", nor stick to the "oh, amazing" - over and out. I had to elaborate, rant, be long winded. It's just me.


----------



## kbros

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Cool shots. Color, composition etc - and yes, the sharpness of this 50 1.8 is well known - wide open and all the way to f4-5.6 is better than Nikkor 1.4G/D but, boy, it produces a busy bokeh! - easily illustrated in the above images
> 
> So does the 35 1.8 DX, and more or less the Canon 50 1.8 ...one of the subtle areas the Sigma 30 1.4 easily sits a class above those lenses . Some nit-pick on the fact that Sigma does a tad worse with out of focus lights against the camera, but I think it is easily better with natural occurring highlights like this from the foliage in our example scenario.
> 
> Remember, still judging bokeh creaminess here - which is subjective to an extend - and the reasons people opt out of lenses despite them being sharper, or cheaper than "alternatives" that might have other advantages.


I totally agree with the crazy bokeh, it reminds me of small plastic bingo chips lol. Although the average viewer wouldn't really notice it because the main use of DOF is to isolate the subject anyway. It works fine for me right now, as I'm trying to get it out the door and get a "standard" focal length lens.


----------



## Jixr

I like the bokeh on it, looks nice to me.


----------



## ace8uk

I agree, that lens renders bokeh horribly, but I appreciate that he's making use of what he has.


----------



## jameyscott

So... I finally bought some continuous lighting. It's not great, but for my uses it's absolutely fantastic.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B005DFP6M4/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o00_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1

There are a lot of caveats though (Should be expected at this price point!) The bulb definitely isn't the full 105w, the stand is okay at beast with a lot plastic, but for the price I can't complain at all.

For someone like me with a dimly lit office it's great for my small youtube channel and occasional shots around my office. Not to mention it's big enough to accept a 4 socket adapter with 4 45w CFLs (looks like it might fit 4 of these 105w bulbs as well, but at least two and then 2 45w)

I don't expect it to stand the test of time, but I do think it'll survive my light (hahah, punny) uses until a proper set up seems like a reasonable purchase. I do plan on picking up another one, and maybe even a third.


----------



## Conspiracy

oh lord. those lights are awful. my ikan hotshoe mounted 144 bulb LED panel cranks out more light than those things. its really sad that companies make these super cheap lighting solutions. it will work dont get me wrong but the overall quality, as you have already seen, is very rough around the edges. when it breaks i highly suggest spending more money next time. dont cheap yourself toooo much on lighting. its not that you get what you pay for but to a degree you do get better quality and craftsmanship with higher quality gear not to mention those CFL bulbs arent bright at all unless you put them in sets of like 5-7 high wattage bulbs on a single fixture. i have only seen one nice quality CFL light and it have 7 bulbs that were i think 300W each. it was nicely constructed too. i used it once working at the state capitol here as i borrowed it from the local FOX affiliate because i didnt want to use my hot fresnel lights


----------



## jameyscott

Oh yeah, when it breaks I will definitely upgrade, but I have too many hobbies right now to be able to spend money on a proper lighting kit.
Any particular brand of cfls that you would recommend? I can at least upgrade the lights themselves for now.

With my current set up, I can get 18mm 3.5 with 100ISO, so it definitely is not bad for the money, but quality is definitely not great. I knew what I was getting into though.


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ace8uk*
> 
> I agree, that lens renders bokeh horribly, but I appreciate that he's making use of what he has.


^This.
Also note that this is a weakness when shooting against bright spots etc. If the background was in shade / he was shooting something inside / the background was less busy to begin with (vs. the current with thousands of leaves shooting light back perpendicular to the lens etc etc) the out of focus areas would be far smoother.
Should for example we had a finite amount of backlit spots (i.e. street lights) it would not be as profound.


----------



## Scott1541

Just got my bag packed for an explore me and a friend should be doing tomorrow and it weights an absolute tonne. All I've got in there is the D5100 with 10-20, F60 with 28-80, tripod, flashgun, a few other small accessories and a 2D maglite.









It should be a good day out if it's still anything like the pictures we've seen, which were taken around 3-4 months ago. It looks kind of like the farm equivalent to that rusty car place Conspiracy posted pictures of a while back. There should be several old trucks there, a few farm machines, several Land Rovers and an intact farmhouse with stuff still inside.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> Just got my bag packed for an explore me and a friend should be doing tomorrow and it weights an absolute tonne. All I've got in there is the D5100 with 10-20, F60 with 28-80, tripod, flashgun, a few other small accessories and a 2D maglite.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It should be a good day out if it's still anything like the pictures we've seen, which were taken around 3-4 months ago. It looks kind of like the farm equivalent to that rusty car place Conspiracy posted pictures of a while back. There should be several old trucks there, a few farm machines, several Land Rovers and an intact farmhouse with stuff still inside.


have fun and post lots of pics


----------



## Scott1541

We got down to the farm today but we could only take pictures outside since someone was actually living in the house, read below for more details of how it went...


Spoiler: What went down...



Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> Had one hell of a day today. We went to visit that abandoned farm and after avoiding cyclists and dog walkers on the tow path we found a suitable section of fence and we were in. We were there for about half an hour when we walked past the side of the farmhouse when the owner, who's in his late 60s came out and confronted us. He reaslied what we were up to and the he started talking about all the old trucks and vehicles he owns, which apparently includes an original pre-production Land Rover S1, and the very AEC Matador that towed Enola Gay out of the hanger before bombing hiroshima. After about an hour he let us continue shooting and we went off around the rest of the vehicles.
> 
> After we were done we thought we would go and tell him we were off so we went inside the farmhouse to find him. This then triggered another hour long conversation about various things, including how someone came in through the window last night and scared his dog. Then as we were standing there we look out through the window and see a man standing outside, holding a pair of bolt cutters in his hand. He only saw us two initially and shouted "What you doing lads!" to us. The farmer didn't believe there was someone outside at first but when he got up, and the man outside saw that the farmer was there he was straight off. All three of us then went outside fairly quickly and could see two men standing by the fence next to the canal, as we got a bit closer then jumped the fence and made off. Afterwards we looked around the lorries and several had copper piping cut off and bundled up next to them. We couldn't believe that while we were inside, in broad daylight a couple of men were going over his vehicles that we had just been photographing and cutting the copper pipes off them.
> 
> After this we decided it was about time to leave since so we put all of our gear away as if we encountered those two men again they'd likely not think twice about nicking our gear.






Some pictures:


Spoiler: Rusty Metal...



DSC_3176 by Scott3933, on Flickr

Dodgy Disco by Scott3933, on Flickr

Another Defender & Series 3 by Scott3933, on Flickr

Scammell Explorer by Scott3933, on Flickr

Scammell something... by Scott3933, on Flickr

Tractory stuff by Scott3933, on Flickr

DSC_3197 by Scott3933, on Flickr


----------



## Conspiracy

dig it dude

nice shots


----------



## Scott1541

It would have been nice to get down there in the late evening some time but it's a 20-25 minute drive, then 10 minute walk each way. Neither me or my friend that I went with have our own cars so we can't be that picky about when we do things


----------



## Jixr

Looks like I'm taking a trip to the beach this weekend, I'm going to pack my gear and hopefully get some good shots while I'm out.


----------



## Gobigorgohome

Okay, so I am a student and I want to get my first real camera (have one Canon something that costed around 150 USD which have worked okay for me, but I think the quality is rather poor and it was just a "wait for a better camera" really. I have looked a bit and I am debating purchasing a Nikon D7100 with the 18-105 mm optic. But then I started looking at a few reviews and I came across the Canon 6D and from what I could read it is a little better. The price difference from 1350 to 2500 USD bucks do not really mather too much, I have work on the side of the school so money is no big problem, I want to photography anything from cars, boats, nature, buildings and computer parts (and a lot more in the future I guess), I want this to be a one-time investment and if I want I could get something better after a few years if I want. I am very fussy about details and I would rather spend 1000 USD more on a camera that is somewhat better just so I do not have to buy a "cheaper" camera then sell it after a few months/years to buy something better.

So do you guys have any recommendations beside the Canon 6D and the Nikon D7100? I would love to buy the best camera under 1650 USD really with a combined optic for close and mid-range photography.


----------



## Jixr

the canon 6d owns the 7100, but the thing is, all the advance controlls, features, and benifits are not usefull at all if you don't know how to properly use the camera, might as welll just be using a point and shoot.


----------



## laboitenoire

Honestly, if you're buying your first camera, the 6D is probably gonna be way too much. Better to jump in and find out you like it before you blow too much money.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> the canon 6d owns the 7100, but the thing is, all the advance controlls, features, and benifits are not usefull at all if you don't know how to properly use the camera, might as welll just be using a point and shoot.


6D doesnt beat the 7100 in every department. it truly depends on what you want to shoot. there are several categories that i would totally chose a 7100 over a 6D for such as sports, wildlife, and general photography. just because its FF doesnt mean its a good camera. i will say for the price the 6D is an awesome bang for your buck FF camera if you want something new instead of used. the 6D is a smart choice if your printing your photos out but if your just shooting for fun the 7100 will be much faster and take practically the same quality shot with ever so slightly less dynamic range. take the money saved and put it in good glass. the only thing that makes the 6D worth it for a new camera is if you buy it bundled with the 24-105L because youre getting like almost half off on that lens when you buy them together. otherwise people end up buying body only and putting entry level glass on a FF camera and wonder why their pictures dont rock


----------



## Magical Eskimo

My question is what sort of job does a student have on the side that allows the ability to purchase a camera that expensive?? I think I've chosen the wrong career path!!


----------



## OmarCCX

A scholarship. lol


----------



## Conspiracy

refund money lol

also ive decided to stop being cheap. in 2 months im buying a 1DmkIV unless canons new 7DmkII blows the 1D away which is possible but kinda doubtful it will be a complete knockout


----------



## Gobigorgohome

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> the canon 6d owns the 7100, but the thing is, all the advance controlls, features, and benifits are not usefull at all if you don't know how to properly use the camera, might as welll just be using a point and shoot.


Yes, that is what I have started to wonder about, and the price is more than double for the 6D vs the D7100.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> Honestly, if you're buying your first camera, the 6D is probably gonna be way too much. Better to jump in and find out you like it before you blow too much money.


Yes, I currently have a Canon Ixus 200 (or something like that) and it is okay if I just want to look at the pictures on the camera, but on the computer and other stuff which can show the picture at the full resolution it looks pretty bad. I want the resolution together with a better camera and optics. I guess D7100 is entry level for me and I read somewhere that the 7100 is a good "noobie" camera.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> 6D doesnt beat the 7100 in every department. it truly depends on what you want to shoot. there are several categories that i would totally chose a 7100 over a 6D for such as sports, wildlife, and general photography. just because its FF doesnt mean its a good camera. i will say for the price the 6D is an awesome bang for your buck FF camera if you want something new instead of used. the 6D is a smart choice if your printing your photos out but if your just shooting for fun the 7100 will be much faster and take practically the same quality shot with ever so slightly less dynamic range. take the money saved and put it in good glass. the only thing that makes the 6D worth it for a new camera is if you buy it bundled with the 24-105L because youre getting like almost half off on that lens when you buy them together. otherwise people end up buying body only and putting entry level glass on a FF camera and wonder why their pictures dont rock


In the reviews I have been reading it pretty much say the same, the 7100 is more "action" camera than the 6D, and the 6D is more leaned towards "professional" users and probably a lot more fussy about small details than I am. Beside, the D7100 I can get for about 1600 USD which is an okay price to pay for the camera + the 18-105 optics (some sort of package solution I guess).
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> My question is what sort of job does a student have on the side that allows the ability to purchase a camera that expensive?? I think I've chosen the wrong career path!!


I work at some kind of public health service with work pretty much every weekend and one night a week, studying the second year at collage beside working.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

About to buy some extension tubes, recommendations? I saw someone bought some here the other day for $45, but then after some searching I saw similar looking ones for $25. What am specifics should I be looking for? Does price effect image quality?


----------



## PsYcHo29388

How many of you guys have had to deal with SD Card locking? As in you plug in your camera into your computer but you cannot edit your photos right on the camera because its all write protected? I Recently obtained a GoPro and it has this issue, the only work around is to throw the card into an SD Card Reader and make sure that the lock on the side of it is off.


----------



## kbros

I hung out on my roof tonight.

Milkyway by Noah Blalock, on Flickr


----------



## Scott1541

Drop the shutter speed down to 10s and maybe put the ISO up a stop too and I think you'll get better results









I've tried astrophotography a couple of times and there's too much light pollution here to get good results. I meant to try again while I was camping a couple of weeks ago but there was only one night with clear skies, and I couldn't be bothered to get my gear out.


----------



## laboitenoire

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gobigorgohome*
> 
> Yes, that is what I have started to wonder about, and the price is more than double for the 6D vs the D7100.
> Yes, I currently have a Canon Ixus 200 (or something like that) and it is okay if I just want to look at the pictures on the camera, but on the computer and other stuff which can show the picture at the full resolution it looks pretty bad. I want the resolution together with a better camera and optics. I guess D7100 is entry level for me and I read somewhere that the 7100 is a good "noobie" camera.
> In the reviews I have been reading it pretty much say the same, the 7100 is more "action" camera than the 6D, and the 6D is more leaned towards "professional" users and probably a lot more fussy about small details than I am. Beside, the D7100 I can get for about 1600 USD which is an okay price to pay for the camera + the 18-105 optics (some sort of package solution I guess).
> I work at some kind of public health service with work pretty much every weekend and one night a week, studying the second year at collage beside working.


Like I said, if you're buying your first real camera, the 6D is overkill. The D7x00 series is solidly in the upper midrange in terms of features and price. I've been shooting for years and even still my D7000 is more camera than I often need.

And how much is just the body for the D7100 over there? The 18-105 VR is an okay lens to start with, but depending on how much things cost it may be better to buy the body and get better lenses.


----------



## Conspiracy

Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gobigorgohome*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> the canon 6d owns the 7100, but the thing is, all the advance controlls, features, and benifits are not usefull at all if you don't know how to properly use the camera, might as welll just be using a point and shoot.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, that is what I have started to wonder about, and the price is more than double for the 6D vs the D7100.
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> Honestly, if you're buying your first camera, the 6D is probably gonna be way too much. Better to jump in and find out you like it before you blow too much money.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes, I currently have a Canon Ixus 200 (or something like that) and it is okay if I just want to look at the pictures on the camera, but on the computer and other stuff which can show the picture at the full resolution it looks pretty bad. I want the resolution together with a better camera and optics. I guess D7100 is entry level for me and I read somewhere that the 7100 is a good "noobie" camera.
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> 6D doesnt beat the 7100 in every department. it truly depends on what you want to shoot. there are several categories that i would totally chose a 7100 over a 6D for such as sports, wildlife, and general photography. just because its FF doesnt mean its a good camera. i will say for the price the 6D is an awesome bang for your buck FF camera if you want something new instead of used. the 6D is a smart choice if your printing your photos out but if your just shooting for fun the 7100 will be much faster and take practically the same quality shot with ever so slightly less dynamic range. take the money saved and put it in good glass. the only thing that makes the 6D worth it for a new camera is if you buy it bundled with the 24-105L because youre getting like almost half off on that lens when you buy them together. otherwise people end up buying body only and putting entry level glass on a FF camera and wonder why their pictures dont rock
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> In the reviews I have been reading it pretty much say the same, the 7100 is more "action" camera than the 6D, and the 6D is more leaned towards "professional" users and probably a lot more fussy about small details than I am. Beside, the D7100 I can get for about 1600 USD which is an okay price to pay for the camera + the 18-105 optics (some sort of package solution I guess).
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> My question is what sort of job does a student have on the side that allows the ability to purchase a camera that expensive?? I think I've chosen the wrong career path!!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I work at some kind of public health service with work pretty much every weekend and one night a week, studying the second year at collage beside working.
Click to expand...





first of all. reviews are not the end all answer to everything. they examine the overall performance of a camera. You cant compare the D7100 to the 6D fairly. The 6D is full frame yes, offers the *capability* but no guarantee of better quality, has outdated AF, is not marketed as a pro body but more of a consumer FF camera for amateurs that cant afford the 5D. the 7100 is by no means a newbie camera. if youre calling it that because you read somewhere online that crop cameras are for beginners then you need to start over and do proper research. the 7100 is a very powerful camera. for someone buying their first DSLR you will not be able to tell the difference between a T3i and a 6D anyway lol. the 7100 is more than an "action" camera, its an all purpose camera that can handle anything you put it up against. the 6D is a nice camera but slow, honestly that wont matter for you because for a first camera you wont know how to use it to its full potential until after you learn its limitations.

another thing to note. resolution is practically irrelevant unless youre printing your photos in larger than normal sizes. if youre looking to just spend money on a good camera and then learn photography later then waste your money on a Sony A7s. otherwise be smart and buy a semi-professional camera and good lenses to go with it rather than blowing your wad on a FF camera and buying cheap lenses because you ran out of money for lenses that match the quality that the 6D will give you. when i was working at best buy selling camera i cant tell you how many idiots would buy the 6D because of good reviews and then slap the cheapest glass on it and complain about lack of quality that they saw in internet samples.

going back to a point i already made. you will not be able to tell the difference in image quality between those two camera. buy what you want because none of us can stop you. there is no wrong camera choice but there are smart camera choices


----------



## ace8uk

I was going to chime in on this, but Conspiracy pretty much said everything that I wanted to. I'm a strong believer in buying quality first, but that implies the D7X00 is a bad camera to begin with, and it isn't. I think even the D7X00 series is a bit overkill for a first camera, but it's entirely your choice.


----------



## jameyscott

This is why I started off with the t3i instead of something better. After installing ML... I've realized how much more I need to learn. I'd really like to take a photography course at my local CC, but it doesn't fit in wit:/my course schedule. :/


----------



## OmarCCX

If he starts with a D5xxx or lower he'll want to end up upgrading to a D7K in a matter of months. Might as well start there to begin with.


----------



## Sean Webster

For the whole what camera to buy debate going on, I would suggest you just get a cheap entry level body and spend more on fast lenses. All full frame really just offers you is better ISO performance over 1,000 ISO and a larger POV with same mm range lenses...and sadly for some, more camera E-Peen. lol Otherwise, a crop body can do everything else just as good. I would suggest you also feel the camera bodies in your hands as well before you buy. For example, I hate the feel of the intro bodies and most Nikon bodies. While I love the feel of the canon 5DMKIII and 6D in my hands. My friend on the other hand can't stand touching Canon bodies lol.

And there are the other mirrorless option out there, my friend really likes his Fuji X-T1 over anything else. I can't get used to the viewfinder on it tho. But the mirrorless cameras are pretty cool looking and light.


----------



## pcfoo

Don't buy expensive gear after saving up money for ages etc...a camera should be thought of as a disposable tool, just like a car - if you cannot afford to use either anywhere, at anytime, with the slight possibility loosing them for whichever reason without getting your psychology & budget ruined, you have a more expensive camera / car / OC PC etc than you can really afford.
That's me ofc, but I feel that when I buy any "utility" thing, I should be able to enjoy and use it way bigger % of the time than taking care and babying it.

Unless ofc I am buying a vintage car / camera etc to keep behind glass and stare more than use. - again, that's a game for people that have allocated enough of their income for that.

There are lots of camera deals out there (used mainly ofc) that can give you great results under nearly any situation.
The only condition is that you get to use them enough to have the experience to pull it off. There is no single camera out there that will make an unseasoned photographer take consistently good photos any better than a equivalent used camera - even if the latter is 1-2 generations older.


----------



## Scott1541

I agree providing insurance comes under being able to afford a replacement. I don't see anything wrong with saving up for a better caemera as long as the act of saving up doesn't prevent you shooting for whatever reason.

I also agree that cameras are tools that inevitably wear out so you should budget for upgrades, repairs and replacements.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OmarCCX*
> 
> If he starts with a D5xxx or lower he'll want to end up upgrading to a D7K in a matter of months. Might as well start there to begin with.


is that a fact?


----------



## Gobigorgohome

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laboitenoire*
> 
> Like I said, if you're buying your first real camera, the 6D is overkill. The D7x00 series is solidly in the upper midrange in terms of features and price. I've been shooting for years and even still my D7000 is more camera than I often need.
> 
> And how much is just the body for the D7100 over there? The 18-105 VR is an okay lens to start with, but depending on how much things cost it may be better to buy the body and get better lenses.


Yes, the 6D is a little overkill, the camera itself cost 2100 USD when the D7100 cost 1300 USD, the D7100 with the 18-105 mm cost 1590 USD. Which optic would you recommend on the D7100 if I just buy the camera without the 18-105 mm optic?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> 
> first of all. reviews are not the end all answer to everything. they examine the overall performance of a camera. You cant compare the D7100 to the 6D fairly. The 6D is full frame yes, offers the *capability* but no guarantee of better quality, has outdated AF, is not marketed as a pro body but more of a consumer FF camera for amateurs that cant afford the 5D. the 7100 is by no means a newbie camera. if youre calling it that because you read somewhere online that crop cameras are for beginners then you need to start over and do proper research. the 7100 is a very powerful camera. for someone buying their first DSLR you will not be able to tell the difference between a T3i and a 6D anyway lol. the 7100 is more than an "action" camera, its an all purpose camera that can handle anything you put it up against. the 6D is a nice camera but slow, honestly that wont matter for you because for a first camera you wont know how to use it to its full potential until after you learn its limitations.
> 
> another thing to note. resolution is practically irrelevant unless youre printing your photos in larger than normal sizes. if youre looking to just spend money on a good camera and then learn photography later then waste your money on a Sony A7s. otherwise be smart and buy a semi-professional camera and good lenses to go with it rather than blowing your wad on a FF camera and buying cheap lenses because you ran out of money for lenses that match the quality that the 6D will give you. when i was working at best buy selling camera i cant tell you how many idiots would buy the 6D because of good reviews and then slap the cheapest glass on it and complain about lack of quality that they saw in internet samples.
> 
> going back to a point i already made. you will not be able to tell the difference in image quality between those two camera. buy what you want because none of us can stop you. there is no wrong camera choice but there are smart camera choices


I do not think I said that the D7100 is a action camera, but from what I have read of it, it is supposed to be better at taking pictures of moving objects and the 6D more towards things that stand still. No, I am not a big time photograph, I admit that, but I would like to buy a good camera to start off with so I do not have to sell it and buy a more expensive one after a few months.
It would have helped me more that you could have given me alternatives of optics instead of criticising on what I had set up as my options when it got to buying a camera, a lot of what you are writing here is really meaningless to me, I would rather you gave me some advice and not try to be the "big boy" and set the "newbie" at a lower ranked place. Thank you very much!








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ace8uk*
> 
> I was going to chime in on this, but Conspiracy pretty much said everything that I wanted to. I'm a strong believer in buying quality first, but that implies the D7X00 is a bad camera to begin with, and it isn't. I think even the D7X00 series is a bit overkill for a first camera, but it's entirely your choice.


I did not say that the D7100 was a bad camera, I just implied that I did not wanted to buy a camera that is garbage (like cheaper cameras).
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jameyscott*
> 
> This is why I started off with the t3i instead of something better. After installing ML... I've realized how much more I need to learn. I'd really like to take a photography course at my local CC, but it doesn't fit in wit:/my course schedule. :/


I believe that I could find some kind of guide of setting up different modes on the cameras and then try out different things until I find something that works good for my preferences.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OmarCCX*
> 
> If he starts with a D5xxx or lower he'll want to end up upgrading to a D7K in a matter of months. Might as well start there to begin with.


You got me right on, sir. I would like to buy a camera for about 1650 USD (which the D7100 match pretty good). If it is 2000 or more with lenses does not really mather, but that was the thought behind it.


----------



## Conspiracy

grow up and join the rest of the internet.

im not selling you a camera therefore i dont have to ask you the probing questions to see what interests you. give us a budget and we will make suggestions.

you lack experience and knowledge to know what is good quality. in the world of photography cheap doesnt mean bad. until you open your mind to what is out there you wont be able to understand what youre spending money on anyway. photography is not an impulse buy or hobby, its something you learn over time









im not trying to be the "big boy" and put your down as a newbie. we are all here because we like photography, i gave you very solid pointers. if you find everything i have tried to tell you as meaningless then you might as well buy a 6D since you thinks its better because of reviews you read. i can do without your sarcasm as well considering i gave you incredible advice that you are completely missing. so i will put it in bold for you

*
It does not matter what camera you buy because as a newcomer to photography i promise that you will not be able to tell the difference until you learn the limitations of your equipment. A more expensive camera will not give you better quality, it will provide the ability to capture higher quality images but until you master your gear you will get newbie photos anyway*


----------



## ace8uk

I don't think Conspiracy was trying to be derogatory in any way, he was just saying it how it is. People become obsessed with buying "the best" camera, and he's just saying that there is no such thing. The best camera is the one in your hands, an amazing camera really doesn't make for an amazing image; sharpness and resolution don't make for a great photograph.

You seem to be taking a lot of offence when people here are trying to help you, nobody is trying to be an arse, just saying how it is. A cheaper DSLR will be so much better for you at the moment, when you start out with photography it really doesn't matter what camera you have as most of your time should be spent learning how to control the camera and compose an image.


----------



## OmarCCX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> is that a fact?


It's how most of the people I personally know have felt. It also depends on the intentions of the person. I've also seen people buy 60Ds and not use them for over a year which makes me sad.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ace8uk*
> 
> I don't think Conspiracy was trying to be derogatory in any way, he was just saying it how it is. People become obsessed with buying "the best" camera, and he's just saying that there is no such thing. The best camera is the one in your hands, an amazing camera really doesn't make for an amazing image; sharpness and resolution don't make for a great photograph.
> 
> You seem to be taking a lot of offence when people here are trying to help you, nobody is trying to be an arse, just saying how it is. A cheaper DSLR will be so much better for you at the moment, when you start out with photography it really doesn't matter what camera you have as most of your time should be spent learning how to control the camera and compose an image.


yup. if we are nice and sugar coat everything for you then you will gain nothing, buy an expensive camera, have buyers remorse, never shoot it or return it, and who knows what else OR shoot it and be pissed that it doesnt give you the quality you think it should for the price

@omarccx sounds like your friends had gear lust and upgraded because they wanted something more expensive because im currently shooting on a 10 year old 8MP camera and still manage to take acceptable photos so no way will a brand new entry level camera with considerably newer technology make someone want a newer camera lol. its less about the gear and more about the person. some people naturally like the latest and greatest or enjoy upgrading a lot. isolated incident = opinion =/= fact







just messing though. to each their own. until recently i was ok with buying cheap old camera because the camera doesnt matter, now i have a really good job and want to finally buy newer cameras that will give me nicer ISO performance to shoot sports under super terrrrrible lighting conditions


----------



## Gobigorgohome

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ace8uk*
> 
> I don't think Conspiracy was trying to be derogatory in any way, he was just saying it how it is. People become obsessed with buying "the best" camera, and he's just saying that there is no such thing. The best camera is the one in your hands, an amazing camera really doesn't make for an amazing image; sharpness and resolution don't make for a great photograph.
> 
> You seem to be taking a lot of offence when people here are trying to help you, nobody is trying to be an arse, just saying how it is. A cheaper DSLR will be so much better for you at the moment, when you start out with photography it really doesn't matter what camera you have as most of your time should be spent learning how to control the camera and compose an image.


I do not find you condescending, so I just ask you. Which camera would you recommend to a newbie which had a budget for about 1650 USD (included camera and optics)? I have just set my eye on the D7100, and I missed a pretty good deal on the D5200 last weekend so I feel like I have nothing to loose on just going with the D7100. If I do not get any other suggestions I guess I will hear around with different shops and in this thread after which optic(s) I should buy to the D7100.

I do not take a lot of offence, but when someone is typing like that to me, then I get offended, case closed. You are saying a cheaper DSLR would be "more optimal" for me, Could you give me some options of better newbie-cameras that I would be happy with aswell? And I also like to know which stands, bags, memorysticks and other things I also might need.

I would also like a better explanation of what you are meaning with "compose an image".









In advance, thank you a lot.


----------



## Conspiracy

so sensitive









read these then come back when youre done. this will at least get you started

http://www.overclock.net/t/898709/for-new-dslr-users-a-beginners-guide

http://www.overclock.net/t/911216/for-new-dslr-users-a-slightly-more-advanced-guide


----------



## ace8uk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gobigorgohome*
> 
> I do not find you condescending, so I just ask you. Which camera would you recommend to a newbie which had a budget for about 1650 USD (included camera and optics)? I have just set my eye on the D7100, and I missed a pretty good deal on the D5200 last weekend so I feel like I have nothing to loose on just going with the D7100. If I do not get any other suggestions I guess I will hear around with different shops and in this thread after which optic(s) I should buy to the D7100.
> 
> I do not take a lot of offence, but when someone is typing like that to me, then I get offended, case closed. You are saying a cheaper DSLR would be "more optimal" for me, Could you give me some options of better newbie-cameras that I would be happy with aswell? And I also like to know which stands, bags, memorysticks and other things I also might need.
> 
> I would also like a better explanation of what you are meaning with "compose an image".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In advance, thank you a lot.


The trouble is that people assume that because a camera is cheaper, then it is a "newbie" camera. That simply isn't the case. Loads of people still shoot older camera bodies because they're still fantastic quality. That's the point we're trying to make, it isn't us saying you aren't ready for an amazing camera yet, it's us saying that older cameras are far more capable than you're giving them credit for. Kbros only recently stopped shooting on a D50, which he learned on. Of course it's nice to have more pixels and better ISO performance, amongst other things, but when you're learning it's better to have less things to confuse you. A lot of people will recommend you start on film to truly appreciate photography as an art and understand exposure.

Now that's all out there, I'd say if you can snag a good deal on a D7100 and you're willing to spend that much money, then it'll last you a long time. I'd definitely stick with some kind of standard zoom that comes with the camera to begin with and get used to shooting that, then see which focal lengths you find yourself shooting at the most and consider new lens purchases from there.


----------



## Eggs and bacon

I am one of those people who would recommend you start with film. It has several benefits
1. You think before you shoot: you don't take 10 photos of the same scene from slightly different angle, you pick the best.
2. learning exposure. Once you get a roll back with nothing on it, you pretty quickly.
3. Film cameras generally look cool =)
4. You can get a film camera and a nice lens for under 100 bucks, cheap enough to test the waters to see if you like photography at all, then you can buy your nice 1.5k digital camera. Rather then spending 1.5k on a nice digital camera only to use it for a couple weeks.
Proof of cheap awesome file cameras here and here.

But feel free to ignore me, most people can not be bothered to shoot film in the digital era.

On another note I won an auction with 3 TLRs, I am giving away two to friends and keeping a nice yashicamat 124g =)


----------



## Conspiracy

awesome on the TLR win

ALSO

has anyone ever bought used bodies from Adorama. Im scratching the 1DmkIII and will just buy a 1DmkIV in two months since im finding them for $2500 and the 1DmkIII is only $1000. might as well get a nicer upgrade for $1500 more. only reason i ask is because i love KEH but they are selling the 1D4 for $3500 which is a pretty serious price difference.


----------



## MistaBernie

I've bought used from Adorama and B&H, they will absolutely be as advertised and their grading is almost always spot on.


----------



## Conspiracy

cool. yeah B&H also has it graded as an 8 for $3000. i still have 30 more days unless something comes up that just cant be passed. ill buy one end of next month. i get paid this week so hopefully im patient enough to wait one more month so that i have plenty of money left over. i love my new job but being paid once a month is totally new to me


----------



## MistaBernie

Do you have Paypal Buyer Credit (Bill Me Later)? Six months free financing..


----------



## Conspiracy

naw ill just pay cash because ill have the money anyway. i dont want to deal too much with that stuff not to mention im already in the middle of financing a lens through best buy with the credit card. id prefer to finance only one thing at a time in case anything bad happens i dont ruin my credit. im more than likely going to pay off 50% of my remaining balance on my best buy card after i pay the rest of my bills since i made a small payment this past month and will have the money to make another payment just to get it close to being paid off


----------



## Jim-CL

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Eggs and bacon*
> 
> I am one of those people who would recommend you start with film. It has several benefits
> 1. You think before you shoot: you don't take 10 photos of the same scene from slightly different angle, you pick the best.
> 2. learning exposure. Once you get a roll back with nothing on it, you pretty quickly.
> 3. Film cameras generally look cool =)
> 4. You can get a film camera and a nice lens for under 100 bucks, cheap enough to test the waters to see if you like photography at all, then you can buy your nice 1.5k digital camera. Rather then spending 1.5k on a nice digital camera only to use it for a couple weeks.
> Proof of cheap awesome file cameras here and here.
> 
> But feel free to ignore me, most people can not be bothered to shoot film in the digital era.
> 
> On another note I won an auction with 3 TLRs, I am giving away two to friends and keeping a nice yashicamat 124g =)


[taking on my vendor hat off here ...







]

I'm not sure I fully agree with this. Using digital gave me the freedom to fully explore exposure settings, DOF, etc. on my camera. I shot the equivalent of dozens of rolls of film and got immediate feedback. Shooting film would have been costly and time consuming. I found a good deal on an F5, so I bought it, partly for that reason, but never ended up using it.

I will say that composition often suffers in the digital age. It's too easy to machine gun shots in the hope that something will turn out well. I've been guilty of that myself







Film forces you to be more disciplined. In that sense, film has the advantage for a newcomer.


----------



## MistaBernie

Good call. If you don't _need_ it immediately, wait till you can swing it yourself.


----------



## Conspiracy

yup









and i dont think waiting one month will be THAT bad considering its soooo hot outside that i dont want to start shooting soccer until it drop below 90ish lol. so no point in rushing to buy as im seeing lots of people upgrading to the 1DX lately which means it will be easier to find a 1DmkIV for a reasonable price. definitely cheaper and faster for my needs than buying a 5D3 which is nice and all but i will rarely shooting much other than sports and some events here and there on campus if they ask.


----------



## Jim-CL

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gobigorgohome*
> 
> I do not find you condescending, so I just ask you. Which camera would you recommend to a newbie which had a budget for about 1650 USD (included camera and optics)? I have just set my eye on the D7100, and I missed a pretty good deal on the D5200 last weekend so I feel like I have nothing to loose on just going with the D7100. If I do not get any other suggestions I guess I will hear around with different shops and in this thread after which optic(s) I should buy to the D7100.
> 
> I do not take a lot of offence, but when someone is typing like that to me, then I get offended, case closed. You are saying a cheaper DSLR would be "more optimal" for me, Could you give me some options of better newbie-cameras that I would be happy with aswell? And I also like to know which stands, bags, memorysticks and other things I also might need.
> 
> I would also like a better explanation of what you are meaning with "compose an image".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In advance, thank you a lot.


The D7100 is an extremely good camera. I had a D7000 before it was "stolen"







by my product team for it's superior performance over the D300 in product photos (better IQ and WB under difficult lighting). You really can't go wrong with it. I will caution you though as a newcomer, that it is easy to fall in love with tech (speaking from experience here!







) in the hopes that it will somehow make you a better photographer. It won't. if anything, it will be a distraction. Expensive cameras and lenses have their purpose, but except for unusual salutations, they don't add much to a picture unless you _really_ know what you're doing. Good photography is achieved by lighting and composition and that can be achieved by almost any camera. Top level gear only adds a little to that. For pros, the cost is worth it; for the rest of us - YMMV


----------



## Gobigorgohome

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Eggs and bacon*
> 
> I am one of those people who would recommend you start with film. It has several benefits
> 1. You think before you shoot: you don't take 10 photos of the same scene from slightly different angle, you pick the best.
> 2. learning exposure. Once you get a roll back with nothing on it, you pretty quickly.
> 3. Film cameras generally look cool =)
> 4. You can get a film camera and a nice lens for under 100 bucks, cheap enough to test the waters to see if you like photography at all, then you can buy your nice 1.5k digital camera. Rather then spending 1.5k on a nice digital camera only to use it for a couple weeks.
> Proof of cheap awesome file cameras here and here.
> 
> But feel free to ignore me, most people can not be bothered to shoot film in the digital era.
> 
> On another note I won an auction with 3 TLRs, I am giving away two to friends and keeping a nice yashicamat 124g =)


I am not "going back" to a film camera, just because it is kind of unpractical and my father have an expensive Canon-camera that is 30 years old (or more) laying in the house, which is almost never used, of course I see what you trying to get to there. For me the camera (either dSLR or "normal" camera) it will be used now and then, but the Canon Ixus 200 I have now is just a little lousy if it does not have exactly the right lightning and it is really bad when seeing it on the computer. I normally use the Ixus to take shots of animals, water, boats, cars and computers. As of taking a lot of shots of the same object, I do not really do that other than on my cellphone







I do not even waste space on the Ixus 200 even though it blows. I kind of like that camera, but I want something that is a little more advanced so I can enjoy the pictures more and now that my computer is "done" I need something new to do beside school and work. I do not think I will use the camera a whole lot, but rather less than most of you guys, I just want quality of what I am taking pictures of. The D7100 I think fit my preferences pretty good.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Case Labs*
> 
> The D7100 is an extremely good camera. I had a D7000 before it was "stolen"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> by my product team for it's superior performance over the D300 in product photos (better IQ and WB under difficult lighting). You really can't go wrong with it. I will caution you though as a newcomer, that it is easy to fall in love with tech (speaking from experience here!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ) in the hopes that it will somehow make you a better photographer. It won't. if anything, it will be a distraction. Expensive cameras and lenses have their purpose, but except for unusual salutations, they don't add much to a picture unless you _really_ know what you're doing. Good photography is achieved by lighting and composition and that can be achieved by almost any camera. Top level gear only adds a little to that. For pros, the cost is worth it; for the rest of us - YMMV


I have set my mind on the Nikon D7100 now, seems like it is the right amount of money to "waste" on a camera this time around. I am probably buying it with the 18-105 mm optics, if there is not any better optics to start out with?









Thanks for the replays.


----------



## Conspiracy

get the newer 18-140 instead. more reach and slightly improved IQ


----------



## Jim-CL

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gobigorgohome*
> 
> I have set my mind on the Nikon D7100 now, seems like it is the right amount of money to "waste" on a camera this time around. I am probably buying it with the 18-105 mm optics, if there is not any better optics to start out with?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks for the replays.


I can't comment directly on the 18-105, but from what I've read, it's a pretty "average" lens. If you can get a good deal on a bundle, fine, otherwise, I'd try to go to the 18-140. I have the 18-200 and it's pretty solid. IQ is reasonably good (a little soft on the long end) . All these lenses are a little slow, so I would also suggest a fast prime (35mm or 50mm). My work horse is the 24-70, but it's big (FX), heavy, and expensive, so I can't recommend that at this point.


----------



## Kreserb

Thought this would be the best place to ask, please correct me if I'm wrong










I have been toying with the idea of buying a couple of old and used lenses with adaptors for cheap so that I can get some practise with something other than the standard lens that came with my 1200D.

would this at all be possible? or would the resulting pictures be so bad that I might as well just start saving up for new lenses?









I'm just looking for ways to more interesting shots for cheap


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gobigorgohome*
> 
> I am not "going back" to a film camera...I have set my mind on the Nikon D7100 now, seems like it is the right amount of money to "waste" on a camera this time around. I am probably buying it with the 18-105 mm optics, if there is not any better optics to start out with?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks for the replays.


Nothing against film - I really like developing it really (something "magic" about it, tho it has been some time since I've left my dev kit & film cameras @ my homecountry and never moved it in the US) but I agree that it is impractical in numerous ways. Plus, unless you are really going for 120/220 or 4x5 or bigger, there is really little reason from a quality or even economic perspective: if you shoot a lot, and you don't develop your own stuff, you will break even getting any kind of D-SLR taking into account the extra work and consumable costs pretty fast. It is just too cumbersome to get things online or even print them to decent quality using film as your original medium.

I agree that digital has in some ways diminished the value of each of our clicks as amateurs, but this is actually relative to the perception of each shooter: even between the "masters", the way a street photoreporter ala Cartier-Bresson was thinking about his clicks was totally different to what a landscape photographer ala Adams and the members of the f/64 club would think about them: one would shoot a handful an hour, the other few thousands a day, yet none of the two categories was really thinking about "cost" or was worried about "limited supply" of film.

It is kind of a distorted perception in a way, as if the amateur film photographers that would think twice before "wasting" one of their 24 or 36 exposures in [135], had anything in common with the examples above, and all 3 would cherish each frame of emulsion as sacred









As for the D7100 and optics for it...
I would go for a super zoom as the ones mentioned by you and conspiracy to use as an "all-around" / travel / family etc toy.
I would not worry much about quality of optics in those, just call them "passable" and have realistic expectations. Don't spent the money expecting something amazing as far as quality goes, super-zooms are all about convenience and sacrifices have to be made.

Then add a used Nikkor 35 1.8 DX or Sigma 30 1.4 DC for $200/300 respectively, and use that as much as you can (possibly leaving the zoom @ home or in the bag) to get yourself to think more, use your body & mind trying to learn photography.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kreserb*
> 
> Thought this would be the best place to ask, please correct me if I'm wrong
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have been toying with the idea of buying a couple of old and used lenses with adaptors for cheap so that I can get some practise with something other than the standard lens that came with my 1200D.
> 
> would this at all be possible? or would the resulting pictures be so bad that I might as well just start saving up for new lenses?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm just looking for ways to more interesting shots for cheap


Which are the lenses or better "what kind of shots" are you really after?

There are many great lenses (for the price usually, tho some are great with the full meaning) out there, but in the long run few people actually use manual focus lenses with D-SLRs for more than toying around and then locking them up in a drawer.


----------



## Scott1541

I'm on holiday and walked past the local camera shop almost drooling.

They have a couple of Mamiya SLRs, a couple of Bronicas, a few other things and a TLR. Then they have all the usual canikon stuff too.


----------



## kbros

Waay OT but can any of you OCN vets help me out. I'd like to start a "Sneakerhead/ Sneaker Enthusiast" Club but I have no idea where to put it. pls halp


----------



## ace8uk

In the Off Topic section would be my advice.

There is a member-run clubs section here: http://www.overclock.net/f/377/member-run-clubs


----------



## kbros

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ace8uk*
> 
> In the Off Topic section would be my advice.
> 
> There is a member-run clubs section here: http://www.overclock.net/f/377/member-run-clubs


Alright thanks.


----------



## Eggs and bacon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> I'm on holiday and walked past the local camera shop almost drooling.
> 
> They have a couple of Mamiya SLRs, a couple of Bronicas, a few other things and a TLR. Then they have all the usual canikon stuff too.


I know that feeling, at the viewing of an auction I went too I managed to hold a mint Mamaiya 7 and a few old Leicas. The Mamiya sold for $900 with two lenses , which is an absolute bargain (Body only in keh is 1100 and maybe anothe 1000 for lenses), I was a little sad I didn't have the cash on hand to bid.


----------



## Mongol

All this talk about cameras for beginners and no mention of the "lowly" D7000.









Can be had with glass for much less than the D7100. Just a thought.


----------



## ace8uk

I shoot on a D7000.


----------



## Conspiracy

i shoot on a 1DmkII which can be bought for $400 on KEH and provides excellent IQ and clean photos at ISO 800 or below


----------



## pcfoo

Yeah, pretty weird talking about a D7000 in this manner...this is probably still one of the best APS-C DSLRs in the market.

Always keep in mind that photographic masterpieces taken less than a decade ago with far inferior cameras in pretty much any way, or artists made Spiderman III / King Kong / Avatar / (your choice here) on PCs slower than our current i7s etc etc. And that's cause there is no need to rant about relative equipment available more than a decade ago.









For the price, the D7000 is still great. I would rather get a good lens or two with it than fooling myself that I move up the food chain going for the 7100 or w/e would be the "upgrade".


----------



## THEStorm

I too shoot a D7000, I am very pleased with mine!


----------



## Blaise170

Would this be a decent DSLR just for occasional use?

http://www.ebay.com/itm/201154105283


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Considering it's film, no.


----------



## Blaise170

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> Considering it's film, no.


Ooh, didn't even notice, listed on ebay wrong.


----------



## jlhawn




----------



## Eggs and bacon

I quite like that shot. What is the light source int he corner? One small thing that would make it slightly better is if the lens flare lined up with the moon, but that is almost impossible to do when taking the shot.


----------



## jlhawn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Eggs and bacon*
> 
> I quite like that shot. What is the light source int he corner? One small thing that would make it slightly better is if the lens flare lined up with the moon, but that is almost impossible to do when taking the shot.


well I hate to say it but I added the light in the back ground playing around with photo shop.
first time I ever edited like that, so I'll post a non edited photo of mine.
the moon is real, taken from my backyard during the super moon episode.


this is Mt Rainier, I took it from the roof of my house, the mountain is 45 miles away.

used a Canon EOS 40D with a Canon 100-400mm F4.5-5.6L for the mountain shot, also used the same setup for the super moon.


----------



## Blaise170

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jlhawn*
> 
> well I hate to say it but I added the light in the back ground playing around with photo shop.
> first time I ever edited like that, so I'll post a non edited photo of mine.
> the moon is real, taken from my backyard during the super moon episode.
> 
> 
> this is Mt Rainier, I took it from the roof of my house, the mountain is 45 miles away.
> 
> used a Canon EOS 40D with a Canon 100-400mm F4.5-5.6L for the mountain shot, also used the same setup for the super moon.


Wow, that would be an amazing place to live. I see suburbs and an expressway from my roof.


----------



## jlhawn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Blaise170*
> 
> Wow, that would be an amazing place to live. I see suburbs and an expressway from my roof.


I live in Olympia Washington (state capitol) which is 50 miles from Seattle and there are better views of Mt. Rainier from Seattle.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Olympia is cool though. I've been there for a few days on vacation once.


----------



## jlhawn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> Olympia is cool though. I've been there for a few days on vacation once.


yeah I like it, but with all cities it has it's up's and down's.
I live 12 miles from the city center so I don't have to much city noise, but I'm 3 miles from interstate 5 but really can't here it either with all the big trees between me and the freeway.


----------



## Aussiejuggalo

So I took some pics of my new amp...



Spoiler: Potatoed Pics



Think I did better then the last lot I did, went full manual this time and used my crappy tripod thing

ISO 200, F11, 10th sec shutter (I think), WB was 5400K (not auto this time







)





Yes er... this one was taken upside down and I flipped it in Lightroom







to lazy to try and stand it normally





I think my side lights are to high for a lot of these shots, might need to try and lower them or raise the subject more


----------



## Eggs and bacon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jlhawn*
> 
> well I hate to say it but I added the light in the back ground playing around with photo shop.
> first time I ever edited like that, so I'll post a non edited photo of mine.
> the moon is real, taken from my backyard during the super moon episode.
> 
> [URL=http://www.overclock.net/content/type/61/id/2149439/width/500/height/1000]http://www.overclock.net/content/type/61/id/2149439/width/500/height/1000[/URL] /IMG] this is Mt Rainier, I took it from the roof of my house, the mountain is 45 miles away. used a Canon EOS 40D with a Canon 100-400mm F4.5-5.6L for the mountain shot, also used the same setup for the super moon.[/QUOTE]
> 
> That reminds me of an AA photo but in color.


----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jlhawn*
> 
> well I hate to say it but I added the light in the back ground playing around with photo shop.
> first time I ever edited like that, so I'll post a non edited photo of mine.
> the moon is real, taken from my backyard during the super moon episode.
> 
> 
> this is Mt Rainier, I took it from the roof of my house, the mountain is 45 miles away.
> 
> used a Canon EOS 40D with a Canon 100-400mm F4.5-5.6L for the mountain shot, also used the same setup for the super moon.


That's a great lens for stuff like the moon. I wouldn't have thought of using it for landscapes though.









Also, was it possible to zoom out a bit? That way you could get more of the mountain, and crop the top/bottom.

EDIT: Now you made me want to get on the roof. Too bad we don't have mountains here.


----------



## Conspiracy

rejoice! celebrate!









http://petapixel.com/2014/08/27/italian-film-company-ferrania-start-manufacturing-film-mid-september/


----------



## jlhawn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JKuhn*
> 
> That's a great lens for stuff like the moon. I wouldn't have thought of using it for landscapes though.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also, was it possible to zoom out a bit? That way you could get more of the mountain, and crop the top/bottom.
> 
> EDIT: Now you made me want to get on the roof. Too bad we don't have mountains here.


I could not zoom out as there are cell phone towers that would have shown up in the pic.
I will be taking some shots from the other side as there isn't anything that will be in the way it's just I will
have to drive about a 100 miles.


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> rejoice! celebrate!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://petapixel.com/2014/08/27/italian-film-company-ferrania-start-manufacturing-film-mid-september/


Good news


----------



## Eggs and bacon

Hopefully it isn't outrageously expensive.


----------



## Jixr

man, I went to go look at taking some classes in photoshop at the local colleges, on top of the class cost ( which isn't bad ) You need your own laptop. I don't wanna shell out $700 for a laptop just to learn photoshop better.


----------



## Blaise170

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> man, I went to go look at taking some classes in photoshop at the local colleges, on top of the class cost ( which isn't bad ) You need your own laptop. I don't wanna shell out $700 for a laptop just to learn photoshop better.


Look on ebay, you can get a pretty decent laptop for around $250.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> man, I went to go look at taking some classes in photoshop at the local colleges, on top of the class cost ( which isn't bad ) You need your own laptop. I don't wanna shell out $700 for a laptop just to learn photoshop better.


can you just sneak into the class? lol Half the classes I take here can be snuck into haha


----------



## Jixr

heh, I probably could... I used to sit in a GF's class so basically I could help her take notes and help her with her work and on test and things.
We had a pretty good system going


----------



## jlhawn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> man, I went to go look at taking some classes in photoshop at the local colleges, on top of the class cost ( which isn't bad ) You need your own laptop. I don't wanna shell out $700 for a laptop just to learn photoshop better.


if it's just for a class I bought my granddaughter a very nice ASUS i3 laptop from new egg for $325, it was a refurbished unit by the manufacturer so it came with a warranty as if it was new. been using it for 8 months now with no problems. and it looks brand new with not a mark of any kind on it.
it has a intel i3 cpu, 8 gigs memory, 500gb hdd, dvd burner, windows 7 pro 64bit, led backlit screen.


----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jlhawn*
> 
> I could not zoom out as there are cell phone towers that would have shown up in the pic.
> I will be taking some shots from the other side as there isn't anything that will be in the way it's just I will
> have to drive about a 100 miles.


That sucks. Well, the picture is far from bad as it is so it's not that much of a problem.


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> man, I went to go look at taking some classes in photoshop at the local colleges, on top of the class cost ( which isn't bad ) You need your own laptop. I don't wanna shell out $700 for a laptop just to learn photoshop better.


rant ON

Learning software packages through courses can be frustrating, especially with super-complicated dinosaurs like Photoshop, AutoCAD/Revit, 3DS etc.
Issues is, these tools can be used for a gazillion things, serving completely different industries & workflows.

The Developers keep "adding" & "optimizing", but practically take nothing out - so that they don't disrupt the workflow of existing customers than have to have "that tool", but ontop of that have "that tool in legacy mode" etc etc. The result boils down to you pretty much being able to achieve similar results in multiple different ways, through workflows that make more sense for some applications and being inefficient or "not good enough" for others.

I have 3 basic advice for learning to use software packages:


Practice. No book can teach you what hands-on experience does, plus you won't be able to understand the advanced pieces of advice that the book/course could teach you the 1st place, unless you had a general idea of what the subject is about. In order to practice methodically, you need a schedule, a goal. Setup a lil project and force yourself to work on it a few hours a week, EVERY week. That's what pretty much courses do. Force you into forming a habit for a few weeks / months.
Research. The most important step for finding the proper answer / solution / method is phrasing the "question/problem" correctly. People, like google, prefer it that way. Asking the right questions, the proper way is a skill invaluable in any part of our lives.
Finally, ask the advice of those that are already where you want to be. Don't ask for opinions, ask for knowledge & listen those that "did it", not those that are just half a step ahead of you (if that). That "goal" above needs to be far enough for you to keep working on it, and so should be your mentors. After you've done some of your research, you can jump straight into the point, instead of asking them to "lecture you" in hope of you getting 1-2 tips per hour out of it.
Thus "generic" Photoshop/premiere/illustrator/3DS/your-pick-here courses, can be boring - as the threshold between me considering myself an intermediate user (lets be humble) to what the creators of the course think or simply can "market" as beginner/intermediate/advanced etc can be chaotic. You go there thinking that you will learn new exciting things, and 2/3 of the course is basic file handling, or creating an absolute basic adjustment layer.

Long story short: there are so many teaching tools for photoshop out there, that unless you need the credit towards a relative major/degree/certification, I find it almost pointless taking these courses, outside the frame of having someone forcing you to do your homework.
There are valuable & much cheaper courses online, having recognized "experts" teaching you anything from the very basics, to pretty advanced stuff - some of which I bet most college courses or even professors won't really come close touching.

I would recommend starting with Phlearn .com + its homonymous Youtube channel, creativeLIVE and focus your learning to skills you really want - not just one-fits-all courses that are doomed to be repetitive and generalized.

Then, if you have the need for personal interaction with creative people & time for college courses, get courses in creative photography, art, composition etc - something less technical than software.

/rant


----------



## Sean Webster

^Yeah, I kind of agree, you dont need to take a class to learn. You need to just find good web series online on the basics and then look up tuts for what you want as you go. It just comes with practice and curiosity. All I have learned is easily and freely available on youtube. I can link you to channels to follow if you like.


----------



## Jixr

I just know how I learn, its better for me to have someone help me along than me learn for myself. And part of the idea was for the social aspect of it too.


----------



## Scott1541

I know I've mentioned it before but I could do with learning how to use the more advanced features of Photoshop. I'm going to be the uni photography society President's right hand man when I go back in a few weeks, it'll look bad if I can't even work Photoshop


----------



## jameyscott

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> I know I've mentioned it before but I could do with learning how to use the more advanced features of Photoshop. I'm going to be the uni photography society President's right hand man when I go back in a few weeks, it'll look bad if I can't even work Photoshop


Just say you only shoot film because digital it too mainstream. No need for photoshop then.


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jameyscott*
> 
> Just say you only shoot film because digital it too mainstream. No need for photoshop then.


I don't think I said anything quite to that effect







I don't only shoot film and I probably won't ever do, even if it was cheaper to use I wouldn't be using it exclusively. If I developed myself I'd probably do a bit of cross processing though


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> I know I've mentioned it before but I could do with learning how to use the more advanced features of Photoshop. I'm going to be the uni photography society President's right hand man when I go back in a few weeks, it'll look bad if I can't even work Photoshop


Nice, I'm vice president of my university's photoclub.  Editing skills arent needed, creativity is.


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Nice, I'm vice president of my university's photoclub.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Editing skills arent needed, creativity is.


I don't actually know what my official position will be, I'll have to take whatever position the students union says needs to be allocated for the society to be allowed to run. Last year the society was run very badly with half the committee standing down early in the year and the rest having other commitments. We've got to get it turned around this year.


----------



## Jixr

make your minions do the photoshopping for you.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> make your minions do the photoshopping for you.


THIS!!!!!


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> make your minions do the photoshopping for you.
> 
> 
> 
> THIS!!!!!
Click to expand...

10% work, 90% credit.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> I know I've mentioned it before but I could do with learning how to use the more advanced features of Photoshop. I'm going to be the uni photography society President's right hand man when I go back in a few weeks, it'll look bad if I can't even work Photoshop


Again, piece of advice #2: learn to define the problem.
What's "advanced features of Photoshop" for you and how do you think that will inform your role as a photographer?

Most pro photographers (not retouchers / editors) these days try to do as much as possible through Lightroom or equiv - avoiding PS altogether.
The latter is reserved for retouching, and that is advised to happen only AFTER a large format print is ordered or licensing of the image is complete/almost complete. Or maybe if you want to be really careful with a blog post / portfolio / facebook etc entry.

Really detailed retouching takes lots of time and effort, so if you are not getting "compensated" for your time, doesn't worth it.

I hope you are not retouching each and every snap out of your camera, are you?

Even then, I don't know what is "advanced". The vast majority of what you do is some high-pass filtering for sharpening or retouching skin without killing off the natural texture of skin, some clone stamping for dust spots, cables, perspective corrections etc. Those are not that "advanced" - pretty much basic skillset.

If you break down the problem / properly state the question, the answer won't be a insurmountable crazy thing - will actually make it easy for you to take small steps towards the top of any lil hill.


----------



## Eggs and bacon

Whats the difference between processing a photo and retouching?
So far as i can tell processing is adjusting brightness/contrast/sharpening/color correction and retouching is making it look nice be altering features, like removing distractions like cables, as well as dust spots.
correct me if I'm wrong

@pcfoo
Out of curiosity why would you retouch a large format print, if for example a client saw the photo online and ordered it, wouldn't they want that photo, not that photo + what ever you would deem retouching to be?
I don't know much about commercial photography I am just curious.


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Eggs and bacon*
> 
> Whats the difference between processing a photo and retouching?
> So far as i can tell processing is adjusting brightness/contrast/sharpening/color correction and retouching is making it look nice be altering features, like removing distractions like cables, as well as dust spots.
> correct me if I'm wrong.


I don't know the difference between the 2 to be exact.
In my mind there are 2 stages:

1) RAW Development, along with basic adjustments (Lightroom / ACR) = gettng the most out of what your camera captured, and
2) Retouching (photoshop) = altering what you camera has captured to make it "better" - many times better than life (eg. any single fashion / beauty shot that wants to sell)

The vast majority of serious amateur and pro digital photographers that respect what they do and don't need uploading the images minutes within them being taken (eg. some photo-reporters that wifi/mobile upload their images virtually immediately after being shot) usually will opt for shooting RAW. For those that RAW benefits >> resolution, serious cameras offer the option of mRAW (smaller resolution, but full color depth RAW).

This allows for far more forgiving exposure, noise and sharpening corrections in Post Processing (aka PP / or P/P or "post") due to notably higher captured dynamic range & color depth. All these processes compare neighboring pixels to "judge" what is to be done, and the JPEG algorithm, ontop of being just 8bit, relies its compression in the assumption that "if it is close enough, its the same", discarding those subtle differences between neighboring pixels.

RAW converters / editors like Lightroom, are pretty much the modern equivalent of the "Darkroom" in the past. You develop RAW as you were developing film, being able to pull/push etc, only you can do it for each image individually, but presets and setting sync can help you speed up the process tremendously.

But even that doesn't need to be done for ALL your images in a session. Most of them will be snapshots / repeats-duplicates / same subject shot @ portrat & landscape orientation etc.

You select those that are the best of, and then you develop.

It is relatively fast to color correct, sharpen and crop your images without altering the original, while maintaining >>8bit information = win.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Eggs and bacon*
> 
> @pcfoo
> Out of curiosity why would you retouch a large format print, if for example a client saw the photo online and ordered it, wouldn't they want that photo, not that photo + what ever you would deem retouching to be?
> I don't know much about commercial photography I am just curious.


Professionals are not in this to produce the best images possible.
They are in this to make a living, meeting some standards and ideally exceeding them, but always within time constrains. Their time = money.
It's more than a hobby.

After you select and develop the series of images to be shown to the client (if you are an amateur, the client might be family or even yourself), you usually upload low/medium resolution of them on a distribution service or invite the interested party over for a session reviewing and picking those that will end up in an album, or will be printed & framed.

So this selection process will most likely reduce the final selection of images even further.

It is not uncommon for a photo-shoot - from a wedding, (eg) 500 shots taken, 100-150 shortlisted by the photographer, less than 100 being selected by the couple.
Out of those, 50 are framed in ways where skin detail is not an issue, or its family members etc that you don't really care about. Then there are 10-15 or so closeups of the bride that will need special attention, out of which 2-3 will be printed at the end.

Those prints, usually come at at decent additional fee, that will cover the man-hours retouching them and leave a nice profit (YMMV).

If you had to retouch 500 or 150 images, of non-professional makeup portrait photography, quick turn-around and profitable rates would be nearly impossible to meet.

A fashion / beauty photo-shoot, might boil down to just a handful of images to be retouched also - some of them might even be outsourced to a specialty retoucher, if we are talking a busy photographer that doesn't want to sacrifice his personal life @ evenings & weekends to meet deadlines.

So, in a nutshell, large prints are usually an added service charges that will mean justifying added work.

Professionals and amateurs alike, should try to do as much as possible within camera, then be honnest and objective while selecting the worthy frames and properly develop them. That would be a couple of minutes to a handful of seconds for each. If you want to present it to your client slghtly retouched, you might do so REALLY quick - no more than a couple of minutes in PS, few seconds if you know your way around the tools.

Sole exception would be senior portraits of girls with acme or boudoir shots of "real women" where you are aiming directly to their vanity and you know they expect a white lie from you.
Then you could sped some extra time to make them look good and help you secure a couple of extra sales (or even as single one, if they really need the push!!).

Exception #1 - for pro and amateur / enthusiast alike - would be those images that you are proud enough of, to choose for your portfolio - in this case you are the client, you "authorize" the added cost, as you want your online or printed portfolio to look its best.

Exception #2 - you are uploading the images to an agency or you are selling it through smugmug etc directy to the client - ofc you want the uploaded image to be ready to go


----------



## Eggs and bacon

Thanks for that. Before I was thinking of commercial as fine art, ie not for a specific client, rather than working directly with a client. I see your initial point much more clearly now


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Eggs and bacon*
> 
> Thanks for that. Before I was thinking of commercial as fine art, ie not for a specific client, rather than working directly with a client. I see your initial point much more clearly now


Certain fields of photography were people might make money out of (e.g. semi or full professional photography) are not subject to the same restrains.
Eg a landscape photographer might take hours waiting for the right light, taking a few shots before and after etc, but ending up with 20 shots of that framing / position (tripod, ND grads, possibly 10-stop ND etc making each shot a minute or so long, you don't just snap away).
There is no real framing issue - he/she took his/her time. Same for focus, plus usually it is with a W/UW lens and f8~16 so it is not a big issue.



EOS 6D / 24-70L @ 24mm f/11, Hoya NDX400 + CPL Pro 1D, 120 sec, ISO 100. No PS work.

On the flip-side, a wildlife photographer, wearing his camo and trigger-happily shoots 100s of frames of birds in flight etc. But that's another animal altogether.
Aiming and panning those 400+ mm lenses is a biatch, Most images are not perfectly framed, chances are that at least half of them might not achieve good enough focus. And even if you do, wildlife photography needs to tell a story - after you have the right tools and find out the right spots, it is not hard to get sharp tight "portraits" that are great for some wildlife catalogs, but....nothing more.



EOS 6D / 400 5.6L @ 5.6, 1/1250 sec, ISO 160. No PS work.

Similarly in studio: people photograhy can be taking pictures of kids, shy teenagers, nervous brides, experienced beauty models or product / table top still subjects.
Success will vary.

In any of the above cases, you will perhaps select and develop 10-20% of the images, mildly retouch few of them for casual use, be happy to have a couple really good ones that will make their way into your portfolio / wall / be sold or published.

Really now, if you are in a creative profession, and you cannot aggressively edit down your work - especially if you walk away from it and return after a couple of days - you are probably too full of yourself, or you are very methodical and slow when making your pictures, designs etc. Masters of any field, become great exactly by being the harshest critics of their own work.


----------



## Scott1541

I probably should have mentioned it earlier but I don't really intend to use photoshop to do much retouching or otherwise improving existing photos. At the minute I'm happy using Lightroom and making minor adjustments to exposure, sharpness, lens corrections, etc..

I was thinking about using photoshop more for making composites and stuff like that where several individual images are involved. By advanced I meant anything beyond the current extent of my PS skills, which includes copy and paste, selecting stuff using the various tools and using the paint brush/eraser







I'm pretty much a PS noob


----------



## jackeyjoe

Okay, I learned a good lesson today, make sure you have a proper camera strap.

Had it on my back, one of the strap clips broke, fell onto a lino floor(only free fell about 30cm, tried to catch it the strap as it fell) and smashed up the UV filter pretty bad. Lens also is busted, cannot focus and there is something wrong with the zoom:

No idea what I broke, but it must be pretty bad. Makes me feel much worse as it wasn't mine but another family members, trying my best to get it covered by insurance otherwise it will be coming out of my travel fund









Anyway, moral of the story, make sure anything you use to carry your camera won't break, and you have insurance!


----------



## Scott1541

Ouch. I hope you can get the insurance company to pay for it because I'd suspect you'd have to pay $450+ to replace that with a good used one.


----------



## Sean Webster

Also, see how much it would be for Nikon to repair the lens. It shouldn't be too much.


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jackeyjoe*
> 
> Okay, I learned a good lesson today, make sure you have a proper camera strap.
> Had it on my back, one of the strap clips broke, fell onto a lino floor(only free fell about 30cm, tried to catch it the strap as it fell) and smashed up the UV filter pretty bad. Lens also is busted, cannot focus and there is something wrong with the zoom:
> 
> No idea what I broke, but it must be pretty bad. Makes me feel much worse as it wasn't mine but another family members, trying my best to get it covered by insurance otherwise it will be coming out of my travel fund
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Anyway, moral of the story, make sure anything you use to carry your camera won't break, and you have insurance!


Sorry to hear that. Always sucks damaging your gear. What strap were you using?


----------



## jackeyjoe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> Ouch. I hope you can get the insurance company to pay for it because I'd suspect you'd have to pay $450+ to replace that with a good used one.


Yep, if insurance doesn't cover it I think I will go down the repair route, all the glass seems to be fine so it must be the focus and/or zoom mechanism which is broke(aperture ring still works though), I am assuming those would be cheaper to replace than the glass. There is a place in town I should be able to get a quote from...
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Also, see how much it would be for Nikon to repair the lens. It shouldn't be too much.


Lets hope so








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aksthem1*
> 
> Sorry to hear that. Always sucks damaging your gear. What strap were you using?


A very cheap one that I took from another camera, I bought my D7000 second hand and it didn't come with a strap so I just used what was available. I am going to buy a proper one now


----------



## Curleyyy

How does everyone feel (your thoughts) so far about the 7D Mark II?


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Curleyyy*
> 
> How does everyone feel (your thoughts) so far about the 7D Mark II?


Would love to see it using the "goods" from the 70D (dual pixel CMOS AF) but improving a bit on the sensor - not necessarily more MP, but...
Build & control wise, it should be great, I don't worry about it too much - unless ofc they make a move away from the old 7D/50D layout and closer to the 6D, which I am not a huge fan of.


----------



## Sean Webster

Its not out yet. If I can't use it, my opinion is that it is crap. lol


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Curleyyy*
> 
> How does everyone feel (your thoughts) so far about the 7D Mark II?


i have no opinions until i see it presented at photokina. im sure it will have an APS-C sensor. While i dont mind that im really more in love right now with the APS-H sensors. If the price is right i would be willing to get a new APS-C camera. I will likely rent one when it comes out and shoot some sports with it. assuming i still dont pull the trigger on a 1DmkIV next month. All depends on first hands on impressions of the new 7D successor


----------



## pcfoo

APS-H is fortunately or unfortunately a dead/dying breed.
Was inability to manufacture 35x24 sensors and sell them for decent profit in cameras that did not cost close to 5 digits.

There are benefits for sport & wildlife photography, but with entry FF bodies being so cheap, and mid range FF already at 6+ fps, marketing is probably going to insist on you getting an 1X or a 7D/7D2.


----------



## Conspiracy

marketing cant control me im a rebel lol

ill enjoy it while i can then because eventually ill have to chose between APS-C and FF. eventually i see myself probably having one of each once the 1DX drops down to $3500ish used in a few years. i have tested out the 5D3 and like it, i played with one at a soccer game since my friend has 3 of them and its not too bad honestly i just wish that it did have more speed on the occasion that you need it because 10 fps does make an extreme difference at sports when you know something good is happening and you cant miss it. if the 5D3 offered lets say like 8fps then id already own one and ditch the thought of upgrading to a better 1series body


----------



## sakae48

great!.i found this thread!

i owned a canon 50D w/ the stock lens and Tamron LD Di 70-300 1:4~5.6f

still new to photography


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> marketing cant control me im a rebel lol
> 
> ill enjoy it while i can then because eventually ill have to chose between APS-C and FF. eventually i see myself probably having one of each once the 1DX drops down to $3500ish used in a few years. i have tested out the 5D3 and like it, i played with one at a soccer game since my friend has 3 of them and its not too bad honestly i just wish that it did have more speed on the occasion that you need it because 10 fps does make an extreme difference at sports when you know something good is happening and you cant miss it. if the 5D3 offered lets say like 8fps then id already own one and ditch the thought of upgrading to a better 1series body


You rebel you!

Well, you are not in bad luck, the EOS 1 IV is a great camera, so if FF is not you cup of tea, you can keep "sipping" it (if you decide so) for a long time.
But I think that will be the last of the APS-H cameras - with the vast adoption of the 1DX, I don't see a reason for Canon side/back stepping from FF.

In a few years we might have "good enough" EVFs that will find their way in a 1 series body (heresy!) and you will have the option for switching to whichever mode you wish, with live feedback through the viewfinder. I am not a big proponent of the "both FX/DX through the same optical VF" Nikon uses. I want to see the frame close to 100%, If I wanted to be squinting through tiny frame subdivisions to guestimate if the subject is in or not, I would be shooting teles with RFs! Otherwise "shoot generous" and crop in PP.


----------



## Conspiracy

Zess announced the newest lens to the Otus line.

http://blogs.zeiss.com/photo/en/?p=5234


----------



## pcfoo

Meh, manual focus, stupid 86mm filter thread, heavy, I don't like the styling, the metal will make it unbearable in the freezing conditions in SoCal etc etc
(com on guys, come up with more reasons not to like this - other than the very real reason - price ofc)

I just hope when I will see the 1st test for this, it won't be on a D810 or D800E (i.e. a AA-less sensor) for the Otus, and a 5D3 for whichever competitor - as it was the case with the 1st head to head I've seen with the 55 Otus vs. the Sigma 50 Art...


----------



## Conspiracy

yeah. hopefully sigma will roll out a 85mm ART at photokina this year. many will think this is also dumb but not only do i want to see tests on an AA-less camera like the new 810 compared to the 5D3 but i also would love to see tests on crop sensors as well just to cover everything although this is really a lens that kinda belongs on FF sensors


----------



## pcfoo

Well, the Sigma 85 1.4 already is pretty good - in FF I believe the Canon 1.2L only tops in in bokeh quality. And anything good in FF is almost sure to be "better" in APS-C, as the weak spots are almost always found in the edges of the FF frame and naturally get left out of the effective capture area in crop sensors.

The Otus might be improving on the existing 85mm across the board, but it is not reaaaaaly my concern on this price point - is like forum warriors nit-picking on supercars they will be lucky to seat in, furthermore drive once. And to be honest, people that can afford the Otus and can cope with its weaknesses (bulk, manual focusing etc) could find most if not way more of its qualities in a MF digital system.

Sigma delivering an 85 (A)RT also delivers +/- 95% of the goods for <25% of the price and topping with AF - as the case is for the 50/55 standoff - is a far more relevant feat for the average D-SLR shooter.

As for testing different systems with the those "benchmark" lenses, ofc it is useful, but when comparing systems - e.g. I'm a portrait / fashion / wedding shooter, I want to pick between the D810 / D800 / 5D3, how far behind is 5D3 vs. the D800 having less MP, how bad and how often can I expect moiré when shooting fabrics and repetitive textures with the 810 vs the other two that solve that with AA filters etc - all with these bodies behind a 3rd party, for intents and purposes not only excellent but more importantly "equally well performing" lens on either mount/system.

But that's a system vs. system or body vs body comparison setup.

When testing optics, it should be on the same body, while the only 50 A vs. Otus 55 comparison I've seen (I did not search lately) was on a D800E for the Otus (the already suspected to be best lens in its class, with the highest resolution and AA less sensor in the market for [135] digital) and a 5D3 for the Sigma Art...way too unfair for the Sigma from the get-go.


----------



## Conspiracy

well the other issue with using the different bodies with different pixel densities is the change in resolving power of the camera with the lens which quickly turns it into an apples vs oranges even though its the same lens.

we will just have to wait and see


----------



## Conspiracy

anyone use wescott rapid box modifiers? im eyeballing the 26" octa softbox

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/925397-REG/westcott_2031_rapid_box_octa.html


----------



## pcfoo

Do you plan using this with the YN speedlights ?


----------



## Conspiracy

yeah i do not have any plans to buy strobes any time soon. i dont shoot enough to want to deal with the bulkiness and extra gear for strobes. id love to have a strobe kit but its not as convenient as having a more compact speedlight kit. ill eventually pick up 2 strip boxes and another speedlight over the next few months as well


----------



## Jixr

I still want to buy canons new ultra wide angle. $300 is pretty cheap for a lens like it, I love the look that UWA give.


----------



## Conspiracy

i still want a 135L but im waiting until i completely pay of the bill on my 70-200 f4


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> i still want a 135L but im waiting until i completely pay of the bill on my 70-200 f4


i want one too. im just too lazy to look for one lol :/


----------



## pcfoo

FM Buy and Sell forum has 135L lenses pretty often...average one or two per week?

Most of them are great, as it is a niche lens that few ppl end up using (and abusing)

Copy variation is very small too, most if not all of them are very sharp.









As for UW, I love it. Sold my 17-40L and "hoping" for a used 16-35 L 4 IS coming up before I plan my next trip, or might have to get a new one!


----------



## Sean Webster

Yea, they are very common. POTN forum has them in their B&S section like every day lol. I love the swirl like bokeh the lens makes...its soo nice.


----------



## Conspiracy

with how everything is going. i should be able to snag a 135L within the next 2 months probably. totally going to use it for like everything. going to pretend to do portraits, sports, walk around. its going to be a fun lens. and it will go nicely on whatever new camera i get to replace my 1DmkII


----------



## Jixr

bill for a 70-200 f4? I got mine for $400 cash


----------



## Conspiracy

a Canon 70-200 f4L IS? $400 if its in ugly condition maybe.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> a Canon 70-200 f4L IS? $400 if its in ugly condition maybe.


You mean broken...lol


----------



## Eggs and bacon

Fuji announced the x100t and 50-140. Not too different from the old model but an even better viewfinder is cool.


----------



## Jixr

I thought it was a regular non IS version.


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> bill for a 70-200 f4? I got mine for $400 cash


You got a good deal even for the vanilla 70-200 f4L.
Used 70-200 f4L IS go for $850+ as a norm. Often asking price is more than $950.


----------



## ace8uk

I can't say I'm particularly excited about this new D750, I don't really see the point of it to be honest. I know it's meant to be their proper debut into video, but that ship sailed a long time ago for Nikon; there is no reason they couldn't have put these new video features into the d610 or D810 instead. Pretty uninspiring stuff, Nikon.


----------



## Conspiracy

agreed. honestly to me the D750 is what the D800 should have been. The D800 is a beast in resolution but it lacked practical features needed in video mode and even 100% reliable AF for photos as well.


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> agreed. honestly to me the D750 is what the D800 should have been. The D800 is a beast in resolution but it lacked practical features needed in video mode and even 100% reliable AF for photos as well.


Easy to say after the fact...sometimes it is hard to keep up with the competition and also the demand.

The D800 was amazing on paper for a 2012 camera...it wasn't exactly the 1D II deal, when Canon pretty much locked eyes with Nikon in a "I see your bet (D2H) and double it" move that lead to market gradually but positively and in mass switching systems, but it did give a big oomph to Nikon and caused many professionals to switch back. Still it wasn't perfect.

At the same time Canon was reacting to the D-SLR movie thing exploding out of control, having its priorities also changed radically, producing far from perfect products. Something has to give for products to be launched on schedule, especially if you try to innovate.

Now each one is trying to fortify its strengths and play catch up for their weaknesses striving for that "perfect" for the moment product, while at the same time playing a double game: it cannot be too perfect, cause how will we be able to improve it a couple of years from now for you to buy again?

Make it too good, and the flock might realize that there is little reason to upgrade anymore!
After all, you have those silly rationalists still using 1D IINs so many years after


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Is it worth getting one of these?

https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B000BH5OUI/ref=cm_sw_r_awd_Ef4eub01Z7743


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> Is it worth getting one of these?
> 
> https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B000BH5OUI/ref=cm_sw_r_awd_Ef4eub01Z7743


It is not a bad idea having all your lenses "wearing" a UV filter, protecting the front glass element from scratches, dust and the weather.

Some photographers argue that it is silly to put a cheap piece of glass in-front of a multi-thousand-dollar lens degrading the output, and it is true that cheap, low quality filters might introduce flare and unwanted reflections but the reality is that real life & test lab tests don't show any tangible image degradation when you are using good quality, multicoated filters (like the one you are posting above).

Plus I doubt you will be using it on a multi-thousand-dollar uber lens to begin with









In reality its utility in protecting the front element depends on the lens' design (how recessed or not the front element is), whether you are using a hood or not and if you are trying to achieve weather sealing - for example certain lenses like most UWA zooms (17-40 / 16-35) from Canon and Nikon, might be weather sealed in many places, but it is hard to seal the front element areal, as this portion moves in and out a little bit when the lens is zooming. A rubber seal / gasket in that area would wear out prematurely.
Thus it is recommended to use a filter, which tightly screwed in won't interfere with any mechanical movement / friction and will seal the lens completely of rain drops etc.

I have been using UV filters for most of my lenses, but not religiously. I just try to be reasonably careful.

For example I don't have any 52mm / 43mm filters for my EOS M kit. I mostly use the 22mm STM, and I doubt I will be scratching that tiny recessed element, even when I pocket the thing without a lens cap on.

On my larger EOS D-SLR kit, I used to have a 77mm UV on my 2.8 zooms, but I would often switch from UV to C-PL*. The latter naturally cuts some light off the lens, so when light would come down and I could not get handholding speeds, I would remove the C-PL but not religiously add the UV back, leaving it off for hours or even days at a time. Never had a lens' element scratched, and I do have subjected those to many tenths of thousands of photos, and dozens of national and international trips.

*highly recommended filter for anyone with a mild interest in landscape / travel / architectural / car etc photography


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Thanks for the reply dude, seeing as it's pretty cheap I think I'll get one. It'll be going on just the 18-55mm kit lens that came with my 1100D and eventually it'll go on a 55-250mm IS II when I've got the money


----------



## ace8uk

^ What he said, basically.

It's a subject of debate that will continue to rage on for many years. Personally, I don't bother with them on any of my lenses. I'd say if you're looking to maintain as much future resale value as possible from your lens then it might be a good option, keeps the front element in really good condition and reduces general weathering / wear and tear (although I guess you could argue the wear and tear it causes on the filter thread).

My person opinion is that it isn't really necessary at all, and that your money would be better invested in more useful equipment like the CPL pcfoo suggested.


----------



## DizZz

7D MKII is looking really good on paper


----------



## pcfoo

Which paper? Do we have a official announcement?


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DizZz*
> 
> 7D MKII is looking really good on paper


the rumors are looking super good. lets hope they are accurate because if the 7D2 is actually what canonrumors.com says and it performs nicely in high ISO then it might be a strong contender for my next camera body. i shot some video on a 7D today. footage is wonderful as always but at ISO 800 f4 1/60 there was still decent noise in the shadows which makes me really want a newer body for the occasional video that i shoot for work that requires higher quality than the pro panasonic cameras i shoot 99% of my video on


----------



## DizZz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Which paper? Do we have a official announcement?


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> the rumors are looking super good. lets hope they are accurate because if the 7D2 is actually what canonrumors.com says and it performs nicely in high ISO then it might be a strong contender for my next camera body


http://www.canonrumors.com/2014/09/a-rundown-of-canon-at-photokina/

http://www.canonrumors.com/2014/09/canon-eos-7d-mark-ii-specifications-confirmed/


----------



## Conspiracy

NICE. well then now i just need to see some samples to tease me even more before i can rent one and decide between the new APS-C beast or an old 1DmkIV


----------



## pcfoo

Well, saw those, thought it was actually announched outside canonrumors and i've missed it!.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> seeing as it's pretty cheap I think I'll get one. It'll be going on just the 18-55mm kit lens that came with my 1100D and eventually it'll go on a 55-250mm IS II when I've got the money


Well, it is not that expensive but still costs like 25% of the value of your lens









If you don't shoot in sand blowing winds etc, I doubt there will be a real danger for your fantastic plastic lens, but...w/e rocks your boat


----------



## DizZz

What's the best way to de-noise a photo? I've been using lightroom but is there a better alternative?


----------



## Eggs and bacon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DizZz*
> 
> What's the best way to de-noise a photo? I've been using lightroom but is there a better alternative?


Not really a helpful response sorry but, I have found light rooms de-noise very good. The trick for me is to find the right balance between luminance and color noise.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DizZz*
> 
> What's the best way to de-noise a photo? I've been using lightroom but is there a better alternative?


what are your sharpening and noise reduction settings?

Adjusting the sharping masking setting to somewhere around 60-90 and adjusting the detail and radius sliders usually helps me a lot.


----------



## pcfoo

There is a thin line between a sharp and a "noise free" image that was underexposed + brought up @ shadows etc...
Always pick sharpness over smoothness in anything but female portraits - maybe.

Plus, what you think is noisy, usually happens @ 100% digital magnification.
Printed or resized for web the same image might look great.


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> Is it worth getting one of these?
> 
> https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B000BH5OUI/ref=cm_sw_r_awd_Ef4eub01Z7743


My opinion on UV filters is not to use them, don't add another layer of glass to the equation, unless you know you will be in a sandy or otherwise dusty environment and the font element of your lens moves in the barrel or for other reasons could use some additional sealing.

As for protection from bumps I don't think they are the best idea. If the filter breaks it is going to put shards of glass behind the filter (in between your filter and the front element) which you then have the risk of scratching your front element. I have dropped two lenses and with both having hoods the front elements came out untouched. The hood for my (now stolen) 24-105 took a serious blow to the pavement and the lens was untouched. My hoods have also done a lot of bumping into stuff where the lens may have otherwise been hit.

Just my two cents.


----------



## DizZz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *silvrr*
> 
> My opinion on UV filters is not to use them, don't add another layer of glass to the equation, unless you know you will be in a sandy or otherwise dusty environment and the font element of your lens moves in the barrel or for other reasons could use some additional sealing.
> 
> As for protection from bumps I don't think they are the best idea. If the filter breaks it is going to put shards of glass behind the filter (in between your filter and the front element) which you then have the risk of scratching your front element. I have dropped two lenses and with both having hoods the front elements came out untouched. The hood for my (now stolen) 24-105 took a serious blow to the pavement and the lens was untouched. My hoods have also done a lot of bumping into stuff where the lens may have otherwise been hit.
> 
> Just my two cents.


So you prefer hoods > UV filters for protection but what do you do about cutting glare?


----------



## Dream Killer

A hood reduces glare but a CPL is probably better.


----------



## TTheuns

Hello, some of you seem to know a lot about DSLRs and I am wondering, wether a Nikon D5200 with a AF-S Nikkor 18-55 1: 3.5 - 5.6 GII ED DX lens would be a good deal for €300 (roughly $390)


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DizZz*
> 
> So you prefer hoods > UV filters for protection but what do you do about cutting glare?


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> A hood reduces glare but a CPL is probably better.


I think there is a terminology misconception here - which maybe wrong on my end too...but I will share my burning thoughts / opinion!

*Glare*: low contrast "glowing" patches in our frame.

*Example of really bad Glare*

Glare is caused by stray light, i.e. shooting towards the light enough to have a source directly or almost directly in-front of our camera. Even at great angles, lenses with curved, un-shaded front elements will catch some stray light directly from those sources. This causes loss of contrast in ALL cases, and under certain circumstances might cause glare.

High quality lenses are VERY glare resistant.

Erechtheion, Athenian Acropolis - EOS 6D + 24-70L 28mm @ f/8 - 1/1600s

Glare can cover our whole frame. A "subset" of glare, caused by the same conditions, i.e. light sources directly facing the camera lens one way or the other, is lens flare.
Lens flare is harder to eliminate, and appears to be there so often, that it is almost "expected" when we see shots against bright light sources. Photographers use it to emphasize there compositions and film directors are known even to digitally introduce it in P/P to create that "mood" - often accused for over-doing it (JJ Abrams, I know you can read this).


Flares are patches of light - usually in the shape of the aperture iris that are repeated on one or more of the lens elements. You can literally count them, and see the diaphragm's shape that the moment of the exposure.

Lens hoods (on camera) and off camera "flags" are the best way to reduce lens glare, blocking light sources on the sides and right outside the fame to reach the front element. Those do nothing to help cases like the one above where the light source (sun) is in the frame.

Dusty lenses, filters & even dust on the sensor itself reflect light in random ways that make lens glare & flare worse.
With shots like these you know that something need cleaning NOW!!!

California PCH - EOS 50D (dusty) + EFS 17-55 IS - @ f/11 - 1/500s

*Polarizers*

Now, polarizers can do little to limit glare exactly. Polarizers eliminate reflections caused by non-metallic / high specular materials. The shot above HAD a polarizer.
As the light travels through the atmosphere, it hits particles in the air and reflects off them in random directions. Same happens when it hits the soil, the water, glass for the most part etc.


A PL filter acts as a "mask" blocking certain wavelengths, and allowing others. This blocks much of the light reaching the lens (thus reducing the effective brightness anywhere from 1 to 2 stops) but also boosts contrast as it eliminates all those micro-glare-sources in our frame. You see, each one of those elements was an indirect light source as-soon-as it was reflecting light, potentiially sendng some directly back to our lens creating glare. And glare = less contrast.


PLs are "directional" as you can see in the image above, thus have to be rotated perpendicular to their axis, and for us to judge the desired level of polarization.
Of course just by having the filter you are universally reducing some glare - this is why static polarized lenses in sunglases for example, are still far more effective than non-polarizing counterparts.

Polished metals and other shiny surfaces reflect light without dispersing it as much, but polarizing it to their "own" rhythm - i.e. Thus a PL cannot eliminate those reflections (can reduce a bit). But a hood / flag can, given those are not directly in our frame.

Thus PLs work with hoods and not instead of hoods, and vice versa. Each one does its own thing, even tho indirectly fight against a similar enemy.


----------



## Dream Killer

glare can also be that shimmer you get from water, or from leaves of trees, or shiny car paint, or from light reflecting off glass - all of which are caused by polarized light. a cpl would help tremendously there.


----------



## kbros

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TTheuns*
> 
> Hello, some of you seem to know a lot about DSLRs and I am wondering, wether a Nikon D5200 with a AF-S Nikkor 18-55 1: 3.5 - 5.6 GII ED DX lens would be a good deal for €300 (roughly $390)


Yes.


----------



## DizZz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> glare can also be that shimmer you get from water, or from leaves of trees, or shiny car paint, or from light reflecting off glass - all of which are caused by polarized light. a cpl would help tremendously there.


I was thinking of the reflection off water as glare as well but @pcfoo's post was really helpful.


----------



## Dream Killer

For @Conspiracy :



been awake for 12 hours for this. i'm doing it for free. ya feel me?!?


----------



## Magical Eskimo

So I should get a CPL even if it's just for protection over a UV filter?


----------



## Dream Killer

no. cpls cut stops of light so they are not suited for general use.

a uv filter would be the one you need for general protection but the good ones are expensive. 77mm B+W MRC UV 010s are about $70-$80 ea but I have them all on my lenses to complete the weather seal (i run out in the rain a lot).


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Ah right okay thanks


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> For @Conspiracy :
> 
> 
> 
> been awake for 12 hours for this. i'm doing it for free. ya feel me?!?


ewww for free and in final cut.


----------



## Dream Killer

dude. never again!


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> So I should get a CPL even if it's just for protection over a UV filter?


Pretty much what @Dream Killer said is the reason it is not practical to have them on all the time.

But for example when I go for hiking or even neighborhood / street / architecture walks, I have a CPL always on. But it is not for "protection". I am not that worried about protection, and if you would see what professionals put their 5-figure gear through you would understand that being "too anal" for taking your lens for a beach hike is trivial.

You get the CPL for higher contrast and richer colors - both under the sun and when overcast. Not protection. It is a "special effect" filter.

Yes, you lose some light using it, so it will give you some trouble in deep shades (thick forest canopies / indoors) but you can shoot @ f/8 or even slower apertures with a CPL handheld pretty much for as long as the sun is out.

Good CPLs are expensive, but for the 58mm diameter your 18-55 needs the dilemma is twofold* :

It's a cheap and not stellar optical lens. Good enough for great shots tho, don't get me wrong.
Thus you should not worry about "cheap" filters. A $20 Tiffen CPL will be as good as a $80+ B+W. In your case doesn't make sense to use a filter nearly or more expensive than your lens - the filter won't be the "bottleneck". Still I would go for a Tiffen over an eBay Chinese filter that could be cheaper.
You will probably out-grow this lens if you keep talking with the wrong (or right, depends how you see it) so investing lots of money in a filter diameter that is not likely out be found in good lenses - outside primes/fixed focal lengths that is - is not wise at this point. Dropping serious cash on a 67 / 77 / 82mm filter is a given due to size, but at least you have the piece of mind that most modern "serious" zoom & fast prime lenses out there use those sizes, so you are not making an investment for a single lens.

* funny syntax, as dilemma means exactly "twofold", even tho it is used in English for situations for more than two options


----------



## hokiealumnus

7D Mark II is official. Few links:

http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/standard_display/eos_7dmkii_feature?WT.mc_id=C126149
http://www.dpreview.com/articles/3373094259/canon-announces-long-awaited-eos-7d-mark-ii
http://www.shutterbug.com/content/canon-unveils-long-awaited-eos-7d-mark-ii-digital-slr-and-three-new-lenses
http://www.wexphotographic.com/blog/canon-eos-7d-mark-ii-announced
http://www.canonrumors.com/2014/09/video-review-canon-eos-7d-mark-ii/

Looks hot, but not hot enough to make me want it over the 70D. Supposedly it's a new sensor...seems awfully similar to the 70D's though. Video looks nice, as does the built-in intervalometer. Aside from that, I'd miss wifi, touch screen and flippy screen. I use all of those a whole lot more than I thought I would, and would miss them tremendously.


----------



## Conspiracy

i will say just because its the same MP doesnt mean its the same sensor. On several sites im seeing speculation that it will provide similar low light to the 6D. I find that incredibly difficult to believe but im not a non-believer at all. if it indeed does provide excellent low light performance then i would totally purchase this over the 1DmkIV which i have been eye balling for quite some time now. im not much of a fan of the APS-C sensors right now but id still buy it for the performance. if it came down to it id almost make my kit a 5D3 + 7D2 instead of a 1DmkIV + old 7D, of course over time with some saving up of course lol. as of right now at the end of this month ill have saved enough for a 1DmkIV but im waiting for reviews and hands on test with it when it comes out. if aperturent doesnt have a 7D2 to rent for a week ill be a sad panda


----------



## hokiealumnus

One of the links says they redesigned the microlenses at the pixel level for better low light sensitivity (hence the ISO 16000 setting), so it's different, but not altogether reinvented. Second gen dual pixel AF seems to be the same dual pixel plus customization options.

I think people are getting confused about the 6D comparison. Nowhere does it say that it has the same low light imaging capability - indeed, I would find that impossible. Rather, the center AF point can focus down to -3 EV, the same as the 6D, which is where people are drawing the comparison. Low light imaging isn't the same, but it can AF down to the same low light level.


----------



## MistaBernie

The AF system and 10fps as well as the dual Digic 6 processors seem like the biggest differences between the 70D and the 7D2. The 16000 ISO is expandable to 25,600/51,200 which is only one stop below the 5D3. On top of this, the MSRP isn't crazy for everything that the 7D2 includes. It's not a homerun, but it's a solid base hit if you ask me.


----------



## werds

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> The AF system and 10fps as well as the dual Digic 6 processors seem like the biggest differences between the 70D and the 7D2. The 16000 ISO is expandable to 25,600/51,200 which is only one stop below the 5D3. On top of this, the MSRP isn't crazy for everything that the 7D2 includes. It's not a homerun, but it's a solid base hit if you ask me.


Owning a 70D, I don't see myself jumping out my seat to buy the 7Dmk2. I was HOPING it would make me jump out and open my wallet (GAS GAS GAS!) But I just am not moved atm... maybe if when they did ISO comparisons I saw a decent leap in the low light imaging side...

Nice camera for those that have been waiting though. And I am sure the AF system will make many people happy.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *werds*
> 
> Owning a 70D, I don't see myself jumping out my seat to buy the 7Dmk2. I was HOPING it would make me jump out and open my wallet (GAS GAS GAS!) But I just am not moved atm... maybe if when they did ISO comparisons I saw a decent leap in the low light imaging side...
> 
> Nice camera for those that have been waiting though. And I am sure the AF system will make many people happy.


Absolutely. My backup at the moment is a 7D. 7D -> 7D2 seems like it will be worth it (especially since I should be able to hopefully get like 7-800 for my 7D)..


----------



## hokiealumnus

Yea, I think they made a good enough leap to make 7D -> 7D II worth it for sure. For my needs, I'm with werds - it's not enough to make me want to jump from the 70D to the 7D II, but I'm not a pro either. I can see a reason for people to make that jump, especially pros. It's just not enough for me...and for the non-pro things I'd lose (things I admittedly dismissed as gimmicky - wifi & articulating touch screen), I'll stick with the 70D. I can live with a _mere_ 19 point AF system and 7FPS.









Still, it's got hella great specs. I can see using that as a pro sports and wildlife body for sure.


----------



## Conspiracy

yeah either way the specs definitely impress. im very excited to rent one for a night time soccer game which will be my ultimate test. if it passes no more 1series cameras for me unless i get a super bad case of GAS


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> yeah either way the specs definitely impress. im very excited to rent one for a night time soccer game which will be my ultimate test. if it passes no more 1series cameras for me unless i get a super bad case of GAS


Same thoughts here


----------



## pcfoo

Impressive specs. Articulated screen would be nice, but probably hard to weather seal for? Don't know. Seems to be a no-no for their Pro bodies, even tho its a popular feature in their consumer DSLRs.

I would doubt low light performance can be the same as that in a 6D / 5D3. Even tho it might be a sensor 2 years ahead in design, it is also the same more or less MP with 1/2 the area = 1/2 the photodiode size. Signal to noise ratio is fighting an uphill battle vs. its [135] sized brethren. 7D wasn't better than the 5Dc, cannot see the 6D gen losing to the 7DII.

AF looks very nice, I really hope it delivers and I do drool over it as a 6D owner








Lack of WiFi is not a biggie for me - I don't really using it outside showing off to the friends with my Note II








GPS I do use. I did not see the battery model - is it still the same? GPS is a powerhog, and I would guess these new AF / Dual Digic and the rest are not going to take it easy on power either.

I also hope they won't bump the price above $2K inline with the price bump we saw with the 5D2->5D3 transition.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Impressive specs. Articulated screen would be nice, but probably hard to weather seal for? Don't know. Seems to be a no-no for their Pro bodies, even tho its a popular feature in their consumer DSLRs.
> 
> I would doubt low light performance can be the same as that in a 6D / 5D3. Even tho it might be a sensor 2 years ahead in design, it is also the same more or less MP with 1/2 the area = 1/2 the photodiode size. Signal to noise ratio is fighting an uphill battle vs. its [135] sized brethren. 7D wasn't better than the 5Dc, cannot see the 6D gen losing to the 7DII.
> 
> AF looks very nice, I really hope it delivers and I do drool over it as a 6D owner
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I also hope they won't bump the price above $2K inline with the price bump we saw with the 5D2->5D3 transition.


Price is listed in the Canon link.. $1799.


----------



## Conspiracy

honestly at that price i have no problem grabbing one just to have as an APS-C backup camera. as i think about it a 5D3 +7D2 combo is looking really good right now. i can also patiently wait to see if any new rumors pop-up for a 5DmkIV


----------



## MistaBernie

100% agreed. Especially since the 7D2 will be able to make full use of the 600 EX RT system..


----------



## Jixr

ahhh Super excited about the canon 24mm 2.8 pancake, I had the 40mm for a little bit, loved it, and am SUPER excited about this lens since its only going to cost $150

Yes please. 50mm 1.8 killer for crop bodies.


----------



## Conspiracy

id love to see an update on the 50mm f1.4 and put a normal USM motor and ditch the micro-USM,

starting to wonder if i should keep my 7D or try to sell to help pay for whatever future upgrade i get


----------



## pcfoo

Yes, looks pretty good.
$1800 is not bad - inline with the old 7D, which means $1500 by Xmas would be doable in local stores with some bartering, less used.

If I was into sports / wildlife more, I would certainly consider it. Tried my luck with a 400 5.6 L and saw it lacking in birding with the 6D ... AF was surprisingly good (if you can track and aim positively with a 400+ lens that takes some getting used to), but it is still short, much like the lackluster of FPS doesn't help.

The crop sensor working as a TC does works pretty well, and for well-lit subjects the pixel density is a pro (you will be cropping most of the times regardless of focal length).
It is not really light or cheap enough to replace a FF body (unless we are talking 1 series), but it can complement it very well.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> id love to see an update on the 50mm f1.4 and put a normal USM motor and ditch the micro-USM,
> 
> starting to wonder if i should keep my 7D or try to sell to help pay for whatever future upgrade i get


If you would be getting a 7D2, I don't think I would keep the 7D. You will probably never use it.
If you would be getting a FF, I would keep the 7D as a "TC". I tend to think that a good APS-C camera is usuallyy better than a TC + a give lens on a FF, and in case of a "new" 1.4x TC III from Canon, costs give or take whatever you would get out of selling your 7D.


----------



## Jixr

Hm... I was looking to get myself a better body for christmas, currently thinking about etiher the 70d, 7dkm2, or the 6d. Though for what I do, I think the 6d is better off for me.


----------



## Conspiracy

pretty good point. ill put my 7D up for sale probably this weekend i guess. i think id maybe get like $600ish for it in excellent condition. ill do some research.


----------



## MistaBernie

yeah, the market on used 7Ds is about to crash. If I was able to drive / leave the house I'd probably try to unload it now before the deluge..


----------



## Conspiracy

i have a funny feeling i should have sold it at least a month ago. i might be stuck with it as they are going for $600 now on potn and earlier in the summer i saw them going for $800+


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> i have a funny feeling i should have sold it at least a month ago. i might be stuck with it as they are going for $600 now on potn and earlier in the summer i saw them going for $800+


With the price of it new in the mid $900ish after that $500 drop, whoever was buying them for $800 was making a mistake









Eager to see how the 7D2 fairs vs. the oldie ... wonder if I should by buying and flippin 7Dc (is that valid now?) for pretty much no loss other than shipping costs, or renting a 7D2 if I want a 2nd body with extra reach









(yeah yeah, I have the M, but for obvious reasons wouldn't be my weapon of choice).








[line].[/line]
On the 24 STM - that's a great lens - never thought you could get a lens that small and wide for that kind of money...The second cheapest EF 24 2.8 was $300 ish...and we go for less than double that...

If they did as good a job as they did on the EF-M 22mm f/2, I would love this lens...
If only the SL-1 was priced as the M, I could see me being really tempted to go for this and the 40 + 24 instead.
Rebels in general tho would be fun to walk around with just one of these primes.

I don't think I would buy it for my 6D tho...


----------



## DizZz

What is the fastest auto focusing lens for Canon? I know they're all about the same these days and it doesn't really matter but I'm just curious.


----------



## Jixr

the fisheye, because everythings in focus lulz


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DizZz*
> 
> What is the fastest auto focusing lens for Canon? I know they're all about the same these days and it doesn't really matter but I'm just curious.


Canon was claiming the fastest AF "in the World" in 1998 and the introduction of the EOS 3 (film) body, using the EF-L 300mm 2.8 USM.

I would believe that this claim would still stand with an EOS 1DX and a EF-L 300mm II*, but others - mainly Sony - have claimed to be the fastest - don't know under which circumstances and how a mirrorless $600 camera like the A6000 would be faster than a 1DX, but it might be true under certain circumstances.

The 1DX + 300 L II combo retails in the US for a bit less than $13,500.

* probably using the focus limiter @ 6m-infinity setting


----------



## DizZz

Interesting stuff thanks guys


----------



## Magical Eskimo

I think I want a new lens, with intention of maybe trying out some candid shots in some cities, would this be okay with the 1100D?
https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B0056E49MK/ref=cm_sw_r_awd_MF.fub0SR27G7


----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> I think I want a new lens, with intention of maybe trying out some candid shots in some cities, would this be okay with the 1100D?
> https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B0056E49MK/ref=cm_sw_r_awd_MF.fub0SR27G7


I can't comment on the quality of that lens, but I feel there's no reason why you can't use it. You can even use a 100-400L on that body without issues.


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Cool, is it worth spending a little more and getting the STM version? I'm probably gonna buy used so should be able to find one for a decent price I think


----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> Cool, is it worth spending a little more and getting the STM version? I'm probably gonna buy used so should be able to find one for a decent price I think


I don't have experience with STM, but if it's similar to USM then I'd say yes. With my normal lenses I basically exclusively use manual focus, but on my 100-400L (USM) the AF is fast, quiet, and very accurate.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DizZz*
> 
> What is the fastest auto focusing lens for Canon? I know they're all about the same these days and it doesn't really matter but I'm just curious.


85L for sure trololol









jk of course. pretty much the fastest focusing lens is hard to pin point as there is such a wide focal range out there. honestly the fastest comes from a combination of both camera body and lens as the 300L II & 70-200L II & 24-70L II are all lightning mind blowing fast on the 1DX. at a certain point the speed of AF becomes hard to compare because right now with todays new cameras and the new 7DmkII on the way its hard to tell the difference truthfully


----------



## MistaBernie

I feel like the 135L focuses pretty quick too (at least in my experience on the 5D3)..


----------



## Conspiracy

yeah when i played with the 135L on my 7D i was very impressed with its speed. i cant wait to get one. still have to wait for the 5D3 price to bottom out before i get that camera.


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> I think I want a new lens, with intention of maybe trying out some candid shots in some cities, would this be okay with the 1100D?
> https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B0056E49MK/ref=cm_sw_r_awd_MF.fub0SR27G7


Of course you can get an EF-S 55-200 for what you want, and of course it will work nicely with the 1100D much like with any APS-C Canon DSLR.

While getting a 55-200/70-200/70-300 is interesting and can lead in a large variety of shots, shooting street with long teles is usually not very successful.
Sure, you will get your occasional good shot, quite a few funny ones as people are often unaware of the presence of a camera at a distance, but sooner than later you will realize that this is exactly the weakness of this kind of lenses: disengagement. It becomes obvious that you are afar when you are shooting @ the longer end of the zoom range, you are not part of the action, you are a mere observer far away.

It is like shooting track & field games from the upper tiers of seats with a 1000mm lens, hoping that you will get the same shots & perspective the pros do shooting level with the athletes & short distance (by comparison) from the action. Sure, you can land a few gems here and there, but..."something" will be different most of the times.

Most "classic" street photographers stay below 85mm, usually shooting with 50 and 35mm equiv. FOV and more often than not using primes. That is 20~30mm for an APS-C Canon.

Both those focal lengths and a few above and below are within the range of standard kit zooms.

I won't say to you "stay away" from tele zooms cause those are fun in their own way, but I would recommend sticking with your kit lens for street photography.
Or test yourself and try to shoot with either, and after a few months check your favorite shots and see @ what focal length those were shot.

Polling yourself & your galleries is actually the the most objective way to justify getting better / longer / wider lenses or a better body.

If you have your standard zoom shooting almost always on the wide end, you could consider a wider lens. The contrary, if you are always going for the tele end, you might need a walk around lens with longer zoom range, or simply a tele-zoom.
If you shoot constantly around a small mm range, maybe you could replace your zoom with a prime around this range. You would usually get a smaller, sharper & wider aperture kit to carry around this way. Yes, a small % of the shots you would land with a zoom at different mm could be weaker, but the majority of them would benefit from the above.
If you have a tele zoom that apparently it is always stuck @ the long end (most outdoor tele zoom shots are on either the wide or the tele end, like 80% + of the time!), maybe you need a longer lens. Or realize that if it is not wildlife or sports, your feet can "zoom you" in = get closer!
If you constantly shoot wide open and/or stuck with high ISO (1600+), maybe getting a faster (= brighter) lens or that newer body is not a bad idea (or is it?)
I check myself every couple of years, usually I end up with the vast majority of my pictures taken with a standard zoom (for the equivalent system I'm using - was 28-70 / 24-70 for film & FF, 17-55 was my weapon of choice for the APS-C etc, followed by a UWA zoom, like a 17-40 for FF or 10-20 for crop, with a 5-10% being shot past 70mm. That immediately tells me that as much as I would love a 70-200L II for example, my money would be better spent on a 24-70L II or a 16-35L 4 IS.


----------



## Conspiracy

very impressive. would love to see a actual HD version rather than compressed streaming.

shot on the 7DmkII

http://web.canon.jp/imaging/eosd/samples/eos7dmk2/player_cello/movie.html?high


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Of course you can get an EF-S 55-200 for what you want, and of course it will work nicely with the 1100D much like with any APS-C Canon DSLR.
> 
> While getting a 55-200/70-200/70-300 is interesting and can lead in a large variety of shots, shooting street with long teles is usually not very successful.
> Sure, you will get your occasional good shot, quite a few funny ones as people are often unaware of the presence of a camera at a distance, but sooner than later you will realize that this is exactly the weakness of this kind of lenses: disengagement. It becomes obvious that you are afar when you are shooting @ the longer end of the zoom range, you are not part of the action, *you are a mere observer far away.*


I can be one of my favourite TV show characters


----------



## jameyscott

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> I can be one of my favourite TV show characters


Yes! Fringe is awesome.


----------



## Dream Killer

am i the only crazy one that uses a 70-200 up close?


----------



## Eggs and bacon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> am i the only crazy one that uses a 70-200 up close?


define up close.

like head and shoulder portrait style or macro?


----------



## Dream Killer

i constantly curse that 1.4m min focusing distance. i use it for everything - not just portraits.


----------



## pcfoo

You are not the only one, and the 70-200 is a very versatile lens. In a studio environment, 70-200 2.8 could be the most popular choices for shooting people.

It is just not small enough to be "transparent" in a crowd, and hard to include context in people photography = what street photography is mostly about.

Can you "steal" portraits and body details before you get noticed? Much like with any telephoto, yes.


----------



## Conspiracy

that sounds so nefarious....

you can "steal" someones portrait


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> that sounds so nefarious....
> 
> you can "steal" someones portrait


Well, I got carried away from the original "should I get 55-200 for candid photography" question.
But yeah, in my mind capturing the portraits of bystanders from far away so that you maintain yourself "hidden" from their attention is a kinda like that.









I would not call it nefarious (how could I , been there), but as I've elaborated above, if you are honest about it you should outgrow it pretty fast as the results more often than not have the appeal of a paparazzi style shoot...that's with long mm at least.


----------



## Jixr

I love bad streett photography, basically a bunch of pictures of people with the "what the hell are you taking a picture of me for?" expression on their face.


----------



## Scott1541

I'm not going back to look but I bet most of my attempts at street photography have been like that, I don't pick people off at a distance with a tele









ION it's the uni societies fair tomorrow and the photo soc has a stand. We've decided we're going to have the table with various bits of gear on, something to take email addresses on and sweets to give out (who doesn't like free sweets?) As well as this we're going to do a little 'photo booth' and we'll post the pics on our facebook page. There should be 3 of us there most of the day so it should be a good day


----------



## Sean Webster

I'm going to be doing "creeper" (candid) photos at my uni today...pulling out the 70-200 for some long distance bokeh action! lol.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> I'm not going back to look but I bet most of my attempts at street photography have been like that, I don't pick people off at a distance with a tele
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ION it's the uni societies fair tomorrow and the photo soc has a stand. We've decided we're going to have the table with various bits of gear on, something to take email addresses on and sweets to give out (who doesn't like free sweets?) As well as this we're going to do a little 'photo booth' and we'll post the pics on our facebook page. There should be 3 of us there most of the day so it should be a good day


We did something similar, we did a polaroid themed booth: http://www.upressonline.com/2014/08/gallery-get-wowed-event-with-owl-photography-club/


----------



## hokiealumnus

Here's a video I put together last night. It's not worthy of a rating, and it's video not photo. I forgot to switch to my 'video' (read: not sharpened, mostly flat) user setting. Anyway...great video it is not. Great college football entrance it _is_.









Virginia Tech Hokies Football Entrance


----------



## Dream Killer

street photography isn't always about being transparent


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hokiealumnus*
> 
> Here's a video I put together last night. It's not worthy of a rating, and it's video not photo. I forgot to switch to my 'video' (read: not sharpened, mostly flat) user setting. Anyway...great video it is not. Great college football entrance it _is_.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Virginia Tech Hokies Football Entrance


man that goal post was kinda in your way. cant you photoshop that out


----------



## hokiealumnus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> man that goal post was kinda in your way. cant you photoshop that out


Haha...indeed that was a pain. I'm going to guess no, but I actually thought about trying. I think After Effects can crop video. Might make it 720p instead of 1080p though.


----------



## Sean Webster

I started to take photos today...then it rained on us. :'(

I'm rusty...I need to shoot more.


----------



## Conspiracy

i took some photos today since sean failed to check the weather trololol. kinda of a rare thing but got to work saw this dude swimming around so i went to my office grabbed a 7D + 70-200 f2.8 and snapped like 30 photos. it was super crazy overcast today and there was mist/fog everywhere but im slow and by the time i got to work it was all gone :/

also im going to best buy today after work and seeing what kind of discount they will give me on a 5D3 with 2 year protection and maybe even sweeten the deal if i buy a 135L & 1.4X mkIII extender as well. if they offer a nice discount since i used to work there then ill buy it otherwise im planning on buying a 5D3 soon if the price ever drops because right now at $3400 i think its crazy over priced..

IMG_9363 by brian_roberts, on Flickr

IMG_9330 by brian_roberts, on Flickr


----------



## MistaBernie

Whoa, that's crazy money. Have you not checked out Canon Price Watch? They estimate a street price of $2699..

http://www.canonpricewatch.com/product/03868/Canon-EOS-5D-Mark-III-price.html


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Whoa, that's crazy money. Have you not checked out Canon Price Watch? They estimate a street price of $2699..
> 
> http://www.canonpricewatch.com/product/03868/Canon-EOS-5D-Mark-III-price.html


yeah i refuse to spend that much. didnt know about that site. i was just planning on checking every day until eventually the price dropped lol. even $3200 seems like a lot because i know ive seen it go on sale for $2999 and even as low as $2899 once at best buy when i was working there. im in no rush it buy since i already know im getting one. i just want to wait for the price to be right. either way ill likely get it at best buy and have them price match and maybe throw a little discount my way for working for them for a year. and i always gave discounts to customers that bought protection so we will see if they do the same for me as the protection at best buy is actually legit, break it and they fix it unless its like extreme damage

dang. after tax its crazy expensive. i wont buy one unless its on sale for $2999 or less


----------



## MistaBernie

CPW is good to watch for those random deals that pop up that are just like 'whoa'.


----------



## Conspiracy

its so weird because it even lists BBY at $3200 but its still $3400 on their site









do yall trust these random ebay sites that have these really good prices??


----------



## MistaBernie

depends on the site to be honest... I think CPW does a good job of identifying the reliable ones..


----------



## Conspiracy

im may be weird but i find safety in buying from either a reliable site or just grabbing it in a store assuming there isnt an extreme price difference. im ok paying a little extra for peace of mind and safety. but not $400 lololol


----------



## MistaBernie

That's understandable. The way CPW works is that they basically put you in touch with an authorized vendor that sells for the 'street price'. They don't usually advertise who the dealer(s) are because the prices are advertised so low, but I know quite a few people that have bought from CPW without issue.

In terms of buying from eBay, don't buy from individual accounts unless it's something you're looking for that's not brand new, not highly valuable, etc. In recent history I think the most money I've spent on non-retailers on eBay would be a tie for the 7D grip I bought a couple years ago for $100 and the Lee Big Stopper I picked up just over retail when they were hard to find. Just be smart about it.


----------



## Conspiracy

yeah. i get paid the last friday of every month. right now i have enough for the camera but nothing else. so after i get paid at the end of the month ill have money left over in the bank so im not totally broke. this is assuming i find a good deal otherwise ill just sit on it


----------



## pcfoo

I believe you guys are all bad influence. My GAS is mildly sedated and you are waking it up, and once woken up it wants 4-figure items.


----------



## Scott1541

The societies fair today went well, even though we didn't really do the photobooth idea. We got about 8 A4 sheets filled with people's email addresses and handed out a lot of flyers









At the end some asian student came up to the stand and he was looking and what we had on display and talking to us. He said he had a camera and a few lenses, then about a minute later pulled a D800E out of his messenger bag with a 24-70 f/2.8 mounted


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> I believe you guys are all bad influence. My GAS is mildly sedated and you are waking it up, and once woken up it wants 4-figure items.


hey now dont go pointing fingers. i blame photokina


----------



## pcfoo

Nah, I cannot - I have nothing in my sights that was announced recently / in Photokina...
I want to swap my 24-70L I for a II and get the 16-35 f4 IS.

Move #1 is $700ish (after selling the L I have), move #2 is $1200 out of pocket. Apparently there are no offers for used 16-35s that worth not getting a new one. Getting it from the NY camera superstores will let me keep some tax money.

All other "sweet" lenses I would like (GAS), from Sigma 35 & 50 Art to 135L etc I feel will just be added items to my bag that won't be used anywhere near as much as a 24-70 II, and will cost give or take the same money as swapping for the wow zoom, are neither small or light etc.


----------



## Jixr

I'm drooling so hard over the 24mm pancake, so much want, and I can afford it, its awesome. Hope its as good as the 40 2.8, or even better, the 22mm 2.0 for the EOS-M


----------



## Conspiracy

pcfoo i can tell you personally the new 24-70 II is beautiful. i have one im using on a 7D to shoot video at work and i love the weight and feel of it. I really want my boss to replace our two 7D bodies for the new 7D2 but considering how little DSLR video i do as it is that is hard to ask for when i also want to upgrade from kino flo lights to LED panels for convenience


----------



## MistaBernie

yep, love me my 24-70 II. Fantastic lens.


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> pcfoo i can tell you personally the new 24-70 II is beautiful. i have one im using on a 7D to shoot video at work and i love the weight and feel of it. I really want my boss to replace our two 7D bodies for the new 7D2 but considering how little DSLR video i do as it is that is hard to ask for when i also want to upgrade from kino flo lights to LED panels for convenience


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> yep, love me my 24-70 II. Fantastic lens.


Yes, I am kinda aware - tho no 1st hand experience - told you you are all bad influence, but not my only one
















I am hopping that getting it will push aside the silly wants for primes for some time. I still have my Sigma 50 1.4 EX that will do ok for low light / lighter weight.
It is also lighter-weight than my all-metal 24-70L (I have held the II a couple of times @ some of my visits in stores, have no experience shooting it) and that's not a small thing.

I still believe that a 16-35 f4 IS / 70-200 f4 IS is the combo for me to drag along when hiking @ mountains, but still kit weight is important.

Yet for everyday (ok, every other - other day) shooting, I doubt any of the above will see as much action as a 24-70 - not in my hands.

The only downside with the II - outside of price of the lens course which is no joke - is the filter size:

- I have no 82mm filters, while I do have a few decent ones in 77mm (CPL / 10stop ND / good UVs) that I use quite often...replacing / adding to those for 82mm would be a decent dent ontop of the price of the lens, and it's just for this lens







- all other lenses I could think of getting / wanting are 77mm or smaller.
Hope I will get one used with a decent UV thrown in, as most used samples I see in photography forums come, so I might end up getting a just a CPL and call it a day. I will leave long exposures for some other lens, but I have to have that CPL


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> At the end some asian student came up to the stand and he was looking and what we had on display and talking to us. He said he had a camera and a few lenses, then about a minute later pulled a D800E out of his messenger bag with a 24-70 f/2.8 mounted


who are you and how long have you known me?


----------



## kubed_zero

I'd love to be added to this club!

I shoot with:

Nikon D4
Nikon D610

Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8 VRII
Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8
Micro Nikkor 60mm f/2.8
Nikkor 50mm 1.4G

and then for more portable stuff I have:
GoPro Hero 3+ Black (fly it on a DJI Phantom)
Canon SD780IS P&S
LG G3 phone camera (13MP, OIS)


----------



## Conspiracy

so i was just told there is a remote chance that the sports photography workshop im doing as an assistant might have the 7Dmkii among an insane number of 1DX and other sports gear.

so yeah im glad im working that next month to fuel my gear lust


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:



> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> so i was just told there is a remote chance that the sports photography workshop im doing as an assistant might have the 7Dmkii among an insane number of 1DX and other sports gear.
> 
> so yeah im glad im working that next month to fuel my gear lust


You need to stop giving me gas.  First the 85L recommendation and now all the hype you are stirring up with the 7D MKII....and I'm tempted to get a 300 F/4 IS and 135 f/2.0 as well... haha


----------



## Conspiracy

i want that 300 f4 as well but im also considering just grabbing a 1.4X mkiii and using it on a 70-200 for sports. the 135L will be mine!


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Quote:
> You need to stop giving me gas.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> First the 85L recommendation and now all the hype you are stirring up with the 7D MKII....and I'm tempted to get a 300 F/4 IS and 135 f/2.0 as well... haha


I'm actually just about to take photos of my 300 so I can put it up for sale.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Quote:
> You need to stop giving me gas.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> First the 85L recommendation and now all the hype you are stirring up with the 7D MKII....and I'm tempted to get a 300 F/4 IS and 135 f/2.0 as well... haha
> 
> 
> 
> I'm actually just about to take photos of my 300 so I can put it up for sale.
Click to expand...

dont you dare tease me! im saving for my 5D3


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> i want that 300 f4 as well but im also considering just grabbing a 1.4X mkiii and using it on a 70-200 for sports. the 135L will be mine!


A 1.4x + 300mm + 7D MKII would be nice  Also, thinking of tossing the 6D for a 5DMKIII as well.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Quote:
> You need to stop giving me gas.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> First the 85L recommendation and now all the hype you are stirring up with the 7D MKII....and I'm tempted to get a 300 F/4 IS and 135 f/2.0 as well... haha
> 
> 
> 
> I'm actually just about to take photos of my 300 so I can put it up for sale.
Click to expand...

Hmmm, well, I see they go for around $850-$875 PP'd and shipped on POTN. idk if that would be what you would like for it. I'm cheap when it comes to looking for deals lol.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Hmmm, well, I see they go for around $850-$875 PP'd and shipped on POTN. idk if that would be what you would like for it. I'm cheap when it comes to looking for deals lol.


Yeah was looking around on eBay and of course they go for closer to $1000 but then that's all erased because of the fees. Your price seems about ballpark tbh. I don't think the people listing for $1000+ on FM/POTN are getting near that.

Speaking of the 1.4x, that's the other thing I'm ready to sell lol. If it was closer to November I could even deliver them personally.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Hmmm, well, I see they go for around $850-$875 PP'd and shipped on POTN. idk if that would be what you would like for it. I'm cheap when it comes to looking for deals lol.
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah was looking around on eBay and of course they go for closer to $1000 but then that's all erased because of the fees. Your price seems about ballpark tbh. I don't think the people listing for $1000+ on FM/POTN are getting near that.
> 
> Speaking of the 1.4x, that's the other thing I'm ready to sell lol. If it was closer to November I could even deliver them personally.
Click to expand...

dude whats up? are you upgrading or leaving sports? dont quit sports photography its so much fun


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> Yeah was looking around on eBay and of course they go for closer to $1000 but then that's all erased because of the fees. Your price seems about ballpark tbh. I don't think the people listing for $1000+ on FM/POTN are getting near that.
> 
> Speaking of the 1.4x, that's the other thing I'm ready to sell lol. If it was closer to November I could even deliver them personally.


hmmm.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> dude whats up? are you upgrading or leaving sports? dont quit sports photography its so much fun


Just clearing out stuff I don't use anymore. I only used the 1.4x on the 300 and since I have the Tamron 150-600 and I shoot almost 100% daytime stuff it seems silly to keep the 300 and 1.4x around.

I'm probably just going to use the funds to purchase something else I've been wanting to try out. Maybe a Sigma 35/50 Art. Been missing a wide/normal prime for awhile.


----------



## DizZz

I want the zeiss otus 85mm so badly now...

Why are all my hobbies so damn expensive?


----------



## pcfoo

Wait, I up the offers on that 300 4 L for $5 !









(really, I'm in line, shoot an offer @ PM or link the post to your ad)

Doesn't obstruct my 24-70 II plans tho! GASSSSSS


----------



## MrStrat007

Hey guys, looking to join this thread and amazing group of people. Hoping to learn a few things too









Some of my first DSLR photos, taken with my friend's Nikon D5000 (since bought a D5300 with kit 18-55mm lens and Nikkor 55-200mm AF-S DX VR Zoom F/4-5.6G IF-ED) :

https://flic.kr/p/pimE4S
London Eye by Troy.Elliott, on Flickr

https://flic.kr/p/pi7vu4
Waterfront on the Thames by Troy.Elliott, on Flickr

https://flic.kr/p/p1UmXb
Piccadilly circus by Troy.Elliott, on Flickr


Spoiler: Two more



https://flic.kr/p/p1UtPB
Skyline by Troy.Elliott, on Flickr

https://flic.kr/p/pioE4k
Random quote by Troy.Elliott, on Flickr



They're far from perfect but I'm happy enough with how they turned out (considering I'd never touched a DSLR before).

Any advice is always welcome









-Strat

Edit: not sure why clicking on original does not link back to flicker original images







So I added links fwiw.


----------



## Conspiracy

did a very simple graduation shoot for a friend. nothing fancy. photos in exchange for free beer and dinner. busted out the 24-70 f2.8mkII and the 70-200 f2.8 non-IS that i have at work and used them on my 7D and was very impressed. love the 24-70 and look froward to using it on my future 5D3









my review of the 24-70 f2.8 mkII is two thumbs up LOLZ

IMG_4692 by brian_roberts, on Flickr


----------



## sub50hz

What's the word, chumps?


----------



## Conspiracy

not much. my new job has provided me the ability to afford more toys. on the hunt for a 5D3 next month


----------



## Scott1541

Student loan is here so it's time to buy more gear







The first thing on my list is a polarising filter but I don't know if I should get a 77mm filter and 52mm adapter or just go with a 52mm filter and not be able to use it on the 10-20. I've pretty much discounted a Cokin P style filter because I've got a cheap ND set and I find it's a pain to use, plus I wouldn't be using it with the ND or GNDs as they are really cheap and the IQ is crap.

Would the 10-20 be too wide to use a polarising filter in most situations?


----------



## pcfoo

A single, 77mm "slim" CPL will have no issues with a 10-20/10-22 .

A Cokin P or equiv. smaller than 100mm/4in square filter holder will probably vignette heavily with 77mm wide angle lenses: t does with the 24-70 77mm @ FF, and almost surely it will with a 10-20 / 16-35 equiv.

I don't think you should worry about 77mm -> 52mm adapters unless it is for a one time / very special situation. The whole assembly will be too cumbersome. and funny.
Go for a cheap 52mm that works with what you have, think about bigger filters after you actually get lenses that require them.


----------



## Scott1541

The biggest concern I have is the effect where you get dark and light patches in the sky when using very wide lenses because the light is coming from a wide range of angles. Would that still be a problem towards the longer end of the range?


----------



## MistaBernie

I tore three out of four tendons in my left quad on Labor Day. Supposed to go camping in two weeks and to Sunday Night Football in three. Camping's probably out, but I'm going to try to get to the football game. #priorities

Also, camera stuff.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Also, camera stuff.


i like your style. way to keep it on topic hahaha


----------



## MistaBernie

Well, apparently they take pictures during surgery (you have to sign consent for them to do so). I don't think I'd be able to look at them. I've been jonsing to get out and shoot though.


----------



## Conspiracy

yeah now that the weather is much nicer here now i plan on carrying a camera around more often.

already worked out my finances and will definitely pull the trigger on a 5D3 next month assuming the price is right. once my bills are paid im going to best buy and asking for a discount on one since i used to work there


----------



## Jixr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Well, apparently they take pictures during surgery (you have to sign consent for them to do so). I don't think I'd be able to look at them. I've been jonsing to get out and shoot though.


You should, I had my entire chest opened up when I was 16, the pictures were super creepy, but kinda cool to see metal bits inside you before they stitched you back up.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Well, apparently they take pictures during surgery (you have to sign consent for them to do so). I don't think I'd be able to look at them. I've been jonsing to get out and shoot though.
> 
> 
> 
> You should, I had my entire chest opened up when I was 16, the pictures were super creepy, but kinda cool to see metal bits inside you before they stitched you back up.
Click to expand...

NO THANKS


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> NO THANKS


+1. Besides, mine's barely that interesting. They just drill holes in the side of your knee to suture the tendons back together through.

now if you'll excuse me, I'm going to vomit just a little.


----------



## Jixr

psh, no fun. I had my entire sternum taken out.


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Well, apparently they take pictures during surgery (you have to sign consent for them to do so). I don't think I'd be able to look at them. I've been jonsing to get out and shoot though.


Ha ha, I'd definitely want to look at them if I was in the same position







I had a blood test on thursday and I was watching the nurse inserting the needle, taking blood and talking to her about cameras too







Turns out the had a 5D2 with 24-105 f/4 L IS









Edit: Did I mention this already? I can't remember

ION my CPL should be here tomorrow, I just went for a 77mm Hoya one (not pro1)


----------



## pcfoo

I see your chest call and double it.
Open brain surgery @ 14. All nurses were ugly and didn't talk about cameras. Not like they would care about my Zenit-B or my M42 Jupiters - weapons of choice (or necessity?) 19 y ago.


----------



## Jixr

Well, the hospital I went to was a childrens non profit hospital, so at the end of every visit I had to get photographed, and the doctor showed me the pics during the surgery ( that they take for medical study reasons, even more so since my surgery was just now being developed and ( horray for me ) I was the worst case that this world wide specialist had seen.


----------



## pcfoo

No, I was more sick!


----------



## Conspiracy

im actually decent at this game. who woulda guessed lol


----------



## Conspiracy

rather disappointed with manfrotto right now.

i bought 2X 6' boom arms for lighting that said they can hold 6.6 Lbs when fully extended. comes with a 10Lb counterweight. problem is before I even got the light attached and only had it put together half way i realized that the knuckles that it came with cant even support the 10 Lb counterweight in place. so i figured well maybe ill just put the light on there so that there is weight on both ends. I put a approx 8Lb Kino Flo Diva Lite on the other end which weighs less than the counter weight. All this is while the boom is not fully extended, but after being balanced the knuckles still wouldnt even tighten all the way to keep it steady. Damnit manfrotto... i am not impressed by the shoddy craftsmanship and i hate returning stuff but my next boom will be another brand. Should have read the reviews, some people said it couldnt even manage an AB800 with a 5foot softbox which has to be less than 6.6Lbs... even worse is i have 2 of them to mail back to B&H










turns out the knuckles on the first on i opened are messed up. going to have to call frotto and have them replace it


----------



## pcfoo

Few reasons to dislike mail-ordering is when you need to return large items...chairs from overstock.com, monitor stands, lighting legs etc...
I have a few of those items given away or waiting to be CL'd as simply return postage for an individual can be upwards of 50% of their value .


----------



## Conspiracy

yeah. like ive been here at my new job 2 months now. They know i know video better than the back of my hand. its slightly embarrassing to have to deal with that and then tell my boss hey... we might have to mail back this 12Lb boom pole because its messed up. my co-worker is using the other one right now for some stop motion animations and its working nicely so thats a relief at least. still annoying though :/

im more impressed with the other gear i also ordered made by impact and avenger. impact has some excellent quality arms with knuckles for adding to c-stands and avenger makes a really nice quality super-clamp/knuckle combo that im now in love with


----------



## MistaBernie

I couldn't remember B&H's inhouse brand name and was going to comment yesterday but the Impact stuff I've gotten in the past has always treated me well.


----------



## werds

So proud of myself, I actually for the first time since I installed Lightroom 5 over a year ago, I actually edited some photos in it to where I was happy and comfortable using it! Took me a while, up until now I had off and on tried to go in and use it each time feeling lost... mostly used the editing functions in MS Photo Gallery - got me at least comfortable with what some of the basic editing functions did... oddly enough the video that got me comfortable was one that explained the cropping and leveling tools in Lightroom and CS6... Although I only scratched the surface with some of the edits I made I am now confident enough to try and make it my PP software of choice and flipped the switch on my camera from jpeg to RAW! (Finally)

Had no other appropriate location to share this... 

Also am happy as my daughter's dance class instructor and the owner have given me an open invitation to photograph their classes. Gives me a nice opportunity to put a lot of the videos, posts and articles I read about stuff into practice for one


----------



## Conspiracy

nice!

keep on shooting and practicing


----------



## pcfoo

Feel free to ask for any help.

And if/when you start getting better, don't give pictures to commercial establishments for free - Giving away work/pictures/anything to a non-profit is one thing, but there has to be an exchange if they are to be used for advertising etc in a commercial or even semi-professional way.

Or you kinda rob a professional that would do it instead.

Remember, professional photographer =/= fine art / uber technical / end of means camera lover.
He/she needs to make ends meet too, so what we find that actually pays in photography might be purely a mean to an end - like shooting weddings, or theatrical plays & dance studios.

Product catalogs instead of table top artsy stuff, school facebooks instead or classy nude studies.

If you promise to do the job of a professional, the expectations are as high, you will have to work as hard if not harder than him, and there will be no remorse in trashing your end result from the "client's" perspective, as he/she paid nothing for it.

So, being welcome to photograph your kids is one thing, being invited to photograph all the kids and give the studio pictures for free is another ballpark.


----------



## werds

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Feel free to ask for any help.
> 
> And if/when you start getting better, don't give pictures to commercial establishments for free - Giving away work/pictures/anything to a non-profit is one thing, but there has to be an exchange if they are to be used for advertising etc in a commercial or even semi-professional way.
> 
> Or you kinda rob a professional that would do it instead.
> 
> Remember, professional photographer =/= fine art / uber technical / end of means camera lover.
> He/she needs to make ends meet too, so what we find that actually pays in photography might be purely a mean to an end - like shooting weddings, or theatrical plays & dance studios.
> 
> Product catalogs instead of table top artsy stuff, school facebooks instead or classy nude studies.
> 
> If you promise to do the job of a professional, the expectations are as high, you will have to work as hard if not harder than him, and there will be no remorse in trashing your end result from the "client's" perspective, as he/she paid nothing for it.
> 
> So, being welcome to photograph your kids is one thing, being invited to photograph all the kids and give the studio pictures for free is another ballpark.


Most definitely agree! No, they already have a photographer they use (hire) for those kind of things. Plus I made it clear with the owner that I wouldn't be doing any work of that variety. All I take are candids and photos for my family and friends (since most of the dance parents are our friends). They were happy to oblige and asked in return only that I (nor my wife who loves to post things I shoot) don't post any pictures of the instructors without their approval (as they want to control the image they put out) A request I found reasonable considering that in most of the dance studios in our area they forbid parental photography in the studio during classes. And any of the pictures we have ever posted on our social media they have always asked permission and given credit before sharing on their social media page.

I am actually friends/acquantainces with some of the professional photogs from the area (running into them in at public events and having conversations about gear or having met them through my work in public schools). Definitely appreciate the hard work they have to put in and always make sure I am not "stealing" an opportunity from them. Plus I know that unless I can measure up to what they offer I personally feel that I would be an outright misrepresentation of a professional photographer taking any work from them!

And thanks! I am sure I will end up throwing around a question or three once I get something worth asking  Just giddy at the thought of being able to improve on what I capture on camera... and in the idea of being able to recover a poorly exposed shot into something reasonable! I have found the lighting in their studio has definitely pushed me to adapt and "up my game" so to speak.


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *werds*
> 
> Just giddy at the thought of being able to improve on what I capture on camera... and in the idea of being able to recover a poorly exposed shot into something reasonable! I have found the lighting in their studio has definitely pushed me to adapt and "up my game" so to speak.


Human movement needs 1/250s to freeze, 1/500s if its fast - even faster if its for sports etc. Some motion blur might add to the moment, but that's subjective.
Pump your ISO & keep shutter speeds up (without underexposing). This is were a f/2~1.8~1.4 prime can help (no idea on what you are shooting with, sorry if it was mentioned).

Grainy / Noisy images are far better than blurry ones.


----------



## Conspiracy

so one of my coworkers and myself have starting doing gopro videos of ourselves working to show the administration what type of stuff we do because apparently noone knows what i do at my new job









so i recorded my first GoPro video of myself. Ive used gopros a ton but yeah, im a videographer for those that dont know. my job title is videographer and im making timelapse videos of myself making videos so people can watch videos of me making videos


----------



## hokiealumnus

You should totally start a separate company and call it "Inception Video Services".


----------



## pcfoo

Is it Conspiracy or Déjà vu ?


----------



## mz-n10

Yo Dawg I Heard You like Video, Inc.


----------



## Eggs and bacon

I have a bad case of GAS, just got a XA after getting a tlr a couple months ago and now I want a 4x5, but shipping from the US is kinda pricy.


----------



## werds

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *werds*
> 
> Just giddy at the thought of being able to improve on what I capture on camera... and in the idea of being able to recover a poorly exposed shot into something reasonable! I have found the lighting in their studio has definitely pushed me to adapt and "up my game" so to speak.
> 
> 
> 
> Human movement needs 1/250s to freeze, 1/500s if its fast - even faster if its for sports etc. Some motion blur might add to the moment, but that's subjective.
> Pump your ISO & keep shutter speeds up (without underexposing). This is were a f/2~1.8~1.4 prime can help (no idea on what you are shooting with, sorry if it was mentioned).
> 
> Grainy / Noisy images are far better than blurry ones.
Click to expand...

Thanks! Yea, I am working on getting that stuff to be second nature when dialing in. I am starting to remember to use 1/250 while pumping ISO... feels unnatural to me but slowly breaking habits! Currently using a Canon 70D with Canon 17-55 2.8 and a Sigma 50-150 2.8 and a Canon 580ex II (Also have a Tamron 70-300 VC but not a fan of it an plan on selling soon), currently saving up money to purchase either a Sigma 35 Art 1.4 or a Sigma 18-35 1.8 (used to own a Canon 50 1.8 mkI, it was nice but too tight a fov for me since I shoot a LOT of indoor candids of my kids, and it's AF could rarely keep up!)


----------



## pcfoo

I would advice against the 35 1.4 ART. At least not for this cause. It is too wide for you to be @ a comfortable distance from your subjects - even on a crop body.
I tend to think portraits - even environmental / whole body ones - need to me feeling the frame with as much subject as possible. To do that with a 50mm equiv lens, you have to be 2m away (talking kids). That's not realistic - where are you going to be? On stage / dance-floor etc ?

Stick with the lenses you have, are great. If you have to have a 1.4 Lens, go for a Sigma 50 1.4 EX that can be had for 1/2 or less the price of the 35 ART and roughly 1/2 the bulk, while giving you some extra reach, or a Canon 50 1.4 USM for a tad more reliable AF (and far lighter / smaller than any 50 EX / 35 A / 50 A.


----------



## Dream Killer

you can take portraits with a uwa - c'mon now


----------



## Conspiracy

indeed. he has a point. im no real portrait photog but this came out decent enough to share









i have some others i shot of one of my ex-gfs with a 10-20mm lens that came out really nicely and were extremely popular on flickr but im not digging that ish up and re-posting them.

LL1S3137 by brian_roberts, on Flickr


----------



## pcfoo

All that's great - but point was
Photographing kids, in a dance studio, that other than this exception usually discourages parents taking pictures during classes. Lil different than intimate shoots of a (better be non-curvy) GF or your skateboard pal. Scroll up.


----------



## Scott1541

Made my first impulse buy since coming back to uni... a 50mm f/1.8 Series E AI-S

Saw it in the window of cash converters then walked around the block checking ebay for prices, then went back and bought it. It's got a bit of dust inside, which is to be expected for a lens of this age but the focus and aperture rings are very smooth, and the glass isn't scratched. Sure a AF 50mm would have been better but I got this for under half the price they sell for


----------



## MistaBernie

I think once my 24-70 f/2.8L II is paid off, I'm going to move my 17-40 and pick up a 16-35 F/4L IS. So much better than the 17-40...

Guess it would help if I could walk too though.


----------



## pcfoo

GAS attack









I've started doubting the 24-70 II value for me...it is great, no doubt about it, but does it worth $1000 over my current pristine 24-70L for me?
Meh, maybe in the far future, I don't know. All I know is that probably I will be getting a 16-35L f4 IS or a 24 TSE II before it.

The 17-40 is good for what it is, I had 2 copies and both were decent - even wide open for what those were used for (ie street stuff), definitely stopped down @ f/8~11 if light and/or tripod allowed.
Got the 1st as a walk-around standard zoom for my 20D in 2004-5, replaced it with the EF-S 17-55 2.8 IS when it came out.
Got it again for real UWA when I went FF, sold the last one waiting for a 16-35L f4 IS deal.
17-40s are readily available @ great prices used, so when I can sell it for more than I can replace it for, I don't hesitate


----------



## Conspiracy

my copy of the 17-40L is great. i havent tested it much on FF but i dont plan on upgrading it until it breaks as its done me well

my GAS is strong. my paycheck went through and i will be making my last payment on my 70-200 f4 IS and putting a 135L + 1.4X mkIII on my best buy card. i have decided to hold on a 5D3 for one more month only because prices havent changed much. 30 days wont kill me and I definitely plan on buying a 5D3 to be ready for basketball season, my least favorite sport but still a sport to shoot. i wish i had my kit together for soccer this season but ill be ready for next season. and I will be ready to go for tennis season which i enjoy as that sport is a pretty nice challenge to shoot


----------



## pcfoo

There is practically no "expensive" piece in my kit atm that was not bought used or refurbished straight from Canon.
Starting around 2010 I've been getting stuff through forums & CL, gradually replacing my 1st hand stuff with newer / better, all of them in great condition that left little to nothing to be desired vs. getting it new.

You can get 5D3s below $2300 used, with some 20K clicks or less, most of them in "like-new" condition.
Most amateur / enthusiast photographers baby their equipment. Almost all baby $3,400 bodies.
Yes, you cannot finance that interest free, but if you do have the cash the savings are great.

Sidenote: 1.4x III eh? ... don't think I would spend this kind of money, unless I was to pair it with a serious L tele pretty regularly.
For my humble GAS issues, I am using a Kenko DGX Pro 300 1.4, bought boxed & used maybe 1 time for $130 through FM.


----------



## Conspiracy

when i get the 5D3 it will be paid for in cash. my 135L and 1.4X extender will be financed.

im looking at used 5D3 bodies on KEH and other sites. if canon doesnt drop the price then ill buy a like new body. unlike others i will not be babying this, it will get pushed through a ton of shooting for video, stills, and sports which is why i was considering new initially

the 1.4X extender will be paired regularly with a 70-200L f2.8 on my 7D, future 5D3, and potentially future 7D2. as well as being paired potentially with a possible future purchase of a 300L as well







this is all for sports, and maybe pair it with the 135L for some portraits to see what kind of interesting bokeh that lens gets with an extender


----------



## Sean Webster

lol, its soo smelly in here with all this GAS going around. You guys need to chill. 

I got a photoshoot this week with a guy for dating profile pics...anyone have suggestions on shooting ideas? I already have some, im just looking for another perspective.

I also took over as photoclub president now at our uni...our former pres had too much on her plate...things were getting bad and I get to do the clean up. Yay me! :/


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> I also took over as photoclub president now at our uni...our former pres had too much on her plate...things were getting bad and I get to do the clean up. Yay me! :/


We can't do stuff like that. We've got to hold by-elections and specifically state in our constitution that we can actually hold by-elections mid way through the year. Stupid students' union and their crappy rules, not allowing societies to be run how they should be run


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> I also took over as photoclub president now at our uni...our former pres had too much on her plate...things were getting bad and I get to do the clean up. Yay me! :/
> 
> 
> 
> We can't do stuff like that. We've got to hold by-elections and specifically state in our constitution that we can actually hold by-elections mid way through the year. Stupid students' union and their crappy rules, not allowing societies to be run how they should be run
Click to expand...

We have to do that too...it sucks soooo much.


----------



## hokiealumnus

Two paths to get new/refurb 5D3 bodies:

Adorama deal w/ $550 MIR gets 5D3, grip, case, battery, SD card & printer for $2850.
Canon direct has them refurb in stock for $2720.


----------



## Curleyyy

Have there been any reviews done on the 7D.MK2 yet? I'm really wanting to know how it compares to the 5D3 and 70D.


----------



## DiaSin

Add meh!

Panasonic DMC-ZS8 point and shoot.

Lowlight capability is a bit meh, but for what I paid (pre-owned) I quite like it. I've been contemplating one of these but that is a lot of money to spend. I want that zoom though..


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hokiealumnus*
> 
> Two paths to get new/refurb 5D3 bodies:
> 
> Adorama deal w/ $550 MIR gets 5D3, grip, case, battery, SD card & printer for $2850.
> Canon direct has them refurb in stock for $2720.


ill look into adorama deal. that has my interest especially if it beats what deal best buy will offer me with an also included 2 year accidental protection. i used to work for best buy so i still haggle deals and the geek squad protection is legit. break it and they fix it. unless its blatantly FUBAR.

sadly the refurb route is a tough one as canon is always out of stock it feels like

i wish i didnt already put my foot down and chose to wait 30 more days to be even more financially responsible. being an adult is not at all fun i have the money now to buy one but i know i shouldnt just yet

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Curleyyy*
> 
> Have there been any reviews done on the 7D.MK2 yet? I'm really wanting to know how it compares to the 5D3 and 70D.


1) its not going to come close to the 5D3 in IQ, resolution, pixel density, detail, or low light high iso performance
2) there are several comparisons out there and it compares very closely to the 70D in terms of most categories
3) its also kind of apples and oranges as the 5D3 is full frame professional all-around body, the 70D is a prosumer/video oriented body, and the 7D2 is geared towards primarily sports and wildlife. so if you are shooting sports and wild life then the 7D2 is a no brainer as it will indeed have the best damn AF of any camera at that price point or so the hype and canon says

also inspect this > http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=1400305


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Curleyyy*
> 
> Have there been any reviews done on the 7D.MK2 yet? I'm really wanting to know how it compares to the 5D3 and 70D.


There is no comparison - unless of course you move the goal posts back and forth.

5D3 has 2x the sensor area of the 7D2 / 70D, and 4x that of m4/3.
Apples to apples and past ISO 400 you have to have a double standard not to see differences in favor of the bigger sensor.

There is one exception in my book: if you are limited in the focal lenght of your lens and you are shooting with the longest lens you have and it is still not enough - eg. Wildlife photography with a 200-300mm lens, or an airshow with nothing longer than a 70-200 - you wll probably end up with images that will be heavily cropped.

Having 2-3 times the sensor area, but throwing it away or decreasing the image quality stacking Tele-converters is working against the FF camera.
The APS-C cameras cram more pixels @ the center of the lens' image circle, and with good lighting conditions this works pretty well, but this because we are not talking taking even remotely the same frame with the 2 systems.

If say you were birding (shooting birds) with a 300mm 4 IS + 5D3, you would probably have issues filling the frame with most small & timid species in the wild.
Drop a humble 70D behind the same lens, or a 7D2 and you will get effectively a 480mm f/4 IS lens, allowing the sensor to devote much more of the available MP to the subject, than waste them on background / environment.
Should you have the money to get a 500 f4 IS for your 5D3 tho, you would be much closer to comparing the same FOV @ filling frames almost identically from the same distances = the FF would pick up and outperform the cropped bodies in IQ. This is not only because FF sensors have a dynamic range advantage, but also much more forgiving high-ISO performance. It is common to require shutter speeds faster than 1/1000s for wildlife (probably faster than 1/1500s for birds in flight), and that means pumping ISO to 800 or more even during daytime with f4~5.6 lenses.

Issue is, a 70D + 300L 4 IS is a $1,000 + $1450 = ~$2,500 combo
While a 5D3 + 500L 4 IS is is a $3,400 + 9,500 = ~$13,000 combo.

The above is the reason many non-professional Wildlife photographers, actually use cropped bodies - 70D / 7D.
It is just so much cheaper to go this way.

I would expect the 7D2, along with the 300L 4 IS & 400L 5.6 lenses to be a very popular choice for enthousiasts that might already own a FF camera, but cannot afford lenses with equivalent reach (500 & 600+ mm).


----------



## Conspiracy

nice explanation pcfoo.

the 7D2 is a specialty camera. if you are on a budget and want to shoot wildlife and sports its a dream camera for that price, if you are not shooting either of those two things you will not benefit greatly from the 7D2. in most situations the 70D is a smarter choice and my recommendation for anything looking to get a prosumer camera to take the next step up from the rebel series


----------



## pcfoo

Yes, I agree on the 70D. The 7D2 is not the "omg" revelation that will turn the tides vs. a FF camera as far as IQ goes.
It is not a 5D3 replacement - probably not even a 6D replacement, simply because its IQ is on par with the 70D.

The latter will get you as far as Canon intended / could for the APS-C, while balancing prosumer / pro photo quality levels with pretty good video capabilities.

The 7D2 comes to add the 10fps capability and the AF system to match situations where a 10fps "drive" is really utilized - mainly wildlife / action / sports etc as mentioned above, along with better construction, control & viewfinder to give enthusiasts a more "premium" feeling, and pros something reliable and familiar. Also an excuse to charge substantially more than the $1,000-1,200 competition that has been using plastic construction (with no issues)

Canon uses plastic more and more too - pretty much all the really "hot" new Canon lenses that are not too long / big / heavy are using plastic bodies around high quality metal chassis.
Lenses that include the amazing 24-70L II, 16-35L 4 IS & 24mm TS-E II. I would guess that from now on, if it is not white with a red ring @ the end & designed the end of the 2010s onward, expect it to be so. I have no issues with it, I will gladly own any of the above over their all-metal ancestors - in some cases even pay the $1000 premium over.









It was always about the "glass", never about the "metal". Hard to push on Apple lovers, but hey...


----------



## Conspiracy

so im going to the old best buy i used to work at that keeps 5D3 body only in stock. 1 of 2 things will happen. either i will end up paying off the rest of my best buy credit card bill to prepare for the purchase of a 135L + 1.4X extender next week or im going home with a 5D3 if they give me a good discount on it. im going to see if they can price match the deal running on adorama even though its a mail in rebate

so i now own a 5DmkIII. They priced matched adoramas price of $2850 after a mail in rebate http://www.adorama.com/l/Cameras/Canon~Digital-SLR-Cameras?sel=Model_Canon-5D-Mark-III&sf=Price&term=canon-5d

got 2 year geek squad on it so i can beat it up


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> so i now own a 5DmkIII. They priced matched adoramas price of $2850 after a mail in rebate http://www.adorama.com/l/Cameras/Canon~Digital-SLR-Cameras?sel=Model_Canon-5D-Mark-III&sf=Price&term=canon-5d
> 
> got 2 year geek squad on it so i can beat it up


thats awesome! congratulations!


----------



## pcfoo

@Conspiracy, did they match with the same MIR or straight matched the price?
At any rate, hope you are happy with your new beast. Kinda jelly, but I prefer dropping that extra 1-1.5K on glass and bare my 6D for a couple years more...then 5D4 will be out, and/or 6D2 and who knows what else and the G.A.S. cycle restarts on the body side


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> @Conspiracy, did they match with the same MIR or straight matched the price?
> At any rate, hope you are happy with your new beast. Kinda jelly, but I prefer dropping that extra 1-1.5K on glass and bare my 6D for a couple years more...then 5D4 will be out, and/or 6D2 and who knows what else and the G.A.S. cycle restarts on the body side


they straight matched it at 2900 as that was the bottom dollar. $50 wasnt an issue. now i dont have to deal with MIR. if i was anyone else they would never ever match that price because its after MIR







i dont have any other glass to spend money on other than buying a 135L when my best buy card is paid off.

My current DSLR kit combined between personal and work:
5D3, (3) 7D, 17-40L, EF-S 17-55 f2.8, 24-70 f2.8L mkII, EF 50 f1.4, 50mm f1.8, (2) EF 100mm macro, (2) 70-200 f2.8 non-IS, 70-200 f4 IS

I am donating my 1D2 + sigma 30 f1.4 to my friend that cant afford a camera. i already told him that the lens im giving him will vignette. i dont think he fully understands what that means but hes a really good friend so im starting him off with a good camera that ill have to teach him how to use. only thing he has to buy himself is a CF card and a camera strap unless he wants the strap that came with my 7D or 5D as i have domke straps on both

test snap shots from today. didnt get a chance to really shoot as i was busy participating in a film convention on campus while also editing a video project im working on. look forward to wednesday to truly test it out at a evening soccer game that will occur during magic hour. just have to find someone to let me borrow a 1.4X extender because the 70-200 will be too short

9Z4A4851 by brian_roberts, on Flickr

9Z4A4839 by brian_roberts, on Flickr

9Z4A4838 by brian_roberts, on Flickr


----------



## pcfoo

Why not give your friend the EF 50 1.8 and sell the 30 1.4 DC if you won't be using it anymore?

Kinda of a waste for the APS-H imho and too much hassle cropping in P/P. More pain than gain.

You can get 3+ 50 1.8 II for the 30s worth (used for used). If you don't care replacing the 50 1.8, you could play with a 85 1.8 for a bit more or just save the difference towards your 135L baby.

And don't be ridiculous, there is always more glass to spend on!

I have 24-70 2.8L , 70-200 4L IS , EF100 Macro & Sigma 50 1.4 EX. Sold my 17-40L & planning on the 16-35 4L IS. 24-70 II deals are flying by but I've decided that I should stick with my mark I for a bit.

Driver for my choice is also the filter size.
If I am to get a $1600+ used lens & drop the cash for 82mm filters for my landscapes - something that would round it up to $2K easily - I'd rather go for the 24 TS-E II.
Prob in a 1-1.5y from now I will have gotten myself the rights to hold a legit business for myself in the US - I cannot being a mere H1B grad - and the latter would be a business tool.


----------



## Conspiracy

I totally forgot there was interest in my sigma 30. Thanks for the reminder. I was just going to give it to him because its slightly wider. He will be fine with a 50. Hes so new it wont matter.

Ill probably just use what little money i get from the 30 and put it towards some accessories i guess.


----------



## werds

Quick question... When cropping a group of jpegs in lightroom I noticed that some pictures would look softer/blurrier than others. More specifically when I took the original jpeg and applied 8x10 cropping it would remain sharp and in focus when exported... but when using the same source jpeg it was cropped to 5x7 and exported the picture looked softer and not as sharp when side by side comparison with the 8x10 output. Is there a reason for this? Setting I am missing? Explanation for why?


----------



## Conspiracy

@pcfoo thanks for the reminder. just sold the sigma 30 to bizzz who will get some excellent use out of it. i think i might use the money to help buy a grip for the 5D. after using a 3rd party grip on my 7D for a while i know i want the real Canon brand grip this time for such a nice camera that will get tons of use shooting sports.

also need more ideas of toys to buy to feed my GAS


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> @pcfoo thanks for the reminder. just sold the sigma 30 to bizzz who will get some excellent use out of it. i think i might use the money to help buy a grip for the 5D. after using a 3rd party grip on my 7D for a while i know i want the real Canon brand grip this time for such a nice camera that will get tons of use shooting sports.
> 
> also need more ideas of toys to buy to feed my GAS


Glad to be of service to you & your wallet...now lets find ways to disservice the latter.









I got the original grip for the 6D too...don't know if I did the right thing...
Prev. grip I bought was also original, and ended up using it for almost 9 years, as the 20D grip was compatible with the 30D/40D/50D. Jump was 20D -> 50D - the last BP511 D-SLR by Canon, so...

I have no remorse buying Wasabi batteries for the 6D tho...got a pair + charger from amazon, and those have been working great for me.
Think I used the OEM battery for a single charge/week, and I keep using the Wasabi (es?) since I got the grip. You won't get the duration a 1D class battery gives you even from 2x of those firing bursts in a single event, but they last forever for casual shooting.

Other "cool" toys:

*Intervalometer* - Especially if you don't have a remote release cord already - Another field were I got the "cheap Chinese hack" copy and worked great.
got mine from Ebay but it appears to be 95% identical to the Neewer version on Amazon. Mine has a "half-metal" socket mimicking the locking mech of the Canon, but doesn't hold, so I don't really care about it. The socket itself is plastic on all - including the OEM.

*CanonE1 strap/hand strap*: I love mine. I have abandoned neck straps all together, and use just the hand strap or a Rapid type diagonal shoulder strap.

*Shoulder strap*: great. Helps you keep things out of the way. It is not as comfortable as some make it sound when you use a large body + a 2.8 standard zoom, it gets worse when you use a 2.8 tele (not recommended if you don't use the tripod collar on those lenses), but it is very fast and efficient for sport photography. Doubles work great if you have 2x bodies with different lenses and you alternate.

*10-stop ND* What a great tool for landscape & architectural work...so much fun making moving people and cars disappear during the day, or amazing cloudscapes and seascapes flowing like cotton candy in your frame for the golden hours...I have the NDX400, a 9-stop really, but that's good enough for the task. Those effects require looooong exposures, so a remote with bulb or timer setting and a sturdy tripod is required. Lower strength NDs can also be an option for shooting wide open with fast lenses in studio flash environments, or during bright sunlight were your camera shutter is probably hitting its limit (1/4000s ~ 1/8000s).

*Polarizer* - Nough said...82mm can be pricey.

*4in Filter Holder + ND Grad filters* - Well, that's a must for serious landscape work, but not limited exclusively to. 4in/100mm is a must for stacking filters in anything 77mm or bigger & wider than 28mm. Each stab (holder, filters) can be $90-150, so...brace yourselves. That's what's holding me back from 82mm lenses moer than anything. Get the filter system 1st, then jumping back and forth 77-82 is a breeze =)

Wanna go off camera system completely?
*
Sensor cleaning loupe*: Carson SensorMag - This is my fav new toy (had it for 2 months) and I wonder how I could clean my camera sensor without it (yeah, I couldn't).

I personally use it with a sensor brush. Spent $40-45 on those two items (combined), but at least I know I can clean my D-SLR to "professional" (or better) standards fast and easy now.


----------



## hokiealumnus

Congrats on the 5DM3 Conspiracy!


----------



## Conspiracy

already put an old domke 1" strap on the 5D3. will likely start looking into 10 stop ND filters and give long exposures a try. i truly look forward to snagging a 135L soon as that will be a fun lens to walk around with. im a little bummed out that i realized i have to miss the soccer game to shoot video somewhere and that was the last soccer game on a M-F until the end of the month which means if i want to shoot some sports with the 5D i have to drive all the way down here on a saturday







(


----------



## kbros

Anyone want a nikkor 50 1.8 D? I want the robots to focus for me again, manual focus is no fun.


----------



## ljason8eg

No
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> also need more ideas of toys to buy to feed my GAS


My 300L of course!


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> No
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> also need more ideas of toys to buy to feed my GAS
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My 300L of course!
Click to expand...

i would if i could. i have enough glass now to last me a long time so i am going to settle in and enjoy everything i have and my future 135L + 1.4X extender combo purchase will be a nice treat for sports and general photos/portraits


----------



## pcfoo

300 4L is a great lens...but I think i got an offer I could not resist on a lens with artistic pedigree. hint hint.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> 300 4L is a great lens...but I think i got an offer I could not resist on a lens with artistic pedigree. hint hint.


better be that 50mm ART. i need people to test it and give opinions. it intrigues me but its a tough purchase at 1000 for a lens i wouldnt use much


----------



## pcfoo

What if it was $700, LNIB and you could retire the 50 1.4 you already had for some $300? Large ding, yet not $1k. Plus it is already cheaper now that demand is a tad saturated & supply picks up.

Worst case, I sell it for small to minimal loss. Mostly on insured shipping.

P.S. Guessed Bingo


----------



## DiaSin

This worth the money? I need a new camera, the autofocus on my little panasonic is driving me mad. No matter what setting I use indoor shots are a bit fuzzy everywhere but the extreme middle.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00CDIK48U?ie=UTF8&camp=213733&creative=393177&creativeASIN=B00CDIK48U&linkCode=shr&tag=shopfaster0c-20&=ATVPDKIKX0DER&s=electronics&qid=1392506818&sr=1-3

Also considering this.. I would lose all the extra zoom, but I would gain alot more manual control.. I have seen it recommended on various sites..

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/used/1007602?gclid=CjwKEAjwns6hBRDTpb_jkbTv1UYSJACBhberK92v8EOarCvLX-yy10wC59_zUM7TiEj-xrLN_Q0qfxoCKvrw_wcB


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DiaSin*
> 
> This worth the money? I need a new camera, the autofocus on my little panasonic is driving me mad. No matter what setting I use indoor shots are a bit fuzzy everywhere but the extreme middle.
> 
> http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00CDIK48U?ie=UTF8&camp=213733&creative=393177&creativeASIN=B00CDIK48U&linkCode=shr&tag=shopfaster0c-20&=ATVPDKIKX0DER&s=electronics&qid=1392506818&sr=1-3
> 
> Also considering this.. I would lose all the extra zoom, but I would gain alot more manual control.. I have seen it recommended on various sites..
> 
> http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/used/1007602?gclid=CjwKEAjwns6hBRDTpb_jkbTv1UYSJACBhberK92v8EOarCvLX-yy10wC59_zUM7TiEj-xrLN_Q0qfxoCKvrw_wcB


the sony HX50V is a nice P&S. id take that if i had to chose between the two of those or the Canon SX700


----------



## Scott1541

I've got a couple of weeks to come up with a photo challenge for our photo soc. I've got a few ideas but does anyone here have any suggestions? My uni is in quite a small city if that helps.

Last time we did something like this a society friend came up with a list of photos we had to go around and take, such as one with a stranger, one in a normally inaccessible location, some showing different themes, etc... That was quite good but I don't just want to straight copy it


----------



## pcfoo

Although super-zoom compacts are eye catching and desirable (dat zoooom), the vast majority of buyers - after a few months of ownership - will realize that the overwhelming majority of the pictures snapped with those will be in the wide end of the zoom range.

This is approximately the reason I don't already own a 400 5.6L or I did not snatch that 300 4L IS off Jason's hands.

Do I desire long teles? YES! Been thinking those ever since my film days in the EOS system - then being a student of course and with minimal income to even remotely afford them.

Will those be used? Well, occasionally those will be, sure. But how often to justify the investment?

Back to the super-zoom compact argument:

It's not that you won't use the long zoom settings. It's there, right? Why not try it. Thing is, for those tiny sensors to have a lens infornt of them with that kind of zoom range, lots of compromises are made. Both on the sensor size area has to be limited and unfortunately lens' max aperture has to be "slower" = darker / higher max f/number. -> to make the lens smaller & cheaper to design and manufacture.

This sacrifices allow the super-zoom-range to "exist" as an option, but take a toll vs. the overall usability in low light situations, the inability to produce shallow depth of field effects in everyday conditions / logical mm to work with people photography (i.e. usually less than 100mm equiv. settings) & of course the overall IQ vs. less restricted designs with larger sensors & more logical zoom ranges.
This is why the flagship line of compact & P/S for each company is not populated with super zooms - rather with more sophisticated models featuring, large sensors & large aperture lenses, like the Sony RX100 & Canon Gxx lines.

I don't follow compacts for a long time to know better than the top of the line ones (= way more than the $300 class models listed few posts apove), but I would suggest interested parties to research in dpreview.com or equiv. review sites for camera models in this price range that are technically cut-down versions of the top of the line models, offering a similarly bright lens (f/2.x) with decent zoom (5~7x) and the biggest sensor we can find. I promise that 95% of occasions will reward you with better pictures, probably better AF & handling too.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> I've got a couple of weeks to come up with a photo challenge for our photo soc. I've got a few ideas but does anyone here have any suggestions? My uni is in quite a small city if that helps.
> 
> Last time we did something like this a society friend came up with a list of photos we had to go around and take, such as one with a stranger, one in a normally inaccessible location, some showing different themes, etc... That was quite good but I don't just want to straight copy it


As an beginner's challenge with some sophistication (beyond "sunset / dog") I would say "Abstract" challenges give you nice, creative interpretations of everyday things.
It is not limited to location, and for the most part not limited to equipment. You can get abstract street, architectural, portrait/people etc, or everyday items within your own house / studio / classroom.

Another smart challenge that can be very engaging and usually requires collaboration with others, is telling a small story with a series of 3-6 images.
It could be open subject, or it could be limited to campus -> material to publish in the school's paper or site, or describing professionals @ work or the transformation of raw materials to art or even cooking food. This - again - will stimulate reduction techniques. Eventually you want each and every picture to be its own "story", but series are intriguing and easily approachable by a larger audience -> in case you will end up displaying your work to viewers.

At any rate, I think getting an intriguing subject that is open to the participants interpretation would be more engaging.


----------



## Scott1541

Cheers


----------



## kbros

YES. Finally got that old 50 1.8D out the door, sold it on ebay. A 35 will be purchased ASAP.


----------



## jackeyjoe

On the topic of ebay, I've found a sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 for $600 on ebay. About $200 cheaper than I can get anywhere else, and I have been looking for a 28-70(almost all my photos are in this range, and just having a 50mm prime doesn't give me too much flexiblity) so I am very tempted. Is there any reason I shouldn't go for it?


----------



## pcfoo

For which camera system @jackeyjoe?


----------



## jackeyjoe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> For which camera system @jackeyjoe?


D7000. From the research I have done it's a really good lens for crop sensors, not so much for full frame(compared to the nikon and canon 28-70's anyway). I'm just looking for any reasons not to get it honestly


----------



## pcfoo

I would prefer something like the Sigma 17-50 2.8 OS in your case...much cheaper, more useful range for my style.


----------



## jackeyjoe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> I would prefer something like the Sigma 17-50 2.8 OS in your case...much cheaper, more useful range for my style.


Don't get me wrong, also considered it, but already having a 50mm prime I felt I would be limited by not being able to reach out that little bit further, while still being able to go plenty wide. And it would practically replace three lenses I have, which would be nice


----------



## TUDJ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> I would prefer something like the Sigma 17-50 2.8 OS in your case...much cheaper, more useful range for my style.


I recently got the Tamron 17-50 2.8 VC, I'm really happy with it, it's not left my camera since the day I got it


----------



## ace8uk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jackeyjoe*
> 
> Don't get me wrong, also considered it, but already having a 50mm prime I felt I would be limited by not being able to reach out that little bit further, while still being able to go plenty wide. And it would practically replace three lenses I have, which would be nice


If it's convenience you're after, you could also go for the sigma 17-70, although it won't be _as_ good optically as a 17-50.


----------



## jackeyjoe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TUDJ*
> 
> I recently got the Tamron 17-50 2.8 VC, I'm really happy with it, it's not left my camera since the day I got it


What sort of photography do you do? I take a lot of photos of kids, and that extra flexibility would be nice. But half the price....

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ace8uk*
> 
> If it's convenience you're after, you could also go for the sigma 17-70, although it won't be _as_ good optically as a 17-50.


I'd rather have f/2.8 across the whole range if possible, lighting isn't always the best when I take photos. Having those extra few stops is nice...


----------



## TUDJ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jackeyjoe*
> 
> What sort of photography do you do? I take a lot of photos of kids, and that extra flexibility would be nice.


It's main use is live music. I've also used it at work (in a school) for general photography of lessons/activities, the f2.8 is super useful as most of it is indoors and the focal range is perfect for this too, the VC helps get those extra stops really well, I've had perfectly usable shots as low as 1/30s handheld, this obviously depends on how much your subject is moving around









For what it's worth, it's paired with a D7000 too. If you want, I can email you a few example photos, I can't post them on here so PM me.


----------



## ace8uk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jackeyjoe*
> 
> What sort of photography do you do? I take a lot of photos of kids, and that extra flexibility would be nice. But half the price....
> I'd rather have f/2.8 across the whole range if possible, lighting isn't always the best when I take photos. Having those extra few stops is nice...


You should just move to the UK and buy my 17-55.


----------



## jackeyjoe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TUDJ*
> 
> It's main use is live music. I've also used it at work (in a school) for general photography of lessons/activities, the f2.8 is super useful as most of it is indoors and the focal range is perfect for this too, the VC helps get those extra stops really well, I've had perfectly usable shots as low as 1/30s handheld, this obviously depends on how much your subject is moving around
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> For what it's worth, it's paired with a D7000 too. If you want, I can email you a few example photos, I can't post them on here so PM me.


Thanks for making me now consider one of my previous options again








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ace8uk*
> 
> You should just move to the UK and buy my 17-55.


I wish I could move to the UK


----------



## Conspiracy

i still have barely had the opportunity to go out and enjoy my 5D and shoot something for fun







if i can finish editing video early today then i can walk around campus with a 70-200 maybe

shot a simple "studio" video today with it. i ran out of white backdrop paper and used a white board as a background after cleaning it a ton lol









video looks great though but i already knew it would


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jackeyjoe*
> 
> Thanks for making me now consider one of my previous options again : p


http://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Compare/Side-by-side/17-50mm-f-2.8-EX-DC-OS-HSM-Nikon-on-Nikon-D7000-versus-Tamron-SP-17-50mm-F28-Di-II-XR-VC-LD-Aspherical-IF-Nikon-on-Nikon-D7000-versus-AF-S-DX-Zoom-Nikkor-17-55mm-f-2.8G-IF-ED-on-Nikon-D7000___377_680_498_680_173_680



I know DXO is not the answer for all things, but, the Sigma 17-50 2.8 OS would be @ the top of my list.

The only plus on the Nikkor 17-55 2.8 DX is build quality pretty much. All crop 17-xx lenses from Tamron / Sigma / Canon are better optically, and offer IS/OS/VC which is a great plus for available light photography - even on a 2.8 lens.


----------



## OmarCCX

I had a Tamron 17-50, build quality wasn't very good but the optics were great. I'd go for the Sigma too though.


----------



## jackeyjoe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> http://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Compare/Side-by-side/17-50mm-f-2.8-EX-DC-OS-HSM-Nikon-on-Nikon-D7000-versus-Tamron-SP-17-50mm-F28-Di-II-XR-VC-LD-Aspherical-IF-Nikon-on-Nikon-D7000-versus-AF-S-DX-Zoom-Nikkor-17-55mm-f-2.8G-IF-ED-on-Nikon-D7000___377_680_498_680_173_680
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I know DXO is not the answer for all things, but, the Sigma 17-50 2.8 OS would be @ the top of my list.
> 
> The only plus on the Nikkor 17-55 2.8 DX is build quality pretty much. All crop 17-xx lenses from Tamron / Sigma / Canon are better optically, and offer IS/OS/VC which is a great plus for available light photography - even on a 2.8 lens.


Pretty much what I was thinking, there isn't too many benefits going with the nikon, and I hear the tamrons VC makes a lot of noise, I would rather not have anything making more noise than the shutter already does.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OmarCCX*
> 
> I had a Tamron 17-50, build quality wasn't very good but the optics were great. I'd go for the Sigma too though.


Build quality I can deal with, a rubber seal would be nice though, should check if the sigma has one...


----------



## Deano12345

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jackeyjoe*
> 
> Pretty much what I was thinking, there isn't too many benefits going with the nikon, and I hear the tamrons VC makes a lot of noise, I would rather not have anything making more noise than the shutter already does.
> Build quality I can deal with, a rubber seal would be nice though, should check if the sigma has one...


I've tried all three in work. Optically I thought the Nikon was best (from my own shooting) its also got the best build quality bar non, makes most pro lenses nowadays feel like toys. However between the other two I'd buy the Tamron, found it better than the Sigma, more consistant QC. Its not quite as nice in my hand, but I don't really mind too much, its built like every other Tamron lens which is fine.

The VC, I couldnt really hear working over the sound of the AF, a slight clunk as it stop and started.


----------



## jackeyjoe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Deano12345*
> 
> I've tried all three in work. Optically I thought the Nikon was best (from my own shooting) its also got the best build quality bar non, makes most pro lenses nowadays feel like toys. However between the other two I'd buy the Tamron, found it better than the Sigma, more consistant QC. Its not quite as nice in my hand, but I don't really mind too much, its built like every other Tamron lens which is fine.
> 
> The VC, I couldnt really hear working over the sound of the AF, a slight clunk as it stop and started.


...and the nikon is almost 4 times more expensive. Completely off the table haha. Funny though, I was just about to press the buy button on the sigma and found the Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 for $20 more, reading some reviews now. Seems to be a very good lens for the money(considering it's _almost_ competing with the 24-70's which at the cheapest are over double the price), people generally only have issues with full frames, and that is unlikely to happen in the near future. Only thing I'm worried about is durability(for any lens I buy honestly), I am admittedly pretty hard on my gear


----------



## Deano12345

I've owned the 28-75 as well, built the same all other Tamron lenses so don't expect it to take a massive amount of abuse. My particular one was a noisy focus-er and wasn't usable at 2.8, at F4 though, it's a lovely lens !

It's all about getting a good one with that particular lens, IMHO


----------



## jackeyjoe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Deano12345*
> 
> I've owned the 28-75 as well, built the same all other Tamron lenses so don't expect it to take a massive amount of abuse. My particular one was a noisy focus-er and wasn't usable at 2.8, at F4 though, it's a lovely lens !
> 
> It's all about getting a good one with that particular lens, IMHO


Was this a full frame or crop sensor? Because there was a lot of complaints from reviewers with it wide open on full frame, but not so much from reviews with crop sensors. Either way I am very tempted, it would suit me better than an 17-50mm I think


----------



## DVIELIS

Does anyone here know about Nikon ROMs? I have been trying to find some firmware source codes for my Nikon D3000 to make tome custom tweaking, but no success..


----------



## Deano12345

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jackeyjoe*
> 
> Was this a full frame or crop sensor? Because there was a lot of complaints from reviewers with it wide open on full frame, but not so much from reviews with crop sensors. Either way I am very tempted, it would suit me better than an 17-50mm I think


Crop, D7000. I had it before my 17-55,I find the 17-55 is a much more useful focal length. Personal preference really ! 28-75 would be a bit more general purpose if you didn't carry a zoom


----------



## Scott1541

Finally going to get some stuff printed







I've been through every folder in lightroom and there's around 100 pictures I want printing.


----------



## kbros

Put my old 80s Nikon 50 1.8 E series up on eBay, never knew it was worth like $60. Should help me pay for a new phone lol.


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> Put my old 80s Nikon 50 1.8 E series up on eBay, never knew it was worth like $60. Should help me pay for a new phone lol.


Paid about equiv of $45 for mine, and from an actual shop as well







Got it as a sort of stop gap until I eventually get something better.


----------



## Conspiracy

shot with a 7DmkII for a few hours yesterday while working as an assistant at the peter read miller sports photography workshop. first impressions are its definitely nice and priced properly at $1800. obviously i couldnt keep my shots and the exif was stripped before i was even able to edit them. the editted very well in lightroom and actually handled everything quite nicely. it truly does not compare to a 1DX which i shot with more extensively yesterday as well since we shot at the GA Dome for a college football game. it was a sample model and had 'SAMPLE' written ALL over the box. ISO 6400, 8000, 12800, honestly impressive for a crop camera. 8000&12800 had some very serious noise but its not quite as bad and hard to tell the difference between without exif. but with what i guessed was 12,800 is definitely usable compared to 12,800 on the old 7Dc. this was all shot under good even light though with a normal exposure of around 1/1000 f2.8 ISO 2500ish. not the greatest test as i really wanted to test it under poor lighting conditions similar to what i would encounter. i saw some shots peter took with it at a night high school football game with the worst lighting that has ever been described to me with uneven lights on each half of the field and while we dont know the exposure settings of the shot it was a usable shot although looked awful with harsh shadows. it was projected on a screen with a fairly nice canon projector, wish i could have looked at his shots on a laptop screen


----------



## boogschd

so my country has been recognized in the photo scene again..

negatively though

http://petapixel.com/2014/10/12/miss-world-philippines-portraits-poor-beauty-retouching-cultural-preference/

what do you guys think of this ?


----------



## Conspiracy

i think that post processing is terrible and the work of an amateur. there is barely any detail in the photo. that glow is so irritating i hope i never see edits like those again


----------



## Jixr

#killitwithfire


----------



## Sean Webster

why would anyone process like that?


----------



## Jixr

http://s112.photobucket.com/user/clayfinley/media/IMG_3924-Edit-Edit-Edit_zps3da9f5f3.jpg.html

I know there is the "rate the photo above you" thread, but I'm looking for a bit more critical review than ( 8/10, now here's my photo )
I'm not much of a car guy, I like cars, can repair anything on them, but I'm not a fan of ricers.

Typically with car shots, people just max the clarity and the vibrance and call it a day. I tried not to do that too much with this one, and I kinda like it.

I've been kinda lazy with my photography lately, to the point where I rarely bust out my big camera, and I haven't used any of my expensive lens's in some time.
Almost thinking about selling off some of it and thinking about taking the cash and putting it towards my car to help pay off the loan. Sooner I can pay this thing off the happier I'll feel.


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boogschd*
> 
> so my country has been recognized in the photo scene again..
> 
> negatively though
> 
> http://petapixel.com/2014/10/12/miss-world-philippines-portraits-poor-beauty-retouching-cultural-preference/
> 
> what do you guys think of this ?


Agreed with the ppl above...this is full ****** and definately bad processing.
You can do far better high-key beauty retouching than that - and easily far better photography to boot.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> http://s112.photobucket.com/user/clayfinley/media/IMG_3924-Edit-Edit-Edit_zps3da9f5f3.jpg.html
> 
> I know there is the "rate the photo above you" thread, but I'm looking for a bit more critical review than ( 8/10, now here's my photo )
> I'm not much of a car guy, I like cars, can repair anything on them, but I'm not a fan of ricers.
> 
> Typically with car shots, people just max the clarity and the vibrance and call it a day. I tried not to do that too much with this one, and I kinda like it.
> 
> I've been kinda lazy with my photography lately, to the point where I rarely bust out my big camera, and I haven't used any of my expensive lens's in some time.
> Almost thinking about selling off some of it and thinking about taking the cash and putting it towards my car to help pay off the loan. Sooner I can pay this thing off the happier I'll feel.


post here as well to get the thread revived. also dont forget if you have an entire set to share you can always start a new thread in search for feedback. you arent limited to the '______ the photo above threads'

http://www.overclock.net/t/493575/critique-the-photo-above-you


----------



## boogschd

i dont even know why the photos ended up like that, other local pros say that the photographer is a long time professional
idk why he would allow those photos to be released and be called official photos for the pageant

and this is definitely not a cultural preference :/

im no pro or anything and have only just started with headshots/beauty shots but damn
i could probably have done a better job.
SMH


----------



## jackeyjoe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boogschd*
> 
> i dont even know why the photos ended up like that, other local pros say that the photographer is a long time professional
> idk why he would allow those photos to be released and be called official photos for the pageant
> 
> and this is definitely not a cultural preference :/
> 
> im no pro or anything and have only just started with headshots/beauty shots but damn
> i could probably have done a better job.
> SMH


That is even worse, I wonder why they got released like that...

Went into one of the local technology shops today, I walked in not expecting much but ended up having a play with a D610 and Tamron 24-70 f/2.8, it was amazing. The guy I talked to was an events photographer as well which was cool, it was interesting to hear that he used a kit lens on a D5100. I guess it makes sense for him with always having a speedlight on, I definitely couldn't make that work for me, with a flash being not at all practical most of the time


----------



## kbros

Lately I've been going back and trying to salvage photos I thought were fairly bad. For example I went to a car show up in VT and forgot to change the ISO on the old D50 so I shot half the day at 800, and on that camera it was devastating. So I tried to give the shots a film look (back when I was still using photoshop and ACR), now I've gone back in lightroom and handled some of the noise and other adjustments. Wow is it quite the difference. Just thought I'd share.

*Before*
https://flic.kr/p/ox16MGDSC_0104 by Noah Blalock, on Flickr

*After*
https://flic.kr/p/pEugfULine of Bugs by Noah Blalock, on Flickr


----------



## kbros

Also the paypal payment finally came in from my 50 1.8 D sale so I'll hopefully be purchasing a 35 1.8G DX tomorrow.


----------



## Sean Webster

I kinda like the B4 edit. lol

Good luck with the 35mm, it is an awesome focal length on crop for everyday use.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> *I kinda like the B4 edit. lol*
> 
> Good luck with the 35mm, it is an awesome focal length on crop for everyday use.


My thoughts too. Maybe a little brighter, but keep the shadows.


----------



## kbros

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> I kinda like the B4 edit. lol
> 
> Good luck with the 35mm, it is an awesome focal length on crop for everyday use.


Lol, I was thinking of the before and after as more of a noise thing, but yeah the before does seem to have a little more "punch." And I'm excited to have such a versatile lens that I could take anywhere and shoot almost anything, I lust for a Fuji X100 a little less now...


----------



## Jixr

it sucks so hard that there is no cheap 35mm for canon.

Though next month when it comes out, I'm all over the new canon pancake.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> it sucks so hard that there is no cheap 35mm for canon.
> 
> Though next month when it comes out, I'm all over the new canon pancake.


There are....a few actually. the sigma 30 f/1.4 is the best for 250-300


----------



## Jixr

I'm talking 50mm 1.8 cheap, and canon branded.


----------



## Yungbenny911

Not a pro, still using the stock 18-55mm eww lens







(Nikon D5300)


----------



## DizZz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> There are....a few actually. the sigma 30 f/1.4 is the best for 250-300


Just bought one from @Conspiracy and I agree that it's the perfect focal length for a crop body.


----------



## Jixr

new the canon 24 is what i'm super excited about, $150 2.8 pancake lens. sounds fantastic.


----------



## DizZz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> new the canon 24 is what i'm super excited about, $150 2.8 pancake lens. sounds fantastic.


Are there any good sample images out of that lens yet? Sounds like it's going to be popular and a great deal if it can produce clean photos.


----------



## Conspiracy

kinda lame that they made the 40mm pancake an EF lens but the new 24mm pancake is EF-S. good thing i still have my 7D to test out EF-S lenses on


----------



## Mongol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> I'm talking 50mm 1.8 cheap, and canon branded.


http://www.ebay.com/itm/Canon-EF-50mm-F-1-8-II-Standard-Auto-Focus-Lens-BRAND-NEW-/221281433967?pt=Camera_Lenses&hash=item338566b96f

$99


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mongol*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> I'm talking 50mm 1.8 cheap, and canon branded.
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.ebay.com/itm/Canon-EF-50mm-F-1-8-II-Standard-Auto-Focus-Lens-BRAND-NEW-/221281433967?pt=Camera_Lenses&hash=item338566b96f
> 
> $99
Click to expand...

theres a big difference between 35mm and 50mm. especially on an APS-C sensor


----------



## Jixr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> kinda lame that they made the 40mm pancake an EF lens but the new 24mm pancake is EF-S. good thing i still have my 7D to test out EF-S lenses on


no sample images or reviews that I've found yet.

24 x 1.6 = 40mm, so whats the problem?


----------



## Conspiracy

yeah but having a 24mm pancake for a FF camera would be cool. 40mm = 64mm on crop. 40mm on FF cameras is actually a very interesting focal length. a super cheap 24mm lens that i can use on my 5D would be fun


----------



## Mongol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Mongol*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> I'm talking 50mm 1.8 cheap, and canon branded.
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.ebay.com/itm/Canon-EF-50mm-F-1-8-II-Standard-Auto-Focus-Lens-BRAND-NEW-/221281433967?pt=Camera_Lenses&hash=item338566b96f
> 
> $99
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> theres a big difference between 35mm and 50mm. especially on an APS-C sensor
Click to expand...

Indeed there is. I read 50mm literally.


----------



## Jixr

i would love there to be a 20mm 2.0 pancake like my eosm has. things amazing.


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> yeah but having a 24mm pancake for a FF camera would be cool. 40mm = 64mm on crop. 40mm on FF cameras is actually a very interesting focal length. a super cheap 24mm lens that i can use on my 5D would be fun


It is apparently not possible yet to get pancake lenses for SLRs in "sub-normal" focal lengths, +/- some tolerances.

The flange distance from the focal plane (i.e. lens mount plate to sensor) is 44mm for Canon EF, 46.5mm for Nikon F.

That pretty much means that any sub 44mm lens (for canon SLRs), has its optical center outside of the physical body of the lens itself.
Mirrorless cameras can get away with far shorter flange distances, as there is no mirror assembly moving behind the lens, thus you can get lenses like the Samsung NX 16mm f2.5 which is really wide angle for APS-C, the "35ish" FOV Canon EF-M 22mm f/2, and a lot more conventional like the Panasonic 20mm 1.7 for m43...notice that for the Panasonic we are talking 40mm equiv. FOV, again not much different than what we get for FF SLRs...and of course the f/2.8 with a FF is effectively "brighter" (collects more light in absolute numbers) and has shallower DOF than a 20mm f/1.7 @ m43.

I guess that the reason we don't see wider pancakes with large sensors is that it is pretty hard to push the optical center ouside the lens that far off the lens, while maintaining an image projection that falls perpendicular to the sensor plane. Perhaps that would be possible with film cameras, and there have been a few relatively compact UWA lenses designed by Zeiss using fully symmetrical element layouts, but unlike film that was very tolerant and versatile with rays falling on it in weird angles, digital sensors & the current microlens/low pass/glass protection surfaces dislike anything but rays that fall perpendicular or almost perpendicular to their surface. Otherwise you see extreme light fall-off & loss of contrast in most cases.

Now I hope it is easy to see how 35-60mm lenses can be so small and compact and efficient if you don't go crazy fast with the aperture, with numerous pancake options, while wider lenses get to be big and cumbersome, with UWA being so massive. Whole lotta trickery is going on to capture as much as possible with the front element, and bend and correct this image before you shoot it straight through the rear element for the WA/UWA lenses, while the lenses with focal lengths that float around the flange distance for each system "walk in the park" and have it easy









APS-C and 4/3 SLRs have smaller mirror assemblies, so either have a shorter flange (4/3) or have special lenses that despite being mounted @ the same flange distance as the FF counterparts, get to sneak their rear element few mm deeper into the camera body, "saving face" on wider lenses with far easier to design optics...each mm apparently means a lot in convenience and production costs.

Another reason I tend to believe APS-C lenses and especially those for mirrorless camera systems are usually overpriced, stepping on a false representation of "equivalent" FOV / identical f/stop (the lie is in the identical f/stop) to sell a much easier to design and produce lens as identical in practice to a FF SLR capable design.


----------



## Gobigorgohome

Is the Nikon D5200 with 18-55 VR II, 8GB Nikon memory card and bag for 711 USD an okay buy for an amateur? I will probably use it for close range to mid range and if I find out that I want to take better pictures at a longer range I guess I will buy another optic for that.

I looked into the Nikon D7100 (too expensive and probably way too good for me), the Nikon D5300, but it is too expensive for me to want to buy it, the Nikon D3200 is a little on the cheap side (and may be a better buy?) and the Nikon D5200 lands pretty much in the middle and within my budget. Wifi and video capture does not really mean anything to me, I doubt I will use that a lot. I want a good all around camera for easy tasks like photographing my computer-parts, my car and other things.

What is the better choice of:

Nikon D3200 with 18-55 VR, 16GB memory card and bag for 558 USD
Nikon D5200 with 18-55 VR II, 8GB memory card and bag for 711 USD

I am looking for some auto-adjustments or manual adjustments with guide on the internet or something like that, I know there is many parameters when it comes to photography, but as of now for me that is the second priority after getting the camera properly setup. Please do not argue on this right now, rather do that when I ask for options/settings later down the road.









The price difference does not matter to me, which of those is the best buy?









Feel free to PM me with the answers.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gobigorgohome*
> 
> Is the Nikon D5200 with 18-55 VR II, 8GB Nikon memory card and bag for 711 USD an okay buy for an amateur? I will probably use it for close range to mid range and if I find out that I want to take better pictures at a longer range I guess I will buy another optic for that.
> 
> I looked into the Nikon D7100 (too expensive and probably way too good for me), the Nikon D5300, but it is too expensive for me to want to buy it, the Nikon D3200 is a little on the cheap side (and may be a better buy?) and the Nikon D5200 lands pretty much in the middle and within my budget. Wifi and video capture does not really mean anything to me, I doubt I will use that a lot. I want a good all around camera for easy tasks like photographing my computer-parts, my car and other things.
> 
> What is the better choice of:
> 
> Nikon D3200 with 18-55 VR, 16GB memory card and bag for 558 USD
> Nikon D5200 with 18-55 VR II, 8GB memory card and bag for 711 USD
> 
> I am looking for some auto-adjustments or manual adjustments with guide on the internet or something like that, I know there is many parameters when it comes to photography, but as of now for me that is the second priority after getting the camera properly setup. Please do not argue on this right now, rather do that when I ask for options/settings later down the road.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The price difference does not matter to me, which of those is the best buy?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Feel free to PM me with the answers.


You're getting ripped at those prices dude.


----------



## Yungbenny911

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> You're getting ripped at those prices dude.


You know... Whenever you tell someone trying to buy something that they're getting ripped, you're supposed to provide a better deal, not just say "Oh that's too expensive", then leave them hanging...


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Yungbenny911*
> 
> You know... Whenever you tell someone trying to buy something that they're getting ripped, you're supposed to provide a better deal, not just say "Oh that's too expensive", then leave them hanging...


Since when? Those camera's were that price 2 years ago, they should cost the same now.


----------



## Yungbenny911

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Yungbenny911*
> 
> You know... Whenever you tell someone trying to buy something that they're getting ripped, you're supposed to provide a better deal, not just say "Oh that's too expensive", then leave them hanging...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Since when? Those camera's were that price 2 years ago, *they should cost the same now.*
Click to expand...

should? or shouldn't?







. Oh well.. I do agree with you that he's getting ripped lol, i'm just saying if you're going to say that, then at least slap on one or two links with better prices to show him. I got my previous D5200 for 620$ about a year ago. They normally go for about 400$ - 550$ now


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Yungbenny911*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> You're getting ripped at those prices dude.
> 
> 
> 
> You know... Whenever you tell someone trying to buy something that they're getting ripped, you're supposed to provide a better deal, not just say "Oh that's too expensive", then leave them hanging...
Click to expand...

sorry man there is no rule spoken or unspoken for that. finding camera prices is easy. whatever price it is set at on B&H is pretty much the standard MSRP. with cameras there isnt much difference in price unless you are looking at grey market prices. links are not really neccessary as prices in this industry are pretty well standardized and regulated among retailers by the manufacturer. i say this also from experience previously working at best buy where i sold specifically cameras and the best price matches i did at my store was for no more than a $50 difference between retailers (even on pro bodies)


----------



## Gobigorgohome

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> You're getting ripped at those prices dude.


This is Norwegian prices, it is basically your (guessing American) prices with an extra 25 % because of the Norwegian tax-system, everything is like that, the new GTX 980 is 550 USD in USA, while in Norway it is 705 USD (same card, same age, but a totally different price). 5960X is 1050 USD in USA, in Norway it is 1300 USD. It is the same with DSLR's.

Nikon D3200 in USA: *480 USD* + 120 USD (tax) = *600 USD* (this is the Norwegian price, give or take)
Nikon D5200 in USA: *549 USD* + 138 USD (tax) = *687 USD* (this is the Norwegian price, give or take) --> looks like I get a little ripped off, yes.
Nikon D5300 in USA: *670 USD* + 168 USD (tax) = *838 USD* (this is the Norwegian price, give or take)
Nikon D7100 in USA: *1275 USD* + 320 USD (tax) = *1595 USD* (this is the Norwegian price, give or take)

The numbers I put out was from Amazon.com, so the DSLR's could be cheaper some place else, but then the factor of different stores taken in mind. Same objects on all cameras with these prices is the 18-55 VR II.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> Since when? Those camera's were that price 2 years ago, they should cost the same now.


I guess you mean they should not, but look above and you will see why the pricing is so "high".








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Yungbenny911*
> 
> should? or shouldn't?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . Oh well.. I do agree with you that he's getting ripped lol, i'm just saying if you're going to say that, then at least slap on one or two links with better prices to show him. I got my previous D5200 for 620$ about a year ago. They normally go for about 400$ - 550$ now


This is the Norwegian prices and they cannot really be compared to USA prices, I had to buy my LD Cooling PC-V8 from FrozenCPU for 299 USD, while in Norway it was 610 USD (yes, more than double the price for the same exact case). Luckily there is more than one retailer for DSLR's in Norway.


----------



## hokiealumnus

You can get a D5200 w/ 18-55 lens refurbished for $500 at Adorama. They ship internationally, and I would hope whatever you pay on shipping & duties when it arrives is cheaper than the difference to $711. But That's not something I know for sure of course.


----------



## Gobigorgohome

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hokiealumnus*
> 
> You can get a D5200 w/ 18-55 lens refurbished for $500 at Adorama. They ship internationally, and I would hope whatever you pay on shipping & duties when it arrives is cheaper than the difference to $711. But That's not something I know for sure of course.


I am very tempted to just buy something used to be honest, because I think it is a little pricy, but many of the D5200 and D7100 that is being sold used in Norway (with Norwegian guarantee) is almost as expensive as a brand new DSLR.

Anybody know about some really cheap DSLR's that is working good, that can be set at some "auto"-settings and be good? Love to hear about them.


----------



## pcfoo

The whole idea is not to use "auto". That should be one of the main reasons you would go D-SLR, mirrorless or a "prosumer" compact & spend the extra money doing so. The option to be in control.

Digital is easy to experiment with too. No rush to get ut right the 1st time, especially when you take pics of your PC or car.

No, getting a more expensive or bigger camera won't always buy you a better "Auto" performance - in some cases the contrary.

There are many differences on the bodies you mention. Essential IQ is not one of them. The cliché advice is the cheaper one with a better lens (same total cost) will outperform the most expensive one with just a basic kit lens.

If you just go for an out of the box experience, for all newbies the differences will be 95% psychological.


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gobigorgohome*
> 
> I am very tempted to just buy something used to be honest, because I think it is a little pricy, but many of the D5200 and D7100 that is being sold used in Norway (with Norwegian guarantee) is almost as expensive as a brand new DSLR.
> 
> Anybody know about some really cheap DSLR's that is working good, that can be set at some "auto"-settings and be good? Love to hear about them.


If you want something cheap to leave in auto most of the time then I'd suggest something along the lines of a D3100 or D3200. Sure there's even older models that are cheaper but this is as old as I'd go personally if you want something to keep for a few years. IMO buying a D5XXX or D7XXX series body and using it solely in auto mode is a waste of money.


----------



## hokiealumnus

TBH, the reason for a DSLR is to get away from using Auto. If that's all you want, buy a nice point & shoot and be done with it. Our P&S is a Canon S90 (a couple generations old now) and it can take great photos. The S110 is very reasonably priced ($250 at B&H) and would be a good option.


----------



## Gobigorgohome

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> The whole idea is not to use "auto". That should be one of the main reasons you would go D-SLR, mirrorless or a "prosumer" compact & spend the extra money doing so. The option to be in control.
> 
> Digital is easy to experiment with too. No rush to get ut right the 1st time, especially when you take pics of your PC or car.
> 
> No, getting a more expensive or bigger camera won't always buy you a better "Auto" performance - in some cases the contrary.
> 
> There are many differences on the bodies you mention. Essential IQ is not one of them. The cliché advice is the cheaper one with a better lens (same total cost) will outperform the most expensive one with just a basic kit lens.
> 
> If you just go for an out of the box experience, for all newbies the differences will be 95% psychological.


I looked into some older really cheap DSLR's used, the Nikon D40X, Nikon D80 and such for almost nothing. As long as I connect the camera to a computer I am pretty much happy about it, I will probably not use it on "auto", but I will try to find some settings that I can use pretty much all the time when I photograph stuff.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> If you want something cheap to leave in auto most of the time then I'd suggest something along the lines of a D3100 or D3200. Sure there's even older models that are cheaper but this is as old as I'd go personally if you want something to keep for a few years. IMO buying a D5XXX or D7XXX series body and using it solely in auto mode is a waste of money.


Yeah, I looked into those lines, but started to look at older models such as Nikon D40, D60 and D80. How are those? They cost 1/3 of the D3100 used.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> The whole idea is not to use "auto". That should be one of the main reasons you would go D-SLR, mirrorless or a "prosumer" compact & spend the extra money doing so. The option to be in control.
> 
> Digital is easy to experiment with too. No rush to get ut right the 1st time, especially when you take pics of your PC or car.
> 
> No, getting a more expensive or bigger camera won't always buy you a better "Auto" performance - in some cases the contrary.
> 
> There are many differences on the bodies you mention. Essential IQ is not one of them. The cliché advice is the cheaper one with a better lens (same total cost) will outperform the most expensive one with just a basic kit lens.
> 
> If you just go for an out of the box experience, for all newbies the differences will be 95% psychological.


there is nothing wrong with auto mode. techically aperture and shutter priorities are half auto modes. shooting manual at all times is not a requirement for DSLR owners. even in auto mode a DSLR will still take an excellent image. it depends on the user. granted majority of the active posters in this section are advanced photographers we have to remember not everyone is on the same level









i have friends that own 5Dmkiii and D800 and one friend just bought a D810+D750. they almost all shoot in auto... why? because they just want to have fun and have money to spend on toys. i joke with them but im never tough on them about shooting auto. im acquaintances with sports photogs that shoot exclusively on 1DX or D4s bodies. always latest and greatest and never shoot in Manual under tough light, always AV even when i explain the benefit of TV for sports. because they are having fun i dont try to make them change, they get a few lucky shots and that makes them happy. ill critique technique to help them capture better action or help them on timing to get the most dramatic part of the action but thats it


----------



## Gobigorgohome

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hokiealumnus*
> 
> TBH, the reason for a DSLR is to get away from using Auto. If that's all you want, buy a nice point & shoot and be done with it. Our P&S is a Canon S90 (a couple generations old now) and it can take great photos. The S110 is very reasonably priced ($250 at B&H) and would be a good option.


I have a Canon Ixus 230 HS which really bl'ows, I only take pictures with it, good lighting and such. I want the DSLR-options on my camera, but the camera I have is not really doing it for me any more. Yes, I know, it is really cheap.


----------



## Yungbenny911

I can't remember the last time i shot in auto mode







. Oh well, as long as you're willing to learn, just a few youtube videos would help you get started, then the rest is trial and error.







. I strongly believe that anyone getting a good DSLR cam should refrain from shooting in auto mode.


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gobigorgohome*
> 
> I looked into some older really cheap DSLR's used, the Nikon D40X, Nikon D80 and such for almost nothing. As long as I connect the camera to a computer I am pretty much happy about it, I will probably not use it on "auto", but I will try to find some settings that I can use pretty much all the time when I photograph stuff.
> Yeah, I looked into those lines, but started to look at older models such as Nikon D40, D60 and D80. How are those? They cost 1/3 of the D3100 used.


They are alright as long as you'd be happy with a camera produces lower res images, doesn't perform as well in low light and has fewer autofocus points. IIRC the D40 only has something like 3 AF points. There's probably more differences too but that's all I can think of right now.


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> there is nothing wrong with auto mode. technically aperture and shutter priorities are half auto modes. shooting manual at all times is not a requirement for DSLR owners. even in auto mode a DSLR will still take an excellent image. it depends on the user. granted majority of the active posters in this section are advanced photographers we have to remember not everyone is on the same level
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i have friends that own 5Dmkiii and D800 and one friend just bought a D810+D750. they almost all shoot in auto... why? because they just want to have fun and have money to spend on toys. i joke with them but im never tough on them about shooting auto. im acquaintances with sports photogs that shoot exclusively on 1DX or D4s bodies. always latest and greatest and never shoot in Manual under tough light, always AV even when i explain the benefit of TV for sports. because they are having fun i dont try to make them change, they get a few lucky shots and that makes them happy. ill critique technique to help them capture better action or help them on timing to get the most dramatic part of the action but thats it


Semantics.

Yet Aperture / Shutter priority are not auto mode in any way...even P is not "auto".
I use A/Av 90% of the time, Tv/S if I go birding or sometimes with my EOS M for street stuff. M is for macro / video / long exposure & flash stuff.
Yes you can get good pictures with D-SLRs @ auto, but so you can with any other camera. Heck, ppl are happy using their smartphones as their only camera.

I am not an elitist when I write the above.
Sure, expensive toys need to be fun & ppl with money buy them regardless of ability - how many Porsche owners do you know that can squeeze the real potential out of their machine? Heck, how many sub $20K car owners do you know that can really push it? Yet all of them might enjoy driving their machine.

Still this is an enthusiast forum, and much like in a conversation about custom WC loops, someone saying "I don't care about noise or overclocking , just want my temps to be lower @ stock", there are people thinking it is overkill to go for a new DSLR, to keep shooting @ auto.
Ofc the biggest concentration of 5D3 & D800s will be in Disneyland, with proud parents shooting their kids @ auto.
It is not "wrong" or ineffective per se, just "feels a waste" in the eyes of an enthusiast - much like buying a Porsche in your 50s to attract some young gazes and drive back and forth that busy street 20 times.









So, back to @Gobigorgohome,
Yes, I believe an older Nikon D-SLR will deliver the goods just fine. You don't need the latest and greatest (let it slide past your nickname).
You can get amazing deals in the used market for entry D-SLRs or even mirrorless cameras that are a couple years older (and out of fashion).
That's how I've got my EOS M for <$250 ( insane for a quality 18MP APS-C camera & a good lens, even if it is not the best in its class by any way, I could not get a newer / more praised model & lens for less than 2x-3x that). I understand that for w/e reason you look @ Nikon only, but there are great deals in Canon & m43 systems too. If you don't plan expanding in a system with serious $$, I would not worry about it : all will deliver pretty good results. I think the Olympus models will actually be the most pleasing for straight-out-of-the-camera JPEGs.


----------



## Gobigorgohome

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> So, back to @Gobigorgohome,
> Yes, I believe an older Nikon D-SLR will deliver the goods just fine. You don't need the latest and greatest (let it slide past your nickname).
> You can get amazing deals in the used market for entry D-SLRs or even mirrorless cameras that are a couple years older (and out of fashion).
> That's how I've got my EOS M for <$250 ( insane for a quality 18MP APS-C camera & a good lens, even if it is not the best in its class by any way, I could not get a newer / more praised model & lens for less than 2x-3x that). I understand that for w/e reason you look @ Nikon only, but there are great deals in Canon & m43 systems too. If you don't plan expanding in a system with serious $$, I would not worry about it : all will deliver pretty good results. I think the Olympus models will actually be the most pleasing for straight-out-of-the-camera JPEGs.


Lovely, do you have any advice on which cameras I should look for at the used market?

My computer is "gobigorgohome"









Do you have any suggestions for me when it comes to used cameras, I think brand and model and which kind of objects I should be looking for. I do not really favor Nikon, I have just heard/read that they are good (I am sure every other brand is just as good).


----------



## Conspiracy

i didnt say they were auto. i say like a half auto. Av/Tv is partially automatic as the camera auto adjusts a setting to compensate especially when lots of people do Auto-ISO in Av/Tv.

The point is there is no right or wrong way to shoot. If people want to shoot in auto let them. if they are trying to make money and produce a high quality image then guide them on how to learn to shoot manual. dont just tell someone that the point of a DSLR is to not shoot in auto because that isnt true. the fact that it bothers you that people waste money on $3k+ cameras to shoot in auto makes you less capable of providing honest unbias help to those that truly seek guidance. you lose your credibility when you make statements like that.

this isnt semantics. your post was rather elitist lol.

but either way im out of this train wreck of a discussion


----------



## hokiealumnus

FWIW, I didn't mean to imply people that shoot auto weren't worthy of DSLRs, not by any stretch. Just that, if you never planned on attempting to move past auto, then you're paying for things (control) you don't really need. If someone wants a 5D Mark III to leave it on auto, hey, more power to them. It just doesn't fit my kind of budget, which requires extreme cost/benefit analysis, hence my recommendation for a quality P&S, which on auto can produce some very good images.

Buying today, if I were going to just point & shoot in green box mode, I'd probably go for a Sony RX-100 (or II or III, budget-dependant) or Canon S120. Both are compact and capable of gorgeous captures. But that's just me, of course.


----------



## Conspiracy

i was directing that towards pcfoo since hes on the anti-auto mode kick the past few posts lol







he was ranting about the important of shooting manual then admits he shoots Av mode 90% of the time and Tv the rest lol









also the RX100 is a beast of a P&S. id totally but a RX100mkIII if i had the money to have a nice P&S


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> i was directing that towards pcfoo since hes on the anti-auto mode kick the past few posts lol
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> he was ranting about the important of shooting manual then admits he shoots Av mode 90% of the time and Tv the rest lol
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> also the RX100 is a beast of a P&S. id totally but a RX100mkIII if i had the money to have a nice P&S


Well, I would have no issue to stand corrected, but I never mentioned "Manual". Not once.
Just said D-SLR + full Auto = waste.
And I believe Av/A & Tv/S with exposure compensation +/- 3 EV stops is very very tight control of the exposure. I don't need to go M to do that, thus I don't.
I am still in almost total control tho, unlike with "Auto". Now if we want to expand on "Av is semi auto" or w/e, we could drag it nit-picking ad nauseam. No need to derail the conversation further.

@Gobigorgohome
I would definitely consider a look @ used Olympus EPL3 & EPL5 kits. You can get some deals around the $200-250 range for a EPL3 camera/kit lens/battery+charger & the rest in great condition, or $300ish + for the EPL5 with the same accessories. Sources can be photography forums, eBay, Amazon used market etc. I understand that YMMV in different countries, but at least for used equipment I tend to think Europe has a better market than the US (i.e. things appear to depreciate more & faster).

The m43 system is very very popular, with an amazing number of available lenses and accessories for the time it has been around, and of course better / more expensive bodies (hint, the glass is more important).

Image quality is above and beyond nearly any compact camera - even with the older EPL3, and so is AF + responsiveness for the most part.
You can go for a newer model if you feel your budget allows.

What I do think you will like, is how pleasing the processing algorithms are with these Olys, for getting nice JPEGs straight out of the camera, and the interface is beginner friendly.
RAW file capturing is of course still an option, much like full manual controls once the idea of you being in control for more creative stuff matures, along with the confidence in the camera.

The only major downside with EPL series (or the EOS M) for me is the lack of an optical viewfinder, but that's up to personal preference: as an SLR user for ages, I just prefer shooting looking through the camera without my hands extended. I feel I can concentrate the framing more, and that I introduce far less camera shake this way. More serious m43 models do come with a range of acceptable to very good EVFs, but price goes up and it is not necessarily something you will need.

Also, mandatory accessory for the kind of photography you are mentioning, is a tripod!
Budget for at least a cheap one from the get-go to get the best out of any camera you choose.


----------



## Gobigorgohome

I looked around on the Norwegian-used market and found quite a few options.

Canon EOS 20D with Canon EFS 18-55 mm and Tamron 28-200 mm, 2x 72 mm filters, 2GB memory card, charger, bag and cable for transferring to computer: 229 USD (could probably get it for 200 USD)
Nikon D80 with AF-S 18-135 mm, 8 GB SD card, charger, bag and cable for transferring to computer: 275 USD (could probably get it for 230-250 USD)
Canon EOS 400D with 18-55 optics, charger and LowePro bag: 275 USD (probably 230-250)
Nikon D40X with 18-55 optics, charger, battery and carrying strap: 305 USD (seller is open for bids)
Pentax ist DL with (I am guessing 18-55 optics) and bag: 99 USD (I have to investigate in the information about this product though)
Canon EOS 450 D with 18-55 mm, 4GB memory card, charger, bag and cable for transferring to computer: 350 USD (could probably get it for 300 USD)
Olympus E420 with 14-42 mm, 1GB memory card: 140 USD (could probably get it for 100 USD)

There is also many Nikon D3100 for about 380 USD.

Now I have some options on used DSLR's, which is the best buy(s)? To me, the first camera seems like the best buy, the most accessories and it is pretty cheap so that I do not feel that I throw away a lot of money on it.


----------



## kbros

20D probably isn't the best option. D80, 400D and 450D are your best bet. D40x doesn't have a focus motor so it won't focus with as many lenses.


----------



## TUDJ

I'm going to Iceland next week, there'll be plenty of opportunity for great landscape shots and with luck, some great night sky to shoot too









Currently debating which lenses to take out of these;

Nikon 35mm f1.8
Tamron 17-50 f2.8
Sigma 10-20mm
Nikon 55-200mm

35mm is a definite. The Sigma is awesome for landscape, which there will be plenty of but I can't decide which would be best for night sky, I'm thinking the Tamron.

Or I could take them all... but I'd prefer not to


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TUDJ*
> 
> I'm going to Iceland next week, there'll be plenty of opportunity for great landscape shots and with luck, some great night sky to shoot too
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Currently debating which lenses to take out of these;
> 
> Nikon 35mm f1.8
> Tamron 17-50 f2.8
> Sigma 10-20mm
> Nikon 55-200mm
> 
> 35mm is a definite. The Sigma is awesome for landscape, which there will be plenty of but I can't decide which would be best for night sky, I'm thinking the Tamron.
> 
> Or I could take them all... but I'd prefer not to


I'd take the 10-20, 35 and 55-200, but I'm probably only saying that beause I have all of those


----------



## TUDJ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> I'd take the 10-20, 35 and 55-200, but I'm probably only saying that beause I have all of those


I was tempted to leave the Tamron behind but it's a great walk-around lens, I forgot that I'm getting a new bag so I'll probably take them all







I can always leave some in the hotel if I decide I don't need them.


----------



## Magical Eskimo




----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*


That's basically what I do at uni photosoc events


----------



## ace8uk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TUDJ*
> 
> I was tempted to leave the Tamron behind but it's a great walk-around lens, I forgot that I'm getting a new bag so I'll probably take them all
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I can always leave some in the hotel if I decide I don't need them.


I'd take them all and then decide on the day, they're not particularly large or heavy lenses. I imagine you'll probably use the wider angle lenses more, but the 35 could get some cool landscapes wide open at night. I'm still massively jelly.


----------



## werds

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*


Everytime I pack to go somewhere this usually ends up being my answer  and while I am there I always wonder why when I knew better!


----------



## TUDJ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ace8uk*
> 
> I'd take them all and then decide on the day, they're not particularly large or heavy lenses. I imagine you'll probably use the wider angle lenses more, but the 35 could get some cool landscapes wide open at night. I'm still massively jelly.


Sounds like a plan. Need to practice infinite focus on the 35 before I go, might mark it.


----------



## kbros

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TUDJ*
> 
> Sounds like a plan. Need to practice infinite focus on the 35 before I go, might mark it.


Great Idea, what I like to do with non- hard stop lenses is shine a flashlight at a tree or something far away enough to be called "infinity" and AF on it, then lock it. Or you could zoom into a star in liveview and adjust focus until it's sharp.


----------



## kbros

Also, anyone know if a better card reader would increase my transfer speeds? Mine seem relatively slow.


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TUDJ*
> 
> Sounds like a plan. Need to practice infinite focus on the 35 before I go, might mark it.


Would that even work? You can carry on twisting the focus ring forever, it never stops









E: You can feel it get stiffer but surely that point could move in relation to the position on the actual focus ring you turn.


----------



## pcfoo

If I was to take only 2x lenses, it would be 10-20 & 55-200.
If I was to take only 1x, I would take the 17-50.

I honestly see the least utility for a 35 1.8 in this case - that's my opinion and nothing more of course.

At the end it would be a waste not to take a decent tripod with you, and this will be the biggest / bulkiest piece of kit.
I don't see how 1 extra small prime or collapsible zoom will make it or break it.


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> Also, anyone know if a better card reader would increase my transfer speeds? Mine seem relatively slow.


What speed are your cards? Can't go faster than what they are capable of.

What are your current speeds?

What connections do you have available? USB2, USB3, FireWire, ect. ?


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> Also, anyone know if a better card reader would increase my transfer speeds? Mine seem relatively slow.


If your cards are good and you have USB3, this is the one I use and it is awesome. http://plugable.com/products/usb3-flash3

Amazon: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00E2UTU3W/ref=as_li_qf_sp_asin_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=9325&creativeASIN=B00E2UTU3W&linkCode=as2&tag=plugabltechno-20


----------



## jameyscott

I did a review of one that I really like but can't lin to.it because of the ToS.

Channel name is catreviewstech, though.


----------



## aksthem1

I've been using my Transcend TS-RDF8 for a couple of years now. Got it when USB 3 readers were still relatively new and it's been holding up. My fastest CF card (Lexar 800x) will transfer on average of about 90MB/s.

USB 3.0 card readers will make a world of difference, but even class 10 SD cards will saturate USB 2.0 nominal transfer speeds, well barely. Theoretically it's 60MB/s, but the actual throughput I've seen on some of the card readers I've had is around 20-25MB/s. Up to 30MB/s on USB3.0.


----------



## TUDJ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> If I was to take only 2x lenses, it would be 10-20 & 55-200.
> If I was to take only 1x, I would take the 17-50.
> 
> I honestly see the least utility for a 35 1.8 in this case - that's my opinion and nothing more of course.
> 
> At the end it would be a waste not to take a decent tripod with you, and this will be the biggest / bulkiest piece of kit.
> I don't see how 1 extra small prime or collapsible zoom will make it or break it.


I'm certainly taking a tripod! The only reason I want to take the 35 is because it goes down to f1.8 and will let in plenty of light for night sky shots, it's very sharp wide open, sharper than the other lenses when they're at their widest.

Room will be a little tight as we're only taking hand luggage, no suitcases.

Thanks for the input


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TUDJ*
> 
> I'm certainly taking a tripod! The only reason I want to take the 35 is because it goes down to f1.8 and will let in plenty of light for night sky shots, it's very sharp wide open, sharper than the other lenses when they're at their widest.
> 
> Room will be a little tight as we're only taking hand luggage, no suitcases.
> 
> Thanks for the input


Get one of these


----------



## pcfoo

For a USB 3.0 reader - given we are talking SD Cards - I would recommend a Transcend TS-RDF5K.

It consistently delivers >90% of the performance my UHS-1 SD cards promise - like 85-90MB/s reads, so I consider it "as good as it gets".
For just $7, it is an excellent value.

Quality UDMA CF card readers capable of this performance are pretty pricey.


----------



## Scott1541

Got my prints delivered today. They're only 6x4 but most of the photos look good, even nicer than viewing them on a retina display.

I should get stuff printed more often


----------



## jackeyjoe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> Got my prints delivered today. They're only 6x4 but most of the photos look good, even nicer than viewing them on a retina display.
> 
> I should get stuff printed more often


You can actually get away with a lot of stuff with 6"x4", you don't have to nail the focus perfectly and high ISO's don't matter too much as you can't really see the noise. I have a wall covered in prints that size, it is really nice having the better ones printed out


----------



## pcfoo

I got something delivered today too...


----------



## Dream Killer

me too -


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> I got something delivered today too...


You got a new desk? How do you like it?

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> me too -


Nice tambourines!


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Nice tambourines!


Tambourines? Those are wheel rims! Haha


----------



## TUDJ

I still haven't got around to getting my prints done. I've got a few large canvas prints planned (we have a printer at work) but have been too busy.

I hadn't thought of getting smaller prints, quite like the idea of a wall covered in small prints!


----------



## kbros

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> me too -


Nice! For a track or road bike?


----------



## kbros

And thanks everyone for the card reader help.


----------



## Dream Killer

the fixed gear scene is dead!

these are for a special touring bike


----------



## kbros

Cool! Agree on the fixed gear thing too. I'd love to own one but my legs don't. Multiple gears are where it's at.


----------



## DizZz

What's the best website to get prints from? I don't have access to a high quality printer so what would you all recommend?


----------



## Sean Webster

LOL, I was just messing around with my last post. I know those are wheels. 

I need to clean up my bike and start using it again... :/

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DizZz*
> 
> What's the best website to get prints from? I don't have access to a high quality printer so what would you all recommend?


I like going to Costco, they are cheap and really good quality.

For online, I forgot which sites are good...I think Adorama and MPix?


----------



## kbros

So I'm looking into getting bought a nexus 7 1st gen. Scored it for $60, 16GB. Anybody have any android apps they'd recommend for on-the-go RAW editing? lol I litterally bought one right after my OP.


----------



## Scott1541

I have a 32GB one but I don't really use it for much, never edited photos on it and probably never will







I don't see why it wouldn't theoretically work though, could be useful for someone who doesn't have a laptop.


----------



## TUDJ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> Would that even work? You can carry on twisting the focus ring forever, it never stops
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> E: You can feel it get stiffer but surely that point could move in relation to the position on the actual focus ring you turn.


This is how I've done it, there may be better ways but this took 30 seconds to work out and works each time.

3 marks on the body of the lens, 2 on the focus dial:

Code:



Code:


|          |                    focus dial
--------------------
|          |     |              lens body

When the 2 left-most marks of the body line up with the lens, it's completely unfocussed (if the lens is in focus, dial another another full rotation until this is the case).

Dial the focus until the left hand mark of the focus dial lines up with the right hand mark of the lens body. This is the point of infinity focus. Providing you completely unfocus to get the same start point each time, this works without fail









Now I need to find something better to mark the lens with, I tested with a make-up pencil I found on the girlfriend's dressing table


----------



## kbros

Anybody ever tried the "brenizer" method? It seemed to work fairly well and it's definitely something I'll use again.
https://flic.kr/p/pJfQtaPorsche 911 Carrera S by Noah Blalock, on Flickr


----------



## xILukasIx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> Anybody ever tried the "brenizer" method? It seemed to work fairly well and it's definitely something I'll use again. SNIP


That looks pretty sweet! Definitely going to try this out with my 85mm 1.4 some day 
+REP


----------



## kbros

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xILukasIx*
> 
> That looks pretty sweet! Definitely going to try this out with my 85mm 1.4 some day
> +REP


Yeah it's "supposed" to be done with a tele like yours. I used a 35.


----------



## TUDJ

I forgot to buy an ND filter for my trip, I'm so annoyed with myself









I can't find any stores that I can get to that stock them.


----------



## ace8uk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TUDJ*
> 
> I forgot to buy an ND filter for my trip, I'm so annoyed with myself
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I can't find any stores that I can get to that stock them.


What airport are you going from? You might find a Jessops or something in there that stocks them.


----------



## TUDJ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ace8uk*
> 
> What airport are you going from? You might find a Jessops or something in there that stocks them.


Manchester T1.

They've got a Dixons but I can't find anything useful on their site. Fairly sure there isn't a Jessops. There are a couple of shops in Reykjavik, I'm hoping I can pick something up out there but their websites don't show much choice when it comes to filters.

I've been so busy with work that I completely forgot about it, I was going to pick this up.


----------



## hokiealumnus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> Anybody ever tried the "brenizer" method? It seemed to work fairly well and it's definitely something I'll use again.


I haven't tried it, but have read up on it a bit. The photos can turn out wonderfully if you do it right.

Here's a thread of them for the curious.


----------



## DizZz

Saw these deals on CanonRumors and thought I'd share them here in case anyone was interested.

Canon EOS 5D Mark III - $2,559 (for the next hour)
http://www.ebay.com/itm/151109057831

Canon EOS 6D - $1,449
http://www.ebay.com/itm/141292504129

Canon EOS 1DX - $5,079
http://www.ebay.com/itm/151303034199


----------



## ace8uk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TUDJ*
> 
> Manchester T1.
> 
> They've got a Dixons but I can't find anything useful on their site. Fairly sure there isn't a Jessops. There are a couple of shops in Reykjavik, I'm hoping I can pick something up out there but their websites don't show much choice when it comes to filters.
> 
> I've been so busy with work that I completely forgot about it, I was going to pick this up.


Oh wow, that's a good price on the Hoya, I might pick one up to keep in my bag at all times as I don't keep my Lee filters in there all of the time.

I'm sure there will be somewhere to buy filters there, it's quite popular with photographers. I always find Dixon's etc at airports stock a lot more photography equipment compared to their high street stores.


----------



## TUDJ

Think I'll buy one too, hard to ignore them at that price.

77mm filter + a step up for my 72mm lens.

Hopefully I can pick something up en route too.


----------



## hokiealumnus

Wow...if anybody is in the market for a solid crop body, the 70D refurb is only $767.36 right now, which is an _incredible_ price for a camera like that.

Also, the refurbished EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS II lens is available for only $100.


----------



## Gobigorgohome

Is the Canon EOS 450D with 70-210 mm optics any good? Seems like I can grab one for 230 USD second-handed, worth it?


----------



## hokiealumnus

That seems like a bit much one that old (450D = XSi). You'll have to buy a lens to go with it, because 70 is definitely not wide enough. For a few bucks more, you could get a T3 or T3i for $290 or $390, respectively, assuming you can purchase from the Canon direct refurb store in Norway. If you can't, I'd look for one of those bodies with that 18-55mm kit lens near you. I definitely wouldn't pay that much for a used XSi at this point though.


----------



## werds

I just had a DUH moment... I guess reading the manual and actually trying something out can yield two different perspectives! So today was just messing around with my 580ex ii flash and shoved it into high speed sync mode and was doing the usual waltz through AV and TV as I tend to do on occasion just to calibrate my minds eye to what I actually want the exposure to look like when I shoot. When for some reason I moved to Manual and suddenly realized that my shutter speed was not capped at 250 and I could take it up to 8000... and as long as I kept my aperture below f/8 I was actually getting properly exposed pictures (the shots from f/8 and up were not completely black but were definitely underexposed) and this was with the auto ISO defaulting to 400 because of the flash... obviously when I bumped the ISO manually I was able to get some pretty solid exposures...

Boy did I feel stupid after doing this because I so could have used this the other night while shooting pictures of my daughter smashing pumpkins... and feeling helpless because 1/250 felt too slow to capture the decisive moment...

So anyone want to fill me in on more information about this, as in what I am missing? (other than understanding that light fall off occurs faster because of the shutter speed increase)

Either way I felt stupid for not having realized it sooner and now wonder what other situations I could use this in/for...


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *werds*
> 
> ... wonder what other situations I could use this in/for...


err .. one thing is off-cam flash lighting in broad daylight with max aperture ?









https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=21WWjudp5LM


----------



## Gobigorgohome

Which is the best buy of these three:

Nikon D3200 with 18-55 VR II for 502 USD
Nikon D5300 with 18-55 VR II for 1035 USD
Nikon D5300 with 18-140 VR for 1220 USD
Nikon D7100 with 18-105 VR for 1440 USD (or I would probably wait for the D7200)


----------



## Scott1541

Best buy in terms of what? If cost go for the D3200, if you want to go flashing your camera epeen around then go for the D7100 or D5300


----------



## Eggs and bacon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gobigorgohome*
> 
> Delete this, no help to find here anyways.


There is plenty of help to be had from people on this thread, you just listed 4 cameras and asked for the best. In computer terms that is like listing 4 progressively more expensive builds and asking which one to buy without providing any information. Such as what you plan to do with it and why you want to buy it.


----------



## Gobigorgohome

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Eggs and bacon*
> 
> There is plenty of help to be had from people on this thread, you just listed 4 cameras and asked for the best. In computer terms that is like listing 4 progressively more expensive builds and asking which one to buy without providing any information. Such as what you plan to do with it and why you want to buy it.


Let me put it this way, four R9 290Xs is always better than four R9 290s (yes, I have had both). I have looked at quite a bit of reviews on Youtube from different people and have come up to just buy what I think I want, so if I waste my money that will be it, but I have asked about ten times in this thread what the best camera is for me (photography taken in mind) and I have always been met with responses like "at those prices you get's ripped off", "there is no such thing as a better camera" and so on, so for me this is not helping at all. If someone find this "tips" from you guys helping, that is just great, but unfortunately that is not the case for me. You guys may have some good information, but you sure as heck cannot express it in the normal figure of speech, which I take as a matter of course on a forum of this caliber. I guess I should thank you guys then, because I have read myself up on which camera I need/want and found out that this part on OCN is a total waste of time, thank you!









I am going with the Nikon D5200 with the 18-55 VR II (because I have read and listened to some reviews from people which seems to know what they are talking about) and I think the price is right.









If the 18-55 VR II is not doing it for me, I will get the Nikon AF-S 35mm 1.8G.


----------



## Scott1541

I've got to get this photo challenge thing done for tomorrow, it's not quite complete yet but what do you guys think? I'm planning on getting everyone to try and complete part 1 on the night, and having the whole week to do part 2, with the idea of getting people to explore the city a bit more.


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



Part 1: Take a photo to satisfy each category

1. Rule of Thirds
2. Wide angle
3. Reflections
4. Bokeh!
5. Animals
6. A surreal scene
7. Portrait of a stranger
8. Colourful architecture
9. Mobile Phone Photography

Part 2: Go and explore!

1. Statues
2. Long exposure
3. People at work
4. Lincoln Cathedral
5. Street Photography


----------



## kbros

Sounds like a great idea, lots of different subjects. I think it's a well rounded challenge.


----------



## Scott1541

Cheers, I want it to be a decent challenge because our pro photog friend is coming along


----------



## Eggs and bacon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gobigorgohome*
> 
> snip
> 
> I am going with the Nikon D5200 with the 18-55 VR II (because I have read and listened to some reviews from people which seems to know what they are talking about) and I think the price is right.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If the 18-55 VR II is not doing it for me, I will get the Nikon AF-S 35mm 1.8G.


Enjoy your purchase then, I was taking your last post at face value.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ansel Adams*
> The single most important component of a camera is the twelve inches behind it!


----------



## raidmaxGuy

I was going to post in the the Rate The Photo Above You thread, but then I had a bit a realization I don't necessarily want to be struck down and have a rating stuck onto my photo.

Anyways, I was piddling around and took a shot of my friend's 1934 Nimbus motorcycle, don't know much about it other than it is Danish and only 14,000 or so of this model were made over a 30 year period.

I have two examples of the shot, one is unaltered and the other underwent a few changes in Photoshop

Photo was taken from a distance of ten feet with a 70-300mm Sony super compact telephoto lens with an f-stop of 5.6, a focal length of 200mm, and 4.97 aperture.

Untouched


Edited:


Just looking for some CONSTRUCTIVE critique, don't tear me a new one if I did something wrong


----------



## jlhawn

not sure if anyone on here can help me here but here goes,
I have a Canon 40D, I have owned it since 2007 bought brand new and never dropped, gotten wet, firm ware is up to date etc.
camera has worked trouble free up until yesterday, took my grand daughter to the pumpkin patch as I do every year, got about 25 pics taken and camera stopped working, display was lit up showing my settings I could change settings but nothing would happen when using the shutter button to take a pic, no focus points would light up, the lens motor would not do anything, I even changed lens's and nothing. it wouldn't even respond to manual focus and no automatic settings would work either, I use my own settings 90% of the time and even have some saved, so anyway I cleared all camera settings and still nothing, so I removed the cmos battery (2 months old) and put it back in and everything is fine now.
what could cause this and should I have Canon service (big money) the camera? I know on my computers I build I have had to reset the bios before but mostly due to a bad overclock. thanks for any help.


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> Cheers, I want it to be a decent challenge because our pro photog friend is coming along


I'd like to give your challenge a go when I get my camera back from my girlfriend after she's finished her uni project








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *raidmaxGuy*
> 
> I was going to post in the the Rate The Photo Above You thread, but then I had a bit a realization I don't necessarily want to be struck down and have a rating stuck onto my photo.
> 
> Anyways, I was piddling around and took a shot of my friend's 1934 Nimbus motorcycle, don't know much about it other than it is Danish and only 14,000 or so of this model were made over a 30 year period.
> 
> I have two examples of the shot, one is unaltered and the other underwent a few changes in Photoshop
> 
> Photo was taken from a distance of ten feet with a 70-300mm Sony super compact telephoto lens with an f-stop of 5.6, a focal length of 200mm, and 4.97 aperture.
> 
> Untouched
> 
> 
> Edited:
> 
> 
> Just looking for some CONSTRUCTIVE critique, don't tear me a new one if I did something wrong


I think it's a nice shot, I personally prefer the unaltered photo, I feel the altered one is a little dark. I can't really think of much else to say


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Gotta agree, the second focus too heavily on the logo IMO. I'd shoot for somewhere right in the middle.


----------



## jlhawn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *raidmaxGuy*
> 
> I was going to post in the the Rate The Photo Above You thread, but then I had a bit a realization I don't necessarily want to be struck down and have a rating stuck onto my photo.
> 
> Anyways, I was piddling around and took a shot of my friend's 1934 Nimbus motorcycle, don't know much about it other than it is Danish and only 14,000 or so of this model were made over a 30 year period.
> 
> I have two examples of the shot, one is unaltered and the other underwent a few changes in Photoshop
> 
> Photo was taken from a distance of ten feet with a 70-300mm Sony super compact telephoto lens with an f-stop of 5.6, a focal length of 200mm, and 4.97 aperture.
> 
> Untouched
> 
> 
> Edited:
> 
> 
> Just looking for some CONSTRUCTIVE critique, don't tear me a new one if I did something wrong


the unedited photo is the better of the two.


----------



## kbros

Agree also, the vignette loses too much detail in the edges, which previously added to the photo.


----------



## raidmaxGuy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> I'd like to give your challenge a go when I get my camera back from my girlfriend after she's finished her uni project
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think it's a nice shot, I personally prefer the unaltered photo, I feel the altered one is a little dark. I can't really think of much else to say


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> Gotta agree, the second focus too heavily on the logo IMO. I'd shoot for somewhere right in the middle.


I can see what you're saying, the first photo draws the eye a bit more towards the engine and the fusebox, whereas the second photo really forces you to look at mainly the logo.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jlhawn*
> 
> the unedited photo is the better of the two.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> Agree also, the vignette loses too much detail in the edges, which previously added to the photo.


The more I look at the two, I would have to agree with all of you. It did look a good deal better on my laptop's screen but when I pulled it up on my IPS monitor I can really see what you guys are talking about.

Good to hear that you guys liked the original photo though


----------



## jlhawn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *raidmaxGuy*
> 
> I can see what you're saying, the first photo draws the eye a bit more towards the engine and the fusebox, whereas the second photo really forces you to look at mainly the logo.
> 
> The more I look at the two, I would have to agree with all of you. It did look a good deal better on my laptop's screen but when I pulled it up on my IPS monitor I can really see what you guys are talking about.
> 
> Good to hear that you guys liked the original photo though


I was about to ask if you had a IPS monitor and you do.
I bought mine about 2 years ago and it really made a difference in my pictures as I was
able to use my pics as they were a lot more without any editing. my old monitor I even thought my printer was wack
because my pics looked so much different when I printed them then the way they looked on screen.


----------



## hokiealumnus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gobigorgohome*
> 
> Let me put it this way, four R9 290Xs is always better than four R9 290s (yes, I have had both). I have looked at quite a bit of reviews on Youtube from different people and have come up to just buy what I think I want, so if I waste my money that will be it, but I have asked about ten times in this thread what the best camera is for me (photography taken in mind) and I have always been met with responses like "at those prices you get's ripped off", "there is no such thing as a better camera" and so on, so for me this is not helping at all. If someone find this "tips" from you guys helping, that is just great, but unfortunately that is not the case for me. You guys may have some good information, but you sure as heck cannot express it in the normal figure of speech, which I take as a matter of course on a forum of this caliber. I guess I should thank you guys then, because I have read myself up on which camera I need/want and found out that this part on OCN is a total waste of time, thank you!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I am going with the Nikon D5200 with the 18-55 VR II (because I have read and listened to some reviews from people which seems to know what they are talking about) and I think the price is right.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If the 18-55 VR II is not doing it for me, I will get the Nikon AF-S 35mm 1.8G.












You received plenty of help throughout this thread. I went back and checked and nobody was rude to you. Most of your posts were met with what most reasonable people would consider helpful responses. If you think the effort those that responded to you was a "total waste of time" then...I don't really know what to say. You threw a hissy fit (remember "Delete this, no help to find here anyways."?) when nobody responded within 24 hours to your post, then threw a hissy fit when people continued to not respond after your hissy fit.

You're more than welcome to go waste your time somewhere else.


----------



## Scott1541

Didn't know Ansel Adams was on OCN







Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> I'd like to give your challenge a go when I get my camera back from my girlfriend after she's finished her uni project


I've changed it a bit since I posted, but it is still mostly the same, If you want a copy of the final version drop me a PM







The president liked it so we'll see how it goes tonight. I'm still going to have a go at it even though I made it, going at it with the 35mm and 50mm primes


----------



## pcfoo

Lets just say that the difference between decent modern DSLR crop bodies for the average amateur shooter is exactly the same as quad CF R290 vs. quad CF 290Xs. Intangible.
For interweb's shake and that alone, tons of keystrokes will litter the forums discussing in favor of one or the other, but it won't really matter.

Much like with PCs and Cars and any "enthusiast" geek endeavors, open ended questions (like, what do you think is the best camera / car / PC) have no absolute answer, and might reveal a lot on the character & way of thinking of those asking / answering, but add little to an objective discussion.

On the other hand, questions framed within a given context, have the potential to built up to objective answers & conclusions.

The hardest of all boundaries to overcome when looking for a frame to limit down your choices, is budget.
Then comes the type of use & narrowing down your priorities: best for sports might be different than best for overall IQ, or best for either of the two might be different when in need for a specialty lens for example that is available only in one or two camera systems that rule out the up to that point more than a couple runner-ups.

So properly asking the question is paramount: *I need to do X, I want to spent no more than Y, and for personal reasons I like or dislike Z brand.*
I have $1000, I want to shoot macro insects and I hate Canon".
I have $3000 and I want to shoot birds in flight (BIF).
I have $500 and I want to shoot portraits on location with speedlights.
I have $600 and I want to shoot my next PC built. Btw, I have 5x Nikon AIS lenses from my grandpa I would like to use.

This is something I can built an argument for.

If I stubbornly advocate against your personal preferences of judge you for wanting to use your old lenses, you will have the right to badmouth me & my arguments out as unhelpful or missing the question.
If there is no real question, or if the answer is "the most expensive of course" - i.e. a non-question with a no-brainer answer - then coming back with all this drama is pointless.
There is no time restriction or obligation for anyone to be helpful on these forums, no more than you re obliged to follow any advice given.

But be courteous to those that weren't coming in this thread to deduct information on my and your "feelings". They could care less.


----------



## ace8uk

I think you'll find I can, and did, care less. Much less.


----------



## kbros

I need an IPS. I have the TN 1080p version of the Dell U24, same chassis and everything. But obviously not the same quality. Viewing angles suck but I think it's like 5ms response so it's decent for CS. I'd love to get a U24 and run both of them. It only makes sense to get an IPS because I've spent quite a bit on camera gear and I'd classify a monitor as camera gear lol.


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> I need an IPS. I have the TN 1080p version of the Dell U24, same chassis and everything. But obviously not the same quality. Viewing angles suck but I think it's like 5ms response so it's decent for CS. I'd love to get a U24 and run both of them. It only makes sense to get an IPS because I've spent quite a bit on camera gear and I'd classify a monitor as camera gear lol.


A good monitor, much like a good keyboard and mouse or other interface devices like a pen tablet are very important, will get used far more often to their intended capacity and will probably outlast most of the other subcomponents in your computer case. Yet we often deal with those as afterthoughts.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> I need an IPS. I have the TN 1080p version of the Dell U24, same chassis and everything. But obviously not the same quality. Viewing angles suck but I think it's like 5ms response so it's decent for CS. I'd love to get a U24 and run both of them. It only makes sense to get an IPS because I've spent quite a bit on camera gear and I'd classify a monitor as camera gear lol.


I've been looking into the Korean monitors like the X-STAR DP2710LED PLS. PLS is essentially the same as IPS.

But I have also seen the Asus PB287Q is a good TN panel screen...it doesnt have the best viewing angles like IPS and PLS monitors, but it apparently has very good color rendition and it is 4K. 

And finally, make sure that you buy a color calibrator if you want accurate colors...


----------



## kbros

Can anyone vouch for any decent IPS monitors for <$200 USD. I was looking at some U2410's as well as some U23's. Let me know bbs


----------



## Dream Killer

I heard the Asus PA248Q is a good one. I got the older PA246Q and it's really close to my printer.


----------



## Eggs and bacon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> Didn't know Ansel Adams was on OCN


Just a quote I like to throw in whenever people talk about gear like its the be all and end all of making a photo.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Eggs and bacon*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> Didn't know Ansel Adams was on OCN
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just a quote I like to throw in whenever people talk about gear like its the be all and end all of making a photo.
Click to expand...

Well...gear is technically the be all and end all of making a photo. Without the camera with a sensor or film or material to capture and expose the light onto, you can't take the image. lol


----------



## Eggs and bacon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Well...gear is technically the be all and end all of making a photo. Without the camera with a sensor or film or material to capture and expose the light onto, you can't take the image. lol


Sorry, should have made my self more clear: a "better" camera is not the be all and end all of making a "better" photo. (It would be be better in a technical resolution sense, but not perhaps in an artistic sense.) You can make a nice photo on any camera, you just have to be a little more creative when you are restricted, i.e using a Holga or pinhole camera.


----------



## kbros

Sold my monitor for 100 bucks plus 35 shipping, but ebay's giving me 45% of the shipping back, so I make about 116 all together. Not bad for buying it for $130 almost a year ago.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> I heard the Asus PA248Q is a good one. I got the older PA246Q and it's really close to my printer.


The PA248Q is good, but every single one I've seen (including mine) was too cool out of the box. Everyone buying a monitor for editing should also include a profiling tool as part of the cost, as without it you're simply relying on (not always great) factory calibration.


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Eggs and bacon*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> Didn't know Ansel Adams was on OCN
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just a quote I like to throw in whenever people talk about gear like its the be all and end all of making a photo.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well...gear is technically the be all and end all of making a photo. Without the camera with a sensor or film or material to capture and expose the light onto, you can't take the image. lol
Click to expand...

Us enthusiasts hide behind our gear, whether photographic or PC gut related.
We would be so much better with a better lens, right?

Well, Adams, Cartier-Bresson (HCB) and many other Masters, conveniently had top of the line equipment of their time & for their style of shooting - regardless of how different this was.
Not that they could not do wonders with basic gear, and there was little for HCB to gain going from a Leica M3 to an M4 or 5 - for his intents & practice those were almost identical.
The goodness of the MF film era









But I am trying to say that there two ways to disperse the myth of the necessity of top of the line equipment / GAS.
The hard way, is to figure it out shooting great images with humble gear - almost any camera out there is capable of that. You just have to put the right mindset / patience / vision in the person holding it.
The easier (but still requires honesty that is hard to come by) way, is to just go out and buy what you want, only to see that your images won't really improve unless you put in the extra effort yourself.

Either way, helps you run out of excuses, unless you shift the goalposts with a new camera, or a new lens being named the silver bullet for you becoming Adams or HCB.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> I heard the Asus PA248Q is a good one. I got the older PA246Q and it's really close to my printer.
> 
> 
> 
> The PA248Q is good, but every single one I've seen (including mine) was too cool out of the box. Everyone buying a monitor for editing should also include a profiling tool as part of the cost, as without it you're simply relying on (not always great) factory calibration.
Click to expand...

True. And even if you calibrate your monitor, results actually change. Sometimes a lot during its operation and as time goes by.
My CCFL backlit U2711 needs quite some time to warm up, not as much as old CRTs but the difference is noticed.
Newer LED models are not perfect either. Backlighting & overall color balance does shift overtime, and re-calibrating every couple of months or so does show differences.
So even with a "perfect" factory calibration, things do change not just over time & need some TLC.


----------



## Scott1541

There's a photo & optics show in my city next wednesday. I don't know exactly how big it is but I've got some money lying around, and I have some non-camera things I'm selling soon, so this may not go too well


----------



## ace8uk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> There's a photo & optics show in my city next wednesday. I don't know exactly how big it is but I've got some money lying around, and I have some non-camera things I'm selling soon, so this may not go too well


Try the Tamron 150-600 and Sigma 150-600 sport for me if they're there!


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ace8uk*
> 
> Try the Tamron 150-600 and Sigma 150-600 sport for me if they're there!


I'm pretty sure there's a sigma stand, not sure about tamron


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ace8uk*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> There's a photo & optics show in my city next wednesday. I don't know exactly how big it is but I've got some money lying around, and I have some non-camera things I'm selling soon, so this may not go too well
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Try the Tamron 150-600 and Sigma 150-600 sport for me if they're there!
Click to expand...

I was hoping to see more from those lenses myself, but some reviews out there are not that promising for the Tamron.
Too soft @ 500-600 to the point that cropping a 100-400L IS / 80-400 VR image yields same quality.
Canon users also have the 400 5.6L option that is even sharper to boot, and accepts 1.4TCs decently for more reach.

It is not a bad lens, but you can get numerous factory zooms @ 400mm range that are sharper, used, for the same money as this lens is new.
It doesn't have the appeal of older designs like the Sigma 80-400 OS, which was softer on one hand, but 1/2 the price on the other vs. factory offerings.

The Sigma 150-600 on the other hand, is in a whole new ballpark.
Sigma has a good track record with its "bigma" lenses (tho it was overstating the tele-end in some cases, say the 50-500 wasn't really 500mm), but @ $2K list price, this 150-600 is a serious toy.
I do hope its good, but I doubt I & most amateurs will be moved spending as much for a f6.3 supertele...with my super short experience with super teles & wildlife shots, it is already mandatory to pump ISO's up to maintain good handheld speeds....and not even in our dreams "good speeds" are 1/focal length when you go this long. 1/2x focal length or even 1/3x focal length is more like it, unless you want your shots to be blurry, or you are good with panning ofc.

Don't know...torn on this one!


----------



## ace8uk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> I was hoping to see more from those lenses myself, but some reviews out there are not that promising for the Tamron.
> Too soft @ 500-600 to the point that cropping a 100-400L IS / 80-400 VR image yields same quality.
> Canon users also have the 400 5.6L option that is even sharper to boot, and accepts 1.4TCs decently for more reach.
> 
> It is not a bad lens, but you can get numerous factory zooms @ 400mm range that are sharper, used, for the same money as this lens is new.
> It doesn't have the appeal of older designs like the Sigma 80-400 OS, which was softer on one hand, but 1/2 the price on the other vs. factory offerings.
> 
> The Sigma 150-600 on the other hand, is in a whole new ballpark.
> Sigma has a good track record with its "bigma" lenses (tho it was overstating the tele-end in some cases, say the 50-500 wasn't really 500mm), but @ $2K list price, this 150-600 is a serious toy.
> I do hope its good, but I doubt I & most amateurs will be moved spending as much for a f6.3 supertele...with my super short experience with super teles & wildlife shots, it is already mandatory to pump ISO's up to maintain good handheld speeds....and not even in our dreams "good speeds" are 1/focal length when you go this long. 1/2x focal length or even 1/3x focal length is more like it, unless you want your shots to be blurry, or you are good with panning ofc.
> 
> Don't know...torn on this one!


I've heard the opposite from the Nikon crowd in regards to the Tamron, people have said it's perfectly usable at the longest end wide open, but improves significantly at f/8. AF performance is said to be on par with the 80-400G, which I rented and was very impressed with. The Tamron is much cheaper than the 80-400G over here, even used, and whilst the 80-400 is fantastically sharp wide open I couldn't justify the extra price. I'd have to rent some 150-600mm variations before making a proper decision.


----------



## Scott1541

Ok Sigma is definitely going to be there, and the website says they will have the 150-600mm Sport there. There's no mention of Tamron anywhere though so they might not be there as it's not a massive event, just a smallish one organised by a camera store chain that has a couple of stores here.


----------



## ace8uk

I'd have potentially come up to it to have a little goosey myself, but I'm in Bristol and Wales this weekend. Going to go landscape shooting at Afan Forest in between some mountain biking sessions.


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ace8uk*
> 
> I've heard the opposite from the Nikon crowd in regards to the Tamron, people have said it's perfectly usable at the longest end wide open, but improves significantly at f/8. AF performance is said to be on par with the 80-400G, which I rented and was very impressed with. The Tamron is much cheaper than the 80-400G over here, even used, and whilst the 80-400 is fantastically sharp wide open I couldn't justify the extra price. I'd have to rent some 150-600mm variations before making a proper decision.


Truth is, reviews on super-tele zooms have been all-over the place on pretty much all makers & models.

What I've seen is - as you say - that the 150-600 is a respectable lens for the money. No doubt.

But optical performance drops sharply in the tele end, and especially between 500 to 600mm there is no real benefit in optical resolution:
Getting a 500mm sample and cropping it to the equivalent frame you would get on the 600mm end, is pretty much the same after PP. You don't extract any usable extra resolution, you just frame tighter in-camera.

And the IQ @ 500mm is not that much better than what is attainable cropping 400mm frames tighter.

For the most part, I am almost convinced that if you don't have the $$ to drop on a 500 prime, your best value for super-tele FOV is using a good crop camera & a 400 5.6 prime (for Canon guys) or a xx-400 IS/VR zoom for all around. With the price drops for used 7D1 (or is it 7Dc) & decent offerings on D7000 for the F-mount side, I believe it is a great proposition over trying to match 600mm on FF*.

Wish I had time & money to prove me right or wrong.

*then again the 150-600mm on a crop body gets insane!


----------



## raidmaxGuy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> The PA248Q is good, but every single one I've seen (including mine) was too cool out of the box. Everyone buying a monitor for editing should also include a profiling tool as part of the cost, as without it you're simply relying on (not always great) factory calibration.


You gotta watch those color profiles folks, I have an I series AOC 27'' IPS monitor and it installed a D series color profile (I want to assume the same panel was used in that model but can't be sure). I had a major issue where Windows Photo Viewer took on an almost sepia hue and it threw off my photos completely, now I use sRGB IEC61966-2.1 and got rid of that problem. I still think the whites could be a bit whiter though, anyone got any ideas? Monitor is an AOC i2757Fh (IPS with WLED backlighting)


----------



## ace8uk

Agreed, if I had the time and money to do a big collaborative test of all the teles on both Nikon and Canon bodies then I would, it would definitely be advantageous for many others out there as well. I'm simply going off what the peeps over at Nikon Cafe have been saying. Some very respected members over there have said they're considering swapping out their 80-400G's for the new Tamron, such is the performance for the price. I'm not a professional photographer, and as such a tele-prime is useless to me. The only one I'd consider for Nikon is the 300 f/4. I've tried out the 2x TC for my 70-200, and whilst the sharpness wasn't fine for me, the AF performance really suffered. I'm not too bothered about tack sharp at the longest end if I'm honest, as I said I'm no professional shooter and the examples I've seen from the Tamron at 600mm are perfectly acceptable for what I want, as I won't be getting large prints done or selling the images. I do see what you're saying about opting for a sharper, shorter, tele over a longer one and it would certainly be an option if I were shooting on the D810 and had pixels to easily spare.


----------



## Dream Killer

@pcfooYou're suppsed to calibrate every two weeks to compensate for drift. However, it's too much for consumers that print occasionally.

@sub50hzYea, my 246q was too red when I slapped the spyder over it. im not that anal about accuracy nowadays though. It just has to get close and let me know when im approaching the gamut limit of my rx595.


----------



## pcfoo

I know that professional studios & color geeks do it regularly. You have to be pro-active, i.e. fix it before it becomes an issue.

I just said 2 months cause in my experience that's the time it roughly takes for you to really notice the difference between your "thought it was calibrated" display & the fresh profile. Depending on your display, this time can be shorter of course.


----------



## Gobigorgohome

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Lets just say that the difference between decent modern DSLR crop bodies for the average amateur shooter is exactly the same as quad CF R290 vs. quad CF 290Xs. Intangible.
> For interweb's shake and that alone, tons of keystrokes will litter the forums discussing in favor of one or the other, but it won't really matter.
> 
> Much like with PCs and Cars and any "enthusiast" geek endeavors, open ended questions (like, what do you think is the best camera / car / PC) have no absolute answer, and might reveal a lot on the character & way of thinking of those asking / answering, but add little to an objective discussion.
> 
> On the other hand, questions framed within a given context, have the potential to built up to objective answers & conclusions.
> 
> The hardest of all boundaries to overcome when looking for a frame to limit down your choices, is budget.
> Then comes the type of use & narrowing down your priorities: best for sports might be different than best for overall IQ, or best for either of the two might be different when in need for a specialty lens for example that is available only in one or two camera systems that rule out the up to that point more than a couple runner-ups.
> 
> So properly asking the question is paramount: *I need to do X, I want to spent no more than Y, and for personal reasons I like or dislike Z brand.*
> I have $1000, I want to shoot macro insects and I hate Canon".
> I have $3000 and I want to shoot birds in flight (BIF).
> I have $500 and I want to shoot portraits on location with speedlights.
> I have $600 and I want to shoot my next PC built. Btw, I have 5x Nikon AIS lenses from my grandpa I would like to use.
> 
> This is something I can built an argument for.
> 
> If I stubbornly advocate against your personal preferences of judge you for wanting to use your old lenses, you will have the right to badmouth me & my arguments out as unhelpful or missing the question.
> If there is no real question, or if the answer is "the most expensive of course" - i.e. a non-question with a no-brainer answer - then coming back with all this drama is pointless.
> There is no time restriction or obligation for anyone to be helpful on these forums, no more than you re obliged to follow any advice given.
> 
> But be courteous to those that weren't coming in this thread to deduct information on my and your "feelings". They could care less.


Okay, I understand what you are writing, no problems for me if people could answer me on what I am asking about (a few posts back I wanted to know which DSLR is best for photography (image quality)), now I think that should not be too hard. After spending some time looking at different DSLR on Youtube, with different lenses and which lenses they use for the different shots I know what I want. Budget is everything from 100-3000 USD, does not matter as long as the image quality is good, video does not really matter too much, I want to take good pictures of daily "stuff". "Stuff" being computer cases, water cooling parts, cars, nature and animals pretty much. I will start out with one or two lenses, probably some extra batteries, bag and a stand for the camera.
I really like high resolution images (that I could use as wallpapers on my 4K monitor), + that I think higher resolution is better (in more than one way).

Ordinary I thought of getting the Nikon D7100 with the 18-105 VR, but after reading about "bending objects" at much zoomed images I went away from that lens and thought of the 18-55 VR (which supposedly is an okay lens), now I am thinking of going for full frame at the beginning, I am very engaged of good pictures (always have been) and I think my cheap camera is really bad (just bought it instead of using a cellphone). I have thought about getting a DSLR the last six years, but I never actually pulled the trigger because I "want the best" (high resolution, best image quality, most features and so on), now that I am first putting some money down to it I want to buy something that I am really happy with (and yes, I am very picky even though my only camera su'cks). Canon/Nikon does not really matter, but I am ready to spend at least 2000 USD just on the body, lenses should be within 250 USD. The Nikon D610 dumps in at 2000 USD (just the body), it is full frame, seems to been plucked out some problems from the D600 (leaking oil or something) and I will probably have it for many years to come, I looked at a few of the lenses that "Jared Polin" recommended on Youtube in his videos (yes, I know this is a camera for semi-professionals), but I just do not want to feel like I have wasted just a little less on a "pretty good camera" when I want top end. The D750 and D810 is a little on the expensive side (and probably a lot better camera than I need, more FPS in shooting/video and so on).

Then I am down to budget on 2250 USD with body and lens, needs to take good photographs, should have a lot of features that I could dig-into when I have some free time, full frame and it should be Canon or Nikon (personal preferences), now, is there any other recommendations within these limits?


----------



## Scott1541

I'd rather have a $250 body and $2000 lens than the other way around. Any zoom lens that costs $250 is going to be crap.

I think the rule is you're supposed to spend more on the lens than you do the body, or something like that?


----------



## pcfoo

Lenses and bodies need to be balanced.

There are few lenses (if any) that can do justice to a body 10x their price.
It is usually the other way around: a $2,000 lens on a $300 (used) old DSLR has better chances beating the IQ of a brand new, $2,000 body behind a $200 lens.

It is totally un-wise to almost deplete your budget on a body, and leaving out glass, dealing with it as an afterthought.
Think of it as having a Quad CF 290X feeding an old 4:3 900p monitor...lots of potential wasted, unless all you go for is bragging rights.

$3,000 are not enough for a proper D610 kit, unless you are buying used and/or limiting yourself to a couple of good primes.

I would think the D7100 a better basis for expansion. Don't worry, it is high-end as it gets for a cropped body as far as IQ goes. Very potent sensor + the lack of a low pass filter leads to very high sharpness. It is not FF, but it is still better / bigger sensor than m43, that is already plenty for most starting amateurs, and offers a more versatile lens / accessory system approach IMHO.
Pair it with a good lens, something like the Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 EX DC OS HSM for starters, and you have a very good pair, matching or surpassing "professional" requirements in the IQ department, leaving you room in your budget for other necessities.

Then focus on the process of building up your system around what you suits your style & wants, not trying to solve everything with a silver-bullet approach:

*Tripod:* Yes, fast aperture lenses and optical stabilization helps for handheld shooting, but for optimal IQ a sturdy tripod is a must have. Especially for shooting product stills - eg. your PC and whatnot - indoors. Also opens lots of creative possibilities for long exposures during low light / night landscape work, light painting etc.
*Memory Cards:* Lots of MP = lots of data = lots of GB of storage. With current SD card pricing that's not a real issue, but it adds up.
*Batteries:* Shooting away from your base a whole day might require an extra battery or two, but don't get those before you get an idea of the consumption: DSLRs - unless you overdo it with LiveView or shoot movies - have an amazing battery life for stills.
Speedlight (flash) or LED/constant lighting: depending on whether you want one or not.
Camera bag, straps, sensor / lens cleaning tools, filters, remote release cables. Some are necessary, the need for others is more subjective, but there will be lots of crap that will add to the cost of your kit over your body & lens(es).
Take it easy and enjoy building up your kit based on your needs.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> I think the rule is you're supposed to spend more on the lens than you do the body, or something like that?


There is no "rule" per se. You just have to balance.
As you express it, it is actually impossible to follow this rule with a high-end FF DSLR unless all you use is top of the line Leica & Zeiss lenses, or huge telephotos









It can be the case with a 24-70L II or a 85L infront of a 6D, but that's no high-end FF DSLR, even if IQ "is there".
With cropped bodies, you can also approach your rule if we are talking factory 2.8 standard zooms and a med-range body, but again, it just happens to be the case, not the rule.

All these are "suggestions", some of which might make no sense for specific shooting styles or mentalities, but for others is fun to read on and think before making decisions - even if you end up doing the exact opposite, at least you "work" your way to it.


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> I'd rather have a $250 body and $2000 lens than the other way around. Any zoom lens that costs $250 is going to be crap.
> 
> I think the rule is you're supposed to spend more on the lens than you do the body, or something like that?


Lenses make the biggest difference in photography so it's always a good choice vs others. It's also a good investment anyway since bodies and accessories depreciates in value quickly.


----------



## hokiealumnus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gobigorgohome*
> 
> Then I am down to budget on 2250 USD with body and lens, needs to take good photographs, should have a lot of features that I could dig-into when I have some free time, full frame and it should be Canon or Nikon (personal preferences), now, is there any other recommendations within these limits?


At that budget, I have the perfect solution for you if you're trying to go full frame - a refurb Canon 6D + pulled-from-a-kit 24-105L from ebay/forums. The former is $1520 from Canon directly. The latter can be had for a range from $500ish - $650ish on ebay, depending on whether you want a brand new kit pull (so called "white box") or a gently used version.

Or you can get both with some extras brand new from Adorama for $2,300 after a $200 mail-in rebate.

EDIT - Crap, forgot you're in Norway. Sorry, you're on your own to find deals there; this would be my recommendation for someone in the US, for what it may be worth to you.


----------



## Gobigorgohome

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hokiealumnus*
> 
> At that budget, I have the perfect solution for you if you're trying to go full frame - a refurb Canon 6D + pulled-from-a-kit 24-105L from ebay/forums. The former is $1520 from Canon directly. The latter can be had for a range from $500ish - $650ish on ebay, depending on whether you want a brand new kit pull (so called "white box") or a gently used version.
> 
> Or you can get both with some extras brand new from Adorama for $2,300 after a $200 mail-in rebate.
> 
> EDIT - Crap, forgot you're in Norway. Sorry, you're on your own to find deals there; this would be my recommendation for someone in the US, for what it may be worth to you.


To buy DSLR's used in Norway is 95-99 % of new prices, which is not low enough to seem like a good buy to me! the canon 6d is about 2000 USD, as is the 7d mark II and the Nikon D610. The 2250 USD is just approxemately, if I go 2000 or 3000 does not really matter too much, i just need a good body and lens for stills.

If i am going to buy the d7100 i wait on the d7200, just to see what that brings to the table.


----------



## MistaBernie

Waiting for what's coming down the line is somewhat silly given that CaNikon put out multiple new bodies almost on an annual basis. To be completely honest, unless you have a specific reason to go full frame, there's no real reason why you won't get perfectly good image quality out of either a Canon 70D (which actually has some of the best features in recent memory for a prosumer camera) and spending the rest on a decent lens (unless you can find a good kit).


----------



## sub50hz

I see these types of posts haven't stopped:
Quote:


> Hello,
> 
> I have an unlimited budget and want to take photos of every subject known to man. What is the best camera? I will be upset if you suggest I don't need to spend a lot.
> 
> -Thank You


I mean, hey, it's cool you want to get into photography, but... come on.


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> I see these types of posts haven't stopped:
> I mean, hey, it's cool you want to get into photography, but... come on.


I've noticed this.
Do you think it's because with a computer you can (more or less) build a computer that does _everything_ by spending mega bucks, so when it comes to camera kit, people expect the same, but it doesn't work that way?

It didn't really take me long to work that out when choosing my DSLR.


----------



## DizZz

@Gobigorgohome I would recommend getting a body that costs around $1,000-$1,250 and then spending the rest on glass. Any body in that price range will be well above your skill level, and I don't mean that in a negative way - that's the case for 90% of people (including me), so you have something to grow into and learn on. Lenses make way more of a difference in image quality than a body and they're something that you will have for years, unlike a body (they also retain their value significantly better). My advice would be to get a Canon 70D since I think it's a great price/performance body and they can be had for right around $1,000. I've had mine for just over 9 months and I'm still learning new things about it every time I shoot and I expect that this will continue for a long time. For your first lens, the Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L is pretty ideal. It covers a perfect range for day to day tasks like you described and it's $1,150 so you're $100 under budget with this setup giving you extra cash to spend on accessories, software, etc.


----------



## Sean Webster

Pfft, just get a 1DX or D4S + a 50mm prime and you will be set.


----------



## ace8uk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> I see these types of posts haven't stopped:
> I mean, hey, it's cool you want to get into photography, but... come on.


Hahahahaha. Oh, God, so much this.


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Pfft, just get a 1DX or D4S + a 50mm prime and you will be set.


Meh, the D810 is the only Nikon "tool".







D4S vs 1DX is not fair (in my book).

Nikon/Sony has a slight edge on sensor tech over Canon, but I still think the latest Canon lenses are above and beyond (nit-picking, all make great lenses).
The 1DX in particular is a AF/FPS beast that is hard to beat.

I would get a 1DX + assortment of Ls (24-70L II / 70-200L 2.8 II IS / 16-35L 4 IS + a couple of L super teles & TSE lenses to toy around).

If I was after moar quality, I would probably go with a D Hassy & 2-3 primes ontop. For the overkill/epeen effect.

MOAR, gimme MOAR!
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> I see these types of posts haven't stopped:
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Hello,
> 
> I have an unlimited budget and want to take photos of every subject known to man. What is the best camera? I will be upset if you suggest I don't need to spend a lot.
> 
> -Thank You
> 
> 
> 
> I mean, hey, it's cool you want to get into photography, but... come on.
Click to expand...

Thought you were in OCN long enough. It never ends. That's the point


----------



## Sepesusi

Hello to everyone! I don't really know much about cameras and my experience with them is mostly from point & shoot and my phone. Only time I've used a DSLR was when I borrowed my brother's Nikon D3100 for a couple of shots, so that's about it. Recently I started thinking about getting a proper camera, because I'm not really happy with the quality that I get from a phone camera. It's good for quick shots and unexpected situations, but when I really want to take a photograph of something and want the quality to be good, the phone feels insufficient. I don't currently have any other camera and I started looking for an affordable entry-level DSLR to fill that need.

I noticed someone on a local site selling a Canon EOS 1100D + 18-55 EF-S IS (which I guess is named Rebel T3 in North America?) and an extra battery for 220€. They said they've only taken under 500 pictures with it and it has warranty standing for about 6 months still. Like I said, I don't really know about cameras and trying to search for anything gets a bit confusing, since there are so many different names and series of cameras out there. This camera seems to have been released in 2011 so I don't know how much have things changed during this time. So I decided to come here and ask would that be a good deal for an entry-level camera or is it too much for that particular model? I'm not looking for anything fancy, just a camera that I can use from time to time to take good quality shots and learn a bit more about photography. That's why I'm not really looking for anything too expensive either. He was selling it for 300€ 6-8 weeks ago, but has lowered the price since people were mostly offering to exchange it for laptops etc.


----------



## TUDJ

That's a pretty good price. It's a nice camera, my brother has one. For what you want, it will do nicely and also have room to grow/learn as you please.


----------



## Magical Eskimo

I can vouch for the 1100D + kit lens, I've got one and for me, it's great! This is my flickr, all photos taken on the 1100D with the 18-55 IS kit lens







https://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Thought you were in OCN long enough. It never ends. That's the point


I think the issue is that the OCN culture is built around buying bleeding edge tech for miniscule gains -- this kind of mentality doesn't usually serve anyone well when buying photography equipment unless you are stupid and flush with cash.


----------



## Dream Killer

Sub, it's not photography till I look like this!


----------



## sub50hz

Is that white Spike Lee?


----------



## pcfoo

Doesn't pragmatically serve anyone / anything all around. It is not limited to photography








But people feel good thinking they have "the best"...#1 reason Apple is doing so well for example, selling a feeling/perception more than a device.
You have Apple = you are part of the club.

So in extension, you have to have the good DSLR to be part of the equiv. club, the cool car, this and that fashion accessory etc.
Returns are diminishing more and more, you just get spoiled by the "feeling" & you keep spending so that you can call yourself a cool kid again.


----------



## Dream Killer

when did apple come into the picture? c'mon now.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> So in extension, you have to have the good DSLR to be part of the equiv. club, the cool car, this and that fashion accessory etc.
> Returns are diminishing more and more, you just get spoiled by the "feeling" & you keep spending so that you can call yourself a cool kid again.


Sounds like insecurity to me.


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> when did apple come into the picture? c'mon now.


People long for the ability to buy luxury items. Apple succeeds in providing that. It is a very very widely used example in consumer psychology studies. No flame / troll intention there.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Sounds like insecurity to me.


Ofc it is after one point.
But there is also true comfort in acquiring blink. No real utility, just that "feeling", which ofc we cannot satisfy for long before marketing hits us with another must-have and bring our G.A.S. back.


----------



## Dream Killer

im interested in these psychology studies, got any links?


----------



## Sepesusi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TUDJ*
> 
> That's a pretty good price. It's a nice camera, my brother has one. For what you want, it will do nicely and also have room to grow/learn as you please.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> I can vouch for the 1100D + kit lens, I've got one and for me, it's great! This is my flickr, all photos taken on the 1100D with the 18-55 IS kit lens
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/


Thanks guys! Really convinced me to get it. And great pictures you got there Eskimo, that's exactly the kind of quality I was looking for after using the phone camera for so long. Just need to learn to shoot first!


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sepesusi*
> 
> Thanks guys! Really convinced me to get it. And great pictures you got there Eskimo, that's exactly the kind of quality I was looking for after using the phone camera for so long. Just need to learn to shoot first!


No problem








Thanks! I've not been shooting very long so I've still got lots to learn, glad you like my shots though.
You should get yourself a Flickr account, too. Even if you're not gonna use it as a way of sharing your photos it's basically 1tb of free cloud storage for your favourite photos.


----------



## ace8uk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> People long for the ability to buy luxury items. Apple succeeds in providing that. It is a very very widely used example in consumer psychology studies. No flame / troll intention there.
> Ofc it is after one point.
> But there is also true comfort in acquiring blink. No real utility, just that "feeling", which ofc we cannot satisfy for long before marketing hits us with another must-have and bring our G.A.S. back.


Your posts always seem to go off on the most bizarre of tangents, elaborating into the utmost detail regarding things that aren't relevant to discussion at all. Everything has to be such a philosophical discussion with you, and it ends up turning into nonsensical drivel. Are you an academic by profession? It seems like you might be.


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ace8uk*
> 
> Your posts always seem to go off on the most bizarre of tangents, elaborating into the utmost detail regarding things that aren't relevant to discussion at all. Everything has to be such a philosophical discussion with you, and it ends up turning into nonsensical drivel. Are you an academic by profession? It seems like you might be.












Was never my intention. But since I "always" do that and I displease too many of you in this thread, it has to be the case.

Won't happen again.


----------



## ace8uk

Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to be a meany, simply curious.


----------



## Magical Eskimo

I like pcfoo's posts! They're inciteful


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *ace8uk*
> 
> Your posts always seem to go off on the most bizarre of tangents, elaborating into the utmost detail regarding things that aren't relevant to discussion at all. Everything has to be such a philosophical discussion with you, and it ends up turning into nonsensical drivel. Are you an academic by profession? It seems like you might be.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Was never my intention. But since I "always" do that and I displease too many of you in this thread, it has to be the case.
> 
> Won't happen again.
Click to expand...

I like your posts tho! Don't stop.









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> im interested in these psychology studies, got any links?


Check out some via google scholar: http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=consumer+psychology+studies+luxury+brands&btnG=&as_sdt=1%2C10&as_sdtp=


----------



## sub50hz

Everybody has their own brand of advice -- most posters here are a little more long-winded than myself, but it comes down to personality more than anything.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> But there is also true comfort in acquiring blink. No real utility, just that "feeling", which ofc we cannot satisfy for long before marketing hits us with another must-have and bring our G.A.S. back.


I work for a large HFT doing system infrastructure and deployment (s/w and h/w) -- the very nature of our business means buying the latest-and-greatest at the drop of a hat, but it's also done with the highest degree of objectivity you could imagine. It's probably why a lot fo my suggestions come off as dickish (and why I've distanced myself from giving advice in this forum).


----------



## Scott1541

Kind of relevant to the events of recent days...


----------



## Sean Webster

LOL^ So true


----------



## ace8uk

Scott, you were looking for things for your society to do earlier, weren't you?

http://www.nups.org/faqs-the-london-photo-hunt-2014/


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ace8uk*
> 
> Scott, you were looking for things for your society to do earlier, weren't you?
> 
> http://www.nups.org/faqs-the-london-photo-hunt-2014/


Seems like what we did earlier this week but on a much larger scale









It does look like good fun but a) we're not members of the NUPS (at least not yet), and b) It's in London







I'll message the president the link but I think I know what his rely will be.


----------



## ace8uk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> Seems like what we did earlier this week but on a much larger scale
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It does look like good fun but a) we're not members of the NUPS (at least not yet), and b) It's in London
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'll message the president the link but I think I know what his rely will be.


I went last year during my MSc with Kent University and it was fantastic, going to make an appearance to meet some familiar faces again this year, although I can't participate as I'm not a student.


----------



## kbros

So I bought an ASUS PA248Q, let's see how impressed I am once it gets here.


----------



## Dream Killer

Well?


----------



## sub50hz

Yeah, it's been a day, only filthy casuals select something other than next-day shipping. REPORT.


----------



## Dream Killer

I bought mine at a STORE like normal people! lol


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> I bought mine at a STORE like normal people! lol


Guilty of not doing that as much as I should. Anybody else?


----------



## jameyscott

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Guilty of not doing that as much as I should. Anybody else?


What is a STORE? I only know Amazon, Newegg, and Fleabay


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jameyscott*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Guilty of not doing that as much as I should. Anybody else?
> 
> 
> 
> What is a STORE? I only know Amazon, Newegg, and Fleabay
Click to expand...

x2. Unless I can't wait, stores are non-existant.


----------



## Eggs and bacon

Just found this persons flickr, seriously top notch landscape photography.


----------



## kbros

Haha its actually going to be here today. This site I got it from is ridiculous. If I recall correctly the monitor costs like $350 new, they had it used like new with no screen damage for 210, and if I signed up for an email subscription I got 10% off. Ended up paying 189 with free ship. 2 day free shipping ftw


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> I bought mine at a STORE like normal people! lol


To be fair, I _did_ buy my U2713M in a store.... because Fry's advertised it incorrectly at $350 and Microcenter begrudgingly matched their price.


----------



## Dream Killer

You guys must not have a MicroCenter =P


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> You guys must not have a MicroCenter =P


I just have a tigerdirect.com store...and they dont carry anything but cheap crap. If I want anything good i have to order it anyways. So why order through them and pay tax when i can order online elsewhere and save tax $? lol


----------



## Dream Killer

time is money. can't wait 3 days for an impulse buy!

real reason: im never at my apartment when the ups guy comes by so it's more of a logistical problem than a money problem.


----------



## DizZz

Does anyone have any experience with this? Is it worth it or should I just save up for a real flash?

http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00GMZUW6O


----------



## jameyscott

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> You guys must not have a MicroCenter =P


No.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> time is money. can't wait 3 days for an impulse buy!
> 
> real reason: im never at my apartment when the ups guy comes by so it's more of a logistical problem than a money problem.


I'm always at my house nownthat I work from home. I just wish they would knock then they drop off packages...


----------



## xILukasIx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DizZz*
> 
> Does anyone have any experience with this? Is it worth it or should I just save up for a real flash?
> 
> http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00GMZUW6O


I'd save up for a Yongnuo flash, they're not that expensive to begin with and work GREAT!
http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00BXA7N6A
This specific one has a wireless receiver built in and Yonguo's wireless controllers are pretty cheap aswell.
(Note that this flash does not support TTL)

This one supports E-TTL (Canon) and can be used as a master flash aswell:
http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00DB21TCM
(I actually would like to have this one more than my Canon 430EX II...)


----------



## kbros

I got the monitor, its pretty great, 16:10 seems like SO much more screen space, viewing angles are fantastic and after weenie calibrating through software it looks pretty good. No backlight bleed or anything else. Condition is 100%, not even any scratches on the body nevermind the screen. I'm happy.


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DizZz*
> 
> Does anyone have any experience with this? Is it worth it or should I just save up for a real flash?
> 
> http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00GMZUW6O


Not worth it. The cheap ones from Ebay do the same thing for way less, but even something like this would be a huge upgrade. http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00H3EBXJS/ref=ox_sc_sfl_title_3?ie=UTF8&psc=1&smid=A1SDRS5D54HY4U

It may not have TTL, but it's amazing for the price.


----------



## Eggs and bacon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xILukasIx*
> 
> I'd save up for a Yongnuo flash, they're not that expensive to begin with and work GREAT!
> http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00BXA7N6A
> This specific one has a wireless receiver built in and Yonguo's wireless controllers are pretty cheap aswell.
> (Note that this flash does not support TTL)
> 
> This one supports E-TTL (Canon) and can be used as a master flash aswell:
> http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00DB21TCM
> (I actually would like to have this one more than my Canon 430EX II...)


Yong Nuo are the best bang for you buck if you don't need ttl. I have a yn- 560 and highly recommend it, the internal wireless receiver is really convenient and works well.


----------



## Dream Killer

So... why would anyone who spends money on IS, USM focus, Multiple cross type AF, very high ISO, automated monitor calibration systems, and sinks at least a couple of hundred of dollars into each lens _NOT_ get a flash with eTTL?


----------



## cambuff

That would be down to personal preference i.e I shoot manual flash because ETTL can be easily confused by changing light situations. If someone needs identical/repeatable results from frame to frame then they'd use manual power.
ETTL is handy for on the fly grab shots though.


----------



## cambuff

Dizz..pls dont buy a Gary Fong tupperware pot. There the biggest rip off going.
Head on over to Neil Van Niekerk's Tangents blog and read up on 'the black foamie thing'. The whole blog is a must read for anyone wanting to get the most from 'on' and 'off' camera flash.


----------



## Scott1541

I'd like to get a TTL flashgun but I can't justify the cost since it's something I don't use that often, and I already have a Yongnuo YN-560 II and Nikon SB-300.

I think my next purchase is going to be a kit lens upgrade. I don't use that too much either but I'm thinking if I get something like a Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4 I'd use it more


----------



## xILukasIx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> So... why would anyone who spends money on IS, USM focus, Multiple cross type AF, very high ISO, automated monitor calibration systems, and sinks at least a couple of hundred of dollars into each lens _NOT_ get a flash with eTTL?


It's very useful for subjects moving relative to you, no need to use TTL for static subjects though.
Definitely depends on the type of photography you do, not how much money you spent on the other gear...
That's why I suggested the E-TTL version aswell and why _I_'d prefer it, since it's not that much more expensive and I sometimes shoot moving subjects aswell.


----------



## Dream Killer

who told you ttl isnt useful for static subjects? you might as well use manual focus there too then.


----------



## xILukasIx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> who told you ttl isnt useful for static subjects? you might as well use manual focus there too then.


Where did I say it was not useful?


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xILukasIx*
> 
> Where did I say it was not useful?


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xILukasIx*
> 
> no need to use TTL for static subjects though.


Fer yer health.


----------



## xILukasIx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Fer yer health.


No need to use =/= not useful, but hey, to each their own.

Go ahead and suggest buying the most expensive flash you can find, since more expensive must mean better to you guys then aswell.


----------



## cambuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xILukasIx*
> 
> It's very useful for subjects moving relative to you, no need to use TTL for static subjects though.
> Definitely depends on the type of photography you do, not how much money you spent on the other gear...
> That's why I suggested the E-TTL version aswell and why _I_'d prefer it, since it's not that much more expensive and I sometimes shoot moving subjects aswell.


I agree. I fail to see why TTL,E-TTL or i-TTL flash should be bought because someone has gotten an IS or USM lens etc. If what you are referring to is the ability to stop action, then TTL is the last thing to use. The extra time it takes for a camera to send a low power pre flash..then calculate the correct power for the main flash to expose correctly all takes time.
As mentioned, it all depends on a given scenario. The paps will use ttl and just machine gun off loads of shots in the hope one is correctly exposed for example.


----------



## xILukasIx

I was actually talking about the distance between the subject and the flash changing ;-)
High Speed Sync is nice for freezing motion though. Derp, I meant for shooting wide open!
TTL definitely has its uses and advantages and the Yonguo with ETTL (and HSS I think) isn't that expensive either.


----------



## cambuff

Ah, fair comment








Yeah the latest yongnuo is a steal. The next best alternative are Nissin Di 866mkii's at half the price of a new ex/sb.

I tend to think along the lines of stopping power as flash duration because i shoot fluids regularly. In that respect, HSS isnt something i use either. All subjective according to usage i guess.


----------



## Jixr

Can anyone do a price check for me?

I'm looking to unload my gear to put money towards fixing up my old motorcycle.
Rarely use my DSLR anymore and have been thinking of just sticking with my EOS-M or selling it as well and getting a nice fuji or something.

Everything is used but in good working order, cosmetically and mechanically

Canon T3i w/ about 20-30k shots on it

Canon 50mm 1.4

Canon 17-40 F4 L

Canon 70-200 F4 L

Canon 430exii Flash ( like new )
Thanks guys.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> Can anyone do a price check for me?
> 
> I'm looking to unload my gear to put money towards fixing up my old motorcycle.
> Rarely use my DSLR anymore and have been thinking of just sticking with my EOS-M or selling it as well and getting a nice fuji or something.
> 
> Everything is used but in good working order, cosmetically and mechanically
> 
> Canon T3i w/ about 20-30k shots on it
> 
> Canon 50mm 1.4
> 
> Canon 17-40 F4 L
> 
> Canon 70-200 F4 L
> 
> Canon 430exii Flash ( like new )
> Thanks guys.


t3i - $250

50 f/1.4 - $250-300

17-40 - $450-500

70-200 f4L - $450-500

430EXII - $180-210


----------



## Jixr

Thats about what I was figuring, thanks.


----------



## Sean Webster

I may know someone interested in the camera, but idk when he'd have the $. :/


----------



## Jixr

well its not in any rush, and I'm still on the fence about letting it all go, I've just rarely used any of it in awhile. Either that I may just down grade my lens's to some cheaper alternatives. I have a motorcycle thats been sitting for 2 years and I would like to fix it up and get it back out on the road. I tend to bounce from hobby to hobby every year or so, and its starting to feel like a motorcycle year.


----------



## DizZz

What happened to DXOMark? And thanks everyone for the advice on flashes. I think I'll hold off for the time being and save up for something that will last me awhile


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> well its not in any rush, and I'm still on the fence about letting it all go, I've just rarely used any of it in awhile. Either that I may just down grade my lens's to some cheaper alternatives. I have a motorcycle thats been sitting for 2 years and I would like to fix it up and get it back out on the road. I tend to bounce from hobby to hobby every year or so, and its starting to feel like a motorcycle year.


Gotcha, i'm the same way. My whole life I used to fish and have all the best gear, then it turned into bicycling, then RC cars, then video games, and now photography...but I think photography is going to be a big part of my life forever.  I've been wanting to get a motorcycle, but you can not drive one here in SoFlo without risking your life. Already seen too many die just in front of my house, let alone around the area. I think I may buy a dirt bike tho, we have trails around here.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DizZz*
> 
> What happened to DXOMark? And thanks everyone for the advice on flashes. I think I'll hold off for the time being and save up for something that will last me awhile


In my mind all i need are those youngno 560 III's. I never use TTL ever. lol I need to get my butt into gear and sell my two 430EXII's and get 4 of the youngnos.


----------



## kbros

So I posssibly, possibly could become part of a car photography team. ( Royal Stance) Have no idea though I'm just speculating, they've requested some photos and asked where I live and what not. Hopefully I do because I go to all the car shows anyways and I'd love to do private shoots.


----------



## kbros

I'm in! Pretty excited, get my own staff sweatshirt with my name and everything. The way it works is I just do what I normally do ( go to car shows and shoot a ton of photos) and pick any final images I think are above the cut, and submit them. Then they can use them for any social media purposes and I get full credit. If they use any of my work on any clothing or merch, I get payed. If they hire me to cover a show or do a private shoot, I get payed. Pretty sweet setup and I'm stoked.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> I'm in! Pretty excited, get my own staff sweatshirt with my name and everything. The way it works is I just do what I normally do ( go to car shows and shoot a ton of photos) and pick any final images I think are above the cut, and submit them. Then they can use them for any social media purposes and I get full credit. If they use any of my work on any clothing or merch, I get payed. If they hire me to cover a show or do a private shoot, I get payed. Pretty sweet setup and I'm stoked.


Nice!


----------



## DizZz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> I'm in! Pretty excited, get my own staff sweatshirt with my name and everything. The way it works is I just do what I normally do ( go to car shows and shoot a ton of photos) and pick any final images I think are above the cut, and submit them. Then they can use them for any social media purposes and I get full credit. If they use any of my work on any clothing or merch, I get payed. If they hire me to cover a show or do a private shoot, I get payed. Pretty sweet setup and I'm stoked.


That's awesome congrats!


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> I'm in! Pretty excited, get my own staff sweatshirt with my name and everything. The way it works is I just do what I normally do ( go to car shows and shoot a ton of photos) and pick any final images I think are above the cut, and submit them. Then they can use them for any social media purposes and I get full credit. If they use any of my work on any clothing or merch, I get payed. If they hire me to cover a show or do a private shoot, I get payed. Pretty sweet setup and I'm stoked.


sweet! .. good luck @kbros!


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Nice one kbros!


----------



## Eggs and bacon

Being paid to do what you love is a nice bonus. =)


----------



## hokiealumnus

Sounds pretty sweet; congrats kbros!


----------



## kbros

Now to just finish building my car so I can actually get to shows and shoots next show season haha.


----------



## Scott1541

Photo show went well... but not for my wallet









After going around it once, browsing the entire second hand stock of the two local camera shops I went back and came away with a Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 EX DC OS. It was a lot for my student budget but oh well, I've got some other stuff that needs selling so it should offset the cost


----------



## MistaBernie

That 17-50.. I miss it. If I still shot primarily crop bodies I would still own mine for sure..


----------



## Scott1541

I can't really go out and play with it until after thursday next week because I've got deadlines and stuff







Although saying that if it's foggy tonight like it was last night I'll have a quick walk around with it regardless









I was going to have a quick test around the show hall but being an idiot I forgot my SD card


----------



## kbros

Anybody know of any good guides on auto photography? I really want to learn new shooting skills and editing styles. And I want to be super ready for when I get to do private shoots. Thanks guys


----------



## scottath

Calling:@Sean Webster ^^^

Ill make a post if he doesnt - he does it far more than I anyhow...


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> Anybody know of any good guides on auto photography? I really want to learn new shooting skills and editing styles. And I want to be super ready for when I get to do private shoots. Thanks guys


You could start with Kelbyone - Inspired Light and Automotive Photography with Tim Wallace.
I don't think you can distill it down to just 45min or so of video tutorial, this is just a primer.


----------



## PCModderMike

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> I'm in! Pretty excited, get my own staff sweatshirt with my name and everything. The way it works is I just do what I normally do ( go to car shows and shoot a ton of photos) and pick any final images I think are above the cut, and submit them. Then they can use them for any social media purposes and I get full credit. If they use any of my work on any clothing or merch, I get payed. If they hire me to cover a show or do a private shoot, I get payed. Pretty sweet setup and I'm stoked.


That's awesome.


----------



## kbros

^IKR, I even get my own cute lil watermark.

https://flic.kr/p/pEEdZsDITT by Noah Blalock @blalocknoah, on Flickr


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scottath*
> 
> Calling:@Sean Webster ^^^
> 
> Ill make a post if he doesnt - he does it far more than I anyhow...


lol

Here is a list of automotive photographers I follow...I think there are more, these are just the ones I got a list of off hand. Check their work out for idea's. A lot of stuff is done by doing multiple exposures and layers and composite work.



Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



https://www.facebook.com/CiprianMihaiPhotography?ref=br_tf

https://www.facebook.com/fredericschlosserphotography?ref=profile

https://www.facebook.com/NotBland?ref=profile

https://www.facebook.com/1013mm?ref=profile

https://www.facebook.com/williamsternphotos?ref=profile

https://www.facebook.com/arunmnairphotography?ref=profile

https://www.facebook.com/jeremycliff?ref=profile

https://www.facebook.com/GSAutomotiveArt?ref=profile

https://www.facebook.com/MarcelLechPhotography?ref=profile

https://www.facebook.com/pages/Automotive-Photography-by-Damian-Hock/300567240010231?ref=profile

https://www.facebook.com/eastonchangphotography?ref=profile

https://www.facebook.com/richard.thompson.photo?ref=profile

https://www.facebook.com/pepperyandell?ref=profile

https://www.facebook.com/GFWilliamsPhotography?ref=profile

https://www.facebook.com/oskarbakkephotography?ref=profile

https://www.facebook.com/ThomasVanRooijPhotography?ref=profile

https://www.facebook.com/seagrampearcephoto?ref=profile

https://www.facebook.com/GeorgeBucurPhotography?ref=profile



Here are some shots i've done...



Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!

















Try planning the shoot out in your head before you do it. Then, just find a location, clean up the car and area as nice as you can, shoot at near golden hour, a little before is good light too at times. If you want to do night photos, you should look into getting something like a Westcott Ice Light ( or DIY)...especially if the car is not reflective (black and other dark colors). White and silver are great as you can just flash them a few tiems and the whole car will get exposed easily. Dark color cars you need to accent the lines with a continuos light during a long exposure. When shooting, look for symmetry, try different angles and focal lengths and get creative.


----------



## kbros

Thanks sean, my personal favorite auto photog is sean klingelhoefer and has been for a while. We share the same passion of owning a porsche 930 before we die lol. Thanks for the knowledge, will keep it in mind.


----------



## Eggs and bacon

So i may have succumbed to my GAS and bought a 4x5 kit. The holders had some film in them I definitely spoiled one sheet and according to the notch codes I think it is plus-x which was discontinued a couple years ago. Any used plus-x before?


----------



## cambuff

@kbros some good tips in the above posts. From a technical viewpoint the hardest thing you'll ever shoot will be a black polished auto. It'll require a lot of expensive rigging/scrims and/or softboxes (think chimera toplighter) etc. But if you can nail that, then your gold. I bought a black toy car eons ago to practice with, and just made tiny diy scrims and striplights to go with speedlights. Its a good exercise to do.
Getting (or making) yourself a boom rig will really make life easier for motion work also.


----------



## cambuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Eggs and bacon*
> 
> So i may have succumbed to my GAS and bought a 4x5 kit. The holders had some film in them I definitely spoiled one sheet and according to the notch codes I think it is plus-x which was discontinued a couple years ago. Any used plus-x before?


Field or view cam?
Can't say ive used plus x personally.


----------



## Eggs and bacon

view, its a really old calumet and weighs a figurative ton. Though I do plan to use it for landscapes I need to find a backpack.


----------



## cambuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Eggs and bacon*
> 
> view, its a really old calumet and weighs a figurative ton. Though I do plan to use it for landscapes I need to find a backpack.


Perfect tool for landscapes, it'll force you to slow down and think more. Especially using film...on that note - I'd probably go for the obvious choice in Velvia.


----------



## Eggs and bacon

I'm probably going to stick with b&w until I learn the camera properly. Though I am lucky enough to have person nearby to me who will process color sheet film for 2$ a sheet.


----------



## MistaBernie

Goodbye 17-40..

Hello 16-35 F/4L IS!


----------



## cambuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Eggs and bacon*
> 
> I'm probably going to stick with b&w until I learn the camera properly. Though I am lucky enough to have person nearby to me who will process color sheet film for 2$ a sheet.


That's very reasonable (and a damned sight less messy-er).
Enjoy, I'm still waiting for the right sinar P2 to come along if i can pair it with a decent mfdb.


----------



## kbros

What's you guys's opinion on adding effects like light leaks in your photos. I think sometimes they look really cheesy and 'instagram-y.' If they're done correctly they can look very nice. IMO

Here's an example. (Also it's my Media Staff sweatshirt)
https://flic.kr/p/p4RorsRoyal Stance Hoodie by Noah Blalock @blalocknoah, on Flickr


----------



## ace8uk

Every style and effect has its place and I think that, given your audience demographic, the style works for the image. Not sure I ever congratulated you properly on the position by the way, so well done; it's awesome to see you achieved your ambition and so quickly, I've got a feeling we're going to be seeing some pretty cool stuff from you in the future...


----------



## kbros

Thanks man, It really is a great opportunity. Another way to get known in the local car culture as "one of those guys that will shoot your car."


----------



## hokiealumnus

I've never been a fan of adding things that weren't there in post, with the exception of occasional vignetting. That's a very personal preference of course.


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hokiealumnus*
> 
> I've never been a fan of adding things that weren't there in post, with the exception of occasional vignetting. That's a very personal preference of course.


I'm a bit like that too. I'll happily enhance what is there or maybe remove imperfections like dust spots, etc.. but I'm not a huge fan of adding things that weren't there originally.


----------



## kbros

Thanks for the insight guys.


----------



## Scott1541

Just been to a charity comedy gig at my uni and the 'photographer'* annoyed the hell out of me. He was just sitting on the front row using a D7000 & 18-105 and he would take a shot, chimp, zoom in a couple of times and repeat this process every 5 or so seconds for about a minute. Then he'd stop for about 5 minutes then start all over again. From what I could see of the LCD display pretty much every shot he took of the same act was nearly identical too, so I'm not sure why he was taking so many shots.

* - Not really sure if I should call him that, was probably just some guy from that charity that said "I have a camera..."


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> Just been to a charity comedy gig at my uni and the 'photographer'* annoyed the hell out of me. He was just sitting on the front row using a D7000 & 18-105 and he would take a shot, chimp, zoom in a couple of times and repeat this process every 5 or so seconds for about a minute. Then he'd stop for about 5 minutes then start all over again. From what I could see of the LCD display pretty much every shot he took of the same act was nearly identical too, so I'm not sure why he was taking so many shots.
> 
> * - Not really sure if I should call him that, was probably just some guy from that charity that said "I have a camera..."


Which is what a big majority of photographers is, right?
After all, all your friends and family are impressed with your big camera and the "great photos" you take?
Sounds pretty familiar to me at least









At the end, one of his shots might be used in FB, a website or a printed ad for some short to promote the charity / whoever.
It is pretty common in many school events to have "this guy", often using the built-in flash too for maximum effect.

If it is not a phone camera or screen, It cannot be annoying, right?


----------



## ace8uk

I read this article today and was blown away by the guys ignorance. I'm quite surprised The Guardian even published it to be honest. Anyway, what are your thoughts?

http://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/jonathanjonesblog/2014/nov/13/why-photographs-dont-work-in-art-galleries


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ace8uk*
> 
> I read this article today and was blown away by the guys ignorance. I'm quite surprised The Guardian even published it to be honest. Anyway, what are your thoughts?
> 
> http://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/jonathanjonesblog/2014/nov/13/why-photographs-dont-work-in-art-galleries


That person is ******ed. lol


----------



## FrancisJF

What's your guy'es recommendation for Compact DSLR or regular DSLR camera under $600?


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FrancisJF*
> 
> What's your guy'es recommendation for Compact DSLR or regular DSLR camera under $600?


Canon T2i/T3i/T4i/60D

Nikon D3100/D3200/D5100/D5200/D7000


----------



## kbros

What he said^


----------



## Eggs and bacon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ace8uk*
> 
> I read this article today and was blown away by the guys ignorance. I'm quite surprised The Guardian even published it to be honest. Anyway, what are your thoughts?
> 
> http://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/jonathanjonesblog/2014/nov/13/why-photographs-dont-work-in-art-galleries


IMO prints > than iPad screens
The author does seem very ignorant, I find that I can stare at a good photograph for several minutes, if you only glance at it for a couple of seconds you can't really appreciate it.


----------



## TUDJ

I think he is very ignorant but I agree that some photography is treated like painted art when it shouldn't be.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ace8uk*
> 
> I read this article today and was blown away by the guys ignorance. I'm quite surprised The Guardian even published it to be honest. Anyway, what are your thoughts?
> 
> http://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/jonathanjonesblog/2014/nov/13/why-photographs-dont-work-in-art-galleries


He's a numpty. The problem here is that he's presenting his own opinion of photography as fact. I'm surprised the Guardian published something this ignorant.


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FrancisJF*
> 
> What's your guy'es recommendation for Compact DSLR or regular DSLR camera under $600?


What Sean said









Possibly including the Canon 1XXXD like too


----------



## Sean Webster

Another pic of mine got published in an online news article.  Too bad it was a pic i didn't even put effort into. :/ lol

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2234554-johnny-stephenes-unique-ball-handling-biz-has-nba-all-stars-and-brands-lined-up?search_query=johnny

It is a story on a guy I met on xbox. He used to go to my college and I helped manage his training business for a while.


----------



## kbros

SWEET! Congrats


----------



## Scott1541

The only time I've ever had anything published was when I took some photos or a local charity group. Had a group photo printed in the local newspaper and a load more photos were used in a promotional poster.

Wasn't my finest work but they must have thought I did a good job because I've been asked to come and photograph another event for them on the 27th. It's in the late evening so it'll be dark, and they will probably publish photos of this too so I'll have to step up my game


----------



## cambuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ace8uk*
> 
> I read this article today and was blown away by the guys ignorance. I'm quite surprised The Guardian even published it to be honest. Anyway, what are your thoughts?
> 
> http://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/jonathanjonesblog/2014/nov/13/why-photographs-dont-work-in-art-galleries


What a narrow minded, uninformed viewpoint. The guy obviously knows little about photography.


----------



## pcfoo

The most used digital camera for quite some time was the iphone, followed by other smartphones. This statement is not guestimated, it is actually the raw number of pictures and their exif on flickr, photo.net etc that gave this - it is a fact, and of course in Facebook it would be an even bigger "victory" for the smartphones.

So people that use these cameras are not just snapping random pics, are actually "proud" enough to publish them - over and over again.
The result is millions over millions of pics being published daily by people with smartphones, and consumed by ppl on smartphones. For the "consuming" task, an iPad or high res / big screen tablet is actually an upgrade, so I agree with the writer.

Where we all disagree I guess, is that photography doesn't belong in galleries.
That is his interpretation - but not solely his - as he belongs in a generation bombarded by too many good and not so good pictures daily, that the medium is cheapened in his mind.
"A photo is nothing more than something you flip through by the thousands in an ipad, a painting is something unique".

You see, he thinks that "photography is something everyone can do and it begins and ends with an easy click", while "paintings are so engaging" - right?

There are no paintings in galleries, and gazillion crappy ones painted everyday. - Sure.

Much like there are no uneducated - around art - people walking in galleries with either paintings, sculptures or photography that will go "bananas" and walk out in contempt after saying "I can do that, piece of cake" after spending 2sec infront of every exhibit. No, that is just happening in photography galleries with "backlit frames".

At any rate, negative and "safely" controversial articles and reportage is what sells.
Should this be an article explaining the bad choices of a gallery - while providing a positive example - or educating the public on what photography & art that finds its way in galleries should mean and convey, would be a "hard to sell" piece that the chief editors would not allow to be published, or keep it in cold storage for that stagnant week.


----------



## Scott1541

Just picked up some Kodak BW400CN for our photography society trip out later. The local print/dev shop actually sells film at some pretty decent prices, and does student discount. With the discount they're pretty much on par with ebay prices


----------



## TUDJ

My Hoya ND1000 arrived last week, hoping to get out this weekend and see how it performs.


----------



## Totally Dubbed

Hi there everyone - not sure if I should create my own thread in this part of the forum - but I'll post it here and see how it goes









What I want:
-£350 max camera
-Portable - should be able to take it on-the-go - no DSLR size camera - they're too bulky
-Has to be able to do MP4 1080P 60FPS
-Needs to have GOOD/excellent recording sound quality
-Has to have pop-up/integrated flash
-Removable battery and MicroSD card
-Must be able to take good quality pictures and NOT have ANY noise when zooming in/out (for video recording)

My current camera is flawless to me - it does the job just great for pictures and video - however I just want that 60FPS recording functionality and I don't have it.
My camera is capped at 50FPS @ 1080P using the horrid AVCHD format OR MP4 25FPS @ 1080P - my current camera is the Sony HX9V.

The reasoning behind all of this, is because I do a lot of reviews. Written (pictures) and video (YouTube) - so I need something versatile for both photographs and videos.
Sample photo for reviews below (compressed):


Spoiler: Click to view







Sample video:


Spoiler: Click to view











I was looking around and I found the Sony RX100 - Looks to fit the bill I think, but would like to know what you guys would recommend.
Just before you pounce - I have absolutely no brand fanboyism. I simply couldn't careless what brand it is - as long as it's available in the UK and can be bought easily from Amazon/Jessops or other retailer.

Oh and I'll be making my way to the US over Christmas - so if there's something that's cheaper in the US - I can buy it there instead (as long as INT warranty applies)

Thanks in advance


----------



## kbros

RX100 Is supposed to be one of the best point and shoots, it should be a great choice.


----------



## Totally Dubbed

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> RX100 Is supposed to be one of the best point and shoots, it should be a great choice.


I see - any other options though - would love other options too







!

EDIT:
Talked to Jessops, they have also recommended two other cameras to me:
Panasonic Lumix DMC-TZ60 - £270
http://www.jessops.com/online.store/categories/products/panasonic/lumix-dmc-tz60-camera-in-black-90185/show.html

Canon Powershot G16 - £295
http://www.jessops.com/online.store/categories/products/canon/powershot-g16-digital-compact-camera-89365/show.html

The G16 looks absolutely amazing too!

I think it would be the G16 vs the Sony RX100m, that comes in at £310:
http://www.jessops.com/online.store/categories/products/sony/cyber-shot-dsc-rx100-digital-camera-86095/show.html

When looking at reviews of both - the Sony is priced around £350, and the G16 at £550! Huge price drop, probably before a newer G18 of sorts comes out?
Thoughts







?


----------



## hokiealumnus

For something a little more compact but still Canon (I'm a Canon fan), you could check out the S120. I like the controls on the G16, but it's very clunky for a point & shoot. The S120 is more compact and ads touch screen, which you can use for focusing in video mode (big plus).

For point & shoots, the RX100 series (they're up to v. III now IIRC) is extremely tough to beat...if you don't have a budget. Dollar-for-dollar Canon has better features for the price IMHO. No doubt that with its 1" sensor, the RX100 has them beat on the image quality front at least by a little bit.


----------



## MistaBernie

Out of shear curiosity, why do you want/need 60fps for reviews?

Also, on board sound recording on point and shoot (or even dslr) cameras is _*always*_ going to be lesser quality than an inexpensive external dedicated sound recording.

I'd honestly suggest investing in audio gear - something along the lines of a Tascam DR-70D isn't too bad. granted, you'd need to pick up a microphone or microphones as well, so there would be additional cost, but again, I feel if the camera you're recording video with was released in the last 2-3 years, the visual quality shouldn't be a problem at all and the best way to improve on the overall quality would be to focus on audio. Even a low-ish quality microphone (go super cheap, Shure SM58 or something) put through a Tascam DR-70D will be better than 99% of on board sound recording.

Obviously my 2 cents, but while I"m not currently active in the A/V field like some people (@Conspiracy), I have been doing it on and off for about twenty years now (up to and including broadcast quality TV for a few years).


----------



## hokiealumnus

TBH, I missed the sound thing and MistaBernie has a very good point. There is no camera on the market - none - that can match even a cheap shotgun mic. If you don't have a specific reason to upgrade for video purposes, then you'll be sorely disappointed in what you get, because sound will still be poor.


----------



## Totally Dubbed

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hokiealumnus*
> 
> For something a little more compact but still Canon (I'm a Canon fan), you could check out the S120. I like the controls on the G16, but it's very clunky for a point & shoot. The S120 is more compact and ads touch screen, which you can use for focusing in video mode (big plus).
> 
> For point & shoots, the RX100 series (they're up to v. III now IIRC) is extremely tough to beat...if you don't have a budget. Dollar-for-dollar Canon has better features for the price IMHO. No doubt that with its 1" sensor, the RX100 has them beat on the image quality front at least by a little bit.


I see - thanks for that! +Rep - really does help!
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Out of shear curiosity, why do you want/need 60fps for reviews?
> 
> Also, on board sound recording on point and shoot (or even dslr) cameras is _*always*_ going to be lesser quality than an inexpensive external dedicated sound recording.
> 
> I'd honestly suggest investing in audio gear - something along the lines of a Tascam DR-70D isn't too bad. granted, you'd need to pick up a microphone or microphones as well, so there would be additional cost, but again, I feel if the camera you're recording video with was released in the last 2-3 years, the visual quality shouldn't be a problem at all and the best way to improve on the overall quality would be to focus on audio. Even a low-ish quality microphone (go super cheap, Shure SM58 or something) put through a Tascam DR-70D will be better than 99% of on board sound recording.
> 
> Obviously my 2 cents, but while I"m not currently active in the A/V field like some people (@Conspiracy), I have been doing it on and off for about twenty years now (up to and including broadcast quality TV for a few years).


Good question - I want 60FPS to record dancing at 60FPS. Completely changes the dynamic on YouTube for me - dancing becomes a lot more fluid and so much better to watch vs 30FPS.

Sample of me dancing:


Spoiler: Click to view











60 FPS dancing (not me):


Spoiler: Click to view











I won't need it for reviews (such as the headset review you saw) - but for anything with fast movements - it's definitely on my wish list.

Audio gear wise- yes I wish I could but it becomes a bit too much. I don't get paid for reviews, nor get any income from them (ads etc are all disabled) - I do it for pure fun. So yes a mic + some sort of recorders would drastically be better, even a desktop mic like the Spark is miles ahead, but for what I do and what I get out the reviews, my on-board camera sound and/or logitech USB mic/ModMic4.0 do the job more than adequately









The video quality, as said before - is perfect - but it shoots at only 25FPS - and for me, as much as that's fine for the headset reviews, isn't enough for the dancing









Great suggestion though, really appreciate it - imaginary rep to you sir!
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hokiealumnus*
> 
> TBH, I missed the sound thing and MistaBernie has a very good point. There is no camera on the market - none - that can match even a cheap shotgun mic. If you don't have a specific reason to upgrade for video purposes, then you'll be sorely disappointed in what you get, because sound will still be poor.


Thanks again!
So it seems pretty clear - Sony or Canon. I guess the only way around it is to try both and see what I prefer in hand.
Sony seems more compact and better for portability, Canon seems better for stills.
Recording though - I THINK Canon is better for me. MP4 @1080p 60FPS. Whereas the Sony, like mine, again, I THINK is MP4 up to 30FPS @ 1080P and then AVCHD @1080P @ 60FPS (which would mean I would mean I would opt for the canon any day of the week, as I sometimes upload the files without any editing)


----------



## Totally Dubbed

Thanks for the help guys. Got the G16 in my hand.
Reasons were so simple:
Sony rx1000, didn't do macro all that well, reminded me of my hx9v.
More than anything, it didn't do 60fps in mp4 at 1080p. It did do it in avchd, but I don't want that.
Looked at the Canon sp120 too, wasn't as impressed as the g16. It performed very well, but preferred the g16 lens and extra functionalities








Slightly heavier though, which is a shame. Time for testing!
If I don't like it, I'll just return it lol.
Paid £335 for the camera. I get £40 cashback from canon, gives me the camera at £295.
Also went for a 3yr warranty (was very impressed last time around with my sony's repair) so paid £65 on top for 3yrs warranty.
Going to buy an additional battery and 60mbps / 16/32gb sandisk card too


----------



## hokiealumnus

Seems like you got a solid deal on a very nice camera. Hope you enjoy it!


----------



## Totally Dubbed

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hokiealumnus*
> 
> Seems like you got a solid deal on a very nice camera. Hope you enjoy it!


Yup - already taking beautiful shots - going to test the recording capabilities in a bit - I can hear lens noise - that's the only problem I've noted so far.
Other than that, sensational!


Spoiler: Pics!












What's amazing me is the auto focus and how CLOSE I can get to the subject - that Asus SLI thing was literally 2cm away from the lens


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Totally Dubbed*
> 
> Yup - already taking beautiful shots - going to test the recording capabilities in a bit - I can hear lens noise - that's the only problem I've noted so far.
> Other than that, sensational!


The noise you mention coming from the lens could be the image stabilisation (IS) system. If it's in the lens on the G16 there will be element inside the lens that moves a bit to counteract any movement that the camera is subjected to.


----------



## Totally Dubbed

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> The noise you mention coming from the lens could be the image stabilisation (IS) system. If it's in the lens on the G16 there will be element inside the lens that moves a bit to counteract any movement that the camera is subjected to.


Ah it's not that, but I know what you're talking about, that's a small "auto focus" sound - as you said for the IS.
I'm talking about physical lens zoom. "zzzzzeeeee" - I used to think it would be a big deal, but it isn't for me. Just something to note.


----------



## Scott1541

Don't think I've ever used a camera with a power zoom lens that didn't make a bit of noise while zooming in/out. Even a few of the lenses for my DSLR make a little bit of noise while zooming, and they're manual zoom


----------



## Totally Dubbed

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> Don't think I've ever used a camera with a power zoom lens that didn't make a bit of noise while zooming in/out. Even a few of the lenses for my DSLR make a little bit of noise while zooming, and they're manual zoom


yup! The IS does make a little noise - but weirdly enough, even after disabling it.

In other news ERMAAAGAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAADDD 60FPS @1080P NOM NOM NOM NOM:



Unlisted video.


----------



## Totally Dubbed

Boom first noted problem with recording - make sure you make it centred AF - or else this happens:
Multi AiAF :


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Turn it to centred AF only:


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











Shame I quite liked my first freestyle









Boom - love it







!
Love the camera all-round.




And here's a low-light shot:


----------



## boogschd

:heh: cool!


----------



## Totally Dubbed

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boogschd*
> 
> :heh: cool!


Thanks


----------



## Totally Dubbed

Hey guys - so an update on the Canon G16 - one thing I've noticed is that in comparison to the Sony, there's quite a lot of "background noise" with the camera. With or without wind-noise reduction, especially over my Sony HX9V.
I really love the camera, but this background "static noise" and the constant "re-focusing-esk noise" is keeping me on the edge.
I should say the sound quality is extremely good though.

Any pointers?

Trying to google around, all I found was this:
"Audio quality is a bit of a mixed bag. Voices and general ambiances are reproduced very well-the humming of the little train set and the tinkling of the music box from our video test scene sound very pleasant. However, the G16 has trouble telling left from right, and vice versa. Another problem is that sound quality probably seems so nice because the signal from the mics is amplified a little too much. As a result, you get a whooshy hissing noise in the background of everything. And an extra layer of unwanted noise gets added as soon as the lens moves. This can sound invasive in quieter scenes and is still present in livelier situations ... and that's when filming in our perfectly still, wind-free test lab!"

http://www.digitalversus.com/digital-camera/canon-powershot-g16-p17028/test.html


----------



## TUDJ

Didn't everyone in this thread tell you this would be the case without an external recording setup?


----------



## ace8uk

Well, you kind of just bought the camera straight away without really asking anyone on here what they thought of it. You got some advice, I'm not entirely sure what you want from people. The review you found also answered your question about the noise, the amplification of the mic in the camera means it's very sensitive to background noise. Again, I'm not sure what you want people to do given that you've already purchased the camera.


----------



## Scott1541

It's a camera, built-in microphones are almost an afterthought.
Canon probably don't want to spend loads putting better microphones in them when they'll probably still be outperformed by a £20 shotgun mic.


----------



## Totally Dubbed

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ace8uk*
> 
> Well, you kind of just bought the camera straight away without really asking anyone on here what they thought of it. You got some advice, I'm not entirely sure what you want from people. The review you found also answered your question about the noise, the amplification of the mic in the camera means it's very sensitive to background noise. Again, I'm not sure what you want people to do given that you've already purchased the camera.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> It's a camera, built-in microphones are almost an afterthought.
> Canon probably don't want to spend loads putting better microphones in them when they'll probably still be outperformed by a £20 shotgun mic.


alright - I'll just see what I'll do.
Might try the Sony RX100 see how the recording is on that - and sacrifice MP4 for AVCHD.

And for the record (pun intended) - the mic is actually very good, but it's just over compensating for recordings.


----------



## kbros

Just buy an external mic, any point and shoot you get is going to have a fairly bad microphone. Get an external one and you won't be disappointed, forget all the returning nonsense. If you like the way the camera does VIDEO, keep it, then get a better mic.


----------



## Totally Dubbed

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> Just buy an external mic, any point and shoot you get is going to have a fairly bad microphone. Get an external one and you won't be disappointed, forget all the returning nonsense. If you like the way the camera does VIDEO, keep it, then get a better mic.


apparently it doesn't support an external mic?


----------



## TUDJ




----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Totally Dubbed*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *TUDJ*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> you know you aren't helpful at all right?
Click to expand...

You don't need to plug in an external mic into the camera...you cut the sound and video together in post. 

Have you never seen how they do it in movies? http://mentalfloss.com/article/31781/why-do-they-click-board-thing-filming-movie-scene


----------



## Totally Dubbed

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> You don't need to plug in an external mic into the camera...you cut the sound and video together in post.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Have you never seen how they do it in movies? http://mentalfloss.com/article/31781/why-do-they-click-board-thing-filming-movie-scene


Yeah I know that - I do it all the time for dance videos, but I don't want to spend more time editing/rendering - again, as stated previously.
I do direct uploads to YouTube - with no editing.
Actually takes tons more thought and skill to do a 1 take video, over the edited videos people usually publish. Quite proud of the 1 take videos and direct uploads - actually shows the product as a consumer and shows I actually know the products I'm talking about.

I only edit tech video if they need to be (ie headset reviews - for recording tests or software recordings).
So no, I don't want to have to do editing and/or buy a mic for my PC. I'm asking if there's a plug on mic (as there was the option for the Sony HX9V).

Since yesterday did quite a lot of research on the Sony RX100 - and despite having good photos, recording wise it's not that great either.


----------



## ace8uk

You won't get decent audio quality from an on board mic like that, you just won't. If it's only going to be for unedited, one take videos, then I don't see what the problem is as every other solution that fits within your requirements is going to have similar sacrifices in regards to microphone quality.


----------



## Conspiracy

i know i said i was done with this thread. but this video thing is HILARIOUS. much entertainment so wow. totally dubbed, for someone that seems to know so much you are so helpless and unwilling to take advice and help from others. and on that note i disappear again again into the shadows

and no im not chiming in on this video discussion i got tagged once already and im glad i ordered that 20' pole on B&H because 10' just isnt far enough away from this epic video fail









ill chime in with one thing since i have been shooting and editing video kinda sorta professionally for the past 6ish years. syncing sound in post takes all of 2 seconds there is absolutely zero extra work involved so your argument over creating extra work for yourself when you say you sync sound in post all the time has provided me the best laugh of the day and i thank you sir


----------



## Totally Dubbed

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ace8uk*
> 
> You won't get decent audio quality from an on board mic like that, you just won't. If it's only going to be for unedited, one take videos, then I don't see what the problem is as every other solution that fits within your requirements is going to have similar sacrifices in regards to microphone quality.


The argument would be valid, if it weren't for my Sony HX9V...again....it's like I keep repeating myself.
Looks like it was a mistake posting in this thread - and with that, I'll be off.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> i know i said i was done with this thread. but this video thing is HILARIOUS. much entertainment so wow. totally dubbed, for someone that seems to know so much you are so helpless and unwilling to take advice and help from others. and on that note i disappear again again into the shadows
> 
> and no im not chiming in on this video discussion i got tagged once already and im glad i ordered that 20' pole on B&H because 10' just isnt far enough away from this epic video fail
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ill chime in with one thing since i have been shooting and editing video kinda sorta professionally for the past 6ish years. syncing sound in post takes all of 2 seconds there is absolutely zero extra work involved so your argument over creating extra work for yourself when you say you sync sound in post all the time has provided me the best laugh of the day and i thank you sir


maybe you don't understand the concept of direct upload and/or rendering- but it's fine, wouldn't have expected anything less from someone who finds it "hilarious". to talk about video quality about a camera - praise the lord that's blasphemy...








No worries, providing a smile and helping people is something I do daily, unlike trolling and being unhelpful as some have been in this thread towards my concerns/questions.

That doesn't go to everyone, far from it. Just some in this thread have been as useful as my pen hitting a floor..


----------



## Magical Eskimo

I guess with anything audio/visual, it gets to a point where if you want something to a certain standard you have to make that decision on whether you want to compromise on something, or take it to the next level which may not be what you wanted to do but you have to in order to achieve the results you want.


----------



## Totally Dubbed

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> I guess with anything audio/visual, it gets to a point where if you want something to a certain standard you have to make that decision on whether you want to compromise on something, or take it to the next level which may not be what you wanted to do but you have to in order to achieve the results you want.


Yeah I know - I guess you can't win at everything - just really seems odd to me that a 3yr old camera has less static sound than a new camera would do. Then in terms of external audio - it doesn't support it - meaning the only way around it would be, as I knew from the start - PC audio recording on-top - which is something I've not been wanting to do.
Either way - guess I know now. As far as I can tell there's no better camera that's suited for me right now. Either I wait it out or stick to it and deal with the audio.


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Totally Dubbed*
> 
> thanks - reported.
> Yeah I know - I guess you can't win at everything - just really seems odd to me that a 3yr old camera has less static sound than a new camera would do. Then in terms of external audio - it doesn't support it - meaning the only way around it would be, as I knew from the start - PC audio recording on-top - which is something I've not been wanting to do.
> Either way - guess I know now. As far as I can tell there's no better camera that's suited for me right now. Either I wait it out or stick to it and deal with the audio.


Yeah I think stick with it for now. I do think, though, if and when you go down the route of separate audio recording, get yourself a reasonable USB microphone and I reckon you'll be very pleased with how it turns out and wonder why you didn't earlier


----------



## Totally Dubbed

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> Yeah I think stick with it for now. I do think, though, if and when you go down the route of separate audio recording, get yourself a reasonable USB microphone and I reckon you'll be very pleased with how it turns out and wonder why you didn't earlier


haha yeah wallet mate...my wallet








+rep thanks anyway


----------



## Scott1541

Just been comparing the high ISO performance of my D5100 and someone's D800E. Hi2 (25600) on the D800E looks like ISO1600 on the D5100









Next week I'll try and have a play around with the new girl's D810


----------



## ace8uk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> Just been comparing the high ISO performance of my D5100 and someone's D800E. Hi2 (25600) on the D800E looks like ISO1600 on the D5100
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Next week I'll try and have a play around with the new girl's D810


Don't do it, it'll make you cry and want to rob a bank.


----------



## jackeyjoe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ace8uk*
> 
> Don't do it, it'll make you cry and want to rob a bank.


I played with a D610 in a shop a few weeks ago, it made me want to upgrade already









In other news, saw a D750 in the wild a few days ago, was doing some photos at a school event, a parent has one with a kit lens on it. Made me kinda sad to see that sort of body with a kit lens...


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ace8uk*
> 
> Don't do it, it'll make you cry and want to rob a bank.


It really makes you wonder where they get the money from, one student has a D800E, 24-70 f/2.8 and 28mm f/1.8, and the other has the D810 and 24-70 f/2.8. Neither are professionals, although the girl with the D810's dad is.

I find it quite funny that one of them didn't know how to use half of the functions and we're having to tell them how to use their camera







Doesn't help that the menus are in chinese either.


----------



## ace8uk

A guy in my society had a 5D Mk III with some Zeiss glass, but then he knew how to shoot it and did a lot fashion work on the side.


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *ace8uk*
> 
> Don't do it, it'll make you cry and want to rob a bank.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It really makes you wonder where they get the money from, one student has a D800E, 24-70 f/2.8 and 28mm f/1.8, and the other has the D810 and 24-70 f/2.8. Neither are professionals, although the girl with the D810's dad is.
> 
> I find it quite funny that one of them didn't know how to use half of the functions and we're having to tell them how to use their camera
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Doesn't help that the menus are in chinese either.
Click to expand...

Don't you wonder where students find money for decked out MBPs, even tho what they do with them is FB & typing papers at best?
And then upgrade it 2-3 years down the road? Don't tell me that there aren't hundreds of underutilized & overpriced laptops / tablets etc in every campus for every "underutilized" hi-end DSLR in the same area.

For some those are tools, for most those are toys.
Toys are justified by wants, not by needs.

This is OCN. Covering 95% wants - if that.

As for the D800E/D810s, I won't break a sweat...not before they show me their 14-24 2.8 that goes with it...


----------



## Alpha One

Might want to try a Nikon D5100, excellent camera for both stills and video ( I have shot professional quality films with just that camera as have others) and a decent quality on board mic, but it's always best to record the audio separately and add it in post.

As for the lenses, no one makes better glass than Nikon. Ever.
Fragments, a movie shot with a D5100


----------



## Scott1541

I very rarely use mine for video but I have no complaints about the image quality whatsoever. The only things that annoy me slightly are the size and lack of dedicated buttons for things. I keep a battery grip on mine whenever I'm not using a tripod, so that solves the size problem, and regarding the lack of buttons I just have to put up with going menu diving for whatever options I want.


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> I find it quite funny that one of them didn't know how to use half of the functions and we're having to tell them how to use their camera
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Doesn't help that the menus are in chinese either.


reminds me of the time when i was in ocean park in HK
an old chinese couple asked me how to replace the battery in their 5Dmkii

also met a guy with a d800e + 10.5mm*(DX)* with absolutely no clue on how to use it, he was nice though








we chatted for a bit and i kinda helped him out , i think i set his camera on Aperture priority or something


----------



## kbros

First go at blown out backgrounds, this snow is working wonders lol.

Moto X (1st Gen) by Noah Blalock @noahblalock, on Flickr

https://flic.kr/p/pVeLenSteve loves snow. by Noah Blalock @noahblalock, on Flickr


----------



## hokiealumnus

Really like the MotoX shot.


----------



## ace8uk

Same here, the window sill looks slightly skew-wiff, but other than that it's a really cool shot.


----------



## kbros

Fixed. And thanks guys


----------



## Scott1541

Right, I've got to shoot a charity event tomorrow evening. It's going to be outside in a little shopping centre, and it basically involves decorating a christmas tree with little candle pots, there's supposed to be a few choirs there as well.

The organiser hasn't fold me exactly what she wants shots of but I assume it's just generally covering everything, that's what I did last time I shot for her in may. It's going to be dark so I'm planning to approach this with the 17-50mm and YN-560 II, does this seem about the right way to go? Anyone got any advice for shooting events like this?


----------



## pcfoo

Monopod, and do keep the 50 1.8 handy too.

If you want ambient light, with the flash and slow sync or not, you will have to have long exposures, so the monopod will help tremendously.
Don't be shy of ISO 800-1600 or even 3200. Noisier shots are far better than blurry ones, and you might have blur of all possible reasons: camera miss-focusing, shutter speed being too slow for handheld shots, shutter being too slow to stop motion of ppl doing their thing, DOF being too shallow @ wide open apertures to keep close-up's in focus vs. moving subjects. Switch to burst mode.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> Right, I've got to shoot a charity event tomorrow evening. It's going to be outside in a little shopping centre, and it basically involves decorating a christmas tree with little candle pots, there's supposed to be a few choirs there as well.
> 
> The organiser hasn't fold me exactly what she wants shots of but I assume it's just generally covering everything, that's what I did last time I shot for her in may. It's going to be dark so I'm planning to approach this with the 17-50mm and YN-560 II, does this seem about the right way to go? Anyone got any advice for shooting events like this?


Spray, pray, cry when sorting?


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Spray, pray, cry when sorting?


Yeah, probably







Not sure how many people are going to be there, or exactly where it is in the shopping centre so I can't decide on too much beforehand. I'm going to run everything through ACR afterwards anyway so I can attempt to recover any bad shots. Even though it's for charity I'd like to do a good job since they use photos for promotional purposes and maybe published online too.


----------



## jackeyjoe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> Right, I've got to shoot a charity event tomorrow evening. It's going to be outside in a little shopping centre, and it basically involves decorating a christmas tree with little candle pots, there's supposed to be a few choirs there as well.
> 
> The organiser hasn't fold me exactly what she wants shots of but I assume it's just generally covering everything, that's what I did last time I shot for her in may. It's going to be dark so I'm planning to approach this with the 17-50mm and YN-560 II, does this seem about the right way to go? Anyone got any advice for shooting events like this?


I've had reasonable success with my 50mm in low light, although it's not ideal you can usually get something for your camera to focus on, and try to use ambient light as best as possible. It saves you always trying to find something to bounce your flash off









Here are a few I took just with ambient light a few months ago:
https://flic.kr/p/oDtKmm
https://flic.kr/p/oDqCB2
Those are the only two I can post, but I think you get the point. Most events will have lights of some description around, use them to your advantage


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jackeyjoe*
> 
> I've had reasonable success with my 50mm in low light, although it's not ideal you can usually get something for your camera to focus on, and try to use ambient light as best as possible. It saves you always trying to find something to bounce your flash off


I don't think 50mm will be wide enough, so I'll put the 35mm in my bag as well and make the choice when I'm on location









@pcfoo I don't have a monopod so I'll have to just have to bump up the ISO. I've used the 17-50 at night in a fairly well lit area at ISO 1600, with shutter speeds about 1/20th. I'll carry out noise reduction in post anyway so I'm not afraid to put it up to 3200, or even 6400.


----------



## Sean Webster

Just remember with shutter speeds being low like you stated 1/20th, that it will most likely introduce motion blur.


----------



## pcfoo

If you don't have a monopod and don't care to drop $15 for one (I would), google "string monopod" or "stringpod" and see a pretty effective diy hack for one.
Yes, it is vastly better than nothing for camera shake.
No, it will not help with all the other reasons blurriness can occur in your images as described above.


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> If you don't have a monopod and don't care to drop $15 for one (I would), google "string monopod" or "stringpod" and see a pretty effective diy hack for one.
> Yes, it is vastly better than nothing for camera shake.
> No, it will not help with all the other reasons blurriness can occur in your images as described above.


haha genius!


----------



## Totally Dubbed

Just thought to update here - for those that potentially care:
I'm going to get a full refund on the Canon G16 - the recording background noise was sensationally distracting. Therefore the G16 would have only been used for photos and at that rate, not worth £300 for me.

I'm back on the hunt - I'm all ears - here's the requirements, in order:

£350 max (I can purchase from the states too, as I'll be going there in late December)
Portable - should be able to take it on-the-go - no DSLR size camera - they're too bulky
Has to be able to do MP4 1080P 60FPS
Needs to have GOOD/excellent recording sound quality (I don't mind a separate mic ON the camera, that I can buy additionally, but has to be included in that price quotation of £350)
Has to have pop-up/integrated flash
Removable battery and SD card
Must be able to take good quality pictures - preferably with an integrated lens, so that I can zoom in/out easily in video recordings
In other news - I bought these two items and they're both sensational (especially for the price):
-Hama Star 61 Tripod - £17
-SanDisk Extreme SDHC 32 GB UHS-I U3 Memory Card 60 MB/s - £23


----------



## Magical Eskimo

I've been searching but I don't really know of anything that fits the criteria.

The only thing I could think of was a Nikon D3300 and an external microphone, but you wanted compact and it would be a little over the budget (although it may not be in the US)


----------



## Totally Dubbed

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> I've been searching but I don't really know of anything that fits the criteria.
> 
> The only thing I could think of was a Nikon D3300 and an external microphone, but you wanted compact and it would be a little over the budget (although it may not be in the US)


Yeah - I like having a compact camera - as it's easy to take around.
If it were not to be "compact" - would that open the criteria more (as in other camera's like the D3300)?

I should also say I'm in no rush - I don't mind waiting till Jan2015 (Maybe there will be newer cameras about?)

+rep for the pointer


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Totally Dubbed*
> 
> Yeah - I like having a compact camera - as it's easy to take around.
> If it were not to be "compact" - would that open the criteria more (as in other camera's like the D3300)?
> 
> I should also say I'm in no rush - I don't mind waiting till Jan2015 (Maybe there will be newer cameras about?)
> 
> +rep for the pointer


Well there's cameras in-between SLRs and compact, like the Canon EOS M and DSLR bridge cameras - which I just googled and found this http://snapsort.com/cameras/Sony-Cyber-shot-DSC-HX400V-specs and literally as I'm writing this realised that camera has external mic support. Maybe some food for thought


----------



## Totally Dubbed

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> Well there's cameras in-between SLRs and compact, like the Canon EOS M and DSLR bridge cameras - which I just googled and found this http://snapsort.com/cameras/Sony-Cyber-shot-DSC-HX400V-specs and literally as I'm writing this realised that camera has external mic support. Maybe some food for thought


I remember looking at that - some sites say 50FPS and not 60FPS?
Also - these cameras does the zoom work automatically (via a button) or manually? As manual zoom is a little pain to use I must say (for videos)

On another note is AVCHD a sony "thing"? All their cameras have it for some reason.


----------



## MrStrat007

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Totally Dubbed*
> 
> Yeah - I like having a compact camera - as it's easy to take around.
> If it were not to be "compact" - would that open the criteria more (as in other camera's like the D3300)?
> 
> I should also say I'm in no rush - I don't mind waiting till Jan2015 (Maybe there will be newer cameras about?)
> 
> +rep for the pointer


If you don't mind sacrificing a bit on size, an entry-level DSLR like the Nikon D3300 can shoot 1080p/60 in MPEG-4/H.264 format (D3300 product page. It also supports a 3.5mm external microphone that can be attached, and still image quality will be better than a point and shoot. One thing to note with (at least the Nikon) Entry-level DSLR's is that their video record time is limited to about 20 minutes. Canon has some entry-level DSLR's as well, but as far as I can tell they are limited to 1080P/30 and .MOV file type. For a sample of the D3300 video capabilities, see here: dpreview: Nikon D3300

HOWEVER. I'm not sure about cost differences across the pond or in the US (Canadian here, we get somewhat gouged as compared to our American neighbors), but the D3300 seems to be selling for about $499-549USD depending on the retailer, which is about ~320-350 GBP.

With all that said, there may very well be compact options out there as well that would serve your purpose (I personally don't have any experience with compact cameras, only my Nikon D5300 and some other DSLR's), and I'm sure others will chime in with some options. If you do consider the Nikon or another entry-level dslr for whatever reason, go to a store and try holding one first and make sure it feels good in your hands. It meets most of your criteria but I believe that the size will be the determining factor for you - whether you find it too big to be portable or not, and at what cost you can get it for.

Personally, I carried a D5000 around London for 4 days and didn't find it's size prohibitive (slung the strap across the shoulders, lens tucked under my arm with cap on when not shooting), but thats just my opinion.

Edit: as Magical Eskimo pointed out, there are cameras in between "compact" and DSLR that might work for you as well








Edit 2: SP&G


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Totally Dubbed*
> 
> I remember looking at that - some sites say 50FPS and not 60FPS?
> Also - these cameras does the zoom work automatically (via a button) or manually? As manual zoom is a little pain to use I must say (for videos)
> 
> On another note is AVCHD a sony "thing"? All their cameras have it for some reason.


I couldn't comment on the details unfortuantely, but it looks like it zooms like a compact camera with the little switch on the shutter button


----------



## Totally Dubbed

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrStrat007*
> 
> If you don't mind sacrificing a bit on size, an entry-level DSLR like the Nikon D3300 can shoot 1080p/60 in MPEG-4/H.264 format (D3300 product page. It also supports a 3.5mm external microphone that can be attached, and still image quality will be better than a point and shoot. One thing to note with (at least the Nikon) Entry-level DSLR's is that their video record time is limited to about 20 minutes. Canon has some entry-level DSLR's as well, but as far as I can tell they are limited to 1080P/30 and .MOV file type. For a sample of the D3300 video capabilities, see here: dpreview: Nikon D3300
> 
> HOWEVER. I'm not sure about cost differences across the pond or in the US (Canadian here, we get somewhat gouged as compared to our American neighbors), but the D3300 seems to be selling for about $499-549USD depending on the retailer, which is about ~320-350 GBP.
> 
> With all that said, there may very well be compact options out there as well that would serve your purpose (I personally don't have any experience with compact cameras, only my Nikon D5300 and some other DSLR's), and I'm sure others will chime in with some options. If you do consider the Nikon or another entry-level dslr for whatever reason, go to a store and try holding one first and make sure it feels good in your hands. It meets most of your criteria but I believe that the size will be the determining factor for you - whether you find it too big to be portable or not, and at what cost you can get it for.
> 
> Personally, I carried a D5000 around London for 4 days and didn't find it's size prohibitive (slung the strap across the shoulders, lens tucked under my arm with cap on when not shooting), but thats just my opinion.
> 
> Edit: as Magical Eskimo pointed out, there are cameras in between "compact" and DSLR that might work for you as well
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Edit 2: SP&G


Thanks for the info +rep - ok I'll do some more digging around!
As for the video limit- it's odd - normally it's 25-27mins - as it's the law. Utterly stupid one, but apparently after that it's considered a camcorder.
Out of curiosity - what mic is a budget mic and good - I read in this thread a "shotgun mic"?

EDIT:
Just been suggested the Panasonic FZ200 as well. Again - same body size
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> I couldn't comment on the details unfortuantely, but it looks like it zooms like a compact camera with the little switch on the shutter button


thanks nonetheless!


----------



## MrStrat007

Dubbed - a shotgun microphone is essentially a highly directional microphone, so it's less likely to pick up noise from sources that aren't in the microphone's path.

To all else, regardless of your personal opinions, this IS the "OCN Camera Thread" and Dubbed's posts are on the topic of cameras. If you don't like them, you aren't obligated to comment on them. Derogatory comments won't get anybody anywhere.

@Dubbed - perhaps your own thread would be advisable and post the link here. I think the general consensus is onboard sound is crap no matter how you spin it and a shotgun mic would be recommended with whatever camera supports one. Personally I don't think you'll find a compact that meets all those criteria without an external mic or going to entry level dslr but I could be wrong.

If anybody else has constructive recommendations, I'm sure they will be welcomed. Try to keep an OPEN mind (all of you).

Keep the peace people please and thanks. Most of us don't come here to read about fights; we have enough of those in RL as it is.


----------



## mav451

Dubbed - this thread and OCN in general is dominated towards Canikon talk. You will find a rare m43 user, like me, but it's going to be difficult to have a productive conversation here.
I would strongly advise a separate thread b/c this thread is unofficially a DSLR thread haha.

I can discuss further in PMs, but if you want enthusiast compact/m43 discussion, you will find better forums elsewhere.


----------



## ace8uk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mav451*
> 
> Dubbed - this thread and OCN in general is dominated towards Canikon talk. You will find a rare m43 user, like me, but it's going to be difficult to have a productive conversation here.
> I would strongly advise a separate thread b/c this thread is unofficially a DSLR thread haha.
> 
> I can discuss further in PMs, but if you want enthusiast compact/m43 discussion, you will find better forums elsewhere.


I disagree partially, there are people here who shoot on a variety of different formats and there is a wealth of knowledge. You can only advise a person so much, if they choose not to listen then it's entirely up to them.

Where I do agree is finding help elsewhere, as the technical inclination of OCN means people tend to worry a little too much about the nitty gritty technical stuff when it comes to equipment, and it's not as easy as that when it comes to photography/cinematography.

I have little else of value to contribute to the current discussion because I've given my opinion already. However, to reiterate my point, a £350 system is going to have sacrifices. You'll find something that works very well, but it won't be perfect, the best thing about this field is that you don't need the best equipment to achieve the best results. I am aware that Panasonic and Sony mirrorless systems are very highly regarded for their video, and I know that Sony lenses have a useful auto zoom feature that helps with smoothness.


----------



## Scott1541

Shot that event, went quite well. I thought I was going to be the only photog there since I was asked to come by the organiser, but there was a pro there shooting for the shopping centre. He was using a pair of 1D Mk IVs, one with 70-200 and one with a wide zoom and flashgun.

I had a couple of short conversations with him and he seemed alright. He was useful for getting ideas for shots, and forcing me to up my game a bit because of the competition


----------



## Totally Dubbed

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrStrat007*
> 
> Dubbed - a shotgun microphone is essentially a highly directional microphone, so it's less likely to pick up noise from sources that aren't in the microphone's path.
> 
> To all else, regardless of your personal opinions, this IS the "OCN Camera Thread" and Dubbed's posts are on the topic of cameras. If you don't like them, you aren't obligated to comment on them. Derogatory comments won't get anybody anywhere.
> 
> @Dubbed - perhaps your own thread would be advisable and post the link here. I think the general consensus is onboard sound is crap no matter how you spin it and a shotgun mic would be recommended with whatever camera supports one. Personally I don't think you'll find a compact that meets all those criteria without an external mic or going to entry level dslr but I could be wrong.
> 
> If anybody else has constructive recommendations, I'm sure they will be welcomed. Try to keep an OPEN mind (all of you).
> 
> Keep the peace people please and thanks. Most of us don't come here to read about fights; we have enough of those in RL as it is. I'm no mod, but I have a very low tolerance for BS.


yeah I find it extremely hard to think people are helping by posting such things. A few people, including yourself have been very helpful. I must say if it wasn't for the g16s background noise, I would still keep it. Sound quality was nice and crisp actually








Either way, to get what I want it seems like I'll have to go down the bridge route, which isn't something I would particularly do. I'll have to see in store, if I like the size, but can already feel that it won't be 'for me' - let's see who knows!
Thanks for the pointers anyway, and it's a shame that people would rather troll or spam rather than actually help. I take all advice on board, just the fact that most advice is like what you see when trying to build a pc:
'i want a gaming pc at X budget'
'you're an idiot, you can't do that. Here's an m atx suggestion that's also 2x your budget and runs 4 monitors, not the single one you wanted' lol








I guess I'll have to make some sacrifices. Might mean that I don't invest now and just wait another year to see what happens.
Compact cameras are getting a lot better nowadays, and it shouldn't be long till what I want comes out. I just find it hard to believe it isn't exactly out yet








To me it looks like where the innovation lies, is in the compact scene (ie when the Sony nex line came out) it's all very interesting really


----------



## Sean Webster

So....anyone caught up in that BW challenge going around? I have to do it now...


----------



## Totally Dubbed

Right fun fact for everyone:
AVCHD actually uploads directly to YouTube (tried it this morning with my current camera) - bit surprised to be honest. Last time I tried it was rejected.
This opens more doors for my camera choices now. Be it a bridge camera or a compact

EDIT:
I know I'm being a real pain....but...couldn't resist - Sony Alpha A5100 went for £300 on amazon lightning deal. If I don't like it I'll return it








Looks like a better option than the RX100 either way, but still - let's see. If that fails (as the RX100 would be similar) - I'll know for sure to wait more time....but that price....was too tempting








http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B00MTZI376?psc=1&redirect=true&ref_=oh_aui_detailpage_o00_s00


----------



## TUDJ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> So....anyone caught up in that BW challenge going around? I have to do it now...


I was nominated but it wasn't explained very well. I think the chain of people before me kind of distorted the idea of it. I assumed it was to go and and capture a new image each day whereas they were simply posting photos they'd taken previously, I followed their lead as I was too busy to pick my camera up


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TUDJ*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> So....anyone caught up in that BW challenge going around? I have to do it now...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I was nominated but it wasn't explained very well. I think the chain of people before me kind of distorted the idea of it. I assumed it was to go and and capture a new image each day whereas they were simply posting photos they'd taken previously, I followed their lead as I was too busy to pick my camera up
Click to expand...

Yea, you're supposed to take a new pic each day and, from what i've seen, nominate a new person every day to do the challenge. lol


----------



## TUDJ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Yea, you're supposed to take a new pic each day and, from what i've seen, nominate a new person every day to do the challenge. lol


It did seem a little pointless and not much of a challenge







I'm interested to see what you come up with!


----------



## Gobigorgohome

Nikon d5200 with 18-55 vr ii for 520 USD, good buy? Thinking of getting a stand for it as well, if i like photography i will get better lenses along the way.
The nikon d5300 is 870 USD with either the 18-55 or 18-105.

The less money spent the better, is the d5300 worth that much more than the d5200? I do not care for GPS and built-in wifi, but the d5300 handles low light better, right?

I just want good image quality, video performance or FPS does not matter too much, only going to be used for stills.


----------



## MrStrat007

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gobigorgohome*
> 
> Nikon d5200 with 18-55 vr ii for 520 USD, good buy? Thinking of getting a stand for it as well, if i like photography i will get better lenses along the way.
> The nikon d5300 is 870 USD with either the 18-55 or 18-105.
> 
> The less money spent the better, is the d5300 worth that much more than the d5200? I do not care for GPS and built-in wifi, but the d5300 handles low light better, right?
> 
> I just want good image quality, video performance or FPS does not matter too much, only going to be used for stills.


I believe*** when my parents got me a D5300 for my birthday that the camera store guy told them the only reason for getting the D5300 over the 5200 was wifi/GPS/better video performance iirc. I could be wrong though, it was in July


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrStrat007*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Gobigorgohome*
> 
> Nikon d5200 with 18-55 vr ii for 520 USD, good buy? Thinking of getting a stand for it as well, if i like photography i will get better lenses along the way.
> The nikon d5300 is 870 USD with either the 18-55 or 18-105.
> 
> The less money spent the better, is the d5300 worth that much more than the d5200? I do not care for GPS and built-in wifi, but the d5300 handles low light better, right?
> 
> I just want good image quality, video performance or FPS does not matter too much, only going to be used for stills.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I believe*** when my parents got me a D5300 for my birthday that the camera store guy told them the only reason for getting the D5300 over the 5200 was wifi/GPS/better video performance iirc. I could be wrong though, it was in July
Click to expand...

meh on all those features. the one that really matters is they removed the low pass filter for better IQ so your pictures SOOC are actually sharp and dont have to be sharpened in post


----------



## Dimaggio1103

Is a Canon t5 for 300 bones a good price? or can better be had for that price?


----------



## Gobigorgohome

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrStrat007*
> 
> I believe*** when my parents got me a D5300 for my birthday that the camera store guy told them the only reason for getting the D5300 over the 5200 was wifi/GPS/better video performance iirc. I could be wrong though, it was in July


Yeah, I guess it can be seen that way, I kind of see it that way too. Even though it is pretty old it seems to be a good buy for that price.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> meh on all those features. the one that really matters is they removed the low pass filter for better IQ so your pictures SOOC are actually sharp and dont have to be sharpened in post


Yes, is the low pass filter the same as the anti alazing filter? Is not the anti alazing filter removed on the D5300 as well?

Even though, the question is, is the low pass filter worth 250 USD(?) ... the D5300 just seems to be "too expensive for what I get" over the D5200.


----------



## Conspiracy

D5200 vs D5300

D5200 = inbody motor

D5300 = no low pass filter AND no in body motor.

the in body motor is kind of a nice feature but not required


----------



## Gobigorgohome

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> D5200 vs D5300
> 
> D5200 = inbody motor
> 
> D5300 = no low pass filter AND no in body motor.
> 
> the in body motor is kind of a nice feature but not required


Okay, thank you very much. Nikon D5200 it is.


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> D5200 vs D5300
> 
> D5200 = inbody motor
> 
> D5300 = no low pass filter AND no in body motor.
> 
> the in body motor is kind of a nice feature but not required


The D5200 never had an AF motor.

Actually the D5XXX series and below didn't have the AF motor.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aksthem1*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> D5200 vs D5300
> 
> D5200 = inbody motor
> 
> D5300 = no low pass filter AND no in body motor.
> 
> the in body motor is kind of a nice feature but not required
> 
> 
> 
> The D5200 never had an AF motor.
> 
> Actually the D5XXX series and below didn't have the AF motor.
Click to expand...

guess i got mixed up lol. who cares about nikon anyway trolol


----------



## Sean Webster

^ Agreed, Nikon is for those who like baby hippos anyways.


----------



## G33K

Got a pretty sweet birthday present today




I excitedly picked up some Fujicolor 200 to experiment with it already









Also, renting a 7d Mk II around Christmas time


----------



## Conspiracy

nice present!!!


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> ^ Agreed, Nikon is for those who like baby hippos anyways.


is that a good thing or a bad thing?


----------



## kbros

I would love to be a baby hippo.


----------



## DizZz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> I would love to be a baby hippo.


----------



## Totally Dubbed

Just thought to share that Canon G16 recording background noise problem - I've now gotten a full refund for it:

Skip to 1:00 to hear it - it's extremely obvious, even through my Sony HX9V mics:


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DizZz*


----------



## Gobigorgohome

Baby hippo or whatever, the price on the D5200 is goooooood in Norway, cheapest I have seen this far.









Pulled the trigger on the D5200 with a "kit" with remote releaser, camera bag, memory card, D5200 with 18-55 VR, also bought two tripods, some strap, UV-filter and the cheap WU-1a (Yeah, Wifi, still 55 USD I can waste that). Debated on getting another lens too, but I can buy that later if I want. Wish me luck!









Maybe you guys can explain to me what this "lightroom" really is, lots of people seems to be using this for stills of computers and so on.


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gobigorgohome*
> 
> Baby hippo or whatever, the price on the D5200 is goooooood in Norway, cheapest I have seen this far.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pulled the trigger on the D5200 with a "kit" with remote releaser, camera bag, memory card, D5200 with 18-55 VR, also bought two tripods, some strap, UV-filter and the cheap WU-1a (Yeah, Wifi, still 55 USD I can waste that). Debated on getting another lens too, but I can buy that later if I want. Wish me luck!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe you guys can explain to me what this "lightroom" really is, lots of people seems to be using this for stills of computers and so on.


Lightroom is a great piece of photo editing software from Adobe http://www.adobe.com/uk/products/photoshop-lightroom.html


----------



## Gobigorgohome

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> Lightroom is a great piece of photo editing software from Adobe http://www.adobe.com/uk/products/photoshop-lightroom.html


Okay, great, looks like I am going to need that, not too expensive either. Have been looking at "Jared Polins" youtube videos where he uses that program for his editing and it seems like a good program.







Appreciate it!

Anyway, I got the "Andersson CAT 2.0" and "König TRIPOD40", is this okay for the D5200? Also, the UV-filter, is that necessary to use whenever I am outside taking pictures?


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gobigorgohome*
> 
> Okay, great, looks like I am going to need that, not too expensive either. Have been looking at "Jared Polins" youtube videos where he uses that program for his editing and it seems like a good program.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Appreciate it!
> 
> Anyway, I got the "Andersson CAT 2.0" and "König TRIPOD40", is this okay for the D5200? Also, the UV-filter, is that necessary to use whenever I am outside taking pictures?


UV filters are not necessary what-so-ever, you don't need them for digital photography. The only reason to use one is to protect your lens if you're clumsy like me







Cheap UV filters will degrade image quality slightly too, all of mine are made by a reputable company, such as Hoya.

Both of those tripods look like they'll do the job, why did you buy them both though? You can only use one at once


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *G33K*
> 
> Got a pretty sweet birthday present today
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I excitedly picked up some Fujicolor 200 to experiment with it already
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also, renting a 7d Mk II around Christmas time


Nice.
I gambled on a lil present for myself too ...




Appears to be working pretty good, tho the 1st film is not out of it yet...I chose Ilford XP-2 400, as I didn't want to go for "real" B&W - CN41 is easier and cheaper to develop locally.
There is some haze in the lens (minor fungus) but for $15 you cannot go wrong...the cost of film, the development of that 1st roll and the special battery will end up costing more! So would any kind of "lomo" camera that would be inferior in most ways. Worst case, it will stay on my shelf as part of photographic history =)


----------



## Gobigorgohome

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> UV filters are not necessary what-so-ever, you don't need them for digital photography. The only reason to use one is to protect your lens if you're clumsy like me
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cheap UV filters will degrade image quality slightly too, all of mine are made by a reputable company, such as Hoya.
> 
> Both of those tripods look like they'll do the job, why did you buy them both though? You can only use one at once


The uv-filter is Andersson (i do not know if that is good or not). Bought both tripods because one of them were 12 usd on sale, they both had gotten good critiqe on the site where i bought it so i figured why not. Better safe than sorry.


----------



## Eggs and bacon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Nice.
> I gambled on a lil present for myself too ...
> 
> snip
> 
> Appears to be working pretty good, tho the 1st film is not out of it yet...I chose Ilford XP-2 400, as I didn't want to go for "real" B&W - CN41 is easier and cheaper to develop locally.
> There is some haze in the lens (minor fungus) but for $15 you cannot go wrong...the cost of film, the development of that 1st roll and the special battery will end up costing more! So would any kind of "lomo" camera that would be inferior in most ways. Worst case, it will stay on my shelf as part of photographic history =)


Nice camera, I love the look of old Japanese rangefinders.


----------



## Scott1541

I'd like to get a 35mm rangefinder. I used to have a FED 2 years ago that my grandad gave to me, but I was about 8 at the time and didn't care much for photography, so I don't know what happened to it. It probably got sold at a carboot sale


----------



## kbros

Every time I see an old rangefinder I long even more for a Fuji X100.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> Every time I see an old rangefinder I long even more for a Fuji X100.


My good friend has one. I used it...i don't like it lol. It is cool and all, but idk. I can't get used to the EVF.


----------



## pcfoo

The most serious issue with most "serious" 35mm RF, is the size. Yes, it is smaller than most SLRs, but not "that small".
If you want a really small and "low key" street shooter, the Electro 35 is not really offering that. It is actually not smaller than my AE-1, or a Nikon FM/FE etc with a 50mm 1.8. It is seriously more quiet tho, as the shutter does nothing but a subtle mechanical "tick" (or two, if the exposure is long enough for you to notice both opening and closing). No mirror clapping tho.








The EOS M has also a louder shutter.



If you want a really small 35mm RF, I think your best bet would be a Canon Canonet (or a very basic Oly 35RC). There are many available in eBay. Almost all are wearing great 40mm lenses. There are various models, the 28, the 19 and the 17. This is the maximum aperture for the lens, so the 28 is a 40 f/2.8, the 17 a f/1.7 etc. Later models added the QL (quick loading) designation, but pretty much the same story.

The QL17 is the most sought after model, and a great camera, but a tad pricey in good condition. The issue is that even with slow film, the maximum shutter speed of 1/500s is too slow for you to take advantage of the faster aperture. This is unfortunately the case with the Electro 35, the Olympus 35RC and most of the cheap RFs too. 1/500s max shutter speed.

So, regardless of which one you pick, you will end up shooting @ f/8-11 most of your shots, which is actually the proper way to go for most street photography, where trying to focus with shallow DOF - unless you are VERY competent and/or lucky - will probably end up with a miss-focused or completely missed opportunity. Most of the lenses are pretty sharp at these apertures, and the end result is far superior than any "lomo" / Holga etc alternative. Probably cheaper too.


"Peek a boo"
EOS M + 22mm EF-M Los Angeles, DT. "Lunch break shot".
Missed focus example - the camera was focused @ 7-10ft, but the aperture @ f/3.5 was not enough to render the kid sharp. Not completely lost image, but...see how sharp the lady is 20ft away

Most street photographers pre-focus their RFs (or SLRs) @ 2-3m (6-10ft) and use a small aperture (f/8~16) to make sure pretty much anything from 1.5m to 10m is in acceptable focus, and struggle with figuring out their framing and timing instead of the technical crap.

That's where the EOS M is sluggish ( you have to turn it to MF, then "guestimate" the focus through the screen, then make sure you don't touch the overly soft focusing ring - it is cumbersome and won't stay "put" should you turn it off), despite having an obvious advantage in naturally wider DOF for the same aperture (uses a much wider lens in "real" mm) and of course it is miles ahead in high ISO performance, offering less grain @ ISO 1600 than many 400-600 films.

But what ISO 400 & 800? We said we shutter is not fast enough, why would we go more than 100?
In most cases, along with decent DOF for focusing to be less critical in fast point and shoot scenarios, while shutter speeds slower than 1/125 - 1/250 will probably be to slow to "freeze" this spontaneous action (along with you being to hasty bringing the camera to you eye). So you often load 200 or 400 film to get that, but then you are "stuck" with that for 24-36 frames...my Electro is pretty much forced to be near its max shutter speed during daytime now that I used a 400 film. I really love 1600 ISO film grain, but I knew it would be "too much" not even having 1/1000s cheap SLRs of that era offered. Maybe 400 is "too much", but I knew I wanted to try it with the XP2 that is not available in 200 speed.


"Girl Dancing, waiting for street light"
EOS M + 22mm EF-M Los Angeles, DT, another lunch break shot. Lucky focus f/2.8 & 1/250s example. Shutter is barely fast enough to freeze the girl.


"Transaction"
EOS M + 22mm EF-M Los Angeles, DT. Prefocused hip-shot, f/8 & 1/250s- ISO 250

Meh, I just missed film, and I wanted to give this cute "dinosaur" a try.


----------



## Jixr

I think my Canon 50 1.4 is broken.

I did a small photo job this weekend, and nearly every photo I have is out of focus, or really soft focus, and I never shot wider than 2.8

at least 75% of my photos are out of focus, and I've never shot this poorly in my life.

The photos aren't blurry, so thats not the problem. but I don't know what I did wrong and I feel bad for only having a hand full of images to give to my client. Maybe I'll just return their payment and give them what I can. I'm looking at only about 30 photos out of probably 100 that are salvageable, and most of those are not still what I want. At the least I'll go get some prints made and framed for them.

It could also been that they are young kids, and they move around quite a bit, but I've been reading online about the focus of this lens being very erratic, and I think mine is starting to do the same. :/


----------



## OmarCCX

Yeah I had a friend that bought a used one for $150 because the focus ring stopped working. Fixing it isn't too hard though, if you're patient. Or sell it now and get the Sigma 50 1.4.


----------



## Jixr

I've been really wanting a 30, it just sucks that I did a shoot and most of my pictures are crap.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> I've been really wanting a 30, it just sucks that I did a shoot and most of my pictures are crap.


what was the cause of the pictures being crap? did you gear limit your ability to capture shots the way you visioned them or just one of those shoots where it just didnt work out. we all have shoots where it goes ok but we dont feel like anything came out the way we wanted. good news is im sure you learned from the experience and will improve


----------



## Jixr

Its was just a mix of things not working out, young kids not cooperating with the camera, since the shoot was for a friend, it was hard to get them to listen to me to try to help them get good shots, and that for whatever reason I couldn't get a my 50 to focus half decently.

There was on and off cloud cover too, so there was quite a bit of lighting issues.

If I could I'd use my 70-200 on everything, but on a crop body its just too long for family portrait stuff.

but live an learn, hopefully my friend will still like the photos, and I went ahead and got some prints for them and framed a few ( cheap Ikea frames FTW ) so they feel like they get a little something to make up for the lack of finished photos.

I'm just always disappointed in myself when I charge and its not my best work that I produce.

But yeah, live and learn.

Some photos the AF was on point, like this one


and others its was just slightly off a bit ( and most of them are like this )


----------



## Conspiracy

^ bro i feel your pain. my most recent shoot was my first time ever doing family portraits as a favor for a photog i mentor to help their business working as a family/child photog. her business is doing great but she just had to have me photographer her family. i wasnt at all happy because it was hard working with a 1year old and a 10 year old and my first time shooting my 135L so i was wanting to experiment some. i was also stubborn and though i could use a speedlight/umbrella for fill and then the wind picked up. i got decent enough shots where she was very happy but overall i hated the experience not to mention at the time i edited them on a cheapo computer so some of the edits came out very cold. i have since bought a fancy new monitor to edit on

not every shoot will be a breeze. i found the best experiences for me have been from working as an assistant doing corporate stuff before i actually starting shooting corporate gigs on my own. totally different world though that is a cake walk for me because once you work live televised sports you can pretty much handle the stress of just about any type of gig

unrelated note: POTN is going through a major overhaul and im curious to see what changes they made. its no longer canon exclusive as well btw


----------



## Jixr

yeah I noticed POTN today, was going to ask about my 50 and if its just me or the lens. ( they have a history of AF issues )

And My cousin is asking me about doing a cooperate gig.

I'm kinda hesatant, if its just facebook worthy photos, thats fine, but if they are wanting prints and things ala wedding style, nope nope nope.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> yeah I noticed POTN today, was going to ask about my 50 and if its just me or the lens. ( they have a history of AF issues )
> 
> And My cousin is asking me about doing a cooperate gig.
> 
> I'm kinda hesatant, if its just facebook worthy photos, thats fine, but if they are wanting prints and things ala wedding style, nope nope nope.


which 50 do you have?

dont be scared of corporate gigs. there are different types. even doing work for small business qualifies as corporate in my book. ask them what type of work they need and if it is extremely out of your comfort zone then let them know. if you do not feel like you are equipped with the gear and proper experience to meet their needs there is no shame in telling them. they will respect it more and usually ask what you are comfortable with and find a project to bring you on later.


----------



## Jixr

the canon 50 1.4

I was shooting at 2.8, which I typically never go wider than that.
Its not that part of the subject was out of focus, its everything in the shot is, not sure what the deal was. Seems like I had vaseline smeared over my lens or something.

And i'm not sure of the details of the cooperate gig, if its just a holiday party or something, then thats fine, I can do that kinda stuff all day long, but if its a more formal thing, I'll probably skip it.


----------



## Conspiracy

oh. i love/hate that lens. for the price its pretty impressive if you want a nice reliable image but that AF motor is something else lol. my trick for that lens and the f1.8 is to hit the AF button multiple times because sometimes it doesnt always nail it first time. its like an OCD thing with all canon 50's actually


----------



## Jixr

Yeah, when it hits its amazing, but when its off, its off.

I guess thats something I need to try to keep in mind when I use it.
But with kids running around, its not fantastic.

I've had the lens for sale on CL for awhile, and my 17-40 too. Thinking of picking up a 17-55 instead, but I have a love/hate relationship with that lens too.

I'm deff going to pick up the canon 23mm or whatever the new pancake is, hope its close to what my 22mm is on my EOS-M, love that little lens.


----------



## kbros

Conspiracy, how do you like the 135L? My next lens is probably going to be an 85 1.8 which will be equivalent to a 135 on crop.

Also, do you think this shot is a brenizer or single shot with a 135? If it's a single shot, then the DOF is crazy.
https://flic.kr/p/qcAZWbMK4 Volkswagen R32 by Eric Dowd, on Flickr
Obviously not my photo. Credit to Eric Dowd


----------



## Sean Webster

Yea, I have experienced those random OOF shots with the 50mm f/1.4. It misses here and there, but usually just double shooting takes care of it for me. The Sigma 30 f/1.4 I had was a sweet lens....I don't think I really ever missed focus with it. Too bad it was a crop body only lens. :'( The Sigma 50mm is supposed to be really good too. A lot better than the canon. My friend has one and it is all he uses on a 6D.

Quote:



> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> Conspiracy, how do you like the 135L? My next lens is probably going to be an 85 1.8 which will be equivalent to a 135 on crop.
> 
> Also, do you think this shot is a brenizer or single shot with a 135? If it's a single shot, then the DOF is crazy.
> MK4 Volkswagen R32 by Eric Dowd, on Flickr
> Obviously not my photo. Credit to Eric Dowd


sick^ I just spent over $700 on PC stuff on Black friday...I should have just got the 135L instead!


----------



## Conspiracy

Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> Conspiracy, how do you like the 135L? My next lens is probably going to be an 85 1.8 which will be equivalent to a 135 on crop.
> 
> Also, do you think this shot is a brenizer or single shot with a 135? If it's a single shot, then the DOF is crazy.
> https://flic.kr/p/qcAZWbMK4 Volkswagen R32 by Eric Dowd, on Flickr
> Obviously not my photo. Credit to Eric Dowd






i love the 135L, great lens on a FF sensor

that shot looks like it can totally be a single image. i got very similar bokeh from the family shoot i did while standing give or take about 11-15feet away from the family and the exif on that shot shows the focus distance at 16.5.

the 85 1.8 on a crop sensor will give you pretty close to the same isolation as the 135 f2 on FF. obviously not the same bokeh but similar in the ability to isolate with close to the same DOF since they are only 1/3rd stop difference on aperture which technically isnt a legit comparison as i would much rather lenses be labeled with their T-stop equivalent as well but im not THAT OCD about it haha.

more than likely despite my several odd experiences with some of canons primes i will probably at some point end up with the canon 50mm f1.2 simple because it is reliable despite some copies having issues, as well as i want an 85mm lens to pair with my 5D to make a 3 prime kit for light weight shooting i just dont know what i want but its so much easier to buy glass when you can do like 18 month financing on the best buy card because i could have bought my 135L straight up but my bank account would be lower than i like if i did that. i still need to test out the new sigma 50mm art, im impressed with the IQ in samples i have seen although the bokeh isnt as nice as i would like for a $1000 lens. if best buy starts actually selling sigma art lenses ill get it otherwise ill probably grab a 50L just because i can finance it instead of paying straight up. i doubt ill finance an 85L though, i have to test that lens more thoroughly because idk if i like it THAT much for the price


----------



## MistaBernie

Man, I've been loving my 135. Sucks when you're not 100% mobile (stupid left leg is still in a full brace, but hopefully only for a couple more days) but man, it really is a great piece of glass.

As for the above car shot.. I'm not 100% sure it's a single image, although what could be throwing me off is that it APPEARS that there's moisture on the bottom -center of the lens - you can kind of see that it's a little more than a half circle, starting just to the right of the yellow lines and going over to about 20% into the frame from the left, as a semi-circle. At first glance I thought that was bokeh - I really don't think it is. I could absolutely be wrong though.


----------



## hokiealumnus

I think that's a brenzier shot. To get DoF anywhere near that, you'd have to be wide open or very close to it...yet the entire car from the corner of the front bumper closest to the camera to the back bumper behind the rear wheel is perfectly in focus. It also very much has the brenzier method look to it.

Regardless, that is one awesome photo.


----------



## Conspiracy

it is very likely. here is a shot a took, obviously a different subject with different relationship to the backgrounds. so if you didnt want to do breznier and take a single image you can still render some nice isolation on the subject

also focus stacking can be used as well

this shot i took was at the same subject distance of 16.5 in the exif data

9Z4A5585 by brian_roberts, on Flickr


----------



## hokiealumnus

Oh yea, that lens is great...wish I could afford one. Tell-tale brenzier - when the plane of focus doesn't extend to the sides of the subject. Notice the leaves in Conspiracy's shot to the right & left of the family are just as sharp as the subject. Not so with the scenery to the left & right of the car. That's what gave it away to me.


----------



## pcfoo

I don't know if you guys that thrilled with this kind of car shot should be after a 135L or a 90 TSE...








Plus you can guestimate on a lot of PP work that could lead to that kind of a shot - a simple gradient radial masked filter could blur things around the car. Are you sure it had this kind of OOF rendition straight out of the camera?

Again, a TS lens would be your best bet for total control of focus and out of the camera shots that look like that every time.

Also, @Conspiracy, welcome back. Do go for the 1.2L(s) - tho don't do it if you are after a "light prime kit", those things are massive.

As for the 50 1.2L vs. 50 1.4 Art ... I think it is almost unanimous that the Art is notably sharper wide open.
But 1 extra stop is 1 extra stop the extra speed is important for some, and the bokeh in either 1.2L primes is unique in the mainstream AF SLR world.

For the record, I ended up exchanging my 50 Art for a used 24-70L II that I believe will be used more. The Art was amazing, but so is the latter.
The only think I hate on the II is the 82mm filter thread that renders my $250 or so worth of 77mm filters useless.

What is also amazing is that the 50 Art @ 815gr is heavier than the 24-70 II @ 805gr, and its built quality being all metal feels far more premium than that of the Canon zoom's plastic shell. The 50 1.2L - big vs. the average 50 1.4 - is notably lighter and smaller vs. the 50 Art.

I had zero issues with focusing the 50 Art with my 6D.
Both AF and the MF ring felt massively better & more positive than any sub $1000 50mm available for Canon EF. And I've tried them all.


----------



## Conspiracy

f1.2 -> f1.4 is 1/3rd of a stop









i have a 24-70 II and its glued to my 5D 90% of the time


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> f1.2 -> f1.4 is 1/3rd of a stop
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i have a 24-70 II and its glued to my 5D 90% of the time


I stand corrected...the elusive f/1.0L was in my mind, the 1.2 is 1/2 stop faster than the 1.4, not a full stop.
But still the 1.2L is creamier than the 50 Art, even @ same apertures.

Not that the Sigma is bad ...




Portrait - EOS 6D + 50 Art @ f/1.4 - Full CR2 File


----------



## Conspiracy

new potn is up and running from what it looks like


----------



## kbros

Thanks for the advice on that shot guys. I'm FERSURE getting an 85 1.8 as my next lens purchase. Atleast I'll have ONE lens I can take to FX later on lol.


----------



## werds

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> new potn is up and running from what it looks like


Yarrr! It is going to take a minute or three to get used to the new forum layout there...


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> Thanks for the advice on that shot guys. I'm FERSURE getting an 85 1.8 as my next lens purchase. Atleast I'll have ONE lens I can take to FX later on lol.


Get this...http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/113487-USA/Nikon_1935_Telephoto_AF_DC_Nikkor.html

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *werds*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> new potn is up and running from what it looks like
> 
> 
> 
> Yarrr! It is going to take a minute or three to get used to the new forum layout there...
Click to expand...

Geeze, it is hideous lol.


----------



## kbros

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Get this...http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/113487-USA/Nikon_1935_Telephoto_AF_DC_Nikkor.html


Yeah, sure.. HAHA and it wouldn't even AF on my camera.


----------



## kbros

I just checked out POTN, my eyes, they hurt. That layout.


----------



## Sean Webster

Dawwww

Quote:



> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> I just checked out POTN, my eyes, they hurt. That layout.


Yea. Looks so poo poo now.


----------



## Conspiracy

Ive sent 2 emails requesting the ability to chose layouts and use the old layout as well as changing the font. Its impossible and irritating to navigate the new potn. Also upset i have to re-sub my threads


----------



## Sean Webster

I have to re-sub now? Great...


----------



## Jixr

you do? I didnt have to.


----------



## werds

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> I have to re-sub now? Great...


Ugh, just checked and you are right - it shows as 0 followed threads...


----------



## Totally Dubbed

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> Conspiracy, how do you like the 135L? My next lens is probably going to be an 85 1.8 which will be equivalent to a 135 on crop.
> 
> Also, do you think this shot is a brenizer or single shot with a 135? If it's a single shot, then the DOF is crazy.
> https://flic.kr/p/qcAZWbMK4 Volkswagen R32 by Eric Dowd, on Flickr
> Obviously not my photo. Credit to Eric Dowd


my all time favourite car, so well done up and pics to match it - I think I found my new wallpaper! +rep for sharing


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *werds*
> 
> Ugh, just checked and you are right - it shows as 0 followed threads...


pretty sure there was a way to import your followed threads.. I haven't bothered to do it yet though.


----------



## Conspiracy

they made too big of a change all at once with tooo many new things. its barely the same forum now. i feel like they should have rolled this out in stages to make the transition smoother for the people that actually use the forum

i dont think i can post on potn anymore. i quoted someone inquiring about their statement saying that there are no leaf shutter lenses available for the pentax 645Z and that medium format requires more light than when shooting lol. last i checked sensor size has no impact on exposure. but the part that bothers me is my post didnt go to the bottom of the thread it got squeezed in the middle under the post i quoted and thats just too weird for me


----------



## pcfoo

Sensor size doesn't really change exposure values, simply because f/ is a calculated value, relative to the size of the lens / iris used.
In reality bigger formats do capture more light in absolute values, simply because the lenses & capturing areas (film/sensor) used are bigger.

Thus low light performance is getting better as sensor sizes go up & you can push/pull more information out of the same exposure if the latter is off.
The 645Z sensor is 66% bigger than the 35mm/FF ones, almost 3.9 times bigger than APS-C, so in absolute amounts it gathers that much more light for the same exposure. The 645Z is to APS-C what FF is to m43, yet you will find tons of ppl that say m43 has nothing to envy vs a FF sensor.

So technically it is exactly the opposite: apples to apples MF (and bigger formats in general) need less light to yield same results smaller formats do, or if exposure is the same (the relative f value + same time on the shutter) you get a finer image with better DR.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> they made too big of a change all at once with tooo many new things. its barely the same forum now. i feel like they should have rolled this out in stages to make the transition smoother for the people that actually use the forum
> 
> i dont think i can post on potn anymore. i quoted someone inquiring about their statement saying that there are no leaf shutter lenses available for the pentax 645Z and that medium format requires more light than when shooting lol. last i checked sensor size has no impact on exposure. but the part that bothers me is my post didnt go to the bottom of the thread it got squeezed in the middle under the post i quoted and thats just too weird for me


Your post went to the bottom, you just replied to someone and it showed up for you under that location. If you go back to the thread, it'll be where it's supposed to be (there's a little chat bubble that explains that).


----------



## Conspiracy

yeah i see it now









im having a tough time adjusting to their changes, i like a lot of what they have done but at the same time its like they didnt HAVE to make the interface for the reply box sooo different compared to what i think most consider the norm which is pretty much what we have here at ocn


----------



## Paradigm84

Hey guys, I'm looking to get a camera over the holidays so I can take some better photos for keyboards reviews I have lined up, at the moment I'm looking at getting a D5300, specifically this one:

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Nikon-D5300-Digital-SLR-Camera-Kit-Nikon-AF-S-18-55mm-f-3-5-5-6-G-VR-II-Lens-/331317550575

Are there any other options I should consider in that price bracket, or would pretty much anything at that price do the trick? Any advice would be appreciated, and forgive me if I've failed to mention something.


----------



## Jixr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Paradigm84*
> 
> Hey guys, I'm looking to get a camera over the holidays so I can take some better photos for keyboards reviews I have lined up, at the moment I'm looking at getting a D5300, specifically this one:
> 
> http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Nikon-D5300-Digital-SLR-Camera-Kit-Nikon-AF-S-18-55mm-f-3-5-5-6-G-VR-II-Lens-/331317550575
> 
> Are there any other options I should consider in that price bracket, or would pretty much anything at that price do the trick? Any advice would be appreciated, and forgive me if I've failed to mention something.


Para get out of here, go back to the keyboard forum.

But really, I would highly suggest budgeting for whatever body you end up with and a macro lens.


----------



## Paradigm84

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> Para get out of here, go back to the keyboard forum.
> 
> But really, I would highly suggest budgeting for whatever body you end up with and a macro lens.


All webcams are peripherals, all webcams are cameras, therefore all cameras are peripherals, *ergo I claim this land as mine.*

Just kidding.









Anyway, back on topic, I forget to mention I was considering getting this when I had the money for it as well:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B005C50H2Y

Seem reasonable?


----------



## kbros

That Nikon kit lens focuses really close, you could use it for macro until you get a REAL macro lens. But all the Nikon D3xxx,d5xxx,d7xxx are good options, as well as Canon T3,4,etc.


----------



## Jixr

that would be a good setup.

and just a general rule, for image quality, the lens is WAY more important than a camera body.

I don't know if you care for portability or anything, but there are some really good pocket sized cameras with good macro capability.

Are you brand specific ( canon/nikon? )
and also are you wanting something just for product photos or for general every day use as well?


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Paradigm84*
> 
> All webcams are peripherals, all webcams are cameras, therefore all cameras are peripherals, *ergo I claim this land as mine.*


them are fighting words














you cant take our land or freeeeeeeedom


----------



## Paradigm84

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> That Nikon kit lens focuses really close, you could use it for macro until you get a REAL macro lens. But all the Nikon D3xxx,d5xxx,d7xxx are good options, as well as Canon T3,4,etc.


Ok, that's reassuring, thanks for the input.









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> that would be a good setup.
> 
> and just a general rule, for image quality, the lens is WAY more important than a camera body.
> 
> I don't know if you care for portability or anything, but there are some really good pocket sized cameras with good macro capability.
> 
> Are you brand specific ( canon/nikon? )
> and also are you wanting something just for product photos or for general every day use as well?


Yeah, I've researched enough to know the lens is more important than the body, but I was going to buy this camera with the intent of not upgrading for a long time, so I thought it would make sense to buy something on the level of a D5X00 rather than a D3X00 so I won't feel the need to upgrade any time soon.

As for if I'm biased towards a particular brand, not really, I've just read more about Nikon than Canon, I'd be willing to go with a Canon or another brand if it offered more features that I'd use.

Also, it will be mainly for product photos, I don't imagine carrying it round with me every day.


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Paradigm84*
> 
> Anyway, back on topic, I forget to mention I was considering getting this when I had the money for it as well:
> 
> http://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B005C50H2Y
> 
> Seem reasonable?


It is a good lens, and will do far better than the kit lens macro wise, but I would refrain from buying a 40mm macro.

It is a weird focal length for most stuff on a cropped body. Not long enough, not wide enough.
At f/2.8 is not that bright. Still brighter (faster) than the kit lens, but a cheaper 50 1.8 will fair notably better in low light. It is also better for people photography, unless you care from knee up and not really close portraits. Distortion can also be an issue when you focus a lens that wide, that close. People won't be flattered.
As a dedicated macro lens, it does 1:1, but to get to the maximum magnification you have to go really really close. It will do fine indoors for table-top and/or still subjects if you have a tripod, but soon you will find why most macro lenses are in the 90-100mm range, and most photographers shooting more timid animals / insects etc use 150-180mm lenses. Then again the cheapest of longer lenses are 50% more expensive than that, so...
No matter what you choose, I would recommend buying used / refurbished - from amazon or other sources.
I have a very good experience selling and buying used photo gear in many forums, even through ebay.
For specialized lenses - this 40mm macro is definitely one - you have the added advantage & ease of mind that most owners will rarely use them! There are good chances that you can get a practically unused lens for cheaper.

Camera bodies have more things that can go wrong, so buying new or refurbished with factory warranty is recommended.


----------



## Paradigm84

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> It is a good lens, and will do far better than the kit lens macro wise, but I would refrain from buying a 40mm macro.
> 
> It is a weird focal length for most stuff on a cropped body. Not long enough, not wide enough.
> At f/2.8 is not that bright. Still brighter (faster) than the kit lens, but a cheaper 50 1.8 will fair notably better in low light. It is also better for people photography, unless you care from knee up and not really close portraits. Distortion can also be an issue when you focus a lens that wide, that close. People won't be flattered.
> As a dedicated macro lens, it does 1:1, but to get to the maximum magnification you have to go really really close. It will do fine indoors for table-top and/or still subjects if you have a tripod, but soon you will find why most macro lenses are in the 90-100mm range, and most photographers shooting more timid animals / insects etc use 150-180mm lenses. Then again the cheapest of longer lenses are 50% more expensive than that, so...
> No matter what you choose, I would recommend buying used / refurbished - from amazon or other sources.
> I have a very good experience selling and buying used photo gear in many forums, even through ebay.
> For specialized lenses - this 40mm macro is definitely one - you have the added advantage & ease of mind that most owners will rarely use them! There are good chances that you can get a practically unused lens for cheaper.
> 
> Camera bodies have more things that can go wrong, so buying new or refurbished with factory warranty is recommended.


Ok, thanks for the input, I wouldn't be getting another lens for a month or two after I get the camera anyway, so I can look at some alternative choices based on your recommendations closer to the time.









Oh, and I'll obviously be using a tripod, at the moment I was looking at this - http://www.manfrotto.co.uk/product/7269.58969.1094355.0.0/MKCOMPACTADV-BK/_/Compact_Advanced_Black

I know it's a fairly basic tripod, but I'm not going to be travelling with it or using it outside all the time, so I thought something fairly rudimentary would make sense.


----------



## pcfoo

This is a fairly decent tripod. I have been using €30 ones before I got my Manfrotto 190 XProB that had for the last 10 years, and trust me, despite those being of really low quality, they did pretty good. The main issue cheap tripods have, is the plastic head pieces that get loose / wear over time. Legs hold fine for basic SLRs.

I also own a Dolica AX620B100 that I bought when I 1st moved to the US leaving some of my gear behind (including the 190X), and I had no real issues using it with my gripped DSLR + 2.8 lenses. I think it is very solid for the price.


----------



## Paradigm84

Yeah, tripod heads can get super expensive, but I don't think I'll be needing an amazing one any time soon.


----------



## Jixr

Joby's are super asweome little gizmos, and the good thing about tripods is you can find realy nice ones for cheap. My vanguard reguraly goes for $250 and I paid $50 for it when a store was having a sale, awesome deal.


----------



## kbros

Speaking of tripods, I tried the tripod jib method today. I was impressed.


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Paradigm84*
> 
> Yeah, tripod heads can get super expensive, but I don't think I'll be needing an amazing one any time soon.


Again, I am a big proponent of used gear. Especially for sturdy or specialized stuff that I know that see little usage and/or are easy to spot abuse.

POTN, Fred Miranda etc forums have great deals - often better than eBay - and you get to exchange gear with other "gear-heads" shaving quite a bit off retail.
I don't know the equiv. sites with bigger EU presence, but I know those are there. I was dealing with the greek photography sites back in the day.

I have been through a couple of heads for my manfrotto. 3/4 of them where bought used.
I think I'll settle with my current 410 junior. Got it used for 1/2 retail, it was as good as new for my purposes.
Weighs as much as some cheap tripods, it is slow, but for precise movements I think it is hard to beat. It just begs for a 24 TSE II, I just cannot get one for 1/2 retail anywhere


----------



## Paradigm84

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Again, I am a big proponent of used gear. Especially for sturdy or specialized stuff that I know that see little usage and/or are easy to spot abuse.
> 
> POTN, Fred Miranda etc forums have great deals - often better than eBay - and you get to exchange gear with other "gear-heads" shaving quite a bit off retail.
> I don't know the equiv. sites with bigger EU presence, but I know those are there. I was dealing with the greek photography sites back in the day.
> 
> I have been through a couple of heads for my manfrotto. 3/4 of them where bought used.
> I think I'll settle with my current 410 junior. Got it used for 1/2 retail, it was as good as new for my purposes.
> Weighs as much as some cheap tripods, it is slow, but for precise movements I think it is hard to beat. It just begs for a 24 TSE II, I just cannot get one for 1/2 retail anywhere


Ok, I'll have a look around and see if I can find anything that seems like a good deal, thanks again.


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Paradigm84*
> 
> Ok, I'll have a look around and see if I can find anything that seems like a good deal, thanks again.


Have a look on Mpb photographic as well, good used stuff on there. Also check eBay, Canon has an outlet store on there called canonuk1 or something like that, I got an 1100D with 18-55 IS lens 'refurb' for £200 as far as I could tell it was brand new, shutter count was empty


----------



## Gobigorgohome

Okay, I looked at a Youtube-video with "recommended" lenses for the D5200, the guy did say that the lenses which people should look for was 18-200mm, 18-55mm, 35mm and 18-105mm. 35mm lens pretty much for portrait (pretty much the same that I have read before), but should I just buy the 35mm already? There is one used at my hometown for 115 USD second-hand, probably going to get it for around 100 USD, if that is a good buy, what should I look for with it?

Possibly getting the D5200 tomorrow, going to make the day worth the while and study how it all works and try it out a bit.

Also, what is a good lens for nature photography?


----------



## Paradigm84

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> Have a look on Mpb photographic as well, good used stuff on there. Also check eBay, Canon has an outlet store on there called canonuk1 or something like that, I got an 1100D with 18-55 IS lens 'refurb' for £200 as far as I could tell it was brand new, shutter count was empty


Will do, thanks for the tip!


----------



## nvidiaftw12

All the camera guys say it, and you might think, "psh, that's ridiculous", but it's better to spend more on glass than the body.


----------



## Gobigorgohome

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> All the camera guys say it, and you might think, "psh, that's ridiculous", but it's better to spend more on glass than the body.


I know this is the general "speaking" and I do not mind really, I just have read that the Nikon 35 mm lens is good for still portrait photography, new price is only double of used so no big deal, but if the used is pretty much as good as the new one, why not?

Anything I should look for with used lenses?


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gobigorgohome*
> 
> Okay, I looked at a Youtube-video with "recommended" lenses for the D5200, the guy did say that the lenses which people should look for was 18-200mm, 18-55mm, 35mm and 18-105mm. 35mm lens pretty much for portrait (pretty much the same that I have read before), but should I just buy the 35mm already? There is one used at my hometown for 115 USD second-hand, probably going to get it for around 100 USD, if that is a good buy, what should I look for with it?
> 
> Possibly getting the D5200 tomorrow, going to make the day worth the while and study how it all works and try it out a bit.
> 
> Also, what is a good lens for nature photography?


what type of nature photography? like animals? birds? far away stuff? if youre doing photography for fun then a good kit would be the nikon 18-105 for general whathaveyou and look at some of the 70-300mm lenses from either nikon or 3rd party or if you want really nice reach for nature stuff look at some of the 3rd party 150-500mm lenses









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> All the camera guys say it, and you might think, "psh, that's ridiculous", but it's better to spend more on glass than the body.


truly depends on what youre shooting. some situations may even call for spending more on lighting and modifiers than body/glass. it all depends on the needs for each person







but the generic statement of glass > body applies to majority of people considering hes doing a lot of product stuff and not a single lighting suggestion means most of yall are forgetting whats most important. cant capture an image without light even though solar is free


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gobigorgohome*
> 
> I know this is the general "speaking" and I do not mind really, I just have read that the Nikon 35 mm lens is good for still portrait photography, new price is only double of used so no big deal, but if the used is pretty much as good as the new one, why not?
> 
> Anything I should look for with used lenses?


I'm really not an expert on camera stuff, but as for looking at used lenses, you should look for damage (dropped or the like) missed focus or blur, dust, and if it's an old one, fungus on the inside. Some others can probably chime in more.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> what type of nature photography? like animals? birds? far away stuff? if youre doing photography for fun then a good kit would be the nikon 18-105 for general whathaveyou and look at some of the 70-300mm lenses from either nikon or 3rd party or if you want really nice reach for nature stuff look at some of the 3rd party 150-500mm lenses
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> truly depends on what youre shooting. some situations may even call for spending more on lighting and modifiers than body/glass. it all depends on the needs for each person
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> but the generic statement of glass > body applies to majority of people considering hes doing a lot of product stuff and not a single lighting suggestion means most of yall are forgetting whats most important. cant capture an image without light even though solar is free


That's true to. I missed the product photography part, only skimmed through this thread and really replied to paradigm, as he's about the only bigger noob than me who I might be able to help.


----------



## Paradigm84

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> That's true to. I missed the product photography part, only skimmed through this thread and really replied to paradigm, as he's about the only bigger noob than me who I might be able to help.


You wanna fight me IRL?









But regarding lighting, I'm not exactly setting up a studio, so I don't think I'll be buying light boxes any time soon, so think I'll have to make do with using a white screen from the computer monitor to try and give uniform light.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> That's true to. I missed the product photography part, only skimmed through this thread and really replied to paradigm, as he's about the only bigger noob than me who I might be able to help.


youre not as big of a n00b as you think








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Paradigm84*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> That's true to. I missed the product photography part, only skimmed through this thread and really replied to paradigm, as he's about the only bigger noob than me who I might be able to help.
> 
> 
> 
> You wanna fight me IRL?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But regarding lighting, I'm not exactly setting up a studio, so I don't think I'll be buying light boxes any time soon, so think I'll have to make do with using a white screen from the computer monitor to try and give uniform light.
Click to expand...

dont buy that stuff DIY. and lighting can be found on the super cheap at home depot from some super versatile clamp lights (my fav for DIY rigs) idk you have have home depot over there but yeah whatever home improvement store.

your best friend \/


----------



## Gobigorgohome

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> what type of nature photography? like animals? birds? far away stuff? if youre doing photography for fun then a good kit would be the nikon 18-105 for general whathaveyou and look at some of the 70-300mm lenses from either nikon or 3rd party or if you want really nice reach for nature stuff look at some of the 3rd party 150-500mm lenses


Hmmm, that is a good question, probably everything you listed.







Will take a look at 18-105, 70-300mm and some 150-500mm, thank you.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> I'm really not an expert on camera stuff, but as for looking at used lenses, you should look for damage (dropped or the like) missed focus or blur, dust, and if it's an old one, fungus on the inside. Some others can probably chime in more.


Okay, seems like the "normal" stuff for buying anything used I guess.







Thank you!


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gobigorgohome*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> what type of nature photography? like animals? birds? far away stuff? if youre doing photography for fun then a good kit would be the nikon 18-105 for general whathaveyou and look at some of the 70-300mm lenses from either nikon or 3rd party or if you want really nice reach for nature stuff look at some of the 3rd party 150-500mm lenses
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hmmm, that is a good question, probably everything you listed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Will take a look at 18-105, 70-300mm and some 150-500mm, thank you.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> I'm really not an expert on camera stuff, but as for looking at used lenses, you should look for damage (dropped or the like) missed focus or blur, dust, and if it's an old one, fungus on the inside. Some others can probably chime in more.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Okay, seems like the "normal" stuff for buying anything used I guess.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you!
Click to expand...

being over seas sometimes finding used gear is tough but sometimes it can be a breeze, sometimes its just luck. but definitely keep on eye on potn(photography-on-the.net), fred miranda, i dont think KEH sells worldwide even though they claim largest used inventory world wide haha. my best advice is definitely find a photography related facebook group for your country and from there you will very likely find a sale/trade group for norway as well







im part of one for italian photographers but i only lurk there because i love the landscapes some of them share there


----------



## Gobigorgohome

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> being over seas sometimes finding used gear is tough but sometimes it can be a breeze, sometimes its just luck. but definitely keep on eye on potn(photography-on-the.net), fred miranda, i dont think KEH sells worldwide even though they claim largest used inventory world wide haha. my best advice is definitely find a photography related facebook group for your country and from there you will very likely find a sale/trade group for norway as well
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> im part of one for italian photographers but i only lurk there because i love the landscapes some of them share there


Oh yes, good thinkin'.









Btw, if you like nature photos in kind of the same style as Italy, you should look for Dubrovnik, Croatia, I was there last summer on vacation, took a ton of pictures with my Canon Ixus (what a beautiful place), really old too. The Ixus is not really too bad at day-to-day vacation photos, wish I had a DSLR for that though.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Paradigm84*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> That's true to. I missed the product photography part, only skimmed through this thread and really replied to paradigm, as he's about the only bigger noob than me who I might be able to help.
> 
> 
> 
> You wanna fight me IRL?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But regarding lighting, I'm not exactly setting up a studio, so I don't think I'll be buying light boxes any time soon, so think I'll have to make do with using a white screen from the computer monitor to try and give uniform light.
Click to expand...

Pfft, you need this:


----------



## kbros

I have that same flooring in my kitchen


----------



## THEStorm

Hey, what are your thoughts on switching from APS-C to M4/3?


----------



## Jixr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *THEStorm*
> 
> Hey, what are your thoughts on switching from APS-C to M4/3?


size and portability, worth it, but IQ is going to take a hit, and most micro cams look crappy above 800 iso.


----------



## Gobigorgohome

Finally!











Have not been playing around with it too much yet, have found out where the most important buttons are, some things is actually the same as with the poor Ixus







Only got a couple of shots of my cats, going to take it outside a day there is sunshine and see if I can capture something nice.









I already see the limitations with the 18-55mm VR lens, probably not too good for anything other than day-to-day and portrait shots. I will definitely need another lens with some good zoom-options.


----------



## hokiealumnus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> youre not as big of a n00b as you think
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dont buy that stuff DIY. and lighting can be found on the super cheap at home depot from some super versatile clamp lights (my fav for DIY rigs) idk you have have home depot over there but yeah whatever home improvement store.
> 
> your best friend \/


Bingo! My lighting setup for product shots for years:



...I upgraded the semi-off-white sheet to two pieces of very white foam board (bottom & back) and it improved things significantly. Here's one taken recently.


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> size and portability, worth it, but IQ is going to take a hit, and most micro cams look crappy above 800 iso.


IQ is still definitely there. Even when I had an E-PL1 it was still sharp and noise wasn't as bad as I thought it would be. Comparable to a D3100 or D3000. Can't remember which one exactly. Had some great features too.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *THEStorm*
> 
> Hey, what are your thoughts on switching from APS-C to M4/3?


You do have less lenses to work with though and it is a 2.0x crop factor. Depending what you shoot it wouldn't be a bad choice to switch, but if you've invested a lot of money in your current system then you may want to reconsider.


----------



## Gobigorgohome

How is the Tamron AF Di 70-300 4-5,6 NIKON? For the Nikon D5200? Read some reviews and they are writing it is pretty good, what do you guys think?

Generally, is Tamron okay lenses for the D5200? Thinking of the 150-500mm as well, the price difference to Nikon's 150-500mm is noticeable.









Also, which ISO should I be taking stills with? Using ISO 1600 and the files is like 25 MB, what a good quality, sharp and good colors this camera give, pretty much this I was looking for.

Anyone have recommendations on a free editing program, until I get my hands on Lightroom v5 and Photoshop CS5, will Photoshop CS5 do the same as Lightroom v5 or will I need to have them both?


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gobigorgohome*
> 
> How is the Tamron AF Di 70-300 4-5,6 NIKON? For the Nikon D5200? Read some reviews and they are writing it is pretty good, what do you guys think?
> 
> Generally, is Tamron okay lenses for the D5200? Thinking of the 150-500mm as well, the price difference to Nikon's 150-500mm is noticeable.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also, which ISO should I be taking stills with? Using ISO 1600 and the files is like 25 MB, what a good quality, sharp and good colors this camera give, pretty much this I was looking for.
> 
> Anyone have recommendations on a free editing program, until I get my hands on Lightroom v5 and Photoshop CS5, will Photoshop CS5 do the same as Lightroom v5 or will I need to have them both?


tamron is totally fine. you will likely enjoy the 150-500 for nature/wildlife A LOT MORE, if you can fit it in your budget.

ISO depends on light and what exposure you need between DOF or fast shutter to freeze motion. if you are taking pictures of birds in flight then you will find yourself using a higher iso in order to get a super fast shutter speed to freeze them in motion especially when they flap their wings. as you shoot you will find the balance between iso, shutter, aperture. shutter is important because if you use too slow of a shutter speed your photos will be less sharp and even potentially get motion blur from camera shake

look up gimp for free. lightroom is incredible for the price


----------



## pcfoo

Cheap lenses are cheap lenses. Don't expect magic.

Sigma & tamron 70-300 zooms have been around for quite some time and they have matured well. But put those next to the cheapest Canon L - the 70-200 f/4L - and you will probably be disappointed.
Does that mean you should not get them? No, it means get them knowing that you are making some compromises in order to make pictures that you wouldn't otherwise - not before spending 2x or 3x as much.

ISO should be kept as slow as possible, in order to maintain usable handheld speeds for your lens/camera configuration.
If you were to use that 70-300 on a 1.5x crop body, it would mean an effective FOV equiv. to 450mm @ [135]. The rule of thumb says that 1/500s would be the minimum for handheld shots, but I would say even @ 1/800s you won't have just keepers. It just cannot happen if you are shooting moving subjects, and that's your end.
Fast moving subjects like running animals or birds in flight might require 1/1500s.

In a slow tele-zoom that doesn't really get that sharp before f/8-11, you can easily be looking at 1600 ISO even during daytime to achieve a good balance between sharpness due to aperture, DOF, camera shake & stopping motion. But I would prefer setting exposure manually, and leaving ISO @ Auto, instead of locking it anywhere that high.


----------



## Gobigorgohome

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> tamron is totally fine. you will likely enjoy the 150-500 for nature/wildlife A LOT MORE, if you can fit it in your budget.
> 
> ISO depends on light and what exposure you need between DOF or fast shutter to freeze motion. if you are taking pictures of birds in flight then you will find yourself using a higher iso in order to get a super fast shutter speed to freeze them in motion especially when they flap their wings. as you shoot you will find the balance between iso, shutter, aperture. shutter is important because if you use too slow of a shutter speed your photos will be less sharp and even potentially get motion blur from camera shake
> 
> look up gimp for free. lightroom is incredible for the price


Okay, will do. Better save up some money for the Sigma 150-500mm then.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Cheap lenses are cheap lenses. Don't expect magic.
> 
> Sigma & tamron 70-300 zooms have been around for quite some time and they have matured well. But put those next to the cheapest Canon L - the 70-200 f/4L - and you will probably be disappointed.
> Does that mean you should not get them? No, it means get them knowing that you are making some compromises in order to make pictures that you wouldn't otherwise - not before spending 2x or 3x as much.
> 
> ISO should be kept as slow as possible, in order to maintain usable handheld speeds for your lens/camera configuration.
> If you were to use that 70-300 on a 1.5x crop body, it would mean an effective FOV equiv. to 450mm @ [135]. The rule of thumb says that 1/500s would be the minimum for handheld shots, but I would say even @ 1/800s you won't have just keepers. It just cannot happen if you are shooting moving subjects, and that's your end.
> Fast moving subjects like running animals or birds in flight might require 1/1500s.
> 
> In a slow tele-zoom that doesn't really get that sharp before f/8-11, you can easily be looking at 1600 ISO even during daytime to achieve a good balance between sharpness due to aperture, DOF, camera shake & stopping motion. But I would prefer setting exposure manually, and leaving ISO @ Auto, instead of locking it anywhere that high.


Okay, thank you. No, I've better save up the money for the Sigma 150-500mm, they are about 1000 USD here so I think it will be good.


----------



## Paradigm84

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Pfft, you need this:
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


Sadly I don't have a spare room to turn into a studio.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Paradigm84*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Pfft, you need this:
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sadly I don't have a spare room to turn into a studio.
Click to expand...

Neither do I, that's my living room and everything packs away into a closet nicely.


----------



## Paradigm84

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Neither do I, that's my living room and everything packs away into a closet nicely.


Ah right, that sounds like a lot of work, I need like an inflatable studio or something.


----------



## Conspiracy

i hope this happens. for that price ill buy one when they come out. they did hit their goal but that doesnt mean it will hit retailers

http://petapixel.com/2014/12/03/foldio2-foldable-pop-light-box-product-photos-bigger-brighter-better-ever/

so many toys i want. also need a xrite colormunki, sekonic L308, more glass, more speedlights, more modifiers


----------



## Jixr

an old lamp, cardboard, and a trash bag goes a long way.


----------



## Paradigm84

I'll have to see what I can come up with when I get the camera then.


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Paradigm84*
> 
> Ah right, that sounds like a lot of work, I need like an inflatable studio or something.


You might be interested in a DIY Lightbox


----------



## hokiealumnus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> i hope this happens. for that price ill buy one when they come out. they did hit their goal but that doesnt mean it will hit retailers
> 
> http://petapixel.com/2014/12/03/foldio2-foldable-pop-light-box-product-photos-bigger-brighter-better-ever/
> 
> so many toys i want. also need a xrite colormunki, sekonic L308, more glass, more speedlights, more modifiers


That would be sweeeet to have!


----------



## Paradigm84

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> You might be interested in a DIY Lightbox


Yeah, that would work well, it would have to be a decent size to accommodate a keyboard though.


----------



## MunneY

Alright guys, I need your expertise!

I can take "Decent" pictures with my D5100, but I'd like to really get more familiar with it. Can anyone tell me somewhere online that does a course on it? I've tried finding classes locally, but I can't seem to find anything. I did the YT thing but it hasn't REALLY helped.


----------



## Jixr

speaking from myself here, the best teacher I've had has been trial and error. YT videos help a little bit, but really, just find a photo you like, and then try to copy its style until you can figure it out and understand the steps that were taken to achieve it. Its also easy to say "oh well he has $$$$$$$ pro gear and I don't" thats just an excuse.

if you can stand his personality, jared polin aka 'fro knows photo' has some decent videos online. His vids are not the most detailed thing of all time, but he does communicate well and its entertaining to watch compared to an old man just reading stuff off in a monotone voice.


----------



## MunneY

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> speaking from myself here, the best teacher I've had has been trial and error. YT videos help a little bit, but really, just find a photo you like, and then try to copy its style until you can figure it out and understand the steps that were taken to achieve it. Its also easy to say "oh well he has $$$$$$$ pro gear and I don't" thats just an excuse.


I feel like I've taken some good pictures, but I'd like to be able to do it consistently. Thanks for the tips though!


----------



## Jixr

yeah, thats the hard part. Anyone can get lucky every once in awhile, but to be able to hit those shots every single time is something only practice can develop.


----------



## Conspiracy

its all luck. but as you learn more the odds of getting lucky increase significantly


----------



## Gobigorgohome

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> yeah, thats the hard part. Anyone can get lucky every once in awhile, but to be able to hit those shots every single time is something only practice can develop.


How many shots do you think it will take (for example me - pretty much totally noob) to take decent pictures every time? I have at least found out that poor lightning is not too good for good shots, so the room in my basement is a bad place to start out. Is the best way to go outside and try to catch a few good shots?

I think I have to get myself some kind of a guide of usage of this thing, because I am not really understanding a whole lot of it. I think the 18-55mm VR has its limitations for mostly "indoor-usage", because in dusk lightning it is doing pretty well (took a few stills of my cats with lightning coming through a window and they got pretty good) so I guess lightning is one good source for good pictures. Aside from that I have a whole lot of reading to do.


----------



## Jixr

along with all the billion photography quotes by famos people, one is ' the first 10,000 shots are your worst'

I can't really answer that question, because I still suck and I recently completely blew a paid photoshoot I did the other day, but practice practice practice.

One of the best things that helped me starting out was doing one of those "30 day challenge" things, where you just task yourself with taking 1 photo a day, for 30 days. and try to make them as different as possible. You'd be suprised what good images you can get out of those 30 days.


----------



## Gobigorgohome

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> along with all the billion photography quotes by famos people, one is ' the first 10,000 shots are your worst'
> 
> I can't really answer that question, because I still suck and I recently completely blew a paid photoshoot I did the other day, but practice practice practice.
> 
> One of the best things that helped me starting out was doing one of those "30 day challenge" things, where you just task yourself with taking 1 photo a day, for 30 days. and try to make them as different as possible. You'd be suprised what good images you can get out of those 30 days.


Hmm, that 30 days challenge sounds exciting, will have to try that out.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> My good friend has one. I used it...i don't like it lol. It is cool and all, but idk. I can't get used to the EVF.


X100s have an OVF, with the EVF toggle on the front of the camera where you would expect a frameline lever to be.

The X100 is not for anyone who loves to spend money on lenses and fluff, which is probably why there are a ton of them on the used market. You would have to pry mine from my cold, dead hands.


----------



## Conspiracy

i dont care about your X100. let me borrow that RB67 though


----------



## sub50hz

By "borrow", do you mean "purchase" as I have previously offered?


----------



## Conspiracy

maybe i can arrange a barter and trade you some doll hairs for it after i recover from my recent monitor purchase and very soon colormunki purchase and now im looking/considering buying another light meter for flashes, im thinking the L308


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> an old lamp, cardboard, and a trash bag goes a long way.


So.. uh... is the spartan dude from this month's Lootcrate?


----------



## Jixr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> So.. uh... is the spartan dude from this month's Lootcrate?


Nah, its one of those lego knock off guys. I mysteriously found it on my balcony of my 3rd story apartment one day.


----------



## Conspiracy

been learning the basics of after effects to help spice up the video i make at work. learned how to make this simple hipsterific animation from a youtube tutorial today. i made this for fun to learn the elements that are involved in the animation, not using this at work lol


----------



## Sean Webster

I just got an iPhone 6+ ...I'm going to only shoot with the camera on it. No more DSLR for me.


----------



## kbros

LOL, make an instagram and put #photographer in your bio.


----------



## Scott1541

Had a photography society session today and D810 girl didn't know how to use her camera again







Luckily for me the other Nikon guy wasn't there, so I was forced to intervene and get my hands on it









She's also bought a £20 velbon tripod for it too, one of those plastic/aluminium ones with the cheap looking pan-head. I'm not sure what kind of person has a good £3000 of camera/lens and only buys a £20 tripod, even if she didn't actually pay for the camera herself.


----------



## MunneY

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> Had a photography society session today and D810 girl didn't know how to use her camera again
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Luckily for me the other Nikon guy wasn't there, so I was forced to intervene and get my hands on it
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> She's also bought a £20 velbon tripod for it too, one of those plastic/aluminium ones with the cheap looking pan-head. I'm not sure what kind of person has a good £3000 of camera/lens and only buys a £20 tripod, even if she didn't actually pay for the camera herself.


The same people that spend 2000$ on a rig and cheap out on the PSU.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MunneY*
> 
> Alright guys, I need your expertise!
> 
> I can take "Decent" pictures with my D5100, but I'd like to really get more familiar with it. Can anyone tell me somewhere online that does a course on it? I've tried finding classes locally, but I can't seem to find anything. I did the YT thing but it hasn't REALLY helped.


Practice, practice, practice. Once you get comfortable with it in one situation, try another. When your bored one night, go outside and capture star trails or something. Photo stacking. Just try new things a bit at a time, and after a while you'll be very familiar with it.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> speaking from myself here, the best teacher I've had has been trial and error. YT videos help a little bit, but really, just find a photo you like, and then try to copy its style until you can figure it out and understand the steps that were taken to achieve it. Its also easy to say "oh well he has $$$$$$$ pro gear and I don't" thats just an excuse.
> 
> if you can stand his personality, jared polin aka 'fro knows photo' has some decent videos online. His vids are not the most detailed thing of all time, but he does communicate well and its entertaining to watch compared to an old man just reading stuff off in a monotone voice.


^

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gobigorgohome*
> 
> How many shots do you think it will take (for example me - pretty much totally noob) to take decent pictures every time? I have at least found out that poor lightning is not too good for good shots, so the room in my basement is a bad place to start out. Is the best way to go outside and try to catch a few good shots?
> 
> I think I have to get myself some kind of a guide of usage of this thing, because I am not really understanding a whole lot of it. I think the 18-55mm VR has its limitations for mostly "indoor-usage", because in dusk lightning it is doing pretty well (took a few stills of my cats with lightning coming through a window and they got pretty good) so I guess lightning is one good source for good pictures. Aside from that I have a whole lot of reading to do.


Define decent. You might be able to get the sharpest, clearest, most well colored photo your first try, but if you aren't one of those lucky people born with a good eye or develop one, you might never have good framing, subjects or the like.


----------



## pcfoo

Camera was paid for by family - perhaps the dad wanted to get her "the best".
She paid for the tripod herself, simple as that.
Few years ago, she would be shooting that DSLR @ S JPEG cause the dad did not get her a big enough CF*









*My 1st CF was 1GB 66x and set me back €170. Was pretty common for "prosumer" P&S users, buying €1500 or so Sony 505s and whatnot, to shoot @ fractions of the resolution as they would not spend additional money to shoot on a MS bigger than the 32MB that was included, and the story would trickle down to cheaper models that would come with 8MB cards etc.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gobigorgohome*
> 
> How many shots do you think it will take (for example me - pretty much totally noob) to take decent pictures every time? I have at least found out that poor lightning is not too good for good shots, so the room in my basement is a bad place to start out. Is the best way to go outside and try to catch a few good shots?
> 
> I think I have to get myself some kind of a guide of usage of this thing, because I am not really understanding a whole lot of it. I think the 18-55mm VR has its limitations for mostly "indoor-usage", because in dusk lightning it is doing pretty well (took a few stills of my cats with lightning coming through a window and they got pretty good) so I guess lightning is one good source for good pictures. Aside from that I have a whole lot of reading to do.


As written above, 1) define "decent" 2) forget about "every time".

Photography is the equivalent of looking though a keyhole into the real world, and capturing the moment. The technical aspect of it (pretty much exposure) can be taught and / or be automated. Modern cameras are getting better and better in capturing w/e shines through that keyhole very very reliably.

But the camera doesn't decide when to press the shutter, or doesn't point the keyhole for you. That's you. Framing and timing is you, the rest can be automated.

Framing and timing is what makes a photo, not the technical portion of it, which tho important, doesn't really "create" content & convey emotion.
Almost any DSLR or mirrorless camera in the market today, blows away in potential the tools many of the masters of photography used in the 20th century. Pair it with Photoshop and/or lightroom, stuck some exposures and even Ansel Adams would be frustrated.

And that's why we see thousands of technically perfect, tho uninspiring pictures every day. Buying a better DSLR will not change that. Buying a specific guide about your camera won't change that either. Content is not created by the camera.

Moments are unique. If you are not into landscape or architecture or other kinds of static subject photography with lots of time to spend on each frame, you have no real control of the timing. If you want to capture generic product shots in your basement, asking a few questions, following some advice & online tutorials will get you there pretty easily. But transferring emotion through product photography - that's a pretty hard to get and also maintain skill.
But being an event (eg. wedding) photographer, a reporter, a wildlife photographer, then the "every time" suddenly sounds audacious.
Of course you cannot do it every time. Even the best of the best don't - at least to their standards.

Asking how many clicks you will need to produce great results with your camera, is similar to asking how many tubes of oil paint you need to waste before you become the next Picasso. It just cannot be quantified like that, and the fast & hard answer - if there has to be one - is unfortunately "never".


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Asking how many clicks you will need to produce great results with your camera, is similar to asking how many tubes of oil paint you need to waste before you become the next Picasso. It just cannot be quantified like that, and the fast & hard answer - if there has to be one - is unfortunately "never".


That's really good analogy actually. I like it.


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> I just got an iPhone 6+ ...I'm going to only shoot with the camera on it. No more DSLR for me.


The best camera is the one in your hand


----------



## THEStorm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aksthem1*
> 
> IQ is still definitely there. Even when I had an E-PL1 it was still sharp and noise wasn't as bad as I thought it would be. Comparable to a D3100 or D3000. Can't remember which one exactly. Had some great features too.
> You do have less lenses to work with though and it is a 2.0x crop factor. Depending what you shoot it wouldn't be a bad choice to switch, but if you've invested a lot of money in your current system then you may want to reconsider.


I wouldn't say I have a lot invested into my current Nikon kit, body, couples lenses, and a flash.

The main reason for considering the switch was something that is M4/3 sized would be a lot easier for me to take with me out on my bike compared to my current D7000. Normally I just have a tank bag with me that really isn't that big, and normally if I'm going out for the day I bring a snack and a drink in there too.

I have been finding more and more posts online of people that have made the switch from APS-C to M4/3 and never being happier, haven't found that many people that have regretted it.

Been thinking about switching over to a Panasonic GX7 or an Olympus E-M10 from my D7000. The only other consideration would maybe be getting a tail bag for my bike.


----------



## Jixr

well, I don't have a m 4/3'rds per say, but I did buy a Canon EOS-M , which is a TON smaller than a DSLR ( and shares the same sensor as a canon T3/4/5i ) and I use it much more often than my big cam because I can take it with me everywhere I go, and its super small. Though when I do want some nicer photos with more control, I bust out my Big cam.


----------



## pcfoo

I was very tempted to get a m43, till i got an EOS M + 22mm f2 for 1/2 to 1/3 what it would need for me to get a good m43. The latter would probably focus faster, have more features but in general inferior IQ to the M. I would not really mind, I only wanted and all-around street shooter that I could have on me. I got stubborn and said that I would have to work with what I had, and getting an M for $250 was something I could not resist.

Most users making big gear decisions, usually try to overcompensate to convince themselves more than others. Especially amateurs that don't have the portfolio or the income from their pictures their new equipment will score them to speak for itself, they drag along theorizing - like I am now - as if anyone cares for them being fools with their wallets more than themselves.
If you are happy with your equipment, more power to you. But don't dismiss anyone's choices.


----------



## Gobigorgohome

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> Define decent. You might be able to get the sharpest, clearest, most well colored photo your first try, but if you aren't one of those lucky people born with a good eye or develop one, you might never have good framing, subjects or the like.


What I would characterize as "decent" photo is clear shots (background blur or whatever does not matter if that is not the main "theme" in the picture), with right focus (of what I actually is taking the picture of), right zoom (that I get what I want to see in the picture and not too much or not enough), "right" lightning (pretty much get a smooth transition between dark and light) and be careful to have the background that fits the object I am shooting and so on. That is what I would call "over-the-normal" good photo, this is just what I think is the trickiest part.
Let's take an example, I am up in the mountains walking around and look at this great sky formation when the sun is either raising or setting, I would like to get that shot right (perhaps even with the horizon underneath it to make it "the little extra" and set it into a relation with the nature. This is very likely what I want to be using this DSLR for (typically me), or sunsets over water, with some bushes and a wharf in the front (pictures I prefer). I would probably take a few shots to be sure I actually get what I wants, either with the wharf in focus or the sun/clouds in the background.

I think I have a good eye for detail and the mindset to take "decent" pictures with a DSLR.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> As written above, 1) define "decent" 2) forget about "every time".
> 
> Photography is the equivalent of looking though a keyhole into the real world, and capturing the moment. The technical aspect of it (pretty much exposure) can be taught and / or be automated. Modern cameras are getting better and better in capturing w/e shines through that keyhole very very reliably.
> 
> But the camera doesn't decide when to press the shutter, or doesn't point the keyhole for you. That's you. Framing and timing is you, the rest can be automated.
> 
> Framing and timing is what makes a photo, not the technical portion of it, which tho important, doesn't really "create" content & convey emotion.
> Almost any DSLR or mirrorless camera in the market today, blows away in potential the tools many of the masters of photography used in the 20th century. Pair it with Photoshop and/or lightroom, stuck some exposures and even Ansel Adams would be frustrated.
> 
> And that's why we see thousands of technically perfect, tho uninspiring pictures every day. Buying a better DSLR will not change that. Buying a specific guide about your camera won't change that either. Content is not created by the camera.
> 
> Moments are unique. If you are not into landscape or architecture or other kinds of static subject photography with lots of time to spend on each frame, you have no real control of the timing. If you want to capture generic product shots in your basement, asking a few questions, following some advice & online tutorials will get you there pretty easily. But transferring emotion through product photography - that's a pretty hard to get and also maintain skill.
> But being an event (eg. wedding) photographer, a reporter, a wildlife photographer, then the "every time" suddenly sounds audacious.
> Of course you cannot do it every time. Even the best of the best don't - at least to their standards.
> 
> Asking how many clicks you will need to produce great results with your camera, is similar to asking how many tubes of oil paint you need to waste before you become the next Picasso. It just cannot be quantified like that, and the fast & hard answer - if there has to be one - is unfortunately "never".


1.) Look above (hope that is a good enough explanation of what I think it is), I know it is subjective.
2.) "Every time" was probably the wrong term to use, what I should have written is "most of the time". I will always be looked at as an amateur on photography and I am fine with that.









Lots of information in the last part there, but what I get from it (it is a lot), but of course the person behind the camera has to find the good locations and good motives to take picture of (luckily I am not hard to please), I love nature in general, I like architecture (such as different building-cultures is kind of inspiring, buildings, bridges, tunnels and generally "art-forms of architecture (or engineering)). I also like cars, boats, animals and pretty much everything within computers. I need to learn the basics with the camera (which settings to use for which objective), obviously a lot about lightning and the presentation of the objects (such as computer-parts). In the start I will not focus to much on moving objects because I can imagine how hard that would be to get a clear shot and the right focus and everything that follows. I know a camera only capture a piece of the "big picture" which I would call what you see with your eyes.







Thank you for explaining.


----------



## ljason8eg

Been awhile since I posted here. When I went to Miami this year I spent a day in the Everglades. Really cool place. I'm nothing special at wildlife photography but I had fun trying! Here's a few from the day.

9R1V8684.jpg by ~JLo~, on Flickr

9R1V8609.jpg by ~JLo~, on Flickr

9R1V8596.jpg by ~JLo~, on Flickr

9R1V8647.jpg by ~JLo~, on Flickr

9R1V8652.jpg by ~JLo~, on Flickr

9R1V8641.jpg by ~JLo~, on Flickr

9R1V8659.jpg by ~JLo~, on Flickr


----------



## Gobigorgohome

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> Been awhile since I posted here. When I went to Miami this year I spent a day in the Everglades. Really cool place. I'm nothing special at wildlife photography but I had fun trying! Here's a few from the day.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 9R1V8684.jpg by ~JLo~, on Flickr
> 
> 9R1V8609.jpg by ~JLo~, on Flickr
> 
> 9R1V8596.jpg by ~JLo~, on Flickr
> 
> 9R1V8647.jpg by ~JLo~, on Flickr
> 
> 9R1V8652.jpg by ~JLo~, on Flickr
> 
> 9R1V8641.jpg by ~JLo~, on Flickr
> 
> 9R1V8659.jpg by ~JLo~, on Flickr


Amazing photos, I like the stills best, but that bird picking up that thingy looks pretty awesome. First picture is insane, detail, focus and everything is good. Well done!


----------



## Magical Eskimo

What sort of spider is that?! Looks menacing!


----------



## ace8uk

Awesome, I see these are using the new 150-600 as well. I'm impressed, quality looks good, even at the long end. What are your opinions of the lens?


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> I just got an iPhone 6+ ...I'm going to only shoot with the camera on it. No more DSLR for me.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The best camera is the one in your hand
Click to expand...

I take that back, my DSLR is sooo much better. People who say cameras on phones are soo much better these days are 100% full ******. IQ looks the same as my old iPod Touch. lol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> Been awhile since I posted here. When I went to Miami this year I spent a day in the Everglades. Really cool place. I'm nothing special at wildlife photography but I had fun trying! Here's a few from the day.


Thanks for letting me know...lol Where in the everglades did you go? I haven't been there in a while. Last time I went I caught a 4 ft alligator and threw it at my friend in his van. XD

Great shot of the blue heron with the snake in its mouth!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> What sort of spider is that?! Looks menacing!


Golden silk orb-weaver. They are essentially harmless. They are everywhere around here.


----------



## MistaBernie

The general IQ on phones has noticeably improved over the last couple couple of years (dare I say few), but when your day is spent tooling around with a relatively recent full frame DSLR, it's real easy to see the differences.


----------



## hokiealumnus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> I just got an iPhone 6+ ...I'm going to only shoot with the camera on it. No more DSLR for me.


I decided to try that once after getting my G3. It lasted about two shots.

EDIT - Which is what I figured, so I had the SLR with me already.


----------



## Jixr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> I was very tempted to get a m43, till i got an EOS M + 22mm f2 for 1/2 to 1/3 what it would need for me to get a good m43. The latter would probably focus faster, have more features but in general inferior IQ to the M. I would not really mind, I only wanted and all-around street shooter that I could have on me. I got stubborn and said that I would have to work with what I had, and getting an M for $250 was something I could not resist.
> 
> Most users making big gear decisions, usually try to overcompensate to convince themselves more than others. Especially amateurs that don't have the portfolio or the income from their pictures their new equipment will score them to speak for itself, they drag along theorizing - like I am now - as if anyone cares for them being fools with their wallets more than themselves.
> If you are happy with your equipment, more power to you. But don't dismiss anyone's choices.


Yeah, The M has some problems, but once you figure out how to work around them, its an awesome little cam. I think I paid $300 for mine with both lens's brand new. Love the little thing. Goes with me everywhere

Also if you don't have the EF adaptor, canon droped the price down to like $50, so I'm thinking of getting one of those as well.


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gobigorgohome*
> 
> Lots of information in the last part there, but what I get from it (it is a lot), but of course the person behind the camera has to find the good locations and good motives to take picture of (luckily I am not hard to please), I love nature in general, I like architecture (such as different building-cultures is kind of inspiring, buildings, bridges, tunnels and generally "art-forms of architecture (or engineering)). I also like cars, boats, animals and pretty much everything within computers. I need to learn the basics with the camera (which settings to use for which objective), obviously a lot about lightning and the presentation of the objects (such as computer-parts). In the start I will not focus to much on moving objects because I can imagine how hard that would be to get a clear shot and the right focus and everything that follows. I know a camera only capture a piece of the "big picture" which I would call what you see with your eyes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you for explaining.


Getting good shots and people in your surroundings to praise you and think "you are a great photographer" is not that hard.

Just think OCN: getting a good gaming PC to game and have fun @ 1080p is something that would cost you what? $600? Realistically you can do that easily, built it in an afternoon, end of story.
You will be enjoying better graphics than your console friends, you are good enough.
But how about getting your built discussed a lot in OCN with a monstrous built-log? How about being the MOTM winner? Apples and oranges, right? Huge money sink, huge time sink, but it is not as hard for all ppl. Some can make it easier than others, it just "clicks" to them easier. Does it mean that they will have more fun using their computer than the next guy with the $600-one-afternoon-build? Nope.

Same for photography.

Some will spend minimal amount of money on gear, practice a lot and get to a good level.

Others will spend tons (by comparison, if you think about money as a % of their income it might be nothing for them) and just take some "snapshots" (hint, derogatory term)

Others will spend tons, go good images if the have the time to invest, but rarely have the time to do so properly.

Some will become pros, do mediocre job, often worse than what passionate amateurs produce. Pro photographer doesn't mean "better" photographer, much like pro PC builder doesn't mean you will do better than the passionate OCN or equiv. "forum hero builders". But guess what? The former makes a living from photography - mediocre or not - while the other most likely just sinks money into his/her hobby.

Some, amateurs or pros, transcend their photography to art. Art is a medium for conveying feeling, for communicating and provoking emotion. If you are good at it, you can plan ahead and capture, choose and edit images in a way that communicate specific (give or take) feelings, "move" people the direction you want just by viewing a 2D picture, let their minds loose but not "everywhere", just around where you want them to be.

All of the above categories can get moving images once in a while.
Will it take 10,000 clicks to get one? No, it might take 10.

I don't believe that the 10,000 clicks mean anything as a number, especially in our digital world where the medium is not dirt cheap. I have friends shooting sports, and even at semi-pro levels they have hundreds of thousands of clicks each year. Quantity is not quality. It is how you grow with time, not the amount of work you produce - although the latter is important too if you are making a living out of it.

For sure tho, a photographer that wishes to "grow" and become better, should be able to spot the weaknesses of the first 10,000 clicks, learn and evolve. Much like every cell in us contains the experience and improvements of thousands (or millions) of generations behind us, each additional click in our shutter should be a tiny bit informed by the knowledge the previous clicks (should) have provided. It is a slow process, tho the digital photography medium with its instant review potential can help you learn darn fast by comparison.

I am in architecture. We say "which is my best work? perhaps the next one!", and this should be the mentality for every passionate "anything".
I will strive to do better with my next rig, my next photoshoot, my next travel, my next w/e.

Talent is maybe 10% of the outcome. The rest is practice, critical thinking and most important editing. Not photoshop editing, but shorting out the good from the bad, cherry picking your best work and learning from your mistakes and successes. Its what I suck at doing with my posts. Keep getting longer and longer.


----------



## Conspiracy

Great Article i saw on facebook that i want to share in hopes that some will read and learn but, for the most part, yall will also share with newcomers/amateurs to help them and maybe they will share as well. this isnt a mindblowing or though provoking or game changing article. just straight up advice









http://petapixel.com/2014/12/04/4-questions-amateur-photographers-need-stop-asking-ask-instead/


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ace8uk*
> 
> Awesome, I see these are using the new 150-600 as well. I'm impressed, quality looks good, even at the long end. What are your opinions of the lens?


Overall I'm happy with it. I definitely did not have any issues with it grabbing focus or tracking the birds in flight and I am happy with the sharpness considering the price.

The biggest drawback for me personally is that the VC doesn't have a mode for panning. I left VC on for the wildlife shots and it seemed to not matter because the shutter speeds were high enough. For lower shutter speed panning at the racetrack I had to turn it off to get sharp shots.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Thanks for letting me know...lol Where in the everglades did you go? I haven't been there in a while. Last time I went I caught a 4 ft alligator and threw it at my friend in his van. XD
> 
> Great shot of the blue heron with the snake in its mouth!


Yeah yeah that's on me. Sorry about that.

I went out to the Shark Valley visitors center and did the tram tour. Then on the way back into Miami we decided to do an airboat ride at Gator Park.


----------



## Gobigorgohome

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Getting good shots and people in your surroundings to praise you and think "you are a great photographer" is not that hard.
> 
> Just think OCN: getting a good gaming PC to game and have fun @ 1080p is something that would cost you what? $600? Realistically you can do that easily, built it in an afternoon, end of story.
> You will be enjoying better graphics than your console friends, you are good enough.
> But how about getting your built discussed a lot in OCN with a monstrous built-log? How about being the MOTM winner? Apples and oranges, right? Huge money sink, huge time sink, but it is not as hard for all ppl. Some can make it easier than others, it just "clicks" to them easier. Does it mean that they will have more fun using their computer than the next guy with the $600-one-afternoon-build? Nope.
> 
> Same for photography.
> 
> Some will spend minimal amount of money on gear, practice a lot and get to a good level.
> 
> Others will spend tons (by comparison, if you think about money as a % of their income it might be nothing for them) and just take some "snapshots" (hint, derogatory term)
> 
> Others will spend tons, go good images if the have the time to invest, but rarely have the time to do so properly.
> 
> Some will become pros, do mediocre job, often worse than what passionate amateurs produce. Pro photographer doesn't mean "better" photographer, much like pro PC builder doesn't mean you will do better than the passionate OCN or equiv. "forum hero builders". But guess what? The former makes a living from photography - mediocre or not - while the other most likely just sinks money into his/her hobby.
> 
> Some, amateurs or pros, transcend their photography to art. Art is a medium for conveying feeling, for communicating and provoking emotion. If you are good at it, you can plan ahead and capture, choose and edit images in a way that communicate specific (give or take) feelings, "move" people the direction you want just by viewing a 2D picture, let their minds loose but not "everywhere", just around where you want them to be.
> 
> All of the above categories can get moving images once in a while.
> Will it take 10,000 clicks to get one? No, it might take 10.
> 
> I don't believe that the 10,000 clicks mean anything as a number, especially in our digital world where the medium is not dirt cheap. I have friends shooting sports, and even at semi-pro levels they have hundreds of thousands of clicks each year. Quantity is not quality. It is how you grow with time, not the amount of work you produce - although the latter is important too if you are making a living out of it.
> 
> For sure tho, a photographer that wishes to "grow" and become better, should be able to spot the weaknesses of the first 10,000 clicks, learn and evolve. Much like every cell in us contains the experience and improvements of thousands (or millions) of generations behind us, each additional click in our shutter should be a tiny bit informed by the knowledge the previous clicks (should) have provided. It is a slow process, tho the digital photography medium with its instant review potential can help you learn darn fast by comparison.
> 
> I am in architecture. We say "which is my best work? perhaps the next one!", and this should be the mentality for every passionate "anything".
> I will strive to do better with my next rig, my next photoshoot, my next travel, my next w/e.
> 
> Talent is maybe 10% of the outcome. The rest is practice, critical thinking and most important editing. Not photoshop editing, but shorting out the good from the bad, cherry picking your best work and learning from your mistakes and successes. Its what I suck at doing with my posts. Keep getting longer and longer.


I understand, I do. Got pretty happy with some of my first shots actually, especially with one of my cats that was in focus, colors was also pretty good.

I have a few questions about the D5200, I have been trying to figure out this focusing-thingy, this green little box does not focus on the object I want to have in focus, have tried to turning on the "wheel" to change to either "auto" or "manual" mode, sometimes it works great in "manual" and the next time it does not. I think I have to study the user manual some more because I should manage to have the object focused right even though I am totally new? I get some shots that has the focus the right place, but it seems to be just "luck" and not that I have learned how it will focus on the object I want it to focus on. The most interesting option is "M-manual(?)" because I can change everything from Blitz to HDR (have not tried HDR or anything else of those yet).

I need some good "recipe" for how to do this properly, I have to make one for myself till I remember it, been trying to figure out this with the lightning, where should I place the lightsource when I am taking photos? Behind, aside or some other place? Best shots with the focus right and everything happens with the Blitz.

Blitz = flashlight/flash lamp


----------



## TUDJ

You're asking questions which are broad and some of them are the fundamentals of photography. Many of them depend on the situation you are in, the subject, lighting etc.

The skill of a good photographer isn't just being able to figure out one group of settings but being able to quickly adapt and work with the changing conditions and environment they are shooting in.

I strongly recommend putting some of your questions into Google or even loose terms such as "photography lighting" and take your time to read through various sources. There is no quick answer, it's a skill (or group of skills) which will take time to learn and hone as you progress.

I consider myself a quick learner, I started the hobby a year ago and I still see myself as a beginner.

I like to choose one area to focus on and spend my next few outings with the camera with that as my main objective. I might decide to practice panning, using perspective effectively, subjects with patterns etc. Once I feel I've made an improvement I'll bunch some of those together. Doing this often, I feel I now do many of them without thinking about and the quality of my photos is much higher.


----------



## cambuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gobigorgohome*
> 
> I understand, I do. Got pretty happy with some of my first shots actually, especially with one of my cats that was in focus, colors was also pretty good.
> 
> I have a few questions about the D5200, I have been trying to figure out this focusing-thingy, this green little box does not focus on the object I want to have in focus, have tried to turning on the "wheel" to change to either "auto" or "manual" mode, sometimes it works great in "manual" and the next time it does not. I think I have to study the user manual some more because I should manage to have the object focused right even though I am totally new? I get some shots that has the focus the right place, but it seems to be just "luck" and not that I have learned how it will focus on the object I want it to focus on. The most interesting option is "M-manual(?)" because I can change everything from Blitz to HDR (have not tried HDR or anything else of those yet).
> 
> I need some good "recipe" for how to do this properly, I have to make one for myself till I remember it, been trying to figure out this with the lightning, where should I place the lightsource when I am taking photos? Behind, aside or some other place? Best shots with the focus right and everything happens with the Blitz.
> 
> Blitz = flashlight/flash lamp


Ignore the gimmick features and master the basics of manual exposure and focusing.
The little green box is a focus point. Your cam should have quite a few of these viewable in the viewfinder. They should be individually selectable via a menu although the center focus point is normally the default. The idea being that you can compose your image first, then choose which focus point the camera actually uses to obtain focus.
The reality is that rarely will one of these selectable points land exactly upon what you intend to focus on. Bummer huh?
Sooo, instead just use the centre point to obtain focus by way of a half press on the shutter button, keeping the button half depressed you then recompose your image then fully depress the button to take the shot.
This feature is called shutter/AF lock, your camera should give you the option of using one of the external buttons to lock focus rather than using the halfpress.
On canons its the '*' back button,I'm not sure about nikons but it should have it.
Be warned, if you're shooting macro or wide open with a f2.8 or wider lens - recomposing will possibly alter the field of focus sufficiently enough to knock your original subject out of focus.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gobigorgohome*
> 
> What I would characterize as "decent" photo is clear shots (background blur or whatever does not matter if that is not the main "theme" in the picture), with right focus (of what I actually is taking the picture
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> of), right zoom (that I get what I want to see in the picture and not too much or not enough), "right" lightning (pretty much get a smooth transition between dark and light) and be careful to have the background that fits the object I am shooting and so on. That is what I would call "over-the-normal" good photo, this is just what I think is the trickiest part.
> Let's take an example, I am up in the mountains walking around and look at this great sky formation when the sun is either raising or setting, I would like to get that shot right (perhaps even with the horizon underneath it to make it "the little extra" and set it into a relation with the nature. This is very likely what I want to be using this DSLR for (typically me), or sunsets over water, with some bushes and a wharf in the front (pictures I prefer). I would probably take a few shots to be sure I actually get what I wants, either with the wharf in focus or the sun/clouds in the background.
> 
> I think I have a good eye for detail and the mindset to take "decent" pictures with a DSLR.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1.) Look above (hope that is a good enough explanation of what I think it is), I know it is subjective.
> 2.) "Every time" was probably the wrong term to use, what I should have written is "most of the time". I will always be looked at as an amateur on photography and I am fine with that.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lots of information in the last part there, but what I get from it (it is a lot), but of course the person behind the camera has to find the good locations and good motives to take picture of (luckily I am not hard to please), I love nature in general, I like architecture (such as different building-cultures is kind of inspiring, buildings, bridges, tunnels and generally "art-forms of architecture (or engineering)). I also like cars, boats, animals and pretty much everything within computers. I need to learn the basics with the camera (which settings to use for which objective), obviously a lot about lightning and the presentation of the objects (such as computer-parts). In the start I will not focus to much on moving objects because I can imagine how hard that would be to get a clear shot and the right focus and everything that follows. I know a camera only capture a piece of the "big picture" which I would call what you see with your eyes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you for explaining.


Outdoors, not much you can do about lighting. The sun is so bright that even the strongest of flashes will do little. Your best chance at shooting in wooded areas is probably right after the sun goes down, as you will have fully even light. Might be a bit dark though, so it helps to have a fast lens. I snapped a few shots of my new car during this time, and you can see just how even the lighting is. (Click on "Minus" in my sig.) That was at 100 iso too, so I had plenty of room for more shutter speed or aperture. As for the right zoom, you can always crop, but you can't always go back and take a wider shot. If I'm unsure of what zoom I want, I generally take a few at different ranges (say 18mm, 25, 35, and maybe 55) and find what I like best.

Fyi, capturing clouds not directly in front of the sun, or far away, will be quite hard.


----------



## Totally Dubbed

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MunneY*
> 
> Alright guys, I need your expertise!
> 
> I can take "Decent" pictures with my D5100, but I'd like to really get more familiar with it. Can anyone tell me somewhere online that does a course on it? I've tried finding classes locally, but I can't seem to find anything. I did the YT thing but it hasn't REALLY helped.


well I would just like to input my noob opinion here:
First of all, I'm no photographer, I'm not a person with genuine desires to manually control my camera each time, nor am I someone with a great camera (although I've ordered a Sony a5100). However, I'm someone that appreciates good photos, art and likes to see things or people well represented in photos.

My 'advice' would be very simple - each time you're about to take a photo, ask yourself a few questions:
What is the subject of the photo?
What am I trying to show in this photo / what emotions?
How are the colours going to show on my PC, after I've taken this photo? (Ie if things match or blend etc)
And finally, one that I love asking myself, due to my love of skies and nature: Will this make a good desktop wallpaper?

These questions to me, help me understand and portray better photos.
If you look online, most of the time you'll find photos, ever so slightly edited. It's not always true, but be careful with what you read and trust online, in terms of photography. Sure getting a photo you like and trying to recreate it can be educational, but could also lead to a dead end, especially if the photo was edited (ie you can't get that type of light/brightness in xyz conditions)

More than anything, take photos that you'll be proud of, something you can show your family and friends, to say to them: I took this. Rather than, check this life event etc


----------



## cambuff

@nvidiaftw12That's a little misleading. Plenty of flashes can overpower sunlight, especially when combined with higher X-sync speeds.
But that's another topic all of its own tbh.


----------



## Gobigorgohome

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cambuff*
> 
> Ignore the gimmick features and master the basics of manual exposure and focusing.
> The little green box is a focus point. Your cam should have quite a few of these viewable in the viewfinder. They should be individually selectable via a menu although the center focus point is normally the default. The idea being that you can compose your image first, then choose which focus point the camera actually uses to obtain focus.
> The reality is that rarely will one of these selectable points land exactly upon what you intend to focus on. Bummer huh?
> Sooo, instead just use the centre point to obtain focus by way of a half press on the shutter button, keeping the button half depressed you then recompose your image then fully depress the button to take the shot.
> This feature is called shutter/AF lock, your camera should give you the option of using one of the external buttons to lock focus rather than using the halfpress.
> On canons its the '*' back button,I'm not sure about nikons but it should have it.
> Be warned, if you're shooting macro or wide open with a f2.8 or wider lens - recomposing will possibly alter the field of focus sufficiently enough to knock your original subject out of focus.


Yeah, the focus kind of worked against me it seemed like, I thought it might be a button to adjust the focus-points somewhere, I will take a more accurate look at the manual of the button layout for the buttons I do not understand. I will be taken your points to mind and head back to the user manual for some more information about this camera.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> Outdoors, not much you can do about lighting. The sun is so bright that even the strongest of flashes will do little. Your best chance at shooting in wooded areas is probably right after the sun goes down, as you will have fully even light. Might be a bit dark though, so it helps to have a fast lens. I snapped a few shots of my new car during this time, and you can see just how even the lighting is. (Click on "Minus" in my sig.) That was at 100 iso too, so I had plenty of room for more shutter speed or aperture. As for the right zoom, you can always crop, but you can't always go back and take a wider shot. If I'm unsure of what zoom I want, I generally take a few at different ranges (say 18mm, 25, 35, and maybe 55) and find what I like best.
> 
> Fyi, capturing clouds not directly in front of the sun, or far away, will be quite hard.


I have not taken a single shot outdoors yet I think, either dusk or dawn for lightning I have read somewhere. I do not find much help in the zoom options on the 18-55mm lens, I would probably get a 150-500mm when I have the money for it to use for long shots.


----------



## cambuff

@Gobigorgohomethe camera manual is your best friend. Too many beginners tend to skip reading it which is daft because they give very detailed instructions on every feature, and more importantly - 'why/what' the feature is for.

Seriously, with the sheer volume of beginners posting the same questions in here I have to wonder why there isn't a bunch of stickies pointing towards suitable tutorials. I think it would save a lot of hassle, and cut out a lot of the misinformation I've seen posted as responses to these questions.


----------



## G33K

Where's the best place to get my film developed and scanned? I just took my first roll to Walgreens and they pumped it out at 1545x1024 for $11. Below is one of the only probably 2 salvageable shots so it was good for just practice, but I'd like to get higher res when I finally figure out how to best use this old geezer.


----------



## kbros

Nice! Looks Great.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *G33K*
> 
> Where's the best place to get my film developed and scanned? I just took my first roll to Walgreens and they pumped it out at 1545x1024 for $11. Below is one of the only probably 2 salvageable shots so it was good for just practice, but I'd like to get higher res when I finally figure out how to best use this old geezer.


If youre Planning on sticking with it then its worth while to invest in a kit to develop at home. No darkroom necessary. I think it was less than $100 for chems and tanks for me. I started off dumb and wasted money on stuff. And i also bought a refurb epson v500 for $99 which will give nicer scans than walgreens lol. If its more casual then id mail your film off for dev/scans.


----------



## G33K

Actually, I found a place in town, I might take it there. I know the guy and took one of his classes at the college for fun elective credits, so he might even teach me how to develop it and then let me use his Hasselblad X5. That or someone on POTN linked me to http://www.northcoastphoto.com/

Edit: forgot the place in town http://www.agximaging.com/


----------



## Conspiracy

OMG DEAL

if you have been considering a sony mirrorless grab this and dont think twice about it. $300 for NEX-5T + 16-50mm lens

http://www.amazon.com/Sony-NEX-5TL-Compact-Interchangeable-Digital/dp/B00ENZRP38/ref=sr_1_1?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1417791779&sr=1-1&keywords=nex-5t&tag=viglink20349-20


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> OMG DEAL
> 
> if you have been considering a sony mirrorless grab this and dont think twice about it. $300 for NEX-5T + 16-50mm lens
> 
> http://www.amazon.com/Sony-NEX-5TL-Compact-Interchangeable-Digital/dp/B00ENZRP38/ref=sr_1_1?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1417791779&sr=1-1&keywords=nex-5t&tag=viglink20349-20


Great price, great camera, expensive system tho*.

But if I was to get a single camera for all around use, and I would not care much for the decreased battery life vs. a DSLR (given you won't be using liveview with the DSLR), I would seriously consider this. You will feel it is not a toy as soon as you get it in your hand.

* EDIT: expensive is relative...but I would not settle for the kit zoom, I know it, and the compact primes / pancakes for NEX are a bit salty - the cheapest one is more than this kit's current price.
Would not mind the 35 1.8 OS, but it gets out of control fast with the prices crop lenses ask these days...


----------



## hokiealumnus

Wow, if I had that much lying around I'd totally jump on that deal; thanks for sharing.


----------



## Conspiracy

im almost considering it but i know it will get like zero use. money should probably be better spent on a colormunki for monitor calibrating since that will probably get slightly more use since ill at least calibrate probably once a month every month lol


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> im almost considering it but i know it will get like zero use. money should probably be better spent on a colormunki for monitor calibrating since that will probably get slightly more use since ill at least calibrate probably once a month every month lol


You can also be a hero and calibrate the monitors @ work and all your friends etc









If you are not into street photography, hiking or anything that would make the 5D III or whichever DSLR you have too cumbersome or intimidating to carry around, those mirrorless cameras will be of limited use.

If you don't own a good DSLR and you want (crop) DSLR like quality, or if you have a DSLR but you are after something smaller but would not get a small-sensor compact, then this is an amazing deal. 1/2 the price of an RX100...


----------



## Conspiracy

im calibrating everything at work. my dual ultrasharps on my desk, my MBP, my co workers ultrasharp thats used for animation, my other coworkers ultrasharp used for reading emails and youtube.

you get a calibration, you get calibrated, you get calibrated. we are all getting a calibratiooooooooooooooooooon


----------



## ace8uk

Throw me some of dat calibration, brah.


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ace8uk*
> 
> Throw me some of dat calibration, brah.


Me and markeh found a colormunki on ebay, and it's in lincoln as well. The only problem is it's over £100 now with 2 days to go


----------



## ace8uk

Colour munki, huh. Never had you down as a UKIP supporter...


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ace8uk*
> 
> Colour munki, huh. Never had you down as a UKIP supporter...


That got me


----------



## Jixr

So slightly OT here, but does anyone know of any decent free video editing software?

I have imovie, and its completely useless, and am looking for something thats user friendly, but not as basic or as limited as imovie


----------



## kbros

Anyone know what this is? Small red dots around my picture. Sensor issue? "Dead Pixels?"


----------



## ace8uk

That's the higgs boson.


----------



## MistaBernie

Could be hot pixels. These can be prevalent in long exposures, for example, because the sensor is working for longer than normal and can heat up.


----------



## kbros

LOL. Must be noise, it went away with noise reduction in lightroom.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> So slightly OT here, but does anyone know of any decent free video editing software?
> 
> I have imovie, and its completely useless, and am looking for something thats user friendly, but not as basic or as limited as imovie


mac or pc? both come with free software/ imovie and windows movie maker. imovie isnt too shabby

ALSO OT. i found a nikon SB900 at work with a rather corroded battery compartment so i brought it home to clean. looks like i have 3 speed lights now ^_^ just need to order a stand and im good to go


----------



## Jixr

either is fine but preferably OSX, as thats where all my photo and media is.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Hot pixels as bernie said. I actually first learned about those from good old Marin. Shouldn't happen except at high isos and longer exposures. Maybe high iso video too.


----------



## kbros

I shot maybe <10 shots at about 1 second each before that shot I posted. Would that cause hot pixels? And do they go away?


----------



## MistaBernie

hypothetically it could.. as you saw though, noise reduction tends to take care of them, so unless your images look like chicken pox, it shouldn't be a huge deal.

If you start seeing clumps of them in consistent areas in your images, that's when I'd start paying attention to what you're doing as that's a sign of a bigger issue.


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> Anyone know what this is? Small red dots around my picture. Sensor issue? "Dead Pixels?"


It is a lens issue.

You might read chromatic aberation as the cause and color fringing as the result.

It is visible in high contrast transitions (eg your text example, branches infont of sky etc).

Most lenses exhibit that wide open and it gets reduced as you stop the aperture down.

Since in your case the subject was b&w mostly, the color noise reduction picked the CA pattern easily, but usually LR & PS offer lens profiles that fix it in a more targeted fashion.

This is not dead pixels and don't worry. Photo sensors are the most reliable part of our cameras. Plus hot pixels are stuck to a full R, G or B value, rarely stuck with all =white. Dead are black. Those don't form patterns.


----------



## Scott1541

Been out trying some HDR again this afternoon, what do you guys think? These have been done by creating a 32 bit TIFF in PS then editing in camera raw. Second one was 5 exposures, ±2 stop, others were 3 ex ± 1 stop (I think)


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



HDR Attempt 1 by Scott3933, on Flickr

HDR 2 by Scott3933, on Flickr

HDR 3 by Scott3933, on Flickr



I've tried to keep it realistic because I know a lot of people 'over do' their images, and I'd rather not have mine look like someone's thrown up a load of skittles


----------



## Conspiracy

not bad scott. im not really into HDR but you did it well


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> It is a lens issue.
> 
> You might read chromatic aberation as the cause and color fringing as the result.
> 
> It is visible in high contrast transitions (eg your text example, branches infont of sky etc).
> 
> Most lenses exhibit that wide open and it gets reduced as you stop the aperture down.
> 
> Since in your case the subject was b&w mostly, the color noise reduction picked the CA pattern easily, but usually LR & PS offer lens profiles that fix it in a more targeted fashion.
> 
> This is not dead pixels and don't worry. Photo sensors are the most reliable part of our cameras. Plus hot pixels are stuck to a full R, G or B value, rarely stuck with all =white. Dead are black. Those don't form patterns.


I think you missed a few things - I.e. The individual red 'hot pixels' in the black region of the picture. They're tough to see at first glance but they're there.


----------



## kbros

Yeah I was talking about the red dots in the black portion of the photo.


----------



## cambuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> Yeah I was talking about the red dots in the black portion of the photo.


Its quite normal, even on higher end Dslrs and medium format backs to have a couple dead pixels. Normally raw converters see these and replace them with information from surrounding pixels. Its no biggy unless you've a lot of them.


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> Been out trying some HDR again this afternoon, what do you guys think? These have been done by creating a 32 bit TIFF in PS then editing in camera raw. Second one was 5 exposures, ±2 stop, others were 3 ex ± 1 stop (I think)
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> HDR Attempt 1 by Scott3933, on Flickr
> 
> HDR 2 by Scott3933, on Flickr
> 
> HDR 3 by Scott3933, on Flickr
> 
> 
> 
> I've tried to keep it realistic because I know a lot of people 'over do' their images, and I'd rather not have mine look like someone's thrown up a load of skittles


Me likes, but i think in all 3, WB is too cold.
The 1st one is definately better, but the other two are too cold (WB was fooled as you were in the shade probably).
Most landscape shots (that don't need to convey cold at least) look better with a warmer WB - i.e. warmer than "ideal". In this case I think you are on the cool side.

I don't think that any of the 3 "screams" HDR or looks overcooked otherwise.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> Been out trying some HDR again this afternoon, what do you guys think? These have been done by creating a 32 bit TIFF in PS then editing in camera raw. Second one was 5 exposures, ±2 stop, others were 3 ex ± 1 stop (I think)
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> HDR Attempt 1 by Scott3933, on Flickr
> 
> HDR 2 by Scott3933, on Flickr
> 
> HDR 3 by Scott3933, on Flickr
> 
> 
> 
> I've tried to keep it realistic because I know a lot of people 'over do' their images, and I'd rather not have mine look like someone's thrown up a load of skittles
> 
> 
> 
> Me likes, but i think in all 3, WB is too cold.
> The 1st one is definately better, but the other two are too cold (WB was fooled as you were in the shade probably).
> Most landscape shots (that don't need to convey cold at least) look better with a warmer WB - i.e. warmer than "ideal". In this case I think you are on the cool side.
> 
> I don't think that any of the 3 "screams" HDR or looks overcooked otherwise.
Click to expand...

idk what youre rambling about with those 2 shots being too cold and all landscapes should have warmth added.

-these arent traditional landscapes and more show desolate/abandoned interior and exterior of something that looks isolated in the woods
-adding warmth to this would ruin the images by making them look more inviting. these are pretty neutral on my screen, even if they were cold it would only help not hurt the abandoned emptiness of these shots.
-not all landscapes need added extra warmth. its great that you prefer warmer landscapes but these would look extremely strange if overly warm as it just wouldnt be natural to see a warm landscape in the middle of nowhere woods lol
-warmth = soothing, calm, inviting.... cold = uninviting, desolate, abandoned, eery, etc. even making it colder and converting to b/w would really punch it up on the creepiness if that was desired


----------



## Scott1541

Thanks for the responses guys. HDR is something I'd like to use more but never really get the chance, there's nothing that would really do it justice where I am at uni. Plus I usually push & pull the shadows & highlights on a lot of my images anyway so it's not that necessary to use HDR.


----------



## Conspiracy

had no clue there was a gif form of that meme lol

i usually push/pull as well. i did some photos today and totally forgot my 5D3 has built in HDR that i wish i had tested out since i was shooting under awful performance/theater concert lighting


----------



## Scott1541

My D5100 has a built in HDR mode but it only works for JPEG, so I prefer the bracketed exposures route

Edit:

Just finished playing around in the proper uni photography studio for a couple of hours







It was pretty fun, can't wait to get a SB-700 now (christmas present)


----------



## Conspiracy

watch the video in this article

http://petapixel.com/2014/12/09/kenji-yamaguchi-tinkerer-builds-custom-gear-national-geographic-photographers/


----------



## Jixr

Hey guys, I'm looking to do a timelapse this afternoon.

And I have a few questions.

Its going to be over a period of probably 3 hours, and due to the large volume of photos is it best to shoot .jpg's at a smaller resolution?

Also does anyone know of any easy to compile timelapse video software?


----------



## Scott1541

Just dropped a roll of Superia 200 and BW400CN off to be developed. I had a little accident with the BW400CN though, I was winding, about mid way through the roll the handle went stiff, popped the back open thinking it was done but it wasn't so I closed it up again quickly and continued winding. I hope it's not messed up too many frames









Film dev is getting a little more expensive here now, cost me £12 for those 2 36 ex films to be dev'ed and scanned, which overall I worked out is about £0.29 per shot. It's a good job I don't shoot film that regularly


----------



## xILukasIx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> Hey guys, I'm looking to do a timelapse this afternoon.
> 
> And I have a few questions.
> 
> Its going to be over a period of probably 3 hours, and due to the large volume of photos is it best to shoot .jpg's at a smaller resolution?
> 
> Also does anyone know of any easy to compile timelapse video software?


If you have the option, try using MRAW or SRAW if you plan on editing the photos.
If not, JPEG for sure.

Can't help you with the video software though, I always use AfterEffects.


----------



## Jixr

yeah, i figured small scale jpgs to save card space and reduce editing time would probably be easiest.


----------



## Conspiracy

@Jixr

do math and calculate exactly how many photos you will be taking at what interval and that will help a ton.

Total time of event(s)/fps (24 or 30) = X

X/length of the timelapse (s) = the interval you will shoot (how many seconds between each picture)

then use that to calculate how many total pictures will be taken. i use that to calculate gopro time lapses all the time


----------



## Jixr

well, the thing is I don't know exactly how long its going to take me.

But I think i'm going to skip the idea for now, its probably going to have a lot of start and stopping, but i'm not sure if I wanna do all that work just yet.


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> well, the thing is I don't know exactly how long its going to take me.
> 
> But I think i'm going to skip the idea for now, its probably going to have a lot of start and stopping, but i'm not sure if I wanna do all that work just yet.


All that work?

Hours = 3
Seconds (above * 3600) = 10,800 sec
Frame Frequency (seconds) = 10 ?
Total Frames = 1080
MB/Frame = 25MB ? Full RAW
Total MB (above * frames) = 27,000MB

It is not crazy, you can probably fit it in a single 32GB card with lots of space to spare.
Depending on the settings, a single battery might not last that long (pro cameras & cameras with battery grip + 2 batteries are a safer bet for that kind of duration), but it is certainly doable.

You can be shooting the whole thing in M exposure & JPEG to keep PP to a minimum outside assembling the slideshow/timelapse video, or you can go with M exposure + RAW and sync your settings between multiple exposures, in LR, so again it should take more time "baking" & exporting the JPEGs than actually "tweaking" them


----------



## Jixr

well, it was going to be a timelapse of me building some other stuff, and If I have to worry about batteries and all that all while trying to do something else, it seems like i'll just push it off and start off on something much easier to manage.


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> well, it was going to be a timelapse of me building some other stuff, and If I have to worry about batteries and all that all while trying to do something else, it seems like i'll just push it off and start off on something much easier to manage.


If it is you controlling both sides of the process, you can always carefully replace either battery or memory card and keep going!

Nobody will know if you skipped 1-2 frames, and a solid tripod will let you drop in the camera in almost the exact same place to make it un-noticeable.









Did you figure out how to assemble the video?
Will you use LR or another s/w?

Don't procrastinate for too long. Find a shorter project and just practice if you don't want to waste 3 hours.
Shoot yourself washing your new car from an interesting vantage point or something


----------



## Jixr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> If it is you controlling both sides of the process, you can always carefully replace either battery or memory card and keep going!
> 
> Nobody will know if you skipped 1-2 frames, and a solid tripod will let you drop in the camera in almost the exact same place to make it un-noticeable.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Did you figure out how to assemble the video?
> Will you use LR or another s/w?
> 
> Don't procrastinate for too long. Find a shorter project and just practice if you don't want to waste 3 hours.
> Shoot yourself washing your new car from an interesting vantage point or something


Yeah, I think my idea was a bit too ambitious, as I wanted to show a full custom mech keyboard build from the ground up, but I don't think it would have been all that interesting to watch, mostly just soldering.


----------



## jackeyjoe

Okay guys, right now I am in British Columbia, but am thinking of going on a road trip along the west coast of the US(and a bit more inland for the trip back up, not exactly sure where we are going to go yet). Anybody know some places I must visit? I will have my D7000 with me and plan to take plenty of photos, so any recommendations would be amazing!


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jackeyjoe*
> 
> Okay guys, right now I am in British Columbia, but am thinking of going on a road trip along the west coast of the US(and a bit more inland for the trip back up, not exactly sure where we are going to go yet). Anybody know some places I must visit? I will have my D7000 with me and plan to take plenty of photos, so any recommendations would be amazing!


Probably the grand canyon would first come to mind. Yellowstone? Possibly moab if you go that far? I hear cali route 1 is beautiful. Yosemite and the redwood forest would be cool. I'm sure some others will chime in with some less tourested areas.


----------



## jackeyjoe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> Probably the grand canyon would first come to mind. Yellowstone? Possibly moab if you go that far? I hear cali route 1 is beautiful. Yosemite and the redwood forest would be cool. I'm sure some others will chime in with some less tourested areas.


Bit too far south I think, only have 6 days and I'd rather spend about as much time in the car as I am out of it(aside from sleeping of course), wasn't thinking of going any further south than San Francisco if at all possible, then head back east(looking at going through northern Nevada, southern Idaho and back into Washington). Basically, not sure where to go specifically, my friend and I haven't been into America before and have no idea where to go really. I'd like to see as much variety as I can over the 6 days if at all possible


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Gotcha. Olympia nathional forest is like a mini redwood forest, just without redwood, but still damn big ones.



There's me a while back for some scale.

You might enjoy riding the ducks in Seattle, but that won't be as fun as visiting some other places I'm sure.


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jackeyjoe*
> 
> only have 6 days and I'd rather spend about as much time in the car as I am out of it(aside from sleeping of course), wasn't thinking of going any further south than San Francisco if at all possible, then head back east(looking at going through northern Nevada, southern Idaho and back into Washington). Basically, not sure where to go specifically, my friend and I haven't been into America before and have no idea where to go really. I'd like to see as much variety as I can over the 6 days if at all possible


Well, San Francisco is a given then. That will give you your urban hook, good food, nightlife.

I don't have much road-tripping experience in NorCal away from the coast but that's what I can share.

Driving along the HW101 & PCH is amazing, but it can be slower at times. Especially if you stop along the road for pics









If you want some Giant tree fix, you can get it North of SF, driving along the 101HW "Avenue of Giants" & the Redwood national Forest north of Eureka, CA.

You can head south after that and spend the remaining day (or two) in SF. But I know time is limited.

Depending on how many days you have for CA alone, you could try Yosemite, but just getting in (and eventually out) of the park will be a chunk of the day. The park itself is breathtaking, even if you don't hike up and stay in the mild paths around the valley. If you are not an experienced hiker, or you haven't done it for some time, expect getting really tired trying even the "easy" portions of the paths that lead to the waterfalls etc.

I won't even suggest Sequoia national park, as you would probably think that's sidetracking too south, and maybe trees are not "your thing" as much at is mine.
So the places below add some variety without too much sidetracking.

If you want some interesting wildlife, Elephant Seal colonies are fun.
Ano Nuevo state park I believe is the closest you can get to them from San Francisco. I think it is easier to go closer in the Cambria, CA colony along the PCH , but that's much more south. You can find them in either location year-round, but pups are born around this time of the year so it could be exciting. Note that elephant seal males fight over their territory and harems all the time, very violently. Avoid if you don't want to see what 2+ton males do to their adversaries' pups or females when things go wrong (or the seagulls eating the spoils from the last night's incident). Some of the babies lying still are sleeping too deep.

Lake Tahoe is also beautiful and could also be the point where you enter NV.
Maybe stopping by the Yolo Bypass Wildlife Area before Sacramento for some wetland shots & perhaps bird encounters on your way there could be interesting.
Winter is the best season to see birds around there - both wintering travelers, waterfowls, ducks, geese, and predators praying on them (peregrine falcons, northern harriers, red-tailed hawks)! The wetlands are also flooded this time of the year, for nice landscapes. Lots of snakes too, most of them harmless, but be careful when you walk through meadows.


----------



## Scott1541

Got my images back today from the films I got developed. To my amazement accidentally opening the back of the camera mid roll hasn't wrecked any frames whatsoever









If anyone wants take a look here's the album links:

Superia 200

BW400CN

A couple of photos have been cropped but that's it, nothing has been edited otherwise.


----------



## pcfoo

A few cool shots in the BW roll, but i think I liked this one the most:

https://flic.kr/p/qmJWkJ

25130035 by Scott3933, on Flickr


----------



## ace8uk

^ agreed, the B&W film came out really well, especially that shot.


----------



## Scott1541

That shot was taken on a whim when I met my flatmates in the library after a studio session


----------



## kbros

I'm in the process of backing up my raw files and jpegs, as well as my lightroom catalog. In total, they're 42GB. Is there anyway I can compress them into a zip or something to make them considerably smaller. I compressed one folder and it only lost like 3GB, I thought compressing would let me bring it down to a fraction of the size.


----------



## MrStrat007

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> I'm in the process of backing up my raw files and jpegs, as well as my lightroom catalog. In total, they're 42GB. Is there anyway I can compress them into a zip or something to make them considerably smaller. I compressed one folder and it only lost like 3GB, I thought compressing would let me bring it down to a fraction of the size.


Applying compression to a lossless file type will result in considerably less space reduction than converting to a "lossy" or compressed file type such as JPEG, or compressing that particular file type vs. RAW. Because raw preserves all the data from the camera, it will be by nature more difficult to compress without losing some of these details. As far as I know there's no compression type for that kind of data that'll give you significant space savings (I could be wrong though). Converting to JPEG would give you big space savings but at the obvious cost of losing some of the finer details and of course not being in RAW format anymore


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> I'm in the process of backing up my raw files and jpegs, as well as my lightroom catalog. In total, they're 42GB. Is there anyway I can compress them into a zip or something to make them considerably smaller. I compressed one folder and it only lost like 3GB, I thought compressing would let me bring it down to a fraction of the size.


Most "modern" file types already perform some form of "lossless" compression (ala zip) so gains are not that significant.
With RAW/CR2/NEF etc you gain a little bit.
With JPEGs almost nothing.

The most aggressive aproach would be converting your original RAW file type to Adobe "Lossy" DNG file format. Is the closest thing to a RAW, it remains 12-16bit, but does interpolates some pixel islands ala JPEG and ends up 1/3 ~ 1/4th the size of the original RAW.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> I'm in the process of backing up my raw files and jpegs, as well as my lightroom catalog. In total, they're 42GB. Is there anyway I can compress them into a zip or something to make them considerably smaller. I compressed one folder and it only lost like 3GB, I thought compressing would let me bring it down to a fraction of the size.


Forget compressing, buy a bigger back up HDD if needed, use freefilesync for all your file backup needs.


----------



## kbros

Ended up using windows' "refresh" option, where it keeps everything in my pictures folder but deletes all programs etc. Sweet deal. I am in the process of building a home server so I can keep my files in there for next time.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> I'm in the process of backing up my raw files and jpegs, as well as my lightroom catalog. In total, they're 42GB. Is there anyway I can compress them into a zip or something to make them considerably smaller. I compressed one folder and it only lost like 3GB, I thought compressing would let me bring it down to a fraction of the size.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Most "modern" file types already perform some form of "lossless" compression (ala zip) so gains are not that significant.
> With RAW/CR2/NEF etc you gain a little bit.
> With JPEGs almost nothing.
> 
> The most aggressive aproach would be converting your original RAW file type to Adobe "Lossy" DNG file format. Is the closest thing to a RAW, it remains 12-16bit, but does interpolates some pixel islands ala JPEG and ends up 1/3 ~ 1/4th the size of the original RAW.
Click to expand...

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> I'm in the process of backing up my raw files and jpegs, as well as my lightroom catalog. In total, they're 42GB. Is there anyway I can compress them into a zip or something to make them considerably smaller. I compressed one folder and it only lost like 3GB, I thought compressing would let me bring it down to a fraction of the size.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Forget compressing, buy a bigger back up HDD if needed, use freefilesync for all your file backup needs.
Click to expand...

going to have to say without a doubt seans advice is WAY better lolz









HDD space isnt that expensive these days so there isnt much excuse for running out of space and its much easier than trying to convert a butt load of files just to save space. also 42GB of images is not a lot









i just hit almost 1.5TB from the past 3 months alone of just video work


----------



## kbros

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> going to have to say without a doubt seans advice is WAY better lolz
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HDD space isnt that expensive these days so there isnt much excuse for running out of space and its much easier than trying to convert a butt load of files just to save space. also 42GB of images is not a lot
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i just hit almost 1.5TB from the past 3 months alone of just video work


It is when you thought you could throw it on a 32gb flashdrive and call it a day.

I have like 850gb left on my HD, I was just trying to re-install windows but I wanted to put my photos on a flashdrive.


----------



## pcfoo

Well, I wasn't judging what he was trying to do, only suggesting how it can be done. Maybe he tries to keep everything on a smallish SSD? I don't know, I don't judge.

42GB is literally nothing as far as digital photo libraries containing RAW files go these days...I have bigger memory cards than those, and I know too many people that would produce that weekly, if not daily.
Assuming your library is already edited down (= duplicates and/or unimportant snaps deleted), the only way to make RAWs smaller in a meaningful way, is converting them to a lossy format - one way or another.

If you want to relieve your Lightroom catalog to make it work faster, the proper way is to break it down to smaller catalogs (in Library , select one or more folders and export folder as Catalog)
Want it be by year, or by month or by trip/session/job etc, that is up to you. Again, I don't think 42GB of files is that much to make LR considerably slower, tho adding 100s of GB in a single catalog does eventually slow your workflow a bit. Many pros keep a different catalog for each job, or each job type - e.g. "Weddings" Catalog, "Marathons" Catalog, Lil Mike's Basketball Games Catalog etc

Edit: he gave his reasons above...


----------



## Magical Eskimo

My photo library is only about 20gb I think


----------



## Conspiracy

20GB of jpg's


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> 20GB of jpg's


RAWs and jpgs actually


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> 20GB of jpg's
> 
> 
> 
> RAWs and jpgs actually
Click to expand...

well in that case you need to shoot more


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> well in that case you need to shoot more


Yeah I know lol, my camera is shared with my girlfriend who goes to uni so I only get it half the year. I have it over Xmas though yay and I just got a tripod so hopefully I'll get plenty of chances to go shoot


----------



## Sean Webster

Gosh how do you have such small libraries? I havent even shot much this year and this years library is near 300GB. lol

If you need to backup your pics just buy a dedicated external or two for it. A small USB is useless once you start shooting more.


----------



## Scott1541

My library is just over 40GB, mostly raw with a few jpegs too. This is only what I've shot since getting a DSLR though which was just under 12 months ago. I store my photos on a 1TB USB hard drive which currently has about 600GB free, so I won't need to upgrade for a while







(Photos are backed up to another 1TB HDD which is at kept home, so I can only back up once every few weeks)


----------



## DizZz

My library is at 103gb after 3 months. Instead of external drives, I have found that cloud storage is way cheaper and has numerous benefits over externals.


----------



## Sean Webster

Cloud would never work for me unless I got Gigabit internet. My upload is only 1.5Mb/s....on a good day lol.


----------



## kbros

Oh that's horrendous.

PS. I store all my JPEGS in google drive, and when I run out, I have 40gb on Copy (Cloud service) and another 30gb on OneDrive.

PSS. And 100gb of google drive is only $2 /month so I might just do that, I'm a google fanboy fershure.


----------



## Sean Webster

I have never been a fan of google drive since it went full ****** on me after reformatting. Dropbox is so much better.


----------



## scottath

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Cloud would never work for me unless I got Gigabit internet. My upload is only 1.5Mb/s....on a good day lol.


Oh - i get about 100kb/s.....work is far better though.
My library is currently 1.35TB








Google drive just became 'unlimited' for me via my work account (Google apps for education) - going to exercise that a bit over the holidays,


----------



## DizZz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> Oh that's horrendous.
> 
> PS. I store all my JPEGS in google drive, and when I run out, I have 40gb on Copy (Cloud service) and another 30gb on OneDrive.
> 
> PSS. And 100gb of google drive is only $2 /month so I might just do that, I'm a google fanboy fershure.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> I have never been a fan of google drive since it went full ****** on me after reformatting. Dropbox is so much better.


AWS (Amazon Web Services) is where it's at in terms of data backup


----------



## hokiealumnus

FWIW, I just keep everything on redundant HDDs in the same machine. All finished jpegs are on three HDDs. I only keep RAW files for definite keepers that I might want to mess with later. If I kept all RAW files period the storage requirements would be insane. Over the years my wife & I have built up around 200GB of jpegs alone.


----------



## werds

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Forget compressing, buy a bigger back up HDD if needed, use freefilesync for all your file backup needs.


Exactly what I do - watch for the sales on the 4tb hard drives, install them into pc's as a backup drive and set FreeFileSync to do periodic backups.

Each drive last time I caught a deal cost me $89 a piece. Bought some for our pc's and HTPC's


----------



## Curleyyy

My library is at about 200GB since Christmas 2012. I don't keep JPG's on storage, only RAW's. If I want the JPG's I'll just go back through my library and export it again. Saves space, plus gives me the ability to make any adjustments to the settings I might have done several months ago, because we're always learning and improving. I haven't even gotten myself a nice camera setup yet with decent lenses. Lately I've put the camera down because it's that great, and I kinder dropped my lens so the AF is completely ruined.


----------



## DizZz

Any advice would be greatly appreciated









http://www.overclock.net/t/1530701/help-best-small-camera-for-traveling


----------



## kbros

So I almost talked my (Really cheap) mother into buying me a Yongnuo 560 II. She asked me if I could take Christmas photos of our whole family, so I replied w/, "If you buy me a flash, there's not a lot of light in that house" She legitimately thought about it, which is hilarious because she's the cheapest person I know.


----------



## ace8uk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> So I almost talked my (Really cheap) mother into buying me a Yongnuo 560 II. She asked me if I could take Christmas photos of our whole family, so I replied w/, "If you buy me a flash, there's not a lot of light in that house" She legitimately thought about it, which is hilarious because she's the cheapest person I know.


I did this at my old work, my boss needed some engineering photo samples for a client and was going to pay for a photographer. I told him I'd do it if he bought me a light tent and an SB900, so he did.


----------



## Scott1541

Earlier someone who does stuff for a local student newspaper was asking for a photog to shoot deaf havana at a venue here on saturday. It's a couple of days after I go home for christmas, so I hesitated and subsequently missed out







:

It would have been a nice opportunity (and a free gig) but oh well.


----------



## kbros

You can TELL yahoo owns Flickr.


----------



## kbros

I'm thinking about getting into prints soon, what price range would I be looking at to get a "decent" printer?


----------



## Conspiracy

anywhere from $50-$50,000 would be reasonably. but if its more than $49,999 then id pass


----------



## ljason8eg

You can find really good deals on Canon's higher end printers when shops discount them and there's also a rebate going on. I just picked up a Pro-10 for $50 AR from Midwest Photo Exchange but looks like that deal is done unfortunately.

The Pro-100 is $148 AR at Adorama right now, which is a fair deal but nothing too special.


----------



## Jixr

meh, i did the research, and its just cheaper for me to get them made at print shops.

prints at home = printer + ink + paper which adds up.

Or you can pay 10-20 cents a photo at a store.

I've also made the plunge, I'm selling off my L lens's to recover some cash and later on buy some cheaper lens's.

I've come to figure out that the type of paid work I do, people just want photos of themselves, and no one cares about IQ or anything like that.
I've no need for $2k in lens's when cheaper stuff will make my clients just as happy.

Its looking like 75% of my pictures are shot with my mirrorless anyway, and I just have all this money's worth of stuff sitting around never getting used.

Though I have a kid wanting to shadow me for some shoots, kinda flattering since i've no formal photography training, but If I get anything in Jan. I'll invite the kid to come along.


----------



## Conspiracy

depends on the person. sometimes you dont have the convenience of waiting on a store or even mail order prints out of state


----------



## kbros

Well, what's a good website to get prints done?


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> Well, what's a good website to get prints done?


Here are some I've had or seen good quality prints from

http://www.mpix.com/

http://www.adoramapix.com/app/home

http://www.costcophotocenter.com/Home

I like just going to costco myself since it is just a few miles away.

I heard these are good too:

http://www.snapfish.com

http://www.shutterfly.com


----------



## cambuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> I'm thinking about getting into prints soon, what price range would I be looking at to get a "decent" printer?


Grab a used Epson 3880 off ebay. Can't go wrong with that, in the long term you'll make huge savings.


----------



## kbros

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Here are some I've had or seen good quality prints from
> 
> http://www.mpix.com/
> http://www.adoramapix.com/app/home
> http://www.costcophotocenter.com/Home
> 
> I like just going to costco myself since it is just a few miles away.
> 
> I heard these are good too:
> http://www.snapfish.com
> http://www.shutterfly.com


I have a costco nearby, so they're good quality?


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Here are some I've had or seen good quality prints from
> 
> http://www.mpix.com/
> http://www.adoramapix.com/app/home
> http://www.costcophotocenter.com/Home
> 
> I like just going to costco myself since it is just a few miles away.
> 
> I heard these are good too:
> http://www.snapfish.com
> http://www.shutterfly.com
> 
> 
> 
> I have a costco nearby, so they're good quality?
Click to expand...

Yes. Lots of people go there for prints. And they are dirt cheap.  Go there and see how you like their quality. I got a few 8x10s from there and a ton of 4x6's and all are great.


----------



## Paradigm84

Ordered a D5300 yesterday, should be here today, unfortunately I can't open it until Christmas due to it being a gift.


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Paradigm84*
> 
> Ordered a D5300 yesterday, should be here today, unfortunately I can't open it until Christmas due to it being a gift.


niiiiice, you'll end up spending more on camera equipment than you've ever spent on keyboards and knives


----------



## Paradigm84

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> niiiiice, you'll end up spending more on camera equipment than you've ever spent on keyboards and knives


Pfft, I doubt it.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Paradigm84*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> niiiiice, you'll end up spending more on camera equipment than you've ever spent on keyboards and knives
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pfft, I doubt it.
Click to expand...

You say that now...wait a year or two lol.


----------



## Paradigm84

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> You say that now...wait a year or two lol.


I have almost $3100 in knives and keyboards, I think it might take a bit longer than that.


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Paradigm84*
> 
> I have almost $3100 in knives and keyboards, I think it might take a bit longer than that.


One lens is all it would take!


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Paradigm84*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> You say that now...wait a year or two lol.
> 
> 
> 
> I have almost $3100 in knives and keyboards, I think it might take a bit longer than that.
Click to expand...

I have more than triple that in camera gear now, almost quadruple that...and all i started with was a Canon T1i and kit lens in 2010.









Gosh I could have had my twin turbo vette already....


----------



## Jixr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Paradigm84*
> 
> Pfft, I doubt it.


dude... its true.. I'm like 4 custom keyboards in and I can't touch how much i've spent on camera stuff. And you know my keyboards are not cheap.

Edit: woot 4k post.


----------



## DizZz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> dude... its true.. I'm like 4 custom keyboards in and I can't touch how much i've spent on camera stuff. And you know my keyboards are not cheap.
> 
> Edit: woot 4k post.


Congrats on 4k!


----------



## Paradigm84

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> dude... its true.. I'm like 4 custom keyboards in and I can't touch how much i've spent on camera stuff. And you know my keyboards are not cheap.
> 
> Edit: woot 4k post.


I don't doubt it's possible to spend a tonne on keyboards, I just don't imagine myself getting a lot of lenses and more expensive equipment.


----------



## ace8uk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Paradigm84*
> 
> I don't doubt it's possible to spend a tonne on keyboards, *I just don't imagine myself getting a lot of lenses and more expensive equipment*.


You say that now, but soon you'll become one of us.


----------



## DizZz

What is everyone's thoughts on trying to recreate a film look in LR or PS? Worth the work or can you never get it close enough to look interesting/passable?


----------



## MistaBernie

Depends on what you mean by 'film look'. I feel like alot of times if I'm shooting with certain lenses at what the camera perceives to be correct exposure that the resulting image actually can look like film (usually because in my experience, the camera is off by about 2/3 of a stop on the low end). That with a natural vignette kind of makes stuff look like film without even doing any processing (even more so if shot at higher ISOs).


----------



## kbros

Try VSCO, I tried it once and liked the results.


----------



## DizZz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> Try VSCO, I tried it once and liked the results.


I have both VSCO and XeL and I've found XeL to be a little more interesting and accurate in terms of reproducing images that mimic the feeling of film. On a slightly different note, how often do you guys use presets when editing photos?


----------



## THEStorm

Just signed up for my second photography course (lighting this time). Took one back at the beginning of summer at a local college and it was by far the best thing I did for photography! First course was mostly an intro (full semester long) but you come out of it comfortable shooting in manual all the time (as well as much more). I would highly recommend anyone who hasn't taken a course before to take one!


----------



## kbros

Right now, I don't use presets at all. I am still learning how to edit. I would assume pros use presets a lot because they want to speed up their workflow.


----------



## Scott1541

Never done any photography courses, and probably never will







I always wanted to do A level photography back in school but never actually did.

Although to be fair I know a couple of professionals through my uni photography society (which I'll probably be president of next year), If I want to know anything I'd just ask them, or you guys on here of course


----------



## kbros

So I NEED a CPL before next spring. Is THIS any good? I really can't afford anything over $50. I know anything I get this cheap will have a hit on sharpness, but the reflection eliminating will make my car photos a ton better. Thanks guys.

Edit: Found THIS also, which is probably closer to my actual budget. 10 Year warranty, made in USA. Think I might grab it. Again it's more of an emergency buy until I can afford something better.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Paradigm84*
> 
> I don't doubt it's possible to spend a tonne on keyboards, I just don't imagine myself getting a lot of lenses and more expensive equipment.


But with lenses, unlike knives and keyboard, you can come up with valid reasons for owning ten.


----------



## ace8uk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> So I NEED a CPL before next spring. Is THIS any good? I really can't afford anything over $50. I know anything I get this cheap will have a hit on sharpness, but the reflection eliminating will make my car photos a ton better. Thanks guys.
> 
> Edit: Found THIS also, which is probably closer to my actual budget. 10 Year warranty, made in USA. Think I might grab it. Again it's more of an emergency buy until I can afford something better.


I'd go for the tiffen, they actually make some quite alright filters for the money and I think it'd suit your needs well.

Also, given that I'm going to upgrade to FX next year.... Hnng hnnnng hnnng hnngggg


----------



## Paradigm84

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> But with lenses, unlike knives and keyboard, you can come up with valid reasons for owning ten.


Well, it's all relative, some people don't see the use in owning multiple knives, some people don't see the need in owning multiple cameras, but broadly speaking, it's about having something perfect for a given task.

Also, held the D5300 earlier, the body is a lot lighter than expected, felt very comfortable in hand though.


----------



## ace8uk

Paradigm, are you going to be getting on board with Flickr or something? Is it mainly for keyboard shots? I'm just curious is all.


----------



## Paradigm84

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ace8uk*
> 
> Paradigm, are you going to be getting on board with Flickr or something? Is it mainly for keyboard shots? I'm just curious is all.


Maybe once I've watched enough tutorials, I don't want to be uploading garbage.









But the majority of the photos will probably be in the review threads.


----------



## ace8uk

Pft, everyone uploads garbage. Most of what I upload is garbage.


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Even after cherry picking my 'best' shots to go on Flickr they're still usually pretty rubbish









I think it's good to upload shots even from when you first start, because in the end it'll display how you got better and how your style might have changed and whatnot


----------



## Jixr

yeah, even your best shots now will look like crap to you a few months from now


----------



## Paradigm84

Maybe I will then, might be interesting to see how my first shot compares to my 100th or 1000th.


----------



## ace8uk

Do it, then link it on here so we can all criticise give pointers.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Your first shot will probably be horrible, as it will probably be the first thing in your sight just to make sure all the functions work.


----------



## TUDJ

I like having a time line of photos I can look over on my Flickr, it's easy to see how much I've improved (imo).


----------



## ace8uk

You've improved?

Ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooh, shots fired.


----------



## TUDJ

Lololol


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ace8uk*
> 
> Pft, everyone uploads garbage. Most of what I upload is garbage.


im hurt that you havent fav'd some of my recent stuff on flickr. some of my garbage isnt bad for garbage








IMG_4482 by brian_roberts, on Flickr


----------



## nvidiaftw12

No, sorry mate, but that really is some garbage.


----------



## jackeyjoe

Sooo I definitely do not have the eye for general street photography I think. I am travelling around the west coast US and really haven't taken any good photos yet(although I have been driving all the time, my friend has lost his license







), even though I am pretty sure I have had a heap of opportunities. Least I can take good pictures of people, I might just stick to that


----------



## pcfoo

Pardon my confusion, but i think street photography = people photography. You shoot people @ the streets, not streets. Takes some time and nerve to shoot strangers "in their face" for maximum impact.

This kind of "real life reportage" is very challenging, thus rewarding and hyped. Should come with time, it is not easy, unless you are a rare "natural"









Keep shooting!


----------



## Jixr

i'm not a fan of street photography, everyone in my hipster town claims to be a street photographer, so i'm over filled with crappy images of random people in a b+w photograph. boring....

EDIT:
I also sold my canon 50 1.4 last night, profited $200 on the deal. Bought it for $100 at a pawn shop, sold it for 3


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> i'm not a fan of street photography, everyone in my hipster town claims to be a street photographer, so i'm over filled with crappy images of random people in a b+w photograph. boring....


I'm sure if you sifted through them, you might find some really inspired photographs. Not everyone with a moustache in tight jeans is a talentless hack.


----------



## ace8uk

Lens Culture often have some pretty decent collections of street photography, they're worth following on Facebook or checking their website every now and then. Here's a direct link to street photography, some cool stuff. https://www.lensculture.com/?category_id=17#slide-14

One of my best friends who lives in Paris is a fantastic candid street photographer, she predominantly shoots on film but has since invested in an X100s. She'll often go up to random people with unique fashion style and ask them if she can take a portrait as well, she has a real way of building rapport with strangers on the street.

I was with her when she took this portrait; the guy was just sitting there on a bench by the Seine, writing down his thoughts in this little journal he was carrying, and looking rather inquisitive. We approached him and just started to talk to him and he told us about his travels, why he was there and what he did. Then she just said, I love your style, can I take a photograph? And he said sure.


----------



## cambuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> So I NEED a CPL before next spring. Is THIS any good? I really can't afford anything over $50. I know anything I get this cheap will have a hit on sharpness, but the reflection eliminating will make my car photos a ton better. Thanks guys.
> 
> Edit: Found THIS also, which is probably closer to my actual budget. 10 Year warranty, made in USA. Think I might grab it. Again it's more of an emergency buy until I can afford something better.


Tiffen are good. The Hoya Pro are better. If you want to save $$ in the long run, get yourself a Cokin filter holder and set of nd grads (including a polariser). Or go one better and buy the Lee filter system. I've used both, the Lee is better quality and will let you stack more filters whilst not obstructing a wide angle lens.


----------



## Jixr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> I'm sure if you sifted through them, you might find some really inspired photographs. Not everyone with a moustache in tight jeans is a talentless hack.


I live in Austin Texas, everyone here is a tight jeans moustache tallentless hack. ( ironically )

I guess I just don't see the art of taking pictures of random people on the street. Most of the good street art i like has been staged stuff.


----------



## kbros

Do all lenses have such bad CA at large apertures as mine? Damn it's bad.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> Do all lenses have such bad CA at large apertures as mine? Damn it's bad.


Nope.


----------



## ace8uk

Nope.


----------



## kbros

I don't remember seeing anything about it being THIS bad. Brb going to check reviews.


----------



## Jixr

my canon 50 was horrible, I hated the CA so much on it i sold the thing


----------



## kbros

This is an example of how bad it gets sometimes. It's easily correctable so no biggie. Can't buy another standard lens, saving up for that 85 1.8











EDIT: Sorry about the HUUUUUUUGE size, imgur doesn't let me change it.


----------



## Conspiracy

@kbros

the thing with CA is some lenses handle it better than others. that sample shot you posted will suffer from CA in a lot of lenses. that looks like a pretty tough case. DO NOT look up reviews of the lens looking for CA complaints, instead look up what CA really is and the causes of it. because shiny metal will always get those bad halos unless you drop big bucks on glass or fix it in post... but not all CA can be completely fixed. there might be some left but it will at least be under control sometimes


----------



## kbros

I hear ya. I do know what CA is btw.


----------



## cambuff

Whatever raw converter your using (Lightroom, Capture One etc) will have selectable lens profiles. These are a quick fix for CA and distortion.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> This is an example of how bad it gets sometimes.


This is basically unavoidable in a situation like that. Stop down or learn how to fix it in post. Don't buy more gear to compensate.


----------



## Conspiracy

wait so throwing money at my problems wont fix them


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> wait so throwing money at my problems wont fix them


Yes it will, you've just got to throw it in the right direction....... towards me


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> This is basically unavoidable in a situation like that. Stop down or learn how to fix it in post. Don't buy more gear to compensate.


^This.
It is a good exercise in selective adjustments and layers if you try to fix that in PP.
Unfortunately LR presets won't really help you, those look for color fringing halos around edges, so you will have to manually do it.

It is also a good exercise to figure out how to control it better in camera (which angle will give you less of it), and also an even better exercise to learn how to edit down your photo selections:
Not all of them are worthy of being showcased equally big or get the same PP to make perfect.

Finally, in most applied arts, there is a useful rule-of-thumb (woot, flagged words): if you have to go to great lengths to "hide" something, maybe you should make the case to embrace, and why not raise this weakness to become a "feature", part of the character of your style.

I don't say make CAs an new Holga like - Instagram - wanna-be retro "must have" JJ Abrahamic feature in every one of your shots, but maybe there could be some value in not trying to religiously remove in everywhere.


----------



## cambuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> ^This.
> It is a good exercise in selective adjustments and layers if you try to fix that in PP.
> Unfortunately LR presets won't really help you, those look for color fringing halos around edges, so you will have to manually do it.
> 
> It is also a good exercise to figure out how to control it better in camera (which angle will give you less of it), and also an even better exercise to learn how to edit down your photo selections:
> Not all of them are worthy of being showcased equally big or get the same PP to make perfect.
> 
> Finally, in most applied arts, there is a useful rule-of-thumb (woot, flagged words): if you have to go to great lengths to "hide" something, maybe you should make the case to embrace, and why not raise this weakness to become a "feature", part of the character of your style.
> 
> I don't say make CAs an new Holga like - Instagram - wanna-be retro "must have" JJ Abrahamic feature in every one of your shots, but maybe there could be some value in not trying to religiously remove in everywhere.


True enough, lens profiles target edges usually towards the outer edges of frame where most lenses lose ability to resolve colours equally.
I'm presuming we're talking about the purple cast across the grill of the car? I've doubts about that being CA at all,it looks more like a mixture of flare and reflection that's picking up colour off the metal.


----------



## kbros

Did a little 2 minute shoot with my parents so we could send prints to some relatives. How do you think I did. I wanted to make sure the tones were right for that winter feel, while still keeping correct skin tones.
https://flic.kr/p/qcTnyuMom and Dad Portraits by Noah Blalock (ig: @noahblalock), on Flickr

https://flic.kr/p/qd1gVxMom and Dad Portraits by Noah Blalock (ig: @noahblalock), on Flickr


----------



## kbros

Also, regarding the whole CA thing. I understand what CA is, I'm not ignorant on the subject. That photo was an EXAMPLE. I don't have any raw files to show you, but another example is even lower contrast areas, like wrinkles, will have bad CA. I wasn't going to buy a new lens from some super high contrast scenario I encountered that gave me bad CA.

I know how to fix it. That was an old edit from BEFORE I knew how to.
DITT by Noah Blalock (ig: @noahblalock), on Flickr


----------



## pcfoo

Well, the fact is that axial CA that is cause by direct light reflections into the sensor cannot be removed 100% when occurring.

Direct reflections from any material can cause that, but unfortunately metal is the worse case scenario.
For other materials (water, env. haze, dust & rocks), a polarizing filter could help for example, but for light that gets reflected out of metal, it cannot.

Good lenses do resist it more effectively, but again it can be a biatch.

The pics with your folks are sweet. The bokeh is a bit busy (as with most cheap nikkors) but that's for us going after details. The "bigger picture" is that they pop out of their background nicely, focus looks correct and so are the colors of skin / overall saturation and "cold winter" feel.

The fact that your dad doesn't make eye contact with the camera ( = viewer) diminishes his role in that pic.
Your mom will be cherishing it regardless, I guess.


----------



## kbros

Thanks! And the bokeh is the worst thing about this lens, I hate it. Totally worth it for $180 tho.


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> Thanks! And the bokeh is the worst thing about this lens, I hate it. Totally worth it for $180 tho.


Of course, the lens is great for the money, have no regrets.

Be happy that you had that option without dropping 5-6 times that for a Sigma 35 Art (or the even more expensive still worse than the Art, 1.4 Nikkor).

Most lenses wide open are not stellar, and this is especially true for the super fast glass - be it Nikkor, Canon, Zeiss, Leica etc.
Think of having the ultra-fast aperture as a perk, and embrace the fact that even your "cheap" prime, stopped down at f/2.8 probably outshines the 24-70 f/2.8 ED or other serious zoom options that could be funneling the world into your sensor. I would say it is simply unfair to compare it to cheap kit zooms and the like.

I have a 24-70 L II, considered by many a vast improvement vs. the older 24-70L which again was considered by some the best "pro" standard zoom regardless of mount / brand.
I don't have my 50 1.8 II anymore, but my also "cheap" and "dated" EF 50 1.4 is easily better than the 24-70 II @ f/2.8. At f/4 the L starts picking up some serious punch, but despite 35-50 being the sweet spot for most standard zooms, the plastic prime just shows its teeth.

So you don't even have to pull out serious "L" or equiv. primes to deliver very good results.


----------



## Paradigm84

Turns out my mother bought a camera for work, a D3200, so I've been playing around with that today, I think I need to read the manual though as there are a lot of options to choose from.









Also, I like the lens she has on it, one of these:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Tamron-10-24mm-3-5-4-5-Aspherical-Canon/dp/B001GVINA6

Although apparently I'm not allowed to steal it.


----------



## Conspiracy

6666


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> 6666


The extra 6 makes it more metal.


----------



## Conspiracy




----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Paradigm84*
> 
> Turns out my mother bought a camera for work, a D3200, so I've been playing around with that today, I think I need to read the manual though as there are a lot of options to choose from.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also, I like the lens she has on it, one of these:
> 
> http://www.amazon.co.uk/Tamron-10-24mm-3-5-4-5-Aspherical-Canon/dp/B001GVINA6
> 
> Although apparently I'm not allowed to steal it.


Its long term borrowing.
Promise her it will be returned right after they get a 5xxx or 7xxx replacement


----------



## Paradigm84

I don't like making promises I can't keep.


----------



## pcfoo

Read again: what would stop you from returning the D3200 if you were to get the new 5xxx/7xxx model for the next round of "extended" lease period?


----------



## Paradigm84

D3200 isn't mine, I have a D5300 waiting to be opened on Thursday.


----------



## Scott1541

Hmmm... thinking about selling my SB-300 and the 50mm Series E in the new year and getting a 50mm f/1.8 AF-D


----------



## Conspiracy

as long as that is not your only external light source. i dont think you will be disappoint. i enjoyed the quality i achieved from a friends 50mm 1.8 AF-D on his D3

i think i have decided i want a 50mm to pair with my 135mm for the 5D so i have decided to pay off my credit card faster in preparations for probably purchasing in like May for a nifty 50 when i decide which one i want


----------



## kbros

The 50 D is a great lens, I miss it a little. But the 35 G is just so much more practical for an everyday lens on crop.

PS Throw the E series up on eBay and it'll most likely sell. Mine was in decent condition and I think I got like $45 for it.


----------



## THEStorm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> Hmmm... thinking about selling my SB-300 and the 50mm Series E in the new year and getting a 50mm f/1.8 AF-D


Wouldn't you want to grab the 50mm f/1.8G so you have autofocus?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> The 50 D is a great lens, I miss it a little. But the 35 G is just so much more practical for an everyday lens on crop.
> 
> PS Throw the E series up on eBay and it'll most likely sell. Mine was in decent condition and I think I got like $45 for it.


I have the 35 1.8 and personally I am not huge on the focal length, I would prefer it a bit wider if I was using it for an everyday lens, or a bit longer (like the 50).


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *THEStorm*
> 
> Wouldn't you want to grab the 50mm f/1.8G so you have autofocus?


That would be a sensible decision, but I probably won't use it all that much anyway so I'm not sure I could justify spending twice as much. I could probably get a decent copy of a D for £50-60, where I'd need to spend around £120 for a G.

Half of the reason I'm considering this is for my F60, using the 50 Series E with that is a pain because I can't use metering. The F60 can't focus AF-S lenses, and the D5100 can't focus AF-D lenses, and I'm not sure which body I'd use it most on








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> as long as that is not your only external light source. i dont think you will be disappoint. i enjoyed the quality i achieved from a friends 50mm 1.8 AF-D on his D3


It's not







I currently have the Yongnuo 560 II, which is my main flashgun, and I should be getting a SB-700 for christmas/birthday so the SB-300 will be surplus to requirements.


----------



## Sean Webster

Just sold one canon 430 exii one more to go...gosh this is taking forever lol. In other news. I should be taking some pics In Las Vegas during CES. Hopefully some selfies with playboy bunnies that i heard would be serving me as well lol.


----------



## kbros

Also, Sean I was totally not just creeping on your past flickr photos, but is that blue Moto X yours?


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> Also, Sean I was totally not just creeping on your past flickr photos, but is that blue Moto X yours?


Lol, no it isn't i have an iPhone 6 plus. The Moro was for a friend in Mexico so he could save some $.


----------



## kbros

Ahh


----------



## FrancisJF

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Canon T2i/T3i/T4i/60D
> 
> Nikon D3100/D3200/D5100/D5200/D7000


About to buy D3300 this Friday, anyone got recommendation before I buy it?


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FrancisJF*
> 
> About to buy D3300 this Friday, anyone got recommendation before I buy it?


I see you've already seen Sean's advice, which is pretty much what anyone in here will tell you









If you've considered those and still want the D3300, go and buy it









Edit:

Now thinking about getting a Lomo Lubitel 166 since they can be had for around £40, what do you guys think? Worth it or save for something better? I've been thinking about getting a cheapish medium format camera for a while, but before all I could find were the fold out ones, and I'd much prefer a TLR/SLR to one of those.

(Totall didn't get this idea from that DRTV video







)


----------



## Conspiracy

you can find Yashica TLR's for pretty cheap. seriously depends on the model though. some are cheap and some get very expensive very fast. ive also seen some affordable mamiya and rollei if you look hard enough


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> you can find Yashica TLR's for pretty cheap. seriously depends on the model though. some are cheap and some get very expensive very fast. ive also seen some affordable mamiya and rollei if you look hard enough


Yeah, I'll keep looking. I question why I bother shooting 35mm at times, it's not really any different to using a DSLR. Medium format however, I'd imagine that would be a fair bit different







I follow a couple of photographers that shoot medium format film exclusively and really like their work.


----------



## Conspiracy

well the thing about medium format is even 6x4.5 isnt like super huge in comparison to a 35mm frame but you really do see a different level of detail. medium format has a look to it that really appeals. when you get to larger negative sizes like 6x6, 6x7, 6x9, you really see that awesome texture and character from larger formats. i follow a lot of photogs that shoot 6x7 and 6x9 or bigger


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> well the thing about medium format is even 6x4.5 isnt like super huge in comparison to a 35mm frame


6x4.5 is massive compared to 3.5x2.4 (35mm).


----------



## SLOWION




----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> well the thing about medium format is even 6x4.5 isnt like super huge in comparison to a 35mm frame
> 
> 
> 
> 6x4.5 is massive compared to 3.5x2.4 (35mm).
Click to expand...

"Massive"...it's "only" 3.4x bigger.








And if we were to believe m43 owners (that are 4x smaller than 35mm), that is negligible









Truth is the 645 doesn't seem that impressive of a leap, but already stunning when used properly, and as conspiracy said, the bigger formats possible on 120 rolls are even better.

Remember that the MF digital cameras that pros are willing to pay 5-figures for are not even 645 - most of them - including the tailored "digital" MF lenses" - are 48x36 or smaller, "merely double" the size of 35mm, and they already squeeze notably better DR and handle enlargements much better. The H5X is 56 x 41.5mm and $6200 for the body only is already getting better, but a "FF 645" Hassy would be insane at this point.


----------



## Eggs and bacon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> well the thing about medium format is even 6x4.5 isnt like super huge in comparison to a 35mm frame but you really do see a different level of detail. medium format has a look to it that really appeals. when you get to larger negative sizes like 6x6, 6x7, 6x9, you really see that awesome texture and character from larger formats. i follow a lot of photogs that shoot 6x7 and 6x9 or bigger


I shoot mainly 645, and used to shoot 35 mm. 645 is a pretty big leap up and I also shoot really differently, its not as big as the difference between digital and 35mm/film, but I do shoot slower because I only get 16 shots.


----------



## kbros

Merry Christmas All!


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Merry Christmas! I humbly request a photo of steve with a santa hat


----------



## Paradigm84

Ok, so I may have been wrong in thinking I wouldn't spend much on camera stuff, I've been playing with the D5300 less than a day and I already want more lenses.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> well the thing about medium format is even 6x4.5 isnt like super huge in comparison to a 35mm frame
> 
> 
> 
> 6x4.5 is massive compared to 3.5x2.4 (35mm).
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> "Massive"...it's "only" 3.4x bigger.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And if we were to believe m43 owners (that are 4x smaller than 35mm), that is negligible
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Truth is the 645 doesn't seem that impressive of a leap, but already stunning when used properly, and as conspiracy said, the bigger formats possible on 120 rolls are even better.
> 
> Remember that the MF digital cameras that pros are willing to pay 5-figures for are not even 645 - most of them - including the tailored "digital" MF lenses" - are 48x36 or smaller, "merely double" the size of 35mm, and they already squeeze notably better DR and handle enlargements much better. The H5X is 56 x 41.5mm and $6200 for the body only is already getting better, but a "FF 645" Hassy would be insane at this point.
Click to expand...

645 is a massive leap up in difference. the point i was trying to make but didnt say it correctly is that when you put a 35mm negative on top of a 645 negative it doesnt look THAT huge of a difference. but there is a HUGE difference in the photos themselves. when it comes to digital MF its more than sensor. sensor size isnt 100% everything. the lenses with considerably greater resolving power used on the MF cameras make a important improvement as well. you are looking too much at one detail (physical size) and not the bigger picture of the entire format itself


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Paradigm84*
> 
> Ok, so I may have been wrong in thinking I wouldn't spend much on camera stuff, I've been playing with the D5300 less than a day and I already want more lenses.


Welcome to our world









Earlier I worked out that I've bought (or been bought) a total of £1500 of gear over the last year. I know it's been a year because I got my D5100 as a christmas present last year









Out of that about £800 has been spent on lenses.... thank god for student finance


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Paradigm84*
> 
> Ok, so I may have been wrong in thinking I wouldn't spend much on camera stuff, I've been playing with the D5300 less than a day and I already want more lenses.


[George Takei voice]Toooolllld you.[/George Takei voice]


----------



## ace8uk

Hello, Big Stopper, fancy seeing you underneath my tree today!


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ace8uk*
> 
> Hello, Big Stopper, fancy seeing you underneath my tree today!


Nice









ION a wild SB-700 appeared underneath my tree this morning







Now I'll no doubt need to spend more money buying wireless triggers, and maybe a little softbox for it. I also _may_ have found a buyer for the SB-300, he said he'll consider it, but if he says no then it may be ebay to the rescue.


----------



## ace8uk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> Nice
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ION a wild SB-700 appeared underneath my tree this morning
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now I'll no doubt need to spend more money buying wireless triggers, and maybe a little softbox for it. I also _may_ have found a buyer for the SB-300, he said he'll consider it, but if he says no then it may be ebay to the rescue.


I got some wireless triggers off Amazon for ridiculously cheap. less than £20 for two receivers and a remote, a year or so ago and they work perfectly with my SB-800 and SB-900. I'd recommend getting some cheap little tripods from Amazon for them too.


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ace8uk*
> 
> I got some wireless triggers off Amazon for ridiculously cheap. less than £20 for two receivers and a remote, a year or so ago and they work perfectly with my SB-800 and SB-900. I'd recommend getting some cheap little tripods from Amazon for them too.


I was thinking 3 Yongnuo RF-603N IIs would do the job, 1 for camera, 1 for SB-700 and 1 for the YN-560 II. Cheap tripods sound like a good idea too


----------



## TUDJ

The GF surprised me with a jobi gorillapod, quite sneaky of her as I don't ever remember expressing interest to her.


----------



## ace8uk

You did explain to her it's for a camera and not some mental ribbed sex toy, right? Don't want her getting wrong ideas.


----------



## TUDJ

Nah already got loads of those


----------



## kbros

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> Merry Christmas! I humbly request a photo of steve with a santa hat


Damnit, now you remind me? He's already asleep. I'll do it tomorrow if I find a small santa hat lol.


----------



## kbros

So, I have $105 in amazon gift cards. UV filter and YN-560 lll will most likely be purchased. Might grab the kit w/ the wireless transceiver for an extra 20 bucks.

EDIT: I bought it, lol.


----------



## FrancisJF

So I'm about to buy the D3300, there any tutorial/tips like night, focus, etc?


----------



## Paradigm84

You can either focus manually or automatically by setting a switch on the kit lens to M or A respectively. If you focus automatically, you press the button down half way, which will get the camera to autofocus, then press it all the way down to take the photo. If you choose manual focus, you'll need to frame the photo, then use the smaller front ring to set the focus as desired, then press the button all the way down.

That's all I've learned from my D5300 so far.


----------



## FrancisJF

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> *I see you've already seen Sean's advice, which is pretty much what anyone in here will tell you
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If you've considered those and still want the D3300, go and buy it
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> Edit:
> 
> Now thinking about getting a Lomo Lubitel 166 since they can be had for around £40, what do you guys think? Worth it or save for something better? I've been thinking about getting a cheapish medium format camera for a while, but before all I could find were the fold out ones, and I'd much prefer a TLR/SLR to one of those.
> 
> (Totall didn't get this idea from that DRTV video
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )


I've been eyeballing it since I first saw it. Compared it to t3i-t5i, the Nikon beats it. It should arrive sometime next week. Can't wait!


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FrancisJF*
> 
> So I'm about to buy the D3300, there any tutorial/tips like night, focus, etc?


Firstly you should consider getting familiar with the various exposure modes of the camera, like program (P), aperture priority (A), shutter priority (S) and manual (M), these are all you'll need, forget the built in auto and scene modes they don't do anything you can't do with PASM modes. Along with this try to understand what effects shutter speed, aperture and ISO speed have on an image, this goes hand in hand with the exposure modes, and it'll give you a lot more control overall. There's loads of information around and likely some on youtube too, this kind of stuff is everywhere.

With focusing, as Paradigm says, you can either do it automatically, or manually. I tend to use autofocus most of the time, I only really use manual if autofocus isn't doing the job, like at night or in dark locations.


----------



## Paradigm84

As requested, here is the first photo I took with the camera, probably should've tried to focus closer to the centre of the light, but oh well.


----------



## Conspiracy

faster shutter speed would have helped too. looks like you got some motion blur in there


----------



## Paradigm84

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> faster shutter speed would have helped too. looks like you got some motion blur in there


Yeah, there's definitely a lot I need to learn and work on before I can take good pictures.









Also I was wondering, are there any recommended add-on things I should look at getting for product photography? I've been perusing Amazon all day and seeing stuff like lens hoods and filters, but I'm not sure how useful any of it would be (apart from making the camera look pro







).

Failing that, does anyone know of a good general introduction or buying guide to look at? The amount of information out there is huge and I'm never sure what to specifically follow. Thanks.


----------



## Conspiracy

good pictures are subjective. if youre having fun and you like what you are capturing then you are doing the right thing, for the most part


----------



## Paradigm84

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> good pictures are subjective. if youre having fun and you like what you are capturing then you are doing the right thing, for the most part


You raise a good point, it's fun so far, but I'm already looking at what I could get next, I can already see the need for a light box, trying to take photos without horrible lighting is proving awkward.


----------



## THEStorm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Paradigm84*
> 
> Yeah, there's definitely a lot I need to learn and work on before I can take good pictures.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also I was wondering, are there any recommended add-on things I should look at getting for product photography? I've been perusing Amazon all day and seeing stuff like lens hoods and filters, but I'm not sure how useful any of it would be (apart from making the camera look pro
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ).
> 
> Failing that, does anyone know of a good general introduction or buying guide to look at? The amount of information out there is huge and I'm never sure what to specifically follow. Thanks.


I would recommend taking a course, the first course I took allowed me to be comfortable shooting in manual all the time. A general rule of thumb is to keep the shutter speed 60 or above unless on a tripod. Using that rule has proved pretty well for me. I start my second course in 2 weeks, lighting this time around.


----------



## Paradigm84

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *THEStorm*
> 
> I would recommend taking a course, the first course I took allowed me to be comfortable shooting in manual all the time. A general rule of thumb is to keep the shutter speed 60 or above unless on a tripod. Using that rule has proved pretty well for me. I start my second course in 2 weeks, lighting this time around.


I haven't even figured out how to change most of the settings on the camera yet.









But yeah, I'll be using a tripod regardless of shutter speed, not intending on taking the camera anywhere without it, especially considering it's so easy to pack up and carry.

I think I'll probably get a Pelican case for the camera next, not a fan of these softer looking camera bags.


----------



## Jixr

and here you have it ladies and gentlemen....

told ya para, you'll end up spending more on camera equipment than keyboards.


----------



## Paradigm84

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> and here you have it ladies and gentlemen....
> 
> told ya para, you'll end up spending more on camera equipment than keyboards.


Yeah, it turns out there are a lot of add-on things you can forget about when you're considering buying a camera.









Still not sure I'd need more than like 3 lenses though, 1 for long-distance landscape stuff, 1 for macro stuff, and a fisheye so I can make some sick B+W skateboard montages.

Kidding about the last one.


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Probably going to get a new lens for my 1100D soon, thinking that nifty fifty, Currys have it for £59.80 at the moment and I'm hoping Amazon will price match so I can use my Amazon voucher.

Is a 50mm prime a decent all round lens?


----------



## MistaBernie

50mm is a nice focal length on 35mm. On crop, it's more like an 80mm. Nifty fifty itself is what it is. It's an inexpensive 50mm lens. It suffers from being what it is - an inexpensive lens - because of build quality and components, which results in more abnormalities/imperfections and slower (and in my experience, less accurate) auto focus.

With that said, for the price, it's decent to get a 1.8 lens that's close to 80mm on a crop camera, so if you don't _need_ fast auto focus speed and can correct for the distortions commonly attributed to it, it's plenty fine. (Lightroom 5 makes it fairly easy to remove Chromatic Aberration as well as perspective distortion, usually just clicking a couple of boxes). If budget is a concern and you're in the market for a prime lens, on the Canon side you won't do a whole lot better (there are those that would argue that the 40mm STM pancake might be something to consider, but that's an entirely different discussion for another day).


----------



## FrancisJF

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Paradigm84*
> 
> You can either focus manually or automatically by setting a switch on the kit lens to M or A respectively. If you focus automatically, you press the button down half way, which will get the camera to autofocus, then press it all the way down to take the photo. If you choose manual focus, you'll need to frame the photo, then use the smaller front ring to set the focus as desired, then press the button all the way down.
> 
> That's all I've learned from my D5300 so far.


Why I can't rep you?









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> Firstly you should consider getting familiar with the various exposure modes of the camera, like program (P), aperture priority (A), shutter priority (S) and manual (M), these are all you'll need, forget the built in auto and scene modes they don't do anything you can't do with PASM modes. Along with this try to understand what effects shutter speed, aperture and ISO speed have on an image, this goes hand in hand with the exposure modes, and it'll give you a lot more control overall. There's loads of information around and likely some on youtube too, this kind of stuff is everywhere.
> 
> With focusing, as Paradigm says, you can either do it automatically, or manually. I tend to use autofocus most of the time, I only really use manual if autofocus isn't doing the job, like at night or in dark locations.


Thanks! +rep


----------



## Paradigm84

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FrancisJF*
> 
> Why I can't rep you?


You can't rep staff, but I appreciate the sentiment.


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> 50mm is a nice focal length on 35mm. On crop, it's more like an 80mm. Nifty fifty itself is what it is. It's an inexpensive 50mm lens. It suffers from being what it is - an inexpensive lens - because of build quality and components, which results in more abnormalities/imperfections and slower (and in my experience, less accurate) auto focus.
> 
> With that said, for the price, it's decent to get a 1.8 lens that's close to 80mm on a crop camera, so if you don't _need_ fast auto focus speed and can correct for the distortions commonly attributed to it, it's plenty fine. (Lightroom 5 makes it fairly easy to remove Chromatic Aberration as well as perspective distortion, usually just clicking a couple of boxes). If budget is a concern and you're in the market for a prime lens, on the Canon side you won't do a whole lot better (there are those that would argue that the 40mm STM pancake might be something to consider, but that's an entirely different discussion for another day).


Thanks for the reply







keeping price down is always good but I can spend more on something better maybe ~£150
Or maybe if I got the nifty fifty I could get a flashgun of some sort? My mum wants me to do some shots of my little brother if that helps to give advice

I have lightroom so that's good


----------



## MistaBernie

Let's try this another way.

Is there something wrong with your current lens setup that prevents you from being able to take decent portraits?

Having a prime lens is great for portraits, don't get me wrong; if that's going to be one of the primary uses, then you actually will get decent value out of picking up a nifty, but if light is the issue with some of your current gear, then as you mentioned it might be wiser to pick up a flash instead.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Paradigm84*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *FrancisJF*
> 
> Why I can't rep you?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You can't rep staff, but I appreciate the sentiment.
Click to expand...

reported for not letting people rep you.

how rude lolz


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> Probably going to get a new lens for my 1100D soon, thinking that nifty fifty, Currys have it for £59.80 at the moment and I'm hoping Amazon will price match so I can use my Amazon voucher.
> 
> Is a 50mm prime a decent all round lens?


The nifty fifty is a very honnest and tried lens, but I think it is a bit long for all-around use.
That said, I know people taht have been using 50s on cropped bodies all the time, but I could not do it...

I would think the EF-S 24mm f/2.8 pankake would be very good all-around, at a pretty affordable price. Yes, 2.8 is "not" f/1.8 as far as shallow DOF and the such, but the resulting effective FOV on a cropped camera is much better than that of a 50mm ( ~ 38mm FOV equiv. vs. 80mm FOV equiv. makes huge difference in my book).

The 50 is faster and can be used on FF / Film bodies, but the EF-S 24 is not that more expensive and gets excellent reviews all around.
It also focuses more silently (STM motor) than the 50 1.8 II that is a bit of a whiner.

Notice that more silently =/= silent. All of canon's cheap primes (50 1.8 I & II, 50 1.4 USM, 40 & 24 pankakes, older 28 & 35 non USM) are buzzers.

If I did not have an EOS M + 22mm pancake, I think I would be wishing for a SL1 + 24mm EF-S if I was after a compact, single lens kit, but the 1100D (T3) is not that much bigger either.


----------



## Scott1541

It's a shame canon don't have a 35mm lens as cheap as the Nikon DX 35mm f/1.8, that would be an obvious choice if they made one for that kind of price since it's pretty close to 50mm FOV on a crop.


----------



## Paradigm84

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> reported for not letting people rep you.
> 
> how rude lolz
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!












Also, I'm not sure I'm even going to need a macro lens, the kit lens seems to be working better than expected. I took a picture of some Smarties (small confectionary) to see if it would focus well for small objects and it seemed to do ok as you can see here. Of course you photography experts can probably point out several flaws with the photo, but I think quality like that would be sufficient for close-up shots in product reviews.

I guess we'll find out tomorrow as I have to take a keyboard apart and get some pictures of the quality of the soldering and other small-scale stuff.


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Let's try this another way.
> 
> Is there something wrong with your current lens setup that prevents you from being able to take decent portraits?
> 
> Having a prime lens is great for portraits, don't get me wrong; if that's going to be one of the primary uses, then you actually will get decent value out of picking up a nifty, but if light is the issue with some of your current gear, then as you mentioned it might be wiser to pick up a flash instead.


There's nothing _wrong_ with it per-se but a lot of the time I only get time to shoot in the evenings and my house doesn't offer much good light.

Part of me just wants a new lens to just be able to try things and get experimenting. My girlfriend also likes shots with lots of bokeh (we share the camera) and so I thought a lens with that sort of aperture would be good for that.

Would it be any good for shots around towns as well? I've always been interested in the whole candid photography thing. I thought at first a telephoto would be good for that but someone pointed out it can come across a little 'stalker-ish' from far so you just gotta try get stuck in









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> The nifty fifty is a very honnest and tried lens, but I think it is a bit long for all-around use.
> That said, I know people taht have been using 50s on cropped bodies all the time, but I could not do it...
> 
> I would think the EF-S 24mm f/2.8 pankake would be very good all-around, at a pretty affordable price. Yes, 2.8 is "not" f/1.8 as far as shallow DOF and the such, but the resulting effective FOV on a cropped camera is much better than that of a 50mm ( ~ 38mm FOV equiv. vs. 80mm FOV equiv. makes huge difference in my book).
> 
> The 50 is faster and can be used on FF / Film bodies, but the EF-S 24 is not that more expensive and gets excellent reviews all around.
> It also focuses more silently (STM motor) than the 50 1.8 II that is a bit of a whiner.
> 
> Notice that more silently =/= silent. All of canon's cheap primes (50 1.8 I & II, 50 1.4 USM, 40 & 24 pankakes, older 28 & 35 non USM) are buzzers.
> 
> If I did not have an EOS M + 22mm pancake, I think I would be wishing for a SL1 + 24mm EF-S if I was after a compact, single lens kit, but the 1100D (T3) is not that much bigger either.


Hmmm the EF-S 24mm looks good, it's annoying it's like £50 more expensive on amazon than lots of other places. AMAZON PRICE MATCH PLS

I think no matter what lens I end up getting I might get a flashgun anyway








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> It's a shame canon don't have a 35mm lens as cheap as the Nikon DX 35mm f/1.8, that would be an obvious choice if they made one for that kind of price since it's pretty close to 50mm FOV on a crop.


yeah that would be nice


----------



## Jixr

the new 23mm is kinda nice, 2.8 but only $150


----------



## jackeyjoe

I pretty much exclusively used a nifty fifty on my D7000 for about six months, I found it was a good middle ground for the photography I was doing(photos of kids doing... well, whatever was happening that day). Although it definitely isn't a telephoto it is far from a wide angle lens, I wouldn't even bother trying to take a landscape photo or something like that with one, put I find it's the ideal focal length for kids(and probably people). I have since moved to an 18-200 VR, but it still comes out for low light shots and when sealing/durability is an issue(broke my 18-200 a while back and don't trust the weather sealing now, and don't want to have to get it repaired again), they are an inexpensive and pretty darned versatile lens for taking photos of people.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Paradigm84*
> 
> I haven't even figured out how to change most of the settings on the camera yet.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But yeah, I'll be using a tripod regardless of shutter speed, not intending on taking the camera anywhere without it, especially considering it's so easy to pack up and carry.
> 
> I think I'll probably get a Pelican case for the camera next, not a fan of these softer looking camera bags.


First, I recommend not loading full res pictures. Makes any flaws in the picture that much more visible. 

Second, your soft bag will probably be fine, mine gets beat around a fair bit, no problems. These cameras are actually pretty tough. I've dropped my camera from about an 11 foot fall on a tripod, it was fine.


----------



## Paradigm84

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> First, I recommend not loading full res pictures. Makes any flaws in the picture that much more visible.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Second, your soft bag will probably be fine, mine gets beat around a fair bit, no problems. These cameras are actually pretty tough. I've dropped my camera from about an 11 foot fall on a tripod, it was fine.


No, capture ALL the pixels!









And yeah, I imagine they offer sufficient protection, I'd just prefer to have something a little more durable.


----------



## Conspiracy

well damn. very interesting results

http://petapixel.com/2014/12/27/comparing-optics-40-yongnuo-50mm-f1-8-125-canon-50mm-f1-8-ii/


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> well damn. very interesting results
> 
> http://petapixel.com/2014/12/27/comparing-optics-40-yongnuo-50mm-f1-8-125-canon-50mm-f1-8-ii/


Phwar! for what it's worth I think I might get a yongnuo! I'm no master photographer and nor do I have an expensive body. Seems fairly logical to me


----------



## Scott1541

I've seen a few things about the Yongnuo 50mm over the past couple of days, looks like a pretty decent performer for the price. Should be a prime for the (canon) masses if they keep the quality control tight enough.

I wonder if they have any plans to produce it in other mounts.


----------



## pcfoo

Plastic is fantastic & thrifty fifty redefined!
Even a ef 50 1.4 should be falling for this if it wasn't for the CA.

I wonder when it will be available for $40.


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Can't find the yongnuo anywhere in the UK, can order it from China but I can't be dealing with the delivery time!









As soon as I get paid Monday I'm ordering a flashgun. Is this https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B00F5JE87M/ref=cm_sw_r_awd_iRZNub0RQGF3S okay for a few family portrait shots and pictures of keyboards and knives and computer stuff?


----------



## Jixr

I can't wait till I move. Assuming I don't sell off one of my lens's to help the cost of moving, I'm going to set up a small studio in my apartment.


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> Can't find the yongnuo anywhere in the UK, can order it from China but I can't be dealing with the delivery time!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As soon as I get paid Monday I'm ordering a flashgun. Is this https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B00F5JE87M/ref=cm_sw_r_awd_iRZNub0RQGF3S okay for a few family portrait shots and pictures of keyboards and knives and computer stuff?


I've heard of the brand, but don't know how good their flashguns are. Looking at the reviews I don't see any reason why it won't do the job though. Not sure if I'd buy one myself though if I was looking for a flashgun on a budget, I'm more of a Yongnuo fan


----------



## Jixr

edit: whoops


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> I can't wait till I move. Assuming I don't sell off one of my lens's to help the cost of moving, I'm going to set up a small studio in my apartment.


you and me both. ill be collecting a few more speedlights and a backdrop stand for my apartment when i move out. ill also start small collection of props after i move


----------



## Jixr

my main thing is i'll have space to where I can just have my light stands and things sitting out and not have to break them out and hook everything up every time I want to use them.


----------



## Conspiracy

i plan on just sticking with speedlights, saves a ton of space. i doubt i would shoot that much at my own apt where i would want a permanent setup. i generally like to provide people with a mobile studio option that way people dont know where i live unless im just messing around doing photos with close friends


----------



## kbros

Tried out some compositing today. Put a few hours into this.

https://flic.kr/p/qyTcoFW201 Composite by Noah Blalock (ig: @noahblalock), on Flickr


----------



## Paradigm84

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> Can't find the yongnuo anywhere in the UK, can order it from China but I can't be dealing with the delivery time!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As soon as I get paid Monday I'm ordering a flashgun. Is this https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B00F5JE87M okay for a few family portrait shots and pictures of *keyboards and knives* and computer stuff?


A man after my own heart.


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Paradigm84*
> 
> A man after my own heart.


Hehe I wrapped the handle of my kershaw cryo 2 with some paracord, turning it in to a fixed blade. Need to make up another light box and get some pictures


----------



## Paradigm84

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> Hehe I wrapped the handle of my kershaw cryo 2 with some paracord, turning it in to a fixed blade. Need to make up another light box and get some pictures


Just don't go treating it as harshly as you might a fixed blade, you'll end up breaking the lock.









Also, I think this is the best picture I've taken so far, does anyone have any tips on how I could improve shots like that? I'm not sure if I should have focused more towards the middle of the board or not.


----------



## sub50hz

I should probably pick up a new knife.


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Paradigm84*
> 
> Just don't go treating it as harshly as you might a fixed blade, you'll end up breaking the lock.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also, I think this is the best picture I've taken so far, does anyone have any tips on how I could improve shots like that? I'm not sure if I should have focused more towards the middle of the board or not.


Aye, it does't get used for much other that opening packaging and various light work around the house.

Photo looks good. I think a shot like that just put the focus on where you think the most interesting part of the keyboard is.


----------



## Paradigm84

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> I should probably pick up a new knife.


Do it! PM me if you want help choosing a good one.









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> Aye, it does't get used for much other that opening packaging and various light work around the house.
> 
> Photo looks good. I think a shot like that just put the focus on where you think the most interesting part of the keyboard is.


Ah ok, I prefer to just leave them as folders so I can flip them open.









And yeah, I tried to capture a large range of the RGB lighting, but you can't really see all the colours further down the board very well, maybe the angle was a little too steep or I should have changed the colours around a bit, oh well, now I know for next time.


----------



## kbros

I'm most likely going to return that flash impulse buy and get a wacom tablet, I need one of those more than I do a flash atm.

Edit: NVM I'll use my old wacom bamboo for now, I ain't paying $10 return shipping.


----------



## Conspiracy

^ LOL


----------



## kbros

The whole field needs to get plowed. That's what I always say, lol. I would've ended up rebuying the flash when I had money again anyways. Now I'll save for a wacom haha


----------



## Magical Eskimo

oo baby


----------



## Jixr

I'm thinking of picking up one of those 50's as well. I jsut sold my 50 1.4, but for $40, why not.


----------



## Magical Eskimo

http://www.shootingonabudget.com/ this guy really sold it for me. I can only get it from China at the moment, will take a couple of weeks to arrive


----------



## Gobigorgohome

I have been looking after some 150-500 or 150-600 lenses for my D5200, the 150-500 is Sigma while the 150-600 is Tamron, will the quality be about the same? I am interested in catching "frost smoke" from a big lake (it is cold up here in the north and a perfect time to be taking nature stills), but I cannot do anything with the 18-55mm lens on 150+ meters .... it would not look good at least.









Is there any big difference in the 150-500 and 150-600?

Sigma 150-500 is 862 USD
Tamron 150-600 is 1307 USD

Pricedifference is 445 USD, this is brand new prices, pre-owned they seems to be 5-10% cheaper and that is not quite enough cheaper for me to buy it used rather than brand new.

Should I cheap out and get the Tamron 70-300mm first or should I jump the big guns and get the 150-500/150-600mm?

I have just got a GF and she has this old Nikon D40 with a 55-200mm lens, would that lens work on my D5200?


----------



## Scott1541

I'm going to order a few bits when I'm back at uni.

This is what I'm thinking of getting at the minute:


Amazon basics backpack, but haven't decided which yet, leaning towards smaller one
A sling type strap, because I want to try one and they seem like they may be better for me
3x Yongnuo RF-603N IIs
Cheap light stand (was thinking it would be more useful than a tripod)
Bracket for aforementioned light stand
Shoot through umbrella
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gobigorgohome*
> 
> I have just got a GF and she has this old Nikon D40 with a 55-200mm lens, would that lens work on my D5200?


If it's a nikon lens, either the older non-VR, or newer VR model it'll definitely work







I'm not sure if any other manufacturers make a 55-200mm, but it's probably a nikon lens since they're cheap as anyway.


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> I'm going to order a few bits when I'm back at uni.
> 
> This is what I'm thinking of getting at the minute:
> 
> 
> Amazon basics backpack, but haven't decided which yet, leaning towards smaller one
> A sling type strap, because I want to try one and they seem like they may be better for me
> 3x Yongnuo RF-603N IIs
> Cheap light stand (was thinking it would be more useful than a tripod)
> Bracket for aforementioned light stand
> Shoot through umbrella


I got an Amazon basics camera bag, it looks smart and is pretty nice but some of the stitching has already started to come apart and I've had it about 5 months


----------



## Gobigorgohome

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> If it's a nikon lens, either the older non-VR, or newer VR model it'll definitely work
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not sure if any other manufacturers make a 55-200mm, but it's probably a nikon lens since they're cheap as anyway.


Okay, thank you. I will ask her about it, not sure because I have not seen it in person.


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gobigorgohome*
> 
> Okay, thank you. I will ask her about it, not sure because I have not seen it in person.


I've got the VR version, I don't use it that much but it never disappoints when I do. It's got pretty much the same image quality as the 18-55, you've just got to remember to crank up the ISO to keep shutter speeds acceptable, something which I've forgotten in the past









Sample image, one of my favourites I've shot with this lens, shutter speed probably a little too slow but it's acceptable.


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



Exmoor Pony by Scott3933, on Flickr


----------



## Gobigorgohome

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> I've got the VR version, I don't use it that much but it never disappoints when I do. It's got pretty much the same image quality as the 18-55, you've just got to remember to crank up the ISO to keep shutter speeds acceptable, something which I've forgotten in the past
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sample image, one of my favourites I've shot with this lens, shutter speed probably a little too slow but it's acceptable.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> Exmoor Pony by Scott3933, on Flickr


If I was able to produce a picture like that I would be happy.









When you say "crank up the ISO", how much are you thinking of?


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gobigorgohome*
> 
> I have been looking after some 150-500 or 150-600 lenses for my D5200, the 150-500 is Sigma while the 150-600 is Tamron, will the quality be about the same? I am interested in catching "frost smoke" from a big lake (it is cold up here in the north and a perfect time to be taking nature stills), but I cannot do anything with the 18-55mm lens on 150+ meters .... it would not look good at least.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is there any big difference in the 150-500 and 150-600?
> 
> Sigma 150-500 is 862 USD
> Tamron 150-600 is 1307 USD
> 
> Pricedifference is 445 USD, this is brand new prices, pre-owned they seems to be 5-10% cheaper and that is not quite enough cheaper for me to buy it used rather than brand new.
> 
> Should I cheap out and get the Tamron 70-300mm first or should I jump the big guns and get the 150-500/150-600mm?
> 
> I have just got a GF and she has this old Nikon D40 with a 55-200mm lens, would that lens work on my D5200?


Tony Northup has a video Comparing the two. IIRC those performed alomsot exactly the same, but both were still less sharp than a Canon 100-400 digitally zoomed.


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gobigorgohome*
> 
> If I was able to produce a picture like that I would be happy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> When you say "crank up the ISO", how much are you thinking of?


Just enough to keep the shutter speeds high enough. For example if you're zoomed all the way out to 200mm you'll want to keep the shutter speed faster than 1/200, or possibly even faster to ensure that movements from shaky hands, etc.. don't blur your photos.


----------



## Gobigorgohome

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> Tony Northup has a video Comparing the two. IIRC those performed alomsot exactly the same, but both were still less sharp than a Canon 100-400 digitally zoomed.


Okay, I see. There is obviously a lot of different lenses to choose for this particular usage. The 100-400mm would not have that good zoom as a 150-500mm though?


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> Tony Northup has a video Comparing the two. IIRC those performed alomsot exactly the same, but both were still less sharp than a Canon 100-400 digitally zoomed.


That would be an unusual result. Most reviews I've seen show the Tamron and Canon 100-400 having about the same image quality in the 150-400 range and the Tamron being ahead at 600mm compared to the Canon 100-400 with a 1.4x teleconverter. The 1.4x is going to get better results than cropping 400mm.
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=929&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=5&API=2&LensComp=113&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=8&APIComp=2

Also, the Tamron and Sigma are absolutely nowhere close to the same at the long end. Tamron is way better.
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=929&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=4&API=0&LensComp=683&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=5&APIComp=0


----------



## Gobigorgohome

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> That would be an unusual result. Most reviews I've seen show the Tamron and Canon 100-400 having about the same image quality in the 150-400 range and the Tamron being ahead at 600mm compared to the Canon 100-400 with a 1.4x teleconverter. The 1.4x is going to get better results than cropping 400mm.
> http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=929&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=5&API=2&LensComp=113&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=8&APIComp=2
> 
> Also, the Tamron and Sigma are absolutely nowhere close to the same at the long end. Tamron is way better.
> http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=929&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=4&API=0&LensComp=683&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=5&APIComp=0


I could pick up the Tamron 150-600mm pretty locally for 1050 USD pre-owned. The 150-500mm is around half of that pre-owned, still worth it taken the price difference in mind?

The lens in question will fit my Nikon D5200, right?


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gobigorgohome*
> 
> I could pick up the Tamron 150-600mm pretty locally for 1050 USD pre-owned. The 150-500mm is around half of that pre-owned, still worth it taken the price difference in mind?
> 
> The lens in question will fit my Nikon D5200, right?


If it has the Nikon mount, then yes.


----------



## Gobigorgohome

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrTOOSHORT*
> 
> If it has the Nikon mount, then yes.


I am pretty sure it has the Nikon mount. Will look around for a Tamron 150-600 lens then, hopefully pre-owned ...


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gobigorgohome*
> 
> I am pretty sure it has the Nikon mount. Will look around for a Tamron 150-600 lens then, hopefully pre-owned ...


Taking shots of the moon soon?


----------



## Gobigorgohome

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrTOOSHORT*
> 
> Taking shots of the moon soon?


Probably a lot of things outside, winter in Norway have so many beautiful themes, at least nowadays with -15C outside. It was frost smoke this morning, which I really wanted to get a picture of this winter, hopefully the cold temperatures is not over yet.


----------



## TUDJ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> Just enough to keep the shutter speeds high enough. For example if you're zoomed all the way out to 200mm you'll want to keep the shutter speed faster than 1/200, or possibly even faster to ensure that movements from shaky hands, etc.. don't blur your photos.


That doesn't apply to the VR version though, with mine I can get good results at 1/30 handheld when VR is on


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TUDJ*
> 
> That doesn't apply to the VR version though, with mine I can get good results at 1/30 handheld when VR is on


It does when you leave VR in the "Off" position
















Don't think I've ever really tested it out on this lens, I'm usually one of those people who leaves VR off unless I specifically need it.


----------



## jackeyjoe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TUDJ*
> 
> That doesn't apply to the VR version though, with mine I can get good results at 1/30 handheld when VR is on


VR is an amazing piece of technology for photography, makes stopping down not a requirement for lower light shots which is really nice








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> It does when you leave VR in the "Off" position
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Don't think I've ever really tested it out on this lens, I'm usually one of those people who leaves VR off unless I specifically need it.


I'm curious as to why, it definitely doesn't hurt leaving it on unless you have your camera on a tripod... and as far as I know it doesn't make a difference to the battery, I haven't charged my D7000's battery since I left Australia(which was 25 days ago apparently) and it has got plenty of use.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> That would be an unusual result. Most reviews I've seen show the Tamron and Canon 100-400 having about the same image quality in the 150-400 range and the Tamron being ahead at 600mm compared to the Canon 100-400 with a 1.4x teleconverter. The 1.4x is going to get better results than cropping 400mm.
> http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=929&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=5&API=2&LensComp=113&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=8&APIComp=2
> 
> Also, the Tamron and Sigma are absolutely nowhere close to the same at the long end. Tamron is way better.
> http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=929&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=4&API=0&LensComp=683&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=5&APIComp=0


Well, it's quite possible I misremembered, or he had it wrong to begin with. That's why I put the IIRC.

Edit: They put it up against the Canon 400mm f/4 prime. My mistake.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1fmMG5jgDwk


----------



## Conspiracy

let the tediousness begin. i just started a project scanning ALL of my grandparents old slides. currently scanning boxes of Kodacolor


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> let the tediousness begin. i just started a project scanning ALL of my grandparents old slides. currently scanning boxes of Kodacolor


What are you using, and how many slides are we talking about?

I had a Nikon Coolscan 4000ED for 6-7 or so months trying to scan all my crap right before i turned all digital in 2004-2005...was slow and cumbersome as nothing (would take more than 75 sec @ framed slides, less than a min if I was using the motorized strip loader - did not have the automaded slide feeder for it), tho the results were pretty good.

Needless to say, I am at the point now that i miss it a bit (had to return it to the family member who owned it), but took me a few years!


----------



## Conspiracy

we are talking about 1000+ slides. thats being really naive.

im using my Epson V500. Scanning at 2400 dpi. 24bit. low level sharpen because im not photoshopping each frame by hand. saving in tiff each file is similar to a DSLR raw in size coming out at roughly 18-20MB because HDD space isnt that important. they will take up maybe 40GB and will be put on a 64GB USB drive and mailed to family.


----------



## FrancisJF

First camera test. I really love the D3300.


----------



## G33K

I was looking at yongnuo and neweer stuff. I shoot for fun and rent if I'm shooting family weddings and stuff, so I don't care if it doesn't all say Canon. Plus, my new beast is my Pentax Spotmatic and the differences of working with film.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *G33K*
> 
> I was looking at yongnuo and neweer stuff. I shoot for fun and rent if I'm shooting family weddings and stuff, so I don't care if it doesn't all say Canon. Plus, my new beast is my Pentax Spotmatic and the differences of working with film.


both are great. i like yongnuo because their new flashes have the built in triggers so i dont have to keep buying more triggers which are very affordable anyway


----------



## Sean Webster

I just ordered 3 yongnou 560-iv. Once I sell my other 430exii I should be getting another two, then the fun shall begin!


----------



## Conspiracy

let us know what you think of them. i have a 560II and a 560III. i can only imagine the new 560IV is equally good in quality with more bells and whistles. i need to eventually upgrade from these el cheapo YN603 triggers to the 622. hard to upgrade though when it actually works so well for the price


----------



## kbros

My 560lll is at the post office down the road, but I can't get it till friday. Can't wait to learn.


----------



## Conspiracy

just found the greatest meme that i need for my desk. i wonder what my boss would say 

also kbros go down the street and get your flash lol


----------



## sub50hz

Your boss would ask you to stop using my likeness.


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> I just ordered 3 yongnou 560-iv. Once I sell my other 430exii I should be getting another two, then the fun shall begin!


right on! ... 560IV as master flash for 560ii's








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> let us know what you think of them. i have a 560II and a 560III. i can only imagine the new 560IV is equally good in quality with more bells and whistles. i need to eventually upgrade from these el cheapo YN603 triggers to the 622. hard to upgrade though when it actually works so well for the price


probably a stupid question, .. if you pair a 560iii with a 622 , can you do high speed syncs/auto-fp? ( >1/320)

[hr]

happy new year everyone!!!


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boogschd*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> I just ordered 3 yongnou 560-iv. Once I sell my other 430exii I should be getting another two, then the fun shall begin!
> 
> 
> 
> right on! ... 560IV as master flash for 560ii's
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> let us know what you think of them. i have a 560II and a 560III. i can only imagine the new 560IV is equally good in quality with more bells and whistles. i need to eventually upgrade from these el cheapo YN603 triggers to the 622. hard to upgrade though when it actually works so well for the price
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> probably a stupid question, .. if you pair a 560iii with a 622 , can you do high speed syncs/auto-fp? ( >1/320)
> 
> [hr]
> 
> happy new year everyone!!!
Click to expand...

yes you can. also if you have the cheaper yn 603 triggers you can sync to a max 1/320, not a HUGE step up from 1/200 or 1/250 depending on camera. for the price if you can do yn-622 triggers then its worth it you plan to use HSS a lot. i personally rarely find myself needing to fire flash faster than 1/200 but i think maybe twice i did HSS at 1/320


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> yes you can. also if you have the cheaper yn 603 triggers you can sync to a max 1/320, not a HUGE step up from 1/200 or 1/250 depending on camera. for the price if you can do yn-622 triggers then its worth it you plan to use HSS a lot. i personally rarely find myself needing to fire flash faster than 1/200 but i think maybe twice i did HSS at 1/320


i do have the 603 .. fun to use knowing i can just change the mode on the 560iii , no need to mount it on a reciever









..

but, i meant for faster syncs .. say 1/500 or even 1/8000 ? (i wanna try it for outdoor daytime portraits)
i was thinking since the 622 supports hss , maybe itll work on a manual flash like the 560iii

or do i really need an hss capable flash like what this guy did?


----------



## Conspiracy

the yn-622 does indeed support HSS so if you want that feature you will need the flashes that support it. im searching and have not found anything. i truthfully have never done much HSS because i rarely try to mix flash and daylight doing outdoor portraits and with my new camera if i need an extra stop ill drop to ISO 50 or do HSS to 1/320 which isnt reliable on the el cheapo yn-603 so i stick to the 1/200 normally. im no expert on working outside the norms with flashes but i do get weird stuff happen, like xfiles stuff where sometimes my 7D/5D3 will work fine with my setup at 1/200 and sometimes its like NOPE screw that i only want to work at 1/160 today try again later. my 7D is supposed to sync at 1/250 but when using the triggers i have they are limited to 1/200 even though the specs say up to 1/320









it does not look like the yn-560III supports HSS from what im initially finding but im still looking around. getting into HSS gets slightly tricky because while its pretty simple factors like camera body, triggers, flash vs strobe are important. not all strobes and flashes support HSS but on the cheap the YN-568EX definitely for sure supports HSS.

its all about the combination of gear. in the end its everything or nothing for HSS. i still would go for the yn-622 just for the extra features and easier control of channels if thats something you would use, i rarely find myself needing to ever change channels on triggers

-sorry this post is all over the place. im not fixing it lol, the pieces are there.... kinda sorta


----------



## boogschd

haha! .. id try it out myself , but i dont see the point replacing the 603 with a 622 , especially since it cant trigger the 560iii without mounting a flash to another 622

id probably just get the 560tx instead so i could change settings and stuff on my 560iii's , then probably get a 585ex


----------



## Conspiracy

560TX = fancy!

the only reason i have the 603 other than price is so i can have one on my camera and the other on the 560II. i love the 560III for the built in wireless. for shooting on a budget when it comes to occasional flash work its all i need other than maybe adding more flashes down the road. i like the yn-622 and will upgrade to that solely because you can get (2) for $80 on amazon which is pretty nice

since you are building your kit now the 560TX is a nice starting point combined with the 560III since you will eventually at some point get more flashes in your kit depending on what you shoot and need.

they also apparently make a yn-622TX that i just found out about









idk about the 585 but the 568EX II is nice and packed full of the cooler features like HSS and wireless









also just found out that B&H carries yongnuo on their site. new to me since the prices look totally normal and same as amazon but with more reliability than amazon if there is an issue


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boogschd*
> 
> i do have the 603 .. fun to use knowing i can just change the mode on the 560iii , no need to mount it on a reciever
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ..
> 
> but, i meant for faster syncs .. say 1/500 or even 1/8000 ? *(i wanna try it for outdoor daytime portraits*)
> i was thinking since the 622 supports hss , maybe itll work on a manual flash like the 560iii
> 
> or do i really need an hss capable flash like what this guy did?


Just get a variable ND filter or shoot at a smaller aperture. I have a tiffen 8 stop vari-ND filter.

If you really want to use HSS there are draw backs to it. It uses more power and at higher shutters the power output is much weaker. The flash needs to support HSS, the cheapest I know of off hand is this one: YN-568 EXII


----------



## Conspiracy

a variable ND will definitely be the easiest and cost efficient alternative to HSS.

HSS is one of those tricks you keep in your back pocket but really shouldnt find yourself needing to use that often.

heres one of my many crappy photos but its kinda sorta not really is an example that its totally possible to do a shoot without HSS in daylight. i put them in the shade and this is a single speedlight off to the side, no modifier because we were moving fast that day and it was windy. now if i was on a budget and shot this with say a 50mm or 85mm f1.8 stopped down to f4 i would still get some very nice pleasing separation between them and the background. only reason i say stopping down to f4 is because the base iso on nikons is ISO200 so i dont think your D7000 has an ISO slower than 200, i could be wrong though

Canon 5D+135mm f2
ISO 125
f2.8
1/200

9Z4A5730 by brian_roberts, on Flickr


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jackeyjoe*
> 
> heres one of my many crappy photos but its kinda sorta not really is an example that its totally possible to do a shoot without HSS in daylight. i put them in the shade and this is a single speedlight off to the side, no modifier because we were moving fast that day and it was windy. now if i was on a budget and shot this with say a 50mm or 85mm f1.8 stopped down to f4 i would still get some very nice pleasing separation between them and the background. only reason i say stopping down to f4 is because the base iso on nikons is ISO200 so i dont think your D7000 has an ISO slower than 200, i could be wrong though


It'll be ISO 100, the D7000 has the same sensor as mine







I don't think the base ISO has been 200 since the D90 days, but I could be wrong.


----------



## boogschd

meh .. yeah.. ill probably just get a variable ND








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> It'll be ISO 100, the D7000 has the same sensor as mine
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't think *the base ISO has been 200 since the D90 days*, but I could be wrong.


the D90 had a "LO 1" setting which was equiv to ISO 100 iirc

my old D60 had a base ISO of 100 though









anyway ... anybody got any new camera stuff for christmas ?


----------



## Conspiracy

i bought myself a sekonic L308S because apparently borrowing one for more than 6 months is too long so my friend took MY light meter back. i needed to buy my own anyway. i cant always rely on borrowing stuff like that all the time







i barely used it anyway and i didnt even use it for flash photography at the time i needed a good solid digital meter for video stuff. but now ill have a decently nice digital meter that can do strobe/flash up to 1/500 shutter so maybe i might get into some flash work on medium format too hopefully









i hope my yn-560iii can do optical slave at 1/500. never tried it


----------



## TUDJ

Mid level nikons do ISO 100, higher end do 50


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boogschd*
> 
> meh .. yeah.. ill probably just get a variable ND
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the D90 had a "LO 1" setting which was equiv to ISO 100 iirc
> 
> my old D60 had a base ISO of 100 though
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> anyway ... anybody got any new camera stuff for christmas ?


Does an SD card count?

I've become surprisingly comfortable with my gear and haven't felt the need to upgrade in a while. Well, aside from a 70-200 f/2.8, but seeing the amount of money for that and my current broke againCollegeStudent status, gonna put that on the backburner.


----------



## Scott1541

Just finished my ebay ordering session







Triggers, stand, bracket and a sling I want to try all inbound. I'll forget light modifiers for now because I don't think I'll be needing any yet, I'll just keep things simple.


----------



## Nemesis158

I got a sweet deal on a Canon rebel T5 kit a few months ago, so i actually bought two. My original intention was to check one out and see whether to use it over my D5100 and sell off whichever one was the loser, and sell the extra one for a possible profit. However I dont really have the funds to replace all the gear i have for my D5100 and it does have its uses, but i do like the T5 so far after figuring it out. I ended up giving my brother the second kit for xmas. i was able to find a bag that fits all of the gear i have now (canon rebel gadget bag, advertised as being able to hold 2 bodies and 3 lenses, well i fit 6 lenses in it.....) and gave my old bag to my brother to go along with his new T5.

First thing on my list, im looking at getting either the 55-250, or the 70-300 canon lens. any recommendations?


----------



## Gobigorgohome

Okay, so I got around New Years Eve and tried the 55-200mm Nikon lens (which my GF had on her D40) and it worked okay, the focus was much better than my 18-55mm, cannot really wait on getting better lenses on my D5200 ....

Picked up a Tamron 70-300mm off of a Norwegian site (actually where I bought the camera) for 105 USD which is an okay price to pay until I get my hands on better zooming lenses.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nemesis158*
> 
> I got a sweet deal on a Canon rebel T5 kit a few months ago, so i actually bought two. My original intention was to check one out and see whether to use it over my D5100 and sell off whichever one was the loser, and sell the extra one for a possible profit. However I dont really have the funds to replace all the gear i have for my D5100 and it does have its uses, but i do like the T5 so far after figuring it out. I ended up giving my brother the second kit for xmas. i was able to find a bag that fits all of the gear i have now (canon rebel gadget bag, advertised as being able to hold 2 bodies and 3 lenses, well i fit 6 lenses in it.....) and gave my old bag to my brother to go along with his new T5.
> 
> First thing on my list, im looking at getting either the 55-250, or the 70-300 canon lens. any recommendations?


55-250 is ok, can't speak for the 70-300. Just don't get the 75-300, whatever you do.


----------



## kbros

Anyone know if the 560iii comes with batteries? Man I'm probably going to have to buy some expensive rechargeable ones aren't I?


----------



## nvidiaftw12

It doesn't come with any. I wouldn't recommend rechargables, as the recharge rate of the flash capacitor is what really counts. For that you need the most amps possible. Rechargables have a lower amp output than regular alkalines as far as I know. I'd recommend ultimate lithium batteries. They really do make a difference. For my own testing, the ult. lithiums took 3.1 seconds to regharge a full power flash, the alkalines took 7 seconds. Also, they last a *lot* longer. When your shooting something that can't wait, like people, that recharge rate makes the difference between the perfect shot and a ruined shot.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> Anyone know if the 560iii comes with batteries? Man I'm probably going to have to buy some expensive rechargeable ones aren't I?


No flash comes with batteries lol. Buy Panasonic Eneloops. Some of the best batteries out. I have 32 of them, they are so much cheaper than normal batteries in the long run. Recharge time in a 560 IV at full power is under 3 seconds.


----------



## THEStorm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> No flash comes with batteries lol. Buy Panasonic Eneloops. Some of the best batteries out. I have 32 of them, they are so much cheaper than normal batteries in the long run. Recharge time in a 560 IV at full power is under 3 seconds.


Yep, I picked up some Panasonic Eneloop Pro's. Was on sale $10 off ($30 CAD with charger) so i figured I will give them a shot after all the great reviews I have heard about them. Will start getting some good use out of them in about a week when I start my lighting course.


----------



## kbros

Thanks for the tips, gonna grab a 4pk of eneloops and a charger for $23 total. Not as bad as I thought.


----------



## Scott1541

Seems I'll probably end up having to buy a couple of sets of eneloops when my little stash of ikea's finest alkalines runs out







I still need to buy my backpack too, the cost of all these little bits of gear certainly adds up


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> Thanks for the tips, gonna grab a 4pk of eneloops and a charger for $23 total. Not as bad as I thought.


Down the line, when you own 32 Eneloops+ like Sean and I, the charger to get is the Powerex MAHA MH-C801D (or newer equivalent if they have one, since I've had mine for quite a bit).

http://www.amazon.com/Powerex-Maha-MH-C801D-Eight-Charger/dp/B003OU51LG

Charges individual cells, rapid charge is less than an hour, normal(ish) charge (called Soft Charge, which I use as often as I can) is usually under two hours, and has a drain and recharge setting that you run every once in a while if you feel like the amount of change the batteries are holding is running low.


----------



## Sean Webster

That's the same charger I have!


----------



## MistaBernie

It's a sweet charger.


----------



## kbros

Thanks for the tip! I just bought the eneloop branded one for 11 bucks or whatever, but If I get more serious into this whole flash business I'll for sure be buying more batteries and a better charger.


----------



## kbros

Also bought a little joby bendable tripod to make on feet pictures a little bit easier, yes I'm a sneaker nerd.


----------



## kbros

Also, tried the flash with 4 cheap AA's and got about 10 shots at 1/128 before it died lol. I'll wait till the eneloops get here before I learn how to use the thing I guess.


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> Also, tried the flash with 4 cheap AA's and got about 10 shots at 1/128 before it died lol. I'll wait till the eneloops get here before I learn how to use the thing I guess.


I've got duracell plus powers in mine at the moment. It's hardly left my camera since I got it, I think I'm going to quite enjoy flash photography! It's fun bouncing light off of things.


----------



## xILukasIx

Am I stupid for thinking about returning the Canon 600EX-RT I got for christmas and getting 2 Yongnuo YN-560 IV + YN-560TX?
Maybe even 2 Yonguo 600EX-RT + YN-E3-RT? (benefit of having TTL)
I just can't find a good reason to keep the 600EX-RT, since I'd only have one and buying another one or two is just too expensive to me...
Can't really make use of the RT system with just one and I'd rather have multiple than just one!
All I have so far is my Canon 430EX-II which is great, whichever other speedlite I chose will need to be able to trigger this one optically.


----------



## Jixr

Question for you guys.

I have nearly 25k photos in my lightroom catalog, and I'm thinking about going through and deleting some to clear up my system a bit.

Most of the photos are crap, but was wondering what you guys do with your 'junk' photos and how your organize your library.


----------



## Sean Webster

I delete junk and organize photos by category and/or date.

Ex.

*Catalogs:*


2010 - No Category
2011 - No Category
2012 - No Category
2013 - No Category
2014 - No Category
2015 - No Category


2012 - Photoshoots
2013 - Photoshoots
2014 - Photoshoots
2015 - Photoshoots


2013 - Uni Press
2014 - Uni Press


2014 - The SSD Review/Tech X
2015 - The SSD Review/Tech X


Stuff For Sale


----------



## Jixr

I need to figure out how to better organize my lightroom, I currently just have all my photos in one place.


----------



## kbros

Managed to squeeze a few shots out of it, tried out the trigger.

https://flic.kr/p/pGPgtwGlass by Noah Blalock (ig: @noahblalock), on Flickr


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xILukasIx*
> 
> Am I stupid for thinking about returning the Canon 600EX-RT I got for christmas and getting 2 Yongnuo YN-560 IV + YN-560TX?
> Maybe even 2 Yonguo 600EX-RT + YN-E3-RT? (benefit of having TTL)
> I just can't find a good reason to keep the 600EX-RT, since I'd only have one and buying another one or two is just too expensive to me...
> Can't really make use of the RT system with just one and I'd rather have multiple than just one!
> All I have so far is my Canon 430EX-II which is great, whichever other speedlite I chose will need to be able to trigger this one optically.


If you can't afford more 600s then your plan seems more than reasonable.


----------



## xILukasIx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> If you can't afford more 600s then your plan seems more than reasonable.


The Canon is back at the store, now I have 500€ to spend 
Imagine this:
YN-600EX-RT: 134€ (x2)
YN-E3-RT: 81€
16 Eneloop XX Pro 2550mAh + cases: 55€

Sum: 404€ (incl. shipping)

Isn't that ridiculous


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xILukasIx*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> If you can't afford more 600s then your plan seems more than reasonable.
> 
> 
> 
> The Canon is back at the store, now I have 500€ to spend
> Imagine this:
> YN-600EX-RT: 134€ (x2)
> YN-E3-RT: 81€
> 16 Eneloop XX Pro 2550mAh + cases: 55€
> 
> Sum: 404€ (incl. shipping)
> 
> Isn't that ridiculous
Click to expand...

much better plan. im with bernie, much smarter move


----------



## pcfoo

For off-camera work, those are the "industry standard" low cost speed-light, and for a good reason: cost is a small fraction & relative performance a very big fraction of the OEM.

The only "weakness" with the Yongnuo is the - occasional - color inconsistency between different units, and the somewhat worse coverage when used on-camera (for some models, visible usually only with wider lenses). The former is rare and usually PP fixable easily, the latter is not a worry if you use modifiers, use more than one units or shoot with the lights off-camera.

You can also resell the Yongnuo's losing a $20-or-so on each unit, while a used Canon or Nikon Speedlight might shave $100s off the original investment.


----------



## Pandora51

Can you add me please to the list or do I have to PM the Op?

Nikon masterrace here








(just kidding)

My camera setup:

cams:
Nikon D7000
Nikon D80

Lens
Nikon 40mm F2,8
Nikon 18-135mm F3,5-5,6

Flash
Yongnuo speedlite 565ex

Relating to the Yongnou topic:

I got my Yongnou some weeks ago but however I think they are getting really useful if you need several flashlights at the same time or a backup.
For some photos 3+ flash are pretty useful and you can get 3 Mark III for 1 Canon / Nikon flagship flash. For low money its a no brainer.

Of course I cant compare them (TTL for the most part) with other flashlights but as far as I read and saw it Yongnou is on the same level as expensive ones.

One question through: Is it okay to keep the akkus/ batterys in the flash even If im not using it for a longer period of time? Or should I take them out?


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pandora51*
> 
> One question through: Is it okay to keep the akkus/ batterys in the flash even If im not using it for a longer period of time? Or should I take them out?


I'd take them out if you're not going to be using the flashgun for longer than a couple of weeks. I know they're not exactly expensive but you don't want the batteries leaking and making a mess, or potentially rendering it inoperable.


----------



## werds

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> I delete junk and organize photos by category and/or date.
> 
> Ex.
> 
> *Catalogs:*
> 
> 
> 2010 - No Category
> 2011 - No Category
> 2012 - No Category
> 2013 - No Category
> 2014 - No Category
> 2015 - No Category
> 
> 
> 2012 - Photoshoots
> 2013 - Photoshoots
> 2014 - Photoshoots
> 2015 - Photoshoots
> 
> 
> 2013 - Uni Press
> 2014 - Uni Press
> 
> 
> 2014 - The SSD Review/Tech X
> 2015 - The SSD Review/Tech X
> 
> 
> Stuff For Sale


Hmm I like that organization! If I ever get into the business side I think I will do that  For now I organize nested folders Year > Month Pictures /Month Video > Individual Event name with Date

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> Question for you guys.
> 
> I have nearly 25k photos in my lightroom catalog, and I'm thinking about going through and deleting some to clear up my system a bit.
> 
> Most of the photos are crap, but was wondering what you guys do with your 'junk' photos and how your organize your library.


I have a friend who when they clean their stuff out they move them into a different folder and name it "Culling" or Something like that. Then there is a separate folder called Delete inside there - basically any pictures that just flat out don't do it get moved into delete and are dumped every few months. The ones that managed to stick around get a second look by year's end. He said he does this because sometimes the imperfections or a different perspective with times makes him like some of those better than when they were originally shot. He then does PP on them as he feels. Sounds like a good enough process IMO - now if I could make time to do similar I would.... because boy do I need to!


----------



## PCModderMike

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> It doesn't come with any. I wouldn't recommend rechargables, as the recharge rate of the flash capacitor is what really counts. For that you need the most amps possible. Rechargables have a lower amp output than regular alkalines as far as I know. I'd recommend ultimate lithium batteries. They really do make a difference. For my own testing, the ult. lithiums took 3.1 seconds to regharge a full power flash, the alkalines took 7 seconds. Also, they last a *lot* longer. When your shooting something that can't wait, like people, that recharge rate makes the difference between the perfect shot and a ruined shot.












Do you just spit stuff out and hope it will turn out legit?

Even a novice like me uses Eneloops with my YN560-II's


----------



## nvidiaftw12

I guess I'll just keep my opinion to myself, as it is apparent it's not welcome here.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> I guess I'll just keep my opinion to myself, as it is apparent it's not welcome here.


i wouldnt say that. but PCModderMike was pretty rude on that one lol

i personally use cheapo AA batteries, duracell or whatever is on sale and i am yet to have any problems. i buy in bulk and its just easier than dealing with rechargeable batteries


----------



## PCModderMike

Sorry...that's me acting like an ass. Mostly related to my last run in with you when you were acting like a pedantic nut.








But it just seems like I've seen that from you before...you give someone advice without actually knowing what you're talking about...basically an assumption. However, you did state "as far as I know" so that should cover you.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PCModderMike*
> 
> Sorry...that's me acting like an ass. Mostly related to my last run in with you when you were acting like a pedantic nut.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But it just seems like I've seen that from you before...you give someone advice without actually knowing what you're talking about...basically an assumption. However, you did state "as far as I know" so that should cover you.


dude its ok lol. 99% of the time if you read a lot of stuff in this thread out of context we all sound like we are being an ass to each other. its the novice comment that was a little too far. i know im probably the worst at making posts that come across as though im an ass but its really just my way of being helpful. nothing needs to be sugar coated here as we are all here to help each other out.

i know you were directing that at nvidia but im bored so i chimed in too


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Ok. I was wrong. And the internet agrees with the 3 of you. However, if we didn't have conflicting opinions, and people disagreeing even with the experts, just where would we be? Still believing the earth was flat?

For me, the energizers work. For others, they don't. I get a much better recycle time over alkalines, which is what matters to me. And don't flash enough to have to replace them often, so it really doesn't matter. If enolopes work for you, great. Still, basically anything is better than alkalines.

In my past experience, alkalines have whooped rechargeables in anything I've used them in, but maybe the enolopes are much better.


----------



## PCModderMike

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *PCModderMike*
> 
> Sorry...that's me acting like an ass. Mostly related to my last run in with you when you were acting like a pedantic nut.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But it just seems like I've seen that from you before...you give someone advice without actually knowing what you're talking about...basically an assumption. However, you did state "as far as I know" so that should cover you.
> 
> 
> 
> dude its ok lol. 99% of the time if you read a lot of stuff in this thread out of context we all sound like we are being an ass to each other. its the novice comment that was a little too far. i know im probably the worst at making posts that come across as though im an ass but its really just my way of being helpful. nothing needs to be sugar coated here as we are all here to help each other out.
> 
> i know you were directing that at nvidia but im bored so i chimed in too
Click to expand...

Ha dude you are the king of no sugar coating, tell it like it is....and most seem to be side swiped by the way you answer questions or comment on things...but I just sit back and enjoy the show.








And like you said, it is still helpful stuff so I just try to learn more from the conversations that go on in here.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nvidiaftw12*
> 
> Ok. I was wrong. And the internet agrees with the 3 of you. However, if we didn't have conflicting opinions, and people disagreeing even with the experts, just where would we be? Still believing the earth was flat?
> 
> For me, the energizers work. For others, they don't. I get a much better recycle time over alkalines, which is what matters to me. And don't flash enough to have to replace them often, so it really doesn't matter. If enolopes work for you, great. Still, basically anything is better than alkalines.
> 
> In my past experience, alkalines have whooped rechargeables in anything I've used them in, but maybe the enolopes are much better.


Wait...what?

You say that like the Earth *isn't* flat...










OK seriously though....I agree with you on that sentiment....if non-rechargeable akalines work for you, great.


----------



## Conspiracy

the best way to learn even more is to not be shy and get in on it all







its really only when someone says something just completely outrageously wrong that popcorn gets passed out









also i sugar coat most stuff in real life. but yeah online i dont think its necessary when google is a great place to start looking for questions when you dont have a place like OCN or POTN (bleh) or fredmiranda or etc to ask for help


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PCModderMike*
> 
> Ha dude you are the king of no sugar coating, tell it like it is....and most seem to be side swiped by the way you answer questions or comment on things...but I just sit back and enjoy the show.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And like you said, it is still helpful stuff so I just try to learn more from the conversations that go on in here.
> Wait...what
> You say that like the Earth *isn't* flat...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OK seriously though....I agree with you on that sentiment....if non-rechargeable akalines work for you, great.


You are right though. I tend to do that, talk out my ass. That's why I no longer post in on topic. I didn't keep up with the tech enough to contenue to make informed statements. I've pretty much been told what you said twice today, so I'll heed the advice.


----------



## aksthem1

Eneloops actually do have a higher current than Energizer's Lithium batteries. Lithiums were recommended a lot for flashes years ago, but rechargeable NiMH battery technology has come a long way.

I've used all sorts of batteries and while lithiums tend to last longer. Their recycle times get absurdly slow. I'd have to switch them out about 3/4 of their battery power. So it would be the same as using some alkalines. Recycle time is almost the same on fresh batteries, on my flashes. So I just stuck to using Eneloops with a good charger.


----------



## Conspiracy

nothing is more fun though. i enjoy talking out my butt


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aksthem1*
> 
> Eneloops actually do have a higher current than Energizer's Lithium batteries. Lithiums were recommended a lot for flashes years ago, but rechargeable NiMH battery technology has come a long way.
> 
> I've used all sorts of batteries and while lithiums tend to last longer. Their recycle times get absurdly slow. I'd have to switch them out about 3/4 of their battery power. So it would be the same as using some alkalines. Recycle time is almost the same on fresh batteries, on my flashes. So I just stuck to using Eneloops with a good charger.


That's impressive. I'll might have to try out a pair sometime.


----------



## mironccr345

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> nothing is more fun though. i enjoy talking out my butt
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## pcfoo

People might be fulled by the initial "responsiveness" of Alcaline or "Lithium" disposable batteries as those maintain a pretty higher voltage vs. NiMH cells (1.5V vs. 1.2V), but the internal resistance of disposable batteries - including lithium energizers and whanot - is the weak link that kills the fun for them.

Speedlights are a high current application that requires surges of high amp in short bursts to recharge the lights main cap. The high resistance of the disposable cells is self-defeating in this scenario, as it heats up fast and/or simply cannot allow as high amps as a lower impedance NiMH cell, despite the higher voltage. Energizer Lithiums have around 3-4 times the internal resistance of eneloops.

There are numerous tests out there especially for speedlights comparing battery types, but if you don't mind killing a disposable 4-pack, you could try it for yourself: you will need a fresh set of eneloops or another low self discharge "contemporary" NiMH set, 4 alkaline or lithium AAs, a speedlight and 2x 30-40 minutes (or less). If you would start your timer and start activating the flash to full power, counting flash cycles - not the exact recharge time between them - you would see that the disposable pack would very fast get "tired" and despite starting strong, will very soon "wear out", with the Eneloop being a clear winner in recycling time after the first minutes of continuous bursts.

In real life, we often don't get full power flashes going off that often, so it is harder to tell the difference when the speedlight is on camera and operates @ ATTL/ETTL, or its off-camera and fires @ 1/4th or so the power, as the strain on the batteries is much smaller and the cap buffer "dilutes" your perception of delay.

For higher than 1.2V cells, the most promising tech is that of NiZn batteries, which have a nominal voltage of 1.65V and are great for AA powered devices that don't like the lower voltage of NiMH cells. I have 2x sets but I did not see an advantage in speedlights vs. eneloops, and I've seen tests like the one described above that prove it.
Those do rock in devices with small motors tho, like R/C toy cars (not high end sub-C etc powered models, AA powered toys) and handheld mixers.


----------



## Paradigm84

Just thought I'd pop in and try to make everyone hungry:


----------



## jjsoviet

So yeah, I boguht a little something.


----------



## pcfoo

The 7ii made me more hungry


----------



## Jixr

Man I'd love to trade my entire DSLR set up for one.


----------



## jjsoviet

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> The 7ii made me more hungry


I'll be eating ramen for the next three years, have to pay this off for a long time. :v


----------



## kbros

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> Man I'd love to trade my entire DSLR set up for one.


As would I. By the time I have money saved up for a sony, the a7 will probably be a decent bit under $1k. I'd sell all my Nikon stuff and switch with the quickness!


----------



## jjsoviet

The best part about the A7 II is the IBIS. As a Minolta lens user, having any form of image stabilization is a godsend; before, I could only get decent shots at 1/60th of a second at best, now I can go up to 1/8th of a second which is a phenomenal improvement. The ergonomic changes over the original make it way easier to handle as well.


----------



## OmarCCX

I'm debating buying the A7 now for $900ish used or wait next year and grab the Mk. II. I'm not that impatient, plus I could use the money on other things.


----------



## jjsoviet

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OmarCCX*
> 
> I'm debating buying the A7 now for $900ish used or wait next year and grab the Mk. II. I'm not that impatient, plus I could use the money on other things.


Just wait for a discounted price or combo on the II. It's honestly a big improvement that's more than worth the price difference.

The improved body alone is so good it feels more solid and robust than pro DSLRs in my opinion. Has that hefty rough magnesium build to it.


----------



## Conspiracy

im sticking with my good ole DSLR for a while longer before id make the switch. im still not impressed with the speed of the sony A7-series yet. IQ is great but fps and AF leave me wanting more as these cameras currently fall behind on my needs for fast action stuff (sports, events, run and gun photo/video). they definitely are catching up quickly though


----------



## Scott1541

I see Nikon have announced the D5500 and 55-200mm VR II. No D7200 yet, or a D300s replacement









Edit: 300mm f/4E PF ED VR has been accounced too.


----------



## Paradigm84

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> I see Nikon have announced the D5500 and 55-200mm VR II. No D7200 yet, or a D300s replacement
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Edit: 300mm f/4E PF ED VR has been accounced too.


Just after I buy the D5300.


----------



## Jixr

don't worry, its just like the canon rebel t series, its basically all the same thing in a slightly changed body.


----------



## Paradigm84

But it's a D5500 instead of a D5300, it's 200 better!


----------



## Magical Eskimo

What's special about that Sony camera? Is it not a dslr of some sort?


----------



## jjsoviet

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> What's special about that Sony camera? Is it not a dslr of some sort?


It's a full-frame mirrorless camera, so it's not a DSLR.


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> What's special about that Sony camera? Is it not a dslr of some sort?


Full frame mirrorless, with EVF and all that crap









ION my flash triggers are here. I've had a quick play around with them and they work pretty well considering they only cost like £10 per unit (I got 3) Got to put them away now though, got uni work to get on with


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Paradigm84*
> 
> But it's a D5500 instead of a D5300, it's 200 better!


indeed it is. AND 200 is 100 more than 100 better so its like even that much more better!!!!!


----------



## Jixr

damn. if upgrading my t3i to a t6i is only 2 better, then I deff need to change to the nikon train, where things are 200 better.

Also saying bye bye to my 70-200 f4L today.

I don't want to sell it, but need money for moving, and I rarely use it anyway.


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> Full frame mirrorless, with EVF and all that crap
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ION my flash triggers are here. I've had a quick play around with them and they work pretty well considering they only cost like £10 per unit (I got 3) Got to put them away now though, got uni work to get on with


I just googled them quickly, so basically there's less to them, smaller, lighter, no mirror = easier to get a higher quality image?


----------



## MrStrat007

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> I just googled them quickly, so basically there's less to them, smaller, lighter, no mirror = easier to get a higher quality image?


The image quality should be about the same iirc. They are smaller and lighter as a result, but more power-hungry and cheaper models can struggle a little more with low light situations due to slower autofocus (which is fixed on intermediate to higher end models through the integration of phase-detecting pixels). There's also a smaller lens selection as many of them use a proprietary system.


----------



## jjsoviet

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrStrat007*
> 
> The image quality should be about the same iirc. They are smaller and lighter as a result, but more power-hungry and cheaper models can struggle a little more with low light situations due to slower autofocus (which is fixed on intermediate to higher end models through the integration of phase-detecting pixels). There's also a smaller lens selection as many of them use a proprietary system.


I think the idea of having a paltry lens selection on mirrorless systems is quite overstated. You can argue about Sony's own E-Mount lens selection, which frankly only has a few good native glass while full-frame FE versions are even fewer. However, other brands like Fuji, Olympus, and Panasonic have a stronger lens ecosystem - the latter two which adopt the smaller Micro 4/3 sensor standard so both systems can use each other's glass.


----------



## pcfoo

The 7 II is a great camera, I just cannot justify the expense going for one as the owner of lenses that would cost more than not just one each, but all of my limbs.

Plus as Conspiracy said, it is not "there"100%. Not small or quiet enough, not faster, many features that are great for some but not for all.
would probably go for a D810 if I had to have this Sony sensor, and the abundance of Nikon users would probably allow me to rebuilt my system with cheaper and as good if not better options for the all important glass.

/

The 300mm "DO" Nikkor is interesting, but pricey.300 f/4 lenses are not that big and heavy for the savings to be substantial (think Canon had a better case to make with choosing 400mm f/4, although price was not for "every other weekend" amateur photographers), but I wish advancements in fresnel element designs will give us smaller lenses in all categories without compromising too much.


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> I just googled them quickly, so basically there's less to them, smaller, lighter, no mirror = easier to get a higher quality image?


It is easier to get smaller wide angle lenses designed, although the picky digital sensor technology we currently have won't let that work 100%. Not like it used to be with film at least and won't be there soon.

The small distance to the lens mount also allows for pretty much any lens with big enough image circle to be adapted to mirrorless system.


----------



## jjsoviet

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> The 7 II is a great camera, I just cannot justify the expense going for one as the owner of lenses that would cost more than not just one each, but all of my limbs.
> 
> Plus as Conspiracy said, it is not "there"100%. Not small or quiet enough, not faster, many features that are great for some but not for all.
> would probably go for a D810 if I had to have this Sony sensor, and the abundance of Nikon users would probably allow me to rebuilt my system with cheaper and as good if not better options for the all important glass.


Oh yeah, Sony in particular is notorious for selling expensive lenses for its E-Mount that they're usually just as expensive or more than the bodies. From day one I swore off buying native glass and bought an LA-EA4 adapter to use legacy Minolta lenses, which are largely the precursors to the current Sony A-Mount lenses for half the price or less. The most expensive I have right now is a 100 f/2.8 Macro for ~$300, which if I were to get the modern Sony version it would be $800.

Also I think MILCs are getting there in terms of the fundamentals such as AF speed, burst rate, lens selection, etc. Cameras like the X-T1, A7, GX7, A6000, and E-M1 are really compelling alternatives to DSLRs in their respective price brackets, and for someone who hasn't invested in glass yet wouldn't find it difficult to upgrade, as opposed to a long-time Canon/Nikon user who wants to migrate systems.

And of course, there's the advantage of adapting vintage glass easily with the shorter flange distance. I'm seeing a lot of people buying mirrorless solely to adapt their Leica/Voigtlander/etc. lenses to great effect; and with stuff like the Metabones adapter they can still use Canon and Nikon AF lenses - albeit with slower AF performance currently.


----------



## Conspiracy

sony is even more notorious for proprietary EVERYTHING. its refreshing to see they are ok with companies making 3rd party lens adapters that retain AF


----------



## Jixr

i think a killer dream combo for me would be the sony with a canon 70-200 f4L Im so sad I never got to use that lens on a FF body


----------



## hokiealumnus

If I were to go mirrorless (which I'd do if there were enough funds to add to my DSLR, but probably wouldn't replace it), I'd want a Fuji X-T1 with the newly announced 16-55 f/2.8. That combo is tooootally drool-worthy to me.

The A7 II looks like a much better camera than its predecessor from a design standpoint though. The original looked like a pain (literally & figuratively) to use compared to the new body. That extra grip and how they designed the shutter/control/C buttons was a needed and welcome improvement. I'm totally jealous you got one jjsoviet (if nothing else, for that lovely FF sensor). It's not a choice I would make for several reasons, but the camera itself is very, very nice.


----------



## jjsoviet

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hokiealumnus*
> 
> If I were to go mirrorless (which I'd do if there were enough funds to add to my DSLR, but probably wouldn't replace it), I'd want a Fuji X-T1 with the newly announced 16-55 f/2.8. That combo is tooootally drool-worthy to me.
> 
> The A7 II looks like a much better camera than its predecessor from a design standpoint though. The original looked like a pain (literally & figuratively) to use compared to the new body. That extra grip and how they designed the shutter/control/C buttons was a needed and welcome improvement. I'm totally jealous you got one jjsoviet (if nothing else, for that lovely FF sensor). It's not a choice I would make for several reasons, but the camera itself is very, very nice.


Yeah, the improved body is just as big of a deal (if not more so) as the IBIS it packs. Compared to the original series, the II is better balanced and more solid, as well as being easier to hold with the larger grip and a button placement that makes more sense.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> damn. if upgrading my t3i to a t6i is only 2 better, then I deff need to change to the nikon train, where things are 200 better.
> 
> Also saying bye bye to my 70-200 f4L today.
> 
> I don't want to sell it, but need money for moving, and I rarely use it anyway.


Look at it like this. It's 2 entire times better.


----------



## Conspiracy

well if you use canon non-US numbering its 200 better









its a Canon 600D T3i vs a 800D T6i (when it releases)









new toy came in the mail 9Z4A5978 by brian_roberts, on Flickr


----------



## Magical Eskimo

TIL flashes eat through batteries pretty quick







4 new Duracells drained in a few days!

Gonna get some Panasonic Eneloops (These seem to be good? £16 for 8 on Amazon Prime) - Can a decent charger be bought for around £20?


----------



## Scott1541

While we're on the subject of TIL, and flashes...

TIL my point & shoot can sync up to 1/2000th







Although it make sense since it'll be utilising an electronic shutter.


----------



## kbros

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> TIL flashes eat through batteries pretty quick
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 4 new Duracells drained in a few days!
> 
> Gonna get some Panasonic Eneloops (These seem to be good? £16 for 8 on Amazon Prime) - Can a decent charger be bought for around £20?


I bought the panasonic eneloop branded charger for about $12 USD.


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> TIL flashes eat through batteries pretty quick
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 4 new Duracells drained in a few days!
> 
> Gonna get some Panasonic Eneloops (These seem to be good? £16 for 8 on Amazon Prime) - Can a decent charger be bought for around £20?


You can get the Intellicore I4 charger for less than that. Great charger too.


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aksthem1*
> 
> You can get the Intellicore I4 charger for less than that. Great charger too.


I ended up getting these

http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B001P8OCCS?psc=1&redirect=true&ref_=oh_aui_detailpage_o00_s00

http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B00JWC40JY?psc=1&redirect=true&ref_=oh_aui_detailpage_o00_s00


----------



## pcfoo

Was reading the other day reviews on Amazon.com for the "new" (for me) AmazonBasics AA High-Capacity NiMH, which a well known reviewer (NLee the Engineer - pretty much reviews every consumer charger & battery out there) claims are rebadged 2500mAh Eneloops XXs (very similar characteristics) and others have similar conclusions doing analysis on those cells' discharge curves etc.

Although not cheap, those AAs are much cheaper than Eneloop XXs in Amazon.com
When you buy them @ packs of 8 = $23 or $2.9 per Amazon hi-cap cell

vs.

$19.5 / 4 = $4.9 per Eneloop XX cell.


----------



## Jixr

I've been using amazon brand batteries for awhile, and have had no complaints about them.


----------



## Conspiracy

oh lawd sweet baby jesus. Rokinon announced a 12mm f2.8 fisheye for full frame cameras today on facebook







ive watned that 8mm APS-C fisheye they make but id much rather have this bamf

http://www.amazon.com/Rokinon-Ultra-Fisheye-Canon-Cameras/dp/B00PDHY4Y8/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1420755040&sr=8-1&keywords=Rokinon+12mm+f2.8


----------



## pcfoo

Was aware / had used only the "basic-basic"









On a second reading, there are Eneloop Pro XX 8-packs under the Panasonic brand for $31.5 that brings it to $3.9ish per cell.
Meh, me thinks it is better to have more "decent" batteries for redundancy - if you can afford carrying the weight - than nit picking for the best, which can also fail at any point and leave you hanging.


----------



## kbros

@Conspiracy Those are the ones that are either full MF or have a focus confirm chip? Correct? jw


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> @Conspiracy Those are the ones that are either full MF or have a focus confirm chip? Correct? jw


apparently only the nikon version of this new 12mm fisheye gets focus confirm AE confirm chip. i dont remember if the rest of rokinon lenses have the chip or not. ive never owned one but the quality is definitely impressive for the price. dont really need AF confirm on a fisheye even at f2.8 the DOF will be almost everything LOLZ. this lens is obviously also compatible with crop sensors as well. 12mm is pretty darn wide for both


----------



## Jixr

yeah I used to have a rokinon fish eye, just point it at whatever and everything will be in focus.


----------



## pcfoo

The AF confirm chips are only for Nikon models afaik.

Their 14mm is amazing (for the price). Heavy distortion, but great sharpness even wide open, makes a great nightsky / landscape lens.
I would like one, but I don't know if I can justify it ontop of the 16-35L IS. I am not into nightsky/startrail etc to factor in the f/2.8 advantage over the f/4 Canon.

The 12mm is just a bit too much for my style (14mm is already pushing it for me), but I can see why many people would be excited.
The Fisheye portion kills it as I deem it too much of a niche, but if performance ala 14mm Rokinon is there, it is not a bad price for a full frame coverage fisheye.


----------



## Scott1541

You don't need an AF confirm for Nikon







The only reason you'd need a chip is for metering on the lower end bodies

Edit: ION I've just sold my SB-300... that's £50 in the bag. Not bad considering it was given to me


----------



## Jixr

So I'm downsizing my gear quite a bit.

I've kinda discovered ( for me ) that 9 times out of 10 i'm just using my little pocket cam for photos, and since I don't do paid shoots anymore or anything like that anymore, my dslr just sits in its bag.

I sold my lens collection, 50mm 1.4 ( hated it ) 70-200 ( loved it, but rarely used it ) and my 17-40 ( it was meh ) for money to help fund my move in a little bit and to create a bit of an emergency savings fund.

And i'm thinking about still keeping my DSLR, but maybe just buying 1 lens for it.

I was thinking of either going with a sigma 30mm ( good fast sharp prime ) or possibly keeping an eye out for a used 17-55 2.8.

What do you guys think?


----------



## kbros

I would go w/ the sigma 30. More performance for the money imo.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> So I'm downsizing my gear quite a bit.
> 
> I've kinda discovered ( for me ) that 9 times out of 10 i'm just using my little pocket cam for photos, and since I don't do paid shoots anymore or anything like that anymore, my dslr just sits in its bag.
> 
> I sold my lens collection, 50mm 1.4 ( hated it ) 70-200 ( loved it, but rarely used it ) and my 17-40 ( it was meh ) for money to help fund my move in a little bit and to create a bit of an emergency savings fund.
> 
> And i'm thinking about still keeping my DSLR, but maybe just buying 1 lens for it.
> 
> I was thinking of either going with a sigma 30mm ( good fast sharp prime ) or possibly keeping an eye out for a used 17-55 2.8.
> 
> What do you guys think?


both good options but only you can chose prime vs zoom. its personal preference


----------



## Pandora51

Its the sigma 30mm f1.4 right?

Personally I have no issues with prime lens and could shot all day long with it.
17-55mm is more variable through and f2.8 is very useful aswell.
In the end its indeed personal preference and depends on thr type of photography. I guess you want to use it for special events or moments so the 17-55mm might be the better choice.

Why did you hate the 50mm f1.4?


----------



## Jixr

the AF was always slightly off, and I just was never really happy with using it.


----------



## pcfoo

Why would you keep you DSLR if you won't be shooting it?
Both the 30 1.4 DC and the 17-55 IS where great lenses for me, but the later is big and heavy (for a cropped body lens, sure, it is smaller/lighter than FF 2.8 standard zooms), so if you leave your DSLR home as it is big and heavy, the 17-55 won't help.

Didn't you have the EOS M at some point?

If you where to get rid your DSLR kit - why not go for a mirror-less cropped body altogether?


----------



## Jixr

I still have my M, and the DSLR is much more user friendly when shooting certain things.

I could just jump to a mirrorless system, but Mainly I wanted to just downsize my gear a bit since I don't plan on doing paid work anymore.

I suppose I could just get a semi-decent mirrorless system, but the only one that really interest me is fuji, and its quite expensive.


----------



## jjsoviet

A6000, GX7, OM-D E-M10 strike your fancy?


----------



## Conspiracy

a6000 is beast


----------



## kbros

^


----------



## Scott1541

My new amazon elcheapo backpack should be here tomorrow







I can finally get all of this gear off of my desk and shelf


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> My new amazon elcheapo backpack should be here tomorrow
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I can finally get all of this gear off of my desk and shelf


reviews! im in need of a decent backpack


----------



## Paradigm84

If you'd be willing to fork our that much for a bag, I'd highly recommend a 5.11 Rush 12, it can store a surprisingly large amount of stuff for a small bag and it seems almost universally praised for how well put together it is.

You can also get it in black fortunately:


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!







And yes, I know it's a bad photo, it was before I had the tripod or knew how to focus properly.


----------



## Conspiracy

eventually i want a bag that can hold a lot. not everything i have but a good bit without looking like a camera backpack which is also tough. i almost just said screw it and bought a rolling bag but im not at that point in my life where i need one of those lolz


----------



## TUDJ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> eventually i want a bag that can hold a lot. not everything i have but a good bit without looking like a camera backpack which is also tough. i almost just said screw it and bought a rolling bag but im not at that point in my life where i need one of those lolz


I use one of these; LowePro Photo sport Pro 30L AW

Obviously isn't suited to all uses but is great for taking the camera along on hikes as the bag is designed for both your hiking gear and photo gear. Fully waterproof too







I used it for a week long trip to Iceland, fit a decent amount of clothing, camera, 4 lenses, tripod (on the side). A great thing about it is that the camera compartment comes out so that it can be used solely as a backpack.


----------



## Pandora51

Has anyone experience with the Amazon basic SLR Backpack for 30 bucks?
Is it worth it? I mean I know buying one lowePro lasts like forever but Im not sure if I want to spend that much right now.

What do you use for long tours and do you use anything different for short trips?


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pandora51*
> 
> Has anyone experience with the Amazon basic SLR Backpack for 30 bucks?
> Is it worth it? I mean I know buying one lowePro lasts like forever but Im not sure if I want to spend that much right now.


That is the one I got. I'm not expecting it to survive years of abuse or be able to carry all my gear up mountains etc.. but for what I do it should be alright, at least for now









I was reading through the reviews and a few people said it's bigger inside than it looks... well I can say that isn't true, it's a little smaller than I was hoping for but it's adequate


----------



## Pandora51

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> That is the one I got. I'm not expecting it to survive years of abuse or be able to carry all my gear up mountains etc.. but for what I do it should be alright, at least for now
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I was reading through the reviews and a few people said it's bigger inside than it looks... well I can say that isn't true, it's a little smaller than I was hoping for but it's adequate
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


Not everything can be a tardis









Thank you for your opinion. It really seems not bad.
I need something bigger since I cant fit everything in my camera bag. Flash + 2 lens + 1 body is already too much. But I have barely any experience with a big fototour and if this amazon basic backpack would work out on larger trips like norway (just an example)..

Edit: Is it waterproof / rainproof?


----------



## jjsoviet

Has anyone had experience with selling kit lenses? I'm planning to sell off the 28-70 OSS since I don't plan on using it anyway, but I'm not sure how this will affect my camera's warranty. If for example I'd like to put my camera on repair within the warranty period would the lack of the bundled lens void the warranty in any way?


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pandora51*
> 
> Not everything can be a tardis
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you for your opinion. It really seems not bad.
> I need something bigger since I cant fit everything in my camera bag. Flash + 2 lens + 1 body is already too much. But I have barely any experience with a big fototour and if this amazon basic backpack would work out on larger trips like norway (just an example)..
> 
> Edit: Is it waterproof / rainproof?


The only concern I have about it is that the stitching on the straps may come loose eventually. I know that's something eskimo mentioned about his amazon basics bag (although it was a different one), and I saw similar comments in the reviews on amazon. If this does happen I'll probably try and sew it back on myself, but make it stronger.

Can't comment on whether it's waterproof or not yet, haven't tested but it probably isn't.


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jjsoviet*
> 
> Has anyone had experience with selling kit lenses? I'm planning to sell off the 28-70 OSS since I don't plan on using it anyway, but I'm not sure how this will affect my camera's warranty. If for example I'd like to put my camera on repair within the warranty period would the lack of the bundled lens void the warranty in any way?


Don't sweat it, people separate camera kits all the time, there is no issue.
Camera & Kit lens, each have a separate #s/n and are dealt with as different items @ service.


----------



## jjsoviet

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Don't sweat it, people separate camera kits all the time, there is no issue.
> Camera & Kit lens, each have a separate #s/n and are dealt with as different items @ service.


Awesome. I'm about to sell the kit lens right now. Thanks!


----------



## Gobigorgohome

How will the Sigma 2.0x Teleconverter APO work with Sigma 150-500mm APO?

I read in this review that it had compatibility problems with other brands than Sigma and that the clarity of the image would be 25-30% worse than without the Teleconverter mounted (this was the review: https://photographylife.com/reviews/sigma-2-0x-teleconverter). I can manage to pick up the Sigma 150-500mm used for about 500 USD (pre-owned) and I will probably be able to pick up the Teleconverter for another 275 USD (new).

For long shots (like I have been doing with the 70-300mm I need a little bit more to go on), the 150-500mm probably will be the perfect zoom for me, with the Teleconverter I would have no problem in really long shots either. The compromise is buying the Tamron 150-600mm brand new, because I cannot manage to find it used in Norway, import is not an option either ... it is still ~1500 USD which is almost double of what I have to pay for the Sigma 150-500mm with the Teleconverter ... I have yet to read/see some reviews of the Sigma 150-500mm lens (and the Teleconverter), but at the pricetag of the 150-600mm it does not sound like it is worth it to me at this point and in this case where they are pretty much impossible to find pre-owned is not making the case any better.

What do you guys think?


----------



## pcfoo

The Sigma 150-500 is a relatively "slow" lens, much like the tamron 170-600, with both lenses maxing out aperture at f/6.3.
This is already putting most AF camera systems to a tough position as it is close to the "darkest" those can tolerate for reliable AF speed & accuracy.

Adding a teleconverter, will result in further light loss: 1.4x TCs lose -1EV extra stop, (making them around f/9), and a 2x would result to -2 EV stops, effectively making it f/11+.
Almost no camera would be able to AF with such a lens combo, even if the TC is mechanically compatible with the lens (i.e. the TC's elements have room to go in and not collide with the rear element of the lens).

The TCs are suggested to be used with lenses f/4 or faster for the above reason.

Traditionally those lenses are not amazing performers to begin with, and adding a TC will probably lead to diminishing returns.

Both of those lenses on a crop body are equiv. to insanely long FOV. Unless you are after astrophotography, you would be better of with any of the above on a cropped body without any TC.
For astrophotography, although you could work with stacked TCs and long tele-zooms for that occasional moon or eclipse shot, you should start looking into more specialized tools.

If you are after wildlife, there is little chance that you would be able to handhold aim and shoot sharp pics with a 500/600mm + TC combo anyways, even if your AF would work (good luck MFing too).

Your best bet is camo/hide, patience and spending lots of time in the field. That's how 90+ % of pro's do it, rarely having longer than 500mm lenses.


----------



## FiveStarZA

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> reviews! im in need of a decent backpack


The SO got me one of these (the black version) for Christmas. It's not a massive, but can comfortably fit my entire kit (1 body, 4 lenses and all accessories) with a fair amount of room for more. It's more of a travel pack than a hardcore gear bag, but plenty of nice little extras.

Kata minibee:
http://www.kata-bags.com/minibee-111-ul-backpack-lg

And I see it comes in a pro version, now under the Manfrotto brand:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1049377-REG/manfrotto_mb_pl_mb_120_minibee_120_pro_light_backpack.html


----------



## Gobigorgohome

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> The Sigma 150-500 is a relatively "slow" lens, much like the tamron 170-600, with both lenses maxing out aperture at f/6.3.
> This is already putting most AF camera systems to a tough position as it is close to the "darkest" those can tolerate for reliable AF speed & accuracy.
> 
> Adding a teleconverter, will result in further light loss: 1.4x TCs lose -1EV extra stop, (making them around f/9), and a 2x would result to -2 EV stops, effectively making it f/11+.
> Almost no camera would be able to AF with such a lens combo, even if the TC is mechanically compatible with the lens (i.e. the TC's elements have room to go in and not collide with the rear element of the lens).
> 
> The TCs are suggested to be used with lenses f/4 or faster for the above reason.
> 
> Traditionally those lenses are not amazing performers to begin with, and adding a TC will probably lead to diminishing returns.
> 
> Both of those lenses on a crop body are equiv. to insanely long FOV. Unless you are after astrophotography, you would be better of with any of the above on a cropped body without any TC.
> For astrophotography, although you could work with stacked TCs and long tele-zooms for that occasional moon or eclipse shot, you should start looking into more specialized tools.
> 
> If you are after wildlife, there is little chance that you would be able to handhold aim and shoot sharp pics with a 500/600mm + TC combo anyways, even if your AF would work (good luck MFing too).
> 
> Your best bet is camo/hide, patience and spending lots of time in the field. That's how 90+ % of pro's do it, rarely having longer than 500mm lenses.


Yes, I understand. For most situations the Sigma 150-500mm would be enough anyways ... yes, I read about the lightning too at the review I posted in my last post, it seemed that they could not zoom in max with a 100-400mm lens either, so it would not have been optimal for the 150-500mm either way.


----------



## Conspiracy

and the 135L just isnt long enough. i need the new 400L DO for super light ultra tele awesomeness. i have been trying and failing to get a shot of this dude by the lake at work. i can get as close as maybe 30 feet before i totally spook him. looks like i need to keep my 1.4X extender at work so i can use it with the 70-200 f2.8 in the office in hopes of getting this guy. ive never seen him fly unless its flying away because i scare him. hes always just chilling walking around like the gangster of the lake. i will get a good shot eventually


----------



## TUDJ

Step up your game!


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> and the 135L just isnt long enough. i need the new 400L DO for super light ultra tele awesomeness. i have been trying and failing to get a shot of this dude by the lake at work. i can get as close as maybe 30 feet before i totally spook him. looks like i need to keep my 1.4X extender at work so i can use it with the 70-200 f2.8 in the office in hopes of getting this guy. ive never seen him fly unless its flying away because i scare him. hes always just chilling walking around *like the gangster of the lake*. i will get a good shot eventually












Made me chuckle


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> and the 135L just isnt long enough. i need the new 400L DO for super light ultra tele awesomeness. i have been trying and failing to get a shot of this dude by the lake at work. i can get as close as maybe 30 feet before i totally spook him. looks like i need to keep my 1.4X extender at work so i can use it with the 70-200 f2.8 in the office in hopes of getting this guy. ive never seen him fly unless its flying away because i scare him. hes always just chilling walking around *like the gangster of the lake*. i will get a good shot eventually
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Made me chuckle
Click to expand...

i aim to please


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Has anyone managed to get hold of the Yongnuo 50mm nifty fifty clone yet? Still eagerly anticipating the delivery of mine, Amazon said delivery est. 8th - 28th Jan


----------



## Conspiracy

wow that estimate window


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gobigorgohome*
> 
> Yes, I understand. For most situations the Sigma 150-500mm would be enough anyways ... yes, I read about the lightning too at the review I posted in my last post, it seemed that they could not zoom in max with a 100-400mm lens either, so it would not have been optimal for the 150-500mm either way.


Most people are excited about long lenses, but the tough truth is long lenses = bigger lenses = more glass, which also means beefier lens body to support it = harder to design and build cheaply.
It gets expensive, even for not "amazing" lenses.

TC's won't help you much unless the starting point is already very good : e.g. good 2x TC on a 70-200 2.8 or 300 2.8 = viable option. 1.4x TCs on good f/4~5.6 lenses (mostly primes) are also ok.

Most people that are excited about long lenses etc, usually get to shoot them once a year to so on some vacation trip.

My take would be to get a xx-400 / or xx-500 used & relatively cheap, "test the waters" and see if you will get enough usage out of it or it is just the excitement of a "what if" and "G.A.S."

After a few months you will know if that is something you want to pursue further, and ofc you will know that there is little you can do other than dropping some serious cash for you to get something considerably better.

No silver bullet on this one.


----------



## Magical Eskimo

No doubt it'll probably end up arriving on the 28th


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> No doubt it'll probably end up arriving on the 28th


dont be sad. it may get there early. like on the 27th instead lol


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> dont be sad. it may get there early. like on the 27th instead lol


----------



## Scott1541

I don't think a 20 day window is that bad for shipping from china


----------



## Pandora51

A Yongnou lens? At first I thought its a joke but I never heard about it. Unfortunately its not available here on amazon and only canon.

But If the rumors are true about the nikon lenses and the 35mm F1,8 is just a bit better than the original I will buy it. For sure.


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pandora51*
> 
> A Yongnou lens? At first I thought its a joke but I never heard about it. Unfortunately its not available here on amazon and only canon.
> 
> But If the rumors are true about the nikon lenses and the 35mm F1,8 is just a bit better than the original I will buy it. For sure.


Yeah it's pretty cool, this guy has had some great hands on experience with it http://www.shootingonabudget.com/


----------



## Pandora51

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> Yeah it's pretty cool, this guy has had some great hands on experience with it http://www.shootingonabudget.com/


thanks and nice source! It brought my attention to the neewer Flashes.


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pandora51*
> 
> thanks and nice source! It brought my attention to the neewer Flashes.


No probs







I actually have a Neewer NW680 flash, it's really good especially considering its a ttl flash for £40!


----------



## Pandora51

thats nice to hear. I might use some of them for slave. TT560 for 32 euro and NW680 for 50 euro. Its sounds too good to be true lol


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Haha yeah when you compare the prices to the price of a Canon flash it does seem too good to be true!


----------



## pcfoo

Yongnuo / Neewer flashes are very very competitive for off-camera work, as even the cheaper models contain optical or even wireless slave receivers etc.
Those cheaper models - like Yongnuo 560 models - are also "non-TTL", i.e. there is no metering electronics in them - you just set the % of power you want them to fire at, and those fire. That is easy to identify just by looking the hotshoe mount: there is only one contact for "fire". There is no other communication between it and the camera.

Think the x6*0* models are "dumb" and the x6*5* models are TTL - or something in this pattern.

So to be fair, for on camera usage those are not the same as Canon or Nikon Speedlights that do include TTL functionality in all their models.
Yongnuo's 565 series does tho, and those remain vastly cheaper, although according to some not as reliable @ TTL. Meh, that's good enough.

I think a YN560 IV set with or without the YN560-TX (guess you don't need it if one of the 560-IV is on-camera) is hard to beat for off-camera flash. I mean, Yongnuo was hard to beat having to buy the slave RF modules, bug having those built in? Insane, simply insane value for $.

I've noticed for some time now that Amazon has a 560 IV (before III) pair with a 560TX for around $220 shipped, which is silly as each 560 IV is $70ish and the TX $45ish.
i.e. $220 buy you 3x 560 IV or you can get the same set @ $190 as separate pieces with free shipping...what is the point of bundling?


----------



## xILukasIx

Oh man, I can't stand the waiting!
Hope it comes soon...









That's two YN600EX-RT and one YN-E3-RT for 350€ :3


----------



## Conspiracy

NICE!!!!!!!!!

ive been looking at that trigger since pretty much all the yongnuos that matter are getting built-in wireless now


----------



## kbros

Finally learned how the histogram works. MAN editing is a breeeze now!


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> Finally learned how the histogram works. MAN editing is a breeeze now!


really? It made no difference for me. :/ What secrets have you learned?


----------



## kbros

I used to play with the whites and blacks to get a correct exposure(LR). I still do, but you don't need to like alt and drag until it blows out or clips. You just need to drag it until there is no "pixels" in the right and left side of the histogram. Super simple. Then use the exposure slider to get more of a "mountain" shape in the middle.



Edit: This is only for PERFECT exposure, some artsy things like high exposure, low or high key, wouldn't look like that on the histogram.


----------



## Conspiracy

histograms are only a guide. dont rely on them too heavily because most photogs read the histogram but dont take into account the scene in front of them which is equally important. histogram is perfect if you take a photo under controlled light of a thirds cards broken into pure black, 18% grey, and white. the histogram for that will definitely tell you a proper exposure









histograms are great but i LOL hard at "pro" photogs here in atlanta that talk down to people for not using histograms when they themselves cant even explain what you learn when you actually read it rather than glancing at it


----------



## kbros

Good tip^

Did you guys see the D750 was recalled for that flair issue?
http://petapixel.com/2015/01/14/nikon-d750-disappearing-stores-shelves-quiet-recall-underway/


----------



## xILukasIx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> NICE!!!!!!!!!
> 
> ive been looking at that trigger since pretty much all the yongnuos that matter are getting built-in wireless now


Adding to that, my 24 Panasonic Eneloop XX Pro 2450mAh batteries arrived today, yay!


----------



## PCModderMike

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> Good tip^
> 
> Did you guys see the D750 was recalled for that flair issue?
> http://petapixel.com/2015/01/14/nikon-d750-disappearing-stores-shelves-quiet-recall-underway/


Ahh that's why it disappeared from Amazon.com....not that I could afford to get it right now anyway, but I was just doing my usual window shopping.









EDIT:







clicked the link *after* posting my comment, so didn't realize they were going to be using Amazon.com as their example


----------



## Pandora51

A recall again? oh Nikon!

It is still possible to order the D750 in germany..


----------



## kbros

Nikon = GM


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> Nikon = GM


Oh, oh, I see where this is going

Ford suxxxx

S-10 > F150, chevvvvy rulesssss


----------



## kbros

When it comes to domestics, chevy's the only one I like. I will own a 60's C10 b4 I die, as well as a porsche 930 and a Vw Beetle, bus, and thing. lol


----------



## Conspiracy

lets not turn this into a brand bashing but yeah so nikon totally has had recall worthy issues in 3 out of the 6 most recent affordable pro FF bodies. and of the 6, 2 of them were kinda re-branded cameras to fix issues























i kid though. nikon still impresses us all in the image quality department


----------



## Sean Webster

Yup, Nikon sucks. Crapkon is their new name. lol


----------



## pcfoo

Dangit Canon!
Give us a proper FF CMOS without low-pass and teach those Nikon/Sony noobs their lesson!


----------



## Dream Killer

Im here laughing with my d800e and 24 1.4g


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> Im here laughing with my d800e and 24 1.4g


I am being defensive with my "ok" FF


----------



## hokiealumnus

APS-C for life!

(Until death, or such time as FF is within my budget, in which case I retract the previous statement.)


----------



## kbros

^


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> Im here laughing with my d800e and 24 1.4g


I think you meant crying.


----------



## jjsoviet

And I'm here with my A7 II, unaffected in all this and probably one of the 10 people within a thousand miles to own one


----------



## THEStorm

Canon 5dIII had light leakage when it came out. Canon recalled them for a fix.

Every brand has issues, it's just good that the recalled it so that they can be fixed. Personally I would rather Nikon recall them and own up to the issue than to deny that there is an issue at all.


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hokiealumnus*
> 
> APS-C for life!
> 
> (Until death, or such time as FF is within my budget, in which case I retract the previous statement.)


The only real complaint I have about APS-C at the minute is the smaller viewfinders. The viewfinder on my F60 is so much nicer to use, It's like of like looking through a toilet roll tube vs a straw.


----------



## Jixr

Yeah, I used a 7d the other day, and man the viewfinder on that is amazing compared to the rebel series.


----------



## kbros

I need to try a FF camera.


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> Yeah, I used a 7d the other day, and man the viewfinder on that is amazing compared to the rebel series.


My 1st D-SLR was a 20D...supposedly "better" than Rebels of its time (not a 7D ofc). Even with a fast prime, APS-Cs are a joke vs. even a "non-100%" FF viewfinder. The AE-1 (FD 50 1.4/ 35 2 SSC) and EOS 30 (50 1.8 was my brightest EF) I was using before would just put the 20D to shame.

Apples to apples (same aperture lens used, similar quality of optical glass in the VF & number-type of mirrors & coverage), a APS-C optical viewfinder cannot be brighter than roughly ~1/2 that of a FF/[135] film DSLR, and a m43 DSLR ~1/4 that of a FF.
Our eyes see the same difference sensors see. "Its all about da bass"- gough area.

The same situation can be reversed for the FF/35mm camera when you start peeking through MF DSLRs, or even worse, view (large format) cameras.


----------



## G33K

Got some manual glass and an adapter for my Rebel











Also some macro bellows


----------



## boogschd

impulse buy last tuesday - 85mm 1.8G



:|


----------



## Scott1541




----------



## kbros

I want one bad.


----------



## PCModderMike




----------



## PCModderMike

@Sean Webster


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!







In the rate the photo thread.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PCModderMike*
> 
> @Sean Webster
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In the rate the photo thread.


Fixed lol. Flickr updated the photo after I removed a spot, if I reupload from lightroom after I link a photo, flickr breaks the link and i have to make a new link wherever I share the pic.


----------



## kbros

The photo rate thread is pretty complicated for some people apparently. I got my photo rated 3 times XD


----------



## PCModderMike

Never fails.
I feel like this time it's partly my fault...I posted a random gif with no pic and no rating.










Spoiler: Really don't care though


----------



## Conspiracy




----------



## Jixr




----------



## Paradigm84

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


People like that shouldn't be allowed animals.


----------



## Scott1541

Went out to try a bit of street photography again this afternoon









Tried my knock-off black rapid strap/sling today and a bit last night too. It works pretty well, much less hassle than the standard straps. I need to tie something onto body and bottom plate though, I don't like the idea of having my camera only attached via a cheap chinese battery grip.

DSC_5531 by Scott3933, on Flickr


----------



## Conspiracy

potn just updated to a slightly easier and nicer looking interface to navigate


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> Tried my knock-off black rapid strap/sling today and a bit last night too. It works pretty well, much less hassle than the standard straps. I need to tie something onto body and bottom plate though, I don't like the idea of having my camera only attached via a cheap chinese battery grip.


better safe than sorry ,, i dropped my camera probably about 1 1/2 onto concrete cause this thing decided to come loose



:/

thankfully, the lens, flash, and body all survived


----------



## Sean Webster

oooo, i need to check mine out now.


----------



## kbros

I use a DIY paracord wriststrap. It kind of catches on the bottom of my palm so it's not going anywhere.


----------



## GrimDoctor

I bought a light tent off of ebay and it works well. So far I have only been able to get good lighting outside during the morning before lunchtime. I would like to get some basic lights so I can move my setup inside and take photos whenever I want.

Can anyone suggest anything for AU$60 or less? If possible.

Ebay is fine. I don't really know what I'd need. I'll be using this setup to take build photos. Nothing strobe based, my camera doesn't support it.

This is what I've achieved so far:
http://www.overclock.net/t/1536425/


----------



## GrimDoctor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GrimDoctor*
> 
> I bought a light tent off of ebay and it works well. So far I have only been able to get good lighting outside during the morning before lunchtime. I would like to get some basic lights so I can move my setup inside and take photos whenever I want.
> 
> Can anyone suggest anything for AU$60 or less? If possible.
> 
> Ebay is fine. I don't really know what I'd need. I'll be using this setup to take build photos. Nothing strobe based, my camera doesn't support it.
> 
> This is what I've achieved so far:
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1536425/


Would this do the job?



http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/2x85W-Photography-Table-Top-Continuous-Lighting-Tent-Cube-Light-Lamp-Stand-Kit-/251752666332?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_15&hash=item3a9da0d4dc


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> potn just updated to a slightly easier and nicer looking interface to navigate


It just so happened that I replaced my phone between the last time I checked POTN and the most recent time, so when I opened POTN on my new phone it was all different and I was like 'lame'.

Then I realized it's the new NEW POTN, and it's definitely more lightweight and navitagatable (if that's a word).


----------



## Jixr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boogschd*


easy safety net is just run a zip tie through it, Your thing wont spin anymore, but if the hook breaks, the zip tie will catch it.


----------



## xILukasIx

Awww yeah


----------



## Conspiracy




----------



## xILukasIx

Now all I need are some light modifiers, I really want to get into portrait photography!

Does anyone have some suggestions (relatively wallet friendly)? Maybe start with a softbox and/or beauty dish?
Is it a good idea to buy adapters for Bowens mount or similar?

So many questions!


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xILukasIx*
> 
> Now all I need are some light modifiers, I really want to get into portrait photography!
> 
> Does anyone have some suggestions (relatively wallet friendly)? Maybe start with a softbox and/or beauty dish?
> Is it a good idea to buy adapters for Bowens mount or similar?
> 
> So many questions!


#1 = Umbrella

Then whatever else you want.


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> easy safety net is just run a zip tie through it, Your thing wont spin anymore, but if the hook breaks, the zip tie will catch it.


thats actually a pretty good idea ! gonna do that when i buy a new sling strap
thanks man!









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xILukasIx*
> 
> Awww yeah
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!












Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GrimDoctor*
> 
> Would this do the job?
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/2x85W-Photography-Table-Top-Continuous-Lighting-Tent-Cube-Light-Lamp-Stand-Kit-/251752666332?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_15&hash=item3a9da0d4dc


i dont have much experience with these things, but i guess theyll do alright ?
lets wait for the others to chime in. lolz


----------



## Sean Webster

Has anyone had this?

When I start feeling my photography is dookie, I start to look at the work by the self-proclaimed local "pro's"...then I start feeling much better about my work lol. Some of these people who have been shooting for more than 2x the time I have make me laugh. Their shots are so terribad. Just because you bought a DSLR, it doesn't suddenly make you a pro...XD


----------



## xILukasIx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> #1 = Umbrella
> Then whatever else you want.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Has anyone had this?
> 
> When I start feeling my photography is dookie, I start to look at the work by the self-proclaimed local "pro's"...then I start feeling much better about my work lol. Some of these people who have been shooting for more than 2x the time I have make me laugh. Their shots are so terribad. Just because you bought a DSLR, it doesn't suddenly make you a pro...XD


Yeah, I also started looking at the portfolio of some local "pros", most of them are kind of crap lol


----------



## TUDJ

A couple of friends had their engagement photos done recently, they were shockingly bad. The same person is doing the wedding, I've given my opinion but it's fallen on deaf ears.

I don't know how some people have the cheek to charge for their poor work.


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Don't think I'll be getting my Yongnuo 50mm any time soon








I'm still suspicious, I'm not sure I believe the reason why they can't send it at the moment...


Spoiler: Warning: Email Conversation



Re: Order information from Amazon seller Chinatera LTD (Order: 026-5857558-7276331)‏

Re: Order information from Amazon seller Chinatera LTD (Order: 026-5857558-7276331)
Chinatera LTD - Amazon Marketplace ([email protected]) Add to contacts 09:26 Keep this message at the top of your inbox
To: Luke
[email protected]
Order ID 026-5857558-7276331:
1 of Chinatera Yongnuo YN50mm 50mm F/1.8 AF/MF Standard Prime Lens for Canon EOS Rebel Cam [ASIN: B00R5OL4YK]

For Your Information: To help arbitrate disputes and preserve trust and safety, we retain all messages buyers and sellers send through Amazon.co.uk. This includes your response to the message below. For your protection we recommend that you only communicate with buyers and sellers using this method.

Begin message

Dear Luke,

Thank you very much for your understanding!









We have refunded you,please check later!

And we will contact you to reorder at your original price when the problem is solved.

Apologize for the whole thing and wish you have a nice day!

Best regards,
Shirley

--- Original message ---

For Your Information: To help arbitrate disputes and preserve trust and safety, we retain all messages buyers and sellers send through Amazon.co.uk. This includes your response to the message below. For your protection we recommend that you only communicate with buyers and sellers using this method.

Begin message

I'll take the refund for now, then you contact me when the issue is sorted so we can reorder at the original price I paid.

Thanks

Luke

On 22 Jan 2015 08:46, Chinatera LTD - Amazon Marketplace <[e-mail address removed]> wrote:
Order ID 026-5857558-7276331:
1 of Chinatera Yongnuo YN50mm 50mm F/1.8 AF/MF Standard Prime Lens for Canon EOS Rebel Cam [ASIN: B00R5OL4YK]

For Your Information: To help arbitrate disputes and preserve trust and safety, we retain all messages buyers and sellers send through Amazon.co.uk. This includes your response to the message below. For your protection we recommend that you only communicate with buyers and sellers using this method.

Begin message

Dear Luke,

Do you mean that you'd like to keep the order and wait for our resending?

Best regards,
Shirley

--- Original message ---

For Your Information: To help arbitrate disputes and preserve trust and safety, we retain all messages buyers and sellers send through Amazon.co.uk. This includes your response to the message below. For your protection we recommend that you only communicate with buyers and sellers using this method.

Begin message

Hi,

Okay, well I suppose that's in writing so I can hold it to you.

Thanks for quick communication

Luke

On 22 Jan 2015 08:10, Chinatera LTD - Amazon Marketplace <[e-mail address removed]> wrote:
Order ID 026-5857558-7276331:
1 of Chinatera Yongnuo YN50mm 50mm F/1.8 AF/MF Standard Prime Lens for Canon EOS Rebel Cam [ASIN: B00R5OL4YK]

For Your Information: To help arbitrate disputes and preserve trust and safety, we retain all messages buyers and sellers send through Amazon.co.uk. This includes your response to the message below. For your protection we recommend that you only communicate with buyers and sellers using this method.

Begin message

Dear Luke,

I am really sorry for that.

But now it is not the problem of money, since it is a new product, it may takes a period of time for the factory to solve this problem.

Don't worry, how about we refund you first, and when the problem is solved, we will contact you to re-order at your original purchase price, is that OK?

Sorry again for the inconvenience and please trust us!

Best regards,
Shirley

--- Original message ---

For Your Information: To help arbitrate disputes and preserve trust and safety, we retain all messages buyers and sellers send through Amazon.co.uk. This includes your response to the message below. For your protection we recommend that you only communicate with buyers and sellers using this method.

Begin message

Hi,

I don't want a refund, I just want my lens.
I've heard about things like this happening to other people, it's a way of getting more money because you know you can sell the lens at a higher price.

I had noticed after I paid £32 for the lens your raised the price to about £60; a price I won't pay.

I know your game. I'd like my lens please.

Many thanks

Luke Wanden

On 22 Jan 2015 02:34, Chinatera LTD - Amazon Marketplace <[e-mail address removed]> wrote:
Order ID 026-5857558-7276331:
1 of Chinatera Yongnuo YN50mm 50mm F/1.8 AF/MF Standard Prime Lens for Canon EOS Rebel Cam [ASIN: B00R5OL4YK]

For Your Information: To help arbitrate disputes and preserve trust and safety, we retain all messages buyers and sellers send through Amazon.co.uk. This includes your response to the message below. For your protection we recommend that you only communicate with buyers and sellers using this method.

Begin message

Dear Luke,

Sorry to bother.

Very sorry to tell you that yesterday we were informed that your package was returned to our local post due to our Customs take this kind of product has hazardous material.

And along with other orders all returned back. We have informed this to our factory and will solve the problem.

How about we refund the full money to you then you re-purchase some days later?

Really sorry for any inconvenience caused to you.

Best regards,
Chinatera LTD.


----------



## xILukasIx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> #1 = Umbrella
> Then whatever else you want.


Would you recommend getting a 2-in-1 umbrella (shoot through and reflective)?
For size, I thought about getting one at around 40 inches.

@Magical Eskimo:
Wow, that seems sketchy








And that price increase


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Yeah I'm a little disappointed really, was looking forward to a new lens, and not just new to me but new to others as well, so it would have been nice to share my thoughts

Hopefully I'll still be able to get one eventually


----------



## PCModderMike

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Has anyone had this?
> 
> When I start feeling my photography is dookie, I start to look at the work by the self-proclaimed local "pro's"...then I start feeling much better about my work lol. Some of these people who have been shooting for more than 2x the time I have make me laugh. Their shots are so terribad. Just because you bought a DSLR, it doesn't suddenly make you a pro...XD


When I grow up...I'm gonna buy a Canon 6D and then I'll be a pro.










Honestly though, you do awesome work...something to aspire to.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TUDJ*
> 
> A couple of friends had their engagement photos done recently, they were shockingly bad. The same person is doing the wedding, I've given my opinion but it's fallen on deaf ears.
> 
> I don't know how some people have the cheek to charge for their poor work.


Hearing stuff like that worries me








I'm in the process of planning our wedding with my fiance and it's a destination wedding in Puerto Rico. I've had a difficult time researching and finding a photographer. We don't wanna blow 2 grand on someone who does half ass work.


----------



## Scott1541

Made a trip to the second hand shop down the road... came out with a Moscow olympic edition Zenit EM with Helios 44M. I wanted it for the lens because I kind of broke my other helios. Fortunately the guy who runs the shop doesn't know much about cameras so I got it the body and lens for less than I paid for the Helios 44-2 I bought off eBay last year









He also had a very nice Fujica GEr in there too, I was tempted for £8 but left it in the end because I couldn't figure out how to test it


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Has anyone had this?
> 
> When I start feeling my photography is dookie, I start to look at the work by the self-proclaimed local "pro's"...then I start feeling much better about my work lol. Some of these people who have been shooting for more than 2x the time I have make me laugh. Their shots are so terribad. Just because you bought a DSLR, it doesn't suddenly make you a pro...XD


hahaha all the time then i realise my snap shots taken with less gear are better than most work done by local "pros" here


----------



## pcfoo

Well, unlike a handful of professions, there is no professional license or testing for one involved in being a professional photographer.
You just convince people that you can do the job, and they hire you. That's it.
It's like being a professional PC tech, doing small office network installations or re-installing windows and the such.

These guys don't expect to wow forum warriors, they just make a living.

I would advise everybody to stop looking @ the mediocreses out there. That's what those sub-par photographers did probably, and encouraged them to become pros. "Meh, I can do that too" mentality.

Look up to those that are better than you.

Life advice is like drifting a car: you have to look towards the place you want to be, not away from where you want to be, nor where "your guts" feel.

And even when you've reached the conclusion that these neighborhood pros are sub-par, give them some credit for taking that step and starting their business, while thousands of others procrastinate forever, being timid to try: perfect is the enemy of good.


----------



## Jixr

wait, you mean its a bad thing that i have www.mylastnamephotography.wordpress.com?

Don't forget to like and subscribe to my facebook page Mylastname Photography! Also keep an eye out for my craigslist postings!

Mini sessions starting at $30

*crap photos downing in a sea of watermarks*

Crap like this is why I hate photography now. I can't share a photo without getting crucified online, or berated by gear snobs for not using the correct settings or whatever.

I've since sold off my len's, canceled my photoshop subscription, and quit doing paid work. It became really unfun, really quick.

If I knew how snobby the photo community is, I would have never touched a camera.


----------



## PCModderMike

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Well, unlike a handful of professions, there is no professional license or testing for one involved in being a professional photographer.
> You just convince people that you can do the job, and they hire you. That's it.
> It's like being a professional PC tech, doing small office network installations or re-installing windows and the such.
> 
> These guys don't expect to wow forum warriors, they just make a living.
> 
> I would advise everybody to stop looking @ the mediocreses out there. That's what those sub-par photographers did probably, and encouraged them to become pros. "Meh, I can do that too" mentality.
> 
> Look up to those that are better than you.
> 
> Life advice is like drifting a car: you have to look towards the place you want to be, not away from where you want to be, nor where "your guts" feel.
> 
> *And even when you've reached the conclusion that these neighborhood pros are sub-par, give them some credit for taking that step and starting their business, while thousands of others procrastinate forever, being timid to try: perfect is the enemy of good.*


QFT
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> wait, you mean its a bad thing that i have www.mylastnamephotography.wordpress.com?
> 
> Don't forget to like and subscribe to my facebook page Mylastname Photography! Also keep an eye out for my craigslist postings!
> 
> Mini sessions starting at $30
> 
> *crap photos downing in a sea of watermarks*
> 
> Crap like this is why I hate photography now. I can't share a photo without getting crucified online, or berated by gear snobs for not using the correct settings or whatever.
> 
> I've since sold off my len's, canceled my photoshop subscription, and quit doing paid work. It became really unfun, really quick.
> 
> If I knew how snobby the photo community is, I would have never touched a camera.


Damn I hate to hear something like that. I really enjoy my camera and I love taking pictures of whatever interests me. But I also rarely share photos online for fear of being bashed by some know it all gear snob.

Also, can't help it.








www.SeanWebsterPhoto.com

Click
Like
Now


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xILukasIx*
> 
> Would you recommend getting a 2-in-1 umbrella (shoot through and reflective)?
> For size, I thought about getting one at around 40 inches.


I have two wescott 43" shoot through umbrellas I use sometimes and they work fine. I am going to get a 7' parabolic umbrella soon too. Since you are starting just get whatever to play with and learn.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TUDJ*
> 
> A couple of friends had their engagement photos done recently, they were shockingly bad. The same person is doing the wedding, I've given my opinion but it's fallen on deaf ears.
> 
> I don't know how some people have the cheek to charge for their poor work.


my friends friend highered an amateur for their wedding. after they complained to me that the person is taking forever to edit the photos and they didn't turn out well. they also told me all photographers are scammers and stuff and once I said it was their fault for being cheap and hiring a fake pro they got defensive and stopped talking to me lol.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Well, unlike a handful of professions, there is no professional license or testing for one involved in being a professional photographer.
> You just convince people that you can do the job, and they hire you. That's it.
> It's like being a professional PC tech, doing small office network installations or re-installing windows and the such.
> 
> These guys don't expect to wow forum warriors, they just make a living.
> 
> I would advise everybody to stop looking @ the mediocreses out there. That's what those sub-par photographers did probably, and encouraged them to become pros. "Meh, I can do that too" mentality.
> 
> Look up to those that are better than you.
> 
> Life advice is like drifting a car: you have to look towards the place you want to be, not away from where you want to be, nor where "your guts" feel.
> 
> And even when you've reached the conclusion that these neighborhood pros are sub-par, give them some credit for taking that step and starting their business, while thousands of others procrastinate forever, being timid to try: perfect is the enemy of good.


Nope, looking at pros makes me think I am dookie, looking at fake pros makes me feel much better, al though I suffer from severe confidence issues...I would love to shoot and edit like some of the people I follow some day. It just takes time and dedication and networking.

If someone makes the majority of their living from photography, sure they can call themselves pro. It is their profession. But when you just buy a camera for fun and make a Facebook or website with poorly edited pics, you are foolish to call yourself pro. Most of the time people do this and don't even know how to run a business.

And when it comes to being a pc tech there are certifications to acquire to prove you know what you say you know...and if you work in either field there is always a business license of you are running your own service.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PCModderMike*
> 
> QFT
> Damn I hate to hear something like that. I really enjoy my camera and I love taking pictures of whatever interests me. But I also rarely share photos online for fear of being bashed by some know it all gear snob.
> 
> Also, can't help it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.SeanWebsterPhoto.com
> 
> Click
> Like
> Now


lol, I know I'm super duper cool and a true pro eh? Lololololololol

Actually, I technically am a pro photographer as the majority of my income comes through my photography... lol

And Jixr, you had a good thing going.







don't listen to losers who put you down for stupid things that they can't even master. They are stupid and you should know better.


----------



## Conspiracy

its impossible to define what makes a professional photographer these days. the market in MANY areas is so over saturated with photographers of varying skill levels with their own "businesses"

so much over generalization about comparing to the "pros" lol. we all here know there are different types of pros these days not to mention different types of photography. you cant compare a weekend warrior pro that has their hobby/side business of random portraits on the super cheap to a photog whose sole income is commercial or corporate photography. apples and oranges and honestly a never ending vague argument that really has so many blurred lines today that its tough to even talk about. the online photographic community also is not the same as the community of photogs that are out there doing actual work. the bulk of what many view photographers via the crowded areas of the internet of people with facebook pages for their business site are more really extremely hobbyists, some talented some that make you wonder how successful their business really is. sean really nailed it and i also add the growing number of people pursuing degrees in photography both BFA and MFA

i personally define a true professional not based on quality of their work because honestly there are many times where clients want something simple and do not desire a fancy look to their images. to me a real professional are those that pay self employment taxes on their freelance business or work full time as staff for a company producing images. Many weekend warriors and local pros just cranking out cheap portraits do not make enough in a year to report or pay taxes on their income and deal in cash so nothing is recorded, and if they do make enough when running an all cash business working for just people rather than getting paid by a company may have a profession in photography but it is not exactly the same as the photog with a registered business that has a huge pile of W2's on their desk around this time of year which i am starting to get in the mail and dread as i now have to start organizing my pay stubs, receipts, documentation for taxes









i *do not* refer to myself as a professional but do work full time as a staff videographer and previously did put 6 years of my life and sanity doing television work


----------



## Jixr

my deffinition is anyone who makes more than 51% of their income from photography.


----------



## Scott1541

I had to laugh earlier, on my village spotted Facebook page someone asked for wedding photographers. Anyway, I ended up checking a few of the suggestions out and one woman stood out to me as being particularly bad. Profile pic was her with a D300, superzoom and a crappy flashgun around her neck tourist style, most of her photos were mediocre snapshots, and to top it off there was a photo of the camera LCD and she was shooting in jpeg









To me a professional photographer is someone who not only makes money from photography, but also their work is of a very good standard. I'm not going to say they need to make most of their money from photography, because they don't. I have a friend who only does photo jobs on evenings and weekends, but he's a bloody good photographer who I'd definitely class as professional. I know another guy who only makes money from photography, and although his work is good, I'm still undecided as to whether I'd call him a professional or not, although by definition he is.


----------



## Dream Killer

What's wrong with shooting in JPEG and having the camera around the neck?


----------



## xILukasIx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> What's wrong with shooting in JPEG and having the camera around the neck?


_Nothing_ wrong with JPEGs, but more flexibility with RAW (although bigger size and more work afterwards, I suppose). At least that's my opinion.
As for having the camera around the neck: neck strain








I'd rather get a BlackRapid or something similar.


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> What's wrong with shooting in JPEG and having the camera around the neck?


I guess there's not really anything wrong with using jpeg, it's just lost potential. If you're doing a wedding shoot and charging close to £400 for a set amount of photos it's the least you can do IMO, especially if you're not a great photographer anyway (like her).

That pro I mentioned in my last post spends endless hours editing and tweaking his wedding shots to give his clients the best he can offer.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jixr*
> 
> my deffinition is anyone who makes more than 51% of their income from photography.


thats too much 50.1% trolol

also as far as the jpg debate. i almost always shoot jpg unless i know the client will need the highest quality end product which is usually just corporate clients. if i was a wedding photog id shoot jpg to save my sanity, if youre marketing yourself as a pro wedding photog (definition of pro always debatable) you should have no excuse for not getting it right in the camera. thats what people pay for, the perfect shot and if it gets heavily processed with filters and hipster aesthetics so be it but the original needs to be also perfect before processing in case the client wants a nice clean version of the image


----------



## pcfoo

If you make "real" money out of photography (i.e. you get to pay taxes for it, it is not the occasional gig where you are hired just as a friend or someone who grossly undercuts the prevailing rates), you are pro.

For sure people have in their minds the highest standard of care or experience etc when thinking professionals, but I cannot agree with it completely.
You can have very talented amateurs that deliver stellar results and who could easily be professionals - at least as far as end-result goes. That doesn't make them professionals.

You can be a professional paparazzi, part of the pron industry, just shooting passport photos, stock photos in your backyard or your specialized studio, to covers for Vogue and Rolling Stone to year long assignments for NG. Hell, you could have some stupid niche (Peter Parker, lol) or be thrilled to risk your neck like James Nachtwey or "our own" Yannis Behrakis. There is a huge gamut in the creativeness, implied quality, involved planning and patience or randomness and even luck involved.

Same for other creative professions, be it visual arts, music, architecture etc related.
In the end, everything is subjective by the fact that you are making a living (or a serious part of your living) doing something.

Again, don't get me wrong, you can be a GREAT PHOTOGRAPHER making nothing out of it. It is just a hobby. Just like a great painter, sculptor, designer, videographer etc.
But this mundane work the guy making portraits & clay faces @ the pier, the designer that puts together the dated leaflets @ the burger joint around the corner or the city's local newspaper, the videographer that shoots that televangelist or telemarketer etc, might be doing a sub-par job by your standards, but are getting paid = they are professionals.

--

As for JPEG vs RAW.
I tend to shoot both. Usually a Small~Medium Fine JPEG & the RAW. I rarely shoot bursts where this could be an issue, and if it was I would still try to stick with the RAW.
I shoot the small Jpeg for those that knew I had that shot and want it "immediately" for whichever reason. I will not be editing casual shots, although I leave my camera's @ RAW + something as I prefer to be safe than sorry forgetting about it and shooting just Jpeg the next time I will pull my camera out to do "my thing". I have tried Custom Programs that cameras offer, but even those keep my capture type to RAW + something or RAW only.

I totally get what Consp. says about getting it right in the camera, and I do believe that shooting RAW is not a way to cheat yourself out of that.
But if any short of more-than-a-single-move editing is meant to happen, even a slight S curve + EV adjustment, or color boost + w/e, the RAW gives tangible benefits.
Even if you really don't care about those, just the WB flexibility would be enough for me, unless you are shooting in a known environment and you had custom WB etc etc. In my experience, even the best bodies do mess up with AWB a lot, be it in shade outdoors and especially indoors with multiple light sources of different types.


----------



## Dream Killer

Eh, I used to shoot weddings on positive film- but that was 10 years ago. RAW is nice but a lot of people, especially the ones that started out with dSLRs, use it as a crutch though.

The workflow process is not the same for a typical wedding, the people I know who make a living on this will shoot about 1900-2500 shots on each of the 5 cameras per wedding. They tell me it's impossible to spend more than a 2-3 minutes adjusting an image when 9500-12,500 images needs to be sorted through. Nevermind that each event generates about 1TB of data that needs to be backed up.

RAW is not always the best format.


----------



## Conspiracy

^ so much that. i was going to mention color positive film and forgot


----------



## MistaBernie

I really need to get out and shoot some more. Leg's healing up nicely, just need the weather to turn a little. Gotta use that 16-35...


----------



## pcfoo

You will edit down your selection of those 7500 (2000 shots per camera with 5 cameras? really? how many people shoot them? sounds kinda improbable unless you have 5 photographers) shots down to 500-1500 or so before even touching the "RAW vs. JPEG aspect of it. It is improbably that this volume of shots is not full of duplicates / have inadequate focusing / have bad framing / not worth salvaging etc.

That will get rid of at least 4/5 the shots.
Then you will start pixel peeping for a couple of seconds @ each image looking for details and further reduce the selection to those that you should invest the time color correcting / sharpening / NR and whatnot. And you still don't care about file format, while you should have edited down the number of shots to be dealed with by a significant %.

Those simple edits can be synced between sequences of shots @ mass - you don't have go image per image in shots that were taken in the same space, with the same lighting, within seconds of each other.
At least not with LR.

Yes it is extra work, but it is doable fast enough imho, for the client to be faced with a few hundred images to choose from for an album, prints or digital files - whatever the deal is.

More serious PS editing and retouching etc could be used for whole-page album or larger mounted prints, but again, it is not necessary - at least for weddings etc.
Slight PS adjustment might be suggested for boudoir or close up portrait work even before the client see's the product for the 1st time, for you to secure a sale, then move on to a more elaborate retouching on the handful of images that will be actually delivered @ high res / or large prints.

Backing up is a pain, but you don't have to backup the whole thing.
You've gotten rid of the thousands of duplicates / sub-par images, you've made an educated selection between the best of those that were technically good enough, you have a few hundred images to store for the future. You might just keep the end-JPEG or PSD (if you've edited and need to keep layers etc), or keep some DNGs / RAW + sidecar xmp files (w/e you prefer). But this "TBs" of data per job, should be a non issue. If you want to keep it all "in case", well, that's not a "real" problem, it is just your preference and will make a nightmare revisiting in the future regardless of file format.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> I really need to get out and shoot some more. Leg's healing up nicely, just need the weather to turn a little. Gotta use that 16-35...


good to hear dude. dont forget to share your work when you get to start shooting again. im hoping that the craziness of my job will settle down and I will get to have my weekends back to return to photographering for fun


----------



## kbros

I feel lost in the winter, all the nice cars are garaged so I feel like there's nothing to shoot. Next big snowfall I'll probably go out and explore with my camera, I live in a rural area.


----------



## Conspiracy

SAD SAD DAY today as more staff photogs lose their jobs at SI. I worked with Al Tielemans on a shoot, was a cover shoot photographing AJ McCarron for his 4th cover of the magazine. looks like Peter Read Miller saw this one coming because when I worked for the PRM sports workshop he mentioned that he left SI to work for another publication

https://nppa.org/node/69374


----------



## TUDJ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> I feel lost in the winter, all the nice cars are garaged so I feel like there's nothing to shoot. Next big snowfall I'll probably go out and explore with my camera, I live in a rural area.


There's an infinite number of things to shoot, only your own imagination and creativity limits you.

Why wait for snow? Go and find an interesting tree, abandoned barn, hidden pond, old rusting farm equipment, sneak up on some wildlife, whatever. Find it in the day and then shoot it at night, use some light painting if you live rural enough do some shots under a clear night sky and capture the milky way.

Saying there's nothing is lazy!


----------



## MistaBernie

I don't necessarily think it's 'lazy' TUDJ, I think inspiration comes in a myriad of ways and one can't be faulted for not being inspired by some things that inspire us.







obvs but you know what I mean..


----------



## kbros

Well, I can agree that it's lazy. Anything outside of cars is outside the norm for me lol. I'll probably go do some exploring today.


----------



## kbros

Took some product shots today.
https://flic.kr/p/qT9PyETte Poseidon Z by Noah Blalock (ig: @noahblalock), on Flickr


----------



## Conspiracy

by product shots you mean pictures of stuff youre going to mail to me. sooooooo kind of you


----------



## MistaBernie

nice shot kbros -
WHOA, 12-18" of snow Tuesday? NO BUENO. (no good for those not in the know, and to follow TOS. Seriously).


----------



## kbros

lolol @conspiracy

thanks @bernie


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> nice shot kbros -
> WHOA, 12-18" of snow Tuesday? NO BUENO. (no good for those not in the know, and to follow TOS. Seriously).


Me gusta nieva. Tomaré.

(I like snow. Will take.)

And that looks damn professional if I do say so myself, Noah.


----------



## kbros

Thanks! It was just soft light coming in from the window, I then photoshopped it out from the desk it was on.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

That's a really smooth job of cutting it out. I've had little success in trying that in gimp.


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> Thanks! It was just soft light coming in from the window, I then photoshopped it out from the desk it was on.


I wasn't sure if the background was shopped out or just really blown out, but I suspected photoshop since you only have one flash


----------



## kbros

Yep lol. Took me about half an hour to finish.


----------



## Scott1541

ION my afternoon lens modding persestance has paid off. Not only have I undone my previous mess-up with the Helios 44-2, I've now got it properly modified to focus to infinity (and in fact past infinity)







So now I have my original Helios 44-2 working perfectly on my DSLR, and I've got the new Helios 44M that I can use on film







There is a slight problem in that the modified Helios can only be used on DX format bodies, it hits the mirror on full frame, although that's not really a problem for me.









Nope, I'm totally not a big russian lens fan or anything


----------



## MistaBernie

@sub50hz, I paid $10 to attend a Bruins Alumni game. No big names really showed up this year. Just Terry O'Reilly, Rick Middleton, Reggie Lemelin, Bob Beers and Bruce Shoebottom.

oh and Ray Bourque.





In other news, hockey is hard to shoot through glass just below the netline.


----------



## kbros

Perks of living in Boston.


----------



## Nemesis158

I recently bought a Canon 55-250MM f/4-5.6 IS II that was listed as "like new" on amazon for a little over $100.

my initial inspection of the lens when i got it was that it did look "like new" with one visible speck in the optics.

resulting shot:


Upon further inspection, the non-moving lens group in this lens appears to have shifted off center. Needless to say i have requested a refund.


----------



## kbros

Oh dang that's bad. If the seller refuses you'll for sure get money back from eBay no matter what.


----------



## Conspiracy

so unless schedules change im booked to be a set photog for part of a horror movie being shot here this weekend. will be a night shoot but now im wishing i had even more toys to take with me just to goof around since being a set photog is easy. i know for sure the 5D3 24-70, 135L, 70-200 f4 are going. maybe ill take the speed lights to take headshots after people are done with makeup. would be cool if i had 2X 5D3


----------



## hokiealumnus

Congrats!

....and rent a second one.


----------



## Conspiracy

if im going to rent another body might as well be a 1DX but this gig doesnt pay enough to cover the costs so im only using what i own or can take from my job. id drag one of my 70-200 f2.8 but since they are non-IS that extra stop isnt that important as traveling light on an outdoor shoot. would be badass if i had a sony A7s though. that would be perfect for this gig. one day ill have one of those mirrorless FF bodies. $110 for 3 day A7S rental.... that might happen if they throw in the metabones adapter too


----------



## kbros

Congrats on the shoot, hope it goes well for ya.


----------



## MrStrat007

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> It just so happened that I replaced my phone between the last time I checked POTN and the most recent time, so when I opened POTN on my new phone it was all different and I was like 'lame'.
> 
> Then I realized it's the new NEW POTN, and it's definitely more lightweight and *navitagatable* (if that's a word).


Navigable.









Anyone have a suggestion for a good macro lens for a D5300 that doesn't cost an arm and a leg? Looking to do some product shots of components and some of my models. Appreciate any suggestions!


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrStrat007*
> 
> Navigable.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone have a suggestion for a good macro lens for a D5300 that doesn't cost an arm and a leg? Looking to do some product shots of components and some of my models. Appreciate any suggestions!


The 40mm 2.8g, around $250.

Problem though is that you have to get so close to the subject(few cm), which can block the light at the same time.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrStrat007*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> It just so happened that I replaced my phone between the last time I checked POTN and the most recent time, so when I opened POTN on my new phone it was all different and I was like 'lame'.
> 
> Then I realized it's the new NEW POTN, and it's definitely more lightweight and *navitagatable* (if that's a word).
> 
> 
> 
> Navigable.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone have a suggestion for a good macro lens for a D5300 that doesn't cost an arm and a leg? Looking to do some product shots of components and some of my models. Appreciate any suggestions!
Click to expand...

there are used nikkor micro 105mm on KEH.com for just under $400


----------



## Pandora51

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrStrat007*
> 
> Navigable.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone have a suggestion for a good macro lens for a D5300 that doesn't cost an arm and a leg? Looking to do some product shots of components and some of my models. Appreciate any suggestions!


Like MrTOOSHORT says its pretty much only the 40mm 2,8 for cheap but you need to get really close. Its not the right lens for insects and in some situation you might block your own light for the shot.
But picture quality is as good as any other macro lens.
I got mine for 220 euro with 40 euro Nikon cashback but I tend to use it as a prime lens for everything.

You should propably buy a used 105mm lens from sigma, tamron or nikon.

Since we are talking about macros has anyone experience with the old Sigma 105mm F2,8? A local store is selling it as used.
Is it worth it? F16 is important.
Somehow I think the new Sigma 105mm is alot better but there is not much information about the old one.


----------



## Gobigorgohome

Okay, so I tried out my D5200 with 300mm zoom on the Tamron 70-300mm on the moon yesterday, ISO 6400 (might have been a little too high, better try ISO at around 3200 next time around). Very much noise in the picture with ISO 6400 .... wondering on getting D610 or D750, any suggestions when it comes to glass for those bodies? I see the D750 comes with a Nikkor 24-85 VR for 3000 USD, body only cost 2600 USD (Norwegian prices). Will get the Tamron 150-600mm after I get a new body, seems like a total waste buying the Tamron 150-600mm for the D5200 when the camera have problems with handling ISO 6400 which I have to use to shoot at 600mm.

The ultimate body would be Canon 5D Mark 3, but the price tag is high enough, but when I have the money and the choice I will see what I end up doing.


----------



## TUDJ

Why do you need to shoot at 6400 ISO? Just use a tripod and longer exposure and low ISO. You'll want to use a tripod anyway at those focal lengths.

What were your other settings? Shutter speed, aperture etc?


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gobigorgohome*
> 
> Okay, so I tried out my D5200 with 300mm zoom on the Tamron 70-300mm on the moon yesterday, ISO 6400 (might have been a little too high, better try ISO at around 3200 next time around). Very much noise in the picture with ISO 6400 .... wondering on getting D610 or D750, any suggestions when it comes to glass for those bodies? I see the D750 comes with a Nikkor 24-85 VR for 3000 USD, body only cost 2600 USD (Norwegian prices). Will get the Tamron 150-600mm after I get a new body, seems like a total waste buying the Tamron 150-600mm for the D5200 when the camera have problems with handling ISO 6400 which I have to use to shoot at 600mm.
> 
> The ultimate body would be Canon 5D Mark 3, but the price tag is high enough, but when I have the money and the choice I will see what I end up doing.


ISO 6400 to shoot the moon? Your settings are way off. Learn to use your camera before you spend thousands.

A starting point for moon photos is this: https://photographylife.com/how-to-photograph-moon

Shutter: 1/125

ISO 100

Aperture: F/11

Adjust the exposure triangle as needed to take the shot how you want.


----------



## Gobigorgohome

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TUDJ*
> 
> Why do you need to shoot at 6400 ISO? Just use a tripod and longer exposure and low ISO. You'll want to use a tripod anyway at those focal lengths.
> 
> What were your other settings? Shutter speed, aperture etc?


Well, I guess I could have shot at a little less than ISO 6400, I am using ISO 2500 in broad daylight (which is looking great), I have not found out where I adjust shutter speed manual as of yet, I took one shot of some star with ISO 1000 so I guess I can see how that turned out. Did not have my tripod with me.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> ISO 6400 to shoot the moon? Your settings are way off. Learn to use your camera before you spend thousands.
> 
> A starting point for moon photos is this: https://photographylife.com/how-to-photograph-moon
> Shutter: 1/125
> ISO 100
> Aperture: F/11
> 
> Adjust the exposure triangle as needed to take the shot how you want.


As I said, probably should have used something around ISO 3200. Handheld, no lights what so ever (only moonlight), my settings are way off (and I know it).

Will look into the link you posted, I have to get into the menus to look at what settings I used.


----------



## Sean Webster

Wow, shooting ISO 2500 in broad daylight?!? Please go and google some videos on learning how to use the camera!


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gobigorgohome*
> 
> Okay, so I tried out my D5200 with 300mm zoom on the Tamron 70-300mm on the moon yesterday, ISO 6400 (might have been a little too high, better try ISO at around 3200 next time around). Very much noise in the picture with ISO 6400 .... wondering on getting D610 or D750, any suggestions when it comes to glass for those bodies? I see the D750 comes with a Nikkor 24-85 VR for 3000 USD, body only cost 2600 USD (Norwegian prices). Will get the Tamron 150-600mm after I get a new body, seems like a total waste buying the Tamron 150-600mm for the D5200 when the camera have problems with handling ISO 6400 which I have to use to shoot at 600mm.
> 
> The ultimate body would be Canon 5D Mark 3, but the price tag is high enough, but when I have the money and the choice I will see what I end up doing.


Woa, I don't know where to start reading this post









First thoughts:

* It is classing G.A.S. Get over it, no you don't NEED more glass or anything "better" than the D5200, and shooting ISO 6400 is nowhere "needed".

Some more details:

Moon Exposure: Too many variables for shooting the moon, but the rule of thumb back in the film days was f/11 and 1/ (ISO speed) sec shutter speed. E.g. f/11 + 1/160~250 sec for ISO 200 should be a good starting point, and you can experiment around this with a digital camera very easily.
If you have to hand-hold it (which if you are that anal and serious about it, you should not, just use a tripod), for a 300mm lens on a APS-C body you would want 1/300~1/500 sec shutter speed (lets not get into the IS or not arguments and whether mr steady-hands can do 1/30s with his 100-400). For the RoT above, what would put you in the f/11 and ISO 320~640. How did ISO 6400 come into the picture???
If you were to "dismiss" a camera based on 6400 ISO performance, FF won't save you.
G.A.S makes you seeking the silver bullet for just pointing your "magic toy" and "nailing" the perfect image regardless of conditions, but this is improbable. You have to learn to use each tool within its limitations - and every tool has its own - and more than that learn what each application of that tool requires in accessories and from its user. Don't rush to point fingers to your camera and/or lenses, when the real issue (much like with crashing planes) is 99% the user, and not the machine.

If what I say above is not convincing...can I has your D5200?


----------



## xILukasIx

@Gobigorgohome
Here's a shot I took about 3 1/2 years ago on my Canon 450D (this one didn't even *HAVE* ISO 6400)
https://500px.com/photo/50061000/going-in-circles-by-lukas-berger
Notice that I used ISO 100 for that and still got a shutter speed of 1/100th at f/5.6.
(Tamron 70-300 f4-5.6, horrible performance wide open)

You should really learn how to use your current camera before even thinking of upgrading, it will NOT make it easier for you.
Using ISO 2500 in broad daylight is just madness...


----------



## kbros

Anyone know any cool DIY flash diffusion methods/softbox ideas? I might buy one of these lol.


----------



## PCModderMike

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> Anyone know any cool DIY flash diffusion methods/softbox ideas? I might buy one of these lol.


I bought two for my YN560II's and didn't like them at all. They've been sitting in my closet ever since. I bought them thinking they would be a nice alternative to always busting out my stands and umbrellas...but nah. I wouldn't waste your money.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> Anyone know any cool DIY flash diffusion methods/softbox ideas? I might buy one of these lol.


dont buy that. it barely does anything. softer light comes for a larger light source, not a piece of whatevers 3 inches in front of the flash. at least buy an el supre cheapo 30"ish softbox from cowboy studio or something


----------



## THEStorm

A nice big piece of white coroplast is a good, cheap start for learning to bounce light.


----------



## hokiealumnus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gobigorgohome*
> 
> ...I am using ISO 2500 in broad daylight (which is looking great), I have not found out where I adjust shutter speed manual as of yet, I took one shot of some star with ISO 1000 so I guess I can see how that turned out.


_What??_ Looooooong before you consider buying a D750, D810 or 5D Mark III, you really (_really, really_) need to learn the very basics of photography. Shooting ISO 2500 in broad daylight is just plain absurd.

Please force yourself to get rid of the GAS and learn photography. I hate to see anybody waste money, but in your case the reasons for doing so take it from merely wasting money to flushing it down the toilet for absolutely no good reason.

EDIT - Hopefully this doesn't make you defensive or offend you, as that's not the intent. It's an effort to wake you up before you go make poor purchasing decisions.

I presume "gobigorgohome" applies to computers, so maybe an analogy is in order. The cameras (and lenses you'll have to buy too) you're talking about buying for the stated reasons would be like buying a GTX TITAN Z and a 5960X system worth a few grand to do no more than browse the internet and play Civilization IV/Counter Strike/TF2/Portal/insert game that takes no GPU/CPU horsepower here.


----------



## Conspiracy

7' parabolic umbrella or go home

jk
















also if anyone needs help with GAS i can help with picking out stuff to put on a GAS fueled wishlist. i was looking at the canon 35L yesterday and that might become a thing in my kit this summer


----------



## MistaBernie

I barely use my 35 at all to be honest. Guess it doesn't help that I have a 24-70 II and a 16-35 F/4L... maybe that one needs to go.


----------



## Conspiracy

since i have every zoom i would really ever want/need between my kit and what i have at work. the only things left to buy are primes for lightweight shooting. i was also looking at the 85L but i seriously doubt i would use it enough to justify even the GAS that i have. the 35L would get some good use i think


----------



## Jixr

Jesus Christ.

Adobe CC is such a PITA, no wonder why people pirate it.

I signed up for the photography program in Dec of 13, and it auto-renewed in Dec of 14.

I thought I signed up for only a year, and check my account, and it showed that I auto-renewed.

Contact CS, talk with them to cancel my account.

Blah blah I wanna cancel, blah blah, I didn't authorise a renewal blah blah

Tells me that they sent an email reminding me of the renewal, and it was in my spam folder.

Then, that If I still wish to cancel, I could do so, but have to pay 50% of my subscription cost.

Basically $100 to use the software, $50 to cancel.

Then they tried to offer a free month, then two free months, etc trying to keep me on their hook, and after over an hour with CS, finally got them to cancel without any charges. Be warned when you want to cancel guys.


----------



## Conspiracy

i will never do cloud based software for that reason. CS6 for life


----------



## pcfoo

Well, the photography program is like what? $10 a month ?
The PS CS6 alone will cost you more than three years of subscription fees. Along with a current LR version, it will be more than 4 years of the Photographer's CC bundle subscriptions.
For individuals, I think it is a good proposition.

For companies with portable/license server deployments its much more PITA, but again, this is a different story.

Ofc nothing beats the pirated version "in value", but assuming you would pay for the software, and you would want to upgrade it more often than every 4 years or so, it is not as bad.
PS it might not need updating as often, as it pretty feature packed already, but LR I prefer to do so, lets say every 2 years.


----------



## Conspiracy

dude word of advice dont even talk about pirated anything here. big no no and against TOS.

but on topic. if you cant afford photoshop get lightroom. the stand alone isnt that expensive if you need a strong editing platform. piracy isnt a good solution


----------



## Jixr

I can easily afford PS+LR, I just don't use it much anymore, and the $10 a month for something I only use 3-4 times a month isn't worth the cost for me, espc since I've sold off all my DSLR gear and just use my mirrorless now.

My money is better off just buying the standalone LR ( and you can often find it on sale for cheap )

I just think its ridiculous that to stop paying for their product, you have to pay half of what the product cost you.


----------



## Conspiracy

well if you sign up for a year subscription yeah i could understand a cancel fee. but if you do month by month that fee probably isnt there but you end up paying WAY more because of that. adobe wants you to subscribe as long as possible. im happy im on CS6 but if anything happens to my PC im screwed because it was a master collection given to me to use at home which i was working at the TV station and since then they have switched to final cut and i dont work there so i cant ask for another license. although now i do have the ability to get an educator discount now that i work at a public university







we get discounts on Adobe CC per program. i never looked to see if they still sell CS6 master


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> dude word of advice dont even talk about pirated anything here. big no no and against TOS.


There's nothing wrong with talking about it. Some mods may say it is but the TOS are open to interpretation (this has been mentioned by several ex mods), just like laws are in 'real life'. I can see that telling people to do it or encouraging it is different however, and could end up causing problems for the admins, and we probably shouldn't do that here. I'm a big believer in free speech and all that stuff, regardless of what 'rules' it may be against.

Anyway, back on topic, a new event photography company has started up here in Lincoln, and they are looking for photogs to join them. The guys that started it up seem alright, and they've already got about 5 club/bar nights under their belt, so I sent them a message. I didn't make a great impression when I told them I'm not free on friday, but they said get back to them on sunday, so I guess I'll have to do that and see how it goes







It would be nice to get a bit of cash on the side to buy even more gear with


----------



## Jixr

thats the catch, there Is no monthly subscription, its yearly, but you're billed monthly so its a false sense of a monthly subscription.

So no matter what, you're on the hook for a year, but you can choose to pay it out over 12 months, or pay in full for a discount.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> dude word of advice dont even talk about pirated anything here. big no no and against TOS.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm a big believer in free speech and all that stuff, regardless of what 'rules' it may be against.
Click to expand...

same here but every time i actually speak completely freely i get BOMBARDED with messages from mods where it usually starts with your posted has been edited then usually one of them ends up sending me a message saying 'blah blah blah i deleted your post' then i usually respond to one saying youre a moron







this forums TOS vs its enforcement is a little backwards sometimes. ive seen posts get deleted and threads locked because that one person mentioned the word piracy or suggested that someone go down that road to save money


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> same here but every time i actually speak completely freely i get BOMBARDED with messages from mods where it usually starts with your posted has been edited then usually one of them ends up sending me a message saying 'blah blah blah i deleted your post' then i usually respond to one saying youre a moron
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> this forums TOS vs its enforcement is a little backwards sometimes. ive seen posts get deleted and threads locked because that one person mentioned the word piracy or suggested that someone go down that road to save money


Haha, I've had a fair few of those messages









There have been a couple of times where I've posted stuff that I genuinely though would get me banned. These posts usually followed a mod deleting other posts, and involved me making references to a certain dictatorship


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> same here but every time i actually speak completely freely i get BOMBARDED with messages from mods where it usually starts with your posted has been edited then usually one of them ends up sending me a message saying 'blah blah blah i deleted your post' then i usually respond to one saying youre a moron
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> this forums TOS vs its enforcement is a little backwards sometimes. ive seen posts get deleted and threads locked because that one person mentioned the word piracy or suggested that someone go down that road to save money
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Haha, I've had a fair few of those messages
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There have been a couple of times where I've posted stuff that I genuinely though would get me banned. These posts usually followed a mod deleting other posts, and me making references to a certain dictatorship
Click to expand...

im convinced said dictatorship of OCN is imaginary because ive never actually seen or heard from said almighty overseer


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> im convinced said dictatorship of OCN is imaginary because ive never actually seen or heard from said almighty overseer


I have spoken to Admin on skype







(only through text not on video call)


----------



## PCModderMike

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> im convinced said dictatorship of OCN is imaginary because ive never actually seen or heard from said almighty overseer
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have spoken to Admin on skype
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (only through text not on video call)
Click to expand...


----------



## pcfoo

Mods/admins don't want to get in trouble/lose the right to operate OCN for stuff other people say and/or do.
I would think my post had an obvious sarcastic tone.


----------



## Conspiracy

99% of my posts are sarcastic. not a valid argument as i have been told numerous times and reminded the TOS


----------



## Scott1541

Finally ordered myself some eneloops and a charger







Thought I'd get some now since I may start working clubs soon, and I'll need some anyway when my alkalines run out.


----------



## xILukasIx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> Finally ordered myself some eneloops and a charger
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thought I'd get some now since I may start working clubs soon, and I'll need some anyway when my alkalines run out.


Great!

All of my 16 Eneloops actually have more than 2600mAh, didn't expect that!
They're pretty serious about their "min 2450mAh" and go way beyond that


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> 99% of my posts are sarcastic. not a valid argument as i have been told numerous times and reminded the TOS



Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xILukasIx*
> 
> "Great!
> 
> All of my 16 Eneloops actually have more than 2600mAh, didn't expect that!
> They're pretty serious about their "min 2450mAh" and go way beyond that


Batteries lose capacity over time, so they play it safe. Sanyo / Panasonic always had above average QC in their NiMH & NiCd production line.


----------



## Gobigorgohome

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> but on topic. if you cant afford photoshop get lightroom. the stand alone isnt that expensive if you need a strong editing platform.


I read/saw somewhere that Photoshop CS6 and Lightroom did not do the same things? Was I misinformed about that? Got myself Lightroom for the convenience that I would not need Photoshop ...









I will dig in and try out the Tamron 70-300mm primarily later this week for some understanding of which ISO and shutter speed I should use in daylight, dusk, dawn and at night, the 70-300mm will probably be dusting in the near future anyways. Bought a Sigma 150-500mm F5-6.3 APO DG OS HSM that I will try out on my camera, got it for 590 USD pre-owned with a camouflage bag on it (or whatever it is called), the Tamron 150-600mm would have been the perfect lens I think, but not for double the price of the Sigma.


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xILukasIx*
> 
> Great!
> 
> All of my 16 Eneloops actually have more than 2600mAh, didn't expect that!
> They're pretty serious about their "min 2450mAh" and go way beyond that


I'm only getting 4 with a (presumably basic) battery charger for now since even this is a decent chunk of my weekly budget gone







If I need more sets in the future they'll set me back about £10 for 4. They're not cheap compared to normal zinc chloride/alkaline AAs but there's a fairly obvious reason for that


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gobigorgohome*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> but on topic. if you cant afford photoshop get lightroom. the stand alone isnt that expensive if you need a strong editing platform.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I read/saw somewhere that Photoshop CS6 and Lightroom did not do the same things? Was I misinformed about that? Got myself Lightroom for the convenience that I would not need Photoshop ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I will dig in and try out the Tamron 70-300mm primarily later this week for some understanding of which ISO and shutter speed I should use in daylight, dusk, dawn and at night, the 70-300mm will probably be dusting in the near future anyways. Bought a Sigma 150-500mm F5-6.3 APO DG OS HSM that I will try out on my camera, got it for 590 USD pre-owned with a camouflage bag on it (or whatever it is called), the Tamron 150-600mm would have been the perfect lens I think, but not for double the price of the Sigma.
Click to expand...

they are different but LR can do almost everything that photoshop can do on the topic of photo editing. there are some more advanced manipulations that are easier done in photoshop. Lightroom is insanely powerful and in when used to its fullest is capable of the exact same edits with better workflow. anyone that says lightroom cant be used for professional photo editing is uninformed and spreading misinformation because they arent able to figure it out for themselves. if you have been using photoshop for 15+ years and switch to lightroom then its going to feel inferior to your strongly established routine workflow. long story short if you are only processing digital photos and nothing else then they both do the same thing


----------



## Gobigorgohome

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> they are different but LR can do almost everything that photoshop can do on the topic of photo editing. there are some more advanced manipulations that are easier done in photoshop. Lightroom is insanely powerful and in when used to its fullest is capable of the exact same edits with better workflow. anyone that says lightroom cant be used for professional photo editing is uninformed and spreading misinformation because they arent able to figure it out for themselves. if you have been using photoshop for 15+ years and switch to lightroom then its going to feel inferior to your strongly established routine workflow. long story short if you are only processing digital photos and nothing else then they both do the same thing


Okay, got it, thanks.


----------



## pcfoo

LR is a primarily a RAW developing & Image Library organizing software. As far as small scale edits / sharpening / B&W conversion / color tweaks and exposure corrections, the LR workflow is much easier than PS.
If you are working with RAW files, LR doesn't actually edit the file itself, it just changes the "developing parameters" of that said RAW image data, then exports a separate file with the changes baked into it once you are done. (say a JPEG or TIFF). It also has specific modules designed around the photography practice, that allow you to export slideshows, or create albums and/or link your library to social media sites effortlessly.

PS is the industry standard in photo / bitmap editors, and has myriads of additional functionality options over LR, but in general requires more expertise to use.
The biggest advantage for me, is the ability to use layers and masks when either retouching or combining multiple image composites, but depending on the photography you do, these options might be used sparingly or even never. In order to keep working non-destructively on your file, those layered PSD images become big and much more demanding from a hardware perspective than tweaking developing parameters in LR.

Also, LR is leagues better than bridge if all you want to organize is photographs and not all kinds of image/graphic files etc, much faster to tag and retrieve single images or image collections.


----------



## jjsoviet

I've been using Lightroom since I got my NEX-5T, and for me it's incredibly powerful with all those customizations. At first I was hesitant to do anything much to my photos save for cropping, exposure, and grain correction, then I started to dabble with the histogram, color channels, split-toning, and many others. I've saved a lot of photos by making interesting edits, which would have otherwise made my shots useless.


----------



## jackeyjoe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jjsoviet*
> 
> I've been using Lightroom since I got my NEX-5T, and for me it's incredibly powerful with all those customizations. At first I was hesitant to do anything much to my photos save for cropping, exposure, and grain correction, then I started to dabble with the histogram, color channels, split-toning, and many others. I've saved a lot of photos by making interesting edits, which would have otherwise made my shots useless.


In saying that though, don't ever expect it to save bad photos, you are always better off getting it right when you take it and doing some minor fixes in lightroom(although I am still having trouble getting the exposure right most of the time, having the flexibility to make it dead on afterwards is nice). It is just a nice bonus when you can save a photo or two that you thought were complete losses


----------



## jjsoviet

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jackeyjoe*
> 
> In saying that though, don't ever expect it to save bad photos, you are always better off getting it right when you take it and doing some minor fixes in lightroom(although I am still having trouble getting the exposure right most of the time, having the flexibility to make it dead on afterwards is nice). It is just a nice bonus when you can save a photo or two that you thought were complete losses


Yeah, no amount of editing can save a truly bad photo - a polished turd is still a turd after all.









Having said that, with LR I was able to make some of the shots I thought to be mediocre to look way better, keepers in fact. Changes in cropping, color grading, etc. worked wonders for a lot of my shots.



This for example, I would have thrown it out if it weren't for the fact that RAW preserved more info than I expected. Loads of color recovery work.


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jjsoviet*
> 
> Yeah, no amount of editing can save a truly bad photo - a polished turd is still a turd after all.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Having said that, with LR I was able to make some of the shots I thought to be mediocre to look way better, keepers in fact. Changes in cropping, color grading, etc. worked wonders for a lot of my shots.
> 
> 
> 
> This for example, I would have thrown it out if it weren't for the fact that RAW preserved more info than I expected. Loads of color recovery work.


Wow that's amazing how well you've made the sky come out like that!

I love Lightroom, I'm not particularly great with it yet but it's so easy to get the basics down.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PCModderMike*


Yep. Cos I won one of those win your Ultimate Rig competitions and so they gave me a skype account to communicate with!


----------



## Dimaggio1103

Just bought my first newer entry DSLR. grabbed a D3300 for 400 with adobe lightroom and 16GB SD card. Will sell light room for 60 so not bad deal. Excited to get back into it. Tight on cash but really wanna take good pictures and video of my kids while they are still young. we go out in nature a lot so worth it.


----------



## xILukasIx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dimaggio1103*
> 
> Just bought my first newer entry DSLR. grabbed a D3300 for 400 with adobe lightroom and 16GB SD card. Will sell light room for 60 so not bad deal. Excited to get back into it. Tight on cash but really wanna take good pictures and video of my kids while they are still young. we go out in nature a lot so worth it.


Awesome, hope you enjoy shooting with it!

I wish my 5D Mark III came with Lightroom 5, got Lightroom 4 when I bought it :-(


----------



## Conspiracy

i think i want an instant film back for the ETRSi


----------



## Conspiracy

serious rumors flying all over facebook this morning about Canon announcing their new 50MP FF camera that is apparently going to be called the 5Ds and a 5Ds R with the low pass filter removed. either one site published this and everyone copy/paste or this is legit but they all say the same thing which is check back next week when its rumored to be announced officially. personally 50MP is way too much for a FF 35mm digital sensor but we will see what comes of it. i am going to go ahead and say hello to worse low light performance because the pixel density is just too high lol


----------



## werds

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> serious rumors flying all over facebook this morning about Canon announcing their new 50MP FF camera that is apparently going to be called the 5Ds and a 5Ds R with the low pass filter removed. either one site published this and everyone copy/paste or this is legit but they all say the same thing which is check back next week when its rumored to be announced officially. personally 50MP is way too much for a FF 35mm digital sensor but we will see what comes of it. i am going to go ahead and say hello to worse low light performance because the pixel density is just too high lol


Hmmm Interesting - aren't most lenses only able to resolve around 20-24 mp anyway? Or am I missing something here as a nooblet?

Curious to see where it slots in price wise though...


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *werds*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> serious rumors flying all over facebook this morning about Canon announcing their new 50MP FF camera that is apparently going to be called the 5Ds and a 5Ds R with the low pass filter removed. either one site published this and everyone copy/paste or this is legit but they all say the same thing which is check back next week when its rumored to be announced officially. personally 50MP is way too much for a FF 35mm digital sensor but we will see what comes of it. i am going to go ahead and say hello to worse low light performance because the pixel density is just too high lol
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hmmm Interesting - aren't most lenses only able to resolve around 20-24 mp anyway? Or am I missing something here as a nooblet?
> 
> Curious to see where it slots in price wise though...
Click to expand...

that is also my major concern as well. im not even sure if there are that many that can resolve much further past 20MP. according to DXOmark in the top 5 canon lenses ranked by overall DXO score only the 300L mkII surpasses 20MP sharpness coming in at 22MP. the rest sit right at 20MP. obviously only lab tests but we shall see what happens


----------



## pcfoo

50MP is a lot, but who knows...I doubt that they would just "double" the MP of their current models, would make little sense from a business standpoint.
Going 40MP would already put them ahead of their competition atm, give probably more headroom for image processors etc to catch up.

If we have APS-C sensors with 20-24MP that do good we can definitely get 50MP FF, overkill or not. Yes, the cropped bodies use sweet spots on FF lenses, but imho it is better to have a sensor that has some headroom for newer lenses that also catch up slowly, than the other way around.

At any rate, I don't want to deal with 50MB RAW files without really good justification = me getting tangible benefits over 25-30MB files.

Also, I don't know if getting all those "extra" MP will allow Canon to solve the moire issues removing the AA leads to, something that all AA-free competitors didn't do so far very well.
Maybe the "answer" to that is a 50MP sensor that gives 20-25MP images? Foveon and Fujifilm have toyed with those concepts, and results weren't bad at all.

That said, I would love to have a 20-40MP FF without AA, without having to switch to Nikon, Sony or Leica, even if it is a plain-ol-standard-bayer Canon CMOS !


----------



## jjsoviet

http://petapixel.com/2015/01/30/canon-5ds-leaked-50-6mp-full-frame-dslr/



_It looks like the rumors were spot on. A sneak peek of the not-yet-announced Canon 5Ds full frame DSLR camera has leaked onto the Web. The photograph above shows what the high-resolution 50.6MP camera will look like.

The leaked image and specs were first published by Japanese camera site digicam-info, which also confirms that there will be a separate 5Ds R version of the camera that comes without a low-pass filter for greater sharpness at the expense of more moire._

So apparently that 50MP sensor is a thing


----------



## werds

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Maybe the "answer" to that is a 50MP sensor that gives 20-25MP images? Foveon and Fujifilm have toyed with those concepts, and results weren't bad at all.


I was actually thinking that myself - maybe with a 50MP camera they were looking at using some type of supersampling technique like seen on cell phone cameras? (For example like on my xperia Z3 Compact with the 20.7 MP sensor or like on the Lumia with their 40MP sensor)

But would that be a worthwhile gain? How?

Can someone explain how this following quote works or what it means re. the rumored iso?

Quote:


> The first thing people have noticed is the maximum ISO of 6400 for both the EOS 5DS and EOS 5DS R.
> 
> We're told this is because of a much stronger CFA which will produce much greater color accuracy than anything currently in the Canon lineup.


I also find it interesting that there is a possible crop mode of 1.3 and 1.6- I wonder if it will be similar to the Nikon implementation or if it is something different altogether...


----------



## kbros

Did a product shot of my old Apple SE Keyboard from 1986 with orange alps switches.

Should've set up my flash to eliminate some of those shadows.

https://flic.kr/p/qXfTy7Macintosh SE Keyboard 1986 by Noah Blalock (ig: @noahblalock), on Flickr


----------



## pcfoo

Drooling then...I hope this cheezy "Gold" nameplate is not a pun on the pricetag.


----------



## MistaBernie

at the moment it sounds like the ISO range on the camera is locked at a high of 6400 (though we don't know if that's the native and can be unlocked or what).


----------



## Conspiracy

with a camera like that i dont think many are going to care much about anything past iso 3200 maybe even 1600, unless they have some super new technology that offers amazing low signal noise from high pixel density sensors. even the new 7D2 with its new whatever technology that has impressive low light for APS-C is still has trouble competing when it comes to clean high ISO shots. i met so many people that are trying to ditch their 7D2 bodies for cheap because of how disappointing the low light was but thats small sensor high pixels for you. honestly im more curious to see if they keep the low iso settings and even offer an ISO 25 and go in the other direction


----------



## Dimaggio1103

So wait its 50MP but cannot process more than that because of a lens bottleneck? Is that right? Sorry im new just trying to understand it. If so than what would be the purpose?


----------



## G33K

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=3393.0

Buy cheap glass and put it on an expensive sensor, get worse results than an expensive lens on an expensive sensor. Go figure.


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dimaggio1103*
> 
> So wait its 50MP but cannot process more than that because of a lens bottleneck? Is that right? Sorry im new just trying to understand it. If so than what would be the purpose?


First of all, there are some lenses that will benefit from that jump. No, it won't be your average $300 zoom, even your average $300 prime, and probably not unless stopped down to optimal apertures, but there are lenses that out-resolve current FF bodies, and more like those will be coming over the next few years.

We see this new generation of lenses that simply outshine everything before them, even zooms that match or surpass primes that were thought to be "best in class".

It is much easier, and in my mind better to have a sensor that is beyond current lens generations, than the other way around.

After one point the amount of information the sensors will be able to resolve is irrelevant anyways, it is all with the glass, much as it was back in the film days.
Yes, we want the pixel count to be "big enough", but after one point it is irrelevant, it is just MB feeling our cards & drives. What really matters is DR and resolving power (I just use this term instead of resolution) of the final image.

Cell phones and compact cameras have been at far more intense pixel densities than D-SLRs for a looooong time, without having really better glass - granted, it is easier to make a small lens covering a small image circle / sensor to meet consistently good resolving power, but after one point, "nothing beats cubic inches" if we keep comparing apples to apples.

And in photography, cubic inches = sensor / film area. Glass quality is of great importance too, but in the long run, the bigger the capturing area, the less magnification you are going to need in order to reproduce that captured image on screen or on paper, the less the weaknesses are magnified etc.

What if 35mm lenses are marginally better than MF or large format lenses in absolute MTF? (by average, those are, again, cause it is easier to make smaller pieces of glass meet "perfection")
The capturing surfaces are 3-4 or tenths of times better, eliminating any advantage the smaller glass had.

As for ISO and noise: the plague of D-SLRs and digital photography in general is the ease of pixel peeping. What if individual pixels of a 50MP image appear "bad" ?
Looking the full image on a 4K / 2K monitor or making a real print out of it would probably show none of those minute details, that are lost in the interpolation the down-sampling the monitor does, or the bleeding of the printer does. Pixel peeping, even now, the before "5Ds" era, is confusing macro (real world) scale with micro scale, just to keep forums and blogs having something to talk about outside photography.


----------



## cambuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> Did a product shot of my old Apple SE Keyboard from 1986 with orange alps switches.
> 
> Should've set up my flash to eliminate some of those shadows.
> 
> https://flic.kr/p/qXfTy7Macintosh SE Keyboard 1986 by Noah Blalock (ig: @noahblalock), on Flickr


I noticed a few posts back you asked for softbox suggestions. If you shoot a lot of small products then buy stripboxes 36" in length. Try and get one's with Bowens speedring fitted then you can use speedlight T-piece mounts that are widely available. Combined with Translum diffusion roll (cut your own diffuser sizes to suit your needs) and the rogue grid set...you'll be good to go.

On the topic of the new 50mp canon. This camera isn't aimed at novices, its canons way of exploring the medium format market. Its aimed at Pro's who want an alternative to shelling out 25k on a mfdb system like Phase One etc.
No one interested in this camera will give a damn what the image is like at ISO 3200. I expect canon will release suitable glass for it shortly, as a workaround I'd probably slap on an adapter and some Rodenstock sironar digital medium format glass.


----------



## Conspiracy

so being a set photographer is super easy..... unless youre film at night in the woods and the primary light source is a small campfire. they were filming on a red dragon with cine primes so extreme low light was of no concern for them. the 5D3 on the other hand, not a big fan of extreme low light. *note this was the end of the night, the fire was much bigger while they were filming. my last shots were of the crime scene as the fire died

here's a shot of the camp fire at the end after they filmed a murder scene.

5D3+24-70 light source was a 1x1 LED panel for fill


----------



## Scott1541

Meanwhile me and my mate have been out exploring a culvert, amongst a few other things. Didn't get all the way down though, this culvert splits into 2 tunnels half way through and only one side had water flowing down, so we explored the other tunnel







Turns out my underground photography skills are a bit lacking...


----------



## lacrossewacker

Hey fellas, just thought some of you may be interested in this video I saw this morning. Inside a camera at 10,000fps


----------



## kbros

Yeah I saw that the other day, it looks so violent in slow motion lol. That mirror just slaps around.


----------



## G33K

No wonder SLRs have a finite shutter life


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *G33K*
> 
> No wonder SLRs have a finite shutter life


All mechanical shutters have the same kind of motion and wear over time. It is not SLR specific.
Afaik many praised mirrorless digital cameras have much louder / crisper mechanical noises than serious Canon / Nikon SLRs.

Also, my 2cents, amateurs who are "worried" about the life of their camera's shutter, are only slightly more valid to do so than users over-hyping the limited life of SSD drives (even TLC) for consumer use...yes, it is doable to kill it, but you almost have to force it to happen.

If you manage to wear your shutter off exceeding its rated life without mindlessly running around shouting daka-daka-daka with the shutter at burst for a few weeks straight, you just got your money's worth out of it.
Plain and simple.


----------



## G33K

I'm not worried, it's just pretty crazy to see how violent it looks in slow-motion (I've seen other videos, but I think slow mo guys have the best one yet). Thanks for your 2 cents though









Edit: now that I think of it, my 1964 Pentax Spotmatic might be getting up there. I wonder how many rolls of film this puppy has seen


----------



## Conspiracy

there are tons of cameras that have shutters that die WAY before the expected rated number of estimated actuations. pro bodies that die before 100,000 clicks are not getting your money worth. i met a guy that had his 1DX die after 75,000 clicks and technically canon wouldnt do anything because there is no guarantee you will get 250,000whatever shots. 2 weeks of arguing and flashing the CPS Platinum card it was just straight replaced. but if he was not a CPS member then canon would have charged him for the repair and made him go on his way. shutter actuations is something to be concerned about but not stressed about. the shutter will randomly die and generally pro bodies will be the ones that die the most because they get the most use. replacing a shutter is cheap compared to a new camera anyway. another friend just replaced the shutter in a 1DIV for like $700 and the camera is still worth somewhere in the $3,000 range in LN condition

shoot, and on top of that i think it was the 5D2 that had a mirror problem that would brake in some bodies. mirrorless cameras may have considerably less moving parts but its apples and oranges to compare the systems. all depends on what youre doing


----------



## Scott1541

Look what was waiting for me when I got back today:


----------



## Conspiracy

so this happened near me today. sadly the highlights were blown and his photo was unrecoverable. no amount of post processing is bringing this back

http://petapixel.com/2015/02/02/looks-like-someones-solargraphy-camera-just-got-blown-atlanta-bomb-squad/


----------



## pcfoo

To GAS or not to GAS?
Not all GAS is the same!


----------



## Sean Webster

I think I need to start looking into flash modifiers.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> To GAS or not to GAS?
> Not all GAS is the same!


Some is stunky too.


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> replacing a shutter is cheap compared to a new camera anyway


For pro bodies, this is the case, and reporters/journalists/sport shooters that know they will be getting this kind of use through their tools, budget (or should budget) for those.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> there are tons of cameras that have shutters that die WAY before the expected rated number of estimated actuations. pro bodies that die before 100,000 clicks are not getting your money worth


Well, this is a bit contradicting with what you say above.
First of all, I bet that for every serious body that has failed that short of the rated actuation count, there are many many times more bodies that go quite far past the rated usage. Especially 1D bodies.

Yes, the occasional short-fall will get you pissed, but they often honor replacements, or the fix is not something that should bring a pro shooter to his knees. Surely much cheaper than a new camera.
[email protected] happens all the time, thus most pros have backup bodies.

Where you are out of luck is usually with smaller / entry bodies, where the shutter replacement cost can be 1/2 or more the value of the camera in the used market, in which case the body usually gets trashed, and the owner gets really pissed.

Ccluster-foks due to bad design choices have happened before, usually followed by a recall or free fixes, but again, usually the actual # of affected units is not that bad as it might sound.
Camera manufacturers place lots of chips on their reputation, and usually try to keep their customers happy, at least in big markets.

Servicing in smaller markets / countries can be a nightmare, but this is common for pretty much any specialized product.


----------



## Gobigorgohome

Got the Sigma 150-500mm today, from the first look it seems like the zoom is faster than the Tamron 70-300mm, the picture looked sharper too, but I will take a few more shots and get into Lightroom and see what I got to work with.


----------



## xILukasIx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gobigorgohome*
> 
> Got the Sigma 150-500mm today, from the first look it seems like the zoom is faster than the Tamron 70-300mm, the picture looked sharper too...


The zoom is faster? 
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gobigorgohome*
> 
> ...but I will take a few more shots and get into Lightroom and see what I got to work with.


If you still need some help with your settings/camera, post some of your pictures (maybe with the settings used), I'm sure we can help


----------



## Pandora51

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lacrossewacker*
> 
> Hey fellas, just thought some of you may be interested in this video I saw this morning. Inside a camera at 10,000fps


Thank you for the post. Very interesting and a reminder for me to watch slow mo guys more often.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> so this happened near me today. sadly the highlights were blown and his photo was unrecoverable. no amount of post processing is bringing this back
> 
> http://petapixel.com/2015/02/02/looks-like-someones-solargraphy-camera-just-got-blown-atlanta-bomb-squad/


Somehow this is dumb.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> I think I need to start looking into flash modifiers.
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> To GAS or not to GAS?
> Not all GAS is the same!
> 
> 
> 
> Some is stunky too.
Click to expand...

im loving the wescott rapid box modifiers. super awesome, fast setup, well thought out, and well made


----------



## Dimaggio1103

Wow police are dumb.....that is insane.


----------



## Gobigorgohome

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xILukasIx*
> 
> The zoom is faster?
> If you still need some help with your settings/camera, post some of your pictures (maybe with the settings used), I'm sure we can help


Okay, I am not really sure what I meant by that.









Have been trying to catch some bird action at ISO 100-160, 1/40 and/or 1/50 shutter speed, F6,3 @ 500mm. I think I got some really good shots, need to get myself educated on Lightroom now ...


----------



## cambuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gobigorgohome*
> 
> Okay, I am not really sure what I meant by that.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Have been trying to catch some bird action at ISO 100-160, 1/40 and/or 1/50 shutter speed, F6,3 @ 500mm. I think I got some really good shots, need to get myself educated on Lightroom now ...


@1/40sec I'm fairly sure a bird (feathered variety) would need to be either deceased or seriously stoned to get a sharp image ;-)


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cambuff*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Gobigorgohome*
> 
> Okay, I am not really sure what I meant by that.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Have been trying to catch some bird action at ISO 100-160, 1/40 and/or 1/50 shutter speed, F6,3 @ 500mm. I think I got some really good shots, need to get myself educated on Lightroom now ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> @1/40sec I'm fairly sure a bird (feathered variety) would need to be either deceased or seriously stoned to get a sharp image ;-)
Click to expand...

LoL









We have touched "freezing motion" and birding - even refering to @Gobigorgohome 's questions me thinks - but he wants to experiment - I guess =)

To have concistent "success" with anything, you need to balance two aspects: subject movement + camera shake.
The worst case leads the way.

Subject movement with living things can be anything, and get compensated with different speed depending on the scenario.
1/60 - 1/100 s for casual ppl standing, to 1/250+ for walking people to much faster than that for action shots.
Similarly for animals, with birds and birds in flight being one of the toughest subjects, often requiring 1/1000 s or 1/1500 s speeds to get sharp results (consistently, you might nail a good panning shot in a burst series with much slower speeds, but...)

Then, camera shake is different for every person and every equiv. focal legnth / fov. But for a 500mm lens on an APS-C body, with IS or not, I would say that 1/500sec is the absolute minimum to go with for handheld shots. And i would argue that 1/500 * crop factor is actually the safer bet, or around 1/800s for a green shooter.
Yes - again - you might be very good @ panning or have very steady hands, but consistency will suffer greatly if you don't try too keep your shutter speed reasonably close to that or higher. Even if you are shooting a still subject.

Now, if you are shooting a bird in flight or a moving subject that requires more than 1/500s to be "frozen" mid-action, the worst case prevails, e.g. you are back to 1/1000s or 1/1500s regardless of 300mm, 400mm or 500mm.


----------



## Gobigorgohome

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cambuff*
> 
> @1/40sec I'm fairly sure a bird (feathered variety) would need to be either deceased or seriously stoned to get a sharp image ;-)


Yes, for birds in motion I will have to go for quicker shutter-spead, for birds sitting still on the "bird-feeder" or what you guys call it (have some shots of this) if I could find out how to upload .NEF-files to OCN.







It also depends on the bird, I would like to go to the coast of Norway to get some good shots of "cormorant" (not sure that is the right name for it), it also have the variety of different eagles too which can be caught on camera (one of the biggest reason I bought a DSLR in the first place). I will try it out, I am only down 250 shots and I want to try out different settings so that I get to know the camera and how the "mechanics" work.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> LoL
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We have touched "freezing motion" and birding - even refering to @Gobigorgohome 's questions me thinks - but he wants to experiment - I guess =)
> 
> To have concistent "success" with anything, you need to balance two aspects: subject movement + camera shake.
> The worst case leads the way.
> 
> Subject movement with living things can be anything, and get compensated with different speed depending on the scenario.
> 1/60 - 1/100 s for casual ppl standing, to 1/250+ for walking people to much faster than that for action shots.
> Similarly for animals, with birds and birds in flight being one of the toughest subjects, often requiring 1/1000 s or 1/1500 s speeds to get sharp results (consistently, you might nail a good panning shot in a burst series with much slower speeds, but...)
> 
> Then, camera shake is different for every person and every equiv. focal legnth / fov. But for a 500mm lens on an APS-C body, with IS or not, I would say that 1/500sec is the absolute minimum to go with for handheld shots. And i would argue that 1/500 * crop factor is actually the safer bet, or around 1/800s for a green shooter.
> Yes - again - you might be very good @ panning or have very steady hands, but consistency will suffer greatly if you don't try too keep your shutter speed reasonably close to that or higher. Even if you are shooting a still subject.
> 
> Now, if you are shooting a bird in flight or a moving subject that requires more than 1/500s to be "frozen" mid-action, the worst case prevails, e.g. you are back to 1/1000s or 1/1500s regardless of 300mm, 400mm or 500mm.


Yes, I know a "bit" higher shutter speed would have been optimal for flying birds and such, but I am trying to learn to crawl before I walk, then jog and after a while run (if you know what I mean), I want to start to produce some decent photos even though I am a newbie when it comes to photography. I will work my way upwards to learn, might take a whole lot longer time than it need to, but I have time.








I have gotten some blurry shots, mostly because I have used wrong settings on my camera, the Sigma 150-500mm is heavy so I cannot really hold it up for that long (did some moon-shots tonight), used ISO 100 and 1/100 shutter speed and it seemed to work good, the moon was very bright so I may could have used 1/125 too, but done is done.

I will try out 1/500 on some birds in action, if I could find some.

Anyone know of a good batterygrip for the D5200? Could someone explain to me why ISO 100 and 1/40 shutter speed gives a totally black screen when in-door? Or generally the connection between shutter speed and ISO? I am sure there is some rule of thumb "notes" I have missed somewhere.


----------



## Scott1541

May have bagged myself a little shoot with a fashion student next week







She wants photos for her modelling portfolio, so I said I'd be willing to do it if she's happy with me using some photos for my flickr/portfolio/upcoming website. It'd give me a chance to play around with some of these new toys I've acquired over the past few months; flash triggers, etc..

The only problem is we might not be able to do it in a studio if she can't get access to one, because I can't, I'm not a media student. If we can't get a studio I'll have to play around with speedlites







I'll try my best but ultimately you get what you pay for I guess


----------



## pcfoo

Keep practicing.
But read what I am saying: you should bump your ISO/apperture to have 1/1000s or even 1/1500s shutter speeds for birds in flight.

You should adjust to 1/500sec or faster for ANYTHING you shoot at or close to the tele-end of the 150-500mm handheld, not just birds which is one of the worst case scenarios.

If you are serious about using this lens often, consider getting a monopod for it. You won't need a fancy one, nor one with a head.
The tripod collar works fine for you switching between portrait and landscape orientation without touching anything else.
The cheapest monopod out there is vastly better than hand-holding and will make your keeper rate much higher. You will still need fast shutter to freeze motion tho.

For moon, or any kind of serious landscape work with any tele-photo & low ISO settings (thus speed) settings, stopping down to f/8~11 and using a tripod might be necessary.


----------



## kbros

x-post from rate thread. But I think this pic came out so well I'll post it here too.









https://flic.kr/p/r1isiySnow Day by Noah Blalock (ig: @noahblalock), on Flickr


----------



## Gobigorgohome

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Keep practicing.
> But read what I am saying: you should bump your ISO/apperture to have 1/1000s or even 1/1500s shutter speeds for birds in flight.
> 
> You should adjust to 1/500sec or faster for ANYTHING you shoot at or close to the tele-end of the 150-500mm handheld, not just birds which is one of the worst case scenarios.
> 
> If you are serious about using this lens often, consider getting a monopod for it. You won't need a fancy one, nor one with a head.
> The tripod collar works fine for you switching between portrait and landscape orientation without touching anything else.
> The cheapest monopod out there is vastly better than hand-holding and will make your keeper rate much higher. You will still need fast shutter to freeze motion tho.
> 
> For moon, or any kind of serious landscape work with any tele-photo & low ISO settings (thus speed) settings, stopping down to f/8~11 and using a tripod might be necessary.


I think I understand, thank you very much, I will do so. I can take pictures of dogs, cats and birds right outside my window (and in-door). I need to get my hands on a monopod then, I have seen those in action and they seem like just what I need.







And yes, I am seriously about shooting very much with this lens, to be honest, I think the Sigma 150-500mm will be the lens I use the most. Untill I get the Tamron 150-600mm (hope to get by one used) or get my hands on a better DSLR with crop-mode, also shooting at 1/1500 shutter speed would acquire higher ISO's. right?

I saw a youtube-video with a lens review of the Tamron 150-600mm where they shot with 1/2000 and 1/2500 at ISO 6400 @ 600mm, this was in daylight and flying birds and so on (think it was the Canon 5D Mk3). I will sooner or later get a FF and probably do cropmode on it to get that extra focal length together with the 150-500mm or 150-600mm. From what I have read it seems like teleconverters is a temporarily solution to the problem, but off course, I want to learn to use the D5200 properly first.


----------



## pcfoo

I would try to figure out how Auto-ISO works for my body and stick to Shutter Priority (Tv for Canon / S for Nikon etc) to set my Shutter @ 1/1500s or the such, or M if I want to force aperture to wide-open or f/8 (not much bigger diff in your case, but surely f/8 will be sharper than f/6.3), and let the camera figure out if it needs to bump the ISO or not.









Forgetting your ISO stuck to values above ISO 800/1600 sucks, and Auto-ISO helps you avoid that !









Also don't forget to switch to burst mode. Sure, being ready for the "Decisive Moment" (great book, has been republished after 60 or so years in 2014) is great, but action shooting @ bursts does pay of more often than not. Sharting your burst a tad before the "decisive moment" (e.g. bird lifting off, or touching down, or catching prey or dog catching up with ball etc) and staying with it for a few moments is the best tactic to insure you get something interesting.

Also, in LR, avoid "keeping all the gems"...edit down your collection, most of the shots in a birst sequence are repetitive. One will be the most interesting one / has the best timing. Pick it out, trash the rest. Tthen check for correct focus, otherwise, trash the latter one too. Seriously.
No need to keep everything "in case"...


----------



## hokiealumnus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gobigorgohome*
> 
> Could someone explain to me why ISO 100 and 1/40 shutter speed gives a totally black screen when in-door? Or generally the connection between shutter speed and ISO? I am sure there is some rule of thumb "notes" I have missed somewhere.


http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/camera-exposure.htm

Spend some time reading around that site. It will help you learn some of the basics you are asking about here. You'll find the more you help yourself (especially in this section), the more help folks are willing to give.


----------



## Conspiracy

PhotoRumors has posted the prices of the Canon EOS 5DS, EOS 5DS R and EF 11-24 f/4L USM in Euro.

Canon EOS 5DS: €3,499 (around $4,000 USD)
Canon EOS 5DS R (no low-pass filter): €3,699 (around $4,200 USD)
Canon EF 11-24mm f/4L USM: €2,999 (around $3,400 USD)

that new 11-24L has my eye but i doubt ill be able to snag one new


----------



## pcfoo

Think me 16-35 IS is fine for WA zoom, bud dat 5DS R ...







Body not ready ... heart tho ... <3


----------



## Conspiracy

the point of the 11-24L is the fact that its going to be a very low distortion lens considering its ultra wide. hence the price tag

im probably going to save up for a used one. until then i still have my eyes on the 35L i think


----------



## pcfoo

I don't doubt that for those that would want a 11-24L class zoom, this could be the best lens there is...typical latest generation Canon lens design that is, blowing anything out of the water. I would probably never go for a fish-eye / hybrid fish-eye, and it was about time Canon would try to match the Nikkor 12-24's success.

But the reason I like the 16-35 IS (and the 17-40 before it), is that It doubles as a walk-around lens (for my style) as the 35mm end is pretty versatile. I could go on a trip with just this lens and not feel very confined, while the 1x-24 class zooms feel too wide to be on my camera exclusively. Landscape photographers might manage.

As for the 35L...Why not the Sigma 35 1.4 A ?
Even the non-perfect samples (apparently it has wider sample variation than the 35L) are sharper and more contrasty than the 35L...just curious.

As for my 2c: I had the 50 Art for a couple of weeks, and was amazing in all regards but one: size.
It is as big (virtually) and heavy as f/2.8 standard zooms.
Perhaps heavier than most that is, we are talking as heavy as the all-metal 24-70L I.
At any rate, IQ wise, I am a total believer in the Art primes.

Unfortunately the 35 1.4 is almost the same in size. I could see those great studio lenses, but for street / backpacking / travel shots (which I mostly do), it was just not viable.
That's why I could also recommend entertaining the idea of the 35 2 IS. I would be willing to sacrifice both speed and absolute IQ, in order to get something smaller, lighter and less intimidating.

As for 50 1.4 - I fell back to the Canon 50 1.4 USM. Got a decent copy used for $230 (stands up against the 50EX out-sharpens the Canon 24-70 II before f/4), and I am willing to hang with it for as long as it will take Canon to come up with a successor. If it is anything like the 24-28-35 IS triplet, I will be buying.


----------



## Conspiracy

i dont care about sharpness. that isnt something i consider when choosing lenses. i care about the way a lens renders its images. the ART 35 doesnt appear to be more contrasty from all the samples ive seen, sharper hells yeah but thats all it has going for it and the bokeh looks quite bland to me. your needs/uses differ from mine though where you care about sharpness i enjoy the unique look/feel/texture a lens brings to the table which is why i have 3X 70-200's and still bought a 135 f2 because of its different look it brings to images. also when it comes to primes size and weight dont matter THAT much as that only prime that is overkill in size is the siggy 50 ART


----------



## mavericklrc

I want to join.


----------



## Conspiracy

have you gone through initiation yet?


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> have you gone through initiation yet?


Yea, this is very important, you can't join until you go through it.


----------



## mavericklrc

Haven't been initiated yet. What is the initiation process?


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mavericklrc*
> 
> Haven't been initiated yet. What is the initiation process?


Hope you tolerate pain and fire.


----------



## mavericklrc

I've been married once already I'm sure I can handle a little initiation. XD


----------



## xILukasIx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> PhotoRumors has posted the prices of the Canon EOS 5DS, EOS 5DS R and EF 11-24 f/4L USM in Euro.
> 
> Canon EOS 5DS: €3,499 (around $4,000 USD)
> Canon EOS 5DS R (no low-pass filter): €3,699 (around $4,200 USD)
> Canon EF 11-24mm f/4L USM: €2,999 (around $3,400 USD)
> 
> that new 11-24L has my eye but i doubt ill be able to snag one new


More like
$3,499
$3,699 and
$2,999

We have tax here! lol


----------



## Dimaggio1103

So the D3300 DSLR I scored refurb only has 350 on the shutter. Not bad. Very nice starter kit with LR5 and all the extras for 400. So happy to have one again.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dimaggio1103*
> 
> So the D3300 DSLR I scored refurb only has 350 on the shutter. Not bad. Very nice starter kit with LR5 and all the extras for 400. So happy to have one again.


awesome! dont forget to share some of your photos


----------



## jjsoviet

http://www.dpreview.com/articles/9437515928/olympus-announces-om-d-e-m5-ii-with-40mp-high-resolution-mode



_Olympus has unveiled the OM-D E-M5 II. Picking up where its successor left off, the E-M5 II continues to offer weather sealing and 5-axis IS while adding a redesigned 16MP Four Thirds sensor and 5-axis image stabilization. The E-M5 II also boasts a 40MP high resolution shot mode, achieved by shifting the sensor in half-pixel steps and capturing eight images over a period of one second.

The E-M5 II also offers a built-in 2.36 million dot EVF, Wi-Fi and an articulating 3" 1.04 million dot touchscreen LCD. It's capable of 10 fps shooting with single AF (5 fps C-AF), as well as 1080/60p video capture with headphone and microphone jacks.

The camera will be bundled with a dust- and splashproof FL-LM3 flash. Other optional accessories launched for the E-M5 II include an HLD-8 dustproof and splashproof power battery holder and an EE-1 External Dot Sight, similar to the built-in sight on Olympus's SP100 superzoom. Also announced is a PT-EP13 Dedicated Underwater Case, capable of diving 45 meters with the E-M5 II.

The Olympus OM-D E-M5 II will be available this month for $1099.99 body-only. All-black and silver body versions will be sold for the same price._

http://www.dpreview.com/articles/7658835946/samsung-introduces-nx500-with-nx1-28mp-bsi-sensor



_Samsung has announced the NX500, which borrows many features from the NX1 starting with a 28MP APS-C-size BSI-CMOS sensor. It too provides 4K and UHD video recording, a sophisticated hybrid NX AF system III, and (naturally) built-in Wi-Fi. The NX500 offers 9 fps burst shooting and a flip up 3" touchscreen AMOLED display. The NX500 will be available in March 2015 for $799.99 with 16-50mm F3.5-5.6 Power Zoom ED OIS kit lens._

This is really great news in the mirrorless front. One's an updated E-M5 with sensor-shift technology that can provide up to 40 MP worth of stills, while the other is practically a downsized NX1 with all its capabilities including 4K video capture with no frame skipping.


----------



## boogschd

*Canon EOS 5DS / 5DS R*

Quote:


> Canon EOS 5DS / SR key features
> 
> *50MP CMOS sensor*
> 5fps continuous shooting
> ISO 100-6400 (Extends to 12,800)
> 61-point AF module with input from 150k pixel metering sensor
> Dual Digic 6 processors
> 3.0" 1.04m dot LCD
> CF & SD slots (UHS-I compatible)
> 1080/30p video
> M-Raw and S-Raw down-sampled formats
> 30MP APS-H crop and 19.6MP APS-C crop modes
> USB 3.0 interface






http://www.dpreview.com/previews/canon-eos-5ds-sr


----------



## xILukasIx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xILukasIx*
> 
> More like
> $3,499
> $3,699 and
> $2,999
> 
> We have tax here! lol


Almost:
3,699
3,899
2,999

Same DR as the 5D3...


----------



## Conspiracy

obviously professionally produced and considering this guy is a "canon master", maybe ambassador he obviously is going to say what they want him to say but without a script probably. im very curious to see what comes of this new camera.

man so many articles on facebook about canon's new announcement and im sitting here at work drooling over that 11-24L

interesting little AD from canon australia


----------



## hokiealumnus

Did you guys see the T6s? It's definitely no 70D, but Canon just ate into their xxD sales for the on-the-fence-between-the-Rebel-vs-xxD crowd.


----------



## jjsoviet

No EOS-M3 released to the NA market... figures.

Is Canon really holding back the platform because it may eat into its DSLR sales? It seems to gimp the EOS-M for no real reason other than that, in my opinion.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hokiealumnus*
> 
> Did you guys see the T6s? It's definitely no 70D, but Canon just ate into their xxD sales for the on-the-fence-between-the-Rebel-vs-xxD crowd.


it was only a matter of time before the Rebel lineup catches up to the XXD. that just means that the 80D will hopefully be a nice improvement


----------



## JKuhn

I haven't been very active in photography (and this thread) lately, I hope I didn't miss anything in the last 800+ posts.


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JKuhn*
> 
> I haven't been very active in photography (and this thread) lately, I hope I didn't miss anything in the last 800+ posts.


Nah, probably not


----------



## Conspiracy

article to go with it.

http://petapixel.com/2015/02/10/3-5-minute-music-video-shot-5-seconds-1000fps-high-speed-camera/

supra cool. as in a whole nother level above super cool


----------



## PCModderMike

I just ordered a Manfrotto MK393-HM, should be here in a couple of days.

Can't believe I've been using my current janky tripod as long as I have.


----------



## halfeatenwaffles

Any thoughts about the upcoming Nikon D810_A_? It's a flavor of the D810 with a couple added features geared specifically towards astrophotography; such as 15+ minute exposure capabilities, optical IR-cut filter etc. Just stumbled upon an article on Wired, thought I'd share.

Wired
KenRockwell

I know Canon has come up with similar offerings in the past and as someone who appreciates good space photography, it sounds interesting to say the least.


----------



## Conspiracy

honestly its just a regular D810 with the only change being that IR filter thing to help it snag richer detail and accurate colors of space. other than that its not really mind blowing other than apparently being the first digital full frame astro camera. this camera is so niche that its not really going to get mainstream attention. canon currently only offers APS-C astro cameras with the 60Da being the only in production right now. without a doubt the D810a is extremely cool and all but its a rebranded camera with one major change offering considerably higher quality capabilities for specifically astro photos. this camera wouldnt be something you buy as a hobbyist unless you have plenty of money for toys


----------



## sub50hz

If it doesn't have 50MP, I don't want it.


----------



## Pandora51

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *halfeatenwaffles*
> 
> KenRockwell


eww









Very cool but only useful for a few people out there and it wont get alot of attention. Aside from that I read about this camera on gsmarena.com for phone tech which has nothing to do with cameras at all lol


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> If it doesn't have 50MP, I don't want it.


50MP is so last week.

I require at least 75MP to stay relevant in my photography endeavors. and by photo endeavors i mean which piece of gear is most efficient at collecting dust


----------



## kbros

* I agree, I'm gonna need _atleast_ 75MP to make the snapshots of my dog into billboards/murals.


----------



## Conspiracy

billboards arent even big enough anymore







need to find a new way to showcase my snapshots


----------



## pcfoo

And of course no billboard "of ours" is printed @ less than 300dpi.








Interpolation is for luzers.

(typ. billboard prints are at 12 dpi - from a distance of 50ft, typically you cannot distinguish more than 5-6 dpi/lpi. Usually designer specs call for scale output drawins, i.e. 1" = 1' / 1:12 scale @ 300dpi. e.g. a 48x14in 300dpi board will be printed 48x14 feet. Input would be 25dpi, but output is lower. Typically lower than 12dpi, rarely up to 18dpi for billboard use)


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> And of course no billboard "of ours" is printed @ less than 300dpi.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Interpolation is for luzers.
> 
> (typ. billboard prints are at 12 dpi - from a distance of 50ft, typically you cannot distinguish more than 5-6 dpi/lpi. Usually designer specs call for scale output drawins, i.e. 1" = 1' / 1:12 scale @ 300dpi. e.g. a 48x14in 300dpi board will be printed 48x14 feet. Input would be 25dpi, but output is lower. Typically lower than 12dpi, rarely up to 18dpi for billboard use)


You must be fun at parties.


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> You must be fun at parties.


I am. Too bad they don't invite me. Ever.


----------



## Conspiracy

par·ty1
ˈpärdē/
noun
1.
a social gathering of invited guests, typically involving eating, drinking, and entertainment.
"an engagement party"
synonyms: (social) gathering, (social) function, get-together, affair, celebration, after-party, festivity, reception, at-home; More

just in case you have never heard of a party before


----------



## sub50hz

Got too hopped up on pain meds after being in the hospital all weekend, accidentally one-click ordered something:



Whoops.


----------



## ace8uk

Ohhhhhhh looorrrddddyyyy, lord. I'm super jelly.


----------



## kbros

A good kind of Whoops.


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Got too hopped up on pain meds after being in the hospital all weekend, accidentally one-click ordered something:
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Whoops.


Good thing you weren't there a few extra days...I hope this gold pill will help your recovery


----------



## Dream Killer

Oops,just have to live with it then.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> Oops,just have to live with it then.


Yeah, I guess so. Drat.


----------



## nvidiaftw12

You poor guy.


----------



## Scott1541

Won a Lomo Lubitel 166B on eBay earlier







From the description it should be in good condition, and even comes with the original box and case







I've been wanting a 120 film camera for ages, but after playing with someone's Mamiya C3 last week I decided it's time to get one.

Hopefully the image quality will be a fair bit better than a Holga/Diana. Obviously it won't compare to a more expensive TLR but it should be pretty decent.


----------



## MistaBernie

Hey guys, I know I haven't been around a whole lot lately.. but if you need anything specifically from me, please PM. I'm not retiring, but I've got some stuff going on IRL that's going to likely keep me away more than I Have been lately.

Keep shooting and sharing. Be excellent to each other. Party on, Wayne. This Coke's for you. Etc.


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Aw take care mistabernie, hope all goes well for you


----------



## Conspiracy

omg the gear lust









http://petapixel.com/2015/02/11/10k-time-lapse-video-created-using-80mp-still-photographs/


----------



## pcfoo

Impressive.



On a side note for the OM-D E-M5 II - which is sexy as hell but gets me thinking:
"Empty" MP is a waste.
Sensor shifting over 1 sec - what a gimmicky idea to sell this as a "40MP" or w/e.

If it has the ability to stack exposures shifting the bayer pattern around - effectively capturing full color ala Foveon - that would be neat. But still, 1 second (+ exposure for each image I guess * 8)
But if I was to be stuck on a tripod, I could probably do nice stuff on both HDR and stitching fronts anyways.


----------



## kbros

Take care bernie!


----------



## Sean Webster

Bernie is busy? Time to wreak havoc!









Also, got to use my flash gels finally. I can't wait to use them more and try some new ideas...especially with the fog machine I also just got.


----------



## Conspiracy

dude fog machine and flash gels. someone is going to have tons o fun lol


----------



## Sean Webster

I know! I've been wanting these for so long! They were so cheap, I don't know why I didn't buy them before! haha


----------



## TUDJ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> I know! I've been wanting these for so long! They were so cheap, I don't know why I didn't buy them before! haha


Look forwards to seeing what crazy ideas you come up with


----------



## kbros

Make a model rainforest setting and do all your ssd product shots with mock moonlight and fog everywhere. Just imagine it.


----------



## sub50hz

You need a larger, more obtrusive watermark.


----------



## Sean Webster

Hmm
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TUDJ*
> 
> Look forwards to seeing what crazy ideas you come up with


Thanks, wasn't there something else I was suppose to do? I think I wasn't able to do it or was just lazy lol.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> Make a model rainforest setting and do all your ssd product shots with mock moonlight and fog everywhere. Just imagine it.


That would be pretty cool. I should paint one up with blood too and raggy clothes. ZOMBIE SSD lol
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> You need a larger, more obtrusive watermark.


I know, its on my to do list. I'm lazy tho, can you do it for me? Thanks.


----------



## kbros

Rambo SSD with a little bandana tied around it. ahaha


----------



## Dream Killer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Hey guys, I know I haven't been around a whole lot lately.. but if you need anything specifically from me, please PM. I'm not retiring, but I've got some stuff going on IRL that's going to likely keep me away more than I Have been lately.
> 
> Keep shooting and sharing. Be excellent to each other. Party on, Wayne. This Coke's for you. Etc.


Keep in touch, you know where to find us cool kids (IRC).


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> Rambo SSD with a little bandana tied around it. ahaha


HAHA, oh man, we could start a whole new industry trend right there!


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> I'm lazy tho, can you do it for me? Thanks.


No.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> Keep in touch, you know where to find us cool kids (IRC).


SupersecretOCNcamerachatters


----------



## Conspiracy

Awesome explanation of diffraction. I really like the emphasis he puts on the facts thats it is physics of light and optics and not a lens flaw


----------



## Khaled G

Just Bought a 700D, Compared to my 5yr old Samsung ST70, Takes much longer to adjust everything in the manual mode, but the results are astonishing and it's much easier to shoot with. Need time to recover from the black hole in my pocket before I start buying accessories and lenses.


----------



## Scott1541

Worked my first club night last night







I thought it went fairly well considering it was my first time doing it. Had a more experienced photog there and he gave me some decent pointers like where to position people, where to shoot from, etc..


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> Worked my first club night last night
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I thought it went fairly well considering it was my first time doing it. Had a more experienced photog there and he gave me some decent pointers like where to position people, where to shoot from, etc..


Pics or it didn't happen.


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Pics or it didn't happen.


You don't want pics, trust me









It was pretty much locals night, so basically over half the people there were eastern europeans, the rest were in their 30s/40s. The other photog was quite annoyed because it's the first time they've done this event and he's used to much livelier nights, and we were just stuck with 2 half empty floors of middle aged drunks. They've got to try and poach a few more student nights from other photographers


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> You don't want pics, trust me


post a few of your best shots from that night anyway


----------



## jjsoviet

Hey guys, long time no see.

I am in the market for a new lens, specifically a wide-angle. I kind of need one for indoor shots and the occasional group photos (I get asked to take pictures of extended families quite often







), and I'm still not sure what focal length to go for. I'd like to have a Sony A-Mount prime, so currently it's between the 24mm f/2.8 and 20mm f/2.8 - both Minolta to match my theme.


----------



## pcfoo

What is your widest lens now @jjsoviet?


----------



## OmarCCX

I'd say get the 24mm. I have the SEL20 ƒ2.8 right now on my A6000 and I hate it. lol
Just not a big fan of wide angles, unless they're ultra wides like 12mm.


----------



## jjsoviet

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> What is your widest lens now @jjsoviet?


Believe it or not, it is my trusty Minolta MD 35-70mm but realistically I mostly carry the Minolta Maxxum 50mm f/1.4 so I barely have anything considered wide. I could only step back so far to get those group photos. :v

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OmarCCX*
> 
> I'd say get the 24mm. I have the SEL20 ƒ2.8 right now on my A6000 and I hate it. lol
> Just not a big fan of wide angles, unless they're ultra wides like 12mm.


The 20mm I have considered is the Minolta f/2.8, and the current Sony counterpart is just a rebadged version of the Minolta with identical optics.

You have the A6000 though so the 1.5x crop factor makes it a 30mm which isn't very wide. I have the A7 II, a full frame shooter so I think 20mm should make for a good wide-angle lens. Though you make a good point, it is sitting between the more workable 24mm and the true ultra-wides so I'm still on the fence.


----------



## pcfoo

Well, obviously you cannot keep all your eggs in one basket.
I can relate remotely to your situation as I am toying around with an EOS M & 6D. Those are different cameras than yours, but in essence still a "big FF guy" and a smaller APS-C guy.
When I think about glass, I try to use something that works with the strengths of one of the two, instead of trying too hard to find something that could work on both equally well - something that imho is impossible. Having a cropped body that is "compatible" with a lens, doesn't mean there aren't serious compromises.

The M, much like your (much better) A6000 is @ its best being small and compact, and this of course has to take the lens into consideration.
When you toy around with adapters & FF lenses - especially older SLR FF lenses - vs a mirrorless cropped lens, you just throw the compact size out of the window, and this is the biggest strength with my M, much like with most cropped bodies.

In case of the M, that EF-M 22mm f/2 is smaller than the EF -> EF-M adapter to begin with! So if I am after something remotely "pocketable", the 22 is pretty much the only way to go.
For the A6000 I guess the closest thing would be the SEL 16 F 28, or the great 16-50 OSS if you don't care about faster apertures, as it is pretty darn compact. If this was your only body, you could consider other SEL optics that are good, but is really a A6000 + SEL 35 1.8 combo that much smaller than a A7 II + 50 1.8 or 1.4 lens (something like the sigma 50 Art doesn't count!)? And is it better in any way? Probably not. The FF A7 II will trump the optical output of the A6000 even with a cheap prime, and honnestly although heavier, it won't be that much bigger. If neither is pocketable, few grams won't change things.

And if big SEL primes are shaving points away and give it to the A7, any FF 20-24mm, with an adapter is killing the A6000's portability even further, so forget about it...just think about what the A7 II would work with, and forget the cropped body in relation to this lens.

If it is capable of using it, good, but that's pretty much it. I am happy my EOS M can use all my L zooms & primes, but would I ever leave my FF body home or in the bag to use the M hanging behind my L glass? No. It is just not good enough in anything but being super compact.

At least the A6000 is super fast to AF & has great fps capabilities, so I would consider it as a decent amateurs wild-life / sports body, as it would probably buy you better optical performance on the tele end vs. a FF body + a TC using the same lens, but trying to do that on the wide spectrum of things, especially if fast apertures are required (i.e. also low light, i.e. also better DR/ISO performance), leaves the A7 as a clear winner and the body to plan for.

If it wasn't for the higher price, I would have no issue ditching my M for a A6000 and a pancake prime, forgetting any benefits for having compatibility with my SLR lenses. I just cannot beat the value of a $200-250 mirrorless body+ 35mm equiv. f/2 lens.

That's my "22" cents.


----------



## jjsoviet

I don't have an A6000, I upgraded from an NEX-5T to the A7 II just last month. :v

But yeah, I see what you're saying regarding lenses for APS-C and FF owners, especially with Sony because of the cross-compatibility between E and FE lenses as well as A-Mount glass with the corresponding adapters. I myself bought FF-capable Minolta lenses because of the possibility of me upgrading to FF (which I did), so for the past year I have been lugging a really small camera with large lenses, you might as well call my NEX an expensive lens cap.









Anyway, so far I'm leaning towards the 24mm because it's cheap and I really don't have much use for a wide-angle save for those group shots. I may dabble on landscape and architecture photography though, and that eventuality has made me reconsider going for the wider 20mm instead for a slightly larger field of view. What focal length do you think is best for those situations? Is 24mm or 20mm enough, or should I go wider like 16mm and below?


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jjsoviet*
> 
> I don't have an A6000, I upgraded from an NEX-5T to the A7 II just last month. :v
> 
> But yeah, I see what you're saying regarding lenses for APS-C and FF owners, especially with Sony because of the cross-compatibility between E and FE lenses as well as A-Mount glass with the corresponding adapters. I myself bought FF-capable Minolta lenses because of the possibility of me upgrading to FF (which I did), so for the past year I have been lugging a really small camera with large lenses, you might as well call my NEX an expensive lens cap.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Anyway, so far I'm leaning towards the 24mm because it's cheap and I really don't have much use for a wide-angle save for those group shots. I may dabble on landscape and architecture photography though, and that eventuality has made me reconsider going for the wider 20mm instead for a slightly larger field of view. What focal length do you think is best for those situations? Is 24mm or 20mm enough, or should I go wider like 16mm and below?










read the last paragraph @ your prev post but did not actually read it....was left with the impression that you had both the A7 & the A6000









/reading comprehension = FAIL

Yes, for a prime I tend to think that 20mm is already TOO wide for most stuff other than landscapes/architectre.
A 17-35 or 16-35 is easily a walk-around lens, but talking primes, I would not be happy being stuck that wide, even tho I do shoot on the wide end more often than not. But that's landscapes & architecture. Being stuck with a 20 or wider & wanting to shoot people = bad idea in my book, so a 16ish would be just too limiting, even more a 14mm or so - the reason I did not get a 14mm Samyang although there are plenty going used for very good prices for what this lens delivers.

As for architecture, yes, the 24mm will not be ideal, but neither will the 20. Compromises either way. Also note that architectural photography is not only about fitting everything in. I find joy in tighter frames that isolate details as mush as capturing a whole building + its surroundings. For me, the 16-35 I have is good all around, and if I wanted more, I think the 24 TSE is the only lens that has something substantialy "more" to offer me in either landscape or arch work.

I think keeping healthy steps between your primes makes for less guessing on which should you use etc...17-24-50-135 or something like that is already crowded, but each lens is different enough from the other.

Go for a kit of 2-3 distinct lens roles that will make it more clear on what a lens is for, and what it is not for, and will have you using your feet and imagination more instead of reaching to your bag for "the perfect lens", which is never there and always keeps you itching for more equipment.

I believe something in the 24-50-100 or 135 should cover you decently, retiring your 35-70 altogether, and pumping that extra bit of detail out of that top-shelf sensor of yours.


----------



## jjsoviet

Yeah that is what I'm shooting for: a 24-50-100 prime trio and I also have a 100-200 just in case I needed a bit more reach.

I could also instead go for a wide zoom like the 16-35 you mentioned, but since Minolta doesn't offer a lens of that focal range I would have to look elsewhere. I've heard Tokina has a really decent AT-X 20-35 f/2.8 and it's not that expensive.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jjsoviet*
> 
> I'm leaning towards the 24mm because it's cheap and I really don't have much use for a wide-angle save for those group shots. I may dabble on landscape and architecture photography though, and that eventuality has made me reconsider going for the wider 20mm instead for a slightly larger field of view. What focal length do you think is best for those situations? Is 24mm or 20mm enough, or should I go wider like 16mm and below?


The only answer to these questions is:

RENT LENSES AND TRY THEM.

It's easy to post some long-winded response about what's best in some arbitrary scenario for one person, but your style will ultimately dictate what focal lengths are appropriate for you. Don't buy a lens because it's cheap, buy something because you _need_ it.


----------



## jjsoviet

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> The only answer to these questions is:
> 
> RENT LENSES AND TRY THEM.
> 
> It's easy to post some long-winded response about what's best in some arbitrary scenario for one person, but your style will ultimately dictate what focal lengths are appropriate for you. Don't buy a lens because it's cheap, buy something because you _need_ it.


I wish I have money to rent lenses, I only have enough to purchase them. However, I suppose I can rent one for the coming Houston Rodeo this March and see which focal length works best for me.

I'll probably get the Zeiss 16-80 or Sigma 16-35 for this lol


----------



## pcfoo

Renting works well with really expensive lenses, available relatively close to your base (ideally no shipping involved).
For cheaper lenses, buying in the used market, testing and re-selling can net a smaller loss/total cost.


----------



## Scott1541

My Lubitel came today







It's in good condition and came with the original manual (dated 1985), the case, box and cable release. Everything seems to be working properly too, the aperture blades are moving fine, shutter is firing and speeds seem fairly accurate. I don't know how long ago it was last used but it came with a partly exposed roll of Ilford FP4 inside. The only slight issue with it is that the viewfinder lid is a bit tight and is difficult to lift up.

I've been a bit of an idiot though because I was reluctant to order any film before I got it and thought it was working correctly, so I've now got a camera I can't yet because I only just ordered film







I went down to the local photo dev shop first but they only have Portra, Ektar and all Ilford films, and they're charging £7.50 for each.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Renting works well with really expensive lenses, available relatively close to your base (ideally no shipping involved).
> For cheaper lenses, buying in the used market, testing and re-selling can net a smaller loss/total cost.


You don't honestly believe this, do you?


----------



## Dream Killer

what focal lengths you need falls in the "subjective" side. rent the lenses, play with them then figure out what you like.


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Renting works well with really expensive lenses, available relatively close to your base (ideally no shipping involved).
> For cheaper lenses, buying in the used market, testing and re-selling can net a smaller loss/total cost.
> 
> 
> 
> You don't honestly believe this, do you?
Click to expand...

Well, I do. I am doing it.
Through forums I have bought all sorts of lenses. Some to keep, some to resell. For well established systems, there are pretty stable prices. You buy something @ $300, you will probably sell it @ $300 6 months later. You end up paying shipping out of pocket, and that would be the case for renting the same lens also. For small primes, that cost is not that bad to bare.

Today I don't own a single lens I bought new, and I can sell all of them @ 90% or more of what I've paid for them, with this 10% "loss" including shipping, paypal fees if involved etc.

Local photography or photo/cine equipment stores allow you to rent with less costs involved, but you might have other shortfalls, like, getting to the place sane (gough SoCal traffic).
Popular $1500-2000 lenses are like $35-40 a day. Say, a 85 1.2L II that you want to try.
Less popular lenses, like a 400 5.6L are $20-25 a day (Sat+Sunday = 1 day).

So sure, if there is a local store involved, renting can be easy, and probably faster than hunting for a used deal.
But with FM & POTN forums, the latter is not that hard to come by, and whoever navigates their buy & sell sections, should be able to agree with the above.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Renting works well with really expensive lenses, available relatively close to your base (ideally no shipping involved).
> For cheaper lenses, buying in the used market, testing and re-selling can net a smaller loss/total cost.
> 
> 
> 
> You don't honestly believe this, do you?
Click to expand...

pretty sure he does based on all his other long winded posts. rather poor advice but yeah people will learn over time and i guess some dont have to be as financially responsible as the rest of us so its no biggie to lose out on a deal if you get buyers remorse and try to sell it used to recover (if you can even call it recover)

also, to his new long winded post about something insanely simple. cheap lenses dont re-sell as easy as expensive ones do. cheap lenses get low ball offers from people looking for a bargain. while you may have been lucky most people end up losing when trying to re-sell cheap glass they bought used when


----------



## pcfoo

Sorry,
We we cannot all be laconic with one-liners full of "insightful" criticism, but no advice.
One day, I will be level 5 @ condescending insults, recycled memes & forum drama queening like some of you.


----------



## Conspiracy

1) im a level 83 condescending insulter. get it right n00b /sarcasm otherwise people flip out for no reason









2) we are not actually being condescending. we are questioning the irrational advice you blabber to people about what lens they should buy
3) how is your doctoral thesis on internet camera advice going?
4) did you see what i did there?


----------



## pcfoo

The same thing you are doing every time, Pinky.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Well, I do. I am doing it.
> Through forums I have bought all sorts of lenses. Some to keep, some to resell. For well established systems, there are pretty stable prices. You buy something @ $300, you will probably sell it @ $300 6 months later. You end up paying shipping out of pocket, and that would be the case for renting the same lens also. For small primes, that cost is not that bad to bare.
> 
> Today I don't own a single lens I bought new, and I can sell all of them @ 90% or more of what I've paid for them, with this 10% "loss" including shipping, paypal fees if involved etc.
> 
> Local photography or photo/cine equipment stores allow you to rent with less costs involved, but you might have other shortfalls, like, getting to the place sane (gough SoCal traffic).
> Popular $1500-2000 lenses are like $35-40 a day. Say, a 85 1.2L II that you want to try.
> Less popular lenses, like a 400 5.6L are $20-25 a day (Sat+Sunday = 1 day).
> 
> So sure, if there is a local store involved, renting can be easy, and probably faster than hunting for a used deal.
> But with FM & POTN forums, the latter is not that hard to come by, and whoever navigates their buy & sell sections, should be able to agree with the above.


I mean, you're entitled to your opinion, but buying and selling with the knowledge that you'll incur a loss if it's not the right equipment for you seems pretty stupid to me. Rentals are a great way to ensure you don't invest a ton of capital and then find out you don't like it.

All of this "what lens is best for xxxxx" talk is hilarious to anyone who actually shoots often. Try what you think you will need, and if it doesn't fit the bill, purchase what does.


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> I mean, you're entitled to your opinion, but buying and selling with the knowledge that you'll incur a loss if it's not the right equipment for you seems pretty stupid to me. Rentals are a great way to ensure you don't invest a ton of capital and then find out you don't like it.
> 
> All of this "what lens is best for xxxxx" talk is hilarious to anyone who actually shoots often. Try what you think you will need, and if it doesn't fit the bill, purchase what does.


Well thank you.
I don't think we are disagreeing in essence, you are offering one path (renting straight), I just suggest a different one that I think is pretty viable for certain systems, especially with cheaper lenses. I really don't know if either is that viable talking specifically for "older Minolta lenses" or what jj was after as everything is bound to supply & availability of either used or rental equipment.

Where we disagree is that it that getting a used lens and reselling equals a loss, while renting doesn't.
For relatively affordable primes and zooms, I strongly believe you can get away with roughly the same costs, unless you can manage to complete your "trial" through renting it for a single day.

For lenses you will be using sparingly (i.e. that 400mm you really need once every other month for the weekend), having a local shop that rents it for $20-60 a weekend is hard to justify buying either used or new. Just rent it and return it.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Where we disagree is that it that getting a used lens and reselling equals a loss, while renting doesn't.


Wait, what? I'm aware that you PAY to rent lenses -- but in doing so you're assured that you will find out, without having to eat the entire cost of the lens up front and then deal with reselling, that you're going to choose the appropriate lens to buy _after renting it_.

The buy-try-sell system you're proposing requires more time (arrange a deal with a seller, process payment, when you're done you must attempt a sale, arrange another deal, and wait for payment to process -- and then ship it) and a potentially greater monetary loss than simply renting something for a few days.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Where we disagree is that it that getting a used lens and reselling equals a loss, while renting doesn't.
> 
> 
> 
> Wait, what? I'm aware that you PAY to rent lenses -- but in doing so you're assured that you will find out, without having to eat the entire cost of the lens up front and then deal with reselling, that you're going to choose the appropriate lens to buy _after renting it_.
> 
> The buy-try-sell system you're proposing requires more time (arrange a deal with a seller, process payment, when you're done you must attempt a sale, arrange another deal, and wait for payment to process -- and then ship it) and a potentially greater monetary loss than simply renting something for a few days.
Click to expand...

not to mention probability of getting screwed and dealing with trying to get refunds or dealing with accidentally getting stolen gear. does anyone really want to have that on their conscience if they realized they bought stolen property?

also, you already know but ill remind you that youre basically trying to argue with a brick wall. he loves to go out of his way to preach his whatever just to be different so that we can give him attention by sparking these absurd discussions. this is a no-brainer. buy-try-sell is a terrible solution for figuring out what option is best for a person and even more so if they are on a tight budget and cant afford to take a loss

there is no possible chance to never take some loss when going with a buy-try-sell approach to gear. how much loss is acceptable depends on the person


----------



## PCModderMike

This discussion has really sparked my interest in renting a lens. What a good well known source for renting?
Google brought me here, looks good so far. http://www.lensrentals.com/for-nikon


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PCModderMike*
> 
> This discussion has really sparked my interest in renting a lens. What a good well known source for renting?
> Google brought me here, looks good so far. http://www.lensrentals.com/for-nikon


aperturent.com
borrowlenses.com

are both two great and easy to deal with online rental companies. i like aperturent because they are local for me and super affordable

lensrentals is also good but ive never used them. only the above 2 for online stuff. otherwise i usually stick to local renting because its nice to test stuff there before you rent


----------



## PCModderMike

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *PCModderMike*
> 
> This discussion has really sparked my interest in renting a lens. What a good well known source for renting?
> Google brought me here, looks good so far. http://www.lensrentals.com/for-nikon
> 
> 
> 
> aperturent.com
> borrowlenses.com
> 
> are both two great and easy to deal with online rental companies. i like aperturent because they are local for me and super affordable
> 
> lensrentals is also good but ive never used them. only the above 2 for online stuff. otherwise i usually stick to local renting because its nice to test stuff there before you rent
Click to expand...

Not much around me for local stuff. But I'll check those out, thanks for the suggestion. +rep


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PCModderMike*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *PCModderMike*
> 
> This discussion has really sparked my interest in renting a lens. What a good well known source for renting?
> Google brought me here, looks good so far. http://www.lensrentals.com/for-nikon
> 
> 
> 
> aperturent.com
> borrowlenses.com
> 
> are both two great and easy to deal with online rental companies. i like aperturent because they are local for me and super affordable
> 
> lensrentals is also good but ive never used them. only the above 2 for online stuff. otherwise i usually stick to local renting because its nice to test stuff there before you rent
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not much around me for local stuff. But I'll check those out, thanks for the suggestion. +rep
Click to expand...

borrowlenses rules because i get promos from them almost every day. i just deleted an email from them about 15% this weekend

ALSO

these dudes are local to you

http://shootrentals.com/

http://www.highoutput.com/hoc_index.html


----------



## PCModderMike

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *PCModderMike*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *PCModderMike*
> 
> This discussion has really sparked my interest in renting a lens. What a good well known source for renting?
> Google brought me here, looks good so far. http://www.lensrentals.com/for-nikon
> 
> 
> 
> aperturent.com
> borrowlenses.com
> 
> are both two great and easy to deal with online rental companies. i like aperturent because they are local for me and super affordable
> 
> lensrentals is also good but ive never used them. only the above 2 for online stuff. otherwise i usually stick to local renting because its nice to test stuff there before you rent
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not much around me for local stuff. But I'll check those out, thanks for the suggestion. +rep
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> borrowlenses rules because i get promos from them almost every day. i just deleted an email from them about 15% this weekend
> 
> ALSO
> 
> these dudes are local to you
> 
> http://shootrentals.com/
> 
> http://www.highoutput.com/hoc_index.html
Click to expand...

I was aware of high output, but they didn't amount to much when I checked them out a few months ago. The shootrentals place looks good, might be my best bet. One consistent thing I'm seeing on all of these online sites is that the shipping is really up there. I get excited when I see the rental rates, but then I add shopping and I immediately do a 180.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PCModderMike*
> 
> I was aware of high output, but they didn't amount to much when I checked them out a few months ago. The shootrentals place looks good, might be my best bet. One consistent thing I'm seeing on all of these online sites is that the shipping is really up there. I get excited when I see the rental rates, but then I add shopping and I immediately do a 180.


Shipping rates are mostly due to insurance.


----------



## PCModderMike

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *PCModderMike*
> 
> I was aware of high output, but they didn't amount to much when I checked them out a few months ago. The shootrentals place looks good, might be my best bet. One consistent thing I'm seeing on all of these online sites is that the shipping is really up there. I get excited when I see the rental rates, but then I add shopping and I immediately do a 180.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shipping rates are mostly due to insurance.
Click to expand...

Ah yeah

Welp, think I'm going for a Nikon 10.5mm f/2.8G AF DX fisheye.


----------



## sub50hz

Well, it will make Lil Sebastian larger than life.


----------



## ace8uk

When you have to send it back, you'll miss it in the saddest of fashions.


----------



## sub50hz

Speaking of buying lenses, might be selling both my X100 and the X-mount 35/1.4 -- if anyone is interested in either, feel free to contact me. I know I've said a million times that I would never get rid of the X100, but I can only keep one of the two Fujis.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Speaking of buying lenses, might be selling both my X100 and the X-mount 35/1.4 -- if anyone is interested in either, feel free to contact me. I know I've said a million times that I would never get rid of the X100, but I can only keep one of the two Fujis.


is this related to a recent nikkor purchase you made?


----------



## ace8uk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> is this related to a recent nikkor purchase you made?


Don't be silly, he only bought that for rental purposes.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> is this related to a recent nikkor purchase you made?


No, it's related to another Fuji purchase I have just made.


----------



## PCModderMike

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ace8uk*
> 
> When you have to send it back, you'll miss it in the saddest of fashions.


Agreed


----------



## Scott1541

Guys how do I store unexposed 120 film? My film came today but it's about a month away from expiring so I think it needs to go in the freezer, because it'll take a while to get through 5 rolls









Can I put it straight in the freezer just in the sealed packets that the rolls are individually sealed in or do I need an additional container as well?


----------



## Conspiracy

why not just put them in the fridge. also put those desilica packets in with them in a ziplock so when you defrost it will soak up the condensation. ive never freezer stored film but i have heard thats what some do


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> why not just put them in the fridge. also put those desilica packets in with them in a ziplock so when you defrost it will soak up the condensation. ive never freezer stored film but i have heard thats what some do


This.
Fridge is pretty safe - at least with 135 you don't need anything but the plastic container those come with.
For 120, a zip-lock / sealing plastic bag should be fine, a Tupperware also.

Store your unexposed films in the fridge too.

Freezer is doable but too much hassle imho. Again, a sealed bag or a Tupperware should be enough when inside the freezer, but you need to move it to another sealed container for a few hours when taken out of the freezer for the film to reach room temperature without in direct contact with large volumes of air to avoid condensation.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Freezer is doable but too much hassle imho.


The only hassle involved is letting the film sit for a couple hours in room temp to slowly warm up. I've shot 5 or six complete boxes of Portra 400 that was freezer-stored in the last year alone using that method, and never once had a problem. Just don't load it into the camera right out of the freezer and you'll be fine.


----------



## Scott1541

I've put 4 rolls of 120 Superia 400 and 1 35mm BW400CN in the fridge for now. I put the packages/container individually in freezer bags with a packet of silica gel, then tied it tightly. Then I put all of the freezer bags in a locking tupperware tub, I figured that should be enough









Would it be advisable to open the tupperware tub inside the fridge (or freezer if I move it) and take 1 roll out to defrost/warm up, reseal the tub? Would that cause any condensation or would it be alright as they're in bags inside the tub?


----------



## pcfoo

You will be fine. You just don't need lots of fresh air around the cool object for a long time.

The air inside a small container doesn't contain enough moisture to condense into meaningful mounts of water.

Opening a tupperware for a few seconds and taking out something before you put it back in the freezer wont introduce more than what was in there to begin with.


----------



## Scott1541

Okay then, looks like I'm all sorted so I can shoot these rolls at my leisure, cheers guys


----------



## Conspiracy

Arri just announced this very conveniently right after the oscars yesterday









http://www.arri.com/alexamini/


----------



## hokiealumnus

Looks nice, and really (really) expensive.


----------



## Conspiracy




----------



## pcfoo

The RF looks interesting, but price & performance will determine the true value. If it costs like a new or used Leica, or if it doesn't really outshine an X-Pro 1 or the awaited X-Pro 2, it will be pointless.

The Alexa is sexy (dat carbon fiber), but out of my immediate interests. (lets pretend that a good $1K FF RF with a decent M 50 f2 - decent as in not necessarily leica, to keep our sanity - could possibly be)


----------



## sub50hz

Or, just buy an X-Pro1 and 35/1.4 now. I'm having a hard time letting go of mine, but I have too much kit and need to downsize.


----------



## pcfoo

I was ready to dump $250 for an EOS M, extra batteries, a good 22mm f/2 lens, an EF adapter and the such to use as a daily carry-on camera.

The X-Pro1 is a beast by comparison, I just lack the disposable income to get one @ what is considered fair street price atm. Although the 50mm FOV is closer to my style than the 35mm I am getting with my lil pancake, I can bare!









I consider the Fuji X pretty decent, so that's why I brought it up as the "benchmark" for the proposed Konost FF: It has to be cheap enough to make other M mount cameras unattractive, but also good enough to make it worth it over a smaller and already pretty good RF like the X-Pro1, or the 2 that is rumored to be around the corner for some time now.


----------



## sub50hz

For me, the benchmark 'everyday carry' digital camera is the X100. Especially considering how cheap you can find them for now.


----------



## Dream Killer

iPhone 5s is best edc camera


----------



## Conspiracy

i base all benchmarks on my everyday carry as a 1DX+70-200mkII
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> iPhone 5s is best edc camera


this coming from someone that hasnt shot on the iphone 3GS camera because the 5S is balogna


----------



## pcfoo

As much as I drooled over the X100, and keep drooling over the "T" in the back of my head, moved by ppl swearing by their smartphone camera, I cannot beach about the EOS M.









I am just weird and have that obsession with wanting a viewfinder, along with thinking 45-50mm FOV being preferable over the 35mm FOV that the X100 line and most pancake cropped lenses out there offer.
I would be happy with a 45/50mm equiv. FOV and f/2 (XF 35 1.4 is great, but too big imho).

Goal is to get something notably SMALLER than a gripped or pro FF body & last gen of "pro" zooms.
I have than in my 6D kit already.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> As much as I drooled over the X100, and keep drooling over the "T" in the back of my head, moved by ppl swearing by their smartphone camera, I cannot beach about the EOS M.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I am just weird and have that obsession with wanting a viewfinder, along with thinking 45-50mm FOV being preferable over the 35mm FOV that the X100 line and most pancake cropped lenses out there offer.
> I would be happy with a 45/50mm equiv. FOV and f/2 (XF 35 1.4 is great, but too big imho).
> 
> Goal is to get something notably SMALLER than a gripped or pro FF body & last gen of "pro" zooms.
> I have than in my 6D kit already.


Doesn't the EOS-M lack a finder, though? In any case, the X100 is way small, way quiet and way awesome. I can't think of any other APS-C compacts that are as small, especially since all the ones I can think of off hand have interchangeable lenses.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> iPhone 5s is best edc camera


You shut your dirty mouth.


----------



## pcfoo

I totally agree - again - that the X100 is the benchmark all around, failing me slightly on the lens FOV.
The only plus on the M is the price, which was 1/2 that of a used X100. Size wize I consider them equal.

The only option for OVF with the M is an external shoe mounted one.

I think I would bite the bullet if the X100 had a 3x mm f/2 lens. (area of 50mm [135]) fov. As it is, I just meet it half way with the M and the external ovf.
Or if that XF 27mm was f2 with similar price, I would again flirt closer to a X-Pro.

But even with me whining about prices, the "competition" to the XF system is what? The FF Leicas, where just a 50 f/2 will set you back $2K, as icing over the body price.
Should that new 3rd party M body deliver notable goods, knowing that they toy vs. $5K Leicas, I doubt they would be listed below the $2K for just the body. Much like Epson was pretty bold with their RD1 pricing. They don't try to appeal to cheap-ass photographers, and tbh neither does Fuji with the X line.

I just want to daydream over the X100/X- system, thinking that the new 3rd party M won't be more than $1.5K paired with a used Konica M 50 f/2


----------



## sub50hz

Looks like the EOS M is, in fact, a bit smaller -- but man, does that thing look like a handling nightmare.

I mean, it looks like you can pick up an X-Pro with the 35 (which isn't really that large) for like 1100 bucks or so, which is WAY less than I pad for mine when it was released. Actually, I think I paid less for my D610.


----------



## pcfoo

It is very intuitive to use actually, and I don't get to fiddle with the controls much. I usually shoot ppl @ street with it, so I shoot it @ M with 1/160~1/250s & f5.6 (the dof is very good), with Auto ISO 100-1600. The lack of dedicated controls other than the rotating dial in the back, is offset by the touch screen - all exposure controls are either a touch & swipe away, or a left/right on the control dial to select between aperture or shutter value.

The major weaknesses are:

The lack of OVF/EVF. I just don't like shooting with my hands extended, and it is harder to see under strong sunlight.
the slow AF (X100 & X100s are not really better afaik), which is tho very very reliable (once it locks).
Unforturately the main culprit for slow AF is the 22mm f/2. The camera is notably better to nearly "good" with the 18-55 IS, despite the latter being darker. But being 5x as long, it kills the pocket-ability for me.
Focus system that is completely "focus by wire", with zero distance markings etc. Makes locking focus @ hyperfocal distance (which should and does work good with the massive DOF of 22mm @ f/8 or so) a major pain. You have to pretty much focus on a subject the distance you guesstimate your subject will be, switch to MF while holding the shutter half-pressed for AF to remain locked, and then DON'T TOUCH THE FOCUS RING again...








In the pros are the very good built quality (for the price), the very sharp 22 f/2 (for size/weight and price, prob unrivaled) and the good (for the size/weight/price) sensor which is meh for a APS-C 18MP (was meh in 2012 already), but the IQ is comfortably comparable with than most cameras in this size.

Nuisances like short battery life etc, are within small variation shared with most large sensor / large screen mirrorless offerings.

So I am really splitting hair here: The M is more than great for the price paid. I got it thinking it is a cool toy, but I think of it as a tool now, if you can work around the limitations.
I just want something that solves these little issues, and perhaps boosts IQ a tad further.
The X100T appears to be a leap toward all these, and in a few months perhaps you will be able to get one used for what would be a palatable price. If only it was offered with a 35 (real) mm lens...


----------



## sub50hz

Lol, zone focusing with a touchscreen, what a time to be alive. Six and one as long as it allows you to work in your preferred fashion and make great art -- it doesn't really matter what you use.


----------



## pcfoo

Fun part is that for most users, what I am annoyed and think is "missing" are all the complicated nuisances "noone will miss".









I totally dig the retro look in the fujis, but I honestly think it is a tad kitsch too - i.e. Sony and Leica have moved on to more contemporary designs with similar functionality. You don't have to copy a M3 to be cool.

But I also like the minimal look the M brings. Sure, it wont attract looks and complements by "romantic" (don't want to abuse / miss-use the term hipster) bystanders, but so what?

It is purely functionality I am missing - even if it was driven just by the touch screen or a built in "Siri": "M, zone focus to 3m and lock it there".


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> I totally dig the retro look in the fujis, but I honestly think it is a tad kitsch too - i.e. Sony and Leica have moved on to more contemporary designs with similar functionality. You don't have to copy a M3 to be cool.


Fuji has been making rangefinders for a good long time, though -- mostly medium format, so nobody knows about them. A lot of the tech in the GA645 has made its way into the X-Series, but obviously modernized and refined (i.e. AF with frameline adjustment for parallax).


----------



## pcfoo

I don't talk down Fujifilm, they have great technology and they've been putting out great products given their limited resources: not that long ago, some of the best F-mount D-SLRs were not Nikon! The had/have good compacts with their own sensor & optics, and the X series only improved on that. Pretty good come back.

But as far as design cues go, I still think they went straight for the retro Leica look, with no continuation of that the GA & GW/GSW lines had - far more contemporary for their time, so I think they are not very genuine with their X100 line. Still great looking.The X-Pro is more honest and I can see some GW in it


----------



## sub50hz

I will have to snap a pic of the x100, X-Pro and GA645 side-by-side tomorrow -- it becomes pretty obvious that a lot of the design cues have stuck for.... more years than I am willing to admit I have been around for.


----------



## pcfoo

I have to admit that I've never shot any of the film Fujis. Held a 6x9 once (but they took it away so I wouldn't drool over it)
I did shoot a M3, M3 Russian clone, Contax G2.

Up close, I could be getting a different feel for it, but as it stands, I think there is little question in my mind where they draw inspiration from.
The G690 was their 1st interchangeable lens RF.

I chose some landmark designs to illustrate my point in this.



Here are pics from all (?) Fuji's 645 RF line, to get a larger picture. http://antiquecameras.net/fuji645cameras.html

And direct side by side of the X100 with the M3.


----------



## sub50hz

I'm not saying they don't resemble the Leica aesthetic, but it's one of those designs that's been tweaked by so many manufacturers over the years that it's almost unfair to say Leica "owns" it. I've never owned a Leica -- and I probably never will. But the similarities are few between the X series and the Leica M line; the Fujis are more Contax in spirit than Leica, so IMO it's futile to compare the two. There's more stigma and glamour surrounding the red dot than anything Fuji has ever made, which is why people will always lust hard for an M3 but never an x100 -- which is hilarious to me because I would rather shoot a larger format anyway.


----------



## Dream Killer

all range finders in the post war era looked the same. nikon had rangerfinders (1946) that looked like the leicas before leica made the m3 (1954)


----------



## Scott1541

Well... it's rumoured that Nikon are announcing a D7200 tomorrow







This could mean upgrade time









Also it's my 1600th post


----------



## Conspiracy

im very curious to see what they do with the D7200. honestly, i was not blown away by the improvements they made from D7000->7100. seemed more of just a refresh than something like really new new. same goes for the canon 7D->7DmkII. i expect something more drastic of an improvement as nikon has really be making some bigger improvements lately on camera bodies for the pro market and i still consider the 7XXX part of the pro market even though the numbering scheme doesnt line up. unless nikon has plans for a replacement for the D300 then the D7200 will need to be a nice step up to fill the high end amateur and low pro/semi-pro


----------



## sub50hz

7D2 was a huge jump under the hood from the 7D, though.

Scott, at the current cost of a D610 (new, $1500 USD) or a used D800 (good condition, $1600-1700 USD), you should think about an FX camera as a _real_ upgrade.

edit: I see you have all kinds of DX lenses so nevermind.


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> 7D2 was a huge jump under the hood from the 7D, though.
> 
> Scott, at the current cost of a D610 (new, $1500 USD) or a used D800 (good condition, $1600-1700 USD), you should think about an FX camera as a _real_ upgrade.
> 
> edit: I see you have all kinds of DX lenses so nevermind.


I have kind of been eyeing up D700s







$1000 is about the maximum I'd be able to spend, and that would be at a rather large push, the lower the better really. Depending on the D7200 price I might look out for D7100s instead. Sensor performance wouldn't be much of an upgrade but I'd be happier with a larger viewfinder, better AF, physical buttons for things, larger body etc..


----------



## sub50hz

I can assure you, a D7200 won't be less than $1200. Be careful what you wish for when you say "larger body" as well -- there have been almost zero times where I wanted a larger camera in my bag, but about a million where I wanted something a little lighter and more compact.


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> I can assure you, a D7200 won't be less than $1200. Be careful what you wish for when you say "larger body" as well -- there have been almost zero times where I wanted a larger camera in my bag, but about a million where I wanted something a little lighter and more compact.


Probably be more like $1500 with the standard UK price hike









By larger I mean something I can actually get my hands around properly and comfortably. My hands aren't massive by any means but even my D5100 is to small to use comfortably without a grip.


----------



## sub50hz

I understand the need for comfort, but a D700 is gigantic compared to even a D7100:

http://camerasize.com/compare/#181,440
Quote:


> Nikon D700 is 8% (11.5 mm) wider and 15% (16.5 mm) taller than Nikon D7100.
> Nikon D700 is 1% (1 mm) thicker than Nikon D7100.
> Nikon D700 [1095 g] weights 43% (330 grams) more than Nikon D7100 [765 g] (*inc. batteries and memory card).


43% weight increase is substantial, and this is coming from the owner of an RB67.


----------



## Dream Killer

d700 is life. if you want a cheap entry into FF with a lot of bells and whistles - that'll be the ticket.


----------



## sub50hz

But it doesn't have 38MP!


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> 7D2 was a huge jump under the hood from the 7D, though.
> 
> Scott, at the current cost of a D610 (new, $1500 USD) or a used D800 (good condition, $1600-1700 USD), you should think about an FX camera as a _real_ upgrade.
> 
> edit: I see you have all kinds of DX lenses so nevermind.


it was but the major marketing point that got too much emphasis was the low light which was a marginal improvement over the 70D. canon nailed it with the AF and 10fps but the rest left most people underwhelmed sadly. its a killer first camera but if you compare its image quality to other cameras its not much of a game changer







i for one was one of many super excited and ready to buy one until i shot with it at a basketball game

im now excited about this lens that ill never be able to afford http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/cameras/lenses/ef_11-24_f4l.html#compare_11_and_14mm


----------



## pcfoo

At this point, I honestly cannot see why Canon is not watering down their game for a couple of years, using Sony sensors for a few model of cameras till they get their game up to speed.
They do it since forever in their compact line, but apparently they are trailing the sensor game for quite a few years now.

IMHO, the 7D II, much like the 1D X and the AF / metering / DIGIC etc improvements that trickle down to most of their serious models are top notch.
Paired with the arguably best overall lens line, Canon has much more to gain than lose by saving a few $100 here and there on the sensors, which they don't seem to improve radically over the last 3 gens, ending up below the competition in pretty much anything. I don't say they do bad, yet...

Nikon & Sony are stealing their customers customers, many of which don't care that much about fps & AF performance, just wanted high DR, AA-less high res sensors and similar whistles that rumor has it even the 5DS (R or not) won't be able to deliver.

All i'm trying to say, we should not be trying to re-invent the wheel every time, and sometimes surrendering to the cruel reality might lead to the best overall benefits for all (e.g. see the growth & market penetration Apple had when was talking **** about intel, and how far they went after they've accepted "defeat": turned out to be the best thing for their PC segment). There are still many ways to make your picture quality unique, much like Sony and Nikon SLR/Mirrorless cameras that share the same sensor technologies are really different animals.

Instead, they might focus their R&D on specific - perhaps niche - sensor applications that their position and experience in the market could allow them to achieve. E.g. the Cxxx line could be transcended etc.
I believe they are trapped in a "Jack of all trades, master of none" limbo.

The D7200 won't be a 7D II killer, but why should they try to make one? I think they have much more to gain by providing a solid prosumer body with relatively affordable price (sligjtly north of $1000-1200 that also appeals to professionals as a secondary body, than an all-out pro grade APS-C that would force pricing in the $1700 or more.


----------



## Scott1541

Looks like the D7200 is going to cost £939 (~$1450) here, so I won't be getting one, at least not for a while.


----------



## Conspiracy

the D7200 looks very very promising

i love that it offers the ability to switch to a 1.3X crop mode. im curious to see how that works out on a 1.5X factor APS-C sensor. sports people will dig that option. and i know everyone is jumping on the no low pass filter bandwagon lately


----------



## pcfoo

D7200: like the serious construction that wen't away with Canons after the 50D, serious VF, serious AF etc. Don't like that other than that it is just a 7100 refresh, mostly on issues that should't exist in a 7100 level camera to begin with (e.g. the silly small buffer).

Me thinks the average user that is willing to spend north of $1K for a body, is better off with a D610.
Unless ofc you care more for adding reach for tele shots.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> Looks like the D7200 is going to cost £939 (~$1450) here, so I won't be getting one, at least not for a while.


How far is £939 from a D610 or a used D700?


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> How far is £939 from a D610 or a used D700?


High street & online retailers are selling the D610 for £1199, and used D700s seem to be going for £500-700+ depending on condition and shutter count.


----------



## pcfoo

And used D610 should be in the sub £900 range too









But in your case Scott, you seem to have invested into a full line of DX zooms & primes, so the ding going FX will be substantial.
Unless ofc you want to start from scratch and keep only your "trusty" 50


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> And used D610 should be in the sub £900 range too
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But in your case Scott, you seem to have invested into a full line of DX zooms & primes, so the ding going FX will be substantial.
> Unless ofc you want to start from scratch and keep only your "trusty" 50


Yeah, that would be a problem







A few times since buying my 17-50 I've wondered if I'd have been better getting a used sigma 24-70 instead. I'm still undecided, I've used several full frame bodies and at the minute I'm happy enough in crop land. I might just wait it out and see what happens to the prices of the D7100, and others in the same price range.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> Yeah, that would be a problem
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A few times since buying my 17-50 I've wondered if I'd have been better getting a used sigma 24-70 instead. I'm still undecided, I've used several full frame bodies and at the minute I'm happy enough in crop land. I might just wait it out and see what happens to the prices of the D7100, and others in the same price range.


I'd take a D700 w/a 50mm over a D7100 with a bag of lenses any day.


----------



## sub50hz

Just got home and saw the D7200 -- Nikon really phoned it in on high-end DX.... again.


----------



## Gobigorgohome

Okay, still looking for a monopod for my Sigma 150-500, anyone have any suggestions? I am thinking of upgrading my camera-body around summer 2015, so I think I am better off buying a good monopod right away. I really do not know how much I should drop on it though. Kind of thinking on 100-150 USD max. Anyone have any suggestions within that price-range?


----------



## Conspiracy

holey moley gabroney http://actu.epfl.ch/news/the-first-ever-photograph-of-light-as-both-a-parti/


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> holey moley gabroney http://actu.epfl.ch/news/the-first-ever-photograph-of-light-as-both-a-parti/


So you could say, "The photo of that young Catholic boy literally touched me" if you were a priest.


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> holey moley gabroney http://actu.epfl.ch/news/the-first-ever-photograph-of-light-as-both-a-parti/
> 
> 
> 
> So you could say, "The photo of that young Catholic boy literally touched me" if you were a priest.
Click to expand...

Thats...a...weird parallelism...


----------



## sub50hz

Humor.

Thank you.


----------



## MistaBernie

So.. who knows anything about 5D3 battery life and filming video? I got something like 5 clips of about 33 minutes but it absolutely killed my battery (67%-0% in about 50 mins of live view / recording / etc). Can you turn off the live view during video recording? If so, does it make a drastic difference?


----------



## sub50hz

@Conspiracy should know, he has one.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> So.. who knows anything about 5D3 battery life and filming video? I got something like 5 clips of about 33 minutes but it absolutely killed my battery (67%-0% in about 50 mins of live view / recording / etc). Can you turn off the live view during video recording? If so, does it make a drastic difference?


you cant turn it off during live view but you can drop the brightness which makes a huge difference. for short stuff i use the camera LCD but long recordings is when i bust out the external preview monitor and turn down the brightness on the DSLR and use the screen to see. that honestly sounds about right if you had your brightness all the way up same goes for recoding on the 7D give or take. the 5D drains a little slower i think


----------



## THEStorm

Just traded my D7000 for an A6000 and so far I am really enjoying it! I wanted something smaller to take out on the motorcycle without sacrificing image quality and so far I am very pleased. Just need some better glass to really make this shine, but so far the compact little kit lens has been pretty decent. I will see on Monday how it does with some studio lights!


----------



## gdesmo

Can you not add me to the list ? Thx.


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gdesmo*
> 
> Can you add me to the list ? Thx.
> Nikon D610
> Nikon D5100
> Canon 5D
> Canon 40D
> Canon T2i
> Canon XTi
> Sony 5R


Wow, that's a lot of cameras


----------



## pcfoo

Thanks for proving how lean my kit is.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gdesmo*
> 
> Can you add me to the list ? Thx.
> Nikon D610
> Nikon D5100
> Canon 5D
> Canon 40D
> Canon T2i
> Canon XTi
> Sony 5R


Three different systems? Why? Did you just have _too much money_ laying around?


----------



## gdesmo

Bye


----------



## gdesmo

Later


----------



## sub50hz

I don't buy that, not for one second. Plus, i'm not really sure what that image is supposed to prove.


----------



## gdesmo

No


----------



## PCModderMike

No, he doesn't buy it.


----------



## Conspiracy

3 systems smells like bored with too much money

This is how filter stacking is done right boy i tell you what


----------



## nvidiaftw12

Imagine how long that took to put together.


----------



## gdesmo

Thanks for the nice welcome ! Maybe I'll just move along to a nicer area. At least there was 1 really nice person, thx 12


----------



## Conspiracy

Not a single person was mean lol


----------



## PCModderMike

Yea sorry I'm just the guy who likes posting random gifs, didn't mean to upset ya.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gdesmo*
> 
> What part don't you buy ?


That you need to have a crop and full frame body for both Nikon _and_ Canon systems. Nobody in their right mind would diversify like that -- even working professionals with thousands upon thousands invested will usually stick to one system unless their job supplies them with something else. I mean, do what you want, but it seems pointless to anyone that's ever done any professional work or otherwise.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *gdesmo*
> 
> What part don't you buy ?
> 
> 
> 
> That you need to have a crop and full frame body for both Nikon _and_ Canon systems. Nobody in their right mind would diversify like that -- even working professionals with thousands upon thousands invested will usually stick to one system unless their job supplies them with something else. I mean, do what you want, but it seems pointless to anyone that's ever done any professional work or otherwise.
Click to expand...

its even silly to most non-professionals too. very few people justify that diverse of a collection unless they are just collecting out of boredom


----------



## gdesmo

Edit Gone


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gdesmo*
> 
> Where does it say I "need" to have a full-frame and crop sensor camera ?


I don't take issue with that, I understand the need to have both. But when you do that with _both_ Canon and Nikon, it seems pretty stupid. Only someone with more money than sense would have both a crop Canon, crop Nikon, full-frame Canon and full-frame Nikon. I mean, come on.
Quote:


> It's a shame you can only find faults with others instead of trying to build them up. Is there anything I can do for you to help you through your anger issues at all ?


You're free to spend your money however you like, but it doesn't mean I'm not equally free to question why you would do something that seems very silly to just about everyone else.


----------



## Scott1541

Took the first roll of 120 from the Lubitel to be developed and printed today, will be ready on thursday. Went for 5x5" prints because I can always scan the prints or try to scan the negs for posting online.

Hopefully they will turn out alright, I took precautions to reduce light leaks and the shutter on it seemed fairly accurate


----------



## sub50hz

5" prints from 60mm film? Weak, should have had them made in SUPER DELUXE ENORMO size for maximum enjoyment.


----------



## Scott1541

Might try super deluxe enormo once I've verified this thing actually works, where it's sharpest, etc..


----------



## Scott1541

Well I got the prints back today. The good news is everything is properly exposed and are adequately sharp. The not so great news is that a screw came loose inside and it's show uip on a few shots. Also on some there's a black line down one side, I'm guessing this is because the spools weren't level but I'm not entirely sure.

Overall most shots were pretty meh, got a few keepers though. I would show you guys but I don't have a negative scanner, or in fact any scanner here


----------



## Conspiracy

but you have a DSLR. take digital pictures and process in PS


----------



## Gobigorgohome

Is there any problems to get RAW-files printed on photo-paper? Got some good shots of my brother in laws dog, which was pretty great actually and he wanted to get them printed so he could have them in his living room.

Also, decent monopod for 2-3 kg (body and lens)?


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> Well I got the prints back today. The good news is everything is properly exposed and are adequately sharp. The not so great news is that a screw came loose inside and it's show uip on a few shots. Also on some there's a black line down one side, I'm guessing this is because the spools weren't level but I'm not entirely sure.
> 
> Overall most shots were pretty meh, got a few keepers though. I would show you guys but I don't have a negative scanner, or in fact any scanner here


The DSLR copying thing is doable - there are "slide copiers" available for ages that are essentially the cup - contraption in the video posted above. Some (like the one above) contain optics too to sorta work on any lens and help it focus really close, getting close to 1:1 mag.

I don't know how easy it will be for you to find a [120/240] slide copier tho, and if you would, I have no idea how expensive it would be.
The macro lens + DSLR solution might be easier with 6x6 negs like yours, and you don't even need a 1:1 capable lens.

You would need some backlighting ofc, and I surely don't think laying your iMac flat is that versatile of an idea









Some LED video light panel like that perhaps?

If you don't have a slide / negative capable scanner, but you do have an "ok" flatbed, you could always try to use the above light face down, and try to scan your negatives / slides.


----------



## Scott1541

I gave it a quick go putting the negs up against my MBP screen on full brightness. Sort of worked but it was a bit too blue, and you could see the pixel patterns.

Can't be bothered to try again tonight, I'll probably give it another go at the weekend or next week. I'm not that motivated to do it since the roll is a little disappointing to be honest. About 1/3 of the shots are great, 1/3 pretty average, then the last 3rd are a bit strange, slightly underexposed with different colours compared to what I'm used to. Maybe next time I use it I should take my DSLR along and take a test shot with that to nail exposure, then break out the lubitel.


----------



## pcfoo

There is no way you will capture enough detail without also capturing some of the dot-matrix of the screen.
If that will be your light source, at least find some for of diffusion panel - some translucent white plastic sheet of some short.

And yes, even P/S cameras work great for "light-metering" film cameras, you don't "need" to drag the SLR for that.


----------



## Scott1541

I was using a reflected light meter app on my phone for metering this time. I guess I could use my P&S and make up the exposure with shutter speed, thought the DSLR would be better though since it has a proper range of apertures, my P5100 only does f/2.7-7.7.


----------



## pcfoo

Sunny 16 rule baby









Well, you P5100 has M mode, so, if you stick the aperture to a full stop value (guess 5.6 is the closest for your case), you can do the math easily if you shoot f/8 (double the exposure time - or one click down) or f/11 (quadruple the exposure time - two clicks down) with the Lubitel. Don't forget to match the ISO setting in the P5100 manually to what your film is (think it goes all the way down to 64, so you are good there).

Lubitels have pretty limited selection of shutter speeds anyways, (5 steps, with max shutter varying between models from 1/200 to 1/250) so it is not like you will have that many options, or that you will be able to nail the exposure town to 1/3 stops on both shutter and aperture etc as modern electronic cameras do. Relax and enjoy.


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Sunny 16 rule baby
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well, you P5100 has M mode, so, if you stick the aperture to a full stop value (guess 5.6 is the closest for your case), you can do the math easily if you shoot f/8 (double the exposure time - or one click down) or f/11 (quadruple the exposure time - two clicks down) with the Lubitel. Don't forget to match the ISO setting in the P5100 manually to what your film is (think it goes all the way down to 64, so you are good there).
> 
> Lubitels have pretty limited selection of shutter speeds anyways, (5 steps, with max shutter varying between models from 1/200 to 1/250) so it is not like you will have that many options, or that you will be able to nail the exposure town to 1/3 stops on both shutter and aperture etc as modern electronic cameras do. Relax and enjoy.


I don't think it has any full stops actually, I think the closest it goes to full stops are 2.7, 4.3 and 5.4. Shutter speeds and ISO speeds are fine and work as expected, albeit only in whole stops.


----------



## JKuhn

I'm back (again) and have a question.

My EOS 400D has trouble getting reliable exposures, could it be the light meter, or is it a sign that I should start looking for a replacement?


----------



## sub50hz

You need to check it against a hand-held meter to be sure.


----------



## pcfoo

Could you give examples of what you name a bad exposure?
Camera light meters are often fooled in weird lighting situations - like backlit subjects, really bright or really dark backgrounds etc.


----------



## Scott1541

Wow, just wow...

Today we had a guy from our Uni's Law Society ask for a photographer to work their ball party on friday at a bar/nightclub. It's a reasonable request, so I responded, showed the guy my work, etc. He was happy and confident that I could do the job. Then I asked what's happening about payment I got this reply:
Quote:


> If I'm being perfectly honest we weren't looking to pay, we've had 3 or 4 offers of it being done for free. Obviously if that means you don't want to do it then fair enough. We saw it as more an experience/portfolio booster..


So after this I told him where to go, albeit a bit politer







If this was any other society I wouldn't have minded, I might have even offered to do it, but this is the Law society. The society that has in excess of £9,000 in their student union account and they don't what to chuck a photographer £40 or so for a few hours work.

On the other hand my friends in the Squash Society are much nicer. They're nowhere near as big but they're quite happily paying me £40 to do a group photo for them next monday.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:



> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> Wow, just wow...
> 
> Today we had a guy from our Uni's Law Society ask for a photographer to work their ball party on friday at a bar/nightclub. It's a reasonable request, so I responded, showed the guy my work, etc. He was happy and confident that I could do the job. Then I asked what's happening about payment I got this reply:
> So after this I told him where to go, albeit a bit politer
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If this was any other society I wouldn't have minded, I might have even offered to do it, but this is the Law society. The society that has in excess of £9,000 in their student union account and they don't what to chuck a photographer £40 or so for a few hours work.
> 
> On the other hand my friends in the Squash Society are much nicer. They're nowhere near as big but they're quite happily paying me £40 to do a group photo for them next monday.


LOL


----------



## Conspiracy

lol Scott some people think they deserve everything for free


----------



## Sean Webster

Have you guys seen this?


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Have you guys seen this?


*cue dead horse beating*

Sucks, but it's never gonna change.


----------



## Scott1541

The thing that really annoys us is people seem to think that photography society = free photographers. We get a fair amount of people messaging us saying stuff like "Is someone willing to do this, it'll give them experience..." Ok, maybe it will give the photographer a bit more experience and possibly a few shots for their portfolio, but there's plenty of other things they could be doing instead to gain experience, things that they might actually enjoy doing. We don't really get people messaging us looking for photogs that are willing to do stuff on the cheap either, everyone seems to want it for free.

This really annoys our vice-president since he's a (part time) pro, the rest of us are pretty much just amateurs. We want to promote fair payment (if that's the right world) for jobs that any of our members do, we don't want them working for free and being taken advantage of. Unless of course it's something like a charity event, a favour, etc.. We'll turn a blind eye to quite a lot of things to avoid paperwork, health & safety crap and SU by-laws ruining the society and how we run it, but this is something we don't really like. Then again, as sub50hz said, it's not going to change.


----------



## Conspiracy

as long as there is someone out there that is openly working for free and trying to book plenty of gigs for free then people will expect free work. its a never ending cycle. i had a company ask me to do some corporate work for free and they said that i could write it off as charity work.... it doesnt work that way and needless to say i sent them a new inflated quote


----------



## TUDJ

This is partly why I gave up on doing photos at live music events, I was happy doing it for the price of a ticket because I'm starting out but there are so many full-time pros doing it for the same price that they've effectively pushed any up and coming photographers out of the game, my kit isn't perfect for low light/fast action stuff but I was doing my best with what I had. The other guys were coming along with top of the range FX cameras and superfast primes and tele primes (I saw a couple of D3s) which is ridiculous when you take into account I'm talking about gigs with less than a 100 people on occasion.

The editors of the magazines and websites were favouring these guys every time, even if they had no live events in their portfolio.

When people can get a high standard for free/low cost, they're going to choose it every time over the new guy.

It's this whole situation which prompted me to take the decision to keep photography purely as a hobby. I did have a long term plan to build a portfolio and experience and gradually work up a collection of decent gear but I really don't think it's worth the investment in time and money, especially as a second income stream, it requires more effort put in than reward I'd get out.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> Wow, just wow...
> 
> Today we had a guy from our Uni's Law Society ask for a photographer to work their ball party on friday at a bar/nightclub. It's a reasonable request, so I responded, showed the guy my work, etc. He was happy and confident that I could do the job. Then I asked what's happening about payment I got this reply:
> So after this I told him where to go, albeit a bit politer
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If this was any other society I wouldn't have minded, I might have even offered to do it, but this is the Law society. The society that has in excess of £9,000 in their student union account and they don't what to chuck a photographer £40 or so for a few hours work.
> 
> On the other hand my friends in the Squash Society are much nicer. They're nowhere near as big but they're quite happily paying me £40 to do a group photo for them next monday.


Tell them you'll do it for barter. You provide your service, they work on your photog contracts gratis. It'll be a great experience builder for them AND they get free photos!

Also, I'm back.

Also also.. sold my 35L. I never use it anymore, I got a fair price for it given it's a UU date code and the front element kind of looked like it had a petrol spill on it (lots of coating issues). Turned that money into a brand-spankin new Gretsch & Orange 35watt combo. I probably have photos of the rig, but I ain't got no tiiiiiiiiime for that.


----------



## THEStorm

Hey guys, looking for a bit of advice on bags. I am looking for a new bag for my new camera (Sony A6000 w/ 16-70z) as it is swimming in my current backpack camera bag (Lowepro Flipside 200).

I am looking for a small messenger style bag. All I will currently be carrying is the Body with lens attached, and an external flash (Sony HVL-F32M), and some small accessories (spare battery, spare sd car, maybe battery charger), however I may pickup a prime at some point in the future for non flash low light work but at the moment I am pretty pleased with this Zeiss zoom.

Currently the bag I am considering are:

Domke f-5xb
ONA The Bowery
Thinktank Retrospective 5

Does anyone have any experience with these bags?


----------



## sub50hz

https://www.goincase.com/shop/camera-bags/incase-dslr-sling-pack/black/

I have this, the larger sling and the Ari, which is my everyday bag. Even the smallest of the three, which I've linked above, will have sufficient room without being obnoxious -- they also have the benefit of not looking much like camera bags.

edit: They used to make this bag in heather grey, but now it's black only, which kinda sucks. The gray was very nice.


----------



## pcfoo

I have a dislike for messenger bags in activities that involve lots of walking etc.
Sure, messengers are slick (I have a couple leather ones for work, and yes, I do throw my EOS M + 22 in them, but that's it, no special padding or compartments for additional lenses) but horrible for prolonged walks.

I would also recommend a smaller sling or dual purpose (sling + messenger-ish) if you plan on long sessions. For urban type hikes with the ocasional lens swap etc, the slings are ideal.

For strenuous hikes, a backpack or something that evenly distributes weight to more than one shoulder and doesn't naturally want to bang against your hip or slip off entirely (e.g. what messenger does) has only one alternative - that I used for just 2 days but loved: Lowepro Toploader + chest harness. Easily the most comfortable solution if you have to have a second backpack with you, but looks kinda funny in a city environment!

For shorter outings, I don't even use a bag.
A black rapid or a clone serve me fine if I'm not taking along anything more than a small-ish body and a prime. Again, far more comfortable than a messenger regardless of weight carried.
Long story short, IMHO, if any short of utility is involved, messenger doesn't cut it! Especially if it is something big like the Thinktank Retrospective 5 that eventually will start being stuffed with crap and become totally cumbersome and very uncomfortable for your shoulder to bare.


----------



## Scott1541

Well, I've just shot my first gig tonight, and the photos are supposed to be for a magazine too







I got a message saying if I was free phone this number, which I did. Turned out it was a magazine editor desperate for some shots of a hip-hop duo at a venue called the basement (it's actually in a basement) here in Lincoln. Grabbed my gear and got down there, and after dealing with non-cooperative promoters I got a space near the front, right next to another photographer.

The gig itself got a bit crazy, because the venue was so small the crowd were pushing forward and at one point there were about 10 bouncers holding the crowd back with bottles flying ,etc... Got the shots then afterwads I was supposed to take some backstage. Promoters and the tour manager were un-cooperative again and didn't let me at first, but then I found one of the guys later on, the other had gone though.

Overall a crazy night, got to get them all edited and uploaded in a couple of days now


----------



## Conspiracy

congrats on your first editorial gig. very exciting stress and pressure especially when its super time sensitive









keep up the hard work dude









dont forget to buy several copies of your work printed if its a physical magazine. AND as you do more events i highly suggest keeping your photo/press passes. piece of advice i received early on to keep any and all press passes in a box together because down the road its nice to have something to remember your hard work by and in many cases that press pass might be the only thing you have as a keep sake from gigs. this might mainly apply to video work as thats what i do and you dont really get to keep a copy of something you shot for tv broadcast so for me all i have is a shoe box literally crammed with press passes


----------



## Scott1541

This gig didn't have press passes, we just got a wristband like the rest of the punters. Us photographers and the video guy had to stand in the crowd at the corner of the stage as well.

It wasn't organised that well, the set ended up being cut short due to the crowd and the promoters weren't that happy either.


----------



## Conspiracy

as you do good reliable work you will start covering events that require passes. in the world of time sensitive media its sadly not always about quality but about reliably meeting deadlines. those that have been doing it a long time manage to meeting fast deadlines and produce quality as well. its one of those skills you get from experience. youre on the right track if this is what you want todo


----------



## Scott1541

I don't know what I want to do... I'm a CS student but do I really want to spend my life being IT support or writing code? I don't know









Anyway, I think it's about time to hit the hay, got to get some assignment work done tomorrow, maybe some editing, shooting a group photo monday, then 2 club nights on friday and saturday. Busy week


----------



## Conspiracy

take it easy dude. dont work too hard and nothing wrong with making photograph a side job/gig. its stressful trying to make a living off of solely photos


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Long story short, IMHO, if any short of utility is involved, messenger doesn't cut it! Especially if it is something big like the Thinktank Retrospective 5 that eventually will start being stuffed with crap and become totally cumbersome and very uncomfortable for your shoulder to bare.


Not everyone packs 8 billion pieces of gear everytime they take a bag, though. Utility doesn't always have to mean being overencumbered.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Long story short, IMHO, if any short of utility is involved, messenger doesn't cut it! Especially if it is something big like the Thinktank Retrospective 5 that eventually will start being stuffed with crap and become totally cumbersome and very uncomfortable for your shoulder to bare.
> 
> 
> 
> Not everyone packs 8 billion pieces of gear everytime they take a bag, though. Utility doesn't always have to mean being overencumbered.
Click to expand...

apparently there is no point to having tons of gear if you dont always carry everything all the time lol


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Long story short, IMHO, if any short of utility is involved, messenger doesn't cut it! Especially if it is something big like the Thinktank Retrospective 5 that eventually will start being stuffed with crap and become totally cumbersome and very uncomfortable for your shoulder to bare.
> 
> 
> 
> Not everyone packs 8 billion pieces of gear everytime they take a bag, though. Utility doesn't always have to mean being overencumbered.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> apparently there is no point to having tons of gear if you dont always carry everything all the time lol
Click to expand...

Sub50, I agreed with you pretty much, I don't get your tone.
Conspiracy - let me guess. Rolling eyes and zero input, insults, quote after quote and a derogatory: "go read the interwebs and educated yourself before you come before me, you peasant"

Are you a bit biased and just quoting everything I say to twist it, or do you actually read it? Because even your selective quotes don't make sense with your re-battles, which again are one sided - Apparently you are the only one here to battle.

There is no point getting a huge bag that fits a body or two and 5-6 lenses - like the one he mentioned and I copied, in the quote you criticize and just have to shoot down - if you don't plan on dragging all this gear with you. It is needless bulk, one way, or the other, and the messenger bag is the least comfortable either way. At least IMHO as stated, which apparently you don't like me having.

Have a nice weekend.


----------



## TUDJ

Nice one Scott. Gigs are really good fun but can be hella stressful. I highly recommend getting any requests/confirmations for passes by email to show on the door, quite a few times its been the difference between me being able to shoot gigs and not being let in. The smaller gigs aren't so well organised and the guys on the door might not have the guestlist.

Also get a good grasp of who owns the copyrights to anything you take from the beginning.

I realise it might be a one off but hope it leads to some decent work!


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Long story short, IMHO, if any short of utility is involved, messenger doesn't cut it! Especially if it is something big like the Thinktank Retrospective 5 that eventually will start being stuffed with crap and become totally cumbersome and very uncomfortable for your shoulder to bare.
> 
> 
> 
> Not everyone packs 8 billion pieces of gear everytime they take a bag, though. Utility doesn't always have to mean being overencumbered.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> apparently there is no point to having tons of gear if you dont always carry everything all the time lol
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sub50, I agreed with you pretty much, I don't get your tone.
> Conspiracy - let me guess. Rolling eyes and zero input, insults, quote after quote and a derogatory: "go read the interwebs and educated yourself before you come before me, you peasant"
> 
> Are you a bit biased and just quoting everything I say to twist it, or do you actually read it? Because even your selective quotes don't make sense with your re-battles, which again are one sided - Apparently you are the only one here to battle.
> 
> There is no point getting a huge bag that fits a body or two and 5-6 lenses - like the one he mentioned and I copied, in the quote you criticize and just have to shoot down - if you don't plan on dragging all this gear with you. It is needless bulk, one way, or the other, and the messenger bag is the least comfortable either way. At least IMHO as stated, which apparently you don't like me having.
> 
> Have a nice weekend.
Click to expand...

apparently you think everything is about you lol. my post was not at all directed towards you. i was joking with sub. get over yourself because im not here to battle you and have been posting in the OCN camera section since before you joined OCN. instead of challenging everyone and starting your own battles maybe you should just cool your jets. i will properly tag you and let you know if any of my posts have anything to do with you and they rarely do even though you have to get a post in on every single topic in this section lol. i dont know what we would do without your expertise









go back to writing your doctoral thesis on internet expert commenting. theres some sarcasm for you


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Long story short, IMHO, if any short of utility is involved, messenger doesn't cut it! Especially if it is something big like the Thinktank Retrospective 5 that eventually will start being stuffed with crap and become totally cumbersome and very uncomfortable for your shoulder to bare.
> 
> 
> 
> Not everyone packs 8 billion pieces of gear everytime they take a bag, though. Utility doesn't always have to mean being overencumbered.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> apparently there is no point to having tons of gear if you dont always carry everything all the time lol
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sub50, I agreed with you pretty much, I don't get your tone.
> Conspiracy - let me guess. Rolling eyes and zero input, insults, quote after quote and a derogatory: "go read the interwebs and educated yourself before you come before me, you peasant"
> 
> Are you a bit biased and just quoting everything I say to twist it, or do you actually read it? Because even your selective quotes don't make sense with your re-battles, which again are one sided - Apparently you are the only one here to battle.
> 
> There is no point getting a huge bag that fits a body or two and 5-6 lenses - like the one he mentioned and I copied, in the quote you criticize and just have to shoot down - if you don't plan on dragging all this gear with you. It is needless bulk, one way, or the other, and the messenger bag is the least comfortable either way. At least IMHO as stated, which apparently you don't like me having.
> 
> Have a nice weekend.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> apparently you think everything is about you lol. my post was not at all directed towards you. i was joking with sub. get over yourself because im not here to battle you and have been posting in the OCN camera section since before you joined OCN. instead of challenging everyone and starting your own battles maybe you should just cool your jets. i will properly tag you and let you know if any of my posts have anything to do with you and they rarely do even though you have to get a post in on every single topic in this section lol. i dont know what we would do without your expertise
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> go back to writing your doctoral thesis on internet expert commenting. theres some sarcasm for you
Click to expand...

Thanks for proving my point, yet again.
That's all you do. judging others, adding NOTHING to the conversation. Post after post after post, it is derogatory one-liners, emoticons, canned meme images and general ad hominem crap.

This is no sarcasm, it is irony, as the one time you tried to write something longer, was again to deface me, instead of try to be useful, and what you accuse me of, POINT BY POINT is what you do - other than the thesis part, cause you have no thesis, regardless of you also jumping in any conversation and any newcomer.

Cut the personal arguing, prove to others that the "authority" you presume of yourself is actually present. How long you have been around before me, grands you nothing. I am judging what I see, and the way to prove me wrong is by doing better, not through personal attacks and childish "oh, I was quoting you, but not referring to you".

We are not the same, I get it, and I don't ask you to be. But I definitely ask you to stop being a prick, especially if you are referring to things I write that don't offend anyone.

Now, have some dignity, let it sit in your mind. You have nothing to prove, or lose if you let it fall down and don't try to start yet another flame war.
If you cannot see that you are adding nothing intelligent to the conversation this way, you make yourself look bad, and claiming sarcasm doesn't change that.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Sub50, I agreed with you pretty much, I don't get your tone.


I wasn't agreeing or disagreeing with you, merely pointing out that the meaning of 'utility' will vary from one person to the next. There's no "tone" inferred by my post, I think you're reading into peoples' comments a little too much.


----------



## Gobigorgohome

Seems like I have some money coming my way this summer, thinking of upgrading my camera to a better DX or go with FX (not sure yet). I have looked at the Canon 7D for DX, not really made up my mind yet and I still have a couple of months to decide what I am going to go with. I have heard that the Canon 7D is pretty good for nature/animal shots and with photography that is my passion.







I would just like a camera that are capable of taking more RAW-files before the buffer is full, more FPS, better sensor and having a better selection of lenses is always the bigger factor for me.


----------



## Scott1541

Oh no, it's happening









Just got back from doing a group photo for my mate's society. That went well and I should be getting paid £40 for that. Now I've just been messaged by the same photog that asked me to do saturday night, saying there's a pre-party job going tonight... 1-1.5 hours for £20.

I've agreed to do it and he says I'll get my money next week. He works a lot of club nights here in Lincoln, and is a student at my uni, so I don't imagine he'd mess me around. Even if he does it's a small world, I'll go to his house


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gobigorgohome*
> 
> Seems like I have some money coming my way this summer, thinking of upgrading my camera to a better DX or go with FX (not sure yet). I have looked at the Canon 7D for DX, not really made up my mind yet and I still have a couple of months to decide what I am going to go with. I have heard that the Canon 7D is pretty good for nature/animal shots and with photography that is my passion.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I would just like a camera that are capable of taking more RAW-files before the buffer is full, more FPS, better sensor and having a better selection of lenses is always the bigger factor for me.


Why do you need such a large RAW buffer? I assume you're not shooting professionally, as you would already be ordering a 1DX or 1DIV (guessing you are currently shooting Canon by your interest in the 7D).


----------



## Conspiracy

unless im getting people mixed up i think they are interested in birding and nature which would explain the interest in the large buffer.

ill sell my 7D in like excellent condition, recently professionally cleaned, no idea how many clicks but i can hook it up


----------



## sub50hz

Ah, makes sense, then.


----------



## Dimaggio1103

I need some help I stayed up last night till 430 AM to snag some galactic core shots. However Phoenix even though its 100 miles away still got in my shot. Lights from it got in the way a bit. Would anyone be willing to run through post processing for me? Im a noob and still learning but I cant seem to get it done right. I can load them in a zip if anyone is willing to help me out here.


----------



## OmarCCX

Go ahead. I'm usually editing random raws anyway.


----------



## Dimaggio1103

Welp nvm cannot seem to get it uploaded anywhere. Today is just not my day.....


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dimaggio1103*
> 
> Welp nvm cannot seem to get it uploaded anywhere. Today is just not my day.....


if you have a gmail use google drive. free hosting


----------



## Dimaggio1103

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> if you have a gmail use google drive. free hosting


Thank goodness for people smarter than me. lol I packaged it weird all the pics are in the MW folder ignore the two in the root, they are doubles.

MilkyWay Zip

Anyone is welcome to take a crack at these would love the help.


----------



## Scott1541

Just had an hour using a 5D3, and I must say they aren't that comfortable. I'd take a D810 any day


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> Just had an hour using a 5D3, and I must say they aren't that comfortable. I'd take a D810 any day


Feeling the same whenever using Nikon gear, but it's just a mater of habit.

I bet if you had enough justification to switch to Canon, you would get used to it in short notice, and vice versa.
Much like the thousands that switched to Canon for their DSLRs - mainly after the 1D2 introduction - and the large numbers that switched back to Nikon as the latter started picking up their game last few years.


----------



## OmarCCX

Took a quick shot at these in Lightroom before leaving for school. Really liked this one. The galaxy was clearer on the first picture, but the composition on this one makes it look slightly more pleasing. 

Here are the full-size JPEGs if you want them: https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0BzMbh9g6pMHtQlgxbkpXbUtQcEU&usp=sharing


----------



## Dimaggio1103

TY sir yea the lights from phx really mess up the shot. Ill just have to wait until june when its on the other side of the mountains here. Thanks a bunch thought man.


----------



## Conspiracy

that looks awesome. i like the mix of light pollution in there on the horizon


----------



## ace8uk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> that looks awesome. i like the mix of light pollution in there on the horizon


I agree, bar the bottom right hand corner, I think it's a good image.


----------



## Scott1541

ION I've learnt that the D5100 is quite uncomfortable to hold for a long period of time, even with a grip. Did a bar job last night for a few hours and my thumb is sore this morning







I'm supposed to be doing the same thing again tonight so this time I'll use the knock-off black rapid instead of the stock strap.


----------



## sub50hz

ION I've learnt that the D5100 is quite uncomfortable to hold for a long period of time, even with a grip. Did a bar job last night for a few hours and my thumb is sore this morning







I'm supposed to be doing the same thing again tonight so this time I'll use the knock-off black rapid instead of the stock strap.[/quote]

All the small Nikon/Canon/Sony bodies suck to hold, unless you have tiny hands. Even the D610 with a grip is on the verge of "too small" for me sometimes.


----------



## Azefore

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gobigorgohome*
> 
> Seems like I have some money coming my way this summer, thinking of upgrading my camera to a better DX or go with FX (not sure yet). I have looked at the Canon 7D for DX, not really made up my mind yet and I still have a couple of months to decide what I am going to go with. I have heard that the Canon 7D is pretty good for nature/animal shots and with photography that is my passion.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I would just like a camera that are capable of taking more RAW-files before the buffer is full, more FPS, better sensor and having a better selection of lenses is always the bigger factor for me.


If you're doing wildlife I'd just stick with DX/APS-C, you can do FX with cropping but you'll need to pony up more for lens that can back up the bigger sensor unless you want to buy second hand or older gen models which still do good. How big of a buffer are you looking for? They aren't gigantic for non-professional bodies (D4,D4X, 1D-X) but the 7D Mk.2 does 31 RAWs.

I'd think you'd only need around 6 frames if you're trying to get a fleeting shot of wildlife before your composition is gone if not already.


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> All the small Nikon/Canon/Sony bodies suck to hold, unless you have tiny hands. Even the D610 with a grip is on the verge of "too small" for me sometimes.


True







My hands aren't huge but then again they aren't particularly small either. The grip made a difference but there's definitely still room for improvement. Anyway, I think I'm going to buy a D7100 in the next couple of weeks







I'm pretty sure I'll get a grip for that too, especially since the grips for these models have all the wheels on them etc.., don't need one of those stupid cables, and they can take AA batteries.


----------



## Gobigorgohome

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Azefore*
> 
> If you're doing wildlife I'd just stick with DX/APS-C, you can do FX with cropping but you'll need to pony up more for lens that can back up the bigger sensor unless you want to buy second hand or older gen models which still do good. How big of a buffer are you looking for? They aren't gigantic for non-professional bodies (D4,D4X, 1D-X) but the 7D Mk.2 does 31 RAWs.
> 
> I'd think you'd only need around 6 frames if you're trying to get a fleeting shot of wildlife before your composition is gone if not already.


The 7D MK2 sounds like the best choice for me, I can also have a battery grip on it (big hands) and that is one of the things I miss the most with my D5200 at the moment. Canon is supposed to have a better range of good lenses too, only downside is that I will have to sell my Sigma 150-500 if I go with the 7D.







I will probably have enough for a second-hand 1D-X by summer-time, but they are a bit hard to find and I do not really need it. Going to need a good zoom-lens (in the area around 150-500/600mm), 70-300mm and a lens around 24-70mm (I know Sigma have one for FX). I never use my kit-lens on the D5200 under 24mm zoom (it is a 18-55mm).









Thank you for the answer.


----------



## SpecTRe-X

Does anyone know why fixed aperture lenses like the nikkor 80-200 f/2.8 aren't more common compared to their variable aperture counterparts?

I've googled it but haven't found much aside from hints at constant apertures not being a wide target market. I would imagine that faster zooms (55-200 f/3.5 sounds nice) would be something more people would want, but then I've just recently become interested in photography.


----------



## TUDJ

They tend to be more expensive and heavier than their variable aperture counterparts.

I'd hazard a guess that less people need those low constant apertures, a good prime lens can be cheaper and optically, better than a similarly priced constant zoom.

You mention a 55-200 which is a DX version of the FX 70-200 lenses, those are popular in f2.8 versions. The majority of people wanting (or needing) a constant aperture zoom lens are likely to be shooting full frame (FX). I think you'll see there are quite a good amount of constant aperture zoom lenses aimed at FX cameras; 14-24, 24-70, 70-200 etc.

I think the demand for constant aperture DX lenses is low, not constant aperture lenses in general.


----------



## Azefore

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gobigorgohome*
> 
> The 7D MK2 sounds like the best choice for me, I can also have a battery grip on it (big hands) and that is one of the things I miss the most with my D5200 at the moment. Canon is supposed to have a better range of good lenses too, only downside is that I will have to sell my Sigma 150-500 if I go with the 7D.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I will probably have enough for a second-hand 1D-X by summer-time, but they are a bit hard to find and I do not really need it. Going to need a good zoom-lens (in the area around 150-500/600mm), 70-300mm and a lens around 24-70mm (I know Sigma have one for FX). I never use my kit-lens on the D5200 under 24mm zoom (it is a 18-55mm).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you for the answer.


Yah the new 7D is definitely a nice piece of kit, having a grip is always nice as well. My D800 is just large enough to where it's comfortable enough but I definitely still prefer the 5D Mk3 grip a lot more, just not the UI but that's apples to oranges and something that shouldn't be counted. Depends on what lenses you want really, AFAIK Nikon has a few lenses that Canon hasn't touched in image quality wise but those are some of the top end stuff (some tilt shift lenses, Nikon's 200mm F2, some of their primes, and their current 24-70, at least from my researching). Canon's 70-200 is regarded highly as the best as well (real world usage between that one, Nikon's, and Tamrons...eh?).

Always spend more on your glass in the long run of things (I'm sure you've heard this before as well) but it holds true, the 1DX is nice but you'd want to use some nice lenses on it and large telephoto by the primary brand are always expensive, even the not so good 70-300L by Canon is $1450 (just one example). Tamron's 24-70 would do good with a 7D, it's barely behind the heels of the current Nikon and Canon standard zooms for a lot less. Canon's 24-105 F4 is also worth a look if you can get a nice used one just for the versatility of it but it's all up to your preferences.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpecTRe-X*
> 
> Does anyone know why fixed aperture lenses like the nikkor 80-200 f/2.8 aren't more common compared to their variable aperture counterparts?
> 
> I've googled it but haven't found much aside from hints at constant apertures not being a wide target market. I would imagine that faster zooms (55-200 f/3.5 sounds nice) would be something more people would want, but then I've just recently become interested in photography.


Consumers who aren't into photography as a bigger hobby or occupation like the cheaper lenses that are more versatile. It's more costly to R/D and produce bigger lenses that have a bigger apertures and usually less of a focal range since less people will buy them overall. Constant aperture lenses are what anyone would idealy want but might not be able to afford and/or carry around with them (they are more massive the higher the focal length you want at a constant aperture).

(Nikons 70-200 F2.8 VR1 next to Nikon's 18-200 F3.5-5.6 VR1)


There's actually a lot of constant aperture lenses, probably not as much as the variable aperture lenses, but there's a big market for them make no mistake. Most are made to target the full frame sensor crowd but you can still use them on a crop sensor body, however they'll act as a different focal range on the crop sensors since it's usually a 1.5X factor. So a 24-70mm lens on a full frame camera will act as a 36-105mm roughly on a crop sensor camera (usually, there's different crop factors for different sensors).


----------



## SpecTRe-X

I think I understand now. I wasn't finding a whole lot of constant zooms for F-mounts but now I believe I may have been looking for the wrong focal range grouping. I can understand the weight of such lenses being a large consideration though, I was given an old Tokina 75-260 f/4.5 and its weight is considerable.

So would an amateur gain anything substantial using a fast zoom or would most of the benefit be potentially wasted? I've seen primes more typically recommended to beginners.


----------



## Azefore

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpecTRe-X*
> 
> I think I understand now. I wasn't finding a whole lot of constant zooms for F-mounts but now I believe I may have been looking for the wrong focal range grouping. I can understand the weight of such lenses being a large consideration though, I was given an old Tokina 75-260 f/4.5 and its weight is considerable.
> 
> So would an amateur gain anything substantial using a fast zoom or would most of the benefit be potentially wasted? I've seen primes more typically recommended to beginners.


Yah anyone could stand to gain a benefit with a fast zoom (I presume you mean a larger constant aperture zoom lens? like the 80-200mm F2.8 you linked earlier). The bigger the aperture the more light you stand to get for your shot and it also gives you a shallower depth of field( which is great depending on what you're trying to do).

You could learn everything you need to with a variable aperture zoom without a problem and get great shots regardless, you'd just lose out on some ability to maybe get the type of shot or ease of shot you were looking for.

Constant aperture lenses also have a disadvantage when they're shot fully open and that's usually softness, some lenses are better than others for shooting wide open and across different focal ranges (some are better at say 24mm F2.8 than 70mm F2.8). Depending on what you're doing you'd want to stop down the lens (say a 70-200 F2.8) from F2.8 to F3.5-4 to get better sharpness across your image.


(Source: Camerlabs. Nikon's 70-200mm F2.8 VRII. @ 70mm, F2.8 (left) vs F4 (right))

I'm still an amateur in most aspects, I only started shooting in 2010/11 with any real passion for it. However, I'm not one for advocating a prime to a beginner. They do have their upsides when learning (making you really put in an effort to get your shot down pat) but even on my D40 I still used my 18-55 kit much more than my 35mm 1.8. I see primes as a good use in certain, specific situations but not a primary lens, that's just me.


----------



## SpecTRe-X

Thanks, that was really helpful.

I have the same philosophy when it comes to primes vs zooms. I just got my camera last week and while I plan to carry a few primes in my case/bag I expect most of my shooting will be done with zooms due to range flexibility.


----------



## Gobigorgohome

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Azefore*
> 
> Yah the new 7D is definitely a nice piece of kit, having a grip is always nice as well. My D800 is just large enough to where it's comfortable enough but I definitely still prefer the 5D Mk3 grip a lot more, just not the UI but that's apples to oranges and something that shouldn't be counted. Depends on what lenses you want really, AFAIK Nikon has a few lenses that Canon hasn't touched in image quality wise but those are some of the top end stuff (some tilt shift lenses, Nikon's 200mm F2, some of their primes, and their current 24-70, at least from my researching). Canon's 70-200 is regarded highly as the best as well (real world usage between that one, Nikon's, and Tamrons...eh?).
> 
> Always spend more on your glass in the long run of things (I'm sure you've heard this before as well) but it holds true, the 1DX is nice but you'd want to use some nice lenses on it and large telephoto by the primary brand are always expensive, even the not so good 70-300L by Canon is $1450 (just one example). Tamron's 24-70 would do good with a 7D, it's barely behind the heels of the current Nikon and Canon standard zooms for a lot less. Canon's 24-105 F4 is also worth a look if you can get a nice used one just for the versatility of it but it's all up to your preferences.


Yes, the 7D MK2 seems to be a good piece to start off with in the higher "end" of APS-C bodies. I have seen a few reviews on Youtube and overall it seems to hit the spot the old 7D filled. Although, it might be good, but it is still 2000 USD body-only and the Nikon D800 is 2375 USD body-only (new prices), the D800 was my real target for the body I should get after my D5200. The drawback with the D800 is the low FPS, is it 6 or 7 FPS? On the other side, that is 36 megapixels of goodies. The Sigma 150-500mm I got will probably do okay with the D800, and I need something a little smaller than that, the best lens for me would be 24-200mm (in that range) or something along those lines. The D800 I could probably find second-hand as well, although I think I would have bought it brand new.









Why is there such a big price-difference between the Nikon D800 and the D810?


----------



## Scott1541

Haha, I'm kind of wondering what to do about my next upgrade too







A new body is coming, that's inevitable, but I don't know whether I should go for a used D7100 for about £600, new D7100 for £750 or a used D600 for around £650-700. If I went D7100 all I'd need is a few batteries and maybe a grip, If I went D600 I'd need all that, along with maybe an AF-S 50mm and I'd need to juggle my lenses around and acquire a decent(ish) FX zoom, maybe a sigma 24/28-70 or older AF-D nikkor.


----------



## Azefore

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gobigorgohome*
> 
> Yes, the 7D MK2 seems to be a good piece to start off with in the higher "end" of APS-C bodies. I have seen a few reviews on Youtube and overall it seems to hit the spot the old 7D filled. Although, it might be good, but it is still 2000 USD body-only and the Nikon D800 is 2375 USD body-only (new prices), the D800 was my real target for the body I should get after my D5200. The drawback with the D800 is the low FPS, is it 6 or 7 FPS? On the other side, that is 36 megapixels of goodies. The Sigma 150-500mm I got will probably do okay with the D800, and I need something a little smaller than that, the best lens for me would be 24-200mm (in that range) or something along those lines. The D800 I could probably find second-hand as well, although I think I would have bought it brand new.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why is there such a big price-difference between the Nikon D800 and the D810?


AFAIK they're phasing out the regular D800 with the D810 and thus dropping prices on it to get rid of stock. The D810 does have a ok increase on the spec sheet technically speaking but now since the D800 can be had well under the original 3k price tag it's hard to really recommend it.

FPS on the D800 is 4 fps in FX and 6 fps in cropped modes, you can get the higher cropped FPS without using a grip as well.


----------



## Scott1541

Well damn, I've just gone and bought a D7200









I was originally going to get a used D7100, but then my mum said get a new one and gave me some money to put to it. That would be £750, and the D7200 was only an extra £170, so I thought why not spend the extra and get a camera that's not 2 years old







It was more than I originally wanted to spend but oh well, it'll still be worth about £600 in a couple of years, hopefully


----------



## OmarCCX

£170 would've been a brand new 35mm ƒ1.8.


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OmarCCX*
> 
> £170 would've been a brand new 35mm ƒ1.8.


Yep, it would have been, It's a good job I don't need one


----------



## Azefore

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> Yep, it would have been, It's a good job I don't need one


Bam!

But nice otherwise, I loved using my D7000 as a primary body for quite a bit. The 7 fps should be fun to use as well lol, never can get tired of doing 6fps or more.


----------



## boogschd

wouldve probably sold all the DX gear and bought a d610/ used d800 , but thats just me

'grats on the new camera


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boogschd*
> 
> wouldve probably sold all the DX gear and bought a d610/ used d800 , but thats just me
> 
> 'grats on the new camera


Yeah, that was another option which I was considering, If the D600/610 had all the features of a D7100/200 but just in full frame form I would have gone down that route. I didn't like how all of the focus points were in the middle, and if I got a used D600 there's the possibility of that dust/oil problem occurring if it hasn't been fixed.

At least staying DX I'm happy with the lenses I have at the minute, with the exception of the 55-200, which I'd like to upgrade but can't justify (or afford) doing it.


----------



## Azefore

Aye my biggest gripes using my friends D600 (before he returned because of the oil issue) was the AF points being so densely packed together, felt like an older DX body in usage.

It's just the D7000 points on a fullframe and scaled to actual size more or less.


----------



## Gobigorgohome

How is the Sigma 50-500mm F4.5-6.3? On both Canon and Nikon? It seems like Canon-lenses generally is quite a bit cheaper second-hand than Nikon-lenses.


----------



## Lyxchoklad

Using a point-and-shoot camera, Samsung WB350F, I picked up from Amazon. Here is my Favorite shots so far.



I've been watching video on youtube on how to take better pictures and now I'm hooked on food photography.


----------



## Conspiracy

nice. keep shooting! food photography is fun.... if you know how to cook unlike me haha


----------



## THEStorm

To solve the close grouped focus points on the D600 (in most situations) you could have just used back button focusing. Focus on the subject you want, recompose, take the shot.


----------



## Azefore

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *THEStorm*
> 
> To solve the close grouped focus points on the D600 (in most situations) you could have just used back button focusing. Focus on the subject you want, recompose, take the shot.


It's heavily dependent on the shot, having a bigger AF grouping is the only way to do it properly. Why Nikon didn't do it for the D610 is beyond me.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Azefore*
> 
> It's heavily dependent on the shot, having a bigger AF grouping is the only way to do it properly. Why Nikon didn't do it for the D610 is beyond me.


Its because they went full ******.


----------



## sub50hz

Anything more than a single point is nice, so it doesn't really present a problem for me.


----------



## Conspiracy

^ what sub said.

we are so spoiled with technology that we should appreciate the fact that we even have super precise AF that can lock focus faster than the most proficient manual focus users and track focus accurately on top of that as well.

unless you are birding or shooting sports there isnt much justification to complain about AF points. even wedding photogs dont need that many AF points or spread covering the entire VF


----------



## Azefore

You can play it that way sure, that's up to you. However at $2,000 for a body wouldn't you want a better AF point system if it's a simple oversight for probably a quick rework in R/D?

It's like saying it's ok to pay for something that should have been reworked as a priority but making a side excuse for the company to get away with it. I'd rather not buy it if the new model didn't show a redesign in the AF points when they are obviously too small even compared to older bodies.

It's not mandatory sure, but if they could've done it easily wouldn't you have wanted it?

Subjectivity from your own standpoint doesn't really negate the objective fact Nikon didn't even bother with the D610 in this regard, my .02.


----------



## SpecTRe-X

Perhaps it was done that way to bracket that body into a certain sub-segment.


----------



## ace8uk

It's all business really. Why would they give an entry level camera the same features as a pro body when they can make more money out of selling pro bodies to the users who will pay for such features anyway?

I personally agree with Conspiracy and sub; unless you're a birder or sports photographer, even the entry level FX bodies should be more than capable. There's often way too much analysis paralysis with photography.


----------



## Azefore

Again it's just a why not situation, can I say skill and technique will compensate overly so against a less filled AF point system? Sure I can, I'll say that on any single body be it film or digital it doesn't matter, you can compensate and work without a lot of stuff proficiently. I don't personally care much too much for specs but when I picked and used the D600 that was the ONLY glaring issue I had with it, especially when the old D300 had excellent systems and I had a great time using that in New York back in 2012.

Spectre-X pretty much said it right, they want you to look into bigger bodies if you care about the AF points in the Nikon FX line up but also the D610 isn't exactly entry level at the price point they're pushing, it's middle grounds and should hold its own against the pro-sumer DX models. That's all I'm saying. Just why not.


----------



## pcfoo

The AF sensor needs to see things through the pass through portion of the mirror in the SLRs.

If we are looking to physical limitations, to have AF points more spreader apart, the sensor itself needs to be bigger, thus cost more to produce and make it harder for the manufacturer to make room for it @ the bottom of the camera's mirror box. With crop SLRs that is less of an issue as the sensor / effective image circle is roughly 1/2 that of FF and the mirror box roughly the same size, so both the AF sensor is much smaller for the same spread, and fitting it in is much less of an issue.

Now, for artificial excuses, "entry" FF SLRs are often penalized in this aspect (if you think 610 is meh, the 6D is worse), simply because IQ is already so close to the higher end models, internal competition would hurt them.

Some choke points need to be inserted - AF / FPS / Buffer / VF + body quality & sealing - something or everything has to give.


----------



## Azefore

True enough, the D600 had partial body magnesium instead of full, lower cross type AF points, gimped max shutter speed, and obviously a lower MP count compared to the D800/D800e at the time.

I could understand the AF shortcoming on the first iteration but on a second revision I'd hope they would've thrown the customers a bone compared to what they got (little if nothing for a lot of shooters).


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Azefore*
> 
> True enough, the D600 had partial body magnesium instead of full, lower cross type AF points, gimped max shutter speed, and obviously a lower MP count compared to the D800/D800e at the time.
> 
> I could understand the AF shortcoming on the first iteration but on a second revision I'd hope they would've thrown the customers a bone compared to what they got (little if nothing for a lot of shooters).


Whatever helps you feel better about buying that D800, buddy.
Quote:


> Subjectivity from your own standpoint doesn't really negate the objective fact Nikon didn't even bother with the D610 in this regard, my .02.


"Your opinion is worthless, just my opinion."


----------



## Azefore

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Whatever helps you feel better about buying that D800, buddy.
> "Your opinion is worthless, just my opinion."


I'm just talking about the meh upgrade the D610 brought from the D600

I thank you for your constructive criticism though


----------



## sub50hz

I don't view the D610 as an upgrade from the D600, just a couple of minor changes to get the D600 debacle out of the minds of people who felt Nikon handled the oil/dust issue poorly. Functionally, they are identical as far as I'm concerned, and the D610 is currently only a few hundred dollars more than the D7200 -- which, if you want to use FX lenses without incurring the "crop penalty" of reduced angle-of-view, is a pretty easy choice to make (especially if you're more inclined to make prints than jerk off to spec sheets). If the D800/e/810 had the same issue, more people would be upset because it's a flagship model of sorts -- but something half the price has to give something up.

Personally, I think the light level at which the D600/610 is usable is more of an issue than the number of AF points, but that's just my opinion, which anyone here is free to ignore.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Azefore*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Whatever helps you feel better about buying that D800, buddy.
> "Your opinion is worthless, just my opinion."
> 
> 
> 
> I'm just talking about the meh upgrade the D610 brought from the D600
> 
> I thank you for your constructive criticism though
Click to expand...

yeah.... D610 is not an upgrade its a replacement for nikon royally screwing up on the D600 and releasing a screwed up in box camera and made the D610 rather than offering to fix the problem and service cameras. this is the point where canon gained a ton of business when nikon poorly handled the dust/oil spot issue that was pretty bad and wide spread.


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Saw this and thought some of you might like a read as this seems to be an all too common issue with some photographers

http://time.com/3760599/response-work-for-free/?utm_content=buffer8c83a&utm_medium=social&utm_source=linkedin.com&utm_campaign=buffer


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> Saw this and thought some of you might like a read as this seems to be an all too common issue with some photographers
> 
> http://time.com/3760599/response-work-for-free/?utm_content=buffer8c83a&utm_medium=social&utm_source=linkedin.com&utm_campaign=buffer


i saw that article yesterday pop up on my facebook as well as another great one about whether or not pro photogs should work for free or not. good reads.

personally if someone asks you to do your career work for free then i agree with the author in saying they appreciate the expertise but not the work itself enough to pay. its a strange situation especially when the approach is from a close friend or not so close acquaintance. its a situational decision for me. depends on what they are asking me to do. if it something that i will find tedious, 99% of the time, i tell them i dont offer my work for friends and then get complicated and explain that i only do corporate style work which will not meet their needs best and offer to help with a referral. i keep it honest the best i can without being rude by telling them flat out no


----------



## Sean Webster

I just ask people what do I get out of it if they want me to do anything without pay? If nothing that I consider a benefit to myself, I say NOPE in caps lol.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> I just ask people what do I get out of it if they want me to do anything without pay? If nothing that I consider a benefit to myself, I say NOPE in caps lol.


the issue is maybe 90% of the time their response is going to be... well you can use it to build your portfolio


----------



## Magical Eskimo

I have varying views on it really, if it's someone I know reasonably well and I know they have some other skill I don't that might come in handy, I'll do it as a favour, so then I'll be able to call on them for a favour in return in the future - something my grandad did a lot with his Architecture business and he's had some pretty good return favours!

But on the other hand, if I can't see it would work out in my favour I'd probably go about it another way.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> the issue is maybe 90% of the time their response is going to be... well you can use it to build your portfolio


Like I said, if it doesn't benefit me then they get a big NOPE. Building port included lol. AIN'T NOBODY GOT TIME FOR FREE WORK.


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> the issue is maybe 90% of the time their response is going to be... well you can use it to build your portfolio
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Like I said, if it doesn't benefit me then they get a big NOPE. Building port included lol. AIN'T NOBODY GOT TIME FOR FREE WORK.
Click to expand...

If it was a celebrity of sorts, or the concept was amazing or w/e would bring something "more" than the average photographic "errand" - which rarely, if ever, is - sure.
That would be adding to your portfolio something.

There are 100s of wanna-be models that want to grow their portfolio you can get to work for free, helping each other - if that's the goal on the photographer's side. You don't wait for random people to "volunteer".

Those that do, 99% of the time you are asked to take photos for free, its because they don't want to pay. They don't give a damn of your worth, you are just conveniently there and they have nothing to lose asking you to.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> the issue is maybe 90% of the time their response is going to be... well you can use it to build your portfolio
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Like I said, if it doesn't benefit me then they get a big NOPE. Building port included lol. AIN'T NOBODY GOT TIME FOR FREE WORK.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> If it was a celebrity of sorts, or the concept was amazing or w/e would bring something "more" than the average photographic "errand" - which rarely, if ever, is - sure.
> That would be adding to your portfolio something.
> 
> There are 100s of wanna-be models that want to grow their portfolio you can get to work for free, helping each other - if that's the goal on the photographer's side. You don't wait for random people to "volunteer".
> 
> Those that do, 99% of the time you are asked to take photos for free, its because they don't want to pay. They don't give a damn of your worth, you are just conveniently there and they have nothing to lose asking you to.
Click to expand...

if i was offered the opportunity to do photos of or with a celebrity it would definitely not be for free. even if that person was my favorite star. a professional is a professional. taking a picture of a celeb and doing it for free doesnt guarantee that the work is portfolio worthy. the quality of the image determines portfolio worth in almost all situations, content isnt as much because in the end whats the difference between a nicely taken portrait of a celeb vs a model with proper makeup under the same light and conditions. i get the point youre trying to make but the problem is there is more to photography than portraits. being offered the ability to take a portrait of someone important doesnt help you if youre aspirations dont involve portraiture. same goes for if i want to be a professional photojournalist and someone asks me to shoot a child's birthday party for free so that i can build my portfolio.

its easier to go find work than to wait for work to come your way in the opportunity of portfolio building work. for example, if you want to do corporate work then start small and do affordable work for small local business and build your portfolio in a way that is more constructive for the desired career path


----------



## Sean Webster

The trifles have been memed some more: http://imgur.com/gallery/U3gCa

If they can help me with some cool concepts or ideas that is a different story. I don't count that as work. There is a benefit to me. That is called fun.


----------



## MistaBernie

Sean, you'd be so proud. I installed an Intel 730 in my Ideapad Z580 last night. Stupid Data MIgration tool didn't work because I was using a USB enclosure (ugh) but I got the drive cloned and setup, only to find out the Z580 has an issue where you can't access the BIOS and the fix is to flash the bios, but they only have the Phoenix util for Win8 (didn't create one for Win 8.1). Long story short, I got the bios flash to run in Win8 mode, got into Bios (and it's already in AHCI, ugh, so all that work for basically nothing, haha). Boot time went from ~1:15 to 12 seconds (and it shuts down in ~5 seconds now)

Lightroom runs quick. I should probably update to 5 on the laptop though huh, haha


----------



## sub50hz

Psh, SATA, what a peasant interface.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Sean, you'd be so proud. I installed an Intel 730 in my Ideapad Z580 last night. Stupid Data MIgration tool didn't work because I was using a USB enclosure (ugh) but I got the drive cloned and setup, only to find out the Z580 has an issue where you can't access the BIOS and the fix is to flash the bios, but they only have the Phoenix util for Win8 (didn't create one for Win 8.1). Long story short, I got the bios flash to run in Win8 mode, got into Bios (and it's already in AHCI, ugh, so all that work for basically nothing, haha). Boot time went from ~1:15 to 12 seconds (and it shuts down in ~5 seconds now)
> 
> Lightroom runs quick. I should probably update to 5 on the laptop though huh, haha


haha, nice. I hate laptop mobos that give that issue...ive dealt with it a few times myself. And yes, sometimes the boot loader doesn't get cloned over USB for some reason, its weird.

Wait for LR6! or move your LR5 key to the laptop and update to 6 on your main rig. Supposedly there will be GPU support finally. 

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Psh, SATA, what a peasant interface.


Agreed, its all about PCIe


----------



## Sean Webster

Finally got to take some new photos today for our photoclub. Here are some of the headshots we did. For these I just used a 22" beauty dish above right, a white reflector below left, and an 8.5" reflector as a hair light.


----------



## Conspiracy

not bad dude. a little hot on the hair light for my taste but that style of headshot is really popular right now


----------



## Sean Webster

Thanks, I was trying to get away from flat lighting and wanted it a bit more edgy. You should have seen some of the set up shots....gosh it was way hot lol


----------



## Scott1541

I need to try and get my society in the studio again before the end of the year. If not I'll just wait until next year when I'm supreme overlord


----------



## Conspiracy

yall are lucky you have local groups to be part of. ive had trouble finding a decent organized group. the one i talk to now is a group of film enthusiasts. a few are super snobs and seem to deny that digital photography exists. i enjoy both so one day ill find a group thats cool with both lol


----------



## Sean Webster

lol, yea. But our club is almost dead... :/ We only have like 6-8 active members including myself. I'm hoping things go better next semester. I may have to be president again just because no one else can be. A few are graduating or wont have the grade/class requirements down. Officers have to be full time students. It is so stupid.


----------



## Scott1541

It's a similar story for us actually, about 5 regular members, all international students, which is a problem because I'm going to be the only person left to run it next year. We need to try and get at least another person on board or there might be problems, I can't do everything. I could maybe have a word with my mate who I do the odd jobs for, he might want to help out.

There's a club in the city that's open to the public and that's supposed to be pretty decent. We're friends with the guy who was the president there a year or two ago and he'd always give us ideas based on that they were doing


----------



## Conspiracy

so i finally took photos for the first time in forever. nothing fancy just was requested to take photos with my friend. as the rain got worse we moved inside. got this neat snapshot with an incredibly photogenic cat. we got 10 frames. i kid you not when i say this cat was totally chill. each time the flash fired she moved her head and looked in a different direction. sadly this was a random snap shot. the other frames wihtout the cat dont have the shadow against the wall. im just surprised we even got frames with the cat not freaking out lol

5D3+24-70mkII


----------



## boogschd

oh that cats eyes ...


----------



## Conspiracy

one of my buddies is better with photoshop than i am and will hopefully super impose the cats head larger on the image and turn it into one of those awesome 80's portraits lol


----------



## Scott1541

Since getting the D7200 I've joined a few appropriate facebook groups since I'm not really very active on any photo forums. Anyway, I've noticed that the admins are always insistent on people posting settings, lenses, focal lengths, and even in some cases the camera mode for every photo they post to the group. I asked one admin about it and they claimed it's for helping newbies get the right settings etc..

I though to myself what help is that going to be unless the person is in the same location, at the same time, taking the same shot? Fair enough mentioning the aperture if you've posted a shot with shallow DOF, or shutter speed for a long exposure, but beyond that I just think it's a bit counter productive. It might make new people think "Oh, that guy used these settings, so I have to use the same settings.", shouldn't it be more about enabling the new people to work out settings for themselves rather than giving it to them? What do you guys think?

Also I think it's a bit ironic that the admin of one of the D7200 groups doesn't even own a D7200


----------



## Sean Webster

I find camera settings when a photo is taken is helpful for learning.


----------



## Conspiracy

i get the reasons behind posting of setting but really it isnt SUPER helpful without a description of the lighting conditions if you want to get technical. its also a pain to post all the extra info, at best ill post body and lens used and strobist info if i even remember the finer details


----------



## SpecTRe-X

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> Since getting the D7200 I've joined a few appropriate facebook groups since I'm not really very active on any photo forums. Anyway, I've noticed that the admins are always insistent on people posting settings, lenses, focal lengths, and even in some cases the camera mode for every photo they post to the group. I asked one admin about it and they claimed it's for helping newbies get the right settings etc..
> 
> I though to myself what help is that going to be unless the person is in the same location, at the same time, taking the same shot? Fair enough mentioning the aperture if you've posted a shot with shallow DOF, or shutter speed for a long exposure, but beyond that I just think it's a bit counter productive. It might make new people think "Oh, that guy used these settings, so I have to use the same settings.", shouldn't it be more about enabling the new people to work out settings for themselves rather than giving it to them? What do you guys think?
> 
> Also I think it's a bit ironic that *the admin of one of the D7200 groups doesn't even own a D7200*


I'd agree. I read a bunch of "how to" guides and explanations on what each setting actually did and affected. I think that should be the more important aspect. Giving settings to someone who can't work out why they are what they are isn't going to help anyone. Never mind the different subjects and lighting. I'd rather be asked how I got a shot/feature than be required to post the settings because the former is at least likely to start a conversation that will lead to better understanding/inspiration. Plus the settings don't tell the whole story.

lol _I'd like to call a vote of no confidence._


----------



## pcfoo

I don't mind reading or posting basic exposure settings. It takes away the need for redundant posts questioning for that exact info (often repeated, as the 2nd person to ask might get straight to asking without scouting for the existing answer if that wasn't in the original post).

Takes the super-basic technicalities out of the way, and leaves more important questions, like "why" this shot is shot as it is, why do I like it (or I don't) etc.

I agree that for more complicated lighting scenarios, a moderately detailed diagram is almost required for non experienced photographers, especially when using strobes when technically the exposure balance is controlled by the lights and not the camera.


----------



## Gobigorgohome

I am looking for a good FX-camera to replace my D5200.

I am currently looking for Nikon D800 (because that is pretty much where my budget is), found one second-hand with Nikon 50mm 1/8 and two camera-bags for 1650 USD (which I am willing to pay for it). The 5D3, D4 and 7D2 is out of the question. I will maybe get around 450 USD for my D5200 with the kit-lens, bag and everything else I got with it.

I am able to look at one D800 before I have to decide if I get it or not.


----------



## OmarCCX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gobigorgohome*
> 
> I am looking for a good FX-camera to replace my D5200.
> 
> I am currently looking for Nikon D800 (because that is pretty much where my budget is), found one second-hand with Nikon 50mm 1/8 and two camera-bags for 1650 USD (which I am willing to pay for it). The 5D3, D4 and 7D2 is out of the question. I will maybe get around 450 USD for my D5200 with the kit-lens, bag and everything else I got with it.
> 
> I am able to look at one D800 before I have to decide if I get it or not.


That's quite a good price. The only other camera I can think of suggesting would be a D750, but used prices aren't low enough yet.


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gobigorgohome*
> 
> I am looking for a good FX-camera to replace my D5200.
> 
> I am currently looking for Nikon D800 (because that is pretty much where my budget is), found one second-hand with Nikon 50mm 1/8 and two camera-bags for 1650 USD (which I am willing to pay for it). The 5D3, D4 and 7D2 is out of the question. I will maybe get around 450 USD for my D5200 with the kit-lens, bag and everything else I got with it.
> 
> I am able to look at one D800 before I have to decide if I get it or not.


You mention the 7D2 but not the D7200, what is this madness?







I think it's worth considering even though it's not full frame, and you seem to pretty much have your heard set on that format. (IIRC you do the bird stuff? Was that right?)


----------



## pcfoo

Some thoughts / questions:

1. What are you really after trying to update your camera?

2. Why FF/FX ? I remember you were after birds/wildlife and whatnot, poised to get super-telephotos in order to achieve that etc. Believe it or not, the DX format will be better for all scenarios that more lens reach is required. Including IQ. It will resolve better resolution if you were to either crop the D800 file or use a TC to achieve the same FOV you would get straight out of a DX sensor.

3. Why the D800? It is a relatively slow shooting FF camera. If the extra reach is not an issue and FX "its the way" because you will be shooting at high ISO and whatnot, a D750 or similar "faster"/newer FX Nikon would serve you better.

It has been too soon since you got your D5200 to outgrow it, you went straight for super-telephotos which you also "out-grew" etc etc.
I suggest you slow down and shoot your way into better photos.
Nobody can buy his/her way to great photos, unless it is a matter of geography or time = you have to afford time and expenses for traveling in order to shoot specific stuff. Even if say I had the best gear, it would be no good in a bag. It needs to be taken out.
Just reads too much G.A.S. for me, and I am afraid you will just drop all these savings on a FF body, and then "out-grow" it in a matter of months (i.e. be bored) and just look for another toy.

EDIT: D800 and similar cameras are often used by pros and get lots and lots of actuations. 30K is not that much for what will probably be a 2-3yo camera, especially if you are looking for something in a good/low price.


----------



## Aussiejuggalo

I got a question for you guys, have any of you used an LED strip for lights instead of fluorescents or flashes?

If so what led type would be best? 3528, 5050, 5630 etc

I'm curious because these fluorescent lights I have are taking up to much room (also stupidly easy to break as I found out







) and I was wondering if LED strips cut down and fixed on something like a board would do the same job, I don't have anywhere near enough money to invest in "proper" LED lighting or flashes which is another reason I'm asking

Thanks


----------



## Scott1541

pcfoo definitely has a point









Those answers seem pretty GAS like too tbh.


----------



## Gobigorgohome

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> pcfoo definitely has a point
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Those answers seem pretty GAS like too tbh.


I think I will go ahead and blow some money on gear I do not need, because it is making more sense than trying to get any good information or information at all from this thread!









Trying to get help here .... that is just funny!


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gobigorgohome*
> 
> I think I will go ahead and blow some money on gear I do not need, because it is making more sense than trying to get any good information or information at all from this thread!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Trying to get help here .... that is just funny!


Go ahead and buy a D800. It's a solid camera but whether or not you'll get better quality images with it is debatable.

Personally I think you've gone about this all wrong, you've basically just come in here like "Guys I want a D800, justify it for me". A more logical approach would be to come here and post a few photos saying what the problem is and asking now to improve it. If a new camera was necessary then you'd state your requirements and we'd give some suitable suggestions that would satisfy your requirements and budget.


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gobigorgohome*
> 
> I think I will go ahead and blow some money on gear I do not need, because it is making more sense than trying to get any good information or information at all from this thread!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Trying to get help here .... that is just funny!


People are helping - they're helping you to realise you don't need to just dump money on camera gear to get better at photography because it doesn't work like that.


----------



## hokiealumnus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> Personally I think you've gone about this all wrong, you've basically just come in here like "Guys I want a D800, justify it for me". A more logical approach would be to come here and post a few photos saying what the problem is and asking now to improve it. If a new camera was necessary then you'd state your requirements and we'd give some suitable suggestions that would satisfy your requirements and budget.


+1. This isn't the first time you have come and asked for "help", didn't get confirmation of what you had already decided, then threw a hissy fit and deleted your posts when people tried to help you. Just go buy what you've already decided you want to buy and enjoy it. Quit coming here to waste our time attempting to help you when you don't want to listen to anything that doesn't confirm your already-made decision.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gobigorgohome*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> pcfoo definitely has a point
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Those answers seem pretty GAS like too tbh.
> 
> 
> 
> I think I will go ahead and blow some money on gear I do not need, because it is making more sense than trying to get any good information or information at all from this thread!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Trying to get help here .... that is just funny!
Click to expand...

are we related?????? thats my answer to everything!!!!

screw it just waste money on gear















ive been busy at work otherwise i would have saw your cry for help. it seems like you were looking at a D800. its a fantastic camera for everything except super speed fps. the only complaint i would have about that camera is that its not tippy top of the line at tracking moving subjects but it does a good job. if you want resolution, cropping power, dynamic range, and a workhorse it will not let you down. if you can id suggest a bump to the D750 if you dont mind a swivel screen on your camera. i say D750 because that thing is a damn beast. the D750 is what the D800 should have been in my opinion when it comes to raw performance

im about to blow some money on a Fuji X100T because why not. i want a cool P&S and its great for carrying around all the time and because i havent bought anything in a while so that alone is reason enough for new gear lolz


----------



## Gobigorgohome

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> are we related?????? thats my answer to everything!!!!
> 
> screw it just waste money on gear
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ive been busy at work otherwise i would have saw your cry for help. it seems like you were looking at a D800. its a fantastic camera for everything except super speed fps. the only complaint i would have about that camera is that its not tippy top of the line at tracking moving subjects but it does a good job. if you want resolution, cropping power, dynamic range, and a workhorse it will not let you down. if you can id suggest a bump to the D750 if you dont mind a swivel screen on your camera. i say D750 because that thing is a damn beast. the D750 is what the D800 should have been in my opinion when it comes to raw performance
> 
> im about to blow some money on a Fuji X100T because why not. i want a cool P&S and its great for carrying around all the time and because i havent bought anything in a while so that alone is reason enough for new gear lolz


Conspiracy, you are like Muhammad Ali was in boxing, one of the best there is!


----------



## Wolfsbora

Took this using a leather lapdesk as the backdrop (I used an IPS monitor with the brightness cranked and laid it flat on top of a dog crate with the lapdesk and cable in the crate







)









I try to be as crafty and thrifty as possible when looking for places or surfaces to shoot.
Here is one where I am using an old curtain, I liked the texture (cloudy day as the lighting):

All photos taken with a Nikon D5000 and a 50mm f/1.8D lens.


----------



## SpecTRe-X

@Gobigorgohome Obviously you want the gear that gives you the flexibility to do what it is you're looking to do. I haven't been shooting long but that is one of the key points I picked up on and it carries to just about everything. I'm not sure what the whole "gas" thing is about but put the time in to understand your resulting shots and just shoot what you enjoy. After all, if you're not enjoying what you're doing it's going to show in your work; gear is only part of the equation.


----------



## pcfoo

@Gobigorgohome We don't judge you, we understand you and trying to help you. At least I do.









There was what I believed was useful information in my post either way, if your mind is so set on one thing and not caring for anything else, might as-well follow your impulse and do whatever makes you happy.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> im about to blow some money on a Fuji X100T because why not. i want a cool P&S and its great for carrying around all the time and because i havent bought anything in a while so that alone is reason enough for new gear lolz


I am so happy that fuji doesn't make a 33-35mm version of the X100s/t or I would be tempted to blow some monies that way too!


----------



## Conspiracy

Iphone6 pano BTS from a video shoot today


----------



## DizZz

Been out of the game for a little bit but I just ordered a Sony Alpha A7 w/ a Sony Sonnar T* FE 35mm f/2.8! I'll post some photos when it comes in.


----------



## Conspiracy

bought a new toy yesterday. still havent taken my obligatory shot yet but heres a snap shot from this morning. still need to find a better editing software because apparently ACR in photoshop CS6 is terrible at fuji raws. very fun compact camera. so far an A+ for the X100T so many features and bells and whistles idk whats going on lmao


----------



## Scott1541

Last week I was thinking that it'd be nice to replace my D5100 with something more portable, maybe something like an X-Pro1. But that would firstly cost me more money, and secondly I wouldn't have a second (cheaper) DSLR, which is very handy when odd jobs come up that involve the presence of drunk people. I don't like the idea of taking the D7200 into nightclubs, etc.. as I don't have any insurance and it'll increase the shutter count faster. The AF and viewfinder on the D7200 are better suited to that sort of situation, but the D5100 with 17-50 & SB-700 does a good job for the most part, after processing you can't see that much difference between that and my mate's 5D3.

In other news I finally ordered myself a (decent) 10 stop ND filter







(coincidentally using money from club jobs







) Should be fun to play with after exams are done.


----------



## pcfoo

The X100 series is nice, but at least part of its portability over a small SLR, is the fixed prime (we want a 50 equiv FOV compact f/2 model fuji! plz).

The IL X series, is smaller than a SLR as far as body is concerned, but add a fast lens infront of it, and...things get mudded again.

Your 5xxx is not that big, but it gets massively bigger adding a full size speed-light and a fast zoom.
In all honesty, I believe that if an X100/S/T would fit the bill for your nightclub work, so should a 5100 with the 35DX 1.8 & no external flash.

As for shutter count & the 7200...I don't know what to say...cameras are a tool, you should use & enjoy them.


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Your 5xxx is not that big, but it gets massively bigger adding a full size speed-light and a fast zoom.
> In all honesty, I believe that if an X100/S/T would fit the bill for your nightclub work, so should a 5100 with the 35DX 1.8 & no external flash.
> 
> As for shutter count & the 7200...I don't know what to say...cameras are a tool, you should use & enjoy them.


Haha, you're telling me











35mm wouldn't be wide enough on DX, It'd be fine for 2-3 person shots, but group shots need ~20mm or wider. I don't really like doing group shots because they end up looking rather boring, I'd much rather do 2-4 at a time which a 35mm or slightly wider prime would work for, but when someone's mates see them having a photo they all want in









Regarding the shutter count, it's not something I'd usually care too much about but seeing as I've not had it long, and it's the single most expensive electrical item I've ever bought, I'd rather not waste shots on drunk people who will probably want another photo anyway because this one makes them look fat.


----------



## Wolfsbora

35mm roughly equates to 50mm in DX format.


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> Regarding the shutter count, it's not something I'd usually care too much about but seeing as I've not had it long, and it's the single most expensive electrical item I've ever bought, I'd rather not waste shots on drunk people who will probably want another photo anyway because this one makes them look fat.


I feel you, but you also have a rMBP, the 7200 is not that expensive.
As for the photos, I have a suggestion / white lie :


PS action that transforms scale @ X axis. Make em 10-15% slimmer. It is not a lie, you are just "undoing" the width the lens adds, restoring their original figure!
Apply to all photos.
Present "corrected" photos
Profit? -> buy yourself a trip to enjoy that D7200 of yours


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> I feel you, but you also have a rMBP, the 7200 is not that expensive.
> As for the photos, I have a suggestion / white lie :


Got the macbook with education discount







Otherwise that would have been the most expensive.


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> I feel you, but you also have a rMBP, the 7200 is not that expensive.
> As for the photos, I have a suggestion / white lie :
> 
> 
> 
> Got the macbook with education discount
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Otherwise that would have been the most expensive.
Click to expand...

Replacement cost is the only thing that matters in real life


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> The X100 series is nice, but at least part of its portability over a small SLR, is the fixed prime (we want a 50 equiv FOV compact f/2 model fuji! plz).


its APS-C. with a 23mm lens its very close to 50mm FF FOV soooooooooooooooo yeah. it has a very pleasing FOV when used







probably closer to 40mm equiv which is a great FOV


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> The X100 series is nice, but at least part of its portability over a small SLR, is the fixed prime (we want a 50 equiv FOV compact f/2 model fuji! plz).
> 
> 
> 
> its APS-C. with a 23mm lens its very close to 50mm FF FOV soooooooooooooooo yeah. it has a very pleasing FOV when used
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> probably closer to 40mm equiv which is a great FOV
Click to expand...

I have my EOS M with the EF-M 22mm f2 and I find it a bit wide for my taste (and that is a 1.6x crop, so longer than the 23 on the X100).
If I was getting a X100, it would be to improve on the M's shortfalls: optical VF, reliable AF and also MF being my main complains.
But since the X100 comes exclusively with the 23, I cannot justify the cost - even for the S model that goes down - the 50 equiv would sweeten the deal.

Its personal preference, I know the X100 lens is a gem otherwise.

For similar reasons I don't care for 35s for my FF, despite friends owning some amazing Sigma copies, and the EF 35 IS being so good. I am just a "normal" guy.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> I am just a "normal" guy.


Don't you own a 16-35L?


----------



## pcfoo

I own and owned quite a few zooms that go 35mm or much wider than that. WA & UWAs all have their uses.

It is not that the 35 is pointless or anything that dramatic. But if I was stuck with one prime, I think I would like it to be a 50, or 50ish equiv.

Some EOS M + EF-M 22 f/2 images - theme "metrolink"









Last one is through a window, so some weird artifacts/reflections are visible


----------



## boogschd

nice shots pcfoo

this thread needs more photos


----------



## Pandora51

Hm speaking of 35mm primes etc..

What do you guys think about the Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 vc?
Or would you prefer a Nikon 35mm f1.8?

Zoom with your feets they say but in my experience with 40mm it is not always possible or the best solution. Same with switching between 2 lenses.


----------



## TUDJ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pandora51*
> 
> Hm speaking of 35mm primes etc..
> 
> What do you guys think about the Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 vc?
> Or would you prefer a Nikon 35mm f1.8?
> 
> Zoom with your feets they say but in my experience with 40mm it is not always possible or the best solution. Same with switching between 2 lenses.


I have both.

The 35mm is a fantastic lens and I always find myself drawn back to it. It's extremely sharp throughout the apertures, it's small and light too.

The 17-50 is a nice lens too, much bigger and heavier than the 35mm. I have been struggling to get consistently sharp images from it, I've had some great images using it but other times I've been disappointed with the results, it's softest at f2.8 and for me that's an issue as I bought it for low light events, as a side note, the VC does work very well. I do prefer the focal range for landscape images, the wider angle makes a huge difference.

I'd say you need to decide where your priorities lie, what will be the main use(s) of the lens? If it's everyday shooting and nothing where a wide angle or the Vibration Control is essential, I'd lean towards the 35mm.

There are samples of each lens (with others mixed in) on my Flickr https://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/ EXIF should be present for all images.

Don't forget about crop factor, a 35mm prime on DX is 50mm equivalent.


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pandora51*
> 
> Hm speaking of 35mm primes etc..
> 
> What do you guys think about the Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 vc?
> Or would you prefer a Nikon 35mm f1.8?
> 
> Zoom with your feets they say but in my experience with 40mm it is not always possible or the best solution. Same with switching between 2 lenses.


I guess my Siggy 17-50 is close enough for me to chime in on this:

I really like both lenses, they're both pretty sharp wide open, and very sharp stopped down to f/5.6-f/8. I tend to use the zoom more than the prime for convenience but I really should use the prime more. I'm not sure if the Tamron has these issues but the sigma has a pretty noticeable amount of focus zoom, especially at longer focal lengths, and sharpness falls off from the centre. I shot a large formal group photo with this zoom and at f/8, at 100%+ you could tell that the edges weren't as sharp as the centre. This is a bit worse at wider apertures but most of the time I don't actually notice it.

ION my ND filter came today, tested it out briefly and it seems decent, but I'll have to wait until next week to see how it really performs.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> It is not that the 35 is pointless or anything that dramatic. But if I was stuck with one prime, I think I would like it to be a 50, or 50ish equiv.


That's fair, I was just curious.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pandora51*
> 
> Zoom with your feets they say


The only people that say this are those who don't understand or misuse perspective. You know, internet specialists.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Pandora51*
> 
> Zoom with your feets they say
> 
> 
> 
> You know, internet specialists.
Click to expand...

have i been summoned? trololol


----------



## Sean Webster

I got one of these Sensor Gel Sticks and it actually works. I didn't get every piece of dust but I got 95% of it my first go. I can say that it did work better than the sensor swabs I've used before. So if anyone is thinking about getting it or trying to see how to clean your sensor, this thing is good.

In other news I still want a 135 f/2, but I'm being cheap and don't want to pay for it. lol I may buy one by the end of summer depending on how bad my GAS is. XD


----------



## Wolfsbora

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> I got one of these Sensor Gel Sticks and it actually works. I didn't get every piece of dust but I got 95% of it my first go. I can say that it did work better than the sensor swabs I've used before. So if anyone is thinking about getting it or trying to see how to clean your sensor, this thing is good.
> 
> In other news I still want a 135 f/2, but I'm being cheap and don't want to pay for it. lol I may buy one by the end of summer depending on how bad my GAS is. XD


Yes, thank you!! I've been looking for the ultimate sensor cleaner!

As for your gas, I'd try some of this:


----------



## Sean Webster

Yea, I'm definitely gonna need that...I just bought a second BenQ GW2765HT as you posted that! :O

I'm going to see if I can charge my friends to clean their sensors now to make a profit off this sensor gel stick lol.


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> I'm going to see if I can charge my friends to clean their sensors now to make a profit off this sensor gel stick lol.


I take it you can reuse it then? I should really invest in something like that at some point, especially since I'm a compulsive lens changer. The D5100 is a little dirty, even after using the rocket blower, but I'm in no hurry to clean it


----------



## Sean Webster

Yeah, you can reuse it for a bunch of times, until it is no longer sticky apparently. Maybe like 50-100 times? You just need to buy that sticky tape it comes with to continue. Just as is with 10 sticky tapes you can basically clean your sensor for like $2-$5 per cleaning.


----------



## Wolfsbora

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Yea, I'm definitely gonna need that...I just bought a second BenQ GW2765HT as you posted that! :O
> 
> I'm going to see if I can charge my friends to clean their sensors now to make a profit off this sensor gel stick lol.


Congrats on the BenQ! I hope it only comes with light indigestion.


----------



## Pandora51

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> I guess my Siggy 17-50 is close enough for me to chime in on this


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TUDJ*
> 
> The 35mm is a fantastic lens and I always find myself drawn back to it. It's extremely sharp throughout the apertures, it's small and light too.
> 
> I'd say you need to decide where your priorities lie, what will be the main use(s) of the lens? If it's everyday shooting and nothing where a wide angle or the Vibration Control is essential, I'd lean towards the 35mm.


Thanks for your opinions.

Well I read about the soft corners but the tamron should be fine.

However I might pick up the tamron 17-50mm soon. I will use it for various things. Landscape, street photography, little events like cons..
For the moment Im just using my 40mm f2,8 as daily lens and the 18-135mm as the lens for everything else that needs a different focal length.
While I really like the 40mm I have found many situations where I needed a wider lens. The 18-135mm is also not the best choice.

It might not be a bad idea to buy a f1,8 prime lens someday but 17-50mm should give me more value at the moment.


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pandora51*
> 
> Thanks for your opinions.
> 
> Well I read about the soft corners but the tamron should be fine.
> 
> However I might pick up the tamron 17-50mm soon. I will use it for various things. Landscape, street photography, little events like cons..
> For the moment Im just using my 40mm f2,8 as daily lens and the 18-135mm as the lens for everything else that needs a different focal length.
> While I really like the 40mm I have found many situations where I needed a wider lens. The 18-135mm is also not the best choice.
> 
> It might not be a bad idea to buy a f1,8 prime lens someday but 17-50mm should give me more value at the moment.


The 17-50mm range is great for events, It's my go-to event lens. If I didn't shoot events occasionally I'd probably get rid of it to be honest, in hindsight buying it (especially new) was a mistake considering what I shot when I bought it. The stuff I shoot for fun I can usually get away with my 10-20 and 35.

What body would you be using this on? IMO on the newer bodies a 1.8 lens is less useful as it's only like 1 1/3 stop faster than 2.8, if depth of field/bokeh isn't an issue you can easily put the ISO up another stop to compensate.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Wolfsbora*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> I got one of these Sensor Gel Sticks and it actually works. I didn't get every piece of dust but I got 95% of it my first go. I can say that it did work better than the sensor swabs I've used before. So if anyone is thinking about getting it or trying to see how to clean your sensor, this thing is good.
> 
> In other news I still want a 135 f/2, but I'm being cheap and don't want to pay for it. lol I may buy one by the end of summer depending on how bad my GAS is. XD
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, thank you!! I've been looking for the ultimate sensor cleaner!
> 
> As for your gas, I'd try some of this:
Click to expand...

that doesnt help well when you run out. my GAS kicked in full on monday when i bought my X100T


----------



## Pandora51

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> What body would you be using this on? IMO on the newer bodies a 1.8 lens is less useful as it's only like 1 1/3 stop faster than 2.8, if depth of field/bokeh isn't an issue you can easily put the ISO up another stop to compensate.


Nikon D7000.
F1.8 for Bokeh is pretty great. This is why Im thinking about it aswell.
But again a good zoom with f2.8 might be more useful in most situations. That is atleast my current idea.
350 euro for the 17-50mm is alot through.

Shouldnt be the tamron better for low light because of the vc?


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pandora51*
> 
> Nikon D7000.
> F1.8 for Bokeh is pretty great. This is why Im thinking about it aswell.
> But again a good zoom with f2.8 might be more useful in most situations. That is atleast my current idea.
> 350 euro for the 17-50mm is alot through.
> 
> Shouldnt be the tamron better for low light because of the vc?


Yeah, it should allow you to drop the shutter speed by a couple of stops, this would be better for low light, but VC/VR/OS/IS can't solve everything.

Just thought I'd post this, might have been able to go a stop lower on the shutter speed but it's an alright example. 1/15th at 29mm, f/2.8, ISO 1600 on my D5100 (same sensor as D7000) I think I did a bit of noise reduction in post though.
Waterside by Scott3933, on Flickr


----------



## Sean Webster

LOL,

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> that doesnt help well when you run out. my GAS kicked in full on monday when i bought my X100T


haha, how do you like it? I'm starting to look at those Sony cameras myself since I can use an adapter for my canon lenses...


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> LOL,
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> that doesnt help well when you run out. my GAS kicked in full on monday when i bought my X100T
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> haha, how do you like it? I'm starting to look at those Sony cameras myself since I can use an adapter for my canon lenses...
Click to expand...

im having fun with it. i havent edited much but i took this a few mins ago. impressive for iso3200 and f2.8 for more DOF although it didnt really gain that much when so close to MFD


----------



## pcfoo

Get behind me GASatan!

If i will be ga-sinning, it would be for a remote speedlight kit...
Dunno if i should go for a manual YN560 IV pair + 560-TX for $190 or so, or go for a YN622C pair and the relative Ettl-II speedlights & transmitter for $150 more.

Immediate interests are indoor portraits, so manual would work, but i don't know if TTL would really benefit me elsewhere. Choices, choices...


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> im having fun with it. i havent edited much but i took this a few mins ago. impressive for iso3200 and f2.8 for more DOF although it didnt really gain that much when so close to MFD


Can I have one of those? Or all? Im hungry lol.

That ISO is pretty good!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Get behind me GASatan!
> 
> If i will be ga-sinning, it would be for a remote speedlight kit...
> Dunno if i should go for a manual YN560 IV pair + 560-TX for $190 or so, or go for a YN622C pair and the relative Ettl-II speedlights & transmitter for $150 more.
> 
> Immediate interests are indoor portraits, so manual would work, but i don't know if TTL would really benefit me elsewhere. Choices, choices...


I'm currently trying to sell my Canon 430EX II because I find for my useI don't need ETTL. I got three YN560 IV's + 560-TX and 2 Paul C Buff E640s + cyber commander. I want another two E640s one day lol.


----------



## Gobigorgohome

I upload one JPEG-file, because none of my RAW-files was under 10 MB.

Picture taken with Nikon D5200 with Tamron 70-300mm (the 120 USD version for Nikon).. ISO-450, 1/1000th, f/4,5, focal length 180mm.


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!







I looked over my pictures, shot 626 pictures which I think about 100 of them are keepers. I failed on ISO and focus most of the "none-keepers". Shot primarily with the Tamron 70-300mm and the Sigma 150-500mm.







Hard to get feedback from one picture, how do I upload RAW-files?


----------



## TUDJ

RAW files are uncompressed, that's why they are huge. There's no harm in uploading JPEGs, just don't go overboard on the compression.

FlickR is a good photo hosting site, some people don't like it but it's free and easy to use.

As for the photo, it's under exposed, what were your settings? I'd also recommend getting down to the subject's level, it looks like you were stood up looking down, experiment with alternative perspectives.


----------



## Gobigorgohome

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TUDJ*
> 
> RAW files are uncompressed, that's why they are huge. There's no harm in uploading JPEGs, just don't go overboard on the compression.
> 
> FlickR is a good photo hosting site, some people don't like it but it's free and easy to use.
> 
> As for the photo, it's under exposed, what were your settings? I'd also recommend getting down to the subject's level, it looks like you were stood up looking down, experiment with alternative perspectives.


I usually shoot in RAW only because of the little buffer of the D5200 (it is only 7 shots at RAW before the buffer is full), JPEG is about 13 shots before the buffer is full (I tested both), because you did think RAW+JPEG, or?

I have a photobucket-account if I can remember username and password.









Nikon D5200 with Tamron 70-300mm (the 120 USD version for Nikon).. ISO-450, 1/1000th, f/4,5, focal length 180mm. I shoot in "sport"-mode, because it is auto ISO and auto shutter speed, I cannot seem to have both shutter speed manually and auto ISO (not even in Manual mode). I was standing while taking the picture, might help getting down a bit (but is not this kind of like personal preference), or is it not? I have both anyways.


----------



## TUDJ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gobigorgohome*
> 
> I usually shoot in RAW only because of the little buffer of the D5200 (it is only 7 shots at RAW before the buffer is full), JPEG is about 13 shots before the buffer is full (I tested both), because you did think RAW+JPEG, or?
> 
> I have a photobucket-account if I can remember username and password.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nikon D5200 with Tamron 70-300mm (the 120 USD version for Nikon).. ISO-450, 1/1000th, f/4,5, focal length 180mm. I shoot in "sport"-mode, because it is auto ISO and auto shutter speed, I cannot seem to have both shutter speed manually and auto ISO (not even in Manual mode). I was standing while taking the picture, might help getting down a bit (but is not this kind of like personal preference), or is it not? I have both anyways.


I shoot RAW too, you definitely want to if you can, it gives you the most to play with in PP.

Photobucket isn't a great host for photography, they limit the size of the images and apply heavy compression.

You could certainly have pushed the ISO higher, I'd have gone up to 800-1000. I'd also recommend learning how to use manual mode fully, you want to have full control over the settings. Learn how they all work together and practice lots, get used to changing settings without looking at the camera (whilst you're looking through the viewfinder) this will mean less missed shots.

The thing about perspective is preference but in most cases a different perspective that simply standing and shooting works because it's interesting, it's different.


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gobigorgohome*
> 
> I usually shoot in RAW only because of the little buffer of the D5200 (it is only 7 shots at RAW before the buffer is full), JPEG is about 13 shots before the buffer is full (I tested both), because you did think RAW+JPEG, or?


To make the most of a raw file they need processing/editing, if you're not doing that then its a waste of storage space, and as you mentioned, the buffer. If you're just going to use images straight out of the camera use jpeg.

Most of us in here will shoot raw, but there's nothing wrong with jpeg.


----------



## Gobigorgohome

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TUDJ*
> 
> I shoot RAW too, you definitely want to if you can, it gives you the most to play with in PP.
> 
> Photobucket isn't a great host for photography, they limit the size of the images and apply heavy compression.
> 
> You could certainly have pushed the ISO higher, I'd have gone up to 800-1000. I'd also recommend learning how to use manual mode fully, you want to have full control over the settings. Learn how they all work together and practice lots, get used to changing settings without looking at the camera (whilst you're looking through the viewfinder) this will mean less missed shots.
> 
> The thing about perspective is preference but in most cases a different perspective that simply standing and shooting works because it's interesting, it's different.


Okay, I think I understand.









All good points.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> To make the most of a raw file they need processing/editing, if you're not doing that then its a waste of storage space, and as you mentioned, the buffer. If you're just going to use images straight out of the camera use jpeg.
> 
> Most of us in here will shoot raw, but there's nothing wrong with jpeg.


I am not big at editing, I admit that, I have tried Adobe Ligthroom, but nothing more. I will dig into it with my best shots and see if I can get them a little better. I like the thought of not "creating" something that is not there, I mean what I myself cannot see, although I understand why it is a good idea to edit images.

As of Lightroom, which settings should I look at to improve the pictures? I will dig into it though.


----------



## Wolfsbora

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gobigorgohome*
> 
> Okay, I think I understand.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> All good points.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I am not big at editing, I admit that, I have tried Adobe Ligthroom, but nothing more. I will dig into it with my best shots and see if I can get them a little better. I like the thought of not "creating" something that is not there, I mean what I myself cannot see, although I understand why it is a good idea to edit images.
> 
> As of Lightroom, which settings should I look at to improve the pictures? I will dig into it though.


Lightroom is all you need. It is laid out in such a way that you can start at the top of the photo adjustment panel and work your way down. It takes some practice and learning to understand what each adjustment does and how it impacts the others but it is an absolutely incredible photo editing suite.


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gobigorgohome*
> 
> I am not big at editing, I admit that, I have tried Adobe Ligthroom, but nothing more. I will dig into it with my best shots and see if I can get them a little better. I like the thought of not "creating" something that is not there, I mean what I myself cannot see, although I understand why it is a good idea to edit images.
> 
> As of Lightroom, which settings should I look at to improve the pictures? I will dig into it though.


Even the 'purists' photos are processed in a sense, albeit in camera. You can still adjust the contrast, saturation, light in camera, just just don't have anywhere near as much control as shooting raw then processing in LR/ACR.

I can see where you're coming from about wanting to keep the images looking realistic. I'll usually push the shadows, pull highlights, adjust saturation slightly and perform noise reduction if necessary but still leave everything looking fairly natural, since the human eye has a greater dynamic range than a CMOS sensor. I don't like the overly processed and tone mapped HDR crap that looks like someone has just thrown up a load of skittles.


----------



## Conspiracy

i shoot mostly jpg unless its an important shot. if you get it right in camera jpg is just fine


----------



## hokiealumnus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> i shoot mostly jpg unless its an important shot. if you get it right in camera jpg is just fine


Ditto. I always shoot RAW+JPEG, just in case; but for the majority of photos (think family stuff) I just ditch the RAW and keep the JPEGs. Storage is cheap, but not keep-every-RAW-ever-shot cheap.


----------



## Barefooter

Camera recommendations

I'm looking for a camera recommendation here. I plan on doing a build log soon and want to take better pictures than my old cheapo camera I currently use.

I'm a total amateur and want to keep to around a $400 budget maybe a little more.

Please recommend a camera or point me to where I can do some more research.

Thanks in advance for you input.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Barefooter*
> 
> Camera recommendations
> 
> I'm looking for a camera recommendation here. I plan on doing a build log soon and want to take better pictures than my old cheapo camera I currently use.
> 
> I'm a total amateur and want to keep to around a $400 budget maybe a little more.
> 
> Please recommend a camera or point me to where I can do some more research.
> 
> Thanks in advance for you input.


just my 2 cents. its smarter to start a thread requesting a recommendation so all the advice you receive is in one place. posting here is much less effective at yielding results but sometimes works









more info is good as well. is this camera just for the build log and has no other intended use?


----------



## Barefooter

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> just my 2 cents. its smarter to start a thread requesting a recommendation so all the advice you receive is in one place. posting here is much less effective at yielding results but sometimes works
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> more info is good as well. is this camera just for the build log and has no other intended use?


Besides the build log, my wife will use it to take pictures of our cats around the house. I'll probably want to take it out on the boat to take some skiing pictures too.

Thanks for the tip on starting a thread, I'll do that if needed. I figured there would be lots of camera buffs subscribed here.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Barefooter*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> just my 2 cents. its smarter to start a thread requesting a recommendation so all the advice you receive is in one place. posting here is much less effective at yielding results but sometimes works
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> more info is good as well. is this camera just for the build log and has no other intended use?
> 
> 
> 
> Besides the build log, my wife will use it to take pictures of our cats around the house. I'll probably want to take it out on the boat to take some skiing pictures too.
> 
> Thanks for the tip on starting a thread, I'll do that if needed. I figured there would be lots of camera buffs subscribed here.
Click to expand...

there are tons of camera buffs and photographers here. i am one of them, thats why i gave you the advice. i only post in this section of OCN so i have seen many people post in this thread seeking advice and then get frustrated when their post gets buried by off topic stuff. so im trying to save you from frustration OR leaving OCN photo in anger when you feel ignored because i see it happen often


----------



## pcfoo

What's your cheapo camera @Barefooter ? If you were to get a new one, are we talking retail new, or used is an option?

@Gobigorgohome

Few of the basic benefits or RAW Is that you have a higher color depth, usually 12bit (although modern cameras claim 14, you don't really get 14bit with most sensors, even if the DAC is 14bit), that gives you way more headroom to push/pull exposure and adjust colors before pixels start clipping.
12bit = 4096 tones for each RGB channel vs. 8bit (256 tones) which is what JPEG automatically limits you to.

At the end you will "publish" a 3x8=24bit image in the web, but if the process happened in 36bit, you get to choose "which 24bit" get presented. If you were printing and you knew you would be printing on a very good machine, there is some merit in actually exporting a 36bit TIFF, and print from that, but for casual and even most non-fine-art professional prints, that's overkill.

With RAW you also get to correct the White Balance without losing any information, with JPEG - again - there will be some tone compression with all colored pixels getting a permanent warmer or colder tint while you are trying to correct for whites / neutral tones.

In your example with the dog playing in the snow, you should have corrected exposure +1 or +1.5EV to get it as close as you could "in-camera".

If you were shouting RAW (NEF), you could have corrected that +1EV or 1.5EV or w/e "looked" good in LR or PS Camera RAW, and maintain much more information that you would if you were editing the JPEG, pushing the levels or Curves or Exposure (you can do it in so many ways). You see, the snow although white, does have some texture that would be "burned out" and lost if you were doing the EV comp. straight to the JPEG, while shadows would get "muddy" and lose contrast too. With editing the NEF file, the RAW developers can target Whites (the very bright stuff, like snow and bright clouds) / Highlights (bright stuff that are not that bright to be close to white) / Midtones / Shadows and Blacks independently, and try to preserve the detail for each tone category with far more detail than if you were editing the JPEG - even if you were using an elaborate system of curve adj. layers, with layer masks etc.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TUDJ*
> 
> You could certainly have pushed the ISO higher, I'd have gone up to 800-1000.


Why? The recommended adjustment would be to slow that shutter down before cranking up ISO.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *TUDJ*
> 
> You could certainly have pushed the ISO higher, I'd have gone up to 800-1000.
> 
> 
> 
> Why? The recommended adjustment would be to slow that shutter down before cranking up ISO.
Click to expand...

that or just throw money at it


----------



## TUDJ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Why? The recommended adjustment would be to slow that shutter down before cranking up ISO.


Granted. I assumed he was using 1/1000th intentionally to freeze motion, I guess that could go lower and have the same effect for a dog


----------



## Scott1541

That guy who gives me the odd jobs must be happy with my work, he's just asked if I want to be a second shooter at a wedding he's doing at the end of the month. He's done 1-2 weddings before but he's nervous about this one.

Also had to cover him last night as well, that's twice this week alone







Don't really _need_ the money but it's nice to have some extra to pay for new toys, etc.


----------



## pcfoo

Save the monies for later. There are always excuses to spend more than you can make!


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Is there a cheap effective way of creating a fish eye lens for a canon 1100D? This http://www.amazon.co.uk/Canon-8-15mm-Fisheye-USM-Lens/dp/B0040YEFKI/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1431227418&sr=8-1&keywords=canon+fisheye is a little expensive lol and me and my gf just want to be able to take some fun shots when we go to Amsterdam, are any of the cheap adapter things on amazon any good?


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> Is there a cheap effective way of creating a fish eye lens for a canon 1100D? This http://www.amazon.co.uk/Canon-8-15mm-Fisheye-USM-Lens/dp/B0040YEFKI/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1431227418&sr=8-1&keywords=canon+fisheye is a little expensive lol and me and my gf just want to be able to take some fun shots when we go to Amsterdam, are any of the cheap adapter things on amazon any good?


http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=&sku=769428&gclid=COT4x9ChtsUCFQqGaQoddx0AjA&is=REG&Q=&A=details


----------



## pcfoo

The Rokinon above is actually a pretty good fisheye if you don't mind spending this kind of money for one.

The Opteka 6.5mm f/3.5 is a pretty decent lens for the price - not as cheap as the "adapters", but pretty wide. It is MF but that is not an issue with lenses that wide - DOF is massive.

If you don't have an ultra wide angle already, I would recommend chipping a bit more than the Opteka, but not getting a fisheye: the Canon EF-S 10-18mm f/4.5-5.6 IS STM. It is one of the best APS-C digital UWA zooms, with top-of-class optical performance - even tho it looks like a meh cheap plastic lens.

10mm is plenty wide to do creative shots with up-close perspective exaggeration etc, but remains usable for a range of subjects; from landscapes and cityscapes, to creative selfies, group portraits and object closeups.


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=&sku=769428&gclid=COT4x9ChtsUCFQqGaQoddx0AjA&is=REG&Q=&A=details


Nothing is loading








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> The Rokinon above is actually a pretty good fisheye if you don't mind spending this kind of money for one.
> 
> The Opteka 6.5mm f/3.5 is a pretty decent lens for the price - not as cheap as the "adapters", but pretty wide. It is MF but that is not an issue with lenses that wide - DOF is massive.
> 
> If you don't have an ultra wide angle already, I would recommend chipping a bit more than the Opteka, but not getting a fisheye: the Canon EF-S 10-18mm f/4.5-5.6 IS STM. It is one of the best APS-C digital UWA zooms, with top-of-class optical performance - even tho it looks like a meh cheap plastic lens.
> 
> 10mm is plenty wide to do creative shots with up-close perspective exaggeration etc, but remains usable for a range of subjects; from landscapes and cityscapes, to creative selfies, group portraits and object closeups.


That's cool - thanks I'll see if she wants to get the Canon one because it does look good. She does an architectural uni course at the moment as well so I imagine it would probably be good for big buildings, spaces and installations?

Edit: Oh and what about adapter options? Are any of them any good?


----------



## pcfoo

I think adapters OK as a "toy".
Remember that most of them are circular fisheye (= 180deg FOV on all directions), which leads to a circular image like these examples below:





That is cool and all but I feel like after a few shots the niche is exhausted as a photography tool...at least in my eyes. Yeah, deformed portraits of friends, whole rooms or even skylines distorted in a single shot...but then, what?

Also note that those "squarish" crops above show one of the weaknesses in circular fisheye design: you are actually exposing a bit more than 50% of the sensor/film area. The rest is black and thrown away. Add the fact that a fisheye adapter will actually be killing lots of light and introducing CA and softness to any lens, you realize that images won't look nowhere that impressive.

More "conventional" are full-frame fiisheye lenses, which offer 180deg coverage only on the diagonal.
That leads to - as the name implies - to full frame images.

Tbh I don't know if there are FF fisheye adapters - perhaps there are.

FF fisheye images:





At any point, for architecture school / interests and whatnot (I'm Arch too btw) I feel rectilinear wide / ultra wide angle lenses are far more useful, so I would vote for the 10-18mm regardless.


----------



## Gobigorgohome

I have shot about 500 shots yesterday and today in "manual" mode of the D5200, only thing that is starting to get to me is that it would have been easier to have a camera with more buttons. I cannot find the way to change the ISO without taking the camera away from my eye (and therefor _maybe_ miss the shot), everything else is fine though. Pretty bright out yesterday and today so the ISO have been from 200 to 500, shutter speed from 1/300 to 1/1250, from 1/1000th and down is pretty good for ISO around 400. Only been shooting with Tamron 70-300mm (mostly at 300mm) and Sigma 150-500mm (mostly at 500mm), got very close to the birds today so the 500mm zoom and 3-4 meters away did end up with pretty decent shots, I only shot RAW and now I am going to fiddle around in Lightroom to try to make them the way I want. Really fun to play around with the 150-500mm zoom, if I ever going to switch that out I would have wanted the Tamron 150-600mm, because I have a little more zoom and it is supposed to be sharper at 600mm than the Sigma is at 500mm.


----------



## TUDJ

Don't worry about taking the camera away from your face to change a few things, it's only a small thing. I find it helped me get more shots by learning to change settings by "feel" but it is probably easier on some cameras than others.

I'd concentrate of getting used to the basic settings using manual mode, refining technique can come later.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gobigorgohome*
> 
> I have shot about 500 shots yesterday and today in "manual" mode of the D5200, only thing that is starting to get to me is that it would have been easier to have a camera with more buttons. I cannot find the way to change the ISO without taking the camera away from my eye (and therefor _maybe_ miss the shot), everything else is fine though. Pretty bright out yesterday and today so the ISO have been from 200 to 500, shutter speed from 1/300 to 1/1250, from 1/1000th and down is pretty good for ISO around 400. Only been shooting with Tamron 70-300mm (mostly at 300mm) and Sigma 150-500mm (mostly at 500mm), got very close to the birds today so the 500mm zoom and 3-4 meters away did end up with pretty decent shots, I only shot RAW and now I am going to fiddle around in Lightroom to try to make them the way I want. Really fun to play around with the 150-500mm zoom, if I ever going to switch that out I would have wanted the Tamron 150-600mm, because I have a little more zoom and it is supposed to be sharper at 600mm than the Sigma is at 500mm.


shoulda bought a D4S or the soon to be released D5. those have plenty of buttons. some may even say its just 2-3 buttons shy of perfection


----------



## pcfoo

It is good that you spend time with your camera - nothing substitutes that, but make sure you've researched the camera's available capabilities and tricks to make your life easier.
Shooting manual is cool, but I would suggest to you to not over-analyze it, nor stick to "all-manual" just for the shake of it. Automations are in place to help everyone, it is not for "noobs". "Real men" use everything in their disposal, not "manual".

Re-inventing the wheel can be the fun way to do it, sure, but rarely the "smart" way to do it. Work with, not against what's available to you.

So, back in your example, the ISO button is not there, not (only) because Nikon is run by cheap bastards that "cheated" you out of it to make D5200 cheaper to make (and sell) but also because it is not really needed. Why? Because "AutoISO".

Auto ISO works amazingly good with modern SLRs - I see little to zero reason to "long" for a dedicated ISO button and keep changing ISO without taking your eye off the VF, when you have that feature.

Say you are concrete you don't want to go above ISO 400 or 800? Say it to Auto ISO settings: max ISO 400, min shutter speed 1/500s. It will bump iso if needed to maintain 1/500s, it won't go above ISO 400 (or whatever you said is the limit), even if it will need ISO 1000 to maintain 1/500s. Works perfectly good, and everyone I know is happy with it. Nobody really changes ISO on the fly if something like that is in place. Pros and enthusiasts were asking for those for AGES...but you "don't trust them" apparently.

Even if you had the dedicated ISO button, like D7200 or D750 have, you would not be able to use it without taking you eye away from the VF. Not handheld at least, as you need to pull your left hand that I assume is supporting a heavy lens in your scenario, and tamper with the left side of your camera body while the right rotates dials around the right grip...yeah, not realistic. Even if you "manage" to do it while keeping your subject in focus, framed properly etc, probably camera shake will be a real issue when you will choose to shoot.

Thus AutoISO is used by people that do have ISO buttons too









Now that you have some more experienced and know what you need - say shutter speed 1/X or more, diaphragm Y for maximum sharpness, ISO >Z for reasonable noise, you can prepare your settings in both camera and mind to move in next weekend with a "plan", adding AutoISO to the mix to help you.


----------



## Gobigorgohome

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TUDJ*
> 
> Don't worry about taking the camera away from your face to change a few things, it's only a small thing. I find it helped me get more shots by learning to change settings by "feel" but it is probably easier on some cameras than others.
> 
> I'd concentrate of getting used to the basic settings using manual mode, refining technique can come later.


Manual mode is pretty easy to use, I only fiddle too much with the shutter speed and which ISO to pick in which scenario, in the sun ISO 320 with a shutter speed on 1/1000th worked great (have many keepers on those settings, and the details is pretty insane on some of the birds). When the birds is sitting on the "shadow-side" of the tree I need to bump the ISO up to atleast 400 and still it gets a little muddy (have seen through all the photos now).

I seem to get this blue/mauve and green coloring if I shoot with too high ISO at the white-details, the pictures seem to be too bright, I get alot of that when I try to get birds flying. So that means, whenever a bird is in motion I need to bump the ISO down? Shutter speed at 1/1250th is not enough for this small birds, it does not get sharp even if it is focused it seems like. With larger birds I have no problem when they fly, but the mauve-colors still appear.

I found out that the Sigma 150-500 produces pretty good quality pictures with "right" settings, I get very clear and crisp shots at 500mm with ISO 320. I stood 4-5 meters away of the birds plus that long zoom, so I am very happy.


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gobigorgohome*
> 
> I have shot about 500 shots yesterday and today in "manual" mode of the D5200, only thing that is starting to get to me is that it would have been easier to have a camera with more buttons. I cannot find the way to change the ISO without taking the camera away from my eye (and therefor _maybe_ miss the shot), everything else is fine though. Pretty bright out yesterday and today so the ISO have been from 200 to 500, shutter speed from 1/300 to 1/1250, from 1/1000th and down is pretty good for ISO around 400.


There should be a button on the side of the lens mount that you can set to change ISO, should be just below the flash button. I've got the D5100 set up like this, it's actually easier to change the ISO on this than it is the D7200 by default.


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> There should be a button on the side of the lens mount that you can set to change ISO, should be just below the flash button. I've got the D5100 set up like this, it's actually easier to change the ISO on this than it is the D7200 by default.


this, Set the FN button to change the iso

had this config back when i had my D60, hate my D7k for not letting me use any of the two function buttons in the front to change ISO -_-


----------



## Gobigorgohome

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> There should be a button on the side of the lens mount that you can set to change ISO, should be just below the flash button. I've got the D5100 set up like this, it's actually easier to change the ISO on this than it is the D7200 by default.


Wow, that's really nice.









Looking to get a few more lenses to play around with, first off, what is the main difference in the Tamron AF Di 70-300 4-5,6 and Tamron SP DI VC 70-300 4-5,6? I found a video on youtube comparing the VC 70-300 against the expensive Nikon 70-200, at 200 mm they was about equal pursuant to the reviewer. I really like the AF Di 70-300 (which I currently have), but is there any reason to go with the VC over that one?
Also, is there any other lenses I should be looking for? I shoot mostly long range, but I would like to have a lens from around 24-70 or something (the only small zoom I have is the Nikon 18-55 kit-lens).


----------



## TUDJ

VC (Vibration Control) is Tamron's version of Nikon's VR (Vibration Reduction) technology which takes very specific measurements of camera movement during an exposure and compensates for the movement resulting is a sharper image. They usually claim 3-5 stops of difference.

On the non-VC version you may only get sharp hand held images down to 1/150 of a second but with VC you may be able to get sharp results down to 1/50. Those are rough examples, real world results will be close but vary with conditions.

There is a huge choice of lenses, try not to get caught in the mindset that you need more. If you don't see anything wrong with your current ones then there's no need to upgrade. Wanting to cover different focal lengths is different, work out what you need to cover (by thinking about what subjects you will shoot) and go from there.

---

I had a break a couple of weekends ago and got a chance to play with my ND filter, quite happy with this shot


----------



## Scott1541

I shall be playing with mine in a couple of days, my last exam is later today







There's not a lot of subjects that lend themselves to long exposures here in Lincoln, but when I get home in a few weeks I've got some plans


----------



## Conspiracy

just got home from attending a presentation hosted by Ryan Muirhead. super laid back and insightful dude. pretty neat to meet photographers you follow online

unexciting photo i took with the x100 testing out manual focus with the focus peaking VF within the VF. super neat feature but tough to use under extreme low light haha


how many people does it take to fix a projector?? im not sure what was wrong but it took that many people standing together to figure it out lolz


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> how many people does it take to fix a projector?? im not sure what was wrong but it took that many people standing together to figure it out lolz


Bang, HDMI into a VGA projector... had similar problems when we were doing our group project


----------



## hokiealumnus

I'm totally stoked....for my birthday (the end of next month, unfortunately), my wonderful, beautiful, awesome wife is getting me an EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS STM!

No, it's not an L lens, or anywhere even close. However, after plenty of deliberation/soul searching, I came to the decision I'd use that more than a) the 10-18mm STM or the b) 50mm STM. Also, I already have the 50mm II. Those were the only other real contenders; I'm no professional and just can't justify L quality glass, no matter how much I want it, I'm neither that good nor could that kind of budget be justified without making plenty of income from my photos (that number is currently a big fat zero). Hopefully the 55-250 STM will allow me to get some solid telephoto results in the future!

Canon crop shooters can get them dirt cheap (relatively speaking) on eBay as white-box kit pulls. I got mine here for $173.29, a steal for the quality it's supposed to have. There were numerous reasons to buy the STM over the older IS II, but if you're on an extremely tight budget, I should mention you can get the older lens refurbished from Canon for only $99.99.

Now, if it shows up before Sunday, the biggest challenge is going to be getting her to let me use it just one day before late June for the airshow this weekend.....


----------



## FiveStarZA

That is a great lens (price to performance wise). I'm also sticking with the STM family on my 700D (T5i in the US and A I think?). I did add the 10-18mm recently and it's also pretty amazing. Surprisingly I tend to be using the 10-18 most. I quite like the little bit of barrel distortion and at 10mm it's plenty wide.

Rocking the 10-18, 18-55, and 55-250mm IS STMs, with the F1.8 50mm II thrown in and i'm pretty much kit-lens-covered.


----------



## Pandora51

Can someone tell me please if there will be a Adobe Lightroom 6 student and teacher version? Cant find any informations. Now Im not sure if I should wait any longer or get Lightroom 5.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> Yeah, it should allow you to drop the shutter speed by a couple of stops, this would be better for low light, but VC/VR/OS/IS can't solve everything.
> 
> Just thought I'd post this, might have been able to go a stop lower on the shutter speed but it's an alright example. 1/15th at 29mm, f/2.8, ISO 1600 on my D5100 (same sensor as D7000) I think I did a bit of noise reduction in post though.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> Waterside by Scott3933, on Flickr


Sorry I didnt respond to this. Thank you for the example.

So Im planning to get this lens soon. I dont think there is a better option for the same or lower price with the same versatility.


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pandora51*
> 
> Can someone tell me please if there will be a Adobe Lightroom 6 student and teacher version? Cant find any informations. Now Im not sure if I should wait any longer or get Lightroom 5.


As far as I'm aware I don't think they are doing one, they're only doing upgrade and full for LR6. They've got a student creative cloud photography package, which includes LRCC but obviously that's subscription.

It sucks because I was planning to buy the Lightroom 6 student version too as I can't upgrade, it's a shame they're trying to force people over to creative cloud


----------



## TUDJ

What does 6 do that 5 doesn't?


----------



## hokiealumnus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TUDJ*
> 
> What does 6 do that 5 doesn't?


From here:
Quote:


> New Features
> - HDR Merge: Takes two images and merges them into a single HDR while leaving the two originals intact.
> - Panoramic Merge: Merge a panoramic image or something like a Brenizer effect images. Vertical and horizontal panoramic merging are available.
> - Facial recognition: Lightroom now recognizes faces but will keep that private unless you consciously want to integrate that information into the image.
> - Faster GPU performance of image editing
> - Support for touch-enabled PCs
> - Import directly into collections
> - New metadata filtering options
> - Pet Eye - Red eye correction for pets
> - CMYK Soft Proofing support
> - Music based Slideshow Transitions Slideshows that Pan & Zoom
> - Add up to 10 songs to Slideshows
> - HTML5 Web Module galleries


Of course the most important thing is that Adobe EoL's new camera RAW support on older versions of software. So any camera released after the LR6 launch will require it for RAW support. I think that's crap, but it is what it is and we should all be used to it from Adobe by now.


----------



## Conspiracy

6>5 numerically speaking so theres that









im also curious because photoshop CS6 and ACR are terrible for editing fuji raws. i havent yet researched photoshop CC but im needing to find a new program thant can do my canon raws and fujis


----------



## Pandora51

Yeah LR6 is not really better than LR5 but why should I get lr5 when lr6 is around the corner?
Atleast that was what I thought. It sucks there is no lr6 student version.

Is it possible to upgrade from lr5 student to the normal lr6 version in the future?


----------



## Sean Webster

I can't tell if the GPU usage in LR6 actually helps to speed up editing or not...mine is still laggy all the time when using some of the tools like the clone stamp/healing brush especially.


----------



## Makki

About a month ago I somewhy started to do some homework with photoshooting. This is for my own usage, and hopefully i learn to take some good pictures without editing. Thats my objective in this "hobby". As an camera i have Canon EOS 1000D with EFS 18-55 kit lens and Tamron AF 70-300 1:4-5,6


----------



## FiveStarZA

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> As far as I'm aware I don't think they are doing one, they're only doing upgrade and full for LR6. They've got a student creative cloud photography package, which includes LRCC but obviously that's subscription.
> 
> It sucks because I was planning to buy the Lightroom 6 student version too as I can't upgrade, it's a shame they're trying to force people over to creative cloud


Yeah, this is Adobe.

That said, even as a South African, the Photography package at $9.99/pm (over 12 months) for PS and LR CC is pretty good value for money.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FiveStarZA*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> As far as I'm aware I don't think they are doing one, they're only doing upgrade and full for LR6. They've got a student creative cloud photography package, which includes LRCC but obviously that's subscription.
> 
> It sucks because I was planning to buy the Lightroom 6 student version too as I can't upgrade, it's a shame they're trying to force people over to creative cloud
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, this is Adobe.
> 
> That said, even as a South African, the Photography package at $9.99/pm (over 12 months) for PS and LR CC is pretty good value for money.
Click to expand...

everything is expensive in south africa. idk how yall even have photography over there. my friend bought a nikon D5200 a few years back and i think he paid way more than double what he could have paid while he was here in the states


----------



## FiveStarZA

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> everything is expensive in south africa. idk how yall even have photography over there. my friend bought a nikon D5200 a few years back and i think he paid way more than double what he could have paid while he was here in the states


Yeah, all the nice hobbies are crazy expensive here, but then again, we do live in Africa







Which is rad and sad.

I paid approximately $750 for a T5i with 18-55mm, I see on B&H it goes for $650. That said Nikon, and in particular their lenses are hellishly expensive here. One of the reasons I "compromised" and went Canon.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Makki*
> 
> hopefully i learn to take some good pictures without editing. Thats my objective in this "hobby".


Unless you're planning to shoot JPG, that's an unrealistic goal. Consider that all film needs processing and adjustments during print/dev, and ask yourself why the same wouldn't be true for digital RAW.


----------



## hokiealumnus

These certainly aren't worth being rated, but I took some product shots to post on Amazon (hey...why not, they might add me to their reviewer list







). Dust suuuucks and it is extraordinarily difficult to get every last speck off. Thus, I cheated and turned the screen on to hide it.







These were just for Amazon, so I stopped trying after that. Anyway, these were on a piece of wood (obviously), re-purposed from an old shelf. I had my two shop lights reflecting off two pieces of white foam board and was hand-holding the camera and the flash off to camera-left'ish.

Shot to show a screen protector installed:










Case + screen protector:










Back of the phone/case:










Last one, a little closer to show the tapering around the camera/buttons:


----------



## sub50hz

Woof, that red wood is hard to look at.


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Makki*
> 
> hopefully i learn to take some good pictures without editing. Thats my objective in this "hobby".


Striving to shoot things as good as possible in-camera is a good goal, so that you have a "better photograph" to work with.

There are a lot of reasons why most photographers should edit their pictures regardless. The best the photograph "out-of-the-box", the better and faster the editing process will be.

Note that there is a huge difference between editing, and "distorting/manipulating/lying" etc.
There should be little or no "guilt" in editing photographs, unless we are talking those that are heading to a forensic lab, a court or perhaps for publishing certain types of reportage.

Even then, the photographer is "editing" reality by capturing a specific moment, from a specific point of view and a specific framing through is lens. The art of photography is picking those angles and telling a story the way you think it should be told with a picture, so subjectivity is weaved into what matters in photography, not a pseudo-idealization of "Truth". An image is usually more specific and less subjective to interpretation than conveying the same message through words, and I would never advocate presenting a photoshop "collage/painting" as a photograph, but this is another story.


----------



## hokiealumnus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Woof, that red wood is hard to look at.


Agreed. I want to get something nice & black, but haven't had occasion to do so. Velour is probably my best bet...totally light-absorbing, non-reflective. Marble looks better, but controlling reflections is extraordinarily difficult.

So let's talk...what do you guys use for your dark floors/backgrounds for product/macro shots? I already have white covered (foam board &/or a sheet) and just tried something different with the wood once, but would really prefer black.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hokiealumnus*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Woof, that red wood is hard to look at.
> 
> 
> 
> Agreed. I want to get something nice & black, but haven't had occasion to do so. Velour is probably my best bet...totally light-absorbing, non-reflective. Marble looks better, but controlling reflections is extraordinarily difficult.
> 
> So let's talk...what do you guys use for your dark floors/backgrounds for product/macro shots? I already have white covered (foam board &/or a sheet) and just tried something different with the wood once, but would really prefer black.
Click to expand...

i really like Seanwebsters setup. look up his flickr for some examples


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Striving to shoot things as good as possible in-camera is a good goal, so that you have a "better photograph" to work with


This has less to do with processing than it does with the technical aspects of shooting, though. I think it's important to make the distinction between technical proficiency and the need to make processing adjustments to fit style/taste/sensor type/print medium, etc.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hokiealumnus*
> 
> Agreed. I want to get something nice & black, but haven't had occasion to do so. Velour is probably my best bet...totally light-absorbing, non-reflective. Marble looks better, but controlling reflections is extraordinarily difficult.
> 
> So let's talk...what do you guys use for your dark floors/backgrounds for product/macro shots? I already have white covered (foam board &/or a sheet) and just tried something different with the wood once, but would really prefer black.


Gosh, I hate wood backgrounds unless they are bamboo. lol

I was forced to figure out how to shoot with a dark background for my job. I just do a basic lazy setup with a black acrylic sheet. 2x2ft is good to start with unless you need bigger, it should cover you fine. The only issue with it is that it gets scratched up soooooooooooo easily. There are liquids that are supposed to clean up the scratched somewhat, but I haven't used them. I just photoshop out the scratches when they show along with all the dust. You could also get a slab of absolute black tile. If you don't want a reflective surface you can still use the same set up you will just have to shoot at a top down type angle.

You also need a black curtain/cloth for the background, I used a big curtain I had hooked on a backdrop stand.

And for lighting the product I mainly use two lights, one slightly in front of and above the product and another to the side or in front 45 degrees. I use softboxes, you can use umbrellas as well no issue. The softboxes just have more of a directional light so they don't leak much onto the background. You can also use another light and gels to light the background diff colors. Possibly add in another light and do two lights from the side slightly behind with the top middle light as main to five a cool look...I haven't done that yet but I been meaning to.

*Setup:* Not really configured as stated, but you should get the point.



*Examples*

From side with something holding product up



From above


----------



## Conspiracy

i like your black surface with the blue backdrop. super clean


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> i like your black surface with the blue backdrop. super clean


Thanks, me too, it's my favorite...well blue is my favorite color.  In order to get the blue background I just shoot a flash with a blue gel (got with a pack of like 30 speed light gels off ebay for cheap) at it and it gets that way.


----------



## hokiealumnus

Agreed about blue & black, that looks stunning. Thanks for sharing!


----------



## Scott1541

First attempt at scanning a 120 negative using a DSLR. It's quite good considering I was using a flashgun placed on the floor with diffuser cap on, firing up through 2 layers of toilet roll and then a white plastic bag.


----------



## Minnie Cee

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> First attempt at scanning a 120 negative using a DSLR. It's quite good considering I was using a flashgun placed on the floor with diffuser cap on, firing up through 2 layers of toilet roll and then a white plastic bag.


Looks quite good!!


----------



## Conspiracy

so i visited this awesome olde place called Sloss Furnaces in Birmingham, AL yesterday. We were scoping it out to get ideas for a steampunk themed star wars fan film about boba fett

this place is almost as cool as old car city here in GA.


----------



## pcfoo

I don't know how good it would be for Boba Fett, but I can just hear that Taurus' suspension squeak as another armored film character is stepping out of it, smelling trouble!


----------



## Scott1541

I'm not sure if I've made a mistake or not.... Just bought a Tamron 70-200 off ebay







It's used, and the cheaper version without VC but it was in my rather limited budget. Now I've got to sell a few things to make way for it since I'm not made of money, such as the 55-200, my old iPhone 5 and Nexus 4







Also should have a battery grip coming today for the D7200.... that with grip and 70-200 is going to be a beast


----------



## Conspiracy

be careful and selfie responsibly


----------



## pcfoo

Yeap, I laughed with the above...

Selfie master race ftw!


----------



## Pandora51

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> I'm not sure if I've made a mistake or not.... Just bought a Tamron 70-200 off ebay
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's used, and the cheaper version without VC but it was in my rather limited budget. Now I've got to sell a few things to make way for it since I'm not made of money, such as the 55-200, my old iPhone 5 and Nexus 4
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also should have a battery grip coming today for the D7200.... that with grip and 70-200 is going to be a beast


Sounds like one of those cheap zoom lens. Guess you mean the 70-200 f2.8









Im wondering:
Is it worth it to sacrifice the vc for the f2.8?
I can totally imagine that for sports but for everything else?

Funny thing is a shop not for from me has the old Sigma 70-200mm F2.8 without vc to offer.
Should I consider this over a new tamron 70-300mm at the same price? (Not including the fact it has the better max. zoom).


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pandora51*
> 
> Funny thing is a shop not for from me has the old Sigma 70-200mm F2.8 without vc to offer.
> Should I consider this over a new tamron 70-300mm at the same price? (Not including the fact it has the better max. zoom).


IMO, definitely







.. id take it any day over a 70-300 4-5.6, even without the VC

would be a nice sports/portrait lens









just make sure everything works fine, a 2nd hand 70-200 2.8 for a price of a bnew 70-300 vc is a bit cheaper than expected ,,, i think ?


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pandora51*
> 
> Sounds like one of those cheap zoom lens. Guess you mean the 70-200 f2.8
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Im wondering:
> Is it worth it to sacrifice the vc for the f2.8?
> I can totally imagine that for sports but for everything else?
> 
> Funny thing is a shop not for from me has the old Sigma 70-200mm F2.8 without vc to offer.
> Should I consider this over a new tamron 70-300mm at the same price? (Not including the fact it has the better max. zoom).


VC isn't needed, but it is helpful for daily shooting. I use a canon 70-200 non-is and as long as I have a steady and and at least 1/200th shutter I'm fine.


----------



## pcfoo

On the 70-200 2.8 Tamron, it boils down to price. I believe the old model was nothing spectacular, exacltly because it had to overcome what the 70-200L 4 non-IS was (a really good, really fast focusing, pretty sharp lens @ the lowest price for L optics), and ofc its 3rd party competitor, the 70-200 EX DG (blah-blah) 2.8 Sigma that was perhaps a tad better. The Canon 2.8 IS models were simply out of reach price-wise, so those being better was almost practically irrelevant.

But a 2.8 zoom is a 2.8 zoom, that will give you a much brighter VF in SLRs, will perhaps allow the camera to focus more positively (albeit perhaps not faster, it could be more consistent) than f/4 optics would allow, and wide open would also allow for double the shutter speed for freezing motion - something VC/IS/VR etc can never accomplish.

I feel happy with my 70-200L 4 IS, mainly because it is so light, but I don't think you did bad buying the 2.8 tamron. Especially if it was a good price which would allow you to push it to the next buyer if you don't like it. I have taken flak on this before in this thread, but again, armed with patience you can buy 2nd hand lenses which you can later flip for close to no loss other than shipping.


----------



## Scott1541

If I shot canon I'd get a 70-200 f4 non-is as those things sell almost dirt cheap, over in the nikon camp things aren't as cheap though







The nikon 70-200 f4 probably sells for about £600 used (not to sure, haven't even looked). My budget for this is about £300-£350ish, which sits quite nicely in the used Tamron and Sigma (non-VC/OS) price zone.

My plan is to see how it goes with the Tamron; if it's alright I'll keep it, if not I'll return it as the seller I got it from allows returns of unwanted goods within 14 days. Then I'll maybe get on the lookout for a Sigma 70-200 (non-os), My mate has a non-os sigma and he really rates it.


----------



## pcfoo

Sorry, I wasn't paying attention/remembering you had Nikon gear.
The Tamron is a good lens...unless you get a lemon, the center should be tack sharp @ f/2.8 and only gets better f/4-f/8.

You should not worry about it much with the APS-C D7200, but it does vignette a bit on the heavy side in faster apertures @ FF.
That's pretty much it, otherwise it is very respectable for the money, and if you got it for sub 350 pounds with the ability to return for a refund, I think you did pretty well!


----------



## Pandora51

And the very old Sigma 70-200mm F2.8 APO EX ?

Is this still a good lens by today standards?


----------



## Scott1541

Ok I got the 70-200 this morning and have taken it out twice today to give it a good test, once around midday, then again just now (evening) to really get a feel for what it's like. Optically it's great, fairly sharp at f/2.8 and very sharp stopped down to f/5.6. The only real problem with it, as I expected after reading reviews is the autofocus. It misses focus occasionally, but not as much as I originally thought as it turns out I just let the shutter speed drop too low. The main problem is the speed of autofocus, it's slow, very slightly slower than my 55-200 and that's not a fast focusing lens by a long shot. While I was out with it today I tried taking shots of birds and was getting about 40-50% decent shots. Then the red arrows came by (practicing) and I had a bit more success with those than I did the birds but AF was still being a bit of a pain while I was shooting them. There's also another little problem with it, there's something loose rattling around inside near the lens mount, probably a screw or similar.

So overall I'm not sure whether to keep this lens or return it, I love the IQ but the AF is a pain. On the other hand some guy on facebook (who seems to check out) is selling a Sigma 70-200mm APO f/2.8 II HSM DG EX for around £250. It comes with all accessories and according to him the HSM motor was replaced and firmware updated just over a year ago. I'm considering purchasing that and getting the Tamron returned, what do you guys think? I really can't make my mind up


----------



## Pandora51

Sorry Im asking in between about a similar lens scott









But rattling is not a good sign.

Well the Sigma 70-200mm F2.8 APO EX I mentioned earlier would cost only 170 euro. Super cheap with a little scratch which is not visible in any photo so far.
The only issue here is most of my test pictures look soft. Propably too soft when cropped.

Now Im pretty unsure about this lens. What do you guys think?


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!









Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!






I messed up some photos because its so heavy







But not every photo and it looks soft. (Atleast in my mind lol)

btw thanks for all the previous answers about the vc.


----------



## Conspiracy

what are you looking for? not many lenses are going to look eye bleeding sharp SOOC unless you are shooting on a camera that has the aliasing filter removed. that filter softens images optically to battle against moire and various other flaws that come with digital sensors. i bet if you sharpen in post those will be sharp as a tack.


----------



## Pandora51

yes you are right.
But I dont think this lens would be as sharp as others without the AA Filter.

Not many pictures look perfect sharp without any extra sharpening. The thing is I have a feeling it looks alot softer than any picture from other lenses. The Nikon 18-135mm is not even a good lens but sharp.
Otherwise it might only be me. I cant compare them picture by picture.

I want to make sure Im doing the right. A 70-200mm f2.8 for that cheap? Should anyone even think about this?
And then again.. soft images might annoy me and prevent me from getting the best possible picture.


----------



## Scott1541

Update:

I sent the Tamron back today, the package was 40g away from costing me an extra £15 to post







The guy selling the Sigma got back to me this morning too, the price was decent so I ended up buying it for £270 inc paypal and postage fees. He then posted the lens then realised he'd left the tripod collar off, so there's now two packages on the way to me, which should get here tuesday due to the bank holiday.

Hopefully I'll be happier with the Sigma, if it's sharper than my 55-200 and focuses faster I'll be happy. That tamron wouldn't even focus as fast as the 55-200, and that's pretty much a kit lens


----------



## Makki

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Striving to shoot things as good as possible in-camera is a good goal, so that you have a "better photograph" to work with.


It'll be hard objective to learn that. But as you said it hastes editing progress nicely. Im just too lazy to tweak every picture i take, honestly. I swapped today Tamron to my camera and only word i could say was like: Woah. Im no longer using that Kit lens, its just horrible if you can compare it to this. Only minus i know is that its way too big for indoors, 70-300. I might order another for that. Hopefully i can control this "hobby" of mine.


----------



## pcfoo

@Pandora51, your Sigma and most equivalent zoom lenses (with few exceptions) designed more than a decade ago (or carry-over designs that are even older) are in general soft wide open.
Especially @ 200mm, you have to stop down to f/5.6 or so to see the lens at its fullest. And even then - depending on your expectations / experience / comparisons - those might not appear impressive. But are good lenses and are able to produce amazing images if you work with their weaknesses instead of against them.

Also don't judge from a couple of shots handheld with slowish shutter speed. If you are worried that you have a lemon (Sigma lenses of that era were often de-centered = most likely cannot be fixed with a mere calibration, lens elements are glued together imperfectly - had a friend who was so pissed that his 100-300 f4 EX had that - and that was in Greece, for a lens you could not just return, that would cost what a 20something student would make working in a quarter or so!), take your time, use a tripod and make sure you focus properly. Do it at a reasonable distance too, not at or close to the MFD. If the lens is consistently soft, you would be absolutely justified to let it go.

Sigma got better gradually with their EX line, upgraded them later to the EX DG and a gazillion of acronyms past that.
Each generation was a bit better, but none was a revelation. AF got better, quality got better, QC got better etc.
What was great, was that you could get "ok" f/2.8 and good build quality that would cost you double the money (new) to get from Nikkor or Canon alike, which also weren't that amazing wide open (still clearly better). Took some time for the OEM lens designers to nail lenses like the Nikkor 70-200 VR II & Canon 70-200 L IS II which are just painfully sharp even @ f/2.8, and the new Tamron 70-200 2.8 VC is not too bad either. These lenses are sharper wide open than the best samples of zooms and even some primes were before them, and not just @ center, but all the way to the borders. Bad news is that you have to drop $1500 for the Tammy and $2000~2400 for the OEM models. And that's US prices, EU and other parts of the world are higher.

Sigma is picking up their game with the Art series, but apparently nothing really good comes really cheap


----------



## Pandora51

Pcfoo

Thank you for your advice and info.

Well I dont have it yet. Those were just some testshots. So it might be me who messed up some shots.
I will go to the shop in a few minutes and give it a last chance.
Could be a lemon aswell.
Atleast I can say new Sigma lenses are very good like my sigma 105mm.

F2.8 is good and at all but with bad quality wide open I might aswell get the tamron 70-300mm vc..
Not sure if Im able to get a 70-200mm f2.8 any time again im my current budget range but yeah.
Lets see and thanks.

Edit:
Turns out it is a lemon. Very unsharp today (very weird). Propably de-centered and the shop wont sell it anymore.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> Ok I got the 70-200 this morning and have taken it out twice today to give it a good test, once around midday, then again just now (evening) to really get a feel for what it's like. Optically it's great, fairly sharp at f/2.8 and very sharp stopped down to f/5.6. The only real problem with it, as I expected after reading reviews is the autofocus. It misses focus occasionally, but not as much as I originally thought as it turns out I just let the shutter speed drop too low. The main problem is the speed of autofocus, it's slow, very slightly slower than my 55-200 and that's not a fast focusing lens by a long shot. While I was out with it today I tried taking shots of birds and was getting about 40-50% decent shots. Then the red arrows came by (practicing) and I had a bit more success with those than I did the birds but AF was still being a bit of a pain while I was shooting them. There's also another little problem with it, there's something loose rattling around inside near the lens mount, probably a screw or similar.
> 
> So overall I'm not sure whether to keep this lens or return it, I love the IQ but the AF is a pain. On the other hand some guy on facebook (who seems to check out) is selling a Sigma 70-200mm APO f/2.8 II HSM DG EX for around £250. It comes with all accessories and according to him the HSM motor was replaced and firmware updated just over a year ago. I'm considering purchasing that and getting the Tamron returned, what do you guys think? I really can't make my mind up


So, you tested the lens for a few hours and wrote it off? I can't help but feel like there's a fair amount of expectation bias being applied here due to other users' suggestions and online reviews.


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> So, you tested the lens for a few hours and wrote it off? I can't help but feel like there's a fair amount of expectation bias being applied here due to other users' suggestions and online reviews.


I gave it a chance doing the sort of stuff that I'd want to be using it for and I wasn't happy with it. Loved the image quality, but the focusing speed/accuracy and fact that something was rattling around inside made me decide to return it. What good is a lens that has great IQ but can't focus properly









If I'd have read the reviews before I bought it then I most likely would have decided against it. It was a sort of impulse buy as I was lying in bed on eBay


----------



## Conspiracy

365GP. not MP... GP monster panoramic

http://www.in2white.com/


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> 365GP. not MP... GP monster panoramic
> 
> http://www.in2white.com/


Impressive. Although I kinda prefer megacity gigapanos, as there are more things to discover!
I would never expect it to be shot with a 70D tbh...









Also loved the solar panel blanket idea to keep the thing running.

Been itching dropping the EOS M + EFM 18-55 + EFM 22 + EFM-EOS adapter kit I god for something with a half decent EVF (if not optical) and something closer to a 40-50mm prime...









Options range from used X-Pro1, to XT1 to XE-2 on the expensive retro end with a 35 (waiting to see the 35 2) to the less robust but also much cheaper A6000 that is easily cheaper than the Fujis, and I feel would work fine for me with a humble 30 2.8 Sigma (albeit have zero experience whether that thing can zonefocus if needed as easily as fuji lenses/software can).


----------



## Minnie Cee

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> 365GP. not MP... GP monster panoramic
> 
> http://www.in2white.com/


Breathtaking!!!


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> 365GP. not MP... GP monster panoramic
> 
> http://www.in2white.com/


That's nuts!


----------



## Scott1541

Right then, the Sigma 70-200 came this morning and I've just been out testing it. Overall it's in fairly decent condition, quite well used but not bad. I was expecting a little worse externally, however there is one other thing I've discovered, there's a small patch of fungus on the edge of either the second of third element from the front. It's about 5mm wide and extends around 3mm towards the centre, should I just forget about it for now and see how it goes? How quickly does it grow? I don't think it's worth sending it in for repair at this stage.
Here's a shot at 200m, f/2.8, what do you guys think? Good, average, bad?



(That was default camera raw settings, nothing adjusted apart from white balance)


----------



## Pandora51

Looks fine to me. Alot better than my experience with the old 70-200mm.









Not sure about the fungus. Is it visible? Maybe at f8?
Silica gel packets is propably your best bet to prevent it from growing.
This is pretty interesting: lens fungus


----------



## Sean Webster

I think I'm gonna sell my 70-200 for a 135mm f/2.0 it's all about dat bokeh life right?


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> I think I'm gonna sell my 70-200 for a 135mm f/2.0 it's all about dat bokeh life right?


you either about that life or youre not. theres is no turning back when you join the club.

honestly the 70-200/2.8 is quite excellent but its too bulky for me. im still very happy with the choice of going with the f4 IS even though it gets like zero use its a good lens to have in the kit. the 135L is dreamy. i was going to save for a fast wide prime but i really really need to upgrade my pc, its getting old and worn out. i think im going to upgrade my cpu/mobo/ram this summer to hex core and upgrade one part at a time after that


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> you either about that life or youre not. theres is no turning back when you join the club.
> 
> honestly the 70-200/2.8 is quite excellent but its too bulky for me. im still very happy with the choice of going with the f4 IS even though it gets like zero use its a good lens to have in the kit. the 135L is dreamy. i was going to save for a fast wide prime but i really really need to upgrade my pc, its getting old and worn out. i think im going to upgrade my cpu/mobo/ram this summer to hex core and upgrade one part at a time after that


Ugh, I just need $200 more and I will get one! I think i'm going to the corner tonight and offering my services... XD haha

That picture is epic.

Go Xeon 18 core...go big or go home bro.


----------



## Conspiracy

im waiting to see what goes down at CES before i make any impulse buys


----------



## PCModderMike

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> I think I'm gonna sell my 70-200 for a 135mm f/2.0 it's all about dat bokeh life right?


Monica


----------



## mironccr345

Just saw Monica......and,


----------



## Sean Webster

LOL, it looks like I have to do more shoots like that I guess! I just need locations and models...

Quote:



> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> im waiting to see what goes down at CES before i make any impulse buys


CES? That isn't until next January!


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> I think I'm gonna sell my 70-200 for a 135mm f/2.0 it's all about dat bokeh life right?


If you shoot at 135 a lot, it would make sense. Great lens, my favorite EF offering.


----------



## Conspiracy

BOKEH


----------



## teh_HyDr0iD

Hey guys, sorry to crash the conversation here a bit. For a while I've been thinking it's time to move on from my trusty little point and shoot. It's getting a little long in the tooth and my new phone tends to take better photos if I'm not setting up all my lights.

The plan when I bought the camera a few years ago was to keep it until I could go for a DSLR so now I'm looking to get a foot in the door. I noticed the Nikon D5300 come up on Massdrop and from what I can see it looks like a decent camera. What is the consensus here? I'm no professional and this will be my first DSLR, but I want something that will last a good few years. It's not something that I will use on a daily basis, but I will use it fairly regularly and don't want to outgrow it or find myself wishing I'd saved for a bit longer and invested a little more.

Primary uses for me would be, car photography (stationary and action at racetracks), computer parts (occasional reviews) and general things that catch my fancy.

Also, what would you say is the closest equivalent from the Canon side?

Here's a link to the drop.

https://www.massdrop.com/buy/nikon-d5300-24-2-mp-cmos-digital-slr-camera?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_term=Community%20-%20Mechanical%20Keyboards%20-%20MAU%20%28Active%29&utm_campaign=Mech%20Keys%20A%20Product%20Announcement%202015-05-28&mode=guest_open&referer=QURU8D


----------



## Wolfsbora

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *teh_HyDr0iD*
> 
> Hey guys, sorry to crash the conversation here a bit. For a while I've been thinking it's time to move on from my trusty little point and shoot. It's getting a little long in the tooth and my new phone tends to take better photos if I'm not setting up all my lights.
> 
> The plan when I bought the camera a few years ago was to keep it until I could go for a DSLR so now I'm looking to get a foot in the door. I noticed the Nikon D5300 come up on Massdrop and from what I can see it looks like a decent camera. What is the consensus here? I'm no professional and this will be my first DSLR, but I want something that will last a good few years. It's not something that I will use on a daily basis, but I will use it fairly regularly and don't want to outgrow it or find myself wishing I'd saved for a bit longer and invested a little more.
> 
> Primary uses for me would be, car photography (stationary and action at racetracks), computer parts (occasional reviews) and general things that catch my fancy.
> 
> Also, what would you say is the closest equivalent from the Canon side?
> 
> Here's a link to the drop.
> 
> https://www.massdrop.com/buy/nikon-d5300-24-2-mp-cmos-digital-slr-camera?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_term=Community%20-%20Mechanical%20Keyboards%20-%20MAU%20%28Active%29&utm_campaign=Mech%20Keys%20A%20Product%20Announcement%202015-05-28&mode=guest_open&referer=QURU8D


You cannot go wrong with the D5300. I'm still shooting with my D5000 and the D5300 puts it to shame. Considering its specs are better than the original D7000 you'll be in great hands at a better price. I say jump on it, especially if it is your first camera. Just get yourself some good lenses. If I'm not mistaken, Massdrop also has the amazing 50mm f/1.8D for an unbeatable price. That is my main goto lens.


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pandora51*
> 
> Looks fine to me. Alot better than my experience with the old 70-200mm.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not sure about the fungus. Is it visible? Maybe at f8?
> Silica gel packets is propably your best bet to prevent it from growing.
> This is pretty interesting: lens fungus


It's not visible, as it's on the very edge of an element it should be out of the crop image circle, it might even be out of the 135 image circle too. I emailed sigma about what it would cost to get repaired and it would basically cost the difference between what I paid for it, and the going price on eBay... how suspicious







My current plan is to sort of my storage bag to reduce humidity in there to discourage further growth, then get this lens a nice healthy dose of sunlight when I get home in a couple of days







Hopefully all of that combined will kill it or prevent continued growth, if it doesn't I'll have to send it in to sigma in about a month, can't do it before then as I need it and turnaround time is 2-3 weeks.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *teh_HyDr0iD*
> 
> Hey guys, sorry to crash the conversation here a bit. For a while I've been thinking it's time to move on from my trusty little point and shoot. It's getting a little long in the tooth and my new phone tends to take better photos if I'm not setting up all my lights.
> 
> The plan when I bought the camera a few years ago was to keep it until I could go for a DSLR so now I'm looking to get a foot in the door. I noticed the Nikon D5300 come up on Massdrop and from what I can see it looks like a decent camera. What is the consensus here? I'm no professional and this will be my first DSLR, but I want something that will last a good few years. It's not something that I will use on a daily basis, but I will use it fairly regularly and don't want to outgrow it or find myself wishing I'd saved for a bit longer and invested a little more.
> 
> Primary uses for me would be, car photography (stationary and action at racetracks), computer parts (occasional reviews) and general things that catch my fancy.
> 
> Also, what would you say is the closest equivalent from the Canon side?
> 
> Here's a link to the drop.
> 
> https://www.massdrop.com/buy/nikon-d5300-24-2-mp-cmos-digital-slr-camera?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_term=Community%20-%20Mechanical%20Keyboards%20-%20MAU%20%28Active%29&utm_campaign=Mech%20Keys%20A%20Product%20Announcement%202015-05-28&mode=guest_open&referer=QURU8D


A D5300 should be a pretty decent camera for you. You shouldn't outgrow it too quickly, if at all, since this range of bodies are just as capable as the more expensive ones, it's just that these have less physical buttons and tend to rely much more on menus. This isn't really a problem if you just want to leave it in auto or aperture priority all the time once you've got it set up initially. Even though I've got a D7200 now I can easily pick up my D5100 and use that just as easily, with a fair bit less weight









I believe the Canon equivalent is the 700D


----------



## guitarhero23

Hey guys, I'm pretty new to the more "serious" photography scene and I'm trying to find a decent lens to pair with my Canon 7D that is a good all around lens with an emphasis on video.

Looking for a used one and budget is in the $200-$300 range preferably. Can push it "a little" if needed. Looking for a decent start not looking to spend more unless I get into it. Thanks


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guitarhero23*
> 
> Hey guys, I'm pretty new to the more "serious" photography scene and I'm trying to find a decent lens to pair with my Canon 7D that is a good all around lens with an emphasis on video.
> 
> Looking for a used one and budget is in the $200-$300 range preferably. Can push it "a little" if needed. Looking for a decent start not looking to spend more unless I get into it. Thanks


gotta be more specific. saying emphasis on video doesnt help. what type of videos do you plan to work on? what do you need form the lens? do you need a prime for the extra stops for low light or do you need a zoom for versatility? wide? normal? tele? help us help you


----------



## guitarhero23

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> gotta be more specific. saying emphasis on video doesnt help. what type of videos do you plan to work on? what do you need form the lens? do you need a prime for the extra stops for low light or do you need a zoom for versatility? wide? normal? tele? help us help you


Figured this was gonna be the answer. Wish I knew how to describe it better (BIG NOOB HERE)

Let me try and explain. Videos will mostly be of relatively close up objects but would like the option to get a little distance at least. I think a normal lens but this is where I would need a suggestion on if I should go wide or not. Looking for best versatility between different possible shots. The jack of all trades expert at none if you will. Plan on shooting in decent lighting.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guitarhero23*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> gotta be more specific. saying emphasis on video doesnt help. what type of videos do you plan to work on? what do you need form the lens? do you need a prime for the extra stops for low light or do you need a zoom for versatility? wide? normal? tele? help us help you
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Figured this was gonna be the answer. Wish I knew how to describe it better (BIG NOOB HERE)
> 
> Let me try and explain. Videos will mostly be of relatively close up objects but would like the option to get a little distance at least. I think a normal lens but this is where I would need a suggestion on if I should go wide or not. Looking for best versatility between different possible shots. The jack of all trades expert at none if you will. Plan on shooting in decent lighting.
Click to expand...

unless you dont want to share, we really need examples of what you think you would shoot. when i read close up of objects that can be subjective, like do you want to get really close or close up in terms of cinematic framing?

if you want a jack of all trades lens you cant beat the 24-105 f4L. if thats too much look at the EF-S 17-55 f2.8 for zooms. if you need a prime look at options in the 28mm, 30mm, 35mm, 40mm, 50mm


----------



## guitarhero23

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> unless you dont want to share, we really need examples of what you think you would shoot. when i read close up of objects that can be subjective, like do you want to get really close or close up in terms of cinematic framing?
> 
> if you want a jack of all trades lens you cant beat the 24-105 f4L. if thats too much look at the EF-S 17-55 f2.8 for zooms. if you need a prime look at options in the 28mm, 30mm, 35mm, 40mm, 50mm


It's not that I don't want to share it's just I don't completely know. I would definitely be doing things like this as an example of what I did with a standard camcorder:





Would also be cool to do things like this:





Would be cool to get some videos of golf stuff possibly but mostly up close in the tee box.


----------



## Conspiracy

if you are still trying to figure out what you want to do with video id suggest keep thinking it through before you buy a new lens. this will ensure you make the wisest purchase possible.


----------



## teh_HyDr0iD

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Wolfsbora*
> 
> You cannot go wrong with the D5300. I'm still shooting with my D5000 and the D5300 puts it to shame. Considering its specs are better than the original D7000 you'll be in great hands at a better price. I say jump on it, especially if it is your first camera. Just get yourself some good lenses. If I'm not mistaken, Massdrop also has the amazing 50mm f/1.8D for an unbeatable price. That is my main goto lens.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> It's not visible, as it's on the very edge of an element it should be out of the crop image circle, it might even be out of the 135 image circle too. I emailed sigma about what it would cost to get repaired and it would basically cost the difference between what I paid for it, and the going price on eBay... how suspicious
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My current plan is to sort of my storage bag to reduce humidity in there to discourage further growth, then get this lens a nice healthy dose of sunlight when I get home in a couple of days
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hopefully all of that combined will kill it or prevent continued growth, if it doesn't I'll have to send it in to sigma in about a month, can't do it before then as I need it and turnaround time is 2-3 weeks.
> A D5300 should be a pretty decent camera for you. You shouldn't outgrow it too quickly, if at all, since this range of bodies are just as capable as the more expensive ones, it's just that these have less physical buttons and tend to rely much more on menus. This isn't really a problem if you just want to leave it in auto or aperture priority all the time once you've got it set up initially. Even though I've got a D7200 now I can easily pick up my D5100 and use that just as easily, with a fair bit less weight
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I believe the Canon equivalent is the 700D


Thanks for the help guys. One more question then, on the topic of lenses, they are offering a 18-55mm VR II Zoom Lens for an additional $80 with the camera, is this worth buying or am I better off just getting the Nikon 50mm f/1.8D AF Nikkor Lens from the other drop?


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *teh_HyDr0iD*
> 
> Thanks for the help guys. One more question then, on the topic of lenses, they are offering a 18-55mm VR II Zoom Lens for an additional $80 with the camera, is this worth buying or am I better off just getting the Nikon 50mm f/1.8D AF Nikkor Lens from the other drop?


The zoom will give enough versatility to allow you to do what you want to do, however a prime lens would give you better image quality. Personally I don't think the 50mm f/1.8 D is a great choice for two reasons: firstly it's an older AF lens, which means that it won't be able to autofocus with the D5300, as the D3XXX and D5XXX series don't have motors built into the body to drive the lens. Only AF-S lenses can autofocus with these bodies.

Secondly 50mm is quite a long focal length for a DX format camera, it's field of view is equivalent to a 75mm lens on full frame (135/FX) which is pretty much short telephoto territory. A wider lens like the AF-S 35mm f/1.8G would be a much better general purpose lens, the field of view of this lens is equivalent to 52.5mm, much closer to 'normal' focal length which should be much more usable. I'd really suggest going to a store and trying out a few different lenses and see which you prefer.


----------



## Wolfsbora

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *teh_HyDr0iD*
> 
> Thanks for the help guys. One more question then, on the topic of lenses, they are offering a 18-55mm VR II Zoom Lens for an additional $80 with the camera, is this worth buying or am I better off just getting the Nikon 50mm f/1.8D AF Nikkor Lens from the other drop?


This may have been mentioned above but the 50mm is a manual focus. It takes practice but works well once you get the hang of it. The 18mm - 55mm is the kit lens that typically comes with the camera. I actually use this lens quite a bit. It's a cheap feeling plastic lens but does a really good job and is one of the best kit lenses you can get within that range of camera.


----------



## teh_HyDr0iD

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> The zoom will give enough versatility to allow you to do what you want to do, however a prime lens would give you better image quality. Personally I don't think the 50mm f/1.8 D is a great choice for two reasons: firstly it's an older AF lens, which means that it won't be able to autofocus with the D5300, as the D3XXX and D5XXX series don't have motors built into the body to drive the lens. Only AF-S lenses can autofocus with these bodies.
> 
> Secondly 50mm is quite a long focal length for a DX format camera, it's field of view is equivalent to a 75mm lens on full frame (135/FX) which is pretty much short telephoto territory. A wider lens like the AF-S 35mm f/1.8G would be a much better general purpose lens, the field of view of this lens is equivalent to 52.5mm, much closer to 'normal' focal length which should be much more usable. I'd really suggest going to a store and trying out a few different lenses and see which you prefer.


Thanks again.









With the longer effect from the lens, that would be a bit of a plus for some of the motorsport photography I would like to do. I do track days in my cars several times a year, but when I can't afford to drive for the day I often still go out and watch so my hands are free to take pictures. I noticed though that all the other photographers seem to have really long lenses due to the distances we have to keep for safety.

But then, if autofocus doesn't work that could be an issue when trying to snap fast moving cars from the side of the track.


----------



## pcfoo

@teh_HyDr0iD,
As mentioned by others, the D5300 is a pretty decent camera. You won't be disappointed - at least from a IQ standpoint, few DX cameras can come close. Canon does offer similarly speced models, but the last couple of generations it is hard to compete with the sharpness of the low-pass-less Sony sensors found in Nikon & Sony DSLRs and Sony mirrorless systems. We are not talking day and night differences (thus I try to chug it and stay with Canon for the time being), but if I was starting new, I would strongly consider Nikon.

I still give Canon having better lenses, and usually for less money than equiv. Nikkors, but unless you are going for something specific, it is usually not a deal breaker.

Lenses: get the kit lens with the D5300. At $80 is relatively cheap for a new lens. Outside popular belief, most of the pictures we are talking are wide angle - with few exceptions that just strengthen the extend of the rule. Yet most people getting into a more serious photographic system, or buying a new compact, daydream about the long lenses or choose based on the available zoom.

The 18-55 will be your most used lens easily. That's till you replace it with something with similar reach that is. You could for example opt out of it and get a Sigma 17-70 f2.8-4 or 17-50 f2.8.

The 50mm is a good lens, but not as versatile as you might think: on a cropped body, it gives you similar FOV with a short telephoto @ 75mm, and the fast aperture helps in low-light situations and/or subject isolation with selective focus / DOF control. It makes it good for waist up portraits & headshots, perhaps still life here and there, but in general is "tight" of all-around use, and "short" for tele use.

Don't think of it as a tele. Shooting cars or other distant subjects with the 50 (75 equiv) will be tough, especially track days. Even a 17-70 or similar standard zoom would fall short. I would recommend a 70-200 or 70-300 class lens for that. This could be one of the exceptions that would push you using a tele or tele-zoom more than standard/wide lenses: motorsports, sports (field & track, school games, surfing etc), wildlife. Unless it is indoors, with those you need as much reach as you can get, and even though for really long lenses primes are the best option, you cannot beat the versatility of a zoom. Most pros use more than one body & many lenses to cover sports, but a 70-200 2.8 lens is most likely permanently on one of those.

If you want a prime with more versatility than the 50, I would put my money on a Nikkor 35 1.8 DX or a Sigma 30 1.4 EX DC. Those are roughly 50mm FOV lenses, with good IQ and low light capabilities. I think 35-50mm equiv. lenses are the way to go if you were to have "only one" lens in your arsenal, or chose to go for a photographic excursion with just one prime.

For a relative affordable tele-zoom, you could consider anything from a Nikkor 55-200 VR, to a slightly better, longer and more expensive Tamron 70-300mm f/4-5.6 VC.
Depending on what you want to do, it could be a good idea to get the tele-zoom before a fast prime, but don't stress it.

Have fun, and remember: experience >> gear.


----------



## teh_HyDr0iD

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> @teh_HyDr0iD,
> As mentioned by others, the D5300 is a pretty decent camera. You won't be disappointed - at least from a IQ standpoint, few DX cameras can come close. Canon does offer similarly speced models, but the last couple of generations it is hard to compete with the sharpness of the low-pass-less Sony sensors found in Nikon & Sony DSLRs and Sony mirrorless systems. We are not talking day and night differences (thus I try to chug it and stay with Canon for the time being), but if I was starting new, I would strongly consider Nikon.
> 
> I still give Canon having better lenses, and usually for less money than equiv. Nikkors, but unless you are going for something specific, it is usually not a deal breaker.
> 
> Lenses: get the kit lens with the D5300. At $80 is relatively cheap for a new lens. Outside popular belief, most of the pictures we are talking are wide angle - with few exceptions that just strengthen the extend of the rule. Yet most people getting into a more serious photographic system, or buying a new compact, daydream about the long lenses or choose based on the available zoom.
> 
> The 18-55 will be your most used lens easily. That's till you replace it with something with similar reach that is. You could for example opt out of it and get a Sigma 17-70 f2.8-4 or 17-50 f2.8.
> 
> The 50mm is a good lens, but not as versatile as you might think: on a cropped body, it gives you similar FOV with a short telephoto @ 75mm, and the fast aperture helps in low-light situations and/or subject isolation with selective focus / DOF control. It makes it good for waist up portraits & headshots, perhaps still life here and there, but in general is "tight" of all-around use, and "short" for tele use.
> 
> Don't think of it as a tele. Shooting cars or other distant subjects with the 50 (75 equiv) will be tough, especially track days. Even a 17-70 or similar standard zoom would fall short. I would recommend a 70-200 or 70-300 class lens for that.
> 
> If you want a prime with more versatility, I would put my money on a Nikkor 35 1.8 DX or a Sigma 30 1.4 EX DC.


Thanks for that!

I've joined the drop now for the camera and included the lens. I'll pass on the other 50mm one for now as I see there is another vote up for lenses that includes the Nikkor 35 1.8 DX, I will see if anything comes from that vote and maybe pick that one up.

Thanks for the tips on telephotos too, I'll shop around a bit and maybe pick up one once I've had the camera for a couple of months and gotten used to it.

You've all been great help, I look forward to getting the camera and posting up some photos soon.







I am sure it will show my old Canon IXUS 220HS compact/point and shoot a clean pair of heels.


----------



## Wolfsbora

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *teh_HyDr0iD*
> 
> Thanks for that!
> 
> I've joined the drop now for the camera and included the lens. I'll pass on the other 50mm one for now as I see there is another vote up for lenses that includes the Nikkor 35 1.8 DX, I will see if anything comes from that vote and maybe pick that one up.
> 
> Thanks for the tips on telephotos too, I'll shop around a bit and maybe pick up one once I've had the camera for a couple of months and gotten used to it.
> 
> You've all been great help, I look forward to getting the camera and posting up some photos soon.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I am sure it will show my old Canon IXUS 220HS compact/point and shoot a clean pair of heels.


Congrats! If you have the money for the 35mm f/1.8G then I'd definitely recommend it. Other than that, you cannot beat the price of the 50mm. It is easily the best priceerformance you'll find in the world of lenses.


----------



## PCModderMike

New lens arrived today. Play time!


----------



## THEStorm

Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PCModderMike*
> 
> New lens arrived today. Play time!






That's a beautiful lens you have there, regarded as one of the best E mount has to offer!


----------



## Yungbenny911

Is the Sypder 3 pro any good for today's 32" 4K IPS Monitors? Some guy wants to sell his for $30. If it's not, then what would you recommend for calibration? I'm just trying to get colors, and contrast as accurate as i can without breaking the bank.

Thanks in advance!


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Yungbenny911*
> 
> Is the Sypder 3 pro any good for today's 32" 4K IPS Monitors? Some guy wants to sell his for $30. If it's not, then what would you recommend for calibration? I'm just trying to get colors, and contrast as accurate as i can without breaking the bank.
> 
> Thanks in advance!


Should be ok. It is old but came after LED backlit panels, so it should be "aware" of it and give you correct WB values.
Don't think it reads down to "pixel" level for it to mind the super-fine pixel pitch 4K panels have. Colorimeters average multiple pixels through their sensor afaik. Doubt you can get something better for $30.

Note that If you have more than one monitors, often it won't be able to calibrate them in "extend" mode in Windows 7/8.
You have to complete the calibration in "clone" mode for all displays and then switch to whichever desktop configuration you want after the profiles were created.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Should be ok. It is old but came after LED backlit panels, so it should be "aware" of it and give you correct WB values.
> Don't think it reads down to "pixel" level for it to mind the super-fine pixel pitch 4K panels have. Colorimeters average multiple pixels through their sensor afaik. Doubt you can get something better for $30.
> 
> *Note that If you have more than one monitors, often it won't be able to calibrate them in "extend" mode in Windows 7/8.
> You have to complete the calibration in "clone" mode for all displays and then switch to whichever desktop configuration you want after the profiles were created.*


I never did that with my spyder pro 4, should I? It loads the calibrations for each screen fine, however, one screen is more green while the other is more red with my monitors...

On another note, I got around to using my flash gel with something other than review product shots! I used my little Yongnuo YN560IV flashes for this, but i'm going to make an ice light soon...get sexier results. Also, I can't believe this used to be my car! Friend bought it and painted it up nicely.


----------



## boogschd

hey @Sean Webster

have you seen this ?

you might get featured , thatd be cool


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boogschd*
> 
> hey @Sean Webster
> 
> have you seen this ?
> 
> you might get featured , thatd be cool


No way, my stuff isn't that good. Maybe in a year or two after I hone in some more skill.


----------



## PCModderMike

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Should be ok. It is old but came after LED backlit panels, so it should be "aware" of it and give you correct WB values.
> 
> Don't think it reads down to "pixel" level for it to mind the super-fine pixel pitch 4K panels have. Colorimeters average multiple pixels through their sensor afaik. Doubt you can get something better for $30.
> 
> *Note that If you have more than one monitors, often it won't be able to calibrate them in "extend" mode in Windows 7/8.
> 
> You have to complete the calibration in "clone" mode for all displays and then switch to whichever desktop configuration you want after the profiles were created.*
> 
> 
> 
> I never did that with my spyder pro 4, should I? It loads the calibrations for each screen fine, however, one screen is more green while the other is more red with my monitors...
> 
> On another note, I got around to using my flash gel with something other than review product shots! I used my little Yongnuo YN560IV flashes for this, but i'm going to make an ice light soon...get sexier results. Also, I can't believe this used to be my car! Friend bought it and painted it up nicely.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
Click to expand...

I thought that was your car when I saw it up on flickr. Looks really nice with a respray.


----------



## teh_HyDr0iD

Looks great @Sean Webster!

I'm looking forward to taking my car out for some happy snaps when my camera arrives.









Here's just a phone pic from a few weeks back.









http://i3.minus.com/ibfK0qauRYDIm0.jpg


----------



## boogschd

nice wheels


----------



## teh_HyDr0iD

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boogschd*
> 
> nice wheels


Thanks! Due to the weird stud pattern on this car, I had to wait 7 months for a special set to be made by Work Japan to get them lol.


----------



## ace8uk

Is that an Astra VXR, or Sxi?


----------



## Conspiracy

https://www.phaseone.com/en/Products/Camera-Systems/XF-Camera-System.aspx?

and new line of glass said to resolve pass 100MP


----------



## teh_HyDr0iD

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ace8uk*
> 
> Is that an Astra VXR, or Sxi?


It's an SRi Turbo.







I have wanted one since they came out and was fortunate enough to be able to make the purchase last year.

So far it's still running the stock Z20LET, Bilstein B14 coilovers, Whiteline rear anti-roll bar, DBA T3 rotors front and T2s rear with QFM A1RM pads. The tires are Nitto NT01s around Work CR-Kiwami rims.

Late last year it threw a welch plug out of the cylinder head in the oil channels so I took it off the road and spent a few weeks giving it a solid overhaul worth about $10,000AUD including the above upgrades. She's running sweet now and I'm just enjoying driving it and doing some track days.

Here's a quick clip from the first time I took it out in April to a local track here in Sydney. I'm still new to this whole trackday thing though so there's still a few seconds left in the car with the current setup before I add any power.









https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fbaSBWZs39Q


----------



## ace8uk

Awesome, I drive a Corsa VXR and it's such a fun little hot hatch to throw around. Also has those awesome Recaros, which make me very happy.







No performance upgrades yet though.


----------



## pcfoo

Cool ride Hydroid, although dat reliability








Think your tires are 90% of your upgrades.









Here in the US hatchbacks & 3-doors are not selling, so hot-hatches are not even imported for the most part...your only options think are the Golf GTI and the Focus & Fiesta ST, now that the WRX is only a sedan. Even the A3 is a sedan here (abomination for me, who left my S3 back in Greece).

Seriously thinking getting a Focus ST myself soon...perhaps one of the reasons I don't spend on camera toys lately. WRX is just too ugly in my eyes, and I am getting old for a smaller car me thinks...if I go small, will be roadster!
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.phaseone.com/en/Products/Camera-Systems/XF-Camera-System.aspx?
> 
> and new line of glass said to resolve pass 100MP


Drooly it is, but they lie a bit...they claim "full size MF sensor", but it is still a bit smaller the the effective 645 film frame was and ~60% that of 6x6 (which really comes in mind when thinking MF personally).

I love the waist level finder option - hip for a 80MP DSLR! - but the whole modularity / upgradeability concept is a great thing.

We need 16bit processing in our smaller cameras...the DR advantage of those MF backs is more into having access to 16bit DAC than some special sensor...35mm DSLR/crop ILC etc cameras already have sensors that are held back by 12 & 14bit DACs.


----------



## teh_HyDr0iD

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ace8uk*
> 
> Awesome, I drive a Corsa VXR and it's such a fun little hot hatch to throw around. Also has those awesome Recaros, which make me very happy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No performance upgrades yet though.


I'm jealous! One of those would be my second pick after this Astra, but I like your seats more haha. A few of my friends have them and I'm always wishing I could have their seats.









Quote:


> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Cool ride Hydroid, although dat reliability
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Think your tires are 90% of your upgrades.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here in the US hatchbacks & 3-doors are not selling, so hot-hatches are not even imported for the most part...your only options think are the Golf GTI and the Focus & Fiesta ST, now that the WRX is only a sedan. Even the A3 is a sedan here (abomination for me, who left my S3 back in Greece).
> 
> Seriously thinking getting a Focus ST myself soon...perhaps one of the reasons I don't spend on camera toys lately. WRX is just too ugly in my eyes, and I am getting old for a smaller car me thinks...if I go small, will be roadster!
> 
> 
> 
> Haha thanks. Well the car is 12 years old this year and the service history was a little sparse, so I just had to work through a big list of maintenance items. I've replaced enough now that it should be sweet.
> 
> Haha, the tires are actually one of the cheaper purchases I made. Picked them up for $800 brand new. Everything else costs so much for these cars in Australia though, we call it the "euro tax" so most of the time I source parts from the UK myself and pay for shipping because I still end up saving money.
Click to expand...


----------



## Pandora51

Hm is HSS worth for a single flash on camera?
I want to pick up a Yongnou 565ex again but the 568 is an option aswell. Untill now there is no need for hss but it could be useful?

I will get a neewer TT560 for sure. Lets see how it performs.


----------



## Conspiracy

HSS is always useful. helps avoid the limit of the shutter sync that is 1/160 or 1/200 or 1/250 that most cameras have. if youre camera has a sync speed of 1/160 its nice to be able to push past that if you want to light outdoors or if you want a fast shutter because you need to eliminate motion blur because your lens is heavy or your subject is moving. moving subjects gets semi-trickier with strobing if you need to go past 1/250


----------



## Pandora51

Ah thank you.
After some research for the 568ex the only thing which concerns me is the weak battery door. Unfortunately only canon users have the option for the 568ex II. Not sure how big this issue really is. The 565ex was fine but there was an issue with the flash stand and I got a refund which is the reason why Im looking for another one in the first place.
Maybe I will go for a neewer flash later with hss or right now without spending too much.

Edit:
Went with one Yongnou 568ex I and one Neewer TT560 for now. Thanks
Hopefully everything will be fine.


----------



## Conspiracy

random cloud pr0n snap shots from the x100


----------



## Scott1541

Just purchased myself another SD card and battery in preparation for the airshow I'm going to next weekend. I'm not sure how big it's going to be as I've never been to this one before, and I haven't been to any others in 5 years







I've accepted that the 70-200 may be a bit short for this sort of event but oh well, I didn't think the price of renting a teleconverter or even longer lens was worth it, so I'll just have to use 1.3x crop mode and/or crop in lightroom.

Now all that's left on my to do list is get a monopod, any recommendations for decent monopods that won't break the bank? Need something with either no head at all (so I can use my tripod head), or a ball or tilt head, I don't want a pan-head.


----------



## hokiealumnus

Enjoy! You'll be fine with a crop sensory and 200mm. This was with only 135mm.

I also totally hand-held at air shows. Having it on a monopod will just slow you down IMHO. Have fun.


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hokiealumnus*
> 
> I also totally hand-held at air shows. Having it on a monopod will just slow you down IMHO. Have fun.


Maybe, I'm a bit shaky hand holding at 200mm but we'll see how it goes. The monopod isn't just for this, but I thought it'd be a good time to get one in case I end up needing it.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> Maybe, I'm a bit shaky hand holding at 200mm but we'll see how it goes. The monopod isn't just for this, but I thought it'd be a good time to get one in case I end up needing it.


I bought a monopod like 8 years ago "just in case" and have only ever used it once, FWIW.


----------



## hokiealumnus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> Maybe, I'm a bit shaky hand holding at 200mm but we'll see how it goes. The monopod isn't just for this, but I thought it'd be a good time to get one in case I end up needing it.


I don't think you'll be shaky at an air show. The reason I say it will slow you down is that the vast majority of the time you're going to be panning, fast; and at shutter speeds of 1/1,000** or faster. Now, if you're going there as much for the static displays as the planes in the air, and you plan on shooting them with long focal lengths, then you might want to bring one along.

**For jets...if you're shooting props and trying to get prop blur, you may indeed want that monopod. Shutter speeds will need to be much slower, and props are more difficult to shoot as a result.


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> I bought a monopod like 8 years ago "just in case" and have only ever used it once, FWIW.


Same here. Had a monopod, brought it on a hike, ended up using it as a very expensive hiking staff.

Personally I feel monopods are in a weird middle ground between bulkiness and stability.


----------



## Conspiracy

only use i have ever found for a monopod is shooting with a 400mm prime or longer. and not the new f4 DO glass that compact and ultra light. the monster f2.8 mamajama


----------



## r31ncarnat3d

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> only use i have ever found for a monopod is shooting with a 400mm prime or longer. and not the new f4 DO glass that compact and ultra light. the monster f2.8 mamajama


Was too poor to afford that three years ago, too poor to afford that now. I wish I had your problems.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r31ncarnat3d*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> only use i have ever found for a monopod is shooting with a 400mm prime or longer. and not the new f4 DO glass that compact and ultra light. the monster f2.8 mamajama
> 
> 
> 
> Was too poor to afford that three years ago, too poor to afford that now. I wish I had your problems.
Click to expand...

I cant afford it either when i dont do do sports at all anymore. Ive had to rent it before on a few shoots


----------



## pcfoo

I have a monopod I rarely use too (pretty expensive Manfrotto one, only got it cause I've got it 50% retail along with a decent ball-head that I also wanted to use on by 190PROB).
It is good to have for indoor shoots, used it for concert / theatrical performances, and maybe few functions / portrait shoots with ambient light where shutter speeds were doomed to be 1/60s or so, and I wanted to use my 70-200 for.

Certain types of shooters swear by it, and if you find a way to incorporate it in your shooting style can REALLY up your game and keeper %.

Here is an extreme example:





Still, I think you can do 90% of what he does with a basic monopod: http://www.amazon.com/AmazonBasics-WT1003-67-Inch-Monopod/dp/B00FAYL1YU/ref=sr_1_1?s=photo&ie=UTF8&qid=1433822076&sr=1-1&keywords=monopod, as long as you have a lens with a tripod collar.


----------



## Conspiracy

i found this beauty around the office yesterday. it had a disk in it with photos on it from some math workshop that was being hosted in a computer lab. it conveniently takes the same sony L-type batteries as my video camera so its on the charger and I will be taking shots and sharing soon









this mama jama takes whopping 0.3MP images at a startling resolution of 640x480


----------



## hokiealumnus

Wow; I don't think I've ever seen a camera that writes directly to floppy. Very interesting.


----------



## Conspiracy

its from 1997


----------



## Conspiracy

witness the Sony Mavica MVC-FD7 in all its 0.3MP glory


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> witness the Sony Mavica MVC-FD7 in all its 0.3MP glory
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!












Lomos, eat its dust!


----------



## Scott1541

Wow, that thing's a beast







Our first digital camera was a Nikon Coolpix E775, which is still lying around somewhere but I've lost the battery charger now so can't use it even if I wanted to. It was given to me when my dad got a D50, and that was my only camera for quite some time


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> i found this beauty around the office yesterday. it had a disk in it with photos on it from some math workshop that was being hosted in a computer lab. it conveniently takes the same sony L-type batteries as my video camera so its on the charger and I will be taking shots and sharing soon
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> this mama jama takes whopping 0.3MP images at a startling resolution of 640x480


I'll try to remember to grab it out of storage tonight, but I think I have that same camera or one really close. Pretty sure it uses a floppy, somebody gave it to my dad years ago.

Thanks for posting that, if nothing else it jogged my memory


----------



## Sean Webster

Seen the a7r II? ?


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Seen the a7r II? ?


YES OMG SUPER HIGH MP FF AND BSI CMOS


----------



## PCModderMike

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Seen the a7r II? ?


oh yes









I just purchased the A7II and I'm over here like








......but the A7RII is way out of my budget so it's not like I would have picked it up.


----------



## Pandora51

wow looks very impressive.

But the battery will last for only 290 shots?


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pandora51*
> 
> wow looks very impressive.
> 
> But the battery will last for only 290 shots?


All mirrorless cameras than need to power their sensor and a large screen or EVF constantly when in use, are doomed to have a worse battery life. FF ones have to power the big ass sensor too, so...

I am happy 5Ds/r images don't look too bad, otherwise I admit I suffer from body envy! Yes, DR is not as good, but I think the issue is blown a tad out of proportion @ fora - but that's the game.

Even if I was not invested in Canon FF glass, I admit that I have almost no desire for a Sony FF mirrorless at this point. Sure, if money was not an issue, I would toy with A7s*, but with most of its lenses being SLR big anyways, there are no "real" savings in size over a grip-less SLR - at least in my mind. Weight is also the same, although the "machined metal" approach does make them feel more mechanical & sturdy in your hand than equivalent FF SLRs. And dat Sony sensors...









At this point I believe Fuji has a better chance of getting me monies towards a X-T10 - If I don't cheap out with a used A6000. If I go mirrorless, it would be for a small, carry around package with 1-2 primes. Perhaps a kit zoom for the better half to borrow.

Eventually we will see better and better mirrorless designs, and I believe both Canon & Nikon should pick up their game & lead the way instead of following with half baked products (like my EOS M) and having consumers settle for travesties, preferring to leave Canon for Sony along with a Metabone adapter etc.

I don't know how many more generations it will take for MILCs to solve the long(-er than SLR) EVF blackouts, perfect contrast tracking and electronic shutters etc, but Sony makes impressive steps year after year. A7IIR comes further ahead for enthusiasts, but I believe the (hideously expensive) RX100 IV has actually introduced more impressive features than just a bigger sensor.

* as in plural, not model


----------



## OmarCCX

I have an A6000 right now with mostly manual focus lenses like the Helios 44-3 and Nikkor 105mm ƒ2.5. In other words, I'm not invested in the system apart from a couple of additional batteries. Right now I just want to go out and take pictures and I feel like switching to something like a Fuji XT1 with the 23mm ƒ1.4 and 56mm ƒ1.2.

I dont like the A6000 body enough to commit to it in APSC lenses. The viewfinder is annoying and the body is a bit on the uncomfortable side. It records brilliant 1080p video, but it has no microphone output, which renders it useless.

The A7R II sounds fantastic though, and in a few years I'll probably grab a used one.


----------



## Scott1541

If I had a mirrorless body I'd have a stack of old manual lenses







If I got one I'd want to go straight to full frame though rather than bothering with m43 or aps-c, so I could use lenses to their full potential and for their intended purpose. I looked at the original A7 around when I picked up the D7200, but I dismissed it as an optical viewfinder is better for what I do, or at least what I like doing. (not done that much of it lately though







)

I can see myself owning a mirrorless body at some point in the future, probably when the original A7 is dirt cheap used







Depending on what I'm doing then photography wise, it may or may not become my main camera.


----------



## pcfoo

On one hand I snob APS-C (FF sup race), on the other hand I see that there are little ways to get to a really small sized, 21st century ILC without it.

Not unless you are going for Leica or RF lenses in general, which in turn bring their own limitations, as for the most part rays from the back of RF lenses are not falling on sensors as perpendicular as you would get them to be from a longer Lens->sensor flange distance like the ones we see in 35mm SLRs. This meant little to film, but does mean much more to digital sensors - at least those with our current micro-lens technology.

And to be honest, current technology APS-C sensors are leagues ahead of 35mm film in quality (outside DR in B&W & bokeh/cretive DOF that is format driven and a bit more limited with smaller sensors) & versatility - IMHO.

So yes, since a digital Leica M is simply out of reach for me, I still think APS-C a good option. Not that Fuji X lenses are not a bit pricey for my liking (its a cropped size lens priced as if it was full frame Fuji, please, get real), but I think I would settle for 1-2 primes (probably used) and thus I don't really ache.

This introductory mumble is also a pun on the "old lenses" thingy. Yes, you can adapt a crap load of lenses on those MIRCs, but other than the novelty factor, you are not gaining that much...its like grabbing a few dozens of old GPUs and start benching them...its an exercise you might find joy for a few hours or days, but then is gone and you are stuck with lots of hardware that is obsolete in too many ways for you to recuperate your costs.

I happen to have half a dozen of Canon FD/FL primes, all "decent" SSC/SC models ranging 28-35-50-135, all bought back in day where MIRCs haven't stirred up the pot and those were DIRT cheap @ eBay and fleamarkets. Yes I've used them on my EOS M, but outside video, even the 35 f/2 SSC doesn't hold a candle vs. a modern EF 35 2 IS, nor a $80-90 EF-M 22mm f/2 @ really open apertures. Sure, a FL 55 1.2 is kinda unique, but once you get in this territories, you are spending a lot.

Getting old lenses might seem to be cheap and fun and all, but soon it grows to a can of worms kind of G.A.S. that just focuses @ quantity over quality - just as bad.


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> This introductory mumble is also a pun on the "old lenses" thingy. Yes, you can adapt a crap load of lenses on those MIRCs, but other than the novelty factor, you are not gaining that much...its like grabbing a few dozens of old GPUs and start benching them...its an exercise you might find joy for a few hours or days, but then is gone and you are stuck with lots of hardware that is obsolete in too many ways for you to recuperate your costs.
> 
> x
> 
> Getting old lenses might seem to be cheap and fun and all, but soon it grows to a can of worms kind of G.A.S. that just focuses @ quantity over quality - just as bad.


You've got a point actually. Even if the body meters fine with the lens, it's still going to be manual focus, which I know from my own experience gets old pretty fast.

The only manual lenses I use at the minute are my 50 Series E and Helios. Both very rarely get used, and sometimes it's only because I need a 50 and still haven't picked up an AF version yet. There are manual lenses that I'd love to own, like the Helios 40 and Tair 11, but yeah, you're right, they probably would be a sort of novelty item.


----------



## DizZz

I think the most impressive thing about the a7r II is the new autofocus system. I'm interested in seeing real world tests as Sony tends to overestimate their focusing systems in product launch presentations.


----------



## Conspiracy

totally agree. im very interested as well in how well the AF works with other brand glass because it seems like huge number of people are using canikon glass on the a7 bodies


----------



## boogschd

guess where i went last weekend


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boogschd*
> 
> guess where i went last weekend
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


i hate you and im very jealous


----------



## guitarhero23

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boogschd*
> 
> guess where i went last weekend
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> i hate you and im very jealous


Where is it I feel stupid!!!


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guitarhero23*
> 
> Where is it I feel stupid!!!


Me too!


----------



## boogschd

the most expensive government project our country ever did.

this is inside the actual nuclear reactor of the Bataan Nuclear Power Plant

heres a pano shot from outside










Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> i hate you and im very jealous


hehe!


----------



## Conspiracy

i was about to guess that plant because when i googled nuclear power in your country thats the only result i got and was like no way that is the only one but i guess it might be. shame about the whole ***ishima event because it looked like they were in plans to get Bataan up and running again


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> i was about to guess that plant because when i googled nuclear power in your country thats the only result i got and was like no way that is the only one but i guess it might be. shame about the whole ***ishima event because it looked like they were in plans to get Bataan up and running again


hehe!

nah, i dont think they could get it up and running even if the ***ushima incident didnt occur

the current presidents mother was the reason the plant never went operational, so you can bet old baldy shares the same

maybe next year IFFF they ever elect a proper president this time around









anyway,, if ever any of you get a chance to visit,, its a real treat to check the place out!


----------



## THEStorm

Not sure how many Sony A6000 users there are on here but Sony released a new FW for the camera:

http://www.dpreview.com/articles/0250956781/sony-adds-xavc-s-and-high-bitrate-video-to-a6000

You can get to the download link from there. I did it on my A6000 from 1.21 today with no issues.


----------



## Scott1541

Just been browsing ebay looking at the price of Sigma 70-200s while mine is in for repair and I came across this:



Wat?


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> Just been browsing ebay looking at the price of Sigma 70-200s while mine is in for repair and I came across this:
> 
> 
> 
> Wat?


lol


----------



## Pandora51

You were the one with the Sigma and the fungus? Why did you send it in now? (Just being curious).

And lol about the ebay one. The only healthy reason I can imagine is this person copied an old sale and forgot about the last sentence.


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pandora51*
> 
> You were the one with the Sigma and the fungus? Why did you send it in now? (Just being curious).


Yeah, that was me







Sent it in now because I'd rather get it sorted out early before it potentially causes more damage, especially since nobody really seems to have a definite answer regarding the potential for it to spread to other lenses, sensors, etc.. I would have sent it off a few weeks ago but I put it off until after the airshow I went to last weekend. The estimate I've got so far is fairly reasonable, in line with their repair tariff, which puts the cost of the lens and repair on par with the price these are selling for on ebay (~£400).

Hopefully they'll update the firmware as well, it could do with it as it won't focus in live view on the D7200. I didn't mention it on the RMA form but I'm hoping they do it anyway, not really a problem if they don't though.


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Off to Goodwood festival of speed tomorrow, first time at a car show with the camera. Hopefully I'll at least get a few good pics








Any tips for car pictures? Probably most will be stationary


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> Off to Goodwood festival of speed tomorrow, first time at a car show with the camera. Hopefully I'll at least get a few good pics
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Any tips for car pictures? Probably most will be stationary


Umm, capture the moment. If focusing on cars get low and look for symmetry and aggressive angles. I always like to get the front quarter panel.

Overall, just take pics and take your time working on composition...I usually don't and it reflects that lol.


----------



## pcfoo

If it is busy with lots of people swarming particular gems, go for interesting angles and details: how panels meet and split, badges, grills, mirrors wheels/brakes/suspension details etc.
Similar approach if you have access to the interior, even through a window / without stepping in.


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> Off to *Goodwood festival of speed tomorrow*, first time at a car show with the camera. Hopefully I'll at least get a few good pics
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Any tips for car pictures? Probably most will be stationary


WOW! . have fun man!


----------



## teh_HyDr0iD

Wooo! So my Nikon D5300 arrived from Massdrop!







Pretty chuffed to finally have something I have wanted for years, but held out on.









Anyway, so I went out to my parent's property just outside Sydney this afternoon and took some photos to start getting used to it. I was shooting in Manual and just trying to get the hang of adjusting things for the pictures. Once I got home and opened them up on the computer I think I was perhaps shooting with too wide of an aperture for the landscape shots and maybe too high of an ISO all around. It was about an hour before sunset in a valley so there wasn't a ton of light though.

Anyway, I dropped the pictures on Flickr, some constructive criticism would be greatly appreciated by this noob.







They were shot with the standard kit lens with no post processing. I was also shooting direct to JPEG for now, I will switch to RAW further down the line when I have more of a hang of the camera itself and want to try out Lightroom.

https://www.flickr.com/gp/[email protected]/Gqa7n9


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Couple of pictures from Goodwood FOS, I wasn't very happy with how a lot of them turned out, just need a bit more practice I think. There's a few more on my Flickr page, too.

Merc AMG by Luke Wanden, on Flickr

GAS1 by Luke Wanden, on Flickr


----------



## Conspiracy

so i definitely still love the 135L

this is pretty much sooc just sharpen and compressed

this is an actor headshot so before anyone says omg fix the skin. you dont do touch ups on headshots for actors. they want it as is, soft simple light, nothing dramatic

9Z4A6757 by Brian Roberts, on Flickr


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *teh_HyDr0iD*
> 
> Wooo! So my Nikon D5300 arrived from Massdrop!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pretty chuffed to finally have something I have wanted for years, but held out on.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Anyway, so I went out to my parent's property just outside Sydney this afternoon and took some photos to start getting used to it. I was shooting in Manual and just trying to get the hang of adjusting things for the pictures. Once I got home and opened them up on the computer I think I was perhaps shooting with too wide of an aperture for the landscape shots and maybe too high of an ISO all around. It was about an hour before sunset in a valley so there wasn't a ton of light though.
> 
> Anyway, I dropped the pictures on Flickr, some constructive criticism would be greatly appreciated by this noob.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They were shot with the standard kit lens with no post processing. I was also shooting direct to JPEG for now, I will switch to RAW further down the line when I have more of a hang of the camera itself and want to try out Lightroom.
> 
> https://www.flickr.com/gp/[email protected]/Gqa7n9


Not too bad, looks like you've got the hang of the meter and getting a good exposure for the most part. Regarding the ISO speeds, yeah, you do have it a bit high on a few shots, but not that over the top. How I'd normally do it is figure out what aperture value I want/need to use, then adjust the ISO to keep the shutter speed where it needs to be.

For the landscape sort of shots you've posted on your flickr I'd start by stopping the aperture down to about f/8, or maybe even f/11. That would give you an increased depth of field, and f/8 will be about where you 18-55mm lens is sharpest. For these shots nothing is really moving, so you don't need to use a high shutter speed, 1/100 or even 1/50 is fine. Once you've got your aperture decided, and know what shutter speed you need, then you just increase the ISO as necessary to achieve the shutter speeds you need. That's what I do in both manual aperture priority most of the time, probably not the best explanation but it's the best I can come up with at this time of night.


----------



## Sean Webster

Some idiot just asked if I would take $650 cash for my Canon 70-200 F/2.8L USM... Seriously??? It is in mint condition and they are asking me to take $650!!! You can't even get one that is beat up with fungus for that price. HAHAHA


----------



## Conspiracy

id email him back and tell him if/when it breaks youll let it go for that price


----------



## teh_HyDr0iD

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> Not too bad, looks like you've got the hang of the meter and getting a good exposure for the most part. Regarding the ISO speeds, yeah, you do have it a bit high on a few shots, but not that over the top. How I'd normally do it is figure out what aperture value I want/need to use, then adjust the ISO to keep the shutter speed where it needs to be.
> 
> For the landscape sort of shots you've posted on your flickr I'd start by stopping the aperture down to about f/8, or maybe even f/11. That would give you an increased depth of field, and f/8 will be about where you 18-55mm lens is sharpest. For these shots nothing is really moving, so you don't need to use a high shutter speed, 1/100 or even 1/50 is fine. Once you've got your aperture decided, and know what shutter speed you need, then you just increase the ISO as necessary to achieve the shutter speeds you need. That's what I do in both manual aperture priority most of the time, probably not the best explanation but it's the best I can come up with at this time of night.


Thanks for the kind words and tips.







I will give it a try!


----------



## guitarhero23

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *teh_HyDr0iD*
> 
> Wooo! So my Nikon D5300 arrived from Massdrop!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pretty chuffed to finally have something I have wanted for years, but held out on.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Anyway, so I went out to my parent's property just outside Sydney this afternoon and took some photos to start getting used to it. I was shooting in Manual and just trying to get the hang of adjusting things for the pictures. Once I got home and opened them up on the computer I think I was perhaps shooting with too wide of an aperture for the landscape shots and maybe too high of an ISO all around. It was about an hour before sunset in a valley so there wasn't a ton of light though.
> 
> Anyway, I dropped the pictures on Flickr, some constructive criticism would be greatly appreciated by this noob.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They were shot with the standard kit lens with no post processing. I was also shooting direct to JPEG for now, I will switch to RAW further down the line when I have more of a hang of the camera itself and want to try out Lightroom.
> 
> https://www.flickr.com/gp/[email protected]/Gqa7n9


I think your photo ending in 0118 would look pretty cool prcoessed in a dark sense to give it an eery/scary look


----------



## teh_HyDr0iD

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guitarhero23*
> 
> I think your photo ending in 0118 would look pretty cool prcoessed in a dark sense to give it an eery/scary look


Yeah that would look pretty cool!


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Just ordered one of these
http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B00QIIMEMK?psc=1&redirect=true&ref_=od_aui_detailpages00

Arriving on Thursday just in time for Amsterdam


----------



## guitarhero23

I'm a noob but this thread lacks pictures so throwing some quick pictures I took for ebay using a photo box like this:


Again these were all just half decent quick pics so my girlfriend could sell them on ebay so although I do want to learn more about product photography, criticism here won't really help as I wasn't trying to put the item on display in "too" fancy of a way. ANYWAY....


----------



## ljason8eg

I really should post more photos.

I guess I hadn't tried much of the shot below with the 150-600 but it really struggles to stay focused on the car at this angle. Tons of throwaways. I may have to try the Sigma as it also has an IS mode for panning which I miss with the Tamron.

9R1V9409.jpg by ~JLo~, on Flickr


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> I really should post more photos.
> 
> I guess I hadn't tried much of the shot below with the 150-600 but it really struggles to stay focused on the car at this angle. Tons of throwaways. I may have to try the Sigma as it also has an IS mode for panning which I miss with the Tamron.
> 
> 9R1V9409.jpg by ~JLo~, on Flickr


That's an awesome picture

Is the the sort of lens that's good for autosport photography? http://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B003YUBTIU/ref=wl_it_dp_o_pC_nS_ttl?_encoding=UTF8&colid=1WPCUC55FURCM&coliid=I1DP2E53VNJTQS&psc=1


----------



## xenophobe

I haven't really used my dlsr for a while... last year's Blood moon with Mars and Venus.... was a bit overcast that night. Nothing spectacular.



Finally found a use for my 14mmL.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> That's an awesome picture
> 
> Is the the sort of lens that's good for autosport photography? http://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B003YUBTIU/ref=wl_it_dp_o_pC_nS_ttl?_encoding=UTF8&colid=1WPCUC55FURCM&coliid=I1DP2E53VNJTQS&psc=1


Thanks.

That could work on a budget. It depends how close you can get too. Sometimes 300mm will be too short, like the shot I posted above, but lenses with more reach than 300mm can get pretty expensive.


----------



## Pandora51

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> Finally found a use for my 14mmL.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


Great capture!
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> Is the the sort of lens that's good for autosport photography? http://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B003YUBTIU/ref=wl_it_dp_o_pC_nS_ttl?_encoding=UTF8&colid=1WPCUC55FURCM&coliid=I1DP2E53VNJTQS&psc=1


hm I have heard only good things about this lens. The optical stabilisation is amazing.
The only issue about it is the aperture or focal length. But better would cost alot more


----------



## hokiealumnus

Finally had a few before the 4th weekend to get the new lens out and take a few shots. No, it's certainly not L-caliber, but it should do well for my purposes.









Please 'scuse the dust, I did the best I could in a short time. :bang head









Fully extended.









Plastic mount, but I don't plan on abusing it.









Horray for the new Canon lens caps!









(Taken with the 70D / EF-S 18-55 STM, some foam board, two shop lights and a single off-camera flash.)


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> That could work on a budget. It depends how close you can get too. Sometimes 300mm will be too short, like the shot I posted above, but lenses with more reach than 300mm can get pretty expensive.


Cool yeah anything more than 300mm is way out my price league lol

And when it comes to Canon lenses, I've seen a lot of discussion about what is better for autosport out of IS and USM, some say it's preferable to have an IS lens without USM that can be switched to a panning mode is a good place to start on a budget, others say USM but no IS is better.
Which do you personally prefer? That's if you've been able to compare

Edit:
Just had this delivered! Ooooo


----------



## Gobigorgohome

Still with the dog ... I shot both RAW and JPEG, just to be able to work on some of the files later on.


----------



## Pandora51

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> Edit:
> Just had this delivered! Ooooo


Nice
Please provide some pictures if you can.

Still waiting for Yongnou lenses with Nikon mount.


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pandora51*
> 
> Nice
> Please provide some pictures if you can.
> 
> Still waiting for Yongnou lenses with Nikon mount.


I'm off to Amsterdam tomorrow so I'm sure to get a few I hope!


----------



## Aussiejuggalo

Question for you guys, out of the X-Rite ColorMunki Smile ($85), X-Rite ColorMunki Display ($169) or Datacolour Spyder 4 Pro ($174) which would you recommend for triple screens?

Thanks


----------



## Sean Webster

X-Rite ColorMunki Display


----------



## Aussiejuggalo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> X-Rite ColorMunki Display


Cool









I got my monitors hardware calibrated but I feel like the Dells are still off a lot


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Aussiejuggalo*
> 
> Cool
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I got my monitors hardware calibrated but I feel like the Dells are still off a lot


Yeah, while mine were decent, having them calibrated made the colors and exposure spot on for prints.


----------



## Aussiejuggalo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Yeah, while mine were decent, having them calibrated made the colors and exposure spot on for prints.


Nice, I'm also curious to see how my 144Hz Asus will go, not that I expect much









With the ColorMunki Display does it have a limit of how many screens it can do on a since pc?


----------



## Conspiracy

dang yall reminded me i still havent bought a monitor calibrator since i upgraded to my U2713HM.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> Cool yeah anything more than 300mm is way out my price league lol
> 
> And when it comes to Canon lenses, I've seen a lot of discussion about what is better for autosport out of IS and USM, some say it's preferable to have an IS lens without USM that can be switched to a panning mode is a good place to start on a budget, others say USM but no IS is better.
> Which do you personally prefer? That's if you've been able to compare


I haven't used a lens without USM in several years. Nearly everything worthy of consideration will have it. Lenses with USM tend to focus quicker which can help for certain shots where the car is approaching your position quickly.

IS is nice to have and will increase your keeper rate, but not absolutely necessary. I have to disable it on my 150-600 because it does not have a panning mode. It makes longer focal length pans tricky but anything under 250mm or so isn't too, though it does take practice.


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> Cool yeah anything more than 300mm is way out my price league lol
> 
> And when it comes to Canon lenses, I've seen a lot of discussion about what is better for autosport out of IS and USM, some say it's preferable to have an IS lens without USM that can be switched to a panning mode is a good place to start on a budget, others say USM but no IS is better.
> Which do you personally prefer? That's if you've been able to compare


Sounds like a false dichotomy.

I don't think there is an option with IS without USM atm, at least not for Canon.
Even 3rd party lenses from Sigma and Tamron feature some sort of "hypersonic/ultrasonic" motor, if not even newer linear / STM motors (Sigma / Canon respectively).

Non USM lenses from Canon are the super cheap EF 50 1.8, EF 28 2.8 etc...pretty much all AF lenses above $150 are USM or STM driven.

The IS / non IS debate is too old to even talk about. There are a handful of white tele or tele-zoom lenses that don't have IS, pretty much anything does these days, and examples like the 70-200L 2.8 IS II and 70-200L f4 IS prove that there isn't necessarily a compromise to be made for choosing to have IS: those tele zooms rival many very good primes in IQ.

Now, the fact that IS is not infallible for panning shots is true, and you might not need it at all when you are panning or using shutter speeds that freeze motion so often people disable it when not needed/wanted to conserve battery, but it is a very nice option to have when shooting slow moving or static subjects @ low light.


----------



## Aussiejuggalo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> dang yall reminded me i still havent bought a monitor calibrator since i upgraded to my U2713HM.


Haha, I've been meaning to get one for err... 3 years now









On that note, I just ordered the ColorMunki Display














, just hope my 290 plays nice with it


----------



## Pandora51

The moment you realize your Sigma 105mm f2.8 OS has backfocus. The second thing you realize AF correction is on (not sure how exactly) and third it still has backfocus









It is noticable at f2.8 but since it is a prime lens and a macro I might calibrate it with my camera.
Or would you send it in?

Somehow Im pretty unlucky with camera gear these days.

Tamrons 5 year warranty or 6 in the USA is only valid for the first-time buyer. Is there a workaround or something?
There is a deal on a used Tamron 70-300mm USD but without warranty it is not worth to save a few bucks. Unfortunately


----------



## teh_HyDr0iD

I just have a quick question for you guys. When the length of a lens is listed, are they always listed consistently regardless of whether it's a full frame or APS-C lens? I thought APS-C lenses listed the effective focal length on crop sensors, but I saw somebody else mention that you still have to apply the crop factor multiplication. I don't know if this was an ill informed statement or if I should still be taking that into account when shopping around?


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *teh_HyDr0iD*
> 
> I just have a quick question for you guys. When the length of a lens is listed, are they always listed consistently regardless of whether it's a full frame or APS-C lens?


Yes. Focal length is a property of the lens. The crop sensor does just that, crops the image. The focal length is still the same.


----------



## teh_HyDr0iD

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> Yes. Focal length is a property of the lens. The crop sensor does just that, crops the image. The focal length is still the same.


So a 1.5x crop sensor camera with a 200mm APS-C lens would still be a 300mm lens effectively?


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *teh_HyDr0iD*
> 
> So a 1.5x crop sensor camera with a 200mm APS-C lens would still be a 300mm lens effectively?


Yes. I believe the correct way of saying it would be a 200mm lens on a 1.5x crop sensor has an identical field of view as a 300mm lens on a full frame sensor.


----------



## teh_HyDr0iD

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> Yes. I believe the correct way of saying it would be a 200mm lens on a 1.5x crop sensor has an identical field of view as a 300mm lens on a full frame sensor.


Thanks, that helps!









+rep


----------



## hokiealumnus

Well, I couldn't resist and did a write-up on the new lens: Canon EF-S 55-250 mm f/4-5.6 IS STM - Initial Thoughts and Samples

To make a long story short, my conclusion is:
Quote:


> I'm thoroughly impressed with what this little inexpensive lens is capable of in just a short time out. It's sharp as a tack (just look at the 100% crops!), handles very well and all for a price that's one fifth (retail-to-retail comparison) of what you'd have to pay for a decent 400 mm lens on full frame. It's both a bargain and a strong lens in its own right.


In one sentence - This lens is sharp. Here are two of the sample images of a hydrangea:

Full photo:










100% crop:










Like I said - Sharp.

Read the full article for more lens details and plenty of sample images.


----------



## Gobigorgohome

Is it normal that a 30x40 cm print to cost 57 USD? The dog picture I posted a few days ago, I'm having it printed for my brother in law (kind of a surprise when they come back from holiday), I also want it framed, but I think the 57 USD price-tag is enough, to say it like that. What do you guys think?


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gobigorgohome*
> 
> Is it normal that a 30x40 cm print to cost 57 USD? The dog picture I posted a few days ago, I'm having it printed for my brother in law (kind of a surprise when they come back from holiday), I also want it framed, but I think the 57 USD price-tag is enough, to say it like that. What do you guys think?


that doesnt sound terribly bad for a quality print and framing. i plan to get some of my work printed because my apartment walls are boring so i guess thats what i can expect for a small framed prints


----------



## xenophobe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *teh_HyDr0iD*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> Yes. Focal length is a property of the lens. The crop sensor does just that, crops the image. The focal length is still the same.
> 
> 
> 
> So a 1.5x crop sensor camera with a 200mm APS-C lens would still be a 300mm lens effectively?
Click to expand...

No. With Canon, EF lenses are full frame, EF-S is for APS-C sized sensor.

If an EF lens says 200mm it will be approximately 300mm for a 1.6 sensor. If an EF-S lens says 200mm it will be 200mm equivalent on an 1.6 sensor.


----------



## hokiealumnus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xenophobe*
> 
> No. With Canon, EF lenses are full frame, EF-S is for APS-C sized sensor.
> 
> If an EF lens says 200mm it will be approximately 300mm for a 1.6 sensor. If an EF-S lens says 200mm it will be 200mm equivalent on an 1.6 sensor.


I'm sorry, but this is incorrect. Canon always lists actual focal length ranges on their lenses, both EF and EF-S. You have to apply the crop factor after the fact on both kinds. See Canon's own page on the 55-250mm STM (it's a footnote referenced from earlier in the paragraph, but makes the point all the same.)
Quote:


> *Testing performed using the EOS 7D digital SLR at a focal length of 250mm (400mm in 35mm equivalence).


Another example, from the B&H product page.
Quote:


> 88-400mm (35mm Equivalent)


Certainly not the best site, but per Ken Rockwell (sorry, don't flog me guys...it's easy to find!)
Quote:


> Focal Length
> 
> 55-250mm.
> 
> On the APS-C cameras for which it is designed, it gives angles of view similar to what an 88-400mm lens would give on a 35mm or full-frame camera. See also Crop Factor.


----------



## xenophobe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hokiealumnus*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *xenophobe*
> 
> No. With Canon, EF lenses are full frame, EF-S is for APS-C sized sensor.
> 
> If an EF lens says 200mm it will be approximately 300mm for a 1.6 sensor. If an EF-S lens says 200mm it will be 200mm equivalent on an 1.6 sensor.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm sorry, but this is incorrect. Canon always lists actual focal length ranges on their lenses, both EF and EF-S. You have to apply the crop factor after the fact on both kinds. See Canon's own page on the 55-250mm STM (it's a footnote referenced from earlier in the paragraph, but makes the point all the same.)
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> *Testing performed using the EOS 7D digital SLR at a focal length of 250mm (400mm in 35mm equivalence).
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Another example, from the B&H product page.
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> 88-400mm (35mm Equivalent)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Certainly not the best site, but per Ken Rockwell (sorry, don't flog me guys...it's easy to find!)
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Focal Length
> 
> 55-250mm.
> 
> On the APS-C cameras for which it is designed, it gives angles of view similar to what an 88-400mm lens would give on a 35mm or full-frame camera. See also Crop Factor.
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...

You cannot use EF-S lenses on a full frame body, so EF-S lenses are always listed in focal length in comparison to sensor size.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xenophobe*
> 
> You cannot use EF-S lenses on a full frame body, so EF-S lenses are always listed in focal length in comparison to sensor size.


No, they're not. I don't know where you're getting this information. Focal length is focal length. It has nothing to do with sensor size.


----------



## xenophobe

EF-S 10-22 is roughly equivalent to EF 16-35 in field of view. You can put the EF lens on any canon body. You cannot use an EF-S on a non APS-C sensor. Using that 16-35 EF lens on an ASP-C body will result in an effective focal lenght of 16-35 x 1.6. Putting that EF-S lens on a full frame body is a no-go.


----------



## Gobigorgohome

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> that doesnt sound terribly bad for a quality print and framing. i plan to get some of my work printed because my apartment walls are boring so i guess thats what i can expect for a small framed prints


The 57 USD is just for the print, framing and print is 97 USD. I just hope it is worth it in the end.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gobigorgohome*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> that doesnt sound terribly bad for a quality print and framing. i plan to get some of my work printed because my apartment walls are boring so i guess thats what i can expect for a small framed prints
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The 57 USD is just for the print, framing and print is 97 USD. I just hope it is worth it in the end.
Click to expand...

ok that seems kinda high i think. are you getting it local or ordering online?


----------



## aksthem1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xenophobe*
> 
> EF-S 10-22 is roughly equivalent to EF 16-35 in field of view. You can put the EF lens on any canon body. You cannot use an EF-S on a non APS-C sensor. Using that 16-35 EF lens on an ASP-C body will result in an effective focal lenght of 16-35 x 1.6. Putting that EF-S lens on a full frame body is a no-go.


I think we know that part. Most of us Canon users know that we can't mount EF-S lenses on an APS-H or full frame body. They're just saying that the focal length is always stated as 35mm equivalent. Regardless of the sensor size. Even on point and shoots and cell phones.


----------



## Conspiracy

is today obvious day or something? this is like a back and forth of obvious stuff lol. anyone that has taken the time to learn how their camera works regardless of brand understands these concepts. why are you, xeno, trying to school us haha


----------



## xenophobe

I was confused about what he was trying to say. My new meds are stronger too. lol


----------



## Gobigorgohome

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> ok that seems kinda high i think. are you getting it local or ordering online?


Sorry for late answer, got myself 14 hours behind the wheel in two days, worth traveling 500 kilometers for some Dali Helicon 400 MK1 speakers though!









Yes, it was a local "photo-store", they are actually the only local business (therefor the prices I guess).


----------



## Aussiejuggalo

Got the x-Rite Colormunki Display yesterday, I'm surprised how much of a difference it actually made, was kind of a shock to see all the pretty colours etc I've been missing, it even made my 144Hz TN looks semi decent to which was the biggest surprise.

I also changed my photo lights from the generic 125w 5400k Fluro globes to Philips 14w 6500k LED globes, not sure how these are going to go but we'll see.



Spoiler: Warning: Potato Pic





Yes its a really crap photo







.



Next things camera (Olympus EP-5) wise are gonna be a couple more lenses (Olympus 60mm f2.8 Marco, maybe an Olympus 45mm f1.8) & a Sirui P204s Monopod


----------



## Conspiracy

aaaand now im sneaking a color munki into my list of stuff i want along with timelapse remotes for canon and pretty much 2 of everything that gopro makes. think they will notice


----------



## guitarhero23

Incoming Amateur Hour:

Taken doing some kayaking:

https://flic.kr/p/viRLZF
https://flic.kr/p/wgat66
https://flic.kr/p/vY7qaU
https://flic.kr/p/wfJ6Tv

Kind of lucky and cool (to me at least) but a bug happened to run across the lilypad as I was filming and staying at the center of the frame as my kayak moved.


----------



## Magical Eskimo

To buy a 70d or not to buy a 70d...


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> To buy a 70d or not to buy a 70d...


VS what you have and why?


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> To buy a 70d or not to buy a 70d...


hold off. wait for 80D OR go big and get a 5Dwhatever


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> VS what you have and why?


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> hold off. wait for 80D OR go big and get a 5Dwhatever


I share an 1100D with my girlfriend and she goes to uni so a lot of the time I can't use it, so I want to get my own. I thought and first I wouldn't mind sharing and that I wouldn't get hooked on shooting but that didn't happen









I like motor and air shows so the 7fps and auto video focus with flip out screen was pretty attractive.

A site has a 0% interest finance offer for the 70d 18-55 IS kit with a free backpack and memory card for £760


----------



## Conspiracy

try to find a kit that bundles it with a tele. you will want that unless you plan to get something else later on. ive seen some killer results from the sigma super tele zooms


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> try to find a kit that bundles it with a tele. you will want that unless you plan to get something else later on. ive seen some killer results from the sigma super tele zooms


I was planning on getting the 50-250 STM or something similar for my birthday. Once I get that I'll have the kit lens, a 50mm prime (I already have a yongnuo 50mm) and a telephoto which should have me set for a good while!


----------



## pcfoo

With most mid-range AF systems, cameras will struggle with fast moving subjects even with the dedicated AF circuits (i.e. mirror down and not in LIVE mode / Video shooting mode).
Video AF works ok for people walking around, but sports, BIF, motorsports etc are a different animal. Thus I don't know how good video AF (even 70D's dual pixel "best in class") would be for something like either an air-show or motorsports in general. I think you would be far better off with manual tracking along with a small aperture (decent depth of field). It is a hard to acquire skill, but I almost guarantee it will be more reliable once mustered. Till then, realize that there is huge % for missed shots with stills, so asking for reliably focused video with fast subjects is not an easy thing.

Also, as mentioned above, the 70D is a bit dated, and the T6i / 750D already has outclassed it with better sensor, and more or less anything that matters other than fps (5 vs 7, does make a difference) and battery life. The T6i has already been used by ppl for Wildlife / BIF and similar "focal length limited" subjects for its high pixel density, with good results, and I would expect the same for what you are after.
It is pretty clear that there will be a "80D" or whatever that will improve upon the 750D bringing it up to 70D/7DII size and handling class, but the "when" and "how much" might not fit your schedule / budget.


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> With most mid-range AF systems, cameras will struggle with fast moving subjects even with the dedicated AF circuits (i.e. mirror down and not in LIVE mode / Video shooting mode).
> Video AF works ok for people walking around, but sports, BIF, motorsports etc are a different animal. Thus I don't know how good video AF (even 70D's dual pixel "best in class) would be for something like either an air-show or motorsports in general. I think you would be far better off with manual tracking along with a small aperture (decent depth of field). It is a hard to aquire skill, but I almost guarantee it will be more reliable once mustered.
> 
> Also, as mentioned above, the 70D is a bit dated, and the T6i / 750D already has outclassed it with better sensor, and more or less anything that matters other than fps (5 vs 7, does make a difference) and battery life. The T6i has already been used by ppl for Wildlife / BIF and similar "focal length limited" subjects for its high pixel density, with good results, and I would expect the same for what you are after.
> It is pretty clear that there will be a "80D" or whatever that will improve upon the 750D bringing it up to 70D/7DII size and handling class, but the "when" and "how much" might not fit your schedule / budget.


Thanks for the info








I'd never really thought about the possibility of an 80D being launched, I think looking at the original retail prices of the 70D I don't think an 80D would really suit my budget (Assuming they'll be costing around the £1200 mark with a kit lens) Is there any speculation at all for when the 80D will arrive? I guess I've basically got until September until my gf goes back to uni and she takes the camera.
Maybe if the 80D comes out by then the prices of the 70D will fall further?


----------



## pcfoo

Almost certainly the 80D will bring the prices for the 70D down, much like it was the case for every successive generation of every camera.

The 750D (T6i) is a better step upwards than most previous generations of entry/mid range SLRs (More MP, notably better DR, notably better AF system) so it is a tough call to say "just go" for the 70D, and "waiting" for the 80D again might be a dissapointment in a sense, as it might be using exactly the same electronics with the 750D, perhaps with a slightly faster shutter and/or bigger buffer.
Perhaps a tad better video but not much more, otherwise it will be outclassing the 7DII (much like the 70D was outclassing the 7D, but the 7D was not 1yo back then!).

The rational me, would say you buy a good, older used model cheap to satisfy your "want" and wait for something better when you actually "need" it. You might be lucky enough to feel that you don't need it and that any SLR build the last 5-6y was much better than what pro's where using 10y ago to shoot marvels. Yes, they were using pro-glass, but that adds to the point. Bodies come and go, glass sticks for much longer and skills stick forever (or w/e mind & age allows). E.g. a 60D would work fine and you can get one used for $300 or so. Dunno how the UK used market is really.

The less rational me, says that the 750D is a better camera than the 7D for what counts for me, and I would get that instead if I really wanted to buy something new that would stay relevant for longer.

By the time the 80D or w/e comes and you would like to update to either, I believe you will be more able to justify buying that "w/e" body, or hold on your older / smaller one and instead treat yourself an extra trip to Air Tattoo, or a 70-200 f4 L instead of a 50-250 STM...perhaps that Sigma 170-600 C ? Who knows better than the future you?


----------



## hokiealumnus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> With most mid-range AF systems, cameras will struggle with fast moving subjects even with the dedicated AF circuits (i.e. mirror down and not in LIVE mode / Video shooting mode).


Just wanted to jump in here and say the 70D's AF system is the same as the 7D's before it (minus center point expansion) and it doesn't struggle tracking fast moving subjects in any way, shape or form. It is not _young_, but it is a strong formerly high-end AF system. Sure, the 7D Mark II or 5D Mark III's AF systems are better. So is the 1DX, but you're going to be paying a whole heck of a lot more for those than a 70D. The 70D's AF is plenty for motorsports or airshows (see 2014 MCAS Cherry Point & 2015 Wings Over Wayne albums). Even with the 70D's great live view AF, I do agree it's not up to very fast moving subjects - none of them are.

Also - where are you seeing the T6s/T6i's sensor is that much better in dynamic range or that its AF system is "notably better"? It's the same AF system as far as I can tell. I'm certainly happy to be wrong of course, I just haven't seen that said anywhere. Aside from the more MP item, which is plainly obvious. I definitely prefer the 70D's controls and weight to the T6s, though if it ticks all the boxes he needs, then by all means, get the Rebel. They definitely cut into the xxD market by putting an LED screen and a couple extra buttons along with a second wheel on the rear on a rebel. Unfortunately, I regularly use all the buttons on top of the 70D and would very much notice the omission of two of them trying to move to the T6s...it really depends on how he'd use it. Controls are a big deal to me, and having them outside the Q-button/menu system is very important. To me, of course.

Anyway, on the 80D vs. 70D, there aren't even rumors of the 80D yet. The only rumor I've seen was from a long time ago and it turned out to be a photo of the back of the T6s. There hasn't been a peep of a rumor since then. Its release would certainly drive 70D prices down further, but they are already quite low if you find a good deal (I saw one a couple of weeks ago with a printer + MIR for $649...in the US unfortunately). I'm sure it's likely higher in the UK, but as long as it's a good deal relative to MSRP, there's no reason to wait. You could be waiting quite a while.


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hokiealumnus*
> 
> Just wanted to jump in here and say the 70D's AF system is the same as the 7D's before it (minus center point expansion) and it doesn't struggle tracking fast moving subjects in any way, shape or form. It is not _young_, but it is a strong formerly high-end AF system. Sure, the 7D Mark II or 5D Mark III's AF systems are better. So is the 1DX, but you're going to be paying a whole heck of a lot more for those than a 70D. The 70D's AF is plenty for motorsports or airshows (see 2014 MCAS Cherry Point & 2015 Wings Over Wayne albums). Even with the 70D's great live view AF, I do agree it's not up to very fast moving subjects - none of them are.
> 
> Also - where are you seeing the T6s/T6i's sensor is that much better in dynamic range or that its AF system is "notably better"? It's the same AF system as far as I can tell. I'm certainly happy to be wrong of course, I just haven't seen that said anywhere. Aside from the more MP item, which is plainly obvious. I definitely prefer the 70D's controls and weight to the T6s, though if it ticks all the boxes he needs, then by all means, get the Rebel. They definitely cut into the xxD market by putting an LED screen and a couple extra buttons along with a second wheel on the rear on a rebel. Unfortunately, I regularly use all the buttons on top of the 70D and would very much notice the omission of two of them trying to move to the T6s...it really depends on how he'd use it. Controls are a big deal to me, and having them outside the Q-button/menu system is very important. To me, of course.
> 
> Anyway, on the 80D vs. 70D, there aren't even rumors of the 80D yet. The only rumor I've seen was from a long time ago and it turned out to be a photo of the back of the T6s. There hasn't been a peep of a rumor since then. Its release would certainly drive 70D prices down further, but they are already quite low if you find a good deal (I saw one a couple of weeks ago with a printer + MIR for $649...in the US unfortunately). I'm sure it's likely higher in the UK, but as long as it's a good deal relative to MSRP, there's no reason to wait. You could be waiting quite a while.


Thanks for thorough reply - You two both have great points so thanks for all your help so far









I did remember reading somewhere about the top controls and screen on cameras and someone's quote was "I'll never have a camera without it again, you can pry my top LCD from my cold dead hands!" I thought that was funny.
I'm a sucker for gadgets and extra controls and the likes, if I can have or find an easier and quicker way to do something I'll be all over it









Yes on the 80d front I've been digging and literally can't find anything which makes me think it's probably not worth waiting around for. £60ish a month for 12 months for a sweet-ass camera with a free memory card and backpack seems pretty good to me. I can't imagine my better half will be too happy though















I'll sleep on it and see how I feel tomorrow, I'm usually quite impulsive with buying things but I'm fairly sure I've put in the research and I do really enjoy shooting so I'm certain I wouldn't regret it.


----------



## hokiealumnus

The only exception to that top LCD rule would be something like a Fuji X-T1 or a Nikon Df - they don't need the LCD because the knobs with the settings are right there. Of course, that would take away the LCD back light, which comes in handy a lot at night.


----------



## Scott1541

Top LCD master race









I was tempted to upgrade my second body last night, a D7000 popped up on a gear selling group I admin on... £230 for the body and 18-105, hardly used with only 1400 clicks







It was a steal, you could even sell the lens on and essentially get the body for about £150. In the end a fellow admin bought it, however said he might end up selling it on soon, in which case it may end up in my hands


----------



## guitarhero23

My goodness ive got some GAS over the Sony a7rii for both photography and videography. Even tempted to do some side jobs just to pay for it.


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Oops


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> Oops


Ooooooooh, from wex as well, no expense spared


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> Ooooooooh, from wex as well, no expense spared


They had the best deal! Couldn't pass on the freebies! It's the same price at Jessie's, John Lewis and a few other places but no where else had freeeeebies!


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> They had the best deal! Couldn't pass on the freebies! It's the same price at Jessie's, John Lewis and a few other places but no where else had freeeeebies!


Fair enough, I didn't get any freebies with my D7200







Then 3 months after I got it Nikon started offering a free MB-D15 grip worth £150+, and all retailers dropped the price by about £90 around the same time.

I should probably have bought a grey import instead and saved myself £250 but oh well, at least I have 2 years warranty with Nikon.


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> Fair enough, I didn't get any freebies with my D7200
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Then 3 months after I got it Nikon started offering a free MB-D15 grip worth £150+, and all retailers dropped the price by about £90 around the same time.
> 
> I should probably have bought a grey import instead and saved myself £250 but oh well, at least I have 2 years warranty with Nikon.


Oh damn that sucks lol.
Yeah I looked at grips and they're like £130?!? I'll get an El cheapo neewer one off Amazon for £20 at some point lol. My neewer ttl flash is great, I'm sure their grips can't be bad.


----------



## ace8uk

Wex are always really good for freebies. I hope you remembered quidco, too!


----------



## hokiealumnus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> Oops


Congrats!

If you can cancel that remote (unless it's part of the deal), do so. The 70D has WiFi and you can control the shutter from the smartphone app.


----------



## boogschd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> Oops


nice freebie bag!

i own a 3n1-22 myself


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hokiealumnus*
> 
> Congrats!
> 
> If you can cancel that remote (unless it's part of the deal), do so. The 70D has WiFi and you can control the shutter from the smartphone app.


Oh thanks! Haha I had no idea!
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ace8uk*
> 
> Wex are always really good for freebies. I hope you remembered quidco, too!


I'm not aware of quidco

Also I promised some pictures taken with the Yongnuo 50mm lens. The last 7 on my Flickr are with the yongnuo









Alley-1 by Luke Wanden, on Flickr

Coffee-1 by Luke Wanden, on Flickr


----------



## Magical Eskimo

New baby arrived


----------



## Pandora51

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> New baby arrived


Nice Gz!

Here is the classic photo from the moon:
Tamron 70-300mm USD; handheld, 300mm crop, 1/250, f5.6, Iso 200



Like the lens so far. The OS is ridiculous!


----------



## lacrossewacker

Fellas,

My parents returned from a 15 day trip through Alaska. My dad used a Samsung NX30 for this trip.

The images all turned out decent for your average Joe, but I'd like to go through them and touch them up a bit.

As you can imagine, the camera would often priorities focusing on their faces, while washing out the detail in the snow capped mountains in the distance. So I'd just like to balance out some of the images, and deepen some of the greens in their "woodsy" type pics

*DISCLAIMER* I'm not camera/photo expert - I'm simply going to change whatever I can to make the images _look better_

Any free/cheap photo editors out there that you can recommend?

Thanks


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lacrossewacker*
> 
> Fellas,
> 
> My parents returned from a 15 day trip through Alaska. My dad used a Samsung NX30 for this trip.
> 
> The images all turned out decent for your average Joe, but I'd like to go through them and touch them up a bit.
> 
> As you can imagine, the camera would often priorities focusing on their faces, while washing out the detail in the snow capped mountains in the distance. So I'd just like to balance out some of the images, and deepen some of the greens in their "woodsy" type pics
> 
> *DISCLAIMER* I'm not camera/photo expert - I'm simply going to change whatever I can to make the images _look better_
> 
> Any free/cheap photo editors out there that you can recommend?
> 
> Thanks


Get a 30 day trial of Lightroom, it's powerful but simple and does a great job as it's pretty easy to use. Most work is just done with sliders


----------



## hokiealumnus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> New baby arrived


Congratulations!


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hokiealumnus*
> 
> Congratulations!


Thanks!

Couple of pictures from this evening. I JUST missed golden hour this evening at my local lake while on a bike ride









Also the STM motor on this lens is amazing, it's completely silent and it's so smooth

https://flic.kr/p/wkiCbjRiver Graffiti-1 by Luke Wanden, on Flickr

https://flic.kr/p/wBVjskSmall Flowers-1 by Luke Wanden, on Flickr


----------



## kbros

Hey guys, haven't checked in in a while.

I have a question. I have like naturally shaky hands and I have a hard time keeping my cam straight at lower shutter speeds(<80th). I use the correct holding method, tucking in my elbows. Anyone have any tips on helping steady my shaky hands?

Also I think it may be time for a body upgrade soon. I'm getting quite annoyed at the lack of focus points on the d3200. I have like no money though so that's out of the question. Haha


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> Anyone have any tips on helping steady my shaky hands?


Couple of Xanax should do it.


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> Hey guys, haven't checked in in a while.
> 
> I have a question. I have like naturally shaky hands and I have a hard time keeping my cam straight at lower shutter speeds(<80th). I use the correct holding method, tucking in my elbows. Anyone have any tips on helping steady my shaky hands?
> 
> Also I think it may be time for a body upgrade soon. I'm getting quite annoyed at the lack of focus points on the d3200. I have like no money though so that's out of the question. Haha


Pump ISO up, try to predict subject position and "pre-frame/focus" instead of trying to track, hold your breath.
If the above fail, than Xanax might be a good solution (YMMV).


----------



## hokiealumnus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> Hey guys, haven't checked in in a while.
> 
> I have a question. I have like naturally shaky hands and I have a hard time keeping my cam straight at lower shutter speeds(<80th). I use the correct holding method, tucking in my elbows. Anyone have any tips on helping steady my shaky hands?
> 
> Also I think it may be time for a body upgrade soon. I'm getting quite annoyed at the lack of focus points on the d3200. I have like no money though so that's out of the question. Haha


I'd start with a faster shutter speed (which often means higher ISO, which means more noise...so that's only useful to a point). If that fails and it's really a problem for you, consider a solid monopod. It would be more cumbersome, but at the same time it's better than having unusable images.


----------



## kbros

It's funny you mention xanax thought because I'm on an antidepressant/antianxiety. Not for my brain but for my digestive system. lol

Thanks for the tips guys!


----------



## Conspiracy

finally doing some fun stuff. here are some light tests from the other day for a star wars fan film im shooting. this is just part of the location that will be Jabbas den basically, focus for the first part of the light test was just lighting his throne. its missing the actual throne and some fill light from the side but its going to be like a sleezy location because its Jabba. so super contrasty lighting. the exposure for his throne will be 1/60 f2.8 ISO1600. this will be a sequel to a steampunk bobba fett movie. and also pictured is a headshot of our steampunk jabba

these were taken on the 5D with the 17-40 so i was stuck with iso 3200 for the tests but we will film either f2.8 or f2 to drop the iso. havent decided what glass i want to use for this scene. i might give the new sigma art primes a test


----------



## pcfoo

Does look fun.
Fidling with primes myself, I was positively impressed by the Rokinon/Samyang 85 1.4 (albeit blown away by the 50 Art), and I think their 35 1.4 is also pretty good (again maybe not 35 Art class, but very close). You could give those a try if the Art(s) are high $ to acquire/rent etc. Guessing MF is not an issue for your film


----------



## Conspiracy

money is not an issue as rental fees are dirt cheap and i never shoot with AF for DSLR video anyway. no one in their right mind would buy glass for one gig, thats why rental houses exist. i can also easily rent a zeiss prime kit for cheap as well as cinema glass for 3 days for practically nothing. if i rent sigma art lenses its for tests, id never trust them for something important without more experience using them. all canon/zeiss glass i have experience with and can rely on without initial testing before the shoot


----------



## Magical Eskimo

I unintentionally ended up photographing some runners at a lake I cycle around yesterday, would like to get some opinions/criticisms if possible









I think they turned out quite good myself, it was a little dark around the lake with all the trees but I found a spot I though had the most even light covered by the trees

https://drive.google.com/folder/d/0BxUmo418uVk7fm5BUXo2SXJaTnRZVUNDR0EzbDhjWm9OSDEwbUVGZ0RpamctRDh2Wm9JdGM/edit


----------



## TUDJ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> I unintentionally ended up photographing some runners at a lake I cycle around yesterday, would like to get some opinions/criticisms if possible
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think they turned out quite good myself, it was a little dark around the lake with all the trees but I found a spot I though had the most even light covered by the trees
> 
> https://drive.google.com/folder/d/0BxUmo418uVk7fm5BUXo2SXJaTnRZVUNDR0EzbDhjWm9OSDEwbUVGZ0RpamctRDh2Wm9JdGM/edit


They look great, nice and sharp.

What were your settings? You could have maybe squeeze a little extra out of shutter speed and aperture to get a little more light.


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TUDJ*
> 
> They look great, nice and sharp.
> 
> What were your settings? You could have maybe squeeze a little extra out of shutter speed and aperture to get a little more light.


Thanks Mike!









IIRC I was at 55mm focal the whole time as to not get too close to the runners, so I was stuck at f5.6 on my lens. I switched between around 600-800 ISO and 1/500th or 1/400th. I was worried anything below 1/400th I'd start to loose the freezing motion.

I gotta say, the STM motor is really great on this lens, does a fantastic job of following the subject smoothly.


----------



## TUDJ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> Thanks Mike!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IIRC I was at 55mm focal the whole time as to not get too close to the runners, so I was stuck at f5.6 on my lens. I switched between around 600-800 ISO and 1/500th or 1/400th. I was worried anything below 1/400th I'd start to loose the freezing motion.
> 
> I gotta say, the STM motor is really great on this lens, does a fantastic job of following the subject smoothly.


I think you could have gone down to 1/250 or maybe even 1/200, it's motion but they're not moving super quick. Don't be afraid of quickly changing settings and doing a few test shots, see how they look on the screen.

Did you speak to any of them? They look like a friendly bunch, if you haven't already, find out who they are and let them know who you are, they might want some photos taking during their next race, it would be great for experience and maybe even turn into a little earner too. Networking is always a good idea


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TUDJ*
> 
> I think you could have gone down to 1/250 or maybe even 1/200, it's motion but they're not moving super quick. Don't be afraid of quickly changing settings and doing a few test shots, see how they look on the screen.
> 
> Did you speak to any of them? They look like a friendly bunch, if you haven't already, find out who they are and let them know who you are, they might want some photos taking during their next race, it would be great for experience and maybe even turn into a little earner too. Networking is always a good idea


I spoke to a couple of marshalls before I took any shots, they seemed to welcome the idea. I emailed their webmaster with some of the photos and said they're welcome to use them on their website as long as they credit me for them. I didn't ask for any money for them, didn't feel right as it's just a local thing I shot on a spur of the moment. Do you think that was the wrong way to go about it?

One of the runners shouted to me that he wanted a new Facebook profile picture lol. Hopefully I'll get to shoot some more at some point, they're a large running group in my area and the lake is a 5 min ride from my house.


----------



## TUDJ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> I didn't ask for any money for them, didn't feel right as it's just a local thing I shot on a spur of the moment. Do you think that was the wrong way to go about it?


Not at all, all I meant was that by making these connections there is the possibility of earning later down the road. It might turn into something you do purely for the experience/enjoyment but by connecting with a group such as this, people may come your way to ask for photos of them running/their kids/their sister's newborn etc.

Asking for credit if they use them on their website was a good move too, sometimes that's all the compensation that's need (so long as you're happy with it).

My comment was related more to planting seeds early on, they may blossom into great opportunities down the line, the more you "plant" the more opportunities will come your way, if that's what you want. You may wish to keep it purely as a hobby, even so, getting affiliated with a group like this will be a great thing for expanding/practicing your skills


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TUDJ*
> 
> Not at all, all I meant was that by making these connections there is the possibility of earning later down the road. It might turn into something you do purely for the experience/enjoyment but by connecting with a group such as this, people may come your way to ask for photos of them running/their kids/their sister's newborn etc.
> 
> Asking for credit if they use them on their website was a good move too, sometimes that's all the compensation that's need (so long as you're happy with it).
> 
> My comment was related more to planting seeds early on, they may blossom into great opportunities down the line, the more you "plant" the more opportunities will come your way, if that's what you want. You may wish to keep it purely as a hobby, even so, getting affiliated with a group like this will be a great thing for expanding/practicing your skills


Aahh right yeah I get ya









Yeah I'm really enjoying shooting at the moment, I definitely want to progress more in to photography and try develop a style. If one day I get the opportunity to earn something from it that would be cool.

My mum wants me to get some pictures of my little brother at some point, so that will be a good opportunity to try some portraiture


----------



## kbros

Those look great eskimo. I especially like photo #3.


----------



## kbros

Here are some shots I took at Niagara on my way back from Indiana. Wish I had a passport to visit the canadian side. Can barely see the falls from the US side.

https://flic.kr/p/wc2vXLNiagara pano by Noah Blalock, on Flickr
https://flic.kr/p/wfUfYZNiagara Falls by Noah Blalock, on Flickr
https://flic.kr/p/vAwjCtNiagara Falls by Noah Blalock, on Flickr


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> Those look great eskimo. I especially like photo #3.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> Here are some shots I took at Niagara on my way back from Indiana. Wish I had a passport to visit the canadian side. Can barely see the falls from the US side.
> 
> https://flic.kr/p/wc2vXLNiagara pano by Noah Blalock, on Flickr
> https://flic.kr/p/wfUfYZNiagara Falls by Noah Blalock, on Flickr
> https://flic.kr/p/vAwjCtNiagara Falls by Noah Blalock, on Flickr


Thanks dude







Some lovely shots you got there as well!


----------



## MistaBernie

@sub50hz, was it you that had a Timbuk2 Classic Messenger or was it someone else? Thinking about customizing myself one as my day bag. The small version looks bigger than my Crumpler 'The Maurice') (enough for an iPad Air 2, Apple Wireless Keyboard, sketchbook, charcoal, some other random stuff). AH, that's what I was going to look for, the dimensions because I'm too dang lazy to get a tape.


----------



## Scott1541

I'd like a new bag... I've been eyeing up the billingham hadley pro but damn they're expensive







even second hand they are about £100


----------



## MistaBernie

Stupid Amazon Prime and stupid allure of having my new Timbuk2 as early as tomorrow after work for $5...

In other news, my new Timbuk2 (Small) will be here tomorrow. I'm okay with the generic looking one (even if it's white) if it saves me $60 over customizing my bag. And if the size is bad, I can return it and get a medium (doubt I'd need to though). And if the color annoys me that much, I can return it too and just splurge and get my customized one.

Oh.. needs to be photo related. Uh...

I will be using this bag when I go to work. And on Saturday, I'm taking photos at our company's annual picnic with my camera. There, relevant.


----------



## guitarhero23

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Stupid Amazon Prime and stupid allure of having my new Timbuk2 as early as tomorrow after work for $5...
> 
> In other news, my new Timbuk2 (Small) will be here tomorrow. I'm okay with the generic looking one (even if it's white) if it saves me $60 over customizing my bag. And if the size is bad, I can return it and get a medium (doubt I'd need to though). And if the color annoys me that much, I can return it too and just splurge and get my customized one.
> 
> Oh.. needs to be photo related. Uh...
> 
> I will be using this bag when I go to work. And on Saturday, I'm taking photos at our company's annual picnic with my camera. There, relevant.


I'm enjoying my backpack style camera bag. Going to be great for hiking and outdoors stuff.


----------



## MistaBernie

Yeah, I don't dig the backpack style personally. Granted if I hiked I might bite the bullet but for the most part I have no need for it.


----------



## Scott1541

I have a cheap backpack that I use for storage or if I've got to carry a significant amount of gear. If I'm only carrying a body and a couple of lenses a messenger bag or similar is more convenient. I need a new one because the one I have isn't great and isn't that practical, but saying that it was a freebie.


----------



## Conspiracy

so apparently this happened without anyone telling us way down here

what happened to throwing a party when you retire @MistaBernie

http://www.overclock.net/t/1568196/staff-retirement-mistabernie#post_24268170


----------



## MistaBernie

Haha, surprise...?

I'll actually probably be around a bit more now that I won't be watching the mod queues, putting out fires or getting yelled at by people that don't know how to read a TOS document (or worse, those that think it doesn't apply to them because of any reason they can think of, including none at all).


----------



## MistaBernie

In other news, there's a *chance* I'll be shooting Patriots cheerleaders tomorrow at a private event.

Bauss mode: reactivated.


----------



## gdubc

Are you going to let them deflate yours?


----------



## pcfoo

My







on camera bags...

I've switched away from messenger style bags and I am not looking back. It should be doable (= comfortable IMHO) with a mirror-less setup with 1-2 lenses, but for SLR gear along with f/2.8 zooms it is just too uncomfortable. I switched to a backpack and I saw significant less stress on my body, even when hauling heavier gear.
And that was my early 20s - I would not even want to deal with that 10 years later for long urban or trail hikes.

The backpack is the most comfortable to carry around, but slow and cumbersome if you want to have easy access to switch lenses or just temporarily store the camera.

If quick access is your thing, maybe a sling style bag would do it:
Still more comfortable than a messenger, sits tighter up to your body and allows you to move fast without it bouncing off your body on every other step, no need to lean the other way to balance it and straining your back or legs, even climb small obstacles without it tangling with your limbs & all of that mess the messenger would unavoidably get to.

If there is an unavoidable conflict using dedicated camera back or sling bags, and you need to haul more stuff @ your back than just camera gear,
The best solution I have come to is to use a Lowepro Toploader bag with the chest harness. Along with auxiliary lens cases hang on the sides, this allows for easy access and storage of the camera without taking either bag off yourself, and it pretty comfortable for hauling a FF body & large L zooms (as much as that can be).


----------



## MistaBernie

That's cool. My Timbuk2 hasn't even been used for camera gear yet and I already like it better than I ever liked the various backpack style bags I've used. You can't really use a backpack style bag for the kind of shooting I tend to do - if you need to swap lenses, your bag has to be accessible without taking the bag off, putting it down, opening it up, etc. If I were hiking, biking, etc, I"d probably still use the Timbuk2 messenger over a backpack and just use the additional strap to anchor it in place behind me.

Backpacks to me are for lugging gear, not carrying it around to shoot with. I have quite the little collection of bags going now; a pair of Domkes, my Tamrac Rally 4, Lowepro Classified 200AW, ThinkTank Digital Holster 40 V2 and a Lowepro Exchange Messenger for flash stuff. Notice what's not listed? A single backpack. I only currently own one, and it's because my company gave it to me, and it's actually a fairly neat little backpack (perfect for a laptop, not really designed for photo gear).

It's all preference. Each of the bags I listed above has their uses. For formal events, I'd much rather load up the Lowepro Classified 200AW with what I need than bring a backpack. It's more visually pleasing to me, and I can shoulder it if I absolutely need to (though I rarely do). Usually I'll actually bring one of the Domkes and load it up with what I need and keep the rest on the Lowepro. It sounds more complicated, but I can divide up what I need at any given moment (or will need) much easier, without lugging everything around, etc.


----------



## pcfoo

Totally agree that it is all about preference, and that backpack is more about transporting than actually using - its a hindrance. But I just prefer it over the neck pain a messenger would give me after walking with it for miles. For my daily usage, my half empty leather messenger bag with a thin laptop & my EOS M works & looks fine, I just don't think of it as a camera bag.









My backpack, counting 12y now I think, is a Lowepro Mini Trekker AW and it is still holding too good for me to replace...its a tad dirty, but its "wearing" it proudly after travelling 3 continents.









For faster changes, I really want to look into a Lowepro Lens Exchange 100W or 200W tho...think it might suit me.


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Am I the only one that cringes when I'm out somewhere and I see someone with a massive big tele L lens and they have their monopod on the camera body?!


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> Am I the only one that cringes when I'm out somewhere and I see someone with a massive big tele L lens and they have their monopod on the camera body?!


Don't think I've ever seen anyone doing that, but if I did I'd probably just chuckle to myself, like when you go to a tourist destination and see pop-up flashes firing left right and centre


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> Don't think I've ever seen anyone doing that, but if I did I'd probably just chuckle to myself, like when you go to a tourist destination and see pop-up flashes firing left right and centre


Wait - is using the pop up flash wrong?

I took about 1300 photos of the motorbike races at Brands Hatch today, gonna take me a while to sort through them all! SO MUCH PANNING. I'll never tire of Druid's. Until I get a super tele zoom


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> Wait - is using the pop up flash wrong?


It is when you're taking a photo of a building that's over 100 metres away


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> It is when you're taking a photo of a building that's over 100 metres away


I use mine at the zoo and the aquarium


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> @sub50hz, was it you that had a Timbuk2 Classic Messenger or was it someone else? Thinking about customizing myself one as my day bag. The small version looks bigger than my Crumpler 'The Maurice') (enough for an iPad Air 2, Apple Wireless Keyboard, sketchbook, charcoal, some other random stuff). AH, that's what I was going to look for, the dimensions because I'm too dang lazy to get a tape.


Usually my everyday bag when I carry a camera is the Incase Ari, which is just barely large enough to carry the D610 (no grip) and 24/1.4, a 13" rmbp or Surface Pro 3 (depending on what my needs for the day are), keys, a pack of smokes and a lighter, the x100 and a few other small things. It's big enough to carry all three of my Fujis at once, though I would probably never be caught in that kind of scenario. It's easily my favorite camera bag, and it's nice-looking, so I don't mind carrying it to business meetings or functions. Pricey, sure, but worth it. I have a lot of bags, and it's still my go-to.


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> Am I the only one that cringes when I'm out somewhere and I see someone with a massive big tele L lens and they have their monopod on the camera body?!


I see bias in that comment / question!

Define massive =) . My friends think my 70-200 f4 IS is massive (I have a 3rd party tripod ring, totally worth's it over the crazy exp. OEM).
Also nikon users are wiser than that? Or Sony? Plz...








You are more jelly than cringed
Meh, it is not as bad...still helps massively. Guess where my monopod went before I decided to get the ring

So thinking introspectively it is mostly bullet #3..."why this idiot and not me"









I get the same envious (in as-good-as-it-gets way that is, I don't lose any sleep) feeling everytime I see midleaged men in their sport-cars, 20ish yo asian ladies in their EVOs, 20ish yo asian boys in their plastidipped M4s (that's daily, for that stupid kid that lives South @ my office @ Pasadena).

//Sub50, beautiful bag ... takes a greek I guess...but salty pricetag.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> //Sub50, beautiful bag ... takes a greek I guess...but salty pricetag.


Eh, I don't see $200 as an objectionable price tag considering what I carry inside of it, though I'm not blind to the fact that there are many bags that perform the same function for considerably less.


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> I see bias in that comment / question!
> 
> Define massive =) . My friends think my 70-200 f4 IS is massive (I have a 3rd party tripod ring, totally worth's it over the crazy exp. OEM).
> Also nikon users are wiser than that? Or Sony? Plz...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are more jelly than cringed
> Meh, it is not as bad...still helps massively. Guess where my monopod went before I decided to get the ring
> 
> So thinking introspectively it is mostly bullet #3..."why this idiot and not me"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I get the same envious (in as-good-as-it-gets way that is, I don't lose any sleep) feeling everytime I see midleaged men in their sport-cars, 20ish yo asian ladies in their EVOs, 20ish yo asian boys in their plastidipped M4s (that's daily, for that stupid kid that lives South @ my office @ Pasadena).
> 
> //Sub50, beautiful bag ... takes a greek I guess...but salty pricetag.


Hah I'm talking probably a 400mm f5.6L USM lens, of course I'm jelly! Here's me with my 18-55 STM kit lens and there's matey over there with his 400mm bad boy lens bending off his camera body, of course I'm jealous!

Edit: my 18-55 STM actually did really well at Brands Hatch today despite being limited to pretty much one part of the track (Druid's) I think I got some cracking panning shots - currently sorting through my 1300 photos on Lightroom... Might be done by tonight if I crack on


----------



## pcfoo

Eskimo: meh, 400L 5.6 is light...If I was to give it to you with demanding never to use its tripod collar, you would say .... ?
Again, the fact that they are using a monopod (and probably supporting the lens with the 2nd hand) is way above what you would see in average.

My fav is when people with serious SLRs, are holding them with both hands on the body. Its a tad better than seeing them zooming with their hand juggling around and above the lens - i.e. zero support on the lens. Kinda hard to see that with a 400, but I see it too often with 24-105s / 24-70s and FF bodies. Only takes a walk in a theme park









sub50hz : Respect. My custom made, leather messenger (Greek designed and made







) carries nothing nearly as valuable as yours but I still got it...spending money on things we deem important is a pleasure in itself sometimes







. (wait, this forum and subforum are all about that).


----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JKuhn*
> 
> I'm back (again) and have a question.
> 
> My EOS 400D has trouble getting reliable exposures, could it be the light meter, or is it a sign that I should start looking for a replacement?


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> You need to check it against a hand-held meter to be sure.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Could you give examples of what you name a bad exposure?
> Camera light meters are often fooled in weird lighting situations - like backlit subjects, really bright or really dark backgrounds etc.


Sorry for bringing up posts from so long ago (March if someone wonders), I forgot about my own post and didn't go on this thread again until now.









Anyway, the issue I have with that camera is that the exposure is rarely acceptable. I can't remember right now if it gives over- or underexposed shots (lately I've been too busy with my car, violin and other stuff), but my 1100D doesn't have that issue (using both at the same event).

Speaking of which, I need ot reinstall some old NV drivers so I can use Canon's DPP. I have some photos to edit, and the cut-off for entries is tommorrow.


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> My fav is when people with serious SLRs, are holding them with both hands on the body. Its a tad better than seeing them zooming with their hand juggling around and above the lens - i.e. zero support on the lens. Kinda hard to see that with a 400, but I see it too often with 24-105s / 24-70s and FF bodies. Only takes a walk in a theme park


I see the old hand above the lens thing pretty often, from both canon and nikon users. I originally thought people did it because they thought it was more comfortable with canon lenses zooming anti-clockwise, but evidently not as nikon users so it too. I was somewhere with my dad last week and he took his D5200 with him, it was like amateur hour over in his area... flash popping up every few minutes, hand on top of the lens. On my part I will say I made a rather inappropriate lens choice though, only went with the 35, where he had the flexibility of a 18-105









It pains me to see someone with 'pro' gear who clearly doesn't know how to use it properly. Oh well, at least they're keeping canikon, sony etc in business


----------



## TUDJ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> It pains me to see someone with 'pro' gear who clearly doesn't know how to use it properly. Oh well, at least they're keeping canikon, sony etc in business


It's not limited to photography, you see it in all walks of life.

Look at all of the people on here who go and spend thousands on hardware and then come and ask the most basic questions. I see people wearing super high end hiking gear, coats that cost £300+ and all they use it for is walking the dog. People like the comfort of expensive things, 98% of people in the western world attach status to material possessions, having an expensive DSLR despite not having the slightest clue how to use it is one example, there are endless others.


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Got a bunch of pictures up from Brands Hatch now, check em out tell me what you think!









https://flic.kr/p/x8hYvfBrands Hatch BMCRC-41 by Luke Wanden, on Flickr

https://flic.kr/p/x8itKYBrands Hatch BMCRC-6 by Luke Wanden, on Flickr

https://flic.kr/p/wcbV3aBrands Hatch BMCRC-45 by Luke Wanden, on Flickr


----------



## JKuhn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> Got a bunch of pictures up from Brands Hatch now, check em out tell me what you think!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://flic.kr/p/x8hYvfBrands Hatch BMCRC-41 by Luke Wanden, on Flickr
> 
> https://flic.kr/p/x8itKYBrands Hatch BMCRC-6 by Luke Wanden, on Flickr
> 
> https://flic.kr/p/wcbV3aBrands Hatch BMCRC-45 by Luke Wanden, on Flickr


In the second one you got part of a third bike, and I noticed that photo judges hate that kind of thing. The third one's foreground and background also distracted me a bit (especially the foreground). Great panning though. I won't pretend to be able to do better.


----------



## Conspiracy

so im doing an 8 hour time lapse of a 3D print of a logo at work and just realized i forgot to buy an AC adapter lol. ill also be doing more time lapse stuff in upcoming months which ill try to remember to share







this 3D print should be pretty cool since im going to light it up with some 1000 bulb LED panels on each side

guess im checking on it every couple hours to swap batteries


----------



## TUDJ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> Got a bunch of pictures up from Brands Hatch now, check em out tell me what you think!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> https://flic.kr/p/x8hYvfBrands Hatch BMCRC-41 by Luke Wanden, on Flickr
> 
> https://flic.kr/p/x8itKYBrands Hatch BMCRC-6 by Luke Wanden, on Flickr
> 
> https://flic.kr/p/wcbV3aBrands Hatch BMCRC-45 by Luke Wanden, on Flickr


Great panning skills! What was your keep rate like? I'd be happy to have just one image as good as these panning wise, I've never properly nailed it









On the second image I'd crop out the rear of the bike on the right edge of frame and reduce the amount of foreground so that there's a similar amount as in the first image.


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JKuhn*
> 
> In the second one you got part of a third bike, and I noticed that photo judges hate that kind of thing. The third one's foreground and background also distracted me a bit (especially the foreground). Great panning though. I won't pretend to be able to do better.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TUDJ*
> 
> Great panning skills! What was your keep rate like? I'd be happy to have just one image as good as these panning wise, I've never properly nailed it
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On the second image I'd crop out the rear of the bike on the right edge of frame and reduce the amount of foreground so that there's a similar amount as in the first image.


Thanks guys








Funny you say about the 2nd photo, I posted that one to Instagram and was forced to crop it and realised it does look better after a crop









I ended the day with about 1400 photos, and after scrolling through all of them and picking my favourites I came out with 57. I'd say if I were to pick EVERY good sharp one I might have ended up with probably over 100 keepers but there would have been a few repeats of the same bikes, so I guess I might be knocking on 10% which isn't bad considering I was blasting away at 7fps all day lol


----------



## pcfoo

Not bad @Magical Eskimo









I agree with TUDJ about the 2nd one. Some cropping is needed.
The 3rd one is the most powerful of the lot for me.


----------



## Conspiracy

3D print time lapsing. Only thing im mad about is i cant get the dang mirror lockup to work for shooting 3s interval. Next time ill have an AC adapter and use live view instead


----------



## kbros

Great pans eskimo!

On the topic of bags. I was camping up in NH last week around lake Winni. I still only had the stock nikon bag(little lunchbox looking one). I climbed a mountain while holding that like a purse on one shoulder and my tripod bag on the other. That was rough and super annoying. I drove out to the local walmart and bought a 14 dollar backpack with a bunch of compartments and used that for the rest of the week. It actually fits my tripod in it so I might keep using it. I'll probably order a camera pad insert for added protection.


----------



## Particle

Anyone planning to go for an a7R II?


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Particle*
> 
> Anyone planning to go for an a7R II?


it has my interest but ive been hearing about some of its short comings such as horrible performance with long exposures


----------



## guitarhero23

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Particle*
> 
> Anyone planning to go for an a7R II?


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> it has my interest but ive been hearing about some of its short comings such as horrible performance with long exposures


Tony Northrup did a long exposure test and noted that he heard that too but didn't find anything. (But it wasn't really a specific long exposure test with lots of them) This camera had me going hard. Looks real good. I think I'll wait for the a7sii.


----------



## Particle

I wouldn't mind an a7S II either. Preferably somewhere around 20 MP with an Exmor RS style sensor layout.


----------



## kbros

I want to upgrade soon to something with more AF points but at the same time I want to save up for a while and get a sony. I'm only 1 lens into nikon so nbd.


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> I want to upgrade soon to something with more AF points but at the same time I want to save up for a while and get a sony. I'm only 1 lens into nikon so nbd.


7D mk ii


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> I want to upgrade soon to something with more AF points but at the same time I want to save up for a while and get a sony. I'm only 1 lens into nikon so nbd.


If you can put up with what you have now keep on saving. At times I still wonder if I would have been better off getting an A7 or D610 over the D7200. The D7200 is no slouch by any means but I can't help but think I'd be happier with full frame, especially mirrorless for using any lens I wanted.

ION I was cleaning the viewfinder glass today on the D7200 and I think a bit of the coating somehow wore off. I've messaged Nikon about it showing this photo and I should get a reply monday. It definitely looks like the coating to me, not a reflection or crap behind it. I'm hoping it's covered by warranty, if not I may just keep on using it regardless.


----------



## Pandora51

Good luck. How did you clean it?

Well Im thinking the same about new cameras. After all its not much different than new pc hardware.
Fullframe is interesting espacially the D750.
But there is nothing to say against the D7200 + Sigma 18-35 f1.8.

What do you think about this lens? Would it be worth to skip FF for it or do you think prime lenses all the way anyways?


----------



## pcfoo

Why would the 18-35 Art be a reason for someone to "skip" FF?

It your reasoning is It being a 1.8 vs. the 2.8 zooms in the FF format, I would say it is not a real advantage, more like evening out the field.
Smaller APS-C sensors have roughly 1/2 the area, thus absorbing roughly 1/2 the light FF sensors do during the same exposure.
Thus a f/1.8~f/2.0 lens is exposing an APS-C sensor to roughly the same light during - say - a 1/60s exposure as a f/2.8 lens would a FF sensor during the same duration.

If you are after low light performance and increasing signal to noise ratio, the 18-35 Art is thus just evening out the field in some (not all) ways vs. a f/2.8 Zoom with a FF body.

That said, there is no "obligation" or requirement to go FF, or absolute advantage either. Truth is more and more people can afford FF cameras, and thus more and more end up getting them, and then forum warrioring about them being a "must-have". All the advantages the FF has over APS-C, are also found in medium format digital cameras vs. FF, which lately are not more expensive than what FF SLRs where 10 years ago. Yet the price difference is beyond what I would classify as impulse buy, something I can do between what a D610 costs over a D7200 for example.

Best advice is to chill out, and understand that equipment has very VERY little do do with the pictures you make, unless what you want to capture is VERY VERY technical, which for the most of us it definitely is not. Open any magazine or read any article or see any photo taken 5y ago, and what you see was probably taken with a body far less capable than what entry level D-SLRs and m43 and all kinds of larger-than-p&s-sensor-cameras are capable of today. If it worked for them, you should be able to make it work today.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Smaller APS-C sensors have roughly 1/2 the area, thus absorbing roughly 1/2 the light FF sensors do during the same exposure.
> Thus a f/1.8~f/2.0 lens is exposing an APS-C sensor to roughly the same light during - say - a 1/60s exposure as a f/2.8 lens would a FF sensor during the same duration.


This is absolutely not true. Assuming the same angle of view, the only thing that changes is depth of field.


----------



## Pandora51

Hm thanks for the answers.
Was not sure how to put the question and ended up with something in between.

Im saying this because the lens is unique and might outperform any f2.8 zoom. So if your field of photography heavily benefits from it wouldnt it be better to go only asp-c even with more than enough money for FF?
I would think so.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Best advice is to chill out, and understand that equipment has very VERY little do do with the pictures you make, unless what you want to capture is VERY VERY technical, which for the most of us it definitely is not. Open any magazine or read any article or see any photo taken 5y ago, and what you see was probably taken with a body far less capable than what entry level D-SLRs and m43 and all kinds of larger-than-p&s-sensor-cameras are capable of today. If it worked for them, you should be able to make it work today.


I know. Another reason to not bother with FF








(Please dont take this statement to seriously)


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pandora51*
> 
> Good luck. How did you clean it?


Just with a normal microfibre cloth, after blowing off any loose dust particles, which is how I'd do it on pretty much all of my bodies. Never had this problem with the D5100, and I would have thought a higher end body would be a bit tougher that a cheaper one.

Anyway, I should get some sort of answer from Nikon tomorrow


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Was in London on Saturday and felt like I really progressed with my confidence in street photography. Quite happy with how these turned out, please check out the rest on my Flickr!









Busking by Luke Wanden, on Flickr

Street food by Luke Wanden, on Flickr

Thinking Man by Luke Wanden, on Flickr


----------



## Particle

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> This is absolutely not true. Assuming the same angle of view, the only thing that changes is depth of field.


Given two sensors with the same base sensitivity per unit area, he is absolutely correct. Depth of field is not the only thing that changes. The rub comes from sensors not all being equal, and over time we make them more sensitive. You couldn't compare today's FF to yesterday's APS-C for instance. You can't really even compare two different families of contemporary sensors, like today's Canon vs today's Nikon sensors.


----------



## pcfoo

^This.
The reason is 2/3s of the exposure triangle we are taught to think and adjust as photographers is based on relative values, not absolute ones - shutter speed being the exception.

For aperture, f/2.8 might be f/2.8 on all formats, but that doesn't make the aperture the same physical size. Regardless of FOV, bigger lenses let more light through than smaller ones @ equal f-stop values.

For ISO, yes, the AD converter is calibrated to a ever-evolving ISO standard (current 12232:2006, but lots of "freedom" is assumed by manufacturers on how they rate their cameras), but the gain applied on what the sensor actually is able to capture varies - a lot - depending on the size & native sensitivity & DR of the sensor, which ofc is yet again an ever-evolving component unique to each manufacturer but also to each generation of procucts within that manufacturer's line.

Long story short, each camera model (not just each format) has a unique way to calculate exposure, as the reciprocity failure range for each is also practically unique.
Differences might be minute if we are talking similar generations and/or shared components, but can vary significantly if the format is changing all-together.

In a nutshell, the bigger the sensor, the more light it has to play with even if the exposure values are the same on paper.


----------



## sub50hz

My apologies, I definitely misread your post, and you are correct. I really need to stop trying to browse OCN during on-call work hours.


----------



## MistaBernie

Great, @sub50hz apologizes and kills the thread.









Photo related... I'm shooting the New England Revs on Labor Day weekend (we're apparently playing Orlando and that's apparently a big deal because of some big name player on said team whose name I do not even know). ANYways.. my friendly neighbor photographer heard I was shooting the game and asked if I had long glass with which to shoot (look ma, not ending sentences with prepositions!). When I replied I should be fine with my 70-200 2.8, he turned around and handed me a trunk. Inside, his old 300 f/2.8 non-IS and a 1.4x extender.

I was like 'uh.... ' but after a couple of minutes of coaxing, etc, I accepted the loaner. The problem is, I've never shot with a prime that long before (especially if I toss the 1.4x on it, and even (I know not really longer, you know what I mean though) longer on the 7D due to crop factor. So, I guess my question is, what's the best way to get out and practice with it? There's local sports stuff going on, but no games that I'm aware of, and I really don't think it's cool to show up at practice and start taking photos with a mondo lens like the 2.8. Plus the weather is supposed to suck this weekend, so my options for practicing capturing action with a long prime are relatively limited.

So, who's got suggestions?


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Great, @sub50hz apologizes and kills the thread.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Photo related... I'm shooting the New England Revs on Labor Day weekend (we're apparently playing Orlando and that's apparently a big deal because of some big name player on said team whose name I do not even know). ANYways.. my friendly neighbor photographer heard I was shooting the game and asked if I had long glass with which to shoot (look ma, not ending sentences with prepositions!). When I replied I should be fine with my 70-200 2.8, he turned around and handed me a trunk. Inside, his old 300 f/2.8 non-IS and a 1.4x extender.
> 
> I was like 'uh.... ' but after a couple of minutes of coaxing, etc, I accepted the loaner. The problem is, I've never shot with a prime that long before (especially if I toss the 1.4x on it, and even (I know not really longer, you know what I mean though) longer on the 7D due to crop factor. So, I guess my question is, what's the best way to get out and practice with it? There's local sports stuff going on, but no games that I'm aware of, and I really don't think it's cool to show up at practice and start taking photos with a mondo lens like the 2.8. Plus the weather is supposed to suck this weekend, so my options for practicing capturing action with a long prime are relatively limited.
> 
> So, who's got suggestions?


Just practice by shooting long distance street shots and trying not to look like a pervert









Or try wildlife, long distance, unpredictable, fast, much like a lot of sport!


----------



## MistaBernie

Neither of those will really help with sports photography. I know how stuff works, it's just getting used to the flow of a sport that I'm not used to watching/shooting..


----------



## Magical Eskimo

In that case I don't really see why you couldn't turn up to practice or smaller local stuff to practice shooting sports


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> In that case I don't really see why you couldn't turn up to practice or smaller local stuff to practice shooting sports


Because practices are all kids (even high school). I mean I guess I could ask, but I wouldn't want to promise to delete them before I left without having a chance to review them on a screen, etc. Don't want to creep people out, etc..

If I was a kid/coach and some random guy showed up taking pics with a 300 f/2.8, I'd be like 'uh.. what's up with that?' and with the way things are in the world right now, I wouldn't blame them.


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Because practices are all kids (even high school). I mean I guess I could ask, but I wouldn't want to promise to delete them before I left without having a chance to review them on a screen, etc. Don't want to creep people out, etc..
> 
> If I was a kid/coach and some random guy showed up taking pics with a 300 f/2.8, I'd be like 'uh.. what's up with that?' and with the way things are in the world right now, I wouldn't blame them.


I don't think people would have a problem if you spoke to them first, explain what event you're shooting and want to practice for, give them some of your details etc once you stop being a stranger to them they'll be much more comfortable with you shooting


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Great, @sub50hz apologizes and kills the thread.


Meh, as a human being (for all you know) I do occasionally end up with some egg on my face.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sub50Hz*
> Meh, as a human being (for all you know) I do occasionally end up with some egg on my face.


lol, you know I'm just razzing you bro.


----------



## sub50hz

And I, you.

Spaghetti.


----------



## pcfoo

Intro:

My GAS is taking over and I am daydreaming again finding something better than my $250 bought EOS M + 22mm f/2 (35mm FOV) kit as a carry-around camera.
I don't like the 35 FOV as much, but that's not my real problem with it...it is more that I cannot really pre-focus the lens and there is no viewfinder (EVF or Optical, doesn't matter).
I do like the size and the IQ @ good / medium light, no issue there.

I am a bit biased against m43, so I am looking more into Sony & Fuji mirrorless offerings, to pair with a decent prime.
Unfortunately things that I would consider good contemporary candidates are a bit expensive along with a "ok" prime - I would classify a Sigma 30mm 2.8 as a cheap viable option for the A6000, but I do dig the Fuji X system and I think I would go for their 27mm 2.8 pancake (40mm FOV) ideally.

Real Question:

*X-E1.* Those have dropped a lot. So do X-Pro1, but XE-1s are selling for $220ish now used, so paired with a 27 2.8 I can get it for ~$500ish, while a X-Pro1 or X-E2 cost that or more just for a body. Its not throw-away money, but I can recuperate some of it through selling the M and yada yada GAS excuses.

On the pro sides of the X-E1, the IQ & EVF is pretty much unaltered vs. the newer offerings in this class, so overall I expect to be happy.

Anyone with experience with this camera and primes* ? Is focusing too slow or are ppl just nitpicking?
I don't expect things to be perfect, but at least it gets a decent EFV with focus peaking and pre-focusing capabilities all-together, so I think of it as a clear update over the M for what I want/miss with it.
Did anyone get to use the X-E1 and or updated within the X line and saw improvements in the newer models that would make the X-E1 too dated realistically?

Thanks

* I think most fast primes focus slower with those mirrorless bodies than the IF zooms. That is true for pretty much all brands, especially the M with the 22M that its much worse than with the "slower" in fstop 18-55M.


----------



## THEStorm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Intro:
> 
> My GAS is taking over and I am daydreaming again finding something better than my $250 bought EOS M + 22mm f/2 (35mm FOV) kit as a carry-around camera.
> I don't like the 35 FOV as much, but that's not my real problem with it...it is more that I cannot really pre-focus the lens and there is no viewfinder (EVF or Optical, doesn't matter).
> I do like the size and the IQ @ good / medium light, no issue there.
> 
> I am a bit biased against m43, so I am looking more into Sony & Fuji mirrorless offerings, to pair with a decent prime.
> Unfortunately things that I would consider good contemporary candidates are a bit expensive along with a "ok" prime - I would classify a Sigma 30mm 2.8 as a cheap viable option for the A6000, but I do dig the Fuji X system and I think I would go for their 27mm 2.8 pancake (40mm FOV) ideally.
> 
> Real Question:
> 
> *X-E1.* Those have dropped a lot. So do X-Pro1, but XE-1s are selling for $220ish now used, so paired with a 27 2.8 I can get it for ~$500ish, while a X-Pro1 or X-E2 cost that or more just for a body. Its not throw-away money, but I can recuperate some of it through selling the M and yada yada GAS excuses.
> 
> On the pro sides of the X-E1, the IQ & EVF is pretty much unaltered vs. the newer offerings in this class, so overall I expect to be happy.
> 
> Anyone with experience with this camera and primes* ? Is focusing too slow or are ppl just nitpicking?
> I don't expect things to be perfect, but at least it gets a decent EFV with focus peaking and pre-focusing capabilities all-together, so I think of it as a clear update over the M for what I want/miss with it.
> Did anyone get to use the X-E1 and or updated within the X line and saw improvements in the newer models that would make the X-E1 too dated realistically?
> 
> Thanks
> 
> * I think most fast primes focus slower with those mirrorless bodies than the IF zooms. That is true for pretty much all brands, especially the M with the 22M that its much worse than with the "slower" in fstop 18-55M.


For what it's worth I have been quite happy with my a6000, great little camera! I don't have any experience with the Fuji cams but I have seen some people come back to the Sony after switching to the Fuji as they didn't like the xtrans sensor. The general consensus from them was the lenses are better for Fuji (however you do pay for it), but the bodies are better with Sony.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Intro:
> 
> My GAS is taking over and I am daydreaming again finding something better than my $250 bought EOS M + 22mm f/2 (35mm FOV) kit as a carry-around camera.
> I don't like the 35 FOV as much, but that's not my real problem with it...it is more that I cannot really pre-focus the lens and there is no viewfinder (EVF or Optical, doesn't matter).
> I do like the size and the IQ @ good / medium light, no issue there.
> 
> I am a bit biased against m43, so I am looking more into Sony & Fuji mirrorless offerings, to pair with a decent prime.
> Unfortunately things that I would consider good contemporary candidates are a bit expensive along with a "ok" prime - I would classify a Sigma 30mm 2.8 as a cheap viable option for the A6000, but I do dig the Fuji X system and I think I would go for their 27mm 2.8 pancake (40mm FOV) ideally.
> 
> Real Question:
> 
> *X-E1.* Those have dropped a lot. So do X-Pro1, but XE-1s are selling for $220ish now used, so paired with a 27 2.8 I can get it for ~$500ish, while a X-Pro1 or X-E2 cost that or more just for a body. Its not throw-away money, but I can recuperate some of it through selling the M and yada yada GAS excuses.
> 
> On the pro sides of the X-E1, the IQ & EVF is pretty much unaltered vs. the newer offerings in this class, so overall I expect to be happy.
> 
> Anyone with experience with this camera and primes* ? Is focusing too slow or are ppl just nitpicking?
> I don't expect things to be perfect, but at least it gets a decent EFV with focus peaking and pre-focusing capabilities all-together, so I think of it as a clear update over the M for what I want/miss with it.
> Did anyone get to use the X-E1 and or updated within the X line and saw improvements in the newer models that would make the X-E1 too dated realistically?
> 
> Thanks
> 
> * I think most fast primes focus slower with those mirrorless bodies than the IF zooms. That is true for pretty much all brands, especially the M with the 22M that its much worse than with the "slower" in fstop 18-55M.


As a long-time user I'm quite satisfied with the X-Pro1, X-E1 should be fine so long as you're alright with the EVF. I've become considerably less critical of most cameras as long as they just get out of the way and let me shoot, so take that for what it's worth.


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> As a long-time user I'm quite satisfied with the X-Pro1, X-E1 should be fine so long as you're alright with the EVF. I've become considerably less critical of most cameras as long as they just get out of the way and let me shoot, so take that for what it's worth.


Thanks for that.

As much as I do like the RF X-Pro1, I believe the EVF would work for me. Is definately better than constantly shooting with the back screen - in my book at least. I will keep my phone for that







Most people say it is good and that complains about it being slow-ish etc to refresh are exaggerated. If I can do with the M in most fields that many more are bashing, I think I will survive the XE1's EFV.

How is the AF with the X-Pro1? I would guess the X-E1 is inline with it, and I think they are pretty much identical after the latest firmware for each is used.
Yes, I do want to zone focus from time to time, but AF is still important








The M is "compact" slow, so I doubt it will be worse than that.

Also, have you tried the XF 27?

Cheers


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> How is the AF with the X-Pro1? I would guess the X-E1 is inline with it, and I think they are pretty much identical after the latest firmware for each is used.
> Yes, I do want to zone focus from time to time, but AF is still important
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The M is "compact" slow, so I doubt it will be worse than that.
> 
> Also, have you tried the XF 27?
> 
> Cheers


AF is, at least in my opinion, satisfactory for my use case (mostly street/"landscapes"). It's not the fastest thing on the planet, but I'm very rarely caught off-guard by having slow AF -- and in the cases that I might be, I prefer to use the Nikon anyway. I have not tried the 27, it's a bit of an odd duck for me in terms of focal length.


----------



## Magical Eskimo

What are people's opinions on putting a lens like an EF 24-105 f4L on a crop body like my 70D?


----------



## guitarhero23

I'll let you know, getting the 24-105 to put on my 7D tomorrow. I don't see how it could be an issue unless you actually need something as wide as 24mm since it will be more like a 35mm


----------



## hokiealumnus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> What are people's opinions on putting a lens like an EF 24-105 f4L on a crop body like my 70D?


Personal opinion is that it's too long on the wide end as a walk around lens. I regularly shoot wider when out and about. Though it's an "L" lens, there seems to be a lot of copy variation (at least anecdotally speaking on forums) with the 24-105L. It's the kit lens of full frame, which is why you can find them somewhat reasonably priced. It's a fair bet that you'll get one better than the EF-S kit lenses, but the 18-135 mm / 18-55 mm STM lenses are pretty solid, especially for their price (not necessarily retail, but white-box on eBay). I'm speaking as someone who can't afford even "cheap" L glass, but every photo on my flickr was shot with an EF-S 18-135mm IS (the older, non-STM version...and the STM version is better), EF-S 18-55mm IS STM or for the top-most seven recent shots an EF-S 55-250mm IS STM. They all seem plenty sharp for me, especially considering that what all of them cost together (even at retail) was right at the 24-105L retail price.

In any case, if you require the constant aperture and are ok with it starting a bit long for crop on the wide end, then give it a try. Before you do though, I'd go out for a couple days of shooting and set a hard wide limit of 24mm. See how you fair with that limitation.

Given a crop sensor, if I wanted to spend that much, I'd probably steer toward one of these two: For wide aperture, the EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM. For longer range but variable aperture, the EF-S 15-85 f/3.5-5.6 IS USM. They aren't L lenses, but they're reasonably priced and stronger lenses than their kit-lens counterparts. The only reason to avoid either of those for the 24-105L is if you absolutely plan on moving up to full frame and don't want to bother with selling off EF-S lenses. At least IMHO.

ALL of that said, do note that the 7D was regularly sold in a kit with the (not so great) EF 28-135 f/3.5-5.6 IS USM for years and seemed to sell just fine. So maybe it's just me that doesn't like starting off so 'long' on the wide end.









Apologies if this is rambling, I got very little sleep last night with a sick kid.


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guitarhero23*
> 
> I'll let you know, getting the 24-105 to put on my 7D tomorrow. I don't see how it could be an issue unless you actually need something as wide as 24mm since it will be more like a 35mm


Cool I'll be interested to see how that goes, thanks









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hokiealumnus*
> 
> Personal opinion is that it's too long on the wide end as a walk around lens. I regularly shoot wider when out and about. Though it's an "L" lens, there seems to be a lot of copy variation (at least anecdotally speaking on forums) with the 24-105L. It's the kit lens of full frame, which is why you can find them somewhat reasonably priced. It's a fair bet that you'll get one better than the EF-S kit lenses, but the 18-135 mm / 18-55 mm STM lenses are pretty solid, especially for their price (not necessarily retail, but white-box on eBay). I'm speaking as someone who can't afford even "cheap" L glass, but every photo on my flickr was shot with an EF-S 18-135mm IS (the older, non-STM version...and the STM version is better), EF-S 18-55mm IS STM or for the top-most seven recent shots an EF-S 55-250mm IS STM. They all seem plenty sharp for me, especially considering that what all of them cost together (even at retail) was right at the 24-105L retail price.
> 
> In any case, if you require the constant aperture and are ok with it starting a bit long for crop on the wide end, then give it a try. Before you do though, I'd go out for a couple days of shooting and set a hard wide limit of 24mm. See how you fair with that limitation.
> 
> Given a crop sensor, if I wanted to spend that much, I'd probably steer toward one of these two: For wide aperture, the EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM. For longer range but variable aperture, the EF-S 15-85 f/3.5-5.6 IS USM. They aren't L lenses, but they're reasonably priced and stronger lenses than their kit-lens counterparts. The only reason to avoid either of those for the 24-105L is if you absolutely plan on moving up to full frame and don't want to bother with selling off EF-S lenses. At least IMHO.
> 
> ALL of that said, do note that the 7D was regularly sold in a kit with the (not so great) EF 28-135 f/3.5-5.6 IS USM for years and seemed to sell just fine. So maybe it's just me that doesn't like starting off so 'long' on the wide end.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Apologies if this is rambling, I got very little sleep last night with a sick kid.


I mainly do street photography and I'm getting more in to photographing people and portraits and most of the time I use a 50mm prime as a walkaround, I seldom encounter a situation where I'm limited by 50mm but there's plenty of opportunities where I want further than 50mm


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> What are people's opinions on putting a lens like an EF 24-105 f4L on a crop body like my 70D?


personal opinion is that lens is fantastic. not ideal walk around on a crop sensor but for most uses its excellent. id love one for video but i dont need it for what i shoot


----------



## Scott1541

Whoops, Just bought a D7000 on the sale group I admin. 34k on the shutter but it was cheap so I got it to replace the D5100, which I'm going to try and sell, along with possibly my ipod classic that I don't use. That should easily get me what I paid for this









Also the D7200 is away at Nikon being repaired, got an email back yesterday saying they estimate it'll be done by 3rd sept. There's no mention of cost on the document they sent so fingers crossed it's warranty work.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> What are people's opinions on putting a lens like an EF 24-105 f4L on a crop body like my 70D?


I mostly echo the above sentiments - for street photography it can be a little tight due to crop factor, but in all honesty I actually think it's very versatile. I am definitely more of a 'away from whatever it is that I'm shooting' kind of guy anyways, including if I'm just walking around doing random stuff. I feel like it removes me from what's going on and makes the real feel of 'candid' photography a little easier. Thus, for me, it's actually pretty useful. On top of this, with the crop factor, you're using more of the 'sweet spot' of the lens with a crop body. Some lenses benefit more from this than others (especially if you're not wanting to have to deal with different types of distortion). Makes it easier for situations where you want to process stuff as quickly as possible (though it seems like there isn't really any necessity for most of us to be in that situation).


----------



## Pandora51

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> Whoops, Just bought a D7000 on the sale group I admin. 34k on the shutter but it was cheap so I got it to replace the D5100, which I'm going to try and sell, along with possibly my ipod classic that I don't use. That should easily get me what I paid for this
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also the D7200 is away at Nikon being repaired, got an email back yesterday saying they estimate it'll be done by 3rd sept. There's no mention of cost on the document they sent so fingers crossed it's warranty work.


Why replacing the D5100? Isn't it the better choice as second camera? (mainly because its smaller and lighter)
But well the D7000 is excellent and has some other advantages.

Anything about the issue itself? What is it?


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pandora51*
> 
> Why replacing the D5100? Isn't it the better choice as second camera? (mainly because its smaller and lighter)
> But well the D7000 is excellent and has some other advantages.
> 
> Anything about the issue itself? What is it?


For the past week I've been shooting nightclubs with the D5100, and it's flaws are really starting to show after having to go back to it from a better camera... Smaller/worse viewfinder, serious lack of af points and cross type sensors, and the controls. I just thought something with very similar controls, and that takes the same batteries would be better suited to being my second body. I got it at a good price so I could sell it on again without making a loss if I wanted, I'll see how it goes. Size isn't a massive concern to me right now either, the midrange bodies aren't that heavy and aren't that much larger than the entry level ones, but of course I'd avoid heavy lenses if I had to carry it around all day







It should be here tomorrow and I'm planning to do the nightclubs with it this weekend, so I'll see how it copes and if it's worthy of being the D7200's companion.

Edit: One more reason for the D7000, the AF motor, I have a couple of screw drive lenses

Oh and about the D7200 issue, check the last image in this thread


----------



## Conspiracy

woke up to exciting news.

Canon just announced the update to an old prime. We shall soon see a EF 35mm f1.4L mkII. with new proprietary optics to help with CA. also they are said to have added weather sealing to this one which is a BIG plus in my book. MSRP said to be $1800.

with image samples http://petapixel.com/2015/08/27/canon-unveils-the-35mm-f1-4l-ii-the-first-lens-with-blue-spectrum-refractive-optics/


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> woke up to exciting news.
> 
> Canon just announced the update to an old prime. We shall soon see a EF 35mm f1.4L mkII. with new proprietary optics to help with CA. also they are said to have added weather sealing to this one which is a BIG plus in my book. MSRP said to be $1800.
> 
> with image samples http://petapixel.com/2015/08/27/canon-unveils-the-35mm-f1-4l-ii-the-first-lens-with-blue-spectrum-refractive-optics/


Better be pretty great for 1800 smackers.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Better be pretty great for 1800 smackers.


Ugh, tell me about it, but this will be the first lens that uses the blue optics to prevent CA...

I will say this though - the MTF data compared to the original is noticeably improved.. though, in reality, the fact that the lens is a little larger and heavier will probably be more of an issue to the overwhelming majority of people that want to shoot with the lens. Also, since the original retails for $1479 still. While it's $320 more, in the grand scheme of things, that's about right for the markup from the release price of the original 35L, etc.

Luckily, I won't be tempted by this. With the 16-35L I get most of what I need on the wide spectrum, and it leaves me the cash to make an offer on my neighbor's UM Date code 300 f/2.8L (provided I can actually use the thing, ha).


----------



## Conspiracy

all i can say is ill either be going to a store to test one or renting one asap.

ill try and plan something neat to take pictures of


----------



## pcfoo

35L II ought to be great, especially for the price and what Sigma was able to put out in the form of their 35 Art that also costs much much less than both the old and new 35L.

But either of the 35Ls or the 35 Art is just too big for all-around usage imho. Yeah, yeah, for certain things f/1.4 is unique but...all those properly corrected 1.4 primes end up being the size and weight of my 24-70 2.8








I am almost sure I would pick a 35 2 IS if I was shopping for a 35 instead, choosing to sacrifice 1 stop of light for "1 stop" (as in half) of weight and bulk!

Canon, if you are renewing your older lens designs, please replace your EF 50 1.4 with something more usable before f2, without making it 2x as big and heavy, and I will happily pay 2x as much.









PS. That X-E1 + 27mm 2.8 is still troubling me...I've been reading on the X-Pro1 having issues with the 27 and its OVF magnification settings being borderline too wide for the 27 @ wide setting, and too tight (almost cropping into the FOV) @ tele, so I am thinking going EVF altogether (and saving $200 in the process). Missed a great deal @ FM forums for a XF 27 @ $145, otherwise I would be buying the body too


----------



## Sean Webster

The Sony A7R II is haunting my dreams. ? Can some one give me one? Thanks. Lol


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> The Sony A7R II is haunting my dreams. ? Can some one give me one? Thanks. Lol


I bet many are willing to hand you one...and then get it back after a few seconds - maybe a couple of clicks, sure.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> The Sony A7R II is haunting my dreams. ? Can some one give me one? Thanks. Lol


you can have one if you get me a 645z. ive been day dreaming about that camera for unknown reasons this week


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> I bet many are willing to hand you one...and then get it back after a few seconds - maybe a couple of clicks, sure.


lol if im even that lucky!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> you can have one if you get me a 645z. ive been day dreaming about that camera for unknown reasons this week










we might need to do some negotiation on that trade...


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> I bet many are willing to hand you one...and then get it back after a few seconds - maybe a couple of clicks, sure.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> lol if im even that lucky!
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> you can have one if you get me a 645z. ive been day dreaming about that camera for unknown reasons this week
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> we might need to do some negotiation on that trade...
Click to expand...

ill totally trade you a $3,000 camera for a $8,000 camera. im going to hold you to that


----------



## pcfoo

Yeah, well, I am daydreaming of dat stupid Fuji XF system, and you guys are blowing it out of proportion !!!...









I have to admit I dig the 645z much more...A7R II is cool and all, but I don't dig the compromises one has to go through.

I would prefer the sensor in a Nikon or Canon DSLR any-day over the current, admittedly cool yet in quite a few ways half-baked mirrorless FF package. Yes, I know, it is a matter of preference to an extend, but I think Sony tried too hard to make those bodies small, leading to more compromises than benefits - for my liking.

Due to the physical limitations on the lens side, the resulting kit, unless you plan on using pancakes / f2.8 primes etc, is not that much smaller than SLRs. I totally get it that there is a need for smaller system, that's what I want to do with my "daydreamed" XF kit, that's what I thought EOS M will be better at: leaving little excuses for not dragging the thing along. But I don't see why a A7II R with have an ergonomic or meaningful bulk advantage vs. a D8xxx Nikon with the same sensor really, either both with a small prime, or both with an adapted or even native 2.8 zoom.

If you ad adapters to SLR lenses etc - what most of the people switching to those really do - I feel the whole "small size" starts working against you as it becomes too front heavy and the supplied grip starts feeling inadequate for you to balance the camera + large lens combo in one hand.

The 645z on the other hand, plays in a whole different field. It is big and bulky, but for a reason. I am just not the person that could actually use it as often it would deserve.


----------



## Conspiracy

did some blue screen work for no budget star wars fan film im working on. BTS shot


----------



## Sean Webster

Nice^

Ok, so I'm torn between a 135L and a 35mm prime...what to do? I have a Canon 6D body still.

My current lens set up


24-105mm f/4
50mm f/1.4
85mm f/1.8
100mm f/2.8 macro


----------



## kbros

I'd go with the 35. It would complete your fast prime trifecta.


----------



## Conspiracy

wait for 35L II. test it then decide


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Nice^
> 
> Ok, so I'm torn between a 135L and a 35mm prime...what to do? I have a Canon 6D body still.
> 
> My current lens set up
> 
> 24-105mm f/4
> 50mm f/1.4
> 85mm f/1.8
> 100mm f/2.8 macro


Well, a 35 of any aperture is a very different animal from a 135 f2.
You are pretty much the only one who can really answer the "what I like shooting most" or "what I would like to shoot that I cannot without that new toy" question.

If you want a more educated approach / guess into what you would be using the most, a tool that could assist you in that - and many other data driven decisions - , is Exposureplot (http://www.vandel.nl/exposureplot.html). This little program can plot bar graphs and give you statistics derived from the metadata (exif) of your photo collection. It is pretty fast and with brutal honesty can show you which focal length you use the most for each of your cameras, which aperture etc.

There are thousands of combinations and conclusions, but in a nutshell, if you are shooting all your portraits with your 100 or 85 and you are always stuck @ wide open apertures, you could perhaps use something faster at this or longer focal lengths.

If your 24-105 shots are heavily hovering around the 35mm range, then maybe that's your choice. If it is constantly stuck @ 105mm end, maybe you need something longer.

By looking your kit, imho, a need for a 135 doesn't pop. What I could see you using a lot, including for portraits, would be a 70-200 zoom, and a 70-200 f4 IS is 135L money while being top notch. You cannot go wrong with a Canon 70-200L 2.8 IS of any generation, but that's another ball park of weight and cost.

If what you want is to go all or mostly prime for your shooting, perhaps the 35 would see much more use than a 135 that is a much more specialized lens.

Again, I am not a 35 guy myself, and the 135L intrigues me a lot, but tbh I think a 85 is more versatile as a portrait lens and the EF 85 1.8 is pretty good for the $ already if shallow DOF is your priority. Its no 135L or 85L, but...

On the 35 end, I think my vote would be for the EF 35 2 IS if I was after a compact solution, or the Sigma 35 A for the 1.4, as the 35L I is not up to par before f/1.8-2 in any department, i which case it is just adding bulk over its f/2 brother.
The 35L II will selling for MSRP (or more) for quite some time after its introduced (which won't be soon I predict), and I have a feeling it is beyond what you wish to spend.
The current 35L is a dropping a lot in the used market, even before the II was announced, but tbh unless I was dying for weather sealing, I would not pick it over the Sigma Art that clearly outshines it optically. Even the 35L II won't really be sharper than the Art, but the secret sauce might be that blue defractive (mambo jumbo) tech and it might have minimal CA wide open. Again, the original 35L was much worse @ that field than the 35 Art so who knows? It might well worth the $1800 for those that need the best, but...
Given that 35 Arts float around $700 used (same for 135L), I would still opt for the Sigma if I had to have 1.4, or get both the 35A and the 135L with change to spare vs the 35L II.


----------



## Sean Webster

I just sold my canon 70-200 f/2.8. I really want a 135 for the bokeh and sharpness for the price...although a 85 f/1.2 would be my dream lens. I also would like a wider prime and may sell the 24-105 once I get one. I'm probably gonna get both a 135 and 35, I'm just not sure what to get first. I'm thinking maybe a 135 would be the better option right now as I like doing candid photos around school. But looking at some of the wide open shots from 35mm lenses is making me long for one too. I wouldn't buy a canon 35L or f/2, the sigma art is where it is at. I'm also thinking of swapping out the 85 f/1.8 for the sigma 85 f/1.4 too. Ugh, I'm just cheap lol. I find I shoot my 85 often and I think when I have a 35 I'll use it a lot too.

Also, I think I need a cpl filter...time to start looking for what there is in 82mm.


----------



## Conspiracy

you have gear lust


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> I really want a 135 for the bokeh and sharpness for the price...although a 85 f/1.2 would be my dream lens.


I would think you want both for the bokeh and to an extend the prime coolness. The sharpness is kinda of a placebo these days...maybe 135L II or 85L III, with BD and $2000/$3000 pricetags respectively will reverse it, but a 70-200L IS II beats them both @ sharpness hands down @ all apertures, and ofc @ longer mm the bokeh is also if not as dreamy, at least comparably shallow.

But you start with your post with "want", so who can contest that? If you won't be borrowing money or neglecting other responsibilities, go for it!
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> I also would like a wider prime and may sell the 24-105 once I get one. I'm probably gonna get both a 135 and 35, I'm just not sure what to get first. I'm thinking maybe a 135 would be the better option right now as I like doing candid photos around school. But looking at some of the wide open shots from 35mm lenses is making me long for one too. I wouldn't buy a canon 35L or f/2, the sigma art is where it is at. I'm also thinking of swapping out the 85 f/1.8 for the sigma 85 f/1.4 too. Ugh, I'm just cheap lol. I find I shoot my 85 often and I think when I have a 35 I'll use it a lot too.


Remember, being close is part of the magic @ candit shots.
If it was indoor sports and you needed more reach than the 85 can give, I could buy the 135L excuse, but outside action, for me it reads more formal studio or outdoor natural light headshot kind of lens than candit. The 85 and the 50 either would be better choices. I don't say you cannot shoot the 135 or pretty much any lens @ any situation given need or creativity. Just 2cents.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Also, I think I need a cpl filter...time to start looking for what there is in 82mm.


Well, you cannot go wrong with B+W, but I think the Marumi DHG CPL are surprisingly good too, beating in uniformity & neutrality Hoya, Tiffen, Heliopan and pretty much everything even before you factor in value.

http://www.lenstip.com/115.4-article-Polarizing_filters_test_Results_and_summary.html
(seen good results/reviews in printed press too, but as always there is a subjective factor in all we read - even OCN)
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> you have gear lust


...don't we all ... but the nail was hit right there


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> you have gear lust




Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> I would think you want both for the bokeh and to an extend the prime coolness. The sharpness is kinda of a placebo these days...maybe 135L II or 85L III, with BD and $2000/$3000 pricetags respectively will reverse it, but a 70-200L IS II beats them both @ sharpness hands down @ all apertures, and ofc @ longer mm the bokeh is also if not as dreamy, at least comparably shallow.
> 
> But you start with your post with "want", so who can contest that? If you won't be borrowing money or neglecting other responsibilities, go for it!
> Remember, being close is part of the magic @ candit shots.
> If it was indoor sports and you needed more reach than the 85 can give, I could buy the 135L excuse, but outside action, for me it reads more formal studio or outdoor natural light headshot kind of lens than candit. The 85 and the 50 either would be better choices. I don't say you cannot shoot the 135 or pretty much any lens @ any situation given need or creativity. Just 2cents.
> Well, you cannot go wrong with B+W, but I think the Marumi DHG CPL are surprisingly good too, beating in uniformity & neutrality Hoya, Tiffen, Heliopan and pretty much everything even before you factor in value.
> 
> http://www.lenstip.com/115.4-article-Polarizing_filters_test_Results_and_summary.html
> (seen good results/reviews in printed press too, but as always there is a subjective factor in all we read - even OCN)
> ...don't we all ... but the nail was hit right there


I'm more of a distance candid shooter when i'm on campus. I don't normally go out of my way to socialize, even though I do at times to get the shot I want. I didn't like the size of the 70-200 f/2.8. I'm thinking the 135 will be perfect for that. But, I also would love 35mm on FF... I was using my 50 a lot lately and wished it was wider.

Thanks for the link on the filters!


----------



## Conspiracy

you can also combine a 1.4X tele to that 135L for reach if its too short. when i use the 1.4X + 135L on my 5D its still smaller than using a 70-200


----------



## pcfoo

And then he will find out how unpopular, thus dirt cheap, those EF 200L 2.8 IIs are, which are also black, and sharp, and compact, and...











Above: 50 1.4 / 135L / 200L / 70-200 2.8L


----------



## Sean Webster

lol, I think 135 should be he perfect size for my main use, 200mm is too zoomed for my liking and 100mm isn't enough.

I am looking at this guy's photos and wondering how he gets the quality like he does. For more examples look in this album: https://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/albums/72157643130750424



Do you think he is using a CPL? Or is it just his editing? Like the shine on the headlights and low reflections in the paint. Definitely a CPL right?


----------



## kbros

Definitely a CPL.


----------



## Conspiracy

sean from what it sounds like if you are trying to just go primes 35/135 is going to be your kit at some point. since you dont have a 70-200 anymore get the 135L first then the 35mm. im assuming you still have that 24-105 as well as the 50mm and 85mm. this way you have time to wait for people to unload various 35mm lenses for the new 35LmkII. you might see cheap 35L mkI as well as people upgrading from the 35 Art just because they didnt want the old 35L due to its lack of resolving power among a few other minor but insignificant flaws


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kbros*
> 
> Definitely a CPL.


Thanks!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> sean from what it sounds like if you are trying to just go primes 35/135 is going to be your kit at some point. since you dont have a 70-200 anymore get the 135L first then the 35mm. im assuming you still have that 24-105 as well as the 50mm and 85mm. this way you have time to wait for people to unload various 35mm lenses for the new 35LmkII. you might see cheap 35L mkI as well as people upgrading from the 35 Art just because they didnt want the old 35L due to its lack of resolving power among a few other minor but insignificant flaws




That sounds like a plan. Now to search POTN!!!


----------



## Magical Eskimo

I went to try out the 24-105 f4L yesterday, they didn't have it but I tried the 24-70 f4L just to see what 24mm is like on the 70D and I think it's fine, 24mm is still pretty wide on a crop body.


----------



## mattg

Hey guys

some gear ive had. (feel free to ask about any of it)

canon 1000D (second camera)
canon 7D (Third camera)
canon 6D (FF) (fourth camera)

Nikon D3000 (my first ever slr camera)

Currently using a

Nikon D810 (monster) (FF)

Past lens
kit lens obviously for both brands
canon 10-22 F4
canon 24-105L
canon 17-40L
canon 70-200 2.8 is2
100mm macro
nikon 16-35L

currently using the d810 with the 16-35 i primarily do landscape photography havent bothered getting more lens for the d810 yet.


----------



## Conspiracy

nikon makes a 16-35L now? about time they realized canon was doing it better


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> nikon makes a 16-35L now? about time they realized canon was doing it better


Well, their 16-35 VR is a good example of a Nikkor zoom that was actually standing up to the competition - for a change.








But yeah, i think wishfull thinking took over Matt's keyboard there...much like I wish my 16-35L IS was sitting in a canon body with either of the D810 or (why not) the A7R II Sony sensors


----------



## Conspiracy

you should learn sarcasm because i bet you are just the life of every party


----------



## Conspiracy

http://petapixel.com/2015/09/01/paypal-unveils-paypal-me-links-for-getting-paid-grab-your-url-before-its-gone/


----------



## pcfoo

My bet is that someone here has friends only on Blue-Ray. And zero patience to learn how to read past one line cause he knows better.
w/e, happy Tuesday.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> My bet is that someone here has friends only on Blue-Ray. And zero patience to learn how to read past one line cause he knows better.
> w/e, happy Tuesday.


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> http://petapixel.com/2015/09/01/paypal-unveils-paypal-me-links-for-getting-paid-grab-your-url-before-its-gone/


Wow, bernieh was still available. Very nice.

Also, replying as I'm watching Friends on cable.


----------



## mattg

My bad guys typo I'm so used to saying L series hah! The 16-35 doesent look as good but it tough as he'll The amount of water that has been on it without breaking is nuts salt water to


----------



## Conspiracy

I was just poking fun lol

cant speak for others that prefer this to be an all facts all the time, zero fun zone


----------



## MistaBernie

Those jimmies, un-rustle them.


----------



## Conspiracy

just poking fun while abiding by TOS


----------



## Magical Eskimo




----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*


looks more like you just got your jimmies straight out of the dryer on a super cold winter day haha


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> looks more like you just got your jimmies straight out of the dryer on a super cold winter day haha


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> looks more like you just got your jimmies straight out of the dryer on a super cold winter day haha
Click to expand...

if its a staring contest you want then you got it


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> if its a staring contest you want then you got it


I would entertain such a contest, but I'd probably get an infraction for spamming with just images or something lol



oh yeah, on topic.. ummm... I took a photo on the weekend.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> if its a staring contest you want then you got it
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I would entertain such a contest, but I'd probably get an infraction for spamming with just images or something lol
> 
> 
> 
> oh yeah, on topic.. ummm... I took a photo on the weekend.
Click to expand...

no way. i totally took like maybe 2-3 photos this weekend as well. i mean if you want to get technical i took thousands of photos because i shot a bunch of video at 30fps



staring contest through a screen we are using the honor code system. i am assuming you havent blinked yet


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> no way. i totally took like maybe 2-3 photos this weekend as well. i mean if you want to get technical i took thousands of photos because i shot a bunch of video at 30fps
> 
> 
> 
> staring contest through a screen we are using the honor code system. i am assuming you havent blinked yet


I actually took about 1000 individual exposures on the weekend at an air show, which reminds me I need to sort through those tonight and post some



There has been no blinking here!


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> no way. i totally took like maybe 2-3 photos this weekend as well. i mean if you want to get technical i took thousands of photos because i shot a bunch of video at 30fps
> 
> 
> 
> staring contest through a screen we are using the honor code system. i am assuming you havent blinked yet
> 
> 
> 
> I actually took about 1000 individual exposures on the weekend at an air show, which reminds me I need to sort through those tonight and post some
> 
> 
> 
> There has been no blinking here!
Click to expand...



while also continuing to keep it photo related the fuji x100t has proven itself nicely to be an amazing camera to keep on you at all times so basically everyone should go get one









post air show photos asap


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> 
> 
> while also continuing to keep it photo related the fuji x100t has proven itself nicely to be an amazing camera to keep on you at all times so basically everyone should go get one
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> post air show photos asap


I left my desk for 10 mins, I think I lost









Sneak Preview of the Air Show









Red Arrows-1 by Luke Wanden, on Flickr


----------



## Conspiracy

hooray







staring contest champion for September 2015







good game


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> hooray
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> staring contest champion for September 2015
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> good game


Until next month!


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> http://petapixel.com/2015/09/01/paypal-unveils-paypal-me-links-for-getting-paid-grab-your-url-before-its-gone/


sweet! I got SeanW!


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> sweet! I got SeanW!


Nice!

I have an unusual Surname, LukeWanden wasn't taken, LukeW was.
I don't do photography to get paid at the moment, but seeing as my paypal account is business ready with no restrictions I may as well set this up


----------



## Conspiracy

id totally tell everyone to grab their name if they can just because you never know how you will use it. even if its just trading gear online you can use that for money transfers


----------



## Sean Webster

Yeah it takes the mystery out of getting paid and hoping the person wrote your email right. Now you can just send a url with the exact value you want to get paid.


----------



## hokiealumnus

Sweet, got hokiealumnus (like I have pretty much everywhere, thankfully). Thanks for the heads-up!


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hokiealumnus*
> 
> Sweet, got hokiealumnus (like I have pretty much everywhere, thankfully). Thanks for the heads-up!


going to be hilarious if your alma mater contacts you because they want that to use for donations and fund raising


----------



## hokiealumnus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> going to be hilarious if your alma mater contacts you because they want that to use for donations and fund raising


Hahaha...that's funny.

I also have the .com domain, twitter, instagram, flickr, 500px...most anything with a forward-slash hokiealumnus. It's just unique enough to be available if I catch it relatively early on things like this paypal deal.

They do contact me personally on occasion, but separate from my online name. I politely tell them if they wanted me to give them more money than tuition, they should have forced me to major in something other than theatre arts.


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Got some of my photos from the Wings & Wheels festival at the weekend sorted









https://flic.kr/p/xccfQQWings & Wheels-11 by Luke Wanden, on Flickr

https://flic.kr/p/xRBk9YWings & Wheels-9 by Luke Wanden, on Flickr

https://flic.kr/p/xRBobQWings & Wheels-4 by Luke Wanden, on Flickr

Unfortunately I was limited to an 18-55mm lens and a 50mm prime, so range wasn't on my side for the planes, but I think I did a pretty good job with what I had.


----------



## KSIMP88

Found this old thing in the closet. Is it any good?


----------



## pcfoo

Canon AE-1 Program. Whoever bought that back in early 80s (I presume) did pay quite a bit. The lens is not that great tho.

In a nutshell:
The body: Mid-range Canon Manual Focus / Auto Exposure (=AE) body. It is a pretty decent film camera and you could get excellent lenses (FD/Fn mount) for it. I love the viewfinder on my AE-1.
Only real weakness is the mediocre max shutter speed, as 1/1000s it is a pain to work even with 100 ISO film and fast lenses. It will probably need new seals for the back, otherwise light might be leaking and depending on the severity it will spoil your film. You will almost definitely need a battery for the AE and shutter to work after all these years. Make sure the contacts are clean of any battery acid leads before you spend the money on one only to find out its ruined. Careful with the battery door, it is easy to break the locking latch off, and the plastic appears to only get more brittle / sensitive with age. Rest of the body built is pretty robust.

Lenses: pretty good and dirt cheap 5y or so ago, even more 10y ago.
Those lenses could not be mounted in EOS bodies without adapters with corrective optics that would take a toll on both image quality and would reduce real max aperture and field of view at the same time, i.e. those were pretty much undesirable for general D-SLR use.

The rise of the mirror-less cameras for m43 (Oly / Panasonic etc) and APS-C/FF formats (Sony, Fuji etc) did boost demand and thus prices for Canon FD/Fn lenses a lot, as it only requires a simple very cheap tube-like adapter with no optics to work, and the performance of some of those lenses is pretty decent with good colors and high resolving power.

You can get a FD 50 1.8 SC that is excellent for the price still in very very good condition and produce excellent results for $30, but there are more specialized FD/Fn lenses that can cost you in the $100s (still much cheaper than modern alternatives tho).

The zoom you have is not unusable (unless ofc the aperture blades are stuck, and you don't have fungus growing inside it - pretty much the only things that can go wrong with those older lenses it seems) : film in general was much more forgiving with softer lenses than digital is.


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KSIMP88*
> 
> Found this old thing in the closet. Is it any good?


Yeah get yourself a little 50mm lens or something and go shoot some film! You'll be a qualified hipster then!

I was actually thinking about buying one of those for some Street photography.


----------



## Sean Webster

Okay, I got my CPL filter today. Why didn't you guys force me to buy one before? This thing is freaking black magic! I can't wait to start taking more car photos with it.


----------



## hokiealumnus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Okay, I got my CPL filter today. Why didn't you guys force me to buy one before? This thing is freaking black magic! I can't wait to start taking more car photos with it.


CPL filters are awesome! Especially for cars, but for other stuff too. The shot below was taken in the middle of the day. The water & sky both looked great to me with sunglasses on...which are polarized. When I took them off, there was still color, but not like this. Putting the CPL on my camera allowed me to see what my eyes saw, and the result is stunning color that was there, but that could never have been captured as well without the CPL.

Teal Waters of the Carolina Coast by Jeremy Vaughan, on Flickr

Yep, big fan of the CPL here.


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Okay, I got my CPL filter today. Why didn't you guys force me to buy one before? This thing is freaking black magic! I can't wait to start taking more car photos with it.


Most "surviving" filters cannot be replaced by P/P...and I characterize "surviving" polarizers and the various ND filters.


CPL is one of them...I get one for all my lenses last 10y or so. It's weakness is with skies and UWA lenses (weird vignetting type of thing). Its effect cannot be simulated by any P/P software at this point, and most likely for a long time.
ND Grads are fading out as bracketing shots and (mild) HDR is becoming easier and more popular or for cases including expressed treelines/skylines etc that don't work well with the horizontal line the ND grad effect is applied in.
Still pretty much a must if you want to take your time to setup and take one "as close to perfect" exposed shot or if you are using film. Yes, LR/PS ND grad effects are doing some of the trick, but...no cigar for hard cases (and dramatic landscapes are almost always hard cases).
Strong ND (8+ stops) are very nice for sea-scapes / cloudscapes / fluid related long exposures.
Vari-ND are very nice for shooting wide open with fast lenses @ good light when the shutter speed would be maxed out without them. Very popular with video makers, but also nice for strobe shots that are X-speed (but also minimum strobe output limited) and usually result with f/8~f/11 meterings. Another reason many pros use good zooms @ studio shots, i.e. there is little difference if you will stop all the way down to f/8. A constant low-strength ND can work great to bring your 1.4/1.8/2 lenses back in their game, a Vari-ND gives you more control/versatility.


----------



## guitarhero23

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> What are people's opinions on putting a lens like an EF 24-105 f4L on a crop body like my 70D?


Ok i've been able to use it "a little". I like the 24-105 range on the crop. Definitely going to be my go to "does most of what I need on the fly". Still will use 50mm 1.8 for portraits and things where I need lots of nice bokeh.

https://flic.kr/p/xq9Yz9Pure Happiness by Travis Simpson, on Flickr

https://flic.kr/p/ymeJRSSophia Beach by Travis Simpson, on Flickr


----------



## MistaBernie

First time shooting pro sports (especially soccer, which I do not follow at all). First time shooting with a 300 f/2.8 & 1.4x extender on a 5D3. Go easy on me..

(mods: I do not have an interest in ProstAmerika, but I can't upload images to OCN because MLS retains the copyright to media images taken at the games).

http://www.prostamerika.com/2015/09/07/ne-revolution-30-orlando-city/128350#prettyPhoto


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> First time shooting pro sports (especially soccer, which I do not follow at all). First time shooting with a 300 f/2.8 & 1.4x extender on a 5D3. Go easy on me..
> 
> (mods: I do not have an interest in ProstAmerika, but I can't upload images to OCN because MLS retains the copyright to media images taken at the games).
> 
> http://www.prostamerika.com/2015/09/07/ne-revolution-30-orlando-city/128350#prettyPhoto


Pretty kewl!

@guitarhero23, I like the 1st one the most, although bot scream "fill-in-flash" due to strong shadows.


----------



## guitarhero23

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Pretty kewl!
> 
> @guitarhero23, I like the 1st one the most, although bot scream "fill-in-flash" due to strong shadows.


Definitely but, if you're just shooting for fun can't account for everything! I noticed same thing though


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> First time shooting pro sports (especially soccer, which I do not follow at all). First time shooting with a 300 f/2.8 & 1.4x extender on a 5D3. Go easy on me..
> 
> (mods: I do not have an interest in ProstAmerika, but I can't upload images to OCN because MLS retains the copyright to media images taken at the games).
> 
> http://www.prostamerika.com/2015/09/07/ne-revolution-30-orlando-city/128350#prettyPhoto


Noice!

I haven't been able to use the new CPL filter I got much, but I did do some car photos in a parking garage the other day. It was raining out and it wasn't a planned shoot, but I like how the shots came out. I mirrored over the right side pillars to the left for the background.


----------



## pcfoo

Great work Sean.
The light did not help the all-black E90 as I don't read any contours of it @ the front, but I dig the other two, esp. the GTI.
The background looks great.

@guitarhero, I wasn't picking on you, the contrary, there is a good energy in the picture with the baby girl bursting with happiness. Summer midday sun is relentless tho.

On my GAS: I think i will be pushing my EOS M kit @ the ads. Used X-E2 + 35 1.4 in the mail. Could not find a used 27 pancake @ good price, and I would not pay as much as a mint 35 1.4 for an also used 27 2.8, sorry. Hope it meets the expectations outside looks.








Will give it a try and I have already planned a couple of nice trips for it to tag along the the next 6 months!


----------



## sub50hz

The 35 is wonderful, but I hope you're managing your AF expectations, as it's not exactly the fastest thing in the world. It's also a little buzzy, but only internet pedants take issue with it (I believe it to be fine).


----------



## pcfoo

I've studied the pros and cons, and I believe I've managed my expectations.
I admit I was going for the X-E1 originally, but I've chickened out and preferred to pay the extra $$ for the X-E2, mainly for the AF speed. I also knew that the 35 1.4 is not the fastest AF lens, but I found it in a OK deal bundled with the silver X-E2 body above, so I've decided to give it a go instead of trying the 27 pancake that I originally had my sights on. I would not mind toying with a X-T10, but that is just too expensive even used for a "secondary" carry on camera. Now I am fooling myself with the fact I will recuperate 1/2 of what I've spent, selling the EOS M with the 2 lenses and the EF adapter









I think the lens selection and sensor performance, ontop of the retro feel, was what made me go Fuji X vs. a A6000 that would probably cost me a tad less with a 35 1.8, considerably less with a Sigma 30 2.8, but would be leading in raw AF performance. I also wanted something to shoot a lot and PP less with, and I think Fuji has the edge in OOC JPEGs etc - I don't care with nonsense like "oh, they cheat in exposure here or they pull 1/3 ISO there" etc. That's BS.

Long story short, if I have even marginally usable zone focusing with AF override if needed and a decent OVF/EVF I will be happy.
I don't expect it to focus faster than my EF lenses, and tbh I don't need it to. I was managing working around the EOS M weaknesses (again, to a large % because I was using the 22 f/2, the 18-55 IS was much much faster in AF for example, much like the XF 18-55 is faster to focus than the XF primes I am into).


----------



## guitarhero23

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Great work Sean.
> 
> @guitarhero, I wasn't picking on you, the contrary, there is a good energy in the picture with the baby girl bursting with happiness. Summer midday sun is relentless tho.


Oh I know, the exclamation was more meant as a strong agreement to what you said. It's funny how easily text appears differently than you intend.


----------



## guitarhero23

Oh snap, Sony a7s ii announced. http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/full-sony-a7s-specs/


----------



## MistaBernie

_*MUCH*_ more interested in the Zeiss Milvus line of lenses. Dat 85 f/1.4... (wipes drool) -- whoa, the 35 f/2 is almost reasonably priced! ($1117 @ B&H)

https://fstoppers.com/gear/zeiss-launches-entirely-new-milvus-line-high-performance-lenses-nikon-and-canon-85670


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> _*MUCH*_ more interested in the Zeiss Milvus line of lenses. Dat 85 f/1.4... (wipes drool) -- whoa, the 35 f/2 is almost reasonably priced! ($1117 @ B&H)
> 
> https://fstoppers.com/gear/zeiss-launches-entirely-new-milvus-line-high-performance-lenses-nikon-and-canon-85670










those prices are very reasonable


----------



## sub50hz

That 35/2 better be something really special for ~1200 USD.


----------



## pcfoo

I dig the design, I think the The declicked mode is pretty smart for videographers, but I have a silly question: why don't they do AF ?
It's 2015 ffs. Even Sigma and Tamron have figured it out and provide not only good optics, but decent AF and IS to boot!


----------



## Conspiracy

because manual focus still have a place in high end photography. zeiss isnt a consumer budget brand people buy just because its another option to chose from between tamron, sigma, tokina, etc. a manual focus lens is a fantastic tool to have in a kit for the precise shooter especially those videographers that will take advantage of the de-click feature. manual focus lenses offer the ability to have more control over focus and precision. imagine a low light scene where you are rack focusing. a lens with AF might be a centimeter turn of the ring to shift focus from 3 feet to 5 feet. on a manual focus lens it takes more turning of the focus ring which translates to easier nailing of focus rather than guessing and focusing back and forth to try and actually get your subject in focus. to keep it simple. manual focus glass for most is personal preference but for those that require precision its a great tool. the average photog will not benefit greatly from manual focus lenses. also not to mention lens breathing is slightly less exaggerated on zeiss lenses which is another positive for zeiss. i only speak from the video side of shooting. if i was doing stills then im AF all the way because its faster on modern cameras and pretty much wont miss focus so it eliminates user error

im pretty sure ill grab at least their new 50/2 makro. i love the current 50/2 they have available. its a gift from the lens gods in video shooting


----------



## pcfoo

I don't bash on MF. It is good to have and I do use MF correction with almost all my lenses @ close distances / super fast apertures. Matte focusing screens help too in all my AF SLRs.

I also understand that AF is also nearly useless for serious DSLR videography - at least with current tech - so the declicking thingy is - as I've said - a pretty smart move - and I bet pretty cheap to implement and surely more preferable than having two lines - like Rokinon does for example.

Yet something is fishy. Zeiss did start to produce decent AF performing lenses for Sony and Fujifilm systems, lenses that do sell well and are quite pricey for their class, but their SLR line outside those made for Sony remain MF. I was not the only one hoping that they would renew their line of lenses with AF capabilities after those latest Batis' & Touits debuted.

In my mind there are two "excuses".


There is something silly behind the scenes licensing scheme for Nikon and Canon are pulling perhaps, one that Sigma and Tamron either paid or ignored.
Apparently Zeiss is not willing to pick either option if that was the case, despite having a decent presence with their ZE and ZF mount line for some time now. Companies with smaller presecse that have entered the market very agressively last few years - Sony and Fuji - apparently are willing to share more tech in order to have Zeiss validate their systems.
It is also important to have a precise mechanically driven focusing mechanism, not that new drive by AF motor only crap that some companies now use to simplify - and cheapen - their designs. Most of the times the feel is not there, even if we are talking great lenses.
Perhaps Zeiss cannot marry their preferred MF mechanism's feeling and precision with a AF/MF clutch and whatnot, so they chose to go with that only for a couple of smaller crop lenses, and stay MF only for their bigger and more complex primes.
So I can think of excuses for not going all-out AF, I just bet that they would have far more success if they would go for designs with AF capabilities. Unless ofc their contract with Sony is binding them not to provide with AF lenses any other big player, or perhaps the AF mechanism utilized being patented by Sony and again that being the reason it cannot mitigate to the ZE / ZF lines of optics.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> zeiss isnt a consumer budget brand people buy just because its another option to chose from between tamron, sigma, tokina, etc. a manual focus lens is a fantastic tool to have in a kit for the precise shooter


Methinks ye doth partake of the Zeiss Kool-Aid. I also would disagree heavily on the precision part, since none of the modern SLRs are equipped with any of the manual-focus aids of cameras past (quality ground glass, split window, etc).


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> zeiss isnt a consumer budget brand people buy just because its another option to chose from between tamron, sigma, tokina, etc. a manual focus lens is a fantastic tool to have in a kit for the precise shooter
> 
> 
> 
> Methinks ye doth partake of the Zeiss Kool-Aid. I also would disagree heavily on the precision part, since none of the modern SLRs are equipped with any of the manual-focus aids of cameras past (quality ground glass, split window, etc).
Click to expand...

methinks you dont shoot much video. im by no means a zeiss fanboy but if im shooting video and require manual focus lenses zeiss is the only budget friendly option for rental since i dont have a need for cinema glass for the gigs i work on and the budget for $200+/3days for a single lens isnt in hardly any of my clients checkbooks. i simply am saying the MF does have a purpose and really the only thing its practical for is video. none of the local rental houses that i use rent any other MF DSLR options other than zeiss. also new mirrorless and some DSLR bodies now have more modern features to revive MF glass. yes the days of split prism focus is gone and has been replaced by focus peaking and PIP focus checking. catch up dude, youre way behind on new camera features







the only thing that hasnt 100% caught up yet is completely reliable AF in video mode on these new modern DSLR/mirrorless bodies. once that happens manual focus glass will be completely obsolete and zeiss will just be a name brand with nothing special to offer anymore in the world of video. but right now its the go-to brand for video glass unless youre pinching pennies and go rokinon which isnt in abundance for rentals


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> yes the days of split prism focus is gone and has been replaced by focus peaking and PIP focus checking. catch up dude, youre way behind on new camera features


Ok, so:

1.) Focus peaking -- still mostly a video tool, not available in any *SLR* without moving to the workflow-murdering Live View method. Notice the emphasis on SLR.

2.) PIP is only available on the X100T, which is all well and good, but it has no relation to the discussion at hand.
Quote:


> really the only thing its practical for is video.


There's the problem -- I don't care about video creation. I do appreciate that manual-focus lenses have their place in that scenario, but then I would assume it would be more appropriate to market these lenses specifically to videographers, rather than try and hang their hat on nostalgia.


----------



## Conspiracy

well i was only speaking on behalf of manual focus glass from a video perspective. did so in my OP. im not defending MF glass for photography nor trying to make a case for it. we are talking two totally different things. if zeiss markets only to video they lose whatever market they do have for photographers that buy their glass because of solely the name brand. its in their best interest to keep zeiss a name for glass as that is their company model anyway. photography lenses is only a portion of their entire business.

my post was a response to pcfoo's gripe about zeiss not putting AF in all their lenses just offering one purpose for manual focus glass. not trying to say its the end all reason why zeiss still makes lenses for DSLR mounts. who knows why they dont change their marketing strategy. they are an optics company way before a camera lens company. like i said camera lenses are only a part of their much larger business. they make a killing on cinema glass, binoculars, telescopes, microscopes, eye glass lenses, and who knows what other industrial/research products that have. their products in the industrial markets is likely what keeps them in business just like canon isnt a successful business simply because they make DSLR cameras. zeiss MF lenses are such a small part of their bigger pictures. its not worth worrying about just dont drink the koolaide haha


----------



## pcfoo

Meh, no delusions about Zeiss. They do make cool optics, but for 35mm SLRs I would not care for them. My whole rant above was springing out of "wishful thinking" for an old and respected player to bring something new in the game, like Sigma did with their Art line and hopefully Tamron will do with their new SP primes. That forces the industry to re-align and adapt. Well, apparently Zeiss doesn't adapt.

Again, I am much more impressed by Sigma, current prime and some zoom lenses delivering the kind of quality and value they do lately for SLR lenses, than I ever was about [135] Zeiss ZE/ZF, including the latest Otus' - even without the extraordinary price premium.


----------



## Dimaggio1103

So I bought a new lens yesterday, then saw it cheaper on amazon by a lot. Was wondering if anyone could tell if there is a difference. I know BB is overpriced sometimes, but did not think there would be that much of a distance.

The one I bought
BestBuy Lens

The one on amazon
htAmazon LensURL]

If they are exactly the same ill just return this one. Looks the same but worried its a fake, or something diff. One review said it came without Nikon box.


----------



## pcfoo

Go to BB with the lens and a printout of Amazon's page and ask for a refund.

They often won't price match if the seller is not Amazon itself though.

Try not to mention anything else









In reality the linked lens is in bulk packaging, perhaps originally intended to be part of a 2 lens kit with a camera. They often refer to those as white box lenses.

The retail version is $395 in Amazon.com


----------



## Dimaggio1103

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Go to BB with the lens and a printout of Amazon's page and ask for a refund.
> 
> They often won't price match if the seller is not Amazon itself though.
> 
> Try not to mention anything else
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In reality the linked lens is in bulk packaging, perhaps originally intended to be park of a 2 lens kit with a camera. They often refer to those as white box lenses.
> 
> The retail version is $395 in Amazon.com


So it is the same lens then? Worth taking back and buying if I cant get them to refund?


----------



## Scott1541

Looks like best buy are selling lenses destined for the US market and the amazon seller is selling grey imports. I don't think the 55-300 comes in many kits, so it's probably not a split kit.

They are the exact same lens essentially though, I'm sure even import lenses have a worldwide warranty.


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Just ordered the 55-250 STM woop woop


----------



## Dimaggio1103

I always get paranoid im going to break my camera the new 55-300 lens is so huge. Im I just being paranoid or will the weight of this thing damage my body?


----------



## MistaBernie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dimaggio1103*
> 
> I always get paranoid im going to break my camera the new 55-300 lens is so huge. Im I just being paranoid or will the weight of this thing damage my body?


Damage your body as in your camera body? I'm pretty sure they wouldn't sell a lens / accessory that would damage the item it's designed for.


----------



## pcfoo

A 500 or 600mm f/4 - that's a long lens that technically the camera is hanging from and you are holding the lens with the body being a "accessory".



The 55-300 is a comparatively light telephoto lens, you will have no issues damaging the camera body mount - even if you are carrying it around hanging from a neck strap or using it with just your right hand (I mean holding the camera normally, I don't know what kind of gymnastics you do with it to prove the opposite!).

Most fast prime lenses, although they don't look as big as the 55-300VR or other plastic telephotos in its class, are really notably heavier - but again there should be zero issue for your camera to support a Sigma 35 A or 50 A 1.4 hanging infront of it.

I don't have experience with super-telephotos but I casually carry around bodies with 70-200 2.8 lenses that are 3-4 times the weight of a 55-300 and I feel pretty confident. Handheld shooting requires both hands to insure sharp results, and mounting the strap to the lens instead of the body is the way to go for balancing the combo, but either-way the bodies can take the stress easily.

There are reports of super-cheap & flimsy lens adapters bending under the weight of super heavy lenses (i.e. don't use a $10 adaptor to mount a 4lbs lens infront of your mirrorless body and expect it to "just take it") but never heard of bodies suffering.


----------



## Conspiracy

so i had a time lapse project dumped on my desk last week. we had a ribbon cutting ceremony for a new building on the campus i work at. basically 2 years ago one of the IT people setup an IP cam on the roof of a building overlooking the build site. they made a script that saved a photo to a server. person was smart and saved 2MP copies rather than full quality, also they did jpegs... nice. heres the kicker, they decided on 4 different occasions to change the interval during construction and also everything was dumped into one folder with no naming scheme. at the end of 2 years i had 488,000ish images to download and timelapse at the request of the higher ups into a video of 3 minutes or less. so before they gave me the login for the server a different IT person was kind enough to run a script to organize them into months and then into days for each month folder based on the meta data. COOL dude. i then spent about 2 days combining everything into folders that is each month individually. tried to timelapse...ERROR... the files names were based on time meta data so they are not sequential. another full day of going through and using automator to sequence them so premiere can be happen. on average at the beginning each day averaged 3,000ish (rounding up) images and at the end the final interval was one image every 5 minutes for 288 photos per day. after sequencing everything i drop it all into premiere and start speeding each month up so that they are about 30 seconds per month. Unknown error







still dont know what it was. backed off and ran multiple tests until the errors went away. tried to render it out as a full speed up but hit errors. eventually broke it into segments until i figured out which months were being stubborn and then isolated and rendered those separate. at the very end i had to go through frame by frame and remove the night shots to make it play smoother. i could have done this first but i started out making a 15 minute version that played smoothly but crushing 2 years to 3 minutes with night shots requires an epilepsy warning. i could continue to ramble about other obstacles but basically moral of the story is if you get a huge time lapse project that you either get dumped on you or have to plan then take the time and really plan it out. also if there is a deadline for the final video give yourself at least a week to make it lol. 6 days to make a 3 minute video from a 2 year server of 488,000 images.

tips for long time lapses:
figure your interval out before you start and calculate file sizes
dont change the interval mid timelapse
organize where these files will live
use good file naming
premiere hates trying to time lapse anything that is longer than about 3 months. error message galore in both CS6 and CC
the program that comes on all mac's called automator is amazing
dont set it to save during the night unless you want that as part of your time lapse
make sure your camera doesnt kick over into B/W or night vision during night. the contrast is so intense when you render it that it creates a strobe effect against the daylight images

this is not my work technically. all i did was take the images and create the final video. this purpose of the video was to be displayed during the reception after the ribbon cutting ceremony





so glad to be done with that project lol


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> so i had a time lapse project dumped on my desk last week. we had a ribbon cutting ceremony for a new building on the campus i work at. basically 2 years ago one of the IT people setup an IP cam on the roof of a building overlooking the build site. they made a script that saved a photo to a server. person was smart and saved 2MP copies rather than full quality, also they did jpegs... nice. heres the kicker, they decided on 4 different occasions to change the interval during construction and also everything was dumped into one folder with no naming scheme. at the end of 2 years i had 488,000ish images to download and timelapse at the request of the higher ups into a video of 3 minutes or less. so before they gave me the login for the server a different IT person was kind enough to run a script to organize them into months and then into days for each month folder based on the meta data. COOL dude. i then spent about 2 days combining everything into folders that is each month individually. tried to timelapse...ERROR... the files names were based on time meta data so they are not sequential. another full day of going through and using automator to sequence them so premiere can be happen. on average at the beginning each day averaged 3,000ish (rounding up) images and at the end the final interval was one image every 5 minutes for 288 photos per day. after sequencing everything i drop it all into premiere and start speeding each month up so that they are about 30 seconds per month. Unknown error
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> still dont know what it was. backed off and ran multiple tests until the errors went away. tried to render it out as a full speed up but hit errors. eventually broke it into segments until i figured out which months were being stubborn and then isolated and rendered those separate. at the very end i had to go through frame by frame and remove the night shots to make it play smoother. i could have done this first but i started out making a 15 minute version that played smoothly but crushing 2 years to 3 minutes with night shots requires an epilepsy warning. i could continue to ramble about other obstacles but basically moral of the story is if you get a huge time lapse project that you either get dumped on you or have to plan then take the time and really plan it out. also if there is a deadline for the final video give yourself at least a week to make it lol. 6 days to make a 3 minute video from a 2 year server of 488,000 images.
> 
> tips for long time lapses:
> figure your interval out before you start and calculate file sizes
> dont change the interval mid timelapse
> organize where these files will live
> use good file naming
> premiere hates trying to time lapse anything that is longer than about 3 months. error message galore in both CS6 and CC
> the program that comes on all mac's called automator is amazing
> dont set it to save during the night unless you want that as part of your time lapse
> make sure your camera doesnt kick over into B/W or night vision during night. the contrast is so intense when you render it that it creates a strobe effect against the daylight images
> 
> this is not my work technically. all i did was take the images and create the final video. this purpose of the video was to be displayed during the reception after the ribbon cutting ceremony
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> so glad to be done with that project lol


Awesome! 488,000 photos?! That's like over 600 a day, for two years, right? Or am I calculating that completely wrong?


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> so i had a time lapse project dumped on my desk last week. we had a ribbon cutting ceremony for a new building on the campus i work at. basically 2 years ago one of the IT people setup an IP cam on the roof of a building overlooking the build site. they made a script that saved a photo to a server. person was smart and saved 2MP copies rather than full quality, also they did jpegs... nice. heres the kicker, they decided on 4 different occasions to change the interval during construction and also everything was dumped into one folder with no naming scheme. at the end of 2 years i had 488,000ish images to download and timelapse at the request of the higher ups into a video of 3 minutes or less. so before they gave me the login for the server a different IT person was kind enough to run a script to organize them into months and then into days for each month folder based on the meta data. COOL dude. i then spent about 2 days combining everything into folders that is each month individually. tried to timelapse...ERROR... the files names were based on time meta data so they are not sequential. another full day of going through and using automator to sequence them so premiere can be happen. on average at the beginning each day averaged 3,000ish (rounding up) images and at the end the final interval was one image every 5 minutes for 288 photos per day. after sequencing everything i drop it all into premiere and start speeding each month up so that they are about 30 seconds per month. Unknown error
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> still dont know what it was. backed off and ran multiple tests until the errors went away. tried to render it out as a full speed up but hit errors. eventually broke it into segments until i figured out which months were being stubborn and then isolated and rendered those separate. at the very end i had to go through frame by frame and remove the night shots to make it play smoother. i could have done this first but i started out making a 15 minute version that played smoothly but crushing 2 years to 3 minutes with night shots requires an epilepsy warning. i could continue to ramble about other obstacles but basically moral of the story is if you get a huge time lapse project that you either get dumped on you or have to plan then take the time and really plan it out. also if there is a deadline for the final video give yourself at least a week to make it lol. 6 days to make a 3 minute video from a 2 year server of 488,000 images.
> 
> tips for long time lapses:
> figure your interval out before you start and calculate file sizes
> dont change the interval mid timelapse
> organize where these files will live
> use good file naming
> premiere hates trying to time lapse anything that is longer than about 3 months. error message galore in both CS6 and CC
> the program that comes on all mac's called automator is amazing
> dont set it to save during the night unless you want that as part of your time lapse
> make sure your camera doesnt kick over into B/W or night vision during night. the contrast is so intense when you render it that it creates a strobe effect against the daylight images
> 
> this is not my work technically. all i did was take the images and create the final video. this purpose of the video was to be displayed during the reception after the ribbon cutting ceremony
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> so glad to be done with that project lol
> 
> 
> 
> Awesome! 488,000 photos?! That's like over 600 a day, for two years, right? Or am I calculating that completely wrong?
Click to expand...

well the problem was the person that set it up changed the interval a few times during construction. the first few months were about 2,800 images per day and the last like 7 months were 5 min intervals for 288 images per day. would have been nice if i was working here when he set it up so i could have helped him set it up


----------



## MistaBernie

I really think they should have had you make another version (like a 15 minute version) with less frames per second to elongate it and loop during the reception, etc. It's happening so fast that it's almost like 'welp that's cool but I lose interested about 20 seconds in'.

That said, the technical explanation and the work you did on this project was definitely fascinating, thanks for sharing man!


----------



## Conspiracy

yeah. i just do what im told







im going to make a 15 second version and hand pick some frames and slap a song on it


----------



## Magical Eskimo

New lens yay
Ended up getting the 55-250 STM


----------



## hokiealumnus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> New lens yay
> Ended up getting the 55-250 STM


Congrats! I haven't used mine that much, but when I have it's been absolutely stunning, especially for the price.


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> New lens yay
> Ended up getting the 55-250 STM












I picked up a Tamron 70-300 VC about a week ago. I was thinking I wanted something longer than 200mm for a while, and it just so happens that I let my dad borrow my 70-200 for an airshow, and that very weekend I needed a tele-zoom for a job. I'm an admin on a facebook selling group for Nikon gear and one of the other admins had it and offered it to me for a good price







I could sell it on and make probably at least £30-40 but I might as well keep it since it's longer than the 70-200, and it has image stabilisation too.

I won't be buying anything else for a while, need to get saving for a car... which shouldn't take too long as I'm working 5 nights per week as a bar photog at the minute.


----------



## xILukasIx

Got myself a little camera case:


That's a 5D Mark III with a tripod plate, Walimex (Samyang) 14mm f2.8 and the Canon 17-40 f4 in there, fits perfectly!
My intervalometer, spare battery and memory cards should fit in there nicely aswell


----------



## Conspiracy

nice!


----------



## gdubc

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dimaggio1103*
> 
> So I bought a new lens yesterday, then saw it cheaper on amazon by a lot. Was wondering if anyone could tell if there is a difference. I know BB is overpriced sometimes, but did not think there would be that much of a distance.
> 
> The one I bought
> BestBuy Lens
> 
> The one on amazon
> htAmazon LensURL]
> 
> If they are exactly the same ill just return this one. Looks the same but worried its a fake, or something diff. One review said it came without Nikon box.


Same lenses but with the Best Buy being a US market lens you would get the extended warranty of 5 years or whatever and I beleive the grey market amazon lens would have standard timed warranty. I got that lens from BB for $250 as a add on sale price when I got my d5200, so maybe they will flex on the price a little and give you some money back, worth asking anyhow, but their policy is they don't price match outright if it's not a best buy item.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gdubc*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Dimaggio1103*
> 
> So I bought a new lens yesterday, then saw it cheaper on amazon by a lot. Was wondering if anyone could tell if there is a difference. I know BB is overpriced sometimes, but did not think there would be that much of a distance.
> 
> The one I bought
> BestBuy Lens
> 
> The one on amazon
> htAmazon LensURL]
> 
> If they are exactly the same ill just return this one. Looks the same but worried its a fake, or something diff. One review said it came without Nikon box.
> 
> 
> 
> Same lenses but with the Best Buy being a US market lens you would get the extended warranty of 5 years or whatever and I beleive the grey market amazon lens would have standard timed warranty. I got that lens from BB for $250 as a add on sale price when I got my d5200, so maybe they will flex on the price a little and give you some money back, worth asking anyhow, but their policy is they don't price match outright if it's not a best buy item.
Click to expand...

best buy will price match any competitor BUT it has to be sold by that competitor. the lens linked is sold by a third party. to price match amazon the item must be shipped and sold by amazon


----------



## Dimaggio1103

Thanks everyone. So now to add another stupid question, im hearing a lot of rave about the a6000 would it be worth jumping ship from my d3300? Probably would break even selling my d3300. Specs look better but lens are in short supply. I just keep seeing a lot of hype about the mirror less.


----------



## Pandora51

What is your current lens setup? I don't think its worth to change your whole setup for it or use your nikon lenses for the a6000. Not yet.

The A6000 is excellent but you will see only minor improvements in picture quality. If any at all.
The best thing about is you will be able to use nearly every other lens with an adapter espacially old lenses.
But expect very slow AF.

Sonys lens setup is not so great and battery life and AF is still an issue.

Btw I have to admit the Sony A7R II seems to be very fast


----------



## THEStorm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dimaggio1103*
> 
> Thanks everyone. So now to add another stupid question, im hearing a lot of rave about the a6000 would it be worth jumping ship from my d3300? Probably would break even selling my d3300. Specs look better but lens are in short supply. I just keep seeing a lot of hype about the mirror less.


I switched to an A6000 from a D7000 last winter and have been quite pleased with my decision. The best camera is the one you have with you most, and for me it is much easier to carry the a6000 around than my DSLR was. I didn't have a lot of Nikon lenses so it wasn't hard for me to switch. There is some limitations in the Sony e mount lineup so look into those before you jump ship, but overall I have been very happy!


----------



## Dimaggio1103

I have the kit lens and a nikkor 55-300 VR ED DX lens. If It is only a side grade ill stick with my d3300.


----------



## gdubc

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> best buy will price match any competitor BUT it has to be sold by that competitor. the lens linked is sold by a third party. to price match amazon the item must be shipped and sold by amazon


Oops, that's what I meant to say, they would only price match if it was an amazon item. I rushed and typed best buy instead.

Best Buy has always been good to me so I try to give them my business when I can. I buy enough that with the Reward Zone thing I get a longer return window which has saved me additional $$$ so many times.


----------



## THEStorm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dimaggio1103*
> 
> I have the kit lens and a nikkor 55-300 VR ED DX lens. If It is only a side grade ill stick with my d3300.


I'd say that would be dependent on what you mostly use your camera for. For me the biggest advantage is the size.


----------



## Deano12345

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dimaggio1103*
> 
> Thanks everyone. So now to add another stupid question, im hearing a lot of rave about the a6000 would it be worth jumping ship from my d3300? Probably would break even selling my d3300. Specs look better but lens are in short supply. I just keep seeing a lot of hype about the mirror less.


I use both every day (joys of working in a camera shop







) and from my experience the two cameras are pretty similar, the AF on the Sony is faster, however I've found it to be less accurate than the Nikon. Image quality is the same to my eye. If it was me, I would personally stick with the Nikon, it is easier to expand your system in the future, and the battery life on the Sony is poor by comparison. It is smaller though, but that advantage goes away if you ever want to use a telephoto lens.


----------



## pcfoo

I agree with ppl above suggesting that there will be compromises either way.

The A6000 is a very very good MILC with some teething weaknesses - mainly in the AF department in not so well lit conditions.
Same for the A7 big brother series. AF is good, perhaps in line and occasionally better than with cheap DSLRs in good light outdoors, but for indoors / poor light, mid-range & Pro DSLRs are simply in a different league.

That is ofc with seasoned shooters operating the DSLRs that are good in selectively focusing and recomposing etc, or when judge is really picky. Many users are very very happy with their MILCs and believe there is little to no difference, others simply cannot see themselves using it for something other than video (where serious users only MF) or slow paced shoots where it doesn't really matter.

If you really want to spend time to learn MILCs, certain features like face detection, even face recognition and prioritization that the Sony system brings to the table can even out the field and in a few years from now most likely will be the leading way to do things and are ofc only available with mirrorless cameras.

Afaik I haven't spent enough time with the "gadget" side of Sony cameras to feel comfortable with them, so I use my Canon & Fuji systems in the "dump-ol-AF-n-recompose" way, and I think that's how I would be initially using a A6000 too.

I would stick with your DSLR for a bit longer.
The A6000 is a great camera, but I think something replacing it will be due soon.
I doubt we will see better IQ in a meaningful way, but I do believe the gadget features will get better and more mature. It might even get a sensor stabilization like its bigger brother, the A7R II.

Till then, focus into making more pictures


----------



## Dimaggio1103

Thanks gents took the advice and will be holding off. I need lens diversity anyways.


----------



## Magical Eskimo

This thread needs some more photos!

Brighton-5 by Luke Wanden, on Flickr

Brighton-1 by Luke Wanden, on Flickr

Brighton-19 by Luke Wanden, on Flickr

Check out the rest in my album








https://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/sets/72157659229041135


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Thinking of getting one of those Holga 120N film cameras for a bit of fun, anyone here got one or anything similar?


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> Thinking of getting one of those Holga 120N film cameras for a bit of fun, anyone here got one or anything similar?


Got a Lubitel 166B TLR, slightly better image quality (I think) but still in the cheap tier of 120 film cameras. I've only put one roll through it so far but it works fine, currently got half a roll of fuji superia left in it


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> Got a Lubitel 166B TLR, slightly better image quality (I think) but still in the cheap tier of 120 film cameras. I've only put one roll through it so far but it works fine, currently got half a roll of fuji superia left in it


Wow I don't think I could actually bring myself to walk around Brighton with that. I'm completely not worried about IQ at this price point, I'll probably get the Holga because it looks to be small enough to fit in my pocket


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> Wow I don't think I could actually bring myself to walk around Brighton with that. I'm completely not worried about IQ at this price point, I'll probably get the Holga because it looks to be small enough to fit in my pocket


To be fair I got the Lubitel because it was one of the cheapest medium format cameras that's slightly better IQ than a holga or diana. If money was no object of course I'd have a Hasselblad 500 series


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> To be fair I got the Lubitel because it was one of the cheapest medium format cameras that's slightly better IQ than a holga or diana. If money was no object of course I'd have a Hasselblad 500 series


Haha yeah the Hasselblads are pretty cool, so much monies.

Did you see the NASA Hasselblad photography manual for astronauts? Really cool.
http://www.popphoto.com/News/NasaHasselbladGuide?image=0


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> To be fair I got the Lubitel because it was one of the cheapest medium format cameras that's slightly better IQ than a holga or diana. If money was no object of course I'd have a Hasselblad 500 series


Lots of Mamiya stuff is great, and quite affordable.


----------



## xp4life

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dimaggio1103*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks gents took the advice and will be holding off. I need lens diversity anyways.


Who doesnt always need more lenses? lol


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> Got a Lubitel 166B TLR, slightly better image quality (I think) but still in the cheap tier of 120 film cameras. I've only put one roll through it so far but it works fine, currently got half a roll of fuji superia left in it
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wow I don't think I could actually bring myself to walk around Brighton with that. I'm completely not worried about IQ at this price point, I'll probably get the Holga because it looks to be small enough to fit in my pocket
Click to expand...

I see no value in the 120 film Holga / Lomography thingy to be honest. Why go for a bigger format than [135] to get horrid IQ? It is just a novelty thing that will grow old too fast imho.
Just use your phone + the zillion of instagram like PP apps to apply any short of "image degradation" technique filter and you are done.

Lubitels are actually "good" cameras (i.e. they've tried a bit), and you have the potential to capture great images with it. Yes, it is bigger than a Holga 120N, but the latter is not exactly pocketable either, and at least you get a real camera.
If you want something better on the cheap, me thinks Bronica is also a good choice, either for 645 or 6x6 120 frames, but we are talking $200 or so for a ok set (body/back/lens).


----------



## sub50hz

The Bronica 645 I had is now in the hands of @Conspiracy, was quite good for what I had paid for it.


----------



## Deano12345

Happy birthday to me !


----------



## pcfoo

Wah? No EVF?


----------



## Deano12345

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Wah? No EVF?


I've not totally left the EVF master race


----------



## Conspiracy

idk about yall but its been raining and super cloudy forever down here. i almost forgot what the sky looked like but today we got to see it again









did yall know that clouds arent always big? they can be small too and the sky is blue NO WAY



taken on the x100t and edited in-camera


----------



## Conspiracy

does anyone have the light-blaster or used one? http://www.light-blaster.com/ i am seriously considering grabbing it because for the price it looks much nicer than any DIY gobo kit i can make with cardboard lol


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> does anyone have the light-blaster or used one? http://www.light-blaster.com/ i am seriously considering grabbing it because for the price it looks much nicer than any DIY gobo kit i can make with cardboard lol


Pretty cool - although not exactly cheap if you factor in the cost for the slides ontop of the housing.
That's also a nice 3D print project to build up/around to for those that are into that









Oh, and the clouds get bigger here in SoCal...



X-E2 + XF 35, Velvia profile


----------



## Dream Killer

this still exists?


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dream Killer*
> 
> this still exists?


The thread?


----------



## guitarhero23

Did first fashion show. This was an interesting model....


----------



## pcfoo

And back for some camera porn:

Leica announced their entry into AF mirror-less cameras with a bang.



Leica SL - Typ 601*, In a nutshel, FF 24MP CMOS without AA filter, 4.4MP EVF, 11 fps, 3" Touch TFT, Video: 4K @ 24fps & 1080p up to 120fps, dual SD slots, WiFi. Battery is rated @ 400 shots.

SL lenses: Vario-Elmarit-SL 24-90mm F2.8-4 ASPH, Apo-Vario Elmarit-SL 90-280mm F2.8-4 and Summilux-SL 50mm F1.4 ASPH.
Leica promises the fastest AF in the world, as all companies do lately. SL body and lenses will be weather sealed. Six more lenses for the SL mount, and two external flash units are planned for release in November.

Almost all existing Leica Lenses are supposed to be compatible with relative adapters. Body is milled out of a single aluminum piece. Sexy - though not my cup of tea exactly - and expensive.

MSRP Body: $7,450, 24-90 lens $4,950

Bold move. Bet it rocks, but dat pricing is...well, Leica. Also, lenses are massive in size and zooms don't maintain 2.8 despite not being really smaller than existing 2.8 SLR zooms.



Actually the SL 24-90 appears to be easily bigger than the SLR 24-70 2.8s out there. The 90-280 is flirting with 300mm, so its size is more understandably huge. Still smaller than the massive Sigma 120-300 2.8 and I can see the incentive in that. Still I would think their "standard" zoom could be 2.8 throughout. Perhaps the 6 planed SL lenses to come will expand the options with faster zooms - even at the expense of range.
Lets see how many will still claim benefits for MILCs being smaller than SLRs comfortably forgetting the lens ala Sony. This looks it can balance with the massive lenses much better than a A7 body does, and the battery is considerably bigger - at least in size, but dwarfs my 6D + 24-70L II combo.

At least we can hope Leica can make zooms better than Sigma & Tamron (unlike Sony/Zeiss).
As a perk, their's do go to 2.8 at the wide end, doesn't stay with f/4








I cannot imagine how expensive the 90-280mm will be. I guess we will be getting (un)comfortably into MF price regions.

*Looks and sounds like a German tank


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> MSRP Body: $7,450, 24-90 lens $4,950


And yet, a 645D can be had for half the cost. Insane.


----------



## sub50hz

edit: Double Post


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> And back for some camera porn:
> 
> Leica announced their entry into AF mirror-less cameras with a bang.
> 
> 
> 
> Leica SL - Typ 601*, In a nutshel, FF 24MP CMOS without AA filter, 4.4MP EVF, 11 fps, 3" Touch TFT, Video: 4K @ 24fps & 1080p up to 120fps, dual SD slots, WiFi. Battery is rated @ 400 shots.
> 
> SL lenses: Vario-Elmarit-SL 24-90mm F2.8-4 ASPH, Apo-Vario Elmarit-SL 90-280mm F2.8-4 and Summilux-SL 50mm F1.4 ASPH.
> Leica promises the fastest AF in the world, as all companies do lately. SL body and lenses will be weather sealed. Six more lenses for the SL mount, and two external flash units are planned for release in November.
> 
> Almost all existing Leica Lenses are supposed to be compatible with relative adapters. Body is milled out of a single aluminum piece. Sexy - though not my cup of tea exactly - and expensive.
> 
> MSRP Body: $7,450, 24-90 lens $4,950
> 
> Bold move. Bet it rocks, but dat pricing is...well, Leica. Also, lenses are massive in size and zooms don't maintain 2.8 despite not being really smaller than existing 2.8 SLR zooms.
> 
> 
> 
> Actually the SL 24-90 appears to be easily bigger than the SLR 24-70 2.8s out there. The 90-280 is flirting with 300mm, so its size is more understandably huge. Still smaller than the massive Sigma 120-300 2.8 and I can see the incentive in that. Still I would think their "standard" zoom could be 2.8 throughout. Perhaps the 6 planed SL lenses to come will expand the options with faster zooms - even at the expense of range.
> Lets see how many will still claim benefits for MILCs being smaller than SLRs comfortably forgetting the lens ala Sony. This looks it can balance with the massive lenses much better than a A7 body does, and the battery is considerably bigger - at least in size, but dwarfs my 6D + 24-70L II combo.
> 
> At least we can hope Leica can make zooms better than Sigma & Tamron (unlike Sony/Zeiss).
> As a perk, their's do go to 2.8 at the wide end, doesn't stay with f/4
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I cannot imagine how expensive the 90-280mm will be. I guess we will be getting (un)comfortably into MF price regions.
> 
> *Looks and sounds like a German tank


WHAT THE









It's bloody ginormous!


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> WHAT THE
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's bloody ginormous!


Not actually as large as that photoshopped image would lead you to believe:

http://camerasize.com/compare/#639,557


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> MSRP Body: $7,450, 24-90 lens $4,950
> 
> 
> 
> And yet, a 645D can be had for half the cost. Insane.
Click to expand...

You cannot shoot your kids with live view & your hands extended using the 645D. Leica 1, Pentax 0.
Probably its easier to brag about the Leica as laymen recognize it more often. Leica 2, Pentax 0.
/sarcasm.

Don't think the image is photoshoped. They had a hands on in dpreview.











That thing is definately bigger than the A7 - perhaps not bigger than a D810, that's true - but the lenses are massive (all 82mm filter thread).


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Not actually as large as that photoshopped image would lead you to believe:
> 
> http://camerasize.com/compare/#639,557


Oh okay only a little bit bigger than my 70D then, damn misleading photo!

Also just as a topic of conversation, I've been getting more involved in instagram recently and now I'm really starting to notice how much awful photography gets such high praise, it really is a bizarre community sometimes


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> That thing is definately bigger than the A7 - perhaps not bigger than a D810, that's true - but the lenses are massive (all 82mm filter thread).


I can't even make my D810 look that big in my own hands, they must have chosen the smallest person on their staff to take those shots with.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo* 90]
> 
> Also just as a topic of conversation, I've been getting more involved in instagram recently and now I'm really starting to notice how much awful photography gets such high praise[/B], it really is a bizarre community sometimes


Have you ever looked at the rate my photo thread here on OCN? Cringey.


----------



## pcfoo

Social media area about marketing your stuff. And ofc if you have boobs in the "ad", things sell.
You cannot build a following out of scratch using a portfolio of landscapes and casual street photos. You do more with #yourcraphere than with the photo itself. Unless ofc it has boobs and #s.


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Have you ever looked at the rate my photo thread here on OCN? Cringey.


Yeah I stopped posting there haha


----------



## Scott1541

IMO too many of the photography communities are online, especially on facebook, are just places for people to spam they crappy photos. I mean if you type your camera model into facebook, find the D7200 group for example and it's just full of crap, nobody really talking about it, just crap photo after crap photo. If I want to look at decent photos I'll browse flickr or similar, definitely not facebook.


----------



## Conspiracy

scott scattered in those crap photos are people that are trying to learn. but then there are still a ton of people that just want to shoot and get paid and have no desire to improve. sadly its tough to tell them apart many times. the groups i am in on facebook have slightly stronger support with feedback, i never comment on facebook unless requested to do so, there are still plenty of people posting garbage thinking its something new and unique. i saw someone post asking for critique on a new edit technique they are experimenting with to make colors pop... needlesstosay the colors did not pop one bit haha. i inquired as to the process used to help actually make it work but the individual was under the impression they just discovered some new revolution in editing and was gaurding it lmao. it really looked like HDR mixed with boosted saturation but it fell short because the colors were lost in other unknown edits


----------



## Conspiracy

when airing out your baby mama drama on facebook makes you lose credibility and opens you up to legal issues. this semi-well know photographer on social media whose work is quite generic and consists up nicely created photoshop actions for images shot on full frame sensors with expensive fast primes and blasted out of focus backgrounds seen here http://www.ljhollowayphotography.com/

another photog bought their video workshop and broke their TOS of service which claims that all customers direct quote: "may not produce any videos in the form of a photography and/or post-processing workshop/tutorial either for sale and/or free for two(2) years from the time that you signed up for a workshop. Even if you cancel your workshop you are still held to this two year condition."

way to go on the public shaming and sharing of their personal information and information that can lead to other private information







if you find yourself in a questionable legal situation then keep it private and consult a lawyer

i blacked out information to not contradict myself


----------



## sub50hz

I don't understand any of what you just wrote.


----------



## Conspiracy

me either. i never understand what i write.


----------



## hokiealumnus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> when airing out your baby mama drama on facebook makes you lose credibility and opens you up to legal issues. this semi-well know photographer on social media whose work is quite generic and consists up nicely created photoshop actions for images shot on full frame sensors with expensive fast primes and blasted out of focus backgrounds seen here http://www.ljhollowayphotography.com/
> 
> another photog bought their video workshop and broke their TOS of service which claims that all customers direct quote: "may not produce any videos in the form of a photography and/or post-processing workshop/tutorial either for sale and/or free for two(2) years from the time that you signed up for a workshop. Even if you cancel your workshop you are still held to this two year condition."
> 
> way to go on the public shaming and sharing of their personal information and information that can lead to other private information
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> if you find yourself in a questionable legal situation then keep it private and consult a lawyer
> 
> i blacked out information to not contradict myself


That one was hard for me to understand too.

Seems Lisa Holloway, who is no stranger to public drama mind you, thinks she can bar people from teaching photography and/or editing for two years after purchasing her teaching products. Here is the post to which he is referring. While, yes, the ToS does say that, it's patently absurd to have that in there. I would absolutely love to see her get that to hold up in court, rather than simply complaining about it publicly in an attempt to shame the "offender" into submission. I highly doubt it would be successful. You could bar someone from using YOUR product in their teaching most likely, but not from teaching editing/photography altogether. Way too broad.


----------



## Conspiracy

yeah there is no way her TOS holds that much legal ground. her problem is she cares more about social media drama than actually taking care of the matter properly. she either needs to buy the other persons workshop to confirm if her alligations are true and if so if she can actually claim copyright infringement because its far from theft LOL. the other option is talk to an actual lawyer and confirm that the TOS can be enforced and then take the next step from there to get the content taken down. at the end of the day her work is generic and her editing is all photoshop actions she learned from someone else. she isnt doing anything new and different. people have been shooting with big fast primes wide open before she started shooting.


----------



## pcfoo

Patent Trolls vs Tutorial Trolls - FIGHT!


----------



## Scott1541

Well it was the local annual photo & optics show today, and again like last year I made a purchase







This time I came away with a new tripod, a Manfrotto 290 Xtra & 3 way head which is the replacement for the 804RC2 but has a weird model no. It only cost me £104, which I don't think is too bad at all, I can't even find them online that cheap and I got this from a highstreet retailer







The list price for this kit was £149.99, and they were doing 20% discount for the event, and somehow that worked out as being nearer 30%.

Also while I was there I played around with a few lenses; all of the 70-200s, a few muchos expensive nikon primes and a samyang 85 1.4. I wanted to give the Nikon 200-500 a try but the guy wouldn't let me as the lens they had was a sample copy, which nobody was allowed to actually try on a body


----------



## THEStorm

Wow, it's really dead in here! Anybody get anything exciting for Black Friday?

I have a new Sony 50mm f1.8 on the way for my a6000 and am trading my 10-18mm f4 for a 24mm f1.8! Excited to see what this little camera can really do!


----------



## Jiryama

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *THEStorm*
> 
> Wow, it's really dead in here! Anybody get anything exciting for Black Friday?
> 
> I have a new Sony 50mm f1.8 on the way for my a6000 and am trading my 10-18mm f4 for a 24mm f1.8! Excited to see what this little camera can really do!


You will definitely need to let me know how that goes!! I have the a6000 and been wanting a 24mm prime lens for awhile now in prep for a new PC build! You will have to upload me some example shots taken from it!

Jiryama - Sony a6000 reporting for duty!


----------



## pcfoo

Serious question: what will a 24mm (~36mm FOV) lens offer you exactly documenting that PC built?


----------



## Jiryama

mainly wanting it for the lower f/1.8 since I have terrible lighting in my house and the build is going to be in a black case and well flash in any chassis is pain in the butt to work around!

Can also multipurpose it to any situations where I don't want a zoom but a bit lower lighted areas or just lots of colors to capture as well. Make the lens do the work and not the ISO!


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *THEStorm*
> 
> Wow, it's really dead in here! Anybody get anything exciting for Black Friday?
> 
> I have a new Sony 50mm f1.8 on the way for my a6000 and am trading my 10-18mm f4 for a 24mm f1.8! Excited to see what this little camera can really do!


Not really, the only thing I bought was a new torch, a LED Lenser P14.2 which is supposed to be delivered today actually









ION I'm starting my latest photography project today; 24 Frames of Christmas. 24 days, 24 frames, F60, 50mm f1.8 and the finest ISO 400 film from poundland







I've never done any photo projects before, and I've decided to do this as I don't really have many opportunities to go out and take photos now that I'm in my 3rd year at uni, and working 10-15ish hours per week.


----------



## Sean Webster

I'm still slacking on getting myself a Sigma 35mm f/1.4 Art and Canon 135mm f/2... I even passed up some good deals on them used. :'( Plus I haven't had time to shoot...this second to last semester of my degree is evil.


----------



## THEStorm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Serious question: what will a 24mm (~36mm FOV) lens offer you exactly documenting that PC built?


For the Sony E Mount the 24mm f1.8 Zeiss lens is one of the best lenses available.


----------



## Jiryama

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *THEStorm*
> 
> For the Sony E Mount the 24mm f1.8 Zeiss lens is one of the best lenses available.


Yay validation! I am saving up for that one right now, I think it runs for around $800 here which is half the PC build im doing right now :x
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> I'm still slacking on getting myself a Sigma 35mm f/1.4 Art and Canon 135mm f/2... I even passed up some good deals on them used. :'( Plus I haven't had time to shoot...this second to last semester of my degree is evil.


I hear ye on that one! University is getting in the way for me too, and working retail at this time of the year.


----------



## ahnafakeef

Hello everyone.

What's the most cost-efficient alternative to Canon's EF 11-24mm f/4L lens? The only one I've found so far is the Sigma 12-24mm f/4.5-5.6 lens.

The priority here is the focal length, which should ideally be as low as possible, mm-wise. I don't think I would even mind a prime lens if it means low cost and a bigger aperture than f/4.

The lens will be used for landscape photography and will be used with a Canon 6D.

Thank you.

EDIT: I only have the 24-105mm f/4L lens. So as far as focal length is concerned, I want something around the 11mm range.

Also, what is the lowest price the EF 11-24mm is going for? I couldn't find it for any lower than the usual price of $2999.


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Plus I haven't had time to shoot...this second to last semester of my degree is evil.


I hear you on that, I've got quite a lot of work to do as well







I try and make time here and there though to stop me going completely crazy


----------



## Pandora51

Very likely rumor:

Nikon acquires Samsung NX tech!









This also explains why Samsung has stoped to sell any cameras in germany recently.


----------



## MistaBernie

I feel that the (wow, not so new anymore) new 16-35mm F/4L seems like a good fit here. Not quite as wide as the 11mm but for the cost ($1049 BNIB at B&H) it seems like a great value alternative to the 11-24. In most cases if you're looking for wider than 24mm prime you're looking at what end up being fisheye lenses (regardless of the intention). My







anyways.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ahnafakeef*
> 
> Hello everyone.
> 
> What's the most cost-efficient alternative to Canon's EF 11-24mm f/4L lens? The only one I've found so far is the Sigma 12-24mm f/4.5-5.6 lens.
> 
> The priority here is the focal length, which should ideally be as low as possible, mm-wise. I don't think I would even mind a prime lens if it means low cost and a bigger aperture than f/4.
> 
> The lens will be used for landscape photography and will be used with a Canon 6D.
> 
> Thank you.
> 
> EDIT: I only have the 24-105mm f/4L lens. So as far as focal length is concerned, I want something around the 11mm range.
> 
> Also, what is the lowest price the EF 11-24mm is going for? I couldn't find it for any lower than the usual price of $2999.


---

Also, Nikon purchasing Samsung NX seems kind of... interesting? Is it to thin the marketplace or does Nikon see something with Samsung's photo division? Kind of reminds me about the news I heard recently that Canon was trying to buy Sigma. That would have had pretty far-reaching implications on the market..


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ahnafakeef*
> 
> Hello everyone.
> 
> What's the most cost-efficient alternative to Canon's EF 11-24mm f/4L lens? The only one I've found so far is the Sigma 12-24mm f/4.5-5.6 lens.


So get the Sigma, no? It's only $950, and achieves what you want without costing an arm and a leg. Wides are hard to make properly, which is why something as wild as the 11-24 is so expensive. I would also hope this is for a full-frame body as there's about 100 alternatives for crop bodies that are even wider.

In other news, I bought the D810 a while back and it's been great with the 24/1.4 -- similar output at normal print sizes, but the button placement, sealing and AF are a definite step-up from the D610, which I now have to sell at some point. Also grabbed an Ona Brixton (in cognac leather) and it's quite nice. Company bought our entire department Surface books, which I'll have tomorrow, so it should be interesting to see if the improved display makes it worthwhile to edit on (though my current 2012 rMBP is still more than capable).


----------



## ahnafakeef

Thank you MistaBernie and sub50hz for your inputs.

Questions:
1. The 11-24mm isn't termed anywhere as a fisheye lens. What do you mean by "wider than 24mm prime you're looking at what end up being fisheye lenses"?
2. How much does the absence of the IS feature matter? My current 24-105mm f/4L lens has it. Will I miss it much in the 11-24mm lens?
3. Where can I find the best deals on lenses? Is there any online store that's providing any discount on the 11-24mm lens?

Thank you both very much for your help.


----------



## Jiryama

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ahnafakeef*
> 
> Thank you MistaBernie and sub50hz for your inputs.
> 
> Questions:
> 1. The 11-24mm isn't termed anywhere as a fisheye lens. What do you mean by "wider than 24mm prime you're looking at what end up being fisheye lenses"?
> 2. How much does the absence of the IS feature matter? My current 24-105mm f/4L lens has it. Will I miss it much in the 11-24mm lens?
> 3. Where can I find the best deals on lenses? Is there any online store that's providing any discount on the 11-24mm lens?
> 
> Thank you both very much for your help.


1. Generally in my experience you won't see something termed as a Fisheye unless you get below ~10mm on a fixed lens. When you have such a wide angel lens it will start to curve a bit similar to a fish eye lens and become distorted. another side effect is that sometimes you will see the black edges in a circular shape like you are looking down a tube barely too long. (I forgot the term for it







)
2. Losing Image Stabilization is a HUGE difference. You think that you have steady hands until you try to take a photo on a slower shutter speed or try taking a video for a minute or so. Image Stabilization can be built into some DSLR bodies but it works best in the Lens because it corrects the photo BEFORE it hits the image sensor, where the body does a digital fix afterwards. Adding Image Stabilization into a camera can increase the retail selling price by hundreds of dollars depending what you are looking at. Get it, it's worth it.
3. Really like anything else just shop around, I can't say any specific place because I like to give the profits to my local shops since it can be a tough business to be in even for the huge names.


----------



## ahnafakeef

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jiryama*
> 
> 1. Generally in my experience you won't see something termed as a Fisheye unless you get below ~10mm on a fixed lens. When you have such a wide angel lens it will start to curve a bit similar to a fish eye lens and become distorted. another side effect is that sometimes you will see the black edges in a circular shape like you are looking down a tube barely too long. (I forgot the term for it
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )
> 2. Losing Image Stabilization is a HUGE difference. You think that you have steady hands until you try to take a photo on a slower shutter speed or try taking a video for a minute or so. Image Stabilization can be built into some DSLR bodies but it works best in the Lens because it corrects the photo BEFORE it hits the image sensor, where the body does a digital fix afterwards. Adding Image Stabilization into a camera can increase the retail selling price by hundreds of dollars depending what you are looking at. Get it, it's worth it.
> 3. Really like anything else just shop around, I can't say any specific place because I like to give the profits to my local shops since it can be a tough business to be in even for the huge names.


Thank you for your detailed response.

If IS is such an important feature, how come Canon has so many L-series lenses without it? Just seems contradictory to me. And I'd actually like to know the reason, because any and every L lens I'm browsing for has the IS feature missing from it. The 11-24mm f/4L, 50mm f/1.2L etc. for example.

And if absence of IS is a drawback of L lenses, what can a photographer do on his part to make up for the lack of IS?

Also, any online store that sells the lens for anything less than $3K would help. I can't find it for less anywhere.

Thanks again.

To rephrase my requirement - I want a wide angle lens with as low minimum focal length and as high aperture as possible with IS. Is there anything near about the 11-24mm that fulfills all those criteria, or is my only option to learn how to deal with the lack of IS on the 11-24mm lens?


----------



## Pandora51

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jiryama*
> 
> 2. Losing Image Stabilization is a HUGE difference. You think that you have steady hands until you try to take a photo on a slower shutter speed or try taking a video for a minute or so. Image Stabilization can be built into some DSLR bodies but it works best in the Lens because it corrects the photo BEFORE it hits the image sensor, where the body does a digital fix afterwards. Adding Image Stabilization into a camera can increase the retail selling price by hundreds of dollars depending what you are looking at. Get it, it's worth it.


Yeah but it is less an issue with super wide-angles. If any at all. You use them with a tripod most of the time and if not you are able to take pictures with very slow shutter speeds like 1/20 anyways. It is not necessary.
Is there even a super wide angle with image stabilization?

Im not very familiar with canon lenses but is there no cheaper solution? 3000 dollar is insane.
Well there is the Walimex Pro 14 mm but it is manual focus and fixed focal length. And the Sigma 12 - 24mm..
Surely it is easier with asp-c.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jiryama*
> 
> 1. Generally in my experience you won't see something termed as a Fisheye unless you get below ~10mm on a fixed lens. When you have such a wide angel lens it will start to curve a bit similar to a fish eye lens and become distorted. another side effect is that sometimes you will see the black edges in a circular shape like you are looking down a tube barely too long. (I forgot the term for it
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )


Fisheye and focal length are mutually exclusive ideas. Fisheye lenses are not rectilinear, and part of their inherent design is curving straight lines.
Quote:


> 2. Losing Image Stabilization is a HUGE difference. You think that you have steady hands until you try to take a photo on a slower shutter speed or try taking a video for a minute or so. Image Stabilization can be built into some DSLR bodies but it works best in the Lens because it corrects the photo BEFORE it hits the image sensor, where the body does a digital fix afterwards. Adding Image Stabilization into a camera can increase the retail selling price by hundreds of dollars depending what you are looking at. Get it, it's worth it.


IS/VR is a matter of opinion. Most super-wides don't have it because it makes less of a difference. If you need long shutter times, use a tripod. I also don't agree with in-lens stabilization being superior, as it's much easier to do it at the sensor level than it is to compromise lens design. Sony's and Olympus' implementations of this are quite good. It is not a "digital fix" as you're suggestiong.
Quote:


> 3. Really like anything else just shop around, I can't say any specific place because I like to give the profits to my local shops since it can be a tough business to be in even for the huge names.


Most small shops are so limited in the service they provide these days (and they almost never match prices), that it doesn't make a lot of sense to shop with them unless they're spectacularly good (do they offer printing/drum scanning, repairs, etc). As much as I like to support small businesses, the price and ease of replacement advantage that places like Amazon and B&H can offer (leveraging their buying power) is pretty hard to beat.


----------



## MistaBernie

Why is Image Stabilization important for landscape? Your subject isn't moving. If it's that important, use a tripod. Up your shutter speed a little. Image Stabilization is really beneficial for cases when you're panning, your subject is moving, a combination of the two, or any other scenario in which something is (or could be) moving. At least in my experience.

Also, sidebar, but another acquisition that is interesting.. Phase One purchases Mamiya...

http://www.diyphotography.net/phase-one-buys-out-mamiya-giving-it-critical-mass-in-the-medium-format-market/


----------



## Magical Eskimo

I got a new toy









24-105 f/4L £275 and in mint condition, couldn't resist a deal!


----------



## Conspiracy

nice find


----------



## IntoxicatedPuma

Quote:


> If IS is such an important feature, how come Canon has so many L-series lenses without it? Just seems contradictory to me. And I'd actually like to know the reason, because any and every L lens I'm browsing for has the IS feature missing from it. The 11-24mm f/4L, 50mm f/1.2L etc. for example.


I think most people who buy L lenses are either A) Professionals/very enthusiastic photographers or...... B) People with too much money and worried about their image. Chances are they're both carrying around tripods and don't need IS.

I didn't see the point of IS on wide angle lenses until I tried a 1 second exposure on my E-M1 using the IBIS.


----------



## pcfoo

Everybody can make use of IS. I often find myself wondering whether I should replace my 24-70L 2.8 with a 24-70L f4 IS.
I don't agree at all that "pros" and "enthusiasts" use tripods or just can magically hand-hold impossible shots. The contrary, people that buy fast glass, unless used for star-scapes, will very very rarely care for using them wide open on a tripod.

It is just the case that for wide angle, fast (i.e. big glass - like what is required for FF 35mm SLRs) it is apparently very hard to make optically stabilized lenses. Especially if we are talking wide angle (pretty much a given reverse telephoto basic design) that pretty much every sub-35mm focal length lens for SLRs is.

Canon and Tamron have been throwing stabilized primes at us the last few years, but none of them is super fast or wider than 24mm.

Computer aided design and new glass / plastic optic technology will probably allow designers and manufacturers to achieve it easier with each generation, but today's standard 2.8 zooms for example, demonstrate that if you are after maximum sharpness wide open, you have to stick with f/4 for your maximum aperture. Even the latest, most expensive, biggest and heaviest 24-70 in the market, the Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8 ED AF-S VR, doesn't match the 24-70 L II in absolute sharpness, at least not below 70mm.

It is a great lens still, improves notably over the Tamron - the first FF 35mm stabilized standard 2.8 - and shows more consistent curves than the 24-70 L II from center to edge - just a tad lower in absolute sharpness. All this speaks on the fact that is a "next gen" design over those competitors, or at least a "tack" forward.

f4 standard zooms by comparison, offer apparently an easier path to success, with lenses like the Sigma 24-105A and the Canon 24-70L f4 IS being more consistent and improving uppon already good designs like the 24-105L.
16-35 f4 class lenses are also very very good despite the stabilization, and of course f2.8 zooms with IS have been working great for APS-C and smaller sensor systems.

Now, the 11-24L is such a niche lens, with a front element so big that Canon claims is the largest mass produced round front aspheric element yet, @ 87mm real diameter, followed by three more aspherical elements behind it to correct for the inherit distortions of such an extreme reverse telephoto geometry. Last generation 16-35 lenses usually have 3 such elements, simpler wide angle primes like the EF 24 2.8 IS or EF 28 2.8 IS rely on only one, and this beast has 4.

If you think that the 11-24 is meant to replace an all-around 24-105L, well, you cannot be helped from disappointment.


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Everybody can make use of IS.


Maybe not everyone wants to deal with the complexity and cost of having IS added, though.


----------



## pcfoo

What I was trying to push with the long winded thing above, is that the will is there, apparently the technology / ability will take some time to catch up.
Time is a big factor in the evolution of tech, you cannot assume that if you throw more money at it, it will just happen.

And ofc many people work fine without IS/OS/VR as it has been the case for so much time before it.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sub50hz*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Everybody can make use of IS.
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe not everyone wants to deal with the complexity and cost of having IS added, though.
Click to expand...

exactly this. i wouldnt want IS on say my 135 f2. its freaking F2, just shoot wide open and crank the shutter and/or iso if im having trouble holding steady. same goes for the mention of the 50mm f1.2, IS isnt going to save you from that razor thin DOF when youre shaking. thats what tripods are for. IS on an f1.2 lens will just make it even more costly than it already is


----------



## sub50hz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> exactly this. i wouldnt want IS on say my 135 f2. its freaking F2, just shoot wide open and crank the shutter and/or iso if im having trouble holding steady. same goes for the mention of the 50mm f1.2, IS isnt going to save you from that razor thin DOF when youre shaking. thats what tripods are for. IS on an f1.2 lens will just make it even more costly than it already is


I would argue that on a longer lens like the 135, IS would be useful. At least for me, would have been nice to have when I owned that lens.


----------



## pcfoo

Potatos, Potatoes (u see?)









At the end of the day, if you have an option for a "better" non-stabilized lens, or a slightly inferior-yet-great stabilized, it could go either way depending on the user, but if you have it, you will use it.

As cameras get more and more needy with high density FF sensors (APS-C are there already), the effect of good lens stabilization will be more evident - at least for pixel peepers.
And in my mind, in-lens stab > sensor plane stab, though as a backup I would not mind having both.

Speaking of IS, decided to give away my EF 50 1.4 and give a try to the EF 35 f2 IS as my walk-around prime. Was waiting for first impressions on the new Tamron 35/45 1.8 VC primes, but I wasn't impressed enough, plus those are bigger/heavier than the 35 f2. If I wanted the bulk, I would rather go 35A or 50A again.
Had the 50A, was impressive even wide open but was just too big: for all practical purposes as big and heavy as my 24-70L.
Thus I've stuck with the EF 50, which in turn was more of a 2.8 lens, as f1.4 on it is too soft, and f2 is again decent only @ center. Was better than the 50 1.8 II, but I think these days there is little to no benefit going the EF 50 1.4 as the 50 STM got similarly smooth bokeh and is comparably sharp @ 1.8.
Might revisit the 50mm once Canon revises its line, as I think a new 50 is due soon, and I would not be surprised if it was stabilized too.


----------



## guitarhero23

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> I got a new toy
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 24-105 f/4L £275 and in mint condition, couldn't resist a deal!
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


Nice deal man, mine was like $500 USD used.


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guitarhero23*
> 
> Nice deal man, mine was like $500 USD used.


Yeah I'd been looking for one for ages, it came up on a used gear website described as 'well used' because it had a tiny scratch on the outer edge of the lens and a tiny bit of dust but otherwise fine optically and mechanically. When it turned up it was mint condition not a mark on it or anything!


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> Yeah I'd been looking for one for ages, it came up on a used gear website described as 'well used' because it had a tiny scratch on the outer edge of the lens and a tiny bit of dust but otherwise fine optically and mechanically. When it turned up it was mint condition not a mark on it or anything!


Wow, if you wanted to see well used you should've seen my 10-20, that thing was old, beaten up and the grips were discoloured. I sold it on ebay last week for £140, which I'm not complaining about









Gear has been shifting about over here, my D7000 is gone, a couple of other smaller bits are too to fund some upgrades







I was looking for full frame on a budget and ended up with a D600 which I'm pretty happy with, and a 20mm 2.8D that I'm still on the fence about. It's a lovely wide lens but I don't know if I'd have been better going for a 24mm 2.8D, or going 20mm manual such as the AI 20mm 3.5 or Voigtlander Color Skopar 20mm 3.5 which are both supposed to be better lenses.

The guy I bought the D600 off says it hasn't had any dust/oil problems, I drove over to his house to get it (only 40 miles away), took a few test shots there and confirmed that it seemed pretty normal with only a bit of dust (the D7200 has more). I've taken close to 1000 shots with it so far and it's still looking normal, touch wood it stays that way


----------



## Dagamus NM

I like my 24-105mm f4L, but generally keep it on my 60D.

My daily on my 6D is the 100mm f2.8L IS. I get my new 5Dmk3 next week as well as my 16-35mm f2.8L.

Next I want a good 24-70, a 14mm, and 300mm.


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dagamus NM*
> 
> I like my 24-105mm f4L, but generally keep it on my 60D.
> 
> My daily on my 6D is the 100mm f2.8L IS. I get my new 5Dmk3 next week as well as my 16-35mm f2.8L.
> 
> Next I want a good 24-70, a 14mm, and 300mm.


My mate at uni makes me jealous with all of his gear, even though its canon.

He's gone from a 60D to a 5DIII to a 1D X in the space of about a year, and has got so much nice glass over the year too. It baffles me that someone who's only 20 has (to my knowledge, he probably has more) a 1D X, 300mm f4L, sigma 120-300 2.8, 24-70 2.8L, 16-35 2.8L, 70-200 2.8 (sigma for now, but upgrading soon), sigma 8mm, and is also buying a 50 1.2L soon as well









He's doing better than me, but hey, I can't complain, photography has paid for my trip to amsterdam with friends in september, a few gear upgrades, and my car.


----------



## Dagamus NM

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> My mate at uni makes me jealous with all of his gear, even though its canon.
> 
> He's gone from a 60D to a 5DIII to a 1D X in the space of about a year, and has got so much nice glass over the year too. It baffles me that someone who's only 20 has (to my knowledge, he probably has more) a 1D X, 300mm f4L, sigma 120-300 2.8, 24-70 2.8L, 16-35 2.8L, 70-200 2.8 (sigma for now, but upgrading soon), sigma 8mm, and is also buying a 50 1.2L soon as well
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He's doing better than me, but hey, I can't complain, photography has paid for my trip to amsterdam with friends in september, a few gear upgrades, and my car.


What are you studying? I am a graduate student in Nuclear Engineering. Photography is a hobby that I got into after years of making a living as a radiographer, many parallels.

I don't need a 1Dx. Now if one presented itself at the right price then I probably wouldn't be able to resist.


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> My mate at uni makes me jealous with all of his gear, even though its canon.
> 
> He's gone from a 60D to a 5DIII to a 1D X in the space of about a year, and has got so much nice glass over the year too. It baffles me that someone who's only 20 has (to my knowledge, he probably has more) a 1D X, 300mm f4L, sigma 120-300 2.8, 24-70 2.8L, 16-35 2.8L, 70-200 2.8 (sigma for now, but upgrading soon), sigma 8mm, and is also buying a 50 1.2L soon as well
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He's doing better than me, but hey, I can't complain, photography has paid for my trip to amsterdam with friends in september, a few gear upgrades, and my car.


Mummy and Daddy most likely


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dagamus NM*
> 
> What are you studying? I am a graduate student in Nuclear Engineering. Photography is a hobby that I got into after years of making a living as a radiographer, many parallels.
> 
> I don't need a 1Dx. Now if one presented itself at the right price then I probably wouldn't be able to resist.


I'm studying computer science







In my 3rd year now so its work work work, It'll all be over before I know it though

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> Mummy and Daddy most likely


I'm not sure, he does work quite a lot but the amount of stuff he has is still pretty crazy even for that. One thing I can laugh about though is he keeps getting pulled over by the police, they must think he's a drug dealer as not many students drive a 10 year old BMW.


----------



## Dagamus NM

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> I'm studying computer science
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In my 3rd year now so its work work work, It'll all be over before I know it though
> I'm not sure, he does work quite a lot but the amount of stuff he has is still pretty crazy even for that. One thing I can laugh about though is he keeps getting pulled over by the police, they must think he's a drug dealer as not many students drive a 10 year old BMW.


My BMWs are 25, 25, and 29 years old.


----------



## pcfoo

My photo gear worth more than my 10yo tC too









Its all about priorities, having parents paying for part or all of what you are doing, or not.

I know people that live with their parents in their mid 30s, "cause cannot afford their own place" (probably don't like cooking or laundry either), but drive $35 ~ $45K cars... and I spend less on photogear a year than many of my friends spend on starbucks coffee and/or smoking.

Still I would not get the 1DX (or the upcoming mark II, perhaps your friend should upgrade)... I have no need for a press camera atm, or the time for wildlife shooting as much as I would liked to. Moreover, I would probably prefer to go the 7D2 route for that, as you can never have enough reach.

Now, a 5DS/R would not be bad









Already seen some in the $2300 range used, yet mint. At this point ALL of my equipment (cameras & lenses) are bought second hand and I haven't had a single issue.
I have said it before, and people here disagreed, but I will repeat it for what its worth:

If you have the time to wait and know where to look, you can get used yet 9/10 or better condition lenses & bodies that has been through the 1st depreciation shock, use it and if you don't like it or you out-grew it, just sell it again for a similarly small loss. You won't be looking at a bigger loss than renting the same equipment for 1-2 weekends (after shipping costs etc).

Over the last year quite a few stuff came and went:

EF 50 1.4 - bought used 1.5 year ago, sold for same price - $15 P/P.
Sigma 50A - bought used, kept for 3 weeks, sold for same price after p/p.
EF 24-70L 2.8 I - bought used 9.5/10, used for 10 months, sold for same money -$10 locally.
EF 17-40L - bought used, used for 2 trips over a month, sold with small profit even after amazon commission & P/P.
EOS M + 22mm - bought used $250, sold $220 after pp after 1.5y
EF-M 18-55 STM - bought used $65 ebay, sold $90 in Amazon (deduct commission)
Yada-yada-yada.

All of my current lenses can be sold within a couple of weeks for pretty much 90% or more of what I've paid for them.


----------



## Dagamus NM

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> My photo gear worth more than my 10yo tC too
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Its all about priorities, having parents paying for part or all of what you are doing, or not.
> 
> I know people that live with their parents in their mid 30s, "cause cannot afford their own place" (probably don't like cooking or laundry either), but drive $35 ~ $45K cars... and I spend less on photogear a year than many of my friends spend on starbucks coffee and/or smoking.
> 
> Still I would not get the 1DX (or the upcoming mark II, perhaps your friend should upgrade)... I have no need for a press camera atm, or the time for wildlife shooting as much as I would liked to. Moreover, I would probably prefer to go the 7D2 route for that, as you can never have enough reach.
> 
> Now, a 5DS/R would not be bad
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Already seen some in the $2300 range used, yet mint. At this point ALL of my equipment (cameras & lenses) are bought second hand and I haven't had a single issue.
> I have said it before, and people here disagreed, but I will repeat it for what its worth:
> 
> If you have the time to wait and know where to look, you can get used yet 9/10 or better condition lenses & bodies that has been through the 1st depreciation shock, use it and if you don't like it or you out-grew it, just sell it again for a similarly small loss. You won't be looking at a bigger loss than renting the same equipment for 1-2 weekends (after shipping costs etc).
> 
> Over the last year quite a few stuff came and went:
> 
> EF 50 1.4 - bought used 1.5 year ago, sold for same price - $15 P/P.
> Sigma 50A - bought used, kept for 3 weeks, sold for same price after p/p.
> EF 24-70L 2.8 I - bought used 9.5/10, used for 10 months, sold for same money -$10 locally.
> EF 17-40L - bought used, used for 2 trips over a month, sold with small profit even after amazon commission & P/P.
> EOS M + 22mm - bought used $250, sold $220 after pp after 1.5y
> EF-M 18-55 STM - bought used $65 ebay, sold $90 in Amazon (deduct commission)
> Yada-yada-yada.
> 
> All of my current lenses can be sold within a couple of weeks for pretty much 90% or more of what I've paid for them.


Would you mind telling us what you paid for your gear? I am curious about what people consider good deals. Particularly the 24-70L.


----------



## pcfoo

Bought my 24-70L (mark 1), mint, boxed, last production year for $880. Sold it for $870. Both transactions where made through CL locally, in OC CA.
That was 2014 and was sold in early 2015, so prices do go down for out of production lenses, and ofc condition might vary the price.

Currently 24-70Ls still do sell for $900-925 lacking wear marks etc, you can find them as low as 650-700ish with obvious wear and average $800-850.

It was replaced by a 24-70L II, which I've paid for $1400 for. Again, I won't have issues selling this lens for similar money right now, but even if I was to sell it for $1250-1300 (which would be a steal), that would be the non-refundable difference for renting that same 24-70 II for 10-15 days or so. Remember that most rental vendors, ask you to prepay insured return shipping that would be ~$25 for a 24-70 II. For a lens that served me so well for that much time, $100-150 are not much to pay - when people are willing and do pay that for renting it for 1-2 weeks.

So, for mainstream "expensive" photo gear, I am relatively confident that if I have the time to research and get a feel for the market, I can buy whatever I want used, and then resell it for roughly the same money, or lose no more than I would pay for renting it for the same amount of time through lensrentals.com, samy's etc.

I was entertaining the idea of renting a 5DSR for a 18 day trip to HK & Thailand (as a backup, cause I so out-grew the 6D







, GAS is GAS) but it boils down - again - being cheaper or the same to actually buy it used, and resell if you don't want to keep it. What holds me back is that I don't want to be tempted to keep it (and I really don't need a $3000 body), plus the dream that I might find better deals in HK









Oh, and I was wrong on the $2,300, that price was actually quoted for a low mileage, US model 5DS, not the R, but that's again an amazing price for the amount of time those cameras have been out. A7R II early adopters are also off-loading them for decent savings lately.

You always barter, within reason and always being polite. Worst case, you will get a No.
Best case, a yes, usually a counter offer.
You want to hunt for local deals (gives you leverage to ask for a reasonable estimated P/P to be deducted, Paypal fees to be deducted, etc etc).
Yes, it is not as easy as Lensrentals, the amazon used market etc, but I had more luck getting deals through forum buy & sell ads and CL than ebay for example.


----------



## Dagamus NM

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Bought my 24-70L (mark 1), mint, boxed, last production year for $880. Sold it for $870. Both transactions where made through CL locally, in OC CA.
> That was 2014 and was sold in early 2015, so prices do go down for out of production lenses, and ofc condition might vary the price.
> 
> Currently 24-70Ls still do sell for $900-925 lacking wear marks etc, you can find them as low as 650-700ish with obvious wear and average $800-850.
> 
> It was replaced by a 24-70L II, which I've paid for $1400 for. Again, I won't have issues selling this lens for similar money right now, but even if I was to sell it for $1250-1300 (which would be a steal), that would be the non-refundable difference for renting that same 24-70 II for 10-15 days or so. Remember that most rental vendors, ask you to prepay insured return shipping that would be ~$25 for a 24-70 II. For a lens that served me so well for that much time, $100-150 are not much to pay - when people are willing and do pay that for renting it for 1-2 weeks.
> 
> So, for mainstream "expensive" photo gear, I am relatively confident that if I have the time to research and get a feel for the market, I can buy whatever I want used, and then resell it for roughly the same money, or lose no more than I would pay for renting it for the same amount of time through lensrentals.com, samy's etc.
> 
> I was entertaining the idea of renting a 5DSR for a 18 day trip to HK & Thailand (as a backup, cause I so out-grew the 6D
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> , GAS is GAS) but it boils down - again - being cheaper or the same to actually buy it used, and resell if you don't want to keep it. What holds me back is that I don't want to be tempted to keep it (and I really don't need a $3000 body), plus the dream that I might find better deals in HK
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh, and I was wrong on the $2,300, that price was actually quoted for a low mileage, US model 5DS, not the R, but that's again an amazing price for the amount of time those cameras have been out. A7R II early adopters are also off-loading them for decent savings lately.
> 
> You always barter, within reason and always being polite. Worst case, you will get a No.
> Best case, a yes, usually a counter offer.
> You want to hunt for local deals (gives you leverage to ask for a reasonable estimated P/P to be deducted, Paypal fees to be deducted, etc etc).
> Yes, it is not as easy as Lensrentals, the amazon used market etc, but I had more luck getting deals through forum buy & sell ads and CL than ebay for example.


Thank you, I have considered trying out a subscription to Canon Professional services. For $100/year I can evaluate gear and get special cleanings and other services.


----------



## Ithanul

Well looking to get me some more lenses. Looking to get a prime lens or two since I don't have any. What you all would advise I nab?

My camera is a D90. I mostly leave the 18-300mm lens on it, but want to play around with some prime lenses.

This one got my attention atm.

http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-AF-S-NIKKOR-Focus-Cameras/dp/B001S2PPT0/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1453750660&sr=8-1&keywords=nikon+prime+lense

Also looking to get a good cleaning kit for the camera.


----------



## THEStorm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ithanul*
> 
> Well looking to get me some more lenses. Looking to get a prime lens or two since I don't have any. What you all would advise I nab?
> 
> My camera is a D90. I mostly leave the 18-300mm lens on it, but want to play around with some prime lenses.
> 
> This one got my attention atm.
> 
> http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-AF-S-NIKKOR-Focus-Cameras/dp/B001S2PPT0/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1453750660&sr=8-1&keywords=nikon+prime+lense
> 
> Also looking to get a good cleaning kit for the camera.


The 35 is a good one if you enjoy using that focal length. I had it for a bit when I had my D7000 and didn't use it much because I wasn't a fan of that focal length. I don't think Nikon has one at a good price point but I prefer 24mm on apsc. Another safe bet is 50mm for portraits on apsc if you do that much.


----------



## pcfoo

The 35mm 1.8 DX is very good all rounder. Primes are challenging and not for everyone.

Its part of the deal tho: forces you to work with limitations and perhaps grow better. Doesn't mean its guaranteed to be so.

Still, quality wise, most nikkor primes will sweep the floor with a superzoom. If you are happy with your 18-300, the 35 or 50 1.8 will blow you away at similar apertures.

The 50 1.8 is great but a bit too long for my taste. I agree that the 24-30mm is ideal, but the 35 DX is the only "standard" option for DX nikon below or close to $200, so for a first prime works fine.


----------



## Pandora51

The 35mm f1.8 sandpaper lens?









But really it is a good lens and a much better choice than any kit lens.
Only the bokeh could be better.

The Nikon 40mm f2.8 is a good choice aswell. Just the aperture can be a huge limitation in comparision.


----------



## jellybeans69

The 35/1.8 nikkor is great been using that lens for almost two years and i love it. It was great change from kit 18-55. Some old photos i've taken with this lens


----------



## Ithanul

Well nabbed a used 35mm f/1.8G. Now to wait for it to show up.

I don't have the kit lens, basically bought the body with two other lenses several years back. But I have put a butt load of pictures through it.

I tend to use my 18-300mm f/3.5-5.6G a lot, but those f stops do cause me some issues at times.
My fav is my little Tamron I have. 28-80mm, but course it has f/3.5-5.6G. So never got to mess with a lens with a lower f stop before.
Have a Tamron 75-300mm /4-5.6 Tele-Macro as well.

What would be another good lens to add? Thinking of getting just one more to add.


----------



## Pandora51

What type of photography do you do or like best?

There are so many great choices and it depends on what you want to do with it.


----------



## Ithanul

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pandora51*
> 
> What type of photography do you do or like best?
> 
> There are so many great choices and it depends on what you want to do with it.


Well it varies depending where I am at and what I am in the fancy to do.

My favorite thing though is taking pics at car shows, airshows, and animals (especially fish in aquariums).


----------



## pcfoo

Its a slippery slope you are treading.








You have the range to cover pretty much anything. What you are lacking is faster / better glass, but that is a bottomless pit. Even if you were to drop $10K today on new gear, you could do the same tomorrow. There is always something faster / better coming out every few years, so if you set on that trip, soon the camera won't be good enough, and the 35 1.8 will be mediocre (although it is better than you existing lenses, so what does that make those?) and it never ends.

You just got your 35 (or not even). Wait and see how you like it








If you have money to spend, take your camera - and good company - out to a trip and enjoy it.


----------



## Ithanul

Yeah, I know. The 18-300mm put me back a grand a few years back.







But used the crud out of it. I plan to rock this D90 for a few more years before I replace it. Even if it about to be seven years old.









Bad thing for me is I got several expensive hobbies I like, computers, art, and photography. Though, I think I have drop more money on art supplies that would make some people shake theirs heads and clam I'm nuts. I have drop more money on canvases than any of the video cards I have. Well that and the markers.


----------



## Dagamus NM

I am excited to get my new body today. Just sitting at home with the flu waiting on UPS.

I did get to take some shots with my new 16-35mm on the 6D and they are quite nice. Very sharp, although the short throw on the zoom seems almost pointless and makes me wonder if I should have just got a prime.

Next I would like to get a good photo printer. That and a good two camera harness.

Edit: got it. Wow, the feature set on the 5D3 is crazy. So many features that are absent on my other bodies. I will be busy learning, got another three year old's birthday party to shoot this weekend so I need to sort out these action sequence settings.


----------



## Tchernobyl

Hello!

No camera to speak of yet - but I've been eyeing the DSLR Canon 1200D. The prices are really good (330 euro). Any comments/feedback on the camera, before I make any type of plunge?


----------



## maddangerous

Well, I have a nikon D60 that my fiancees dad is letting us use. Can I join the club?









Need to get some accessories for it too.


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Tchernobyl*
> 
> Hello!
> 
> No camera to speak of yet - but I've been eyeing the DSLR Canon 1200D. The prices are really good (330 euro). Any comments/feedback on the camera, before I make any type of plunge?


Doooo iiittttt









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *maddangerous*
> 
> Well, I have a nikon D60 that my fiancees dad is letting us use. Can I join the club?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Need to get some accessories for it too.


That'll do! What accessories do you think you need?


----------



## maddangerous

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> Doooo iiittttt
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That'll do! What accessories do you think you need?


Nikon D60 accessories and tips for a beginner

I made a thread about it ^









In short, at first it was just a tripod, and now a new strap has been added to that list. I'm starting small though because I still very much need to learn my camera.

I'll post the rest of my (small) amount of gear when I'm home too, that way you know what lens(s) I have, and I can get added to the list in OP


----------



## Tchernobyl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> Doooo iiittttt


Was hoping for some feedback on the camera itself!


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Tchernobyl*
> 
> Was hoping for some feedback on the camera itself!


Haha it's a good entry level camera, it'll do everything you need it to for sure. I had the older 1100D as my first camera and it was great


----------



## Pandora51

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Tchernobyl*
> 
> Hello!
> 
> No camera to speak of yet - but I've been eyeing the DSLR Canon 1200D. The prices are really good (330 euro). Any comments/feedback on the camera, before I make any type of plunge?


No come to the dark yellow side. Nikon!









Can't speak much of the 1200D but as far as I know Canon and Nikon have both good entry level cameras. So pick up a good lens aswell and you are good to go.
Although you could look for a Nikon D5100 deal. "Old" but a very good camera. Or any good Canon/ Nikon/ Sony camera + lens deal depending on what you are going to do with it.


----------



## pcfoo

The 1200D is a fine camera, capable of amazing pictures.

That 18MP sensor was used in a dozen cameras over a few generations, so people were asking for something newer and better.
Meanwhile, that thing is a "Sandybridge" of sensors...surely there are better things introduced since, but...most likely you don't really need something "faster"/better.
You can shoot everything on it with very good results.

The 1200D is certainly much better than the first DSLR I've got back in 2004 (20D), which also could deliver much more than I was ever capable of producing myself.
You see, the tool is rarely the limiting factor. Mostly its the photographers obsessions / lack of creativity & imagination what holds him/her back.


----------



## Tchernobyl

Sounds great!

I've been eyeing it because it's *amazingly* cheaper than anything else. By like 50 to 80$ or more, so I was wondering if it's 'made cheap', so to speak. Which doesn't seem to be the case!







(it's 300 euro, new, on Amazon)

I've found some places in town that'll do one to one sessions, teaching how to use the camera, which I think is worthwhile just to understand how it works and how to take the better pictures. Pricey, though, but oh well~


----------



## pcfoo

There is lots of information around the basics of photography online...from youtube, to forums, to free guides.
Spend some time and learn the basics by yourself.

Then you can have more "advanced" concepts explained to you and have "educated" questions to ask further down the road.


----------



## maddangerous

Alright, I'm just posting because I have my gear list now.

Nikon D60
Nikon DX AF-S Nikkor 55-200mm 1:4-5.6G ED
Nikon DX AF-S Nikkor 18-55mm 1:3.5-5.6G
Basic lens hood
Nikon Strap
NIkon camera bag
Sandisk Extreme 32gig SD card

That's it. Now I'm off to look at some info about photography


----------



## ahnafakeef

Sharing this here because it seemed relevant to buying a camera on a budget.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JqVBWTVgr8Q


----------



## serothis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *maddangerous*
> 
> That's it. Now I'm off to look at some info about photography


Ken Rockwell is my go-to person for information for both basic photography and equipment review.

The last lens I bought (35mm f/1.8 DX) I did so based pretty heavily on his review and it's been my go-to lens ever since. He's pretty good about giving a thorough run down of the equipment. If it's a good value. If there is a comparable lens. If the lens is even necessary (even if it's a good lens).

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech.htm


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *serothis*
> 
> Ken Rockwell is my go-to person for information for both basic photography and equipment review.
> 
> The last lens I bought (35mm f/1.8 DX) I did so based pretty heavily on his review and it's been my go-to lens ever since. He's pretty good about giving a thorough run down of the equipment. If it's a good value. If there is a comparable lens. If the lens is even necessary (even if it's a good lens).
> 
> http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech.htm


Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope

No, don't do it, not Ken Rockwell








I'd take anything he says with a fairly hefty pinch of salt. Some people call him a downright idiot, but I won't go that far, he probably does actually know a thing or two about photography but some of the things he comes out with are ridiculous.


----------



## serothis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> No, don't do it, not Ken Rockwell
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'd take anything he says with a fairly hefty pinch of salt. Some people call him a downright idiot, but I won't go that far, he probably does actually know a thing or two about photography but some of the things he comes out with are ridiculous.


really? That's unfortunate to hear. So far I've found his advice and analysis quite helpful. Although my skill level is quite low, which means pretty much anything is helpful.


----------



## Pandora51

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Tchernobyl*
> 
> Sounds great!
> 
> I've been eyeing it because it's *amazingly* cheaper than anything else. By like 50 to 80$ or more, so I was wondering if it's 'made cheap', so to speak. Which doesn't seem to be the case!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (it's 300 euro, new, on Amazon)
> 
> I've found some places in town that'll do one to one sessions, teaching how to use the camera, which I think is worthwhile just to understand how it works and how to take the better pictures. Pricey, though, but oh well~


You are also fine with german sources for helpful tips, right?


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



Gwegner.de
Benjamin Jaworskyj


There are some pretty good articles and videos for beginners.

___

lol Ken Rockwell..

I won't go far here and will just say: His site can be useful but not for a beginner.
Some articles and user guides are dangerous and misleading for beginners.
For example the picture control settings for any nikon camera..

One tiny example for ridiculous statements


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



"The D3300 can't make a bad image even at it's lowest setting. The NORMAL, FINE and NEF RAW modes are for people who don't mind fitting only 12 images on a card. The pictures really do look the same; try it and see if you're curious. I did, which is why I shoot JPG BASIC. "


----------



## THEStorm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *serothis*
> 
> really? That's unfortunate to hear. So far I've found his advice and analysis quite helpful. Although my skill level is quite low, which means pretty much anything is helpful.


Yeah I would definitely avoid Ken Rockwell! If your looking for a site with some good dslr info (especially for Nikon) check out http://www.dslrbodies.com/ .


----------



## ahnafakeef

Any advice on where to look for tutelage on composition? Videos will work just as fine as reading material.

I've studied exposure somewhat and have an idea of the basics. What other than exposure and composition should I read up on?

Thank you.


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ahnafakeef*
> 
> Any advice on where to look for tutelage on composition? Videos will work just as fine as reading material.
> 
> I've studied exposure somewhat and have an idea of the basics. What other than exposure and composition should I read up on?
> 
> Thank you.


Check out Mike Browne on YouTube, his videos are great


----------



## Tchernobyl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pandora51*
> 
> You are also fine with german sources for helpful tips, right?
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> Gwegner.de
> Benjamin Jaworskyj
> 
> 
> There are some pretty good articles and videos for beginners.
> 
> ___
> 
> lol Ken Rockwell..
> 
> I won't go far here and will just say: His site can be useful but not for a beginner.
> Some articles and user guides are dangerous and misleading for beginners.
> For example the picture control settings for any nikon camera..
> 
> One tiny example for ridiculous statements
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> "The D3300 can't make a bad image even at it's lowest setting. The NORMAL, FINE and NEF RAW modes are for people who don't mind fitting only 12 images on a card. The pictures really do look the same; try it and see if you're curious. I did, which is why I shoot JPG BASIC. "


Yep, german is fine. I'll have a look at that. Just bought the camera. *pokes Amazon faster*


----------



## Ithanul

Lens showed up. Playing around with it atm.

I believe my cat, Doder, getting annoyed at me.


----------



## Dagamus NM

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *maddangerous*
> 
> Alright, I'm just posting because I have my gear list now.
> 
> Nikon D60
> Nikon DX AF-S Nikkor 55-200mm 1:4-5.6G ED
> Nikon DX AF-S Nikkor 18-55mm 1:3.5-5.6G
> Basic lens hood
> Nikon Strap
> NIkon camera bag
> Sandisk Extreme 32gig SD card
> 
> That's it. Now I'm off to look at some info about photography


The Nikon strap, like the canon is an advertisement to thieves of what you have. You can get nice custom straps for cheap. I have different straps based on what I am wearing as well as what season it is. I just got my first harness and it is pretty sweet. I can sport three cameras so I don't have to deal with changing lenses. One with a very sharp wide angle, one with a strong telephoto zoom and a sharp prime for everything inbetween.

Same with the bag. Thief magnet. My bag is a low key lowepro dslr that fits a laptop and all of the other junk I need to carry in the top compartment. Comfortable and I wear it every day. I always take one of my cameras with me.


----------



## serothis

I need some advice. I'm looking for a good macro lens. It will be general purpose macro lens. My GF is a scientific illustrator and she's going to panama in June. I'll be tagging along and I figure this is a perfect excuse to pick up a macro lens.

My two top candidates are:

nikkor 105mm f/2.8G IF-ED
and
Sigma 150mm f/2.8 EX DG OS HSM

Since the price between the two are comparable, we'll ignore that for now. Also note I'm using a D40x...an old DX body. I will eventually upgrade the body but I'm not sure if it will happen before the trip.

Does anyone have hands on experience with either or both of these lenses? Does anyone have a another suggestion in a comparable price range?


----------



## Pandora51

Sigma 105mm f/2.8 EX DG OS HSM and Tamron 90mm f/2.8 SP Di MACRO VC USD.
Both are excellent lenses and cheaper than the Nikon lens.

It is hard to decide because all 4 lenses are superb.

However if you want to buy a sigma or tamron lens make sure it will work out with your D40X. I think there were some issue with 3rd party lenses and the D40. Not sure about the D40x.

I have the Sigma 105mm. It is as good as it gets but before I bought it there was a tie between this one and the tamron 90mm. Almost went for the Tamron 90mm (warranty and weather sealed) but it was out of stock and I was not able to test it. As a result I bought the Sigma 105mm. 150mm was out of my range.
So Im using it for waterdrop photography. Not necessarily comparable to other macro but here is my impression all around:
- Ultra sharp
- superb contrast, colors, bokeh..
- smooth and precise MF
- good enough AF (propably as "bad" as every macro lens)
- noisy but acceptable image stabilisation (nothing compared to a Tamron 70-300mm Usd)


----------



## Tchernobyl

It's heeeere!









Took an accidental picture when transferring files from camera to computer. Apart from the corner blur, it's quite nice.


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Tchernobyl*
> 
> It's heeeere!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Took an accidental picture when transferring files from camera to computer. Apart from the corner blur, it's quite nice.


You have much to learn padawan









So are you enjoying the camera?


----------



## Tchernobyl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> You have much to learn padawan
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So are you enjoying the camera?


Looks good so far! I'm not venturing much outside of the presets yet. Taking snapshots here and there. I'm wondering what I have to do to tweak the ISO settings without having to go full manual control (and even then, poking around at that didn't let me change it. That or the interface is just being obtuse...)


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Tchernobyl*
> 
> Looks good so far! I'm not venturing much outside of the presets yet. Taking snapshots here and there. I'm wondering what I have to do to tweak the ISO settings without having to go full manual control (and even then, poking around at that didn't let me change it. That or the interface is just being obtuse...)


You should be able to adjust the ISO yourself in modes M, P, Av (Aperture priority) and Tv (Shutter Speed Priority) I think with the 1200D if you press the iso button on the back of the camera and then scroll the little knurled wheel by the shutter button that should adjust your ISO


----------



## ahnafakeef

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> Check out Mike Browne on YouTube, his videos are great


Thanks. I've started watching them. I wish he were a Canon user though. Would have been easier for me to grasp the technical stuff.


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ahnafakeef*
> 
> Thanks. I've started watching them. I wish he were a Canon user though. Would have been easier for me to grasp the technical stuff.


Canon/Nikon are so similar, ignore what camera he uses, focus on the the ideas behind taking a photograph, composition, depth of field etc.

The only significant difference is what they call Aperture and Shutter priority on the camera

Canon:
Av = Aperture Priority
Tv = Shutter Speed Priority

Nikon:
Mode A: Aperture Priority
Mode S: Shutter Speed Priority


----------



## ahnafakeef

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> Canon/Nikon are so similar, ignore what camera he uses, focus on the the ideas behind taking a photograph, composition, depth of field etc.
> 
> The only significant difference is what they call Aperture and Shutter priority on the camera
> 
> Canon:
> Av = Aperture Priority
> Tv = Shutter Speed Priority
> 
> Nikon:
> Mode A: Aperture Priority
> Mode S: Shutter Speed Priority


Thanks for the clarification. But the confusion I faced was with focus modes. His camera had Continuous, Manual and Single modes, which I think translates to AI Servo, Manual, and One Shot in Canon.

But you're right. I'm going to focus on the photographing techniques instead of the gear.


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *serothis*
> 
> I need some advice. I'm looking for a good macro lens. It will be general purpose macro lens. My GF is a scientific illustrator and she's going to panama in June. I'll be tagging along and I figure this is a perfect excuse to pick up a macro lens.
> 
> My two top candidates are:
> 
> nikkor 105mm f/2.8G IF-ED
> and
> Sigma 150mm f/2.8 EX DG OS HSM
> 
> Since the price between the two are comparable, we'll ignore that for now. Also note I'm using a D40x...an old DX body. I will eventually upgrade the body but I'm not sure if it will happen before the trip.
> 
> Does anyone have hands on experience with either or both of these lenses? Does anyone have a another suggestion in a comparable price range?


In a nutshell ? None! Get a used Tamron 90 or Sigma 105, the older, non VR/OS versions.

Don't get me wrong, both are great lenses, with the Sigma 150 probably being not only better / more useful for hunting down small insects etc but also having better IQ and much more convenient working distances vs a 90-105 lens.
Me thinks the Tamron 180 macro is the best value macro out there, especially used, but all of those mentioned bought new are a bit too expensive for someone with a basic kit like yours.
There are so many more useful lenses and not to mention bodies that you can buy with that kind of money, and still save some change for a used 100/105 Macro.

Some points: Macro photography involves camera - to - subject distances that make DOF razor thin...I mean we are saying that over and over about 50 1.4 or 85 1.4 lenses, and how at MFD that doesn't capture sharp impression of both eyes of a human face that is posing 3/4...now try to understand that at 1:1, 10in away from your subject you will face the same issue with a fly. Even at f/11.
So Macro photography is too often DOF limited, so you have to stop down, a lot. And when you are focusing really close, you are limiting the light that reaches your sensor...light levels that would easily be metered to expose properly @ f/11 and say 1/160s & 100 ISO @ 5ft for a portrait, might require quite a few more ISO stops to meter for same aperture / shutter speed at 10in.

That pretty much makes most natural light macro photography pretty limiting for hand-holding the shot - at least without bumping your ISO to levels that kill quality.
Not only because you need pretty strong (aka harsh = not good for 95% of the time) sunlight to keep your shutter speeds high enough, but also because in macro distances, camera shake is magnified - much like when you are shooting with a super-telephoto. Add the fact that even light breezes make vegetation that your subjects often hang to, moving back and forth for longer distances than your DOF, and then you have an issue.

So you need either a still subject and a very elaborate tripod positioning, flash or both to make shots.
And ofc when we say flash, the on-camera flash is almost useless for the distances we are talking about (lens is shading the light beam).

Most of the macro shots of insects, small flowers etc you see with decent DOF, are made with flash. Do some research (Google / Youtube, easy) on macro rig setups most often used.

Dropping $1,000 on a lens without understanding how much work and potentially extra "stuff" you need to support that lens @ work, is not a good advice.


----------



## Dagamus NM

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> In a nutshell ? None! Get a used Tamron 90 or Sigma 105, the older, non VR/OS versions.
> 
> Don't get me wrong, both are great lenses, with the Sigma 150 probably being not only better / more useful for hunting down small insects etc but also having better IQ and much more convenient working distances vs a 90-105 lens.
> Me thinks the Tamron 180 macro is the best value macro out there, especially used, but all of those mentioned bought new are a bit too expensive for someone with a basic kit like yours.
> There are so many more useful lenses and not to mention bodies that you can buy with that kind of money, and still save some change for a used 100/105 Macro.
> 
> Some points: Macro photography involves camera - to - subject distances that make DOF razor thin...I mean we are saying that over and over about 50 1.4 or 85 1.4 lenses, and how at MFD that doesn't capture sharp impression of both eyes of a human face that is posing 3/4...now try to understand that at 1:1, 10in away from your subject you will face the same issue with a fly. Even at f/11.
> So Macro photography is too often DOF limited, so you have to stop down, a lot. And when you are focusing really close, you are limiting the light that reaches your sensor...light levels that would easily be metered to expose properly @ f/11 and say 1/160s & 100 ISO @ 5ft for a portrait, might require quite a few more ISO stops to meter for same aperture / shutter speed at 10in.
> 
> That pretty much makes most natural light macro photography pretty limiting for hand-holding the shot - at least without bumping your ISO to levels that kill quality.
> Not only because you need pretty strong (aka harsh = not good for 95% of the time) sunlight to keep your shutter speeds high enough, but also because in macro distances, camera shake is magnified - much like when you are shooting with a super-telephoto. Add the fact that even light breezes make vegetation that your subjects often hang to, moving back and forth for longer distances than your DOF, and then you have an issue.
> 
> So you need either a still subject and a very elaborate tripod positioning, flash or both to make shots.
> And ofc when we say flash, the on-camera flash is almost useless for the distances we are talking about (lens is shading the light beam).
> 
> Most of the macro shots of insects, small flowers etc you see with decent DOF, are made with flash. Do some research (Google / Youtube, easy) on macro rig setups most often used.
> 
> Dropping $1,000 on a lens without understanding how much work and potentially extra "stuff" you need to support that lens @ work, is not a good advice.


Pretty spot on. That shallow depth of field can make shots look amazing, but can be very complex to set it up and get the shot you want. Image stabilization helps a bit for handheld, but really the tripod is what you want. I got some shots of a leaf bug on the side of my house that came out amazing this past fall but it was full sunlight out and it was a bug.

A lot of lenses say macro on the but really don't focus all that well very close or lack the narrow depth of field as discussed above.


----------



## serothis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> In a nutshell ? None! Get a used Tamron 90 or Sigma 105, the older, non VR/OS versions.
> 
> Don't get me wrong, both are great lenses, with the Sigma 150 probably being not only better / more useful for hunting down small insects etc but also having better IQ and much more convenient working distances vs a 90-105 lens.
> Me thinks the Tamron 180 macro is the best value macro out there, especially used, but all of those mentioned bought new are a bit too expensive for someone with a basic kit like yours.
> There are so many more useful lenses and not to mention bodies that you can buy with that kind of money, and still save some change for a used 100/105 Macro.
> 
> Some points: Macro photography involves camera - to - subject distances that make DOF razor thin...I mean we are saying that over and over about 50 1.4 or 85 1.4 lenses, and how at MFD that doesn't capture sharp impression of both eyes of a human face that is posing 3/4...now try to understand that at 1:1, 10in away from your subject you will face the same issue with a fly. Even at f/11.
> So Macro photography is too often DOF limited, so you have to stop down, a lot. And when you are focusing really close, you are limiting the light that reaches your sensor...light levels that would easily be metered to expose properly @ f/11 and say 1/160s & 100 ISO @ 5ft for a portrait, might require quite a few more ISO stops to meter for same aperture / shutter speed at 10in.
> 
> That pretty much makes most natural light macro photography pretty limiting for hand-holding the shot - at least without bumping your ISO to levels that kill quality.
> Not only because you need pretty strong (aka harsh = not good for 95% of the time) sunlight to keep your shutter speeds high enough, but also because in macro distances, camera shake is magnified - much like when you are shooting with a super-telephoto. Add the fact that even light breezes make vegetation that your subjects often hang to, moving back and forth for longer distances than your DOF, and then you have an issue.
> 
> So you need either a still subject and a very elaborate tripod positioning, flash or both to make shots.
> And ofc when we say flash, the on-camera flash is almost useless for the distances we are talking about (lens is shading the light beam).
> 
> Most of the macro shots of insects, small flowers etc you see with decent DOF, are made with flash. Do some research (Google / Youtube, easy) on macro rig setups most often used.
> 
> Dropping $1,000 on a lens without understanding how much work and potentially extra "stuff" you need to support that lens @ work, is not a good advice.


Thanks for all this.

I've been doing some research on techniques, equipment, etc for a little bit now and i'm excited to do a canon ball into the deepend.

I know you say don't spend huge amounts of money but it almost seems unavoidable with macro photography. Here's my shopping list:

Phoenix RF-46n
Manfrotto focusing rail
DG-2 Eye piece - probably not necessary but might be helpful. I would also need to get the dk-22 eyepiece adapter.
On the lens bit. I've never purchased a used lens. I'm little bit skittish buying used because of the unknown condition of the optics. Should I just stick to local camera shops where I can take a look at the lens before I buy or are places like B&H and Adorama ok? If I do look at lenses in person is there any good things to check given limited hands-on time and probably mediocre lighting?


----------



## pcfoo

Out of the listed accessories, I would not spend money for something other than the rail, and even that is a bit too specialized for a first timer.

I would not go for a macro ring flash, at least not one with just one strobe (you cannot balance it, like say the Canon MR-14EX II or its yongnuo clone). I had the MR-14EX and it was too weak for say portrait photography, so it is an expensive one-trick-pony. Same goes for other dedicated macro flash units like the Nikon 4804 R1.

People have great success with adapting regular speedlights with brackets, and using small soft-boxes to even the light. It is much easier to do with a simple "cold-shoe" ball-head mounted directly to the lens' tripod collar, which allows you for lots of positioning. If you have a lens that accepts tripod collar, you don't have to drop $100s that the OEM usually asks for, I am pretty happy using "cheap chinese" aluminum copies which you can get for $10-25, even for L lenses. The aluminum for my 100 2.8 Macro was like $12 (ebay , but Amazon sells them now too).



There are many flash bracket options if you don't have a tripod collar (or if you want to mount more than one flash on the tripod collar etc, there are crazy setups out there).

Something like that will allow you to shoot at your camera's Xsync speed (1/200s for the D40x) which is very respectable and can allow you to completely eliminate ambient (natural) light if you want to - say f/11~16 with 1/200s / ISO 200 probably gives a heavily under-exposed or even black frame under a tree canopy.

Remember that if you eliminate the ambient, the only thing that defines your exposure time is really the flash from the speedlight: its flash duration will probably be measured in 1000s of a second, and that will be your effective shutter speed - even if the curtain stays open for 1/200s, if all the light that "matters" lasts 1/2000s, than this is your exposure time, so hand-holding the setup is possible and relatively safe / shake free.

For starters I would not try for a dual speedlight setup. I would get a reflector/diffuser to balance out lighting. Doesn't need to be expensive, and it will double as a "breeze-block" to stop vegetation from moving around - although you can use clamps, strings, wires etc to do that too.

You can try a tripod, but a monopod could also be a good companion if you need extra support.

The whole idea is that you are investing money to accessories that can double as more than just "macro".


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

I own that Nikkor 105mm f/2.8G IF-ED lens, and it's an acquired taste for macro. But it's a pretty decent 105 lens, I guess, for regular pics.

Here's a shot done with it, handheld, indoors, fairly close (don't remember exactly how close).



My desktop is another shot taken with it, outdoors, handheld, good light (ignore the RealBench score







).


----------



## Tchernobyl

https://imgur.com/a/mLcry

Pics taken with my 1200d - mostly all preset configs, landscape mostly with the occasional scene intelligent auto. Mostly was taking a pic of stuff that caught my eye... the puddle looked a lot more interesting outside the picture. Ah well!


----------



## bluedevil

Nevermind...


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Tchernobyl*
> 
> https://imgur.com/a/mLcry
> 
> Pics taken with my 1200d - mostly all preset configs, landscape mostly with the occasional scene intelligent auto. Mostly was taking a pic of stuff that caught my eye... the puddle looked a lot more interesting outside the picture. Ah well!


Tip for landscapes - get looowww, crouch down and create more interesting perspectives.

I highly suggest giving your camera's manual a good read through, it really does help with learning the full capabilities of the camera. Av (Aperture Priority) and Tv (Shutter Speed Priority) are good places to start on beginning to adjust the camera's settings to your preference
Also maybe check out https://www.reddit.com/r/photoclass_2016


----------



## Tchernobyl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> Tip for landscapes - get looowww, crouch down and create more interesting perspectives.
> 
> I highly suggest giving your camera's manual a good read through, it really does help with learning the full capabilities of the camera. Av (Aperture Priority) and Tv (Shutter Speed Priority) are good places to start on beginning to adjust the camera's settings to your preference
> Also maybe check out https://www.reddit.com/r/photoclass_2016


That sub looks like what I'm looking for. Thanks!


----------



## serothis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Out of the listed accessories, I would not spend money for something other than the rail, and even that is a bit too specialized for a first timer.
> 
> I would not go for a macro ring flash, at least not one with just one strobe (you cannot balance it, like say the Canon MR-14EX II or its yongnuo clone). I had the MR-14EX and it was too weak for say portrait photography, so it is an expensive one-trick-pony. Same goes for other dedicated macro flash units like the Nikon 4804 R1.
> 
> People have great success with adapting regular speedlights with brackets, and using small soft-boxes to even the light. It is much easier to do with a simple "cold-shoe" ball-head mounted directly to the lens' tripod collar, which allows you for lots of positioning. If you have a lens that accepts tripod collar, you don't have to drop $100s that the OEM usually asks for, I am pretty happy using "cheap chinese" aluminum copies which you can get for $10-25, even for L lenses. The aluminum for my 100 2.8 Macro was like $12 (ebay , but Amazon sells them now too).
> 
> 
> 
> There are many flash bracket options if you don't have a tripod collar (or if you want to mount more than one flash on the tripod collar etc, there are crazy setups out there).
> 
> Something like that will allow you to shoot at your camera's Xsync speed (1/200s for the D40x) which is very respectable and can allow you to completely eliminate ambient (natural) light if you want to - say f/11~16 with 1/200s / ISO 200 probably gives a heavily under-exposed or even black frame under a tree canopy.
> 
> Remember that if you eliminate the ambient, the only thing that defines your exposure time is really the flash from the speedlight: its flash duration will probably be measured in 1000s of a second, and that will be your effective shutter speed - even if the curtain stays open for 1/200s, if all the light that "matters" lasts 1/2000s, than this is your exposure time, so hand-holding the setup is possible and relatively safe / shake free.
> 
> For starters I would not try for a dual speedlight setup. I would get a reflector/diffuser to balance out lighting. Doesn't need to be expensive, and it will double as a "breeze-block" to stop vegetation from moving around - although you can use clamps, strings, wires etc to do that too.
> 
> You can try a tripod, but a monopod could also be a good companion if you need extra support.
> 
> The whole idea is that you are investing money to accessories that can double as more than just "macro".


Again, Thank you.

All your advice has been very helpful. I've bookmarked your posts for later reference.

Your use of equipment is pretty clever and makes a lot more sense. It looks like it's a lot easier to assemble and break down than the ringflashes&#8230;also turns out be a lot cheaper.

I'm basically just mimicking the setup you showed. Shopping list 2.0:


Yongnuo YN-565EX
Vello Off-Camera TTL Cord
el cheapo soft box
Ball head - I'm not sure how cheap is too cheap.
Collapsible disc reflectors
I could make use of almost all of this equipment, while I hunt for the lens.

The tripod collar and lens aren't on the shopping list yet. I don't know how big of a collar to get for the sigma 105mm lens....and I need a find a shop with used one that has the nikon mount.

I already have a tripod. I might pick up a monopod for travel, If I feel I need one.


----------



## pcfoo

Thank you for taking time to digest the information @serothis. I don't claim to "do it better", but as you say I want you to make informed decisions and not over-spend on "too-specialized" stuff - not yet at least.

I had something like this Fotga ball-head / cold shoe in mind, in place of your "ball-head" :http://amzn.to/1KvHgCR
The cold-shoe is build-in, and heavy flashes are held by it just fine. You can thread the assembly to a tripod ring (you need a male-to-male 1/4" or 1/4" - 3/8" adapter for the tripod ring) or cheap straight flash brackets you can also find easily.

The soft-box looks good. You don't need to worry too much about diffusion etc its better than the bare head for sure. People use all-short of DIY diffusion boxes far less sophisticated than that. Its good to have something like that to keep it water-resistant etc, otherwise many foam / paper solutions fall-apart when you are taking them away from your back-yard.

As far as flash goes, Yongnuo is the "standard" in econo-speedlights, but I never liked dealing with AAs...

Lately I've been falling in-love with the Godox / Neewer Li-Ion speedlings. Personally I used them full manual, so I've settled with 2x Neewer TT850 (Godox V850) , but the same platform appears in the "860" series too (TT860 or Godox V860) that offers iTTL/ETTL compatibility, for 50% more ofc.

The full manual 850s are in the $105 range ea, and the TTL ones are in the $160-170.
More expensive than the Yongnuo ones, but not that bad after you factor in the non-included cost for AA batteries in case of YN (and the fact that this Li-Ion pack promises similar run-time with 3x sets of AA, and self-discharge is actually better than Eneloops).

What also makes the Godox/Neewer system pretty attractive, is the supported remote triggering accessories. Not 2.4GHz like the latest YN, but 433MHz is already pretty interference free and fast enough to achieve 1/8000s sync speeds. Use a Cells-II and cheap, FT-16 recievers to run HSS / remote TTL. Add "dumb" FT-16 transmitter to control the power of up to 16 groups of speedlights and fire them independantly...
Need more power? There are FT-16 compatible, Li-Ion powered open bulb speedlights like the Godox AD-360, even cheap monolights.

Me thinks a great enthusiast strober system.


----------



## Conspiracy

super quiet in here lol

i did some greenscreen stuff today at work. it worked. nothing exciting just lots of video and even more editing


----------



## Minnie Cee

Super quiet here. But some very exciting products announced. The Sigma 50-100/1.8 and Nikon DL18-50 are on my radar


----------



## sub50hz

Still daily-carrying the D810 and 24/1.4, shooting whenever I have the chance (less and less frequently these days, since I'm spending more time at work). Should upload some things to Flickr one of these days when I'm not working until 22:00 on stuff halfway around the world.


----------



## Jiryama

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> i did some greenscreen stuff today at work. it worked. nothing exciting just lots of video and even more editing[/QUOTE]
> 
> What video editor as you using?
> 
> I am looking for a new one for my creations that are anywhere from 3minutes to 1 hour. Nothing extreme, using PSE 13 right now and it just runs my processor at 100% for rendering during the export and the program uses 0% GPU acceleration! I think that is crazy that they don't allow outside iGPU acceleration in that program.


----------



## IntoxicatedPuma

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Minnie Cee*
> 
> Super quiet here. But some very exciting products announced. The Sigma 50-100/1.8 and Nikon DL18-50 are on my radar


I had the Sigma 18-35 when I had my Canon. Loved that lens. If I still had it i'd buy the 50-100 in a heart beat, especially at the price. I have gotten used to Olympus so carrying around the larger lenses is a harder pill to swallow. I think I read the 50-100 is 1.5kg


----------



## Sean Webster

Dang, 18 days and no replies! I've been too busy myself and haven't even been able to post on here much. I went to a strawberry farm this weekend and got some cool shots of animals there and some friends. I'm also kinda mentoring a girl in photography now lol. She hasn't used Lightroom yet and it's going to be a big to teach her how to edit.


----------



## Jiryama

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> Dang, 18 days and no replies! I've been too busy myself and haven't even been able to post on here much. I went to a strawberry farm this weekend and got some cool shots of animals there and some friends. I'm also kinda mentoring a girl in photography now lol. She hasn't used Lightroom yet and it's going to be a big to teach her how to edit.


Would love to see some of those photos! Also are you going to make videos on how to use lightroom and have her watch them or do something more personal?


----------



## ahnafakeef

Could someone please advise me on which color space to use when exporting photos from Lightroom?

Using the largest one i.e., ProPhoto RGB seems like the best choice to retain the colors achieved during processing, but is there any disadvantage to using it?

Thank you.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jiryama*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> i did some greenscreen stuff today at work. it worked. nothing exciting just lots of video and even more editing[/QUOTE]
> 
> What video editor as you using?
> 
> I am looking for a new one for my creations that are anywhere from 3minutes to 1 hour. Nothing extreme, using PSE 13 right now and it just runs my processor at 100% for rendering during the export and the program uses 0% GPU acceleration! I think that is crazy that they don't allow outside iGPU acceleration in that program.[/QUOTE]
> 
> I use Adobe CS6 and Adobe CC between work and home. Both support GPUs. Adobe CC has wider support as CS6 only recognizes nVidia cards. I have not yet had time to test how well AMD cards work in Premiere CC much less dual AMD cards in a Mac Pro. I am still on CS6 at work because I dont want to upgrade while in the middle of multiple projects
Click to expand...


----------



## Pandora51

What do you think? Is it fungus or just turbid or some result from water?



It looks alot worse than it actually is. It is an old Exakta lens for minolta (worth of ~5 euro). But if it is fungus I want to keep it even further away from other lenses than currently.


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pandora51*
> 
> What do you think? Is it fungus or just turbid or some result from water?
> 
> x
> 
> It looks alot worse than it actually is. It is an old Exakta lens for minolta (worth of ~5 euro). But if it is fungus I want to keep it even further away from other lenses than currently.


I'm not sure, most of the fungus I've seen if of the stringy sort of type, that has fibres stretching out from a central point where the spore would've been. Although saying that I did have a couple of zenits that had fungus in the prisms and that looked a bit more like elongated blobs.

Speaking of fungus I really need to do something about my fungal issues. Got a Helios 44 with a very small patch inside which I need to clean, got a Olympus trip with a bit in the lens and viewfinder which I've left in the window for now, and an absolutely infested Nikon 35-70 which I don't really want to throw away as I think my dad got it in saudi arabia in the '90s. It's all stored away from my usual gear, but I can't help but think I should put more distance between them


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jiryama*
> 
> Would love to see some of those photos! Also are you going to make videos on how to use lightroom and have her watch them or do something more personal?


I posted some on my flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/seanwebsterhd/

It will be more personal. One on one lessons at my place.


----------



## Jiryama

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> I posted some on my flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/seanwebsterhd/
> 
> It will be more personal. One on one lessons at my place.


Aah I gotcha, was gonna say record the video and put them together for an OCN tutorial! I'd definitely watch them all since I am looking to move from Elements 13 to Lightroom.

I definitely just spent wayyy too much time going through those photos. You have some serious skill my man! That 6D is awesome - I don't think that my a6000 can take photo likes that!


----------



## Conspiracy

preparing all my gear for a project i have been working on the past year. on March 1st ill be directing and switching an 8 hour live fundraising broadcast at the university i work at. ill be directing, switching, mixing audio, and anything else related to the video production side of the event

behold my funkopop crew


----------



## pcfoo

...we only share Chewbacca....


----------



## carayan

I'd like to add myself to the list!

I shoot with

Canon EOS 550D
Canon 17-40 f/4L
Canon 50mm f/1.8 II

Looking to maybe move to full frame or another APS-C that has better noise control.

Cheers!


----------



## iandroo888

Update !

*Old* -

Nikon D5000 + Zeikos ZE-NBG5000 Battery Grip

Nikkor 12-24mm f/4G AF-S DX
Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G AF-S

Nikon Speedlight SB-800
Nikon ML-L3 IR Remote
Sto-fen Omnibounce Diffuser
Gary Fong LightSphere II
12x Sanyo Eneloops NiMH Batteries
2x B+W F-Pro 77mm MRC UV Filter
B+W Kaesemann 77mm MRC Circular Polarizer
Timbuk2 Camera Snoop Medium Messenger Bag
Ancient aluminum tripod

*New* -

D800E + Zeikos ZE-NBGD800 Grip & D5000 + Zeikos ZE-NGH5000 Grip

Nikkor 12-24 f/4G AF-S DX
Nikkor 14-24 f/2.8G AF-S
NIkkor 24-70 f/2.8G AF-S

Nikon Speedlight SB-800
Nikon ML-L3 IR Remote
Sto-fen Omnibounce Diffuser
Gary Fong LightSphere II
20x Sanyo Eneloops NiMH Batteries
2x B+W F-Pro 77mm MRC UV Filter
B+W Kaesemann 77mm MRC Circular Polarizer
Timbuk2 Snoop Camera X-Small Gunmetal Insert
Timbuk2 Snoop Camera Medium Messenger Bag
BlackRapid RS-Sport Camera STrap
Ancient aluminum tripod


----------



## Deano12345

So as some of you may know (I don't post nearly as often as I used to, so maybe not !) I work in a camera shop, so I'm constantly trying new things out, and I figured this might be helpful for anyone who dislikes carrying bags, but does any kind of shooting that might need a tripod.

I picked up this little Manfrotto Tripod (model is the Pixi Mini, part no. is MTPIXI-B, if your interested, cost here is €25) today, and with some velcro and the space behind the logo on my strap, I've now got a strap mounted tripod. Now I understand this is nothing special, but despite the fact saying that it only supports 2.2lbs, I've had my DSLR on it this evening, and it is no problem despite the camera and lens weighing probably 5.5lbs, I've tried other small tripods in the past, but all they've been useful for is my CSC, its nice to have finally found something quite a bit sturdier so I can leave my bag at home more often.

Hopefully someone finds this useful


----------



## pcfoo

Funny...been using that same black PIXI model last night











JPEG straight out of X-E2 + XF 27mm, f/11 - 12s - ISO 200

It has zero issues properly supporting my EOS 6D with any of my Canon glass...


----------



## Deano12345

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Funny...been using that same black PIXI model last night
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JPEG straight out of X-E2 + XF 27mm, f/11 - 12s - ISO 200
> 
> It has zero issues properly supporting my EOS 6D with any of my Canon glass...


Yeah I was super impressed with the build, and the fact that its really light too is nice !


----------



## pcfoo

The Fuji was bought to replace my EOS M as my "all-day-drag-along" camera, the PIXI is exactly the same tripod wise.
At least I have zero guilt dropping that pixi in the messenger bag


----------



## Deano12345

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Deano12345*
> 
> Yeah I was super impressed with the build, and the fact that its really light too is nice !


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> The Fuji was bought to replace my EOS M as my "all-day-drag-along" camera, the PIXI is exactly the same tripod wise.
> At least I have zero guilt dropping that pixi in the messenger bag


Good choice on that upgrade ! I need to get the 18/27 lenses for my Fuji too, I've got the space for it in my bag now


----------



## ahnafakeef

Was anyone else as interested in the Sigma 50-100mm f/1.8 lens as I am?

I really like shooting with my 24-105mm f/4L and would have really appreciated being able to go down to f/1.8 on a lens with a similar zoom range.

Too bad they aren't releasing a version for full-frame bodies.


----------



## KenjiS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ahnafakeef*
> 
> Was anyone else as interested in the Sigma 50-100mm f/1.8 lens as I am?
> 
> I really like shooting with my 24-105mm f/4L and would have really appreciated being able to go down to f/1.8 on a lens with a similar zoom range.
> 
> Too bad they aren't releasing a version for full-frame bodies.


Give it time, they followed the 18-35 f/1.8 with the 24-35 f/2 after all... A 75-150 f/2 OS would be epic, especially for video

Excited? Yes. Also excited for that 30mm f/1.4, Looks like a nice little lens to slot between my 15mm f/1.7 Summilux and my 45mm f/2.8 Macro-Elmarit

Speaking of, I supplemented my Canon DSLR with a Panasonic GX8, a criminally underrated body...

https://flic.kr/p/DKoLf5Micro 2 by Trevor H, on Flickr

https://flic.kr/p/DCxfa9Floating by Trevor H, on Flickr

https://flic.kr/p/D2pS8kSpiced Mule 1 by Trevor H, on Flickr

https://flic.kr/p/EA6me5Kagutsuchi, Part 1 by Trevor H, on Flickr


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ahnafakeef*
> 
> Was anyone else as interested in the Sigma 50-100mm f/1.8 lens as I am?
> 
> I really like shooting with my 24-105mm f/4L and would have really appreciated being able to go down to f/1.8 on a lens with a similar zoom range.
> 
> Too bad they aren't releasing a version for full-frame bodies.


Personally I don't shoot video with a GH4 or something like that, so all those 1.8 DC zooms are of little utility for me.
Although I have used and have recommended the 18-35 Art to people looking after "the best", not caring about weight or wishing to advance to a FF SLR anytime soon, personally I can achieve similar or shallow DOF with a FF 2.8 class zoom on a FF camera.

Yes, f/1.8 gives you shutter speeds that are unparalleled by FF zooms, but I think after factoring in added noise gains and low light capabilities, along with the lack of IS/OS in those Sigmas, its a wash in most scenarios. So for APS-C shooters the 50-100 1.8 can potentially be a great lens, but Unfortunately it is massively big and heavy for a APS-C lens, which in my eyes negates the real benefits of a smaller format system - namely size and weight. Anyone that can afford it to begin with, could afford also a 70-200 2.8 with IS/VC/OS, which would be in the same weight class, offer more options as far as reach goes and match it roughly in subject isolation @ 200mm f/2.8. IS/OS would also help a lot for both stills and video - usually more than the f/stop difference implies.

Sigma also doesn't cater for Fuji X mount yet, instead focusing in Sony E and m43 mounts of MILC, something that I would not mind changing, namely for their affordable, compact yet more than decent primes for MILC but I don't know if they will ever offer them for Fuji.

I like that sigma is pushing their line, and I don't mind that I am not part of their target group - I just hope enough people are, as I don't want them to be losing money and momentum.


----------



## IntoxicatedPuma

Quote:


> Was anyone else as interested in the Sigma 50-100mm f/1.8 lens as I am?


I'm super excited about any Art lens......as for a full frame version of a 75-150mm eq.... not so interested. That lens would be gigantic and the 50-100 is already the same size as my Olympus 40-150 and almost double the weight of it. I had the 18-35mm and got tired of lugging it around. It's great for portraits and indoor events but if I am walking around the city taking pictures I'd rather have one or two small primes.


----------



## KenjiS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> *edited for length*
> 
> .


Counter argument of course being if you shoot a large variety of things and have a bunch of varied needs, IE, adding a 50-100 f/1.8 to your APS-C system if a lot of your shooting benefits from the pixel density advantage of APS-C for instance but you still want very thin depth of field without adding a second camera, the 50-100 makes sense

Its the same arguement people make against say, the Oly 300mm f/4, but not everyone wants to maintain 2 systems for different purposes... if you do a bunch of street photography but also like to shoot birds, adding the 300mm f/4 makes more sense than buying into a Canon/Nikon SLR system for one lens.

Not saying you're wrong, but i do think a lot of folks get way too caught up in FF is ALWAYS BETTER ALWAYS CONSTANTLY FOR EVERYONE PERIOD. I got a lot of pressure and flak for getting the GX8 over an A7...


----------



## pcfoo

@KenjiS, you are countering an opinion with an opinion, we are not really arguing.

I am totally with you that I would not want to maintain 2 systems for different uses, but unfortunately - in my case - there was no compact Canon MILC with an EVF...so I got a X-E2...and just the 27mm 2.8 pancake.

I simply don't see why the 50-100 is nowhere as versatile as the 18-35 or other 2x zooms for that matter (say 200-400).
It is a short tele on one end, and short tele on the other end...we often oversimplify the phrase: "zoom with your feet", but if it is true for one lens, this might be it!

Sure, again, a matter of opinion, but I feel like the zoom range in this particular case is unappealing.
99% of the time I would see someone use it, he could also use a 85 1.8 prime for the same effect, zooming with taking a single step forward or backward - literally, and save hugely on weight and cost - perhaps even get a better result.

As for FF is always better...well...its horses for courses.
If I wasn't going for better pixel density (i.e. the best TC for my 6D is probably a 7D or 70/80D etc) or smaller size (EOS M, X-E2 WITHOUT a 2.8 zoom), yes, the bigger sensor is better if you are after absolute IQ. And the interwebs make it so easy for stupid perfectionists to share their opinion, doesn't it?

We are fortunate to have so many great options to produce amazing pictures. It's rarely the camera's or "its sensor size" that stops us


----------



## KenjiS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> @KenjiS, you are countering an opinion with an opinion, we are not really arguing.
> 
> I am totally with you that I would not want to maintain 2 systems for different uses, but unfortunately - in my case - there was no compact Canon MILC with an EVF...so I got a X-E2...and just the 27mm 2.8 pancake.
> 
> I simply don't see why the 50-100 is nowhere as versatile as the 18-35 or other 2x zooms for that matter (say 200-400).
> It is a short tele on one end, and short tele on the other end...we often oversimplify the phrase: "zoom with your feet", but if it is true for one lens, this might be it!
> 
> Sure, again, a matter of opinion, but I feel like the zoom range in this particular case is unappealing.
> 99% of the time I would see someone use it, he could also use a 85 1.8 prime for the same effect, zooming with taking a single step forward or backward - literally, and save hugely on weight and cost - perhaps even get a better result.
> 
> As for FF is always better...well...its horses for courses.
> If I wasn't going for better pixel density (i.e. the best TC for my 6D is probably a 7D or 70/80D etc) or smaller size (EOS M, X-E2 WITHOUT a 2.8 zoom), yes, the bigger sensor is better if you are after absolute IQ. And the interwebs make it so easy for stupid perfectionists to share their opinion, doesn't it?
> 
> We are fortunate to have so many great options to produce amazing pictures. It's rarely the camera's or "its sensor size" that stops us


Eh fair enough i suppose.. I dont think ill buy one, my eye is more on something like the 150-600 for my 7D than the 50-100.. i considered that nifty new Leica 100-400 but im not sure i see a point in it at twice the cost and i dont know if i really trust the AF in my GX8 vs the 7D for birding lol.. i will be upgrading my 7D despite the GX8 purchase (They're for different things) but i have yet to decide with what at the moment...I also have to say the Leica 45mm macro is pretty awesome, m4/3's 2x crop is REALLY good for macro

Actually i suppose as a counter to the 50-100 i could buy the DG Nocticron and the Oly 75 f/1.8, f/1.2 at an 85mm equivalent and f/1.8 at 150.... Both lenses have a lovely rendition too and are stabilized!


----------



## IntoxicatedPuma

But that's a $2,000 combo for the Nocticron + Oly 75....the Sigma is only $1,100?


----------



## Tchernobyl

http://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B00LN5YKMU/ref=pe_385721_48721101_TE_M1T1DP

The "canon 1200d for dummies" book is 62% off. Nabbed it since it looks pretty helpful, and I got that camera. Might be worth looking at amazon to see if anything else has gotten a big discount?


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Tchernobyl*
> 
> http://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B00LN5YKMU/ref=pe_385721_48721101_TE_M1T1DP
> 
> The "canon 1200d for dummies" book is 62% off. Nabbed it since it looks pretty helpful, and I got that camera. Might be worth looking at amazon to see if anything else has gotten a big discount?


Whatever keeps you engaged and interested is good.
I tend to ignore "for dummies" books as I find them a bit too simplistic.
Plus this day and age, all the information in that book is probably a google-search away...most likely on youtube too.

What you are after are concepts, not specific controls. You can find your specific controls/keys in the manual of the camera (you can download that for free if you've lost it or got your camera used without one). Once you have the concept down, you will figure out how to make it happen with your kit. Doesn't matter if the demo on youtube was using a Canon 5D or a Nikon D7000. 99% of DSLRs can do the same thing, even if you have to dig into a menu for a setting while "the guy" had a dedicated button for it.

So, try to grow into photography, not into the 1200D. Avoid specifics.


----------



## Conspiracy

so a thing happened today at best buy which is probably why i dont frequent that store very often since i stopped working there. already had a memory card, didnt forget that but i got just about everything else. came very close to grabbing a selfie stick but realized it would get barely any used since i dont do much high angle video stuff


----------



## Deano12345

I didn't want to pay the €25 for the BlackRapid tethering kit, so I made this for €5. Does just as good a job !


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Deano12345*
> 
> I didn't want to pay the €25 for the BlackRapid tethering kit, so I made this for €5. Does just as good a job !
> x


I should try and make something like that for mine. Last night I ordered a few bits to make the stock strap removable, so I can switch between my black rapid and the normal strap when using a tripod, etc.. I ordered a set of optech utility connector things to connect to the eyelets on the camera, and some 'heavy duty' carabiners for the strap to attach to. I'm not really a fan of having plastic buckles on camera straps so that's why I went down this route. It wouldn't be too hard to make something to connect one of these things to the black rapid strap instead


----------



## Deano12345

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> I should try and make something like that for mine. Last night I ordered a few bits to make the stock strap removable, so I can switch between my black rapid and the normal strap when using a tripod, etc.. I ordered a set of optech utility connector things to connect to the eyelets on the camera, and some 'heavy duty' carabiners for the strap to attach to. I'm not really a fan of having plastic buckles on camera straps so that's why I went down this route. It wouldn't be too hard to make something to connect one of these things to the black rapid strap instead


Yeah the Optech connectors are great, about they only plastic ones I would use. Im really not a fan of Blackrapid's mounting system, so the extra security is a big plus.

In other news, got this for €75


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Deano12345*
> 
> Yeah the Optech connectors are great, about they only plastic ones I would use. Im really not a fan of Blackrapid's mounting system, so the extra security is a big plus.
> 
> In other news, got this for €75


I really like the black rapid system, but its not perfect. The connection method does create a single point of failure, but their reputation is pretty good so the advantages outweigh the disadvantages. The only problem I've encountered with mine is losing the rubber viewfinder eyepieces, and I use mine about 8 hours per week while working.

Also €75 is a steal for that, who's head did you hold a gun to for that price? (You're the guy who works at the camera store right? I can't remember, don't come on here much at the min







)


----------



## Deano12345

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> I really like the black rapid system, but its not perfect. The connection method does create a single point of failure, but their reputation is pretty good so the advantages outweigh the disadvantages. The only problem I've encountered with mine is losing the rubber viewfinder eyepieces, and I use mine about 8 hours per week while working.
> 
> Also €75 is a steal for that, who's head did you hold a gun to for that price? (You're the guy who works at the camera store right? I can't remember, don't come on here much at the min
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )


I've lost a few Fuji eyepieces that way, trust me, I feel your pain.

Yep I do work at a camera store ! The lens was in a second hand shop near where I work for €225 (which is a bargain anyway, the lens is mint !) so I traded in my Fuji 18-55 that I genuinely think I've used once, and got €150 credit for that, so only had to pay the difference


----------



## Scott1541

Decent price either way, I'm currently looking to replace my 35mm DX with a full frame prime, but I'm not sure whether to go 28mm (probably the 1.8 AF-S version as I can use it for work) or stick with 35mm (most likely the f2 AF-D)


----------



## freitz

Getting rid of my Leica X2 (My third backup) Figured I would take a couple quick snap shots of it.

https://flic.kr/p/FoAneHL1005452 by Fred Reitz, on Flickr


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Deano12345*
> 
> Yep I do work at a camera store ! The lens was in a second hand shop near where I work for €225 (which is a bargain anyway, the lens is mint !) so I traded in my Fuji 18-55 that I genuinely think I've used once, and got €150 credit for that, so only had to pay the difference


Well, it doesn't look like €75 then, does it ??? U got me so jelly...I would buy that any day even having no intention to own a Nikon body atm, just to resell (and for bragging rights on that deal







).

Just got back from a trip in SE Asia...as much as I wanted to test myself using the Fuji X-E2 more, I just stack with the EOS and the fat zooms for the most part








X-E2 was used for "street" stuff when I did not want to drag anything big, and it did well.

Here is a shot with the Fuji on the Manfrotto PIXI discussed above:



X-E2 + XF 18mm @ f/11 // 10 sec // ISO 200


----------



## Conspiracy

kinda good blog post about confessions of a gear head

https://www.hurlbutvisuals.com/blog/2016/03/confessions-of-a-recovering-gear-head-cinematography-education/


----------



## Onex

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> kinda good blog post about confessions of a gear head
> 
> https://www.hurlbutvisuals.com/blog/2016/03/confessions-of-a-recovering-gear-head-cinematography-education/


lol G.A.S. is a very real problem that we all deal with. From time to time I end up on ebay looking for new gear just to have, I dont even need it.

Does anyone have any tips shooting street with an 85 manual lens? I find I have to look waaaay into the future before I can get a shot.


----------



## Deano12345

So I wanted to try this out before I bought the really expensive Nikon Wi-Fi Adapter for my camera, and it works ! Kind of...







the metal on the Adapter is causing the connection to become quite weak, I do want to work on it and see if I can improve it though !


----------



## MistaBernie

Is this the same as an Eye Fi Mobi card? Seems like it. Love mine. Made shooting the charity event that I usually shoot before Xmas very easy.


----------



## Deano12345

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> Is this the same as an Eye Fi Mobi card? Seems like it. Love mine. Made shooting the charity event that I usually shoot before Xmas very easy.


The same idea yes, i just bought this one since it was cheapest !

Also got a 9/10 condition Nikon 50mm 1.4 today as well for €200, so another good deal







I had planned to get the Sigma Art, but at €800, I figured I'd try out the Nikon and if I really want the Sigma, I can always sell the Nikon for more than I paid anyway (They go for €280-€320 over here)


----------



## ahnafakeef

Does upgrading the camera body offer any significant improvement in image quality?

I'm asking because I found a noteworthy difference in sharpness upgrading from a 24-105mm f4L to a 24-70mm f2.8L II. So I'm wondering if upgrading from a 6D to something better will improve image quality even more.


----------



## pcfoo

If you were to go for a 5DS / 5DSR, i.e. body with significant MP advantage, you would see a notably improvement in the amount of detail being resolved, given of course the camera is properly stable / shutter speeds are insuring good hand-holding results.

Minute increases in MP, say going from a 20 to a 24MP body won't give you notable advantages, and often you are compromising else-where. E.g. the EOS 6D sensor is a tad better than the 5D3 sensor, with better pattern noise suppression, long exposure capabilities and DR, so overall despite the slightly less MP, it is actually a "better" option IQ wise.

Remember, that the resolution is "spreaded" over the area of the sensor. The linear increase from 20MP (6D : 5472p Horiz) to 22MP (5D3 : 5760p Horiz) is just 5%, not "10%" as one would think through 22/20.
Similarly, the 5DS/5DSR with more than 255% the pixels, really gets a 59% higher linear resolution.

For absolute sharpness, a body that features a AA cancellation or lacks a AA filter completely will also give you sharper results, but in the Canon world the only D-SLR with that option is the 5DSR.


----------



## ahnafakeef

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> If you were to go for a 5DS / 5DSR, i.e. body with significant MP advantage, you would see a notably improvement in the amount of detail being resolved, given of course the camera is properly stable / shutter speeds are insuring good hand-holding results.
> 
> Minute increases in MP, say going from a 20 to a 24MP body won't give you notable advantages, and often you are compromising else-where. E.g. the EOS 6D sensor is a tad better than the 5D3 sensor, with better pattern noise suppression, long exposure capabilities and DR, so overall despite the slightly less MP, it is actually a "better" option IQ wise.
> 
> For absolute sharpness, a body that features a AA cancellation or lacks a AA filter completely will also give you sharper results, but in the Canon world the only D-SLR with that option is the 5DSR.


Thank you for the detailed response.

Does a lack of AA filter introduce unwanted jagged edges in photos? Or is that a non-issue?

If shooting at a high FPS is not important or even necessary, is the 5DSR Canon's best camera among their current offerings?

Also, is there any resource online that shows direct comparison of image quality between different cameras with no change other than the body?


----------



## pcfoo

There are a few, but it takes lots of effort to do such a comparison properly, and often some things are omitted or overlooked.
Some examples:
http://www.florianbieler.de/5ds-5d3-en/

https://youtu.be/Gq3ISUHsfsQ

https://youtu.be/NK5J571CKvE

And ofc you can google yourself for lots and lots of similar results. None is perfect, and it is not always the reviewer's fault:

E.g. for the 5DS/5DSR it is known that Adobe LR for example has a tone curve very different than the rest of the Canon DSLRs. This can be manually patched today, but the default settings - especially those seen in the early reviews like those above, are all biased, crashing the blacks (lowering DR and boosting contrast ofc) in the 50MP camera.

The toughest thing is to "normalize" results. It is tough to keep things equal when comparing different systems.
For sure going 100% mag (pixel per pixel) comparison makes no sense. It is 100% sure that the higher the MP, the more detail you will resolve under ideal conditions. The sharper the lens, the biggest the difference. Most tests these days sample down the high MP image to the lower MP competitor, and I think that is the proper way to do it (as you see in all videos above).

It is also stupid to compare noise without normalizing to the same resolution.

And even with "identical" lenses, yet not the same sample, it is not unthinkable that the results will be skewed, as often QC tolerances are allowing for slight variation (e.g. a lens being more decentered for the Nikon mount, than on the Canon mount, thus favoring the Canon).

All in all, we have to manage expectations and understand that for very very small differences in RL applications under ideal conditions, we have to pay increasingly higher premiums.
Ideal conditions rarely occur for casual shooters. Yes, a 5DS will virtually "always" be better than a 6D, simply because it is a completely different / better class of body all-together.

Focuses better, handles better, shoots faster, resolves more detail etc. Ok, working with 50MP files sucks if you are doing layer work in PS or exporting few thousands in LR, and battery life is notably lower as the electronics work with so much more data, but lets forget about this for a sec and say its overall better all-around.

But will it be 4 times better as roughly the price difference implies? Will it be 2.5 times better as the resolution difference implies?
Well, virtually never.


----------



## ahnafakeef

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> There are a few, but it takes lots of effort to do such a comparison properly, and often some things are omitted or overlooked.
> Some examples:
> http://www.florianbieler.de/5ds-5d3-en/
> 
> https://youtu.be/Gq3ISUHsfsQ
> 
> https://youtu.be/NK5J571CKvE
> 
> And ofc you can google yourself for lots and lots of similar results. None is perfect, and it is not always the reviewer's fault:
> 
> E.g. for the 5DS/5DSR it is known that Adobe LR for example has a tone curve very different than the rest of the Canon DSLRs. This can be manually patched today, but the default settings - especially those seen in the early reviews like those above, are all biased, crashing the blacks (lowering DR and boosting contrast ofc) in the 50MP camera.
> 
> The toughest thing is to "normalize" results. It is tough to keep things equal when comparing different systems.
> For sure going 100% mag (pixel per pixel) comparison makes no sense. It is 100% sure that the higher the MP, the more detail you will resolve under ideal conditions. The sharper the lens, the biggest the difference. Most tests these days sample down the high MP image to the lower MP competitor, and I think that is the proper way to do it (as you see in all videos above).
> 
> It is also stupid to compare noise without normalizing to the same resolution.
> 
> And even with "identical" lenses, yet not the same sample, it is not unthinkable that the results will be skewed, as often QC tolerances are allowing for slight variation (e.g. a lens being more decentered for the Nikon mount, than on the Canon mount, thus favoring the Canon).
> 
> All in all, we have to manage expectations and understand that for very very small differences in RL applications under ideal conditions, we have to pay increasingly higher premiums.
> Ideal conditions rarely occur for casual shooters. Yes, a 5DS will virtually "always" be better than a 6D, simply because it is a completely different / better class of body all-together.
> 
> Focuses better, handles better, shoots faster, resolves more detail etc. Ok, working with 50MP files sucks if you are doing layer work in PS or exporting few thousands in LR, and battery life is notably lower as the electronics work with so much more data, but lets forget about this for a sec and say its overall better all-around.
> 
> But will it be 4 times better as roughly the price difference implies? Will it be 2.5 times better as the resolution difference implies?
> Well, virtually never.


So the 5DsR will definitely be an upgrade over a 6D. More importantly and regrettably, it would allow a higher usage of the potential of my lenses.

I'm curious as to why Canon chose the 'S' and 'SR' nomenclature over going for the more conventional Mark IV. Do they not consider these cameras a direct successor to the Mark III?

Regardless, I think I'll hold out till Canon drops something new - preferably the 5D Mark IV - and stick to my 6D for now. It's getting the job done perfectly fine for now, and I feel even better knowing that it has image quality similar to if not better than the 5DM3.

Thank you for all your help, pcfoo. Much appreciated.


----------



## Pandora51

What is your opinion about grey market products? Especially Sigma lenses.
Is it worth considering a sigma art lens for 100 dollar / euro less and including a sigma dock instead?

Does Sigma repair grey market lenses for money? In the case something happens after 3+ years?


----------



## TwirlyWhirly555

Just got my first decent camera , its a massive improvement over my phone .

Its a Panasonic panasonic dmc fz200 .

Managed to capture these photos after a few goes , was really happy with the results .

https://flic.kr/p/ErSyQjP1000094 by TwirlyWhirly555, on Flickr

https://flic.kr/p/F3h74dP1000067 by TwirlyWhirly555, on Flickr


----------



## Deano12345

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pandora51*
> 
> What is your opinion about grey market products? Especially Sigma lenses.
> Is it worth considering a sigma art lens for 100 dollar / euro less and including a sigma dock instead?
> 
> Does Sigma repair grey market lenses for money? In the case something happens after 3+ years?


Provided they have parts, yes they will. Be prepared for a fairly expensive bill though.


----------



## Pandora51

The new Yongnuo YN50mm f/1.8 for Nikon is avaliable!

80-90 dollar. Propably around 100 euro if they get avaliable in europe.
Took them like forever to release it. The big question is how good is it? The Nikon 50mm f1.8G is already excellent.


----------



## Deano12345

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pandora51*
> 
> The new Yongnuo YN50mm f/1.8 for Nikon is avaliable!
> 
> 80-90 dollar. Propably around 100 euro if they get avaliable in europe.
> Took them like forever to release it. The big question is how good is it? The Nikon 50mm f1.8G is already excellent.


Even if its only average, its cheap enough to warrant most people buying it, here in Ireland the 50 1.8G is a €250 lens.


----------



## Pandora51

Depends on what you mean with average. A used 50mm f1.8D would be a better value if the yongnuo is too bad. The 50mm f1.8G itself is pretty expensive, especially compared to canons counterpart back in the days but optically there is not much that can be improved. So the 50mm f1.8G is worth its price.
However 80 dollar is a steal. Im looking forward to a review.


----------



## Magical Eskimo

If it's an consolation, the Yongnuo 50mm f/1.8 is great. It cost me £45 lol bargain!

I went to Brands Hatch and took some photos on Sunday

https://flic.kr/p/GjsKMkBritGT+F3-4744 by Luke Wanden, on Flickr

https://flic.kr/p/GmmAhUBritGT+F3-4626 by Luke Wanden, on Flickr

https://flic.kr/p/Fv2izKBritGT+F3-3382 by Luke Wanden, on Flickr


----------



## ahnafakeef

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> If it's an consolation, the Yongnuo 50mm f/1.8 is great. It cost me £45 lol bargain!
> 
> I went to Brands Hatch and took some photos on Sunday
> 
> https://flic.kr/p/GjsKMkBritGT+F3-4744 by Luke Wanden, on Flickr
> 
> https://flic.kr/p/GmmAhUBritGT+F3-4626 by Luke Wanden, on Flickr
> 
> https://flic.kr/p/Fv2izKBritGT+F3-3382 by Luke Wanden, on Flickr


I really liked your photo on the Rate This Photo thread.

If it's not too much trouble, could you tell me what technique you used to freeze the subject while blurring everything else out? Thank you.


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ahnafakeef*
> 
> I really liked your photo on the Rate This Photo thread.
> 
> If it's not too much trouble, could you tell me what technique you used to freeze the subject while blurring everything else out? Thank you.


It's called panning - so I use Shutter Priority mode, set to between 1/100th - 1/250th depending on how close/fast the car is, single point focus, and you just follow the car in the viewfinder and take photos


----------



## pcfoo

Cool pans in that album @Magical Eskimo

The Yongnuo 50 1.8 has definitely a place in the market. The price for the F mount is a bit higher than that for the Canon, but it should normalize down with time I think - The canon was introduced in the price range the Nikon is at now, and today you can get it for less than $60 without even ordering through eBay from China.

Might not be a competitor for those that had to have the Nikkor 50 1.8 G, but if it is optically identical to the EF version, adopters might lose an insignificant % of resolution vs. the Nikkor 50 1.8 D and gain a far smoother bokeh, as the D is a bit on the busy side. Flare is an issue , but the 1.8D is again no better.


----------



## Deano12345

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> It's called panning - so I use Shutter Priority mode, set to between 1/100th - 1/250th depending on how close/fast the car is, single point focus, and you just follow the car in the viewfinder and take photos


Nice shots dude ! Planning a trip to brands for BSB when my 200-500 arrives !


----------



## ahnafakeef

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> It's called panning - so I use Shutter Priority mode, set to between 1/100th - 1/250th depending on how close/fast the car is, single point focus, and you just follow the car in the viewfinder and take photos


Thanks. I'll Google panning and see if I can find details on how to execute it.


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Deano12345*
> 
> Nice shots dude ! Planning a trip to brands for BSB when my 200-500 arrives !


Well at least you'll be able to sit back behind the crowds with a lens like that!! They've re-done the standing area at the top of the outside of Druid's corner, it's much better now.


----------



## Echoa

I'd like to join, just got my 550D and am really excited to get using it.

Current gear

Canon 550D
Canon 18-55mm kit lens (from my broken xt)
Minolta Auto Rokkor 58mm f1.4


----------



## Deano12345

I decided I need a slightly more subtle bag than my Lowepro for carrying my equipment around, that and I've outgrown the trusty Flipside 300, and I've more lenses on the way. Buying some foam tomorrow to convert this bag to carry my eventual full setup (2xFF bodies, 1xCSC , 4x zooms, 4x primes, 2 flashes etc) plan is to cut a template out of thick foam for protection but still make this section removable so I can store my gear when I get home too, and use the bag for day to day.

Will post updates to how I'm getting on !


----------



## DamselinDistres

Thinkin of selling my 5dmkiii and mkii to get a Sony a7rii. Then get the shogun external recorder for video. What do you guys think?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Deano12345

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DamselinDistres*
> 
> Thinkin of selling my 5dmkiii and mkii to get a Sony a7rii. Then get the shogun external recorder for video. What do you guys think?
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Very solid choice if its for video ! I get to use A7II's once every couple of months for training and I love them. About the only downside is the battery life but its not like the batteries for them are expensive.


----------



## DamselinDistres

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Deano12345*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *DamselinDistres*
> 
> Thinkin of selling my 5dmkiii and mkii to get a Sony a7rii. Then get the shogun external recorder for video. What do you guys think?
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
> 
> 
> 
> Very solid choice if its for video ! I get to use A7II's once every couple of months for training and I love them. About the only downside is the battery life but its not like the batteries for them are expensive.
Click to expand...

Ah ya that's what I've been told! Battery life is sub-par but as you said, they're not overly expensive. If I could trade my lp-e6s for Sony batteries that be great haha


----------



## Pandora51

There are also some issues with overheating. Not a big problem for short clips and normal temperatures but you should consider this.

*SnapBridge*
Hopefully here are some Nikon users:

As it seems Nikon has failed horribly with SnapBridge. It is the new app from nikon for the D5, D500 and future cameras. It will allow you to transfer / share pictures with a smartdevice and control your camera through wifi.
Unfortunately it will only work with a Bluetooth LE connection. In order to initialize the camera control with wifi you NEED SnapBridge which works, again, only with bluetooth LE.

There are no manual wifi settings in the D5 and D500 anymore and as a result 3rd party apps like qDslrDashboard won't work with new nikon dslr's.
First there are already reports about issues with SnapBridge and secondly the app works only with Android and iOS.

Without qDslrDashboard (which is btw an excellent program so far) there is no second choice. Wifi control with a windows, linux or mac device? Good luck with that in the future.

Im not sure how many people know about this matter yet but I think it is pretty important to share it. I have seen this in a german blog. So it does not make much sense to share the link but you can search for yourself or ask nikon. Especially if you are interested in buying a brand new nikon camera soon and rely on wifi control.
However what Nikon could do is to release a firmware update and enable manual wifi settings again. Pretty much like now.


----------



## KenjiS

I got a 150-600 for my 7D.. Will soon be getting a 7D Mark II I think... the 7D is a bit... outdated now and its taken some hard use in the 7 years I've owned it..i dont feel its operating 100% anymore so time for a new camera..

anyways, pics or it didnt happen right? Heres 4 favorites...

Blue Jay 3 by Trevor H, on Flickr

Miss Bunny 1 by Trevor H, on Flickr

Brown Thrasher 1 by Trevor H, on Flickr

Robin in the Rain 3 by Trevor H, on Flickr


----------



## Dagamus NM

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KenjiS*
> 
> I got a 150-600 for my 7D..\


The depth of field is great for such a long focus lens. Very sharp. f2.8L?


----------



## Echoa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dagamus NM*
> 
> The depth of field is great for such a long focus lens. Very sharp. f2.8L?


well even with a long lens you can narrow the DoF by essentially being "closer" to the subject no? its probably closer to f5 i think, just the appearance of shallower DoF because of the lens being zoomed closer to the subject (could be entirely wrong)


----------



## Dagamus NM

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Echoa*
> 
> well even with a long lens you can narrow the DoF by essentially being "closer" to the subject no? its probably closer to f5 i think, just the appearance of shallower DoF because of the lens being zoomed closer to the subject (could be entirely wrong)


I am guessing the subjects don't allow one to get too close. I was thinking of the Canon 100-600 which is an f4L. Also a $9K lens, too rich for my needs.


----------



## Echoa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dagamus NM*
> 
> I am guessing the subjects don't allow one to get too close. I was thinking of the Canon 100-600 which is an f4L. Also a $9K lens, too rich for my needs.


well you dont have to be physically close thats why i said "close", just be zoomed in so you are visually close to your subject. A friend of mine was talking about it the other day with his lens but his is the 400 f2.8 i think.


----------



## KenjiS

I'm flattered by what you think I have and the aperture you believe i used







I am in NO way rich enough for one of the big white Canon primes...

For future reference you can go to Flickr and see the EXIF data on the shots, Respectively you're seeing, All handheld using OS

Blue Jay:

f/8, 1/200 @ ISO1600, 600mm

Bunny:

f/8, 1/50 @ ISO1600, 600mm

Thrasher:

f/8, 1/200 @ ISO400, 600mm

Robin:

f/8, 1/80 @ ISO1600, 600mm

IN actuality i have this..ignore awful cell phone pictures





Sigma's 150-600mm f/5-6.3 OS Contemporary zoom, Will run you about $990-$1100 depending on deals. Super nice lens(I've owned a LOT of these supertele zooms too for the record) I'm planning to type a full review on (And take some nice, proper product images of, I actually might do this as a video review)

it also does more than birds, Big super teles are GREAT for lots of things

Crocus Blooming by Trevor H, on Flickr

f/8, 1/1000, ISO400, 600mm and a lot of pain laying on the sidewalk trying to get this framed

Now for the depth of field issue! the longer the focal length the more you compress the background, thus f/8 at 600mm is actually still thin, if you look at the full resolution uncompressed images of the birds their entire bodies are actually NOT in focus! You'd need f/11 or so probubly to completely get the bird in focus...


----------



## Dagamus NM

Ahh, I have never worked with longer lenses. I didn't realize how the depth of field changes related to lens length.

Everything I shoot is on the wider end, I have that same macro lens that you have. Love it. Just got the flash for it, was a little frustrated that for $550 Canon doesn't include the adapter rings for the specific macro lenses that they make. So I got it but couldn't connect it without getting the 72-67mm adapter. But the lighting on the shots I have taken with it are quite nice.

I feel you on the pricing of the long primes and even zooms. Photography is a hobby for me. If it were paying I might feel differently. $2,500 is the max I could spend on a single lens or body right now. Maybe when I am done with grad school and I move into a different income bracket this will change but I still don't see $10K for a single lens being feasible any time soon. Especially since it would just be for shooting whatever.


----------



## pcfoo

Well, the number of individuals that own $10K lenses and are neither 1%-ers or specialized pros, is very limited.
But so are the number of $10K class lenses. We are talking Canon's "Big Whites" - and equiv. Nikkors ofc - that many long for (out of curiosity) but far less people can use often enough to make buying them worth it. Renting such lenses for weekend field trips or 1-2 week vacations is actually an excellent proposition, and quite affordable by comparison.

The Sigma 150-600 C, and the equivalent Tamron before it are amazing value for money, no doubt, but if you have $2.5K (preposterous money for most people), you could also do with the great Nikkor 200-500 5.6 VR or the amazing Canon 100-400 L II both of which cost far less and can effectively provide similar if not better results with the 150-600 class lenses, as cropped for the same framing they actually provide similarly sharp images (especially the 100-400 II, as its contrast / sharpness @ 400 is simply in a different ballpark).


----------



## ahnafakeef

If anyone here has experience with studio lights, read on and provide me with your two cents.

I'm planning on setting up a very basic studio setup. I'm currently planning on getting the following equipment.

1. 2x Godox light stands
2. 2x Godox DE-400 studio flashes
3. 2x Godox soft boxes
4. 2x white, shoot-through umbrellas
5. 1x Remote trigger for camera shutter
6. 1x Godox wireless flash trigger (only if necessary)

Question: What are my options when it comes to triggering the flashes? And what is the most recommended/optimum option?

Size of the soft box - 60x60 or 80x80? Is there any disadvantage to getting the bigger one?

Also, could I possibly get a better setup for the same amount of money? If yes, do recommend the names of the parts.

I am new to studio lighting setups. So if you have any suggestions, or believe that I should be concerned about something that I'm not taking into account, do tell.

Thank you.


----------



## pcfoo

Some thoughts / suggestions:

*For triggering* look no further than the Godox / Neewer (fully compatible / same manufacturer) FT-16 system of triggers & the remote of the same family:


I own the V850 line of Speedlights flashes and once up in a lightstand and/or inside a softbox (that won't be an issue with the monolight) changing settings is a pain...well, not with that super reliable remote! The remote is the same, but the receivers come in two flavors: FT-16 has a USB type connector and its for the monolights & bare bulb models. The FT-16s is for the compatible speedlights and has a 4pin propriatary connector. The receivers are powered by the host light. The Trigger / remote needs 2x AAA. You can mix speedlights & monolights of this system in whichever combination, using the same trigger.

*For lightstands:* pretty much all of them will be ok for light monolights / speedlights. I would look into the option for a more expensive, yet far more flexible option like the Fotodiox Pro 3-in-1.
I own this stand and I am pretty happy with it. Helps positioning the strobe / modifier right ontop of your subject with no column in-between the subject & camera. I fill the "sandbag" with bottles of water.



*Modifiers:* Don't go all-out getting everything. If you are after indoor portraits, just go with the softboxes imho. Ok, the umbrellas are cheap, but what are you going to use them for?

For the distances involved in most portrait shooting with softboxes (i.e. as close to the subject as possible), even a speedlight (or 2 ganged in one) can provide enough light for f/5.6~8. A 300-400W monolight should have no issue. I would go with the bigger softbox I will be able to store away without disassembling. Its a huge pain to do over and over.


----------



## Pandora51

Never mind. It is gone.


----------



## Dagamus NM

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Some thoughts / suggestions:
> 
> *For lightstands:* pretty much all of them will be ok for light monolights / speedlights. I would look into the option for a more expensive, yet far more flexible option like the Fotodiox Pro 3-in-1.
> I own this stand and I am pretty happy with it. Helps positioning the strobe / modifier right ontop of your subject with no column in-between the subject & camera. I fill the "sandbag" with bottles of water.


I like the look of that stand. I have been looking at stands to use for a microphone. I want to place the mic up high and out of my frame.


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dagamus NM*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Some thoughts / suggestions:
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> *For lightstands:* pretty much all of them will be ok for light monolights / speedlights. I would look into the option for a more expensive, yet far more flexible option like the Fotodiox Pro 3-in-1.
> I own this stand and I am pretty happy with it. Helps positioning the strobe / modifier right ontop of your subject with no column in-between the subject & camera. I fill the "sandbag" with bottles of water.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I like the look of that stand. I have been looking at stands to use for a microphone. I want to place the mic up high and out of my frame.
Click to expand...

Yes, it can definitely do that. It has no issues supporting my 47"/120cm octabox and a couple of speedlights (others use monolights on it with no issues).
The lighter the load, the more safely you can extend it to its fullest.

It is a heavy duty light-stand + boom, well constructed for the price.


----------



## Magical Eskimo

I met up with a photographer from Poland I speak with online on Saturday for a day out shooting in London. It's great meeting up with other photographers and getting inspiration!

Just a couple from the day out

https://flic.kr/p/HoXjTMLondon-6613 by Luke Wanden, on Flickr

https://flic.kr/p/HhVpaZLondon-6608 by Luke Wanden, on Flickr


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dagamus NM*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Some thoughts / suggestions:
> 
> *For lightstands:* pretty much all of them will be ok for light monolights / speedlights. I would look into the option for a more expensive, yet far more flexible option like the Fotodiox Pro 3-in-1.
> I own this stand and I am pretty happy with it. Helps positioning the strobe / modifier right ontop of your subject with no column in-between the subject & camera. I fill the "sandbag" with bottles of water.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I like the look of that stand. I have been looking at stands to use for a microphone. I want to place the mic up high and out of my frame.
Click to expand...

if youre trying to get a mic high and out of frame and you already own a c-stand and boom but dont have a boom operator go with below. i never go on a shoot without that because sometimes i need my PA to help out with something other than boom operation

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/469810-REG/General_Brand_Boompole_Holder_and_Grip.html


----------



## Dagamus NM

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> if youre trying to get a mic high and out of frame and you already own a c-stand and boom but dont have a boom operator go with below. i never go on a shoot without that because sometimes i need my PA to help out with something other than boom operation
> 
> http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/469810-REG/General_Brand_Boompole_Holder_and_Grip.html


I was just looking at that the other day. I will get one to put my boom pole on. I need another stand so I might go with the one above to be used with whatever.

Another question for y'all. I am looking to add two lenses to my repertoire. I have a $3100 limit.

I am thinking about the Canon 100-400mm II. This can be had for anywhere between $1900 on eBay with no guarantee and most likely no UPC for the $100 rebate to $2100 on B&H with rebate takes it to $2K.

For a second lens I am thinking of the Canon 135mm f2. I would like the 50mm f1.2 but that puts me over the limit. If I could pick up a used one for less than $1K that would be nice too.

If you had money to burn on lenses what would you get?


----------



## pcfoo

The 100-400 II is the latest example of amazing zooms from Canon. Its MTFs are as good as the 70-200 II's at common apertures. So we are not talking one of Canon's best zooms...its like "top 5 AF zooms evar"...This zoom has practically retired the 300 f4 L IS and 400 5.6L fleet out there, and quite a few owners of big whites are leaving them home if they can work with f/5.6 aperture.

It even takes the 1.4x III pretty well.

That said, it is a big & heavy specialized lens. If you are not heavily into wildlife and whatnot, a 70-200 will serve you better as a all-around telezoom. The f4 IS if you want to travel / backpack light, the 2.8 if you need the speed / minimal DOF.

Don't bother with ebay if you canon find it in the $1700 range or less. You can get it refurbished from Canon's USA store for less than $1800, with 1y factoty warranty - like the new one would have. This lens according to Roger Cicala has smaller sample variation than the 70-200 II, so I doubt returns to canon were lemons...and ofc you could return it if it is.

The 135 f/2 is amazing, but MF 135 f/2s from Zeiss and Samyang alike are better in every single way - other than focusing ofc. Many think Canon should replace it "soon".
If you don't have a 70-200 II, again, I would not recomend the 135 f/2. Kinda tight. The 85 1.8 can be a fast lens with great AF for 1/3 the cost. First impressions show that the new Tamron 85 1.8 VC is also great. The 135 will not dissapoint, it is just a bit long for indoors.

At any scenario, I am a big proponent of the used market on those lenses. Refurb @ good prices even better. The 1st depreciation shock is taken by the enthousiasts that thought they would use them but end up selling or returning them - many times unused - is your friend.


----------



## Dagamus NM

Thank you for the suggestion. Unfortunately the lenses I am interested are all not available on the canon site. I went with the 100-400 on B&H as that is what I wanted regardless. I am bidding on a few lenses on eBay. I wouldn't mind having the 180mm f3.5 macro. Let's see if I can get it for $750


----------



## pcfoo

Refurbished lenses come in and out of stock every now and then.

Last week the 100-400 II was in stock, but it doesn't provide you with # of lenses. It could be 1 or 100, and its now gone. Next week you might find more.

If you want the best 1:1 macro longer than 100mm, look into the Sigma 150 f/2.8. The non- OS version is the sharpest, but the latest OS is also better than the aging 180L.


----------



## Dagamus NM

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Refurbished lenses come in and out of stock every now and then.
> 
> Last week the 100-400 II was in stock, but it doesn't provide you with # of lenses. It could be 1 or 100, and its now gone. Next week you might find more.
> 
> If you want the best 1:1 macro longer than 100mm, look into the Sigma 150 f/2.8. The non- OS version is the sharpest, but the latest OS is also better than the aging 180L.


I will look into the sigma. I went with a 24-70 f2.8 as I had been wanting one forever. I really wanted the newer version but perhaps down the road if I find this one displeasing. I somehow doubt that will happen.

I still need a 50mm f1.2 and could see picking up a longer macro too as well as the 135.

I have a decent collection now. For my 60D I have the 18-135mm and the 50mm 1.8. Then for the 6D and 5D3 I have the 16-35mm f/2.8 II, the 24-105mm f4, the 24-70 f2.8, the 100mm f2.8 macro and the 100-400mm II.


----------



## Jiryama

I have been looking for a solid strap system for while I am rock climbing and hiking and I think that this Peak Design Slide Strap would be an awesome option. You can even buy an extra Camera Capture Clip that I could put on the backside of my waist to lock it in while I climb as well or latch it onto the backpack so the heavy weight is attached to it and not my shoulder.



Does anyone have any experience with their products or this strap?


----------



## Dagamus NM

So I went with the Sigma 150mm f/2.8. I bought the updated version for $900. I wish it would be here soon but coming from South Korea it is going to take a minute.

The 100-400 will be here soon though. I am going to shoot some night sky stuff from Chaco Canyon this coming weekend. New moon should allow me to capture some good colors of the Milky Way.


----------



## MistaBernie

For the record, yes, I am still alive.

The Peak Design Slide Strap setup looks fancy. No personal experience with it but if you try it out, do us a favor and tell us about it. My opinion on PD is mostly neutral, haven't heard enough to scare me away but only because I haven't heard all that much.

In other news, I really need to get out and shoot with my new to me 300 f/2.8.


----------



## Artikbot

They seem to be rather up their bumsides, it certainly would be good to get to test some of their equipment they claim to be basically the second coming of Jesus.


----------



## Scott1541

Bit late to the party but I actually quite like the look of that Peak Design strap, but I only discovered it after I'd bought a black rapid and I'm happy with that so there's no point switching.


----------



## Squeeker The Cat

i took that peak designs strap to disneyland this year for 10 days...........its a great strap, not padded so that may push some away, also those little quick connects are sweet!! i also have the peak designs wrist strap and id say maybe 2 times i was bumped and "dropped" my camera that little thing saved my cameras life!! i have their back pack clamp thing too and its really well built but bulky plus i didnt wear my back pack enough to really test it out.


----------



## Unknownm

Bought myself yashica fx3 super 2000 w/ 50mm 2.0 from Victoria, British Columbia "Camera trades". Also purchased 3x 800 colour film.

Planning on pulling @ 400 and pushing @ 1600, first roll will be developed @ normal Asa (800). Any suggestions? Should I push 3200 and pull 200 or is this asking too much?


----------



## pcfoo

Not all color C41 films take pushing / pulling well.

I am guessing the whole idea is for you to test how exactly the film will take +/- 1 stop, but unless you plan on sticking with this film from now one, perhaps it doesn't worth the risk if you plan on shooting those rolls fast, and you want to take your time with it etc (which will mean you will forget that this is an experiment, end up relying on proper results and being bummed if the resulting color shifts etc are too bad).

Ofc if you want to toy with it and you get to rapidly go through the rolls in 1-2 days just to test the results, there is no issue. Getting 1-2 friends to pose for portraits etc, could yield interesting results.
Wear something colorful, as usually saturation and contrast go hyper-realistic and could produce interesting results if lots of color is present already.

800 film is already fast, usually rated as "press film" so I would think its tolerances are not as good as a fine grain, slower film would be - say a Portra 400.


----------



## Artikbot

Hmmm... Film.

I know absolutely nothing about it. I bought an EOS 620 for an absolute steal (so I can use my EF lens) and my grandmother gave me my grandpa's Yashica Lynx 1000, so that should hopefully change in the near future.

Can't wait to shoot some rolls


----------



## Sean Webster

I haven't shot for leisure in like forever...or posted here in like forever. lol

How's everyone? I graduated in May! Still trying to figure out what to do exactly for work...may get a job in IT or open a performance auto shop...or both. Or do something for some SSD/Storage company. IDK for sure yet. AND...I still need to buy a Canon 135 f/2.0 and Sigma 35 f/1.4 Art one day.









Here's a random recent shot:


----------



## Artikbot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> I haven't shot for leisure in like forever...or posted here in like forever. lol
> 
> How's everyone? I graduated in May! Still trying to figure out what to do exactly for work...may get a job in IT or open a performance auto shop...or both. Or do something for some SSD/Storage company. IDK for sure yet. AND...I still need to buy a Canon 135 f/2.0 and Sigma 35 f/1.4 Art one day.


Lol polar opposite here, I've never made any money out of any picture, had a job in IT and resigned from it last week









Word of advice, stay clear of first line technical support! Unless you use it as a stepping stone top move further up, then go for it.


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> I haven't shot for leisure in like forever...or posted here in like forever. lol
> 
> How's everyone? I graduated in May! Still trying to figure out what to do exactly for work...may get a job in IT or open a performance auto shop...or both. Or do something for some SSD/Storage company. IDK for sure yet. AND...I still need to buy a Canon 135 f/2.0 and Sigma 35 f/1.4 Art one day.


I'm pretty much in the same situation, I've finished uni now, waiting on my final grades next week, and if that all goes to plan I'll be graduating in early september







I too still don't have a job yet either









Now I've moved back home the only photography stuff I'll be doing, at least for a little while will be leisure stuff. I was shooting nightclubs and events back in Lincoln, but now that has taken a backseat as I don't have anywhere near the number of connections here. I'd like to start shooting the clubs in my hometown, but so far its seeming pretty hard to break into as a couple of people almost have a monopoly. I'm keeping my eyes open though, so maybe I'll find something in between trying to sort out a normal day job.

Despite being unemployed, I've managed to squeeze in the purchase of a 16-35mm f4... because why the hell not







Coincidentally it should be arriving today.

Edit: It's here


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> Lol polar opposite here, I've never made any money out of any picture, had a job in IT and resigned from it last week
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Word of advice, stay clear of first line technical support! Unless you use it as a stepping stone top move further up, then go for it.


I would only do tech support if I make make my fee of $60 an hour, too many idiots to deal with for anything less than that. lol My friend said the position i am offered would be setting up systems and maintenance and such for like 50K a year, which isnt too bad. I'm just not sure which route to take yet.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> I'm pretty much in the same situation, I've finished uni now, waiting on my final grades next week, and if that all goes to plan I'll be graduating in early september
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I too still don't have a job yet either
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now I've moved back home the only photography stuff I'll be doing, at least for a little while will be leisure stuff. I was shooting nightclubs and events back in Lincoln, but now that has taken a backseat as I don't have anywhere near the number of connections here. I'd like to start shooting the clubs in my hometown, but so far its seeming pretty hard to break into as a couple of people almost have a monopoly. I'm keeping my eyes open though, so maybe I'll find something in between trying to sort out a normal day job.
> 
> Despite being unemployed, I've managed to squeeze in the purchase of a 16-35mm f4... because why the hell not
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coincidentally it should be arriving today.
> 
> Edit: It's here


Nice! Good luck with work. I want to see some nice shots with that bad boy!


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> I would only do tech support if I make make my fee of $60 an hour, too many idiots to deal with for anything less than that. lol My friend said the position i am offered would be setting up systems and maintenance and such for like 50K a year, which isnt too bad. I'm just not sure which route to take yet.


Doubt you can jump into a $60/hr job easily straight out of school. Unless ofc you start your own thing, with all the risks involved.

Get the $25/hr job ($50K/y) and work you way up. Having a steady job is a big asset to negotiate up from, instead of waiting for the "perfect" opportunity.
If something better comes up, use it as leverage to bump your wage on either side. Never walk out without asking if the current employer can sweeten the deal for you to stay (unless ofc you are sick of it/him/her).

If you are young and ambitious, "do your own thing" in your spare time (i.e. work 2 jobs, one for yourself, while having something to fall back to).

This is how most photographers do it really


----------



## aksthem1

With any sysadmin type jobs you will get sucked into your work whether your like it or not. Depending on the size you won't just be a sysadmin, but do it all type of guy.

If it's a plugged into the wall then people assume you can fix it. Though it paves the way for more specialized IT/IS fields that can pay pretty well. Especially if the company will pay you to get certs.


----------



## TheGeneralLee86

I Just bought a Canon T6S with the 18 to 135mm Lens and am loving it so far now on to finding out how to do some professional photography classes that don't cost a ton of money!


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheGeneralLee86*
> 
> I Just bought a Canon T6S with the 18 to 135mm Lens and am loving it so far now on to finding out how to do some professional photography classes that don't cost a ton of money!


I recommend this http://www.r-photoclass.com/


----------



## TheGeneralLee86

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> I recommend this http://www.r-photoclass.com/


Thanks! a lot looking at it now. I greatly appreciate it.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

If anyone is interested, I'm selling my Canon 35mm f/1.4L:

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=1462810


----------



## Dagamus NM

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*
> 
> If anyone is interested, I'm selling my Canon 35mm f/1.4L:
> 
> http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=1462810


What PC upgrades are you looking for?


----------



## Artikbot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dagamus NM*
> 
> What PC upgrades are you looking for?












That said I'm off to tear my Auto Cosinon 35mm f/2.8, I can just about spot some cleaning marks and some fungus. Damn these pesky previous owners.


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That said I'm off to tear my Auto Cosinon 35mm f/2.8, I can just about spot some cleaning marks and some fungus. Damn these pesky previous owners.


That's one thing I'm paranoid about with buying used lenses now. A bit of dust or dirt, fine, the lens is still perfectly usable, but with fungus there's always the possibility that it is still active and grow more. Then on top of that add the possibility that spores may spread the fungus to other lenses or even the camera itself. I've read that its pretty unlikely, and there are spores all around anyway, but personally that's a risk I wouldn't like to take.

I got my 70-200 with a little patch of fungus on the front element, which the seller completely failed to mention. I decided to keep it and send it in for repair though as I got it very cheap anyway, this might be the reason, I don't know. That was about a year ago now and touch wood the lens has been fine ever since.

Every lens I've bought used since then I've always inspected thoroughly with a torch as soon as it came, any fungus and they're straight off back to the seller as its something I will specifically ask about now. It's not a risk I want to take now I have more expensive lenses. A bit of fungus and that £700 lens is now worth a fraction of that, on top of the above concerns.

E: ION I cleaned my sensors today







No more dust... well maybe a tiny bit remaining at f/22, but good enough for me


----------



## Artikbot

I've returned all lens so far that had fungus and weren't advertised as so.

This Auto Cosinon was £25 shipped and is some 45 years old, so I was expecting some degree of imperfection.

It's an awesome little lens anyway so I'm not fussed at all.

My more expensive glass (anything autofocus and the Zeiss 135mm, basically) I like in perfect condition.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dagamus NM*
> 
> What PC upgrades are you looking for?


Well I actually already got it, a 980 Ti. Not looking for anything else at the moment.


----------



## Dagamus NM

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*
> 
> Well I actually already got it, a 980 Ti. Not looking for anything else at the moment.


You know you want water cooling gear to go with that









I can't interest you in an 800GB Intel 750 PCIE SSD, the EK waterblock for said SSD both brand new in box?

I also have some 64GB 2133MHz DDR3, 64GB 2800MHz DDR4, 32GB 2800MHz DDR4 memory kits. The 32GB are also BNIB. Some 480GB intel 730 SSDs, Lepa 1600W PSUs, Platimax 1350W PSU. Tons of fans. 200mm, 140mm noiseblockers, 140mm cougars, mayhems dyes, tons of EK and bitspower fittings most new, some used. Lots of aquacomputer stuff. A corsair h110 bnib too.

I am about done with all of my builds for a while. Well, I do have a couple of CL cases coming at some point but there are no additional major components going in.

I have the 24mm rokinon for astrophotography, but the 35mm you have would be a better multipurpose lens to carry out to dark sky places.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dagamus NM*
> 
> You know you want water cooling gear to go with that
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I can't interest you in an 800GB Intel 750 PCIE SSD, the EK waterblock for said SSD both brand new in box?
> 
> I also have some 64GB 2133MHz DDR3, 64GB 2800MHz DDR4, 32GB 2800MHz DDR4 memory kits. The 32GB are also BNIB. Some 480GB intel 730 SSDs, Lepa 1600W PSUs, Platimax 1350W PSU. Tons of fans. 200mm, 140mm noiseblockers, 140mm cougars, mayhems dyes, tons of EK and bitspower fittings most new, some used. Lots of aquacomputer stuff. A corsair h110 bnib too.
> 
> I am about done with all of my builds for a while. Well, I do have a couple of CL cases coming at some point but there are no additional major components going in.
> 
> I have the 24mm rokinon for astrophotography, but the 35mm you have would be a better multipurpose lens to carry out to dark sky places.


Tempting, but I have to pass! Lots of good hardware you have. I actually had to make a choice (mostly because of the wife







): get a new GPU plus possibly a new mobo, CPU, and RAM, or a new GPU and a new pistol. I went with the second option. Now I'm one EVGA 980Ti FTW and one Beretta PX4 Storm .45 ACP richer.







What I'm trying to say is I really need the cash. Thanks for the offer though. If you can swing it, I might drop the price a bit. PM me if interested.


----------



## Dagamus NM

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoneTomorrow*
> 
> Tempting, but I have to pass! Lots of good hardware you have. I actually had to make a choice (mostly because of the wife
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ): get a new GPU plus possibly a new mobo, CPU, and RAM, or a new GPU and a new pistol. I went with the second option. Now I'm one EVGA 980Ti FTW and one Beretta PX4 Storm .45 ACP richer.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What I'm trying to say is I really need the cash. Thanks for the offer though. If you can swing it, I might drop the price a bit. PM me if interested.


I feel you brother. Good call on the Beretta .45 though.

I am straight outta lowcash for a little bit. In the last month I have bought four lenses. 24mm rokinon f1.4, 150mm sigma f2.8 macro, 24-70mm canon f2.8L, and the 100-400mm canon big guy.

Monday night is the new moon so Tuesday morning at 0300 I am going to try and get some good Milky Way shots.

I ordered a cool focusing tool for astrophotography. Creates a starburst diffraction pattern on a bright star. The central peaks will be to the left or right of the star's center when out of focus. The peaks will be right on the middle top and bottom when focused. I will just use live view to focus. Turn it off and use my shutter release.

I don't yet have that so I will probably setup my 11" video monitor on live view for focusing manually. I hope it works. If it doesn't I will learn why and try again next month. I should have it well figured out by December/January when the lack of humidity in the air will give me even better shots from dark sky locations.


----------



## GoneTomorrow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dagamus NM*
> 
> I feel you brother. Good call on the Beretta .45 though.
> 
> I am straight outta lowcash for a little bit. In the last month I have bought four lenses. 24mm rokinon f1.4, 150mm sigma f2.8 macro, 24-70mm canon f2.8L, and the 100-400mm canon big guy.
> 
> Monday night is the new moon so Tuesday morning at 0300 I am going to try and get some good Milky Way shots.
> 
> I ordered a cool focusing tool for astrophotography. Creates a starburst diffraction pattern on a bright star. The central peaks will be to the left or right of the star's center when out of focus. The peaks will be right on the middle top and bottom when focused. I will just use live view to focus. Turn it off and use my shutter release.
> 
> I don't yet have that so I will probably setup my 11" video monitor on live view for focusing manually. I hope it works. If it doesn't I will learn why and try again next month. I should have it well figured out by December/January when the lack of humidity in the air will give me even better shots from dark sky locations.


I love the Canon 24-70, such a great workhorse lens. What body are you using? Are you using a startracker? Wish I still had the drive to shoot more, hence why I'm selling everything I have in my sig.


----------



## Dagamus NM

I wish I had a star tracker. I'm carrying the 5Dmk3 daily with the 24-70 on it. I use the 6D for shooting the skies. Color reproduction seems better, good low light performance. The 5D3 is better at focusing situations. I have a 60D for a third body.


----------



## Sean Webster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Doubt you can jump into a $60/hr job easily straight out of school. Unless ofc you start your own thing, with all the risks involved.
> 
> Get the $25/hr job ($50K/y) and work you way up. Having a steady job is a big asset to negotiate up from, instead of waiting for the "perfect" opportunity.
> If something better comes up, use it as leverage to bump your wage on either side. Never walk out without asking if the current employer can sweeten the deal for you to stay (unless ofc you are sick of it/him/her).
> 
> If you are young and ambitious, "do your own thing" in your spare time (i.e. work 2 jobs, one for yourself, while having something to fall back to).
> 
> This is how most photographers do it really


Well, I doubt I would get a $60 an hour job under someone too lol. Right now my fee is roughly $60-100 an hour depending on the jobs I do around here in Boca for PC work, but this is with me just doing things on my own. It isn't a 9-5, just a few jobs a week here and there. I also compensate by doing some photo work here and there as well as writing SSD storage reviews. My friend and I also do car work and tuning, but that is mostly him. Getting a full time job is going to be a sigh of relief or I am going to over burden myself with it plus the work I do now lol.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aksthem1*
> 
> With any sysadmin type jobs you will get sucked into your work whether your like it or not. Depending on the size you won't just be a sysadmin, but do it all type of guy.
> 
> If it's a plugged into the wall then people assume you can fix it. Though it paves the way for more specialized IT/IS fields that can pay pretty well. Especially if the company will pay you to get certs.


Yeah, I am hoping to get started in the next few months and get my certs paid for by them as well. If not, I can always pay for them if needed since I still live at home. I wouldn't mind being a do it all type of guy, tho it can be tiring at times having to battle problems at different ends of the spectrum. Specializing in storage systems deployment or something like that would be my dream.

BTW, anyone get some good shots this 4th? I was in Miami and saw 4 different fireworks clusters from where I was, but forgot my tripod.  I took this shot of the port tho:


----------



## Marin

Huh, this threads still here. Cool.


----------



## Dagamus NM

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sean Webster*
> 
> BTW, anyone get some good shots this 4th? I was in Miami and saw 4 different fireworks clusters from where I was, but forgot my tripod.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I took this shot of the port tho:


I need to see how my shots of the sky came out. The new moon was on the 4th as well so I figured I would try and get some shots of the milky way through the light polluted city glow sky. I probably should have gotten out of bed earlier but I was tired. I got up at about 0430 and with how much summer light there was on the edge of the sky I realized that I should have probably gotten up at 0200. 20 second exposures at f2.0 with iso set at 1600 was probably grossly overexposed. I need to look at the raw images in lightroom. I was using a field monitor for focusing but I am not sure how to see the shot after the exposure on the monitor. It is for shooting video but the live viewer through the HDMI worked well for focusing on the stars that I could see.

So this month's lesson was to look up the sunset and sunrise times and set my alarm clock for an hour before the mid point so I can get my gear setup. If I keep at it each new moon I should be ready for the shots I really want in December.


----------



## Conspiracy

holy crap. Marin appears out of nowhere lololol


----------



## bluedevil

Hey thinking of selling my Sony OSS Emount 50mm F1.8 lens for a Sigma 30mm F1.4. Thoughts? Tired of the 1.5x crop making my 50mm a 75mm focal length.

Sigh...


----------



## pcfoo

I feel you with the 50mm x 1.5 being a bit long...but I will through a curve ball @ you, and suggest the Sigma 30mm f/2.8 EX DN (art version or not, its the same)...yes, it is not 1.4, but its super sharp @ center even wide open, spectacular for the price when stopped down and $170 or so BNIB...you get to keep your 50 for portrait work and/or for w/e you might go FF.









You get your G.A.S. satisfied without compromising too much (f/2.8 is plenty fast), the FL is great for walk-around and its pretty compact as a bonus! (I love my XF 27mm f/2.8, but I still wish Sigma would make their 19/30/60 DN lenses available for Fuji X).


----------



## bluedevil

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> I feel you with the 50mm x 1.5 being a bit long...but I will through a curve ball @ you, and suggest the Sigma 30mm f/2.8 EX DN (art version or not, its the same)...yes, it is not 1.4, but its super sharp @ center even wide open, spectacular for the price when stopped down and $170 or so BNIB...you get to keep your 50 for portrait work and/or for w/e you might go FF.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You get your G.A.S. satisfied without compromising too much (f/2.8 is plenty fast), the FL is great for walk-around and its pretty compact as a bonus! (I love my XF 27mm f/2.8, but I still wish Sigma would make their 19/30/60 DN lenses available for Fuji X).


Yeah I thought about the Sigma f2.8 Art, dunno I want dat bokah.


----------



## Ithanul

Well, I luck out. Got a early B-Day gift. GoPro Hero 3+ Silver, just not sure what to do with it.

On the other hand, I am debating about getting a new camera body. Whats anyone's thoughts of upgrading from a Nikon D90?

Anyway, share a shot from a car show I went to.


----------



## bluedevil

MMmmmm I think this just sealed the deal.







Specifically, around 14:20 he says that he prefers the 1.4 over the 2.8 ART.


----------



## pcfoo

Its a great lens, no doubt, but dat size...especially with the hood its ridiculous on a Axxx body...

I like my primes to be compact...if its remotely the size & weight of a good f/2.8 zoom, I'd pick the zoom anyday for 90+ % of the cases.
And if a lens corners itself in such a niche, well, it is phased out of my bag.


----------



## Pandora51

The Sony 35mm f1.8 is not an option? 5mm to much or just not good enough?

Im all for f1.4 / 1.8 as long the weight is fine but really don't sell your 50mm f1.8. You might regret it someday.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ithanul*
> 
> On the other hand, I am debating about getting a new camera body. Whats anyone's thoughts of upgrading from a Nikon D90?


Your lens setup is good enough? The D90 is a good camera but an upgrade might be worth it for better AF, ISO performance, dynamic range and features like wifi.
The D7200 is a very good camera and propably the best choice as an upgrade (aps-c)
D5500 is superb aswell but has a different feature set and everything above the d7200 is fullframe or the d500.


----------



## pcfoo

The D7100 is also a good APS-C option that is a considerable upgrade, offers practically the same IQ as the D7200 / later 5xxx 24MP sensors, just lacks in buffer vs. the D7200.
The buffer depth is irrelevant if you are not shooting action stuff, and the cost for a used D7100 often qualifies it as a steal ( I was close to getting one myself to full around with being a Canon user!).


----------



## Ithanul

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pandora51*
> 
> Your lens setup is good enough? The D90 is a good camera but an upgrade might be worth it for better AF, ISO performance, dynamic range and features like wifi.
> The D7200 is a very good camera and propably the best choice as an upgrade (aps-c)
> D5500 is superb aswell but has a different feature set and everything above the d7200 is fullframe or the d500.


Well, I got to play around with some of the newer cameras. Kind of like the fact they have more focus points to choose from and seem to do a bit better in lower light.

Just not sure which would be a good route from my D90. I mostly use my Nikon DX 18-300mm 1:3.5-5.6G ED lens. I do have one fix lens and two other lenses.


----------



## Zaxbys

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ithanul*
> 
> Well, I got to play around with some of the newer cameras. Kind of like the fact they have more focus points to choose from and seem to do a bit better in lower light.
> 
> Just not sure which would be a good route from my D90. I mostly use my Nikon DX 18-300mm 1:3.5-5.6G ED lens. I do have one fix lens and two other lenses.


If all your glass is DX the D500 is a great option. Its a great all around performer with fantastic ISO performance. I own one and find myself in most situations grabbing it over my D750. Also if you ever grab any FX lenses then they look fantastic on the D500 as well.


----------



## Ithanul

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zaxbys*
> 
> If all your glass is DX the D500 is a great option. Its a great all around performer with fantastic ISO performance. I own one and find myself in most situations grabbing it over my D750. Also if you ever grab any FX lenses then they look fantastic on the D500 as well.


Alright, I look into that one. I think I recall that one getting mentioned a lot on some arcticles when looking around at camera bodies.

Though, if I do get the D500, about what is a fair used price to sell my D90 for?

Any who, the plants are in full bloom. Decided good time to take the camera out for a short bit. The 100+F weather a bit to hot to stay out in for long periods of time.


----------



## Marin

Another shoot wrapped.


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> Another shoot wrapped.


You shoot just for a hobby or a living?


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> You shoot just for a hobby or a living?


Living.


----------



## Scott1541

My photography might be going somewhere again.... maybe







I'm sort of getting in with some guy who runs a nightclub/event photography business, and also runs a little studio in town. I worked a couple of nights last week for him, it went alright and he said I could probably have those nights regularly if I wanted. The pay is a little lower than what i'd like at the minute, but there's room for negotiations as it depends on how much work he has to do fixing photos, etc.. I've also been told by his girlfriend that he's been having problems with photographers coming and going, this could possibly be a bargaining chip.

I don't know how long I'd end up doing this for, but at least its something to do until I find a proper job... which isn't going to be just yet as I've still not pulled my finger out and got applying for stuff







I'm way more relaxed about this than I should be.

In different photography related news I've made friends with a few guys (and girls) from a certain urbex website, we went out exploring last week and I've been invited along on their next trip out. That's going to be drain exploring though, which isn't something I've done before but it looks interesting. I kind of regret selling the D7000, 10-20 and cheap tripod now, that would've been perfect kit to take down a drain in case it gets damaged. There's no way I'm taking my D600 & 16-35 down there, I'll have to borrow my mums D5100 instead, which happens to be my old camera anyway.


----------



## Pandora51

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ithanul*
> 
> Alright, I look into that one. I think I recall that one getting mentioned a lot on some arcticles when looking around at camera bodies.
> 
> Though, if I do get the D500, about what is a fair used price to sell my D90 for?


Im not familiar with prices in the us but 200-250 bucks propably? However you should keep it as backup camera if possible.

Just a slight warning about the D500: Keep it mind it has crippled wifi. Besides from that it seems like the best aps-c dslr to date.


----------



## Ithanul

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pandora51*
> 
> Im not familiar with prices in the us but 200-250 bucks propably? However you should keep it as backup camera if possible.
> 
> Just a slight warning about the D500: Keep it mind it has crippled wifi. Besides from that it seems like the best aps-c dslr to date.


I could care less about wifi on a camera. I don't even have a smartphone.







So, not really missing anything much.
If you wondering about why I don't have a smartphone. I dislike phones in general. Don't ask me why, I just straight up dislike phones even land line ones.

Yeah, I may just keep the D90 or give it to my parents. Right now, have to figure out a good place to nab a D500. Good thing the GTX 1070 and GTX 1080 did not impress me. Can use some of that money on the camera instead after I fix my truck first of course.







Stupid thing seems like to act up when I have to get ready for long trips.


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ithanul*
> 
> I could care less about wifi on a camera. I don't even have a smartphone.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So, not really missing anything much.
> If you wondering about why I don't have a smartphone. I dislike phones in general. Don't ask me why, I just straight up dislike phones even land line ones.


Richard Stallman alert







On a more serious note I've only ever used the wifi feature on my D7200 once, and I've had that about 15 months now. I do have a smartphone, but I'd much rather wait until I get home to edit/upload photos


----------



## Pandora51

Yep there are not so many people who might use it but regardless it could be an issue for some. Wifi is not only great for pulling off photos but for remote control. (with tablet or notebook)
It is a pretty great feature for timelapse and similar tasks.

Also possible with cable but well wifi is standard by now and alot more convenient. 3rd party apps like qDslrdashboard are very useful.
However this is not possible with the d500. You need an android phone and bluetooth le for remote control via wifi. 3rd apps will not even work.. (current state of the matter)

I have read alot about people loving their d500 but coming from a D7xxx, D5xxx or D750 the new "wifi" caught them off-guard.


----------



## Ithanul

Well, I hardly use wifi since I don't even carry around tablets, laptops, etc. Only time I use an electronic is my desktop at home. I just not into lugging electronics around on me. On very rare occasions my 3DS may get lugged around, but that is even very rare for me to do.

Funny thing, because I usually go about without stuck to looking at tablets, phone, etc. I see all the silliness others do daily. Like people walking into poles, etc. Which right now is occurring a lot atm.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pandora51*
> 
> You need an android phone and bluetooth le for remote control via wifi. 3rd apps will not even work.. (current state of the matter)


I hate that crap so freaking much. I be looking sometimes at some mini drones, but blasted things need a stinking smartphone and app to fly them. Pisses me off. What happen to that being a option instead of a main requirement and having a good old fashion remote radio controller.


----------



## Dagamus NM

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> Richard Stallman alert
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On a more serious note I've only ever used the wifi feature on my D7200 once, and I've had that about 15 months now. I do have a smartphone, but I'd much rather wait until I get home to edit/upload photos


I rarely use the wifi on my camera but when I do it is quite handy to have. Transfer to my iPhone and share immediately. I have a canon 6d I do this on but same thing really.


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ithanul*
> 
> I could care less about wifi on a camera. I don't even have a smartphone.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So, not really missing anything much.
> If you wondering about why I don't have a smartphone. I dislike phones in general. Don't ask me why, I just straight up dislike phones even land line ones.
> 
> Yeah, I may just keep the D90 or give it to my parents. Right now, have to figure out a good place to nab a D500. Good thing the GTX 1070 and GTX 1080 did not impress me. Can use some of that money on the camera instead after I fix my truck first of course.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Stupid thing seems like to act up when I have to get ready for long trips.


So you do care about wifi on a camera?


----------



## Ithanul

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> So you do care about wifi on a camera?


No. Like I said, I don't really use wifi. So I don't care if the camera has it or not.

On my current cameras I just take the SD card out put it in my USB stick card reader and go.


----------



## serothis

Personally I like wifi on my camera.

The problem I have with usb sdcard readers is that they so easily lost. I don't keep it attached to my phone. and my tablet (Pixel C) uses a usb-c connection so I need two different card reader depending on which device I have on me at the time. Even when you do have it, having to juggling 4 items (phone, sd card reader, sd card, camera) just to show someone 1 picture on a better screen is colossal pain in the butt.

On the other hand, just turn on wifi, throw the camera over your shoulder, whip out your phone/tablet and download the picture. Done.

My only complaint about wifi (on my camera) is that it's horrifically slow. transferring one image is fine but multiple take an unseemly long time. That's where usb sd card readers shine. When i'm on trips where I don't have access to my main computer, this is where I use the sd card readers the most.


----------



## Ithanul

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *serothis*
> 
> Personally I like wifi on my camera.
> 
> The problem I have with usb sdcard readers is that they so easily lost. I don't keep it attached to my phone. and my tablet (Pixel C) uses a usb-c connection so I need two different card reader depending on which device I have on me at the time. Even when you do have it, having to juggling 4 items (phone, sd card reader, sd card, camera) just to show someone 1 picture on a better screen is colossal pain in the butt.
> 
> On the other hand, just turn on wifi, throw the camera over your shoulder, whip out your phone/tablet and download the picture. Done.
> 
> My only complaint about wifi (on my camera) is that it's horrifically slow. transferring one image is fine but multiple take an unseemly long time. That's where usb sd card readers shine. When i'm on trips where I don't have access to my main computer, this is where I use the sd card readers the most.


I don't put my pics on my phone. Hate trying to show off pics on small screen. Drives me nuts. So instead, at home I use my USB stick which stays near my desktop at all times to off load to my 3TB HDD. If I need to put it on something mobile it goes onto the USB 128GB stick. Or depending if someone wants to look at it on their phone. I have a dual 32GB stick that can do both full size USB and mini.


----------



## pcfoo

For pros that are marketing actively through social media, and want to get at least a couple of shots on FB or Instagram before or at least "within the hour" of guests in weddings & events, easy linking to a phone makes for convenience. It is important for the pro to get out the pic liked / shared the most, the fastest possible.

Although WiFi is great in theory for that, I do like card readers more because of speed and I would think a OTG cable (android) + card reader or a lighting -> SD card reader (iphone) would work more reliably. Fall back to WiFi if you are sure which pic you want or you've forgot/lost it in the moment...

WiFi makes for great remote controlling capabilities tho...I love it with my 6D + DSLR Controller, EOS remote is also ok.


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ithanul*
> 
> No. Like I said, I don't really use wifi. So I don't care if the camera has it or not.
> 
> On my current cameras I just take the SD card out put it in my USB stick card reader and go.


But you said you could care less about wifi, so that implies you already care a bit.

What I'm getting at is, you should say "I couldn't care less" instead lol


----------



## Ithanul

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> But you said you could care less about wifi, so that implies you already care a bit.
> 
> What I'm getting at is, you should say "I couldn't care less" instead lol


Grammar ain't my strong point.


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ithanul*
> 
> Grammar ain't my strong point.


To be fair a lot of americans seem to say "I could care less" for some reason, no idea why


----------



## Ithanul

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> To be fair a lot of americans seem to say "I could care less" for some reason, no idea why


Well, I am not good at it. It is straight up my weakness. Reason I have always dislike English class, not for trying to learn it. Just that I suck major at it even when I try. Plus, I had to take speech classes when I was younger. Though, sit me in a Science and Math class, and that is easy for me to do math problems all day and balance chemistry equations.

Odd ball thing, my reading compression is very high. But if people talk to me, I usually have to have them repeat depending on what they are trying to say to me.


----------



## Dagamus NM

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ithanul*
> 
> Well, I am not good at it. It is straight up my weakness. Reason I have always dislike English class, not for trying to learn it. Just that I suck major at it even when I try. Plus, I had to take speech classes when I was younger. Though, sit me in a Science and Math class, and that is easy for me to do math problems all day and balance chemistry equations.
> 
> Odd ball thing, my reading compression is very high. But if people talk to me, I usually have to have them repeat depending on what they are trying to say to me.


Yeah, Bama is not exactly where proper English is spoken. To be fair, England isn't either.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> For pros that are marketing actively through social media, and want to get at least a couple of shots on FB or Instagram before or at least "within the hour" of guests in weddings & events, easy linking to a phone makes for convenience. It is important for the pro to get out the pic liked / shared the most, the fastest possible.
> 
> Although WiFi is great in theory for that, I do like card readers more because of speed and I would think a OTG cable (android) + card reader or a lighting -> SD card reader (iphone) would work more reliably. Fall back to WiFi if you are sure which pic you want or you've forgot/lost it in the moment...
> 
> WiFi makes for great remote controlling capabilities tho...I love it with my 6D + DSLR Controller, EOS remote is also ok.


What app are you using for a controller? EOS remote is not my favorite.


----------



## Ithanul

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dagamus NM*
> 
> Yeah, Bama is not exactly where proper English is spoken. To be fair, England isn't either.


It no matter who is speaking to me in English. I have a hard time especially when some one is trying to tell me a lot of information by word of mouth.

Pffff Bama, try understanding hill folks.....even us Alabamians have a hard time understanding them.


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dagamus NM*
> 
> Yeah, Bama is not exactly where proper English is spoken. *To be fair, England isn't either.*


Can confirm


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dagamus NM*
> 
> Yeah, Bama is not exactly where proper English is spoken. To be fair, England isn't either.


oi m8 u wot m8 dats my ends ur dissin


----------



## Dagamus NM

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> oi m8 u wot m8 dats my ends ur dissin


Que?


----------



## Artikbot

Even I know what that means and I'm not even British!

(okay I might be cheating a little here)


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dagamus NM*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> For pros that are marketing actively through social media, and want to get at least a couple of shots on FB or Instagram before or at least "within the hour" of guests in weddings & events, easy linking to a phone makes for convenience. It is important for the pro to get out the pic liked / shared the most, the fastest possible.
> 
> Although WiFi is great in theory for that, I do like card readers more because of speed and I would think a OTG cable (android) + card reader or a lighting -> SD card reader (iphone) would work more reliably. Fall back to WiFi if you are sure which pic you want or you've forgot/lost it in the moment...
> 
> WiFi makes for great remote controlling capabilities tho...I love it with my 6D + DSLR Controller, EOS remote is also ok.
> 
> 
> 
> What app are you using for a controller? EOS remote is not my favorite.
Click to expand...

Mentioned it in the post but I guess you've missed it: https://dslrcontroller.com/ is what I use and like.
I have no experience with its iOS version, but the android one I use and like on both phones & tablets.


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> Even I know what that means and I'm not even British!
> 
> (okay I might be cheating a little here)


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dagamus NM*
> 
> Que?


no worries me ol china.


----------



## Dagamus NM

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Mentioned it in the post but I guess you've missed it: https://dslrcontroller.com/ is what I use and like.
> I have no experience with its iOS version, but the android one I use and like on both phones & tablets.


I looked over the iOS version. I already have the lightning to USB connector for listening to music. If it really is as simple as connecting to my camera that would be sweet.

I have a field monitor that is the same size as my iPad pro, but supplying power can be annoying. I would rather use my iPad when actually out in the field. Indoors the field monitor is fine.

According to the dslrcontroller site I need to jailbreak the ipad. No idea why.


----------



## pcfoo

Oh, wasn't paying attention on the iOS simply because I don't own a iOS device for quite some time.

I am guessing the app is not officially launched in Apple's app store, so you cannot install it unless you device is "jailbroken" / unlocked.

I'd rather buy a 7-8" Android tablet for <$100 than jailbrake my $1000 iPad Pro (including accessories and crap, if I had one) just to use DSLRcontroller









Yes, at least in case of the Android OS, the process is just as simple as connecting a micro-USB cable in the phone/tablet to mini-B on the camera side.

I use a 3" OTG cable (micro USB male to Type A female) and any Type A male to Mini-B male cable (like the one that came with the camera). Than fire DSLRcontroller and it assumes control over the camera, turning on live view. You can tap-select the focusing point on the device's screen.

USB connection is notably faster than WiFi.


----------



## Artikbot

All this fancy talk and I use a £3 Canon IR remote and a cronograph, lol.

Sometimes I think I'm like a photography dinosaur.

Carrying CPLs to car meets and shoreline shoots, ND grads to hiking trips, using only primes on a full frame, the IR remote...


----------



## pcfoo

Hey there, I am using a $6 Chinese copy wired remote for my SLRs & my 10 stop ND shots / tripod shots etc.
Don't make us sound like super snobs









But shooting architecture with a TS-E on LiveView using a 7~10" screen instead of the camera's ~3", or the optical viewfinder, is actually a different experience. Even phones offer 2x the size of screen these days.
And you can expand the utility to self portraits, weird angles (far better than a tilt screen, you can be anywhere, I've used it with 15' USB cables and/or WiFi @ 30+ yards/m away, but that's another story), astro, etc.

Same as reviewing images on a big screen while still practically "in camera". And being able to do this "tethered" shooting on the go, with a device you probably already have and minor additional expenses, aided by a $7 app and a $1 OTG adapter (how much was your IR remote?)...well, it is hard to resist trying.


----------



## Artikbot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Hey there, I am using a $6 Chinese copy wired remote for my SLRs & my 10 stop ND shots / tripod shots etc.
> Don't make us sound like super snobs
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *But shooting architecture with a TS-E on LiveView using a 7~10" screen instead of the camera's ~3"*, or the optical viewfinder, is actually a different experience. Even phones offer 2x the size of screen these days.
> And you can expand the utility to self portraits, weird angles (far better than a tilt screen, you can be anywhere, I've used it with 15' USB cables and/or WiFi @ 30+ yards/m away, but that's another story), astro, etc.
> 
> Same as reviewing images on a big screen while still practically "in camera". And being able to do this "tethered" shooting on the go, with a device you probably already have and minor additional expenses, aided by a $7 app and a $1 OTG adapter (how much was your IR remote?)...well, it is hard to resist trying.


There you go, a single bit of glass worth more than my entire gear









I kid, I kid, I've got fancy gear, just paid pennies for it.


----------



## Marin




----------



## MistaBernie

love me my 100 and my 135... should probably actually use them from time to time LOL


----------



## Sparhawk

I just picked up the new Tamron 90mm F2.8 Macro, it's wonderful so far.







Good for portraits, and macro which saves me money.

Here's a test shot from yesterday.


In other news, I haven't posted here in a LOOONG time. So Hi. Again.


----------



## silvrr

Anyone have any input on if a graphics card helps in PS and Lightroom? When Lightroom (my primary use) first got gpu acceleration it didn't provide much help. There have been a lot of updates since and I haven't seen much new news on it.

I have the subscription so latest version of both programs. Computer is in my sig under shrinkage if any details are needed.


----------



## pcfoo

@silvrr , not much has changed.
PS and LR remain poorly optimized for multiple threads and GPU acceleration. Adobe is doing a much better job with Premiere in these aspects, but maybe it is just the nature of the beast (video trans-coding) that allows for better parallelism /and favors hardware that multitasks.

I would not really sweat it on a GPU upgrade just for LR/PS - I don't see much in your Shrinkage rig as far as a GPU goes, so I am guessing you are using the intel IGP.
In that case, any $100 GPU will benefit a bit, but none will make the World's difference. If you don't plan on gaming or doing something else with that GPU, I would not bother at all.

It seems you have a good cooler, O/C your CPU as far as you can with your current mobo and leave it at that.
What I see as perhaps being an issue is your RAM (8GB?), which depending on the size of you RAW files might be too little.

A compatible i7 s1155 would not do much...maybe a 10-15% performance gain when you creating previews or exporting multiple images. A decent O/C on the i5 will give you much more than a stock i7 would. If you already have a clocked i5, perhaps the i7 @ same clock, would be a slightly better upgrade than the GPU.


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> @silvrr , not much has changed.
> PS and LR remain poorly optimized for multiple threads and GPU acceleration. Adobe is doing a much better job with Premiere in these aspects, but maybe it is just the nature of the beast (video trans-coding) that allows for better parallelism /and favors hardware that multitasks.
> 
> I would not really sweat it on a GPU upgrade just for LR/PS - I don't see much in your Shrinkage rig as far as a GPU goes, so I am guessing you are using the intel IGP.
> In that case, any $100 GPU will benefit a bit, but none will make the World's difference. If you don't plan on gaming or doing something else with that GPU, I would not bother at all.
> 
> It seems you have a good cooler, O/C your CPU as far as you can with your current mobo and leave it at that.
> What I see as perhaps being an issue is your RAM (8GB?), which depending on the size of you RAW files might be too little.
> 
> A compatible i7 s1155 would not do much...maybe a 10-15% performance gain when you creating previews or exporting multiple images. A decent O/C on the i5 will give you much more than a stock i7 would. If you already have a clocked i5, perhaps the i7 @ same clock, would be a slightly better upgrade than the GPU.


Thanks.

Ive got 16GB, my sig must be out of date. Its overclocked at 4.2 GHz and that is about as far as my chip goes without a lot of voltage.


----------



## Marin

Current gear after selling some stuff. Need to get a 5DMKIV/5DSR along with a 24-70II.


----------



## Scott1541

I've been thinking that I need another full frame body lately, but it won't be happening for a while. Grey market prices have increased, and used prices too to an extent in the wake of brexit and other stuff that's way over my head







Good for selling, not so good for buying.

In related news I took the plunge and took my 16-35 to the nightclub last night, paired with the D600. It was an experience to say the least... darker viewfinder as its only f/4, and the general ultra-wide craziness in a dark venue kept me busy. I'm quite liking the photos though, I think its going to become my regular setup from now on.


----------



## Artikbot

Well excited to see the new 5D4!!

Even if I won't own one for the next... 5 years? 6?


----------



## Dagamus NM

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> Well excited to see the new 5D4!!
> 
> Even if I won't own one for the next... 5 years? 6?


ISO goes to 204,800? If that translates to better low light focusing then that would be interesting. DIGIC7 will be the biggest thing here I think. 30MP is cool but not sure what difference that makes aside from zooming in super far post exposure.

I wonder how the pixel pitch is affected?

Anyhow, it will be a good time for people to pick up a 5D3. The magic lantern support on it is awesome. As long as the 5D4 has a single digic processor which it should then magic lantern will be available before too long. Probably a year or so. Maybe I will pick up another 5D3. I would love a third FF to shoot with.


----------



## Artikbot

And to think that my mind was blown when I went from usable ISO 800 on the 450D to usable ISO 3200 on the 5D2... Dayum.

Although in all fairness I have absolutely no need for a better body. Like, none at all. Zero.

I'm arguably more excited to see if Canon will release a decent APS-C EOS M...


----------



## Dagamus NM

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> And to think that my mind was blown when I went from usable ISO 800 on the 450D to usable ISO 3200 on the 5D2... Dayum.
> 
> Although in all fairness I have absolutely no need for a better body. Like, none at all. Zero.
> 
> I'm arguably more excited to see if Canon will release a decent APS-C EOS M...


Canon has confirmed a new EOS M by the end of the year. No idea what all that actually entails but I'm sure you can dig up some info if you look.


----------



## Artikbot

I'd like competitive AF performance and a built-in EVF. Don't care about creative modes, don't care about burst speeds, don't care about video, don't care about flappy tilty screens.

All I need is a good AF system, an EVF with high refresh rate and full manual with rear button focusing.

...which might be reasonable to expect since they say it's a 'prosumer' EOS-M body.


----------



## Marin




----------



## pcfoo

Most FF sensors, including low light "monsters" like the A7S, fall apart after ISO 6400-12800 roughly. The fact that you can "select" higher ISOs doesn't mean anything...the D5 has ISO 3 million (highest selectable in any camera right now), but is not the best high-ISO performer (or that close to being).

What is "usable" is a rubber band, based on the user. Some are willing to accept horrible (exaggerating here) colors, noise etc as long as they get the shot, others look at FF cameras @ ISO 800 and say I wish I could shoot that with less. Remember that most people still think their iphones/smartphones have the best cameras "evar". Criteria vary.

What is really happening is that we are pushing the boundary of "bad, not good" 1-2 stops every other generation of sensors...what was barely passable @ ISO 1600, became 3200 and now 6400. Maybe. ISO 400~800 are actually closer to "don't even think & go for it" than before, but higher than 1600 is still "avoid it if possible"...regardless of camera. The rest is there for marketing hype, and/or for extreme applications. For some might be there for video applications where most still shoot @ 2~8MP, not 20-30.

@Marin, I bet the ISO 6400 of that sucks...and stuck with a 90mm f/4...how unfortunate


----------



## Dagamus NM

Agreed. Interpolation of signal to noise ratio is what is important and this is where the digic7 processor playing with upgraded firmware shines.

For shots of the night sky I am finding that I have to keep ISO at 1600 or less with the 5D3. The 6D seems less noisey at 1600 so I just use the 6D for the night sky.

I am more excited at the prospect of getting another 5D3 on the used market than anything else. I shot a wedding recently and used three bodies. With the lenses I wanted to use, the aps-c was a pain in the arse.

With a 5D3, 6D, and 60D I took my 24-70, 100mm macro, and the 100-400. I used the 24-70 on the 5D3, the 100-400 on the 6D and the 100mm macro on the 60D.

It was ok, but aside from shots far away the macro didn't get used much. It was not a paid gig, more of a lesson for myself in a real setting. I have a lot to learn.

I went to Carlsbad Caverns the weekend before last and shot with the 24-70, 5D3, sirui k40x ball head on a modified tracker 2 tripod. Heavy and made me wish I had brought a wider lens. I was worried that my 16-35 would not have been sharp enough but in retrospect I should have taken it. The tripod and camera were heavy enough. I wasn't about to carry a bag with other gear plus I needed to be able to chase and catch my three year old. I found that I really had wished that I had an L-bracket to mount the camera in portrait as a lot of the objects were close and tall. Plenty of wide panoramic shots as well but the ones I found myself annoyed with not getting as well as I would have liked would have benefitted from an L bracket.


----------



## pcfoo

My Greek background has weddings & christenings alike happening almost exclusively indoors, in dimly lit churches, usually with no artificial lighting allowed.
FF cameras are uncontested, given you can afford the cost and weight of the glass, as with cameras like the 6D or a used 5D2, bodies are not insanely more expensive than a good APS-C option.

APS-C handheld in low light cannot really shine without really fast glass...if you want zooms that pretty much limits you to Sigma's 18-35mm f/1.8 and 50-100mm f/1.8 DC pair. That will bring you almost inline with a FF kit with f/2.8 zooms, and although far from cheap, both cost ~ as much as a 24-70 f/2.8 alone. Of course regardless of sensor size, having 2x bodies, 1 each dedicated to your standard & tele zooms respectively is making a huge difference.

I have used a EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS to cover such events with both a 20D and a 50D, but it was tough, and ofc 10y later that is still the fastest / best low light APS-C lens from Canon.








I been shooting pro-bono for friends that didn't care for fully pro coverage, so I never bought extra gear for that.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> @Marin, I bet the ISO 6400 of that sucks...and stuck with a 90mm f/4...how unfortunate


*120mm f/5.6


----------



## pcfoo

Hmm...impossible to tell the difference








(tho that 5.6 is readable if you look for it, FAIL!)


----------



## Artikbot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> My Greek background has weddings & christenings alike happening almost exclusively indoors, in dimly lit churches, usually with no artificial lighting allowed.
> FF cameras are uncontested, given you can afford the cost and weight of the glass, as with cameras like the 6D or a used 5D2, bodies are not insanely more expensive than a good APS-C option.
> 
> APS-C handheld in low light cannot really shine without really fast glass...if you want zooms that pretty much limits you to Sigma's 18-35mm f/1.8 and 50-100mm f/1.8 DC pair. That will bring you almost inline with a FF kit with f/2.8 zooms, and although far from cheap, both cost ~ as much as a 24-70 f/2.8 alone. Of course regardless of sensor size, having 2x bodies, 1 each dedicated to your standard & tele zooms respectively is making a huge difference.
> 
> *I have used a EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS to cover such events with both a 20D and a 50D, but it was tough, and ofc 10y later that is still the fastest / best low light APS-C lens from Canon.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *
> I been shooting pro-bono for friends that didn't care for fully pro coverage, so I never bought extra gear for that.


Loved mine. Too bad I needed the monies to buy a better 50mm and a 28mm for the 5D2 when I upgraded earlier on this year.

It's even more saddening that there's no real FF alternative... The 24-70 could be it, but it's too short and WAY too heavy. The 24-105 is a stop slower... And there really isn't a 24-105 f/2.8 (I don't want to imagine the sheer size of it)


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Hmm...impossible to tell the difference
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (tho that 5.6 is readable if you look for it, FAIL!)


And the fact that MF only has that length.


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Hmm...impossible to tell the difference
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (tho that 5.6 is readable if you look for it, FAIL!)
> 
> 
> 
> And the fact that MF only has that length.
Click to expand...

Woa, I was convinced that the 90mm was actually a MF lens, just factory adapted to EF and other 35mm formats. Standing corrected facing the wall..








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> 
> 
> Loved mine. Too bad I needed the monies to buy a better 50mm and a 28mm for the 5D2 when I upgraded earlier on this year.
> 
> It's even more saddening that there's no real FF alternative... The 24-70 could be it, but it's too short and WAY too heavy. The 24-105 is a stop slower... And there really isn't a 24-105 f/2.8 (I don't want to imagine the sheer size of it)
Click to expand...

Tamron & Nikon are producing 24-70 f/2.8s with image stabilization, so it is certainly possible to have a EF-S 17-55 IS equivalent.
What is saddening is how expensive the said Nikon 24-70 VR is vs its optical performance. The Tamron 24-70 VC is not that sharp for its price, but certainly a far better value at half the price of the Nikon...

Perhaps we were spoiled with the latest 16-35 f/4 IS/VR lenses from Nikon/Canon, and the superb 70-200L IS II, 100-400L II, Tamron 10-30 VC etc zooms that pretty much fooled us to believe that stabilization can be added without real compromises...unless standard zooms are the only exception









btw Nikon fanboys, I would be willing to bother myself with the different ergonomics should I was to switch, but given the limitations of 2/3 of the "holy trinity of Nikkor zooms", and their salty price, I would be super disappointed. It is weird that their best lens in the Trinity is the niche 14-24.
Nikon should pick up their game with their most popular "pro" zooms as they did with their bodies. Unless ofc the momentum for selling those is sufficient - much like it is for Canon having slightly inferior sensors - and they don't care as much.


----------



## Artikbot

The lack of IS on wide angles or even short teles doesn't really bother me to be honest. Hand-holding a 70mm at 1/25 isn't the end of the world unless you're running and gunning.

So from that perspective, the 24-70 isn't too bad. But I simply cannot justify what Canon asks for it.


----------



## Marin

Gotta pay for that quality.


----------



## Artikbot

Indeed... The more recent L glass is extremely well built. Makes anything else made by Canon look like a Tonka truck.

Alas.


----------



## Dagamus NM

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> Indeed... The more recent L glass is extremely well built. Makes anything else made by Canon look like a Tonka truck.
> 
> Alas.


I am very happy with my Canon 24-70. Bought it used and it is flawless. Prior to it I had been using the 24-105 f4 kit lens. While it is a decent lens, it annoys me to no end that there is not a focal length brake. Walking with it on a strap results in the lens extending out all of the way and it drives me nuts. The 24-70 doesn't have a brake but the lens extends inside the hood so the length doesn't change. 16-35 movement is internal. EF-S lenses don't weight enough for it to be a concern and the 100-400 has a proper brake.

Does the 70-200 have the brake on it? Probably the only other zoom I am considering.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dagamus NM*
> 
> Does the 70-200 have the brake on it? Probably the only other zoom I am considering.


It's internal so it doesn't need one.


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> The lack of IS on wide angles or even short teles doesn't really bother me to be honest. Hand-holding a 70mm at 1/25 isn't the end of the world unless you're running and gunning.
> 
> So from that perspective, the 24-70 isn't too bad. But I simply cannot justify what Canon asks for it.


The higher the resolution of your sensor and the resolving power of your lens, the more obvious camera shake becomes.
Again, what is "acceptably good" varies greatly from person to person, but even 1/125s is iffy for tack sharp results @ 70mm FOV, and subject movement will be an issue, unless it is a posed portrait where people are trying to remain still.

The EF 24-70 f/2.8 II is better to keep shutter speeds up, the EF 24-70 f/4 IS is better if you care for total low-light capabilities as the IS accounts for far more than a single stop of extra light.

The EF 24-70 f/2.8 II is expensive, but still relatively competitive with all equivalents:

Tamron SP 24-70mm Di VC - $1,300
Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L II - $1,800
Nikon 24-70mm f/2.8G ED - $1,800
Nikon 24-70mm f/2.8E ED VR - $2,400
Sony FE 24-70mm f/2.8 GM - $2,150

The Sony is the latest in this class and the only that comes close to the 24-70 II performance. One slightly edging the wide end, the other the long end. Both are BIG and EXPENSIVE. Note that the latter is true for the Nikons too, only those perform worse, and even after the price reduction for the non-VR variant, this is disappointing for a company that over and over and over gets praised about their optics by die-hard Nikonians. Seems like a one-way love.

It is also worth noting that the 24-70 II is available as a refurbished product with full warranty directly from Canon USA (sorry, don't follow other regions) for the price of the Tamron. You can also buy any of the above used for a much better price (I bought mine used, but refurb with 1y warranty and the right to return would be the same $ roughly).


----------



## Dagamus NM

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> It's internal so it doesn't need one.


Sweet. This will be my next lens.


----------



## Artikbot

At any rate though, I'm going to be moving again in the coming months, so while now I feel the 28mm is too narrow for what I shoot most, it might soon become a secondary bit of glass in favour of the 50mm (again).


----------



## Magical Eskimo

God dammit stop talking about gear! Post more photos!!1!!11!

https://flic.kr/p/JMVzYzFOS-1124 by Luke Wanden, on Flickr

https://flic.kr/p/JwhH8zFOS-1299 by Luke Wanden, on Flickr

https://flic.kr/p/HERzsiBHHM-6875 by Luke Wanden, on Flickr


----------



## Artikbot

Kden


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> Kden


ooo very nice! Got a bit of atmosphere in that.


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dagamus NM*
> 
> Sweet. This will be my next lens.


Do it, 70-200 2.8s are teh secks







I don't think there is such thing as a bad 70-200.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> God dammit stop talking about gear! Post more photos!!1!!11!


I have no problem talking gear as long as it doesn't turn into a pissing contest







Although saying that I shall post this photo you may have already seen on my flickr







(I know Artik has)


----------



## Artikbot

I did, and I loved it!









Also yep, talking about gear is unfortunately in the blood of the amateur photographer. And the pros as well, it's just they can control themselves a bit better than n00bs like myself haha


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> God dammit stop talking about gear! Post more photos!!1!!11!


Okay, some of my stuff.

Need to update my site with more work once the campaigns run.


----------



## Artikbot

Daaayum! Dat quality son









Do you also do the postproduction?


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> Daaayum! Dat quality son
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Do you also do the postproduction?


Yeah, I handle everything. I have had work recently where I've used stylists but those aren't up yet.


----------



## Artikbot

That is some seriously gorgeous work, it really is


----------



## Dagamus NM

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> Okay, some of my stuff.
> 
> Need to update my site with more work once the campaigns run.


Damn. I am super impressed. I need to get off my ass and practice more.

Those cooling towers on the previous page are rad too. I would like to get shots of the ones in Johanesburg some day.


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> Okay, some of my stuff.
> 
> Need to update my site with more work once the campaigns run.


Great work man, nice stuff!


----------



## LeviathanVI

Hey, camera experts! Any advice for a good camera to start off with? Maybe something in the £300 range? Though I could definitely be persuaded to spend more for the right camera. I'd be using it for capturing some of the crazy sunsets and sunrises we're lucky enough to witness on a daily basis round here, but mainly just the views we see when we're out walking the doges... I live right beside a national park and I feel like the camera on my phone isn't really doing it much justice.


----------



## pcfoo

The long answer could involve DSLRs with kit lenses (mirrorless other than m43 probably are outside your budget), tripods etc...if the "we" involves a spouse/ bf/gf/better half etc, the dedication required to haul, setup etc all this madness might be one-sided and overwelming for part of the "we".

The short answer, involving something less intimidating and far more portable (pocketable even) could be a used Sony RX100 or Canon G9X. If you are really into it, a tripod and full manual controls could also be used to do more elaborate work, but you can also snap away as you would with your phone, only this much bigger sensor + lens combo will yield far better results.

EDIT: for virtually any camera, including DSLRs with heavy lenses, check the Manfrotto PIXI Mini Tripod...it is super sturdy for its size and can fit in a pocket / purse / small bag easily.


----------



## LeviathanVI

Aah, yes. I suppose I forgot to mention my preferences about size and weight. Something fairly portable would be preferable. I don't think my girlfriend would overly mind the tripod situation, but her bag is always bursting at the seams and I'm not a handbag kinda girl myself... Way too much commitment for me. I'd like something I could carry around with me a lot, so that it's to hand when the countryside decides to slap us in the face with it's beautiful.

I'll certainly take a look at both of those suggestions. Thanks for the reply! =]


----------



## Artikbot

An EOS 100D maybe? You get the same performance as an EOS 700D on the smallest DSLR with interchangeable lens Canon has ever made (and I don't think Nikon makes anything smaller either).

The price is also in the bracket you're considering. Around £300 with the kit 18-55 IS STM lens, neck strap, charger and battery.

Since you're in Britain, I suggest you drop by the closest Jessops and give it a try. It's almost always in stock as a demo unit since it's quite a popular body.

My aunt has one and I'm seriously tempted to replace my secondary 450D with it, since it's so tiny and so light.


----------



## LeviathanVI

Oooooh. That looks very fancy. I'm amazed that so many people say it's light, it doesn't look light at all. I really like the look of it and will definitely follow your advice.
Think there's a Jessops in Reading as well, so we'll stop off at it when we're there next week.

It's also nice to know that there's a shop nearby that caters to it.. I'll definitely be needing lens advice down the road.


----------



## Artikbot

You'll be amazed at how much lighter a DSLR feels in your hands than it does judging it by its weight! That SL1 is so light it's almost strange to handle (coming from someone who lugs around a 5D Mark II).

The guy at my local Jessops (Bath) had a tendency to sell UV filters and other malarkey, but there was also a girl that shot drift events for a living that was super knowledgeable about her stuff (there's more to that story as well... @Magical Eskimo







)

They're definitely good people if you set your grounds clearly.


----------



## LeviathanVI

Yeah, I think I'm going to go for the EOS 100D with the 18-55mm IS STM Lens! However, I'm considering getting 24mm fixed focal length lens too. I did some reading that suggested that would be the best lens for what I want to do.

Also, the more I do research on landscape and nature photography, the more appealing a tripod becomes.


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Wheeeyyy Reading! They're good in there. Don't see many other people from Reading on here.

If you wanna do landscape properly it might be worth getting a decent tripod, don't get a cheap one though it'll just be unstable and let you down.


----------



## LeviathanVI

South East Massive!

I'm actually closer to the Jessops in Eastbourne, but we're off to Reading to see friends next week.

Gotcha, get a decent tripod.

Thanks for all the advice, guys.


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LeviathanVI*
> 
> Yeah, I think I'm going to go for the EOS 100D with the 18-55mm IS STM Lens! However, I'm considering getting 24mm fixed focal length lens too. I did some reading that suggested that would be the best lens for what I want to do.
> 
> Also, the more I do research on landscape and nature photography, the more appealing a tripod becomes.


+1 On the tripod. Although we've been though that...

The EF-S 24 is great all-around-almost pocketable choice, much like the EF 40 for FF cameras, and of course you can get great landscapes with either, but if you are after dramatic framing & landscapes, probably the EF-S 10-18 is more appropriate and not much more expensive (although your original budget is prob. blown long time now!).


----------



## Marin

Current product setup. Upgrades going to be a 5DSR,5DMK4 or A7RII or whatever they announce.


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> Current product setup. Upgrades going to be a 5DSR,5DMK4 or A7RII or whatever they announce.


Noice..... I kind of want to get myself an 85 1.4, but I don't really have a use for one at the minute. It definitely wouldn't be a Zeiss though... more like samyang on my budget









The guy I work for doing nightclub photography needs to up his camera game, he's borrowed my D600 twice in the last couple of weeks as his 5D MkII broke. He's had some pretty big product jobs come in and wanted something better than his 550D that he usually uses for the generic clothing shoots with (which he does a lot of). It's a slight inconvenience at the minute but he's putting a lot of money into his new studio, so helping him out a bit now will mean I can use the studio in the future







He has some good plans as well, so maybe a little further down the line is could actually become a proper second job, but for now I'm just doing the nighclub stuff while my lazy ass finds a day job


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> Noice..... I kind of want to get myself an 85 1.4, but I don't really have a use for one at the minute. It definitely wouldn't be a Zeiss though... more like samyang on my budget
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The guy I work for doing nightclub photography needs to up his camera game, he's borrowed my D600 twice in the last couple of weeks as his 5D MkII broke. He's had some pretty big product jobs come in and wanted something better than his 550D that he usually uses for the generic clothing shoots with (which he does a lot of). It's a slight inconvenience at the minute but he's putting a lot of money into his new studio, so helping him out a bit now will mean I can use the studio in the future
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He has some good plans as well, so maybe a little further down the line is could actually become a proper second job, but for now I'm just doing the nighclub stuff while my lazy ass finds a day job


I dunno how you can do nightclub photography man. Far too high stress ahahaa


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> I dunno how you can do nightclub photography man. Far too high stress ahahaa


Honestly, its not too bad most of the time. The club I'm at now are pretty relaxed, they just want 100+ photos per night, but other than that they just let me get on with it. The clientele though, that's where most of the annoyances come from... "my arm looks fat", "you're too close", "let me check you've deleted that", "one more, one more (x5)", etc.....

The too close one I've been getting a lot more now I've started using the 16-35, people have no idea just how wide 16mm is on full frame. Getting close really helps deal with the smoke though, and looks a bit different so I like to get in peoples faces


----------



## Artikbot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> Honestly, its not too bad most of the time. The club I'm at now are pretty relaxed, they just want 100+ photos per night, but other than that they just let me get on with it. *The clientele though, that's where most of the annoyances come from... "my arm looks fat", "you're too close", "let me check you've deleted that", "one more, one more (x5)", etc....*.
> 
> The too close one I've been getting a lot more now I've started using the 16-35, people have no idea just how wide 16mm is on full frame. Getting close really helps deal with the smoke though, and looks a bit different so I like to get in peoples faces


Lol, I shot my brother's band last saturday, I used the 28mm and the 50mm for the vast majority of the gig, some random people were asking me to take pictures of them and were generally cool about it, but this one guy walked up to me and went...

'I know you didn't take that picture.'

'Of course I did, why?'

'Cause I didn't see any flash.'

'Have you seen the flash pop at any time during the concert? Besides, there isn't even a flash on this.'

*with a gigantic poker face* 'Whatever dude.'

I honestly was like... what the crap is wrong with these people?


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> Honestly, its not too bad most of the time. The club I'm at now are pretty relaxed, they just want 100+ photos per night, but other than that they just let me get on with it. The clientele though, that's where most of the annoyances come from... "my arm looks fat", "you're too close", "let me check you've deleted that", "one more, one more (x5)", etc.....
> 
> The too close one I've been getting a lot more now I've started using the 16-35, people have no idea just how wide 16mm is on full frame. Getting close really helps deal with the smoke though, and looks a bit different so I like to get in peoples faces


Isn't that one of the main rules of club photography though - Never review the photo on the back of the screen or they'll want to look at it as well. Unless you got chimping addiction or something









@Artikbot I'll admit I'm a little envious of your FF


----------



## Dagamus NM

5D IV email from adorama and B&H photo came out this morning for preorder.

I will not be purchasing one of these. I have a bad case of Gear Acquisition Syndrome as it is. So I really need to be selective and mull it over for quite awhile. I was thinking I could pick up a cheapish used 5D III as a third FF but now that I think about it I think about it I could probably pick up a 5D II for even cheaper.

Hmm, I think that I will mull it over awhile longer. Got all of my primary gear fitted into a couple of pelican cases. 1510 and 1650. A 1710 will be coming at some point for my lights and tripods / video shooting stuff.

Unless I see a great deal on a 50mm f1.2, 70-200mm f4 IS, or 5D II/III I am done with gear.

I need to spend more time processing pictures anyhow.


----------



## Artikbot

I used to be a picture review whore, these days I don't even have the feature enabled. So much easier and gives me another handful of pictures' worth of battery life back.

@Magical Eskimo pls, your 70D is more expensive than my 5D2, and your glass is better than mine so cut your whinging









Also, 5D4 already bound to release? Schweeet. I guess I'll upgrade to a 5D3 or a 5DSR in 4 or 5 years then.


----------



## Dagamus NM

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> I used to be a picture review whore, these days I don't even have the feature enabled. So much easier and gives me another handful of pictures' worth of battery life back.
> 
> @Magical Eskimo
> pls, your 70D is more expensive than my 5D2, and your glass is better than mine so cut your whinging
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also, 5D4 already bound to release? Schweeet. I guess I'll upgrade to a 5D3 or a 5DSR in 4 or 5 years then.


Yup. A couple of new lenses too. 24-105 f4 IS Mark II, 16-35 f2.8 mk3, and something else that didn't excite me.

The 6D II is supposed to be coming out soon too. Not sure what they are modifying over the original. Probably slightly faster, maybe 5D3 speed for processing and more AF points. Just not too many that it competes with the 5D4.

It will probably just be a 5D3 with wifi and GPS, less AF points and still gimped with a single SD slot.

The 5D4 seems to have adopted with wifi and GPS. Not sure how they fit it in with the pentaprism of the 5D models. Don't really care. I use the wifi on my 6D sometimes. The GPS is pretty cool. Magic Lantern allows for disabling of the GPS when the camera is in standby mode. This is something Canon did not do and caused people to just turn it off altogether as it eats batteries.


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> 'I know you didn't take that picture.'
> 'Of course I did, why?'
> 'Cause I didn't see any flash.'
> 'Have you seen the flash pop at any time during the concert? Besides, there isn't even a flash on this.'
> *with a gigantic poker face* 'Whatever dude.'
> 
> I honestly was like... what the crap is wrong with these people?


At least the last few years you can shoot video with your DSLR...

You would not believe how far back people could roll their eyes back in the day when I had to explain that my DSLR doesn't shoot video...or uses the screen to frame...the "awe" impact of its size would wither away so fast...









--

5D4 = respect...nice machine.
Now push ppl to get rid of their 5DSRs (for cheap)!


----------



## Mazda6i07

These just arrived last night pretty cool, good job Nzxt, just bring that price down.

https://flic.kr/p/KyrJBw

https://flic.kr/p/KyrH2C

https://flic.kr/p/L51Jrhhttps://flic.kr/p/L51Jrh


----------



## Marin

5D4 is whatever. Gonna see if Sony brings anything to the table otherwise it'll probably be a 5DSR.


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> Lol, I shot my brother's band last saturday, I used the 28mm and the 50mm for the vast majority of the gig, some random people were asking me to take pictures of them and were generally cool about it, but this one guy walked up to me and went...
> 
> 'I know you didn't take that picture.'
> 'Of course I did, why?'
> 'Cause I didn't see any flash.'
> 'Have you seen the flash pop at any time during the concert? Besides, there isn't even a flash on this.'
> *with a gigantic poker face* 'Whatever dude.'
> 
> I honestly was like... what the crap is wrong with these people?


I can relate, but for me its mostly the opposite of that, people thinking I took a photo when I didn't. In the past I've had someone run up to me after thinking I took a photo, then demanding I show the photo I didn't take. In Lincoln I got a guy kicked out of a bar as a result of something similar









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> Isn't that one of the main rules of club photography though - Never review the photo on the back of the screen or they'll want to look at it as well. Unless you got chimping addiction or something


I try not to but a lot of people expect to have a look. I don't know why because most of them are pretty drunk, and when uploaded the photos won't look that much like they do out of camera anyway.


----------



## Pandora51

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> 5D4 is whatever. Gonna see if Sony brings anything to the table otherwise it'll probably be a 5DSR.


Waiting for something interesting from Nikon. D620, D820 or somthing similar.
The D500 and the 105mm f1.4 seems pretty epic but nothing for me at all









Also I have to admit the 5DIV looks like an amazing camera (based on stats).


----------



## pcfoo

All current cameras are amazing...and I count older models inline with the 5D3 in that too...improvements in still photography, but also videography are incremental.

Any tool in the $ range of the 5D4 has to be good, and it is...I understand why it doesn't blow ppl's socks off, but what does/did? Tech is more mature now, and initial excitement withers fast as the diminishing returns of "new" stuff is realized...like the MILC crazyness withered quite a bit, and the "omg we don't have DR with canon sensors" withered (outside of forums) etc...in the long run, those with disposable income and the need to jump systems will do it anyways to satisfy their G.A.S. with the latest F.O.T.M. whatever. Then jump back / elsewhere again and again.

Also - as far as $ goes and people complaining about the price for the new 5D (which is the same as what all the 5s before it were), I will just mention that the D500, a $2,000 body, was awarded prosumer camera of the year 2016-2017 by EISA...sure, they wanted to give something to Nikon for this amazing piece of kit, but "prosumer" @ $2,000? It is clearly a professional cropped body, with a price to match (i.e. the most expensive mainstream APS-C DSLR over a decade)...oh, sorry, only FF cameras are "pro", so a cropper has to be amateur-ish...


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pandora51*
> 
> Waiting for something interesting from Nikon. D620, D820 or somthing similar.
> The D500 and the 105mm f1.4 seems pretty epic but nothing for me at all
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also I have to admit the 5DIV looks like an amazing camera (based on stats).


Not switching to Nikon, have too many L lenses and don't feel like selling them off.


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pandora51*
> 
> Waiting for something interesting from Nikon. D620, D820 or somthing similar.
> The D500 and the 105mm f1.4 seems pretty epic but nothing for me at all


The thing I'm waiting for Nikon to release is a 16-35mm f/2.8. Canon are on the 3rd revision of theirs, meanwhile us Nikon users only have the f/4. People can't keep clinging onto the 17 year old dinosaur 17-35 2.8 forever.... we need a real replacement. I've been using my f/4 a hell of a lot recently, and its a great lens, but I can't help but think how much better it would be if it came in a f/2.8 version as well, for more flexibility, brighter viewfinder, etc..


----------



## Artikbot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> Not switching to Nikon, have too many L lenses and don't feel like selling them off.


Plus that cheap flange adaptor compatibility... That's a big plus for me to stay on the EF system.

...along with compatibility with my film body of course. Although I don't use it all that much to be fair.

Why can't the silly Sigma 50-100mm f/1.8 be compatible with full frame bodies? I'd be all over that.


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> The thing I'm waiting for Nikon to release is a 16-35mm f/2.8. Canon are on the 3rd revision of theirs, meanwhile us Nikon users only have the f/4. People can't keep clinging onto the 17 year old dinosaur 17-35 2.8 forever.... we need a real replacement. I've been using my f/4 a hell of a lot recently, and its a great lens, but I can't help but think how much better it would be if it came in a f/2.8 version as well, for more flexibility, brighter viewfinder, etc..


Most Canon users I know that have tried the 16-35L 4 IS - which for all intents is not really better than the 16-35 4 VR - along with a recent FF body that really lets you play with higher ISOs without too many compromises, have left their 16-35L 2.8 IIs when shooting weddings, events etc.
UWA f/2.8 lenses often have serious falloff / not really flat field @ f/2.8, so people are using them stopped down anyways. Modern f/4 zooms are really good in this respect. For staff that are not "Reeeeeeallly" low light limited - e.g. super low light or astro etc - f/4 works fine.

Filters also work better / are cheaper @ 77mm vs 82, so people shooting landscapes that don't like to blend a zillion shots, opt for them over wider/faster options that don't accept filters at all or heavily vignette with them...

Nikon made a great lens in the 14-24 f/2.8...its "holly trinity", people love it, guess Nikon prefers to push that instead. Ofc the range is pretty limiting for things other than landscapes / astro / UW interiors etc.

If you are not adhered to the Nikkor line, why not try the much cheaper and equally amazing Tamron 15-30 VC? Seems to have everything - or nearly everything. Better zoom range than the 14-24 for all-around, practically just as good optics, effective VC tech and ofc much cheaper. Just as the 14-24, doesn't accept filters unless you are prepared to invest in and carry those monster rectangular ones with adapters etc...


----------



## Artikbot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> If you are not adhered to the Nikkor line, why not try the much cheaper and equally amazing Tamron 15-30 VC?


Christ almighty, just had a quick look around tinternets and it looks seriously impressive.

Equally impressive is its price tag though, Twelve-hundred dollars is a notch steep.

Ah well. Carry on dreaming.


----------



## pcfoo

Historically Nikon's top glass is more expensive than equivalent Canon L glass...so with the pricing of the latest 16-35L III being what it is, and ofc the precedent of the 14-24, any new UWA f/2.8 Nikkor zoom would make the Tamron look even more competitive!

Cheap it'll never be called, but there is lots of value...if you are after a kg (or two) of such glass.


----------



## Artikbot

I would if I was a professional.

But I'm not so certain things are a bit off-limits









Not like I'm constrained by my current gear at all, though. It's more of a case of GAS than it is anything else. But since I know this, I can stop myself from buying anything!


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Most Canon users I know that have tried the 16-35L 4 IS - which for all intents is not really better than the 16-35 4 VR - along with a recent FF body that really lets you play with higher ISOs without too many compromises, have left their 16-35L 2.8 IIs when shooting weddings, events etc.
> UWA f/2.8 lenses often have serious falloff / not really flat field @ f/2.8, so people are using them stopped down anyways. Modern f/4 zooms are really good in this respect. For staff that are not "Reeeeeeallly" low light limited - e.g. super low light or astro etc - f/4 works fine.
> 
> Filters also work better / are cheaper @ 77mm vs 82, so people shooting landscapes that don't like to blend a zillion shots, opt for them over wider/faster options that don't accept filters at all or heavily vignette with them...
> 
> Nikon made a great lens in the 14-24 f/2.8...its "holly trinity", people love it, guess Nikon prefers to push that instead. Ofc the range is pretty limiting for things other than landscapes / astro / UW interiors etc.
> 
> If you are not adhered to the Nikkor line, why not try the much cheaper and equally amazing Tamron 15-30 VC? Seems to have everything - or nearly everything. Better zoom range than the 14-24 for all-around, practically just as good optics, effective VC tech and ofc much cheaper. Just as the 14-24, doesn't accept filters unless you are prepared to invest in and carry those monster rectangular ones with adapters etc...


True, there aren't a whole lot of differences between f2.8 and f4 for most applications, but one thing I've found is with an f4 lens, vs 2.8 the viewfinder can be noticable darker in lower light situations. Sometimes I can have trouble seeing people in dark places in the nightclub, and have little more than a faint silhouette to compose against

I did consider a Tamron 15-30, but the inability to use filters, and the sheer size of it are problematic. I really need a filter thread, so I can put a piece of glass between my nice expensive glass, and drunk people/their drinks. I had the chance to pick up a 15-30 for £600 at one point, which is exactly what I paid for my 16-35.


----------



## pcfoo

I don't think any 16-35 f/2.8 is going to be "small", but 16-17mm definitely seems to be the widest round screw-on filters are applicable - at least with f/2.8.
Again, you are right, for your niche application it is hard to find something really better than the 16-35 4 VR ... but at least you have that!









Also some pretty nice primes there, so ... you can make it work .... doubt a $2,500 f/2.8 zoom would change your situation ... even if it could accept a screw-on UV


----------



## MistaBernie

16-35 F/4L IS, 24-70 F/2.8L II, 135L.

I should just sell the rest and pay for most of the jeep I just bought.


----------



## Conspiracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> 16-35 F/4L IS, 24-70 F/2.8L II, 135L.
> 
> I should just sell the rest and pay for most of the jeep I just bought.


that looks good for a zoom kit with a 135L. id probaby still want at least a 70-200/4 in the kit just because it doesnt take up much space and its never bad to have laying around. im preparing to probably get rid of a few of my lenses and move back to primes since im doing more DSLR video stuff lately. that new 35LmkII is looking pretty darn good


----------



## pcfoo

Have 16-35L 4 IS & 24-70L II...thinking I could do without my 70-200L f/4 IS if I could replace it with a 100-400L II








Perhaps I will regret it weight-wise on my 3rd or 4th day-long hike with it, but definitely looking forward for the first two


----------



## Dagamus NM

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Have 16-35L 4 IS & 24-70L II...thinking I could do without my 70-200L f/4 IS if I could replace it with a 100-400L II
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Perhaps I will regret it weight-wise on my 3rd or 4th day-long hike with it, but definitely looking forward for the first two


It isn't light, but it has tremendous zoom range and the images it takes are so sharp.

I cannot speak to the 70-200 f/4 as that is one of the lenses that I would still like to add to the repertoire.


----------



## pcfoo

The EF 70-200L f/4 IS is the 1st of Canon's new generation of zooms...it is sharper than the EF 70-200L f/2.8 IS Mark I & at least as sharp as the last non-IS 70-200L f/2.8, second only to "The" 70-200L II.

To stop sounding like a complete fan-boy, and although the f/2.8 arena is clearly dominated by "The" 70-200L II, it appears to be true that all the 70-200 f/4 stabilized lenses out there, meaning Canon, Nikon & Sony are actually very-very sharp and consistent:

https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2016/03/just-the-lenses-the-70-200mm-f4-comparison/

So there is nothing I really miss from my 70-200 quality wise...I actually have a 85 1.8 and just don't use it ... always prefer the ease of the 70-200

I just feel G.A.S.sy and want to try something longer and ... (blah blah, excuses)....


----------



## Dagamus NM

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> The EF 70-200L f/4 IS is the 1st of Canon's new generation of zooms...it is sharper than the EF 70-200L f/2.8 IS Mark I & at least as sharp as the last non-IS 70-200L f/2.8, second only to "The" 70-200L II.
> 
> To stop sounding like a complete fan-boy, and although the f/2.8 arena is clearly dominated by "The" 70-200L II, it appears to be true that all the 70-200 f/4 stabilized lenses out there, meaning Canon, Nikon & Sony are actually very-very sharp and consistent:
> 
> https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2016/03/just-the-lenses-the-70-200mm-f4-comparison/
> 
> So there is nothing I really miss from my 70-200 quality wise...I actually have a 85 1.8 and just don't use it ... always prefer the ease of the 70-200
> 
> I just feel G.A.S.sy and want to try something longer and ... (blah blah, excuses)....


I feel you. I would probably get more use out of the 70-200 f4 IS than the 100-400. The 100-400 is heavy. A lot of glass and body. It is a pleasure to shoot with.

I carry the 24-70 2.8 daily. Probably use the 100mm macro and the 16-35 the most after that. The 24-105 f4 IS is pretty nice other than the lens extending when carrying on a strap. This really bugs me for some reason.


----------



## Artikbot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MistaBernie*
> 
> 16-35 F/4L IS, 24-70 F/2.8L II, 135L.
> 
> I should just sell the rest and pay for most of the jeep I just bought.


My carry-around kit is even skintier. Canon 28mm f/1.8, Canon 50mm f/1.4 and Zeiss 135mm f/2.8









But yeah, if you don't really like or need fast primes, your kit above is what I'd choose as well.


----------



## Marin

Todays setup. Should be fun seeing how my 100L performs on a Red.


----------



## Dagamus NM

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> Todays setup. Should be fun seeing how my 100L performs on a Red.


That is pretty sweet. What are you shooting?


----------



## Artikbot

Bold move by Canon on the 5D4, no CFast slot, SD and CF only!


----------



## ahnafakeef

Hello everyone. Lightroom on my PC feels sluggish even after a fresh OS install. Would upgrading CPU+RAM help? If yes, how much performance increase would I incur with a 6950X as opposed to a 6700K? Thank you.


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ahnafakeef*
> 
> Hello everyone. Lightroom on my PC feels sluggish even after a fresh OS install. Would upgrading CPU+RAM help? If yes, how much performance increase would I incur with a 6950X as opposed to a 6700K? Thank you.


Describle "sluggish"....doing what? Import & create previews? Working on files with the Develop module? Export the finals?

For the most part LR is very badly multithreaded. The 6700K @ stock speeds - if anything - is faster than the 6950X at pretty much anything PS & LR wise, other perhaps than exporting 100s of large RAW files (older versions or LR would not even utilize hex-cores to 100% when exporting, ppl where exporting 2x jobs in parallel to make it happen).

If you overclock the 6950X you might cover some ground, but if your excuse for getting it is LR, you really need to double check what's wrong with you current "Fresh" install of either Win or LR itself.

Better off to getting a large SSD and move your working catalog / files to that.
My


----------



## ahnafakeef

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Describle "sluggish"....doing what? Import & create previews? Working on files with the Develop module? Export the finals?
> 
> For the most part LR is very badly multithreaded. The 6700K @ stock speeds - if anything - is faster than the 6950X at pretty much anything PS & LR wise, other perhaps than exporting 100s of large RAW files (older versions or LR would not even utilize hex-cores to 100% when exporting, ppl where exporting 2x jobs in parallel to make it happen).
> 
> If you overclock the 6950X you might cover some ground, but if your excuse for getting it is LR, you really need to double check what's wrong with you current "Fresh" install of either Win or LR itself.
> 
> Better off to getting a large SSD and move your working catalog / files to that.
> My


I meant working on the Develop module.

Also, I don't yet have a 6700K. I'm still running a 3770K.

For LR to benefit from an SSD, would the RAW files have to be on the SSD as well? If not, I already have a 250GB SSD which might suffice depending on how much space is required for ideal performance.

Thanks for the quick response.


----------



## pcfoo

The LR catalog is doomed to get slower and slower the more entries you put into it.
Moving your catalog(s) it to a SSD is definitely improving things massively in many fronts, but it remains a LR catalog that will get slower and slower over time - depending of course on the volume of images you produce.

You can further speed up things by using multiple catalogs, one or more of which are temporary "working" catalogs that include all your keywords & organization tools but only a few photo sessions / trips and whatnot, and you use intermittently to develop those photos, then export them either as projects with their own catalogs, or import them into a main catalog for searching through all of them in the future and whatnot.

So big-picture, you have one or more "lean" and fast catalog to work with, and a large "slower" catalog used to search through your whole collection.

There are dozens of LR workflow videos & tutorials that discuss those possibilities, some for free, some for a fee, most serious of those do touch on working catalogs, options of working with or without side-car files etc.

Having the photo-files themselves into the SSD, does speed up things but mostly during the first import & preview building, and the final export process. Most of the develop module's work is happening in RAM / on the previews. Oh, btw, you SHOULD check whether you have preview building enabled on your machine. Full previews give you the best quality to work on, smart previews are smaller / easier to work with slower computers. Having no previews means the develop module is referencing the original file and transcoding between LR & the RAW structure virtually for every silly move on a slider, slowing things down tremendously.

The previews are stored into the catalog - thus it is easy to bloat it up and make it hard to work with if you don't split between working / indexing catalogs etc.


----------



## Artikbot

I wish Lightroom could be used without having it import things anywhere.

I already have a working organisation system and the Lightroom catalog only annoys me.


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> I wish Lightroom could be used without having it import things anywhere.
> 
> I already have a working organisation system and the Lightroom catalog only annoys me.


I'm the same way. I just delete my catalog periodically.


----------



## Artikbot

After much reading I think I'm gonna give DxO Optics a chance. Free trial here we go.


----------



## von rottes

Go ahead and add me I guess..lol Been pointing my camera at stuff since January.










Body:
Nikon D5300

Lenses:
Nikkor 18-55 VR II
Vivitar Series 1 28-90 f/2.8-3.5 *Komine
Vivitar Series 1 70-210 f/3.5 *Kiron

These lenses are my babies.




The 70-210 was the first lens I bought after realizing how terrible the kit lens is.
it's been great for me.
And I just recently got the 28-90 after getting really tired of having to be so far away from the subject with the 70-210


----------



## korruptedkaos

anyone have any tips on how to snap good pics of LED's.


----------



## silvrr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *korruptedkaos*
> 
> anyone have any tips on how to snap good pics of LED's.


Got an example of what you are trying to achieve. There are lots of outcomes for a picture of a LED.


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *silvrr*
> 
> I'm the same way. I just delete my catalog periodically.


Same here, my catalogs are pretty much disposable. I do my organisation myself, just drag the folder into lightroom, and have it set to write changes to .xmp files..... sorted


----------



## Artikbot

I really want one of those Peak Design quick release things that use a standard Arca Swiss mounting plate...

But I don't want to pay the 80 bucks they want for it.

I'll have a squeeze at building one now that I have some metal stock again.


----------



## von rottes

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> I really want one of those Peak Design quick release things that use a standard Arca Swiss mounting plate...
> 
> But I don't want to pay the 80 bucks they want for it.
> 
> I'll have a squeeze at building one now that I have some metal stock again.


I just got the peak design sling
It's soooooooooo nice ?
Instead of the capture pro, you could just go with the standard capture it's only $49

Sent from my HTC 10 using Tapatalk


----------



## Artikbot

Oh, that's neat.

Will still give it a go tomorrow, I've drafted something really quick and it doesn't look like it's rocket science.

Good to know that if my failure is of reasonably epic proportions I can resort to a somewhat affordable commercial solution.


----------



## Artikbot

I MADE DIS



Spoiler: Pics













It's crude but it works well. So zero complaints.


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> I MADE DIS
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Pics
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's crude but it works well. So zero complaints.


Well, +1 for trying =)

Let us know how it performs "down the road" !


----------



## Artikbot

Lol yes. I'll be taking it with me on Sunday, it's the national day and it's going to be amazing!

Well excited


----------



## Conspiracy

SHUT THE FRONT DOOR

https://techcrunch.com/2016/09/20/sandisks-1tb-sd-card-has-more-storage-than-my-computer/?sr_share=facebook


----------



## pcfoo

Is the joke on the guy writing it that has just 256gb in his iMac?
The price is kinda stupid unless you venture into the wild forever shooting uncompressed - sorry, meant mjpeg - 4K video









My future Fuji GFX doesn't need it


----------



## Dagamus NM

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Is the joke on the guy writing it that has just 256gb in his iMac?
> The price is kinda stupid unless you venture into the wild forever shooting uncompressed - sorry, meant mjpeg - 4K video
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My future Fuji GFX doesn't need it


The one thing I like about this is that by the time the storage is needed it will be cheap. It will also translate to the faster cards in time.

I have a handful of fast 256 cf and sad cards. They have really just encouraged lazy data habits. For every 256 card I have a 6TB hard drive so I just shoot everything large raw + large jpeg. My computers are up to the task so why not. Sharing is the only real issue.

What are ya'lls thoughts on gimbals?

I was recording the Misfits reuinion concert in Denver a couple weeks back without an IS stabilized lens and the motion while not terriblly excessive gave the video an iPhone video feel to it. Quality was much higher but it would have been nice to get better video.

I honestly didn't think I would get my camera into the show so I didn't prepare like I would have with a press pass. As a result I had my 5D3, 24-70 2.8, no tripod and no external mic.

I guess an IS lens would have helped.

But gimbals are money. There is a guy on here selling a two axis cheap. Maybe I should get it and toy with it.

Edit: I just picked up a new 50mm f1.2L. Should be delivered soon. I am excited.


----------



## Conspiracy

the use of gimbal vs IS lens is a tough one because both have different uses depending on the need. i personally prefer a gimbal so that I dont drain my battery on IS lenses when shooting video. its hard to beat having a glidecam in your kit for the one off things like a concert. IS is great for low light photos and slow shutters and quick video but not for an entire video production unless you just love swapping batteries and ruining your in-camera audio if that is all you have since in-camera mics and hotshoe mics will pick up the noises from IS

also drooling over that Fuji GFX. but realistically ill just stick with canon since my next forseeable purchases are building up my primes in my kit. looking forward to snagging the EF35/1.4II very soon. i wish i could dump everything and go cheap MF digital but the whole video thing is keeping me with my kit


----------



## pcfoo

Never really used a pro / DSLR class gimbal, but I did recently toyed with a DJI Osmo Mobile & an iPhone 6 (ok, my S6 too) and I have to say I was impressed.
I have edited footage from a Inspire 1 and I knew it the Zenmuse X3 variation mechanism is good, but ... I think it totally transforms the output...

I don't know how involved you are with videography @Dagamus NM, but if your concern is for casual video shooting, the Osmo might not be too bad...its expensive, yes, but for sure you will be able to sneak it in more places along with your phone









If you are serious about shooting & have a press pass, the benefit of a DSLR rig of any kind is huge vs. handholding. Gimbal obviously better, but forget about sneaking that thing anywhere ... only your exposure can be low key with that









---

@Conspiracy EF 35 II eh? ... beauty... The EF 35 II is not hyped enough, like the 35A and 50A where, simply because it is too expensive...too few get to toy with those.

Personally, I had to "settle" for the EF 35 2 IS myself, just cannot accept them big-ass 1.4 primes these days...using a 50A for a couple of weeks was an eye opener (wide open is better than pretty much anything I have shot until f/4-5.6, other perhaps than the Sigma 150mm f/2.8 macro - non OS - which is also insane) but it was just too big ... if I can "afford" the bulk and weight of a lens of that size, I'd rather have the 24-70 II with me. The 35 f/2 IS is the light, single lens alternative.

Fuji GFX = daydreaming... I am stuck with the EF mount myself, but who knows?








Probably I will go for a used 5DSR or something like that way before MF is a realistic upgrade.

---

Which are you peeps' thoughts on the 5D4 ?
Lots of flak on it not being a FF 4K camera, but I personally still see it as the best "jack of all trades / master of none" DSLR on the market today. Just like the 5D2 and 5D3 where. Again, personally I would consider it a good move from Canon - a "safe", solid upgrade that caters to the majority -not the forum warriors.
Perhaps not for all 5D3 users, but definitely for those going FF 1st time or moving up from a 6D / 5D2 class camera.

Video shooters on a budget wanted more, but I guess Canon has no incentive to push their 5D4 for that...They have a C line for that, no need to undercut themselves - what Sony is doing for example as they try to wedge in a market they originally had zero grip in.

30MP is not bad, 7 fps is leading in its class ... I hope they would do with a better buffer... I honestly don't get why they didn't ... don't think doubling their buffer or something along these lines would be that bad, or stop people from going the 1DXII way.
I mean, Nikon does 200 frame depth with its $2K D500 (i've estimated some 6GB RAM depth for that...)...I bet they could afford 3-4GB more RAM in a $3.5K body








The increased DR and malleability in pulling shadows in RAW files seems a very decent improvement over previous models too - especially the 5D3.

Personally I wanted more enthousiasm for the 5D4 only to have more ppl dropping their 5DSRs and driving prices down in the used market. I suits more my wants and style of shooting


----------



## Dagamus NM

Well, hopefully I can figure out how to score some press passes to future shows. I still managed to get decent images of the concert. The video was just shaky from the camera (5D3) getting heavy holding it as high as it would go above my head, the 24-70mm lens, battery grip and L bracket.

I did use the internal mic here but would probably use a mic on some sort of boom pole. I have a couple of Rode mics and haven't had any issue with noise from the lens when using IS but I have not had them mounted on the hotshoe.

I think I will buy the 2 axis and learn how to use it. See if the justification for three or more axes is there.

As for the 5D4, it is pretty sweet. Single processor means the magic lantern devs will have a port for it soon enough. While the buffer could have been bigger, even the 5D3 doesn't have that big of an issue with 4K and raw video as it writes fast enough to CF for 4K and both CF and SD for raw.

While I would love to get a 5D4, I still think a second 5D3 would make more sense for me. This way I can make direct comparisons between cameras when I only change a single setting between the two. So much to learn still. To the point that I don't even know what to tackle next short of shooting, identifying things I didn't like and figuring out how to fix the issue.

Digital zoom in live view for focusing will be my next task to get good at.

Default aspect ratio is 16:9 right? 3:2 uses the whole frame? I am a bit confused.


----------



## Ithanul

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> SHUT THE FRONT DOOR
> 
> https://techcrunch.com/2016/09/20/sandisks-1tb-sd-card-has-more-storage-than-my-computer/?sr_share=facebook


....Darn...that would take a long time for me to fill up one then again. I can fill up a 16GB one in under a few hours depending if I am in a picture taking happy mood.







I have a 32GB one, just keep forgetting to use the darn thing.


----------



## Dagamus NM

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ithanul*
> 
> ....Darn...that would take a long time for me to fill up one then again. I can fill up a 16GB one in under a few hours depending if I am in a picture taking happy mood.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have a 32GB one, just keep forgetting to use the darn thing.


Just for reference, shooting raw video on the 5D3 eats up ~2GB/ 3 minutes of video. So with one of these (assuming that SD could actually write that fast) you could have around 1,500 minutes.

Haha. Seriously, what would you really do with this thing?

I have a couple 256GB micro SD cards. I thought that was pretty baller, it never lasts very long though does it.


----------



## Artikbot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Which are you peeps' thoughts on the 5D4 ?
> Lots of flak on it not being a FF 4K camera, but I personally still see it as the best "jack of all trades / master of none" DSLR on the market today. Just like the 5D2 and 5D3 where. Again, personally I would consider it a good move from Canon - a "safe", solid upgrade that caters to the majority -not the forum warriors.
> Perhaps not for all 5D3 users, but definitely for those going FF 1st time or moving up from a 6D / 5D2 class camera.


I obviously haven't used one, but I've soaked in a lot of reviews by all sorts of people, positive, negative and neutral and I feel this way:

-Canon don't want to undercut the EOS C or the 1D. The 5D3 was, save for burst speeds, pretty much a 1D-class body in terms of features so they don't want that to happen. Same applies to the C re. video.

-As a stills camera - mainly what it has been designed for, it seems to have very cool stuff, LiveView focusing has been vastly improved going by everyone's feeling and the gist of it seems to be like the expanded AF points really do work. There's a lot of interest and buzz around the dual-pixel CMOS, so that could be promising once it starts getting adopted by Lr, DxO Optics and Capture One.

-Like you said, seems like more of an upgrade for those who are on a 5D2 and didn't fancy the high resolution sensor of the 5DS than an upgrade for the 5DIII users.

Forum warriors complain about the exact same points all the time - no 4k60, no 4k on full frame, no zebras or focus peaking when recording. The latter are inexcusable, but the other two are very understandable from a business point of view, although they are disappointing as it makes other bodies a better option for those who aren't heavily tied into one particular system.


----------



## Ithanul

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dagamus NM*
> 
> Just for reference, shooting raw video on the 5D3 eats up ~2GB/ 3 minutes of video. So with one of these (assuming that SD could actually write that fast) you could have around 1,500 minutes.
> 
> Haha. Seriously, what would you really do with this thing?
> 
> I have a couple 256GB micro SD cards. I thought that was pretty baller, it never lasts very long though does it.


No doubt probably useful for people taking a whole bunch of video. But I don't mess with video. Plus, my old D90 not the greatest for such any ways, but still takes some nice pictures.


----------



## Dagamus NM

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ithanul*
> 
> No doubt probably useful for people taking a whole bunch of video. But I don't mess with video. Plus, my old D90 not the greatest for such any ways, but still takes some nice pictures.


But even if this is the case the SD controllers are too slow in general to write any video resolution above liquor store CCTV VHS monitoring quality. At 720p you would record for a month with this thing. Might as well use it in security footage where you want your perps to get away with whatever crimes you are filming for in the first place.

I understand that they have to get this beast out, then work on making it fast enough to be useful. CFast maybe. Regular SDXC seems to have the bandwidth but the controllers in the cameras do not. Canon is the worst at this. Absolute worst part of the 6D is how slow it writes followed by the small buffer. At least a 5D2 can write CFlash.


----------



## Artikbot

I honestly thought CF was ancient until I got into photography, lol.

Makes you realise just how it actually is the closest it gets to a mini hard drive.


----------



## Dagamus NM

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> I honestly thought CF was ancient until I got into photography, lol.
> 
> Makes you realise just how it actually is the closest it gets to a mini hard drive.


It writes faster than most hard drives if you get fast CF with a fast controller.


----------



## Artikbot

Replace hard drive with SSD, same story.

It's the kind of storage I'm referring to, not the actual element itself 

After all CompactFlash uses a parallel ATA-like bus.


----------



## pcfoo

Yeah, CF is much faster than HDD, "cause Solid State"...

tho I did love those old MicroDrives that were literally 1" HDDs in CF II format were super cute! I actually had a MD MP3 player by creative, and it was a common "hack" to break it open and salvage the MicroDrive (2GB & 4GB, LOLZ) for use in your DSLR...it was much cheaper than buying the drive seperately, much like in many ocasions people buy external HDDs and crack them open cause its cheaper than buying the internal bare drive...









Back then (~2004ish) , a 1GB CF - horribly slower by comparison, like x133 speeds for top of the line (and that is "CD speed" as a measure, aka 133x150kb/s = 19MB/s reads!) - was €140 for me...and I bought one for my 20D...and then waited a few months and got a SECOND one....wow...








And I was shooting RAW...everybody thought that was stupid and a waste. And ofc I was an idiot for spending all this money for a camera with no screen shooting (LiveView was not invented) and no video capabilities...

Anyways, DSLRs today still offer a Compact Flash slot for Type II cards, which was the format used almost exclusively by MicroDrives! All modern CF cards are Type I (difference is Type II was ~5mm thick, Type I is ~3mm) ...talking about a waste of space









All cards of that class should have 2x CF cards + SD, or 2x SD as a minimum IMHO.
The mix of 2x card formats is just a pain in the @ss. Another area where I think Nikon has it down better than Canon.


----------



## Artikbot

My first memory card was a Memory Stick ProDuo for a Sony DSC-P200. 512MB, at the time it was 56€.


----------



## Conspiracy

so i helped make a thing kinda goofing around to test out the idea of creative photoshoots on a budget. the main idea really revolved around not planning anything and just creating an impromptu shoot by spending only a little on props or wardrobe. its a nice refreshing alternative to many planned shoots that many portrait photogs do for work but can easily get boring spending more time planning than having fun.

i know we dont have a ton of portrait only photogs here but i thought i would share what we put together. the only thing planned was the date we shot with the model. we wanted to see what happened putting our idea to practice for cheap creative photos


----------



## Taint3dBulge

Hey guys, just picked myself up a Nikon D750. Updated all the firmware and am loving the camera. Just wondering if anyone has one too, and if you have experienced any negative aspects of the camera or stuff to watch out for with it. Thanks.


----------



## Conspiracy

the 750 is nice and has some super impressive latitude. great camera but not a fan of having a flip screen and pop-up flash on a pro body.


----------



## Pandora51

Whats wrong about a flip screen?


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pandora51*
> 
> Whats wrong about a flip screen?


More prone to getting broken. For a lot of people with pro bodies they might handle them pretty roughly and a flip screen is just more delicate than a fixed one.

Could also purely be a personal preference.


----------



## Taint3dBulge

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> More prone to getting broken. For a lot of people with pro bodies they might handle them pretty roughly and a flip screen is just more delicate than a fixed one.
> 
> Could also purely be a personal preference.


Ya i wish it had a flip and rotate or side fold out. But for using it for filming on a tripod i think the flip function works great. I really had a hard debate with myself over getting this and the new D500.. But im happy with it. Just wish it had the focus points that the D500 has.


----------



## Dagamus NM

Prices on used Canon 5D mark III's are dropping. I just picked up one that looks new with under 4300 exposures, battery, an extra charger and a few other things for $1680. I am looking forward to having two of these to work with. The 60D will be in a kit for my girlfriend to shoot with as she prefers that one and the ef-s lenses I have for it are decent anyhow. The 6D for astro and a 3rd FF when needed.


----------



## wedge

Anyone have any thoughts on the A99II?
Looks like it makes my A77II obsolete in every way except price. Even the extra reach of the crop sensor is almost completely negated by the 42 meg sensor. I'll probably be picking one up once they start hitting the used market.


----------



## Artikbot

Not a fan at all of SLTs. I like the light that comes through the lens hitting the sensor, not going through a semi-mirror and then hitting the sensor.


----------



## wedge

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> Not a fan at all of SLTs. I like the light that comes through the lens hitting the sensor, not going through a semi-mirror and _then_ hitting the sensor.


There's pro's and con's to everything. SLT does sacrifice 1/3 a stop of light. But that's the only con. And if you're using a fast lens, it's actually a really small con. There is zero impact on image quality. The A6000 and A77II have essentially the same sensor, and they got the _exact_ same DXOMark score. Actually the A77II would score higher if you omit the ISO score, which is lower due to the mirror.

Because the mirror is locked in place, the AF performance and burst speed of SLT is unbeatable.
Just look at the A99II: performance comparable to a D5/1DX, but priced like a D810/5D. That's why I'm excited about that one. And I don't think Sony is pushing that tech to its limit, if they wanted to build a $5K+ SLT, it would be an absolute beast.


----------



## Marin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wedge*
> 
> Anyone have any thoughts on the A99II?
> Looks like it makes my A77II obsolete in every way except price. Even the extra reach of the crop sensor is almost completely negated by the 42 meg sensor. I'll probably be picking one up once they start hitting the used market.


Sony still doesn't have a solid lineup for the a-mount and they've been pouring more into the e-mount in comparison. I'd rather go with the e-mount at this point in time since there's way more of a guarantee that they'll stick with that in the future.


----------



## wedge

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marin*
> 
> Sony still doesn't have a solid lineup for the a-mount and they've been pouring more into the e-mount in comparison. I'd rather go with the e-mount at this point in time since there's way more of a guarantee that they'll stick with that in the future.


I don't think e-mount will ever get any long telephoto's (what I'm most interested in). At least not for a long time. It took 6 years for them to release a consumer class 70-300, and that is the longest native e-mount currently available. A lens like that should have been available when e-mount first launched. I'd give them another 6 years to come out with a 300 2.8.
That's why I sold all my e-mount gear. Seemed tempting at first, until you get into the details and realize all the shortcomings.

But my question is simply what's your opinion of the A99II as a camera? (just based on specs right now). Forget a-mount, e-mount, sony, not sony. Just looking at it for it's own merits and weaknesses.


----------



## Artikbot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wedge*
> 
> There's pro's and con's to everything. SLT does sacrifice 1/3 a stop of light. But that's the only con. And if you're using a fast lens, it's actually a really small con. There is zero impact on image quality. The A6000 and A77II have essentially the same sensor, and they got the exact same DXOMark score. Actually the A77II would score higher if you omit the ISO score, which is lower due to the mirror.
> 
> Because the mirror is locked in place, the AF performance and burst speed of SLT is unbeatable.
> Just look at the A99II: performance comparable to a D5/1DX, but priced like a D810/5D. That's why I'm excited about that one. And I don't think Sony is pushing that tech to its limit, if they wanted to build a $5K+ SLT, it would be an absolute beast.


Losing 1/3-2/3 stops of light is a bit substantial in the kind of stuff I shoot, although it'd be a non-issue with say an A99II because it can go higher on the ISO range without looking bad than my 5D2 can.

Still, burst isn't something that I use a lot (or at all) so it'd be as good as any other full frame body 

Nice to see Sony straying from the traditional ways though, and even better seeing them succeed. Canikon are way too conservative these days.


----------



## KenjiS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wedge*
> 
> Anyone have any thoughts on the A99II?
> Looks like it makes my A77II obsolete in every way except price. Even the extra reach of the crop sensor is almost completely negated by the 42 meg sensor. I'll probably be picking one up once they start hitting the used market.


I think its the A-mount camera everyone wanted for a few years now... but its probably the last one, its one last great hurrah for the system and its users before the A-mount dies. Don't get me wrong, I think its a lovely camera, but I'd honestly not waste my money on one unless I was one of the people with a huge investment in A mount glass...

The E-mount is Sony's future...for now..One big problem with the E-mount is you have a lot of Canikon people happily buying an A7-series to shoot on...with their Canikon glass or converted MF optics... Theres nothing "keeping" them with that investment

As for Canon and Nikon's conservative nature (IE not coming out with a proper full mirrorless camera) to me both companies have been working towards it subtly, Canon's Dual Pixel AF and STM/Nano-USM and Nikon introducing the Electromagnetic Diaphragm lenses to its lineup for instance... Theres a reason for this, they're building the technology and system out so when they drop a mirrorless A7-rival there will be PLENTY of lenses to use in addition to dedicated optics, and they will work flawlessly

Sony has had a lot of teething to get the E-mount to its current point, and even then I have a lot of complaints towards it (Namely how many more 50mm and 24-70 lenses can you make Sony? Why no 24-105?)

Canon wasn't the first to make an autofocus SLR, Nikon wasn't either. Minolta's 7000 was the first on the market... Look where they ended up

Someone needs to actually compete with the A7 however, Im tired of the Sony monopoly


----------



## pcfoo

I don't know whether the E-mount's compatibility with Canon and Nikon lenses is bad for Sony...Especially the over-sold AF capability with EF lenses.

A huge % of their A7R & A7S adopters would not be buying them if it wasn't for that compatibility, and if it wasn't for them getting started into the E-mount, there would ZERO excuse for them to even consider buying more E-mount lenses as those became available over time. There would be ZERO hype about the A7 line outside of reviews, and the #1 weapon of Sony's in this battle was the hype.

Sure, they make good cameras, but IMHO with the lens availability they had a couple of years ago, they would have been nowhere close to the market penetration they have today.


----------



## ahnafakeef

Not to digress from Sony, but comparing specs on DXOMark was an eye opener for me. Even a "measly" $800 Nikon D5300 from 2013 beats Canon's $3500 2016 flagship in terms of dynamic range. Not sure how I feel about that as someone heavily invested in Canon.


----------



## pcfoo

DXO is a "tool" with some objective and some completely arbitrary weighted conclusions.
Lets assume that the measurements are accurate and reliable:

5D4
Overall Score 91
Portrait (Color Depth) 24.8 bits
Landscape (Dynamic Range) 13.6 Evs
Sports (Low-Light ISO) 2995 ISO

D5300
Overall Score 83
Portrait (Color Depth) 24 bits
Landscape (Dynamic Range) 13.9 Evs
Sports (Low-Light ISO) 1338 ISO

Reading the above, why would you pick the D5300 ? Because 2.2% DR (.3EVs) merit more than 3.3% (.8 bit) of Color Depth?
Or does it outweight the ISO performance difference? And since when the performance of a camera can be distilled to its sensor in combination with an unknown lens vs. a different camera with a different sensor and a different lens?

This is exactly the "hype" I am talking about...perpetuated by click bait Youtubers and forums etc...doesn't really matter whats on DxO...the "hated" and terribad 5D3, much like any 5D before it has outsold any other DSLR in its class. If a professional is using a FF DSLR, is dis-proportionally more probable that he/she is using a 5D.
And you know what is almost nesesserily true based on the above? The majority of the amazing pictures you see and admire around you daily, have been shot with Canon 5D cameras. And the majority of the awarded photos by International Press etc, over the least decade or more, have traditionally been dis-proportionally awarded to Canon users...

Now, either the above photographers don't know about the DR and are blinded to the benefits, or simply they don't think there are as many benefits as people in the forums and Youtube make it to be.

Yes, you can find objective weaknesses in the 5D3...lots of them, but for its time it was the best jack of all trades camera out there, and the 5D4 is probably repeating that trend. As in, being the safe bet for a company that has the biggest - by far - established market-share. 100% the opposite of Sony, who has nothing to win by trying to play on a level field, and just throws w/e wild idea they have in order to grab attention. And when they fail to do that, they launch another model...thus they've been updating their A7 line faster than any other company ever cared to push any FF line. In return, there are many well thought innovations in the A7 line, and also many silly weaknesses. In so many ways, if people where buying theses same cameras from Nikon and Canon, would cry "beta" or at best "prosumer" and return them.
If you choose to focus on DR, you are free to neglect anything else, Sony does that great. Especially if you don't mind MF lenses.

There are objective weaknesses in many areas, that people find ways to iron over or simply overcome.

For example I could claim that the hugely praised "holly trinity" of Nikkors, the 24-70mm 2.8G, the 70-200mm 2.8G VR II and the 14-24mm 2.8G are by comparison one fantastic lens - the 14-24 - and two mediocre for their salty price lenses. Don't get me wrong, all three are great for what they do, but bring in the competition from Canon: namely the 24-70L II and 70-200L II...

With the 24-70s - The Canon was cheaper before the VR version of the 24-70 2.8G was released, VASTLY sharper, MUCH lower distortion. The 24-70 2.8G VR is a great step towards a very flat field for lenses in its class, but despite it being launched in 2015, it cannot even surpass its brother that is much older, and both are not any better than the 24-70L, which was vastly improved with the 24-70L II...what is Nikkon doing?

The 70-200 VR II: Not only it is not as sharp as the Canon equivalent, but it suffers from the worst focus breathing of any lens in its class. By far. Close to the minimum focusing distance, the 200mm end of the lens has wider FOV than 150mm lens...which meant a lot for professionals that jumped ship to Nikon after Nikon's bodies outclassed Canon bodies in pixel count and DR - namely the D8xx series - only to find out that the available glass for their new cameras was forcing them to change their shooting habits by a lot of weird ways....what is Nikkon doing? Cause for example at this point of time, they have issues competing with Tamron...Older designs from Canon match or beat their newer lenses, and the latest Sony GM lenses also handily beat them..

So, there are many people that complain about Nikkor glass...people with experience from both sides...some drop Nikon because of it, some remain.
Again, they weigh the pros and cons, and act accordingly. The fact remains that Nikon's f/2.8 workhorse lenses, the 24-70 and 70-200, trail the competition in notable ways, ways that for some are much more tangible than the elusive DR.

Now, as someone heavily invested in Canon, why are you troubled?
You feel the "burn" in some real areas, or you just cannot handle your e-peen being bigger? Is it G.A.S. or FOMO?
Let me tell you my opinion: it doesn't matter. Photographers all-around you are shooting great images with worse. You can do it too!


----------



## Artikbot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ahnafakeef*
> 
> Not to digress from Sony, but comparing specs on DXOMark was an eye opener for me. Even a "measly" $800 Nikon D5300 from 2013 beats Canon's $3500 2016 flagship in terms of dynamic range. Not sure how I feel about that as someone heavily invested in Canon.


And does that make a D5300 better than a 5D4?

Nope.

Dynamic range is like any other thing. It does let you push the shadows further or bring back the highlights more, but at that point, are you trying to save a shot that is miserable to begin with?

Yes, it's nice to have, no, it's not the end-all matter. Just like megapixels, X-TRANS CMOS vs regular Bayer CMOS, or whatever.


----------



## Marin

Gonna be honest, DXO makes the cameras seem like they're miles apart when they're pretty much neck and neck for the most part while offering unique features. IE log capture or higher levels of resolution.


----------



## KenjiS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> I don't know whether the E-mount's compatibility with Canon and Nikon lenses is bad for Sony...Especially the over-sold AF capability with EF lenses.
> 
> A huge % of their A7R & A7S adopters would not be buying them if it wasn't for that compatibility, and if it wasn't for them getting started into the E-mount, there would ZERO excuse for them to even consider buying more E-mount lenses as those became available over time. There would be ZERO hype about the A7 line outside of reviews, and the #1 weapon of Sony's in this battle was the hype.
> 
> Sure, they make good cameras, but IMHO with the lens availability they had a couple of years ago, they would have been nowhere close to the market penetration they have today.


Except your investment is in your glass, Never your bodies, the thing that prevents many folks hopping ship to another system is repurchasing a ton of glass

So if all you have is an A7 and a collection of L lenses and Canon launches their FF mirrorless with a superb adapter (Because electrically id imagine their mirrorless mount will be the EF mount, so it will be 100% compatible) theres nothing stopping you from dropping the Sony like a brick. Sony has a lead for now because they're literally the only FF mirrorless except the Leica SL.

I tried one of the adapters on an A7 in the store trying to determine if i wanted to bother.. the AF barely worked. I want AF. Now granted, right now the decision would be a little more difficult for me (Sony came out with some lenses and sigma is offering that lovely adapter for their lenses which would allow me to use my 150-600 on it) But I still prefer my DSLR for many subjects, which is why my battered 7D is likely going to the wayside to make room for a shiny new 7D Mark II

----

My "terribad" 7D and GX8 do better than some A7 shooters who cannot figure out that sometimes you need depth of field. That said, the 7D is long in the tooth and yes, the 7DII's upgrades would be welcome (Honestly? its more wanting some of the ergonomic improvements and it would be nice to have a lighter AA filter.)

DxOMark is really overrated, its like those places that will say something stupid like "a GTX 970 4gb is worse than a 960 8gb because more vram is gewd" (Yes i know there isnt an 8gb 960, you get my example however)

Lenses? I admit i like the Sony 90mm f/2.8 OSS Macro and the 55 f/1.8 Sonnar is magical, and the 135 f/1.8 Sonnar badly needs an E-mount equivalent. I'd absolutely love to own the Nikon 105 f/1.4 (I'd love to see a comparison between the 105 f/1.4 and the 135 f/1.8 actually). But I'd also love to have a 42.5 f/1.2 Nocticron in my bag and that new Olympus 25mm f/1.2 looks quite epic. Oh and every piece of Canon L glass I've owned has been stellar, and I'd absolutely love to have my 70-200 f/4L IS back (Or a f/2.8L IS II). My 15mm f/1.7 Summilux is one of the most fun little lenses ive ever owned, the 45mm f/2.8 Macro-Elmarit is probubly one of the greatest macro lenses made, my 100mm f/2.8L has given me more shots than I can even count, I was one of the first 15-85 owners and my experience with it sold a bunch of them to people because its every bit as good as the 24-105 f/4L IS (Which I owned, Briefly) Oh, and the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 HSM (non-art) can paint a beautiful picture.

I guess to me the glass has always mattered more to the image than the sensor, Dynamic range hasnt bugged me much, but im not a landscape shooter, I've recently started to toy with HDR again (Nik's plugin for Lightroom)

But you know why I still love my 7D? Because its been rained on, frozen, dropped, covered in mud, smacked about and still works pretty well. Could use a bit of an alignment and cleaning, but I've owned the thing 7 years and treated it hard. I have very very few things that have lasted that long(I've had 3 computers since i bought the 7D..and i dont treat them like this!). Ive never hesitated to try to do a shot for fear my camera will get killed. In fact not long ago i layed in a deep puddle with the damn thing to get some shots of a lego model in rain so hard i couldnt even see through the viewfinder, Did it fail? No. I've shot probubly close to 200,000 shots with the stupid thing. Its earned retirement.


----------



## Dagamus NM

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KenjiS*
> 
> Except your investment is in your glass, Never your bodies, the thing that prevents many folks hopping ship to another system is repurchasing a ton of glass
> 
> So if all you have is an A7 and a collection of L lenses and Canon launches their FF mirrorless with a superb adapter (Because electrically id imagine their mirrorless mount will be the EF mount, so it will be 100% compatible) theres nothing stopping you from dropping the Sony like a brick. Sony has a lead for now because they're literally the only FF mirrorless except the Leica SL.
> 
> I tried one of the adapters on an A7 in the store trying to determine if i wanted to bother.. the AF barely worked. I want AF. Now granted, right now the decision would be a little more difficult for me (Sony came out with some lenses and sigma is offering that lovely adapter for their lenses which would allow me to use my 150-600 on it) But I still prefer my DSLR for many subjects, which is why my battered 7D is likely going to the wayside to make room for a shiny new 7D Mark II


I have a decent amount of L glass and four Canon bodies, three FF and one APS-C. For me it is the familiarity with the user interface. Same reason I went with Canon DSLR in the first place. I was used to Canon point and shoots from the Elph line. Smart phones pretty much killed those off but I am very happy with my Canon products.

Albuquerque Balloon Fiesta is sponsored by Canon. They have many services here this year. Professional services has a booth with features to uses of CPS, they have a store, and if you signed up they have professional photographers giving a workshop all week that comes with your choice of bodies and lenses for the week (can swap any time), the pro to critique your work, and a hot air balloon ride to shoot from above. Pretty cool when in a sea of 500+ balloons. They also have pro level photo printing available to the public, just give them your memory card and select your prints.

I imagine that the others do events like this. But I can only speak to what I see.

I went Saturday evening for the balloon glow with my new 50mm f1.2L and what I could fit into the frame looked amazing. Focusing on my son's face while he was in awe of the fireworks after the balloons and seeing just how much light was on his face in the image was amazing. I had never shot with such a fast lens at night.


----------



## KenjiS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dagamus NM*
> 
> I have a decent amount of L glass and four Canon bodies, three FF and one APS-C. For me it is the familiarity with the user interface. Same reason I went with Canon DSLR in the first place. I was used to Canon point and shoots from the Elph line. Smart phones pretty much killed those off but I am very happy with my Canon products.
> 
> Albuquerque Balloon Fiesta is sponsored by Canon. They have many services here this year. Professional services has a booth with features to uses of CPS, they have a store, and if you signed up they have professional photographers giving a workshop all week that comes with your choice of bodies and lenses for the week (can swap any time), the pro to critique your work, and a hot air balloon ride to shoot from above. Pretty cool when in a sea of 500+ balloons. They also have pro level photo printing available to the public, just give them your memory card and select your prints.
> 
> I imagine that the others do events like this. But I can only speak to what I see.
> 
> I went Saturday evening for the balloon glow with my new 50mm f1.2L and what I could fit into the frame looked amazing. Focusing on my son's face while he was in awe of the fireworks after the balloons and seeing just how much light was on his face in the image was amazing. I had never shot with such a fast lens at night.


That 50mm f/1.2L is one lens i might get.. My Sigmalux is amazing but I'm rather afraid its gonna not work on my 7D2 or newer bodies, and its not one of the ones that can be flashed or upgraded...

That sounds like a lot of fun actually. Not sure id enjoy the balloon ride however


----------



## KenjiS

I cant use a cell phone camera to save my life... Like literally i cannot hold the phone very well or very still to actually USE it, i hate composing on rear screens (I struggle to see) and making the thing do what i want, even when mine actually has manual controls, is more frustration than useful lol.. I carry my GX8 everywhere, that was the reason i decided to get the mirrorless in the first place was to have something a lot lighter and smaller than the 7D (Which again, i took everywhere)

I find my smartphone camera is used for very quick "note" pics more than anything else


----------



## Artikbot

I don't use my smartphone at all, other than when I absolutely *must* take a picture and I don't have any of my cameras with myself (rare occurrence).

I would love something smaller than my 450D/5D2 though. Been eyeing an X-E1 for a while, with the 27mm to use as a pocket camera to keep with me at all times.


----------



## Dagamus NM

I struggle to make good images with my iPhone. I have a 6S+, but have had every generation before that. They were all terrible for anything other than quick images and documentation.

So I was at the Balloon Fiesta this morning with the department of Homeland Security and we were walking the field making our rounds when I decided to visit the Canon tent.

I did not know that they did this, but they have a desk where they check out gear. I checked out the 5D4 and the 24-70mm f4L IS lens. They give an 8GB memory card to shoot with and keep. The only thing I had to do was hand over my driver's license. They said that they do this at any big event that they sponsor. The next one they do will be at the festival of cranes at Bosque Del Apache at the end of the month. He said that I will be able to use a 100-400mm with a 1.4x extender and still have certain autofocus features not previously available at and effective aperture ratio of 8.

There is also a canon professional services trailer doing free camera and lens cleanings. I will check that out when I return Thursday.


----------



## pcfoo

pfff...purists...









Meanwhile ppl are happy snapping away with their phones, much like console ppl are happy gaming, being oblivious to the difference.
Whats the point of color and grain if you will rape it with that instagram "creative" filter anyways, right?

At the end of the day, each person chooses to choke on a specific gnat while swallowing their camels whole


----------



## Artikbot

I will stand proud and say that all the pictures on my Instagram are taken with my phone.

...the whole zero of them.


----------



## LaBestiaHumana

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> pfff...purists...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meanwhile ppl are happy snapping away with their phones, much like console ppl are happy gaming, being oblivious to the difference.
> Whats the point of color and grain if you will rape it with that instagram "creative" filter anyways, right?
> 
> At the end of the day, each person chooses to choke on a specific gnat while swallowing their camels whole


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> I will stand proud and say that all the pictures on my Instagram are taken with my phone.
> 
> _...the whole zero of them._


I use both, but gotta say phone is so convenient. iPhone 7 camera is also not bad for low skilled photographers like myself.


----------



## pcfoo

I have a couple of dozen ones...maybe 2 by one of the phones









My phone's camera (Galaxy S6 currently) is great for visual notes, grocery lists and why not, a whanabe good shot every-now-and-then...before, when I was still @ school, phone was the best tool for quick note-taking @ school projection screens.


----------



## Artikbot

I could really do with a 24-70 II, but that's a thousand euros more than I can spend on it.

Let's hope this business malarkey I have in the works does well and I can get one. It'd definitely come in really handy.

Problem is, the reason I could do with the lens is because of this business malarkey lol


----------



## Dagamus NM

I was pretty pleased the 24-70 f4L IS when I used it yesterday. I don't know how it compared to the 24-70 2.8ii but it sure is lighter than my 24-70 2.8i. The only thing I had an issue with yesterday was getting as much light as the f2.8 before the sun came up. After the sun came up it was a non issue.

It worked pretty flawlessly on both the 5D3 and 5D4


----------



## pcfoo

Both the latest 24-70L lenses are beautiful...but the original 24-70 f/2.8L is no slouch either. It still the best 24-70 of its generation, and again, I don't wish to re-trash the Nikkor 24-70 2.8G, but the latter is notably worse in CA without being sharper than the "mark I" Canon.

The 4 IS is arguably as sharp as the 24-70 II and the IS will help you getting sharper images in RL scenarios that don't require

I had the 24-70L I and I was happy with it - ended up being a $300-350 difference to upgrade, so G.A.S. took over.
I don't miss the bulk and weight of the I (hood included was humongous), but the said hood design is far better than with most lenses of that zoom range...I do miss it being 77mm as I had a # of decent filters at that diameter ... one of the reasons I like the 16-35L 4 IS: half of its price is offset by not buying 82mm filters









And this is a big deal for many, mainly landscape photographers.

77mm kit: 16-35L f/4 IS, 17-40L f/4, 24-70L f/2.8 I, 24-70L f/4 IS, 24-105L I & II, 70-200L f/2.8 I & II, 100-400L I & II
82mm kit: 16-35L f/2.8 II & III, 24-70L f/2.8 II, TS-E 24mm II

Step-down rings are not always an option, and the 82mm filters are often 30~50% or more expensive than 77mm - depending on the manufacturer and availability.


----------



## Artikbot

Problem (and reason I currently cover that focal range with primes) is I need fast glass.

I'm using it to shoot gigs in not-so-great-lit venues.

At the moment I shoot at f/1.8-f/2.5 with a 28/1.8 and a 50/1.4, but switching lens is a pain, multiple bodies is out of the question and I still come in a bit too tight with the 28 depending on the stage, as well as too wide with the 50 again, depending on the stage.

I don't really need IS, since due to the way these guys play I need to keep at 1/100-160 to get decent shots, and at such shutter speeds my own shakiness is the least of my worries.

And due to the fast shutter speeds as well, I need to go very wide and push the ISO to 1600+.

I can go 3200 with sufficient light, I've found noise doesn't really affect the images that much as long as I get the backdrop a tiny bit overexposed, as I can then push the shadows down and remove the biggest source of noise altogether.

So it would seem the 24-70/2.8 is the lens I'm looking for.

Problem is I don't really know anyone who I can borrow them from, or anywhere I can rent them either.

And I will be shooting wide open 90% of the time.

I've ruled out the Tamron and Sigma alternatives due to extensive reports of erratic focus. I'd rather shoot with a 24-105/4, push a stop on Lr and end up with a noisefest than miss focus on a 2.8.

Now the question remains... Will the 24-70 I be good enough to use wide open all the time? I can just about squeeze that one if I shoot a few more gigs with my current prime pair.


----------



## pcfoo

The 24-70L I is pretty good wide open.

That said, both the primes you've mentioned are better at f/2.8, at least at the edges, but this is universally true and depending on sample variation, those ol primes beat the 24-70 II in uniformity & sharpness throughout the frame.

Depending on the distance you are shooting at - most likely long-ish if you are off-stage - missing focus @ f/2.8 needs to be massive to "break" a shot. You should be fine. Same goes for ISO noise...3200 is doable in most FF DSLRs and latest APS-C bodies. 1600 is probably the highest you want to go with older APS-C models but still the grunge of some grain / noise is rarely an issue with moody / dark concert shots IMHO.

What body are you shooting again? Are you sure going for a $800 (mark I) to $1300-1400 (mark II) 24-70 is the way to go over 2x bodies?

I believe you are wrong on the IS...IS is good universally, and 1/100 sec is slow enough for it to make a difference, especially as higher resolution cameras are in question.
Quick example: no IS, 1/FL rule of thumb for hand-held shooting and 5DSR vs 5D3 = underwhelming differences in too big a % of shots. Using IS, still with 1/FL min speed, and the 50MP sensor starts shining in a notable way.

For your scenario I agree that the f/2.8 is the way to go as far as zooms go, but primes will be better.


----------



## KenjiS

Surprise?! by Trevor H, on Flickr

So i got an actual surprise today. Wasnt expecting it.. Now i need to get out and shoot it.. First will need an SD card however


----------



## Artikbot

Quote:
Originally Posted by *pcfoo* 

The 24-70L I is pretty good wide open.

That said, both the primes you've mentioned are better at f/2.8, at least at the edges, but this is universally true and depending on sample variation, those ol primes beat the 24-70 II in uniformity & sharpness throughout the frame.

Depending on the distance you are shooting at - most likely long-ish if you are off-stage - missing focus @ f/2.8 needs to be massive to "break" a shot. You should be fine. Same goes for ISO noise...3200 is doable in most FF DSLRs and latest APS-C bodies. 1600 is probably the highest you want to go with older APS-C models but still the grunge of some grain / noise is rarely an issue with moody / dark concert shots IMHO.
Agree, I can get up to 3200 if the framing is tight and it'll look just fine. 1600 is the general rule of thumb for more 'general' stage shots. Primes will be better, yes, but I find myself wasting too much time swapping lens, and often being like 'Damn, this scene would look so much better with the lens that isn't mounted. That's why I'd like a zoom, to suppress these issues.

What body are you shooting again? Are you sure going for a $800 (mark I) to $1300-1400 (mark II) 24-70 is the way to go over 2x bodies?
5D2. Dollars don't work over here unfortunately. I is some 700€ in good condition, II is basically same price as retail, so around 1500€.

I believe you are wrong on the IS...IS is good universally, and 1/100 sec is slow enough for it to make a difference, especially as higher resolution cameras are in question.
Quick example: no IS, 1/FL rule of thumb for hand-held shooting and 5DSR vs 5D3 = underwhelming differences in too big a % of shots. Using IS, still with 1/FL min speed, and the 50MP sensor starts shining in a notable way.
I've not had any issues at all at over 1/100 so far, hence my observation. I do think that an extra stop is more desirable over IS though, that's why I'm pretty much set on the 24-70/2.8. While IS would be a cracking addition, at the moment it doesn't appear to be much of an issue. I do wish I had a newer body that could do ISO 3200 standard and 6400 if need be, and use a 24-105/4 instead, but that's pretty much an impossibility.

For your scenario I agree that the f/2.8 is the way to go as far as zooms go, but primes will be better.


> Definitely, but they're not practical enough with just one body... :/


Broken down inside the quote.

I'm gonna look at actual T-stop figures for a variety of glass and see what's around, come to think about it. I'm aching too much over F-stops.

E: Fun fact. The 24-70/4 IS is actually spot on 4 T-stops, while the 24-70/2.8 I is 3.5 T-stops.

The 24-70/2.8 II is 2.9 T-stops, as is the Tamron 24-70 Di VC USD.

So yeah. So much for aching over things.

And here I come with DxOMark sharpness charts because why not. The Tamron is actually better than the Canon 24-70 I throughout the range. And half a stop brighter. And it has VC.

On the poorer side of the scale.. Autofocus and compatibility with future bodies.


----------



## Marin

Got my 35L back from cleaning. Only took a few days and it got calibrated too (don't think that was necessary but I'll take it). I think one of the things keeping me from going to Sony is their customer service is abysmal compared to Canon.

Canon and Fuji are easy to deal with. And I can just drive to Canons repair center.


----------



## Artikbot

Place in Barcelona rents a 24-70 II for some 35€ a day.

I may grab it round for the next shot and see how I get on.


----------



## jackeyjoe

Soooo I made the jump to full frame. Bought a D610 second hand(impulse buy, came up locally for a reasonably price), 30k actuations on the clock so plenty left in it(I don't go crazy, 10k a year maybe? Should still get a few years out of it). The difference in low light is absolutely astounding compared to my D7000, I can easily get shots I used to struggle with. The resolution bump from 16MP to 24MP is a nice change too, I can actually crop photos and have them look good. Unfortunately the autofocus is the biggest letdown for me, in fact I think it's as bad as the D7000, which really struggles to focus in low light. Anyway, really happy with my purchase, I have a nikon 80-200mm f2.8 on the way, and I'm keeping my eye out for a cheap 24-70mm f2.8, once I have them I think I'll be ready for pretty much anything I want to take a photo of










If anybody is considering jumping to full frame, if you value low light performance it's so worth it


----------



## Artikbot

Sounds like you're paraphrasing what I said when I moved from a 450D to a 5D Mark II


----------



## jackeyjoe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> Sounds like you're paraphrasing what I said when I moved from a 450D to a 5D Mark II


I was sure I wasn't the first, but if you haven't ever used a full frame camera the improvements really can't be quantified until you have one in your hands. Low light is now no longer much of a factor, it practically needs to be black to not be able to get shots


----------



## eurotrade07

http://facebook.com/varnabythesea

That's my photography page, just taking street photos around my city, but I haven't been shooting in a while, because I don't have lots of free time.


----------



## Artikbot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jackeyjoe*
> 
> I was sure I wasn't the first, but if you haven't ever used a full frame camera the improvements really can't be quantified until you have one in your hands. Low light is now no longer much of a factor, it practically needs to be black to not be able to get shots


To me the main 'wow factor' points were:

1) The viewfinder.

2) The way noise is rendered is somehow much easier to deal with than on other APS-C/smaller sensors I've used.

3) How much differently standard focal lengths look when you see the entire circle, for the better.

E: Also decided to start posting stuff on my Instagram profile, exclusively phone shots and only using whatever postprocessing I can do inside the app. Let's see how it turns out... I'm getting some local followers, which is encouraging









Hoping to improve my phone technique. I'd like to not depend on lugging around a half-serious bit of kit to be able to take respectable pictures.


----------



## Wolfsbora

My Alpine Labs Pulse finally arrived from Kickstarter. I'll be giving it a go on my trusty ol'D5000. Did any of you pledge on it too?


----------



## Marin




----------



## Conspiracy

seeing that reminds me i need to start using my x100T more


----------



## Scott1541

Random news, but I've got my first wedding job booked in







It's something I've been hesitant to step into, but this opportunity came up so I decided to take it. It's for a sort of friend, and they aren't made of money so that kind of works with my inexperience and how much I'm willing to do it for








It's about 6 months away, but I'm already thinking about it, got to put in the leg work checking out the church, getting some shot ideas together, etc.. Need to get a bit more practice in with the primes too as I've been getting a bit lazy recently and just working with zooms. If I have a decent job by then I might pick up another full frame body before the time comes, if not them It'll have to be D600 & D7200


----------



## Conspiracy

NICE! Pretty sure you will do great man.

in unrelated news i got some new toys on the way but just got a RodeLink wireless filmmaker lavaliere kit for video stuff. so far first impressions are its pretty solid for the price compared to what im used to working with from sennheiser. the shielding on the lavaliere mic seems cheap but doesnt cause any feedback or static from first test. also have a meFoto compact tripod on the way as well as a new full set of eneloop pros, taking a leap in trusting rechargeable batteries for audio which until today i wouldnt normally consider but new tech new beginnings haha


----------



## von rottes

Just finished a personal project I started 7 years ago.

(shot with my D5300 and Vivitar 70-210)

It's a visual for some terrible "Prose" I wrote in 2009









Also, in other news... I MAY have a paid shoot coming up soon. Doing some family portraits for a friend


----------



## davcc22

so do i get to join the big boy club yet with my nikon d3400 and a nikkor DX 18-55 1:35.5-5.6g photo's of the rig as per normal


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



https://flic.kr/p/NUzBQ2The new rig taken on a nexus 5x by C4NF00D, on Flickr https://flic.kr/p/NUzBTDThe new rig taken on a nexus 5x by C4NF00D, on Flickr
https://flic.kr/p/P3oWLXThe new rig taken on a nexus 5x by C4NF00D, on Flickr


----------



## Scott1541

Ooooh, so the D3400s are out in the wild now


----------



## Artikbot

Quietest launch ever.


----------



## Scott1541

I did see something about a D3300 replacement being in the pipeline, but thats the last I heard of it







When Nikon normally launch something it pops up on my facebook news feed like BUY ME!! BUY ME!! Not that I'd be interested in another DX camera now, my next one is going to be another full frame body.


----------



## Artikbot

Same, if I even do upgrade this decade.


----------



## davcc22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> Ooooh, so the D3400s are out in the wild now


here have some of it's prduct https://flic.kr/p/NSaztQDSC_0031 by C4NF00D, on Flickr


----------



## homer98

I've read through large chunks of this thread as it's quite large. But I did wan't to ask about entry level/beginner DSLR's.

Since Black Friday is in a few days, I'm seeing some reduced pricing on both Canon and Nikon models. Would something like the D3400 be a good starting point for a beginner who wants to learn, and isn't sure what their preferred subjects(landscape, portraits, sports, wildlife,etc) are?

The kit comes with two lenses as well (18-55, and a 85-300)

Is there anything I should look out for or check when going to pick a camera?

Sorry for the noob questions, I see all these awesome pictures and want to start learning!
Cheers


----------



## pcfoo

Pretty much any DSLR or Mirrorless (MILC) will perform great these days. As in "you cannot go wrong".
The D3400 is a great camera for its price, although it doesn't really add much to the photographic experience over an older, cheaper model of its class . i.e. a D3200 or 3300.
Similarly the lenses in all these kits are "safe" and good value performers.

The issue with all young photographers, much like with most people loitering "enthusiast forums" of any kind, be it automotive, photographic, computer etc, is that think satisfaction / progress / results are paid for through better equipment. What you should budget for is time to spend before, during and after your photoshooting if you really care to improve, and any DSLR/MILC with an OK lens - even if 6-7 yo - will be a great school.


----------



## Pandora51

Look out for deals with the d5200 or d5300 aswell.
The d5200 or even d5100 are "old" cameras but pretty amazing value with one or two advantages like a flipscreen.

But yeah the d3400 is a good choice aswell.


----------



## homer98

Awesome, thanks for the helpful advice. Just wanted to make sure if there was anything I should beware of with the entry models.
I'll look for some older models as well, see what available.

And for the second part, I'm super excited to start learning and improving my photography skills, and start posting some pics!

Thanks again !


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *homer98*
> 
> Awesome, thanks for the helpful advice. Just wanted to make sure if there was anything I should beware of with the entry models.
> I'll look for some older models as well, see what available.
> 
> And for the second part, I'm super excited to start learning and improving my photography skills, and start posting some pics!
> 
> Thanks again !


Go to a store and try them out, go with what feels best









Let's have some pictures

https://flic.kr/p/MgPC6jKop Hill-3548 by Luke Wanden, on Flickr

https://flic.kr/p/MUokEsItaly-4753 by Luke Wanden, on Flickr

https://flic.kr/p/Ld8jfTPok3r-3132 by Luke Wanden, on Flickr


----------



## ahnafakeef

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> Go to a store and try them out, go with what feels best
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Let's have some pictures
> 
> https://flic.kr/p/MgPC6jKop Hill-3548 by Luke Wanden, on Flickr
> 
> https://flic.kr/p/MUokEsItaly-4753 by Luke Wanden, on Flickr
> 
> https://flic.kr/p/Ld8jfTPok3r-3132 by Luke Wanden, on Flickr


What lighting did you use to shoot the one of the keyboard? My guess would be a single speedlight on the camera hotshoe bounced directly off of the ceiling.


----------



## jackeyjoe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> The issue with all young photographers, much like with most people loitering "enthusiast forums" of any kind, be it automotive, photographic, computer etc, is that think satisfaction / progress / results are paid for through better equipment. What you should budget for is time to spend before, during and after your photoshooting if you really care to improve, and any DSLR/MILC with an OK lens - even if 6-7 yo - will be a great school.


To an extent. A decent photographer should be able to get awesome looking photos no matter the gear they have, they just keep it within the gears limitations. Fancier gear just gives you more options to get the photo you want, which you can't really appreciate until you already have those skills. For example, I'd tried some some night shots with my D7000 and didn't really have much success, tried again with my D610 and ended up with stars behind a lit building from a handheld shot. Honestly, aside from the bump in resolution and everything looking a little sharper(which I can probably thank my new lens for), there is very little difference between them(aside from at night, obviously). For the majority of my photography the D7000 is plenty, and it'd probably be worse off than a D3400 as it's so old now.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *homer98*
> 
> Awesome, thanks for the helpful advice. Just wanted to make sure if there was anything I should beware of with the entry models.
> I'll look for some older models as well, see what available.
> 
> And for the second part, I'm super excited to start learning and improving my photography skills, and start posting some pics!
> 
> Thanks again !


Any nikon body paired with kit lenses released in the last 5 years is plenty for a beginner, once you know what you like taking pictures of you can go from there









I'm personally doing a fair bit of portrait photography(I work in a boarding school and do all of the photos for that), I am getting shots that are a heap better than when I started. Gear isn't a big reason that they've improved, it makes a difference but knowing how to use your camera to match what is in front of you matters so much more.

While we are sharing photos, here is one of me.



Handed off my camera to someone else after I got covered in shaving cream(one of our end of school year activities), there isn't many of me floating around











An example of night photography with the D610, it is amazing what it picks up considering the light pollution.


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ahnafakeef*
> 
> What lighting did you use to shoot the one of the keyboard? My guess would be a single speedlight on the camera hotshoe bounced directly off of the ceiling.


Yeah I think that's more or less what I did


----------



## juneau78

EOS 1Dx Mark II + EF 50mm f/1.4


----------



## Artikbot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jackeyjoe*
> 
> 
> 
> An example of night photography with the D610, it is amazing what it picks up considering the light pollution.


My 5D2 has hot blue and red pixels almost in the exact same spots


----------



## Whyifide

Just posting here for posterity's sake, but I can't believe my first specs are posted here! I'm listed as having a Nikon D50







But now I'm running with a Pentax 645Z


----------



## JohnSanchez

Hello all! Photography... what a glorious invention.
I personally have an Olympus EPL-3, Nikon 5500, Canon QL17 35mm, and Pentax K1000 35mm.
What a great community.


----------



## Dagamus NM

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *juneau78*
> 
> 
> 
> EOS 1Dx Mark II + EF 50mm f/1.4


Do you have a filter on your lens in this shot or is the flaring from the lens? It looks like reflections within the elements.


----------



## pcfoo

The EF 50 1.4 is not that good resisting flare, CA or pretty much anything in super fast aperture settings...love the size, but that's pretty much it.
If I was buying a 50mm lens for my Canon or Nikon today, I would stick with the 50 1.8 models.
The 50 1.4 OEM models are simply un-exciting wide open. The 58mm 1.4G Nikkor is better, but if you were to spend this kind of money, just go for the "king": Sigma 50 Art.

It performs into a completely different level. But...its pricey, big & heavy. As much as a 24-70 2.8 pretty much.
Yeah, Nikon & Canon alike need to update their 50s ... unfortunately all the latest lenses are released with hefty $ hike ...


----------



## Dagamus NM

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> The EF 50 1.4 is not that good resisting flare, CA or pretty much anything in super fast aperture settings...love the size, but that's pretty much it.
> If I was buying a 50mm lens for my Canon or Nikon today, I would stick with the 50 1.8 models.
> The 50 1.4 OEM models are simply un-exciting wide open. The 58mm 1.4G Nikkor is better, but if you were to spend this kind of money, just go for the "king": Sigma 50 Art.
> 
> It performs into a completely different level. But...its pricey, big & heavy. As much as a 24-70 2.8 pretty much.
> Yeah, Nikon & Canon alike need to update their 50s ... unfortunately all the latest lenses are released with hefty $ hike ...


I get that flare pretty good on my 24-70 f2.8L original version. I have the 50mm F1.2L and while I like it as my daily carry, I wish I would have went with the 35mm prime instead.


----------



## pcfoo

I have the 35 2 IS and 85 1.8 as the "cheap and good enough" versions.
I did try the 50A for a few weeks and was blown away, but I could not justify the weight ... ended up selling both the 50A and the EF 50 1.4 and went for the "light" alternatives, despite liking the 50 FOV a bit more.

Some 24-70L 2.8 I "flare" samples w my 6D:





and how a similar shot is handled by the 24-70 II on the same body:



Back lit scenarios always lead to loss of contrast, but in this SOOC JPEG you can see that extreme flare is resisted much better.
You can still get it with VERY strong sun but far less prone to it than its older brother.


----------



## Artikbot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dagamus NM*
> 
> Do you have a filter on your lens in this shot or is the flaring from the lens? It looks like reflections within the elements.


My 50 1.4 does exactly the same if you point the sun at somewhere around the top third of the frame. Definitely lens flaring.


----------



## Dagamus NM

So it seems that the 24-70 f2.8 I had some serious issues with flaring. It makes a great indoor lens but so many images taken outdoors have flaring. Even at night, flaring from the moon seems worse than the sun.

I will post some images of flare at night when I am on my PC.

35mm f2 IS sounds like a winner. The 50mm f1.2L is pretty sweet so I am not complaining, for indoor shooting which I do at work often I find myself with my back pressed into a wall to get my shot framed.

Some day. I can use my 16-35L in the meantime I suppose.


----------



## Artikbot

For some reason, no matter what I do I always end up finding myself putting the 50mm back on. I'll take some shots with the 135, put the 50 back on. Need to go wide? 28, take the shot, go back to the 50.

Need to go somewhere and don't know what I'll find? Again, the 50 is the chosen one.

And if I use zoom lens, I find myself around the 45-55mm equivalent lol


----------



## pcfoo

Yeah, I like the 40-50mm range too. Good thing this falls in the "sweet range" for most standard zooms too, although reviews mostly focus on the tele & wide end of things.
I've "settled" for the 35 f/2 IS cause G.A.S. and curiosity for the latest mid-range prime.
I am perfectly sure I would do fine with the EF 40 2.8 as my walk around lens instead, but....wanted to give a 35 a try...haven't had a 35 prime since my film days, and even then I would shoot my FDn 50 1.8 more than my FD 35 f/2 SSC...

With my Fuji kit, I shoot with the XF 27mm f/2.8 (41mm FOV equiv) the most. Perhaps that's the reason I did not get the 40 with the Canon, meaning, I have my "small carry around camera" figured out.


----------



## Artikbot

I've been trying to justify a 40mm f/2.8 simply because it's cheap, light, considerably sharp and much more inconspicuous than any of my lens.

...but then I thought, well perhaps if I'm looking for an inconspicuous setup I should do something about the 5D first haha


----------



## Dagamus NM

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> I've been trying to justify a 40mm f/2.8 simply because it's cheap, light, considerably sharp and much more inconspicuous than any of my lens.
> 
> ...but then I thought, well perhaps if I'm looking for an inconspicuous setup I should do something about the 5D first haha


Well, I see that. The 16-35 I have is just not as sharp as I would like, I wish it had IS. Honestly, I really like the 24-70 f4L IS II. Small, light, perfect daily. Maybe that will be my next lens.

Though, I think next I want a lighter tripod, a gimbal and a 2X extended thing to add to my 100-400 for those outdoor shots.


----------



## Artikbot

I was also seriously considering a 24-70 f/4 II, but considering it costs just €200 shy of the 24-70 f/2.8 II used, I don't see much point in that (especially as I am rather cash strapped atm).

Mostly because the f/2.8 could potentially replace all my other lens for shooting gigs.


----------



## pcfoo

Hey, there is no 24-70 f/4 IS II or 24-70 f/4 II non-IS (is there?) -









the 24-105L got a Mark II update - kinda underwhelming but, "OK"...

the 24-70 II is only @ f/2.8. THERE IS ONLY ONE 24-70 II to rule em all! (for now).

Now, the 24-70L 4 IS - even tho Mark I - is a great lens. Much more portable, great IS, good pseudo-macro mode for those closeups.
When 1st released was super-expensive - but that's no different than the original 24-105L I or the newer 24-105L II. Few justify buying those full retail.

BUT, last 1.5-2y or so , the 24-70L 4 IS has replaced the 24-105L in quite a few cases as the "kit" lens, along with a drop in the street price.
This has increased the supply in the used market (which I am a YUGE proponent of), and now you can get 24-70L 4 IS samples for $6xx pretty casually. That is 1/2 the price for a used 24-70L II, and a good value for that excellent little zoom!

/geek talk


----------



## Dagamus NM

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Hey, there is no 24-70 f/4 IS II or 24-70 f/4 II non-IS (is there?) -
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the 24-105L got a Mark II update - kinda underwhelming but, "OK"...
> 
> the 24-70 II is only @ f/2.8. THERE IS ONLY ONE 24-70 II to rule em all! (for now).
> 
> Now, the 24-70L 4 IS - even tho Mark I - is a great lens. Much more portable, great IS, good pseudo-macro mode for those closeups.
> When 1st released was super-expensive - but that's no different than the original 24-105L I or the newer 24-105L II. Few justify buying those full retail.
> 
> BUT, last 1.5-2y or so , the 24-70L 4 IS has replaced the 24-105L in quite a few cases as the "kit" lens, along with a drop in the street price.
> This has increased the supply in the used market (which I am a YUGE proponent of), and now you can get 24-70L 4 IS samples for $6xx pretty casually. That is 1/2 the price for a used 24-70L II, and a good value for that excellent little zoom!
> 
> /geek talk


Mixed them up in my head then. The 24-70 f4L is the one then. Internal zoom, compact, and super crisp. I used it with a 5D4 at balloon fiesta earlier this fall. It made a good balance with a 5D without battery grip. Would seem a little small on one with a grip. Maybe the balance is why I like the 50mm 1.2 even though I don't really shoot at 1.2


----------



## KenjiS

I've just never personally been a huge fan of the 24-70 range, Always felt too "short" for me as a walkaround.. The only reason I personally would bother would be to get a 2.8 aperture..

So if its f/4 id rather have the 24-105 range..

Curious to see if the Sigma Art 24-105 now starts to sell better..


----------



## Artikbot

I only own the kit 55-250 in what you could call tele lens range, and a 135mm f/2.8 Zeiss for tighter proportioned stuff.

I thought I'd need a 70-200 when I went FF, but much to my surprise... I almost never use over 85mm.


----------



## Dagamus NM

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KenjiS*
> 
> I've just never personally been a huge fan of the 24-70 range, Always felt too "short" for me as a walkaround.. The only reason I personally would bother would be to get a 2.8 aperture..
> 
> So if its f/4 id rather have the 24-105 range..
> 
> Curious to see if the Sigma Art 24-105 now starts to sell better..


The 24-70 f4 is much smaller than the 24-105. The zoom being internal is quite nice, a much more sealed system and inconspicuous.

When going out to historic sites or wildlife areas I carry my 16-35 f2.8L and my 100-400. My girlfriend carries a 60d with the 18-135mm ef-s lens or the sigma 150mm macro.


----------



## KenjiS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dagamus NM*
> 
> The 24-70 f4 is much smaller than the 24-105. The zoom being internal is quite nice, a much more sealed system and inconspicuous.
> 
> When going out to historic sites or wildlife areas I carry my 16-35 f2.8L and my 100-400. My girlfriend carries a 60d with the 18-135mm ef-s lens or the sigma 150mm macro.


?? The 24-70 isnt internal zoom though..

http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/798-canon2470f4

Still extends when it zooms..


----------



## Dagamus NM

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KenjiS*
> 
> ?? The 24-70 isnt internal zoom though..
> 
> http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/798-canon2470f4
> 
> Still extends when it zooms..


Correct, I realize that the lens I got on loan at balloon fiesta was not a 24-70 at all. It was the 16-35mm f4L II. This is why I was wrong on it being an internal zoom and a II. Derp.


----------



## pcfoo

None of the Canon 24-70 or 24-105 is internal zoom, only internal focus.
Even the 16-35 4 IS and the 17-40 etc lenses, are really not internal zoom - the front element moves a bit as you zoom - even if the movement is small and the length of the lens doesn't change.

Of the popular EF lenses, only the 70-200L series of EF lenses are internal zoom afaik. Sure, you have monsters like the 200-400, or the 11-24 being internal zoom lenses etc, but those are not mainstream lenses.

Not that I mind, cause it doesn't effect the operation in a significant way, just making a point that "internal zoom" is rare.


----------



## von rottes

Started playing around with long exposures with a friend because we got bored..

by no means good, but these are pretty fun to do


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## Artikbot

I'm going on a ski trip tonight, decided to try and take some video... Let's see how it turns out lol


----------



## ahnafakeef

Got featured in one of DPReview's articles. Wanted to share this small achievement with you guys.

https://www.dpreview.com/articles/9881385328/2016-dpreview-readers-best-shots-people

My improvement in photography has been slow, but I'm glad for however much I've improved.


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ahnafakeef*
> 
> Got featured in one of DPReview's articles. Wanted to share this small achievement with you guys.
> 
> https://www.dpreview.com/articles/9881385328/2016-dpreview-readers-best-shots-people
> 
> My improvement in photography has been slow, but I'm glad for however much I've improved.


Nice shot & Processing


----------



## Nvidia Fanboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ahnafakeef*
> 
> Got featured in one of DPReview's articles. Wanted to share this small achievement with you guys.
> 
> https://www.dpreview.com/articles/9881385328/2016-dpreview-readers-best-shots-people
> 
> My improvement in photography has been slow, but I'm glad for however much I've improved.


Very nice! Congrats. There is so much story that can be told through their faces.


----------



## Nvidia Fanboy

Just a few of my favorite photos. I'm definitely a fan of low light photography.


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Picked up a shiny new Sigma 18-35 f/1.8 Art yesterday.



It's so damn sharp even wide open at f/1.8.

Can't wait to get some proper shots with it, for now just random test shot

https://flic.kr/p/PEVymXLinn Sondek LP12 by Luke Wanden, on Flickr


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> Picked up a shiny new Sigma 18-35 f/1.8 Art yesterday.
> 
> X
> 
> It's so damn sharp even wide open at f/1.8.
> 
> Can't wait to get some proper shots with it, for now just random test shot


I know its almost 3 weeks old.... but noice..









Over here things have been going a little backwards.... like back to the early 80s







It's a Nikon FE (yeah yeah, cheapo electric version of the FM







) which I only got a few days ago. After a clean up and replacing a few light seals and the mirror damper she's all ready to go. I took it out today and its so satisfying to use, its like nothing I've ever shot before. Hopefully the photos turn out alright, because so far its been everything that I was hoping for. I even splashed out on a 28mm f/3.5 AI prime for it too, to go alongside the 50mm Series E I already had.


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> Over here things have been going a little backwards.... like back to the early 80s
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's a Nikon FE (yeah yeah, cheapo electric version of the FM
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ) which I only got a few days ago. After a clean up and replacing a few light seals and the mirror damper she's all ready to go. I took it out today and its so satisfying to use, its like nothing I've ever shot before. Hopefully the photos turn out alright, because so far its been everything that I was hoping for. I even splashed out on a 28mm f/3.5 AI prime for it too, to go alongside the 50mm Series E I already had.


Lol...I was playing with my cheapo A-E1 earlier today myself....no, I won't run a film through you baby...


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Lol...I was playing with my cheapo A-E1 earlier today myself....no, I won't run a film through you baby...


Doooooooo it, give it some film...







To be fair I could do with trying to get rid of my other cameras that I'm just not going to use now I have this. I'm not really a collector, but I've got a fair few bodies that I haven't, and probably never will put any film through.


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> I know its almost 3 weeks old.... but noice..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Over here things have been going a little backwards.... like back to the early 80s
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's a Nikon FE (yeah yeah, cheapo electric version of the FM
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ) which I only got a few days ago. After a clean up and replacing a few light seals and the mirror damper she's all ready to go. I took it out today and its so satisfying to use, its like nothing I've ever shot before. Hopefully the photos turn out alright, because so far its been everything that I was hoping for. I even splashed out on a 28mm f/3.5 AI prime for it too, to go alongside the 50mm Series E I already had.


Very nice! what film are you using?


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> Very nice! what film are you using?


Right now its loaded up with Poundland's finest Agfa Vista 200 which I'm using to test it. After that its probably onto Fuji Superia 200 which I think I've got a roll or two left in the freezer. That's probably what I'll shoot the most, but I do plan on trying some other film, like Kodak Ektar, Ilford Pan F, Delta or FP4.

Since I'm mostly going to be scanning the negs for online use I don't want to go crazy with expensive film all the time. I would stick to Agfa vista but to get the best value I really need to be shooting 36 exposure rolls, and the stuff poundland stocks is only 24 ex.


----------



## refillable

I'd like to join the club. I shoot Sony A6000 with two lenses, 18-105 and 10-18. I don't talk about gears a lot but I like shooting pictures.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *refillable*
> 
> I'd like to join the club. I shoot Sony A6000 with two lenses, 18-105 and 10-18. I don't talk about gears a lot but I like shooting pictures.
> 
> https://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/


Welcome to the club!

You have some nice photos, keep it up


----------



## refillable

@Magical Eskimo Thank You!

Actually Used Flickr for the first time... I think it is very neat and organised very well. Better than what I have been used to use...


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Just thought I haven't posted a photo in a while on here. Got a chance to take the Siggy 18-35 f/1.8 art the other week to a car show, it's a really awesome lens.

This is my favourite shot of the day. I had an A2 print made for a friend of this.
https://flic.kr/p/QENDpAAutosport Show-6406 by Luke Wanden, on Flickr

Audi Quattro Group B
https://flic.kr/p/PYdXWhAutosport Show-6275 by Luke Wanden, on Flickr


----------



## von rottes

Went to a convention and talked a friend into letting me shoot her...
Wasn't anything serious, more just a.... I got a new speedlight and wanted to play with it..









Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!















iirc Those were all shot at 1/60 sec shutter, iso 100 and I want to say 1/64 to 1/32 power on the speedlight.
Was also the first time using my vivitar 28-90 in a more serious manner... not quite as sharp as the 70-210 but still looks nice for a $50 lens








also, yes the focus was off in some of those because.... we were all in a hurry to get drink and party.

And I also got tasked with being the designated photographer for her throughout the day.
Convention pictures


----------



## Artikbot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Lol...I was playing with my cheapo A-E1 earlier today myself....no, I won't run a film through you baby...


I wanted to buy one of them for the sake of hipsterness, but the smart part of me got the upper hand and decided an EOS 620 was a much more logical choice as I wouldn't need to invest in another lens system


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> I wanted to buy one of them for the sake of hipsterness, but the smart part of me got the upper hand and decided an EOS 620 was a much more logical choice as I wouldn't need to invest in another lens system


The more modern plastic SLRs are way more convenient to shoot, but a lot less hipstery







At least with Nikon you can use the same lenses on both to an extent. Although saying that this isn't the case for me, I asked on a fb group and they came to the conclusion my FE has been dropped at some point and the lens mount has been knocked slightly to the point some more modern lenses won't mount, so I can't use my 35mm f/2D







If it shoots ok I'll just carry on using it as-is, If I wanted to use my newer lenses I've always got the F60.


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *von rottes*
> 
> Went to a convention and talked a friend into letting me shoot her...
> Wasn't anything serious, more just a.... I got a new speedlight and wanted to play with it..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> iirc Those were all shot at 1/60 sec shutter, iso 100 and I want to say 1/64 to 1/32 power on the speedlight.
> Was also the first time using my vivitar 28-90 in a more serious manner... not quite as sharp as the 70-210 but still looks nice for a $50 lens
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> also, yes the focus was off in some of those because.... we were all in a hurry to get drink and party.
> 
> And I also got tasked with being the designated photographer for her throughout the day.
> Convention pictures


Some of them are a little blurring due to 1/60th shutter speed. Don't be afraid to raise your iso a bit to keep your shutter speed up. 1/125th and iso400 or something probably would have worked a lot better


----------



## Artikbot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> The more modern plastic SLRs are way more convenient to shoot, but a lot less hipstery


I've got my hipster needs covered with my grandfather's Yashica Lynx 1000


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> I wanted to buy one of them for the sake of hipsterness, but the smart part of me got the upper hand and decided an EOS 620 was a much more logical choice as I wouldn't need to invest in another lens system
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The more modern plastic SLRs are way more convenient to shoot, but a lot less hipstery
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> At least with Nikon you can use the same lenses on both to an extent. Although saying that this isn't the case for me, I asked on a fb group and they came to the conclusion my FE has been dropped at some point and the lens mount has been knocked slightly to the point some more modern lenses won't mount, so I can't use my 35mm f/2D
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If it shoots ok I'll just carry on using it as-is, If I wanted to use my newer lenses I've always got the F60.
Click to expand...

Timing is crucial sometimes...I got into the Canon FD/FL system after DSLRs were picking up speed and I already had my 20D (2004), which had replaced the EOS 30 that was my "serious" camera in high school.

At this point, around 2006-2007, DSLRs were starting to becoming more mainstream and the shorter flange distance FD/FL gear was becoming obsolete, as too few hipsters were around to preach on film, Holga was not a thing yet etc...so you could buy FD/FL gear of eBay or fleamarkets for nothing...got my AE-1 + FDn 50 f/1.8 from the original owner in Greece for something like 45-50 euros...this is not an insane price these days, but back then it was dirt cheap and my easy way out of the FM2 I was eyeing








Stopped shooting film with the EOS and kept the EOS fully digital, with all my film - mostly Tri-X - being run through the AE-1.

Prices kept falling, got a couple of lenses here and there: FD 35mm f/2 SSC + FDn 135mm f/2.8 both for €90 in a beautiful Berlin fleamarket....some FDn 28mm f/2.8 for €25 or so in eBay, plus a FD 135 f/3.5 SC given to me for free...Then the film revival came along, and later MILCs and cheap adapters came around, and many of these lenses now sell for many times that.

Eventually film was too cumbersome and when I moved in the US mid 2009, I've left all these in Greece. Brought them back gradually, and although I have occasionally shot the lenses on my now sold EOS M and lately on the X-E2, I haven't put a single roll of film in the A-E1 since 2009. It is a fancy toy on display in my man-cave.

If you are really into giving film a try, I would avoid SLRs, as much as I like them. Try an Olympus 35 RC. That thing is a piece of beauty of a late RF camera, and with some hunting you can get good prices. The 42mm f/2.8 makes for natural perspective and it is darn sharp. Won't melt backgrounds like f/1.x lenses, but overall you could lie and be convincing that you are using a Summicron to viewers of the end results. One of the real limitations of this camera, but also of the A-E1 and most cameras of that age - including Leica Ms - is the mediocre top shutter speed. 1/1000 for most SLRs, 1/500 for the RFs like the Olympus 35 RC and the Canonets from Canon (which are also great). So to shoot wide open during the day, you will need super slow speed and/or ND filters. Or blow all highlights...that works too! The latest Nikons with electronic shutter can do 1/4000 s and that is a "yuge" advantage if you are shooting fast glass during the day...that's where the FM2 comes into play, or if you are a cheap(er) guy, a FE2 that has exactly the same shutter mechanism, it is just as beautiful, just a tiny bit more reliant on the battery.

Film where I'm at, will cost me $30 roughly - after the film itself and mail-in development...that's why I buy film cameras for the cost of 50 exposures, and don't run film through them









And we do Yashica's too !


----------



## Artikbot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> So to shoot wide open during the day, you will need super slow speed and/or ND filters. *Or blow all highlights...that works too!*


It gets you mad hipster points as well, lol


----------



## caenlen

my ancient smartphone moto g3 took this picture, its funny because smartphones 3x the price seem to not be able to get such detail. Can any of you recommend a Android Nougat phone that has a better camera than my moto g3?


----------



## Artikbot

Moto G 3rd gen? Pretty much anything over 150 dollars will. It wasn't exactly praised for its camera after all.


----------



## caenlen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> Moto G 3rd gen? Pretty much anything over 150 dollars will. It wasn't exactly praised for its camera after all.


I think it takes better pictures than my Dads galaxy s6. maybe cameras are about preference much like audio is.. hmm neat


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Film where I'm at, will cost me $30 roughly - after the film itself and mail-in development...that's why I buy film cameras for the cost of 50 exposures, and don't run film through them


Yeah, thats one of the big drawbacks of film really.... its not too cheap to shoot







I think I've worked out a reasonably cheap way of doing it, at least for the time being. For 35mm, If I choose to have the negatives scanned to CD it would cost me £0.26 per frame, or If I scanned myself (will try and do this in future) it would cost £0.22 per frame. This is worked out sending 2 rolls at a time for development, and shooting 36 ex rolls of Fuji Supiera. It doesn't seem mega expensive, but it is compared to digital...... for the price I paid for my D600, if it reached 150k on the shutter that'd work out at about £0.0041 per frame


----------



## von rottes

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Magical Eskimo*
> 
> Some of them are a little blurring due to 1/60th shutter speed. Don't be afraid to raise your iso a bit to keep your shutter speed up. 1/125th and iso400 or something probably would have worked a lot better


Yeahhh might have had a little to do with it... but that lens at 28mm is SUPER finicky even at high shutter speeds...

I did check the EXIF and they were between 1/13 and 1/30 and I THINK I was shooting at f/4
The group pictures in the link were all at iso400 1/40 and I think f/2.8


----------



## pcfoo

DSLRs were just insane in revolutionizing the overhead.

As an amateur, back in 2004, I figured out the EOS 20D that was €1,400 then, would be recuped in ~2-2.5y if I was to retire my film gear.
I already had tried digital ~€300-400 compacts and for everyday stuff those were "ok", but the 20D was 8MP, with usable ISO 800 ... for anyone that had shot ISO 800 35mm color film, that was just crazy good - yet today we would call that horrible. Still beats most smartphones today handily in my eyes. 3-4MP compacts would have similar noise @ ISO 200.

Don't think I got 150,000 clicks on my 20D, in fact I don't think I got 100,000 even. Still beats the alternative. Ended up selling it in 2014 for $100...I did not need it, but it wasn't being used, so...



Budapest 2004, EOS 20D + EF 50mm f/1.8 II -- f/16.0 10s 100 ISO



Budapest 2004, EOS 20D + EF-S 18-55mm -- Horizontal 3-shot panorama, 18mm @ f/11.0 10s 100 ISO

Both on a $25 tripod.


----------



## Artikbot

...I should go out and take some pictures tomorrow.

Clear up my mind and such.


----------



## LaBestiaHumana

Question for the camera enthusiasts:

A friend is selling me a used Canon 7D camera with EFS 17-55mm Lens, lens hood and Canon Wireless File Transmitter for 500 bucks. I understand it's an older camera, rated at semi pro level. Is it worth buying for 500 bucks today? Looks like a great deal, but not sure is a brand new 500 camera from Best Buy will match or even beat this. I have until tomorrow to make a decision. Thanks in advance guys.


----------



## pcfoo

@LaBestiaHumana Get it...IF you want a big camera like it, get it....it is an amazing camera - tho old - with one of the best lenses for APS-C bodies there are...
The lens alone sells for ~$500 used - if in good condition, the body alone would be $350~500, depending on condition / actuation etc.

Otherwise send me your friends contact info in a PM








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LaBestiaHumana*
> 
> not sure is a brand new 500 camera from Best Buy will match or even beat this.


Depends on what you mean "beat"...yes, in many areas some current $500 bodies, will do better than a 7D - or a 7D II - given proper glass as far as absolute image quality goes. But just go to Flickr and look at what a EOS 7D can do: https://www.flickr.com/cameras/canon/eos_7d/

Do that for every camera/lens you can think of. Yes, equipment matters, but only with the proper photographer. You won't "impress" any gear-nut photographer with a 7D, but you can still produce screaming good shots if you put yourself to do it.


----------



## LaBestiaHumana

Thanks for your input. +1


----------



## pcfoo

@LaBestiaHumana Make sure it is the EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS lens, not the EF-S 18-55 ... "Yuge" difference.
The 7D + EFS 18-55 IS for $500 = normal pricing.
7D + EFS 17-55 f/2.8 IS for $500 = good friend pricing.


----------



## LaBestiaHumana

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> @LaBestiaHumana Make sure it is the EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS lens, not the EF-S 18-55 ... "Yuge" difference.
> The 7D + EFS 18-55 IS for $500 = normal pricing.
> 7D + EFS 17-55 f/2.8 IS for $500 = good friend pricing.


----------



## pcfoo

That's the proper lens then








Had it on my 20D and 50D...was simply great.


----------



## Artikbot

In two words: get. it.

The 17-55 is the single most impressive lens I've owned and the one I regret the most selling.


----------



## LaBestiaHumana

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> In two words: get. it.
> 
> The 17-55 is the single most impressive lens I've owned and the one I regret the most selling.


Yeah, I'm pretty convinced now. Thanks +1


----------



## Dagamus NM

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LaBestiaHumana*
> 
> Yeah, I'm pretty convinced now. Thanks +1


agreed. The 7D is great for action shooting, sports, cars, etc. I don't have any experience with that lens, but I hear great things.

I do not think you will be disappointed.


----------



## Conspiracy

i know yall have been probably wondering forever so i went ahead and figured out if the myths were true... gopros are indeed milk proof. youre welcome. i think the waterproof housing is rated for at least 1 jumbo size cereal bowl, pictured below is a medium size bowl

GoPro is milkproof and waterproof  by Brian Roberts, on Flickr


----------



## Wolfsbora

Hi folks, just thought I'd share that my photo got featured on Kotaku! It was taken with my DSC-RX100.

Cold Path on Kotaku


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> i know yall have been probably wondering forever so i went ahead and figured out if the myths were true... gopros are indeed milk proof. youre welcome. i think the waterproof housing is rated for at least 1 jumbo size cereal bowl, pictured below is a medium size bowl


Well thats good to know


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Conspiracy*
> 
> i know yall have been probably wondering forever so i went ahead and figured out if the myths were true... gopros are indeed milk proof. youre welcome. i think the waterproof housing is rated for at least 1 jumbo size cereal bowl, pictured below is a medium size bowl


Accident or experiment?
More importantly, was it recording and where is the footage?


----------



## Conspiracy

it was on purpose and there is footage. part of a webseries im working on and the episode was about learning how to throw clay and make a bowl. the host wanted to make a super sized cereal bowl


----------



## Artikbot

Sigma just chopped a good bit of bulkiness from their newest 24-70/2.8 and added IS!

Your move Canon


----------



## von rottes

So I've really been working on portraits and I think I've really started to improve since last year.


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## Magical Eskimo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *von rottes*
> 
> So I've really been working on portraits and I think I've really started to improve since last year.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


Some good attempts, the lighting is a bit flat though and they all seem a little underexposed.
Check out Strobist and their Lighting 101 guide http://strobist.blogspot.co.uk/2006/03/lighting-101.html if you wanna start taking it to the next level


----------



## IntoxicatedPuma

I took my E-M1 in to get the control dials fixed (most E-M1's have dials that become less responsive over time) and now the camera is completely borked, the official olympus repair place where i live (who fixed the dials) says they have no idea what the problem is and suggested I just buy a new camera.

So I did....and got a Panasonic GX85. I wish I'd gotten the G85 instead now, but the GX85 is not a bad camera. I don't like the ergonomics as much as my LX100 or E-M1, but it's decent enough. I also picked up a 15mm f/1.7 lens to go with it. I'd like to see how the dual IS performs but all my other lenses are Olympus. So far the IBIS is not as good as the E-M1 but better than the A6500. I'd say it's more towards the A6500 for performance in video.


----------



## serothis

I have a bit of exciting news. While helping my grandpa clean out a closet we found his old Nikon FE2 and a pair of lenses. He said I could have it. According to him there are more old school lenses somewhere....and mamiya (he didn't say what model).

I cleaned off the body and lenses, replaced the battery and bought some film. Cheap film at first to make sure things still work (and make sure I have the competence to use it).

So far it seems to be working. The built in spot meter (so far) has been very close to the spot meter in my digital body. But the real test is when I get the film developed. I'm still going through the first roll.

It's very exciting...and a bit overwhelming.


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *serothis*
> 
> I have a bit of exciting news. While helping my grandpa clean out a closet we found his old Nikon FE2 and a pair of lenses. He said I could have it. According to him there are more old school lenses somewhere....and mamiya (he didn't say what model).
> 
> I cleaned off the body and lenses, replaced the battery and bought some film. Cheap film at first to make sure things still work (and make sure I have the competence to use it).
> 
> So far it seems to be working. The built in spot meter (so far) has been very close to the spot meter in my digital body. But the real test is when I get the film developed. I'm still going through the first roll.
> 
> It's very exciting...and a bit overwhelming.


I love my FE, its so satisfying to use.... no DSLR I've ever used comes close IMO.


----------



## Artikbot

Talking about Fs... Yesterday I saw a F301 for sale at a local shop.

Body only, with a flash, 110 EUR.

...I'd seen them on ebay for around 30 quid for the body only...


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> Talking about Fs... Yesterday I saw a F301 for sale at a local shop.
> 
> Body only, with a flash, 110 EUR.
> 
> ...I'd seen them on ebay for around 30 quid for the body only...


Thats crazy









The most I've ever paid for a film camera is £50.... and that was for a practically mint F80, boxed, complete with 28-100mm lens


----------



## Artikbot

Most I've paid for a film camera was my EOS 620. It wasn't mint but not far off, easy 8.5/10 condition. Also came with the leather protection half-case thing (the other half was missing), the manual and an EF 35-70 lens.

For a whole 21 quid lol


----------



## pcfoo

I've bought a Olympus µ[mju:]-III Wide 100 for my dad ... new, in 2003...yeah...more expensive than all "used" prices above combined.
And I had my share of AF EOS film bodies that were roughly a month's wages - not far from a modern mid-range DSLR body adjusted for inflation and being a young adult in Greece, not the US.

That is how much mid to high end SLRs where always priced...always...how expensive do you think a decent F2 or F3 was when first introduced? That Canon AE-1 that you see in yard sales and you want to get for $50?



The AE-1 + 50mm 1.8 was $270 -> ~$1,150 today.
The FD 85 1.2L was $465 -> ~$1,950 today.
A FD 300mm f/2.8 was $1,850 -> ~$7,600 today.

In other words, "business as usual". Photography was always expensive if you wanted the "cool" toys of your time. Actually more expensive, as the wage index for 1978 was less than $11,000, while now it is above $45K. Sure, expenses are higher, but buying a AE-1 in the late 70s I would think was harder for the average family than buying a 5DSR or a A7R II today. We save less, but it is easier to spend $ on impulse.


----------



## Artikbot

Yeah, obviously they were expensive back then, but nowadays unless they're very specific models or in really good condition they're worth their weight in scrap.


----------



## pcfoo

The fact that unless you are developing your own film, 36 frames of [135] will cost you like $20-30 after paying for a roll and mail-in developing doesn't help much either.


----------



## Scott1541

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> The fact that unless you are developing your own film, 36 frames of [135] will cost you like $20-30 after paying for a roll and mail-in developing doesn't help much either.


If you do it right you can get it done for about half that, but you're still right, its expensive for what it is. Just done the maths and for what I'd currently pay per shot of 135, if you shot 150,000 frames (a reasonable DSLR shutter life ex) it'd cost about 10x more than a current pro DSLR would cost (D810, 5Dwhatever, etc..)









I really need to get into home developing but I haven't got the time right now, and don't use film often enough to justify it


----------



## Artikbot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scott1541*
> 
> I really need to get into home developing but I haven't got the time right now, and don't use film often enough to justify it


Story of my analog life.

Plus half the times I feel like shooting film I'll still go 'bleh piss that' and stick some old glass onto the 5D.

Related, you guys seen Ian Wong's new series, Digital Darkroom? It's like a follow-up of his AnalogRev space back when he worked for DRTV and it's brilliant:

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXV7bLiYu6DSX73KuoprBzw


----------



## pcfoo

Film calls for...dedication, to say the least.
$ for sticking with film did not even pencil out back in 2004, when I got my 1st DSLR (EOS 20D).


----------



## Scott1541

As much as I love using it, digital is always going to be my main format. I've got 2 full frame DSLRs now, about £1500 of lenses (what I paid used, not new)... as if I'm going to turn my back on all of that in favour of mediocre scans from cheap film, shot in a beaten up camera from the 70s


----------



## Artikbot

Definitely.

Film for me is more of a 'zen' thing to do rather than something I'd use as a primary medium.

When I need to be at peace with myself and slow the hell down I dust out the old Yashica Lynx and spend an entire afternoon shooting just one roll.


----------



## serothis

Since absconding with the FE2 I've used a grand total of...3 rolls (24exp each). It certainly introduces a non-trivial amount of paranoia.

Is it focused right?
Is my exposure accurate?
Hows my composition?
Was I still enough?
.
.
.
I've repeatedly not taken a photo because i'm not convinced by 1 or more of those questions.

There is something addictively satisfying about clicking the shutter button.


----------



## Artikbot

Funnily enough, I worry less when shooting film.

I stick to what I've learnt with digital, look at the exposure meter and take the shot. No point in worrying because I can't fix it


----------



## Jbravo33

hi guys didnt know where else to post. I'm interested in a camera that can record in 4k and take great still as well. got a 15 month old and id like to spend a lot of time with him and when he gets older have some nice photos and videos of him and the family. will figure out the whole editing and content thing as i go, but looking for suggestions for cameras. id be willing to spend a couple grand if need be. would like to only have to do this once and do it right. appreciate your time.


----------



## Dagamus NM

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jbravo33*
> 
> hi guys didnt know where else to post. I'm interested in a camera that can record in 4k and take great still as well. got a 15 month old and id like to spend a lot of time with him and when he gets older have some nice photos and videos of him and the family. will figure out the whole editing and content thing as i go, but looking for suggestions for cameras. id be willing to spend a couple grand if need be. would like to only have to do this once and do it right. appreciate your time.


For the money I suggest a Canon 5D mark 3. Full frame, can record longer sections of video to compact flash, and once that 15 month old starts moving very fast you will have a camera that can focus and release the shutter fast enough to catch without motion.

I started with a Canon t3 and it excelled at nothing. It was fine for most of what I shot up to having a kid. It was lousy for video as the buffer would fill and it would cut quickly. It was slow. So I decided to get a full frame and moved up to a 6D. Great for the higher dynamic range in the sensor, and better all around compared to the t3, but so slow. Same issue with recording video. I knew this going into it, but did not understand just how much impact that would have. Also, from things like waking from sleep to the slow focus to shutter release time this camera was terrible. My favorite for night time bulb exposures, pictures of the milky way etc.

So then I finally bit the bullet and bought a new Canon 5D mark iii, fell in love. This camera does what I want it to. I still have a lot to learn with respect to how it focuses and other functions but it is pretty stout. I liked it so much that I picked up a second one used off of B&H. I love having two of them and still pack the 6D for camping and stuff. I also have a 60D that my girlfriend likes to shoot with.

If you run out of things to do on a 5D3 you can give magic lantern a go and shoot raw video and lots of other things. The development of magic lantern is most robust for the 5D3. Look it up, cool stuff.


----------



## Jbravo33

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dagamus NM*
> 
> For the money I suggest a Canon 5D mark 3. Full frame, can record longer sections of video to compact flash, and once that 15 month old starts moving very fast you will have a camera that can focus and release the shutter fast enough to catch without motion.
> 
> I started with a Canon t3 and it excelled at nothing. It was fine for most of what I shot up to having a kid. It was lousy for video as the buffer would fill and it would cut quickly. It was slow. So I decided to get a full frame and moved up to a 6D. Great for the higher dynamic range in the sensor, and better all around compared to the t3, but so slow. Same issue with recording video. I knew this going into it, but did not understand just how much impact that would have. Also, from things like waking from sleep to the slow focus to shutter release time this camera was terrible. My favorite for night time bulb exposures, pictures of the milky way etc.
> 
> So then I finally bit the bullet and bought a new Canon 5D mark iii, fell in love. This camera does what I want it to. I still have a lot to learn with respect to how it focuses and other functions but it is pretty stout. I liked it so much that I picked up a second one used off of B&H. I love having two of them and still pack the 6D for camping and stuff. I also have a 60D that my girlfriend likes to shoot with.
> 
> If you run out of things to do on a 5D3 you can give magic lantern a go and shoot raw video and lots of other things. The development of magic lantern is most robust for the 5D3. Look it up, cool stuff.


Thank you. I will research them both. I figured someone on here might have been looking for the same thing and would save me some time and a few less purchases. Thanks for the reply.


----------



## Artikbot

Question - how familiar are you with prosumer/professional camera gear? It might not be best to go straight into a 5D Mark III if you're not handy with a camera.


----------



## Jbravo33

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> Question - how familiar are you with prosumer/professional camera gear? It might not be best to go straight into a 5D Mark III if you're not handy with a camera.


To be honest not very familiar. My last camera purchase was back in 2001 and it was a Sony DSC F717 which i still have. I can only imagine whats involved nowadays, but i consider myself a fast and motivated learner. Pc in my sig is the first PC i have ever built and that was 6 months ago. i knew basics but i went full mod crazy (led me here) and i think it came out pretty decent. i just know camera will be very time consuming so i would like something that i dont need to upgrade anytime soon and can learn as i go. i was told a Leica D-LUX is a very newbie friendly camera, but the video recording didnt seem to be where i would like. id prefer 4k. @60 would be awesome but even @30 is good.


----------



## Artikbot

Mind - if 4K is a strict requirement, the 5D3 doesn't do it. Best it can do is 1080p30.

For 4K video your best bet is probably in the Sony realm, in form of an a6500 and a kit lens. It will do 4K30 and 1080p120 if necessary, has in-body IS and paired to a stabilized Sony lens it really is a fantastic bit of kit for video purposes.


----------



## Dagamus NM

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> Mind - if 4K is a strict requirement, the 5D3 doesn't do it. Best it can do is 1080p30.
> 
> For 4K video your best bet is probably in the Sony realm, in form of an a6500 and a kit lens. It will do 4K30 and 1080p120 if necessary, has in-body IS and paired to a stabilized Sony lens it really is a fantastic bit of kit for video purposes.


You sure about that? https://petapixel.com/2017/04/03/magic-lantern-adds-4k-raw-canon-5d-mark-iii-announces-april-1st/https://petapixel.com/2017/04/03/magic-lantern-adds-4k-raw-canon-5d-mark-iii-announces-april-1st/


----------



## pcfoo

Well...it is not supported without the - amazing - hacked ML firmware.








I would agree that if you are after good 4K out of the box, you are better with a Sony a6300/a6500 (the latter for in-body stabilization) or a panasonic m43 like the GH4 or GH5.

The newest Fujifilm cameras also do 4K, although it is clearly not a "priority" for the platform, as it is for Panasonic. I would pick a Fuji as a still camera over either the Sony a6xxx or Panasonic m43 line though, as I love their lens line and overall handling.

Personally I am a Canon DSLR user with a pretty big kit, but still opted for a X-E2 for the size along with a handful of primes, but I rarely shoot video. I actually think 1080p is good enough when I do.


----------



## Artikbot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dagamus NM*
> 
> You sure about that? https://petapixel.com/2017/04/03/magic-lantern-adds-4k-raw-canon-5d-mark-iii-announces-april-1st/https://petapixel.com/2017/04/03/magic-lantern-adds-4k-raw-canon-5d-mark-iii-announces-april-1st/


I'd not recommend someone that has no experience with high end camera gear to hack the firmware of their brand new 2 grand body









I've used ML myself personally (albeit on the 5D2) - it's a brilliant bit of software, absolutely no doubts at all. I did go back to vanilla however, as the longer wake times annoyed me quite a lot since I am primarily a stills photog.

But video-wise, or for MF? ML turns the camera into the body that would have utterly destroyed the competition beyond any imaginable point, had it shipped with the camera from the factory.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Personally I am a Canon DSLR user with a pretty big kit, but still opted for a X-E2 for the size along with a handful of primes, but I rarely shoot video. I actually think 1080p is good enough when I do.


That'll be me as well. I don't own a lot of kit since I can't even justify it... But when the job needs to be done, I always end up defaulting to the big clunky heavy 5D2. It gives me a feeling of security and reliability that no other camera (other than its newer, pro-er brothers) has given me so far.


----------



## Dagamus NM

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> I'd not recommend someone that has no experience with high end camera gear to hack the firmware of their brand new 2 grand body
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I've used ML myself personally (albeit on the 5D2) - it's a brilliant bit of software, absolutely no doubts at all. I did go back to vanilla however, as the longer wake times annoyed me quite a lot since I am primarily a stills photog.
> 
> But video-wise, or for MF? ML turns the camera into the body that would have utterly destroyed the competition beyond any imaginable point, had it shipped with the camera from the factory.
> 
> That'll be me as well. I don't own a lot of kit since I can't even justify it... But when the job needs to be done, I always end up defaulting to the big clunky heavy 5D2. It gives me a feeling of security and reliability that no other camera (other than its newer, pro-er brothers) has given me so far.


Valid points. Though the statement of hacking the firmware is intimidating, the reality is that the firmware is already hacked by the developers at ML. It is a matter up downloading the correct firmware from Canon to run with the desired ML version and then run the firmware update on the camera.

If a person can make their way to and navigate a forum then I don't see it as much of a stretch to doing this.

Those Sony cameras mentioned are nice. Though those that I know that have them seem to just shoot everything they do with their iPhone. I carry a 5D3 with battery grip and L bracket on it everywhere I go. I keep a 50mm 1.2L on it daily. I also keep a 580ex flash in the bag. It isn't light but ditching the laptop for an iPad Pro makes the backpack weight about the same as it did before.

Whatever camera you get it needs to be able to write fast enough to the memory card. I don't personally know the specs of the cameras Artikbot or Pcfoo mentioned so they very well could use cfast or whatever the high bandwidth memory cards are. Research the frame buffers in the cameras before you make a decision as that will control the length of video clips you can record. Bandwidth limitations is what these companies use to move people to the cinema bodies. Those are sweet but expensive.

I recently acquired an induro CLT404L tripod and a promediagear katana Jr. gimbal head. I am in love with both of these pieces. I learned quickly how unruly the Canon 100-400mm II lens is on a ballhead. Didn't think it was large enough to require a gimbal head and it could easily be argued that it is not but it is so nice. Head changes are so easy with this tripod so I can bounce back to my sirui ball head and back in seconds. But for my sigma 150mm macro lens and the 100-400 this gimbal head is amazing. I need to get a mount for my 100mm macro to use the rail. Requires a mount on the lens. Body mounts won't clear.


----------



## pcfoo

Pretty much all cameras outside the DSLR world use UHS-I SD cards. That includes 4K shooting monsters, or high-FPS monsters. Some have support for UHS-II but it is not really needed for 4K shooting, at least not with the compression engines limiting it at ~100-150mbps so UHS SD cards can keep up easily.

CF, CFast and XQD are not apparently required.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> I recently acquired an induro CLT404L tripod and a promediagear katana Jr. gimbal head. I am in love with both of these pieces. I learned quickly how unruly the Canon 100-400mm II lens is on a ballhead. Didn't think it was large enough to require a gimbal head and it could easily be argued that it is not but it is so nice. Head changes are so easy with this tripod so I can bounce back to my sirui ball head and back in seconds. But for my sigma 150mm macro lens and the 100-400 this gimbal head is amazing. I need to get a mount for my 100mm macro to use the rail. Requires a mount on the lens. Body mounts won't clear.


I wonder why you keep your 100mm macro if you have a 150mm macro (or vice versa)...sold my EF 100mm Macro when I got that same Sigma


----------



## Artikbot

Hey, I didn't say that









Broken huddler at it again lol


----------



## Dagamus NM

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> Pretty much all cameras outside the DSLR world use UHS-I SD cards. That includes 4K shooting monsters, or high-FPS monsters. Some have support for UHS-II but it is not really needed for 4K shooting, at least not with the compression engines limiting it at ~100-150mbps so UHS SD cards can keep up easily.
> 
> CF, CFast and XQD are not apparently required.
> I wonder why you keep your 100mm macro if you have a 150mm macro (or vice versa)...sold my EF 100mm Macro when I got that same Sigma


Shooting straight raw video from the sensor takes a crazy amount of bandwidth. I guess the compression for 4K makes most controllers work fine. I like that 4K will write to CF without having to use both cards as raw does. Putting it back together is an extra step when writing to two cards.

I use the 100mm inside generally. The 150mm outside.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> Hey, I didn't say that
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Broken huddler at it again lol


Que??


----------



## Artikbot

pcfoo quoted you, but the quote says I said it









Huddler loves screwing up with people.


----------



## Dagamus NM

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> pcfoo quoted you, but the quote says I said it
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Huddler loves screwing up with people.


Ahhh, I totally missed that. Hilario.


----------



## pcfoo

...huddler divides and conquers the confused masses...


----------



## Artikbot

Just bought a Fuji X-E2 to use as a travel body.

Super super happy with it so far! Even with the crappy Cosinon MC 35mm I've used to test it.

Waiting on a 28/3.5 SMC Takumar


----------



## pcfoo

Nice. I love mine.
Get a XF 27mm f/2.8 for ~40mm FOV
or XF 18mm f/2 for ~28mm FOV, forget about the rest of the lenses.


----------



## Artikbot

I want a 18/2, but 3money5me atm









Eventually









A 23mm would be nice, too. The newer f/2 though.


----------



## pcfoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> I want a 18/2, but 3money5me atm
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Eventually
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A 23mm would be nice, too. The newer f/2 though.


I hear you @ the moneys, just keep in mind that "alternative" / vintage lenses and adapters are also a steep rabbit hole that can easily become a money-sink, even if it is $30-50 at a time. I find it too often that MILC owners end up with a ton of vintage glass & multiple adapters that they "got cheap"...cheap times 5-6 = still a lot.

I don't really like the ergonomics on the 35 f/2 WR / 23mm f/2 WR twins, although these are fine lenses (the 23mm less impressive IQ, but 50mm FOV seem to be too narrow for most).
I've sold my XF 35mm f/1.4 that I bought from the same guy with the X-E2 after a couple of months of landing a 27mm for $165 on eBay which I've started using exclusively.

My personal favorite is the XF 27mm f/2.8, with the 18 as second best. Don't think the 23mm warrants a lens change or is different enough from the 27, while it is notably longer / bulkier and not better in IQ. For my applications, the f/2 would not make a World's difference, although, for the price they ask for the XF 27 typically, I would expect them to try harder to make it a f/2...at any rate, the 27 is like 1/3 the length and makes the combo with the camera much more desirable for my application = everyday carry-on.

At any rate, ended up grabbing a 35 f/2 WR when it was on sale for $300 (happens at least once a year with Fuji lenses afaik, seen it 3 times so far): ended up impressed with how fast and positive the AF was vs. the 35mm 1.4, but otherwise there was nothing special. It is a fast sharp lens, but the 1.4's results wide open are notably better bokeh wise, even if absolute sharpness is not better. Size wise there is no benefit: if anything the 1.4 has the benefit if you have the XF 18 too, as both are 52mm filter thread vs. 43 for the 23/35 f/2 which is not that widely used - at least for someone that comes from a SLR background. RF users might have more relative odd diameters.


----------



## Artikbot

Never knew there was Fuji nerds in here too!

Eventually, I plan on getting an 18mm and a 27mm, but it might take me a couple of years before that happens, depending on how is the state of my finances.

For now though, I'm using the M42 lens I already have and I bought a SMC Takumar 28/3.5 for 50 bucks shipped to have something a little wider than the 35, which is a bit too narrow for my liking as a general purpose (and it's also optically terrible, so there's that).

The idea is to carry the Takumar 28/3.5 and the Helios 58/2 around (the latter I am in love with) with me when I go on trips and stuff, perhaps the Zeiss 135/2.8 MMJ as well. But that one is as heavy as the camera and the two lens together... And my use for a 200mm eq. is rather limited when going travelling. But I can always chuck it in the backpack and not worry too much about it.


----------



## pcfoo

Pff, its a geek, not a nerd...plz..


I still shoot my Canons a lot...but it is too much to carry every day.


----------



## Artikbot

I'll go with that









Weight's the main reason I got the Fuji tbh. The Canon has kind of become my 'pro' body and I'd rather it doesn't get damaged or stolen away on a trip... Plus it's bloody heavy when you factor in all the primes and stuff I carry round with it.


----------



## pcfoo

The a6000 is a great value proposition if you don't care about video (where 6300/6500 up the notch a lot) with small size too, but for whichever reason I don't like its handling as much.
I've embraced the closeted hipster in me and went with the retro Fuji


----------



## Artikbot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcfoo*
> 
> I've embraced the closeted hipster in me and went with the retro Fuji


You read my mind, lol.

I wanted an a6000 too at first, but went... Screw that, the X-E2 looks so damn pretty, and I have a beard as well so it first me right like a glove!


----------



## Artikbot

Well... I caved. MPB had a mint 18mm f/2R for 229 shipped complete with the box and I bought it.


----------



## pcfoo

Good price - I think. You can let it go for more if you don't like it


----------



## Artikbot

Exactly my reasoning!

I can sell it on ebay for 300 and it'll fly off my hands, or locally for even more.

Though I do fully intend on keeping it.


----------



## Sparhawk

Gonna bump this thread because let's get some more photo talk up in here!


----------



## Unknownm

Bump again 

Sent from my HTC 10 using Tapatalk


----------



## Mrip541

Not sure if anyone is checking this thread but.... I want to get a mid range camera for travel, and the Lumix GX85 for $600 with lens seems like a done deal. Dual stabilization, weather sealing, evf, tilt screen, usb charging, wifi, flash, 4k 30p. If I want that all that with a larger sensor I'll need to jump up to a $1500 a6500. gx85 worth it?


----------



## Conspiracy

so which did you go with? the gx85 looks serious with that many features crammed into that price point

also this place looks way different now


----------



## Dagamus NM

This thread was struggling already, now with the forum update it is not looking good.

I am struggling with focusing on the shots I want to get. Using a Canon 5D3 which I moved to from the 6D because of the lag from focus to releasing the shutter.

So I took my 5 year old son and 3 year old niece to a little carnival thing last weekend and was having trouble getting proper focus on a ride. It wasn’t a fast moving ride but my time to focus as the hit the apex of the ride was very short. The sun was setting so I kept the aperture setting between 1.2 and 5.6. At 5.6 the shutter speed was leading to blurry images (50mm f1.2, no IS) and the wider end of settings had the focus on the front of the little car or missing the kids heads and focusing somewhere behind them. At f2.5-f4.0 it was better but still not focusing on the kids.

The autofocus menus on the 5D3 are a bit overwhelming. Any suggestions on how to get better at this? I have a tutorial for shooting birds but it is long and confusing.


----------



## MistaBernie

I know this is an old post, but why not? Dagamus, the AF system on the 5D3 is definitely robust -- I think there's five different AF modes you can cycle through for when you're moving around or shooting things that are moving around a lot. There's lots of tutorials out and about that can help you with the AF system.

Are you using back button focus or half shutter press? 

Also, looks like I might be getting me an 85 f/1.4L IS tomorrow. You know, for the camera I've taken out of my closet once this year so far, but that's gonna be changing lot with the kiddo. 

oh yeah, we had a baby in January. Also, I'm back.


----------



## von rottes

Recently made the jump to Full frame..
Upgraded to a D800 from a D5300 I learned on, and maybe it's just me but using the D800 is WAY easier than using the D5300...

Really excited for saturday as it's supposed to be fairly nice out, and I'm going to take pictures at my local Cars & Coffee as well as the Auto show..
Car photography is like the only thing I've been constantly shooting since I Bought the D5300 4 years ago.


These are just some random shots I got with the D800 a few weeks ago.
Was the first time I used it, and I was using a Vivitar Series 1 28-90...a lens which was absolute garbage on my D5300, which I'm guessing is probably because it lacked a LPF?


----------



## Conspiracy

i havent touched my camera in years and almost forgot this website existed for a while 

life is weird working a staff video job using company gear for the past 5 years


----------



## KenjiS

In Memoriam by Trevor H, on Flickr

A photo from a trip downtown I did today 

sad theres not as much discussion here anymore


----------



## LaBestiaHumana

Shot with Sony


----------



## KenjiS

Nice job with the smoke


----------



## LaBestiaHumana

KenjiS said:


> Nice job with the smoke


Thanks bud!


----------

